City Council Packet - 07/28/1992AGENDA
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
PUBLIC NOTICE. Anyone wishing to speak on an
agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up
sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be
recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that
agenda item. Visitors Agenda items are asked to be
two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for
a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or
the City Administrator.
Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by
7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard In and
order after 7:30 p.m.
6:30
• STUDY SESSION (6:30 PM)
Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corporation Update - Mary Tobias
7:30
1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 PM))
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)
7:45
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 Council Minutes: June 23, 1992
3.2 Authorize Submittal of Greenspaces Grant Application to Restore and Enhance Fanno
Creek Park
3.3 Authorize City Administrator to Sign Quitclaim Deed Vacating an Easement within a
Portion of the Meadowglade Subdivision - Resolution No. 92-1~
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 28, 1992 - PAGE 1
7:510
4. PUBLIC BEARING - SUBDIVISION SUB 92-0003 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PDR 92-0001
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT MIS 92-0006 HART/RENAISSANCE (NPO 7)
The City Council has called up for review the Planning Commission's decision approving this
application. The Council's review is specifically limited to Planning Commission's Condition of
Approval No. 15. This condition of approval requires the site developer to provide a water
quality treatment facility sized to handle stormwater runoff from this development only.
Testimony before the Council will be limited to only that issue.
• Open Public Hearing
• Declarations or Challenges
• Staff Report - Community Development Department
• Public Testimony
- Planning Commission
- NPO
- Applicant
Additional Testimony
• Staff: Response to Testimony and Recommendation to Council
• Council Questions or Comments
• Close Public Hearing
• Consideration by Council
8:20
5. SUBDIVISION SUB 92-0005 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PDR 92-0003 VARIANCE VAR
92-0010 SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 92-0002 QUAESTOR/MATRIX DEVELOPMENT (NPO 3)
The City Council has called up for review the Planning Commission's approval of the following
development application. The Council's review is limited to the issue of whether the site's
developer should be required to construct improvements to the S.W. Gaarde Street extension
throughout the site or pay a fee in lieu of constructing the improvements. The Planning
Commission's decision did not require the developer to construct improvements or pay a fee
in lieu of construction. Testimony before the Council will be limited to that issue.
• Open Public Hearing
• Declarations or Challenges
• Staff Report - Community Development Department
• Public Testimony
- Planning Commission
- NPO
- Applicant
Additional Testimony
• Staff: Response to Testimony and Recommendation to Council
• Council Questions or Comments
• Close Public Hearing
• Consideration by Council
9:00
6. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 28, 1992 - PAGE 2
f
9.10
7. 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.
9:20
B. ADJOURNMENT
=a6728.92
l`
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 28, 1992 - PAGE 3
y Council Agenda Item
T I G A R D C I T Y C O ..U N C I L
MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992
• Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Edwards.
1. ROLL CALL
Council Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Judy
Fessler, Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten, and John Schwartz.
Staff Present: Dick Bewersdorff, Senior Planner; Ed Murphy,
Community Development Director; Liz Newton, Community
Relations Coordinator; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel; Catherine
Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randy Wooley, City Engineer.
STUDY SESSION
Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corporation Update President
Mary Tobias:
Ms. Tobias commented on the continuing Metro Charter Commission
process. She noted concerns with recent Metro action forwarding an
advisory vote to the November ballot proposing the consolidation of
Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties with Metro and Tri-
Met.
Ms. Tobias referred to issues monitored by TVEDC. Two issues were:
• Urban Growth Boundary Focus Group formed in response to
a DLCD Study with regard to development issues.
• DEQ proposals to issue regulations to curtail auto
emissions include parking fees and toll roads in the
Metro area.
A packet of information on TVEDC's activities is on file with the
Council packet material.
Ms. Tobias, along with several other Washington County
representatives, recently visited Poland. She advised several
joint venture opportunities with considerable World Bank financing
were available which would be of benefit to Washington County
businesses.
Water District
Mayor Edwards updated Council on water issues. He noted concerns
with timing of the efforts to form a 190 agency concurrent with
regional water issues and the water Shortage. These issues are
immediate but were slowing the efforts'`on 190 formation.
There was lengthy discussion between Council, staff, and Audrey
0071- Castile who is Chair of the Tigard Water District. Council noted
the work of the Tigard Water District Advisory Committee and that
their process was on track. Council asked staff to prepare a
Resolution of Intent with a draft 190 agreement attached. it is
Council's understanding that a resolution supporting the formation
of a 190 agency is being drafted for Water District Board approval.
Audrey Castile noted the following areas of concern:
The Water Board was seeking assurances of
• Protection of Water District employees/status.
• Form of Governance outlined.
• Water assets, capital would be utilized for water-related
services only.
• Current Water District boundaries would remain intact.
BUSINESS MEETING
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA
Audrey Castile, Chair of the Tigard Water Board, spoke of
the water shortage situation and restrictions in force.
Presently, TWD patrons are self-policing. The number of
calls complaint calls have been relatively small. She
congratulated Tigard citizens on how well they have
responded to the situation.
3. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Councilor Kasten, seconded by
Councilor Johnson to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:
3.1 Approve Council Minutes: June 23, 1992
3.2 Authorize Submittal of Greenspaces Grant Application to
Restore and Enhance Fanno Creek Park
3.3 Authorize City Administrator to Sign Quitclaim Deed
Vacating an Easement within a Portion of the Meadowglade
Subdivision - Resolution No. 92- 38
The motion was approved by unanimous vote of Council present.
4. PUBLIC HEARING - SUBDIVISION SUB 92-0003 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
PDR 92-0001 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT MIS 92-0006
HARTaMAISSANCE (NPO 7) The City Council has called up for
review the Planning Commission's decision approving this
application. The Council's review is specifically limited to
Planning Commission's Condition of Approval No. 15. This
condition of approval requires the site developer to provide
a water quality treatment facility sized to handle stormwater
runoff from this development only. Testimony before the
Council will be limited to only that issue.
a. Public Hearing was opened.
b. There were no declarations or challenges.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992 - PAGE 2
C. Senior Planner Dick Bewersdorff reviewed the Staff Report
(a copy of the Staff Report is on file with the Council
meeting packet material).
d. Public testimony:
• Cal Woolery, Chair of NPO 7, advised the NPO
thought the plan was basically good.
He concurred with the proposal and advised that he
thought requirements for addressing the water
quality treatment issues were being met.
• Bill McMonagle, 12555 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon
97223, testified that he appreciated the staff's
concerns in dealing with this issue. He commented
on the regional efforts for treatment of storm
water drainage and advised that he thought it would
be more practical on an overall basis to treat
smaller areas rather than trying to address the
large county-wide issue as a whole. He advised
that he agreed with the staff recommendation that
the applicant pay a fee in lieu of construction of
a water quality facility.
Councilor Johnson urged Mr. McMonagle to contact
citizen groups involved with Unified Sewerage
Agency (USA) and submit his ideas of treating storm
water in smaller areas.
In response to a question from Councilor Schwartz,
City Engineer Wooley advised that fees in lieu of
construction would be placed in a reserve account.
Funds in this account are dedicated for purposes of
treating water quality. He advised that USA has
criticized the City of Tigard saying Tigard may be
too willing to accept a fee in lieu of
construction.
e. Public Hearing was closed.
f. Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor
Kasten, to amend Planning Commissions Condition No. 15
to read as follows:
15. The applicant shall provide a water quality
facility meeting the requirements of Unified
Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47 that
is designed to accommodate this development.
Subject to the City Engineer's approval, payment of
fees in lieu of construction of a water quality
facility to accommodate this development may be
authorized.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992 - PAGE 3
v
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council
present.
5. SUBDIVISION SUB 92-0005 PLANNED DEVELOPMEN-T PDR 92-0003
VARIANCE VAR 92-0010 SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 92-0002
•NPO 3) The City Council has
called up f for r r review DEVELOPMEN
theP Pla lanning commission's approval of the
called up
following development application. The council's review is
limited to the issue of whether the site's developer should be
required to construct improvements to the S.W. G a d lieu Street
extension throughout the site or pay a f ee in of
commission's
constructing the improvements. The Planning
decision did not require the developer to construct
improvements or pay a fee in lieu of construction. Testimony
before the Council will be limited to that issue.
a. Public Hearing was opened.
b. There were no declarations or challenges.
C. Community Development Director Murphy reviewed the Staff
Report which is on file with the Council packet material.
Community Development Director referred to overhead
layout.
s
showing the topography and proposed
He referred to the Mountain Highlands subdivision which
was similar. The Mountain Highlands developer was
required to construct improvements to the For streets
throughout the length of their property.
proposal, however, staff recommended that Council uphold the the Planning Commission's decision to r through the
developer extend Gaarde Street only partially
subject property because of the unusually steep grade and
difficult topography.
d. Public Testimony:
Bev Froude, NPO 3 member, advised that she was in
• favor of requiring the partial construction of the
road through the subject property. She also stated
the
that she would rather see decisions or
minor
alignment and type of road (i.e., major collector) be left open for future consideration.
In response to a question from Councilor Johnson,
City Engineer Wooley reviewed past Council action.
lie noted that the Gaarde Street extension, if
completed as recommended in the staff an and nand
commission proposal, would be roughly the alignment would be established.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992 - PAGE 4
• Steve Pfeiffer, 900 SW 5th, Portland, Oregon 97204,
testified as attorney for the applicant. He noted
that the slope in the area was in excess of 20%.
He referred to testimony submitted via letters
contained in the Council packet. He advised that
Gaarde Street would not serve the development as it
would have other access. The houses would not face
Gaarde Street; rather, Gaarde Street would run
along the back property line. He referenced the
topography and terrain as problems to overcome for
an extension of the road.
a
Bruce Dunlap, 17017 SW Bendsdale Court, Tigard,
Oregon testified that a road through the steep area
would destroy the beauty of the canyon. He said
requiring such a road would mean that it would not
be economically feasible to proceed with the
development.
Councilor Fessler asked the difference between a
major and minor collector with regard to cost of
construction.
Mr. Dunlap explained that the cost for this road
would primarily be due to necessary cut-and-fill
work; therefore, the costs between a major and
minor collector would not be significant. He
advised that right-of-way would be dedicated to the
north boundary of the property line for the road.
(See Condition #18 of the Planning Commission
decision).
If the street is developed as a major collector,
the houses cannot face the property and, as such,
it would create a double frontage situation for the
abutting homes.
Councilor Johnson noted that in time development to
the north would necessitate completion of the
Gaarde Street connection. She observed that the
residents of the proposed subdivision (the subject
of this hearing) would use the Gaarde extension
when completed.
G. Staff response to testimony:
Community Development Director Murphy indicated
that this situation was similar, although to a much
larger.degree, to the Mountain Highlands
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992 - PAGE 5
development. Staff's recommendation was against
requiring collector street construction to the
northern property line because of:
topography,
unusual natural features, and
the City policy of disallowing frontage
on major collector streets.
Council discussed the fact that if the street was
not stubbed out at this time, then eventually it
must be determined who would pay for the street
improvements. This particular extension would be
eligible for TIF funding. It would be up to the
City Council to recommend to the County to place it
on the priority listing which would compete with
other City transportation projects. It was noted,
however, that TIF fees were paying for a portion of
other improvements for this property. The amount
of TIF fees collected from this development would
not cover the expense of completing the Gaarde
Street extension to the north property line.
Community Development Director recommended that
Council uphold the Planning Commission decision and
require improvements to the Gaarde Street extension
to the northern property line to be that of rough
grading. In addition, the property owners should
dedicate future right-of-way.
Mr. Dunlap advised that Phase III could be drawn up
which could show the Gaarde Street extension
improvement to the northern property line. He
summarized his choices as a developer included:
1) to ask that TIF funds be designated to
develop the remaining Gaarde Street extension
to the northern property line;
2) to resubmit a plat showing Phase III with
the Gaarde Street extension; or
3) to abandon the project.
f. Public Hearing was closed.
g. Consideration by Council:
• Councilor Kasten acknowledged the arguments against
extending the road to the northern boundary and
advised that he understood it was a unique
situation. He noted that the City must plan for
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992 - PAGE 6
the future with regard
He cited the potential
residents if the road
with this development.
road should be built.
to development to the north.
financial burden to Tigard
extension was not required
He advised that he felt the
Councilor Fessler said that the decision on this
issue was difficult. She advised that the Mountain
Highlands development represented a similar
situation. She proposed that the market potential
for this property would bear the added cost of this
road extension. She advised she supported
continuing the road to the north property line.
Councilor Johnson indicated that she, too,
supported the continuation of the road to the
northern property line. She advised that this
segment of road would be of benefit to the proposed
development when it was connected. She said that
the topography was not unusual enough to warrant
making an exception in this case.
• Councilor Schwartz noted he agreed with the
previous Councilors' comments. He also supported
the continuation of the Gaarde Street extension to
the northern property line. He referred to
strenuous objections by residents when they learn
that roads are going to be constructed, which were
previously planned and approved, but delayed until
after the homes were built. He noted the problems
would not be as great if the road was already in
place at the time people purchased their homes.
• Councilor Fessler added that there was a need for a
continual process of planning and follow-through
with regard to transportation issues in the
community.
• Councilor Johnson asked a procedural question
referring to testimony by the applicant that he may
be able to submit a Phase III on the plat which
would show the Gaarde Street extension and then the
Phase III would remain unbuilt for an unspecified
period of time. She advised she would not want the
Gaarde Street extension to be held hostage to
theoretical lots on Phase III. She requested that
conditions for Phase III or a time limit be set to
avoid this type of situation.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992 - PAGE 7
• In response to a question by Mayor Edwards, Legal
Counsel Ramis advised that the Council must request
staff to prepare a proposal for a set of findings
in the context of supporting criteria for the
Council's decision.
• Mayor Edwards said he had not heard legal
justification to deny the applicant's request. He
did not support a requirement to construct the
street extension as a condition of development on
this property. He advised the Planning Commission
and the NPO, in his opinion, were correct in their
decision.
i. Motion by Councilor Kasten, seconded by Councilor
Johnson, directing staff to prepare tentative findings
requiring the developer to construct the improvement to
the SW Gaarde Street extension throughout the site to the
northern property line.
Motion passed by a majority vote, 4-1 (Mayor Edwards
voted no).
6. COUNCIL CALENDAR/STAFF UPDATE
Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Joint Meeting
All Council members plan to attend. Meeting is on August 4,
6:30 p.m., at the TVF&R Regional Training and Simulation
Center.
Scholls Ferry Road Closed
City Engineer Wooley advised ODOT told staff today that 121st
at Scholls Ferry Road would be closed for construction this
Thursday. Detour routes through Springwood and S.W. North
Dakota are planned.
Driveway to Burnham Street
Council agreed that the driveway to Burnham Street from City
Hall property should be put "on hold" for the time being.
The property needed for an easement could not be purchased at
this time.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992 - PAGE 8
7. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Canceled.
8. AD.TOURT: 9:45 p.m.
4
Attest: L~Xtherine Wheatley, City Rec err
w~
i~ayar City of Tigard
Date: ( (~Gl I ggt2-
can0728
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - July 28, 1992 - PAGE 9
%.0
co
~HH
H®
U
W C
J Z
6
z
w
z
z
0
Z
C)
aC
C
u
a
c
s
F
0
u
C
oc
0
co
(a
Ire,
w O., x ~ . T7 c> .C C GI)
> c C s 1ii++
2A I $ i~ rr cC~d ' n c `ate
Oct
. uj A a a3 a
00 0
Co A U E- va >
cn e.>
as,
y C7 C' ? A O4, w C:4S Q >
13
h" d C
od EL-0.
o. p O D E ` e I I t n,
,o ® E o m a
=0711
0 0 ~
CD m m
E m ~
o mo v c •O~m. = c
ca CL ca
~ I-m D I~ M ~ I s m
~ Q
Z
J~
® • i
ff~
~ O
ai 71
ctn.
rn~
N
o Y. b
. ~'~oo ~c~-fD
U W H
0
Z
0
Q
m
a
CL
LL
O
H
LL
U.
^Z
C7 ~
00
w~
00
LL 0~:
M
5 Z
wU
CD rn
VI
(D (1) 0
• c
a
CD
~c c
ca m
E-- •o
>rll co
ca co
0 (D t SE
v ..a
wO cd .
=
Ogbl,
CD
a~ d U
o m
m U U co
•a c0 ~ 'C
m m m
~ 'U c t
O c m q
Q wA
m O G
~0Wo
.r 4' C C+?
O M
C C1 ® T
- M O v9
m
t
to Um
~ U
CL
co
(1)
m
x
m
c
c
w
m
® m
t a
c? o.
O
t $
U
's c
$ :C
O O
G7
CL o
O m
U ~
•O N
(D M
C_ m
n
m m
~i
m
0
m
O
CD
t
c
m
7
U
m
O
c
O
U
N
0)
rn
('r
c\
rt
ON
r-f
r-I
h ~
0~
.b
ro
c`y
C4
m
E
E
3
M
V
c
CD
CD
.O
U
.O
N
c
O
O)
CD
0
CL
co
O
z
c
o
E
0 U.
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS,
INC.
Legal TT 7332
Notice
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360
BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075
R C E 11 Y E gal Notice Advertising
• BUG 111992 ° O Tearsheet Notice
,y
City of Tigard
&-Lff' c",r.
• PO Box 23397 OF TIGARD • O Duplicate Affidavit
Tigard, Oro 9722
9ris o ev
yf IG
t
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON,
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss'
I, Judith Koehler
being first duly sworn, depose and as at I nr the Advertising
Director, or his principal clerk, of the garcl Imes
a newspaper of general circula gn as defined in ORS 193.010
ard
li
g
in the
and 193.020; published at
afor aid county and state, that the
Public Hearig/ SUB W-0003
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the
entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and
consecutive in the following issues:
July 16, 1992
Subscribed and "sworn before me this 16th day of July 1992
Notary Public for Oregon
My CorRmission Expires: !P
AFFIDAVIT
c
The following will be consi de-red by the Tigard City Council on July 28,
1992, at 7:30 P.M. at Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall Room, 13125 S.W.
Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Further information maybe obtained from the
Community Development Director. or City Recorder at the same location
or by calling 639-4171 You are invited to submit written testimony in ad-
vance of the public hearing; written and oral testimony will be considered
at the hearing. The public hearing will be conducted in accordance with
and any roles
the of oocedure adoptped by the council and eaailble a Cy Hail.
,ELTR*~MSION SUB 92-0042
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PDR 92-Q09i
LET LINE ADJUSTMENT MIS 2-0006.!
HAR'1 /RENAISSANCE t°_ (NPO #7)
The City Council has called up for review the Planning Commission's
decision approving this application. The Council's review is specifically
limited to planning commission's condition of approval #15. This condi-
tion of approval requires the site developer to provide a water quality
treatment facility sized to handle stormwater runoff from this develop-
ment only. Testimony before the council will be limited to only that issue.
ORIGINAL APPLICATION: A request for approval of the following
development applications: 1) Lot Line Adjustment to adjust two parcels of
aroximately 1.23 and 13.53 acres into two parcels of approximately
610 and 7.86 acres; 2) Subdivision preliminary Develop-
parcelein into 34 lofts
ment conceptual plan approval to divide a 7.86 plat/Planned
between approximately 6,300 and 10,600 square feet. APPLICABLE
REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.50,
18.80, 18.84, 18. 88, 18.92, 18.102, 18.108, 18.150, 18.160,
18.162,18.164; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1; 3.4.2, 3.5.4, 4.2,1,
7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.3.1.7.4.4, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, 8.1.3. LOCATION: 10993 SW
North Dakota (WCTM IS1, 34AC, pax lots 2300 and 2400). ZONE: R-4.5
(PD) (Residential, 4.5 units/acre, Planned Development). The R-4.5 zone
allows single family residential units, public support facilities, residential
treatment homes, manufactured homes, family day care, home ocrupa-
tions, and accessory structures among other uses.
' BDIVISION SUB 92 0005 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PDR
92-0003 VARIANCE VAR 92 W10 SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 92-00L2
O[JAESTORlMATRiX DEVELOPMENT (NPO #3)
The City Council has called up for review the Planning Commission's ap-
proval of the following development application. The Council's review is
limited to the issue of whether the sites developer should be required to
construct improvements to the SW Gaarde. Street extension throughout the
site or pay a fee in lieu of constructing the improvements. The Planning
Commission's decision did not require the developer to construct im-
pro<.ements or pay a fee in lieu of construction. Testimony before the
Council will be limited to that issue.
ORIGINAL APPLICATION: A rcgdcst for approval of the following
developmem, applications: 1) Subdivision preliminary plat/Planned
Development conceptual plan approval to divide a 33.8 acre parcel into 64
lots ranging between 7,000 and 21,950 square feet in size; 2) Variance ap-
proval to allow a 14 percent grade for a 200 foot section of a proposed
local street whereas Code Section 18.164.030 (M) (1) limits the grades of
local streets to 12 percent; 3) Sensitive Lands Review approval to allow
grading, road construction, and home construction on lots in excess of 25
percent gradient and to allow utility construction within a drainageway.
APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code
Chapters 18.50, 18.80, 18.84, 18.88, 18.92, 18.160, and 18.164; Com-
prehensive Flan Policies 2.1.1, 3.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.5.1, 4.2.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4,
7.6.1, 8.1.1, 8.1.3. LOCATION: West of the intersection of 121st Avenue
and Gaarde Street (WCTM 2SI 3CC, tax lot 401 and 2514, tax lot 1400).
ZONE: R-4.5 (PD) (Residential, 4.5 units/acre, Planned Development).
The R-4.5 zone allows single family residential units, public support
r facilities, residential treatment homes, farming, manufactured homes,
family day, care, home occupationstemporury,uses , and Accessory struc-
Ctresamong other ups:
T177332 -Publish July 16, IM.'
{
I
~/~~`~e~F DATE: ~'t2
/"~vAGly~`7/.~.3.L,;.k'y
(Umited 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.
Q
STAFF
NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC CONTACTED
i t og n o w ors.s
it.
f Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount
l` of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair
may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to
supplement oral testimony.
Please sign in to testify on the following:
i1l~lll("~i,,fr DATE:
,`f192~ y'
PLEASE PRINT
PrQ ,,enL,--XSp9akingjm- Egvorzq .SUWMi31in opponent-,-N,(Speakingr-Agaumt-,7 0bff ri§i& 92-
n...sir:.G. Ta!C.da l:iv:~.:zi+a""''' e'~i• `a~,n RA ax.-str~. ec.rw- ~yc,~: asst. ,,:,•e'pr
Fi2nwskrir rau uvvaiuNr i iv7 ii i'Ur'f ~L-WC7' I ~'f wJ-rranriea r rvai~pn U10 It o-ur' ~c uw r °Lot
-L*°LirW-Ad-~ia nrtelrYt Jii~y -f)fl 3 Lfirie" ►drus#~men llS 9 =f3€
'Ha Renalsssnt
Name
Name
6P -A4
Address
z3
sc~ry ~(3Z~~.
rasa
ame
4WdrOSS
Address
e
\
Name
Address
Address
Name
Name
dress
dress
Name
me
dress
Address
Name
Name
Address
ress
Name
Name
Address
Address
Name
Name
Address
Address
C
Depending on the number of person wishing to testify, the Chair of the Council may limit the amount
of time each person has to speak. We ask you to limit your oral comments to 3 - 5 minutes. The Chair
may further limit time if necessary. Written comments are always appreciated by the Council to
supplement oral testimony.
Please sign in to testify on the following:
AGENDA ITEM NO. (A T
PLEASE PRINT
DATE~.ft ~s
P qP.qp4 1 p 4 - f v r 5~ ~-.ogi, Oi?pongnj T ( akin ft ns ubdivis4on 92-'pq
gr Sip+ent araarde
,
a+8at43~afFIX-Dei/®~C7 r~ 1eT1t`
!$3C~ _ilC~~`t Tent) Q6
Name
Name
Address
Address
Name
J
(
c7 D
e
teas
ress
Name
.
Name
Addre
_ ^
4444
Address
e;
Name
Address
Address
Name
Name
Address
dress
Name
Name
Address
Address
Name
Name
Address
Address
Name
Name
Address
t,
dress
President's
March 1992
The month of March provided TVEDC with a taste of
international partnership as its president traveled to Eastern
Europe to lecture on public/private partnerships in economic
development. After weeks of planning the team, comprised of
members of the business and academic communities, conducted
seminars in the cities of Pecs, Hungary and Wroclaw, Poland. it
was an enlightening 2 1/2 weeks filled with discovery and made
the team appreciative of their country.
TVEDC continues to work on fulfilling its contractual
obligation to Washington County and is currently finishing the
research portion of the economic development plan project. After
soliciting feedback from county economic development
professionals, we will begin the actual writing of the document
in may.
With every meeting of the Washington County reonomic
Development Professionals Group, it becomes more appa
important this network of people and information has become. The
group continues to meet on a monthly basis and share information
on various economic development issues affecting the region.
Washington County Economic Development Plan
Research assistant Darin Goble continues to volunteer his
invaluable time and energy on this major project. The existing
conditions aspect of the plan has now eaction lptan andT work his
begun on a strategy for the 5 year
scheduled to meet with the project steering committee for
feedback and input in late May. John Mitchell, Chief Economist
for U.S. Bancorp, will brief the committee on the state of
Oregon's economy as part of this review stage.
METRO Charter Committee
After months of meetings, there is finally light filtering
through with the morass of issues facing the committee. work is
almost finished defining the functions of the regional
government. The committee has also called for local government
to act, in an advisory role, to METRO on issues of regional
significance through a Regional to determine Policy Advisory
remoftta eregional
Work has now begun models:
government using three primary m
Status Quo - Elected Council/Elected Executive
Council/rianager - Elected Council/Professional Manager
Derr/Josselson Plan - Elected Council/Elected dExecutive
(Council does policy an
only. Executive runs all other
operations and services.)
Washin ton Count Economic Development Professionals Grou
Mark Clemons, with two of his associates from the Portland
Development Commission, demonstrated the way PDC make a business
recruitment presentation. Using a variety chart and
overheads, they gave an interesting and informative look at the
city of Portland from a marketing viewpoint. There was a general
discussion of strategy to incorporate Washington County into the
presentation with an analysis of the area as a specific
component.
The Washington County Economic Development Plan was briefly
discussed with a revision being made on the timeline and planning
program.
Beaverton Business Assistance Program
TVEDC met with Beaverton economic development director Ann
Mulroney about the City of Beaverton Business Assistance Program.
Ann gave an overview of the program and discussed retaining aid
expanding existing basic industries. The goal of the program
to retain Beaverton's competitive position in the Portland area.
One way the city has been able to coordinate retention and
scheduledAssistance
expansion efforts is through the Beaverton Business
Center (BBAC) . The Westside Light Rail project, for
completion in Beaverton in 1997, will also contribute to the
city's economic position in the region. Economic development
foundations are being established now to deal with the
opportunities that will arise when the project is finished.
Living Histor Museum (Washin ton Count Historical Society)
Joan Smith, executive director of the Washington County
inproject.
Historical Society, briefed TVEDC on the status of the
terest
WCHS is working with local land owners and special
groups to identify potential issues that could threaten the
project. There is some resistance to the project because of
concerns over land use and urbanization.
"Doing Business in Washington Count "
TVEDC discussed with Deanne Funk (PGE) the possibility of
collaborating on this project. A meeting is scheduled for early
may to go over the proposal and decide whether or notts
feasible. PGE is interested in working on this kind of project,
so we will actively pursue a grant.
ISSUES MANAGEMENT
DLCD Urban Growth Management Study
Currently, the subcommittees change finishing
recommendationsk oDraft
administrative rule and statutory
proposals will then go to the full committee for review and
comments in April. There is a strong emphasis on density, infill
and redevelopment in all the work. More than likely, some of the
recommendations will be quite controversial. When the full
package comes out for review, TVEDC will nced to create a task
provide
r force to do a thorough analysis and
Western Bypass
The proposed north/south route continues to be controversial
with high activity from opponents. STOP heldA their
were
community meeting with over 300 people attending. ttendees
predominantly, but not exclusively, anti-bypass. The "event" was
carefully orchestrated and made many people angry because of its
one-sided negative overtones.
G (Gridlocked
efforts Oregonians)
able tot wrestd controls ofe then floor
despite e STOP OP
for a pro-bypass viewpoint.
The Sunset Corridor Association hosted a dinner with the Washington County mayors
forethew ODthe statu OT studys oPat Ritz y and Mary
to gather input on support
Tobias represented TVEDC at the event and responded to requests
for background information, as well as an update on current
strategies.
The Wilsonville Chamber of Commerce hosted a bypass debate
with TVEDC president Mary Tobias taking the "in favor" position
and STOP member Dave Stewart taking the "against" position.
C Oregon Transportation Policy Plan Draft
The plan is now under review by the Oregon Department of
Transportation advisory committees. TVEDC's comments on the plan
C
were submitted and will be included in the review. Bill Knox
(UPS and a TVEDC board member) expressed concern about where the
state of Oregon is going regarding the issue of automobiles vs.
transit. He suggested a legislative committee be formed to
monitor transportation issues next session.
ODOT 6 Year Transportation and Improvement Plan
This is what used to be called the Highway Improvement Plan.
The name was changed to provide emphasis on the state's multi-
modal transportation approach. The plan includes the Western
Bypass study, but no additional funding beyond the study stage.
Mentor Graphics is concerned about interchange improvements
needed in Wilsonville and has solicited TVEDC's support.
PCC Rock Creek UGB Amendment Request
Currently, Portland Community College is outside the urban
growth boundary. Because of the urban use nature of a community
college, it needs to be included in the boundary. The college is
planning some expansion, but can't build under the existing
zoning designation. PCC needs business. community support and
TVEDC has written a letter to the Metropolitan Boundary
Commission urging a zoning change to keep the.facility consistent
with the actual land use.
Washington County Economic Development District
The U.S. Resource Conservation + Development program has
proposed the possibility of creating an economic development
district in western Washington County. The purpose would be to
attract federal business recruitment project money to the cities
in the district. Bob Alexander/Forest Grove Council on Economic
Development Coordinator will provide more information in early
summer..
MEMBERSHIP AND PROGRAMS
TVEDC continues to take a proactive approach to new member
recruitment sending four information packets out and following up
with letters of encouragement from TVEDC board members, the
membership committee chair and the vice-chair. Calls were made
to Sequent Computer Systems, Inc., Pumpkin Ridge Golf Club,
Norris 6 Stevens and The Lutz Snyder Company. Subsequently, the
Lutz Snyder Company became a new member of the corporation.
The March I-5 Forum Breakfast featured Richard Callicrate,
executive director of CESCO, as the guest speaker. He made a
presentation on he benefits of employee ownership which elicited
C a significant amount of interest among our members. It was
decided at the membership meeting that a survey would be
distributed at the April Forum soliciting feedback from the
membership on the caliber of programs and suggestions on ways to
improve the breakfast, etc.
C
The transportation committee and saw a better than average
turnout of members discussing the I-5/217 interchange, the ODOT 6
Year Plan and improvements to the Stafford Road exit on
Interstate 5.
INFORMATION SERVICES
Generally, requests were light in March after a good first
quarter. Most inquiries are for general demographic information.
In an effort to build on programming, board member Dick Porn and
president Mary Tobias will discuss a new program component
designed to develop a countywide base of economic data that we
can market to the membership and others.
ADMINISTRATION
C
The executive committee held a planning retreat this month
to set the agenda for the board retreat scheduled for May 16th at
Intel.
The process of gathering information got underway for the
1992/1993 budget cycle. A significant amount of time was spent
analyzing income and expenses for the first 8 months of 1991/1992
to project the 1992/1993 budget.
New members for the month of March are Hillier & Associates
and the Lutz Snyder Co. TVEDC continues to focus more on
membership with plans for members to begin taking a more active
role in this important aspect of the corporation.
OUTSIDE MEETINGS
C
PRESENTATIONS
SEEBA - Lecture Series in Wroclaw, Poland
Lecture Series in Pecs, Hungary
Wilsonville Chamber of Commerce - Western Bypass Debate with STOP
REGIONAL MEETINGS
Washington County Public Affairs Forum - Weekly Luncheon (2)
METRO - Charter Committee (2)
Washington County Visitors Association - Monthly Meeting
DLCD Infill & Redevelopment - Bi-Weekly Meeting
STOP - Bypass Meetings (2)
Sunset Corridor Association - Bypass Meeting
Tigard Chamber of Commerce - Open House
Washington County Economic Development Professionals Group (2)
GO - Western Bypass Meeting
Washington County Business Consortium - Bypass Subcommittee
C
TVEDC SPONSORED ACTIVITIES OR EVENTS
I-5 Breakfast Forum - Richard Callicrate, CESCO
"Employee Ownership: Is It Worth The
Investment?"
INDIVIDUAL CONTACTS
Bill Knox/UPS - Oregon Transportation Policy Draft
Ann Mulroney/City of Beaverton - Business Assistance Program
Betty Atteberry/Sunset Corridor Association - Western Bypass (3)
Mike Cook/Mentor Graphics - ODOT 6 Year Highway Improvement Plan
John Larsen/West One Bank - Western Bypass
Bob Alexander/City of Forest Grove Economic Development Council-
Economic Development District
Joan Smith/Washington County Historical Society - Living History
Museum
Dr. Betty Duvall/PCC Rock Creek Campus - UGB Amendment
Deanne Funk/PGE - Higher Education "Doing Business in Washington
County"
Tim Estes/Greenwood Inn - Membership Status
INFORMATION SERVICES
Generally, requests were light in March after a good first
quarter. Most interest remains in general demographic
information. Ili an effort to build on programming, board member
Dick Porn and president Mary Tobias will discuss a new Iprogram
component designed to develop a countywide base of economic data
that we can market to the membership and others.
TVEDC COMMITTEE STAFFING
Executive Board Planning Retreat
Transportation Con!n:i t.ta,e
Membership Committee
C
DATE: March 25, 1992
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Mary L. Tobias
RE: President's Report
February 1992
vurTnn.NI, PROGRAMS AND PLANNING
C
After an extremely busy month in January, TVEDC's schedule
returned to a more normal pace with an average number of meetings
and individual contacts scheduled.
A significant amount of time was invested in Western Bypass
meetings and monitoring the status of the ODOT study. The Sunset
Corridor, the Oregon Transportation Commission and Oregonians in
Action all held special meetings on the issue and TVEDC provided
information. TVEDC also collaborated with the Sunset Corridor in
preparing strategies for this much needed circumferential
arterial.
The bypass's major opponent, Sensible Transportation Options for
People (STOP) held three public meetings to generate additional
grass roots'support for their position. TVEDC hosted Gridlocked
Oregonians (GO) meetings to strategize for advocacy. The
Washington County-Business Consortium also held a bypass strategy
meeting.
TVEDC continues to bring a Washington County based voice to the
table of Portland State University's President's Advisory Council
and the Greater Portland Trust in Higher Education. Mary Tobias
president also continues to participate in consensus building for
the writing of the Metro Charter with a final draft expected to
be brought before the voters for consideration at the November
general election.
The media is still playing a strong role in TVEDC's increased in
visibility. The corporation's president gave interviews
regarding the charter to Jim Mayer of The Oregonian and was asked
by Lisa DuPre of Hillsboro radio station KUIK to do a program in
May. She also appeared on Bill Gallagher's talk show (KXL Radio)
as a bypass proponent opposite Meeky Blizzard of STOP.
During the month of February, TVEDC gave regional briefings to
the city councils of Hillsboro and Tigard.
C
Sunset Corridor Association
TVEDC's president and the Sunset Corridor's president
Atteberry, have begun to schedule monthl Betty
share information on various regional issues. in order to
corridor association follow on several ke TVEDC and the
issues including the Western B Y Washington County
ypss Because
interest are similar, both feel ita is.
important toe areas of
other apprised of new developments on a regular basis. keep each
Portland State Universit President's Advisor Council
Work continues on "PSU Listens"
universit with the goal of linking the
y to the community. Under the guidelines for the
program, the private sector will be involved in providing input
into the knowledge base that will be used to design long-term
strategies for PSU.
Greater Portland Trust in Hi her Education
At last month's meeting, it was decided that the major area of
effort would be assisting in the development of a regional
research library network which would link the public and private
university libraries in the Portland area. A presentation was
made of PORTALS which included information that the federal
government has pulled away from library development. There is
federal support, however, for funding a regional information
network.
The governance aspect of the research library
important because it will be the basic structured orsother
cooperative efforts by the state's universities as well. The
Council of Presidents has contacted the Murdoch Trust with the
hope that it would be willing to provide funding to match with
private sector dollars. They would like to discuss the project
more at length sometime during the last week in March.
State Acrencv Council
Transportation was a focus of this month's meeting with briefings
by ODOT, TVEDC and STOP on the Western Bypass. for discussion included mention that thestudyn begandwith
the agreement of all parties to put aside biases and examine all
the data with impartiality. Proponents of the bypass that request. There has been extensive examination ofvall lthe
issues and until last week, all activist activities had been set
aside. TVEDC did notify the council that with STOP's recognition
of activist activities, TVEDC will be speaking publicly as a
proponent of the bypass.
TVEDC stressed that land use planning regardin
part of the solution, but not all of it. g the bypass is
stressed the importance of activel TVEDC s president
y participating to find answers
;s'
to Washington County's traffic problems. Ways to participate
include becoming involved in DLCD's Urban Growth Management
Study, reading and submitting written comments on the Oregon
Transportation Plan.
Presentations to the council were also made by the Oregon
Department of Transportation, Sensible Transportation Options for
People and 1,000 Friends of Oregon. The directors of the
Department of Land Conservation and Development (Dick Benner) and
the Department of Environmental Quality (Fred Hanson) along with
the chairman of LCDC (Bill Blosser) all spoke to STOP's
objections to the Western Bypass study. The three informed STOP
representatives that their position had nothing to do with the
ODOT study, but were instead issues directly related to a
transportation system plan. The state representatives
particularly told STOP members they would accomplish more for
land use and transportation planning, if they would adopt an
active approach. Bill Blosser noted that it would be in STOP's
best interests to copy the TVEDC problem solving approach to
regional issues.
Social and East European Business Association (SEEBA)
SEEBA, a program at Portland State University and funded by a
U.S. government grant and private foundations, is aimed at
establishing societies of marketing, accounting and financing in
East Europe. A group of economic development professionals,
including TVEDC's president will travel to Poland and Hungary to
help governments there establish free-market economies.
TVEDC's president will be team leader presenting seminars on
defining the role of local government in economic development and
its role in small business development. She will also take part
in teaching a session on economic development practices using
programs in place in the Portland area as models. Her final
session will deal with the financing and pricing of public
services.
Metropolitan Chamber and Corridor Executives
TVEDC updated metro area chamber and corridor executives on the
status of the Metro Charter Committee and the direction it is
heading. Chamber and corridor executives were told that
discussion has continued on additional service responsibilities
with concerns voiced about the role local governments will take
in decision making process. Comments were also made about
possible involvement of knowledgeable citizenry, concern for
special districts and the role RPAC will eventually play in the
charter. The final version of the charter is to be completed by
July and placed before the voters in November.
C
Oregon Economic Development Department
TVEDC's president met with Steve Peterson for an update on the
status and direction of OEDD in the face of Ballot Measure S.
Peterson said OEDD will have to cut about 20 positions. Despite
the projected cuts, OEDD is concentrating on business
development, tourism and international trade. Peterson was
informed that CEDO has been put on hold for 1992. Peterson
thinks CEDO is needed for the purposes of networking and
training, but feels the organization is too formal and
structured. He suggested that a volunteer group could be formed
to informally facilitate a few professional development
conferences a year. He would have an interest in reshaping the
organization and stressed the importance of having economic
development professionals as the driving force.
Higher Education and Economic Development
Dr. John Byrne, President of Oregon State University, Keith
Mobley, OSU and Jon Carnahan, Linn-Benton Community College met
with TVEDC President Mary Tobias to discuss issues surrounding
stimulating Oregon's economy and the current state of higher
education in the state of Oregon.
Regional Briefings
TVEDC gave quarterly briefings to the cities of Hillsboro and
Tigard and met privately with Forest Grove Mayor Cliff Clark
regarding the status of TVEDC programs. The briefings included
an update on the Western Bypass and TVEDC's strategy to counter
work done by the bypass's major opponent, STOP.
INFORMATION SERVICES
During the month of February we had an array of information
requests ranging from regional maps requests to area office space
availability. . The majority of requests were for information on
demographics, the current job market and contacts in Washington
County.
ISSUES MANAGEMENT
The management of issues continued to be a priority for TVEDC
with a significant amount of involvement devoted to the Western
Bypass, the Metro Charter and DLCD's Urban Growth Management
Study. With the reactivation of GO (Gridlocked Oregonians),
TVEDC is once again investing time and energy into countering the
C efforts of STOP (Sensible Transportation Options for People), a
grass roots special interest group formed to block the
construction of the Western Bypass.
C
Western Bypass
Progress on the Western Bypass continues with several different
organizations holding strategy and informational meetings in
which TVEDC participated or audited. After a hiatus, GO
(Gridlocked Oregonians) has been reactivated, holding two
meetings in February to define its mission as a staunch advocate
of the bypass. GO attended a series of meetings organized by
STOP and provided a much needed voice for support of the bypass.
TVEDC continued to monitor the ODOT study's steering and
technical advisory committee meetings and worked on future goals
and strategies with the Sunset Corridor Association and the
Washington County Business Consortium. TVEDC also presented an
overview and update to the Oregon Transportation Commission and
Oregonians in Action.
Metro Charter Committee
The Charter Committee is slowly moving forward with another round
of public hearings scheduled for the end of March. Meetings in
February focused on the scope of Metro's authority, service
delivery functions, service responsibilities and the role of RPAC
in relation to the Charter. As a member of the Charter
Committee, TVEDC's president had requests from the Gresham
Chamber of Commerce, Washington County Visitors' Association and
Rep. Delna Jones for presentations and updates on the charter's
status. The committee is expected to present a final draft of
the document to voters for approval in the November general
election.
DLCD Urban Growth Management Study
The satewide urban growth management study continues with TVEDC
participating on the committees for infill and redevelopment for
and land use and transportation. Areas of discussion in the
infill and redevelopment committee include the role of local
jurisdictions in providing incentives, additional funding from
the state for infrastructure incentives and draft recommendations
for LCDC to consider. Points covered in the land use and
transportation committee include a possible public information
project, revised draft recommendations and a funding and
incentive package.
Affordable Housin
TVEDC met with Washington County Housing Authority's Susan Wilson
to discuss housing needs for the region. Points that were
discussed include methods for reducing housing costs,
establishing long term financing programs and establishing tax
credits in order to create affordable housing.
One of WCHA's goals is to become interactive with various groups
and working with non-profits and the private sector. WCHA also
deals with low rent programs, federally subsidized Section 81s,
bond projects to finance private development of affordable
housing and the administration of the HOME program. In the
future, it will be revising CHAS (Comprehensive Housing
Affordability Study).
Telecommunications
TVEDC was the source of background information solicited by Bill
Warner of Alliance Consulting Group. Alliance Consulting Group
is conducting an informational survey for the Public
Communications Network to determine how people are using cable
access for data communication via video and audio linkages.
Land Use/UGB Amendment
Portland Community College (Rock Creek Campus) Executive Dean
Betty Duvall asked for TVEDC's support in requesting an urban
growth boundary amendment so that the PCC campus can be brought
inside the UGB. There have been suggestions about relocating the
campus to bring it inside the boundary. PCC opposes this
unnecessary move and intends to remain in its current location.
However, the campus will need to be brought inside the boundary
before facilities expansion can occur on the present site. TVEDC
wrote a letter on behalf of Duvall and sent it to Metro stating
its support of PCC's request.
Since the beginning of the year, TVEDC has been taking a more
aggressive approach to membership and renewals. It has begun
hosting business briefing breakfasts again which involves
inviting members and potential members to hear representatives of
local and regional government about current issues affecting
business. A breakfast was held in February at MCI with State
Senator Joyce Cohen and Lake Oswego Mayor Alice Schlenker as
speakers.
Forum Breakfast continues with Bill Fuller of Tualatin
s as the February speaker. Although attendance for the
s been consistent, TVEDC feels it could be higher and has
d the Membership/Programs Committee to explore different
achieve this. The committee is in the process of
a survey to be used as a tool in understanding how
membership feels about the breakfast's time, location,
matter and ways to improve the monthly program.
The Transportation Committee continues to meet monthly with a
steady attendance of members addressing pertinent Washington
County issues. The committee is currently working with ODOT on
the possibility of hiring an ombudsman to work on behalf of area
businesses during the I-5/217 interchange project.
ADMINISTRATION
The Executive Committee held a retreat at the Greenwood Inn in
February to plan for the full board retreat scheduled for mid-
May. The committee also discussed the goals of the TVEDC Board.
Cathie Frederickson and Dick Johnson acted as facilitators.
In the area of new member recruitment, TVEDC and the board are
currently talking with Fred Meyer, Speed's Towing and Chapel &
Stowell regarding membership. Staff member Stephanie Baker is
also calling members who have received 3rd and 4th notices about
renewing.
OUTSIDE MEETINGS
During the report period, TVEDC was represented at the following
outside meetings or events:
PRESENTATIONS
State A
gency Council - Bypass Presentation
( Hillsboro City Council - Regional Briefing
Tigard City Council - Regional Briefing,
Oregon Transportation Commission - Bypass Presentation
Gresham Chamber of Commerce - Charter Update
Washington County Visitors Association - Charter Update
REGIONAL MEETINGS
Sunset Corridor Association - Coordination on Issues (2)
Forest Grove Mayor Cliff Clark - TVEDC Update
Sherwood Chamber of Commerce - Monthly'Meeting
SEEBA/PSU - East European Trip Planning (4)
Higher Education Trust (2)
PSU President's Advisory Council Executive Board
Stage Agency Council
Metro Chamber/Corridor Executives - Charter Update
Affordable Housing Meetings - Susan Wilson/Wash. Co. & Mary
Weber/Metro
MACC Telecommunications/Public Communications Network - Bill
Warner
Oregon Transportation Commission - Bypass
Oregonians in Action - Bypass
Metro Charter Committee - Regional Meetings (3)
Rep. Delna Jones - Charter Briefing
DLCD Urban Growth Management Study (Infill & Redevelopment) (1)
C DLCD Urban Growth Management Study (Land Use & Trans.) (1)
STOP Meetings - Western Bypass (2)
GO Meetings - Western Bypass (2)
ODOT Technical Advisory Committee Meeting - Bypass
ODOT Steering Committee Meeting - Bypass
Q
C
June 24, 1992
TO:
REGARDING:
INFORMATION REQUESTS FILLED
May - June 1992
Mel Hewitt
Sherwood
Land use
Ralph Groener
ASFME
General economic trend information - Washington County
Dee Staple
James Brown & Associates
Salem, OR
Population, income and market profile
Meg Frost
Seattle NW Securities
Portland, OR
Major employers in Tualatin Valley
Suzanne Stone
Portland, OR
TVEDC membership packet
TVEDC Board of Directors
INFORMATION SERVICES/Summary of Activity
C.
April 29, 1992
TO:
REGARDING:
INFORMATION REQUESTS FILLED
March - April, 1992
Pietro Ferrer!
Bolivian National
Job Market
Graduate Student
Lewis & Clark College
Portland, OR
Market information, demographics for Washington County
Deane Funk
Portland General Electric
Portland, OR
"Doing Business" update - cooperative project
Peggy Hoag
Stan Wiley, Inc.
Beaverton, OR
Map of Western Bypass Study Area
Jill Smith
Willamette Week
Portland, OR
Washington County overview - 1st Congressional district
Jackie Bradshaw
Village Baptist Church
Beaverton, OR
Income - market profile
t
Y
q
n~
C
TVEDC Board of Directors
INFORMATION SERVICES/Summary of Activity
Frank Trupil
Relocation Consultants
Fresno, CA
TVEDC information packet, list of economic
development professionals in Washington County
Norman Voorhees
Tigard, OR
Market and population information, small business owner
Alan Pedro
Fidelity National Title
Lake Oswego, OR
Projected growth in Washington County - market information
C
~ TALATI~i VALLEY
~T ECONO~tiIIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
June 16, 1992 1
Michael Hollern, Chairman
Oregon Transportation Commission
Salem, Oregon
RE: 1993-1998 PROPOSED ODOT SIX-YEAR PROGRAM
Mr. Hollern and Members of the Commission:
The Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corporation is a
public/private partnership linking the businpvs community of
Washington County and portions of Clackamas County with the local
governments of the region. It is our mission to work toward
ensuring a positive. climate in which. those businesses can grow
and prosper:-
As we all know, an-efficient transgostation system in- an-d
through a region is crucial to its economy. Tfris-is particularry
important to- a region that is- experiencing- a health-y economic
growth cycle.
•Histarically when transportation improvements lag economic
expansion, the costs of doing business that are directly related
to time/delay rise significantly. These costs can be related to
distribution costs or employee costs. Businesses that are
particularly sensitive to this rise then begin the process of
cost/benefit analysis and in many cases actually relocate to
'bring down the cost of doing business. If enough companies are
impacted and forced to adjust their operations to accommodate the
increased costs of shipping delays or employee commute time
costs, then the healthy region begins the downward cycle that we
see occurring in other parts of the nation.
While TVEDC recognizes the complexities of balancing the
many statewide needs with the limited funds available, we believe
that it is in the best interests of the state of Oregon to take
an active approach toward pfreserving the economic vitality of the
Tualatin Valley. With that goal in mind, there are several
projects that are very important to move through the process
toward construction as rapidly as possible.
We would like to be on record as supporting the issues
raised by the Washington County Transportation Coordinating
Committee and the individual projects supported by the county and
C its cities. In addition, TVEDC has particulate concerns for four
of the projects in the proposed six-year plan: the I-5/217/Kruse
Way Interchange, the OR Hwy 47 bypass at Forest Grove, the I-
5/Stafford Road Interchange in Wilsonville, and the Western ODOT
10200 5.%V. Nimbus A~-enue • Suite G-3 • Tigard. Oregon 97223 • (303) 620-1142 • FA_X (503) 624-0641
1993-1998 SIX-YEAR PROGRAM
Testimony/June 16,'1992
Page 2
Bypass.
The interesting thing about these projects is that in many
ways, they each act as a gateway to the Tualatin Valley. They
are all important to the future of the region for the movement of
goods, services and people. For the most part, each of the
projects will enhance access to other parts of the state which
will undoubtedly provide an economic stimulus to other regional
economies.
I-5/217/KRUSE WAY INTERCHANGE With the increase in
traffic into and around Portland, improvements to this
interchange need to be placed on the 'urgent, it should have been
done five years ago" list. Highway 217 provides the only
continuous flow access from the south to the north on the west
side of Portland. In combination with the Sunset Highway, it
provides the only uninterrupted flow from I-5 to western
Washington County. There is a significant problem with access to
Highway 217 at the current traffic volumes. Work on the
interch-ange improvements needs to proceed at an accelerated pace.
Recommendation: Keep the 1-5/2-17/Kruse -Way Interchange
project on the fastest possible timeline.
OREGON HIGHWAY 47 BYPASS (FOREST GROVE) The cities of
Western Washington County all experience access difficulties. As
we explained earlier, ease of access is crucial to economic
vitality. It is particularly important to the economy of Forest
Grove that improved access to and from the Sunset Highway be
enhanced. In keeping with the state's goals for providing jobs
and housing in close proximity to one another, it will be ever
more important that cities are connected to one another for the
movement of product to and from the regions' distribution hubs.
Currently,. access to Forest Grove causes the time factor to
disadvantage the city in attracting business. One of the largest
employers in the city, Pacific University, needs smooth, easy
access for students, parents, faculty and visitors to keep it
attractive in the higher education marketplace. An important _
component of this project is the local match that has been
designated by the MSTIP2 funds in Washington County. In
addition, the current access provides a significant safety
problem.
Recommendation: Move the Hwy 47 Bypass back onto the
original schedule for construction.
I-5/STAFFORD ROAD INTERCHANGE, WILSONVILLE ROAD This
project is another example of the excellent cooperation ODOT is
getting from the citizens and governments of the region. This
1993-1998' SIX-YEAR PROGRAM
Testimony/June 16, 1992
Page 3
project has been designed to move forward in concert with a
series of local improvements that have been endorsed and financed
through the support of the City of Wilsonville and businesses
that border SW 95th in that city. As is usual when governments
plan projects of this scope, a lot of compromises have to be
worked out. Wilsonville put a great deal of time and effort into
the planning and negotiating that the 95th street improvements 3
required. In addition, because of regional plans for a solid
waste transfer station, the negotiations for handling future
traffic needs involved the Metropolitan Service District. A lot
of Portland area public policy was predicated on the original j
construction schedule. It is imperative that the good faith in
which all of these decisions and compromises not be violated. In
this time when all government is suspect, the City of Wilsonville
needs to keep faith with its citizens and provide the promised
improvements on time.
Recommendation: Move the I-5/Stafford Road, Wilsonville
Road improvement projects back up to the original construction
schedule.
Aff1h
VESTSRN BYPASS As you know, north/south traffic in
western Washington County is currently served .by-farm to market
roads. As the northwest corner of the state of Oregon continues
to experience economic and population growth, these roads are
going to become congested and traffic safety will become a
significant issue. It is most important that the commission
continue to pursue ways in which this problem can be addressed.
Currently the Western Bypass Study has the problem under intense
scrutiny. However, there are issues of increased traffic on
rural roads that may not be adequately examined in the context of
the current study. These must be a prio'rity for the future.
Recommendation: Continue to support the Western Bypass
Study and keep it moving forward as rapidly as possible.
TVEDC would like you to know that we support your efforts.
These are difficult times for our state and there are many
demands on our resources. However, we offer you any assistance
that we can give in working toward the resolution of the issues
surrounding transportation system improvements in Oregon.
Sincerely,
Mary L. Tobias
. President/CEO
g C n 6 T... O
® O Z G a. C'~ .S E c c a'3`J o .D u=
> a ty ~ E._ 0. ~ 7
o"oo0.iny ~ o; ~ H e c
6 y~ u v u .G a 7 a r U .
P y 7C q u C g .7 u O° u >.j
V'1 p F N F F u v= O u v
3ei p` q❑a.oa~= ~
F O nn u
~ 1p u < ~.G ~ C.G~ N u p0, ~ U7
A ~ T ~ > >
E 7 t" m° o-> u 3
con L~^~c 'Z C~u 4'e _~o a ccu2~E
C.~ 7-• ~ A O p - O T
~~~~~°^°-E .flE;r7°33 rJU- i3c~L'u3 u
5-y~ K o s° 0 5p 3 ~?L E
o @ u 3 c° 5 0 , o.N > 5 o'ao~j n
a U _ o y
'm a d c 3` u n- T O t u_ u
>
e
X?E e a~x He °nd
u o_ c a o_ E C> o H K c ue_ 07_ Eu
P~1 `-'uQ u.=S O.c>> U yn•~k-- I~Zo =
~r12 E~~' rC ma E33`~ $
> c
- - -
• 315 000 ° oq~ v e 3 ~2, ° c~ 3i a
y5 3 y~
elm ~~'O v;_6 NEE _ pax 2
7 u _~-1 O m V n d V L n ° N O C U L
n0.' 3 K qL O i
3 N CJ O u K ~ n u 3 .y ~ N Q Y N n H v 27 U~ n y U Q. 4~ C ~ C A V u u TQ V 7 7 = L °
T C ~ 'O
AouECC~c~-_ `ScA
E O 7 C E u V V K ¢J N
EW~3ou ao~=mUKUO~o'^~°'cu7
y e `u Cey- ° u u a~t 3 e-c~_O ;;m
O L y ~ C>> c ~ .o u~ ~ 7 p Q T o u
a a n c 3
us y ='te'a d m° eo
9~I/ ° v `Jj a•p c ~,~F e~S TE °
U _ C q p
>gi $Lt~%'~ cr3 ~t
gcoo33c3LO
Kv mC~.=9 L =:c~_-5~ra333°'
U
7 > o c u 3° v 3 3 c~ m~ 3
-95
,a"~gur'EcEiuity
• ~ 3 0 33 cv ~ Ec a mc...
_ A
5
SE c 3~ c $t' r EE ~-rE
g~
p
m ~ u_ •o o° t~L v c c o eo
-e3~' u~~m `t''uS?O~ E0t una0 -
L ri y S u. 7 V e w- u 7 m S O. °
v~ Q EF .E H c E c o "'C o0 o c r~3 ?
so-
F > pa=sT~> ac~~9 ~
p qq v_
12 E-E
'~O FZSmo~~3 o0 c~o~3 tp
OG y; o u u n 3 e G
• >o~uN$AL~~`°uCUEm ua~t
a, Ul ~8'3u c -E? u S c q
in m> u m'S ~H L C p 1p V> C go
pmp 0 G
La -5i
0
I
NI (n
C;1 ~0 W
WI z Q
G W W
I 0 Z U-
(0-4
i
"
vr .r c J .r = O
U
~
G
J
h
.
U
r
U l r
~2
N O r
v
^
C ri S r r r r L A .
r
r 1
:S
V-•
_ ^
-2 = s ~ Si Wi-
.
® I.
~7•~~r r?- tea`... -2p
vlC=~-
. =3ccc--
r
AIM
i
aw
V _ U C
C u C~~ O C R C T O .bj
C T~ Y V V V C of
,.o-.s
_ v
V r _ T C _ J 6 O
= U Yl C. ~ > U
L Y U -
_ ^ = - ~ - ~ C V V V N
r 7 ~ u v 1 h O
_ U
Cam. ;j v •9 r Gi s~ v G Z .7
7 c ~
p. C u 4 _ C. G . w
to V: r 6. ~ r~` t J r~ V L
F_c.~J. a.F_ yy Co
macs--=J r~~ _
'C r i C+ - = C J
> _ T V
~ L CJ
r L n v°
Et
C _ [ ^
> =~==u air=
N
W O
~ U
4-J 0
p L'ZA
0 -
W
Lij
V /
En lao
N S
W
CL
O 4-
4)
E
4)
%aft
000,
mI~~
(^j( t
~ f 1
O
Sao ■
r ~ - ~ - r v - C C _T _
_
° r c T N > J
r T r - r r = H
- - U CJ H
r- r^ 7 U G C ^
CSC v E. T r C
2 T U
fi
r -
.O O
r'.
r~> C v U U
Ci
U
• -
7
-
U •
i
.
=
C
0, C.
W
Z,p
Q.
rr ca: n~ ° n
~ C G.' v _.O _ r
m' o
G. r C .
C.
"1
Tomorrow's transit -
What happens if region can't meet ridership goals?
Who gets hurt if transit
doesn't entice the new
riders that Tri-Met's
general manager, Tom
Walsh, projects in his draft plan for
the agency's next decade?
Those most dependent on clean air
for health reasons, certainly. But in
fact, all of us who want to breathe
easily and not have to search for
Mount Hood through a shroud of
smog; who want a nation less depen-
dent on foreign oil; who want to
spend less time driving - or parked
in lines of congested traffic - and
more time at work and home.
The list is longer, and it includes
Oregonians outside of the metropoli-
tan area who want.more transporta-
tion dollars invested in highways and
streets to serve them, instead of more
freeways to serve Portland drivers.
Under Walsh's plan, transit rider-
ship here would grow from 200,000 a
day this year to nearly 700,000 by
2005. However, the foundation for
that growth includes: (1) new operat-
ing money - $45 million a year in
1995 and $30 million more a year in
1998; (2) changed land-use patterns to
foster growth along transit corridors,
and (3) a third light-rail line to begin
operating in 2002.
If those things don't take place,
Tri-Met's analysts estimated last
week, daily ridership more likely
would limp upward only to about
255,000 by 2005.
Without new money, Tri-Met could
add no new service hours after 1994,
would delay bus replacement in 1995
and would gradually decrease service
each year after 1997. Peak-hour trans-
it would be standing-room-only. That
would further discourage ridership
growth.
Take a look at traffic congestion
today and the growing impact on resi-
dential neighborhoods of drivers
seeking alternative routes. Then
apply the population-growth projec-
tions for the metropolitan area. New
high-cost freeways? More smog?
More sprawl as people seek to get
away from congestion, but actually
increase reliance on the automobile?
Increased fuel consumption?
It's an ugly scene, one that resi-
dents here cannot want framed in
their home and workplace windows.
Walsh envisions a different future,
but Tri-Met is going to need help:
First, citizen understanding of what
is at stake. Then, strong support and
advocacy to ensure Tri-Met the mon-
ey it needs to serve more riders and
to encourage local elected officials to
make land-use decisions that will
take full advantage of the public's
investment in transit.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3, a
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 28 1992 DATE SUBMITTED: July 15, 1992
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Greenspaces Grant PREVIOUS ACTION: none
FannovCreek Pa PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Ed MurRhy CD_Dir. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
To authorize the submittal of an application for U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service grant funds available through Metro
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Authorize submittal of the application
INFORMATION SUMPIARY
Grant funds are available from Metro to restore natural sites to their
original states to the extent feasible. Eligible sites include urban
wetlands, streams, and riparian corridors, and selected upland sites. The
intent of the grant program is to demonstrate that open space protection and
restoration projects can be successfully completed on a regional level with
the proper planning, cooperative efforts, and the availability of resources.
Last year Fowler School was awarded $10,000 in Greenspaces grant funds to
diversify the ecology of the large wetland areas located on the school land.
The City seeks funds to purchase and plant native trees and shrubs in Fanno
Creek Park. The plantings are intended to improve the natural character of
the park and its ability to support the area's wildlife inhabitants. The
project is consistent with the master plan for the park, which calls for a
continuous corridor of natural vegetation along the creek and the maintenance
of the central portion of the park as a nature preserve. Technical
assistance in designing the project has been provided by the Fish and
Wildlife Service and the Urban Stream Council.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
1.) authorize as recommended
2.) do not authorize submittal of the grant application
-Y_ FISCAL NOTES
Approximately $20,000 is requested. A 50 percent local match is required.
The City's match will include staff time to be allocated to the project and
volunteer hours used for the clearing and planting work. The Fans of Fanno
Creek and the Ti Tu Mi Girl Scouts will be partners in the project and will
provide the volunteers. No local cash would be required.
C
Page 1 of 3
® APPLICATION FORM
Metropolitan Greensoaces Program - Demonstration Grants
Due August 3, 1992 -by 5:00 p.m:
Name of Applicant Organization: CITY OF TIGA n
Department or Division: COMMUNITY DEVELORMENT DEPARTMENT
Type of Organization: -2i-City County Special District Nonprofit
Describe Your Organization: Incorporated Municipality
(You may,enclose brochures about your organization.)
If This Is A Joint Application of more than one agency/organization, please list all
the agencies anal/or organizations: Fans of Fanno Creek, Ti Tu Me Girl Scouts
Project Manager/Contact Person: Floyd Peoples, Parks Maintenance Supervi
Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
Telephone: (503) 639-4171
Project Title: /F~anno Creek Park Restoration Prnjprt
Type in N of S'efn Ory: Gerald Edwards. Mayor
Signatur, ' Date 7L-? k /qL
of Ele 0fficia or ecutive Director
r
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3.3_
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
L tf , 1 y y z
AGENDA OF: July
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Quitclai
of an existing sewer easement
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK
DATE SUBMITTED: July 16, 1992
PREVIOUS ACTION: None
PREPARED BY: Chris Davies _
REQUESTED BY:
Should the sewer easement granted to the City, recording number 79020484, be
extinguished?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approval of the resolution authorizing that the easement be extinguished.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
In the early 1970's Muttley's Addition Subdivision was approved, (see
attached map for location). A portion of the subdivision needed to access a
sanitary sewer line located to the south. The adjacent property owner
granted a public sanitary sewer easement to the City so that access would be
available. In the late 1980's the City of Tigard had a sewer project in this
vicinity that reconfigured the system so that it would be a gravity system
instead of a pumped system. Therefore, at this point in time the easement
that was granted as part of the Muttley's Addition Subdivision could have
been extinguished though it was not. In 1991 the Planning Commission
approved subdivision, SUB 91-14. As part of the conditions of approval it
was required that the easement be vacated prior to final plat approval. The
developer of SUB 91-14 has provided for all lots to be served by a public
sanitary sewer and requests that the easement be extinguished.
The attached resolution will allow the easement to be legally extinguished.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
1. Authorize the City Administrator to sign the easement extinguishment.
2. Deny authorization of the easement extinguishment.
FISCAL NOTES
No additional expenses are expected.
glaubko-ca.1
% I
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM L
CITY OF
TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 28,
1992
DATE SUBMITTED:
July 15. 1992
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE:
Review-Hart's
PREVIOUS ACTION:
Planning Com.
Landin Subdivision
Approval-Sub 9
Hearin - June 8
1992
0003 PDR 92-000 MIS
92-0006 1
A11
1 PREPARED BY: Bewersdorff/Offer
l
DEPT HEAD OK C
ITY ADMIN OK I
/T
M
REQUESTED BY: Ed
Murphy
Should the City Council uphold the Planning commission's decision to require
the developer to provide a water quality facility that is designed to
accommodate this particular development even though it may not accommodate
all future upstream runoff?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Affirm the Planning Commission's decision which was to require a water
quality facility to accommodate runoff from the Hart's Landing Subdivision.
Modify condition No. 15 to allow for the payment of fees in lieu of
construction of a water quality facility to accommodate the Hart's Landing
Subdivision.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
On June 23, 1992, the City council voted to call up for review the Planning
{ Commission's approval of the Hart's Landing Subdivision, a 34 lot subdivision
by Renaissance Homes, Inc. located at 10993 SW North Dakota Street between
Englewood Subdivision on the north, Englewood Park on the south and Black
Bull Park Subdivision on the east. The Planning Commission's final order is
attached for reference.
Of specific concern was the Commission's decision not to require the
developer to size a USA required water quality facility to accommodate the
treatment of drainage from upstream properties. The Commission required that
the water quality facility be designed to accommodate the subject development
only. Staff had indicated to the developer and Commission that subsequent to
the construction of the water quality facility, the developer could request
that the City Council establish a reimbursement district for the purpose of
having upstream benefitted properties compensate this developer for the cost
of over-sizing the water quality facility. However, the reimbursement
district process provides no certainty that such a district would be formed
until after the developer actually constructs the facility. Without
certainty that a zone of benefit could be established or that the developer
would be fully compensated for over-sizing, the Commission did not require
the over-sizing (see page 21 of P.C. Final Order). There was also concern
that over-sizing the water quality facility would require the removal of
additional trees and possibly reduce the number of lots.
Staff's initial recommendation to require over-sizing was based on the City's
policy to require public facilities, including storm drain facilities, to be
C oversized to accommodate the impact of off-site impacts that must be routed
through a particular development. Code Section 18.164.100. C. requires that:
a culvert or other drainage facility shall, and in each case be, large
enough to accommodate potential runoff from its e~iissue sis whetherl gths
area, whether inside or outside thdevelopment'". Unified Sewerage Agency to
code section applies to facilities required by t
Storm drainage treat me need facility a uirements create
treat storm drainage.
a relatively new issue brought about by to impr the of
specifically for
the Tualatin River. The city's code lists no requirements
are in a
state storm drainage treatment facilities. changes U As ra result,l staff recommends no
continuous flux and are likely concur with the Planning
change in city code requirements and, therefore,
Commission that the water quality treatment facilities should not be
oversized.
Current USA rules call for the construction of water qualit treatment
exception process allows for payment of a fee in
facilities on each site. An the Commission's recommended
lieu of construction in some cases. M ifmould provide more flexibility
condition No. i5 to allow for such _ payment
in addressing the water quality treatment issues relative to Hart's Landing.
The modified condition could read as follows:
licant shall provide a water quality facility meeting the
1 The app Resolution and Order No. 91-47 that
require ements of Unified Sewerage Agency Engineer's develo
to th is designed to accommodate fees in hlieu of constructi unof a waterequality facility
approval, payment nt be authorized. _
to accommodate this development may _
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
1. Affirm the Planning Commission's decision. the water
2. Amend the Planning Commission's decision to require over-sizing
quality facility to accommodate upstream drain.of fees in lieu of a
3. Modify the condition of approval to allow payment -
water quality facility. =
FISCAL NOTES
Financial impact unknown.
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
FINAL ORDER NO. 92-03 PC
All,
A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS WHICH APPROVES AN APPLICATION
FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN TWO EXISTING PARCELS. IN ADDITION, THE FINAL
ORDER INCLUDES FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION WITH REGARD TO AN APPLICATION FOR A 34 LOT
SUBDIVISION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR ONE OF THE ADJUSTED PARCELS. THE REQUESTS
ARE MADE BY RENAISSANCE DEVELOPMENT.
The Tigard Planning commission has reviewed the above-described applications at
a public hearing on June 8, 1992. The Commission has based its decision on the
facts, findings, and conclusions noted below.
1. SUMMARY OF THE REQUESTS
CASE: HART'S LANDING
Miscellaneous MIS 92-0006
Subdivision SUB 92-0003
Planned Development Review PDR 92-0001
SUMMARY: The applicant requests: 1) Lot Line Adjustment approval to adjust
two parcels of 1.23 acres and 13.53 acres into two parcels of 6.9
acres and 7.86 acres; 2) Subdivision preliminary plat/Planned
Development Review conceptual plan approval to divide the
approximately 7.86 acre site into 34 single family residential lots
averaging 7500 square feet in size. In addition, the applicant has
requested an exception to the 25 foot undisturbed buffer area
adjacent to "sensitive areas" requirement of the Unified Sewerage
Agency Surface Water Management regulations.
APPLICANT: Renaissance Homes, Inc.
2098 Eighth Avenue
West Linn, Oregon 97068
AGENT: Harris-McMonagle, Inc.
(Contact: Bill McMonagle)
12555 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
OWNER: Mary Hart
10993 SW North Dakota St.
Tigard, OR 97223
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential
ZONING DESIGNATION: R-4.5(PD) (Residential, 4.5 units/acre - Planned
Development overlay)
LOCATION: 10993 SW North Dakota Street (WCTM 1S1 34AC, Tax Lots 2300 and 2400)
APPLICABLE LAW: Community Development Code Chapters 18.50, 18.80, 18.84,
18.88, 18.92, 18.102, 18.108, 18.114, 18.150, 18.160, 18.162,
18.164; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.5.4,
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 1
4.2.1, 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.3.1,
Unified Sewers 7.4.4 7.6.1. and 8.3.3;
Surface Water ga Agency Construction Standards Pertaining to
Management R&O 91-47, as amended by R&O 91-75.
II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
A. Sit--mssi--1
At present, tax lot 2300 is 13.53 acres in size and tax lot 2400 is 1.23
acres.
B. Site location and surroundin uses:
The site is bounded on the north and west by the Englewood subdivision; on
the east by the Black Bull Park subdivision and on the south by th,-
Carnahan•s Addition subdivision and a number of large lot sin le-
residences. Englewood park is located to the northwest of this site. The
Fanno Creek floodplain and g family
Pedestrian/bicycle pathways are located insboth Fanno Creek and Englewood
Parks relatively close to the subject the northeast.
property.
The site is surrounded by developed residential
with all areas developed to their full develo mA;
the large lot properties on all s;des
properties to the south. P r` potential, except for
C. Existin uses and structures:
_ Tax lot 2400 presentl
several outbuildin s•y contains a large house (the
Hart area in the southern Tax lot 2300 contains sca tered trees dance) and and field
pond on the northern
a portion of the site and dense vegetation surrounding
includes some potion of the parcel. The area of the
deciduous trees in associated wetlands and a few lar a pond
year. Access to bo hl nd areas is g mature fir and
The pond has been drained in the past
parcels
North Dakota Street that
extends acrosst provided by a gravel drivewa
- ax lot 2500 to the south.
y from SW
D. Tonoara
UhV arirl ec
The site slopes to the
north
and east from a approximately 194 feet to a water level of 161.2 feet x ornthe pond n The
maximum elevation on the north side of the pond is 178 feet in
northwestern corner of the site. pond. The
the
E. Plan des' nation and zonin
The site is designated for
Comprehensive Plan low density residential
units/acre Map. The site is zoned use by the
The Planned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5
parcels as well as two other Development overlay zone was a
subdivision a properties to the south as applied to these
art of an earlier
Development overlay is not associated with onl
approval but instead remains on the propert 1' a particular development
also designated for low Y- Surrounding Pment
are
density residential use and are also o zoned properties
d R-4.5.
a FINAL ORDER - SUE 92-0003/PDR 92-00011MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB.
PAGE 2
F. Development proposal:
The application proposes a lot line adjustment between the 1.23 acre tax
tax lot 2300 so as to result in parcels of
lot 2400 and the 13.53 acre
7.86 and 6.9 acres. The 6.9 acre parcel would contain the Hart residence,
the pond, an undevelopable buffer area on the south side of the pond, and
all of the area north of the pond.
The applicant proposes subdividing the 7.86 acre parcel into 34 single
family lots ranging in size from 5,920 to 10,610 square feet as shown on
the preliminary plat. Access to Englewood Park to the northwest of the
proposed subdivision is proposed from a 10-foot wide pedestrian access
easement and pedestrian path across proposed lot 8 connecting to the
public street system.
The applicant proposes an internal network of roads that would include
extensions of the current dead ended SW 109th Avenue and SW Black Diamond
Way. A SW 109th-SW Black Diamond Way connection was required by the
Planning Commission's decision for SUB 91-0001. These two streets would
intersect just south of the Hart residence. In addition, two east-west
public streets would be stubbed to provide for future extension to the
south and west. Public street improvements within the subdivision are
proposed to conform to City of Tigard local street standards, including 34
feet of pavement within 50 foot wide rights-of-way and sidewalks on both
sides of all streets.
A 24-foot wide private street with sidewalk on one side is proposed to
serve lots 5-10 in the northwestern corner of the proposed subdivision.
The private street would be located in a 32-foot wide access tract that
would be commonly owned by the owners of lots 5-10.
In addition, the applicant has requested an exception to the 25 foot
undisturbed buffer area adjacent to "sensitive areas" requirement of the
Unified Sewerage Agency Surface Water Management regulations (R&O 91-47,
as amended by R&O 91-75). The exception would allow portions of the 25
feet adjacent to wetlands on the site to be included within lots 2-6
instead of being placed in A separate buffer tract as is usually required.
The applicant has proposed that "compensating buffer area" between lots 6-
8 and other portions of the wetland area be set aside from development.
The lot setback from the wetlands in this area would be 50 feet rather
than the 25 foot requirement.
G. Public service and utilities:
The applicants propose replacing the existing cleanout at the end of the
sanitary sewer at Ponderosa Court and Black Diamond Way with a manhole and
extension of an 8-inch line installed westward to serve the proposed
subdivision.
Water service would be extended from existing dead end lines on Black
Diamond Way and SW 109th Avenue.
A storm drainage network would be developed throughout the site that would
drain to the existing pond. No water quality treatment facility is
proposed to treat storm drainage from the proposed subdivision.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006 PAGE 3
HART LAKE SUB.
III. APPLICABLE APPROVAL STANDARDS
A. Community Development code:
1. Chapter 18.50 contains standards for the R-4.5 zone. Single-family
detached residential units are the primary permitted uses in the
zone. Single-family residential lots in the zone must comply with
the following dimensional requirements:
Minimum lot size
7,500
square feet
Average minimum lot width
50
feet
Front setback
20
feet
Interior side setback
5
feet
Corner yard setback
15
feet
Rear setback
15
feet
Maximum building height
30
feet
2. Chapter 18.80 contains provides a process for providing a means for
creating planned environments through the application of flexible
development standards. The purpose statement notes that it is the
intent of this section to preserve to the greatest extent possible
the existing landscape features and amenities through the use of
site planning procedures that relate the type and design of a
development to the site.
The Planned Development process is permitted only through the
application of the Planned Development overlay zone to a parcel
through a zone change application. If the application involves the
subdivision of land, the application for the zone change and the
preliminary plat approval may be heard-concurrently. Approval of
the Planned Development overlay zone shall not expire. Approval of
the Planned Development site development plan is valid for eighteen
months, and may be extended for an additional twelve months.
The minimum lot size, lot depth, and lot width standards of the
underlying zone shall not apply to a planned development except as
related to the'density computation. Building height requirements of
the underlying zone shall not apply except within 100 feet an
Established Area. Front yard, side yard, and rear yard setbacks of"
the underlying zone shall not apply except on the perimeter of the
site. Garages must maintain a twenty foot setback from public
rights-of-way. An applicant may request special setbacks to be
applied to the development or the Planning Commission may establish
special setbacks.
Code Section 18.80.120 identifies approval criteria for a planned
development site plan. Of particular note with regard to the
current request is Section 18.80.120.A.3.a(i) which states that
streets, buildings, and other site elements shall be designed
and located to preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural
drainage to the greatest extent possible.-
3. Chapter 18.84 contains regulations for development within or
adjacent to wetlands, including land within 25 feet of an identified
wetlands. Wetland locations may include but are not limited to
those areas identified as wetlands in either the Comprehensive
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
` HART LAKE SUB.
PAGE 4
Plan's Floodplain and Wetlands Hap or the "Wetland Inventory and
Assessment for the City of Tigard, Oregon," by Scientific Resources
Inc., 1989. Specific identification of wetland boundaries by
` qualified professionals may be required to be done at an applicant's
expense.
Code Section 18.84.040.D provides that the hearing body may approve
a development adjacent to a significant wetlands provided that
activities meeting the Code's definition of development are located
at least 25 feet from the wetland boundary.
4. Chapter 18.88 contains solar access standards for new residential
development. A lot meets the basic solar access lot standard if it
has a north-south dimension of 90 feet or more and has a front lot
line that is oriented within 30 degrees of a true east-west axis. A
subdivision complies with the basic requirement if 80 percent or
more of the newly created lots meet or exceed this standard.
5. 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,
divide the net development area by the minimum parcel size permitted
by the zoning district.
6. Chapter 18.102 requires that adequate vision be provided at road
intersections.
7. Chapter 18.108 contains access standards. Private streets or
driveways are permitted to serve up to six dwelling units subject to
pavement width and improvement standards that vary with the number
of dwelling units served. Common driveways serving three dwelling
units to a maximum of six residences must have a minimum pavement
width of 24 feet within a minimum 30 foot wide access tract. Curbs
and a sidewalk on one side of the street are required. A turnaround
area is required for private streets in excess of 150 feet in
length.
8. Chapter 18.114 establishes standards for sizes and locations of
signs. A process is established for the review and approval of sign
permits. Platted subdivisions are permitted one permanent,
freestanding sign at each entry point. Sign area is limited to 32
square feet per sign face.
9. 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 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;
FImA3+ ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/HIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 5
C
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.
10. 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:
t
a. The subdivision proposal 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 of other plats
within Washington County and the plat must otherwise satisfy
the provisions of ORS Chapter 92;
C. The streets and roads must be laid out so as to conform to the
plats of subdivisions and maps of major partitions already
approved for adjoining properties 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
11. Code Section 18.162.060 contains approval standards for adjusting
parcel boundaries when no additional parcels are to be created. The
proposed adjustment must not take either of the parcels out of
conformance with the:-minimum lot size of the applicable zoning
district; must not create setback violations; or otherwise take the
parcels out of conformance with the access and dimensional standards
of the zoning district or other Code standards.
12. 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 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 street that can be extended off-site.
41
d. Section 18.164.030(M) requires local street grades of 12% or
less.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 6
i
t
i
e. Section 18.164.060 prohibits lot depth from being more than 21
times the lot width and requires lot frontage of at least 25
feet on a public or private street for all lots created
through the subdivision process.
f. Section 18.164.070 requires sidewalks adjoining all local
residential streets.
ction 18.164.090 requires sanitary sewer service.
S
e
Cf.
h. Section 18.164.100 requires adequate proviai0^_s for storm
ements for storm drainage
water runoff and dedication of eas
facilities.
B. A licable Com rehensive Plan Policies.
1.
Policy 2.1.1 provides the city will assure citizens will be provided
of the planning process.
an opportunity to be involved in all phases
2.
Policy 3.4.2 requires the protection of fish and wildlife habitat
arian vegetation, requiring
ri
i
i
p
n
ng
along stream corridors by mainta
and by retaining standing trees and
res
,
erosion control measu
the maximum extent possible. This policy also
natural vegetation to
ecial consideration be given to minimizing tree removal
s s
eas
i
p
re
requ
related to development in areas designated as timbered or tree ar
etland areas on
th
e w
in the Comprehensive Plan. The area south of
the Plan's vegetation map at I-39 as
'
is noted on
the Hart property
also
d coniferous-deciduous tree cover. This p 1
i
i
xe
having m
w
ldlife
requires cluster development in as areas having important
rehensive Plan's resource
Com
h
p
e
habitat values as designated by t
The Plan does not designate the subject site as an area
document.
with important values for wildlife (Plan Volume I, map at I-41).
y
3
Policy 3.5.4 provides that the an interconnected pedestrian/pathway
.
system be developed throughout the City.
4
Policy-4 2-1 Provides'that' all development' within the Tigard Urban
state and
deral
f
,
e
Planning Area shall comply with applicable
regional water quality standards.
5.
Policy 7.1.2 provides the City will require as a condition of
and storm drainage
development approval that public water, sewer,
standards and utilities placed
d to Cit
y
will be provided and designe
underground.
6.
Policy 7.3.1 provides the City will coordinate water services with
water districts.
7.
Policy 7.4.4 requires all new development to be connected to an
approved sanitary sewer system.
B.
Policy 7.6.1 requires that as a pre-condition to developments`., a
m having adequate water
t
e
development be served by a water sys
and that the Fire District
pressure for fire fighting purposes
review all development applications.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/HIS 92-0006 PAGE 7
HAR' LAKE SUB.
9.
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.
10.
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 hazard.
C. USA
Surface Water Management Regulations
1.
Chapter 6 of the Unified Sewerage Agency Surface Water Management
Regulations, Resolution and order 91-47, requires that a 25 foot
undisturbed buffer corridor be provided between a development and a
sensitive area, such as a wetland, floodplain, or pond. The
undisturbed corridor may be required to be fenced, signed, or
otherwise separated from parcels that will develop. The undisturbed
corridor shall not be included in a developable lot and may be
required to be dedicated to USA or the City or else an easement may
be required conveying storm and marface water management rights to
USA or the City and preventing the owner of the undisturbed buffer
area from activities and uses inconsistent with the purpose of the
corridor. Sensitive areas shall not include a constructed wetland
or a water feature constructed during an earlier phase of site
development for specific purposes such as a recreational lake or a
water quality facility. Chapter 6 allows exceptions to the 25 foot
standard where it is unfeasible to provide the full corridor. In
the case of exceptions, an area equivalent to'the 25 foot corridor
shall be provided.
2. Chapter 7 of the USA regulations requires that certain developments
install water quality facilities for the purpose of removing
phosphorous. The water quality facility may not be placed within a
water quality buffer corridor separating a development from a
"sensitive area" unless the corridor is widened to compensate for
the placement of the water quality facility.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAZE SUB. PAGE 8
IV. NPO & AGENCY COMMENTS
C 1. The City of Tigard Engineering Department reviewed the proposal and
provided the following comments:
Streets:
The site is located north of SW North Dakota Street and.has access from
two local streets: SW 109th Avenue and SW Black Diamond Way.
The applicant is proposing to extend SW 109th to the north to intersect
with a westward extension of SW Black Diamond Way. SW Black Diamond Way
would extend further westward to intersect with SW 111th Avenue and a
private drive. The applicant is also proposing two new streets, SW 111th
and SW Geneva, to serve the interior of the subdivision. These two
streets would be stubbed or dead ended so that they could be extended to
serve the properties to the southwest for future development. All
proposed public streets meet Code standards for local streets. The
applicant should be required to install a temporary turn-around for SW
Geneva Street. The Code requires that roads which terminate and are in
excess of 150 feet in length provide a turn-around for fire apparatus
until such time as they are extended.
The applicant is proposing a private drive which would serve six lots in
the northwest corner of the proposed development. The private drive meets
applicable Code Chapter 18.108 standards for private drives.
Sanitary Sewer:
The applicant proposes to connect the development to an existing 8 inch
line located at the intersection of SW Ponderosa Place and SW Black
" Diamond Way. The existing system has the capacity to handle this
development. In addition, the applicant has shown an extension of the
sanitary sewer system to the subdivision's boundaries for future
development.
Storm Drainage
The applicant is proposing to direct the storm drainage to the northern
portion of the development and discharge it at two different locations,
into an existing drainage way. The northern portion of the property
contains an existing pond which ultimately drains into Fanno Creek.
The applicant has shown an internal storm drainage system to handle this
development with no extension for future development. Based on the
contours of this and adjacent upstream parcels that could develop, the
applicant should be required to extend the proposed storm sewer. The
system should be extended and designed to handle this development and any
future development which would drain into this area.
The Unified Sewerage Agency has established and the City has agreed to
enforce, Resolution and Order No. 91-47, Surface Water Management
Regulations, requiring construction of on-site water quality facilities or
fees in-lieu of their construction. The applicant has not proposed any
such facility. After a review of the preliminary plat and the site it is
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 9
recommended that a combination of an on-site water quality facility and
possible fees in-lieu be paid.
Federal, State and local regulations all require erosion control permits
for this project. The applicant should apply, through the City, for a
joint permit. Application should be made at the time that construction
drawings are submitted.
Accordingly, the Engineering Department recommends that approval of the
subdivision proposal be subject to the following conditions:
- The applicant shall provide a water quality facility, meeting the
requirements of Unified Sewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-
47, that is designed to accommodate this and all future developments
which will drain into this system.
- The applicant shall, for Lots 2 through 5, provide for one of the
follo:
A. Install individual facilities on each lot that meets the
requirements of Resolution and Order No. 91-47; or
B. Design each lot so that it drains to the public storm sewer
system; or
C. Pay a fee in-lieu of construction.
The final determination as to the acceptability of any alternative
as outlined above shall be with the City of Tigard Engineering
Department.
- The applicant shall provide the City with an easement for the buffer
and compensated buffer area, as shown on the preliminary plat. The
easement shall convey storm and surface water management rights to
the City and prevent the owner of the easement from activities and
uses inconsistent with the purpose of the land.
2. The City of Tigard Building Division reviewed the proposal and submitted
the following comments:
a. A demolition permit will be required for removal of existing
buildings. Any septic tank shall be pumped out and completely
removed. An inspection shall be obtained after tanks are removed.
A copy of the receipt from the pumping company shall be provided.
If the building is connected to th,~ public sewer, the line shall be
properly capped off and inspected by the City.
b. A sewer permit shall be obtained prior to the connection-of the
existing house to the sanitary sewer.
C. Private storm drains shall be provided for lots 22, 23, 27-32.
Easements shall be provided where crossing other lots. The minimum
pipe size of a private rain drain shall be as follows:
Serving 1 house - 3 inches
Serving 2 houses - 4 inches
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 10
C
C
Serving 3-6 houses - 6
Serving 7-15 houses - g inches
inches
d' A joint
access and maintenance agreement
lot accessing a private
shall
storm drain as follows:
: recorded with each
Lots
27`32 shall have
operate and maintain equal right use
private or public drainsthe private to drainage facand an ilities legation to
3• The Ti ga easements as shown, within the
to thegard Water District has
proposal. reviewed the proposal
locations However, the District and has
be rev' water main sizes has commented no objections
sewed and approved ae and locations, and that fire h
apart of water meters will hydrant
4 need to
. The Tualatin the final public
Valle improvement , and onlyoone side ate street should bescue District has plans.
Final of the required to be commented that the
fore hydrant street and no parkin posted for Parkng
Water District and locations will g within the turnarooundlar °n
the ^ire D need to be approved b area.
5. estrict. by both the
Tigard School Tigard
within District 231 has
the attendance noted that the
Middle School areas of C. F_ proposed development
develo is' and the Tigard Senioreg Hrdeg}1 Elementary school ent lies
at thosee sc projected to , Fowl
schools: 11 studenteenerate the School. The
Fowler er
Middle Sch at Ti following additional proposed
District ool; and 2 atudenteard Elements enrollment
notes Elementary School; 5 chool
students at
aesult of this that school capacities a re Tigard gh School. The S
pproved developments development projected to be exceeded as
that core ptnents within those and other rrenti a
consider facilities the attendance Y reviewed and
Portable schools areas. The District notes
provided classroom additions. are insufficient
including by other options Additional to
be able to
grade level reconf der consideration b school capacity
adjustments, double lguration by the school may be
bond shifting, burin • rescheduled sch district,
measures leading to constructeon ° under-utilized faci i es boundary
housing year, options. of new facilities and
future
The Unified Sewers other school
approval of this develoAgency has reviewed the proposal
pment application with the followinld reco~end~
Require on-site water qualit g conditions:
L L Y facilities;
Public storm and sanitary sewers
shall the A
Y'a R&O
L Re enc 91-47, Chapter 3, as designed in conformance
quire a plan showin amended by 91_75;
with adopted g erosion control
guidelines; measures that are
I' Prohibit consistent
eohib direct discharge of roof
g or created wetlands; drains and surface
L Require water to
undisturbed buffers that
the Agency,s RHO 91-47, Chapter 6, as amended
are designed in conformance
7.
FIN by 91-75. "
ORDE
UB•SUB 92-0003/pDR 92-0001/MIS The actual
92-0006
PAGE 11 r
}
a
a
r
r'
width of the buffer can be less than 25 feet only if the following a
conditions are met: {
i
a) Any lot adjacent to a buffer that is less than 25 feet in
width shall not drain into the buffer. All roof drains and ti
surface water runoff from these lots shall be directed to the
street or conveyed to the storm drain system, OR shall be
conveyed to a buffer that has a minimum width of 25 feet;
b) Any reduced or eliminated buffer must be compensated for
elsewhere, to the effect that the total average width of the
buffer shall be no less than 25 feet.
8. PGE, Northwest Natural Gas, and the Metropolitan Area Communications
Commission (cable television) have reviewed the proposal and have offered -
no comments or objections.
9. NPO #7 chairperson appeared at the public hearing and summarized the NPO's
comments. NPO #7 has voted 3-1 to recommend approval.
10. Associate Planner Jerry Offer reported at the meeting that a letter had
been received that day from the Oregon Division of State Lands noting that
they had reviewed-the wetlands delineation report and concurred with its
findings. No DSL permits are required.
11. The Commission received a substantial amount of oral and written testimony
at the June 8, 1992 hearing on this item. Names and addresses of persons
testifying and summaries of their comments are included in the minutes of
the Commission's meeting.
C
V. EVALUATION OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT REQUEST
The proposed reconfiguration of tax lots 2300 and 2400 will be consistent with
the lot line adjustment approval standards of Code Section 18.162.060 as long as
the existing::-outbiuildih southwest" of Mrs. Hart's house is removed prior to
recording and if the applicant's engineer can demonstrate that both parcels will
continue to have guaranteed access to a public street. Both parcels have
substantially more area than the 7,500 square foot minimum lot size of the R-4.5
zoning district and both parcels will be consistent with other applicable
dimensional standards. The outbuilding straddles the proposed lot line between
the parcels and therefore a setback violation would occur if the building is not
removed prior to recording. All other buildings would be consistent with the
setback standards.
Although Mrs. Hart currently receives access to her home from an easement across
tax lot 2500 to SW North Dakota Street, the application materials do not indicate
whether an easement already exists across the current configuration of tax lot
2300 to the proposed future configuration of tax lot 2400. Therefore, the
applicant's engineer will need to provide the City with this information prior
to recording the lot line adjustment. Of course, this will be unnecessary if the
subdivision is recorded at the same time as the lot line adjustment since the
proposed public streets will provide the required access to Mrs. Hart's parcel
as well as the subdivision lots.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 12
C
VI. EVALUATION OF SUBDIVISION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REQUEST
A. Com liance with Communit Develo went Code.
1. The proposed subdivision/planned development complies with the use
standards of the R-4.5 zoning district because t s are intended the
to be used for single family detached dwelling units Because
lay zone, the lots
parcel is zoned with the Planned Development over
need not individually be consistent with the in prel of zeplat nd
setback requirements of the underlying zone. utilizes the lot size averaging allowance of the Planned Development smaller section of the Code result foot mi~nimumlothsize. However,tthe
the R-4.5 zone's 7,500 square proposed lot sizes and other
preliminary plat attempts to keep the 's
lot dimensions relatively consistent with the underlying zone's
standards and with the dimensions of lots in neighboring
developments.
2. The proposed development scheme is consistent with the approval
standards for a planned development (Code Section 18.80.120.A.1 and
2) as demonstrated by the findings_ presented for the various Code
Chapters that the staff has found applicable to the request. The
Commission finds that the requirements of the following Code
Chapters are not directly applicable to the current review although
future improvements on the subject site will need to conform s iith
the requirements of these Chapters: Chapter 18.144,
Structures; Chapter 18.96, Additional Yard Area Requirements;
Chapter 18.98, Building Height Limitations: Exceptions; Chapter
18.100, Landscaping and Screening; Chapter 18.102, Visual Clearance
Areas; Chapter 18.106, Parking; and Chapter 18.114, Signs. Staff
is charged with reviewing the conformance of future improvements
with these standards through the building permit and sign permit
review processes as well as through continuing code enforcement
actions.
With regard to the additional Planned Development approval criteria,
and (v)
the Commission 'finds only Section 18.80.120.A.3.a( residential
applicable to the review of this single-family".•. streets,
subdivision proposal. These Sections state that
buildings, and other site elements shall be designed and located to
preserve the existing trees, topography, and natural drainage to the
greatest extent possible" and " Trees with a six inch caliper .
shall be saved where possible." Although the subdivision's streets
and residences will necessitate the removal of Ta number r mature
trees and understory on the south side of the pod
relatively considerate of the site's natural attributes through the
reservation of an undisturbed buffer area adjacent to lots 2-8
ranging in width between 25 and 50 feet and also will provide for
area
retention of the majority of the existing mature trees on bthe uilding
to be subdivided through the lots being configured so that
requested
envelopes would avoid major trees. The original proposal
that the required undisturbed buffer area adjacent to lots 2-5 be
omitted with this area to be included with d the s tlot an of to he north
compensating increase in buffer area be can::, Randy Sebastian of
lots 6-8. At the hearing, the app proposed development
RenaissanceDevelopment, and a neighbor of the FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB.
PAGE 13
i
site, Doug Smithey, revealed that they had agreed that the plat
50 foot undisturbed buffer
should be revised to provide a 25 to
d the wetlands to the north. Mr.
between all proposed lots an
Ed Sullivan, submitted conditions of approval to
Smithey's attorney,
the decision to formalize the agreement. Those
be included in
cluded specifications on the variable width of the
a
i
n
conditions
undisturbed buffer, restrictions on activities within the buffer,
hts
n pla
and th
requirement for the developer to install a fence
the
t
a requiremen for
between the lots and the buffer area,
t informational signs regarding the benefits
to
developer to pos
removal restrictions. The applicant agreed
wetlands, and tree
onditions into his development plan for the site.
incorporate these c
furthe
ds that these additional conditions
fi
r the
n
The Commission
and
i
lanned development approval
f the
the
p
purposes o
conditions as conditions of approval for
incorporate these
development plan.
In addition, the Commission believes that the development plan would
f the site if the
be more considerate of the natural attributes o
roposed lots 2-8 can be further removed
on
it
p
es
actual building s
to the north. The Commission has decided
from the wetland areas
ard setback for lots 2-8 should be reduced
nt
f
y
ro
that the minimum
10 feet (except for garage setbacks which should remain the
tback should
t
o
standard 20 foot setback). This special reduced se
the
the lots in order to increase
encourage moving houses forward on
or
f
the wetland area, may provide
buildings' setbacks from
etention between the buildings and the wetlands,
additional tree r
ld limit the amount of private open lawn area in the front of
ace
s
p
and wou
these lots in exchange for an increase in private open
In addition, a
tlands
.
including mature trees adjacent to the -we
ard setback should also be allowed for
ont
f
y
r
minimum 10 foot
proposed lot 1 due to its shallow front to back depth and because it
the
2
Howeve ,
5
-
ame stretch of street as lots
d
.
a
h
is along the s
se
Commission will not impose an increased rear yard as
osal since a special
ro
hi
p
s p
been proposed in the staff's report on t
uire that trees be unnecessarily
re
ll
q
y
setback like that could actua
-to --meet the setback standard despite the
order
in
be removed
rovide the special setback to-reduce tree
to
i
p
on
original intent
related
flexibility
tt
k
s
s
o
with regard
homes
future
locate
best
d staff
ev
eloper an
d
existing trees.
The currently proposed preliminary plat is substantially different
than the preliminary plat reviewed by the commission in March, 1991
in that the current proposal does not propose to dedicate to the
city the approximately 4.3 acres of pond, wetland, and upland areas
to the north of the subdivision for public park and open space
purposes. This area is not floodplain, a currently designated
significant wetlands identified by the Comprehensive Plan's
Floodplains and Wetlands map, or an area identified for park
expansion by the Plan's Parks and Greenways map. As such, there is
no authorization for the City to require dedication of this area.
As was pointed out in the Commission's final order for the March,
1991 proposal, the earlier offer to dedicate this area was being
made in exchange for a request to transfer density from the area to
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006 PAGE 14
<iART LAKE SUB.
be dedicated to the southern portion of that proposed project. The
current application involves a substantially smaller area than the
prior proposal and therefore has very limited opportunity for the
transfer of development opportunities. The applicant has chosen not
to use density transfer opportunities that might have been provided
through including the wetland and heavily wooded area in the plat as
reserved open space. In addition, and most importantly, Mrs. Hart
has chosen not to sell that portion of her property for development
purposes. Since there is no clear authority in the Plan or Code for
the Commission to require dedication of this area and because this
area that several commentors would have like to see transferred to
public ownership is not part of the area being subdivided but is
only involved in the lot line adjustment, the Commission will not
require dedication as a condition of development approval.
3. The applicant had Scientific Resources, Inc., conduct a detailed
wetland delineation for the site as is required by Code Section
18.84.028.B. The wetland boundaries as identified by SRI are shown
on the preliminary plat.
The wetland area on the subject site is identified as a wetland and
drainageway on the Comprehensive Plan's Floodplain and Wetlands Map
but is not identified as a significant wetland by this map or the
Comprehensive Plan test. Because this area is not currently
identified as a significant wetland and the drainageway
characteristics are not being modified, the current proposal is not
subject to the Sensitive Lands regulations of Code Chapter 18.84,
except that Code Section 18.84.028.A requires that areas that are
within 25 feet of a wetland are considered by the City as a wetland
and therefore are subject to the Sensitive Lands regulations for
r wetlands. This effectively requires a 25 foot setback for
development activities from the edge of the actual wetland for lots
2-8 as is also required by the USA rules and as has agreed to in the
developer's agreement with Mr. Smithey. This standard is therefore
satisfied.
This area ''isalso identified as a wetland area by the Scientific
Resources 1989 wetlands study conducted for the City of Tigard.
This identification does not make a judgement regarding the
significance of this wetland area. This wetland identification by
SRI does not supersede the earlier decision recorded by the
Comprehensive Plan's Floodplain and Wetlands Map. Several
comarren .ors made reference to a i-ane 2, 1992 letter frarr the Oregon
Department of Land Conservation and Development relative to the
City's responsibilities under the state's periodic review program to
consider the information in the 1989 SRI study with regard to
whether additional wetland areas in the city, including wetlands
adjacent to the pond on the Hart property, should be designated as
significant wetlands. The Commission was advised by staff and the
city attorney that the DLCD letter had no bearing on the current
application but that the issues raised by the DLCD letter would need
to be reviewed and responded to separately.
The erosion control requirements that apply to development within
the Tualatin River basin will require that an erosion control plan
be filed and followed during development of the site.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 15
3. Proposed lots 1, 7, 9-12, and 33 are excluded from the solar access
calculation as the 20 percent of total lots that need not be
considered as part of the solar access design standard (Code Chapter
18.88). Nineteen of the other proposed lots (lots 2-6, 8, 13-17,
21-26, 33 and 34) meet the basic solar access requirement's front
lot line orientation standard of being within 30 degrees of true
north-south and a minimum north-south lot dimension of 90 feet.
Code Section 18.88.040.E allows the approval authority to reduce the
number of lots that must meet the basic solar access standard if
requiring changes in the design to achieve this standard would cause
an adverse impact upon the allowed density or an adverse effect on
amenities or a significant additional expense. This Section
specifically states that one of the constraints upon the
subdivision's design that may be relied upon is a showing that
existing road patterns must be continued through the site or must be
terminated on the site in a way that prevents the development from
fully complying with the solar access standards. The existing
stubbing of SW 109th Avenue into the site and the absence of any
possible east-west road connections adjacent to the property other
than the connection with SW Black Diamond Way dictate that the
subdivision of this parcel include a substantial amount of north-
south road frontage and a resulting need for lots to be oriented in
an east-west direction. This constraint should adequately qualify
the proposed subdivision for a partial adjustment to the solar
access design standard as allowed by Code section 18.88.040.E. Any
revisions to the plat will need to be approved by staff as generally
conforming with these findings relative to solar accessibility.
4. The proposed subdivision complies with the density standards of
Chapter 18.92 because the approximately 6 acre net developable area
of the site (after deductions for proposed public and private
streets) yields an opportunity for slightly more than 34 dwelling
units under the R-4.5 zoning designation. The application proposes
the creation of 34 lots in the subdivision. No density transfer
from the buffer area is requested, nor is a density transfer
possible from this buffer area since it is not proposed to be
dedicated. The applicant's statement includes a detailed density calculation.
5. The proposed 32 foot wide access tract, 24 foot wide private street,
and sidewalk on one side is consistent with the requirements for
common driveways (commonly referred to as private streets) of Code
Chapter 18.108 (Access). Code Section 18.108.070.A limits private
streets to serving no more than six dwelling units. The proposed
private street would serve proposed lots 5-10 and therefore is
consistent with this standard.
It is pointed out that the Code required minimum width for a private
street access tract is 30 feet; the proposed width therefore exceeds
this slightly. The Commission encourages the applicant and the
applicant's engineer to look at reducing this width to 30 feet in
order to obtain slightly more buildable area in the area of lots 5-
10 so as to result in enlargement of lots 6 and 7. In addition, the
private drive could be moved slightly westward towards lots 9 and 10
so as to increase the buildable area on lots 5-7.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 16
The proposed hammerhead turnaround on this private street is
consistent with the requirements of Code Section 18.108.070.C for
turning areas for fire fighting apparatus, as well as general
Y• traffic. As recommended by the Fire District, this turn around area
as well as one side of the proposed common driveway should be
required to be posted for no parking.
In addition, a temporary turnaround will need to be provided at the
western end of SW Geneva street in order to comply with Code Section
18.108.070.C since at least temporarily this street will be a dead
end street in excess of 150 feet. This turnaround area may be
provided by a temporary easement and turnaround area upon the
proposed lots or upon the. adjacent parcel to the west if the
developer of the subdivision can obtain an easement from that
property owner for the turn around area.
6. Chapter 18.150 requires that the number of trees over six inches in
diameter that are removed during the course of construction be
minimized and requires that tree removal permits be obtained prior
to the removal of any trees. This Chapter applies to all of the
property involved in the Lot Line Adjustment and Subdivision
applications.
It is noted that the applicant's proposed location for the storm
sewer outfall between lots 2 and 3 would apparently require the
removal of a number of sizable trees. However, the USA Surface
Water Management regulations (as referred to in the comments from
USA) prohibit the discharge of surface waters directly-to a wetland
without first being routed through a water quality treatment
facility. This regulation will require that this outf all be
relocated. This should result in these trees being spared, although
relocation may require the removal of other trees. In addition, the
reduced front yard setbacks for lots 1-8 should result in additional
opportunities for retention of significant trees.
Clearly the proposed development's streets, utilities, and
residences"'Will' require the removal of a significant number of
mature trees. The preliminary plat indicates trees within the
proposed right-of-ways that will need to be removed and it is
apparent that a number of other trees within the centers of the
proposed lots will also need to be removed to allow for site grading
and home construction. The Commission finds that the proposed
development plan is quite reasonable in its attempt to retain
existing trees given this property's zoning, location within an area
that is mostly developed with single family detached residences, and
with current housing market conditions that are not favorable to
other types of construction such as condominiums or attached single-
family development that could have resulted in less of a need for
tree removal on this site. Still, the number of trees removed can
be minimized through careful study of the site to be accomplished
through phased tree removal. Initial tree removal on the site will
be limited to the proposed public right-of-way areas and areas
necessary for the installation of public utility facilities.
Potential 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
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 17
residences on the lots. The developer will be required to provide
the services of a certified arborist for this analysis. Care should
be taken to retain as many mature trees as possible through careful
planning and execution of the final grading plan, curving driveways
around trees, and care during the site development process.
Minimizing tree removal should be a benefit to the proposed
development in both increased property values as well as atmosphere.
5. 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, the regulations of the R-4.5 zone,
and other applicable regulations;
b. The proposed name of the subdivision, Hart's Landing
subdivision, is not duplicative of any other subdivision in
Washington County;
C. The proposed roads will provide for adequate and safe access
through the site. In 1991, the Planning Commission required
that SW 109th Avenue and Black Diamond Way be connected as a
condition of approval of the prior subdivision application
that was filed for this property. This will also be required
with this proposal. Such a connection would not only provide
better access for all types of emergency vehicles, but a
connection would promote a feeling of neighborhood between the
existing development to the east and the proposed development;
would provide improved access for school buses and other
important public and private service providers; and would
provide improved 'access for the residents of this area.
Because the connection would place the intersection of SW
109th Avenue and SW North Dakota Street closer to some of the
existing residences in Black Bull subdivision than to the SW
106th and North Dakota intersection, the connection would
likely reduce the traffic through the existing subdivision
- "rather than increase traf€ic as some of the prior comments
from this neighborhood have predicted.
In addition, Black Diamond Way has been stubbed at the edge of
the Hart property for several years and a sign has been posted
announcing that the road would be extended with future
development. Requiring a connection at this time will be
consistent with earlier development plans for this general
area.
6. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the requirements
of Chapter 18.164 because:
a. The proposed roadway preliminary designs are consistent
with City of Tigard local street standards for gradient,
improvements, and layout. The applicant will provide a
needed and planned for connection between the current
dead end of SW Black Diamond Way and the proposed
extension of SW 109th Avenue as described above.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 18
b. The proposed lots are consistent with Code Section
18.164.060 standards for maximum lot depth-to-width
ratio and other lot dimensional standards. All lots are
consistent with Section 18.164.060.13 which require a
minimum of 25 feet of public or private street frontage
for lots created through the subdivision process.
C. The subdivision proposal includes adequate provisions
for public water and sanitary sewerage service as well
as other typical utility services in accordance with
Code Sections 18.164.090 and 18.164.120. Proposed
utility facilities within the subdivision would be
appropriately sized and located to facilitate extensions
to serve adjacent properties. Utility providers will be
provided with an opportunity to review final public
improvement plans.
d. The applicant should be required to redesign the
proposed storm drainage system within the parameters set
by the USA Surface Water Management Regulations and the
comments of USA and the Engineering Department. The
redesigned system should be subject to the approval of
the C'it'y' Engineer in consultation with USA staff. The
redesigned system will need to eliminate the discharge
of both the public and private storm drainage to the
wetlands adjacent to lots 2-8 unless first directed
through an undisturbed buffer, include development of a
water quality facility for the proposed development. It
may be necessary that a lot be eliminated from the
currently proposed development or additional land be
acquired from an adjacent parcel in order to facilitate
construction of the required water quality facility.
B. Compliance With Comprehensive Plan Policies
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with Policy 2.1.1 because
riotice of 'the--applicatiori'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.
A number of written comments regarding the proposal have been
received by the Planning Commission prior to the hearing. The
Planning Commission heard and considered a substantial amount of
oral testimony at the June 8, 1992 hearing. Those comments are
summarized in the minutes of the Commission's meeting.
2. The proposal is consistent with Policy 3.4.2 because the staff
proposed reduced front yard setbacks, the 25 foot undisturbed buffer
area adjoining lots 2-5, and the 50 foot wide buffer area abutting
lots 6-8 area will result in the preservation of riparian wildlife
habitat containing a number of mature trees and other important
vegetation. In addition, the proposed development plan is being
reviewed through the planned development review process as is
required since this a designated treed area and special concern is
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 19
being given to reducing the numbers Ofto gni provide cat treesc o be
removed. The developer will be required
measures during the course ofbwetlandnaand home construction in
order to reduce impacts upon the
3. The subdivision proposal is consistent with policy 3.5.4 because the
proposal includes a bicycle/pedestrian path on lot 8 connecting the
proposed development to the existing pathway system in Englewood
Park. This area of Tigard is well served by pedestrian/bicycle
pathways. This proposed connection will provide the proposed
development with access to not only the pathway system for
transportation purposes but will also provide access to public
playground equipment in the park. It will be necessary for the wide pub final subdivision plat to include a minimum pr vfootstreet dlic
pedestrian/bicyclist easement on the proposed
lot 8. Public improvements to be constructed for the subdivision
will need to include an eight foot wide g pathway within
offered that the easement. area of
The applicant's engineer, Bill
the pedestrian/bicycle pathway will be fenced from adjoining lots to
the west.
4. In order to comply with Policy 4.2.1, conditions of approval are
warranted requiring the developer to submit an erosion control plan he Tualatin ensuring compliance with erosion control standards f of tthe grading
River Basin and to obtain a NPDES permit as part
permit application.
5. This subdivision proposal complies with Policy 7.1.2, .%.3.1, 7.4.4
and 7.6.1 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. The Fire and
have not
District and Water District have
proposed development'speffects upon the
raised concerns with the public water supply's capacity or water pressure.
6. The subdivision proposal complies with Policy .8.1.1 and 8.1.3
because the proposed-improvements to the public streets adjoining
this site will be consistent with City of Tigard standards and
should provide a safe and efficient network of local streets in the
proposed development.
C. Com liance With^USA Surface Water Mana ement Re lations
1. The applicant had requested an exception to the 25 foot undisturbed
buffer area adjacent to "sensitive areas" requirement of the Unified
Sewerage Agency Surface Water Management regulations (R&O 91-47, as
amended by R&O 91-75). The exception would have allowed portions of
the 25 feet adjacent to wetlands on the site to be
o separate incltractuded
lots 2-6 instead of being placed proposed that "compensating buffer
usually required. The applicant area" between lots 6-8 and other portions of the wetland area be set
from
asi . The lot
the area wofrom uld bev50 pmenettrather thansthea25 foot requirements in this
At the public hearig on this matter, the approval of an exception to the1
the buffer area standard
request for r app
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006 PAGE 20
- ~ HART LAKE SUB.
adjacent to lots 2-5 and to reconfigure the plat to provide for a 25
foot buffer area adjacent to these lots as well as the originally
proposed 50 foot buffer area to the north of lots 6-8. The buffer
area on the east side of lot 6 would vary between 25 and 50 feet in
width.
With the modifications required by the Commission's conditions of
Subdivision/Planned Development approval, the proposed development
is consistent with the USA Surface Water Management Regulations
relative to buffering sensitive water areas.
2. Approval of the proposed subdivision proposal is conditioned upon
the applicant providing a water quality facility largely as
recommended by the Unified Sewerage Agency and the City's
Engineering Department in order to satisfy the requirements of
Chapter 7 of the USA Stormwater Management Regulations. The
Engineering Department had recommended that the water quality
facility to be constructed as part of this development should be
sized to accommodate treatment of drainage from upstream properties.
Development Review Engineer Chris Davies stated at the hearing that
subsequent to the construction of the water quality facility, the
developer could request that the City Council establish a zone of
benefit for the purpose of having upstream benefitted properties
compensate this developer for the cost of over-sizing this water
quality facility. Without certainty that a zone of benefit can be
established or that the developer of this facility will be fully
compensated for over-sizing the water quality facility, the
Commission is unwilling to require the developer-of the proposed
subdivision to over-size the facility. The developer, however, will
be-required to provide a facility that is adequately sized to serve
anticipated drainage from this development. It will be the
responsibility of the applicant to design a stormwater disposal and
treatment facility for the review and approval of the City Engineer
and USA within the limits of this condition.
Areas that cannot be served by the required facility may not direct
drainage to"the wetlands"'to the north without at least discharging
the drainage to flow through an undisturbed buffer area. It should
also be understood that the applicant may need to lose a lot to
create the water quality facility. The applicant should have the
latitude to redesign a portion of the proposed plat in order to meet
these requirements without needing to resubmit a new preliminary
plat.
VI. CONCLUSION AND DECISION
The Planning Commission 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 that
development that occurs after this decision complies with. applicable local state
and federal laws.
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 Commission approves Lot Line
Adjustment application MIS 92-003 and Subdivision/Planned Development Review
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 21
proposal SUB 92-0003/PDR 92/0011 for the proposed Hart Lake subdivision subject
to the conditions which follow.
THE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PROPOSAL IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1. A lot line adjustment survey map and legal descriptions showing the
existing and proposed lot lines shall be submitted to the Engineering
Department for review and approval. The applicant shall submit evidence
that existing or new easements or direct access to a public road exists
for both parcels. These requirements must be completed prior to the lot
line adjustment survey map being recorded with Washington County by the
applicant. The lot line adjustment may be recorded without the applicant
following through on the proposed subdivision, as long as these conditions
are satisfied. STAFF CONTACT: Chris Davies, Engineering Department.
THE SUBDIVISION/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS WHICH, UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED, APPLY TO THE AREA
REQUESTED FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL. 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 SUBDIVISION PLAT WITH
WASHINGTON COUNTY. STAFF CONTACT FOR ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IS DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW ENGINEER CHRIS DAVIES, UNLESS LISTED OTHERWISE.
2. a. All lots shall be fully dimensioned on the final plat. The final
plat shall comply with Chapter 92 of the Oregon Revised Statutes,
Tigard Community Development Code Chapter 18.160; and Washington
County standards, except to the extent otherwise provided by the
County. The final plat shall be limited to the creation of thirty-
four lots and shall be similar to the preliminary plat dated April
21, 1992, except as required to be modified by the following:
- The public storm drainage water quality buffer easement to the
north of lots 6, 7, and 8 shall be 50 feet in width and shall
run southerly and parallel to the southern edge of the
delineated wetland. The buffer area on the east side of
proposed lot 6 shall vary in width from 25 to 50 feet as
illustrated on the preliminary plat. The buffer easement may
be provided on the adjacent parcel or may be a separate
unbuildable tract that is part of the subdivision.
- A public storm drainage water q*aality buffer easement shall be
provided along lots 2, 3, 40 and 5 and shall be at least 25
feet wide, and shall run southerly and parallel to the
southern edge of the delineated wetland. This buffer area
shall be an unbuildable tract to be owned by the Homeowners
Association or an entity charged with managing this area for
protection of its resource values.
SW Black Diamond Way and the private street may be shifted
southward in response to the required increased buffer area to
the north.
Lot areas and dimensions may be modified throughout the
proposed development in response to the increased buffer area
adjacent to lots 2-5.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB.
PAGE 22
a
b. The applicant shall submit plans, obtain city approval, and either
construct the necessary improvements or provide an adequate
financial assurance for the completion of the following public
improvements:
I. All public and private streets within the subdivision
as specified in the following conditions;
ii. storm drainage system.
These improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance
with the requirements of the City of Tigard. The improvements
shall be completed and accepted by the City within the time frame
specified in the public assurance contract.
3. The public storm drainage water quality buffer easement shall be dedicated
or granted to the public, or maintained by a home owner's association.
The easement area shall remain in its natural state and shall be subject
to the following additional requirements imposed on all lands subject to
approvals in these proceedings:
a. There shall be no trespassing, tree cutting, disposal of grass
clippings or other yard debris nor landscaping in the easement.
b. No spraying or other application of chemicals, nor dumping of
chemicals or toxic materials shall be permitted.
C. No littering or dumping shall be permitted.
d. No activity shall be permitted within the easement which has the
effect of harming or harassing wildlife.
4. The applicant shall provide a 5-foot high chain link fence along the
public storm drainage water quality buffer easement as the south side of
that easement borders the buildable portions of lots 2 through 8. The
applicant shall plant native thorny plants on the north side of the fence
to disdouragb'climbing or scaling the fence. - Those plants and the fence,
shall thereafter be maintained by the Homeowner's Association.
5. The applicant shall provide and post informational signs, in consultation
with the Wetlands Conservancy, along the fenced buffer area regarding the
significance and benefits of wetlands. The Homeowner's Association shall
cause these signs to be maintained and kept in good repair.
6. No trees shall be removed from the public storm drainage water quality
buffer easement or the delineated wetland without approval of a tree
removal permit under the standards and procedures provided in Tigard
Municipal Code (TMC) Chapters 18.150 and 18.80, including TMC
18.80.120()(a)(v) and other relevant provisions of the Tigard Municipal
Code.
Any tree removal or grading can 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: right-of-way and utility
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
C HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 23
C
licant shall provide
construction preparation and lot preparation. grading The and app t Shall pr tree protection. The
plans for g ive measures for
for an arborist to review Division may prescribe protect
structures or
arborist or the Planning eas not covered by ssible after
as p° roved
trees to be retained on the site. re-vegetated as soon a d
impervious surfaces shall co epyof °the tree removal permit an app
completion of grading. A all tree removal and
plan shall be available on-site Odurin ffer, planning Division,
grading STAFF CONTACT: Jerry
grading activities. 8 shall
Minimum building setbacks on all parcels except for lots 1 through
7.
be as follows: 2O feet
front yard _
corner yard -15 feet
garage - 20 feet
side yard -5 feet
rear yard - 15 feet
B, Minimum building setbacks for lots 1 through 8 shall be as follows:
front yard - 10 feet
corner yard -10 feet
garage - 20 feet
side yard -5 feet
rear yard - 15 feet
fired for removal of existing buildings-
. will be requ letely removed. An inspection
g, A demolition pumped out and comp copy of the receipt from the
Any septic tank k shall be connected to the
shall be obtained after trovided removed
if the building is cted by the
pumping company shall be p rly capped off and inspe
public sewer. the line shall be pro Building Division.
City. STAFF CONTACT: Brad Roast,
sewer system. A the sanitary 10. The existing house shall be connected to the connection of the existing
sewer permit shall be obtained Prior grad Roast.
house to the sanitary sewer' STAFF CONTACT.
23, 27-32 if
drains shall be provided for lots 22ed to the public
11. Private storm a-from these parcels cannot'be convey Easements
storm stormwater drainage system age sygstem in the strother adjacent to these lots.
.
shall be provided where crossing
12. A joint access and maintenance agreement shall be recorded with each lot
accessing a private storm drain as follow:
ation to
Lots 27-32 shall have. an equal right to use and an oblig
operate and maintain the private drainage facilities Bwit n the
Roast.
private or public drainage easements- STAFF CONTACT:
,mprovements for the internal streets including traffic
13. Full width street
control devices, mailbox clusters, concrete sidewalks , storm driveway aprons,
curbs, asphaltic concrete pavement, sanitary sewers, drainage,
installed within the
streetlights, and underground utilities shall be
subdivision. Improvements shall be designed and constructed to local
street standards.
14. A turn around shall be provided at the terminus of SW GGenevaa
temporary blic access easement(s) shall be pov
Street. Temporary public
PAGE 24
rINP.L ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/HIS 92-000
HART LAKE SUB.
turnaround area.
15.
The applicant shall provide a water quality facility meeting the
requirements of Unified S
ewerage Agency Resolution and Order No. 91-47
that is designed to accommodate this development.
16.
The applicant shall provide for storm drainage for lots 2 through 5
through one of the following:
A. Install individual facilities on each lot that meet the
requirements of Resolutio
n and Order No. 91-47; or
B. Design each lot so that it drains to the public storm sewer
system; or
C. Pay a fee in-lieu of construction.
The final determination as to the acceptability of any alternative as
outlined above shall be
ith
w
the City of Tigard Engineering Department.
17.
Two (2) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction
drawings shall be submitt
d
e
for preliminary review to the Engineering
Department. Seven (7) sets of a
pproved drawings and one (1) itemized
construction cost estimate, all prepared b
a P
f
y
ro
essional Engineer, shall
be submitted for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans
addition t
are in
o any drawings required by the Building Division and should only
include sheets relevant t
o public improvements.
18.
An erosion control plan shall be provided as part of the public
improvement drawings. The
lan
h
ll
p
s
a
conform to "Erosion Control Plans -
Technical Guidance Handbook, November 1989.
19.
A grading plan shall be submitted showing the existing and proposed
contours and typical finish
d
e
floor elevations on each lot, including
elevations at 4 different c
orners of the floor plan tied to the top of
curb elevations as shown on the public im
provement plans.
20.
The applicant shall make an appointment for a pre-construction meeting
with the City of Tigard Engineerin
D
g
epartment after approval of the
public improvement plans but before startin
w
k
g
or
on the site. The
applicant, the applicant's engineer and contractor shall be required to
attend this meeting
rio
t
p
r
o receiving the approved plans and permits.
21.
For all common driveways a joint use easement shall be clearly defined and
shown on the plat. In addition
th
,
e plat shall also be accompanied with
a maintenance agreement which shall be stat
d
e
on the plat.
22.
Construction of the proposed public improvements and issuance of Building
Permits shall not comme
nce until after the Engineering Department has
reviewed and approved the public im
provements plans, a street opening
permit or construction compliance agreements has be
f
o
en executed, execution
a developer-engineer agreement and payment of
ll
a
permit fees.
23.
Prior to the plat being recorded with Washington County the applicant
shall provide a 100 percent performance a
ssurance or letter of commitment.
As an alternative the applicant may have th
e plat recorded after the
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB.
PAGE 25
public improvements have been accepted by the City of Tigard and has
posted the appropriate maintenance bond.
24. A maintenance and access agreement shall be executed and recorded on City
standard forms for all storm drain outfalls. The agreement shall be
referenced on and become part of all applicable parcel deeds. The
agreement shall be approved by the Engineering Department prior to
recording.
25. Wetland boundaries shall be clearly marked in the field. The field
delineation shall be maintained throughout the subdivision development
process and during construction activities on proposed lots 1-6.
SUBDIVISION APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID ONLY IF THE FINAL PLAT IS RECORDED WITHIN
EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION.
It is further ordered that the applicant and parties to these proceedingsbe
notified of the entry of this order.
PASSED: This /Z day of June, 1992, by the Planning Commission o the City of
Tigard. _j
JO:sub92-03.pc
FINAL ORDER - SUB 92-0003/PDR 92-0001/MIS 92-0006
HART LAKE SUB. PAGE 26
+ V
v.-~
C'^J
O O
o
p
v
an
V
N V
Q
.
r
CQ
V
V-C a.C> D
.
r ►+a
a...... O C N
C'
a'
.
cn
a~aov
Y
H
v]
r
a
0
z
G
II
Q
0
v
0
wtu
w
1
"
•
~a c a o
~,i s a a
o a 4 s ~ "F" yYP
s
'G
l
_ _
~A.
~
1
_ _ _
______'__.'l' 'irY fY
4 K
;
3a
~c a,sxa'~35
-
S
q tj, 5,q6'.~
T'
38 ~'o
3
,
, ~
a
TRACT A'° -
}
_
i~ ~ ~ ~ S d 'sa
- a r;aew
~
f.,R~
A• .i~
I ,AP r J"~ :~:ls
~ 40 ~ t :~=r
f
y
, 1l~;F~j ~
~
i 42
6¢ 4
•
qu' , ax
43 E: '
®
.yam'" 'e~ ~
~ rF' W
f , _ A6 ~ 94 N ,S ?9 t
s's-
a6 a 1 26
:1Mft ,~FC~ 'ts4i
~ ~ . _
4~' ~ ?7
p ~ A9rG "`ror b
~ 4_._
' ~ ~ q ~'49~• 61 2b ~ ~ E
TRAM 8~ i - " t 25 ~ _.m-_~ _ -
-.--e r.r
~ ~ _ _
r! ~ [ x ~i
~ ' N
~ t, 'r' R'o Z, V~+ '~~t~ d r Im,.tutr f W~
ii ~ ~ S1 ~ ~r 7 r n°'>I e
t` ,3,3see. 2J " ~ ~ r e`
rl ~1 x.100 ~ S ~ O,IN~Z. ~ ;ir ~.t~ _ /,r~~
er, w• ! e~
X54 ~ • OteAi"~IS, ;e14 :$13 ! 12 it S10 ~},.u~: } 6 " ~ 9~
~ a"°Pe~ ~ Itee» me 7,1k01 ~ ~,zc ;tcs} , J~ : Q,0
J • J
e I 1Acot , glsof yap '
56 1 i 3
~'r' _ 60 ;Y ;g e ~ 6
tt ~ ~ \ 'yo t,'feo}' 7,~ro} '/A1at :eeea 4cood ~
~'d ,`o U.l4oi 11,11oi t -T?'-1,-'~' - a• -
I
-~--z-- X04'_ ~ ~ S.W. GAARUE ST.
- • ---R ~ -
T N ► V •,P O O O O C C 0 O C - O
O O O O 0 0 ul A A I'1 q n O p , O ~ J. a O
O O O O e e JO
a2 - r~
_ _ ~ -
'r'dr""'3 r~C,'tk?
~Q3
-b ~Ak,c~z::: ~F.~ 5wr~
;e~~ ~,uv
:J~~ a .emu#~~~£~~
t~E .
,..ass, ..fl
s`,d5 qunr
L'(~TAL be 1Abf#`~'s6r1ai6
f~.,.vt~r4abvl:r:4 4kF.,G,tf~
g:pfii`.~ ~ IEI&R4` Mkk1~
Rtes, Q8 rigs
fib ditt e
lCt3!YCA4"•`rsa~SiY> O.IYt+3bi,K,d
1J ~kNil'4gA1
.4t. 1
.•I •.,~a
.1
0 50 100 200
i
I ~
NORTk SCALE 1 = 100-0
~R J t'f° T.~ LIAi 101 A.'tU A
YONTRl~V ftR' :fit / t11k 1,()i' lR03
et ecpY~
Ru s ra
_,.~._m._.._ ,
awe
.
p..
_
a,.
1
r'I
C~
4
W
4
~i
Z
0
a
a !
i
1
'VC
.i• u.. •wv I
EXHIBIT A 1
$.NI NO. _
3870
e.oi.e, No.
YiCi~HTY IiAP
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 5
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 28 1992 _ DATE SUBMITTED: July 15 1992
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Review-VisOPPoil PREVIOUS ACTION : Planning Com.
Subdivision A roval-Sub 92-00Hearing - June 22 1992
92-0003 SLR 92-0002 VAR 92-00PREPARED BY: Bewersdorff/Offer
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN-REQUESTED-BY_-Ed-Murphy------------
~N ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Should the City Council uphold the Planning Commission's decision to require
the developer to extend Gaarde Street only partially through the subject
property because of unusual circumstances peculiar to the property?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Affirm the Planning Commission's decision.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
On June 23, 1992, the City Council voted to call up for review the Planning
commission's approval of the Matrix/Quaestor subdivision, Vista Point. This
is a 64 lot subdivision west of the intersection of 121st Avenue and Gaarde
Street. The Planning Commission's final order is attached for reference.
Of specific concern was the Commission's decision not to require improvement
of the extension of Gaarde Street beyond lots 53 and 64 or pay a fee in lieu
of construction. The Planning Commission required that the portion of Gaarde
beyond lots 53 and 64 be dedicated and graded concurrent with the
construction of phase II of the subdivision. The Commission found the
relationship between the needs created by the proposal and the benefits to
its residents did not justify the imposition of the improvement of this
portion of Gaarde Street (see page 12 and 13 of P.C. Final Order).
The staff had recommended construction or payment of a fee in lieu of
construction. Staff's recommendation followed previous application of code
requirements calling for the developer to build all public facilities within
the boundaries of their property regardless of relationship to the need
generated by the development. Staff referenced Code Section
18.164.030.A.1.b. which states that "any new street or additional street
width planned as part of an approved street plan shall be dedicated and
improved in accordance with this Code." The Commission found that this
street section has been planned for by the Comprehensive Plan Transportation
Map Note 2. However, the Commission did not find that this Code Section was
an open-ended directive to require both dedication and improvements even if
there is not a reasonable relationship between the needs created by a
proposed development and the exaction requested. The Commission did not find
a reasonable relationship between the proposal and the need to improve this
section of Gaarde Street.
Another consideration was Code section 18.164.030.F.1. which states that
"Where necessary to give access or permit a satisfactory future division of
adjoining land, streets shall be extended to the boundary lines of the tract
to be developed " This particular development is, perhaps, different
because of the extent of the required improvements compared to the size of
the development, the steep slopes involved and the developer's decision not
to try to build on these slopes, the shape of the property and the city's
policy of limiting direct access on collectors. In addition, the Commission
found that access to property to the north was not dependent on the
development of the subject property.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
1. Affirm the Planning Commission's decision.
2. Amend the Planning Commission's decision and require the full street
improvement through the subject property or payment of a fee in lieu of
construction for the Gaarde Street extension.
FISCAL NOTES
Construction of the extension of Gaarde as a major collector was estimated at
$250,000 by the developer. (This is the portion of Gaarde Street that would
not be built by the developer. It would be assumed that the public or the
adjacent properties would eventually have to pay for the construction.)
RECEIVED PLANNING
L RIVES 13OLEY
STOE
_
_ T-N/
)ONES `J u1`G T
JUL. T 7 lonj
war.
:YTTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE ?300
STANDARD INSURANCE CENTER
900 SW FIFTH AVENUE
PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-1268
Telephone ( 3380
T'lecopier (503) 220-2380
Cable Lampert
Telex 703455
Writer's Direct Dial Number
(503) 294-9523
July 15, 1992
Mayor Gerald R. Edwards
City Council
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
PO Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mayor Edwards and Fellow Councillors:
On behalf of Matrix Development Corporation
ort of
("Matrix"), these written comments are offered 1992uto approve of June 22, the Planning Commission's decisiond development. As part of
Matrix to develop an
the above-referenced 64-lot planne
this decision, the commission has required
extension of SW Gaarde Street to major collector standards plat
to the northern boundary of Lot 52, which coincides with the
this new roadway. Although SW Gaarde street
platted lots along
remains undeveloped north of the applicant's property, the
commission further required the applicant to dedicate the
necessary right-of-way and complete preliminary grading from
Lot 52 to the northern boundary of the site in an effort to
facilitate extension of the roadway concurrent with future
development of the adjoining property. The applicant concurs
conditions and is otherwise supportive of
conditions imposed by the commission.
all with these remaining mandato
As evident from its final order, the commission's
the
decision was bayed upon a number of considerations. First,
need for extensions of new streets by Section 18.164.030(F)
proposed development tract is q
of the code, which provides:
41
pDXJ-13389.1 18817 0001 lY A51IINGTON
ROISE. D15TRICT OF COLD..WIA
BELI.EVUE. \'ASIIINGON IDA110
ST.ATTLE, 1Y ASHINGT
PORTLAND. N'A5I IINGTON
OREGON ll'ASIIINGIUN
5-1UEL KI V ES BVLEY
ION ES & V KEY
Mayor Jerry Edwards
City Council
July 15, 1992
Page 2
"F. Future Extensions of Streets and
Reserve Strips:
"1. If it were necessary to give
access or permit satisfactory future
division of adjoining land, streets shall
be extended to the boundary lines of the
tract to be developed and * *
Since the record demonstrates that the 40-acre tract to the
north enjoys adequate street access along two boundaries and is
not dependent upon the extension of SW Gaarde Street for access
or redevelopment, the Commission properly found that this
criterion is not met. This fact, coupled with the fact that
none of the platted lots would front or receive access to or
from the uncompleted portion of SW Gaarde Street, led the
Commission to find that there is no reasonable relationship
between the proposed development and any public need to improve
this portion of SW Gaarde Street. To the contrary, the record
demonstrates that all transportation impacts created by this
proposed development can be accommodated through the
substantial portion of SW Gaarde Street to be constructed by
the applicant and existing surface streets within the area.
Second, the Commission found that Section
18.164.030(A)(1)(b) of the Code, which states that any new
street planned as a part of an "approved street plan" shall be
improved in accordance with the Code, does not provide a basis
for a mandatory construction requirement absent such a
reasonable relationship between the need created by the
development and the specific improvements to be required.
Further, we believe that, it light of the specific section
noted above addressing street extensions, this provision can
only be reasonably interpreted to require that any new street
constructed under the terms of this ordinance be in compliance
with all construction standards. To hold otherwise would
ignore the more specific criterion quoted above and would
otherwise be contrary to the ruling in Dolan v City of Tigard,
113 Or App 162 (1992) that there must be some reasonable
relationship to support the required improvement. Since the
construction of SW Gaarde Street north of Lot 52 is designed to
serve the developable property to the north and would be of no
benefit to the Vista Point project, the Commission was correct
in finding that this criterion cannot be construed to support
this additional roadway construction.
PDX1-13389.1 10817 0001
STOEL RIVES QOLEY
r c. ^n C
JONES) ~
At"
Mayor Jerry Edwards
City Council
July 15, 1992
Page 3
Finally, it is important to recognize tohee uniquethe
circumstances associated with the Vista Point Pr the Council.
portion of SW Gaarde street
of which were presented to the de:
These circumstances, all include:
Commission during its consideration of this matter,
Re ired Facilit Im rovements. dedication
the and
Commission elect to require only
of this limited portion of SW Gaarde Street,
grading ced to dedicate and construct
the applicant is requi
the street to full major collective standards through
the remainder of the proposed project and to improve
SW 21st Avenue on the eastern perimeter of the site.
In addition, the applicant will be requugh ired to construct full sewer improvements ther the vacant
oximately
tract to the north at the cost of atract and
$200,000 to serve this undeveloped on
developed properties in the immediate vicinity now septic tanks as well as the Vista Pint projct.
Taken together, these required improvements s e e to
ning
beyond the demands of the Vista Point project oi to a provide substantial additional whole
property owners
Environmental Considerations. The Vista Point
project will be located in an area of extreme
topography and natural resource valves.the site is
Consequently, a substantial portion undevelopable and is not available to offset the
estimated $25•offsSW constructing tFurthermore,
additional segment construction n of of this portion of the roadway at this
nointo a
time would constitute a suubstandial intrusion
wooded ravine containing
service to this project and no assurance that the
licant's
road will be continued north Cof the ommission determined
property. Consequently, the only the
that it would be more appropriate to require
at this
dedication and grading of the right-of-way went
time and defer actual construction until development
of the adjoining tract to the north.
Construction Options. While the Vista Point project
. does not create a need for construction of the
PDX1-13389.1 18817 0001
STOEL RIVES 6OLEY
JONES & GREY
Mayor Jerry Edwards
City Council
July 15, 1992
Page 4
contested portion of SW Gaarde Street, development of
the 40-acre tract to the north will generate such a
need and provide a means before constructing the
roadway through conditions attached to any such
development approval. Since the right-of-way will be
dedicated and graded as a condition of the Vista
Point plat, this future exaction will be limited to
actual construction of the roadway and will be
available as a credit to the traffic impact fees
associated with the project. Further, there can be
little doubt that development of this scale will
create a need for access to SW Gaarde Street, thereby
providing the type and degree of relationship between
the project and infrastructure requirements which is
not present under the Vista Point scenario.
• Construction Cost Impact. Given the substantial
portion of the Vista Point tract which is
undevelopable due to terrain and the extraordinary
roadway and sewer improvements required as a
condition of approval , it has become
apparent that the project cannot accommodate the
additional cost of constructing the remaining segment
of SW Gaarde Street under current acquisitiGn terms.
Consequently, it appears likely that the project
would not go forward under this additional
improvement burden, thereby leaving the portion of SW
Gaarde Street lying south of Lot 53 to be constructed
at public expense or as part of other development
projects in the immediate vicinity.
Based upon such considerations unique to this project and the
specific code criterion relating to road extensions noted
above, we believe that the Commission's decision is appropriate
and does not constitute a precedent which would serve to
preclude the City from requiring the construction of full road
improvements throughout a tract during future development
reviews. To the extent that the Council agrees with the
commission's ruling, we would be happy to assist the staff in
preparing additional findings to establish these unique
circumstances as a basis for the decision and to ensure that
the City remains free to review future road exaction on a case-
by-case basis.
k
PDX1-13389.1 18817 0001
S l OEL RAVES 30LEY
)ONES & GREY
c
Mayor Jerry Edwards
City Council
July 15, 1992
Page 5
We appreciate the opportunity to present these
comments, and we look forward to presenting oral testimony at
the hearing on this issue scheduled for July 28, 1992. For
your reference, I enclose a copy of a recent letter to Mr.
Ramis addressing this same issue.
Very truly yours,
Steven L. Pfeiffer
SLP:a-m
Enclosur
cc: Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
11
e
Timothy V. Ramis
Jerry Offer
Randy Wooley
Bruce Dunlap
PDX1-13389.1 18817 0001
STOEL RIVES BOLEY
JONES Cs GREY
,I r0RNF1ti %r 1. WW
,;LITE 2300
STANDARD INSURANCE CENTER
400 Sly' FIFTH AVENUE
PORTLAND. OREGON 1)7204.1268
i:Irldnnre x5031 2_'4-.3380
T•lrroprer ;L)3)220-2480
Cable Laws rt
R-Ie.r 03455
R'n fr •'s Orrxt Dial Number
(503) 294-9523
July 10, 1992
VIA FACSIMILE
Mr. Timothy V. Ramis
O'Donnell, Ramis, Crew & Corrigan
1717 NW Hoyt Street
Portland, OR 97209-2242
Re: City of Tigard - Vista Point
Dear Tim:
Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation, the
` purpose of this letter is to provide you with a brief written
" summary of the issues pertaining to the Council's decision to
call up the above-referenced Planning Commission decision,
together with related code language.
As you know, the Planning Commission rejected the
recommendation of the City Engineer to require dedication and
full improvement of SW Gaarde Street through the entire
proposed development. Specifically, the commission's order
requires the applicant to construct the street extension to
major collector standards as far west as Lot 52 and the
applicant agrees with this improvement requirement. Although
the Planning commission and the applicant agree that the
remainder of the right-of-away to the north edge of Tax Lot 14
should be dedicated and graded by the applicant as a condition
of this approval, the City Engineer's request goes beyond this
requirement to demand full improvement of this portion of the
right-of-away notwithstanding the absence of any right-of-way,
approved or otherwise, on the property to the north.
The findings adopted by the Planning Commission
provide express justification for its decision to not require
full improvements of the right-of-way north of Lot 52. Among
other findings, the Commission found that all lots within the
subdivision can be served through the provision of SW Gaarde up
to Lot 52 and additional collector improvements on the east
side of SW 121 Avenue. In other words, there is no evidence or
PDX1-12888.1
PORTLAND. SEATTLE. BELLEVUE. VANCOUVER. BOISE. %'ASHI NG TON.
OREGON LV A5111NGTON ',WASHINGTON WASHINGTON IDAHO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
'-TOEL RIVES BOLEY
JONES & GREY
Mr. Timothy V. Ramis
July 10, 1992
Page 2
testimony to suggest that the extraordinary improvement
requested by the City Engineer is necessary to serve the Vista
Point development or otherwise mitigate any infrastructure
demands created by this project.
The initial staff recommendation for full road
improvements to the north boundary relied exclusively upon
Section 18.164.030(F), which provides as follows:
"F. Future Extensions of Streets
and Reserve Strips:
1. Where necessary to give access or
permit satisfactory future division of
adjoining land, streets shall be extended
to the boundary lines of the tract to be
developed, and * *
Contrary to the staff report, however, it is obvious that this
language requires the street extension only under the two
specified circumstances, and the Planning Commission agreed
with our position that neither of these circumstances are
present in this instance. The record contains evidence, which
is relied upon by the Commission and its findings, that the
forty-acre tract to the north enjoys adequate street access
along two boundaries and is not dependent upon the extension of
Gaarde for access or re-development. Further, the staff
offered no testimony that these circumstances exist or, to my
recollection, any other testimony or evidence to suggest why
this standard provides a basis for the required extension and
improvement in the face of this interpretation.
At the close of the hearing, the staff was asked to
respond to this issue and Randy offered two bases for his
recommendation. First, he indicated that it has long been
"Council policy" to require the dedication and full improvement
of all new streets through the entire development site. As we
have discussed, however, it is our position that city policy on
this issue is set forth in Section 18.164.030(F) and indicates
that such exactions are mandatory only in these circumstances.
Second, Randy indicated that Section 18.164.030(A)(1)(b)
requires full street dedication and improvement in all
instances. This section provides as follows:
PDXI-12888.1
STOEL RIVES COLEY
10N ES & vREY
ti
Mr. Timothy V. Ramis
July 10, 1992
Page 3
111. No development shall occur unless
the development has frontage or approved
access to a public street:
"b. Any new street or additional
street width planned as a portion of an
approved street plan shall be dedicated and
improved in accordance with this code; and
This standard was not cited in the staff report or relied upon
as a basis for the exaction until the closing of the public
hearing. As you can see from the Commission's order, the
Commission noted that this type of standard, even if properly
interpreted by Randy, is subject to a demonstration of a
reasonable relationship between the "needs created by the
proposed development and the exaction requested." It was
apparent from the oral discussion among the commission members
z that they agreed with our position that this development should
not be construed to create a need for the improvement north of
Lot 52. From my perspective, I believe that Randy has
misconstrued this standard to require that any street depicted
on the Transportation Map shall be improved in its entirety
regardless of the absence of any nexus between the proposed
development and the burdens it imposes on the transportation
system. To the contrary, I believe that the only reasonable
interpretation of this standard is to confirm that any new
street or additional street, as may be required under the terms
of this ordinance, shall be constructed in compliance with all
prescriptive development standards. Under this interpretation,
one would first look to more specific criteria such as
Subsection F to determine whether a street shall be
extended to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed
***11 and, if so, to the former standard to assure construction
in accordance with the Code. Even under the Dolan ruling,
Randy's assumption of automatic exaction authority in all
circumstances is unsupportable, particularly in the face of a
more specific criterion which identifies two specific
circumstances under which the full improvement must be
provided.
During the hearing I called the Commission's
attention to Section 18.32.250(E) regarding the circumstances
precedent to the imposition of conditions of approval. As you
know, this section authorizes conditions which are found to be
necessary to (1) carry out the comprehensive plan, (2) carry
PDX1-12888.1
5,TOEL RIVES QOLEY
)ONES & V REY
Mr. Timothy V. Ramis
July 10, 1992
Page 4
out the applicable implementing ordinances and (3) ensure that
adequate public services are provided to the development or as
otherwise required under the ordinance. Since the record does
not support the finding that full road improvment is necessary
to comply with Section 18.164.030(F) and I do not believe that
Subsection 030(A)(1)(b) can be read to authorize or require an
automatic exaction, it appears that these limitations on
conditions of approval provide a separate basis for the
Commission's ruling.
The basis for Randy's concern and any potential
concern by an individual Council member remains unclear to us.
If, on the one hand, Randy is concerned that allowing this
development to proceed without constructing the entire roadway
would mean that the city would be left to construct this
limited portion of road with public funds, this concern would
appear to be unrealistic in light of the expected development
of the parcel to the north. At the time of such development
approval, this burden could be imposed in an effort to assure
adequate access and circulation to and through this large (40
acre) parcel. Moreover, it is apparent to me that any decision
to reverse the Commission's ruling will likely have the
opposite effect of requiring public funding for the
construction of the entire section of collector from SW 121
Avenue through the Vista Point site since our clients have
indicated that, under current acquisition circumstances, this
project will not move forward if the additional $250,000
expenditure for road construction is required.
If, on the other hand, Randy or the Council are
concerned that the Commission's ruling, while perhaps
appropriate in this instance, creates some form of unfavorable
precedent, the more appropriate approach would be to eliminate
any such precedence through the adoption of specific findings
addressing the unique circumstances surrounding this particular
plat. The circumstances include extreme typography,
significant natural resource values, the absence of lot
frontage within the affected area and the ability to serve the
entire development through the new collector south of Lot 152.
The commission's order contains a number of these specific
findings, and it would be an easy task for the Council to
modify the order and provide a more detailed analysis in its
own written determination.
C I hope this information is of assistance to you in
your upcoming meetings with city representatives. If you have
PDX1-12888.1
STOEL RIVES BOLEY
JONES & VREY
WL;
Mr. Timothy V. Ramis
July 10, 1992
Page 5
any questions regarding any aspect of our position or the
specific circumstances surrounding the Planning Commission's
decision, please feel free to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
Steven L. Pfeiffer
SLP:a-m
cc: Mr. Bruce Dunlap
Mr. Larry York
Mr. David Bantz
PDX1-12888.1
C
Aff
ON
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
FINAL ORDER NO. 92-04 PC
AND
SUBDIV SIO /PLANNED
A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING To AN APPLICAT ONUFOR A 64C LOTINCLUDES
LOPMEOPMENT T FOR A 33.8 ACRE SITE. THE REQUESTS ARE MADE BY MATRIX DEVELOPMENT.
DEVELOPMENT WITH REGARD
The Tigard Planning Commission has reviewed the above-described applications at
a public hearing on June 22, 1992. The Commission has based its decision on the
facts, findings, and conclusions noted below.
1. SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST
CASE: VISTA POINT SUBDIVISION
Subdivision SUB 92-0005
Planned Development Review PDR 92-0003
Sensitive Lands Review SLR 92-0002
Variance VAR 92-0010
SUMMARY: The applicant requests Subdivision preliminary plat/Planned
Development conceptual plan approval to divide a 33.81 acre parcel
into 64 lots ranging in size between approximately 7,000 and 21,950
square feet. Two private open space tracts totalling 6.78 acres
would also be created.
Sensitive Lands Review approval is requested to allow home
construction, road development, and utility construction on slopes
in excess of 25 percent and to allow utility construction within a
drainageway.
A Variance has been requested t200 foot long stretch Section a
18.164.030.M.1 to allow an approximately
proposed local street to have a gradient of approximately 14 percent
whereas the Code permitted maximum grade for local streets is 12
percent.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Matrix Development
7160 SW Hazelfern Road
Tigard, OR 97224
ADDITIONAL OWNER: Quaestor, Inc.
1990 SW Bundy Avenue, Suite 725
Los Angeles, California 90025
REPRESENTATIVE: OT ISW . (David Bantz)
55 Road
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential
ZONING: R-4.5(PD) (Residential, 4.5 units/acre, Planned Development
Overlay)
LOCATION: West of the intersection of SW 121st Avenue andi SW Gaare
Street. (WCTM 2S1 3CC Tax Lot 401 and eastern po t of WCT14
2S1 4 Tax lot 1400).
PnGd^. 1
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT
APPLICABLE LAW: Community Development Code Chapters 18.50, 18.80, 18.84,
18.88, 18.92, 18.150, 18.160, 18.162, 18.164 and Comprehensive
Plan Policies 2.1.1, 3.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.5.1, 4.2.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1,
7.4.4, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, and 8.1.3.
DECISION: Approval of the Subdivision/Planned Development requests as well as
the Variance and Sensitive Lands Review requests associated with the
Subdivision preliminary plat. Approval is subject to several
conditions of approval listed at the end of this order.
II. FINDINGS ABOUT SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
A. Site size and shape:
Tax lot 401 is 7.7 acres and has approximately 330 feet of frontage along
SW Gaarde Street. The property extends approximately 805 feet to the
west. Tax lot 1400 is immediately west of tax lot 401. Tax Lot 1400
includes 40 acres in a square shape. The proposed subdivision would
include approximately the eastern two-thirds of tax lot 1400, as well as
all of tax lot 401.
B. Site location:
The site extends westward from the intersection of SW 121st Avenue and SW
Gaarde Street. The northeastern-most portion of the proposed subdivision
is approximately 450 feet east of Benchview Estates Subdivision and the
present terminus of SW 132nd Avenue.
C. Existing uses and structures:
e.
The site is presently vacant. Tree cover consisting of a mixture of
evergreen and deciduous species is found onrthe western half of the site.
Meadow and orchard land occupies most of the eastern half of the site.
The applicant's exhibit 3 (last page of the applicant's statement booklet)
includes a tree inventory for areas that would be directly affected by the
development proposal.
D. Topography and drainage:
The property slopes generally from the south to the north. The steepest
slopes occur in the south to north ravine in the center of Tax Lot 1400.
Grades in these areas are approximately 40 percent. Grades on the
remainder of the site are in the 2 percent to 25 percent range. (See
applicant's site analysis map at exhibit B).
E. Surrounding land uses:
The areas to the east and northeast of the site are generally single
family homes on lots larger than the minimum lot sizes of their zones,
although limited redevelopment potential exists in these areas at this
time due to the lack of sanitary sewers in this area. The western half of
tax lot 1400 is a rather steep property that is heavily wooded. The
Planning Commission has previously approved a separate subdivision
application (SUB 91-0009) for a 52 lot subdivision on the western half of
tax lot 401 (Mountain Highlands subdivision). No development activity is
occurring on this property. The Benchview Estate= cubdivicion, phases I
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 2
and II (to be developed) are further west. Large parcels that are
generally undeveloped lie to the north.
F. Plan designation and zoning:
All surrounding properties are designated for Low Density Residential
development by the Comprehensive Plan map. Properties to the north and
northeast are within Washington County, but are within the City of
Tigard's area of interest for planning purposes. Existing zoning of
surrounding properties is illustrated on the vicinity map attached to this
report.
G. Proposed use:
The applicant proposes to subdivide the site into 64 single family
residential lots ranging in size from 7,000 square feet to 21,950 square
feet as shown on Exhibit A. Two development phases are proposed: 35 lots
in phase I and 29 lots in phase II. In general, the smaller parcels are
located along the eastern edge of phase II (lots 24-34). The applicant
proposes leaving the steep ravine areas on tax lot 4100 as private open
space area (Tracts A and B). The only disturbances proposed in these
areas are for sanitary and storm sewer construction.
H. Public service and utilities:
The preliminary utility plan (applicant's exhibit D) proposes that the
subdivision be served by development of a water main network from the
existing water main at the intersection of SW 121st Avenue and SW Gaarde
Street and another main on the southern edge of the site.
r`
Public storm sewers are proposed within the streets throughout the
proposed subdivision with four separate outlets, including one outlet to
the existing ditch on the south side of Gaarde Street east of the proposed
subdivision. No treatment.of storm drainage is proposed.
Sanitary sewers are proposed to be extended through the site from 1) an
existing sewer in Gaarde Street (this extension is proposed to serve
proposed lots 1-15 and 58-60) and 2) from a planned but as yet to be
constructed sewer to extend from the northern edge of the site to an
existing sewer in SW Walnut Street (this sewer is proposed to serve the
remainder of the proposed lots). Exhibit D illustrates possible future
extensions of this sewer within proposed Tract C to serve other nearby
properties.
1. Access and nearby streets:
The proposed development would be provided with access from an extension
of SW Gaarde Street from its intersection with SW 121st Avenue.
Jurisdiction for SW Gaarde Street lies with both the City of Tigard and
Washington County. SW Gaarde is functionally classified as a major
collector street. Current pavement on Gaarde is approximately 24 feet in
width from this point eastward to SW Pacific Highway. No sidewalks are
provided along SW Gaarde and streetlights are few. There are no current
plans for widening or improvements to SW Gaarde Street in the near future
other than the current project for realignment of Gaarde with SW Pacific
Highway and improvements in the area of that intersection.
4-5 FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 3
SW 121st Avenue abuts the subject property for a
alon the pproximately 330 feet
g property's eastern side. SW 121st Avenue in this area is under
the jurisdiction of Washington County. SW 121st Avenue is also a major
collector street with approximately 24 feet of pavement, open ditches, few
streetlights, and no sidewalks. There are no current plans for widening
or improvements to this section of SW 121st Avenue.
In general, the proposed subdivision would consist of a local street
paralleling the collector street extension of SW Gaarde, with two streets
stubbed to the property to the north and east. In addition, four lots
would be located off of an eyebrow street widening on the west side of the
Gaarde extension. The proposal also includes stubbing the Gaarde Street
extension at the western end of phase I, although right-of-way would be
dedicated for the further extension of this street. Right-of-way would be
rough graded for street construction in areas abutting lots 46-52.
Preliminary street sections on exhibit D indicate that local streets
within the subdivision would be fully developed with 34 feet of pavement.
The proposed SW Gaarde extension would include 40 feet of pavement. The
applicant's statement indicates that the streets within the proposed
development will be developed consistent with the standards of Community
Development Code Chapter 18.164, except that a variance has been requested
to Community Development Code Section 18.164.030.M.1 to allow an
approximately 200 foot long stretch of a proposed local street to have a
gradient of approximately 14 percent whereas the Code permitted maximum
grade for local streets is 12 percent. The portion of street for which
the variance is requested is the proposed north-south local 'street
abutting lots 16, 17, and 20-21. The applicant's statement at Section VI
addresses the subdivision variance criteria of Code Section 18.160.120.
J. Previous applications affecting this parcel
Two separate subdivision applications were submitted in the fall of 1990
for development of both parcels involved in the current application, as
well as an adjacent parcel to the west (SUB 90-0011/PDR 90-0007 and SUB
90-0012/PDR 90-0008). Both applications were withdrawn prior to hearings
on the requests. 'In September 1991, the Planning Commission approved the
subdivision plan for the 52 lot Mountain Highlands subdivision on the
western portion of tax lot 1400. That decision also approved the
partitioning of tax lot 1400 into two parcels: the area involved in the
Mountain Highlands subdivision and the area involved in the current
subdivision application. Neither the partition or subdivision plats have
yet been recorded.
III. APPLICABLE APPROVAL STANDARDS
The approval criteria for a Planned Development are found at Code Section
18.80.120. The approval standards for a preliminary subdivision plat are listed
at Code Section 18.160.060.A. The hearings authority may grant variances to
Community Development Code standards if the variance approval criteria of Code
Section 18.160.120.8 are satisfied. In addition, the proposal must also be found
to be consistent with the development standards of the following Code Chapters:
Chapter 18.50 (R-4.5 zone); Chapter 18.88 (Solar Access Requirements); Chapter
18.92 (Density Computations); Chapter 18.150 (Tree Protection); and Chapter
18.164 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards). Standards of other community
Development Code chapters may apply to subsequent development of the subject site
T FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT
PAGE 4
but are not applicable to the current review. Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1,
3.1.1, 3.4.2, 3.5.1, 4.2.1, 7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, and 8.1.3 also
O apply to the review of this development proposal.
The approval criteria for Sensitive Lands Review approval relative to development
or landform modifications on slopes of 25 percent or greater are listed at code
Section 18.84.040.B.
IV. NPO & AGENCY COMMENTS
1. Both SW 121st Avenue and SW Gaarde Street adjacent to the site are under
the jurisdiction of Washington County. The County's Department of Land
Use and Transportation has reviewed the request and recommends that
approval of this subdivision proposal be conditioned upon the following:
A. The proposed collector road shall be constructed pursuant to Section
C.4.a., b., c., d., and e. of the Urban Planning Area Agreement
(UPAA) between Washington County and the City of Tigard.
B. Prior to Final Approval/Issuance of a Building Permit:
1. The applicant shall submit an Access Report per Washington
County Resolution and Order 86-95. The County will review
this study and condition any necessary improvements prior to
final approval. Contact Doug Norval, County Traffic analyst
for specific questions regarding the Access Report.
-2. The applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way to
provide 33 feet from centerline of SW 121st Avenue frontage,
including adequate corner radius.
3. The applicant shall sign a waiver not to remonstrate against
the formation of a local improvement district o'r other
mechanism to improve the base facility of SW 121st Avenue
between SW Walnut Street and SW Gaarde Street.
4. The applicant shall sign a waiver not to remonstrate against
the formation of a local improvement district 'or other
mechanism to improve the base facility of SW Gaarde Street
between SW 121st Avenue and SW Pacific Highway.
5. A one-foot non-access reserve strip shall be established along
SW 121st Avenue frontage, except at the approved access point
(extension of SW Gaarde into the site).
The documents needed to complete conditions B.1 through B.5 above-
shall be prepared by the Washington County Survey Division and
recorded in the Washington County Records Department.
6. The applicant shall assure that the access to SW 121st Avenue
will be adequately illuminated through the formation of a
street lighting service district, or other measures as
approved by the County Engineering Division.
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PAR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 5
L
7. Submit plans, obtain County Engineering Division approval, and
obtain a facility permit for construction of the following
public improvements:
a. Concrete sidewalk to County standard along SW 121st
Avenue frontage.
b. Adequate roadway drainage along SW 121st Avenue
frontage.
C. Any traffic improvements required as a result of the
applicant's required Access Report and UPAA agreement.
d. Construction of the 121st/Gaarde/Gaarde westward
extension intersection to County standards.
These improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the
requirements of the Washington County Uniform Road Improvement
Design Standards.
C. Prior to Occupancy:
1. The 121st/Gaarde/Gaarde westward extension intersection shall
be adequately illuminated as required by Condition B.6.
2. The road improvements required by Conditions B.7.a., b., c.,
and d. shall be completed and accepted by the County.
2. The City of Tigard Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and
offers the following comments:
A. Comprehensive Plan Compliance:
The Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map designates the area of the
proposed subdivision as a study area. Map note #2 indicates that
two options for the extension of Gaarde Street must be considered in
this study area. The recommendations of the Northeast Bull Mountain
Transportation Study Report are one option to be considered. This
option would extend SW Gaarde north and west from SW 121st Avenue to
connect to SW Walnut Street as a major collector. The proposed
subdivision would satisfy this option if the extension is required
to be constructed to major collector street standards. The other
option to be considered, as specified by the study area notes, is a
minor collector extension of SW Gaarde Street west from SW 121st to
connect with SW 132nd Avenue, as was previously recommended by NPO
#3. The NPO has reviewed the proposed subdivision and concluded
that the proposal does adequately provide for the NPO's option.
B. Streets:
Access to the site is provided from the southwest corner of the
intersection of SW 121st and SW Gaarde. Both of these existing
streets are currently under the jurisdiction of Washington County.
The Engineering Department has reviewed the County's recommendations
for these streets (above). We agree with the County's
recommendations except for the following:
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 6
a. Section 18.164.030A.1.a. of the Community Development Code
specifically requires that "streets within a development and
streets adjacent shall be improved in accordance with this
" title". Therefore the applicant should be required to install t
half-street improvements along the frontage of SW 121st Avenue J
instead of deferring these improvements until a local
improvement district is formed. s'
s
b. The county has requested that the applicant be required to
sign a non-remonstrance agreement for future participation in
an LID for SW Gaarde Street, east of the site. With reference
to Section 18.164 of the Community Development Code, there is ;
no specific requirement that the applicant be required to
participate in the improvements for S.W. Gaarde east of the
subdivision, be it now or in the future, with respect to this
development. The Code specifically limits improvements to
roads that front the development and it has been City policy
to not extend this requirement to adjacent roads. Therefore,
the applicant should not be required to execute a non-
remonstrance agreement for future improvements to SW Gaarde as
requested by i:aahi: y ^v.. Count -
I . ,
Thy,, applicant is proposing to extend SW Gaarde Street as a minor collector
street to the west and north. In order to meet the requirements of the
Comprehensive Plan's Transportation Hap, the Gaarde extension would be
required to be built as a major collector street. This proposal would
then meet both options as required by the Transportation Map. In
addition, the proposed road would be eligible for credits through the
county-wide Traffic Impact Fee program.
The applicant has indicated that they would install full street
improvements for the extension of Gaarde only up to the Phase I boundary.
From the end of the full improvements, grading only would be provided to
the northwest corner of lot 45, and no further improvements would be
provided to extend the road to ;the north property line. Code Section
18.164.030.F.1. requires that streets be extended to the boundary lines of
the development. We feel that if and when Phase II is developed, the road
extension should be completed by the developer to the north property line.
This would be consistent with current City policy. As an alternative, the
applicant could be required to dedicate the right-of-way, do the grading,
and pay a fee-in-lieu-of construction for the remaining work.
The applicant is proposing several internal streets to serve the interior
of the subdivision. The streets that are to be extended are located so
that they would serve the properties to the northeast for future
development. The internal streets meet city standards except as follows:
a. The applicant should be required to install a temporary turn-
around for the local street which would serve lots 16 through
22. The standard requires that roads which terminate and are
in excess of 150 feet in length provide a turn-around for fire
apparatus until such time as they are extended.
b. . The applicant has requested a variance to the maximum grade of
12 percent. The applicant has shown on the preliminary plan
a need to propose a local road with a 14 percent grade for a
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 7
,distance of approximately 200 feet. We do not feel this has
any detrimental effects to the standards and would recommend
AITP* approval of the requested variance.
VL.
C. The applicant should also be required to demonstrate that the
road grades can be logically extended and meet city standards.
C. Sanitary sewer:
The applicant is proposing to install and extend two existing sanitary
sewer systems to serve this development. The first system is located in
SW Gaarde, approximately 200 feet east of the proposed development. The
existing 8 inch public line within SW Gaarde has the capacity to handle
this proposed development. The second system is located approximately 200
feet south of SW Walnut, in SW Lansdowne. The applicant is proposing to
extend the line to the south to serve this development.
There are several issues that need to be addressed relative to sanitary
sewers:
a. Both systems would need to be installed to serve Phase I of
the development; while this is not a problem, we wish to bring
attention to it;
b. There are some lots along the west boundary of the development
which show that they would be connected to a proposed future
sanitary sewer line. The proposed line would need to be
installed as part of the development;
C. The line that is to be extended south from the vicinity of
SW Walnut would go through a area that is not within the city
limits. The applicant has indicated that it is their intent
not to annex the properties where the extension would go to
the City of Tigard. Therefore, the line would ruin the
responsibility of the Unified Sewerage Agency. In addition,
the City would require that prior to any Berson connecting to
the line outside the city limits be annexed into the City or
sign a non-remonstrance against annexation, and that access be
provided to the sanitary sewer line; and
d. There are numerous portions of the sanitary sewer main line
and manholes that are not within the public right-of-way and
will cause maintenance problems. Therefore, it should be
required that access to the manholes outside of the right-of-
way will be assured.
D. Storm Drainage:
The applicant has submitted a preliminary plan for the storm drainage
system. Based on the information presented, it appears that it would be
adequate to serve the development. Again the applicant has shown two
different systems to drain the development. The first system would drain
the southeast corner of the development and connect to an existing
drainage system located approximately 200 feet east. The second system
would drain into an existing drainage channel located to the west of the
development.
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 8
It&
The Unified Sewerage Agency has established, and the City has agreed to
enforce (Resolution and Order No. 91-47), Surface Water Management
Regulations requiring the construction of on-site water quality facilities
or fees in-lieu of their construction. Requiring surface water quality
facilities on this site would result in facilities at various locations
that would become a maintenance burden to the City. In addition, regional
facilities, funded by fees in-lieu of construction of these facilities,
would provide the required treatment for this site and future development.
The regional facility would also provide improved reliability and less
maintenance. Therefore, the applicant should be required to pay the fee
in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility.
Federal, state and local regulations all require erosion control permits
for this project. The applicant should apply, through the City, for a
joint permit. Application should be made at the time that construction
drawings are submitted.
3. The City of Tigard Building Division has commented that private storm
drain lines and easements should be provided for lots 7-15, 18, 31-34, and
62 to allow roof drains to be directed to public storm sewers or existing
drainageways. Easements should be provided where storm sewers cross other
properties. A joint use and maintenance agreement should be recorded for
each lot utilizing a common private storm drain. In addition, the
finished slope of all lots with cuts or fills should have a maximum slope
of 2:1, or else an engineer shall certify the stability of any steeper
slopes. This would include the slope and fill from excavation for
foundations for the structures.
4. The Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District has reviewed the preliminary
plat and has provided the following comments:
a. Hydrant locations should be coordinated with the Tigard Water
District.
b. The Fire District always encourages the reduction of street grades
to the minimum possible grade; however, the proposed street grades
are within acceptable limits for the District.
5. Tigard School District 23J reviewed the proposal and has noted that the
proposed development lies within the attendance areas of C.F. Tigard
Elementary School, Fowler Middle School, and the Tigard Senior High
School. The proposed development is projected to generate the following
additional enrollment at those schools: 20 students at the Tigard School;
2 students at Fowler Middle School; and 1 student at Tigard High School.
The School District notes that school capacities are projected to be
exceeded as a result of this proposed development and other recently
reviewed and approved developments within those attendance areas. The
District notes that core facilities of the schools are insufficient to be
able to consider portable additions. Additional school capacity may be
provided by other options under consideration by the School District,
including: grade level reconfiguration, rescheduled school year, boundary
adjystments, double shifting, busing to under-utilized facilities, future
bond measures leading to construction of new facilities and other school
housing options.
41 FINAL nRDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 9
6. Neighborhood Planning Organization #3 Chairperson Herman Porter provided
testimony at the public hearing regarding the NPO's position on the
proposal. NPO 3 recommended approval of the proposed subdivision/planned
development subject to the following conditions:
a. Half-street improvements, including a school bus turnout, should be
required along the SW 121st frontage of the site. The intersection
of SW 121st and Gaarde should be widened and improved.
b. At a minimum, a three way stop should be provided at the 121st and
Gaarde intersection with consideration of a traffic signal as
traffic increases in this area.
7. Washington County Community Planning Organization CPO 4B has provided the
following comments:
a. The CPO urges the City to require dedication of the proposed private
open space tracts to be developed as an area-wide greenspace
network;
b. Half-street improvements, including a school bus turnout, should be
required along the SW 121st frontage of the site. Appropriate
safety improvements should be provided at the 121st and Gaarde
intersection with TIF fees applied for these improvements.
B. The Unified Sewerage Agency has provided the following comments:
a. An on-site water quality facility should.be required;
b. Sensitive areas should be identified. A minimum 25 foot undisturbed
buffer should be required from the edge of sensitive areas to rear
lot lines;
C. An erosion control plan should be required to be submitted and
approved prior to any construction on the site. An NPEDES permit
should be required for this site since the area to be disturbed
would be larger than five acres in size.
9. Northwest Natural Gas has commented that there are both a 10 inch diameter
high pressure feeder main and a 2 inch gas line within the approximate
alignment of the Gaarde Street extension in the southeastern portion of
the site. The developer's representatives should contact Northwest
Natural Gas to have the main located prior to any excavation on the site.
10. The Tigard Water District has provided the following comments:
a. A 16 inch diameter water main will need to be installed along the SW
Gaarde Street extension;
b. Utility plans will need to be revised to place water mains on the
south and east sides of streets;
C. Final approval of the plans for water main location and size,
Aff
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 10
including water meters, will need to be approved jointly-by the Fire
and Water Districts.
11. The Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (cable television) has
reviewed the proposal and offered no comments other than that the site
developer should contact Columbia cable prior to the opening of utility
trenches.
12. PGE and GTE have reviewed the proposal and have offered no comments or
objections.
13. Mrs. Ellen Bechtold, property owner and resident of tax lot 500 of WCTM
2S1 3
CC, provided the following comments to staff:
a.
The septic tank and drainfield for her house cross the property
boundary onto the subject site
Sh
.
e also has stated that the owner
of 401 has previously agreed to
rovide f
p
or a sewer line extension
to her property boundary as per the sales agreement between the
Bechtold's and the original purchasers of tax lot 401;
b.
There should not be a stop sign for southbound traffic on SW 121st
Avenue since traffic stopped for this sign would back up and block
existing driveways;
C.
Mrs. Bechtold would like a solid fence around her property to be
installed prior to the st
t
ON,
w
ar
of construction on the subject site;
V. EVALUATION OF REQUEST
A. Compliance with Communitv Development Code Subdivision/Planned
Development/Sensitive Lands Review
1. The proposed Vista Point subdivision is consistent with the approval
criteria for a subdivision (Code Section 18.160.060.A) because:
a. The proposed subdivision complies with the Comprehensive Plan
Map's Low Density Residential density opportunity for the site
and with applicable plan policies, the regulations of the
R-4.5 zone, and other applicable regulations, except as noted
within the accompanying paragraphs that point out specific
deficiencies that will need to be corrected.
b. The proposed name of the subdivision, Vista Point, is not
duplicative of any recorded plat within Washington County.
C. The extension of SW Gaarde Street through the proposed
development is laid out so as to conform with the planned
collector street connection between SW Gaarde and SW Walnut
Street as illustrated on the Comprehensive Plan's
Transportation Plan Map. It will be necessary that this road
be required to be constructed in accordance with Section
III.C.4.a of the Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA) between
Washington County and the City of Tigard, or in other words,
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT
PAGE 11
it will need to be constructed to collector street standards
as far west as lot 52. The city Engineer shall be charged
Aff Mi. with determining whether the roadway width may be reduced in
width from collector standards. The conditions of approval
should also specify that the applicant should be responsible
for grading the remainder of the Gaarde right-of-way to the
north edge of tax lot 1400.
The commission has determined that the applicant should not be
required to provide street improvements for SW Gaarde past lot
52 with the development of phase two, or to pay an equivalent
fee in lieu of construction of this road section as had been
recommended by staff. The Commission finds that the applicant
_ has a substantial enough burden in providing collector street
improvements to both SW 121st Avenue on the east side of the
site and for SW Gaarde up to lot 52. These street sections
are both necessary to serve the proposed development; however,
these collector street segments would be oversized to major
collector standards and would not allow for direct driveway
connections and therefore place a substantial burden on the
applicant that goes beyond just a direct relationship to the
needs created by the development. The applicant loses
possible developable area to right-of-way for these street
sections and also gets charged with a substantial financial
outlay for developing to collector standards rather than local
street standards that would typically apply to other
subdivisions of this size. The applicant, however, does not
object to these requirements on these street sections.
The applicant also does not object to dedicating right-of-way
and grading beyond lot 53 for a further extension of SW Gaarde
to the northern edge of the site. However, the applicant
requests to not have to build this roadway section since: 1)
it will not provide necessary access to any of the lots to be
developed as part of the subdivision; 2) this street section
will not connect to any existing public streets to the north
or west that might provide better access to the site or access
from the site to facilities such as shopping areas or schools
that might be a benefit to the subdivision; and 3) this
street section is not necessary to provide access to or permit
the future division of the property to the north.
The Commission agrees that there does not appear to be enough
of a relationship between needs created by the proposed
development or benefits to its future residents and this
section of the collector street to justify the imposition of
the substantial burden of improving this street section on the
applicant. As noted by the applicant,.. this street section
will not provide access to any of the proposed lots in this
subdivision and will not connect to any existing streets to
the north at this time that might provide access from this
proposed development to schools, parks, or shopping facilities
or connections to other roads that would reduce travel times
for the subdivision's residents.
The Commission notes that Code Section 18.164.030.F.1.
requires that streets be extended to the boundary lines of the
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 12
tract to be developed to give access or permit a satisfactory
future division of adjoining land as pointed out by staff, but
the Commission finds that this Section does not apply to this
situation since the Moore property immediately to the north
(WCPM 2S1 4, tax lots 100, 200, and 300) already are provided
with adequate street access from SW 132nd Avenue from the west
and a private access road to SW 121st on the east and
therefore these parcels are not dependent on extension of this
section of SW Gaarde for access or to allow for redevelopment.
In addition, right-of-way for SW Gaarde Street would be
dedicated as a condition of this approval and therefore would
extend to the Moore property to allow for street development
if it is found desirable at the time of development of the
Moore property. If this street section is found necessary at
that time, it might be able to be constructed, or partially
constructed, with funds from traffic impact fees.
Staff also pointed to Code Section 18.164.030.A.i.b which
states that -any new street or additional street width planned
as part of an approved street plan shall be dedicated and
improved in accordance with this Code.- The Commission finds
that this street section in question has been planned for by
Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map Note 2. However, the
Commission does not find that this Code Section is an open-
ended directive to require both dedication and improvements
even if there is not a reasonable relationship between the
needs created by a proposed development and the exaction
requested. Because the Commission does not find the
reasonable relationship exists between this proposal and the
need to improve this section of SW Gaarde Street, the-
4L Commission finds that Section 18.164.030.A.I does not apply to
this case.
d. The proposal would provide stubbed local streets adjacent to
lots 20 and 21 and adjacent to lots 30 and 31 to provide for
future extensions of the local street network in this area.
In addition, the right-of-way for SW Gaarde Street would be
stubbad to allow for future extension. Exhibit C of the
applicant's statement illustrates how these streets could be
extended to facilitate future development of this area.
e. The subdivision s_s proposed to be developed in two phases of
35 and 29 lots. The proposal to develop the subdivision in
two phases is consistent with the approval standards for a
phased subdivision/planned development (Sections 18.160.050.0
and 18.80.100.B) because necessary public facilities are
proposed to be constructed in conjunction with each of the
phases and because no temporary public facilities will be
required for either phase.
A schedule for total development of the site will be required
to be submitted prior to development of, the initial phase.
The total time period for developing all phases of a planned
development may not exceed seven years without reapplying for
conceptual plan approval.
4 FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 13
f. The applicant requests approval of a variance to allow the
local street adjacent to lots 16-22 to have a grade of
• approximately 14 percent grade for a 200 foot long stretch
whereas a maximum local street grade of 12 percent is allowed
by Code Section 18.164.030.H.1
Code Section 18.160.090 authorizes the Commission to grant
variances to code standards if the requested variance can be
found to be consistent with the variance approval criteria of
code section 18.160.120. The applicant's statement addresses
the criteria point-for-point relative to the requested
variance. Service providing agencies and the neighborhood
planning organizations have not raised concerns with the
requested variance. The length of road that would exceed 12
percent grade is approximately the same as the 200 foot
maximum distance for excessive grade allowed by the new Fire
District standards. The Commission concurs with the
applicant's analysis on the requested variance and hereby
adopts the applicants's proposed findings as the Commission's
findings in support of the variance request. These findings
are hereby made appendix A of this final order.
2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the use standards of the
R-4.5 zoning district because the lots are intended to be used for
single family detached dwelling units. The Planned Development
overlay zone applied to the parcel provides for flexibility with
regard to lot dimensional standards, including lot size. Although
not all lots are consistent with the minimum 7,500 square foot
minimum lot size of the R-4.5 zone, the average lot size of the
proposed lots is well in excess of 7,500 square feet; therefore, the
proposal is consistent with the density allowed for the site by the
R-4.5 zone. All proposed lots are consistent with the minimum lot
width requirement of 50 feet. No special setbacks have been
requested. Therefore, standard R-4.5 setbacks should apply to this
subdivision
3. The proposed development scheme is consistent with the approval
standards for a Planned Development (Chapter 18.80) as demonstrated
by the findings presented for the various Plan policies and Code
Chapters applicable to the request. The requirements of the
following Code chapters are not directly applicable to the current
review, although future improvements on the subject site will need
to conform with the requirements of these chapters: Chapter 18.96,
Additional Yard Area Requirements; Chapter 18.98, Building Height
Limitations: Exceptions; Chapter 18.100, Landscaping and Screening;
Chapter 18.106, Parking; and Chapter 18.144, Accessory Structures.
Staff is charged with reviewing the conformance of future
improvements with these standards through the building permit and
sign permit review processes as well as through continuing Code
enforcement actions.
with regard to the additional Planned Development approval criteria,
the Commission finds that only Section 18.80:120.A.3.a(i) is
directly applicable to the review of this proposal since the other
additional criteria relate to commercial • or multi-family
developments in planned development areas. This particular section
states that streets, buildings, and other site elements shall
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 14
F
be designed and located to preserve the existing trees, topography,
and natural drainage to the greatest extent possible." The proposal
does not provide for crossings of the drainageways on the site
except as called for by the City's Transportation Plan Map. The
proposal avoids placing development in or adjacent to these
drainageways. Instead, the plat would reserve a 6.78 acre portion
of the site for private, tree-covered, open space and drainage
purposes rather than including this area within lots. Because this
area would have very limited recreational potential for the general
public and dedication would remove this area from the tax roll,
dedication of this area to the City is not considered desirable.
Through the subdivision plat recording, this area will be created as
common tracts to be owned by the lot owners in the subdivision.
4. The proposal is consistent with the Sensitive Lands requirements of
Chapter 18.84, although some site grading within areas in excess of
25 percent slopes will be necessary to facilitate the proposed
development. Review of the grading plan shows that grading of areas
in excess of 25 percent slope is primarily limited to areas within
and abutting proposed public right-of-ways and where necessary to
construct sanitary sewer utilities. Opportunities to further limit
grading of the site are restricted because of the number of building
sites that must be prepared due to the single-family residential
nature of the proposed development and the need to provide limited
grade public streets. Plans for methods for maintaining slope
stability shall be required to be submitted as a part of individual
building permit applications for the individual lots. '
The erosion control requirements that now apply to development
within the Tualatin River basin require that an erosion control plan
be filed and followed during development of a subdivision as well as
prior to construction of individual homes.
S. Exhibit 5 of the applicant's statement contains a solar access
evaluation demonstrating consistency with the solar access
requirements of Chapter 18.88. Code Secticn 18.88.040.E allows the
hearings authority to reduce the percentage of lots that must meet
the solar access design standard if certain conditions relative to
the site (such as slope, existing shade, or existing or planned road
patterns) make it difficult or impossible to fully ccmply with the
o solar access design standards without adversely impacting the
development's permitted density and cost or amenities. The
applicant requests, and the Commission concurs, that lots 25-33, 38-
43, 47, 50 and 51 should be exempted from the solar access
calculation because the collector street alignment through this site
required by the Transportation Plan Map, along with collector street
access spacing standards, dictates a parallelling local street and
a concomitant number of lots with an east-west orientation. In
addition, lots 46 and 63 are exempted due to northwestward facing
slopes in excess of 20 percent. Of the remaining 43 lots not
exempted for the above causes, twenty-two other lots satisfy the
basic solar requirement of a front lot line orientation within 30
degrees of a true east-west orientation and a minimum north-south
dimension of 90 feet as shown on the applicant's solar access
evaluation sheet. Seven other lots (lots 6, 7, 8, 17, 20-22) are
proposed to have solar building lines recorded. Lots 23, 24, 35,
52-55, and 63 are exempted under the basic 20 percent exemption.
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT
PAGE 15
Therefore, eighty percent of the lots not exempted for cause would
meet the solar access design standard. The proposed subdivision is
therefore consistent with the requirements of Chapter 18.88.
6. The proposed subdivision complies with the density standards of
Chapter 18.92 because the 18.31 acre net developable area of the
site (after deductions for streets and excluding original slopes of
25 percent and greater) yields an opportunity for 106 dwelling units
under the R-4.5 zoning designation. Sixty-four single family
residential lots are proposed. The applicant's submittal includes
a density calculation.
7. Chapter 18.150 requires that the number of trees over six inches in
diameter that are removed during construction be minimized. The
proposed development's public streets, utilities, and.residences and
related grading will necessitate the removal of a number of apple
trees on the eastern portion of the site as well as several fir
trees adjacent to lots 39, 45, 46, 47, 62, and 63. In addition,
trees will need to be removed within Tract B for installation of
sanitary and storm sewer facilities. However, the majority of the
site area proposed to be developed is open field and will not
require any tree removal.
The preliminary plat is reasonably designed with respect to
minimizing tree removal. However, special care should be given in
the development of final grading and public utility plans to further
limit tree removal, especially in Tract B. No tree removal should
be allowed until review and approval of a tree removal permit. The
commission should require the developer of the site to provide for
an arborist's analysis of the tree removal plans with the arborist
being requested to recommend to staff protective measures to be
employed during site construction to protect trees to be retained.
8. The proposed subdivision's streets and other public improvements,
with modifications recommended by staff, comply with the
requirements of chapter 18.164 because:
a. The applicant will be required to dedicate additional right-
of-way for SW 121st Avenue and SW Gaarde street to major
collector street standards adjacent to or through the site.
As noted above, the applicant will be required to improve SW
121st Avenue and the the portion of SW Gaarde Street to major
collector standards with development of phase one, but the
Commission will not require the applicant to construct
improvements to SW Gaarde beyond lots 53 and 64 for the
reasons described in la above.
Construction of these major collector streets by the developer
will qualify for traffic impact fee credits for the individual
lots in the subdivision.
b. Internal subdivision streets should be able to be developed
consistent with City standards for local streets, except for
the short stretch of the street adjacent to lots 16-22 which
is -recommended to be allowed to exceed the 12 percent grade
standard as described above.
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 16
C. The preliminary plat provides for street stubs to the north to
provide for a future further extension of SW Gaarde Street and
to the east to allow for a possible local street network
connection eastward to SW 121st Avenue. When the subdivision
is built, reserve strips and barricades should required to be
provided for these street stubs. The stubs should be posted
with signs indicating that future extension of these streets
is anticipated with future development.
d. The proposed lots are consistent with Code standards for
maximum lot depth-to-width ratio and other lot dimensional
standards, except for lots 18 and 19 which do not provide the
required minimum 25 feet of frontage required by Section
18,164.060.8 for lots created _through the subdivision process.
It is staff's understanding that the minimum lot frontage
requirement is at least partially intended to discourage the
creation of flag lots such as these two lots. The applicant
has not requested a variance to the minimum frontage standard,
and even if a variance had been requested, the Commission
doubts whether we could approve such a variance. The
applicant will need to revise the plat in this area to provide
a minimum 25 feet of frontage on a street other than an alley
for these lots- This standard could be met by placing a
private street in this area, as long as the private street is
consistent with the standards of Code Section 18.108.070.A.
If an east-west private street is utilized, lots 17 and 20
could be oriented towards the- private street in a manner that
should increase the development's compliance with the solar
access standards.
e. Access to SW Gaarde Street and SW 121st Avenue should be
prohibited for all lots which would have frontage along these
collector streets. These lots as well as all other lots can
receive access from local streets or the proposed knuckle
fronting lots 61-64.
C. Compliance With Comprehensive Plan Policies Subdivision/Planned
Development/Sensitive Lands Review/Variances
1. The Subdivision/Planned Development proposal is consistent with Plan
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
development application on this site was pending. The Commission
conducted a hearing on this proposal, on June 22, 1992. Therefore,
a substantial opportunity has been provided for the public to
comment on this development application as is required by this
policy.
2. Policy 3.1.1 is satisfied because the Code allows development of
hillsides that are steeper than 25 percent when sufficient detailed
information is provided which shows that adverse environmental
erosion or slope instability will not result. The applicant has
submitted a general description of the site; however, specific
techniques for mitigating any potential problems related to steep
C FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 17
slopes have not been described. Significant construction
` difficulties are not anticipated for development in these areas
provided that appropriate construction and erosion control measures
are employed. Since many issues regarding slopes are site specific,
it shall be required that methods for maintenance of slope stability
and erosion control be submitted for approval in conjunction with
the detailed grading and public improvement plans and building
permits with particular attention being paid to grades over 25
percent. As recommended by the Building Division, finished grades
on lots with cuts or fills shall be limited to a maximum 2 to 1
slope or else an engineer shall be required to certify the stability
of the greater slopes.
3. The proposal is consistent with Policy 3.4_2 because the development
application is being reviewed through the Planned Development
process and because wildlife habitat along drainage corridors will
be protected through the establishment of private open space tracts
along the drainage corridor on the site. The private open space
tracts should serve to limit tree and understory vegetation removal
in the drainageway to only what is necessary for utility
construction. The undeveloped nature of this area will allow the
vegetative understory to return after construction.
4. The proposal is consistent with Policy 3.5.1 because 6.78 acres of
long-term open space will be provided for by tracts A and B which
will be commonly held and maintained by the residents of the
subdivision. Mature trees will be retained in these areas except
for trees that must be removed to construct utilities. Because of
the steepness of these areas, their usefulness for active
recreational opportunities are limited. The Comprehensive Plan's
greenways map does not call for these areas to be required to be
dedicated for greenway/open space purposes.
In order to provide better opportunities for residents of this
subdivision to have access to the open space tracts and to also
provide better pedestrian circulation for other purposes, a minimum
10 foot wide pedestrian pathway tract, or extension of tract A,
will be required between the north-south street in Phase 2 and the
extension of SW Gaarde Street. This may require that the pathway be
provided in a relatively steep area; therefore, the pathway to be
provided by the applicant may need to be either a stairs or else may
need to be a soft-surfaced pathway. The applicant should work with
the Engineering Department with regard to the location of the
pathway, its construction, and pedestrian warning signs on SW Gaarde
Street.
5. In order to comply with Policy 4.2.1, a condition is warranted to
require the developer to submit an erosion control plan ensuring
compliance with erosion control standards for the Tualatin River
basin, as part of the grading permit application.
6. This subdivision proposal complies with Policy 7.1.2, 7.3.1, and
7.4.4 because the applicant will be required to extend public sewer
and water systems to this site prior to development or else the
development of this site will be dependent upon others extending
these utilities to the property. Extension of a sanitary sewer to
serve this area is presently being contemplated by the Unified
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT
PAGE 18
. ,
Sewerage Agency. The prospective developer of this subdivision may
need to work with USA to assure that the extension will be
constructed prior to expiration of approval for the proposed
development plan. The Tigard Water District did not raise any
significant concerns with regard to the District's ability to
provide for the additional water demand created by the proposed
subdivision although the Water District has pointed out revisions
that will need to be made to the applicant's preliminary plans for
extending water service through the site.
In addition, development of this site will require provisions for
underground installation of phone, electricity, and cable television
lines. No significant concerns were raised by the providers of
these utilities.
7. The proposed development would provide for a safe and efficient
street system as required by Policy 8.1.1 for the reasons stated in
sections 1 and 8 of the section above describing the proposed
subdivision/planned development's consistency with Community
Development Code public road requirements.
8. The subdivision proposal complies with Policy 8.1.3 because required
improvements to the public streets and utilities within this
proposed subdivision will be consistent with City of Tigard
standards, except as specifically recommended for the variance to
the local street gradient standard.
VI. CONCLUSION AND DECISION
AM- The Planning Commission concludes that the proposed subdivision/planned
development, with minor modifications, will promote the general welfare of the
City and will not be significantly detrimental nor injurious to surrounding land
uses, provided that development that occurs after this decision complies with
applicable local state and federal laws.
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 Commission approves
Subdivision/Planned Development Review proposal SUB 92-0005/PDR 92-0003 and the
associated Sensitive Lands Review SLR 92-0002 and Variance VAR 92-0010 requests
for the proposed Vista Point subdivision subject to the conditions which follow.
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED AND PUBLIC IMPP.OVEMENTS
SHALL BE COMPLETED OR COMPLETION SHALL BE FINANCIALLY ASSURED PRIOR TO RECORDING
THE FINAL PLAT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, STAFF CONTACT IS
CHRIS DAVIES OF THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
1. The preliminary plat shall be limited to the creation of 64 lots. All
lots shall be fully dimensioned on the plat and shall be consistent with
R-4.5 zoning district dimensional requirements.
Lots 18 and 19 shall be revised to provide for a minimum 25 feet of road
frontage. (A private street consistent with the standards of Code Section
18.108.070.A may be developed in this area to meet this standard. Any
9 FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 19
such private street should be located in a tract separate from individual
lots. ownership and maintenance responsibilities for this road should be
41 specified on the plat and/or the covenants, codes, and restrictions for
the subdivision.)
Tracts A and B shall be platted as a common open space tract for the
subdivision to be maintained privately by the homeowners in Vista Point
subdivision. The manner by which these tracts are to be maintained by the
homeowners association shall be approved by the Planning Division. The
plat shall be revised to provide an extension of Tract A to the proposed
north-south street in Phase Two in order to provide access to Tract A for
all residents of the subdivision. Alternatively, pedestrian access to
Tract A may be provided by easements across lots from the street to the
tract. Access to the tract shall be provided by a minimum 5 foot wide
soft surfaced trail. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division.
2. The subdivision/planned development may be constructed in two phases as
proposed. Total development time for the proposed planned development may
not exceed seven years.
3. 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: public right-of-way and
utility construction 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. Areas not covered by structures or
impervious surfaces shall be re-vegetated as soon as possible after
completion of grading. A copy of the tree removal permit and approved
grading plan shall be available on-site during all tree removal
activities. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division.
4. A grading plan shall= be submitted showing the existing and proposed
contours including elevations at the corners of the lots tied to the top
of curb elevations, as shown in the public improvement plans. If trees
are to be removed as part of grading activities, the grading permit is not
valid without a tree removal permit also being issued.
5. 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."
6. No construction plans for this subdivision shall be approved until the
Engineering Department has received evidence that right of way has been
dedicated and assurance has been posted to assure construction of
improvements to provide public roadway access to the subdivision
consistent with City roadway standards.
7. No construction plans for this subdivision shall be approved until the
Engineering Department has received evidence that sanitary sewer service
will be made available to the property and that construction of necessary
off-site sanitary sewer lines is assured.
8. Two (2) sets of detailed public improvement plans and profile construction
drawings shall be submitted for preliminary review to the Engineering
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 20
e
Department. Seven (7) sets of approved drawings and one (1) itemized
construction cost estimate, all prepared by a Professional Engineer, shall
I. be submitted for final review and approval (NOTE: these plans are in
addition to any drawings required by the Building Division and should only
include sheets relevant to public improvements.
9. Approval of the requested variance to the 12 percent grade standard is
approved to a maximum grade of 14 percent for a distance no greater that
250 feet.
10. The applicant shall be required to pay the fees in lieu of construction of
a water quality facility as established under the guidelines of unified
Sewerage Agency Resolution and order No. 91-47. NOTE: This is a two part
fee. The first portion is paid with the public improvements which is for
that portion of the development which increase the impervious area within
the public right-of-way. The second portion is paid at building permit
issuance which is for each individual lot.
11. The applicant shall provide for a temporary turn around at the terminus of
the local street which serves lots 16 through 22.
12. The applicant shall submit a traffic study per Washington County
Resolution and order 86-95. The City and County shall review this study
and condition any necessary improvements at the SW 1218t and Gaarde
intersection prior to final approval of the construction plans.
13. The applicant shall dedicate- additional right-of-way to provide 33 feet
from centerline of S.W. 121st Avenue frontage, including adequate corner
radius.
`y 14. The applicant shall investigate whether the septic tank and/or drainfield
for the residences on tax lot 400 of WCTM 2S1 30C to the north are located
on the subject site. If the septic system(s) intrudes onto this property,
the applicant shall show how development of this property will not violate
standards for the placement of septic systems or else shall arrange for
the connection of these residences to the sanitary sewerage system. STAFF
CONTACT: Brad Roast, Building Division.
15. As part of the public improvement plans, the applicant shall apply for and
provide the necessary information to obtain a 'Joint Permit' for erosion
control.
16. The applicant shall demonstrate that storm drainage runoff can be
discharged into the existing drainageways without significantly impacting
properties downstream.
17. The SW Gaarde Street extension shall be built to major collector standards
from SW 121st Avenue to proposed Lot 52.
18. Concurrent with construction of phase II, the applicant shall provide for
the grading of the SW Gaarde Street extension in Phase II. Dedication of
this right-of-way shall be required with recordation of the plat for phase
II.
19. Full width street improvements (including traffic control devices, mailbox
clusters, concrete sidewalks, driveway aprons, curbs, asphaltic concrete
pavement, sanitary sewers, storm drainage, streetlights, and underground
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 21
utilities) shall be installed within the subdivision. Improvements shall
be designed and constructed to local street standards; except for the SW
Gaarde Street extension which shall be built to major collector standards.
20.
Profiles of SW 121st Avenue, SW Gaarde Street, the Proposed SW Gaarde
extension, and the local internal streets that may be extended shall be
required to be submitted. The profiles shall extend 300 feet beyond the
subject site showing the existing grade and potential future grades.
21.
The applicant shall submit plans, obtain Washington County/City of Tigard
Engineering Division approval, and obtain a facility permit from
Washington County for construction of the following public improvements:
a. 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 site's SW 121st Avenue frontage.
b. Any traffic improvements required by the City and county in response
to the applicant's required traffic study.
C. Construction of the 121st/Gaarde intersection to County standards.
22.
The applicant shall assure that the access to SW 121st Avenue will be
adequately illuminated. Plans shall be approved by the Washington County
Engineering Division.
23.
Construction --,of the proposed public improvements shall not commence until
after the Engineering Department has reviewed and approved the public
411 improvements - plans, a street opening permit or construction compliance
agreements has been executed, a developer-engineer agreement has been
executed, and all permit fees have been paid.
24. The applicant shall make an appointment for a pre-construction meeting
with the City of Tigard Engineering Department after approval of the
public improvement plans but before starting work on the site. The
applicant, the applicant's engineer and contractor shall be required to
attend this meeting prior to receiving the approved plans and permits.
25. Prior to the plat being recorded with Washington County the applicant
shall provide a 100 percent performance assurance or letter of commitment.
7:s an alternative the applicant may have the plat recorded after the
public improvements have been accepted by the City of Tigard and has
posted the appropriate maintenance bond.
26. One-foot non-access reserve strips shall be established along all SW 121st
Avenue and Gaarde Street frontages, except at approved access locations.
27. The finished slope of all lots with cuts or fills should have a maximum
slope of 2:1, or else a professional engineer shall certify the stability
of any steeper slopes. Prior to the issuance of building permits for
construction on all lots with slopes in excess of 25 percent, building
permit applicants shall demonstrate that the proposed structure will be
sited and designed to ensure structural stability. Foundation plans shall
be stamped by a registered engineer. Approved erosion control measures
shall be employed throughout the construction process on individual
building lots. STAFF CONTACT: Brad Roast, Building Division (639-4171).
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 22
- 8' LANOSCAWE BUFFER BEHIND ALL PLANT MATERUIL IN THE VISUAL CLEARANCE - -
R.O.W. fSEE PLANT LIST) TRIANGLES SHALL MEET C.O.T. VISION
STANDARDS, SECTION 1&iD2,020
CHANCELLOR LINDEN I F
25• ~ 50'
n
DARTMOUTH STREET
~O
BEARBERRY COTONEASTER
1 tRitCTION 1fl VILLAGE GREEN ZELKOVA
NT ~ wAL cLtARANCE PLAN
CHANCELLOR LMrOEN - >rO' O/C
~f W~~ VILLAGE GREEN ZELIfO1M - SO" O/C
e' SIDEWALK fTYP.)
r
-TURN LANE
~
I
_-:v v ~ -
v. - _ _ _
40'0/C DARTMOUTH STREET
-
BEARBERRY COTONEASTER ~ L ORNAMENTAL SIiRUB (SEE PLANT LIST)
CHANCELLOR LINDEN EVERGREEN SCREEN SHRUB (SEE PLANT LIST)
DRIVEWAY & TURN LANE PLAN
SCALE: 1 "=30'-0"
GROUNDCOVER SHRUB
(SEE PLANT LIST)
_
~a+
sofa
g
,..s
a.
w~
I-
1l.i
1~-
~
Q
F-
0.u Oft/Y2
0./yn. M~9MN
Dn.n r1F'4
CheeMW ~
Rmnanf
10/t/A2
~ ~G
° • ~I~pfr
r
r (iiiL,tiVV
i'~ ~t~,
~1.
Shrrl Muniber
MP-1
4-296-0601
28. Private storm drain lines shall be provided for lots 7-15, 18, 31-34, and
62 to allow roof drains to be directed to public storm sewers or existing
drainageways. Easements should be provided where storm sewers cross other
properties. A joint use and maintenance agreement should be recorded for
each lot utilizing a common private storm drain. STAFF CONTACT: Brad
Roast.
C
29. Utility plans will need to be revised to place water mains on the south
and east sides of streets. A 16 inch diameter water main will need to be
provided along the SW Gaarde Street extension, unless a smaller diameter
main is approved by the Tigard Water District. Final approval of the
plans for water main location and size, including water meters, will need
to be approved jointly by the Fire and Water Districts. The applicant
shall be responsible for providing the City with proof of the water
District and Fire District's approval of the revised water service plan.
APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID ONLY IF THE FINAL PLAT L-R PHASE ONE 1S SUBMITTED FOR
APPROVAL WITHIN EIGHTEEN MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS DECISION. THE
MAXIMUM TIME FOR COMPLETION OF ALL PHASES OF THE APPROVED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IS
SEVEN YEARS.
It is further ordered that the applicant and parties to these proceedingsbe
notified of the entry of-this order.
PASSED: This -2--day of July, 1992, by the Planning Commission of the City of
Tigard.
JO/Vista Point
FINAL ORDER SUB 92-05/PDR 92-03/VAR 92-10 VISTA POINT PAGE 23