Ordinance No. 85-23 I ,
CITY OF TIGARD, ORLUON
i
r
p' ORDINANCE NO. 85-23 :
A FINAL ORDER IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR A CONCEPTUAL PLAN !APPROVAL
AND ZONE CHANGE REQUESTED BY MAIN STREET LAND CORPORATION, FILE NO. PD 1--85 a
AND ZC 5-85, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A CONCEPTUAL PLAN
WITH MODIFICATIONS AND REVISING THE PLANNING COMPASSION DECISION ON THE ZONE
CHANGE WITH MODIFICATIONS, ENTERING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, AND DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY.
f
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council heard the above application at it's
Regular Meeting of spri.l 29, !gar) in a reviawi of the. Planninq Commission �
action of April 2, 1985. The applicant was represented by Rob Ball, assisted
by Dennis Brun, Grigsby Christopher, Christopher Freshly, and Wayne a
Kittleson. 3, 8. Bishop, representing Main Ctreet Land Corp. was present.
Appearing in opposition were Gloria Johnson, Emmett Whitaker, Dan Gott, Anita
Edin, and Gary Ott, representing NPO #1; and,
The Council finds the following facts in this matter:
WHEREAS, the applicant, Main Street Development Corp. , applied for
Conceptual Plan approval for a 22.1,000 square foot retail center on a 20.3
acre property and for a Zone Change from R-12 (PD) Residential, 12 units/acre)
to CBD (Central Business District) for a 3.19 acre parcel on the southeast
4, side of Ash Street. The remaining property is zoned CBD. The property is
located at the Southwest corner of Main Street and Pacific Highway (Was3-:. Co.
Tax Map 2$1 2CC, Tax Lot 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600, 2200, 2300, 2301, 201
and 2S1 208, 300): and,
WHEREAS, on April 26, 1982, the City Council granted Preliminary and
General Plan approval as well as a Sensitive Lands Permit for an earlier
proposal for -the Main Street project (CPR 8--81, CPR 9--81, and M 2-81). The
( proposal included approximately 16 acres of land and 174,000 gross square feet
of building area. The Planning Commission granted an Extension for this
approval on May 3, 1983. This extension for the preliminary plan approval has
expired; and,
WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission conducted a hearing on this
matter on April 2, 1985. The Commission voted to grant conceptual plan
approval of PO 1-85 subject to conditions and approval of ZC 5-85 subject to
conditions. The information supporting the applicant's request, the record of
the hearing, and the final order of the Planning Commission are found in
Planning Files Number PD 1-85 and ZC 5-85; and,
WHEREAS, on April 8, 1985, the Council by motion, voted to call asp
the Planning Commission approval of PD 1-85 and ZC 5-85 for a review of the
record. A hearing date of April 29, 1985 was later scheduled; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council had before it ;the record of the proceeding
before the Planning Commission. The matter waa brought before the City
' Council underSection18.32.310(b) and 18.32.320. The public hearing was field
on April 29, 1985; and,
ORDINANCE NO. ?35�2� .,,. Page 1
WHEREAS, the relevant approval criteria in L`riis c«se for ~yr r:ti^g
conceptual plan approval are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, and 9.
Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 3.2,1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.2, 3.5.3,
5,1.1, 5.1.3, 6.3.3, 6.6.1, 7,2.1, 8,1,3, 11.2.1, 11.2.2 and 11.2.3; and
Community Development Code chapters 18.66, 18.80, 18,84, and 18.100,
WHEREAS, the application complies with the following Statewide
Planning Goals and Guidelines:
1. Goal # 1 is met because the City has adopted a Citizens
Involvement program including review of all development
applications by the Neighborhood Planning Organizetion (NPO).
In addition, all public notice requirements were met.
2. Goal # 2. is met because the City applied all applicable
'lo. on73riaa
Statewide Planning Goals,Goals, l.1 Ly iveFej;,re:el�eeaxv.: . n an']
..-
Development code requirements to the application.
3, Goals # 5 and # 7 will be addressed during the Sensitive Lands
aview of the project.
4. Goal # 8 is satisfied because the site plan is compatible with
the Fanno Creek Park Plan. The Park Board has reviewed the
proposal and no objections were raised.
5. Goal # 9 is satisfied because the development will have a
positive economic impact upon the downtown area; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council. has determined that the proposal, with
several modifications, is consistent with the relevant portions of the
a Comprehensive Plan based upon the Findings noted below:
3
1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood
Planning Organization and surrounding property owners were
given notice of the hearing and opportunity to comment on the
applicant's proposal.
2. Plan Policies 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2,3, 3.4.2, 3.5.3, and 7.2.1
shall be reviewed as part of the Sensitive Lands permit
process.
3. Plan Policies 5.1..1. and 5.1.3 are satisfied because this
commercial center will have a positive affect upon the local
job market and it will contribute towards establishing the
downtown as the viable core area for the community.
The largest building in the commercial center would consist of
approximately 109,000 square feet. If it is occupied by
Costco, as proposed by the applicant, approximately 160 jobs
would be created by that facility alone. The remainder of the
project will create a substantial number of additional jobs in
the City.
ORDINANCENO. 85-23 Page 2
4. Plan Policy 6.3.3 is not completely satisfied because the
downtown is considered to be an "E'stabiished area" and
development occurring with the area is intended to preserve
and enhance the character of these areas. The proposed site
plan does not provide sufficient setbacks and/or buffering
adjacent to some of the existing residential uses and
therefore the project would have a detrimental impact upon.
-these properties.
5. Plan Policy 6.5.1 is not satisfied because the buffering shown
on the site plan between the commercial structures and some
adjacent residential buildings is inadequate. Modifications
to correct this deficiency are noted below.
6. Plan Policy 8.1.3 will be satisfied during the detailed plan
h_5,._ a f the dcva!,-p—_ nt
and cons�e ruciiau f.rl loel G:s v •+t.r...v„”
7. Pian Pollc.ies 11.2.1, 11.2.2 and 11.2.3 are satisfied because
the site plan includes the extension of Ash Street to the
f eastern boundary of the project and a temporary barricade will
be installed near Hill Street. This obstruction will be
removed in accordance with Policy 11.2.3.
8. The major building will be used for retail. However, the
building's proposed appearance will be that of the largest
industrial building in Tigard, appropriate buffering is �.
necessary ,to protect the adjacent neighborhood.
9. Landscaping and buffering are important featuras of the
project, as such, they must be installed and maintained in a r.
manner (which meets the intent of the code to provide
protection throughout the life of the project.
10. Ali, improvements described in Phase T must be made in
accordance with modified conceptual site plan submitted at the
April 29, 1985 hearing prior to occupancy of any buildings;
and,
11. The applicant proposes to dedicate approximately 1.2 acres of
Tax Cot 300 to the City for park purposes. The park land will
e an important addition to the City's inventory of parks and
open space in the "backbone of the City's open-space system"
as described in Plan Policy 3.5.3.
WHEREAS, the City Council concludes that with the modifications
noted, the proposal satisfies the relevant portions of the Community
Development Code based upon the findings listed below:
1. Chapter 18,66 (CBO Zone) of the Code is satisfied because the
proposal meets the minimum standards relating to setbacks, lot
coverage, and building height.
2. chapter 18.80 (Planned Development) of the Code is satisfied
except for- Section 18.80.110 (c)(3) and 18.80.120 (a)(3). The
ORDINANCE Ik® 85-23 Rage 3
L
i
staff understands that extensive grading will be necessary on
the site, but a generalized grading concept has not been
submitted. The grading proposed in -the flood plain may be
reviewed during the Sensitive Lands review. The land form
alteration to be done on the remainder of the site is critical
for conceptual review in order to determine the relationship
between the new commercial buildings and the residences to the
south and west.
Section 18.80.12.0 (a) (3j 'is not i�atisfied because in some
cases insufficient landscaping or visual buffering is shown
between the commercial buildings and nearby residential uses.
Of particular concern are visual impact and the noise from
loading areas and building ventilation systems. Additional
information must be submitted to illustrate how these negative
impacts will be mitigated. The t.'orrdiziuria :. deucl opment
� r..._.._
include steps which the applicant must take: to comply with
code requirements.
t The site contains several large fir trees and one significant
cluster of trees on the western boundary of the project near
Pacific Village Apartments. Section 18.80.120 (a) (3) of the
Code requires that trees with a six inch caliper or greater be
saved whenever possible. The proposed site plan indicates
that all existing trees will be removed. The plan should be
revised to save as many of these larger trees as possible.
This is particularly true of she -trees along the western
boundary of the project because of their usefulness as a
landscaped buffer.
3. Chapter 18.84 (Sensitive lands) of the Code will be satisfied
during the Sensitive Lands review process with the Hearings
Officer. It should be noted that it is possible that the site
plan will need minor revision as a result of this review.
4. Chapter 18.100 (Landscaping and Screening) of the Code is 15
-, foot wide except for a thirty foot set—back which is required
when the property abuts the Pacific Village Apartments; and,
The following additional findings have been made by the City Council.
5. The applicant has proposed to realign the right of way for Ash
Avenue adjacent to the site in order to create some curvature
of the street. The proposed curvature will be aesthetically
pleasing and conducive to maintaining slow traffic speeds
which will be compatible with the residential neighborhood.
6. The applicant has presented a conceptual site plan which has
been modified from the conceptual site plan approved by the
Planning Commission. The modified pian would eliminate the
creation of a roadway through the site connecting Ash Avenue
with Main Street and Pacific Highway. No plan policy or
provision of the Development Code requires such a roadway to
go through the property. The modified plan submitted by the
ORDINANCE NO. 85-23 Page 4
applicant is preferable to the plan approved by the Planning
Commission because it would help to insulate the residential
i neighborhood east and south of the property from commercial
traffic from the subject property and from the central
business district. Adequate alternative accesses from Ash
Avenue to Pacific Highway already exist on Burnham, Frewing,
Garrett and McDonald streets, among others.
7. In 1982, the City reviewed and approved a site plan for the
subject property, and approved a traffic analysis conducted by
CH2M Hill in March 1982. The evidence indic«tes that the
traffic volumes and traffic-related impacts of the proposed
development will not be significantly different from that
approved in 1982. It is estimated that, upon full build-out,
the development will generate approximately 11,200 one-way
vehicle trip--ends on a daily basis, and 1,060 p.m. peak hcwr
vehicle trip ends. 'The surrounding street system has adequate
capacity for this traffic.
WHEREAS, the Council concludes that the relevant criteria for
.. granting a Zone Change for Tax Lot 300 on the southeast side of Ash Street are
Statewide Planning Goals 1 and 2 and Section 18.66.030 of the Community
Development Code; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council concludes that the proposal is consistent
with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines based upon the
findings below:
r,
( 1. Goal 0 1 is met: because ttxe City has adopted a Citizens
Involvement program including review of all development
applications by the Neighborhood Planning Organization (NPO).
In addition, all public notice requirements were met.
2. Goal # 2 is met because_ the City applied all applicable
Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and
Development code requirements to the application; and,
WHEREAS, -the City Council concludes that the proposal is not
consistent with the applicable standards in the Community Development Code as
set out below:
o Section 18,66 030 of the Code indicates that the subject
property as well as the other nearby parcels zoned R-12 (FAD)
shall be developed in accordance with the provisions of the
R-12 zone. A rezoning to CBD would conflict with the intent
of this provision of the code; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the zone change requested
was inappropriate, and
WHEREAS, the City Council found that the parcel of land west of the
proposers Ash Avenue right-of-way realignment which was zoned R-12 as depicted
caro the modified site plan submitted by the applicant should be zoned CBD; and,
ORDINANCE NO. £§rs�2.3 - Page 5
WHEREAS, the City Council found that it was appropriate to place a
PO designation on that portion of Tax Lot 300, as well as Tax
xoLot 2300 of the
and
2301 of the modified site that is zoned CBD and rezone that p i
modified site on the west side of 5W Ash Avenue proposed right--of••-way to
tr
CBD--PD.
The City of Tigard Ordains as follows:
SECTION 1: The City Council Upheld the Planning Commission approval of
the conceptual plan review with modification, and the
following conditions:
1. The modified site plan submitted at the City Council meeting
of April 29,1985, is acceptable subject to the conditions
whiMh fnllt p}; 3:
f
2, The project will be built in phases as described by the
applicant and Shawn on plans submitted at the April 29 hearing. k.
9. Phase I shall. include the retail building, all parking lots
and parking lot landscaping proposed in Phase I, all ingress
and egress from the project, all improvements bordering the
greenway, all oikepaths and pedestrian paths, all improvements
to Ash Avenue as re—routed, and grading of land included in
Phases IT and III. A finalized landscape plan shall be
submitted which guarantees the proper installations of the
landscaping materials and the perpetual maintenance of all
landscaping. Such maintenance shall include regular scheduled
pruning and feeding of materials.
The retail building which is included in Phase I shall be set
back 50 feet from the south property line of the development
as it adjoins the existing residential. neighborhood.
5, A PO designation is placed on Tax Lots 2300, 2301, and that
portion of Tax Lot 30o which will be west of the realigned
. -
right--of--way of Ash Avenue.
g, The shopping center will be built with temporary access to Ash
Avenue to allow residents of the Philadelphia Square
Apartments to exit through the site to Ash Avenue. Upon ..
Apartments
tion of Phase I and improvements to Ash Avenue, the
complbarrier on Ash Avenue, erected in compliance with policy
11.2.2 will be removed, as required in policy 11.2.3(e).
At
that time, no through traffic from the shopping area to Asti
Avenue will be allowed, as a barrier will be constructed by
the applicant at the location of the temporary access.
7. There will be no public streets within the shopping center.
r
8. No parking lot for commercial use will be constructed on tax
lot 300 east of the S.W. Ash Avenue realignment.
_.w� — page ORDINANCE NO.. �#5 � P g
i
9, Dedication of necessary right-F--Way is � •-,-rcqui-•rad so that the
applicant can build Ash Avenue. The dedication shall take
i place in conjunction with street vacation processing at the
applicant's expense.
10. Conceptual plan approval is subject to staff review of traffic
study inft,-mation submitted at the April 2.9 hearing.
11.. The park land shown an the plan, including greenway/floodway
areas, shall be dedicated to the City as part of Phase I.
12. A thirty foot setback along the south property line will be
maintained as it adjoins the R-1.2 zone.
13 , All subsidiary applications, documents, and fees shall be
r],_..1 ah the City, including, but not limited to, street
t tied w++••
vacation, sensitive lands, detailed pian review.
14, Staff conditions from the April 2, 1985 staff report, items
1.-4, must be complied with, as follows:
-
Sensitive (_ands approval will be required for all
grading and improvements within the 100 year flood
plain. A SensitiveLands of theroval Detail d shallP1 Plan obtained
submitted
prior to final approval
for review.
A detailed plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Director for approval that is in conformance with the
requirements in 18.80 of the Code. In addition, said
plan shall include the following information or
modifications:
with
ion
a, euffering and(3) (B) ng and Chapter,-t18 00 of(the
18.80.120(a,
Code.
b, Identification and location of noise sources
within the western portion of the project and L
method for shielding adjoining residences from
excessive noise impacts.
C. The landscaping plan for the development shall
preserve as many trees over six inch caliper on
the site as practical.
Specific conditions relating to public improvements
shall be applied upon Detailed Plan approval,
This approval is valid if exercised within one year of
the final decision date.
15. The grading of the entire site, including the area within the
r 100-year flood plain, shall be reviewed by the Park Board.
The location of the pedestrian/bicycle path shall also be
reviewed by the Park Boardprior to final approval of a design.
4 ORDINANCE W0. 85-2 - Page 7
i
6
SECTION 2: In Order to protect the public health, safety and welfare of '
the citizens of Tigard, it is necessary to adopt this final
order declaring the Council's conditions upon the Main Street
Development Corp. requests without delay, an emergency is
hereby declared to exist and this Ordinance shall become
effective upon its passage by the Council and approval by the
Mayor,
PASSED: By unanimous vote of all Council members present after being read by
number and title only, this 13th day of May, 1985,
Deputy City Recorder - City of Tigard
d
z
t
APPROVED: This 16th day of May, 1985.
E
a or Cita of Tigard
i
dft
i
'i
lw/1338P
r
F
I
t
i
3
f
t
t
t
ORDINANCE: NO. 85--25 - Page 8