Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Packet - 06/23/1980
a Q, TIGARD CITY COUNCIL s j REGULAR MEETING s o JUNE 23, 1980, 7:30 P.M. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL LECTURE ROOM NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME ON THE APPROPRIATE SIGN-UP SHEET(S) LOCATED AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM, PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK WILL THEN BE CALLED FORWARD BY THE CHAIR TO SPEAK ON THE INDICATED ITEM(S). AGENDA: 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. CALL TO AUDIENCE FOR THOSE DESIRING TO SPEAK ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. 5. CONSENT AGENDA: (All matters under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted in one motion in the form listed below. There will be no these items. If discussion is desired separate discussion of by any Council member or member of the audience, that item will be removed from the consent agenda and will be considered separately.) (a) Approval of Minutes: June 9, 16 & 18, 1980 (b) Approval of Expendituresand Investments: , $64,988.54 (c) Written Communications - Receive and File ' Transmittal from Van Lom Kraxberger Architects re: proposed Multi- Family Residential Zone. (d) Subdivision Compliance Agreement & Performance -Bond or Cash Bond Escrow Agreement Approve and authorize Signing by Mayor and City Recorder. Koll` Business Center Panorama Extension Sanitary Sewer (e) RESOLUTION No. 80-51 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE FINAL rPUBLIC{IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN CLOUD CAP SUBDIVISION. (f) RESOLUTION No. 80-52 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN GREENSWARD PARK SUBDIVISION. (g) RESOLUTION No. 80-53 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING ALL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN SHADOW HILLS SUBDIVISION, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD AND WEST OF 112TH AVENUE. (h) RESOLUTION No. 80-54 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN WATKINS PLACE SUBDIVISION, SUBJECT TO HEREIN SPECIFIED CONDITIONS. ` (i) RESOLUTION No. 80-55 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN AS 72ND AVENUE SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF PACIFIC HIGHWAY AND NORTH OF BAYLOR STREET. Cj) Monthly Reports: Receive and File Building Library Police Finance Planning 6. COMPUTER SOFT14ARE AGREEMENT& 26 MB DISC DRIVE (a) Recommendation of City Administrator. 7. RESOLUTIONZ No. 80- A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AS TO FORM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT No. `1 FIRE CODE. (a) Presentation by Washington County Rural Fire Protection District No. 1. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS APPEALS 8. CONDITIONAL USE CU 4-80 (The Robert Randall Company) NPO #1 The Planning Commission denial of a request by Thomas J. Edmonds for a Conditional Use in an M-4 "Industrial Park" zone for RV outside storage as allowed in the Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.52,020. Also requesting use of floodplain area for RV storage located at 8900 SW Burnham (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2SI 2DB, Tax Lot 200 and Tax Map 2SI 2AD, Tax Lot 2200), which decision has been appealed to the City Council. All testimony will be limited to a summation of previous statements. (a) Public Hearing Opened (b) Summation by Planning Director (c) Public Testimony Proponents Opponents Cross Examination (d) Recommendation of Planning Director (e) „Public Hearing Closed (f) Consideration by Council 9. ZONE CHANGE ZC 12-80 AND CONDITIONAL USE CU 6-80 (Eaker and Associates) NPO #1 The Planning Commission approval with conditions of a request by Eaker and < • Associates;for a Zone Map Amendment from C-3 "General Commercial" to'C-P "Commercial Professional" and a Conditional Use request for a professional office building on .97 'acres located at 13620 SW Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1` 2CC, Tax Lot 900), which decision has been appealed to the City Council. All testimony will be limited to a summation of previous statements. (a) Public Hearing Opened (b) Summation by;Planning Director (c) Public Testimony Proponents Opponents Cross Examination PAGE '2 - COUNCIL''AGENDA - JUNE 23 1980 `` E s P _ _ y (d) Recommendation of Planning Director (e) Public Hearing Closed (f) Consideration by Council (g) ORDINANCE No. 80- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Eaker and Sherman Lee Associates). PUBLIC HEARINGS 10. S.W. 74TH AVENUE SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROPOSAL. (a) Public Hearing Opened (b) Summation by Director of Public Works (c) Public Testimony Proponents Opponents Cross Examination (d) Recommendation of Director of Public Works (e) Public Hearing Closed (f) Consideration by Council (g) ORDINANCE No. 80-- AN ORDINANCE CONFIRMING AND RATIFYING THE RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF JUNE 9, 1980, WITH RESPECT TO "74TH AVENUE SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT"; APPROVING, RATIFYING AND ADOPTING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM; DECLARING RESULTS OF HEARING HELD WITH RESPECT THERETO; DIRECTING SOLICITATION OF BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION; ' PROVIDING FOR THE MAKING OF SAID IMPROVEMENTS, AND-DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. 11. S.W. HILLVIEW STREET SEWER I14PROVMENT DISTRICT PROPOSAL. _ (a) Public Hearing Opened (b) Summation by Director of Public Works (c) Public Testimony Proponents Opponents Cross Examination (d) Recommendation of Director of Public Works (e) Public Hearing Closed (f) Consideration by Council (g) ORDINANCE No. 80- AN :ORDINANCE CONFIRMING AND RATIFYING THE RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 'JUNE 9, 1980, WITH RESPECT TO "HILLVIEW STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT"; APPROVING, RATIFYING AND ADOPTING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF x SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM; DECLARING RESULTS OF HEARING HELD WITH RESPECT THERETO; (DIRECTING'SOLICITATION'OF BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION; PROVIDING FOR THE MAKING OF SAID IMPROVEMENTS, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. PUBLIC NOTICE HEARINGS: 12. ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 14-80 AND CONDITIONAL USE CU" } 7-80 AND SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT, M 4-80 (Senior Citizen Center) NPO #F`1 A request by William R. Bruner for a Zone Map Amendment with a Preliminary and General Program Review request from R--7 "Single Family Residential" to R-7PD "Single Family Residential Planned Development District" and a request for Conditional'Use to build a 'Senior Citizen Center on 3.257 acres located at the corner of O'Mara and Edgewood Streets (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2DB, Tax Lot 600). PAGE '3 - COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 23, 1980 s (a) Recommendation of Planning Commission. (b) Consideration by Council. (c) ORDINANCE No. 80- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Senior Citizen Center) . 13. ZONE. CHANGE, ZC 11-80 (Patricia Jacobsen) NPO #1 A request by Patricia Jacobsen for a Zone Map Amendment from Washington County R11-4 to City of Tigard R-7 "Single Family Residential" located at 9850 SW Garrett (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2SI 2CC, Tax Lot 400). - (a) Recommendation of Planning Commission. (b) Consideration by Council. (c) ORDINANCE No. 80- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION FOR r1N AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Patricia G. Jacobsen) 14. ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 8-80 AND CONDITIONAL USE, NPO #7CU 8-80 AND VARIANCE, V 5-80 (Alpha Properties) A request by Alpha Properties for a Zone Map Amendment with a Preliminary and General Plan Program Review request from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7PD "Single Family Residential Planned Development District" and a request for Conditional Use to build duplex (attached single family) units and a Variance request for a cul-de-sac located at 10485 SW North Dakota Street (Wash. Co. Tax Map ISI 34DA, Tax Lot 100) . (a) Recommendation of Planning Commission. (b) Consideration by Council, (c) ORDINANCE No. 80 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF 'TIGARD-AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Alpha Properties/Dakota Court) 15. : ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 29-79 (Winter Lake) NPO #7 A request by Russell Kruger for a General Plan Review for Phase II of Winter Lake located between SW;135th and SW 130th, north of Morning Hill and Falcon Rise Drive (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 33D, Tax Lot 300 and Tax Map 1S1 33DC, Tax Lots 100,' 300, 400 and 500). (a) Recommendation of Planning Commission. (b) Consideration by Council. i (c) ORDINANCE No. 80- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION FOR,AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE, (Winter Lake). ; 16. RESOLUTION No. 80- A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION,' (a) `Recommendation of Selection Committee. 17. RESOLUTION No., 8Q- A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING AN `APPOINTMENT TO THE PARK BOARD. (a) Recommendation of Selection Committee. PAGE 4 —COUNCIL AGENDA - .JUNE 23, 1980 18. ORDINANCE No. 80- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 14.04 AND 14.05, TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO ADOPTION OF THE 1979 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (a) Recommendation -of City Administrator. 19. REDUCTION OF LIBRARY HOURS (a) Request by Head Librarian 20. RESOLUTION No. 80- RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TRANSFERRING FUNDS FOR UNFORESEEN EXPENDITURES. (a) Recommendation of Finance Director. 21. RESOLUTION No. 80- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BUDGET, DECLARING THE AD XIALOREM TAX LEVY FOR THE GENERAL FUND AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1981. (a) Recommendation of City Administrator. 22. CANVASS OF VOTE - Loaves and Fishes measure on May 20, 1980 election. (a) Report by City Recorder. 23. T.M.E.A. CONTRACT - Adopt and Authorize Signature of Mayor & City Administrator. (a) Recommendation of City Administrator. 24. STORM WATER STUDY STATUS REPORT (a) Report by City Administrator. 25. POLICE STUDY' STATUS REPORT (a) Report by City Council/City Administrator.' 26. COLONY CREEK PARK Removal of Landscaping - $2,200 (a) Recommendation of Director of Public Works. 27. CITY OF PORTLAND SEWER AGREEMENT (a) Recommendation of Director of Public Works. 28, OTHER 29. ADJOURNMENT PAGE 5 - COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 23, 1980 r- T I G A R D C I T Y G 0 U N C I L REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 23, 1980 - 7:30 P.M. 4 1, ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Alan Mickelson; Councilmen Tom Brian (arriving at 9:10 p.m.), John Cook, Kenneth Scheckla; Chief of Police, Robert Adams; City Administrator, R.R. Barker; Public Works Director, Frank Currie; Planning Director, Aldace Howard; City Recorder/Finance Director, Doris Hattig; Research & Development Assistant, Martha McLennan. 2. CALL TO AUDIENCE FOR THOSE DESIRING TO SPEAK ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS. (a) No one appeared to speak. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JUNE 9, 16 and 18, 1980 (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 4. APPROVAL OF EXPENDITURES & INVESTMENTS: $64,988.54 (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - RECEIVE & FILE Transmittal from Van Lom Kraxberger Architects re: proposed Multi-Family Residential Zone. (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to receive and file. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 6. SUBDIVISION COME'LIANCE AGREEMENT & PERFORMANCE BOND OR CASH BOND ESCROW AGREEMENT -- Koll Business Center Panorama Extension Sanitary 'Sewer (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve and authorize signing by Mayor and City Recorder. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 7. RESOLUTION No. 80-51 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE FINAL PUBLIC II^PROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN CLOUD CAP' SUBDIVISION. (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of 'Council members present. 8. RESOLUTION No. 80-52 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN GREENSWARD PARK SUBDIVISION. ` (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. k r a Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 9. P.ESOLUTION NO. 80-53 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING ALL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTSWITHIN SHADOW HILLS SUBDIVISION, GENERAL- LY LOCATED NORTH OF BULL I10UNTAIN AND WEST OF 112TH AVENUE, (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 10. RESOLUTION No. 80-54 RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN WATKINS PLACE SUBDIVISION, SUBJECT TO HEREIN SPECIFIED CONDITIONS. (a) Motion by Councilman Cook seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve, Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present.. 11. RESOLUTION No. 80--55 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER II:PROVEMENTS KNOWN AS 72ND AVENUE: SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION, GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF PACIFIC HIGHWAY AND NORTH OF BAYLOR STREET. (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilmen Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 12. MONTHLY REPORTS: RECEIVE AND FILE Building Library Police Finance Planning; ('a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present.` 13. COMPUTER SOFTWARE AGREEMENT &'26 14B DISC DRIVE (a) City Administrator reported that further research had been done regarding the appropriate capacity of the disc drive unit. He stated that the 26 Megabyte Disc Drive would be more cost effective, faster, allow less error potential. He went on to compare prices of the 10 and 26 MB units demonstrat- ing that even though the '26 would cost more now, it would provide` substantial savings as the systems is implemented and expanded. (b) Terry Fleming, a representative of Wang, stated that this change would cause a slight delay, but he did not expect it would be more than'a few weeks. He also recommended the 26 MB disc. Council questioned him regarding the fact that this had not been proposed earlier and asked how long this system would ovide for City needs. 'He stated that the 26 MB disc was a new technology pr and had therefore not been identified in the comparative study of other, similar agencies. lie also stated that the 26 14B disc should suffice for all currently proposed applications for five years. ` PAGE 2 -COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES June 23, 1980 e { (c) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve the 26 MB disc drive system. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. (d) City Administrator reported that the contract for software with Cogebec was ready to be executed. He pointed out that this would establish Cogebec as the prime contractor and also specify that the support firm was to be mutual- ly agreed to by the parties (Telios). He recommended approval. (e) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to authorize the Mayor to sign and execute the agreement. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 14. RESOLUTION No. 80-56 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL APPRO�MED AS TO FORM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY RURAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO 1 FIRE CODE. (a) Wilburn Dodge, Washington County Rural Fire Protection District No. 1, stated that they were seeking endorsement of a fire prevention ordinance which would adopt the 1979 edition of the State of Oregon Uniform Building Code, Mechanical Code, and Fire Code, and establish minimum fire flow requirements in the district. This change was merely an up-dating of the ordinance to conform to the new State codes. He pointed out that the Washington County R.F.P.D. contained only a small area within the City. (b) City Administrator reported that the Building Official had recommended approval of this item. (c) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 8:00 P.M- 15. CONDITIONAL USE CU 4-80 (The Robert Randall Company) NPO #1 The Planning Commission denial of a request by Thomas J. Edmonds for a Conditional Use in an M-4 "Industrial Park" zone for Rv outside storage as allowed in the Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.52.020. Also requesting use of floodplain area for RV storage located at 8900 S.W. Burnham (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2DB, Tax Lot 200 and Tax Map 2S1 2AD, Tax Lot 2200), which decision has been appealed to the City 'Council. a brief history of the project stating that the (a) Planning Director gave developer had requested a conditional use permit to allow outdoor RV stor- ` He stated that the staff report had recommended a trade-off age on the site. with the developer to allow much reduced storage and require a dedication to the 'greenway. He reported that the Planning Commission had denied recommenda- tions of the staff report. PAGE 3 - COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - June 23, 19$0 e _ (h) Paul Yang, Robert Randall Company, stated that they had appealed this decision because they felt that this type of service was necessary in the community and they were willing to make every effort to insure that it was a compatible use. Specifically he stated that the developer was willing to accept the reduced development proposed by the staff report, to provide adequate fencing and screening from the neighborhood, and dedicate a large portion of the property for park use. He requested that Council give every consideration to the appeal. (c) Paul Johnson, 9300 S.W. Hill Street, opposed the appeal stating that it would destroy the greenway buffer between this land and the residents, would be detrimental to wildlife and the future park, and would pose a problem as the 8" of gravel fill would wash down and alter the flooding in the area. He presented to Council. a petition containing 54 signatures of neighboring property owners opposing the development. (d) Ron Stark, 9340 S.W. Hill Street, opposed the appeal pointing out the encroachment on the floodplain. He also spoke to the unfeasibility of the project in terms of acquiring flood insurance on the stored property. (e) Larry Saub,- 13230 Burnham Court, stated that the proposed development would be in line of sight with his property. He felt that this would be detriment- al to the neighborhood and encroach on the greenway and proposed park. He opposed the appeal. (f) Planning Director stated that there were two principal choices before the Council: 1) deny the appeal, awaiting either a new proposal from the develop- er which might be a more compatible use and hope for a park dedication at that time, or consider purchase of the entire 3 acres for park (rather than acquiring only one acre through dedication); or 2) reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and place the restrictions on development as outlined in the staff recommendation. He recommended the second choice. (g) After discussion by Council, Councilman Scheckla moved to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal. Seconded by Councilman Cook. Notion approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 16. ZONE CHANGE ZC 12-80 AND CONDITIONAL USE CU 6-80 (Faker & Associcates). The Planning Commission approval with conditions of a request by Eaker and Associates for a Zone Map Amendment from C-3 "General Commercial" to C-P "Commercial Professional" and a Conditional Use request for a professional office building on .97 acres located at 13620 S.W. Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1'2CC, Tax Lot 900), which decision has been appealed to the City Council. (a) Planning Director explained the appeal regarded an objection to a condi- tion requiring the provision of access from this development through one Tot to a major parcel to be developed in the future. ' He stated that this restriction had been placed to limit access to 99W and pointed out that the end point of this access would align with a`future traffic light onto 99W. r PAGE 4 - COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - June 23, 1980 I, (b) Fred Anderson, representing J.B. Bishop, spoke first to the lack of formally adopted rules regarding the appeals process. He felt that this was a. disadvantage to the appellant because they would have no advance method of determining the appropriate format for their testimony. In addi— tion, he felt that there was no assurance that the informal Council rules were being applied uniformly. He went on to detail the reasons for the appeal, stating that it represented a violation of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in that it depriv— ed property rights without due—process of law or just compensation (by man— dating a private access through private property). In addition, he pointed out that this type of arrangement, espoused to limit access to 99W, was unique and not a standard operating practice in other- projects along the highway. Finally, he stated that procedural problems existed in that several effected property owners had not received notification in order to participate at the Planning Commission level. (He submitted two documents which are marked exhibit A & B) Councilman Brian Arrived: 9:10 P.M. (c) J.B. Bishop, Suite 303, 10505 S.W. Barbur Blvd. , spoke in favor of the appeal. He felt that the lack of notification to property owners and lack of consulta— tion with the NPO had resulted in a disjointed decision by the Planning Commission. He spoke to the violation of property rights of the developer, the neighbor through which access was designated, and his own property. (d) Jerry Eaker, Eaker & Associates, architect for Mr. Lee (the developer), stated that his client had no real problem with the condition requiring future access and that it would not impact significantly on the project one way or the He further stated that the primary concern of his client was to obtain other. the zone change so that they might proceed with the development. Finally, he pointed out that he had conferred with the NPO early in the planning process. (e) " Mr. Chuck Stearns, adjoining property owner, protested the Council rule that only'those'who had testified before Planning Commission could testify before the Council, stating that he had not been notified in advance of the Plann— ing Commission hearing. (f) . After discussion by Council it was the consensus of Council to allow Mr. Stearns to speak, as his; lack of testimony at Planning Commission level had apparently been 'a staff error. (g) " Mr. Stearns, owner of the property through which access was designated, pro — tested`this decision, stating that it would cause depreciation in his property value without due process or just compensation. (h) - Planning Director clarified several points in the discussion. He stated that notices were sent to ten (10) property owners and four (4) were returned due to insufficient or incorrect addresses (which were obtained from most recent property ownership records at Washington Councy). He pointed out that PAGE 5 — COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES — June 23, 1980 a in there are 43 instances in the City, where street plugs of this recendenttin that this project exist--therefore, this case did not set a p respect. He went. ori to say that this was merely an effort to direct eloped in the future by Mr. Bishop and to traffic to tne. signal to be dev reduce access points to 99W. He felt that it would not be a significant detriment to Mr. Heinz's property as there was a zoning split at the proposed line of access development which would tend to indicate that access between the two parts of the property would occur here anyway. Finally, he recommend- ed that the decisior, of the Planning Commission be upheld. (i) OFDINANCE No. 80-50 AN OT� T� EAOING MEGWITH LCT TO A SANENDTTOTHE 1970ZONINGMAP OF pANFN THE CITY OF TIGARD AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE THE & Sherman Lee Associates) . Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Mayor Mickelson to approve. After much discussion. by Councils Councilman Cook moved to amend the Ordinance as follows: Section 'L, subsection 4, to read, "Northern access subject to but the joint agreement by the property owners, access may exist. Site 11 Motion to amend, seconded Design Review Process to include these parties. by Councilman Scheckla. d by 3 to 1 vote of Council members present, Council- Motion to amend approve man Brain abstaining. Amended Ordinance approved by 3 to 1 vote of Council members present. Council- man Brian abstaining. Councilman Brian explained that he would abstain from voting as he had not heard the entire appeal. COUNCIL RECESSED: 10:10 P•I�• COUNCIL RECONVENED: 10:20 P.M. 17, S.W. 74TH AVENUE SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROPOSAL (a) Public Works Director gave a brief history of this project and stated that at this point preliminary, engineering and cost estimates have been completed. He recommended authorization for staff to proceed. (b) Mr. Harvey King; 4505 S.W. Bernard, Portland, owner of tax lots 1600, 1700, and 1800 spoke_in favor of the LID, and requested Council approval. He pointed out the increases in cost which any delay would cause. Gheen R. Abbot, 4952 S.W. Oakgrove, Lake Oswego, owner of the southern most (c) parcel in the district, spoke in favor of the LID. 10 (d) George Koeber, 9320oS'W. 74thWasrhe�alreadyf tax ohadts 1aeoernaccess'totthedUSAat hefeltno reason t participate line at the back of the property. He stated that he did not object to the w project but objected to being forced to participate when he has no need of the service. Public Works Director pointed out that it may be in his best interest to participate due to increased costs and limitations on usage of the USA line• sessments had been based on amount of build- Ha went on to explain that the as PAGE 6 COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - June 23, 1980 q e able land (outside of the floodplain). Mr. Koeberg stated that hip engineering study showed a very different con- figuration of floodplain, and wondered if in his development proposal. he could use the City drawn line (the assessment line). Public Works Director stated that a double standard could not be applied, and therefore he could depend upon the final line used for this LID. (e) ORDINANCE No. 80-51 AN ORDINANCE CONFIRMING AND RATIFYING THE RESOLUTION __. _ OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF JUNE 9, 1980, WITH RESPECT TO "74TH AVENUE SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT"; APPROVING, RATIFYING AND ADOPTING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM; DECLARING RESULTS OF HEARING HELD WITH RESPECT THERETO; DIRECTING SOLICITATION OF BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION; PROVIDING FOR THE MAKING OF SAID IMPROVEMENTS, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Motion by Councilman Brian, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 18. S.W. HILLVIEW STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROPOSAL (a) Public Works Director explained that this was a project of four recently annexed lots (annexed in order to obtain sewer). (b) Phil Westover, 10340 S.W. Hillview, spoke in favor of the proposal. (c) Eldon Kellas, 10360 S.W. Hillview, spoke in favor of the project (d) Tom Jurhs, 10330 S.W. Hillview, waived his -right to speak and concurred with previous testimony in support of the project. (e) Public Works Director recommended approval. (f) : ORDINANCE No. 80-52 AN ORDINANCE CONFIRMING AND RATIFYING THE RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF JUNE 9, 1980, WITH RESPECT TO "HILL- VIEW STREET SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT"; APPROVING, RATIFY- ING MID ADOPTING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM; DECLARING RESULTS OF HEARING HELD WITH RESPECT THERETO; DIRECTING SOLICITA- TION OF BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION; PROVIDING FOR THE MAKING OF SAID IMPROVEMENTS, AND DECLARING AND EMERGENCY. Motion by Councilman Scheckla, seconded by Councilman Brian to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 19. ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 14-80 AND CONDITIONAL USE CU 7-80 AND SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT, M 4-80 (Senior Citizen Center). A request by William R. Bruner for a Zone Map Amendment with a Preliminary, and General Program Review request from R-7 "Single Family ResidentialtP to R-7PD "Single Family Residential Planned Development District" and a request for a Con- ditional Use to build a Senior Citizen Center on 3.257 aures located at the corner of O'Mara and Edgewood Streets (Wash. Co. Tax`Map `2S1 2DB, Tax Lot 500). PAGE 7 - COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - June 23, 1980 r (a) Planning Director reported that this was a request for a zone change from R-7 to Rv-7PDfor a conditional use permit for the Senior Citizen Center. He report- ed that the Planning Commission had approved the request with 12 conditions. Finally, he noted the importance of strictly applying the rules to this City project as they would be applied to any other project within the City. (b) Gary Chamberlin, 8824 S.W. O'Mara, stated that he favored the project, but was concerned (due to the tentative nature of the funding) that it not be left halfway finished. He approved of the conditions stated in the Ordinance. (c) ORDINANCE. No. 80-53 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AiNID FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Senior Citizen Center). Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote'. of Council members present. 20. ZONE CHANGE, ZC 11-80 (Patricia Jacobsen) NPO #1 A request by Patricia Jacobsen for a Zone Map Amendment from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7 "Single Family Residential" located at 9850 S.W. Garrett (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2CC, Tax Lot 400). (a) Planning Director explained that this was a request to change the zone from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7. He recommended approval. (b) ORDINANCE No. 80-54 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICA- TION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING I4AP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AND FIXING Ali EFFECTIVE DATE. (Patricia G.Jacobsen). Motion by Councilman Brian, seconded by Councilman Cook to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 21. ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 8-80 AND CONDITIONAL USE, CU 8-80 AND VARIANCE, V 5-80 (Alpha Properties). NPO #7 A request by Alpha Properties for a Zone 3-lap Amendment with a Preliminary and General Plan Program Review request from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7PD "Single Family Residential Planned Development District" and a request for Conditional Use to build duplex (attached single family) units and a Variance request for a cul-de-sac located at 10485' S.W. North Dakota Street (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1Sl 34DA, Tax Lot 100). (a) Planning Director stated this was a. change from County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7PD and a'conditional use to allow' the 'development`of duplexes. He stated ` that this was a high quality development and would please the Council. ' He recommended approval. r (b) ORDINANCE No. 80--55 AN ORDTNANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION FOR AN,AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF TUE CITY OF TIGARD AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Alpha Properties/Dakota Court). PAGE 8 - COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - June 23, 1980 N MM Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. - 22. ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 29-79 (Winter Lake) A request by Russell Kruger for a General Plan Review for Phase II of Winter Lake :Located between S.W. 135tMap 151and 33D,`�Tax30Lot'300rand Taxth of oMapn1SI133DCnll dTax LotsFalcon R100, Drive (Wa 300, 400 and 500). (a) Planning Director stated that this was for a urge development containing 87 single family, dwellings and 138 apartment units, as well. as a large park area. He recommended approval. G FINDING` (b) ORDINANCE No. 80-56 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTIN , WI-.1P, RESPECT TO ANI APPLICA- ___ TION FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE (Winter Lake). Motion by Councilman. Brian, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 23. RESOLUTION No. 80-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL 14AKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. (a) City Administrator reported that applicants had been interviewed by the Selection Committee. He went on to report that the committee recommended the appointment of Craig Helmer and Donald Moen. (b) Motion by Councilman Brian, seconded by Councilman Cook to approve the ` recommendation of the Selection Committee and appoint Craig Helmer and Donald Moen to terms on the Planning Commission. Motion approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 24. RESOLUTION No. 80-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING AN APPOINTMENT TO THE PARK BOARD. (a) City Administrator reported that applicants had been interviewed by the Selection Committee. He went on to ;report that the committee recommended the appointment of Audrey Kartak. (b) Motion by Councilman Brian, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve the recommendation of the " .lection Committeeand appoint Audrey Kartak to the «Park Board. Approved by unanimous vote of'Council members present. 25. ORDINANCE. No. 80-57 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 14.04 AND 14.05, TIGARD MUNICIPAL, CODE, RELATING TO ADOPTION ,OF THE 1979 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE AND DECLARING Ali,EMERGENCY AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. { PAGE 9 - COUNCIL REGULAR 14EETING MINUTES - June 23, 1980 1 (a) City Administrator reported that this was merely an up-.dating of our ordinance to conform to the new state codes. He reported that the Build- ing Official recommended approval. (b) Motion by Councilman Scheckla, seconded by Councilman Cool; to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 26. REDUCTION OF LIBRARY HOURS (a) Irene Ertell, City Librarian, reported that she had just ost a full-time CETA staff position, and this on top of the already stretched manpower, would require either a reduction in service hours or additional manpower. She went on to say that she understood the current budget restraint, and recommended that Council. authorize the reduction in service hours by clos- ;ng the Library to the public on Mondays. (b) After discussion by Council regarding appropriate notice to clients and NAM implementation date, it was the consensus of. Council to approve the reduction ir► library service hours. 27. RESOLUTION No. 80--59 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGAR.D CITY COUNCIL TRANSFERRING FUNDS FOR UNFORESEEN EXPENDITURES. (a) City Recorder/Finance Director explained that this was merely a year end shuffling of funds to meet budget requirements. She recommended approval. (b) Council questioned the $2,200 item for Colony Creek landscape removal. Planning Director explained that this was to remove raised medians in the street as they were causing access problems. He felt that as this had been developed in this way zither because of staff or Planning Commission error, and as he had extra funds in the 1979-80 department budget, his department should pay for the removal. (c) Motion by Councilman Scheckla, seconded by Councilman Brian to approve. Approved',by unanimous vote of Council members present. 28. RESOLUTION No. 80-60 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BUDGET, DECLARING THE AD VALOREM TAX- LEVY`FOR-THE GENERAL FUND :AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1981. (a) City Administrator recommended approval. (b) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by CouncilmanBrian to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 29. CANVASS OF VOTE - Loaves & Fishes - May 20 1930 (a) City Recorder reported that the vote on the, Special Levy for Loaves & Fishes was 2,780 Yes, and 785 No. PAGE 10 - COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES- June 23, 1980 ' t (b) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Brian to accept into the record. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. 30. T.M.E.A. CONTRACT (a) City Administrator explained that the contract had been ratified by Council and merely needed authorization for the Mayor to sign and execute the con- tract. He recommended approval. (b) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by three to 1 vote of Council members present. Councilman Brian voting Nay. 31. STORM WATER STUDY STATUS REPORT (a) City Administrator suggested that this might be postponed as the hour was getting late. (b) Consenus of Council to postpone this item and have it placed on a study session agenda. 32. POLICE STUDY STATUS REPORT (a) City Administrator reported that the Chief of Police and he had met and discussed the recommendations contained in the report and were currently pre- paring implementation procedures for the recommendations they agreed with and documentation to refute those with which they did not agree. He stated that a final report would be presented to Council on July 21, 1980. 33. CITY OF PORTLAND SEWER AGREEMENT (a) Public G7orks Director reported that Portland was nervous about the City`s commitment to participate in a sewer agreement to allow drainage into the Tigard system from the 'Lesser Road;,Sanitary System., He went on to say that Portland requested further indication from Council that they were willing to`participate"in this agreement. (b) Consensus of Council to indicate that they were still willing to participate in this agreement. 34. OTHER (a) Councilman Scheckla requested a status report on the, weed problem atSummer- that letters were mailed and that TDC field. City Administrator reported would have 10 days to resolve the problem or the City would have the work done and cY,a ped to them. (b) City Administrator reported that he had been researching actions to prepare' for future ash fallout from Mt. St. Helens. Chief of Police reported that he was obtaining draft ordinances dealing with emergency speed limits and ash clean-up and would,present them to Council in the near future. PAGE 11 _'COUNCIL REGITLAR MEETING MINUTES - June 23, 1980 (c) Mayor requested that a discussion be scheduled at a study session to discuss further procedures for hearing appeals. (d) City Recorder reported that local students would soon be traveling to Shipley, England and suggested thatgift to the students there would be appropriate. She asked for suggestions. Council discussed sending some ash from Mt. St. a Helens and Tigard Daffodil bulbs. (e) City Recorder reported that the CETA receptionist was resigning. She went on to say that this position could be re-filled for up to 18 months (with no prior commitment to the employer to pick up the position when the CETA grant expired). She asked for Council authorization to proceed. Consensus of Council to authorize re-filling the position. They expressed concern that no promises of transition be made or implied. (f) Public Works Director requested authorization of payment in the amount of $2,148.10 to RCI for construction of the Summerhills sewer. He reported that this payment was already 30 days overdue (due to oversight) and requested immediate attention. Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Brian to authorize payment. Approved by unanimous vote of Council members present. (g) Planning Director reported L.C.D.C. had authorized funds in the amount of $7,500 for a maintenance grant. He will formally apply to bring our comprehen- sive plan up to date. (h) Director of Public Works gave status report in that the parking lot at Cook Park was paved. MEETING ADJOURNED: 11:53 F City Recorder j ATTES . Pa PAGE 12 - COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - June 23, 1980 r Date June 23, 1980 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on j the following item: (Please print your name) Item Description: 'AGENDA ITEM # 8 RnRPRT RAUDAT L CONDITIONAL USE A PEAL_ .— I Proponent (for) ! Opponent (against)tame, Address and Affiliation l Name, Address and filiation62, f ME WE L, Date June 23, -.- u i I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on i the following item: (Please print your name) j Item Description: AGENDA ITEM # 9 rTu�ra r. zc , E� 7,OWE CT4ANM-P. Z r NnTTTnNAT USE APPEAL Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation F�6/Z- 3—'5"7S.w./C�QL� /T�Jqut.4tlN i^ `S :!C G C �W 'w �.Kc'12 � �ss,�aAras -�Bc�1fY'c�Ys�.✓L f'fioJe<.f; L'. L�-�-�G�S.t���_1���r'` �~!/ k'152R SV,) PACs Valu Lo —A iI Il W13 I, �. Tate �JUP7E 23 . 1980 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following, item: (Please Print your name) Item Description: ' AGENDA ITEM n 10 _ - �,� Tk�-AVF SETAIT-,I? T"11RRQ17Fr:a -UT a1-S- — Proponent (for) opponent (against) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation r r'7 o OCU _e- " S-V 0.4, A Date JUNE 23 , 1980 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the followi.a:g item: (Please print your name) Item Description: AGENDA ITEM 11 1 S.W. iflbhviEW Proponent (for) Opponent (against) Name, Address and Affiliation ` Name, Address and Affiliation 1,-2 7 S ' 'f�LL,siGeL( 33 3 a i ._._...._.._.. _... ._ . _.._ ...._..__.. -- -.__._._. ._... ..,, .._ ._,,. ,....-._......_._....,.. . _ ..._.;_.. .. Date `JUNE 23, 1980 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print your name) Item Description: ' AGENDA 1TEDA # 12 SR. CITIZEN CENTER ZONE CHANGE -- Proponent (for) Opponent (against) <ameAddress and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation =a ,HClresL�. zsFlak r Ow� - — - yR� r '. t I nECF-IVSD THE (i 1qVAN LOM KRAXBERGER PARTNERSHIP CITY OF TIGARD ARCHITECTS PLANNERS M.A. Raleigh Hills Professional Bldg. 4455 S . Scholls Ferry Road June 16, 1980 Portland,oregon 97225 (503) 292-8895 City Council City of Tigard 21.420 s.w• Main Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Council Members: ing the Exhlb3_t "A" draft of the propos I have been reviewed multi-family 2, A-20, A-40 zone concept is a good one. I am The A-I Residential Zone. 20, however I do think that there are areas heartily in favor of the proposal, m thoughts for your Where the proposal can be improved. I am listing Y review. ures or Section 18.24.010 Permitted Uses. trNmeanslthat residence i_sdonhthe be used" is pretty harsh language-- ur ose, (rented ;• site of a A-12, 20 or 40 zone it cannot be used for wed Pt Phen must be or indavidually Occupied) and in fact if it: is Occup vacated, if we interpreted the directive literally• believe the statement should read "No buildings or -20stra d A- shall be I A-'LO and A-40 zones hereafter erected, enlarged or altered in the A-12, except for the following uses: etc..- on 18.24.030`Does not list a rear yard requirement. I assume it will Sects yards. be identical to side ya Section 18.24-fl30Z4) where buildingp are grouped as one project the mini- be This M distance between buildings must noted,inrthe ee stingecode) .the T yards changed to `10 instead of , from its multi-family unit if de- requires that garages must be 20 away and innovativeness tached. This will subsantiallbelreduce ieve that units the bshould be allowed to of design for n projects. group until the area requirements for units (listedh�nu�tsCi)torsmalleeded. This Will allow for clustering, or other grouping articu- communities within a larger;comp3.ex. This requirement will be p laxly helpful in`the A-20, A-40 zones where densities will be nearly-impos- this requirement• tem sible using r . H. Page 2 9 I object mildly to the 18.24.060 recreational space requirements which I feel should be tied to a bedroom count rather than a unit count. A three bedroom unit would conceivably generate more need for recreational space than a one bedroom unit. Section 18.24.040 refers to a 30' height restriction but does not clarify what the measurements are to be taken from i.e. average grade?, highest elevation around building?; and where the height is to be measured to i.e. peak of roof?, average height of all roofs in multi-roof structure?, finished ceiling height?, mid point between highest peak and fascia of roof? Note that you could have a three story flat roofed building in this zone (which I think is perfectly okay) . A-20 zone Section 18.24.080(1) A front yard setback of 40 feet is not realistic. Some lots may be rectangular and not particularly deep. The 40' serves no particular advantage either to the project or the surrounding area. It would tend to (a), create less open areas at the ;interior of the project (b); cause greater densities at other perimeters of the site (back ,yards of neighbors) (c) cause buildings to go higher. A more realistic setback would be in the 20 to 25 foot range. Multi-family projects tend not be have a front yard since units generally -- ' face in all directions. The front yard of a project may be the rear yard a of a building) The larger the:project, the less definable the 1°front" becomes. ; I would recommend that you concentrate on perimeter spaces of units-- those which are habitable spaces i.e. balcony or patio uses. Those "living spaces" should have'a minimum setback requirement from property lines and other units (minimum 15 'feet). A 40 foot setback in!both the A--20 and A-40 zones would make :it difficult to achieve the intended densities. The required setbacks between buildings mould make it impossible. Section 18.24.090 are you really interested in having a 60 foot high build- ing with 10 feet of a property line? Section 18.24.100(5), What .are you saying? All parcels designated;as A-20 moist be rezoned (by ,the city?). "And subject to the standards".. does this mean that the project does not have to be zoned as a P.D., merely subject to the standards? If this is true then a`p•roject can be built r 3 Page 3 on land of less then one acre if the requirements of the P.D. are met... I have a serious objection with this item in particular for I don't feel it is justified to require that only people with one acre or more have the right to build in this area. First I don't believe it is legal, for it does not give all parties equal opportunity to utilize this land for its intended use. Example: Suppose a land owner with 1/3 of an acre is ad- jacent to a street on one side and land owner B (with an excess of one acre) on the other. Land owner B derides to construct his apartment unit on his property, and he has the right to do so. When he comes in are you going to hold him up until he buys out his neighbors 1/3 acre? No, he has met the requirements of the P.D. and you therefore must allow him to continue. The land owner of the 1/3 acre is left holding the bag. He can- not utilize his property for its intended use. (the possibility of use exists if he goes thru an appeal process with the Planning Commission, but it is not an outright use). In the interum according to Section 18.24.010 the land owner may not use his building structures or land for any use. Secondly, a land owner with less then the required one acre is forced to "bargain" with the adjacent owner (or possibly several seperate owners) of land in order to construct any kind of multi-unit development. If the adjacent owner does not wish to sell, the first owner may not consider any additional improvement of his property and must wait until a change is made, or he must sell. It seems to-me; that there are.other ways to handle this, situation, other than requiring largeland parcels, such as requiring combined driveway access,, open space and pathway joint usage or even recreational vehicle joint facilities. You will not be happy with large groups of similar sized, similar constructed,' similar colored building. Some smaller, individualized project are pleas- ing and desirable. Not all people with property ,have the desire, or the financial capabilities to back` a twenty to forty unit project. This leaves these properties to the larger developer. Is this what you desire? Section 18.24°100(6) The density computations are not equitable. If a land owner has property which is considered in the "sensitive land area" =, he 'should be allowed to use that density on the remainder of the property` as is the standard for Planned Unit Developments. He/she should not have the usable recreation/open space deducted before the total number of units are determined. Again it would not be possible to achieve the densities you desire using the formula you propose. If you run thru your formula for net buildable area you will see that it is not workable. Taking off required land improvements such as required street dedications is proper, but to remove usable recreation and open space (generally 60% of a project) before establishing density would not leave enough unit count to worts. with. €€6 I { Page 4 The same conditions exist for the A-40 zone as have been mentioned for the A•-20. As a property owner in Tigard and Architect of many projects in the city, I am in favor of the new designations for A-20 and A-40 properties, how- ever I ani concerned with verbage in the draft and its effect on the land holders and developers of these effected parcels. I would recommend that further studies be conducted before this change is enacted possibly with input from more builders, architects and planners in addition to the C.P.O. groups. Examples showing test projects should also be considered to check the workability of the setbacks and densities which are proposed. A hard look at the one acre requirement both legally and practically should also be made. Your desire for a method of improving the densities of multi-family is commendable--your vehicle for achieving it seems to need work. Yours very truly, THE 'VA LOM/KFiAXEEP}GER PARTNER IIP, A.I.A. J ph Van Lom, A.I.A. Ar' i ct ' I ,JMVL.bd cc: Aldi Howard. 4 p., 1 PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL PROGRAM BUDGET JUNE 23, 1980 Community Protection Police 4,344.34 Public Works 6,497.54 Municipal Court — 671.52 Planning 565.25 Building 593.89 Total Community Protection 1.2,672.54 Home & Community Quality Public Works 2,972.43 Social Services Library 930.78 Aged Services 249.49 Youth Services 1,682.43 Historical Total Social Services 2,862.75 Policy & Administration Mayor & Council 239.97 0 Administration 364.91 t' Finance 1,133.08 Total Policy & Administration 1,737.96 City Wide Support Functions Non-departmental 6,736.68 Misc. Accounts (refunds & payroll deductions, etc.) 14,657.38 ` CAPITOL BUDGET Community Protections Road Acquisition & Dev. Parks Acquisition & Dev. 20,385.92 Storm Drainage 1,512.41 Total Community Protection 21,898.33 Support Services Building Improvements DEBT SERVICE General Obligation Bond Bancroft Bond 1,450.47 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY Contract TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 64,988.54 MAPr t T a 4Z'W MEMO TO: CITY COUNCIL DATE: JUNE 23, 1980 FROM: BUILDING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: MONTHLY REPORT FOR MONTH OF MAY, 1980 May ' s building activity included permits for 12 signs, 14 single family residential, 2 residential alter and repair, 9 commercial alter and repair for a total valuation of $1, 370,265.00 Fees for 25 permits $5872.25 Fees for 12 signs 200.00 Plumbing Activity - 16 452.00 Mechanical Activity - 5 44.00 Business Licenses - 16 704.00 TOTAL - - $7222.20' Sewer Permits - 20 $10,940.00 Sewer Inspections - 20 `500.00 King City Activity included 1 residential alter and repair, for a total valuation of $2,300.00 and fees of $24.00. TIGARD BUILDING PERMITS - MAY, 1980 contractor addresstype valuation Sam Gotter (plancheck fee only) 10080 SW Riverwood Lane residential $ 6,5,300. Jacobs Construction 15050 SW Bath Avenue residential 55,400. Tom Miller 15015 SW Dawn Court residential 49,100. Ed Hodgson 15005 SW Leslie Court residential 56,200. Arista Estates, Inc. 10055 SW Picks Court residential 83,100. Trademark Homes 12635 SW Glacier Lily Circle residential 76,000. Trademark. Homes 12570 SW Glacier Lily Circle residential 64,000. ' James Daniel 12303 ,SW Katherine Street residential 60,100. Lynn Forsberg 10025 SW Kent Place residential 74,100. Steve Vink 12160 SW Ann Place residential 107,700. } Jim Clark 16380 SW Sylvan Court residential 61,100. Trademark Homes 12940 SW Glacier Lily Circle residential 69,700. Wedgwood Homes 13265 SW Falcon Rise Drive residential 60,500. Arista Estates 10075 SW Pinks Court residential 60,800. C. A. Griffith 14315 SW McFarland Blvd. residential a/r 7,000. Charles Griffith 14315 SW McFarland Blvd. residential a/r 5,100. Western Foundry 8200 SW Hun'ziker Road commercial a/r 3,500. Summerfield Comm. Center 11545 SW Durham Road commercial a/r 8,000. Prendergast` Moore Co. 9735 SW Shady Lane commercial a/r 52,000. Mercury Deva Co. 12180 SW Scholls Ferry Road commercial a/r 22,000. Columbia Hardwood & Moulding 12700 SW Hall Blvd. commercial a/r 22,000. Fred Meyer Corp, Inc. 11565 SW Pacific Highway commercial a/r 60,000.' Union Oil Co. 15650 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd. commercial a/r 4,000. Oak Hill Invest. Co. 13825 SW pacific Highway commercial a/r 10,000. Jerry Kolbie 14385 SW Pacific Highway commercial a/r 225,000. TOTAL FOR MONTH OF MAY, 1980 - - - -$].-,361,700. KING CITY PERMITS - MAY, 1980 S. Taylor 16580 SW Matador Lane $2,300.00 ME N aJ CD cu CL 0 0 0 0 Lf) 0 0 C= 0 0 0 0 O O O N O O U') 0 0 0 0 N O C-• �-1 -1 01) M lD lD C7 L(1 - N -A CO �# ice- 1 O tb m T T ro ro C N L 0? O 014-) -ice 17 "q "6 •r-1 C4 •-I LD (1) (U 0 M � a) _ -N s (1) ro o o O C U') La N rz O O ` ro o r, >, o. U -P -P _ - J -0 •r-1 +% E O •,-I Cf) u) E E E CU O C� ca ro cc I- ro N ca O N f4 CU CU ro n n O S 0cicr- 7 •r-1aE: F- OO M U) U Cn L- C :3 o Cn cr) Cn (n LC) O :N CO M Ln tI7 Lf7 C) -i C) O O LC) d' �-t m LC) Ln CC �- _ONO:nN'C7 U') I'D r-I -4 1-1 0� �D ' -H m C- r-1 1-1 -4 -1 r'-! r-I O ' 'E co N rn C O [o 4-3 cx C C CL o •,i U E: ro (U E.;C -P CI C C :W aaoH ro -0HH p E EO' —Cim a - O O to -U U T CA co '..-'I F- cCI 1. olC 01 CD •r-I •,i `S U7 "o -0 to En 7 Z Z W Cn Cn ,-I C 1-- O_ -0:T•r1 0 T T a) 0 t-+ t0 7 0. ro ro ntl L L Q C 7 c i ca Cn E -0 E E L. ro M W Y H ctr4 -1 cu :D 'C ro ro N N (D u) MM cr_ 2,_ cr—u) X y FINANCIAL STATEMENT EXPENDITURES Date May 31, 1980 OPERATIONAL BUDGET 1979-80 Current Year-To Budget Month Date 1. COMMUNITY PROTECTION POLICE SERVICES 1.1 1.1.1 Patrol * +5,000 $ 448,558 = 453,558 32,696 s 404,191 1.1.2 Investigation + 5,205 99,1.51 = 104,356 8,216 89,276 1.1.3 Communication & Records + 2,295 110,557 = 11�,85'L x,472 110 464 1.1.4_ Administration 65,556 4 X59 58,4-02 __ TOTAL * + 12,500 $ 723,822 = 736,322 55. 243 662,333 PUBLIC WORKS 1..2 1.2.1 Street Lighting 71,180 _ 5,535 48,087 1.2.2 Traffic !:! & Marking Sig 1250 22,404 = 22,654 1 515 451001 ,2. Engineering +2 825 •6, 74 = 48 999 1 970 dministration & Clerical 2,450 21' 9 = 18,58_ 1=655 16,024 TOTAL n + 625 $ 160,797 =161,422 10.675 128,587 MUNICIPAL COURT 1.3 1.3.1 Arran-invents &Trials 25,757 2 004 22.049 PLANNING AND ZONING 1.4 1.4 1 Current Planning 69,657 2,132 43,790 1.4.2 Advance Planning 30,189 2079, 22,914 $ 99,846 4,211 66.704 DOTAL - BUILDING INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT 1.5 1.5.1 Plan Checking` 15,803 1,175 13,329 1.5.2 Field In 62,066 5.224 54,365 1.5.3 Suppoxt Services (Clerical) 9,495= 786 8 519 1.5.4 Program Administration 10,643' 783 _ 9.326 TOTAL $ 98,007 7,968 85.539 2. HOME AND COMMUNITY QUALITY x .a� PUBLIC WORKS 2.1 2 1 9.2 Sanitary Service +12,800 181,71 = 194,519 9,934 77,904 95 136 2.1.3 Streets and Roads - 4,800-4,250 241,580 = 232,530 3,432 9 2.1.4 Parks + 1 000 56,294 = 57y294 4,174 50,320 2.1.5 Storm Water Control + 11,500 27,946 = ' 39,446 1 229 28654 201.6 Special Projects 10,201; 832 9 307 2.1.7 AncillaryService 27,484 2 227 24,566 2.1.8 Engineering + 5,000 43,862 = 43,862 4 908 35' 266 2..1.9 Administration & Clerical -2,450 '24,527 = 22,077 1,914 18,786 2.1.11 :Insect Control + 4500 6,440 = 10 940 5 400 TOTAL * +23,300 $ 620,053 643,353 28,650 345,339 �` 'Trans. s, EXPENDITURES Date May 31, 1980 OPERATIONAL BUDGET Page 2 1979-80 Current Year-To 3. SOCIAL SERVICES Budget Month Date LIBRARY 3.1 3.1.1 Technical Services _ $ 37,991 2,279 317455 3.1.2 Community Services 54,292 4,618 49.112 3.1.3 0 eratior_s & Maintenance 4,146 251 3.162 3.1.4 Administration 12,342 966 10 928 TOTAL $ 108,771 8.114 94.657 YOUTH & AGED SERVICES 3. 3.1.1 Loaves & Fisches 6,000 5,651 3.2.1 Youth Services 49,699 41,020 TOTAL $ 55,699 46.671 4. POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION MAYOR AND COUNCIL 4.1 4.1.1 Policy and Direction +2,500 $ 10,614= 13,114 2X846 8 X661 CITY ADITINISTRATION 4.2 4.2.1 Management Functions 35,759 29907 31,412 Y-Staffunctions +9,700 -13273i 23 433 2,310 22,486 44v'2'y3 Yncnci ary unctions , 5 367 3,377 TOTAL +9,700 $ 53,350 = 63,050 5,584 57.275 FISCAL ADMINISTRATION AND RECORDS 4.3 4.3.1 Finance Program +5,635 74,448 = 80,083 '7,676 73,515 4.3.2 City Records 31,881 2,060 23,458 4.3.3 Management Support Services 9,120 766 8,640 TOTAL +5,635 $ 115,449 121,084 10,502 105,613 5`. CITY WIDE SUPPORT FUNCTIONS R,. NON-DEPARTMENTAL. FUNCTIONS 5.1 5.1.1 Legal Services $ 22,500 22230 178079 5.1.2 Insurances 43,750 39,954 5.1.3'Utilities 30,485' 1,628 26,078 5.1.4 Rent 7,175 605 -5,737 5.1.5 Postage 9,240 (2,000) 5,351 a 5.1.6 Audit7,250: 6,960 5.1.7 Memberships >9,591 440 - 9,921 + ' 5.1.8 Codification of Ordinances 2,500 _ __1.903 5.1.9 - Stationer & Supplies 2,000 1.354 4,760 5.1.10 ;Bldg. & -Equip.-Maint. & _Repair 7,500 215 5.1.11 Contractual Services 7,391 2,138 91001 ¢ 5=1:12 Unemployment Reserve 4,000 889 5.1.13 _ Donations 2,000 � 5.1.14Puhlicit & Coimnunit Relations 1,700 1 975 r 5.1 15 Materials &'Su2plies 700 13 283 5.1.17 Office_Equipment Expense 1,225 1,201 5.1.19 Contingency-3 , .3,135 442,115= 387,855 TOTAL -54,260 $601`,122 = 546,862 6,408 131:307 f CAPITAL BUDGET Dater May 31, 1980 Page 3 1979-80 Current Year-To 6. COMMUNITY PROTECTION Budget Month _Date HOPE AND COMUNITY QUALITY 6.2 6.2.1.3(7) Road Acq.. & Development $ 629,753 _ 12.000 _ 122584_____ o ar s cq & eve opment1SY,TSI- 20_►213 _`. 31 ,71.E 6.2.2.5(3) Storm Drains e 47,619 6,793 131_303 TOTAL $_108,523 29,006 57.600 DIVISION 6.5 6.5.1.13(1) Donations 2,000 6.5.1 Bldg. Im rovement Expense 147,273 6,341 89,484 TOTAL $ 149,273 6,341 89,484 7. DEBT SERVICE 7.1 General Obligation Bonds 9,000 9,000 7,1.1 --__=enerai 05ilgation ons Int. 1,041 1.,041 . Unappropriated Balance 26,445 TOTAL $ 36,486 10,041 _ 7.2 Bancroft Improvement Bonds 44,000 30,000 ancro mprovemen on s (Int.) 10-164 3,527 10,488 Unappropriated Balance 108,176 TOTAL $ 162,340 3.527 _40.488 4 . i TOTAL $ 3,929,909 181.079 1,952.348 I.R Mi ZO { } e a N GA u w C9 r0 ¢ 0 0 oa Ci X u1 O a M M1 M O M � 9 vi �n N 6 M w r O - E W -+ n d 1 Y coN M1 N t .i r OI vS W� rn ... N m r•! 3 � N w � N U) R p i Y 0.v 8 W N G r 01 w CL a v x M o 01 .iq 1w, W O S.0 na r H " •a•O N �I i C7- Md M tiny I �I U:ca.. 1 .F;.w { ro �1 v w 00 M H C• .Gi C3 Q) v w c c >' o w v v W y' Cl) M NN u'S M1 r � i v 1� G 1= 5:..O. �O r, M Vl M1 6� V�1 +rG �O O R w N M f0 90 Y a d G04 N f w Cl x O t �Q! O 14 G. G ❑ '6 f C o o aJ -11 d U :t� d u O v w r .. w a7J as •.� o+ J w O O W w.q V1 '. u •-i N X U L A > cl � to a. m 7 •.a H 1]. O � O+. m7 w W C E .: N W y [, '� a.+ Fri :,ice+ •� P n-: •� Y' - i U G 2a o a 'c m u w v: N m ".u� rrov w ;w . b -� a i v o v w d m v :3 u o 7 w C 3 w f: " i •a o �+r u v w G. 0 •c -o w v m v w ,� G a 1 a o o o U 4 d O) O L a X a O O O m G .i NU H a W 6 ` G� u • w aJ•o O O d c0 u a G C a VI a 7 CY IA �O 1� d N E W N m M n - W d N N v N i W r-+ O G A o o D C 00 G •O O u > E rn m N H a 0 W a w A o° e` u C 1 m u u.1-1 G - N H � y -'so+ O W U P4 W s- 10-1 U M F cuG o 7 M O N N p.� u Q) N rn W Y W Ci Ci e W m i' m `s4 'G C W a H00 < N MI W M W W tY. w co 0 v N•O �O c0 o] ul ul M - C 17 lei CD r: W O 1� O co " In N� EvO +7 �7 I� O D\ v T Ill �: N O !L L C N N W Uca aW C3 i N � Am L N ?M � O..a..t C4 > cJ 'Uy w a w > G u G r W •a 'a y `n w•�na C m v w ' x E .•u-I .� w m +N-' ^a-� w ro w v G 4 0 .. H K H X H - am o v •a a H ?. }O.+ B a H .tea }:+ ar-a ro13 O+Cd W "''.�.°a w .�.+ co W 7 7 .G aol rn Y+ N u1 O. . W H.0 C YI H M a G5 2 an g N � n � N1 ua0C� LL N E W )+ Q1'O 00 a C�� mv�w C U W m V G C l+4 N > 0 7 ro H v E W a u q � N w u v U c O a + 11 G y •ro•Nw� W v a rn m G o o :3 ^ � N uJ W .p H F:7 R. co U G Z 'V > M W W a m W Ij C7 C7 G O H W N O n M1 T M N M W O W O N Ocli CG G M 61 Gl O� n o U tL N N N W M E--1 O N � N S M O P �7 P Ol VJ P M N M W O M vl M H -zj' Im N.cr N O O 'o c0 N O O U ) C. O O O O .7 P O M N O H H c0 O CD O v1 O O .7 O+ d' 1 n . 7 0l M W H .r N CO M O 6` n vl O 1 N N P N may' N �tl s U +� r v y U W W ca dJ N y W f+ v T T w ba U.. a w F .0 T C G o o.:. W z X X m a" v C G v u v n. U m s > H F O 0.. X :N' g al U > b �1 Z V W W: Yo m Cl N > O N C O 7 :'.7 V) (n u) (r) C N G rJ C d 1,G N H a Q) N o a) yri : Imo+ m ...y +T 5 A .,Gy E u .v-) .v , NN 0,. 4 r y O O L....m -7, L. a L C O N o �y r3 7 0 S'" �.7'tea u1 7•<. .a.. W W :ti x.� .0 CI C a +� O N (n U ...2 cn V a; W cn (n U U b P. m O ca f., a • r _ N U N Cl 7 .p N [n d CO O M N v7 O n0 - U C oD Ln C C w vP O � 47 N N [MM. O G G .p y y•O Cl > a �� W a3 U q F O Cj w 7 P •c.o a ^ cn w w v v u o I M o a wi N e� � u i a ;;.x v•�� oM CG-" F lie W W H N v ^ A Z W ryP. ,.a w no N in y w w Y 7 ^ w N E G N v cd v� v W d N O M h i0 00 M O M N O of -. �' O M .f1 N .O. h .c H ,O E� M rl a0 M h N -.N "Io W I O O U O O O v1 N lo nNj lu 6D w i Y N N U co flo •_' s C G .q w N tG Cla w G7 w U N N w a.i d S •.•. etj 5 w awi .yl a w cY; N .+ d U - b C v w ..-) N w G 7 •d w... C g o w ... N G:.:C ++ -O d c.10 -r,•,' - c`'": ., m N N i+ .a. .w �o w C 3 u o o: .H fa on rn �' N cn w w ai n C P C C7 tn.... fG 'w i d m w .wi m rn w w 4 w a _ . C,n EyI cn N G T1� o m ❑ t I a i C � Lo H W co N O ;3 G a w O V =1 w 1 A z w WX W V CO O r- -0 G A 0 Z ei 7 N W G N G N.= g wxN cn Ln `yaw " F W.ee N 0 a - vw Y 0 H ca U H2 ,d to U. br4 N A F W u Z a.a col OO O O N (p OD O` O O C9, C^ VT tD m H H w k Y tj 3 '.i o w C j4 ID L A. N t G O U .0 � U ✓ U ..N }.a a Sa Ll :25 V �n a a n e N N N U G C C � N O 1 � I6 r,. 0 . 0 is� N G G C .v u❑ �I ¢. dG L .d r u j 1 O 1 V p� a+ H Z xa W b lam+ :3 .Ci G G v > �2 w w x in H.W z cc r1 N M I� M N N O' v C� : O W ^ M. N co Ka v 14 O c+: C. oo M rn a ni ol rn h O 1�4 C �M ✓1 h d ^ NoO 0,p" O N ul ."�'DW N H y O N �. e•A-t '�T O 00 O p• .O c0 O '� *"'^ (., O� M W LW N ai d } s o to ... F. '+� G U G N y •°-; n N v h W 4 u u ; p ca qj 43 N 2 C W G N U CI }+ Y L. .p G O .`L ., H'. m u H C u G.: H a G L` j ".Q. 3.:.� r H u O X y p.. C U v] CG W d UI CS G t. G •w ':.-_-,_,tea,!: H.n 1 M i � L'O !n G b G �m w k v o a C! m v P p y +�' w•c tnU W y 0 G� Q x w C4 v 'go 'A 0) cm InH 00, W F t`>Ta G G G O d H 7 ym v c} GL v w d to mw. . ,y rn a f• ro M N S OM1 M O N H i H W H H � G M -N a' 0 N r.: O M � 4 In S c N W L' r O• O, S oo oo D` M H N N N M1 10 M1 .� O P S O W O W Q` M1 u'1 h o+ O ci M1 O O O W O` Ti d M N S rn w O �O S tf1 P m W .D Q` V ,A OM1` M O N O` of O S N ri N sy M1 W It 11 II II li N M II II II ii 11 p M O N In �. O O14 . M p..H. p . O N ..OM1 O r-1 O M ^ s ul N N 1 4 _ w O to p_. rl S N c0 O t7 O F :N., CO H N W t� x q H Nle b b q W W o 0 py ..t it1 y 1 n G n > d 0 m 4 U a CG ,� :y 'd O ,dL V U G c U W 7 g f4 7 CD to Y+ It t:! N }+ 0 ,. �., N .0 O od O .`t 'x 9 i+ d G y .Qj C 3 y H C a w c m' .a 4 v w s v . _w .__ _ .. . .. _ _ _ ,� .,max.. _. x.- .. _ _z:r• .. ..._ x�d J U C F N N d W �Y N G •o � ' N�I t - Gs O O G co. p ty ii.-1 aJ•O n M fes.. H v E C, I u O .O+ r+ rd N HL y U n 0 v v �l :1 5��, U)U P+ - N n G W O ry1 O U t•1 eJ N u W l � N N �tii W W w. H w s� cn m a 43 N �a w o -1 0 p. co 0 N W 1J Cc U w G m In w Z G4 H W 14 w wV3 cz. u m`c v d y a!W pP.,4 IU ... N '.sF. 'W �.; W >+ r •, ; G 0 W w ,J L W N'> G 4. o caQ-. w wr w.. .Ui v F o CJ,O m cL i b ,o X F � °n. � � G t a ro h N <n w I m c C G •C vG 1 0 O iJ.-1 aJ b x ro v G G N u r=W m x H ro V Q N G N•0 •n, _ N ro C P �°0 w a " v x m W W 1' s% C3 o g v v u G CO N wain s o m o H> H bI u"o 00 P O P �a O N N r. O•F.. C a �n �•+W N W M N N O N � F O V -_ v v ,a01 m v v w ao W � "'•.GI E vl c0 P O P N W O 0, N N E-4 d G MN P n d N c0 L .- GO M N N O N M r � (/ A� W C N W t� c0 W .-1 N '0 P t� O ri c-1 .O �Y' It1 M .-i O M 'V 00 P �a :O H .Y W ul +O (^ 90; O cC P ri v1 N N M N O V W C1 P ra yr + C H T L N _ { W ro U3 INa Q . H> a H m G H M 'dH M x H ,.0_ G O O _. H :.co Q M d 00 H h U W 4L N In N 4 7 to :y.. y C �.. y ' 5 ` ami N O 0 � .4 E w "C �: v 0 o x a ro m r } > a v a o a H h N 0 > O L d L p G w ro u E-- v x -o � fn cn ro m no m y m M a C rq � � H'. 7+ J �-1 u � i H � � oj p. IX. N '.L 7 t4.1` G N y .�- d C C d.. y •.+' E yr1 v qNj ''ai NCG'l u ,mi hci. u O 'O RC1 q u O 0 W W O cn U U O u W _ MFla - 0u... U a C G N N a a a w n o H •OI b V) O N 00 G G w O• i •o o G. co u� L •p P.aU A . ej UQ H +a t0 L a D 7 43 $ JIj H-� N H W a cnU W ~ y cd C n arazassm U M N im Z W O ao Q 7 G b H G•,+ G '• N > W M W FL n En H 2� S• O a C� •D �Y' N . U H W •.Fa O O �/1 vl •O n ul 7 u1 O 'O w n O O n W -7 N m M m M in m W Ln O (�• O.T. d :r. M CO M'.N 1 N N 17 lo d N H ++ O M n O O O (P M M1 n n .-i M GO H I� O n N O a�I M e-i u'1 �"1 u•1 N M � •O M M O W [a. GO 1! m cr N :N N CO ei'.•a - n M n O 5a y a on a a V W CI V a:w a •-7 a. a F G w a a. ::4 �. • O N •• H u! G. E. - i G ul H VI ul a. H C. a O V y �. ¢ F :o U O oo T F > O Ca C O m H H 'a H H •.i G] w •-1 M : V rn: Cr t ' [s• u ca,D N H F 3 :� 'O H a o C H H N: •.i H H.. H w a O a O C G O y a :a •O 'O a a s W ,O G: O G C7 (n rn 61 ani - •"� m V v W O i U 61 C C fJ N Cl 7 v to � Fw m &Ff 9 � b O a 0.N o m .H.-� +� ro 0 0 m v G n o 0 �e v > v o w m H HQ E L• ro un t P. az p �,0 u 0 C) •"f Ol•M•�G O 'nU N H Q. Ow O ro ai r0 G O 7 O F4 4+I U co119, E- yV ( I m H :3 O uJ N Z W � :3 r W H G H G [] w v H a� A � M wz N W E+? cc .. .. c G r O vl o r rn _oP aGw� M co v O N M M Y W•p t7 h W � r H O ai v W N b W O O Q M a0 [¢.. OHO y v m A.0 W Y .Z y O O O M d'. r r r c+� e-I M O .0 O u� �[l co M i(1 �D D 'i r CO r c't N M CO '..t N : C V0 r CO H M H S D` J. cn N ro c a k � W • y m C N N to y b W Id E 13 0 CL U C w r w u �.+ G -+• .,-t °• H G1 H N j p J71 'N U p Z G ~ u y 7 L y G .c3o. v b ',�� C % a° �a .-� c '+ m v o o A A .� H o k: :� ,� E H G .+ J ..Ei j y a m O y w > E e E G > I f n ro u v 5 'CJ y 5 u CO ,k W A y v 1 y G-3+ K � F v Q '" v F, a 7 N H H 91. N U W y v] 14 Z3 N cu 'U 14 O1 ' > H N > C/ H CJ 57 H.�.t +¢.+ O ,..x i 0... T a m i v C P. P. G O N P. Z C7 V O a..7 O o W G U IM C N G 7 N 4'1 .1co H 'p [A co GGw O•M G t o p 0 .• a U G C a Im !I - H a U O u u U 0 •rt O7•.. •n G u cat C� O ? c x w W " y � W � wxco W H G•.1 G W C1 H 7 a� wav'�aiw� A m w1" N > cc Is F°W -t N o7 h N' fi A N '4 ► G C N M• O N 01 L.. i ' M 1 Y W X11 C)W ✓U1'1 1`01'1 N 't - 00 N Vn O Ka O Q UHW 0 515.T : O7 M Zt1 :' ri W � N. O .L7-E N M O N � [a,•~4 J C.L O O �O - 0!. e-I ZV iJ OW O 11.1 .D H h 3 O N F1 �l O .-1 O-M O w r v1:. �O W .� N 'r, O d CD O t M O M N O Cl 11 - ZT U7 h e•i r N O [O lT -0' :N Zr1 O' 0. 0 M G ka W 0... C - .f1 O a H W N W M H t0 H G JI u w : H U y . f-1 Pa 7 > ++ ZJ d N N UM > O G : W G % x v ;p x 0 > 3 p H V '^� •O H N.1 W H :-+ :n G Gj W O :3 C. 0. G >+ Q. fn .JJ 'd d F:la+ H L }aa H a a w c7 C _ W U M •.-1 •.1 s.+ Vl H a: al •.1 M W v O .�: ,� '� :J a.1 .�-1 A C Gari a W 7 T L to 0f+ C-a CJ ��+ :007 a q. Q o L70 C. O ' O 0 7 7 .-1 •7 h0 O a •.1 ++ C7 v1 rn W A'' C31 x U U C C O cf1 W 11• � w i (V � 00 �GI C G [A vi 0 U Im E w N N I - } L y U O O 41 G cl �� o O.O 7 N v u ro ar w ^a �cnUa L H a)W N N N Z "' u) w a of o v m ^ h N 0 rn N .Z cc N Y W•�a1 C7 WI � I �� _ w o m W a N 14 W ao wi .O rt h U a Rl Q� � ti E., N v Ij � C � 7 f+ U ca m d v a v > ^ 7 a w ; L C3 o ,.G w c t� X 3�a H .�+ C u O :d Cj d N E5 14 y,a n W �. ! vAR Ll fo PUBLICPhone 639-91 12568 SW Main-Tigard, Or.07223 MI 2RANDUH June 9, 1980 TO: LIBRARY BOARD CITY COU!dCIL FROM: CITY LIBRARIAN; SUBJc,CT: Monthly Report, May 1980 1. Administration: a. Librarian attended meeting on reciprocal borrowing at Lake Oswego Library, May 9. A ten-month survey shows that Tipard _Public Library has minimal borrowing from persons living in Clackamas County. Heavier.borrowing at Tualatin and Sherwood indicates possibly establishing a system of reimbursement. h?atter is still. under study. ri an.attended all sessions of the Ci b. Libraty uudgc L coryittee, making a final request to hire part-time clerk to full time. Committee indicated that request will be favorable considered if additional funds become available from county through the June 24th levy. c. Library Board held regular meeting May 12. Minutes are attached. d. Librarian attended regular meeting of Washington County Cooperative Library Services (WCCLS) May 28. This was Tigard's last meeting as presiding officer for the professional board. Of interest: 1. Acronym for the automated circulation system was chosen. RAIN-- Regional Automated Information Network. 2. Possible county-wide bond issue for building libraries was discussed. Feed-back indicated-most library boards have reservations. Donna Selle will ask the Citizens Advisory Beard (CAB) to consider visiting the various $ _ boards and giving them direct information on the matter. 3. Jack Nelson, Mayer of City of Beaverton and chairperson for.the county-wide Cable T-/Com--iittee, discussed cable development; in Washirgton County. The WCCLS TT! cable "position" paper was approved by the Board for transmittal to the CAB. 2. Personnel: a. Volunteer hours totaled 137.5; daily average 5.3. Andrea Asbell, outreach volunteer, worked 60.5 of the total_ Volunteer, Neta Hernstedt, attended a book-repair workshop at Cedar Mill Library. b. Court referrals worked 40 hours. 3. Statistics: a. Total circulation 8687 (334 per day, 26 days) Books 8053 Magazines .306 Adult 5968 Audio-Visual. 181 Juvenile -2085 Other 39 Interlibrary Loan 108 b`, User cards 335: in town 175 out-of-tc:-xn 160 c. Story Hour 100 total; 12 average d. Materials added 367 €, e Materials withdrawn 41 f. Money received': Fines $31.50 Lost Books $25.80 F Donations _ 1.50 s a Tygard Monthly Report, May 1980 _ page 2 4. Ybuth Sec-rice - FCath , Tremaine: Summer reading activities have been planned and are being advertised. The 1980 theme. is "SuuLmer of Champions" with "Champ" the beaver as mascot. Local schools have been conducting tours through the City which have included a visit and introduction to the Library. Tigard has conducted six such orientations. During the summer months, story-time age limits will be expanded to eight-year olds to encourage family attendance. Volunteers will be vacationing and the staff will be conducti story time. School visits to advertize the sur".er reading program have been made to the following: Woodward, St. Anthony's, C.F. .Tigard and Ga.arde. Information was left with Librarians at Phil Lewis, Ttaality, Durham, as well as Tigard Friends, Canterbury and Start Rite day-care centers. Claire Sheldon, staff, conducted a .bi.-monthly story-time for the day-care group at Start Rite this past winter. On display in children's room is a wall-sized expression of the group's appreciation. ' .7 4 : , a n '+ LIBI un PUBLICPhone 539-9511 12.558 SW Potain•Tigard, Or.97223 MINUTES Tigard Library Board May 12, 1980 Call to Order The regular-meeting of the Tigard Library Board was called to and (toll Call: order by Chairman Betsy Chick, at 7:30 PM, May 12, 1980. Excused: Yvonne Burgess. Reports: Minutes of the previous meeting were approved. Librarian reviewed the monthly report. Old Business: Friends of the Librarian reported on the Friend's presentation at the City Library Building Council study session on April 21, and the citizen's meeting Fund on April 30. (See monthly report for April) . ^ d that e had bccn un bic to find 11.:.tte_ Librarian :'c:pQ��c- S�1 �„�' .. inu :1 •-.� Copy Machine copy--machine arrangement because vendors seem unwilling, to consider such a small operation_. New Business: Library Policy Librarian distributed to the Board recommended changes and Statement additions to the Tigard Public Library Statement of Policy. The members will review recommendations for consideration at the next meeting. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 FM. Respectfully submitted Irene Ertell Approved: Approved as corrected.: I W—lam- ` �- i\ c � PE J, JLN E TY NEWS June 1980 r r�IGARD PUBLIC LIBF. RY : 000 , �r o �hax pions Reach Out and Touch �sZ,1mm If ou're looking for a volunteer TPL is winding up for a super Y aranteed, Tigard Public Library needs you for its summer of fun l�allreel ) with activities job with great satisfaction gu for kids of aages* A t15ummer of Champions" Read-a-than Outreach program. far 6 to 14-year-olds will begin with outreach m vOlunt eto shut-insand registration Monday and Tuesday, June 23 and library with them., The and 24. Participantsew who read ten enabaaks Volunteers arrangeend time gtheir visiting by the end of summer d all schedules to suit their own time avail- "Champion Reader frisbee, an lease contact participants will be invited to an end- abilit r more information p of-the-summer party August 29. Beery Friday during the read-a-thoui - Clare Shb3d9 ) o951' Andrea Asbeil at the (except July 4) there will be contests library from a watermelon seed-spitting competi- tion to a balloan�-popping contest -- open ''�heWritiil ®� the r'a'il to the first ten 6-14-year-olds to sign You may have no a small bulle- up for each event (names being accepted tin board in use above the suggestion box now). Overseeing all these activities will . the front room. This is the library' s be Champ the beaver, this summer's libraryStsounding board" where TPL responds to '-rsuggestionssubmitted by our paafg sour mascot. and Champ wish We encourage you to drop Y Tiger Public Library you a happy susnmert ideas:, criticisms, observations and recnm- . mer.dations in the suggestion box to help - Lettiu Share c°1Story TPL better fit the needs of library users. Story hours geared; for 3-8 year olds Take a look at our responses on the board will continue this summer at I P•m® and keep those ideas coming. Wednesdays and 10 a.m. Thursdays. Regis- tration is not necessary.time August 27 Do-it-YOU rSelf Vacation Help A final summer story or 28 will be a pajama party both nightsn With summer vacations just around at :7:30 p.m. See the "Summer of Champions the corner, may we suggest an early side calendar at ;the library; for a complete trip our way to tape in the 10Travel Time°° schedule of storyt?mes. displays and resources being featured at the library through dune, and at's Happening TPL has ?naps, travel guides 4-8 ear-olds celebrating a materials to spark trairel idea,, all ourself -For those Club invites available to check out for do-it-y birthday soon, the Birthday ,a7„�;nom, June VaCati su 'vs -=-na them to a library birthday party. have dis- , Area travel agencies will birthdayswll be celebrated Tuesday, to give potential ibirthdays plays a June 1 `pym. , July birthdays library customers an idea of the services they Tuesday, July 15 at 3:30 P.m. in TPL's offer as well:as additional :trip ideas. rY That laid-back chicken relaxing Travelers are invited, on their root win ow is aur rave. Time mascot return home, to share azy travel tips 0, ,in by children' s librarian Kathy they may have Picked up on their journeys 2remaine. Jul with the 'library's Travel Box so that -The fibra vail? be closed Friday, y roue Crave":era to the same destination and Saturday°, uyy -A com leie sr�,, •h e °f TPLL?s summer may draw on first-hand advice, activities is naw availab leEM_14M r n T - TYPELINE Tigard. Public. Literary News — --- - Page 2 Who Are the People aveYou ead. . . in the Libg'ary 'Iwo Paycheck Marriage, cy Caroline Bi How women at work art changing life in The Pacific Northwest's natural America _- also good hints on stretch- beauty brought TPL's Assistant Technician in our paychecks. KARRIIb HAWES to Oregon eight years ago. How toyour Whatever You Want Out of 'Life, Geologically speaking, that was `just in r Exp sins how to time for her to witness "natural history b1 Joyce Brothers. the making," as she put it, with the understand what you really want and how in in them making Mt. 5t. Helens, to achieve your desires (written from "I find what's going on with the both male and female viewpoints) • volcano extremely exciting. I'd love to Lonel Walk: The Life of Sen. Mark be up there to watch what' s going on -- at,�.iie d, y Obert e s. Fair ve pminded, but at a safe distance, thank you! " reasonable study of a or Karrin is a nature-lover whose first cian-theologian. visit to her adopted hams state was during CCo--m�pleat Fa.miZ Book, by Anson & Liden. a three-week trailer trip from the Midwest 1'- you fee overwhelmed by household and family responsibilities, this book in h on Camping and being outdoors are (by local. Tigard authors! ) will help high on her list of el and has you learn skills needed to handle She enjoys travel and has visited twice, but she doesn't feel any everything well. Mexico urge travel. abroad. "There's so much Man, Woman and Child, by Erich Segal. to see in this country that I still haven't A perfect marriage envied fro by all is threatened by a voice from the past. seen. Even just here in Oregon we have Presence' In an Em t Room, by Velda a wonderful variety of geography within Johnson. Combination mystery and reach." _ Karrin grew up in Erie, Pennsylvania, chillin g tale of supernatural set in where she belonged to a library club in Maine. high school and. spent time sky-gazing as No Love Lost, by Helen Van Slyke. Her Observer as —novel surpasses all. A novel of ob a volunteer dor the Ground server Corps in the mid-1950s. "I worked a regular memorable characters, capturing the shift on a downtown rooftop, watching for love conflicts of a woman and the passing aircraft and recording the number courage it takes to be true to one's and type of craft I saw." The Corps was self. associated with Civil Defense with whom Karrin was later employed. She_,also worked for an insurance agency and as an TYPELINE is a bi-monthly newsletter of y, 12568 SW Main, airline reservation clerk before marriage Tigard Public Librar and the birth of her sons (Ken, now 20 Tigard, Oregon 97223. Phone 639-9511 . 4 and Brian, 19). Susan Kristof, Editor The Hawes home is an old farmhouse Irene Ertell, Librarian; just south of Tualatin, to 'which Karrin brings home mysteries, adventures and Library hours: Mon - Thurs 9:30-8:30 outdoors books to read'in her spare time. Fri & Sat 9:30-5:00 "I've always loved to read," she said. Children's storytimes: Wed 1 :00 and "The library is a great places for some Thurs 10.00. ` one like me who enjoys both people and books."' r MONTHLY RE:PORT PLANNING DEPARTMENT May 15, 1980 - June 15, 1980 CURRENT PLANNING The following projects were acted on by the Planning Commission over the past month. ZONE CHANGE ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 14-80, combined with _ CONDITIONAL USE, CU 7-80, combined with SENSITIVE LANDS PEPJIIT, M 4-80 (Senior Citizen Center) - Ap-p i r_s:.nt: William R. Bruner/City of Tigard Request: For a Zone Map Amendment with a Preliminary and General program Review request from R-7 "Single Family Residential" to R-7PD "Single Family Residential Planned Development District" and a request for a Conditional Use to build a Senior Citizen Center on 3.257 acres. Site Location: Corner of O'Mara and Edgewood Streets (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2DB, Tax Lot 600) . Action Taken: Approved May 20, 1980 ZONE CHANGE, ZC 11-80 (Patricia Jacobsen) Applicant: Patricia Jacobsen Request: For a Zone Map Amendment from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7 "single Family Residential". Site Location: 9850 SW Garrett (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2CC, Tax Lot 400) -- -- Action Taken: Approved May 20, 1980 ZONE CHANGE, ZC 12-80, combined with CONDITIONAL USE, CU 6-80 (Eaker/Sherman Lee Associates) Applicant: Eaker and Associates T Request: For a Zone Map,Amendment from C-3 "General Commercial" to C-p -"Commercial Professional" and a Conditional Use request for a professional office building on .97 acres. Site Location: 13620 SW Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2CC, Tax Lot 900) . Action Taken: Approved May 20,` 1980 ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 8-80, combined with CONDITIONAL USE, CU 8-80, combined with VARIANCE,, V 5-80 (Alpha Properties/Dakota Court) Applicant: Alpha Properties Request: For a Zone Map Amendment with a Preliminary and General Plan Program Review request from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7PD "Single Family Residential Planned Devcioprrnnt District" and a-request for Conditional Use to build duplex (attached'single family) units and a Variance request for a cul--de-sac. Site Location: 10485 SW N. Dakota Street (Wash. Co. Tax Map I51 34DA, Tax Lot 100) Action Taken: Approved May 20, 1980 m .......... #Y° --.�. L8z----..... MONTHLY REPORT: May 15, 1980 - June 15, 1980 Page 2 ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 29-79 (Winter Lake) Applicant: Russell Kruger Request: For a General Plan Review for Phase I and TI of Winter Lake. Site Location: Between SW 135th and SW 130th, north of Morning Hill and Falcon Rise Drive (Wash. Co. max Map 1S1 33D, Tax Lot 300 and Tax. Map 1Sl 33DC, Tax Lots 100, 300, 400, and 500) , Action Taken: Phase I approved May 20, 1980 ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 1-80 (Copper Creek) Applicant: Tualatin Development Company Request: For a Preliminary Plan Review for Stage I of Copper Creek for a single family planned Development District. Site Location: South of Durham Road, between 98th and Alderbrook. Drive (Wash. Co.- Tax i'4ar 231. 14ii, 1ox LQL 100) Action Taken: Approved May 20, 1980 ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, ZCPD 6-80 (J. B. Bishop/G.I. Joe's) Applicant: J. B. Bishop and:H. J. Buchholz of Main Street Development LTD. Request: For a Zone Map Amendment from C-3M "Main Street Commercial" to C-3MPD "Main Street Commercial Planned Development District" for approximately 11.51 acres. Site Location: On the southern end of Main Street (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2AC, Tax Lots 1600, 1500, 2200, 1400, 1300, 1200, and a portion of 200 parcel #3) Action Taken: Land Use only approved June 3, 1980 ZONE ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT ZONE ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, ZOA 2-80 (City of Tigard) Applicant City of Tigard Request: For a Zone Ordinance Text Amendment for Chapter 18.24 creating zoning regulation for the A-12 (12 'dwelling,'units per gross acre) and A-20 (20 dwelling units per gross acre) and A-40 (40 dwelling units per gross acre) "Multifamily Residential" Zones. Action Taken; Deferred to June 3, 1980 meeting, May 20 1980 ZONE ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, ZOA 2-80 (City of Tigard) Applicant City of Tigard Request: For a Zone Ordinance Text Amendment for Chapter 18.24 creating zoning regulation for the A-12 (12 'dwelling units per gross acre) and A-20 (20 dwelling units per gross acre) and A-40 (40 dwelling units per gross<acre) ` "Multifamily Residential" Zones. k-_ EV : 2d for iadeuptian June 3, 1980 ZONE ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT, ZOA 4-80 (City of Tigard) Applzcant: City of Tigard Request: For a Zone Ordinance Text Amendment for Chapter 18.36 relating to the"'Highway Commercial" C-5) Zone. Action Taken: Recommended for City Council adoption May 20, 1980 <t f POLICE DEPARTMENT CONSOLIDATED MONTHLY REPORT FOR MONTH OF D'A'Y 19 80 DISTRIBUTION OF PERSONNEL AVERAGE NUMERICAL STRENGTH DAILY ABSENCE I{ AVERAGE EFFECTIVE STRENGTH` L'�xd of Same This Same This E Last Same this Month Month Month Month Month Month Month Yeast Last Last Year Year Year TOTAL, PERSONNEL 28 26 11.4 11.2 16.6 17.9 14.8 CHIEF'S OFFICE 2 2 .7 .9 1.3 1.3 1.1 SERVICES D%VIS. 7 7 2.9 2.8 4.1 4.6 492 PATROL DIVISION 15 14 6.1 6.3 8.9 9.2 7.7 TRAFFIC 3?IVIS. •-------- ------------------ --------- -------- -------- -- INVEST. SECTION 4 3 1.5 1.5 a 2.5 2.7 1.5 FORCE ONE 14 12 6.0 5.4 �� 8.0 8.7 6.6 FORCE TWO 8 8 3.2 3.5 4.8 4.7 4.5 FORCE THREE 6 :6 2.2 2.3 � 3.8 4.5 3.7 CHANGES IN PERSONNEL DAILY AVERAGE PATROY. STRENGTH . onth 1. Pxesent for duty end of last month ' 29 This Same Year Month � Last Year 2; Recruited dusting month 0 1. Total number `€ield 3. Reinstated during month 0 officers . 13 14 - -Total to account for 29 2. Less Agents Assig- i 4. Separations from the service ned to Investigat. 0 0 (a) Voluntary xesignation(parttime)** 1 3. Average daily abs- 0 ences of field off- (b) Retirement - iters owing to: a 0. Vacation, Susp- (c) Resigned with charges pending ( ) erasion, days of (d) Dropped during probation 0 _ eorrg. time, .etc. 5.1 5.8 =(e) Dismissed for cause 0 ' (b) Sick & Injured .1 .in line of duty :0.:. (c) Schools, etc. .9 •3 3 (f) Killed Total average daily . (g) Deceased 0 absences 6 1- - -6.3 -Total separations . 1 4. Available for duty : S. Present for duty at end of month 28 - - - e Page oneW14 i 651 q! k TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT Monthly Report I. Calls for Service: This Month 590 Year to Date 2,728 _ A. Obligated Time 1.6100 B. Non-Obligated Time7�_433.0 IL PART I CRIMES * No. Cleaned Arrests A. Homicide - --- - -e B. Rape — -- -C. Robbery �� 3 - D. Assault 7 4 . - — E. Burglary 18 - 2 3 F. Larceny 63 10 G. Auto Theft 3 -- Totals 92 17 19 -------9 III. PART 11 TOTALS * 66 41 49 TOTAL_ - Part I and II .�.®�. 158 58 68 :! IV. TOTAL PERSONS CHARGED: 68 a. Adult Male 38 c. Juvenile Male _1.5 b. Adult Female-8 d. Juvenile Female - 7 V. WARRANTS_ SERVED 13 VI. TOTAL PROPERTY LOSS' $ 20,984.03 TOTAL PAOPERT`f RECOVERED ;5801.45 -- VII. TRAFFIC a. Accidents Investigated 41 Injury Accidents 10 Fatal 0 b.`' Citations: VBR (Speeding) 56 ` Yield Right of Way__5 Following too Close 1 Red Light 20` Stop Sign 7 _•, Improper Turn 8 Reckless Driving 1 Careless Driving 12 Driving Under the Influence 13 Driving While Suspended 19 Other Hazardous 20 Non-Hazardous 140 Total Hazardous 162 c. Enforcement Index 16.00 Pte. d. Traffic Enforcement Totals Citations This Month This Year 302 , Year to Date 1271 - This Month Last Year 207 Last Year to Date1254- bdarnings: This Month This Year 99 Year to Date 551 This Month Last,Year 61 Last Year to Date320 NOTE: - Part I Crimes (Major Crimes) Clearance Rate 18.5% Part 11 Crimes (Minor Crimes) Clearance Rate 62.1%i n 2 a VIII. TRAINING A. Governor's Emergency Preparedness Conference. Lt. Rea went to Sale. on May 2L to attend the Governor s Emergency Preparedness Conference, held in the Capitol Building. This was a 6 hour conference. t B. 23id-Management. Then on May 22, Lt. Rea attended the Washington County Mid-Management Meeting. This was held in Tigard at the General Motors Training Center for 1-1/2 hours. C. Polio Basic Supplemental Course. Officer Miller attended the Oregon Police Basic Supplemental Law Course at the Police Academy in Monmouth. Class is mandatory for all police officers hired with out-of-state experience. This was an 80 hour course, starting May 19, ending May 30. D. police Supervision. Cpl. Featherston attended the Palace Supervision Course at the Palace Academy in Monmouth, receiving 80 hours of instruction. Course began on May 19, ended on May 30. E. Arson Seminar. Cpl. Featherston and Cpl. Myers went to Eugene on May 5 to attend an Arson Seminar, which lasted for one week. 80 man hours of training was received by these two corporals. F. TNT Training. Sgt. Newman received 8 hours of training on May 29, when I Re attended the Tactical and Negotiating Team meeting at Washington j County Sheriff's office. G. First Aid Training. 6,departmental personnel were given 8 hours of instruction in first aid on May 29, in order to renew those expired first aid cards held by them. This session was held at the General Motors Training Center, and was taught,by Sgt. Wheeler and Cpl. Myers. A total of 48 man hours was,spent. x H. See Tigard Police Reserves monthly report for May. k IX. COMMUNITY RELATIONS E A. Town and Country Days. On May 7,; the Chief and Lt'. Rea met at Sambo's Restaurant; to discuss plans with the Town and Country Days Committee'. A total of 3 departmental Baan hours were spent at this meeting. B. ' Station Tour. On May 15, 50 second graders from Charles F. Tigard School toured the police department. Lt. Rea and Sgt. Newman spent a total of y 1 departmental man hour with theme C. See attached monthly report from Officer Grisham, Juvenile Officer, for his activities during May. E b: X g' is k- 4 f, £ X r r _ yy, v a a, 1 f r M 'b t13v o 9 1,43 10, w a vim ® P.r► .c 14. u 4J CS Wa.ci � m. to 0 )Q CO2 W 4CO co cd Z4 04 CA Op � CO ' LC-4-0 TT- 94 Sal { ci j C2 V4 A� P P ® ! m o Gy ari •ce•�f a ma to ca 94 ce 94 � s r ( tA too c ro ro r C C .t:• � . � c w co ca ul m m to m s N coOC3 � O. b C3 O Ln Aid N C C _ as c`7 co Fl O - e••6 rn 0 0 0. A 0 0 O O 0 O O O 41 4-1 41 4J 41 43 is iMll Cd cc cd ca ca U) cli p01 co m of tOia U m H fl t'Cil H SO.+ H H N O 5+ U 1" x c. w 9w a a u r� H 3 vii •. uF3iCd W •- O : ca ca ctf co .eb w ct H W co '4 •cv H H � c cc 0 M U w ro �4 CD cn 6' 6 A 6 H H 6a O •-a U O C/3 O O � ® C O DU H � o V3 m A p EH •m O 7+ A r5 -O O 14 d! cid � *_3.' � Fa H N co N '. Ga A W V9 ."E". . r1 U C) C7 O C 'C C3 C -E 0 c cf ws c 94 co I � co v3 L! In t!3 tfp tf i eft t!9 I i r _ , I I'ME EMn t6rr< CITY OF rhthis TIGARO > eof CU CI — o Comfy WASHMGTON Election r�C' -,(/0 MAY 20, 1980 �°; � s_ iJ 11 U O ki fC :1.. C n a w a Pg. 1 of 1 Pn9•r 1 N ✓, N _ rn Ballot Number 63 63 N—o. �. I —. _-I— I _I_—� I > rR No.of Pinct YFS ;40 roc - 3020 '79 ---- ® O 31 3f}51n 3218 --- a 0 k 33517_ 113 -- -- — — 0 34 7 r '60 I ti 35 2131 —q'4 i 1 Absentee R; Zh -- — -- A � µ x 00"L 3 y o m Lt� • 'n P• o 4 w a\ 1 9'k Nag a TOTAL certify that the voins recorded on this abstract car- Si .atur of County C r� Date of Abstract roctly summarize the telly of votes cast at the election pp {{ indicated. : Q�p-! ^ Q1) fA--3:—Od ABSTRACT OF VOTES AT GENERAL AND ABSTRACT OF 1 TES AT PRIMARY ELECTIONS: C") SPECIAL ELECTIONS: Separ, shao s for Democratic, Republican,,Nonpartisan'and other m--t candidates •� rn . r Votes cast for Governor must be on Eoparafo r Cid Parole shoots for candidates for City, County(inOuding precinct) q=> page or pages. and State office. For add4lanai instructions sea ORS 250.810. For additional instructions,see ORS 249.410. 0 ; s Ota C:) TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING May 20, 1930 - Agenda Item 5.3 - Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. Fowler Junior High School ,- Lecture Room 10865 SW Walnut Street .- Tigard, Oregon Present for thin. hearing: Commission: Vice President Speaker, presiding; Commissioners Bonn, Funk, Helmer, Herron, Holleas, Popp, Smith Staff: Planning Director Howard STENOGRAPHER'S NOTE: The recording of some speakers who were either some distance from the recorder, or who spoke in a low voice, was not very good. Where their words were not decipherable, the record so indicates with . . . . . . Speaker: we will go to Item 5.3, Zone Change. Staff? Howard: (He read the Staff Report, including Staff Recommendations, Exhibit A.) On the Commercial-Professional Zone, C-P in the rode, it speaks to "limited commercial uses if integrated within the office park, including confectioneries, barber shops, beauty shops, delicatessens, pharmacies, florist shops, gift shops, and shoo repair shops." You will notice on your plan there are about 4500 square feet there that are designated retail, and also the additional square footage that would be allowed for Rosemary's Interiors. That, by the xray, is the use being made presently at the church on the site. The church would come down, the site would be cleared, there would be two buildings then built. 'Rose- mary's would move into a portion of the building on the Pacific Highway, and there would be commercial office space to the rear', which would be again that 4500 approxi- mately square feet of retail, sounder the Conditional Use section of the Code there are .limited retail uses that are allowed, and I wanted to explain that so you understood where 'I am coming from. Speaker: Well, staff, is the anticipated use permitted? Howard: Yes, 'sir. ` Speaker: I mean Rosemary's Interiors? Howard: Well, that's not really a retail operation per se, although she does sell out of that, you know; it is a decoration--home decorating outfit; so it is ®- quasi retail? Herron: It doesn't venerate a lot of traffic. #• � r r m TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COP24ISSION HEARING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. May 20, 1980 Howard: No. Not a high traffic generator. Speaker: There would be no conflict with her use and the ordinance? M. Howard: Pio, sir; there would not. Speaker: Is there a presentation by the applicant? Faker: I am Jerry Eaker, Faker and Associates, architects, 12555 SW Center Street, Beaverton, architects for the project; and the comments as fax as the statement and the additional portion of that retail space has been leased this month to a delicatessen which will take over the balance of that., OEM Rosemary's and the delicatessen will leave only a small portion of space that will be falling under your category. I have nothing further to add, but will stay to answer your questions. Funk: Are you telling us then that there is a 3,000 square foot deli going to go in there? Faker: Two thousand. Funk: Two thousand; so there is 1200 square feet to go? Faker: At this point. Speaker: Thank you. Is there anyone else wanting to speak in favor of this proposal? Anyone opposed? Bishop: Hr. Speaker, members of the Planning Commission, Staff: J. B. Bishop, Suite 303, 10505 Sal Barbur Blvd, Portland, Ore. I am an adjoining property owner across the highway 'from 'this property and proposed development. I own the Stan Miley Office building and the adjoining property on the west side of the highway. At the same time I also have ownership and development concepts and plans under way for properties directly adjacent to this property to the north on this side of the highway, so I am greatly affected:by the kind of impact of this property; and yet it certainly looks like itis going to be a . . (good?) development, in conformance with the plan that is in front of you; and if you have had a chance to review it, it certainly will be an upgrading of the property, and I am most in favor of it. I- have some serious concerns with the staff report, and at this point the information that isavailablein regard to the staff®m report, and more probably in regard to notice, and people who may or may not have been contacted. I have four questions, and I do not have the information that carte out _2_ TR,+NSCEIPT OF PL,"tNNINO COMMISSION HEARING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. May 20, 1980 Bishop: from the staff report or the information from the presentation (Cont.) by the applicant. I am hopeful that through the public process tonight some of this information becomes available for our future sessions. I am not aware that this program has been presented to the NPO for their analysis, and it is a zone map change, and I am not cognizant that any input has been generated from the NPO. Normally in this case you are aware the staff advises the applicant to go to the NPD. I have been at all the meetings of the NPO for the past six months, and not to my knowledge has this come up. I am sure that some time the NPO may be asked for comment in regard to the NPO plan and concepts and guidelines that they have for that. Secondly, and I am most concerned, I was not informed of this meeting on this issue, and as I understand, on all issues like this, all property owners within 300 yardsc-(sic) are informed. Neither was my partner, neither to my knowledge was Mr. Heinz, who is the direct adjoining property owner to the north. I am curious what was the notice for this meeting, but I am sure that at least I know what's going on this evening. I don't know if these other property owners want to be involved. And again, the point has been raised for ! a very proper issue. The staff report--and I have not been privy to the site plan--I wasn't aware that this was on the — - agenda--I was here on another issue this evening.` Predicating the staff report is, finally, exit out of the property in the future through property at is not owned by the applicant. There is no presentation yet by the applicant on how he intends to'.have 'access through to Mr. Heinz's property. But I am not involved with this. His property is sandwiched by my''development and by Aar. Sherman' Lee's development. And I am curious how staff and the applicant have worked predicating entrance onto,property that they have no ownership and/or any contact to my knowledge with Mr. Heinz, I have been very close to Mr. Heinz and my development on my properties. I would be curious to know whether any direct contact had been made with Mr. Heinz before' predication of the staff report was made for direct exit and entrance being put through the middle of his property. As he very properly pointed out, in the future definitely there will probably be redevelopment on Mr. Heinz's property,; and I think the utaff rewrt sayb that"therefore tLe hire plan shows a future access. Again my question is, .in what manner has the applicant and/or the staff and applicant worked for the improvement of his property, which is very laudatory, with the owner-of that property, and as the staff report goes on 9 to say, with the Bishop property? This is news to me. Ydobody -3- .0 3. TRANSCP—T.PT OF PLANNING CC7MMISSION HEARING Sherman Zee & ,Associates, Inc. may 20, 1980 Bishops has said anything to me. I could like to be involved if (Cont.) Amy property is going to be impacted in the future or now in a public decision--making process at this point. I see the applicant in a cover letter that went with the staff report given this evening by the person sitting next to me had a copy of the staff report, says that storm drainage is to dump into existing facilities at the apartment complex. I don't see anything at this point in the staff report—it may come up in site design review---I am not sure if that would be the proper point for that to come up or this evening. What the applicant had done to show the Public Works Director that those facilities are adequate to carry the storm drainage or if that Is going to the State right of way and to the public drain areas what I dumped into off my Pietro's, if there has been no contact with the State's design or the State's designs for that storm drainage. I raise that as a point for the Planning Commission to explore. Also it goes on to say in the letter from Mr. Eaker that storm drainage to be installed is to be installed in a sewer easement. I am not raising the point for argumentation, I am just wondering where that mould be. Because if it was an adjoin— Ing property easement, then it affects setbacks on others adjoining property owners* property, and that is a question k t hope can be clarified in the near future, if not at tonight's woofing. The points that'- I make on this is that I have a real difficulty that' a property owner looking at staff report that predicates a serious impactof traffic, of restricted access and of bisecting a person's property---in this case Mr. Heinz, who is not here ;,tonight--I am not even aware whether he has been contacted about this proposal by either staff or by applicant, but I am certain that in his behalf and on my property the direct connotation of the staff report and the applicant's letter to bisecting ,that property without any knowledge; any negotiations or anything that shows that there is a satisfactory resolution between property owners to allow for that happening In the future. I am surprised that there isn't some more input at this point in time, but maybe it will come ups--some of these questions will be explained in the future. Thank you very much. Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Bishop. That's the sort of thing that can be taken care-of In_cross--examination? Arethereany other opponents to this proposal? If not, we w-ill go into cross— examination and rebuttal; and Mr. Eaker, you have some response to that? —4d y < y. x TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COJV4ISSION HERRING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc: May 20, 19$0 Eaker: We were directed by staff to at least in some say indicate how that might happen in the future. At this point in time certainly we have no plans to do that, nor desire to; but it was deemed by staff to be a prudent thing at least show how it could later on. The storm easement that Mr. Bishop brought up is at the southeast corner, which would be right here (indicating on site plan). Actually, as far as the layout of the plan is concerned, it works with us with or without the . . . (access?) on its own merit to further Tiga.rd's eventual traffic problems and we were directed . . . . . . s . . . . in the future. That's all I have. Speaker: Thank you. Staff, do you have any comments on this public notice? Howard: Yes, I do. We have a return envelope from Mr. Bishop. For some reason he didn't get it. We have about four other occupants, one being Mr. Heinz--for some reason he didn't get that one. But I talked to Mr. Heinz about a year .and a half ago, and I explained to him; I talked to Mr. Bishop when he first came in, and he also talked to us about a € possible street installation at the Stan Wiley building. That was one of his strong points for development. Since we own the frontage road there, initially we talked about the possibility of a bus turnout; he has been in contact with T'rl-MetA-that is a possibility. We have talked all the may ` around this thing. You can remember that we got between the Iii Hat Restaurant and Way Lea because we couldn't think ahead and plan ahead and get those two guys to cooperate a little bit. And here's an effort'to•try to get people to cooperate and plan for the future, and we;get criticized for it. Now he brought it up originally when we talked about the street lights on 99—he wanted one at Stan Wiley. The only way to serve all the property on 99 is to funnel it to the light. And that's why when this applicant came in—that's why we made that allowance. Now when he comes in, or when Heinz comes in-and I have talked to Mr. Heinz, I know what his projects are and what he is thinking--one of the conditions of that will be, "You will line up with this piece of property, and we will take you right out to a light, and serve Stan Wiley. So when we talk about planning In the community, a lot of it is up here in the things that I remember (tapping forehead). And we talked 'about this realignment. We had a big, flail with Mr. Bishop about the light at Park; we are going through another flail with Mr. Bishop over a street light installation at another location in the city. I am trying to see that that doesn't happen, and the only way to get; people to cooperate is;to say that the street is plugged w^5- 15 r _ WE TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING CO"S'ISSION HEARING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. May 20, 19E30 at your property line„ Eventually that street plug means Howard: o through. Be lost Ash Avenue Cont.) something. The street will g �, coming across the back of Heinz's property to 99 because construction took place and apartments were built. So those typos of things are Just going to have to take place, and people are going to have to cooperate a little bit, or 99 e going to have other diffi=- Isn't going to work, and we ar culties. Now I an sorry about it, you know—the failure to notify everybody---but some-,times the machine goes gunnysack and we can't get the "word to them. But we do have the record that those are returned, and are did make an effort to contact them. Speaker: About the sewer easement? Howard: I don't know about that. I can only sa.y to you at site design review we condition him that he will have approval to go and for any work get Ore-on Department of Tiansrortation In the 99 right of way. Frank Currie will review all the go through the whole thing on–site improvements. We will , with the fire and the police, and we will get the sewer lines epartment, and we will make and we will go through the 'later D sure that everything works, including the site drainage program. And that's at the site design review level, and that will be his next step. Speakera Okay. ' Funk: May I ask Mr. Howard since the site design board was dis- solved, who makes out the committee of the site design? eo le in the Planning Department, the Build– Howard: Well, there are p P Ing Department, the Engineering Department, the Fire Department. Is it done as a joint meeting, or is it;passed from coffee Funk: ust how Is that arrived at---what the break to coffee break–�J desires are, what transpire; during the site design revieaB The application is made to my department—the Planning Howard: Okay• reviewed through Department. It-is there reviewed jointly, Department. Department and the Public Works Department. the doe Greulich comes in from the Fire Department and (sits down with Greulich and I or Building, and we go`over it. 6e contact , thea it has to be if they have serious seater difficulties reviewed by the Department of r?av-1ronmental Qualitf, and it also has to be approved by the Unified Set7erage Agency before ,. E IN IF 4 TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING .IF OMDSI5Si0N. H4RING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. May 20, 1980 Howard: we will approve the program. In this particular case he must (Cont.) go to the Oregon Department of Transportation and get a signed approval on his plan before we will do anything with the plan at all at our level. So those are some of the steps that take place. A lot of times on a big project we will all sit down together. I usually write the .staff report and circulate it again after the meeting--I circulate the staff report amongst all these different bodies so they can add their input. Speaker: T'nank you, staff--that's informative. Is there any ---- Mr. Bishop, doee that take care of your concerns, short of the site design review process? Bishop: It raises one main question for me, or two. (Note: Mr. Bishop was speaking from the audience and the record is not very clear*) . e . . e ea . e e half of this property is in the hands of other ownership. As a matter of fact . . . o . subsequently on the market for sale; currently it is now under option for development, and it will be conducive for development„ Mr. Howard goes on to say that notices"- were sent Out to Mr. Heinz and it was returned. I am bothered as an individual and as an adjoining property owner that since he talked a year and a half ago before this application and`befare this plan . . that this property be developed this way, that Mr. Heinz wasn't contacted as an'adjoining property owner who will be impacted if this is an enforceable actiontytow pity attorney rule it as an enforceable action, * Again the bottom of preconditioning somebody else's property line, I ,am very concerned that ; e e e Heinz . staff has not been in contact with him; then it goes on in the staff report and says . e 0that one of the conditions on this property. The key on that particular piece of property there on than site 'plan on the wall . . e e a . The question of the light on my property at Stan Wiley came up two years in September, 1978. The question -not on that light-there was 'never any difficulty on that light—it was a question between the neighborhood, the Staten Highway Department, staff and ,myself--all of us-involved- there was to be a light in front of;Pi.etro's and not in front of Stan Wiley's, or whether it -could be on Park Street. It was resolved by the,Planning Commission and City Council that It;would be at F'artc Stroot, and that's where it's going. _- [Li Ei Ueat in front: of Stan Wiley's- is tied up in joining the split line between my south property line and 13r. Heinz's north property linea Now if staff is going ahead and planning, as they believe, properly, with the R:blic Works Department e e e I think Mr. Heinz and myself`abould be deeply involved in ;this. We were not informhd, not only by ..7® f. 1 TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. May 20, 1980 Bishop: letter . . . review this site plan. In other cases (Cont.) when Mr. Benson was developing behind my (G.I. Joe's?) property, we were called in by staff and we had foreknowledge, and we worked things out. This hasn't happened in this case. I find it disturbing. Speaker: Staff, can you take such steps as are necessary to be sure ' that Mr. Bishop and Mr. Heinz and other adjoining property owners are aware of the — would they be involved in the site design review process? } Howard: Yes, sir. Speaker: I think that's about the best we can do for you right at this moment. Bishop: If I may ask one question: Is there a predication, though, before proceeding on this site plan -- is there a predication on the part of the Planning Commission that that's what is going to be there? Or is there a chance of whatever judicial review---by Judicial I mean quasi-Judicial--planning process--- Planning Commission and City Council---are you approving . . • . • • as shown on site? Howard: You don't have to, Speaker: Staff, correct me if I understand this correctly. -1 would - say that -.. now the plan shows arrows going;in and out on the north property line onto--what?..-the Heinz property? Howard: Yes, sir. Speaker: I think that's an indication that that is a possibility, but it isn't necessarily mandatory. Is that correct? Howard That's correct. As I_say, it's only an effort to eventually, realizing that Heinz_wants to develop and Bishop owns a large W property to the north-wit's only an effort Or' our,part to make the whole thing ,work eventually. Speaker: Right. Funk: Mr. Chairman, I think we ought to do something to note that is a recommendation only. If we approve this pian and it comes back;a year and a half from noir and they say, "Well, you approved that as it is, like you got caught before". we 'don't have a leg to stand on. Smith: (To ink and others) We should iron that out. I agree . . -8- 1 TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING Sherman Lee & Associates,, Inc. May 20, 1980 Speaker: Commissioner Smith, do you want to enlarge on your thought's Smith: (Indistinct) . . close the public hearing, then I would like to get into that condition , wher it is brought up good points . . Speaker: Fir. Bishop? Bishop: Just one final question: actually it won't come up until the _ ;Final hearing. If your decision leads up (to) initial approval of that intersection through Heinz's property and coming out into m1ne, the question then to be addressed in your decision- making thiE c.cniag in your findings, possibly as one of your stipulations, who will be sharing the cost of that light If that ends up being a predication o . that there will be a percentage share of that cost, if that happens? Speaker: Is there anything else in the way of cross-examination and rebuttal? Funk: I would like to ask of the engineer: your ingress and egress-- is that the size it is now--is that the size that we are going to be talking about? Eaker: It could be. > . r^unk: And that's why you nave to go to the State? Otherwise you :h F, could do without going to the State agency on this? Eaker: At the sane location , . . � • Funis: How wide is that? Eaker: Presently it is 20 feet. Funk: And you are going to take how much? Esker Thirty feet. Speaker: Oh, in that connection, is that something that the ODOT controls? Car, they deny you that? Eaker: They couldn't deny access to the: property as it already exists; the 30 feet is only an effort to ease the flow in and out of the property, and I 'can't imagine that they 'would . as it exists. It's only an effort to expand•one that. Funk: you wouldn't have to go to ODOT for anything that has happened -- Eaker: On a public driveway . . . . -9- a I TP.ANSCRIPT OF PLANNING COrLMISSION HEARING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. may 20, 1980 Funk: Even though it exists today? Faker: Exists, yes; but you see there is work we would do inside the driveway . . sidewalks, curbs, and all this,. ' The width of that Funk: Well, you got 30 feet in the roadway, but your plan here seems to reduce to 24 feet • • . . . as you lengthen your parking spaces- Eaker: Right. The 30 feet is to get them off the road . • Once they are in the parsing lot it is standard parking lot width. Speaker: Any other questions of the applicant? I close the public hearing. Commissioners? Mr. Smith: Smith: I would have to agree with Aldie that (we should) plan for additional circulation for what may well be a lighted access on 99• However it seems that in doing that, I think we need to get the three landowners together with us and the applicant and also Mr. Bishop, and get all three of them together-- whether it turns out to be a punching match or a friendly affair. But we need to get them together to decide where that circulation ought to run through the center of those properties; so I have no other problems with the development other than just put in a condition there that that access between the parcels be worked out in a ,point thing rather than — "r Howard: I-guess I got to admit I'm gun shy you know? live got a million pain'. -- a 1.5 million dollar suit against myself and the cityfor conspiracy because I went to work for three developers trying to get a street through three different properties. Okay? Now when;you need it and you try it, r you get the,same thing. You got three lawyer calls in about 30 minutes, and then you get the suits poured on you. So It's really 'tough, folks--you kind of sit there and say, "Now we would like to have you people work together, ;and don't sue mea,, I understand what you are saying. We can do It. Smith: I would like to have the Planning Commission to require that this property have available access to property to the north . . requirement here, and that. the exact lor-ati.n" is to be worked out with staff and the adjacent property owners. But I don't grant to leave it loose--leave it to where there might not be such an access. But I think the question—rand the question that Mr.Bishop is addressing is where that access is going to be, and.maybe they would 1 like a little input in 'regards to where . . • . ®10— ,F ' TRANSCRIPT OF PLANNING CoMmiSSION HEARING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. May 20, 1980 Speaker: Well, that makes a little problem to me. Conceivably the adjoining property owners would not have any idea of what his development would be, perhaps because he has not contacted potential users, or.mhatever, and he might not be ready at this time to say, "Okay, this as it is shown here, or 15 feet one way or another", or whatever. I think we went through this before, that this is a possibility, and I do feel this, that this development could stand on its eown feet ciate taff'there concern were no access to the north. I can apP «.-*'Let's get as much circulation off of 99 as possible*'-- Howard: But I would also point out to you that this is in the neigh- borhood planning organization plan. They realized the impact on 99, they are trying to make use of the frontage road, they are trying to suggest a realignment of streets and signal lighting patterns; so again here's an attempt to satisfy the NPO #1 concerns, and the only way that we are going to do on, move to the north as develop- it is to start at this locati ment takes place, and make sure that then we can realign 99 at a signalized intersection. ,Smith: Mr. Speaker, we approve developments on a regular basis where streets run through and dead end at adjacent property, where we don't go to the adjacent property owner and say, "Is that where you would like that street to dead end?" And we are saying in,no unquestionable terms whatsoever that if that person develops, he has got to pick up that,street at that point; so this is not in any way setting a precedent in terms of pre-setting some traffic patterns. We do (this) on a regular basis on residential and commercial development, and if the property owners to the north'don't know exactly what they want to do at this time, then I think they. will have to accept the applicant's development as is. But if they do have some ideas, I think 'the point Mr. Bishop is making is they would like to have input. Howard: We can do that. Speaker: Now the place for that would be site design review? Howard. In this particular case we obviously contact all partiest and we will iron this out before we go any further, right after M1 we get through the Zone Change and Conditional Use, But ; that's why I suggested the street plug. There is a portion there; that'i.w actually dedicated to the City of Tigard, and that strip=-that;36 inch by 40 foot wide strip is -- belonvs now to the City, and it says to the property owner, "That street will continue." That's why we use the street plug. 9 x 3 e 5. rW101 e ., 'TRANSCRIPT OF PLANl7ING COMISSION HEARING Sherman Lee & Associates, Inc. May 20, 1980 Speaker: Oh, I did not understand that. Is that where the arrows go in and out? Howard: yes, because now at the present time Heinz owns that property and he's in operation with the automotive deal, and so he is not about to — you know, there is no reason for him now -� to allow that to come out to 99. Speaker: Commissioner Smith, does that take care of your concerns? Smith: yeah; I am saying if we approve this I think we want to add a condition stating that we want in the site design review process to include the adjacent property owners in regards to the street situation. I don't even know how you word that. Howard: I have got it. "Northern access to be agreed upon by property owners, but the access will exist; add street plug; site design review process to include these parties." Speaker: That sounds good. Commissioner Herron? Herron: I think Commissioner Smith covered my concern on the topics. Speaker: Commissioner Kolleas? Kolleas: I don't have any problems with it at all. Speaker: Commissioner Helmer? Commissioner Funk? Commissioner Bonn? Popp: I would like to make>a motion for approval, based on staff's recommendations, and the additional Noe 4, and the Conditional Use. Kolleas: Second. Speaker: Motion has been made and seconded for approval, including the added Condition No_ 4; based on staff recommendations. Any further discussion? All in favor`say aye. Chorus: Aye. Speaker: opposed, no? (no response) The motion carries. u � dig µ z -m STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.3 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION May 20, 1980 - 7:30 p.m. Fowler Junior High - Lecture Room 10865 SW Walnut Street, Tigard DOCKET: ZONE CHANGE, ZC 12-80 and CONDITIONAL USE 6-80 (Eaker & Associates) APPLICANT: SHERMAN LEE & ASSOCIATES, INC. OWNER: SAME 21785 SW Tualatin Valley Highway Aloha, Oregon 97005 APPLICANT -- DATE: April 25, 1980 REQUEST: For a Zone Map Amendment from C-3 "General Commercial" to C-P "Commercial Professional" as designated on Tigard's adopted Comprehensive Plan and a Conditional Use request for a professional office building on .97 acres. LOCATION: 13620 SW Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2Sl 2CC, Tax Lot 900) . PREVIOUS ACTION: None. I. FINDINGS OF FACT: F 1. Prior to new construction on this parcel, the zoning designation must be brought into conformance with the adopted ComprehensivePlan zone Designation of C-P'"Commercial Professional". Section 18.40.011 Commercial Professional Conditional Uses allows professional office buildings. 2. Public services are presently installed on site. II. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS:' 1. Property to the north will redevelop in the future (Heintz Automotive)' and, therefore, the site plan shows a future access to the north on the 'proposed;plan.. The intent is to provide overall traffic circulation : through the Heintz Property through the Bishop property to a future traffic signal on 99W at the '.Stan Wiley Site. A light is being installed ' + at Park Street to 'serve a portion of the vacant property to the 'north of this site. 2. Pacific Highway right-of-way needs improvement with -the addition of Sisicwaiita c.rt�l u c:at�ilay. i-Lt1 work al6lty l:'f2is right—O£—zany Shall meet the specifications of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the City of Tigard. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this zone Change and Conditional Use with the following'conditions: , STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.3/ZC 12-80/CU 6-•80 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION May 20, 1980 y Page 2 1. A demolition permit be obtained from the Building Department prior to any 5 work on this site. 2 All work in the 99w/Pacific Highway right-of-way be approved by Mr. Bill Geibel of ODOT prior to the issuance of Building Permits. These plans _ shall be reviewed and approved by the Tigard Public works Director in conjunction with ODOT. 3, All development on this site shall be subject to Site Design Review. w , Planning Director a: WE ff t SEE NIAP 1 2C6 a : b 2_00 /M �y 9YD9°S7�E 213.95 64.el� 700 600 i 500 AN /.37Ac i to CJ I b r 0 G 'b 900 / .9/AC. 1 SEE M:,P 1 2S 1 3DD10 00 ! m 1N '3syye% /98Ac /// 800 3 2.33 ^:c. / cr w v o :ry i w9l00� ti°f 1p9AC .n 120o 11ir.10 62 'w co, 588°55•W 6 24CH \" �. ..,.� 2539 ,.. ar s89 9 9 1300 1500 1600 1700 1800 T800 7700 r 7900 17 18 19 1 § L N ME }Y. 'A;, SS. =WATKWS Y ON ST IIeENTA fT ER IL W. JAPES A0. r n `j ' sw PARA ♦r �^' �4.vR,0 N 3 ♦ / '0 '{y ; 0 0468.RA FAtiNAY - ♦.: �i^ _ T yj`S y 9W EDOEWO00 § lAIR rEN W S L4 oT SW A F tl�, y / 4 tH ISW O(Hf. s 4 W-1 N. Cl. .. § aJ +ter PARK Mc DONALD tL= D ANOE T i oma....,.. ElAo3a ! l _ urftA y 3-Y tq NTA OV. L NK W Y� m CT i ------ o� i �'^ tom. YfEx. TE flAGC SY. y �7.W. lux 9L AT m gm § 4y 1!L 000 A RAW 1 1 LN. ro Y $ `� Y AD Q _ LYJtIIY.YwNd PEYeROOK a }T N(T MOUNTAlS STA T Y3.Y § PiNE8ND0 70 aw i - • f.ty,1S 6PEk.W13Z , k t4, f ' n } CENTER PLAZA WEST 12655 5.W. CENTER STREET BEAVERTON, OREGON 97005 PHONE 643-6611 Tigard Planning Commission April 25, 1980 City Hall Tigard, Oregon Zone Map Amendment; From C-3 to C-P Sherman Lee Developer Tax Lot 900, Map 2S1- 2CC Dear Commisioners; We respecfully request your consideration to the proposed Zone goo, Map 2S1- 2CC , located on South Pacific Avenue, change for Tax Lot from C-3 to C-P. The site is designated C-P on the Comprehensive Plan, therefore our request is in conformance with Tigard's Adopted Comprehensive Plan. The highest and best use of the site is for a mixture of retail commercial and general office. We propose a one story 4650 sq. ft. retail building and a two story office of 14,000 sq. ft. The existing building on the site is an old church presently being used by Rosemary's Interiors. Under our;proposal the existing in then would be razed and the present tenant would become an anchor tenant in the new retailstructure. The community will benefit from our proposal by the removal of an old , `unsafe structure and a general upgrading of the area. The proposed development is in harmony with adjacent uses. Anew office development is located across Pacific Avenue. The land to the North is presently zoned C-3 and is currently being used as an Import Car repair shop, this site will undoubtedly be upgraded in the near future to higher and more suitable uses. An apartment development is located to the South and will not be 'adversly affected by our proposal .: Presently the area adjacent to the apartments is being used for parking. Under our plans the area would continue to be used for parking but will be seperated by 10' wide landscaped buffer. The present curb cut from Pacific Avenue would remain in its present location but would be widend to 30' to allow safer ingress and egress'. Sewer is available at the southeast corner of the site and a 12" waterline is available along Pacific Avenue. Storm drainage would be built in a sewer 'easement to dump in existing facilites to the South at the apartment complex. Therefore no new public services would be necessitated by our proposed devel opment. Thank' you, Jerry J. Eaker Eaker & Associates ARCHITECTS PLANNERS - ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS t MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COI.11-IISSIOIT May 20, 1980 Wage 4 via the storm sewer for the apartment complex to the south. Isis principal concern, however, was zritb the impact of what apparently is contemplated as access through adjoining properties without notifica- tion or consultation with the affected property owners. ! CROSS-EXA'-IINATION AND REBUTTAL_: Mr. Eaker explained the project would work with or without the provision for access to the north, but that he was working in accordance with staff direction in this matter. He explained the sewer easement. Howard stated he had a returned envelope containing notice to Mr. Bishop and about four othar�, iucludl.n� Mr. He�.n�. He told of mast di cuosi.ons with Mr.. Bishop and others at curious tines in the past 1-i yeas-s, and recounted aictilar erfcrts (not all successful) in getting property o:tners to ed cooperate in plans for streets to afford good circulation. He indicat 1 the site design review level would be the next step. Funk asked hoar site design review w0rRs, and by whom. Hozrard explained. Mr. Bishop reiterated his displeasure at not being consulted (( on a matter that affects the future development of his property, but was assured he Mould be involved in the site design review process, II sphere his concerns would be considered. Funk and Smith felt this issue should be resolved, and the status of the present 20 foot and r proposed 30 foot access onto the highway was explored. CplorISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTTOti: Smith urged the commission 1 require'an available access to the 'north. After considerable discussion Howard offered the following as Condition No. 4: 11Northerzs access to be agreed by ;property owners, but the access sill exist; add street plug? site design review process to include these parties." Bonn MOVED approval of Zone Change ZC 12-80 and Conditional Use 640 based on son staff findings and recommendations, plus the addition of Condition 4 above. The motion was seconded by Eoll,eas and carried unanimously. The president declared a five-minute recess® 5.4 ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVEIAPMEUT DISTRICT, -ZCPD 8®80 and CONAITIOPIAI, IISE, CII 8-80, and V,1RT_A.6Cz^, V j-80 (Alpha` Properties) A request by Alpha Properties for a Zone Map Arzendment with a Preliminary and general Plan Program P_avi ear request from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7PD "Single Family Residential Planned Development Dlstrict" and',a request for Conditional Use to build duplex (attached single family) units and a Variance request for a cul-de-sac s M'zflti�oai MINUTES t TIG-RD PLANNING CONO-IISSION May 20, 1980 Page 3 respect to parking spaces, and Condition 12 calling for a half street improvement. The motion was seconded by Helmer and carried unanimously. 3.2 ZONE CHANGE, ZC 11-80 (Patricia Jacobsen) NPO 111 A request by Patricia Jacobsen for a Zone Map Amendment from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-7 "Single Family Residential" located at 9830 SW Garrett (Wash. Co. Tan Map 2S1 2CC2 Tax Lot 400). Howard .cad .... --T =OR' c! There was neither an APPLICXgT'S PRESENTATION nor any PUBLIC TESTD-IODTr. COIII•IISSION DISCUSSION ?IID ACTION: Popp MOVED for auproval of ZC 11-80 based on staff findings and recommendations. The motion was seconded by $olleas and carried unanimously, 5.3 ZONE CHANGE, ZC 12-80 and CONDITIONAL USE CU 6--•80 (Faker and Associates) Np0 #1 A request by Eaker and Associates for a Zane Map Amendment from C-3 "General Commercial" to C-P ttCommercial Professional" and a Conditional Use request for a professional office building,on .97 acres located at 13620 S9 Pacific Highway (Mash. Co Tax Map ZS1 2CC2 Tax :Lot 900). Howard read the STAFF REPORT and RECOIQIENDATION.S. He explained the uses and confirmed there was no conflict between the proposed uses and the governing ordinances. u The APPLICANTtS PRESENTATION was made by Jerry Eaker, Eaker and Associates, architects and planners, 32655 S+7 Center, Beaverton. He explained the retail uses which `will, occupy the retail space in the project. He had nothing further to add to the staff report.' PUBLIC TESTIMONY was offered by J. B. Bishop, Suite 303s 1.0505 Sly Barbur 'Blvd., Portland,° owner of property across the highway and m to the north of the adjoining property. He expressed concern that proper notice was not given adjoining property owners; that this proposal had not been referred to or reviewed by the 111PO #1; that while an entrance to the Heinz `property to the north was called for by the staff, no arrangements for nor discussion of such a street through properties to the north was had with the affected property 1 owners (Heinz and Bishop). He raised the question of storm drainage t N a 1 wt ;t-�3 s ANDERSON. DITfNIAN 8e ANDERSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW TIGARD pROFESSIONAL CENTER 6665 5. W. CENTER STREET P. O. '70X 23006, TIGARD. OREGON 97223 639-1121 FRED A. ANDERSON DERRYCK H. DITTMAN ;ROGER F. ANDERSON z4 BEFORE THE. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD In the Matter of the Application of ZC12-80 and CU6-80; ---- APPEAL AND OBJECTIONS FROM ADJACENT SHERMAN LEE & ASSOCIATES, INC., OWNERS TO PLANNING COMMISSION For Zone Map Amendment and ) FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditional Use. ) JB Bishop, acting in his own behalf and in behalf of Heinz Sauerbrey, each being an owner of adjacent property affected by the Planning Commission's approval _ in the above-entitled case, hereby appeals to the City Council of Tigard, Oregon, I from the findings and conditions proposed to be established by the Planning Com mission, as: set forth in its Staff Report of May 20, 1980, Agenda Item 5.3, with respect to the following points and reasons: (1) The following is quoted from the said findingsofMay 20, 1980: I'll. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS: 111• Property to the north will redevelop in the future (Heintz Automotive) and, therefore, the site plan shows a future access to the north on the proposed plan. The intent is to pro- vide overall traffic circulation through the Heintz Property through the Bishop property to a 'future traffic signal on 99G7 at the Stan Wiley Site. A light is being installed at Park Street to serve a portion of the vacant property to the north of this site. (2) The minutes of the Tigard Planning Commission's proceedings of May 20, 1980, page 4, state: -I 1 - APPEAL` A "Bonn MOVED approval of Zone Change 7.0 1.2-80 and Conditional use 6-80 based on staff findings and recommendations, plus the The motion was seconded by Kolleas addition of Condition 4 above. and carried unanimously." (3) The Commission's discussion and action on Page 4 of the minutes of its proceedings states: " . 'Northern access to be agreed by property owners, but the access will exist; add street plug; site design review process to include these parties. "' Condition No. 4 is unacceptable to Appellant for the reason that it obviously contemplates the designation of access and use thereof by applicant across the ad- jacent properties, in violation of Amendment XIV of the United States Constitution, and violates the Constitution of the State of Oregon in that it proposes to take private property for public use or use of others without just compensation, and also violates the due-process rights of Aypellant. Further, this imposition, as proposed, would seriously interfere with the usefulness of the adjoining property and the right of the owners thereof to make such use thereof as they may see fit, consistent with the statutes of the State of Oregon and ordinances of the City of Tigard, Council is invited to the plan of Eaker Additionally, attention of the City and Associates, as approved by the Planning Commission, which does not conform to or comply with setback requirements, landscape requirements and parking requirements as set forth in the Municipal Ordinances. In further review of Condition No. 4, it needs to be pointed out to the City Council that, as a follow-up for clarification of Condition No. 4, Mr. Bishop a 2 - APPEAL h � was directly informed by Aldee Howard, Planning Director, City of. Tigard, that he, Mr. Howard, would mail to the client, Mr. Bishop, a copy of the staff recommen- dations that would be drawn up through the review process of site design review. On behalf of my client, I find this in violation of the Planning Commis- sion's dictates as adopted and approved; since it precludes adjoining property owners further participatory involvement in the site design review process. The Appellants request that this appeal be placed on the agenda for full place to be set by the City Council. evidential hearing, at a time and DATED: June 9, 1980. ANDERSON, DITTMAN & ANDERSON i f By J Bishop Fred. A. Anderson Of Attorneys for JB Bishop 3 - APPEAL I 4 i R ,, k SELECTION COMMITTEE MINUTES JUNE 19, 1980 PRESENT: Mayor Alan Mickelson, Councilman '.Com Brian, City Administrator Raeldon Barker. COMMENCED: 4.06 P.M. BACKGROUND: Park Board: There is one vacancy which was Edna Annand's position. The term will expire 12/31/80 and may be filled by someone inside or out of the city limits. Planning Commission: There are two vacancies from expiration of terms (Allan Popp who does not wish to be .reappointed and Craig Helmer who does wish to be reappointed). Terms will expire on July 1, 1984 and one member may be outside the City Limits. (Please note that Craig Helmer lives outside). INTERVIEWED: Planning Commission: Craig Helmer & Donald Moen Park Board: Lee Hansen, Ken Carlisle & Audrey Kartak RECOMMENDATIONS: The Committee recommended the following appointments: Planning Commission: Craig Helmer (reappointment) & Don Moen. Park Boazd: Audrey Kartak ADJOURNED: 5:45 P.M. '' Submitted by Raeldon R. Barker 1w _ [ g June 23, 1980 Page One of Two Tigard City Council City of Tigard r `1 Tigard, Oregon, 97243• - Dear City Council: I thank you, as a citizen of the City of Tigard, for a chance to speak. I went to City Hall to get information on the request of The Robert Randall Company for outside Recreational Vehicles storage. This may not sound like a bad request until you find out the details of what The Randall Company really wants to do and the of Tigard, the Residential Area, impact it will have on the City the Flood plain and the Wild Life in our area. The request concerns 63,713 square feet of land. Over half of this land is in the Flood Plain and 36,275 square feet is all in the Flood Plain. This land on the N.P.O. #1 map looks like ee comes two thirds of the way across the Flood Plain which is the Greenway. It comes down to only thirty-five feet from Fanno Creek which is a residential area. The near Greenway is supposed to be a buffer between the residential and commercial area. At this point eThis Greenway buffer would be destroyed and so would the Wild would destroy the homes of birds , ducks and pheasants of which some are on the Endangered List. st says the Recreational Vehicles would be parked in The reque the Flood Plain at owners risk. - The Engineers ,say the water at Fanno Creek could be seven feet high. There was a flood about, two years ago when the water was so high that it came within a few inches of the Philadelphia Square Apartments. It was like a lake with many ducks swimming around. The request says that they would; remove eight inches of dirt and replace it with crushed rock in the Flood Plain area. This would destroy all of the 36,275 square feet which is now Greenway and Flood Plain. It would destroy the trees, grass, buchcs rd ::comas �g of the Wild Life, also, the buffer between, the Residential and Commercial area. On the request, The Randall Company want to stunt Recreational Vehicles in the open on this land;which is mostly Flood Plain and Greenway. There are many homes and apartments in the area that are high above the Flood Plain and would have to look down at X11of the R.V,S stored in the open on the Flood Plain. It rAr z me of a Juni: Yard. We do not need a 'situation like thio in Tigard which is next to a residential area and in a Flood rla_x� and Greenway; There are many areas outside of the Cityof Tigard which are not next to a `Resident:ial area and not in a Flood Plain and Greenway;and :would be ,a much better location for R.V. storage August 26, 1974, the City of Tigard, adopted ordinance #7+-50 restricting the filling of Flood Plain land. The Randall Company wants to fill 36,275 square feet of Flood Plain with gravel eight - inches deep. As you know, ,gravel is not ,stable, It slides around and when the floods om tito he gravel whenwill moresgravelaway. wouldThis havelto „' raufiP a ;candition.from me Page Two of Two _ June 23. 1980 e working its way down into Fanno Creek 1 The gravel in time would keep which would effect the floods in the suture, s near this location. What All of the storage ,is in buildino of Tigard if gravel fills happen in the future in the City in the flood plain and open s-ttorage in the Flood Plain is alloyed? also, no .storage on `"here is no outside storage in thravelefills in the Flood i the Flood Plain and Greenway and no g r which would plain and Greenway. }�elab©vewconditionsiderlts of Ti�a_d� have to live with t La conclude , please put yourself in our situation of ha ring to down upon all of these R.V. ' S stored in thofathis pen on the Plaindo P please considerthe impact I Plain and Greenway. the nearby i . storage at this location upon the City of Tigard, residential area, Flood Plain and Greenway. I , I believe that this is a. very serious problem and should be 'Iti stopped now. I Thank you very much. Sincerely yours® r n: i Enclosure' = `s Map attached f is i r g 0 • � ,. \ w ��� � •�' 1 old � 'J.4: f QUPLEX Ilk DI 1p, /y 4 r` r t �'•y�� ��r` r // W 4 'Cl ti\ \ - �. v,: fit, t•: r 4�Yt/•,Z,�f�',6 G\ '•�,PARK, V, MARdZi ay. . ell a .-+ .p C'4 3 t �. I w h-1 r ^ w M O 4- r-4 h cn �. �4 v H41 a., . d a CO r4 O CO 4.J H H = ro Q r-4 ro CtlLi ? wo iii rno y cj -4 C c $4 Fa ro CU o °o + +n N CA W N N 4J C2 4 >i to x: f7 p E-a & LJ h w.a Z •� [n • t ctf y w ro c4 co co „ co Q as a ns cna U C"1 •ri 0.�+. N •r•1 QO tl N h O 1 O w 14 �4 C11y crOf 3 M --4 _ r- c°Z4 .a a t r cam, h w r C-4 ccnn _M CN h f [ � N ell ,a