Resolution No. 85-57 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. BS-
A RESOLUTION OF 1HE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION
DENIAL OF AN APPLICATION BY BALDWIN/ULLRICH AND ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
CONCLUSIONS (MLP 5-85, V 9-85, M 1-85)
WHEREAS, the Planning Director approved, on April 26, 1985, a request by Bill
and Jean Baldwin and Richard and Sharon Ullrich to adjust and then divide
three parcels of 0.29, 0.78 and 1.02 acres into five parcels of 40,300,
20,800, 8,700, 7,800, and 8,600 square feet as well as a variance to allow a
20 foot wide driveway width where 24 feet is required; and
WHEREAS, the decision was appealed to the Planning Commission and at at hearing
on June 4, 1985 the Commission reversed the Director's decision; and
WHEREAS, the applicant applied for only the lot line adjustment (M 4-85) and
received Planning Director approval on July 5, 1985; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the case at a public hearing on July 15,
1985.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
Section 1: The Council adopts the Following CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. Based upon the facts, findings, and conclusions contained in
Final Order 85-11PC (attached as Exhibit "A") issued by the
Planning Commission, the Council has determined the proposed
Partition (MLP 5/85) and Variance (V 9-85) are not consistent
with City policy and the Commission decision is upheld.
2. The Planning Director's subsequent approval of lot line
adjustment (M 4-85) does not conflict with Council's decision.
Section 2: The Council, therefore, ORDERS that the above referenced request
be, and the same is hereby DENIED. The Council FURTHER ORDERS that the
Planning Director and the City Recorder send a copy of this Resolution as a
Notice of Final Decision to the parties in this case.
PASSED: This 2 wd day of 1985.
Mayor - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
uty City Recorder - City of Tigard
lw/1629P
RESOLUTION NO, 85-
i
0A of
fxa;6;i
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
FINAL ORDER NO. 85- // PC
A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, WHICH DENIES AN APPLICATION
FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 5-85, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT M 1-85, AND VARIANCE
V 9-85 REQUESTED BY BILL AND JEAN BALDWIN AND RICHARD AND SHARON ULLRICH.
A. FINDING OF FACT
1. General Information
APPLICATION; Request by Bill and Jean Baldwin and Richard and
Sharon Ullrich to adjust and then divide three parcels of 0.29,
0.70, and 1.02 acres.into five parcels of 40,300, 20,800, 8,700,
7,800, and 8,600 square feet. A variance is also requested to
allow a 20 foot wide driveway width where 24 feet is required.
The property is zoned R-4.5 (Residential 4.5 units/acre) and is
located at 13500 and 13530 SW 121st Ave. (Wash. Co, raiz Map 2S1 3
CO. Tax Lots 4400, 4401, and 4500). The findings and conclusions
on which the Planning Commission based their decision are as noted
below.
2. Background
The subject properties were annexed to the City in 1979. No other
land use actions have been reviewed by the City. The Planning
Director approved the above application on April 26, 1985 and this
decision was appealed by NPO #3 on May 6, 1985.
3. Vicinity Information
The properties to the east_ on Terrace Trails Drive, one parcel on
the west side of 121st Avenue and one property imnediate to the
south are within the City and are zoned R-4.5 (Residential. 4.5
acres/acre). The remaining parcels are within Washington County.
The entire area is designated for Low Density Residential
development in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan.
Single family residences lie to the north (Woodcrest Subdivision)
and east.(Terrace Trails). A long, narrow parcel wit'% at mziCance
borders the subject properties to the south. his southern
property was originally to be considered as part of this proposal,
but it has been deleted at the request of the applicant.
4. Site Information and Proposal Description
The subject property contains three parcels and two residences
I
with driveway access onto 121st Avenue. The properties are long
and narrow and they extend from 121st Avenue to Terrace Trails
Drive, The Property slopes gradually from 121st Avenue down to
Terra4:d Til.,Drive.
FINAL ORDER Nt3a _&_PC - PAGE 1
The applicant proposes to adjust the configuration of the parcels
followed by a partition of the parcels. The end result will be 5
parcels of 40,300, 20,800, 8.700, 7,800 and 8,600 square feet.
The three smaller parcels aro undeveloped and at private drive is
intended to provide access to Terrace Trails Drive.
A variance is a to requested relating to the length and pavement
width requirement in the City Code for private drives. The Code
requires a 30 foot wide access strip or easement with at 24 foot
wide, paved driveway with a maximum length of 100 feet. The
applicant is proposing to install a 20 foot wide drive within a 30
foot wide easement along the northern property line. That will be
approximately 230 feet long.
5. Agency and NPO Comments
The Engineering Division has the following comments:
a. An easement will be required for the sanitary sewer line.
b. A street opening permit will be required to gain access to
Terrace Trails Drive.
C. Parking should be restricted for 25 feet on either side of
the driveway and a stop sign should be provided.
d. A new mailbox cluster will be required.
The Building Inspection Office has no objection to the request:.
The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has the following comments:
a. The vertical clearance for the drive shall be a minimum of 13.5
feet.
b. The driveway shall be at least 20 feet wide and capable of
supporting loads up to 40,000 pounds.
C. "No Parking" signs are needed aloha the driveway.
d. All portions of the residences shall be within 500 feet of a fire
hydrant.
NPO af3 is opposed to the proposal for the following reasons:
m. Traffic of five additional houses on Terrace Trails Drive.
h. The 20 foot wide private drive will inhibit police and fire
district access.
C. The small area on Terrace Trails Drive that is north of the
driveway may be a maintenance problem.
FINAL ORDER NO.�__-�,�PC — PAGE 2
Several letters have also been received in opposition to the proposal.
The concerns related to the additional traffic, emergency access, and
drainage.
e. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
The review of this proposal is subject to the applicable policies in the
Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the relevant sections in the Community
Development Code. The criteria relevant to the lot line
adjustment/partition are Plan Policies 2.1.1, 6.3.1, 6.3.2, 6.3.3,
7.1.2, 7.4.4, and 8.1.3 and Community Development Code Chapter 18.50 and
Sections 18.96.080, 18.96.090, 18.108.070(m), 18.162,030, 18.162.050(e),
18.162.060, 18.164.030(a), and 18.164.060(e).
The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal is consistent with
the applicable portions of the. Comprehensive Plan based upon the
following findings:
a. Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning
Organization was given an opportunity to comment and surrounding
property owners will be informed of the proposal.
b. Policy 6.3.1, 6.3.2 and 6.3.3 are satisfied because the proposed
lot line adjustment/partition is virtually the same as the
development in the area. Nearby lots are 7,500 to over 10,000
square feet in size and the lots proposed are all in excess of
7,800 square feet. Also, detached single family residences are
proposed for the undeveloped lots.
C. Policy 7.1.2 is met because the Engineering Division has reviewed
the application and has found that adequate water, sanitary sewer,
and storm sewer facilities are available.
d. Policy 7.4.4 is met because the development will be required to
connect with the public sewer system/
e. Policy 8.1.3 is satisfied because the driveway access can be
established in a manner that is consistent with City requirements
for sight distance, public improvements, and safe access onto
Terrace Trails Drive. j
The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal is not totally
consistent with the applicable portions of the Community Development
Code based upon the following findings:
a. Chapter 18.50 is satisfied because the proposal meets the minimum
lot size (7,500 square feet) and dimensional requirements of the
R-4.5 zone.
1
b. . Section 19.96.680 is satisfied because the proposed lots are of
sufficient size without including the land devoted to the common
driveway.
Q.
FINAL ORDER MO.&-ryj PC - PAGE 3 f'f
c. Section 18.96.090 is satisfied because adequate lot width is
proposed to meet the 10 foot side yard requirement for houses on
"flag lots".
d. Section 18.108.070(x) and 18.162.050(e) are not satisfied because
the parcels did not have 15 feat of frontage on the public street.
e. Section 18.164.030(c)(1) is not met because the private drive will
exceed 100 feet in length.
f. Section 18.164.060(e)(1) is not met because the proposal will not
allow for the efficient re--division of the subject property and
adjacent lots to the south.
C. DECISION _
Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning Commission
denies M 1-85, MLP 5-85, and V 9-85.
It is further ordered that the applic-nt be notified of the entry of this
order. s
PASSED: This / day of 1985. by the Planning Commission of
the City of Tigard.
A. Donald Moen, President
Tigard Planning Commission
(9SL:pm/1481P)
FINAL ORDER NO.95'//-PC — PAGE 4