Resolution No. 83-22 C7I'IY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 83-,Z�
IN THE MATTER OF THE DENIAL OF A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO.
82-136 ADOPTING A FINAL ORDER UPON COUNCIL REVIEW OF ITEMS S-4-82 AND ZC
12-82, AS PETITIONED BY THE ROBERT RANDALL COMPANY, APPLICANT.
(SUNNYSIDE ESTATES).
THIS MATTER came before the Council at its meeting of February 28, 1983, upon
the filing of a Motion for Reconsideration under TMC Section 18.84.330.
The Council had before it the entire record of the proceedings before the
Tigard Planning-Commission, which denied the request with one dissenting vote,
on September ', 1992. The applicant, The Robert Randall Company, sought
review of that decision by filing a timely Notice of Review on October 5,
1982. On December 6, 1982, the Council affirmed said denial and entered
findings and conclusions by Resolution 82-136.
® Based on the record in this case, the Council makes the following FINDINGS OF
FACT:
1. The findings of fact contained in Resolution No. 82-136 are hereby
FF reaffirmed by this resolution except as indicated below in Finding No. 3.
S. 2. By failing to provide a drainage plan with the application for what the
applicant has termed their 'hew proposal," the Council determines that the
applicant failed to show compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 11 as
well as submission requirements for subdivisions and rezonings. See
Resolution No. 82-136, Findings of Fact No. 9, December 6, 1982. The
applicant failed to deal with the drainage issue adequately by evidence
submitted in the record, thus failing to carry its burden of proof on this
point-.
3. The City has begun its scheduled revision of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan
which will bring the draft revised plan map, including consolidation and
revision of the existing NPO, Plans before the Council in February and
March 1983, rather than December 1982 as formed in Resolution 82-136. At
present, the Council has adopted the policy elements of the plan which
will be effective April 1, 1983, some of which (housing, public facilities
and services) affect the application under consideration. During March,
the City Council will deal with the map element of the Plan and the
implementing Development Code, which may well render moot the applicant's
contentions.
The Council also makes the following CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. The conclusions of law contained in Resolution No. 82-136 are reaffirmed
{ and hereby incorporated in this resolution.
f
RESOLUTION No. 83-_ad__
2. The Council concludes that the application should not be remanded to the
Planning Commission. The issue raised by the applicant's Motion for
Reconsideration (8)(1)(2)(3)(4) is the same as the issue which is the
subject of Resolution No. 82-136, Conclusions of Law Nos. 1, 2, and 3,
December 6, 1982. In view of the revision of the Tigard Comprehensive
Plan and implementing ordinances already in progress, no purpose would be
served by the remand, due to the change in applicable criteria.
3. The staff may not waive substantive requirements of an application when
accepting it for consideration.
4. The Council did not have a Comprehensive Plan amendment before it in this
aoDlication. The Council concludes that it was, therefore, not
appropriate to consider Comprehensive Plan issues which were not before
it. See Resolution No. 82-136, Conclusion of Law No. 4, December 6, 1982.
5. The applicant contends in Item II B(2) that the Council is free to approve
actions which vary from our NPO plans. We do not interpret either state
law, see ORS 197,175, 227.160 to 227.100, or our ordinance, TMC 18.84.100,
to allow this. In the event of conflict of differing standards, the
stricter regulation governs.
6. The Council also concludes that the applicant and the public are better
served by a new application being filed, if necessary after the adoption
of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Development Code, rather than sending
this application to the Planning Commission for a new hearing on criteria
other than that which was before the Planning Commission. previously.
The Council, therefore, ORDERS that the above referenced motion be, and the
same hereby is, DENIED.
The Council FURTHER ORDERS that the Planning Director and the City Recorder
send a copy of the Final Order as a Notice of Final Decision to the parties in
this case.
PASSED: This ,��? day of � 4 „ 1982, by the Council of the
City of Tigard.
�C ��
Mayor City . Tigan
ATTEST:
City Recorder — City Tigard
RESOLUTION NO. 83-x`
PAGE 2
(0458A)
i