Loading...
S 8-83 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions please contact City of Tigard Records Department. • � A (,. Gi -ry; e � +:�� c rl' � - 'W'K Irt 5 1r� F r t v. I � - - ..... n .., ._. .. ..r ...w...�.,.tn � .,t ,. Century 21 Homes S 8-83 PD 13900 SW 121st ,Ave. 251 3CC 401 • 251 4 1400 • • • • • • • • ,�, �.... .."__.._...,,. ,.,_ ,.....,....-........,.,..-.�,,......cr�„_.�...�_..k,,.,M...-..,.w_,,...:.,..;r•,..,�_......4.�.. .......... ......_._:,r,..w_.,......._.M,.,�,:. -.4a�r.H«�+r�w,,;. �.-„,..., ..,_..._..,..,,w..;'�., `. .,...�[1�--�.:..J..,�F..,...,.....-..,. `��M,.,_ �....+�°,,.N�,�., M`' �, �. y • • t ; • ;rte r k • • art y ”, ' ar '" • fr ,g. c. WASHINGTON COUNTY. /Li.. i .t ADMINISTRATION BUILDING - 150 N, FIRST AVENUE ,''9 --/ ,/e,iCe 4 HILLSBORO, OREGON 97124 DEPT,OF LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION September t 20, 1985 n Engineering/Survey Division Ind Floor \' (603)648-8761 Bill Monahan Planning Director City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Or. 97223 RE: SONATA PARK/S.W. GAARDE STREET The Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation has reviewed plans for the, Sonata Park Subdivision and is unable to approve the current street and access design. The design issues at this time are the same as those that existed in early 1984 when the project, formerly named Park Place, was reviewed. After lengthy discussions between the City and the County, the Tigard City Council adopted the following revisions to the Park Place project design at their meeting on April 23, 1984: 1. Elimination of the "T" intersection and lots 21 and 22 2. Preserve a 60' right-of-way 3. Construct a road with a 40' width 4. Stripe the road for two lanes, or no stripes at B11 • 5. Take steps to reduce the access points to Gaarde, lots 15, 23, 24, and 25, (now lots 14, 31, 32 and 33 respectively). As shown each lot has access. The number of access points should be reduced to two; 6. The road wi l l be designed to City strue.ural standards A chronology of, the creation and adoption of these conditions is contained in the attached° merno. The current design for Sonata Park has met conditions 1, 2, 3, and 6 but has not met condition 5. Lots 14, 31, 32 and 33 are still shown as each having direct access to the new section of S.W. Gaarde Street., According to condition 5, no more than, two accesses For these four lots are allowed to S.W. Gaarde Street. There are two solutions to this design in consistency: Solution A. Design ,lots 31, 32 and 33 as flag lots with a common access drive extending southward between lots 26 and 36 to the existing private street named d "Tract C°. Desi 9 n lot 14 as a flag lot than access drive extendi ng to °Tract A" . . between lots S and 9, an aqua! oPPoi.Mun tty p loy,-4 ■ a J Sonata Park/SW Gaarde �,ereet k; Page 2 0 ■ n Solution B: Provide a common drive for lots 31, 32 and 33 accessing S.W. ;;garde Street on lot 32. Lot 14 would access S.W. Gaarde Street directly across from the combined access on lot 32, . while maintaining Washington County access spacing standard of 120 feet between drives. °`' ,: Washington County perfers Solution A because it provides for no private drive accesses directly to S.W. Gaarde Street and maintains the functional class of S.W. Gaarde Street as a major collector. However, either nne of the potential solutions must be implemented before the Department of Land Use and Transportation can approve the Sonata Park Subdivision design. Once the agreed upon condition as approved by your City council are met, we will approve these plans immediately. e' P'. If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact me. St `'''--- -,2e. CA-------" !..* '4( Richard A. Daniels, Director �� • Land Use and Transportation e�� CC: Bob Jean, City Administrator /\b ) Bruce Warner, Deputy Director � � �`__ Jerry Parmenter r. � /1 John Rosenberger (Brent Curtis °� ��l 0 Dave Ori n dol h I / f/- •4?„/ ivv . 0%2 /, ?'5 s) 4. / s,,, , , /cp 0 VO L.) )010)3 1P:\ C-3 •ill .<?'). \!" 1 (.7 \41* /7/:\' &N /01/4 4/*4' /<C) , <<\ ° 4/) 1> LI*? # /C-c)* . SONATA/G /<C:7 ,„,(-) N.- c)* A;;-"" , Q'.-/ ) ,,i'lx- gic2'ci ?...4\'` f' r 4. i . . 6 i, c 1 WASHINGTON COU . ," Inter—Department Corresp6ndence i Date September 18, 1985 , To : Jerry 'Parmenter, Engineering/Survey Manager From : Kevin Martin, Senior Planner / Subject : SONATA PARK CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, N At your request I have prepared a chronology of the creation and status , of road conditions for Sonata Park subdivision (formerly Park Place) : 1 . ) March 6, 1984- City of Tigard Planning Commission holds public hearing on Park Place subdivision (Attachment A). I ° w ;., 2. ) March 6, 1984 -- Washington County submits testimony to Tigard Planning Commission objecting to the street design (Attachment B). 0 3. ) March 6, 1984 Tigard Planning Commission approves Park Place .',. subdivision essentially 'as submitted (Attachment C). a' 4. ) 21 ,) Mar 2 1984 - Washington County appeals Tigard Planning Commission decision to Tigard City Council (Attachment D). - . 5. ) April 9, 1984 - Tigard City Council hears appeal . Hearing is continued to allow developer, City, County and NPO to discuss issues. 6. ) April 16, 1984 —City and County staff meet to work out a compromise, 7. ) April 16, 1984 - City and County staff meets with developer and NPO to present and discuss compromise (Attachment E). 0 8. ) April 23, 1984 - Tigard City Council reopens public hearing and considers compromise developed by City and County (Attachment F . 9. ) April 24, .1984 - City Council approves Park Place subdivision subject to modifications agreed to by City and County staffs (Attachment C) , This chronology clearly indicates that the modifications requested by the County were formally recognized by the City of Tigard and were a part of the public record. kM:mb , r c: Brent Curtis, Planning Manager Jane Jensen-plc:wan Principal Planner 0, ,\ / . I - v + - - ' -Allff11111111111LIPNIIIII . , ,977-#94s k T- ii ......., . ,, .., . . !/ / i I I / 1\ ;S_ ;1N ;91� /'�",,w,..,,,,,i,� 1 I ( : I / 1 I If r W WATERS-WS \` / f _ 1 \ ---0tr,46,7512- VAJ-ve. I / I ; _ �• I m rtp-- HTvPAM r t / ; ---- IrxiST LiEtE jjj r t ��i� 1 7 I A PRELIMINARY PLAY r � I R,� I _ A PLACE - i t I �I I I / I ,J FLANKED t�5VEL©PMEt.1T a 3t16D1 J lS:oN $`; / / % I ! t+ t / / �� CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES, INC, _ t f ! j j �7 - 1 ewNE!2 • DEVEt�or°ER • ENGIE1rR ttt / � � J [ F F.D. box 1405 1160 S.4.f-IAaELFERt-t 1 I Na�TH UA1.•A.T 1�1, OREGON 1ioto2 1.84-2762 T V F / ' ,�-� / i • T/�x t-cT 40l u.I SECS. 3 JO MAP 25 13CG / Tr�x {.or 1400 114 3sc. tssaP 2s i 1.1 s I I \ T:2S, R I W. vi.H., crr OP TV 'P..D, _ 11 -v I - /11� / - ( ` vJASN1EIGTo�1 COUNT`(, OREGON- r,J" F _ , . ‘ I i ..1-74..i 1 t SGALE: tr1=1a�' fr'- I {1--71::1/". ' . . i : I I r I r Y �{ +=r1 �.IT>,1 4.6 [ . t 7‘°� t•, i r - 330' t / jL - - - - - — - i S.W. RASE-! �� ' ` I f .•' / c `1 a `i2 62`' I t'2 !off 5 �r -3s i v i srA ©R• • T P'C krl�P'G~ it- 5 - `� i -_ -.•I -/� 'o 2 ` { pr l .°1F-1---4t--18) . m /\/,/\//\ '�'25� 'i . 1 1 ,-- ***.'. ..i.1 i- i ' / . 1, { ft ip TAI i3' ar. wfY - L---� - -P.« .- Y Taff t.}F�;.if r • s �JECi��O�j .in wj! 1 t1� j ' � • S \lr� jV` 24 -8---1�rD �" r 1 F- t t Y 1,2-- + ✓ •- - -.' YV,.e.. [ i ' - - - I- -YY+ fr• - - _a - _ 00 'a .•_ i - - 1- '‘. ' \ 1 Q 1 wi M R} • I t �_ r' .� L- N 2¢- .. -:. c� \ IA I $d�- ! ��:, t 72 oC� (oo` CaaT (08' io /- i '� _ -_\- _-. . I- i 4.\,/ ' �• 1 1 1 ,,;11 Ark %\ r, i'.-�� 2 ,I1 I 1 I I± 9 { 8 i . - P= I :1 , 1 i ,i`�� 17-ia- p--:-•- � .23- 6 G��\ ,�� -•z'I—�'! /raa�,( I•<;J b� t! .....,U'te. 1 ffyy s fi I /ft / ■9 SG -3 4 jt •�\, - \ .' T! f`<GT s ��`1S•[ �`� if 94______,_ N` ; -`c9-,,,/ -•,\. 90. ��� �r.nt ' ' _I --N- \ i I - x . CxTR�t)Et1s3 t 3� ' _ �' o - i r ' IN5tDE E�G�OF FED= tip' 2'� •' /w '` E -4► -5• �� i `' t t 'i t . , ESTt-1141 GORIe.tD p_.tro) �'d. s Soeg�y / �jo �_ (p ""t. k -.. ‘ . L--1 r. tt lSTt�.tL r l fo PAN`Kta lCs _ e'g -ctj* \\ w 3 ..9=..__I A 13 stQE' s%645 o 3� i _ 'ip ...____,:i `': _ � -_ �i �Y 1 LL � .il a lit L. 3 -- j----' _ A 1 [ PKtvATC Roavw'AYs. r`—: 29 i� [r~ k•�`111 C� ��. ��5, ` f I EQ— `�.,��! I 39- - - ‘ ‘ \ -\J- - A.. --‘ :‘ i i lv, III__ I_ i 1 -i_.7_7-__-_-_— __._—N,—__;-1 Ir.......C.1.-____!_L___ _---: _ f-��rPACT q -- �- _ :u, S Q r Its t -------- . F'A1`Kip&TNts SIDE° GAS-s ssr-iat-tr y 5 Klt;6 HIS SIDC o PAR T 4 I.AhlDSG�.PE srF4P' - - _ . 1 . •. __._- :.', . ,. , ,', , ,. CITYOFTIGARD May 9; 1985 WASH1NGTONCOUNTY,OREGON ,.`' James M. Polak : :: Century 21 Properties, Inc. • 7160 SW Hazel Fern Road ' • Tualatin; OR 97062 Dear Mr. Polak: '• . On April 16, 1985, the Planning Commission extetded the preliminary plat , approval for Park Place Phase I (S 8-83PD) until October 22; 1985. The ' . Commission also approved a six month extension on May 7, 1985 for Shadow Park • ' •••• • Subdivision (S 7-83/V 7-84) which will expire on November 1; 1985. In response to your letter of April 24, 1985, the Planning Director and I are somewhat puzzled by the, statement made .by the Appraiaal: ,Group regarding the availabili.lty of City servicee And facilities for the Park Place property. It has bren the City s intent that utility 'extensions to the property would be • the rponsibility of the applicant, No public improvement plans for sewer facilities or street construction are contemplated for this general area. The preliminary plat,�approval ,for Park Place is conditioned upon the applicant • providing the necessary utilities and streets By virtue , of the zoning 4 applied to the property and the preliminary plat approval, the City has made' a ' coin 1tment to serve the project, provided the necessary line exceneions, etca are constructed.•. . `,, . lf, •you have any questions or need additional information)'1 regarding the .X - ;•...extensions., granted , by the COmwissi'on or services for Park Platce. r ,ple ise contact me. ': ' . Stn"erelv'«�, . . .',: r 1,.':[r t:, '.:,,r,, '''''),e,r0111V,e: '';:' ; ..!,;':','",(,,,",;,,,,.,);:, :,..,r::;,, 44.,,:,;;;;,. ,L.,. ;, : ; : , ; ".;,,,: ;:'. , , c: ' ' ' r . :.;, ,:: a M1 fie.1 i •�' _ . '� q � l''`'':'yy'�'u ' � tik^�1�� f��'�t� � � d Y �� ; 4 z' '. .b�tl t ', i a ", - ��„, i ',•!'1 th',S.a Liilleia ,�,14i,- A''JkA. �4,- _1kr4 , P�' 1 4i,j, i', yaf� 0. ■y�Ih+ t�,i�ty,T�y? 'l' ° ” "dk �1 ( J 'f m" .r. k ^ 6 „r y,'' *AB"soci,L3tt"'.�PltA ne{T1 .,, t� -,, '� .'�!`f'1.:' t:' , , . .�S ^ 1 d 1 p yp[�, �u (/, y,,,',IIt,, ,31r A 4 y+ir aimj ! ' ' ,,% ;4_.- ,v _ I (KSLsbs,yf133Ni�., lf 4 o .W'','6 '''','-'1 ',' • it rl pj Y'' �} , .��• . i' �p!#- z az;iV� rt dftA i q4 ),I , yy ri t.,x.11 ,..'i^' 4. 1 e �,i 1, ., ',r , `i' "r+ w,'.y`;,} e'a 4,i., l' `,,,t 1;,.14^',?;,',,,*,,,,'''',''.W4 kk p,'r,i t tl ,e -,•. „ y ,4, +. 0 r, i,, +�I df] f 1 �M"'Yu'A "-M1, x ay i;!'Cq y�,k' a!:,a �a,4 1,,, iii ,„ .;„,,,t,,04 t Ya ,'b n ''. ' "'1+ Cx,t 311, ?,a ( ,, a' ' a, ;:.4N,rj4MTA +'1 1 ���a ;h ape,r, Rd .1, ," } , q,ft :; +sf W,, is .ti. ,*. i. °i3, ' ,fi' +^i,k y t c !, °w1 # 'N.,1 ri:4> .r,, dr" ,+.�. 'r..,,l ', �,7'' '�;,.�P ,. r .�, ,.� ,k..L ., 90,4/P G• '9 , . '..4 {4 ��j rt^t. +,a ,7 U.,*a. .., iy,�n,'rl, 4v7 � l�o.i- �.�. ,r��`w;..k"���.�.,. 't��,�1,�'.1 '01 it' ,e, r � e„� ((9� pq�� , � 'n r ' :.. '' -.'I "� ,�,: ,.� '� , ".'"' .ne,,,A ., �r t �,vn.�,�� �1 .a� � t4`"r;�, �i.73�� `bu ` n ,�+r,Yl�,wbA"Sa•�.�" apt.,1..4'ri�ri'1"��, .,ti r,,. i v .r,,r.',w;A1 ,,i,.x,,1,^,,y rar,1,' !,1?,it.n1 1i'A r.41 l{ a t;,1, P„i �!.. r 4�. ^', � � ,iv� ', ",.4ro ' *r ;'a.M �' aaa,°N, 1 ; i ;�e1��r�^!vix:C w 'bF” � &4, � "R; o�• i�1 c " '�o�' : fh ,Nd ,i,� �; ,�7,t 4�. 1, •'"?�,,1, ,ray,, ♦ �, '" , p{ .��.. eft ,`,; -s ",' 4,, , ..,,,,' N� ',u �� i �'3 h'W'.Cw, a t .t 'rt S4",e?�,'',p• � `�.�'�:•w1 �:v+iw t 4 ;�, � ..P i�.�',w,a„ r; ��, t; �'�P � .4�3,N'��' kt t,n H., �, i.. �.., ,..t,r.#� r� p ,�..,,� Y .; ,�' .;t+T^ � '(,wa 'w1},,3::;,, �1,� wa n' �N ."� . r' 6• ;r �,it� , ,,� iY� •^t I,° '' V''.r 9��y - "^'' p�� e. "S,.j' rda(,tp+1 '.7i, ¢,,y.' `M't 'a ,I� ,.ti, ;,�V; '! i ,1'"lnl,+f ,9' .I 'C`r�t. ,.�":..�- ,v, .-c ��A��'u i..', �...^.� •, i n ,.r i> 'hE.���, e�. M'�,:, ,.,�I �� ��,a t r 1„4's ti',�> r-�,�P,:'''k� i,�, ,» .�' ',!k i � ,..�4�, ���_�� 6,+`. '"d° %. i.},r ,��' ..7� � �i� �., ,� T� +��, ,.W ,.54,,� " "�I, ♦ � -i. „�, 7�r, D s',1 -•r�1.Y�� ;,a„+ Si t. }., 'i, li�i sir "w �q i . '-i',.i i t•. l�, ,. y a '":t'JJ p;Y. ,3 't, ,M`#.. ,k *�«� 7,. ,�` x, f*_ 'a iti...��-�. .C,�_ � n�,� �r� .1 '� -z*'t`,y ,�1,�M1 '.� a 9^ y ,� f',.�. � p,,,,,}'� •�� +i ;i, !n.'sa,`�.Y � ,i,.:,4, i��,.lr� .S, +�,. �c.. � 1h.y , ���,'{' �1'i7'�'� +1,.6,,. =„e..t'. �Wa��",.,� �i'�,�, ..1,. M a Y {.�. ,•.p�, t, pi .�� w ale,�r+ ,.« s�fP:,'�S"cTkfc r 1.. ,,., ..;,.1 i� .a �'YA."14.nkrir.,, ',yk,, .v y"�9�r d' �� tii l y ..�. ...,... a, 7! �ri�a'�t ,�'+p1 e.,a, ..5":.rM i� MM,, .i,. '1C�:� 9A� '�{���a��'�+ � ,. .. � r,. � V .., � MP'x�-, ... .��. +A«.n ��M'"%e,��, V:a •mrlf„«� 'i� . i' '�7� �. r P 111"V4 ,1111111% 'Aigir.511°1° Maas* ENTER THE WORLL OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES IETLYR vs\ 11 r M April 24, 1985 APR 2C; 1995 :' Keith Liden, Planner City of Tigard CFFY OF T IGMD P.O. Box 23397 PLANNING DEPT. a r Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Parkplace Dear Mr. Liden: f' As I mentioned to you yesterday, our lender is requesting a will serve" letter concerning city services to Parkplace future phases. We intend to develop an additional 40 lots in 1986, and 40 more 1its in 1987 as phase 3. I am enclosing 2 pages of the appraisal report that was done in September 1984. I have highlighted the statements that have con- L _. cerned the lender, Citizens Savings and Loan. Could you please draft a letter to my attention that states that sewer and water will be available to the portion of the site that. is earmarked for future phases? Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely„ 11, 44, James. M. Polak Viq 2President ghtury 21 Properties, Inc. JOidt • .., CENTURY 21 PR...o P8 RTlES Va h Coast Plaza • O BoX 1408 1 0 S.W. I���tx�M,Fern��� �+ ��telat%1i OR OM • (503)"684-2/62 • Ni.; p .r r, _ d' 7. 44, City of Tigard has plans to continue SW Gaarde Street� ':cross the The Gi t, ^ ► c.� �. .. subject property and connect up with either SW 132nd or St' 135th Streets . ; on the west side of the subject property. Until that decision is made and the placement of the street determined, the balance of the property I. cannot be platted. • Both SW Gaarde and SW 12i st Streets are harrow, two-lane patted roads ' ig with l ittle or no shoulder. Considering the width and condition of ' these roads, traffic i= f a i r l heavy.,, Ingress and egress. to the subject ec t `. parcels are apt to be difficult and hazardous even if stop signs are placed on both streets The propo eo Par ; Place Subdivision lies ap Q.r+imat e l + j h w e 7ou an t_rs o.l T a m i l e west of SW P a c i f i c Highway (US 991,rJ) and about two m i l t s from, i': • Tigard 'city center. , Wash i notc+n Square reg'i c:ri t' .:rp;, ,ng :enter , _ about 2,= miles to the northeast off S hor i=_ ;e.r . .<_s.: Th,s zubject does of . have particularly coo: , . __ to the , _t_ . F The immediate area of the subject A s a mix of smz i ' farms, generally ten • to sixty acres in sizes and a few smaller siubdi, s,icns. Several larger subdivisions have been derrelones alsing SW Walnut street to the north of the subject. Phases of some of these subdivi -n remain undeveloped. r The overall tren: , _ tc,'.„3r`s :.�.bd i v i si on development.'1 opme .�.' ' l l: Legal Cons i derat tan- The subject has been annexed to the C i t> of i uz;�o _.r+W �.arr�►a: i'tt~ T+ Tigard zoning designation PJ4.5, which allows 4,5 dwe l , t ng units to the �-` u acre and a minimum lot size �::f 7 ,5CiC' swore feet . fl. i The subdivision has beer, .,:-anted PJD status t,,wh i of rreserues the ove�raf l ,: dens i t`r`, but permits :l u_tar i n► of undersized lot to _'i l o w ; arge areas :,, ■ to remain open for 'recreational use . ''i ' ' At t h i s time, only Ch:5 e I t e n C o 'a s s t r g eight '`w e W t, t;M. 1 r r_^i 'a�`W s t a S'.4 :;‘,1,; :1st.• has bear ul at 4.d and approved by the City .e.: . ::d �-e y �,. nt >,,. y of the balance i��' ' ta1e s;site is contingent or several f,,,:tors. � c r ') `I �«' acres .L t 'Y'f +S r,r' F„ w .u,1..L 1" 'F the '�P 1 . The ea_ ,erl : 11 .a� o Phase a I car. bg, 7 at :ed tur i n�, a -w t. r +. Mr a ,•5 Ci > agrees on ►•"lye• e the e.ltens. .n of S,,, ..raarde, Street is to .* ;,r c o n r e c i; r ;=r. 2 Y w e u e 1 o Lt m e rt . of t 9 f's w a .ter l ',!."9 4,." .7a: - ,. :�.,, t. i'�+'s a in t or I 'i. creation of access' .i:ori sewer, water .;;u rt'ra , 4,: a s �rr� d that the location o the Goa r'de -ee extension t,+�.i � be -. i t i a d` , P I t f: 1. t .t1 ! 'v determined within a 1,.r and that an adds ttanay 'cts can tea Cl a Yted -; and devel f~peed on the easterly portion of Phaae d 1L F J., rt ►, ��;� �. � i�q,r�1�,t r�n ,f,� #��r�, ��'ri~~��� 4�� c,��:�,'�.. ..�1v, ....: .,�.,�:t���d`f i�� �(t� :64 � �- w ill �&.;.1M.1 h.ot_ : 1 e..:. to to . . ._tP':.n? r'"' ., . .� : ...�i' ,: . �iT,fr, ,. t t,� P' area' ....... t . l ,.4 t r SAL , , „ , .. ,.. ,.. " , , . { , 71' D r',....:Xt , 1 4. .„„lriNM hn tr 4 t tl . • ,. . , , , , , , , „. _-_----,_....---.-..,,..,,-.......:.._.....,... ,—..,,,iikTawkc*i*a***raiiiiiiikiiif0*Mtk.VriV , .. p/ ,....... 1, , ..... . . . . . .. . f,___ - , e,,,, ' ee.• 8. , ,• . . .. , 4iifE.iii)frlrfaifi(i,iAeOT,o,ixr,et.oe:2Ra,,ViftienifiZD-Wd46Ae'n.;WZt47iTii7Fjti'4, 6'4f,iTi'fr„rais'ic&T:,::_ . . ,. , . PtiriIh'"teEDrrnie:fb'E;',:,,14,:rfktfte3'fi7tiFirt:',IFitlii'f,'Tiii,TV:2•:akTftiV,A',a'ia:',&r.'e146'iike,e . 4-,Pn'cisieean-c;'req17,1.'X'AITIP,E6VgiiiilikEOVIde;;;bie;::::;::tak-14,Ei',•4,0rAfletieffil3!,',Tgetidnia,W,'::',Leei 4,4iir'''',4ifiriiiiiiCr'i',71,','*146,4::'- :51iietlito:-""the'eeareae"earee,,,,,s,e,,vekkeeti'v,,rwa427iT40:TKi:'.:Triiik: _ ,-----,,,--" '.,,:,.,4, ' ' t . ' l! L,"'''.4":t,.. -,,,,,s,,,,!--.77- 4;f1'; 64.-1''tfi:4 ;81-,1':::1-titt:2,.',0,f,'60b i'.6 .."-ki,;e414,1::,:k.fiW.:3Avt,t t'efl'Y'ft'.'.5'"-a.dr'e , . ■'f. , A conversation with the property owner on the north side of Parcel I e e revealed that they believe one of their outbuildings encroaches on the 1 • . subject property along the northern boundarY. 'The encroachment was not , , e ;- apparent at the time of physical inspection o4 tns site but snceId . checked out further, Northwest Natural Gas nas a 1 foot easement r',- . across the site with buried natural gas lines. , T1 ,, 'With these exceptions there appear to be no othee adverse ea;emente, Or encroachments which would impede development c..:: Phaee I o4 the sub,ieet • , property. i, amalLeand Demand , . , The developers, of the subject property, Centue 21 Prespentiec for t ,,, Quaestor, Inc. , intend to retain and build out all 6i the lots in Phase ( 1 with both custom and epeculative homes. While the site has value as bare land, the oreater, value is the 41r; ered, subdivision , : The ..': marketability of the lots is dependent on tne ,?,:".31I-.!lliC c whether or not afforde,ble funding : 5 availe,de i : nee,i residential . construction. . , , , 7 eibsorption of building lots in the immediate aese of the eubject appear; to have been slow oeer tne past three years, 1-104,,,zver', :,:, -Few mil . es awoy. . in the PicK's Landing area ov Tigard Heoh Eeh:61 , subdivision sales . have been brisk. Th area has hed seoe- :rd water lihe; in foe a . . , number of years and oevelociment is attractive i.,,hd e,ell planned. Accese is very diood. Despite the shar.y e :;. te eecreihg ':: a r; ._ interest rates, develcpment in the Pick' s Land,n; aeea, dc:Itinues te.. be . . , " succ very essful . Several , large parcels of undeveloped ', and eeresee ;ree. --eeeeeee4e1 i , . • deeelopment are locaeee .n tne .e'in'eedte Ciein t :ef tiie eeer.:,ect , M'oe,, e . of these parcels face peptlems s'iimiI..er tc ,t,i,e see , :t ,,n thet ;et.ler , water lines are not ava, lable and the ,tsrein it di44iduIt to develop. , - When tiaarce, Street' is ecioleted through td 1:7tt, dr :22ndl it is 1 , . several new subdivisions will be spawnee',. . , . lots PropiPeed for tees subject prOpe-te t,re veailer than most elf lots which have been deJeIpped in this are ar.d the lower cost aer lot these smaller lbts snould generate construetidn o4 more affordable , 1H housind,, e In some areas Of Washington County, where smaliee'4, !owes' prjced eeinole ii i family lots have been introduted to the market, sales activity o4 both , and Completed homes has been good despite adverse ectineimIc factors, le' .141.60.4440•••■■....41...4.6.1.6.■••••...............,...own......................spouo4— ' ' ormomentrammemimi . ■ iTIRA( 41ALO' BYD...3. ,' .I IJII) . , .... „ .. V.Pm.,. . ., / 1 , • t i . S 6. OTHER BUSINESS 6.1 o Associate Planner Liden stated that he had received ,a request for a time extension for Park Place Phase I, (S 8-83130.P��). Discussion followed. * Commission Butler moved and Commission Owens seconded to approve a six month time extension for Pi .K Place Phase I, file number S 8-83 PD. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioner present. 6.2 o JB Bishop requested that changes be made to his final order. Staff explained that this was not the appropriate time or place to correct a final order. Amendments could be made to the final order at the City Council hearing on May 29, 1985. 7. Meeting Adjourned 10:45 P.M. {o. Diane M. Jelderks, Secretary ATTEST: •^ l. Bonnie Owens, Vice President 1269? I n S i . II. P. NIN COMMISSION MINUTES April 16,, 19185 Page 6 . . . ..... . . r., - Pit AGENDA ITEM <Reg. er April 16, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING • MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON • TO: Planning Commission April 12, 1985 FROM: Keith S. Liden , SUBJECT: Extension of preliminary plat and detall'er- plan approval for Park Place Phase I. j15 8-83 PD). The applicant is requesting a six month extension of the Planning Commission approval granted on March 9, 184, and the decision became effective on March 22, 1984. 1„b changes to the approved plan re proposed. Attached is a site map, The staff recommends approval of the request for an extension until Octobet- 22, 1985. (1208P) L';i N EN eER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES IIPPr April 8, 1985 Tigard Planning Commission City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Or. 97223 RE: Parkplace No. 1 Attn: Keith Liden , We are requesting a 6 month extension of the planned development approval for Parkplace No, 1 . The approval date was April 23, 1984. Please be advised that we have recently secured a loan committment for the improvements and have enlisted the services of Kampe Associates to provide engineering plans. It is our intention to begin improvements in mid - June of this year. If all goes well the project will be complete and marketable by October 1 , 1985. The Zoning ordinance makes provisions for extensions of time if the delay is justifiable. Economic conditions and time constraints were such that we are only now able to proceed with this project. We hope that you agree that the delay is justifiable. Thank ycu for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely: -401,1 Jame M. Po ak \jj r -President Century 21 Properties, Inc. JMP/dt M'At`ri u i Yti �r. k1y.. r Porn w�� «ti � ���,� K r� h rrN iFt1�NP wr�r«r tC�...� 11hv, E" „1 'h4 :1/h; .. . .. ........ 11 r I : Arrropatokulif- x W WAHINGTON CC J Inter--Department Correspondence Prate April 24, 1984 ' • To : Richard A. Daniels, Director I Department of Land Use & Transportation tD From : Kevin Martin K Subject : STATUS OF TIGARD URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT AND COUNTY APPEAL OF THE PARK PLACE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT p. At their meeting on April 23, 1984, the Tigard City Council took. the following. actions: 1 . Passed a Resolution reactivating the UPAA which had expired on January 1 , 1984 and continued it to June 30, 1985. �.; 2. As part of the Resolution reactivating the UPAA, the City Council also approved' a process to work towards resolving City-County Transportation Plan inconsisten- cies and adopted interim design standards agreed to by i City and, County staff for any segments of the planned Murray Blvd. connection that may be proposed prior to ! final re,sulution of the inconsistencies. 3. Approved the 'Park Place Planned Devel opmertt with the ' condition that the developer modify the design to incorpor_ ate the interim Murray' Blvd. design 'standards and resubmit ' the plans to the City Planning Director for final review. This action will require the developer to delete the "T" intersection and ''reduck the ni; fiber of driveways accessing directly to Gaarde street. 4. Voted not to refund a portion of the County's appeal fee. ` 5. Voted to deny the County's appeal on the basis of the modification requirement imposed in (3) above. The actions taken by the Tigard City Council are consistent with those requested by Washington County, The UPAA has been reactivated, interim de-ign standaru�S have been established for the planned Murray Blvd. connection that 011 not preclude the County's Transportation Plan options, and, the Park Place Planned Development will be modified to con- form to the?Ibe des,i gn standards, On this basis I recommend that Washington y drop i appeal . and �I fy � oun �� ro � its app of the Park Place Planned 'Development note LCDC that our objections regarding Goals 2 and 12 of the Tigard Plan have been satisfactorily addressed by the City and should be dropped from the • record. STS cw 8rent Curtis Il (t , 47 Al ,..5 0 5 21 CITY OF TIGARD RESOLUTION NO 84-- A RESOLUTION REACTIVATING AND CLARIFYING THE URBAN PLANNING AREA AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF TIGARD AND WASHINGTON COUNTY. ! 9', .. WHEREAS, the City of Tigard -11-!A Washington County agreed to an Urban !.• Planning Area Agreement (UPAA) wh Lch wa8 adopted by both governmental bodies in 1983; and WHEREAS, the UPAA lapsed on January 1, 1984, and was not extended by the r two parties; and WHEREAS, a prior" agreement executed in 1980 was reactivated on January 1, 1984, which is unsatisfactory to both parties as it is inconsistent with the City and County Comprehensive Plans, specifically relative to transportation issues; and i WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the. City and County to establish a ` . process to resolve transportation inconsistencies between the City and County � ° Plans; and - WHEREAS, it appears to be in the best interests of the City and Count hj to establish temporary design standards for the planned connection of S.W. Murray , Blvd. and S.W. Gaarde Street to be applied until such time as the City and County Transportation Plans are consistent with one another. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: . ► 1. The Tigard-Washington County Urban Planning Area Agreement, adopted - as. Ordinance No. 83-33, is hereby reactivated and ratified through June 30, 1985 by the City in accordance with the provision o' Section VI of said Agreement which allows it to be extended; and 'hat. this Agreement shall supersede all earlier Urban Planning Area Agr:;,e;of,nt' between the City and the County; and 2 The City agrees to the following process to resolve transportation inconsistencies between the Cit,,,r and County Comprehensive Plans; A. Upon receipt of the draft METRO Southwest Corridor Study, the City and the County shall designate an equal number of appropriate staff personnel to meet and prepare a join: report which presents a committee recommendatibu on: (1) The functi6nal classific;;tion. of Durham Road q The need and location of an indirect(2) location a:rect connectx:on or connections between Murray Bivd./Snholls Ferry Road and i'4 Gaard6 Street/99W and n.e 11. Within six, months of the Southwest.e receipt of the draft Sou est Corridor S .4d., the joint report findings to the Tigord City Council and Board of County Commissioners for y� City coi�nxttee shall re o�`t �xt Washington County for adoption of a •mutual agreement resolution of the transportation iss s and on the 1ESOLU '1ON NO. 84- , • •I 3. The City hereby establishes the followiig temporary design guidelines for any segments of the planned Murray Blvd. and S.W. Garde Street connection between the vicinity of 135th/Walnut and 121/Gaarde utersections that may be proposed prior to the implementation of [2] above: A. Right-of-way shall be 60 feet; B. Improvement width shall be 40 feet; C. There shall be no ' T" intersection or other design features that • will impede the function of the street as a minor collector; D. Driveway access shall be limited, but not prohibited; E. The road shall be constructed according to Ci4y structural standards. P. The curve radius will be a minimum of 350 feet, The need to modify the proceeding standards shall be reviewed by the committee established in [2] above; and 4. The City hereby reaffirms its strong support for the inclusion of the proposed westerly by-pass in the METRO Regional Transportation Plan. 5. The County agrees to support the City at Tigard's LCDC hearings. I ` PASSED: This ',-4 day of , , 1984. Mayor pro tem - City of Tigard ATTEST: 0o c21)s, ,Iwo i,A Deputy City Reil•.Irder City of Tigard • t . . I ttUSOt:UTION. NO0 84-�3 LI o .P. � 4 4o� ) A. 8.. PARK ?.DACE APPEAL CONSIDERATION a. Director ofd .anning 6 Development synopsi " issue to date and `' recommended tne Council adopt alternative r+ ..,. which is set out t cot below and authorize a refund of 50% of the fees paid by Washington County for the appeal. "Alternate #1 - Approve the application with conditions: A. Applicant prepare revised plan which incorporates the design guidelines established by Resolution No. 84-34. B. Applicant submit the revised plans to the Planning Director for approval." b. Councilor Scott stated she felt no refund would be appropriate since staff has spent so much time on the appeal. c. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve the application with conditions as set out in Alternate #1. Motion approved by 3-1 majority vote of Council present. Councilor Scott voting nay. d. Kathy Baxter, 135th Avenue m,. dent, noted her concerns regarding the street extension from Mui.•ray Blvd. to 121st Avenue. She said she did not want to have the street too busy. e. Herman Porter, 11875 SW Gaarde Street, was concerned that the Council may give its' options away to an indirect route. f. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to uphold '. the Planning Commission decision and deny the appeal. • Approved by a 3-1 majority vote of Council present:. Councilor Scott voting nay. ., g. Motion by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor Brian to deny the request for a fee waiver by the County. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. Page 6 COUNCIL MINUTES'7 APRIL 23; 1984 • I Al+144jA 164444k F \\\\ CITY OF TIGAFD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF April 23, 1984 AGENDA ITEM •h: DATE SUBMITTED April 19, 1984 PREVIOUS ACTION: Continued from ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: April 9, 1984. Park Place Appeal REQUESTED BY: �. DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY A The City Council conducted a public hearing on April 9, 1984, on the appeal filed by Washington County relative to the approval by the Planning Commissxin of the Park Place Project. A continuance was granted to allow the applicant, the City, the County, and NPO # 3 to discuss the outstanding issues. A meeting was held on April 16, 1984, with the results outlined in the attached memo dated April 17, 1984. Based on the standards agreed to by three of the four parties involved, i feel that the matter may be resolved upon adoption of the Urban Planning Area Agreement as modified by Resolution and application. of the standards contained therein to Park Place. The Council has authority under section '18.32.090 D. 3 to review decisions of the initial hearing body and to approve, deny, or approve with coa`iditi bns,the application. The Council should approve the application and place a condition on the approval that the applicant prepare revised plans which incorporate the design guidelines established in the resolution which reactivated, and clarified thu Urban planning Area Agreement. • A second condition would require the applicant to submit the revised plans to the Planning Director to determine compliance with the design guidelines. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The :Council may: I. Approve the application with conditions. A. Applicant prepare revised plan which incorporates the design guidelines established by resolution. No. 84-- . B. Applicant submit the revised plans to the Planning Director for approval. 2. Uphold the Planning Commission decision and deny the appeal. SUCGESTEO ACTION n - Staff recomends that the C ouncil adopt alternative number one. In addition; I County. that authorize a refund o 50% of the fees paid by Washington �e�O�I3Iri�nd' .hat the Council y w A PirftalAtivur 44 WASHINGTON COUNTY • , • 1ntcr--Dcpartinenl Correspondence. Date April 17, 1984 To : Richard A. Daniels, Director From : Kevin Martin, Senior Pl anner Subject : STATUS OF PARK PLACE APPEAL AND TIGARD UPAA Tom Tuschner and I met with Bill Monahan and Frank Currie on April 16 to work out a com- promise design for the portion of Gaarde Street passing through the Park Place development. y The City and County staffs reached the following agreement: + 1 . Delete lots 21 and 22 aid all adjacent roadway from this phase of the development. This removes the "T" intersection. 2. The Gaarde Street right-of-way shall be 60 feet. 3. The roadway improvement width shall be 40 feet and constructed to city structural standards (very similar to the County's) . 4. The future northward extension of Gaarde through Park Place shall be designed according to County major collector standards when possible. 5 Redesign the access for lots 23, 24 and 25 to conform to County standards. 6. Redesign lot 15 to access onto private street. i This proposal was presented to the developers, Century 21 , and the NPO on the evening of . April 16, 1984. The developers indicated they would be able to accommodate the chances. ,e. The NPO indicated they are opposer to an77s 7n"that"a ows a ree- owl ng co ector through the area. efi . The City and County staffs also worked out a compromise regarding the Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA). County staff agreed to present a Resolution and Order to the Board of County Commissioners with the following clauses: 1. Readopt the UPAA which expired on January 1 , 1984 and continue it to June 30, 1985. 2. The County agrees to staff participation in a committee outlined in City Resolution 84-19B which will evaluate the results of the SW Corridor Study and present findings to the City and County for adoption of a mutual agreement on transportation issues. 3. The County further pledges its support of the Aloha By-pass as contained in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) . This R & 0 should be placed on the Board's work session sessionagenda for April 24, 1964. Should the Tigard City Council agree to the staff compromises, staff rer,,mends that the Board of Commissioners drop the appeal on the Park Place development and withdraw the County objection, to acknowledgement ` objection owledgement of g Comprehensive � g Goal 2 the Tigard Plan rebate?rn and Goal 12: The City Council has indicated its desire to meet with the Board of Commissioners 4.,o further discuss these matters in the near future, MBM "•'• .. II 1A Il vt +1 Y.I u.i w...w..114c r..r ., . .n • • A (; f MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Mayor pro tem and City Council April 17, 1984 4, FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning & Development SUBJECT: Park, Place Project • On Monday, April 16, 1984, a meeting was held at City Hall at, 7:00 P.M. to discuss the Park Place project to reach a resolution of the City and Council concerns. Present at the meeting were: Frank Currie and Bill ;lonahan -• City of Tigard • Kevin Martin and Tom -fshner - Washington County • David Oriugdulph and Mike Fain' - Century 21 Homes Bob Bledsoe, Lou Ane Mortenson, Vittz Ramsdell, Mike Smith, & Herman Porter - NPO #3 Beverly: Froude CPO #4 Ralph Flowers, Gordon Moore, Lyall Turnbull, Tony Maksym, Betty McCain - Citizens • I explained to those present that Frank Currie and I had met in the afternoon with the County to discuss the subdivision and the Urban Planning hrea Agreement. Based on our discussion, we recommended the following revisions to the subdivision. o Elimination of the "T" intersection and lots 21 and 22 o Preserve a 60' right-of-wa,, .� o Construct a road with a 4.0' width o '' Stripe the road for two lanes, or no stripes at all o Take steps to reduce the access points to Gaar:ie, lots 15, 23, 24, • and. 25 as shown each have access. The number of access points should be reduced to two o The—Fa-id wi ll be designed to City structural standards The NPO took a vote to oppose this proposal as they did not feel sufficient assurances were provided by the City and County. The Council at it meeting on April 9, 1984 had suggested that the four parties meet to recommend a solution to the Park Place issue: Please be advised that of the four parties concerned (the City; the County, Century 21 Homes, and NPO #3) three of the parties with the exception of the NPO have agreed to the above stated compromise. (405P) i ii ...1 i n....•.,.w .. w..L.0 t.w„ ..li.t.11x in.J. ..•.<....www••.AU.w w.i,r N O T I C E O F PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT ITS MEETING ON MONDAY, •6 April 9a 1984 __ AT 7:30 P.M. , IN THE LECTURE ROOM OF FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, 10865 SW WALNUT, TIGARD, OR. , WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: lly�p FILE NO.: SUBDIVISION S 8-83 PD APPLICANT: Century 21 Properties Inc. OWNER: Same North Coast Plaza 7160 Stir Hazelfern Road Tualatin, Oregon 97062 ', REQUEST: An appeal by Washington County of a Piannitig Commission /" approval of a conceptual and detailed plan and preliminary plat of Phase I, Park Place Subdivision,, submitted by Century 2' Properties. LOCATION: 13900 SW 121st Avenue (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S 1 4, lot 1400 and Map 2S1 3CC lot 401) . (See map on reverse side) K ' THE PUBLIC HEARING ON Tills MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDA1:ti,CE WITH THE 1/4 RULES OF PROCEDURES OF THE CITY COUNCIL. TESTIMONY MAY BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD. FOR, FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY RECORDER OR. PLAONING DIRECTOR AT 639-4171 CITY OF TIGARD - 12755 S.W. Ash Ave. Tigard, Oregon 9722 . (corner of Ash St Bur wham) (0272P) A a n ,r f� n 1, .1 \,.yj j }'A i,........,... 4. t. .........1 . . o J�i' 1 „. ., ra.---- . t: 0 : z Itsch,..,„ tio.. ..4,,,,„eys/04. f �� 91,V1. f ' 4 .b , 1 CO4fiMeKC� lr �i HAWK1S SEA 7'. r, vii •• S.W. La 4E , W '• 0 WAY 3 c' •' I . /ri M Ci A ST.�KixY'S7 �, 3 < ry,l.'-°; t NORTH DAKOTA SP.�� S.W t/l or i .a<,G•AL`i LILY CIR. v+• S.W. -----,-- , t"1� I'1 tr NEklpt. „ it: o i el'� -� ; s, SUMMER S DR. r` :' w 0 • S.W, TIGARD �T • %; .RCREST DRIVE. ` .�r.,....._—„ 9C T/ +�t1 I NENE! ONE. roj. ui r > t lr • 7, ' I t o-Cr'�1 1 ''' S.W.7.,...\\ 3. �' I ( l�AltCON RIS I•. �,iL:040: SW.w w K�THER ° L` —�LKA ERINE S T., 3i: p in'?t f " \:% !liij�o a na I /., / - CT, �I7� lt. d w ;: � � w S.Vr LYWN 5T. � �: ::::::,,,‘,..:1:73VI:K..SART. C�Q ,.., ,�• ^ SlIIt.KA. ,,.� �b A ... * r - >l;W% +t 57 i' )9 r 3 �',' :;Z E R t r 3' tl �Y rA oil>I 0 a M IE: ��{{t Pt”. c JP` �� r, {W d 1 3 CT, w +y"l a1/4".%,..... �'r ab S,' °;. NUT .,� w S7. ; S.W., a*4 W GARMEK ST. �-. I'' S.W. t, , r`d• , d `-WATKINS • c..J•1, f 3 S W. ALBERTA ST. W PL S� tr` aA+/ S.W FONNER '1 C..::, V.14 V// ° / S Wi r.. NT So Vya " .V,. 1 ', rW. jA ES' D. 5T. .RG. DERR F' ". L !I ,/ {I S.W. MARION 57. aA s O 1 S tIV. nputi.: 5T. / -, , 1d � ry`•`. V¢ - / , , , q ~o, •COOK A '� I O I I��:j o f i '•-`N 'q ».Ayy- ;-.1.. LN. /�s*�0 t�4# 1 I ti,4.4 i .!' .1y,1 -1- t.). • 4.ii ! pW. P.O. g� In CT t �: o - a LMJ 3 w NR.L.MIEW aT. IEWMO IA :j .- •-...: �� sr V Oal 4ti.,, `�"�" u�i�v a rr �,�KOK� . . El �` 5 Ai+ c+areti� A,AROE PARK PL' S NI( s y ej CI Z ti 11;" Du CT _, +t i i '� * �. J-6: I C')''' " —t sot, El > ' "a: ` — Pte+ n; s In Gr. 1 WiL6:100 !Tr. Z ' VIEW TES ACE r= `. . E w(3 CY+fMCafr ,d IN Z _ , p',' ,,ti a UNT____hd,_., no /// treA`a LNe. Q OULL «• PEMf11DOkT +r► v ,, ,t d ct1 in S.W. I' i._f l0iT 1±n EMERALD MTS. !? ,t c j r 1 s.w. 0000SnEW c■.•:- 41 El. 5.:! f1AfILE' 5. T '* L f , ',$.' • 11 • 5.2 SPACE NEEDS III REPORT a. City Administrator outlined the timetable for the Civic Center program as set forth in his memo. b. Consensus of Council was to have a committee of perhaps 5 members '\ appointed to guide the Civic Center program. 2 of the members are ti to have strong technical backgrounds in design/.architect and the other 3 members can be `members at large' . Councilor Scott suggested advertising for volunteers in the Tigard Times or Oregonian would be appropriate. Coun..il agreed to advertise. c. After further discussion, consensus of Council was to allow Mayor pro tem Scheckla to appoint by May 1, 1984 members to this committee if he obtains full consent of C6 ancil members. If full Council does not agree oa those people to be appointed to the new committee, a special Council meeting will be called on 5/7/84 to " consider this issue. City Administrator is to return to Council ' on 4/23/84 with a resolution to create the advisory :committee and set forth the scope and focus of the committee along with a preliminary report on the interest applications received to date. 6. DARTMOUTH STREET LID FORMATION ORDINANCE a. Director of Public Works presented ordinance for Council consideration and recommended approval. He also noted that Council would be holding a pre-assessment public hearing on April -: 23. 1984. b. ORDINANCE NO. 84-17 AN ORDINANCE CONFIRMING AND, RATIFYING THE RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF FEBRUARY 27, 1984, WITH RESPECT TO THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DARTMOUTH STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID #40) ESTABLI`:1HING THE 1))STRi"CT; APPROVING, RATIFYING AND ADOPTING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS; DECLARING RESITLTS OF THE HEARING HELD WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPROVEMENT; AND DETERMINING THE BENEFITED PROPERTIES TO BE ASSESSED. • c. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to adopt, Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 7. PARK PLACE SUBDIVISION PPEAL .E . WASHINGTON OU VISICN S 8-83PD VISION. Y r� "ON 'C.,,;..�Y/S;d�3DI CENTURY 21 Homes Inc. , NPO #3 An appeal by Washington County of a Planning Commission approval of; a conceptual and detailed plan and preliminary plat of Phase I, Park Place Subdivision, submitted by Century 21 Proparties'. The property is located at 13900 SW, 1 21st Avenue (Wash. is will be an ar u�ien so Map 2S1 � Tax hearing and Map 281 3CC Tact Lot 401). This g yp anly. The Council will, consider anl�der any new testimony the or evidence Comm :,ssi Council will not cons on. The. ny y which is not in the record. a. Legal Counsel gave information to. Council regarding broader implications of the issues raised rased by the appellant in this issue and advised Council on the extent to which those matters were relevant to the quasi-judicial decision before them. Ile stated " dt.cxa before � Page 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - ARIL 9, 1984 r. _ ' • v , y T . ` that a policy issue dispute of placement of an extension of Murray „1 Blvd. was not a basis to deny the landowner and encouraged Council to base their decision on evidence presented at the Planning Commission hearing 'on the record' . b. Public Hearing Opened a c. Director of Planning & Development gave synopsis of history and stated that Planning Staff has tried to resolve the transportation issues with Washington County. Staff has also presented a transportation agreement to the County and suggested a committee be formed with County and City representatives to resolve the matter. He also reviewed some site maps at the hearing. �w, d. Public Testimony: �` 1 III Appellants o Richard Daniels, Director of Land Use and Transportation for ,i Washington County, requested a waiver of the appeal fee since Washington County was also a political subdivision. \, Consensus of Council was to hear the request for fee waiver after the hearing when the facts were presented. Mr. Daniels proceeded to present the County's concerns regarding b the proposed subdivision. He stated that approval of the �s subdivision would violate LCDC goals and the County plan for the area connecting Murray Blvd. to 1-5 and noted that the road location is based on traffic needs. The County is recommending that the Metro SW Corridor Study be accomplished, a Southwest Bypass be made by Sherwood to Wilsonville, and that the County may then look at the needs for the Mu;,ray Blvd. extension. Mr. Daniels went on to say that once the City of Tigal.d supports 1 the regional transportation plan with the SW Bypass being shown on the plan, the County will then commit to identifying the Murray Blyd./Gaarde connection as a two lane facility with turn refuges at intersections or a three lane facility with a continuous left turn if the City wishes to allow continuous access to all 0' residences and not just at intersections. Until the Regional Transporation Plan is amended, with support of the various cities, to ,show a regional bypass by Sherwood and Wilsonville, traffic will continue to increase and be a problem in the area: Mr. Daniels concluded by requesting Council allow the objection of the County to the Park Place Subdivision. To remove the objection by the County requested the following c Onditions be mett s 1 The City and County must. fully participate in the Southwest Corridor Study by Metro., 2. The City endorse the western bypass to be included in the Regional Transporation Plan. i - 9, 1 9 8 � ,_, Page �3� �: COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL i , ,.. , . \ . , , . ‘ . . , r a ,/ < .`x" 3. Once the Regional Transportation Plan is amended, the City and County need to amend their Plans to identify the Murray Blvd./Gaarde Extension as a "collector" road. This _..�, collector road be identified to connect Murray Blvd. , Scholls Ferry Road, 135th Avenue, Walnut Street and Gaarde Street. 0 Mr. Daniels noted this would not have to be a straight toad which could encourage speeds beyond neighborhood collector traffic, a winding road would be adequate to meet the needs in the area. A road, as proposed in. the Park Place Subdivision, with "T" intersections is totally unacceptable since traffic will exist in. the area and a "T°' intersection would stop traffic and bottleneck the flow. 4. The City deny this subdivision as being incea.sistent with • LCDC Statewide Goals #2, 11, & 12. The City request the subdivision be redesigned to be consistent with both City and County Plans. This would also meet the statewide planning goals. 5. Reactivate the expired Urban Planning Area Agreement. " o Mr. John Skourtes, property owner in City, supported the County's appeal and requested Council consider the traffic congestion needs in the area. it 0 Karen Thorin, resident of area, supported new street and the westerly bypass. Concernei that vacant land could not be developed until road was constructed. o City Attorney noted that Mr. Skourtes and Ms. Thorin did not testify before the Planning Commission and thus their testimony was inadtissible ae evidence in this hearing. Respondents: i o Michael W. Fain, representing Century 21 (the developer),, stated that the development has been in, the 'works' at the City since early 1983. He was concerned that if ' redesigning was required that the 1984 construction season would be lost and economically would be difficult on the developer.. He requested the appeal be denied on that basis. o Vince Ramsdale, 11635 SW Terrace Trails, represented NPO #3 and stated that the NPO had unanimously approved the tom.promised subdivision plan on 3/5/84. He also noted that the policy in the comp plan is to not allow alignment of Gaarde and Murray Blvd. The right--of-way of Gaarde is not wide enough to allow for development of that type of street alignment. o Bob Bledsoe, 11800 SW Walnut Street, NPO #3 Chairman, supported the past City action in the comp plan and also the Planit,ing Commission recommendation for appioval of the subdivision. Page 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1984 • • c• o Attorney Fred Anderson, representing himself personally, requested • Council disregard the City's Legal Counsel's opinion which was a 'closing statement ' and should not be heard during public t e$1 t imony. Cross Examination o Richard Daniels, Washington County, stated that the County's transporation plan in the area concerned has been approved by LCDC and reminded Council that Tigard's plan has not been approved. He also mentioned the proposed connection from Murray Blvd. to Gaarde Street would not be a 5 lane str,;et, but a two or three lane road. 1; Lengthy discussion followed regarding the "T" intersection as a major issue to be resolved. is ri . o Michael Fain, Century 21, felt it appeared, that there was lots of °common ground' surrounding the issues and proposed continuance of the appeal and allow the, City, County and developer to find a yoluti.c;n to right-of-way and street alignment. He stated this f should be a compromise matter. e. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Scott to continue hearing to 4/23/84 and that hearing be closed except for issue of extension of Gaarde Street. City Administrator asked for clarification of motion. Council concurred that issue will be considered under 'Council Consideration' portion of the meeting on 4/23/84. Motion to continue to 4/23/84 was approved by unanimous vote of Council prei,ent. . 8. APPROVE COUNCIL MINUTES 3/26/84 a. Deputy Recorder requested Council amend minutes on page 7, item 19 (f) by changing the name 'Stewart' to 'Probstfield' . b, Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Scott, to approve as amended. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 9. APPROVE NPO MEMBER APPOINTMENTS - NPO #l, 5, & 6/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT I: COMMITTEE/PARK BOARD a. City Administrator advised Council of the following appointment recommendations NPO #1 - Edward D. Duffield & Robert C. Wyffeis NPO #5 - Harry Saporta NPO #6 -, Murel Gillen Park Board -• Steve Newman & Steve Slabaugh Economic Development Committee - Robert Williams Page 5 - MUNCTL MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1984 . ••I ._-- .,.. ,.,...,,.. ...,,...,. ..,. ,_,.,, ., ,. .:.. ... ....... „ .. ,^ - .,. ..., ,, .,w<..w.... i n[ .1 K'k+ Y in 41 N1Y,LU aia4hw.fNM1li J1.14 V(IMMf InY uT F Y6AY NK}t5 • q2eike„,,,Q=, 31'7-9 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Kathleen Reffett , being first duly sworn, on oath depose and say: That I am a aide for The City of Tigard, Oregon. That I served notice of hearing of the Tigard Planning Commission " ' of which the attached is a copy (Marked, Exhibit A) upon each of the following. named persons on the 29th day of March 1984, by mailing to each of them at the address shown on the attached list (Marked Exhibit B), said notice as hereto attached, desposited in the United States Mail on the 29th day of March , 1984, postage prepaid. • Secretary • I r4 0. Person who'delivered to POST OFFICE Subscribed and sworn to before me on the 'ri'� day of aw , 1984''. 411111 C' T:RY PUBLIC OF OREGON 1 My Conrnissi.on .Expiros //- . .r t , a. r CITY OF TIGARD---1247.�0 S.1�w�.VAIN'-TIG�►�'D,OREGON 97223 • l R1 CEIPT DATE:_,. .31,22-.2 �,,' AMOUNT:$ 0 4:7(-� C_'- DOLLARS ' NAME: Gv4.sh7' ',/52,›.) l t s✓✓.� CASH: ADDRESS:. CHECK: I-~'' M,O.: I. # OF FOR: ACCT. # PERMITS SURCHARGC AMOUNT . i' SEWER BILLINGS 40-364 $_ BUSINESS LICENSE 05-331 _ • PLUMBING PERMIT 05-332 $_ ._ MECHANICAL PERMIT 05-332 _ BUILDING PERMIT 05-333 SEWER CONNECTION 40-363 _ _ s SEWER INSPECTION 40-365 SYSTEM DEV.CHARGE 25-366 k r. PARK DEV.CHARGE#1 30-367 ., { PARK DM/.CHARGE#2 30-368 ' ZONING ADJUSTMENTS 05-362 • 4 -e _ ;.,, tee , . TOTALS $..._. $ .2600 ,, �-t1- RECEIVED BY: ��.��G --N . PERMIT NUMBERS ASSIGNED: • Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount a..........-h— $ • $ $ — $ ' , $ $ $. _— RECEIPT# 1 7 5 I „ , 7 . i ,, . ,,, ,„, , , . ., 4s4 ' i , • % t ASHINGTON COUN T,Y ■ ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 150 N. FIRST AVENUE HILLSBORO,OREGON 97123 014 !� BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PLANNING DEPARTMENT • WE;S MYLLENBECK, Chairman (503) 648-8761 BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman EVA M. KILLPACK JH E. MEEK LOUCILLE WARREN APPEAL, Oric k 1.sn�'�ao fl Y Rv M► �i$ �� 1� �"� •. March 21 , 1984 .;, :c7 Jeri Widner, City Recorder City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 S Subject: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION N DECISION ON S 8-83PD In accordance with the provisions of Sections 18.32.340 of the City of Tigard Development Code, Washington County hereby requests that the City Council review the decision made by the Planning Commission on Subdivision S 8-83-PD, Park Place. Washington County has standing to appeal according to the provisions of PF Section 18.32,290. Washington County has been a party co the proceedings on 5-8-83PD through its entire hearings process. Most recently, County staff presented oral and written testimony at the Planning Commission public hearing on March 6, 1984. According to Section 18.32.130 (c) Washington County is entitled to mailed notice of impending land use actions as an affected governmental agency. The County is aggrieved and its interests adversely affected by the. Planning Commission decision on S 8-83-PD as discussed • The Park Place development lies within the general alignment proposed for a street which will ultimately connect Murray Blvd. with S.W. Gaarde Street. The future construction of this, street is vital to traffic circulation in this area of Washington County. The Acknowledged Washington County Transportation Plan indicates that the Murray Blvd./Gaarde Street connection should be con- structed as a major collector facility in order to handle projected traffic. On March 6, 1984, the City of Tigard Planning Commission approved an extension of SW Gaarde Street throii t the Park Place Planned Development which is incon- sistent with Washington County's standards for a major collector for the following reasons: 1 . The proposed "T" intersection is inconsistent with Washington County design considerations for major collectors because it impedes the smooth flow of traffic through the area. 2. The ose ro�� d 6O p p ' �ri jht-of-way is inadequate for a major collector. 1 ' an equal opportunity employer • t ly.' Jeri Widner Appeal of S 8-83PD March 21 , 1984 Page 2 3. The proposed improvement width is inadequate for a major collector. 4. Direct access to the Gaarde/Murray Blvd, connection is allowed ,y for some of the dwelling units. This is inconsistent with County design considerations for major collectors. Additional information regarding the design of the Murray Blvd./Gaarde Street connection is contained in the attached letter submitted to the Planning Commission at their March 6 1984 public hearing on S 8-83PD. The City of Tigard has failed to coordinate its, transportation plan with that •e of Washington County. This failure to coordinate violates the existing Urban Planning Area Agreement between the City of Tigard and Washington County, as well as the Urban Planning Area Agreement which expired on January 1 , 1984, which was specifically designed to prevent a land use approval such as Park ( Place from occurring prematurely. Furthermore, the approval of S 8-83PD :3 violates the following provisions o-r LCDC Goals 2, 11 and 12: Goal 2: City, county, state and federal agency and special district plans and actions related to lanca use shall be consistent with the compre- hensive plans of dties and counties and regional plans adopted under ORS 197.705 through 197.795. All land use plans shall include identification of issues and problems, inventories and other factual information for each applicable state-wide planning goal , evaluation of alternative courses of action and ultimate policy choices, taking into con- sideration social , economic, energy and envi ronmertal needs. Goal 11 : Urban and rural development shall be guided and supported by types and levels or urban and rural publ c facilities and se i,vi ces appropriate for, but limited k,o, the needs and require- ments of the urban, urbanizable and rural areas to be served. A provision for key facilities shall be included in each plan. PI To meet current and long-range needs, a provision for solid waste disposal sites, including sites or inert waste, shall be included in each plan. A Timely, Orderly and Efficient Arrangment --refers to a system or plan that coordinates the type, location and delivery of public facilities and services in a manner that best supports the existing and proposed land uses, A i . 11. •J. c . Jeri Widner Appeal of S 8-83PD March 21 , 1984 ,'<` Page, 3 Goal 12: A transportation plan shall (1 ) consider all modes of transpor- tation including mass transit, air, water, pipeline, rail , highway, bicycle and pedestrian; (2) be based upon an inventory of local , regional and state transportation needs; (3) consider the differences in social consequences that would result from utilizing differing combinations of transportation modes; (4) avoid principal reliance upon any one mode of transpz i:ation; (5) minimize adverse social , economic and environmental impacts and costs; (6) conserve energy; (7) meet the needs of the transportation disadvantaged by improving transportation services; (8) facilitate the flow of goods and services so as to strengthen the local and regional economy; and (9) conform with local and regional comprehensive land use plans. Each plan shall include a provision for transportation as a key facility. The City of Tigard has provided no factual justification supporting the con- tentlon that the indirect minor collector approved for the Park Place Planned Development will be adequate to carry future traffic. Based on the preceeding discussion Washington County requests that the Tigard City Council review the Planning Commission decision on S 8-83PD. The required appeal fee of $300.00 is enclosed. Washington County requests that the City Council waive this appeal fee and the transcript fee. Should the' City Council chose not to waive the fees, Washington County will submit the required $500.00 transcript deposit. -----"A:-.______ Richard A. bani el s; Tree or I/ Land Use and Transportation .,. RAD:KM;mbm c: Board of County Commissioners J 1 4 Ari I ti o ..tea • , `Y lirtipormx6,T AGENDA • WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSION R / Agenda Category Department of Land Use and Transportation "C" Appeal of Tigard Planning Commission Decision on the Park Planned Develokment,,, Agenda Title Place Richard A. Daniels, Director • To be presented by SUMMARY (Attach Supporting Documents if Necessary) • Attached please find two memos regarding appeal of the Park Place Planned Develop- ment approval to the Tigard City Council and a letter re: "Extension of Gaarde Street Through the Proposed Park Place Development" which constitutes the County's position on this proposal as presented to the Tigard Planning Commission. The street circulatiion design of the proposed Park Place Development is contrary to adopted County trolsportation policy and, if built as proposed, would have a major negative impaction traffic circulation in the southwest portion of the County. An appeal fee of $300 and a transcript fee deposit of $500 may be required; requests for waiver of these fees may be filed. • 0 . DEPARTMENTS REQUESTED ACTION: The Department of Land Use and Transportation recommends the Board appeal the Tigard Planning Commission's approval of the Park Place Planned Development to Tigard City Council . The Department also recommends the Board request a waiver of appeal and transcript fees for such an appeal . • moms.malow, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVED WASMNGTON.COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS IYMIUTE ORDER II DA i„ — tt Artenda Item No Ar / MI 0 9 1 4 • ^ L.<.* d 1 ' 4.4 a , J 1 � CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION - BY PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Concerning Case Number(s) : SUBDIVISION S -83PD Park Place 2. Name of Owner: Century 21 Properties, Inc. 3. Name of Applicant: Same ..._. North Coast Plaza Address 7160 SW Hazelfern Rd. City Tualatin State Or Zip 97062 , , Location of Property: Address 13900 SW 121st Ave. _______-_ Legal Description 3CC tax lot 401 and 2S1 4 tax lot 1400 5. Nature of Application: Conceptual and detailed plan approval of a planned development and preliminary plat approval TriTase I, consisting of 39 units., 6. Action: Approval as requested Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall q and mailed to: XX The applicant & owners xx Owners of record within the required distance XX, The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization XX Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON Mcrch 22,, 1984 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and ; "atement of condition can be obtained from the Planning Department, Tigarkt 'ity Hall, 12755 SW Ash, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 57223. 9. Appeal: • • Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 which provides that a written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice is given and sent. „The,deadline for filing of an appeal l is March _2.2.,a r 27 1984 g pp 11. 4esnx-ns; E-Y.014 have any questions 5 please call the City of Tigard lanni eD partmeiit, 639-4171:: gard Planning Commission E APPROVED ( PLACE UNDER CITY, OF TIGARD LOGO PUBLIC HEARINGS The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission on March 6, .0! 1984, at 7:30 P.M. at Fowler Junior High School Lecture Room, 10865 SW Walnut, Tigard, Oregon. Further information may be obtained from the Director of Planning and Development at 12755 SW Ash Ave. , Tigard, Oregon 97223 or by calling 639-4171. SUBDIVISION S 3-b4 ZONE CHANGE ZC 3-84 Robert Randall Co. NPO # 6 Et1 Request by Robert Randall Co. for a zone change from R-12 (Residential - 12 units/acre) to R-7 (Residential - 7 units/acre) and to request 4 preliminary plat approval for a 49 lot subdivision on ploperty located on the northwest corner 0.)f Hall Blvd. and Durham Road, Tigard (Tax Map 2S1 11DD tax lot 200). SUBDIVISION S 4-84 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD 1-84 Rosebud Enterprises NPO #7 Request by Rosebud Enterprises, Inc. for detailed pi,:nned development approval, and preliminary plat approval for a 34 lot subdivision utilizing • "0" foot side yards, on the property located northeast of the intersection of SW 106th Avenue and SW Black Diamond Way, Tigard (Tax Map 1S1 34AD, Tax Lot 2600). SUBDIVISION S5-84 VARIANCE V 2-84 ZONE CHANGE Hallberg Homes Inc. NPO # 7 Request by Hallberg Homes, Inc. for preliminary plat approval of a 51 lot subdivision, a variance to permit the setack requirements of the R-7 zone rather than the R-12 zone, and to allow for "0" foot side yard setbacks within the subdivision. Also the Panning Department request8 consideration of a zone change from R-12 (Residential - 12 units/acre) 4-o R-7 (Residential - ? units/acre) in lieu of the variance application. The property is located on the west side of Hall Blvd. , 600 feet north of Durham Road (Tax Map 281 11DD, Tax Lot 100). SUBDIVISION b 8-83 PD PARK PLACE (Century 21 Homeo) NPO # 3 A remand from City Council for Century 21 Home's request for conceptual and detailed plan approval and preliminary plat approval of Phase I, Park Place, on property located at 13900 SW 121st Ave. (Tax Map 2S1 4, Tax, Lot 1400 and 281 3CC, Tax Lot 401). NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION APPOINTMENTS Foa NP0t8 1, 5 6, 6. (continued on page 2) r ; I. r. , , 4 , . o .' 1 NOTICE O F P U B L I C HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Tigard Planning Commissio°►, at its meeting on Tuesday, March 6, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. , in the lecture room of Fowler Junior High School, 10865 S.W. Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon, will consider the following application: ii / FILE NUMBER: S 8--8J PD Park Place APPLICANT Century 21 Properties OWNER: Same North Coast Plaza / 7160 SW Hazel fern Rd. Tualatin, Or. 97062 /'. REQUEST: A remand from City Council for Century 21 Homey, request for conceptual and detailed plan approval and preliminary plat approval of Phase I, Park Place. ( • 1 ■ OCATION;, 13900 SW 121st Ave. (Tax Map 2S1 4, Tax lot 1400 :. i . and 2S1 3CC, Tax Lot 401) 1, (See map on reverse side) The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the rules of Chanter 13.32 of the Community Development Code and rules of procedure o;E the Planning Commission. Any persons having intere8t in this matter may attend and be heard, or testimony may be submitted in writing to be entered into the record of the initial hearing. • 1'`or further information please contact the Planning Department at 639-4171. TIGARD CITY HALL, 12755 S.W. Ash Avenue (Corner of Ash Avenue & Burnham Street) 1 tpm/0257p ', 1'; 4 fl I I 1 .n w.vdrE.+w.,.uae Mr+ li 0 qn _.•. ' ' . ' � ` ` ' �. . •„ � ' . ' -, ' ' � ' ' ` ' `'` . � ' ` r ��[� ' •. tfio),A R–5 (PD) , .. , 1' . . ) r • , I - * , , L , L , . 1 looms MN MIL 1 „ . 11 I., ..f. L ,L, ., 4 A-rz, j . . • , . . ,., -,... _CO RM.NM MO iiMol‘ ;,-.. . • f , 11*.i. • \ „, }';,7 • 1 4.I , d. i ,el:\\\: , i INN,Me 11, , ,.,kjt lii:vmsii.1!001.,,,,,...,...., [, , Yr 4 '' OUNITY 4,,___,-_:„.,,„,„-e. .rt If, r N:-i % , .„,,,,.. . ., •, :. ...„,..,... , , r• ..04+,•-• 11 r I!!ti i % 1 . ,„ , , ,, . , ,,,. _ ,.......„..„.........., # , __, A ic.4.2_14...e.,----,...0.--- "--1 . • ',, .1 1 i . ,.t„, : i „ ,..., , ,,./ 4 IN • , . ‘■,;,.....'\...,,,,,,„,_,...... ,...____,$:....,0_,....2L,122...„....,11.2.,,,,,,t. . .•:! t .10- 15 I°il I eivi i?-' 1 , , , ,..,4"..:,'. .. ,; ,..... - i , . „..... . - . . • t , . —, I .if. ,. ;•-•1 FP:f... 2. „...,: ., L., , ., 1 i,,,, , 4, 7 n )l'4.,i tinLi 1 1'' get . ,„ 1. 7:-..11DD ,' 11:7:100 - . , .., _ (Lo...0.),. .. im ' 4,. ,c,".171 i tli.l.''....1 1 11,:"!!1`.."'' 1 I i t ; i- . .• , t 1 'FL wow 41 Ivo* A , t,,,,, ...„5„.• ,0• . . 5(.4.) 6!',.'■r. , — - •tgosiiiptily:440411030, ....... .4. le('' • .• .'•". ' .,.:.. .„..14: 141 j-k..;• -. •..44''. ' '.',*....4::, -- i. ._..._.Itm-gitlit--14-- 7:---•----. i ,...iust...• • g ::': (PD)it ...... i I ,,•\■ ......„,,,,, 4„,".„,...,': , • „ , - leik fu. ei -*C.3 1 It . . 114 L :,,,....;#,H )111,:.„Li0,:,,,,, ,,, ,i.„ .41,, (ED) , ''!' ' ''' 1 - 410*4 ? 4- A. \51: .._.,......4„.a...ii„,,,,,,,„ . Irk.4 ' 7, :,4,,,fr p , 1 . , : L ..,4, „ , ,.... „. , . . „ 1111111 11:111 INN 1111111.10 " !oil*.1;01.614 Eli Olt I* '• • . --• '• -: .iii 1111 i TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION IglEiLT.JU:1-01clhHfl'GH1:10L7:30LG P.M.100M 10865 SW Walnut - Tigard, Or. 1. Call to Order 2. Rcll Call 3. Approve minutes from previous meeting 4. Planning Commission Communication o Walt Munhall concerning Space Needs III and the City BuiEing Board. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 SUBDIVISION S 4-84 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PD 1-84 Rosebud Enterprises NPO #7 5.2 SUBDIVISION S 3-84 ZONE CHANGE ZC 3-84 Robert Randall. Co. NPO # 6 , 5.3 SUBDIVISION S 5-84 VARIANCE V 2-84 ZONE CHANGE Hallberg Homes Inc. NPO # 6 N.) 5.4 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION APPOINTMENTS FOR NPO‘S 1, 5 & 6. 5.5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 1-84 City of Tigard NPO # 3 • • 5.6 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2-84 City o1 Tigard 5.7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 3-84 City of Tigard 5.8 SUBDIVISION S 8-83 Fa PARK PLACE' (CentuTy 21 Homes) NPO # 3 5.9 ZONI ORDINANCE AMEMENT ZOA 4-04 City of Tigard/Residential Homes 6. Other 3t!siness 7. Adjourn Meeting 02g8P Y I •, • . - ' ;rd `--- WASHINGTON COUN A ° ��_,�� . ADMINISTRATION BUILDING-- 150 N. FiRST AVENUE \a ,e7 HiLLSBORO,OREGON 97123 BOARD OF ICOMMiSSIONERS PLANNING DEPARTMENT WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman f 503) 648-8761 BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman EVA M. KILLPACK � JOHN E. MEEK LUCILLE WARREN March 6, 1984 � . ' Tigard Planning Commission City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, OR 97223 RE: EXTENSION OF GAARDE STREET THROUGH THE PROPOSED PARK PLACE DEVELOPMENT . Washington County staff has reviewed the proposed Park Place Planned Develop- ment to be considered by your Commission on March 6, 1984. Washington County staff finds that the extension of SW Gaarde Street, as designed, is inconsistent with the Washington County Comprehensive Plan. The extension of SW Gaarde Street will ultimately become part of, the Murray Blvd, Extension. The acknowledged Washington County Transportation Plan states; Extension of Murray Boulevard: ' E,xi sti n as well as 9 proposed development within the Cities of Beaverton and Tigard will increase the need for improved access between these municipalities. Lacking this interconnection, local , . short distance trips will plague and congest travel on Highway 217 and Scholls Ferry Road. County analysis indicate that a two to three lane minor arterial or major collector extension of Murray Boulevard south of Old Scholls Ferry Road, preferably to Gaarde Road which connects to 99W (Pacific Highway), will accommodate Year 2000 travel projections. Assuming that an Aloha bypass is constructed west of Bull M^antai n, the Murray Blvd. Extension could be designed and constructed as a major collector rather than a minor arterial . (The process used to determine the functional classi- fication of the Murray Blvd. Extension is contained n �n Attachment A. ) The County's Transportation Plan describes a major collector as follows: (3) Major Collectors° (Example, Rock Creek Blvd, and Parkway) Functional Purpose: In most in-tauces Major Collectors are intended to carry traffi z from Local St. 'As or Minor Col 1 ecto' s to Arterials and are public thoroughfares wit ) a lesser degree of future traffic than an Arterial , C112 equal o1 roa°tun ty eM plo yi Tigard Planning Corimission March 6, 1984 Page 2 Design Considerations: A Major Collector will be two to three lanes wide and designed to carry traffic at speeds of between 35 and 45 miles per hour. On-street parking will not be provided. Sidewalks will ha provided and bicycle facilities are required by , the Pedestrian-Bicycle portion of the Plan. A Major Collector will , be designed to allow for the efficient movement of buses in mixed . traffic. The design of a Major Collector will include a comprehensive land- . scape plan including street trees (which do not impair transportation safety), ground cover, and provisions for minimizing the impact of overhead utilities and outdoor advertising. + d Land Use Considerations: Developments likely to generate a high volume of traffic should be discouraged from locating on Major { Collectors that also serve residential districts. Residential development adjoining a Major Collector will be carefully buffered from the right-of-way. County road design standards call for major collectors to have a paved width of 40' - 46' located within a 70' right-of-way. A road constructed to the preceeding • standards would adequately carry traffic between Beaverton and Tigard as wall as providing good access to persons living in the vicinity of the Murray Blvd. Extension. In light of the preceeding discussion, Washington County staff finds it necessary to object to the proposed Park Place Planned Development for the following reasons: Eb 1 . The proposed "T" intersection is inconsistent with Washington County !. design :.onsi derati ons for major collectors because it impedes the smooth flow of traffic through the area. 2. The proposed 60' right-of-way is inadequate for a major collector_ • 3. The proposed improvement width is inadequate for a major collector. 4. Direct access to the Gaarde/Murray Blvd. Extension is allowed for • some of the dwelling units. This is inconsistent with County design ()� considerations for major collectors. The city and the County have been aware of the inconsistent designation of the Murray Blvd. Extension within their respective Transportation Plans for some time ry This issue was specifically addressed in the Washington Count Ti gard Urban Planning Area Agreement, The Urban Planning Area Agreement contained the following languages 4. Resolution of outstanding transportation issues between the parties including: w + X .a ■ �, • t f a l 1 , A •, - Eta \b., ,. Tigard Planning Commission March 6, 1984 ' Page 3 • , I a. consistent street classification standards; r b. the status of Durham Road; and c. the need and location of the Murray Boulevard Extension and Scholls Ferry Road to Highway 99W. Until resolution of these transportation issues, the rarti es shall take no action to preclude alternative solutions to those issues. As of January 1, 1 984, this Agreement shall lapse and the agreement currently in effect between the patties shall revive, unless: . 1 . The parties resolve the issues riot forth above; and 2. The parties extend the time in Mich to reach agreement. r< The purpose of this language was to indicate that an inconsistency existed and to assure that a solution would be achieved prior to any development taking place. .x . Foh whatever reason, the City of Tigard has decided not to extend the Agreement. Washington County is ready and willing to move toward resolving these issues. se Please enter this letter into the hearing record. If you have further questions regarding this matter, please give me a call . / 56'22) ' Ir ,64 I 1 /1::?2 ‘61fti 44" ' 'er6, . d i ' and A. Daniels, Di recto, , Land Development and Transportation Division 1.' RAD:KM:MBM c: Commissioner Wes Myllenbeck Commissioner Lucille Warren Donald EL Stilwell , County Administrator '" Brent. Curtis, Planning Manager , Jerry Kammerman, Road Engineer '' Bob Jean, Tigard city Manager Frank Currie, Director of Public, Works, Tigard William Monahan, Planning Director, Tigard Andy Cotu', no, METRO . f f , , C t . n a •"‘ ` • ''. • . 1 \ STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.8 MARCH 6, 1984 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LGI 10865 S.W. WALNUT TIGARD, OREGON 97223 '- A. FINDING OF FACT 1. General Information CASE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S 8-83 PD (Park Place) NPO #3 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting conceptual and detailed plan approval of a planned development and preliminary plat approval of Phase I, consisting of 39 units. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONING DESIGNATION: R-4.5 (PD) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of S 8-83 PD, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. APPLICANT: Century 21 Homes 14c. OWNER: same 7412 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy. Portland, OR 97225 LOCATION: 13900 SW 121st Avenue (Wash. Co. Tax Map 25] 3CC, Tax Lot 401 and 2S1 4 Tax Los: 1600). LOT AREA 47.81 acres NPO r'OMMENT: NPO #3 has not responded in writing to this revised • application request. 2. Ia.ckround , This application went before Planning Commission on December 6, 1983 for conceptual and detailed plan approval for a planned development and preliminary plat approval for a 43 unit development. The proposal was denied by the Commission for the following reasons: • a. Incomplete and inaccurate information; , b. Private streets are Anappropriate and c. Insufficient informal.ion was available to ap prt, the density ,. transfer to Phase I. ,I .. • , ,�... _ A �. . • h • M , i The decision was appealed to the City Council and on February 16, 1984, the Council decided to remand the application back to the Commission with the following direction: a. Gaarde Street should be designed to minor collector standards and that it be aligned to provide a "T" intersection. b. Gaarde Street also be developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The street should be designed to discourage the use of Gaarde Street and the development streets as an extension of Murray Blvd. r.. c. The development be designed to meet the purpose of Section 18.80.010 (A)(1) "To provide a means for creating planned environments through the application of flexible standards which allow for the application of new techniques and new technology in • community development thich Mill result in a superior living environment." 3. Proposal Description The applicant has submitted a revised plan for Phase I of the development in response to the comments of the Commission and the Council. A. narative provided by the applicant outlines the changes that have been made to the earlier proposal. The r,,, jor changes are: £ a. Expansion of Phase I, from 8.6 gross acreage to 9.42 acres and t ruction of the number of units from 43 to 49; b. ReOigning Gaarde Street and modifyi_xg the location of l� intevsection at the west end of Phase I; c. Indivi.i'ual lots are shown to clarify ownership■ poundaries; and d. Private street locations have to be modified. In addi'r.ion, the applicant has submiZted the following comments regarding the development: as Density is now at approximately 4.5 units per aere. • b. Private drives remain at a 24-foot paved width; however, at NPO #3's suggestion and our concurrence, the extruded curb on one side of the private drives shall be pi,aced at four (4) feet from edge of pavement to better delineate and protect pedestrian traffic. The curb will help discourage parking on this side of private streets and can, for emergency vehicles, be straddled if need be. c. A four (4) foot landscaped strip has been added between the private roadway and south boundary line. . O PARKING THI S SID signs on. " side d. We propose �,� " °g' pedestrian "de of private streets. STA P REPORT - 8 8.85 PD PAGE 2 /5c 1&' , e. Angle parking has been added adjacent to lots 16 through 20. f. Lot dimensions have been added. . ( g. Sidewalk and curb is proposed to be, continuous through the driveway approaches to private streets. h. It is clear intent of the Homeowners Association by-laws that maintenance of the private streets be the sole responsibility of the Homeowners Association with no participation required or needed by Vhe City in this regard. Provision for funding , street maintenance is made in Article IV, Section 4 of said by-laws. In , view of the fact that some sites have direct access from, Gaarde, the matter of annual assessment as well as the voting percentages required to, effect maintenance will be reviewed with our attorney. In this regard, items that will be considered include both life expectancy of pavement and replacement costs. i. On the most southerly of private streets, catch basins have beet, added at some distance away from Gaarde to mitigate the surface runoff problems at the entrance and exit points. j. Although the plan indicates a twenty-five (25) foot setback on Gaarde, it is the intent of the plan to show a twenty (20) foot setback. ' 4. Agency Comments The Engineering Division has the following comments: a. The applicant must improve the 121st Avenue frontage and the intersection of SW 121st and Gaarde to City interim standards. b. Half-stret improvements to collector standards shall be made to SW 121st Avenue where it fronts the applicant's project. C. All on-site streets, curbs, and sidewalks shall be constructed to City standards. • If the, 24-foot wide private streets are made one-way, parking will only be allowed on one side of the street. The applicant ,teast provide bicycle lano.s on the Gaarde Street extension within the project boundaries ah4 along the 121st Avenue frontage. • f. rifteen-foot wide public utility easements shall be provided for storm and sanitary sewer linen in the project. Where the lines are under the private streets (Tract "A" and "C"), the entire • tracf* should be used to describe the easement. g. Provisions must be made for adequately handling off-site drainage to the west of Gaade Street. Also, provision should be made for roof-top drainage on the northern lots 4 STAFF WORT - 8-83 PD PAGE 3 '40. „ rv• r . . -V , 0 [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] 111 * - h. The proposed alignment of Gaarde Street near the lalst Avenue intersection will apparently necessitate right-of-way dedication from the property to the south. A 60-foot wide right-of-way will be required for the entire length of Gaarde Street. i. The western end of access Tract "B" should be redesigned to eliminate awkward left turn movements onto Gaarde Street. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has no objection to the propoal. A school impact statement has not been received from the School District. B. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The provisions of the R-4.5 and Planned Development sections of the Code allow for a maximum of 43 units on Phase I without transferring density „ • from Phase II. The 39 units requested conforms with the R-4.5 (PD) designation. The alignment of Gaarde Street has been modified and appears to successfully addrea,a previous concerns regarding its location. The applicant contends this alignment is satisfactory with NPO #3. The major features of the proposal are propen.ly designed and provided the conditions of approval below are met, Phase I of Park Place is in conformance with City policy and the Development Code. Co RECOMMENDATION The Planning staff recommends approval of the request for conceptual and detailed planned development approval and preliminary plat approval of Phase I of S 8-83 PD subject to the folIoving conditions: 1. Seven, (7) Gets of plan-profile public improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a registered civil engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall, be submitted to the City's Engineering Division for review. 2. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Division has issued approved public improvement plans. The Engineering Division will require posting of a 100% performance bond, the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/street light deposit. Also, the execution of a sivreet opening permit or construction compliance agreement just prior to, or at the time of it's issuance of approved public r, improvement plans. 3 The final subdivisioq plat shall be recorded with Washington County prior to the issuance of any building permits. 4. No changes or modifications shall be made to approVed plans without written approval from the appropriate City department, STAFP REPORT S 8-83 Pb - PAGE 4 .191 • . ' NMA. . p ..,.. , . , 0 ('4 \ % ",,, •5. The applicant must improve the 121st Avenue frontage and the intersection of SW 121st and Gaarde to City interim standards. 6. Half-street improvements to collector standards shall be made to SW 121st Avenue where it fronts the applicant's project. 7. All on-site streets, curbs, and sidewalks shall be constructed to City standards. 8. If the 24-foot wide private 3:re0ts are made one-way, parking will only be allowed on one side of the street. 9. The applicant must provide bicycle lanes on the Gaarde Street extension within the project boundaries and 121st Avenue in accordance with City standards. 10. Fifteen-foot wide public utility easements shall be provided for storm and sanitary sewer lines in the project. Where the lines are under the private streets (Tract "A" and "C"), the entire itract should be used, to describe the easement. . ., 1 11. Provisions must be made for adequately, handling off-site drainage to the west of Gaarde Street. Also, provision should be made for roof-top drainage on the northern lots. 12. A 60-foot wide right-of-way will be required for the entire length of Gaarde Street. 0 , 13. The western end of access Tract "B" shall be redesigned to eliminate awkward left turn movements onto Gaarde Street. 14. Survey Conditions: a. Vertical Datum shall be City of Tigard (N.G.S. 1929). All f existing and established (temporary) bench marks in the c vicinity of the project shall be shown on the construcLion ) . LIEEEL11' b. Compliance of 18.160.160 (all) with the following oxceptions: 18.160.160 A.2 Capped 5/8" x 30" Iron Rods on suvface of final lift will be acceptable. • NOTE 18.160.160 B.1 City of Tigard Primary Control Surveys (CS. # 19,947 & 20,223) Local-Ground coordinates exist for all stations, State plane coordinates not Imired. City can make , transformation given local coordinatWS7-- 1 ) STAPP REPORT - S 8-83 PD - PAGE 5 I ( 1 ' 1 ii f, ,,, 1.1, ' ' - i 1 c. Compliance with Section 18.160.190 (B) : 18.160.190 Filing and Recording B. Upon final recording with the County, the applicant shall submit to the City a mylar copy of the recorded final plat. /. 15. A School Impact Statement that , t has been -.2a viewed by the appropriate school district official must be submitted prior to final plat approval. / i•Orif/ PREPARED BY: Keith Liden APPROVED BY: William A. Monahan Associate Planner Director of Planning & Development (KL:pm/0337P) STAFF RtpOBx - S 8-83 Pb PACE 6 r .� o i 4 `,,... a; 5.6 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S 8-83 PD (Park Place) NPO #3 The applicant is requesting conceptual and detailed plan app*oval of a planned development and preliminary plat approval of Phase I, consisting of 39 units . LOCATION: 13900 SW 121st Avenue (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 3CC, Tax Lot 401 and 251 4 Tax Lot 1400) . o Associate Planner Lidert made staff's recommendation for approval with conditions. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Mike. Fain, CentLry 21 Properties, reviewed history of the project and . changes which had been incorporated and addressed. NPO COMMENTS Bob Bledsoe, 7.1800 SW Walnut, NPR: #3, unanimously supported the 1 application. He then addressed issues of concern which had been resolved. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Betty McCain, 13950 SW 121st, opposed the application. She felt the density violated the Established Atea policy. Also opposed the "T" on Gaarde. o Ralph Flower, 11700 SW Gaarde, opposed the project because of street alignment. He submitted a June 6, 1978 letter from Washington County concerning the future alignment of the extension of 135th and proposed asrlurances. o Kevin martin, Washington County, opposed this development due to the fact that the street design is inconsistent with the Washington County Comprehensive Plan. CROSS EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL o Discussion followed regarding additional information submitted, and City Council's direction. o Discussion followed on how to proceed with this application. o Bob Bledsoe, NPO 03, reviewed Compreh.a ive Plan process and pointed out that this application was in conformance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Edin questioned if staff was requiring 1,Y - iurng half-street p, improvements on both sides of 121st. Discussion followed. Streets, would probably bt2, 3/4 improved. o Lengthy discussion followed regarding the private streets. . PACE 11 * PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTi S - MARCH 6, 1984 1 Y o Mrs. McCain asked if a guard rail could be installed to replace trees which have been protecting her house. o Further discussion on private street comparisons were done between London Sq. and proposed project. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner Butler asked that a condition be added regarding maintenance of the private street. o Commissioner Moen had concerns regarding private streets. o Commissioner Pyre felt that the plan was a compromise. He was concerned with private streets. o Commissioner Peterson also was concerned about private streets. Also he would like to see sidewalks. o Commissioner, Edin was also concerned regarding private street. He was also concerned with I!r, Flower's testimony and wanted to see it resolved. o Commissioner Leverett favored. o Commissioner Owens felt the road issue must be resolved between the City and County. She was also concerned with private roads and had other concerns she felt she was not able to address ' R during cross examination and rebuttal. o Discussion followed regarding the private streets. o President Tepedino had numerous concerns regarding the roads and traffic circulation. o Commissioner Leverett moved for approval of S 8-83 per staff's recommendation and conditions, o Commissioner Edin seconded. o Commissioner Peterson stated he would like to see a condition included for sidewalks and to include Mr. Butler's notion for maintenance of public roads. o Commissioner Leverett agreed to add a condition for maintenance of private roads, Commissioner Edin seconded: o Motion failed with Commissioners Peterson, Eyre, Tepedino, Moen and Owens voting NAY, j o Commissioner Fyr : moved for approval with conditions (per tapes . o Commissioner Edin conded. • ' WAGE 12 - PLANNING COMI.TSS'ON MINUTES MARCH Cat 6, 1984 o Motion failed 4-4. Commissioners Leverett, Butler, Moen and Owens voting NAY. a Commissioner Owens moved for denial because of the private street design, lack of sidewalks and lack of an agreement between the City and County for the arterial. o Commissioner Moen seconded. o Discussion followed regarding street alignment. o Motion failed. Commissioner Leverett, Edin, Peterson, Fyre and Tepedino voting NAY. o Commissioner Butler moved for approval based on Homeowner's By Laws reflect maintenance requirements, that there is no previous formal agreement for the street alignment, there be 34 ft. street, but no 50 ft. right-of-way, 12 ft. each lane and four ft. sidewalks. o Motion failed for lack of second. o Commissioner Moen moved for approval of conceptual and detaile.1 stp planned development approval and preliminary plat approval of Phase I of S 8-83 PD subject to staff's conditions and the following conditions. Conditions: 1. 'ne' Homeowner Association By Laws will reflect that maintenance of private streets and dedicated open space, recreational areas or private mini park be the sole responsibility of the Homeowners Assoc. with no participation required or needed by the City. 2. Streets will be 24 ft. wide, with four ft. sidewalks on both sides of tracks A & C, and sidewalks on one side of track B. 3. Garages will be located 20' to outside edge of sidewalk. o Commissioner Butler seconded. o Motion carried, Commissioner Owens voting NAY. 5.7 RESIDENTIAL HOMES ZOA 4-84 o Director Monahan explained that residential homes fall under the home occupation portion of the Code. Issue to deal with is does the Planning Commission feel that the home occupation is a commercial venture and if language in the Code Is adequate to handle the issue. O' Carbly'n 'Eadon, representing NPO #1, supported staff's recommendation, ;FACE 1 - PLANNINC MINUTES - ._kRC 1984 • 3 F'L�AAtNING C '� H 6� '198, TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE March 6,1984, Planning Commission Meeting President Tepedino, "There being no objection I now move to item 5.8, the subdivision Park Place, following that we will move onto 5.9 the residential homes questions, then pick up the other two ;items that are being proposed by the City of Tigard. So 5.8, please may I have the staff report and recommendation" 4 Associate Planner Keith Liden, "This proposal is for Park Place, this was reviewed by the. Planning Commission in December of last year and was denied for the following reasons, incomplete and inaccurate information, this felt that private streets were inappropriate, and insufficient information available to approve the density transfer in phase I. This proposal, this decision was appealed to City Council and on February 16 of this year Council remand the request back to Planning Commission for reconsideration. In response to the comments received at the two hearings before, the applicant has proposed a number of changes that are listed in the staff report. Changes • on the previous application that you've seen. I'm not going to go through all of those, but I do want to, bring up one thing that, actually a couple of mistakes, on, Item 3 a. on page two, and that is that Phase I will be still approximately 8.6 acres and will not be extended to the 9.4 as indicated, . there was a change after some of the initial information was given right at end, just before I finished the staff report . . . , also the reduction in the number of vnits will be. from 43 to 39. Obviously a typo error. Okay, with the 8.6 acres and the 39 units we come up with an overall density of 4.53 units per acre. Staff recommends approval of this proposal subject to the conditions which are listed in the report." President Tepedino, "Okay, thank you staff. Can I have the input from the NPO." Bob Bledsoe., "Yes, can we following the applicant." President Tepedino, "Okay, fine. Is there anyone from CCI? Anyone from CCI? Applicant's presentation please." Mr. Chairmen, members of the Commission, my name is Mike Fairi, I represent and am employed by Century 21 Properties. I am a civil engineer, and have taken over recently this particular project, . .. . . Bob, NPO records, as well as the remand by the City Council to the Planning Commission. As a little bit of background that you have in front of you anyway. This proposal before your is the result of a remand by the City Council. Their main items of concern were that Gaarde be designed to minor collector standards and p•covide for a "T" intersection and that the development be in compliance with the comprehensive plan. I thipk you will notice the "T'i intersection has been provided, in fact is included within the boundaries of this particular phase and that we designed, or that we prepared, we proposed that it would be built within this phase. Another item of concern by the. City Council is that this street design at Gaardet be designed to discourage the use of Gaarde and other streets in the vicinity as a extension of Murray. This we have gone with two consultations with staff and NPO, we've increase the radius, which should. slow r . 4 ` • •c, down traffic slightly. The other item was that the development be designed to as to meet the purpose of planned development per section 18.80.010 a. , 1. , of the municipal code which reads, "To provide a means for creative, planned ' environments through the application of flexible standards which allow for the ,, .: application of new techniques and new technology in new developments which will result in superior living environment." With regard to the design of the ! development and section 18.80.010 a. , 1. , we sincerely believe that due to the constraints imposed by the, alignment of Gaarde that we have designed the rr development in the best way that we can. To design it in the conventional manner would at best be a marginal venture resulting in a housing cost, that would possibly be beyond the reach. of any potential consumer. The plan as " submitted provides a far superior living arrangement than what would otherwise be achieved by conventional development techniques. Some of the other iems of minor concern, concerning sidewalks and 24 ft. non-curbed streets and the alignment of SW Gaarde. NPO had one concern, we have addressed all of theirs early 'on, with the exception of the one lane, which we were able to iron out just recently. And that concern was that in the by laws of the home Owners Association that we possibly take a hard look, at the,, percentage , voting �' requirements on maintaining private streets. We have to take a look al, that, in view of the fact that there are some loss, whose access would come off of Gaarde and thus may not have a interest that those people who live on, Gaarde Street may have and far as maintenance is concerned.. It would drop the required percentage to majority rather than 66 and 2/3 percent. The other y items of concern to the NPO was the $100.00 annual assessment fee for those maintenance items. After a brief review of that, we feel that a , $100.00 annual assessment fee is proper, that it should cover the cost of maintenance j. . of the streets. More from the standpoint that any street reconstruction would be more from the, more for overlay situation, rather than a total street L reconstruction. With that we feel that we have NPO',s unanimous support, we have the planning staff's support, we tried to address every issue, in the IIIbest manner possible, in a responsible manner and with that, we ask for your approval at this time. President Tepedino, "okay, thank you sir. Call for the NPO's presentation." "Bob Bledsoe, 11800 SW Walnut, Chairmen of NPO # 3. We had a meeting last night, uh, we had twice previously contacted the developer with regard to the development application. NPO # 3 unanimously support this development. We had the one condicion, which he mentioned in the by laws, include a lower percentage required to special assessment group for road improvements for the private roads. We thought this was necessary because of the . . . . .. . .... . . . . interest. Uh, Like to point out that some features of this application, previously you hacl a concern that the, your concern was that you were approving things on phase II, which you do not know really, wasn't specified out. This app1;,Lcaticn completely separates phase It from future phase., phase 1. All your including right low is the phase I and whenever the other phases J cone in you'll get to cee all of them and in the appropriate proper detail.. So your not approving, giving anything away in the future. Which was a , concern you properly had at the last hearing. Another concern that you has was in regard to the private roads. We note that this density on the, project r has been reduced down to the larger 43 units approximately same .... . .. down P to 39 now This will include a lower iii aec" on parking, and the parkizig is ,..: along one side of the entire private road: Its a one way road 24 ft. wide, E' Cy r ,. • ��Y4 . 1: } with separated area for the p pedestrian to travel. You may not noticed, that, , but there is a four ft. , the curb has been moved four feet to provide a separate identifiable place for, and there will be parking on the other side of the private road. That leave twenty feet, eight feet for parking, twelve for the traveling lane. .Aa,so, the new alignment of Gaarde Street, in regard to the parking situation, is now more clearly a minor collector, which is its designation. As a minor collector it allows for parking on the edge, places where its not interfering with intersection traffic. The minor collector road which are Gaarde and the un-named road headed to the north includes the "T" which is specified and is also noT., designed to more clearly discourage through traffic, than some of the earlier plans. We support the staff's conditions, except for one condition, which the NPO has not taken a position on, and that is the development across the street, on the other side of 121st, from development. Staff is requiring full curb and we not takin any position on that. ..... . . . .. There will be some neighbors here speaking to that particular issue. We'll be ready for questions later on." President Tepedino, "Thank you Mr. Bledsoe. I would like to call for public comment now. First pro, those in favor of this application. May I call for those against the item." "Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, my name is Betty McCain, I live at 13950 SW 121st Street. I note that they have reduced the amount of units that 1 they plan to put on this, but somewhere in the development code I read that if ' a new division, subdivision like this abuts a established residential area, within a hundred feet then it has, to it can only be twenty-five percent more than the residential established area or there has to be a buffer, and I don't see a buffer and I know they, are within a hundred feet. A established residential area up there is between one and three units per acre and what their proposing is 4.53. Maybe something wrong with that, I don't know. I am still very concern with this "T" end on Gaarde. The "T" end on Gaarde oa top of that hill is nothing more than setting it up for an extension to Murray Road later on- The kind of traffic we get there now, the road c:•tn't, almost can't handle it as it is. I think we, are all in agreement with that. Your going to be pouring, all the traffic from the, subdivision onto that road in addition to what we've already got. Plus your opening the door for Washington County Murray Road extension. I, there isn't a way around that. Because it will connect soon or later. Its going to connect ... five lanes now, you know. It would put a lot of us up there out of misery instead of taking a piece of our land at a time. The other Lhin .. . . . . g, , I know that LCDC and HUD, or LCDC and 1000 Friends of Oregon, they've really been on the Planning Commission back and. I'm afraid that the other thing thats going to happen up here is that thats going to be turned into a development for low cost housing to appease 100:00 Friends of Oregon and LCDC. Thats all I'm going to say." President Tepedino, ''Thank you. Any other parties wishing to speak in opposition, those opposing it. Yes sir.' Y " . s S r "Ladies and Gentlemen, I hope you can hear me, I have a little trouble talking. My name is Ralph Flowers, I live at 117th and Gaarde, 11700 SW Gaarde. You've probably heard my talk against this project ,before. Mainly for the fact that the they are connecting their streets to Gaarde and for , 121st. Now, several years ago when the Ames family, Edwards property were up for their annexation yeah for their annexation approval we had meetings with • the Council and Washington County. We were, . ader the condition that we approve, we were promised at that time that there would be no connection, no • street connection to either Gaarde, or 121st Street. That being the case. Live up to that statement. The whole block laid out, here with these streets is contrary to that. Now, Mr. oh gosh I have trouble with names, uh one of the employees uh Monahan, Yeah one of the staff, Mr. Monahan said he v:ouid, n` told me over the phone that he would go back thru the records and try to find a record of that promise. It, he apparently couldn't find it. The statement; that he made that he didn't locate it. However, Mayor Bishop was preceding at the Council meeting, on the night that this was referred back to you folks and he remembered it. He, says regardless whether it is on the record or not he remembers the statement. Alright, that bears that out somewhat. And again I have a letter, and the NPO, Mr. Bledsoe came by the other day and showed it,, that 'I undersrpnd And he told me that he didn't see where there was much that I could do about this. But I called some of my friends, who I hope would come up with some help and here it is. Had Mr. Bledsoe told • me they were having a NPO meeting last night I would have been there with this, this might have helped a little hit. But this is a letter from, its dated June the 6th, 1978, we know this happened a few, years ago, back when Miss was working for the It from the Planning its Larry K. Frazier, address to Mr. Aldie. Howard and its thanking him for trying • to get him a copy of the material on re: proposal to annex 142 acres lying north of Bull Mtn. Road and west of 121st at 114th Avenue, which covers this whole county, this area, we which is west of 121st and the Ames property and all this other stuff uh 114th up Gaarde Street and uh Bull Mtn. Road. Covers, the whole. works. But there a couple of paragraphs • that come along here and then down to paragraph four, I can give you folks a, copy of this if you would like to see it and I'm, sure you would. I feel bears out my . . a . . . . when this debate that I'm speaking on was going on, there was an agreement that the road that is know as McFarland now thru the Ames property and the Edwards property were to be extended on thru as it was needed by these future developments and likely would come out on. Walnut, somewhere in the neighborhood of 132nd to 135th. Alright, this says a portion of the area in this proposal has been formally recognized by . Washington County Planning Commission as the future alignment for the extension of SW 135th Avenue. The Ames and the Edwards developments have already dedicated and constructed portions of 135th extension and requirement of other developments, this is McFarland Street. If annexations occurs, assurance are needed that the remainder of the alignment will be acquired and the roadway constructed as development on the parcels occur x think that that b lr s out the statement that it was planned to take this traffic from all these developments up over the hill, McFarland is laid out As they are proposing on this Gaarde. Street extension that they have on there, its laid out as a aligned road to, discourage fast cars you won't be driving it at no 55 miles per • hour, and thats what we agreed to way back here when hectc+r was a pup. And its been lost somewhere due to oversight, change in personnel, or something, but, 1 still don' t •... . . . .. . . . asking that this that you conside , serious consideration, because this is the conditions under which the first annexations of the property south and east of this Bechtold property were annexations for the beginning. uditek 4 • " 1 President Tepedino, "Thank you sir. I'rz sure we'll have some questions on that. Any other parties wishing to speak in opposition, those opposed to this proposal. "Chairman, members of the Commission, my name is Kevin Martin and tonight I'm representing the Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation, • thats the new version of the consolidated Planning Department and Public Works Division. I'm here to speak in opposition to the proposed design of the Gaarde Street extension to the Park Place project. We are not opposed to the development itself, only to the design of the roadway. I just had passed out to you some written testimony, summarizing the County's position on this particular project. I will briefly summarize what is contained in, that letter. The general, the County's analysis of transportation needs in this particular part of the urban area indicates that a major collector connection will ultimately be needed between Pacific Highway/99W and Murray Blvd. and it is proposed that that extension connect somewhere in the vicinity of 135th and Walnut and extend down to Gaarde Road and 121st. The County's transportation plan suggest that the street should be a major collector, which indicates that it should be generally a thru street with no obstructions to the smooth flow of traffic, suc'' as "T" intersections and tight radiuses. To be built on 70 0 ft. right of way with 40 to 46 ft. improvement. The City is proposing to, or at the request of the City Council, the developer is proposing a "T" intersection, from what I can tell and 28 to 36 ft. improvement 60 4t. right-of--way and direct access by several homes in the development, which is inconsistent with a major collector status. Other County staff members have been involved in this particular project for over a year now, with a number of meetings that were held • - what not,. I was not party to those meetings. But other County staff members were. This particular issue was of serious b , A enough concern to the County that it was addressed in the Washington County Tigard Urban Planning Area .Agreement, which was signed last summer., That particular condition is in the Urban Planning Area Agreement calls for a further study rf the Murray Street extension and Durham Road being one of the other issues, and both parties agreed that neither party would take a action to preclude the other parties preferred option. In this case, the County prefers a major collector extension, the City of Tigard proposes an indirect connection. There was a sunset clause placed, in that Urban, Planning area Agreement that said, if the transportation issues were not resolved, where both parties could not agree to extend the agreement, that the agreement would. lapse on January 1st of this year. City of Tigard has chosen not to renew the agreement so it has expired and is not in effect at this time. The County has made other comments to LCDC in regard to status of the Urban Planning Area Agreement. Oh 1 might make a cointn nt, the woman who testified earlier about the five lane extension for Murray Blvd. There was an error, apparently in a one of the local newspapers, that said the Murray Blvd. extension was proposed • as five lanes. Five lanes is the improvement standard for a major or regional arterial and we're proposing a major collector, which is throe lades, so there was an error in there and was misconstrued by a number of people. Are there any questions. President Tepedino, "rho, not at this time, thank you for your, testimony. Any other parties wishing to speak ' in opposition to this application, in opposition. Now is trie oppc7 tunity for cross examination and or rebuttal. I u T- pose q' � a' to staff to why, at this guess what I would like to do is p °e a question t as t late date we're getting additional information Director Monahan, "Your referring to the, information from Mr. Flowers.' • President Tepedino, "Yes." • Director Monahan, "Well, Adrianne has the letter, the letter, second paragraph, says, We have investigated the potential land use impacts of the proposal and offer the following findings ^r yc..dr consideration. This letter was submitted by Mr. Flowers and its and %,r.,er of findings, now I have not seen this letter I don't know if the offer was accepted or whether or not the finding that this being referred to by development was in fact incorporated into any decision. President Tepedino, "If I may, it was a offer made by the City of Tigard to Washington County. • Director Monahan, "No, Washington County offering findings to us. On some type of negotiation that are taking place. It's similar to when someone gets a land use approv,1 and then they, the applicant proposes findings and the City make a decision whether those findings are agreeable. I don't know what the status of this is. • President Tepedino, "The significants of this offer is what? Your interpretation please." Director Monahan, "Until we, analyze whether or not, now that we have a lead 1: to potential dates to what Mr. Flowers is speaking of, we might be able to find something in the records that shows that such and such an agreement was made. What standing such an agreement has now, uh, I don't know, Adrianne?" Legal Counsel, Adrianne, "Can I make two comments, one, the letter you have there is signed by the Planning Director, it is not a official action by Washington County in anyway. There just comments saying thank you for the opportunity to review. Here some information for you. So the ' letter itself has no status at all. The Boundary Commission actually does, in the annexation and so the conditions of annexation would be included, the Boundary Commissior's action. The next questions which concerns me is despite ' any kind of comment or any kind of things that went on about denying someone ' access to a public street. If you were to deny this on th' grounds that it was inappropriate for them to have access s I think there some really, I don't know how to phrase it, but I'm really not aware that you can deny someone access to a public. street. William Monahan, " Relative.' to the County comments, the County comments are not new. This is a continuing problem between the County and the City and I think that the policy direction that we got from the Council is reflected in the staff report. The Council asked, us, rather asked tha applicant to show that "T"' intersection. Sure, that violates the old agreement which is no longer in effect. Thats the policy direction we got. At this point we are trying to come up with a interim Urban Planning Area Agreement, that I will be proposing to the Council. But I know that. I canit propose an agreement that is exactly the same as the one that we had December 31. So the proposal that I place procedure i ) Cofnany transportation decisions, but will will be making (coughing) is void of a set in lace a .- for the, County and the City to negotiate over a' period of time to resolve the long term transportation issues, tut only once ,e have sufficient data ... . .. . waiting for during that interim area planning agreement." • ti n • e President Tepedino, "Let me see if I'm understanding what you are saying. Your saying that the Council's policy, in direction to you would be to go with this "T" intersection not with standing the County's interest. "' Monahan, "That is correct.'" Tepedino, "Now where is the County's, now where is the City Council's ' direction in policy Mr. Flowers. Monahan, "There was no policy raised. When Mr. Flowers, Mr. Flowers is correct, he brought this matter up at the City Council at the time they remanded it back. . . . . . . .found the information, I said nO I hadn't found it, as he mentioned the Mayor said Well 'I remember that discussion." Tepedino, (someone coughing) Monahan, "You have the full body of the Council's position. Commission Edin, "My questions, I guess to Bill, in fact don't we have some policies, due to the fact that we just went through the comp plan development and streets were laid out. I'm bothered because we went clear through that and the time I was here. I don't remember any of that testimony. It may have been and I was just absent. I've heard Mr,, Flowers address us a couple of times before on this issue. I don't remember, as I sat here in the comp plan process of hearing that testimony. I may have been absent, but it seems to me that thats the policy I' :1 bound by is what in that comp plan." Monahan, "Well, I think you are right. Even if it wa_. brought up in public hearings and Council and the Planning Commission and tit.. Council choose not to incorporate it; then its gone. Thats the way I would first look at it, I don't kr,:;Hr. { Tepedino, "Yes, I would agree, the Planning Commission put together the comp plan and sent it to the City Council to law. Monahan, "A lot of old policies are gone now, from the previous old NPO plans, previous adopted a city wide plan. i� comment." Teped�.no, Mr Flowers you have a Mr. Flowers, ". . ..:, couple I was wondering about. flow come you people come up with a copy of that letter tonight. I got my saturday, from a friend of mine.' Monahan, "That is the cop;.r you turned in tonight. It's the one you gave to the secretary." I underlined where the Flowers, "Okay, Y in that letter, referred to this street that they have laid out through the Edwards and the Ames properties and. it refers to annexation . . .. ..... .. as they development. That bears out in my mind the fact that thats the way they plan to take it." Monahan, "Theres no question that that opinion was expressed by the County, but whether or not that was actually incorporated into an •agreement between the City and the County is not evident in that letter. That what I 4 h 44 ( .., 1 Mr. Flowers, Well its evident from the plots of these Antes and Edwards properties. That street is plainly shows on right up to the across the boundary of the Ames addition, which leads you right into the property were speaking cif. It would be a logical extension through as that letter states. Monahan, "It would be logical, but its not the only alternative that road :: could lead into. When I look back into the records, for whatever value there might be, to see what this lead to. .. (two people talking). .. you might be, correct, the comprehe i••e plax has been changed and the transportation map has been adopted, that probably is in conflict wit:;: this old agreement, if that agreement exists. Flowers, "Okay, in otherwords, then a governing bodies word isn't worth the time wasted to, speak up. Is that what your trying to tell me." Monahan, "No, the governing body has the ability as it develops over a period of time to change its policies and change its programs to meet the needs of the population in the future. And its possible, if that was adopted as a policy, that for some reason when the comprehensive plan was adopted in 83 that someone had different idea, and possibly a better idea." Flowers, "Well, not to us and the neighborhood, it can't be a better idea." (laughter) Tepedino, "Thank you sir. Counsel." Legal Counsel, "I would say, if it is a condition of the annexation that access ba somehow some other way then you would probably have to follow that. It would be in a formal, document, not just discussion, it would have to be formally adopted. . (veveral people talking the same time) Monahan, "When you first ask me, the question, I said, now that I've seep•k the letter received today we might bei able to ,trace it back. Liz went back, *pnt back through the City's ordinances and records with Loreen with the approximate dates that Mr. Flowers gave us during his telephone conversation, we might be able to find something. (''''' Tepedino, "Then the staff's position with this latest knowledge, is that a ongoing search . . .« ' Monahan, "I would say that we're advising that application go forward and . come back to you with Jour finding, if we find that this has been adopted and . •,. .",. . . .,. • — • . . with Adrianne." I I pedino, "Would it be a conditio al approval, :Om asking the City Attorney. If we so choose to approve it, with condition that no other agreement be found • on the part of the City." r `t Legal Counsel, "You could do that." �° Monahan, "No other cot:,flicting agreement.' Tepedino, "Because if there is a prior agreement, then we would be bound by that .* .'.b+.... ,y,, ... .it. ... . e . . . M i/ —6 , .« « Legal .Counsel, "I'm worried about no other agreements At some point this development has to be assured that. I think that you have to be. clear . . . . . .. . . . . concisely what your, talking about. Informal discussion at the City Co=..ncil versus and adopted document. In other words if annexation was conditioned upon. Tepedino, "I take it it would have to been on or after June 6, 1978. "° Flowers, "I think it probably was right around or slightly before that. It was stated and I believe it was recorded at Washington County Commission, I believe, called the annexation hearings of the Ames and, the Edwards properties. Tepedino, "But, I take it sure that this letter is talkie.!; about a proposal." Flowers, "Of further annexations. It says right there in that part that I underlined that the Ames and the Edwards additions properties had plotted and built that road. if annexation occurs. Tepedino, The underlined part. : Flowers, "That whole paragraph does" • Tepedino, "Yeah, but it says if annexation occurs annexation then would be assess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . It sound that it might be almost to much of a burden to search records on this. Monahan, "Now that we have a lead it won' t take us hardly any time at all." Tepedino, "So if the Commission so choose to go forward with an approval bed on we could make it conditional upon the actions of any formal written agreement between the City and other associated parties for " Would Counsel be comfortable with that." Legal Counsel, "Well, the 'boundary Commission is the would be the juri:;diction because of the annexation. So if the annexation is conditioned upon that, that would be one, or I suppose the other thing is could there be ary agreement enter into, formal agreement between the Board of County Commission and the City Cc ,ncil of, Tigard as a precondition of going forward with the annexation. So I suppose },lose two things you could have." Tepedino, "Thank you. Any other questions on Cross Examination or Rebuttal. ' Yes sir." • Bledsoe, "First I'll address the issues just under discussion. The City did adopt the comprehensive plan and what Mr. glowers says, as far as I know, is true about the County has implemented this provisio q. In all County maps that you see, you'll see this road going thru it provide for future developinelp:t. Going from 135th and Walnut all the way to MCFarland. However, the County adopted a comprehensive plan this day, aligned the road not to M.7 arland any longer but to Gaarde. The City of Tigard adopted a comprehensive plan, calling for a connection between, 121st and Gaarde and 132nd. ., . . . ... .: . , .. If this agreement your talking about affecting the County plan and the City plan are viol ated al r ead y. The development a r �:�.. :. . . . . .. ..... . is within the scope of the comprehensive plan which was sent forward by the Planning Commission and adopted by the City Council. I think you are in your proper authority to approve something that is entirely within the comprehensive plan,. Regarding the density transition. The project is separated by a major collector, 121st is a major collector and the transition does not apply. I would encourage the Planning Commission to read page 60 of your Community Development Code sometime. There have been several times that I have observed that the has come up and the Code is very clear as to what the limit is. For example for a single family (tape ended) (2nd tape has loud buzzing noise much of Mr. Bledsoe testimony cannot be heard) The City Council gave clear direction, first the ''T" intersection, second that it be designed according to the comprehensive plan, • which was c Direct access is allowed, parking is allowed. These, features of the comprehensive plat , by City Council are incorporated into the .' plan. So we urge your support in approving this plan. • Tepedino, "Thank you. Any other questions on Cross Examination and or Rebuttal. Commission Edin, "I guess to first of all with conditions, condition number five. I would like it explained a little bPL er what we mean by 121st Ave. frontage, are we talking about the opposite sine of the street? Associate Planner Liden, "My understanding of interim standards means that you have a section of twenty feet and . Edin, °i I've read it several time, you said in one condition • that you must improve 121st frontage plus the intersection at 121st and Gaar6.e, then we say in the next condition that must make half-street improvements to 121st .. . . Now I c?n only 'nclude from that, that in the first condition is that were making them do, the, opposite side of the • street to interim standards. Thais my question. Does it have to be half street in front of his property this go across the centerline and improve the other side to interim standards? Liden, "Okay, someone from public works was here to address this. The interim standard would be, first you start approximately in the center . • 4 then in addition to that they would half street improvements to there side so we wind up with a finished street oft one side plus enough pavement . .. . . . . . .. . .. ..... ... . . . three quarters street improvement. • Min, "I guess I would like to ask the applicant, do you understand the condition. Mike Fain, "Commission Edin, staff and I talked with the engineering department. We tried to get a hold of Frank Currie and he wasn't available. I did talk with two people, one I think was Randy and the other was John 1 .. .. .. But in talking 'with, John he indicated that to expect to the applicant in this case to fully improve the other side of the street was not keeping with , pass process. . :.: .d . . .. however, he thought that it maybe reasonable to have a little bit of pavement to make Lhat turn more # negotiable ......... . .. . .. . He also stated, I might clarify that those policy decision should actually come from Frank Crrie, .., .. :.�,.. ..... ..... that would be his understanding. The last item he indicated that would probably be resolved here at this process ..«.. . . . O... ......... A..........,�.. A a; • t`. Tepedino, "Any other questions an cross examination and or rebuttal." Edin, "I have a feeling that when we heard this before that what was bothering a number of us, part of it was because it was to private streets standards and we weren't sure less standard . . . . . ..w. . .. . . . ,, . , . I can I'm still wrestling with it, I still don't feel comfortable with that question. Yet, I don't see anything in the way of finding or legality which say you can't have So I guess I / Fain, "If I could, maybe I help explain the situation better. I don't know if it was clarified or emphasized enough during, the last hearing,, but the traffic is one way, with proposed parking on one side of the street and if you allow a eight foot space for parking, for a six foot wide ,;,'.' automobile, and four foot pedestrian corridor on the other side, you end up with a 12 ft. lane. Now as I was driving here this evening, along Hall Blvd. you have a similar situation, with as pedestrian corridor on the east side Theres traffic there and the speed limit is 45 MPH. It didn't seem to present that much of a hazard. Here we would not expect speeds over 10 to 15 miles per hour in the private road,. On that bases it appears to be a reasonable proposal." Tepedino, "Okay. Any other questions on cross before I close the public hearings. Commissioner Owens." Owens, "I am just wondering if the radius for the fire engines, I guess they didn't have much concern about it, but the one way street there. could a fire ! ' .. engine get around that corner." Tepedino, "Staff can you address that." Liden, "The fire district reviewed the proposal and Owens, "And they saw this street configuration. What is a intruded curb, I think I know, but I just want Liden, " is four feet out a would be just Several people talking. Owens, "Is it like the bike path along Farmington. Fain, " ::, its approximately 6 to 8 inches high and the bases of it is anywhere from 10 to 12 inches wide, they make different forms using different ..+.. . . o for extruded. curbs. You see some .. . ...... 41. . 11.:. ......... . . . . .' Owens, "Like they use in parking lots?" Fain, "Yes." Tepedino, "Anyone else" Mr. Flowers, "May I make another remark please." Tepedinc, "Okay." 4141.., 4141.. 4141 4141 4141. ,. . s u '4141, '4i• GSM.., Mrs. Flowers, "I heard it mentioned a curb on the opposite side of 121st, , .t• I would like to highly recommend that one of these curbs such as your talking about now be put on the inside of that curb. IOn Christmas morning we had quite a bit of ice as you will remember. Our ' daughter lives over by Progress and didn't want to drive here car home. So I say okay, sis, I'll take it home. Boy, she had as small car, with all weather radial on it, and we put on her chains. I drove that car going west on Gaarde street and started to make to corner on 121st and I lost all traction and went sliding down into Mrs. McCain driveway. Now of course, something like that I think it would be advisable to put something up there to Mrs. McCain, "Could I suggest something. One of the things that going to happen with this street, improvement is that your going to take out a lot, of trees along the front of my property and the side of my property and those trees have actually protected, we gotten tired of puttiug up our fence, its down in one portion, every neighbor who goes by there can testify to that. We. got tired of putting the darn fence back up every time some ran thru it. The • trees have protect .d us from people running into our house. If your going to widen the street and take out my trees, how about a guard rail in there to 1* protect my house. I mean a big metal guard rail." Tepedino, "Thank you. Any other questions regarding. . . . Commissioner Fyre, 'r you proposed no parking on one side of the street, who is going to enforce that no parking." Mike Fain, "In our discussion with the NPO, we felt that by moving the ; I extruded curb out that would help discourage the parking on that particular side of the street. It will be clearly indicated Fyre, "Staff a question for you on the streets standards (several people talking same time untranscribable) Monahan, "Minor collectors, its generally 40 ft. , looks like 34 for a local street, local street in a planned development is normally 26 ft. (discussion not transcribable) • Commissioner Moen, "I have a real problem with, maybe the applicant can tell me why he objects to building sidewalks on in this development .. .. .. . . Fain, "We feel that the private roadway is sufficient for moving pedestrian traffic to Gaarde. Moen, 'Pedestrian traffic .. . .a . . .. . .a,. . couple of little kids on big wheels." Fain, "I don't know if you can enforce kids from playing in the street t know I live on a cul-de-sac and my kids play" Moen, "If th.eres no sidewalks thats where they will play." Fain, "But again we have to focus back on the fact that speeds are only 15 miles per ho ♦ g would like to make it a condition stir. If the Planning Commission w that we .r b.'a ii .. w'a a a a s r a'i'• r tl a a • ai i r a a i i i a a r i,.. 14 i a w. i t....i r r.. r.r a li''. .' .. C o o • j � • ri.i. , „m .....u..wl..... +i...w,....,ed.l,i. .v,,..lkU1•d:a...i1kly.,l.lUl'ran,Aav ,t• • Commissioner Fyre, "I have a questions for the applicant. Your proposing private roads, why not public roads? Could you answer that? Fain, "Well, I think that we tried to address that before and again I'm only been with Century 21 a short time. I've discussed it with Mr. Bledsoe of NPO # 3. We, in looking at the development as a whole from the way the property is bisected by Gaarde, to development both sides or on both sides of Gaarde in the conventional manner in. using 50 ft. right of ways and large you end up with something thats almost unusable. If you try to development in a conventional manner. Fyre, "You couldn't add five more feet on the side of the road Fain, ''It would be difficult, as it is." Fyre, ''The reason I'm asking is I've driven through London Square and it quite, with cars parked along the side of the road. I think the driveways are only single car driveways and, are a little short. If you have a two car family, one car is in the driveway and one car is, in front of the houcle. The very stack up in there. . .. . „. . . .. . . . . .. � . . are ver narrow so cars kind, of sta p The other concern I have, and I'll make it i,:L the form of a question, lots 16 thru 22 on Gaarde have nothing to do with the.. private roads, however. . . . . .. . ... Fain, "Your saying they don't have access onto a private strut, is that correct?o.. Fyre, "Well, I asking if they would be paying for part of the maintenance of the private street even though they are not on the private street.” Fain, "They are abutting a private street, Its set up so everyone contributes Fyre, .... . ... ... . .Is this, I can see The proposal proposal before us was for a condominium development, where everyone, own the land, I assume that this proposal here that the Land goes with the house and these lots are fee simply by the homeowners, is that correct." Pain, "Thats correct. Now 'I think in fact. I pointed, out to Mr. Liden, that back in September, I believe it was, the initial application was for a subdivision PD, in fact both fees were paid at that time. .... .. So it was intended that the land be sold, even though it may not have been, shown on the previous proposal. (Discussion between Commission Pyre and Mr. Fain untranscribable) Mr. Oringdolph, (Compared this development with London square - testimony not transcribable. Tepedino, "Okay, one quick questions, ...‘1A have four more public hearing f . items. Okay sir. Speaker (unable to identify - unable to transcribe.) Tepedino, "Close the public hearing oft this issue." 0 Commissioner Owens, "I was interrupted several times and I have several more , a questions." Tepedino, "You'll have your chance when we go up and down the aisle, sorry we are running late. Commissioner Owens do you have any questions." !; Owens, "No." , Tepedino, "Commissioner Butler." Butler, "Yes, I would like to, add an additional condition, if its appropriate, that would be that the Homeowners Associations bylaws will reflect that maintenance of private streets and dedicated open space will be the sole responsibility of the Homeowners Association, with no participation i required by the City. And that would be reflected back earlier on page three, where the intent of the Homeowners Association bylaws were to do that, but they did not include open, space and Open space is going to come on down the road, the Homeowners Association going to be paying for those Upkeep on those Phase one, should be paying for a, it as long however many other phases t'h,ere area So if its inappropriate to put that in there I stand corrected. But I feel that the City can't afford to keep up 12.58 acres of recreational Tepedino, Okay,, I'll ask the staff later. Commissioner Moen." • Moen, "I guess I have problems with this Phase, primarily with the street improvements. I have some concerns ., ..•... .. . . (untranscribable) Tepedino, "Okay, thank you sir. Commissioner Fyre.1° Fyre, "The whole, plan represents to me a compromise in my mind prevent a lot off through traffic coming extremely fast I not comfortable with the private streets, two aspects, one is the safety standpoint; secondly I don't see where it contributes to a superior living arrangement Tepedino, "Commissioner Peterson." Peterson, "I also have a problems perhaps with the private street, or the lack of sidewalks. I think I would definitely like, to see sidewalks. • Tepedino, "Thank you sir, Commission Edin." Edin, "I guess two or three things. I also like the "T" that would solve one of the major concerns we have The private streets bother me, but I said in December, I don't know what legal bases I can . . . . . .. ... reason to exclude them. I haven''t been able to find one. I guess I would suggest that we have a look at that in terms of putting some standards in for private streets, particularly the base and that asphalt and things like that. I realize that we can't do that here tonight. I'm bothered by Mr. Flowers' testimony. I. feel like the time we should have been talking, about that. was during the comp �interru interrupted not have been missed when understand that ng about (Mrs. plan. i y transcribable) hat and I think we are going ... en we where talking Flowers to try to respond as best really proper time was gwhen p - ranscr we can. I realZ believe the proper we were dealin,. with the comp plan, in dealing with the whole mat then. I guess ■ if we put a condition on that this approval is subject to investigation by staff, any conditions on annexations and/or agreement between Washington County and City Council, then I could go ahead a vote on this tonight. Without that I would have to oppose it. I would like to get to the bottom of that and get it the issue resolved one way or the other.O1 (' Tepedino, "Thank you Commission Leverett." . Leverett, "I basically in favor of it, I think its been very well covered by NPO # 3 and I'm in support." Tepedino, "Okay. Comrissioner Owens would you care to make a comment.'' l Owens, "Yes. I feel that the road issue is something that needs to be decided between the City and the County so that we can go ahead with some clarity about how planned in the whole areas that involved and I'm not comfortable with a plan that may not fit at some future time after a decision has finally made. Furthermore I have not had a adequate opportunity tonight • in the cross examination to asked and address some of the concerns that I had And furthermore I am not completely satisfied, not comfortable with the private roads. One of the Commissioner referred to it as a compromise, I think he was referring to the "T" and some things like that, but it seem like i a compromised plan to me. I do appreciate the developers tremend aus amount of effort, time and thought on this and I think the road questions is not entirely his problem, but it is affecting his, thats my decision in the development." Tepedino, "Okay, Commission Moen." Moen, "Two questions of staff. Is there, the only problem I have is the /1 private roads, the second problem is the sidewalks. Is there is any provision , which would allow the City of have a public street Liden, "A publLic street is one way and • • p . . Monahan, "Well its under the PD concept that the application is made, isn't I it Keith„” Liden, "Yes." • Monahan, ''Under the PD . . your saying that if it weren't a PD, if it came in as a straight subdivision, would we grant a variance." . Moen, "No I'm saying that . . . .. ...... o. i.. ..e private' street standards. I'm not trying to redesign it But what I'm trying to say is that x .. one way streets . .. ... . (not. transcribable)........ , . .. . Monahan, I don't think a variance is necessary, I think under the PD concept . you would get an opportunity to work with the applicant to come up with a street that meets everyones. . . . . Moen, It couldn't be i. public street unless .* ,.... •, .. ... . ..... . . Monahan, "Right." I. , . .... ... .,. „ .,. , . wan. Ih• �i. Tepedino, "Any other questions. My feelings, I'm not very happy with this proposal. Gaarde is a dangerous street the way it stands and I see a lot of little roads cutting in an out and private road on Gaarde. How do you control them. .. .,. ... .. .,, this is the right forum. Sidewalks were mentioned, that bothers me. not transcribable _�:• .. . ,:� i,. not transcribable.. . .., } Tepedino, "Any other questions before I call for a motion on this. Commissioner Butler would you like to make a motion." Butler, "I don't (laughter). l° Tepedino, "Commissioner Leverett." Leverett, "I moved that we accept this proposal." Tepedino, "You accept as proposed with the staff's findings and recommendations to Leverett, "Thats correct." Tepedino, "Motion made for approval based staff's findings and PP g recommendations ,tnd with their conditions. Motion made do I hear a second. • (Several people tallying same time) Edin, "I'll second it I would like to see some modifications Tepedino, "Motion made and seconded." Peterson, "I think here would like to see some sidewalks and I would say perhaps we ought roads 4 %t. . ., I would think we could go with a 24 ft. road with two, four foot sidewalks or possible ... . . I don't know emerg&!ncy vehicle access. (several people speaki y (several talking same time) . . Leverett, I would like to clarify the motion.. Secretary, What about Commissioner Butler's condition. Tepedino, "That was not in the motion that was made and seconded." Edin, "Thats correct." Leverett, "Thats is correct." Butler, "Then it not in here. � Tepedino, "It is not in the motion that has been made a seconded. We can k' either amend that, withdraw or vote up or down. Leverett, "I would like to amend my motion to include Mr. Butler's . .. . Secretary, "You want to amend your condition to include Mr. Butler's condition. (Several people talking same time.) Tepedino, "That the Homeowners Association include responsibility for maintenance of f, Butler, "For open space and the private streets. Tepedino, "And the second point that was raised is the sidewalk." Leverett, "No, (several people talking). . . Tepedino, "Okay the second condition being that their will be no formal agreements. Is that, apart of your motion. Leverett, "Yes." Tepedino, "Do we have second with that. Edin, "Yes. (several people talking.) 0 Tepedino, "All of those in favor of the motion as made and seconded excluded the sidewalks and includes the park maintenance and open space and, includes that fact that there be nr, prior formal agreements and excludes the sidewalks, all those in favor say aye." "Aye" A Tepedino, "All those opposed." "No" Secretary!, Could I have the names of the Commissioners why voted no. Cc�z>�uni s s . � oner Peterson, Fyre, Tepedino, Moen and Owens voted no. lI �•+I I Tepedino, "Commission Fyre, would you like to make a motion." Fyre, "Yes .I would love to. The sidewalk issue what I would like to see is those roads widened to allowed additional pedestrian trAffic. • Tepedino, "Staff what do you suggest?" - � Liden, "Well, if your going to ask for sidewalks, you, might as well get the s. whole thing, if (discussion untranscribable) ` Fyre, "So moved." Tepedino, "Okay, all the conditions, the open space maintenance, private "�• streets maintenance, the no prior formal agreements and the sidewalks. What are the dimension Phil?." ' G . Edin, 20 feet of pavement and four ft. sidewalks. . . Tepedino, "Do I hear a second. Edin, seconded. I,. I , Tepedino, "All those in favor, further discussion, further discussion. Staff." y Liden, "I hate to I did discuss this with the fire district. They did note that they did have had problems in the past with enforcing of the parking of one side, so they were talking about if it 24 ft. ". width, even if things get lax and cars park on both side, they can still get through. If you reduce the width to 20 they may have a problem. Butler, What's a normal street 32ft. right instead of ... .,,. .. . around lets just go for the whole thing. several talking.. . . .. .... . Tepedino,, "I'll call for the motion. All of those in favor of the motion made and seconded, signify by saying aye. ""aye'" Tepedino, "Those opposed." "Na." Tepedino, "Could I see a show of hinds. We have a the so the motion fails. Oe.xt motion. Comma,ssioner Owens would you like to make a motion. Owens, "I rake a motion Chat we deny." Tepedino; "Do a hear a feconded for motion of denial." ies \ I A l.: • p Secretary, Don't we need finding for the denial, or does that come now or afterwards?" Tepedino, "Motion for denial do we have a. seconded." Moen, "Seconded" Tepedino, "Seconded. Discussion. Commission Owens would you like to give us your findings." Owens, "I'm voting for denial because, I am recommending denial, this is always hard to do, how do I say about the sidewalks. to not seem to be I don't know how to say it. The design of the plan wit:.) the private streets and �. the (I know the concerns of the Commissioners about the sidewalks doesn't cut it.) how can that be worded. Would prefer to see sidewalks in there. That the private roads remain a concern and the other one and I don't know if this is a valid finding but I feel again we are, putting the horse before the cart in trying to put a development in this area, when a decision has not been made and reached between the City and the County regarding the eventual alignment of the road, because I feel that raises some real serious concerns, at some point a decision may finally be agreed upon for, is that major arterial, major collector, Not a major collector, whatever the width is, I'm sorry my thoughts are very scattered, because I wasn't thinking about doing this. Tepedino, "Let me ask the staff to address that. Staff can you clarify the issue." Monahan, "As far as I'm concerned the City has made its policy clear that it is a minor collector a series of minor collectors that will connect Gaarde and Scrolls. Ferry Road,. We are not in agreement with, the County, I don't think its a prerequisite that we ever do agree with the County. I. certainly would like for us to reach an agreement so that we can go on and have our plans acknowledged and serve the transportation needs of the area. But I don't think thats something we should hang this on. The City has made its policy .0 and its to dictate a "T" intersection on this piece of land." Tepedino, "Thr'c the way I read it. That the City has made their policy decision that th'3y are not going to agree with the. County. • Monahan, "Teats right." Tepedino, "Th;t the way I see it.01 Owens, But somehow, and it. may be that I can't put that in as a finding, but it seems to be in contest, what I hear stated by people,., that they do not want . .. .. . yets thats exactly what we are creating, We are going to create a whole series of neighborhoods that traffic is going to flow right thru. Its a conflict and a contradiction to me and I feel its a major issue that we will have to live with for hundreds, of years if it isn't resolve and thought out and some decision is come to. Okay, so we can't put this in as a finding. But, I feel that, there are some valid points which could be proposed for denial. Once would concern the streets, the narrow private driveways, one concerns sidewalks issue. But I don't know how to say them, because I don't know wherp in our code it specifies that, we have to have them. Can you Mr. Moen? `.. , • yt, .n. Moen, "My comments would be that private streets are Owens, "I don't know if this can be a finding, but I did not have an adequate f' opportunity in cross examination to have my some of my concerns answered. So , . Tepedino, "Do you have some particular issues you would like to address." Owens, "I did, during the cross examination and rebuttal tw; ne, there was some concerns and (Tepedino, "Would you like to raised them now?) Well, I think we're a little far (Tepedino, "I'll give you special five to eleven and we have four more) I don't really know what it will accomplish. ' I've made a motion for denial. Tepedino, "All those in favor of the motion thats been made and seconded for denial signify by say Aye." "Aye.'1 Tepedino, "All those opposed" . "No." (Leverett, Edin, Peterson, Fyre and. Tepedino voting no.) Butler, "I would like a turn. (Tepedino, "Commissioner Butler") I, would like to go to Mr. Leverett's original motion which included everything and plus the condition that I put on and the one that Phil put on and I would like to go to 34 ft. streets as specified in the transportation chapter, not the 50 ft. right-of-way, but just the 34 ft. pavement width, with the appropriate sidewalks and parking. City standards except for the right-of-way width for the local. Tepedino, "So your suggesting a motion for approval including the Homeowne t-s Association for the open space and private road maintenance (tape ended. ) Tepedino, "Making motion i:or approval based on Homeowners Association maintenance for open space, no prior agreement-. Let me refer to Commissioner Butler." Butler, "34 ft. width on the streets, but not 50 ft. right-of-way, 12 ft. on each lane, . .. . what does that leave . . . . . also sidewalks. I'm not an expert on what they look like, but two lanes and two sidewalks. !' Secretary, "Okay, 34' street, 50 ft. right-of-way, 12 ft. each lane and 4 ft. sidewalks. ' % Butler, That does&t leave anyplace to park, does it? What I'm trying to do `` is get this through, I guess I'itt losing. Go ahead." (several people talking) Tepedinoi. Lets let this was fail for a lack of a seconded and Oonimissioner Moen will you i.. ... .... . v i to ,y fi t.,, tt Moen, "I don't necessarily like this, but. I think, I move that we approve IIIthis thing with the following conditions. The conditions that Commissioner Leverett put on, okay, the one Commissioner Edin put on for prior agreements, the one Commissioner Butler put on about the Homeowners about the private street and open space maintenance, streets are 24' wide and four ft sidewalks on both side of the private street on tracts A & C and on track B, sidewalk along the north side, west side of track B. Secretary, "Commissioner Moen, Track A C and Moen, "Both sides on track and A & C and on track B along the north aid easterly side.. Thats my motion. • Commissioner Butler, Second. . Edin, "'I would like a clarification. Did you sal 24 ft. and then sidewalks, N are you now talking now a total of 32 ft. . discussion not transcribable.)..,, s ti r�. Tepedino, "So motion is made for approval with the Homeowners Association ;;. : • taking care of the open space and private streets, also includes no prior formal agreements, also include a third item, the 24 ft. wide private street with sidewalks on both side of Track A & C, sidewalks on one side, on the • housing side of Track B. and the sidewalks are the four ft. sidewalks." Fyre, "I have one questions, the sidewalks are part of the lot not part of i. the street, so your not asking for reduction of lot sizes i' I would like to add that the garages be located 20° back from the sidewalk, which is less than ... .. .. .. . . (Moen, "Okay.") Tepedino, ''Motion made, do I hear a set'ond. F , Butler, "Second." m Tepedino, "Further discussion. I call for the questions, all those in favor of the motion as made and seconded for approval with those conditions based on staff's findings acid recommendations, signify by saying A,ye." "Aye" r Tepedino, "Those opposed." "Nay" (Commissioner Owens voting Nay.) . if- Tepedino, "One nay, motion carries. I think :era fortunate that the Planning Commission sees one of these kinds of problems once every four years or so. 9 ji M , ' Y;y ' • }II! *OREGO;N* \\ . w 0.0i,„A4 1[ 1111 P-R. 1-itt : 1" 1 - 1 A; w .y'� P.O. BOX 127 • TUALATIN, OREGON 97062 • PHONE 682-2601 q�4r� p� i; PARK PLACE SUBDIVISION March 2, 11484 1.1. 1:3'400 SW 121 A TIQARD 8138_. SUB —026-000 Dear Keith Liden, Q This letter is to notify you that a Site Plan Review has been conducted for the Park Place Subdivision in accordance with Uniform Fire Code Article 10 to establish required fire flow, hydrant location and street access for fire apparatus. Plans are acceptable as shown. If you have any questions regarding this letter, r' or if we may be of any assistance in this matter, please feel free to call me at 682-2601. ' , " Sincerely, Joseph Oreulich Fire Prevention Bureau • • V . • . , ) l' , (, 6 ), , 4*. 1/4,, ' 141.1111 ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES , . . so IF• ............................• ...........__ # , 11, -, • .........._ February 29, 1984 Mr. William A. Monahan Planning Director q City of Tigard Ili 12755 S.W. Ash St, - Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: S 8-83 PD (Subdivision) - Park Place m \,. 3900 S.W. 121st Ave. , Dear Mr. Monahan, I have advised your staff of our meetings withN.P,O. #3 Chairman Mr. Bob Bledsoe and of the desire by N.P.O. #3 to re-submit an alter- naei,ve proposal which would satisfactorily address all of their re- malning concerns. Accordingly, we have modified our plan and submit h6rewith, for your review fifteen (15) prints of the revised prelimi- nary plan for Park Place, The material diffeoences between this sub- mittal and that of February 15th are as follows: 1, S.W. Gaarde Street within Phase I has been realigned to show two (2) 350 foot-radius curves. This results in the tee intersection at the northwest corner of Phase I being shifted slightly south- eastrrly which allows more continuity within the project at its north boundary as well as providing better future street alignment to the west, 2. The new plan provides for 39 homesites, down from 41 as shown in the previous submittal . 3. Acreage is reduced to 8,5 acres, down from 9.42 acres in previous - sumbittal . 44 Density is now at approximately 4.5 units per acre. , 5, Private drives remain at a 24-foot paved widths however, at N.P.0, #3's suggestion and our concurrence, the extruded curb on t”1.* side of the private drives shall be placed at four (4) feet from edge of pavemerit to better delineate and protect pedestrian traffic. The curb will help discourage parking on this side of / private streets and c'an, for emergency vehicles, be straddled if need be. A ceNTUPW 21 komas • 1\10th Coast Plaza • PA box t44011 • 1160 SAN,Hazel Fon Htl, a Tualatin,OR 07062 0 (S03)6844762 -,k ' ' , y,,,, infitist ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROz Ei iTIES 111%111111f fr ,'1 . P4e 2 William Monahan . 6. A four (4) foot landscaped strip has been added between the private roadway and south boundary line. 7. We propose "NO PARKING THIS SIDE" signs on pedestrian side of private str :ets. 8. Angle parking has been added adjacent to lots 16 through. 20. t 9. Lot dimensions have been added. 10. Sidewalk and curb is proposed to be continuous through the drive- way approaches to private streets. 11 It is clear intent of the Homeowners Association by-laws that maintenance of the private streets be the sole responsibility 'r, of the Homeowners Association with no participation required or needed by the City in this regard. Prop: ►si on for funding street maintenance is made Article IV, Section 4 of said by-laws. In view of the fact that some sites have direct access from Gaarde, the matter of annual assessment as well as the voting percentages required to effect maintenance will be reviewed with our attorney. In this regard, items that will be considered include both life expectancy of pavement and replacement costs. :. ,S 12. On the most southerly of private streets, catch basins, have been added at some distance away from Gaarde to mitigate the surface runoff problems at the entrance and exit points. 13. Although the plan indicates a twenty-five (25) foot setback on Gaarde, it is the intent of the plan to show a twenty (20) foot setback. Would you please make the appropriate notes to indicate our intent? I am also submi tt7 ng, as you requested, 15 copies of the pri i iini navy street centerline profiles of Gaarde Street and the street as. yet A unnamed to extend northerly (near the northwest corner of Phase I) The plans of the storm and sanitary sewers and waterline are shown °. on the preliminary plan suhmi tted herewi th. A review of the contours will reveal approximate depths and grades. Sizing and final location will be determined during final design and will be designed to City I • standards as applicable. - , ., CENTURY 2i HOMES 4 North Coati Plaza 0 P O.5 i408 • 7i60 s.W,Hazel Pam Rd. • Tualatin,OR 97052 • (5b )684-2/62 441:* ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES riigr Page 3 William Monahan I am also enclosing for your review 15 copies of scaled cross sec- tions of proposed rights of way. These are as previously submitted and there should be no material change required other than the unit numbers. I sincerely appreciate your cooperation in this matter. You have been most helpful . Should you need or require further information oreterial , please call me. Sincrely, ,000( c ael W. Fain, Vice-Presilrnt, General Manager Century 21 Properties, Inc. MWF/km enclosures cc: Mike Levin Quaestor, Inc. 0ENTUIV 21 HOMES • North Cot Plaza • P.O.bolt 1408 • 7160 Hazel 1-1tem Ad, • Malallri,O1 07082 • (503)Al;84-8707 ' " • * , , r • , „ •4+ `hJ AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING " i(--- ce ' x STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Bernice K. Reffett, being first duly sworn, on oath depose and iJ ay: That I am a office aide for The City of Tigard, Oregon. • That k served notice of hearing of the Tigard Planning Commission • of which the attached is a copy (Marked Exhibit A) upon each of the following named persons on the 24th day of February 1984, by mailing to each of •\, them at the address shown on t.ie attached list Marked Exhibit B) , said notice as hereto attached, desposited in the United States Mail on the 24th day of February 9 198 4, postage prepaid. • - Secretary .•• idok,17TAAA.A.a, 4 1/ Person who del' er€d to POST OFF?:CE the day of <�/� , 198 . Subscribed and sworn to before me on � ,;�.,� y a�� �.. _ Ai.yiti t +a iiv,u n aY ;y _«fN", «„«.yy L'j rya•,Ja` r, ' '�`b,v4a x y NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON u n • My Commission Expires\y , '_ 7 1 ;I l 0 cn C) (D cl) w ) i:13 u O : ()UJ com tr 0 O O O- ' © rr w U, �(D O C hi = , • H �11:1 ( . 11 t1 a to �' Co . w re N v � 0 O n Qj X O , ` f W , O 1, • ; N N .. a ca m p ' Zc -w.:lvy > .D D 70 w H. M � a, -h a'co g b 0 O -n ,.i Q • 4"' a * 1 vi m 5 O H. I 11 lc) ,� 0 . •a ► 0 = • 0,=0 0 -, Z -4 II o k -6 / . \ 9 * „ ...,. CL rx, 0.) Q. H ____, > N.3 , . . ro (4 m -T . .R-.,•(b p Z 7 — 0 N m ;�' C -., v. CO O n) y m m b CZ'-.: In -0 I.„� a) \ '� ) D o-Q C O C ;-� — at z o , u. y� 0 co y c • } c $), •` ry 'O ,-r 0 o Of)a O t 4 — n et • e 0 C ' al C n r) e..a tD ►I N N l 1-1 CD: k it r-a fa) ° W i .. .. m CD o- CO 1 07 0) T = ) �?rp ^ e t S Y�ry S ar?' �, t wo g.i ropy 3 } , r a) CG f " .4. y p�P,M^.i,'ftei y+, '} y!'! '� ''.."'T'1 4 rr,.p.;a4r7�s4S•., -R'} O J 'y�n u' ;: 1D (D A 'r,1,, t 4.', i�g � r .,',44 'fiS4 'r l af� l }! ,, ,, ..„,„;,0;ri- 1,: 04 > 'rU . SWµ' 'atntit,T!g 1,Oregon. er infordsatlo .nia ,d ;from;the c " ' ,, r, n m Dir of,=Plannin>nd y'e op eint°a 2755'SW Ash} vex,, �. 97223" ti"'calling a' 1rii�!. i '� 1t•c.t4 E;'•a,�t",w, ,{gg{s,,� 4. r ;4, ;y r Ore otl i, O il*i '�,.X. '-.ate ,.z:Kb•y�,4; +. 't.,. .tt,''r, 1. ' ,./1,,`‘•,'",.7 'ar',4„” }a (aY `may'/ 4. , .. GE.zC����a all Co NPs.#6x. 5. lu, • 'k �.� Ct���f0 . �n�� �r�'�-�2 esi4ebdin V ±q, n. �„ � 'tie' kJ'. v. { tl h' .•l �q1 t X" 1��` A } t �w g! 4Q ,M'un1 c`re � �._J7L,� eats► 7t ntt suet).'+ nid.to reA pi =,- 'i°�t '1i!'.�,�W.+����,!!':!!�.a�. .+t �":�i�a �`�H �.v ,.. ,.T�.y«. a;`, ` +, y ;" n> ;Ytplat�,•appro c:for a.j.Af;lot u vlsiO4Can piroperty 1ot;ated on`thei • is 4 fnot s t:t o' eer•r CH i e•iw 1♦,*, 4 3 ajAuk B al i Ry ed,,.r.gar d�r raX wiwWi�Z p t p I ; 8. e },yam}. l.. ,20rMx,R r� m r •r>w!k x +p w r4 r.,,eMu,v.} ",t1 'M My,,,M.v..y .t" ` '•1 JMYd.• o ',,,i tkz M *, h T F a '4,•Z','',4',' .W.3 `• b;14 Reb 1 S YOn'/ 4� . S T i 1 `D1 1 P D ` ie', S k j� CO , �R " �k ,*g1, { 'r� ,, %�,S�xM`���' P }s d 4 ',5� �l 1�v 7 ��'�a 0 0 � r equ€ B Rosebud dv t, Ine,;Ior detailed.plannedydv .p i. ►t 1 � ', t `" 4, � r ,Plat:spp l for;a34 1ii s,u o t ►' '1� Q f ,te` s o te pin y io+2ed?n►orth i oth sttnteriectioa , f $ t '1$W 1) th Avn and Iaek140101d1W OttRaap $ .! w � &ry� " 4AD,l:!ox i 3600) , ,, ,n' } i*d,;}rg `�" r } . �r CR0 0 (Jj ,4 Srt DF Ii SI O N S!i 4 V&U AI V: r ZO NI r GE'L be rg a r at , ....I tilK n y,iid S � { 'elt a e llti t ✓ : t../ 4,Ieittieety Uhe1?.! otn s,r1 fo iert,,er p pprovd kasklot 1 i1,;sittbdi�sion a v r1a.1'S permitthe 7tid leant(i e�nts o1 e z ,, ' . ther'than te R.2 zone nd to 4.016* oigeOot sde yardsetbaks . ywitbinathe u 1siot '' 'l,the`I'annlr>gDcparthent reguR:tts considers . vtlonlh a don `1 " Ot 2 esiden 1 unksit, );to R 7 1;Tt (r eslan „j�,y 3Jaa -.: fl t Tit t t,..3xv an apipu�naan.,,The. ,+ prop ``y ,06-atedhWfOrt.( '!west de or h ai�ll',Tra?,,d . ;i �.t_ -,of+ Sit M p Y y ar w k 1411.,1LD,i y,ax'Loth1l4,a) o'441n ,#A`f}�,1' tr�,1,e "t, ��'� �ha��aad �i� � ria :i, N S b'b'l+p, ,LACE(Ce�nturyr21,41 , ) "# ,�:, . , • .� '1,';»emanddfr(n`�i' ty C " lfor x-21* gtne quest for concepth- . ` ,�- 'ati detalledtPl*Ati r` lav It ar"plaf approval of Plitse 't ;Par Place,otln;propert+y'i ,.:t =at'1�3900 SW 121 t.Avid°(Tax Iap.ZSI„4ti.; 1 it','•1'ax Lo+t 14OO'aw 2SI3i `az Lt 401x`�f , ' , *r x r -, , *' ° 4 x �y�y 1 i� 4G 1 ,¢r a,�Fnrr''t•�r1 fi1't t�.n +• �S,4 a, 4 S, �+ y. 9, ��{y,r i, ro�Ft.f F1, lL7S'W�'�,���p l��"% f� xi" t S�7°+�)h'`E;`�"`"tiii"���t�� �� e"i �� ,r �� t MPR I NSIVE PLA �I rmi 1.y34,,{ipPt :star ya45, 4,�q���y��' . :f :'l, l iiequ t�by t i of,T�•r►µ•• to 5'dgn ther�ji deoett«'esi4ential pl1 . . ' d k'1d s1gn t{-toY �lo h the,Uty.'9a,tl,rban GO!a t, Bo�undo y,-the °. ro, ..a . ,i+ ted%nu "of W ,-'Fut,;east,of 135th 1 ash.,�o `a4 +p ', SI 4,^' iy�1 Lot4G0�500�,50plf t.�r��ir,*�`&�.,,,�5.03), ft434 :41, 6 ►��,' t4W YL1PL )iME110414N og�CPA 4 t k,4 r'A l 0 l'0:" ,.` 1./4", t3", ,yrthe Ciityy t f T rd 0Tadd'a poU y to the:Cit,8 anweh'n, • rs�x� ,f°, 'slve P1ian u r n t .kt annexe"to'the,ri ; g .the city` fl • 7 designation Which Oct closely conforms to the eistinS :atxnntly designate ''� Ilia policy will be added as 10,1.3 In'the,,Cottipre•�� tto�for tlxe pro�rtyy , henslve�tan. ` i COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 4. . . y ' - x A request by the City of Tigard to adapt r site specific map designating ti,KAA..ri 4#iy'n rera6 Urban G BOunda;�y`with,a flood* ail# �'#h�!`;Ia~tt�z 1 n ' 4 ` • 2. A list, certified by the Washington County Tax Assessor' s Office of the names and addresses of all persons who are property owners of record within 250 feet of the site. 3 , The required fee. B. The prtliainary, .0221 map and data or narrative shall include the following: )010(2 1. Sheet size for the preliminary plat shall not exceed 18" x 24"; • '1 2. The scale shall be 80, 50, 100 or 200 feet to the inch, and J limited to one phase. per sheet; • kikl 4p) 3. The proposed name of the subdivision, The name shall comply with ORS 92.090 (1) and, shall not duplicate or kfir) fi'lr, fir resemble the name of any other subdivision in the County, unless the land platted is contiguous to and platted by the same party that platted the subdivision bearing that name or unless the applicant files and records the consent of * lov the party that platted the subdivision bo ring that name. 4. Vicinity map showing the general location of the subject • property in relationship to arterial and collector streets; 5, Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the owner, developer, engineer, surveyor, designer, as applicable; .'i 6. The date of application; • � `'' 7. The. Assessor's Map and tax lot number and a legal sit description sufficient to define the location and boundaries of the proposed subdivision; • 8 The boundary lines of the tract to be subdivided; 9, The names of adjacent .subdivisions or the names of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of unsubdivided land; ,w4. 10. Contour lines related to a City established benchmark at 2--foot intervals for grades 0-10% and 5—font intervals for „ ; grades over 10%; 11 , The purpose, location, type and size of all the following (within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision) existing and proposed; 'P a, Public and private rights-of—way and easements, 14, Public and private sanitary and storm sewer lines; domestic water mains including fire hydrants, gas mains, major poWel (50,000 volts or better) telephone transmission lines and watercourses, • vrx - 294 c, Deed reservations for parks, openspace, pathways, and any other land encumbrance. • /2. Approximate plan and profiles of proposed sanitary and storm sewers with grades and pipe sizes indicated and plan ; of the proposed water distribution system, showing pipe sizes and the location of valves and fire hydrants, 3. , Approximate centerline profiles showing the finished grade of all streets including street extensions fora reasonable nr distance beyond the limits of the voposed subdivision. • fr/14, Scaled cross—sections of proposed street rights--of—way; 1.5. The location of all areas subject to inundation or storm , water overflow, and the location, width and direction of ' flow of all watercourses and drainage ways; / 16. The proposed lot conf durations, approximate lot dimensions and lot numbers, !mere lots are to be used for purposes other than residential, it shall be indicated upon such • lots. Each lot shall abut upon a public street; 17, The location of all trees with a diameter 6 inches or greater measured at 4 feet above ground level, and the loe:ation of proposed tree plantings, if any; 18, The existing uses of the property, including the location of all structures and the present uses of the structures, ate; and a statement of which structures are to remain after platting; and, ,. Supplemental 19, Su informatiori including:pp. proposed deed ' restrictions, if any, proof of property ownership, a prop' ed plan for provision of subdivision improvements, • • 20. Existing natural features including rock outcroppings, • wetlands and marsh areas, C, If any of the foregoing information cannot practicably be shown on the preliminary plat, it shall be incorporated into a rarra'`rve and submitted with the 'application. o 18 160,0800 Additional �Information Regiired and Wgiyer of Requirements A. The Director may require information in addition to that required by this Chapter in accordance with Section 1832,080 (A) , b, The Director' may waive a specific requirement for information i►�' a,:cordan e with section 18,82,0 80 (b) and (C) ' d rr f , 1 1, 295 ' r r ' , oIN i 4 • MEMORANDUM .- CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Planning Commission February 16, 1984 FROM: Deputy Recorder, Loreen Wilson 5.,,` SUBJECT: Park Place/Bechtold Appeal Hearing Minutes _._ pd. I am forwarding a copy of the unofficial minutes from the above noted public hearitlg held on 2-13-84 by the City Council. The minutes will be officially approved on 2-27-84 by the Council, however, I wanted to give you as much advance notice as possible of the Council's position and concerns in this matter. lw/1249A -' y M O y q , I " ti Y I y h ` d• , 4 • P p r. , 0 ,,,,‘ y //- .. 1 Alk . February 16, 1984 il!!!!!ik Mr. David Oringdulph Century 21 Properties, Inc. ar(oF 'WA 1 PO Box 1408 WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON Tualatin, Oregon 97062 Re: Park Place Appeal He cring 58-83-PD •' Dear Mr. Oringdulph: 1' The Tigard City Council, at their regular meeting of February 13, 1984, voted „ ' to remand the above mentioned issue back to the Planning Commission for further modification with direction concerning the following issues: f, �? tF o Gaarde should be designed to minor collector" standards and be a Maligned so as to provide for a "T" intersection with development to be in compliance with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan; o The minor collector should be designed so as to discourage the " use of Gaarde Street and the development streets as an extension of Murray Blvd. ; o The development be so designed as to meet the purpose of Planned `' �a, Developments as , set out in Section 18.80.010 (A) (1) of the Tigard Municipal Code which reads as follows: "To provide a means for creating planned environments through the application of flexible standards which allow for the application of new techniques and new technology in community development which will . result in a superior living arrangement." t. Councilor Brian, with a consensus.' of Council, expressed concern whether this development, as currently proposed, results in a "superior living • arrangement".. He noted the streets were 24-foot wide and private with. no „ , curbs, no sidewalks, increased density, of units designed for younger families,: no street parking, no park/open space area, etc. He also encouraged you to consider these issues before making a modification proposal to the planning . Commission. 1. The Planning Commission will consider this remand application at the regular ' meeting on, Tuesday, March 6, 1984.' If you have any, questions regarding this P . issue, please contact the Director of Planning and Development, William A. 67 Monahan , Si ,cerel y :::,) . /.0.--sr, ig.,,„1/4_ (.,,t,),....5 , .. Loreen R. Wilson Deputy 'City Retarder 1w/1249A 4 1. ' 12755 S;1J14 ASH P.O.SOX 25397 'TIGARb,OREGON 97.225 PH:639-071 71 .--------- �. 8 „iii,. • mania , ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES 11116111.51, 13111•11•11d ■•■ rp, February 15, 1984 Mr. William A. Monahan Planning Director City of Tigard 12755 S.W. Ash Tigard, OR 97223 RE: S 8-83 PD (Subdivision) 13900 S.W. 121st Ave. Dear Mr. Monahan; For the record, the subject project has been remanded to the Planning Commission for final disposition, by the City Council during their February 13, 1984 hearing. This was done at the request of Century 21 Properties and with concurrence of NPO #3. The reason for the request for reffland bc.iing that we believed a compromise had been reached regarding provision for the future alignment of S.W. Gaarde St. that would be acceptable to all concerned (City Staff, NPO #3 and Century 21 Properties) . Additionally, it was our desire to examine our plan further in an attempt to better address old and new issues of concern to staff and the community as well as to improve the livability and thus ti-,e marketability of the • project. In this regard, our preliminary plat has been modified slightly as follows: 1. The western boundary of Phase I has been shifted westerly in an attempt to provide more land area per unit and to provide better traffic circulation. 2. A tee intersection has been provided within the project boundaries near the northwest corner of Phase I. This tee is as discUssed with City Staff, NPO #3, It is my understanding that this provision 'T.'or S.W. Garde St. and future road extension to the north is acceptable to and satisfactorily addresses the concerns of City Staff, NPO #3 and most members of the Planning Coomissiol CI\ITUIRY 21 HOMES North Coast Plala • P.c.Box 1408 • 'TAO 81,W.Ha Zi:4„etti Pd, Tualath,b 97082 • (SW)684-276 • - • • • • " , , , . * , lik,k• (.. lArW4111,341 ill ' ill 111 111(111- I IN ‘ . . , ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 HOMES . .. page 2 1 ... .., 3. While the gross acreage of Phase I increases to 9.42 ' acres, the number of proposed units has ddcreased to 41 This reduces the required density transfer from Phase II to 0 and should eliminate this as an issue. 4. Individual lot lines have been added to show and clarify extent of proposed ownership. 5. Private streets and other common areas have been labeled as Tract "A", "B", "C", etc. ' As you are aware, when the City Council remanded this matter back to the , Planning Commission, it did so with direction to the Planning Commission to review the issues of 1. Provision of a mini-park. • - 2. Off-street (public) parking and traffic circulation patterns as relates to access and fire protection. 3, Streets to conform with minor collector standards, , 4, Plan design to meet PD designation and to conform to the Community Development Code, Section 18.80.010,A.1 . 5. I.:,fdewalks. 6. Twenty-four foot non-curbed streets. .. 7. Alignment of S.W. Gaarde St. Although the Council minutes are not available, these appear to be tiro issues by comparing our notes during our meeting this date at City Hall . Your staff has requested that we address these issues lith this submittal . Accordingly, I offer the following as a narrative in this regard. NARRATUE 1, Min' -Park - In view of the location of land available for this within . ____........._ Phase I, C.ntury 21 Properties believes that to provide such an improvement would be irresponsible both from a planning standpoint and future maintenance liability. We ; -si , I believe the development of open space within the next phase will provide to the needs of the development's residents in a more than adequate fashion. , 2, Off-Street Parking, Traffic Circulation , AI Every effort has been made, within the planning constraints ' • the alignment of S.W. Gaarde has imposcd on us, to minimize - . , the number () access points to S,W. Gaarde, thus reducing . r18NTUrlY 21 HoMES • North Coast Plaza -, P.O.NV 1408 4. Mb S.W.Hazel rent Rd. • Tualatin,OR&AM lei (SO 654.2762 k k o•, ifil4ii ► ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES AZOV `al page 3 A potential for traffic conflict here. By maximizing one-way interior traffic, potential for conflicting turning movements at S.W. Gaarde St. is reduced to hali of that which would result, two-way traffic were permitted. ° y The proposal for twenty-four fcu one-way private streets has been previously documented and submitted, but perhaps not sufficiently clarified. Proposed, are some one-way traffic patterns allowing for parking on one side. Assuming an eight foot wide parking width on one side of the private street, this allows a sixte60 foot width for vehicular t;affic which also allows within that, a modest width for pedestrian traffic. We would expect traffic speeds within the private street areas on the order of 10 - 15 mph which is more that sufficient to provide safe passage for vehicular and pedestrian traffic alike. I find, in reviewing our file,, that the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District finds no objection to the proposed plan. We believe, in view of the "land width" constraints imposed by V' the Gaarde St. alignment that the plan as submitted represents a responsible, best planning effort resulting in an economical development which can contribute to our objective of providing affordable, livable housing to the community. nQ.. As you are aware, London Square is a project similar in concept and which, provides twenty-four foot streets. It appears to be functioning well and we would anticipate no future problems. 3: Streets to Conform to Minor Collector Standards We shall , of course, design and construct S.W. Gaarde St. and the intersections at the east and west ends of the project to current street standards as applied to the proposed development and off street parking. It is my understanding that most details in this regard have been reviewed with Staff and incorporated in previous submittals. 4. PD Designation/Community Development Code It is a matter of record that the subject proposal conforms to the requirements' PD Designation. L . , q i rement5 of the s�gnati on, regard to the .. i L 1f .. .. el o menu Code, . Dave p Planned l opts±eht section of the Comrouh��.y� � Cod, specifically section 18,80.010.A.1, one purpo d of the PD overlay ... zone is To provide a means for creating planned environments through the appl i cati on of fl exi bl e standards which allow for tiro application of .!. newn technology it Pp � _ 4 q i h community �' new techniques ues and • devel opmeni which will result i n a superior living arrangement' cENTUHY 2i HOMES Noah Coast Riaza • �,C, ak id6b o 'T�5 0 S. W+Hazel Fern Rd, 0 TUaIaflh,b ', o;2 . (5 b0)6e4- r 1 i • . 4 N I ' sell ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES page 4 • We submit that again, in view of the contraints imposed by S.W. Gaarde St. , to develop the property in a more conventional manner would at best be a marginal venture resulting In housing ,. costs beyond the reach of many potential consumers. The plan as submitted provides a far superior living arrangement than would otherwise be ,chi eve through conventional development techniques. 5. Sidewalks - This issue was previously addressed within item 2, above with regard tc room for and safety of pedestrian traffic. We ` propose that pedestiran traffic be accomodated within the 24 foot one-way streets (or wider as indicated) . As concern was mainly centered on passage from within the interior of Phase I to future open space in Phase II, it is reasonable that pedestri a? , traffic route to S.W. Gaarde, where sidewalks shall be provided, II then to the west and Phase Il open space. c 6. Twelyty-Four Foot Non-Curbed Streets - Our files indicate previous submittals to Staff of private street cti•-css-sections indicating f , proposed extruded curbing. Th9 private street, are proposed wth inverted crowns, sloping up toward the ■ots, resulting in ,' ad;antages relevant to landscaping and r?:i nfal l percolation from homesi tes to the streets as well dS savings in construction costs associated with street excavation. 7. Al i gl ment of S,W. Gaarde St. - WE have adapted cur plan to the several alignments of Gaarde,the last of which Staff and NPO #3 seem to feel most comfortable with. This includes a tee intersection at the west boundary of Phase I which Century 2:1 agrees to build in this development phase. You and Liz Newton advised me this date that a subdivision application ILwould be required if we wanted detailed plan approval (this as a result of adding ownership lines) . This will confirm our intent to obtain subdivision -PD approval simultaneously. However, a search of our files reveals receipt of our application for 1'Subdi vi si on S 8-83 PD"„ dated 9/1/83. Further, our Ili application form states on its face that the application is for "Planned Unit Development" as well as ' ubdi vi si on". The application indicates fees for both have been paid. Accordingly, a check for a subdivision fee will '' not accompany this submittal . Also, since most of the relevant data for this submittal is shown on the preliminary plat, we wu l not be submitting ' any additional application form: If during your review of this submittal , you find that you reoui re supplemental data, we shall supply it as needed, ■ CENTURY 21 HOMES 4 North(bast Raze • P.O,� Box 14(4A3 +� 71SO SA Hazel,Pir1 Rd. 0 Tualatin,OR£706 •� (S03)684-276:? I'. ■ V � I • 411,Pr/111111411%Ilk la% ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES page 5 We sincerely appreciate your cooperation in allowing us to make the March 6 Planning Commission agenda as every month lost now could put us in another construction season and unknown market conditions. Thanks again for your efforts. You will find 15 copies of the preliminary plat and supporting documents as requested. Should you have any questions, or need additional information, please call . Sin erely iY 1 t Michael W. Fain, P.E. Vice President - General Manager Century 21 Properties, Inc. d . MWF/cmc A , i c Ntutt'Y 21 HOMES'4 North Co t Plata' • P.O,BOX 140G • 7164 S.W.Hem(Fern kt, • tualattn,OFt 97062 (608)684.276g car / 4 [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] • T 1 G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 13, 1984 -- 7:30 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur Bishop; Councilors: Tom Brian, Kenneth Scheckla, artd Ima Scott; City Staff: Frank Currie, Director of Public Works; Bob Jean, City Administrator (arrived at 8:38 P.M. ) ; Bill Monahan, Director of Planning & Development (arrived at 8:05 P.M. -- left at 10:02 P.M.) ; Ed Sullivan, Legal Counsel; and Loreen Wilson, Deputy City Recorder. 2. CALL TO STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS P a. Deputy Reco- ter advised Council of changes in the agenda, noting that the City Administrator would join the meeting about 8:30 P.M. and requested item 17.1 be placed under Non-Agenda Items for discussion • of a Sales Tax Update by the City Administrator. :jv' b. Mayor Bishop requested Happy Valley Board of Appeals Ruling be discussed as item # 17.2. c. Councilor Scott discussed with the Director of Public Works various street, lighting and improvement areas around the City. d. Mayor Bishop welcomed City Attorney Ed Sullivan to the meeting noting that Mr. Sullivan is visiting on vacation from his sabbatical leave ' . ' in Europe. 3. V1C1TOR'S AGENDA (2 minutes c,t less, please) a. Mr. Gary Ott, 9055 SW Edgewood, Acting Chairman for NPO #1, requested Council keep on top of the health care facilities in residential zones which has been discussed recently. They are requesting that Council pass an ordinance if necessary to protect the rights of the individuals operating the businesses and also the residential zones. 4. EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION -- 20 Year Pin - Doris Hartig a. Mayor Bishop read into the record a proclamation declaring February 7, 1984 as "Doris tartig Day" as she has been with the City for 20 years, He also presented gold key to Mrs. Hartig on behalf of the citizens and Council. • . b. Mrs. Hartig expressed her appreciation. I 5., AAA SAFETY AWARD '�.:� a. CMs. Mary Merit, representing AAA, presented Council with a plaque noting a fatality free year for the City of Tigard and noted that the f: City started the Pedestrian Protection Program in 1974. RECESS., 7:54 P.M. bl {yy� 1 PACE � "" COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY tJ, � 984 • ti 6. TURA BUSINESS MEETING • • a. Roll Call: Present: Agency Members Wilbur Bishop, Tom Brian,, Kenneth Scheckla,, and Ima Scott; City Staff: Frank Currie, Director of Public Works; Ed Sullivan, Legal Counsel ; and Loreen Wilson, Deputy City Recorder. b. Deputy City Recorder advised the Agency Members that a report would be presented at the March 12- 1984 meeting concerning the procedure for TURA close out. c. Adjournment: 7:56 P.M. RECONVENE COUNCIL MEETING 7:56 P.M. 7. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS REGARDING COUNCIL AND CITY OFFICERS SECTIONS OF TMC a. ORDINANCE NO. 84-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AMENDING SECTION 2.04.020, CITY ADMINISTRATOR,, AND SECTION 2.16.020, MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE, ADDING PROVISIONS FOR THE APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY AND TH,, RECORDER IN THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. b. City Attorney stated that a new ordinance is submitted with the deletion of Section 5 which dealt with Council advisory role. • c. City Attorney reported that the ordinance provides for a full 5 member Council to vote on appointment or removal of City Officers. • d. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Mayor Bishop to adopt. Failed due to 2 - 2 vote of Council on motion. Councilors Scott and Scheckla voting Nay. e. Mayor Bishop noted this item would be continued. 8. TRANSFER OF CITY PROPERTY - 124TH AVENUE PUBLIC HEARING a. Public. Hearing Opened b. Director of Public Works gave summary of history noting there are three property owners involved and that they would be assuming' the tax l'urden of the parcels of land if the Council approves the transfer. c. Public Testimony: No one appeare to speak. c 1 DTRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ARRIVED: 8:05 P.M. d- Director of Public Works recommended approval of the transler and, authorization for the Mayer and Deputy Recorder to sign the Quit Claim :Deeds to formalize the transfer. '` e. Public Nearing Closed PACE, 2 - COUNCIL L MINUTES. - FEBRUARY 13, 1984 1/4k, \ f. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to authorize the Mayor and Deputy City Recorder to sign the Quit Claim Deeds to transfer City property Co private ownership. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 9. THATCHER SIDEWALK REQUEST a. Director of Planning & Development summarized history and stated that Mr. Thatcher questions whether he can install a sidewalk along his property on 98th Avenue and in Summerfield and also be annexed into the Summerfield Subdivision. b. Mr. Thatcher stated his property ends at the Summerfield Golf Course and he would be willing to install a sidewalk on his property and pay for Summerfield's portion of the sidewalk also if he could annex into the Summerfield Subdivision. • c. Mr. Dave Atkinson, President of the Summerfield Civic Association, P stated the Association feels a sidewalk is not necessary on 98th Avenue in that location, He read into the record a letter sent to Mr. Thatcher from the Civic Association dated 2-9-83 stating they did not wish to have Mr. Thatcher annex his property into the Summerfield Subdivision. CITY ADMINISTRATOR ARRIVED: 8:36 P.M. . d. Discussion followed regarding City's policy on piecemeal sidewalk improvements. Consensus of Council was to not take action now and let the requirement stand for Mr. Thatcher to place sidewalk on his property according to City standards as required by the Building Division. 10. COOK LANE SEWER LID PETITION a. Mayor Bishop stated he may be financially involved in this LID and would not be voting on the issue due to a possible conflict of interest. b. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to table this item to the March 12, 1984 meetivg. Approved by a 3 - U majorLy vote of Council present. Mayor Bishop abstLning 11. UNCONCEALED WEAPONS PERMITS DISCUSSION a Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to table item to a date uncertain per a request from Payles, Security, • Approved by twanimous vote of Council present, PACE 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - PEBRUARY 13, 1984 [- V { 12. DARTMOUTH STREET LID ENGINEER'S REPORT ;s a. Mr. R. A. Wright, Project Consulting Engineer, synopsized the history of the request and stated he had returned to the property owners to discuss the assessment method. General consensus of property owners was received for the proposal Mr. Wright drafted. • ' Mr. Wright continued by noting that, the cost estimate for the project is $1,995,700 if the project is let for bid during the summer of 1984. He also stated that the proposed improvement includes construction of a 44-foot wide paved and curbed street within a 70-foot wide right-of-way extending approximately 3,250 feet from SW 68th Avenue at its intersection with the new L-5 access ramp right-of-way to Pacific Highway z its intersection with SW 78th AAenue. In addition to the street improvement, the project would also include a 200-foot street stub for a future street extension to the south, traffic signal improvements on Pacific Highway, street lights, storm drains, waterlines, sanitary sewers, and other underground utilities as required to minimize future excavation within the pavement of Dartmouth Extension. The sidewalks would only be constructed adjacent to property that is already developed. Mr. Wright stressed that this should be considered only a street LID even though some sewer, water and sidewalk construction is proposed, these are only to minimize future excavation of the street improvement area. b. City Attorney advised that the paragraph on page 5 of the report, dealing with Bancroft Financing, should be excluded from the report, as it is inconsistent with state law. . c. Mayor Bishop stated he felt it only fair that the City participate in the LID if it is to be developed to major collector standards. d. Motion by 'Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to accept the Engineer's Report with the deletion of the Bancroft Financing paragraph on page 5 and direct staff to prepare a resolution to call for a public hearing. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. RECESS: 9:08 P.M: /- RECONVENE: 9:25 P.M. 15. PARK PLACE/BECHTOLD - APPEAL HEARING This was an "argument-type: hearing only The Council advised th,2 audience that they would coasider only the record before. the. Planning Commission, and that no new testimony or evidence would be considered which is was not in the receri. a. Public Hearing Continued from 1-3O-84 PACE 4 — COUNCIL MINUTES - EBRUAR?' 13, 1984 • b. Legal Counsel stated a letter has been received from the appellant ; waiving the 120 day hearing limitation. He stated the findings, as they stand, may be inadequate, however the Council must apply the City standards to the plan presented and look close at the modifications made to the original application. The decision must be made by the Council whether the plan is so different from the original submission that it should be reconsidered by the Planning Commission. c. Director of Planning and Development spent time with the appellant and their attorney and thinks it is time to remand the issue to the Planning Commission. • d. Public Testimony: • o Mr. Steve Janik, Attorney for Century 21, stated that they would request the issue be remanded to the Planning Commission for further modification. o Bob Bledsoe, NPO #3 Chairman, stated they had no objection to • the remand, however, requested direction be given to the Planning Commission regarding street alignment, "T" intersection issues, and possible Murray Road extension questions addressed. o Director of Planning & Development concurred that the Planning 4 Commission was looking for direction from Council. • • Mr. Ralph Flowers, 117th & Gaarde resident, stated he was against the Murray Blvd. extension and concerned that this development, as it is currently proposed, would encourage that extension. /// Ms. Betty McKane, 13950 Sk 121st AvenuEt, did not object to remanding back to Planning Commission. She expressed some of her concerns to Council regarding location of road being too • close to her home and water table ramifications. e. Public Hearing Closed f. Council discussed the street alignment issues anti Murray Blvd. extension concerns. Councilor Scheck1a, also had concerns that there was no mini-park area or street par!ring allowed and that the street width may hamper traffic movement. g. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to remand back to the Planning Commission with tFe following direction from Council, (noting that the Planning Commission and applicant consider Council's concerns in developing a new modified plan)! Naarde should be designed to "minor collector" standards &nd that it be aligned so • as to provide for a "T" intersection and development to be in compliance with the Tigard Comprehensive Plan;.Ahe minor collector should be designed so as to discourage the use of Caardt Street and 0, the development streets as an extension of Murray Blvd. ; 1)the development be so designed as to meet the purpose of Planned PAC! 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - PEBRUARY 13# 1984 -.. :k Developments as set out in TMC Section 18,80.010 (A) (1) - "To provide a means for creating planned environments through the application of flexible standards which allow for the application of • new techniques and new technology in community development which will result in a superior living arrangement." h. Councilor Brian stated he questions whether this development, as currently proposed, results in a "superior living arrangement". He noted the streets were 24-foot wide and private with no curbs, no sidewalks, increased density of units designed for younger families, no street parking, no park/open space area, etc. He also encouraged the applicant to consider these i,,,sues before making a modification proposal to the Planning Commission. ` i. Motion to remand with concerns was approved by unanimous vote of Council present. DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT LEFT: 10:02 P.M. • 14. POLICE DEPARTMENT ANNUAL REPORT a. Consensus of Council was to table item to a future meeting due to the late hour. RECESS COUNCIL MEETING: 10:05 P.M. 15. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council and Library board went into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1.)(e) regarding Real Property Transactions. • RECONVENE COUNCIL MEETING: 10:55 P;M. 16. SPACE NEEDS III REPORT a. Mr. Dick Bendixsen gave an updated report stating that the Air King site has tentative negotiations for $3.25 per square foot for 3 acres and the Sturgis site at $3.54 per square foot for 3.4 acres. He M, noted that the negotiations do not need to be final and stressed the success of this issue it going to be encouraged by total Council commitment. b. Motion by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor Brian, to accept the report by the subcommittee and assign Councilors Brian and Scheckla to continue negotiations on the Sturgis site and report back on a 2/20/84 at a special Council meeting called at Tigard City Hall at 7:30 P.M. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. c. Councilor i;i C � cilor Scott stressed that nothing should be id3.dden but total costs should be shown to the, citizens when a proposal is presented for voter approval. Councilor Brian stated that the subcommittee had done an excellent job in the one week they were given and expressed his appreciation. SOLUTION NO. 84-10 A RESOLUTION �F THE TIGAP.0 CITY COUNCIL L EXTENDING 17. RESOLUTION '�It�N OF � *I.. BUDGET COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS. PAGE 6 COUNCIL MINUTES - FEBRUARY l3, 1984 ♦ •n • Terms of office are extended from December 31st to June 30 expiration F dates to allow Committee Members to serve through the budget process. a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 18. APPROVE COUNCIL MINUTES - January 16, 23, 30 and February 6, 1984 a. Motion by Councilor. Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 19. APPROVE BRAMBLE BEND RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AD DEPUTY RECORDER TO EXECUTE. a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve and authorize execution by Mayor and Deputy Recorder. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 20. RESOLUTION NO. 84-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE TIGARD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. The Committee recommended appointment of John Skourtes and Robert Nuan. a. Councilor Scheckla questioned how' Mr. Skourtes qualified for the 72nd . Avenue area representative. Councilor Brian stated Mr. Skourtes owned business property in the area. b. Councilors Scott and Scheckla stated they could' not support either applicant for appointment. Mayor Bishop noted this item would be continued to a future meeting. 21. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 21.1 City Administrator stated the League of Oregon Cities wishes input from cities if there: is anything further they desire to add to the current Sales Tax issues. Consensus of Council was to not add anything further at this time. 2..1.2 Mayor Bishop discussed an article he included iu the Council packets regarding Happy Valley`s ruling by the Oregon Ourt of Appeals on the order: of a plan mix of 50-50 for single-family and multi -family units • in the City. Legal Counsel stated the Legislature has amended the law and that the article was not correct as it appeared in the paper. • 22. ADJOURNMENT: 11:15 P.M. ATTEST: Deputy City Recorder W' City of Tigard, Mayor - City of Tigard (14086/A) PACE 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 13, 1984. 't-), Il'AlfaV''Cie4r-i.:47 e f- t /yiw�l1! �� I�a�u���h��/}��" cirtoF WASHINGTON COUNT`f,OREGON ' MEMORANDUM February 7, 1984 TO: All Concerned Citizens FROM: William A. Monahan SUBJECT: Park Place Project At the January 30, 1984 meeting of the City Council, the Park Place project was delayed to afford the applicant au opportunity to meet with the Planning and Public Works staff. A meeting was geld on January 31 with the applicant k' where suggestions were presented by NPO #3 Chairman Bob Bledsoe. The JP' applicant then prepared the enclosed plan which will be presented to the City { Council as a potential modification at the Council meeting on February 13, 1984 only if the council chooses to consider approving the plan with , 1 modification. Please review the plan. If you have any comments on the plan, they may only be provided to the Council if the Council chooses to consider this modification. (WAN:pm/0310P) i , 1 : 39.41/1 ------ 2i SrW.ASH p�.b.BOX 330 ' `1'It3Al OREGON p2 1 P : • I 0 TTACHMENT A ,,,,p,..„, . ,... ....4_,..,,,,... ' t - S ; *' , ASH 1 N G T O 1 C O / Y it:' r \ ADMINISTRATION BUILDING -- 150 N. FIRST AVENUE HILLSBORO,OREGON 97123 February 3, 19 8 3 DEP7.OF PUBLIC WORKS ' BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS y ! WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman ROOM 201 BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman (503)648.8886 . i EVA M. KI LLPACK JOHN E. MEEK . LUCILLE WARREN Mayor, Council and City Manager City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Status of County Planning for Roads in Tigard Area r i Ladies and Gentlemen: r Washington County Commissioner Lucille Warren has asked that I prepare for you a report of the. County' s recent efforts to ' plan for County facilities in the Tigard area. Two reasons have generated this need: 1) Development of the County' s Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and 2) the feasibility analysis of a Local Improvemq;nt District in the 135th-Walnut area. Commissioner Warren has also asked me to summarize this Department's position on Durham Road in light of recent studies carried out on that roadway as well as in relation to our trans- portation planning efforts. Sincerely, y+ Rice Larry Rice • Director o ublic Works '-'7*LR:.MCN: ss Martin C. Niz ek,' y Athment CCtaC�O�.rd of County Comm Transportation Manager y ) County Administrator Rick Daniels Frank Currie tu oh cirtzt1 opportunity ct ploys t 4 • • • J• • • . 'AS COUNTY ROAD PLANNING In the spring of last year the County contracted with Metro and jointly developed an extensive upgrading of Metro' s computer model used for analysis of roadway needs. This model encompassed the entire urban area, including the City of 2igard, allowing a detail of traffic analysis to at least the arterial and major collector system never available to Washington CountyH jurisdictions previously. ' In the late spring of last year the County Planning staff (assisted by Metro staff) collaborated with city staffs to establish concensus on population and employment projections for use in the transportation model. While staff representatives from Tigard were made aware of ... this effort at interagency coordinating meetings (Planning Directors' meetings) as well as through correspondence from Metro staff, no input was received from Tigard. Given the City' s non-response to requests to participate in reaching a mutually agreeable set of population and employment projections, Metro staff utilized previously adopted regional control totals to estimate Tigard' s share of future growth. Subsequently the computer model was run to analyze road, needs. #.) One readily apparent problem to the transportation planning staff throughout the analysis process was the magnitude , of congestion to be witnessed along Highway 217 and sections of Scholls Ferry Road and the increased encroachment this would generate to local Tigard streets, such as Walnut. Given the fact that the County functional classification plan as well as the Regional Transportation Plan have for some time called for the Murray extension, it was logical for staff to investigate this alternative. I would note here, as I do under discussion of the 135th Local Improvement District, that County staff has made every effort to respect the character of the land use and the terrain of this area. In this respect efforts to minimize the size pf any extension of Murray were quite explicit and this was one of the primary reasons for looking into the Aloha bypass using Beef Bend and Reuss:9r Roads. * This brings us to the County's evaluation of the traffic requirements in this area. Attached you will, find diagrams which evaluate the following configurations 1. Na new road extensions. 2 Murray extended to 99W. 3. Beef Bend-Reusser bypass, 4 . Beef Bend and Murray extension. 1 1 would note that Metro staff has informed us that Tigard staff has made partial use of the information at Metro but has not used the model to evaluate its proposed transportation plan. / County Road Plaik.ing Page 2 Not having benefit of the City ' s transportation analysis efforts we are not able to contrast thcce values to the City' s. We stand ready to do so, however. In viewing the alternatives shown, in the referenced diagrams, staff noted the congestion on Highway 217; a facility which I'm sure you will agree would be extremely cos4-ly to expand given the existing structures and land costs in the area. We feel it is important, however, to recognize the regional significance of improving the accessibility in this area Frankly, given the vacant developable lands not only in Tigard, but in Beaverton and other, areas of the County, the only sound planning approach is • to provide, the urban services which will be necessary to accommodate 1 . this growth. Finally, I would note that our plan recommendation (which has been available since mid-November of last year) embodies the objectives discussed above. That is, improved Washington County accessibility to meet State planning guidelines are met while minimizing neighhor- , hood encroachment as well as potentio.1 costs to the public for new roads. * ' 135TH-WALNUT LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT • As you are most likely aware, the County and City staffs have been cooperating in establishing a Local Improvement District to place improvements on portions of these facilities , I would like to take this opportunity to note to you two efforts which the County has absorbed, to further this effort. First, in May of 1982 the County expended some $2000 for services by Metro to carry out a special traffic analysis. The purpose of this study was to provide preliminary information to the Local Improvement District consultant on the traffic which a Murray extension would carry and, thus, the relief, to 135th and Walnut. (This effort, of course, was superceded by the broader Metro modeling effort completed last September. ) The second effort which the County has supported to assure the provision of appropriate urban services was a supplemental $6000 agreement with the Local Improvement District consultwit to evaluate alternative alignments for the Murray ' extension. (Thi process is - nearing completion and an alignment map will be presented in discu8- sion with your Council. ) In summary, we feel our process has been open, cooperative and comprehensive as LCDC would require in meeting the intent of the goals . We hope, when briefed on these facts, you will realize our attempt to rspect the neighborhood needs but, also, the need to consider the broader travel needs of other County residents. 4 n , , 1 1 County Road Planni��s�,.� �' ;. Page 3 DURHAM ROAD , In joint discussions with Tigard and Tualatin staffs last year, it j' • was decided that a series of studies be carried out to investigate the following: , 1. The need to restrict truck traffic (over 30 ,000 pounds GVW) on Durham Read, and 1' 2 . the feasibility of using the Tualatin-Sherwood bypass as an alternate route. • Several studies were carried out in this regard and, while we have not been able to compile a final report 'on these efforts, the following represent the major conclusions which can be drawn: 1 The average (three axle +) truck traffic on Durham Road , • , (99W to Hall Blvd. ) is 200 per day during weekdays and about ,, 75 per day on weekends. . 2. Very few of these heavy truck movements occur between 10 : 00 PM and 6 : 00 AM. An average of only about six per night was determined: , 3. Noise studies carried out by the USDOT over a one day period r• ' found only two violations, neither of which were heavy trucks. 4 . The Oregon Trucking Association looked into speeding on this facility and found that smaller, step-type vans and delivery . vehicles are responsible for speeding violations, not heavy trucks. 5 . The Oregon State Speed Control board carried out speed and • accident studies and found the existing 40 MPH limit to be appropriate. 6 . The proposal to route truck traffic to Tualatin Road and the Tualatin-Sherwood bypass cannot be enacted at this time because of the inability of a number of intersections to safely accom- modate trucks. 7. Metro and ODOT will be conducting a travel survey in this area later this year,.. Additional data could be developed from this study (if appropriately structured) to determine if the proposed Tualatin truck route would divert a significant number of trucks to make this a viable option. o In summary' cannot recommend� t he limitation of truck t raf fic at this time on Durham Road. Further, the transportation modeling effort previously discussed indicates the need for Durham Road to function as an arterial street given projected development in the area. (See ' previous figures in this report. ) • County Road PlanniL Page 4 • It may he possible to improve Durham Road while protecting and buffering surrounding residential neighborhoods. The County stands ready to discuss this option with Tigard and, indeed, we need to move forward in this area given new development that will require County permits in order to access Durham Road. Finally, it appears that both the County and City transportation planning efforts have arrived at differing conclusions as to the appropriate functional classification for Murray' s extension and for Durham Road. I would greatly appreciate the opportunity to review the technical information supporting the City ' s recommendation and the subsequnt opportunity to work with your staff in resolving the differences. MCN: ss ' • " got 1* '1 0 r'ff, I CI 1 m\ ‘... ,,,r1 -----:t\j ' 1..,...', I' . iii:..., .....,.„. ..-...5= .-. 0 -,iii. .• 4.4 ‘ . — al \V.,. , \--, .%,. . . -... I 'P. :-:,..-...., ; ,-,.....-...;-. de . 1 i-I ..:,,...... ,.-..........7...).-:,..,, -.....x,......:,!,....:::::::..T..,,y e.T1,c,.,:::::.::::-..%::-........ ,t.._ •-• :::::::::',-..if.,.-,.... D 12_1 s7t, . - - N....1 2/3 • i . 0 . • ‘25*. i = . —1 . u , . \f) 35 -1 1 ......_ , ta 1 i ki Z/3 .4p I . ; . . .. ........... • 1 1 ttl . KRA, M Li 'it- _._..... 215 . I Til . , ' e• LEGEND , , 1,• 6........................................,....____) Lane Requirements c---1 EXISTING 1 YEAR 2000 :0, • .. Congested Road Section . , :,-;44..:.:.-...---...x.:•••-...:•4-.....-. • t...x.:-:-.:".$:;:::::-:-:-:::-:-::::f-:::::(Level of Service SD') ■ .,..:,..x.:.:-.......x.,:•,:e.,:-.....x-x...:•.:-.. . I,i ‘ 7. ;01://77/0:44 (Level ot Service*L:' or icre) .-...., . • , .„,..,::..i.:,t..:.:; ,.... :::::f.:..... — '...*' •:-:Itlf-titti::.::et::::::it-X0'.:::;:.: 2/3 ,., . 2/3 miz::::".-..- ••--- -- -- .#4:is .11.1.0.1. -id • 1 • 1,...4414E ?...EQUIREINA5t4T6 . .. a,ashingtori . , . t . t-Junty it b 1 1 PL8 t IC kvOrki,ZS W 1 6 h NO P,OM) ,)<ISN5\O5 i qt,, , . . , 0, „.. . . „ .0 ' •• 7 I A ' * (Lt_ 7) ..• ••::::i... r * • ••:: :•••••• •.........;• .: . ::...:::::-:::::::....•2:' •••••• ..:*:".. •t. I , %:..■:"....1..:::::$•:''.. ... ' ',' •••:.-':::::•. ...,•••77 I.•• •,,,•. •••• ••• ''' 1 X I 11, , .4,, .......• , , : fis . ••• 4 4 ■ , , .....0., .:.::.. . .1 i • ..kit : • , —. .!.:L:■:ii::: 1 ■. ■ .% ..Z.t.:".:,::!:::-\\O • ::NA ', .-::::::” ..::*:. Y- • •.. •••• , ••. ••. . I ..•... ••• ... .... .::-- •::: .......-.-., --•••••••• •••••••• .- .. . . ~ t•I , ,.. ::::::-: :•:-:-•"."-' • 6 ....• • •,....,....• ..I.• ••,...••.• . .........."11' ..• 1. q • • 110.° "4.0 1 *1,...•' . . , r V.1 • 0 6. •I.•, A..%. I''''' . •. \LN:..;::g:•....:...::::i::.. . . ---,4":0;:::.::1:;:;::. --7, trl, • , . •:::;:;:-...*:::;.:,-, - ........, , • -1 &I • • • dd. a' ■• . ::•.,:::::::„. . . 3. ......,.., . . ,. . •--: ‘....0+.\);: '::;:::: • t4 , . . I l• .• Zdf • 12_1 ,,.. . ...1 . .- . . ., o . . , 12541, . , . .....)' . . \t'l . , (NS ,., . 0 •-\ 13544 IM ,,, I .19 . • I:4 . . I t•.: . I . \r% • • tl • I IC\ tt 6'• . • •%a a.., M U R.RA%e iitsi t.1, . . . . . 4 . LEC: ND . fal ( . , Lane Requirements . 1 EXISTING/ YEAR 2000 ) • . , . . • Congested Road Settion (Level of Service "D.) 5 1 1r te4yrdeirtn (Level of Sertique Ea or Worse) -:I , KC). A A A4:t::::.•A ' f' ) ,...x.,•,.. 1 - -I • ; ashangton . 1...it\tis KECIU1r,,r0mEWT 5 , county k:BLIC \VC:IRKS w14.4't g.5U9. SOK- 555F D5I4P IMP47A/ P / . ,. _........... ..._ ,.. _ • r, " .• . 1. . P . ,. ) -' x : . oil ti , i . ..i.p _ . . . . , . • _ .s,........ . . ..,., 6. .--- . • tt... --.-..:-..... lai 4. p.,,,, ,,,,,•;„•...*.;, •......tttt. • , ........ k _,s y. tc2, N.C.' ":"....‘‘'‘‘,............:.*: .s.$V.1 .. . _..1. z/3 • 2.13 I . = v....) , • Ncl t\1 • „ ler4 s°0* ; C*4 too". ,..!.."' 1 .... 135 ' .. . la* . 1.:. . . , --% ''''r Z=. •• 01 , .• • fret 1%4 Li R.RW • .- .. i , D : . : \i K1 l' i . ......., LEGEND tNI Lane Requirements 10 CSI . .• EXISTING/ YEAR 2000 , . , - Congested Road Section •, ' :.,-..-:.:,:..:.:.,x,x-:.;:-:.:.:•::,:.:-...;::: (Levet of Service *D ) of:007://4:04:049 (Level of Service 'Ea ot Worse) I` '13.E.E V 15E},1 V ?V. , 2.,/3 , , . , , hingtori LAt45 KV' 11%1NIIP:*st-rES 0• , . With U , . EXTE S IC)t'l Puttic WORKS 41 • / c. . . O d 4, p. 1 i .Jig `V4I�. Z . ..ts?!.....-...,,_ . . ir.I .;., . . ....7, , .......7 , ,I. Z� s A 1254 : ar, O, k . Y iii_ ��� •� 135"M r�rww6°rr,� i • •��+ !� 0 M u f.FZA' o? c4 LEGEND Lane Requirements � EXISTING I FEAR 2000 Congested Road Section -:;....*.,. .;:`-• "y (Level of SeMce 'D) f„.............i (Level of Service `I „dot rraii . d°„) Y:.: .lf4.: 1wwrr�jjj ���lllddd 1 a5hington ounty 1.,,fla4 5 qQti I K F. 141- i ki,t4,..._ PuBtic%A.'og WI ill Mial&tZRY MD Z E:roo. 0, 141,011, .,yr fip, 1 111111111111111 1,4 ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES $1111111/ Iiiiiiill!!! February 1, 1984 City of Tigard 12755 SW Ash Street P.O 4 Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Liz Newton, Planner Re: S 8-83 PD Park Place Herewith 20 prints of Park Place Preliminary with street revisions suggested by the Planning Commission and discussed with Staff and Bob Bledsoe from NPO #3 on Jan 31 at City Hall. Please advise if additional data will be required. , 1 Respectfully submitted, AL1774 Robert N. Miller Vice President cy Stephen T. Janik Ball, Janik & Novak uite 1470, One Main Place 101 S .W. Main Street Portland, Oregon 97204 CENTUtV 21 HOMES I NOrth Coast Plata • liX),tbk 1408 • 7160 S,W,,Haat Pero Rd, • Tualatin,00 97062 • (503)584-2782 N O T I C E O F P U B L I C H E A R I N G NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT ITS MEETING ON MONDAY, January 30, 1984 AT 7:30 P.M. , IN THE LECTURE ROOM OF FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, 10865 SW WALNUT, TIGARD, OR., WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.: S 8-83 PD (SJBDIVISION) Century 21 Properties ° ' APPLICANT: Century 21 Properties, Inc. OWNER: Same North Coast Plaza 7160 SW Hazelfern Road .j Tualatin, Or 96062 REQUEST: An appeal by Century 21 Properties, Inc. of a Planning Commission denial of a conceptual and detailed plan and preliminary plat of Phase I, Park Place. LOCATION: 13900 SW 121st Ave. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 251 4 Lot 1400 and 2S1 3CC lot 401) (See map on reverse side) THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ROLES OF PROCEDURES OF TRE CITY COUNCIL. a TESTIMONY MAY BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD. I ; FOR FURTHER INFOErfiATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY° RECORDER OR PLANNING DIRECTOR AT: 639-4171 CITY OF TIGARD = 12755 S.W. Ash A t'•e. Tigard, Oregon 97223 (cornet of Ash & Burnham) (02722) I • M 1:PC)) t r P 5 (P C,) ; .. , r• . ( ' ',,,,;;,4. - " J�. . , �_ •, •.� ..� �.. h , i, �., , , 1• , �, J i' : ' �'� •.... , ran . , .7.41...kir*toor, .., ,,,i,,, . N::: i,if i?‘... lien i - i• . 1 • • 1 ' \ ' ''' A-1 A. ., , .., ..: ....,,,. \\ N ` . 1 I ti ",� r 1 ' 44'4P11 II' '� ]lllR3y��R � � • , ..wet a.I�� °' r� 1 r , a . °" �' T `-' -F:P Y'v Pte'44-, Ua.1 e, 4 a M • IE 3 ' 's,t✓ �-�,. 1 + � � ,..; i .04°1' , Mire ,•� ,411 ) S I , 7 ✓: • • 'III , . .....,...? ..., .,.. ...,mr. , .. f j:: -' r , r ,I• •, 'r r„ A/ '1.. Irl—( „. ', '. . ., . '..'.■ir,:r:.:.''..,... '...•,..: ,',': ,..: , r ill 1.eiC isi / , 101 I r i(•)\> R—7 L.I.t.J. .A , -.,. .,/,;#1s' R--2 0 R--I 0 ' � Ili i •, •, (PD)/ < IMI 4 ir'� ! N' ii Or 'R—20 ii. it. %******el . 5 , i ,,,,,, .1. 1044611 Ir.t ea .' .� ,it tk .1r11at- .mss-writ!t. a e 1 ili' �.a (PD > ::. 4 + 0041,�Ian '1101X11161 kn� I �' ilrei� ..o, o 'iliwr► .; s i r. e. ice, / r;:�+1 , ! T M l l • PP'19 t'I 1' • of, d 1 x . PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGARD LOGO PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The following will be considered by the Tigard City Council .. on January 30, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. at Fowler Junior High School Lecture Room, 10865 SW Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon. Further information may be obtained from the City Recorder or Director of Planning and Development at 0 12755 SW Ash Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, 97223, or by calling 639-4171. SUBDIVISION S 8--83 '2D CENTURY 21 Homes Inc. NPO # 3 An appeal by Century 21 Properties of a Planning Commission denial of a conceptual and detailed plan and preliminary plat of Phase I, Park Place The Property is located: 13900 SW 121st. Ave. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 4 Tax Lot 1400 and Map 2S1 3CC lot 401). 1 This will be an "argument-type" hearing only. The Council will consider only the record before the Planning Commission, which is on file at City Hall. The Council shall not consider any new testimony or evi6ettce which is not in the record. • • • i'. 1lllq pppA TT a pub1 .5h �-19 ter 8'4 • CITY Or TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: January 30, 1984 AGENDA ITEM k: 7 DATE SUBMITTED: -28-84 PREVIOUS ACTION: DeTual of S 8--83 Pi, ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Park Place by Planning Commission Appeal Hearin REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY The applicant for the Park Place. Project, Century 21 Properties, has requested a two week delay of the scheduled public hearing to provide an opportunity for discussions with staff. It is hoped that a plan can be agreed upon which will address the concerns of the Planningc ommission and the needs of the applicant. • A two week delay to the Council's regular meeting of February 13, is requested. The applicant has scheduled a meeting with the Public Works and Planning Department for Tuesday, January 31, to wori, on the project -should the Council approve the delay. • ueaime.EumeiaM tacaraetssreirtsRmas.+icrsrtrrstiieiisanbcrearrcl ismrcaereu=ar=_::40 :==e==mfrsrsa¢;Naaac�*ascYescsrebursascia . ALTERNATIVES�, CONSIDERED The Council can accept the applicant's request for a delay or go forward with the public hearing to reach a decision. ,` he+ecneci:ei,ieaicr.x`seerwiwenri�ac��esiewt.caRyrr�acin=krei�as�ck��+acsk�5cc+�a:���;���-.• .- .,.+'::,•.� .:.=•-�.• ..• -- SUGGESTED ACTION • recommend that the Council by motion grant a two week postponement of the park Place Appeal Rearing until February 13, 1984. wA n P COUNCILOR SCOTT LEFT THE MEETING: 9:04 P.M. RECONVENE: 9126 P.M. d. Various members of the audience and Library Board expressed their support of the Sturgis site. e. Mayor Bishop stated he would support studying two options further; Crow and Sturgis. IH f. Councilor Brian felt the City should proceed with 2 sites in further study; Sturgis seems to be most attractive (need to look at easement/construction/acquisition/costs closer) and Crow site based only on sheer economics. He felt priority should be given to study of the Sturgis site and develop some figures. g. Councilor Cook suggested that Air King site should be compared to the Sturgis site as they are both sites requiring new construction. ' h. After further discussion, Councilor Cook moved to proceed to compare and negotiate the Sturgis and Air King sites for a possible May election. Councilor Scheckla seconded the motion. Motion failed to have further consideration. i. After lengthy discussion between Council to decide which site should be considered, consensus was to have the Air King, and Sturgis sites studied since there was already adequate information on the Crow t, option. j. Councilor Brian moved to have the Space Needs III Committee Chairman, or his designee, and a representative from the City Attorney's office authorized to obtain necessary expertise to determine acquisition x costs, building standards and specifications, site improvement costs in general terms, and actual space requirements needed to build,, with up to $I,O00 allocated for those expenses as needed. Motion seconded )". by Councilor Cook. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 8 PARK PLAMitECaTOLD APPEAL HEARING PL This will be. an 'argument type hearing only The Council will consider only the record before the Planning Commission, which is on file at City Hall. The Council shall not consider any new testimony or evidence which is not in the record. a. Public Hearing Opened b. Director of Plannin g p and Development advised Council that a letter had been received from the Appellant, dated January 27, 1984, requesting a 2 week delay to February 13th for the hearing. The Director further stated that the Appellant, wishes to modify the ■ Proposal and recommended Council approval the extension of the hearing to the 13th. PAGE 3 - COUNCIL MANUTE8 JOWARY 30, 198 ; . e r > 4 c. Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to continue the " •' hearing to 2/13/84 as requested by the Appellant. 'N6 Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. '4G d. Council requested that staff make the modifications available to the citizens concerned. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 84-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO THE TIGARD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 10. APPROVE COUNCIL MINUTES -� JANUARY 9, 1984 a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 11. RECEIVE AND FILE DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve. A Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 12. RESOLUTION NO. C4-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL APPOINTING AN ALTERNATIVE REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT POLICY ADVISORY BOARD. a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve. • 0 Approved by unanimous vote of Council present, 13. APPROVE OLCC APPLICATIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING BUSINESSES: o Lone Oak Restaurant, 11920 SW Pacific Hwy. , A License a Safeway Store #383, 250 Tigard Shopping Plaza, PS License o Coco's Famous Hamburgers #116, 10900 SW 69th Ave. ,, R License a Bus. Stop Deli, 10240 SW Nimbus #1-4, RMB License o Stein & Burger; 11688 SW Pacific Hwy., RMB License o Bergmann's Restaurant, 12725 SW Pacific Hwy. , R License o Albertson's Food Center #544, 12.060 SW Main St. , PS License o L'Ecurie, 12386 SW Main Street, DC License, o Banning's Restaurant & Pie House, 11477 SW Pacific, R License o Fred Meyer Inc. , 11565 SW Pacific Hwy. PS License o Fred Meyer's Eve's Restaurant,, 11565 SW Pace Hwy. , R. License S, • Pa yless Drug Stores NW, 12080 SW Main Street, PS License • Silver Palace, 14455 SW Pacific Hwy.; DA License o Hi Hat Restaurant, 11530 SW Pacific Hwy. , DA License • Sherwood Inn Restaurant, 15700 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd. , DA License a. Motion cc nded, by Councilor Councilor Brian;, se � by ncilor Cook to approve. I�• Approved by unanimous vote of Council present.. PACE 4 COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1984 W , ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES • SIB N 6 7 1984 CITY®F ri, •January 27, 1984 �RD 4 Tigard City Council City of Tigard • P.Q. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attn: Jerri Widner, City Recorder re: Park Place File 58-83PD • This will confirm our conversation today with Mr. William A. Monahan, Planning Director, in which we agree to waive the 120 ,day hearing requirement and do hereby request a 2 week delay to February 13, 1984 for the subject appeal hearing. .. Respectfully Submitted, jec,44-7,7- �t • Robert N. Miller Vice President Century 21 Properties, Inc. cc: William A. Monahan Stephen T. Janik RNM/cmc cEN UI?21 HOMES North Coat Plaza o'' P.0,box 14 8 7160 S,W.Hazel Pem t d, • ' ualatilt,OH 97062 • OM M 684.21 (V ................. l''' - -• ...................., .............0..... , 1 , I .. ' MEMORANDUM I hieditploc II S'It JANUARY 26, 1984 -4, ..:.:L-1....•,e . CITYOFTIGARD 11 , ' TO: City Council WMHINGTON COUNTy,OREGON i . I .. . FROM Steve Skorney, Assistant Planner je4... , . SUBJECT: Park Place' Development Appeal S 8- ,:,3 PD • / , . . ' The Planning staff has reviewed the Planning Commission's findings concerning :;. Th the denial of S 8-83 PD. The Planning Staff feels that the application was , . complete. . , The Planning Commission based their denial on the following findings: " .. 1. DENY ,DENSITY TRANSFER TO .PHASE I BECAUSE THERE WAS NO SITE .PLAN FOR PHASE" II. . . - I . . , ... . . The issue of the density transfer was cited as a reason for „denying .. ... 'the. planned .development application.: The Planning 'Commtssion'. Wa'al I , .I . . • 4. • ' . * ' - 'A '■ 9 inIg*tied '.74 with ,.(0.: ,Plhe,...iipprdpriate.H,i0mber of dwelling :ste that • ., .••;.could-be .transferred & m the''i ibuildiiiite, land in 'Phiae.Th#4;:fpf„,,"the •:' • . .. izioSece;tfi.liiiiifie44,49:.ihe-iiiooib*,:.444Aottiiie:.traliafer,:,,,(41.4iidliiitig:. f ' , •' -,,1141tik.fiiiiiii*e.:':saile40bIliiildablq,:iadt0bliiiidible' iandin,4644t*C. , -.the.projeck';' arid (c).'tfie lack of a'sitplan for Phase'II. . ' " * . „ . . • a. The Community Development Code state's, that 25% of. the number of ' ' • ' .unite:,•:which ,could be accomModated on undevelop,e,ble..land may be kratis,f4iired. and .„placed .,.°''on .: developable ' and., ,;',',13.64exer., ',"'tife.. if.,:.',thi s,'deriiii.ty 'shell be limited°by '1105%*.Of ,ifie,„;,,,top'0.Jok, the' range., of 'the . reeidentiai .'2 plan classifi"ation . "cin: the ... , . 0 .• , d.eirelopable pOttiOns of the site. • . . . Phase I of the site covers approximately 8.50 acres (tax lot 401 1, ,.. - 7.78 acres and a portion of tax lot 1400 - .72 acres). . The site is zoned R..-4.5; Which means a net density ,(subtracting -20% of an acre for 'PUblid laCilities) of 4.5 dwelling -iiiiitii. 'per . . , , acre. , Mast... I is -allowed to -accommodate 38' dwelling units" '(8.50 , acres x 4.5) without the density transfer. • , . / . t . There are five acres of unbuildable land withitt Yhate II (land „ With. slopes greater' than 25Z). The applicant proposes 0 ''.tike credit for the maximum density transfer allovabie from the five acres, 5 units, to Phase 1. ' • , • g Please note in the new Development Code there is no provision for density bonuses for dedication of land. ] , ' H i2745 SW AV P.04 BOX 23897 TIGARD,0518GON 97223 PH:6394171 -----------, . A ,■1... W.,.. . ,,, ■N`.0,14 W4N+1,4"...,“,,. u , I wF� b. The Planning Commission was concerned that the undevelopable land in Phase II would be used for more than one density transfer. r ' The Code does not allow this practice. This fear can be eliminated by conditioning approval of Phase I to not allow any further use of density transfers for additional phases on the • site. The applicant requested conceptual and detailed planned development approval, and preliminary plat. approval for Phase I of their project. The Code, does not .tate that in order to i. - transfer density, the unbuildable land must be part of the phase seeking planned development approval. The Planning Commission did not have the authority to require submisaion of plans illustrating the siting of dwelling units in phases that are not contained in the application. This should not have been considered when the Commission took action on the application. 2. PRIVATE STREETS ARE INAPPROPRIATE; The Development Code allows the use of private streets within planned developments. The design standards, though, must be established by the City Engineer. The City requires • legal assurances for the maintenance of private' streets such as a bonded maintenance agreement e,Atd..the 'creaeion of a homeowners association. (it hould ; be ;noted that the applicant, Century . 21 . Homes, 41.c. recent vea` 'approval :from ;tie• Planning..Comm lesion. on.l►.ay• 3, 1983 for a subdiv .ion"''(London'-Square, ' 11900 S.W. 98th Avenue) with private streets. • The a plica\nt ,ie ' p,� , proposing the same private street plan for Phase I .oi the ,i ► k:;. P,taee: .project. The. Engineering. Division approved the coodept :ef t the` widt'.v"private streets. The Tualatin Fire District approved "the prvate ~street pian with the condition that parking be allowed on one side of the streets, if traffic is one—way. The enforcement of the parking restriction was not foreseen as being a problem. The applicant stated that the fomeowners Associate would handle .the violations as any ownars of, private streets do now it the City of Tigard. • 3. .INCOMPLETE.AND .INACCURATE INFORMATION. The Planning staff conclo.des that the applicant is correct when stating that.the finding of incomplete and inaccurate information is not a basis for denial. Specific. factual findings in support of a decision are rssenlial. If the Comwi:ssion felt that insufficient information was submitted ' for the Cotwu`scion to make a n decision, ,, the Commission had th e option on of p ost a o g their decision un�a � the missing information was supplied. (SS:pm/0298P • :i h it AFFADAVIT OF MAILING ! . , STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. • City of Tigard ) , 3 I, Bernice Kathleen Reffett , being first duly sworn, on oath dispose and . say: 2 ,I. That I am andikevseftev. for the City of Tigard, Oregon r That I served notice of hearing • of the Tigard City Council. of which the attached is a copy (marked exhibit A) upon each of the following named persons on the day of T _ l984,Z," by mailing i p _lath �.v�nuaryr..... > > Y g to each of them, the address shorn on the attached list (marked exhibit B), said notice as hereto attached, deposited in the United States Mail on r;,` ' the ,_2121-h_____ day of _..Ianu 4_ , 1984 , postage prepaid. ' q 0 4 •r ' / , `e i t th.,'rscribed and sworn to before me on the day of _ ,..4 , 1981. J . ,.ens Ni6.------.) • dr., ,;,,• LA r i'''''' A , 111 l ) ,;OT AR PIBLI OR +DREGON mJ a4 . tiy,tommis61.on Expires: iii—, 0272P `'" I✓ Aggll \.44 41 ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES riot" VII I rfr January 1984 Elizabeth A. Newton, Associate Planner City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Liz : Re : Park Place PD (58-83 PD) Thank you for your letter of January 6, advising of the scheduling of the hearing on appeal for January 30, 19844 Unless advised different17, I will assume that the City aouncil meeting will beg:n at 7:30 pm. Would you be so kind as to change our address in this file and also advise Bill, Steve and Hamid of our new address and phone number. Our main offices are now located at Century 21 Properties, Inc. 7160 SW Hazelfern Read P.0.03ox 1408 Tualatin, Oregon 97062 Phone 684-2762 Thank you, Robert NO Miller Vice President 0 0 CENTLIAY 21 HOMES a 1412 8,tiV,.Bea veett3h Hillsdale Hwy„Suite • Portland,Oregon g1225 • (SN't 291143 , • p " ' • * ' a 4 r . , . , ' , f ■ . .,. , ■ . _ . , ,, , ■. . . . . ., , . . , . . , k • . ■ . . , . : 0. ■ <I/ , , ..''' ' r'''7' 9 e /,/,/' ii , , . ., , , . , '• • '' • / te<Ar5'1dR. ;''' le i7le 1 2--- ,..... / , . dr. . 9," , c.../-v"rt.V. e. or ,,,,./ Apo 'A ,..0, - ' 1,7-•-,-- / )/ 1›,(a -e.e..'' 14 , , • , ,• „,, 44 ,, 7i„, /Fr4 c .,7... .,,, a / • / ,,,..,..,....g..., , _.,,,- .ft --f1. . ,69 c ,-aZyL..- -,-, 1 ":2-.."7.ea.-x.,....ez„,-,-X-47' ••,...,.'7 eree,"7,- -a...9.4......./. /(... ....” .4 • iiV '' . , .. 4': -44 ---e. y1 ,.-216.4 ,,,,.../veg,.g 4 , 4,,,, , c7/I f7,--,-,.-40,-,S . / ., ,e;t1i4/1'-:7,42741,,,--dereezi -14? . I . ' 16.--,, "c , /40., ce,-,c4_ -7 ....e4A-et--'j 42-,4---71■7112-, -1,4,-Z... ..7'..-- , . (.. r". 4,1M,,,,, ad.7 .0"..' , i f e'*-A-Gi."4 kt-'2"..t. *---7-4.4.' Vr; . . 16-/ ..'.„ / ' , 44 7 •. \k, / ,/ ■ ,,,,12/7A0 - . A , e . '''te 66;14,C.144-el.-e-tff 4 a r4 f " 1 e7Z,.a...',er.0,11..e..e-.4. .....') 42/ ,W, /5. . , . 3 ' , .. . a, ‘/ ,i , e, ,4/4_,,, ,,A,,,t,., „xi /4 . y ....----,,,,,./. .' .(,•71-- .M. , /' '. Z; ,,2 4,4 x/ ,--;,?, ,,,,,,,,, ,,,- -,e4,4. ,.. ' "..'"*""It4.*44.4•;.,41,4777° 'P? .0.'"7-1"71 -4,. , , ,,,,, , ,, :., ,, , , , , il,,,,-,... ..,,,,,,,,,.,,,,, ,,...'"7,,,r,0 , ...., " tj . , f".* , ‘ /2 . , p... ' --t44,--/tA,e— e-9 ---; 7'(;1,--ii-lee6.--1 A ' ,tArt" ,• /, • 0,,,, , 40.-71 ziW •, .. , 1 ,401,,(„4-01, ; 4 4 ,•ef, „ pt.,tit 4,,, •00,1,... ..... 07., d "er ,1 ...., , , Th, , ''''' • !:9 4:4;*1 ' - ' ' ' '7,1":.'404,04/bt*P '' •''' ' ' ' ' ' • ' ' . ;7/! •- ',„,,,i,t,e„Ye;r,;?;der„te,' ' ,..,,,,i) , .. , .• / ,.1,_■- ■ , . . ' •'. .'..,, •' .,•'. °."\. 3 ' ' . . . _ ,,, ! „ , ' ' r 7 CITY OF TIGARD—12420 S.W.MAIN—TIGARD,OREGON 97223' RECEIPT DATE: 02 -a- ___, AMOUNT:$.75; ` /:.V2____die , , .,/, `711//{-i - pOLLARS /�tae.._., NAME: .._.. "�.... ..�./ .— CASH:ADDRESS: /(� --6,c ; HECK ___ . ' � i�,o,l #OF FGR: ACCT.# PERIf ITS SURCHARGE AMOUNT ",... SEWER BILLINGS 40-364 , $ BUSINESS LICENSE 05-331 t"„ ' PLUMBING PERMIT 05-332 $ _ ., •MECHANICAL PERMIT 05-332 `' BUILDING PERMIT 05-333 ____ SEWER CONNECTION 40-363 ;. SEWER INSPECTION 40-365 _ k SYSTEM DEV,CHARGE 25-366 PARK DEV,CHARGE#1 30-Ug lb P ■RK DEV,CHARGE#2 30-368 ZONING ADJUSTMENTS 05-362 _ 4W)-e-Ag )2,2,,-- 0,...5--evaee-. 9y A747 `-4) • .. 1,412#1,Al.e., ( 4(.:' ,. ',,,, ' , ,N . TOTALS - e ' '� RECEIVED BY: A4 , ' , PERMIT NUMBERS ASSIGNED: ; Number Amount W Nulmbet Amount ? d cunt vw i.hnFa�el Arn et. rr.1 d. . y v -. ._- '. w r.__ ww. $err- -. .- f $ . . $._.._. .� ,. ' $ _ $ , , OIC PT # 16 7:. 1, i' I 1 .'ri „ • I: 1 � ENTER THE WORLD OF CEN rum, 21 PROPERTIES 1!M comber 22, 1983 Mr. Wil .iaii Monahan, Planning Director City of Tigard, Oregon -, P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Bill : Re: Park Place PD S 8-83 PD We have requested Mr ' Stephen T . Janik of Ball, Janik & Novak, Attorneys at Law, Suite 1470, One Main Place, 101 S.W. Main Street, Portland, Oregon 97204, telephone 228-2525 to assist us in the presentation of our appeal to the City Council. If possible, we would like to have his name added to the list of those a:. be notified on this project. d It is also likely that he will be forwarding co.mmunication3 to the City on this mat-cer. Further we would like to change Century 21's address on your records as we will be moving into our new (for us) offices on December 290 1983. dress will be : Century 21 Properties, Inc. , 7160 That address y Hazel Fern Road, Tualatin, Oregon 97062. Our phone there will be 684-2762. The Salem address will remain the same. Beast wishes to you, your staff and all your families for the h o l i days Sincerely, /44,7,414 Robert N. Mll lor Vice President • 6y Steve `a iik 1 CENThil'Y 2 r HOM S • 7412 SAN Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy,,Suite 112 • Pot'tipd,Oregon 91225 4 0,8)207.149 1 . ' ( .. y.+ aie^ .. ..m. .. 1 .. .; •1 ,. . .. .�w.. . `.«vry7.nv.u. w ,tr / J. • . u ^ • AlnrAll■ ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES TWIN V1,4*' December 22, 1983 Tigard City Council City of Tigard, Oregon City Hall • P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Councilmembers: Re PARK PLACE PlanneeDevelopment $ 8-83 PD • Please consider this as our appeal of the Planning Commission decision of December 6, 1983 to deny this development. Century 21 Properties is the applicant for the subject development. We specifically object to the findings in the denial. A motion to deny was made, seconded and voted on without findings. Findings were made by informal suggesstion by individual commission members after the vote to deny was carried by a four to three vote. Moreover, the findings were not substantiated by any appreciable testimony during the public hearings, thereby eliminating any opportunity for us to speak to the alleged shortcomings. The findings State : /1 1. Incomplete and inaccurate information. A 2. Private Streets inappropriate, 3. Deny (Density) transfer to Phase 1 waS inappropriate without see (seeing) the plats (for possible future Phases 11 or In) . This development was originally scheduled to be heard on Sept 13, 1983. On Sept 8 , planning staff delayed the project until additional information could be gathered. Subsequent meetings defined a suffic- iency of detail to meet staff's approval and the project was reschedule. . The Planning Commission did not request additional information nor was there testimony that information presented was eitller incomplete or inaccurate. No teStimony was presented that Private Streets are inappropriate. Testimony was presented that they were specifically appropriate to this project. Density Transfef is inappropriate as a finding because the application is for 43 Units on 47.80 acres. Density Transfer will only be a concern if additional units are requested on any possible future applications, We respectfully request to be placed on the earliest possible Council ad6enda. Very truly, 414, 04.0" Robert N, Miller L. -vice President CENTURY 21 HOME 8 4 7412 9N11,Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy,.Sultd 112 • Portia ndi Oregcip 9/225 « (503)297,103 ■ A ;... fr MEMORANDUM ! December 13, 1983 TO: File Al FROM: Liz Newton '.61/11"" SUBJECT: Century 21 Park Place , Concerns have been expressed by PC members relative to the right of Century 21 to appeal the PC denial of the conceptual plan for Park Place. Section 18.56.021 of the code in effect at the time the application was made reads as follows: (c) No appeal of a denial of a preliminary development plan and report shall be allowed. The intent of the preliminary review is to ascertain staff, planning commissiun, and the affected citizens' concerns relative to a particular project. The applicant's responsibility is to address these concerns prior to a return before the planning commission at a :y rehearing of the preliminary development plan. (Ord. 80-94 §1(part), 1980). '! However, Section 18.84.258 of the Code in effect at the time the application was made reads as follows: 18.84.250 Authority to appeal or seek review of a decision,._ (a) Any decision made by the director on a development application as provided by Section 18.84.050(a) may be appealed to the cc.l.mission as provided in Ser.tion 18.84.150(4). (b) Any decision made by any other approval authority under section 18.84.050(b) or (c) way be reviewed by the council by; (1) The filing of a notice of review by any party to the decision within fourteen days of sending of the notice cf. final decision; or (2) The council. or commission, on its own motion, seeks review by ' resolution filed within fourteen days of notice cf the final decision; or Section 18.84.050 (b) and (c) read as follows: (b) The planning commission shall have the authority to approve, deny, or approve with conditions pursuant to Section 18.84.110, the following development applicationP, as the initial hearings body, pursuant to Sections, 18.84..160 through 18.84.240: (1) Subdivision and major land partition applications pursuant to Title le 17; , Tx.t however, t r � by provided, (2) A quasi-judicial comprehElx�:�the plan map amendment; prc�l y development ll such amendments shall be reviewed b the council; .eta (8) A d pment application referred to the commiss din by the director pursuant to Section 18.84.l50(a)(2) 1 _._! _ `-_- -- o n 46 (4) An appeal of a decision made by the director under Section l3.84.250(a) and subsection (a) of this section; (5) A planned unit development proposal under Chapter 18.56; (6) Iriterpretations of the Tigard comprehensive plan and neighborhood plans thereunder or Titles 17 and 18 of this code, if requested by the director or other interested q.. y persons; (7) Any other matter not specifically assigned to the director, the hearings officer, or city council under Titles 17 and 18. (c) The hearings officer shall have the authority to approve, deny, or approve with conditions pursuant to Section 1 .84.110, the following development applications in accordance with Sections 18.84.160 through 1 13.84.240: t . kr $1 (1) Conditional use permit applications pursuant to Chapter 18.72; h (2) Variance applications pursuant to Chapter 18.76; ., (3) Sensitive land permits pursuant, to Chapt..•er 18.57; Yr (4) Quasi-judicial zoning map av ,adments pursuant to Chapter 18.68. It is tat, opinion of the City Attorney that based on State law and the Administrative Procedures of Tigard's Municipal Code, the applicant should be allowed to file ate appeal on the denial of the conceptual plan by the PC for Park Place:. • (EAN:pm/0242P) I,i: i E i 4r d. W pp u a >,1 • •. 1 . ••r, A 1 m • .�!AsfuhialoN j eMket,0 7x. 1 h NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION .`�' 1. The final decision was filed by Tigard Planning Commission Concerning $-83 PD on December 6, 1983 Case Number Date 1' 2. Name of Owner: Century 21 Properties j • 3. Name of Applicant; Century 21 Properties , J r\ Address 7412 SW Bvtn. Hi17 sdie Hwy.; City Portland State Oregon 4. Location of Property .. Address 13900 SW 121st Avenue '` ' Legal Description Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S I 3CC, Tax Lot 40'1 and 2S 1 4 Tax Lot 1400. )) 5. Nature of Application: Requesting conceptual and detailed plan approval of a PP .,_. planned development and preliminary plat approval of Phase I, consisting of 43 unite 6. Action: Approval as requested 11 Approval with conditions i X Denial 7. Notice: *Notice was published in the newspaper & was mailed to: The applicant & owners ` Owners of record within the required distance ElThe affected Neighborhood Planning Organization Affected governmental agencies *If there are questions regarding the named of the persons or agencies who received notice) this information ,1.s available at the Planning Department. 8. Final Decision The adopted of co p findings fact, decision, �wi�.n �, ;� ' '�?�Y2t1 condition car� be obtained from the Planning Director, City td u ;_rid, City Hall) 12755 SW Ash, F .O. Box e2339 Tigard, Cregon 97223, .. . � an application , th 7h the case of a decision apply. anon for a variance, the applicant , oYi� on n� , must acknowledge this form and return it to the City of Tigard) Planning Director, before any building permits will be issued or engineering approval given- _ Signature of Applicant of Applieant r s Agent Date -over- / ove r-. • ' 0 ' o 9. Appeal: An appeal fl has been filed has not been filed. Note: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.84.250,a which�provides that a written appeal may be filed within fatml.illkilitys after notice is given and sent. a Ter. Days Notice is given on Dee berms T ,% s _, therefore the deadline for filing of an appeal is i ttit r , r k������' 9 1983 10. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard — Planning, Department, 639-4171 .. f • r y s • • % le 1 _.ate ` , ., .+.,,A • ' b e f. (�, � ,. , ., . PUBLIC HEARING OPENED ,w 5.1 Century 21 CC'S 8 ;;83 P7 ¶ R . -�°� . It was tabled from the last meeting, so Vice President Moen, asked staff to review the staff report again. Assistant Planner Steve Skorney , ' J reviewed' the staff 'report to the Commissioners and Public. Associate :' Planner Skorney also reviewed the conclusions and the Plannin g Department De artm,e t ' findings. Staff recommended approval, with conditions of the applicant's , request for conceptual and detailed planned development approval and . preliminary plat approval of Phase I of S 8-83PD. O NPO/CCI COMMENTS u o Bob Bledsoe 11800 SW Walnut, NPO #3. He stated that the concern of the NPO was that the Development Code says a single family dwelling is one detached residence placed on one lot. He f ' . ' said that the NPO cannot understand why the Planning Department is . ' approving this proposal.! �° ilil;. o Planning Director Bill Monahan, said the code concerning Planned Development speaks to the minimum land area per dwelling unit, irregardless of ownership patterns. ;Y o Vice President Moen, asked if the land is going to be common land or not? ' K a M • o Director Bill Monahan said that is what the applicant wanted. He also : said that the applicant himself should speak. Applicants Presentations Bob Miller, Century 21 Proper Lies. He explained that what Century 21 Properties wanted is to put 43 units on 47.8 acres of land or they would even settle for 43 units on 9 acmes of land. He also said that it would be o.k. if they only approved Phase I, of e- the plan. He also mentioned that the "T°' intersection presented to Larry 1. Rice from the County and Frank Currie, Director, of Public Works would be "~ o.k. He also addressed the problem about how the Fire Department was to . respond to a fire in that area. Be said that they can come in on one of the roads oads that are roper off to get to the fire. He also comoetted on who was going to take care •of the common land. He said that the Neighborhood ro,4 • Association, made up of the people who live there, would be responsible . . , ' for it. 0 ' ,Commissioner Edit asked Barb Miller 'about concerns on policing the property b o Bob Miller said that the Amite 'Owners will do their o ?u policing around the area, but Century 21 is Willing to let the City patrol the area even though it is private„property• o Larr��y dice, Washington Co'cnty, said that the County was i a` urofrtplaiid they gave their os,t* t go. mead • Planning Comttission Mititte *bec,�?m`er.�«G,�„ „,'� r 1 1 f Q w may. 7 •'' 4 , L' 1! Hq;t5 o Commissioner Edin asked Larry' Rice if the "T" is good to have at the west r. end of the road. 0, Ralph Flowers 11700 SW Gaarde. He explained that his concern was if you let the development happen the �, traffic on Gaarde and 121st will became extra heavy and that the light can , Gaarde and 99 is already a death trap and he said it will be worse if you put up a stop sign or improve the, road. ' cl 0 Carl Landstrom 12000 SW Gaarde. 1 He wanted to let the Commissioners know that his house is only,' 20 feet #' . from the road 'and that he was afraid that the traffic will get worse than .. , it is now. 1 o Lou Ann Mortensen 11160 SW Fonneir NP(i 0#3 ' ' She asked Bob Mili r if. the Home Owners A,.ssrsciation will have to file with the Oregon State Real Estate Board. Si also asked what would happen if ? •• � � the Home Owners Association doesn't remain in existence. She was upset . . that Larry Rice ' left before any one could question him on What he commented on. L'; o Bob Miller responded by saying that yes it will, be filed with the Oregon t , State Real Estate Board. He responded to the second question by saying, that the Home Owners Association will always exist if there are people • living, on the property. a Lou Ann Mortensen asked what is going to happen with the traffic' on Pacir i,c Highway. • o Director Bill Manahan said that he and Frank Currie have discussed that , . 0 problem and their} will be no answer for at least a year or so. ,i N 0 Commissioner Butipr asked if there will be 'three lanes of traffic and how .'. will they go. , x ' o Assistant Planner Skorney said that 2 lanes will be travel lanes and 1 ' will be a turning lane. , r 0 Judy essler 11180 SW Fenner �.• She asked if there Will be a half-street improverrient or a full street improvement on Gaarde? Will the right-of-way on Gaarde be upgraded? 0 ' Assistat,t Planner Skorney said that the only thing: to be done it the 41 - „, sidewalks on the Park Place side. The y`might-of-wa will be upgraded to • the standerds on tilt! Park Place side. . Lengthly Di�,cus8i.on fol o ed. , • o Betty McCain .13950 SW 1211t . Het concern. d improvements was that if the Ott roe rovearentsonGaarde that. i tri Y put �� � �P will �; _ only be 11 ,inches from hct house.. ghe also said that she has trouble, :, , 7 already with the traffico if the development it approved she will have more. g t y 1 ,,Y i .. ...,.,.. .. .,.....,.,. .v �, .,.. • w..rw ti.rv. v • ....i. .„ u, ,f r l..n.e .nAs..«r ♦1•..•IVIw NI..M.aut.•0.I1[.1 HruuYwu.x.xr .�.•.. -..�.. Tom,T �, . • 11/ . , A , (' ''\,,,,''' .,-.. %, ... ,i, , o Eldon Hodapp 11460 S.W, Gaarde His concern was that if they widen Gaarde that the natural springs will be all messed up. He also was concerned that if an accident happened on Gaarde • who will be the one to respond, the County or the City Police Department. Judy Hodapp 11460 SW Gaarde She wanted to explain that the traffic on Gaarde is already bad an if 0 more is put onto it there will be more accidents than there are now. o Commissioner Edin said that he understands and that it will be considered. •2• BREAK 9:45 P.M. T. CONVENED 9:50 P.M. . . • CROSS EXAMINATION: ) o Bob Bledsoe 11800 S.W. Fortner NPO #3 He would like the County to agree to an alignment for the Gaarde St. extension that indirectly connects to the 121st and Gaarde intersection. ., He asked if there will be a continuous curb to Gaarde St. after the improvements are made. o Bob Miller Century 21 Properties V He explained that there will be 25 ft. of street on 121st on the property owners side and only 20 ft. on the development side. He said that will be the same for Gaarde St. Re also asked that the 200 street improvement be restricted lbecause he doesn't think that it is fair now because the city .2 has no idea at all what is being talked about. As the property is fl ' - developed the developer will be placing storm drains and sewer drains. If • they '.tit anyones spring they will find where it 1.6 and fix it. o Assistant Planner Steve Skorney told Bob Millet that the 200ft. improvement is standard for that kind of subdivision. o Lyall Turnball 11735 SW Gaarde , 1 I Asked if Frank Currie said that there is anything to be done to the County , side of Gaarde Street. r , o Bob Miller said that he did ao • remember that. o Mr. Turnball said no he was talking about street improvements. And then Mr. Currie said only if you have an LID. s, o Ted Dunfill 8895 SW Edgewdod What he wanted to know waS if they do street improvements to part of the street at a later date won't there have to be more work done tO the other street 4' Planning Commizsion Minutes - Decetber 6, 1983 4 '. / . . , . 1 4. ' . . . . . 1 " • I 111 * c, o Commissioner Edin answered his question by saying yes it does open the door for the other streets to, be improved. o Betty McCain then said that they will be violating both the City and County setback ordinances, and once those ordinances are violated who is going to buy the property. O Director Bill Monahan said that there is really no answer for that because it all depends where the house is located. The conflict is from the house to the right-of-way. He also said the problem isn't being created now that it already exists. o Commissioner Edin asked Betty McCain if she heard the answer Mr. Miller gave about the natural springs and drains. O Betty McCain said that she understands, but she is not sure that what Mr. Miller is proposing will be tte ansF-.r. Commissioner Edin told her that no one there is an engineer and that they rely on staff and etaff does not know. o Commissioner Moen had a question for the applicant. Who is going to do the maintenance on that street and how can the city be assured that it will be niaintained properly? He also wanted to know how the police are going to control the parking on the one side, ef tna street. o Bob Miller said the Home Owners Association will have the responsibility to mailtain the property. He said that on a private drive no one else has to let he police OD, but they are willing to work with staff and come up with an tnswer. o Commissienel: Owens asked, the applicalit why he k.'sked for a private road instead of pnblic ones. o Bob Miller responded that it will take away from the land and the land ' itself ix only 300 ft. wide, o Commissioner Owens asked if the project is approved tonight how will the applicant address the issue of the problem with the different number of units that the staff has put in the report. o Assistant Planner Skorney said that it was for a decision on Phase I not on the plat. PUBLIC HEAR= CLOSED 10t3.5 P.M. 0 Commissioner Owens said that the road condition is a major issue but that is not what the Commission is approving. She also said to look at it another way the improvements will in the long run be safer than worse. She also said that ttaffic will increase on. Gaarde reutrdless of what the Commission decides on this property. o Commissioner tutlet said that he has never seen a maintenance overlay like • this one before. He also was wondering why the Gaarde, Pacific Highway problem wsie not regarded in the galls. Also, he 4d like more on the drainage systems. , Planning Commission Minutes - December 6, 1985 5 • . • " , „ a o Commissioner Edin would like it noted how he would like to see the staff : report changed to conceptual detail review of Phase I only, not Phase II. . "" He would like to have the City Council consider appro•ring the private streets and enforce the parking. { 41 o Commissioner Edin said then the Commissio:as' hands are tied to do anything about the 70 ft. right-of-way. Do we or don't we, have anything we can do .M ., y about the right-of-way? o Director Bill Monahan said that no you can't do anything about it because the Cc>mmission cat not violate the Urban Planning Area Agreement. o Commissioner Edin said that the location of the street is a really big . • problem. He said that putting the "T" in at 121st is not the most safe p p , g 1 thing to do. He was thinking about putting the "T" in the other end of Phase I, maybe at the end of the street making cars either go left or ' right in Phase II. Commissioner Edin thinks this is the way Council and �` the neighbors would like it as it wouldn't be a straight away shot. o Commissioner Vanderwood would agree with Commissioner Edin about the street. She has some concerns about #5, she said that she has never seen anything like this before. She also said that 200 ft. improvement will . 'Q increase traffic speed more than it is now. o Bob filler said that with this condition he can see that people are going ' to speed tap on the 400 ft. improvement and said that cars will drive faster than now. . o Commissioner Frye major concern is with the traffic pattern, he doesn't ,_ • like the cars having a straight shot on Gaarde. Re also said that he does o like the offset running into 121st. Havint'' the "T" on the other side r> , would be. good. He said that maybe between 121st and 99 a stop sign could be put in It is a lot of density for a zone that is single family. So he would not aoa rove this unless it. has an indirect. connection. . p o Commissioner Leverett said item #5 show that we have an engineering ' problem and it has to be worked out and that the 200 ft. is not worded. well. ', o Comnissioner Moen comment was that we are here to talk about the development and we have done that, we bave only talked about the street problems. He is in favor of staffs' recommendatiosns and prefers the "T" tt:, Caarde. Two pro?ai e.ns by putting a "T" on the top, one is not to put :,,: the "T" in without gvae input from en ineerin' . The second one is that 121st is not good because he doesn't think the people would be very well served. He asked the applicant if they, plan on having any parking around the development. o Bob Miller stated that they plan on having parking on. one, side and. have �� . enough room for e walkway on the right-of-way. h i o Commissioner utting private drives on this big of a osioner Edin thinks ", development is wren ' p g � +e J • Planning Cottthission Minutes , December 5 1985' b �' f [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] N 1 a a ' , o Commissioner Owens would like to know what Commissioner Moens' feelings on density are. o Commissioner Moen said that we are not here to redesign the plan. a "I o Commissioner Edin motioned to approve Conceptual Phase I with conditions. + To add and correct staffs' conditions. The first addition would be Gaarde Street be extended as shown on the plans an additional 300 ft. northwest !' iilt , : ' from where it deadends now. With other proposed streets to be constructed to make a "T" intersection at that spot. He left in item #5, because he { would like to see, that street improved. Commissioner. Owens seconded the -'I motion. : ,\ x9 The motion was denied with the vote 5 to 2. i o Discussion followed'regarding the density problem. H o Commissioner Butler said that it is inappropriate for this density. Phase I could have been added only, not both Phase I and Phase II. • . o Commissioner Moen asked staff how much of the density transfer is in Phase , I. : o Director Bill Monahan said that about 5 units. ;ice • o Discussion followed among the Commissioners and Staff. o Commissioner Butler motioned to den development S 8 Commissioner Fyre seconded the motion. fi 1 ' o Discussion about, the motion followed. � ,�,_ • o Motion was approved by.,,,, ,. _3/41g. o Director Bill,Mov.ahan asked for the findings. , j , Fi„, r;,mss„ate / Incomplete and inaccurate information. :(ei! , , °"Private Streets inappropriate. , Deny transfer to Phase I was inapproriate without see the ! ' M plats. „,mow, 6.2 Sign Codt.,,EXception SCE 5-83 Chalet ,westaurant and Bakery NPO #4 • • o Commissioner Moen Msa tadat the applicant had to leave and that he would like it tabled until, the neimeeting,. ., o ,commissioner Fyre motion to have i'.° , shied until January's meeting, Commissionei; Owens seconded, ese h Unanimous vote of COM issioners pr nt. I I 1, 1l r O , C'iannin g tomriiss onnutes . ecembct 6; 8 ' 7' ti• .A''' STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.1 DECEMBER 6, 1983 -- 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL LECTURE ROOM 10865 SW WALNUT STREET, TIGARD, OREGON A. FINDING OF. FACT 1. General Information CASE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S 8-83 Pr, (Park Place) NPO #3 • REQUEST: The applicant is requesting conceptual and detailed plan approval of a planned development and preliminary plat ;,e approval of Phase I, consisting of, 43 units. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7 (PD) RECOMMENDATION: Based on information submitted by the applicant, staff's review of applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, zoning code provisions, and field investigation, staff recommend approval of S 8--83 PD, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. APPLICANT: Century 21 Homes Inc. OWNER: Same e' 7412 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy. Portland, Oregon 97225 LOCATION: 13900 SW 121st Avenue (Wash Co. Tax Map 2S1 3CC, Tax Lot 401 and 2S1 4 Tax Lot 1400) „k■ LOT AREA: 47.81 Acres NPO COMMENT: NPO #3 has responded in writing to thi i application request. PUBLIC NOTICES MAILED: Seventeen notices were mailed. One written comment has been received at the writing of this report, 2. Background No previous actions on this property. 3. Vi..iitit Information The surrounding /and uses are as llo s. To the north is designated low density residential, unincorporated and undeveloped at the present time. ..s ..e... .. ...-.._ .ww•ri... .. . } .,_ ..— , .. n ..w ... ..T.4,y_ ..✓tWn Wrn..t To the south is designated low density residential, zoned R,-20 and ' undeveloped at the present time. To the east is designated low density residential, unincorporated and developed as single family residences. To the west iii, unincorporated land which is outside of the City's urban growth boundary. / • 4. Site Information Slopes on the site are generally oriented east to northeast, with some interruptions due to strew. dissection. The slope range is from 5 to over 25%, the steepest areas occurring along the two stream incisions. For the purposes of this analysis, the slopes are divided into 5 categories: 0-10% 9.5 acres, 10--15% 10.5 acres, 15-20% 13.5 acres, 20-25% 9.5 acres, and over 25% 5 acres. The degree of difficulty, cost, and risk of development rises proportionately as the slopes increase over about 15%. Soils on the site appear to be silts and clayey silts of moderate to poor drainage. Depth to bedrock is undetermined, but it is probably near the surface in the higher portion of the site, while fairly deep in the lower areas. There is evidence of soil creep, stream undercutting of slopes, and small surface landslides on the property These .11 occurrences are not uncommon in this type of terrain, but nevertheless should be investigated carefully before development occurs. Potential problems observed in the field are evidenced by: leaning and bent trees, erosion of the base of the ravines, broken, warped topography, and escarpments where some shallow slides probably occurred. While the upper portions of the slopes, ridges and terraces appear to be safe for development, the lower slopes and drainages should be investigated further if any changes are done to these areas. Specifically, steep road cuts, removal of vegetation end increased storm water flows into the ravines could create future problems, which can be avoided by undertaking a more detailed geologic investigation at the appropriate time. Surface drainage is directed'. into two large ravines, both of which originate uphill of the land being considered. The first of these occurs in the extreme western portion of the site. Direction of the drainage is to the east. Consequently, a deep ravine creates a formidable divide between the nort-hwest and southwest portions of the property. This ravine merges with the second drainageway, and even deeper and larger ravine that orients northerly and effectively divides the entire property into east and west halves. This second drainage appears to be spring fed from farther up on Bull Mountain, and may be, perennial. A long, broad ridgeline parallels the larger ravine, causing surface drainage in much of the eastern portion of the property to move east-northeast. Other land forms' on the site include a small, s1!oping terrace in the northeast quadrant, a surface depression created by a man-made STAFF' REPORT -. S 8-83 PD - PAGE i ( ,,, .Q excavation and dam along the large ravine, and a second, larger terrace 1 in the southeast quadrant. In summary, th east facing slopes and ravines are the most significant topographic features of the site. Vegetation growth on the site varies considerably. First, the southeast portion of the site is primarily a meadow with seattered trees, , 0 including filbert, hickory, fir and cedar. Generally this area has an open character. ',; , Adjacent to this area to the west is an old, neglected filbert orchard. ,! i To the north of the orchard is a pasture area, open except for another, Ii smaller orchard and a stand of large, handsome dauglas fir. To the west, a dense woodland of Wester Chinkapin, Red Alder, Bigleaf Maple, Douglas Fir, Cherry, and Cedar stretches south to north along • both sides of the large ravine, and up slope into the southwest quadrant of the site. These trees are important in that they divide the site , visually in half:, in addition to their value in stabilizing the steep slopes along the ravine. The northwest portion of that property is a large meadow, with a few scattered trees. It is surrounded by woods on all sides, although the woods immediately to the west (off the subject property) are more brush than forest. B. APPLICABLE PLANNING POLICIES • 1. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1 THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN AN ONGOING CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND SHALL ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN ALL PHASES OF THE PLANNING PROCESSfl / Notices are sent to all property owners within 250 feet of this application. A notice was publishe6 in the Tigard Times on November 3, 19:33. NPO #3 was notified of this application. 2.1.3 THE CITY SHALL ENSURE THAT INFORMATION ON LAND USE PLANNING • ISSUES IS AVAILABLE IN AN UNDERSTANDABLE FORM FOR ALL • INTERESTED CITIZENS. All interested parties are given, at a minimum, 10 days to • respond in writing to the application and request under • consideration and are encouraged to do so. The Planning staff is available to address any specifi6 questions concerning the application or the application protOss. I 3.1.1 THE CITY SHALL NOT ALLOW DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS HAVING THE Ii.~. FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS EXCEPT WHER3 IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT ESTABLISHED AND PROVEN ENGINEERING TECHNIQUES , RELATED TO A SX)ECIFIC SITE PLAN WILL MAKE THE AREA SUITABLE FOR THE PROPOStD aVELOPMENT: , , STAFF REPORT - S 8-83• pp - PAW, 3 ro a. AA:EAS HAVING A HIGH SEASONAL WATER TABLE WITHIN 0-24 INCHES OF THE SURFACE FOR THREE OR MORE WEEKS OF THE YEAR; b. AREAS HAVING A SEVERE SOIL EROSION POTENTIAL; c. AREAS SUBJECT TO SLUMPING, EARTH SLIDES OR MOVEMENT; d. AREAS HAVING SLOPES 7N EXCESS OF 25%; OR e. ARE,c=„C. HAVING SEVERE WEAK FOUNDATION SOILS. 6.1.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DIVERSITY OF HOUSING DENSITIES AND RESIDENTIAL TYPES AT VARIOUS PRICE AND RENT LEVELS. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 3. The Tigard Community Development Code, through the Planned Development process, shall establish a procedure to allow properties exhibiting physical constraint characteristics, e.g. , steep slopes or floodplains, to develop with density transfers allowable on the site. No more than 25% of the dwellings may be transferred,, 5. The City shall encourage housing development to occur, to the greatest extent possible, on designated buildable lands in areas where public facilities and services can be readily extended to those lands. 6.4.1 THE CITY SHALL DESIGNATE RESIDENTIAL "DEVELOPING AREAS," ON AS," (WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED AS ESTABLISEED AREAS") THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP, AND ENCOURAGE FLEXIBLE AND EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THESE AREAS. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 3. Within the Planned Development section of thk Tigard Community Development Code: a. Development will be prohibited on lands rot classified as developable as defined in OAR 660--07--140; b. Twenty-five ereent. of the nu Atber of units which could be accommodated on the undevelopable laud may be transferred and placed on the developable land; however -y shall be limited, by 125% of the residential __. c. The transfer of the density of the range of the r �a1 plan classification on the developable portions of the site. 4. The Tigard Community ty Development Code shall also' p e for a Planned Development p rocess which encourages innovative desig n, more efficient tae of land, energy efficiency and more flexible development standards. STAPP REPORT - S 8-83 PD PA OS 4 Yy r S �{ A 1 7.1.2 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE' AS A PRE-CONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT: a. DEVELOPMENT COINCIDE WITH THE AVAILABILITY OF ADEQUATE SERVICE CAPACITY INCLUDING: 1. PUBLIC WATER; 2. PUBLIC SEWER (NEW DEVELOPMENT ON SEPTIC TANKS AW SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE CITY); AND 3. STORM DRAINAGE. b. THE FACILITIES ARE: 1. CAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SERVING ALL INTERVENING PROPERTIES AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT; AND 2. DESIGNED TO CITY STANDARDS. c. ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES TO BE PLACED UNDERGROUND. 7.2.1 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRE-CONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT THAT: a. A SITE DEVELOPMENT STUDY BE SUBMITTED FOR DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS SUBJECT TO POOR DRAINAGE, GROUND INSTABILITY OR FLOODING WHICH SHOWS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IS SAFE AND WILL NOT CREATE ADVERSE OFFSITE IMPACTS; b. NATURAL DRAINAGE WAYS BE MAINTAINED UNLESS SUBMITTED STUDIES SHOW THAT ALTERNATIVE DRAINAGE SOLUTIONS CAN SOLVE ON-SITE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS AND WILL, ASSURE NO ADVERSE OFFSITE IMPACTS; c. ALL DRAINAGE CAN BE HANDLED ON-SITE OR THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION WHICH WILL NOT INCREASE OFFSITE IMPACT; d. THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION AS ESTABLISHED BY THE 1981 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY CONDUCTED BY THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS BE PROTECTED; AND e. EROSION CONTROL TECHNIQUES BE INCLUDED AS A PART OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 7.4.4 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE THAT ALL rEW DEVELOPMENT BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER SERVICE. 7.6.1 THE CITY SHALL A REQUIRE AS PRE-CONDITION Q P ONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT THAT a. THE DEVELOPMENT BE SERVED 13Y A WATER SYSTEM HAVING ADEQUATE WATER PRESSURE FOR. FIRE PROTECII!)N PURPOSES b. THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT REDUCE THE WATER PRESSURE IN THE AREA BELOW A LEVEL ADEQUATE FOR FIRE PROTECTION PURPOSES; AND R c. THE APPLICABLE FIRE DISTRICT REVIEW ' OP ALL APPLICATIONS. STAFF WORT S g,-S+3 PD PACE 5 ; • ) y . • 8.1.3 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRE—CONDITION TO' DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL TEAT: a. DEVELOPMENT ABUT A PUBLICLY DEDICATED STREET OR HAVE �' , ADEQUATE ACCESS APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE APPROVAL , AUTHORITY; . : b. STREET RIGHT—OF—WAY BE DEDICATED WHERE THE STREET IS `. SUBSTANDARD IN' WIDTH; c. THE DEVELOPER COMMIT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE . STREETS, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS TO THE CITY' STANDARDS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT; . d. INDIVIDUAL, DEVELOPERS PARTICIPATE IN THE IMPROVEMENT l ' : OF EXISTING STREETS, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS TO THE EXTENT k.." OP THE DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACTS; e. STREET IMPROVEMENTS BE :MADE AND STREET SIGNS OR SIGNALS BE PROVIDED WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT IS FOUND TO is . CREATE OR INTENSIFY A TRAFFIC HAZARD. �! f. TRANSIT ' STOPS, BUS TURNOUT LANES AND SHELTERS BE ' PROVIDED WHEN THE PROPOSED USE IS OF A TYPE WHICH ' ' GENERATES' TRANSIT RIDERSHIP; '{I' g. PARKING SPACES BE SET ASIDE AND MARKED FOR CARS , \ OPERATED BY DISABLED PERSONS AND THAT THE SPACES BE 1 . LOCATED AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE ENTRANCE DESIGNED 0' FOR DISABLED PERSONS; AND ;. h. LAND BE DEDICATED TO IMPLEMENT THE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADOPTED PLAN. a . 11.3.1 THE CITY SHALL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING' WHEN PREPARING STREET . IMPROVEMENTS PLANS THAT AFFECT SW' 121ST AVENUE OR GAARDE !' ,' STREET. a. THE IMPACT: ON THE EXISTING RESIDENTIIAL STRUCTURES, AND , • THE ALTERNATIVES WHICH HAVE THE MINTCUM. ADVERSE EFFECT ' IN TERMS OF: b . 1. REDUCING THE DISTANCE BETWEEN ,;wHE DWELLING AND THE STREET; AND is I. NOISE IMPACTS. 4 is b THE EFFECT THE IMPROVEMENT WILL HAVE ON THE TRAFFIC FLOW AND THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON OTHER STREET INTERSECTIONS. ' ' ' THE USE OF TH. ... S: PART OF � T c.. MINIMIZING: 'T�� �� USE THESE. STREETS' �.� HE . ARTERIAL' SYSTEM FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC. ' ', , , STAFF REPORT - S �S--8 PDt ' � PAGE 6 ' ' �' M • M . 1. E: 4 J 'Y 11.3.2 THE CITY OF TIGARD SHALL WORK WITH OTHER GOVERNMENTAL BODIES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ARTERIAL ROUTE CONNECTION FROM MURRAY BOULEVARD OR' SCT?OLLS FERRY ROAD TO PACIFIC HIGHWAY. THIS ARTERIAL ROUTE SHOULD BE LOCATED WEST OF BULL MOUNTAIN, AND SHOULD NOT UTILIZE ROADS WHICH PASS THROUGH EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS WITHIN TIGARD. .' , IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. SW Gaarde Street and SW 121st Avenue (between Gaarde and Walnut) shall develop as two-land roads with pedestrian-ba.cycle paths, restricted parking and left turning lanes as needed st ,^.o,rygested intersections. 2. The undeveloped land along SW 121st Avenue (south of Walnut) shall be planned for development in accordance with the locational criteria policies that apply to locating medium and higher densities close to arterials and in accordance with they policies for "Established" and "Developing" areas. r 3. The Tigard Community Develoment Code shall require site development review for any development other than a single or two family structure. The site development review shall include review of street right-of-way and pavement location. C. TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE. 18.56.010 Purpose. The purpose of the planned development district is to allow the Planning Commission and the City Council the opportunity to review large and complex developments within this community. This .: designation is used to protect sensitive land areas, ensure reasonable conformance to the standards established in the underlying zones, address major transportation difficulties and allow a degree of flexibility not usually associated with development. r In most cases where sensitive lands, open space, or park areas are . included within a development, that development, whether commercial, industrial, or residential, shall be reviewed as a planned development district. This designation may be applied to both permitted uses and conditional uses in all zones. (Ord. 80-94 Section 1 (part), 1980). 18x56.021 Conde ptual review. (a) The Planning Commission shall. review the conceptual development plan and report and may act to grant conceptual approval, approval with conditions or modifications, or a denial. Such action shall be based on the Comprehensive. Plan, the standards of tLis title, and other regulations, and the suitability of osei the proposed development` area p p p men t in relation to the existing character of the s.. (b) Approval in principle of the conceptual development plan and report ,shall be limited to the conceptual acceptability of the land uses proposed and their interrelationships, and sh�i1.1 not be construed to endorse ores precise location of uses or engineering feasibility. The �! Planning Commission may require the, development of other 'Information 11 di, 1.-1 APP I&PP PORT .-. 8 8-8.3 .PD - PACE 7 iii than that specified in Section 18.56.030 to be submitted with the general development plan and report. However, the applicant should be ,- as specific as possible concerning such issues as floodplain use, traffic circulation patterns, and density calculations, etc. The, more accurate the proposal, the easier it will be for the Planning Commission to render a decision. In many cases, the conceptual and detailed development plan review process can be accomplished at one hearing. (c) No appeal of a denial of a conceptual development plan and report shall be allowed. The intent of the conceptual review is to ascertain +" staff, Planning Commission, and affected citizens' concerns relative to ! ' a particular project. The applicant's responsibility is to address , these concerns prior to a rehearing, of the conceptual development plan • before the Planning Commission. (Ord. 80-94 Section 1 (part), 1980). 3)• 18.56.030 Detailed develo mLnt lan and report. (a) Upon receipt of an application for a detailed plan and report review, the payment of the appropriate fee, and the submission of all appropriate supporting documents, the Planning Director shall initiate a review of the detailed plan and report. Particular attention shall be paid to the issues developed as a result of the conceptual development } . P p p plan. and report review. If significant differences arise, the Planning Director may schedule study sessions with the. Planning Commission and the applicant to resolve the issues prior to a public hearing. Thereafter, if the I Planning Director of Planning Commission agree, the applicant shall proceed to a detailed plan hearing. (b) The detailed development plan and report shall consist of final plans showing the project as it will be constructed. All material which accompanied the conceptual development plan and report shall be updated to reflect the conditions, concerns, and changes brought about by the preliminary review approval. All deviations or variances fronrk the standards prescribed by this title in and in particular, in sp .icific terms, all deviations or variances from the standards and sr^ecifica&ions, and requirements of Title 17 of this code, which are being proposed to ' be varied from, shall be addressed in writing with a showing that the public health, safety and welfare will be best served, by such proposal. (Ord. 81-19 Section 1 (part), 1981;. Ord. 80--94. Section 1 (part), 1980.) D. CONCLUSIONS 1. Staff Comments There are approximately 47.81 total acres on the site; of which 42.81 acres are buildable, and 5 acres are unbuil.dable (slopes in excess of 25%). The buildable land will allow 193 dwelling units, 43 in Phase I and. 150 in Phase II Twenty-five percent of the number of units which could be ao modat d sr on the undeelopable land may be transferred and placed on the ,te of 1e land, not to exceed 125,% of the. allowed density on the developable portions of the site. A density transfer of 5 units can occur. With the density transfer the entire project can accommodate 198 dwelling units. SAFF WORT S 8-83 PD PAGE' 8 : is +n •. .• .. ....s. .T_ .... W.-°''LYY'.WV nd td i r W 1 Ix WTI-.sf A•wilmrW Y1L'Yrl"$Ir'uhtlluW'WK.Nn'H\!"�,. The applicant proposes 215 units for the site and identifies no sensitive land forms within the project - no slopes over 25%. There are no steep slopes in Phase I but Phase II has more slopes over 25% than any similar size area in the City of Tigard. The extent and location of steep sloped areas needs to be confirmed by a registered engineer, when applying for preliminary plat approval of Stage II. The application specifies attached unit., in Phase II. Attached dwelling units are allowed only as a conditional use in an R-7 zone. The Public Works Department reviewed the project and finds the sanitary sewer and storm drainage plan acceptable. However, the Department found the public street plan for the site not designed, to City standards. 121st Avenue should be designed for 60 feet of right-of-way and 44 feet of pavement. Also, no provisions were made for bicycle paths on the extension of Gaarde Street. The Public Works Department found the V-notch private streets inadequately designed. They would like to see the load design of, the private streets engineered to City standards. The dwelling units within Phase I will be served primarily by the private loop streets. There will be accesses onto the loops from public i streets. The lop streets will be one-way with parking only allowed on one side of the street. The Tigard Police will only go onto the private streets to answer a call. The City Council would have to adopt an ordinance allowing the police to enter private streets, to issue traffic/parking citiations. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has reviewed the project and approves of the development with conditions which have been made a part of staff's recommendation. F. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of S 8-83 PD with the following conditions! 1. Seven (7) sets of plan-profile public improvement tonstruction plans and one, (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped Ly a registered civil engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to the City's Engineering Division for review. 2. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Division has i$sued approved public improvement plans. The Engineering Division will requite posting of a 100% performance bond,, the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight. deposit. Also, tbe, execution of .a street opening permit, or compliance agreement ust rior to, at the time public improvement prior construction corn or of, its issuance of approved ublic im rovement '.. plans. 3. The final subdivision plat shall be recorded with Washington County prior to the issuance of any Building Permits. STAPP REPORT - S 8-83 PD - PAGE. 9 ,1 4. No changes or modifications shall be made to approved plans without written approval from the appropriate City department. S. The applicant must improve the existing right:-of-way 200' north and east of the intersection of SW 121st and Gaarde to City interim standards. 6. Half street improvements ;shall be made to SW 121st Avenue where it fronts the applicant's project. OP } 7. All on-site streets, e►trbs, and sidewalks shall be constructed to City standards., 8. If the 24 foot wide private streets are made one-way, parking will .. only be allowed on one side of the street. � S. Hydrants are to be located at the intersection of Questor and . R Gaarde and at the intersections of Gaarde and the private . streets. (Hydrants shall be approved by the Tigard Water District). 1C). The applicant must provide bicycle lanes on the Gaarde Street extension within the project boundaries. • 11. Phase II of the project, when submitted for Preliminary Plat Approval, must include a School Impact Statement that has been F� reviewed by the appropriate school district official. 12. An additional five feet of set back plus the required twenty feet must be maintained on citheyL side of the Gaarde Street extension. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Should the Planning Commission adopt staff's recommendation, the following motion may be made: "Move to approve, with conditions, the applicant's request for conceptual and detailed planned development approval and preliminary plat approval of Phase I of S 8-83 I'D, " a PREPARED BY APPROVED BY iti;luit. I ' SAIII r _ Stove Skorney, Wi liam A. onahan,, 7/45, Assistant Plattner Director of Planning & Development SS tAt4/023SP S TA 'P 1JPORT S 8-83 PD PAqE 10 11 ( MEMORANDUM ' TO: Planning Commissilotp FROM: Planning Staff DATE: December 6, 1983 SUBJECT: Park Place S 8-83 PD At the Planning Commission meeting of November 15, 1983, the request of Century 21 Properties Inc. for approval of the Park Place development was /' postponed to allow the applicant to meet '`h ',he City, County and affected property owners to resolve the Gaarde Street e.%.tension issue'„ e A meeting was held on Wednesday, November 23, at 9:00 A.M. at City Hall. In attendance were Tigard. Planning Director William Monahan, Tigard Public Works Director Frank Currie, Washington County Public Works Director Larry Rice, support staff from the City and County, NPO #3 representative Bob Bledsoe, CPO #4 representative Beverly Froude, property owners Althea. Rodde and Gordon Moore, and Century 21 Properties Engineer Robert Miller. It was agreed that SW Gaarde Street would be extended to the northwest corner, of Phase I of the Park Place development. Gaarde Street would not encroach more than five feet onto Althea Rodde's property. A Larry Rice stated that Gaarde Street would not be a major thoroughfare. Gaarde Street will be built to collector street standards. This will mean two travel lanes and one center turn lane. Traffic speed is a maximum 35 mph. i Rice said that the County does not currently have a program to pay for the . Gaarde Street extension into the County. If surrounding property owners wish to develop and need to extend Gaarde Street to gain access, they will have to pay for the extension, Rice concluded that the County is concerned with the future residential use in that area and must supply a road, to handle the projected housing density. The City and County agreed that Gaarde Street is not the Murray Road extension. Frank Currie said that the agreed upon alignment is in accordance with the City's transportatA.on plan which suggests a series of indirect minor collector connections between Murray Boulevard and Gaarde Street. A follow-up Town Hall meeting was, held on Monday, November 28th, at 7:30 P.M. at Fowler Junior High School., Robert Miller explained the new alignment for the Gaarde Street extension. In attendance were Frank Currie, Bill Monahan, and Steve Skorney from the City and approximately 25 property owners from the Bull Mountain and Gaarde Street neighborhoods. After the conclusion of the Town Hall meeting, Planning Commissioner Phil Edin retaested that Miller design an alternative alignment for the Gaarde Street extension. This alternative would not connect at the intersection of SW 121st and Gaarde, "T" i would northerly boundary of ,the is proposed project d. follow the no and form a T inter„ection at SW 121st. This alternative is fog: discussion purposes only. The Commissioners are reminded that the Planning staff is recommending approval of the previously submitted Park Place project• with the street alignment that was agreed upon at the November 23rd meeting. SS:1w/0236P . • • to • TRANSCRIPT ° CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES PARK PLACE December 6, 1983 Vice President Moen, ''The first item on , the agenda, 5.1 Subdivision Planned Development S 8-83 PD, this item, if I recall, is the it item that we table. I don' t think we need to take any action to get started at this point." • Skorney, "No," Moen, "Okay. I think we will go through the same procedure even though we've had a hearing before, we'll have the staff, staff do you have a report or some background you can give us on this item." Skorney, "Yes. Just to maybe to review for the audience, the applicant is Century 21 Homes, Inc. and they are requesting conceptual and detailed plan approval and planned development and preliminary plat approval of Phase I, consisting of 43 units. At the previous meeting, Planning Commission meeting, it was determined that they had sufficient information for staff to process the preliminary plat for phase I, and it had been left off that staff report.. Anyway, I will quickly summarize that the Planning Commission tabled the discussion until the City, County and effected property owners and the applicant could resolve the Gaarde St. extension issue. A meeting was held Wednesday November 23rd, at City Hall, and in attendance for the, William Monahan, Director of Planning and Development; Frank Currie, Public Works Director for the City; Larry Rice, Washington County Public Works Director; City and County staff support; NPO 3 and CPO 4 r%apr.esentatives; and the property owners; and the applicant, Robert Miller. It was agreed that SW Gaarde St. would be extended to the northwest corner of Phase I of, the Park Place development. Gaarde St. would not encroach more than five feet onto Althea Rodde's, property. The County seem to agree that Gaarde St. would not be a major thurofare, it would be built to collector street standards, meaning • ' two travel lanes and one center turn lane. The County has stated they are concerned with the futurP, residential use, in that area, that they feel they must plan a road to handle the projected housing density, but this Gaarde St. extension is not the Murray Road connection, which we had agreed upon and it is so stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. And it was brought up that the City's transportation plan suggests a series of indirect minor collector connection between Murray Blvd. and Gaarde Ste and that, this connection, this Gaarde Street extension would help to satisfy that. A follow-up meeting was held on November 28th, at Fowler Junior High were the applicant,. Robert Miller, explained the new 4lignment and took questions at that time. After the town hall meeting of Monday the 28th it was suggested by Commissioner Edin that Mr. Miller submi,`: a a,lterr►ative design which would be a more indirect • route, indirect connection to 121st and Gaarde Street here. Now this is the, put together b .., d this p g by y Frank an his shown what, was the agreed upon alignment here going to the northwest corner of the property here and the 121st. This was the other connection here was run along the north end of the property out here just a couple of hundred feet south of Rose » . .. .. . Frank's comments were ("what me to hold that:") okay, well uh, let seen Just to show what .sort of . .. . . . . . .. . would be here. Now, this was shot up here, 121st north, this is from Gaarde Street here. Now. t--`.m would be were the,, were Gaarde would come onto 121st here, Rose Vista L., off to the distance there. PAGE 1 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1 9 . n A V., '� ' ■ .K. It said that 15 1 5 and 9, these shoo the clearance here and that's the 6 distance at the corner of 121st and. Gaarde. Now, you get here and you see here that this is north and south of 121st and the would be about / where the sign is and as you can see there's not much. This is turning around a lookl.rtg the other way towards Rose Vista. So, and he also stated that he felt the' bridge to that, the alignment there, the extension of Gaarde Street, that was agreed upon in the meeting would, the bridge would not be excessive from his site, field inspection and you may also want to note the proximity of the houses on the south, on Gaarde Se. , he has shot some along Gaarde there. Staff, some of the conclusions I naAle made, on that there was, first, of all �' there is, adequate information for u;� to process the preliminary plat and some of the questions that were raised at the last meeting, I think Commission Butler raised about the school impact statement and since he's only requesting for Phase I of a development, he has gotten that school impact statement there run by the school district for Phase I. Then at the time of phase II development he will submit a school impact statement for that and then of course you know about the police, fire departments concerns and some of the recommendations. Staff is recommending the approval of the conceptual detailed plan approval and the approval of the preliminary plat. Some of the conditions that you may want to bring up is that, the applicant will improve the existing right-of-way. This is the existing 45 feet, 45 foot right-of-way, 200 feet north and east from the intersection of 121st and Gaarde to the City's interim stale,lards., There will be full half street, there will be half street improvements along 121st, abutting the applicants . " ' property. And, also, I think, and additional five feet of setback plus the required 20 feet must be maintained on either side of Gaarde Street extensim ' that have been made since the last staff �, and those are maybe the additions h h report. Oh, and also here, I do have some pictures of took of the site, picture you may want to look at here. This is phase I of the development here and this shows the. you can see the . ... . .. barn and off in the distance here you'll see the Moore property to the north. The Raleigh property would be woad include the stand of trees here and shows some of the A interse r tion .. .». .... .. . •not transcribable Commissioner Fyre, "Could you clarify something, when you say concertual in design, are we talking just for the first phase or for the entire project.." Skorney, "Well that would be for the entire, yes, no the entire development. Well y,as Phase I and II" Fyre, "Phase I and II'' Commissioner Edin, "I guess I'm more puzzled, I realize its not time for cross examination but can you explain which to me, what is it that I am look4 ng at for the rest of the property. All I see is shaded." ' Skorney, "Well that's stage, well uh, its detailed approval or plan R . I development, were looking at the, well basically some of the things you • ; address in terms of overall, and I did overall meaning it never mean it could possibly be built: The need fore, dedicate some land for the for public use there," .., . Mo naha n, "More th e o utside limits of what the development going to be that's what we're lookint it rather than the specifics." 1 { PACE ,2 - TRANSCRIPT' :. PACK PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 `,.,_ r • • x�&$ t Moen, "Staff is it a true statement that planned development, we normally handle that through separate." Skorney- 10Well yes, that's,, in the code it will allow for the applicant to apply for both phases at once. Normally they . . (interruption).. . well yes, apparently this has bean, he had ,a meeting with the City core He has brought in many conceptual ideas on how this, development will occur. Usually at this, at first stage, is where, just to get a idea, use of the property, zoning, other code requirement';, they density transfer that type, of thing." Moen, "He's asking for both?" Skorney, "He's, asking for both, yes. Staff feels that he has supplied us with sufficient information to (untranscribable question) yes to review the entire development." Moen, "He wants conceptual approval for the, conceptual for the whole thing and detailed approval for phase I." Skorney, "Well no, conceptual and detailed for the entire, for both phases." (Several people speaking at same time -- inaudible) Skorney, "Well the detailed plan approval is where they, he has shown us the alignment, well I don' t know maybe . . . can give plat spproval for that first phase and have him come back, because of the nature of the terrain and how y. � that road will extend beyond that first phase, how he's going to plat the houses and the. *.., Edin, "You me that's one of the major issues and I've seen nothing there presented to the staff or this Commission for that." 'Vice President. Moen, " Okay, staff do you have, anything further." Skorney, "No." Moen, "Is there anyo-ie here from the NPO?" "My name is Bob Bledso(�, 11800 'SW Walnut, Chairman, NPO 3. We at the earlier meeting presented you with T«ritten summary, our minutes of three meetings ane , we have been to several of these meetings and .,. . . we urge you to address all of the issues we hav2 raised. We didn't prefer the . . . . which was sheTn on the . . .: : . : . ..inaudible) One thing we hadn' t stressed to much before, was the 1.. . . . . . . . . . . . . r . was address to staff, staff Both, basically presenting here is a condominium ownership, were you put many houses on one lot. You might put 10, 8, 15 houses on a lot. In the Community Development Code the definition of a single family residence is once dwelling place upon, a lot, and the allowed use in the R 4.5 zone is for the p r7:vi e Vb e of, I don't know what there's he privilege is, c for a facilities family detached dwelling. There is uh no uh, also p. i s an� .. . We do not see how this type of proposal satisfies , the definition and is an allowed use: : . ..: .. : . . . inaudible : . r:. : . . . Moen, "You want to address that 'now." PACE 3 — TRANSCRIPT — PARK PLACE DECEMBER 6, l qA , . ; ' y'+ U 1 Skorney, "Yes, well I think the definition in the code speaks to an average ' , lot size per dwelling unit. Whether it is physically defined with ownership or not, I couldn't inaudible.. . . . . .. . . ` Monahan, "Similar to in the multi-family zone it might say your R, 12 or R 20, we say that the single family unit 3,000 sq. ft. duplex, 6,000 sq. ft. for multi-family units, 1,850 sq. ft. . So, obiviously it isn't being broken out, but the amount that has to be buildable at the lot, developing for each unit." Moen, "Maybe I should ask the question, is basically the land in , this proposal to be one, maybe the applicant can answer this question better . than you can. Is it suppose to be Common ownership, for mostly the area and Monahan, "I think you should hear from the applicant. That's what the proposal had been and last I spoke with him, it was a little bit up in the air, maybe they have fl.ialized." { Moen "Okay, well give him chance to speak. Okay, is there anyone from CCI here? Okay, the applicant. "I'm Bob Miller, I live at 5164 Bobs Court South, Salem, and I'm a Civil Engineer employed by Century 21 Properties. This is the like most thing that you do by proxi,y y proxi we have 43 lots 43 unit from 47.8 acres was so that • the entire property could be spoken to here not transcribable. . . . . . . or whether or not approval is for 43 unit on 47 acres or 43 units on one acre. . untranscribable. .. . - that CIL' big tax lot into three tax lots and make one tax lot available for open space for the homeowners . . . . . . II: approval is granted for just 43 units on the outlying portion of Phase I, that's perfectly fine at this point,, Because, we can still utilize the remaining of our property as open space, recreational space and before any developments done, or any buildings or anything on the remaining phase come back to you for additional approval . . And not to come back to you until the County and the City have sufficient time to have hearings on the roadways• e .. there sufficient uh interest in debating this between the City and the County and uh the County's going to ,ti,, be starting work with this and . . . .. . . traffic generated and proposal made to the City . . . . .. . . . , inaudible. . .. You decide what the streets will be ... . .... . 4 . . . .. . . . . . . . we can't do anything out there until that's resolved tso, our proposal, original proposed . . . i . . ... . .. ... . . .... i . .. . . . . . i Its not necessary . . . . . .inaudible. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . comfortable with either location safety aspects at 'the town ball meeting . . . . . . If it etas the consensus of the Planning Commission that we improve the intersection, we have no problem with that either., .ina udible. . . i .i . i . . We need an approval on something, either a tentative approval, . . . . . clarify what the street width .s,, 60, . . . . . . .. setbacks, and Lle driveways . .. . . . .i .. . No driveways are accessible to Gearde Street . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . i .. . « . . . . . . because of the grades , i . .. . . .. . . ... . . : • . . . i .few on the alignment . ....,... Gaarde and 121st . ..i .. ii . . . . . . . . . .. few cuts in the , hill. . . w . .. p. .... Staff . .. . . . i . . . . i .,..,.♦ . . ..-.i i n audible . .w i..a.-..... . ... . . .G,.,. s.♦.. . ,'..'..-. . . The City spoke to the fire department . ... .. .. .. . Fy. . . .. . .. . . and the fire department felt comfortable with the . . . .... . . . . rk would like to request • PACE 4 - TRANSCRIPT - PARk PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 y , Y,. that the 200 ft. full street improvement not be levied on Gaarde and 121st as I pointed out last time my visualization of what is g oin to be g required as improvements on Gaarde Street and 121st are there then there is not sufficient right-of-way to do it. And, some comiTi,fkation or right-of--way' • 4, . obe taken, � e . . . . . . .. . ""' Four as kin g me not , . . , . . . . inaudible. . . . . . . . l dontthink that that's fare to ask us to do other developments inaudible . Ownership is, this is a condominium, it is a condominium as you normally visualize a apartment structure. All the land will be owned by neighborhood association and . .. ..,.. . . . . ' . . .. . ..�.naudible the only difference that this arrangement has that normal condominiums is the separated units, each persons has their own privacy. their own unit and they live in and a person has will have a ownership of all the open space That sums up the �+ landscaping is all taken care of I think I've covered all the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .inaudible Commissioner inaudible Mr. Miller comments inaudible Commissioner Edin, " concerned with the the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the police to go into . .. . . . . , . Miller, We made a the proposal to allow the police to come in to do that as a, following a request from staff, that it be inaudible 4. if there's a traffic problem internally the Homeowners Association can have • them cited or towed away or non authorized vehicle inaudible. . . . . . . . . . . • Moen, "We'll ask questions later. We ask people to move forward. The first . one on the list is Larry Rice.91 Larry Rice, "Staff, applicant, . ..... . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . coordinate a meeting. .. . . .. . . .. . . ... ..... the objectives are the usual objectives, in that public works department and the • City and the County get together with the residence and determine how best to take this action inaudible .. . . „. . . .t. Staff summarized it well as far as inaudible City • !: staff, and certainly I agree with Frank Currie recommendation to your rlommission . . . . . . .. . presentation is what we agreed to at that meeting, which the County supports,, which I understand that Frank Currie supports, We would recommend than to you. We also understand, I understand that jurisdiction has changed . . ..Y . . .. . . . • .. Y .Y . I have not seen Y inaudible„ .. . .. . .. In terms of how wide the street is, I think 1 your staff . . . . ' agreement that inaudible support that P osition. Whatever the City standard s are, relat ive to achieving that type of . . . .. ... .. . .ir.audflbi_e y I don't think we have I anything else, to reiterate, were favor the your staff's recommendation and N our staff's r'ecomnien dation .. . . . . ... ...... .. .. inaudible .. . , .. . . . . and we would support that. V. . Commis; lone r Edit, "I understand why the s Frank Curr ie and y ou p refer the , alignment that comes in . . ..... Gaarde. My question really is, approach itfrom pp rather than T it.. .. . . . . . . what would happen La,ta�Cl, the opposite i Y . r w . 1 .. . . if it went to the NW point aid T'd it there. In some manner to preclude it from being a straight shot . . . . . , rest of the way to the Krueger property. PAGE 5 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE' - DECgCtiSER 6, 1985 Do you see a problem from a transportation and engineering standpoint. Rice, " . out there is pretty difficult, unless you I would accept Franks judgment, he's much closer to the about the undesirably I could comment on } i inaudible. . . . . Our primary concern was, I think identical to the City's, that we're concerned that 135th, 121st, up walnut, disperse traffic through that inaudible So what we are trying to do is keep down the volume of traffic throughout any road system inaudible. . . .. . . .. . . . . We have as you'll see in 135th deliberately designed it ... . . . ,, so that 4 straight shot to inaudible Moen, "Mr. Ralph Flower." 1a: I signed up on the wrong side. I have no debate with the man here, I just want to ask a few questions on traffic patterns." Moen, "Carl Landstrom." I signed up on the wrong side also. rl Moen, "Maybe I should ask this. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of this proposal," Moen, "I guess, we go back to you Mr. Flower." My name is Ralph Flowers, I live at 117th and Gaarde Street, and I have know, shall we say close.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . over the developer here on his putting any buildings, housing for his , people, but I am concerned about the way they have laid out the traffic pattern. I was a member of the NPO several years back when the Ames property and the Edwards property was being approved and annexed and all that stuff. We had a big debate on it on the roads at that time. It was agreed at that time that there would be no connections at the corner of Gaarde and 121st or on 121st. Through the Edwards property there a big wide street put in primarily for it. This area and the Edwards • development. It winds through there, its paved it has its sidewalks and a big wide street, I think it 60 ft. wide and it was put in last spring, they made it a, windy road to cut down on through traffic. It runs through the Edwards property noY., up to the fence and d is through the eadends there. I Edwards property, we figured it would take in this uh, well we know that was a back door to our property too and there would be no connection o Gaarde or to 121st. e . . .. . .:: ... ».... . . : . « . Did you folks realize that the intersection at Gaarde Street and 99W is death trap. You have the stoplights down at the end of the « » .. . . . .. . .. .. :. . When they have the traffic stopped on 99 they 'back. up past were you coming off Gaarde St. to go north, there backed off that intersection. there is 'a possibility of two cars sneaking in and parking side by side and waiting until they move out after the light changes, But to do that you have to dodge the traffic coining off McDonald, going south on 99. "That'a not bad, but these people coming north off 99 that want to turn west on Gaarde 3treet. They are sitting there just . .. . . . little rubber thing in the road says stop. Well there could be four, five or six lined up there. Well when they get the brake from these cars coming south on 99 they'll come on PAGE 6 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK ,pLA n * DECEMBERS 6, 1983 • right on across, there will be three and four of them come just bumper to bumper through there, and the guy sitting here on Gaarde. St. has no way in the world to get out there. If you do your going to get run over, that is one point. The relief that you go out through this road that I spoke about, its a scottish name (several persons speak'dng same time) if you went that way or put it, out on Bull Mountain Road and there is ' a light there, that would be a little better chance of getting out with it their scalp. Outside of that, I don' t know what in the world I can say, but I think it should be given some considerable thought.1° Moen, "Staff, do you know where, could you show us on a map, where (tape ended) Moen, "Carl Landstrom." My name is Carl Landstrom, I live at 12000 SW Gaarde, and I inaudible Something to do with his house being 20 ft. from the road. Moen, "Bob Bledsoe, do you have anything to add." Bledsoe, "Wait until the cross examination" Moen, "Okay, sure. Lou Ane Mortenson." Lou Ane Mortenson, NPO # 2, 11180 SW Fonner. I have a question for Mr. Miller on the Association information. Will the Association have to file with the . . State of Oregon Public Commissioner record that that Association is i in existence. 'u Miller, "I don't think its the Public Commissioner, its the Real Ei;tate Commissioner. , Mortenson, "Oh, the Real Estate Commission, what happens when the Association no longer continues to keep going, ongoing, people that development. discussion between Mortenson and Miller not transcribable. Miller, . . . . . . but that's not going to happen. If you bought one of these units, for maybe 100,000, and 43 people bought units at 100,000 dollars and, its totally unconceivable to me that 43 people with that kind of an, investment wouldn't vote (further discussion not transcribable) Mortenson, "Also, I. see Mr. Rice has left the room and I was kind of having a question on here, as to, they were talking about traffic impacts. on 135th and Scholls Fecry and etc. What's going to happen to Pacific Highway? When you get the iL'holls connection coming through you indirect. That was the question that I had for, but evidently that . . . . .. . . is studies Monahan, "Yes; those, it could help to have to better indication from that SW corridor study. Matter of fact we had a meeting yesterday, Frank and I and Tom Brian, talking about the various alternatives for -caving some of the y . problems on 99W, there are tan, more problems than just where Gaarde comes into 99, and al,.ot of those answers won' t come for some time in the nest year. PACE 7 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 r , s • The answers won't come in the next year, but the indication, the data that's necessary to seek some of those solutions. Mortenson, " per County and City request, what, wouldn' t that put a larger impact onto the Pacific Hwy. area thus studies are completed. Then its going to show the project that possible should never have been done in the first place." Mor',ahan, "I don't think this small connections does that, no. I think if we were dealing with the entire road through this property up through Mr. Moore's property, up to Scholls Ferry Rd. , then yes. If we were setting in stone what the capacity of the roads going to be and how it was going to go, I would say it would be, precluding the options that would come out of that study. For this small segment, I don't think does that." Mortenson, "Possible, thank you," Commissioner Butler, " questions on Gaarde Street extension, that is going to be three lanes, rigiit." � Skorney, "Two travel lanes and one center turn lane." Butler, "Three lanes .. ." Skorney,, Well, Uh, Mr. Rice said he said it may not be continuous center lane." Moen, "Judy Fessler." 9 "I just had a few comments and I don't h'here else .. Moen, "Go ahead, we've already had this Judy Fesslet, '"1 live at 11180 SW Former. Tee; or twelve years ago I was transportation chairman for the CPO 4, alot of there road concerns that have cropped up tonight and the other at the other meetings. I guess, to answer Mr. Landstroms question, I believe the right-of--way of Gaarde is . .. feet. So if he's 20 feet, he'd go on the Frank Currie has told me that its 45 feet, is the right-of-way, existing. (discussion not transcribable) Tessler, "I would hope that maybe : , there was one question that I had when Mr. Miller was testifying tonight on ..,.:.. ...... My question is it a full?" Skorney, "No, the only sidewalks would be on the Park Place project. Fessler, "I'm not speaking of sidewalks, I'm speaking of right of road," Skorney, "Oh you said full street improvements." Fes,nier, ",Half street. a ; PACE 8 - TRANSCRIPT - PARR PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 Skorney, "That means including sidewalk. What Frank was talking about was upgrading the existing right--of-way, repaving that and" Fessler, "On 121st?" j Skorney, "Yeah, 200 feet in either direction from the intersection". Fessler, "So your not going to exclude, your going to use the 50 foot right-of-way can 171st as Skorney, "Its 45 feet, I understand (several people taking not transcribable) Skorney, "Whatever the existing right-of-way is, will upgrade to interim standards, which means Fessler, "Because our house, I use to live over on 121st was fifty foot right-of-way, by the County, now the County would like change it to 70, so, I just wanted to check. Okay, but I think there should be some recognition as to that house there belongs to Mr. and Mrs. McCain." Skorney, "There not going to widen the existing right-of-way for this project, no. The existing right-of-way will be upgraded. There will be no condemnation. The only improvements will be, full street improvements will be on the applicants property. b Fessler, "Okay, will not be on Gaarde." Skorney, "No. Its just that" Fessler, "Ever." Skorney, "No not ever, but not for this project, no." Fessler, "Because I think Mr. Miller is talking as though there are Skorney, "No, just what we've required." Fessler, "Will there be one as it comes onto 121st, because, obviously, most of the right-of-way .•. : . .. . . . directly to Gaarde and that seems to be the . the County, that's were they like to see it. Skorney, "See what?" Vessl.er, 'Where the road comes into GaArde and 121st. how wide is that going to be." Skorney, "Okay, this will be;" 1� Fessler, "What's the right-of-way on that fri .. Skorney, `"Gaarde will be 60 foot right-of-way •. _ : fully improved." " Tessler, "So your going, yeah, okay. Skorney, "We're going from a 60 to a 40." l.: ?AG 9 - TRANSCRIPT -' PARK PLACE * DECEMBER' 6, .1983 1 • µ t • Fessler, "So your are going to have to �- (Several speaking same time not transcribable) • Moen, "Question, maybe staff you could, there's been aloe of discussion about this improvement, maybe you can show where it take, place, in relationship to this intersection." Skorney, "Okay, It would be the existing right-of-way on 121st and existing right-of-way on Gaarde St. will be improved, 200 feet from this intersection, 200 feet east on Gaarde 200 feet north on 121st." �. • Moen, "On each side." Skorney, "Well,, its just uh, paving it, just an overlay." Moen, "A new overlay on the road and on the park side." Skorney, ''On this side of the park it will be curbed and sidewalk." Moen, "And that side would be setup at 45, were is that here." I Skorney, "Well that would be from centerline, well uh, this would be a sixty foot right-of-way. so it will be. . . . Moen, "On the other side it would be 30 ft. on the otherside you would just have a overlay here. (Skorney, "Yes.") you don't plan on Iltirying to run 60 foot, . . . . . . . . . . . . . down here, down to this point to county. Skorney, "No, just for the 30 feet." Butler, "I was just curious how your justifying Skorney, "They feet because of the added impact. .. Butler, "Just that added impact." Skorney, "Yes. The way that Frank has, now the way that that intersection occurs, it wouldn't allow the maximum .a... Fessler, "Are there going to be storm drains and things in there? . . . . . .. . . . . . . .inaudible Skorney, "There will be a drainage system proposed for that. (several people talking - inaudible) Fessler, "I would like to reiterate one point, which Mr. glower said, is that can you work ten years ago, people were going through this and at that time I A route, in�o her. cord s,CPO S t Street that fact that there. would be no direct ?. both the • y t extens Jn, the Murray Road extension or whatever intercept . .. . .. . . . impact 1616. .. . . to such an extent that's its just going to be horrible. At that time McFarland was the Street that Mr. `lowers was saying, was deeded to the City, is of 60 foot right-of-way, it is part,a of the plan to go through, eventually through 1616 rt .��1616 property. When she develops that would be continuing, at the time of phase. It of Ames property, would go, its also deeded on there plot plans, if you go back there plan .; 4, 40O . 440164 ,4, 1 a PAGE i0 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 } / ,a»r 7 And my question is, here we are back talking about the same thing, there's, been another that has started, that is going to be paid by the developers, were talking another road that's being paid by the developers . .. . .. . , . . . , . .,. . . . I think that's want angers the people <: . .. . . . . ..inaudible.. . You keep going back to the drawing board, we keep , planning, we keep reiterating our feelings, we work within the NPO, we work • within, the CPO, we work at both I, think that all of us that are here at one time has many many hours defending what we feel in trying, to work out a total plan for the area. And we've hashed it all out because we all realized that, its, got to be possible. And I still feel that the County has not, I don't know what hold they have but I just really resent the fact that there are bound and determined for the last 30 years to put a road down. Gaarde, where there's a cul-de-sac at the end of the line. I think it paves the way to suit the project . . . . . creating a wider image of the road that's going to look like its going to be a natural Y •,. . . . . . . . . .inaudible. . . . . . . . . . I guess we're tired of having to keep defending it, when we feel through the planning process it should help us defend what we have said, maybe three months ago. Why do we have to keep coming, back I guess that's the concern." ; �.. (inaudible discussion with Fessler and one of the. Commissioners) • Fessler, "If you take the Murray Road back thirty years ago, you'll remember it was when they extended the Murray Blvd. across the hill over down, Gaarde and then hit would hook up to 99 and then kind of veer across behind Summerfield. Not on Durham, but where Summerfield, were the golf course is. You see that was a different no longer feasible. Bit by bit its been chopped up, but yet, through the plan, there's still that keeps hanging on. In fact . n. ... . Bechtold worked with us on our transportation and our land use plan years ago. He had inaudible. . . . . . . Thank you. Moen "Betty McCain." "My names is Betty McCain, I live at 13950 SW 121st, I'm directly across from the piece of property in questions. I am the one on the corner. First of all 43 condominiums, I don't think, on nine acres is really what . . is about. Second of all, the road we are talking about putting in, is not what we are . . . . .. . . . on. I have some questions for Mr. Rice, but since he left. I've been in the house for almost eight years. In that eight year period I have tree outside my fence which has been hit twice. The fence, we. stop putting up, because everytime we it up someone runs through it and my mailbox has been taken out twice. Mailbox sits on one side of the house and the fence and the tree on the other side. If this road goes through, I don't have my acres with me, I did at one time. Gaarde will come within 11, or excuse me, within four feet of my garage and within 11 feet of my front door. • I invite any of you and all of you to cotne out and measure it with me ]if you like and see what we're looking at I don't think anyone has really been out ; there. I see your pictures, bu,t I don't think anybody's been really out there and looked at what your talking, about, The other thing I have is drainage, I had a dry drywell at the corner of my property. A spring bubbles up in my backyard. That spring starts some starts so-newhere on that hill. Ones you start messing with that property across the street, who knows where that spring is going to go. All of the water from the corner in my driveway. When, the County was out 0 .. . last year for water, they feeded my driveway, because they could see the kind of problem we were PACE - TRANSCRIPT - PAllk. PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 a • 1 , • • having. Since then we have put in our own drywell, made it extra deep and • doubled layered to pick up all the dirt and stuff which comes off the road. • We get all that water. We . . . . . . . . . . . . . •.inaudible. . .. . . . . .. .. . . . We. have , a A definite water problem here. address that problem. When we have an accident on that corner, we have to wait for Washington County to attend to us. is not in the City of Tigard. What happens once, that road goes through. Who responds to it. We have a no, trucking ordinance on 121st and on Gaarde right now. With a 20,000 GVW, yet the County won' t come out of services this and Tigard City Police can't handle it, and, its a City ordinance. Nobody services that, the trucks still go by. Who's going to service this area if there's a problem up there. Is it going to be Washington County or is it going to be Tigard. I don' t think we, have had any clear definition on that. And I don't really, think they can handle it. Last thing that I have to say inaudible My heart bleeds for Century 21 because they have a Albatrause. It really does. I can see their problem, they have all that land and they can' t build on alL of it,.. But not to the point where I want to reach in may pocket and give them some of my land. Thank you. ' Moen, "Okay, I've got Mr. and Mrs. Eldon Hodapp, both of you want to speak?" "My name is Eldon Hodapp, I live on 114th, ' 11460 S.W. Gaarde. South side of . I've lived there ten years. I've been through this before. I have a question? You plan on widening Gaarde 20 feet, -right. I say, if you did it would put the street five feet from my front door. Gaarde Street between 117 and 112th is natural springs in that road. You cannot keep in repair in winter time at all. It breaks up every year. There's trucks that come down over that hill. Buses and heavy cars, when, they hit a bump in, the road it shakes every house on the south side of the road. because of the natural springs in that area. I've lived there ten years and r I've had to replace my mailbox nine times. I've had accidents out in front of ' those house,' because people come over that hill there airborne. The county police and the city police will not service Gaarde because half of it is ' County and half of it is City. No one will protect it. I have an accident out in front house, has I have had nine or ten times, taken out my fence, my trees, call the 1kor the police. The county comes out and the city comes out . .. . . . . . . then they both leave aYtd no one gets a ticket, nothing. Ones County and ones City . What I'm saying, if they improve Gaarde, widen out in some areas. Right now there a speed limit of 35 miles per hour. I've yet to see a car go 35 miles an hour down Gaarde heading for Pacific Highway. They come over that hill, trucks in the summertime, them cement trucks come over there, there front wheels leave the ground. ' I stood , out front and watched them. Cars . . • on friday nights and saturday nights, there actually . • . . you can see skis' warks on ' top of the hill Where they've 'hit You can' t even back out your ` if you improve `t must fa,�te�' and your driveway, y p ove �.t your just going to make a. " gr,ing 'to make a drag.strip out there in the City. I'm fully against widening Gaarde at either end. Moen "Lyall Turnball''' "Lady and gentleman, panel, I'm not going to go into a lot of . .. . , want 0 ft. on Gaarde Street r about eight and .l suppose 1F have •. these people ha ve said. I have 40 �� had my fences wiped out 'g times. One time, one of them we11:t 400 feet into my property, That's beside the point. What the only question that I. PAGE 12 - TRANSCRIPT * ;PARK PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 « , I would like to way. Is there any members of this panel, and don't answer me - please, just think about it: But live in that area, who will suffer from the impact of this development. Truely suffer from the impact, like we would. That's all I have to ask. I'm not going to be a hell raiser tonight. Moen "Is there anyone else who would like to speak in opposition." "I'm is wife." Moen, "Come on down." My name is Judy Hodapp and live at 1146n SW Gaarde. We've lived there ten years and we all have . . .... . . . .here. And we're concerned about, if you Gaarde now, we have some much traffic on Gaarde that it is " ". trying to get out of there is hard. we're going to have even more problems than we have. We've picked up two little girls off those streets that have been hit by cars coming over that hill and it is dangerous. If you widen Gaarde and add more people to it now we are really going to have some problems and I would like you to stop and think about that a little bit too." ° (discussion between Commissioner Edin and Mr. Hodapp inaudible) Moen, "Anyone else wanting to speak in opposition. Okay the next part of the process is cross examination and rebuttal. I think we will take a small brake here about five minutes." • Moen, "Does anyone have any questions or rebuttal they would like to make. Bob would you like to make.' Bledsoe, "We don' t have any cross examination, so it will have to be rebuttal. Concerning what Larry Rice said, you'll notice that he addressed a need for what he would like the direction connection to Gaarde Bt. a He distributed this to not to the 43 units or not even to the 200 units, not even to the area this back area, which is being served. A collector street would usually serve that the function . . . Its much better to have offset than to directly connect with it A functioning arterial calls for a direct connection, where a functioning Collector you bring the traffic out to you. .inaudible I have a question for staff, they would like to see this intersection improved 200 ..eet in either direction: If this intersection improved would that be a • continuous curve along the south side of Gaarde or are you going to make the intersection provide a extension of 121st to the south. . .. .. ..... ... Monahan "You haven't seen any plans have you?" Skorney "No, no plans for the extension of 121st." Bledsoe, "You would be the one approving or denying" Monahan, "Public Works would be approving or denying. public Works would be working with the applicant to square that away. Bledsoe, "You should remember, but maybe it wasn't drawn out, during the .... . . . . . that the other previous . 1...a. .. . . . +r« i,. . . .. .ii strongly opposed the extension of 121st south. They would much rather see a looping curve between Ei...0 . 4 , . and Hazel t se, which was very similar to .. . .': . . ..... .. . :. ..r.., . PAGE 13 - TRANSCRIPT T - PARS. PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 « �1 t Moen, "Staff I have a question along those lines, that maybe you can IIaddress. On the proposed improvements, is the intersection suppose to be raised up such that Gaarde comes straight through, 121st comes down, what about the south part of 121st. Is that being made up into some type of street or is going to basically be a T there. Monahan, "I'm not quite sure what Mr. Currie intention is I haven't discuss that, perhaps he has discussed that with the applicant. Has he talked to you • at all about that?" Miller, ". . . ... . ... . .. . .. .because o aer lay on 20 feet of asphalt is one thing two collector traffic lanes 13/14 feet wide plus the continuous turn lane of another whatever 13 feet, whatever it is, in my mind comes up to over 40 feet of pavement and I don' t still understand how its going to get there without taking someones property and then I, also had the question as to whether or not to be to improve it to full city standards, as I understood it, included that, because intersection, has not been discussed and I'm really out on a limb because improvement voluntary . ..inaudible... Monahan, "I think Jeremy came up with probably Franks recommendation." Moen, "Anyone else wishing to speak under cross examination or rebuttal?" Miller, "I've got, a couple information comments here, in your packet there is , a copy of the, copy ownership map, after that intersection and the 1:. directly across from street It is plated for a 50 ft. wide 4 street so they have 25 feet on their side Its twenty feet on our side, and also on Gaarde there is 25 and 20 . . . . . . .inaudible 45 feet of right-of-way existing. Now the 40 ft. on both 121st and Gaarde happen to, be past that subdivision. As I said before I really, I really asking for 200 • feet improvements ftom the .. . . . .. . . ,' I don' t think its fair, and I don't t think you have any idea at all what your talking about and and Mr. Rice talked three traffics lane of asph ;lt, and there . no way that you can do that . . . . . . . ... .. ... .. . . . . . . . .200 feet each directions b improvements to maximum standards might mean you 'might have to carve the street down 500 :�eet away, because, if you improve to 121st or Gaarde 200 feet full width from ei'-her direction, you may as set it for future traffic standard, you may be changing the topography of the grades that are on there. The people here talk about on Gaarde there is a problem that hill people • come over . .. ... • . • . . obviously that's not safe. . • obvious its going to need to be cut that down so that won't occur. It obvious • to me ...'. .. ..a . that there's no way that I can do an overlay on 200 feet, '' without totally throwing my money away. Someones going to come back in a rip it all back out. When then to tLa permanent roadway improvements on 121st and Gaarde and . . . . ... .. Effecting ,both the, drainage and the springy*;,, there's slot based on . . and what's happening is that the water is going in and off of .and when the city put their 1 in there they started cutting e springs, as property was . s developed, we_ +, e will be �. water down �. rted t�utt�n off these • developed, as our property p , e cu"thing across with, the i water line, sewer line and storm lines. The sewer lines will be at 22 ft..: on our property and .. . .. ...... . . . . r .. .. r . . .. . . . we will be cutting them off, Vhhich will be a problem in construction for us, but, . . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . inaudible,. . . . .r • as ... .and Frank Currie mentioned that Ii. * G.oilinr6ililooei to improve the situation or, the intent there was that if there was any problem on Gaarde not to worry, if the drainage needed to be imptoved that it woqid be improved . . .. .. .. ..xnaudible• r. .. . . .. ... .. . . . .. r'+,w i PAGE 14 TRANSCRIPT PARK pLACt DECEMBER 6, 1983 1' « Skorney, "I wanted to mention that the improvement of 200 feet in either direction, that's a standard condition that is applied to all subdivisions there, I mean, Frank is, we don't know how far down the road that Gaarde will be improved the entire length up to Pacific Highway or 121st, its just to make that intersection safe and to handle the impact of development at that corner. Its just a standard condition, that's always been applied." n , Miller, "I've been developing here a long time and I've never hit it before. 1 just never hit that, and in this particular case, of 121st, as many people have said, there already .inaudible. . .. . . . . . . If there is forty feet of asphalt created out there, it is going to end up being a there's no way around it." Skorney, "Well all I know is it is the existing right-of-way, whatever, its were Frank loves to sit down and talk about Miller, "I'm saying, I don't understand it .. .. ,. . . what I do know of it scares me. You can go ahead with this condition and the condition turns out to be an impossibility." Skorney, "You and Frank will need to work that out." j{ Moen, "Sir." "The man asked one question." Moen, "Could you identify yourself for the record." ' Yes, Lyall. Turnball, I live on Gaarde Street. I spoke before. Did not, and I ask this gentleman, did, not the other night a week ago tonight, Mr. Currie not say, did he not $►ay, that there was nothing they could do on the County side of Gaarde Street, on the County side of Gaarde Street. Which the County line runs directly down Gaarde Street. bid he 'tot say that? i V Millar, "1 don't remember him saying the County is that. Turnball, "Did he not say there was nothing the City could do on the County a' side of Gaarde Street? • Monahan, "I think they were talking about police surveillance, I think". • Turnball, "Also road improvements, we talked about that". Millers "I'm not sure that I remember . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ; Turnball, "At that particular 'time, are we talking about an LID". Miller) (response inaudible) i . ti PAGE 15 - TRANSCRIPT -, PARK PLACE - DECEMBER ,g) 1983 /. -- _ f . • • ? �. "My name is Ted Dunfill, I live at 8895 SW Edgewood. Now, the reason I'm here is my his place is on Gaarde. I travel, it alot, and I've seen alot of plans with the, road and there been a lot of discussion with wants going on with it Now, you said, stipulate one thing, you are only here to look at this little portion of the project. Okay, then this little project opens up the door to future development cn the other pieces. To align the road up to 135th and Walnut. (someone commented - inaudible) So that opens up the door for traffic and also open up the door for, I mean Gaarde on the other end has to be totally redone, (inaudible comment) It opened the door, right? Isn't that true. (inaudible comment) The question to that one to is what does that do with wants going on with the City of Tigard. "Same problem." . . Dunfill, "So this is actually setting the precedent, for the rest of them, r," because its establi;;hing a road that's going to be two lanes and a turn lane , in the center, totally improved, with no houses facing it. So it starts a collector right there. With no way to jog it, everybody when they Come off 135th from Walnut is going to take that and go straight on to Gaarde Street. Therc's already bus traffic from Tri-Met and all of those create traffic problems. School buses have problems. This will add to it. You've opened the door. I think key situation . . . . . . . curb that a little bit. I know from my standpoint, when you go -ver there, trying, to get out onto Gaarde now is bad enough, if they widen it, some of the property that there, trying to widen it plus improving it, hell, your going to create a bigger hazard for people to get out on the street this long. With the overlay on s 121st and Gaarde, how thick is that going to be. They've been nothing wanting to fi:c the driveway in my, father-in-law' ,_lace and its a hassele: to get out and you really have alot of trouble. Are they going to do the same thing with this? Moen, " pu.�t into interim street standards. That's want its called, noW sure not , what ��b • • • b'. • b• O, • • . . • . (several people talking same time) Turnball,, "Well, that's part of the problem is to., The County says that ,hey're looking at is the connection here to eventually going through. And yet they walk out and leave and any questions that people come up with can't be answered. (tape ended), Bledsoe, "Staff said that making 200 foot extension both directions, is a • • • standard for .. , . • . . . . .. . I would like to know how many: places we're your rev:dire 200 feet .. .w .. . both directions, Monahan, "The requirement is, the requirement is when someone developments their property that if half street improvements are jut in front of those properties, you travel „v you can travel through g �� airy neighborhoods here in Tigard, excuse me, y y 1�ou m g many neighborhoods here in Tigard and find that. there ' might be one house, for some reason or. another, had remodeling done, I guess, and the work is done to widen the road and to put in the storm drainage and put in the sidewalk •.. ... . •. So I think this grows out of that requirement:. Bledsoe, "Well, think that he wasn' t contesting . .. . :. . . . a. But ghat your are talking about it is going 200 feet both directions PAGE 16 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE - DECEMBER b, 1583 Skorney, "There's no condition on what the exact length would be, Frank Currie just said 200 feet." Moen, "I think we've City staff felt the requirement appropriate." Bledsoe, "Well he said this was a standard requirement. • 9 Skorney, "Standard is (several people speaking same time inaudible) Moen, "We're going to discuss that issue." Bledsoe, "As far as the not to mention the previous roles of w Rose Vista comes Gaarde. Moen, "Anyone else" Betty McCain, "I just have one quick questions. If the road is widened 200 feet in each direction on 121st and on Gaarde, there are four house affected." "Skorney, "No, no, its not suppose to be widened, its the existing right-of-way. 1 "Moen, "Overlays to be put on the existing right-of--way." McCain, "Fine, in some cases, you will be violating County or City setback °a 4! ordinances, in that case, once those ordinances are violated, who is it that will be buying those propey•ties. . '.a Skorney, "No, the existing, the right of way is owned, that is not the McCan, "The right-of-way and the setbacks are two different things and they conflict with one another." Monahan, "I don't really tc,ink there's an answer to that, I think the conflict is where the houses is situated and were the eventual right-of-way went. I think the conflict is from the house to the right-of-way, not the, the problem, what isn't being created now, the problem already exists." • 9 McCain, "What's the setback is violated, then what happens," Monahan, "But the setback isn't violated, most likely. The fact that it was setback now." • McCain, "'No, no, no on one side of my house the setback will be violated if "/ it goes from 40 to 50 or 60." Moen, "Yes, that the whole point, at this, what do you propose right now, would not change that, it would not change , that?" On your side of the property. "My driveway, after 18 years of " .. ...;, . its like this, and I would • invite any of you to have a compact car to c,otite down and have coffee wily me so you can replace your muf per," PAGE 17 T ;ANB kxPT PARK PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 198 Moen, "Let me ask the Commissioners, do you have any questions at this time?" Edin, " , Mrs. McCain, . . . . . did you hear the answer Mre Miller gave for what he plans to do with water drainage?'" McCain, "Basically, but you see, what I said earlier was I have a dry drywell in the front of my property. The streams are suppose to feed into that drywell, they don't. So I'm not, sure that what he is proposing up there will handle the job either. I'm sure that those springs cliange direction underground from year to year." "Edin, "I guess I would respond in that none of us here . . . . . . • . . a engineers, we rely on staff, and the standard procedure, is those kind of issues have to be reviewed by the Public Works. They see every little detail. I guess what I would ;ay to you, I'm convenienced that issue will be reviewed by the Public Works. I appreciate some of your concerns, but I think it be Commissioner Owens, Will surface waters be less also, because I think she's concerned with surface waters as well as underground springs." Edin, " didn' t address that, they will., have to put sewers along the front of there property and it is intended to go into the existing pipe system, which will be cleaned out . . . . . .. . s.. . . . . . . . Moen, "I have a question for the applicant. On the private streets how, first of all, you talk, about parking only on one side of the street, you mentioned briefly something about the City police having access to that or enforcing that. Number two, I would like to know, who's going to do the maintenance on that street and why that, and the City can be assured that that would be maintained properly, so , that safety vehicles and so on can, other public vehicles can have access to ti-e." Miller, " ,... a bit of a problem what you have is a situation, says how can you enforce someone to maintain a driveway, the driveway is going to be maintained by the people, because they are want to maintain their investment • when they runt to resale their houses. If they don't maintain that investment they won't be able to maintain the value of their home. The Home, Owners Association will have the right to and the obligation to maintain that. There cuuld be . . . . . . . . . r who may not wish to participate in the Associate and you may have to force them to pay them. But that's usually the result »... . » .. . . . . . They have a legal obligation to do that." question (inaudible) Miller, "I'm not sure that it is a problem. They are several things here that are being asked, of us that are not » » . . : cross the City. No other condominium, no other apartment, no other commercial parking lot or driveway that I know of in Tigard has been asked to . . » ». . » . the City to have the authority to come on their property to enforce traffic. We are trying to work with staff, we have no objections to this, its just that we're the first ones this is being asked of. We will be glad to cooperate with the City in any way possible, we do not ask it of the City. This is not our request, we do not ask that the City come on and enforce our traffic." 1 PACE 18 ,r, TRANSCRIPT - PARK PAC., - DECEMBER b, 198 • V #' Owens, "I do have a couple of questions of the applicant. I'm interested in why you presented this with these kind of roads through here, rather than a standard streets, through the development." Miller, " 60 foot, wide collector street with an additional setback, takes a tremendous amount of and The land to the south is only • 300 feet wide . . . . . in order to try utilize the land at all, we got to get away, this is a collector street one is the standard subdivision and 50 ft. wide streets and 100 tt. diameter cul-de-sac, which is within the 300 ft. wide width that we have would be impossible. Because we take 60 or 70 feet out before this and then try to compose that 100 ft. diameter radius and then try to get and 90 ft. an the end of it, which physically impossible on this property. In order to accomtnod to this street, where is meets nonaccesible from the street. . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . .local streets off of there, you ended up with the situation that the only way, your going to preserve anything at all, without covering the whole site with asphalt is to make it a private drive inaudible We're afraid of the effects of a collector street, just like the rest of the people We ended up with a planned development as being the only . . way to go inaudible) Owens, "If we approve this tonight, how will you address the issue of, the discrepancy between the total number of units that you and staff, have figured j out that can be put on there versus the number that are being required. Which is 215, with no phase II, sensitive, some can be transferred Skorney, "Well basically calculation we made just for our conceptual, entire planned development, whether than is really remains to be seen when he comes in with the preliminary plat. Its just sort of a overall calculation, . really has no bearing on the Phase I preliminary plat." Owens, "As I understand it, as I read this request quote, it, Oh I'm sorry, I thought i t said .. . .,... . . . . .. two . . . . .. .. . . ... . ... . . . ... . . . ... ....'. .• •,.0 .. . . . . 0 Moen, "Close the public hearing. Commissioners its time for discussion. We'll start with Commissioner Owens." Owens +'Okay, I've tried to get some thoughts and some organization down on some of the issue. Because this parti.:ular piece of property location . . .. • possible major connector through there and I feel that its easy to loose site of the . . The road situation does have a bearing on it, it is not they main thing that we are being present with. I think that the fact that there will be road impacts from increased development. There's been opposition as to a connection between Murray and Pacific and there concerns about safety of children and peoples homes. There's another: way to look at the improvemeats that could occur along Gaarde and 121:it and has to be increased flow patterns, it can actually result in safer r,ituation rather than a worse situation: Its been known for at least se+teri years that 121st and Gaarde, traffic flow will continue th increase steadily' to the year 2000 and beyond and that is going to occur whether this situation is developed or not The development is taking; place in 'Beaverton, its taking place in Aloha, its taking place in .,.. :. r+ . .« PACE 19 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE -' bECEHBEn 6, 1983 • { / • ` k *. �`� c a' , and Scholls, its taking place in all the areas between Tigard and Hillsboro and that traffic is flowing through the area and it will continue to and its going to increase. For us to say that we don't want a development in here because this development can impact 121st and Gaarde is shortsighted. I can appreciate the concerns of the immediate neighbors, and the frustrations that have been faced, with the fences and trees being hit. But those problems were k. existing before this was every brought before us. Also, I say this again, and its not comical when 1 say it, but when somebody buys a house in the area, . whether its a 1nt of open undevelopment land, that you can either find out wants going to happen to that land at some point in the future or you can pretend that its always going to stay the same and be frustrated with j1 ,; That's all I have to say." l' Butler, "I just have a few concerns that I would like answers on. I've never 1" . seen maintenance overlay like they have requested on this development. But then I'm new to this. Another concern is and storm water disposition. There's a wetland area there, but we didn' t get enough plans to see what storm water coming out of that development. It might not create a problem somewhere down the stream in a house or a yard. I � was experiencing Gaarde and P.lcific Hwy. intersection and other people have too and I'm wondering why that maybe wasn't address and part of this development. Not phase I but definitely Phase II. Signalization of that i intersection. That's all I have. '' Moen, "Commissioner Edin." r' Edin, "Well, I do have some concerns. I guess first of all I made some notes as to I would like to see the staff's conditions changed. Let me start with those. Condition number five, address the question, what kind of improvement on the opposite side of the development. I would like to put in change favor word after the word improve. I would insert the =;:ards to interim f City standards, the existing right-of-way, so we would definitely define That my concern, I could not :support full street improvements on both side. Another one I would have to encourage us to limit this to conceptual and detailed review of Phase I only and not conceptual of Phase II. Now, I would suggest that we recommend to City Council to consider approving the City Police to enter the private streets and enforce the parking restrictions. Those were the specific things that I had Now a couple of questions. First one, item number 12 from s ff; can you explain to me why . the additional five feet of setback over and abu 1 the . . . .. . . I was unclear as to what 44 . 4644 4 . Skorney, "That was the County's requirement. The County and the City, Frank Currie and Lary Pace agreed to that." Ellin, "Okay, the reason is to give that extra wide, (in audible comment) I guess, I'm wrestling with that, with that whole issue. And I. guess I'm ' wrestling, I understand that our Public Works and, the County's Public Works .�' hove agreed, 1 think, planning staff supports that.' , Monah . ', n, "I think the issue is the Urban Flanrting. Area Agreettent that. I think '� our standards were a little different from there standard as to what the right-of-way should be. 1 think the County's i6 70 and our is 60." PAGE 20 - TRANSCRIPT PARK PLACE - R°ECri ER 6, 198 2 4 ,Y•A Edin, "Do I take that really that this bodies hands are tied in terms of having to accept 70 foot wide," 0 Skorne y, "It's still a sixty foot right-of-way., That was lust an additional five feet of setback." Monahan, "Wasn' t the County's 70 foct." Skorney, "That was for an arterial street." Edin, "What your saying is those properties got to set back 25 feet instead of 20, now is the Okay, again because of the arterial. Then, let me rephrase the question. Have we no discretion in this issue on about •� l • how wide the street will be, or do with have some discretion?" Monahan, "I don' t think you do have any discretion, because this body doesn' t have the authority to violate the Urban Planning Area Agreement, and the Urban Y Planning Area Agreement says that we won't preclude any options at this time. The present language of that agreement that runs until the end of December is • such that this is want the County wants today. We're talking about revising that language, so that we can get the Council to buy off on the Urban Planning Area Agreement to extend it beyond December and its possible, that this 70 ft. • right-of-way might not be necessary after we revise the, or rather this 70 foot wide swath may not be necessary after we revise the language. Because this Urban Planning Area Agreement was written when the County original wanted an arterial. Now they've backed off from the arterial. So perhaps the 70 ft. is a mute point. But its not mute until either the Urban Planning Area Agreement stops or is modified." Edin, 'So, really, if anybody has the authority to make that change, it would •E. be Council." Monahan, "Yes." Edin, "Then I guess I'm down to the real issue, that is the location o that street. I have been wrestling with that at every since having attended that • • town hall meeting addressing how to handle this. I'm. not, ;\.f fact I am afraid like the residents are, that if we alignm.nt the way staff wants its and the County. We are opening it up for a straight shot and that bothers me. Because I. see no conditions, nothing there that haters it. On the other hand, • I am c''nvenienced that putting the T in on 121st, is perhaps not the safest position. So I've been wrestling with how about putting a in on the other end of Phase I and going up there and in effect. stopping it, not with a cul-de-sac, hut by the effect of forcing traffic to go right or left at Phase It I would through that out to 'nmmi,ssioners and staff to respond on as a • way of detering that straight shot and still getting the street construction that is more profitable. If we can somehow design in Phase I the ability to keep it, from cony`nuing on as a straight shot, but to force traffic to go right or left. Then I think we've accomplished the spirit of want I agree with Council saying that indirect connectil.�n, what I believe I hear the neighbors talking about and at the same time taking care of the engineering problem, I. think . .. . . . . e . . . . .. . a . , So I would through that out for S,m • consideration to the rest of the Commissioners," Coen, " Commissioner V"anderwood." wl •a PAGE 21 - TRANSCRIPT PARK PLACE SICCE MBg1i b, 1983 Y . M .......,.. �. ...Y'-....�y ..�,,. ..br ^ A.. ..Y 4.1 .aW.aLa N'LIa.Y>WW.rya.YUma.b4 m.ArN'n•NY.yr,nN Y.mN.W bN.uYJLL.W�NaYr.. l „N. i1 „ . I:� • y (', ,:k , Vanderwood, "I would agree with Commissioner Edin, regarding the . . .. . . . . . . . I have some concerns about number five the 200 foot, I, have to .: agree with Commissioner Butler, I've never seen this before and I'm not sure I understand why they have it. I don' t staff seems to be able to explain, why �'- they have it has a condition, . . .. . . .. .. .. . . . `• Edin, "May I respond there a little, as I understood it from listening to the , . trown hall meetings, that there is a problem with the actual topography and the banking of the road, there on the corner and if there going to put in their ' 4ti half of the road the other half of the road may be higher or lower, is that not correct.” • Miller, "Yes. In my opinion you can't design for the year 2000 traffic standards of any kind by putting a piece of that road in for 200 feet in either direction. You are going to create further down Gaarde. ' You won't effect 121st so bad, because 200 feet from the intersection really doesn' t even cover oar entire frontage. That is pretty well given, Gaarde is the real problem, you can' t project a street or alignment far enough down there to know if its g:=ing to be And banking it or creating anything right now creating that improvement, as. I said before is going to create another traffic pattern. People are going to speed up on that 400 foot improved section, people are going to its going to get worse and your .. aren't going to have done anything, offered anything for these people, you A have just merely created a two block long speedway for someone to • your going to have worse problems than what you have now. "' J Skorney,' "Bob, I think Frank was talking about eliminating that banking, just to make that intersection safer, eliminate the banking and sort of reconstruct that intersection." Moen, "The point is i-, that you can' t go a half of a street there and hook up r • to wants on the other half right now." Miller, '!A week ago on 121st and. Gaarde." r ` Miller, "A 121st you can do a, you can't change that intersection, your are stuck with a 8 1/2 % grade coming down Gaarde, your going maintain 35 mile an i.;a hour speed, you can' t take that grade out of it. So coming down 121st, you aro going to make up with that bank no matter what you do. Your going to have, when you bring 121st into a street that's coming down a 8 1/2 % grade your going to have, in order to get that corner, you going to have to bank the traffic lane up to it. And by, what I'm saying is that on our s de of the 1, 4 street, is that its easy to do is a half street improvement. Our street and our half of the improvement is easy Flo. We were getting about the centerline to . .. .. .. . . . . the centerline. The other side of the street is where the , problem is going to be on 121st on both side of the street there's going to be . a problem on Gaardep Its no the 200, feet improvement, its what happens afterwards. You get up to 50 wiles on the first 200 feet you can kiss those �. . . . ,, . . goodbye coming over that hump .. . . ... . . . . . . . . .'I Vanderwrod, "I still have a problem, I tend to agree to improve it for 200 feet is ' going, to incr: .se the speed, during that period. I've seen on other streets were they've done ; '.. . . . .. overlay and had a lousy street . . . . . .. . . . , that they go fatter than they have before, and the roads not 1: going to be wider •.... . . ..... I' don't think that it will work, so I have ° real problem with that. ' PAGE 22 W Tk1.c,NSCRI?T - PAM PLACE - DECEMBE,. 6, 1983 + 7 t.' 4 .40 Moen, "I guess I would like to make just one cumment, I think we haven' t had phased developments. quite . . . .. . . . . .. . .inaudible. . . slot of based d,wvPlo ments• an here for uite awhile Edin, "If I could just comment, I do think, in that respect that we do need to look at the 'acct that this is only the start that there is going to be 1 considerable more traffic coming out of that in the future and in Phase II we go back and tear up the intersection and build it again. I don't think that's c (several people talking same time. , Vanderwood, "I don' t know what the answer to it is, but i' Moen, "Okay, Commissioner Fyre," a; Fyre, " Okay, my the major concern that I have with this is the traffic pattern now. all those cars having a direct shot onto Gaarde. That's bothered me for some time now. I Y 'ke the idea of having a lot off, set connection . . . . to 121st as the alternar. plan had shown. In think about it, perhaps that would, not distract from the roadway cars that would go onto ", Gaarde, because cars would perhaps go that direction anyway. So what I though was, as a solution is only part of a solution. I do like the idea of having . it offst. All the plans that I have been involved with call for, if there was to be a connection at Gaarde, would be the direct connection. Commissioner Edin came up with a good idea, that perhaps having the T on the other side of the property, so you wouldn' t have it on a 121st because as ;� Frank Currie pointed out if you T into 121st its curved there and it might be ,.. more dangerous. Some, other things that may perhaps be more Gaarde street, perhaps somewhere between 121st and 99 stop signs could be, put in. :, That . 4.. ,. . . .. an intersection there at on 115th, perhaps a stop sign there . � ' would help that situation. My other concern is that this is a awful lot of _ . density in an area which is zoned single family housing to the ;,outh is R-20, across the street its R-7) and that bothers me. I'm not sure what I can do about it other than to vote for a denial on plan and I'm not quita ready to do that, because it doe' fall within, the guidelines, ,so, that is my position, I will strongly, I will support this propoi �al. unless conies, unless we can motion that address an indirect connection. E;,ther at 121st or across . : . . . . . where Commissioner Edin was talking about. That all." Or. . 0 Moen, "Commissioner Leverett.�' 1, • °~ Levezett, "Well, b ...•. . b to much, concerning it +l number 5, why its 200 "` -° It feet, it seems to me what we have is just a engineering problem down, here and I don't think that the 200 feet, that's not worded very well, but it just ;las to be engineered regarding 121st and that should be looked at with Mr. Currie d and the developer. And I, just . .a number like that in there) seem to me an undue btu den, I think. . ... . . .0 . As far as alternative I, either one are to good of a location, I have no idea Of a solution( I guess I one by staff. I don't have ate ` would recommend the � r ` problems with density. lasically those are my only comments." i v . ins . .Y . PACE 25 -- TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE - DECEMBER 6. )9d d p K . it 4„ I, • Moen, Okay, I guess its my turn. 1'Ll try to be brief as the hours is approaching . ., 11 here and. ' First off, I would like to make one overall comment. The issue in this subdivision is, does this development has really become an issue of where to we put Gaarde Street and how do we hook it up. '+ And one thing that we have failed to address, almost completely, is bow dense is the development. The development itself . .. how would you put a big street through it. I don' t know, I think that's unfortunate, because I think our primary mission here involves the, the street is certainly an issue and its a very big and important issue because if its overclouded the real discussion that I think should take place. Since the street has been discussed so much, I guess I ought to make my comments, my feelings know on it. I'm in favor of the proposal as staff has put it it, as • far as a connection to Gaarde at the bottom and straight shot off the top. It make the most sense at this point. I think that the, making it an indirect connection is going to be better done, further upstream than at this point, • that trying to put a T in or something at the top, there two problems. One is : I don' t think that we should try to design that T at the top without some u i input of the engineering folks, a possible area appropriate. So that it can be done right there, maybe place ' but I don' t thank that can be property addressed with the information we have here in hand. I think th.d„ a T on 121st is particular unfortunate, because I think that the traffic coming off this development and the developments in this immediate area would not be very well served by that. And I think that the traffic is going to come down Gaarde in any case. There nothing to stop the traffic, the people are going to make the same decision they would have made • otherwise. If there is a problem in terms of speed, speed can and should be 4 '•! enforced in those areas. I don't think that's something we can address here, probably would be best addressed if maybe the City of Tigard had jurisdiction • of both side of Gaarde down there, I don' t know. Okay, as far as the 200 feet I think its appropriate that this intersection when its constructed that its constructed in such a way that it works. I think that building only half of it is not going to make it work, and I think that f s what staff is trying to address here and the fact that the 200 feet is the number that staff, that Mr. Currie and the Public Works, I assume picked 200 feet for a reason and I think its appropriate that something be done there and if the number they think is appropriate is 200 feet, then I support that. One other thing that hasn't ;' '" been discussed here; is this concept of private streets. I have one question , • for the developer. Are these streets as it gods around here, are you planning on having any sidewalks °-., them. v Miller, 01 wallo*ny, 24 foot wide paved parking, along . . . a adequate space for walking on the right-of-way, . . . . . . . . . . . traffic, its r going to be able carry that. A walking and pathway system will 1)0, looked at in the site development. Moen, "Your intending on having a walking pathwa ar 40?.a'`. .13m the street now. . Miller, ". . . . . .inaudible. . . . . . . ." Moen, "'I guess my feelings are that I th t.nk prit*t=;! drives are out of place, I think they have a place where there's a small developments small parcel than. needs developing, that the only way the road adequately services the private drive. I thr'.nk there are problems with private drives, fro:LA the $tandpoi.nt of ^ 4t i;s �, .,.. u, You put in the private drives after a few years it goes downhill, i PAGE 24 - TR'ANSCRIP'T .� PARR PLACE - DECE4;gl&. b, 1983 w D ¢' your people on your side of the street have, don' t have the funds right now to put in to pave the driveway and you want to pave yours, what do you do? I think that's, I've heard, just had input from that from someone who lives on a private drive and has that kind of a problem. I think its inappropriate to put private drives on an area this large. I think the developer has the « .' ability to put more phases on a pieces of and its a good idea, but I don' t . I think its appropriate for this big of a development. I think it restricts fire access, I don' t think its practical to have all these one way streets going through an area like that that are narrow and i think, and am worried about the, I think there is a reason why we have public streets that have sidewalks on or both side and we didn't just invent that for no reason, I think there's places to make exception to it, I just question whether this is it I that feeling that I feel that we are at a point here where we could make a decision on the Gaarde Street placement. There some dispute, but I think before the end of the day we might come up with something. with the development. So, any comments from any other Commissioners." Owens, "Well, I would like say I support your comments on the streets. What kinds of comments did you make about the, regarding the density? You indicated that you felt that there was something there needed to be some discussion about Moen, "Well, I think, if we redid this thing and put in regular streets you !' would come up with a different density, but we're not here to redesign this." f (several people speaking same time inaudible) Moen,, "We've got conceptual and detailed plan approval. Is 4.t possible for • us to approve, is it possible for us to approve a conceptual plan with some direction to the applicant to come back to us with a detailed plan with streets that are, which we perceive to be" Skorney, "I. think that, as I understand die detailed stage, that he doesn' t have that for phase II, so we can definitely give him direction on phase II for detailed plan approval, yes. For conceptual yes." (several people speaking same time inaudible) Edin, "There's a question in, a motion to approve, deny or change or a motion on a specific thing. I really don' t understand you que;.4.ion." �4 Moen, (inaudible) Edin, "I would be prepared to make a motion." Get it off dead center anyway. • Moen, (ipaudible - someone coughing es,,:• essively) • PAGE 2 —TRANSCRIPT PARK PLACE DECEMBER 6, 1983 ho . w 3 Edin, " I would move that we approve the with condition the applicants request for conceptual and detailed planned development for Phase I. With the following addition or corrections to staff's conditions. That first conditions would be that the Gaarde Street be extended as shown on the plan an additional feet northwest from where it deadends now With other proposed streets constructed to form a "T" intersection at that spot. Now I'll just give assumption. If you look on your map if you go approximately northwest you will see where another street coming in there. At the town hall meeting we discussed the fact that that was a possibility of a street turn that street to he left. I feel like there's some engineering bases for that motion. (several people speaking - inaudible) Edin "I'm suggesting going down and heaving Gaarde deadend. the County and the City staff have behind it Then there would be a "T" formed at the deadend. That, still gives all concerned an opportunity to and come out the other end. . . inaudible I would like to recommend to Council to authorize the police to, go in an enforce parking. Should that be a condition or should that be a side motion. Monahan, "I think it should be a side motion.' Edin, "I' ll leave, that one out. And I would leave in my motion the item number five, I concur that straightening out that intersection (tape ended) Moen, "We have a motion, do I hear a second." Gens, "Second." (discussion . . ...inaudible ° Moen, "Any further discussion. Goods call for the questions. All these in favor of the motion made a seconded signify by saying aye." dirt and Owens, "Aye," Moen, Butler, Vanderwood, Fyre, Leverett, "No,`: . . . . . ..inaudible. . ., ... . Butlers "on the density calculations, it looked like to one they didn' t subtract the land for the public right-of-ways, the private street 1 . . . . . . ,. : ; . density calculation . . ... . . Skorney, "No, that was subtracted." r Butler, "That was subtracted." ,Skorney, "Yes." Bu t lo.r, "I don't believe that." • . PACE 26 -- TRANSCRIPT PARK PLACE - DECEMBER 6) 1483 .1. A. , • 0 I ',i,y Skorney, "That's what the applicant has so stated." Butler, "But, 9.46 and I take subtract for single fatily public facilities, then subtract streets." kk\:. Skorney, "Well, the calculation that I made, going back to the staff re ort 1p I used the fact that for a density for a R.7 or for which is now R 4.5." Butler, You didn't inaudible Skorney, "Well, I used the density at 4.5 is has factor out the, factors out the streets." IIIButler, "According to this your suppose to have inaudible (discussion regarding calculations of density - inaudible) Skorney, "I made the calculation for the entire . . e Monahan, "I think the reason for this, as the applicant pointed out earlier, .r , and I think that the reason why its all one detailed plan, because he's taken credit for this open space for the entire parcel, not ju3t phase II and Phase III, but Phase I, Ii and III. That's why part of the density transfer would be applied to r : a;" • Discussion inaudible Monahan, '+I take issue with that, I think we incorrect there." _ Moen, . . .. ... ......... but I " do not question the concept of which would pertain should improve the Phase II as part of M' 1 locked that parcel into a later on. .. . .. . . . . . . .e. . . I would chink that possibility that . . . . . open space could disappear under someone elses own,.1`sh7p. . .,. . . .. . ... . . . . .. . Is is possible just r p approve phase I and then Monahan, "I think that's why it was all presented as one, so that we would lock it up and so we would be able to tike the density transfer." (several people speaking -- inaudible) Owens, But, I'm thinking now, if we approve the density transfer which would u include ?hale II, then have some sort of situation arise where, perhaps Phase II did not occur for a long period of time, that there could be perhaps a change of hands . . . . . +then we could possible down the road, fake l`. g •� a problem here, somebody di. Brent may come in later and answer for a density � transfer oithiii that second phase and someone will forget � that that has D•.d' already occurred. You see what I'm saying: In making a hypothetical s3,.tuation. Because I recall, . : . :. . . . it was something that had, been cross. 1 ' ' Moen, "Maybe I should a question of staff that has a beating on this. hr=w much of the quote unquote, density transfer, on the open space has been , transferred into Phase I ,� _ Monahan, "Very little, five ,4t, i.ts, on nine acres, that's very little. / PAGE 27 - 'TRANSCRIPT - PAPER ?1,AG: ,* DECE03g t 6, 1983 4 A 0 . t 4 Moen, "You've got five units out of a total 43, so without that you've got 38. How much would that open space be. Monahan, "Well we've got 12.18 acres, that we transfer the density of 25% of that. So that's four or more units to the acres, Steve, so roughly 50 unit, 1/4 of . . . 12 1/2 acres round about" Moen, ''You've got 12 1/2 acres, you got roughly 25 percent of that is about a little over 30 acres, so you've got a potential for 12, let say 13 units." (several people speaking •- inaudibly Butler, "What was the final computation Moen, . . . .inaudible Butler, "I'll make a motion then. I motion that we deny Planned Development S 8-83 PD, Park Place." Fyrc, "Second." Moen, "Do you have some comments as to reason for you motion to deny." ' Butler, "Well, at this point, approval of Phase I, I can only density is to high for what they are requesting. That's the only thing." Miller, "Our request if for 43 unit on 47.3 acres on six lots, there's no density problem cn 43 units. There is only a density problem if we come back • to you with a request, six month a year, two years to resubdivide and add more units. Right now are request Is for 43 units on 47.8 acres." (discussion - inaudible) Moen, ":Jtaff you want to comment on that.'' MonahAn) "I think thi..t conceivable you can make a decision based on that if you like. I think if that's the case. Bob's saying 43 units and that might be it, then I think we have to add in the factor that we need the dedication of all the open space right now tool We looked at it from the phased. Miller . . . . . ... . .. . .,,b we have no problem, with, and that's exactly what this request is, making a lot a platted lot open space to the . . . . Home Owners Association in. Phase I. hutler, "If we approve this whole thing, knowing that . . .14 . . . •644 $ .0 k Miller, "True, but we still can' t put any house on if- or do Anything without a permit or your approval tc do anything." discussion inaudible Hoen, So we have a motion i'or denial and a second." discussioa ; inaudible PAGE 28 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE - DECEMBER 6, 1983 Nn.vwru.pw, • 0 III4 q t' l yJ r t\44c Moen, " With that, I guess I'll call for the question. All those in favor of the motion for denial signify by say aye. Any opposed. \, Vanderwood, "Aye." Butler "Aye." Moen "No." Owens "No." Edin "No." Levere t t "No." Fyre "Aye. Secretary, Four ayes, and three no's Moen, "I guess the Ayes have it. Motion carries, the application is denied." Monahan, "And the findings." Moen, "The findings, Mr. Butler made the motion." Butler, "With the inform "_ion we had I couldn' t see approving one. with the density transfer, without see the whole conceptual plan. We were > told first, that w were just looking at Phase I and not the rest of the property, th`cn al.1. of sudden we're looking at the whole property, , ( ' Monahan, "Co what is the finding? Inadequate information? . , Butler, IL is inaccurate and incomplete. And additional concern . . . .' Monahan, "It has to be more specific than !that." several speaking inaudible ) Moen, "I think what your saying is that, we want to make this clear, is that the density transfer to a small part of Phas I, without seeing Phase II and ,' • e III plat .. e e . , Butler, "I telt that it was inappropriate, especially when we were told we I_ were just considering Phase I, separate from rest. The numbers said we were considering the whole thing, but then we were told we just considering only a small part of it." Vanderwood, "Perhaps it would be helpful to us, if we could see calculations with these density. . .. I know it would help me alot. Monahan, "Okay, we'll take thaµ to mind. Now the finding that I have are,, ,� p information, private were inappropriate and f' x.naccu�ate. and incomplete informatio a streets density transfer to phase I was inappropriate?" Moen, "Inappropriate without the seeing the plots for Phase (Monahan, "The plats") plats. Conceptttai plats, we don't have anything.e4. . . t Monahan, ""Anything else."" Moen, I think that's it. h PAGE; 29 — TRANSCRIPT — PAPJ( PLACE DECEMBER 6, 198; MEMORANDUM TO: All Interested Parties FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning and Development • DATE: November 21, 1983 SUBJECT: Park Place Meeting At the Planning Commission meeting of November 15, 1983, the petition of Century 21 for the Park Place 'pr-zposal was postponed to allow the petitioner to meet with the City, County, and property owners to resolve various issues. ° A meeting will be held on Wednesday, November 23, at 9:00 A.M. at City gall. It is hoped that most of the technical issues will be resolved at that time. A follow up meeting will be held on Monday, November 28, 1983, at 7:30 P.A. at Fowler Junior High School. This is the so called town hall meeting discussed on the 15th. Please attend this informational meeting if at all possible. ' I I 0 •i i .... . ..MIA A lid ll.•a M N I x.+n .. .. ....»F.«..., ..,.. ,,. ., •r...µpr«r [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] coNcPf PLAN FOR A FROPtrcri' ON GULL M 1I\1 11& ORf,ONJ 52. E)EVELOPER°. ! c1'u ' ZI t7VLOPS 7912 5W r'N'ION-- IL I ( &NA Y POZTLANt2 , oar, 97225 f'; LANt $CAPE A COTCT/ PLAtG°3� DEAN APO 51'01-- - 31 4 bbd NINTh PORrLANt2J OFO 97�0� • r 1 •o h ,. . . (AA 2111 jL' : -4 bi toil sulk . Aar* * tt., C r . RECEIVED 1' NOV 1818Z , lielferil : . CITY OF T►CARD WeVe. 0, (Aftii o o �e 06 kind cui-irl,,° 71(5, we -i- 15 OW) 'r e�n-lina 1 i mug reci Z .1 - IYM kepf Ke0t0)(16‘1211 COhP-iCi.€1-‘fiCAL ,\Or [1\12 'i.n1-,..7-1: i 1 V '62 OrlAt '4- o ld s ,/e with. t,,(2.19e.li, 30\'V 1 d icl tv VA 'e (rwvmg,ifmn sb9N7v) 6i- ( c 1r,C Yeo‘i oonlipLefe tkir mkt,t, ( . -co Viee ks 1, { 1 . .1c,,y ots i 01A1 46 deut To- 15 no 12\Onniici -6 fokkt `1.e me‹..1- k Gl w is „,2) 1, some Li br\Q, *+, (2 0,04 hove ovli iva5. 011\ on 1-11(5) ilearg c,c,L.L. 1 1 , 1 , 1 l 1, t 3404:191 C4 ' 1=1 ag u‘ ' 1 4Zf. g t' ST,e,.,:Nj iNa DO DO 0 ,, cr. cdu ‘0311 4:1 ittes 1 , :s H._,w, a:,... ,, ,..,I .,m d' ' I ii 'r ..or....1 -44.1tie. aftwillL 44. N , ,,., r Introduction The following report contains information regarding a proposed housing development to be located one the south slope, of Bull Mountain in Tigard, Oregon. More specifically, the site lies about 3/4 of a mile west of Highway 99W, at the inter- section of Gaarde Road and S.W. 121st Avenue. The legal description of the property is: tax lot 1400, section 4, township 2 south, range 1 west, and tax lot 401 , section 3, al o of township 2 south, range I west, Washington County, Oregon. Altogether, the total land area of the property contains just under 48 acres. The information that follows is intended to provide the developer and interested parties with an analysis of the site and its environs.; a description of the program for development, and recommendations regarding l'urther action. This report is preliminary in nature, and thould be viewed only as a first step towards subsequent design and development. The intent of the "Preliminary Concept" is to provide a framework for more detailed work. o 1670119C, 0 q1\041c10115 7717 1116C15 NOION11-19VM `111!■- 0- -;:_n.H. ro - . 11- • ti , .. . .. ; ___ _ __. - . s -t - .. _ ..: ._. . . . , A t 17. 1. Geographic Context ., The site under consideration is located in the Tualatin Valley, roughly at the southwestern edge of the Portland Metropolitan Area. The Cooper-Bull Mountain highlands have, up until now, presented a barrier to urban growth, which has tended to skirt around them to the northwest and south. Consequently, the highlands themselves are still largely characterized by filbert orchards, woods, brushland resulting from logging, and pasture. While urban development has filled in the surrounding valley floor and much of the ridge tops of Bull Mountain, it has not yet occurred upon the side slopes. However, three factors; lack of available land on the more level areas, attractive views and woods that the high-, lands offer, the annexation of the area to the City of Tigard, and subsequent ' availability of urban services, have raised the value of the land high enough so as to allow urban development to now occur there. Culturally, this site i s located favorably with regard, to major highway access, shopping, and industrial employment. Washington Square is located less than three miles to the northeast, while new industry in the Highway 217 corridor is rapidly expanding. General Topography The general topographic features of this site that need to be considered relative to its development include; slope orientation and degree of steepness, surface drainage, and land, forms such as ridge lines, terraces, and surface depressions. }i Slopes on the site are generally oriented east to northeast, with some inter- ruptions due to stream dissection. The slope range is from 5 to over 25%, the steepest areas occurring along the two stream incisions. For the purposes of this analysis , the slopes are divided into 5 categories: 0-10% 9.5 acres, 10-15% 10.5 acres, 15-20% 13.5 acres, 20-25% 9.5 acres, and over L57., 5 acres. The degree of difficulty, cost, and risk of development rises proportionately as the slopes increase over about 15%. Y Surface drainage is directed into two large ravines, both of which originate uphill of the land being considered. The first of these occurs in the extreme western portion of the site. Direction of the drainage is to the east, Con- sequently, a deep ravine creates a formidable divide between the northwest and southwest portions of the property. This ravine merges with the second drainage- way, an even deeper and larger ravine that orients northerly and effectively divides the entire property into east and west halves. This second drainage appears to be spring fed from further up on Bull Mountain, and may be perennial. A long, broad ridgeline parallels the larger ravine, causing surface drainage in much of the eastern portion of the property to move east-northeast. a Other land forms on the site include a small , sloping terrace in the northeast second,created b a . quadrant, a surface depression c by man-made excavation and dam along the large ravine, and a: �on , larger terrace in the southeast quadrant. All in all , the east facing slopes and ravines are the most significant topographic features of the site. . • Vegetation Vegetation growth on the site varies considerably and offers several opportunities for the development. First, the southeast portion of the site is primarily a meadow with scattered trees, including filbert, hickory, fir and cedar. Generally, !. , this area has an open character, the trees not being particularly handsome or large, although some of them may be worth locating and preserving as the development occurs. Adjacent to this area to the west is an olds neglected filbert orchard. To the north of the orchard is a pasture area, open except for another, smaller orchard and a stand of large, handsome douglas fir. To the west, a dense woodland of Western Chinkapin, Red Alder, Bigleaf Maple, Douglas Fir, Cherry, and Cedar stretches south to north along both sides of the large ravine, and up slope into the southwest quadrant of the site. These trees are important in that they divide the site visually in half, in addition to their value in stabilizing the steep slopes along the ravine. The northwest portion of the property is a large meadow, with a few scattered trees. It is surrounded by woods on all sides , although the woods immediately ately to the west (off the subject property) are more brush than forest. Soils and Ge21291 Soils on the site appear to be silts and clayey silts of moderate to poor drainage. Depth to bedrock is undetermi ned, but it is probably near the surface in the higher portion of the site, while fairly deep in the lower areas. There is evidence of soil creep, stream undercutting of slopes, and small surface land- slides on the property. These occurrences are not uncommon in this, type of terrain, but nevertheless should be investigated carefully lest development worsen the situation. Potential problems observed in the field are evidenced by; leaning and bent trees, erosion at the base of the ravines, broken, warped • topography, and escarpments where some shallow slides probably occurred. While the upper portions of the slopes,, ridges and terraces appear to be safe for development, the lower slopes and drainages, should be investigated further if we do any changes to these areas. Specifically, steep road cuts, removal of vege- ttion and increased storm water flows into the ravines could create future . pr,5blems, which can be avoided by undertaking a more detailed geologic investi- gation at the appropriate time Off-Site Features Off-site features of importance to the development of this, property include access, views, and relationships to surrounding land uses: Southwest Gaarde and 121st Avenue are the only public streets that presently abut I the property, Consequently, if construction of off-si to roads is to be avoided, the property will i have to develop from f east Southwest west l 2nd Avenue, an unimproved p ubl i c road, lies within 5 0' o f the a o uthwe. t corner of the site, but access from it would require considerable off-site improvement. There is no potential access from the west or south; unless further development of these areas occurs. e 3- • • 4 f ' Distant views to the east and north are quite good, getting progressively better as one moves up the east slope. A very good view of 'Mt. Hood, with the Tualatin Mountains in front, is available from most of the site, while views to the Tualatin Valley in the north are available from the higher, eas t facing slopes. Surrounding land uses include; suburban residential to the east and north, forest and agricultural to the west and south. However, the entire area around the site is within the urban growth boundary and has been zoned for suburdan resi- dential development. F n. • t f ' r . 4 i w T,. ,� '', .. 1' I . .f.,.,. .. ., ., . .. ,. . ,.._. . , „ , . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . „, . • . . . . . . . . , . . . .. . . , ., , . . , , , . . . . . . . . , , . . , ,.. ., . . . . . , . . , . ._ , , , , • . , . . . .. , . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . .. , .. . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . , , . . , . 1. . , . . , . . . , . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . .. ,. .. . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . , . . , . , . , . . . . . . . , . . .. . . . . . . . „,.. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . , . . , , . . . . . . . • . . , . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . , , 4. , ,. , . .,,,,:),,j . . n , . . . , , '-r. , . . , , , , . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . „ . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . ' C4.'.'= . . . . , . , . .. , . . . . . . . , . .. . , , . . ,. . ,. , . , , . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . ., , . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . .. . , . . , . . , . . . 1 . . , .. . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . , . . , , „, . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .., . .. . . . 1,,,,,,,,„...., „....... . . , .. . , , 1 . , . , , , . 1 , , . , . . . , „ . , 1 .. . • ,. , ,., , . 1 . . . . 1 , . ,. , . . . . ., . ,, . . . . . .. . . . ... ., . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . , , , , 1 . . . . , , , . . . , . . . , . . . . . ,. , . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . ,. . • ,, , . . . , . . .. , , 1 , , . , . , . , , . , . , . . 1 , . . . . , , . , . , . , . . , . . . , . . , , , . .... , . .. 1 , . . . ,. . , , , . ,. , , . . , , . , . . . . . . ., , . . . . . ., . , . , . . . . . . , , ., , . . .., , . . , . . . . . , . . . . . .. . . . . . . , , . . . . . . , . . . , . , . . . . 1 . , . . , °1 ,,. , . , . . „ .. ... . . ., . . . . . . . ,.... . ,, . . . . . . . . . ,. . . , ,.. . . . ., . , , . . . . . . . . . , . , .. . . . , . , . . . . 1 , , . . . , . . . , , . " , . . , . . 1 . . . . . . , „,.. . . . . . . . . ,. ., , , . , , , . . ,. . . . . , . . . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . , , . . . . . . , , . . 1 . . •, ,, .. .e., . , . . . • . . . . . . . I,;„ ......,,..,,,,,,,,,,o0i . . . . . . ,. . . . . , 3,, „ , , . . . 1 , . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ., . .. . , . • , , . . . . . . . . . , .. . . . . ., , . . . . . . . . ., , „ . . , , . ,. . , . ,.,, . . , . . . . . . , . , . . . . . , . , 1 . ,. . .. ... , . ( . ,1 ,., . , .. . z Program Elements The importance of developing an understanding of the site and its environs is , equalled only by the importance of the design program. The "program" can be simply stated as the requirements of the project. Generally, these can be con- sidered in terms of; land use densities, building types, pathways, and open spaces. In more specific terms, such details as setbacks, parking spaces, road widths, lot sizes, and landscape improvements need to be determined. Program requirements come from three sou' a s, namely; the public planning j uri s- 1 diction, the developer, and the future users, or inhabitants of the property. City of Tigard The general requirements of the City of Tigard, which is the local planning jurisdiction for the subject property, have been determined through discussions with City planners and a perusal of zoning and development ordinances. Infor- mation has been gathered relating to allowable densities and building types, Planned Development District requirements, approval procedure, and area wide planning considerations. • Density and Building Types The subject property is currently designated under the land use plan to allow 4 housing units per acre, minus certain"sensitive land" areas and public streets. This would allow approximately 150 units on the total site. However, a proposed modification of the land use plan would increase the allowable density to 5-12 units per acre on this property. This change, if adopted, will result in an allowable density of from 240-576 housing units on the site. Under the Planned Development District Ordinance, housing concepts may include single family detached homes, duplexes, row houses, or stacked housing arrangements. In addition, related commercial and recreational buildings designed to serve the development are allowed. • Development Regulations Approval Procedure The PD District, regulations are intended to govern development of large areas that will include sensitive land areas, common open spaces, and a variety of housing types. Generally, the preliminary design must be developed to a point where exact building types, square footages, land coverage, parking, landscape improvements, streets, walkways, and other site improvements are located and described. In addition, a written report describing the proposal , traffic analysis, descriptions of sensitive lands, ownership patterns, and other infor- mation is regtifired as part of the proposal . Once the preliminary plan has been approved, the developer may apply g eneral plan review. This plan is essentially a more detailed version of the prelimi pry, which shows the project "as it will be constructed. " I _5_ rN • ' h ,w 1. !r! 11 Area Wide Planning Consideration Area transportation plans by Washington County and the City of Tigard show a neighborhood collector road proposed to cross the subject property from northwest to southeast. Several options for accommodating this proposed road appear to be available, and will be investigated further as the plan develops. Surrounding areas are generally undeveloped, or developed at low density suburban i levels. Future planning in both Tigard and Washington County call for increasing housing density as a response to state and metropolitan area requirements. : " Developer's Needs As of this writing, the developer has expressed a desire to build a planned development, mixing various housing types with open space areas. No ratio has been determined with regards to housing types. The developer recognizes that much of the land is of a sensitive nature, thus clustering the built portions and minimizing site disturbance is a preferred option. Architectural forms are not as yet determined, and will depend mainly upon land coverage consider- ations, aesthetics, and specific locations on site. User Needs In a housing development designed and built for as yet unknown persons, the A responsibility to speak for their needs falls to the site designer. It is necessary to anticipate the potential relationship between the future i niiabi tants and the land itself. This relationship should be considered with regards to: Safety, integration of living with natural land features, identity of the com- munity, and allowance of personal privacy, both indoors and out. These items might be thought of as basic components of on ideal suburban living arrangement. While they are difficult to insure through zoning regulations, they can be assumed through good design. Design Goal': General design goals that should be followed in order to allow the program and land to merge into a successful development are as follows: 1. ReFpond to Topography Pathways should bend, dip, and rise with the landscape. Housing should be placed in advantageous areas. Sensitive land areas should be left as un- disturbed as possible. 2 Place Buildings Carefully Buildings should be placed for: views from, solar exposure, protection from 1 noise and wind, privacy. B. Accessible Open Space Common open space areas be co eas should nveniently accessible from all housing tl'' areas: They should be integral with the housing. A -6- Y_, • 4. Avoid Monotony Housing clusters shcild be kept relatively compact, with varied forms, surrounded by large 'green" areas to maintain a soft appearam.e. 5. Protect Site Ecology Minimize disrLption of the site during aid after construction. Keep street widths narrow and paved areas at a minimum. ' Avoid excessive removal of • vegetative cover. Carefully control storm water runoff to avoid erosion and overloading of natural drai1eways, Re-vegitate exposed areas quickly, Aftercare of the open spaces by t hr4ileowners or city should be given con- sideration early in the design process. •• 1 -7- ,1 fr - ' • - . r--- .. . - . _ -•-. — . . - ... . . ... ‘ . . ... - . •. . - . .. .. _ . _ • . , ......- _ . . . , .s .._ . , . . -- . .._ -'.-.. _ - -_ ,.•-----,-__ - . - 7 - - - -'- '--:7-- -• -_--i.:,-i7_:-'1 :'-_ _ -.,_ k''''-''-',1 --- - -,-,-. -- ' .: . • . _ I i . . . . , ... - , ... - - .. - r--- '2-_-,- . . . .._ _. .. . . ,- . . _ . , OP' . a ,. _ .. . ... . . . . ...,_ : , .. . . _ . _ _ . \\.,....„. __ . • _ . ,. . ... . . ... _:_i. ._ _ . . . _ _. . , .. ,., •_.• i.. • . ._ ____... . , „ ,. . ,. ,...... _ . . . , ... . . _ . . .. , . . . .. . __..„...__... .. . . .__ .. . . .. . • • .._ __..• . _ . . , w..... , _ ,. , . • ,. ._ ._ ..• - f YID' v, Q w Pre l iminarry Qesi gn Conceit The following recommendations are intended to provide a framework, within which subsequent design decisions can be made. For the purposes of this study, the site has been divided into five basic areas, as noted on the following diagram. A,-ea 1 -- consists of the southwest corner of the property, about 4 acres in size. This area has moderate to steep slopes, is heavily wooded, and lies between three drainage ravines. Limited, carefully planned and constructed attached or stacked housing, can be built in this area provided that a subsv�;'face soil and geologic examination proves favorable. Access tr, i.h i s area would best occur from the southwest in order to avoid cmss d xg and disrupting the deep drainage ravines. This action would, of course, rely on the future development of the adjacent properties. If this access cannot be arranged, whether for political or economic reasons, then an approach from the north, or area 2, would be better than from the east. It is most important to minimize vegetation removal , paved areas, and extensive road cuts in this area if it is developed. Housing density could be from 8-10 units per acre under these conditions, or 32-40 total units. �. Area 2 -- includes the northwest 8 acres of the property. This area has a j moderate, east facing slope; with only a few scattered trees, but ,,.,,� � , mom..,,- excellent views to the north and east. Clustered, attached housing arrangements are well suited to these conditions. Again, site clearing and distrubance siuld be minimized to avoid creating erosion or undermining of slopes. A subsurface geologic investigation of the mid to lower slope is recommended, as there are signs of previous earth movement along part of the slope. Access to this area .Crom the west or south via the proposed 135th Avenue extension Would be best, if feasible. Otherwise, a road across the deep north-south ravine would become necessary. Housing density at 8-12 units per acre would allow from 64-96 units to be built in Area 2. Area 3 -- consists of 12 acres of heavii y w ooded drainage ravines and steep side slopes. There is evidence of erosion, slope undercutting and soil • creep and shallow landslides throughout this area. Consequently, the less disturbance that takes place here the better. It y well prove . necessary to build at least one, and possibly two roads across this area in order to reach all of the buildable portions of the prope,rq. In this case, an option of using bridges rather than compacted fills over the ravines should be investigated. • Also, it is important to control the water flowing through the drain- ageways during and after de/elopment so as to limit erosion of side slopes resulting from increased velocities. This is because the emsi on could easily lead to undercutting of the slopes, followed by landslides and risk to developed areas further up slope. Management of Area 3 as a wooded reserve should be an asset to the ° desirability of living i n the proposed development. The home owners ± i . associ ati on coul d hi re a part-time forester to: selectively cut trees for and etimber, plant new trees, maintain trails and drainage "forest commons" . ° t ,, . . . A ;( ,y m • Ares 4 -- consists of abcut 14 acres of land located in the east central portion of the site This area is characterized by open, gassy spaces sur- rounded by groups of trees, woods edge, and orchards. Slopes are y g: ou, F relatively level to moderate, increasing to the west as one approaches :. . the ravine. Tolerance to development in this area is high, although densities should be kept low to allow for compatability with existing housing. Attached housing could be "tusked into" the west facing slope, while detached housing might best be placed near the east and south ends of this area. Consideration of potential future develop- ment adjacent to the east ana south should also be given. Area 5 contains 8 acres of land gently sloping to the north and northeast. This area is best suited for detached housing in terms of compatability with adjacent areas. Access from Southwest Gaarde along the north property line would be the "front door" of the entire development, and should be designed accordingly. Desireable trees within this area should be located and protected during development. Views of Mt. Hood to the east and solor exposure should be used to advantage in the placement of roads and buildings. Summary This report has provided an analysis and preliminary recommendations for the proposed development of 48 acres of land in Tigard, Oregon. The main issues regarding further design development are as follows 1 . Proposed extension of 135th Avenue across the property or alternative routing. Essentially it is up to the developer to examine his options, choose one and present it to the City and County planners. 2. Land Use. Designation. Under the existing land use plan for the City of Tigard, this area could support a maximum of about 175 housing units, Proposed changes, due for review this winter, would allow from 240-576 housing units to be built. The developer and/or landowners should express their support for the new designation at city hearings on this mattcir if they intend to develop more than 175 unis 3. Marketing. The preliminary concept provides an indication of the type and numbers of housing that the site can reasonably support with regard to both natuva a conditions and land use considerations. Final decisions on these matters k, should be made prior to engaEing in further design work. 4, Development Approval Procedurep G e Further study of the two step review process of the City of Tigard is needed in order to determine the devee of detail required on the plans, This also needs to be done prior to engaging in further design work. 'II w 1 W Y , •I1 • - - 'V•■••••mt..iAU'on, Y.n.!••■••••••.,OrlYYsm1rogr1l1 nuIYo. A....YoYd.1.w►. ••■•PA - . . . , \1 • •• �"�"�'.....w���•. fir..• • `Vir Jrb, fps:. `;, rivromme irom�lVV W'Avo w.ivlr�I1;�� . , . 11(LE.c_b "` 1 rrd m .e.,. ....t :( tit e�~4;:-- ,7„.,,,,,...,$417.6at';'-'.,;._''Ic"\i'l- ':',- ''';:L:-.-, , ,'--PC159.55 I:2 AV I 1 E , . E.... . . __ i,9 \ N.%_•• f.,,,, ''''... .,„. ..../ A Y. I ° \ : r rf".t .4141: % il 0 %tk. /,'' ' . ,Z.4 ' , , 8,,f‘ a„,v.,„ • 7' 4 ' 4 ,,,,, ..,./ 4A„:,.....,,,,,,,,,:-.:7 '0, ' S5 TH PVE Ad'i955 1NIOHO y� . - 0 a 0 0 O 1 � . . ..61/4286 ) L7 71/4 4' .44. `• -f'� 111 .1u",-,A, „w��'�t��iT.'1����Tl�`'',/'J,,,, ��,∎- ,• :�,..:4 'w~.� at.,.. . , - , , , ,, ha! , C mow. • • • ■ I. 64;` • ;/"rJ 7 L7"PAY/701 4e0ll Fi 0 vF %rf E, ,' . . 0 FiEtz5Ect 1;5TH ' wri-H 7.7...iir.,!..,,,,,,,,..--f . -... , ._ • ,.... , , , , , , , , L. . . , , , . , „,....- ,,„ A.,,,,„ -1 Gprfp I:1 rCt Q 5 a : , , - . ti , t , , , , , . • .. . I., , . . .,,,,,,, , , . 1. . ,,...,h, . .... . , „ . ,..i ,i , it .. ,). . s . . . ,. , , , . , .. . r I . , , , , , , , , . , .. . , ,. .1,,,. 1 ,. , Lt.. :. . , ..\,, ,. . .;-.- . , , ,. ,.. , . , , , Fri/ , , :,..-, .. . , ,i). 4,401 .10o,0, 54_,..y. 1,...,, , , FOV5E ? (UN ( 2LIIN ,..„., . ' . I I/ . .. ;,. . , , . ' . ,x:11 c; 1 „ t+; .' � H �f� TO 155T D I. MP ur 15T �1IE TO ILILL MT r01-11;7 1 ..- F'rVrg5EV ourrr � I ..; . . . . , . .. PCETO ER a \4, , rzOti lAi D571-I . F. .. , 4.. ,, I ,.), .) *!S. 4r. �y •�►:si • . \ Si'>*► � o 4,,,,i,,.4,,,,i,,..„`j ♦ t % 4'.11;4r• ■Vf # „.1� CT� ► �� ice` G.„,,,,....8 . e6212-EEHOLT r0 .,,,,s,..„,„,...... ,r,&,,., 06.,... ..,,, ..\O re?)1-1 c,r-u.).) iliViii.E5___...............-.,:o ,-... . .,.,,,,,..50,c6,4,0,„ . .--r7„„.... 0,0.-e-r-,....., ks..• , e)-'`4�Af1,,►itil ivIWAYA. .",r,�►�r. I►a A,.�j ��4►I r a'r + �• r � ; �opx.LZ9.,„,,, Jill,,,,,!,,o,,,,,000,,IT,,L7,1•v►x„„-„,,� cty. A A /j`EN. A TO .=ii . . *1 41264 C , i1 CT E L C 41 t'l y ll F v7 t%,,.r e.O.AA Z1 7,w 1.a rte”�"" �/ ", , , , , [.j 1 LFHP . 1.1, n1 1 . IL ?HTE . . .. .. . , ......,_ .,,,i,,,4,1,,,tit, , „„0,,t,,I. .7r . ... . . . , , ... . . ,„4„ , ,,.z :NI .., . . .. , . . _ „ , . 1 . 1 , , , , , , , , , 1 . . , , ,.., . .. . . , , ,. . . ,. . i, . . , .. , .. •. . . . , . . , . ••. , , . . , , . ' . : . , .2',, ' +• ' ,, •• , , . - , , , , ,,, , ,, . ', , , , , .„. . ... . . . ....... . , . . . . ,....„._ ..., . . ' '.I., I • k• . . , ..„--.. , ... , , i pi , , ,, b,' . Q. .,. ' „,,,. yec. 6: FqiipL„ . /, 9 ,. .. , •45' firrilIP 'N' .6Sdil`' s.i ' . , 'a -./1))*Q ' -- , i . ALLILI'lib ' 3'irl , ffr,'7" ,..., ( . . '9 ,NOV 14 1983.1.. 2.: . /3 7./4 53,it), I x i.,417/ . peauc vi•;-,,ivis - . .;---: /f . ii6-ffekti Olffin/ 97a -3 / t4/1 :1,,,VM,,,•;',. , • . ' . „.4<,,,,' „' 0i) ' . ,.. I -44.)2, '' ,e'' N/;i. . . // icail• A.‘ '''''‘' ' • . ' :4- 4/ki.,YYkke / 5- g p j,..1-) . , . , , , . . &LI, . .. . . , . . ..‹.,,Q >,,, , — , ! . , _...4..-.,. ,,, /,..,,,,. *,,,,,," 1 , . . ; ,. ----2n . . . . 1 -/Ad , „ . . , .,. , , . n ,7 , A . .,,. )jV , .. . , A v.k.... `•-: . q , .,. . ,---,_, . 4,----,) D i ' 4, 6_,L .i.A. , . . . . ,, , .........",, / . ...7 , et,„, t . 1 / .... ! / . , 7 4.i 6 . . ..-t-6*- "iise;2 itt4f1 441....c.v4 ., 1, ... ,/ 1._-tit-- --1,1.4„, 4 ---.111---e - '"al ti- , , , il. • - a , . .2--. A-4....e .) `,77) .2, 4,,,,,,) v." .‘0--' ) 6) . i •‘ ■'-a....e.,-) .." A--ey<142•"91;tA/W +t,t,4:6 4 ' i , >1 61' L 4 4 1 ' Clftl-ill-a ' ,41' 1L- (4;L' : , - '_iiif. . , .. ,If., 16-4 ....,!v, . ( its,t. 4...e- -, ,z,' ,4.1141' illitiragt-?-6,-1' /0 ("• 'll-') k-11/ -.1 A' , 4,,... k444.5a&', /Y1.,4741-' A, ' ,' - -.1 • — it.1-47A, 61..11,/. a7 ,,e---ri-e -4-0/--e . _ , . 61. ----**' .,, . , ,. , - ,. ,: / ...4.1_2..2. --, ,.."„,c,2„„ „2/4„ ,,, ,,. ' A? ‘.,.... (9, 1,4(4td ,, 4.774:,,,,- . • '„e.' 41/ laky'--etc-e4.-). .' / 7. „rt.e/e.-lefe 711-fr'4-2-- ,."" .. 1196t--'1-144-a - .- At---1-0 2 ..'"c7.0 0 t --4 - ft • eVe /4 ap16 " .k 1•'.I t-4/144:. _CL 111', .., • ' .11 '4 2,4 ' yt-e--vt2- • . .,. •'. /..a.-It--1....e.2 ..,, Ziipt.,70 ' ' —,..vi,,,i , „., ,)6(C, Z ott.,2:g.t ," - ./t4e., „41..etz7:64.4 d? —.. -4-A. -,,-)--. , . .,. . . . , • ,1 ' iLe,A, az .qi.,. . . , .... ,i,e.,. . ..1-: ,fi- . ,7....ei-L-ff a/2,-. ...., ,..f., tz,,,,d.. ,6,L, - 42- ----" ' . /SP...,".,--4A-e4:'- i, ' -ti1".:4L6t,1-'-it, '• . ' ' ' . . ' , l'' t: ,t ,i' L ' I I . • i I.. • , . ■ . . . . . I + [ L' ' /3 7 1:b'''1.'■'1/., /A/At . . 44,,, , cevci,..e...) n 7 `14,11-4/1,4 earv?72-7-: eettUi.c) 9Pir.-2,4( .,,../AXIAtitt.-4) • /°Z,7:36-51 La, aiditi q-,e',Le. /rud/yrvis-2-ti S-8 r-I.3*PD . • e 0, 6 4v:.t33 9 7 • . ' • 7 1 , i . / „/„44/14/i*, Y1-€44,1-6) L - 5-14r44'415 ih' - st legaPia-toi... ' '!• . _4„4„.96_,A...,i,„.te, ..„.7-4s24- &-fre.ti-ert...• -,-;_7/1":-.4-fri, ,, , ,,-• fizetete.4) , . . #7V-ce, 11-0-vt• 11 '''' T ,,,,..A,,,-,,t-,/ ei,tit -A-P'Aci- d4-41-111/ .._da, , - . - 4. e ' .11-' . , , , 4-I " / i■ 44dir / 1 diL.444,,,,41,&4Z-,471/4 .14;te' j e"11( 61,4 -- 14.&47 ,,. ■ • 44-44-ze. A '-' .0,44 ' Al 4641-6 "t-lfrj m-e2/ a4Liel,i , ..4i -'71.,e-ro. „/,....02, a-fr,z e i fre-"-•' -Af* ''''4`e /tiv" licl'a'Ar-24-- i , ,, ilz,e-et,titteili' p e n , RECEIVED NOV 11983 •. , I MY Of 'MARI) , 1 , ,r., . . ( 742 1-'1P/el ku9,77:".zwee-er te- 7-ey zelez2-," fr1-29 ,144 fr4:02z-nrv-Pse al22. on2;L, 1.4"-'477 .1"rfr", a-72 0641/ rLig ef,727 P2-7* ( c-„? oog 4.-003"2.1.42-r ;;r` 4-4 "P2' ell'21 L-11 " 14491ra-‘1°411/ tL ;%7T 4m 1.0.70„v, I a-)iv -,7et 7 - y 7/- 0C4;y Aeis /ZS' 6 W-14 --Ar,"'", 2r1-4 _te0 2ritV 7e7r." 91.-", ‘14-0 vvi0A, V1'4 'L? p4 ir„.24 16 0 ) P-1-31° 26 _cy z" 474 524/17/ W • 19'1 o d '47 , . Per. ,2.,. 'P 0 -'' 3 vrt r`�-r r r A,,2/V- f 't /97$ r } lk_. , .. .._,. . , ,.. .. .., _.. , . , . . .. » . . , I., C-44.,C.17e-4°Iar i- . . / ds'�.tt,,,e,e4. "1 c(-/''a"t.-'1 Cad,' . i 13/ t,tiAex,vi.A-1,--47%.,.., - , .., 0 ;;I: 3 . ✓:� i f.�!"..-dam t,�/���i� ,!. , ' .,t;t/Le ,i,,,,-1.2Z44.4-, / ,ii.,.....A.e.„74 • 43, Gi,e-y-ev-r-ote.- 5,-7-C-rte-d-! eg 't) (-**<-1,,,e -74,e>c,- e.;0-1. , cA,:t,t4 ' 2._I .4,-- ./4 ve.41.4.4.4, 41?-"V . . 1,4".'"D.V ' ' .0 ' "C7jters'‘""e,t15 . '1V/tegAV7-e-cdf ' . , fr.-te Ceee.-- -eitre,:t. 0 , i ,....e...e.-,' 7' Flo �r - r p'eet4" `` 561 .6e-t, ' C- j r ; , , 4,-,/ "Lti. ' 4?-.11--CLe-#44.0-1-7A- ' t&t,,,c,yf ex.etrAp.4,44,14,x,,,,,,74- . ' j yr . "IA'fl-'ll- pl.e./'Cree"(.064Z" ' trAP, , . C.01,4,40 ., /g. ' c.,e/77,71,Lit,,,,...04;t,...ep ' , ,, '[ . ,,,,,, frea.,,,, ...,„,„„....,„ . , . , . . .. ,..„, . ....„ ,,,,, . ,, . w te.,,,,,f. oll4v4A ), . . „ crcr A- / ,► cu"z.- .ems. .ci.., i. (4,G '''' d "' , 4. ' e4 c,4,-1 . .. :c4,0-2,‘„,t4e,„c„Zz.;,,,,1 ',i'.' 1/?4,7L tf,..e c:01-L-ezer, e04-e..." cr,,,,,,- „ , 1' ' wv-2,elee 1 '' „")-aal ,,-d-e-t-t,-t.. tit., er.7-,e/2-e- 41 cereeeert .4-&-ed fr‘er,,A4 0:44.-40,1 .171-=:,,,t.ki, e,L, . te.,14,' - etn-41/1.4:0,/ .4,444..,0 ' ei : .b.„. ,,,,,,... 7,...,r. , ., .... . ....- ..11::?:t."-Leys,A ' , `7 e ' ' -... • , .. /, . -t6L° '"'"IC' df ("4" .'Z'e'V ti, .' "er'eleYi,L 't'. 71 ' ‘te , . ' ," 1.-.01- 4-76'/. t,..iii4.., 47, et9,- '-a5- 4t.e.t... - :‘,,•tl,„, .,,e,- ...... ',•-.. i. , J ii• • • • • ____ ,..,ki. .. • • ' . 1, , l• , , , , .. ' .13,,',-. ,,,,,,,„7.,...--k.,4'• ' .` - ': 'LH . „14,4,,,,,rzt-A/ t 0 e. ,. . ,, 1 , , te.,t i -.r : " ;r W 7.1,ie"6, 1,";, .e, '!"'J',, .... . , . : . , ixie GL,4::•a: P.,, •417-: . .,. '... z,:t'.,,t*,,L'..'.te. .,:7,,... ' tito.L,' ' ' . ., Hi , L . 1,,,, , L ., :). . .. BH ., ' , L. . L ..: . , . L'' . , , , , i , . , . . I, , , . , i , 4m--e-- ?-r 41-4-) „"re-Ae.,Adef 444-?-rnea..,d 4f) 9 /72-1-4,-,r44 7,6„..aeh, 4,4 #Fe ode,ey '%1 7"m3-) s 4:4 cry driefAr • 7 er?_;1_ deirl-ert 0.1-7 -72 yejA124, ern I l cry '1.141.� �� -7(11-'° ?-7 -7,e'r-v4-1w)d Ail -11 P‘44:27,24 -a-vd-elet ‘Prigcl 0/0 .....r7e-eivp, ,v2 p72/40rd '1'72a-1,1-27 rrt -`. .�.4 0 O'' ' ,� p ,>71' a 1,Kull OT+ '�jam'• C:14, 'J ' a/ / ° 5'701�2.f .0 di/ e 61 - - 060 cv 441-20.).077- cmr; K.) 1,1-4 74,2,741r Tyvvci 5 -3.-70e, .41 11.& '/f erix f � ;e.-77-xo-p 44-4?-4- /IV 14°W11 2^‘ '""7:" 4A4127#1 dyfi A-iv-14-11 ( ?-f,?w 6,1"."4" 4.? E, cl -72.f--?'1." 1-2 -e0,-7-1-4-11--(2----1/4 41-1--43-drho arN/io A 0-12;L /1141 ,11r7 V'af, 24.r /2-: 42 /0,,tzat. ort..2;7 ylA^/AWVO •ip-2241.../ .v)/24. r-1-1,2 2 61-4, vim'- -- -)12 ", 1,9 ,'-t 7* ° ?* #d(714 # 1‘"12 Ca 9::44°71 CaW.-4°72Q 761'2'2-4- -"1°.'/241 )3 03 #°I"7.11.19 :1 44.-e'22° W°21/1 717. 7eV1%t 41#1 . .14/ 117/ 5-776/?1-C1`114 zr‘f d Ai0t- / 3- 1 9r3 ' ' ' FR GM .. ���df cf��,�-c .s,-, 44°0 =, 3 TO " /7 la 14,ie,An c_I m i!•s.5/29I' 5ctjec : ?IdH pi.e�./ Oty4* P447C, S ö1 - 33 P1 (1'.r' Rare ) , ,/f o 3 4/4~ , '. . ' . ,'. - - g"244"`-'-e,14- ''I'l-Aetrs'14.4,s,-4-;-2.,1 . .1:-.44 .' C17.4,11 rlopi.e,ati:74 , ' . -4erae7441.1-en . • 1.2. 0 4 ac.,;.-. /Voi, /4 'r /° NN 1)1~.441.1000 • ': elp4I'C'tql .410,4. q.,2 /6"L•e-, tb. .---66t,;,' ' 7 .; , , .. , F, aecd-7-?-4- -er.--r-:#6,2-, be-'1";2 .. .6.e.,, LI . °774;Gier.A.;41 ' ley . . .'' ' . . ' z I eat 71-/2 . 5 .cii ,'' 44,„.... 7,47.4,.—ht,ws,,,,/, . [ . 1,, . ..., . ' 17'-w, ..' / 1. ,-10,,e.',„,,,, ,,,,,v-:_et ,,--(dey /54- 111/7,4.0-,...: . - ' A-2 e-c. • . . , . , , , ' �'` ., r et;I L 4-o/ 2 5/ ;c .aN� -_ /4o 2-5/ 4 ' to r-pre,,,- . EA.--et,o. ,.,,ecr-z-vva.---,,,,ed,. .01....te.t.t.t., ...47-?. .e.e-,,, ' 6-ecAL-Wir „A-1, 7 . ', ' ,4.-A,A,r,,e ._ .4.41, ..44,1/.6, . . - .' ... . ', , , . , . . . , ,. , . , , , , , , , , „ i , , , „ , , „ , , . , . . , , , , I .,,. f-t-,' .-0. .7,70-pc.„ ,c.044,..-, . „..;..e.e..... ,) L.,t,e .1,t',.et..v,t_. ,...1.4 . .. 47..e."7-,024,-, , G-ef'L'tr r't-w Svc' 6144.,." cam' .. 4.v-+ . ..' . ...14e1..e!,47 ., . , , .: ;, o .,;.,/, ..;.., ,, . .. 0 , live ts,t4,4440 4.1....tetit....e. , ' ,, ' ele"tet ' '" '"'' '. '` '. ''' . - ,. ,, ah-6,-'.." ' . '• ''' ". ''.-- : "'' " '41a4 ri4" ,•-ti.,. .e.,,i4,,,eA' e, /v0.—oire4,4,4ei. ti- / ,',F3 I: ti ,,fit . , 5 ift4t.e 44,,,,ii.„e 1 :' .. ....„ .. ., o*. �, .u. ...,,, ti....� .,.. a wow,w ,w..,.,.M...aw....,.,,,, F • 0 , . /L 77 . , ',.. TRANSCRIPT . . . CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES PARK PLACE • November 15, 1983 ,-. President Tepedino, "I would like to move on, to item 5.5, I need the staff • report and recommendations". Assistant Planner Skorney, The applicant and owner is Century 21 Homes, Inc. . and they are requesting a conceptual/detailed plan approval of a planned development. I would like to mention to the Commissioners that, having, that the staff report has been in the works for six months, it was overlook, they had also applied for preliminary plat approval , also they had paid a fee for . that". Monahan, "However, they didn' t give you the accurate information to make the . evaluation and that needs to be pointed out , . k .:, President; Tepedino, "This application if for what?" Assistant Planner Skorney, "Staff was assuming it wasP conceptual/detailed plan approval for a planned development." , Tepedino, "Conceptual and detailed plan." Skorney, "Yes. It use to be called preliminary and general." • Tepedino, "Thats right. So this will be the only time, if the, Planning Commission approves this, this will be the only time the Planning Commission . . sees this. It will not come back for the detailed plan approval." , . Skorney, "Ye*, thats correct. Okay, so the location is at the corner of • 121st and Caarde, they area is approximately 47 acres. NPO # 3 has responded in writing to this application request. Public notices were mailed. There has been one written comment from a Mrs. Althea Robbins." Tepedino, The NPO, did they approve or disapprove?" -.. 't. Commissioner Fyre, "The NPO, is here." Skorney, "Well this staff report was written before the NPO had made its final recommendation. Staffs comments, which are quite extensive here, they meet 1111 some of the Comprehensive Plan requirements and we recommended approval of the conceptual and detailed plans with the following conditions as listed." Excuse me, I should mention at this time, that the County, I received a call , m from Larry Rice, Public Works Director for Washington County, and he recommends that the Planning Commission not make any appiovals on development i at this site until the City and the County and adjacent property a.lnets have I agreed upon an alignment for Murray Road and Caarde extension." Tepedino, "So thats the position of the County," it Skorney, "Yes." ..,. ' A H . , PAGE 1 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE - NOVEMBER 15, 1983 / 0 . Y � � pp Monahan, "And Frank is in agreement with that." Tepedino, This is the city staff, the city staff is in agreement ," Skorney, "Yes, the Public Works Director." Monahan, "I just want to say, that we rely, almost entirely, on Frank's opinion concerning alignments of the roads and engineering type deals; and he has not, I guess, reached an agreement with the County, and he had not received input before yesterday from Lan.y Rice. Part of the problem here from what we've tried to perceive is we've got some letters that Marty Neisberg, who was the transportation planning person at the County, was in favor of the proposal and we relied on that information. However, we have since found that Marty left the County a couple of months ago and I guess . . , So now Mr. Rice has stepped forward and said he doesn' t like it, so we would like to make the road be suitable to all concerned because it is such a very sensitive issue." Tepedino, "But your packet indicates staff's approval?" Monahan, "Because th(?. packet was prepared last week." Tepedino, "Oh, before Frank Curries." ;', , Monahan, "Before Mr. Rice called yesterday.'+ Fyre, "What is staff's recommendation?" Tepedino, "Well, their recommendation is not to make a decision until the • County, the people involved in the City have come to an agreement on an alignment." Fyre, "So we should table it." Tepedino, 'I propose to go Toward with the public hearing. I would like to call for the NPO representative". NPO -r Bob Bledsoe, "Part of our written testimony is included by staff (muttled everyone talking same time).. . Basically what I did, my name is Bob Bledsoe, 11800 SW Walnut, Chairman of NPO # 3. What I have just presented to you is a minutes of the last three meeting pertaining this application, there are some other things, but only thing pertaining to this portion of the hearing are included. I Mould like to draw your attention to some of the evidence in particular in - ;r minutes. In our minutes of September 14, 1983, um, we had many problems with this, *rid all together there ire probley 20 or 30 problems we have with this s a pp lication. Tepedino, "Does the NPO's,. Bob, summarize the NPD's of the application: PAGE 2 — TRANSCRIPT — PAR,K. PLACE - NOVEMBER 15, 1983 t t v , Bledsoe, "We find many problems with the application and things that need to be corrected. One of the recommendations is that the application be i ,. postponed. We would like to point out just what are problems are. Uh, the first is about the alignment of the proposed Gaarde St. , extension of Gaarde St. , and the item ,B refers to the alignment of Gaarde, in particular the turn lanes in phase one. In regards to, alignment, a better alignment for the collector would be to start from the northward side of lot 401, which is the lot. To start on the northward side of this lot right here 401 b, which intersects 121st, this lot here is 401, and this one over here, the big, one is 1400 which is two lots. A better alignment would be to start; with 401 and then pursue the alignment which is shown,, for Questor Blvd. . That uses your topography to the best advantage. By crossing the revive whero it is steep and narrow you have less total fill required, even though it might be deeper, but its narrower which would require a lot less fill. This would also serve better for the neighborhood as a collector, because the proposed route, it is very close to 121st and the other would swing out and catch more area away from 121st. This route would also very nicely . However, its nothing similar to the proposed lines which were chosen. Then the roads would planned beyond, close to t'tie boundary lines between the Rodde property and Century 21 property, thats alc',n, th'xs property line here. Rodde property, already fronts 121st Ave. and a 1G acre parcel does not get any two collector streets. Century 2l's prorosal cuts off a slice of Mr. Rodde's best property, being thG higher ground, and makes it very difficult to develop it by the size thats left. If c.he road ? ' .F were along the Boundary line both properties would have access to it and 1 ', the could also favor this approach. I did some rough calculations H and I remembered in the presentation that Mr. Miller said that at thet point he was adding to the road and my calculations show that, af: this ti point, theve isn' t no 9 oz 10 feet, if you moved it up one contour line you - wouldn' t be filling at that point anymore. At this point if you notice if they came along here they could run the road flat at this portion. Then both would have access tU the road and then start sloping it down to the ridge across ' here. this particular aspect, the road should be moved westward so that it is along the property line . . a . .. . .. I submit this for the record. 1, 4,V, , Concerning other items about - • We noticee that the setbacks on Questor Blvd. were less that standard. The problem with that is that Questor Blvd. is actually now the only access to the otherside of the revive. Although it is strong as a, minor as soon as a local steet it will serve as a minor collector and it is not a wide street, allowing, less than minimum setbacks will discourage the use as a • . . . . . . . • . • . • Next page. We' re concerned' about the placement of _ road, it happens to be .. . . . . . . . . directly abuting the R-20 zone. We though there should be a little space '^ there. . . . . . . . We have pointed some problems, some are major some are minor. Two of comments were in regards to landscape and the problem of density, we feel, that several factors, which are not readily determined and you can' t arrive at a firm conclusion in density. There sure to be enough total density to allow for 43 units in phase one, but the total: number of units allowed,, for the whole project w:11 be questioning. Also Phase II approval should be made contingent upon the result of the study of slopes over 25% (tape garbeled. ) However, the i lapTovemet-tt on gaarde street out away from the project seems to , be a undue buz-don at this time for phase o,le development for the 43 houses, '° RAGE;. 3 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE - NOVEMBER 15, 1983 9+ maybe with the other, maybe not On Page three of our hand written versions, we conclude, because diffently this development should have a bus turnout to serve it for the small cotteges being proposed, very likely would be using public transportation and the bus, turnout should be good. Last, not last buc;, the last thing I would like to emphazise was that they have not submitted the traffic index statement, although it And without knowing the problems, basically the staff report recommended that you approve the proposal with the condition that they will do a. study. But the problem with that is the study is designed to let you know what the problems are going to be and if � M know the problems then you can take the necessary corrections as specified conditions. If you approve it then have the study, you've already given, you don' t have any more authority, you given it away already. So we recommend a postponement of the hearing on the item until the study is submitted, if the applicant would be willing to waive his right of 120 day review. Otherwise, if he would not be willing to, I guess we would have to recommend denial of the application. " • Tepedino, "Thank you any questions?" ryre, "Who is doing the study?" Bledsoe, "Well, its suppose to be furnshedby the applicant." Tepedino, "Could we hear from the applicant." Bob Miller, "My ndwe is Bob Miller, I reside at 5164 Bobs Court, Salem, I am a Civil Engineer employeed with Century 21 Properties and there is a tremendous amount of misunderstanding and misintnation given, presented here to you and counting each quotes in the last 10 minutes between the staff and the NPO, things which are, being said that are not true. I think the best way to approach this is to quickly run through a cronilogical rundown on how this, . was created. This is a preliminary plan application, it has always been a preliminary plan application. In meetings with staff, including Mr. Monahan, we agreed that . the entire, thing, because that would be the way to handle a subdivision, preliminary subdivision application, that would allow the city to control how future density would be used on the undeveloped lots." Tepedino, "Mr. Miller, may I interupt you for a moment, I take it your T�ped� application is requesting a conceptual and detailed plan approval, are you saying now it is just a preliminary plan approval.", Miller, '`Its' all three, its was and has been all three every since the beinning,.�,� 7 You mean preliminary Plat? Miller, "Preliminary plan, preliminary plat, whatever you want to call it," Tepedino; "Thais what you a*.i, requesting in this proposal., let me 'direct this ". to staff, is the conceptual and detailed plan approval"; Staff, yes.. Miller, "Preliminary plan approval is e.tactly what it states on the first page of the application, that is the fee we paid .for, we paid a fee to be heard on that issue. PACE 4 - TAN CRI?T PARK PLACE - NOVEMBER 15), 1983 / - 4 - rYJ f, ' Tepedir►o, "On the preliminary plan (several talking same time)", Miller, "We paid a $1,000 fee for the conceptual and detailed plan application, we paid an additional $280 fee to be heard on the preliminary ' plat. The documents we have on the wall states that and staff's density for future phases is irrevient, because in order to put anything on lots four and six, later, it would, come back, , before you »� under anrther application to re-subdivide those to So what you are having •. is really a plan, to develop 43 lots on the whole kit and kaboddle. Thats the application thats there, if we wish to come back later for higher density, for lots four and six that would be another application to. the Planning Commission to be heard. Going back through my notes, on March 8th, we met with staff, °, gave them drawing for phase I and were told to go ahead on this. We revised plans • on March 14th and March 25, 1982, and revised it as a planned unit . - development. We had things like Gaarde Street making turns, such as Bledsoe recommended, within the development and not to extend to That was not seriously objected to at that point, The major objection by staff at that, w point was that we had eight units or individual cu'-de-sacs and city code ask for a maximum of six. On April 21,, 1982, we met with staff (end of tape). . . , 1 On 8-20-1983, we submitted the copies of the fact, showing this as stated, local street. On May 26 we received the letter from Tigard Water District and the Schools saying they had adequate capacity for this. On . May 31 and June 2nd we had two meeting with staff, which we told preliminary plan for phase I was okay but one of the plans for furture phases . . ... . had ' . to cover the rest of the property. We had originally applied just for the , smaller lot, lot 401, we had not applied for the larger pieces on the left and we were told we had to do that also and at the June 2nd meeting that was the first time we were told, this is three months after we started this with . the • City, this is the first time we were told that gaarde was now a problem and that we had to go to the County and make peace with, them before the plan would be acceptable. On that June 2nd meeting we were instructed to .., designed to 50 mile an hour speed. On June 6th we met with Washington County, we met with Larry Rice, Marty Nisely, and Martinazzi of Washington County ;. Public Works Department. We reviewed this status, Washington County informed ` us that they had no .. . for Washington Counry for doing the design that they and their staff had been wanted to do it and if wanted to get our project off the ground it would be up to us to spend the 1000 of dollars to do this design. We believe this is perhaps the only :gay we were going to get this development in. On June 8, 1983, we received plans that the . .. .. . had done previously and a letter, from Larry Rice, with a copy to the City of t*a Tigard saying that Murray Blvd. extension must be designed to meet their and e this plan shows crossing the revive with a 40ft fill and Ac . . .which is want would ld be required to design this to . . .. . . ... . . .maxium 10% slope, 7% . .. . . 35 to 50 mile an hour ,,.. • curves. This is want we ware being asked to desi,;n at that time. On June 16, we submitted a revised plan to Washington County and the City of Tigard showing the Gaarde extendr;d from 121st to 132nd. June ,20, we recieved the letter, again . . : . .. .. y 'we received a letter from Jeriey, Coursolle saying that • our ;submittal in late may had flaws on Gaarde St. , does not meet the criteria. for design for the County and the density was okay and came up with the 200 ft. in each direction along 121st and Gaarde as a requirement at that time 200 f t �, ., ,r=r * +. . , . . ., . w , . . . . .� ,. . , . . . . . r� improvement in each direction on 121.rat and Gaarde, because it requireo getting additional rights-cf-ways and 4 ` improving the rig.,1 �s-of--ways .,. . . .... .,. . . ,. (ciot transcribable). fi 1.q• PAC. 5 , TRANSCRITT - PARK PLACE �- NOVEMBER 15, 1983 . INS _ J, • : NO 4 v , . • On June 30th we wet with Bill Monahan to complain about the 200 ft. right-of-way requirement was basically unfair. We were told h. q.• to worry about it that Jermey was leaving and (laughter). . .we should redesign '.:he streets and that we would handle the 200 ft. requirement liter. On June 29, we received a letter from Washington County to redesign from our June "a. , 16 design, because there was a possibility that this street would not be an arterial as the County wanted,, but instead would be a local street and as such, should touch as many of the tax lots as possible between 121st and 132nd at elevations that would allow each of the properties to have intersection with city digital distances in each direction. (something to the effect that it would be impossible to do that) . You can't do that. You have the problems with the existing roads to do, that. And we do . . . . . . . . . . to the . G' structures to the north of there on a piece property, and they had identified those. . . They said they should miss the structures north of this. In my ar,° letter I quote, If you don' t do this, short of this alignment being acceptable it may be just as well to do the option of extending Gaarde to the west, this is the proposal which is being given to you. We wer6 told to . ' redesign this way and if we could'nt do that then jur.st take, to the west, that way we could bail out, We could do that, but anything else was totally out of context from the staff report.. their recommendations, the city has copies of, it states that this is the alternate, . this is not what is being recommended, this is if you don't want to go into the design out there and touch all these properties as is proper and do a separate street that would take its way to the west. On July 7, 1983, we met, with Washington County people, Jerry Gordon, who is still at Washington County, and we discuss the requirement that they had for. touching all the properties. I have the work sheets with me here, we. tried running streets across the revive, along our southerly boundaries, we tried running them every place that we could and we ended up with the alignment that we have as being p , P g g . the one alignment that seem to best touch all the properties and allow an intersection on each of the properties. Mrs. Rodde's property to the north, was probably there major concern, in that the designs your going up a 8% grade tr off gaarde. You are going up the hill, we're making a sweeping 70G ft radius . curve., its still 14ft of cut into that hills if we estend it another 100 feet to the west it would be 25 ft. of cut into that hill. And if you do that, you say okay, lets go up the slope and make it a 10% grade or 12% and make it go higher and you now have a ski jump, you can't get off the hill on the back side to get back, to 132nd. and make the street go thru. I, don't really care '' what the perimeters are, what we are suppose to do, but, I think that engineers have looked at this. I'm an engineer, and Washington County Engineering staff has looked at this: ... . . . . . . . . . . . to Frank Currie . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . an no objections have been received as that design being bad ;�'v or wrong or anything, . . ., . . . (not transcribable).. . . . (something about the 25 ft. cut and Mrs. Rodde property). On July 11th we resubmitted the plans to .d Washington County and the City of Tigard, in that Fetter, we wrote a couple of letters, we stated the clitsria and made the statement then, showed that in ,ii that letter, that the finaly design is shorter by abut 50 ft. in length than 1 the original Washington County design. In the staff report, on page 10 it says, "adding several hundred feet to the length of the road as stated . . . . . . . . . . It is not. several hundred feet longer it is. 50 ft. shorter. (not transcribable) . So I maintain to Wazhington County sent a lettt r to • Frank Currie, City of Tigrd, stating, µ'that the original lnd rs . }.ft.hardship, that hardship is the 40 ft. of� fill and 200 ft. wide fill ,l , 4 0 f j A. high. . 4 . Y♦• . . Y W . w . 1. j=. JT' '' 1AGh 6 - TRANSCRIPT - PAR. . PLACE - NOVEMBER 15, 198 '; d 1 In the letter it says that Century 21 has followed Washington County sugges_iuns in writting this proposal, the letter ask for City support, to give City and County approval on the alignment, this is July lath, July 21st the City of Tigard responds to Washington County, saying they will want to discuss this with City st,,aff and City Council before endorsing, thats July 21st, it's now November. August 10, 1983, we met with the staff, we reviewed what was wanted on a preliminary plat, we got the forms, we were told the fees, you were given the fees to hand: in for preliminary plat • On or about August 17t1-: we submit:ed the application, it was checked for completeness by Planning Staff, They to:* are $1,280.00 to start the process. On September 1st we received a notice stating that this was to be on the Planning, Commission meeting for September 13th, on September 6th, we talked to Mr. Bledsoe, found out there was a • te.rri•fic amount of misinformation being handed out about what Gaarde St. is, whet the design boundaries were and immediately thereafter on September, 8th, we were given a letter stating that the Park, Place was pulled off the • September 13th, agenda, because we had submitted insufficient information. On September 13th, we met with the staff to determine what would be sufficient detail necessary before staff would allow Planning Commission to hear this. We got a list, we met with Mr. Currie, Mr. Monahan, Mr. Skorney, we got this list. so this is the list of the things you need to give us to have sufficiency of detail. It took us . . . . . . . . . . to do this, thus the additional packet of information has been furnished to the City of Tigard and you might notice, that it was required of us to come up with street , street lights, for this 121st extension south, was suggested in there, we don' t care, it doesn' t effect out property at all (not transcribable) Nothing in this development is going to create 121st street south of Gaarde. We fully intend to dedicate all the land and imprt . , all the right-of-ways within in our site as the city requires and all that we ask is that we be told what they are and we will do it. This is a standard thing, we are told that when we you get a preliminary plan approval that whatever you do C.,at you O;sign the streets to standards and we will do not. When we don't do it then when you get a permit to build. This is a automatic thing. On October } 24th, we did meet with the NPO and we found a tremendous amount of concern with, Gaarde, the, street plans and alot of the information that had been mishandled, we thought, and uh, On November 14th, we received your staff, report showing that, the preliminary , plat had been • omitted, maybe embaressing, but its not our doing. The statement now that there is not adequate information on , the preliminary plat is another insufficency details I have a major objection to this, because what we have if I might go down the streets, the only street being created there is Gaarde St. , if we do a half street improvement on 125th we'll match the street :.. . . . . .that are there. Gaarde Street; certainly the grades the plans and the profiles have been done to death, 07e have spent 1,000' and 1,000 of dollars with Washington County and the City of Tigard designing theme . .. .not transcribable). . . . . . . . , . Storm and sanitaty sewers, it a meeting we had with staffs several times they were changed because they didn't like our proposal. • We had storm drains entering on the Rodde property, Mr Currie made us change that we changed that and . . . . . . . . . as it is now showing. We should the tt r jor elevations on the preliminary plan, the sewer grades, this is gone otivt by staff it meeting on the preliminary plan; . . . . , . • . . . . (not transcribable). .... w. Staff Report cn page 9 paragraph 4 states and I quote, 'Public Works. Department has reviewed the proect and finds that the Sanitary and Storm drainage plans acceptable. Water is shown on the preliminary plan, note than the staff recommendation . aa . . i . a . . . (not transtriable)p . a . . . . . a.. . . ac•. . . ..., . . PAGE 7 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE NOVEMBER 15, 1983. ' M / 9 h • • , 4 a • r , r , Underground power was designed by Portland General Electric, we are going to put it in Street lights system is between, Portland General, Electric and City " ., of Tigard on how it is going to be placed. We will put in what is required or we won' t be, allowed to continue. . .. . (not transcribable) I am really missing what is insufficient data now that we haven' t submitted. I think we, • have submitted every bit of data that has every been submitted on any preliminary plat and I think r traffic circulation pattern , . . (not transcribable) , .. (something to do with the streets). . . . . . . . .. . We would like to go ahea,`. this evening a get • preliminary plan approval of Phase I as it says, and I think we can cut out all the u We have a preliminary plan application before you which shows six lots, density is not a question, there' are 43 units on all the acreage, they are 80,000 dollar, single family condominium, if you wish, there is going to be open space. The common belief, / I suppose, is are 80,000 dollar units considered property to the south conaider lower class (not transcrible) I. think the rich folks should come up with their own five feet of buffering. (not transcriable 4 Chairman Tepedino. Ne heard from the NPO, . . . , we've heard from the staff and we have heard from the applicant. There are some people. who have signed up WAo wish to speak in opposition to this project. What I . would like to do, an I have polled the Planning, Commission members. If the , � sense of the Commission is what I perceive it to ba, for a continues of this. I think, once. every year the Planning Commission is privileged to heat. an application as complex and compounding as I think this one is. In my estimation, I don' t think its the, I hope everyone understands, I dont thinks Vii', its at least in my estimation, the job of the staff or the City to, frustrate or obstruct, or at least I haven' t seen that. But this proposal seems to have raised so many issues. And it would he, in my estimation, virtually impossible for me to be sitting up here in this forum and make a decision on personalized issues based, on arguments pro and con on the iss ees, when it seem some of the issues are . . . . . I'm not sure, really where the City stand , it sounds like the City, now is suggesting that they want to get together with the County to resolve those , issues The applicant has raised some issues, the NPO has raised some issues and what. I propose to do, is that we, can sit here and listen to the 12 people who have signed up to speak against this issue, but what I would propose we do is to take a consensus of the Commission and continue this matter, so the applicant is n.3t burdon by using his fees. That would perhaps give the opportunity for . the applicant and the staff I:o pr ~are themselves, the NPO people, other affected organizations, •. . • • get tog,.., er and thrash out the issues so that they can be, presented in a logical manner. Simply so the Planning Commission can make a determination, yes we approve or no we disapprove. I'm not sure that we can do that right now. I would like ask the consensus of the Planning Commissioner as to whether in their minds,, that we would be comfortable, in terms of the interest of the citizentry and the NPO's and the appliant and the , lk ■! City and ourselves, whether we should move for a continuance. With the understandKng, perhaps, that the applicant and everyone else agree that the f 120 requirement be. waived:" Monahan, The 120 day requirement does not apply to this application." 'epedino, "We're not faced with that okay; so we are no fttco.d with, an r .F automatic approval if we don' t take action within 120 days. I would like to get the senile of the Planning Commission wh.eve we sit on this." r PACE 8 * TI:4 NSCRIPT _ PARK PLACE — NOVEMBER 15, 1983 • ee ( - " Commissioner Fyre, "I think it should be tabled until next time, I see the key issue here as the traffic, where Gaarde is going to tie in We need to find out what the County's concerns are If the County can get together with the City and, come up with some agreement as to a consensus where the connection should be and then move ahead from there. I think that could be done in short order. Then City staff could get together with the County staff, wieh the appliant and perhaps somebody from the NPO, as they had some issues. Once that issues is resolved then the rest should be able to be worked out." !� Commissioner Moen, "I don' t think Unfortuately '.or the developer that he happens to have landed smack dab in the middle of this very controversal issue. The think tat i would suggest is that, I would think we should table this. I think it would, be to the developers to take additional testimony tonight. (not transcribable) Commissioner Owens, "I think that the comments expressed by the two previous Commissioners reflect my thinking, as well. I, however, not that sure that I • would like additional testimony tonight. I see Commissioner Moen's point and its a good point. Another side, of that coin is that, I for instance feel that I could better utilize any further testimony at the time the next hearing occurs, rather than hearing it tonight, and then trying to keep a handle on all of that when we then come to the decision at the next. So I don' t know whether shortening the future meeting is the best goal that I should work at." Commissioner Edin, "Just a couple of comments: One, I did some homework on this and made some note on some things that I felt had not been addressed. I realized that two of them that hadn' t been addressed, now pretain to Phase II but don't .really pertain here. The other two the staff addressed. Mr. Bledsoe raised some additional ones, that I hadn' t really picked up. And quite frankly I'm a bit confused on getting a handle on all this. The other one that I made note of is not your problem. I guess I have a concern, that what I feel like what we may end up with is a situation similiar to the triangle, where. Council is saying we' ll do nothing until you property owners get everybody together and work something out, or nobody will development. And I'm afraid we may be stuck in the middle of that similiar type situation. If we do as we' re proposing, rend I favor that I guesill that I would like to see a ; 0 request from this Planning Commission body to this! City Council asking them, ! ` what kind of position they are taking in terms of negotiating with the e:ounty. I they going to stand, on what i:hey said. They may tell us to go jump in a lake) but I would like to ask that oestion. Because it seems to me that the applicant, Wasington County, NPO, Staff can all get together and it isn' t going to make a bit of difference, if tha Council sees it totally different.. So I see that as a key factor, and from what t can see in the comp plan right now says that your not going to build until the County agrees to the City • position. So I see that as the issue," • F.. Commission Butler, On the road?" Edin, "On the road. In terms of taking more testimony tonight, I would concur rr t is `on Owens. an ink it would be appropriate �. .. a t think with C inm` si. I thx , �.ts ;ust that it o�.ugh to be done in a in or al quorum) where the, applicant i.a there and needs to be discussed at much length as possible. Possibly a town hall hype thing where anybody from NPO # 3, staff, apt:" rent, so 'I would favor that Over here," 4� PAGE 9 - TRANSCRIPT - PARK PLACE NOVlM"BbR 15�) 1983 •wL • Commissioner Butler, "I'm still unclear on this planned development, is it phase I, is it just fors 43 and not 215 like we see here?" Assistant Planner Skorney, "Well, the planned development as I understand it, you look at the entire project and only at the preliminary plat approval stage pAA do just approve one phase at a time." Butler, So will this come back before us or something for the other phase is that what you are saying, as a seperate subdivision request?" Skorney, "As a subdivison request." President Tepedino, "May comments on this thing are that, first of all, I p think wants happened here, for whatever reason, good, bad, or indifferent, the application, in my estimation, several discreet steps in the process, and anytime that you do that, unless you are really adept at flying a 747 you are going to have problems. And T think this is one of those were it just didn' t come out the way it was designed to come out, Plus I • think the problems of following into .. . where are we going to put this ;!ad, who's property is affected and how many cars per day and all of that, I just think that its unfortunate, I think that any of us were the developers that had are monies tied up in this property, we would be pretty upset, about whats happening. I think that terribly unfair. I don't know how many people this developer employs, but if he employed my son I would be kind of grumpy, or if he employed me. On the other hand I can understand that if the landowners feelings, the lands theca being affected, but on the otherhand it seems to me that the people involved haven't been adequately communicating for whatever reason. And while I'm always usually in favor of taking alot of testimony and getting a lot of, I'm not really sure ;:hi,3 is the appropriate forum. We could sit here till midnight tonight, but I'm not sure what we would accomplish, I would perfer to see the people that are involved get together and either come to some agreement or ac,,•;:ee to disagree on discreet .lements and then come to the Planning Commission and make their 'z • arguments. So that we can sit back and try and make an intelligent, balanced decision. I'm sure what we would get if we listened to 12 more people which are signed up against this ite*i. Perhaps you might get some new information, perhaps it might be repetitive. But I would think that that all of us are attempting to be adults about an issue like this and agree or agree to disagree. I'm concerned particularly of the . . .. . . . . . .. Washington County will have to do something so those folks and maybe the City Council will ultimately have to make the decision. But I would be more inclined to give the City Council something they can accept or reject.. Becaut,e frankly, I'm not sure going to the City Council an asking them for a policy position would be the most advantageous way of getting them to responds, I don' t think so." ' gdin, "I guess .. . ..... d.. . . . . ; such time as we can boil the issues down I D w � would be inclined the force the issue by approving something J pp �. with some street it p say to the Council,, all right here it is Tepedino, "this is the way we see it or don' t see it and let them. 1 think that would be that best way.. Ir ♦iust wondering how best t;o get that. Do you • have a shr, comment Bob." 0 FA6,11 10 — TRANSCRIPT PARK PLACE — NOVEMBER 15, 1983 i d 4�. w.-._ • ♦ J^_J .CAS... Bledsoe, "Yes, I think you could reduce your testimony to three people, one } ' of the representive from Bull Mountain, Mrs. Rodde, and Mr. Moore. I think „ . the other people would be willing to waive their testimony, if I'm mistaken. J ) Tepedino,, "How many people, would they be speaking on different subjects we a haven't heard?" Bledsoe, "Well she represents her property and he respresent his property and they would represent their neighborhood„” Tepedino, "Okay, what I'm going to do then, I' ll give you each five minutes and if you can take less than that we would appreciate it. Why don' t we move onto the public testimony." Mrs. Athena Rodde, "I am the owner resident of the property next to the Bechtold which is now known as Century 21 for 25 years. The roadway cuts over ° to the Century 21, wants to put .1irough my property and Gordon Moores is going to ruin the future development of these properties. The existin,?, alignment if f' it only goes, straight through for about 10 years. It does not infringe on any individuals property. Century 21 has no right to the proposal at our expenses. They want the roads through our property so they will not be liable for the road expense. The existing alignment should be adopted for the benefit of everyone now and in the future. The alignment proposed by Century 21 destroys the natural development of the area as a part of Tigard in forcing us toward Beaverton. I talked to Mr. Reed the head cif public works for Washington County, yesterday, he said he had no knowledge of the proposed � Gaarde Road to my property. The proposed road on Washington County maps in Washington County, shows the road extension from Murray Road to go through the Century 21 property and not through my property. And Mr. Reed said they can' t get approval without the County. Sr I propose that this planned development not he approves? ," Mr. Gordon Mo'aza, "I've known this every since this carte up 20, 25 years ago. I've beer, in on the bottom of it, and its not nearly as complicated as people make out." Staff, "May I have your name and address for the record." "I'm Gordon Moore at 13535 SW 121, this man comes hare and tells you that he can't get any information) neither Mrs. kldde or I have every seen this man before. This tells you how this has gone. The City of Tigard has not, the Planning Commie lion has never come to Mrs. Rodde or me to tall about this. (not transcribable) .. a. . . . . . . . . „ Now, I heard about thi:r, the first • thing I heard about the road going down through my place was Mr. Bledsoe who came jest before the meeting which was suppose to take care, a month, ago. It was three or fcur days beforet he Meeting, wasn' t it Mr. Bledsoe. At which time I immediately went to the County, and I sure this gentleman, cl'd you work tor the County a month ago (di P.c ted to Steve Skorney). : g y There was a Yvan that I saw and he told me, "I'll give you the whole story on this this man came in and he says I want to bui'd here and this road is going to tax me awful heavy and I would like to tack it onto some of the other people too. And he said, "Well, come up with your program, lt'ts see it." He came up with it he said we have never approved, dirtlapproved disapproved or done anything PAGE 11 - TRANSCRIPT PARR PLACE - 'NOVEM8ER 15,. 1983 • Y t•l • 11 �I I L - an with it. He said "before we can we have to have a public hearing.- Now this is the County. This is the first thing Mrs. Rodde, my wife or myself have heard about this. And if you take carefully the maps that they have proposed, and Mrs. Rodde has some here, all he's trying to do, and Q : incidently don't feel to sorry for Century 21. This projected road has been on the maps long before they ever bought. They bought knowing exactly were the County propsosed this road to go and their very swift and its on maps over there at the County. And when they bought this from Lutz, who in turn had bought it from Bechtold, all that, was known. They bought this knowing that, so don't feel that they have been taking advantage of after buying something that their innocent." Tepedino, "Oh I didn' t say that" (laughter) Moore, "Here, can I hold this up and I'll sit down in a moument here. But here is this protects this projects the road as the County as projected it and you call it you can call it anything else, its Murray Road. I've lived with it and I don't care, I've given in. I'm whipped. Murray Roads going to go through a corner of my property." a Owens, ",s this your property here." Moore, "Yes, theres my house; theres my house, theres a little house, put his road through. And we have 65 acres we go through 135, 132 and instead of ( ' going to go this way, we is not so on my place, over here. So it goes over my place, thats the logical, place for it to go. If you run it down in here so Mrs. Rodde pays for this part of the road and cut in front of my house, the only house on 65 acres, and they got the whole place there and let r;, me pay to put his road through the fill. And thats how simple this is gentlemen, ladies and gentlement. This isn' t complicated, but I agree to this that nobody can do anything until somebody gets the County and these people together. Your program shows this. I can't understand why they would approve this thing. You can't possibly do it, when the outline shows that you have to ' go through . . . . . . . . . . . . . and ,get a, Commitment on what they want to do. Because this is the Murray, Road extension. Frank Currie, who is he, he's T with the City isn' t he. He sure said a moutthful ,then he said this and no one wants to mention it. He reviewed the Park Place project and concluded that the. Gaarde St. extension alignment would seem to shift an alleged hardship 1 from Century 21. land, generally not suited for development, to properties owned by others wnich seem on the surface,' to be more suited for development and Chats exoctly what it noes. Mrs. Rodde's place and my place don' t have those problems of the 25ft I mean 25 degree reverses at,d things like that and they are just trying to shift this on Thats what they are doing. Thanks." • "My name is Ray Barium, and I live at 1+405 S Hazelhill Drive, and I have E acreage just north or ,lust south of th- adjoining there and I also y, . . . . : . . . . . . . . . And I'm trying to rake ; �tution not to seem upset when I'm accused of being one of the rich .. , 1 Kra:,. <:., ,a and the elite.. I happen to, work as a policeman, I don' t make a lot c; p w.e.x.b,: and many of you who know the public service business, know that's very true. I have some exception, to this particular plan, I hake worked through the City, I also, besideo being a -? policeman, I build. I've' built in this City and I've gone through this process on more than one occasion. I think there some reail issues address here. Many of them have been spoken to and I'm not going to reiterate on them. PACE' 12 - TRANSCRIPT -W PACK PLACE - NOVEMBER 15 1985' .. . .,r .... ................ .,,.,. ..._...„ ; ..,..., , C ' 'w .,r.. ..•,v r • • I think the County, City Commissioners already made the plan, that this was not and they were given the standard, they don' t want, I think that comes a ?" • .dl ^ grass roots level of the people all over this area of the City of Tigard, that . we don't want that coming through. And your going to continue to get a fight • n from all of us that have property adjoining that, no matter what you do today. If you set it over to next week, if you set it over to next month, if you set it over to next year, we' ll be here in masses, we'll fight you on it every step of the way. We don' t laugh's Tepedino, "Excuse me you refering to Gaarae and Murrary. Barnum, ''Yes, and I think thats been argued with our City legislature all the way along. The real crux of what I want to say that has not been addressed 1 , and they mention about tough luck with the rich folks which live above us, and their just going to have to do their five foot Burnam, it goes far deeper than that, I know from my experience how this division work, but if thats allowed to be done, your opening pandoras box for the acreage that Ames owns between my property and this piece of property. You look at the very bottom of that 4 " m " map, you find a one way street thats about 20 to 24 feet and you have cluster of cul-de-sacs to the south and you allow that directly above the property of Ames you cannot convience me, that the mentality that we work with in staff, that once that done, they will not reverse that cluster, well its unnatureal folks, to put the same cluster on the Ames property, which then I would have r,ty property directly in contact with a PUD, which I don' t want. That is not zoned, folks, medium density, thats toned R-20 and r want that to be the very -"_. minimum that is abutting to may, that way I have a buffer zone between my property and this property. But the way this is been allowed to be presented • to you, you going to have 'a much high density requirement on the R-20 and the arguments going to come back to you, that if you accept that, then their going to come back with the argument from staff, Oh folks look what we have right across from this little private street. I'm here to tell you that we will fight, we don' t want it." Tepedino, "Okay, thank you sir." "Lets see, we've heard from those three diverse points of view, are there any other points that have to be made here. What I would like to do how, I think we've heard from . .. . . . . .. . .,; . . . ." Bledsoe, "Your going to continue this hearing?" Tepedino, "Well X want to get a sense of the Commissions, because could f , proceed and make a decision and have it stand, or fall on what we've heard tonight. The alternative is to (tape ended). • • Tepedino, "Next schedule hearing, is that sufficient time? I don' t want to get it back on the agenda and then have tot' Monahan, "The next agenda. would December 5.,'r Tepedino, "If you were to come back in December would you have enough time to do anything? Or would you ter January." y Y i Y Miller, "(not transcribable) Te' ediuo,, "The questions is do you want us to continue or do you wt,At"tt us to vote yeah or nay on the proposal t-onight, and if you want us to continue is December adequate? We.'re prepared to go either way," � • PAGE 13 - "C AN3CRIPT - PARK PLACE - NOVEMBER, 15, 1983• r e 1 Millers (to far away not transcribable) Tepedino, "I think you are missing part of what your searching at. Its not only the City of Tigard and County, I think, what I would suggest you might . � want to consider is the differences of opinions between your clients or yourself and the people you heard speak here tonight and the other 12 who have signed up against you," Miller, (to far away not transcribable) Tepedino, "I . . o .. . . object to that, because you can persent your proposal to us." Miller, (not transcribable) Tepedino "Let me crystalize the argument. Would you like us to continue it . and would December be adequate or would you lake us to vote up or down tonight." Miller, (not transcribable) • Tepedino, "Okay, continuance, you perfer continues, the question is, is December 6 adequate for you? Yes or no." Miller, "Yes.' �. . Tepedino, "Okay. Is December 6th alright for the public and the N?O?" No hearing a no I will take that it is." Commissioner Edin, ''I would like to make a motion that we contiaue this to December 6th meeting and that we request our City staff to schedule a meeting between the applicant, + I le staff and in the interest of our public members, Washington County" Monahan, "I think we can guantee that we can get a meeting between us, the County and the applicant, whether or not we can get the public involved too, I think that might be asking Edin, "What I am suggesting to you is that people that are here" Monahan, "The County might not be there, thats what the point is. The County was invited, tonight, but they didn' t choose to attend. First, you have. an obligations to get the technical parties together and see what the issue is on the road. Once thats accomplished, I think then you need some kind of town hall meeting. Now theres a meeting coming up in three weeks, theres not an opportunity for us to number one, guarantee that we can get the County together, then guarantee that we can get a town hRll meeting together, then guarantee that we can write staff report based on the input." Eriih, "Would you perfer January to accomplish that?" Monahan, "I would perfer to deal with the Couf;ty fir6;,. to see how we do." ��' Tepedino, "Then let us know what ttrese people know where to be." •4.1 PACE 14 * TRANSCRIPT - PARK 111,A6E - NOVEMBER l5, 1983 „ r • q • 0. r . Monahan, "I'd say schedule it for the 6th, see what wo can accomplish by the 6th. Maybe that could be your so called town hall meeting. On concerns are going to be based on what comes out of the meeting with the County. Thats what our staff report going to be based on." Then let the town hall meeting a ' be the Planning Commission session hearing on what the technical people say." Edin, I have a problem with that, in that what I'm hearing here is a lot of stuff that I think is minor and that it ought to be thrashed out ahead of time x. between the applicant" Morahan, "Between the applicant and them, I don' t 0—:ink the City needs to be involved. in it." Tepedino, "Unless they (many people talking same time — not transcribable) Butler, "Can I interject something before you motion. I was confused from 4. the beginning actually what tha subdivision was. Here I read its 215 family iv, units, on 47 .81 acres and now I'm to understand that its only really 43 units on 9.46 acres, and I still don' t kno*:: which is right." f; Skorney, "Thats the problem I was talking about, this preliminary plat is type out in phases and . . . . . .. . Its talking about conceptual plan for I� t Butler, ''Then I have a school impact statement, which it does show up and by E! our Comprehensive Plan is required as a precondition to development. And it i'.• says 43 units on 9.46 acres. I called this guy today, and he said If Chats • what it says then ghats all its going to be." And I said, well we have a hearing and it says its going to be 215 units . He said, "Well my notes ate going to be alot different The guy who signed it is Larry • Ribbard or something like that (Hibbard). So I would like to get clarified what the subdivision is." k Tepedino, 'Let me ask the staff, why are all these three elements compressed into one document?. It make its so to read." Monahan, "Because the applicant submitted it. .. . .. . Tepedino, "One way to loose a good . . . . ..... . . is make it some dam confusing for the jury, just some free advice. Okay, would you like to make a motion A • If sir? E'iri, "I'll try again. I would make a motion that we table this to December 6th, that the staff schedule a meeting with the applicant, the County and respective parties recognizing that the meeting for technical purpose May be re`.luired, but if at +111 possible, also a meeting to allow the public, to be involved, to give input prior to coming here." Butler, "Could I add one more thing that I mentioned? Is that possible? To get a true school impact statement, if the development is only 43 on 9. what ever is acres. Thats find, but the point of this is its not going LI be phased and we're told it is going to be c phased development." Tepedino, "The motion is made do I heat- a second." Owens, "Second" PAGE 15 TRANSCRIPT - t$ RC PLACE __ NOVEMBER 15, 1913 lx • / - 1 ` to . b 1 . r 4., Q7 ^ d .., , I�. Tedpedino, "Further discussion? Call for the question, all these in favor of the motion made and seconded, please signify by saying Aye. Motion carries. End of November 15, 1983, Public Hearing Century 21 Homes/Park Place • (0291P) A • Ab • L i r I I 1 b I PACE 16 - T ANSC 'l?T PARK PLACE - NOV EN8ER X51,, 1983 „,,,,, II COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION e Commissioner Edin moved and Commission Leverett seconded to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council for the Comprehensive a Plan Amendment CPA 17-83, from low to medium density; and approval of . the Zone Change ZC 13-83 to become effective upon Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The motion was approved by unamious vote of the Commissioners present. . i 5.4 SUBDIVISION S 9-83 Bond Park # 2 NPO # 5 • Assistant Planner Skorney made staff's recommendation fo app val with conditions. • NPO/CCI COMMENTS - No one appeared to speak. , • e APPLICANT"S PRESNTATION - Bill McMonagle, 8905 SW Commercial, stated the..a had reviewed the staff report and had no problems. They were available to answer any questions. PUBLIC TESTIMONY ' e No one appeared to speak. . I , . COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION commissioner Butler was concerned that there was no school impact statement submitted with the application. The applicant stated they had contacted the school and that they had no problems with the proposed development. C.. ' M e Commissioner Owens moved and Commiasioner Moen seconded to approve • Subdivision S 9-83, with conditions, the applicant's request for a Preliminary Plat of Bond Park 2, a 24 lot subdivision. The motion was approved ty majority vote of Commissioners present, Commissioner Butler voting NO. • 5.5 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S 8-83 PD Park Place/Century 21 Homes NPO # 3 • A request for conceptual and detailed plan approval of a Planned ) Development consisting uf 215 single family units. • Assistant Planner Skorney made staffs recommendation for approval .)f the conceptual and detailed plan with conditions. They are also . i asking for prliminary plat approval, however staff had not responded . I in the staff report to that issue. Also, staff had received a call from Washington County requesting that the application be tabled . until the alignment for Gaarde Road could be agreed upon between the City and Washington County. The Public Works Director also supported a continuance. •....., 4 N..... ,t ) ip / PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 15, l98 ,Page 5 0-0 . - ' . , t ” / . " ' , . 6, ,), ' • ., . , , • , '' ^ 11 r , x d“ rr. • NPO/CCI COMMENTS - Bob Bledsoe, 11800 SW Walnut, NPO # 3 Chairman also supported having this item continued. The NPO had many ; concerns which had not been address including alignment of. streets {; and density calcuations. • APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - Bob Miller, 5164 Bobs Court, Salem, Civil Engineer for Century 21 Homes. Reviewed the history of the . application noting communication problems which had occurred. • Lengthy discussion followed regarding processing o f the application. � A Consensus of the Commissioners was that the there were many difficult i,asues to deal with and there was confusion as to staff's position on ttcis application. ', PUBLIC TESTIMONY • Mrs. Rodde, 13745 SW 121st, read her letter into the record oppos';ng •. . the proposed road alignment and requesting the application be denied. .. • Mr. Gordon Moore, 13535 SW 121st, opposed the proposed application. He stated that Washington County had planned to put the ;;aarde Road, 0 Extension through the Century 21 Property and that Century 21 was aware of this when they purchased the property. Now,. Century 21 is ?: ' proposing shifting the burden onto his property and others without even contacting them. fir: • Ray Barnum, 14405 SW Hazelhi.11 Drive, respresenting the homes owners in the Bull Mountain area opposed the application because of the density and the gaarde/Murray Road extension. • Discussion followed regarding continuance of the meeting. • Commissioner Edin moved and Commissioner Owen seconded to table Planed Development S 8-83 PD to December 6, 1983, and requested staff to schedule a meeting between Washington County, City Staff, Applicant, NPO # 3 and affected arties to address issues of P concern. Also requested applicant to provide a true school impact statement. The motion was approved by unanimous vote of Commissioner present 6. OTHER BUSINESS • Discussion followed regarding iieveloping criteria for justifying • changes to the Comprehensive Plan. 7. Meeting Adjourned 11:30 P.M. !I l • ,a • Dian � - ��� Srz ire tar.... �� Diane M. Tel . r , y ATTES ` }' l'ran pis J. T"epe ito, President fL• ' (O227P)PLAt NINC COMMISSION MINUTES November 15, 1983 Page, 6 f ■ ti [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] 111 N O T I C E O F PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Tigard. Planning Comission, at,.its meeting t;t November 15, .1983 at 7:30 P.M. ,in the lecture room on Tuesday, � . ■ of Fowler Junior High School, 10865 S„W. Walnut Street, Tigar , Oregon, will consider, the following application: • FILE NUMBER; S 8-83 PD APPLICANT: Century 21 Homes lcn. OWNER: Same 7412 SW Bvtn-Hillsdale Hwy. ` . Suite-112 Portland, Or. 97225 1f .o REQUEST: For a conceptual and detailed plan approval of a Planned Development, consisting of 215 single family units. The property is designated low density residential and is zoned R-7(PD) LOCATION: 13900 S.W. 121st Ave. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 3CC lot 401 and 281 4 lot 1400) (See map on reverse side) (r, . The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedures of the Planning Commis8ion. Any persons having interest in this matter may attend and be heard, or testimony may be submitted in writing to be entered into the record of the initial hearing. Should you wish to appeal, a written letter addressed. to the City Recorder must prior p day be received r�:or to the expiration of the fifteenth da after the decision of 0• the hearing. If notice to appeal is not recoi,vod, "ir ith n fifteen days, the action is valid. ?' For further information please contact the Plannding Department at 639-4171. tiARD CITY HALL 12' 5 S.W. Ash T1C 75 � Ash Aveni.�e �Oorner of Ash Avenue & Burnham Street) t r y A A. . , ., . . ... . . , ,./ ' .., . ..,.. .......„_,...._ ...... . .... t, , • . ith-TISL • . , . , . ......... __ ‘ .. (Ft) R—5 (P D) ..' • ,..,.,, 1 L ..........__ . .... i r • I i • 71 ••,.,,• _1 I ' , . , : '4,,,...,. , IN . ) 1,1i ..•• I No .' .. j P i '. 1 i ..„ .. 1 ,...,....„.j :.,. ; 1. : . I immit NMI law,i1 'fi 41 14.4 I 7-''..il , ' t g '■ 9 ; :• .1..• I • , ) 1 J f-■ ,i I 1. i ih.,ji .. i 1,. l 4-k.:,:i is j i I - ; . ,, . , I (..). r.Hn,I, ,, 4 , tf:A."...' ..1 it 7 1.,..'s . ••1 • , , R 7 .• ... , ..• . -. 'IN IF.;.1.-"".'---J1114:1"131.11111:1,1041 MI I ' IIIP A • . I 1 ; i r!. __...1,t ti,;ism i.r. ‘-‘.:" 1_71 [. POW If • 1:.,, 1 ' '''0111 INN INV% BM awl •,..;, r:.. '''' ..1 . . . , . 1 .' ...., . i,• . 1 A—2 0 _....- . . oir. :._ • . . , I , • . . ; c A-14 ,. . . # . . I I ( 1 ' IL I ?c■ . lax.1..-- ..t. '. , ' • t A•.A3 _ 8 .1. lir : T ). 1),...,,i• .. • ' . 1 , , • im.ir 1 1 ...,....to.... ' I ' . , '$g.e. Ti......-- 1- • " , A. .,- .... , ,..,,.....,..._....— I. i, :•, . , 0 - . .. . 4'441,A ''''t''‘ ' .4.' ,•:‘:. . , s•Po'd Ira ,,,,.........e.12::„.,,_ ''' . /fr. ' '..)i. . •. f:. . • \its%se • • i ••- •,. , , 1 ',. .. , .,•',' i- , . - , , I';•• , , . I' li,", • . . . .. , . 0 4,„• • ;. ... /: . '.*........;:,/ •• . , . L Mgt Mit 111111111,11111L MS JON WO*mil amg 111 ' .11.14 ii,,__ • e . , \11 • 'Wit Likor, ....,i ‘1)* • . , .... . 1 %Mg 01,4 Neat s", i r 1 • ,/ ' 1.. , ,1.. R—LOD .... i R - .• ,, j [.. '.iti i INN.mmt. I, • 4.,I . 7) ..4-1,iLLt• 1 7" - 1,4, , i$:•1: ,r1 1 . ... I WI' t I Milt • :i 544)—4*, 1 4 T t ; I,. ',,-A i I l:.,,„:t.'...111 1 111,1 4 e !t i I z!.1.-per mar di ,ft. xis 1 ,.i.t... . . Alle>1114<'1 "1,1,111F1'.0111 ((• 5 Lt...? G.c.■0,44.. ;r.- .4, , . 11 -P i: '''' —--- - .- . ,... ....._. , ........., 1•00..r4'.; g ;.-7-g---- ': 1 • :°' ', * ' ', , ! R—2 0 ' i ' RHO D)/ .. it . sl(P ., , . . .*id*WO low bum man/ 1 pat Om is NMI • r • liall ititt4 Nil Mil • I &ell lillimi Me mai lid II I it 1 , c_-A ''') .4 . g 1 „ . R—3 0''' 1 , si , 4„.• ,, *be, \ H R—20 1. . , . , . , . 1 , WOW U1,11, 04* ill* lain M. ' • aiG1: 01. . I . 1 .16,c_irLinam-All-c ---- ,. i i eii:, _iin (,_,L-1'* i I I' . .,.' 4,4,) a_L,,_ . ,,...„,i,40...tiiii.,...47,4,..----1-.6-m r, .....,,.....;,..._________—. . E ,lp' ,.....,„...4.----....,,.. I C-p . , ' R _7 .1 1 . P . ' ” ,.•,4 ir:. (P D ) ' ' 1 1 L . : , , , to-' ' ' '• '' '' ' ' ' ' L IINII- ' , ,. 1 1 . i , 1 , . .„„ . ,,... .....„ .,... , • ,,.. , ' i': 9,4 1 le( AFFADAVIT OF MAILING STATE'E' OF OREGON County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Diane M. Jelderks, being first duly sworn, on oath despose and say: That I am a secretary for the City of Tigard, Oregon That I served notice of hearing of the Tigard Planning Comnissi on of which the attached is a copy (Marked Wiibit A) each of the following named persons on the day of , 1982, by mailing to each of them at the address shown on the attached list (Marked Exhibit B) , said notice as 4ereto attached, de sited in the United States Mail on the rcJC,, day of 1983 , postage prepaid. d Subscribed and sworn to before ne on the day of r ; _ I . . 1983 • ARY PUB C OF OREGON ' C a'. LN My Cc'm ussion Expires: „ c. • I ',l , ! . - ..•' .”.. .. ...„W. ,, .-... i .. kl.'. .w Y✓.tW ruux llNlr4.wi[M.,a.rA Aut .. .N l. NPO #3 MEETING MINUTES 1 October 24, 1983 I. Called to order at 7:45 P.M. , the delay being necessary to obtain A quorum. II. Roll call: present were Bledsoe, Fyre, Port er, and Moonier. Excused • absent were Ramsdell, Smith, and Mortensen (who was sick). Staff was Planner Steve Skorney. Visitors were Geraldine Ball, Larry and Debby Barnum, J.B. Bithop, Robert Campbell, Bill Clyde, Duane and Julia Ehr, Ralph Furrer, Jo Hobbs, Jim Horsley, Jeanette Kromer, Chuck Lehman. Alex Machin, Lindzey McArthur, Bob Miller--Century 21 Properties, Mark. Neer, Eunice Painton, Marty Poorman, Roger and D. Regehr, Bibianne Scheckla, Ima Scott, Mary Stenford, C.H. Stearn, and Joe Van Lom, archetect--along with about 5 others associated with his project. III. Minutes--Due to the delay in starting, review of the minutes will be . , postponed until next meeting. , IV. Review of Joe Van Lom's project on Pacific Highway between Park Street - k and. School Street: 0 . The developmee': proposal consists of 4725 ft Retail/Automotive Retail/Automotive next to School Street, a 3260 sq.ft. Fast Food Restaurant--it will be Dairy Queen which will move here from the other side of the highway--, a 5700 to 7100 er sq.ft. Retail Shop Building, and a 2400 sq.ft. convenience store next to , . Park Street. There is a 30 to 50 feet wide landscaped. area to buffer the f convenience store from Grant Street. The plan shows: two 24-foot access . driveways on the highway, one access on Park Street, and a service access on Grant Street. The entire complex is to be design coordinated, and it will be developed under the existing (old) code. The complex will , . ,, he devided into 3 lots, with different ownership, and therefore may, not be built as one phase. To keep a clean appearance the owners will sign • a maintenance agreement. The convenience store will apply for an OLCC license. In order to protect the convenience store from loitering, a ' video arcade will not be allowed. So far the only firm committment is the Dairy Queen. Southland (7-11) and Schuck's Auto Supply have shown interest. This information was g;iven by Joe Van Lora in his presentation and in answer to questions. Almost all of the visitors asked questions and/or made comments about the developmeAt proposal. The primary concerns seemed to be traffic safety and the safety of children walking to and from Charles F. Tigard School. In regard to the children, it was agreed that a route other than across the access points on Pacific Highway is important. There was a division of opinion among the citizens and neighbors about an idea of opening up the service Way to allow pedestrian traffic through the rear of the site. One or two said the children have learned to use Grant Lltreet and th'are is no need to open up the short-cut again. Problems of liability to the . tt owners was mentioned. The representative of the school district mentioned concerns about the back passage in regard to possible attacks as occurred on a Beaverton bipath recenty. , • . \ ' III . . 'Page 2--NPO #3 Minutes, October 24, 1983 \'4 • '' In regard to traffic, several people expressed strong opinions that the / ,- deceleration lane to School Street should be extended, so that cars cled'et suddenly stop to enter as they do for Wendy's. Also it was expressed that more than just a sign or arrow was needed to guide traffic )d the, right upon leaving the Dairy Queen, probably some curbing. The was concern about the possibility of an excess of traffic on Grant Street, a4- 414.b . , and it was suggested that speed bumps be installedAto discourage use as 41A17L a thoroughfare. Mr. Van Loin was agreeable to all of the above traffic suggestions. ,,,/ ,( The feeling of NPO #3 seems to be generally goodifin relation to this initial proposal. The motion was made and rssed unanimously that NPO #3 go on record to concur with the condel.,,es raised by the citizens and neighbors in attendance, concerning the problems of traffic and, safety of children; and that we encourage staff to work with the developer to address these problems."' A sign-up list was passed around for those who wished to be notifledof the decision of the Planning (A Director, and several signed #4/* NPO #3 would of course want to receive the decision. /' , . ( ,,e' „. - Other items that this writer forgot to include above are: The vegetation 1 in front will be kept/low so as not to obscure vision for cars accessing the highway. There will be a solid fence and vegetal= along the rear property line. „Mir. Van Loin said there were about 106 parkilig spaces in 1 the plan, whez;egs only 76 were required (I have counted 99),. The proposal ca) for a fence along the back corner by school, street up to ,, the Auto Sipply building, but not along the side of the building, and especi,,e a4r not in front. The placement of signs was not established „ yetyeach occupant would be entitled to at least one sign. The staff will supply the NPO with a copy of the final site plan as submitted for „ 6proval. /* V. Review of Park Place development application for 47.8 acres at SW 121st and S'd Gaarde. Robert Miller of Century 21 Homes presented the proposal. We had seen some of it in our last meeting but Mr. Miller did not come because Planner Hamid Pishvaie had told him the meeting (at Planning Commission) was cancelled. Apparently there was some confusion in communication between Mr. Miller and the planning staff. The application is for single family detached condominium cottages, said to be priced at about $80,000 per unit. For comparison, a conventional development that would nlrmally cost $65,000 to $80,000 Could be reduced to the cost of 0-8,500 to $70,000 by using the . techniques employed by Century 21 in this application. These: techniques , were employed at London Square off of Greenburg Road in Tigard. This will be a phased development because of City requirements—all they really want at this time is approval of Phase I. There will be a requirement in the Homeowners Association that the grounds be maintained; members of the NPO pointed out the difficulties of actually enforcing those provisions. The ofte-way private drives will have parking allowed on one side, which they hope will meet staffs parking requirements. / */ / 4,-- 4,!' t . - , Page 3--NPO #3 Mir "'.e's, October 24, 1983 jno Gruelich of the Fire District said that was O.K. from their point of view. Mr. Miller said that the constraints of locating a major road through the project, which could not be used for individual access, has forced this type of development instead of something more conventional. Herman Porter requested staff to look into the legality of the ownership, not of lots, but of buildings, and also the placing of many single family detached structures on an individual lot; the NPO concurred in this request. Bob Bledsoe noted the following major concerns with the initial application forms, submitted in September, 1983: 1. Page 3, #12; Site Plan Check #A-.11; Site Development Analysis Form:, Sensitive Land Areas; Narrative--page 2. In all these, items, the applica -tion asserts that there are no sensitive land forms within the project area, and that there are no slopes over 25%. This may be true of Phase I, which is mostly in Lot 401, but it is definitely not true of the whole project--Lot 1400 has more slopes over 25% than any similar size area in Tigard's planning area. Since the application is for the whole area, the extent and location of steep (over 25%) sloped areas needs to be specified and certified by a registered professional engineer. 2. Page 3 #18; page 4, #23; and, Site Development Analysis Form. The application specifies attached units in Phase II. This requires a conditional use permit; and either the attached units should be, omitted, or else a complete conditional use permit application should be submitted in detail. 3. Page 4, #21 and #23,, and the Density Calculation Form. There seems to be serious problems with the number of housing units applied for, both for the total project (215) and for Phase I (43). No density bonus has been applied for, but the application appears to use some of the density transfer provisions allowed in the Comprehensive Plan. The application shows 12.58 acres dedicated as "permanent" open space. (Why is that word in quotation marks on the first page of the narrative?) Some of this land may qualify for density transfer, but that has not been shown. The number of square feet shown in public dedications and, public facilities definitely seems inadequate. The area of Phase I is not stated except on the School Impact Statement where it is listed as 9.6 acres; but by subtracting the other areas on the map dated August 15, 1983, one arrives at 8.64 acres--the are(+ ,should be clearly stated in the determination of the density for Phase I. Planner Steve Skorn.ey a, said he had calculated 168 units for the total project, and that the density transfer provisions would have to be met in order to achieve the densities shown in Phase I. 2,4. Page 2, #8 at the bottom of the page. SolLth of the proposed development g is not zoned R-7 as shown, but it is Ry2O; and this tact calls for appropxia'te considerations: in particular the need to move the private drive at least 5 feet northward, away from the property line, and to !F. ' Page 4.-NPO #3 MinQrk:es, October 249 1983 e , i provide some buffering landscaping in this area. See item 4g in the NPO #3 minutes of September 12, 1983. , 5. The application appears to be specifying street width less than, the P . standard for Questor Blvd. The last sentence on the Q sentence the page entitled, "Park Place Planned Development," refers to a 32-foot wide conventional street. Probably this was part of the basis for the area of public facilities listed in the Density Calculation Form. Questor ;Blvd. should be clearly specified and built as a standard local or minor collector road. 6. The 12.58 acres of "peri,anent" open recreational space is not included riy the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions as part of the common area owned by the association. In addition, minor problems noted with the initial application included the following: 7. Page 3, #9A. To the north of Tax Lot 1400 is a farm, and to the west of Lot 1400 is vacant. 8. Site Plan Check List #A7 states that transit facilities are not applicable to the application. Bus #45 traverses 121st Ave. and Gaarde Street, and • a bus stop and possibly a shelter would be appropriate, especially since the project is for more economical housing. Certainly a bus turn-out lane on SW 121st Ave. should be considered. 9. The school impact statement says there are no phases to the project, while the application itself is for a Phase, I in detail, and a unspecified Phase II. 10. The Declaration of Covenamts, Conditions and Restrictions refers to the rights of ownership as r#,siding with the owners of lots; are these Lots • 1, 2, and. 3, or are they something smaller? If so, are they legal lots? Some major concerns with the supplemental information supplied with the applicant's letter to WUi:am Monahan, Planning Director,, on Oct. 12, 1983, were pointed out -b)1 llob Bledsoe , as follows: 11. Concerning SW 121st Aven ,1 e,,, the right-of-way for collectors is 60 feet, not 50 feet; and th.erefott40 the applicant needs to dedicate an additional 10 feet of right-of- way along 121st Avenue. Also, approval, of the project should be contingent upon a half-street improvement of 2a feet of pavement from the present renter line, and including curbs and sidewalk and the stop sign. (.Also, the reduced area of improvements for 121st Avenue probably influenced, the density calculations. ) 1 12. The application's suggestion to extend SW 121st AvenLte southward beyond. Gaarde Street presents an unappropriate, adverse impact on the neighborhoods to the south, which are situated Along Bull Mountain load. Bob Bledsoe suggested that the NPO cppose this sugge; tion and offer dsoe� �u ested th�.a • r w ' Page 3W--NPO #3 Minutes, October 24, 1933 i . } instead, a looping traffic pattern (diagram attached) similar to Genesis Loop. Larry Barnum also testified concerning the devaluation to the expensive homes in the Ames and Shadow Hills Subdivisions if SW 121st Avenue were to be extended into those neighborhoods. The NPO decided by unanimous motion to oppose the extension of SW 121st Avenue, and to offer the alternative looping traffic pattern for those neighborhoods. u `I 13. , Without the extension of SW 121st Avenue, there is no zzeed for a left . turn lane east of 121st Ave. on Gaarde Street. Two lanes sh.euld be sufficient. Two minor concerns with the supplemental information supplied on October 12, 1983, that Bob Bledsoe mentioned were the following. 14. Double catch basin inlets will probably be needed to catch the stormwa 'er at the bottom of those steep slopes (8-l3%) on the private drives. 15• The extruded curbs on the private drives probably will soon break up, as has happened frequently at Cantebury Shopping Center. j The chairman of the NPO read a list of concerns supplied by Vitz Ramsdell on October '22, 1983. Vitz knew that he would be out of town, so he wrote these down for us. Relating to the first two maps attached to the letter of October 12, 1983, from Robert Miller: A. Concerning the right-of-ways and traffic patterns, distinctions need f' ' to be mde between the following types of "proposal' shown: (1) Actual changes or improvements to be done by, the developer, `,. (2) Theoretical changes from city or county street standards, and (3) Theoretical changes that should be dope sometime by others. B. Depending on the distinctions made above, there may not be enough right-of-way in the adjoining street to do what the developer proposes for his part of the street. C. Why is no left turn lane shown on SW 121st Avenue southbound at the intersection with SW Gaarde Street? D. What is the status of the "proposed" continuation of SW 121st Avenue southbound to SW gazelhill Dr. and Bull Mountain Road? If this is more than just a concept, then the adjacent landowners need to get involves in the specifics of the connection before the develop proceeds. E. The intended connection of the bicycle/jogging path to Gaarde/121st ��. is not shown; is it still included? `p ,ud development facilities reside . � .. . �' F. Will the ownership of the �reenw�,;y and recreational .. , side with the homeowners' association or with the City? ; . ,, 1 4 LAdp, (;,„kr . NNN.,. ..//c1c- v ,,,, . El) .., art w .. ......... Cn i , \4%.,4,s„%.....,%.,......%.,..- f* .) , ye,..,...,,,,,3 ., , , <*f . ...........________—„, tzi li ( ,...1..., , .., ' /---) o__..._.___._._____.._v_;;..T._T._. .. cy-) 1 '1i- -0( ( ..t, i cam' 1 r b ' L I,f. O-,‘- t4 . � ciN 4 . j II ./ � i %Pt I(s� 3 O i C1 c 4 b a z ptl . . ..f ,„.....— ek i i f6 i ii 11 {� ► + . #4) ,, , .. 7,,, i.)6,4 6,4 t ii 0 ......., . ,.. . ,- r I verr- m- 5c,.)± L2 iV\ Sait''Arr4r(4iM- ENTER THE WORLD OF-CENTURY-2t-PROPERTIES % October 12, 1983 4111P TA. * " "t 11 A Mr. William Monahan Planning Director ' F RD City of Tigard O TIGA P.O. 23397 NNING DEPT. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Bill: Re : Park Place PD Following our Sept 13 meeting to define a sufficiency of detail necessary for staff to review a conceptual and detailed plan and forward same to the Planning Commission we have prepared the • attached packet. I believe that you will find all of the data requested. Our proposal for an authority by the City uf Tigard to control traffic on the private drives without the City bearing maintenance responsibility is to place the following statement on the face of the recorded plat or "hardboard" ,, Each buyer of a unit will then have this in their possession when they purchase. "The :24 foot-wide driveways dedicated The City of Tigard will assume all rights to control traffic jand parking but will have no, responsibility for maintenance. Maintenance will remain the responsibility of the Park Place Homeowners Association." As per uesent City policy, installation, maintenance and respon- sibility- of payment of electrical power to operate the street , \ lights on the private drives will remain the responsibility of the Park Place Homeowners Association. Mr. Joe Gruelich has indicated to me that he misunderstood our plans and that either 2-way traffic without parking or one-way traffic with parking on one side will be acceptable on the 24 foot private drives. We still propose the one-way pattern with parking on one side so as to provide more than the minimum allowable parking requirements. PleaSe advise if we can be scheduled on the neIt available Planning Commission addenda. Very truly, 1-41 Robert N. Miller, P.E. ceniTUrre 21 1-10Mes • 7412 s W.nonvorion Itilltdold Hwy.,Sulto 112 • Port lood,Or eilnri 97225 • (503)297.1493 / . . , .......v.s\ .. \--- ..-----,r-li ,„ ___.,,......._ _______ I 1 i ;„ , 7 1 i:7:11 ilo t 11 I I i 1 I li ), I \ . .... 01 0 0. fl IP i i Ir 1 1 pi 1 $ 1 1 I $i . / 11 ' los; ' 1 1 0111,› illi I , ' ., , _ • 4 ,f f 1 f * t ' nallEhoii , I i 1 1 .4 ..' . ' I e ..., • , 0 ° k '*44).: N.t.s. N....N.\ ' l' 1 ...AT1' °31 9 . Nzs,,,, ‘.:\,, ' s_ . i 'fileks...A\30....' o "10‘ III t Cos . '''',: ' ' '''' . ' 1/I I 1 I , ' ' lo.fS l II 11 7 ,f , 1","*...,ri,a N.,, -,.\,,,,",,, f •r • r 1 1 1 . f I% No 1091.1 *, :\\-..,-, I I *I,/ 1 1 '-'w;irms,„,r. .4N4..4'‘' . I 1111111 4 11 '.41: I c t 'l 0 l'. /4 1 r . ...... . ' : . f - 311:4911166:: I i I 0 , II,1 *IP- • ar _ar-,11:1:4, p L.S. • i I I I sits-,...,.. 1 I.- 2 \ - , •gel!! IIi r .pri-:!, 1 1 ' ?, , „ 1, I ,;,,,, ii.,..i.. 4/ 4) • f:r j 1 1 I Ira ri II: I: III: I sl ' ' './ ,Ilii, 4t: ■1. tv• ' if 1 $I 1 1 it 1 lo •0 OPD ,.. Ar";.-- • . 1 . . I ., . I / 1 f II 1 I PO ( Ir. 7 . 4 laiL • . . .'' ' ' I 1 I ‘ •,.... • ',. b.• '. ... ■ 0. Aill.1.71 .‘%."1*. .. .. .9'''' 1411 prila.".''4. . 4 .''' *N :Veer ' ge04"1.. ' . .1%■ igiVir.; i..„.......______________ 610. 1' , 1",* Na a-, . . • ," "0■•, '1°70- . 0 , es , ,greetrr , . t .., e gawsca.' . \\\AV\ , . . . ...1 '*, \`\\\‘\1° ' • ,,,..-• . it,* 1 I . . . , . . . . • ., • it ., • . . . . I. ,• . . ..r.• v, , .. ' \ssqk .• ,sop / 1...i. • .4•211, • .' 1, . . te 4.\ 141 ' / ■• '.I 0, r;:•..:.. .,. . "V''''.\ir ‘'T'... ' ,I/ /1/ , • ■ ( ..., .0 4 /,' \ N, it T i ' . .. s. ::".. .4%.•"'".;"f 1 / 1/ \ \\ ,- I iilliN i • . 1 . • -4,":4-ovo`"1 ti: 414,,,,,' . ,i lio 5:), . ..`,:, ,\ , to ‘■,' A .4.1N 0 N7-76'' ,i, VI% ‘t 1, \ .' ' tk' • it 4 ; '''; , x 1 04■i , ■ A ,,_ \ ,. . . izg' . - ,. ...• .:‘ N I.I t \t ',, , C7 151 ' i . . . i ."14IN//1,/1 . . . el i Air'..."liN ..,-1 i/ / I/ 4 1/ ...... ..??.... ...............„,,, . . ,......, , .... ■ . 't' if; ' ' • / I/ 1/7/I" I ' ...), ..— a, ---",1< if / .. 11 . fr,j I '... .' -'.:* l' 1/ fi/ • a• • 4> •• ..:4 /97/1/ I •, e„,.. E .. . '117‘, • .-4, fli /ref •/ "it i \' ' . . 1 . . . ,,voci• . .....',,:,1. " I o . I : . ...c. / 7/ II i-., 1 0 • I I 1. if,•---, 1 . 0 lill il 1/7 • , 1 I.,_,..,_.. . 1 . ........ . si . , ./." 111 .1 ' 111 , . ... . ., ' , ' " ' 1 .......„... ... . 1 II 0 l ' I d 1 , ......... ..„ '"........q. 1i ' j 0 II I I ' Ill i I 0 I i I I 1 ' l i ,. 4. . 0: I 1. ...I I II 11 1 6 r/i 1111111 :•*: % •.. I ••T 11, * 1 , I 1 ,....”...r, all e• . itA . IA11111 , 11 141 III 1 . . . . I I • .., 1 .0 .. , i -•••,,,. ' iihi III r 0 .,. . .ft .4. ‘..% dti I i i .' . ..,.._ 4-----...• . . . • • :, . ... , , , . ,• . . „ . . . ,. . . : , . kt- y, P \ ,:i, , . . . . , ,., .,,, . , , . 1 pr, • , '‘''.-\,. ,,•,.. .. . ,; , , . 0:01 . I.,[if:II.. I- 1 [1 ' idr1 .11i -[ 1f11 P11. [Itt [ t lit , M -11. I'1.1 t ,10,1f1,11,1 l 'dfl< el,I IIP oe' • • P 0 BOX 127 0 TUALATIN, OREGON 97062 0 PHONE 682-2601 ' PARR PLACE October 6, 1983 I 2 SW GARDE ST . TIGARD 6156— 2 • , ' SUB —01S-000 Dear liamid Pishvaie, . , • . . . This letti is to notify you that a Site Plan Review has .. . been cont.ucted for tie Park Plac subdivision . . n accordonce with Uniform Fire Code Aricle 10 to .establish required fire flow, hydrant location and street access fOr .• fire aparatus. . , RECOMMENDATION: . , Recommend City standard of 32 foot public streets throughout , , te subdivision, 24 foot wide streets ,are allowed then no parking be aI lowed on streets with vff street parking provided, and "NO PARKING" signs be . . Hvdrants to be located at k', 1 ? 0,mostor and Gaarde C at the On *.il Gaardia a6d private streetq%. (Hydrants with the .approv..h1 of Tif.lard Water Distrili:t*,,, . .. . . If streets .4re maije one—koi4v4.4 than pal-king could , .. on on,:.'4 side o the streFA, , . . , If yo,J h,3. ...e v4..uvetitincs regarding thi,r letter, or if we may b)F.:, of ang assistance in this nattev, A please .Pel. fri.:',.!*., tr.i, call me at , ,N , '.*-,..., 14:11L )1A-•••'Ke-34-'N Oos ' Gre. itch Preventiop Bureau . ' . . . , . .. . ft . . . , , , L , . ^N.i 7lft`r! t , k4 1 } N O T I C E O F PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Tigard Planning Commission, at its meeting n Tuesday, September 13, 1983 at 7:30 P.M.,in the lecture room of Fowler Junior High School, 1086E S.W. Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon, will consider the following application: FILE NUMBER: S 8-83 PD ;r APPLICANT: Century 21 Homes Icn. OWNER: Same ,' 7412 SW Bvtn-Hillsdale Hwy. Suite-112 • Portland, Or. 9722 REQUEST: For a conceptual and detailed plan approval of a Planned Development, consisting of 215 single family units. The property is designated low density residential and is zoned R-7(PD). LOCATION: 13900 S.W. 121st Ave. (Wash. Co. Tax Nap 281 3CC lot 401 and A C 2S1 4 lot 1400) (See map on reverse side) The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedures of the Planning Commission. Any persons having interest , A' in this matter may attend and be heard, or testimony may be submitted in writing to be entered into the record of the initial hearing. I. Should you wish to appal, a written letter addressed to the City Recorder must be received prior to the expiration of the fifteenth day after the decision of '. the hearing. If notice r to appeal is not received within fifteen days, the action is valid. For further information please contact the Plannding Department at 639-4171. TICM 1J CITY HAIL', 12755 S.W. Ash Avenue (Corner of Ash Avenue & Jurnham Street) q ,,� lll.; ♦ t 4••'Q r 4 11 . . ... : "k--R—5 .( ppl .,,, ' -7k. ---- • •1 e : , .. . ( 4 • I .: ri . . ai, 1 i. .. l''''.,::,' . t; •a•. . iswe Me mil 110•11 MO IMIP1 *.•;. ' p /.. Pr li i , . litial . , :. r it\-.1 j . ., N . ----1.4:,,01 . :11::°- ' It 1:°4 1°"1.(11.4 .N..1. . ,N\%,_ w • :14. • Ai .. , . • . UN TY .- PM 111■1641 r—i s, . ZI‘": 11"...."..e"‘s ' cf.. ... . ! ' ■; •14.. I , ei: ., . S 11°viliggb' , %....4•1' .....•— 1.—' a-:j :. ''''..4..".';',.,'". .;':'4•••1 i'• •: . kii; , 76)00.. e., r , ''/ //*'••......1; 4r s . . . I t ,1 • 14 „� rgai,DI':IK•Qeet.l.ekAawa twit !>Atl,Oea ' ak.� ��f,� _:�anal r- • j I sow ”�► /' It •III it L , ' tr ' f" ,MIMI.1144 p.?p , . Je .../Lag,...1! I.14! , ,,.,i, . . ...,. l'p If 1 p. P'.'CI ..• . ,• :: t...4.)•: 1 .4 r 7 i.,,. .. . • , • i , _.." c 1 . i . Itii. .(t..A) k R—7 . ,i..,..•?..i.t,•A iintsalik. , ,,, . ' . . ..__________, . • ' .' '.... .. . — ' ••' 0' . ' • . • . '40 ...-: ____ __N. — 'SI-4) 4,4%.,k 01,4, 'rf ' ' . I ' • •� Y / ® t _^M• R •� , tract �w o•.�1... t•.. ii •: OE NIA RSA lint am ill imil �I I Mb MO Iwo t 14t * , . . o I 1 i r IPA blr a alit „� p .. •4...t' q i /� .° -' .t.�a+., , b �a I. C—P3 ,, . R Q y , 1! 0 ) • , • . . r ' I • 4 , ), k.,„,,,,,,,""°t. ,,,,i,,.... lilt 1.11 Ma.' 1.4 1.4 ...:. I , , Ii) ,;'''' '' , 7# ' '. 6',,.1... ',.. . 1...',...''', ,',, .,:': ' rr , a n • , • + /, w , ' ` .• 44 , o. j., NPO #3 MEETING MINUTES • September 12, 1983 1. Called to order at 7:25 P.M. ry 2. Roll Call: Present were Bledsoe, Ramsdell(7:32), Smith, Mortensen, and Porter. Milt Fyre has been appointed to the Planning Commission, but he is remaining as a general member o ` NPO #3. Visitors were Althea Rodde and Betty McCain. Staff' were Steve Skorney and Liz Newton. 3. The chairman forgot to bring the minutes of July 25, 1983. 4. Review of Park Place development application by . Century 21 Homes. Bob Miller of Century 21 Homes. Bob Miller of Century 21 had said he would « attend our, meeting, but he never came, although Liz checked the lobby several, times. In our review of this application, NPO #3 has the following concerns and opinions: a. The route for SW Gaarde Street to 135th and Walnut is in accordance with the County's desires for a. thoroughfare between Murray Blvd. and Pacific Hwy. Under the terms of the UPAA, the City cannot exclude • this possibility. However, the approval of this application should leave open the options for a more indirect route, vs specified in Tigard's adopted comprehensive plan, includag connection to SW 132nd Avenue instead of 135th and Walnut. b. The road alignment of SW Gaarde, including in particular the termination point of Phase I, should be moved westward so as to impact the Rodde property less (Tax lot 300). c. Steve. Skorney reported that the City Engineer would like to see the County standard of a 70-foot right-of-way for Gaarde Street instead of the ptcoposed 60 feet This is a chenge from a discussion that Bob Bledsoe had with Frank Curry, in which Mr. Curry said he wanted to see a 60-foot right-of-way with the contingent restrictive easement 4 of 5 feet on each side.., NPO #3 strongly supports the 60-foot right-of-way with the contingent easement. d. The County standard for major collector is a roadway designed for speeds of 35-45 mph. The City standard far minor collector is a roadway designed for, speeds at 25-35 mph. Since 35 mph is the common ground. in this controversy, that is the speed, that should be designed for no more and no less. The radius agreed upon by Frank curry and the County is 700 feet. At that radius the super elevation should be limited to 7Z maximum, in o,cder to provide for speeds of up to 35 mph. e.. Stop signs should be included at .121st and Gaarde. Questor feet instead of th f. Setbacks on estor Blvd. should be 20 fe ead" y e proposed 15 feet. The purpose of keeping the standard setback in this instanc ' is to avoid discouraging the use of Que$tor Blvd. as a minor collector. Although designed to local street standards, it is the only road that will be servicing the other side of the ravine and will therefore function as 41. Minor collector. 0 g. NPO #3 was concerned about the placement of the private road serving units 27-30 on the property line, especially since the land to the south is zoned R-1, which is considerably different than the R-4.5 PD t. of this development. We recommend moving the private road at least 5 feet northward, and including landscaping between the road and the property line. This area would be a good place to extend the jogging path from Unit 32 to the intersection of Gaarde and 121st. h. The use of the gas line easement as a jogging path and nature trail is not a suitable routing for those purposes. In some areas where the slopes are gradual, the route is O.K. , but otherwise, the route of the trail should be designed with the users in mind, not just for the convenience of the developers. 5. Our next meeting will be the regular meeting for October. Our regular meetings will be on the. Monday of the first Council meeting of the month. That should be October 3, 7:15 P.M. at. Fowler Jr. High School. (pm/0182P) i.. • 0 CD CU l ID CD ID p C7.— O(, • * ', cl -"= -=,'m Ot CT 4. CI) CA "� 'n •,.•D' a m n cD C.-i 1-3 r'd n — o Cl) • o m cn (DSO y _1 N• O• rrt CI 2 -5 ' rt C co m CA) O "" „ at a 0N-10ry d 11 arzi o a 3 : ="0 o N< <m 0 N N• a Q. .-. Cl) O `G -*D o >G) - X �S( �� U• i. = In m a o H. S Z 71 OP W in 1 %hi , '' 111 — • a) m N-.. .. 0 '.., °cr iiiL 5' 'V 5. iii -P 0 v..-0 2 7,- --1 : . '` 3 , to W „.-1.•CD a c p cr M'13 CD d S (D Gi) _ '< X ioI � � —I p . All N A C p T co ri, W ` c �i ii,-.41 co a p.) 0 Z T3 r ' ; CD a a N.,-., .,.. o� m co > m -v° a, a N CD ' S.w p —i 0) 0 m 0 411k,P ©Q CD D - ( N ()1t, J+ % d ii. cy, ~. P1,T IC RING,N� 'C o c” The',follows will i,e considei cl.by the' 'k (om ionn,on Q• - ° n8 T1i Lining n A Tuesday, September X1'3; 1981, at 7:30 Pitt at nyiler:J.ilni0f,11ighi School - <, m Lecture-Room, 10865',$W Walnut Tigard;'Or.:F`turthe':i formation may be '"• Z • obtained from the Director,s.f Planning and Development`at*12155 SW Ash ' Aye„,.,,,4igard,;Ore.97223;or;,by calling 6394171. . . ., .' .. • . 5.1�'; i.COMPREHENSIVE�PgAN VIEI MEN ZOl<1E CHANGE 9- 83 PCM Assoc./Portland Chain NPO#2 c A remand trim the pity Council to the Planning Commission for a -C C,,omprehensive Plan change from Industrial„to.General Commercial m z r- _. and a Zone change om industrial-Light to C-3. Located: 9770 SW O ') 54'42' ;r Scholls Ferry Rd.(Wash Co..Tar map 151 27D lot 1200). _,� co fry 5.2 , COMPREHENSIVE PI$AN AMENDME 'Carl Johnson NPO i7 ` m a . #4 li ,,, at ;t a ,f it f' # r, '.a'',I,,�7 ,a>iN,r. "�` -' .D. M —1 , t, f„ l r„ OD 1�I ,. A request to,amend poll±cy_*11.4 2,, 1u4i.2'm,and'',114 2..p regarding.the Q W Cl c NPO Alt„ .area,fn ding r,Policies',and W'mplementation Strategies NI gip,, c, r +klJ�i' .Y �' � + �" y3�, lu+ �.t4'i o + document, :. -,, e +r _, ++ 5.$' SUBDIVISION' +P N D'DEVELOP�i ' .t r'..Century 21 Home N 0#3 i ..A request.by Centuryx21,,Prbpeities.,Inc.for a'.cgnceptual and detailed plan'approVal''of a`Planned`Development which consists of 215 single! , family units.The property is•designated low.density residential and is zoned R-7 (PD),Location:13900 SW 121st Ave.(Wash.Co..Tax Map 2S1' 3CC lot 401 and 251 4 lot 1400). 5.4 ANNEXATION-ZONE CIIANGE.�ZC,12 ;,.:W.79th and Pfaffie, ,•A request by resident(of S:W, 78th Avenue to consider a'petition fora annexation to the City Of Tigard.Also to assign a low density residential comprehensive Plan d&ignation and a R-7 zoning designation:Location: • (Wash.Co.Tax Map.151 36CA tax lots 400;500,600,700;800,900, 1000,1 1100, 1200, 1300, 1400;'2000, 2001; 2002,2003, 2006, 2007; 2008, 2009; 4800,4900;.5000,5100,5201,5300,and 5500), Written comnients,are encouraged.Please submit written comments to the "' Director of Planning"and De)elopment at the above address in advance.of the �'' public,hearing date. TT6200 Publish September'1,198$f' { I' 1 1 • • AFF'ADA'VIT OF MAILING e6kVIV\ Ile(pat4)//' STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Diane M. Jelderks, being first duly sworn, on oath despose and say: That I am a Secretary for the City of Tigard, Oregon That I served notice of hearing of the Tigard Planning Commission of which the attached is a copy (Marked o it A) •.- ea g a.J of the following named persons on the day of , 464 1982, by aailing to each of them at the address shown • the attached list (Marked Exhibit B) , said notice as hereto attached, des••sited in the United States Mail on the day of r r I 4 11983 , postage prepaid. r C)AadeVVL.,--)flfl . /401 Subscribed and sworn to before me on the / day of �!.'.114 , 1983 ARY PUBLIC OF 0' GON gi y""'Conrniss on Expires: „y; • - , .^^'— • � • �o oo now^ P�/. BOX /ux � TUALATnm. OREGON nvw*m • PHONE 682-2601 1/4":0, _ ` . ' F*k1A PL*CE August ;JO, 2 SW GAARDE ST TIGARD 6156- 1 SUB —018-000 • Dear Hamid Pishvaie/ ' ' | This letter is to notify gou that a Site Plan Review has been conducted for the Park Place subdivision in accordance with Uniform Fire Code Article 10 to establish /- . required fire flow, hgdrant location mnd street access for fire apparatus. ^ RECOMMENDATION: Recommend Citg standard of 32 foot public stree+"�~throughout � the subdivision. ' � 11. 24 foot wide streets are al}nwed ' then no parking he allowed on streets with off street parking provided, and "NO PARKING" signs be posted. . � ` . Hgdrmnts to be located at ( 1 ) Gu estor and Gaarde (2) at the 4—may intersection of Qaarde and private streets. (HgdrantS .` with the approval of Tigard Water District), ^ If you have an� questinny reqarding this letters 4? or if we may be of anU assistance in this matter, • please feel free to call mo at 682-2601. \ ^ (41,..te � �rnh �e Prevention Bureau � } ` L ' [ . ~ / . AA"0 0 t . ; ::. 1 , . , WASHINGTON'COUNTY,OREGON , . , • . .r }' a July 21, 1983 C 1 Ryan ,O'Brien •Q Planning Cotsul.tant 1134 S.E. 23rd Avenue . Hillsboro, OR 97123 . Dear Mr. O'Bidenx In response to your letter of duly. 19, 1983, please be advised that we would , require• an area,map showing proposed immediate sewer locations and proposed future sewer locations to serve the total development. 1 • In regard to the availability of capacity in the existing system, I would not • anticipate any problem in line size with respect to the 15 acres and 120 units. , However, the capacity of the system, at present, will be determined by the. U.S.A. pump station at S.W. 121st Avenue, and Summer Creek and the private : , pump station at the S.W. 113th Avetlue and Summer Creek. • ) The U.S.A.,. .Scholls Ferry T1.'..`tk, scheduled for construction in 1984, will eliminate those restriction). You should contact U.S.A. for remaining capacity on their pump station. They may also so have information on the pri- yr Y vate. station. • ir A study of the capacities of the existing system may be required from you de- pendent upon.,the configuration of the proposed systems to serve the total development, and upstream properties which will require use of those lines. I will be happy to discuss our needs in detail, if you require further in- formation. Sincerely, . . ,•' ' Frank A. Currie, P. 1. Director of Phlio Works PAC/do 40 w • 12755 S.W.ASH. Pa SOX TIGA iD,OREGON 87223 PK 6394171 n 4I 4 L e r r • , .0` 0 i 0.0.1KOM■110.11■WiM■71... ., . , ' 4 . -.( . ,,,. . . &ill', , JI\ ilto,II,Li 1 . , . ' . * • . ..• i '^. '',."'`. .: !,. ''':' ' ' '' ' • '''Jul 2X 1983 ' ' ' , . . ' ' .. . artOFTICrfARD , • '. ' y' . ...,' . . , •.,,, . , WASHINGTON,COUNTY,OREGON „. .. . . . , .. . . . . r Martin C. Nizlek ' . . Transportation and Engineering . , Services Mdnager • . Washington Countr Dept. of Public Works I 150 N. First Avenue Hillsboro, OR 97123 . . . ' ' ' Dear Marty: , . I have received your letter of July 19, 1983, accompanying the draft copy of the final adopted.Transpqrtation; Plan, responses to the"City's comments on , . . the original draft and discussion of Mr. Millers proposal for Murray Road ' eictension. , . . .. .0. • , . . ' First of all,, ,thank you for the draft dopy.ok the final Transportation Plan. • ' and for'responding tb.our_commentp. . e I . . . . . Y Secondly, I have reviewed Mr Millers proposal„ Whidhn the surface would ,. - .fl on ' seem.to shift an itlledged''hdrdship ,from 0-21 land, generally not suited for development, to property,oWned-by Others, which seems, on the •surface to be more suited to deVelopment,whilk.adding several hundred feet to the length of the road. ...........Th 4........._ -..--- . ' In reference to Major collector standards a minor arterial right-of-way, Z . will want to discuss the. city's policy in the light of'the Urban Area Planning Agreement with metbers of the city .planning staff and city council. , At that time, I think a meeting would be appropriate. -I willkeep in touch with you to ' that end. Sincerely, t . , . , Frank A. CUrrie„t P.E. .. , Public Works Director ...........-----„,„ . Liz Newton, Planner " ....----- t,..)fiifiFert;Milterr-Century .21 Properties FAC/dc , . • q • i2755 SW ASH ' RO.BOX 23397 `rIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:69i71 • I 1\ a ,- -,,.,. �.i_i_.._.-- .., ,�.., - !" �..�. - .!J.' - u DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS This Declaration is made on the date hereinafter set forth by Century 21 Properties, Inc. referred to herein as "Declarant". , Declarant is the owner of certain property in the county of Washington, State of Oregon, which is more particularly described as: PARK PLACE See Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein which sets out the legal description of said property. Declarant hereby declares that all of the properties described above shall be held, sold and conveyed subject to the following easements, restrictions, convenants and conditions, which are for the prupose of protecting the value and desirability of, and which shall run with, the real property and be bind- ing on all parties have any right, title, or interest in the described proper- ties, or any part thereof, their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each owner thereof. ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS Section 1 "Association" shall mean and refer to THE PARK PLACE HOMEOWNERS ASSOC- IATION, a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Oregon, its successors and assigns. Section 2 "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of a fee simple title to any lot which is a part of the properties, including contract sellers, but excluding those having such interest merely as security for the performance of an obligation. Section 3 "Properties" shall mean and refer to that certain real property here • inbefore described and such additions thereto as may hereafter be brought with- ' in the jurisdiction of the Association. . ) A., Section 4 "Common area" shall mean all real property owned by the Association for the common use and enjoyment of the owners. The common area to be owned by the Association at the time of the conveyance of the first lot is described as follows: 1. All private roadways within the properties; At the time Declarant conveys the last lot to an owner, it shall execute a good and sufficient deed conveying the fee simple title to the tracts described in this paragraph to the Association, free and clear of all liens and encumbranes with the exception of this Declaration and the convenants, conditions, restric- tions, easements and dedications set forth on the plat. Section 5 "Lot" shall mean and refer to any, plot of land shown upon any recorded sub- division map of the properties, with the exception of the commmon area. ,.� Section 'Declaration" shall mean and refer to Century 21 Properties, Inc. , and its successors and assigns, if such successors or assigns should acquire more than one undeveloped lot from Declarant for the purpose of develcpmento ARTICLE II PROPERTY RIGHTS Section 1 Every owner shall have a right and easement of use and enjoyment in and to the common areas which: shall be appurtenant to and shall pass with the title to every lot, subject to the right of Association to dedicate or transfer all or any part of the common area to any public agency, authority or utility for such purposes and subject to such conditions as may be agreed to by the members. No such dec cation or transfer shall be effective unless an instrument signed by three-fourths (3/4) of the members agreeing to such dedication or transfer has been recorded. Section 2 Any owner may delegate, in accordance with the Bylaws, a right to use and enjoy the common area and facilities to the members of his family, in common with himself. Such right shall be deemed delegated without further act to his tenants or contract purchasers who reside on the property. . ARTICLE III III MEMBERSHIP AND VOTING RIGHTS t' Section Every owner of a lot shall be a member of the Association. Membership shall be appurtenant to and may not be separated from ownership of any lot . which is subject to assessment. Section 2 Each member shall be entitled to one (1 ) vote for each lot owned. When more than one (1) person holds an interest in any lot, all such persons shall Ii be members. The vote for such lot shall he exercised as they among themselves determine, but in no event shall more than one (1 ) vote be cast with respect '; to any lot. r` j, k+ M ARTICLE IV COVENANT FOR MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENTS Section 1 . Creation of the. Lien and Personal Obligation ;if Assessments. • The Declayiant, for each lot owned within the properties, covenants, and each owner of any lot by acceptance of a deed therefore (whether or not it shall be sn expressed in such deed) is deemed to covenant and agree, to pay Association: (1) annual assessments or charges; and (2) special assessments for capital improvements, such assessments to be established and collected as hereinafter provided. These assessments, together with interest, costs and reasonable attorney's fees, shall be a charge on the land and shall be a con- . tinuing lien upon the property against which each such assessment is made. Each such assessment, together with interest, costs and reasonable attorneys fees, shall also be the personal obligation of the person who was the owner of such property at the time when the assessment fell due. The personal obligation • for delinquent assessments shall pass to his successors in title Section 2. Purpose of Assessments,. � The assessments levied by the Association shall be used to promote the • recreation,on, healthy safety and welfare of the residents in the propvti es, to improve and maintain the common areas. Section 3 Until January 1 of the year immediately following the conveyance of the last lot to an owner, the maximum annual assessment shall be one hundred dollars . per lot. A. From and after January 1 of the year immediately following the convey- . ance of the last lot to an owner, the maximum annual assessment may be increased each year not more than ten percent above the maximum assessment for the previous year without a vote of the membership. B. From and after January 1 oc the year immediately following the conveys ance of the last lot to an owner, the maximum annual assessment may be increased above ten percent by a vote of two-thirds of the members who are voting in per- son or by proxy at a meeting duly called for this purpose. C. The Board of Directors may fix the annual assessment at an amount not e' in excess of the maximum. Section 4. Special Assessments for Capital Improvements. In addition to the annual assessments authorized above, the Association may levy in any assessment year a special assessment applicable to that year only for the purpose of defraying, in whole or in part, the cost of any con- struction, reconstruction, repair, or replacement of a capital improvement upon the common area. including fixtures and personal property related thereto; pro.. A , vided that any such assessment shall have the assent of two-thirds of the votes of the members who are voting in person or by proxy at a meeting duly called for this purpose. Section 5. Notice and Quorum for any Action Authorized under Sections 3 or 4. Written notice of any meeting called for the purpose of talking any action authorized under Sections 3 or 4 shall be sent to all members not less than fif- teen days nor more than sixty days in advance of the meeting. At the first such meeting called, the, presence of members or of proxies entitled to cast fifty per- cent of all the votes of the membership shall constitute a ouorum. If the required quorum is not present or rep+-esented at the meeting, another meeting may be called f• subject, .to the same notice requirement, and the required quorum at the subsequent meeting shall be the same as the required quorum at the preceding meeting. No such subsequent meeting shall be held more than sixty days following the preceding meeting yr. Section 6. Uniform Rate of Assessment. Both annual and special assessments must be fixed at a uniform rate for all lots and may be collected on a monthly basis. Assessments against any one lot shall in no case exceed the value of that lot.. Section 7. Date of Commencement of Annual Assessments: Due Dates. The annual assessments provided for herain shall commence as to all lots ! ' on the first day of the month following the conveyance of the common area. The first annual assessment shall be adjusted according to the number of months remaining in the calendar year. The Board of Directors shall fix the amount of the annual assessment against each lot at least thirty days in advance of each annual assessment period. Written notice of the annual assessment shall be sent to every owner subject thereto. The due dates shall be established by the Board of Directors.. The Association shall , upon demand and for a reasonable ' , charge, furnish a certificate signed by an officer of the Association setting • forth whether assessments on a specified lot have been paid. Section 8. Effect of Nonpayment of Assessments: Remedies of the Association, Any assessment not paid within thirty days after the due date shall bear interest from the due date at the rate of fourteen percent per annum. The Assoc- iation may bring an action at law against the owner personally obligated to pay same or forocl ose the lien against the property; and interest, costs and reasonable attorney's fees of any such action or on appeal thereof shall be • added to the amount of such assessment. No owner may waive or otherwise escape liability for the assessments provided for herein by nonuse of the Common area or abandonment of his lot. `, Section g, Subordination of the Lien to Mortgages. The lien of the assessnw is provided for herein shall be subordinate to the lien of any first mortgage. Sale or transfer of any lot, shall not effect ,[ the as.4lessmen:t lien. No sale or transfer shall relieve such lot from liability for ary assessments thereafter becoming due or from the lien thereof. ARTICLE 'V ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL AND GENERAL PROTECTIVE COVENANTS A I I e t " • Seot'i on 1. Architectural Control . The Association desires to preserve and compliment the natural beauty of Cambridge Square. To that end no building, wall or other major structure shall be commented, erected or maintained upon the Properties, nor shall any exterior additional to or change or alteration therein be made, until the plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, h:ight, materials, color and location of the same shall have been submitted to and approved in writing as to harmony of external design and location in relation to the surrounding structures and topography by an Architectural Control Committee compos'd of r . three or more representatives appointed by the Board of Directors of the - Association. In the event said Board, or its designated committee fails to approve or disapprove such design, location, addition, change or alteration within thirty days after said plans and specifications have been submitted to It, approval will not be required and this section will be deemed to have been fully complied with. B. Other than as necessitated by construction approved pursuant to 1 of this Article, no owner or occupant shall remove any live tree from the properties where the diameter of the tree is equal to or greater than four inches without approval of the Board of Directors, and, in no event, shall any owner or occupant be permitted to randomly clear a lot of trees and other vegatation. C. No lot shall be used except for res i denti a l purposes. No build- ings shall be erected, altered or piaced on any lot other than one detached ai.ngle family dwelling and private garage or carport for not more than two, ; nor less than one automobile. D. The construction of the dwellings shall be substantially completed within nine months after started. No dwellings shall be occupied prior to substantially 100 percent (100%) completion. E. Residential landscaping must be completed within six months of occupancy of any residence. 1 '1 4 F. All telephone and electric power service wire connections, to the main telephone and power systems shall be placed underground, G. No antenna shall be erected above a height necessary for local television reception. H. All mailboxes and standards as well as all driveway lights must conform with those models selected by the Architectural Committee. I. Fences are allowed in rear yard areas only and cannot exceed six feet in height. They are not allowed beyond; 1. Depth: (a) Interior 'lots: the width of the lot 2. Width: (b) Corner lots the width of the house plus, interior side yard. Section 2. General Protective Covenants. All properties, and all living unOts constructed thereon, shall be constructed, maintained and used in accordance with the following protective I covenants: .I A. Once the initial sale of lots in the development is complete, no owner or occupant shall post any advertisement:, posters or signs of any kind in or on the properties except as authorized by thk..1 Association. This pro- hibition shall not include one political sign or ''For Sale" or For Rent" sign placed by the owner or by a licensed real estate broker, not exceeding eighteen inches high and twenty-four inches long on any lot. B. No trade, craft, business, profession, commercial or similar activity of any kind shall be conducted on any lot, or within any structure located on any lot, nor shall any goods, equipment, vehicles, materials or supplies used in connection with any trade, service or business, nor any vehicles " in excess of 6,600 pounds gross weight used for private purposes, be kept, parked,, stored, dismantled or repaired upon any lot or on any street within the properties without the prior approval (each approval to be for a one year { period) of the Association, nor shall anything be done on any lot which is or may become an annoyance or nuisance to the surrounding properties. - • p • 0 C. Those owners or occupants keeping domestic animals• will abide by the County sanitary regulations, leash laws and rules or regulations of the Associ:ation created by the Board of Directors. !lo animal or fowl of any kind shall be raised, bred or kept on any lot, except that cats, dogs, birds or °• other household pets may be kept if they are not bred or maintained for any commercial purpose, and in any event they shall not be kept in numbers or under conditions so as to become a nuisance to the surrounding properties. D. No lot or part of the common area shall be used as a dump for . trash or rubbish of any kind. All garbage and other waste shall be kept ' n appropriate sanitar containers for property disposal . Yard Takings and sanitary [ , dirt and other material resulting from yard maintenance or landscaping work shall not be dumped onto streets or other common areas. Should any owner or occupant fail to remove any trash, rubbish, garbage, or other such materials from his lot or any street or common area where deposited by him within ten days following the date on which notice is mailed to him by the Association, 4 . the Association may have such materials removed and charge the expense of such removal to the lot owner ae part of the monthly assessment for his lot. This prohibition shall not include a well-maintained compost pile. ` f • ARTICLE VI is GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1 Enforceme__-nt. The Association or any owner shall have the right to enforce by any pro- ceeding g at law or in equity, all restrictions, conditions, covenants, reser- vati ons, liens, and charges now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this Declaration. The Board of Directors shall be specifically charged with the duty 4 of enforcing the provisions of this Declaration on behalf of the members of the Association, Except for the provisions of Article V, Section 1, subsection H, any provision in this Declaration may be waived by the Board of Directors upon . a petition by a member of the. Association and after notice to the other members and a hearing ran the petition. Failure by the Association or by any other owner r A 1' M, to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. Section 2. Severability. In,tivalidation of any one of these covenants or restrictions by Judgment or court order shall in no way affect any other provisions, which shall re- . main in full force and effect. Section 3. Amendment. The covenants and restrictions of this Declaration shall run ►;;r th and bind the land for a term of twenty (20) years from the date this Declaration is recorded, after which time they shall be automatically extended for succyrr;ss- ive periods of ten (10) years. This Declaration may be amended at anytime by an instrument signed by not less than ninety percent (90%) of the lot owners. Any amendment must be recorded. Section 4. Leases. Any lease agreement shall provide that the terms of the lease shall be sub ject in all respects to the provisions of this Declaration and that any failure by the lessee to comply therewith shall be a default under the lease. All leases shall be in writing. ARTICLE VII MORTGAGES Section 1 . Definitions. As used in this article, the term "mortgagee" shall include the beneficiary of a trust deed or a contract seller; "Institutional holder" shall mean a mort- gagee which is a bank, savings and loan association, established mortgage com- pany, or other entity chartered under federal or state laws; any corporation or P any insurance company;ap � or an state or federal agency. Section 2. Notice tai. and Consent of Mortgagees; ti Rights of inspection. A. Notice of Defaultk, Moftgagoe, The Association shall give each mortgagee written notification of any de- fault by the mortgagor of such unit in the performance of such mortgagor's obli- • gations under the project documents which are not cured within thirty (30) days. • B. Written Consent of Mortgagee Required in Certain Cases. Unless all institutional holders of first mortgage liens on lots have • given their prior 'ivri tten approval , the Association shall not: (i) Change the prorate interest or obligations of any lot for pur- poses of levying assessments or condemnation awards and for determining the pro- rata share of ownership of each lot in appurtenant real estate and any improve- ments thereon which are owned by the owner in the properties in undivided pro- rata interests (common area) ; (ii) Partition or subdivide any lot or the common area; (iii) By act or omission seek to abandon the common area except as pro- vided by law in case of substantial loss to the lots and common area; (iv) By act or omission seek to abandon, partition, subdivide, encum- ber, sell , or transfer the common area The granting of easements for public utilities or for other public purposes consistent with the intended use of the common area shall be deemed a transfer within the meaning of this clause, • (v) Otherwise materially amend this Declaration in any manner substan- tially affecting the rights of the first mortgagee C. Proxy held by Mortgagee it Certain Cases The first mortgagee or beneficiary under a°tlast deed may attend a meet- ing of the Association with the proxy of the mortgagor of said lot for the pur- pose of voting to maintain the common area; provided, however, such right shall arise only in the eve;it the mortgagee reasonably believes the Association has failed to maintain the common area in sufficient manner to prevent excessive wear, and tear. The first mortgagee shall , upon written request to the Association, be entitled to receive the same notice of all meetings thereof as is required to be ' given the members of the Association and shall be entitled to attend all such meetings through a duly appointed representative, regardless of whether entitled to vote thereat by proxy as above provided. D. Right to Inspect Books a nd Records. All first mortgagees shall have the right to examine the books and re- cords of the Association upon reasonable notice and at reasonable time and, on I written request, to receive copies of all financial statements prepared by or for the Association. • 10 Ir Executed by Declarant a, ; ' 9 � I By 4//// ,,L.. P id ;Century 21 Properties, Inc. STATE OF OREGON ) ss. COUNTY OF s w Q'o ) +, Personally appeared DA L a 'mot tom _ ,p_ who being duly sworn (or affirmed) did say that he/she is the president of Century 21 Properties, Inc. , and that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is gr the corporate seal of said corporation and that said instrument was signed and 4 •, sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its board of directors {., and he/she acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. Before me: \\A r c)(SEAL) Notary Public for Oregon 0 . Icy Commission Expires: ; ' 7?( t , • r• tl , / a / RECEIVED 's& RYAN O'BRIEN JUL 2 0 1983 Planning Consultant CITY OF TIGARD 1134 S.E, 23rd Ave. • Hillsboro„Oregon 97123 • (503) 648-4061 Frank Currie Currie July 19, 1983 City Engineer Subject: Russ Krueger • Dear Frank, We are now in the process of developing preliminary plans for Russ Krueger' s property on the west side of 135th Avenue. We plan to tap into the sanitary sewer at the intersection of 135th Avenue. and Moring Hill Drive. Our question is what is the the capacity of the sewer line and how many units can connect to that llne. We realize that eventually the main trunk line to the the north will have to be provided to serve the total property. Our first phase will be about 15 acres and will contain about 120 units. It will be located at the sputh east corner of the property by the intersection of 135th and Walnut Street. If you have any questions, please give me a call. I thank you in advance for your consideration in this matter. Sitcerely, Ryan O'Brien 4 _ . • l• ft" • GI 0 WASHINGTON COUNTY Arifilk ADMINISTRATION BUILDING - 150 N. FIRST AVENUE alti • HILLSBORO,OREGON 97123 trE .11 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS July 19, 1963 DEPT.OF Puiric woRks 4 WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman ROOM 201 r.30NNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman (503)648-8886 EVA M. KILLPACK JOHN E. MEEK LUCILLE WARREN < Mr. Frank Currie Director of Public Works City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 . • Dear Frank: The purpose of this correspondence is twofold.. First, you will find a draft copy of the final, adopted Transpurtation Plan along with a copy of the staff response to the City' s comments on the original draft. Second, I would like to discuss Mr. Robert Miller' s letter of July llth regarding the Murray Extension. As noted above, the copy of the Plan is not a final copy. However, only print and graphic quality will be changed. Of particular concern to Tigard will be the material and policies found on page 86. With respect to Mr. Miller' s letter and Murray Extension, as you are aware, f2entury 21 ha'- property at the west end L.)..E Gaarde Road. Mr. Miller felt the existing proposal by tbg_Caunty for the exEension of MurraiTaaEardship on that property by the anTre-it cut dBFE55i-tliTTatTerty7-------- ., Bob has followed my suggestion in arriving at the latest proposed. I will assume he submitted a copy of his plans to you with his letter. If not, please let me know. The isSue now .L5 the procedure for gaining approval from the City and County. We're willing to initiate the hearing process before the Board of County Commissioners but feel it now appro- priate to ensure City support before going ahead. Thus, I would 4 request your review and comment with the goal of working towarAs Cotncil concurrence aria-EaMaitFITZUET571-1-5the BoarTCammis8loners that the •ro.osed ali.nment and major collector dgsign (on minor arterial rig t-of-way Zs I 1 Please let me know if a meeting would be helpful. ,Sincere1y, C014 irodo or/140° Martin C. ek TraasportatiOn and Engineering Services Manager MOLIss Enclapir0 Miller an eaa u I otwornitatv emplover CC: Robert - /‘‘ 4,. 4 iiirliO• Ma ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES %M gr Suite 13•1111=1101111101115,0. 112 - 7412 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway .. 401P Portland, Oregon 97225 Phone 297-1493 . . Jiily 11, I-963• . ,1141 itl it /VI nR TOR Mr. Martin C. Nizlek, Transportation sportation Manager . Washington County Dept. of Public Works 150 N. First Avenue PCLiATjr\UINLOIFNIGIFIDG19AE8pR3TD„ Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 1 Dear Marty: I am attaching several copies of our proposed realignment of 0. the Murray Extension west and nor+h of Gaarde Street. You will note that I have made the c anges that you suggested in our meetine. of July 7. • In general, the alignment that we propose is slightly shorter 4 than the original and the extremes of cut and fill have also i been lessened. Al]. tax lots in the vicinity have been "touched" and grades are proposed that will allow residential street intersections on each property with no appreciable cut or fill at those connections. Obviously, due to the terrain, ( there are still some significant cuts and fills. In addition, no strudtures are impacted except for the one on our property. In using the above criteria we have assumed that each property served by this roadway will be responsible for its construction % as they develop. I believe that this alignment and the grades proposed will allow this. Assuming the acceptability of this proposal, may I suggest that we propose this alignment to the Cit: of Tigard as a preliminary plat application while you seek the approval of the Board of County Commissioners. I am available to do what I can to assist. . , , . 0 . sincerely, Robert N. Miller, P.E. • Cy: City of Tigard : Frank Currie, Director ,, f Public Works Bill Monahan, Planning Director m • . .1 , . C8INI1URY 21 HOMSS • 7412 S.W.5eaverton Hillsdale Hs N„Sulta 1(2 • Portland,Oreon 5/225 • (803)2074403 4 - /, . , . . ,• • , • 1,,5 ■ .0 ' '. ' - ---'-'- ..,, . ..;, • , . , .,...,,,,..0...:91x.. 6„ 4 - Ar 0,, ,, ( ..., . 4, li , (&,v-i, ASHINGTON COti 1. 17 1 , 4 iii .1 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING - 150 N. FIRST AVENUE ., 1 . -\\„:„._ . HILLSBORO,OREGON 97123 ,,.. . June , BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 29, 1983 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman ROOM 201 ' '1 BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman (503)64841836 EVA M. KILLPACK JOHN E. MEEK : 1 LUCILLE WARREN - ' * *, ,, Mr.. robeLt Miller • igliFxrn" 1.1 ■,,,riiter'.•.... ittfi~gexatt rties Centuri 21 Prope . 7412 SW Beaverton Hillsdale Highway Suite 112 JUL 1 1 19 83 l'9 , Portland, Oregon 97225 CITY OF l'IGAHD . . Dear Bob: PLANNING DEPT. ... . . ,.. • The purpose of this letter is to address your recently submitted proposal for realign- : "-rent of the proposed Murray Extension west and north of C,aarde Street. First, let , I, me note that wqsh9L114 coordinate th(?-se,AP44-beratj-9 N1-1 t.41,,thel City,pf ga,gar71. t would hope that, ,given the County'S agreement to an . arteri_al,the_ _ ,,,,will_be in suk)stantialagreerrent. . • . .,.... • We have reviewed your proposed modification of the Extension alignment and I, in turn, • l' would like to propose several modifications. First, my comments, however. ' The existing proposed alignment was approved several years ago by the Board of County , f Commissioners. While no formal, legal action fixed the alignient, it appears that t we will need to at least return to the Board with justification for an alteration. Thus, we must be defensible in proposing changes. A review with staff originally involved with the design reveals that no explicit attempt was made to review ownership/lotting patterns. This is one point in your N , favor, as is the fact that the cutting and filling along the County's proposed align- . ment might restrict your ability to access the Extension. Y . 'f Your proposed realignrrent, however, at fir glanceyould appear to almost intentionally reroute to property other than your ipwn even to tire, extent-of-impacting*a-structure or two My point here is th'at. we nead,,to rualce„ surq that th;ls is the best altemativ. , ./ , \ Second, it would be not helpful if concenso.s were nreached with surrounding/in- acted . owners. . , Considering the need to minimize impacts, especially to structures, 1 feel that beginning at about Station 49 or 5C) (ari your plan) an alignment betwen yours and the C.1.03.Inty'S might be struck which would: . , 1. "Touch' as oarl cm y,pggrqsvas, po417,1. . . , 15 affordin access . to-a: nuaber of properties; and • 2. Miss the structure referred to abOvtz , , _ 'Snort c()r this alignnent being acceptablet it may be just as well to view the option , of extending Caarde west to and along your west property line. This may leave tseveral areas of your complex in a more developable status. , .,4 lio vinitri fiiiiivirniniti3 Vinidt)I'VP 0., . Y ' , 1 ' \, . •r , ,, , . - .....,. ...�0...-,,a'_,.�.,,.. ,.:...,_„_,._a. L.,. ,.,,,._•_.., �__;.•-.a,.,....n..k.. .k:_,_.._ ,_......_._...,. _.,..�..,,__,.... ..,.,_ •.�s.....L.....t.. •..•,.,.._. ��.. .._ •...:,i,_»�.�.....,�. _,,,,r._....-__..,�a ,,.x.....+..�+�a:.,,tt'.. 4 tiv 1 � 1,4 •.,�. 1, L• Bob, I appreciate your concerns and your willingness to carryout some of this engineering work. We simply aren't staffed for it right now and it would be • up to several months before we cotilcl do much detailed work. We stand ready, however, to review submitted material with an attempt to keep the overall gals in mind. SincL eiy, Martin C. Nizlek Transportation Manager MCAT:ja:2:2 • • is I • } I F r ` Page 2 I ohe;;± Miller Jc ile 29, 1983 .,...,,. i„.. ..,.n,.� .n�,,.,..,,, '...,,n.i.,,..,•. -v.x ....,,.,.�'... ,,.n...,.�u.�,a„.�,.,....,,,.�..�•,.,o,.u,.,.u, .�. ..,n nw„�w5i n-..,...•n.u.nr.�,c w•.�s.w��..n•k... .•,vxn _ e I , • 47841 II CIWOFT1ARD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON June 20, 1983 s Robert N. Miller 'Century 21 Properties, Inc. 7412 S.W. Beaverton Hillsdale highway Suite 112 Portland, Oregon 97225 0 Dear Mr. Miller: Per our meeting on June 2, 1983, I am sending you the City's preliminary observations related to your development proposal on the northwest corner of S.W. 121st Avenue and S.W. Gaarde Street: 1. Within both the City's and County's Transportation Plans,, a connection from 121st and Gaarde to the northwest is referenced. On the City's Transportation Plan this connection is called as �. a series of minor collector connections linking 135th, Walnut, Bull Mountain and Gaarde. On the County's Transportation k?Ian this connection is called out as an arterial, directly linking Gaarde to Murray Road. At this point the City a1ad the County have agreed to disagree until the 99W corridor study is completed later this year. In any case, however, we have agreed not to preclude any transportation �• c.,ptions related to the Murray Road extension. The street shown on your plan would be classified as local street and would not meet the criteria stated in the City's pending , _ agreement with the County. 2. The land use designation for the site is Low Density Residential with an underlying zoning district classification of R-7 (PD). 4_ The density proposed on your project meets these requirements. 3. The intersection at S.W. 121st. and, Gaarde would need to be improved to City standard to at least 200 feet in each direction along 121st and Gaa_"de. 4. Each private street with more than six units abutting the street gill be fully improved to City standards, icy ludi J Page 2 June 20, 1983 Robert N. Miller Il, 5. The storm drainage system will be required to be connected to the existing piped system or a storm water storage system will need to be developed for the site, and approved by the City Engineer. 6. The sewer lite alignment will, need to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. \` These comments are only intended tc be preliminary and based on the City's brief review of your plan submitted in late May, and other conditions may be required. Any subsequent submiLtals will be reviewed on their own merit. If you have any questions please contact the Department of Planning and ;\ Development. Sincerely, eremy . Coursolle ss°.,ciate Planner P � it . 1 • 1 i V Q1 0 ` f. d • • li • -...,., . .............. .. .:I..,.,, ....' ...»,. . I. ,...«,...., ,, _., .., .,,r.... „ .. . .. .. ,. ..«F, ..r.. uu iw f ,. aai y ea„xuµ.wu e.. .e . w.wwW I . t „ ■ COUNTY dr 111.116.. c. 0 411111111111111 i WASHINGTON UN WASHINGTON .‘ .N., ..4 itratiMik. •< ,,IIIm yil a 1 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING - 150 N. FIRST AVENUE HILLSBORO,OREGON 97123 , BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS June 8 1983 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS . . WES MYLLENBECK, Chairman ROOM 201 BONNIE L. HAYS, Vice Chairman (503)648-88E6 EVA M. KILLPACK .• JOHN E. MEEK LUCILLE. ,WARREN • Mr. AO13. r Vice President/Ger 'ral Manager , Century 21 Properties • Suite 112 .' ' 7412 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy. Portland, OR 97225 :. O. Dear Mr. Miller: Herewith you will find copies of a plan view and profile for the extension of Murray Boulevard to Gaarde street in Tigard. These drawings and associated preliminary engineering were pre pared prior to the current proposal for the extension of a -______ minor arterial. Thus, there are some discrepancies, such as right-of--way slope requirements, but for the most part the general centerline alignment is as shown. ( _. .0..9,s9,,,uecifically, th aignment across the Century 21 property ,...,,,,,„,11..,..f.„,,,e..a.„,,,-„,„ Gaarde-- : r, -. 6,E,:-.-,-,.,,,:, 1 „-•.- -, • :,,•a,,•, 1-, .,:ti., ,., should' be",-re 1,eet as oppose . so,, ,te exten- sion, south. Second, the indicated alignment on the Century' 21 . „,.....,.... .,......, propert.w....y may be altered in a minor fashion so long as. appropriate , . , standards are met and the general alignment north or east of your . . , property is protected (or equally feasible alignments clearly identified with similar engineel'ing detail) . . .); W ,ch respect to appropriate standards -• the County seeks the general alignment depicted on the functional class plan currently * , . being dopted Dy the Board of County Commissioners. The road would have an 80 foot right-of-way dedication requirement. However, an interim design equivalent (other than right-of-way) to a major collector will be developed at present. This design would not preclude the opportunity to finalize a wider facility in the future. This may be achieved in any numbez of ways. We would look fort a logical design, however. . o , We appreciate t your willingness to cooperate with us in ensuring adequate access to/from your site. We look forward to working with you. .. . sincerely,, c? . ) i Larry Ride , MCN! SS 1 Mid Director of Public Works LR: Attahments k • - CC: :6-',ntlk Currie an equal opportunity employer . ! , . t , . 1 'it ir' , 4. , 4, •., . --- . i c r ., „.K, :d I 4 ^,,r� • 114, `,,( 'ffl .\9 rk TiGARD WATER DISTRICT ._ _ SN, ,, ' — V d �j�t3�++1 9. 'W. Ct9hAPIf�R+�tAt,.r�T. U\ t iciArsii Tnl�•.�©, ORC4cN 97223 C1`1 t `G Dx? PN,pN.E.(5D3) 63' 9-1554 '.\\... . May 26, 1983 From: Tigard Water District �:� 't`6'3 To: City of Tigard, Planning Commission Lill t�- P ' P O Box 23397 P1j\NNING • Tigard, OR. 97223 ' Subject: Water Availability • , • The Tigard `Kates Disti ic t can provide the mininium State of Oregon water service requirements: It is the pollLcy of the Tigard Water District to serve water • to any property within the district boundary; property owners • • pay the pipe, construction, and meter costs. • The district buys most of its water from the City of Lake Oswego (Cl&ckamas River) and its availability to supply is subject to a mutual agreement. `bter is available for each lot at the lot line of "'` Bechtold Property, Tax lot 40,. S 3 & 10,251 , Tax lot 1400 Sec 4 , ' i " ,�:gton corms y ""' 2S14 • at tie time of sale or lease of each lot in quantity and quAlity 2 for dmestic use as. determined by the Health Division of the Departt�lert of Human Resources. Owner-applicant Centur 21 Pro•erties Snc Suite . 223 7412 • Beaverton�-Hills•a e *wy, 'or am R'. Description. Bechtold_Pr.Q,per 4y. T :x_1.Qt 41) A ^ 4 .'ax lot # 1400 Sec 4 251 4 .1 ,. 47.,44a. /7":e ' ilifr, ."t7 • • Robert E. Santee, Administrator/Engineer 6. T ;GARD WATER DISTRICT R q cc: Cen bury 21 Properties ,,. " a Robert N Miller 1°� •• e,_ n R r • 44 - \144 - CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DEPARTMENT SCHOOL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR RESIDENTIAC, DEVELOPMENTS OF 4 UNITS OR MORE Since one aspect of development impact relates to schools, the following information must be completed, and this sheet submitted to the Planning Department with the effected application. Please call 639-4171 if there are any questions. 1. THE FOLLOWING IS TO BE COMPLETED BY THE DEVELOPER • - Name of person or firm developing the property Century 21 Properties, Inc. Person to contact David L. ringdulph Phone number 2ç7-1493 1i?..ing address Suite 112, 7412 Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway - Portland, Oregon 97225 - Legal description of property being proposed for development ( iap number and tax lot(s) number Lot 401 , Map 251 3CC and fr. Lot 1400, ' I Map 251 4 - In order to .expedite responses from the school district involved, please • inidcate a general vicinity description of the property being proposed for development West off of SW 121st Ave at SW Gaarde St. ■ * Does the proposed development require a: (please check appropriate box) Plan Amendment Zone Change P. XXX Subdivision Variance Conditional Use Permit okk'n, - Total number of dwelling Units being proposed 43 • • 4 • ' • , 4ry Z 1 3"^: Y `t;,; 44:. 4,M. � �w,.n.wr.u.wrrw.«wr.s }�.; a ., r w r.r.nr.rww.v,.¢,wr.,.. +w r� w f:. ,.t t: V, 1r'r l t x.:c...a` a r. y,, rl.. .. cP _� +; ,. :: v:,tltiplex 4 Multiple Family •° i r. ♦T� '';', -- How zna.ny acres are involved in tfas ptoposal ^� - When is construction likely to begin. year 198 month ,�,t . _ ry';'. "- Is the development to be completed in phases? No " If so, how �, ":. many and over what time period ;`' ," - When is the last unit scheduled to be completed. year ftwht unknown -- ,r: 'b :: I:, SUBMIT THE COMPLETED FORM TO THE BUSINESS OFFICE OF THE SCHOOL ,C"R' 3' ICT IN WHICH THE SITE BEING PROPOSED FOR bEN LOPMENT IS LOCATED , III. THE FOLLOWING IS TO BE COMPLETED BY 2 if?POPRI TE SCHOOL DISTRICT CYAL' ",. SCHOOL NAME EXISTING ENR� 11.4:'. CAPACITY p 1Vt Elementary Charles F. Tigard 484 . Y, Intermediate Fowler d'unioE f1igh 817 Hirgh Tigard Seiior High - ,270 .r pz Additional Cotmerits.� r The bui1dir gs n .*ected. ' ;aver the space rto he .., s the Ii' 1 stiit:ento who :ott1d pe ,ted .; come from this de' 'e opMent0 , r In o:�tiatiorl prr vided h; . ... ,o i, r M ' te � .le hone y 684-2209 9 Date: 1983 A fl I IV. itETU'PN TO tVt ,OPER EOM SUUMISSION wl.ta APPLICATION (Name 8t: addreswtr on page 1) ,' rr Ina I r iY r 1 k vr.i,rar,i+ +rMrr:.r r .11rK'N.: (yr " •'.i• L f'.'. ... °'f .1,. Y: L t '"..•. r.... .. .. " ... ! -.r _... _...'It t_.... irr.. t Y •� '.. '? t Y is ,ti :',.,4.4 . r. y..�,.��,y...,����yy�. l } .� x �ex'eb ecrta J, ,�t . t,�; .aka ,�, 1 � , ` •' a true and COfl ect :icily o f , ore 'oin1; is the c'�r the on ,e 4 �,:. Iola thereof 1 1 57 Afr�FRICr,�TITLE l; ,r: , M OF COMPANY ( G:,PJ, yr..'� . ,v i' �.. , ' ` , y, ' `' ' '"S . ' 1 1'i•�.14.4 y^rir" .• • . A • • i, ty ,'AMEN Jil tJ'E' 6.3114 'I'IEL SALE or I' T 1,,E►EtOE't.0 'Y 0 0 0 0 2 7 9 6 ; ' tllfQlnfYlCfllflfr �I�Q 1e11 4 „ fkotK�o.,� -�i,men'y�SY3 1 1 1+ 1 ell,a r�alrrr+r nl Crrc n �� `"�; ' � Z � .. 1 11 , ....t °`- •1"il t }`<+=1t1 i'rll;N'i �ffl7tiG t h it; '`�i�+�'' day of January, 1980 ' ' � C A heiv Ptt LOT; (+E�t'E�171,1E'E%I�N'l'' t,'1r4, an Oregon t:t11.11ox'.�t:ion (Seller or "i' �'Sn r�g r ••7. • . . . 1 a. w " ' t• - K�If 1'•11(iMu/`��?714• • {; .k!";�' '• Ettrl.r') a and•c.rATOiri 21 1"Itu E,HT1 E:S, lE;C., an Oregon corporation (L'trl°t?L) f) ■ w ,, , ' , n• •1 .,...r" •!,• n,.a'*.�Y.;; 1'`{ tit 1 T N S 5 1: K ,� „ , , tiOCIMA , Seller desires to ;ell and Buyer &sires to �'' .' buy, the real..ilia persona 1 1Propert�+.hcireinirtct� dese iLe0i ` ;i4'i.�' . ..k;.- ,Tia 1 , ''y,r ' ..., �,I'a•,� •r •rg74•'r.F .3.13 c 1'icrti. ;+ NO i l%n r roVx in consic'lor;Ition of t . .1,1reC:1+�nts herein ' ,.^ ' ' rr}S, ft tP.G ;I ,1 i' SL '4 t.i"s chill' for the 1!s"i,MPI t.5 t.,) 1)C made a S here i no f ter set forth, Seller +'''""gym r ,,,�_tt, 4 7..1:44:'''it , .f. , durees t..11 sell. t:�'+ Buyer :3rial Buyer .igre'eS to buy, ,u en the tents •..`, c; and �:•_,nditions+ se't. fert_h. in this l�Creement, that certain property - ••� '• „, .: ", ;OCai,ed ill the C.tilt�.y' f5.r, t ashin ten, State of O2�et7on, rapre ' 1"� rar1 iekaart 6:2-scribed as fo71,oM . {• . ' ;„h pat•o e 1 of, approximately 4S acres, more or . ` ` • ' :,•';:;••••.,.' ` ' , ' 4" les , or real. p1o1x1a•ty} sittiate3 in t∎ashi:1Cton 4 •• .•,-•... ., . . •Con onnt y, Ore.∎••41, more particularly ,,e eribed '•' is H 1 i Y ��9 " n 1 ra 1•y�''.2yt..,,>t•.i� �lY rla fi"�'� .. A11 4iltik�f. 7l lit L�ia'.Z1e�7'1iC t.to .1:•i� ]..Cvr'� :Ct� ^^ • herein by this reference' (hereinafter C321oa� • . irt't' L,,,wa t,..r 1.• , !'the l'rt•�pertt4'")b 1 i �cn• �. r,4.41.. 4.1...it�+ '1 ((aa//__ tl i, ,i O r ,1 n•fir't?• r Z"'1 ar o t The total t a l purchase r c;- s e price i ce c f. s a_3 ,re a:c ' ..;;rt�' •4 .r r, '• ' 'Q �' i•l' Veh if.Th ikll'et ag'reeC. o Nay t.`J Seller, shall , r•, ="}"n`,}'4,J�.A.,„,,'1�'l;luai�.. 1k•1 �'�1ti'i 1.17;� l7riti 1 1�e.j4'C>1 . Y } + �t''h�'fy!,A, ?AN.� � rl;,Nird' t e the sum of $719,05204,00 a1iv shall be payable .?S ::.il+rb2'a: e,A, " � '7, ' • ' 4a) :" sum of :n60,0000,00 1;7 cash C'in C. •C,1 Ati.S.'d a,::,e' '' ',...°t` " "vt,.. 1 e• 8 to y} Garnesa. mOne'y heretofore paid _i1 a.., ,h ..1 �trfer) �,. ;ra'' + � "1y 41. 'W._ i + 1 , • 1 1'' • p ?•ctG,lri.d ip 4Vr`N',,.",,,,,a5,,, Y • • r'4' . y r '., K '1. , r. C 1 '`` '`i W A+•w,bN' 1 '1,},''i al ') .re ;,.em ,y;}a g x• arici l �al,�ri. a�� e ��r..h .tee z •4 r� ? r �' ,1�eice Shall be .i'(txw 'as 'brollrx'iis,:' he sup. .o: $5594522 00 a le , f. ' + t"'i�Lr ,t, , i«"' >, 1 .40,-,,,.,,,•,,'.44(7 /� a 4i• a ' `1 t;'aa 3.�'.^I,i is , . ' '• . , . , , ' ' �� .(�yt.+i�/w,1y��/�'},1'/ ai�,b,��"{+�i 't' ,+ ,' s 'of' 1.1 '5.71)4'60 _ch I.1. br •- ,. 1'�,•nr11i,♦1y. , ,.,i •tti+•IIts:..11'''''';•,'.1: ���.�, ` ''++ �y ? iiil �i�a/)r4T� 1]e J�,/,/Ya ►/y ��a y� }� cJa� to t �i , , Wry;i+'�•i!f'�.'' .•0lt",;;;. l`• ' ,,Nit ` :4 ‘el! �1utzj , +,^La s Gll il:i1.4: t at �.ho V.a e b lilt �G' �•- .4 l 1 ii 1 "..i1:1Tlry G:2 ..t: 1 iir,'�.ir?.,Ki arM r', 1fy Ilt.;f •,,,,,••,,,•••"., ' .. .�, ✓D tiyk by h...i 4 , uTl(`►Ai'1� Tvx:t :�tt the'r�. �t�-,m �.�.osx�: •riu.. :� �s r., ' ttra ,r,, , 1 .y�"1 h .$' a�h O �a h Y,� y a «att,- .ii s*r.- ,i. 'a,+.,'G t"1btLC `e' �� 7.51+ it:lfi4! -p iL,ll f/U�y►^1�U11 tJyi,�l.i.�J '. .w....1 « iil.�.....,C'..tr.4 ;,..IK'i,4,•V's":',/.717'1,.':'.:41- 1+r.l ^ ri,t•rtIhr•Z aI , 14.41 y'1 40-f 11 yf,Uki�•�+0 -'Dl.IL"s �r.^•.,`:i•':.itt.,:, itt.1,Z4: •C ' r.'trt,,,�f,i ;44-r•,„,,gt1,,,,r,„14 ',,, I, 4,. w -$.;‹1�t04 4�4, r•} 7L5,," ` f:1,8,2 +•ti`•, 41� ,c7 Lid/++ ,30 'Jlus G.•.,✓.:,r..Law �,1t4"G•,:+.�..tt .l'�I,tt...�,,'a;,Y',Fil ti�,til.t,,v,r�'.4;i '�, err ,' '+ 1?O. f, - • t' 7',�"'► Fy VlV..00 . ,14!•1414,44 i dpi1. N,.I" . ,,o. •• +'1 ' " t yir} Wa7},S:+wWd:Jp�J'.1 1• .iµ a�t y yF +4,.,c�, +c, l� .},/y}y Y, y �y '� :. +, :0;`!,.,:7,1N ,'i�'',ii f44y,+"`'`�1.,�' "�' ; ' • ' it`^L i/ ' /�t�. t $.l A no a. .7 4'�f 01 1}0 6-U a, s;i F t.:., ..isi. y az._:i:.i ;, ~}.'1i' ,4,1 'r�•a��,,i.",.,;,'i� ,: '('1tr't`Flrat) 'fib- 1.11t tietR1b �t `t:`1C? .ol.tit'L'1'1`I4 LCJntr/lot .b. +Usti b twE., 1 , rr5;�x "r'1b� } ; a„' fur f' ;, '`' 1 „,„t-..:401. j ' til(inyn ),,• 41 h1:ci1.4 tied $i l lr h ',[1.d •A�1t t4 e4 t1 lit .8ta1'at. ; u • ' r•, 0' Mt:t,}t``l..,,rrttatl'1. X40k 4,tt. Eti31t4thOb"at'trrr 'i'ititt141 .i]r t-etit+llrt.7• „J•, d.7 F'.4r1 (the L ,r.F,Aty,.`t v+-,.: t' �4 : n t ?i e t 4, . i i i 1 « .y W». f � 1`�'i+a:'}"i!'�'Y �" t« �.� •��I `�l�lrP(liC1n1: `?CI..L'1f GI#a.Yli4. ..1} �..��1v.,,, !:al..+� ,el!'�'rllc:i,,..� r ' � •�•', , rl o the L»i,rt. �1lt. cs a.i.la b u ',; e v 411'j,"` v-,,..%,,),..,f,---,, 1 5. tip how zh tt,ri I+tl;,�� � 'Om tr, ax�,'n� rf41tw� ,� # r. .,�M. f i y `y l a, 1`i 48 117;14' 11`idl N;�,'t N+ri' 1'4I :��i,itL! '�'1�J�-1 '�.1`I�rL,L�'�4+~+,, L'•f ,y + `.+i„ ..',IF`7 (i1. . o. .. .......,_...s ytftrr tr. i i_,_w,__._..,.,......,. .t.rnll k '' ' 4Ett1.L�, �i �'� t,�f 1`iiEltti�il.'1`i«,., •f}n �1.Jl..tllitft�'f,.tt :1�'„ #'1�T.Z ..�« 4� .;r„�r :, • i y+ yi{ 1 i y y i y ,` 't14 y y �iitww y .».r y 4 y. ;a.ri�,W �,. • , 41'4"ti1 U VI' w.A t+'4`it,t,r4.L,01.4� thz..•.,% "1�' w�1./,W., !,k44,t`t,ta ttit o.i.rM., slit,,aa,1 eit,..i i ::).1, ..Juw: , * . i ,,,,4 ,,,. r . ; •., }• d• t•,, r. ..-0 n t...., otti Mw' ,,-..4 1�:•`' ,.1., ,•0 S' 0'i,tH,,N- k t` • ' ,« . �• x } 4 Ma�.Y.1' kA:"•11 •.. • h • i. * •, n , • " M i* .i M ° " ' a'* ° , • 1 'tNS Md",t' °' it�°W ' , ,.. • ' ' 1aVY4�,�„ 'is ^udJ7 i „n n •q j u, •wrourv,w,..r. ase,a� ;.tom , »:..t,.. ,„ •„? ,rw+..+�•.1...,.•.«„��... ' , 1 , ,;l” 1 'T r tl, v. ,, • • • • • • • • Y • ' w "„.J wijNi{Y4:I.wh• • • 1 L Mr �'. 1I ' '• •� ', • • " • 1 ••" • ` 1., • l . ' , ~ w h y,,,. Tr q�a�ltij f"'�, .' r. `• ; a, 1 l 1 , fa «« . :• f'4`�S•�I •C''.A:t7•f,„7.„..1 41 •,% ••`.1 •t (•> �, . •. r .•• .n.• «• �•.r M.V r r.�.�,••.•••b•1 ...x..•r+....ww....J ..u�,..••w��...�...•• • • •..... • . ' • fr.I,....■•• •.•` M. C v Y^_ Q��vN r ,breach, default, or misrep,:esentation in connection with any of ' t t',,' • the provisions of this Agreement, the successful or prevail tng , _ gi„ da N�'�.te4b__,. : . party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable r1,,.w:; •_ '�:'' f( attorneys% fees and other costs incurred in that action or proceeding ' r•:i,..,4,,,,e,�:#;;:.,e I'.+ a•,• and in any appellate proceedings relating thereto, in addition to '•10;°tt`''.el."'�+M`'`;•'`�r :;,' any other relief to which such party may be entitled. • ' 27. Real Property Taxes: Real property taxes are to be , .f..`•"; 1.`•,'.' r prorated for the '.:s , '• `� current year fa closing and raersonal. property 1 •' ,.,�•'•'�, z, taxes to be prorated on a calendar year basis. , ..,':,,,;�y ';:°fit`•;',;,;; {�' 23. Number, Gender and Captions: Unless the context other-. '.,.'r`°Mere"`, "'ter"! wise requires, as used herein, the singular shall include the Y ± •. ti 1,1 • plural, the plural shall include the',sirtgtular, the masculine " and neuter'shall each include the masculine feminine and neuter " 1r" • • 4,i, •'�'.'r-e and generally all grarrunatical changes eha),l be made, assumed and implied to make the provisions hereof apply equally to one or more ,;,•,, individuals and/or corporations. All captions used herein are + '; ti• 1'' intended solely for convenience of reference and shall in no way [ 'i 'J•have the effect. of defining, diminishing or enlarging the rights , t'' „" ' .. or obligations of the parties or affecting the construction or ~"'`...004e«r: .:.,':. interpretation of any party of this contract. , • ::";'1'''%%..., " •,. 29., Governing Law: Validity, interpretation, performance, ae remedies, and all other aspects of this Agreement shall be !.e'it,,>�'",n•.y%fi ,,,;e,; ,,e.f :' governed by the •laws",of the State of Oregon., • �- eel,:t'••''z�'"`r r .,;4 ;' 30, Entire Agreement: This Agreement constitutes the !^ ',N,.teee�:,, }�r: {nla,' � 1 entire, final and complete agreement between the parties relevant • 1 . ' -''`' 1. to to the subject matter hereof, and it' supersedes and replaces all "*9`^* :r,`4,�^*`� written and oral agreerr(+ents rei evrant to the subject mahter hereof • • • , ,A pw ..r Nvt.r�, +.`C". ' heretofore made or existing by and between the pa ties or their +'', ,;- '''t , .i'',• '' representatives. ' - ,. g,„.,. .•,. ',' ' ";: K' 31. Credit for+Attorneyys Pees: Seller Sias agreed to pay w IL:e"�;" �•k;,;1'-`e�7itiA"�;'�a 1 one-half of the attorneys fees for preparation of this Agreement , ..• �;��}elzarb �•,:e.; ' 'ee :A :;:e by Buyer's attorney and accordingly Buyer shall be entitled to •, , .1` fit ,,w,,,„r.,, ., v2..41 aC. a credit on the downpa yment in the sum of �.,,_ 4,000.0d� �...« 'P t 444;` ;; ''::17,4''�' �4," ,•,'' `..,. 1 ," • •a e",,,.''•�,.1.164 ,`,a 1'"',, ,!'••••,1 ' ' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this ,Agree-, i .,•; ` meni-, to be c,#ecuted in dtl,pli•cate ;,his•.,~ '3 • day of January, 1990,► ' re.e.o!te^'�'."„4,..'r'':. �,�t ,�,.o,ti ` LUTZ ,DEVELOPMENT CO. lw e:4:7'.Yno,{ �'1� ' • A Lutz President, ''`'"�,�+►�-"&�.y.;• '�/r -t, .. "r . ~ , ^%t�... .Y,•:J:w]1•V T'1 i'.f1 Si:r•”f•Y" 1 % . . ;, 1 4,I, •" ' r ,, . BY , It ...••■■••■1■••■••■•■i' ,.... '-1w-'', Secretory 1, ' z v-�• - ` �uYvR: , « " N f V "• - xen '4.. i C CENTURY ` r Wt lY3, L Gi t r , , aav' Oringdulph f Pr'ns dent ,, , ,. a '• % % ''!1. •a '• ' +iy 1 , w w - . 8,84,..•i 6W48,440,..... . t.01,? ,-,0a„,, d•IW;�.• i„y,.au,+. r •M.:: w r , 4'••' ••Yi',..4:$4,:� r4 6'1114 ' 6lhl• {”4'1"4.** , , t,' a «+ ' . ! i, .« +r, 1 1.(A, �+, . *i K r ,L• G y ,�i5�. 1 .YNdd !I�' , 1 r.. „uµ.♦ ,•.r.a r.. �w,,.�'.�.' +v.+u,ru.�.,.µ,y,. i',I. .a,,,,,w.,,....,:,:.n%r,"•w.... ,Y-Y .JJY MNrN tM'E'w X.« N."a f ww.:.".i +. )I'M"'• y'.!-Y•'.r�.-2+'t'rtAwW�"n.m ,w�:L"�, •_,_ J Y r4t.w 4N .El M ... y,•x"ANM1U•PF cnm.aa<rh t''t ! '1, �... i,; ,'1 1 i 1" ,y. The following will be considered by the Tiga��t Planning Commission on Nrivernber 15, 1983 at 7:30 p.m.at Fowler Jr. nigh School lecture room,10865, 7 .:•., S.W.Walnut,Tigard,OR.Further information may be obtained from the Direc-, E -4: tor of Planning&Development at 12755 S.W.Ash,Tigard,Oregon or by calling 0 ,-; 639-4171, Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 1783 Marvin Smith NPO#6 Zone Change ZC 13-83 A request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from low to medium density residential and a Zone Change from R-7PD to A-L2 to facilitate a 174 -. unit condorninum complex on approximately 8,5 acres. The property is desig- • nated Low Density and zoned R-7PD. Located:Between Cook Park and Tigard • High School oft SW 92nd Ave.,Wash.Co.Tax Map 2S1 14A,Lot 1000. „' Subdivision S 9-83 Bond Park#2'NPO#5 A request for a Preliminary Plat approval for*.i 24 lot single-€cmily residen-, .',. `,' tial subdivision on 3.75 acres.The property is designaf.i. Medium Density and! <s ,�;c; is zoned A-12. Located: on SW 79th Ave. off Durham, Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 ,*. 12C,Lot 2300. , Sign Code Exception SCE 3-83 Wayside Inn NPO#4 . A request for an exception from the sign code to allow the placing of an f.,',':'0' additional free-standing sign, 100 square feet per face and 30 feet hi height,�c ' `"t identify the Wayside Motel, The property is designated General Commercial' • and is zoned C-5.Located at 11460 SW Pacific Hwy. ifs;; :,;:•:„`• Sign Code Exception SCE 4-83 First Interr;tate Bank NPO#2 ' : A request for an exception from the sign code to allow raising the height of an existing 26 foot high sign by eight or tern feet. The property is designated; 1 •;. "� General Commercial aid is zoned C-5.Located at 11760 SW.Mall. 1 Subdivision S84183 '? ;Century 21.Homes Inc.NPO#3 . A request rod'a."Canceptual and Detailed Plan approval of a Planned Devel- ;;,� ., opment, consisting of 215 single family units.The property is designated Low Density Residential and zoned R-7 PD. Located at 13900 SW 121st Ave.,Wash. •••.:- Co.Tax Map 2S1 3CC,Lot 401 and 2S1 4,Lot 1400. ., TT6259 Publish November 3, 1983 •M.'r ,1`t r 9, ,f z,, 11 •,yqf ii' r 1 , '1, '.. 1 .,, y .,.. .. '..w-'P*."a.+wr��x>v '..•Fr..nl;..-a.: t" ,,, ., , ,...� � •i .b . t • ,h , t � 1 'S f �'i !. j,. w s! °' . k, MEMORANDUM s'' ,,: „, 71.5 TO City Council FROM: P1ti . ' • g department R SUBJECT - Community Services and Transportation Pla ' , DATE ' AI 197$ .,, m ._....G,..____.. The enclosed draft Community Services and Transportation Plan is scheduled for discussion by the City Council at its September 18 study session. The Planning Commission has already held a study `l session on this element of the Comprehensive Plan and will hold a hearing on it September 12. ` The draft Community Services and Transportation Plan is che product of several months of staff work. It can be regarded as one of the y z;`' most important portions of the revised Comprehensive Plan, which I will be completed next year, since it deals with the basic services and facilities provided by lo.-2,a1 government agencies and private utilities . There is a summary of the major recommendations at the ' . '` beginning of the draft . This should help you determtae the sections of the draft to be evaluated in most detail. Maps of facilities and services are not, yet in reproducible farm but will be displayed or .,a 1 available •at the meeting (and can also be examined at Tigard City ? ', Hall) . The 'maps are also in draft form and will be revised before ' P Bibliography;�� final versions are printed. The Biblia�,rapny a.s also enclosed. In . .'1 .4' your analysis,, keep in mind the following points : 1 . Draft recommendations are largely based upon or. compatible with the existing Tigard Community Plan and its adopted amendments ,: < ' (NPO PiR ns)-i, Where a recommendation would entail major changes : , in the 'Community Plan , including NPO Plans , this is noted. 2 Major changes in the draft document, on the basis Planning Commis$,ion 'recommendations , response from other jurisdictions and '` .' special districts, and new inf of mation will be presented at the �, - study 'session. P e w•w 3. Since it is a draft resulting from several months of work, there may be errors and omissions of data as well as outdated information. Some of these are already known and appropriate revisions will t• be made before printing. Please advise staff of any errors or mistakes which you may perceive 4, The C :'ty of Tikard's recent budgetary crisis was not anticipated r at the time several portions of this plan were drafted. I-Towever, :` the need for the proposed projects is not invalidated by temporary financial adversity. Indeed; for capital improvements in par- , f ticular , postponement of action will not make the need disappear ,.,. a. but will. just raise the cost. tv, ,.,, •• ,F :. , .. ,,-,,, • . .., • ., f., :i .` ",1 . u, h-+w�f5`*7'^ ,zv.�.w.wv K w..a..+re wrr a,.wwn.»r .L �;�µb i n, � x e r Y • 4 % W . . 4. •-■., " .. '' '', ..;" , ■■' 41, .. , ..,..., , ,, . c, ., ....,... ..,.-,i Page 106 .:-„... :- . COLLECTOR STREETS Purpose: to collect and distribute traffic between arterial and .. .'s ,. local streets or directly to traffic destinations . A . 's,' . . secondary purpose is to provide access to abutting prop- properties . . . Collect Standards : N . .:s.'.. ;, .. ,...:' Right-of-way width 50 - 60 ft . minimum s ,s Pavement width 36 - 44 feet Moving lanes 2 . ., Volume 1, 500 - 13 , 000 vehicles :...:.' per day „..'. Driving speed 20 - 35 miles per hour -".. =' . Collector Streets Designated by the Plan : -' . , . . Main Street ,- 0„:„... Commercial Street ,1 , ,s.., . -• Burnham Street McDonald Street .. , . Ash Avenue (Hill-Burnham) ',..,'.-,... Greenbarg Road (south of North Dakota) .:..., Tiedeman Avenue v North 1.)akota 1.:".. Tigard (Pacific-Tiedeman) , !... Grant Avenue s .., :‘,"•,' 72nd Avenue (40' pavement between Pacific and , Hightiay 217) r,= Hunziker Street .,:., ,:s•s: '..',...-, Cascade Boulevard Walnut Street(NPO #3-see arterial streets above) , - Gaarde Street , ,. s'.; . s. „,.... 121st Avenue ,..,. Bull Mountain Road (44 ' pavement) ,s...: Beef Bend Road (44 pavement) . Bonita Road . 135th Avenue (Scholls Ferry-Walnut) -. .?, Sattler (Hall-98th Avenue) '..: ,.s ,-% 98th Avenue (Murdoch-Durham) 97th Avenue (McDonale -Murdoch) Murdoch Street (97th-98th) .. 1 . Summerfield Drive (Durham - 98th) . ..i .. ... Requiring a. 36-foo.t pavement section: Franklin Street 70th (south of Pacific) 1...,.„ Oak (west o' Hall Boule,ard) ,.. i Atlanta (west of 68th Avenue) .. , „., i .. , . ,.. -- , ,... -.. , b,.. ,.- ,.,.,. . .'..-, ,T.'' 14'",:, * "';'":..', .:* '', -1 . 1 'V44.‘'” ■‘k''"s\ ' ,l'. ' * .''' '., ' ' y. ' . • . -% , ' (:' . '' ::'''.•:' ' .4'. 0;a, . 7,'' s'', ''''''''''' ' 4`'..,r '4 2. .7.'t .. , : . -, . ,..' . -4,,,* '•'--,.....*,..-t , ,..' r?:r. ..\ 1'W "1' r Page 107 Requiring a 40-foot pavement section : j..is 68th Avenue (south of Pacific) `` :4 Planned Hampto, to 69th westerly loop road .' Planned. Dartmouth of Pfaffle le connection (with 48 feet :., at the inter;$ectlon of Pacific Highway) Pfaffle Street Atlanta-Haines (east of 6u;h Avenue) ;,'. LOCAL STREETS ", streets not specified for arterial or collector status All remaining .� Purpose: to provide access to properties abutting the street , �;. Local Standards : New Streets Right-of--way 50-60 feet (50 foot minimum) Pavement width 32-36 feet ,, ` Moving lanes 2 Volume 0-1500 vehicles per day ';a. Driving speed 10-25 miles per hour : 40 feet radius turn around' and , � ".� ' . � � � � � Cul-de-sacs � � � � ��,�� �I a 400 feet maximum length >". Washington County 's street classifications and standards differ in important ways from, those established by the City. Tigard's "Collector" ':'. ''- classification has different standards than the county 's "Major Collectors''" f ''';::' a0' -- 60 ' right-of-way and 36 ' 44 ' paved section compared with 70 ' i: ; ., right--of-way and 44' paved section. Under the city's classifications , '''' ,„. specific streets also vary in terms of the standards to which they are ', to be improved. Specific differences between City and county classifications include , ,` the following: ',, 1 . Hall Boulevard is shown by the county to cross the Tuaiatin : , River as an arterial while the City plans do not address this possibility , 2.. Te county designates Baylor as a collector but the City classifies it as a local street . 4.�` it r1,`; i , .a 3 . Durham is shown realigned at Vanno Creek, but the City NPO *5 Plan accepts the present alignment , - , 4. The county classifies 72nd as an arterial, but the City plan; this as a collector, t 5, The county classifies 71st (north of Pacific) and Oak Str e' t (east of Rail) as ,collectors, but the NPO ,�`. plan classifies i, . n these two strec is as local. 77 i - ` r .., ;' , • ," .t."'..• ,. •. . . ) . . .•', .., "...:, '..,: Page 109 ;:i terms of traffic volume, accident frequencies are more widely distributed ,o. ".... (see Appendix) . The most accident-pron ?. locations ,then , are as follows ( in order) v..... 4.0.,.. , 1 . Scholls Ferry Road and 135th 2 . 98th and Summerfield Drive ,....4, 3. Garrett and Cresmer (possibly a statistical artifact) 4. Fonner and 115th (possibly a statistical artifact) 4. Bonita and 74th , - ., , 4. Grant and Johnson 5, Scholls Ferry Road and Highway 217 .0.4 6. Pfaffie and 79th 7. Walnut and 128th ..:, 7. Pacifil and Hall , 4,.. S. Pacific and Highway 21'i 9. Pacific and Lower Villa Ridge Way 9. Sattler and 96th (pos'sibly a statistical artifact ) . . ..: ,. 10. Hall and Durham• :* ... .' Washington County ' s cUrrent Traffic Safety Study identifies two inter- ";.„I sections within the Tigard Plan Area as among the 26 worst on county . .i roads and county-state roads . The Greenburg - Tiedeman intersection ranks only 17th in total accident frequency within the Tigard area, -, however, according to Tigard Planning Department calculations(12th . ..,'j in rank when traffic volumes are considered) , and Upper Boones Ferry . Road It 72nd Avenue is far down in the rankings we have determined, and ,. ' -' 10 the discrepancy with county 3.nformation is puzzling. . During the course of its study, the county solicited public sug- , 4 gerdtioPs of critical problem areas through a questionnaire puolished in 4.. 4 , . , local newspapers. The citizen suggestions of critical locations in the . Tagard Plan Area are summarized here. Pacific and Bull Mountain(2-4 responses) .:-.. . :'.., North Dakota and Greenburg (2-4 responses) Oak & Hall Tiedeman and RR ,,,.. Tedeman & Walnut Walnut and 112th .. ..' Greenburg over pass of Highway 217 Pacific and Fischer Road ..:, . .:. ,. • Pacific and Beef Bend .', Pacific and Gaarde Pacific and McDonald .' .1. The efficiency of the transportation system-the ease with which •••k .,. • , objects and people are moved -- is the other basic criterion of its success , In 1'; gard many of the major streets are inefficient because most of them ., ,.. ' have not been improved to their designated standard or because the . ; designated standards are inadequate to the demands for their use Ex- : .i. cessive demand on limited facilities is responsible for peak hourtraf- fic congestion on several streets. ,•• 1 r ' t ' . .. e • ' 4 , ; ,,,.t, , , ,, , ,, , • . , 1, - ,..,,,,,,,......,....#,.....,.. ,-,,. ,;,........,,,-., . .„ ad • ...,', i,;. t . . .,% .. % ' i Page 110 ';' ; .1 In terms of an efficiency analysis based on travel speeds and ": volume/capacity ratios , the northern half of Pacific Highway in the Plan Area has operating conditions at Level of Service F. This level .,r : of service : cannot be described by speed alone, but represents :.,,. operations at even lower operating speeds than in p'' level. D, with volumes at or near the capacity of the highway. At capacity , speeds are typically, but ;:,•N'; not always, in the neighborhood of 30 mph. Flow is .r. : 'i, unstable, and there may be stoppages of momentary ' ' duration (see Appendix) . This, level of service now characterizes the eastbound lanes from Garrett '?...) L''', Street north to the boundary of the Plan Area and the westbound lanes ' ,,.. ;' north from the western end of Main Street . ;; Other streets providing relatively low levels of service during ;,, . peak periods include: Highway 217, Main Street, Greenburg Road (es-- c,, : 'a pecially north of North Dakota) , and Hall Boulevard between Pacific and 4 ../ Burnham. -,-•:j, S),I s i Other principal street problems in the area include: ::-,,.', 't: Greenburg Road - Heavy and growing traffic on substandard street `l a;'.'; Greenburg - Tiedeman -- North Dakota intersection -- Dangerous '',:4 " and substandard interse ttion with heat/ traffic f''. �/1 „ice � � r 1 y .h,J.,',: Tiedeman Avenue Sharp curves and substandard ;;„. d' ' Tiedeman - Walnut intersection - Dangerous intersection and curve "' Wa',nut Street - Relatively heavy and growing traffic on sub- , ; standard street street with sections having limited sight distance. Scholls Ferry Road at 135th - Dangerous Intersection r, '' Gaarde Street - Substandard street with growl:11g traffic r 121st Aven��e Growing traffic on partly subs candard street ., McDonald ;Street - Substandard street with history of fatal s.. accidents (none during July, 1976-.June 1977) Durham road - Substandard street with growing traffic ... :. , � Intersection c�.f Upper Booties Ferry Road and `72nd - Dangerous �� Intersection Bonita Read - Substandard street with growing traffic •'.:'',',. ■• .4°." :'r • , , . ' . . %„ . ,:- 4 :.:, ! Page 118 Pi...- Mass Transit Projects '.., cfir See Mass Transit (Tri-Met) Current Conditions Draft Plan BlayLltiPedestrian Path Projects ,.. , •,, ,', 1 . Construct additional bicycle/pedestrian pathways according to the priorities established in the ,1974 Tigard Area Comprehensive Pedestrian/ Bicycle Pathway Plan, That plan identified four phases of development , , .. of which the first is a Metzger Park to Cook Park facility along Hall ;,... Boulevard, Durham Road, and 92nd. In addition to the routes specified in w, : the 1974 Plan, the following should be added to the list and assigned priorities : Commercia (S, of Pacific) . : Scoffins :., Omara (E. two-thirds) ' . i..„ Oak Street ..,,. , . Canterbury Lane , ,.., ,. - Sattler Street Murdock Street (98th-103rd) ' • , Pfaffle 135th Street Extension , . All major street improvement projects alorg identified routes should in- y elude a bicycle/pedestrian pathway. i • 2. Existing substandard facilities should be upgraded to standard. In terms of pathway width, this means a minimum of 8 feet on most routes and 10 feet on those with heavy use. 3. All parallel storm drain grates should be replaced with per- pendicular grates. : •:,:!'; ' , . -.., 4. Future pathways should provide the maximum feasible physical °.. , . separation from motorized traffic. Use of such alternatives as public s & utility easements and dedicated rights-of-way not planned for road - construction needs to be expanded. 5. Theft-resistant bicycle storage facilities should be provided ..'%,. ..d at major activity centers , including commercial areas , apartments, par'its . civic buildings , chi,trches , etc . They should be required as part of th8 . ,,;!..- sit g,!. design review,process . 7 .41 :., ... . ,..,,.., i r , . . , . , 4 ) pi . „. .- .;':(,...-.„: , :,,,,, ,,.%i;,,,:, , , ,:,-, . ... , ,,,,,!,-: ..,,,..,;,•,:..,r,,,. .,.. , ,- ..., ,,, , ,-,:. . :.'i .' -'' . ' ,. • •., 1!, -!-,,, .. .. .',,,., . ‘.4, . 1T . . - Av..- — • .---_p --,:,..-.--..----,-,--..--,::: --,,,,--. a p n- ., o T '} Current Tr:-Met Service in Tigard (Weekday) i� I Travel Time Waiting Times it Line Name Major Streets Traversed in Tigard Major Destinations Peak Off-Peak Peak Off-Peak `t 43 Tualatin Acres Hall, McDonald, 98th, Durham, Downtown Portland 36 min 33 min 20. min 50 m,_ Commercial, Main { 1 44 1 Sherwood Pacific, Main Downtown Portland 30 'T 25 `T 2-15" 60 T` T 45 Greenburg Gaarde, 121st, Walnut, Grant Washington Square 8 8 " 20 " 45 " Main, Greenburg Downtown Portland 43 " 40 " 78 - Lake Oswego- Greenburg,. Scofffins, Commercial, Lake Oswego 29 `` 31 30 30 T` Sunset Main., Pacific Portland Comm. Coll. 16 " 18 " Wash. Square 9 IT 9 ►l Beaverton P & R 18 18 " St Vincent HIosp. 26 " 26 T, "' —_ From Main and Commercial Page 134 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS Page 2 ' STREET SECTIONS AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRAFFIC . ' ' 4 ._._..._ Boone Ferry E. of Durham 18,000 ; E. of 72.ad 19,000 Bull Mt. Rd. W. of Paslific 6,800 (1990) W. of Frontage 3,000 (1990) ' Burnham W. of Hall 4,000 ' '` 7!', Cascade W. of Greenburg 3,500 Comr'LerciLal. W. of Pacific 1,700 tip,' f,:y W. of Hall 6,000 »:' Dakota E. of Greenburg 1,700 '' ` E. of Tiedeman 6,200 0 anno �.�reek �. 00 W. U� 1 e Dartmouth 4,400-4,900 Edgewood 400 Fonner E. of 115th 1,500 (1990) S. of Walnut 20200 (1990) Franklin 1,500-1,800 ' '� Frewing E. of Pacific 3,600 (1990) ' ' E. of Ash 1,300 Garde W. of Pacific 110000 (1990) �r >'s E. of 121st 7,800 (1990) • , Garrett E. of Pacific 2,100 (1990) '' Greenburg E. of Center 5,100 W. of Center 5,000 '�� W. of 95th 4,200 r' , N. of N. Dakota 24,000 , N. of Cascade 26,000 4. Haines Overpass 6,000 Hampton E. of 68th 1,500 a ., W. of 68th 8,100 ' E. of 72nd 12,000 Hill E. of Ash 10800 t `,.:; W. of Omara 2,300 w , Hil lv iew 200 F Hunziker central 14,000 '' E. of Hall 16,000 i Johnson, E. of Grant 900 (1990). ":0 Main W. of Burnham 10,000 8 McDonald E. of Pacific 6',100 (1990) ,4 ''', W. of 100th 1,800** E. of 100th 2 400* " ,-'r E, of Omara 3,200** Y t g. of 97th 4,600��', •; ,'' W.. of Hall 11,000 4. Omara N. of McDonald 900 , S. of rrewirig 800 E, of Ptewing 600 • E. of jog 600 ;., W. of Hall 2,600 ' Park Street W. of Pacific 10600 (1990) ' Pfaffle E. of Hall 50100 ,., Sa�tt,i,c-t W. of Hall 4,000 Scoffins E. of Pacific 5,000 Shady Lane E. of Greet burg 1,000 ;f q rf.� ' ` , ., ,, uw+ , .' � w.. ' i_ /_' r . %rq +S r Page 135 � r NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS P)3 STREET SECTIONS AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRAFFIC Tiedeman N. of Walnut 3,800 >` Tigard W. of Fanno Creek 3,100 S. of N. Dakota (realigned) 12,000 S. of Tiedeman (realigned) 7,400 W. of Pacific 7,500 Walnut W. of 121st 8,500 E. of 121st 9,600 �. E. of Tiedeman 10,000 ' t;: W. of Pacific 10,000 Watkins W. of Pacific 900 (1990) AI II S. of Walnut 800 (1990) *Hill St. - McDonald 400-600 *121st- 135th E. of 135th 4,000 i' W. of 121st 5,000 , *N. Dakota extension W. of 121st 3,000 *Hampton - Pacific Loop W. of Hampton 3,000 .e ,.; W. of Atlantic 2,500 _J ,.'` S. of Pacific 1,000 *Pfaffle - 1-5 connection S. of Pacific 5,500 W. of 72nd 6,000 , :,. 0 . • *Tigard-Pacific on-ramp 2,500 I; ( 1 ar 1. o '' = Planned new streets and major extensions of existing streets. .` ** = Excludes through traffic ot ' I 9 w e. S .T. ' ' {. 4 Page 136 "., CRAG Regional Traffic Projections (1990) (average weekday traffic)ic) '.'.� I Co mi t Led Major Street N e tw orkJ lnterim Transportation Plan ,,,. .l ► TRET (S ectioY) Rai Constrained D. E is�en t Raw Constrained uttke 2 r,'.Y: Beef Bend (W. of Pacific 11,100 3 500 .�,. ;�' 4. Schol l,s Ferry gone,ento-west 13 300 1 6,900 j-8,500 4 500 :. _ `�Sor ren to-12:1 ) 13,100,100 I 71200 I 15,900 " (217-121st) 13,400 f 111500 10,1500 14,000 3 : r • Hail Blvd. (Pacific-Wash. 9,400 :`':..' ,0 - Dr. (6 700-N) ( 9,100 9 800 (Pacific- 19,200 Yes �10,600 . 12,600 A;;,' Hunziker) .i' (Hunziker- 2,800 3,600 7,100 McDonald ', (McDonald-- 6,000 7,300 1.0,400 ; 18,000- :: 3 Bonita) 23 000 M (Bonita- 3,200 5,100 6,400 14,000-,, ' _ Durham) i 16 000 ': 'H'Highway 217 (Scholls 86,000 7L,600 No 69,400 62,300 Greenbur• i (Greenberg, 1 ,�_, Pacific) 80 900 63 50C No 77 600 70 200 f (Pacific--72nd 59 900 40 600 No [ 55,900 54 600 • (72nd-I-5) 73 300 49,600 No 59,300 60 000 , . I--5 (Haines Road-Pacific) 61,100 (217-Haines Rd. ) 53,200 65,400 43,300 53,600 , . ._ . � (217 U.Boones W� ( 1erry) 106,700 87,000 80 100 86 100 : (Upper B.Ferry- :L� _ lower B.Fehr 94 100 73,400 �r�'5_ 500 Pacific (I-5-72nd) , 36 900 Yes 28_,400 25,100 40,000 '. ' (72nd - 217) 50,300 Yes E-28,200 24,700 , W-39,300 32,900 31 000 3 ,° (217-Greenburg) 38,800 Yes 40,900 24,000 34,000 to ', :, Hall , (Greeberg-'4__`ialnut) 38 200 , Yes 36,100 , 18,900 48000 3 .. (Walnut-Ga.arde) 37 400 Yes 35 800 F 23 200 35 000 3 I. (Gaarde-Beef Bend) 340300 Yes 33,300 27,300 22,600- •d 26 000 3 '`;• ' :. (Beef Bend-Durham 28 600 No 28 500 1 22 3 _.� , 300 ) 21 000 (Durt.m-S. ) 28,30( 29,300 �` 27,500 ►. Durham (E, of Pacific) 4,900 11 000 : 15 500 (W. of Hall) 9,400 p • _ 13 000 ` (Hall-Boones Fy. ) , . 11,600 W-8,000 "�=13,O& l 7,000 ,. f . S-1,400 4.00 Si'•- 1,900 ! 20,000 ' N-7,000 LET-11,500 :'41, _S l Foots �� r � es .(S.o,� Durham) � 17,300 Yes 1,800 � � � 4 600 , , ,, (Durham-72nd) 21,800 Yes IIIIIIIIIIIII 18..000 ...... �" n ) 21,86-0 Yes 12,400 13 300 18 000 • .' n of Pac 1,fic N-12,000 �- os 200 IIIIIImmill 2,000 �. 8-16 000 , part; 4,000 • . Mathes Rd. Ext.. to Pacific) ,1,4,001 Yes, W-16,700 W--1,3,800 : W-5,700 : F'- 17 5007 E-1 700 E-4 700 (N«'' oe 217) 13,900 9;200 9,800 19,000 at 217 ,: 6 P s -- i' � . . -,0"- ... .• , . • 11i , w Rage 137 «;R` . • CRAG Regional Traffic Projections (1690-Cont.) • s (average weekday traffic) r , Committed Major Street Network Interim Transportation Plan aw coristrainec le icien ,.,aw ons rain I' 'ut t. e 72nd (217 - Hunziker) ' 6,800 i ' (Hunziker-Bonita) 8,200-N ._ _______ 14;000 - ` 3,500-S 8,200 8,900 17,000 (Bonita-Boones T'y) 6,600 3,600 4,900 { 18,000 (Upper Boones Fy.-S. ) 10,300 5,200 6,000 Bonita (Hal 1-72nd) 3 2�� _ IMAM 4 ,1111 *• 'a t (72nd I-5T 5,600 , �1 -4,709 ,000- �" ,• McDonald .., -�. _ �� ' 3,900-E 4,200 7,500 6 Hunziker 6,900 1,600 3,300 1.4,000 -- _ 16,000 Greenberg (217 - Tiedeman) 24,100 Yes 10,700 15,600 24,000 --1,1 . t26,000 G,'eenburg (Main-Tied man) 26,700 Yes 8,300 8,200 4,200 - !i 5,100 Tiedeman _. 2,800-S . 9,200-N 6,100 11,100 3,800 Walnut ( Lain-Tiedeman) 5 300 4,800 9 400 10 000 '' (Tiedeman-121st) 3,400 ► 2,800 3,300 9,600 ' Gaarde 3,400. ., s1 . , .ra ,;is _ . 1 11,000 ' 1.21ST (Gaarde-Walnut) ` 1,900 3,100 i 7,600 - 7,700 (Wa lnut-Schol is Fir.) 5,700 700 7,300 1 12,000- 15 _ �. I 15,000 *Hall (Durham-Tualatin) 3,400 4,600 ' *135th Extension 1 - 4,800 -- 6,000 }. . * Planned new facilities (in ITP) not included in .Tigard NPO Plans ' • 1.. Washington County estimate 2. 17oreCasts (by Carl Buttke) at full development or 1990 (see also Neighborhood. Traffic Projections Table), assuming comple1 �on of transportation projects recommended in , adopted NPO Plans, Ranges given are for length of th section. 3, Local (Tigard Plan Area) traffic only: these figures exclude through traffic. M1, " . , • (. , CITYOFTIGARD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON , ¢¢ GENL,RAL, APPLICATION FORM CAS C,` No. " i 1-) ' /r t CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397 RECEIPT No. /4. % ` "1 Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 1. GENERAL INFORMATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY: t� / PROPERTY ADDRESS 13900 SW 121st Avenue Associated Cases: /. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONn dot J.4,01 in See, 3 8e-,10, tax 2S1 3 .CO li and Tax, lot 14.00 , Sec Q4,, snap 2S1 4, T2S , R1W, WNI INTERNAL PROCESSING: Accepted for Pre--App. : i' SITE SIZE 47.80 Acres PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* Century 21 Properties Inc By: ADDRESS Suite 112 PHONE 297-1493 •---- 2-- : --PtAft44- - Pre-App. : CITY _ Portland, Oregon ZIP 97225 APPLICANT* Centt,ur• 21 Pro erties Inc. Date & T.ine: ADDRESS 7412 S.W. Bvtn-Hillsdale Hwy. Ste. 112 PH0NE297-1493 cep o------ .�.. _._. t��.c.�:pted for Decision: CITY Portland . Oregon _ _ZIP 97225 B: t *Where the owner. and the applicant are different people , the y applicant must be the purchaser of record or a leasee in Hearing Date: possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner with written authorization. g The written Hearing Reset To: �; authorization must be submitted with this application. , ?. REQUIRED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION IS ATTACHED YES 0 NO Decision: filed & mailed 3. THIS APPLICATION INVOLVES THE FOLLOWING: APP. --, FEE FILED PAID Accepted for Appeal. . Comprehensive Plan Amendment from t By:o .___.__ ,;,.. quasi-judicial legislative Date of Hearing: : Zone Change from to quasi-judicial legislative DESCRIPTION: X Planned Unit Development ------ Comp. Plan Design Lion: concept p lan X detailed p tan X 1000.00 ��&' -1 X Subdivision 80.00 N»0 No. ` ' Major Partition ____-_. . _ Minor Partition '- Zoning Dist-'ct Design Review ?--,-1 Conditional Use Zoning Map No. • Variance to Zoning Ordinance —.9 a\ .. 3 `+q k -- (�Titl,e. 18) Quarter Section No„ Variance to Subdivision Ord. __L)--5_1_,_q____ 1 (Title 17) STAFF NOTES: I Set.sitive Land Permit 13c -!plains w says graina e MOM� Steep Slopes -----*-Y Other ,, 1,1 u , ..... ... ...... .. ..... ,,,.1,,.�P j u .....I. , d,w.v. . tu w.., , ' I GENERAL APPLICATION FOPI`(`' PAGE 2 CASE No. CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397 R Tigard , Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT) FOR STAFF USE ONLY Notre of Response 4 . DISTRICTS A Sent _. ..LY�sl._.,- Yes �Io Yes SCHOOL DISTRICT Tigard WATER DISTRICT gar vid , � .. . FIRE DISTRICT Tualatin PARK DISTRICT Tigard UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY - Sewer Available: YES NO Er- . OTHER 5 . PUBLIC UTILITIES t ELECTRICITY Portland General Electric NATURAL GAS Northwest Natural Gas TELEPHONE General Telephone and Electric OTHER Storer Cable T.V. .._ 6. PUBLIC TRANSIT (TRI MET) ' NEAREST BUS ROUTE AND STOP 121 st and Gaarde, Bus 45 7 OTHER INTERESTED AGENCIES (SPECIFY) ." �. s S CHARACTER OF THE AREA EXISTING LAND USE, PLAN DESIGNATION ZONE VERIFIED BY STAFF NORTH Single Family Urban Low Residential Density R-7 SOUTH Vamt Single Urban Low F"m ,y` Residential Density-- , R-7 "' EAST Single Family Urban Low E' Residential Density R- 7 WEST Vacant Single Urban Low Density R 7 µ ' Family Residential e x r' GENERAL APPLICATION FORL - PAGE 3 c, CASE No. .'` CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171 9. CHANGES IN THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA WHICH AFFECT THIS APPLICATION. Please Discuss: 0 A. The abutting land to the North and East is established single family residential . The abutting land to the South is vacant. To the West the land is owned by the applicant and is projected to be additional and residential . B. In general , the area is developing urban residential . 10. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE Lot Area (acres, square feet) Site 47.80 acres ., 11. EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE SITE Square Distance From Property Line . Use Feet North South East West House 1000 240 50 350 425 M , NATURAL CONDITIONS 12. Percent Slope: Varies from 8,5% to 12.5% usually with one section to 20% in Phase I 13. Vegetation Types: Average Diameter Percent Of Each Yes No Size Of Trees Per Size Trees: X 6" Filberts (old) 95% Brush: X 12" Oaks 2% it Grass: X 10" Firs 3% • 14 . '1oodp a iis: . X How atuch of the site is in fieodplain?none 15. Water Courses X What type? c 16. Rock Outcroppings X , 17. Other: ' 18. Proppsed Development: Please briefly describe the proposed deve loptert . Phase I i� �e ach ed, Sis,, ,e_,,;-arni y. resi_dentia1 units as a PUD. Phase II will be PUb attached and detached ,single family units,, ■ 0 0 r GENERAL APPLICATION FOlk - PAGE 4 \i,.. CASE No. 1 — CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171 19. The following is 0, is not 1----] required.* , 20. Overali_SLt2LJ.21miamenL . . (Drives) Residential Commercial Industrial Open „Space Other Roads Total , ., .7..._____ . No. of acres 7--T----- A or square 7.90 acres none none 30.12 acres 5.63 4.15 ac,47.80 ac, feet per use —4 • Percent of 16.5 0 0 63.0 11.8 8.7 100% . site ,F9Y..e.....r......a.le...................1........,............................................±.............................._.......„........ • . 21. au_21_121iLaLi2122e and Characteristics ■ , # of Bedrooms/tnit , . Type of Use II of Units mann 3 Proposed Density ......,___ _§.1a121Aql.11L..1211 215 111111 4.5 unitilPS21anliiaag , . , dential 2,3, & 4 III IN•, , bedroom units El U ___ .................._„.................„ ,•■•••••••■■■■■••••40" ■•••.....10.00041W0.../ III III , 22. Where applicable , please explain how the open space , common areas and recreational facilities will be maintained. Homeowners and the Homeowners Association will have direct control over the open space, common areas and recreational facilities and will maintain same. , f , . -, , • or, 23. If the project i8 to be completed in phases, please describe each phase of the project. Phase 1 will be 43 detached units on Lots 1,2, and 3, Phase 11 will be 172 attached and detached units on Lots 4 and 6. / 1 • . • .,, . , Please submi.‘ the following with this application: 1, Written General Narrative, number os raquired by Planning Department. 2, Proof of Ownership , 3, Letter of authorization if applicant Is not owner. 4. Tax Map , . * 8taff will identify for you, whether this section $ to be completed. ,„ ' ■ ,, 1 ,,,,,, ' ) - d M . • ' GENERAL APPLICATION FORM q, PAGE 5 CASE No. I CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397 Tigard , Oregon 97223 - (503)539-4171 THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE, AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT, SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF EACH HEARING. '" (e.g. Attorney, Surveyor , Engineer) Civic' �, Staff� Notice Notice Report Decision of Review t,' Name Century 21 Properties, Inc. Phone: ftiq • Street 7412 S.W. Bvtn-Hillsdale Hwy. , Ste. #112 City Portland State OR. Zip 97225 Name Bob Miller Phone: 585-7471 Street Bob's Court South City Salem — State OR. Zip 9730 Name S tree t City State Zip === Name Street City State Zip 4 APPLICANT Centur • 21 ',op: ies, Inc. BY: 41094,44( OWNER Century P>•,e:, i.es, Inc • d 7 ti ti • PARK PLACE . Narrative by: Century 21 Properties ;„ Inc, Applicant, Owner, Subdivider, Engineer 7412 S.W. Beaverton-Hillsdale Highway, Suite 112 Portland, Oregon 97225 Phone: 297-1493 Tax Lot 401 in Section 3 and 10 Tax Map 2S1 3CC and Tax Lot 1400 in Section '4 Tax Map 2S1 4 Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Tigard, Washington County, Oregon. Each condominium unit is a detached structure with adjacent recreational and open space. In addition, the development will have a large open space separate from the housing so that picnic and other recreational facilities will not impact needlessly on the surrounding homes. The present zoning is R-7 PD and the plan designation is Urban Low Density which allows 4.5 units per acre. Minimum lot sizes are 7500 square feet, This proposal complies with these criteria An existing sanitary sewerage manhole exists on Gaarde approximately 150 feet East of the development. Sewerage is shown on the preliminary plat as all draining to this manhole. Two major water lines front the property on 121st. Tigard Water District has advised the Tigard Plaining Commission that water is available to this property (copy of letter is attached) . There are no dangers to the public health safety or welfare by approval of this application. In fact the construction of the collector street through this development will forril a valuable link i n the "Murray Road Extension to Gaarde" as proposed by the City of Tigard and Washington county. All public utilities and services are sufficient to serve this development. This development will provide a total of 12.60 acres of "permanant" open space on an eventual project total of 47.3 acres. This open space will be improved and maintained by an owner's associ,iv ion specifically for the use of its members In addition, 4.23 acres of open, landscaped area (exclusive of driveways and road gays) will exist between the single family residences in the initial, development, of 43 units„ The homes will be placed selectively on the sloping hillside such that the solar access and the view for each are retained. Private driveways will be designed so as to obtain grade separation from the Murray-Gaarde extension which functions as the main roadway through this project I Although some use of city recreational facilities is assumed, this should not be substantial , as casual recreational and picnic facilities will be available on-site. It is projected that each family unit would average one use per month of other city facilities. This projects to 43 family uses per • I ' I� .g 1 - ^ Park .Place Narrati 'w Page two month or 516 per year. This usage is assumed to be for group activities in general , such as softball , tennis, swimming, etc. There are no sensitive land forms within this project area. Internal traffic patterns are limited to a maximum of six units in a group- ing with all traffic impacting the Murray-Gaarde extension directly. Traffic can then move Borth to Scholls Ferry, Murray, Bea"- etc. or North on 121st, which fronts the East side of this -sic can a',Iso weave to Pacific i hwa , via Gaarde which exten.. .� from this p of ect. Public transportation is available at 121st and Oaarde (bus #45) . The Je4nsity of this development is slightly less than 4.5 units per acre The allowable density in the the underlying zone is 4.5 units per acre. Ownership of each individual is intended to rest with the occupant and each owner will have the right to sell the home and the membership in the home- owner's association to another. This proposed development is a single family, planned unit development with a density of less than 4.5 units per acre conforms with having described as allowable in this property in the comprehensive plan. No exceptions are presently contemplated. The single family aspect of this proposed development is in harmony with the existing single family housing now to the North and East of the project. South and West are presently undeveloped. ' .! The approval of this development will benefit this area directly as it will incorporate a key link of the Murray-Gaarde extension within it. Further, the type of housing projected on this very visible hillside will be much more attractive than more conventional subdivisions with straight streets and houses on the same vertical plane with views from your window into your neighbor's window. tl P i ((i { '1. PARK PLACE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Affordable Quality Housing with Assured Public Service 1 A City exists to assure public services to its citizens. At the same 1 time, the Gaarde Street extension through this site sets up a need for special treatment of the entire development. At a point approx- imately 550 feet West of 121st St. the required street grade necess- itates a ten foot cut in the hillside. A system of privately maintained streets was created to allow solutions to the multiple problems of grades, drainage, pedestrian access to recreational areas and, most importantly, affordability of housing. At the same L ( time, control of these streets will vest to the City to assure public services to the citizen-owners of this planned developments AFFORDABILITY Summarizing the following data, the planned development approach with its 24 foot private drives will allow unit costs more than $10,000 below that which would be the resultant of a "conventional" subdivision approach. It is then necessary to say that the conventional approach would end with lot costs (not profit), exceeding $300000 each. This is a result of normal street requirements competing with the extremely awkard size and shape of this property. It is our opinion that a conventional subdivision could neither be financed nor sold given current market conditions. VARIED HOUSING TYPES AND STYLES The planned development approach will , allow a slightly more expensive version of the housing types now being created in London Square. In fact, the success of the styles, private drives and housing siting in London Square has allowed this proposal to meet the requirements of financial agencies. Each home can be situated on the hillside such that it is not competing for view nor will it limit the solar access of a neighbor. You will note from the contours shown on the preliminary plan that each home will be set at an elevation different from its neighbor. Most homes will access from private drives. In lot 2 the homes nearest Gaarde will, be almost 15 feet above the street due to the required street cut bUt grades to the homes from the private drives will not be extreme. Planned development will allow separation, view and the opportunity to create housing that • will affordably fit this special site. PRIVATE DRIVES It is proposed that the 24 foot private drives be privately owned and maintained by the Homeowners Association, Control for traffic, parking and police and fire access will vest in the City r ' of Tigard by easement. It would seem then that the best of both can be attained here. A street system that v-notches in the center for • drainage, ease of maintenance and access to the adjoining lots can be built. This type of street was used in London Square and is working very well. By not drawing the streets down at the edges and by not creating curb aprons to mount, homes can be better sited on the • hillside and not be required to be dug deeply into the hillside. It is easy to visualize that a street cross section that goes up from the center to the edge can more eamily continue up where the home is sited above the roadway. No awkward ftstep t are created, less ground is taken for asphalt and more landscaping i allowed. Costs are substantially 10wer than "conventional streets, A 32 foot wide co street costs $37.80 per running foot. A 24 foot wide r — • • v-notched street costs $17.00 per running foot. In addition, far fewer drainage structures are required and runoff problems are lessened ao more rainwater is allowed to infiltrate the larger landscaped area. For this site and its pecu14ar property configuration, the private driveways will sr ,e Tigard's taxpayers and the homeowners far more efficiently than "seas of asphalt" . WALKWAY ACCESS TO RECREATIONAL AREAS The private driveways will access to the walkway system shown on tLe preliminary plan as a jogging path and nature trail,, This pathway will connect all portions of the development and will traverse the highest point (elevation 412) to the lowest point (elevation 260) . The walkway has been designed to follow the existing and proposed easements for gas, storm and sanitary pipelines. This will proNfie access to these easements farthe utilities involved and, probably more importantly, assures that the walkways cannot ever be blocked off by buildings. Once established, they will always be open. 17 RECREATIONAL SPACE Besides the large amount of open space 9 surrounding the living units, Lot 5 is proposed to be a permanent open space and recreational area. Ownership will vest in the Homeowners Association and the homeowners will decide what types to which types of recreational use it will be put. It has been our experience that arbitrarily imposed recreational uses rarely succeed. If the homeowners here decide that they want picnic facilities, playgrounds, tennis courts or swimming pools, they will have the opportunity to do them as self-help projects. This will significantly reduce costs and make the purchase of their homes that much more affordable . An example might be a tennis court, prebuilt complete with lighting, is estimated to cost $22 , 000. A double court could cost the buyers in Phase 1 over $1000 each. Done as a self-help project the costs would be in • the nature of WO per unit, assuming of course that these homeowners preferred tennis over some other type of facility. The Park Place homeowners should have the choice to create those amenities that they prefer. DEMOGRAPHICS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Park Place Planned Development will be only slightly more expensive than London Square, our prototype on SW 98th Street. Here, the homes will be larger and the open space significantly more but many of the buyers will share the same housing needs. In London Square a sampling of the reserved units shows that ; of 23 units single parents and single persons made up 14. Of the 14, 8 were women ad 6 were men. Age-wise, they were all in their 30's and 40's. Single parents much prefer to have their own homes. Affordability is the key. Park Place will fill a serious need for affordable housing for many people. HILLSIDE RETAINED Almost as important as the affordability and livability of this development is the impact on tho rest of the surrounding community. The neighborhood will look up at this development, literally. The Gaarde Street extension, Is required. 2 ( • The alignment of Gaarde and the 10 feet of cut that it will create are given. The effect of this has been minimized as much as is practicable by a system of private streets that will fit into the hillside and that will allow the homes to be placed on the hillside without terraces that would forever be a blight on r, the view from surrounding homes. Because the 24-foot private drives will fit the hillside and be v-notched to the center, the will not be very visible from below. People will see landscaping, greenery, open space and homes. Moreover, these homes will not be set in rows but will be placed at different levels with different orientations and with different styles. ae homeowners will have the benefits that a City exists for; fire rotect .on, police protection, sewer service, water service, ,arbage service -- through easement access to the City. The Tigard taxpayers will benefit by not, having to maintain the , private streets or the open space in Park Place. Ir . g, q �r I r ' . i 3 o♦ .. .,; „.., ,,.,,."., r,.... .. , rte, w 0EEti CORNER 2afi! 7�i 600 IIIu) 2 [ t� :,.:� Si N z:.ks-, c (a 135_26 ' CR 2025 S 89°35'W 82'3 -�s�,•- 3� 461, t 33Q03 4fl�J 5QC} �s�=t��' 1 In ! 1.06 Ac, /.36Ac. 2. 36 8 21 4. m `v , o) 14 ID 17 N O* ;:, i 3 8.1 6' ' - N` t N 89°35`E 1 6 5.16` - - - -. — .- - — - - ? !8 G 1 N 8°`Q33 34��'H — — – — — — ` . in 4 53_39 °4 S 69° t9'34"E 460.75 N 69°3s�E o ♦. - N r l �'t 111.46 . APPROX Locariou PROPOSED 2 4CQ 17QO 0` XTEi�TidN 9'+�t '3S AVE `� �e. 1 g .-7 ,,.... 12 i \ , 1600 0 N`� • \\ I Q N i i N. � \ 20 m ° ` � Irk — o ti z 1- N N N \ 11f .rr.r �. '.ri .fir rirriiii. . %1/r!r.- _ 3Q4.5t _ — N N. — — —— — -- — — _ 322 — ' B S_DEED t04��/557 v�T is :°os s sas°3 TO PUBLIC 151 N ER0 1 1/4 C06 BET SE° 3810 , � N \ SEE MAP-.. 2S S 1 3CC ` N 2S 1 I OBB s...�� _ - - Q _ _ - . 1. .. s ! i F 1 X t F I `i 23 _ ` 7 i A.PPROX LOCATION OF s P-ROPOSED EXTENSION i 200 300 1+ ti f 135th AVE 502 301 `� , 2024c 1.51A c. la'. y\N. f 4j- '\ Y i 50i 00- 9.9QAt 1 S , = r t22Ac. c,f- , E - - 200 300 }. "- t N 0 ( ... • N ROAD 5I.OWN 0? `_ - t 2 St 3C8 _- - ....a.-- s1� 7 d c. 4 0.03 Ac t , t N. N. • N Z -- 1 f F 4 ty - - - - ;-_ - - € i� , ti f t. ,,,/ \_ __ SEE. MAP 2S ! ACC .. 23 4.. 8 4 ,,,. ... , a 1307 4 _ . �i �3t 4-547 AG 1- 6.30 Ac - t 4 €l 3 _ Pt a t , 0 0". . i r'. - - 9 i - 10 SEE NEAP N - -T I GA R D -- . A. i 0 2 S I-4 I t ^. SITE PLAN CHECK LIST The Tigard Municipal Code, § 18.56.020(2) reluires that the site plan include the following information when applicable. The enumerated requirements are to be located on a plan drawn to scale. This 1iSt is provided to assist you in submitting a complete application. Applicant Staff Applicable Complete ES NO rES NO COMMENT A. IMPROVEMENTS 1. Streets 2. Sidewalks X • 3. Parking areas X 4. Maneuvering areas X • 5. Supply delivery X F areas 6. Ingress/egress X points �. 7. Transit facilities 8. Landscaped areas ✓ 9. Recreation & open X space areas 10. Drainage areas X fi A, 11. Sensitive land- X areas & if aapli- 0 cable; a tdgrap1 is map is required B. NON RESIDENTIAL BUILDIN I. Location of buildings X shown ( 2. fatback distances X r shown 3. Typical elevation X , drawings included � 4. Access points for X the handicapped shown C. RESIDENTIAL NNITS. 1. Number of square X feet & lot dimensions shown for each lot 4: 2. Location of units X shown ',. De OT....HE R. 1. Peripheral yards are X as deep as required by underlying zone 2. Lot coverage same as X alloyed by undorlyatt zone , +� a , _--.,..'.. .., �. ■ .. -..... m r TE DEVELOPMEOT ANALYSIS FORM I''f L , . m , ...., 0. sz . 4.4 ..4 . y.! t7' V Cd c„ 1.1 QJ Al 'L7 •rl GO 0 m ' 4.4 0 H 4.1 N q 0 U c i x N CCdd GJ CO �N 14 b+ 14 0 t 0) V N �� rte ' Total Sq. P Landscaping '� a-+ Total CU 0 0 +J o p. • 14 o cad o 11,4 o Feet P o-a Sq. Feet zcn Sq. Feet z zw Z. c.) zca z BUILDINGS Single Family `Units detached 68,800 16.5 1,312,030 1 344,000 430 1000''. 0 J1000 0 attached or detached 275,200 unit Multiple Fate.ly 1 COMMERCIAL List each struc:. rp! none i , I ft INDUSTRIAL List each structure t rune SENSITIVE LAND AREAS Greenway Floodplains Drainage Ways Steep Slopes . PUBLIC FACILITIES Streets 180,775 Park or Recreation Area,. 547,985 Utility Easements 18,000+ Common Areas 1557,463 1557,463 I LAND DEDICATED TO CITY List 8.W, Gaarde St. 85,500 180,774 , 121st 1,430 Questor Blvd. $34844 TOTAL . 082,23? i , , DENSITY CALCULATION FORMS RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS 10 Gross square foot area it applicable underlying zone 2,082,237 2. Number of square feet in sensitive land area designated as open. space (floodplains, drainageways greenways, or lands having ta :lope or greater) none 25% 3. Number of square feet in public dedications 180,775 4. Number of square feet in public facilities 245,200 (streets, sidewalks, utility easements, etc.) subtotal 425,975 5. Subtract the total number of square feet from 2, 3, and 4 above from the gross square foot area. Net Square Feet 1,5561262 6. Net square feet divided by the minimum lot size allowed in the underlying zone equals the density allowed. p ^ ' Net. sq. feet _ 1,656,262 + Min. lot size allow 7500 + 221 units acres. 7. Proposed number of units 215 6. Density bonus allowed (max. bonus = 10%) . 4 {, ti , •• ' 28 ! 4. 24lV l lt� � EtSL eY s h � 1 i' ROLL 12300 S.W. Bull. Mountain Rd. '' .._,. "" 13820 SW 121st Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, Or. 97223 c r 2S1 9A 100 230Q Walker, Richard A. 4: , lilt t7 LARSON , 14215 S.W. 125th a t , t 2 • i I 13870 S.W. 121st Tigard, OR 97223 I il . s. 3; Tigard, Or. 97223 2S1 9A 1000 2400 Strayer, Manley B. RIT. HIE ' 5676 S.W. Riverpoint Lane 201 3CC 300 13910 S.W. 121st Portland, OR 97201 Rodde, Althea Tigard, Or. 97223 13745 S.W. 121■31 y; Tigard, OR 97223 ■ ° 2S1 9A 1 100 2500 !1 ' Bull Mountain Project of Ore.+■ McCain P.O. Box 30179 13950 SW 121st . ; Portland, OR 97230 2S1 3C0 401 ;. 05ocr �4 $G( , 0 ; Tigard, Or. 97223 {'.,. Bechtold, Glenn A. c/o Lutz Development Co. 1 2S1 4 100,300 /�, 7185 S.W. Sandburg 2S B lO l . Moore, Gordon ��' o Portland, OR 97223 1 4 ;3535 S.W. 121st Ave. Krueger • Tigrd, OR 97223 c/o 14655 NW Hunters Dr. • Beaverton, Or. 97006 . 2S1 1 4 1200 CENTURY 21 .Homes I. Zirmer, Martin 7412 SW Bvtn—Hillsdale Hwy • 1928 S.E. 43rd Ave. Suite 112 ? : Portland, OR 97215 Portland, Or. 97225 + 25.1 4 1300 Paull, David P. Bob Miller 507 N.E. 47th • . Portland, OR 97213, 5164 Bob's Court South Salem, Or. 97306 Tex ' XUNKKXTXXXIIVAMbx St. kRigmm±lodlaxxxNaUx Bob Bledsoe NBO # 3 • 11800 S.W. Walnut. Tigard, Or. u a w � i f ' 1 + l y 4 . Century 21 Properties Inc. chic ull North Coast Plaza L.5910 SW 121st Ave. 13660 SW 121st St. 7160 SW Hazelfetn Rd. Tigard, Or. 97223 Tigard, Or. 97223 Tualatin, Or. 97062 Larson McCain Bob Bledsoe NPO # 3 13870 SW 121st 13950 SW 121st 11800 SW Walnut Tigard, Or. 97223 Tigard, Or. 97223 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Ames, Elsie Roll Washington County Land Use & 12300 SW B1111 Mtn. Rd. 13820 SW I21tt Transportation Tigard, Or. 97223 Tigard, Or 97223 150 N First St. Hillsboro, Or 97123 Walker, Richard Illingworth 14215 SW 125th 12C6O SW Rose Vista Drive • Tigard, Or. 97223 Tigard, Or. 97223 Strayer, Manley Chrisiansen , 5676 SW Riverpoint Lane 12000 SW Rose Vista Drive Portland, Or. 97201 Tigard, or. 97223 Bull M.suntain Project of Or. Zimmerman • P.O. Box 30179 11990 SW Rose Vista Drive Portland, Or. 97230 Tigard, Or. 97223 Paull Stevens 13277 SW Bull Tn. Rd. 12015 SW Gaarde St, Tigard, Or. 97223 Tigard, Or. 97223 Landstrom Erdt 120000 SW Oaarde St. 13760 SW 121st Tigard, Or. 97223 Tigard, Or. 97223 Zirmet Bechtold, Gleen 1928 SE 43rd Ave, C/0 Lutz Development Co. , Portland, Or. 97215 7185 SW Sandburg t. Portland, Or 97223 • , Moore, Elaine and Gordon Rodde 13535 SW 121st Ave. 13745 SW 121t Ave. Tigard, Or. 97225 Tigard, Or. 97223 Kennedy 7, Retkeit Mapes 13615 SW 121st Ave. • , Tigard, Or. 97223 13730 SW 121 TiOtr4 Ot 417223 2S13CC 00100--Bu11, Maryann c 2S13CB 04900--Kennedy, Jean Edwards • 13 •; 0 SW 121st St % Remkeit, Euge.t,e B ET AL ' rd, OR 97223 13615 SW 121st Ave Tigard, OR 97223 00200—Mapes, L V and Joyce 13710 SW 121st 04901--Moore, Elaine and Gordon Tigard, OR 97223 13535 SW 121st Ave ' Tigard, OR 97223 • 00300--Rodde, Althea H C • 13745 SW 121st Ave Tigard, OR 97223 • 2514 00100--(same as above) 00400--Bechtold, Glenn A and Ellen Yvonne 00300--(same as above) 13825 SW 121st Tigard, OR 97223 '"'''4200--Zirmer, Martin • \I 1928 SE 43rd Ave 00500--(same as above) Portland, OR 97215 00600--Erdt, Donald D and \\, 01300—Paull, David P and Beverly Dorothy P 13277 SW Bull Mtn Rd 13760 SW 121st Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 00700--(same as above) • 2S110BB 00200--Landstrom, Marian G and 01600--Stevens, Curtis M and Carl W Juliane T 12000 SW Gaarde St 12015 SW Gaarde St Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 00600--Ames, Elsie W 01700--Zimmerman, Lin A and 12300 SW Bull Mtn Rd Katherine L Tigard, OR 97223 11990 SW Rose Vista Dr Tigard, OR 97223 01800—Christiansen, Carl S and • Ruth I * 12000 SW Rose Vista Drive Tigard, OR 97223 02100--Illingworth, Gerald V and Marion L 12060 SW Rose Vista Drive Tigard, OR 97223 02200--Roll, Wayne a and DeMetra T 13820 SW 121st Tigard, OR 97223 02300--Larson, Donald J and Marjorie 13870 SW 121st Tigard, OR 97223 02400—Ritchie, David 0' and Betty S 13910 SW 121st Ave Tigard, OR 97228 ,,,,,,,, ,,,., . . . . . . 1 T__,_T • ... •-■ [,■ i ....-......-....... -- ( i INFORIVIATION REPORT , PREPARED BY 1-,- , TITLE INSLPANCE C013/4111k ANY ,ir OREGON Prepared for Vicki P a Im er ,--,'=- • • _________Cantliry_.2)..z.-..11ora.e...9.._. 1 ' 2-1 6-84 _ ' Date Prepared PLEASE TURN OVER FOR OWNER'S NAMES AND ADDRESSES , Property Address , . Enclosed please find the following information per your request: Tax Information Account•Number • • D3cription . . Assessed Value-Land , . ' Assessed Value-Improvements , - 1 1 19___Tax Amounts , ____ _ , , it Assessed Owner - Map Copy Deed Ej Contract D Other Documents El (Check one only) Consumer information reports available at these Branch Offices: WASHINGTON COUNTY . CLACKAMAS COUNTY Beaverton––..–...........297-4941 Milwaukle ...................653-7300 Early Bird ......—,.....—297-5356 Early Bird ..,.,–—........,653-7330 ' . MULTNOMAH COUNTY LANE COUNTY Portland...... .......—.225-1005 9.4 J:','''ECO Eugene „ . 485-3588 Early Bird --—–........_243-1100 Call 225-1005 for Agents throughout Oregon ' , I i f This title information has been furrikhed, without charge. in conformance with the guidelines approved by the State of Oregon Insurance OoMmissioner,The insurance Division cautions intermediaries that this service is designed to benefit the ultimate ,i Insureds;indiscriminate use only benefiting intermediaries will not be permitted.Said services may be discontinued.No liability is I , \ , assumed for any errors in this report. i ..................–........................—...........--, ORCS-105(4-80) ■ .1 1 t , • } f , _ , ( SUBDIVISION FILE CONTENTS . .. S 1-13 PD SEE ALSO LEFT SIDE RIGHT SIDE . Assessor' s Map Maps/Preliminary Plat I r Notification Legal Description/Deed ' Surrounding Property Notice Letter of Authorization , ____ . ' .. / / Affidavit of Mailing __ v Copies of Correspondence with Applicant Agency/NPO Notice /Public Input • Affidavit of Publication Agency/NPO Comments /Articles/Notices from IT Staff Report(s)-Date(s) / pplicatiori/Narrative Minutes of meetings . V/ 1...„‘,,,4,4_ , ( /Final Action Notice Planning Commission-Date i2-4,1 3 / 4,1,,-23-54 -13-Sq- . City Council-Date 4--f-no /-2e---?‘4-- ___ P' Resolution No. /44-Date 21 23 S4 Ordinance No. ,d0....._ _ Date __ Correspondence After Approval SUMMARY . , , Approved II Denied No, of Lots ..,...31.. No. of Phases / Special Setbacks Plat Recording Name book/Page No, & Date . Additional Phases Recorded (Date) (Book/Page No,) ° (Datt) (book/Page No ) • KL/bjs(0616P) , i . �� t C n Fir._x r., I 1 ,. a Al I1•i"r S' . ie. ,•,t om,, i r,,/.17 . 4,, ' r,, ✓.t ift'; r . , ' .", r.t' 1,..Li 1 •r - . • 1 ••,.-1A,,,:',,,,-...1 , 11 r'—' ! ' : t ! , 1 , 1 1 •tS ti' Y r-, , ix +'w) �'; , 1 ..,to;' '.,., A 'v ANO�_.1-- - _. ... _c -',. �1 . . ,, L,,,,,,i,,, ,,,,,,,J,„„ _,„,„,, ......-....., ..., \,t.,:-,-,---...„, 1......1 ---...ji j?t,l'Iii „ . , ,,4: C._.), ?‘, ,! „,,.•'•!' '...1 1., 1----1 N' i . , 1 r. 111+� V 1 r r 1'1 CO 1 ' 1 .,,' , . K\.".., i ''. ',,f,:;,� ; M _ I ii.. .. ... : . ,.r I w 4, 1 1_c ''i 1 , . k .. -, i I t; 1 1�! r I ( _'__. , ___.._._/ ■ 1 l 1 Ili la' i (l r �' r x ! N l ws' -w _-- I. o ;� 1 ill ` / .: `f,) i �"V .`t. 14 , I . Itti I� a ` I I , Fry 7 •, • ( 4 (I �' (fit 1 I ,ti� t i [I � 1 `V 1 , ,, ,, t ..,,,'"\ ,,,, . \ s,,,,,,,,,, or) _\ 11 /J./ '''' ': --1.,_ 'V,\-i\:-.. ; 01 '-- 1 ' , 1 \ °C) '....\,i"-... 1.1 CO '\c 01 ,., „...' -.-i ___ *1- r 1 . 1'Y., [I� �) // r,„ C,„).,* I y'~B--Y i (' Y I I 1 Y 1111 y,, f ' V V 2 1 1 . 1 /R R� a ', _rr.i. , : c„,,:i7 ,. N., 0,' .....' I 4"..."--.1 . j, , II 7 0 X V 2',,, ,,' ,ai it r Q 1 1 , 1 "P 10 'Y,'1 •f,�A y^i�INCa0 to [---- ' i ' � ,/ , i or) , i /177 ib"' ..,;' „..,..0, i, , F....,1 / ..,:'''llr /''. \\°') / '. ' `It'fil.t4 ' , , ,! . ,'«Y+ 7....::L a _a .,0- V-''' 4 , ,7 � -,,;n I C.ki�.� ( r�, / ' I� yi. r i . „ y, r • n.Y }, k a t ,i�W' i r f �F • F a z ` - -- PARK - PLACE rtv . r ��- PL ANrIL�r UNtl DFV�LOPM�N� , . t '- 1 \ B - �i� �\� : ...�` CENTURY Zl PROPERTIES, INC '' j � !e`.` _��i 7► ..°' OWA Irrz—$bi3A1Vtoe-R-EN/.f^'Ff1? 1 ,,� ,UrTE 112, 74/Z 9EAYERTOti-„t1LLSDALE r11GNwAr t (f I,U :.1`3 Roar-4 AND, GREGOn! 97225 t 1 S1NIr DGr!,” — PI'JONE 297-1493 A X LOT 401 iN SEC 3€WG TAX MAP 2 91 3C C AND I • r n x cor 1400 IN 5EC 4 1 4 X hop 2 S 4- R Al,':_ii,-,,,-: , ` � � I TIGARD, WASHINGTON COt3N7Y 0!?FfiOAt -_'r 1 1 r� - . 43' on 1 TS __,. I...t: =wilt-44.6...y �!` ,- Q 48a71�' ,.....-��r.,_ .-lilt: 4Scr: " - ei '"tp31-*33°.P. � _Stoat 0 re?61-I. - ... __^ _ - _- -= .=s =tea_ --- SANStwf4 -_---- \„r„ REC ' 0L L `` __ �� .t.'LL .----7.-X,7* . \ , i''' .......''..-...'-. .\ -/\%. 4 , 0 4ett . e liggi ,t;3 _ - I r' • 1 nhl A,j 1-.{ v I f 1 +e 7:, _ _ °� ( ` \ E ' ✓ ! a ..._..;.-7 ' --,"4.- t ry` k.., i ,„,,,,,,,,,/, 4 %i,r a , 4 . ,4,.. : .. _ _. 2,-,i .,3_,,,, , . (-- -11...j_ .5 ---11;.*: ,__-_-.•,., ) "X- 3_-.4.1.,,. . r , _ i!"---,'.1.f , , I [\ , , .. -'4,-- - , , /(-1. - I 1 [ . 1 L_f__j lifliL.1,/".\ ) t,',.”-':.!_-,--: ,,,- ,,,, i„,_, . i, ........ ., , , _ __,/ ._ __ -:c11,----9 ;mss OD 1::::: -- 1 1 ' ; , ._ ti "!I 1-2 i I. r-I____,_ , .11::;; .\_‘ti,i 1 , .t t-----,.--,- , t -7i-_:-17-15 i 1 L. / t f :i `` '` _-_ ` ''s'y . �! �(;``-` (j_ J j1 i 1, 4 ?�j 19 83-:,.., -1 ,i F ''t i � ,�'�. {. :-'7'•'-.--, �`/ {�� ► I r:' -' 54 L 11. yes-� LJ ` I J f 7 }i. ¢ - - t,-----\ -=-T' J f , i - .�.._H t \ -2sT r ~. ''' - `r.- '----,-.:;:i;,';-..,; _=-:.-;_-_-..- -��.. •.�� ..� .}�I ::::E.).1- T----• ^`�- _ R ,.,_ - — - r_.-S - — — \. ._ - "`F S ' it % — I [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing]