Loading...
Resolution No. 80-28 7 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON f RESOLUTION No. 80-_,19 } A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL INITIATING A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION TO THE E CITY OF TIGARD OF LANDS DESCRIBED HEREIN AND REQUESTING FORWARDING TO THE PORTLAND t METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION. (Short Title: Ventura Court). A Resolution initiating annexation to the City of Tigard, Oregon, of the territory bounded by a line: i A parcel of land in the Southeast quarter of Section 34, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the iron pipe on the north line of the southeast quarter of Section 34, T1S, R1W, W.M., North 89045' West, 103.9 feet from the quarter corner on the east line of said Section 34. Running thence South 0033' West, 533.13 feet to a point in the center of County Road /452, from which an iron €' pipe bears North 0033' East, 20 feet; thence North 89016' West in the center of said road 170.0 feet to a point from which an iron pipe bears North 0033' , East, 20.0 feet; thence North 0033' East, 531.7 feet to an iron on the north line of said southeast quarter of section 34; thence South 89045' East along said north line 170.0 feet to the place of beginning, and containing 2.08 acres more or less, or 2.0 acres exclusive of said road. WHEREAS, annexation to the City of the territory so bounded would constitute a "minor boundary change" under the Boundary Commission Law, ORS 199.210 to 199.510; and i WHEREAS, by authority of ORS 199.490 (1) (a) the Common Council of the City way initiate annexation; and S WHEREAS, the lands described in this petition are now zoned in Washington County as "RU-4" and the Tigard Comprehensive Plan designates said lands as "R-7 PD" Urban Low Density Residential, Planned Development. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, A municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, at a regular session held on the 14th day of April, 1980, that: Section 1: The Council, pursuant to ORS 199.490 (1) (a) hereby initiates proceedings for annexation of the territory to the City. Section 2: The Council hereby approves the proposed annexation and requests the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission to approve it. Section 3: The City Recorder is hereby directed to file a certified copy of the Resolution with the Commission at once. Section 4: It is the intent of the City Council to zone this property to the Comprehensive Plan designation upon approval of this annexation by ordinance, following the approval of the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary Commission. �;7 " Dated: This :_ day of ATTEST: %IMaayort Recor r Par.e :YtF:S�OLUT10N f & WASHINGTON COUNTY C ADMINISTRATION BUILDING—150 N.FIRST AVENUE l HILLSBORO,OREGON 97123 PLANNNG BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS March 25, 1980 LARRY ARRY K. DEPARTMENT LK.FRAZIER,AICP,APA,Director MILLER M.DURIS,Chairman 1503)64843761 JIM FISHER,Vice Chairman VIRGINIA DAGG �f) I Mr. Aldie Howard, Director Tigard Planning Department P. 0. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Aldie: The following is in response to your letter of March 18, 1980, concerning your proposal to amend the Tigard/Washington County Urban Planning Area Agreement. Specifically your propose to replace Special Policy D: "The COUNTY will not approve a land use proposal in the Urban Planning Area if the CITY presents evidence to show that the proposal would not facilitate an urban level of development in the future upon annexation to the CITY." Your letter indicates you wish to replace Special Policy D with: "The COUNTY will not approve a land use proposal within the Urban Planning Area unless the proposal is in conformance with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan." The County can see several potential problems with your proposal As th, UPAA clearly states, the county will consider adoption of the City Comprehensive Plan designations for those areas under the county's jurisdiction within the Urban Planning Area. Likewise the UPAA clearly states the City of Tigard will have the opportunity to review certain specified proposed land use actions prior to county action. E The county can anticipate that the only time your proposed amendment would be $ truly operative is during the time prior to county adoption of the City i Comprehensive Plan designations. After adoption of the city plan. designations, there should be no potential for provisions of land uses which may be in conflict with the city plan designations. � a Mr. Aldie Howard, Director March 25, 1980 Page 2 M t Your proposal seems to attempt to put the onus of interpreting and implementing ' the city plan in areas where the county has no existing legal ability to accomplish such a task. Your proposal seems to indicate you wish the county to interpret and implement not only the City Plan designations, but also city policy dictates. This clearly goes beyond the county's existing legislative ability because the City's Plan and its land use designations currently have no legal status for those areas outside of Tigard's existing city limits for which the county has jurisdictions. Additional, I feel that it would be inapporpriate for county staff to make judgments concerning city planning polir.y as it may be contained in the City Comprehensive Plan. Likewise, i feel that the UPAA as presently constituted, provides the City of Tigard an excellent ability to comment on land use actions under the county's jurisdiction prior to county action. This ability to comment allows the city an opportunity to interpret existing city policy from the city's point of view and provide comment prior to county action. I understand the intent of your proposal. Unfortunately, I do not agree with the proposed amendment for the reasons stated above.` The intent of your proposal can be ecurin 'urisdiction of the subject property t rou h annexation. Short of annexation, i believe the contents of the existing AA optimize the City of Tigard's ability to participate in land use actions which have jurisdiction as part of the unincorporated portion of Washington County. i Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your proposal. in the future, we would appreciate more time to comment on City of Tigard proposals such as the subject proposal. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please call Brent Curtis, Senior Planner. S4cere , Frazier, AICP, APA Director LKF:BC/fr cc: Arthur J. Schlack Edgar Storms Sue Klobertanz Linda Macpherson C1TYOF TIGAP WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON April 1, 1980 Larry Frazier, Director Washington County Planning Department 150 N. First Hillsboro, OR 97123 Re: Ventura Court Subdivision, North Dakota Street, Tigard (1S1 - 34DA, Lot 200) Dear Mr. Frazier: In the course of reviewing recent annexations along both sides of North Dakota Street in Tigard, it has, come to our attention that the Washington County Planning Department has approved a preliminary plat for Ventura Court Subdivision, located on a 2 acre parcel which is now "islanded" by the City of Tigard. Since this subdivision is within Tigard Is.Comprehensive Plan area-and could now be annexed to the City administratively, we have a vested interest in its develop- meat. L. Because this subdivision will be part of the City of Tigard sooner or later, we wish to object strongly to the preliminary plat of Ventura Court as proposed for the following reasons. 'r 1. Lotting Pattern The lotting pattern attemps to squeeze 8 lots into as little space as possible. The average lot size is 4902 sq. ft., which is sub-standard according to the Tigard Zoning Code for single-family attached use (5,000 sq. ft. per unit). Lots 3 and 6 are narrow and L-shaped, which may be impractical for common driveways and attached housing. 2. Private Street The proposed 24 ft. private street to serve 8 dwelling units is grossly substandard for a local street. it is objectionable from a safety stand- t point, since it is a deadend with no turnaround for emergency vehicles. Parking on this street would further impair the access for residents or emergency vehicles. {{ i 3. Use of the Flood Plain G Substantial portions of lots 4, 5, and 6 are within the flood plain, including areas that would appear to be needed for dwelling units. The proposed use of TRACT B, the North k of the site, is "Storm Drain Purposes." 12420 S.W.MAIN P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 Larry Frazier April 1, 1980 Page 2 If this is common ownership open space, how will lots 1,2,7 and 8 have access to it? The adjoining property to East (1S1-34DA, Lot 100) is presently under review by the City for a 20 lot Planned Development for single family attached. The property owner will dedicate the Flood Plain portion of this tract to the City for greenway purposes. We feel that Ventura Court's use of the Flood Plain is insensitive and not Coordinated.with Tigard's Environmental Design and Open Space Plan or Sensitive Lands Ordinance. 4. Leel Discrepancy in Lot Lines The legal descriptions for lots (1S1-34DA) 200 (Ventura Court) and 100 to the East disagree on a 6.3 ft. strip on the East line of lot 200. Ventura Court was platted at a 170 ft. width, but if it is legally only 163.7 £t. wide, this reduces the lot sizes even further and creates legal problems foi future owners of those lots. In summary, we hope you will.withhold any further approvals of the present plat because it puts too many lots on too little buildable space, violates the Flood Plain and good site design principles, creates an unsafe and inadequate street access, and may be legally clouded. We are concerned that this subdivision should not be allowed to develop as proposed and we will soon be proposing an administrative annexation of this site to the Tigard City Council. in the meantime, your cooperation in the review of the subdivision, we can jointly assure that Washington County does not create a future liability for the City of Tigard and the future residents of Ventura Court. Sincerely, jq,l6Aa^J 77. Richard N. Ross Tigard Planning Department Aldie Howard Planning Director Encl. 1. Ventira Court Preliminary Plat 2. Tax Lot map of area 3. Legal Descriptions JN 34 T I S R I W IN.M. 4 COUNTY OREGON f ALE 1"=100' s- i SEE MA? � IS I 34A0 •,J"7 s Sco .:. . loo T z ld z 'ttl zoo I 9 V BOO,sa-zs i 2.00AC. 1 6.36AC Q B I - I 700 9 GOV. LOT 3 �F600 jfv l�l�l I 9.00AC. 8 -- � 1� m (fl 7 500 t 400 I - c 300 1 a° - ,]a.za sas•,a'z � ,�i 1� �i 1 it�<� NORTH L! ��OHN L. HICXLM O.L.C. NO. 54 -.eCO 2900 3000 3100 3300 'O6•]] _ 6AC. .96AC. ,96AG .92AC. 4.4TgG _ CtYy 2 � = C PErJor r!�- iooac�57S� i � • 3.M1]'CM. 1.3Z]C:•... � a8i.]! ' SNlTIP3.- POINT /� � V15�VvICIR R f ou27. a y, n c jl[� i•�'41�t Cud r SC/Pvil//5/o.V - zs9�so'sl'w 27 .90 I'V./ 170.00 -, eo3.vo �p,ST l/4 0 1 FD S/A"ZF 1VIUSHPCOe --- L✓? 2oo I LoT lOo ipt .fdEE05 I tD TRA(-I' - �'�nGGa�'I �-DEEos DiS�62E E POP, STORM DRAIN PURPOSES —J---. (COMMON O vm6asmtP,> Q• n {•i N t` 3r tJ 1 0: ` '�gT- .,. 33.00 so.ao 51.99 33.00; Y oF- g w ut 320b 4. opigi �6 8 b_mfi Iz Q L. zs.m— iz3oo 40.00 tU No 8m solo TURNAROUND 51143+ �J W tp solo b] .�G•7 -X2..99 S �1 - 73.Gb ,� E, 1.189 33'low� cl LuNas-3e 45240 N I C- ---n1=Y Tl- �U b9 oaV EAG°G.T ce 7300 t .T LOJ�'T tV89'-+P l0"W �( Np9"3S'10`W / /J � �, 10' STR��T OEble'ATIbN '�, _ StiC/. oAi�OTA ST. baa 1 GLS. 452.