The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 07/25/1988 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate m BUSINESS AGENDA - CATV sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, a JULY 25, 1988, 6:00 P.M. ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start m TIGARD CIVIC CMMM of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are +� 19125 SW BALL BLVD. asked to be to 2 minutes or less. Longer matters F a TIGARD, OREGON 97225 can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or City Administrator. 6:00 o STUDY SESSION - Agenda Review 7:00 1. BUSINESS MEETING% 1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance 1.3 Call To Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items 7.05 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or less Per Issue, Please) 7110 3, CONSENT AGENDA% These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion Without separate discussion. Anyone may request that sn item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion tot 3.1 Approve Council Minutest June 13 6 27, 1988 3.2 Receive 6 filet a. Library Departmental Report - Juno, 1986 b. Selection Criterion For City Administrator 3.3 Roceso Council Moottnxj Convono Local Contrast ROVIOW Board (LCRB)l a. Approve Contract With Parks Design Consultant b. Authorise Request For Tractor bids{ Adjourn L%B; Reconvane Council Meeting. 3.4 Accept Public Improvements In Carnahan'a Subd. - Ras. r1 88- 7115 4. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE CHANCE ANNEXATION ZCA 88-07 LAMKIN NFO d 6 A requsst by Jamos and Marlys LAmkin and Mitcuke Baird to annex three parcels conaitintt of 10.66 acres into the City of Tigard and to chanAo the zoning designation from Washington County R-24 to City of Tigard 1-25 on property located At 10960 SW Durham Road (WCTM 251 15AA lot 800 i 900) and From Washington County R-5 to City of Tigard R-4.5 on proprty located at 16325 SW 108th Ave. (WCTM 2Sl 15AA lot 1900). o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations Or Challenges 0 Summation By Community Dovelopmont staff o Public Testimooyt Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination 0 Roemomendation By Community Devel.opmont Staff o Council Questions Or Comments o Public Hearink Closed 0 Consider. By Council - RES. NO. 88- ORD. NO. 88- 7t2S 5. PUBLIC HURING - ZONE ORDINANCS AMENDMENT/ZOA 66-01/PACI nc RLALTy Request for amendment of Community Development Code Section 18.68.040 to include "transient 'housing" (i.e., hotels/motels) as a conditional use in the I-P (Industrial Park) tone and amendment of Sect,nr. 18.68. 050 to allow 20% site landscaping in the I-P tons if certain standards are astisfied rather than the present 252 site landacoping requirement. o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations Or Challenges a Summation By Community Development Staff 0 Public Testimonys Proponents, Opponents, Croas Examination o Recommo_nahtion By Community Development Staff 0 Council Questions Or Comments o Public Hearing Closed 0 Consideration Ey Council - ORDINANCE NO. 88- COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 25, 1988 - PACE 1 7:45 6. APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE CU 87-03 MINOR -AND PARTITION MLP 87-09 TEXACO NPO 1 3 t Appeal of Hearings Officer approval with conditions to construct a \ vehicle fuel and convenience sales bulsaess and car wash. Also a minor land partition to divide 1.54 acre parcel into two parcels of 38.468 and 28.532 square feet each. Zoning: C-G (General Commercial). Location: 11290 SW Hull Mountain Road. (WCTM 2SI IOAC lot 1100). This will be an '"argument-type" hearing only, The Council will consider only the record before the Hearings Officer, which is on file at City Hall and has been fully reviewed by the Council. The Council will further is not allowed under City code to consider any new testimony or evidence which is not in the record. 0 Public hearing Opened e Declarations Or Challenges o Summation Of Hearings Officer Findings By Community Development Staff o Public Toatimonyt Appellants 15 minutes Respondents 15 minutes Appellants Rebuttal 5 minutes o Council Questions Or Comments o Public Haarin,g Closed a Consideration By Council - Direction To Staff For Final Order 8;45 7. PUBLIC HEARING - WASHINGTON STREET VACATION e Public Hearing Opened o Declarations Or Challenges o Summation By Community Development Staff o Public Tostimonyt Propononts, Opponents, Cross Examination o Reccmmandation By Community Devolopmont Staff o Council Questions Or Comments n Public Hearing Closed o Consideration By Council - ORDINANCE NO. 86- 0155 8. PUBLIC HEARING - NORTH DAKOTA STREET VACATION o Public Hearing Opened a Declaration* Or ChallanA*a o Summation By Community Development Staff o Public Testimonyl Proponents, Opponents, Crewe Examination o Recommendation by Community Development Staff o Council Questions Or Comments 0 Public Hearing Closed A Consideration By Council - ORDINANCE NO. 88- 9105 9. PUBLIC HEARING - 79TH AVENUE STREET VACATION e Public Hrarinx Opened o Daelarations Or Challenges o Summation By Community Development State 0 Public Teatimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Recommendation Ay Community DevelopmFnt Staff o Council Questions Or Comments o Public ISsaring Closed o Consideration by Council - ORDINANCE 140. 68- 1 s 10. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDWNT ZOA 97-07 CIIAPTFJt 28.114 SIGNS o public Nearing Continued From 6/27/88 i o Declarations Or Challenges o Summation by Community Development Staff o Public Teatimonyt proponents, Opponent@, Cross Examination o Recommendation By Community Development Staff o Council Questions Or Comments o public Nearing Closed e Consideration By Council - OB.DINANCE NO. 90- 9:35 8-9:35 11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 9:40 12. EXECUTIVE SESSIONt The Tigard City Council will do into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (a), M. (e), b (h) to discuss City Officer selection, labor relations, real property transactions, and current and pending litigation issues. 10:00 1.3. ADJOURNMENT lm/5523D/15D COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 25, 1988 - PAGE 2 AGENDA UPDATE Council Meeting of July 25. 1988 u STUDY SESSION - Agenda Review 1. BUSINESS MEETING: Call To Order and Roll Call - All present 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or Lw�s Per Issue, Please) 3. CONSENT AGENDA: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes: June 13 & 27, 1988 3.2 Receive & File: a. Library Departmental Report - June. 1988 b. Selection Criterion For City Administrator 3.3 Recess Council Meeting, Convene E.ocal Contract Review Board (t.CRH), a, Approve Contract With Parks Dusi-3n Consultant b. Authorize Request For Ir•cactor Bids; Adjourn LCRB; Reconveno Council Mooting, 3.4 Accept Public I►r►provemonta In Carn:ahcan's Subd, - Ras, # 88-70 , Ed/Jo UA 4. PUBLIC HEARING; m. TONE:: CHANGV ANNVXA110N T(',A 88-01 I..AMKIN NPO 1Y 6 A roquaxt by Jamas unci Marlys 1-Am{ in ,ani Mitsuko Baird to wnnoas thr«a pn►rcols conuiting of 10.66 tiacrau into tho City of l iC3carcd .anti it) 040190 thu ,ronin3 dusit3nition from Wiohint.jton Cotanty R-24 to City of TjgArd R-25 on proporty loc4atod at 10960 GW Ehar•ham Road (W(I1'M 2;:1 II)AA lot 800 & 900) and rrom Washirnit.on County R-� to City Of `TigArd R-4 ,5 on proprty located Fat 1()325 SW 108th Avo, (W,11M 21S1 1')AA lot 1300). 0 Consicdcar. By Council - RES, NO. 88-71 Ea/Jo UA; ORD. N0, 08-15 Jo/Sc UA 5, PUBLIC HEARING -. TONF ORDINANCE' AML NE)ME'.Nl'/XOA 00-01/f>AC1 E1C RE'.AL-1 Y Roquust for .smion dmont of Community Dovolopmunt: Cudo Soctd on 10,66.040 to includo "tronsiont housing" (i .a. , 110toIs/0'0t0ls) ws a conditional uoo in thea I-P (Industrial Park) aruno arld ,vmonde►ont of Soc.tiun 10,60, 050 to allow 20% site+ landgcr►pin,g in the 7.-P tong if' eert*1n st.Wnd+xrds era uatisfiod rat.hur them thea pre►scant 75'& sito laandsc:rapintl roquiromont. 0 Consideration By Council w ORDINANCE NO. 88-16 - Second Reading Raequirad - Ea/Ed 4-1/Jo Nay Cc�r� �-�r�uP�J d� back', , , ► COUNCIL AGENDA - JUDY 25, 1988 _ PAGE: 1 { t b. APPEAL PUBLIC NEARING - COND11'I0NAL USE CU 87-03 MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 87-09 TEXACO NPO # 3 Appeal of Hearings Officer approval with conditions to construct a { vehicle fuel and convenience sales buisness and car wash. Also a minor land partition to divide 1.54 acre parcel into two parcels of 38,468 and 28.532 square feet each. Zoning: C-G (General Commercial). Location: 11290 SW Bull Mountain Road. (WCTM 2S1 10AC lot 1100). o Consideration 8y Council - jo/Sc - Motion directing staff to prepare Final Order ffo� CC review on 8/22; amend thearings Ofcr decision: 1) strike reft;ra_nces to relocation of south frontage road; 2) location awed numbers of driveways to be determined during design review process; 3) Building Permit will not be authorized prior to the closure of ttee north frontage road; 4) Occupancy Permit will not be issued prior to ttm completion of the ODOT-,MSTIP project scheduled for the intersection 71 PUBLIC HEARING ,- WASHINGTON STRILT VACATION u Con3ideration By Council -- ORDINANCE NO. 88--17 - Ea/Sc UA 81 PUBLIC HEARING - NORTH UAKOTA S1RELT VACA110N III Considoration By Council - ORDINANCE NO, 80-1.8 Jo/Ea UA g, PUBLIC HEARING 79TH AVLNUE. STRIJIT VACA110N 0 Considor,4 ion By Council - ORDINANCE NO, $0-19 10. F)UBLIC HEARING m- ZONC ORUI:NAWIL AMENUMCNT JOA 07 ,W CHAPIVIR 18. 114 S'I(iN S 0 Public. Hoviring Continuod Front 0/27/60 u Cunsidorattion By Council - ORDINANCE NO, 0820 Ea/Ed UA A Council consensus to direct stiff to prepare exception criteria (to ba administered by Council) concerning: 1) raeece Pt.ions to height & size requirements; 2) inclusion of freeway--oriented signs at intersections 1# . NON AG(.N[)l1 11 Council consensus to authorize Ea to work with staff to put together packa." of current parks and civic center landscaping maintenance rewirs is — i.p.., what are curront resources and, if necossary, identify alternatives .2 Tri-Met Sus Shelters - Ed noted poor condition and vandalism of City bus shelters; Council consensus; Mayor to send l.ottaer to Tri-Mat asking for repair and keeping shelters in gond condition. 12. EXECUTIVESESSION: Cancalled 13, ADJOURNMENT 11:51 p.m. cw/5523D/15D COUNCIL AGENDA -- JULY 25, 1998 - PAGE 2 T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - JULY 25, 1988 - 6:00 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Tom Brian. Councilors: Carolyn Eadon, Jerry Edwards. Valerie Johnson (arrived at 6:25 p.m.). and John Schwartz, City Staff: John Acker. Assistant City Planner; Randy Clarno, Development Services Manager; David Lehr, Chief of Police (arrived at 6:40 p.m.); Keith Liden, Senior Planner; :sill Mo,iloy. Acting City Administrator; Cd Murphy, Community Development Director, Liz Newton, Senior Planner; Tim Ramis. City Attorney; Randy Wooley. City Engineer; Catherine Wheatley. Deputy Recorder. 2. STUDY SESSION: a. Review of agenda itan►s: a Agenda 3tam No, A (Public. Hoarin„l, 7c)na change ar►ne,Kati on, Lan►kin). It was rioted th,it l.hiu partic0car onncrxa,tion requaat would fell under the now ijuide,linos as propaaod lay Council at their July 21, 1988 meeting; that; is, no City or, Boundary Commis:►ion feov3 would bo paid by the` applicant , o Sonior, Plannor, Newton intrueducod Jou Purcivoel arid Bob MurAlw from Muraae+ Asaoc iatvu who worn pr'ou rit to antiwar quoutions concorninj A4, onda Itom No. 3,3:a (Parks Dosign Conault�int Contr#.A t) . 'thea contiutt:anta rpviawod their opprocach to tho parkti dosirgn project. 1'huy notod Choy would bee working clouoly with sttaff, momborti of the community and thea Park ( Board, COUNCILOR JOHNSON ARR3Vi..D Al 6:215 PM. i o Sonior Plannor t.Adon ravipwo(I tho Sitp Codec mat orial containod in tho Council mooting rwckat, ,oniur Plannor i Lidon oxplainod thea aliornotivou tie► propkiuoed in tho staff ► i roport. K CouncaI roviewed vovoral opt.ionu wrsr•a prop000d fur frooway-carie►ntod virgns. 0 Council discu%uod thea Public Hoarinel for the Conditional Uto CU 97.03, Minor Land Partition MLP 87-09 T4axaco. City � Attorney roc:onm►c►ndod thc+t Council limit tootimony to the itoms as outlinod in tho two ,appoals from Toxac:o and NPO 113 . 3. CALL FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS a►. Parks and Civic; Center landucapi.ng maintonance requiremontti -- Councilor Eadon. E b. "tri--met bus shelters - Councilor Edwnrdn, f Page i - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 25, 1988 t { 4. VISITOR`S AGENDA: a. Ed Maggi of the River City Press, introduced himself to Council. He noised the River City Press would be covering the Tigard City ( Council meetings for their newspaper beginning August 1. b. Mr. Maggi distributed a copy of his newspaper to Council. 5. CONSENT AGENDA; 5.1 Approve Council Minutes: June 13 & 27, 1988 5.2 Receive & File: a. Library Departmental Repnrt — .lune,, 1988 b, Selection Criterion For City Administrator 5.3 Recess Council Meeting; Convene Local Cont:rac.t. Review Board (LCRB); a, Approve Contract. With Parks Design ConsultNint. b, Authorize Request For Tractor Bids; Adjourn LCRB; Reconvene Council Mooting. 5,4 Accept Public Improvomonts In C.arnahan's Subdivision Resolution No. 00-70 Motion by Councilor tdwar-ds, sorlondid by Councilor Johnson to adopt the consctnt agenda. 1ho motion w;as approved by unanimous vote of Council prptiont, 6, PUBLIC HEARING — ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION — ZCA 88-07 — LAMKIN — NPO Nb A request by lamr►s and Morlys LeAnlikin and Mitsukv [Laird to annox throe parcals consisting of 10,66 iacr'ol into the City of Tigard and to chaingo the coning desi.t3nation from County R--24 tr► Cit:y of Iiiii R•-2b on propos-Ly locatod at 10960 SW DurhAm Road (W(;TM 2S1 15AA, Lot 800 and 900) and from Washington County R, ,) to City of Tigard R--4.'.i on property located at 16325 SW 106th Avunuo (WCTM 2a1 15AA, Lot: 1300), At Public Hoaring wos oponod. b. Thc►ro wero no d►►r,,laxra►tions or chAllcngov. c. Summation by Assistant t,lranr►or Acker; This annexation request consists of throo p<arcols totalling 10,66 ascros contiguous to the City of Tigard, The annexrat:ian weAs roque.sted by Jamos and Marlys Ltamkin, who own the northern two parcols, and by Mitsuke Raird, who awns tho southern most parcel , All. proporty is located within Tiga►rd's urban planning aroa, d. public Testimony — There was non*. 4 i e. Recommendation by Community Development staff. Assiutant Planner Acker noted that staff suggested the City Council adopt the proposed resolution and ordinance to forward the annexation to the Boundary Commission and to assign plan and zone designations to the property in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Page z — COUNCIL MINUTES — JULY 25, 1988 c S i t 6 f, Councilor Johnson noted the Washington County Land Use Division reported that Tax Lots 800 and 900 had been illegally partitioned. Assistant Planner Acker advised that this should not affect the annexation process. 9- Public Hearing was closed. h. RESOLUTION NO, 88--71. A RESOi.UTI:ON INITIATING ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT "A" AND DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED. (ZCA 08_07) (LAMKIN) . i, Motion by Councilor Eadon, sec,ondod by Councilor Johnson to adopt Resolution No. 88--71, The notion was adopted by unanimous vote► of Council present, j , ORDINANCE NO, 88-115, AN ORDINANCE. ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE MUNE;: CHANGE: (7CA 80-07) (LAMKIN) AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DAIT, k. Motion by Councilor Johnson, oocondtid by Councilor Sc:.hwt,rt-�, to adapt Ordinance; No, 08-15. Tho motion was adoptod by unanimous vot4, of Council prt+ac nt. 7. PUBLIC HEARING -- ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT/ZOA 88-01/PACIFIC REALTY A roquost for on ,amvndniant of Community Dovolopmont Codec looction 18.68,040 to includo "transiont housin4l" (i ,o. , hotols/motels) as a Conditional Usta in tho I.-P (lnduutri+al Park) zona and an amondmont of Seaction 18,68,050 to allow 20 porcont sites lanedmcaping in thea I-P 4onQ if cortoln stAndards aro oatisfied riat.hcr than tho proavr►t 25 porcont lAndscaping roquironiont. a, Public Hearing w+as oppriod. b, fihoro woro no doclAreetiuns or + hal lungos , C. Stjnior Pla►nnor, Lidon sun►ma►riztod this ogvridca itom. Tho Tigard Planning Commission hold ,a public, hviaring on July 5, 1988, to roview tho nitwits of roducing thea ovoraclI lnsndscesping rwquiramonts+ In tho I.-P zona from 25 to 20 pearcont and to allow transient lodging uses (hote+l.s/motels, etc.) an Conditional Uses in tho I-P zona. Staff amondod the applicant's original proposal slightly and the Planning Commission made further minor modifications to the proposed 7ignrd Municipal Croda (TMC) subsection% 18,68.040 and 18.68,050. Councilor Johnson said she had no difficulty in reducing the landscaping roquirement-; however, she noted hesitancy concerning r the trrannient housing section of the TMC. Councilor Johnson referred to the staff report wherein two Planning Commissioners objected to transient housing lodging as conditional uses in the f Y-P zone. { Page 8 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUL:' 25, 1988 1 4 a ► d. Public Testimony a Larks `tout, Mackenzie/Saito, 0690 SW Bancroft, Portland, Oregon 97201. Mr. Stout testified in favor of the decrease r" � irk overall landscaping requirements in the ]'-P zone. He noted this would increase developable areas and would have a positive affect on the business environment. He requested favorable consideration. There was discussion on the transient lodging portion of the zone ordnance amendment with regard to ancillary uses, such as restaurants and conference roams. the lodging facilities had been identified by tljc? applicant .as a necessary service to assist businesses in accommodating clients, employees, etc., visiting from outside the: region. The request was not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, Plan policies, or othor City ordinancos. o Richard Buono, Pacific Ro alt.y Associatou, 111 SW Fifth Avanuo, Suite 2950, por•t,land, Orogon 91202, Mr, Auono noted thin primary purpouo for tranuient, 10d9in13 as a conditional u►aa would be to uorvo the buuinoss tra►volor. He testified t.h<a induutrial businosuos would be wall aorved by a hotel lodging facilitiou. Thorn wau diucuuuion on whother or r►cat this proposal would cru+at.o a uubsta►nti.al amount of r()quu»ts far hiatal/lod<jing uses in this zona. Mr. fluono not_o►i that the, numbor of rooms would bo limitod by tho market dom«ar►d. �. Councilor Udwa►rdu noted that ho would liko to tighton up la►nquaqe concerning bod and bro.Akf'+out houuiny and roforonc ad problom# exporioncod in othor Arods. Ht, would like to assuru that i,his pr•opou+aal would callow only .x metol/hA'01 1'ac.ility and not bod and broakfout out.abliuhmont's, Mr. Buono notod ho would have no problom with ,s Condit iun which divalltwing bod and brookfa►ut focilit,ieu, Q, Senior Planner LAdon notod that stf►ff ai►dvoce►tc�d city Council approval of 7OA 00-01 as recommondod by tho Manning Commission and adoption of the proposed ordinance, f, After discussion, it was noted that brad and brokkfacst; focilitioo should not be allowod. TMC Section 18.130.180 (30) C. would road: Rod and bruiakfast uue shrill not be permitted. 9. Councilor Johnson expressed concern that th►r integrity of the I•-f► none be preserved, aha noted uno asinrasu in loaving the amount of haul/motel use in the iono open-sanded without: a Limit on the number which could be constructed. h. Councilor Edwards said that; the number of hotel/motel rooms built; would be based upon the market: demand. Mayor and Councilor Etadon concurred. i. Public Hearing a.aas closed. Pace 4 COUNCIL MINUTES •- JULY 25, 1988 j. ORDINANCE NO. 88-16. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SUBSECTIONS 18.68.040, 18.68.050, AND 18.130.150 OF THE TICARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE - INDUSTRIAL "PARK ZONE (ZOA 88--01) REQUESTED BY PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES. k. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded Councilor Edwards, to adopt Ordinance No. 88-16 with the addition of Section E to Section 18.130.7.50 (30) which would state that bed and breakfast use shall not be permitted. Ordinance 88-16 did riot pass on f=irst reading (Roll Call Vote: 3-1; Councilor Johnson voted "Nay.") The ordinance would require a second reading and pall by Council at. the August" 8, 1988 meeting. $, APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL. USE -- CU 87--03 -- MINOR LAND PART MON - MLP 87--09 TEXACO - NPO ##3 Appeal of bearings Officer, approval with conditions to construct a vehicle fuel and convenience salsas business and car wash also a minUr land partition to divide 1 .54 acre parcel into two parcels of 38,468 and 28,x32 square foot such. Zonint3; C-G (General t.)nmisor'cial), Location; 11290 Sw ftul l Mountain road, (WC,IM 2S1 WAC. Lot 1100) . a, Summation by L.e(j al Courfwsol: City Attarncoy advi t; od that tho Council had boforio thom an appeal TexacP (applicant) and NPO ##3 of the abovo-rsofur•uncod be>arings officer, dsoc;:iuion, City Attorns►y also not.sod that tt►a Council tuxd rocoivod an apps+al from the CP0 in tho aroaa; however, tochnivdl difficultios with this ,apps+Al had besan notod by Counc11. b. City Attorney reviowa:d procosa requirements for an Appeal public hoaring, lie not:sod that tcostimony must bio confinod to tho facts and arguniont.o which asppcoaared in thio record now evidence or, facts could not bo considurod by Council. C. Senior Planner L.idon noted historical information Ian thio be6rin�30 Officor's dcocision. On June 13, 1998, thea Hio4r,inja Officor, approved Conditional Uwe CU 07-03/Minor Lard Partition Mi.i► 87-09 subjwc.t to conditions. This deciwion was ,appo alcod by the applicant (7axaaco) and NPO 43, CPO ##4 eal%o mubmittod an ;appoal, but it was received too leatro to bo legally considur-od as An appeal. On July 15, 1988, staff uponsorod aA mooting with Toxraco and 1 neighborhood represantativos to clarify iusuov rmis od in the &ppeals, Senior Planner Li.den noted three issues raised by all parties: 1, staff, `Cexaaco, and NPO 1#3 agreed that the southern frontago road should be closed and not rcalocated. 2. Closure of northern frontage road was not a condition of the Hearings Officer's decision; however, NPO 03 said that the northern frontage road should be closed prior to the construction of the Texaco station, Senior Planner Liden C noted that the Hearings Officer, staff, and Texaco state that this condition (closure of northern frontage road) should net be imposed as a condition. Page 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 25, 1988 { 3. There was agreement among all parties that ultimately two driveways on Bull Mountain Road would be appropriate. Senior, Planner Liden noted that staff and Texaco were in agreement that two accesses would be appropriate at this time. NPU #13 stated that only one access was now appropriate for the Texaco site and thafi a second access would be advisable with development occurring to the wast. d. Senior Planner Liden noted the materials that had been included in the Council packet; 1) site map; 2) Hearings officer decision, 3) copies of appeals from Texaco, NPO ##3, CPO #14, 4) Liden memo summarizing mediation meeting; 5) wooley memo addressing street improvement issues including recommendod amendments to Conditions 3 and 4 of the Hearings Officer decision. Supplemental items also included in the packet were; 1) applicant's st:atemont and traffic study, 2) staff report to the Hearings Officor, 3) community traffic study; 4) applicant response to neighborhood traffic:, concerns; a) letters datod Soptombar 29, 1907, and March 10, 1988 from the OrQgon Department of irianaportation, Senior Pliaranor Lidon noted that a irianxcript of tho Hcaarinja dfficor proc:oodings had boon submittod previously for Council, rouiow, u, City Ent3inoor roviowed tho traffic, ait:uiatic►n (soca City Frigin"sor July lb, 1'988 momorondum in thea Council pac:kot), City C.n(3i.noor nutod ho supported tho rociu4•st by loxiaco and NPO #!3 to doloto they Ho:arin;fs Office►r rocluirumont for rolociation of thea oxisting 0outh frontrojo road, f. City C;nginvor noted that the Flr+arinkp Officer had propoued the relocwtod fronti►ago road bo u%od for unci of thea ,access locations to thea Taaxac:o sito, Ho &dvisod that if the roquiromr.nt for is r-oluca►tod front+jago road would t)o oliminAtud, thea City would nood to roeevaluxto the Ho+arinqu Officer's rar;trictions on drivewiay lo+t+atic�ns. City €hginoor, noted thot thin County staff, during is joint dosign roviow mooting, propobod opprc.)priiut:o drivow.sy loel►tiorlb for this situ and `fpxe►co had incorporratod the C:ounty's roconmondiation±a into their situ drawing, City Enginoor cadvi.sod that the County's proposal appeared to provide► good cxrcess to the %site arid also i provided odeogtaato drivcoway sepecriation and adoquFatta sight distance for good t:raf fic safety. City Ungineor noted that staff support:od tho County's rocummcandation as outlined in tho rebrunry 29, 1988 lotter from Daryl Steffan (Traffic Analyst for ; Washington County), City Enginoer recommended that the Council modify tho decision of the Hearings officer by amending Conditions 3 and 4 to rea,ad as follows: i F 3. Additional right—of—way shall be dedicated along the null Mountain Road frontage to increase the right—of—way to 33 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right:—of--way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms and shall be approved by the City Engineering Section. Dedication forms and instructions are available from the Engineering Section, Page 6 — COUNCIL MINUTES — JULY 25, 1988 i F I 4. The accesses to Bull Mountain (toad shall be located as shown in the letter from Daryl Steffan of Washington County dated February 29, 1988, as Alternate C. The western access shall be a joint use access with the property to the west and shall be located a minimum of 100 feet edge-to--edge from the eastern access. The eastern access shall be located directly across from the existing access to the church parking lot. g City Engineer noted there is no direct access to the property off of Highway 99, site development: review would be required prior to construction, h. There was lengthy discussion on the aouth frontage road and whether or not access from this road w;as essential, city Engineer respondod that it, was not ossontiRil. however. thero waa another parcel adjacont to the Texaco site which would noud tho south trontap road for access. i. Public "testimony, Mayor noted ttiit 15 minuLes for each point of viow hFed boon achodulk)d; howover, duce to the number of porsons who had sitlnwd to testify, Council c:.onsensuy was to grant 20 minutes for each nido to protiont, thiair tomtimony. ,O,ppUnon/: , 0 Bob E3lodtiou, Chairman of N410 W3, 11800 GW Walnut, Tigard, Orogon 977.23, Mr,, t314adsoo communtod th(it NPO #3's iesuwa wero dcesc..ribod cloarly in t.hoir aw)041 , Hee roquvot.od th�At 4.. Council considor coordirWAng thu closure) of tho north Arid sauth eAccous at thin samo time, Mr. Blodsou wakod tho Council to cons Wor "a t,.ocal 3mprovomont W%trict (1.113) for Hull Mountiain RORd so t,hdt improvomonts to tho who10 f-044 could be dovolopud at ono timce, u E3ovorly Uroudo, 12200 CSW 13ull Mseuntain Rood, ligord, Orogon 97223, Mrs, 1'roude idontlfiod Vivo iu®uies which ware of concern to the CPO. 'lheeir issues includod; 1 . No chango in land use be allowed until both the north and south frontogo roads are closed, 2. A center turn lane be made a condition oto tiny land u%o ch*nge. 3. Only onto access to the site be allowed. 4. The 1evol of service at tho intersection of 99W and Bull Mountain (toad be raised from a "f" which it currently is to ae "c" or "b." 5. The hours of operation be regulated, f �- Mrs. Froude concurred with the Hearings Officer's condition to alloys only one access (directly across from the church) to the site. Page 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 25, 1988 Mrs. Froude requested that ramifications to the traffic circulation at build--out be reviewed. ( Mrs. Frcude noted concerns of potential vandalism if the business were permitted to operate 24 hours per day. o John Draneas, 15225 SW 133rd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Mr. Draneas advised that the proposed development should not be allowed until the north frontage road had been closed. He noted concern over lack uf -assurances th*t the north frontage road would ever be closed. Mr. Drane;as noted the traffic flow problems on Bull Mountain Road arid th;� difficulty in making is right turn off Bull Mountain Road to pacific Highway. lie noted that the north (not the south) frontage road wax a major traffic: problc-m in that location. lie advi5od that the problom3 were caused by cars turning right or left onto liull Mountain Road from tho north frontages road. Mr. Dranaaaa adiaad tt►aat tt►t) proposed do►vvlopment would worsen tho traffic conpjeaatiun by dr•aawinq gars u,"i Pacific Hi�jhway.. Mr, Dr•anoaa notod that ut►hic10 fueal salon was a conditional urea unci that it w.%s +appropriat.o for (;,ouncil to t4ko into cenaidtaration all of they Off0cts thin use would haven on t:ht) surrowndirnl ♦aria. He roquuwt ad Council to deny the rog0out until such time as tho north frontage road is c.loovd, o Robcart Amos, 12500 sw Crull Mount:aain lioiAd, Tigard, Oragon 97223, Mr. Amos advised tie haat been a rc►sidont of the► Bull Mountain arra for calnms►t: 40 yoars and t.haat tho tooth fronta go road hoed existed for, Ak)out: that. poriod of gime also. Mr. Ames not-od thorn has boon d hiutury of araricaus sacc^idpntn At thus intorooction, tie iadviraod that it would bo tt►o wrong course of Action to ,allow incrtoa#od traffic tO Dull K)untain Road prior to the tutcal Clirr►ir►at:iran of tho frontage rooAds. o Cprald Kolva, 14357 SW Pacific Highway, lignrd, Oregon 9772.3 . Mr. Kolvea rioted he wing r•eaprosonting tho tonants of i the Canterbury Shopping Center. Mr. Kolve3 ragraed with Texaco's proposal that the south frontage road riot be realigned, Mr, Kolvea reported thrat approximiatoly 10,000 cars per month cross from tho south frontage road to the north frontage road to access the shopping center. Hsi wain concerned that if the south frontage road warts eliminated, f vehicular access to the Crantebury Square merchants would be limited. Mr. Kolve stressed that he would prefer to not have the south frontage road closed until signalization occurs at Canterbury Lane. Rage $ — COUNCIL MINUTES — JULY 25, 1988 is i i 4 o Jim Sernklau. 13325 SW 110th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Mr. Sernklau advised that he was representing the Christ the King Lutheran Church. In addition to safety issues. Mr. Sernklaau noted they were concerned with a potential ( vandalism and litter problem. Ne proposed that limiting hours and adding conditions for patrols and litter cleanup would be desirable. (Note for record: Kent Hanson, 12255 SW Durchilly Court.. Tigard. Oregon 97223 signed the testimony sheet. Mr. Hansen advised that he did not; wish to testify,) o Mr. George Olson, 15165 SW 133rd Avenue, Tigard, OR 97223, Mr, Olson noted that traffic is extremely difficult on Bull Mountain Road ,and cautioned that any new development not_ be allowed to make it worse, tie also requested that Council limit tf►e hours caf operation to control noises and air pollution and to avoid vandalism problems and late nijht robberies. Pro on1L'1 A: 0 Murk 3, Croonfield (te;lal Counsel for lexacO), 101 SW Main, Port Lind, Oro on. Mr. GroorifJold introduced Wayno Kit.tlof,orj, 1r,aaffic inginoor, 'a11 SW tiroodwray, Portland, Oro4jon 97205; pacul Vctll►ijor, Markatinla Ropr000ntaativca for loxraco, 3000 NW at. Holons Road, Portlwid, Oregon; and MiArk Matgo, Urginoor for Toxaco, 117 Log4an, Lynnwood, Orwjon, Mr. Gr,p(,nfiold noted that they propoxbd uric was connist.ant with the Comprehonnivo P14an duaignation and eonint1 for t.ho sit.o. lho convonionco smart #rr►d ccar•weAtih would bo outr1ght purmittod uvos at this situ. Ther vohic,ulor focal sialcas utsca wa# a cotiditionaal uto but it would be a conditional use in all City forloa. Mr, Greenfield nut >d t,hot thio site is surrounded by pr,pdCamin�ant:ly connnercial lard. 'thio rwarast rosidontiaal proporty ias 225 fact wway on thin othor sides of Hlghway 99, Mr, Grponfiold said it wn►ts hies undorstrandfrig that tho iseuos fur tF►ib appee+al weara tht>aa raised by thom in thoir appo&l and by NPO 03's appcnal. Vor the record, Mr. Greenfield objoctod to cunnidaration ref' issues brought forth by t.hra CI>0, but, noted that hes would r<anpond to them for cia►rificatiun. (Wayne Kittlason, Traffic Trnginear, outlined the OPPOaal issues. He noted that he had identified four issues and distributed to Council the following material: out;lina of the eappeail issues comparison of conflict potential (traffic patterns) diagram of traffic flow. Mr. Kittleson commented on the issues: Page 9 -- COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 25, 1988 Should development await closure of the north frontage road? Mr. Kittleson said there was no reason to withhold development of the site until the north frontage road was closed. Mr. Kittelson maintained that improvements proposed would enhance safety. tie noted that eliminating thL� south frontage road would reduce the number of turning movements which would improve traffic safety. In response to a question by the Mayor, Mr. Kittleson confirmed that he was proposing the south frontage read be closed and allowing the north frontage road to remain open, Mr, Kittleson addressed the concern raisod by Mr. Herald Kolvo that closure of tho soutta frontage road would reduce access to the Canterbury shopping center-, Mr, Kittluaon noted some interim mcaasur0$ which could be taken. Should tho wcautarn %ito accuse drive be c:loaod until after OU01 projoct is c',oaaaplOta? Mr, KittleAon advitod that tho accessos gas propo%od wore those which hod boon worked through with thc.j COa.araty si.4aff, klO noted tl:lo nood for the two Acvo%-o* o,nd tho lraaffic cunsidorat;iuris for flow in atirnd cut owhich would necpfisitAo, the two aecvsnirs, lhorQ woo discuuyion on t.rcaff'iv c.unaidorzationu with 01,61 potont:ial build--out of the larva. Mr. Kitticason diucuunad with Council tho traffic:c countu and population ieutimAtau, Mw notelet th(rt thoua wore Wood on a 30 ppreont incraa4aaw according to t,ha study ha had boon uOIN.], Mr, Kittloson roupundud to the c:oncurn that, Taxaaco would be Pulling tr•iaffic off Pacific Highwoy, jw noted traffic gajnorotions would not be oxc.ossivo, Oisccassion followod on traffic 90norat.i0f, €+6timiat09, Paul. Vol.lmor, Toxoco's maarkoting roprosontativo, staitod that fuel stetionn nop.d to utilizo two drivownys to off'kipntly move traffic to and from thea user, Ho notod problonis with single access driveways, With regard to vondaxlism, Mr, Vollmor said it would bee foolish to close the %cervica station during the hour% must lifaly for, vrarvJaaIi.sm, iia notod that with call—night omployaes, the property would have bettor security, Mr, Greenfield noted there had been no opponent: tcrstimony that any applicable plan provision or ordinance roquira,mcent had been violated. Ne ridded that the issue of timing did not relate to any applicable Code requirement, Mr, Greenfield stated he did not believe there ware any rr legal grounds to deny the use. Page 10 — COUNCIL MINUTES — JULY 25, 1988 P Mr. Greenfield noted he perceived cte.,tin►ony by onflicting opponents the opponents, He gUestioned whether or not the were attempting to impose a moratorium on dre was ant' justifiopment cation site. He said he did not think roeect wouldycreate a safer environment.,ritie�askedproposed Courcil approval of the staff's recommendation. j, Mayor called for rebuttal by opponents: John praneas noted concern that the figures used by the pr~opon+ nts in estimating the trips per hour were inaccurate tie advised that; information presented by 'Texaco was inconsistent with what was represented at the hc�arang. Mr. tlraneas took i;raue with the proposal by Texaco to close the south frontage road and lc'av alt we nor thcle�an�t ee north open. He noted thiat Oilc�l a pr oK the South frontago not the south frontage north frontage road would frontAge road wthcaut cloxin,7, be of no►ninal benefit:, te croa Mr, Ura►noas said ttti uc►►dov lopmont would intersection, +additional prcassurca on traffic m0 sou ht by t:ttW Mr, pratnc3as uaid a lth)ratoriunk was not boin]►rc) UStl for a opponents , lie noted that lhisitwwas appropriate for the "conditional a%k" sand. thc�rufuri�a rodtod by the City Council t:o cunsici ding whiAl"Or`Vg or rot to Vt* t tho conditional ust► when dacid r oquca a t, *t the Community t»v+�l'aT►r1ce u [lircae:tor rpermittodrifiod ►uses . Thur a elect ofd(J'Auoli00 nwt would bo a ccor►c nisi>n+le uuw►, k. public heari Councilor Edwards noted that in many cases developments have helped solve some of the transportation problems. tie said he would to like see the Texaco development proceed and have the whole intersection improved. He noted concern with regard to the 1 numbers used for the traffic study Councilor Schwartz commented that the testimony that 10,000 cars per month travel over these frontage reads to the Canterbury Square to established businesses was noteworthy. Councilor Schwartz added that the testimony regarding vandalism may riot be a valid concern, tie said that when the intersection at Canterbury Lane is improved, he could fully support this use as a conditional use, He noted that they should look at south frontage road closure at a later date. m, Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor, Schwartz, to direct staff to prepares a final order for City Council review on August 22, 1988 to au►end the Hearings Officer decision as follows: 1) striko reforeneos to relocation of south frontatle road, 2) location "rid numbers of driveways to be dotormine d during dosign reviow prbicass; 3) buildin,3 por•mit; will not be.► auth►orixe)d prior to tho cluour-a of the rlor,th fr,urlta,3o road; 9) tho o(,,cupar►vy ppr-mit, will not bo issued prior to the cori►pletiur► of thea ODOT-=M ll prujoct, tchvdulod for the Canterbury L ano in►provomar►t s. The motion w:as opprovod by a e.►n.animous votes of Council pr'caseant, t MCI;11ING RECESSUS) AT 10.27 P.M. r MELTING RICONVINLD AT 10:38 P.M. PUBLIC HCARTNG — S.W. WASHINGTON STREET VACATION a, Public 11oa►ring was oponod. b. Thoro wore no dezlAra►t.ions orr 013110n(301►, C. Dovalopmont Sorvi.c,an Managor summar-liod this 690ndaa itom, On Jona 13, 1998, Council pa-3%od a rosolutic,n to call for a public hearing on a Council-initint.ud vacation roqucast to be hold July 25, 1998, PAC 'frust Corporation requestod thea: Council { initisto vacation procoodin<gs, CW Washington Stroot 1' a vary i narrow, mostly unimproved right—of—way crwatad in tho OrArly 190016, The purpose of ttua vacgition is to roturro public right-of-way to privato ownership, d. Thera was no public testimony. e. Development Services Manager noted that staff recommended approval of tho ordinance as presented to Council. f. Public Nearing was closed. page 12 COUNCIL MINUTES — JULY 25, 1989 g. ORDINANCE NO. 88-17. AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF SW WASHINGTON STREET. A DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT-0F-WAY LOCATED WITHIN ROSEWOOD ACRE TRACTS, A RECORDED SUBDIVISION PLAT, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. h. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded b, Councilor Schwartz, to adopt Ordinance No. 88-17. The ordinance was adopted by unanimous vote of Council present. 10, PUBLIC HEARING -- NORTH DAKOTA STREET VACATION a. Public. Hearing was opened. b, There were no declarations or challenges. IC-, Development Services Manager 'ummari:red this ae3onda item, phis past year the City comploted a realignmont. of ISW North 0-40ta Street at SW 11501 Avenue as part of the COPital Improvement Program. As a result of this realignment, it appoArod ghat a portion of the original was no longer noodod for, public purposes, Vacation of this public right--Qf-way would return the ownership to adjoining pr°op0r•t:io,3, d. Thcaraa was no public toutimuray. e, Devolopmont S4rvicaas Mcanivjor not.od staff rocommondod approval of than proposod ordinaanco, f, Public HviAring clouod, g. ORDINANCE— NO. i3 8 A. AN ORDI NANCLI VACAI l NG A E'OR1 l ON 01' SW NOR'1 H DAKOTA STRUf*T, A DCOI.CAILD PUI3I.IC HIGHT,0— WAY LOCAII'D IN t'HI Cl: 'Y OV TIGARD, WASHINGTON COONlY, ORIX40N. h. Motion by Councilor Johnuon, sucondod by Councilor Caadun, to adopt Ordinanco No, 90 , The ordimanco wos bpprovad by uninAnimous vote of Council pr'esant, 11. PUBLIC NEARING - 79TH AVENUE STREET VACATION a. Public Hearing opened, b. There were no docloarations or ch®allongos, C. Development Services Manaager uummarired this saganda item. This past yoar the City pdrticipawtod with as davelopnr of the Mara Woods Subdivision to construct and realignment that portion of SW 79th Avenue at SW Bonita (toad. It appeared that a portion of the original street right-of-way was no longer needed for public purposes as a result of this recent realignment. Vacation of this public right-of-way would return the ownership to adjoining properties. Page 13 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 25, 1988 s d. Public Testimony o Ruth Gillmor. 14630 SW 79th, Tigard, Oregon 97224. Ms. Gillmor• noted questions concerning how she, as an f adjacent property owner, would be affected by this vacation. Mayor advised that the adjacent homeowners would receive portions of the right-of--way; that is, it would revert to private ownership, Ms. Gillmor discussed with Council traffic concerns in this area. She noted that with development, the traffic problems have been increasing; there was a need for three lanes. Mayor suggested that Community Development Director examine the area for options in alleviating the problems as described by Mrs. Gillmur, e, Dav4lopment Sorvice3 Manager notod thatstuff recommendood approval of the ordinance as propoaod. f. Public Nearinj was closed, 91 ORDINANCC NO, 80--^19, AN ORDINANCE VACKIINC A PORTION OF SW 79-fN AVENUE, A DI6iCAiED PUIll1C R1GN1'--OFR-WAY 1.0(:81!t) W1 I1tlN t)tiFt11AM ACRES, A SUE;1)TVIISION PLAT, IN T11C CITY OF T1.t1 n, WASHING1ON COUNTY, ORkGON, h, Motion by Councilor ;3(hwacrt.t., vocon(jca(! by Councilor Johnaun to adopt Ordinanrct No, .00-19, ! The ordinonco wa►s atidoptod by unanimous voto of Council prcesc)nt• PUBLIC NEARING - ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - ZAA 57.07 - C14APTER 15,114 - SIGNS. a. Public Hearing continued from June 77, 1988, b, Thera wore no doclarotions or c;hallongov, C. Senior Plgnnor noted that Draft: 12 of tho proposed revision# of Chimptcr 15,114 of the S:')Jg ► Code hard boon 3ubmittcd to City Council in their mooting packet. d, In rosponso to tho prier discussions with Council, it:aff pr•eparod thEr following information to assist t1io Council in making their decision pertaining to thews two issues. 1, f"r�ac+wayua�ri c�n�:ed�, �ra±a�tnnd ir+ex 5i„Jns, Two Freestanding Si.gns. In response to Councilor's directive, staff prepared Exhibit C, the formula for calculating sign height will romaein at a 150 percent of the total combined height for both signs. Both the original proposal and the second staff recommendation on sign area make sense based on the Council philosophy of allowing multi--tenant shopping centers larger signs but within reasonable limits. Page 14 - COUNCIL MINUTES •-- JULY 25, 1988 e, public Testimony o Gerald holve, Canterbury Shopping Center, Tigard, Oregon. Mr, Kolve noted he hoped Council would give consideration to ( computing sign size on a formula in relation to frontage of property. His concern was the fact that his shopping center sign was set back mare than sixty yards frx)m Highway 99. There was discussion on the proposed 000T Cantebury Lane improvements and how this would affect: or possibly alleviate some of the seat back problems for the Cantobury Shopping Center. options available to Mr, Kclve through the sign code exception process were discussed, r, Senior Planner laiden nested staff recommended that the proposed ordinance be adoptod for 70A 87A)7 with Exhibit* Ai* a, and C attached, g. Council discusawd whkthor or not there was enough floxibility in they exception process, Council consensus was that exception criteria should be adndni.storod on they basis on individual merit and topQ(3riaphy.. h, Public: Hoarinl 60aed, i . ORDINANCE NO, 00:Z72, AN ORD]NANc.L '14) AMFND 01AP1[.R 10,114 GF 11i[1 1I.GARU MUNI G.IPAI.. CODE - SIGNS AND Sr LING AN LFf'VC1TVC pAK, �ZOA 07-07) j . Motion by Councilor [oadon, toe undod by Ce►uancilor Fdwa►rda to Adopt Ordinances wd r,aconmondod by staff, Council soloc:tod option "W" in oxhibit B which provided that. a frpowa►ywric�ntod fraouta►nding sign would bee locratod within 9.00 fooL of the hi9hw,ay rirjhtof-.w►ay, Also adoptod would be oxhibit G Witt, ro(44srd to two fr,cout.anding Signa , Tho ordimAnco wa►s *doptod by uneAninious vote of Council prosont, k. Council dir-ac:t:od staff to pre►pore+ oxcoptiun c:ritoria (to bo a►dministor-ed and roviowod by Council) conc•.orning oxcoptior►s to hoight and %isa .raquiramonLs for, signs 4rnd Lha inclusion of the possibility of including freowa►y-,orionted signs at intor•xoctions (to bo added as an aappo4ablo decision diroctly +'o City Council) , 13. NON-ACCNOA ITS aa. Councilor E,adon askod for authorirr+tion from Council to work with staff to put together a package on current; parks and Civic Cantor landscaping maintenance roquiremant;s, Council consensus was that Councilor Eaadon ba authorised to work with staff on this Issue. b. Councilor Edwards noted the poor condition and vandalism in the Tri--met bus shelters. After discussion, Council consensus was to have the Mayor send a letter to Tri-met asking for repair and continued maintenance of the bus shelters. Page 15 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY .25, 1988 NNW 14. EXECUTIVE SESSION -- Cancelled. 15, ADJOURNKNT 11:51 PM Approved by the Tigard City Council on Deputy Recorder — City of 11 A1TEST Mayor ® City of Tigard cwl62'99D Page 16 — COUNCIL MINUTE'S JULY 25, 1988 TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O.SOX 370 F"QNE(SWO 884.0380 Notice 7-6664 BEAVERTON,OREGON 9707-5 Legal Notice Advertising CTT ' OF T:"ARD • Q Tearsheet Notice O BOX 23397 • L7 Duplicate Affidavit TIGARDj OR. 97223 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )$s' I, a NF* W --- being being first duly sworn, depose and say that 1 am the Advortising Director, or his principal clock, of tl -=A� :S, a newspaper of general circ ftl"defined in ORS 193,010 and 103,020;published at --In the aforesaid county and state;that the _pj I B , I a printed copy of which is hereto annexed,was publishod In the entire issue of&Ud newspaper for---.f-1.V.&--successivo and consecutive in the following issues; JUNE 23 & 30, 1988 a� $ ed and sworn to b me this-lbay-. - 19 8 L- No ublic for O�rego,^.,,...,. • s i .w--. My t;onnnaeaioa Expk"� 9/20/88 t AFFIDAVIT J*25 x or ri� � J t1GbIDfi tt �Jlr s ,�,ti�'�r�c' 1 TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O.sox 370 PHONE(603)664.0360 Notice 7-6664 BEAVERTON,OREGON 87075 Legal Notice Advertising a CITY OF TIGARD • © Toa►rsheat Notice F0 BOX 23397 aupiicste Affidavit e TIGARD, OR 97223 e a AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASWNGTON, des' i, LLA.INE LE ROG 0 being first duly sworn,d pose and say that I am the Advortieing Director, or his principal clerk,of the—ZI GA`D -Z 4�- e newspaper of general circulation as defined In ORS 103,010 and 163,020; published+rt gR---in�in fhs ofTFgW�jeDuptjpltExate; that the a printed copy of which is horoto annex®d, was published in the entire issue of sold nswapsper for..--rI-VE----succeselve and consecutive in the following Isauee: JUVE 23 & 10�_1988 A14D JULY 7, 14 , & 21,__1986 m� 6 subscrll2i d ew for me this Nat ubiic far Orogon My commiasion Expires: 9/20/92 � -K!..g59Zx Y AFFID"IT 0 40k �iRM/411,ti F';p�.,.sp.,'p��'.�."y� i K��H..yiy.I'II iciiiie•��`! M,yJa! *f be sift ri TEL;tom t t€C l .+ t tf WAdf W ft TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY ,.,gam 6666 P.O.Box 370 PHONE(509)644.0360 Noticd BEAVERTOK OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising CITY OF TIGARD s D Tearaheet Notice AO BOX 23397 TIGARD, OR. 97223 • C3 Duplicate Affidavit � s AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, Asa' being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advortising Qiroctor, or his principal clerk,of the?.I.(3AF3D a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and ig3,020;published the � �y < ►t � T ET-.Rj0jj7—LF-WAY VACATION a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of sold newspaper and consecutive In the following Issues: ?UNC: 23 & 30, 1968 Sub�rJbod and tonors me this JULY 21-.�� } No ublie for Oregon My ConwNselonirxlplres: 9/20/88mo 11 x AFFIDAVIT s i►# 1 an't`i r4;# v6C;tom" +baant 3.1123 SW Rol, t etrd* +s`a. +e' rte. ot.a°stract e 1�;YeNB6 at�►e ra�sCtyt.ad�sletrt� gelaq a f/f , -alb t MMMT 5 +i w a ••, i flU fill HIT � SII l m o �,',' O O iCL tri co r ul r.. cocoi ni N ro .1 t 14 am V:c ON EL U. _qr t 0 UJ N L7 rc .Z'ml O C A r. C 9C -60h- ,r C> A U.O .- 1-4 H <g a " ,� w ` CA d A Vii? ...DLJ 41 0 t0 m ti to t f k TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O.sox 370 PHONE t50W sa4.0360 Notice 7-66 BEAVERTON.OREGON 97,075 f 1 Legal Notice Advertising CITY OF TIGARA • D Tearshaet Notice t PO BOX 23397 • Q Duplicate Affidavit tIGARA, OR 97223 z � d I AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ' { STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, Ps' BLAINE PETROGEORGE being first duly sworn, depose and sq that I am the Advertising Director,or his principal clerk, of the IvElti S ,!TTMRS y f n newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193,010 and 193,020,published at '1'T ti ARi1 in the t >atorosai o my a to th ! a m��a a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of sold newspaper for—DNE—ouccessive and consecutive In the ioilowing issues: July 21, 198$ Y Y, -July 21 1988 oribsd and sworn lora mo thio I ey Public for Oregon My Commiselon gxpires:9/2 0/6 8 AFFIDAVIT la f li%inp ft A ttt are !ax yow idwr tion. FtarfBsr lntorsrRatl+le f el am%s"Wd from to city 4orrl121153♦�yF9V�1f1a�1f11d}.�alWvd�..'�i �r&OF►w 1+?tir�N,t r f�►�thiifnt di4ili, e�i�.�i►i�y7�di7ulel,�iiu7,�ti,.�ditilLd�LN,/7�iiAM1�L+`,T3i NO-hii.S $./ ft tI�:Qo 1_�R�study.$�t��ui�W�ry-�t",�.M1�/1�X�(N�}�te..�yi�*�M + l IGAR11 1�. MOM� TOWN nAM 12123 SW RAIL DOULENARD.,nGARD,Otkf�if�i t sf 0 PUN t�ftttttftv! }y�,i�4 ��k��y��{}��/��y°!` �.Latritdp'Z+OW I�•ZCA f3� 47 P R9 b a -1'16rtf�fisicOtati=�trlt+1/t►Cattbs f ! ,:,.'3�Qh AeMltnor.iStt+�it'Vstax� x�.�s . -,: .�.�,.�_ �.•. ,�., .,• �-"u..� -'7f�ttiltiC.2ie8]s;9 f�atitasats Zcrae rDtainsane Aafimt-26A 1:.�;. r 7tsza�d Appeal xk , - )(,/� :�t �•�W »yr.-n'. ';� rr�rp„e,�: qct,,<,,.�c A„n..�• �,, y - - a O,•, WWl -Lin" art. J� iii rx ' igt'os100 " d 6 11 ccp (Oly;�i9�lfyc��C s 3dsi,• >� {t v ► 3'.+-r.'''�F A u�.'j ,/�irOil�ySy;r�.iy(�i��ft� ./'�v •�pb�t �,i°�:r"�� r.�" 'F FINES PUBLISHING COMPANY t.•9at P.Q.BOX 870 PHONE(508}684-0360 Notic®7-056 85 BEAVERTON,OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising CITY OF TIGARD • E3 Tearshaet Notice P�1 BOX 23��7 TIGARD, OR. 97223 • E3 Duplicate Attidavit AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF ORF4 ON. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss' being first duly sworn, depose and ;key that 1 am the Advertising Director,or his principal clerk, of the- TIG.AED TTMF1; l a newspaper of general ciroy t defined in ORS 193.010' and 193.020, published st�,� ,�,�, �In the to VACATION s printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for. 3tZ__successive and consecutive in the following issues; JUNE 23 & )_GILA988 d and w efore me thfs July?2 ► �9 8 j , ry public for Oregon My Commission Exp"r:910,Zt3/88 AFFIDAVIT 7,July 23.:: - oxnt 16 t naan."13173 4V Hall ;The, r CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON r AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING In the Mutter of the Proposed STATE OF OREGON County of Washington ) ss City of Tigard ) I, LA n.l,l M . being first duly sworn, on oath, depose and 4&y; That I posted in the following public and colispicuous pliacas. a copy of ordinance Number(s) es- 4::r -1"'"1 � 1�' q which were adopted at the Oouncil Moat ng +dated copy(s) of saidordi�a ace(s) baing rata attach4 sand y reforaanca� mads ax part hereof, on the day of �.) jl iP . 1. Tigard Civic Center, 13135 A.W. Hal) Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. ( 2. U.S. National Hank, Cornor of Main and $coffins, Tigard, Oregon 3. Safeway Store, Tigard Plaza, S.W. Nall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 4. Albortoon'8 Stare, Corner of Paolfio Hwy. (State Hwy. 99) and S.{i. Durham Roasd# Tipsrd, Oregon 5ubscribad and sworn to before me this s�t� day of _.._ . -IL Notary Public for Orogon My Commission Expires: ;r 7/25 /88 ACOA ITEM N 2 .,'VISrM`S AGENDA DOE.: (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda. but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. NW4E ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF C WTACTEQ • r a .. f : F A � � '?Z/� MMS v C�„ c•�• W Ar J- Yfohie K�,. . sow TA*4 �. Ca K ,n V. 5 E i I S t Tot��Or► dJ � VA t 4�O*.;,, n6A AOD T o- i d� 44ko,4 LJ6 4 `ILA DATE 7/25/83 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Descriptio& . .AGENDA ITEM N0. 4 — PUBLIC HEARING ?ANE CHANGE-ANMEI TION ZCA.80-07 LANKIN'SPO #6 Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) *+t**gat****�***��r*�****�t*x�t***s**�*��* •**�;+�*ic*�r*��t��**s,�**�*�**�t��*�e�k***gat**�t,t�e* Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation i t, M DATE 7/25/88 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: AGENDA ITEC NO. 5 =:pUET,TC�HEARING ZONE ORDINANCE A.�'4FNDMT,jZOA 88-01/PACIFIC REALTY Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation Sal M �� Zs SIR AGENDA ITEM #� fl DATE 7136/88 ITEM DESCRIPTION: AppEAL PUBIC HEARING — CONDITIONAL USE CU 87-03 MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP-67-09 TEXACO NPO #3 APPEAL Pl8!JC HEARING This will be an "argument--type" hearing only. The Council will consider only the record before the Hearings officer, which is on file at City Hall and has been fully reviewed by the Council, The Council is not allowed under City code to consider any now testimony or evidence which is not in the record, If you have provided your comments to the Hearings officer, please refrain from duplicating that testimony this evening. A brief synopsis of information relative to the specific iuvueu being appealed is welcome, You are encouraged to select a spokesperson for your group to present your concerns, Thank you for your assistance in keeping the hearing process timely, iiiiltiiiil��litil11i114it Nil 1t1�It itiiii�it�{ii it�i�lt�idiitit�tit tf ililitN�l N Ni(�i iiil*liititiHi ii i1�i�lit�i itit�i�S�iil iRitiiititititititili(iHFNiF Proponent (ror Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) �kalliit�tliiititlt-1FNi�i1Ni�1411NitNiili�iN�lri i1Nii �liiit�til�E�tit�til�f14i1NitiHt�til�iitit�kNN�f�iEil�lililiiilil�lil�INiNNtiiitiili � ,JPT n dress 6 affiliation • r ,t 1 �1 ' X11 . G OV yA lel 60690 }}r 4. i Ot ` • ti"t.to*m . . 10 4J410, vuAmAjL )4A 6 s � fr DATE V25/0$ 1 wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on f the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: AGF"ITEWN'0• 7 — PUBLIC HEARING WAMINGTON STREET• VACATION Proponent (Por Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) skit*a**it�k�R*+k*tk*dei*#fit*ir.tk*�ft�t�l+katiF+R�t�!*it�R dtlki�•it**�i1•+kik*�'+k�ltirtRit#els*ilkitlk�k**+A+R�k+kir*i��Fic***ie*�t� Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation r DATE 7/25/88 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: '-AGEN'1k ITEM NO.. 8 PTJ=C HEARING NORTH=DAXQTA-�''TR£ET VACATION Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation �4 , I Jill pill DATE 7/27/$8 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: '` AGENDA ITEM NO. 9 `- PUBLIC SING AVEWE-::STREXT''VACATIO ., Proponent (For Issue) opponent (Against Zaaue) Name, Addr ss =4 Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation e) �' '� e DATE 7/25/88 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: AGENDA ITEM! NO. 10. — PUBLIC HEARING ZONE ORDINANCE A?WM.KENT ZOA 87-07 CHAPTER 18.114 SIGNS Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Addreso and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation I '� MEMORANDUM CUTY OF 1IGARD, OREGON a TO, Honorable Mayor and City Council July 12, 1988 Library BoArd FROM, Library Director SUkiU T: Monthly Report, June 1908 WCUS, 1ho Annual Reoport on activity countym•wido shows that two million itoms wuro cir►;uaatud t,hrou(3huut tho WTU �yat;um during the fiscal year, 1907--60") 402.000 patrons wcora ;iorvod, Wawhington County population At this time is castfimtod at Approximatoly 290,000, (Plcaaua scow tho work indicators portion of this roport for Tigard's annusAl c:ir;�wlation Arid aorvico,) Tho Ad Hoe Ccmimitivo on Govornmont and F'inanvo h+as boon mooting, and cos of now, tharo is no finAl action, Ncowavor, in sumo Information which is boing circulcatod to tho profossional board, it door Voy that on 11 mumbor, county bo4rd, consisting of ono vo*t for '.)4 h contrmting atjoncy and two soots+ for, tho county, is boIrig cor►sidorod, L'wA0) igoncy would nomir►ato Any individual of thcoir owr► ch00%irig for• vorifirmcation by tho County Board of Commissionors, Torms would bo for two yoArs oknd aany now contriaciinq cagvnciou would rovoivu a coat on this county board, This issuaa will hoe discusgod cat: some lcangth .at tho professional board mooting arhodulod for July 14, RLGIONAL ISSUrS: Thor@ wags as §tory in thea Orogoniem on b July 1900, rog'Ardinq Metria and Wouhington County relations, It mantic►ns Mytro'® inturost in "coordination of libraar iog" "ca meorn to tho tdvk force (€cona►tor Glon Otto's, .0 - lroutdmlta, committoo) aro rtalIomI fund inta i%suoo fur Motro 4o rid Lha Tr-i-County library oystemo," the story concludvd: "Otto said thea tAvk force would draft lcogiglaat:ion for thv 1999 gaagiran [lagislatur•o]. Tho drwft: proposal% aro ec.h►eduled to be discussed in a July 22 meeting at Matro hc►aduuaartors," This issue wi.11 also bo diocusscad at the WC;US Profcassional Doc►rd mcmating or) .July 14, K' RI ONN L: Wendy Cran%h.aw ondt)d htar employment ,,at the Tigetrd Library during June. Now aide hiroo arca ncbbio i'ishor, Theresa Williams, Mary burd*m. Later in tho gummier, as regular staff members leava, there will be replav@mont hirog to this category. VOLUNTECRS; Regular voluntoors -- 22 worked a total of 439..25 hours; Adopt: A Shelf u 3 worked 4,25 hours; youth volunteors I worked73 _..75 hours. Total,, 4- Zluntoors; 481,25 hours; daily average, 20 (� hours. throo community %orvi.ce workers worked 50 hours,- library � 4 board gave 8 hours, � f MISSION Millis IN Immmm s � I June Monthly Report Page 2 July 12., 1988 YOUTH SERVICES: Summer reading program began June 15. 6etwern June 15 and the 30th, more than 550 children registered. Registration officially closed on the 30th inasmuch as we are forced to limit enrollment to m►knageable numbers. It should also be noted that there are numbers of children that are not able to attend Summar reading programs simply because: wo do not have the staff or the facility capacity to take care of all of the children who would like to attend. The enrollment limit for, spacial programs this year has been increased from 125 children to 175, depending somewhat on the program location, This decision was baaod on last yoars experience with no- Showa, This year, however, the drop--out rate ha,s bovi almost r►onexistent, meaning that our progr4mu% have boon jammed arid still paople ire complaining about not havir►g enough !j p,. fur• thenar• child• Summer Storyt:lmo bo(jan Juno 15, Storytime kits pr,►vidod throut3h WC;O;tS or-P boing used. 3ody Wouterman, Library Assistant 11I fear• children's uorvicos is recoivintl add itIor►al tr•aininq in putting the kit contoritu tot3ot:hor for a fininhod storyt,ime proilram, FifL►non atudQnts have con►plotod the yourvgj ,Adult rNadintl program uo far, Cight youth volur►t(?kar'v h.Avo #itjrwod up for work during then summer to Piwn points it, the ct►nte#Lu by shelving arid puttir►g up bulletin board displrays, f r•iondu of l.ho TitjArd Libr-Ary have votod to contributo $200 towwrd pkArt:haj►arig prizo-A f'or tho v"riouu summer roadinrti prugr,�m#. WORK I.NOICA'l°ORS c Work X Ks►b!-U: 2, nR VI 7yne—Ma 7iarle 1 0, Adult Mstorial s i:0,439 0,509 6,649 3uverila MatoriAl# ? rMUZ ToLal 18,746 14,037 12,434 bay# of C-ervice 24 24 25 Avcaroga DAily Circuli►tion 701 610 497 Houry of V ervice 223 2012 202 Materials Circule►tod per Hour, 84 78 .45 61 .5 7ncrema In Circulation 26% 19% 32% Maturidli Addend/Withdraw 218/5 008/0 347/14 Borrowers Ripgiutore}d 338 alai 570 Storytime (number of ge#gioms) 218(11) 130}(8) 120(7) Toddlertlme (r►umM)er, of #e#slons) 12(2) N/A N/A Special ChIldrean# Programs (number of saugiorm) 465(4) 207(6) 87(3) Porooria1 Computer Usorg 178 N/A N/A Foos/Fines Collected $1,280.42 N/A N/A GifLa Raceived $32.50 N/A N/A !LEEs I . a :Tune Monttcly Report Pa,e 3 July 12, 1988 C Annual Work Indicators; June 1988 June 1987 June 1986 Circulation of Materials 188,606 147,288 110,738 Increase in Circulation 28% 33% i Patrons Served 44,221 N/A N/A Circulation Per Capita f (service area Pop. 3.2,000) 5189 4.9 3.7 Fear/Fines Collected $10,977,70 $2.,746,00 $1.000,00 Gifts Receivod $656,47 bt/5d 844 i v IRIIIHII IN NOW k y1 t 4 I t I f t e({ 4 a i r 1 j CITY OF TIGARa OREGON CQUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY 15 1988 AGENDA OF. Jul 2B 1988 Unit SUBMIT-tEp: Ju1V ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Consultant RREVIOUS ACTION: June 29 1988 1, Criteria for Cit Adn�inistrator Re— PREPnRED BY-' Mancha Hunt cruitment Process t{elan Terr DEPT HEAP OK CI1 Y ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY:_T._ �^T�m_�.:^•:.,�� : POIICY ISSU£ INF C1RMn1 JON�SUMMARY parfurma,nca dims:nuionu-,-criteria for Qvralwation/%elecotiun of City Administrator, ,,„I Norio. _..........:_ t,UfX,, �1 NCS! Apprava criteria as outlined in artt*chod outline. 59S3D r t S CITY ADMINISTRATOR ASSESSMENT CENTER PERFORMANCE DIMENSIONS Leaslersh_.i.�,S�.y!e., �R i nsnc i,a 1 Marla��mant�„ Aub,j,i c/Communi t,,YRgiJkA ,ona �tnti�r$pvernmantaiwRelati,one ±!3�,1�nit�.n..��Z�sna�mf.�,. Oav�l,a�m�int,•,. �r Or,�nn1 xa t,��l�..,,,Sk 3 1,�:a•,. V1a#gnmry/Cram,tJyj y, poroapt.fnn/Rr a ningll�na1ya_fa,t prabl�m�Rat v�ng,LL,�I►�iiWi�t�►�.„ Dec i s i nn-�t�ak t nt1/a u�g�ent�_ pr�rnnn 1_�_Mnag �a�nt/Y��bar.__ite 1 at i ons. Oral CommunicationiPubl is Spe& n� Ski 11S. Writing Skills. Adat bi1ij, laxibi1Aty„, �w «Thaw dimensions will be evaluated for "'match" in the pre- screening Supplemental Application Form. also. PROFILE OF A CITY ADMINISTRATOR CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Tigard' s City Administrator should have prior successful City Management experience in a full-service, suburban City, preferably one that has undergone rapid, complex growth and the attendant problems dealing with annexation, downtown/CPD revitaliza-tion, long-range planning, capital improvements, financing, transportation, and mix of land uses and structures ti, e. , residential , multi—family, commercial , etc, The City Administrator needs: .Strong financial management skills (more than just budgeting and accounting), S/he needs to be abler to develop and recommond to policy-ma.•king officials financisl plans for long-range capital improvement projects, creative financing, bond levies, and the like, and at the same time demonstrate cost-minded etficlent management and the ability to maintain existing Indra-structures. S/he also needs to be prepared to deal with difficult potential future financial challenges, including water service, public safety/fir* protection **rvices, on-going annexation issues, and longer- range financial planning. Critical to Tigan ' s growth Is an understanding of the strategy, financial /ocenomic implicb- tions, and "balance" of Comprehensive Alan implementation. .A philosophy of commitment to Improving pubile/community relations, Including being visible at public/civic junctions. establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with a elder variety of pearaonalitios, such ss the loaders of strong spacial Interest groups, news media representatives, City officials, business/civic leaders, and the like. Yet the City Administrator should not need meadia coverage personally--rather, deferring to and Involving Council , Committees, and staff . .A philosophy of intergovernmental relations that promotes a collaborative, cost-minded approach to solving problems which cross jurisdictional boundary lines and have a far- reaching perspective and impact. Examples include better working relationships with Tualatin and Beaverton, the school district, special service districts, development of r parks and recreation property, facilities, staff, and l equipment, consolidated communications, public safety/fire service, transportation problems/street improvements, etc. (over) t ' -2- Profile of City Administrator -- City of Tigard ` .A planning and economic development philosophy that includes both the "vision" of Tigard' s ultimate potential and the ability to manage complex growth issues in a logical , orderly, well-thought-out fashion. . . . A pro-Plan philosophy expediting proposals consistent with the Plan, but tough on conditions and enforcement of those not in the } spirit of the Plan, An understanding of the strategic importance and financial/economic implications of the p Comprehensive Plan balance. . . 4r, as one civic leader put 1 it; "We need someone with Evangelistic fervor coupled with } stable bulldog tenacity for at least the next 5-7 years." }4 i .A Personnel management philosophy of commitment to "team management" and training and development of key staff members, More emphasis should be placed on city-wide training and commitment to duality public service as the primary purpose of city government. The Administrator should make maximum use of the professional qualifications 1 and abilities of highly-motivated, key staff members in an effort to operate with a lean, highly-productive, efficient overall work force. S/he should be fair, but firm, in approach to employe* counselling/discipline/termination issues, hold employees reuponsible and accountable for good job performance, and have a sound knowledge of federal legislation and court case precedents to avoid costly litigation. Knowledge of performance evaluation and Innovative merit pay systems; ability to administer union labor agreements will be helpful . .Communication skills that include the ability to speak #r@@Iy and honestly, with candor but without obrasivon€►ss, to disagree without being disagreeablo, and to listen s carefully to what other people are saying. Oral presentation/public speaking skills are a must. The Administrator needs to be able to identify and make effective written and oral recommendations to City Council on a wide range of City affairs and problems, to remain somewhat flexible in methodology, timing, approach, etc. , and after Council has made a policy decision, needs to be willing to follow directions and stay on task. k t t i Personal traits desired includes A strong, assertive, aeif- confident leadarship style; mentally/physically fit, high ssnorgy/enthusiasm; visionary (with one foot on solid ground) ; good "public Image" or charisma; candor, honesty, integrity, and flexibility. �. 3Cx- CITY OF TIGARD OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: Jul 25 7988 DATE SUBMITTED: l8 1988 Jul ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Parks Master Plans P�?aIdUwiACTION: adoptiond- of the FYp B - �"� Contracts Bud et PREPARED BY: Elisabeth Newton DEPT NkAD OK CITY AIIMIN OK REQUESTED 8Y: Park and Recreation ed F POLICY ISSUE Should the City Council award the contract for the Parks Master Plans? ---.�-.-----_,....,,,.._,._,,..,e,._,=....,....-.�..,.m,...�.._.�......._.,,._. INFORMATION SUMMARY �..�.,..,....__,.........�..._..._�.�..._...M.,.�,. hEA Parks Master The City received a11 ssociates alsw rt rselected to oafter RFthree tf;nalista were Plans. Mura interviewed, Alressed 11threeMurasur�assecii�t►�ss1efous son citizen capable,involvement? particularly impthoir their strong recreation facilities desiSn barkt�raund and oluphauiu On supporting the plan rafter its c�,mplation, in addition, Prasontod the proposal which best addressed the issues outlined fithe t1Contr �act. bs performed by ail highly qualified on, tears►. N copy and scope of work is attachod, 1. Award the contract to MuraAsa Associa►tt�s. R. Uiror.t staff not to proreod with 010 study. 3. Modify the contract. ACT �A 'he an►ryunt, of the writratt in $2o,Coo. The budgot gppropriation is cido servic+ns A contin+�ancy of $2-1000 will bw retai.rurd ghr�uld the City beyond ttjo extant of tf►e contract' Ara n0006sar4. Motion to *pprove the contract with Murayv 8910eiSte9. ke/5994D C11Y OF TIGARD. OREGON CONTRACT FOR PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT TITLE: PARKS MASTER PLAN CONTRACT NO This Contract, made and entered into this 25 day ofJul�l_9_88, by and between the City of Tigard, a municipal cor•por•ation of the $Late of Oregon, hereinafter called "City" and (full name and address of person or firm),. Piur'3su and A�,aaciates lA1Q NW Johnson Porland„,„Ora,%jn 97209 hai ftar called "Contractor", duly authorized to perform such services in Oregon. roi W I T N F SS17TH; Wjj(nRCAS, the City ro wires nurvicos which Contr,act:ur 1!4 c:apablo or providiraj, ►ander terms and conditions horklina►ftor duscribod; and WH RIAS, Contractor is able and prop4f,j.,d to provide sua;h sorvicou as City does herviniftor ruguirv, undor, t.hraso tormx and conditionic set forth; now. thuruforo, IN CONSIOLRATION of thoso mutual pr'im►i»os ar►d th►o torma Acid conditions lot forth hereafter, t.hv ptar,tic>a agrov as follows ; C(,)rj'tr•0ctor1% #4�rvicvs under this Agrvoluvr►t shall consist of thcl fullOwif1g, a, ConLr++ctor shall Fatarfurn► por•st)nal servicos, oo ouLlinod in the project proposal dtat.ud the ,� day of ;J4ar�uj,�ts„t;,� a copy c,f whit:h is tattwchud horoto Arid incorporratod heroin by rofurancta The project for whir:h ;Orvjcva ary to kap prc►vjduci is known ►as �.ta(1RK�P� U.D=r , 7.. Ga91punspition A. T'he City &9r,00% to pray Contractor $�9,8 409 for pt+rtvrmiunc:c> of thusRa survic os providod harcain, which payment 014471 bo t►„ase+d upon thea following &pplicoblca torms; ], A tache+dulo of payn►onts, ats f011ows; "The contractor will submit billin(j% monthly for paymaYnt which will include a brcaakdown of oxpensov incurred and a listing of the number, of hours and renes for hash individuatl who hays perforn►od work can the controct during the billinci period, CONTRACT FOR PERSONAE. SERVICES — PAGE 1 2. City will withhold 5 percent of each monthly payment with the retained amounts to be paid to the contractor upon satisfactory completion of the project. 3, Payment by the City shall release the City from any further obligation for payment to Contractor fur service or services performed or expenses incurred as of the date of the statement of services. Payment shall nut be considered acceptance or approval of any work or waiver, of any defects therein. 4, City certifies that sufficient funds are available :.and authori.:od for expendituro to finance costs of this contract. 3. Contractor Identification Contractor shall furnish to the City the Contractor's employer identification number, is do5ic.3nated by the Internal Rev,-,nue ;service, or Contractor's Social Security numbor. as City door s apnlicablo, 4. Cite rua�e -- lvu for purposes hareof, tho City's authorirod roprosontativa will be U iewbuth Nowtun, Sonior Planner, 1317.5 ISW ball Blvd,, P.O. Dux 23397. ligard, Oro4jon 97223, (IM) 639--4171 , 5, �;entr&ctor'u Ra rc►santativa For purpouou horoof. tho Controctor-'u out.hori rod roprovor►tative will bn Jca Porcval Prci„j.ae �Mneagar,� M►ari 4►rid� a�?Gia�.tu ,,�14lQmNWmJuF�rin +n� Portland Qroron 9l2A9 In ordor to facilita►to the work of tho Contractor ou a►bovo outlinod, the fi City rhall fur,niah to the rc)ntr,+ctor occoss to all oKiutinyj information which is in Aho City's possousion concerning tho lucotion of aowor and w*tor linos and othor ut:ilitios or structures which a►ffoct tho altorr►ativoo, In aodditIon, tho City Bhit 11 pruvida all a►ppliefibl0 topographic, ayrial, +And floodplain maps And data, 7, ntr etr�r #_endo )andont_._Contractor A. Contractor's services shall bei provi.dod under the t3orior411 suporviuion of City's projQc.t direc=tor or his or, hor, dosignov, but Controctor shall be an indapandQnt contractor for fall purposos arid shall be *ntitled to no compensation other than tho cumpenua►tion pro0dod for under paraeqra►ph 2 of this Agre anwrit, CONTRACT FOR PERSONAL SERVICES -- PAGE 2 i Mimi B, In the event Contractor is to perform the services described in this Agreement without; the assistance of others, Contractor hereby agrees to file a joint declaration with City to the effect that Contractor's services are those of an independent contractor, as provided under Chapter 864 Oregon caws 1979. C. Contractor acknowledyos that for all purposes relatod to this agreement. Contractor is and shall be deemed to be an independent contractor ai►d not An employi*e of City, shall riot be entitled to benefits of any kind to w}►ich an employee of the City is entitled arid shall be solely responsible for all payments and taxes required by law. and furthermore in the event that Contractor is found by a court of law or .an administrative agency to be an employee of tho r;ity for arty purpose, City shall be entitled to offset compensation due to demand repayment of any amounts paid to Contractor under the terms of the +agreement, to the full exiOnt c.►f any benefits or as her' ranumeration Contractor receivol (from City or third F►ar'ty) result of said findinil and to the full extent of any payments that City i!s required t.o n►:ako (to Cor►tr'actor or to a third party as rot3ult of said finding. t), the ur►dersit3nod Controctor horoby rvproocents that no employuo of the City of Ti�yard, or Any p.arirrc►r ship or corporation in which a City omployoo has an ini.►zront, hex Oar will r'saeuivv any rontunor-alion of any dcar;cription fr4,tn thin Contractor, aithor diroctly or indirectly, ir► conn .1 with the letting err porfor►n�anca of this c.cxrt.ract, e�rcc'�`pt �+s spucific.aclly doclarod in wr itin-1, A, Centra►c:tor nhatll taxa t.ttu nrabc:ontr�act.ors +au iodic:,+tod in tho proposal submitted datod Jerrie 10, 1900, and Contrcitvtor shall bo fully rouponniblu for the accts or umissiont of oily nubcontraActor's octet of all pornona employed by i�hunt, and noithur the aapprov«al by City of Orly subcprltr,d,ctor nor aanythintl c:ontainod heruln nholl bQ dracn►od to crca t►a any contractual relation bcaiwoon the uubcorrtr,a+ctor Ond City , 0, This *graoniont, {arvi all oaf thea vroyomints rind corAitions haroof, shall inure to thea laorl0r1t. caf arid bo binding ulaun tbv City a►nd tht4 Contrat:tor rcasprtc;tivcaly and their logiiil reprasunt.aativgr, Cuniraact.or shall riot alsi;ln tarry rights nor, dolegmto ,Arty dutitan incurr'cad by thin contract, or any part hcaroof without the written constant of City, ,and any arssignmont or dolegaation in violation horoof shall bo void, g. CcanLwa, r.�+� Cor 1±i +t_Mtc�dlcis €►ayt Jho Contractor' agroos to prry pr.comptly ars duo, to any person, copartnership, association or cor-poraation furnishing medical, surgical, and hospital carp or other nQeded care and attar►tiori incident to sickness or injury to the Corntractor'o employees, all sums which the Corttracctor agreed to pay for such servicas and all Monies and sums which tho Contractor collected or deducted from employee wage" pursuant to any law, contract or agreement for providing or paying for such service, PAGE 3 CONTRACT roR PERSONAL. SERVICES �- j 10, Early Termination A. This Agreement may to terminated without cause prior to the expiration of the agreed upon term by mutual written consent of the parties and for the following reasons authorized by ORS 279.326, 1, If work under the Contract is suspended by an order of a public agency for any reason considered to be in the public interest other than by a labor dispute or by reason of any third party judicial prciceeding rvl:at.ing to the work other than a suite or action filed in regard to a labor dispute; or 2, If the circumstances or conditions are such that it is impracticable within a reasonable times to procood with a substantial portion of the Contract. Q. Payment: of Contractor shall be aas providod by 0RS 279.330 and shall he prorated to and include tho day of termination and shall be in full uatisfaction of all claims by Contractor againvt City under, this Agrooment. C. lermination under any prevision of this paarograr-i; shall not affoct any right:, obligation, or liabiliLy of C.ontract.or or, City which accruod prior, to ouch tormina►tion. it, �ianca11a1.iog��for. Ca.uK City may cancel all or any part of this Contract if Controct.clr brcraar..t►es any of tho A.erLill s hu roof cir, to tho ovvoL of deny 0f t.het fUlluwing: 3naolvoncy of Contractor; voluntary or- involunt.iary pot.itiun in ba►nkruptGy by or liga,inut Contractor, auppoint,moriL of a rocoivor or truutoo for, Contractor, or, an osuignnivnt for benefit of croditors of Cori trealctor. Qa►magaas for broach shol l ho thou a ail lowod by Ortaujon 'law, rvaisonablo ,and necaysary ottornoy's feria, and other costa of litigation wt trial and upcir► appool, 12, Derr D.urt5?e . City ohAll have Accovis to such hooka, documonts, papors Arid r cords of ContrActijr ars rarsr cliroctly purtinont to this Aclrc►oniont: for tho purposo of making Audit, examination, oxc+;erpts and trarr►bcrlptet. 13. grC_o MAjoura Noithor City nor Contactor, shall be cunaidered in dofault: becausp of Any 4olays in -complotion of re,%ponotbillties her•eundor due to causes boyond the control and without fault or negligence on the part of the party to disonabiod, including, but not restricted to, an act of Grid or of ax public anemy, volca rio, eaurthquaka, fico, flood, tpidomic, quarauntint!, COWMAC? FOR PERSONAL GERVZCCS w- PAGE 4 restriction, area-wide strike, freight embargo, unusually severe weathea• or delay of subcontractor or suppliers due to such cause; provided that the party so disenabled shall within ten (10) days from the beginning, of such delay notify the other party in writing of the causes of delay and its probably extent. Such notification shall not be the basis for a claim for additional compensation, 14. Nonwa erfiver• The failure of the City to insist. Upon or enforce strict performance by Contractor of any of the terms Of this contract or to exercise any rights hereunder shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment to any extent of its righit to assert or rely upon such terms or rights on any future occasion. 15, Warranties All work shall bo gwariantLod by the Contractor for a poriod of ane yoar after the date of final acceptance of the work by the Owner. Contractor warrants that all practicos :Arid procoduro%i, workmanship and materials shall be the best: available unleas otherwise specified in the profesuion. Neaither, acceptances of thea wM'k nor• pay►nont t.horofor shall reliove Contractor Prom liability unci+;r w�rraantie's contained in or implIod by this cont.r."ct, 16, tt4r .L oa F �'Q11 In csauee suit; or n►ction is inutitutod to onforco they pr•uvioie►r►a of this contract, the paartiw% agroo t.hgat thea 1c►viny party uha►11 p+ay such sum AV thea +Cc►ur•t may o►d judtp r•eaaoniablo ottornoy's ferns anti court voots including aattor,neay's 1"r..uu and court coats On to courtu, 19, AP,pl,i c Abl p I a►w, This contract will bo govornod by the hewn of the St.aato of Orogon. It is further oxpr'v##ly aV'00d by arid be.,tw,.epm the parties horoto that should thoria ba aany conflict botwoon they teams of this inxtrumont and the Proposal of tho Contractor, this inutruniont %h(ali control arid nothing horoin shall ba convidor-od as an occraptaanco of the void turans Uf sold propovaal conflicting hurawith. 19. ndPmnificaatiOrl Contractor a►greas to indemnify and to hold harmloss then City, its Officers, Employaas .and Agents aagoinst and from any sr►d all loss, claims, actions, suits, including cast:% and attorney's feces, for or on account of injury, bodily or otherwise, to, or death of por.voriv, damage to or' destruction of Property belonging to City, Contractor or, others, ravulting from arising out of, or in any way connaecteed with Contractor's sole negligence. CONTRACT rOR PERSONAL SERVICCS — PAGC 5 4 i 20. Insurance Prior to starting work hereunder. Contractor. at Contractor's cost, shall secure and continue to carry during the term of this Contract, with an 1 insurance company acceptable to City, the following insurance: A, public Liability and Property Damage insurance with limits of not less than $500,000 for person injury, $500,000 for damage to property, $500,000 for comprehensive automobile liability arid $250.000 for broad form property damage coverage, Such insurance shall cover all risks arising directly or indirectly out of Contractor's activities or work hereunder. including the operations of its subcontractors of any tier. Such insurance shall include provisions or endorsements naming City, its Officers, Employees and Representatives as additional Insureds. provisions that such insurance is primary insurance with respect to the interests of the City and that any other insurance maintained by City is oxcots and nol contributory insurance with thea j insurance required hereunder, cross-liability or sovur•ability of int;orest c:l,-,ause; and provisions that such policies shall not be cMncolled or, its limits of liability roduce without thirty (30) days prior natic,e to City, A copy of each insurance policy, certified as a true copy by can authorleod ropraserrtat ivo of then i sauinl 3 naurance company, or, at: the discretion of City, in lion thoroof, a cortiflcAt,o in farm seWt.isfactory to City cortifyintl to tho issuAn ea of such insurrnco shall be furni%hod to City, p, Workman'►; Componuation from the :tate Are:idont I.nsurancoo rund or from ae rosponsiblra privatea carrier. Priva►tea insurance shall providca the aci►t�dulo of oniployoo borwf,itu roquirod by low, �. C. Preafossional I..i;,al.>i1.1ty Insurcar►sea, T'h►ea Cori tr,act.ur shall ha►vee in ferc:ea a policy of Profossionael Liability Insurainco in ear► amount. of of riot louse Uwan $"00,000, Yho Contractor -shall kcecep suCh policy in forco and currant durintj tho teorm e.,f this contract, p, Adequacy of Porforma►nco, Any insurances boa►ring on adoquacy of parfornianco shgll be maair►t.winod reftur, e-e►n►plotie►n eaf Prs►,des€t, Ghoul such incur rica ba coincal lod bororo the sand or tho tJuAr4r1t.0@ Por iod and tho CK►ntr,*cjor° faiil% iniowdieatoly to procuro othor ihsuran€e' as WPaK.ifi.od, the City rovsor'va the► ritt�ht to procure such lnnur-ofico and tO chmrgea the cost 0wroof to tho Contractor. CONTRACT FOR PERSONAL SERVICES - PAGE 6 70 21. Complete Agreement This contract and any referenced attachments constitute the complete agreement between he City and Contractor and supercedes all prior written ff or oral discussions or agreements. lT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this agreement to be executed by its duly authorized undersigned officer. acting pursuant to resolution of they City Council, duly passed at the Regular Meeting held on the 25th d«y of Ju. ly_1_9_ 88, and the contractor has executed this agreement: on the date herein above first written. CITY OF TIGARD Ely Nayor By Z :' D�hputy City Recorder CON1RACTOR Ely �, ,m�m n•. m�m �, koJa�89D CONTRACT FOR PERSONAL SERVICES — PAGE 7 r ' City of Tigard Park Master Plans fanno park � cook park summerlake park proposal & qualifications � � NI MURASE associates { MURASE associates June 30, 1588 Ms. Elizabeth Newton Senior planner City of Tigard p. A. Box 23397 Tigard., OR 97223 Subject: Fanno, Cook, & Summar Lake Park Master Plan proposals Dear No. Newton% it is with great interest and enthusiasm that Murase associates, in conjunction with Lynn Sharp, environmentalists Ron Kampc+ } hsocicivil e qualificati ns tothe City of Tiq rd Aaronineers; and Carchitect, spark submits this statement of review team. The proposed park sites represent an excbietin en sand chald le dna ( that planning opportunity. it has diversified grouping of of each s will be necessary to fulfill the program requirements k. To meet these goals, we, have organized a team with a level of experience and expertise that will provide the services this oals and objectives projectrequires. Of the projects initial phase,implement ad has the potential obj ? to meet future phase requiremanta. This project repreaaesnts a unique opportunity to expand the recreational exparieznco for all city of Tigard residents. � appreciates ; 114 opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to discussing our qualifications with you in person. ) sincerely, 1 ;:incipali Z AS ACIATLS a , AS ,_,,.,o RKM/j d LA14D CAPE APUESIITEMIRE tees N.W. Nerti+rstp PLANNING ,,,,,�,�,,,� Telephone(543)242-)47'7 'L=s=jyortland,Oregon 97209 PROJECT TEAM The Master Plan proposal for Fanno, Summerlake, and Cook Parks presents an exciting and challenging recreation planning opportunity. Though each of these sites is unique, there is a commonality in the required awareness to environmental, recreation planning, urban design, and implementation issues central, to -each park. pue to the complexity of these issues, Murase associates knows a team approach will best meet the goals and objectives of the Tigard community, Therefore, Murase associates, in conjunction with Lynn Sharp, Kampe Associates, and Faegre Associates, presents a team that can be counted on for design excellence, technical experience, and sensitivity to the environment. Murase associates will serve as the prime consultant for these projects, our firm has extensive background in recreation planning and design. We have served as park and recreation consultants for the cities of Tualatin, Grants Pass, Eugene, Portland, Gresham, and Seattla, as well as Multnomah, Josephine, Clark, and King Counties. Projects for these jurisdictions have ranged from developing master plans for an entire park system to siting and design of individual structures and support facilities within a particular park. In those And a wide variety of other projects, our firm has boon responsible for all aspects of public presentations, master plan d+esvolopment, construction documents, and construction monitoring. The projects provided as examples of our firm's work describe our full range of park planning and design experience. The Tualatin Park system Plan and our currant Metro Regional Park Study demonstrate our firm's understanding of area-wide needs assessments and of how this information applies to particular park sites. The Lacamas Luke Pary Maotar Plan demonstrate* our ability to evaluate the characteric, :ics of an individual park site and to arrive at a sclution that mWto community recreation needs, as well as provides protection to sensitive natural aroas. The St. Johns Landfill End Use Plan demonstrates our capabilities in they siting and design of individual features and support facilities in a wetland environmental area. Lynn Sharp, an environmental consultant, will be responsible for all wetland, woodland, and wildlifa habitat identification. She will ensure that each Master Plan is responsive to the environmentally unique conditions of the particular -site. Kampe Associates, civil engineers, will provide an overview of they technical issuan relating to design impacts in flood plain areas, as well as evaluating all matters relating to roads and utility needs and related issues. r i Faegre Associates, architects, shall provide architectural services related to the visual review of existing structures' potential use �~ as community facilities. Together, we represent a team that has expertise in the field of recreation planning, environmental design, construction methodology, and the process of implementation. Our team can provide the City of Tigard park system with a foundation for continuation. A;\T1G Team. Organization CITY OF TIGARD (City Council) i t l PARK BOARD t L NEIGHBORHOOD E PLANNING ORGANIZATION GENERAL STArr PUBLIC CITY CENTER PLAN TASK rORCE L6 i t MURASE ASSOCIATES � t Principal-in-Charge - Bob Murano � project Manager , sae Percival ti WN-0-0-7-M-0. e 1 LYNN SHARP MURhsE KAMPE rAEGRE ASSOCIATES ASSOCIATES ASSOCIATES Environmental LandsCAPe Civil Architect Cdnaultant Architect Engineering t M MEN r f I { i E I86II S The thread of greenways and wetlands that is found throughout the City of Tigard provides its residents with a distinctive and unique natural system. As a total unit, this system furnishes Tigard residents with a special place for recreation, and a biologically rich but highly sensitive natural area. Though varying in degrees of intensity, Fanno, Summerlake, and Cook park sites are irportant components of this system- Each of the park sites is endowed with proiainent natural features that make thein an enjoyable place in which to spend leisure time. These same features offer a recreation planner the exciting challenge of developnaturals systems ms ter withlan that the recreatip s the nal needs of limitations of the surrounding community. Fanno Park, the most environmentally sensitive site, is not only an important link in this natural system but serves as an integral component in therevitalization plan for downtown Tigard. Au® to the location of adjacent single-family homes and public facilities, this park has the potential to serve as a gateway to the City'a redeveloped commercial core. In addition, the wildlife and vegetation that the park presently supports has the potential for enhancement through sensitive development strategies. Summeriake Nark can actualize the passive and active recreational needs of the residential community which surrounds it. The recreational potential of the site will be mitigated by the existence of wetlands, floodplain, and wildlife flight pattern issues. Redevelopment plans will need to ensure enhancement of the: lake islands and water quuality, buffering for the adjacent single family neighborhood, site circulation, and proper location for all desired improvements. The low flow of the Tualatin River provides for a wide variety of water-slated recreational opportunities. Cook Park is A regionally significant park due to its proximity to the Tualatin River and its size. nnvironmerntaliy, Cook perk is the least sensitive of the three parka. Issues in the, master plan process will include citing of all facility improvements, linkages with existing and future park sites along the river, preservation and enhancement of circulation system through the -site�aand sto adjacent lends sees a t { t i i APPROACH f z a INTRODUCTION i This section outlines Murase associates proposal approach to developing the master plans .for Fanno, Summerlake, and Cook Parks. This approach has been designed to meet "the needs of the project," based on our present understanding of the work scope and our experience in projects of a similar nature. our approach is simple and straightforward. It varies with the general approach identified in the Request for Proposal in three ways. First, we propose to take three park designs through the planning process simultaneously. This will allow for more efficiency and continuity in both the technical and creative process of design development. There will need to be an advancement of the design work on portions of Fanno Park to allow for coordination with the davolopment of the City Center Plan. The main body of the Fanno Par% work would be carried through with that of the other parka. The second variance is on our three-stepped phasing of the process. Breaking the process down in this manner better organizers work tasks and establisheau clear review and decision-r making points. This ia very important, both for keoping participants oriented to the design development process And for moving this creative effort to its goal of developing clear master plan recommendations. The third variation is related to the phasing of the process. At the and of each phase, enough information haps been gathered and work completed to provide a complete view of a facet of the design development process. Such points along wa are important review and docicion-making junctures. Theo@ are important parts of the community environment and are of interest to a wide segment of the population. Keeping the "int.erasted parties" informed and involved throughout the process not only allows for their expression of interest and concern, but also provides an important avenue for giving their, often invaluable, input into the general and specific nature of the designs. The process is benefited not only by arriving at the and of the planning process with a more comprehenasive design but one which has wider community support. The termination of the planning process marks the beginning of the process of gathering the public Isa support to implement the plain. Fostering public support through the planning process can prove invaluable. To better foster this public support and gain broader public input, rather than one public meeting, we propose as many as " seven. The first presentation would be to the Park Board, at the end of Phase I. This meeting should be held at a time and place suitable :for gaining public review and comment. The next three � public meetings would be held at the end of Phase II, Alternative Developments. A meeting, three in total, would be held in the area of each park site. While all plans would be presented, each of these meetings would concentrate on one particular park. The final three meetings would be held toward the latter part of Phase III, Final Master Plan Development. Again, one meeting would take place in each of the park sites. Informal meetings with staff and Park Bozrd members would occur frequently throughout the design process. Formai presentations would be hold :at three points. The first being at the and of Phase I, as noted previously. The next two would follow the two series of public meetings. This would allow for inclusion of public comments, concerns, and ideas to be incorporated into the process. Throughout the process, there would be a pattern of meetings we would propose following. All .public meeting and Park Board presentations would be preceded by an informal presentation to staff. This would be done to verify that all presentation material not with the City,* approval. Following all public and Park Board meetings, we would again moot with city staff to assure that there was mutual agreement on the direction in which to take the next phase of the work. We bring both our experience and expertise to this project. our team brings to this project not only our enthusiasm but the resources needed to sansi5t you in a creative and successful effort. Given our experience with similar projects, our current and projected workload, we know that the project will progress in a timely, officient manner. The following pages outline our proposed project approach. The general arenas to be covered by each phase will be described along with an identification of specific work tasks, products, and meetings. a �i z,nt+sesy anei Anysa The goal of this phase is to faamilari.e all participants in they planning process with the cultural and environmental conditions relating to each site and identification of recreational opportunities which may be not on the site. TASKS AND PRODUCTS t 1. site analysis information collected from various sources will be composited to develop an Opportunities and Constraints Map for each park site. This map will show problems and potentials for recreational activities in areas thoughout each of the three sites. 2. Develop an environmental analysis map of each site indicating type, location, and sensitivity. 3. Visual inventory of condition of existing house at summeriake Park site. The City shall be responsible for making arrangements with the present owners to allow the consultants access to these structures. 4. Evaluation of existing roads and utilities for each site to determine what future needs may be. s. Identification and description of major regulatory issues relating to developments within flood plains. 6. identifying the various recreational activities and facilities which might be developed at each site. This will be compiled into a Preliminary Design Development Program, MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS I. Informal information gathering meeting with staff and Park Hoard. 2. Presentation to Park Board of Preliminary Design Program ,and Opportunities and Constraints Map. This would provide a forum for review and comment by the Park Board and the general public. 2. Meeting with staff to reach consensus on direction for next phase. TIME rRAME (ESTIMATED) July 26 to August S, 1988 Using the guidance of the individual recreation development programs and site analysis information, Murase, associates will develop schematic development plan(s) for each park. i TASKS AND PRODUCTS t 1. Development of alternative schematic plans for each i park site. Each scheme will depict areas recommended t for preservation or habitat enhancement, p=1ssive or 's active recreation, and points and routes for site access, and other pertinent design elements. 2. identification of regulatory guides and constraints affecting elements of the alternative schemes and any necessary mitigation actions required due to proposals contained in the alternate schemes. MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS 1. Regulatory agency review of schematic plans for each site. At this time, review sessions would be informal and informative in nature. 2. Review sessions with City staff at key points throughout this alternative planning phase. Topics Of- review would include project progress and to obtain approval of material to be presented to Dark Board and the public. A final meeting would be hold with staff at the and of this phase to gain consensus of direction for the next phmsc. 3. Throe public presentations would be made, one can each park area. Theses meeatin s would be used to provides the public with the opportunity to review alternative schemes and gain the public's preference for a final master plan for each site. 4• alternativeion would be made tthe � rBoard schematic schemesforeachsiteand related public comment. TIME FRAME (Eati.mated) August 8 to September 21, 1966 Note: Adjustments -court be math to advance the development of the ranno Creek park design to allow for coordination with the City Center Design �Shage�: ttaste��,Len an �hatein2 Bios In this phage of work, preferred plans will be identified, develope4 and refined. i TASKS AND PRODUCTS 1. Illustrative Master Plans for each site, depicting the overall development scheme for each park. In addition, an Illustrative Master Plan, depicting the Phase l development -srcheme will be provided for each park. 2. A schematic phasing plan for each park depicting the evolving development of each park site. 3. Cost estimates for both the total and Phase I . Illustrative Master Plan for each site. 4. A narrative describing the nature and elements of the Master Plan for each site. MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS 1. Review sessions with City staff at key points in the process. 2. Three public presentations would be made, one on each park site for review and comment. 2. Presentation to Park hoard. 4. Presentation to City Council. TIME SCHEDULE (Estimated) September 22 to November 15, 1956 PROPOSED PROJECT BUDGET The following outlines the time that various consultant personnel Will put in on the project in its various phases and the related costs of that work: Hours (Estimated) �Prin!211221 Project Manager Staff Cost $60.00/hr $40.00/hr $30.00/hr PHASE 1: PROGRAM AND OPPORTUNITY & CONSTRAINTS IDENTIFICATION Murase associates 10 33 39 ($400) ($1320) ($1170) Lynn Sharp 36 - - ($1800) Kamp* Associates 20 - - ($1000) Foegre Associates 24 ($1200) Expenses: $250 Phase 1 Total: $70340 PHASE 2: ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT Murase associates 32 100 120 ($1,920) ($4,000) ($30600) Lynn Sharp 12 - I$600) Kamp* Associates 8 - ($400) Expenscess $300 Phase 2 Totals $10,820 { PHASE 3: MASTER PLANS DEVELOPMENT i Murase 80 120 Associates 24 3 200) ($3,600) ($1,440) • i i Lynn 6 - Sharp ($300) 1 xampe - Associates ($400) Faegra Associates ($400) Expenses: $500 Phase 3 Total: $9,840 TOTAL FEE AND EXPENSES ESTIMATE: $250404 r CITY OF TIGARD OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 25, 1988 DATE SUBMITTED: July 13 1988 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Tractor Purchase PREVIOUS ACTION: Budget Adaption June 1988 y PREPARED BY: Curtis Spaan DEPT HEAD 0 CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Curtis Spaan ��_ POLICY ISSUE Tigard City Council has determined policy on purchasing procedures with the adoption of the Tigard Purchasing Manual, _�,�.,„••,...._.,. _�...._.._.._..._.m��.. INFORMATION SUMMARY This tractor is to replace two older tractors. The,4e two tractors are less efficient and taro nouding more and mora frequont repairs. Eutituatod 25 percont incroase in production time, For FY 1980-09, $18,000 has been budgotud for a general a»e tragi tor, A11 T RNATI V ,: ;ONS C1FRr-E) 1, Aut'hor•ite the City t:o tjo to bid on now tractor, 2, Kopp old trRactoru, 1, Impruva production time and Jouuon dowry tinea. 2, Less wastpd staff tift*, Altur•nativa #1.' Motion to outhorir.o tractor bid. ht/5933D CITY OF TIGARD PARKS MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS 1988 4WD GENERAL PURPOSE TRAC1-OR x MAKE MODEL DEALER ADDRESS__ PHONE _ CONTACT PERSON_,_„_, TITLE NO. ITEM List all variations to specifications. ications. ENGINE YES NO VARIATl N 1. Engine to ba an industrial typo, wstor cooled, diosal fueled, four cylindor, with minimum displaco- mont, of 173 cubic inch and dovalc ping riot lass than '.a3 $AI;: NET horsepower. 2. 0a►ugas; wator tamp, hour motor, fuolod lovol, volt. 1110tor', 3. Dry typo air c,loanor with rostrict in indicator, 4. Positiva provouro lubrication with full flow oil filtor. ,�,. ® �� . �, m m� • 5, Mufflar with oxhauat covor, G. 12 Volt Ql0Ctr'i0k1 system, Meavy duty ba tter•y with 700 cold crank amps; ';0 AMP a►1 torr►rator. 7, Fuc►1 toink, 16 941100 capOCity. �.�----� -�-- 8. Kay ignition switch with noutral safaty start. . -. lu—c r4R 1. Front axle 7,000 lbs R@a►r axle 8,0010 lbo ... .� 2. Foot and hand throttles. 3. Hydrostatic power stearirxl. l Jill YES NO VARIATION 4. Adjustable seat with arm cushion, on level deck platform. S. Tires; Front 10.5-18, 10PR--13 Rear 16.9-24 6PR—R4 ._ _. HYDRAULIC SYSTEM 1, Reservoir capacity maximum 32 qts. 2. Pump capacity minimum of 23 gallons per minutes at 2,000 PSI at maximum 2300 rpm. 3. Hydraulic filtor•s; a 10 micron replaceable element in reat.urn MANUALS 1, Two ceipiaa of repair pasta, survica and oporators n►anv4sls to bo provided. IMPLEMENT RVOUT 1, Romoty hydraulics, 2, Throes paint hitch with 3,200 1b lift capacity, ... ,-..�.m...., 3, Powar takeoff with 93 minuto PTO HP por•forma►nce and standard P10 shaft, 4, Drawbar typo swinging, sliding, vxtenda►blo and height adjuutabl.o. ht/5779D OPTIONS YES NO VARIATION FRONT LOADER BUCKET OPERATING INFO 1. Quick release bucket. _ 2. Height to hinge pin fully raised 125.0 in. 3. Clearance with bucket dumped 101.0 in. . 4, pigging depth 2.5 in. 5. Reach at, maximum hvit3ht and dumped 32,0 in. � 6, React► at ground and lovel 79in, 7. Maximum dump "n9lo 390. 0, Rollback angle on ground 160 , 9, Ovormll longth 179,0 in. f;APM»l.T E �. 1, Lift capacity, full hoit3hrL 2,7W pounds, 2. Druakout forco 3,9F,)0 pounds, YCI.f T MFla 23 QvM PUMP 1 , Loader raising timo 33 soc, 2, Loader lowering time (usirig hydraulics) 3.2 st►c. 3, Bucket dump time 2.5 sec. ._..-.-�--•..�-- 4.. Bucket rollback time 3.4 sec, HYDRAULIC_CY1'ND,R3 1. Boom bore 2.25 in. ..v rod d i am. 1 .50 i n. stroke 33.21.) in. ... 2. Bucket bore 2.25 in. _ rod diam. 1.50 in. .� stroke 24.24 in. t IF O?TIONS (continued) YES NO VARIATION BUCKET 1. Minimum width 80 inches. 2, Minimum 3/4 yard capacity. 3. Bucket level indicator. OTHER 1, Forklift attachment, TRADE—INS _s 1, Be able to supply trade valuos on equipment to be spocifiod by City, - � ht/57790 CITY OFT'1GARD GREW COUNCIL AGENDA ITE`RY Jul 25. 1988 DATE SUBMITTED: Jul 13 1968 AGENDA OF PREVIOUS ACTION: Placed on maintenans:e ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE. Resolution q acce tin Carnahan's subdivi5ior► guarantee eriod Res. #►85-42 pFEPARkD BY: John Na man ;ublic im rov�en s r ommunity De�t_CTT'Y ADMIN REQuESTED AY:QT HE flD OK — �-- _ _ �.___--- =POLICY ISSUE INFORMATIO , 1ARY � . SW North Ca,rna f►an+s subdivision is local•►d on ;NW 109tFt Avenue north of Daboia St:r00t- ;t. All public in►Provements h•Av r►m i ar,�n�at�vaar ►pit 0 poriod, od ar►d h��vu WW1,sLood tt,►e roquirod rano year 8 Thee Uivirsi►,n i'icu thiAt Cho in,pruvon►+-int is now acc�cNpi:+�ble f:nt�ir►s�G�ring cor•ti and tt►.st gall r^iestuirs►mants have bc,c►r► f � with 010 tsoL � t fir► nr`or�oa A. ' hcrufor it is r,occmmandod .t►uputcimpruuom+ft 0Cq Cuun(;it +Aw r projoct agrooniont) th ltil'19 for n�n►c►ly j%rcct. tianit«+ry and utCkrm u a pbill�y�`maPd,d furlh r C�Ftta1 Cha City opurat.i►an and maintern��n�ea r'erfip r as se of th Council a+athuriro rolaeatheatar^ans;o bsznd , ro OCL �,� re►c�rf►unt spocifiead City acceaptanc;4► Capon Nona; il►e) (City Qovolupor) p j ruquire?n►eant.f;, sf;.ti'fact0r,y con►plotion, of ill City Ex 1. City assumption of r^ajponsibtlity fur 0PQ?,t*tjon ansa nar9.ntc►nrnncce of Cho Public improvements spocifi.erd abovo, SUfyCf:cr+IC0 AhG7'ZON Pass thn RA3olution titled: "A R SLUTI N CCC$►TING pU0j..IC IMpROyrmCNTS KNOWN AS CARNANAN°S SUBDIVISION PUE3L.1C IMPROVE rr cn/5992D i,ti CITY OF TIGARD OREGON RY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMAJuly 14 19 88 AGENDA OF: Jul 2_ 1986 DAIE SUBMITTED: PREVIOUS ACTION* ISSUISSUE/AGENDAISSUE/AGENDADA TITLE: ZCA 88-07 Mune Lam3;in PRL'.PARE.t] 8Y: Jahn Acker GIIY ADMIN 0 BY: James and Marlys Lam k�__�__n RE=QUE.SI E �._....�_..._.._ DEET HEAD OK POLICY Issa forward to the Portland Metropolitan Arca Local Should the laity Council Government. Boundary Commission a 10,66 acre anneacation Of land located at 10960 $W E;urham Road and 16325 SW 108th Avenue, ..,� �_ �,. ,.m m,., _ .._._�- .., �,.....,,. INFORMATTt�t►1,...UMMA!RL This tannexiation roquaat, cansists c,f threca p�ar'ca�ls t+atalin 10.66 awes that City OV Tigard, Tho annox�atiOn w:as requested Uy Janos arca conti(luous to rho E"ity and Mor•lys t.aamkin, who �,wr► 'l, r►urthern testi) pIscclocatod within aTigard'sd aUrb4n owns the bouthornmout parcolAll prup►arly Planning Area, to d til,, to ( 1 , Adopt the attanc�tti and a'r►t�r��s�'f�nnplan ;�nd�r.ur►icr deeai�r,a►ti►+anstt�o► tt,e 8:hca Boundary Cun►mi ss ion property in conformance with tho comprehunsiVe Plan, 2, Dony the propousl, jAn arp > licrar►t hras plaid a $400 boundary Cc>mn►is Cit fee for chan�J�rfex uif of T ha more tFsan !d acrcas but lease than 70 acr•cas pus y nonca for a zone► c:f)AM90 Of 10 Or more OCr'es, �� .,.W,�_. .�_...w..,.W...__..�......w...,..,,. {:._.,,._ .W..�.. SUGGESTED ACTION ..............,_yW�, , ,,...,..,..,.-. ....W.. ,...W...W,w.,.,..�. ... ::� ca to forward the the attached resolution acid ordin�andesig ►ationsntoxthopn to ► Adopt property Boundary Commission rand to &,3sign plan ur►d xune � in conformance with the Comprcahensivca Plan. en/59450 E i i s s I _.� 1� c M Gfalt I sT Aw falim IN i,xGGU 4 1, j 14 IIM � �t/A4A1 A! pw I " i n e W6Lf1 w •r* 4 16 t5 f. fn W I LAY, 5 14 ro.D 4 SI AFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM � JULY 25, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TIGARD CITY HALL -- TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A, FACTS 1, General Inform+tion CASE; ZCA kle-07 Zone Change Annexation REQUEST, A request to annex three parcels elinsirtirnl of 10.66 acros into the City of Tigard sand Lu assii3n plan and zone designations to the property in conformance with the l igar^d Comprohensiva Plan Land Use Map as follows; COMPREKNSM PLAN Dt:SIGNAIION: WCIM 2S1 15AA 000 & 900 -- Modium-!dish Ros idont,ial Wel m 2$1 150 13()0 Low Dons i ty Residential ZONING DESIGNATION: 1"ROPO;�[.[aN� ,r IAX MAP/t.:OT NUMUR f'URRC.NI' 7QN7NG �,,,,�. ...W...��._ `- 2S1 15AA 800 & 900 Wal, Co, R-24 R-75 •1 Ia1300 Wo, Co' R-5 Rr4„� AA t APPLICANT, Jamov & M4arlya 1.,4nikin OWNER: Jiarntaa & MArly>a t,mikin 10960 SW Durhom Read Mi tauko Llai rd Tigard, OR 97274 16325 SW 108th Ave 1igfird, OR 97224 SL of LOCATION: 108th proparty is at 10960odSW outh Durha m k mdhayand o p The 1632.5 SW108th Avenue, 2. Brrc!�Sround Information No other applications have boon filed for land use actions for the subioct property. The Planning Division has had a prem-application conference with Mr. Bob Martin goo. The proposal is develop a 94-unit d nit apartment comp!xon thispropertyra roperty after nnexation.te STAFF REPORT - ZCA 88-�07 - PAGE 1 According to the Washington County Land Use Diuision, tax lots 800 and 900 have been illegally partitioned, The Washington County Planning Division states that the illegal partition does not affect their position of having no objections to this annexation, The partition will need to be brought into compliance with legal standards or the lots need to be consolidated prior to any change in ownership or land use action. 3. Vicinity Information The portion of the property to be zoned R-25 is adjacent to City of Tigard R-25 zoned property on the west and east, and City of Tigard R-7 to the north across Durham Road. The southern portion of the property requesting annexation is adjacent to City of Tigard R-4.5 on the east, City of Tigard R--25 on the north, and Wa. Co, R-5 on the south arid west. 4, Site Information and Proposal Description -fho proporty is composod of lets 800, 900, and 1300 of Washington County Tax Map 1S1 15AA, Lot 800 is 1,92 acres, 900 is 2,93 acrVs, and 1300 is 5,81 acros, for a totol of 10.66 acroa, lher•o is a singlo fomily house+ on lot 800 and one on lot 1300, The property slopes genora►lly southward toward the Tualatin Rivor, aamos arid Morlys Lramkin who own lots 800 rand 900 roquovtod annox ►tion so the►t: they cAn doll the proporty for dvvolopmont, 5, 022n�ar►d NPO.,Q ►i tiiQrtk a Rouponding dgancicas offorod nu wrjt:ton commentn on the preposa►l . C D. FINDINGS AND CONCLU a1 ONS Itm r4+lavant. criteria in this caro are ligard C',omprohonsive Plan policies 2,1.1 and 10,1.2 and Cha►pt.ur 18,136 and Chaptor 18.138 of the C:on►n►unity povolopmont Code, the Pltxnning Staff htas dote rod nod that tho propos►al as submitted is conristont with the relevvant portiur►v of tho Comprohonsive Plan ha►vud upon tho findin=gs notod bolow: a, Plan Policy 2.1 ,1 is satisfied bocaumo., the Noighbur•hood Planning Organization rand surrounding property owncars were givcan not•icca of the houring and an opportunity to comment on tho applicant's proposal, b, Plan Policy 10,1,2 is sa►tisfiod because t:he Policia Dopiartmur►t has boon notified unci the land is located within+ Tigard's Urbain Planning Area, C STAFF REPORT - ZCA 88-07 -- PACE 2 i The Planning Staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of the Community Development Code based upon the findings noted below: a, Chapter 18.136 is met because the applicant has met all of the approval standards, b. Chapter 16.138 is met because the land meets the definition for buildable lands as defined by OAR 664-C7-000 and shall be designated as "developing area" on the Develepment Standards Area Map. C. RECOMMENDATION Basad upon the above, findings and conclusions, the Planning Staff recommends approval of ZCA 88-07 subject to the follawing conditions; 11 The property shall be designated as a "doveloping area" on the Development Standard Areas map, 2, All development on the property shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Tigard. y PREPARED Y; 34hn Ackor A istarlit Planner (ht/5842D) 9" STAFF REPORT - ZCA 8"7 -- PAGE 3 ;z k 4 ��;'r Nga��GE' 88-1Lj •'-etUired calnd rpaxl0g; Poll . CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUM"tARY AGENDA OF July 25_,_ 1988 DALE SUBMITTED: aul_y 14, 1988______. ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Zone Ordinance PREVIOUS ACTION: Planni Commission Amendment ZOA 88 11 _Recornmondation n ,� PREPARED BY: Deborah Stuarts. _ DEPT HEADCITY ADMIN 0 REQUESIED BY: _ -- �....._�.,�.,.�._._...... _..�_._...._._.__....__..,_._._..�._ POLICY ISSUE will the intent of the I-P (Industrial Park) zone be served if reductions in landscaped area and allowances for transientlodging areti permitted under certain conditions? .....,..n.-.. ....T_..._.._..,_....._.__......_..._..__.._�........_.__m_......_ Tt�F0RMATI4lV SUNIIARY 'fhe fir3a" Planning Con%Rtission held a publar hearinCJ ort July 5, 1988 to review tho merits of reducing the ovorall lalldscapinr3 requirenuont in Lhe I_.P zona front 2S to 20 percont and to allow transiont lodging uses (hatuls, muto", etc,) as Conditional Usas in itte I-P zone, StQkff *wuortdod tha applicant's ariginel propasal slir3htly and the Planninr3 Comn►issiort m:adea further minor modif'ic-ationm to propotiod Coda subsections 18,68,"050 and 18,66,0 Otey Flaming is a copy of the erftplit:•ant,u statement, they atceff re per t, Commiuvion hoaring minutou, And an ordinrenco with they aniondo'd word rq as rocommondod by the Planning Commitlsion, I 1 , Appr•ova Ze.r1 88--01 4v rucominarndod by tho PlAnning Contmi.asion, 2, Approve ZOA 00-01 evs recommorided by the Planning Commiwsion with modifications, 1 . Deny the opplication. �.�W-.�:�_... ....,.._ ,.,.,".....__W..�...�.•..,....., .. ....,............. F'tSCAI_ 7.MPttL'f ".. ...W .., ,.,."....,.,. ...,, ......,...."..,. • None SUGGESTED ACTION Approve ZOA 8"1 as recommended by the Planning Commission and adopt the .attached ordinance. • j br/59580 CITY OF TIGARD. OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 88— Itp i AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SUBSECTIONS 18.68.040, 18.68.050, AND 18.130.150 OF THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE -- INDUSTRIAL. PARK ZONE (ZOA 88--011 REQUESTED BY PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES. WHEREAS, the City of Tigard finds it necessary to revise its Community Development Code periodically to improve the operation and implementation of the Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning staff made recommendations of findings to the City Of Tigard Planning Commission on July 5, 1988; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted to recommond approval of a modified ZOA 88_01 at this same meeting; and WHEREAS, Tho Tigard City Council hold a public hearing on the proposed, changes on July 35, 1988. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS; Section 1; The Community 00volopment Cods shall be amended as shown Oft Exhibit "A". Language to be deleted is shown in [BRACKETS]. L.anguo9a to be added is UNDFRLxNFO, ive an and Section 2; dayafter its this d passage inonce sbylthe Council l be tand approval&bysr theMayor. F PASSED; By vote of all Council +iieinbers present after being read by number and title only, this day of Catharine Wheatley, Deputy Recorder APPROVED: This day of Thongs M. Brian, Mayor Approved as to forms City Attorney Date ORDINANCE NO. GO— Page 1 'Y :i ''gg 6 EXHIBIT "A" 18.68.050(5) The maximum site coverage shall be 75 percent, including buildings and impervious surfaces. The maximum site coverage may be increased to 80 percent if the provisions of 18.68.050(6) area satisfied. (6) The minimum landscaping requirement shall be 25 percent of the site area, except that a reduction to 20 percent of the site maV beapproved roved throe h the devela2Ment review process when all of the followin performance standards are met: A. The aeeroved landscape plan shall rovide: Streat trees as required by Section 18.100.035 are to be installed with a minimum caliper of 3" rather than the 2" at four feet in height required by 18.100.035 a . The landscaping between a parking lot and street property line shall have a minimum width of 10 feet, All applicable bufferin screenin and setback re uirements shall be satisfied, 3 TMe, runt shall provide_ documentation of an sdaauate e►=aing maintenance e=2ram to ensure appropriate irrigation and maintenance, of the landscape area. k 181601040 Transient l,od9 irtg 10,130.150 30 Transient Lodginq in the S.—p zona; A. Sita sixa shall be a minimum Qf two acres and a maximum of �iva acres, ha s �'a shall Ave a< a lie apprcavad by the City nginaar &2 akrlartarial or m4k r collector strae,t with LIAcity •ufficiant to ensure hast adan��aat�+ ,xccaoA� l9caAl bus jnojsos i s main ajf nqO. Anclllnry upas, cited in S�rction 10,G0,030 2)(03, shall ba, rnliowadas intagraI alemants of the Conditional Uso� provided they are designed to moat the 20 parcont floor aroo limitations in S►action 1.8,68.030(2)(0). D. agnrage shall conform to Cho tar 8.114 of this Title. br/5958D t: TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - JULY 5, 1988 1. Vice President Owens called the meeting to order at 7:33 PM, The meeting was held at the Tigard Civic Center - TOWN HALL ROOM - 13125 SW Hall Blvd. , Tigard, Oregon. 2. ROLL. CALL.; Present! Vice President Owens; Commissioner Pyre, Peterson, Rosborough, and Castile. Absent; Commissioners Moen, Leverett, Barber, and Newton Staff: Senior Planner, Keith Liden; Secretary, Diane M. Jelderks 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 0 Commiasioner Peterson moved and Commissionor Pyre seconded to approve minutes of April 5, 1988, as submit cd. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commissioner Owens abstained. o Commissioner Peterson moved and Commissioner Pyre seconded to approve minutes of May 3, 1.988, as submitted. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commissioners Castitle and Owens abstained. o Commissioner Pyre moved and Commissioner RosborouSh seconded to approve minutes of May 17, 1988, as submitted. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commisnionern Peterson, Rosborough, and Castile abstained. a Commissioner Rosborough moved and Comminnioner Pyre seconded to approve minutes of June 7, 1988, as submitted. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners prevent. Commissioners Pertr_rson and Castile abstaino-d. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATION o Staff stated that the Tigard Park Plan had been distributed for each Commissioner. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ZOA 88-01 PACIFIC REALTY CONSULTANTS Request for amendment of Community Development Code Section 18.68.040 to include transient housing (i.e. , hotels and motels) as a conditional use in the I-P (Industrial Park) zone and amendment of Section 18.68.050 to // allow 20 percent site landscaping in the I-P zone if certain standards are \,. satisfied rather than the present 25 percent site landscaping requirement. PLANNING COMPASSION MINUTES - JULY 5, 1988 - PAGE 1 y i Senior Planner Liden reviewed the proposal and stated that staff was recommending approval with some modifications to the language submitted by the applicant. } APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Lans Stout, Mckenzie/Saito Engineering, explained how they felt that they could reduce the landscaping requirement of 1.5% and still meet the intent of the Code. He continued that inserting "transient housing" as a conditional use in the IP tone is consistent with the intent of the Code and is a reasonable request, He suggested modifying staff's language in section 18.130.050 (30) B. , removing the word "direct" and inserting sifter access "as may be approved by the City Engineer", The primary market would be to accommodate the weekday business Ixavler and the motel./hotel would not have nn entertainment type facility to attract weekend traffic. NPA CO14MENTS o Emmett Whitker, NPO # 1 Chairman, 13250 SW Burnham Ct, , stated that thf- NPO had no problem with the 14ndsc4ping proposal. However, they dial have concerns for transient lodging with regards to future! admini,station. Their concern was for the height requirements And protection for the abutting residential Areas. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Dick Buono, the applicant, ill SW 5th, Suite 2950, Portland, OR 97204, explained that they were marketing for the mid range business tr*verler mot",/hotel and it would not, by nature, be a high rise. He felt the height was already protected by the Code. Discussion followed with Commisuionaxa on the type of area they would serve. t e numbor of units (ApproximntclY 90 — 150), and the need for this type a Disicussi9n followed with staff regarding locations, how height sn.d size would be limited, how the n@lghborhood would be prot.elctod, and the type of signs permitted. o Senior Planner Liden Added that after reviewing staff's recommendation he felt minated and section .be change ( . that item number four (4) to hree (3) as they ( could be both eli covered eliminated buffering standards. o Discussion followed regarding access. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner Peterson had no problem with the landscaping request, however, he would like to see a limit put on the number of units and height restriction#. o Commissioner Rosborough favored the landscaping proposal and was not ` uncomfortable With the transient lodging request. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — JULY 5, 1988 . — PAGE 2 o Commissioner Fyre had concerns that the approval would rezone two to five acres to allow motel/hotels. He felt City Council should take a long, hard look at the impact this change would have. He had no problem with the landscaping request. o Commissioner Castile had no concerns regarding landscaping and assumed that the market would control the transient housing concerns, o Commissioner Owens was concerned that reducing the landscaping would start a downward trend for more request to reduce landscaping requirements, +� Commissioner Rosboxough moved and Commissioner Castile seconded to forward ZOA 68-01 to City Council with a recommendation for approval., modifying staff's recommendation to remove 18.68.050 (6) A. (3) and to change the language in section 18.130.050 (30) B. as requested by the applicant. Motion carried by majority of Commissioner present. Commissioner Fyre voting no. o The Commission stated they would put concerns and reservations together at the end of the meeting which would be forwarded to City Council. 5.2 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD 86-03, SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 88-1.3 CARL HECTOR (HECTOR'S NURSERY) NPO # 6 Request for Site Development Review Approval to construct a new retail nursery building, remodel an existing residence for retail use, and construct various site improvementp. Z .ni.ngt C-G (PD) Commercial General, Planned Development). LOCATION: 1.5300 SW Pacific Highway (WCTM 2S1 IODB, lot 500). Senior Planner reviewed the proposal, and m-I staff's recommendation for approval with eight (8) conditions. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o .Till Hector r@ad and submitted a letter objecting to conditions in the staff report and correction note® to the staff report. o Robert Ebert, nn employee of Hector's Nursery, explained that the conditions imposed would make it impossible for the improvements to be accomplished. tie asked that the Commission grant approval., allowing the parking area to be graveled, which would make i.t easier for them to negotiate with the State to waive, their requirement® for hnif-street improvements. o Senior. Planner Liden explained that the commission could not waive the State's requirments, however, they could grant a variance for a gravel parking area. Discussion followed with regard to the State's and City's requirements. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Consensus of the Commission was that there are to many unknown factors r with regard to other jurisdictions requirements and what could and could not be waived. The Commission favored paved parking and appropriate landscaping. They suggested tabling the item and directing staff to work with the applicant to see what could be worked out with the other jurisdictions. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 5, 1988 - PAGE 3 Milt Fyre 1. Creating a defacto zone change by allowing 2 — 5 acre motel/hotel conditional use sites in every I-^P zoned parcel. 2. The need for the change doesn't appear to be prevalent. 3. Nothing to prevent a hotel/motel being the first development on a 1-^P site even though the rationale for this change is, in part, to support the surrounding I—P development. 4. Would reduce the amount of I—P property available for straight I—P use. I—P has been increasingly used for retail space. Bonnie Owens 1. Concern that too many will 90 up. 2. Signage r�quoat too frequent for variance for Nize and height. T3. Increasing height requests in a few years. 4. 'Location need to remain near or at major arterials or coll.ectora. submitted 7/3/88 Planning Commission. 5764D PLANNING COMKISSION MINUTES — JULY 5s 1988 — PAGE 6 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.1 JULY 5, 1988 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD. OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1, General Information CASE: ZOA 88-01 PacTrust REQUEST; A request for amendment of Community Development Code Section 18.58,040 to include "transient housing" as a conditional use in the I-,P (Industrial Park) zone and to amend Section 18,58,050 to require 20 percent site landscaping in the I-P sone if certain standards are mot rather than the usual 25 parcent requirement, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: I-P (Industrial Park) ZONING DESIGNATION; I-P (Industrial Park) APPLICANT: Pacific Realty Associates OWNER; N/A 111 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2950 Portland, OR 97204 s LOCATION: City-wide ' 2. Qakck►yround Information Chapter 10.60 was incorporated into the Tigard Community Development Cade and was adoptod by Council in 1903, This chapter of the Code was later aamonded in September 1985 to allow tho use category "automotive and equipment, body repairs, light; equipment" as aw conditional use in the I-P zoning district. In Novombor 1905, Soction 10.60,030(1)(0) was amended to change the term "parking servicer" to "parking facilities" (ZOA 9-85). 3. Vicinity Information The proposed zone ordinance amendment will affect aa11 properties locaatod within I-P zoning districts throughout the City. 4. Site Information-and Proposal Description The applicant is proposing to amend Section 10,60.040 to include "transient housing" as a conditional use in the I-P zoning district and to amend 18.68.050 to require 20 percent site landscaping instead of the 25 percent now required by the present Code. STAFF REPORT - PacTrust - ZOA 88-01 -m PAIGE i Thn applicant states that PacTrust is proposing these charges because Of a perceived need based on numerous projects and properties PacTrust operates and owns within the City. The company owns and operates 5 major projects in Tigard and owns more than 20 acres of additional land under development or ready for development. �U The applicant states that the 25 percent landscaping requirement has become increasingly difficult to achieve as the market becomes more competitive and sites become fewer and more difficult to develop, A lower landscaping requirement will allow greater flexibility to increase parking, site access, and building area slightly while still maintaining the high quality image intended for industrial park sites, 1 The applicant proposes the following wording to address this requirement. That which is underlined will be new provisions; brackets signify deletions, 18.69.050(5) "The maximum site coverage shall be [75] RO percent, including buildings ;ic4d impervious surfaces, (6) The minimum landscaping requirement shall be 25 percent of theme, see are ea, exceet that a reduction to 20 percent of thew ma be approved throe h the Site Desi2n Review Process when the i'oliowin+a parformance •standards are met: A. The approved landscape plan shall provide Street trees, as required by Section 18,100.095 are to be installed with a minimum call er oP 8" rath_o„�r�than h�+` required by 18,10 Q�5 A) LU Tho__ Is►ndscaping between a parking ,12& arid street property no -shall have a minimum width of 10 feat LU Front yard landscaping shall meat th +'buffer" standard of 18_100.090(()(2) and (3). Pc. TF_..1o _ anolicant shall provide evident sof an aderauat:w 021=951 02 maintenanc. program to ansura _ aper ate r a��a�nd_ma�intenanee ®f the landseane area „ The applicant also proposes to include "transient lodging" and motels as one of the conditional uses allowod in the 1 `2oP zones. PacTrust suggests wording which would limit the uses to those which would likely serve the needs of the surrounding I-•P businessos M►nd uses and not the general traveling public. The proposed text is as follows: 10.168.040 -IL4Mr nsiant f.odalna _(hot el motel) !nL•andad to msot_tho needs of businos--gas in tha cards (sae 18.130.150(30) for standards)." 18,130.050 " 30) Transient Lodging in the T-P zone• A. Site size shall be a minimum of two ecrQs and m maximum of five acres. STAFF REPORT - PacTrU3t - ZO A 88-01 - PAGE Z r B. Sites shall be located in close proximity to a regional or maior local traffic route with capacity sufficient to ensure that adequate access to local businesses is maintained. C. Ancillary uses shall be allowed as integral elements of the Condition Use, provided they are designed to meet the needs of guests of the hotel and business people within the neighborhood. Ancillary uses that are of a larger scale, such as restaurants intended to serve the surrounding I-P area, may be permitted in conjunction with the hotel, but are subject to the erovisions of Section 18.68.030(2)(0). D. Signage shall conform to Section 18.114 of this Code," S. Agency and NPO Comments The City Building Division, Neighborhood Planning Organizations 5 and 8 have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it, NPO 1 recd mends approval of the landscaping amendment and suggests rejection of the introduction of hotels because, if intensively developed, conflicts with adjacent industrial or residential use could rebult. The City Cnginecring Division has reviewed the proposal and notes that a site development review should be required. No other comments have boon received. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Section 19.30.120 of the Community Development Code states that ordinance amendments shall be consistent with State-wide Planning Goals, federal and state statutes, applicable pians adoptod by Metro, and applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and relevant city ordinances. 1. Landscaping The following Plan policies aro opplicabla to this request: 6.6,1, 11.5 and 12.3.1. Cach of these policies mandate the City to require buffering between different uses such as residential and industrial. The purpose, size, direction, required density and whether a viewer is stationary or mobile are factors to be considered in the creation of a buffer zona. Section 18.68.050(3' of the Code requires a 50 foot setback when an industrial project abuts a residential zones, Chapter 18.100 (Landscaping and Screening) provides specific standards, such as street treas and screening, which must be met regardless of the amount of landscaped area. It is the opinion of staff that a 5 percent reduction in the landscaped area requirement will not reduce these important buffering requirements. The proposed supplemental standards will help ensure that the visual appeal of the landscaping will not be diminished by requiring higher quality in return for the five percent area reduction. * STAFF REPORT -- PacTrust - ZOA 88-01 -- PAGE 3 GEM 2. Transient Lodging as a Conditional Use Section 18.68.010 of the Code sets forth the intent or purpose supporting an I--P zoning district. Subsection (a)(1) states that an I-P zone shall combine light manufacturing, office and complementary related commercial uses. The I-P zoning district is also intended to combine uses which have no off-site impacts and which combine parking. landscaping and other design features. Structures in a development should also be physically and visibly linked. A survey of surrounding jurisdictions reveals a varied approach to hotel zoning. The City of Portland allows hotels in certain zoning districts with minimum acreage requirements of 10 - 20 acres, Landscaping requirements are generally a minimum of 15 percent. The City of take Oswego does not allow hotels in any industrial zones. The City of Beaverton does not allow hotels in its I-P zoning district (equivalent to our I-H zone) but does allow them as conditional uses in its C-I or Campus Industrial zone (similar to I-P), A minimum of 15 percent landscaping is required in the C I zone. In Tigard, transient lodging is defined in Section 18,42.020(a)(28) as follows Refers to establishmoiits primarily engaged in the provision of lodging services on a temporary basis with incidental food, drink, and other sales and services intendod for the convenience of quests. Typical uses include hotels, motels, or bod and breakfast houses. The use is presently permitted in the C-G (Commercial General), C-P (Commercial Professional), and CDD (Centrad Business District) zones. Perhaps the most similar zone is C-P which is primarily intended for office use but "'compatible and supportive uses" such as transient • lodging are also permitted, The I-P zone is basically intended for office and light industrial activity but "complementary related comiorcial uses" are allowed as well. The purpose of allowing complementary uses in the I-P zone is to provide nearby services for the convenience of businesses in the area. Many permitted uses (e.g., business ,support services; financial, insurance, real estate sorvicos) in tho X--P zone presently serve this purpose. Lodging facilities have boon identified by the applicant as a necessary service to assist businesses in accommodating clients, omployoos, etc., visiting from outside the region. This mood has already boon addressed in the C-P zona and this proposal appears to also be consistent with the purpose of the I-P zone, The request is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and plan policies or other City ordinances. The Planning staff finds that both of the proposed amendments are appropriate. Howaver, several modifications to the proposed wording are noted below for ease of administration and clarity. . ' STAFF REPORT - PacTrust - ZOA 88-01 - PAGE 4 C. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this zone ordinance amendment request (ZOA 88-01) with the wording as amended below-, 18.68.050(5) The maximum site coverage shall be 75 percent. including buildings and impervious surfaces, The maximum site coverage may be increased to 80 percent if the provisions of 18.68.050(6) are satisfied. (6) The minimum landscaping requirement shall be 25 percent of the site area, except that a reduction to 20 percent of the site may be approved through the development review process when the following performance standards are met: A. The approved landscape plan shall provide: Street trees, as required by Section 18.100,035 are to be installed with a minimum caliper of 3" rather than the 2" at four (4) feet in height required bX 18.100.035(A). The landscaping between a parking lot and street property line shall have a minimum width of 10, Frant and landscaning shall moot the "buffer" standard of 18.100.090(a)(2) and (3), All applicable buffering, crooningand setback requirements shall be satisfiad The applicant shall provide documentation of an adequate on-20na maintgn*nco program to ensu:t aeerapriato irrigation and maintenances of the landscape arae, ' 18,66.040 Transient Lodging 18,130,050 (30) T,rensiQnt Lodging In ho X-P lana 0.1. Pito sire shall be a minimum oP twee acres and a maXimum of five acr.as. Pa. The _sit ___phal htavee dirt+rt aecses to an ar a ial or mafor coiloctor str4wet with ""city sufficient to onsure that adaauatA access to local businesses is maintainad, C. Ancillary uses, cited in Saction 18,68.030(2)(0), shall be allowed as integral elements of thQ Condition Use, provided they are designed to moot the ?.0 parcent floor arca limitations in Section 10.68.0321g)-(0), 0. S49nage shall conform to Chapter 18,114 of this Coda. /,/N r� PREP RED 6Y: Deborah A. Stuart APPROVED BY:•Keith S. Liden Assistant Planner Senior Planner (ht/5611D) STAFF REPORT - PacTrust - ZOA 88--01 - PAGE 5 PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE CITY OF TIGARD IP (INDUSTRIAL PARK) ZONE PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES r 111 S.W. FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 2950 tr PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 MACKENZIE/SAITO L ASSOCIATES 0690 S.W. BANCROFT STREET PORTLAND, OREGON 97201 May 23, 1988 l i k 3 F�F t INTRODUCTION 3 These proposals are made to amend two sections of the City of Tigard's IP (Industrial Park) zone. The first amendment will provide a new development standard for landscaping, which, when implemented, would require 20% of the net site to be landscaped in lieu of 25% under the less �'ringent standards. The second amendment will allow "transient lodging" (i.e., hotel, motel) as a Conditional Use under specified conditions and with specific standards. 4 Both of these proposals are sponsored by Pacific Realty Associates LP ("PacTrust"), with the assistance of the City, staff, in response to needs identified in PacTrust's numerous projects in the City of Tigard. PacTrust owns and operates 5 major projects within the City of Tigard and owns more than 20 acres of additional land under development or ready for development. I This long term commitment to the City of Tigard, and the high quality of PacTrust's projects, are indicative of the experience that has lead to a recognition of the need for this proposal. In an effort to continually improve the marketability of building space, and to be responsive to changing market conditions, it has become clear that these changes are needed to preserve Tigard's lead in attracting and keeping new and existing businesses. REVISION TO SECTIONS 16.68.050(5) AND J6)- BUILDING COVERAGE_AND LANDSCAPING The current Code provisions require 25% of the site area to be landscaped. Although this has been implemented on many sites, it has became increasingly difficult to achieve as the available properties become more difficult to develop and the market becomes more competitive. Therefore, this provision will allow greater flexibility to image established Vy highequality, and landscapingi in the mostrea gvisibie portiwhile on of the preserving g The overall purpose of the IP zone is to facilitate a high quality image development with an opens attractive feeling. iiowever, practical experience shows that quality of the landscaping is more important to achieve this goal than quantity, provided that a reasonable minimum is maintained. It is useful to compare the required landscape percentages in other local jurisdictions with similar zones: Jurisdiction Zone Landscape Percentage_ Beaverton Campus Industrial 15x Washington Co. industrial 15% City of Portland General Employment street frontage only t ? e In order to allow increased flexibility in site development while preserving the intent of the-IP zone, the proposed Code amendment applies more stringent landscape s standards as a condition of the 20% area provision, and further requires that the ? Site Design Review process be the format for review and approval of the landscape plan and an associated maintenance program. i The revised Code wording is as follows (bracketed language is deleted, underlined ! language is added): 18.68.050(5) "The maximum site coverage shall be 1753 80 percent, including s buildings and impervious surfaces. (6) The minimum landscaping requirement shall be 25 percent of the site area, except that a reduction to 20a- -percent of the site may be approve through the Site Design ev ew rocess when the o aw nq performance standards are met: A.The approved landscape elan shall provide: 1 Street trees as require by Section 18,100.035 are installed with a minimum call er of 3" rather than the 2" required by 2) T175-1-anoscaping between a parking lot and Street propertZ line shall ave a minimum width of 10,. 3Front ar an sca n shall meet the "buffer" standard gf F e an 0. The applicant shall provide evidence of an adequate on-going maintenance program to ensure ap ro r ate irriqRion-and ma intenance o� the an scape area." REVISION TO SECTION 18.68.040 - C0401TIONAL USES IN IP ZONE ' This revision to the IP tone will add a provision to allow "transient housing" (i.e., hotel or motel) as a conditional use in the IP zone. The intent of this provision is to provide for hotel or motel housing of persons visiting businesses in the surroundin industrial area. It is not the intent of this provision to allow facilities tha? provide hotel or motel housing for larger traveling segments of the population who are visiting areas of the region substantially removed from the industrial area surrounding the proposed facility. Therefore, the Code wording provides specific standards to ensure that the scale of the use is commensurate with this purpose. A further issue in this provision is the potential impact of the use on adjacent industrial activities, primarily in terms of traffic. Therefore, the Code language also provides a locational criteria to allow establishment of the use only on a site with adequate access capacity. .j� SRI i This proposal will expand upon the concept of allowing ancillary supportive land uses within the IP zone, as established by Section 18.68.040 (Conditional Uses), and Section 18.68.030(2) relating to commercial use types. The decision to recommend establishment of the hotel as a conditional use rather than as an allowed commercial use was made in response to the need to fully evaluate the relationship of the use to the criteria and to allow a full public review of the proposal. The City of Beaverton recently adopted a provision similar to this proposal, to allow hotels as a conditional use in the "Campus Industrial" zone. As a result of the approval of this provision, the "Marriott Courtyard" hotel is now under construction i in the Koll Business Center. The "business-related" hotel in suburban areas is a new development in suburban communities. Typical of this facility is the Marriott Courtyard Hotel, which specifically is located in multi-use industrial park areas with a large employee base. This type of hotel will occupy about 5 acres of land area and offer about 150 rooms. Secondary facilities such as in-house restaurants and meeting rooms are designed to } meet the needs of guests and local business people rather than the entire region The level of development in Tigard's primary IP zone is now such that a business. related hotel is in significant demand. The opportunity to protide this amenity will enhance the growth potential for businesses in the IP zone and will assist in 3: maintenance of Tigard's attractiveness as a business community. The new Code wording is as follows: �f 18.68.040 "(4) Transient Lodging (hotel, motel) intended to meet the heeds t of businesses in the area (see 18.130.150(30) for standards)." e 18.130.150 "(30) Transient Lodging in the IP zone: A. Site size shall be a minimum of two acres and a maximum of five acres. B. Sites shall be located in close proximity to a regional or major local traffic route with capacity sufficient to ensure that adequate access to local businesses is maintained. C. Ancillary uses shall be allowed as integral elements of the Conditional Use, provided they are designed to meet the needs of guests of the hotel and business people within the neighborhood. Ancillary uses that are of a larger scale, such as restaurants Intended to serve the surrounding IP area, may be permitted in conjunction with the hotel` but are subject to the provisions of Section 18.68.030(2)(0). D. Signage shall conform to Section 18.114 of this Code." �ti. CITY OF TIGARD OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 75 1988 DATE SUBMITTED: July 14 1988 ISSUEIAGENDA TITLE: Conditional Use _ PREVIOUS ACTION: Hearings Officer CU 87--03/Minor Land Partition MLP 87--09 A roval PREPARED BY: Keith Liden ' DEPT HEAD OK Aht CITY ADMIN OK tj7V REQUESIID BY: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY On June 13. 1968, the Hearings officer approved the above; application subject to conditions, phis decision has been appotaled by the applicant (Tewxaeco) Arid NPO N3. CPO #4 also vubmittud an appeal, but it waa received too late to be legally considered as an iappoal. Or► July 15, 1988, the staff sponsorod a mooting with Texaco arid neighborhood repro'sontatives to clarify the issues raisad in the appoAls, 1hN5ea issues aro aummar ixr d in memos fr•on► Keith L-Iden and Randy Wooley, Tho Council packet includes tho following items; 1) situ m+ap, 9) I1c►4Arin',1M Officer decision, 3) copies of Appo4l1i from Toxaco, NPO 0, ane, CPO H4, 4) t_3don mcmo summar,i ine3 n►odiotion mooting, arid b) Wooley memo oddressirrl str,aot improvement issues including r,aconunendod 4amondmant.s to conditions 3 and 4 of the Hwaringv Officer decision, eupplowentol ite>mn ,alio included oro, 1) Applicants' statomont and traffic study, 2) staff roport to Lho Ho,*r'invls Officer, 3) c.owmunity traffic study, 4) applicant r,orponu to neaighborhood traffic concorns, and 5) lcattc►rs edaetod >optomber 29, IW71 . Wicd March 10, 1980, from 0C)01 . A tr-a►nocript of thea Noarin;Ta Of ficpr procooedirqu has alroody boon submitted for Council review. ALTF:.RNA'T'�',V�S �QNa�,fat, Rl�;p 11 Uphold the MiArings Officor decision, 2. Uphold the Hk!,srinegs Offic vr� decision but modify tho conditions of approval, 3. Ruvorse the Hearings Officer decision arid deny thea proposal, 4, Reamaend tho case to the Hearings Officar for furthcar r•oviow, FISS_CAL TMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Uphold the Hearings Officer decision but modify the conditions 3 and 4 as suggested on page 2 of Ranby Wooley's memo. ke/5977D' MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON T0: Mayor and Council, July 15, 1988 FROM: Randall R. Wooley. City Engineer 0001***' SUBJECT: Proposed Texaco Development At Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road CU 87-,03 and MLP 87-•09 The Hearings Officer's decision on the referenced project has been appealed by Texaco and by NPO 0, CPO #4 has also submitted objections. Engineering comments on the points of appeal and objections are as follows: Front:aae .Road Relocation There is general agreement that the existing frontage road along the wast side of Pacific Highway should be eliminated. The close proximity of the frontogo road to Pacific Hfgkw4ay creates safety problems where the frontage h road intersects With Bull Mountain Road and with Boat Bend Road, A proposed ODOT/MST1P project will eliminate the frontage road north of Bull Mountain Road. The project will provide a now access to the Canterbury Square area by constructing a now access road and traffic signals at the intersection of Canterbury lana and Pacific Highway. The project is funded and is scheduled for construction in fiscal year 1989, which begins on October 1, 198". This project is proceeding wall and it appears that it will be completed on schedule. The Texaco proposal would savor the existing frontage road south of Bull Mountain Road and provide a cul-de-sac in the existing frontage road. The existing frontage road connection to Beef Bond Road could than potentially be eliminated in conjunction with future development to the south. However, conditions N3 and M4 of the Hearings Officer decision would require a new connection between the existing frontage road and Bull Mountain Road. The new alignment would be a through route and would maintain the existing intersection of the frontage road with Boot Bend Road. In my opinion, all of the existing frontage road should eventually be eliminated. The existing frontage road connection to Beef Bond Road has the same types sof safety problems as the existing frontage road connection to Bull Mountain Road, Therefore, I can find no reason to require construction of a connection between Bull Mountaion Road and the existing frontage road. In the future, some additional connections will be desirable between Beef Bend Road and Bull Mountain Road. It appears that appropriate locations for these roads would be west of the Texaco site and do not need to be tied to the Texaco development. Memo to Mayor and Council From Randall R. Wooley, City Engineer tt Subject: Proposed Texaco Development tI At Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road CU 87-03 and MLP 87-09 Therefore, T support the appeal of Texaco and the appeal of NPo #3 that request deletion of the Hearings officer requirement for relocation of the existing south frontage road, The Hearings officer had proposed to use the relocated frontage road as one of the access locations to the Texaco site, if we eliminate the requirement for a relocated frontage road, we need to reevaluate the Hearings Officer's restrictions on driveway locations, Fallowing joint design review meetings earliar this year. the County staff proposed appropriate driveway locations for this site, Texaco has incorporated the County's recommendations into their site drawing, The County's proposal appears to provide good access to the site and also provides adequate driveway separation And adequate site distance for good traffic safety, We support the County's recommendation as shown in Alternate C in the attached letter from Daryl Steffan, dated February 29, 1989, Therefore, i recommend that the Council modify the decision of the Hearings Officer by amending Conditions 03 and N4 to read as follows: 3. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the Dull Mountain Road frontage to incroaso the right-of-way to 33 feet from centorlina, The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way conterlina. The dodication document shall be on City forms and shall bo approved by the City Engineering Section, Dedication forms and instructions are available from the Enginooring Section, 4. The accesses to Dull Mountain Road shall be locatod as shown in the letter from Daryl Steffan of Washington County, dated rebruary 29, 1980, as Alternate C. The western access shall be a joint use accost with the property to the west and shall be located a minimum of 100 feat edge-to-iadge from the eastern access. The aastern access shall be located directly across from the existing access to the church parking lot. Timing; NPO #3 has requested that the Texaco development not be allowed to proceed until the frontage road is closed north of Bull Mountain Road. We have no objection to such a+ delay in development, However, we find that such a condition would not be consistent with other ascent developmant approvals in the area, Other development has been permitted to occur in recent years along Bull Mountain Road, thereby increasing the traffic volume on Bull Mountain Road, without being tied to the closure of the north frontage road approach, The existing problems at the intersection of the frontage road and Bull Mountain Road are caused by the design of the existing roadways; the nature of the design problem would not be changed by the proposed Texaco development, By closing the south frontage road approach as a part of their development, it appears that the Texaco proposal would actually provide some improvement to the safety of the Bull Mountain Road intersection with the frontage road. [; E t t Memo to Mayor and Council t From Randall R. Wooley, City Engineer ► E rr Subject: Proposed Texaco Development 1 At Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road CU 87-03 and MLP 87-09 Hours of Operation, Vandalism, and Littering: These concerns relate primarily to late night operation when traffic volumes are light and do not impact the engineering concerns relating to the project, Speed: There is a request for a reduction in the existing speed limit, Neither Texaco nor the City has authority to revise the posted speed, This change would require approval of the State Speed Contras Board, It is unlikely that the Speed Control Board would consider changes in the posted speed until the proposed development actually occurs and until the required improvements to Bull Mountain Road are completed, After the development is completed, it would be -appropriate for the City and the County to review the speed on Bull Mountain Road and to request that the Spored Control Board consider appropriate revisions at that time, Haar rardqus rusl Handlli ,, There was a request for review of the routing of NO trucks to the site, We would expect fuel truck accoss to the site to be via the driveways on Hull Mountain Road, especially after the remainder of the frontage road is eliminated in the future. We sae no alternative practical access route for the fuel delivery trucks. Therefore, it does not appear necessary to restrict the routing of fuel trucks as a condition of development approval. However, if the development proposal is approved, then we would look closely at fuel truck access when we review the detailed construction plans. During staff review of the detailed plans, we would check to make sure that there is adequate room for the trucks to maneuver safely on the site and for the trucks to safely enter and exit from the proposed Jrivoways. br/5975D i WASHINGTON �r.,. COUNTY, OREGON l i February 29, 1988 Randy Wooly City Engineer i City of Tigard z Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 i RE: TEXACO SERVICE STATION - BULL MT. ROAD AND PACIFIC HIGHWAY �} We have received and reviewed the revised Transportation Impact Analysis completed by Kittelson S Associates for this development. The revised analysis adequately addresses the concerns detailed in my January 19, 1988 .If letter. The County has sufficient information to make recommendations to the City concerning this development. FINDINGS 1. A left turn lane is not warranted on Bull Mt. Road at the sites access point. 2. Sufficient stacking distance is available betwoon Pacific Highway and the sites proposed east access point; stacking distance exceeds AASHTO ti recommendations. 3. Adequate sight distance is available at both proposed points. 4. Elimination of the south leg of the frontage road at Bull Mt. Road would significantly improve operational safety at the intersection. S. Eliminating the proposed west access onto Bull Mt. Road and providing access through the development of a shared access with the property adjacent to and west of this site would significantly improve operational safety at the intersection. 6. Buil Mountain Road is a County major collector. Ultimate section identified in the County Transportation Plan is three lanes without bike lanes. Right-of-way necessary for ultimate section is 33 feet from centerline. S 7. Sidewalks are necessary for safe pedestrian traffic across frontage. i t Department of Land Use And Transportation.Engineering/Survey division 150 North First Avenue Hillsboro.Oregon 97124 tt+rnr:K+.+ r a:+ :: +•+ February 29, 1988 Page 2 r w � RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Provide access with one new access onto 8u11 Mt. Rd. feast access) and ' through development of a shared access with the property adjacent to and 4 west of this site (west access). Alternative access schema's are shown in Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 enclosed. All alternatives are expected to provided an acceptable level of safety. Alternative A shows the east access point as proposed in the site plan and a shared access at the existing curb cut, Alternative B is preferred over Alternative A as it provides 100 feet separation between the church access and the shared access. Alternative C is also preferred over Alternative A as it eliminates off-set driveways and provides 100 feet separation between driveways. ll ad 2. Elimconsinate stent he withouth the Cities accessof the oandge road at circulationuplantforolotsfin the consistent vicinity. 3. Dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 33 feet from centerline on Buil Mt. Rd, frontage. 4. Establish a one footl non-access reserve strip on Bull Mt. Rd. frontage except at driveway location. S. Half street corstruction'along Bull Mt. Rd. frontage; " Washington County standard section designation C-1. 4. lighting (illumination) at access points. Improvement plans for work within County right-of-way are subject to Washington County Engineering Division review and approval. A facility permit issued by ;the County totaefeQtYtaitheeCityary for to coverothaork wcostnofop',aryi review of-way. The County will charge and inspections. if you have any questions in this matter please feel free to call. Daryl Steffan Traffic Analyst, P.E. c: Ron Failme=ger, ODOT leonal Gunderson, ODOT Wayne Kittleson Mike Borresen Paula Calvin Enclosure 1312U `• • � !-• S s3• c T :.to ` •E�t��1i 1 t � 1 ' to ,..._- ——— s sr as w T1s 40 f JvAsN CA at lee IV IX dp 40 11-4 ry 1 a ' i _ S 310 43' W ,Owls a-ice 0 74 .00 WS ol IN lei 40 op A. �—� •/� � . . s awe w y .,� asw 400, CA . ��.N k . sw r• ri •s '� r v � t !� � hok a. JV J�o <Iry 4b � •• ', is "� / 1 ��• a+ z� 44c+TEi?�K1if.�' V S 31• A3' W CJS •,� - s,.�+.. "� »SIGN ' .-......o ..."� -.. �.. .� ... -- ... iT A yr�• ,.. s as Ole �� •� ` ; Ain i�7 /''� ` \, .i. + YO .L �,, w ►CCN, L►•ti IL/ w »� f" 46 Jt ib 10010 .0 101, AK +�:iw.�wu►.a��.trsaa�r�dA.f: . •,!�..,-s►�+y�w _ � , 6- Akc- rJ-r A t.- c-: i C i { Applicants Statement September 8. 1987 Following is a description of the site development and Texaco's proposed use of the station. As most of the Wormgtion necessary is contained on the site plan and other drawings,this description wbO be very brief. The existing site Is used prescrWy as a used car lot with one permanent build ng and paw4 ureas for car paMm. The site Is gonerally level with a slight slope to the south and lower than Pacific Highway. Neighbor- Irg properties consist of a church across the street and vacant lots around the remainder of the site pedrne- ter. The closest existN residentiasl area Is some distance up on Bull Mountain Road and Is obscured by trees. Texaco proposes to lWall a new station on approximately two thirds of the comer she,leaving the existing bounding for the prosent owners use. A#apical Texaco she oon*ts of a mini food mart ear wash,and gaso- One sales. The bAkfts are 9~4V pmfabrkVod steel enacted on site for a pleaskV.clean appearance. The exbtlng grades will be modified only to the extent to provide proper surface drainage on the site. The addition of this faddy wig provide many needed services to the exparKft area around Bull Mountain Road. Pieaaa refer to the enclosed and attachid drawinps for further Informu ion. 17 r 23-,74 too"'» ,... t IN T £ R' 3 U i2 Y �i• .09 + / • 3900 � 2900 ♦1vw "s ww>J s P L A C 1 i :ts VIVO «Ac a+.G �, �A. T$two 490 OWN. w OF wer• 6..��'f � wA/NR:42'Oti C'.11MT1' ' WOA/lil�i�Oi' 940 ow ? I Af1KfYfNfli Y iAl;ATWft A►Ai Odd • MAY 1 1017 w o • •:•»f h w."Sown me"" j iu1.M"M f"i 9• 1� �j r �� +«•f•�f wr an wo 1p "Al i f�~..�MMMf•fMA• f � ��_I��i M� • f w�w� V' • ti ow + ' • , at 741 400 � ' ✓ fww• ti so V AC • •.! • /M OF 0... A AN At 14 •. ►� n •. �, tt• w>rs1 23-78t �-,�� 3-74 r • r le 1 • • .:r � a i •' a k , � T • A " %i �l, j f R f. 4 10 r.l. 1 _..♦. r i.. ..,w.. � ....... ..C.. .. .-�.. ., _.,�:.{/ r. .. .s... i.. .��J. .... i _.... ....... _. . .. l.�. - ..... n .. ..i ..... . \_.. ......... r ... ..�..'.1. .1 . i LAND USE DECISION APPEAL FILING FORM The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate in local government. Tigard's land Use �� Code therefore sets out specific requirements for RE WD filing appeals on certain land use decisions, OREGON The following form has been developed to assist you in filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what filing fees will be required or to answer any questions you have regarding the appeal process, please .contact the Planning Division or the City Recorder at 639-4171. 1. APPLICATION BEING APPEALED: `'u 8?_Q and 1J.i,? 87-09 TEXACO REFINING & MARKETING, I14C. 2. HOW DO YOU QUALIFY AS A PARTY: Ile aro appealing with the NPU #3 IN CITY OF TIGARD 3. SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR APPEAL OR REVIEW: Same items as on the appeal by NPO ##3 In addition items A- and #5 on page 8 of Hearings Officer ,Report. Also item #13, we would re uest the hours of operation include all services, not the oar wash only. IVa aro not suggasting what these hours should be for the other services, only that it Attached letter from Christ the King Church with their items to be addresoed. 4. SCHEDULED DATE DECISION Z8 TO BE FINAL: June 240 1988 S. DATE NOTICE OF FIN L,DECIB WAS GIVEN: - 6. SIGNATURE,-,. PRO 7 �*xxawts��-x-x-x�x�xtc-x♦4x�eiHa*x1t� x-x- �x�ex��x�x-�acaNtxa�x-�x-x-xx-�x-�x-k I:OR_df'YC£ USE ONLY: Received By: tez� Time: ' /» Approved As To Fors By: Dater Time:- Denied As To Form By: Data:� Time:39, {` 9F9F'lE��k 4iFIfr1 tiHH(3H4�Eili�Flt!{IS#x14iE�iHHE�I-N'l19E3k1F�f #IHkM�HH 1M/4046A. 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,P.O.Bax 23397,71gard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 3 i. 6-19-88 TO: Beverly Ftoude FROM: Jim Bernklau President, C rlst The King Lutheran Church (CTK) SUBJECT: items to be included in an appeal to the Texaco Decision (dated 6-24-86 from Beth Mason, Hearings Officer) . The following points were either not addressed in the subject decision or require further clarification: 1. Vandalism of CTK property Page 3 of our written testimony Included this subject which is very important to us. Conditions of use for the applicant would include 1) limiting hours of operation of the entire business during the night; 2) limiting or prohibiting sale of alcoholic beverages and 3) providing periodic security patrols. 2. Littering of CTKpg operty - Page 3 of our written testimony also included this concern. Conditions of uee for the applicant would include those listed above, plus a requirement for litter patrols of CTK property by the applicant. 3. Sicessive speed on Bull Mt. Rd. - Page 2 of our written testimony included a proposed condition requiring that the current 40 mph speed limit be reduced before development proceeds, in -the interest of safety. 4. Hazardous fuel handling - Contrary to information on page 9 (item 2, continued) of the subject decision, page 2 of our written testimony specifically requested that fuel truck routing ' to and from the proposed development be reviewed from a safety standpoint prior to use approval. AM 19 < S�NOId n v m 1ll'1tfAQ23 3At/ 10 m 2I39� a sly0 AunIN33 � 3ON18d ^b/uN3 _� 10 b'j .��' �dn'1IHd •� SN-A3,10 ��fy �o. ,ry `a3ON14d AN d� 3�WdN00�0 _ 9hlly 4v N331 �J N(� w�� w O� kul oNV'rNUIH Mp�'1-lIM ��O ti' a a° 4� 10 M31A °00H N'1 �� d 0IlS3PdW 'aar .► 'd0 -1��Now 0 b Im lanw ryj.W '77N m- '1 1S TIIH-13ZdH f< :La AN INI -,b�sb ®OOMOII sn AHOO m SAVSIA 1110 1.0 a31 �I�I oNd-1aer��w 161A �'1'11H0 'c4 a In .4� m -r rn m m ? rrrrrrrrrrrrre� rrrrrrrr rrreu►rr�r Us 30adV0 Iw J.8�oIwM3In M�1A TIIH c 1Nf10WM3In 350 AVM Ils1 N3AVHHIV9 b N3AVHalz :l S N3ntIHaiV3 p, _10. N'1i 'L •� off' 0000 "IW)L m a'yb ��bo, IS N0123WW d' t�„ Immo ;K �_o '1'13 ] 113v: �' is S3w7r °7 T MEN CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s): CU 87-03 & MLP 87-09 2. blame of trimer: Rohart C. Wyatt 3. Blame of Applicant: Texaco Refining & Marketina, Inc. Address 10502 NE 38th Place City Kirkland State WN Tip 98033 A. Location, of Property; Address 11aQ X32 Rull Muntain Logrid Legal Description, ; 1 OAC 1100 S. Mature of Applicationt For aeoval of a Conditional Ilse Permit to allow construction of a vahicla fual and convenience aala3 business on gE2p2rty taonad C-G Ganar C9oar area . >:to for a M nor Land Partition to d v de a Y. acre parcel into two parce ss of 38,4£8 W 28r!i32 ire feet each. 6. mgt — Approval as requested xx Approval with conditions Denial 7. Egut Notice was published in the n4wspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed tot _A.. The applicant & owners „AZ_ Owners of record within the required distance # ,,,i[ L The affected Neighborhood 'planning Organisation ,xgw Affected governmental agencies 8. Fel Dar.isi4nt R THB Decrajou SHALL Bic PIVAL ON June 24, 1988 trVLZSS AN AppgAL IS VILBD. The adopted findings of tact, decision, and statement of condition can be obtained from the planning Department, Tigard City hall, 13125 9W Hall Blvd., P.O. box 23397, Tigard, Oregon , 97223. Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 Which provides that a written appeal, may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. 1 The deadline for filing of an appeal is 4:30 P.M. prune 24,, 1988 10. OU05tions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, 639-4171. 0257P • t BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR) a fuel and convenience business and No. CU 87-03 and a car wash on property zoned C-G; MLP 87-09 Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc.,) ApRlicant. ) PROPEL DZECRTPTION; Tax lot 1100, Map 2S1, 10AC, City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon. MUM HEBRTNGs: March 24, 1988, May 18, 1988, May 25, 1988 $ISS The property was originally developed for use as a restaurant and in 1986 the City approved ra car sales business. This use has been abandoned. &PFS ,GLH EMBg �64_N t I. MARK MEDGE 2. WAYNE KITTLESON 3. MARK GREENFIELD 4. PAUL VOLMER 5. !SPEAKING 2H 2PMSTT12H I. BEVERLY FROWDY 2. KEN DICKEY i 3. CHRIS BETNORICK (phonetic spelling) 4. SAM PERKASINS (phonetic spelling) 8. CHRIS HUGHES G. MADELINE UTES 7. AL HIES 8. JEAN YOUNG 9. ELLEN DICKEY 10. FRED KLIGETT 11. BOB BLEDSOE 12. JIM BERNKLAU 13. JOIN MERRIFIELD 14. WALTER GROSS a. IS. CAL WOLRAY 16. ROBERT BALL 17. GERALD KOLVE 18. JOHN DRANEAS a 19. GEORGE OLSEN 's 20. FRANK WRITING 21. LEN CHURCHILL 22. JIM ASBELL 23. ERNEST BLOCH I i Mimi i i EXHIATTS: ' 3 1. Planning Department Staff Report 2. Transportation Xmpact .Analysis (Kittleson) 3. 9-8-87 Conditional Use Submittal 4. B-31-87 plans (6 pages) (a) 1-3 = Boundary and Topographic Survey (b) 4 = Concept Planting Plan (c) 5 - General Arrangement j (d) 6 - Preliminary Grade Sheet 1 5. Colored topographic map (2 pages) 6. 3-23-88 Preliminary General Arrangement (I page) 7. Exhibit map of re-located frontage road 8. Applicant's proposed revision to Condition No. 4 9. Presentation on Traffic Analysis (dated 3-24-88) 10. Petitions in opposition (6 pages) ; 11. Alfson memo of 4-15-88 12. King City letter of 4-20-88 13. Christ the King Lutheran Church letter of 5-18-88 14. Summary of recommendations of CtheK= 15. Petitions in opposition (5 pages) 16. Questionnaires (19) E 17. Summary of Questionnaire data 18. Bull Mountain development projections (1 page) 19. Bull Mountain Urban Services Study (1 page) 20. Ball letter of 5-18-88 21. Sato letter of 4-27-88 22, Community Traffic Study and Summary 23. CPO #4 letter of 5-18-88 24. Adam letter of 5-5-88 25. CPO #4 letter of 3-24-88 26. Wright letter of 4-26-88 27. Franzke letter and photos of 5-18-88 � 28. Zoning map of adjacent property 29. Plans (a) 1 . preliminary General Arrangement of 3-23-88 (b) 2 a Masonry plan, elevations & sections of 4-4 (c) 3 - Car wash plan, elevations, etc. of 4-6-88 (d) 4 - Signage (first page only) 30. Landscape pian of 4-14-88 1 31. DEQ letter of 10-17-86 32. Kittleson letter of 5-14-88 33. Traffic analysis slides (6) 34. Davis memo of 4-25-88 i 35. Aerial photo 36. Applicant' s amendments to conditions of approval 37. Texaco ranponse to opposition transportation report 38. OSHD letter of 3-10-88 39. OSHD letter of 9-29-87 FINDTHGa: , Vic�n{ty Information The property is located at the southwest corner-of Pacific I 2 a G t Highway and Bull Mountain Road. Pacific Highway is an arterial street which is under the jurisdiction of the State Highway Division and Bull Mountain Road is a major collector ( and is a Washington County thoroughfare. A frontage road, under State jurisdiction, which runs between Bull Mountain Road and Beef Bend Road lies between the subject and Pacific Highway. A vacant property located to the osouth and west is zoned C--P (Commercial Professional) and Christ the King Church which is located on the worth side of Bull r Mountain Road is zoned C-G. Site Information E a Past use of the property has left a paved parking area and a building which was formerly a restaurant, located on the west side sof the subject property. There is presently one driveway entrance onto Bull Mountain Road and one additional entrance on the frontage road. The minor land partition portion of the application would place the developed portion on a separate lot from the proposed use. The applicant plans to divide the Of 38, 468 and 28 531 s property into two parcels ; quare feet each. The existing building would be located on the smaller western parcel and the proposed vehicle fuel sales, convenience mart and car r wash would be located on the larger parcel. The proposed r site plan includes two driveway entrances onto Dull Mountain Road and one driveway entrance on tl:e frontage road. The convenience mart and gas station would be located in the northern portion of the property with the car wash to the V south. Landscaping,_ including deciduous. treas and low lying vegetation would be located around the perimeter of the now project. The applicant is also proposing to locate one free-standing sign of an unspecified height, which exceeds aO square fact par aide, at the northeast corner of they property. An°�sir�b a21= 22LLDIM Md ardiflallnp rrav{ts{r�na t Policy 3.1.1 - Thisi p public is satiesfi®d in that the City have provided proper ublic notice to they surrounding property owners and to the neighborhood planning organization reaponsiblo for this areal. In addition, the applicants have not with the neighbors to discuss the proposed applications. } Policy 4.2,1 - The proposalwill require domesticwater services from the Tigard Water District. Storm water run-off from the property would be pumped into the Buil Mountain system by agreement of the applicant, with no discharge into the Yong City system. There are no wetlands on the site. The City of Tigard has sole discharge from this site. jurisdiction over wAte3r use and Policy 5.1.4 - The property to the south and west of the Proposal is zoned Professional Commercial; the property to r 3 1 r 4 t 4 a the north of the proposal is zoned General Commercial; the property to the east of the proposal is zoned R-4.5 and is designated low density residential. While this property is E technically adjacent to the proposed site, it is actually separated from the proposal by Highway 99 and is 3 approximately 220 feet from the proposal. Policy 6.6.1 - The proposal plans a landscaping zone along the frontage of the property on Bull Mountain Road of 1.2 feet in width and along the frontage road to be vacated that varies between 706" and 12,1 in width. The car wash will be screened along the property line and on-site trash will be enclosed, as'will all storage. Policy 7.1.2 - The site is served with a 12" water line from ` the Tigard Water District in the vicinity of the frontage road and an 8'° line in Bull Mountain Road. An 8" sewer kine and manhole is located in Bull Mountain Road within 106 feet of the property line, with adequate capacity. Storm drainage has been addressed above, by agreement of the applicant. r Policy 7.2.1 - Storm drainage has been addressed above, by agreement of the applicant. Thera are no natural drainage ways to be maintained on the property. There in no 100 year floodplain elevation on the property. There is minimal erosion on the site. Policy 7.5.11 7.5.2 - The proposal is within District No. 3 of the Tigard Police Service area, and the police department � anticipates no difficulty in serving the-proposal. Policy 7.6.1 - A fire hydrant in eonnectod to the 8" water main in Bull Mountain Road, approximately 4V east of the property line. A tiro station iso located approximately one mile south of the site. Response time is s: imat d a 2-3 minute sp which is below the standard response time of 5 minutes. The fire department hes indicated that its facilities are adequate to provide full fire protection to the proposal. 6 Policy 7.7.1 - Electrical service to the site is currently 400 amp service with 120-240, three phase service. PSE has indicated that electrical service is adequate for the proposal. GTE has indicated that telephone service in available to the site for the proposal. NW Natural Gas has a 4-1/2" main in Bull Mountain Road, with adequate capacity to serve the proposal. r Policy 8.1.11 8.1.2, 8.1.3 - These policies provide that the City shall plan ,for a safe and efficient street' and roadway system that beets current needs and anticipated future growth and development. The City is required to provide for the efficient management of the transportation planning process, through coordination with other federal, rotate, � 4 i regional and local jurisdictions. All parties to this hearing agree that the intersection of k i the frontage road and Bull Mountain Road snake the area in 4 the vicinity Of this proposal particularly dangerous. All parties agree that the State of Oregon plans to close the northern portion of frontage road when it develops a new access from Highway 99 to Canterbury Square but nes specific, guaranteed plans are presently available. The State Highway department believes strongly that the frontage road should be relocated to the west of the site. The parties disagree on whether, the proposal should be approved 'with just the closure of the south frontage road before the problem of the north frontage road and the convenience of those attempting to reach Canterbury Square from the south can be addressed. All parties agree that the level of service at portions of the intersection of Bull Mountain Road and Highway 99 is intolerably low (an "pm level) . However, the level of service is directly related to the cycle time of the light at Highway 99 and Bull Mountain Road. The State Highway Department has the sole authority to change the timing on that cycle to shorten it and make waits at that intersection less than their present 190 seconds. The applicant has requested Ouch a re-cycling of the light, but there was no response from the State when the record was closed. The Bull Mountain Road queue presently clears within the 30 E seconda allotted to its movements. If the cyclo time at this intersection was reduced, the queue would be shorter and clearance should continue to be no problem, even if the g proposal is allowed. The opponents argued that the traffic counts for the area were too low. for purposes of this decision, the hearings officer adopted the counts as Yeneratead by the opponents. The applicant argued that the ntersection had adequate capacity, even if you accepted the higher traffic counts as accurate. Unless the States Highway department decides to change the cycles times at this intersection, the residents in the area will continue: to experience uncomfortable delays, regardless of whether this application, or another, is approved for the site. The applicant admits that approximately 16,000 cans will uses the proposed facility each months they bane this on a trip generation field study done at a similar facility in Portland and published information from the TXJ2 �_ n^%-Ib �n ffAnUA11. IZAU= LditIon1 . The opponents argues that the comparison is not valid as only one other station was studied. The hearings officer finds that: the comparison is } a sound one. The opponents argue that the ! area indicates a ten-fold increase in the neat is-20 years, with a corresponding increase in the background traffic which will use Bull Mountain Road. The applicant points out that their capacity calculations included a consideration of the 4 5 t population growth projections developed and maintained by *Metro, which projects a 35% increase in background traffic volumes on Bull Mountain Road by the year 2010. The hearings officer finds that the better data is from the Metro growth projections. The opponents point _out that the original traffic report incorrectly considered the stopping sight distance in determining whether the proposed accesses to Bull Mountain Road from the site could be hazardous, particularly to traffic coming down Bull Mountain Road. The applicants traffic engineer conceded the incorrect reference, but i pointed out that the actual analysis was done for intersection sight distance requirements, not stopping distance requirements. Using the formula of 10 times the 85th percentile approach speed of oncoming vehicles, the only evidence in the record shows that this standard is ` exceeded under both current and proposed future site j. conditions. The opponents expressed serious concerns about foot traffic on Bull Mountain Road, particularly new foot traffic that ' would be attracted by the proposed use. The applicant will be required to install sidewalks along the site frontage from the wastarnmost point of the site. It additional root traffic is generated wast of the site, it should not conflict with the additional care turning into the site, which will approach from the east. Until all of Bull Mountain Road is redeveloped to the major collector standard, with curbs, sidewalks and an area for biking, foot 1rr traffic will continue to be at risk on this road. NN jq ' The proposed use will not generate transit ridership. The proposal includes spaces for handicapped parking as wail as the other required handicapped facilities. Policy 9.1.1. - The beat evidence in the record indicates that only 6% of the trips to the proposed used would be "new" trips to the area and 94% would be trips would be from traffic already in the area; the additional energy consumption associated with this use would be minimal. Policy 12.2.1 - The property in zoned General Commercial which is intended to provide for major retail goods and services. The uveas may involves auto repair and services, supply and equipment stores, vehicle sales, drive-in restaurants, etc. Due to the mature of these uses (high traffic generators) , they area to be located next to a major collector street or arterial. As noted above, Bull Mountain Road is designated a major collector street. Locational criteria - As noted above, the proposed site is not bounded by residential districts on more than two sides. The traffic congestion and safety problems associated with 6 1 the proposal are addressed above. The site is sufficiently large to accommodate the use and has the required high visibility. The proposal is consistent with any development which might occur on adjacent property zoned retail and,/or office commercial an,! there are no adjacent non-commercial uses to this property, as noted above. Code Section 18.62.050 - No minimum lot area is reired the proposal exceeds the minimum lot width of 50 fe t by n6 feet. The proposal =sets the setback requirements with the closest building structure to the side property line being 4i- feet. The proposal is well under the height limitation of 45 feet, at 18 feet, 11 inches at the highest point. The proposal covers 84.6% of the site, which is below the maximum standard of 85% coverage. The proposal includes 15.4% of the area in landscaping, which exceeds the standard of 15%. Code Section 18.100.020 - The proposed landscaping would not interfere with the maintenance of any utilities on or off site and would not impair the visibility of traffic on either Bull Mountain Road or Highway 99. Coda Section 18.102 - No structures in the proposal are within the vision clearance areas, Code Section 18. 106 - The proposal meets the parking roquirr.ment:s of the code with three vehicles for each gas pump and four parking spaces dedicated to just the conveniences mart. ,a a Codes Section 18.108 - The access standards of the code Are not by the proposal, and the joint access requirements for adjacent land would be mot by the conditions of approval sot forth below. Code Section 18.114 - A sign permit is required by the City before any sign may be erected. If the proposal includes a sign which exceeds the coda standard, the applicant would have to apply for a separate hearing on that part of the proposal. coNgQNS• 1. The comprehensive plan and coda requirements of Policies 2.1.1, 4.2.1, 5.1.4, 6.6.1, 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.4.4, 7.5.1, 7.5.2, 7 .6.1, 7.7.1, 9.1.10 12.2.1, And Code Sections 18.62 050, 18.100.020, 18.192, 18.106, 18.108 and 18.114 have been not. r 2. The comprehensive plan policies of Policies 8.1.1, 8.1.2 and 8.1.3 have been addressed by the applicant and, as conditioned below, have been satisfied. There was wide- spread sentiment that this property should not be zoned General Commercial, but no application for re-zoning, or re- 7 designation by the comprehensive pian is before the hearings officer. As a General Commercial zone, the uses contemplated include high .traffic uses. The City has not imposed a moratorium on development of this area until the traffic problems created by the intersection of the frontage road and Bull Mountain Road have been remedied. The hearings officer must then consider whether the proposal is consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan and the development code. The hearings officer notes that the only reason the proposed use requires a conditional use hearing is to address the issue of fuel storage in this area. The hearings officer heard no concerns from opponents on this point; generally, the opponents Frere most concerned about the traffic impact this use might have on the area. The hearings officer concludes that the use must be allowed so long as the traffic plan for the area safely meets the current needs and the anticipated future growth and development planned for the area. The application, as conditioned below, meets those standards. 9. The hearings officer finds that adjacent property to the wast will need access to Bull Mountain Road and after the north portion of the frontage road is closed, the present problmms with cross traffic and left-turning traffic from that north frontage road will be eliminated. To best serve the needs of adjacent property and to provide a second access to this site when it in safe to do so, the hearings officer will require the eventual development of a relocated frontage road to the west of the site, to be developed when the north frontage road is closed and not before. a► 4. There was considerable testimony from opponents about whether there was a need in the community for a facility such as the one proposed. Numerous other similar facilities are presently vacant in the area. The City has not adoptod either policies or standards that require the consideration of need in a conditional use application; accordingly, the hearings officer cannot consider that issue. The City has determined by its silence on that requirement, that market conditiona will dictate whether uses will be proposed or not. Similarly, opponents speculated what would happen to the site if the use vas developed and then abandoned. once again, the City does not require businesses to remain open when them► have made a decision that it is no longer economically feasible to do no. if this use is abandoned, the area will have one other vacant building, an the adjacent site to the went presently contains the vacant building from the previous uses on the cite. S. There were many objections from neighbors about the aesthetics of the proposal, particularly at the' entrance to the Bull Mountain residential area. The City has not adopted standards to consider the anesthetics of development within the General Commercial zone, so this issue is not one the hearings officer may consider. 8 MINE 6. Some concern was expressed by opponents about noise from the site. Noise testing was done at a similar site which has been fully developed, and it was found to be within acceptable ranges. In addition, the distance between the site and the nearest residential use should adequately mitigate any noise impact from the proposed use. The applicant has also agreed to limit the hours of operation of the car wash (the noisiest portion of the proposed use) to 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM. In addition, the hearings officer has conditioned the approval to require compliance with applicable noise standards. 7. A representative of Canterbury Squire objected to the closure of the south portion of the frontage road before the State of Oregon developed alternate access to their property: they felt that a large number of their customers used the southern frontage road for access. The hearings officer finds 'that there is an alternate access to Canterbury Square through the intersections at highway 99 and Beef Bond Road and Highway 99 at Bull Mountain Road for customers from the south. While those accesses may take a little longer for patrons to negotiate, they are nonetheless protected by turn signals. The hearings officer finds that these alternate accesses are in fact safer than the present crossing pattern at the frontage road and Bull Mountain Road. The hearings officer does not believe that the closure of the south frontage road as part of this development will have a detrimental impact on accaF.s to Canterbury Square. �.• REQQXXEHDA TQN: Based on the findings and conclusions above, the hearings officer recommends approval of CU 87-01 and MLP 87-09, subject to the following conditions: I. The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Oregon State Highway Division to perform work within the right-of- way of the Highway 99 frontage road. A copy of the permit shall be provided to the City engineering office prior to issuance of a public improvement permit. The south frontage road access to Bull Mountain Road shall be eliminated and shall become a dead and road which provides a single access to the Site on the south side of the site and sufficieent room for turning movements of emergency vehicles. The frontage road paving from Bull Mountain Road south to the site access shall be removed and a five foot widea sidewalk shall be constructed from the sites southern-most property line to Bull Mountain Road. 2. Standard half-street improvements (including a full size left turn lane) including concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement and utilities, including sanitary sewer, storm drainage and streetlights, t shall be installed along the Bull Mountain Road frontage. 9 s a 4 t Improvements shall be constructed to major collector street f standards of the City of Tigard and shall conform to the alignment of the existing adjacent improvements. The street Jmprovements shall include a left turn lane on Bull Mountain Road the length of the subject property which shall provide access to both the applicant0s driveway and the future shared access of this site and the adjacent lots to the west. 3. Additional right-o€--way shall be dedicated to the public along the Bull Mountain Road frontage to increase the right- of-way to 33 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the -existing right-of-way centerline. In addition, the applicant shall dedicate sufficient width, to be determined by the City Engineer, on the west side of the site from the frontage road to Hull Mountain Road, to relocate the frontage road to the west side of the property when a shared access for the ad�j oining property is required and the north frontage road is closed. The dedication documents shall be on City forms and shall be approved b the city engineering section. Dedication forms and instructions are available from the Engineering Section. Not later than the time the northern frontage road is closed, the applicant shall develop the relocated frontage road adjacent to its property with not less than two-thirds street improvements and shall be allowed another access to its site from that relocated frontage road. The City Engineor shall require the posting of, a bond or similar assurances providing for completion of the relocated frontage road. If the applicant wishes to develop the relocated Oki; frontage road now, in lieu of the dead-end access on the southern portion of their property, they shall executes a barrier between the relocated frontage road and Dull Mountain Road, until the northern portion of the frontage road in completed, to prevent through traffic at that point.. 4. The applicant shall be allowed a single access to Dull Mountain Road at this time, the location to be approved by the City Engineer. At the time the frontages road to the wast of the property is relocated ,and developed, And the northern frontago road is closed by the State of Oregon, the applicant ,shall have an additional access to the site from the relocated frontage road adjacent to its property. It is the intent of this condition that the relocated frontage road = be developed until the northern portion of the frontage road in closed. S. The applicant shall provide for internal "stacking" of vehicles waiting for service from the site. There shall be r I2 off-site stacking of vehicles awaiting service from the site. 6. A profile of Bull Mountain Road shall be provided from 300 feet west of the site to the east side of Highway 99W. The profile shall show the existing grade of Bull. Mountain ( Road and a future grade that newts Washington County 10 standards for a major collector street. Two-thirds street improvements shall be constructed where a revised vertical alignment is required to meet the current design standards. t,. Two-thirds . street improvements shall include half-street improvements (including a full sized left turn lane) and a 12 foot lane and 3-foot gravel shoulder on the north side of the centerline. The construction of the vertical realignment portion shall be coordinated with the Oregon State Highway Division's Canterbury Square project improvements; i.e. , the elimination of the north frontage read. if the City Engineer determines that grade changes to Bull Mountain Road should not occur until the 'north frontage road approach has been eliminated, then the City Figineer may allow the required street improvements which involve a grade change to be delayed until the Frontage road access has been closed by the state. Prior to allowing such a delay, the City Engineer shall require the posing of a bond or similar assurance providing for completion of the grade change work. 7. The applicant shall provide connections of proposed buildings to the public sanitary sewer system. A connection permit. is required to connect to the existing public aanitary sower system. 8. The applicant shallrovide for roof and parking lot rain drainage to the public storm water draining system to prevent run-off to the adjacent properties. The applicant shall provide a method of transferring' AU storm drainage water from the site to the storm system on Bull Mountain Road. No drainage shall be allowed to flow into the system presently serving the King City area. ' 9. Joint use and maintenance agreement shall be executed and recorded on City standard forms for all common driveways. Agreements shall be referenced , an and become = part of all applicable parcel deeds. The agreement shall be approved by the Engineering section prior to recording. 14. The applicant shall reimburse the City any pormit fees which the city must pay in obtaining permits from Washington County and the Oregon State Highway Division for work required by these conditions. 11., A one-foot reserve strip granted to the City of Tigard shall be provided along the frontages of Bull, Mountain Road, except in tho areas of driveway access. 12. Seven sweats of plan and profile public improvement construction plana and one itemized cons3tructift cost estimate stamped by a registered professional civil engineer detailing all proposed public ioprovementse shall be submitted to the Engineering Section for approval. Two sets of profile plans seshall be submitted for preliminary review prior to submittal of final plans. Construction of the 11 proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Section has approved public improvement plans. The Section will require a 100% performance assurance bond, or a letter of commitment, the payment of a permit fee and a sign installationjstreetlight fee. Also, the executing of a street opening permit for construction compliance agreements shall occur prior to, or concurrently with, the issuance of an approved public improvement plan. 13. The applicant shall comply with all applicable noise standards. Compliance with such standards shall be demonstrated prior to issuance of a building, permit. The car wash shall operate only within the hours of 7:00 A.I . to 10:00 P.M. . 14. The proposed free-standing sign height and size =hall be revised to conform with the Community Development Code requirements. Sign permits shall be obtained from the city prior to installation of any sign. 15. The partition survey and legal descriptions for both parcels shall be submitted for Planning Director approval., prior to recording with Washington County. 16. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final approval date. DATED t li®_g� ,,,day of June, 1.988. APPROVEDt ETM MAS Hearings Officer r 12 BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR) a fuel and convenience business and ) No. CU 87-03 and a car wash on property zoned C-G; j MLP 87-09 Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc.,) Applicant. ) SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The following findings and conclusions were omitted in error from the decision of the hearings officer dated June 13, 1988. These supplemental findings and conclusions are to be included with that decision. Code Sections 18.130 and 16.162 - The criteria of these suctions have been satisfied as the proposal of the applicant has been amended to satisfy the sat-back requirement of the buildin front yard, and as earlier conditioned to require additional vehicle storage to avoid congestion at the driveways or on Bull Mountain Road. There was significant testimony regarding the problem with traffic from the existing north frontage road crossing Bull Mountain Road and proceeding south through than proposal on the second access, or the relocated frontage road as originally proposed by the applicant. The hearings officer was persuaded that if the south frontage's ,road is roloceatead and opened while the north frontage road is still opean, there will be significant pressure from the traffic that presently uses the entire length of the frontaga road to attempt to use the relocated south portion, even if it ne"s driving through a portion of the applicant"s property. if the only access to they south frontages road is from a singles driveway that taken a car through the heart of the propoced development (rather than on the perimeter from a second driveway serving the relocated frontages road) , the hearings officer is convinced that cars coming from the north portion of the frontage road would = attempt to drive through the proposed development. The hearings officer recognizes that cars using the north portion of the frontage road an an outlet from Canterbury Squares may still turn imtt Onto Bull Mountain Road. However, those turning movements are necessary until another outlet for Canterbury Square is developed; triose turner are presently accommodated. The hearings officer does not believe that another outlet on 1 Bull Mountain Road in this location will be sats until the north frontage road can be closed. IF DATED tt i day of J=es 1988. APP D: 'Hearings Officer A ' THIS SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS IS IN ADDITION TO THE FINAL ORDER MAILED 6/13/88. THIS DOES NOT CHANGE THE APPEAL DATE OF JUNE 24t 1988. -s Y f 2 i MITCHELL. LANG & SMITH 4.TTORNCY3 AT LAW CMARLCAL;MRM AAND.►LLA WILCT =000 ONE MAIN PLACE 11C.4TTLt OIIKC .tIC!MItO L.W'" *AV10 A.AM4ROAC� 101?i.W KAIN 8TACCT RC41o[NT RMATNCIC t RCNNOCK OMCCN • PORTMNO/ OREGON 07204 +►Y�Ts o au CDWMD J.AULLNNN- MTIMC.t 0 OILAOY,JA 1001/OLMTM AYCNYC W"jAft"A.M4T4PW OACO*#ATNOLOM[W iiATTiE.MMININOT'ON oOIM'110a WM.KCLLT OLAON- 1SIL.ACTN A 4..MAON TCLCPNONC WNW 721.1011 Mom Qi►4�iN C PC.1NoCK*"CC""AA. C..NoACC M.WCATI/CRAT smucC M.tyNrtC- KATMLCCN i QICrKCWe WNCOLP/CA OPIKC T66"M W TICNAON- IUCNMto A WTMAN ACOMCNT MATNCA:QRYCC M.W Vm .10N.1 INRT.tA"W TMO.tnA 1..CNRIAT AY1TC 140 C04R14 UAYM tY1tK A.AwUCN Kit WCAT 11—ATRCCT SCOTT J,MCTCR •CART M.WC/NFA YANCOUYCR,wA4a1NgTON YR��O DENNIS Q RCTI.OLCA\.11A, KMK 1 ORCCNIKLO 0001 AW.iA-11 MA\TMCW 7 AO`/LE11 AA CNNtL►7 I#►MAo.A 140)1"Ho" MICMACL A Ni}iUAN\ %W"*W onpoQt1w Q LCALIC ANN AYOCWITt 40'm V"Cb1ARQ I.OIMNT- -eMRR,l61 QRK4QM MQ 44FAL W 40"CA MuiwWOM,O.G MPO I� t!>•C.14iR Y.10wrAtVN .000V i.NN NOON ,Mine 21. 1988 SNI q.KT City Recorder City Nall 12755 SW Ash P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE:, Appeal of CU 87-03 and MLP 57-09 Dear City Recorder; Texaco Rafiningtand Marketing, Inc. , understands that NPO 3 has appealed the hearings Officer' s decision in the above-identified proceedings. Texaco wishes to participate in those appeals and wishes also to challenge certain conditions imposed upon Texaco by the Hearings officer. Those conditions would require Texaco to relocate and develop the mouth frontage road and to dedicate land for that purpose. Those conditions are sot forth in paragraphs 3 and ; of the conditions of approval. It is not clear whether Texaco must file a separate appeal and separate fees in order to participate in the appeal and assure that the issue of concern to Texaco is addressed. Based upon two telephone discussions today with Diane Joldeerks of your office, I am filing a separates appeal and enclosing with It a check for $313. 1 was told by Me. Jeldorka that the XPO has requested a transcript fee waiver and that this issue will come before the City Council. I was advised by her, and by Keith Lidera in a prior phone conversation, not to include payment for a transcript at this time, because the fee might be plaid by the NPO or waived by the City Council. Accordingly, no transcript tees are included. If such coasts, in whole or in part, roust be paid by Texaco, please tat mea know at your earliest convenience. V7 truly youre3, Mark J. reeeanf 1 Attorne for Th co cc: Bob Miles John Bingen Vivian Metzger • LAND USE DECISION APPEAL FILING FORM �Y The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate in locMl government. Tigard's Land Use Code therefore sets. .out specific requirements for C11YOFTIOMW filing appeals on certain land use decisions. OREGON The following form has been developed to assist you in filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what filing fees will be required or to answer any questions you have regarding the appeal process. please contact the Planning Division or the City Recorder at 639-4171, 1. APPLICATION BEING APPEALED: CU 87-03 and XLP 87-09 �s 2. MOW DO YOU QUALIFY AS A PARTY: Texaco is the a�Ali_csnt requesting . anj2roval, to davaloeth subject propert . 1. SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR APPEAL OR REVIEW: Texaco concurs with the Boca ai on to approve CU 87-03 and MLP 87-09 yMyg c g,12,g It A$ ..dtY _ and.selornto and AMj2n. th2L1 gii h fon - .T,t2t1d...S.oLj' * G ', -wannd3tien r,f ae�Y�v�] . 4. 6CHCDULED DATE DECISION 10 TO BE FINAL: June 2 4, 1988. S. DATE NOTICE OFA ,D ISION AS GIVEN: June 13 or 14, '1988. 6. SIGNATURE(0): Gam' doll _j _T -- - FOR S/F1 Cid 1!$ ONLY:. Rae vad_8 Date., Time: ' Approved As To Fora By: Data: Timer r Denied As To Form By: Data:,,,,,,,, *sH4xate --------------- lw/4846A 13125 SW Hail Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397.Tigard.Oregon 97223 (603)639-4171- oig Z LAND USE DECISION APPEAL FILING FORM The City of Tigard supports the citizen's right to participate in local government. Tigard's Land Use �+� Code therefore sets out specific requirements for VITY CIF T1 filing appeals on certain land use decisions. OREGON The following fdrm has been developed to assist you in filing an appeal of a land use decision in proper form. To determine what filing fees will be required or to answer any questions you have regarding the appeal process; please contact the Planning Division i or the City Recorder at 639-4171. C 1. APPLICATION BEING APPEALED: CU 87-03 and MLP 87-09 by Texaco ltefining '. and Marketing, Inc., as decided by the Hearings Officer 2. NOW DO YOU QUALIFY AS A PARTY: galb Chri t2 BfdnnrgX4 igmter, and Bob Bladxsoe, Chair:na,a, of NPO # 3• testified in opposition, representing I e # 3. SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR APPEAL OR REVIEW: r PLEASE SEE' THE ATTACHED SKEET. } r r ' 4. SCHEDULED DATE DECISION 19 TO BE FINAL: June 249 1988 } S. DATE NOTICE OF FINAL,DE'CISION WAS GIVEN: June 23, 1988; spp6n4ed June 14, 1988 �y,�� 6, 'SIGNATURES): cf�G.d�_f.. . �a+t��wt♦ e�i� eetFla+�+�i♦e�>Htx� �xace� xe��x��c��t M. OFFICE USE ONLY: Received By: Approved As To Forst By: Date: Time Denied As To Form By: Date: Tiara:______. lw/4846A 13126 SW Holl Blvd.,P.O.Bax?.3397,Tigard,Ore,Oon 97223 (503)639-4171 or— 0 June 13, 1988 z t i By unanimous vote at our meeting on June 13, 1988, Neighborhood Planning Organization, Number Three (NPO #3) is appealing the decision, of the Hearings Officer of June 13, 1988, upon the Conditional Use Permit for the Texaco service station, mini-mart, and car wash. CU 87-03 and MLP 87-09. Specifically we are appealing the lack of a condition requiring the timing of these developments to be contingent upon the concurrent or previous closure of the northern frontage road at its intersection with Hull Mountain Road. As stated by Waahington County staff (in regard to the project to close the northern frontage road) 66 accidents have occurred at thin intersection since 1977--aver one every two months on the average. The addition of Texaco4s traffic before the northern road is closed will compound that danger. Consequontlx, Condition A6 needs to State that the approval is valid only after or concurrent with the closure of the northern frontage road by the County and State. (Start their ono year with the occuranoe of that event.) If this condition cannot be legally imposed, 'then the permit should be denied. The second aspect of thin decision we are appealing is the provision 'In Condition #) (also referenced in Condition #49 and possibly in Condition #9) to relocate the southern frontage road to the west of this project. This decision reflects a choice of Alignment Alternative #39 Figure 12, page, 27 in the December 1987 "Transportation Impact dy Analysis" by Texaco. Rather we believe the southern frontage road should be closed. at the southern part of this project. This is refloated in Alignment Alternative 29 rigure 11, page 26 of the same documents However, we agree that this project should have only one single access to Bull Mountain Road, as specified by the first part of Condition #4. Any, second access should be reserved for the exclusive use of the remainder portion of the property, when it is developed in the future. We approve Condition #2 requiring the left-turn lane and other half- street improvementse Weapprove Condition #30 but wonder how the City will enforce its Condition #6 should be a significant improvement to this dangerous roadway, NPO #3 requests the traditional waiver of fees for an appeal by a NPO. Furthermore, we request the City Council to call up this -y . Y .. decision->tot their direct review+ with-the advice of the Planning Commission, but not an extra hearing with them. Respectfully submitted June 20, 19k8 l Bob Bledsoe, Chairman NPO # 3 , P.S. The additional findings submitted by the gearing) officer on a June 14, 1988 sal' confirm the first aspect of our appeal. MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD. OREGON TO; City Council July I8, 1988 FROM; Keith S. Liden. Senior Planner SUBJECT: Texaco Mediation Meeting On July 14, 1988, the staff sponsored a meeting with both opponents and proponents to the Texaco proposal. The participants were; Ardis Stevenson — Mediator Mark Greenfield — Attorney for Texaco Wayne Kittloson — Traffic Engineer for Texaco Paul Vollmer — Texaco Marketing Rearosentative Gerald Kolve — Canterbury Square Alvin Web — CPO No, 4 Bev Froude — CPO No, 4 Randy Wooley — City Engineer Keith Liden — Senior Planner The group discussed issues raised in the Texaco and NPO #3 appaA!s. Though +t the Cats #4 a4ppoal was not properly submitted and could not be accepted as an Official appeal, the additional issues raised by the CPO were also reviewed, Total consensus was not roachad on any of the issues, however, the nature of tho differences was clarified as a► result of this meeting, SUMMARY OF rS,UCS A. Items wcpp�� } 1. Relocation of south frontage road to the west side of the property (Conditions 3 and 4). — All partias agreed that ultimately the south frontege road should be closod. Gerold Kolve exprassed soma concern regarding access to Cmntarbury Square prior to completion of the ODOT Canterbury Lane/99W. — All parties agreed, with the oxcoption of Gerald Kolvo, that the ralocation of the Louth frontage road to the wait was not desired, Mr. Kolve said that this was contrary to what he undarstood from ODOT and wanted to r+asorv@ judgment until after he has a charica to talk to the State. - t i City Council July 18, 1988 Page Two 2. Number of driveways onto Bull Mountain Road (Condition 4). All Parties acknowledged that if it is assumed that the frontage road is not relocated, two driveway accesses are appropriate, but under different circumstances or timing. Texaco would like two driveways in conjunction with this development with the western driveway intended to serve as a joint access with the parcel to the west, CPO #4 agrees except that the western joint use driveway should not be opened until development occurs on the western parcel. NPA #3 also feels that the second access is not necessary until development occurs to the west but additionally, the NPO indicates that "any second access should be reserved for the exclusive use of the remainder portion of the property.,," 3. Closure of the northern frontage road, — All parties agree that the north frontage road should ultimately be closed, — NPA #3 and CPO #4 feel that both frontage roads should be closed prior to development of the Texaco facility. — All agreed that If Texaco could not develop until the closure of both frontage roads, a development moratorium would essentially be in affect. Staff indicated that if the closure of the north frontage road is made a condition of approval, findings would be necessary to justify this reversal of the Hearings Officer decision, p, A4ciiti2nal hams Noted in the CPA 94 Aooe ; 1. The hours of operation (Condition 11) — The hours of operation for the caarwosh (7 a.m. •- 10 p,m,) earn acceptable to everyone. — CPA #4 is concerned about 24 hour operation of the mini—mart/gas station and suggests limiting hours to the period of 6 a►,m, to I or 2 a.m. Texaco objects and would like to retain the ability to be open 24 hours a they, — Beer and wine sales were noted as a concern by CPO N4. OLCC only allows sale of beer and wine between 7 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. 2. Littering and Vandalism This issue was discussed and Texaco indicated that littering would not occur on its property and that any unauthorized activity on nearby properties would be reported to the police. No consensus was reached regarding additional conditions that might be applied to address this concern. "s City Council July 15, 1988 Page Three l 3, Reduction of Bull Mountain Road Speed limit s` staff n.ited that this cannot be made a condition of approval i because only the State Speed Control Board has jurisdiction to amend posted speed limits. { 4, Ha-ardous Fuel Handling speNo one in the group was char about theChurch, Accesnatus this can be .� concern raised by Christ the King that nished bus in a safe locations. fuel deliveries trucks �are usuallyTexaco made during that i Y the evening or early morning hours, ke/5977A i yap I' I � � TRANSPORTATION J IMPACT ANALYSIS 1 � TEXACO SERVICE STATION Tigard, Oregon l FEBRUARY 1688 � rig?• � IN e TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS for TEXACO SERVICE STATION Pacific Highway and Bull. Mountain Road Tigard, Oregon ,0 PR aS� �cttv,��, 4' ql 11,404 OR 7 Prepared for CAG, Inc 10335 Main St. Suite 6 Bellevue, Washington 00004 Prepared by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 612 SW Broadway Portland, Oregon 97205 (603) 228-5230 February 1988 Project No. 143.00 f t �E 1 i TABLE OF CONTENTS t i INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 i EXISTING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S SURROUNDING LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES TRAFFIC VOLUMES CURRENT LEVELS OF SERVICE TRAFFIC SAFETY CHARACTERISTICS PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACTIVITY TRANSIT SERVICE PLANNED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 DEVELOPMENT PLANS TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION PATTERN ANALYSIS OF ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE SIGHT DISTANCE I EVALUATION OF ACCESS ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS OF LANE STORAGE REQUIREMENTS REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 J Mill . j i FIGURES y 1. Site Vicinity Map. . . . . 2 2. Existing Turning Movement Volumes (p.m. peak hour) 5 3. Annual Number of Accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 I 4. Accident Frequency by Type of Accident . . . . . . . . . 19 5. Comparison of Accident Severity . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 +6. Preliminary Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 ' T. Estimated Trip Distribution Pattern. . . . . . • • . . • 22 s. Alignment Alternative I . ' 9 . . 23 9. Access Locations Alignment Alternative I . . . . . , . . 25 ? 10. Alignment Alternative 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 11 . Access Locations Alignment Alternative 2 . . . . . . . . 27 12. Alignment Alternative 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 13. Site-Generated Traffic Alignment Alternative I (P.M. Peak Hour) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 14 . Site-Generated Traffic Alignment Alternative 2 (P.M. Peak Hour) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 15 . Total Traffic Volumes Alignment Alternative I (P.M. Peak Hour) .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 16. Total Traffic Volumes Alignment Alternative 2 (P.M. Peak Hour) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 i I =Sf- 1 1 1 i 4 TABLES 1. Level of Service Definitions; Signalized 6 Intersections. . . . . . . 2. Level of Service Criteria forSignalized 7 Intersections. • . . i 3. Level. of Service Definitions; Unsignalized 9 Intersections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Level of Service Criteria for Unsignali_ed 10 } Intersections. . . . . . . . . • • . . I 5. Existing Service Levels at k*y Intersections; S (P.M. Peak Hour) . 6. Projected Service Levels at Keys Intersections; Total Traffic (P.M, peak hour) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 i 1 l 1 INTRODUCTION Texaco is planning to construct a new service station at the southwestern corner of pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road in Tigard, Oregon (see Figure I) . This new service station will provide customers with a convenience food store and a car wash 1 facility in addition to gasoline pumps. Kittelson & Associates was retained to analyze the likely traffic operational and safety impacts of the proposed service station on the immediately surrounding street system. This report describes the analysis assumptions, methodology, and results . It is ----concluded that the proposed project-, can be constructed- without significant adverse impacts on the surrounding street system. t 1. 7,��.5��• arm rr _ i.• Nom r> CANTERBURY i N } F 1. lit �7 D• r r•� •ur SITE VICINITY MAP Fli".r r ' ?TEXACO SERVICE STATION December 1; r. . .f n... .. .".1. ....... .�. .A:• ._ .. .L� .l Ti... ..y. .1 .. 1. V ... .5 .. ._.. _ • _ ..v..4. ......}t.f .tf .1. .. .......1 r .. .-,�. .. -• ... ...,.�'�.•,._• 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS SURROUNDING LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES The land area adjacent to the proposed service station consists primarily of commercial establishments. The site of the proposed development is currently zoned industrial/commercial , which j defines the proposal as an allowable use. 1 Pacific Highway (also referred to as Highway 99W) is in most sections a five-lanes divided arterial roadway providing for the north-south movement of traffic between Portland and the ; . southwestern metropolitan area. it consists of two through lanes its each direction of travel plus a center lane reserved for left- -turning traff-ic. ° Pacific Highway is ,a route that is heavily used by commuters during the morning and evening peak hours, and it is characterized by numerous and closely spaced driveways on both sides of the road. Separate exclusive left turn and right turn lanes are provided at most key signalized intersections. The posted speed limit in the vicinity of the site is 40 mph northbound and 45 mph southbound. Bull Mountain Road is a two-way, two-lane collector street that provides access to single family residentl,al areas to the west. 1 In the vicinity of Pacific Highway, it also connects with a frontage road system that provides access to the commercial proportion abutting the west side of Pacific Highway. The 1 intersection of Bull Mountain Road with Pacific Highway in a throe-Seg signalized intersection. At this intersection, Bull Mountain Road intersects Pacific Highway at a skewed angle, and there is a significant upgrade that must be negotiated by vehicles approaching the intersection on Hull Mountain Road. The posted speed limit in the vicinity of the site is 40 mph. TRAFFIC VOLUMES Manual turning movement counts were conducted by Kittelson & Associates in November 1997 at the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road and Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road intersections. The counts were conducted during the following three critical time periods: o Weekday morning peak hour (7:00 - 9:00 a.m. ) Y o weekday evening peak hour (4:00 - 6:00 p.m. ) // 0 Weekend midday period (1 :00 - 3:00 p.m. ) t -3- i These three time periods were selected for Investigation because they represent the time periods when the combination of site- generated and background traffic is likely to be greatest. a An analysis of the data that were collected shows that the heaviest existing traffic volumes at these intersections occur during the weekday evening peal: hour, from 4: 30-5;30 p.m. Figure M shows the existing turning movement patterns at both intersections during this peak time period. In order to assure that worst-case traffic conditions are evaluated, the remainder of this analysis focuses on this peak time period. CURRENT LEVELS OF SERVICE Level of Service (LOS) is a concept developed to Quantify the degree of comfort (including such elements as travel time, number of stops, total amount of stopped delay, and impediments caused by other vehicles) afforded to drivers as they travel through an intersection or roadway segment . Recent research has determined that average stopped delay per vehicle is the best available measure of the LOS at a signalized intersection. As defined within :the 5885 Highway,Capacity Manuel (Ref. 1) , six grades area used to denote the various LOS; these six grades area described qualitatively for signalized intersections in Table I . Additionally, Tables 2 identifies the relationship between level of service and average stopped delay per vehicle. Using this definition, a "D" LOS In generally considered to represent the minimum acceptable design standard. However, both Washington County and the Metropolitan Service District (Metro) have established a policy that also accepts an "E" LOS providing that the "E" LOS does not peraist for more then 20 minutes of the peak hour. For signalized intersections, LOS defines the quality of the y traffic flow, but doers not necessarily describe the overall design adequacy of the Intersection to accommodates the traffic volumes being analyzed . As an example, a good LOS can be achieved even when the volume/capacity ratio for the intersection exceeds 1 .0. Similarly, there are conditions: under which a poor LOS Is achieved even though the volume/capacity ratio for the intersection is well below 1 .0. Therefore, all signalized intersection summary tables contained in this report provide both the calculated LOS and the calculated volume/capacity ratio for each intersection. in this way, the reader is provided with a complete description of the expected operating conditions for each signalized intersection that is analyzed. The calculation of LOS at an unsignalized intersection requires a different approach. The 1385 highway Capacity Manual Includes a methodology for calculating the LOS at two-way stop-controlled _1 NORTH OUu. MOUMTAIN RD ' 1 >..... EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES P.M. PEAK HOUR j lTMCO SEWCE STATION Figure r9 pec�tmber 1987 L. -5- - Table 1 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS (SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS) Level of Sexvice Traffic Flow Characteristics A Very low average stopped delay, less than five seconds per vehicle. This occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase, Most vehicles do not strap at all, Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. S Average stop delay is in the ranges of 5.2 to 15.0 seconds per vehicles. This generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. Marr vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay, 0 �Average stopped delay is in the range of 15.1 to 25,0 seconds per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear in this, level, The numbcar of vehicles stopping is iignifieant at this 'leaves, although many still pass through the intersection without estopping. D Average stopped delays we in the range of 25.1 to 40.0 seconds per vehicle. The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. I Longer delays may result from some cembirustion of unfavorable progzion, long cycle length, or high volume/capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. f: Average stopp&d delays are in the range of 40.1 to 60.0 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. Theme high delay values generally indicate poor progr fon, long cycle lengths, and high volimw/capecity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. F Average stop delay is in excess of 60 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be unacceptable to moat drivers. This condition + often occurs with oversaturation. It may also occur at high volume/capacity ratios below 1.00 with many Individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing causes to such high delay levels. Note: A signal cycle failure is considered to occur when one or more vehicles are forced to wait through more than one green signal indication for a particular approach. -6- i i BMW- 1 i Table 2 1 ' LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Stopped Delay Per Level of Service Vehicle (Sec) ---------------- ----------------- A < 5.0 8 5.1 to 15.0 C 13. 1 to 25.0 D 25. 1 to 40.0 E 40.0 to 60.0 F > 60.0 w www..www I Source: Reference l 1 J , I 1 -7- 1 1 intersections. For these unsignalized intersections. LOS is defined differently than for signalized intersections in that it .pt of "Reserve Capacity" (i.e. , that por- is based upon the conc tiara of available hourly capacity that is not used) . A qualita- tive descriptio intersction is presented in- of the various v Table 3.els associatedA quantita- unsignalized in five definition of LOS for an unsignalized interSecrta � sented in Table 4. The reserve capacity concept appliesonly nts. once an individual traffic all the individual movemen s has been vement or to shared lane ecalculated 1 the capacity of and their LOS and expected delays determi Normally Vethelmovement tion of the intersection can be made. having the worst LOS defines them overall evaluation., but this may be tempered by engineering Past experience with the unsignalized analysis procedure indi- cates that this methodology is very conservative in that it tends to overestimate the magnitude of any potential problems that might exist- Therefore, the results of any unsignalized inter- section analysis should canslde�rcd to ed with het acceptablea s thought in for inan 1 Generally , LOS E unsignalized intersection, although it investigated. indicates that the I need for signalization should be i All LOS analyses described in this report were performed in accordant e with the procedures in dproject escribedfil* sand areieavailable I analysis forms are c In order this for review upon request. co condi theassure peakh15 minutenperiod is based upon wore ask hour was used in the evaluation flow rate during the evening P levels of service sis of all intersection to occur for ei5 minutes reflects conditions that are only likely ekda out of each ave:rage weekda . For the remainder of w�kends and throughout the , traffic conditions withincthefestudy j impact area are likely to be better than that described in this report. Table 5 summarizes the results of the intersection rsection Ouwithinthe tions for the existing conditionsat key period. study are during the evening pons Table 6 Existing Service Levels at Key Interne etionts: (P.M. Peak Hour) 1 ginsignalizd 1 Signalized Intersection Intersection 4 ---Ave. Veh. V/C Reserve JI LOS Delay(Sec) Ratio LOS Capacity Intersection - ---_--_ ----- --- -------- P;;ific-xwy/Bull Mt. Rd B 1O.4 .58 C 208 Bull Mt. Rd/Frontage Rd 1 Table 3 GENERAL LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LOS General Description •- ------- - -----------�-----�-------------- ------------------ A - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 0 i and 10 seconds - Nearly all drivers find freedom of operation - Very seldom is there more than one vehicle in j the queue i 8 - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 10 - and 20 seconds Some drivers begin to consider the delay an Inconvenience - Occasionally there is more than one vehicle in the queue C - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 20 ' and 30 seconds - Many times there is more than one vehicle in the 'queue Most drivers feel restricted , but not objectionably so D - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 30 and 40 seconds - Often there is more than one vehicle in the queue - Drivers feel quite restricted R - Represents a condition in which the demand is near or *qual to the probable maximum number of vehicles that can be accommodated by the J movement - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 40 1 and 60 seconds - . . There is almost always more than one vehicle In the queue - Drivers find the delays to be approaching Intolerable levels F - Forced flow 1 - Represents an intersection failure condition that Is caused by geometric and/or operational constraints external to the Intersection .. -9- 1 i Table 3 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA for UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Reserve Capacity Level of Expected Delay to (pcph'_--_ Service- Minor Street Traffic _-_w !_, - >400 A Little or no delay 300-399 B Short traffic delays 300-299 C Average traffic delays 100-199 D Long traffic delays 0- 99 , E Very long traffic delays When demand volume ox'coeds the capacity Of the lane, extreme delays will be encountered with queuing which may cause severe n. IcThisaconditioneusuallytwarrants rimprovement ic stonthe Qintersection. Source : Transportation Research Board . "Highway Capacity Manual" . Special Report 209 (1985) l .J I 1 l .� -20- 1 As this table indicates, both intersections are currently operating at acceptable service levels. 7 TRAFFIC SAFETY CHARACTERISTICS In order to evaluate existing accident patterns near the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road intersection, a review was conducted of accident records maintained by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) . A detailed summary was prepared of all reported accidents in the vicinity of this intersection for the time period between 1984 and 1986. These reported accidents were then stratified by a variety of key attributes in order to develop an overview of existing accident characteristics. Figure 9 provides a stratification of the reported accidents at the intersections of Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road and Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road according to the your in which they 1 occurred', and shows the -highest number -of, accidents occurred in 1905, with only a slight increase from the number of accidents that occurred In 1984 and 1986. In 2985, which is the year with the highest number of accidents, the intersection accident rates were estimated to be 0.7 accidents per million entering vehicles at Pacific Hwy/Bull Mountain Road, and 1 .5 accidents per million entering vehicles at Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road. Although IC. several factors must be- taken into consideration when evaluating the accident history at intersections (including accident types and accident severity ) , rates in the range of 1 . 5 to 2 . 0 accidents per million entering vehicles appear to be typical for Intersections in the Portland urban area. Figure 4 provides a stratification of reported accidents by the type of accident, and shows that rear-end accidents constitutes the majority of all accidents that have occurred at the intersection of Pacific Highway/null Mountain Road. This is a typical finding for signalized intersections with fairly high approach speeds . At the intersection of Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road, the only reported accidents have been angle and turning movement accidents . Again , this is an expected observation, given the current operational characteristics of the Intersection. Figure 8 provides a stratification of reported accidents according to the severity of the accidents. As shown in the figure, the majority of accidents at the Intersection of Pacific 1 Hwy/Bull Mountain Road have been injury accidents. At the Intersection of Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road there has been a slightly higher number property damage only (PDO) accidents than Injury accidents. These findings reflect the effects of higher Milli { PACIFIC HWY/BULL MOUNTAIN RD s 4 a 2 i 1 1064 1 DO less 0 BUu. FOUNTAIN ROAD/FRONTAGE ROAD 1 4 1 3 2 i a 1084 1066 1066 1 1 ANNUAL NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS Ron TEXACO SER`✓ICE STATION I1 11 figura December 1387 3 143F003 -12- g PACIFIC HWIY/BULL MOUNTAIN RD S 4 3 2 1984 1083 1936 REAR-END MOLE o BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD/FRONTAGE ROAD s 1 4 3 .l 2 1 0 1984 1983 1986 } ANGLE 'TURNING MOVEMENT C ACCIDENT TYPE w TEXACO SERVICE STATION Figure December 1987 4� oos -13- z»±� - /§ - � \ �� ' ; , . � . . , . , r - ■ • , �� ':\ �\ ■ � _ _ - - - � ■ , , • ■ 2 :/ § , i-7 \� myy � �d\ travel speeds on accident severity. It should be noted that there have been no reported fatalities at either location during the three-year period that was investigated. It is not expected that development of this site will adversely affect the traffic safety characteristics of the surrounding ! street system. Some increase in the total number of accidents within the study area may occur, but this is likely to be due more to the increased amount of driving time exposure than to a change in the degree of hazard. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACTIVITY Field observations of the study site during the peak one hour period showed relatively little pedestrian or bicycle activity on the immediate study area streets. Pacific Highway does have an on-street bike lana and a sidewalk on the western side of the street . it is expected that this development will have a negligible effect on these travel modes. TRANST.JSERVICE }Pus transit service is provided along Pacific Highway by the Tri- County Metropolitan Transit Agency (Tri-Met) . Specifically, Sus Route No . 12 provides weekday and weekend service from Sherwood/icing City to downtown Portland. This service is provided at 10-30 minute headways during weekdays, and 60 minute headways during weekends. ror the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that there is no potential for site-generated person trips to be made via transit. The services being offered by the proposed Texaco service station focus almost ;exclusively on the needs of persons who are driving autr):nobiles. While it is possible that soma of the person trips to and from the planned convenience food store will be made by transit, this is not considered to be a significant percentage of the total site-generated traffic. } E i t PLANNED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS i The Oregon Department of Transportation has recently put forth f plans for modifying the existing frontage road access system on the north side of Bull Mountain Road. The modification would consist of vacating the Frontage Road from 112th Ave to Bull Mountain Road, leaving only the south leg of the Frontage Road intersecting with Buil Mountain Road. Construction of this is scheduled to begin within the next five years. No other roadway improvement projects that might have an effect on traffic operations and safety characteristics within the study area are currently being planned. i Ic ' l ON IMMUNE IN l 1 .� -16- I TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 1 The evening weekday peak hour impact of traffic generated by the proposed development was analyzed as follows: o The placement and size of the planned Texaco service i station were confirmed. o Background traffic volumes on each key road segment within the study area were developed based on 1 Washington County ' s Department of Land Use and Transportation ' s estimate of in-process traffic volumes. l o The regional market area -relative to major feeder I highways was examined to obtain an estimate of trip distribution patterns within the study area, o Site-generated traffic predicted for the weekday evening peak period of 4:30 - 5:30 p.m. was assigned to the highway network and added to background traffic volumes. o Traffic demands on each roadway facility were analyzed to identify any capacity or level of service deficiencies. o Alternative alignment/access configurations were evaluated in order to address issues raised by Washington County and the Oregon Department of Transportation during an overview meeting held at the outset of the Investigation. i o A special analysis was conducted to determine intersection and stopping sight distance at both proposed access locations. A detailed discussion of the analysis methodology and results Is contained in the remainder of this section. DEVELOPMENT PLANS Texaco Is planning to construct a new service station at the 9 southwestern corner of Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road in J Tigard, Oregon. This new service station will provide customers with a convenience food store and a car wash facility In addition -17- i { i to gasoline pumps. Figure b illustrates the proposed preliminary site plan for the service station. t TRIP GENERATION Because the assumed trip generation characteristics represent the basis for the entire traffic impact analysis that follows , special care has been taken to ensure the reasonableness of these estimates. There are two ways to obtain estimates of the trip generation characteristics of land uses. One way is to make e estimates based on empirical observations for similar land uses located throughout the United States . Most empirical observations are summarized in a standard reference manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. When feasible, a more accurate method is to conduct surveys of similar Iland uses within the general area of the proposed development. y nall sis of Tari p_TyRes In evaluating the traffic impacts of the proposed development on the surrounding street system, it is important to realize that I for developments such as the one being proposed , there are different types of veY jcle trips , and that, each type has a different effect on the street system. Generally, there are three basic types of trips associated with any retail/commercial development, which can be described as follows: -ii Trips -- These trips already exist on the l roadways that provide primary access to the new 1 development, and are being made for some other purpose ( for example , home-to-work) . Drop-in trips do not result in any increase in background traffic volumes within the study area. in fact, the only impact of these drop-in trips occurs at the site driveway(s), where they become turning movements into and out of the proposed development instead of through movements . Therefore, drop-in trips have no additional effect on the road system beyond the development's driveways. 2. Diverted Tri -- These trips are currently being drawn to other commercial activities that compete with the proposed development , but are redirected to the new store when it opens. This redirection usually occurs because of an improvement in customer convenience and proximity for the affected drivers;;. Diverted trip* will result in an increase in traffic volumes; within the immediate vicinity of the site, but will also result In a decrease in traffic volumes at other locations within the area (i.e. , In areas where they used to shop) . Therefore, this component of the total generated demand causes no change in the total number ,- 1 Jr r 4 I1 ,�'°�•s's . w tKXACO wA rwwrr,wtlrrv��lo�a r«wr..rs .r.sa,r.ncrn—nre+ PREUMINARY SITE PUN 01gure TEXACO SERVICE STATION [Docenow 190-f —19— S of vehicle trips within the area, even though it may add to the number of trips within the immediate vicinity of the site. Another side benefit is that by i diverting, these trips often cause a net reduction in total vehicle miles traveled on the areawide transpor- tation system. This is a common sense observation, tsince it is difficult to imagine that many drivers would divert to a new location in order to travel a greater distance than they did previously. 9, New Trips -- These retail trips would not have been made without the existence of the proposed development. Therefore, this is the only trip type that results in an !ncrease in the total number of vehicle trips made within the area. These are also the only vehicle trips that represent additional vehicle miles of gravel on the areawide transportation system. Although traffic engineers have long recognized the existence of these three different types of retail trips, very little research has b4an conducted to determine what proportion of the total development-generated traffic demand can be attributed to each of these trip types. Because this issuer is critical in determining the likely traffic impacts of the proposed development , Kitteison & Associates has conducted as, special analysis to better define the probable breakdown of site-generated vehicle trips among these three categories. Due to the limited amount of published empirical data available for this particular land use, a survey was conducted by Kittelson & Associates of 296 patrons at an identical Texaco gas/mini- market/car wash facility located in the Portland area along 92nd Avenue . Within the vicinity of this existing Texaco service station, 62nd Avenue is an arterial with physical and operating characteristics very similar to Pacific Highway. As a result of the survey, the following breakdown of trips during the p.m. peak hour was obtained e Now Tripes: 6 percent Diverted Trips: 26 percent Drop-in Trips: 613 percent The results of the survey indicated that the facility generated approximately 40 Inbound tripes and 40 outbound trips during the p.m. peak hour. Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis it has been assumed that the proposed Texaco will also generate 40 Inbound and 40 outbound tripes during the p.m. peak hour . Consistent with the findings of the field survey, it was also assumed that 65 percent of the total site-generated trip ends can i be classified as drop-in trips. J � -20- ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUTION PATTERN I I The distribulon of site-generated trips onto the existing roadway system within the study Impact area was estimated through examination of the market area relative to major feeder highways, as well as through an examination of the existing movement of traffic within the vicinity of the site. j It is believed that the distribution shown in Figure 7 represents a best estimate based upon available knowledge of existing and future conditions, i ANALYSIS OF ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES As part of this investigation a number of different alignment/access configurations ware evaluated in order to , i address issues raised by Washington County and the Oregon Department of Transportation during an overview meeting hold at the outset of the investigation . The following are than alternatives that are addressed in this report; o Alignment Alt,e rinsative I - Vacating the Frontage Road north of bull Mountain Road to 112th Avenue, leaving only the south leg of the Frontage Road. This can also I be considered' to be the No-Build alternative, since this vacation is already planned as part of the ODOT reconstruction project identified earlier. o "gD1npa A ter vg Constructing a cul-de_sac on the Frontage Road just south of the proposed site, and vacating the Frontage Road from just south of the site to 122th Ava . Thin alternative eliminates that interoection of the Frontage ;toad with Bull Mountain Road. o Alignment Aiterpativ0 3____,Vacating the Frontage Road north of 8u11 Mountain Road to 112th Avenue , and realigning that Frontage Road south of Bull Mountain Road to an internection approximately 200 feet West of the existing intersection. i A discussion of the each of the alternatives is contained in the following paragraphs. Al ianment_Al ternat 3_v_e_1 1 Alignment Alternative 1, shown conceptually in Figure 8, Is the same as the existing roadway configuration without the north leg of the Frontage Road. Due to the reduction in the number of -21- Hilll NORTH AW t' IWLL MOUNTAIN RD 4•• 25% 0000 .S' b+fier. ! ` >' 4: + :n. �.':. l... , DISTRIBUTION PATTER ...j Figure December 1987 ....i1.._..:.). ..1........ ,....Y � ..,. e. r-.. ;....1`.:s . ..<.r�., ,.... .Y`. f.L ....I J .i....._. .. ,...:rY .}.. ..5 . }✓,.�. 1 x�.'. 3 ?.. ,i 5t ; . ..t .r,.M l.. F �' ♦,.�:..�.1 ..._•1 n ...vn t. .. r. ..x.. i I - 1 NORTH 1 AW I BULL MOUNUN RA ' ,.. .;: ,.. .. ,.r.1.1 r.ns• . .� .., J ..t,r1• •fssllr•..s.,.s 11.�� .1.f.1 a,.,rffrll. .f,s1f•.ls l.ar)f,l 1aa1/1 a,.a,f 1111, .111.f1 r11 a1 a1r s,. 1•x.11,1 a 1ss1111 )11.r.1•s.1.1•I, f+ 11)1x111.11.1x1 r1s111 r1.,s 1a I)•a)1.•/lax 1 I 1 1,•• .11)x.111I,.11r s11 11• .I• 11 0. l � l ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE 1 TEXACO SERVICE STATION Figure December 1987 8 _� -23- E I potential conflicts and the reduction in volume, the resulting three-legged Intersection should operate more efficiently and j with significantly less accident potential. The proposed access 1 locations for this alternative are shown schematically in { Figure 9. 1 Alignment Alternative 2 i Due to the limited number of vehicles that currently use the southern leg of the Frontage Road, an alternative that would eliminate the intersection of the Frontage Road with Bull Mountain Road was examined, Alternative 2, shown conceptually in Figure 10, would consist of constructing a cul-de--sac on the Frontage Road at the southern end of the site. The Frontage Road would then be vacated from the cul-de-sac to 112th Avenue, This alternative eliminates all potential safety concerns and stacking distance problems at the Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road Intersection , The proposed access locations for this alternative are shown schematically in Figure ii , 1 Alignment Alternative 3 Alternative 3, shown conceptumlly in Figure 12, would consist of ' realigning than Frontage Road to the west of the existing intersection with Bull Mountain Road , The north leg of the Frontage Road would again be vacated to 312th Avenue. As shown In Figure 12, the realignment of the Frontage Road would bisect the proposed site. The realignment would most likely reduce the accident potential at the Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road intersection, and would also solve the existing stacking distance problem . However , this alternative bisects the site and therefore is not compatible with the existing land use proposal . Since other alignment alternativeo have already been identified that have the same traffic safety and operational benefits of Alignment Alternative 3 without bisecting the site , this alignment alternative is discounted from further consideration ? throughout the remainder of this report. l INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE t Using the estimated trip distribution pattern shown in Figure T, the anticipated site-generated traffic was assigned to the 1 various access locations under Alternatives 1 and 2 (See Figures 13 and 14) . The site-generated traffic was then added to the estimated background traffic for each alternative. Background } traffic volume estimates were obtained by combining existing i traffic with projections provided by Washington County' s Department of Land Use and Transportation regarding the in- process traffic within the study area. The resulting total -24- F l ' NORTH 1 4 I � I 9U1j. moUNTAIN RD .... ..:::......:.:.....:: :•::�:�:•SITE, �:;�:::� ........... ... ............ .... ... a l ACCESS LOCATIONS ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE 1 TEXACO SERVICE STATION Figure i December 1987 1 -25- F� 'a t, ,fir•:' a t .V NORTH i I � ''2N •+►r 1 8U4.L WouNTA1N RD :.: :.. ,�. •:;. ;...... � ':;:: •,SITE'::•:�:•::• 4 1 1 ACCESS LOCATIONS ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE 2 [TEXACO SERVICE STATION figure December 1987 143MI l -27- i NORTH ze 11 AUF l 1 • BULL. MOUNTAIN RD .,. I � 1 � 1 � i l C ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE 3 TEXACO SERVICE STATION Figure December 1887 12 143FO12 -28- ZZ71 19M, i NORTH P 1� w ,0.4 wit A P P P '•w1 1 ' (r DULLMWNT#AN Rd , ' ;.; ;;; \ ;. t 23 WOOD • a... tta 4 SITE--GENERATED TRAFFIC f ALTERNATIVE 1 TEXACO SERVICE STMON Figura Bpi December 1987 13 -29- C NORTH 0 Y1 N 1 SUtL 10 ... .:.: ... ... ..... �:::;::'SITE;;.•:;:,•: 1 .,..rs.... . r . .... u s s,.: . .'.s. ,..... .,,r.r. .. sa.r..a ; :r ... a SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC ( ALTERNATIVE 2 TEXACO SERVICE STATION Figure De�Cernbear 987 4 IM j , ♦ . J1 -30- 1 traffic volumes (site-generated plus background) are shown in Figures 15 and 16, respectively. Table 6 summarizes the resulting LOS analysis at all key intersections for each alternative during the evening peak hour. 1 As shown in the table, all key Intersections are expected to J operate at acceptable service levels. I SIGHT DISTANCE A field survey of the proposed sight was conducted to determine the required intersection and stopping sight distance. Sight distance measurements as well as measurements of speed were taken at key points in relationship to the various site access .locations. The following paragraphs summarize the results of this survey. IIntersection Sight Distance Washington County' s minimum design requirements call for an Intersection sight distance at each unsignalized intersection that is.equal to or greater than ten times the approach speed ( in miles per hour) of oncoming cars traveling at the 85th percentile speed. Based on this standard, it was determined that 250 feet lof intersection sight distance is required to the east of the easternmost access and 400 feet to the west of the westernmost access, In all cases, Intersection sight distance at the access 1 locations either meets or exceeds this county standard . 5too2109 I Plain Following national guidelines developed by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and adopted by Washington County, the required stopping sight distance was computed to be 164 feet from the east of the easternmost access and 346 feet from the west of the westernmost access. The currently available stopping might distance exceeds theses requirements at all accena locations. EVALUATION- OF-ACCESS ALTERNATIVES Current development plans call for two access drives onto Bull Mountain Road located approximately 50 feet apart. if the projected turning movements were relatively high, this close ' spacing could cause possible safety problems due to conflicting ] turning movements. For this site, the projected conflicting 1! turning movements are quite low, and thus the potential for accidents due to this conflict is expected to be minimal . :� -31- "i 1 r i NORTH I o t t Atm J �T 103 0«� w 025 310••ri 4ww 41 D ......,,,,.:.'. ... .>, a TOTAL TRAFFI 0 VOLUMES ALTERNATIVE 1 P.M. PEAK kc!!,o CO SERVICE STAMON Fure rner 987 15 -32- 9 f ' { f NORTH E � AVE r� H Arlo15 s N N r�► � r� ®tJ1l. MwtiTNN RD 1 .....................• 040-410 i i TOTAL TRAFFIC YOLUMES r ALTERNATIVE 2 P.M. PEAK TEXACO SERVICE STATION FigurWIWI December- 1987 1 6 IN 143MIS -33- I I Table 6 Estimated Service Levels at Key Intersections: . (Background plus Site-generated) P.M. Peak Hour i Unsignalized Signalized Intersection Intersection ----------------------- ------------ Ave. Veh. V/C Reserve Intersection LOS Delay(Sec) Ratio LOS Capacity ------------ --- ---------- ----- ---- -------- j Al 2nment Alternative 1 : Pacific Hwy/Buil Mt. Rd , B 13.6 .62 - --- Bull Mt. Rd/Frontsago Rd - --- --- A 400+ jbull Mt, Rd/East Access , - -- -__ A 400+ 1 Bull Mt. Rd/West Access - ---- --- A 400+ - Pacific Hwy/Bull Mt. Rd ' B 14. 2 .64 --- 1 Bull Mt. Rd/East Access - ---- --- A 400+ Bull Mt. Rd/West Accessi - ---- --- A 400+ l I 1 1 1 -34- It should be noted, however, that the current access drive for the adjacent western property is within 100 feet of the site's westernmost access. This close proximity increases the potential for conflicting turning movements between the two access 1 driveways. Therefore, the preferred access configuration would be to make the site's westernmost access a shared access with the adjacent property to the west. The result would increase the distance between access locations and would reduce the potential for conflicting turning movements, thus enhancing the overall safety and operational characteristics of all the access locations. ANALYSIS OF LANE STORAGE R,EgiUIREMENTS A special analysis was conducted of the lone storage requirements under ultimate development for the section of Bull Mountain Road between the intersection with HiS7hway 99W And the easternmost site access drive. This- analysis was conducted to anoural khat � T adequwto room is available for storing queued vehicles without blocking either the site's access drive or the Bull Mountain Road/Highway 99W intersection. In order to assure a realistic analysis, the following assumptions were employed: o Vehicle arrival patterns can be approximated by as Poisson distribution based on the average vehicle arrival rate. o Each queued vehicle requires an average storage length 1 of 25 feet. o Average cycle lengths at the signalized intersection of Highway 99W and Bull Mountain Road will approximate 120 seconds during the morning peak hour and 140 seconds during the evening peak hour. Based on theses assumptions, it was calculated that there will be a 72 percent probability that an eastbound standing queue on Buil Mountain Road will extend past the .Frontage Road during any single signal cycle in the morning peak hour. Similarly, there Is a 42 percent probability that an eastbound standing queue will extend past the Frontage Road during any single signal cycle in the evening peak hour. With respect to the easternmost site access drive , the calculated probabilities for such blockages drop to 12 percent and i percent during the morning and evening peak hours;, respectively. it is important to note that the calculation results described above focus on the probability of blockages during the course of a signal cycle, and thla Is not the same as the probability of a f blockage at any given instant in time. A more refined analysis ,{ -35- reveals that while the queues may back up past the proposed site access for 12 percent of the morning peak hour cycles, the access Is actually only blocked during a portion of these cycles (vi=. , at the end of the red interval and at the beginning of the green hour interval) . Thus, the total percentage of the morning p schen the access drive is expected to be blocked by an eastbound standing or moving queue is calculated to be 4.6 percent (i.e. , about 160 seconds) , Additionally, it should be noted that during the a.m. peak hour, only seven vehicles are expected to make a left turn into the site's easternmost access drive from 8u11 Mountain Road. Thus, the probability that a vehicle will be waiting to make a left turn into the site at * same eastbou d queuethe access drive I is less than one blocked by a standing or moving percent. Therefore, it is concluded that available left turn stacking efficient operation of the road systemlow for the safe and under projected typical weekday operation morning and evening peak hour conditions. I l J 4 l • -36- y 1 i � 1 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS `r 1 It is concluded that the proposed project can be constructed without significant adverse impacts on the surrounding street 1 system. With regard to alignment alternatives 1 and 2, the following summarizes the analysis findings: I 1) Acceptable intersection LOS can be maintained at all key intersections within the study area under either alignment alternative. 2) Both alignment alternatives are likely to result in a significant Improvement in traffic safety characteristics within the site vicinity relative to misting and historic patterns. 3) Alternatives 2 results in significantly less potential for traffic safety or stacking distance problems than does Alternative 1. 4) Serious consideration should be given to modifying the l currently proposed access design so as to convert the i westernmost access drive on Bull Mo.ntain Road into a shared access 'with the adjacent property to the west. I 1 ,1 I 1 l -37- 3 _ r REFERENCES 1. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual. Special Report Number 209 (1985) 2. Tri -Met. Transportation & Guide Map. September 1986. ) U i 1 1 l a1y —38— . J STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 2'1 March 24, 1968 - 7:00 P.M. TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER TIGAFD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD. OREGON 97223 , A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Conditional Use No. CU 67-03 and Minor Land Partition, MLP 87-09 REQUEST: To construct a vehicle fuel and convenience sales business and a car wash. Also requesting a minor land partition to divide this 1.54 acre parcel into two parcels of 38,466 and 28,533 square feet each.' COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial ZONING DESIGNATION: C-C (General Commercial) APPLICANT: Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc. OWNER: Robert C. Wyatt 10602 NE 38th Place PO Box 3521 Kirkland, WA 98033 �a Simi Valley, CA 93063 LOCATION: 11190 SW gull Mountain Road, Washington County Tax Map 281 IOAC, Tax Lot 1100 2. $'.aASk9rggrA Jn font=ti9J3 The property was originally dgveloped for use as a restaurant &rid in 190s the City approved a car sales business (File No. SDR 15-65). This use has apparently been discontinued and the property is now vacant. a 1. yici,Q��v tnforraation ' The property is located at the southwest corner of Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road. Pacific Highway is an arterial street which is under the jurisdiction of the State Highway Division and Bull Mountsin Road is a major collector and it is a Washington County thoroughfare. A frontage road, under State jurisdiction, which runs botwoen Hull Mountain Road and Beat Bond Road lies between the subject property and Pacific Highway. A vacant property located to the south and west is zoned C-P (Commercial Professional) and Christ the King Church which is located on the north side of Dull Mountain Road is zoned C-G. r STAFF REPORT -- 2.1 -• PAGE 1 tJ MEN M, 1 4. Site Information and proposal Description Past use of the property has left a paved parking area and a building, which was formerly a restaurant, that is located on the west side of the subject property. There is one driveway entrance onto Bull Mountain Road and' one additional entrance on the frontage road. As noted above. the property will be divided into two parcels of 38.468 and 24.532 square feet each. The existing building will be located on the smaller westerd parcel and the proposed vehicle fuel sales. convenience mart, and car wash will be located on the larger pt rcel, The proposed site pJAn includes two driveway entrances onto Bull Mountain Road and one ariveway entrance on the frontage road. The convenience mart and gas station will be located in the northern portion of the property with tho scar wash to the south. Landscapirtg, including deciduous trees and low lying vagatation, will be located around the perimeter of tM new project. The applicant is also proposing to locate one free-standing sign of an unspecified height, which exceeds 80 square feet per side, at the northeast corner of the property. An amended use and site place has not been proposed for the existing building located on the smallor parcel and in fact the site ffi - plan for the gas station and 1convanionce store virtually ignores•-the-- - issue ,of access for this building. Np0 Cammentl The Building inspection DYvision, Tigard Water District, Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District, and PGE have no objaetions to the proposal. • GTE staff notes that the customer should contact their office to design an entrance pipe until they identify a point of access for telephone and they suggest that the applicant Contact Sue Douglas at 620-7332. The Engineering Division has the following comnwnts: 1. Texaco is proposing to construct a gasoline sales mini mart and car wash at the southwest corner of Bull Mountain Road and the Hwy. 99W ` frontage road. The submitted plans show the station to have two accesses onto Buil Mountain Road, and one access onto the frontage road between Beef Bend and Bull Mountain Road. I 2. Bull Mountain Road is currently under the jurisdiction of Washington ' County. Tho"frontage road is currently under the jurisdiction of the Oregon State Highway Division, t J. The Oregon Stater Highway Division is currently' designing and will be constructing the Canterbury Road improvement Project schodulad for 1989. As part of the project, the Oregon State Highway Division proposes to oliminato the north frontage road from Buil Mountain Road north to 112th towards Canterbury Square. STAFF REPORT — 2.1 r PACE 2 j 4. A Transportation Impact Analysis Report prepared by Wayne Kittelson S Associates was initially submitted in December. 1987, and a revised report was resubmitted in February. 1988 at the request of ' Washington County. The report evaluated the impact of the gas station on Bull Mountain Road traffic. 5. As reported in the Transportation Impact Analysis Report, safety has been a concern at the intersection of Bull Mountain Road and the Highway 99W frontage roads. The Oregon State Highway Division proposal to eliminate the north frontage road will eliminate a mayor portion of the safety concerns. The transportation report also discusses an alternate to eliminate the south frontage road access. The elimination of the frontage road connections to Bull Mountain � Road appears to eliminate the major source of the safety concerns, 6. A letter from Lee Gunderson, the Assistant District Maintenance } Supervisor for the Oregon State Highway Division, dated September :9, 2987, addressed the necessity to eliminate the northern approach of the frontage road, and to relocate the southern approach to the west or Cull Mountain Road. A subsequent letter from Lee Gunderson a dated March 10, 1988, stated that the Oregon State Highway Division would support the removal of the south lag sof the frontage road, and ,.it-would be a benefit to the Bull Mountain/Highway 99W intersection, 7. Daryl Steffan, Washington County Transportation Analyst, reviewed f the Transportation Impact Analysis Report and provided a letter 'dated February 2p, 1988, to the City ' with his findings and recommendations. A' copy of the letter is attached. His findings and recommendations are as follows: FindiMs by Q^rvl Steffan: A. A left turn lana is not warranted on bull Mountain Road,at the site's access point. D. Sufficient stacking distance is available between Pacific Highway and the site's proposed east access point, stackir>g distance exceeds AASKO racommendations, C. Adequate sight distance is available at both proposed points. D. Elimination of the south lag of the frontage road at Bull Mountain Road would significantly improve operational safety at the intersection. E. Eliminating tte proposed wast access onto Bull Mountain Road and providing access through the devolopmant ut a shared access with the property adjacent to and west of this site would significantly improve operational safety at the intersection, f STAFF REPORT = 2.1 — pAGE 3 > i F. Bull Mountain Road is a County major collector. Ultimate section identified in the county Transportation Plan is three lanes without bike lanes. Right-of-way necessary for ultimate section is 33 feet from centerline. G. Sidewalks' are necessary for safe pedestrian traffic across frontage.'. Re ommendations by Daryl Steffan: A. Provide access with one new access onto Bull Mountain'Road (east access) and through development of a shared access with the property adjacent to and west of this site (west access), Alternative access schemes are showy: in Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 enclosed, All alternatives are expected to provided an acceptable level of safety, Alternative A shows the east access point as proposed in the site plan and a shared access at the existing curb cut. Alternative D is preferred over Alternative A as it provides 100 fleet separation between the church access and the shared access. Alternative C is also preferred over Alternative A as it eliminates off-set driveways and provides - 100 feet separation between driveways, D. " Eliminate the south leg of the frontage road at Dull Mountain Road if consistent with the City's success and circulation plan ., for lots in the vicinity. C. Dedicate additional right-of-way to provide 11 feet from centerline on Dull�Mountain Road frontage. D. Establish a one foot. non-access reserve strip on Dull Mountain Road frontage except at driveway location. E, Half street construction along Dull Mountain Road frontage; Washington County standard section designation C-1. F. Lighting (illumination) at access points. 6. The Washington County C-1 designation has a required paved width of 42 foot and does not include a bike lane. g. The Tigard area podestrian/bikepath map identifies Dull Mountain Road as an extension of the Tigard local bikepath system. Dull Mountain Road is classified as a major collector street on the City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map. The City of Tigard's requirement for a major collector road is 44 foot pavement width, On City streets, where travel speeds are typically lower than on County roads, we usually mark traffic lanes with less width than the county C-1 standards. In the City, the 44-foot major collector street standard is usually wide onough to allow markiraj at bicycles lane on both sides of the stroot. STAFF REPORT - 2.1 - PAGE 4 10. The south Highway 99W frontage road currently has three properties with frontage. All three have alternate access from either Bull Mountain Road or Beef Bend Road. 11. From my review of the Transportation Impact Analysis and the cements from Washington County and Oregon State Highway Division ,staff, it appears that traffic safety and capacity are best provided if the south frontage road is eliminated as indicated in Alternate 2 in the Transportation Analysis, and if driveways are located as in Alternate C in the February 29. 1988 letter from Daryl Steffan. 12. Bull Mountain Road currently has a steep approach to Highway 99W. We expect that the approach would be rebuilt in the future when Bull Mountain Road is fully improved. It may not be feasible to reconstruct this portion of Bull Mountain Road until after the north frontage road is eliminated as part of the Oregon State Highway Division's Canterbury Project as a substantial grade change will be required to reduce the steep approach to Highway 99W. 13, In order for the City to approve access onto Bull Mountain Road. the City will need to obtain permit approval from Washington County, 14 The.gas station. mini-Quart and car wash propose!,will be required to have sanitary sewer service and a store drainage plan for disposal of run-off to the public storm drainage and sanitary sower systems. No additional comments ,have boon received. 9. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Analysis and conclusions: The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 5.1.4, 7.1.2, 7,2.1, 7,3.1. 7.6.1. 8.1.1, 8.1.2, and 8.1.1, and Community Developikent Code Chapters',18.62. 18.100, 19.102, 18.106, 18.108, 18.114, 11.130. Since traffic impact is a major issue in this case, 'traffic impact as well as the corresponding Plan criteria will be discussed in a separate section below. 1. Plan Criteria u. policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the NPO, CPO, and surrounding property owners wort given notice of the baring and an opportunity to comment on the applicant's proposal. b. Policy 5.1.4 is satisfied because the proposal is not adjacent to residentially zoned property and therefore, will not encroach upon established residential neighborhoods. c. Policy 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.2.1, and 7.6.1 are yatisflod because the necessary store sewars, sanitary sewer, wAtor, and other utilities are available and adequate to servo this site. STAFF REPORT — 2.1 — PAGE 5 2. Code Criteria a. Chapter ''18.62 is satisfied because the proposal meets the applicable requirements of the C-G zone including landscape areas, setback requirements, and parking. b. Chapter 18.100 is satisfied because the proposed landscaping plan meets Code requirements for landscaped coverage. materials, and street trees. c. Chapter 18,102 is satisfied because adequate vision clearance will be available at each driveway intersection and the vegetation that is proposed in the landscaping plan will not interfere with adequate sight distance at these driveways. d.,, In order to meet the requirements of Chapter 18,106, the site plan will need to be amended to allow for the storage of three vehicles for each gas pump at the service station. The present proposal only allows for the storage of two vehicles before congestion could occur at the driveway entrances. The Code also requires that a convenience mart of this size have a minimum of ' a.. four.. parking spaces, The— proposed- site plan includes two parking spaces and therefore, it will need to amended to provide for additional parking, a- In order to satisfy the provisions of Chapter 18.108, joint ' access to both Otoposed parcels must be provided. This should be addressed with the revised site plan reconded above. i f. In order to comply' with Chapter 15.114 of the Code, the proposed free-standing sign in the northeast corner of the property will need to be reduced in size. The Code allows for a maximum site of 20-22 feet in height and 70-90 square feet in arra per side depending upon the setback of the sign, The proposes) sign drawing :does not include dimensions, but it appears to be approximately 30-40 feet in height and 160 square feat per side. This proposed sign will need to be reduced in sure in order to conform with Coda requirements or a Sign Code CKemption must be reviewed and approved by the 'Tigard Planning Commission. All signs to be installed on the property will require a sign permit which is issued by the Planning staff. g. Chapter 19.12O.- is satisfied because the applicable conditional use criteria appear to be met. One exception would be Rection le.130.1.60(c)(8) which requires a front yard building setback of 40 feet for tho service station usr.. The proposed site plan Indicates a setback of IS foot fromBull Mountain Road. As mentioned earlier, the site plan should be revised in order to accommodate adequate vehicle stora►go behind this gas pumPf as wall as to provide adequa►to shared access with the exitting building which is on the western parcel. STAT r REPORT -- 2.1 -- PAGE 6 3. Traffic Impact The City staff acknowledges the existing intersection at Bull Mountain Road and Pacific Highway sloes not function optimally in a large part because of the frontage road location. Without addressing present constraints, the proposed development would exacerbate the existing traffic problem. Staff finds the request to be in conformance with relevant Plan policies if the suggested conditions of approval are applied. The closing of the southern frontage road, right-of-way dedication. half street improvements, and modified driveway locations provided in conjunction with this project and the State Highway division's removal of the northern frontage road in 1989 will eliminate the present congestion problems. Policy 8,1.1 requires that the City provide a safe and efficient street system and Policy 8,1.3 states adequate street improvements be provided in conjunction with land development, If the suggested conditions are imposed, the staff finds this request to be consistent with these policies, Finally, because of the cooperative review of this project by the City, State Highway division. and Washington County, policy, B.I.I. which, calls for intergovernmental ,coordination, has been satisfied. C, RECOMMENDATION Dased upon the discussioh above, the Planning staff recommends approval of CU 87-43 and ALP 07-09 subject to the followings conditions. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to issuance of �. building permits. Staff contact for conditions 1-11, Gary Alfson; and for 12-18, Keith Won; phone 619-4171. Conditl�►n•: 1, The applicant shall obtain a permit from the Oregon $tate Highway Division to perform work within the right-of-way of the Highway 99W frontage road, A copy of the permit shall be provided to the city engineering office prior to issuance or at public improvement permit. The south frontage road access to Bull Mountain Roam shall be eliminated and become a cul-d*»sac at the south limits of the subject site. one access from the frontage road to the vita will be allowed from the cul-de-sac. The frontage road paving from Dull Mountain Road south to the property lino shall be removed and a cul-do-sac with a► 45 foot curb radius shall bo constructed, A 5 foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed from the cul-de-sac to Dull Mountain hoed, STAFF RVPORT - 2.1 =4 PACE 7 1 ? 2. Standard half-street improvements. including concrete sidewalk, driveway aprons. curbs. asphaltic concrete pavement and utilities. including sanitary sewer, storm drainage. and streetlights; shall be installed along the Bull Mountain Road frontage. Improvements shall be constructed to major collector street standards of the City of Tigard, and-.shall conform to the alignment of the existing adjacent improvements, 3. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the Bull Mountain Road frontage to increase the right-of--way to 33 feet from centerline, The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline, The dedication document shall be on City forms and shall be approved by the City engineering section. Dedication forms and instructions are available from the Engineering Section. 4. The accesses to Bull Mountain Road shall; be located as shown in the letter from Daryl Steffan of Washington County dated February 29, 1989, as Alternate C. The western access shall be a joint-use access with the property to the west, and shall be located a minimum of 100 feat edge-to-edge from the eastern access. The eastern Access shall--be located directly across from the existing access to the church. 5. A profile of Bull Mountain Road shall be provided from 300 feet west of the site to the east side of Highway 99W. The profile shall show the *xisting grade 'df Bull Mountain Road and a future grade that meets Washington County stw dards for a major ccllector street. Two-thirds *treat improvements shall be constructed where & revised vertical alignment 'is required to meet the current design standards. Two-thirds street improvements shall include half-str*ot Improvements plus a 12-foot lane and 3-foot gravel shoulder on the north side of the centerline. The construction of the vertical realignment portion shall be staged to be coordinated with the Oregon State Highway Division's Canterbury Project improvements, more specifically, the elimination sof the north frontage road. 2f the City Engineer determines that grade changes to Dull Mountain should not occur until the north frontage road approach has boom eliminated, then the City Engineer may allow the required street improvements which involve a grade cha►nga to be delayed until the frontage road access has been closed by the Gtate. Prior to allowing such a delay, the City Engineer shall require the posting of a bond or similar aisurance providing for completion of the grade change work. G. The applicant shall provide connections of proposed buildings to the public sanitary sewer system. A connection permit is roquirod to connect to the existing public sarnitary sewer system. 7. The applicant shall provide for root and parking lot rain drainage to the public storm water draeinaega system to prevent run-off to tho adjacent propertias. STAFF RrPoRtT 2.1 - PAGE 8 8. Joint use and maintenance agreements shall be executed and recorded on City standard forms for all common driveways. Agreements shall be referenced on and become part of all applicable parcel deeds. The agreement shall be approved by the Engineering Section prior to recording.. . 9. The applicant shall reimburse to the City any permit fees which the City must pay in obtaining permits from Washington County and the Oregon State Highway Division for work required by these conditions. 10. A one—foot reserve strip granted to the City of Tigard shall be provided along the frontage of Bull Mountain Road, except in the areas of driveway access. 11, Seven sets of plan and profile public improvement construction plans and one itomiaed construction cost estimate stamped by a registQrod professional civil engineer detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to the Engineering Section for approval, Two sots of profile plans shall be submitted for preliminary review prior to submittal of final plans, Construction of the proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Suction has approved public improvement plans, The Section will require a 1007 performances assurance bond, or a letter of commitment, the payment of a permit fee, and a sign A nstallation/streotlight foo. Also, the execution of a street opening permit f0- .construction compliance agreements shall occur prior to, or concurrently with, the issuance of an approved public Improvement plan. 12, An amended sites/landscaping pian shall be submitted for Planning Director approval which includes than following-. a, Driveway locations consistent with condition 4 above, b, Minimum 40 foot front yard setback for the service station/convenience stores. c. Miniawm of 4 parking spoces, d. Joint access and parking plan for both of the propesod parcels. e. Minimum vehicle storage or 3 spaces par gas pump. 11, The proposed freestanding sign height and size shall bo rovisod to conform with Community Development Code requirements. Bien permits shall be obtained from the City prior to installation of any sign, 14. The partition survey and legal descriptions for both parcals shall bet submitted for Planning Director approval p i ,r t+ racorsii __wf t►► W+1�ihlgir9 County, 15, This approval is valid if axorcisod within on* year of thv final approval data, y t PREPARED BY: Keith t,idan APPROVED BY,. RaRndall'R. Wooley , Scninr Planner Acting Diroctor of Comity Geveldpmeni (ht/37790) STAFF REPORT -4 2,1 — PAGC 9 S33.5TW S3t• 43• W '' i�•iM•1-s��' ww a ww fw..w��w�"s.ar-��w��sr��s��s�"'cs'•,�� P w.w)�♦ f erg �• , •J /N a i oto w►,�' w _J� .. ��►�•�g , �'+�►�. � Qty .. I WAN CA off �. si •+ I,v. fy 06 •/i ' � ,�._.. • ,yam° , woof go ;fie • ' � , 1 `s !� �,� � / ��6 �b O ✓, eS M, , r All #p 40 TRAFFIC COUNTS DAY VEHICLES AVG.YHR. AVG./MIN (D Monday 6,^65 522 9 Wednesday 6,167 514 9 Friday 6,480 540 9 Saturday 5,747 479 E3 Monday, Wednesday, Friday 2,911 vehicles at 970 avg./day Monday, Wednesday, Friday 4,496 vehicles at 1 ,498 avg./day W=Kr.,VD, Saturday only 1 , 1x2 vehicles Closing the SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD ONLY 2,717 vehicles or 905 vahiclou average per day Cloi4ing the NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD ONLY 2,646 vehicle% or BB2 vohicla% averoge per day Closing DOTH FRONTAGE ROADS 292qO Y@hicle% or 764 vehicles average per day Closing the SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD ONLY 4,347 vehicles or 1 ,,449 vehicles Average for three day!§ Clasinq the NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD ONLY 3,528 vehicles or 1 ,176 vehicles average per day Closing BOTH FRONTAGE ROADS ff 2,077 vehicles or 966 vvhiclgs average par day no Closing the SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD ONLY 1 ,110 vehicIP9 Closing the NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD ONLY 891 vehicles Closing BOTH FRONTAGE ROADS iL 746 vehicles Community Study further shows that the reported "existing traffic volumes, P.M. PEAK HOUR (5-6 P.M. ) " of 740 vehicles on page 5 of the kittleson Report are understated considerably. 13 The Community Study shows that THE PEAL: P.M. EXISTING TRAFFIC EXCEEDS iITTLESON'S REPORTED FIGURES AS FOLLOWS% 94" vehicles, or 202 vehicles more than reported, on Wednesday from 5 to b PM. 844 vehicles, or 104 vehicles more than reported, on Monday from, 5 to 6 PM. 802 vehicles, or 62 vehicles more than reported, on x Friday from 5 to 6. 757 vehicles, or 17 vehicles more than reported, on Wednesday from b to 7 PM. 747 vehicles, or 7 vehicles morso than reported, can Saturday from 1 to 2 PM. � The C;mmunity Shady FURTHER SHOWS that the PEAK P.M. EXISTING � TRAFFIC REPORTED BY KITTL.ESON IS QUESTIONABLE BE:CAUdC.e !M rafter considering theclosure of bath frontage roads And the impact that closure would have on traffic volumes shows, than community shows that 691 vehicles would %till tae in that aroa on Wedne %day from 5 to b PM. Considaring that Kittlason reported the existing trajjiG volumes (P.M. Peak Hour) was 740 vehicles with both #rontagce roads open and used ase thsy are currently used, it is hard to reconcile tho kittleson rtpported figure and that of the communi tY when there jr, only a difference of 49 vehicles (740 vs. 691 ) v@hicle. ( X#f�4 r7' AN �g 04 OTHER FINDINGS STACKING _MONDAY WEDNES.. FRIDAY SAT. 7 - 9 S TO 15 7 TO 10 5 TO 11, 4 - 6 TO 1%> I'D 11 zO r. I;A-11A 1 1 P-2 P 2 11A-12N 1 AP-5P 3 5P-6P 3 1 fs XHIAIT � 31�f 1 � 1 t to i F.41: `..fir.. 6.7 i. Y t r r ' r r 1 0 a NS �: 1h?Il1N0+7WNNW4U11l0N N j� ;111PmmPYv7N1NWi0iNgN N Got Ilou 1 mN.+mN"OOMOQkN!m N M" 1 mNv4TwNmwNW.+0 i N N 0 1 .4,4N m1N i 1 N 1 1 q 1 0.+70NNOOMMITIN I O N m.+ 1 NN.+NTvmmw 00m I "II P m i I It I 1 a I I a WN-OmmvmvMMOTIQ4 m« mi I T It I I a 1 1 U I.+m.+OIfIWPWNONOImIN r0 1 N-MNN•+«IVmNmN 1 of u N R11 INN ? 1 I u 1 1 11 1 1 N '.a01Nm10U1NONONi.r I C H .«i0 N1 «u . u V"ONmU1NONITIMM 1 8 N NO MN...d.*N««.4.r.4 u « � 1 IN N a a ryry qqppp �� '' 2 NN"I"NNN,VNNMM i N N0 N wr 10' NPN�mpm�► i��i m m« NJ NN �®■» ff MAM z4Q N0 v 40 r !11 1 N 1 k t� h iPtlTNM t►JNN-YNNmfV 4«D n Irl« Oag Llt•� ; 00�ONO + NI pNiN4iM - i .zW 11 ilV M I O O0-N«NmYm0N 2 IL. JIT I I an nfl o�� 11R IIRIIRII m sz «N«Nm i o� a�a i 0oo�"oaonb ioo rice amid cs iEzzzzzizz o 'm> }N 1 WtCONTNQtNT�+Nh t h U QT J.J!hICLLITN.�NNT�QPN 1 ID Y ++ �H I QPfNINPITQQCtCTh 1.+B N IOI IaN I NNTOTNOhttoNmom 1 D a �~ ¢I m1 1 a 1 I N 1 C�f'NQ��+RI NlpWhtq 1 tC U T�+ 1 In ir1Q P11q�[n tD CIT 101 h U Q mI 1NII 1 1 U 1 CI ICZ:1NtDNhtl�phR11N l N n TO 1 1 ""N-MNINQINNM 1 Q'Uu N > Iai to 1 u I I a I t 11 1 wI wl rl.+"n)"N N N N i N U •+ t Yj INDa N , I NDA1ARItpt•�Qw�Q !�u ND i{t x �= u I I N N�1N.IINTMQQQVIQ4 N�1 TD IN INNtN .Iw�.I.IHaN IV U w a fl N m � IJ i��IDIDNT.wfNnQaW`N� IAg I NrrM.l rl HH Eb w N De 0 1 RfINhNIpN1N1NNIhIBN! Q p fD �s �iiiVNNINVNtVPINI�i� �i PI~ aao I�o �,No� ao�l -MN GN for � IwM C OL M° 94¢ !*+{A•14f1P�1t1�A1'IWIA l �p IAD �aW ��Nt11N+W+NN�Nwm�f w$ �n p Nr O o 1 I n U tIC 01 N hQ IAWr YIN Nn I�N 1 { �IDw�nolso00aW �►M N.,.� .,.. �.. III aw .. r4 .�n 4 V e i W4O�+N++NINtN�Dh Z ALIJW 1100 000000 �r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N Z ¢ra T{000°+«oi 00 a •• IYao 0I %%%%%��7�,]SN O iq poin 1 r ¢4 }y1 t Nn.+00. 01`11 0.4NN 1 O U 00 JJ 1 O4U10tDU1mNPt00�D I W N 4 jF{PNPPPPIflNUI�DWWiPH N 001 1toa _►-t 1 u i nWimm°mnnaPc�n�rnrna i e u Q'� QI IWu m , i u 1 1 U 1 Pn41L01mA�D +NO��D l iD u 0.+ N I.yfi mNP4PTAWh�D 1 N U i I II I POpN�fiPmWfOWmPA I W U N« a1 ««mNmfifimOTfilmu m ©{ i u 1 I a 1«fiN +mPhNh01NP 1 T G NO } ; ...NN«NNNNTN;0 N mNIII { { N I yIPnWW.4 _WNN 1 9il M WO a 1 1«11 { 1 11 i UI«.�tINW9�finTWfi 1«11 «9 InNNN«««« "MM 14, N 1 I N 61 � 1 Nr�m fiCvpphU��V11p 1«N ''O Ni NN IV NNfifiPI { I u I arn�mlvT�ofinoTn 11 a x 00 4Kr 1 NWN N��pp��p1�fi�g1p fi x .+ ry r+N i�Pl(V Y RI iN W W. If � j, 02 iS ko-Z 1 NN'��n69N.Wrf+1T+0fh{O M .h+N L 61- 01►4 IfAn10TM�N�DV1nMdDT mu h0 N Z ZG� x lTNNRmINPI1mIt N`!N{ M M~ 060 u s Zr0 IMUMMONOT0.41 n 7N hnurmWmOON« «« « -YW 1«0 4 u y!9P�O.+N«NmTN�Dn Z 1101.4-470000000 0.4.470000000 IYW kmp+O.+N.1+IYI+ff'U1b J TI 000««•+000000 600 01��+��♦ h @G hmU1 OII�Irk41�1a441�1►44 O 76¢ }�n 1 mNSNomhlnoamm 1 m u rnm JJ1��'O�YNrYOrU1TO1PN h ��1.+NMN4'1Nh4�'iNNN{h N 1.+coaaeh�chmhhm I M 11 m.+ 1.. MNMNMlbabOM 1 11 a sI " IRu all i u 1p2MMMwMTNMNTIaN O•+ I.�.+Nt'MPhMbN1NP 1 ON e 4)l 1 °II i It I Ma�aaoaoafNN��A 1 NU NO 1,. 1 .�wN'+wv NMMNRIJ t111 N 1 1 p 1 o%MNAo;NMOWN i h Ii 8�D "NNaNN•"i Nu v4 1 u 1 1 u N I DMQupTiRl(IyDNm.a 1 41 00 w " NN 1OIAC)wnNNtb'�I�N �D wwiNN �+ a D � � .�NNQMNaCwwulta I b N WD INH D `ADOi�h�hM6DNilfllYlll Y19 OfhZ NlgtlA.rrN�Y7CD0'Nfhibi 1 r N ON �ZD w. 00 w..w.i 1 N N .r Ian ZQEf• �V¢ jNN1000»h4"IO�i1Cbb1091iq ht9 � r 1 n zw «bimNt�Ymin INMt1 py i+1w u MN A C 1 TommoolNo«.bio I ro M oN ut- N I .�ww.l vl ..w. f I N# .. -zW 1 1wN L u F t Moo-N-NMTMON •2 L Ja L 1 00-.4•+0000000 tt— Cil t000a�«000000 ¢ atom ulu`+�1mu`lMMOMMMM p to In }�l 110Y.+N +N 1 DID }G'1 I U1mQt�NP I.+m JJ 1 0)Y10T�DD l iT� JJ I hYAtODQ I.+m �H!`1Q'W0��0) I TO) tl� 1 NYYYYUI 1 rvm 1 T ZH W I mNIDWOiT t am I D6110UIO Q%1 tom 1 mNNNNm Om. 1 W.�+.milA9�C'1 tom lA 1 1 m m j i to l to ' i N 1 DaPYTP I U1U1 1 MMMNNO I Oita N INN mwm I mT n11,�c'cnv Wn 1 Ino CD! I 1 1 I WNO�A�I 00 i dDNt`mm♦ 1 VIII v�uiminwT {mil 1 N ' w I .�mwmwm 1 Nm I RKIAMNN 1 Nm I Naa..ww i 0?m I MNNNI I I I m I i m 1 9Nt�twL1© 1 IDAI I.»mNal�r I Mw N I wwwwwiV 1 AN 1 m1 1 YY 1I//1I IyhI 1 m w ul r r�1 �m ± PIIyP1Nf�IN aN � I wwwww � wM i m I m ' 1 1 N I I N 1 qq yy11 I 1 NNqq �1pp I Nlrllr wimm 1 mVp mID1lw111 I Mfi 1 w p1 ( m ji I w N 1 Wwmm�Dm Mmm 1 rmA�1�r I fit 1 4 m I IM ��.. N a � 1 IM04 � � I j 000h1.Ni.Wi i OWN {TANVI�t1 I IIIM 1 w 1�ys)610hY�14W .�NMMaN � 1 1 10.4.461mN{M�0 y I QrmQ1MW{ r W i yl Pd 1 { W N I 1 r W,IWI I o-�oo�ao 1 r�,p,Iop gww x !I NN It N i N M U OMIT ,tV� 4wM U.U C, d a 1 j I�MI I 10 `LLLL 0 Uy, � oxw I MNIDOIT�D 1 41m U'2W I mh01Am0 {'+ID ?L2 N I M1.�OO1010 I OD U!7 2 1 Ot!ti.aOOR N N www w 1100 W40. N{N.rN.+«N{. N Z I 1 N I N :}I W I 0� }�W Z�Od0000 Nm }�W H 000000 O Or 2 Z 111111 lam 2h % 1440) 040 Tin roTGI J Y 1l000000 Y o 7 000000 F0 o ii331�i p O ZE331a 4 NM IN Jai VOl0 �fI1PQ 1�+ out 1 Ilot,lm :+ ®1 a i I to v I ok N1nmIti m 1 1 1 1 , I.+YIU1 ITNIko ®1 I 1 1 tD {yplm Im I 1 1 1 I t.m 1 1� 1 1 INTIM 1 I 1tt i Im •E1 � I I 0,1124 1 IAm�w ? 1 1 tT 1 1 1 1 1 fFl IN 1 IM�IN Ijj++Nim tnmj0 Q. I .+AIm t� fl+wA�N � I � •1 Q 10INm Z ZI01O " 3p Off"" O °�:Ratl?i 6" JJ 1 PNPmIDN 1.a�D JJ l tDNmNmtD IPP Q4111PPPmU1!hiD tY4 I IfiWID6tWh 1 mP OD 1 i NIR 001 1 P~ s►- 1 1 s si- 1 1 1 mNOOMT 1 trm •1 00WOMM 1 WM 1 mNNNNM 1 IDM 1 M�MoQkak 4 Nm mi I-Mmi 1 1 1 1 lT 1 1 1 I N 1 0"OvTN 1 MM 1 MMMNNT 1 WAD fJ1NN M� fvlIMIP NIWTTTWh1-0 1 1 1 1 h a 1 WNTIt1hW 1 DW '1 MP I Om 3- 1 N a .+; WN I 0IfI0MONmNWQ I mm ml i ml 1 1 1 1l I m I 1 W I t N i"M.+mam 1 Nm I A� mNN 1 Nm }I N.•.�.�.�.+1 Wm m 1 Nm NNQ HM 1 aRINf�IR� I lIIU1 1 QNRI•+90 1 Wm 1 I .+ >i i >1 i m I I I 1 1 I 1 N 1000090100 I0900t�0I09 1 1 I p 1 NNmP1.NtD ~fMol 1 1 I 1 N 109999919 199999199 NPO NGO 1 1�fIy 'NG9Tq min I M D � N wma.+1 t7+P1 � � i �(a11150U1471 I�m a 6 IDdD��Yh �NMq� �{ �1 rN•N+PI•*+N I N� a 1 .�.��+Iflmh WAD a I'114 •1 oil' I� � M I t0 1 ( 01 1lw 1 O 1 000900)1 No t pW�7W I NNhOmN I e�1ry 0( iNf�D rYiN� 2M0 At ml NI-Am h N I 1 fN Wle�p 1 1 m WI�►�d 1 1 Xt W1 flin06lMN 1 ~i0 SWC 11ytIN10Vttl101 WPI �1 J t!1 NwN�-"N wm W � N! .�.r.� '4104 7u 1 v*i Ru Ecir + vNi 1'.U. *1 0) GOT OSP Q SIL t I If1�DN�Dlfib tL It}_— 1100000 Tm ¢?z2 fooll 11000000 Nm 021- + 1 AWhmhOD J 021-2 a 1 CIf1PCIf1fl J 711 000000 ¢ Yo 3 21000000 C . WOOut 41a�aaa♦ 1- W OW 4laaaa�a NO W?-ZY1 O t££331.1,. Oc WYZtR O I S£33wi, 02 3m42 1 h4 3m¢4 I 1-2 r i }N10-+10 JJ 1.+of 1" KcINM1.� Zu1 1 f a t ON 1 11 mI i } t Iinv lol I NM 0 m 1 1 1 1 , I.4v1In DITNi4) i1 1 i@NIM i 1 �No f 1 `oolo � E ! E � foi��o � E E E r^ 4 QQ Rim W tl 0 9 tiIL wm Z Z x.1011 N tC L 1.+N J 340in Of Nin O }N 1 ONNNNN 11DN }N 1 YNtDAAA 1 @10 EEC t It1Yf i'mY;N@ ml -1 Y16YhN�0 N" 001 cot xFl 1000000100 1000000100 m� 1 pl 1 1 OwQ�V fA I Nn 1 Pm@hNO�1 IAtD 1 NN m.+m 1 mY mt1 mA@N@h 1 NtD I ~ 1 1 1 N1 It }j @Na~h~��a 'I EDlnhmmY l Om }1 NNmn�JY Mm 9 10 CI, 1 N N wm.+mwm i Nm 1 01.yl LOIN 1 Nm Ns�""".4 1 @m I NmNNNf I.ham N N N 1�PINOSfIf �Yf 1ONmwOQ �M 1++ N RINmIn1�1N(MM 1 mNNff 1�I 19M ` wwwww m 1 1 h N m Ln 1 r N pp OwiNmlPm; +Om f01h100f 1 fM N j m N w 000000 !00 000000 00 wwwnmh @10ofmm�ao t �.4 jwJ T NI lnY� iiY0w W Anmmf�vn3 t � Wb ��ryry ��jj p�11 i 4h�a, yy pp1I 151T ¢h.02{ A l hb U� N h«89��i�m 1,1 N f1v1. N.e.a n �.4 N pI G f NN n .. �LJ to �°an i comm p s WLLa0 i i Nlonenla a r Wz 0000?0 0 } Wz L=000000 O C), 1 1 1 1 1 1 Ulm arx•' x 1 1 1 1 1 1 Iflm Yo a{fyONON@ i oat- .1 rinfnv0 .S7 000000 a yo 2!000000 ]®zzW w OW O 1 Zr331LU. O> 3m¢2 O l EX33LW OQ 1 JJ 1 fD0 1 d QrC1NmIS i0I i a 10010 QI 1 �i 1 1 1 1Nr10 1hm►o { N 1 1 IWN1 %D } 1 1 �1 � 1 1 imhinl 1 1 ,N { � I I t E Oo o �I d"I I �y N O� N u�iz 'lam s11 m 01 UI M 0 }N 1 Aiflr.+100 t Om }N i O�tAN•�ACI 1 AID JJ 1 N111ONOr 1 o�m JJ I ufotao�a.+1 lAO ]F, rmmmmr'rym ne¢1 mmmmmrll Wlp Oct i M Sno I INN h Q 1000000100 /000000100 cl 1 I t[1 1 to I 1 M1 I t 1 I 1 1 1 9 OaQ�RrA i I�IN 1 0,MMNN0+1 0 0 N INN ma ,40 ul I PIT N 1 v1PPPt7iA NSD ID t 1 1 V4 N I I A 1000000100 1000000100 IAi ' m1 1 1 1 1 1000000100 1000000�ao ys �1 I I�mNONr =Mln `oNm�o�l �m iN MAIM minAm aaca0a�a0 1000000100 1. I ' I NN44 U) { N I � � � r 00000000 1000000100 1 000000 00 000000 00 NO 4 biO�A:hjt ""MON100 w x aAi l��i TV f 1 b y� y1 ��pp qp zyy��w MP t%OmppN .rlp a�1;�rt�W I h.N+ UPO M U17� N N.ONr. OO5 NM "ISI N W ` 9t z4¢Ci I 1 OO�OOIOC wacc0 •1 tnOlritOD00 O2 }> � L i Ob001 t�d N� tC}T� Z CDOI 1°i Nf�f iCQQ Y�1 P�OhOM1O oa+- vv)*Itnrm YO1 TI 000000 ¢ YO J��00%000 � W OIn •! %,,*0* Ht9 W ON W .ZN 01££3344. O> W?ZN O�££334k O> 3m¢¢ I F¢ 3m¢¢ 1 !"¢ }mla>`1a JJ 1 ODN 1 f O a 1 1 21-1 I 10010 �1 M 1 1 1 1 i INr 10 I 1 NM 1 0 N 1 1.+ 1 MI 1 i 1 1 ool•o tt 1 4 AIA IN { 1 I loolo � I 41 I 1 �I 1 t l`o0 0 � I o0 0 1 I I a u i J W 1 l� 000 N�a+ SN aco'o ypl00 WOM 010101 O ` }N 1 [V�►Nf`ISN•.+•-•;t�m�t?�ll�N.'T�I�NO�Dt0��10m� •r�T0�0««Of�mmtt�O�lANm �S c a m�n`n.n�w��u ua'iuf`i�f"'nii>iiif'nfmniiul"i►Nne�nvvvv�.�rvv��vvv��v�m Doi 1 tAtT�O�.ruIOO��DNhOt�m►�f�vWaAvtl�Ovll�t�NOOW�Dtf?tTNQ«f�W1f�Oh,J�O� � i tT�Q�mfTC�l*��OOa�f�m�0f��71�O�mhmO �t�WaltpNNht�mf�h�tVWf�+1:� m O 1 1 \ i iv 1 (�a��tr?U��JNt2aNh�Tw+i7�Dtilf�t�N/+.L�Wt��'t�lf)QOtT�tTt�l�mt�«li�r+O� t�] 1►►►�vvv i Q�tThuahWWQ�tJ�iVWI��\IU��' mvWVll�vm�fWV'i�1U� I�V'�' i�m�'N��+�NI'�1..•N 1 n� 1Um1W�i�V~m m�WyOj�iA1NQ1tTlVmmihS»w1�vm�iQ�-NCm11-NVNmRiMNA� 1 1 1 �'+1htV+Vr+�tu7i��Oah.-�i�1T+j'i�JiThNNSU'��".. 1TS�1''li��f'U�mtAi'14W�A�+1�1 r � I 1 �Np�A�'V0f11��©Or+A� *�W�L1Ah�I'+t' ^+'V'tiL1A41NO0YAA1J�f►? +uWiAU71�0 r ,P U7� .•�m�P it'f t11 W t'fl A ai' vN ty ...�-»t41 T N tR1 .•�q' i91 U'3 NN m.r*r N.+i� �+ ..� Q *+.wltilNm.».»..� .w lP)•�N111N ..�.w .. ., y N.ti .MN...» .. ..� 9 ai 1w1 � � �c*1i+'1�Yt�1�� Fl�i�NNN�t�1�NiViVN••�OA��N��CJNIV��iV�+�N��»� Z F o �ov� •rNAnoAN •r .� A ®rva�m.l ®�tnmAv7tnW •r�nrrirn�o •� Wtn�•»mu�r�►�r„�v� j ~ hlT� lr11iT]�R11DNN �K �l1If�Nlrit�INN�St1'INiVN��iVPV1glR1�.~•+�Y Q 2 O N J•r .r «� .r w.r .•+ .r.r .r.r.+ ..w .. .. .r .+ =O— 1 1 =dt F- o�0 3 torrc9�09 +t' yi—+mina+t7te •ytioitiAO®wtniPimaD+Dc� «l'A-+in -»ul,Gtv,a •»4Dr .r1Dn►+D 1 tr s° =0� � � �+i+'iN+�flll#V�VR►1N�"f+nf ^�Ir �JS� �>`�1��Y<'1?ttv��Nw,D�+'i!�1f1'iN��1i41'VfVNR►hYR1 O�O 1i Z11 N1�N +�"rt �ttaN�'/f*1Tfh (yAM....m.. m tT+LIClOWU7COACD{�mhm�o f .-4.4 L!h 0 � N.41Cif4�fe{T¢ti,•••r G7a101STO00 Q►i� St)r�Wm4►hAGDf7►f�hhm r!rH...r+ .r /w -r.r .r .r .r .•+.r I H:ill I LL v I w tti ti Ko rrw. NrmNtivNMm TN ON-»Qtm m O U.JCC � S C��C700�3��O�C/00000-+�OOO �+00�0009-� 0•+00000�+0 • 1 i t I l i I I I I i l l SJO In �+0-T.� �df`mh��qTN �Om^O�`+mN�+tam-+�-4NrlAY�+MI��-*M_mNr40ri +..:``+ O d V11�3 tli�i Tt0lhilhli~IiU.t1SS2.S,�3� x2tLa.ti ti 32* 33 LL Ln I1 N r-Ia to 1 NO�Q«O�Nm L7 U] MNWWNVIV to N' mmmmmN— W W vm N r+ to m!� N m Y m N W \ OQN�t +WO 00 «a) �c +V I�.O�T vD O m l,�7--• �►� �ys7:��O�T �� O s NAMMMMO m MN—CONO M� m sw N.• w.l .r OMOMNN« f�! N £, NMfaOOOO ' A^n� P '1Y YI�W�Y/'�1 1•/W w s ww H 0--W w�.V N4�1 A, w �1 yy oo wo H n ..n.10`ONa►® ango+•�+co max t ♦ �. �. 1ti � rt�m 3L3EVttl1 O¢v �� i o��m�'mrivvcnan+mmmm�i.�a.Nnumi7�N�.�R�)tO�'1N��oo.Nro+0,lm�ntinL? �c� � .au��ns�vvv�vm.mmmmmmmmmc+�mmmmmmm.-nmc�tc�acvrvc�N�vcuc� aoi + O Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v O 0 0 O O O O!a O Q O O O i rw. ¢ i r nmm.r��arvnwrv.-�J+ama�.om- tvvvcrnN.�Nnvvmmmm000nr.N r o+W�rnnevi��mWaon In.�Wv�rivwmmmcvi,�.rv�v••w.vvmminvvm ^� Li J Q" � caoraacacarwsr�aca+sra+�acaaooaacaota000aaoaaaoaaao a3 r I oot�voovo�looaoor�ooavo �►s000zaoavasvoar�raao 1 � ..�v �ue�n.-��rruvc.cvnmiav�e��aAnv��awn ••Nvoirannao•ra�•y Di:IDDi9�DDDD:��lO0i��1i��IDiaAo�li7i:�L70Ai7G10AA1�ODOAA 1 DNnN �� tq��~I' S'Vi�fl�irl��f�1N ��11r'►1iP1�NRIN�ONN�NN��Nt111V� �GQii v� 000ASA000voaoDOAooDovADDov0000000soorao w px �M OpOADA00o00AOAVDO0i7ADDDAOAO000vOOC�OAAO [D S �j y� y� N p m 04M-z Rf�t4N �OCrD T+ fP/ ovN.�wf11��lN rJM8.00R Nvs g M z A g0.rx OiA.i'� � O® 'R C9�Pr+tllh '4 �fti �+uDfr►ghO��ODN�i1n'1tTU9i�0�1D+,Om�.O�Dw+f�J�l� tf1{DtQ v► z � ! M 4 G44{fli�l1�DY�TN _ NT4�� 'toy Vt � fhrlA1*4RWY9NVANVA99fiA O 1- .r..� .r N-0 CY«.q -0 ►y=W I LL V v+ I n �D f'► nVfv +^�T•t0'�otV�D•tmcv ti�ID�ONNrJ •.••.• �.�a� � _ �a�b°o��o�a000c�c��o-•noo•-� -•000-•�Ooa� -+oo�o cR3 I r r r r l t l r r r l r r l r r r r r r l l r r r i l l r r l l r l r r in.•n.v ,n 4rf�y n�rentommmm-�smm�l.y-��unmm..•.,.•racv T ►- 7� � Ot�00000�0p00000 -+r+0000�+000•-+O 00 +0>00 + �QIil1 3zE>�U,'I U.L�i hili =M=EU`1t`fl=l~f131`i l�fll�ll ii S1`a.l,Ilti 30 i;: E i P V 11) P. NNNNNNNN.+r+ MM V]O� m o0a0oo0oc© o0 �r-•Nvco�o--•wO �rsn aoa��r��oc�a �a 6 i� i� t h Y 1, ww�•• wM w.nw 1� �o�ao �aaol� ao oaoacav� �►o� eta PS w �w w w ar w I R1 iD r'�c+ �ve�vnm�'fv�v� w w 1��1J f��10mQ 6J71!) .+w h w w f�wOOww..rN01m OOw+�..r..�.-•.-.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 111 GC NNNMOOOO-00 t0l1 3 ti 3 Ln Ln 0 3 r¢ t R 1 f e4 i TIGARD 'TEXACO SERVICE STATION DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL WRITTEN RESPONSE TO OPPOSITION'S TRANSPORTATION COMMENTS t 3 4 The purpose of this document is to provide a more complete record of the verbal testimony of Mr. Wayne Kittelson, which was made at a public hearing held on May 18, 1988. This public hearing was held in consideration of a proposed new Texaco Service station near the Intersection of Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road in Tigard, Oregon. The following comments provide a summation of Mr. Kitteison's testimony at the May 18 hearing only, and are not Intended to introduce any new testimony or facts. 1 . Comment: Counts conducted by neighborhood residents during April 1988 showed traffic volumes during a Wednesday p.m, peak hour (5:00 - 6:00 p.m. ) at the Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Rood Intersection, to be 27 percent higher than the volumes indicated in the traffic impact analysis report . This is a significant difference that could substantially affect the estimates of delay, congestion, and level of service within the study area. tfegporse: In defining the period of peak vehicular activity within the study area, the traffig analysis focused upon the Pacific fti.ghway/Bull Mountain Road intersection rather than the Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road intersection, because it Is this former intersection that serves the greatest volume of traffic and controls the overall level of service and amount of delay within the study area. More specifically, Figure 2 on page 5 of the traffic impact analysis report whew* the total entering volume at the Pacific Highway/Buil Mountain Road Intersection to be 2,820 vehicles during the weekday p.m peak hour, compared with 740 entering vehicles at the Buli Mountain Road/Frontage Road intersection during this same time period. Furthermore, it should be noted that the percent variation in day-to-day one-hour total entering traffic volumes is likely to be greater at low-volume intersections (such as the Bull Mountain Road/Frontage (toad intersection) than at high-volume Intersections (e.g. , the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road intersection) . This is especially true on commuter facilities such as Pacific Highway, which have very predictable and repeatable weekday traffic flow profiles. There is usually some day-to-day variation in hourly traffic volumes on these facilities, but this variation is more accurately measured 1 between intersections on an absolute level than on a percentage basis. Thus, the neighborhood residents' measurement of a 200 vehicle variance in entering volumes reflects a- 27 percent variance at the Bull Mountain : f Road/Frontage Road Intersection, but a variance of only seven percent at the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road intersection. ! Testimony by neighborhood residents revealed that traffic counts were conducted over a number of days, and that the 27 percent variance was the highest observed variation from the weekday p.m, peak hour traffic volumes shown on Figure 2 of the traffic impact analysis report. It is interesting to note that the next highest volume observed by area residents at the Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road intersection was 804 vehicles, which is less than a nine percent variance from the traffic volumes shown on Figure 2 of the traffic impact analysis report. This observation gives further validity to r .. the reasonablanaas of the peak hour volume numbers used in the traffic investigation. Finally, it is Important to recognize that the actual Intersection performance evaluation was not based upon the p.m. peak hour voiuniean shown in Figure 2 of the traffic impact analysis report. Instead, this evaluation was based on higher traffic volumes reflecting the observed flow rate during the peak 15 minutes of the peak hour. Exhibit 1 illustrates this concept, and shows that the rate of traffic flow through an intersection varies substantially throughout the peak hour (It should be noted that there is a typographic error in Exhibit l : the vertical or y-axis on this exhibit !should be defined as "f 0-minuto flow rate (vph) ") . Consistent with standard traffic engineering practice, observed entering traffic volumes were summarized by ib-minute periods, and the flow rate associated with the highest 13-minute volume was used in the Level of Services' (LOS) calculations. Thus, the analysis was based on an average one-hour flow rate at the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road Intersection of 3, 1.10 entering vehicles (See Exhibit 2) , which is 10 percent higher than the traffic volumes ,shown in Figure 2 of the traffic Impact analysis report. This exceeds the volume variation observed by neighborhood residents at the Pacific Highway/Frontage Road intersection. The comments and observations contained in the previous paragraphs confirm the reasonableness and conservative nature of the traffic analysis performed in conjunction with the development application. Even if these comments and observations were to be set aside, however, the traffic volume variation observed by neighborhood residents would not be sufficient to change the analysis results or findings. Exhibit 3 shows that the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road 2 intersection is expected to have considerable excess capacity, even after the effects of site-generated traffic and future increases In background traffic are taken Into account (In this exhibit, the bar showing background traffic Includes both existing background traffic and future increases projected by Washington. County and the Metropolitan Service District) For the purposes of this analysis, a special LOS analysis was conducted for the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road Intersection employing the following assumptions: i) The flow rate during the peak 15 minutes of the weekday evening peak hour is 10 percent higher than the total flow rate for the evening peak hour as defined by Figure 2 on page 5 of the traffic impact analysis report. 2) Background traffic volumes are 27 percent higher than the volumes defined by assumption 1) above. In other words, it is assumed that the traffic volumes variance observed by neighborhood residents at the Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road intersection Is equally applicable to the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road intersection, and that this variance also app l-les to the highest observed 15-minute flow rate shown in Exhibit 1 . 3) Site-gen,rated traffic volumes are also 27 percent higher than predicted within the traffic impact analysis report under weekday p.m. peak hour conditions. Furthermore, this higher volume of Brite-generated traffic is assumed to occur aimultaneounly with the higher background traffic volumes Identified in assumptions 1) and 2) above. Under these worst-came assumptions, it Is calculated that the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road intersection will stili operate at an overall B/C LOS under future p.m. peak hour conditions (including the effects of site-generated traffic) . In summary, it is concluded that tho analysis procedure described within the original traffic impact analysis report adequately accounts for the posoibie day-to-day varlatlons in hourly traffic volumes observed and reported by area residents. Furthermore, it is concluded through an additional worst-case analysis (which essentially double-counted the traffic volume impacts of these daily variations in traffic flow) that the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road intersection has sufficient excess capacity to absorb such volume fluctuations whiles still providing a good overall LOS. 2. Comment_ - The traffic analysis conducted by Kittelson & 3 Associates shows that several approaches to the Pacific Highway/Pull Mountain Road Intersection currently experience an F LOS under weekday p.m. peak hour conditions. These unacceptable service levels must be remedied before allowing the proposed development to occur. ResRonse: It Is true that the analysis of existing conditions shows two approaches to the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road :intersection to be operating at or near an F LOS under weekday p.m. peak hour conditions. These analysis results are presented graphically In Exhibit 4; In reviewing the Information provided within Exhibit 4, It should be noted that an F LOS Is defined to exist whenever average vehicle delays exceed 60.0 seconds per vehicle. Comparison of Exhibits 3 and 4 shows why the Intersection's overall LOS is calculated to be a B level, even though Individual approaches are experiencing an F level . Clearly, the heavy volume approaches to this intersection (including the northbound and southbound through movements) are receiving a very good A or 8 LOS, while the low volume minor movements are receiving a very poor LOS. Essentially, this disparity In the LOS provided to different approach movements is caused by. the particular, signal timing strategy that Is being employed at this intersection by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) . The intersection is currently operating under a 140-second cycle during weekday p.m. pe"nk hours, and less than 30 seconds of this time is typically available for use by minor street movements. Thus, ODOT's current timing strategy favors the major street movements at the expense of they minor side street movements, resulting in the LOS disparities noted above. It is common traffic engineering practice to implement signal timing stratagieas which provide better service levels to the major street movements at a signalized Intersection than to the minor movements. This is because the overall effect of such a strategy is to minimize total Intersection delay, and to enhance the progressive traffic flow characteristics of a coordinated arterial signal system. However, a strategy which causes an F LOS on any dingle movement is generally considered to be too restrictive, and can result in ether operational or safety problems. For example, field observations at the site Indicated that the current signal timing strategy is a likely contributing factor to the existing safety and operational problems that have been noted in the original traffic Impact analysis report. Through experience, drivers have come to expect a long wait before receiving a green light on the minor street movements, and so they tend to accelerate when approaching the Intersection In the face of a green light. Their reason for accelerating in this circumstance is understandable, since they know that if they miss the green 4 light they will be forced to wait at the traffic signal for over two minutes. However, this driver characteristic results In additional exposure to angle and rear-end accidents. The solution to this problem is to implement a different signal timing strategy, and preferably one that is based on a shorter cycle length (e.g. , 70 seconds instead of 140 seconds . We find no physical or operational consideration preventing this type of modification to the signal timing x parameters from being made. As a result of such a signal timing modification, maximum approach queue lengths would be significantly shorter on all minor street approaches, average vehicle delays would be considerable shorter for all minor street movements, service levels provided to individual approach movements would be more equall=ed at around a B-C ' level , and oncoming drivers would have less reason to speed through the intersection in the face of a green light. A t letter has been sent to ODOT officials informing them of the � study findings and formally, requesting their considerationin rstiming the: Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road traffic signal (see Exhibit 5) . With respect to the proposed project, several points are worth noting: 1 ) The development and implementation of a signal timing strategy at this intersection in the sole: reasponaibility and privilege of ODOT; neither the project developer nor any other public or private Interest group has any direct authority to dictate the particular signal timing strategy that is to be used. 2) The addition of sites-generated traffic at this Intersection will have no significant effect on average vehicle delays on any minor or major approach. This is because average vehicle delays on the minor street approaches are already at an artificially high level due to the particular signal timing strategy being used by ODOT. Thus, the .intersection has sufficient capacity to accommodate substantial increases in minor approach traffic without any significant increase in average delays to these vehicles. 3) Even though vehicles on two minor street movements currently experience an F LOS during weekday p.m. peak hours, the intersection has not and will not fall with respect to Its ability to accommodate peak hour traffic. In other words, the F LOS is due to the long cycle length at the intersection, and 9s ,.: not caused by a capacity deficiency. No cycle 5 failure was ever observed during field investigations (a cycle failure occurs when one or more vehicles waiting on an approach at the beginning of the green Interval fail to clear the Intersection prior to the end of the green interval , Further, it is unlikely that future traffic volumes on Bull Mountain Road will be high enough to cause peak hour cycle failures, even with the inclusion of site-generated traffic. Therefore, It is concluded that the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road intersection currently has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional traffic expected to be generated by the proposed service station while still maintaining an acceptable level of service. 3. Comment : The proposed access design will cause a great inconvenience to neighborhood residents by eliminating the connection between the South Frontage Road and Bull Mountain Road. Many residents now use the South Frontage Road in traveling to and from Beef Bend Road. Ree1)2onese: Recent manual turning movement counts show that { currently only about 10 eastbound vehicles on Bull Mountain Road turn right onto the South Frontage Road during the weekday evening peak hour. It Is true: that these drivers will suffer some additional delay dues to the closure of the South Frontage Road/Bull Mountain Road intersection. After the: closure is Implemented, these drivers will be forced to turn right onto Pacific Highway from Buil Mountain Road, and then turn right from gull Mountain Road onto Beef Bend Road. The additional delays should be minimal, however, because both additional turning movement® are right turns. Also, it should be noted that this rerouting does not result in a substantial amount of nut-of-direction travel . Finally, the Pact that only 10 vehicles currently make this movement during the weekday p.m. peak hour Indicate that the overall impacts of the proposed street closure will be minimal . 4. Comment: The population within the Bull Mountain area is projected to Increase tenfold over the next 15-20 years. Assuming that this population increase can be translated into corresponding .increases in background traffic on Bull Mountain Road, this means that background traffic volumes on Bull Mountain Road will be Increasing by 20 percent per year for the next 13-20 years. This Is a significant traffic Impact that has not been taken into account by the traffic report submitted in conjunction with the application for this proposed development. 6 ResRonse: For the purposes of this response, it is assumed that the population growth projections described by the commenter are consistent with current regional projections developed and maintained by the Metropolitan Service District (Metro) in association with City and County governments throughout the Portland metropolitan area, Metro's population and employment projections reflect a consensus of opinion among area experts regarding the level of economic activity that will likely be supportable within the Portland metropolitan area through the year 2010. Metro staff have geographically distributed these projected population and employment activity levels throughout the region at a zonal level in coordination with City and County officials. This distribution is taken into explicit account by Metro's computerized travel demand forecasting model , which was used during the traffic investigation to predict future background volumes on the surrounding surface street system. It should be noted that Metro's model also accounts for the likely directional distribution of all existing and future vehicle trips, together with the effects of as=yet unconstructed roadways and roadway improvement projects described within the currant Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) . As a result, it is concluded that the background traffic volume projections contained within the traffic impact analysis report are based on the latest and best available demographic information for the Portland metropolitan region. More specifically, the Metro model is projecting a 35 percent Increase in background traffic volumes on Hull Mountain Road within the vicinity of the proposed development site between now and the year 2010. This is a much lower level of traffic growth than the commenter projects, but is nevertheless realistic in view of the demographic and planned roadway Improvement information available from Metro and other areawide public agencies. 5. Comment: The trip {generation projections described within the traffic analysis report erre based on observations at only a mingle existing Texaco service station. Additional observations are necessary to confirm the reasonableness of these projections. Also, It is likely that the trip generating potential of the new facility will not remain static, but will increase over time as the population and development level within the surrounding area continues to grow. Response: It is true that trip generation field studies were conducted at only one location. However, it is important to note that the selected location was a Texaco service station of virtual identical size and offering identical facilities (including gasoline sales. a mini-mart, and a car wash) . Further, the service station selected for survey was located on a major commuter arterial within the Portland metropolitan area possessing physical , operational, and volume characteristics very similar to those of Pacific Highway within the vicinity of the proposed development site. The results of this survey, which was conducted over a 12-hour period, are shown in Exhibit 6. As this figure shows, a total of 930 site visitations were recorded in the 12-hour period during which vehicle arrival and departure data were collacted. Assuming that 70 percent of the total daily site- generated traffic arrives and departs during this 12-hour ' observation period, then it can be estimated that there will be just under 500 total visitations on a daily basis, By extrapolating this estimate over a 30-day period., it is concluded that the proposed Texaco service station will generate approximately 15,000 visitations per month; thus is consistent with earlier estimates provided by Texaco representatives, which projected total monthly traffic at the now facility to be in the range of 16,000 customers per month. The observed peak traffic hour shown in Exhibit 6 was selected as "the basis for all site traffic impact calculations. As a ,►> cross check on the reasonableness of the trip generation estimates, reference was made to the published results of other trip generation surveys conducted at service stations throughout the United States. These results are: summarized in a standard traffic engineering reference published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in 1996 and entitled, G202rastAgn Manual ($ U t . td.itlonj_. This document suggests an average trip generation rate for service stations that is below the rate observed at the field survey site. Therefore, it In concluded that they trip generation raters used In the transportation impact analysis are reasonable, and are supported by credible data and studies typically employed within the transportation engineering profession. We concur with the commenter that the trip generation rate at a service station facility such an the one being proposed is not likely to remain static, but may increase ars the population and development within the surrounding area continues to grow. In this regard, it is relevant that the site of the field study is in a section of southeast Portland that is already in a mature state. Therefore, it is more likely that the proposed service station will initially generate vehicle trips at a rate lower than was assumed in the traffic analysis. This initially lower trip generation rate will then increase to the level that has been projected over a period of time, consistent with the population and employment growth of the surrounding area. 8 Finally, it is important to recognize that the proposed service station development generates fewer daily and p.m. peal: hour vehicle trips than could other land uses that are permitted outright under the existing zone designation. Exhibit 7 illustrates the expected p.m. peak hour vehicle trip ends associated with a fast food restaurant, a convenience market, and a drive-in bank. all of which are permitted outright under the existing zone designation. This exhibit clearly shows that all of these outright permitted uses generated higher volumes of weekday p.m, peak hour vehicle trip ends than will the proposed Texaco service station. 6, com„_,,,,,,ment: Based on the developers own figures, it is estimated that development of this site will generate approximately 16,000 vehicle round trips per month. Assuming that the trip distribution estimates described within the Kittelson & Associates report are correct , then 70 percent or 12,000 of these trips will include a left turn from Bull Mountain Road Into one of the access drives. This is a level of turning activity that surely warrants installation of a separate left turn lane. Resn nse: Please refer to paa►ges 35-36 of the traffic impact analysis, which describe the analysis of lane storage requirements and detail the evaluation that was conducted of the need for a separate left turn lane. Based on this anaa►lysia, it is concluded that the probability that a vehicle will be waiting to make a left turn into the site at the same time that the access drive is blocked by a standing or moving eastbound queue under p.m. peak hour conditions is less than one percent. It is true that the aaite in expected to generate approximately 12,000 left turn movements per month on Bull Mountain Road. In order to put this figure Into proper perspective, it its important to recall that, as a result of road improvements committed by the developer and ©DOT, all existing turning movements at the Bull Mountain Road/Frontage Road intersection will be eliminated. Considering only existing traffic volumes, this Intersection currently accommodates nearly 100,000 turning movements per month. Therefore, the proposed project is assisting in eliminating nearly 100,000 turning movements per month, while adding only about 12,000. This Is a significant reduction in turning movement activity within close proximity to the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road Intersection, and can be expected to have a significant beneficial effect on both the safety and operational efficiency of the streets and Intersections within the site vicinity. 9 i 111NOROW=1 ?. Comment: The traffic impact analysis report is based on volume counts conducted in October and November of 1983. Were any adjustments made to these counts in order to account for seasonal variations in traffic volumes? Response: Major commuter roadways such as Pacific highway do not usually experience large seasonal variations in traffic volumes, particularly during weekday p.m. peak hour conditions. Additionally, it should be noted that the months of October, November, April, and May are usually considered to be representative of average annual conditions. Therefore, there was no need for any additional adjustment to the field data that were collected, 8, Comment: The report by Kittelson & Associates refers to an analysis of stopping sight distance requirements. Consideration should also be given to intersection sight distance requirements, which are typically much longer than stopping sight distance needs. Rasponqt- The traffic impact analysis report incorrectly refers to an analysle of stopping sight distance. In fact, the analysis that was performed dealt with intersection sight distance requirements as defined by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and adopted by Washington County. Essentially, the minimum AASHTO standards Gall for intersection sight distance equivalent to ten timed the 85th-percentile approach speed of oncoming vehicles, The field investigation shows that this standard Is exceeded under both current and proposed future site conditions. g. Cammrnt; There is a considerable amount of pedestrian activity along Bull Mountain Road, and the additional site- generated traffic possess a significant new hazard to these pedestrian movements. MMP_0nGe:_ Field observations of pedestrian activity along Bull Mountain Road by the applicant's traffic engineer showed very law volumes of pedestrian and bicycle activity during the periods of peak traffic volume that were investigated (including weekday morning peak hours, weekday evening peak hours, and weekend mid-day hours) . This observation is apparently confirmed by the neighborhood's survey of area residents, which shows a very low propensity for walk trips by area residents. It should also be noted that the large majority of all site- generated traffic travels to and from the site via Pacific 10 j s Highway. Thus, there is very little impact of site-generated traffic on pedestrian safety characteristics along Bull Mountain Road west of the site driveways, from the site driveways eastward, sidewalks will be installed along the site frontage (on the south side of Bull Mountain Road) . Additionally, an asphalt pathway is already available for pedestrian use on the north side of Bull Mountain Road between the site driveways and the existing Frontage Road. Therefore, It is concluded that the proposed development does not { adversely affect pedestrian safety and that the existing and planned pedestrian improvements will actually enhance pedestrian safety along Bull Mountain Road within the immediate site vicinity. Comment: The project will generate substantial amounts of noise, which will be detrimental to the liveability of the surrounding neighborhood. R1p_onso,. Reference Is made* to testimony previously provided by Mr. Mark Metge, who is a civil engineer representing the applicants. Mr. Motge noted that the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has recently evaluated the noise impacts of a spimilor Texaco facility in Northeast Portland near the intersection of N.E. Broadway Street and N.E. 33rd Avenue, and has found that the noise generated by this facility is within acceptable limits despite the proximity of the service station to private homes. To expand on Mr. Metge':sR comments, it should be noted that N.E. 'Broadway and N.E. 33rd Avenue'carry daily traffic volumes that are considerably lower than In currently accommodated by Pacific highways N.E. 33rd Avenue and N.E. Broadway Street each carry approximately 17,000 vehicle* per day, while Pacific Highway accommodates approximately 38,000 vehicles per day. Additionally, traffic speeds on Pacific Highway are in the range of 45-50 miles per hour, and are therefore considerably higher than the speeds* on N.E. Broadway Street and N.E. 33rd Avenue (30-35 miles per hour) . Both of these factors contribute to a higher ambient or background noise level along Pacific Highway than near the N.E. Broadway Street/N.E. 33rd Avenue Intersection. Recognizing that the acceptability of any new noise source Is partially related to the level of ambient or background noise that already exists, It Is concluded that the net additional impact of the noise (. generated by the proposed Texaco service station is likely to be leen than the net additional Impact measured by DEQ at the N.E. Broadway Street/N.E. 33rd Avenue site. 11 t _ _ t t ~I•f_ v a a - �t I {IY } _ 1 "1 b S a m 7 t - + a I, TS P a i .I� f 1 c 5, y � t _. - . : ,? 4 3. V� 4 IL WZ cc CO .,..t 0 3: 0 0 we < W A 0z � w �.. CO u op cc x to x• 0 CL eabi ,ivq iins Z CL Z �= 0 r Uj LLI ca 0 0 M cm won z t.' a.- `�yl r'- �i tt:. a k: k � 'J �. It IS x y LI: r qw �r I ; I r ,�r:lyi it i+ t y ,1:... :.t.. Z-'; C .. >t' '•;�'e .......:..1. ..3.'. _..��..::'., il. .':.+�+..�....-M.,r.... ....>...,.. ....:�... "... �. .!. t ,.`;:Y.. is..,,5. �.� 1 .A.. �..7 1 t `4 tt; ;.. � x . _. .. w .. . a. a.wa. . .ay. .. . : . . . . - ■� - :� • �� ., . - , . � . �\ \ @ _ � �\ - •�) EXHIBIT FIVE -J KKITT'ELSON & ASS0CIATES TRANSPORTAWN PLANNINGITRAFFIC ENGINEERING s,t sw.aRo�D++wr . PORTLAND.oaEWN grM5 • can Lo sr� May 14, 1988 Project No. : 143.00 Mr. Ron Failme«ger Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Blvd. Milvaukie, Oregon 97222 SUBJECT: Pacific highway/Bull Mountain Road Dear Ron: Tha purpose of this letter is to request your assistance in reviewing and possibly modifying the signal timing parameters currently in use at the Pacific Highway/Bull Mountain Road intersection in Tigard. I am making this request on the basis of analysis results obtained during the course of a traffic impact investigation for a new Texaco service station proposed to be located -in the southwest, quadrant adjacent to this intersection. During the course of our review of existing conditions at this intersection, we found that vahiclas approaching the intersection on Bull Mountain Road during the weekday evening peak hour (400- 500 400- 500 p.m. ) suffer an average of more than 60 seconds of stopped time delay per vehicle. Similar delay levels were observed for northbound vehicles on pacific Highway -desiring to turn left onto Bull Mountain Road. However, the northbound through vehicles, the southbound through vehi.clos, and the southbound right turning vehicles experienced average stopped time delays of lona than five seconds per vehicle. Thus, the major movements on Pacific Highway are being provided vith an "A" LOS, while the minor movements on Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road are experiencing an "E/F" LOS. Ths disparity in service levels being provided to the major and minor movements at this intersection seems excessive. Furthermore, I believe that the poor LOS currently provided to EXHIBIT FIVE (CONT. ) Mr. Ron Failmezger May 14, 1988 Page Two drivers approaching this intersection from Bull Mountain Road is a contributing factor to the high speeds, long queues, and accident potential that characterizes this approach. Accordingly, I would like to take this opportunity to request your consideration of several options for reducing average vehicle delays on the minor movements to this intersection: 1 . Double-cycle this intersection (and perhaps others nearby as well) so that it operates on a 70-second cycle during the evening peak hour while the rest of the system operates on a 140-second cycle. 2. Disengage this intersection from the arterial system, and allow it to operate as an isolated and fully actuated traffic signal. 3. Modify the signal timing in order to allow the controller to return to the side street phases if a) a call for service has been registered on the side street; b) the, primary platoon on pacific Highway has already passed through the intersections and c) sufficient time remains to meet minimum green requirements before force-off is encountered. 4. create a new arterial subsystem composed of the southern-most signals that are now a part of the larger arterial system. This new subsystem could probably operate on a shorter cycles length consistent with the traffic volumes characteristic of this section of Pacific Highway. Additionally, you and your staff may have other ideas that could also be effective in mitigating the problem identified above. I would appreciate your consideration of these concepts as well. 1 recognAze that some of the above suggestions may necessitate physical change* or upgrades to the hardware currently in use. If this is the case, then I trust you will weigh the costs of any t EXHIBIT FIVE (cant. ) Por. Ron Failmezger May 14, 1988 s Page Three �w such changes against the benefits that can be expected to accrue to motorists on an annual basis and through the expected life of the equipment. Thant: you in advance for any assistance that you can provide in this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional comments or questions related to this matter that I Tright be able to answer. Sincerely, • Kitte on nc pal a _. ., .. .. �.. .. ._ �.. r :r. �� 1) _,'±.t _ _ .�(.' �.y'�r _ _ f'�_ ,,t.,. .,x.�w..+.�� _ 'i1� _;i�� =�•� �� r� ._ Ye''.. �. 1 1 + 1� .. �v. w.... ..� �� _ y, i .�� .+ �� -u !.. ,`' a .. ..,+ ...._.. .. 'a �:I:_." ��r 1 y� .i ��, YC'.......: _ + - `S^.� t%1 t ��. :' y ��'{ "ii y - w ,� � 4# .fi �:t !. •, s S"'. �+ i � r��f � • �' a • � �r'; :i,% 4 �� )' j. ;: �+ :y 1 ,, ;, s �_U ,�t _f �� •• � Y t, _ d ,e S. ..*. `,• Yl: � � A. � � � _ � �, J t +�;. �', � s �: n ;:',:a - � r .c4 :-. ? c � 1'. � 3 i i A_ 'I t h {- r 7 J t 1 �.. 3 f - f � +� i �..,.. .,,� _.�r t <<,,.... �+.: i. *.:'+. __°�. ... �..._ -'t a ..._.,n...t.�-.._ .f.. ,._., ....._. .. .t_'_:�'�. _ � _�.?fes.. �_.`a.. _. .... .. �,. .....j...,..� .,..r.�:. Ak c. a iw 40 or fr1�7 1. i` Oregon State Highway Division DISTRICT 2A MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR PO BOX 565,BE"ERTON,OREGON 97075-0565 PHONE 229-5002 aoe«.s, March 10, 1988 in wwy wr«to Randy Wooley •. City Engineer City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 ;3 Sabaoct: Tzuacc Station Bull Mountain and Pacific Highway WeIhave reviewed the updated traffic report and the commant4 and recommendations from Daryl Steffan, Washington County. State Highway jurisdiction is the south leg of the 99W fr.antage road. The'.,elimination of—this south leg would be a benefit to the operation of the Bull Mountain-99W intersection and support its removal provided it fits with the City's access And circulation plan between B411 Mountain and Bsef Band Road. • The closing of the south leg of the frontage road (Alignment Alternative Two) can be a shade a condition of the access permit for access to the subject partial from the frontage road. Sincerely, Leonal 11. Gunderson Assistant District Maintenance Supervisor xcs Ron Pailmotgor Wayne Xittieson Daryl Steffan, Washington County LHC:cls Fom17JMf!$9�3.t7) S I Oregon State Highway Division DISTRICT 2A MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOROCT r' 1987 ��.tuoawa PO BOX Sa.BEAVERTON.OREGON 97075-0585 PHONE 229-SMCITY OF TlGiMl) � .�...� September 29, 1987 PLANNINUEMi sae w, Keith Liden ; City of Tigard i P.o. Box 23397 Tigard, oregon 97223 Subject: Robert C, Wyatt (Texaco) , 99W Frontage Road - Bull Mountain Road Existing operation of the frontage road Buil Mountain and Bull Mountain - 990 is lass than desirable. The Six-Year Highway xmprovam4nt Program includes a project (Pacific Highway West,- at = Canterbury Lane) that ' proposes to eliminate the, ttiartherly, approach of, the frontage road at Bull Mountain Road. This,' hawavar, will Pot"bolve ail of the problems at the Bull MounesiA' )� '990 froi tago road tnterbaction. taw?rhe loailC"rbnSo"iR,a�'plon-telocating,the frontage road further wast. . This concept,, along ,.�tth tl7e future needs and proposals that Washington County' had for Bull Mountain Road should be considered. A report addressing the impact and operation under and existing conditions, the scheduled Canterbury . 9064 project, the frontage road is required before passible ssalign►mant of the access can be considered. sincerely, Leonal H. Gunderson Assistant District Maintenance Supervisor xis Ron Pailmezger paula Calvin Tom Schwab Beverly Proude LNGicas :f i a» a t - !1} 25 EX ALL 11. i A &ARRANI�EMEMT PLA�li 1 .f__��! �-i��!1.I.E_ 7��_. fm t...�!�_ 1,+# 11..t:e fi � ItE¢l..it ii+s+fit elt 1Fi; Fi +tt +F+ +!+till � fi ('��° � � ._ �. .�' I �._ f i t P � . R-.� 1 1 1 _.. NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMEa 0 DRAMIPG IS LESS CLEAR THAN j .o,, . THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE Tb - - - mob } - ---- — : THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING- I _ ! 0t£ 6z E?Z tz 9Z �;_iZ _6Z az !z oz 61 Bi LI 91 Sf bt -fi-ti-ii- 01 S B L 8 ti-e a 1a 16 - - �i+lUII+EIlU�INI�IUi�N Y f p, • a • - qqII Al 5 0 J LRI N SlaW4DSCAPE PRFA - 30 ,.PPROACH 5'SIpEW4LK I I y. RO' TAGE ROAD ® .O TEWCO USA ti st PRELIMINAP.'i r^a I GENERAL RD, OREGON T TI G�ERR'-.m +mu•ao s(4oe7n•s wn.loo. wcc.m er I1 (IIq�Bln�pvplll'nlmpr�nlplq�1911��n�IIpI1RI'p�mimpn(!IinItl11gn1lu�liuVBpn�a�IlgnIPIIpIIpu�nipppu�nlpnlgqq:J:IIIIPIgiIn:l4gr VI:PIII wrt:Ir rxn xladlu,o 2 3 0 6 8 7 3 B B Ip Ii 12 W mr�w Is ids h" s pif X .. M Bliun•0 CE2 BC dZ B2 t2-Bi R Y2 C2 R IZ Bi_BI pl 21 BI t7 YI CI dl II BI t B l -B C t d u I a �•I A 10 6-5 �=r amu.. (t0k)'01 O l"5 * 3. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public a3jong the Bull Mountain Road frontage to increase the right- of-way to 33 feet from centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. In addition, the applicant shall dedicate sufficient width, to be determined by the City Engineer, on the west side of the site from the frontage road to Bull Mountain Road, to relocate the frontage road to the west side of the property when a shared access for the adjoining property is required and the north frontage road is closed. The dedication documents shall be on City forms and shall be approved by the City engineering section. Dedication forms and instructions are available from the Engineering Section. Not later than the time the northern frontage road is closed, the applicant shall develop the relocated frontage road adjacent to its proparty with not less than two-thirds street improvements and shall be allowed another access to its site from that relocated frontage road. The City Engineer shall require the posting of, a bond or similar assurance providing for completion of the relocated frontage road. If the applicant wishes to develop the relocated frontage road now, in lieu of the dead-end access on. the southern portion of their property* they shall execute a barrier between the relocated frontage road and Bull Mountain Road, until the northern portion of the frontage road is completed, to prevent through traffic at that point.. i 4. The applicant shall be allowed a ,single access to Bull f ( Mountain Road at this times, the location to be approved by the City Engineer. At the time the frontage road to the wast of the property is relocated and developed, ArA the northern frontage road is closed by the State of Oregon, the applicant shall have an additional access to the site from the relocated frontage road adjacent to its property. It is the intent of this condition that the relocated frontage road not, be davolopod until the northern portion of the frontage road in closed. 8. Additional right-of-wary sheell be dedicated to the public along the dull Mountain Road frontage to increase the right-of-wary to 33 feet from centarlina. Tho description shall be tied to the existing right-of-wap centarlina. The dedication document shall ., be on City forms and shall be approved by the City Engineering Section. Dedication forms and instructions are available from the Engineering Section. 4. The accesses to Bull Mountain Road shall be located as shown in the letter from Daryl Steffan of Washington County, dated February 29, 1900, as Alternate C. The western access shall be a joint use access with the property to the west and.,shall be located a minimum of !Ob feet edge-to-edge from the eastern access. The eastern access shall be located directly across from the existing access to the church parking lot. r TEXACO TRANSCRIPT BETH MASON, HEARINGS OFFICER. "We have onQ item on our agenda this evening 1 thats application for conditional use CU 87-03, and Minor Land Partition L MLR 87-09. Its a request by Texaco Refining and Marketing to construct a vehicles fuel and convenience business, and a car wash. I'll be following the procedure that will be found on this blue sheet. I know the staff paused some out before the meeting if you don't have one, please share with your neighbor. Take a minute to review that. At this time I will consider any challenges to my right to hear this matter. Lot me state for the record that I've had to expar'te contact. Which means I have spoken to no one outside this hearing about the merits of this application., I was contacted by the Times publication about a month ago. asking mu if I would be hearing this matter and I said yes, but I hadn't received and staff report yet, and I had no information at all; and they said fine, and that was the and of that, conversation. Some of you ,taw'me grading the honorable Gena Young, the Mayor of King City, here, just before the meeting, As I know many of the faces in the audience, I know some of you personally, I've worked with some of you in the past,. I've supported some of you in political things. I try not to let 11 oil* associations influents my decision in a case like this. However, if any one has any strong feeling, or even not so strong feelings about why they don't think I should hear this matter, this is the time to raise those objections. Okay, I sae none. I suppose I should, just in the interest of full disclosures. say that I do trade at' Texaco. Not this particular location, this is nowhere near where I live, but I drive a diesel vehicle and Texaco is a convenient place to get fuel. out I do trade at a Texaco near my office. Alright, if I could have the •toff report please?" KEITH LIDEW, SENIOR PLANNER, "Okay. The proposal that we have tonight is a conditional use and a minor land partition to develop a property on the southwest corner of Buil Mountain and Pacific Hwy. for a vehicle sales, convenience sales, and car wash. What we are 'hoping to do tonight is, I will sake a brief presentation about the proposal and to forth; and Gary Alfson, is with the City as a traffic anginser, and Gary will go over the different traffic related issues associated with this case, I don't know how wail you folks can sea the site plan up on the.,wall,-but, I just go over that for you. This is the frontage road for Pacific Highway, Pacific Highway is just a TEXACO TRAN.3CRIPT - 3/24/88 - SAWS - 5/25/89 - PAGE 1 - --- ----- r.-.+....-,...--�..�.M^...�.r.... ....awe.._ -- - --- f s r BOB[— little bit further over. Bull Mountain Road. Over on this portion of the property is an existing building that was first a restaurant, and most recently was used as sales office for a used car lot. A food mart, gas station is proposed at this location with the pumps situated here. Two proposed access onto Bull Mountain Road. A third access onto the frontage road was proposed and the car was located in this area of the property. The partition that involves this 1 1/2 acres ;piece, is to divide it into two parcels. One of approximately 28,500 square feet, which would include the existing restaurant, or sales office building; and the larger parcel of 38,468 square feet would be for the proposed gas station and minute mart. Without getting into the traffic issues that, Gary will cover here in a minute, the staff reviewed the site plan and we found that there where a couple of areas where it was in need of some revision. Most importantly the site plan that was subiittod does not really deal with the provision of access to the existing building. Its indicated in the +application that it would be left, and presumably put- to'aam"o, ',usi' in tho 'future;' "ikut ther'a is fldthi'ng' indicated in the site pian. There is, a landscaping strip all the way along this border, and its staff's fealing that some provision for common access and egress needs to be provided to that these building work together in some sort of site plan. There is a setback requirement for 40 feet for vehicle fuel sales and there is 35 foot shown. Thera is also a requirement that for different fuel pumps that there is a storage area for three vehicles for each fuel pump, The � site plan would have a third vehicle getting pretty close to the entry wary and therefor and possibility for congestion for people moving in and out. 8o we are looking for a revision there. And finally there is a sign, a fret g standings sign proposed herr,, by the drawings it looks like its approximately 160 square feet per oldie, and 20 to 40 fret in height; our Code allows a size of somewhere between 70 and AO square fedt per side, and 22 foot in height. R 8o stuff is not recommending approval of the sign that is submitted and we are suggesting that either a revised plan for a sign be submitted, or a sign code exception be submitted; and that typo of application would -need to be approved by the Planning Commission. So I guess with that I'll hand it over to Bary and lot his go over the transportation issues and the recommendations that the staff has related to to this project." GARY ALFSM, TRAFFIC ENGINEER, "As Keith Gras saying, this site located on, frontage on Bull Mountain Ro ad and Frontage Road. Bull Mountain Ros&d is under TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 2 BRIEF— the jurisdiction of Washington County, so they have been involved in the evaluation of the traffic report and the traffic impact for the gas station. Oregon State Highway has been involved because this there. .. .. . frontage along Highway 99 is their jurisdiction. A project, adjacent to this project is a, by the old Oregon State Highway is Canterbury intersection, which is just north of this site. Part of that project includes the closure of the north frontage road. So that will occur when the schedule project for the ODOT project is taken place. The transportation impact analysis report was prepared by Wayne Kittelson and submitted in December and resubmitted in February at the request of Washington County in evaluating the impact of the gas station on Bull Mountain Roam traffic, One of the major concern of this site. is the safety concern at this intersection. The Oregon State Highway Division proposes to eliminate the north frontage road would eliminate a major portionlof the safety concern here. Because it would eliminate a groat deal of the cross traffic. And Lee Gunderson of the Oregon State Highway Division, addressed• a latter, stating that the,,-Oregon 4tate Highway Division would support removal of the south lane of the frontage road of being a great benefit to the Bull Mountain, Highway 93 intersection. Daryl Steffan in the Washington County Transportation analysis, analyst. Reviewed the transportation report and provided a letter to the city with his findings. T Just briefly go through those with you. His findings where that a left turn lane is not warranted on Bull Mountain Road at the sites access point. Sufficient stacking distance is available between Pacific Highway and the sites proposed east access point. Stacking distance exceeds actual recommendations. Adequate site distance is available at both proposed points. The elimination of the south lag of the frontage road at Dull Mountain Road would significantly improve operational safety at the intersection. Eliminating the proposed west access on to Dull Mountain Road and providing access through the development of a shared access to the property and to the wast of this site would improve the operational safety at s the intersection. Bull Mountain, Road is County Major Collector, and he also i states -that sidewalks are necessary for sate podestrian traffic across the frontage road. And Daryl BtefPan's recommendations are as follows: To � provide access with one now access onto Bull Mountain Road and through development of a shared access _ with the property west of the site. Ne � provided three alternate schemes, 2 won't—bother to go through those right [/ now, its just basically alternatives to the driveway locations. He also -� 1 i 1 TLEXACO TRAWCRZPT. — 3/24/06 a- 5/16/60 -W 5/2S/08 — PASS 3 � :./MY.st.19L'•..M.MWh}•MM.,Y'e•Y!THs.�.rvlr«.�w-«.r.•.rrwr+NrH.M.rrra+rrr�rrwr..rr..•+r�..+.r t' propose elimination of the south leg of the frontage road, if it was consistent with the City's access and circulation plan for - lots in the vicinity. He's suggested, recommended dedication of additional right-*i-way of 33 feet from the center line, establishing an on access reserve strip on Bull Mountain Road, except for the Driveway locations. RQcomomnded half-street construction along Bull Mountain Road, and recommended lighting at the access points. Our further findings is, was that the Washington County designation of half--street improvements required a paved width of 42 feet, does not include a bike lane. The Tigard area bike path map identifies Bull Mountain Road as an extension of the Tigard local bike path system. Bull ,Mountain is classified as a Major Collector Street on the City's transportation map, which requires a 44 foot pavement width, versus the 42 feet of ,the County's designation. The 44 root pavement width is wide enough to allow' for bicycle on both side of the street. The south Highway 99 frontage road has three properties with frontage and all three have alternate access- from either,D411 M9untain Road or Boef Und Road'.'- And Orom our raviow of ,the impact analysis and the comments from Washington County, and the Oregon State Highway Division, it appears that the traffic safety and capacity are best provided if the frontage road is eliminator.,' as indicated in alternate two of the transportation analysis report and if the driveways are located as in Daryl Steffan's rscommendaation as alternate "C", which is what we are showing here with the shared access at the boundary, western boundary, and a second access across from the parking lot, across from the church, excuse awe, the church parking lot. We also, are findings was that Dull Mountain Road has a steep approach to Highway 99 and we would expect that the approach to be rebuilt in the future when Dull Mountain is fully improved. Due to the fact of the schedule of the Canterbury project would fall, most likely, behind thea• improvements. That it may not be feasible to reconstruct this portion of Buil Mountain Road until after the north frontage road is eliminated, as for as the Oregon State Highway project, as a substantial grade change may be required to reduce the stoop approach to Highway V9. In order for the City to approve access onto Bull Mountain Road, the City will need to obtain a permit/approval from Washington County since Buil Mountain Read is in the Jurisdiction of Washington County. And then the findings and conclusions, you want me to go along with those Xeith7 Okay. Usicaally the applicant shall obtain a permit from the Oregon State-Mighwdy Division to perform work within the right-of-way of Highway 99 frontage road. The south frontage road access J TEXACO TRANSCRIPT -- 3/24/88 - 5/18/88 - 5/25/99 - PAGE 4 f ' to Bull Mountain Road shall be elieeinated and become a cul-de-sac at the south he frontage road ite limits of the subject site- One access from ttainhtosthe will be allowed. The frontage read paving from the Bull Moun r ;1 be removed and a cul-de-sac or turn around shall be property line shall constructed. A five (5) foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed from the turn around to Bull Mountain Road. We are also requiring, one of the conditions is stausdard half-street improvements, including sidewalk. driveways. curbs. and hts being installed paving, with sanitary sewer, storm drainage, and street lig along the Bull Mountain Road frontage. These shall be constructed to the Major Collector street standa=rds of the City of Tigard conforming tot e alignment of existing improvements. A140 additional right-of-way dedicated 33 feet from the center line. The accesses to Bull Mountain Road to be located as shown in the alternate "C", the western �minimum of iQO feetes's shall be a - euse dge with the- property to the west and will be located to edge, from the eastern access. The eastern access shall be located A , directly from the existing, a►ceoss to -the church.- feetwestfive the'site are+ ' profile of Bull Mountain Road should be provided ntain the east side of Highway 99. Profile showing esting sitar�dardsrade for offor collector Rood and future grade that meets the County streets. Two--thirds street Improvements shall be constructed whether vertical f C- nd Also alignment revision to required to meet the current design stindardor+�r A atom,we require, propose, connection of the proposed to public providing free Storm water drain up to prevent run off on rn Adjacent point use and maintenance agreements for That* basically about it for the meat of the conditions." sm MAW*, "Okay this is the time for questions that might need clarifications. Cary lot me start off with a couple of questions. First lot me state for the record that I'sr, that I have reviewed the staff report, which I have marked as exhibit "i", the transpoEt"lnoor impact Ktolsonl �s Assowhich .is was Chats prepared by the applicant's Transportation ng exhibit. "2",* the Texaco service station conditional use submittal• is' exhibit and than I have a complete set of sato pyans, I m casix lling es xhibing this a exhibit "4" I've just marked this map as exhibit tri--colarod topographic Wrap, showing the staff proposaltyf for Application- intersection, Cary, if I understand the ODOT timina� .on th Chats about five years away"?" l� TEXACO TRAN%MZPT 5/I5/09 - PAGE 5 .� mfr}..♦ +.rYtq..' i GARY ALFSON, "It's in there rive year plan. Its scheduled right now for 1988 or 1989, excuse me. But it is still a proposed project, there is still negotiations with the local property owners, with the county BETH MASON. "And it hasn't been funded yet?" GARY ALFSON, "I'm not aware with the funding, Its scheduled for 89, is the last information I've had from the state." BETH MASON, "When I read Oaryl's, is it Steffans? GARY ALFSON, "Yes." BETH MSON, "letter, When he talked about adequate queing space. I mean, adequate, adequate room for the cars to stock from here while they are waiting to cross this intersection.;, I assumed thiat he meant that it was adequate when these two roads are closed, That, at this point, he's certainly not saying that this distance is adsquate. Is he?" GARY ALF$ON, "There, theres several approaches was used in the traffic impact ` analysis, and there•, basically two options were presented, or were discussed In detail." BETH MASON, "One had Just this area closed and one had both of them closed," GARY ALFSON, "Well both of them had. had the, the access to the north closed." BETH MASON, "So I said ono of them had just this closed, and one of them had both of them closed," GARY ALFSON, "Okay, right. Your correct," BETFI MASON, "Out ray question is, in Daryl Steffan'• letter, he adopts alternate two, or suggest the adoption of alternate two, which Involves both sections of the frontage being closed. As is it basad on that, that he Is suggesting that there is adequate "Ing from the stop light back up Bull Mountain Road. Or is it before that• closed? Do you follow my question," TEXAM TRAN=XPT — 3/24/88 — 5/10/99 — 5/25/8@ -- PAGE 6 • GARY ALFONS. "Not a hundred percent. Not yet." 11 BEH MASON. "Alright lets put it this way. I don't see a scale on this map, i J how far of a distance are we talking about here from frontage road to the intersection?" GARY ALFSON. "It's lass than a hundred feet. I believe. I don't know exactly." KEITH LIDEN, "The scale is one inch equals a hundred foot." GARY ALFSON, "No that* boon enlarged." KEITH LIDEN, "Oh it has." GARY ALFSON, "Yeah." KEITH LIDEN, "Sorry." BETH MASON, "And Kittelson's report, uh, suggest 25 Peet per car for quoins *- standard. So we're talking flour cars, as I recall there was a queing average of about seven cars, so, if I'm tracking all this. Steffens, must have been meaning, that after these two were closed, there would be adequate quoing here. That wouldn't interfere with cress traffic." GARY ALFWNf, "That# correct, um, adequate quoins, its, its kind of a percentage of of the time is there blockage and what percentage is not blockage. The traffic analysis indicated that with, with it there, theres still, is stilt performs at an adequate service level. But with it not there, the safety concerns are much improved." BETH MASON, "When you say there and not there, your talking about the frontage road there and not there?" GARY ALFCM, "flight." 1 f IUAW TRANOMPT — 3/24/88 — 5/10/88 — 5/25/89 — PAGE 7 .•..•.»:: iY=:1'r.1i9.•r_trtrrrrr,.•,n1r,n„rw..r..r�-..,.. BETH MASON, "Okay. And is it the staff recommendation that this proposal be allowed to proceed with the conditions that you've suggested, prior to the closure of the frontage road?" GARY ALMON, "Of which leg of the frontage road?" BETH MASON, "Both. Didn't you suggest alternate two as well. closing both legs of the frontage road?" GARY ALMON, "Right. That is what we propose, is closing of the frontage road would be a much safer situation." BETH MASON, "Right. And are you suggesting, and I just didn't understand your rec+6mm►endation, I'm really asking for information here." GARY ALMON, "Okay." BETH MASON, "Did you suggest that the approval should go forward now, Allowing' Texaco to build now, subject to the other conditions in your staff report. without closing those frontage roads first, or was that " ly GARY ALFSON. "Well the south leg frontage would be closed with the development of Texaco." OCT11 fVAON, "Right." MARY ALFSON, "The north leg would be closed when the improvements to the Canterbury project are completed." BETH MASON, "So anywhere up to five years?" GARY ALPSON, "Correct." BETH MASON, "Okay. Questions, this is the time for questions of the staff, If there is something about the staff report or the recommendation that you don't understand or you would like claarificaition, this is a< good time to ask as ' question. Yes sir." TEXACO TRAXSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 8 UNKNOWN, "Could you tell me who pays for which improvements, what you mentioned, the change of grade. the storm sewers, and the closures and all or that kind of thing?" l GARY ALFSON, "It would Texaco. All of the Improvements would be by Texaco. Of the development." UNKNOWN, "So change of grade there where Bull Mountain comes to 99, that would be. thats what your talking about?" . GARY ALF%*. "Right, correct." BETH MASON, "Well wait a minute. Let me understand this. If, your not suggesting that the grades going to be changed nova? Not until the north frontage is closed?" GARY ALFSON, "That# correct." 86TH MASON, "So are you suggests that Texaco's ••i n9 going to do aA two-thirds street improvement now, and also sign a waiver of romonstrance not to object, 4` or to place a► deposit with you, to then change the grade and resur~faceh again when the north is closed?" GARY ALFSON, "No, no the two third street' Improvements would only be made onto, sand that would be when the north leg of the frontage road is closed." BETH MASH, "Bo those improvements could be five years away." GARY ALFGON, "Correct." BETH MASON, "Under your, a►nd are you suggesting a waiver of remonstrance or as deposit" GARY ALFWN, "A deposit assurance." BETH MASON, "Moro questions? Yeas sir.." l •� TEXAOD TRANSCRIPT-- j/24/68 — 5/18/g9 -� 5/25/60 — PAGE 9 i t UNKNOWN. "If the roads are closed, frontage north and frontage south, how do the cars get into. the cars going south bound, how do they get into Texaco?" \1 GARY ALFSON. "Off of Bull !'fountain Road." UNKNOWN, "They can't get into Texaco from 99W?" BETH MASON, There would be one entrance, no, I guess there wouldn't, would there. Didn't they proposed an entrance on 99W." GARY ALFSON, "No, no. thares never been no direct access of Highway 99." BETH MASON, "Oh, I see. That third entrance that I was thinking about was an this f rdntage road." GARY ALFSON, "On the frontage road." UNKNOWN, "How do people, there are people who want to buy gas there, ..,.paper noises .. . .. .. BETH MASON, "The State's not going to allow them access off 99W, ars they?" r t GARY ALFSON, "Thats not the proposal. and I BVM MASON. "The State's real tight about any accesses off 99W because of how much traffic it carries now." UNKNOWN, "I'm not speaking on behalf of Texaco " 4 BETH MASON, "No, no, no, no (laughter) I'm just " UNKNOWN; "I'm speaking ....... I'm trying to understand how they can have a business running if cars can't get in there. Well, nay other question is going to be, just what would the future traffic pattern look like, if anybody studied, just how the cars cue up, and you know, we really will be packing in there. Uh, because, going to be packing-'In some how or another, because theres going to be a lot more, I mean there going to want to buy gas, so there " TEXA00 TRNWRIPT -- 3/24/88 — 5/18/89 -- 5/25/89 — PACE 10 going to pack in there and, see all different kind of ways, much different than there are right row?" BETH MASON, "Let me answer that, and the answer is yes, someone has studied that. Kittelson and Associate, and he will be testifying tonight. I have, X don't know, what is it a hundred pages, no its not that large, 40 page analysis that he did that address just those issues. The queing pattern, the turning patterns, the, the impact of new trips to the area versus drop by trips of people that are already in the area. He will be addressing all of that, Yes madam." UNKNOWN, "I would like to ask about that access road?" GARY ALF"SON, "The frontage road?" UNKNOWN, "Well no, its kind ,of'like a joint access." DETH MASON, "Your talking about a shared drive on the west size?" f UNKNOFIN, "I don't know which side. Yes. There* other property Chats continuous to this 'property that is, uh, that is in the same ownership, but is not &part of this proposal and if the frontage road south is closed, I, I don't see any address of how future roads would come from the next property. Thats surrounding that. Would there another access onto Dull Mountain? Is this addressed in this proposal?" IM MANN, "No its not. Access of adjoining s � ng property that not included in' this proposal would not be address as part this." UNKNOWN, "This access road does really have, its not, this joint access is not for the next property, its only for BETH MAWS, "Its for this property back hero, which include as I understand It, the restaurant/sales office building. ' So this larger lot that is, there asking to divide into two smaller ,lots, this proposal Addresses the access for both parts of this application. The ,part that will be, would be the service jj station, and the part that would remain the same, as you see it now on the TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/21/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 11 1 •W• • ••.'•.•N.HF•'I�•�• .rvwl wrfMrsww�� ground. It does not address access for anything further west. Only for the two pieces of properties, or south, its only the property that is owned, under this ownership, thats suggested, thats going to be divide„ not the one and a half acres. Yes madam?" UNKNOWN. "As far as the quoins, um. has anyone studied the roads and population growth of Bull Mountain, so that, say 10. 15 years down the road. have they estimated the number of cars that will be quoins at that intersection? Thats my first question." BETH MASON, "Mr. Kittelson is. I think the answer would be yes. haven't you? Yeah, I think that he had considered that. I think he will address that," UNKNOWN,' "Okay, number two, pedestrians walking to King City. I use to find it hard to walk to King City., Many joggers. jog down and cut over. Is there anyway that someone walking will be able to gat to King City, not using ' Highway 99, which has no sidewalks?" GARY ALFSON, "There will, part of one of the conditions of development, in remove. the portion of the south frontage road that would be removing, they will be constructing &. five foot sidewalk in that portion. So we won't be cutting any pedestrian traffic out." BETH MASON, "Yes sir?" UNKNOWN, "I have one other question. For people who live on bull Mountain who want to shop at Canterbury Bhopping Center Rquaris, after the north frontage road is closed, how do they got to it?" BETH MASON, "My understanding is that they would go out on Highway 99 and go yap to the soon to be improved intersection -and turas bank in." UNKNOWN, "And then to get out they would reverse the process." BETH MASON, "Well they would cone out just to the, to the western most lane of 99 and, yes, then go buck to Bull Mountaaih. Yes Madam." TEXAdb TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/08 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 -• PAGE 12 2 UNKNOWN. "Maybe the Kittelson and Associate address this also, but, until the road improvement is done on 99, when we shop, going into or out of Canterbury Square and possible turn left to go to Pacific Highway. Which happens often. At the same time people are coming off of Pacific Highway down crossing us and going to turn left into Texaco Station. This is what we aro going to have to deal with, traffic wise?" BETH MASON, "That turning pattern has been considered. Its one of the slides, or one of the diagrams that I read today, when I read Mr. Kittelson's report. So. .let him, I'm. the reason I keep kind of deferring those is that I know that he has a lengthy presentation and perhaps those questions will be answered and if there not, there will be an opportunity after the hearing to ask more questions. so, okay. Yes sir?" UNKNOWN. "I guess, maybe you could, I can't see that thing. I don't have my -, binoculars, uh. maybe you can stand up and show •m a exactly how the cars, are going to get in and out of, than station is the green plot, right." GARY ALFSOM. "Right." • UNKNOWN, "This is Highway 99, both lanes of HiStruay 99, you would have to exit Highway 99 and one access here and a second access here. So you would have to coma in Highway 99 to the accuse poj.nts." UNKNOWN, "And they'll have to get across the traffic coming down to 99." SEVERAL "Hull Mountain Road" UNKNOWN, to get in." UNKNOWN, "Right, it would be a•loft turn off [full Mountain Road, that*, and that* the proposal you made, that they should do than." GARY ALFSON, "Yes sir." UNKNOWN, "Thats your recommendation." TEXAbO TRANSCRIPT. — 3/21/89 -- 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 -- PAGE 13 i .MrM.•.�1rMA1.M1 ...M"f1+.MM..'N�<r.�rr�sw..bwN.r�w��.w+..wrrrr.� BETH MASON, "The answers yes." GARY ALFSON, "Yes." }� UNKNOWN, "Okay. And how do they get out."" GARY ALFSON, "The same way. They can, they can exit offs to Highway 99 this way. There* also an access onto the frontage road that that they can come down to Beef Bend." UNKNOWN, "But I though the south frontage road going to be closed." GARY ALFSON, "This portion of it," UNKNOWN, "Oh, that portion of it." BETH MASON, "Yes madam." UNKNOWN, "I have a question, what* stopping people from going in that frontage road and going to the Texaco station out onto Bull Mountain Road to get across, what* stopping BETH MASON, "To gest across, what?" UNKNOWN, "To get out onto Bull Mountain Road, a short cut?" BETH MASON, "I suppose nothing, theoretically, Although, it you've ever tried to take a short cut through a service station its not always the easiest thing to do if theres cars in there and people in there. But I moan, you know, there* technically a traffic law against taking, using a private driveway as a through street. Z man, there is a traffic law against that. Beyond that I don't know the answer to your question. More questions? Yes sir." UNKNOWN, "Aar I to assume that right now that we aro dealing with the fact that the station is doing to go there now?" TEXACO TRANSCRIPT•— 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — pAGE 14 BETH MASON, "Not at all. No. No. What you have is a staff report that has recommended approval. That staff report is essentially on the table. Its one of the things that I am considering. I will be making the decision tonight or another night, depending on how long the hearing goes, about weather there will be a service station or not. If anyone in this Y room doesn't care for the decision that I make, and it could be to turn down Texaco, or it could be to approve Texaco, then you are free to appeal my decision to the City Council, And if you don't like the decision the City Council makes, your free to appeal that to the Land Use Board of Appeals and from there to the Court of Appeals and from there to the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon. So you have ahead Of you five possible people reviewing this. The staff report comes to me with no particular weight given it. It is a recommendation by the City's staff, after they have taken their engineering expertise and their traffic expertise and considered the application. Also before me is the applicant's expertise E and their traffic engineer and what they want to say to me. But, Also in E front, of me is what you people are going.to say- to, me. -And- I don't know yet what that is. But its not unusual for . groups to being in their own experts, to have their own opinion about what should be done their." UNKNOWN, "Okay, but, your saying that the, then its possible that it would bo January of $9. the decision could be *Ade and the station could go there. right? Or it could be July of 9q. I don't know. Or it could be July of 66. The point is that soeaetime in the future, if you decide there is going to be a station there, right? .. . . .talking same time,'. BM , "No, no, no, you misunderstand. My decision is one decision, okay, and lots just assume for the sake of discussion that I approve it, alright, and I haven't decided that at all. But let just say, since that seams to be your concern that I approve it. If you don't care for that decision then you appeal it tie the City Council. That stays my decision." UNKtXW,, "Okay, but that* not -my concern. Lots just suppose that you decide that the station is going to go there, and in July, we'11 say it goes their and they build it. 'Then I understand its going to be within five years before they make all of the improvements in that intai-section, right." rr 1 l + ti TEXT TRAt4MIP — 3/24/99 — 5/16/99 — 5/25/00 — PAGE 15 BETH MASON. "Thais the plan." UNK4lOM. "Okay, so then we're to believe that the studies that are made to traffic patterns once the station goes there, is going to work just fine. despite the fact that we don't have all the improvements for the flow of traffic." BETH MASON. "Thais one of the things the applicant has to address, is if they want to build now, can the road system accommodate their building now, without the improvements. So they have a two step application .really. One, is can we build now without making the improvements now, and would it be safe." UNKNOWN, "I would say from the studies that they tell them that they certainly shouldn't. It very evident, all you have to do is drive down there and see, I've been there at any time of the day BETH MASON, "Excuse me, this is a time for questions. You will hava an opportunity to testify later." UNKNOWN, "I realise that, but, but the fact still remains, they put the station there, it, it, I can't tee how the thing would do any good at this i point." •\i l i i„\ \i i i DET" MASON, "Okay, well, sir, I, again, I encourage you to ask a question. And I know you feel strongly, and t'm going to want to hear your testimony later, but, if you have any other questions about how the process works, t would take those at this timI UNKNOWN, "Okay, ii.iii soy questions in the affirmative, but the answers the affirmative, the station might go there, the improvements wouldn't be made for soaybe up to five years?" BETH MASON, "That is one possible scenario." UNKNOWN, "It is a possibility?" TEXACO TRANSCRIPT• — 3/24/88 — 5/19/s8 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 16 i r SETH MASON, "It is a possibility. Another possibility is I could say, you may have the station when you make the improvements and not before. That another possible scenario." UNKNOWN, "But we still don't know whether that would be in good .. ,.." BETH MASON. "Well, thats what we have experts, theoretically to tell us. Yes s madams." UNKNOWN. "Has anything been addressed in any of this. I didn't see the findings. regarding the entire area of Bull Mountain Road there, across from, in front of the church, doing the whole stretch. other than just half street improvements?" i BETH MASON. "The only jurisdiction that the City has in an application is to require the applicant- to-improve their- ownership. - And the applicant's- land only extends to the centerline of the road. Generally the City's policy has been to, when a piece of property comps before the City for improvement or expansion or redevelopment, or division, to than require the applicant to snake ••� their portion of the improvements. And in that way you get sort of a patch � work. Right here in front of Ciky Hall is an excellent example, you sae a f lovely improvement right here in front of City Hall and you see gravel on one side and you see gravel on the other, but you have a lovely sidewalk, wide street improvement in front of this little ownership. that* been the City 4 policy. The other alternative is to tax the people along Buil Mountain Road for a full road improvement, which has never been a popular alternative in this City." UNKNOWN, "The reason I'm asking this, because I think its a jurisdictional problem that isn't being addressed, because Bull Mountain Road is a county road and the church has just finished doing their improvements and nothing was required. 8o thats why I'm finding this verb interesting." BETH MASON, "Well I don't, I'm not sure what improvements that the church just finished, I know I didn't, I don't think.1 saw anything, E F 1 1 TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/89 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 PAcIE 17 UNKNOWN. ..... couldn't hear ........ BETH MASON, "Well, I didn't see it. I don't know what the City requirements >} were for this City, or for the church across the street." KEITH LIDEN. "The church was expanded, you might be able to help me on that. a year and a half ago, got an approval, something like that. And my understanding was at that time that there was not enough known about what the ultimate street grade was going to be to require the half-street improvements at that time# so the church has dedicated right-of-Tway and has signed a non-remonstrance agreement for improvements." BETH MASON, "Do you understand what a non-remonstrance is." .. UNKNOWi, "Yes I, do. Thank you." GARY ALFSON, "Excuse me Beth. I would like to clarify one comment that one man had about the improvements. The improvements, the mandatory improvements irregard,less of Oregon State Highway's improvements would be the closure of •• the south log of the frontage road. And half-street improvements that are not r conflicted by a► revised vertical alignment, to there would be some Improvements automatically' with the development and the improvements in conjunction with Oregon State Highway's project would be the north frontage road and the vertical realignment portion." UNKNOWN, "Did you say the south frontage road would be closed regardless?" BETH MASON, "Yes. If this is approved." UNKNOWN, "So if the Texaco station goes in there " BETH MASON, "No, no, if it is approved the south frontage would be closed. Yes madam." UNKNOWN, "Has any address been .made to that extra building that there and what that would finally become? I man, I can sae really influencing the traffic pattern there, your talking about the Texaco station, what happens if r TEXACO TRANSCRIPT - 3/24/88 - 5/18/88 - 5/25/88 PAGE 18 that becomes some sort of a fast food or something that draws a lot of traffic? Has that been looked at." 1 ) KEITH LIDEN. "Well it hasn't, it has, it was not a part of this proposal. Now if there is a change+ in use for that building, there would be a requirement for either another conditional use review, requiring a hearing such as this or their would be another procedure which is called Site Development Review which is handled through the staff. But there would need to be a review at that time for any change for the use in that building." UNKNOWN, "Whets the present use on the building." KEITH UDEN, "Well it was, it did receive an approval about, I think, two years, $aar and a half ago, for a use car sales which has been there until recently. Its been vacant for, I don't know, about the last couple of months r I guess and -if-•there -is a change in use. to something other than car sales, it would require another, another review." BETH MASON, "Yes Madam." UNKNOWN, "If applied for a change in usage, for a commercial usage, we've only address the traffic problem to far, because that is such a significant problem to Bull Mountain. But if applying for conditional usage, is it incumbent upon the applicant to prove the need for the change in use." BEM MASON, "No. The need for conditional uses is presumed by the fact that they are listed in the Tigard Code and I could give you a number of cites of cases that go way back, but, no there is no need to prove need. More questions? Yes madam." UNKNOWN, Is there there a need- to prove the need of another gas station? 2ETH MASON, "No, thants tho some question. No." t TEXACO TRAN=IPT: — 3/24/92 — 5/19/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 19 UNKNOWN. "I pass closed gas stations that T think are a eye sore." BETH MASON. "No. And if you think about it. I'm not trying tr. excuse the City. but perhaps to explain. I think the City's position is. as is it is with most jurisdictions, is to let the market control. You know, if a business can't sustain itself, then Its going to close and your not going to have a problem. ....several people talking.... You understand what I'm saying though, the City says, we recognize that certain things are needed in a community and then we are going to let the community, the businass investors in a community decide if they are going to invest in a particular type of business. The City made their policy decision when they listed the possible i conditional uses that could be used in this area. Beyond that, they say, market you take over, you determine. Okay, more questions. Okay. Lot me say 1 before v4 get into the public portion of hearing, that I will close this hearing at 10:00 o'clock tonight. Now that doesn't moan that I won't continue it to another night; but I find that my mind and my other end also, don't function real well after 10 o'clock, so I would just as soon that we all be fresh and that I hear the evidence that you have to say. We'll go until about 0:30 and we'll take a short break. then we'll come back and we will • continue until 10:00. It I don't hear from everyone. and its likely that I won't, I will continue this matter and I will announce the date and time tonight of the continued hearing. I an in no rush to push this through tonight. V e going to give you all the tima you need to talk to me and tali me what your concerns are before we make thio decision. Okay. 6o let me open the public portion of the testimony. Is the applicant or its representative present? Do you want to make a presentation? Okay. It you'll step forward when your going to speak, sign in on the sheet up there please, that* going to be the only record I have of who's speaking tonight and state your name for the record." UNKNOWN: "Oo I speak to you or ta" BETH MAWN, "I have that so as a matter of fact, why don-t you show it to the people since I •' UNKNOWN, "You do not." - l� MA00 TRAOmmin -- 3/24/ee — 5/le/ee — S/25/Oe — PAGE 20 BETH MASON. "I don't? Has it been redesigned?" UNKNOWN. "Yes." BETH MASON. "Yes it has, hasn't it. Alright, if you want me to consider that I'm going to have to mark it as an exhibit." UNKNOWN. "Thats fine." BETH MASON. "Okay. The map that I'm being shown will be marked as exhibit "6", so its a revised site plan?" UNKNOWN, "Yes." BETH MASON, "Why don't we, not that anyone going to be able to see it, but why don't we, put it up here." talking to far from mic to pick UP.... You can go ahead." "Okay. Close enough." BETH MASON, "I think so." "My now is MARK METGE, I'm a engineer hired by Texaco to from the audience.... we can't hear you. BETH MA80N, "Lots try it again. Is there a mic in that." KEITH LITiT:N, "Yes." MARK METGE, "Is it on." BETH MASON, "Lets try it again." MARK METGE, "Is that better." BE'T'H MASON, "Tito its not. Is there a► ,clsp on that mic. why don't you clip it to your tie. Alright that ought to do it." . Y TOMW TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/80 — 5/19/68 — 5/25/80 — PAGE 21 MARK METGE. "Is that better?" BETH MASM. "Okay, very good." MARK HUGE, "Okay, my name is Mark Metge, I'm consulting engineer hired by Texaco to run through the permit process for Texaco at this site. I do not live in this area, so I cannot address any questions of traffic or personally experience, but we have later on, Wayne Kittelson--,will, will give that information so everyone can understand. We have worked with the City and State agencies, and the County, to try to provide a facility that is phasing both to the community, and the City, that addresses the traffic needs of the County and the State and the neighbors. As you see the plan you have up there was our first initial presentation to the City and from their recommendations and the County's recommendations and the State, we have �'- revised that to Wdress thdt. We think' that we have considered all of the conditions and recommendations and produced a site that is, well, that is, well that solves all those problems. Number one, just to go through the things br'ief'ly, stacking distance of the cars in front of the gas station, we have increased that distance to provide better stacking. We have relocated €� the approaches, per recommendation, per alternate "C" of the County . .. and of tape .... frontage road, as you indicated that would be as a condition of the work and would provide immediate traffic improvements in that area. And from the studies, and from the County's and State's input, that the stacking lane on bull Mountain would be much Improved, much lengthened and more than is required in that proposal. Okay, we have also address the issue of the City mentioned, of not considering the other portion of the site. We have made the coamn approach, shade access from the Texaco site to the common approach and two, an another access to the other portion of the site, in another place. Let see. Okay. You know, we have also considered, you know, this is what we considered as of the City's staff report, which we received two days ago, on Tuesday -and what we have, we've discussed today also, some of the problems that were discussed earlier in the question period. That closing frontage road would causer some problems, may cause some problems of traffic going through the station to gat to the frontage read from Bull Mountain Road, and, and in that discussion we have coma up-with another alternate which I would like to give to you and which will be discussed by the traffic engineer. What TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/'25/88 — PAGE 22 that does is revise item four of the staff report, to provide, no, okay, maybe I should give some background. The reason the frontage road is being proposed to being closed is that it is to close to Highway 99 and one of the alternates discussed early in the i proceedings was to move the frontage road access to Bull Mountain Road farther, farther west on Bull Mountain Road. But we thought that would cut into Texaco„ right in the middle of Texaco site and we did not consider that further. Wle have considered, we have expanded on that idea and discussed moving tha frontage road access to Bull Mountain Road to approximately the location :af the second approach, the common approach. We feel that that will solve any problems of the frontage road being to close to the highway, the intersection on Highway 99, and it will also provide batter access for people between Bull Mountain Road and the frontage road and will eliminate any cross traffic through the station. It will also provide better access to' the neighborhirg parcel when it is developed. Whenever and whatever that is usad for. There is at sketch there that schematically shows what we think it would look like. As part of that, the State has indicated to us that the, when the, if that frontage road along the southern, south portion of the site, when that is abandoned that would be, probably deeded over to the Property ,-owner and because of that the site could. the sit* would movea little bit to the south, to use that, *PP.^oximcately 40 feet of new Thea* are recent developments, Property. we would just like to improve include those in the, in this hearing, so, if, if we could, we could do something with those later. Like I said these items will be discussed by the traffic engineer more In detail. In more detail later, gust in summary, I feel that, not, I'm kind of, I don't have personally experience with this intersection so I cannot address the traffic, what the neighbors are saying. Out Texaco sites, if anyone has taken the time to visit them in other locations, as you have, with your diesel car, but they do, thay are pleasing facility, they are well kept, and usually a good addition to a neighborhood and good services. Wayne would You like to. Thank you." BETH MASm, "Thank you mr. Metge." WAYNE KITTELSON. "....,,,noise Putting mic on... . I'm principle of Kittelson and Associate, our Office address is 512 SW 00oadwaWy, Portland, Oregon 97205, I brought along a tow slides to try to-make this Presentation A little more visual and understanding to everybody. In addition to that I brought along TUAt10 TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/89 — 5/19/ee — 5/25/88 — PAGE 23 some harm outs the pretty much replicate the slides that I will be presenting. So in the event that you can't see these, and I'm not sure how well this slide projector work. maybe you can follow along with these hand outs. If I can, ....someone talking... let me give a couple to the staff. and to the hearings officer and you can have the rest. ..... laughter .... UNKNOWN. "Do you have more of therA or is this it?" WAYNE XITIEUSON, "Thats it. Okay, I hope people can see this, somewhat anyway, The first slide here. and these follow pretty much in order with what you have, as far as your hand out. Shows sort of a schematic of the transportation system that is serving the site and as you can see the primary access to the area, as you known, is from Pacific Highway. The site itself is located in this gonaaral area and of course this is not necessarily drawn to scale, but on the opposite side of this is the church that people where talking about. we're on the''west side of the frontage road and on the"aquth side, of Bull Mountain Road. The traffic analysis was. I think, a pretty comprehensive one that covered quite a few issues regarding traffic operation , and traffic safety Impacts of the proposed development. Whaht I would like to � do here in the next fifteen or twenty minutes is briefly go through this for you, that report and summarize for you the key things that I think are F Important from a traffic perspective. Those include first a discussion of the t existing conditions out there, as the site and the intersection are today. x What we are talking about there specifically are traffic volumes and traffic safety characteristics. Talk a little bit about trip generation characteristics, I see that* spelt wrong, but in any case, the, what kind, what volume of traffic we expect the site to be generating and where that traffic is likely to be coming from. We'll talk a little bit about the planned roadway Improvements in the area. Both those that are being done by outside parties, specifically Oregon Department of Transportation and those that are being proposed as part of this project. We combine those then to talk about future conditions, traffic, again related to traffic volumes and traffic safety and finally conclude with a summary of the recommendations that camas out of our traffic analysis. The traffic, let me start first with existing conditions. The first question that we had to deal with was, when, what is the time period that we shoald be considering in our analysis. Typically traffic analysis is done during peak hour of the day, of a week day, "i TEXAOD TRANSCRIPT— 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 24 normally thats the evening peak hour of a typical week day. The reason that we pick one hour of the day is because, obviously, traffic volumes change over a course of a day and our objective here is to analysis worse case conditions. So if we can identify the time period when the combination of background traffic, traffic that is already on the roadway, and site generated traffic is going to be greatest. When it put the greatest total demand or stress on the transportation system. If we can evaluate that condition and find a way to accommodate that traffic level, than we suspect we are also able to accommodate traffic volumes at all other times of the day. Well in this case there were several potential candidates for the worse time period of the day. Those included weekday morning peak hours. because Bull Mountain Road has residential land uses and so theres heavy volumes both in the morning and the evening peak hours and also weekend mid day time periods, because of the proximity of the shopping center and the way people travel in that area. So what we did was to conduct traffic volume counts at the intersection of .. Pacific Highway and Bu31 'Moauntain Road , during all three time periods. This slide shows you what we cane up with. This is the maximum one hour volume we � observed. First on the weekday morning peak hour, second, on the weekday evening ;%ak hour and this was generally about, X think, it was five to six, four thirty to five thirty. somewhere in there and finally the weekend midday Period, which was, as I recall was Saturday between about two and throe, somewhere in that range. What you can soo here is that the weekday evening peak hour has the greatest volume by a significant percentage over the other two. So all of our analysis then was based upon this time period." UNKNOWN, "Should this, was this an average over a number of days, or is this WAYNE KITTELSON, "This was observed on two different days. They war* picked, they were picked to reflect typical conditions. Tho data were collected in October, first of all, October is a average traffic month as for as season of the year goes, overall. The data were collected as far as weekday, on a Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday, which is a midday within the weak period and represent typical traffic pattern for the weekdays." UNKNOWN, "Your report says November of '19BY?" TEXAOO TRANsSCRIPT•— 3/24/88 — 5/28/98 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 25 8� WAYNE KITTELSON, "That% when the report was written. but the data, that% when the report was finally submitted, the data were collected' in October, yeah, in \ October." t= BETH MASON, "Let me interrupt for a moment. There was opportunity to ask questions before the hearing, there will be another opportunity to ask questions after the hearing. We'll probably get a lot of these questions answered as Mr. Kittelson proceeds through his presentation. Why don't we give him a chance to do that." WAYNtE KITTELSON, "Okay, so at any rate, what we did then was. we focused upon this time period and we broke these traffic volumes down then, to look at the turning movement patterns during that time period. And this slide shows those turning movement patterns, I've sort,of taken that one area of our map and blown it up so that you can see it In little more detail. Again, because --it, look- thil words •a're hard: to rvaad here. "This As Bull Mountain Road, this is Pacific Highway, and this the frontage road coming through. The arrows here reflect the traffic volumes that we observed, and in fact, the traffic report has a summary of those actual numbers. What I've done here for visual " purposes is to draw these lines with bands that are proportional to the volumes so that you trot some idea, from a visual point of view, as far as what the volumes are and where they are coming from and going to. In terms of the total traffic on Bull Mountain, I don't recall the exact number, but, give me just a second here, the total volume during the evening peak hour was about 2, about 800 vehicles going west bound and about 170 going east bound. So thats the size of these numbers. This total volume hare, I believe, was about 14 or 1500 coming down this way, and about 1100 hundred coming up this way. in terms of level of service, and level of service is a, I should mention, level of service is a concept that traffic engineers have developed to quantify how well the intersection is operating from a qualitative point of view. Arai we take Into account things ]Ike the capacity of the roadway in relation to its volume, :the impediments and delays that drivers incur. What we found here is that this intersection Is operating in an acceptable level of service currently. Level of service range generally from A to F, with A being the best level of service, basically .no interference to traffic, to an individual driver. F level of service being •bpyond' capacity. E is defined as the capacity of the roadway. 0 is generally used as the definition of what is the y. TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 26 minimum acceptable level of service in an urban area. what we found is that this intersection currently is operating somewhere between a B and C level of service. Now, the big problem at this intersection right now is, that the > > cycle length, the time that it take the traffic signal to go through its cycle is way to long for the volumes that are here. And that causes a significantly more delay than you would normally expect. The reason For that, is that this signal is interconnected with the other traffic signals on down the road. In fact its interconnected with the systems that goes all the way to 64th. So consequently they all running at about a two, in excess of a two minutes cycle. And by the time that wa get down hare, even though the demands don't warrant a 140 second cycle, or whatever it is, we're forced into that because Its part of a system. So that* why, in essences you, as a drivor when you come up to this intersection it appears that you sit for a awfully long time before, 'before you can clear through. The reason is, well in fact you are sitting for two long of a time given the traffic volumes, but you are being forced—to do that because—of the signal' system that is running on Pacific Highway. We looked at traffic accidents in the area, and of course that* one of the issues that most people here are concerned about, this slide shows, is basically taken out of the traffic report and shows a summary of the accident history over a, as I recall, the most recent three year period, as it was obtained from the Oregon Department of Transportation. The top slide hare, and these, yes Its a three year period, 1984, 85, and 86. The top graph here shows the intersection of Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road. The bottom graph shows the intersection of Bull Mountain Road and the frontage road. Now the interesting thing here, first, the number of accidents, ranges from, well let* see it was four in 1984, six in 1985, and five in 1986. Now, one thing that you should recognize is that this is not necessarily the total number of accidents that occur at either of these intersections. Theres a number of accidents that occur that arn't reported, typically those are fender benders that are to small to report, for a variety of reasons the drivers just don't report them. These are the summary of all reported accidents at those intersections. The Interesting thing that I was going to say is that, the number of accident, at this intersection, Pacific Highway and Bull Mountain Road is comparable to the number of accidents that were occurring down here at the frontage road. You can see that it was two, four, and four, at the frontage road over those same years.-, Now thats interesting because the volumes, if you recall our previous slide, the volumes are much higher here TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 27 i than here. So what that implies is that the potential for an accident, given the number of cars that go through the intersection, the potential for an accident is Bauch higher clown here than it is up here. And I suspect that if you drive through that intersection you'll see why. The major problem, when we looked at this data in a little bit more detail and tried to brake out the types of accidents that are occurring. khat we found is that the types of accidents are typically angle turning type accidents. So whats happening, to a large degreo. if I do back to this slide, and put it on the right direction. Whats happening many times is that you do get a qua of cars backing up from this intersection on Bull Mountain Road down towards, and even past the frontage road, and again a big reason for that que backing up so far is because we have a long cycle light there. That qua backs up so far that it begins to impede the site distance of people who are coming out from these cross streets. They can't see cars that are coming down this way, there coming down a, basically a grade, and there coming down at a pretty good *peed. This qua blocks the',view of people from- this side who might be'aiakirig a left turn or be crossing. Those are the primary movements that are being affected. And they pull out and get hit by someone whos coming down to fast and can'ti stop. Thats one of the 'big problems with this intersection. It 4 appears that, again that its angle and turning type accidents, and they tend to focus upon the left turning movements out, and the crossing movement, across the frontage rami. That kind of a quick summary of existing conditions, Now, what I would like to do now, is talk a little bit about the site wnd what the trip generating potential is for this site. First you need to understand that there is different types of trips that are being made to a facility such as this and they have an impact on how much additional traffic Is really going to be generated. In order to describe that I've put in here another little slide that you probably, thats not part of your hand out. But what I want to do is show you the basic trip types that you find to commercial developments. Just for illustrative purposes this is some residential area, this is a commercial development, whether its a shopping cantor or a gas stationlor what over. The first type of trip that you think of is a now trip. In other words this trip is being made from home to the shopping cantor and its being made because the shopping cantor is hare. That turns out to be a very small percentage of the total trips that are mads to these types of facilities. In fact, if I can pull this up; there* another type of trip that Is pretty predominate, and thats what we call a drop in trip. And thats being f TEXACO TRANSCRIPT• — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 28 made especially to somethings thats convenience oriented, like a service station, drop in trips are made primarily from home to work from home to other shopping opportunities, a variety reasons. Those trips are already passing by on Pacific Highway or on the frontage roan, and because they are passing by, and because of the convenience provided by whatever this commercial development happens to be, they take advantage of it and drop in and continue on. 5o those trips don't represent any new traffic to the street system. There are additional turning movements at the intersection. Hares where the effect occurs. Beyond that there is no additional impact. Ani finally we have what we call. diverted trip, and a diverted trip is one that, for example was being mads to an ARCO station or some other Texaco station, some distance farther away, but because of the increased convenience offered by this now facility these trips are diverted away from that site and come to this one instead:' Those trips and represent new traffic to the street system in the immediate area, but over all they generally reduce total vehicle miles of travel, because, again people are diverting generally to save travel distance. Well in order ,to quantify how much of each of those typos of traffic we're going to have from this dovelopmant, we conducted a survey at almost identical Texaco facility, here in the Portland arra. And the survey w was a interview type survey where we interviewed that actual patrons of the stone, of the facility to find out, asking a series of questions, to find out Into what category their trip fell. Hsras the results of what we found. And we applied this, by the way, to this facility too, because they are identical In size, there both located on similar type facilities, major arterials, used primarily by commuters. As you can see drop in trips represent a pretty high proportion of the total traffic to a service station. In this case, about 65 to 69 percent of all trips were of the drop in type. In actual numbers what that translates into is 28 in bound trips and 28 outbound trips. Diverted trips was the next highest catogory and they reprosonted 10 in bound trips and 10 outbound trips. Now trips were the smallest and we found only two new trips and two in and out. Now for the purpose of our analysis, we combined these two categories and called these both new trips, because again we're not looking that far a field and for the intersections that we aro analysing, these diverted trips we are going to assume are now to the intersection that we are evaluating as well. 8o this is a break down of the trip generating characteristics of- the facility that •444 would expect during the evening peak hour of a typical weekday, and this was the analysis of future traffic. What TEXAW TRNMRZPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 -- 5/25/88 — PAGE 29 i s we dad was to take these traffic volumes and to assign them, or add them, overlay thew onto the future traffic volume projections that were provided to us by Washington County staff. and by the Metropolitan Service District. Now there future traffic volume projections are based on population and employment forecast for the whole metropolitan region, including the area surrounding this site. And those projections are for the year 2005. So basically we are taking ourselves up to about, what is that. 15, 15 to 17 year time period. Okay, thats my quick summary of the trip generation characteristic and how we arrived at those numbers. Now what I would like to do is talk just a little bit briefly about the planned roadway improvements. This slide, if you can see it, defines, well can't sea it very well, hope you can see it on your hand outs there. its a schematic that shows the site, let me try one other thing here. Well at any rate, this diagram describes the street system as its currentlil proposed for improvement. The major changes, one of which you have already talked about here is the future elimination of this section of the fr*ntage ,road,* &Ad• thaits'marked on your hand out' as a dashad 'line. This is the north section of the frontage road, and this is the section that ODOT talking about realigning to connect hero into 112th, and as I say, or as they have said, their intent is to do that sometime during the construction season oe MO. Although again they have no specific funding for this at this time. � The site itself is also being, proposing to make soma changes to access s conditions in the area. You can see the most significant of those is the elimination of the south frontage road connection to Bull Mountain Road. Again the primary reason for these improvements, is, on ODOT's side and also on ours, the obvious safety problem that exist there today, the obvious impact that that intersection has beyond safety on operating characteristics and capacity of these intersections. The site itself, according to the design that you have on the hand out, and this is a schematic design, shows one access drive that aligned opposite the existing access to the front, to the church and another one that is either just off the property or centered on the property. In either case its going to be s shared driveway,' both for this site and for the property that abuts. Now this is one alternative that Washington County proposed. Its one alternative that we looked at. This is the one that Washington County staff Balt was the most preferred of the three that they recommended. However, I think its important to note that Washington County staff didn't preclude' any of the three as viable alternatives. In fact they found all to be acceptable, but just felt that �- } 1 t TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/89 — 5/18/88 — 5/2b/88 — PACE 30 l E III this one was preferable for a variety of design and operational considerations. Since that time we've also come to another alternative that Mark talked about a little bit and T would like to sort of describe visually here again with you, if you can refer to your ma P• The primary concern, or the intent of all of all of this is to eliminate the, the intersection proximity of the frontage road at Pacific Highway. Elimination of the frontage road per se is not necessary to the solution, to that effective solution. So an alternative that we are talking about now would be to realign the frontage road, in other words vacate this portion of that south frontage road and bring the frontage road through a horizontal curve back down somewhere in here. So its serving first as the shared access, not only to this site but to this property and to other properties that may exist along the frontage road on down toward Beef Bend Road. And it doesn't eliminate the potential for people coming from Bull Mountain or this other area over here to get to Beat Benxi Road. Without getting out onto Pacific Highway, So at least from, an -access point of_ view. to me it Appears to be a preferable alternative. It also give us flexibility in terms of how ware able to provide for for the access needs of all properties in this area without increasing the number of access drives and that an important consideration from a traffic point of view. So what I mus suggesting here Is while all of our analysis has been based on the assumption that this driveway, that this frontage road is closed, in fact if you just realign it down here, its not going to make any significant difference In the traffic analysis, but I think it offers us some flexibility from a operational point of view that may be worth considering in the solution to the access to this property and at the same time it solves the problems with respect to accidents and traffic operational problems up here at this intersection, because it saves it far enough away, this is a distance of about, I don't know, somewhere betwoon 500 and 1004 foot. So that its more than enough distance back to provide for our stacking requirements. Okay, what we did then was to take the site generated traffic and to overlay it onto the additional traffic that$ going to bc yut there in the year 2005 and here again you see a diagram that$ At band diagram, volume profile diagram, that Illustrates the total volumes that we expert. Now this diagrams shows two driveways here. These are the driveways to the site or to the properties down this away. And you can see the. turning volumes that we are talking about here. In the evening peak hour, as I recall, this is, these lines actually, the widths of them are, X, I couldn't make theme thin enough relative to these TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/80 — S/18/88 — 5/25/08 — PAGE 31 r. - .. and still allow you to see thein. The volume into the shopping, into the Texaco service station is somewhere in the range of. what is it 40. 1 think. 40 in and 40 out, and they are splitting between left and right movements and you see here. and its about an even split. Now in addition to that we did a left turn lane warrant analysis. because there was some concern, if you go back and look at that schematic of the street system that serves this area. there is some concern that right now the road way. Bull Mountain Road is a two lane facility. And theres a, fair amount, there* potentially a fair amount of turning traffic, at least there is right now at the frontage road and there may be future, in the future, at the Texaco service station to the tuna, of what. about 15. T think it was about 15 in during the evening peak hour. The question is does that warrant, either from a safety point of view or from a operational point of view a third lane that can be used as a separate left turn lane. We conducted a► analysis and this is again, sort of a visual representation of the results,, of that analysis. For the Hearings Officer �,-- reference. one thing. first'thing that wa'did' look at; and this relates to a „ question you asked the staff earlier. Was the probability of a quo extended past the existing frontage road, and on page 35 of our report we note that in the future that we were estimating a 71 percent probability that there would ' be a que of vehicles in the east bound direction that would extend past the frontage road in the morning peak hour, and a 42 percent probability that would extend past the frontage road in the evening peak hour. Thats pretty high percentages. And I wouldn't consider that generally acceptable► from a traffic operations point of view if I had m lot of traffic trying to get in and out. in this case, we looked at several different categories. The first thing that we did was we considered wall whats the probability of blockage of the site access drive, the eastern most one, the one closest to Pacific Highway in the evening peak hour, at soma point during a signal cycle, and in this case we assumed a traffic signal cycle of 140 seconds, which is a pretty long cycle. What we found is that potential was 12 percent. So there was a potential for 12 percent of the traffic signals, at some point during that signal cycle, you would have a car waiting to turn onto Pacific Highway that was extended back pass the driveway. The eastern most driveway to the Texaco service station. Now generally we try to design with a 90 percent probability of no back up. So this is marginal. But remember we are just talking about the potential of a blockage sometime --d6rin' the signal cycle, and in fact, during most signal cycles the blockage doesn't occur during the whole signal TEXACO TRANSCRIPT• — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 32 cycle, it occurs at the very end of the traffic signal cycle, while the reds been red and the ques been building up and then at the very beginning of the next cycle, as your dissipating that que. So we looked at that in a little i., more detail and said what the probability of blockage of any given time during the hour. That turns out to be 4 1/2 percent, and again this is the morning peak hour because thats the time period when you have the greatest volume of traffic leaving Bull Mountain Road. And finally, the question from a operational or safety point of view, is whats the probability of first of all having a blockage, which is 4 1/2 percent of the time and second of all having a left turning car, which we only have 15 during an hour, trying to turn into the site at the time that the roadway is blocked, so that he has the potential to then to delay, or delay traffic on Bull Mountain Road, or to cause a rear end type accident. And that turned out to be substantially less than one percent;' So our conclusion based on this is that thare isn't a warrant from a operational point of view for a separato left turn lane here. Theres not enough potential for this condition• to ,occur, its less than one percent even, during the mourning peak hour. What it basically translated into is we would expect that condition to happen maybe once or twice a weak. Well that sort of brings ale to a quick summary. And a summary of our analysis is first, that we believe that as a result of the tnAfflc InvestlUation we conducted and access design should be incorporated, or should be modified from, what we original proposed, or what had been original proposed by the developer to incorporate the shared driveway on Bull Mountain. We concur that there is probably not a need that to the extend that we can we want to minimize access drives onto Bull Mountain Road, especially in the vicinity of Pacific Highway. And second. we recommended also that we eliminate that south frontage road connection to Bull Mountain Road, either eliminate it or realign it, and I believe that, at least in there interim, regardless of what ODOT does, regardless of whether 000T builds their road in 1989, or the year 2000, or five year hence, that Chats going to have a significant beneficial effect In terms of the operating and traffic safety conditions at the Intersection. And the reason for that again is that by eliminating the south frontage road, we eliminate two of the key problems, I believe, at that intersection right now. And that* the left turn from the south frontage road out onto Bull Mountain Road. And thats the one Chats blocked from view of the on coming traffic:, and therefore is an accident potential. And• wo also eliminate from both the south frontage road and the north frontage road the potential for crossing �1 TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/89 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 33 . ........ rrr .. .. ....... ...s... .. .._ movements, people to cross Bull Mountain Road and those are also the high risk movements at that intersection, So I'm not saying that a three legged intersection a 100 feet from Pacific Highway is good, but its substantially better that what is there today, and I think it would. as a interim solution it would be an acceptable condition. Recognizing that the improvement and the complete removal of even the north frontage road is likely to occur within two. well one to five years. That* a quick summary of my analysis and I'm open to question if you have any." BETH MASON. "Okay. Why don't we take a break that I promised at @:30, you can organize your thougths and your questions and I will take questions for Mr. Kittelson immediately after break. Well take about a 10 minute% break." BREAK BETH MASON,- "Fresh in your mind and wail we all still fairly fresh. ' So if you have questions of Mr. Kittelson, now is the timo to ask them. Yes Madam." UNKNOWN, "I wanted to ask about the third turning lane, in response. I Suess first I should say that some of this information you are presenting tonight is ' new in the, well. talking about, I haven't seen this, and I haven't seen that, and I haven't seen the new, your alternative "Q" for. whore your coming out with frontage road. In looking at that I am,wondering if that would warrant, or have you considered, why is that now presentation, and not proposing to close the south frontage road, is that not going to discern that *am* problem up higher, up west, I got high and low, up and down, and right and left, okay west" WAYNE KITTEL.SON, "The problem at the }frontage road is not the traffic volume, because the traffic volume as you saw from one of our slid** is not that high. The• intersection itself if its in the right spot has the rapacity to handle the traffic. The problem is is that its to close to Pacific Highway and thats what, its interfering with how wall the signal can work at Pacific Highway, and its interfering with, its causing accidents. So we can move it far enough away so that drivers as soon as they turn on, from Pacific Highway onto Bull Mountain Road, don't run into a,"right a way, all of as sudden run into a new intersection. Then we've solved the operational and the safety TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 34 problems, its a locational problem, I think the realignment solves that. One additional thing that I might mention. You had said that this last alternative that we indicate, that we brought up is new. I don't think it really is, at least from a operational point of view. If you've seen our traffic report and go to alternative three, which original we objected, primarily because it cut through the center of the site. But it showed a realignment of the frontage road to the south. The reason that we rejected it initially is because it cut through the site and ruined the site. But what we've done is rethought that and said well lets move it a little farther south, that makes it evan better from a operational point of view and lines it UP- but still basically is still a realignment of the frontage road. So it was something that we did consider in the original traffic report." BETH MASON. "More questions? Yes sir." UNKNOWN, I guess this is -perhaps . . . ... . .. . statement. people tend to come down. traveling east on Bull Mountain Road fairly fast. What are you going to do in tsr+ms of visibility in terms of someone making a left out of your, whats known as the Joint driveway?" WAYNE KXTTELSON, "A lett out of the west " UNKNawN, "Someone* making a left out of your facility making a left going onto the hili, you have people coving down the hill at a fairly fast clip. You want to **sum* that the visibility in that area WAYNE KiTTELSON, "Right, right, you, Yes your right, and your probably talking about the must most driveway, because thats the one closest to pacific Highway." BETH MABON, "No, there talking about the west most.,, . . . several people talking"... . WAYNE KYTTELSON, "The west most driveway if they make a left . . .. . unknown parson talking at the same time .... Oh coming down Bull Mountain, oh, okay, wall sight distance there is fine comir* dsiwn Bull Mountain Road, your right there is a hill there." TEXAW TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/89 — PME 35 UNKNOWN. "The person turning left onto Bull Mountain ...... WAYNE KITTELSON. "Right. he can see. he can see, and the sight distance is in excess of a thousand feet. Theres no problem with sight distance that way. The area where we had a questions about sight distance, and maybe I shouldn't even talk about it. was on the east driveway. People turning left out of that driveway and being able to see traffic coming from Pacific Highway. Thats, you know, cause, the question is those people are coming at a pretty good speed too. And we went out and actually measured the speed of the traffic there and found, I don't recall if its in the report or not. As I recall the average, the 65 percentile speed, in other words 85 percent of the people were observed to be traveling at or below, I think about 35 miles per hour. Thats a pretty high speed for that turn. This is a right turn northbound on Pacific Highway 'turning onto Bull Mountain Road." -UNKNOWN, "Did ' you do any studies of speeds of people••coming down Bull Mountain." WAYNE K&TELSON, "Yeah, well thats the point where you want to catch them, because its just as they come around that corner, when they first get a glimpse of ..,. . ... several people from audience — no, no, your going the wrong way, coming down east bound. BETH MASON, 01194% answer two questions, he's answering initially the question you asked about the west bound drivaway and then he expanded and went on to talk about left turners out of the oast bound driveways. So he's saying, the initial question as I understand it is what happens to this turning movement here. You have people come down Bull Mountain Road and you have a left turner who wants to go east, or wast on Bull Mountain Road, He answered that by saying that the sight distance between this driveway entrance and up Bull Mountain Road is in excess of a thousand foot. So We not to concern about this person being able to too an adequate distance to so* somona coming down the hill and to make a correct judgment .. ..tape ended . .. . wast and thats ware he expanded his answer and he started talking about people making a left out of Mare as wall. He answered your first question." TEXACO TRANSCRIPT -- 3/24/68 — 5/18/88 -- 5/25/88 — PAGE 36 WAYNE KI7TELSON, "Boy I wish I would have said it like that." 1\' UNKNOWN, My second question is, is about, a question about measuring the speed coming down Bull Mountain Road?" WAYNE KITTELSON. "We did not measure that speed. No." BETH MATSON. "Yes madam." UNKNOWN, "Maybe I missed something in your excellent presentati:an, but did you address the issue of expanding population with all of the development on Bull Mountain." WAYNE KIYTELSON, "I tried to. We, in our analysis of future conditions, we used, we didn't use just existing traffic volumes out there, we, we expandod the traffic volumes on Bull, Mountain Road and on Pacific Highway to reflect what the Metropolitan Service District and Washington County are projecting for the year 2005, so thats about a 15 or 17 year period, time horizon into the future and those projections are based on, basically what metro does, is they look at the currant zoning of all the property throughout the whole Portland Metropolitan area and they project in discussions with City staff and with County staff and all these people, future population and employment levels in each of these areas and then they use that then to translate into traffic volume projections and its something that they use to project regional transportation Improvement needs for the next 20 years. 8o that the basis that we used, its a constant, its a number that* standard and accepted throughout the region as a reasonable estimator of future traffic." BETH MASON, "Yes sir." UNKNOWN, to far from mic . . .. . specific Dull Mountain area or does that incorporate a larger region than this Bull Mountain part?" WAYNE KITTELSON, "Well its both, the Portland, the Metropolitan Service District is responsible for projecting traffic volumes not just in Bull Mountain but throughout the whole regio», *arid they have a computerized model that looks at the whole area and it includes Bull Mountain. So what we see is TEXA00 TRANSCRIPT-- 3/24/88 — 5/38/89 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 37 the net affect of all that development including the stuff that occurs in Bull Mountain area." BETH MASON. "Yes madam." UNKNOWN. "Could we. if we have another meeting, could we have the actual figures rather than just the width of the arrows." WAYNE KITTELSON. ":.ure, or I could, yeah " BETH MASON, "There, in your report arn't they." WAYNE KITTELCON, "They are in the report if you have access to the report." BETH MASON, "I have a copy here if you want to take a minute during the hearing to look at it now." UNxfxWM, "Okay, And I have another question, have you considered the steep"*## of Bull Mountain Road, a thousand feet, okay, the, okay, the western exit, you say you have visibility for a thousand foot. thats great, but have Ew1 you considered a thousand feet . .." WAYNE KITTELSON, "On the grade." UNKNOIe1 ". . . coming down, what does the stopping distance?" WAYNE WrELSON, "Yes the stopping distance, and your right a down grade adds to the stopping distance requirements, but in this case, a► thousand root mora than exceeds the stopping distance requirements, even on a pretty stoop downgrade. In fact, our analysis doesn't just look at the effect of the grade, it also assumes wet pavement, so that your taking into account lower friction between the road pavement and the tiros. And the requirement for a 55 MPH traffic to stop, stopping sight distance is about 500 foot. That* how, that# the time, and that includes time to sea the vehicle, to perceive the problem and to stop on the brake and to come to a stin." TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 30 To BETH MASON, "Yes sir." UNKNOWN. "How do you, referring to this .... .... which is the peak volumes. C# how do you know this are the peak volumes, did you have someone sit there for 24 hours?" WAYNE KITTELSON, "We had someone sit there, what we did was. its okay." UNKNOWN, The reason, the reason I ask is because it seems like you take this data and you extrapolate this and everything else, or a lot of key decisions are determined by these little snap shops, so go on I would like to hear WAYNE KITTELSON, "Okay, your, yeah, your right, tha%ts a bases for the analysis; and what we did was to sample during a< time period, during a 'time period, a time interval, at both, at all three of those time periods. In the „ morning peak hour we look, betwoon- seven, we , had someone stationed there counting traffic between seven in the morning and nine in the after, in the morning, and what you see during that time period is you see traffic volumes start low, build up, then start dropping off again. Okay, so we are sure within that time frags that we found the peak hour, we found when it peak, and Jt turned out, I forget what the time period exactly was, somewhere, it was probably 7:80 to O:So or 7:18 to 8:15, somewhere in there. We did the some thing, we looked at a two hour window between four and six pen on the evening weekday peak hour and then we looked at a, I'think it was a three hour period on a weekend. Decause we wern't quite as sure when the hour, when the peak would occur, to we looked between about one and four. Thats how we found those peaks and we, and typically, you consider the type of road that pacific Highway is, its serving ee lot of function but one of its primary functions is to serve commuter traffic and thats why you see those heavy peaks in the morning and evening and at the other times of the day its busy, but its not as busy." BM MASON, "Yes madam. Oh, did you have a to22ow-up question?" UNKNOWN, "Yeah. do you noraeally talk to sbmer people that travel the road, or do you just" E i t TEXAOD TRANWRIPT — 3/24/ee — 5/19/89 — 5/25/89 — PAS 39 .Y��..I.. �^M�.:!"Y...•MM.M.�/.I(..RM�Y ��.. M .F.. . ..ww�.0 rw WAYNE KITTELSON. "Well I travel the road and I live in Tigard. I use it every day." UNKNOWN. "So you up and down Bull Mountain Road every day. I'm talking about Bull Mountain Road." WAYNE KrMLSON. "Oh Bull Mountain Road, no, I'm probably there about once a month or twice a week. I mean twice a month. something like that." UNKNOWN. "Okay, do you .normally, as part of the traffic survey talk to some people to find out what, other than just the data. which is just counting off. Do you talk with some people about their experiences in traveling up and down," WAYNE KITTELSON, "No, we don't normally • talk to individuals about it. We generally rely• on� traffic,',volume couni's and .accident records and volume records that we can obtain from the City's or the State, or the County," w BETH MASON. "Yes madam." • UNKNOWN, "Where in your presentation can we learn how much of the traffic JJ, that ordinarily goes beyond Bull Mountain through Tigard, pass beyond Bull Mountain Road on Pacific Highway, that will .come down to the Texaco station enc! go back out from the Texaco station. In other words . . . WAYNE KIYTELS M, "And continue on Pacific Highway." UNKNOWN, ".. increasing the clog and mass right there at that intersection because there is a frcility there that will draw them in?" VAYNE XITTELSM, "Okay, your -talking about the, your talking about the facility., the intersection being Pacific and Bull Mountain?" UNKNOWM, ,......... bring in from Pmt fic Highway that would ordinarily pass us by?" ' TEXACO TRANSCtZ'IPT•— 3/24/88 — 5/18/68 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 40 WAYNE K-ITTELSON. "That again is in the report and you can find the estimate of that, if you look at figures 13 or 14 on pages 29 or 30 of the report. They show site generated traffic, additional site generated traffic going !1 through going each of the key intersections in the study area because of this development. Now at the intersection with Bull Mountain Road and Pacific Highway, what it shows, under the evening peak hour and it varies a little bit by alternative. But it shows a increase of about. if your looking in the peak direction, in the evening peak hour, those are cars that are coming south bound. south on Pacific, we have 15 additional cars turning right from Pacific Highway onto Bull Mountain Road, and then we have la additional cars. during the peak hour, during the peak one hour period. And you have 15 more coming out of the Texaco service station turning. coming up to the intersection, turning right and continuing on down Pacific Highway." UNKNOWN, "So we would have .like 30 more activities per hour?" WAYNE KITTELSON, "Thats right, turning movements, you have 30 more, well you have than that, because you have some left turns from, from Dull Mountain Road onto Pacific Highway and there are some left turns from Pacific Road onto Dull •• ll� Mountain Road, to " J UNKNOWN, "Is that considering the present population?" WAYNE K17TELSON, "No, well this is site genaratod traffic, this is just what is generated by the site, irrespective of what, right, and so if you add all those turning movements up you get an additional 25, 35, 50 vehicles, 50 turning movements through the intersection." UNKNOWN, "But my point is so we have 50 turning movements and activities there just generated by the site, not withstanding whatover additional may happen on the mountain coming down, so that moans how many more potential problems. ... . t WAYNE KZTTELSON, "okay, then, then what your asking is the total, whets the total turning movements in the future and we've got that summarized on pages 32, 33, and 34, or 33 of the report and the total turning movements at that Intersection in the year 2005, under PM peak hour conditions is about three, t � ) t TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 5/18/88 — 5/25/68 — PAGE 41 four, five, it looks like about 600 hundred. sin or seven hundred turning movements. That includes right and left turning vehicles." UNKNOWN. "Per hour?" WAYNE KITTELSON. "During the peak hour." UNKNOWN. "So that would be how many a second? ..... laughter .,.." WAYNC KITTELSON, "Six maybe, I don't know. Now, that, now, the intersection clearly has the capacity to handle that. Its a signalized intersection and theres far greater volumes than that hold, handled at lots of other intersection and they do it very, very easily," UNKNOWN, "Well, sure, there not possibly residential areas are they?" WAYNE KrMLSON, "Yeah, well, sura. Its " UNKNOWN. .. .,..,... 217 and Allan Blvd for example but we're not living there." �.. WAYNE KITTELSON. "One other thing to keep in mind here is that in terms of how the commuter traffic flows here, this site is on the correct side of the roadway. Because most of its traffic is during the evening peak hour, most of the traffic coming into the site is during the evening peak hour, and the site is on the right hand side of the road in the, peak direction of travel, to that the majority of people coma in to the site make a right in and a right out and from an intersection point of view thats right side of the road to have a generating convenience oriented facility. Should bo on the side that people are commuting on." UNK1,• "But thats on, yeah, Chats on Pacific Highway not Dull Mountain Road." WAYNE KITTELSON, "Well, yeah, but its a right in and a right out. Bull Mountain Road when you get down there -Irl' the evening peak hour. Dull Mountain Road does not have very, again, most of the traffic on Bull Mountain Road is �. TEX.AOD TRANMRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 42 going up the hill in the evening, not down the hill, there not coming out of the residential area, there going back end." ^ UNKNOWN. "Wouldn't it complicate things to be turning left into a Texaco service station?" WAYNE KITTELSON, "No, No, because your not conflicting with any on corning traffic. its an easy movement to make. There* very few times when when you face an opposing vehicle and have to stop and wait for him to get by.,, BETH MASON, "Yes Sir." UNKNOWN, "Have you visited that site? During peak hours?" WAYNE KITTELSON, "Yes. Yes." UNKNOWN, "And seen the number of cars backed up Pacific Highway, backed up Bull Mountain Road, and your telling ma that the light traffic your not going to have & problem making a left hand turn into there." .� WAYNE KXTrEL8ON, "Oh, no, no. Your right, it backs up quite a ways, and and that* why we say in the evening peak hour, its the morning when you have the biggest problem, if your talking evening, You ought to be out there In the morning, because that* we talking Prom audience . . . . that$ when everybody from the residential area is coming out. 80 that* when you have the 4 greatest demand off the street onto Pacific Highway and, lot as see, there# a 70 percent probability that there agoing to hack through � the intersection with the frontage road. So what that means is that they back through that intersection at the frontage road most every time, most every cycle you have cars extending well past that. But this access drive has boon set back far enough, so that the probability of that quo extending to the vita, to the site's driveway, oven with the future traffic volume is, well as we went through it, 12 percent during a cycle and 4 1/2 percent during any given time period of a day of the peak hour." BIETH M SON, "Yes sir." r TEXAM TRANSCRIPT— 3/24/88 — 5/16/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 43 B� BETH MASON, "Any more questions of Mr. Kittelson? Alright. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in favor of the application. This is the time ( for anyone wishing to speak in favor. Okay those speaking in opposition." "Do I have to talk with this?" BETH MASON, "Yes, please, It might help if its comfortable to put it around your neck, or you can hold it," "Thais okay, I'm not going to be here that long. My names is BEVERLY FROUDE, and I'm the Chairperson of CPO number 4, Bull Mountain. I would like to make a request first, We did have a town hall meeting in October, to which the applicant and the City of Tigard were invited and were in attendance and made a presentation and we had a very good, largo group of people, I would say in excess of 50 or 75. Much ,of' the, its been so ,long, and theres been so many delays and put off* on the, date. The information that we have now received tonight is a little bit different that what we were given at the town hall meeting in the sense that there have boon some changes. In that the entities, the State, the City, and the applicant, and the County have all gotten together and comae up with some different road proposals and some, and that we've not soon and I would request in your setting this over, if it isn't finished tonight, that we have about 30 days so we can have another meeting, I need that lead time because I have to go through the extension service to send out my letters. Also, I would like to say that since the last meeting we did go, I would like to present these additions. We did go to all the neighborhood, this is not a controlled group. We went from door to door, and talked to people about this proposal and the petition say that we the undersigned oppose the proposed conditional use request to allow Texaco service station, car wash, and 24 hour store at the intersection of Highway 99, Bull Mountain Road and the frontage road. Any business on this property which would intensify the already congested and hazardous traffic problems would be unacceptable. And I am presenting these as part of our presentation. The CPO, Bull Mountain did have a town hall meeting last October, to which the applicant and the City of Tigard were (invited and were In attendance. The vote was unanimous Jby the community in attendance at this meeting against this proposal because of safety on the roads, traffic TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/89 — 5/16/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 45 t s congestion and questioning this use of the land. In reviewing the findings submitted by City of Tigard and Washington County Transportation Dept,, traffic safety is still a paramount issue. not acceptably addressed. To close f the frontage roads from both directions is a start, but this must be done in conjunction with the construction of the improvements of Bull Mountain Road and Hwy 99 intersection. There is MSTIP funding and matching funds with ODOT s for this project, which we have been told will occur not any earlier than 1990. It is important that both north and south frontage roads be closed entirely with no openings possibla from either direction. It is important also in conjunction with the access issue that one shared access only be allowed for the remainder of the property to be developed under the CP zoning, and this access be in conjunction with the General Commercial site we are discussing tonight. It is also very important that a left turn lane that could bi' used by both the Church entrance and the south property entrances be provided. In closing comments on the road safety, until all of the ODOT. Washington County. City of,'Tigard' road improvements aro'comolotod the use Of this land should be delayed, Phasing in the road improvements will only cause more confusion than already exists. Regarding the request for this use and needing a conditional use our community is questioning this proposal is compatible with the surrounding zoning and uses. The surrounding land is C—P, i. multi—family, single family, and a church. It is probable that none of these uses will be all night operations, or be to vehicle intensive. We request this use not be allowed on this land because ,it is not compatible use in this location. In closing, we request as a community you deny this use for this land because it is not a compatible use with the surrounding zoning, and more Important the road improvements must all ko in place before any major land us* changes be allowed." BETH MASON, "Before you leave Me. Froude I der have a question. I didn't understand your request on the left turn lane that would servo both the church and the site. Tho*re on opposite side of the street, 'how would a left turn lane serve the church while serving the site." BEVERLY FROUDE, "Ther only reason I think It could happen is because if you go up the hill on Bull Mountain where they put in the Street of Dreams, there* a Street of Dreams road and than right..acrose the road is a driveway and they have arrows going both ways. And the:ras one canter turn lane." TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/86 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 46 C 111 illillismilmnlinsimm l BETH MASON, "Are you talking in the center of the road?" BEVERLY FROUDE, "Yes." I_ ) l BETH MASON, "So its essentially a third land, a turning lane." BEVERLY FROUDE, "Yes, right, a turning lane, thats what I mean, maybe I used the wrong words. A center turn Lane." BETH MASON, "Okay, thank you. And I have a question of staff based on one of things she said. Doesn't a commercial uses require two site access, or can you have one site access on a commercial use." KEITH UDEN, "You can have one." BETH MASON, "You can havo-ono, and then"situ could be served by only one and be within the Code." KEITH LIDEN, "Yes." BETH MASON, "Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition?" "My name is KEN DICKEY, I live at 14565 SW McFarland. I'm just up here as an Individual. I've learned . .." BETH MASOM, "Did you sign in? I really need you to do that, please." KEN DICKEY, "Sura. I've learned basically not to argue with exports because, but I've also learned that history proven as number of experts wrong. And I don't know what assumptions your using in terms of statistical techniques and models and that sort of thing, but I know that when, for an example 8troet of Drams was there, I had a heck of a time getting out of McFarland onto Bull Mountain. And I strongly suspect that further dovelopment that I sae is going to greatly stress Bull Mountain as aA roadway. And both from ax safety concern and from concern of aesthetic,. Y, you know, looking { at the number of business that have cycled through this area, and the number of all night and extended facilities that provide this type of services, Y don't i TEXAOD TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18./89 — 5/25/50 — PAGE 47 E really see the, you know. I don't see this as a economic justification. I'm very concern with what happens to the buildings after businesses fail. And I understand that aesthetics doesn't cut very much weight, but I'm definitely concerned about the aesthetics of the area and the land use. Thank you, just a personal statement." BE'T'H MAS0N, "Let me answer one of your questions Mr. Dickey and that is what happens to the buildings when a business fails. Its much like the vacant building thats behind this proposed area. If any other use goes in there it requires an additional review by the City. So it doesn't automatically turn to another use." KENT DICKEY, "Yeah, I know, I understand that, I mean, I see the Hudson station''there, and I don't like it, And I understand that the market conditions say that things go ,out, but the problem is that I sae an eye sore and 1,don't want to live in- a pig sty. I like to live in a community and I'm ' very concerned about the appearance, because its a place that I spend my time." BETH MASON. "Okay, thank you. Anyone else. Yes," AA ' � J "My name is Chris Bednarek and I live at 14465 SW Hazelhill Drive, in Tigard, on Bull Mountain. And what I would like to say is that I don't really have any argument with a gas station per say. , But the intersection is real dangerous right now. I think when I come down there every day I kind of wonder what• going to happen at the bottom. Cars making turns, sometimes you can see what there going to do, sometimes you can't, it rather unpredictable and I think that anything that increases the traffic into that intersection is just going to increase the danger to the people that regular use Dull Mountain Road. So for that reason I'm against it. I think if someday that 99W is Improved, like the grade is taken out of there, so there• cigar vision in all directions, that would be a good site for &.business. It would probably be a viable site for a business too. I think right now the business kind of sits in a whole there and is not visible to easily from 99W. We've had a succession of failed business there, might have something to do with the fact that nobody knows they are there. Thank you. TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/80 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 48 BETH MASON. "I think I'm beginning to understand why Texaco included a application for a 50 foot sign. This is probably why. Yes sir." ' My name is Sanford Haskins. I live at 14252 SW McFarland, on Bull Mountain. And that 50 foot sign, or I believe it was a 40 foot sign was one of the things that I had in my notes that I have some problem with also. I think thats quite incompatible with the type of neighborhood we have there and it not really quite something I would like to look down on. I understand that the staff has recommended that that be within the 22 foot limit, I believe it is, or some change be made. My real concerns on this is that, if there is a station there, and I'm not real crazy about the idea of a station being there, that there should be the changes made to that frontage road first, and the changes to the grade. and all that traffic thing put into place before any change is made, or any conditional use permit granted for that particular property. I'm also quite concerned as to what the exiting building will be used for. Right now theres- no particular plan, but that gives me some cause for concern. And the other cause for concern on this, is tree thing that waive heard tonight, I believe was referred to as option "C", or option 0311, I'm not aura which it was, but that was the south frontage road being extended somewhat around the property, behind it or through the property and conning ' back onto Bull Mountain Road. And I wonder if that will not cause additional traffic problems. One of the other concerns that I have has, has to do with aesthetics and we've only lived out here about a year. One of the reasons that we moved to Dull Mountain from Portland, is that we like the neighborhood, we like the area, we liked being a► little bit away from the crowd. We have been somewhat concerned looking at Pacific Highway, since we've lived hare, its beginning to remind us 02nd Avenue in Portland, and I t think that another facility like this on Pacific Highway will add to that perception. The other thing that I would express some concern about is the p Issue, that I understand that a convenience store will be in there, and z potentially that is planned to be a 24 hour convenience store. I have some concern with that with relative to potential traffic Into our neighborhood late at night, with people who should perhaps not be there, perhaps younger people, perhaps cruisers, people like that. So I have a very serious concern If the conditional use permit was granted, It, there is any procedure whore the operating hours of that convenience store :could be someway limited. Thank YOU." Ham TEXACD TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 -- 5/18/88 — 5/25/89 — PAGE 49 t mom BETH MASON, "Okay, thank you. I need to stop just a moment. Do you have an extra pen. my pen has run out of ink. I have an excellent memory but I can't remember all of this. Thank you. Alright. Next. Yes sir." My name is Chris Hughes. I live at 12265 SW Duchilly Ct. on Bull Mountain. I commute down Bull Mountain to 99W most mornings, occasionally I go over the back way, and always buy my gas as I commute on 99W. The circumstances of that road is such that there are so many gas station there right now. There is no difficulty what so ever of buying gas at any price or quality you'd like. I understand from what you earlier that Texaco doesn't have to prove a need. But, this community simply does not need another gas station in that area. The only benefits of it will be Texaco themselves in competition with other people. Not the community. And Texaco is a largo company, probably will be*successful, cause they can afford to hang in. Somebody also will go out of business, not Texaco probably, means another eyesore on 99W. We don't need it. Thank you." ' BETH MASON, "Next." "My name is MADALYN UTZ, 14060 SW 133rd, I live on Bull Mountain. I have, I � ri4aliaee ... . BETH MASON, "Whoa, whoa, if you'll take , & minutes and sign in please, thanks. Its easy to lot that +Bat away from you and I, thats my record. MADALYN UTZ, "I have two comments. One you stated that we could bring our own experts in, and I feel that the petitions that we gathered to quickly because we had had, I think four dates, I think they were given to you buy Bev Froude. We gathered them so quickly because we had boon given four different data* of the hearing and until we know the final data we didn't start gathering them. We tried to gat representation of lavary area on the Mountain and this was done under the handicap of being school spring vacation, to a number of people are out of town, and this is why we have aaa small representation at the hearing also. So I feel that we do have expert representation here and those are the people who drive up and down the mountain daily, many time, several tido daily, often. We see not only the accidents that do happen, but many, many near misses, especially at frontage TEXA00 TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 50 i road. I feel that if you take away one of our problems closing the south frontage road you will only add another problem by making it go farther up the mountain. Also, I can't resist, just inserting into this something that I looked into just today. Within in a two and three quarter toile strip on Pacific Highway, and this was jest between Pacific Highway and Hall street and King City. I just wanted to tell you that we have five super markets, one not Yet complete, all of which have either extended hours or are open all night. Albertsons' is presently open all night. OJ's has been open all night, has extended hours. Those two supermarkets are very close to this intersection. We have three convenience stores and one that has already shut down within block$ of the ona that is being proposed. We have eight gasoline stations and one that is up for sale, vacant and up for sale. We have two car washes, and I understand, I don't know this for a fact that there is an additional one planned -for King City, Plus three tiro stores, two quick lubes, two exhaust stores, one used car lot, and car glass door, and I can't resist saying and a partridge in a pear, tree, •... laughter-. . . What means that within, we have one super market to ovary halt mile within this less than three wile strip. We have one convenience story to every wile. We have one gasoline station to every third wile, and one car wash to every mile. Thank you." •• 09TH MASON, "Next. Mr. Hieb you keep bouncing up and down back there, why don't you come on forward. Actually its fairly amusing from up here, but its, ,.-laughter... but I thought he was doing it just to entertain me." UNKNOWN, "Probanbly was." "I'm AL HICB, We reside at 14915 aW 141st. I say we, its my wife Cindy L. Hieb, and three exons, two of which are driving ago. We have lived there since April of 1973, on Bull Mountain. Bull Mountain and Pacific Highway is our major access for all of our family activities and our business activities. On behalf of my wife and myself, we aro requesting that the conditional use Permit and the land partition be deniod. We are not opposed to development per say, but we are opposed to development if is in the wrong type of development in relation to the existing zoning for the particular parcel in question and the zoning of the surrounding And adjacent properties. And also that which poses hazardous conditions- In this particular case traffic .� hazards. I think in, I'd like to add to that statement, because that was r TEXACA TRANSCRXPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/89 — 5/25/88 — PACE 51 �.._ ,, ------- written earlier today, but I think that there are a lot of assumptions being made right now in relation to the decision that you people have to make. The parcel in question is commercial general. The parcel immediately adjacent on the south and the west is commercial professional. The property to the south of that is multi-family, the property westerly of the upper limits of the commercial professional is single family and residential. Now I have some problems because of the fact that, the way that the ingress and egress is situated, or proposed and now is being modified. I guess, What effect that might have on the parcel is commercial professional. It kind of, what ever decision is made here with regard to this parcel is going to affect that parcel because where is the ingress and egress going to be for that. Now if It is Commercial Professional, I'm sure that any business office space that goes in there, or that considers going in there is going to take a real hard look and' how do the get in and how to they out. Now if you swing that proposal up from the frontage, road, up around, and they might connect into that:, That kind of raises-'the question; as to how there going to gat out of there because then then they are facing that situation over on Deal' Band Road, which is a horrible intersection. Its a T, and I've seen a few accidents in that place. Now, no one, other than, I guess we can say the State is in favor of closing that frontage road on the south. I guess that is a given. Thats a, thsats probably a good move. Provided that we don't dump it off further up the hill. We're assuming by making this decision that that northerly frontage road will be closed, but we haven't had the blessing of the state. And I think that someone has to have their blessing before someone shuts that off. So we've made an assumption there. It may be true, it may not be true, but we are making the decision now on an assumption that is kind of iffy. Now it might help to close that frontage road to the south, and it might help to close that frontage road to the north, it still dumps traffic left out of that development onto Pacific Highway, which you have to cross a lane of traffic, or right and back up to the highway, or more importantly the people that are coming homy in the evening hours, as they ware pointing out, waking at right hand turn off of Pacific Highway, then a left hand turn off of Bull Mountain to enter that, that access point, or ingress egress point. You still have problems there with traffic, and I can't believe that making decision based upon no firm evidence that that northerly frontage is going to be closed, because if it isn't you've got peopie,cbmin4 out of there, making a look over there left shoulder to see who's coming off Pacific Highway, seeing if there TEXACO YRANSCRIPT - 3/24/88 - 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 - PAGE 52 going to get hit. and probably plowing right in the back end of a car thats trying to make a left hand turn into Texaco. Thats a possibility. Now. I would like to point out also that the comment has been made several time tonight that. well that parcel is not within this proposal, and I just want to remind you that the decision that you make here does affect those other parcels and they are all zoned differently and could affect the value of those properties in the future. Now safety, at best. is another reason that I want to talk about, because the current situation is bad and will continue to become worse with the growth of the area, Interestingly enough Kittelson made a comment earlier that they look at ODOT records, and naturally there are more accidents there, on that site than are reported. Thats a given. I went to the Tigard Police logs, and by the way for your information, and Alice Carrick and Officer Featherstrom are the keeper of this particular record. It is a log by month which shows all accidents to which the Tigard Police Department responded to. That report can only be made out if they go there. in 1985 there were 381 accident reported and responded to in the entire Tigard community. Eight of those 381 were to that given location, thats about two percent. 1986, there were 391, and increase of 10 over 85, and nine were to that location, or about 2.3, 2.4 percent. I noticed in the Kittelson report, •- and I'm going to hold back with one other place here, that they went to 84, 85 and they showed six in 64, ten in 85, and nine in 86, and that pretty well Jives with what I had and we both agree, thats not everything that happens. I'm sorry that Kittelson's staff didn't go a little bit further and take a look at 1987. Which happens to be the year o'f the Street of Dreams, increased traffic, etc. The report shows a slight decline over 86, in other 385 this year in 1987, against in 391 in 86, but Pour more than 85. Fifteen accidents ware called in and the Tigard Polies responded. Four plus percent. As I said we've lived there since 73, we've seen the increase, increase, increase, and its getting worse and its not going to get any better, and yet we are trying to make a decision without all the pieces laid out and specified or affirmed with State, so that when we make that decision, we make it the right way. Now, one other point that 2 wanted to make. Okay, Texaco and others, including Washington County Transportation analyst give a groat credence to closing of the frontage road and all of that, and I believe that would help, provided that the other sides closed. But at the same time they dismiss the left turn lane. Now if that davelopgwnts going to go, then I'd like to sea a left turn lane in there. Like I say people look over their shoulders and TUAfiD TRRf1t3CRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/98 — PAGE 53 their going to get creamed. I guess one other thing that I wanted to say, and that is, the situation at the long weights at Pacific Highway, if I heard Mr. Kittelson say, is because of the interconnection of all the signals down the way, correct. That ain't going to get better fellers because your going to add another signal at the new intersection thats going to give access to Canterbury Square. So you've got one more signal thats going to control that. I can`t see how its going to improve it. The State says they ... tape ended ..... happened. and T don't think we should get overly excited at this time. Just in summary to say that the decision that is made to go or no go, its gut a lot of ifs and a lot of assumptions that could effect a lot of things, Not only lives of people but also the value of that property down there," BETH MASON, "Thank you, Anyone else? Yes." "You'wint +sa"to sign flrst.al ' BETH MASON, "Please." "My name is Joan Young, I'm the Mayor of King City and we have a concern 4.. because our piople in King City use the frontage road a great deal to go over to Canterbury Square. We have a concern on several situations. Ono is that we are very much concerned about a lot of - concrete because we are getting water run off all the time and somehow or another we have a hard time making other people realize that whom your downstream that 'that is quite a problem and we're interested in knowing whats going to be done on drainage over there because we didn't have very good luck with the apartments, and we are getting an awfully water now because of the apartments on the corner of Beef Bond and Pacific Highway, and we feel that is one of our concerns. But, also, we would like to have more information in King City about this. I had someone show me the findings this afternoon on this program, that hasn't given us very much time to- look at them. And I would like to support Mrs. Froudo's request for the extension of time for the second hearing, if your having another one, so that we can take this before our Council and give them a chance to sere ktmt our people feel to about this, because a very large number of the people in King City do shop at, over at Canterbury and I'm afraid there going to, its going to restrict there activities completely. Because this is quite a _ ' �� TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/86 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 54 ® difference with the proposal for the ingress into Canterbury thats been proposed. I happen to serve on the policy board for the transportation committee in Washington County. I go to all of those meetings. There is no money proposed at the County level for anything on Bull Mountain and Beef Bend. In fact we are pushing for some work on Beef Bend Road rather than on Bull Mountain. And, so that, I can't see how there can be some of these things done under the existing circumstances. Thank you." BETH MAMN. "Thank you, Next. Yes madam," "When I first found out about the meeting BETH MASON. "Could I know your name?" "Oh. Ellen Dickey, 14565 SW McFarland. ' I first found out about this meeting ,and actualllr About the proposed Texaco car wash andaas g station, etc, two days ago and at that time I took petition around Say neighbor-hood, which is Shadow Hills. The reaction was unanimous. No one was for it. There was a variety of reasons and I think we need to hear those because very few of the people who I talked to were able to snake it. Thera were many absent residents also, but, I just want to know that even though there is a small handful here that there aro many. many people who oppose it. The second thing is that my personal opinion, again with the aesthetic problem, we are Part of Tigard, Shadow Hills, but I think that many people who live on Bull Mountain think of themselves as an entity. And I know real estate agents, when they say, well would you like to see a house on Bull Mountain, they are talking about the area as an entity. And I think that Bull Mountain Road being one of the major entrances to that community, I don't see a car wash, as the most aesthetic thing for an approach to a community like Bull Mountain." BETH MASON, "Thank you. Next. Okay. Z think this in a logical breaking point, Avan though we aro A little earlier than ton. I am inclined to continue this hearing for a couple of reasons. One, the magnitude of the application. I have a tendency to want to give avaryona a adequate opportunity to prepare to address tho issues in an application like this. Two, Its taken this application soma,.tIma 'to gat to ane. As wa'va all known Its been in the works since: last fall. You know, we first starting seeing TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/19/88 — 5/25/88 — pAGE 55 reports of this application. Is the applicant can take that kind of time preparing to reach this stage. I'm inclined to give the opponents, perhaps not an equivalent amount of time, but certainly a significant amount of time to organize themselves and to consider the facts that I need to hear. Accordingly I will continue this hearing tonight. And I'm going to continue it for 30 days, and let me give you the date right now that I'll continue it to. This is March 24th, I'm inclined to go to April 28th. Do we have anything set for that evening?" KEITH LIDEN, "Not yet." BETH MASON, "I'd prefer to keep it clear for just this, assuming we're going to take most of they evening for just this." KEITH UDEN, "We don't have anything at this point. So." BETH MASON, "Okay, I'm going to continues this to Thursday evening, April 28th at 7:00 PM in this room. Now I would like to make a couple of comments on what I've hoard so far. Land use decision, at this stage, where we have a • adopted Comprehensive Plan in this community and we have adopted zoning r ordinances in this community, land use decision are not made on the bases of popularity. I appreciate the fact that there aro hundreds of you who oppose this application. I don't take a vote and say there are a hundred people who oppose it and there are three people who want it, so the hundred win. I have to look at the facts, that boar on the suitability of this site for the proposed application. I have heard some of the facts tonight. I know I haven't heard all of them and thats one of the reasons I'm given you thirty days to, hopefully, organize your facts to comae in with your version of the traffic problem. Okay, I've heard from three sources now about the traffic problem. I've heard from the City staff, I've hoard from the Washington County -staff, their traffic analyst, and I've beard from fir. Kittelson. Mr. Kittelson is a hired gun, but I have worked with Mr. Kittelson for, I say ten years in this community on all sides. I've opposed him, I've hired him in the past, I've hoard from him in the Hearings Officer content. You know, he is a professional in this community who has a good reputation. Thera are other professionals in this community who hpve a'good reputation, you may want to consider enlisting one of them to assist you. Traffic engineer is a }} TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/86 — 5/10/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 56 specialty, its a recognized specialty of professional engineering. It has a language all its own. I happen to be familiar with that language because of my background in land use planning and land use planning law. For instance this level of service concept. You know, 2 happen to know that people are uncomfortable, as you are now at a level of service B. B as is boy, and yet from a traffic engineering, from a technical point of view. it would be reasonable to consider taking that intersection down to a level of service D. as in dog, and you would be very uncomfortable. And I happen to know that peoples perception of traffic problems far exceeds the engineering fact of just how much of a problem it is. So there is a disparity there between peoples perception of sitting and waiting at a light and how troublesome that is and when you look at that analysis from an engineering point of view. So I'm encouraging you to, I'm not suggesting that you run out and hire your own traffic, engineer, but I age suggesting that you become educated, at least in the language and the concepts of traffic engineering and organize your experience. You have the one thing that everyone also that spoken tonight on traffic doesn't have, You have the experience, the years of experience of living in that community. Now convert that please for we to the kind of facts that I need to consider in analysing the traffic impact in this area. Counting traffic, if you don't like the counts that Mfr. Kittalson dnas. That% something that anybody can do. You can go out there and count traffic. Stand out there, put someone one a street corner for two hours and go count traffic. That* certainly available to you. That is a way to give me different data. to say that perhaps this data isn't the best inalyst of the area. I'm saying all this to you because I know this is a primary concern, I've heard some other issues, but this issue of traffic is, obviously, of some concern. I'm also going to ask the staff in this intervening time. This notion of relocating the frontage road is apparently a fairly now idea that was present tonight. I would like to hear from Steffan's at Washington County, and Cary I would like you to take a look at that as well, and I would like you to take a look at it in the context of two things. Number one, the impact that that has, for Instance the ono thing that has boon raised tonight, and I think its certainly a good question to raise is, are we simply moving the problem. I'm loss worried that people aro going to take this access point and go through a business, out on Bull Mountain Rand, than I ane if we create a honest to god road here. Are we simply moving an arxisting problem. Ara we saying, we'll stop this problem at this frontage road, we'll just move it two or throe TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 -- 5/18/88 -- 5/25/88 — PAGE 57 { hundred feet further away, but its the same problem, you have the same left turning the same interference of traffic. I'd like to hear you opinion on that. Another issue thats been raised is the notion of serving all of this land in terms of traffic pattern. How is this land going to be served. Is the ultimate plan of the City to serve it by going out on the remaining portion of the frontage road and taking it south to Beef Bend, or is the plan to ultimately serve this along a road such as a relocated frontage road that could become a road, and run it north. I don't know what the City's plan is for this area. I would like to get a glimpse of what the master traffic plan had in mind for this area and how this kind of relocation does or doesn't fit into it. Okay. If its possible to du that, let sea," KEITH LIDEN, ' "By the property served are you interested primarily in the parcel iftt is zoned CP, the one Chats immediately behind, or taking it back into the residentially zoned. or designated areas as well." BETH MASON, "I'd like to see the area bordered by Beef Bund on the south, Bull Mountain on the north, the frontage road on the east, and I guess the hili on e the west. You know. I think there is a point there where the topography is to • steep that there% not going to be much, I would just like to see the general { plan for that area." KEITH LIDEN, "Okay." BETH MASON, "Okay. I'd like to see that and I'm going to put you under the gun here Gary. I would like to sea that by April 15th, and the reason I say , April 15 is that I'm alerting you folks that that letter will be available, and he'll write a letter to me. Copies of that letter will be available at the City so that you can see what he has to say, almost two weeks ahead of the next hearing. Alright, so that we all come into the next hearing fairly well Informed. Do you think you can do it by then?" GARY ALFSON, "Yes. Is this to incorporate also Washington County's comments?" BETH MASON, "If you can get them that fast. I think I have more of a arm hold on you than I have on Steffans. 1itughter. ... lust tell him how big I an and if he doesn't got that to you soon enough . .. laughter. . . he's In � TEXACO TRANSCRIPT.— 3/21/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 50 trouble. No. I'm, I'll think they will probably cooperate with you. There, there planning for that area is probably is not as detailed as yours. you probably have more of the detail than he does. In terms of the planning for f that area, the transportation planning for that area. Okay. Alright. we'll see you on April 28th. Oh, yes." UNKNO6N, "Can I ask what the format is for the remainder of the hearing?" BETH MASON, "Oh yes. I will continue testimony in opposition first, at the next hearing. So those of you who wish to speak in opposition of the application will go on first, then I will give an opportunity for rebuttal by both the applicant's representatives and you folks. And in the meantime, by the way I'm familiar with this intersection, I've traveled it many times, but I an going to go down a visit the site. I'm just going to go down there, I won't be talking to anyone, no one will be accompany me when I go down there, but A f you happen tto sea'me, please don't approach me, because I don't Hunt to compromise this decision soaking; process. I would expect to be able to make a decision at the next public hearing. I don't think I going to need to take it under Advisement. So does that?" UNKNOWN, "And is there, is there a final closing statement by the applicant, or is that just it . . . . . . . . . . ." BETH MASON, "Thais the rebuttal. And there will be one more opportunity for questions, before the whole things closed. Okay." KEITH LIDEV, "Excuse me, One other thing I would like to note. I haven't received a confirmation on this, but the City has boon entertaining the possibility of having traffic court on 'Thursday, late in the day, and had Indicated that possibility they'd want hearings officer to start a little bit later, 7:90 or 9:00. But like I said I do not have a confirmation. I think the best way to handle that, if you folks would have the patience to wait, would be, I can hand out a few shoats, if you could sign up with name and address and we can send you a card to confirm the time so you don't show up at seven and find out that it doesn't really start at eight. It will be that evening, we have the room available, so—you—can set that evening aside, but if your concerned about the time, and don't want, or if you want to just spend a TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — SAWS — 5/25/88 — PAGE 59 0 hour in the library if you come early. I mean, I guess thats okay too. But It otherwise I can pass some sheets around and we can send you a card or something when we have a confirmation on the time.*! f • i BETH MASON, "You also, rather than relying on getting a card, because the ! best intentions sometimes don't follow through. you might want to , g 3 gave a call i to the staff,a couple of days before they hearing, and just confirm the hearing t time. It might save you some time that evening." UNKNOWN, "Can you put it in the Times?" BETH MASON, "They should take it as a public notice." KEITH UDEN, "Yes we can do that also." BETH MASON, "Okay, look 'for it there as well. Thank yo4A. Somoona has my traffic report, I need it back." PUBLIC HEARING ENDED. 5687D TEXAM TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 60 { r -1 MEMO i HEARING OF 5/18/88 BETH MASON. "Town Hall room for the City of Tigard. This is the time and place sent for the continued hearing on CU 87-03, and MLP 87-09 and application for a Texaco service station at Bull Mountain Road at Highway 99W. When I closed the hearing at the last time. I had received 10 exhibits. Since then I've received one memo from Gary Alfson whos the Transportation Engineer for the City of tigard. Thats been marked exhibit eleven. That memo address the impasse of relocating the frontage road, south of Bull Mountain Road, what was known as alternate "C", or the third alternate in the r earlier hearing, and also the effect of closing the frontage road north of Bull Mountain Road and its, impact that would have on the Canterbury Square project. I should apologize to you all for the additional delay to this hearing 'because of nay illness. I hope that didn't inconvenience anyone unduly. But we and here and I said before I run a hearing to ton o'clock. I find that I don't function,,coherently after tan o'clock. So we're hers till ton and if we can't finish it by then, then I will announce another night tonight, so that we will know exactly when we can complete this matter. When we completed the last hearing we were. Is that door locked? I see people trying to got in the side." KEITH LIOEN, "There is another meeting over here." DETH MASON, "Oh, okay. I was hearing from people who were in opposition to the application. T will be following the procedure on the blue shoot, there* a supply of them flouting around, Y don't know what he did with them. Is the supply down on the desk now?" GARY ALFSON, "Pardon me?" BETH MASON, "A supply those over there?" GARY ALFSON, "No." BETH MASON, "Okay, hares an extra, if anyone doesn't have one I would encourage you to share. I had, thera-was a• stack of them, I don't know what happened to theca. When Keith comes back in .... So the last witness that I TEXACO TRAW=IPT- - 9/24/99 — 5/18/89 — 5/25/88 — pAGE 61 heard from was Ellen Dickey and I'm open now to hearing from other people who wish to speak in opposition to the application. Inose speaking in opposition. If you have spoken once I encourage you to delay speaking again until until those people who haven't had a chance have a chance to speak. What happened to the. I had a stack of these up on the, have they been, okay. So who would like to speak next, Yes sir. step forward please." "My name is Fred Clagett, I live at 16930 SW Monterey in King City. I'm appearing on behalf of the City Council of King City. I'm a member of the Compliance Review Board, which is a comparable Planning Commission for the City. Somebody from the Council would have been here, except this is thein regular meeting night so they could not do that, so I asp simply representing them. A letter has been forwarded to you dated April 20, which I would react into the'record at this time. Dear Sir, The City of King City would like to direct your attention to a matter of serious concern with reference to the proposed use of property at the intersection of Bull Mountain Road and Pacific Highway in Tigard. At considerable axponse to this City a complete inventory and analysis of the City's storm drainage system and land tributary to that system has been completed, More detailed analysis in currently underway so ' that priorities of required improvements can be established, appropriate Intergovernmental agreements executed and methods of financing determined. The findings of those studies underscore the importance of drainage basin master planning. In support of our concern Is- the fact that the total acreage In Basin A (including the Texaco property) 360 acres, 210 acres of tributary area are outside the King City limits. The most critical areas are those of the Pacific Highway extending south from dull Mountain Road to Beef Bend Road and into King City. Eight four percent (84X) of the drainage system serving that basin (A) in King City is undersized and inadequate. Therein rests our grave concern. King City's systema does not have the capacity to handle the Impact of additional development in Basin A at this time. For that reason we urgently request that it any development is to be approved that interim measurer be required of the developer to mitigate the impact on the area. We would also strongly suggest that the developer be required to execute a Restrictive Covenant or Waiver not to remonstrate against the formation of a local storm drainage assessment district. at present King City is actively exloring with staff members from Washington County and the City of Tigard, methods by which drainage basin matter planning may be accomplished via TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 62 intergovernmental agreement. We trust that these comments will be given serious consideration and thereby afford the governmental jurisdiction directly concerned with more effective drainage management the opportunity to complete plans which are under development without placing them or downstream properties in greater jeopardy. And the letter is signed by George E. Horgan, the City Administrator." BETH MASON, "I have received the lettei^, staff just gave me the copy that% been marked as exhibit 1112" and its part of the record now. Next. Lots not 3e shy," "My name is BOB BLEDSOE and I'm Chairman of Neighborhood Planning Organization number three." BETH MASON, "Your last name again sir?" "BLEDSOE, I live at 11800 SW Walnut, BETH MASON, "Bledsoe. NPO 0 1?" BLEDSOE, "NPO !. NPO 3 in our vote was unanimously opposed to the development of this particular place ..... from the audience "A little louder please.". .. BETH MASON, "?s that Ric on? Yeah its on now." BLEDSOE, "Okay. Its Rade for shorter people. NPO 3 is unanimously opposed to the development of the Texaco at this location and in particular to the Increased traffic that would be generated by a high traffic use when a very dangerous location there, At that location. Even with the closure of that one road it. will still have a high generating traffic very close to the Intersection coming off of the highway." BETH MASON, "Next. Yes sir." TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 63 . 4 se 1 "My name is JIM BERNKLAU. I live at 13325 SW 110th Ave. in Tigard." } BETH MASON, "Spell your last name for me?" "Yes. B E R N K L A U, I'm here to speak on behalf of the leadership and membership of Christ the King Lutheran Church, located across Bull Mountain Road from the subject property, I would like to read a letter that we've prepared." BETH MASON, "Are you going to give me the letter?" JIM BERNKLAU, "Yes I can." BETH MAiOd, "okay, to move this along this ,evening Y would prefer that people not read letters into the record. I read everything that* given to me by way of a exhibit. If you have'•additional• comments;. please make there now, but if you have something in writing that you can give me, that will speed the process and other people are able to then speak." JIM BERNKLAU, "Okay, can I submit the letter and then just cover the high points verbally." 4 t BETH MASON, .. .. ... . . please." ;XM BERNKLAU, "The summary as far as recommendations, that V* would ask for pertaining to this application, are one, to preserve, or replace, the public access to Christ the King Lutheran Church now provided by frontage road. Number two, lower the sign speed limit on Bull Mountain Road, between' 99W and the westerly edge of the property proposed for the partition, and provide street lighting for this stretch of Bull Mountain Road for safety at night. Number throe, require a specific routing to and from the service station site for tankers delivery fuel. Number tour, assure that storm run off from the site can be property handled. Number five, require a traffic and use plan for the rest of the property before partition is granted. Number six, grant no variance for sign, of sign requiremants. Number seven, assure application of the Tigard tree ordinance in conjunc6ion %with the site development. And finally eighth, recognizing that service stations and mini marts generally TEXA04 TRANSCRZPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 64 1F generate more outdoor trash than usual retail businesses, require the owner/operator to exercise more than usual external trash control. Thats a summary of the letter that I have to submit as an exhibit." i BETH .MASON. "On the issue of access to the frontage road. Do you access off of 112th?" JIM BERNKLAU. "No, we access directly on Bull Mountain Road." BETH MASON, "Okay I'm confused. I misunderstood your first paint than." JIM BERNRLAU, "Okay. the first point was to preserve or replace the public access to Christ the King now provided by the frontage road. its indirect access, 'in that people got to our church via the frontage road to the south, to Bull Mountain Road and then to our property. The same from the other direction also. Its indirect access." BETH MASON, "Okay, thank you. i take it thank. The letter that I've just 4 been handed will be narked exhibit "13" . . .. . ...black out in tape . . . . . . BETH M.4SOA1, "Keith, my staff member is going to start circulating a sign in F sheet for people who speak tonight so that we have ala complete record. To ` expedite this he's going to start circulating it now. 2'm sorry is this in the letter? .. .., sora+* one talking not on mic .. . .. I've just been handed a summary of rocosaaendation from Christ of King Lutheran Church that will be marked exhibit 014". Okay, next." "My now is John Marrifield, 14208 6W High Tor Drive, Tigard. I am a probably a typical resident of Bull Mountain. If anyone is going to benefit or, from and installation such as this combination convenience outlet and service station it should be persons like my wife and myself. I cannot sea any beneficial, any benefit to us. There are, I would point out, at least two convenience stores within a 1/4 mita of that intersection. There are now at least three service stations, four service station within a 1/4 mile of that Intersection. The increased traffic we don't need. It would be .an Inconvenience when we follow school busas ufi axed down that hill like: mad. We don't need anymore traffic. I would also be opposed to closing of the access C � TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/8$ — 5/10/88 — 5/25/88 — pAGE 65 road between Bull Mountain Road and Beef Bend Road. We use that road extensively. our friends in King City use that road extensively. And I believe that it would be a great inconvenience to close it. I am not familiar 1� with the future traffic plan for that area, but I would urge that an alternate method of equal value be maintain for that egress between Bull Mountain Road and Beef Bend Road." BETH MASON. "I should point out, not necessarily Jto you air, just to people generally. This memo that I received from Gary Alfson, the Transportation Engineer, ons of the things that he recommends is that it' the frontage road intersection at Bull Mountain is relocated to the wait, which would be a little further up the road, up Bull Mountain Road. The staff recommends closure of the frontage road at Beef send. They see identical problem at the Beef Benet intersection with Highway 99, or 99 that we are now talking about at the Bull Mountain Road at Highway 99. So they are suggesting a similar solution and that is just close it altogether to eliminate that problem. So that is a recommendation that is before me, I haven't decided anything about it, but that is before me. Next. Yes sir." I'm Walter Groce, I live at 14905 SW 150th, in Tigard. I watched this Intersection a couple of weeks ago and counted cars from four to four-thirty and also from five-thirty to six o'clock. It a wonder that we do not have more accidents than we do. It true the north frontage road will be closed. But this will not stop cars from coming on the frontage road, then going through the station and entering onto Bull Mountain Road. Also, persons coming from Canterbury Square can make a right turn then turn into the station and down the frontage road. So really I don't think that we eliminate that traffic going on that road what so ever. Allowing as many left turns as this station will generate on two lane road without a left turn road is going to hurt the pockets of insurance companies and put some injured citizens Into the hospital. I sight add that a car will enter, either go in or out of that intersection ovary forty seconds. Cars coming off the highway, sometimes three or four at a time, normally step on the gas to make the hill and the third car would not see the first car with his left turn signal, If he's going to make the turn and you thereby have a rear and collision. X do feel that anyone involved in judging whether thit. station should go in, should observe this intersection during the rush hour traffic, Its an eye opener. I have, I h TEXACO TRA=RIPT. - 3/24/88 - 5/18/88 - 5/25/88 - PAGE 66 have a 150 names. I have about a 120 here of people who had not signed the previous .list and I have a 120 here, I copied them, and I don't have, I wanted to copy the other one. And these are all people who very voluntarily signed , 1 it. I did not asked them to sign it, they wanted to sign this list. I like, it you want this I will turn it into you. Now we have one more copy ,.(walked away from the mic).... " BETH MASON. Depends if the hearing goes beyond tonight. If the hearing ends tonight then I will close the record tonight. Okay, I have a four page petition that will be marked, it will be five." WAITER OROOE, "We've got one coming. yeah." SETH MASON, "I have a five page petition in opposition. been marked exhibit 0150. Next." (tape black out). ... BETH MASON. "I guess the most important parson to see it is me. So lets see '• if I can see it. I can see it Pine. Could you state your name for the record." "KEN DICKEY, 14565 Sw Mcraarl+and. The first is, that I observed significant summer walking 'traffic up and down Bull Mountain, particularly with teens and pre–teens when schools out. I wasn't able to measure that traffic because schools in. The report that was commissioned by Texaco mentioned not seeing very many people and since this was, sine* the study period was during the winter time it was raining and pretty muddy down there, Chats not to surprising .. .. .(tap* black out).... .. a questionnaire to just the Shadow Hills development as, a matter of Pact to Piety household in that development t to get some idea of the amount of walking traffic that would be impacted. Basically the questionnaire is fairly simple, ,just asking how many people live In the residence, how many currently walk down Bull Mountain, how many would walk if there was a' bike lane, and how many would walk if there was a sidewalk. And the responses that I got ,....(tap black out).., this is essentially a mail box type questionnaire; I didn't interact, you know I didn't go out a beat on doorways for people. I got 19 responses; back out of a i TEXACO TRANSCRIPT— 3/24/88 – 5/18/88 – 5/25/88 – PAGE 67 »-. _ 50. Which is 38 percent. I'm having difficulty ...... About, a little over 30 percent of the people there, this has nothing to do with frequency, of course, currently walk down the hill. About 20 percent of those are under �. 18. If there was a bikelane the percentage jumps 78 percent. Almost eighty percent. And if thore was a sidewalk there, the response indicated over 90 percent. This, even though I only got, not quite 40 percent of response back. locally and presumably there would be a. I know that there are people that did not answer this survey that I've seen walking up and down and I know that there are people that both walk and jog from place higher up the hill. And so what I sea this representing is a significant walking traffic and assuming that the convenience store is successful, I would assumes that the're people that are going to be crossing the street. A large percentage of young people. And knowing human nature I do not anticipate, that they are going to walk down to a intarsoction to cross and so the first point is that I think that we need to make provisions for some safe crossing and I'm not sure that just a pair of lines in,the street is goinj to be sufficient. -,Maybe need at signal at 114th, My second point is that with this type of installation there is a double queing that goes on. In other words people quo up in there cars for gasoline and then• they have to go into the convenience store to pay, which create '• anther quo. And I tend riot to frequent facilities of this type, though I do � shop at other Texaco installations, because this creates a fair bottleneck. My experience with this type of thing is primarily based on Tannisborne, Texaco there, and on a Friday afternoon around four or four thirty you will frequently see cars backed up not only along the frontage road, or the road that goes into Tannisborne, but also along 169th. My comment here is that there is really no alternate route to got into the lower end of Bull Mountain at this time and I think that there could be a real problem in terms of hampering emergency vehicles that might be trying, you know, fire or ambulances that might be trying to go up the hill during the time that there is someone trying to awake a left. Particularly without a left turn 'lane at this location. My last point is that the situation in terms of traffic, although• helped by the closure of the frontage road is going to be significantly worse duo to .....(tape black out).... for readability of this slides. This is a copy of a typed document, indicates that the population will essentially reach about teen times its cue'rent level and currently than population is doubling. .... (tapas black out) .... . and so my point hora is that any traffic problems that we have that we don't solve are going to get t s TEXACO TRANSCRIPT.— 3/24/08 — 5/19/80 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 69 ' considerably worse over time. I have three recommendations. One is that, and again you may take these as general planning recommendations, I'm not sure the agencies put theses into, that a sidewalk be put in, at least as far as the ' First couple of developments in Bull Mountain Road for safety reasons. The second is that you deny Texaco's request because I think undue traffic problems would be created, And the third recommendation is that the property under consideration be rezoned C P, Commercial Professional. as that I feel it is more in keeping with both the community usages and the surrounding zonings. Thank you," BETH MASON, "Do you want me to consider those slides?" KEN DICKEY, "Yes, I will give you some copies , .,.(walked away from mic) BETH MASON, "If you have exhibit*, you might as well just hand them straight to me, because I'm marking them and keeping the record. This is nineteen. Exhibit "16" will be the 19 responses, the survey. Exhibit "17" will be the summary of ,the survey results. Exhibit "IS", graph of Bull Mountain/Walnut '• ' area development projections. Exhibit "19", page from the City of Tigard, Bull Mountain/Walnut area Urban Services Study. Okay. Next. Don't be shy." "I'm CAL WOOLERY, 14150 SW 150th. I propose that the petition for there Improvement be granted with the following conditions. Vertical curve from Beef Bend tai McDonald be leveled to the existing level of the access road thereby widening 99 Highway to an acceptable width within its right-of-way. Smile. And left turn, adequate left turn lane for access to Bull Mountain. Nether that i think that the property from its western boundary on Bull Mountain Road should be widened to make a right hand lane . . . .(tape black out)... Sidewalks Its boon my experience with convenience store in the neighborhood where I formerly had property, it reduces the live ability by about 75 percent almost immediately. With the all night functions, the undesired consumptions, beverages ....(tape black out)... and the litter that Is . . ..... That this should not be approved unless stringent restriction with regard to safety and deterioration of the live ability of the Bull Mountain community." , . 41 TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/64/89 — 5/18/80 — 5/25/08 -- PAGE 69 BETH MASON. "So that you don't misunderstand my smile. As soon as you talk about widening Highway 99. I'm always impressed with how much power people think I have. ....laughter CAL WOOLERY. "Its in the record that the Department of Transportation, it is a consideration that you can make." BETH MASON, "I understand, wall " CAL WOOLERY, "And its a consideration that we should make," BETH MASON, "What I can do is I can consider whether this application is timely, given the current condition of the road. But I cannot unilaterally requira'tham . ... („both talking same time ,.. , I understand that sir. Thank you. Hent, I've been handed a letter from Ball, Janik, and Novack, dated May 18th, that will be marked ax' hibit 112014. > "My name is ROB BALL, I live at 12765 SW Buil Mountain Road. Given the cor!ment that you made earlier about not reading letters into the record and trying to keep the proceedings moving. I'll try to summarize briefly what )1 some of the contents of the letter are. The letter constitutes my personal �J analysis and commentary on Wayne Kittelson's traffic analyst. And as I've Indicated' in the letter I have a great deal. of respect for his capabilities and for hips personally, but I think the logic of his analyst, in this particular neighborhood is fatally flawed and doesn't provide a bases, without a series of conditions being imposed on the approval, or approval of the application. I've enumerated a whole series of points of analysis of that traffic study which are mine. I'm not hero on behalf of anyone, but perhaps my family, which hasn't read the letter. The underlying promise of the traffic analyst that there will be at this particular location 40 in bound and 40 outbound trips. During the PM peak 'hour. And I think if you look at the traffic-analysis and analyze the bases for that, the bases is exclusively a single observation of another Texaco facility, with a mini—mart and a car wash on 82nd Avenue, southeast Portland. But what isn't,analyzed here is wants going to happen with traffic in this area as 'Bull Mountain is fully developed and as the surrounding area is developed 'morn greatly. And the Kittelson's analyst treats the 40 in bound and the 40 outbound trips as a static number ! ; TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 70 ! •IF that will never change regardless of the increasing development of Bull Mountain. He's also looked at the number of trips generated by this site that are likely to be, what he calls drop in trips. Distinguished from diverted trips. And he's look at the comparable southeast 82nd site to determine the number of site generated trips that are likely to be drop in trips. But on southeast 82nd the mace_ to the Texaco facility is directly from southeast 62nd. .Here, the only drop in trips are Bull Mountain Road trips, not trips from Pacific Highway. Pacific Highway trips here really should be within his like a con be considered diverted trips, because they are going to add traffic to Bull Mountain Road. And there hasn't been any analyst by Mr Kittelson about how many trips this facility are going to be diverted and how -many are going to be drop in and without that kind of information we really don't have any means of determine the effect of this facility on Bull Mountain Road traffic.., My understanding is that Texaco has indicated in meeting that it expects 1604 cars per month to be generated at this facility. Nothing in Mr. Kittelton's analyst int+orgratas that with his counts.-,or with his traffic distribution. He does look at the cloture, what the effects are of closure of both frontage roads, the south frontage road and the north frontage road. And he calculates that 75 percent of the trips into the site► into the trips aro going to be left turn trips. If you look at Texaco's number of 1604 cars per month and if 75 percent of those are left turn trips, and I've analyzed her* In more detail the likelihood of that. There are going to be 1204 left turns per month into this facility that don't exist today. None of those left turns are made today from Bull Mountain into this' facility, which is obviously a closed facility. And I urge, based on that that there should be a left turn lane on Bull Mountain road permitting loft turn, 1200 left turns par month Into the facility. If the approval is given to this facility. I've gotten hero and little late to I'm not sure whether the neighborhood as yet presented Its analyst of traffic based on Its own counts, which have been conducted since the last hearing. But those counts indicate that Mr. Kittelson's traffic counts for the worse case period, the PM peak hour conditions, are low by 27 percent during that time period. I don't know whether that analyst has been given to Mr. Kittelson, I suspect not, but, that* a substantial disparity 1 In percentage and should give you a bases to require that his entire analyst be revised accordingly. A 27 percent disparity, although his count was in November 1957, and the more recent count .was $Inca the data of the last hearing. Y think discredits the November 57 count." TUAW TRANSCRIPT. — 3/24/89 -- 5/10/86 — 5/25/88 -- PAGE 71 _..�..-�...- ,...e.�w.r.,..�...�.....�y....+r+!war.++r......»rr..►w.,....�......... _w...-..•_...........w................,......, BETH MASON, "I don't want to interrupt you, I have a well reasoned five page letter here, I've been reading along with you summarizing. I honestly will read this letter." ROBERT BALL, "Okay, The people in the neighborhood don't have a opportunity to read the letter." BETH MASTON, "I understand, and I encourage you to circulate copies to them, but unless we want to be hera for four nights instead of one, we're going to have to let me rated this myself and not spend the time." , ROBERT BALI., "Okay, may I summa►riao simple the conditions that I have suggested on page five of the letter, so that if you 'tract through the analyst of, that' I've made, and if you decide to approve the proposal, please taka these proposod, conditions into consideration. I propose the closure of both frontage roads as a condition. The improvement of--the level of service of Bull Mountain Road/Pacific, Highway intersection, which is presently at "F" level of,service, to an acceptable level of service. I propose requiring a single atceas point to serve both this development and the adjacent property to the west. Rather than having two access to this, one of which would be a joint access. And' I propose the creation of a left turn lane. And basad on the analyst of the Code and the Comprehensive plan contained in my letter, I proposed the creation, for the control of noise, and the restricting hours of operation, of at least the car wash facility. Which is a noise generator, and for which Texaco has not offered any estimate of noise generation." BETH MA80M, "Thank you Mr. Ball. Mr. Ball did you bring extra copies. .. # to far from mic couldn't hear response . . . . I've been handed a April 27, 1998 letter from Alan Sato, a professional engineer Chats been marked exhibit 021". Exhibit "22" is a community traffic study summary." ALVIN HIED, "And supporting documents." BETH MASON, "Alright, and supporting documents. I count 20 pages does that sound right." TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 72 y ALVIN HIES, "Thais about right." SETH MASON. "This is a 20 page, community traffic study supporting, alright. 1 � "I'm ALVIN A. HIED, I reside at 14535 SW 141st Street, Tigard. Oregon. I spoke at the first night at the hearing in opposition to the proposal for myself and my family. Tonight I am speaking just to present the information that was a result of your challenge to the community, which is in essence was if the community challenges the figures they should hire a consultant and do an independent study, We did what we could with what we had. We did hire a consultant to review the Texaco sarvica station transportation impact analyst and, Mr. Sato for Centrac came back with a letter outlining five points. For the benefit you have. I guess I'll just jump over the individual points, but he does,'raise questions, with regard to what was done, and what was not, apparently done, or compared to, So lot the expert speak for himself. However, with regard to number five, it says that traffic volumes' provided by the community should be compared to consultants volumes. There seems to be a► significant difference and the discrepancies should be analyse. Lot me just take a moawnt to explain to you that the concern at that time was traffic safaty. It continue to be, we took up your challenge, and about 44 people spend 96 person hours taking traffic counts. They did it in a manner of a source and destination with turning in mind. It was done by hour, it was done on four different days for a total of 12 hours each day. The four days did not occur in one week. In the first week they wore as follows; Wednesday, April 6th, which was raining; Saturday, April 9th, which was sunny; In the second week it was done on Monday, April 11, 1906, and 1t was sunny, and ironically, not with any malice of forethought, there was no school. And I think that# Important when you look at those figures. On Friday, April 15th, it was raining, for a lot of reasons . . . laughter . . . These people wore concerned enough to spend from seven am till seven paw on tour different days, hour by hour, taking those counts. We have the original documentation, we would be more than bappy to show them to you. Those that you have there are the summaries that were taken directly from the shoots, chocked, footed, and cross footed by Mr, Tim Adam and myself. The bottom line is that we do raise questions with regard to the particular results that we see in the Kittolson report. In your summary that you have.; it' is keyed back to the individual Pages and schedules. For example, number one is all of the counts by source TEXACO TRANSCRIPT,— 3/24/88 — 5/18/68 — 5/25/80 — PAGE 73 and destination of the traffic. And I've given you an outline on page four of exhibit. excuse me, "B", which tells you that Bull Mountain was "Z", Pacific Highway was "A". In other words if you look at anything that shows 7 AZ, you know that the traffic went from Pacific Highway straight up Bull Mountain Road. If they made a turn to either the north or south frontage road, thats reflected. , So what you have there is by day in schedules one, two. three, and four, exactly where that traffic came from and where it went, and also its by hour. But ironically there are a lot of vehicles go through there, everybody knows it. For example on that Monday there ware 6265 vehicles or an average of 522 an hour, or 9 a minute. Thaty a lot of traffic. But to be in real. be fair. We looked at the peak hours for am, pm, and midday period, or excuse me weekend midday period as defined by Mr. Kittelaon in his report, I believe on his report on page three. And we show those ori'schedule five and six. We differ from what we can tell, although we did not have the details for all of that. We also did one other thing. We ,took the peak hours, am, seven to nine.- tho-peak, hours pm four to six; and the peak hours weekend midday, one to three, and then with the help of a computer and lotus 1, 2, 3, we did an analysis in terms of closing the south frontage road, only for each one of those time periods, and that* reflected there. and '• Its backed by the schedule. Closing the north frontage road only, and closing 1 both frontage roads. Now that is laid out in schedule seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, and twelve. The community study shows that the reported existing traffic volumes pm peak Four, and theres q little misnomer in Kittelson's report in terms of pm peak hour. One plane he's gQtr it a* four to six, but when we've talked to him, it was suddenly five to six, so we changed our gears and we went to five to six. Schedule thirteen, then, the community study shows that the peak par existing traffic exceeds Kittelson's reported figures as follows; and I think for the benefit of those people who did all that work, I'd like to just reiterate a fere of those things. And that is that we found 942 vehicle, or 202 more vehicles than roportod. on Wednesday from five to six pe than was reporter! in Kittelson's report. Thar* were also 944 vehicles or 104 vehicles more than reported on Monday from five to six. There were 802 vehicles or 62 vehicles reported on Friday from five to six. What I'm trying to point out, on a sort, of all those traffic figures, it took us five different, now I want to gnat this right. It took, Monday, Wednesday, arra Friday, five to six, which we don't, apparently this is you peak pea hour, and also six to seven on Wednesday night, and also Saturday, one to two, before ' TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 -- 5/25/88 -- PAGE 74 You get down to the figure that says, existing traffic is 740, which was reported by Kittelson. Thats supported in number thirteen. The traffic, the community study further shows that the peak pm existing traffic reported by Kittelson is questionable, because after considering the closure .ofboth frontage roads and the impact that the closure would have, we're still at 691 vehicles. Thats only 49 vehicles different from what he was reporting as being the peak pm existing traffic. Now if we add the 40 vehicles in that, supposedly the peak hours of the service station, we're up to 731, we're right back where we are right now. Thats not counting anything else. What is not supported there, and its bordered on the original paper, is that we did see some stacking problems. We saw no stops, at stop signs, We saw U balls through right there in that intersection. We saw illegal passing. We saw near misses, and we saw some running of red lights. 'This just compounds all the problems that exist there today. I guess you challenged us to go out if we were really concerned, to look at those figures, we did, now granted we did . not, have the time or the money, to take all- those figures and take thorn to' a qualified traffic engineer and rustle those through. But I think what they do prove, there is question, as supported by the ri'port made by Centrac, that those figures don't pain out entirely and we would hope that you would consider those facts, we did what we could and we did the best job that we could do. .. . .end of taupe.... Then I would have to ditto Mr. Ba11'6 comments. But I also wanted to insert one thing, its something that I didn't hear him say. And that was, that a lot of this is predicated on if the State does something, and if the State does that. I think that the approval should go along the lines that all of this is in writing and in the works before anybody gets any pian approval or turns the spade into the ground. Thank you . .. . applause. .. BETH MAS M, 14e's confusing the word challenge, perhaps that• the tone that I used at the last meeting. It was not my intent to challenge you. But I can say that you have risen and exceoded whatever I had anticipated that you would go out and do, this is fine work, and I appreciate having it to consider. ...black out on tape .. . You didn`t by chance bring extras copies did you Mr. Hieb? (no response heard) Next." "My nava is GERALD KOLVE, address of a 142nd and sw Pacific Highway, representing the tenants of the Canterbury Square Shopping Center, our �1 concern has to do with the volume of traffic on Buil Mountain and its present Y TEXAM TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 75 Kamm form and present condition. Texaco's claim that in the maximum time that they will have the 40 in, 40 out only. I can't only express to you for the capital investment that they're involved with, with a service station, car wash, and !� mini—mart, that in order for them to reach their break even point and have a profit, they have to have much more than 40 in and outs, traffic time, peak time. in order for them to have a viable business. Therefore. it would seem appropriate, before approval could be granted that they do have to put in a left turn lane in that area. Off of Bull Mountain Road. In their plans. Texaco's proposal, they have shown that the north frontage road is closed off and in our discussions with the State Highway Department. Mainly Dick Flemming the Regional Engineers in charge of that project. He indicates that our wish** of not having the north frontage road completely blocked off and have it available so that there is a right turn permitted from the north frontage'road going up Bull Mountain only, there* never been any accidents, so far. of people turning right off of the north frontage road to go up Bull Mountain Road. —The accidents are turning left ,or going across to the south frontage road. His response to us has been that they don't want that to occur because they don't want slow moving, vehicles so close to Bull Mountain and Pacific Highway. Yet in Texaco'* propotai, only a few feet up the street from where the existing north frontage read is, is Texaco's proposed left turn � entrance. The State Highway Department, Dick Flemming, has recommended to us that, if that Texaco request is granted that there entrance be up above where It is share by both the properties and not below, across from the church property. The south frontage road hasn't boon closed. Its a proposal that the State Highway Department is making. It hasn't been closed and from the south frontage road to the north frontage road, from the data thats been collected, it appears that there is a average of 804 cars a day go from again the south frontage road to the north frontage road. The majority of those cars go to our shopping center and serve the twenty merchants that are there. The signal, the left turn signal at Buil Mountain Road and Highway 99, according to Mr; Rittelson's report, is in what he termed the red zone. It is absolutely unconscionable for the &mount of time that people have to wait there, to make that left turn from Pacific Highway on to Bull Mountain Road. If the south frontage road is closed. The assumption is that the people that want to get into the shopping center will go bn Pacific Highway and wait that ungodly time, at that signal, axxi our. prosontation to you is that these people don't do it and they don't want to do it. The reason that they use the TEXACO TRANSCRIPT. — 3/24/88 — 5/19/99 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 76 frontage road now is to avoid that terrible situation. And to use it seems grossly unfair and almost preposterous that a potential petition can come in and close off an access road that generates nearly 300 hundred customers, cars �. to us every date and we would request that before that south frontage road is closed, if it is closed, that it not be closed until the traffic signal at Canterbury lana and Pacific Highway is functioning. Thank you very much." "My name is BEVERLY FROUDE, and I'm the Chairperson of GPO N 4, and I also have a letter, but I'm not going to read any part of it. I'm just going to make one major point. One of the recommendations that our community has coma up with, after, wall at the last meeting, after the last meeting. No changes in land use be allowed until both the north frontage and the south frontage roads are closed entering onto Bull Mountain Road. Since the last meeting, I understand that on June 1, 1988, theres going to be a meating between the City of Tigard, ODOT, and the County, regarding this north frontage road, Canterbury proposal that the State has had on their plan for a number of years in which the citizens of Washington County voted under the MSTIP funds, about two years ago. Our recommendation at this time is not to make any decision on this unell attar this June 1st• hearing, because there may be some dates, we might have more information that none of us seam to be able to get at this time. Its all just hear say and since this meeting is, now been actually Fchaduled at Charles F. Tigard for June lot, at least that is something more conclusive that we have had." BETH MASON, "Okay, thank you. I've been handed a letter dated May 19th, 1988, from Me. Froude in her Chairperson capacity, that# being marked exhibit "28". Oh I'm sorry. Mr. Naib, I thought I saw you, did you have a copy of the study? He's standing back there in the corner. This person that kospe walking up to the desk asking for things is Mark Greenfield, he's an attorney thats been retained by the applicant, in between the last hearing and this hearing. So the reason that he keeps coming up here asking for copies is to that they can review this for purpose of rebuttal. I'm not giving him any favored troatmont, its just that he's entitled to sea these things. Next. Anyone oleo wishing to speak in opposition. Mr. Draneas." "Ms. Mason, how are you?" TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 77 BETH MASON. "I should probably disclaim my relationship with Mr. Draneas, we were classmates in law school. so, that goes back more years than I think he or I would care to count." "My name is JOHN DRANEAS, and I live 15225 SW 133rd. and I think about the nicest thing that you can say about this proposal is that its premature. The intersection, is one that I drive through, at least twice every day. And it is really a tremendous problem. There is a tremendous need for some sort of solution to the traffic problem there. I know its, everyone that has stood up has talked about the traffic problems and it starts to seem kind of redundant, and I know that there have been a lot of studies that have cited a lot of statistic in traffic counts and all that, and usually I like to, when I speak on things I like to be prepared with the details and I'm not tonight. But, from a common sense standpoint, you can look at the qualitative aspects of this and it just doesn't make any sense. They site is at the dip of a valley., Tha-hili coming down Bull Mountain is very, long and steep and Pacific Highway is elevated quite a< bit and as cars come off Pacific Highway, there heading downhill and picking up speed. I've personally been involved in many near misses over the last ten years. Usually its people crossing Bull •- Mountain Road off the frontage roads, and those frontage roads ought to get closed, but they need to be replaced with something. The proposal would close the frontage road, but the problems that that traffic crossing Bull Mountain causes, which would be eliminated by their proposal. There going to be replaced by problems, with cars pulling out of the Texaco station and making left turns up Bull Mountain Road. You have to be very alert and very quick to move as you cross Bull Mountain Road, and people don't do that very well. As a minimum thorn needs to be a left turn lane. The absolute worse scenario It, as you comm off Pacific Highway and turn right onto Bull Mountain Road, people crossing are a tremendous problem, but the absolute worse situation is when somebody stops In the middle Bull Mountain Road to make a left turn. People stopping U turn Into this site, or people pulling out of this site and starting to go up Bull Mountain Road are the absolute largest, biggest hazard. It doesn't seem to make sense unless there access directly to the sits, off Pacific Highway, so that situation can be avoided. The concept of drawing people of Pacific Highway, just worsons the traffic situation, I'm hesitant to see this proposal approved.- because evan if a left turn lane is squeezed into there, I think its going to constrain the ultimate solution to TEXACO TRANSCRIPT. — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 78 a ` the major traffic Problem. That system there needs great improvement and I think that having one constraint added, namely this particular development, is going to constrain the changes that can be made in the future in order to solve the large traffic problems. Another point, Iuess g that everybody is- afraid to raise is this dam ugly thing to have the bottom of the hill.- ..applause... I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but, and I know that. I'm know opponent to commercial development. I know that it can be designed in at way that would minimize that impact, but, if the plan is to draw cars off Pacific Highway, thats contradictory to the concept of designing it in a way to not stand out very much. And probably the biggest irony to the whole thing is, to me, and I can debate economics with anybody and all, but sure seems like a dumb idea, because I don't think that its going to work. The people in that area are not going to frequent that kind of a establishment. The quick service mini-mart ie not going to appeal to most of the residence in the area. OJ's market in Canterbury Square has gotten so beast• up by-'the competitiowin the area, you can get It, And out of there just U quick as you can # 7-11 right now, Gas station is not really goingto attract that tR�tn y people. Th*res a worn out closed down Hudson station half a aril• north of this sit*. That nobody has every had any interest in reopening. Texaco has had its own similar facility up at the top of Pacific Highway, gust off I-5, that closed down. It was an identical facility, gas station, Mini-earket, and car wash. The operators of that, I understand got into $alae trouble with Texaco and Toxpco took it over, the operators now have closed down the mini-market operation, just run a straight gas station, and have also closed down the car wash. I think the concept of being able to draw that many people Into this facility doesn't really make sense. All in all I think the major point that I think that you should address is $imply that this Particular part of the County and the City requires sow* very large solutions and its premature right now to commit any part of this land to A use that might impair the ability to correct those problems later one. Thanks, applause .. . SM MAWN. "yolks know about, oh I guess its been about two crr three weeks Ago I did go out to the site and I sat there for probably an hour. I sat on the driveway coming out of the church area, a little, ,just on the west side of the church theras kind of a little parking"area back In there. I sat there and then I sat right at that intersection between tho frontage road to the TEXAW TRAN=XPT - 3/24/88 -- S/18/88 - S/25/88 i- PACE 79 . south and Bull Mountain, and I just watched. It wasn't a peak hour, it was about ten o'clock in the morning, but I just watched. I wanted to get a real sense of sitting there for awhile. and watching what was going on, and I watched the cars come out of Canterbury, the frontage road to the north, so, I feel I have a better sense of that intersection for having spent a hour there than the earlier times when I've just driven through. Okay, other people wishing to speak in opposition." "I was amazed, any name is GEORGE OLSEN, I live on 133rd Avenue at 15165. I was amazed that anyone would want to buy or develop that property for anything. Because theres been a number of commercial venture there over the years and nothing has succeeded. The only thing that I think that this venture might succeed is bringing more traffic and more hazard and I doubt that it Will help Texaco pay off their debt to Penton. ... applause ... And I would like to second a , comment earlier about the quality of the neighborhood. I realize -that the convenient store will bring armod robbery closer to our homes, but I ,don't think we roally need that. I had two, I'm a reasonably careful driver, I too have been very close to some near misses and w have seen others, in fact, I didn't know that the coaamunity was doing a traffic survey. And in fact the first time when I saw, was a beige colored car. I think, the first time sitting out there, oh my goodness someone else been shoved off the road, because there has been several serious accidents. Than I saw people taking notes there and 'I realized what was going on. About the walking aspect. When they built the development, what was the street of Dreams, up at the top of the Hill, many of us were protesting that because we were worried about the traffic that would bring to Hull Mountain Road, and that isn't finished yet. Thats got many, many more acres to go. And at the time, we said, if they were going to build it, one of the conditions ought to be sidewalks, because some of us would like to walk up and down that hill, but can't, it dangerous, its extremely dangerous. The trend and planning in Oregon, I thought,, for that last 15 or 20 years, when Bev has occasionally -got me to go to some of these meetings is to put in sidewalks so people could walk. In summary I ropresont only my family, I'm not as organized as the rest of the group hero. I'ts Impressed by some of the statistics, and I'm even more worried than my gut feeling of wham was going to go on. Ansi I too would urge that you give careful consideration to. sill the points in view, and at best you delay until there are promises of what the State is going to do to the TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 80 a i i i frontage road, to the situation for making a left turn lane, and so forth. As I understand it, money to do that sort of thing is very hard to come by and I know what will happen, is, is that, if the convenient store and the Texaco station get built and the others are, quote, going to come along, the other changes. traffic changes coming along in the future, that they will never be built or delayed, As I think Bev mentioned a few minutes ago, that theres been ideas about changing the entrance to Canterbury Shopping Center for quite awhile by the State, but that hasn't come about. Thank you." BETN MASON, "I know that there are a number of you here tonight who wern't at the earlier m$ettng. I think that I need to remind you of the limits of what I can and can't black out on tape .,. . one of the things I cannot consider is whether it is economically dumb for Texaco to be, you know, have this application in front of me. The City doesn't get in the business of Judging people. you know, prejudging whether a business should go in or not. T They let the market-take care of that, and, so, I can't consider the economics to Texaco. I can't say that other businesses have tailed here, or theros four stations down the road and you shouldn't be here because theros four stations down the. road. That* just not something I can consider. I'mi sure Texaco's " listening, very carefully to what your saying, but in teres of my decision. don't be ,surprised if you don't see any reference to it in my decision, because its simply not one of the factors that t can consider. Next." "My name is FRANK WHITING, 14500 SW Bunrise lane. One of the issues that was t brought up at a information hearing recently at Fowler yunior High at which Texaco's representative attended and Mr. Kittelson attonded, was the stacking, and the comparison was made between stacking at this type of a station and the stacking problems that currently exist, with a equal number of bays at the ARCO station in King City. At that location, during there peak hours, the traffic not only circles completely around the service station, but also backs up onto street that goat through the shopping center there in King City. That being a' low speed •treat its creates a inconvenience, but no where moor the danger that would exist on high speed street like Bull Mountain Road. The sato study apparently allows for stacking during average operating conditions. But the representatives of the applicant admitted that during their peak hours that that stacking would -hot accommodate all the cars that they anticipated. That would mean that cars would have to stack out onto Bull b� TEXACO TRANSCRIPT— 3/24/65 — 5/18/88 — S/28/88 — PAGE 91 Mountain Road. Even with a left turn lana that would create a dangerous situation. If the applicant's approval, or petition is granted. I would certainly like to see a site redesign so that adequate stacking during their 1 peak hours could be accommodated." BETH MASON. "Okay." "My names is LYNN CHURCHILL and I live at 14675 SW Sunrise Lane and I'm one of the people who have counted traffic and signed petltion and this sort of thing and I'm just herrn to speak in opposition as a concerned citizen. But I also feel that this is not only redundant, and unnecessary, but highly dangerous and would urge you to disallow it." BETH MASON, "Thank you Mr. Churchill. Next. Any one else wishing to speak in opposition. This is the time. Okay, why don't I have those now, it will make the record complete. ', The staff its handing ars other letters,,that have been received. Exhibit "24" ,is a May 5th letter from I. C. Adam. In opposition. Exhibit "25" is a March 24th letter from CPO N 4 again, I assume this is raced in conjunction with your other letter, okay. Thats been marked • exhibit 025". Exhibit "26", April 26th letter from Rachael Wright, objecting to the application. Exhibit 027" appears to be a sort** of photos, with a letter from Richard Franzke, letter dated May 10th. Nine pictures. Okay, staff has handed me a map, that need says, that noeds explanation.' KIETH LIDEN, "I, think the last couple of days tape black out ..a we have uncovered what at this time appears to be a mistake wade, zoning map, graphic zoning map, the plan map back in 1401. Staff report we had indicated that the, there was one parcel of a little over four acres, immediately west of the property thats zoned commercial professional and that the remaining properties to the west .... tape black out . . . like I said we still have to make sur* that this is correct, but it appears that the property was designated in the Comprehensive Plan, the next one over, which consist of two tax lots of a little over three acres are also intended for Commercial Professional .. ..." BETH MSON, "We're talking about tax lots 12bO and 14047" TEXACO TRANSCRIPT•— 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/08 — PAM 82 KEITH LIDEN, "Thats correct, and we've reviewed this with Engineering, (tape black onto we will be continuing working with the property owner to question and see how .. .. property owner )� would like to ........(black out)...... with designation . . ,.(black out).,., BETH MASON, "This revised zoning map has been marked exhibit 1128", .....,, tape blacking in and out ..,. BETH MASON, "Are we talking about the adjacent property now," UNKNOW, "Yes." BETH MASON, "That* outside the scope of this hearing. If you have concerns about that adjacent property, then I suggest that you see the staff. gut, really,- what happens on adjacent property, down the road, is subject to a hearing down the road. You know, we would consider that application at the time that it is before me, just as I'm considering all of the details of this application and not really looking ahead to what may or may not happen on the mountain. I'm not going to consider, you know, what might happen on this � property, because I, don't have an application in front of me. I have know Idea what a land owner might or might not do with that property. 8o if you have specific concerns about how this problem came up, I'm sure that the staff s would be more than willing to talk with you and I encourage you to do that. As the staff has said, we are, it is still in the tentative problem stage, you know, their just not sure, they will clarify for me within the next couple of days, what precisely what the zoning is on tax lots 1340 and 1900, but, the tact that that property is undeveloped and theres not an application pending in front of me, I'm not going to consider that property, the zoning on that property in, in conjunction with this application." t .. ..... someone to far from mic asking question .... KEITH LIDEN, "To clarify the facts in the record." � / � 3 7EXF= TAA IPT-y 3/24/89 — 5/18/88 5/25/99 — PAGE 93 _ P BETH MASON. "Sure. And since we have been discussing that area, in the broad sense of the relocation of that frontage road, its of interest. but its not controlling as to this application. Yes?" E t to far away from mic to hear ... . BETH MASON. "Okay, okay, let me hold this up. West of the subject property, thorn is a lot. The subject property is this corner right here. This is the little lot that they want to divide off. 'Thais part of the application, is a minor land partition to take this 1.54 acres, and .. ...(someone from audience asking question to far from mic) ..... correct, and use that as the service station site. The remainder of the property, which is now designated tax lot 1200, is 2 believe part of the ownership thats' being purchased, but not part of this application. Alright. so it would be under the ownership of Texaco, i guess. but not developed at this times. .,:. (some talking to far from mic)... Okay. alright, anyway, its','not part of this application. Further west from that, is tax lots 1300 and 1400, which is this area outlinod in yellow, is the aro& that the staff is talking about, and it was referenced in the staff . report originally, you know, just looking further west of this site, what is going to happen in the surrounding area? And the original projection was this area surrounded in yellow was going to be low density residential. The staff has come here tonight to say that might not be accurate, that area might be designated commercial professional by the Comprehensive Man, and they are going to follow up in: the next couple of days said let, me know for sure. But It is two lots removed from the subject of this application. Okay, anyone else wishing to speaking in opposition? Alright lets take & ton minute break and we will return for rebuttal." BETH MASH, "... Countering what the people in front of you just said. So now we are going to hear from the proponents, the people in favor of this application, and they are going to be giving ars evidence, contradictory to what 11ve just heard from you, and then the opponents will have one more chanco to speak, as the very last people in rebuttal. Mr. Greenfield." "Madam Hearings Officer, I'm MARK GREENFIELD, my address is 101 SW Main Street, Suite 2000, Portland, Oregon. I'm here tonight representing the TEXACO TRAWCRIPT•— 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 -- 5/25/88 — PAGE 84 WORM applicant Texaco. There have been a number of issues raised by the opponents. and we have also been told informally, but told that there is a possibility that this decision, however it turns out, might be appealed, Accordingly." BETH MASON. "Whatever makes you say that Mr. Greenfield?" . .. laughter ... MARK GREENFIELD, "Accordingly, we want to be as thorwgh as possible and make sure we have as complete a record am possible to show compliance with all the relevant criteria. The order of presentation on rebuttal, we will begin with Mark Metge, who is Texaco's Engineer. Responding to issues addressing the different ..., BETH MASON, "Having trouble hearing you. Is that mic on again?" } { MARK GREENFIELD, "Addressing the different criteria in the ordinance and issues regarding, road design," and things like, that, drainage._ He will be followed by Paul Vomer, of,Texaco, who will speak to the issue of stacking. Then Wayne Kittolson will ipeak. Wayne Kittelson is Texaco's Traffic Engineer.. and• he will be discussing traffic impacts, traffic safety items. �l Then I will return and discuss compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, Y compliance with the zoning requirements, conditions of approval, and summarise our position. So I would like to start with Mark Motge." BETH MASON, "Okay." MARK f'ETOC, "That is a revised site plan, and, which, all the neighborhood organizations have, and a revised structural, or architectural drawings, and a new sign pian." BETH MASON, "I'm sorry your last name is Motge?" MARK METGE, "Motge, yes." BETH HAM, "The revised, site pian, .,. paper noises . .. marked exhibit "29"0 (tape black out) ... . speak close . . . ." TEXAOD TRANSCRIPT — 8/24/68 — 5/19/68 -- 5/25/80 — PAGE 85 t( C E HARK METGE, "Okay, for the record my name is Mark Metge, with Charles a Gove and Associates, Consulting Engineers, out of Bellevue, Washington. As stated before I am not. I am not an, I as not with Texaco. I'm employed by Texaco. Okay. I'm not a employee of Texaco. lets put it that way." BETH MASON. "We've got you disclaimers," MARK METGE, "First off I'd like to mention as few things that, the site that we are considering is zoned for this service station that we have proposed. The general commercial zone allows a service station outright, but a conditional use portion is put on the gasoline sales. That is why we are going this proceeding. And also, that the economic, as you have stated before and I want to reiterate, is that the economic considerations of this site are not on triai'here. Texaco, by virtue of its internal 'studies. and other means. has determined that this is a good site for a station. And, in determining that they will, if approved',, invest a-large sum,of money to build the station there. Bo they okra protty,certain that they are going to got that economic return on this. Okay, I will just touch upon the improvement of the tv*,ffic f at this site, because of Texaco's proposed work. Wayne Kittelson will �• address those issues bettor than I later. But, just, I just wanted to say that the traffic situation will be improved, and that is one of the major Items that the neighbors have brought up opposing this site. Okay. I would now like to go through section '19.120.180 of, the City of Tigard Code, zoning Code, which is the approval standards for the Texaco; for a site like this. The first, there are several sections in this section that address residential applications, and they are clearly not applicable, and I will not mention those. One item that is addressed is 19.144, which is accessory uses and structures, it allows for accessory structures within commercial tones such as barns, garages, sheds, storage buildings; and we will be putting a storage building on this site. Used for storage of stock in the food mart. Okay, the, generally the items required in that section are that the setbacks, setbacks, of this building are the same as the remaining property, and that is met. The accessory building, the arca of the accessory buildings and primary buildings shall not exceed the maximum lot coverage, which is the case hare. And they are not allowed in the front yard, which Is the case, its in the side yard. This, another aspect is, it will'•noe,encroach on property setbacks or right—of-sway, and it does not oxcoad tarn feet in height, which is tho average MAM TRANSCRIPT.-- 3/21/88 — 5/28/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 86 maxima in the ordinance. Okay. Okay the, section 18,96 addressed in that section covers the additional, additional yard requirements, and that does not really apply in this situation. Section 28.98, covers the building height, and states that the maximum height shall be 75 feet, if the total building area is not one and a half times the area of lot, of the lot, and the structure is not abutting a residential area; and we satisfy all of those conditions, Section 18.100 covers landscaping, and I have a landscaping plan that I would like to show." BETH MASON, "Art you going to want me to consider that plan?" CLARK METCE, "You already have that .....(paper noises) ... T just wanted to put that one on display because it does, it does graphically display the amount at landscaping and the type of landscaping that will be put at this site, Installed at this sato. This section requires protection of existing street, site trees, whore ,possible, and if trees are removed, existing Arees aro removed that they be replaced, The suction also dictates the spacing of the trues and as our landscape plan shows Chard aro three trees on the south side that are being saved and the remainder, there are some trees on the north side that will be removed, but there aro many more tress going into the site and such more landscaping, with, the landscaping, the amount required if 15 Percent of the sit* and that has been exceeded by a little bit in Texaco's plawn. So the landscapinq portion of the Code has been addressed. section 16,102 talks about the visual clearances at the approach sites. In the visual clearance triangle your not allowed to have anything over threo feet in height, so as not to obstruct the drivers view, and, but an occasional pole or tree is allowed, if it doesn't have any branches or obstructions below eight feet, or something like that. So that, that is met also. Offstreot parking addressed, talked about 16.106, four off street parking sites are required. As indicated on our plan we have eight spaces, so we have exceeded that. Okay. Aceoss and ingress, access and egress on 16.106 talks about, sets aside that one access is required for each alto with 0 - 99 parking spaces. Obviously we have more than one access, so that is meet. Section 16.114 talks e about signs. In the initial sign that we had submitted to the City of Tigard it did excocd the area requirements, and you have in front of you, a sign that t does moot the City of Tigard's requi.rom►ent8, not of area, not to exceed 70 square feet on each side. The height of the sign is also limited to 20 feet T"A00 TRARMIPT 3/24/86 - 5/19/66 -- 5/25/66 -- PAte 67 { i in their Code. Okay, Okay. In regards to section 18.120.180. talks about building located to preserve trees and natural drainage. The drainage, as I mentioned before, the existing trees are being maintained as much as possible and the natural drainage will not be affected significantly. The site is also not sliding or slumping off, its basically a level site, so there is no erosion or sliding problem. ... tape ended .... I would like to take a little bit of time and talk about a noise, a noise issue that has been brought up. Obviously, a car wash of the type that Texaco installs at there facilities does create some noise. The biggest noise generator would ba from the blower, or, on the exit side, which blows air over the car to dry it. The, the Code states that if the site creates noise, it must be buffered from the residential. the adjoining residential areas. Since this site does not adjoin residential areas and the closes residential area iv a distance away, the noiid generated by this car wash should not create a problem. I wouldn't, like to, to substantiate that, we have a letter from the Department of Environmental Quality, which talks about a Texaco station on ©roadway, and 33rd street. Okay, they, have a car wash and a similar type situation, Installation at this site, with some significant differences. The similarities, the similarities are that its a food mart and a car wash, and gasoline sales. The differences are the car wash is located approximately ten feet away from a residential house." BETH MASON, "I was handed a letter dated October 17th, 1986, from DCQ, that* boon marked exhibit number "31". Are you proposing a, limitation on you hours of operation for the car wash?" MARK MUCC, "At this time, no. .. .... talking to far from mic to hear . .. .. Okay. Okay, briefly the, letter states that this site, even though the car wash was ten feet away from the next house, that by measuromont, noise measurements at that site, it was found to be in compliances with DCQ's noise regulations for the City of Portland. And since our site, our site, car wash Is substantially farther away, you know, nois6 dissipates real, very fast, as the square of the distance, to you would not probably notice the noise from any residential area at this site. Okay. This Coda also talks about crime t prevention. Texaco is vary aware of this, these kinds of problems and has Sighting, lighting systems that light•.t}ce hard for security. The windows are placed such that patrols passing by can observe what goes on inside the r TEXACO TRN1V=XPT — 3/28,/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PACE 88 facility. for better security. And it will provide, you know, measures that are necessary to provide for a secure site. Okay, access and circulation. The access to the site has been rearranged so that it complies with the recommendations by Washington County, which was then recommended by the City of Tigard. The " SETH MASON. "Your talking about on exhibit number "24", the site that you just gave me?" MARK METGE, "Yeah. The Washington County proposed alternate "c"', as there preferred alternative, in a letter dated, sent to the City of Tigard, and then the City of Tigard then took their recommendation and recommended that also." BETH MASON, "This involves the closing of the youth frontage road?" MARK METGE,,. . "Yeah. . closing.,.the south frontage road and putting ono access onto the Texaco site and the other 100' feot as a common access. A 100 foot farther down Bull Mountain Road. Okay. Should also mention that there were also many concerns about walking traffic on this, at this area. With the improvement* that Texaco has, that the City of Tigard has required of Texaco, and Texaco will then be installing. The road will be widened to provide better protection for pedestrians, and a sidewalk installed on Bull Mountain Road and on the frontage road. Which will provide better pedestrian safety. Okay. I would like to .talk a little bit morin about the drainage issue. King City has expressed a strong feelings about the drainage from this site, so I have done, I have looked at the site and, the before and after situation. Okay, there are, is some impervious surface on the site right now. The site was used for a used car lot, they have asphalt paving, which totals approximately 15,000 square feet. At this area. Texaco is also proposing to remove, well the existing, proposing to remove 8,000, approximately 8,000 square fest of the frontage road paving. Which I have taken into the before calculation. That gives us a total of 28,000 approximately square foot that, of asphalt area that we are concerned about. Taking that same area, the 8,000 square foot of road would be removed, and would become, would become pervious surface again, and the now site of Texaco's would be approximately 88,500 square feat of paving. That. would give us a not increase in impervious surface of 2,SOO squadra foot approximately. In, performing a TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 8/21/88 a 5/10/8B -- S/2S/99 -• pAM 84 •_n...,,,.� .�rayaaa+t. •:,.ase:.e_..------------------- simple calculation on that to get your run off, quanitity of run off, it comes out to about .13 cubic feet per second of water, of additional water that that site will generate. And that is approximately 57 gallons per minute. As the it site is graded, one-third of that, approximately one-third of that water would drain to the frontage road and eventually wind up in King City's drainage system. The rest of the surface, the area, the site area would drain to the Bull Mountain system. King City's portion of that water would be about 19 gallons a minute. This is based on a. I guess I should say, is based on a 10 year storm. The, considering the quantities involved, the net increase involved. its not really significant. You turn on your tap at home and your going to got about five gallons per minute. So, in the world of storm water drainage, 19 gallons a minute is not very much. Okay. We have also, Mark Greenfigld will also addressed. in more detail our proposal concerning that. excess waiter, later. Okay. Okay, the Code also addresses handicapped access to the site. The sit* is designed to be accessible for all handicapped peopl*.' The,— as the Code' allows.- -restrooms, sidewalks are all designed for that purpose. Okay. One other item, the land partition portion of the Code states that the requirements for partitioning, which we are doing at this site, says it must conform to the Comprehensive Plan, which this site does. in { the general, commercial general site. Complies with ordinance requirements ^ and regulations. We have done that. Adequate, provide adequate public facilities. That is addressed also. Conforms to site and dimensional requirements. That is addressed and and all ,the improvements menet the City's standards. Okay, land partitioning. The minimum average lot width must be 50 feet and the average lot width, lot width is the average horizontal { distance between side lot lines measured at building lines and the sites here. The Texaco sit* is approximately 56 feet and the remaining portion will, approximately so feat. Bo we cover, to we are covered in both of those." BETH MASON, "Excuse me. .... talking from the audionce to far from etc to hear..., " BETH MANN, "Your point is well taken. Mr. Greenfield asked me before the hearing, since he was retained between the first hearing and the second whether I would allow hies to make a complete record for tho purposes of appeal. *tat he's doing is ossontiallq' reading through the ordinance requirements and saying, we've considered this and its- boon met, we've . ) TEXACO TRANSCRIPT— 3/24/88 — 5/16/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 90 considered this and its been met. I understand what he's doing. I'm assuming its almost done." MARK METGE. "Yes." l`. BETH MASON, "I granted him the leeway to do that, he had asked me that beforehand, and I guess that I should have announced to you, that he had asked If he could do that and I said yea he could." MARK MET'GIE, "Okay. yeah in fact I am done." ,,, applause . . . . UNKNOWN, "Sorry." MARK METGE, "Everybody can wake up. Wolf mayba I'm not, There are two items that I did not address. The setbacks, at, on general, commercial general - site, there .are no .sQtbacks.",' specific setbacks mentioned. But, -for the gasoline sales a setback of 40 feet is required, that has been done. Part of that setback is the stacking distance of the three care per pump that is ' required.by the City. Which is an issue that the neighbors had, have brought • up. That will, I just mention that that has been met. We do have adequate stacking distance for three cars. Al . . . . . .. . of Texaco, will address that more in detail later. One other thing, the cul-de-sac. I just wanted to state that part of the City's requirements was that a cul-de-sac would be put { on the frontage road when it was closed. ' This created some problems for internal circulation, because they required a 45 foot radius on the cul-de-sac. And, in discussions with the City, they have agreed just to let us dead end the road, which would not encroach upon the facility and cause problems for internal layout. And the, enough room was left on the frontage road so that emergency vehicles could turn around, if need be, at that spot. Okay. I, I as now done. Thank you." "My name is PAUL VOMER, I am a marketing representative with Texaco, Portland, Oregon. And in reference to previous testimony whore it was stated that, because, a stacking problem occurred at one existing facility, to automatically assume that there would be a stacking problem at the proposed site, I would like to addrass that. , .By saying that, is not applicable to compare one facility, in an. entirely different market area, to the proposed • TEXAW TRANWRIPT - 3/24/88 - 5/18/88 - 5/25/98 .r PACE 91 e site which is in a completely different area. and also has a completely different design. The site that was mentioned in comparison was our retail facility located near the Tannisborne Mall, on 185th Street, and if we compare l� the. that facility to the proposed site, we see two major differences first all. The site at a 185th has one access drive, thats the Ruin access drive, and that in combination with the fact that the gasoline islands are located parallel to each other, bath island located in front of the convenience store, poses a stacking problem at that site. What the proposed site at Bull Mountain, there are two access drives on Bull Mountain Road, plus a third access drive on the frontage road, and the design of the facility is totally different. The design of the facility has tho pump islands located on different sides of the convenience store, which allows for better access and beater traffic flow on the site. Sa it is not applicable to compare two totally 'different facilities in two completely different areas. Another factor that influences the amount of traffic at a particular site is the amount of, the number of ', compatitive facilities in the particular market area. The Tannisborne Mall, site there is no visible competition within the market area. And as we have previously hoard there are several competitive facilities, up and down Highway 99, within the market area of our proposed site. 8o because of the design of the facility and because they are in two different areas, its not applicable to compare the stacking problems at one existing site with the proposed site of ours. Thank you." "My name is Wayne Kittelson, I'm the Traffic Engineer representing the applicant. I know that time is short here, but I would like to take the opportunity to say what a pleasure its been to work with the neighborhood on this project over that past month or so. While it may not regally appear that way, tonight, I really think any many respects that this has been kind of as tease effort between ourselves and the neighborhood. At the meetings that we have attended with these over the past month, they've been invariably polite And objective. They have, I think, appropriately challenged some of the key traffIc' ,assumptions and m+athodologies, and I think they have conducted a pretty good traffic investigation of their own. What I would like to do hare, there* been a lot of questions related to traffic and I've tried, during the time that I've had available here to orrganizia my comments. I'm going to go through them in as mach as organized f'aishiorr as I can. I would like to begin with, I think, one of the key questions that was raised deals with the { TEXACO TRMSaCRIPT— 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 92 i l OMEN i investigation that the neighborhood conducted on their own, And that was the study over a period of days looking at traffic vol, in a period of hours looking at traffic volumes on, at key intersections in our study area. (black out on tape) What I'ae of to do is take '.' � going you back to a slide that we presented earlier at our original testimony. If you recall the neighborhood representatives indicated that what they found was on a Wednesday in the evening peak hour, they found traffic volumes to be 27 percent higher than what we had reported in our report based on traffic analysis done in October and November, (black out an taps)... . focus of our investigation was to identify .... (tape blacking in and out) .. ,, higher f volumes here ........... ...... ... .. or high volume intersection . . . ., , ., . . considerably less variance in the average hourly traffic volume. .... .. .... from day to day ......... Obviously WQ'ree talking about an intersection serving.'Just a few hundred vehicles. you . got a variation of 14 or more i vehicles the questions is Is it significant on the operation of the intersection. .... .. .. , .et.lye Anothar- thing' that needs to ba taken into account hero that we have presented to the neighborhood but I don't think to you. Is how we arrived at our analysis .tole $ fpr that peak hour. In fact what we did was, to look at the evening •• peak hour, then within that hour to break It up Into four tunes, fifteen minute time frame. Each of those has a different flow rate, If you were to project that out over a ono hour period. 'Traffic Eroaineers recognise, and I think everybody dors. that within that hour there is also a peak. This is the peak hour of the day, but there is a peak within that hour. Cause traffic volumes very over those time periods. Well we plotted this traffic out and selected the time period, the fifteen seinuta time period, highest volumes and used that as one hour flow rate. 80 Z think that accounts for some of this variation that we're talking about today. Aside from that, those coaements and I think there are reasonable explanations. For the purposes of this discussion tonight, what I did, while we were sitting hare, was to go back and do what X did with the very worse case analysis. lets assume for example, lets assume for the purpose of this discussion that the 27 percentage .. .. . hare. Also applies to this intersection here. UNXNfIMP "because this is oral Instead of in writing. .... . clarify that the first hare is the fr-c"tage Road Bull 'Mountain Intersection and the **condone Is Pacifle Highway can I get you to i TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PACE 93 s 4 t• Baum f WAYNE KITTELSON, "Boy its going to be tough. I'll try. Okay. What I've done � in my analysis that I'm about to describe to you, because I have said, lets look at this intersection of the frontage road with Bull Mountain Road. Lets E assume that- the 27 percent increase ..... (tape blacks out) .... also applies i t here. That there is some point in time when volumes at this intersection are 27 percent higher than the volumes that we assumed. Beyond that lets assume that that 27 percent increase applies to site generated traffic as well. Therea 27 percent more site generated traffic at the same time that you have 27 percent .......... traffic, If I assume all of that, and go through the Intersection level of service calculations again, the result is still the same, Y still come up with a, wall its a "B" to "C" level of service. You've gone from a solid "B" level to of service to a "B" to "C" level service. Still, clearly within the acceptable bounds, as defined by traffic ti'ngineers. ...... ..(black out in taps) .... . Let me explain, because a question casae up,, the Htrarings Officer •brought 'up• a -question at the concluston , of the l previous meeting tract I think was very relevant and important to address hers. The question was, wall is a "B" level of service really good at this Intersection. After all people are complaining about it and we do have what '- appears to be soma significant delays at this intersection. That* acceptable to a traffic engineer, then how far do you go to got to a "Q" level of service and is that going to be acceptable. We want back and looked at our data, at our result, a little bit different fashion, because, I recognixe the concerns by the neighborhood. This slide shows you the assumed, one hour traffic volumes during an existing evening peak hour, that we used in our traffic analysis. And these numbers by the way have been adjusted upward to reflect that peak fifteen minutes of .. ... (tape black out) and this again the intersection of Bull Mountain Road and Pacific Highway. You can see the heavy volume,' of course of the through movements here. When we do a level of service analysis, what I describe to you as a "B" level of service, is a level of service for the whole intersection. Thats sort of a weighted average of the delays that are experienced on the different approaches. But in fact each approach can have a different delay of its own, and that translates into ai separate level of service for these different movements. When we went through and broke those delays out, average "delays per vehicles by approach, hares what we found and some of the testimony tonight eluded to this. What we found was is the average delays for traffic on Pacific Highway is only about, TEXACO TRAM=IPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 94 i well this is a "A" level of service. Two to seven seconds per vehicle. Minor street movements are being, are suffering delays at or exceed .. ...... per vehicle. Which by our level of service definition, could be a "F" level of service. "flow why is this happening? Well what this is telling us, is that, the signal timing at this intersection is, well in my view is inappropriate for the traffic volume and traffic conditions that we have at this intersection. The State Highway Department regulates the signal timing a intersections. They like to favor the heavy movements at intersections like this. in terms of green time. Because, to the extent that you can reduce total delay to the main streets, of course thats at State Highway facility, thats all they really care about. Beyond that though, I can minimize total delay for the whole facility if I hold these people a long time. That not withstanding I think that the State also recognizes that delays or 60 seconds for vehicles hera create some of the problems that we are seeing here. They create the long qua* that we see here today, they create high speeds- in observation,, 'others have, seen this as well, because the cycle length here is so long, and I mentioned at the previous hearing. the cycle length Is in excess of .. .(tapa black out)..., in excess . . ., time this approach -get a green, and the time it gets a groan again. Because its so long, when the light turn green, we generally see people coming at a higher ( rate of speed down the hill to try and make that light before it turns red again. Because they recognize that if they don`t wake it they are gong to sit there for two and half .. .... So, I think that signal timing at this i Intersection is contributing to the higher speeds, perhaps to the accidents potential that you see at this intersection and certainly to the longer quo*. Its a timing problem. Its a operational Issue that not necessarily related to this application, its related to how the state is . .. . . . . . . ... made recommendation to the State and I would like to enter into the record a letter I have sent to Ron Faiimezgor, who is responsible for signal timing . ... . identifies for him this problem, irrespective of what happens on this particular application. ... .. . and suggest three or four ways that he might consider for retiming or modifying -his system in this area in order to reduce � delays to these lighter street movements." BETH MASH, "That latter has boon marked Exhibit "32", its a May 14th letter from Kittolson Associate." z 4 1 } TEXAM TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 95 WAYNE KITTELSON, "So, to sort of summarize that, what you see here is an intersection that clearly has excess capacity relative to the volume of traffic thats there now, relative to the volume of traffic that will be there in the future, and relative to the effects to the site traffic. Theres excess capacity here. The question is whether or not. . ...... Oregon Department of Transportation to retime their signal in order to reduce average delays. I don't think that Chats a criteria for evaluation of this particular application. .,.,(tape black out) ...... Some questions were raised regarding the sit* generated traffic characteristics, we had identified a peak condition of 40 vehicle trips in and 40 vehicle trips out, the question is how duos that relate to the overall time period. We were looking at a period from five to six. This is a summary of the data that we collected at the existing Texaco service station in terms of arrivals over a 12 hour period, You can sae a fairly cdnstant, it, there it fluctuates it little bit in here, but more or less a constant volume over from about eight to three, increases to about six and then drops off dramiatically after six.• Phis, is the number that we used In our traffic analysis. The, total twelve hour visitation, about 330, as the number that we observed. Assuming that that twelve hours represents 70 percent of the total, and that basically, just a good guess, I don t ..... not ' much more than that. But assuming that represents 70 percent of the total 24 f hour traffic, the 24 hour traffic volume to ax facility such as this would be around 500, a little under 500 vehicles trips per day. If you take that out to over a month, over thirty days, a month, that cosies to about 15,000 trips per month, which again is consistent with the numbers that Texaco is providing as to volumes that they were expecting to .. . ... .. at this facility. Its also consistent with the information that* provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers'. trip generation manual as to the number of trip in* that you would expect to, see in a facility such as this on a daily basis. Another point that I think is worth recognising here and has, has been brought up to some degree tonight. Deals with what is the trip traffic generating potential through ... . .... land uses. As you know this is ax conditional use, howaver,' there are a number of uses for this site that are permitted out right, where you don't need to go to this kind of . ... .. . ... hearing. What we have done is compared the paaek hour trip rates, pm peak hour trip ins, for am Texaco service, or for any service station, 'against other uses that allowed outright at this facility. These are:yiigher trip generating uses, . . .. ....a' commercial site permitted outright. Fast food restaurant generates 50 percent TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/ee — SPACE 96 more trips during the peak hours, than this would. Convenience market generates four times as many trips as this does. A d rie in bank, about 25 or 80 percent more. ....(tape black out)...... Thats a good point. Okay. A l i1 point that I'd fa � rgotten ..,...... ... as I go back to this, and I'll lust put this one up for a minute. We were talking about the effect of signal timing at this intersection and the delays that are experiencing. Despite the fact that you have high delays here, its important also to recognize that you can see that, if you go back to this slide. Well, we talked about it, theres excess capacity at this intersection. And, so, you never see a driver who doesn't make it through during a green light. There is a enough, the signal is actually, it provides extensions of the green time to get rid of the quos. while the quos are long, there is enough green time to clear those ques out. So we don't $ee A failure, in the sense that we have more demand here th ah we can handle in any . .. paper noise .. . even in the pm peak hour. And thats consistent with our analysis results. Also, our analysis shows that ,even., with that additional traffic generated by 'Texaco than condition remains true. Your not ,.,.coughing.. . failure hare, in terms of not being Able to clear those vehicles '.... . .. . cycle. because of the development of this sits." ( M BETH MASON, "Ifs that the only criteria for judging whether there Is a failure of the intersection, or a lack of capacity at the intersection if the quo doesn't clear?" WAYNE KIITELO N, "No, no. No. ' .. ... . . . . ... and from a cycle, from cycle, to Cycle, you can have so" failures, because .... . . . . ►. . A "0" level of service usually, there ars some failure, they are rather infrequent failure, but there are some failures, there are enough clearances between those so that it clears out." BETH MASON, "But this, but this level of service, "F" at those two points, is based on, even though once you got the light, your able to clear, its based on fact that it take so long to got the light." WAYNE KMELSON, "'chats right. And the State has just really ground down the time, ground down to theres, those guysa hairs vary little window during that two minutes, normally, to get out. Once they get the light, once they get the TEXACO TRANSCUPT -- 3/24/88 d 5/18/08 Y- 5/25/86 — PACE 97 green, then it holds for them until they clear the quo. but they have to sit .. . .......... for that opportunity. The State, now is aware of that. There ; is a couple, theres a couple of ways they can solve this problem. as I say. this intersection right now is operating g p ng at a 140 second cycle. It could i easily operate as a 70 second cycle and you reduce these delays considerably. That would also work in the progression scheme that ODOT has for the rest of the signals all up and down Pacific Highway. And that one of the F alternatives we've suggested." BETH MASON, "But when you suggest that there is excess capacity at this intersection, what your suggesting is more cars could quo and clear in a given cycle time, but its not going to reduce the cycle time unless ODOT steps in." WAYNE Kli ELSON, "Okay, yes, let me put it " BETii MASON, "In other words that excess capacity would'b4"Absorb at the "F" level, but it-would be absorbed because there is enough length of green light to clear the qua, both cycle times?" WAYNE KITTELSON, "Right, let me put it a little different way. We are looking at two different things here. We're looking at capacity and level of service. Two different things. Right now the State has artificially caused ; us to goo to a "F" level of services on these approaches. Because of that, p they don't have to change the timirj at all here. We can increase the volumes f considerably in herb, and we won't increase average delays. We are already being forced artificially up to delays that you would experience is this area, just because of the way that they time the signal. Build increase volumes on Bull Mountain Road, people are going to sit and wait about as long. Its not going to ..... . their average delays. Thats because we can take, up that excess with the excess capacity Chats there." BETH t3,AM, "Before you go on, lot me rAke sure that I have that clear in my notes. Do you have copies of those slides for me to put into the record?" WAYNE KZYTEL8011i, "Yes I do. In fact I can give these to you now. .. .... to far from mic to hear what he is saying . .%. "I kind of intermixed them ..... TEXACO TRAMMIPT -- 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 98 t G ' BETH MASON. "These slides will be marked exhibit "3311." WAYNE KITTELSON. "Okay, I apologize because I don't know who the commentators where, but one comment that came up early in this hearing related to traffic volumes on the minor movement. One of the changes that we are making here, of course, is the cul-,der-lacing of the south frontage road. That will have the most effect probably on vehicles that currently use that frontage road to gain access to Beef Bend Road, Most part" i UNKNOWN, "Question, they said they were not going to cul--de-sac the south b rind?" BETH MASON, "No. He's using cul-de-sac in the sense that it would no longer be an intersection. It would stop, short of the " UNKNOWN,. "..... cul-pie-sap," • i BETH MASON, "Sir. Let me stop you hero. This is not a time for a general discussion. Lets let Mr. Kittelson proceed with his presentation and if you still have a question when he is done there is a time at the end of the procedure for questions." UNKNOWN, "Okay, I'm sorry." BETH MASON, "Okay." WAYNE KMELSM, "Okay. ... .... . that this particular slide illustrates what we are talking about ' ... .... . .. . . . . . . . . .(walked away frons mic)) that what we are trading off here, the number the vehicles that make that turn during evening peak hours right now, vehicles that we observe making that movement. go its not a great volume of traffic that we are talking about having a adverse impact on. Consownts were made regarding the increase volume of traffic that we are going to be adding to this area and the of fact its going to have on a already dangerous Intersection. I think that the important point to nota here is that we are actually eliminating at lot of that traffic. We are eliminating most, a significant number of movements at that existing intersection, and when the TEXAM TRANSCRIPT - 8/24/88 - 5/18/88 - 5/25/88 - PAGE 99 tF t state closes their frontage road .....(walking away from mic) .... .. gone entirely. . ......(black out).. .. Its going to be a dramatic change. I think in the safety characteristics of this intersection. ........(black out) ...... comment was made regarding the walking traffic on Bull Mountain Road. And I certainly recognize that there is ..... (black out) ...... ideal place for pedestrian activities today. . .....(walked away from mic)........... ..........I. ....... important point that I would like to make is that ....... ....(walked away from mic) ..... ...... .. .... .. . . .. . .... ... Comment was made regarding the increased population of the mountain. of the Bull Mountain area. 1 forget the reference, but it was something indicating a ten times growth in population within this area over the next ten years or so .. (black out) ...... increase on average. Well that may be true, its important to also recognize that the road system isn't remaining the same during tfiat time period either. There is, there are plans, on the part of Washington County, within the Regional Government to improve the road system in here. which may take, I provide some relief, to traffic volumes, 'in -this' area. We go back and look at the traf'f'ic projections by Metropolitan Service District and by Washington County for this section of roadway, through the year of 2010. and it shows a 15 percent increase in traffic volume, over ' current conditions. And I think that* fairly reasonable. A 20 percent per year growth is, is not, is not a reasonable growth rate to expect. Okay. A number of comments from Mr. Ball. One of those dealt with the fact that our analysis was based on a single site. That we collected our traffic data and estimated the trip generating characteristic of this facilities based on observation at only a single site. First, of course, the site was a good *ite to select because its identical in as many respect* as we could possibly have for site trip generating characteristic. But beyond that, those volumes, those trip generating characteristics are further supported by, published trip generation rates for similar service stations in the ITE trip generation handbook. So I think that we have some support for those beyond just our observations. Mr. Bail was concerned, what will happen when the area develops more fully. And his concern was that our trip generation rate numbers that we are projecting are for a fully, are static and don't recognize that volumes, or traffic volumes and growth of households in the area, like to the increase In the future. I think thats a good point. But in my view it sort of works of opposite wary. What we are projecting arei the trips that you area likely to sea upon full build out of this area. The numbers that we obtained from the TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 100 82nd Avenue are for a fairly mature area. We're looking at full development. Most likely whats joint to happen when this facilities first opens, is that 1 the trip generation rate is going to be a little bit less that what we were projecting. Mr. Ball make a good point that, that with 1600 drivers per month coming to this facility, and with 70 percent of those being left turning trips, that that translates into 12,000 left turns per month that are not being made today, and that thats a significant impact and warrant a left turn lane. I agree, that sounds like a high number of trips. But we have to put that into perspective. The improvements that we are proposing in this area, include, once again ...... walked away from the mic . .. . . if you translate those turning movement out to a monthly bases, it amounts to just under a 100,000 turning movements per month. ... .... TAPE ENDED . ...12.000 addition ..... .(two far from mic) ... Mr. Ball made a couple of couple of recommergUtion for considerations for conditioning this project before its approval, one of which was the closure of both frontage roads before the project is allowed. I recognire the desirability of, that, but I point out that this project will drastically improve the safety characteristics, conditions of this intersection, in this area. Just with the single closure of the south frontage road. .... ... (away from mic) ... the problem doesn't go away until we rid of both frontage road connections, however, by changing that from a four logged intersection to a three legged intersection, we reduce the number of turning movements by about half, or I guess its more than half, about two-thirds. And that I think results in substantial improvements in operation, in results in substantial improvements in traffic safety. Mr. Bali noted that prior to providing for, to allowing this inter, this facility that the levels at the intersection be improved to a acceptable level of service at all approaches. And again, while I agree with the desirability of that, thats not something that the applicant has a lot of control over. Thate at the discretion of the State, and as I say before, Z don't believe thats a criterion to evaluate this project. Its something that we have no impact, we're not increasing delay, even with our additional traffic. . .. (fade out) ... Mr. Ball recommends a single access drive, not only to serve the proposed sits, but also the adjoining property as well, as opposed to the two that are currently shown ...... (fade out) ..... again from a► traffic operations point Of view, if we only considered traffic on Bull Mountain (Road it would be desirable to minimize the driveway, to be practicable, however, we have to also consider internal site circulation . ....... and from an internal TEXACO TRANWRIPT -- 3/24/90 — 5/1.8/88 -- 5/25/88 — PAGE 101 site circulation Point of view, in order to site ...,(fade out ,,. • Provide for adequate stacking on within in the site. I think its entirely appropriate to provide those two driveways. They don't result in significant operat. . . . (fade away) �• BETH MASON, "While We're talking about access, is the access that you Presently show off the frontage road. Theres been some testimony that the neighbors would leave Bull Mountain Road. go through the site, to get onto the frontage road to continue south. How would you address that problem?" WAYNE KirrELSON, "Well. I, its certainly at Possibility for people to make ,,, (fade out)..,.. some people .... .,. (fade out). . ... . ..(to far from ,, BETH MASON, "Your assumption is that the frontage road to the north is ultimately not going to' be"there, but evidence that I•have before,me is that, that may be true, but we don't know when. Until that happens what do you anticipate the volume being from that frontage road, that would then turn down, go nth rough the site and continuo on the frontage road." ; WAYNE KITTELrQN, ....... .. (to far from mic to hear) projection, but let me give you a suggestion here. We know .that currently, at that frontage road.we have 45 vehicles today that go straight through from the north frontage, road to the south frontage road. Lets say that halt of those vehicles decide to use road instead of going out Pacific Highway. Then you are talking 20 to 25 vehicles. . ...(fade out). . ., Its at .... .... (fade out), . . (fade out).,......... and its a temporary problem, in the sense that it will go Way when this roadway is eliminated. Okay. . .. . .. . to some comments in the letter that was submitted from Mr. Alan Saito, who is an Engineer for Centrac and Associate, here in Portland, He made several observations that I would like to address. One is they, he questioned the volume counts that we conducted in November, as oPPosed to other months of the year. The Point that he's making is that there is seasonal variations in traffic volumes on a roadway and what we counted in October and November may not be typical of what you see on thii roadway over the course of a year. Well, I think it is fairly typical, given the study results that the neighbors TEXAS TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 -- 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 102 gave here in April, however, I should also note that seasonal adjustments of traffic for the months of October and November are very close to those two months, and April and May are very close to average months over a course of a year. Summer is a little bit higher, the winter is a little bit lower. October and November; and April and May are generally very close to one. Or to a average, to a typical average months. Mr. Saito also noted that this was only a one time study of the Texaco service station. I think that I have already address that question in terms of why it was appropriate for us to use that one and how we double checked our number to make it was consistent with other literature that exist. He noted that there is a difference between Intersection sight distance and stopping sight distance. Stopping sight distance is the minimum amount of distance that you need in order to stop a vehicle once you notice a physical obstruction in the roadway. Intersection sight d4ktance on the other hand is the distance that you nead to have, in order to see a _potential conflict and avoid it with a fair degree of comfort. , -Without coming to.at panic stop. He's right, Is, noting thmt intersection sight r distance is considerably longer than stopping sight distance. What we quoted In our report, I think was, .....* misrepresented as stopping sight distance, what we were in fact referring to was Washington County's definition of ••+ intersection sight distance. We measured that sight distance by observing actual travel speeds on Bull Mountain Road, in both directions, and taking ten times those average speeds and miles per hour 'and assessing, that is the intersection sight distance req4ired in feet. For example A 25 mile per hour approach, would require 250 feet in sight distance. • . . . .(fade out). . ., so r thats what we measured. Its consistent with Washington County's definitions of intersection sight distance. I's not sure how that relates to the City'', but I Presume it pretty close. Its also consistent with the American t f Association of State Highway and 'Transportation official's definition of Intersection sight distance. And finally he notes than there are a, that this proposal really includes a series of uses, a convenience store, a car wash, and a service station, and he suggest that perhaps a better way to measure -the trip generating characteristic* of a facility such as th!s would be to co4abine the individual trip rates of those uses as opposed to taking these all as a single facility. Again, I don't think thats appropriate because there* a lot of trips that, multiple purpose trips that people Retake, that, that, for example from the gas station to the convenience store or from the gas station through the car wash, that don't result in additional vehicles TEXACO TRRIPT — 3/34/88 — 5/i8/Ra — 5/2.5/88 -- PAGE 103 1 p trips. And to do that we would probably be over estimating the number of trips that are generated by this site. And I also go back to the results of our survey at an existing facility that also provided all three of those uses and I think that we have taken that adequately into account. Finally, one last thing that I would like to point out. In regard to the noise issue. I know that a DEQ letter was submitted to you earlier. identifying noise conditions, or the acceptability of. I think it was, of noise conditions at the intersection of 33rd and Broadway. This is in downtown Portland for a similar Texaco service station. The important point here to note is that, when you start talking about noise. Noise impacts are affected in part by the ambient noise that exist within the area. The next additional effect depends upon the ambient noise levols that already exist. Its interesting at this facility to mote that the volumes on 33rd and Broadway, the volumes are in the range of' 17 to 20,000 vehicles per day and the speeds aro substantial slower than what we have on Pacific Highway. Pacific Highway by comparison has volumes in the range of°.35,000 vehicles per day and speed significantly higher. both of which create a higher ambient noise level. Which means that the not additional impact of noise generated by this site will be lose. See what I'm saying. Thats all I have to say." '* "I'm MARK GREENFIELD again, and I will try to summarize our testimony and discuss some of the conditions. This is an application for a conditional use permit and a minor land partition. The standards that apply are the standards In the City's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan ,and land use ordinance. The staff report has identified the applicable plan policies and zoning requirements and has found compliance. The applicant has reviewed the staff report and applicable standards, but because of concerns that we have that each standard in the ordinances be fully addressed, we have' retained Cordon Davis, who is a planning consultant, and asked him to go through and just really identify each of the facts with respect to all the Comprehonsive Plan provisions that hava to be meet. That is one of the crLtQrL& of the conditional use requirements. I would like to submit a document that sat forth the compliance with all those policies and with a number of the other ordinance provisions that have to be mot under either the conditional use or the minor land partition ordinances." ;1 TEXACO TRANSCRIPT -- 3/24/88 — 5/16/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 104 R BETH MASON, "I've been handed a report dated April 25th from Gordon Davis. Marked exhibit "3411." MARK GREENFIELD, "I won't discuss at this point the contents of that document except that it fairly much parallels the staff report, but just provides a little more detail in terms of, of facts showing compliance with the applicable standards. The uses proposed for the site are a vehicle fuel sales, or vehicles fuel sales, a convenience mart, and a car wash. Of the three only the vehicle fuel sales use is a conditional use in the zone. The other uses are permitted outright, It important to nota that vehicles sales are not permitted outright in any zone, any commercial zona in Tigard, They are allowed in the general Commercial zone, the neighborhood commercial zone, and the central business district. but in each zone they are allowed as a conditioaial use. The point of this is that there is no other zone in the City whore the use is more appropriate. This is the appropriate zone for locating the uses that the applicant.seeks'to-establish. "Now we have heard some people testify that they don't want a service station here. The fact of the matter Is that the uses that are allowed at the site are the result of Planning decisions which were made many years ago by the City of Tigard and which wore - approved and acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. The question of whether a service station may go on this site is not before this, before the Hearings officer, because that question was answered many years ago. The applicable standards for conditional use permits and minor land partitions do not require a showing of public need, Neither do they require a showing of the use not objectable to the neighborhood, such as we found in the City of King City's ordinance, when a similar application was denied their. Accordingly the bases for the decision here, is not the popularity of the proposed use, or area residents would like the site to be developed, if at all. But the fact that the owner has the right to develop the land, that LCDC's acknowledgment of Tigard's plan allows the use, and that the owner is on firm ground here in seeking to place the proposed uses at this location. In short it the application meets the applicable standards than tha City has no choice but to approve it. We believe that the standards are reasonably objective and that we have met each one of there. I would like to emphasize a point that Wayne Kittelson made. • There are other uses allowed in the zone as outright uses that would havp agival, or greater Impacts on traffic volume and safety and wouldn't necessarily have to go through this kind of TEXACO TRAUSMPT — 3/24/88 — 5/10/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 105 review. Because they wouldn't be conditional uses. For example a Doctors office. a McDonalds, entertainment facilities are all uses that could go there and Mr. Kittelson indicated uses that can have considerably greater traffic impacts that the proposed use, Because many of those uses are permitted outright they might not provide the benefits which the proposed use will provide in terms of improvements to the roadways and drainage, Now I would like to emphasize that Texaco has listened to the concerns of area residents, That Texaco wishes to be a good neighbor and that Texaco wants to go the extra stop to achieve that result and I'll explain what I mean by that shortly. I would,.like' to briefly go over compliance with section 18.1.30 for conditional uses, Thera are six criteria. The first is site size and dimension provide adequate area for the needs of the proposed use- an adequate area for--aesthetic design treatment. Compliance with dimensional standards has been showed in the plans that have been submitted by Texaco and the staff report, and testimony you've heard from Mark Metge. and in the document from Cordon Davis, With respect to possible adverse affects.- we would point out that the site is 220 feet from the closes residential use, which is on the other side of Highway 99 and 245 feet from the closes residential use on the wast side of 99. The uses surrounding the property are commercial or right of way for a •• major US highway. And I would like to submit an aerial photo to show that. I've marked in yellow . . ... . .. . I hope I have marked to much of it in yellow, but" BETH MASON, "The aerial photo will be marked exhibit "35"." MARX GREENFIELD, "The second conditional use criterion is that the characteristics of the site are suitable for the proposed use considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features. We've heard testimony that the site is developable. Its nearly flat. It has no significant natural features. Its boon identified by the City for commercial uses. Acknowledged by LCDC for the same. The dimensions in terms of site and shape are adequate for the proposed uses and its location along a US highway and a collector street makes it appropriate, particularly appropriate for the proposed use. The Gordon Davis report provides considerable detail to show that the public facilities have adequate capacity. The applicable requiremonts of zoning district are mat for reasons which have been provided by Mark Motgo today, and in Gordon Davis's report. And the additional i TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 106 requirements in sections 28.114 and 18.120 are met for reasons for which have already been provided to you. In terms of compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, as I've indicated, we've submitted Gordon Davis's report, which provides ' substantial facts and reasons demonstrating compliance with each applicable criterion. With regard to the minor land partition, we have again shown compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. We have indicated compliance with all the criteria in the statute and ordinances and I would point out that the statutory requirements in chapter, in ORS chapter 92 have been included in the City's ordinance. Again facilities. we show adequacy of facilities in Gordon Davis's report. Mark Metge has indicated that we met size and dimensional requirements of the Code, and we meet all applicable City and agency standards. I would point out that there have been no agency objections to this application. Again for the minor land partition. Need is not a criterion, it is not a question of popularity. Because Texaco meets the applicable policies and applicable Code criteria, we believe that there is not a bases to deny the. application.- We have addressed the issues raised by opponents. We've showed how the use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the ordinance. And the opposition to a large extent is really to the Comprehensive Plan decision that was made years ago to allow these kind of •• uses at this site. That issue is not before you. I want to stress in closing that the intersection of Bull Mountain and 99 will be tater with Texaco . there, because the south access road will be eliminated and because other improvements to Bull Mountain Road will be grade. There will be a vertical realignment of Bull Mountain as a, as a result of one of the conditions. Also, because Texaco has taken seriously the concerns of the neighborhood, we met with the neighbors in October of 97, and then we met again with them on April 19th, and April 25th. We are willing to agree to a< condition to provide left turn access Into both the service station and the sheared access of the two partitioned lots. In terms of drainage, we are willing to pump .all of the run off into the public storm sewer on Buil Mountain Road. Now, we've heard testimony from Mark Metge that that isn't necessary; that the amount of additional increase In runoff would be Insignificant, however, plan policy 7.2.1 subsection c. says, "all drainage can be handled on site or through a alternative solution, which will not Increase the off alto impact." Because there will be a slight increase in Off site impact, we request a condition, -*and I have language that I will ,1 submit on than condition. Lot me read it, If I may, briefly, if I can locate Y TEXACO TRAMSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 107 • it here. We would submit the following new language as a condition. The applicant shall provide a method of transferring all storm drainage from the subject Texaco site to the storm system on Bull Mountain Road. This would necessitate pumping a portion of the site generated storm water from the southern portion of the site to Bull Mountain Road. We also have a proposed conditions, proposed condition that we will submit, regarding the left turn access. We also have a proposed condition that the applicant comply with all applicable noise standards and that such compliance be demonstrated prior to issuance of a building permit, We would also ask that amendments, that condition number one to the proposed conditions be amended to indicate that it will be a dead end road, as opposed to a cul-de—sac, I would like to submit Lhasa," .,.(pause/neper noise). ., A further condition that we are, that we've indicated that we would be amendable to is for the car wash to operate only between the hours of 9:00 ani to 10:00 pat, that is acceptable to us, One final issue I'd like to address is the issue of timing, we have heard some people testify tonight that, that,, they have, they-have- asked the Hearings Officer to delay approval of the proposed use until all of the different improvements to traffic in the area have been completed. We would ask that the Hearings Officer not delay approval, for several reasons. First of all the use can safely go in, now. Secondly if the use goes in now. Texaco can start d Immediately to do the steps, take the steps necessary to close the south i frontage road, which will make the area safer. Texaco would also, at this time, put in the left turn lanes into the site to make the area safer, and to address the concerns of area residents. We believe Texaco's develop, at this time. would speed up the improvements and the safety factor on Bull Mountain Road and on Highway 99, particularly due to the closure of the frontage road. Delay to the year 1999 or later would have a negative impact on Texaco and it really wouldn't benefit the area, because it would only delay safety Improvements to the area that can start to do in now. In summary, we believe we've met all of the criteria, we believe that we are taking steps to be a good neighbor with arca residents. We would like to attract their business ultimately, we think we offer a good proposal, and we would ask that it would be approved, And I would be happy to answer any questions, and all of the people hero on our rebuttal presentation would be happy to answer questions." SM MASON, "Okay. I haver marked as '-exhibit "36" the proposed conditions that the applicant has voluntarily submitted to. It's ten o'clock, at the �' ! TEXACO TRAhI=RIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 109 . beginning the this hearing I announce I wouldn't go past ten o`clock. We have. I assume that completes the proponents rebuttal. Okay. We still have an opportunity for opponents rebuttal, and I'm assuming, as well prepared as You folks{ have been, you will want to exceed the five minute grace period that I might extend this meeting pass ten o'clock. So that means that we need to pick a date now, that we are going to come back now that we are going to come back and complete this hearing. I happen to have my calendar. What do you know about the room? What about tomorrow night? Municipal Court or you don't think we have a conflict, or you don't think we have the room? Would be or wouldn't be? KEITH LIDEN, "I'm not sure. I can see if I can find the calendar." BETH MAWN, "Are you sura that Municipal ,Court would be over at eight. Why don't you. We'll take a five minute break while the staff trios to get the calendar for this room." MARK GREENFIELD, "Before we take a break can I ask one question. I would ask the Hearings Officer permission for Wayne Kittelson to be able to put in •� writing, his testimony. DaCause a lot of his reference wasn't, it was difficult in oral testimony to identify a particular, what roads in was talking about or what intersections he's talking about. Would there be any objection It he filed in writing the, essentially what he said?" BETH MANN, "My concern would be any variation between what he said and what# in the record. I, if you have his remarks here by the continued hearing, and enough copies that, that the opponents could consider the written comments for rebuttal, then I would accept it." MARK GREENFIELD, "Okay." (break — tape left on — several people talking sane time.) BETH MASON, "During the break I took an occasion to talk to Gary Alfson, our Transportation Engineering for the City of Tigard, regarding exhibit alevan, which was his memo dated to me dated April 15th. I had two questions, ono do I have the authority to close the south frontage road, and apparently he has a TEXAM TRAMSCRIPT — 3/24/80 — 5/18/98 — 5/25/Be PAGE 109 a i letter from the State Department of Transportation saying that they support that notion. I hadn't seen that latter yet, its going to be coming in. . .. black out on tape).... second, what did I. I wanted to know how he felt about this access onto this frontage road, onto this turn around. This. were the road stops. it doesn't exactly cul—de—sac. but it makes an ability to turn around there, and how long were they planning to keep that frontage road open. given the problems that are, that the Beef Bend intersection, Ultimately looking at closing that entire frontage road, or limiting any access in some fashion. He's not particularly concerned at this time with accessing this development off the frontage road, so long as that frontage road doesn't go through. And so long as I don't, I wouldn't, for in%tance. take the alternative to, that ran the frontage road around this service station and connected up onto Dull Mountain Road up by the church. That was of some concern 'to him ... black out .... suggested that I just close the frontage road all together, rather than do that. open up that commercial a. professional land to the west for immediate development and use of that road and they're trying to avoid, that, no, thats the conversation you saw me having with Gary. Keith now has the book for the room." { KEITH L,IDEN, "Well we can be her* tomorrow night, after eight o'clock." � i 4 BETH MASON, "Mark, can you people be here tomorrow night after eight o'clock? Okay tomorrow night it is. Eight o'.clock." iNItKKN0WN, .,.. .,to far from mic to heara ... . BETH MASON, "What time is you meeting? The next date?" KEITH LIDEN, "Well we have a Hearings Officer meeting on Wednesday, the 25th, starting at 7:00, we have one item on that agenda., and I'm estimating that that won't go for more than an hour. Could be." BETH MASON, "Hows that date? Okay the 25th would be a week from tonight. Mark? Okay lets set it for May 25th. I can't accommodate everyones schedules, but major things like that are ... black out ... . Wednesday, 7:00 this room, you will got no other notice." Okffy, to for people " TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/08 — 5/10/88 — 5/25/$8 — PAGE 110 V KEITH tIDEN. "Do you propose to have this first on the agenda? First, then go for for the next item?" BETH MASON. "Generally I would have this first. But since the applicant that is usually scheduled for the 25th has no idea that we are going to foist this on their schedule. I think that I will have their item first and we will start the hearing on this at 8:00, alright, so you don't need to even be hear at 7:00, I will not start the hearing on this item until 8-.00. We happen, end that other one early. I just hang around and we won't start until 8:00. Please let your neighbors know that had to leave early. This is the only notice that you'll get, Wednesday at 8:00. .. . .. ..... .. . ... Let me, let me say something, Mr. Greenfield approached me during the break and asked if he could put Mr. Kittelson remarks in writing because in references to slides were not'clear as to what intersections he was talking about. I said I was concerned, I didn't want a variation between the testimony that is in the record and the written -conoaasnts, but if he wanted to provide the written comments sufficiently in advance to the opponents, to you can address those written comments in your rebuttal. that I would accept them. 8* Mark, I would think that at the very least get it to NPO 4, as possibly, I mean CAO 4, . .. black out . . .. and they will be available at the city, .. 61600 . . 04 okay, and they will be available at the city at least 24 hours ahead of the 25th. Alright. Thank you for coming I'll see you next week." MAY 25, 1908 r SETH MANN, "Just handed that to me. , Co that summary has been marked as exhibit 0370. In the meantime. (long pause) I thought I received something from the City, the copies of the, of the 0001' stuff, or did that come in before the last time? Was that before the last hearing, that I got those from you? You haven't sent me anything between the last hearing and this hearing? ..,(pause) Yeah, thats what I thought. The staff sent me copies of the $tato Department of Transportation letters regarding the recommendation for the closure of, of the north and south frontage roads, naturally I've misplaced theme, but he says he's going to give me another copy. Bark it so the records complete. Okay. Exhibit "38" will be the March 10th, 88 latter from the State Highway Division regarding the closure of the frontage road. As I recall you sent me both letters, the September 29th, and the, t TEkAOO TR IPT = 3/24/88 — 5/18/68 — 5/25/8$ — PAGE iii j t 1 .. ........................ .. «......«.. 1. exhibit "39" will be the September 29th . ...... letter from the Oregon State Highway Division. Again regarding relocating the frontage road .. ... ... both letters signed by Leonald Gunderson, who the Assistant District Maintenance Supervisor. (pause) Alright. I'm here then, to hear from tho opponents and their rebuttal." "My name is ROBERT BALL, 12765 SW Bull Mountain Road, I spoke to you during the last hearing and have a couple of additional comments I'd like to make. First I would like to compliment Texaco, particularly for agreeing during the course of the last hearing, to putting in a left turn lana and voluntarily committing to that conditions. Which I think is, first of all important, because it is responsive, to the neighborhood. Second I think it is crucial to the safety of the proposal. If Texaco agrees to two additional conditions. I can be converted from a opponent of this application. to at least neutral, if not a proponent of it. The two additional conditions that are important to me personally are, closing the north frontage road, They, have committed to closure of the south frontage road. And reducing the access points on Pull Mountain Road from two to one. Those two conditions. I think are extremely important for you to consider this evening. First. of all, with respect to the north frontage road closure. Mr. Kittelson in the information, or the summary that was given to you this evening, exhibit "170, indicates that the frontage road, Bull Mountain Road intersection accommodates 100,004 turning movements per month, currently. And all those turning movement will be eliminated by the closure of both frontage . roads. And he indicates that that would have quote, 'A& significant beneficial effect on the traffic congestion at that Intersection." I agree with that. He also Indicates on page 37 of his original analysis. The traffic analysis submitted to you, which is dated February 88, that alternative II, which is the closure of both frontage roads, quote, "results in significantly less potential for traffic safety or stacking distance problems at that intersection." I agree with that. So what Texaco Is doing in these proceedings= is arguaing, I think persuasively, that there are substantial benefits, in terms of public safety, in closure of both frontage roads. Accordingly, concurring with that factual analysis by Texaco, I believe the proposal should be conditioned on the closure of both frontage roads. Thar* analysis is based on that, the condition should bay based upon that. With respect to the access onto 'Bull' Mountain Road, Texaco a concoded In the course of the hearing that Bull Mountain Road would be sora efficient TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PA,E 112 and would be safer is there were one shared access from the site to Bull Mountain Road, rather than two accesses. They have urged, however. that. they've not demonstrated that the internal site circulation, in the site, ! � would be more awkward with only one access point onto Bull Mountain Road, I urge that the safety on Bull Mountain Road is paramount in reducing the number of points at which turning movements occur onto Bull Mountain and from Bull Mountain into the site. is much more important than any potential awkwardness in internal circulation within the site. Texaco simply hasn't tried to redesign the site, hasn't demonstrated how the awkwardness exists, and whether is could or couldn't be feasible altered so that its not awkward internally within the site. So I urge that Texaco simply hasn't mat its burden of proof on this issue. That the public safety on Bull Mountain Road is another paramount factor for you to consider, If Texaco agrees to those two conditions, there I can support the application." -BETW MASON, , "Thank you Mr. Bail. Others speaking in opposition. Rebuttal." "KEN DICKEY, 14565 SW McFarland. Again my concern is with crossing safety. I've observed during the summer months, particularly there is fairly heavy foot traffic at times. Two thirds of this are people under 18. We're putting and convenience store right across the street, which has some traffic now and from all projections anticipates to got very much more heavily trafficed, and I think that would could be creating a real problem for ourselves here if we don't address crossing 'safety. I don't have a solution for this, I haven't seen a solution for this. Again, if we rezone comercial professional, the property in question, I think we would be keeping ourselves Into, you knew, a situation where we are not going to have the problem. But I think putting convenient* store across the street from the significant &mount of crossing traffic, from walking traffic, it sort of setting ourselves up. "Thank you." BETff "AWN, "Thank you. Others speaking in opposition?" "My none is JOHN DRANEAS, 15225 SW 133rd. The key issues here, as everybody seems to be responding to, is traffic. And Texaco has presented some statistical analysis that is very. ,technical and appears to be very persuasive. But statistics are something that you can make what over you want Y TEXAM WAR$CRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 113 T Yr.. .....r... �.�r r..,...err r.rrr.erre.... .....r..r. r. .. out of. They can be distorted very easily and they can also mean what you 8 want them to say. Mr. Kittelson made an excellent presentation last week, but he is, above anything also. and advocate, and he is, by. in his position ?1 required to, to view this from a standpoint of Texaco's interest. The real key point her, I think is that, the proposed development is not on Bull Mountain, or is not on 99, or Pacific Highway. Its on Hull Mountain Road. And a more appropriate location for something like this is would be on a major arterial, such as Pacific Highway. The success of this business that Texaco E plans to install, by its very nature and location. depends on its ability to draw cars off of Pacific Highway onto Bull Mountain Road. because thats were the major customer bane is going to come from. When that happens, that is going to intensity the existing traffic problems, not at the Bull Mountain Pacific Highway intersection, but at the Bull Mountain frontage road intersection. Texaco's response to this is, first of all, basically to say that there development is not going to add much to the traffic in that location. I subject that 1thats just not accurate. Theres a' very detailed " statistical analysis presented that suggest that there would be only 500 care per day and that would not be that significant a impact. All of the statistics that have been presented are not specific projections of what would ' happ4n at that particular location. They are simply, they are projections based upon averages, at a average location. I submit that Texaco does not f view this as 'beirsg a average location. They have acquired, or are acquiring more property than what they need for this development. They have gone f t through, a very lengthy process trying to get this approval. They have Invested quite at bit of time and money in this. They have made it Abundantly clear that they intend to appeal you decision it it is adverse to their view. This does not suggest to mac that Texaco beliave that this is going to be simply an average facility, but more of an above average facility. In the written versus of Mr. Kittelson's comments, exhibit "7" is a bar' graph that Indicates the traffic impact that comes from different uses. Convenience store indicates a< average use of 285 visits per day, & gasoline station 80. Last week someone suggested that the two should be added together. In order to estimate thea impact the this development, and Mr. Kitteison objected to that, strenuously and said thats not the way it is to be done. I agree statistically its not, but it should be something in bet!-men. In any advent If you scold the two together, it coaxes 'out'to 325 cars per day. Texaco has been comfortable in discussing the traffic impacts at 500 cars per day, which TUOM TRA IPT — 3/24/88 - 5/18/99 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 114 is far above the average, and I submit that the averages don't really apply in this situation. Texaco's next point is that their improving the traffic flow here anyway, because with the added traffic drawn of Pacific Highway. that will be out weighted by the improvement in the intersection, because of the closing of the south frontage road. I don't think that closing the south frontage road is dependent upon this development. That can be done with or without this development at this location. ......end of tape ... ... They admit that the timing of the signals at the Pacific Highway intersection is poor and its too long of a wait for cars coming off Bull Mountain Road onto Pacific Highway. The suggestion is then made that the solution liars with the State and not with us. Well, that true, but I think that from your perspective in deciding this, this petition, you cannot assume the State is going to make a change. I ithink that you have to assume that that Intersection is going to be a giv�gn, and its going to continue in the state that it is in and worsening the situation here. Its really not going to improve anything, I agree,with Mr. Ball's comments •that- the situation would be greatly improved if Texaco limited the site to one access point off Bull Mountain Road. Its a horrible situation as it Is with added left turns goings Into the. site, and cars coaxing out from two locations CIOs* togethar in a •• congested area, safety would be greatly improved by limiting it to one sharod access point. Another factor is that Texaco admits that cars speed down Bull Mountain Road because they see the long wait at the signal. I must admit that I think that is true, I do it to. But having cars coming in and out of that site Is going to worsen that situation, and t don't think that you should do anything that would add any greater impact to that, than absolutely necessary. The north frontage road should be closed before this development is allowed. Speaking from over ton years of experience crossing this Intersection twice a day, the worse traffic conditions coma, not from people crossing Bull Mountain Road from the south frontage road, but people crossing Bull Mountain Road of the north frontage road. That is the most dangerous situation and this proposal is not going to change that. There is no control ever what than State does. 'When and It the State closes the north frontage road, than that mould be a more appropriate time to consider this request. roma+►, its like buying a pig in a poke. Allowing this development on the bases that the State is going to close the north frontage road someday, is not a service to the community, and does not, make 'sense. Also, I want to point out 'y that the case made by Texaco, probably satisfies their requirements to present TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18!88 — 5/25/88 -- PAGE ITS a s f a prima facie case, but I don't think they have proven their case. One thing that you can take into account is their credibility. I'm pleased that they have agreed to provide the left turn lane. It might be instructive to look at � ) the process that they went through in doing that. That was not a proposal of theirs until last week. in Mr. Kittelson's testimony, he suggested that the analysis was that should be an appropriate action and that it should be done. Until last week, I presume that their position was to the contrary. Had, had the neighborhood resistance not been brought forward that proposal, that eliminate of fact, that thats an appropriate improvement would not have been considered. I presume. And that should be taken into account in evaluating the merits of the statistical analysis that they have presented. In conclusion I agree with Mr. Ball's suggestions that the two changes, limiting access to one driveway off Bull Mountain road and closure of the north frontage"road would make this an acceptable development for the area. and unless both of those conditions have been met, for certain. I do not think this request should be granted. Thank you." BETH MASON, "Thank you Mr. Draneas. Anyone also speaking" DRANEAS, "Do you want me to sign this." i BETH MASON, "Please. There* someone coming up from the back." "I'm WALTER OROCE, I did speak last week, and I just have two comments and the first one is that the frontage road as Mr. Kittelson would taken the traffic t there, would be a tremendous help. And he thought that about half of this traffic might go through the gas station. I think that more than half would, and I think that would actually eliminate most of the help that closing the frontage road is going to be. And I am wondering, they did say that they f would put a left turn lane in, since they are closing off the frontage road, which is going to be detrimental to Canterbury 5quaro, because there are sone of those people who will not be using that road, that I think that they should extend their frontage, their left turn lane down so that it does allow a left turn lane for Canterbury Square. Becauso I am Burn that a lot of people are going to be coming off, out of Canterbury Square nuking a right turn, using a loft turn lane, going through the gas.stati6n, than going to King City. And by the same token those coming, on the frontage road, which is closed, going • 3 TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 116 ° through the gas station • making a left turn onto Bull Mountain Road, . or a right turn onto Bull then a left turn into Canter then a left turn into Canterbury Square. And Mountain Road. excuse me, and that area. you want to call it to use thats going to cause a tie up in And I think that there is goi ng fighting# or whatever to s e e soave, you might say traffic think it should be extended this left turn lane. So I better entryenough, so it would allow way. And as Mr. Ball has said Canterbury Square a to the gas station • I think, m&Ybe the one entry wa would be more appropriate than two. Thank y you B£TN MASON, "'Thank you Mr. Grace. Yes sir," "GEORGE OLSEN" from 233rd. I spoke briefly 010 34 hour operations. last weak too, What bothers me is I understand that at time, Chat there was some concession that the Why We need a gas station and acar the end Of the hearing last too no reason wash Would close earlier, I car a wash apenod 2A ,houre da afore and perhaps certainly th+► Problemy It jconvenience it load: to late night robberies, it with teenagera going in there at night. At a member of the community and hav i family- think its +►S a family and knowing people on that area that 3 A disservice to the neighborhood to have a 2 Facililhave ty of any kind. which Is not necessary 4 ho,rr .. businesses In the area, which have tried 34 hour nPoodttrlrvi�o• and some of the decided not to do that," , for Instance, I BETH MAWN, "Thank you Mr. 019en. Next." Hit JIM ABBELL, 18220 SW 121yd. I have a couple" BETH MAIiON, "Could � you sp9ll you last now For see70 JIM ABBELL, "A B 9 E L L really 990 the Head for that I halve a coupl* Of concerns, First of all I don't � t 948 stations ype of business, Wo }aVe half a doron or so ��ly mor* than that convenience ►carts poasiblllty thwee car washos be +ted I think two, � that ther*s a between 217 and burhauw Rom, go 2 really doubt i need, that the neighborhood f currently, gpCondi has a need for such a facility traffic y. As a Former busin@ss owner on one, of on 99w, the Q®*s so fast, that its difficult to•,attract business. 1�his facility, into your place of y. as Mr. ID ra►neas Pointed out is not on 99, its on TEXAW TRAM=XPT r- 3/29/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 PAGE 117 Bull Mountain Roan. And its going to attract, in order to survive, it needs to attract business from 99W. Therefore it has to, in my opinion, really be garish and aesthetically very unattractive in order to turn head from 99W to get them up Bull Mountain Road and to the facility. So I am against it on the c grounds of aesthetics. But my most area of concern is safety and the fact s that they are closing tha south frontage road, to me, doesn't really solve to much, because most of the traffic problems that I have encountered, are not from people crossing south to north or north to south. its from people turning left from the north, on Bull Mountain Road. And those people turning left. turn in front of people turning right from Pacific Highway up Bull Mountain Road, And we're not going to solve anything at all if we don't close the north frontage road. And as was pointed out, all we're going to do is route them on a convoluted route and we're Wife to have people clogging the loft hand turn lanes. Were going to have people coming down the hill, And I don't think people coma down the hill fast, necessarily to hit a green light, their coming down-the hill bacau:a• ite a big hill and they Accelerate And, they don't' brake. $o people are going fast for that reason, if for no other reason. I think we are going to have a catastrophe. And I think it irresponsible of ,the City to Allow further development Of A commercial property, in that situation, when we already have, problem because of commercial development on the north frontage road. 80 It we are going to contemplate any kind of development of a � { retail activity, on the south area, where Texaco is contemplating, wa have to close the frontage road on the north." BETH MASON, "Next...Ir there Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition." "My name is BEVERLY FROUDE, and I am the Chairperson for Cie N 4, bull Mountain. And I'm just going to say again that my latter that I gave you On the 18th, the points that are Important in that, that Mavis not boon addressed. NO change in the land use be allowed until both the north frontage and the south frontage roads are Closed entering Onto Buil Mountain Road. Only one Access to this site be allowed. The levl Of service at the Intersection of Highway go and Bull Mountain Road be raised from a "f" to a "C" or "B". And the hours, of operation be limited to comply with the gateway to a residential community, and that meant more than Just the car wash. On Saturday, or Sunday, there was awther -accldant at Highway, at the frontage road, the north frontage road and Bull Mountain, there were a four car TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/80 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 119 accident there. This will continue until both of those roads are closed. Also. I do want to say again, that our community does feel that this is improper zoning on this although this isn't the time +�o address that. So in conclusion, I would say again, please do not make any decision, or at least hold the record open until after the June 13t meeting, where the City, and ODOT, and the County will be talking specifically about this north frontage road and the new intersection into Canterbury. And its the first time that, i actually we've come this far in addressing this issue. $o it is exciting. But we're not there yet." BETH MASON, "Thank you Ms. Froude. Anyone else wishing to speak in Opposition to this proposal?" "GERALD K,OLVE" BETH MASON, "I'm sorry, your last none air?" 1 "HOLVE, K O L V E, 14337 SW Pacific Highway, rapresanting Canterbury Square. Last week, Mr. Kittalson again emphasized the difficultly with the traffic Signal at Highway 99 and Bull Mountain Road in that the tremendously long watt r and the frustration that occurs there. What Mr. Kittelson didn't bring out last week, which he did at the earlier neighborhood meeting was, the equal frustration of trying to make a left turn from Highway 99 onto Bull Mountain Road. And for that reason again I'm emphasising that for a competitor to have the right to block off the south frontage road, which supplies to nearly 20 MOM and pop operations in Canterbury Square, almost 9,000 cars a month going Into that facility, seems unconscionable, and we would request that the frontage road not be shut of until the traffic signal at Canterbury Lane and Highway 99W with the operating left And right turn lanes, etc., etc., is operational. Thank you." BETH MASON, "You don't Leant to iee the south frontage road closed either?" GERALD KOLVE, "No." BETH MASON, "And so. Anyone else? Yom sir." TEXACO TRAM IPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 PAGE 119 i t "My name is Ernest Bloch. B L O C H. I live at 15715 SW Bull Mountain Road. I've been a resident there for nearly five years. I'm certainly not in opposition to Texaco. I use their products, primarily from two other gas t , stations within three miles of this proposed site. However. I am concerned about the safety at the intersection. I am appalled to hear about the volume accidents that are already there. I have not had an accident myself for about ten years, and knock on wood. I have had two near misses at that particular intersection. Primarily from exited Highway 99 onto Dull Mountain Road with traffic coming out of Canterbury Square on the north frontage road, trying to got onto Bull Mountain to make a left turn in order to get through the signal ,onto Pacific Highway, I think because of the grade and the sight lines at that intersection that traffic coming off of Highway 99 onto Pacific Highway with additional traffic from a gas station with left turn lanes the congestion is an ac6idont waiting to happen. I urge you to defer any further action on this until than Highway Department can realize its plans for bettor access to and from Canterbury Square, so that the north and, south frontage roads can be closed. Thank you." BETH MASON. "Thank you Mr. Bloch. Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition?" UNKh'AM, "You kn*w I was going to come up here." BETH MASON, "Sure." "I've had an opportunity to look at exhibit "37" BETH MASH, "Stat* your name for the rocord." "Oh, AL NIEB, 14935 EW 141st Street. I did have an opportunity to examine exhibit "37", which was submitted to you. And just a couple of comments about, we've belabored the point long enough, and I think what I'm hearing is a pro con, If there is tiuch an item, on the agenda. But, this was not to introduce additional information. But there is some in here that I was a little bit surprised at. But, just to touch upon a couple of things. Thar* seem to be shifting criteria as to what a peak pm hour was. And as I was looking through the records I notice that in one place that as they discussed f �. TEXACO TRANSCRIPT — 3/24/89 — 5/16/98 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 12o our figures. Where they said that the testimony by neighborhood residents review that traffic counts were conducted. And this is paragraph two of page �^ two of number 37. That the next highest volume observed by the area residents f` at the Bull Mountain frontage road intersection was 804. Well thats incorrect we had 942, 844, 802. 757. and 747. In other words five different traffic figures greater than what they had on their page. I think it was page, it was figure two on page five, if I remember right. Which, by the way, at that point in time was, supposedly the peak pas hour was five to six. They go on, on page two of exhibit 37 to talk about exhibit number one which illustrates the concept referring to the flow Tato during the peak fifteen minutes, which we didn't do: I think that if you look at our figures, and if you applied that principle of the fifteen minutes of the peak hour. I think that our figures might come a little higher than their 740 that they talked about on their particular page five of the traffic analysis. Interesting enough I look at exhibit one too, and was a little bit dismayed by the fact, that when I looked at the, at one of ,the axis that I find .that its four thirty to five thirty. I don't know, whast, is peak pm hours. This also says that the effect of peak hour factor of assumed flow rates. We're doing a lot of assumptions here. And I'M not to sure exactly what they met by the peak pm hours. Because they keep shifting depending on which schedules that you look at. I think the point here is. we have some actual figures. The figures prove to be higher than what they have. Utilizing the principal of the 'peak fifteen minutes of the peak hour, even as they defined it. You would find that we would still have higher figures than they have. One of the other things that, exhibit two goes into some assumptions also. But I think of purposes right now, that* exactly what they are, they are assumptions. I do agree with page, the paragraph. four of page two of the exhibit 37, which says that the comments and observations contained in the previous paragraphs confirm the reasonableness and conservative nature of the traffic analysis performed in conjunction with the development and application. I believe that they are very conservative, and they are vary conservative in favor of Texaco. I guess the bottom line is this. We have assumed a lot of things and I would have to ditto what Mr. Ball said, and other before nae. We can't assume anythings going to be done by anybody except what you write into your recommendation. And I would be very happy that the recommendation that you prepare, which will probably be appealed, would carry both' cl sing of the north and the south frontage road. And that be done before anything happens. and also closing TEY.A00 TRANSCRIPT -- 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 PAGE 121 i 3 t of the one of the ingress and egress points onto Bull Mountain Road, thereby leaving one on the frontage road as south, the stub, the south frontage road and one off of Bull Mountain Road. And also, that would just leave the use � � I of the joint. It would be nice it they could raise the level of service at the intersection of Bull Mountain and pacific Highway. But thats another i assumption, because I think Mr. Kittelson adequately addresses number, in E exhibit 37, where he says that is totally the prerogative of the Oregon State Highway Department. And I think that thats one of those things that it probably will not get done. And theres nothing else that we can do about it. I don't know if you can even say anything to that point. But you can put the other stipulations in. I think that we started out by -saying we are concerned about the traffic, We said it last time, we're still saying it now. And I think if you address these issues, or these recommendations, then we will 'bave a safer condition and allow the use which is permitted at that point. BETH MASON, "Thank you Mr Hieb. Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition. This is- your last chance. Alright I'm going to close the public' hearings. Ara there any additional points needing clarification. This is a time for questions. Not additional testimony. Questions? UNKNOWN, . .. .(from audience to far from mic to hear to question.) , . . . . BETH MASON, "Does the City ordinance address light on adjacent property?" KEITH MEN, "It doesn't address light in any great detail. It does, our Code does say that if you have on site lighting that it should not be directed In any way towards other properties. And there is some subjective language in the Code, I guess, that we use in Site Development Review to evaluate lighting in certain cases so that it won't cause problems. Particularly with resident, with adjacent residents." BETH MASON, "Questions needing clarification? Yes sir." UNKPXWN, "I don't know whether this has boon covered, but his question made me think. What about some billboards••eiM sign, because someone made a point that, that TEXAM TRAMRIP'T - 3/24/08 — 5/18/88 - S/25/89 - PAGE 122 BETH MASON. "The size of the sign is limited by the Code. ....both talking.. . any other questions, any clarification? Yes sir." UNKNOWN. ........to far from the mic to hear question .... .. BETH MASON. Thats not exactly a question. I think if they heard the applicant response to that, and the time for the applicant. the record is closed, so. This is just a time for information. Questions about the application that you don't understand. Okay. Let me explain how the process works from this point. I was hoping to be able to give you a decision tonight, but I did not have time in the last week to review my three inch file and all the exhibits that you've, you all have given me. Under the ordinance I have ton days from tonight* hearing to make my written decision. Now you folks area entitle to an oral decision, It you would like to coma to another hearing and sit as you are sitting now and visit with tae another Wednosday night I will be ,mora than happy to give to a decision orally. The other possibility is that my written decision will be filed and I will give you the date tonight what time it would b* filed and then you could contact the City and get copy of that decision. Is there anyone who wishes to hear an oral decision. Okay, I sea none. Given the breath of this application and the } fact that Monday is a holiday, its going to shorten my work week next weak and , I happen to be sitting downtown on a three day case this week. To conclude my review of the file I'm going to extend my teen days slightly. I'm also going on vacation Friday the third and Monday the sixth, I'll be in Detroit. I realize thats a contradiction in terms going to Detroit on vacation but . . . laughter FROM AUOIENCE, "Pick a date Beth." BETH MASON, "I'm trying. Looking at my calendar is does not look good. Lest see hare. I'll have a decision for you Thursday, Juno 9th, at 5:00 PM. So if you call the City on Thursday, Jun* 9th, don't expect to got my decision, because I will have it there by 5:00 pm, probably at 4:59 and counting. So anytime Friday, the 10th you can call and got the decision. Once again I want to command everyone who has boon involved in this hearing, both on behalf of the. applicant, and behalf of the neighbors ,and those in opposition for their thoroughness of which you have addressed the issues. Its, its much easier to �1 TEXACO TRA0r=RIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/88 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 123 . e make a decision, a tough decision. as this one is going to be. when- I have good fact and good evidence before ms and I think that both of you have done an excellent job in presenting those issues to me. With that I will adjourn the hearing. ....... decision on the ninth." 58670 w TEXACO TBAKWIPT — 3/24/88 — 5/18/98 — 5/25/88 — PAGE 124 1 PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES F E The purpose of this public hearing is for citizens, taxpayers, and others to provide the Council with information and opinions on the subject for which the hearing is convened. The City Council will make it possible for everyone who wants to speak on a matter to do so, Since the agenda is heavy this evening, I would encourage each group to select a spokesperson or spokespersons to present its position. The hearing will be recorded on tape, so please speak into the microphone. When you speak, first state your full name and complete mailing address before ! proceeding with your testimony. Statements should be limited in length, Repetition should be avoided, Unless new information is available, support or disagreement should be simply stated, if previous speakers have made the same points. To allow every participant a fair opportunity 'to be heard, statements shall not exceed five minutes in length. After everyone on the sign—up sheet has been given the opportunity to speak (or the prodetermined completion time has arrivod), the public portion of the hearing will ba clamed. The Council will than have Lima for discus%ion of tho matter. lw/6868D ADDITIONAL STATEMENT FOR APPEAL HEARINGS ON THE RECORD This will be an "argument—type" hearing only. The Council will consider only the record before the Hearings Officer, which is on file at City Hall and has been Fully reviewed by the Coun::il. The Council is not allowed under City code to consider any new testimony or evidence which is not in the record. The specific issues which are being appealled and heard this evening will be covered by the Community Development Staff prior to acceptance of public testimony. lw15963D f e w � w r w c 0 co LL UJ 0 LLI 0 > C) Q w cl (01 c 0 ww � 0 w � � � w a wI. co ui Z H0 IL 0"grate CoCAW za U cr.cc z 0UJ wrx s wuu U > w � � ► c r w4 � a � z z aw J. W CO �c 0 o cicl 0w 0) z cr � � cW C� E a r �YIYi � C0 z ' z 1+� W U41 um z 0 Lim6 0 z Z Q 0 a.44 0 I IOL 0 ! co 0 0 4 i T ! Q AL n Ix t, 1 i 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 > / I �4; s 1 , i 1 , I ' r I / s h J/ 1 t ooh � • Nw W N W M N 49 x in 04 0� 3 P f f 1NRITT i TsSTILONY TlakPD CITY COUNCIL 1.i3ETING OF July 25, 1988 ' Topic: Texaco F.oilinin and t:azi eting Inc. Levolopment 11290 S.W. Bull Mountain Road. Directly apposite ti;e proposed davelEarriant (which is to ack:cm- modate a vehicle fuel, a convanianoo sales business and a ear wash) on the :'Dat side or 59 111 is a r€irip end road which leads to a eametary and two pr.iNata roaide-noos. Suis short dea-d end privnta road is also iden- tified by bolug, di.raatly above the? Dull. 11t, tra.Me liCiit. The aartotary is subject to vauidalisra. It is often usad in ti;e lekto eveninr; azid early rnrar ,ligr, hours for ,ars pnrking, with driainS rAnd tea doubt some usa or druCa whioh ondargars tho realdonoos. We believes that the PolicO vtauld nubatantiato that this a.rou is a problem. Our concern is that misuse or this oemotory and privute road will incro&ro bocou: o of the proximity to the abova ftaility. If the devolopmont wore to ba open limited hours wo would have leas oonaarn. S inoo rn ly, C1 4tv Ike A LVM I CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 25, 1988 DATE SUBMITTED: July ld, 1988 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Street Vacation PREVIOUS ACTION: Called for Public _ Public. Hearing --- Portion of Hearin — Res. 88-49 on June 13 1988 SW Washin ton treet _ PREPARED BY: Development Srvcs Mana DEPT HEAD O CITY ADM1N Old,. REQUESTED BY- PacTrust Corporation _ _...._ ...�._�,..__..._....�.�_._._._._._POLTCY ISSUE Council initiated street vacation request -- consistent with Council poi . as adopted by Resolution No. 07-30. ..__..._.,..,,_..._...._..._......____..._.�.........�.........._,_.._�........._.____INFORMATION SUMPifiRi' On June 13, Igoe Council passed a reskilution to cull for a public hearing on a Council—initiated vacation ruqueat to bQ hold at 7:30 p,m. on July 25, 1900, PaacTrust Corp. r+Nquo*Aod that. Council initiate vacation procoodin(Js, :W Washington is a very narrow, mostly unin►provod right—of—way croatod in thea early 1900's. The purpose of the vacation is to return public: ri,3hV--'uf--way to privato ownership. StQat'f has pruparod a roport, which is ;4ittAC110d, that inc.luden muni bocktjround, findin,3a arid recommenda►tior►s, A,l,'t'jRNfiT;]VC",S CnN370f:N[i) 1. Appruvo thea attaichod ordinances which vdcoto% thea roma►ininlj portion of SW W;asahingi.:•► M treat (sto►ff ro oniniondotion), 4 2. Roquovt st4Aff to pr•capa►.r'e A rovol.ul.ion donying thu prop000d vAca►t:ican Which may be b000d on objections «anti remonstrances ruceivod durin+J tho public h►oa►r i r►q, All feast and staff time is boing paid for, by rapplkrAnt whaather, or, not thea proposal is tapprovod. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recon►monds Altv.rnaative No. 1 with motion to approve the Ordinaancsa as presented, cn/S9A6D k, I •■w�•v 2 r - �' •ira.•C 1 800' 14 Li ITE � t I •,� • •Mlf a• / « i L 1 w i 100,� i•J i a USA , TRCATMCNT PLANT H 3 00 oll 46 Y .• axr � 1 •.•.. ` . _ qui t - t MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON i t July 14. :998 'i0: Mayor and City council FROM: Randy Clarno. pevolopment Servicas SUBJECT: D4.)partm+lnt Report for Prc'+posed Vacation of Community iscavel��pm+�rst t A Portion of S.W. Washington Strc-�Qt 1 r E i QAC- CKGROUND SW Wauhin�Jton Streit is i+ narrow (30wide) public right-of-way lcacated rai:+�r i the Oro,Jurr, 3usincsss Park On Of dcavt�loFacatinf isWthr, lnsteron►ainingupic'c0iofn right-Of--WAy being proposed fcr 19Ags with the uubdivisa a public W; ut+in�jton ;tract whit:h w.�s cr•0,Atk3J in the early plant of Rusc,wood Acre Ira pri to Ac1,�1ciassht�d pokrk i l'113 rice provu�n vents, atP,ac'�t'r•uut, i ut:root but does taavQ some privt�.0 devulc�pers of t.hu Orc+gun [3usinotio Park, aro r��cxuualiniJ that thc� right-of-way ba vacatod. t UNOGM �._ e,1,►nning�CMMm3ss �An iti?r��mm�rrd�i�iP�l 1 hra Planning Cnnamissi+nn is r,equirod t�' c+imr` 1 isaiaraiA tt�rtav'it�wad��thiu pd roqut stan d TMC 15.08-o9o. On July 5, lgeQ, i.hca ,o r@Cumn►c,r►dod that it be opprovvd. enca Responses waare received frail► bnthahui.cet� ' or•treaspuralstimrar►d Fire nistriet. end nait.hur had concerns ralativa to ser C�t_Uti_l i ti e� {draainega and srwsar•) Noexisting City drainage and sowor im Uiviasinn montshear rravirawc�dd tt�itpropcasaal proposed vacation arvaa. the Era<Jincaer n,! ard seat no need to retain saassamants for future facilities. Trensrrtartation and ca-pital I.mnravcmant_t'10MO lan Tho venle proposal does riot conflict with either the Trc�rtlr sub-otandeardrinate mss Improypment Plan. SW Wa+shingtt�n Street is signf y if of right-Of-way width and improvements. It also provides lcntafilities advantages, and matintained as a public street, with circulation, por s. Adjoining properties, which number three, e, are und y ghtsingle ownership �,nd protecting access d and have recorded easements p a w x Mayor and City Council Page 2 July 14, 1988 Other Utilities Responsou were received from the following utility providers: Portland General Electric Northwest Natural Gas General Telephone Company Tigard Water District. Willamette Cable TV None of the above utility providers have existir►g services within the propo5od area to be vacated, t uture services wera not anticipated :and each prvvldWr reconwiended approval without retaining easements, t 1'TTt.E TO VACATED LANDS It is my opinion., givon st.wtutory fguidolinou, that title to the proposed vacation lands of WW WAshingt.un Strout will ego to that propur,ty south of ;W , Washington Street, t RE(."ENDATION Staff roco mnends that the propovvd vwcotiun bo ap►provod without condition as � prooentod in thu attachod orAinanco, ht�68li7G i Atta4;hmont k i CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 25, 1988 DATE SUBMITTED: July 14, 1988 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Street Vacation PREVIOUS ACTION: Called for Public Public Hearing - Portion of Hearin - Res. 88-51 on June 13 1988 SW North DzLkota Street PREPARED BY: Develo ment Services r. DEPT HEAD O CITY tDMIN 0 (� REQUESTED BY: Staff _._......____.�..__..__.._......._ POLICY ISSUE.___.__.._...._..._..... .._..._.._........_._...�..___.__ _._, _. r t Council initiated strQe:t vacation request T- consistent with Council policy as adopted by Resolution No. 87-30, E INFORMATION SUMMARY This past yoar the City completed a roalignmont of SW North Dakota Streot at ::W 115th Avenue as part; of the capital improvement program, As a re, ult of this roalignmont•, it appoaers that: a portion of tho original right-of-way is no lon,lear noodod for public purpovo», Variation of this public: right-of-way would roturn tho ownor•ship to adjoining proportion. Attached is A r•uport by staff that givens more information on tho back,lround and findingv of the proposal, ,. .. ......... ALTF RNATIVES C;ONSIVR0 1 . Approvo tho aattac.hod ordinvancea which vocatov a portion of SW North Dakota Stroot and resorveas cQr•tain utility e►asumonts oyer a portion of tho arG►,a to bo voc.atod (titaff rocommondtation). 2, Roquovt vtaff to propuarta revolution dunyin�l proposod vdedt.iun which may bra baoud on objocticnv and remonstrance+s rocoivod during tho public, Waring. l 5C/►t:_....3 MPAC"I All fear :and staff time arra boing paid by thea City as cost av:aoc;iatod with the realignment projoct. :. �...., .,.... �... �.._..�...W,.., .,L...._.......................... W. w_.,.. .....,... w .w,�.,.,.�,...� �,.W......... , SUGGESTED ACTION Staff roconnond# Alternative No, 1 with motion to approver the Ordinance as presented, SA/5957'D t` 1. �-- - . __. _ .r►r� -tip► �� '� �, it ►�"�+! ii�ii�i ��r .Y,..... � ir�i � f�� ---_ ► � - ' Ain1PER SOMME �� ► r. PENS , i MEN WAS n i _ MINE ago soon no Al OFF W-11 Pool son In SIBS • i .r wry � •� � . N .��* ��►�_ �� 111 � i � , -:: ' rli�ii � �,. � � � �1'S► r s r MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 10: Mayor and City Council July 14, 1986 FROM: Randy Clarne, Development Services Manage SUBJECT: Community Development Department Report for Proposed SW North Dakota Street Vacation BACKGROUND The City recently completed a capital improvement known as the SW North Dakota Street/SW 115t:.h Avenues intersection realignment, A portion of the original SW North Dakota Street right—of-way appears to be no Ik ri er nes►ded for public purposes as a result of this realignment: project, On June 13, 1988 Council initiated the process to formally consider this vacation proposal, FINDINGS Pl anninq Commission Roccammondation They Planning Commission is recluirod to m,Ao A rocommondaatiun a-s providod by TMC 1x.06,090. On July b, 1966 tho Commission rovivwed this proposal and recommended that it be aappruvod, Transportation a►ndGra�iial 7n��r�iu��m�r�t Plan r This vacation propoual doss riot conflict with oithor the TranoportAtion Plan or Capital Improvomont Plan. SW North Dakota Street is classified as A minor collector and will continuo to huava thea samo claasaificaat.ion in its now a]ignmont. 1ho re*aalignmont: and improve►wont of thio per°tion of SW North Dakotas Stroot woo complotod ras puri: of the Capital I.mprovaameent Pr-ogram for FY 07-80, City Utilities (drain-age and sower) Currently there arra no City utilities l.ocaataad within the► prom prop000d for vacation. Thea Cngineerirrj Division has roviowod tho proposal and docs riot recommend thio retainage of any public eaaseemonts. Other Utilit:i." Responses to the proposed vacation were roceived from the following otha►r utility providers. Portland General Electric Northwest Natural Gas General Telephone Co. Tigard dater District Willamette Cable Co. I i l S e 9 �t t Memo to Mayor and Council Page 2 July 14. 1988 Portland General. Electric, Willamette Cable TV and the Tigard Water District have all requested that easements be retained for facilities they currently have within the vacation area, staff is recommending that two separate easements be retained to accommodate these facilities. These easements have been inciirparated into the ordinance attached to this j report, Fire and police services Both the Fire District and police Department have reviewed the proposal and have no concerns with the vacation, TITLE TO VACATED LANDS It is any opinion, given statutory guidelines, that title to the proposed vacated lands will go evenly to properties on both the north and aouth sides o ' SW North Dakota Stroot, it; should be noted that the property owner on the south vide is the City of Tigard, The City owns this property as a result of right—of--way acquisition necessary to complete the r•oxli;1nment project, RrGQhY+14 DATION Staff rocommonds that Council opprovo the propound vacation with the condition that cartaain utility providers retain uwual e;as►amont rights. The ottachod jj ordinonco incorporotou Chia nreceseary lan;tu#age and 1�►gal daueriptione to 4 provida these easemer►ts, cn/5A46D o. F l CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY t AGENDA or: July 25, 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: July 14 1986 ISSUEIAGENDA TITTLE, Steet rVacation PREVIOUS ACTION: Called fur Public Public Hearin - Portion of SW 79th Heari - Res. 88-50 on lune 13 1988 Avenue PREPARED BY: Develo ment Srvcs Mana er DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN��OK' RE.OULSTEt? SY: Staff ___ AOLIGY ISSUE Council initiated street vacation request consistent with Council policy as adopted by Resolution No. 87-30, s T.NMRMATION SUMM!iRY I'his past year the City participated with the developer- of the Mara Woods Ralilin that portion of SW 79th Avenue ,at subdivision to construct and re SW Bonita Rand, l.t appearsthat a portion of they Original street right-of-'WAY t is no lontlor noodiad for public purpw:ie3 •am a result of this rei unt f raalignment, Vocation of this public rit3ht-of-way would return the ownership to adjoininj propurtios, Attachod is a report prepared by staff which includes afore informationck�ro on tk►e bwund, findin�3s iand ri�canuniand�ations. x 1 /if 1 E�RNATl�V['�GOMa,'!i��6t[Il vonuo ixndrresrarvcrs a public utility�ciasan►rnt avuro Which t.� portion portion af the v c'ationAarea�. 2. Request staff to preporo a resolution denying the propo%4)d vacation which may b4► based on Objections and romonstraances rucoived during tho public hgarin�,l x rr.��A�y iMc��cdr All fees and staff time will be. pli+id by the+ City au cost a+ssaci+atod with they realignment projact•. Stuff recommends Alternative No, 1 with motion to approve the Ordinance as presented, cn/59A6D ■� 11 w�d■ MUM MOB �- ow, iiiTJ Owns Mango . � ,PIP '' �� -fir � '� _ _ __ ,•: po Aw 1i�1 r -oft • now • ' r III ..rf<!'.tl, m•s� ��` r U! •, i �un� - - v � f t MEMORANDUM r / CITY OF TIGARD. OREGON 10; Mayor and City Council July 14, 1960 ! FROM: Randy Clarno, Development Services Man4—eF=—`r++�••"'' SUBJECT; Community Development Department Report. for Proposed i SW 79th Avenue Street Vacation. I BACKGROUND In June of 1907 the City completed a capital impr•aivement known as the SW 79tH AvenuQ/Sonita Road intersection realignment, This project was done in j conjunction with the Mara Woods subdivision divelopment, A portion of the original SW 79th Avenue right-of-way appears to be no longer needed for public parrpaseas as a ret;ult of this realignment project. i F'TNDTNGS 6>l,aann�, Comnai�„s,,�ian Rora�nmaar►dxt�..�r� The Planning Commission is required to m.*ko a recummondation as provided by 'CMC 15,00,09, On July aa, 1900 the C4+mmisniun ruviowod this roquost and rocummondod that it be approved, lraans c+rt.ation .and Ca twlmprovem�nt: Plano 'This vacat:iun pruporml does not: conflict with oithor tho Transportation F Plan or Capitol ]mprovement Plan, SW 79th Avenuo is classifiod as a minor collaactur street and has boon prosQrvod as ouch in its now alignmant, `i'hQ realignment and improvement of this portion of SW 79th Avvnue was complaatod as part of' the Capital ?mprovomont Program for t"Y 07-00, City Ut�-1 itiipa. (dreainogo and sewer) Currently thar•a ara nor City utilities locaatod within thea area pruposaad for vacation. 'the Lnginotiring Division has rvviowvd this proposal and saes no R nood to rotain any oasamonts for future drainvagaa and sawar improvements. r Other Utilitiou Responses to the proposed vacation were received from the following other utility providers: i Portland General Electric Northwest Natural Gas � General Telephone Co, r Tigard Water District t Willamette Cable Co. r c Memo to Mayor and Council Page 2 July 14. 1988 i� Portland General Electric. General Telephone Co., ligard Water District and Willamette Cable have all indicated that they have facilities along the easterly portion of the area to be vacated, Staff is recommending that a general public utility easement be retained over this easterly portion to accommodate these utilities. This easement has been incorporated into the ordinance presented for your approval. Fire and Policv., Services Both the Fire District and Police Department have reviewed the proposal and have no concerns with the vacation. TITLE TO VACATED LANDS Although determinint] title to vacated londs is a function of Washington County, it is my opinion. given statutory gui.delinea, that titla to the proposed vacated lands will rho evonly to properties on both the vcAst and went sides of SW 79th Avenue. RFCOMMrNDATIAN Staff recommendu that tho prc%posed vavation ho wpprovo?d with tho condition that a public utility oaasomont bo rotaAined ovor a portion of the ora.* to boa vacatod. this easement Ju novouua►ry to accomm000to a► numbor of oxistintl utilitioa► and it doacribod in Cxhibit "0" which is incurpor4tud into the proposed ordinance. cn/59460 r' INS INEIR CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 25, 1988 DATE SUBMITTED: July 15, 1988 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Chapter 18.114 PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission Signs ZOA 87-07 Hearings on 12/15/87, 1/19/88, 2/28/88, 3/8/88, and 3/15/88; City Council Hearings on 3/28/88, 4/25/88 /2� 7/88 PREPARED BY: Deborah Stuart DEPT HEAD CITY ADMIN 1 C?a REQUESILU BY: POLICY ISSUE Shall the City's Sign Code (TMC 10.114) be revised? w� _...,."...,.�,..........,,...�,..,..,,....�....,m�..,...�,m...,�...,.w�. INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached is draft 12 of the proposed revisions to Chapter 10,11.4, the Sign Cuda, Pleaue comult the attached momor�rndum, ,.,ALTERNATIVES�CONSIDEREQ 1. Adopt tho proposed revisions recommendod by the Planning C;o►mniusion and mudifiod by the City Council with 170ibits A, 0 ;,ind C. 2. Adopt the prop000d rvvisiuns with further modifications. 3. Rojocc tho pruposod revisions. , ,_ , FISCAL IMPACT None 1 . Adopt tho attAched ordinance for ZOA 67-.07, with Lxhibit,s A, U tend C. ht/1.025D MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD. t>Rr(;()U TO: Honorable Mayor Brian and City Council July 18, 1986 �nn FROM: Deborah Stuart, Assistant Planner A-6` SUBJECT: Latest Revisions to Chapter 18.114 -- Draft 12 At the June 27. 1988 study session, the Council reviewed several options for location of freeway- oriented signs and allowable size and number of froestandirig signs for shopping centers, Concerns wore rogarding the proposed amendment to allow freeway signs on abutting freeway properties without a clear limitation as to where these si�jns could be located. Regarding shopping center signage, the consensus of the Councilors present was not to increase the maximum size of freostanding signs but to allow for a second froout:anding with limitations for size and height:, In rosponse to this discussion, sl.,Aff has prep4ered the following inform+t:iun to assist the Council in masking a decision pertoinint3 to tF 000 two issues. 1, Fraew ��orie?ntead frcaa ar�di� sr�x, E►chibit 0 provides four options for thea specific location of fro0wW,_(ar^ientud, signs within: 1. "W" - two hundred feet of the highway right-of-way or within: "X" 600 feet of centorline irate;+rooctions "Y" - 500 rout: of intorsection of freeway off-ramp and a surface st'roat additional interchange, areas 2, Jwo F're&Ltndiunn3�irrJr�s. In response to Councilors' directiva, st;a►ff prop,arad Erchibit C. Thee iatt.ochod chart indicatoo tho chaango# to sign arow only. Thee formula for calculating sign hoight: will romain at IF40 pseMOrlt of thea total combined height. for both signs. Both the original propos*l and the socond st:raff rocommondation on sign area make sense based on thea Council philosophy of allowing multi-tenant shopping cantors larger signs but within reasonaebla limits. ht/5986D Attachment Yrt Options for Section 18.114.090(e)(3) to be substituted for (3) on Exhibit B. LXJ Locations Pertnitted. Freeway-oriented signs shall be permitted to locate within 200 feet of the Highway 217 and/or Interstate Freeway No. 5 rights-of-way or within 600 feet of the intersections of the centerline of Highway 217 or interstate 5 and Scholls Ferri Road, Greenburg Road Pacific Hiqhway, 72nd Avenue or Upper Boones Ferr Road centerlines as shown in the FOS (Freeway-Oriented Sign) overlay zone maps in Figure 1. Locations Permitted. Freeway-oriented signs shall be permitted to locate within 200 feet of the Highway 217 and/or Interstate Freeway No. 5 rights-of-way or within 500 feet of the intersections of the highway off-ramp and Scholls Ferry Road Greenbtar, i,,.-Road Pacific Highway, 72nd Avenue or Upper Boones Ferry Road as shown in the FOS (Freeway-Oriented Sign) overlay zone maps in Fi ure 1. M Locations Permitted. Fre-?wa ,.oriented signs shall be�permitted to locate within200 f eat of '" Hiqhway 217 and/or Interstate rreewav No s rights-of-way sir additional interchange,areas ori Sccholls Forr„y Road Grnbeu2Road, Pacific Highway, 72nd Avenue or Upper Booneser Farr Road as shown in the FOS U'roawav,0r;iwrtted Sim ax rUI xt-ria Ma s in F„3qure 1. 5263D I i f e r �ff ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ZOA 87-07 DRAFT 12 - FACE 49 (07/15/88) 1 TO BE CONSIDERED IN CONJUNCTION WITH "EXHIBIT C" OPTIONS FOR SIGN AREA REQUIREMENTS (Number Signs/Percent of Total Area) Interior Corner } Lots or Shopping Shopping Shopping Plazas Plaza Center (Over S (1-7 Businesses) (2-7 Businesses) Businesses) EXISTING CODE 1 1 1 ORIGINAL PROPOSAL 2 (130X) 2 (130X) 2 (1300 ALTERNATIVE STAFF 2 (100X) 2 (130X) 2 (150X) RECOMMENDATION CI1Y COUNCIL 2 (130X) 2 (130X) 2 (1500 REVISION ' (IN DRAFT 12) A ht/590130 r ii Y I c i F r;. t '��t.