The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 02/12/1991 CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AGENDA OREGON E BUSINESS MEETING N FEBRUARY 12, 1991 5:30 IIM TIGARD CIVIC CENTER PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item shoul.. sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is 13125 SW HALL BLVD available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning TIGARD, OREGON 97223 of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda Items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future F+ Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Administrator. 5:30 • STUDY SESSION 5:30 - Discussion • Agenda Review • Street Maintenance Policies 6:30 - Meeting with Washington County Commissioner Roy Rogers 7:30 1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 p.m.) 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:50 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Approve Minutes: January 15, 1991 3.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: Approval of Consultant Contract for Street Bond Projects 3.4 Approve Oak Tree Apartments Easement Dedication and Partial Greenway Conveyance - Resolution No. 91- c2- keS. qlI-C-5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 1 7:55 4. PUBLIC HEARING - SUBDIVISION SUB 90-0010 CASTILE/MCMONAGLE (NPO 6) An appeal of a Hearings Officer decision for a Subdivision to divide a site which is approximately 1.45 acres in size into six parcels ranging from 7,500 to 10,800 square feet in size. ZONE: R- 4.5 (Residential, 4.5 unit/acre) LOCATION: 14380 SW 97th Avenue (WCTM 2Si i i BA, tax Ivt 1301) • Continuation of Public Hearing from January 22, 1991 • Summation by Community Development Staff • NPO and/or CPO Testimony • Public Testimony - Proponents - Opponents • Recommendation by Community Development Staff • Council Questions or Comments • Public Hearing Closed • Consideration by Council C~irecA- -mac ~ Uf a,,v G~ ~,iy,~~ 0,6 L 8:40 U 5. APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING - SCE 90-0005 VARIANCE VAR 90-0027 - SHERWOOD INN SIGN (NPO 5) A request for Sign Code Exception and Variance approval to allow two freestanding freeway- oriented signs where only one is permitted. Also requested is approval to retain one sign of approximately 1,180 square feet per sign face with a height of approximately 65 feet and one sign of approximately 698 square feet per sign face with a height of approximately 69.75 feet where the code specifies a maximum allowable sign area of 160 square feet per sign face and maximum allowable height of 35 feet. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) LOCATION: 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road (WCTM 2S1 12DD, Tax Lots 100, 900, 1100) • Continuation of Council Deliberation from January 22, 1991 • Summation by Community Development Staff • Recommendation by Community Development Staff • Council Questions or Comments a • Consideration by Council 6u-(f,; fb (-~D6+PLEWd- 9:00 6. PUBLIC HEARING ON SOLAR ACCESS ORDINANCE ZOA 90-0003 A proposal to create a new chapter (18.88) of the Community Development Code to require " solar orientation for new lots in residential subdivisions, solar access in conjunction with the construction of single family or duplex residences, and solar permit for the protection of solar devices from tree shading. AFFECTED ZONES: 'All residential zoning districts. • Public Hearing Opened • Summation by Community Development Staff • NPO and/or CPO Testimony • Public Testimony - Proponents - Opponents • Recommendation by Community Development Staff • Council Questions or Comments Public Hearing Closed • Consideration by Council , U f~ iyAc, Ce_, C~- 02 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 2 l ,:20 -s 1L%f%&1 An InA 1'fl"C&AS / . 1\VIr~M\i~~~ AVe% ■ o a-5V8v 7.1 S.W. North Dakota Street Discussion 9:45 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. 10:00 9. ADJOURNMENT cca122.91 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 3 "u Council Agenda Item T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 • Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Edwards. 1. ROLL CALL Council Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten and John Schwartz Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Keith Liden, Senior Planner; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Liz Newton, Community Relations Coordinator; Tim Ramis, City Attorney; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randy Wooley, City Engineer. 2. STUDY SESSION a. Street Maintenance Policies City Engineer asked for clarification on the City's policies concerning improvement and maintenance of unpaved streets. He proposed that all existing gravel, public streets be accepted for City maintenance. After discussion, council consensus was that all City streets will be eligible for maintenance funding as prioritized on the capital improvement project listing submitted - during budget review. b. Agenda Review • Urban Area Planning Agreement (UPAA) - City Administrator distributed letters from NPO 3 and CPO 4 which supported the material received from NPO 7. These groups all asked for reexamination of the UPAA and City transportation plan with regard to the Murray Road Extension. City Administrator advised that, as late as last week, the City of Beaverton indicated that they would be willing to work with the City of Tigard and enter into an agreement which would disrupt Murray Road as a through-road pending a Scholls Ferry/Elsner Rd. to Hwy. 99 route. r Beaverton indicated they think the Murray Road connection is important and should not be taken off the map entirely. The County also believes it is an important connection for Tigard's internal traffic circulation. { CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 1 Council discussed a possible Letter of Agreement between Tigard and Beaverton which would delay the Murray Road extension until after completion of the Eisner R:.ad connection. City Administrator noted this was consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan which called for the improvement of other transportation routes (i.e., Hwy. 217) before final connection of the Murray Road extension. Legal Counsel advised that a Tigard/Beaverton letter of agreement could not supersede any component of the UPAA. Such a letter, however, could serve as an interpretative document to the UPAA. He cautioned that inconsistency with the UPAA could cause Tigard to fall out of compliance with acknowledgement from LCDC. • Councilors Eadon and Schwartz and City Administrator reported on a recent "FOCUS" meeting of representatives from surrounding counties and cities. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss regional coordination of issues. With the passage of Ballot Measure 5, talks of combined efforts among Portland/Multnomah County, and the push by METRO to offer regional services, it was decided that an evaluation of course of direction was needed. Washington County and cities within Washington County have a reputation of good, open communication. Another meeting will be held to discuss structure of a inter-county/city group designed for coalition building. 3. DISCUSSION MEETING WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY COMMISSIONER ROY ROGERS a. Commissioner Rogers and Council discussed the following items: • Elsner Road Project - Preliminary design consultant ($20,000) work is now being negotiated. This project would connect "Six Corners" @ Sherwood to Scholls Ferry Road. Funding for the construction of such a project has not been identified. • A review of preliminary census: Washington county continued to grow at a fast pace during the 1801s; however, the growth rate was not as fast as during the 70's and 60's. • Commissioner Rogers is the Vice Chairman of the Washington County Board of Directors. In this CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 2 capacity he is serving on such committees as WCCTCS, JPACT, and the Urban Growth Planning Committee. • Discussed House Bill 2175 which is a proposal that a monthI f°e ^f $15 re raid per parking space to employers with over 100 employees. Ramifications to governments, hospitals, shopping centers, etc. were noted. • Metros role and the Urban Growth Boundary was discussed briefly. Concerns with METRO becoming the regional planning authority were noted. • Measure 5 will not impact the County as much as neighboring counties because Washington County is under the $10 limitation. Commissioner Rogers attributed this good posture to the five-year-old County 2000 Plan. He cited the County policy change several years ago to switch to fee-based services when possible rather than relying on general fund dollars was a good decision. The main concern with Measure 5 is the social services administered through the County but funded by the state. • County annexation policy will be reviewed again. Commissioner Rogers advised his position was that the County should be neutral on annexations. • Coalition building between the County and cities should be emphasized. Meetings between cities and the county should occur on a routine, regular basis. BUSINESS MEETING 4. KEITH LIDEN HONORED Mayor Edwards, on behalf of the City Council, presented Keith Liden with a Resolution of Appreciation and a plaque for seven years of dedicated service. Senior Planner Liden is leaving the City of Tigard, and the Council extended to him their best wishes for the future. 5. VISITOR'S AGENDA a. Cal Woolery (NPO 7) urged Council to set as an agenda item the review of the Murray Road Extension through reexamination of the Tigard Transportation Plan and the CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 3 Urban Planning Area Agreement with the County. He referred to material sent to council from NPO 3 and CPO 4 which also noted support for review of the Murray Road extension. b. Doug Smithy (Ironwood Loop) submitted a letter outlining concerns for protection of natural resources of the Englewood Park area. C. Bill Gross (NPO 7) asked Council to schedule, as an agenda item at their next meeting, the Murray Road Extension issue. d. Sue Carver, Chairperson of NPO 6, requested a fee waiver to appeal two subdivision proposals on 97th Avenue (SUB 90-0007/VAR 90-0011 and SUB 90-0013/VAR 90-0037). Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Council Kasten, to waive the appeal fees as requested by NPO 6. The motion passed by a unanimous vote of Council present. e. Herman Porter, Chairperson of NPO 3, advised his NPO was in agreement with NPO 7's request for a review of the UPAA with regard to deletion of the Murray Road extension on the Tigard Transportation Map. t4 f. Randy King, Tigard resident, advised that his wife was a piano teacher. A neighbor complained to City staff because of a problem associated with this home occupation. Staff had advised Mr. King that he would need to submit an application for a home occupation permit which would probably be denied because of code restrictions. Council directed that staff review this and similar situations and report their findings to council. 6. CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Eadon, to approve the Consent Agenda as presented:- 6.1 Approve Minutes: January 15, 1991 6.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar 6.3 Local Contract Review Board: Approval of Consultant Contract for Street Bond Projects 6.4 Approve Oak Tree Apartments Easement Dedication and Partial Greenway Conveyance -Resolution No. 91-02 and Resolution No. 91-03 Motion was approved by unanimous vote of Council present. { CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 4 7. APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING SUBDIVISION SUB 90-0010 CASTILE/MCMONAGLE (NPO 6) An appeal of a Hearings Officer decision for a Subdivision to divide a site which is approximately 1.45 acres in size into six parcels ranging from 7,500 to 10,800 square feet in size. ZONE: R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 unit/acre) LOCATION: 14380 SW 97th Avenue (WCTM 2S1 11BA, tax lot 1301) a. Continuation of Public Hearing from January 22, 1991 b. Council declarations: • Councilor Kasten advised he is personally acquainted with Audrey Castile; however, this would not affect his ability to make an impartial decision. • Councilor Johnson advised she had not been present during the initial public. She noted she had reviewed the record and felt qualified to participate in the deliberation of the issue. • Mayor Edwards advised he would not participate in the hearing because of his personal acquaintance with Audrey Castile as he had noted during the initial hearing on this issue. Council President Schwartz presided over the remainder of the hearing. C. Senior Planner Liden summarized the staff report. He reviewed a map of the subject area. Council,. at their November 5, 1990 meeting, directed staff, the applicant and NPO to review the overall traffic circulation, verify that lots were at least 7500 square feet in size, and examine drainage adequacy. Senior Planner reported that with an amendment to the plan, all lots can meet the 7,500 square foot size requirement. The Engineering Department, after review, determined that a diffusion trench for storm water runoff would not be adequate. Alternate street alignments were considered but judged not to be feasible at this time. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 5 'a CI d. Public Testimony • Alan Peterman, 9335 View Terrace, Tigard, Oregon, advised he would prefer tc see the parcel developed with only fivG lot-- ; ^°n..Vv t-e-a i iYi ice. v4 six which would mean each lot would barely meet minimum size requirements. He noted concern that the property line between the lots designated as, No. 1 and No. 2 would be irregular. • Jim Castile, 9563 S.W. Inez Street, Tigard, Oregon testified as the owner and applicant. He advised he met with a staff member of the City Engineering Department earlier in the day and discussed storm water drainage. The staff person indicated new information had recently been received outlining a process of putting stormwater back into the ground. Mr. Castile emphasized that 7,500 square foot lots were allowed in the Code . Council discussed the issue of storm water drainage at length and asked several questions of the City Engineer. City Engineer acknowledge receipt of new literature on storm water diffusion; however, staff was not optimistic that the subject site could meet design criteria. Councilor Johnson noted that she would prefer that the development not be created with a private street as proposed.. She pointed out that it would have been desirable to work this into the transportation system in readiness- for future development. • Sam Gotter, 9541 S.W. Inez, Tigard, Oregon, testified in support of the development as proposed by the Castiles. He noted the 7,500 square foot lot size met Code requirements. In addition, he advised that irregular lot lines were not unusual. With regard to storm water runoff, Mr. Gotter argued that it would be best to provide a means to allow the water to drain into the ground rather than through public sewer lines into the Tualatin River. More drainage into CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 6 the Tualatin would exacerbate problems with the River clean-up efforts now underway on a regional basis. e. Recommendation by Community Development Staff was to uphold the Hearings Officer's decision with a modification to storm water runoff provisions as outlined in the staff report. f. Public hearing was closed. g. Council deliberation .followed. City Engineer reported on continuing surface water management studies and development of methods to protect water quality and assist in flood control. Legal Counsel advised options for Council included denial of the application for development as proposed or as recommended by the Hearings Officer. Another option would be to further condition the approval of the development. h. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to approve the development as outlined in the Hearings Officer decision with modification to the storm drainage system proposal. Storm drainage system is to be developed as recommended in the staff, report or by any other system acceptable to the City Engineer. All six lots shall be at least 7,500 square feet in size. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 8. APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING - SCE 90-0005 VARIANCE VAR 90-0027 - SHERWOOD INN SIGN (NPO 5) A. request for Sign Code Exception and Variance approval to allow two freestanding freeway-oriented signs where only one is permitted. Also requested is approval to retain one sign of approximately 1,180 square feet per sign face with a height of approximately 65 feet and one sign of approximately 698 square feet per sign face with a height of approximately 69.75 feet where the code specifies a maximum allowable sign, area of 160 square feet per sign face and maximum allowable height of 35 feet. ZONE: C-G (General Commercial) LOCATION: 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road (WCTM 2S1 12DD, Tax Lots 100, 900, 1100) a. This hearing was continued to March 12, 1991, at the request of the applicant. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 7 9. PUBLIC HEARING ON SOLAR ACCESS ORDINANCE ZOA 90-0003 A proposal to create a new chapter (18.88) of the Community Development Code to require solar orient-a Jon for new lots in residential subdivisions, solar access in conjunction with the construction of single family or duplex residences, and solar permit for the protection of solar devices from tree shading. AFFECTED ZONES: All residential zoning districts. a. Public hearing was opened. b. There were no declarations or challenges. C. Senior Planner summarized the staff report. The policy issue was summarized as: Should the City amend the Community Development Code to include standards for providing improved solar access for single family residential development? On October 8, 1990, the Council decided to proceed with a public hearing to review the proposed ordinance. The Council requested that the proposal be reviewed by the NPOs prior to the hearing. The packet included a memo from the staff which elaborated upon the rationale for approving the proposed ordinance, and pertinent supplemental information. Tigard staff experience in pretesting the ordinance and the experience of other jurisdictions that are implementing the ordinance indicates that additional review time for new development and residences is minimal and should not require any revision of fees. A fee will need to be established for the third portion of the ordinance pertaining to Solar Access Permits. On July 24, 1990, the Planning Commission received a presentation regarding the model ordinance and the associated design principles. A public hearing was held on August 7, 1990 and the Commission voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the model ordinance. On January 8, 1991, the Commission reviewed the Code language contained in the attached ordinance and voted four to two to recommend adoption of the Code amendment. The dissenting votes were due to concerns relating to the regulation of future shade trees in the Solar Access Permit portion of the ordinance (Section 18.88.060). Joint presentations of the proposed Solar ordinance were made before all of the NPOs on July 18 and November 14, ( CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 8 l 1990 and the NPOs have been given an opportunity to comment on the issue. NPO 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 voted to recommend approval of tue proposed ordinance package. NPO 4 and 5 have not had a quorum and therefore official recommendations have not been made. NPO 5 members did not express any objections to the ordinance but did indicate that clarification should be provided in the Solar Access Permit portion of the ordinance relating to permit status if a solar feature becomes inactive after a permit is granted (This is addressed in Section 18.88.060 H. 1, page 25, of the proposed ordinance). d. Public testimony: • Forest Soth, 4890 S.W. Menlo, Beaverton, Oregon testified as Chair of the Portland/Vancouver Solar Access Project Committee. He noted the City of Beaverton has had this ordinance in effect for the last three years; no new subdivisions have been rejected because of solar access requirements during that time. Staff review time to assure compliance has been minimal. Mr. Soth advised the Homebuilders Association approved the ordinance as did former Governor Goldschmidt. Cities in the State of Washington l have used the proposed ordinance as a model ordinance to implement solar access guidelines in their communities. Mr. Soth also referred to state energy conservation agencies which warn of diminishing energy resources. Access must be provided so new technologies can be implemented. • Richard L. Durham, 3413 Royce Way, Lake Oswego, Oregon advised he was a City Councilor for Lake Oswego and Vice President of the Solar Access Project Committee. Mr. Durham introduced Mr. Michael R. Wheeler of the Lake Oswego staff who advised staff time and difficulties of implementation since the institution of this ordinance in their City, has been minimal. Mr. Durham commented on the cooperation to date with 17 out of 22 local jurisdictions adopting the solar access ordinance. He noted that this effort has drawn national attention and is being used as a role model for other areas of the United States. • Michael McKeever, 722 S.W. 2nd, Portland, Oregon noted he has been working with local governments as ( CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 9 t well as the y,,.,.. on solar access implementation. Solar access, he advised, is a long-term issue and will increase in importance as it becomes more cost effective Mr. McKeever advised that training services are available and there is support available should there be any difficulties in placing the ordinance into effect. • Mr. Rodger Bekooy, 2400 S.W. Barnes Road, #913, Portland, OR 97235 stated he was Chair of the State Energy Conservation Board. He noted the solar access ordinance was compatible with the state building code. In addition, Mr. Bekooy advised of state efforts and the philosophy that energy conservation is good public policy. • Mary Clinton, 9865 S.W. View Court, Tigard, Oregon testified in opposition to the solar access ordinance and cited intrusion of individual's rights. She noted her concerns with enforcement difficulties and over-regulation. e. Staff Recommendation - Senior Planner Liden advised that staff recommended adoption of the model ordinance as Chapter 18.88 of the Community Development Code. f. Lengthy Council discussion followed. Questions were asked of staff with regard to implementation ease of the provisions of the ordinance. Councilor Kasten noted his support of the ordinance as proposed. Councilors Eadon and Johnson noted their support of solar access efforts, but only on a voluntary basis. Mayor Edwards and Schwartz also noted their concerns with elements of the ordinance, especially with regard to regulation of the solar permits to protect solar devices for tree shading. g. Council considered the ordinance in three parts: 1. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Kasten to include a section in the proposed ordinance which would require solar orientation in residential subdivisions. Motion passed by a 3-2 vote; Councilors Eadon and Johnson voted "Nay." ( CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 10 Motion by Co~mcilor Kasten, seconded by Councilor 2. Schwartz to include a section in the proposed ordinance which would require solar access in conjunction with the construction of single family or duplex residences. Motion passed by a 3-2 vote; Councilors Eadon and Johnson voted "Nay." 3. Motion by Councilor Kasten, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to omit the section of the proposed ordinance which provided that a solar permit be issued for the protection of solar devices from tree shading. Motion passed by a unanimous vote of Council present. h. ORDINANCE NO. 91-02 - AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ZOA 91-0001) INITIATED BY THE CITY OF TIGARD i. Motion by Councilor Kasten, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to approve Ordinance No. 91-02 with the omission of the proposed section providing that a solar permit be issued for the protection of solar devices from tree shading. The motion carried by a 3-2 vote; Councilors Johnson and Eadon voted "Nay." Mayor Edwards announced that since the ordinance did not pass by a unanimous vote, it would be read and voted upon a second time. (See minutes for February 19, 1991.) 10. SOUTHWEST NORTH DAKOTA STREET DISCUSSION a. City Administrator reported that previously, Council reviewed options for extending traffic islands on SW North Dakota Street and directed staff to work with the Anton Park neighborhood to resolve continuing traffic concerns. In response, an informal committee was formed consisting of representatives of the Anton Park neighborhood and staff. An independent traffic engineering consultant was retained to explore alternatives and to advise the informal committee. As a result of several meetings, the committee recommended the following: i CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 11 1. Close North Dakota St. temporarily during the reconstruction of Scholls Ferry Road. The closure would be south of Springwood Drive. The temporary closure would be removed 90 days after the completion of the Scholls Ferry construction. A plan has been developed to maintain emergency vehicle access through the closed area. 2. Prior to reopening the street, install circular traffic islands at the intersections within Anton Park to further discourage high-speed through traffic. 3. If the Beaverton plan to connect 125th Avenue to Hall Boulevard should be funded, residents can ask for further consideration of diverters and other concepts presented by the traffic consultant. Staff supported the recommendation presented above. b. Several persons from the Summerlake area testified noting concern with temporary closure of North Dakota (see sign- up sheet in Council packet material). Jeanne Rohlff, represented the neighborhood committee which worked with E staff on the above recommendation. She advised they were in agreement with the staff and expressed appreciation for their work on this issue. C. Lengthy discussion followed and is summarized as follows: Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Schwartz to authorize the construction of circular traffic islands as proposed. The vote on the motion was 3-1-1; Councilor Johnson voted "No" and Councilor Eadon abstained. Councilor Johnson, during discussion, noted that she felt this was a unique situation with a major street emptying onto a minor collector which also was a residential street. She said she had not changed her position and believed that street closure was a viable option. Councilor Eadon, during her remarks, noted that she would not be opposed to construction of the islands, but felt the Transportation Advisory Committee should review this expenditure along with other transportation needs competing for street capital improvement dollars. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 12 { 17 17nCllo..s.r Schwartz, Acu uy t,vu a by Cou ~I9t1Cn by CO,,.~.seconded nCilOL' Kasten, to not close S.W. North Dakota Street on either a temporary or permanent basis. The motion passed by a 4-1 vote; Councilor Johnson voted "No." 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Cancelled. 12. ADJOURNMENT: 10:51 p.m. ~u/►t.2 VLF Catherine Wheatley, Cit Recorder Att~js~t / i~Mayor, C ty of Tigard Date: fa~CP ccm212.91 ( CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 12, 1991 - PAGE 13 7 ' lot ` , TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 NOeC~'T7822 n BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 r Legal Notice Advertising P~ AP The following willbe considered by the Tigard Ciry C4~ura:il on'Febnuuy • • ❑ Tearsheet Notice 12. 1991, at 7:30 P M. 'at Tigard Civic Center, Town Ha71 Room 13125 S W: -Hall Boulevard,Tigard; Oregon: Further information maybe o6=_ • City of Tigard • tamed from the . orr►munityUevelopmentDirect0r or Ciiy`ilZecoidei al the' P.O. Box 23397 13 Duplicate Affida ; same_loeatcon or by calling 639=417.1, You are invited to submit ' -tten •Tigard OR 97223 testimonp to advance of the pub& hearing; written and:oral testimpny • will be considered at tlie, heanng._The public hearing will b accordance ig' e coriducted in; vyia~ipucable`.Chapter`_'18.32oFtha'Tard Municipal' Code`and any ru ftles the., of pr9_, ado !04 by the Counc and~aaailab]e at City Hall a z +'~rt'.'. I)WR AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION EHE ` S E-PLFAlNEND ? MENT CPA-2 OF. 0-0 1 I Y' TI ARD A HrA NUEBXTENSI N B mNi;Ab rrrr, ;~g D STATE OF OREGON, jss ME IFIC HiGHWAY/TIt:A>7t0 STREET LO O NP() #1f&+#21 P t COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, A reques~ - oy the Cat of,Ti and to amendithe,Comprehbn tv yr g I, T ldi t_h lZ~Iratl5por~hon Map The exentton of Ash Avenue from Burnham Sereet being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising AshAenuell`rom way Director, or his principal clerk, of the- and Times . urnha otHall Bo < evazd iHeu z ke s~ wouol~ be f deleted a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 woWbe ddeaTt enaloig S ent of Bush mBS S tt:ta Hi1154 eet and 193.020; published aTigard 4 w in the b6dil aforesaid aforesaid county, and state; that the southbound nespoof P~cifific Haghway.,conneoarig"to the'c ty irkgt via; i ~iblic H a ,nn CPA q0-0010 pa t:= a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the Tigard Street would be added L'OCATION' ~15H°AVENUEE7 N SION ApDITI~IY betweCn the`ands oEezisdng Ash Avenue near;Bur z;; entire issue of said One nham Street and'near Hdi Bttegt (.WCTMIS1;4& `,25L2AD; ~S] 2CiA) newspaper for_ successive and ASII AVENUE DELETIONS " betweed'ac c x ' r ' consecutive in the following issues: and 11 hamsand betweGh Buii foam arid' fall Wev ~ 5 `ter Sb'eet (V~4TM`2S1 ZAP; 2S 2AiC, 2S1`2; S~l2BD, S1f2C~;;~~d~3 ~brua><T 7~ 7 AA1 2S1 ?BD) BURNHA14t/TGARDRLIGI~?MEIT~DBLTION' °betcvfn $ W~ Main Street at Tigard Streetfand ihetex~sting~=right of way qBu~ riham Stiieet at point southof 9185=5 W Burnham ZS12AD) PACIFIC HIGHWAY RAMP Al?ATIYON12 , - .~t~ ~he~sa,tth 4 bound lanes ot"Pacific~Higghway and the Mal '1; 6 y Htghway v'aduct (WC rA:iS1_+2ABj 5°r<dtlar~hePac~ fic ; Subscribed and swot to before me this 7th d T~B~ Publish?FebruaryM1i7; gQ1; t rr ~r'~': t n=, , 1991 ~r .::R<tg: ~v~: Notary Public for Oregon My Commissio xpires: G~ y ~3 AFFIDAVIT TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Legal Notice TT7821 ~e~ON, OREGON 97075 - - Ql~ - The'followmg meeting" highlights are published. for your iitfotmation Ftill. Le gI NOtipe Advertising agendas maybe obtained from the CityRecorder, tl3.125 S W Ball _ F EB 11 Boulevard, Tigard, ~(3regon 97223, or by callin ` g639-~1~/1' • Cltlf DF nDypD • ❑ Tearsheet Note. COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETINI^ *City of Tigard • iztFEBRUARY~12;19Q1:": 13 Duplicate AffidF t t TIGARD CITY. HALL' TOWN HALI r ' PO Box 23397 13125 S Wp HALL BOULEVARDf TIGARD OREG01\T t t 1EIl~ a1i~3~1U t t y rr7(4t11 AGi trlp> ti{1+1c 2 !r prr r •Tigard, OR 97223 • ~ thi`n~i:4 i~i~d~, t:.~#n• "ar~t& u 1vl,z wnt~~ AN e30 PM - Discussion g wi`9~asiun`gton County'- Commissit)nei~Roy Rogers To~yn Hall ~ ~ a; ? 3Q P,M Business Meeutig~wnel) f , r' AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) PubhcHeatyt►gsi, Ave COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. •`I~artngsOfficerdeetsiisi=T" I, Judith Koehler r r hu lion SU>90-010, Castile/McMonagle being first duly sworn, depose and say 8t I a Advertising r (1~1P06 -vn Director, or his principal clerk, of the. $0L es • -..",Solar- Ordjnantg W DW ! 1 a newspaper of general circulatiT1as defined in ORS 193.010 ° ' 4r c 2w c,. 43; and 193.020; published at 1Q a in the a t out►c :Conste~eration, aforesaid county and state: that the • +t13 5 e ~~3~ y +ti pry} _Ci tv ('r,un~i 1P1 9nu►gGommtsstonr~~? Rosin ac I`'pPPt-ing_Fah 19 1,991 ' g VI ctsi n ; tgnCodelERcegtton'SCE w~ a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the ' ' f y ! "s`r90-OQOSVananceYIt9Q002 x rf 1. StierwoodS entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and Na a~,,~`~ka,~< consecutive in the following issues: + ' x~7 ti, t alCphtrac Raview,I MAI I~Ieean ' ; f, R, g February, 7 1991 C~u t ve,Sel"sion fi1te~Ti City Cdr hwi y Srit~ J rr . r tYl~" Xx w 7 -k y< f 3""t5yeSS~esSdo1 ~tymde/i~n~e `//~~.4vi~s0 ~ , 'KF: 4. t r '(I1) to diWdss laU 4 1~►41y~ Y~ Utz ~el,^`, ' rr ~yy e'an , R.~ v.a ~p,a ,.xri x1 cEv ?F, d av ..;F TT7821 1'ubbst►~ebniazy~?i~93 xtt<~ Subscribed and sworn o before me this 7th day of February 1991 Notary Public for Oregon My Commission xpires: AFFIDAVIT TIMES PUBLISHING COMPAU1 t.ega781 P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360 ppoticg BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 l/ W Legal Notice Advertising • • ❑ Tearsheet Notice City of Tigard • P.O. Box23397 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Tigard, OR 97223 TLIBU HEARING The following will be consideredfby the Tigard City~C6unbilJodFebi6* 12,1991, at 7:30 P.M. at Tigard Civic Center; ivn?lial)(' toani,13115 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION S W ~Ha11;BouleW-- Tigard; Oregon F,tirther uiformation may be ob- tained from the Communety Develbppmerit Drector or Cnty Recorder at STATE OF OREGON, ) the same locatimi bf. by calling 639,-"4171. You ar(;Itnvtted to subirit writ COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, as. ten testunon)+,in advance of.the public hearusg, wntten3endl Dial testimony_ I, Judith Koehler will be coiistdered`at the hearing The public hearing wdl be conducted m. accordance with the applicable Chapter 18:32 of the Tigard Municipal being first duly sworn, depose ands that LL the Advertising Code and any rules of procedure adopted by the'Councii i;d available at' Director, or his principal clerk, of the~gard ~'imes Ci Hall " 1 a a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 CY - and 193.020; published at Ti and g in the 80LAR ACCESS' ORDINANCE ZOA 90-t10Wuproposal-to create i aforesaid county and state; that the ;new chap,ter (18;88) oftlie,Commamty Development7'ode'to7reyuiip Noti r--P o Pub - OA 90-0003 solar onentattonTor new lots m residential subdiv~stons; solar access,"w a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the con~upCtonw~thtfitsScogstrucaonofS~ngldfatptly`orrluplezesidences, One aridsolar permiv for thewprotecboh ofsolar devices from'tn~ shading AF entire issue of said newspaper for successive and FECTED ZONES A1) restdendal zoning dtsGrtCts, rs consecutive in the following issues: 7T7818 Publish January 31,1991 Y t a c s 1 January 31, 1991 ~w , _ Zrr Subscribed and &sworn o before me is 31st da of January 4th Notary Public for Oregon My Commission s: AFFIDAVIT AGENDA -"ITEM NO.• ° '2 ' VISITOR S lAGENDA ` DATE : 2/12/91 (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 -4--sues a 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. NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED .•.,t-;PL~B~ISE~'a'PR31~P1' . SWII C Ce, aMn%m t l~ ~o I~~D 67 J A4 ~~A-f -I C L~ CJ AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE: 2/12/91 (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. i NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED PLEASE PRINT H,sTff ~ f~,P~c'P. - /i~3o ~ 4~. (~/~'M„r6•~L/9~t'.E J~.4<lorff G.[vsd2~~ J 3 tr1510 Stu, .~i4~ of u 1 ZZ 7S cl j d-uwm~e 5-1- -j7 'TD 1 S f Please sign in to testify on the following: AGENDAIZ'EM~pNO ti DATE : 2/12/91 PUBLIC HEADING SUibn iISION SUB19( OOlO CAS E MCMONAGL'ENPOi•6,, x' ?LEASE PRINT NAME & ADDRESS NAME & ADDRESS PROPONENT (FOR APPEAL) OPPONENT (AGAINST APPEAL) CCA i rl i Please sign in to testify on the following: ?►~ENDA ITEM NO `4 f 5 DATE : 2/12/91 c: APPEFiL PUBLIC. HEARING SCE 90-0005 VARIANCE VAlt90--0027:` SHERWOOA,. INN: SIGN''(NPO'"5) PL19ME PRINT;'. - NAME & ADDRESS NAME & ADDRESS D10►1'B APPLIt:AN'i'r tipLS W.HSTRW t'ACa[A .:I`1'~9+~SSQ'9'OVII2" : . ti Please sign in to testify on the following: AGENDA STEM NO ` O.y x~ DATE : 2/12/91 ")ML3C ,HELARING'ON SOLAR'.ACCESS ORL?INAI CE r`,. ZOPi NAME & ADDRESS NAME & ADDRESS Proponent (Supports Ordinance) ponent (Against Ordinance) q~~f ~l y S d vu-7ri / cam' 7 a fi s sue/ ytPE sclry t . /Cf/$iP~ ~ U~°l~A/J e~/31~C ~soEGa M lG "A-E1- Y2. • w4-4 Lar=- GY3 ST46ws+ 7Zz V.., r. e% r RCN EL PYC- eevee X-Akd 0o S" aa•nu d 1 0 p ~`~~/aid ~2z STUDY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SESSION CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGEND-L1 ITEM SUMMARY I L AGENDA OF: Februarv 12, 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Street PREVIOUS ACTION: i maintenance policies PREPARED BY: City Engineer lei DEPT HEAD OKP'fffr CITY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY: POLIO /ISSUE Shall the City accept and maintain the public gravel streets within its jurisdiction? INFORMATION SUMMARY City policy regarding maintenance of existing gravel streets is unclear. The attached memo proposes that all existing gravel public streets be accepted for City maintenance. Staff would like to discuss this proposed policy with the Council at the study session on Feb. 12th. rw/ststd 1 .e MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Pat Reilly FROM: Randy Wooley DATE: December 11, 1990 SUBJECT: Street standards I feel that we need to clarify the City's policies relating to improvement and maintenance of unpaved streets. Currently, we have approximately 3.1 miles of unpaved streets. This is about 3% of our total roadway system. Approximately 75% of the unpaved streets have a good gravel surface. The others are generally very short street segments carrying little traffic. The City policy has been to provide occasional maintenance on the streets having a good gravel surface and little or no maintenance on the other unpaved streets. In order to receive full city maintenance, property owners must pay to have the streets paved to City standards. As a result, the streets don't get improved, they don't get much maintenance, and we receive many complaints about bumps and dust. In the older areas of the City, we have many miles of streets with some type of surface treatment. Generally, these surfaces are old and require considerable maintenance. However, because they are surfaced streets, the City does provide routine maintenance, including patching and sometimes overlays. I suggest that we should eliminate this disparity between gravel streets and those with a minimal surfacing. I think that we should accept all developed streets for City maintenance. What I have in mind is for the city to do sufficient maintenance to provide a reasonably smooth surface and adequate drainage. Unpaved streets would also be considered, along with all other streets, for potential improvements under the streets major maintenance program; these are the funds used to preserve our existing streets. Improvements would generally be those which reduce the City's long-term maintenance costs or address safety concerns. Improvements to full City standards would still be required in conjunction with new subdivisions and site development. In already developed areas, upgrading to full street improvements (curbs, sidewalks, etc.) would still require funding by property owners. I believe that the change in policy would provide more equitable service to all City property owners. It would definitely reduce citizen complaints. And it would provide a better coordinated maintenance effort through our major maintenance program. MEMORANDUM C ~(SQ►'i.~, WIt--KGB L, TO: Urban Growth Management Plan PAC FROM: Larry Cole ~1~a t~ r DATE: January 30, 1991 RE: Recommendation From: City of Beaverton City of Cornelius City of Forest Grove City of Hillsboro City of Sherwood City of Tigard City of Tualatin Dear Policy Advisory Committee Members: This memorandum will present the recommendations of the Washington County cities regarding the RUGGO document. These recommendations are the product of consensus among the city managers and planning directors after careful review of the draft Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives. INTRODUCTION: A Time to Choose We have agreed that the region has reached a turning point in growth management planning. It is now time to choose the vision that we want for our future. Unless this is a consensus decision, however, local citizens will feel no commitment and the vision will fail. This would be a disaster for management of urban form as well as for the prospects of a restructured form of governance. \ We find ourselves in agreement with the metro area planning Memo re: Recommendation January 29, 1991 Page 2 directors and with those members of DLCD staff who have observed that the current document does not present a clear vision of urban form to the public. We believe it would be an historic mistake to proceed without expanding the current process to cure this defect. For these reasons we offer the following recommendations: 1. Intensify the Current Process to Include Analytical Definition of Problems Facing the Region and Clear Description of Alternative Approaches to Solving Them. We believe the PAC has taken an important step toward developing a consensus vision for our future. The following additional steps will be necessary to implement this recommendation: a. Define the problem: Other than the impressionistic concerns expressed at last year's Growth Conference, we have no definition of problems. Moreover, no data or analysis describes or measures the problems which RUGGO addresses. The issues are too important and too complex to proceed without a disciplined, analytical foundation. _ Memo re: Recommendation January 29, 1991 Page 3 b. Define alternative visions: The current RUGGO draft has developed a solid alternative vision which should be expanded upon and described graphically. Other potential solutions should also be defined. As a baseline for measurement and comparison, we also need to develop a description of what the urban form will be if nothing happens other than implementation of current acknowledged comprehensive plans. ( As you may be aware, the Planning Directors in the region are attempting to initiate this kind of visioning process. We should collaberate in their efforts. C. Analyze the alternatives: The choice among alternatives should be based upon analysis of various scenarios, which should in turn be based on accurate projections. What transportation service levels does each alternative provide? What are the housing cost impacts of each alternative? What implications-are there for the cost of infrastructure? These and other critical issues can and should be evaluated analytically. Memo re: Recommendation January 29, 1991 Page 4 2. Use Citizen Involvement Processes That are Already in Place. Each of the cities in the region, and the counties as well, have extensive and time tested citizen involvement mechanisms already in place. We should is take advantage of these structures and use them in making a choice among the competing visions. While this can be an expensive process, we are prepared to assist in shouldering the burden. The cities of the region are experienced in using these procedures to solve their problems. We know, based upon that experience, that the citizen involvement process creates commitment and that commitment will be necessary to make the RUGGO policies work. No single-day, limited-seating conference can substitute for the state-mandated citizen involvement process. The common thread in every city's analysis of the RUGGO document is that it fails to take advantage of the "bottom up" grassroots planning process that is the keystone of Oregon's land use planning system. RUGGO appears to impose from above a single land use Memo re: Recommendation January 29, 1991 Page 5 plann=ing solution. In doing so'; it makes the critical mistake of failing to satisfy the Citizen Involvement Goal. Such an approach would also fail to serve Metro's most important responsibility: regional coordination. 3. Separate the RUGGO Process from Periodic Review. Metro's periodic review letter from LCDC does not require development of the RUGGO document. At this critical turning point in the metropolitan area's 4 history, we must take the time to.make an informed decision. Forcing the procedure to fit the unrelated periodic review process does not serve the region's interest. CONCLUSION Washington county cities ask that these three recommendations be included in the recommendations of the PAC. The work completed to date forms a starting point for what may become the consensus vision for our community's future. In order for that consensus to be created and galvanized into citizen commitment, the vision ( implicit in RUGGO must be made explicit and must stand scrutiny when measured against other options. i Memo re: Recommendation January 29, 1991 Page 6 The opportunities, problems and solutions. of the region are shared between all participants. In that sense, RUGGO is our document, and we want it to succeed. We look forward to working with Metro as equal partners to develop a vision for the region, and, equally important, to obtain the commitment of the region's citizens which is necessary to its success. ruggmmo2 ca~~ of Appr., . gat • vQ,~ lOh Cirf OF WARD WASHINGTON COUNTY. C. 'EGON RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Keith Liden has served the City of Tigard conscientiously and in an exemplary manner since 1984, and WHEREAS, Keith has had a major positive influence on the development of the City of Tigard that will be felt for years to come, and WHEREAS, Keith has established an outstanding reputation for his integrity, competence and professional manner, and WHEREAS, Keith has decided to pursue other professional and business interests. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that The City Council acknowledges, in grateful appreciation, the many contributions Keith Liden has made to the City of Tigard. Further, the City Council extends its heartfelt expression of esteem to Keith for serving the City faithfully and well, and its best wishes for good health, success, and prosperity for many years to come. ATTEST: f CITY RECORDER-CITY OFTI RD MAYO Y OF TIGARD mfr. PP- WASHINGTON COUNTY, ! a. f q 1. OREGON G< - February 7, 1991 r .qn Ira tqc Gerald Edwards City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Edwards: At the December 19, 1990 Public Officials Caucus at the Nike World Headquarters, one of the issues we discussed was the need to establish a group, similar to the Washington County Transportation Planning (WCTCC) Policy Group, to address land use planning issues of common concern to Washington County and its cities. The consensus of opinion among those attending seemed to be that it would be a good idea to consider forming such a group. The Metro initiative to adopt Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives (RUGGOs) is a land use issue that has recently become a major concern to the County and cities in Washington County. City managers and planning directors have already met to discuss their concerns with the RUGGOs and the Metro process that has led to their development. Given the present concerns about the RUGGOs, I believe the time is right to give serious consideration to the formation of a "Land Use Planning Coordinating Committee", including a policy group and a technical advisory committee. Such a committee could become a permanent forum for discussing and hopefully attaining consensus on a variety of land use issues beginning with the RUGGOs. As a first step, I would like to invite you or a member of your Council interested in land use planning issues, to attend the February 13, 1991 meeting of the WCTCC Policy Group (agenda enclosed) to discuss this matter. Hopefully, we can reach agreement at the meeting on the need for a land use coordinating group, and the organizational structure. Board of County Commissioners 155 North First Avenue, Suite 300 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 Phone: 5031648.8681 If you have any questions, please call Brent Curtis, Washington County°s Planning Manager, at 640-3519. We hope to see you on thle 13th. Sincerely, :;B Bonnie Hays, Chair Washington County Board of Commissioners BH:HB:mb c: Patrick J. Reilly, City Administrator . ^x WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON taw>~ u ~ i DATE February 8, 1991 t . y TO Washington County Transportation Coordinating Committee Policy Group FROM Bruce A. Warner, Director Department of Land Use and Transportation SUBJECT MEETING NOTICE J DATE WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1991 i. TIME 12:00 NOON PLACE: BEAVERTON CITY HALL - 2nd FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM 3. 4755 S.W. GRIFFITH DRIVE - BEAVERTON 1 A G E N D A * 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Action. JANUARY 9, 1991 * 2. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE Information 3. RUGGO - LAND USE COORDINATING Information COMMITTEE * 4. ODOT SIX-YEAR PROGRAM Information * 5. TECHNICAL GROUP REPORT Information * 6. JPACT AGENDA Information 7. OTHER BUSINESS Information * Material enclosed The next WCTCC Policy Group meeting is Wednesday, March 13, 1991. If you have any questions, please call me at 648-8740. ti MB:1t(d0c:p1cyagen) Department of Land Use and Transportation, Planning Division f 155 North First Avenue Phone: 503/648-8761 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 FAX 503/693-4412 Printed on Recycled Paper ' , ~PCE..i ✓Q ~ ~u.1..c r2~ C February 12, 1991 11396 SW Ironwood Loop Tigard, Oregon 97223 City Council City of Tigard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Council Members; ' I wish to have input into the current land-use planning periodic review. I have comments pertinent to your Goal 5 and development review processes. The specific area of concern I have is the lake/pond wetland and adjacent upland area identified as B-1 and B-2 on your inventory (map attached). This area is generally described as the creek which flows through Englewood Park to its confluence with Fanno Creek, and adjacent lands. The B-2 wetland complex is in T1S R1W Sec. 34 NE 1/4. I am a professional wildlife biologist with an M.S. degree in wildlife management and many years of work experience in the field. I live in this neighborhood. My property is on SW Ironwood Loop adjacent to Englewood Park and very near the B-1 and B-2 areas. C This area is a highly significant Goal 5 Resource deserving the most intensive levels of protection. I recommend that a minimum of 100 feet area around the B-1 and B-2 wetlands be protected. This will buffer the wetlands. But, more importantly, the natural resource actually is the irregular mosaic of water, wetland, uplands and forested habitat. All these components work together to create what, in an urban setting, is a very rare and rich natural system. A diversity of wildlife such as this in an urban setting is unique and extremely valuable. The ecosystem should be protected in its entirety. It is worth noting that the Refections on Summer Creek development just off SW Scholls Ferry Road has incorporated a 200-foot corridor associated with Summer Creek for open space. This development has occurred profitably while protecting natural resources. It suggests to me that this type of site design approach could serve as a model or example for any development of private lands in the vicinity of the B-2 area. The B-2 area is unusual in that it has forested lands completely surrounding the lake and wetlands. On the south side of the lake there are many broken topped trees, particularly cedars. These candelabra shaped trees are very attractive as roosting sites for the great blue herons which occupy this area year round. Current human access to that area is very limited which contributes to the security of the herons using that grove. Great blue herons are sensitive to human disturbance especially where they nest or roost. Great numbers of waterfowl use this area. They tend to concentrate ( along the shores and coves where human disturbance is more limited. Within the last week, I have seen Canada geese, mallard ducks, buffleheads, and teal i .j~ 1 . 2? ~Y using this area. I have seen red-tailed hawks soaring over the grasslands and great-horned owls sitting on snags and using hollow trees in the vicinity. 3a Furbearers and other medium-sized mammals make extensive use of the entire area. I have personally seen beaver, nutria and muskrats in both the s lake (B-2) and the small pond (B-1). Racoons and opossum are common. ,Y 1 One morning, I even saw black-tailed deer tracks in the mud. My; neighbors who have lived in the area.longer than I say they have observed otter and bobcat there. t' 3! This tributary of Fanno Creek is an important component in the efforts to clean up the Tualatin River system. Wetlands and the mosaic of habitat around them filter and purify water and provide storm water storage. The more intact or whole and healthy these systems are, the better job they can do in i purifying and storing water. Having the whole mosaic of habitats (wetlands, forested uplands, grassy uplands) maintains the value of the wetlands. { In summary, this area provides great opportunities for wildlife habitat, urban wildlife and open space use (such as bird watching) and benefits to water quality and flood abatement. It may continue to provide these benefits, but only if it is given a high level of protection and any development of private lands is most carefully planned. I would appreciate being kept informed on your Goal S update and any development plans or design review for {f this area. _ 3 y Sincerely, .r Douglas A. Smithey a cc: Mike Houck Jack Broome Jeff Gottfried i =3 'i ~i . ;i ~i OW tiff, AV9 gar, 11 tt+ P `•~1 4th: ~ N x1 r,`• ti-•~ y ±x''7 S.rk TWIN q PA4 It PL... r' 1 ill 1 11 ELL P~.. ,W, IQ 1A V ; .i SAIL foe to AVE. LO r f 1K: tD004DER S.MI. 1 6 tt A •,Y a fir; N : it ~ {;:;i:.f • OPPO ail ~ " 5 21 ~ a 1~1 NPO #3 - MINUTES February 6, 1991 1. Meeting called to order at 7:04 p.m. 2. Pres3nt: Porter Bishop Froude Mortensen Root Smith Excused: Hansen 3. Liz Newton briefed us on "Voice Mail" system. 4. The minutes for meeting date January 2, 1991 were approved. The minutes for meeting date December 5, 1990 were approved. 5. Keith Liden informed us on Mountain Pointe and Mountain Ridge developments. These are scheduled for Planning Commission February 25, 1991. There have been revisions that were not available for NPO #3 to review. NPO #3 requested staff to mail all revisions to Chairman, Herman Porter and Committee members, . if possible, before February 25, 1991. Staff report will be available sometime during the week of February 18-22. 6. Randy Wooley held question/answer discussion regarding Bull Mountain transportation plan. 7. Cal Woolery gave presentation on the NPO #7 petition requesting elimination of the Murray Boulevard extension from the UPAA. A motion was made to support the NPO #7 petition. Motion carried. unanimously. Note: Cal Woolery will present this petition to Tigard City Council on February 12, 1991 (two minute agenda). 8. Other Business: None. 9. Meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Nancy Smith NPO #3 Secretary C l : izD J7 -.Anuar-y 24, 199.1 ~~d 1: ~ 1g91 Ti ciar-d Ci tv Cc,unci 1 J.•'1.".- SW Hall f 4D Tigard, OR 97:''? Dear Council members: At. oL.ir- last yener°a]. mF=etir7c:1 of Cf='lJ !{z✓,, Lti_il1. Mt, Tigard, 1"'i ncl City a moti c:,n was maxde and unani mous:l. y passed to support 1\1F'(J and NPO 7's pnsition ri•=garding e. IJ.rn:inati ng the llurr~.-:.xy Ext.:rantion and connecl::ion to SW I2l.st/Gaar•de entirely from the LJPAA. •T•1ie specific v 1 angU age +0110 W S CITY of TIGARD Rc-2so],Ution NO. A-8-1:1.4 Amend tht_i U1='A, to delete Subsection I:I:I. C. 4. Murray Extension and Connection to 1 ,2.1 st and C-laa r-c:le in its entirety.. Amend the (1PAA to rep:lacc_ the Mt_irr ay Corme?c•tion with alternative trt r7spc:~r tati.on improvements to serve the broader- transportation needs o-t" (4ashington Coc.uni_y and E,eaverton. Review the Tigard Comprehensive Tran :por•tation Flan. Amend the Transportation Plan to del.e•(:.e the Murray Extension and Connection to 121st and Gaa.rc:lt, in its entirety.. Amend the Tr•ansportati. on Plan with alternative local and collector str9e,t improvement= to serve Iocal Tigard transportation and neighborhood nereds. l•hailk YOU for your cr..n=ir..lerai:ion. ~ncerely, v_ vv ~ :ra.rr_~:I. E{o~ 7 e `_ecretary Tre,_ ur-er C.l'CJ `TE! Bull Mt, Tigard, k::i.ng City. 7'!;611 r `=i(Al Fern Str(=et 'Tigard, Cll=r. 97223 r COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 2 • VISITOR'S AGENDA { MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Patrick J. Reilly, City Administrator/, DATE: February 4, 1991 SUBJECT: Request to Amend UPAA & Review Tigard Transportation Plan - Murray Road Extension and Connection (NPO 7) Attached please find documentation with regard to the above- referenced request. Bill Gross of NPO 7 advises representatives from both NPO 7 and 3 will be present during the Visitor's Agenda on February 12 to formally present the petition. It is my recommendation that the Council accept the petition and schedule this item for further discussion during their February 19, 1991 meeting. Attachment NPO #7 is before Council tonight to petition Tigard City Council to review and amend its Urban Planning Area Agreement with Washington C.tunty. ae adopted by Tigard R.Ozolution NO. 99-114. NPO #7 petitions Council to delete the UPRR Murray Extension and Connection to IZIst and Saards, under Subsection III. C. 4., in its entirety, pursuant to the UPAR amendment procedures, under Subsections IV. A. and IV. C. NPO #3 and CPO #4 are long standing opponents to the Murray Extension and Connection to IZIst and Gaarde. NPO #7 stands with NPO #3 and CPO #4 in their opposition to the Murray Connection. NPO #7 directs Council's attention to the Washington County Transportation Director's letter to the Tigard City Manager, dated March ZS, 1990. The letter first recites the history of the Murray Connection and the UPRA: The Aloha-Reedville-Cooper Mtn. and Bull Mtn Community Plans and Washington County adopt the Murray Connection in 1983. Tigard adopts a UPRA with Washington County in 1983 which states the NEED and the LOCATION of the Murray Connection is unresolved. Washington County adopts a UPRR with Tigard in 1988 which includes the Murray Connection. Washington County adopts a UPAA with Tigard in 1988 which includes the Murray Connection. The letter then states that: The Murray Connection is envisioned to provide improvements to the local Tigard circulation system and is not intended to serve any broader transportation needs. Beef Bend Road, Scholls Ferry Road and Highways 217 and SSW are intended to serve as the needed arterial connections and access in the area. The Beef Bend Road Extension and Highway Z17 Widening SHOULD BE completed BEFORE the completion of the Murray Connection. The Murray Connection is a new road on a new alignment, and thus preserves lower traffic volumes on existing streets and protects livability in Tigard neighborhoods. ( The Murray Connection's section from Old Seholls Ferry Road to 135th Ave. is considered a committed project in Metro's Regional Transportation Plan. i The Murray Connection's section from 13Sth Ave. to Gaarde is a project recommended to be completed over the next ten years in Metro's Regional Transportation Plan. NPO #7 asserts that the Murray Connection will not improve local Tigard traffic circulation, but instead attract and channel Aloha and Beaverton traffic from Murray Road and Scholls Ferry Road onto Tigard streets which now serve Tigard traffic needs. The NPO asserts that the Murray Connection will not preserve lower traffic volumes on existing Tigard streets and protect livability in Tigard neighborhoods, but instead: Attract through traffic onto Tigard streets and subject Tigard neighborhoods to more traffic hazard and traffic noise. Result in widened streets and subject Tigard neighborhoods to physical and visual segmentation. NPO #7 asserts that the Murray Connection will serve as an ATTRACTIVE transportation ALTERNATIVE to Beef Bend Road, Scholls Ferry Road and Highways 217 and 99W despite its intended use, its intended designation and its intended design standards. The NPO asserts that significant segments of the Murray Connection will be built BEFORE the Beef Bend Road Extension and Highway 217 Widening are completed because any Tigard development adjacent to the Murray Connection IS FORCED to construct the connection as a condition of development approval. NPO #7 asserts that the Murray Connection will destroy significant urban wetlands and wildlife reserves within the Summercreek wetlands and L;atercourse in Beaverton adjacent to Tigard's city limits. NPO #7 directs Council's attention to Metro's Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives, August, 1990 Review Draft. The draft recites Metro's transportation policies: Transportation, Objective 3., states that a regional transportation system shall be developed which provides ADEQUATE levels of mobility consistent with local comprehensive plans, recognizes financial constraints, and MINIMIZES the environmental impacts of system development, operations and maintenance. Mobility, Policy 3.2, states that adequate mobility will be provided by actively working to most mobility needs in ways that do not require new transportation system construction and as a LAST RESORT, expanding the capacity of existing systems or developing new transportation I system infrastructure. Environmental Considerations, Policy 3.6, states that the regional transportation system shall be planned to remove through traffic from neighborhood streets which results from congestion on adlacent facilities and MINIMIZE negative Impacts on parks, public open space, wetlands, and negative effects an communities and neighborhoods arising from noise, visual impacts and physical segmentation. NPO #7 asserts that the Murray Connection fails to most Metro's transportation goals and policies, despite Metro's previous adoption of the Connection. Therefore, Neighborhood Planning Organization #7 petitions Tigard City Council to: Review CITY OF TIGARO RESOLUTION NO. 88-114. Amend the bPRA to delete Subsection III. C. 4., Murray Extension and Connection to IZtst and Gaarde, in its entirety, pursuant to Subsections IV. R. and IV. C., amendment procedures. Amend the UPRR to replace the Murray Connection with alternative transportation improvements to serve the broader transportation needs of Washington County and Beaverton. Review the Tigard Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Amend the Transportation Plan to delete the Murray Extension and Connection to IZtst and Gaarde, in its entirety. Amend the Transportation Plan with alternative local and collector street improvements to serve local Tigard transportation and neighborhood needs. C. w ra . 11 t Ry o 1 ' • CID f ~ ro ~ •r7 •ii • S i~i ~MI • V 44 a ~^^~•1111 0 a 4.1 w P4 t " ►a ° a w 44 ' Its r4 N „vbJ'c . 1 , Y'4 j,Vage 8 4. The City of Tigard,, City of Beaverton: and Washington County have agreed to the following stipulations regarding the connection of Murray Boulevard from Old Scholls Ferry Road to the intersection of SW 121st Avenue and 6aarde Street: a. The City of Tigard, City of Beaverton and Washington County agree to amend their respective . comprehensive plans to reflect the following functional classification and.design considerations: , 1. Designation: Collector 2. Number of Travel Lanes: 2 (plus turn lanes at major intersections). 3. Bike Lanes: Yes 4. Right-of-Way: 60 feet (plus-slope easements where necessary) 5: Pavement Width: 40 foot minimum 6. Access: Limited 7. Design Speed: • 35 M.P.H. 'J 8. Minimum Turning Radius: 350. to 500 feet 9. Parking Facilities: None provided on street 10. Upon verification of need by traffic analysis, the connection may be planned to-eventually accommodate additional lanes at the Murray/Old Scholls Ferry and Murray/New Scholls Ferry intersections. 11. The intersection of SW 135th Avenue and Murray Boulevard connection will be designed with Murray Boulevard as a through street with 135th Avenue terminating at the Murray connection with a "T" intersection. 12. The general alignment of the Murray Boulevard connection is illustrated in Exhibit B. b. Any changes to land use designations in the Murray Boulevard connection area shall be coordinated with all jurisdictions to assure that traffic { impacts are adeT3ately analyzed. ' o Page 9 C. The City of Tigard, City of Beaverton and Washington County shall support improvements to the regional transportation system as outlined in ~.~,.~~,a~i~.vil Plan (1t16Y) . the adopted Regional T'^ansp-'""_t_a~.i d. Improvements to SW Gaarde Street between SW 121st Avenue and Pacific Highway 99W should occur coincident with the connection of Murray Boulevard from Walnut/135th Avenue to Gaarde Street. e. The City of Tigard and Washington County, with involvement by affected property owners, shall jointly develop an alignment for the connection of Murray Boulevard between the 135th Avenue/Walnut Street and 121st Avenue/Gaarde Street intersections in 1986. 5. The-CITY and the COUNTY shall informally establish f administrative procedures and designate appropriate personnel to receive and review notices required by Sections II A,•B and C of this Agreement. IV. Amendments to the IIrban Planning Area Agreement A. The following procedures shall be followed by the CITY and -the COUNTY to amend the language of this agreement or the Urban Planning Area Boundary:-- 3.. The CITY or COUNTY, whichever jurisdiction originates the proposal, shall submit a formal request for amendment to the responding agency. 2. The formal request shall contain the following: a. A statement describing the amendment. b. A•statement of findings indicating why the proposed amendment is necessary. c. If the request is to amend the planning area boundary, a map which clearly indicates the proposed change and surrounding area. 3. Upon receipt of a request for amendment from the originating agency, the responding agency shall schedule a review of the request before the appropriate reviewing body, with said review to.be held within 45 days of the date the request is received. 4. The CITY and COUNTY shall make good faith efforts to resolve requests to amend this agreement. Upon completion of the review, the reviewing body may approve the request, deny the request, or make a . i page 10 determination that the proposed amendment warrants additional review. if it is determined that ;l additional review is necessary, the following procedures shall be followed by the CITY and COUNTY:- a. I. inconsistencies. noted by both parties cannot -be resolved In the-review process as outlined in Section IV (3), the -CITY and the COUNTY may agree to initiated a - joint study. Such a study shall commence within 90 days of the date it is determined that a proposed amendment creates an - inconsistency, and shall be•completed within 90 days of said date. Methodologies and procedures regulating the conduct of the joint study shall be mutually agreed upon by the CITY and the COUNTY prior to commencing the study. b. -Upon completion of the joint study, the study and , the recommendations drawn from it shall be included within the record of the review. -The agency considering the proposed amendment shall give careful consideration to the study prior to snaking a final decision. B. 'Prior to the commencement of Deriodic review for the City of Tigard and the County's'Urban Areas (April. 19891_, the CITY and the COUNTY shall mutually study the following topics: !J - 1.' The -feasibility of expanding the "active- planning' area" to include the -current "area of 'interest" and assigning land use planning responsibility to, the CITY. E 2. The'feasibility and cost-effectiveness of the CITY and- the COUNTY contracting to provide building inspection and plan review services, administer development codes and collect related-fees within the active planning area. Proposed revisions to this Agreement. shall be considered by the CITY and the COUNTY as soon as analysis of the above topics is complete, subject to the time constraint and other requirements of the COUNTY's land use ordinance hearings and adoption process. C. The parties will jointly review this Agreement every two (2) years, or more frequently if mutually needed, to evaluate the effectiveness of the processes set forth herein and to make any necessary amendments- The review process shall commence two (2) years from the date of execution and shall be completed within 60 days- Both J parties shall make a good faith effort to resolve any inconsistencies that may have developed since the previous review.' If, after completion of the-60 day review period inconsistencies still remain, either party may terminate this Agreement- FROM:PLNNG TO: 503 G84 7297 MAR 26. 1990 4:04PM 9622 P.02 WASHINGTON 01 COUNT Y, OREGON March 26,. 1990 Pat Riley, City Manager City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: Murray Boulevard Connection As we discussed last week, I have developed some additional back- ground information for you and the City Council on the establishment of the Murray Boulevard Connection. Following is a chronology of events as they relate to the County's Plans and the Urban Planning Area Agreements (UPAAs) between the County and the City: June 28. 1983 - Washington County Transportation Plan adopted, stating that the Murray Blvd. Connection from Old Scholls Ferry Road to-Gaarde Street should be a minor arterial or major collector. Aloha-Reedville-Cooper Mountain and Bull mountain community Plans also adopted, showing the proposed alignment for the Murray Boulevard Connection. June 28, 1983 - Washington County-Tigard UPAA adopted, includ- ing language stating that the need and location of the Murray Blvd. Connection was an unresolved issue, but that until the issue was resolved, the City and County agreed. to take no actions which would preclude alternative solutions.-' January 1. 1984 - Washington County-Tigard UPAA expired. March, 1984 - Tigard reviewed Park Place Planned Development. The proposed development contains a street design violating County major collector standards. County appeals approval of Park Place to City Council. bpri123 • „1904 - After lengthy discussions between the City of Tigard, and the County, the Tigard City Council adopted revisions to the Park Place project design which. addressed the county's concerns and preserved the integrity of a major collector Murray Blvd. Connection through the project. April 24.1984 - Board of County CommissionR.rs (BCC) adopts R&O 84-73 reactivating the UPAA which had expired. The R&O con- tained a process for resolving transportation issues and adopt- ed interim design guidelines for the Murray Blvd. Connection. l June 30. 1985 - UPAA expires again. Dapartment of Lend Use And IMnsportation. Administrotion 150 North First Avenue Hillsboro. Oregon 97124 Phone: 603/646.0761 FROM:PLNNG TO: 503 684 729? MAR 26. 1990 4:05PM !#622 P.03 l Murray Boulevard Extension March 26, 1990 Page 2 September 9.1986 - BCC enacts Ordinance 307 adopting a new UPAA with Tigard which-includes the following policies relat- ing to the Murray Blvd. Connection, and adopts the general alignment for the road from old Scholls Ferry Road to 135th Avenue: "...C. Special Policies... 4. The City of Tigard, City of Beaverton and Washing- ton County have agreed to the following stipula- tions regarding-the connection of Murray Boulevard from Old Schollso Ferry Road to the intersection of SW 121st Avenue and Gaarde Street: a. The City of Tigard, City of Beaverton and Wash- ington County agree to amend their respective comprehensive plans to reflect the following functional classification and design consider- ations: 1. resignation: Collector 2. Number of Travel Lanes: 2 (plus turn lanes at major intersections) 3. Bike Lanes: Yes 4. Right-of-Way: 60 feet (plus slope ease- ments where necessary) 5. Pavement Width: 40 foot minimum 6. Access: Limited 7. Design Speed: 35 M.P.H. 8. Minimum Turning Radius: .350 to 500 feet 9. Parking Facilities: None provided on street 10. Upon verification of need by traffic analysis, the connection may be planned to eventually accommodate additional lanes at the Murray/old Scholls Ferry and Murray/New Scholls Ferry intersections. i FROM:PLNNG TO: 503 684 729? MAR 26. 1990 4:05PM UG22 P.04 t Murray Boulevard Extension March 26, 1990 Page 3 11. The intersection of SW 135th Avenue and the Murray Boulevard connection will be de- signed with Murray Boulevard as a through street with 135th Avenue terminating at the Murray connection with a "T" intersection. 12. The general alignment of the Murray Boule- vard connection is illustrated in Exhibit B. (attached) b. Any changes to land use designations in the Murray Boulevard connection area shall be co- ordinated with all jurisdictions to assure that traffic impacts are adequately analyzed. c. The City of Tigard, City of Beaverton, and Washington County shall support improvements to the regional transportation system as outlined in the adopted Regional Transportation Plan r (RTP). d. Improvements to SW Gaarde Street between SW 121st Avenue and Pacific Highway 99W should occur coincident with the connection of Murray Boulevard from Walnut/135th Avenue to Gaarde Street. 9. The City of Tigard and Washington County, with involvement by affected property owners, shall jointly develop an alignment for the connection of Murray Boulevard between the 135th Avenue/ Walnut street and 121st Avenue/Gaarde Street intersections in 1986...." Optoue 251988 - BCC enacts Ordinances 332 & 333 adopting UPAA with Tigard including the same policies and design stan- dards as the 1986 UPAA. These Ordinances also adopted an updated Washington County Transportation Plan including the proposed Murray Blvd. Connection, the generalized alignment, and collector classification. The UPAAs note that Tigard, Beaverton and Washington county support the improvements in Metro's Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The { RTP includes the Murray Blvd. connection in the category of projects intended to improve local circulation and arterial operations. The section from old Scholls Ferry Road to 135th Ave. is considered a committed project in the RTP and in the region's Transportation FROM:PLNNG TO: 503 694 7297 MAR 26. 1990 4:06PM UG22 P.05 Murray Boulevard Extension March 26, 1990 Page 4 Model, because of the on-going development activity dedicating por- tions of the necessary Right-of-Way and constructing portions of this segment as needed to access their developing properties. The section from 135th Ave. to Gaarde Street is listed as a project recommended to be completed over the next 10 years, with the RTP further noting that the extension of Beef Bend Road from Scholls Ferry Road to Hwy. 99W in Sherwood, and widening and other improvements to Hwy. 217 should both be completed befgre the completion of the Murray Blvd. Connection. Beef Bend Road, Scholls Ferry Road, and Highways 217 and 99W are intended to serve as the needed arterial connections and access.in'the area. The Murray Blvd. Connection is envisioned to provide improvements to the local Tigard circulation system and is not intended to serve any broader transportation needs. The connection of Beef Bend Road to Elsner Road and Highway 99W is a project that the County is considering for project development. If the cities in southeast Washington county, including Tigard were to offer their support for this facility, Preliminary Engineering could be started for this project. The Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation study completed by City of Tigard staff, with assistance from Washington County and Metro staff, indicates that the majority of the traffic projected to use the Mur- ray Blvd. Connection is generated locally from the Bull Mountain/ Tigard area. A very small proportion of the traffic is expected to be through traffic to/from points north of old Scholls Ferry Road or to/from the area south and east of Highway 99W. More importantly, the Murray Blvd. Connection is predominantly a new road on a new alignment, and thus preserves the lower traffic volumes on existing streets and protects the neighborhood livability in the 135th Ave., Walnut St., and 121st Ave. areas. For example, only about 2$ of the traffic on Walnut Street is projected to be through traffic as defined above. The City°s HE Bull Mountain Transportation Study noted that the buildout of the Bull Mountain area will result in nearly 13,000 dwelling units housing over 29,000 residents within the study area. The recommendations developed by your staff reflect the need to accommodate that planned growth, to support that development with a system of collector streets, and to minimize impacts on existing neighborhoods. Your staff's conclusions beginning on page 29 of the Report and Recommendation note that elimination of the Murray Blvd. Connection would not reduce traffic volumes on Walnut or Gaarde Streets. Traffic would double on, 135th Avenue, which would serve as the alternate route to they Murray Blvd. Connection. In addition, traffic would be projected to increase substantially on 121st, North Dakota, Davies, Greenburg, and Scholls Ferry. FRCH:PLNNG T0: 503 684 7297 MAR 26. 1990 4:07PM 0622 P.06 l Murray Boulevard EXtension Parch 26, 1990 Page 5 In light of the foregoing discussion of the history and intent of the Murray Blvd. Connection, and the recent analysis by City, county, and Metro staff which support the retention of the Murray Blvd. Connection, I Would urge you-to recommend to your city Council that the Murray Blvd. Connection from old Scholls Ferry to 135th be retained as adcipted, and that the staff recommendations for the other minor collectors in the Bull Mountain study area and the alignment for the connection from Walnut to Gaarde be adopted. Again, I want to emphasize that the County agrees with the City and the Regional Transportation Plan, that the Murray Boulevard Connection to Gaarde Street should not be completed before necessary projects are its place to improve the capacity of Highway 217, and to provide the Cohnection of Beef Bend/Elsner Roads From Scholls Ferry to Highway 99Wi The County is willing to begin project development and Preliminary Engineering for Beef Bend/Elsner if Tigard and other cities in the area would support that project. Please don't hesitate to call me if you need any further information on the Murray Blvd. Connection, orif you wish to discuss the Beef Bend/Elsner Road ~i 1J t 044 ~ cif f ~rY r Bruce A. warner, P. S. Director Attachment cz Linda Davis, City of Beaverton FROM?PLNNG T0: 503 694 7297 MAR 26, 1990 4:07PM 4622 P.O? HURRAY BLVD. 'ONNEG T 'ON u GENERAL ALIGNMENT } ~ • Ao EXH1B1T 6 goo ,eae p UkDAN PLANNMG AREA AGREEW-W 002 691 501 60'4 10? 800 301 tOG 500 108 1o1 100 1100 l _ ~ 200 l i t 101 v T f~ 1301 1200 1302 1300 100 201 101 MURRAY CONtdECTION I I 6 recognizing that to achieve a total public comprehensive plans and state and ; service and facility package which is the regional policies and plans; recognizes most cost-effective may require less than financial constraints; and minimizes the ; optimum u.anciai commitments for one or environmental impacts of system a number of services or facilities. development, operations, and maintenance. Policy 2.6 Concurrent Funding - It shall Policy 3.1 Transportation be the polic of the region to seek the Coordination -Build on existing provision of a wide range of public mechanisms for coordinating transportation facilities and services concurrent with planning in the region by: - urban growth. However, the primary obstacle for providing a wide range of • identifying the role for local public facilities and services concurrent transportation system improvements with new urban development is financial. and relationship between local, Planning for concurrency, and requiring regional, and state transportation concurrency, is not enough. Developing system improvements in regional funding mechanisms is critical. An transportation plans; aggressive effort shall be made to seek funding mechanisms to achieve • clarifying institutional roles, concurrency. Two results are expected especially for plan implementation, with this effort: in local, regional, and state transportation plans; and • A formula which apportions responsibility for paying for public • including plans and policies for the facilities and services needed to inter-regional movement of people achieve concurrency among new and goods by rail, ship, barge, and development, existing development, air in regional transportation plans. the state, the region, cities, i counties, and special districts. Policy 3.2 Mobitity - In portions of the region outside of designated economic } • Tools and techniques to enable activity centers, adequate mobility will be each of the responsible parties to provided by: secure the funds necessary to meet the overall objective of • first, encouraging growth in areas concurrency. having transportation system capacity that meets regionally adopted mobility goals; OBJECTIVE 3. • second, actively working to meet TRANSPORTA- the mobility needs of those areas in TION ways that do not require new transportation system construction; A regional and transportation system shall be • third, as a last resort, expanding developed which the capacity of existing systems or provides adequate developing new transportation levels of mobility consistent with local system infrastructure. l t Draft Regional Urban Goals and Objectives Metro Folicy 3.3 System Priorities - In neighborhood streets which results developing new regional transportation from congestion on adjacent system infrastructure, the highest priority facilities. will be meeting the mobility needs of designated economic activity imentPrs ® minin'negative ■•vbsu.~. impacts or, Such needs, associated with ensuring parks, public open space, wetlands, access to jobs, housing, and shopping and negative effects on within and among those centers, will be communities and neighborhoods assessed and met through a combination of arising from noise, visual impacts, intensifying land uses and increasing and physical segmentation. transportation system capacity so as to minimize negative impacts on Policy 3.7 Transportation Balance - environmental quality, urban form, and Planning for increased use of transit shall urban design. address a broad range of requirements for making transit competitive with the private automobile. Policy 3.4 Barriers - Structural barriers to mobility for transportation disadvantaged populations will be assessed in the current and planned regional transportation system and will be OBJECTIVE 4. addressed through a comprehensive ECONOMIC program of transportation and non- OPPORTUNITY transportation system based actions. Public policy shall Policy 3.5 Transport of Goods - The encourage the needs for movement of goods via trucks, development of a rail, and barge will he assessed and diverse and addressed through a coordinated program sufficient supply of transportation system improvements and of jobs, especially family wage jobs, in actions to affect the location of trip economic activity centers and other generating activities. appropriate locations throughout the region; and, seek the full utilization of the Policy 3.6 Environmental labor force in the region through ongoing Considerations The regional efforts to provide education and training transportation system shall be planned.to: linked to the needs of present and i minimize, as much as practical, the prospective employers. region's transportation-related energy consumption through Policy 4.1 Economic Coordination - improved auto efficiencies and Enhance coordination among economic increased use of transit, carpools, development groups by: vanpools, bicycles and walking; 0 completing and maintaining a • maintain the region's air quality regional and subregional economic (see clean air objective); analysis, identifying specific impediments to and opportunities • remove through-traffic from for the retention, recruitment, and Draft Regional Urban Goals and Objectives Metro f COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM .3. d l MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Patrick J. Reilly, City Administrator DATE: January 31, 1991 SUBJECT: COUNCIL CALENDAR, February - April 191 Official Council meetings are marked with an asterisk If generally OK, we can proceed and make specific adjustments in the Monthly Council Calendars. February 191 *12 Tue Council Business Agenda (5:30/7:30) 18 Mon President's Day - City Offices Closed *19 Tue Council Business Agenda (5:30/6:30) 20 Wed Eggs & Issues - (7:30 a.m.) - Elmers *26 Tue Joint Council/School Board Meeting (6:30/7:00) March 191 8-9 Fri/ Sat Council Goal Setting Workshop Friday: 6:00 - 9:00 p.m. Saturday: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon *12 Tue Council Business Agenda'(6:30/7:30) 18-22 Mon- Fri School Spring Vacation Week *19 Tue Council Study Agenda (6:30) 20 Wed Eggs & Issues - (7:30 a.m.) - Elmers *26 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) April '91 * 9 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) *16 Tue Council Study Agenda (6:30) 17 Wed Eggs & Issues - (7:30 a.m.) - Elmers *23 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) cccal l Council Calendar - Page 1 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3,~ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA OF: Februarv 12, 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: Jan. 23, 1991 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Approval of PREVIOUS ACTION: Council review at consultant contracts for Street Bo Jan. 22 studv session projects PREPARED BY: City Enaineer DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLIC ISSUE Approval of consultant contracts. INFORMATION SUMMARY At the Januarv 22 study session, the Council reviewed the attached memo requesting approval of consultant contracts on three Street Bond projects, and informally authorized staff to proceed. Formal Local Contract Review Board approval is now requested to ratify the previous informal decision. t, ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the contracts in accordance with the attached memo. 2. Direct that work be stopped on the contracts. FISCAL IMPACT All costs are covered by the budget for the Street Bond projects. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve the consultant contracts in accordance with the attached memo and authorize the City Administrator to sign the contracts. rw/lcrb MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Pat Reilly January 17, 1991 FROM: Randy Wooley pl__~ SUBJECT: Consultant Contract Major Streets Bond Projects We are preparing contracts for three consultant contracts needed to complete the Street Bond projects. The contracts require Local Contract Review Board approval. Cancellation of the January 29 Council meeting could create some unexpected delays. To avoid delays to the projects, I request informal approval at this time. We would then request formal LCRB ratification on the February 12th agenda. All contracts are on a time-and-materials basis; the work could be stopped at any time if LCRB concerns are raised. 1. Professional design and construction management services are required for the 69th Avenue/99W Project. We are recommending Mackenzie Engineering, Inc., as their skills are best suited for this intersection realignment project. They are specialized in intersection analysis and are familiar with ODOT and the City requirements. Their proposed fee not to exceed $21,100 is appropriate and is within the proposed project budget. 2. Professional right-of-way negotiation/acquisition services are required for the Bonita Road project. We are recommending a contract with Right-of-Way Associates as they have performed similar services on all our previous bond projects. Their services have been adequate and they are familiar with our procedures. Their proposed fee not to exceed $17,000 is appropriate and is within the proposed project budget. 3. Professional right-of-way negotiation/acquisition services are required for the Gaarde Street project. We are recommending a contract with Right-of-Way Associates as they have performed similar services on all our previous bond projects. Their services have been adequate and they are familiar with our procedures. They have proposed NTE fees ranging from $10,000 to $24,000, depending upon the alternate chosen for construction, which are appropriate and are within the proposed project budget. The fee limit will be tied to the alternative eventually chosen by the City. Usually, the right-of-way work does not begin until after an alignment has been chosen and final design is nearing completion. However, in the Gaarde project, right-of-way costs are a major share of the total project cost and will play a role in selection of the final design alternative. Available design alternatives will affect which properties need to be acquired. Therefore, on this project, we want to include preliminary right-of-way appraisal work as part of preliminary design. Preliminary design work is under way and we have scheduled the first meeting with property owners for January 31. Following completion of preliminary design work, including meetings with property owners and evaluation of right-of-way costs, we would expect to discuss selection of the final design alternative with Council. j t Council authorization will be required before we begin actual right-of-way f acquisition. rw/m-rw-cc CO[INCIL AGENDA ITEM 3A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF:_2/12/91 DATE SUBMITTED: 2/1/91 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Oak Tree Apts. PREVIOUS ACTION: None easement dedication and partial reenwa conveyance ' PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY: 4-77r-7 - POLICY ISSUE Should the City grant private storm and sanitary sewer easements within a dedicated greenway? Should the City transfer a portion of a greenway back to the original property owner? INFORMATION SUMMARY In 1989, the Director approved a Site Development Review application to construct a 94 unit apartment complex (Oak Tree Apartments, SDR 88-26) subject to conditions. One condition required the dedication of the ravine area located in the southern portion of the property. The complex has been completed and the ravine area was dedicated to the City. Following a survey of the project, it was discovered that one building in the complex does not meet City setback standards due to the greenway dedication. Also, private storm and sanitary sewer lines are located within the greenway area without easements being retained to give the apartment complex owner the legal right to maintain these lines on City property. To correct these deficiencies, the property owner has applied for a lot line adjustment to transfer a small portion of the greenway back to the apartment complex (MIS 91-02) and has prepared easement documents for the sewer lines which have been approved by the City Attorney and Engineering staff. A copy of the lot line adjustment decision and resolutions for approval of 1) the property transfer and 2) the granting of the necessary easements are attached. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the two attached resolutions 2. Modify and approve the attached resolutions 3. Deny the request and direct staff to prepare corresponding resolutions K FISCAL IMPACT The dedication of the easements will act to clarify that the maintenance responsibility of the utility lines belongs to the apartment complex owner. ' SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the two attached resolutions MIS91-02.SUM/kl NE 1/4 NE 1/4 SECTIOI I WASHINGTON CC SCALE r Sao -Vu AK t T DUR HA f ICR.429-40' WIDTH) - n 115.45 l l 686.40) 90.43283 REM 800 700 I 1.82Ac. 2.58 Ac. I n r 2.5 ~~6 0 r► 1° w m I 1 r N 344.35 0 1000 c .79 AC. 1100 1 4 • .63 AC. ~ \t ~J J 900 Ac. 1200 2.20 AC. z c. (JOI.AT SON 6~7 L.O'C ~.I b to A,%I US AOT L' LAVOa 90 33A c. GREENWAY EE MAP 11 - 344.35 olmmm= S I 15 A •9 84.69 61' 60' S2 50' 1 a 5100 5000 4900 0 4800 4700 4600 v 440d15 o n 1 r 8 BAOC. 7 2 6 / 2 r5 0_ 4 a c I15.07 e^ 8 J r, 3 N a 4500 a 5200 0. 4s' 38.20 z e 2 6p 9O 3.33 234 to 9ri TRACT 9 3741 50' 98.12 `OPEN SPACE" ao Ip C H A •e ^ R+125 q` o- g ,y a U 5300 LANE -0 o, yea e• Jp, 24.1 36 R•z7 g in \ • ~6?aenn cnnn 46.30 V _ _ COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 4 _ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON _ COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF : Februa-c' 12, 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: December 11 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Appeal of Subdivision PREVIOUS ACTION: H.O hrq. on 9/28/90; Approval SUB 90-0010 (Castile) On appeal, Council continued hrq. for further staff analysis. PREPARED BY: Jerry Offe Asst. Planner DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK i REQUESTED BY: Ed Mu h Comm. Dev. Dir. OLICY ISSUE Should the City Council overturn or modify the land use hearings officer approval for a six lot subdivision located at 14380 SW 97th Avenue? At issue is Comprehensive Plan policy 8. 1.1 which requires the City to plan for a safe and efficient street system. The approved subdivision would provide for a dead end private street in an area where there is an apparent need for a public street connection between SW 97th Avenue and a developed area to the east. Also at issue is the proposal's compliance with Plan Policies 7.1.1 and 7.2.1 which require that new developments be provided with drainage to an adequate public storm sewer system or alternatively for all storm drainage from the development to be handled on-site with no adverse off-site impacts. The approved subdivision would provide for an on-site storm drainage diffusion trench instead of the storm drainage being directed to a public storm sewer or a natural drainageway. Should the Council overturn the decision because other development options for the property and neighboring properties may provide for a street and utility network that would better serve public interests? INFORMATION SUMMARY The land use hearings officer approved, subject to conditions, a request for Subdivision approval for Jim and Audrey Castile's proposed six lot subdivision. NPO #6 appealed the geptember 10, 1990 decision citing concerns related to sanitary sewers, storm drainage, treet location, allowance of a private street, and a general concern with regard to the pattern of development in the area east of SW 97th Avenue and north of Twality Junior High School. The Council reviewed the hearings officer's decision in a public hearing on November 5, 1990. The applicants, engineer submitted a revised preliminary subdivision plat in response to the hearings officer's decision's conditions of approval related to lot sizes and dimensions. The Council continued the hearing until December 17, 1990 and requested that the staff prepare responses to the following: 1. Does the revised plat satisfy minimum lot size and dimensional requirements? 2. Will the proposed stormwater @iffusion trench provide for adequate disposal of storm drainage from the proposed subdivision and private street? The applicants' engineer was to provide staff with further information on the diffusion trench. 3. Will the proposed private road preclude or severely limit opportunities for a needed public street connection between SW 97th Avenue, and a developed neighborhood to the east? Are there better development options for this entire area than the options that would remain if the subdivision is developed as proposed? Staff finds that the six lots as shown on the revised preliminary plat satisfy the 7,500 square foot minimum lot size of the R-4.5 zone. It appears, however, that the proposed lot line between proposed lots 1 and 2 will continue to create a rear yard setback violation for the house on lot 1. It appears, however , that this lot line can be modified in order to comply with the setback requirement without negatively affecting the size of the lots. such adjustments are typically allowed to be made between the approval of a preliminary plat and the submittal and recording of a final plat. The attached memorandums address the second and third questions. In addition, the applicant '-as submitted two maps showing how the two parcels to the north could be developed if the abject property is developed as currently proposed. Those maps are also attached to the Second memorandum. Staff has reviewed the area development options for buildability with respect to Community 'evelopment Code' requirements. All options appear feasible within the Code's constraints c_lthough some somewhat unusual lot configurations may result under some of the options. Wide, shallow lots would be formed for all of the lots on the parcel just north of the appi:.aaTat' S parcel, map c---- a.csi under tale Cc^.~.t ile m'^O^ One O^t i n*1z All other options also would result in a wide, shallow lot in the southeastern corner of this parcel unless the parcel is developed in conjunction with the Castile parcel. Without a full development plan, it is not possible to determine whether the staff generated options would necessitate flag lot creation. Flag lots are generally discouraged in the subdivision process. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Y Y M 1. Affirm the hearings officer's September 10, 1990 decision. Direct staff to prepare a final order. 2. Approve the proposed subdivision subject to a modification to the hearings officer's decision requiring that the subdivision be connected to an existing public storm sewer of adequate capacity or through development of a storm sewer outfalling to the natural drainageway near McDonald Street north of the site. 3. Deny the application and direct staff to prepare a corresponding final order. FISCAL IMPACT None. SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the proposed subdivision subject to a modification to the hearings officer's decision requiring that the subdivision be connected to an existing public storm sewer of adequate capacity or through development of a storm sewer outfalling to the natural drainageway near McDonald Street north of the site. Direct staff to prepare a final order. JO:CCSUM.zc MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Planning staff FROM: Randy Wooley, City Engineer DATE: December 11, 1990 SUBJECT: Proposed Castile Subdivision, SUB 90-10 As directed by Council, we have reviewed options for future development of the area bounded by McDonald Street, 93rd Avenue, Inez Street, and 97th Avenue. Several conceptual plans were prepared by the staff and by the applicant. The options are shown and briefly discussed in the attached memo from Greg Berry. Street System Each of the options calls for extension of Mountain View Lane to provide a connection between 93rd and 97th. Another recently submitted subdivision proposal would, if approved, construct most of the extension of Mountain View t Lane. It seems both likely and appropriate that the Mountain View extension will eventually be completed as further development occurs. In addition, all of the options would extend View Terrace to connect either to Mountain View Lane or to 97th Avenue. All of the options appear to provide adequate traffic circulation and adequate emergency access to the neighborhood. Our joint (Planning and Engineering) review of these conceptual options indicates that buildable lots can be developed, in compliance with the Community Development Code, on the properties to the north of Castile under each of the options. Therefore, we conclude that a workable street system can be developed for the area under the Castile proposal or under any of the other options. Traffic As a "worst case" prediction of traffic, we assumed that Mountain View would be the only connection street between 93rd and 97th. In addition, we assumed that all of the traffic to and from the study area would use 97th as the primary access route, except for lots with direct access to McDonald. On this "worst case" basis, we estimate that the average weekday traffic on mountain View would be approximately 750 vehicles per day near its intersection with 97th. Because it is likely that a portion of the trips to the study area will actually use 93rd, rather than 97th, the actual traffic on Mountain View would C likely be under 500 vehicles per day. If other street connections to 97th are provided, the traffic on Mountain View would be even lower. r The Comprehensive Plan (p. I-224) suggests that traffic on local streets should be under 1,500 vehicles per day. Under any of the concepts, traffic on the local streets can be expected to remain well within the Comprehensive Plan guidelines. Storm Drainage The study area all drains to a natural drainageway near McDonald Street. There are currently storm drain pipes in View Terrace and in Mountain View Lane, but they are not adequate to carry future flows from the entire study area. At least a portion of the area will need to be served by a new storm drain pipe, as shown on the conceptual plan. Because there is currently no adequate storm drain pipe at the Castile Subdivision, the applicant proposes to install a temporary system until a public storm drain system is available. The temporary system would discharge to a diffusion trench, intended to spread the storm runoff over a 40-foot wide area before discharging onto the properties to the north. When the parcel to the north develops, the diffusion trench would be abandoned and the storm lines in the Castile Subdivision would be connected to the public storm drain system. The applicant's engineer has provided calculations for the flow in a design storm. The design storm is a 25-year storm (i.e., a storm intensity having a 4% probability of occurring in any given year). The calculations indicate that the design storm would cause the water to flow from the diffusion trench at a depth of approximately 3/4 inch over an area approximately 40 feet wide. By spreading the flow over such a wide area, the velocity of the flow would be low, so that erosion would probably not be a problem. However, discharge of such a volume of water onto adjoining properties could result in other damages to the properties. Therefore, if the subdivision is approved, we recommend that the diffusion trench not be allowed. Based on the additional information presented, we recommend that the subdivision's storm drain system be connected to an existing public storm drain of adequate capacity or' to the natural drainageway near McDonald Street. Sanitary Sewer The subdivision proposal calls for the sanitary sewer to be constructed through the back yard of the property to the east. This alignment can be constructed to work adequately. However, a superior alignment would be one that went north from the subdivision, then along the future extension of View Terrace. Easements Mr. Castile indicates that he has been unable to negotiate utility easements across the property to the north. In order to extend storm and sanitary sewer lines as recommended above, such easements will be necessary. Although rare, the City has in the past used its power of condemnation to provide a street access to a proposed development: in order to assure that development occurred with a safe and efficient street system. Similarly, the City Council could authorize condemnation to provide extensions of the utilities in an orderly manner to serve development in this area. The utilities could then be constructed by Castile as part of the subdivision development. Alternatively, the City could build the storm sewer as a City project; creation of a reimbursement district, as provided in TMC 13.08, could provide for the various property owners to pay their share of the storm drain costs as they develop their properties. The other options would be to require that the subdivision development be deferred until the applicant can negotiate the needed easements or until the property to the north is developed, or to approve the temporary systems proposed in the applications. rw/castile .i MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Randy Wooley December 11, 1990 FROM: Greg Berry pa SUBJECT: SUB 90-10 Castile As requested, I have prepared several options for developing the parcel of this application as well as the area to the north as shown on, the attached maps. Advantages and disadvantages are summarized below. OPTION S1 This option provides for the connection of SW Mountain View Lane to SW View Terrace and a connection to SW 97th Avenue while eliminating the need for a private drive to SW 97th Avenue. Four lots south of S.W. Mountain View Lane would continue to access directly to S.W. 97th Avenue. The subdivision is provided with access to S.W. 97th Avenue by a single local street of adequate capacity for the expected volume of traffic. SW 97th Avenue is a major collector street so direct access from individual lots should be minimized. This is accomplished by providing access to the Castile Subdivision by a public street rather than a private drive that only serves the lots within the subdivision. Moreover, elimination of the private drive will relieve the owners of the subdivision of maintenance responsibilities as well as eliminate the need for an undesirable roadway along the back lot lines of the subdivision to the south. This option also has the advantage of confining the storm and sanitary sewer to public right-of-ways. However, construction of the proposed subdivision would require obtaining sufficient right- of--way from the parcel to the north to provide for a connection to SW View Terrace. The applicant has stated that the owner of this parcel is not interested in participating in development. The sanitary sewer could be extended within the proposed right-of- way to the existing line in SW View Terrace. However, the storm drain would have to terminate with a device similar to the one proposed in the subdivision application until the storm drain line could be extended north to the creek along SW McDonald Street. OPTION S2 This option would permit the construction of the Castile subdivision without acquiring additional right-of-way or cuff-site ENGINEERING COMMENTS: SUB 90-10 CASTILE PAGE 1 improvements. This option includes the private drive along. the back lot lines of the subdivision to the south and the temporary storm drain outfall that has been proposed by the applicant. The applicant has proposed ::o temporarily terminate the storm drain with a diffusion trench. This trench would be abandoned once the public line could be extended north. The applicant has submitted calculations showing that there is less than a four percent chance in any year that the depth of flow from the trench would exceed 3/4 of an inch. The expected velocity of the water flowing out of the trench is 0.6 feet per second which is well below the velocities that would be expected to cause erosion. OPTION S3 This option would eliminate the need for the private drive by constructing a public street along the northern edge of the subdivision parcel. However, this would require razing a house as well as acquiring additional right-of-way from the parcel to the north as with option S1. Acquisition of additional right-of-way could be delayed by only constructing the portion of the proposed street that is within the subdivision and providing a temporary turnaround. However, the storm and sanitary sewer would have to be constructed as in option 2 since there would not be rights-of-way available for their extension. Unless the City Council is willing to require the developer to obtain easements for extension of these utilities or unless the Council was willing to use eminent domain to condemn the necessary right-of-way and easements. APPLICANT'S SUBMITTAL In addition to the staff generated plans, the applicant has submitted two area development plans. Both plans assume development of Castile Park subdivision as proposed. CASTILE ONE This option would provide for both SW Mountainview and SW View Terrace to be extended roughly east-west with no connection between the areas to be developed. The advantage to this approach is that all of the underdeveloped parcels along SW 97th can develop independently. In addition, the number of roadways would result in good access to the developed area to the east and traffic would be distributed amongst these streets. Also, no lots would need to have direct access to SW 97th Avenue. Disadvantages to this approach include the long east-west blocks that would be formed with poor north-south access and the number of intersection on SW 97th Avenue. In addition, the extension of SW View Terrace would necessitate the removal of the existing house on the parcel that extends from the existing terminus of the street to S.W. 97th Avenue. Wide, shallow lots along this road would result ENGINEERING COMMENTS: SUB 90-10 CASTILE PAGE 2 if the parcel is developed by itself. If this parcel and-the parcel to the north are developed together, the road could be shifted northward; lots on both side of the street could be deeper than shown, and the existing house could possibly be spared. CASTILE TWO This option is similar to staff option S2 except that the road connecting SW View Terrace to SW Mountainview lane is further to the west. The same advantages and disadvantages listed for S2 exist. In addition, the location of the SW View Terrace extension may necessitate back lot line sanitary and storm sewer lines for parcels on the east side of the road due to the eastward slope. An additional advantage of this option would be that no individual lots would need direct access to SW 97th Avenue other than the lot containing the existing house just north of the proposed subdivision. dj/GB:s90-10.GNB ENGINEERING COMMENTS: SUB 90-10 CASTILE PAGE 3 a ~k Q FAR ~P ~.~E 3 51414 F L14 0000000 r ~ ;1 ` 'n~LiBNrr►OUN1AtNVlE~ •24~.f 250 VIEW t ik, r r i 16'4 y. ~y i tx i . • Y Ir~.d~:,• IVATE RIVE a \ now ' yc.t. .i:_ye;t:33 {:Y:i:'`•^a^::~~°i~' ~ N~..r; rrpn•. rr 7 1~,=~... 1 250 Y',' ~ ~ I ~r 1 I ~ O P }}v~v/r'~' "•i~~{{{{ . ' • ~e x ...fir o~ I )fir •irw;• I ~ ®261.3 + VICW ' . 64•8 t%•'3'~. 1 4 ~ 3 ruiu • ` ~ ; 1 rx ~aa u iro t I N Vii. y; • ~ r, i 97 NATE RIVE a 1 >t ~?a¢ h c~` ,A ;BLS _ ~ ~(YQ,(y)'• • ~ ~ • • f l X a S.W. 'INEZ SUB t4ovroaSs C. c, COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November Z, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: October 24,1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: A eat of Subdivisi n PREVIOUS ACTION: Hearings Officer Approval SUB 0-0010 Castile hearing on August 28, 1990 PREPARED BY: Jerr Offe • sst. Planner DEPT HEAD OK ` CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POL CY ISSUE Should the City Council overturn or modify the land use hearings officer approval of a six lot subdivision located at 14380 SW 97th Avenue? INFORMATION SUMMARY The land use hearings officer approved, subject to conditions, a request for Subdivision approval for Jinn Castile's proposed six lot subdivision. NPO #6 appealed the September 10, 1990 decision citing concerns related to sanitary sewers, storm drainage, street location, allowance of a private street, and a general concern with regard to the pattern of development in the area east of SW 97th Avenue and north of Twality Junior High School. A memo is attached describing the application, the NPO's concerns, and staff's response to those concerns. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Affirm the hearings officer's September 10, 1990 decision as is. 2. Affirm the hearings officer's decision and mc'3ify condition. of approval #15 to add the following: Furthermore, the applicant shall submit design criteria, calculations and other information showing that the proposed storm drainage outfall will not result in standing water, erosion, or other injury to the land and is otherwise a legal discharge. Direct staff to prepare a revised final order including the above modification. 3. Deny the application and direct staff to prepare a corresponding final order. FISCAL IMPACT None. SUGGESTED ACTION Affirm the hearings officer's decision with the modification described above. Direct staff to prepare a modified final order. MEIMOR-ANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Ed Murphy, Director, Community Development DATE: October 24, 1990 SUBJECT: Appeal of the Hearings Officer Decision Subdivisic SUB 90-0010 (Castile/McMonagle) SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant requested preliminary plat approval to subdivide one parcel of approximately 1.45 acres into 6 parcels ranging from 7,500 to 10,800 square feet in size. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONING DESIGNATION: R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) LOCATION: 14380 SW 97th Avenue - East side of SW 97th Avenue north of Butler Terrace Subdivision and Twality Junior High School (WCTM 2S1 11BA, Tax Lot 1301). APPLICANT: Jim Castile, represented by Harris/McMonagle & Associates CONTRACT OWNER: Jim Castile HEARINGS OFFICER'S DECISION: Approval, essentially as proposed, subject to conditions. Decision issued September 10, 1990. APPELLANT: Neighborhood Planning Organization NPO #6 PRIMARY CONCERNS: - Adequacy of sanitary sewer system. - Adequacy of privately owned storm drainage diffusion trench; failure to direct storm drainage to public storm sewer. - Private street location; private street rather than public street. - Lot configurations and piecemeal development of area. 1 STAFF RESPONSE TO CONCERNS: Staff is uncertain as to the nature of the HPO's concern related to sanitary sewers. The subdivision plan calls for the a public- sanitary sewer extension from an existing sanitary sewer in SW View Terrace to the east. The capacities of this existing sewer, downstream lines, and the Unified Sewerage Agency Durham Road Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant appear adequate to handle additional sanitary sewage from the proposed development. .1-mo La Cicy Council October 23, 1990 i Page 2 The Engineering Department has reconsidered the department's recommendation regarding the adequacy of the proposed storm drainage diffusion trench along with NPO's concern related to the storm drain not being directed to a public storm sewer. The proposed diffusion trench is being considered since typical development of the downstream parcel (i.e., to the north) could include the extension of the proposed line and abandonment of the proposed temporary diffusion trench. The Engineering Department will review a detailed construction plan and other information required of the applicant by the recommended conditions of approval to determine if the storm sewer meets City standards. To ensure that the storm sewer meets City standards, the following could be added to Condition 1S: Furthermore, the applicant shall submit design criteria, calculations and other information showing that the proposed storm drainage outfall will not result in standing water, erosion, or other injury to the land and is otherwise a legal discharge. The Engineering and Community Development Departments generally share the concern of the NPO that streets within subdivisions should be public streets as well as the concern that the proposed development will continue a pattern of piecemeal development of this area. Nevertheless, the applicant has satisfied the applicable subdivision approval requirements of the community Development Code and Comprehensive Plan related to.access to the proposed parcels, even if it might have been preferable from the standpoint,of the NPO and City to have the proposed lots front on a public street. Specifically, Code section 18.108.070 permits private residential access drives serving six or less lots. , The City could deny creation of the private street if the City found it essential to have a public street in order to provide a needed connection of streets or if it was necessary for a public street to be" developed in order to provide access to another parcel. Neither of these conditions exist in this situation because SW View Terrace and SW 97th Avenue abut the adjacent under-developed parcel to the north, thereby providing both the necessary access as well as the opportunity for a future connection between these roads. In addition, as the staff report points out on page 11, the applicant's intent to keep the existing house on this property- makes it difficult to divide this property without locating a street along its southern edge. It would be difficult to create a C logical and efficient lot pattern from this parcel with a street along this parcel's southern edge curving northward to connect with SW View Terrace. If the applicant should reconsider his intent to keep the existing house on the subject parcel; staff would strongly recommend that the applicant consider a new plan that would extend a public street across the majority of the northern boundary of the parcel intended to connect with SW View Terrace. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON APPEAL: Uphold the Hearings officer's decision, with the addition of the above stated addition to condition of approval 15. ATTACHED MATERIALS: Vicinity Map. Appeal form filed by NPO #6 on September 20, 1990. Minutes of September 19, 1990 NPO #6 meeting. Hearings officer's decision dated September 10, 1990. Staff report to the Hearings Officer. Preliminary plat for proposed Castile Park subdivision. NPO #6 August 15, 1990 meeting comments on the proposed subdivision. w br/JO:Castile.Mem t. t _ C) / Om Q 3 S.W. 0i a S ELR SE ST ELROSE CT JANZE v a- ui C Y. > ao- m a S, W. 3 ~ VIEW L MO NTAIN e. v M S W. 3 w ` N Q' VIEW TERR w 'IEW TERR 3 Q ~r ~ I 3 a ST. S.W_ INEZ vi o► S. w FIN~BRO- PEMBROOK ST TWALITY a CT. JUNIOR 'a 3 HIGH S.W. w PINEBROOK c ST. SCHOOL. - VITY CINe P 'LAND USE DEC SIO APPEAL FILING FORM The City o Ti and supports the citizen's right- to i ticipate in ocal government. T'igard's Land Use i ~e t-heref-.re sets out specific requirements for .'iling appea s o certain lanai use decisions. CITY OF ~'/_"'~7.H/,®~ The followin , in has been developed to assist- you in i~l~ filing an appeal of a land use aecisior. i 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. L 'l 1. APPLICATION BEING APPEALED:Z/ 2. NOW DO YOU QUALIFY AS A PARTY: a/PO~ (~~(CGl[ 3. SPECIFIC GROUNDS FOR APPEAL OR REVIEW: AIJ00 ~'(v ll~lJ~Lt~i f 'A 4. SCHEDULE DATE DECISION IS TO BE FINAL: -Q<O 3= ~O ~/Yf 5. DATE NO FINAL DECISIONS GIVEN: 6. SIGNATU (S): FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Re eived By': Date:Time:f~~• UQ•,,~. gym, Approved As To Form Date: QTime: ~0.00a Denied As To Form By: Date: Time: ,ceipt No. Amount: A (P K 1E K K K )ciF 3(~Y(Y~(~f )EYE ~ !(IHHE~E Y-H(~E)()E)(~E)(1E~E)E # Kit N 9E )EX~E IHE R 1E1HHE 1E c;c ;~:.~(Xi( )(iEx R 3E iE 1Hf AL 7,f1 l.c CIX &I" G-t A/ ()18 lG 0 6auma ~r►1 n~ 13125 SW Hall Nvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 NPO #6 MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 19, 1990 1. Members in attendance were: Carver, Crow, Davenport, Kasson, and Mitchell. Excused: Dillin, Clinton and Pasteris. 2. Minutes of the August 15, 1990 meeting approved as written. 3. TRIAD SDR 90-0004/PDR 90-0002 After a lengthy discussion between NPO members and guests: Bruce and Jan Law, Greg Law, Peter and Dorothy Adamski, Betty Peck, Jane Miller and Richard and Judy Watson the following motion was made: NPO #6 appeals the decision made by Planning Commission on TRIAD DEVELOPMENT SDR 90-0004/ PDR 90-0002 based on the following issues: 1) Opening the North end of 109th; 2) Excessive traffic on a local street; 3) Grade variance; 4) Restrictions to access of local driveways (both private and business); 5) Limited access to Durham Road due to "first option" intersection; 6) property is zoned R-25 and should have direct access to a major arterial; and 7) No consideration given to the Potential development of the properties to the east of 109th and the consequences of the increased traffic flow through the existing neighborhoods East of these properties. This motion passed unanimously. 4. Lot Line Adjustment MIS 90-0015 Royal Oaks/Beacon Homes. This adjustment was requested in order to place a sidewalk on the west side of a private drive instead of the east as originally planned. NPO members reviewed the request and found no objections with it. 4.] OTHER BUSINESS: Stephanie Mitchell updated the NPO members on the status of the Q Castile/McMonagle Subdivision Sub 90-0010. After discussing the ° Hearings officer's findings and learning of the surrounding neighbors' concerns the following motion was made: NPO #6 appeals the approval with conditions made by Tigard Hearings Officer on the above referenced application based on the many concerns of the local residents including the sewer and storm drainage system, OD the private street and the lot configurations. s / This motion pass unanimously. C 5. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 PM. 3 BEFORE TIME LAND USE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Regarding an application by Jim Castile for approval of ) FINAL ORDER a preliminary plat for a 6-lot subdivision in the R-4.5 ) zone for land adjoining " c sr 97µa A A........Vc auv.~sou►sh o of SUB 90-00:10 ) McDonald Street in the City of Tigard, Oregon ) (Castile Park) 1. SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide a 1.45-acre parcel into 6 lots ranging from 6,811 to 10,800 square feet. The applicant proposes to construct a private drive along the south edge of the site to serve the lots. In addition the applicant will improve SW 97th Avenue adjoining the site. An interim on-site storm water retention facility is proposed until adjoining land to the north is developed and a storm sewer is extended to the site. Staff recommended conditional approval. In the staff report, the staff recommended that the preliminary plat be limited to 5 lots to comply with minimum lot area requirements. At the hearing, the applicant argued and the staff agreed that the proposed 6-lot plat could be approved consistent with minimum lot area requirements. Five area residents testified. Four expressed objections and concerns regarding the minimum lot size, the need for an east-west through street in the area, setbacks and buffers, tree removal, storm drainage, and detrimental impacts on area schools. One neighbor testified in support of the proposal. LOCATION: Adjoining the east side of SW 97th Avenue, about 200 feet south of McDonald Street, WCTM 2SI I IBA, Tax Lot 1301 APPLICANT: Tim Castile represented by Harris-McMonagle & Associates PROPERTY OWNER: Fun Castile SITE AREA: About 1.45 acres APPLICABLE LAW: Community Development Code Ch. 1850, 18.92, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160, and 18.164 and Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4, 8.1.1, and 8.1.3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conditionally approve EXAMINER'S DECISION: Conditionally approved H. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE AND SURROUNDINGS A. Site size and shape : The site is a rectangular parcel about 124 feet north-south and 505 feet east-west and contains about I A5 acres. B. Site location : { The site adjoins the east side of SW 97th Avenue feet south of McDonald Street and about 180 feet north of Twality Junior High School. Page I - Hearings Offir.•er decision g SUB 90.0010 (Castile Park) ( C. Existing roses and structures : There is a dwelling, garage and associated storage shed on the western portion of die site. A gravel driveway leads from SW 97th Avenue to the garage. D. Proposed uses and structures : 1. The applicant proposes to divide the site into six lots. a. Lot 1 will contain about 10,600 square feet and the existing house. It has a lot width of about 94 feet. The existing garage and shed are proposed for removal. The preliminary plat notes a new garage will be built to serve the existing home. If the existing shed is removed from the north side of the house, the house will be setback about 15 feet from the north property line. b. Lots 2 through 6 will contain about 7500 square feet and a minimum lot width of about 67 feet. 2. The applicant will build a private drive within a 30-foot easement along the south edge of the site from 97th Avenue either to the west edge of lot 5 or 6, depending on how the lot area is computed. A turn-around is proposed at the east end of the easement As shown on the preliminary plat, the turn-around would extend onto lot 6; however, to comply with minimum lot area requirements for that lot, the turn-around will have to be moved west, because land within a road easement is not counted toward lot area. The drive will consist of 24 feet of pavement between curbs. A 5-foot gg concrete sidewalk will be built on the north side the curb. About 2-1/2 feet of the Cl - sidewalk will be situated within a 10-foot wide easement on the north side of the private clove easement The sidewalk may terminate at the point where the drive serves only two lots, consistent with CDC 18.108.070. If die sidewalk continues east of that point, City staff recommends the area of the sidewalk be included in the lot area for the lots it crosses. The remainder of the 10-foot easement will be used for utilities. The drive within the easement will be setback about 2-1/2 feet from the south property line, and the applicant will landscape that setback and install a fence at the south edge of the site to the extent a fence does not exist between the site and land to the south. A fire hydrant will be situated within the private drive or utility easements. 3. The applicant also will build a storm water drainage system. See finding II.F. E. Existing and proposed vegetation There are several fir trees and assorted deciduous trees and other landscaping materials on the western third of the site and along the east edge of the site. The remainder of the site is mostly open and grass covered. The proposed development's private street, utilities, and residences will require the removal of a significant number of trees. The examiner assumes that the site will be landscaped with vegetation typical of other developed lots in the vicinity. F. Topography and drainage :.t 1. The site slopes from an elevation of about 292 feet in the southwest comer to 268 f- feet in the northeast corner. No grading plan has been submitted Page 2 - ffearings Officer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) 2. "l'hc applicant will grant a 20-foot sanitary and storm sewer easement along the north edge of the site across lots 2 through 6. The applicant will build a 10-inch diameter storm sewer line and an 8-inch diameter sanitary sewer line in the easement. Stone water will flow due cast on the paved drive and be directed to an inlet at the east end of the drive. From there, it will be directed through a closed pipeline to a 3-foot deep and roughly 50-foot long storm drainage diffusion trench in the storm sewer easement. The trench will be filled with 2- to 3-inch rock. Storm water from roof and footing drains also will be directed to the trench. The applicant testified that individual drainage trenches may be provided for each lot as well as or instead of the single trench shown on the preliminary plat. The storm sewer would eventually be linked with a public storm sewer when development to the north makes this feasible. The storm sewer will drain to McDonald Creek about 600 feet north when intervening land develops. G. Plan designation and zoning The site and vicinity are designated Low Density Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Map and are zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre), except the land to the northeast known as Mara Court, which is R-7 (Residential, 7 units per acre). H. Public services and utilities : The site is served by public sewer and water systems. Sewer service is available from an existing 8-inch line from an existing manhole at the west end of SW View Terrace northeast of the site. The line will be extended across a 10- to 15-foot easement over lot 32 in the Penrose Subdivision to the northeast. A 6-inch diameter water line will be extended from 97th Avenue in the easement for the private drive. L Streets and access 1. The site has about 124 feet of frontage along SW 97th Avenue, a major collector street with a 30-foot paved section but no curbs, storm drains, or sidewalks. The applicant will dedicate 5 feet for the widening of the 97th Avenue right of way and will widen the street to a standard half-width section with curb and sidewalk on the east. 2. There is no direct vehicular connection between 97th and 93rd Avenues south of McDonald Street and north of Sattler Road. a. SW View Terrace is about 100 feet north of the east edge of the site. View Terrace could be extended west to 97th Avenue in the future. If the applicant dedicated right of way for such an extension along the north edge of the site, it would facilitate such a connection, but would result in creation of an irregular and largely useless remainder tract where the street would have to curve to make the connection. When adjoining land north of the site develops (TL 1300), View Terrace could be extended west to 97th Avenue with a less extreme curve, so that it will not create a largely useless area at the curve. b. SE Inez Court serves lots south of the site in the Butler Terrace subdivision. There is no potential for extending that street to 97th Avenue because of interver3ng development. There is a pedestrian connection from 97th Avenue to Inez Court along the north edge of the Twality Junior ):sigh School property south of the site. ! c. The private drive on the applicant's site cannot be extended directly east to other public streets to the east because of development to the east. Page 3 - Hearings Officer decision SUIT 90-0010 (Cavite Park) J. Surrounding land uses : Land to the north is a roughly 100,000 square foot tract that contain one older single family home. Land to the east and south is divided into urban-sized lots that developed with single family detached dwellings. There is an oversized lot with a single family home to the southwest. Land to the west is divided into oversized lots and is developed with single family detached homes. Twality Junior High School is about 180 feet south of the site. III. APPLICABLE APPROVAL STANDARDS A. Community Development Code. 1. Chapter 18.50 contains standards for the R-4.5 zone. A single family detached residential unit is a permitted use in the zone. Lots in the zone must comply with the following dimensional requirements: Minimtun lot size 7500 square feet Average minimum lot width 50 feet Front setback 20 feet Interior side setback 5 feet Street side setback 15 feet20 feet for a garage Rear setback 15 feet Maximum building height 30 feet 2. Chapter 18.92 contains standards for density. The number of dwelling units permitted is based on the net development area, excluding sensitive land areas and land dedicated for public roads or parks. To determine the number of lots, multiply the net development area by the number of units allowed per acre in the zone. 3. Chapter 18.108 allows private streets to serve up to 6 dwelling units subject to pavement width and improvement standards that vary depending on the number of units served. A private street serving 6 dwellings is required to have a minimum 24-foot paved section in a 30-foot easement; curbs and walkways are required except beyond the point where a private road serves fewer than 3 dwellings. A turn-around is required for a private street that is more than 150 feet long. A hammerhead turn-around is pezmitted if each leg of the hammerhead has a minimum depth of 40 feet and a minimum width of 20 feel CDC 18.92.020(A) and 18.26 provide that the area used for private streets does not count toward the area of any lot. 4. Chapter 18.150 requites a permit and contains standards for removal of trees having a trunk 6 inches or more in diameter four feet above the ground on undeveloped land. A permit for tree removal must comply with the following criteria: a. The trees are diseased, present a danger to property, or interfere with utility service or traffic safety; b. The trees have to be removed to construct proposed improvements or to otherwise utilize the applicant's property in a reasonable manner, r ' c. The trees are not needed to prevent erosion, instability, or drainage problems; Page 4 - Hearings Ofj-icer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) d. The trees are not needed to protect nearby trees as windbreaks or as a desirable balance between shade and open space; e. The aesthetic character in the area will not be visually adversely affected by the tree removal; and f. New vegetation planted by the applicant, if any, will replace the aesthetic value of trees to be cut. 5. Chapter 18.160 contains standards for land divisions. To be approved, a preliminary plat must comply with the following criteria: a. It must comply with the City's comprehensive plan and the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations; b. The proposed plat name may not be duplicative and must otherwise comply with the provisions of ORS Chapter 92; c. The streets and roads shall be laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of major partitions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern. 6. Chapter 18.164 contains standards for streets and utilities. a. Section 18.164.030(A) requires streets within and adjoining a development to be dedicated and improved based on the classification of the street b. Section I8.164.030(E) provides a major collector street is to have a minimum 60-foot right of way and 44-foot paved section between curbs and sidewalks. c. Section 18.164.060 prohibits lot depth from being more than 2-1/2 times the lot width and requires at least 25 feet of frontage on a street. d. Section 18.164.070 requires sidewalks adjoining all collector streets. e. Section 18.164.090 requires sanitary sewer service. f. Section 18.164.100 requires adequate provisions for storm water runoff and dedication of easements for storm drainage facilities. B. Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies. 1. Policy 2.1.1 provides the City will assure citizens will be provided an opportunity for be involved in all phases of the planning process. 2. Policy 7.1.2 provides the City will require as a condition of development approval that public water, sewer, and storm drainage will be provided and designed to City standards and utilities placed underground. 3. Policy 7.3.1 provides the City will coordinate water services with water districts. Page S - Hearings Officer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) / 4. Policy 7.4.4 requires all new development to be connected to an approved sanitary t sewer system. 5. Policy 8. 1.1 provides the City will plan for a safe and efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future growth and development. 6. Policy 8.1.3 provides the City will require as a precondition of approval that: a. Development abuts a dedicated street or has other adequate access; b. Street right of way shall be dedicated where the street is substandard in width; c. The developer shall commit to construction of the streets, curbs and sidewalks to City standards within the development; d. The developer shall participate in the improvement of existing streets, curbs, and sidewalks to the extent of the development's impacts; e. Street improvements shall be made and street signs or signals shall be provided when-the development is found to create or intensify a traffic hamid. N. HEARING, TESTIMONY, AND NPO & AGENCY COMMENTS A. Hearing. The examiner received testimony at the public hearing about this application on August 28, 1990. A record of that testimony is included herein as Exhibit A (Parties of Record), Exhibit B (Taped Proceedings), and Exhibit C (Written Testimony). These exhibits are filed at the Tigard City Hall. B. Summary of testimony. 1. Jerry Offer testified for the City and summarized the staff report and recommendation. 'He modified the written staff report to recommend approval of a b- lot land division, provided the private street and turn-around are redesigned so that all lots comply with minimum dimensional standards and recommended that the area used for sidewalk east of the point where such sidewalks are required be counted toward lot area: - 2. Jim Castile and Bill McMonagle testified for the applicant. Mr. Castile introduced a photograph showing the shed to be removed and testified that the house will be setback at least 15 feet from the north property line once the shed is removed He and Mr. McMonagle testified that they could modify the private street to reduce its width and to relocate the hammerhead tum-around so the 6 lots do comply with minimum lot size requirements. Mr. Castile also testified that the lots are laid out to minimize adverse effects on the views and privacy of lots to the south. 3. Stephanie Mitchell, Don Ferguson, James Long, and Lynn Worth testified against ` - the subdivision. In general their concerns were as follows: a. The subdivision reflects a cookie-cutter approach to land development, continues the proliferation of dead-end streets in the area, and does not address adequately the integration of cross-streets. The applicant should be required to provide right of i Page 6 - Hearings Officer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) way along the north edge of the site so View "Terrace can be extended west. The proposed street system violates policy 8.1.1, because it does not result in an enicient and safc street system. b. Storm drainage from the site will change as a result of the proposal. During peak storms, storm water will flow over adjoining property to the north rather than northeast as it does now. c. Schools cannot accommodate more growth. C. NPO and Agency Comments. 1. NPO #6 expressed concern about the impact of the street configuration on circulation, voicing concerns articulated by Ms. Mitchell in her testimony. 2. The City Engineering Division recommends approval of the private street; establishment of the storm drain system as a private sewer, connection of the private storm system to a public storm sewer when feasible; and enforcement of surface water management regulations. 3. The City Building Division recommends acquisition of a demolition permit before removal of structures from the site; submission of utility locations and appropriate easements; and extension of the storm drainage system to the public storm sewer. 4. Tigard School District noted its concern regarding growth in the area generally as it relates to school capacity. It recommends prospective purchasers be advised that students may have to be bused to other schools or placed in portable classrooms. C.~ 5. The Fire Department recommended the fire hydrant be situated at he intersection of the private drive with 97th Avenue. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. Compliance with Community Development Code. 1. The proposed lots comply with the use standards of the R-4.5 zone, because they will be used for single family detached dwelling units. 2. The lots so or can comply with the dimensional standards of the R-4.5 zone, provided the private drive and tam-around are redesigned, because they each will contain at least 7500 square feet and a minimum average lot width of 50 feet. the existing structure on lot 1 violates setback requirements; therefore, a condition is warranted requiring removal of the offending portion of that structure. A condition also is warranted requiring the applicant to obtain a demolition permit for structures removed from the site. 3. The proposed subdivision complies with the density standards of Chapter 18.92, because the developable area of the site divided by 4.5 units per acre equals 6.3 lots. 4. The applicant will remove a significant number of mature trees to provide for public rights of way and utilities. A condition is warranted prohibiting the applicant from removing trees 6 inches or more in diameter four feet above the ground from the site until the applicant applies for and receives a tree cutting permit pursuant to that chapter. Page 7 - Ifearings Officer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) ' 5. The proposed subdivision complies with Chapter 18.160, because: a. It complies with the Comprehensive plan map designation of the site, the applicable plan policies, the regulations of the R-4.5 zone, and other applicable regulations. b. The proposed name of the subdivision is not duplicative. c. The road on the site is adequate to serve the site and cannot be extended off-site efficiently. Although a road along the north edge of the site could be designed to join View Terrace, it will contain a curve that is more extreme and results in less useable land area than would extension of that street due west across tax lot 1300 when. that lot develops. The Code does not authorize the hearings officer to require this applicant to provide an access plan for the area to solve the cross-circulation problems evident in the community. That responsibility falls on the City in its case- by case review of proposed development. Whether that policy is most efficacious is not relevant to the review of this subdivision nor within the jurisdiction of the hearings officer. 6. The proposed subdivision complies with Chapter 18.164, because: a. The applicant will dedicate for and improve the public road adjoining the site to City standards. b. Lots are not more than 2-1/2 deeper than the lot width and have at least 25 feet of frontage on a street C c: The public street and the private street on the site will be improved with sidewalks at least to the point where the street serves only 2 lots. d. All lots will be served by public sanitary sewer and a storm drainage system. Conditions are wan-anted requiring granting of easements for the storm sewer system and other utilities where they cross private property, and requiring the applicant to submit a plan showing the location of existing utilities that will be retained. B. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan policies. 1. The subdivision complies with Policy 2.1.1. because notice of the application or hearing was provided to the neighborhood planning organization in the area and to owners of property in the vicinity of the site. The concerns raised by the NPO and neighbors have been considered in reaching this decision. Although the development does not result in cross-circulation, it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to develop the site with a private "dead-end" street. 2. The subdivision complies with Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1, and 7.4.4, because the applicant will extend public sewer and water system to the site, will provide a storm water drainage system on the site, and will provide underground utilities. Detailed public facility improvement plans need to be prepared and approved. 3. The subdivision complies with Policy 8. 1.1 and 8.1.3, because the street system on ( and adjoining the site will be improved to City standards or modified as permitted. Page 8 - Ilearings Officer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) VI. SITE VISIT BY EXAMINER The exar.iiner visited the site and area that could use affected by die proposed change. VII. CONCLUSION AND DECISION The examiner concludes that the proposed subdivision will promote the general welfare of the City, and will not be significantly detrimental nor injurious to surrounding land uses, provided development that occurs after this decision complies with applicable local, state, and federal law_ In recognition of the findings and conclusions contained herein, and incorporating the Staff Report and other reports of affected agencies and public testimony and exhibits received in this matter, the examiner hereby approves SUB 90-0()10 (Castile Park), subject to the following conditions: UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED AND COMPLETION OF PUBLIC 11"ROVEMENTS FINANCIALLY SECURED PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT WTM WASHINGTON COUNTY. 1. The applicant shall submit two (2) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings to the Engineering Department for preliminary review and approval. The applicant shall submit seven (7) sets of approved drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate. The plans and estimate shall be prepared by a professional engineer licensed in Oregon. These plans are in addition to plans required by the Building Division and should include only those sheets relating to public C improvements. Contact John Hagman, Engineering Department, 639-4171. 2. Building permits will not be issued and construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the public improvement plans and a stavA- opening permit or construction compliance agreement has been executed The applicant shall provide a 100% performance assurance or letter of commitment and a developer-engineer agreement, and shall pay a permit fee and a sign installation/staeet light fee. Contact John Hagman. 3. The applicant shall dedicate to the City right of way as necessary for a 30-foot half- width for 97th Avenue adjoining the site frontage. The description of the dedication shall be tied to the existing right of way centerline. The dedication shall be on City .-forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. Contact John Hagman. 4. The applicant shall make standard half-width improvements to-97th Avenue adjoining the site, including sidewalk, driveway apron, curb, asphaltic concrete pavement, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, street lights, and underground utilities. Improvements shall be designed and built to collector street standards and shall conform to the *alignment of existing adjacent improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering Department. Contact Gary Alfson. 5. The applicant shall submit plan and profile drawings and cross section details of the proposed private street and storm drain system as part of the public improvement plan. Contact Gary Alfson. Page 9 - Hearings Officer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) 6. The applicant shall submit a method for maintenance of the private street and stonn water drainage system, such as a home-jwners association. `Che plan and method shall be approved by the Planning Division. Contact Jerry Offer. 7. The applicant shall post the private street with signs prohibiting parking on one side. A sign noting the drive is private shall be posted at the drives intersection with 97th Avenue. A note shall be placed on the plat that the street is private. 8. All lots shall contain a minimum of 7500 square feet exclusive of public right of way and private easements for road and sidewalk purposes, provided the area of an easement for sidewalk may be counted toward the area of adjoining lots beyond the point where the road serves only two dwellings. Minimum setbacks shall be: Front setback 20 feet Interior side setback 5 feet Street side setback 15 feet/20 feet for a garage Rear setback 15 feet Garage, corner yard, and front yard setbacks shall be measured from the individual lot/easement boundary for all lots fronting the private street Contact Brad Roast 9. The applicant shall locate driveway cuts at least 30 feet from intersection right of way lines and at least 5 feet from property lines. Contact John Hagman. 10. The applicant shall submit sanitary and storm drainage details as part of the public improvement plans. Plans shall include calculations and a topographic map of the storm drainage basin. Calculations shall be based on full development of the serviceable area. The location and capacity of existing, proposed, and future lines shall be noted Contact Greg Be rry, Engineering Department, 639-4171. 11. The applicant shall show that storm water runoff can be discharged into the existing drainageway without increasing the flow of storm water off-site more than the flow from the property in its undeveloped condition. Contact Greg Berry. 12. The applicant shall submit a grading plan showing existing and proposed contours. 13. The applicant shall submit and receive approval of an erosion control plan as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook," November, 1989. Contact Greg Berry. 14. The applicant shall obtain a tree cutting permit before removing any trees from the property. Tree removal permits will be issued in two stages: private street area preparation and lot preparation. The applicant shall provide an arborist to review the plans for grading and are protection. The arborist or City may prescribe protective measures for trees to be retained on the site. A copy of the tree removal permit shall be available on-site during all tree removal and grading activities. Contact Jerry Offer. 15. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit before removing existing buildings on the site. Contact Brad Roast. 16. The applicant shall submit a plan showing utilities for existing buildings. If the utilities cross new property lines, then the applicant shall grant utility easements as needed. Contact Brad Roast. Page 10 - Hearings Offer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) SUBDIVISION APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID ONLY IF THE FINAL PLAT IS _ RECORDED WITHIN gg MOnrrl-r OFTI-IE EF_rrrrrVr DATE OFT1-Ile nFC'ISION. D TE its 7th day of ber, 1990. i Q Larry Epstein, g icer ,t ` Page 11 - Hearings Of -tcer decision SUB 90-0010 (Castile Park) AGENDA ITEM 2.3 i STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 1990 - 7:00 PM TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OR 97223 i 1. SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST CASE: Subdivision SUB 90-0010 SUMMARY: The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide one parcel'of approximately 1.45 acres into 6 parcels ranging from 7,500 to 10,800 square feet in size. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONING DESIGNATION: R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) APPLICANT/OWNER: Jim Castile PO Box 23702 Tigard, OR 97223 REPRESENTATIVE: Bill McMonagle Harris-McMonagle & Assoc. 12555 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223-6287 LOCATION: 14380 SW 97th Avenue (WCTM 2S1 11BA, Tax Lot 1301) APPLICABLE LAW: Community Development Code Chapters 18.50, 18.92, 18.100, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160, 18.164, and Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 7.1.2, 7_3.1, 7.4.4, 8.1.1, and 8.1.3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conditionally approve a five lot subdivision following the basic layout submitted for the six lot subdivision. II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE AND SURROUNDINGS A. Site size and shape: Tax lot 1301 is a rectangular shaped parcel on the east side of SW 97th Avenue. The site is approximately 124 feet north-south by 505 feet east- west containing approximately 1.44 acres. HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 1 B. Site location: The site is situated approximately 180 feet north of Twality Junior High School on the east side of SW 97th Avenue. C. Existing uses and structures: There is a dwelling and garage located on the western portion of the site. A gravel driveway leads from SW 97th Avenue to the garage. There are several fir trees and assorted deciduous trees and other landscaping materials on the western one-third of the site. The remainder of the site is mostly open and grass covered. D. Pressed uses and structures: The applicant proposes to divide the site into six lots. Lot 1 is intended to contain the existing house. The existing garage and shed are proposed for removal. The preliminary plat notes that a new garage is intended to be constructed to serve the existing home. The preliminary plat calls for six lots to be served by a private drive that will be located along the southern edge of the site. The private drive will be located within a 30 foot wide access tract and will contain a 3 foot wide landscaped area adjacent to the developed lots to the south, 24 C. feet of pavement with curbs on each side, and a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk along the north side of the private drive. The sidewalk is intended to straddle the boundary between the access tract and lots 1 through 5. The portion of the sidewalk which would be located on lots 1 through 5 will be located within a 10 foot wide sidewalk and utility easement. The proposed drive is intended to terminate in a modified hammerhead turnaround on its eastern end. One leg of the turnaround is intended to be placed in an easement on proposed lot 6. E. Topography and drainage: The site slopes from an elevation of approximately 292 feet in its southwestern corner to 268 feet in its northeastern corner. No grading plan has been submitted. The preliminary plat notes that a 10 inch diameter storm sewer will be placed within an easement along the northern boundaries of proposed lots 2 through 6 draining to a storm drainage diffusion trench on the northern portion of proposed lot 6. A 20 foot wide sanitary and storm sewer easement is intended to be located along the lots, northern boundaries. F. Plan designation and zoning: The site and adjoining properties are designated Low Density Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Properties to the north, east, and south are zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre). Properties to the west across C SW 97th Avenue are zoned R-3.5 (Residential, 3.5 units/acre). t HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 2 r 1 G. Public services and utilities: The site will be served by public sanitary sewer and water systems. An 8 inch sanitary sewer line will be extended from an existing manhole at the west end of SW View Terrace to the northeastern corner of the subject site. The sanitary sewer is intended to be located through an easement to be acquired from lot 32 in Penrose Terrace subdivision to the east. The sanitary sewer will extend westward within the 20 foot sanitary and storm sewer easement to be located on the north end of proposed lots 2 through 6. A 6 inch water line is proposed to be placed within the proposed private drive extending eastward from an existing water line within SW 97th Avenue. H. Streets and access: The site has approximately 124 feet of frontage along SW 97th Avenue. SW 97th Avenue is classified as a major collector street by the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map. The street presently has approximately 30 feet of pavement width with no curbs, storm drains, or sidewalk. The preliminary plat notes a 5 foot right-of-way dedication along the site's western edge. The preliminary plat also notes that an expanded half street improvement will be constructed along the frontage of SW 97th Avenue. As previously noted, access to the proposed six lots is intended to be C provided by a 24-foot wide private drive to extend eastward from SW 97th Avenue along the subdivision's southern edge. I. Surrounding land uses: The Butler Terrace Subdivision which includes single family residences built on lots close to 7,500 square feet in size is located to the south. In addition, Tax Lot 1401 to the south is developed with a single-family residence and has a potential to be redivided to create one additional lot. Penrose Terrace Subdivision is located to the east. This subdivision contains single family residences on lots averaging approximately 8,000 square feet 1n size. Parcels to the west of the site across SW 97th Avenue are substantially larger than the minimum lot size for the zone, although all contain single family residences. Parcels to the north of the proposed subdivision are substantially larger than the minimum lot size for the zone and most contain single family residences. A subdivision application has been submitted for review by the City of Tigard Planning commission for approximately 2.4 acres located approximately 325 feet north of this subject site. III. APPLICABLE APPROVAL STANDARDS A. Community Development Code. 1. Chapter 18.50 contains standards for the R-4.5 zone. A single-family detached residential unit is a permitted use in the zone. Lots in the zone must comply with the following dimensional requirements: HEARINGS OFFICER - SUS 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 3 Minimum lot size 7,500 square feet Average minimum lot width 50 feet Front setback 20 feet interior side setback 5 feet Street side setback 15/20 feet for a garage Rear setback 15 feet Maximum building height 30 feet 2. Chapter 18.92 contains standards for density. The number of dwelling units permitted is based on the net development area, excluding sensitive land areas and land dedicated for public roads or parks, or for private roadways. To determine the number of lots, multiply the net development area by the number of units allowed per acre in the zone. 3. Chapter 18.108 allows private streets to serve up to six dwelling units subject to pavement width and improvement standards that vary with the number of dwelling units served. Turnaround areas are required for private streets in excess of 150 feet in length. 4. Chapter 18.150 requires a permit and contains standards for removal of trees having a trunk 6 inches or more in diameter four feet above the ground on undeveloped land. A permit for tree must comply with the following criteria: a. The trees are diseased, present a danger to property, or interfere with utility service or traffic safety; b. The trees have to be removed to construct proposed improvements or to otherwise utilize the applicant's property in a reasonable manner; C. The trees are not needed to prevent erosion, instability, or drainage problems; d. The trees are not needed to protect nearby trees as windbreaks or as a desirable balance between shade and open space; e. The aesthetic character in the area will not be visually adversely affected by the tree removal; and f. New vegetation planted by the applicant, if any, will replace the aesthetic value of trees to be cut. 5. Chapter 18.160 contains standards for land divisions. It allows phased development, provided construction is initiated within eighteen months of the approval and construction of each phase does not exceed a 2 years. To be approved, a preliminary plat must comply with the following criteria: a. It must comply with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the applicable zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 4 regulations; b. The proposed plat name is not duplicative or otherwise satisfies ' the provisions of ORS Chapter 92; C. The streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and maps of major partitions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern 6. Chapter 18.164 contains standards for streets and utilities. a. Section 18.164.030(A) requires streets within and adjoining a development to be dedicated and improved based on the classification of the street. A future improvement guarantee may be accepted in lieu of improvements, among other reasons, if: (1) A partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve property (sic) design standards; or (2) A partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians C _ b. Section 18.164.030(E) requires a local street to have a minimum 50-foot right-of-way and 34-foot paved section between curbs and sidewalks.. C. Section 18.164.030(F) requires a reserve strip and barricade at the end of a dedicated street that can be extended off-site. d. Section 18.164.030(J) allows partial street improvement "where essential to reasonable development when in conformity with the other requirements of these regulations, and when it will be practical to require the improvement of the other half when the adjoining property [is] developed.- e. Section 18.164.030(M) requires local street grades of 128 or less. f. Section 18.164.060 prohibits lot depth from being more than 2 times the lot width and requires at least 25 feet of frontage on a street. g. Secy;ion 18.164.070 requires sidewalks adjoining all local residential streets. h. Section 18.164.090 requires sanitary sewer service. i. Section 18.164.100 requires adequate provisions for storm water runoff and dedication of easements for storm drainage facilities. HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 5 . 1 B. Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies. i 1. Policy 2.1.1 provides the City will assure citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. 2. Policy 7.1.2 provides the City will require as a condition of development approval that public water, sewer, and storm drainage will be provided and designed to City standards and utilities placed underground. 3. Policy 7.3.1 provides the City will coordinate water services with water districts. 4. Policy 7.4.4 requires all new development to be connected to an approved sanitary sewer system. 5. Policy 8.1.1 provides the City will plan for a safe and efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future growth and development. 6. Policy 8.1.3 provides the City will require as a precondition of approval that: a. Development abuts a dedicated street or has other adequate C . access; b. Street right-of-way shall be dedicated where the street is su'-standard in width; C. The developer shall commit to construction of the streets, curbs and sidewalks to City standards within the development. d. The developer shall participate in the improvement of existing streets, curbs, and sidewalks to the extent of the development's impacts; e. Street improvements shall be made and street signs or signals shall be provided when the development is found to create or intensify a traffic hazard. IV. NPO & AGENCY COMMENTS 1. The City of Tigard Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and offers the following comments: a. Access to the site is provided by a private street from SW 97th Avenue. The proposed street meets the requirements of subsection 18.108.070 A of the Code. SW 97th is a major collector street that is not improved with curb and sidewalk along the frontage of the site. C: The applicant has submitted a report showing the adequancy of the sight distance from private street along SW 97th Avenue. HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 6 l b. Because of difficult maintenance, the proposed public storm sewer along the back lot lines should be a private sewer. Upon development of the parcel to the north, the proposed storm drainage diffusion trench may be abandoned and the private storm sewer may be extended to a public storm sewer. c. Sanitary sewer service is provided by an existing line in SW View Terrace. Access for maintenance vehicles to the manhole in the proposed easement east of the site is required. d. The Unified Sewerage agency has established and the City has agreed to enforce, (Resolution No.90-43) surface water management regulations requiring the construction of on-site water quality and quantity facilities are not required at this site and only a fee in lieu of the construction of on-site water quality facilities should be assessed. 2. The City of Tigard Building Division has reviewed the proposal and has commented that: a_ A demolition permit is required prior to removal of the existing garage and shed. b. The applicant must provide a drawing showing a location of utilities for the existing residence. If the utilities will cross proposed property lines, easements must be provided. C. The proposed storm drain diffusion trench does not appear to be an appropriate way to provide for storm drainage for an entire subdivision. The Building Division feels that the applicant should be required to extend the storm drain to a public facility. 3. The Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District has reviewed the proposal and has commented that the proposed fire hydrant should be relocated to the intersection of the private drive and SW 97th Avenue. 4. Tigard School District has noted concerns with its ability to maintain the current level of educational programs and school facilities as a result of rapid growth throughout the district. The projected enrollment resulting from the proposed subdivision is 2 students at Templeton Elementary school and 1 student at •Twality Junior High. When combined with other recent proposals on file with the school district, the total projected enrollment increase is 72 students at Templeton and 99 students at Twality. This exceeds the design capacity of both schools. Further, the District cannot guarantee that the new schools which are planned to open in 1992 will have the design capacity to serve these proposed developments if the rate of growth continues to increase. Prospective home buyers should be advised that students may have to be bused to other schools or placed in portable classrooms. S. NPO #6 has reviewed the proposal and has commented that the NPO has S\:~ concerns regarding the effect this proposal may have on the future extension of SW View Terrace from the east. The NPO raised concerns HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 7 regarding the future street pattern in this area at the time that the Butler Terrace subdivision proposal was reviewed several years ago. The NPO members are unhappy to see possible additional piecemeal development in this area further reducing the possibibility of a connection between SW 97th Avenue and the developed neighborhood to the east. The NPO does not find that approval of this proposal would be consistent with Plan policy 8.1.1 which promotes a safe and efficient street system. 6. The Tigard Water District, Metropolitan Area Communication Commission, (cable television), Lnd PGE have reviewed the proposal and have offered no comments or-objections. 7. No other comments have been received. V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST A. Compliance with Community Development Code. 1. The proposed lots comply with the use standards of the R-4.5 zone because they are intended to be used for single family detached dwelling units. The lots as shown on the preliminary plat, however, are not consistent with the dimensional standards of the R-4.5 zoning district. Proposed lot 6 as shown is only 6,811 square feet in size whereas 7500 square feet is the minimum lot size for the R-4.5 zoning district. The applicant's engineer has not deducted the 747 square feet of private street turnaround area intended to cover an access easement from the net lot area to determine the net developable area. The turnaround is required as part of the private street as per Code Section 18.108.070.0. • Code Section 18.92.020.A requires that "(A]11 land proposed for private streets..." be subtracted from the gross site to determine net developable area. Likewise, Code Section 18.162.050 states that in the case of a flag lot, the accessway may not be included in the lot area calculation. The Code clearly does not intend for required accesb areas to be included within the minimum required lot area. Staff therefore finds that this lot as shown does not meet the minimum lot size of the zone. Likewise, lots 3, 4 and 5 are not consistent with the minimum lot size standard because the area covered by the required sidewalk has not been deducted from the gross lot area. If the three foot wide area to be covered by sidewalk is deducted, these lots would be less than 7500 square feet in size. The subdivision plat must be revised so that all lots meet the minimum lot size. - In addition, the house that would remain on proposed lot 1 would not satisfy the fifteen foot rear yard setback required in this zoning district. The required rear yard may be on either the north or east side of this house because it would be located on a corner lot. As HEARINGS OFFICER - SUES 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 8 shown, the setback would be approximately ten feet on both of these sides. The lot line between lots 1 and 2 will need to be shifted eastward so that a minimum setback of fifteen feet is provided or else the house must be moved or removed prior to recording a subdivision plat. In order to resolve both the minimum lot size and setback problems described above, as well as to avoid the creation of unusual shaped lots, staff recommends that approval of the preliminary plat be conditioned upon lot 1 being increased in size to at least 15000 square feet so that setbacks can be met for the present time with the possibility of the lot being re-divided in the future upon the house either being removed or relocated. This would also allow the other lots to be increased in size to satisfy the minimum lot size of the R-4.5 zone. While this would result in only five lots being created at this time rather than the six proposed, re-division of lot 1 would fulfill the full housing opportunity of the parcel. 2. The proposed subdivision complies with the density standards of Chapter 18.92 because the net developable area of the site divided by 4.5 units per acre equals an opportunity for 6.3 units. 3. The proposed subdivision is consistent with Chapter 18.108 because the proposed private street is of an appropriate width for the number of dwelling units to be served, contains a sidewalk and turnaround area, C and is provided with a three foot wide strip along its south side for landscaping to buffer the impacts of the private street upon residential uses to the south. A landscaping plan for this strip should be submitted for staff review and approval prior to recording the plat. 4. Chapter 18.150 requires that the number of trees over six inches in diameter that are removed during the course of construction be minimized. The proposed development's private street, utilities, and residences will require the removal of a significant number of trees. However, the number of trees removed should be minimized through careful study of the site to be accomplished through phased tree removal. Initial tree removal shall be limited to the proposed public right-of-way expansion and the private street area. Individual lots, potential driveway locations, and potential building sites will then be easier to see. The developer and City staff can then identify which trees will need to be removed to construct residences on the lots. The developer shall provide the services of a certified arborist for this analysis. Care should be taken to retain as many mature trees as possible through careful site planning, curved driveways around trees, and care during the site development process. Minimizing''::-Eree removal should be a benefit to the proposed development in both increased property values as well as atmosphere. No tree removal may occur prior to Planning Division review and / approval of a tree removal permit. HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 9 S. The proposed subdivision complies with Chapter 18.160 because: a. The proposed subdivision complies with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation density opportunity for the site and with the applicable plan policies except as noted below, the regulations of the R-4.5 zone except as noted above, and other applicable regulations; b. The proposed name of the subdivision, Castile Park, is not duplicative; C. The private road into and adjoining this site conforms with the typical road pattern in the-area. 6. The proposed subdivision complies with Chapter 18.164 because: a. The applicant will dedicate additional right-of-way for and improve the SW 97th Avenue frontage of the site to City standards. b. The proposed private drive is consistent with City of Tigard private roadway standards. B. Compliance With Comprehensive Plan Policies 1. The subdivision is consistent with Policy 2.1.1 because notice of the application and the public hearing on this item was provided to the neighborhood planning organization and to owners of property in the vicinity of the site. The proposed site has been posted with a sign noting that a land use or development application on this site was pending. Although the development changes the existing character of this site, it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to develop this site for housing and proposed densities so that expected population growth can be accommodated in the urban area. 2. This subdivision complies with Policy 7.1.2, 7.3.1, and 7.4.4 because the applicant will extend public sewer and water systems to this site and will provide for underground installation of phone, electricity, and cable television lines. Although staff concurs with the Building Division's concern regarding the proposed storm drainage diffusion trench for this size of a development, staff defers to the Engineering Division's recommendation to allow the diffusion trench as a temporary system if the applicant's detailed storm drainage analysis (recommended to be required as condition of approval 15, page 13) indicates the adequacy of such a method. It is recommended that the proposed private storm drainage system be replaced with a connection to a public storm sewer when storm sewer development in the area makes this feasible. If the Engineering Division's review of the storm drainage analysis finds the diffusion trench to be inadequate, a public storm sewer extension may be necessary or an alternative 7 private drainage system(s) may need to be provided. 4 BEARINGS OFFICER - SUR 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 10 3. The subdivision complies with Policy 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 because the proposed improvements to the public street adjoining this site will be consistent with City of Tigard standards and will be developed to the full major collector street width called for by the functional classification of SW 97th Avenue. The Engineering Division has confirmed that adequate sight distance will exist along SW 97th Avenue for the private street intersection. Staff shares the concerns raised by NPO #6 with regard to the effect this proposal may have upon the possibility of public street connections between the neighborhood to the east and SW 97th Avenue. The proposed subdivision would further restrict opportunities for making such a connection but would not preclude the final opportunity for a connection; therefore, staff is not willing to assert that this proposal is sufficiently inconsistent with this policy so as to mandate a public street connection through this property. The applicant's intent to keep the existing house on this property makes it difficult to divide this property without locating a street along its southern edge. It would be difficult to create a logical and efficient lot pattern from this parcel with a street along this parcel's southern edge curving northward to connect with SW View Terrace. If the applicant reconsiders keeping the existing house, however, staff would strongly recommend that a public street extend across the majority of the northern boundary of the parcel intended to connect with SW View Terrace., VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION The staff concludes that the proposed subdivision with modifications, will promote the general welfare of the City and will not be significantly detrimental nor injurious to surrounding land uses, provided development that occurs complies with applicable local state and federal laws. Staff recommends, however, that reconfiguration of the proposed subdivision be required to increase the size of proposed Lot 1 to at least 15,000 square feet so as to accommodate a possible future partitioning as well as to allow the existing house to comply with the rear yard setback requirements of the R-4.5 zone. In addition, staff. recommends that the sidewalk and entire hammerhead turnaround area be included within the common tract for the private drive. All lots must meet the minimum required lot size of 7500 square feet for the R-4.5 zoning district. These modifications will require that the subdivision be limited to five lots. Staff recommends approval of this subdivision proposal subject to the recommended conditions which follow: UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED OR COMPLETION SHALL BE FINANCIALLY ASSURED PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY. 1. The preliminary plat shall be limited to creation of five (5) lots. All HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 11 lots shall. be fully dimensioned on the plat and shall be consistent with R-4.5 zone dimensional requirements. A minimum rear yard setback of 15 feet shall exist for the existing house. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division, (639-4171). 2. A demolition permit shall be obtained from the Building Division prior to demolition of the existing garage and shed. STAFF CONTACT: Brad Roast, Engineering Division, (639-4171). 3. The applicant shall post a letter of assurance guaranteeing that a minimum of one covered parking space will be provided for the existing house. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division, (639-4171). 4. The applicant shall submit a plan showing utility locations for the existing dwelling. If the utilities will cross proposed property lines, utility easements shall be granted as required. STAFF CONTACT: Brad Roast, Engineering Division, (639-4171). 5. Any tree removal or grading on this property must be approved by the Planning Division through approval of a tree removal permit and approval of the grading plan. Trees over six inches in diameter shall be removed only as necessary to construct streets, utilities, and residences. Tree removal permits will be necessary for two stages: private street area preparation and lot preparation. The applicant shall provide for an.arborist to review the plans for grading and tree protection. The arborist or the Planning Division may prescribe protective measures for trees to be retained on the site. A copy of the tree removal permit shall be available on-site during all tree removal and grading activities. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division (639-4171). 6. The private street shall be signed for no parking on one side. A sign noting that the drive is private shall be posted at the drive's intersection with SW 97th Avenue. STAFF CONTACT: John Hagman, Engineering Division (639•-4171). 7. Minimum building setbacks on all parcels shall be as follows: front yard - 15 feet corner yard -10 feet garage - 20 feet side yard -5 feet rear yard - 15 feet Garage, corner yard, and front yard setbacks shall be measured from the individual parcel/access tract boundary for all lots fronting on the private street. STAFF CONTACT: Brad Roast, Building Division (639-4171). 8. Two (2) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering Department. Seven (7) sets of approved drawings and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, all prepared by a Professional Engineer, shall be submitted for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 12 16 include sheets relevant to the public improvements. STAFF CONTACT: John Hagman, Engineering Department (639-4171). 9. Building permits will not be issued and construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the public improvement plans and a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement has been executed. A 100 percent performance assurance or letter of commitment, a developer- engineer agreement; the payment of a permit fee, a fee in lieu of the construction of an on-site water quality facility and a sign installation/streetlight fee are required. STAFF CONTACT: John Hagman, Engineering Department (639-4171). 10. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the SW 97th Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 30 feet from the centerline. The description shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline. The dedication document shall be on City forms. Instructions are available from the Engineering Department. STAFF CONTACT; John Hagman, Engineering Department (639-4171). 11. Standard half-street improvements, including concrete sidewalk, driveway apron, curb, asphaltic concrete pavement, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, streetlights, and underground utilities shall be installed along the frontage. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to street > standards and shall conform to the alignment of existing adjacent improvements or to an alignment approved by the Engineering Department. STAFF CONTACT: Gary Alfson, Engineering Department (.639-4171). 12. Plan and profile drawings, cross section details of the proposed privately operated and maintained street and storm drain shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. STAFF CONTACT; Gary Alfson, Engineering Department (639-4171). 13. Driveway cuts shall not be permitted within thirty feet of intersecting right-of-way lines nor within five feet of property lines. STAFF CONTACT: John Hagman, Engineering Department (639-4171). 14. SanLtary sewer and storm drainage details shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. Calculations and a topographic map of the storm drainage basin shall be provided as a supplement to the public improvement plans. STAFF CONTACT: Greg Berry, Engineering Department (639-4171). 15. The applicant shall demonstrate that storm drainage runoff can be discharged into the existing drainageways without significantly impacting properties downstream. STAFF CONTACT: Greg Berry, Engineering Department (639-4171). 16. A method for maintenance, such as a homeowners association, shall be provided for the private street. The plan and method for maintenance shall be approved by the Planning Division. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, ( Planning Division (639-4171). HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 13 17. An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public improvement drawings. The plan shall conform to "Erosion Control Plans- Technical Guidance Handbook, November 1989." STAFF CONTACT; Greg Berry, Engineering Department (639-4171). SUBDIVISION APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID ONLY IF THE FINAL PLAT IS RECORDED WITHIN EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. oww_ OA"" -ate Jb PREP D B Offer DATE tlpiate Planner Z-1 L ,~14,o _ APPROVED BY: Keith Liden DATE Senior Planner rn ? a w. a S.W. N S C- J1 MSEST ELROSE CT JANZE v t CT s F a ca m 3 tw MO iNs-w VIEW L v M ~ S. W. W L VIEW TERR m '1EW TER 3 Q fA V 1 G ST. S.W_ tNEZ ST J ~ 4M ui S. PIN ESRO- EEMBROOK ST• TWALITY 41 a CT. JUNIOR HIGH S.W. PINE13ROOK ST. SCHOOL T HEARINGS OFFICER - SUB 90-0010 - CASTILE PAGE 14 :.Jr d R E C E v~GU COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NPO ##6 MINUTES FROM AUGUST 15, 1990 1. Members in attendance were: Carver, Crow, Davenport, Mitchell and Pasteris. Excused: Dillin, Clinton Not Excused: Kasson 2. Minutes of the July 18, 1990 meeting approved as written. 3. ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT/ZIA 90-0002. Fuel Tank Storage. Reviewed without any objections. 4. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW/PDR 90-007 - COAST FINANCE, INC. Approval to allow construction of a 20 unit retirement complex. Reviewed without any objections. 5. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW/SDR 90-0017 - BATES. Request for approval to allow the development of a retail garden center. Reviewed without any objections. 6. SLR 90-0008 - COOK PARK. Reviewed without any objections. i 7. SUBDIVISION SUB 90-0010 CASTILE/MCMONAGLE. Request for subdivision approval to divide a site (1.45 acres) into six parcels. The following comments were passed with one abstention. "We have significant concerns about the extension of View Terrace and we are further concerned that the spirit of the Comprehensive Plan is not ® being followed by providing a safe and efficient street system. (See ® 811 of the Comp. Plan.) i "We saw this coming five years ago and we are very unhappy to see or piece-meal development in the neighborhood. i "It should be noticed that no Butler Terrace residents were present at the meeting." COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM S CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ( COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 2/12/91 DATE SUBMITTED: 2/4/91 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Sign Code PREVIOUS ACTION: Council Exception SCE 90-05/VAR 90-27 decision to continue for fur- appeal for Sherwood Inn ther consideration PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Should the applicant be allowed more freestanding signs and sign area than permitted by the Community Development Code? INFORMATION SUMMARY This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission on October 16, 1990. The Commission determined that the proposal submitted by the applicant was not consistent with Community Development Code criteria for granting a sign Variance. The Commission did approve a Sign Code Exception that would 1) require the removal of the two nonconforming signs and 2) allow one freeway oriented sign with a maximum area of 200 square feet and height of 50 feet. The Council continued the hearing to consider alternative solutions to the issue. The applicant has submitted a proposal to 1) remove the "Sherwood Inn" sign on the structure shared with Chevron and 2) substitute the "Motel" portion of the larger sign with a "Best Western - Sherwood Inn" message. This proposed sign would remain 65 feet in height and it would be approximately the same size (1,180 sq. ft. existing/1,194 sq. ft. proposed) but the total sign area on the property would be reduced by approximately 334 square feet per side. The applicant plans to provide justification for this compromise at the hearing and the staff will be prepared to respond to questions., Without the benefit of the applicant's justification, the staff continues to recommend adopting the attached resolution upholding the Commission's decision, Final Order 90-25 PC. Recent correspondence related to this case is also attached. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the attached resolution 2. Modify and approve the attached resolution FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the attached resolution SCE90-05.SUM/kl I mill 11`1111, 11 1 111' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 90-_ IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF A FINAL ORDER UPON CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF AN APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE A SIGN CODE EXCEPTION APPLICATION AND DENY A VARIANCE APPLICATION (SCE 90-05/VAR 90-27) PROPOSED BY SHERWOOD INN (H. E. FERRYMAN). WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the case at its meeting of October 16, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Commission denied the variance request and approved a sign code exception subject to conditions (Final Order No. 90-25 PC); and WHEREAS, this matter came before the City Council at its meeting of December 10, 1990, upon the request of the applicant; and WHEREAS, the Council reviewed the evidence related to the applicant's appeal. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the requested appeal is DENIED and the Planning Commission decision is upheld based upon the facts, findings, conclusions, and conditions of approval noted in Exhibit "A" (Planning Commission Final Order No. 90-25 PC). The Council further orders that the City Recorder send a copy of this final order to the applicant as a notice of the final decision in this matter. PASSED: This day of December, 1990. Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor City of Tigard ATTEST: Tigard City Recorder SCE 90-05.RES/kl RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 1 S CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 90-25 PC A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS WHICH DENIES AN APPLICATION FOR A SIGN CODE VARIANCE (VAR 90-0027) AND APPROVES AN APPLICATION FOR A SIGN CODE EXCEPTION REQUESTED BY H. E. FERRYMAN (SHERWOOD INN). The Tigard Planning Commission has reviewed the above application at a public hearing on October 16, 1990. The Commission has based its decision on the facts, findings, and conclusions noted below. A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Sign Code Exception SCE 90-0005, Variance V 90-0027 REQUEST: Request to allow two freeway oriented freestanding signs where only one sign is permitted. Also requested is approval to retain one sign of approximately 1,180 square feet per sign face with a height of approximately 65 feet and a second sign of approximately 698 square feet per sign face with a height of approximately 69.75 feet where the Code specifies a maximum allowable sign area of 160 square feet per sign face and a maximum allowable height of 35 feet. APPLICANT: Greenhill Assoc., Ltd. Hal Hewitt 9999 SW Wilshire Portland, OR 97225 OWNER: H. E. Ferryman 9106 NE Highway 99 Vancouver, WA 98665 LOCATION: 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road (WCTM 2S1 12DD Tax lots 1000,900, and 1100) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial General ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G (Commercial General) 2. Backaround Information The existing Sherwood Inn motel and restaurant were constructed prior to annexation of the subject site and adjoining properties in 1976. Also in 1976, the City Planning Commission approved a Varia.. to allow the continued use of the existing signs that exceeded the City's size requirements. In 1977, the City amended the sign code to reduce the FINAL ORDER 90-25 PC - SCE 90-0005/VAR 90-0027 FERRYMAN - PAGE 1 EXHIBIT "A" developed portions of adjacent parcels to the west and south. The slopes between these parcels are covered with grasses, shrubs, and several small trees. The subject property is presently developed with the 56 unit, three story Sherwood Inn motel, the single story 4,200 square foot restaurant, and paved parking for 135 autos. Access to the property is provided by a paved driveway shared with the adjacent service stations. The two nonconforming freestanding signs, which are the subject of this application, are located near the property boundary of the adjacent service station parcels. The applicant proposes to retain the existing signs and states that it is appropriate for the City to continue to recognize the 1976 Variance approval. . The Sherwood Inn sign is part of a larger sign structure that includes an oversize sign for the Chevron station. This application does not apply to the Chevron sign. The Chevron Corporation has been also notified of the sign amortization program and the City's requirement to bring this sign into conformity with the Code. An application from Chevron is anticipated in the near future. 4. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division, State Highway Division, and the Building Division have no objection to the proposal. No other comments have been received. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS As proposed, a Variance is necessary to approve this proposal becauz.-- it goes beyond the basic Code requirements for number and size of signs, as well as the allowances that are available through the Sign Code Exception process. The Variance criteria which are relevant are listed in section 18.134.050 (A) of the Community Development Code: 1. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this title, be in conflict with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other properties in the same zoning district or vicinity; 2. There are special circumstances that exist which are particular to the lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances which the applicant has no control and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district; 3. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and k City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably possible while permitting some economic use of the land; t 4. Existing physical and natural systems, but not limited to traffic, FINAL ORDER 90-25 PC - SCE 90-0005/VAR 90-0027 FERRYMAN - PAGE 3 + 1 r proposal. ` 5. The hardship is not self imposed because the signs in question were erected legally and have become nonconforming and subject to the sign amortization program due to changes in applicable sign regulations. However, the variance is not the minimum deviation from Code requirements that would alleviate the hardship. As an alternative to approving or denying the variance request, the Planning Commission may consider approving a modified proposal that would be consistent with the sign code exception criteria that are listed in section 18.114.145 of the Code. The criteria from this section are listed below: A. The Commission shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an exception to the sign code based on findings that at least one of the following criteria are satisfied: 1. The proposed exception to the height limits in the sign code is necessary to make the sign visible from the street because of the topography of the site, and/or a conforming building or sign on an adjacent property would limit the view of a sign erected on the site in conformity with Sign Code standards; 2. A second freestanding sign is necessary to adequately identify a second entrance to a business or premises that is oriented towards a different street frontage; 3. Up to an additional 25 percent of sign area or height may be permitted when it is determined that the increase will not deter from the purpose of this chapter. This increase should be judged according to specific needs and circumstances which necessitate additional area to make the sign sufficiently legible. The increase(s) shall not conflict with any other non-dimensional standards or restrictions of this chapter; 4. The proposed sign is consistent with the criteria set forth in Subsection 18.114.130.E of this chapter; 5. The proposed exception for a second freestanding, sign on an interior lot which is zoned commercial or industrial is appropriate because all of the following apply: t a. The combined height of both signs shall not exceed 150 percent of the sign height normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district; however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district; b. Neither sign will pose a vision clearance problem or will project into the public right-of-way; and c. Total combined sign area for both signs shall not exceed 150 FINAL ORDER 90-25 PC - SCE 90-0005/VAR 90-0027 FERRYMAN - PAGE 5 r~ THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE FINAL APPROVAL DASE NOTED BELOW. It is further ordered that the applicant be notified of the entry of this order. RASSED: This day of October, 1990, by the Planning Commission of the City of Tigard. t n F. Fyr , V ident Tig d Plann' iss' SCE 90-05.PFO/kl i l FINAL ORDER 90-25 PC - SCE 90-0005/VAR 90-0027 FERRYMAN - PACE 7 LN t January 25, 1991 CITY OF TIGARD OREGON Hai Hewitt Greenhill Associates, Ltd. 9999 S.W. Wilshire Street Portland, OR 97255 Rat Sherwood Inn Signs File No. SCS 90-0005 Dear Mr. Hewitt: The City Council has continued the public hearing on the above case to February 12, 1991 to consider additional information regarding sign height and size prior to making a final decision on the matter. Since the staff should have any suppl-ental information prepared for this hearing by January 30th, we should meet or discuss this case on the phone prior to this date. During the hearing on January 22nd, the point was made that the City consistently gave the property owner the assurance (or impression) that the 1976 Variance approval was permanent and not subject to changing c , such as the Code amendments which occurred in 1977 and 1978. Following the hearing, the staff reviewed the record and found that in 1981, a Site Design Review application was approved, subject to conditions, to add 40 parking spaces to the motel (SDR 3.2-81). Condition 2 of the decision (attached) clearly indicates that the signs were not in conformity with the Code and that no further development on the site would be permitted unless this issue was resolved. Although the file copy is not acknowledged by the owner, the parking spaces were subsequently constructed and therefore Mr. Susajarna must have been aware of this document. Please contact me early nest week. S ly, Reath S. Laden Senior Planner c: Tim Ramie Pat Reilly Rd Murphy SCa90-05.LTR/kl t 13125 SW Hall Rha-! Pn Rnx 9.tgW. 77snrd Oregon 97"A f.5(1~1 AAQ.d174 STAFF REPORT CITfOF UFA FINAL ACTION WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON TIGARD PLANNING DEPARMENT MAY 5, 1981 DOCKET: SIM MSIGN 1EVM1 (SDR 12-81) NPO # 5 Sherwood Inn on Upper Boones Ferry Read APPLICANT: Marko Susnjara 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road Lake Oswego, OR 97034 OWNER: Same IMLMST: Addition of forty (40) space parking lot r9quires fill permit form the Building Department. SITE VOCATION: 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road Washington County Tax Map 2S1 12D Lots 1403, 1405 and 1406 4 Staff Comr ents : The applicant wishes to enlarge an existing parking lot by filling a portion of his property. In the future an addition to '1ze existing hotel is conterrplated. STAFF ACTION: Planning Staff reeoratends that a Fill Permit be issued to the applicant. Conditions plaaed upon this permit are as follows: 1) Future development on this site (motel construction) shall be subject to Site Design Review. 2) Several large signs on this site are not in conformance with the Tigard Municipal Code - Title 16. When any future addition is made to this site all signs shall be brought into conformance with Title 16. (The applicant is encouraged to provide a plan for bringing these signs into conformance with the Code over the next five (5) years. No future development on this site shall be approved unless this issue is resolved.) 3) No changes trill be nade to approved plans or specifications unless ( formal application is mmde to the appropriate City department and changes are approved by that department. Application for changes will be nade in writing and shall include applicable drawings. 4) The Public Works Director shall approve of the grading plan for this narking lot and shall supervise constnieiinn, 12420 S.W. MAIN P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD. ORMON 979)q PH- A1Q.1171 I 1 STAFF REPORT FINAL ACTION TIGARD PLANNING DEPAFM&W ' MAY 5, 1981 SITE DESIG4 REVIEW SDR 12-81 Page 2 Of 2 5) All proposed utilities shall be placed underground. Street lighting installations shall be approved by the Public Works Department. 6) All street and parking areas shall be concrete or asphalt. An sidewalks shall be concrete. 7) The embankuent created by this fill shall be landscaped to control erosion. Terracing shall be'created and embankment shall be constructed in conformance with Chapter 70 of the'Uniform Building Code. 8) Trees on this site shall be retained in the future until a plan has been approved on the' inotel' addition. Planning Director NOTE: Sign below to acknowledge conditions set forth for this project and return to the City of Tigard Planning Department. Failure to acknowledge will result in no further action on this project with regards to issuance of Building Permits or engineering approval. Signature - Owner Date C LE GREENHILL ASSOCIATES LTD 9999 SW Wilshire St Portland OR 97225 RECEIVED PLANNING Jan. 28, 1991 Planning Dept. FEB 1 :1991 City of Tigard Box 23397 Tigard, 97223 ATTN: Keith Liden Dear Keith, Referencing your letter recieved this date, please be advised that as indicated to the City Council on 1/22, Mr Ferryman has considered a compromise proposal for the councils consideration on Feb. 12th. Toward this end, his contractor, Martin Sign Co in Salem is doing the work neccessary to present this proposal to the city. As quickly as I have the material I will contact you for a review. In the meantime, Mr Ferryman wishes to have me make his position on the central issue in this case unequivocably clear. Both he and the previous owner, Marko Susanjara, feel a keen sense of injustice and betrayal of the staff's integrity on the sign issue at the Sherwood Inn. The facts as we understand them are: 1). In response to an agreement to annex the subject property into the city in 1976, the city issued a variance for the free-standing signs for the restaurant and motel. This variance was issued without time constraints, conditions or limitations. 2). In 197U, the city adopted amendments to it's sign code placing additional limitations on the types of signs considered in the previously approved variance. A 10 year amortization was imposed. However, the owners at that time were not so advised of any affect on their signs as a result of the new amendments. 3). In 1984, the owner, Mr Susnjara, sought approval to alter one of the previously approved free standing signs. This request was reviewed by the planning staff. The Planning Director, Bill Monahan, now employed in the City Attorney's office, then advised in a letter to Mr. Susnjara, that the staff had reviewed the previous variance approval and granted the request indicating it "will not be adversely affected by the new proposal" l Irn,21 90'9.'1.`004 4). The staff indicates that sometime in 1988 or '89, that the owners were advised of the amortization provisions and that the previously approved variance was no longer in effect. No one has any written record of such correspondence, however. 5). In 1989, Mr Ferryman purchased the property with the intent to impeove the motel facilities and with a clear understanding that the signs were not an issue with the city. 6). As a part of a site review process last year, to expand his facilities and utilize the balance of the property, Mr Ferryman, is advised of a new staff position requiring compliance with sign code, disregarding authority of previous variance. 7). In your letter of 1/25/91, you now refer to a city action taken in 1981, wherein then Planning Director, Aldie Howard, included a condition also seeking compliance with the '78 sign code. Your letter included a copy of the '81 staff report responding to Mr Susnjara's request to expand his parking lot. It includes 8 conditions and on the second page, an acknowledgement and signature acceptance block. However, it is neither signed nor dated. Mr. Susnjara recalls this matter quite well. Upon reciept of the report, he immediatly contacted Mr. Howard and reminded him of the approved variance. Mr. Howard did not contest the matter and withdrew that recommendation. To summerize the foregoing, the record indicates that under Jerry Powell's directorship, the city induced the annexation of the subject property and granted a variance for the signs. Under Aldie Howard's directorship, the issue was raised and settled in favor of the previous variance. Mr. Susnjara did not acknowledge the condition. Under Bill Monahan's directorship, the matter was again raised, considered and resolved in favor of the previous variance. If this were not the case, it seems very clear to us that Mr. Monahan would have stated otherwise to the owner at that time. I am well aware of the consistant staff turnover in the planning dept. having known each of the planning directors and managers who have served the city since 1969. I suggest the high staff turnover during 70 & '80's, has contributed to inadequate record keeping and inability to maintain an accurate and consistant perspective on matters such as this. Mr Susnjara is very clear about the issuance of the original permit and the reaffirmation of that permit under two seperate planning directors. The issue was never in doubt until last year when the current planning staff made a completely new and radically different determination on the 1976 variance. Mr. Ferryman is making a substantial effort, at considerable time and expense, and delay of his proposed expansion, to reach a final agreement over the Shewood Inn signs with the city. We sincerly hope this can be accomplished in a true spirit of mutual understnding. However, if it cannon he will proceed without reservation, to have the matter fully resolved in court. Very/Truly, I i Hal Hewitt cc: H. E. Ferryman M. Susnjara 17 rte. January 31, 1991 City Council of Tigard FEB c/o City Hall ¢ 199 P. 0. Box 23397 ^ Tigard, Oregon 97223 ~g Re: Sherwood Inn Sign Dear Members of the City Council: I am aware that you are considering a sign ordnance problem with the Sherwood Inn and had hoped to be at the last meeting to disclose the series of transactions that spell out the history of the sign. I was the owner of the Sherwood Inn Restaurant from 1968 to 1982 and the owner of the Motel until 1987. From what I have been told you have received most of the information I may have provided. There was one fact that I had not disclosed before but came to mind only recently again, that could be of help in making your decision. In 1973 the late Governor McCall required that all commercial signs be shut off to conserve energy during the original "energy crisis's of 1973. They were only off for a matter of 24 to 72 hours but the impact on the Sherwood Inn was devastating. The business coming directly from highway traffic dropped dramatically and even people who were referred to us had difficulty finding us in the late night hours. There is no question in my mind that a removal or lowering of the signs could have a major negative economic impact on the Sherwood Inn. If you have any questions that I can answer I would be happy to do so. Sincerely,` Marko A. Susnjara MAS/hh cc:file 3 (503) 234-8811 • LLOYD CENTER TOWER • 825 N.E. MULTNOMAH • SUITE 1001 • PORTLAND. OREGON 97232 ~ =m _ - - ~n ` ~ y: _ _ ~ e. u= - T . ~s - ~ j~ rw - ~ _ PLAT - f arm M ~ li.~t t j; QF S~ 11, s xrrr..~as ~.oanitcac a^~r~ ~ tel.. Q!f r~r,,ss~aaoc :~:6,a.~I,Rr~c ~ . ~ L:~ gT~T ~iEG7lgy ~ PR~Y.dI~ N~Lr~ST;>~T ~EG7l~ ~ t~t►1It ~nr t~ ~a~-~tsts ,c r~..E 9'7TH AYE ~ Ptlllt ~ fl~Y i4-4S iY ,lA. 3JBi WP ?S-it-~A ,t~k i.~ III r--- ' ~s-~ ,IY GB~E mac ~i~~f ~ ~ ~ ;a~a s.~. ~ b :1tIQE: i34•-?3i5 l~Aq~ SR 1T3Z3-~tlE7 ` !V ? i?'U#6iE (S6t3} q~-3f'S3 FAX: ~:4CS} i~7ts-4232 r I 33 1 t i F.Bff ~f I 3 I 4 I ~ ~ I-- 'e I S.W. VIEW TERRACE g , ti ~ E I ~ ! a w a wtaorG - [ ~ ,,ao,,,~Fa ~ ~ ~ I- ~ ~ ~ I 3? t/1 ~ - qAJ ~ ~ ~ - - - P F N R O g E I ~ r t r~'RRACE b sr~ o tiaat ~a 4 1"i` ~ } ~ t p 2 i ~ ~ m ae $ t I ~ i ~ I cw. , s~-v raf 6 X i - : ~ 31 a~ v~cnvm r~aP IV_ATE RIVE ~ .....E,, . _ _ _ ` ~i - so's - - - - `j!' ~ ~s NOTES: ' • >tAES~ E3~ ' 1. ALL PUBUC WORKS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE CITI' OF TIGARD STANDARDS, I B rtF • I r 2. A PRNATE DRNE AS SHOWN WILL 8E UTILIZED FOR ACCESS TO THE SIX LOTS • 1 E R A C F SHOWN. EACH LOT WILL OWN AN UNDMDEO t/6TH INTEREST IN THE PRNATE ~ 3 ~ ~ 6 DRNE AND WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RS MAINTENANCE. ' 1 2 3. THE PRNATE DRNE SHALL HAVE AN EASEMENT FOR ALL PUBUC AND PRNATE I 1 ZZ UTILITIES. " ~ I I 4. AN EXPANDED HALF-STREET IMPROVEMENT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG THE ~ ~ L FRONTAGE OF S.W. 87TH AVE. ~ 5. THE IXISTING GARAGE/SHED WILL BE REMOVED. A NEW GARAGE WILL BE CONST- i: ~ RUCTED TO SERVE THE EXISTING HOME, ~ ~ S.W. INEZ ST. ~ _ . , _ . , _ , 6. THE SANITARY SEWER WILL BE EXTENDED VIA AN EASEMENT AS SHOWN. ~r~ ~ r>~4b ' ~ 7. THE STORM DRAINAGE FROM THE HOMES AND PRNATE DRNE WILL BE COLLECTED AND DISCHARGED INTO A DIFFUSION.DISSIPATOR TRENCH AS SHOWN. THE AREA ' DRNN WILL HAVE A,BLOKED STUB OUi TO THE NORTH FOR FUTURE CONNECTION, I AND AN OPEN STUB OUT INTO THE DRAIN ROCK WILL FUNCTION IN THE INTERIM." :s'" ~ ~ s. A to Foor wt DE UTILITY AND SIDEWALK EASEMENT SHALL BE PROVIDED ALONG -...,t;~ ~ THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PRNATE DRNE. . '~3 ~ - I 'kkM~w ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ , , . ~ I r F f ~ ' ~ ~ a fir' 2-12-91 AGENDA #5 A,, l ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 OF ` ~ ' , i ~ 4 . . . . ~ . . , ~ ~ ; rpjt a: ; ~ ► ~ I Irk Y►~►Ie r►. ` t~'i . , r ~~i ~ . r i ' NDTE: If THIS Ml(ADFI ~ ~.A _ d , ~ INED _ z.._....., s.. it . ~ I. txrnwrxo Is ass c q THAN; - ~ - - - _ . - _ _ _ - - , , , THIS NOT i I , TY OF TH: aRIBINAL ~ ~ ~ - 1 7 , . IND , , - GE , t3a ~ LIZ;:` ~'Z` 9Z.. S2 1? . . a V . _ ! CZ ..ZZ''.~ O >bl 01 ~i t►t ,~~t i,l Ef al ti OI ! 1 fl= 4 C 8` 1 . ti , i. 1 ~ 1. - N . _ - - _ I _ _ _ - _ , _ - _ _ _ _ s- ~ ..,-.ms's'- ~ - ~ ,e~''.~,r . _ _ .ti. _ , _ _ . p ~ s. . - - r _ a ~ - ad= - ~ . - _.F. ~ ~ - ar " 9 ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ z i • r h*, a,~ w~ ' . ~ Tf~C~t. 31;F~ft ~i6CT,~pMf ~ t'•,6e► P~1~.41f T)'>~fC~. f~~7f~1' ~6f $~M1nM Olf~t I~ ~ ~~I~-t~.:S~. IX'Ji~£ - ro actF 7M~t i-,t►.S _ 1~ Ili: 13@1 Illy ?5~-11-11 f ~ 1~ 1.~ IIC'i1~S ~ 1 y, ~ - ~ z ' - qq d vs ~ f . f.:"2 1^p2 'YCaA1A3}, ~J!• see"t;e3 T2'53E~ S.iL ltltr,:. ~tG ~LL t ~ ~E ; 5.3G-' ~ 3J1f'L,~-Ei~7 ~ € `503; 533-315: 2^ b t ~ sA(: (503% b,.s- 233 ' i I 33 ..v. . I _ I ~ f I ~ i F 1 (y f < . I ~ . . ~ , ' s S.W. ViE1M TERRA+C>E ~ I 1. ~ ' Q i 3? ~ -k* ~ ~ ~ ,~_y, f ~ I Y ~ P ~`J v I E,, c s ~ ~•s~ I ~ 6 ro ~ rr swutr r spa stTwr ~ 1 f - I I), sr. pIW »Ob dr. ~0 xr 1106 si ti I i~ _ I~ L_~., +r... _ i^ . F t 3 Q b i x crw a Icw. ~ r. 6 _ !.tee _.~.T. ~ , f - - ~scrcM .1 - --~--1 o+oo' ► , a ~ 31 „ Y~CIN/lY hL4P N ~ R ee ~ - - - Yp.,:."'` I ~ 503 T , ~ NOTES: •?s~Yy; ~ - - t, ALL PUBLIC WORKS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO 1HE CRY OF TIGAR ;s., ~ , B ~ ~ ~ • \ D STANDARDS. . ~ y ~~n,:: I ~ ~ Q C ~ ~ 2. A PRNATE DRNE AS SHOWN WILL BE UTILIZED FOR ACCESS TO THE SIX. LOTS ~rz . I ~ SHOWN. EACH LOT WILL OWN AN UNDMOED I/6TH INTEREST IN THE PRVATE {z- ` ~ ~t:...._~•,~ , I I ~ DRNE AND WILL B~ RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS MNNTENANCE. r. ` I 2 3. THE PRNATE DRIVE SHALL HAVE AN EASEMENT F R -1.r ~'='~''r ~ ~ 22 UTILITIES. r 0 ALL PUBLIC AND PRVATE I~''r~ ; ~ ~ 4. AN EXPANDED HALF-STREET IMPROVEMENT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED ALONG THE 4y, t~+r F ~ L , FRONTAGE OF S:W: 97TH AVE. , k, ~t ~ ~'t 5. 1+ ~-z : 1 THE EXISTING GARAGE/SHED WILL BE REMOVED. A NEW GARAGE WILL BE CONST- , RUCTED TO SERVE; THE EXISTING HOME. ' ~.YT ~ ~ S.W. INEZ ST. ~ , ; r ~ . ~ ~ , . _ ~ 6, THE SANITARY SEWER WILL BE EXTENDED ?A~ AN EASEMENT AS SHOWN. r ~ ~ ~ I r~~ r'~+.a ,g< , . ~ 7. THE . STORM D FR M H k~ 3 y 4 RAINA E. 0 THE OMES AND PRIVATE DRNE.WILL`BE COLCEQTED ; . si , _ AND' DISCHARGED I A, DIFFU510N dI5SlPRTOR,•TRENCH AS :SHOWN: THE ARE$ • . DRAIN WILL HAVE, A .BLOKED STUB. O1If:T0 T'h1E,NORTH FOR. FUTURE :CONNEG;TiQN ~r''~'~ ' . t ; 4 , . AND. AN OPEN,,STUB 'OUT INTO •TH~ LtRNN ;ROCK, WILL ,FUNCTION IN".THE: IN'1fR[M ~ h~"'` . P,/~tK~,9y~.,3,ty k' r7 ~F rs . s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - y r,' ~ X~,.j. 4 , 4f - ; . . I ~ r NT S SD •DI P 'SIDEWALK. E'AS E HALL~BE PROVIDED AI.O~+IG~ ',~jr ~h>m ~ , „ . , . ' THE.,NORT !DE ~ a r : . „ . j~ , H l E OF E RNATE RNB. , , ~ ~ x. ~,_-c 2-12-91 AGENDA 5 , w, sa I ~ . „ ~ _ r ' `9;'` a : , s: F , , 2 ~ 2 .~sx; ~ :6 .r t v r. . ,..._.........,.:......,!~i~. ,..:r ~ ~ , r 'fix a k . s vt r ~ y ~ - . hk ~ 1:. , . r f ~ f r ..,.T,, ,r . ~ t ~ ~ _ . _ . : x ~ ~Fi ~1 ~ N~'~t~ f'I' ~I ' [tit ~ ~ r. ~ NOTE: If7HISMICRDFI ~ ~ ~ ~ 5:'......_ ..:.,~.7. .i:... _ ~ _,.t ' ~ . - - ` ING IS LESS ClE R THIS'NOT , _ - , I ' ~ ~ TY OF THE gil0lNAI ' , 1Nfi oe ea az . >oa : sa ; a:.: cz 1 as , a . o , e~ vi ~ I r~ - , ! • ~ a it . f ~ at r,_. r_:-..; ~ 4~ of s o , ~ R o~ s r ~Idx ~ r [ ~ E:~ f , _ ~ - - t _ w____..~,. r... t•. ~ ~ - I. 71 GREENHILL ASSOCIATES LTD 9999 SW Wilshire St Portland OR 97225 Feb. 8, 1991 Tigard City Council Muni. Bidg. Tigard, OR ATTN: Cathy Wheatley RE: Sherwood Inn Variance Ladies & Gentlemen, Both of my clients, Mr Freeyman & Mr Banning, must be out of during the first part of the coming week. We therefore request a continuance of our hearing on the Feb. 12th. In the meantime we are working with the Mr Reilly and his staff to further resolve the issue at hand. Very Truly Hal 44w-Ttt cc: E. Ferryman Real Estate Planning & Development (503) 292-6933 17 2-I2-91 Ayen~o *g For IDhoi. o5 5e~ ~ho~o boo k COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM co CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 2/12/91 DATE SUBMITTED: 1/30/91 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Solar Access PREVIOUS ACTION: Council Ordinance Cha ter 18.88 CDC approval to proceed with a 4 public hearing PREPARED BY: Keith Liden f DEPT HEAD O CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Ax- POLIC ISSUE Should the City amend the Community Development Code to include standards for providing improved solar access for single family residential development? INFORMATION SUMMARY On October 8, 1990, the Council decided to proceed with a public hearing to review the proposed ordinance. The Council requested that the proposal be reviewed by the NPOs prior to the hearing. The packet includes a memo from the staff which elaborates upon the rationale for approving the proposed ordinance, the proposed ordinance, and pertinent supplemental information. I ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the attached ordinance 2. Modify and approve the attached ordinance 3. Reject the proposal and direct staff to prepare a corresponding resolution FISCAL IMPACT Tigard staff experience in pretesting the ordinance and the experience of other jurisdictions that are implementing the ordinance indicates that additional review time for new development and residences is minimal and should not require any revision of fees. A fee will need to be established for the third portion of the ordinance pertaining to Solar Access Permits. SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the attached ordinance SOLAR.SUM/kl t` MEMORANDUM TO: Pat Reilly, City Administrator FROM: Ed Murphy, Community Development Director DATE: January 31, 1991 RE: Solar Access Code Amendment Purpose of the Hearing The purpose of this hearing is to review proposed amendments to the Tigard Development Code relating to solar access standards and procedures, and determine whether all or a portion of the draft ordinance should be adopted as part of the Community Development Code. Packet Contents The attached packet includes the following new information: 1. The Solar Access Ordinance (Chapter 18.88 Community Development Code) a. Section 18.88.030 - Solar Access Definitions and Illustrations b. Section 18.88.040 - Solar Access for New Development C. Section 18.88.050 - Solar Balance Point Ordinance d. Section 18.88.060 - Solar Access Permit ordinance 2. Minutes from the City Council meeting of October 8, 1990, where the model solar access ordinance was discussed. 3. Minutes from the Planning Commission and NPO meetings where the proposed Solar Access Ordinance was discussed. Materials that were also presented to the Council in August are included for convenience: 4. A letter from Linda Davis, Director of the Department of Planning and Building, regarding the City of Beaverton's experience with implementation of the Solar Access Ordinance. 5. A letter presented to the Planning Commission from Charles Hales of the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland. 6. "Sunlines", First Quarter, 1988 which contains an excellent summary of the three major components of the model Solar Access ordinance for 1) new residential subdivisions (New Development), 2) single family construction on existing lots (Solar Balance Point Standard), and 3) protection of solar access from future tree shade (Solar Access Permit). 7. "Sunlines", First Quarter, 1990 which features several articles regarding the current status of the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar Access Project as well as a few recommended amendments to fine tune the original model ordinance. 8. Solar Subdivision Re-design Case Studies which evaluate nine subdivision plats and illustrate how the solar access ordinance can be met with little difficulty and a negligible impact upon development costs. t Planning Commission Recommendation C on July 24, 1990, the Planning commission received a presentation regarding the model ordinance and the associated design principles. A public hearing was held on August 7, 1990 and the Commission voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the model ordinance. On January 8, 1991, the Commission reviewed the Code language contained in the attached ordinance and voted four to two to recommend adoption of the Code amendment. The dissenting votes were due to concerns relating to the regulation of future shade trees in the Solar Access Permit portion of the ordinance (Section 18.88.060). NPO Recommendation Joint presentations of the proposed Solar Ordinance were made before all of the NPOs on July 18 and November 14, 1990 and the NPOs have been given an opportunity to comment on the issue. NPO 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 voted to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance package. NPO 4 and 5 have not had a quorum and therefore official recommendations have not been made. NPO 5 members did not express any objections to the ordinance but did indicate that clarification should be provided in the Solar Access Permit portion of the ordinance relating to permit status if a solar feature becomes inactive after a permit is granted (This is addressed in Section 18.88.060 H. 1, page 25, of the proposed ordinance). Staff Recommendation The staff recommends adoption of the model ordinance as Chapter 18.88 of the Community Development Code. If approved by the Council, assistance shall be provided by the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar Access Project to train City staff members to administer the ordinance. Two work sessions will be provided to familiarize the City staff with the ordinance. Assistance will also be available on an "on call" basis until June 30, 1991 and probably beyond that date. A flyer summarizing the ordinance and a three-part "how to" packet will ` be provided for the City's use to provide information to the development community. It is recommended that the ordinance become effective on May 1st to allow adequate time for the staff and developers to become familiar with the ordinance. Concerns have been expressed by a minority of the Planning Commissioners and some Council members regarding the Solar Access Permit section of the Code (Section 18 88.060). This portion of the ordinance is considered by the staff to be an important component of the solar ordinance package which will allow solar features to function effectively in the long term. However, this portion could be deleted without affecting continuity of the remainder of the ordinance. Rationale Supporting Adoption of the Solar Access Ordinance The positive recommendation by the Commission, the NPOs, and the staff is supported by two major considerations: 1. Consistency with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan The Plan contains two policies that support the use of energy conservation techniques, including solar energy. Policy 9.1.1 THE CITY SHALL ENCOURAGE A REDUCTION IN ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY INCREASED OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION AND THE PRODUCTION OF ENERGY FROM ALTERNATIVE SOURCES. Policy 9.1.3 THE CITY SHALL ENCOURAGE LAND USE DEVELOPMENT WHICH EMPHASIZES SOUND ENERGY CONSERVATION, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION. The Implementation Strategies 1, 4, 5, and 6 which support these policies elaborate upon possible methods for implementation. 1. The City shall encourage public and private programs that offer weatherization and energy conservation programs, e.g. tax credits, low-interest loans, etc.. 4. The City shall, in the Tigard Community Development Code, allow for more flexibility in structure siting to provide for maximum solar exposure. 5. The City shall review the feasibility of implementing a solar access ordinance and wind generation provisions. 6. The City shall cooperate with both public and private agencies that make use of site development and architectural techniques using natural elements for heating and cooling in all developments. Polices 2.1.1 and 6.2.1 are also relevant in the evaluation of the proposed solar access ordinance. Policy 2.1.1 THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN AN ONGOING CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND SHALL ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN ALL PHASES OF THE PLANNING PROCESS. The model solar access ordinance was presented to the NPOs two years ago soon after the project commenced. Presentations were made to joint meetings of all the NPOs on July IS and November 14, 1990 which included the rationale behind the ordinance, the regulatory provisions, and the public hearing schedule before the Planning Commission and the City Council. Between November and January, the NPOs were given an opportunity to submit comments for Council consideration. Policy 6.2.1 THE CITY SHALL DEVELOP CLEAR AND CONCISE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS TO FACILITATE THE STREAMLINING OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS, AND WILL ELIMINATE UNNECESSARY PROVISIONS WHICH COULD INCREASE HOUSING COSTS WITHOUT CORRESPONDING BENEFIT. The solar access ordinance package represents new Community Development Code provisions that have been thoroughly critiqued by local government officials, development industry representatives, the public, City staff, and the City attorney's office. The model ordinance has been endorsed by the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland, the League of Oregon Cities, the Oregon chapters of the American Institute of Architects and the American Society of Landscape Architects, the Solar Energy Association of Oregon., and the Oregon Remodelers Association. In addition, the ordinance has been in effect for as long as two years in several Portland area communities and it has been found to operate efficiently for the administering governments and developers as verified by the letters from the Home Builders and the City of Beaverton. Studies related to the implementation of the ordinance have shown that a minimal amount of time is necessary for administration and that additional costs for design and public improvements have been negligible. As illustrated by the nine subdivision examples in the packet, a departure from customary subdivision designs is not necessary to provide solar access to residences. Proper solar orientation of conventional homes without solar devices has been proven to result in significant cost savings for the life of the structure and that those savings increase with the use of solar equipment or design. 2. Consistency with State and Regional Energy Policy The Oregon Department of Energy and the Northwest Power Planning Council have identified the importance of creating low-cost and g. environmentally sound sources of energy. The proposed ordinance is consistent with this strategy by siting conventional homes to take advantage of proper solar orientation and the subsequent reduction in energy demand for heating and cooling. In addition, proper siting of residences allows present and future options for the efficient use of solar devices such as additional south-facing glass or hot water heaters. SOLAR.SUM/kl l i 1 ( b. ORDINANCE NO. 90-28 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF TITLE 18 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE, ADOPTING RULES FOR EXTERIOR THERMAL ENVELOPE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, FOR MANUFACTURED HOMES ON INDIVIDUAL BUILDING LOTS. C. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Kasten, to approve Ordinance No. 90-28. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 11.2 Amend Definition of Wetland and Amend Sensitive Land Approval Criteria Regarding Wetlands in Chapter 18.26 and 18.84 of the Tigard Municipal Code a. Community Development Director reviewed the staff report as presented in the Council packet. He also referred to errata language, submitted to the Council, which should be incorporated with the proposed ordinance. b. Council discussion followed concerning the buffering requirement of 25 feet. This is the minimum amount of buffer land and would apply to those small parcels of wetland not under the jurisdiction of the Oregon Department of State Lands or the federal government. C. ORDINANCE NO. 90-29 - AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS OF THE SENSITIVE LANDS AND DEFINITIONS CHAPTERS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PERIODIC REVIEW. d. Motion by Councilor Kasten, seconded by Councilor Schwartz to approve Ordinance No. 90-29 along with the proposed errata documentation as submitted. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 11.3 Model Solar Access Ordinance a. Senior Planner Liden reviewed the information submitted in the Council meeting packet. b. The following persons testified in favor of adoption of a solar ordinance: Richard Durham, City Councilor for Lake Oswego, noted that the proposed model solar CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 8, 1990 - PAGE 11 ordinance was a unique project; 22 jurisdictions were cooperating in this effort. He advised the U.S. Department of Energy was interested in this region's efforts and had asked for information on the project. i Forrest Soth - City Councilor for Beaverton outlined his involvement with the solar access effort in the region. He advised the Home Builder's Association supported the model ordinance. He reported that efforts for a volunteer-only solar access program have been unsuccessful. Beverly Froude, NPO 3, testified she supported the solar access program. C. Motion was made by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor Kasten, directing staff to prepare an ordinance for formal consideration and to schedule a public hearing. The motion passed by a unanimous vote of Council present. d. Mayor Edwards and Councilor Eadon noted their desire to have solar access efforts be voluntary rather than mandated. The Mayor added he was aware this was a worthwhile endeavor and Councilor Eadon noted she would be willing to review her position. Council asked staff to make a special effort to involve NPOs. Community Development Director noted Planning Commission would review and make a recommendation to the City Council. 11.4 Coiirmunity Development Code and Comprehensive Plan Revisions for Group Residential Care and the "Economy" Chapter Mayor Edwards noted the public hearing would be continued to October 22, 1990 for consideration of proposed ordinances for Group Residential Care and Review of an Update on the "Economy" Chapter. 12. NON AGENDA Councilor Eadon announced a "Play in the Park" celebration to inaugurate installation of new park equipment in Cook Park. The event will take place at Cook Park on Saturday, CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - OCTOBER 8, 1990 - PAGE 12 re-designating the area to Residential. He favored recommending to City Council that high consideration be given to adopting the text from the Metzger-Progress Community Plan. * Commissioner Barber moved and Commissioner Boone seconded to recommend to City Council to: (1) reverse the decision that amended the Comprehensive Plan and text which initiated the Presidents Parkway proposal, and (2) initiate planning effort to develop an area plan using the Metzger-Progress Plan as the basis to evaluate future land use and development opportunities in the area. Motion carried by a unanimous vote of Council present. Meeting recessed - 9:42 p.m. Meeting reconvened - 9:55 p.m. 5.4 PERIODIC REVIEW Solar Access Ordinance Senior Planner Liden discussed the proposed Solar Access Ordinance. He explained the purpose is to devise a uniform ordinance which can be used metro wide. He described the policies in the local Comprehensive Plan and Northwest Power Planning Act which pertain to solar access. He outlined the specific zoning areas which would be affected by the ordinance. He explained the five parts of the ordinance which were: - New Development - Solar Balance Point Ordinance (affects building permits for houses on existing lots). - Solar Access Permit (applies to vegetation) - Solar Access Definitions - Solar Access Illustrations o Mike McKeever, Project Manager for the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar Access Project, is with McKeever Morris, Inc., 812 SW Washington Street, Suite 1110, Portland, 97205. He stated that goad solar features can provide a home with energy savings of 15% to 20% in the winter. He named the many governmental bodies and groups who have endorsed the Solar Access ordinances. He used a model neighborhood to demonstrate the spacing and sun angle for various sites and house sizes, noting that east-west facing houses have better solar orientation. He said that the purpose of the new development ordinance is to promote good solar orientation for 80% of the lots. There was further discussion about integrating good solar access into design and landscaping using solar friendly trees and east-west orientation. Handouts were provided to further illustrate the various aspects of solar access. Wetlands Senior Planner Liden summarized the proposed changes to sensitive areas PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 24, 1990 PAGE 6 codes. He said staff recommendations were as follows: - change definition so it coincides with the Federal and State definitions; and - provide comprehensive inventory of wetlands for the City He showed the index map of wetlands devised by a consultant and described the various information sources used. He explained the benefits of this inventory to developers and planners. He noted that some of the wetlands are under the control of the Corps of Engineers and briefly described how this designation comes about. He advised that notification of this proposal has been sent to property owners who are located in the wetlands, and to the Corps of Engineers, Division of State Lands, the Audubon Society and others. He said the wording will be re-worked depending on comments received from interested parties. There was discussion of the wording to be changed in the code, and the need for clarification of the City's role. There was discussion concerning the August 7 meeting. 6.0 OTHER BUSINESS Senior Planner handed out information pertaining to a seminar by the Oregon Planning Institute at the University of Oregon September 5 - 8. The seminar is entitled "Linking Growth Management and Urban Livability." C_. ADJOURNMENT: - 10:45 PM k, /v Ellen P. Fox, Secretary ATTEST: Mi l t6n Fyre, a"si ent of/pcm72490 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 249 1990 PAGE 7 fr 1 A TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST 7, 1990 1. Vice President Fyre called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M. The meeting was held at the Tigard Civic Center - TOWN HALL - 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Vice President Fyre; Commissioners Barber, Boone, Fessler, Leverett, Moen (arrived at 9:30 P.M.) and Saporta. Absent: Commissioners Castile, and Peterson. Staff: Senior Planner Keith Liden; Planning Secretary Ellen P. Fox. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Barber moved, and Commissioner Fessler seconded to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commissioner Saporta abstained. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATION o There was none. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 PERIODIC REVIEW Senior Planner Keith Liden explained that the Periodic Review process is required by the State in order to review Tigard's Comprehensive Plan and implementing ordinances and to make changes to bring them up to date. !e o Solar Access Ordinance: Senior Planner gave a background of the proposed Solar Access Ordinance. He said the purpose for reviewing this proposed ordinance f1~ was to determine what recommendation should be forwarded to the City ~tLJO0-4-1 Council for its consideration on August 27, 1990. He briefly described i~ the four parts of the proposed ordinance: tr M~ pa~ - Solar Access Ordinance for New Subdivisions - Solar Balance Point Ordinance - Solar Access Permit Ordinance - Solar Access Ordinance Definitions and Illustrations He gave examples of some of the exemptions for existing homes and new construction. He discussed the use of "solar friendly trees; and he explained that the permit.and enforcement would be the City's responsibility. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - AUGUST 7, 1990 PAGE 1 He advised that'~~,,,~~aff was recommending adoption ~ the model ordinance to be incorporal d as Chapter 18.88 of the Community Development Code. He said this recommendation was supported by two major considerations: (1) consistency with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and (2) consistency with State and Regional Energy Policy. He elaborated on each point. He noted that State and Regional Policy calls for development of low-cost, efficient sources of energy that are also environmentally sound. Clear and concise development regulations have been thoroughly reviewed by industry representatives and government representatives and the public. There was discussion of how implementation would affect staff, administrative time and cost to City. Senior Planner reviewed the actual cases which were used to evaluate the processing time, and he said each case did not take much time to process. PUBLIC TESTIMONY i o Forest Soth, 4890 SW Menlo Drive, Beaverton, said he is the Chairperson for the Portland/Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar Access Project. He thanked the City of Tigard for the service rendered, and for the service of Senior Planner Liden for serving on the ordinance committee. He spoke about the need for energy conservation, and he said the adoption of the ordinances would enable citizens now and in the future to take advantage of solar energy features. He referred to the ordinances as an investment in the future. He said 22 jurisdictions worked on the set of ordinances over a two-year period. He mentioned that the Northwest Power Plan recognizes solar access as one method of conservation which reduces the need for, and extends the time in which new electric generating facilities will be required. He urged the City of Tigard to adopt the new ordinances. He said the experience in Beaverton has been favorable and has not been time consuming to work with. Mr. Soth read a letter from Charles Hales, the Director of Governmental Affairs for the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland (Exhibit I). In his letter, Mr. Hales praised the model Solar Access Ordinances. In his letter he said the Home Builders appreciate uniformity among various jurisdictions. He advised that after two years of implementation and minor, fine-tuning amendments, the field testing has shown that the ordinances work as expected. He endorsed the Solar Access Ordinances on behalf of the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Poi^tl and. o There was discussion about the State's proposed reduced insulation requirements in some areas. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioners all expressed satisfaction with the Solar Access Ordinance. * Commissioner Barber moved, and Commissioner Saporta seconded to recommend to City Council to adopt the Solar 'Access Ordinance. * Motion passed by unanimous vote of Commissioners present. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - AUGUST 7, 1990 PAGE 2 17 November 14, 1990 NPO #1 & #2 Started 7:00 p.m. Attending: Gott, Sena, Duffield. Visitor: John Acker, Staff 1. Presentation of solar access guidelines and protection low ordinances; to be useful on a regional basis, a solar code would be helpful to both builders and home owners to maintain consistency in how future housing divisions are planned. We think this is useful and far-sighted code ideal, and approve of its intent. 2. Variance 90-0035 Building an accessory 864 square foot storage building We have no problem with the oversize building, as long as it's built in a good manner, and its appearance is favorable to the neighborhood. May our NPO chairman get a copy of the building exterior plan? 3. Discussion as to whether the Senior Center is being used to any good effective purpose or not. Can its use be expanded? / 4. Comp Plan Amendment CPA 90-0010 t Comprehensive plan amendment to return to the earlier Ash Avenue extension plan, where Ash is run straight to Burnham Street. Also, a loop is proposed to get into downtown Tigard. This would be still an incomplete proposal because nothing is shown to divert the traffic onward once it gets off the proposed loop onto Tigard Street. If loop adopted, the left turn at Greenburg & Main should be eliminated. 5. Other Business Is Hwy 99 complete or not? We will contact Randy Wooley to see if the State intends to clean up the meridian going to King City. Trees have been removed, and it is wondered whether the State is going to make an effort to beautify the strip to a level to at least match what used to exist at these places. 6. Park Grant Discussion: We approve if practical. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dan Gott, Secretary NPO 11 (639-3065) 1oo1n%11z%npo2o1n January 3, 1991 141anni-n&--.'C76mm ssi°on-•-. City of Tigard ate: Solar Access Ordinance We would like the Tigard Planning Commission to be informed that NPO rr$ took action in the form of a motion voted on by unanimous vote to endorse the Solar Access Ordinance as presented. This action was taken at our meeting on January 2, 1991 at which there was a quorum present. typed for Herman Porter, P"esident r S RECEIVED 3 191 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECEIVED .'1! 8 1991 r' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: Cathy Wheatly, Recorder FROM: Irvin- L. Larson SUBJECT: MINUTES OF NPO #4 Meeting Date: NOVEMBER 14, 1990 STARTING TIME: 7:10 P.M. PLACE: TIGARD CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Dick George, Chairman Irving Larson, Gordon Martin STAFF: Ronald D. Goodpaster, Chief of Police Liz Newton, John Acker GUESTS: Mike McKeever, Consultant, Solar Access Ordinance, Meeting (including other NPO s)was called to order by Keith Mike McKeever discussed solar access standards. A quorum for NPO #4 was not present, however due notice off the the meetin- had been given. Chief Goodpaster agreed to limit the number of hours of riding "dirt bikes" on private property West of S.W. 72nd Avenue. John Acker stated that the TIGARD TRIANGLE MASTER FLAN (PROPOSAL) by The Benkendorf Associates will be on the NPO # 4 agendas for at least six months. The next regular meeting of the NPO # 4 will be Wednesday, December 12, 1990, 7:30 P.M. TIGARD CIVIC CENTER. There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. TOTAL VOLUNTEER HOURS: 15 Irviny,- . Larson, Secretary Attest: Dick George, Chairman cc Liz Newton ~i 0 190 i L NPO #5 MEETING NOVEMBER 14, 1990 CIVIC CENTER LUNCHROOM After a joint presentation on the Solar Access Ordinance, NPO #5 convened its regular meeting in the Civic Center lunchroom. Present were Chair Hopkins, Bieker, Doty and Takahashi. Members Hawley and MacKinnon were excused. Guests this evening were Debbie Mangold, property owner in NPO #5 and Dick Bauer, a former property owner. Minutes of the September and October monthly meetings were approved as circulated. New business: SDR 90-0023 Site Design Review/Schmidt This was an amendment request for SDR 89-0022 on which a previously decision had been rendered requiring the removal of underground fuel storage tanks. Applicant has changed designation of tank usage to residential and farm use only. Discussion: Ms. Mangold is an adjacent property owner who purchased her property from Mr. Bauer, a principal affected property owner in the previous decision. Her concern regarding the tanks were based on the proximity of the tanks to her water supply (well) for her residence and the gas L fumes which are vented close to her property. The NPO members present felt that nothing had changed to warrant altering the previous decision and the conditions imposed by the city. We support the previous decision and advise the parties to contact the city planning department and ask what factors would change the decision. Since this item was the only agenda item we had, we were able to adjourn at 8:20 p.m. spectful lsubmitted, Sharon Takahashi, Secretary l NPO #5 NPO #5 met on January 16, 1991 in Pat Reilly's office at City Hall. The meeting convened with the following present: Hopkins, Bieker, Hawley and Takahashi. Minutes of the previous meeting were approved as circulated. Unfinished business: Keith Liden visited with our NPO to comment regarding the ordinance review for solar access. There were no real objections to the ordinance but a question of clarification was asked by Chair Hopkins regarding protection of a system which an owner chose to let go "inactive." New business: 1. Lot line adjustment 91-001--Pacific Realty Ass'n No objection was voiced on this adjustment in the Light Industrial zone. 16600 -16640 SW 72nd Avenue. No objections noted but not enough information given. 2. Site Development Review 90-0024--Severson This is for construction of an auto repair building and a i construction office and warehouse building, respectively. Although this is a permitted use, we have concerns regarding noise, outside storage, paint odors and disposal, and DEO regulations being enforced. 3. Home occupation permit 90-0029--Gain' West Trading Post 15210 SW Gentlewood Court This is a clothing and jewelry manufacturing site. No objected noted as long as neighborhood restrictions regarding traffic and signage are observed. 4. Dorsey Bus company was given approval for a mobile office. 5. Gage-Wilmarth building approved in CP zone at 13615 SW 72nd. Some of the members had a concern about the parking at this .time. 6. Final decision on Schmidt property: tanks decommissioned. 7. Lot line adjustment on 15630 SW 79th to allow for more flexibility in development. No objection noted. Announcements: Chief Goodpaster would like to speak to any NPO's which have concerns regarding the state of the city, law enforce- mentwise. Liz Newton invited all to a light rail presentation of Wednesday, from 7:30-9:00 p.m. at City Hall. We adjourned at 8:50 p.m. pectfull submitted, RECEIVED PLANNING Sharon Takahashi, Secretary JAN 2 2 1991 NPO #6 MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 14, 1990 1. Members in attendance were: Carver, Crow, Davenport, Dillin, Kasson, Pasteris, and Watson. Not excused: Clinton and Wilson. 2. Minutes of the September 19th meeting were approved as written. Minutes of the October 17th meeting were corrected and then approved. The corrections were as follows: Excused: Dillin Not excused: Clinton and Wilson 3. Otak/Schekla subdivision - David Bantz of Otak presented a preliminary overview of the subdivision (at this point called "Riverwood Estates") to the NPO members and 17 visitors from Picks Landing and Dover Landing. Briefly, City of Tigard approved the annexation and the zone change to R-7 (the Boundary Commission was to give final approval on November 15th). The subdivision has 23.5 acres and will be divided into 89 lots with an average square footage of 8,500. NPO will review the actual plans at their December 12th meeting. 4. Keith gave us a status report on the Castile subdivision. A revised plan had been submitted at the last hearing and is currently being reviewed by Staff on three points: 1) Affect on traffic circulation, 2) Evaluate storm drainage, and 3) Lot size conforming to code (7,500 sq. ft..) 5. VAR 90-38 Misc 90-18 Administrative Variance - Beacon Homes Inc. NPO reviewed the variance request for a 4-foot side yard setback as opposed to the required 5-foot setback and found no objections. 6. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. The final notice on TRIAD will be going before the Council for approval on November 26th. 2. NP0:6 recommends approval of the Solar Access Ordinance. The motion passed unanimously. 3. NPO 6 changed their December meeting date to the 12th. 6. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30. f 01 11 u I NPO #7 C NOVEMBER 14, 1990 MINUTES Solar presentation _ Solar access ordinance ROLL CALL: Present - Blanchard, Dorsett, Gross, Howden, McGlinchy, Woolery Absent - Cunningham, Robbins Meeting convened at 7:30 p.m. Cal suggested we all get a copy of NPO rules. Discussion of where BP Oil is going with their plan. Liz said there will be an orientation meeting about third week of January. X 5 . Minutes were read and approved. Solar Access Ordinance - Howden motioned to support this ordinance. Seconded by Blanchard. Gross mentioned City of Portland has adopted same type of ordinance. All in favor of this ordinance - 6. Against - 0. Any plans for development in our NPO need to be mailed to Cal before anything happens. Cal mentioned that we did not get minutes of other NPO' s . McClinchy suggested having a spot in CityScape to let people know of upcoming developments. Discussion of letter to have NPO 17 in Cityscape. Meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Katy Dorsett 1o91n%11z\np07■1n 71 NPO #8 Minutes November 14, 19S 3 MEMBERS PRESENT: Blomgren, Burness, Curtis, Epler, Haglund, Hartzel, Hein, Iford, Juve, Nolan, and Stevens. VISITORS: Nancy Tracy 7310 SW Pine... Hazel and Donald Lyon 10440 SW 87th...Paul Brossia 8585 Pfaffle (1511 Park Ave Portland)... Gene Davis 10875 SW 89th. 1. Meeting Called to order by Marilyn at 7:30 pm. 2. Minutes of September 19, 1990 meeting were approved. 3. Minutes of the October 17, 1990 meeting were approved with an amendment to item 5 ( Sensitive Lands Review-Davis). The amendment adds the sentence: "City, State, and Corps of Engineers requirements should be met." 4. After some discussion about the Solar Access Ordinance (presentation given prior to the meeting) the following motion was passed: NPO #8 recommends passage of the Solar Access Ordinance by the City of Tigard. 5. Keith Liden gave an account of the procedures for approving proposals. He noted that, for variances, notification to affected neighbors is given after the decision, but they may appeal within ten days. It was recommended that neighbors be notified prior to the NPO meeting, so they may express their views. This should be an agenda item for the next meeting. 6. Marilyn circulated the following decision notices: a) Davis Proposal (October minutes): Denied. b) Lincoln Center (October minutes): Minor land partition: Approved; Building height: Not yet decided. c) Pole building (October minutes): Approved. d) Home Occupations Approved: Lighting services for events: 11115 SW 78th. Design and manufacture dance wear: 9640 SW 74th. Office and paper work for Aluma Fab products: 6918 SW Pine. 7. REVIEW recommendation on SDR ()-0022; Var 90-0033; Lincoln Eight. Keith answered questions regarding Lincoln Center. They want to reduce the size of the compact parking stalls from 8.5 by 15 to 8 by 15. There is a traffic study underway. Concern was expressed about the safety of the large trees near the traffic circle. 8. Gene Davis gave a presentation to the NPO regarding cattle grazing. He wants to enlarge the area that his cattle can be allowed to graze in the wetlands area. He indicated that the land is not in the 100 year flood plain. There was a heated exchange among those present regarding the present areas where his cattle graze, the hauling of fill in the area, and whether or not he is in compliance with current statutes. 8. Meeting adjourned at 9:15 pm. Submitted by Jim Hein TO LIZ (STAFF): * Place an agenda item on next meeting re: Martin's proposal for solution to traffic flow problems in Tigard. * Place an agenda item on the next meeting re: policy procedures changes. * Commissioner Fyre moved and Commissioner Fessler seconded to request staff to prepare the Final Order for January 21st. Motion carried by f C majority vote of Commissioners present. 5.5 SOLAR ACCESS .ORDINANCE. _ZOA 90-0003 A proposal to create a new chapter (18.88) of the Community Development Code to require solar orientation ?j for construction of single family or duplex residences, and solar permit for the protection of solar devices from tree shading. AFFECTED ZONES: All residential zoning districts. VIC, Senior Planner Liden provided a brief overview of the ordinance and explained that the ordinance was basically a translation of the model ordinance which the Commissioner had reviewed previously. He said the date for City Council's review of the ordinance will be February 12, 1991. He outlined the topics of the various sections. He advised he would be proposing modifications to the time line requirements to bring them into line with current time lines now used. o Commissioner Fyre inquired which other municipalities have adopted Solar Ordinances. Senior Planner advised that 17 other municipalities in the metropolitan area have adopted similar ordinances including Lake Oswego and Beaverton. Senior Planner reviewed for Commissioner Moore the background of development and described the proposal funded by the Department of Energy to study and develop an ordinance for the area. He pointed out some of the benefits of developing the model for the entire area as opposed to different ordinances from one city to the next. o Mary Clinton, 9865 SW View Court, from NPO #6 spoke about some of the { draw backs for existing residences in certain instances. She objected to the restrictions which could be placed on residents by new construction moving into the neighborhood. o Senior Planner explained plantings already in existence would be protected from the ordinance. He advised that the Solar Ordinance only deals with new plantings and discussed exempt trees which do not create shade in the winter. He explained the process for notifying affected property owners. CLOSE PUBLIC NEARING o Commissioner Fessler said she was not in favor of the Ordinance for several reasons. She discussed the complexities and problems with interpretation; and she found the setback requirements confusing, and was not convinced of the economic benefits. She suggested the Ordinance would be burdensome for the nurseries and landscapers, and that too many solar friendly trees might upset the mono-ecosystem. o Senior Planner addressed her concerns and commented on the positive administrative experiences thus far reported by those municipalities who have been using the Ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 8, 1991 PAGE 9 S * Commissioner Moore moved and Commissioner Barber seconded to forward a recommendation to City Council to approve the Ordinance. Motion passed by a majority of Commissioners present, with Commissioners Fessler and Castile voting "no." 6. OTHER BUSINESS Senior Planner Liden read a letter of resignation from Commissioner Peterson, who was resigning because the Commission would be meeting on Mondays during this coming year. o Senior Planner handed out schedules of the 1991 Planning Commission Meetings dates. ADJOURNMENT - 11:10 PM i Ellen P. Fox, Secretary ATTEST: _ Vice President Milt Fyre PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 8, 1991 PAGE 10 Aug. 7, 1990 City of Beaverton Ed Murphy, Director RECEIVED Community Development Department /!(f City of Tigard 0 0 9 1990 P.O. Box 23397 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tigard, OR 97223 RE.: Metro Solar Access Ordinances Dear Ed: As a member of the Steering Committee of the Portland-Vancouver Metro Solar Access Project, I am pleased to'hear that Tigard is now considering adoption of the ordinances. You asked me for information concerning administration of these ordinances which I am happy to provide. 1. New Development - During the past two years that these ordinances have been in effect in Beaverton, we have processed about 30 subdivisions. There was an initial learning curve, but we have become more proficient in reviewing them,. cutting down our processing time. A report prepared by Benkendorf Assoc. in June 1989 reported that, for the jurisdictions which had adopted the ordinances, it took an average of 3.3 minutes/lot to review a subdivision.under the new development standard. We have bettered this average to about 1 minute or less per lot with the use of a'"solar protractor", or about one hour per average subdivision. At times, we will have to spend more time on the solar issue if a developer is asking for exemptions from the standards. In no case has the solar review resulted in a delay by staff nor have we had to hire additional staff to handle the workload. 2. Solar Balance Point (Infill) - The exact number of lots we have reviewed is not available, but probably approaches 1,000 or more. This review is done by our single family plans examiners and takes less than one minute per lot. Initially, a few lots required major modifications to plans to meet the requirements. Over time, however, designers and builders have become familiar with the requirement and very few plans require more than very minor modifications to a roof line or pitch or minor setback to achieve the standard. Given that a single family plan review takes 2 - 4 hours overall, the solar balance point review is insignificant. 3. Solar Access Permit - To date, only one permit has been processed in the City under this ordinance, and it was successful. I believe it is only one of two processed in the region so far, so it is difficult to determine its impact. All in all, we have found the ordinances fairly easy to administer, getting easier over time as both staff and the development community get used to the standards and process. Since a lot of the builders in Tigard are the same as those in Beaverton, and they have become familiar with the ordinance, your job should be much easier. 4755 S.W. Griffith Drive, P.O. Box 4755, Beaverton, OR 97076, General Information: (503) 526-2222 An Equal Opportunity Employer I hope this information is useful. If we can provide anything additional, please let me know. Sincerely, Linda L. Davis, AICP Director, Dept. of Planning & Building c: Forrest Soth, Council President Chair, Metro Solar Access Steering Committee Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland 503/684-1880 503/245-0530 15555 S.W. Bangy Rd., Suite 301 • Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Fax # 503/684-0588 August 7, 1990 Tigard Planning Commission P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Commissioners: I regret that due to a scheduling conflict I will be unable to attend your public hearing Tuesday evening on the model solar access ordinances. I am writing to comment on the Home Builders Association of Metroplitan Portland's (HBAMP) experience with these ordinances. The HBAMP participated thoroughly in the development of the model ordinances, including the research effort, which provided the foundation for the standards on which the ordinances are based. We believe this level of participation from the development industry is critical to the development of workable land use ordinances. Further, we support the approach of developing regionally-uniform development standards wherever feasible as a means of reducing the costs of development to the private sector and improving administrative efficiencies for local governments. As you know, we are strong supporters of uniform road standards for Washington County local governments for precisely this reason. While never anxious to increase the amount of regulation' imposed on new housing, we endorsed the model solar ordinances because we were satisfied they would work in the field. After nearly two years of implementation in several jurisdictions, and some relatively minor finetuning amendments, the evidence indicates that the ordinances work as expected. The project has conducted an evaluation study, which indicates that the ordinances require, on average, very little administrative processing time. With due respect to the project's evaluation study, however, I place more credibility in my own evaluation system. My system is based on the number of phone calls I get from angry builders. M phone rin s when local government actions create problems for builders; these ordinances do fi5t generate phone calls. Should Tigard make t e policy ci solar access protection program we would encourage you to use these ordinances. EM 17 I R / One final note: The State of Oregon is in the process of l updating its residential energy conversation code. A proposed code developed by the Energy Conservation Board (ECB) provides for energy savings credits for "sun tempered" houses. The proposed code has been drafted.so that these energy savings credits would be relatively easy for a house. to achieve on a solar lot as defined in the model f ordinance's new development standard. The ECB's r acaarr•h indicates that these sun tempered houses would realize-uR- front cost savings of be ween 4 to re uce 1.nsu a ion requirements. We support integrating the t a and use ordinances ana _building codes in this manner. Should the final code proposal, which the State adopts include ECB's sun tempered paths the high percentages of solar lots called for in the solar new development ordinance could help to minimize cost impacts to builders of higher insulation requirements. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. arles Hales Director of Governmental Affairs CH/ sb i f PoRT[An~a g'- j . VANCOUVER' METRO AREA.. ; I . SOLAR ACCESS PROJECT' t 'First Quarter 1988•: COMMITTEE homes will be oriented to maximize meeting will begin at 4:00 pm. at solar access and minimize shade on BPA headquarters, 1500 NE Irving, RELEASES DRAFT adjoining properties. The standard ;Room 444 East_ would apply to applications for a SOLAR ACCESS subdivision or planned unit develop- Local governments are scheduling ment in all urban single family R E C O M M E Nublic hearings - residential zones and single family public to consider the D ATI O N S developments in other zones. Staring Committee's recommends C-L-red on page 2- tions beginning in February, 1988. Three draft solar access protection PRE-TEST UNDERWAY: IU public hearings process is expected to last through May, 1988. ordinances have been prepared by the STEERING Project's Ordinance Committee for COMMITTEE SETS public review and comment. The pro- THIS ISSUE OF visions provide comprehensive pro- JANUARY 28 MEETING SUNLINES tection for both new and existing ms- FOR FINAL ACTION dences in the metro area. A New Development Standard maxi- ON ORDINANCES 'tom issue of Sunlines describes the mizes solar access in new residential three solar access ordinances which subdivisions and PUD's by requiring A have been prepared by the Portland- that 80% of all lots have pre-test of the draft solar access proper solar Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar ordinances began in late November ~ orientation. A Solar Balance with twelve of the participating local Access P~roject's Ordinance Commit- Point Standard minimizes build- ing-to-building shade and limits a governments. The pre-test, which is te Wee. . Summaries of two important research products are also new building from casting shade designed to identify any modifica ptrject rprovided. esThe first, prepared the is greater than 12' to 20' high at the tions to the ordinances which are , northern lot line depending on the nay, will end in early January. pfO~ s Research Committee, north-south lot dimension. The scan- Participating governments include: estimates the economic benefits of Bard also provides a calculation that Washington County, Beaverton, providing solar access protection in the encourages siting the proposed Tigard, Lake Oswego. Clackamas metropolitan area. The second, pro- structure with its south windows in County. West Linn, Wilsonville. Pared by the Ordinance Committee in the sun. The third ordinance, called a Ord, Troutdale. Scappoose, draft form, estimates the costs of im- Solar Access Permit, provides Vancouver and Clark County. plementing the Solar access ordinances existing single-family residences it has developed. Now is the time to protection against shade from future provide comments to the project on the non-solar friendly trees on adjoining The Steering Committee has scheduled its regular meeting on Proposed recommendations. If you properties within each The details January 28 to take final action on would like copies of the ordinances or and illustrations of f each ar<dinanoe air; reports complete the form on discussed below. the proposed solar access ordinances research the back page of this newsletter and developed by the project's Ordinance 0 SOLAR ACCESS Committee. The Steering Commit- mail it to the address on the form. tee will adopt firlalchanges to the nx,:'" : DEVELOPMENT x~t4%tvefo~,.:~ lvndord Y ordinances and decide whether to sib ~£¢ih {:a recommend implementing the ordt- o~QrBalvncs pof.... ~Sofd~~cec~f!siriff metres purpose of the new development as development regulations ;.;£c4onorrrl BofflJid,µ~ standard is to deli tots so that or thrnu{,~,..~ :COsft'~.c'~(7~_' i~,'5~. ~:«~•~~•`'~t~<i avoluntary The ;isti:::i:::-'n..'n.':fi:.3rt:{.';:r:";~??~L~ta`a:.,,;'.;~.E3~j~`a•~ti:t..^ 22 GOVERNMENTS PARTICIPATE IN SOLAR ACCESS PROJECT i Milwauldq Beaverton, Caaelius. Forest Genre, Tigard. Greshan. Fairview. Troutdale, Vancouver. Clash county. aadcama, Caney. Canby. Happy Valley. Lake Oswego, Portland. Washington County. Os City. Wen Linn, Wasnnvine, St. Hekm. Scsppoose and Mdtramah Co. 2 Sunlines, First Quarter, 1988 From the Steering;Committee . By Dick Durham, Chairman; Steering Corumittee, and Clty Councilor, Lake Oswego Beginning in February. 1988 planning commissioners and elected officials from the twenty-two. local governments participating in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar Access Project will deliberate on whether or not their committees should adopc:the model solar: access ordinani es developed by the Project..: Before the local demo- crane pivicess,begms, i believe tt is:valuableao reflect ion „Cbmmunlcation -understanding and conse rsus hive the tremendous progress wtuch we have madeiogther become the hdllmarks of this public=privafa>partnershlp " during the past year.: Representatives from 22 govern : . meetslarge and small. erttes msd counties, m::-.. gWn and Oregon have sucetecleif m working together to develop a solar access land use program that" ill Wortc for all Thehome buitduig uidtistry has worked with the local governments stile by rde day ih and day 64% fivm the fast day of the'p% t. Commumcatiou understanduug an d consensus have become the haItmcs of this public p.." pactneishig TheProjecthas mach to accomp(tsh.tlirs spring, but a very strongfoundaaon has been.built andI aw optunuho That thaplanning commons and elected offic'ials thoughout the metropohtatrarea will carefulllr stndy and ulutnately support the work oPthis protect NEW DEVELOPMENT Siting of Structures and Trees south wall passive solar uses as well (continued from page 1-) as future rooftop cues. Development Lot Design Standard The solar lot design standard will on all lots meeting the 80% solar provide proper solar orientation for design standard, or any lot which The Ordinance requires that lots and homes. The recommenda- might shade one of these lots, must eighty (80) percent of the lots lions also include a method to meet the shade standard. The in a proposed development provide legal protection from proposed standard preserves comply with one of the follow- *-building and tree shade as develop- and guarantees construction of ing three solar design options: -.inent occurs on each lot. The pro- at least a two story (301) home posed standard would permit 12 feet on every lot. 1. Basic Requirement: The of shade from buildings or non-solar lot depth must be at least 100 friendly trees at the north property Exemptions from the Design ( feet measured north to south. line between 10.30 am. and 1:30 Standard The front lot line must be pm. January 21 (see Figure 4 on oriented within 30 degrees of a page 4). This will result in a shadow An entire development. or portion of true east-west axis (see figure 1 25 feet into a lot with a north-south the development, shall be exempted on page 2); or depth of 100 feet. Adjustments to the from the solar design standard for the standard are made when a protected following reasons: .2. Solar Building Line solar building line is used. Option: The developer must 1. Slopes over 20% in the designate a precise location on This shade standard would protect north, west or east direction; or each lot where sum will be combined an vare 3- protected. This option adds Figure 1 design flexibility to the standard. SOLAR LOT OPTION 1: BASIC REQUIREMENTS The protected solar building line must be designated on the plat I and be oriented within 30 degrees of a truce east-west axis N (see figure 2 on page 3); or 3. Performance Option: At least eighty (80) percent of the south wall or glass area of habit- Minimum of 1 OW able structures must be protected north-south tot from future shade by develop- dimension required ment or non-solar friendly trees Front lot line is within and the long axis of habitable 30 degrees of structures must be within thirty an east-west axis i . (30) degrees of a true east-west axis. Figure 2 Sunlines. First Quarter, 1988 3 ~f^ SOLAR LOT OPTION 2: PROTECTED SOLAR BUILDING LINE single family uses in other zones. The standard requires that both a "shade reduction line' and a "solar Protected Solar Building gain line" be calculated with each Line within 30 degrees permit application (see figure 3 on of east-west axi N page 4). The shade reduction line standard protects sun to the northern property owner. The solar gain line helps the applicant determine t whether his south windows will be At least 70' between solar located in the sun. The goal is to building line and middle place the new house where both of of lot to the south. This will these standards can be met. ensure ability to build two t story house. Shade Reduction Line n t i The standard establishes a maximum ------t------ shade standard for each lot. The shade standard, which is measured at the north lot line, varies depending on the north-south dimension of the lot- The standard guarantees the ability to construct - at a minimum - a 30 foot house in NEW DEVELOPMENT such trade-offs include: slopes the middle of the lot being (c-db-edit-page 21 to the north, east or west affected by the standard. The 2. Off-site shade, from between 10% and 20%, sig- variable shade standard means that in existing or allowed permanent nificant natural features-, some cam full south wall solar off-site features which precludes pre-existing road or lotting access protection will be provided, in solar USC$ or patterns: and public ease- other cases partial south wall ments or rights-of-way; or protection will be provided, and in 3. On-site shade. The still other uses only south roof applicant documents existing 2. Significant development protection will be provided. amenities would be lost or im- solar trees and agrees to preserve which could sign iftcantlY hd~gk effects of the standard on three variable most of the e trees after develop- paired ifferent lot meat occurs. reduce the market value of the conditions are explained below. property if the solar design Adjustments to Design principle were applied; or Shade Reduction Line Case Standard 1: Full South Wall Protection 3. Existing shade precludes The jurisdiction shall reduce the solar uses. A house on a lot which has at least percent of lots that must comply with 100 feet of north-south dimension the solar design standard below the (e.g. 50' by 10(Y or 70' by 100' lots 80% standard to the minimum extent kOLAR BALANCE POINT fronting east-west streets) must be necessary if the applicant has shown TAN DARD FOR EXISTING designed and sited so that it does not one or more of the following LOTS cast more than 12 feet of shade at the conditions exist: north property line in the winter. The purpose of this standard is to The proposed sun angle in the 1. Meeting the standard would minimize building-to-building shade standard is 10:30 am. to 1:30 p.m. result either in reduced and to promote solar access and its on January 21, which results in a density or significant utilization in residences. The setback from the northern lot line of infrastructure cost in- standard would apply to applications 2S feet for every 1 foot of building creases. Development for new houses and remodeling height over the allowed shade height constraints which have been projects on existing hots in urban at the northern lot line. in most identified as possibly creating single family residential zones and earvurued oR a 4- 17 4 Sunlines, First Quarter, 1988 Figure 3 A SOLAR BALANCE POINT APPROACH TO INFILL DEVELOPMENT: LOOKING AT BOTH SIDES OF THE COIN SHADE REDUCliON POINT SOLAR GAIN POINT Protecting yot.tr northern Locating your house neighbor's sun to receive sun on south windows N ' 15' of shade allowed 15 of shade allowed at property line at property line SETBACK ADJUSTMENTS IF NEC- Standard Side Setbacks ESSARY TO MEET SOLAR STANDARDS 5 • to5 Reduced Side Setbacks BALANCE POINT IOU lot fronting on north-south house to the north is protected from (,onrtnaed fioar pace s) street) must be sited so that it does shade, regardless of the height of the not cast more than 20' of shade at the shadow at the north= lot line. This cases buildings which meet this solar northern lot line. This will typically will provide design flexibility to the standard will protect full south wall protect the south roof of a two story building community. i solar access to a typical house on the . lot to the north (see figure 4 on this house (see figure 6 on page 5). Exemptions from the Shade page The standard for theselots >S Performance Option Reduction-Line Standard identical to the one for r new develop- ment lots. The applicant may meet the standard If any of the following conditions Shade Reduction Line Case 2: by showing that at least 80% of the exist an exemption from the standard Partial South Wall/South Roof south facing glazing area of the shall be granted. Protection rained an pale 5- - Figure 4 A house on a lot with at least 70' of NEW DEVELOPMENT STANDARD FOR SITING north-south dimension (e g. 70' x BUILDINGS AND TREES 100' lot fronting a north-south street) rising must be designed and sited so that it suatn n 2.5 to angle r 1 does not cast more than 16' of shade ratio from i at the northern lot line. In most SOUTH WALL cases this standard will protect either south wall solar access to the second story of a two story house or the roof of a single story house on the lot to the the north (see figure 5 on page 5). • . Shade Reduction Line 3: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r 100 a+ - _ _0-4 ter - -loon' South Roof Protection 12' of shade allowed A house on a lot with at least 50' of 1 property line north-south dimension (e.. 50' x P7 w7l Figure 5 Sunlines, First Quarter. 1988 5 SOLAR BALANCE POINT STANDARD FOR LOTS neighbor, the standard requires that WITH 70' NORTH-SOUTH DIMENSION the application show the potential shade on its south windows that could be cast by its neighbor to the sun angle rising at 2 .5 to 1 ratio south. However, any action by the from SECOND STORY applicant to modify a house design to sOtrrH WINDOWS provide greater levels of sun would be voluntary. If the applicant finds his home will be pushed south into shade from the adjoining property, ` he can request that the difference between the two calculations be split. This is called the Solar Balance Point % ------70•------ +-----7o•--%' ---s for the lot. The neighbor to the north must agree with this request. 30' of height guaranteed in middle of lot SOLAR ACCESS 16• ofsh8deallowed PERMIT FOR TREE SHADE at property line BALANCE POINT 4. The shade from the building The purpose of the solar access (continued fr- page 4-) strikes only an unbuildable area; or permit standard is to minimize shade 1. The shade from the building falls from future trees. A solar access within pre-existing shade from trees, 5. The shade from the building permit applies on a lot-by-lot basis. other buildings or topography; oar strikes an unheated area such as a A property owner must apply for a garage, or a south wail with minimal solar access permit to receive the 2. The lot has a north, west or east glazing. protection it offers. Eligible proper- facing slope of greater than 20%; or ties include lots in a single family Solar Gain Line residential zone and single family 3. Difficult lot conditions exist such lots in other zones which existed as public easements. before the adoption of a solar access drairtageways. In addition to analyzing the shade a etc; or new structure casts on its northern pro!' Figure 6 Solar access permit SOLAR BALANCE POINT STANDARD FOR LOTS WITH 50' NORTH-SOUTH DIMENSION Asolar accesspermit isadocument sun angle rising issued by the local planning agency at 2.5 to t ratio pursuant to appropriate review from SOUTH procedures. The document describes ROOF the maximum height that trees can grow on lots generally south of and within 150 feet of the lot benefitted N by the permit. It prohibits the owners of property to which it applies from allowing non-solar friendly trees <tx <:< planted after the date a permit is t issued to grow above that maximum - - - - _ - - - - so• -gip height limit. The maximum height --so ~ :1 5 limit is a line extending up at an angle of 2.5 to l south from the area 30' of height guaranteed to be protected. It can be represented in middle of lot by a series of contour lines extending 20• of shade allowed east to west across a lot to which the at property tine permit applies for easy administra- tion. eowbwed on page 6. 4 6 Sunlines, First Quarter, 1983 RESEARCH mated that solar access will save PERMIT COMMITTEE $150 million in heating costs for (eontfnuedfrom page s_) new homes built in the next 20 ESTIMATES ECO - years in the project area (exclud- The planning agency shall grant a N O M I C BENEFITS mg the City of Portland). If all new homes were passive solar solar access permit if the application OF SOLAR AC- designed c we to the fullest the accurately describes existing sauc- C ESS solar access provided, the tares and trees on the applicant's potential is $325 million. These property and adjoining properties, The Project's Research Committee estimates do not include cooling, and trees on the applicant's rcieased the final draft in October of solar water heating, or pho- property do not shade the area to be its report on the projected benefits of tovoltaics. protected by the permit providing solar access protection. The reportrPotential Benefits of Average savings Mr home, It is Exempt Vegetation Solar Access", identified four main estimated that solar access will benefits of solar access. Solar access save an average of $1,160 ($300) Research has identified more than may: in heating costs over the life of 250 varieties of trees that are °sol:u• each new home. If all homes friendly ter they Sunlight). not block save energy and lower heating were solar designed, the average much winter A solar savings per home would be access permit does not apply to solar bills; • preserve future options to use $2500 ($630). Savings for any friendly trees. Therefore a solar solar; given home can be as much as friendly tree can exceed the maxi- • encourage the use of solar $4150 ($1075). These estimates mum height permitted for trees energy, and do not include cooling. solar subject to a solar access permit. A • establish a minimum solar water heating, or photovoltaics. solar access permit does not right apply to existing trees in the Incremental savings. The ground on the date a permit is 1. Solar access saves energy and issued, greatest savings are in preventing lowers heating ills. The worst case shading, running committee estimated a range of streets east west rather than Enforcement a solar space heat savings from solar north-South. and encouraging access permit t access, solar orientation and sun-tempered or solar design. solar design. Savings were Once the tire access permit fected adjusted for inflation and listed 2. Solar access future granted. . d. notices are sent to affected in 1987 dollars. The savings gptions to use solar. Solar properties, and an o the to were calculated over 30 years at ss is a Iost opportunity challenge the accuracy of of the with a 2 percent energy price. resousce. The option to use solar information contained in the applfca- immerse per year and discounted may be lost for good if it is not lion provided if granted, the permit at 3 percent yearly. Savings provided when a hare is bnt~L aisffected recorded the chain of lark re over seven years, the average These options include the use of properties, giving future length of home ownership, are in solar for space heating. water owners of those properties notice of parentheses. heating, and 10 produce electric- ity existence. If a tree is allowed to ity. grow above the maximum height The savings estimates are for permitted by the permit, the owner of passive solar heat gains only. Solar technologies are r+eceat, property bamefitted by the permit They do not include savings spurted by the energy crises of may petition the local planning front lower cooling bills on cast- the 1970's. They are expected to agency to enforce the permit The west streets, solar water heating. stature and improve in coming local agency considers the facts and, or photovoltaics. Some mem- years. Passive solar design and if it funds a violation exists, notifies bers felt that savings should be many solar water heaters are the owner of the property on which increased 10 patent to account cost-effective today. Photovolta- the offending tares are situated and for intangible. benefits of solar ics should become cost-effective provides an opportunity for a hearing energy to the environment and in the 1990's. With other energy to contest the issue. If a violation is society. prices expected to increase, solar proven, enforcement follows as with is expected to be a long-tercet t_ other land use law violations. Ater-wide savings. It is esti- growth industry. eorubuued on page 7- 17 71 RESEARCH COMMITTEE ing the cost-effectiveness o the Sunlines, First Quarter, 1988 7 (continuedfrom page 6-) proposed ordinances. 3. Solar access encourages the cases (1%) may occur during the first f use of solar energy, A review of Cost Reducing Features year of implementation. state of Oregon solar tax credits shows that homes on east-west In keeping with the Metro project's The cost report for the New Devel- streets were four times more design goals, the Ordinance Commit- opment Standard identified the likely than homes on north-south tee expressly designed the two following cost categories: streets to use passive solar. They standards to effectively provide and also were three times more likely protect solar access at the least cost Immediate Approval rases will to use solar water heaters. Three possible. Therefore, both standards require little or no additional costs times more tax credits were contain many cost-reducing features and are estimated to constitute 85% granted in communities with which distinguish them from solar of the future subdivisons submitted. solar access standards than in access standards currently enforced those without- by other communities. • Exemption Cases are sub- divisions (estimated at 4%) that are 4. Solar access creates a mini- Methodology expected to be exempted outright mum solar right. Solar access due to very steep slopes and existing protection creates a new property Cost estimates were based on heavy shade conditions. . right. It provides certainty to evaluations of existing solar access people wanting to use solar ordinances, the Metro project's own Partial Adjustment cases are energy, and protects investments research and interviews with subdivisions that are expected to in solar. It balances the current members of the building/develop- involve partial adjustments to the right to cast shade. ment community. standard due to various site con- straints (10% of the cases). ORDINANCE Typical cost cases were developed for both building and subdivision Re-Design Cases include COMMITTEE permit applications. For the Solar subdivision designs which totally ESTIMATES Balance Point Standard the following "fail" the solar design standard, POTENTIAL categories of costs were identified- necessitating substantial redesign COSTS O F and processing time. The Committee SOLAR ACCESS Nf nimum Impact cases consist estimated that 1% of the subdivision of straightforward building permit applicants may be of this nature. STANDARDS applications and exemptions which would entail little or no additional Findings The Ordinance Committee has costs to the applicant. Aproximately ieleased the drafts of two reports on 85% of the applications would fall Using the above information, a base the potential costs of the Solar within this category. case was developed which estimated Balance Point Standard WdI the average first year implementation situations) and the New Develop- Moderate Impact Cases possess oasts for both builders/developers ment Standard (subdivisions and lot and/or bolding design constraints and local governments. The major planned unit developments). Both which would require some additional conclusions of the studies were: reports examine the full array of design time and, perhaps, moderate potential costs to both the local construction costs in order to comply i. Solar Balance Point Standard government and development with the standard. About 15% of the community from implementing the building permit applications are Local Government Staff Costs: ordinances, including those for expected to be such cases. First year implementation costs are public hearings, education and estimated at an average of $6 per training, budder/developer project High Impact Cases would entail building permit application with design time, permit processing. additional design and construction declining costs thereafter. constriction costs, and market costs resulting from difficult site impacts. The cost reports are conditions and an applicant's Builder Costs: First year companions to the "Potential unfamiliarity with the solar access implementation costs are estimated AM, Benefits" to Solar Access study standard Although the Solar at an average of $55 per building recently prepared by the project's Balance Point Standard is designed permit application with declining Research Committee. Combined, the to eliminate such cases, the Ordi- costs thereafter. studies provide a basis for determin- nance Committee assumed that some eowinued on pale 8. 8 Sunlines, First Quarter, 1988 PEOPLE TO CALL (F YOU HAVE QUES71ONS ORDINANCE COMMITTEE The MetroProject is adrninistetedbythe0regonDepartmeotof (continued from page 7-) Energy and the Washington Stage Energy Office. 'ilte Oregon Department of Energy also has lead nnponsibility for conduct- 2. New Development Standard leg many of the Projeca s research activities. You can react the project's contact people for these agencies at the following numbers: • Local Government Staff Costs: For a typical 40 lot subdi John Kaufrnatn, Oregon Deparunaa. of Energy, vision, first year implementation costs are estimated at an SM-373 79M average of $4 per lot with declining costs thereafter. Karen Messmer. Washington State Energy Office. 206-5855013 • Builder Costs: For a typical 40 lot subdivision, first year Con:avadeaMmagementServices,lne.,isu econmltingrum implementation costs are estimated at an average of $20 per lot which has been hired to manage the project. C 34S is working with declining costs thereafter. with two local Repmscnuiivves,'I1ae aenkendotf Associates and Tarry Epstein, P.C., to provide sa vices to the 21 local governments. Tic low, along with the nacontact mes of pCi te u f The Metro pre-test that is currently underway will be used to be juris"ons working with finalize these estimates. each I oca► Repteseatative. CMS, Mike McKeever, ProjectManage , 503-227- 0400 CIAS. Carole Connell, Iocal Representative for Washington County. Beaverton, Coanclim. Forest Grove. 'Tigard. Fairview. Tmuadale, Gresham and Vancouver. 503- If you would like more information: 2264)M CMS, Les Tomidaj. Idol Representative for Copy of ordinance Canby. Happy Valley. Mlwaukie, OM- City. and Wlsen- ville, 50-2264)068 Larry Epstein. P.C..LxalRepresentative forClark Research C-ointrunce's economic benefits report Coatnty and Multaoaaah County. 503-2234855 Ordinatnee Committees cost analysis reports The ProJet Liaitaa Breiletil it prtWirhaf nawathlj by (.wcsvsa- If you would like to have a presentation of the lion Maxesenert Service. Lac. a division ofThe Betkendwf draftordinances in January or February A-ociater Corpmatim. p-ject nn"4 - for the PcrN Va, juver bfe&opo1dms Area Solar Access Project. CMS's oK=a are located at 522 S.W. Fifth Arwwe. Saute 1106. Please mail to the address below: Porda"Ongoas.97204. Ifyotrha-qucrtiowrormtegasimcs. CMr'sphoare aaanber is503,227-0400. ThePwdaxd-Varrrow.,z,Metropofi;aaAnaSakrArearProj- If you have questions. orwish additional information. please ect itfaadedby die BmwvakPowerA&niktioa.aadad callMticeMcKeever.ProjectManager. Conservation miviweadby*OrsgaaDepartmentofF.+tsrgyaatddwWash- 'ManagementSaviees, (503) 227-0400 insetarrSraMF.ire gyofrc -krden-pi-ofdwJVosrhaarst PowwAcr. Funding for ibis pablieodtow is provided by the Bonneville Power Adwiwisfntiow Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Am BULKRATE Solar Access Project r US POSTAGE 522 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 1406 PAID Pordand, Oregon 97204 PORTLAND. OR PERMFTNO.1692 t POaltA~i[)--. VANCOUVER METRO AREA ,y.:: _.:..i.:::..:::::.r..:.:nrc:}:i}.:,.:•:n;}r:r}}:p:::::::;}:::::.v:nyv,'y':'i'•'::ri::}}{.:<.:..:.y.:.Y... "i ...u.:........ n: ...f.:::4 ..:v w::::u.: xf}::••}iii}::'}}:: •}:•:......:i: i ' :First carter . LOCAL Vaneouvermetropolitan Area SOW REGIONAL SOLAR Access Project" prepared byConser- ACCESS LAND USE GOVERNMENT vation Management Services in the summer of 1989.1 PLANNING PROJECT ACTIONS Twelve of the twenty-two jurisdic- CONTINUES Clackamas County Adopts tions that participated in the Portland- Mearopolitan Ordinances Vancouver Metrpolitan Area Solar Area Solar olar Access Project is a Access Project have adopted and ale Area Project , Since the Steering Committx's cooperative project of 22 local administering the model solar access release of the model ordinance governments in five counties and two package, thirteen of the participating ardinancm As a means of dete min- states and the private development local governments have adopted and ing if there are problems with the community. The purpose of the administration of the Solar Balance implemented the ordinances. Clacka• project is to develop and implement a mas County, which began implement- Point and New Development ordi- . uniform set of land use standards to nances. the Project staff in coopera- ing the ordinances January 2. 1990. is lion with the administering jurisdic- Provide and protect solar access to the latest government to adopt, the lions, have completed an evaluation residential properties- ordinances. Other implementing local of these ordinances. governments include Multnomah In the spring of 1988 the Steering County, Portland. Gresham, Forest The ordinance evaluation focused on Committee for the project adopted a Grove, Cornelius. Beaverton. St. the potential problems with the package of solar access ordinances Helens, West Linn. Lake Oswego, and recommended their adoption to adequacy of the information and any Scappoose, Troutdale and Fairview. other potential complications which the participating local governments. All of the other participating local "Tile ordinances are providing a This issue of Sunlines provides a governments are expected to take status report on local government action on the ordinances sometime high percentage of homes and ordinance adoption actions, summa- homesites later this winter or spring. These and admiwith nistration of access to the the ordi- sun rizes the results of a one-year evalu- nd admi include Oregon City, Washington ation of the model ordinances. County, Tigard, Canby, Happy nances appears to be economical" explains the fine-tuning ordinance Valley, Clark County, Vancouver, amendments adopted by the Steering Milwaulde and Wilsonville. The Would make administration of the Committee, provides commentary Clark County Planning Commission ordinances costly and time cwnsum- from those on the front-lines working ing. The evaluation fonts were has scheduled a public hearing on the completed by plan reviewers in the with the ordinances, a sample solar ordinances for January 18. The subdivision design completed under different jurisdictions as they worked Vancouver Planning Commission had through their reviews of building the ordinances, and looks south to recommended adoption of the Eugene and north to Tacoma to see ordinances in the fall of 1988 and the permit and land division applications. continued on page 2 City is expected to resume its consid- The information contained in the - eration of the ordinances along with INSIDE: Clark County. evaluation forms received from the participating jurisdictions indicates ordinance Evaluation that there are no significant problems : Results, P 1 FIRST-YEAR with the ordinances. View from the Front, p 2 Steering Committee Flee-Tunes ORDINANCE EVALU- Solar Balance Point Standard Ordinance Pockoge, p 3 ATlO"r COMPLETED ordinance Summaries, p 3 The Plan Review Time for the Solar Around the Region, p 4 (Following are excerptsfrom the Balance Point Standard was predicted P'ofect Receives APA Planning "Evaluation Re rt or the Portland- continued on pave 4- Award, p 8 2 Sunhnes, First Quarter, 1990 Forrest Soth, City of Beaverton City Councilor "The ordinances promote an important public purpose at very Line cost. There is little doubt that solar must bean increasingly important part of our energy future I have been'veeji imliressed with how, efficiently the ordinances Piave' been applied." - - THE 1lIEYV FROM THE FRONT - T. . .Charlie liiaies, Nome Builders Association of Metropolitan PorRland; Director of Govcrn>iiental Affaurs "We endorsed the ordinances because we were satisfied they would work in the field; and theevidence indicates that they.' dog my phone rings when local government actions create p ipblems for builders; and 6'. ordinances do not'.generate 'phone calls." John Andersen, City of Gresham Community Development Director "0►e of the best ordiliatices I have seen for benefitltng the community wick the least inconvenience and cost Ridrard Durharer; Lake Oswego City ,Councilor "Efficient energy cue helps sopety as well as homeowners. nth current coatcerns about electrrcity'shortaes, :the gmenhotrse effect; artd worldwide eavnruental[ degradataon, these ordutancesdemoristrate art important local commie- ment to be a part of the solution; nota part of the km I Tiro Boatwright, City of )seaven-toa Building Ynspector Plans Fzaeniner I work with the SolarBalapce'Point ordinance.Throw our g6 princess in Beaverton I have found rCrdasonably easy t® implement; with very; few problems. The average case takes approximately t uec'minutes to check." . Dave Prescott,'Multnomah County Planner "I work with the solar subdivision design standards) The nine front the developers has been supportive "I haven't encountered anq sirpiise`or resistance`• I can't think of any cases where the development didn't either mcet'tlie.solai standaid or qualify for one of the exceptions." t PLANNING CONTINUES The Steering Committee is comprised Technical Assistance Services (co-limed fret v-ge 1) of 11 elected officials, planning Available to Local Govern- I how the model ordinances are commissioners and planners ap- ments and Builders beginning to have an effect through- pointed by the participaiirig govern- out the region. ments. Forrest Soth, Beaverton City The project offers technical assistance Councilor, chairs the Committee. services at no cost to local govern- The ordinance package requires new Richard Leonard, Multnomah County ments and the private development subdivision and planned unit develop- Planning Commissioner, is Vice- industry through the summer of 1990. ments to be designed to maximize Chair and Linda Davis, Beaverton These services are available through solar access to houses, and provides Planning Director, is Secretary. Other McKeever/Morris. Inc., Portland land members of the Committee include standards for siting houses and use consulting firm, through contracts landscaping to minimize shade on ' William Holstein, Lake Oswego City with the Oregon Department of adjoining properties. Councilor, y Andersen, Gresham Energy and the Washington State Community Development Director, Energy Office. For governments The package of ordinances was Karen Scow, Vancouver Planning which have not yet adopted the developed after the most comprehen- Director, Glen Gross, Clark County ordinances these services include sive solar land use research program Portland Planning Energy Energy ctor, Linda Director, training for staff and briefings for in the country and extensive work , Gerald Planning Commissions, City Councils with members of the home building Taylor, Cornelius City Manager, Len Waldemar and County Commissions. For industry who would be affected by the , Clackamas County governments implementing the new standards. Representatives from Planning Commissioner, and Marge- ordinances and members of the local governments and private rot Schumacher, Siappoose Planning private development industry these industry served on two 15 to 20 Commissioner. Dick or Durham and f t, Lrmer ake services include troubleshooting on person technical committees, the Oswego City Councilor and ee projects which are having difficulties currently chair the Steering Committee, complying with the solar standards. Research and Ordinance Committees.' to guide all aspects of project research settees as special advisor to and ordinance devel ment the Committee. standard to more specifically SunHrLm First Quarw. 1990 3 ORDINANCE FINE- indicate that an exception to the TUN!NG COMPLETED standard shall be panted if the "It is my. greaf pleasure; to en- developer cannot create 80 percent dorse the: recommendations of The Steering Committee reviewed the solar lots through use of the ' the- Metro`'Area `Solar:Access results of the ordinance evaluation "basic", and simplest, solar ::>1?aoject3'.Thi§ uni6e coopera= (see story on page 1) and information standard. This change makes it five;: project' sfioiild"stand"as a benchmark to government eve provided to it by the project consult- clear that the developer has the ant, staff from the implementing option whether or not to use ant, staff from the imPlementing oPlion whether a not to use rywhere local governments, and the private performance options which are banding industry. Following this included in the ordinance review the Steering Committee Governor, State of Oregon; adopted a series of fine-tuning • Simplification of some of the :February 24;`198$, : . amendments to the ordinances. The procedures for documenting shade Committee recommends that the from existing trees when a dential subdivisions and PUDs by thirteen local governments which are developer chooses to use this requiring that 8496 of all lots have implementing the model ordinances condition as a reason to apply for proper solar orientation. A Solar adopt the fine-tuning amendments an exception to the solar design Balance Point Standard minimizes sometime during the next year. The standard. building-to-building shade and nine local governments expected to limits a new building from casting act on the ordinances later this winter • Replace a requirement for a shade greater than IT to 20' at the are spring are encouraged to take topographic survey by a licensed northern lot line depending on the advantage of the experience of the surveyor in certain exceptions north-south lot dimension. The other governments and adopt the cases with a more lenient require- third ordinance, called a Solar Ac- amended version of the ordinances. ment for reliable topographic cess Permit. provides ex'rsting- The ordinance amendments are information. single-family residences protec- summarized below. tion against shade Erom future Solar Balance Point Ordnance Solar Access Permit Ordinance non-solar friendly trees on adjoining properties within 159. -Additional exemption in cases • No amendments are recom- The primary features and illustra- where there is a vacant adjacent lot mended. tions of each ordinance are to the applicant's north and the Solar Access Definitions discussed below. prevailing development pattern in the neighborhood is to place insig- This article summarizes the essen- nificant areas of glass on the south ' Minor amendments to the tial features of the proposed solar walls of houses. definitions for "front lot line" and access ordinances. A separate in- "solar feature" were made to formation packet contains the ordi- better handle irregular lqt shapes nances themselves, the Steering • Extension the standard to and provide more flexible design. Committee's resolution recom- diapply to all all not lots just in the new 80 sub percent mending adoption by local govern- of the lots meeting the solar New SUMMARY OF ments, and Findings in support of Development Standard This RECOMMENDED the ordinances. continued on page 6. provides consistency in the standard's application in infill and SOLAR ACCESS "Assuring access to the sun is a new development areas ORDINANCES part of providing: available and • Replace a requirement for Tire Steering Committee of the Pon- affordable energy for the future. a topographic survey by a licensed land-Vancouver Metro Area Solar The use of solar energy can surveyor in certain exceptions Access Project has recommended for protect our environment--and cases with a more lenient require- adoption by local governments three our economy-by reducing the ment for reliable topographic solar access protection ordinances. need for additional and more information. The provisions provide comprehen- expensive energy resources. sive protection for both new and ( New Development Standard existing residences in the metro area. Booth Gardncr, Governor A New Development Standard State of Washington • Clarifying the solar design maximizes solar access in new resi- April 22. 1988 4 Sunlines. First Quarter, 1990 need for modications or an exemption evaluated. The longest time recorded EVALUATION COMPLETED from the standard. for a subdivision review was 3-hours (conlinwed from page t) for a 17-lot subdivision. The case 1 Th°v av=gv° Dt..'.." .0-ewc r Cost yr the required a longer scrod of ui by the project's Research Committee Solar Balance Point Standard is because the original submittal to be approximately 10 minutes for 85 approximately $350. The projected contained several errors and an percent of the applications received cast per building permit application in adjustment request which was The average staff time for all of the the Ordinance Committee's research subsequently denied The shortest 158 Solar Balance Point applications report was $6,00, review period was I-minute for a 2- evaluated was 9-minutes 40-seconds. lot minor partition. Overall, the Of the 158 cases, six took between 15 New Development standard average review time per lot was 33- and 20 minutes to complete: and two minutes. took 90 minutes each to review. The Eighteen subdivisions or partitions evaluation illustrates that less than which created a total of 527 residen- The Ordinance Committee's research two-percent of the permit applications tial lots were evaluated. Of the 527 report estimated the average staff evaluated could be classified as "high lots created, 322 were lots meeting review time per lot would be 12- impact cases", as defined in the the ordinance's basic solar require- minutes, or $4.00 per lot The Ordinance Committee's research ments. An additional 25 lots met the evaluation sample illustrates that local report. Only four percent could be New Development Standard through government costs were only approxi- classified as "medium impact cases", the use of one of the solar perform- mately $1.00 per lot which is significantly lower than the ance options provided in the ordi- expected ten-percent rate of oc- nance. Overall 68 percent of the lots Conclusions curance. met a solar standard. Based on the information derived The data gathered from the evaluation The evaluation illustrates that the from the evaluation process, both the process illustrates that the Solar New Development Ordinance Solar Balance Point Standard and the Balance Point Ordinance is relatively provides adequate flexibility for New Development Standard appear to easy to apply in most cases. Only 5 unusual site characteristics or be functioning efficiently. They are of the 158 cases evaluated, or 7 amenities. It also illustrates that the providing a high percentage of homes percent, did not meet the standard. minimum 80-percent standard for lots and homesites with access to the sun, Only 11 cases. or 3 percent, required unaffected by development limita- flexibility to accommodate for those a modification to the original building tions can consistently be met development situations which cannot plan submitted to meet the standard. meet the basic standards of the Therefore, 90 percent of all evaluated The time necessary to review these ordinances, and administration of the cases met the standard without the - development applications was also ordinances appears to be economical. SOLAR ACCESS AROUND THE REtGION. TACOMA ADOPTS SOLAR ORDINANCES.. On December 12, 1989 mG Tacoma City Council by unanimous vote adopted`a comprehensive package of solar access protection ordinances:: The ordinances are patterned ter, 'e model ordinances developed for the metro area project witkmodifications to stilt local conditions. Deputy Mayor Hyde, before casting his favorable vote for the ordinances; said "I'd just like to note that this is an example of how - things`should be done les just ani excellent example: of good legislation." With the action Tacoma becomes the first local government in the state of Washington to implement comprehensive' solar access protection. Other local governments have implemented solar protection for.either,new development or existing development areas, but not both. EUGENE EYES METRO SOLAR ORDINANCECity of Eugene is considering implementing the meti& model solar access ordinances in place of its existing solar.-access land use ordinances. Glenn Havener, Energy Codes Director for the Oregon State Home Builders Association (OSHBA), said the state organization, in coopera- tion with the local builders association, is encouraging the City to make the change because of OSHBA's long-. { standing commitment to uniform statewide codes. Havener indicated that he was hopeful that all interests in the City, including environmentalists and local utilities, would be supportive of the change. He praised the metro model ordinances for being based on state-of-the-art technical research and real world building practice. SOLAR ACCESS PLAT Sunlines, First Quarter, 1990 5 IN ACTION ' by Gregg Everhart, Landscape Designer t'a •~j - David Evans and Associates. Inc. js. I TFrta~ Portland, Oregon EXEMPT AREA FORESTHEIGHTS - PHASE 3 J CITY OF POfMAN:>. M LT 40MA" cOUWY, Oi2EGort J90° - , ` ".7 LF iM ~ The recent platting of Forest Heights - o , fit y~ }ice; ► ~ . Phase III provides this issue of SUNLINES with a good application of the Metro Solar Access New Develop- _ ment standard in the City of Portland. , _.z X. gyn.; ~ The plat prepared by David Evans and Associate, Inc. (DEA), utilizes all of the innovative tirr:,, saving tool for map- severe slope. three available options for creating so- ping solar access on steep sites. lar lots while taking into account sev- The sample illustration below provides eral areas of exemption due to non- Using GIS (geographic information a graphic depiction of the "Slope and solar vegetation and severe (>20%) systems) technology, DEA created a Aspect" overlay for a portion of the slope. DEA has worked with solar "Slope and Aspect" digital terrain tentative plan. Next to the overlay is the access on several sites, but the issues model which, incorporating over final plat of the same area showing the and opportunities provided by Forest 5,000 survey points, calculated the methods used to classify lots for solar Heights prompted the firm to create an areas qualifying for exemption due to compliance. Legend Solar Key Non-Exempt pnC_ M, ~i Eligible for rye cF~o ~-e _a »•m w. r Adjustment ke,' ^ 13 "--~_y Exempt for Slope gp~ as 11 3t'• 81. ex O n eGR li pL.n1] T f1Z L.r]]S Y!,~ en,• OR C L~% n 701J0 w CJL IF 1000 l L-3W 400 11 iS " L-N., 11 1 211 ,1 PD ']co »e] V i L.v•• v0 n .1.1 \.r d! u O OR ER _ O.np• 01.11 'O'10• 0~., 0~• " _ CR de Forest Heights III: GIS "Slope & Aspect" Overlay (portion) Forest Heights III: Final Plat (portion) 5 Sunlines, First Quarter, 1990 Figure 2 ORDINANCES NEW DEVELOPMENT STANDARD FOR SITING RECOMMENDED BUILDINGS AND TREES (continued from page 3.) sun angle rising to t at 2.5 SOLAR ACCESS STANDARD ratio FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT ratio o from sounHwAl.l. t._ N The purpose of the new development standard is to design lots so that homes will be oriented to maximize solar access and minimize shade on 25' • adjoining properties. The standard applies to applications for a subdivi- - - - -100-- - - - - - - e- - - - ''i - - - - 100' sion or planned unit development in all single family residential zones and 12' of shade allowed single family developments in other at property line zones. Lot Design Standard Portland. shade. The Ordinance requires that eighty Siting of Structures and Trees Adjustments to Design Standard (80) percent of the lots in a proposed development must comply with one The Solar Balance Point Standard The jurisdiction shall reduce the of three solar design options: provides legal protection from percent of lots that must comply with building and tree shade as develop- the solar design standard below the 1. The Basic Requirement: (see fig ment occurs on each lot in a new 80% standard to the minimum extent ure 1), or development (set figure 2). necessary if the applicstri has shown 2. A Solar Building Line Option; or one or more of the following condi- 3. A Performance Option. Exemptions from the Design. lions exist: Standard The plat on page 5,. is an example of a 1. Meeting the standard would subdivision which meets the solar de- An entire development, or portion of result either in reduced density or sign standard. The development was the development, shall be exempted significant infra.,`. acture cost in- designed by David Evans & Associ- from the solar design standard for creases (that i:; , 5% or more); or aces and was approved in the City of steep slopes or significant pre-existing 2. Significant development ameni- Fi gure I ties would be lost or impaired which SOLAR 1.07 OPTION 1: BASIC REQUIREMENTS could significantly reduce the market value of the property if the solar design principle applied; or 3. Existing shade precludes solar t uses. N SOLAR BALANCE POINT STANDARD FOR EXISTING LOTS OF Minimum 90' RECORD north-south lot dimension required Front lot One is within The purpose of the standard is to ao east..: d an east... ads minimize building-to-building shade and promote solar access and utiliza- tion in residences. The standard applies to a licatiors for new houses - A 1 ' 3 t and remodeling projects on existing regardless of the height of the shadow Sunlines, First Quarrar,1990 7 lots of record in urban single family at the northern lot line. SOLAR ACCESS PERMIT residential zones and single family FOR TREE SHADE i uses in other zones- Exemptions from the Maximum • Shade Point Height Standard a Maximum Shade Point Height The purpose of the solar access permit If any of the following conditions standard is to minimize shade from ! The standard extabUshes a maximum exist an administrative exemption future trees in existing areas. A solar shade point height for each loL The from the standard shall be granted. access permit applies on a lot-by-lot Shade standard varies depending on basis. A property owner must apply the north-south dimension of the IOL 1. The shade from the building falls for a solar access permit to receive the The standard guarantees the ability to within pro-existing shade from trees, protection it offers. Eligible proper- construct - at a minimum - a 30 foot other biiildings or topography; or ties include lots in a single family house in the middle of the lot being residential zone which existed before affected by the standards. The 2. The lot has a north, west or east the adoption of a solar access program variable shade standard means that in facing slope of greater than 20%; or and single family leas in other zones. -some cases full south wall solar access protection will be provided, in 3. Difficult lot conditions exist such Exempt Vegetation other cases partial south wall protec- as public easements, drainageways, tion will be provided, and in still other etc; or Research has identified more than 260 cases only south roof protection will varieties of trees that are "solar be provided. Figures 2 and 3 provide 4. The shade from the building friendly" (ire. they do not block much examples of how the standard works strikes only an unbuildable area, or winter sunlight). A solar access on a lot with 100 feet and 70 feet of permit does not apply to solar friendly z fiorth-south lot depth, respectively. 5. The shade from the building trees. Therefore a solar friendly tree strikes an unheated area such as a can exceed the maximum height Performance Option garage, a south wall with minimal permitted for trees subject to a solar glazing, or a vacant lot where access permit A solar access permit The applicant may meet the standard neighboring structures have minimum does not apply to existing trees in the by showing that at least 80% of the south glass. ground on the date a permit is issued. south facing glazing area of the house coa hwwd on page 8-- to the north is protected from shade, Figure 3 SOLAR BALANCE POINT STANDARD MAXIMUM SHADE POINT HEIGHT ALLOWED SHADE ON SOLAR FEATURE Protecting your northern Locating your house neighbors sun to receive sun on south windows N GUARANIEELP W HEIGHT N LOT CENTER --------70-------- --------70'--------0 10 t►~10 I Standard Side Solbacks is Reduced Side SetbadLs SETBACK ADJUSTMENTS IF NEEDED TO MEET SOLAR STANDARDS 8 Sunlines, First Quarter, 1990 PROJECT RECEIVES PROFES- PEOPLE TO CALL W YOU HAVE QUESTIONS S I O N AL ACHIEVEMENT The M` o Proiect is administered by the Oregon Depa anent of Fnergy and the Washington State Facrgy Office. The Oregon AWARD FROM OREGON APA Dcparbncm of F=rgy also has lead responsibility for conducting marry of the pmjtds research activities. You can teach the projects contact people for these agencies at the fdlowing numbers: In May, 1989, the Pordand-Vancouver Metropolitan Area John Kauftnuat, Oregon Depamnera of Energy, 503 373- Solar Access Project was given the Professional Achieve- 7809 ment Award by the Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association. The Professional Achievement Scott Merriman, Washington State FxcW office, lob 58& Award recognizes planning projects of unusual merit; en- So3t courages innovative and effective techniques for solving McXeaver/Morris, Inc., is the consulting firm which has been problems at local, regional, and state levels; and publicizes hired to manage the project. McKeever/Morris is working with plans or projects of special significance. Larry Epstein, P.C., to provide services to the 22 local govern- tne nts. The key contact people for these fimts ate listed below. In presenting the award the APA noted that `The project's McKeevedMorris, Inc: Mike McKeever. Project Manager. merit is recognized in the endorsements of the governors and Patti Morris, 503 228-7352. of Oregon and Washington, the Solar Energy Association Larry Epstein, P .C.. 2234955 of Oregon, the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, the Homebuilders Association of Metropolitan Portland, the canlinued franc page 7. Portland Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, itecordtrtg and the Oregon Remodelers Association. The adoption of the implementation ordinances by every local government Once the solar access permit is granted, notices are sent to that has considered them also attests to the high quality of the project», affected properties, and an opponuoity to challenge the accuracy of the information contairied in the application Receiving the award on behalf of the project were Dick provided. If granted, the permit is recorded in the chain of Durham, then the chair of the Steering Committee, John title of affected properties, giving future owners of those Kaufmann, Oregon Department of Energy, and Mike propeties notice of its existence. McKeever, then of Conservation Management Services. Sun/i"i. it published by McKeeverlAlarrir, Inc., Project Manager The Oregon APA has nominated the project for this year's for the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar Access Proj- national APA awards. ect., McKeever/Morris, Inc.'s offices are located at 812 S.W. Warh- ingion St., Sure 1.1.10, Portland, Oregon 97105. If you have questions or suggestions, the telephone number is 503 228-7352. The Portlond-Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar Access Project is funded by the Bonneville Power Administration, and administered by the Oregon Department of Energy and the Washington State Energy Offices under the auspices of t e Northwest Power Au. Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area Solar Access Project 812 SW Washington SL, Suite 1110 Portland, Oregon 97205 T N POW •SIGN IVIS10 5OLN~ C5~ STUDIES A. lion on of The SenkendOll Ser 5ervation Management ,1:3y 22'; A propored by t:on r' ORIGINAL PLAN SOLAR PLAN BEFORE AFTER m 0 Ale t 'tWy f1( eau . t~ ;r s o r C , .3oy F o N '.`„7 ~ 'ri' ~s r.:tt~,'y~j. ti• } btio . Fr..:~r: p t. .py li y. 4j ,yN`' M,t . gfi , 1r r `r1 , ` U7 y ':i:~ u~. ~'t ..ay .((5:%'r•1'Y. ry•'~:9•• .:'it' F' .,[fir.. i.. p*' ry.. Iff, 7+l.~i~..:•;•1 ,''n' ~03 0: I~ is°✓ ::,rv;'x t~,r!:: t~+' 1 • ,i.. 's'ir ",•r:: 6. V a ~c; .ii,,:i,`';il;,: ':,'•'r.'r!':ij.:, F . r y r irf' .;:,r ,.r~i: • (F?' i ;;r P, 8 0 O / ~ F , irifrr 0~ / rlr' ,(U! rltr ' 1 `1 ~tli. r r ¢ t J ? a _ I G C Original Plan ttx 32, tax 2 ,..,..0,. Y30•, 27% 5750 •ex: s5x •so, -os ' tx,e0o 7,000 10 10' V Solar Plan ,12 e2 82% 2 0 e0 80 5780 ss 49% 57 51% 2,800 7,000 27.000 y KEY EZ SOLAR PARCELS 9.n n 'NON-SOLAR PARCELS 2 Z°: PARCELS LOST TO VEGETATION DA TAI CRUgr L!.rPARCELS LOST TO SLOPE t/NI/(PMflf M_&(/I KLIIM/J,(/)l,RJfO I C/I~Yr~ OR nSH AM4L rNOM .NCCO GN «p Gpry ORIGINAL PLAN BEFORE J 2 32 F 2:! 2 3 r7i 1 1 2 2 t / 2 2 f r-- o , W -i--, 1 2 5 /2 2, 2-{'-\2 1. 1 1 z ~3\ \ z i z 1 CL, 2 u/ 2 f<<.. x z z \ \a~ 3\ \ z z ( r., :YS: 11 \ 3 \ 1 2 2 wAUatr DR l 2" arelwrr+~ l a a\ „ 'a`• l ~ ~ 2s a t' 2 <"4¢? ' Y {i ;%:2i I + ;`s.<` s' 'ri aJ ti .L 4 1 + ~.t~, ~u+.'~:~". '°.J"_-'°.,ti r,'r:,'i sryyr-~~ ~ rwhe'.-<:c. ?;.x';*+ % ~ - ~ . f -=;.G .'F3.:~'a'..si?"£~?Y..vsi::.. I 1 1 SOLAR PLAN AFTER -L L 3 3 'a^z'$ ~ :.tY<a_ ?'s < ..~:2i; : '.:,,:fi <,•ss i.1:Y~ '.:"i.:s;~ . r .~'1~ I 5~u , ';i: • ~ '-M:~' :i:'•~.., <v ~~F.a~: a '~+'y::i 'a~+4'3z.• '$'2 i `F x°xa s• ¢ i:" 66611", L -3 7 WAUW PL ' \ . w~ y o : r KEY ANALYSIS , I- BASIC SOLAR PARCELS LAND OPTM -2 SOLAR PARCELS ORKWAL PLAN 30 100 4A 10.850 7.700 13.500 84 38 4.400 C3~ OPTION ♦3 SOLAR PARCELS SOLAR PLAN 30 101 4.0 10.700 8.000 15,.700 SO 42 4.100 . NON SOLAR PARCELS r-1 PARCELS LAST TO VEGETATION SOLAR - PARCELS LOST TO SLOPE ORIGINAL PLAN >a 39% 0 OM 39 39% 42 tYy 100 100% E_; i CONTOUR NrFFrvAI SOLAR PLAN 83 82% O O s, 8z% O /8 t0/ 100% sNEET IDAHO SOLAR ACCESS PROGRAM ® D The BenY.endorf Associates COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SOLAR REDESIGN m sw rae, w...K "ATM 97 Sc.Y ~w bw PLAT NO. 2 cALOWELL W.'9 226.0068 a~ tbnh 1~17 ORIGINAL PLAN l SOLAR PLAN BEFORE v AFTER N ~ 2 W 8 Y t V) L..^ Z m N 01 OE~ D >x o 0 NW MISSION ; Nw.gS10H , 0 ~3 . 0 2 Q R'~F Q ~no u ~ N F Z a Original Plan 81 33 H140%1 3 3 27 33% 4.400 9,500 9,400 12,Solar Plan 81 87 2 5 80 74% 4,400 63 78% 18 22% 9,500 9,000 13,200 KEY yra ® SOLAR PARCELS VFF.(~'~'F.'RERWiS#i 1 r NON-SOLAR PARCELS SS OF SEUgN 32. L W. R iW. Wtd. PARCELS LOST TO VEGETATION AISO OENG H THE SAM DLC NO 59 THE SCOTT 1 a> DLC NO. 53 PARCELS LOST TO SLOPE WASHNGTON CCUNTY,CRUCN I ' t ; ; 'lam owve ~ ORIYt A-N AVER I Y■'1VT a 1 a 9ESO86 Fi : e 4 ~ ~ U :T. ~'1`\ ice} ~i's~c .~.i`'.i~ V i~ J CAN \ p~. " y r zC O X J r _ gat z, a J'~ UT{' Fq 4 ~a 0 6YY Ads'' 1 oll Y Y~ suss ° as b 00 F(6Y Land jou ° M w~. w tsiu stya, sstw S. B°seRSma 0810 Pt/~s w~ M to .n.. ~ r4 aR ViCIxCfYRSAP n~ORaOtARt SQIABPtAt+ p g ® Lam AFF£Ct£OBY VFA£TAtiON ~Mr .nw r"" ♦ - //01/Ilk su 0YB£V£R£°tAPB g°tat ~ ~ tya YCOHtQOR1NSiriY'u' ORtOttU4tMAH ` . BOIARNNt t~ ~ .s ~ I ORIGINAL PLAN W SOLAR PLAN BEFORE AFTER 8 5 tF C ~ S;t• w• • ~ d NW 0 NW iii MISSpN / a '•:..a'>:~ O .,~yu ~ N i / 4~ / / Q Q I( op z ANALYSIS Land Use „fit', :r:•S«•., ",il~ 't"« w« V Solar t° ;r~ Original Plan 81 »32, 40% Original Plan 4,400 66 81% 16 19% 8,600 8,400 12,000 Solar Plan 81 65 8096 Solar Plan .4,400 63 78% 18 22% 8,600 6,000 13,200 lie KEY D st..t SOLAR LOTS NOTE. A tow tots on the We ere significantly 1 (acted by vegetation and could be eaempled A'ORTFI ' too • HOWSOLAR LOTS al the dmioper's option, Tan I a t Now= IOU AMER s BEFORE t n• u rl {E-Y rM*mus 7 JIRrR6LTN6 < ~ , T' ~ k t a y d ~V 1 < 3%h Bret ~ ~ ~ 1 ~►6t*`A -i 9 ~ tai STRLr c~ Yy ✓ rx~ +111 y~ t `y ~ ` i; j ~~N p~ "fit, • / mlBT N.i ' . }IIdCOURr G t 1 N.t 2 Np N• wRY IIr O WAY •c Ir .'r. ~~,w~ H N00.r01NT IT, 31 wl+ -J~ Land w w. aft y70st *.WGL I//00{L r ouo 241 ViCI ~,.m., souR►OIR oNotNALetN+ Ills s{I tol ~ppa IOloOJ UR rU1N I6l«. 217 L4'p • ©}10N•60 W'[9 00µR W G ~y .:1-, •,'a•~ ~ C ~ i:QIq AFf£(.T60 RYYWLTAYION s IN i i1~ _ t f Q sAFrse~cnersevcneswrc War 'mow" I•r N l Ilt //C\ s 'r•.r SCONTOURIMLRVAL u0. N~ Q ff5 Vf/ ~ ORIOINAt.IYAN O e \/J\f~1''',y~ , II{4:7 1~ ~ ..CI ;pljln P{A{I IW tUl ORIGINAL PLAN SOLAR PLAN aD BEFORE AFTER / Kyh JFu1ur e,~ FulureiT `.'kil'o<'.l w ~M (~tlol~l) titia}~{ _ ! / - I 1:. 1 { 11 • "iM~ t 7f ,v4T / RKa t<'XS - N R ~.r,.• ~Jew p ~ i~ • i~4h' ` /"~«",tr+~"~"' ~ Y iT Fox ItiX,NO. 2 Fox WNo. 2 ! t.~p 9 ' SW WIC1eTA 3T WICJiTA ST, ' , i j , 1 I ,/.1 1 1 1 1 1 ` SITE LOCATION MAP 8W NAT ' % cc SW NATCt7EZ 91, r^••• (J _1 (r •--;--,---•T°-; --,---r--r--~-•-,---*-..•, N.T.B. - C1 «T.' O I { SlWpepal No. 1 I , 1f BrWpooorl No. 1 1 c- cc 0 -SW JOSNW ST. ___r_-_ _r__~..-_~. - _ I - - BWJOSHf1A8T. \ , :~(J } r -1 { . , .1 , i I 1 I 1 t 1 , I 1 ' &Idgeparl Elem. School , Proposed Fox w8 No. 1 It. • y - - . , &Wgewt Elem. 80*0 :P, opoud `Fox F0 No.'9.,' - , 1 1 I I• Analysis "P n =j E' U Original Plan 39 29 Tex ««0 F nn 821 SIx 1,730 70 67% 13 33% 10,200 7,000 18,985 Q Solar Plan 39 31 80% o 0 31 Sox 1,730 22 sex 17 ax 10.200 7,tM0 18,100 b KEY U.0 SOLAR PARCELS BRIDGEPORT L ,'NON-SOLAR PARCELS J _ M IY,1 w+al1 M IM IYr14.,1 .w-..Ww M j L PARCELS LOST TO VEGETATION 11 t e_. PARCELS LOST TO SLOPE Eiiiiiiiiiiiiiij ~yyyq cot ~ O V iii . -y'•'~:h:. 1 W /v O r ~ ~ ~ ~ f ~ eJ o W ~ W• ' N / • jW o ~ ~o ~ nth lC~ • `~°y ' 10 t 1\1 N t1 Ira, ai :i ` .and :,,„::t'«•,' <sti:t:t<2 p ~ .tit ! ~ y 2q•: :1tc< • 8ourhLf rW r Cle~ 'I w P w ~y VICINITY YAP ~ r[Y»f0 -141LI.v1 ILrI YEAOOW LARK VISTA SUBDIVISION t 4LnL, IP4ro ORIGINAL PLAN ° ..`e"E ++tt SOLAR PLAN BEFORE AFTER I I L . u--- w 'IOWA T•~•- 7 AV1 W IOWA AV[ T 1 I F3~N 3 1 I 3 r 11; 2 W. JERSEY AYE 2 I - 1 / it' n-y}y1.~ 2; 1 3+F L 1 w a x,,. 3 1 3-4- 2 I 1 `61 q .a '''a :i 1 T t 3 aka } I Z !r • Z • 9 2 Y 2 W JERSEY AM 3- . 2 2 0 2 2 tx J 3y: y>Rf ~iiz '75 - 2 1 pp. A P 4}r r~ r < P 2 2 2 3 P -~~3 -I I a 1tll 9f g~ 3_i,_ 1 2 2 ' j 3 ~e . 9 P 2 I 1 w wLSON/ Av[ AYE 2-1 ' I _ 2 4. 13 9 l~ ~~1 iY, w s ~l ~d2\~~o ez~ v{{ el 9, W. LOUSIANA f/~ 3 1 f .c'.Y~'~•/ ~ et I +D2 tF.~. 3 w LoussANA Irk, ,',~,+2 •3 I y~3!~~ 1`};\ 13 ~3 />4 i~ ~1 1 23'ri 3>2\ f t Z' W MAINE ORryE W. PANE N i ^01tl1f[ .2 2 KEY SAW SOLAR PARCELS L}J OPTION SOLAR PARCELS [:3 .mow .ww> oPTroN n sa.AR PARCELS ANALYSIS . L J NON SOLAR PARCELS ORgINAIDLAN U 110 ].1 5.700A/. 7,0001.1. 21,10011. 111 is 5,100 $I ]a% OT ""0 4r 31 r 30% » ]0", » »"710 71% L.~I•J PARCELS LOST TO VEGETATION LIB PARCELS LOST To SLOPE SOLAR PLAN 13 110 0.1 5,7000. 7,0001.1. 10.750i.1. 111 ]S 5.400 122 02% 0 0 17} 02% 1 { 10 i15 100% SHEET ® IDAHO OD COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS The Benlcendorf Associates OF ,ts"o °u~e"s'72°4 SOLAR ACCESS PROGRAM SOLAR RE-DESIGN Stale of Idaho Department of Water Resource[- Energy Division PLAT NO. 1: NAMPA - COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: February 12, 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: SW North Dakota PREVIOUS ACTION: Street traffic concerns PREPARED BY: City Engineer 09 DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK, REQUESTED BY: POLI Y ISSUE Traffic concerns on SW North Dakota Street in Anton Park - - INFORMATION SUMMARY Previously, Council reviewed options for extending traffic islands on SW North Dakota Street and directed staff to work with the Anton Park neighborhood to resolve continuing traffic concerns. In response, an informal committee was formed consisting of representatives of the Anton Park neighborhood and staff. An independent traffic engineering consultant was retained to explore alternatives and to advise the informal committee. As a result of several meetings, the committee will. be reporting to the Council on February 12, recommending the following: 1. Close North Dakota St. temporarily during the reconstruction of Scholls Ferrv Road. The closure would be south of Springwood Drive. The temporary closure would be removed 90 days after the completion of the Scholls Ferry construction. A plan has been developed to maintain emergency vehicle access through the closed area. 2. Prior to reopening the street, install circular traffic islands at the intersections within Anton Park to further discourage high-speed through traffic. 3. If the Beaverton plan to connect 125th Avenue to Hall Boulevard should be funded, residents can ask for further consideration of diverters and other concepts presented by the traffic consultant. An ordinance would be needed to implement the temporary construction closure. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Accept the recommendations above and direct that the appropriate ordinance be prepared. 2. Direct that the street remain open. FISCAL IMPACT Approximately $5,000 for islands and signing. - - - SUGGESTED ACTION Staff supports the recommendation presented above. rw/anton-jan