Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CPA 12-83
POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. " R LPN 7 C ATS CPA 12--83 ZC 3 9770 Sin] S±olls Fry. Ed. 1S1 27E0 1ot 1200 Hr. Terry C. Hauck. Schwabe, Williamson, Wyatt, ,Moore & Roberts 1200 Standard Plaza 1100 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, Oregon 97204 Appeal on CPA 12/83 & ZC 9/83 (Portland Chain) Dear Hr. Hauck: The City L$ enclosing a check in the amount of $167.75 which is the amount, left on account after all fees and charges have been cleared from the appeal on the above mentioned matter. If you have Sincerely, any questions* please contact AY offiee Loreen R. Wilson Deputy► City Recorder. lta/1380A. Enclosure . 1 12755 SW., ASH SOX 2 3397` 'IGAM), OREGON 97228 'H :0 94171 CITY OF TIGARD ORDINANCE NO. 83- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS' AND AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE' PLAN MAP AND ' ZONING DISTRICT `MAP (,CPA, 12 -83 Pea) AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the Tigard' Commission denied a zone change request and comprehensive plan amendment for the property owned by PCM Associates at a public hearing on September13,1983; and a ealed the decision of the S the applicant respresenting FCM pP WHEREA , pp Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, public hearing was held before the City Council on November 7 , 1983; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council reversed the decision of the Planning Commission after considering the comments Hof the Planning Commission farm individual' .citizens, District a Plan Map in the . d the Zoning' Comprehensive Exhibit b as � "A" an Voted Co amend District in and vo t the m Map set forth in . the form set or Exhibit "B'° attached hereto and, by this reference, made a Part hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, TIGARD CITY 0F'. ARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:, Section 1: 'ihe; City Council ,adopts findings in this case as follows 1. the change of land use designation on this property from Industrial to commercial' will not result in ,.a use which is incompatible with the uses of the, immediately surrounding area. The prop ased . use �� 11 not result in an increase in traffic to 2., - and from the site that is a detriment to the surrounding uses. amends p p' Section .2'. Tkte City Council, therefore, 4he Com rehens ve Plan Ma and Zoning District Hap; as follows: t Tax Map 15 the General '.. g y 1 27DD,:, Tai. Lot 1200 � to Wash�.n toci��� Chun p Commercial Plan Designation and the CG Zoning District Designation, in ' the bistric orm set forth th in Exhibit � Cotnptei;ensive'' Plan Map and �'8;" Zonin p eta att�ched here o' and, by thris reference, made a part hereof. FLU . ANCEr NO. ti tut uur :YaR�NNkr �n4i � r �a�vire;fY i � ,u:;N�+u,c�wudi�a�r Section 3: In order to provide a uniform date for the effectiveness of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, this shall become effective upon adoption of y Development the CommunxC ment Code and final ratification o f the Comprehensive Plan. PASSED: By � AITLa ok vote of all Council members present, after • g Y only q y !a ar, 1983. being read b number and title onl this da of � Recorder - City of 'Tig APPROVED: Y the Ma Y o= , this 9 ay o 1983. D8Dt`NA:NGE NO. OT I CE OF PUBL I E A R I N G r NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AT ITS MEETING ON MONDAY, November 7 1983 AT 7:30 P .Iv. , IN THE LECTURE ROOM OF' FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, 10865 S.W. Walnut, Tigard, Oregon, WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: CPA 12-83 and ZC 9 -83 APPLICANT: ,'PCM Associate OWNER: Same, Mike McKenna Box B x 4 16 2 Portland, Or. 97208 REQUEST: An appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment' from Industrial to General commercial ;and a Z ci one Change from Industrial- „, Light to C -3. 'LOCATION: 9770 S.W. Scholls Ferry 'Rd. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 151 ' 27DD lot 1 200) (fee ,Map bn Reverse Sid) 1 THE, P1ThLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL 118 CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TIME RULES; OP:'' PROCEDURES OF THE CITY COUNCIL. k • : T ED IN WRITING TO '3E ENT . RE0 INTO TIIE 'RECORt) �ESTIMO�” MAC EE SUBMITTED T FOR FUTHER INFORMATION, ;PLEASE 'CONTACT THE CITY RECORDER DR, PLANNING DIRECTOR.. AT: 6439 171 CITY OF TIGARD 12755 S.W. ASH TICaAm RD, OREGON 97223 Corer AS ill,' so' vurioisons,.it any in d.rnensions on&tocoiion';,sctirtoined by octv" A ,Irvey yn.4.4,221 rah; eoz•. / C. S. 8234 toI.T1. thi 1 CO' TAX LOT/ED 4//4j11 *1st. 1 / 170 �P 301.s To P& LIG W f /1211 a�i / 1171 -04 TA art 33 E WA HIS (,E'GON NOTICE OF FINAL DECISTON • The final decision was filed by: Concerning l;. Case Number • Name of Owner: 0 ,► A . 4 Rd Date `N • Name of Applicant: iC�- Address • Location of Property: Address City 1°6y State; &)770 Se0 Saft.0A.C.0 it.42■rr Legal Description i SA / '- Ail - di.' I'/.f /J4 / �, , / 14 i.� .Ace_'�+G n7 -4 +CI 61- Na Ure of Application:, ▪ Action: or .4 ! .! it Approval as requested L Approval with conditions Denial • Notice: * pa Notice was published in the news ..... e, pex° & was mailed to ►:r The applicant & owners owners of record within the required distance The aff.ected.Neighboi. hood Planning Organization Affected governmental agencies *If there' are questions regarding the names of the persOn8 or agencies who received, notice, this information is available at the Planing Department.,, Final Decision! The adopted findings of fact, decision, aid statement of condition can be obtained from the °planning DirectDri city of Tigard, city Hall, 12755 SW Ash., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard; Oregon 97223.' In the c of °a decision on an application for a variance, the applicant must acknowledge this form acid .return it to the City of Tigard, Planning Director, before any building, permits Will be 'issued r et gin Bring p °a given z;gnaturo of Applcant or., App cart sl Agent Da Note; Any. party to -the decision may appeal this decis7on ;n accordance 'with. �;'ection 18.84.250, which provides thata �rrritte'n appeal may b e filed within ' fourteen days after notice °is..given and sent, Notice is given on for filing of ' an appeal i therefore' the •deadline 10. , Questions: . If you have any questions, P City Tigard call �.he C7ty of �zg and Planning Department, 639 -4171. ORDINANCE NO. 83--50 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING' AND SUPPLEMENTING CHAPTER "AL CODE BY ADDING TO. 10.28, OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL "� SECTION 10.28.130 TO PROHIBIT PARKIN G ON A PORTION OF SW 115TH AVENUE, DECLARING AM EMERGENCY AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE PATE.' Motion by Cou ncllar, Brian, 'seconded d y, Councilor r Coale to adopt and direct t staff to put center yellow wh erever app P ro riat e• to o.f Council.. with Councilor Schecki,a voting Motion approved by 4 ,- I ' vote ��' � i , N Ordinance No. $3' °50 will keqa. ure a se c reading. �' $ -$3 ZONE CHANGE �C 9-83 PCM ASSOC. SIVEPLAN AMENDMENT CPA 12-83 RD. �'An::a��eal of the COMPREHENSIVE' ORTL Nr�EN APPEAL HEARING ON-THE -RECD PCIRTLAND 'CHAIN, � NPO �2 #2, Commission's denial for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Lone Change from rial•=Light Planning h. Co. , Ta Corm and ' a as m Industx Map Sl Industrial to General Commercial' 3 Located: ,, at 9770 SW Scholls' Ferry Road (W to C�- • 27DD, Lot' 2700) • Public Hearing Opened d history lic'ation: 'ze y' of application. nos i Director of Planning Development Y P now Discussion with Council followed regarding quality of transcript and Commission voted. the Planning Those who testified are as follow s. APPELLANTSt Oregon PCM Associates, 1200 Standard Plaza, Portland, tape of PT' Terry Hauck, evi4us • ute tap Attorney representing the. applicant showed 7 minute iven at the Planning Commission meeting im 0 test Y. g Hike McKenna, PCM Associates, 4005 SW Sixth, Portland, Oregon use made � i to =. and noted ' the u that Summarized the land, use history wou Sumtn the property by 'Levitz Furniture. bas . for i[t Commission's �S Attorne , : summarized the Planning proposal would be Furniture- Terry .�auck, �` .. denial and findings and explained in his ,.addressed the s issue of traffic area. �i compatible v�ith the �u�`round� -ng evaluation for the City • and higher impact, improving site an g It - general manager for P'ortlarcd Chain spoke in support �of the John No�rdhr� , g en , , � , zone change, RESPONDENTS ; aina t zone ''change • In hid 1701 ' � it Road testaf iet ag do n l o t i- it , .' 0 f W th+e block and diet industrial •and commercial op'ncn�i �. dmesn ,propr e�y uses do not tt17L . 'T I N IN ERAr�I e. M o nna Ke ub'1.ic Hearing: ClcSed AGE �+ °CO NCIL M NUTE NOV Mgg un.,rcnl 141 d3+1 u.nf. J••1i Mayor Bishop made disclosure statement; stating he had worked with the legal firm and general contractor, but has no conflict of interest, discussed II m and. r surrounding Councilor Brian is d the co atibilit chaacter of p y area' and possible future uses. He supported the - cial use. Councilor Scheckla questioned the transcript and previous action of Planning Commission.' Council continued! to discuss i.f sometime in the future this area should go commercial. Counc lor: Bra 'seconded', b. ' Councilor Scott, to sustain the Motion '� by ' an, se � �' appeal to allow the comprehensive plan 'change and 'allow the zone change' and direct staff!to prepare findings for final consideration.. Motion passed by 4 -1 vote of Council with Mayor Bishop voting NAY. MEETING NG RECESSED D 10: 35 P.M. , MEETING RECONVENED 10:47 P.M. COUNCILOR BRIAN ABSENT 10. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 9 -83 ZONE CHANGE ZC 8783 GALLO'S VINEYARD /HEM) MORISSETTE BUILDERS NPO #7 - APPEAL m HE- RECORD. Commission's denial for p dhe - P anna.n a, CoG reYee'nsive. 'Flan ¢ the H A I Amendment from Low Dens g PP `tai to Meda.um 'Density, Residential and a Zone C3lange from R -7 (S'.ngle Family` Residential) to R -5 (Single Family Residential). Located at S' Tigard' 'Street- and' SW 113th Avenue (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 34DC,, Tax Lot 290) • Pub l,ic Hearing Opened Planning Director summarized history f application.! COUNCILOR BRIAN ARRIVED 10:55 P.M.. e. Discuss ion by Council r g ardin g clarification by Planning members . Planning Commis szan Those who testified are as follows: f the trP.asc ipt' and voting APPELL.ANT,S: y . torna 1600 w Cedar Astor eir d. noted: hL y At l pl� 5 wh o y, g y as And ,lordan, y proposa't, raq'�e� , He sut ested�� i���he be al.lo� d a1�io lots ��.n 'the trn ng � f gg y �u ro 7 is w 22 .o is on 3.38 acres . subdivis,ian by ' changing the and approving the zone change. w .II r d t is Coi��c i to r� D�� an. �� na fed t�t� �. s it near -t do � res ond�e h es t�.mony a And�r rdan g is a compromise to attach as a. coedit on. Discussion: followed with the city .Attorney stating the bestimony' may b `allowed, as it is. a lessor use acid the Council' has, the authority to ggran.t it. ,The issue was raised if, Councilor 'Scheckla had a Conflict ! of interest as it teas the opinion of some members in the aud;.e,rnce from NPO ' 1 t his brothers property was included ' in the a ea'l., The Cit s:t� af, pp �' PACE 4COUNCIL M1 ND 0VM W 7, ° 1983 d AF°FADAVIT OF MILING STATE OF OREGON' County of Washington) ss. City of Tigard ) g, on oath despose ing first duly swr�rn, and say: That I am a Secretary for the City of Tigard, Oregon That I served notices of hearing Tigard of the g City Council. of which the attached is copy (Marked Exhibit A) upon each . ' s a vo Exhibit the following nand persons on the '"" day of () e , 1981, by mailing to each of them at the address shown on the attached list (Marked Exhibit B) , said notice as hereto attached, de it ed in the United States Mail on the . -rl, .apes day of c"-T- 198x, po sta prepaid. zd. Subscribed and swozri to be N i Oon tii8 ar, ' E pines 19. re ire on 'the Yof NUTARY PUBLIC OF ORE TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684 -0360 Notice, BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 City, of T.sigard PO Box 233,7 Tigard, OR 97223 Tearsheet Notice Duplicate Affidavit AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STAVE OF OREGOIN, ass.1, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) Susan Pinkely being first duly sworn, depose and say that 'I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of "the 4d.. m ir'e s , a newspaper of ;general circulation as defined in ORS 193,010 and 193,020; published at Tigard in the aforesaid county and state; that the aPub - printed copy o of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 1 successive and consecutive in the following issues: October ,27, 1935' us ribed nd„s to before me this My orrirriis September 29, 1983 ITY OF TIOX*I WASHINGTON' 'COUNTY, OREGON Mr. Teary C. ixauck Schwabe, Williamson, Wyatt,' Moore & Roberts 1200 Standard Plaza 1100 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, Oregon 97204 Re: Appeal On'CPA12- 83/ZC9 -83 (Portland Chain) Dear Mr. Hauck: The CLt ° of a eal which was filed in the above mentioned. y is in receipt o Your cur PP cane. The appeal has been ticheduled for Council consideration, on November 7, 1983 at 7:3G P,M. Tigard City Council meets at Fowler Junior High School, 10865 SW Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon, in the Lecture Room. Upon completion of the transcript of Planning Commission proceedings, a copy will be forwarded to your office. If you have any questions regarding this hearing, please contact this ofice. Sincer_ 1 3` Loreen Wilson Deputy City Recorder (1w /0895A) CC :` PCM Associates, Attn: Mike McKenna William Monahan, Planning Director i 2755 S; '» ASH .0.14 P.O. OX T1GAR a, OREGON, 9 al N O T I C E O F P U B L I C ! HEARING Notice is hereby giver, that the Tigard P1rnning Commission, at its meeting on Tuesday, September 13 , 1983 at ' 7:30 ' P.M. , in the lecture room of Fowler Junior High School, 10865 S.W. 'walnut S Greet, Tigard, H Oregon, will consider the following application: FILE NUMBER: CPA 12L83 ZC,, 9 -83 NPO # 2 APPLICANT: , PCM Associates OWNER: Same ' Mike McKenna P.O. Box 062 Portland, Or. 97208 REQUEST: A remand from the City Council to the Planning Commission for a Comprehensive' Plan Change from Industrial to General Commercial, and a Zone Chard -ge from Industrial -Light to C-3. LocATIljN: 9770 S.W. Scholls Ferry Rd. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1SI 127DD lot 1200). (See map on reverse side) The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the Cor.. rues of procedures o�, the � Planning. rr�ttissioh Any , � . y persons hiving interest in this matter may attend and be heard, or testimony may be submitted it it±ng to ;!be entered ihto the record of the i initial hearing. Should you wish to appeal, ;a writtm letter ad+ressed to the City Recorder. must received prior to the expiration of the fifteenth day after the decision ' of the hearing. If notice to, appei is not received within fifteen. dares, the action yis valir . For further information please contact the Plannding partmeent atl 639 -41/1 TYCO CITY' HALL' 2755 , S., . As y- � Averi�ie �Ccsrne,r` of ! �s�, � Avenue & $tarriu Streej` the kettn bck1w is mode sooty for the purpose 01 o t∎strng in locating sold Rrem sops and th;? Corn;o';y t,.t.imt•. I' C. lily for voriotions.,.ii ony,.!n dimensions and•1ocotion iscertol':2d by oc1Ur 4'►rvey TTT / . ., .•11 . ,rTj :. �, t •� • • SEE MAP .. k �, .0.....,...;,4.... ~ .: a'.S,`......�.'� � . !S 1 27D . ><a S I G A R D PLANNING C O M M I S S I O N REGULAR MEETING September 13 ," 19S • Acting President Ed in called the meeting' to order at 7:40 P. .., The meeting was held at Fowler Junior sigh School -- in the Lecture. Roomy 10865 S.W. Walnut, Tigard, Or. ▪ ROLL CALL:' PRESENT:H cting President Edin, Commissioners' Owens, Butler, Vanderwood, Leverett and �� it 'I i � ` i ♦ . din o • Commissioners Christen and F'�esident Te e , ABSENT: x P Moen. t .Will iam A Imen � D veto • and e nzn o f Plan P ''''Director g. Monahan; Associate Planner Elizabeth Newton and Assis Hamid Pishvaie ; Secretary Diane tant:: Plan ne x M Jelder,ks Minutes from August 30, 1983, considered. Commissioner Owens moved .. � were and Commission' Pyre seconded to approve the, minutes as, submitted. PLANNING COMMISSION N C OMM UNTCA,T O I� I 1? NG CJMISSI Chief Adams appeared before Commission as invited. ;He discussed ore. the C • PP n throw g asked for an crime Prevention gh environmental desi n and a ��tunit to apear before the Commission to give a formal oppor y P presentation., Staff will, schedule. L EARI'Y GS PUBLIC HEARINGS P 0 � 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Ah4ENDMENT GPA 12 83 �,' Z;ONE CHANGE ZC 9-85 PCM j NPO # 2 , d sociates Portla ri: Council the Planning Commission for a A remand': from the City Cou n c to �, Comprehensive Plan � . ` � Scholis Fer prehensive Plan Change from Light Industrial to General. Commercial and a Zone Change from .M-.4 to C 3. Located: 977: SW Perry Rd. (Wash, Co. Tax MAP 1S1 27DD lot 1200) � application was reijanded `1 o °� �issoc�.ate Planner Newton explained how ,the ' aPp back to the Planning Commission. She also made, staff'.s recommendation ' for denial. APO -- CCT COMMEN 'S No 'ono appeared to s,pea . • dald PPLICAN � S PRESENTATIO - Terr w lauc t Attorne' 1200 Stet ra lac representing the appl cant, read letter front Bruc Clark., mei ber of NP 3 .2, supporting the application ike�' Mc enna, 4010 SW 6th Pohla d, show a video tape of t "he s,u.rrou ding ;area anti the site. • The L n is to be reproduc.y d aid submitted, to the cite $ taf. for the duE I c r c rd. Richard Wright, Toys "R'' Us, Rent, Washington, read a letter into the y s, Inc., Rochelle Park, e Michael Miller, To s "R" U record from Iicl Jersey, supporting t.hz application,. • He concluded that a business is aided or hampered by his neighbor and they needed thy^ ,adjoining property to be zoned commercial. Levitz Santa Clara, California, explained how the Robert ' Figone, , He ,site 'wouldIbe used as a retail showroom with no warehousing. submitted a copy:'of Levitz s annual report, before and after pictures of a remodeled Levitz' store, photos of the site and area, and a ,drawing of the proposed b'uildi.ng Guy Barber, General Manager, Levitz, Milwaukie, Oregon, stated that he had been looking for a southwest site, for the last five years. This is a excellent location for their needs Mr. lauck reviewed the staff report noting that the history did not xriclude ado tp -tion of� the Comprehensive 'Plan which chartged the site i ical to Industrial. He read a letter, into the record fx,om, Conlme�r , � � fr��m John B. Nordholt iii, General Manager for Portland Chain, supporting tl�e rezona.ng. tie rev ewe.d the amount of vacant industrial land within' the city'. He reviewed staff's findings i, taking exception ointin out. inconsistencies'which he'did not feel were supported and evidence. He explained how the site met the criteria for by 1 commercial retail use• O NY S M PUBLIC_ T E,. TI � Beaverton, ` opposed the changed. 17010 SW Weir' Road John Skourtes, changed one site He felt this would be breaking the'' block. If they g .rig they change the � whole area. He stressed not the. advantages of Levitz should the Planning tzi commission is considering a zone change, no Mover another use. CROSS EXAMINATION ANI REBU"'TAL • rect a inn us �' ate� the were here to ,cor Lice, caused by the o Mr. Hauck s, d y rezoning done during the. Comprhensive PlanAprocess. i - ` staff was reques °tiny opens' asked. staff,' to clarify why, er , a Coirtmissioin , , � cation a eared to meet the criteria for deny aY when the apple P, lso Portlati` h p p p comme.rc�.al ,retail A ate use d C a1rt Was not an en ro ri fora Industrial Park zone decis ion Associate Planner tlewton explained. how' 8- taff made di.se�xss�:on follo�ed w gthy . ba.ed on land fi;se not oa cl I..en us.e y In C �L oS D o Commission r Butler d w .c not support. o Commissioner Leverett favor'red the' app .ic.ation as: be ng the 'highes't and bo` use fur t1e laiy,d• pa . S �e tembe'r 1.3 g PLANING CCrIC l�i.IU LB P Commissioner Pyre felt it was unfortunate that Toy "R" Us was allowed at this location as it is ideal for Light Industrial /Industrial Park use. Acting President Edin had mi)1ed emotions, he felt areas should be protected from encroachment. There was a mistake made in zoning Toys "R" Us and he supported staff,'s recommendation. However he did no'. see ;any problem with zoning the property commercial. Commissioner. ()Wens was concerned that once they d' starte changing ` designations to,', commercial this •would cause other property owners in the area to reque g ommercia'l. She felt this was a q st c11an es to c difficult application to decide. d d.�. d.. d C mi s ione Eutc Commissioner,; Van ,erwoo wave, , � an om s� r ter seconded:. to move for d'eni,al of " "the app icant's..:Mrequestl for d. Comprehensive: Plan • Amendment from Light Industrial to General Commercal and for . denial of the Zone Change from M-4 to Motion curried ,by maijority vote !of Commissioner present, Commissioner Edin: and Levere t, t voting no RECESS: 9:10 P.M. RECONVENE: II 9 :25 P.M. li 5.2 COMPREHEN§TVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA .13 -$3 ,Carl Jotnson NPO �� 41 1 I A request to, amend policy' ' 1.1.4.2 l l .4.2' a and b re ardin the NPO q to j1 g y � g g # 4 area 1 in the': Findings, Policies document and Implementation Strategies o Associate Planner Newton requested the Planning Commission review the information submitto.d and make a recommendation to City Council on the interpreatian of the policy. APPLICANT"" 5 .PRESENTATIO -- 'Mr. Johnson, 51 5 SW IEonita Lake 'Grove, e l'a iced ho F e ware req g language be changed to enable p � thl y uestin ghat ' de'Telopment to ocicu.r; west of 72nd Ave.. NPO COMMENTS - .agreement Martin, NPO PO # 4mber stated that the NPO was in unanimou4� w t h r, J n son PUBLIC TESTIONY O, Jim 'Mille r 12918 SW 63r dP lace s u pp o r d r . dohtison s reques t. f1 1 I y. I I S AND k��U A' II �YEOS , �,��M'1N'A�SIC�N .fix �`�` U 1 I islouss .on followed regarding the LI.Ds in the Tigard ' riangle . and tit, ntent of the City Counciwl ' s'' policy language*' PLANNING COM11lSSlON MINUUS' p ember 9 CITYOF TIQARD wAsKINGroN COUNTY, OREGON NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION : PLANNING The final .decision: was filed bya �, COMMISSION Concerning CPA 12-83 on September 13, 1983 Case Number Date s Name of Owner: PCM ASSOCIATES Name of Applicant: SAE Address P.O. 'Box 4162 Location of Address Property: 9770 SW Scholls Ferry Road Legal Description Nature of Application TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND ZONE CHANGE FROM M-4 TO C -3 City Portland State Or' I S I 27DD lot 1200 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL Action: Notice: Approval. as requested Approval with conditions enial *Notice was published in the newspaper & was mailed to: Theapplicant & owner:, P. Owners of record rd wi t an the required distance The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization Affected, g overnmen tal agencies encies *If there are questions regarding the names of the persons or agencies who received notice,j this information is available at the Planning Department. Final Decisitin: The adopted findings of .fact decision, and, statement, of condition can be obtained from the Planning Director, City of Tigard, Olt;y Fail, 12/55 SW Ash, P.0. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. In the case of a decision, on an application for 'a Variance, the applicant must acknowledge this .form and return it to the city of Tigard, Planning Director, before any' building permits will be issued or engineering approval giver u Signa,tu 'e of Applicant or Applicants Agent Date Appea An appeal as been filed, XX, has not been filed.. Note: Any party to the decision may appeall this decision in accordance with 250;. which provides that a written appeal !may. �i th ' section �18. $4. be filed within fourteen days after notice is given and sent. Notice i s given on septetibeLi_6, a ' therefore• the deadline for filing of an appeal is september 30 cgs 1 questions: you , ou have any questions,, please call the City of Tigard 0� Planning Department, 639-4171. t r f • CITYOF TIFARD WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION The final decision was filed ty: Planning Cornmission Concerning CPA 12 -83 /ZC 9-8GTI Case Number, August 2, 1983 Date Name of Owner: rrM Associates ike McKenna)' 3 Name of Applicant: Same Address P•O. Bo7k 4162 • Location of Property: Address' 9770 S.W. Scholls Ferry Rd. Legal Description ▪ Nature of Application: 181 27DD lot 1200 Portland, State Or 97208 Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from light industrial to general Commercial and zone • Action: Approval as requested Approval with conditions, Denial change from M -4 to C- • • Notice: *Notice was published in the newspaper & was mailed to: The applicant & owners Y Y `thin the re ux red distance "f record wa. Owners o 4 I I I Y 4 1 annin Or -anization e The aff cted Ne�ghborkiood Pl g g ,Af f'ected overnmenta, agencies i *If there) are questions regarding the' names of the persons or agencies uhho received , notice, this iftfox'mation isl available at the Planning Department, 1,1 1 slon. l ec � na The a co p t ed fa: n rih g s fact � decision � and statement condition can be obtained from the Pinning Director, City of Tigard, City Hall, 12755 SW Ash, P.O.Box 25397, Tigard, Oregon 97228: in' the case of a 'decision on an application for a variance, the applicant, must acknowledge th9Ys, foram aid return it to the City of Tigard, a Inn ng Director, , before any building, permits will be issbed. or s err � g ineerin approval g given. Sid ture of Applicant or Applicant's ,Agent 4 a OV'er peal An appeal has been filed XXX, has not been filed. Note:' Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.84.254;. which provides that a written appeal may be filed within °fourteen days after notice is given and s e Notice is given or. August ;5, 1983 , therefore. the deadline for filing of an appeal i °s August i9, 1983 • you have aoy l . Questions: If questions, please call the City of Tigard If l e Planning Department, 639 -4171 STAFF REPORT AGENDA, ITEM 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL LECTURE ROOM' 10865 SW Walnut - Tigard, Or. FIND]T NG OF FACT e General Information mat i o n l 0 CASE: ,;COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMLNDN�EN T CPA 12-83 � N�' # 2 ZONE; CHANGE 2C 9-83 RE UtST• The ,app l xcant is requesting i a comprehensive Plan Amendment t fro m light industrial to general ;commercial, and ;zone change from M -4 to C -3. RECOMMENDATION: Based on staff's analysis of applicable planning policies and exis -ting land. uses, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend, to the City Council denial of the ro osed Comprehensive Plan Amendment P P and deny the Zone; Change from light industrial (M--4) to general. commercial (C-3). APPLICANT:' PCM I Associate OWNER: Same' (Mike ,McKenna) P.0.1 Box 4162 Portland, Or, 97208 LOCATION: 9770 SW Scnolls etY1 Road lot 1200) LOT AREA.: 3.71 ' Acres PRESENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:, PRESENT ZONING DESIGNATION: t' M -4 NPO COMMENT: NPO Y 2 PUBLIC NOTICES MAILED:; is inactive (Wash.. Co r' Tax Map 1S1 271 DD Light Industrial at this time' en notices 'Mere mail :d.;, No Whitten . been received at the . writing 6k this :omiments ha�:t eport. • On August 5 x 1)80, the Planning ' Cbimmission approvChange , ed s Zotie ;from co:n ►i oht4s . ve � Plan Dos ignation indu;s tri,i '�M``�F `' to genera worm xcial. "C -319 On 'M'�arch 5 Boundary 0o' 198. the ,Portland Met:ropoli tan ,,Area nodal Governrnent ssu �n .annexed nas; 'property in.'to k' e City M. a, On April 24, 1981, the Tigard Planning . Department approved', a Minor Land Partition, request by the applicant to partition an 8.29 acre . parcel into two lots 3.71 acres and 4.58 acres each (MLP 3 -83) City Council ratified the On Male 11 81-21, the C n y 11, 1981$ by ordinance y above named annexation. On July 1,3, 1981, ".. by ordinance 81 -58, the City ,Council - appro'ved the ,applicant's request for a. Zone Change from light' industrial "M-4i' to general commerc ia'l "C_ =3 41e. R i "'fie%.∎ e On Au s�'t 2 1 the Plannin Commission denied the applicant s � � g request for a CPA From Light Industrial to General Commercial and a Zone Change from M -4 to C -3. On August 15, 1983, the City Council decided to remand CPA 1.2, -83 and ZC 9-83 to the Planning Commission for' additional ,public testimbny. Vicinity Information The surrounding land ',uses are as follows: The property to the west is developed as Koll Business Center. Highway 217 - is to the east. S.W. Cascade Avenue, SW 1Scholls Ferry ' Road ,and Tigard Times' building' _ Toys " n j t are to � the north. , anr3. To s R Us �5 located south of the subject site. Site Information (here is an existing building on this site which houses Portlan Chain Manufacturing: APPLICABLE PLANNING POLICIES Comprehensive' .Plan Policies l l THE CITY SHALL E AAIN A N ONGOING NGOING 'CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT P ROGRAM AN D SMALL ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY T O BE INVOLVED IN ALL P HA SES OF THE PLANNING PROCESS. All owners r o d within 250 feet were notified by ied' b mail of o � �. re c this application. A notice was published in the Tigard Times on. July 21, 1983. THE 'CITY SHALL ''ENSURE THAT INFORMATION ON LAND USE PLANNING SSUE �" ":CAiDA$iiE �FOR�t .FGR ALL INTERESTgb �S IS n,'VAILA$LE IN AN N'NI?�RS CITIZENS. All einterest "d Pa, t � ue5 die g t ..i ar of Len days to Y commnt dn all land se a Pp licaions and re . encouraged to ,do sow Staff is available to, answer any quesbons on applications or th,e application 'Prates s ST 'E REPORT CPA 12 -8.3 & —83 Page ( 12.4.1 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE THAT: . ISITES FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ' DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE: 1) BUFFERED FROM RESIDENTIAL AREAS TO ASSURE THAT PRIVACY AND THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE AREA ARE PRESERVED. (2) LOCATED ON AN ARTERIAL OR COLLECTOR STREET AND THAT INDUSTRIAL TRAFFIC SHALL NOT BE CHANNELED THROUGH RESIDENTIAL AREAS' THE SITE SHALL 'BE OF 'A SIZE AND SHAPE WHICH WILL PROVIDE FOR THE SHORT AND LONG RANGE NEEDS OF THE USE. ALL OTHER APPLICABLE PLAN POLICIES CAN BE MET. All applicable plan policies, 1 locational criteria and Tigard Municipal Code provisions have been considered in review of this application. The locational criteria to be considered in determining General Commercial are as follows: General Commercial (1) Spacing and location (a) The commercial ,'ar ,!a is on more than two sides. (2) fl Access (a) a change to not surrounded by `residential ! districts The proposed area' !or ' expansion olf an existing area shall not create traffic. ;congestion or a' traffic safety problem. Such a determination shall bel based on p� f existing and . n. the street ca aci�t e�is projected itraffic volumes,' - the speed limit, number of turning uavements i'i nd the traffic generating characteristic olr the various types o f uses . . d" c,t access from a ma or, collector br �(b) < Th,e sate s -hat, 1. have ire � arterial is tree't. � I (c) Public transpor'tat.F on shall be area. (.) Site "Characteristics' ;a) The site shall be of a size. prof e.cted 'use... available o the site or general rich can accommodate present and (b) The site shall have high visi.bility.' STAFF REPORT CPA 12 -B (4) Impact Assessment ) The scale of the project surrounding uses. (b) A The the Fq shall be compatible, with the site configuration and characteristics shall be such that privacy of adjacent non - commercial uses can be maintained. (c) It shall be possible to incorporate the unique site features into the site design and development plan. ), The, associated lights, noise and activities shall not interfere with adjoining non-residential uses. The property is currently being used by the Portland Chain Manufacturing which complies with applicable planning policies and locational. criteria. The proposed commercial /;retail" use is - -not compatible with ,surrounding non - industrial uses (except Toys "R" Us which is located `' to the south and in retrospect 4it seems i.nappropriate),' which, include. Tigard Times to the office and business activities and 'are perwitted in an. industrial park north west, of , which are defined as ortta �n doll Business Center to ,- d o the west both o zone, whereas the commercial /retail "use is not allowed. Further, the applicant's argument on,the ground that there is a need for additional commercial /re tail space in that are du.ue to its vicinity to the Washington Square Shopping Center is not valid, since, Highway 217 separates and divides'these two areas and therel is no direct access, from the shopping E center to�the, site except a visual one. Also-, the applicant s own traffic impact analysis shows that the numbers lof total daily trips would increase from .94 to 186 trips which puts "additional burden on Sid Cascade Blvd. , a substandard major' collector. TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE b + 1 ements All of the requirements r eti dmen t Al � q �, a.ve Plan , Am Comprehensive Tigard `lunicipa1 Code have been considered in review application. CONCH US 1ON5 The proposed Comprehensive Plan 'Amendment does planning policies. ggCONENDATION Staff recommends denial of the of the f this not meet applicable request for a Comprehensive Plan general commercia , based'`on the ollo�t' ng. Amendmen uten,t of the Industrial land use designation is to protect existing and potential lands suitable for industrial development from end ro,athmen,t by non-industrial or incompatible uses. STAF kg ?ORT CPA l -8 & ' ZC 9 -8 Page 4 fl M1 Thare is ample supply of land suitable and zoned for commercial /retail use along Pacific Highway (99W), which may Prove to be more desirable for the proposed use. RECOMMENDED MOTION Should the Planning Commission agree with staff's ,recommendation„, the following motion may be mane; "Move for recommendation to City Council of denial of the applicant's regtest for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Light Industrial to General Commercial and for denial of the Zone Change Erom M -4 to C -3 NOTE: Should. the Planning Commission not adopt staff's recommendation) findings will have to be ad.opted with the motion.` PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: d3 w William A. Monahan :�. liam Pishvaie Assistant Planter Director of Planning and Development p1PO i ` CPA, 1 2- ZC P e APPEAL - PORTLAND ( tN CPA 12-8 AC 9 -8 ter (3 Page, 1 oL 16 CHAIRMAN: Before I open public hearing I'll attempt to tell you from memory what our normal commissioner reads. We do have a procedure that ewe 'try to follcw to make this an orderly form of business. Basically the agenda follows this, with a staff report, then asking for any reports' from the NPO or, the Citizens' CCI committee, then a presentation by the applicants, at that point we open it for public testimony, first those in favor and then those against We then give, some time for cross examination and rebuttal. We then close the public hearing portion at which time the commissioners deliberate and finally take a vote, then we go onto the, next item. So with that preliminary, I! open the public hearing, Agenda Item 5.1, which is a ;Comprehensive Plan amendment CPA 12 - -83 and Zone Change 9 -83. This is a remand from Council. Staff, would you like to explain haw you got it. NEWTON: I think of the commissioners present recall this item, on NEWTON. x think.. most P August 2 of this year the Planning Commission denied the applicant's request' for a Comprehensive Plan iinendment from light industrial to general commercial and for a zone change f tom M -4 to C-3- You may recall the propem't-y is _ located in this ,• .rea here, near the Toys ' "R" Us site in Cascade Industrial Park. On August 15 tie City;; Council voted to remand this issue back to the Planning Commission for additional Public testimony. The item is going to be appeal :d' to the City Council and the applicant pointed out to the staff and the City Attorney's office that they had new information that they would like to present. It was. on the advice of the City Attorn.!zT' that the Cit' Council remanded the item, because the new information would not have been appropriate under appeal of the. City Council, Ii.a Council has remanded it. You do have the staff report as well as the minutes of the August 2 meeting . in front of you as well as i g is a lication be denied. The staff is � still � recommending that th � pp CHAIRMAN: bo we have anybody here froth NPO? CCO? OK aPPl.cant. HAUCK: Mr', Chairman, members of the Commission. My name is Terry Hauck. I. at an attorney. I practice ,law at 1200 Standard 'Plaza, Portland,p Oregon,' telephone number 222-- 9981. In `respect to the inquiry as to the NPO we I'talked with Mr. 'Bruce Clark of the NPO, and as you are probably aware, NPO is sort, of loose and not totally activve. Z will put this into the record but l would like to read' it tc,. you It's to the Tigard Planning Cor'mv ssion 'from Brnce. Clark, NPO, re: PCM Building, Cascade 8t.' "1 have had discussions' regarding. the PC t Levitz prtoposal with some of the area business people, 'which leaves 'me to conclude that there :.s tt:le o;r no objection to the proposal provided that traffic be oriented to exit and enter 'from ',S,cholls Ferry Rd . i1 order to minimize the traffic itblpact on Greenbury- Cascade intersection. The existance of Toys "K° Us certainl; has not produced deer %ental neighborhood impact today„.".It is signed Clark, would like do if 1 may .' . . We were unable to have w0t s t that 'cue tho ,i tit t o old be of value to you., song eo le . g What l o p p come and tes t�,�f y �, fa ing 'under the pr.esutnptoion.ttha�t, and also, .and ih�.s isi my 'ult,, operat , cedure to have pictures and xt 'was ,u.orinal, a1�af pro �, ,,. Fite and surrounding, area, Much to my cha fin and, i . pologite that pp what ewe have this evening is l ,3us� assumed that �tot��,d, Yha en �.nd t a video tape and some ietures Plus tie have a ,gentleman. from Toys R APPEAL - PORTLAN IN CPA 12-83 i AC 9-83 Page' 2 of 16 Us, Mr. Wribt, and we have'two gentlemen from Levitz who we are proposing use the site if we car. get the land use necessaryto convert; from zoning to commercial zoning. That is Mr.lF .gone 'and Mr. Guy Barber. ,What I'd like to' do if I may with your permissiois have MMcKenna' from PCM show a' videotape and also some pictures. I would like to have the representative from Toys "R" Us testify, and at > the conclusion of those 'gentlemen, I would like to addressiyou' once again. We have somewhat of a ptoblem' with the tape. ' We can't leave it with you 'tonight but we want it part of the record, and 1 was wondering if it :would possible to have a videotape of ,it made tomorrow, certified by the company that makes the vLdeotape,` and get it :back to 'you. They simply could not get!it done in time. inaudible HAUCK.: OK. The ,other proLiem we have is people from Levitz have a big picture, of what,they would iike to do at the site, and they c,an`t leave that with ou. The are tr 'n ''to et some more prints -of it tirade I Y g g P Y y, one the want to, show ou this evenin g 'and they w211 give you back :the y y It 4s just a logistics problem. No problem. VIDEOTAPE: The following video presentation was made on `behal.f of PCM Associates' to depict' the. scene of the Portland Chain site which is the motion before you for land use plan amendment and zone change. The beginning shots are aerial depictions of the Site itself starting at the intersection of Schoils Ferry itd, and 217 sweeping ,A.st to show the site beginning at the Times Building through the Portland Chain site, Toys "R�' Us store, Washington Square in tee foreground, then continuing on down, Cascade, the Par:Gas facility, Electrical Transmission substation and Seaman Ellis. In the background is the residential area and Koll Business Park. Next, scenes :show the area in questionr►. beginning at G 'eenbut Road and sweeping north along the S-2 railroad tracks and encompasses most of y . the in question. The fac.� `1 ty .��nediatelin tliel, picture now is Seaman Ellis, followed by the storage facility for vehicies,l' Transnmission. site, Par Gas, Toys R Us and rzrtland Chain. Coming into • view now is Koll Bus .nesn Park which is located immediately west of the subject 'property. These scenes include the SP itusiness Park whic a is located j ust across 8cholls Ferry road from the site. The following scenes are another sw ±en down. 217 capturing the ,entire point which includes the Times Business facility and the. Portland' Chain site. The next scene includes . shot from the.- west looking east toward the site ()Vet the residential area which s e — ni includes Engl�.wood neighborhood anti, the multi fatal units on the left u y side. This scelie shows the Chain plant from the ground through the residential o nd level' th g� area And we Vero fortunate to capture ari t SP �al. 7"L going by the tracks. we' are on the g rourxd letrel taking r motor trip down Cascade .Blvd. beginning at the ,in .ersectibn of Scholl, Ferry` Rd . and Cascade. The fist site is the Portland Chan site followed by Toys' "►k"' Us,. The tour continues down Cascade. The next site the Parr Ga;;,,, facility followed by the electrical transmission site and vehicle storage and Seanto.n .Ellis as the next rind . principal facility along Cascade The °following scene is vacant i`ttnd which has sold to another user c±cintir uing on ck,w n to Greerrbt.rg Rd, are vareity o f retail/who1esa1,1e ,f c.il :ties ¥ , A • g Mi 9 a APPEAL - PORTLAND ( LN ,CPA 12--83 AC 9 -83' Page 3of16 and ma ' facturing depots. The journey begins again at Greenburg Rd. heading back towards the s•.:bject site and the next facility iv the Franz Bakery which includes a retail outlet for consume::' use and immediately behind is the Mayflower storage facility, va,L:ar land which is presently unused, and just following th c' vacant land is a facility used by Oregon State for vocational rehabilitation. And finally, the facility called Power Rents. The remainder of Cascade beyond Power Rents is unusable space which borders Highway 217 until to the Times Bldg. get t g � g . again which concludes the sweep along the north side. Following sites are taken from`the'Koll Business site lookin west , g. toward the Chain Plant) and we tried to ca ture in these view of what the e back side encompasses � �ncp scenes a panoramic t th p luding the Koll Business Park which is primarily a commercial /retail center. Scholls 'Perry Rd. provides a border between Ko11 Business Park and the SP Park directly across the street. next scenes are taken from Washington Square and include treeta The n Wa the sweep from the Times Bldg., a commercial office building, to Portland Chain site. The traffi c in the foreground is from 217. ' Following scenes are taken from ground;,level immediately surrounding the site itself., and, we, br in at more towards the back undesirable side' of the Chain plant compl.�te with chemical storage facility` and large' s1::orage areas' of chain and other metal. The sce��es1'which you have just ;seen depict the machinery and noise enerated b t e roduction levels inside the b g y p g plan+. This concludes the: presentation. These are the pictures. They` are aerial. photographs in color which show the sites from different angles, and there are''some 'that are,l the same. I t leave these with yo ss ar u tb pa ' w� 1' oun�.. CHAIRMAN Any q uestions. WRIGHT! My name is Richard Wright. t am an area' supervisor' for Toys' "R't' Us, ss Kent, Washington' I think I should begin by reading and m address is Kent Was a letter which has been forty • arded on to me by our ,vine president of real' estate„ Michael Miller.' He was instrumental in finding the location we ate ° currently located on on '`Cascade. 'Blvd. and in sealing the deal. The letter is addressed to Mr., Frank Tepedino, Chairman;, City of Tigard Planning 'Commission, regarding Toys "R" Us retail, store, Portland Cha ;A Manufacturing Co.. and PCM Associates. Dear Mr ?. Tepedino: Toys "R!' Us his been notidied by PCM Associate's that the zoning designation for Portland Chain Manufacturing, a neighbor to the north, has been changed from C-3 to Such a change is 'very detrimental to our interests, and we find it amazing that such 'a change could be made without our input and without notification:. �-7e purchased. the land upon which..tur retail store` �M Associa�tes,� with .g zoning sits from, PC in ;� 9$l h the knowledge that the 8 and loud use criteria a allowed commercial and retail establishments on our], land, and that our neighboring property, Portland Chain, was zoned. the same, stay. ,The Chain plant hats been allowed to exi8t as is for the term of its lease which we knew would end by at least Deco'tmber 3: ., 1985. PCM Associates discu,osed their long range Plans with us at 'that, time, and we knew that it would only be a rer 'years until the unsightly ,noighbor was one and a more oomplem n�t+aryy, neighbor + hb �lledrelied elied on the documentation. provided .y city. of IL� c p d, P,lann�. �n t � staff „ e al's �r �' �" ... �,� end, report �there. g g t as wee �' 3n that staff re ar ' they -spe iticaf.ly tdeolemended, a retail ,furniture .facility, or the like as the best Use o the Chain. plant site. The C t of Tigard Ordinance s pec f i call r Ce APPEAL PORTLAND CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page 4 of 16 changed the zon)',ng to C -3 on those parcels and set in concrete all of the plans for our facility and to the ultimate ;rehabitat:ion' of the Chain plant. We have 'commited millions of dollars to our investment which is irreversible. If the Chain plant and industrial C -4 zonm is allowed to remain,'' it would seriously impair our business and our economic investment. The unsightly nature of the chain plant, the noise chemical smell, and the acti 7ities surrounding the manufacture of heavy chains is not the least bit conducive to a retail sakes 'establishment. I''m sure I'm not just speaking for ourselves since nearly all our neighbors in that retail hub are commercial businesses. The City of, Tigard has in fact created an island out of our property. The rezoning of the Chain plant heavy industrial leaves the Toys "R ", Us store as an isolated ted :.retail establishment. We feel very strong that the petition by PCM Associates to have the Portland Chain site rezoned, to C--3 needs to be approved on the basis of the 'land, as well as the fact that the zoning was C -3, and there appeared to be no logical reason �it to rrevert into M-4. All of the reasons which led the City of Tigard to change this land to C-3 in 1981 are even stronger. today as we witness the growth of the regional hub which is commonly urge ' a known We ur you to rove as the Washington Square Center. g y PP and rezone the Portland Chain site to C-3. Sincerely, 'Michael Paul: Miller About the only addition I have to that that our business is severe 1S hampered or aided by who our neighbors :Ire, and when we went into the N ventu e it was thought that the neighbor ;,rood was changing. We would wish that that would continue. ` Anything I could answer for you? CHAIRMAN: It would be appropriate later on to ask the questions. Mr. Figone. am the Group 7 Operations Manager for Levitz FIGONE. My name Figone. Bob;` Fgoz�e. I P_ Furniture Corp., and my office is in Santa Clara, California. I am here tonight to tell, you a couple of things, one of which is to tell you a little about the nature of our business and also what we had planned for this Portland. Chain Bldg., and I have some pictures which I will leave with you. I'll get to those in a moment. Our plans, I guess you know, or the Portland Chain Bldg are to completely , for o convert it ; com' letel ' into a retail. furniture showroom. . This showrk -oin' would be quite a bit different from our o eratirn 'in. Milwaukie, Oregon where we have a showroom and a warehouse attached to it. Again, the Portland' Chain t3.dg. would be a hover furn�turP�del..ver warehousing re s m. All the wa u wo�tl entirely �: furnitu oo rehousx.n Milwaukie `store. This being the case, we would nut have delivery trucks corning in and out of this area. All of that would be done in Milwaukie. About the only delivery trucks we would have would' be a once or twice-a-week -a -week :shuttle between the. warehouse and this store to bring over r �7 new merchandise and floor 'samples.' Again, as I said, the entire building would be turned into a furniture showroom. We would have a small office . space, small storage space, and the rest showroom. ! The nature of our business , here ,would be that customers: Vvould come to this location; and they could purchase and complete the entire sale at one title, pay for it, whatever they ',gate' go '.ng to do, and then either go the 'LLiwatikie store and P.. pi merchandise if they "wanted it t away or have ». ed' ck up the merch y � rxgh y r have �;t delivered 3irectly ''to their home. f :.ow I lwaukie. So it, would, be a one -stop trans tion. It would not necessitate coming back and picking up something another day. our hours'' of operation are 'Monday- ,Friday from lCi 00-9:00, Saturday 10:00 -6 7.0O and Sunday n.on -6 :O0. Our heaviest, traffic times, when the majority of cu.r uu.sine;s s doat, is in the evenings and on weekends. Most furniture e dtb f !'LPPEAL - PORTLAND CHAIN CPA', 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page 5 of 16 purchases seem to be made by couples and those are ;:he times when couples can get together to make a purchase. We are a high volume operation but we also are a big ticket operation. Our average sale runs several hundreds of dollars, so that we get, a lot of volume without a lot of people. We are not a high traffic operation that some other high volume operations are. 1 As far as projected sales in this area, it's tough to say..; We would pro ' ect sales in, this area of about $400,000 a month, with ; an employment of around 25 -30 people in that location. Customer traffic, again it is hard to say at this point, but based on our history in Milwaukie we are probably looking at an average, of 75 people coming to this location Per day. As I mentioned, g I brought some pictures, some that I can leave and others I'd like to get a copy back to you. '; These that I can leave, these „ before and after pictures of ; a building in Atlanta, Georgia that was recently converted. It was a roller skating rink, and we turned it into a furniture showroom. The 'small ones are before and the big ones are the after. This is the one I can't leave. It is a building that is currently under construction in Oxnard, California. If we' were converting the Portland Chain Bldg. , disregarding this back here because it is a little different situation, this this is the type of entrance, etc. I can get you copies of these. L 1stly I'd like to leave this copy of our annual reports for last year so if ;'there's any further information about our company that might be beneficial to you. Thank you very much. y 'C Guy Manager the Milwaukie BARBER: my name �.� Gu Barber °,�1 am the Branch Mana er at Levitz store, and I will also be the Branch Manager at this store when the transaction is complete. I am going to briefly explain to you why we would like this site. I have been up here about 5 years and we have looked '' at many different sites since I''ve been acre. . We have been ;'_looking for a building on the wost'side for quite some ; time, I personally haver been looking for 5 years. When I looked at this site it was obvious' to me that this was the ideal ideal location we needed. When we look for a site for a satellite operation, which is what this would 'be,' with the warehouse on the, other side, we need something that is far enough removed from your present site so it doesn't interfere with your business, so if you're getting mostly plus business in your new site, so you need to be 20 -30 mikes away from your original site, which this site is. We, would like to be in an area where there is a tremendous amount ofi; retail trade going on already. Obviously with Washington Square right across the street and Toys "R" Us' right next Idoor,, this is an ideal location from that standpoint. The freer ay access is very, very good, in fact it is much better than wnat the other side. I almost wish this store was my original but weedon' t feel that we could get a better location, f g b �, ton as far as access for people ' to get on and, off and get into our shopping area here. That is all ;I have to address. HAITCk The first thing 'I d lik 'make reference to Is in respect to the, e to staff report on page, 2 of the ttatt report' where it's going back to the history', the backgr aund., These shot .d be. an entry between July 13, 1981 and,,August , 1983" eutry. That ent. y would be the one where the Cot prehensive" nn designation ,and zoning by the !City from commercial, zoning and Cotprehensive Plan designation 'back to :industrial. I have-a. lette from- Mrs N"ordholt of Portland Chain Manufacturing' Co, that is 'directed to bra ' k epedino, I'd like to tend. that into' the record, ra APPEAL _ PORTLAND C�•tN CPA 12-83 2C 9 -83 d Page 6 of 16 Re: Portland Chain, Manufacturing Co., Tigard, Oregon Rezoning Petition by PCM Associates. Dear Mr. Tepedino: The purpose of this letter is Lc) express our support for the ' zone change and Land Use.. Planning change �.: for PCM Associates 'as applied for on the land commonly known as the Portland Chain site. Portland Chain Manufacturing is a wholly owned subsidiary of Webster Industry, an Ohio concern, and as its General Manager, I have direct responsibility for the operation of this facility. I support the rezoning as a recognition of a change, in the area in which our business is located. When the plant was mostly rural constructed over 15 years ago, the area around it was y and consisted mostly of farms and just a few businesses. Portland Chain with its heavy equipment, noise and industrial look operated � situations ha ve with little or no notice in this open setting. .ti.ng . Since situation changed dramatically since those early days, we find ourselves as a nonconforming member of the community. The area around our plant has grown to be the largest retail hub in the state of Oregon and is few comprised of retail and commercial establishments. There are true industrial users further down Cascade Blvd. However, they, as � usi ' ourselves, are in a minority because of the changing area. We recognized this change in our neighborhood a number of,ye�3 ago and made the conscious decision to sell the land and building take back a and dl a lease for a medium term. ' This provided us with the flex y to re-locate to another area. The pressures which have led us to the need to re- locate are n , t confined to the fact that we are surrounded by commercial retail establishments but, go further to the cost of operating our facility. Items such as real estate taxes and municipal services have increased dramatically over the last few,yearsi, and we believe that our facility is better suited in a true industrial area away and quite possibly in an from commercial and residential neighbors area where the tax burden is not quite as heavy. The net effect of the Chain plant moving from Tigard is negligible when you consider ttc disposed use of the site is an active retailer who will employ that o than site our plant done. n ac yet many or more employees. p one. We have not et 'selected an alternative site, and it is within the realm of possibility that our relocation could be within the City if Tigard in another 'area, '' The present lease does not have the possibility of expiring before December 31, 1985, time to conduct further studies on alternative which will allow us sites, We are supportive of the initial, successful efforts by PC Associates to zone the. land C - -3 back in 1980-81, recognizing the facts We feel that re- designation was not that I have xeviou.sl.. mentioned. g y consider granting and ask that Planning ;Commission. strop l sider granting P at. the Plannin th.e Petitioner their request for a C 3 zone on this prop =t h P: Very truly yours,' John Nordholt, III, General Manager.' . . : to the Planning (Commission. Behind are I `thine the original was .sent.. had several maps that we have produced. One we h previously, the 2nd one That is an aerial of thu vicinity. The second Is an, inventory of ir.Y� �. industrial lands within the City of Tigard. We prepared both of those and ' l' d like `'them:' to be part of the record. The. inventory of industrial areas., shows that there, is in accees , of 100 acres of industrial land lofts corridor in .a that has not been developed .and is vacant at is available for fµ' : developai nt and present development for industrial. purposes. I u ..�e that reference in respect to your staff reliance upon preserved industrial What I y .,. : truly � i lands . a�n trying i tosu to you is there is substantial amount o;f industrial. .land that ruly 411, e t APPEAL PORTLAND L...AIN CPA 12 -83 2C 9 -83 Page 7 of 16 appears to be suitable for industrial land. It is our position that the parcel we are dealing with tonight and discussing is truly, in nature commercial property and is clearly not industrial property, and one other criteria your Comprehensive Plan set forth on page 3 of the staff report provides the following. For your information, it is down on 12.4.1(c). "The ,3ite ' shall be of a size and shape which will', provide for the short and long -range needs of the use." The size we're talking about is'approximately 3.70 acres., not a very large tract of land to develop for industrial us. In'fact, it's a bit'on' the small side. I've been practicing real estate law for approximately 12-13 Years now, and I have not been involved in many, transactions where a parcel of industrial land this small was actually, utilized for 'industrial development. I'm suggesting, that the site does not meet the criteria set forth in the staff report' because of its size. I'd also like to make reference to'some staff findings on page 4. They're not numbered but I'd like to go through those and discuss some of those findings and comment regarding them. The first one reads as follows: "The property is currently being used by the. Portland Chain Manufacturing which complies,with applicable planning policies and locational criteria." I strongly take exception to that olicies nd loc.a.ti finding. I don't think it is accurate in all due respect. What you have there,; is you have a use that was appropriate to the surrounding. area'a long time ago but as times have changed in that area, it is! no longer appropriate, and I think the best example, rather than going into a detailed dibc:ussion onithat point, is the latter part of the videotape which actually shows what the manufacturing facilities were like, the noise that was involved and that type of thing. Once: again, I cannot believe that that staff finding is accurate, with all due respect I don't'lthink.it is supported by the evidence. The 2nd step reads as follows: "The proposed commercial.retaf1 use is not ib with surrounding uses (except ' Toys "R" compat' le with thF� urroundr_ non-industrial , which is located to the i south and in retrospect it seems inappropriate) which include Tigard Times to the. north, Koll Business Center to the west, both of which are defined as office and business activities and are commited in an industrial Park zone whereas commercial retail 'use is not allowed. . Once again, I think that that, finding is justified by the .facts I would like to just point out on the map back here - -the back portion of i thit property from all this to Koll Industrial Park that's on the other side of the railroad tracks but is called industrial zoning, but that's the Koll TiOard [Business Center. The uses in that center are virtually all, with a minor exception, office and sales (change of tape) Toys "fit'° us it is compatible with. There has been testimony to that effect tonight, and I :don't, think the staff would, quarrel with that. The only comment Is that in retrospect maybe it was not such a good idea, to have Toys In there. I Won't t quarrel with that but it is there.' The Times acility is an office building. The retail type use that is permitted under the commercial zoning is clearly compatible with that. There is no factual evidence on the record to show any incompatibility whatsoever. We do C,r t" h reb e have a ate a g tive statement not supported by an . facts that n l ` hat'we an h y �.s ot. co�tpat�ble, but I think when they look at the type of use permitted within the, general commercial use, the office ,activ,rties going on there, I think' that that in and of itself shows compatibility There,.s no reason .t would tt be compatible. Also it was ported: out re APPEAL - PORTLAND 1 .IN CPA 12-83 ZC 9 -83 Page of ` 16 at least with the case of Levitz is the hours don't even coincide. We have a user here whose hours are basically 10:00- middle evening. The office is a daytime office. I think also when you're talkingl compatibility and it gets down into that finding and I '11 make reference to it right', while we're at it is that the a licant's argument on the ground that there is a need for additional commercial and retail space in that arc, and I'm ''just reading that the way it is, are due to the vacinity to the Washington Square shopping center to Highway 217 separates and divides these two areas, and there is no direct access from the shopping center to the site except for . Once again, with all due respect to the staff report, I have to take exception to that finding. There is a great deal of continuity between Washington Square on one side of 217 and the other conducted on the opposite of 217. businesses that are 1 That has been one of the attractive features of Toys "R" Us. It is one of the attractive - 'features for Levitz. Immediately north of Cascade Blvd. your uses are all commercial pup in there. You've got the Canned Food W , ': into Datsun office Warehouse the Malibu and I'm not ,i if the space is still there or ,not but with it the old! Viewmaster site it is a retail development. I'm:'not exactly sure what the configuration is but it's in access of 108,000 sq. ft. of office space, and they are also planning to Put in offices, hotels and the like, 'so what's really happening in there is along Cascade Blvd. on the westerly side the old uses that at one time were appropriate to the area are starting to phase out, and tie kind of changes and the technology of changes in the died industrial area you are also having, to cha�egel' the type of user, and I think that is evident by what is going on in that area, ,particularly looking at ithe change of use, as example the Viewmaster site. That also emphases another point of view and that is the continuity - between the Washington Square , center site on one side of 217 and the activities on her.' There is very good access acros y that point,' s the 'freeway at ecut that I really think staff f ending . the o and b ase of tha The last staff finding that I want to discuss reads as follows: "Also the °applicant' s , traffic impact analysis showed that the total trips will increace from 94 to 186 'trips, which puts an. additional burden on Cascade Blvd., a substandar d m ajor collecto r. " The one thing the staff fails to point out in' that respect is true, not ',quibbling about the numbers, because the proposed traffic help` would be somewhere in that neighborhood. But they're not on 'peak. hours. The traffic ',is not there during the busy time of the day. What is ,most' likely to occur is that the peak traffic hour is going to be less if you have something other than an industrial user' in that location, ' solely because general' commercial, b4r and large, traffic impact is at non -peak hours. That is true. of ' i i� Washington Square. Their traffic does not coincide with traditional . peak hours. Levitz won't, and that's generally the case with Commercial type. users. With 'respect to that, I'd' just like to point out one thing by' inference. '`' That's on the letttr to Mr: Clark. Made the statement i n that that. that there has not been any adverse impact of Toys "Rr Us. te: My feeling is that 'if in fact a commercial user in that location would cause an adverse impact 1 r. Clark, familiar with that area., would, ; be aware of it and, would have mentioned it or he would not have made that statement in the letter. Also taking into consideration traffic is the people from Levitz feel that the access: is exceptional. Just to put that into perspective, we have a lighte4 intersection at i Ir APPEAL -- PORTLAND th IN CPA, 12 -83 ZC 9783 Page 9 of 1,6 Cascade Bird. and Scholls Ferry, and we have a lane for turns into • that site. Furthermore, that site is the first sit e as you enter onto Cascade Blvd. It is , estimated that virtually ; all or in excess l' 90% of the :"traffic or more will be coming into that site as it does to Toys "R" Us from Scholls. There is basically none if any impact on the balance of the Cascade Blvd. property. Jecause of the proximity of the site to ' Scholls, to the light, to the refuge, and coming right into that site, I really fail to see how there is any adverse traffic impact particularly taking into consideration the low volume of traffic that is anticipated and the timing of that traffic in respect to this proposal. One of the things I would like to go through relates to the criteria of comprehensive planning to . the part of the staff report for general commercial locations. It mentions on 'page 3 with the underlined Land Use General Commercial, The Spacing and Location: "a. the commercial area is not surrounded by residential districts on more than 2 sides." This site is not surrounded at all by residential districts. It's bounded by basically commercial on the north and a little bit to the northwest is the SP park. On the west behind the railroad tracks is the Koll Business Center, which is bascially'a combination of commercial type 'uses. To the immediate south aatd further on down there is no residential uses' in the immediate proximity. The y other side of Fano Creek with the residential development back on the of Ols al uses are on down west on Scholls FP.r y Road. J residential n�. r R The'secondcriteria is access. It says, "The proposed area or expansion of an existing area shall not create traffic congestion or a traffic safety 'problem." What 'I said just Previously to this is extremely applicable to this situation. Considering the traffic, t timing and the light, which I mentioned. before, I do not feel there will be any adverse traffic impact if this proposal is granted. To continue with that, it says, "Subject determination shall be based on street capacity existing and projected traffic volume, speed limit, number of turning and the traffic generating characteristic' to the `various tYP The site immediately You come off es of uses." " ,.e is rmmediatel; there: ff of Scholls � Ferry at the light and are immediately into the site. You don't have to traverse Cascade Blvd. any great distance. There's, no turning movement once you get off the freeway or Scholls Ferry, ;you're right,, there. Section b in regard to Access: "The site shall have direct access' from a major collector or arterial street." It is immediately right there. Criteria c :,' Public transportation,' shall be available to the site or general' area." The Washington Square center is a honeycomb, of transpor- tation. Public transportation is everyplace around there: General Characteristics (3) Site Characteristics !a) "The site, shall e of a site which can accommodate present and projected uses. This site is large enough for a numerous amount of, general oommerc:ial type uses; and You've heard tonight that it adequately meets the ` +;4' ,,ls of Levity for proposed lact.vities on the site. criteria (b, 13ite`' shall have high visibility " don't think you cou ' ;k, s,r; ,,, ` r tter site t in respect to visibility: fit has visibility front' 2:1' '!4b101, H p: ma, or thoroughfare: It's', highly visible from Scholls Ferry wu i§ also a major thoroughfare:. criteria (4) Impact Assessment , ,a) " "The scale of the project shall be sonipa'tible with the surrounding uses ;, "t I 1 don" t think that will be probleJ'aifi that is !,1 to some extent a question of design review approval, Page 10 of 16 APPEAL - PORTLAND dilAIN CPA 12 -83 2C 9 -83 But the proposal that you've seen tonight is basically a renovation of what's there and kind of cleaning it up ;a little bit, modifying . it and making it more aesthetically pleasing to the community and in line with the commercial use. Criteria (b) "The site configuration and characteristics shall be such that the privacy '' of adjacent non -'' commercial uses can be maintained." In this case I don't there is a usu around that is not commercial in nature. If screening of the light is desired, I'm sure that can be facilitated through design review. Criteria (c) "It shall be possible to incorporate the unique site features, into the site design and development plan." That's something that can be addressed when we get to that point,' if we do. Subsection (d) "The associated lights, noise and activities shall not interfere with ad' any al uses." Once again, there do not appear to � i ses. adjoining non- resident non- residential be +. uses to impact, and to the extent that the staff feels there needs to be some modification, that can be, accomplished in the design review functi. elements that I As I view land "natters there are two essential think could be addressed by everybody and that includes the Planners and the Developers. They are site,, suitability and growth management. In this case I think we, have made an extreme Ly good case for site suitability, in all ,'honesty.' I think the site is highly suitable for the proposed use that we are proposing for it and to the contrary to. that, I think the site is inappropriate for the type of use for which it now exists. Secondly, on growth management, the only question I' think can be involved in the growth management question is the traffic, and I feel I have adequately addressed that for you. That is all I have. Thank you. If you have any questions I,'d, be more than happy to do so. CHAIRMAN: I do not have anyone signed up to speak in, favor. Is ` there anyone in the audience who did not sign up? Those opposed? Mr. Skourtes. SkOtTRTES: I came down here' to night because I heard we were going to get some tl. t " y t e Z' '' new Les mon , but all all I ve heard is a re-hash of A.u'�us r t 2. M y name is John Skourtes. I lice. at 17010 S. W. Weir, Road, Beaverton. So, if he can re -hash what was said on August 2, I guess I can re -hssh' what August 2. Ladies and gentlemen, we are to LkL.ng about a zone I �� �nA o chant, I don't care if ,t s Levitz, if its General Motors, if it s Chrysler or Meier & Frank, we are talking About a zone change. Of course Levitz .likes, that site. It's a beautiful site. We're talking zone Change. Let's et. back to the traffic. You and I, know You, Cannot g g �' control traffic. If you come down 1-5 and take the . exit to go 'to Washington Square, , there's two exits, Greenburg Road or Schoils Ferry., If you, want to'i go to Levitz or the ' commercial site, you can go right down Greenburg Road, turn right on Cascade Avenue. They may say they're' going to control the traffic froth Scholls Ferry Road. It fact the left turn, signal froth. Scholls Ferry Road stays there for about 2 °hinutes, so if you wart to make good time you come' around. Greevburg Road. We are .going to start breaking a block, I think we should, every parcel on 'Cascade Avenue should go commerci al right now, what was the testimony on August 2? Maybe. 5 years from,' now , it's OK. 'At acme print yout're got to draw the l tie Teat's how the game is payed. Now we're talking about economics. The people who bought this parcel bought it as industrial property. �ay didn't' buy it last 'week and pay $6 a foot for it and stow :they're half a million r .our i : fo atio this. o ert. ' 8 o�rtg two lose 1 Ilion, do�.Ia s. �oi~ y n rm nip 'p� p y" r r, .:`. ` APPEAL - PORTLAND C, IN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page 11 of 15 �k is _ not' heavy industrial, it's M--4, ,and �as you know. M -4 lets office buildings er, in' the' light ommrc . ceial, etc We -know that the Chain r' We ,,ye heard that all along. What 'we are talking Company is ° 1ea ing . - about, the property the way they want to use it will be worth one million dollars for the land versus M--4 value of about half 'a million. T don' .t blame Mr. Mcenna coming back an sp endin g a :little money i to ' impress ,' you '. people . H s ta1k?,ng about `making another half a million dollars. It's the American -'ay. Now if we lived where we had no- zoning, no Comprehensive Plans, 'great. You can''do anything ,�,. Here we have a system, and whether we like it or not, ,that's you want. howthe game is played. We can't have high powered people`comingi1 here and changing the 'system because it is economics. 'I don't blame them. We all like to make'a buck. It's the American way. We just, m went through a''Ca F reh ensive Plat. ! How many months did we :spend? ' >Yf I',ow ned 4 ;acres I ,'sure would make stire''l, I knew what J was happening if I were talking half a million versus one million. Were talking a zone change. We're riot talking about Levitz, about Toys "R" Us, about individual tenants, w 're talking zone change. . a s the Koll Business I want to clear something about that tape. Its y Center is a retail center. It' is not a retail center; I am against,it because we have to'' draw the line. • W:' csannot have high powered. economic T ests 'chan e 'the s ste' how man times I ve a:nter � been g y m. You all 'know y before the Planning Commission whenevOr I want to dolsomething. A lot1 -' la ed . I don t like, i, really of times I lase. That s how the game is p y I wish we were living in Ilous ton, Texas, but we ' re not, we' Le= living me. That' all L want, to say, • right borer ;crle 3ust have tz play the >,ga right now. CHAIP�AN� Anyone else wish to speak? Appropriate time now for trots - examination and rebuttal. HAUCK. L i resprect to Mrs center under' any stretch of he imagination. I would • e H I ,ike to make one coimint'. ? y :client is aware of the system, am awa r "e c'£ the system, and that's why w,re're here. We went through a zone change pace. Things ';happened, and it was; re- zoned. We're not quarreling- about that.,' I don't want to snake a'.big ,issue out of that tonight but we're y trying' here ueca Pp �. }. in u� .g r use of what. has ha erred thro�. � h d t.em to correect wt:at the s stems an to work w' y ' �.th�n the s s we think �� as an s ti c �. . tion?? uestibns frot Commissioners? .y � CHAIRMA%i . An: � other, cross ex�,��.na � , OWENS. As I look through the staff report that was prepared I find i "t, hard to see the conclusion that they' o "e to, so I guess I want to a you if y ou. can give some nore, background, impatt or reasoing on why y' are recommending denial+ " pia be w+7e oouit ask what in partic�lr hu Issue with. Is there y � there that you feelIwas riiss;tatedtake ... anything th OTA/EMg: I don t thin1 it was riit-stated. was tot here for the first hearing o i this,, so tonight is qty` first'~ tie" to hear a lot of this testimony and ,also to 'eally review your' report, and as I did review it the.` other a that ,, - tat` :" " ice, t � tiu site :seems y. cri �' y p ' ,o. it was the, � oa�tlonal � . � . � � da m res ons�e t, t~b act � to support a genera. cosh" a c,ia1 guess I 'hav�a a, tiestio b, as ---� -- ----ter., APPEAL PORTLAND, IN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page 12 of 16 to why (page 3) light the 12.4.1 was included f���" ;11 i�t Indus trial because already is light industrial and the requt,'st is for it to be changed from that so I didn't understand why that was phut in I looking instead for information to be put there regarding general commercial. When I initially read this I felt there was a conflict in the report. On page 4 after the Impact Assessment Statement the paragraph begins "The ro P Y ert is currently being used . . which complies with applicable planning g palaces ." then somewhere in the report it seemed to me that there was either a locational criteria or something that was sited that seemed to actually say that if it remains light industrial that Portland Chain would not be in compliance with that. NEWTON: First of all, the reason we included 12.4.1 is that we are in essence defending the industrial designation and so we need to includ those locational criteria so that you can see why we feel that it i %a appropriate to go industrial. I think it is important in the first sentence of the analysis . . Portland Chain Manufacturing; is not an It in itself is the applicant's t>zrack in saying that Jthat lisa not taPppropF riate for the industrial park zoning. What we m'ar'e talking about here was industrial park zoning versus general commercial zoning. It is the staff's thinking that Portland chain is not appropriate there either. What we're dealing with is whether the use on that site should be industrial park, which the Times Bldg. is allowed the industrial zone, Business Center is allowed the : industri1 park zone, park �o�te, the K s F however' To. s "R" Us would not b y retail, and ~wou � be. General commercial allows re that's 'what. Toys "R" Us is. So what we're talking about is not Portland Chain versus Levitz but industrial park versus general commercial. And it is staff's opinion that because most of the area is developed in more industrial uses, with Koll Business Center and the Times and some of the other uses that are permitted in the industrial, park zone, that it is more appropriate to leave the site as it is rather than eroded away at that industrial park base and changing it to commercial. The applicant is also correct in outlining the fact that we have industrial sites in other Parts of the city, only those are light industrial sites-and heavy Industrie sites down in the Bonita 72nd -74th area. There is not a lot of industrial Park land down there. It is important to make that distinction. As Mr. Skoutes pointed out we are talking about r;. zone change. The staff is not concerned about what tenants are in. there.' We are not looking at that specifically. We are looking at what the land base would be used, sites k As You all know for in that area. There are other commercial y ,k there are 16 acres in downtown Tigard.' There are 10 acres on Tigard. West, ther4='s',more land in Tigard East down along Pacific U :ghway. The argument can also be made that there are other avail able commercial sites. So we're not really not speaking about Portland Chain or Levitz or what, we're talking about zoning and what's appropriate in that area atd we feel that particularly because of the good character of the area:; the other uses ,that, are already there and the availability for that area to develop, as an ,industrial:' Park area with the vacant land and also the impat on . cascade blvd. if the area goes commercial retail You have different types of traffic impact into industrial park tones, True, ,you have a different pattern You ma have typical pea traffic, , 8--.5� that y� YP :.. ��....:.cC hour traffic � type of ` t- x.i.ng, but retail, traffic - if that ,Thole area went rat ail y p ' traffitt and traffic. patterns in the def�.ni tel" has a �d�fierent .zt' at�t OA area x;, I APPEAL - PORTLAND .IN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83, Page 13 of 16 So, we're looking at industrial park versus general commercial,; and we feel because primarily` of the area and how it's developed, th; fact that we would like to protect industrial park, land in the city and traffic and conditions of the street ''.hat industrial park is a batter use four that area OWENS Thanks for your explanation. The other question is rather than assume,that T know the answer to this, T would like to ask you, why has it become more appropriate with the new Comprehensive Plan for this to be light industrial when prior' action had granted it be general commercial designation? NEWTON:,' For this articular ste'�ou mean? Prior to 1pal the = •whole area ON, p �Y was zoned light industrial park, 1t- When Toys "R" Us came in in 1981 they, ware awarded a Comprehensive Plan change. There was a minor land Partition and an, annexation and several things that occurred all .N 4� same App .rently, from reading the record, both properties, at � time. Toys R Us ,and Portland Chain, were given th designation. , That's y " " e�C -3 what �.he record indicates._ Because, when they were doing the Comprehensive plan,, Jeremy and I discussed designate the or not we should de he whole thing industrial park or learn Toys "R" Us as commercial, and we battled about it long and` hard and decided that since;Toys "R" Us was a fairly new tenant and the building had not been there very long that it would be appropriate, to leave that as C -3 although in our opinion it would constitute sort of,a spot zone, but because it was there, it had been built, we decided that we did not want to make it nonconforming. However, nothing had happened on the Portland Chain site. It was Portland Chain and Baas really, z,l my''opnion, heavy industrial user more than industrial property, zone. W e decided that we would rather sae that to be industrial' park< When you're consl'dering the pthervariousl,industriallandin Tigard, really we have' substantial industrial park land directly across the y. y ? that Do au gyre ;;that an weight. T realize that is Beaver: ton We have to consider that we don't live in a little 'vacuum- here, and a user doesn't crjnsi:der'Tigard he considers'a general area (inaudible) stud this site; when there is ample industrial park site across the street Which in filly opinion is better as industrial park land than the site NEWTON': ,a".. guess there 'ate' points on that. First of all, the character o. thhe area would be our first concern. Seon d of all, there is also e p p y p .as that subs tanta.al commercial. ro ert that �s undevelo ed in o thr are at t divider3 at: much from Washington Square as this is . ln other �.s no .. a hing ton e commer words; on, the other side of Washington Square and close to �Tas Square without crossing, 21r you have a lot of available' °cial laid. it's -a balancing act,, and you +pan go either ways but basically because that area i� already zoned, What area are. Yalu talking about EWTOW. Over near ,,irtc.oln,, Center area, and over an there. The ' <'Vi,ew Master site. HAUCK: Number one, there is no mare crommcrci immediate proximity of Washington. Square. and the only properties avai. able is the Square between Exit 'Road ' aac t 'Road al land available in the 1 represent 'Washington Square of Washington 1, That new is in the Process A APPEAL -- PORTLAND C4 IN CPA 12 -8 C 9 -83 Page 14 of l of being planned out, and that is committed. There is the old farm people that have that house up there that nobody can ever talk to about anything, and that's going, to stay that way for long time. But over on the other side of Greenburg, basically the commercial land has been committed and is gone, and Washin ton County is abscilutely hostile to any further incursion of commercial uses into that; residential area. On the View Master site that is being, devol.oped right now. They're in the planning process. That is going to be developed either as 180,00 square feet or 108,000 square feet for retail commercial, and also in 'conjunction with that is a hotel and office. There truly is not a great deal of commercial land available. Furthermore, in response to that, bascially speaking, the old criteria of available property similarly zoned within the community is no longer within this criteria CHAIRMAN: Are there questions ?' OWENS: ` Perhaps I could request one more explanation from staff. Both the applicant and the staff cite the other users in the area in their argument for why the site should be zoned one way or the other. So, whet I'm, wondering, and I did not go through the list of users, I guess my confusion is that perhaps there is some ambiguity in the charectpr of the area so that maybe there are some retail things that are not: appropriate ire an industrial park area but there are also some very appropriate industrial park things there that , would not be compatible with the area going commercial. � al. Is that an appropriate conclusion? NEWTON: My comment would be obviously since office like the Times Center and Koll Business ?ark and some of the other users in the area obviously since they are permitted in M -4. The, site would be more compatible with them. If Levitz was compatible with the Times Bldg. and Koll Business wouldn't need . a'Com Comprehensive Plan Amendment because the Center they wbul p Pla ant beca 'uses , in terms of ` compatibility would be permitted. OVENS: Let's take some o sf the ,'other users in •the'area? Power th ' at , industrial or general commercial? .-NEWTON:: That wouldn't be ' commercial..' OWJENS �So then the applicant ! is somewhat incorrect When he's refers to the • area. as already he ding other 'commercial users other than Toys R Us. Rer,�tal . NEWTON: To be fair to the applicant I think it is a matter of how you. define compatibility. 14e happen to define compatibility as users that are permitted within the toner ' i I I Y : at the criteria are since ,I raid not � response as to wh OW'ENS �. I want your. rest specifically look up all those various uses of all the different. trades along Cascade Blvd. WTON: Most of the things that are theta now, not ail , but most would not: i, , nclu;ded in general commercial' 'Like T said, there are 5ohe ecetioiS 0 : e cepta ons H..at e soda than ere tot cot p sib e with the industrial part. 8WTOtit Like Portland C p °age 15 '� o f •16 APPEAL: PORTLAND CHAIN CPA 12-831 ZC 9--$3 OWENS: rilight, and like Toys "R" Us. What are they compatible with? Let's not talk about Portland Chain or Toys ' "R "'Us right now NEWTON: Some of them would be more appropriate in light industrial. That would be'the other zone that would bey appropriate.' OWENS: Are there any that would ' be appropriate in ge neral i commerci;1, other than Toys' "R"' Us? Or Levitz? NEWTON: th ink to be truthful t (inaudible back and forth between Chairman and N'ewton) e ortion of this hearing.' CHAIRMAN; 'I am gong to close th p ubli� P Commissioner Vanderwood? VANDERWOOD: I was real mixed about this at the last time, as the record has n me an advantage to look back in retrospect _ g at . Y � 1V_�. shown w r� losk at it. � I 'think tJe something g we did and he, I1a %e y nd m y t this a a be take another .. t. made the'rightldecision. I don't see any' new , evidence here tonigh think it was just done fancier than it was done last time. It's I thi � J ' the lame stuff. 1 think Toys "R" Us was a mistake, and I '° don t think 2 wrongs are going to make it right, and I think it should be left industrial. ii BUTLER: 7 haven t changed m � mind. (z n a ud�b le ) LEVERETT: I wasn't here at the last meeting. However, I did have the data, and I, am very familiar with the site, have looked the site over. I believe that the highest and best use of the site would be for Levitz As �f far as blending � think thdt; would blend or some appropriate use. A g itself to Toys "R" Us and commercial sites there. would blend that area and be subs tenti%.slly more compatible with the uses that are there now or could be In the future. It has all the outstanding r 1 don't think you can call it spot zoning g � ' hLn assets of high vis�blity. � lot better is substantially Toys R Its has blended in a 1 err and I think it a better use of the prcperty than before. It has substantially increased ht, back to tax base the � °�raltte of the property and that � g,oe° rjg 1 think it is the highest and best use of the property with a commercial use such as Levitz. � wed. I I wash' t here at the last meeting 'when this was di$+�� s read the material :, and. I didni t see significant differences to fight. My feeling is that maybe it should. go back to the city Council. , It is unfortunate that Toys "R "" Us is in that area because from my of thinking in urel Planning p P this is a Perfect � .�' .a .� � g ers :act � � rfe j i P y It is well buffered�fr_,m residential }day. :. g � � areas ,, area for light industrial. eed the City needs a certain amount of light, industrial 's called and 1 think this Coild be it. upon in the Cbiripre'hensive Planning, I support the staff's recommendation CHAIRS: I was al su one that' had very' mixed emotions the last time we heard this. l' re read the material and have had a chance to reflect. on it considerably more. , It seems to me it boils down to there is .is� a good ease .for the use being commercial.. There: no c��.es t�,on t�,tere g [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] APPEAL - PORTLAND IN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9- 83.., Page 16 of 16 is a good case for industrial park" I could make an argument either way. J As 'I have testified before, I am very bothered when people pay taxea; and use a property on the basis of one zoning and then we down- zone it. We ought to avoid that whenever possible. The opposite issue is the one the staff has raised, and that is encroachment. That is the problem. How do we protect that industrial park area and still honor the zoning the way it was. Given just those facts I support the same way as I did before and that is to support the staff. But as I look at it now I am hard pressed to see why that corner couldn't be industrial park. It isn't going to make any iota of difference on the rest' of that property. It is already buffered by the railroad tracks, buffered b y Toy s R Us , buffered by the Times Bldg, aAd I don't think which ever way it is used is going to make a whole lot of difference. I really don't think its going to break the block. On Bldg. y Bld I:would sa the other side of the Times. it would, aiid; I would be totally opposed to that. OWENS: Your comments certainly reflect or express for me the ambivalance. I am feeling too. I heard persuasive arguments both ways tonight. I am bothered by the issues or the facts that are a problem now for Toys "R" Us. I appreciate the concerns of the applicants who would like to have Levitz. there. If I'm swayed toward the staff side I have " to take account that we into are a land use planning body and have a lot or issues to take into consideration above and beyond those kinds o f concerns. cerns . 1 would feel ver Y concerned allowing allowing g that to go commercial if that would then set up the possibility of all those properties eventually over time wanting to go general c.'rmnercial. When I think about ghats there I, think that couldn happen, but it could happen. I, for instance, had no idea that was no there . i. g until this issue arose, . n s t going to be Portland 'Chaff I just thought it there forever. As the area developed .would be ''there ,forever. they did 'become more and more glaring as inappropriate in the area This is a difficult one for me to decide. That is all I "m going ''to say right now. mments. 1 would just. to address the audience. HAI3�AN • �ytake this v going " like .After we Vote we are . i to take a short recess. Some of o ur er c you are here to hear Item 5.3, and I apologize for not announcing ahead of time, that is not goingito be heard tonight. The applicant has withdrawn. That., will be heard October 4, r , � and. 1 apologize for keeping. I i you here this length of time and not announcing it. Would somebody like to cake a motion? VANDER.WOOD: I would like to move that the City` Council deny the applicant' Ire u pr from light industrial to q est for nom reher�s�.ve Plan Amendment eneral commercial, I I CHAIRMAN: Motion as been made and seconded ft r denial, All those in favor say i "Aye. ' opposed,, Nay, Passes. (inaudible) t this time we'll take a ten minute break. b ti P M1 ti Iv.- M�-Fnx , n •w ri•"�A M!ciiAEL PAUL MILLER Vtc,R PRESIDv T- Rf/1E5TM% -4: TOYS "2" Us, INC 395 WEST PASSAIC. STREET ROCHELLE PARK, NJ 07662. 0)7 �E •� A �l4 nl fr � CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DEPT. September 9, 1983 Mr. ` Frank epedino, Chairman City of Tigard Planning Commission 11910 S.W. Summercrest Drive Tigard, Oregon 9722.3 RE: Toys "R" Us Retail Store Portland Chain Manufacturing Company PCM Associates' Dear Mr. 'Vepedino : Toys °R" Us has been ' notified by PCM Associates that the zoning designation. for Portland Chain Manufacturing, a neighbor to the north, has been changed from C -3 to M -4. etri interests and Ima Such a change is very detrimental to. our in find it amazing that su ch a change could ' be made without our input and without notification. 'We purchased ase the land upon which our retail store now sits from. PCM. Associates 1981 with the knowledge that the zonirig and land use criteria allowed commercial /retail establish- ments on our land and that the neighboring Property, Portland chain, was zoned the same way. The Chain Plant was allowed to exist as -is for the term of its lease, which we knew would end at least by December 31, 1985. PCM Associates discussed Itheir long range plans with us at that time and we knew that ' it would only he a few Years before the unsightly neighbor was gone and a more complementary neighbor . 1nst al led . We also o relie d . o n the he do c i1 en tataon p rovided by the City o f T i ar d Planning Staff as defined in their stag rep ort where they speci fical recommended a retail furniture facility, or he like, as 'ibesto use for the Chain Plant site The City .of Ii'igard ordinance specifically changed the zoning' to 'C- ,3 on both parcels and set it concrete all of the plans for our facility ,and for the ultimate rehab,i:tation of the Chain Plant,, t.! Mr. Frank Pepedino Portland Chain Manufacturing C Page 2 We have committed millions of dollars to our investment which is irreversible. If the Chain Plant and the industrial C -4 zone is allowed to remain it may seriously impair our business and our economic, investment- The unsightly nature of the Chain Plant, ` the noise, chemical smell and the activity surrounding tha fabrication of heavy chain is not the least bit conclusive to a retail sales establishment. I'm sure I'm not just speaking for ourselves, since nearly all of our neighbors in this retail hub are now commercial businesses. The City of Tigard has in fact created an island out of our property. The rezoning of the Chain Plant to heavy industrial leaves the Toys ' "R" Us store as an isolated retail establishment. We feel very strongly that the petition by PCM Associates to have the Portland Chain site rezoned to C -3 needs to be approved on a basis of the ;best, use for the _ land as well as the fact that the zoning was C-3 and there appears to be no logical reason for its reversion to M -4. All of the reasons which led the City of Tigard to change this land to C -3 on 1981 are even stronger today as we witness the growth of the regional hub which is commonly known as the Washington Square retail center. We urge you to approve the rezoning of the Portland Chain Site to C -3. Sanford Bolinger Michael McKenna !, Sincerely, L -11 •, , CD W WNWptr' oCn c _. 0 m c�D N' W -r CO Z' > y CI a w 13 0-<— as o rt Co . p H <' c n O Sv 9,-9 r« cn _n ,,, = v cn' < o S r Crq 2 2. ., 0 O'a c a0 > W 0Y °' to m b o7��- "i1 m w. ir), . ..-2, 14 . ;.z om 0 q) H m; ' ca CD ' . . , ' a s*,. o v. m c cD c m .Z r 0 d , a) fkkA, � D O O c � ..4. ►, = Co 2 No N cr 03 CD -.* ci? : CD LO •J N ▪ Do o ▪ Itli: 46 0., a) as - b Q 14., 0 a rin z ,;,,, w -1.- c to 0 i. 0 — m cf, ),„ o : : a CD 0 cr -# N m i CD CD (.fl . S. PUBLIC REARING NOTICE . "" w The following will he considered by the Tigard Planning Commi sidt. on' Tuesday, September 13, 1983, at 7 :30 P.M. . Lecture Room 111805 Walnut - :. at l~'owler Junior High chool obtained from the Director of Planning and Development at 12755 SW sh Ave., Tigard, Ore. 97223, or by `calling 639 -4171. Ash 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA;. l2 -83 ZONE CHANGE 9- 83 PCM ,ASSoC. /Portland Chain NP04 2 A remand from the. City Council to the Planning Commission for a and a Zone change from Industrial-Light ; p iVe Plan Change from Industrial to General Commercial Scho a Zon change to C 3. Located. 9770 SW, 5.z COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AM NDMENV A . lot 1200). Carl# X3-83 Carl Johnson NPO A request to amend policy 11.4.2, 11.4.2 a and 11,4.2 NPO # 4 area. in Findings, Policies and Implementation Strategies document gt 5.3 SUBDIVISION PLANNED bEVELOPIVi] NTr,Srt .S PD Centu 21 0 Homes NPO 4 3 r+Y a A request by Century 21 Properties ,Inc., for a conceptual and detailed ,.. Y e pa plan amuty nits The'a. Planned Development which consists of '2i5 singlet • designated low density residential and is zoned lot 7 (PD). Location: 13900 SW 121st Ave. W � property �sd Y .._ 401 and. 2514 lot 1400),, (Wash, Co, fiat Map 2S1 5.4 ANNEXATION - ZONE CHANGE Z'C A request by resident of; Sw S.W. 78th Avenue to consider Prairie annexation tC, the City Y x a l;gtition rot of Tigard, y Y .. � ..�'+�, Also, to assign a IOW density residential comprehensive Plan p : e n designation and a R-7 i al (Wash, Co. Tax Map '1S135CA. tit. lots 4091, 500, 0, designation, 00, 800 90 , 1000, 1100, '120 1300, 1400, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007,, '2008, 2000, 4800, 4900, 5000, 0100, 520 , 5300,, and ;5500). iV'rEttert cottl ehi� ara �n cotraged. Please submit written c of Planning elrinrients to tale Director g. and Development a the, above addr l iii. advanc e public hearing, date, of'te TT5200 - Publish Se rsh, 8e to P r�b�'G w 171 z a =CO 0 co cr. 5.1 SITE DESIGN REV IEW C DR 26 79 - Summerfield Shoppin g Center NPO # 6 A by request b Realty Financial Services Co. for a modification to an approved planned development for the Summerfield Shopping Center. Located: Corner of Durham and 99W (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 10D lot 1902, 1906 and part of 1910). Associate Planner Newton made staff's, recommendation for approval as requested by 'applicant. She also stated she had attended NPO # 6's meeting where they had reviewed this 'application and the NPO supported the applicant's request. o APPLICANT'S PRSENTATION, Rick Lewis, Realty Financial Services' Co.' showed pictures of the Summerfield Shopping c rater and a.sk the: Planning Commission to' approve their request. P I USL CITESTIMONY B orted the a licant s' SW Ba bur Blvd. S -300 su pp o J B Bishorp, 10505 r PP request citing it as a good w location' for, general commercial use: and' the PD was;an,undue burdon. CROSS-EXAMINATION ' A ND £ BUTTAL o Commissioner Moen questioned why the restriction had been placed on the project in the first place. President Tepedino recolleted that" it had to do with the traffic and serving ,!the ,needs of Summerfield. 'COMMISSION DISCUSS ANDACT,ION j Commissioner Edin moved and Commissioner Moen, seconded to ,,approve removal', of the PD 'from, 'SDR, 26 -79 based on staff's findings and recommendatio Motion carried unanimously by Commissioner present. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ;CPA 12 -83 ant ZONE CHANGE ZC 9.83' PCM AssociateslPort1and Chain NPO # 2' 1' Miiiiiii A, request for a Comprehei „s,ve PlettH Change from Industrial t HOerieital Commercial and a 'none Change rrom Industrial-Ligh.t. to 0-3. Located: x- 9770 SW Scholls Ferry` Rd. CWash. co. Tait. `Map 1Sl 27DD lot 1200 . Associate Planner' Newatoaa made staff's recommendation for denial to protect the industrial designation of the 'Comprehensive Plan. NPO COMMENTS ,,-,•'' No one appeared to speak. o APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - Mr. Michael Mckinnon, 400 SW 6th Ave., explained the difference between. PCM' Associates and Portland Chain. d the his to r o f the He re:v�e�r� h �� site and the zone changes vihich occurred. He said he was never notified of the North Tigard Businessman Association eeting,,; which discussed how the property would be desig� lte stated that the whole surrounding area designated. .� PLANNING CO MISS ION MINUTES August 2 i; 1983 Page '2 f rr: P should be considered when evaluating the proposed request. This is a prime site for a retail outlet and would provide jobs as well as increase the value Of the ; land. He felt Portland Chain was not compatible with surrounding land uses. c) Lans Stout, Planner or MacKenzie Saito Engineering ineering addressed the, following four points: Portland Chain as a heavy industrial use is not compatible with surrounding uses d since Washington County area :has change g y orginially zon; the property. It has become a hub area which would make it' a suitable site, for Levitz. The site meets locational criteria for a CommOrcial designation. Levits would compatible with surrounding land uses.' Dave Larson, Traffic Engineer, ;MacKenzie /Saito Engineering had' done a traffic survey and found the traffic created by Levitz would be equivalent to that created by Portland Chain. Also the majority of the traffic would enter from Scholls Ferry Road. John Skourtes, member of the ',North, Tigard Businlessmens Association not support the' Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He stated that Mr. h Tigard Businessmens Mckenna had � been notified of the � North and Association meeting to discuss the Comprehensive Plan desigiations for Cascade Blvd'. Industrial area. Also there ac: '' numerious commercial sites available `table for Levitz needs. commercial would be suitable EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL o Mr. McKenna: responded ,that he had never received a letter from the North Tigard Businessmens Association. o Commission Mden had on both ieces of p property du g the Compr.ehens,ive 'Plan ; process , Staff ;responded they had only acted on t;he Toy R Us site. Terry Hauck, Standard Plaza, (222-998,1), applicant's legal counsel stated the original Co a rehensive Plan Amendment. included the, total site. Discussion followed., RECESSED 8t40 CONVENED 9t06 give s aff iopport'uni� 0„, obtain files from. City Hal,. b Commissioner Moen stated the Iissuel is what is the best. use of the property now: He ; • felt th.s would be a good site because it was close l 217 interchange. X'.. has good access and controlled intersection+ ! The site has access to' an' arterial and public transportation, high v;isab .lity and is comnpatable with surrounding , uses. He. 401tated that whole area is going through a evolution and Levitz would: be an. appropriate use. PLANNING 'Coz*tISSiO ! MINUTES August) 2, 1 88 Page missioners Edin and Vanderwood had mixed feelings. Commissioner Butler supported staff recommendation, Especially since all the industrial designation had been lost in the Tigard Triangle • and the Central Business _Dis trict. Also Cascade Blvd was' not development "to city standards. President Tepedino was not pursuaded that changing to a commerciil designation would be highest and best use. Commissioner Moen did not feel Portland Chain was an appropriate use for long term, nor was it appropriate to have Toys R Us isolated. Lenghty discussion followed. Commissioner Moen moved and President Tepedino seconded for approval of CPA 12. -83 and ZC 9 -83 based on reason as previously stated, Motion failed four to one, Commission Moen voting yes. Commissioner Butler moved and Commissioner Vanderwood seconded Butler for denial of CPA, 12 -83 and ZC 9 -83 based on staff's findings and recommendations. Motion carried by unanimous vote of Commissioners present, Commissioner Moen voting no. OTHER BUS INES S o Staff stated because of the Labor Day holiday the September meeting would be scheduled for September 13, 1983. . MEETING ADJOURNED 9 :30 P.M. ATTEST ands 3. Teiiedino, President :Diane M. Jelderks, Secretary 'LA NIN C`OMMISSIOt MINUTES AUGf ST Pa'e" \■ AFFIDAVIT OF NAILING i 0 cuAA Cvn STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington) 'ss City of Tigard ) II I, Diane N. Jelderks, being first duly sworn, on oath r de s po se and say: That I am a Secretary for the City of Tigard, Oregon That I served notice of hearing of the Tigar Planning Commission of which the attached is a copy (Marked • it A) of the following named persons on the y of MOf ea 1982, by mailing to each of them at the. address shown on the attached (Marked Exhibit B) , said notice as ,. reto attache attached list day of de , i the United States Mail on the . r 1983 , postage` Prepaid- /// 'Subscribed and sworn to before ue on the %' day of 1983 $ cion, Expires» Litt irARX PUBLIC OF 'OREGON' Terry C. Hauck Schwabe, Williamson, Wyatt,; Moore Attorneys at Law 1200 Standard Plaza Portland, Oregon 97204 s Notice of Appeal PCM Associates CPA 12-83/2C 9 -83 The Tigard City Council at t considered youtletter, oflap advised it was the unanimous issue without prejudice,to t heir Special Meeting of August 15, 1933, peal for the above issue. Pleal3e be vote of Council present to remand this e Planning Commission, If ''you have further questions regarding, this the Planning Commission staff at 639- 4171. matter;' 1 IS. '80) 0 3P `' fiM A aw 0a0 00.972"3 CITY OF TIGARD --,12420 S, W'. MAIN — TIGARD, OREGON 97223 RECEIPT DATE: k " /r--- r .. AMOUNT: S `% "- '; OLLAPS NAME: _ �' ..�• .1' ^ ..P CASH: ADDRESS; //4 f;i4x, CHECK' OF FOR: ACCT. # PERMITS ' ' SURCHARGE AMOUNT SEWER BILLINGS 40 -364 BUSINESS LICENSE 05 -331 PLUMBING PERMIT 05 -332 MECHANICAL PERMIT 05-332 BUILDING PERMIT 05 -333 `,SEWER CONNECTION 40-363 SEWER INSPECTION 40 -365 SYSTEM DEV. CHARGE 25-366 PARK DEV, CHARGE #1 30 -367 PARK DEV, CHARGE 2 30 -368 ZONING ADJUSTMENTS 05 -362 , PERMIT NUMBERS ASSIGNED: Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount J +.. wi, - .;+.Iry .uY anon i Wi „aYWA +doh lH' APPLICANT' Terry C. Hauck S CHWABE , WI L' L IAMS ON , WYATT, MOORE & ROBERTS Attorneys at Law 1200 Standard Plaza 1100 ` SW Sixth Avenue Portland OR 97204 Telephone: (503) 222 -9981 NOTICE OF ''APPEAL' 'August 8 , 1983 PCM'ASSOCIATES Attn: Mike McI {enna P.O. Box 4162' Portland, OR 97208 CASE NUMBER: CPA 12 -83/2C 9-83 7cEiv,52 AUG 11 1983 10111 OF TIGARD 1. ,NATURE RE OF REQUEST.: v review Of the decision of the Applicant hereby request re ' �. Planning n of the C.t of Ti ard.,! Ore on in respect � ��� ink` Commiss o y 9' g I ' he above -ca M�,oned ca The hearin in res ect. to the a.bove to t pt se g, P I I referenced n w ld on Au ust�2 1983 and notice of the after ..as `he d g r r _sion of the Planning Commission, was given on ',August 5, 1983 APPLICANT'S I STA J S Applicant is the owner of the real roperty which is he � v f renced case number h ah oeree su � � matter of t e .,S IS OP APPEAL, 3.1 The i. g y i i n ark f�.nd.in. s made h the Panning Comnt�.ss�o� su or c. h, the evidence ., 3.2 he Planning 'Commission failed to make findings ' e roduced. b the A .licant ev�denc orte►� � tie � �,P S�ip� �' 3.3 The planning Commission failed to follow the applicable law that should be applied under the circumstances relating to this case. 3.4 The decision of the Planning Commision, was arbitrary, capricious and not supported by the facts. SCHWABE, WILLIAMSON, WYATT, MOORE & ROBERT / bTtCE Or P8AL NOTICE P U' B rs. if E A1 I N Notice is ' hereby given that the Tigard Planning Commission. at its meeting ©n Tuesday, August 2, 1983 at 7:00 R.M., in the Board Room of the ' T g and �Scnoi D stri t; wil .ng, 1 7 4.1. Pacific hig hwaY � will consider the following application: FINE N[ER: CPA 12--83 & ZC 9-83 PCM Assoc- %Portland Chain NPO # 2 APPLICI NT: PCM Associate OWNER: S iite Mike McKenna P.O Box 4162 Portland, Or. 97208 Dr N' LOCATION= For a Comprehensive Plan Change from°Light Industrial to General Commercial and an Zone'Change from M -4, to C-3. 9770 S. . Scholls Perry Rd., (Rash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 27DD tax. lot 1200) (See map on reverse side) The puh1ic. hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with the es of � roc edures of ;the. . p I __ Ct7�ii1lSalot'1. rules rcratter ;try attend and be head ' orb An ., s ha�a.t�g' interest P1 Y ]person a .ed in wr t 'entered into the record of the a.nit .a 1 i heatl.I' �.�lt uld. you . ish to anal a written t letter' at essed to tt the City Recorder ear n st be receive prior to the e iratiot of the fifteenth y after` e ,decision of tide hearitg. If notice to appeal is not received witrin. ;fifteen days the actioft . is valid, or ur TIC bola ion please contact the ;Plat riding De tireht at 639 - x417.1. rt HALL,. 4.27 sh Avenue (fort of Asti Avenue The sketch belt.-) : v mode sole'ty for the purpose of ast..isting in locating, said premises and the Cornpony 'lily y ns,.it any in dimensions and °location nacLrtained by actual survey. r� tt for varioiia Set $ a ' ism 57•_oi 641.X97t) ATiY...1A�Mfl'�dY' -YwIW STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.2 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD SCHOOL DISTRICT - BOARD ROOM . FINDING 'OF'' FACT 1. General Information CASE: COMPREHENSIVE IVE PLAN. AMENDMENT CPA 12-83 NPO # 2 ZONE CHANGE ZC 9-83 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from ' light industrial to general commercial, and zone change from M -4 to C-3. �. RECOMMENDATION: Based on staff's analysis of applicable planning KECOMME ` policies and existing land uses, staff recommends that the. Planning', Commission recommend to the City Council denial of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and deny the Zone Change from light. industrial (M -4) to general commercial (C-3). APPLICANT: PCM Associate OWNER: Same (Mike McKenna)'' 'P.O. Box 4162 Portland, Or. 97208 LOCATION: 9770 SW Scholls Ferry Road (Wash. Co. Tax Map IS1 27 DD LOT AREA of 1200) .71 Acres PRESENT COMPREIIENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION , PRESENT ZONING .DESIGNATION :'� M 4. ''APO commtN Light Industrial' NPO # 2 is inactive at this time. PUBLIC NOTICES MAILED: Ten. notices Were mailed. Nb written comments had iAe d receive d at the rwri ing of this report; Bat ground August 5 19 0; the Pla nin Cammis'sion approved a Zane Change f p n Deli nation zndu :.. t i rom Com rehensirre P1a . g . • , � tr�,al M-4 to ge�xeral On Wirth ,�; " 19$1; the art' an Metro olitari Aria ; Local onndary Co m .ss on ,atine ted this ',property` into the City. ►vernm tit SF On April 24, 1981,' the Tigard Planning Department approved a Minor Land Partition request by the applicant to partition an 8.29 acre parcel into two lots 3.71 acres and 4.58 acres each (MLr 3 -83) On May 11, 1981, by ordinance 81 -21, the City Council ratified the above named annexation. On July 13, 1981, . by ordinance 81-58, the City Council approved the . applicant's request for a Zone Change from light industrial "M -4" to general commercial "C °3;" (Toys "R" Us . section, i.e., the 4.58 acre site). . Vicinity Information The surrounding land uses are as follows: The ro..,ert to the t surrounding P�- P y west is developed as Roll Business Center. Highway 217 is to the ` east. S.W. Cascade Avenue, SW Scholls Ferry Road and Tigard Times'" building are to the north, and Toys "R" Us is located ,'south of the subject site. Site Information There is an, existing building on this site which houses Portland Chain Manufacturing. APPLICABLE' PLANNING POLICIES 1. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1 2.1.1` THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN AN ONGOING CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND SHALL ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN ALL 'PHASES OF ! THE PLANNING PROCESS. . 4. d All feet 'were notified by owners of 'record within. 250 noti,fie Y mail of this application.. A notice was published in the Tigard Times on duly 21, 1983. r 'INFORMATION THE CITY, SHALL ENSURE' C) RE THAT INFORA'lI N ON. LAND USE I PLANNING ISSUES IS A VAILABLE IN AN UNDERSTANDABLE FORM FOR ALL INTERESTED CITIZENS. P r g' minimum of ten days to All ' interes fed, a�. t�.es � are ��ten a. comment on &,,11 land use applications and are encouraged to do so. Staff is QvailabJe to anuwer any questions on applications or the sppl catiot: proces s . HE CITY SHALL • Ong THAT :, SITES FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE: (1) HU ?FEED FROM RES IDEN 1AL AREAS TD ,ASSURE THAT PRIVACY AID THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE. AREA ARE P.RESERVED.' STAP1± !REPORT CPA 12 8 ZC 9 -8 ` Page r (2) LOCATED ON AN ARTERIAL OR COLLECTOR STREET AND THAT INDUSTRIAL TRAFF1C SHALL NOT BE CHANNELED THROUGH RESIDENTIAL AREAS THE SITE SHALL BE OF A SIZE AND SHAPE WHICH WILL PROVIDE' FOR THE SHORT AND LONG RANGE NEEDS OF THE USE. ' R,TH a ONG f. ALL OTHER ,APPLICABLE PLAN POLICIES CAN BE MET. All applicable plan policies, an olici locational criteria and Tigard Municipal Code provisions have been considered in review of this application. The locational criteria to be considered in determining General Commercial are as follows: General Commercial;'; (1) Spacing and location' (2) (a) a change to The commercial area is 'not surrounded by residential districts on more. than two side. it � Access (a) Thepro.posed area or expansion' of an 'exiscing area shall not create traffic. congestion or a ';traffic safety .ilproblem. Such a � street capacity existing and ,rminata.an shall be based on 'the proected traffic volumes, the speed limit, number of turning movement and the 'traffic' characteristic of the various typesof uses. ) The site shall have arterial street. dc) Public transportation aria,. (3) Site Characteristics. (a) The site shall be projected uses. (h) direct access from a major collector, or' shall, 'be available to the site or general a size which can, accommodate, e site, shall have high visibili present an apac't Assesst ent t1 :The., scgle o �' the pro) a c cot atible with t surrounding :uses. The ! site configuration and characteristics shall, be such tha the ;privacy of adjacent non - commercial uses can be maintained. it shall' 'be possible to incorporate the into the site design and development plan,. STAFF REPORT CPA 1.2.83 & ZC 9 -83 gage unique site feaitur+ 8 (d) The associated lights, noise and activities shall not interfere with adjoining non-residential uses. The property is currently being used by the Portland' Chain Manufacturing which complies with applicable planning policies and locational criteria. The p osed p commercial/retail ercial /retail use is not o ot cmpatible with surrounding =o non - industrial uses (except Toys "R" Us which is located to the south and in retrospect it seems inappropriate), which include Tigard Times to the north and Kol „l Business Center to the west, both of which are defined as office and business activities and are permitted in an industrial pares °l' zone, whereas the commercial/ retail use is not allowed., Further, the ' additional appl�.cant s argumE.nt on the ground that there is a need for a commercial/retail space in that are due to its vicinity to the Washington Square Shopping Center is not valid, since, Highway 217 separates and divides these two areas' and there is no direct access from the shopping center to the, site except a visual one Also, the Applicant's own traffic impact analysis shows that, the numbers of total daily trips would increase from 94 to 186 trips shich puts additional burden on SW Cascade Blvd., a substandard major co11ector. . TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE m ehensrve Plan ;Amendment Al r the � pr , 1 of the requirements o h Tigard Municipal Code have been considered in review of this application .' CONCLUSIONS The proposed Comprehensive P applicable P P Comprehensive lqn Amendment does not meet � app_�.cablP planning;' policies. . RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the request for a `Comprehensive Plan Amendmen general , based llowing to eneral commercial bayed on 'the fo 1. Intent of I the. Industrial land use designation is to protect existing and potential lands suitable for industrial development from encroachment by non-industrial or incompatible uses There is ample supply of land suitable and zoned for commercial /retail use Along Pacific Highway (99W),, which may prove to be more desirable or the propos ed. use. R1�COMMENDE1 MOTION y Should , Sh the Planning Commission agree with s tuff "s recommendation, , the following motion May be made: °hove for recommendation to City Council of denial of the, ;applicant's request for a COunprehensive Plan Amendment from Light Industrial to General Commercial and for denial of the Zone. Change from M -4€ to C,�-3 STAE', " REPORT CPS. 1'2 -; - Page 4 NOTE: Should the Planning commission not adopt staff's recommendation, findings will have to be adopted with the motion. S. fiamid Pishvaie iliam. A. Monahan Assistant Planner Director of Planning and,Development T` REPO 9-83 RT CPA 1� 8� & Pa a,a APPEAL. - PORTLAND . , ,OEN CPA 12-83 ZC 9 -83' /q $ Page 1 of 13 Ellin: We move i' e to' Item 5.2 please. May I have the staff report and w1] L' recommendation, NewtonTis is a r e q ue5L'for C oM r ehens ve Plan' amendment f rom Lig ►zt Industrial to General "Commercial and a Zone Change from M -4 to 'C - -3 . The property is located along Cascade Blvd. and it is the 'Portland Chains to which is right north of Toys ' R' Us . There is° s or s.e -. scan It land up here, the area designated for Light Industrial and M -4. _ :?,:: cally developed bas, as Light Industrial - Industrial Land Use type.. Tie,o 'ti exception is Toys Us which is a commercial site., That land'was 're,�.oh: " ;�' : ack in 1980 -81 to Commercial to suit the' needs of the people who were going to develop the Toys 'R' Us site. The staff feels that, the area "tieing primarily industrial and the existing uses H in the •area being industrial, that that is ;he• designation which should he protected for that area. The applicant points out that there are commercial, uses across Highway' 217, Washington` Square. The staff feels that 217 is a, good divider and buffer and that'character does nct carry over into :he Cascade Industrial Park as is'known by the people who own, operate businesses inthatarea. The staff would recommend that the Planning. Commission recommend ,;, a denial` of ,this . request' for', Comprehensive Plan Amendment and forward that recommendation of denial to the City'Council- andalso deny the zone change. Edin: there an NPO , on 'the denial? or a COX? Is the applicant Present. McKenna: Good, evening Coin ° Chairman, and Commissioners. ncil members, Mr. I °am Mike McKenna., I am. with Simco Properties. Simco is a management group that handles the affairs of various partnerships. I want to make a distinction here. It is PCM Associates who is the applicant tonight. There is also Portland Chain. Manufacturing, which is a different entity, and I will go into that just a little bit so that we keep the characters straight of who's who. PCM Associates is a group of limited individuals in the area who for a general partnership and invested in this 1979. Port `in is a heav manufacturing is land back in land � y facility which has no connection with PCM Associates other than to lease the the land right other people with me tonight' facilities that are on ht now. I have o who will follow my testimony.' They are a group of individual I put together to present this. They are MacKenzie /gaito in the ` form of Lans Stout, Land Use specialist, and Dave Larson, who specializes .. in, Traffic, and Mr. Terry Hauck P y y of Schwabe Williamson, who is an attorney who has a specialty in land use planning. I will go into a number of F different po.Ints, trying to keep them brief, and these gentlemen will follow behind me. a... d back land af. this land, Purchased the l ocates the owners �n 1979 from We'bstex Industries, who owned Portland Chain Manu ac. tu ing This !is There the cronfusion . gets into it, bat we 'own the land and the buildings . that are now called.. Portland Chain site. We also Used to own the land that is Toys Us . ate approached the City of Tigard back in 1980 for a zone change, and in a series of discussions and negotiations arrived at a zone change to C-3 for the entire parcel which, is a little over 8 acres and agreed to the annexation within the City of Tigard which beG`atie a matter of record in 1981 with the City Ordinance, and l believe it was August sometime in 1981. This was done by ,PCM to facilitate what they beli r�r pmt APPEAL - PORTLAND :..AIN CPA. 12-83 ZC 9 -83 Page 2 of 13 will go over those reasorj and get into them in more detail a little bit later. The change did happen. We negotiated the sale of approximately half the parcel, of land, the south half of it towards us, with the condition that it be: zoned C-3. Once the zoning was accomplished Toys "R" Us built the facility that is on the site right now, but they built it with the understanding that the adjoining property, therPCM site, was zoned r -3 and would become some kind of retail establishment in the future. Now there is a lease on the land for Portland Chain site that Portland Chain Manufacturing has with us, and it has its term Yet to run, and then we have the right to exercise what- ever powers to either re- negotiate the lease, or they can choose to - leave, but Toys "R" > Us did build the facility and continue to operate. We, in the form of myself, offered the remaining parcel p g put a big sign up on the Portland of Chain nsite "For Sale, Zoned C-3n ' into some very' serious sale this last s r�. , Levitz FurniturenCompany�out nof Miami, and that's negotiations with Company their headquarters. After 4 months of some fairly intense negotiations we arrived at, a final earnest money agreement which contained the standard contingencies for checking on zoning and land use and financing and the building facility and what -not,, In their investigation Letitz called me in a panic one Friday in `early June and said that the zoning is ! not C -3, it is M -4. '' That was the first indication that we had that in fact our C -3 designation had disappeared. We then, after a few startling moments, approached Bill Monihan to find out what had happened and we learned that during the fall and winter the Comprehensive Land Use Plan had been discussed,;' approved, adopted, and that's all fine except that we, never knew about. it Now, the ` the news aer and'I have no great argument proper notice did go in the P P with. that. I live in Tigard. But PCM1'has other holdings in Tigard. we have two large apartment complexes right down the street. We and �e. d. follow it, but we just t interested to r didn't are ice. Y a that day, � and we PP nit . in s the comet ha en t road that nec��spapet, I gues ` j Y,� p make any approach to this ownership missed an in Put, nor did the staff m a soliciting input as to a change. We ended up without.a C -3. We are, to my knowledge, the only parcel adversely affected (adverse from our position, please understand) , and we just feel that it would have been proper and judicial to' have at least gotten our input. They solicited input from another group, the Tigard Business Association, but their input wasn't in keeping with our intent or use for the land. Nonetheless it was there, so after more discussions with Bill. , he advised that we approach the City Council and ask for permission: to submit a zone change and Plan change which is why we are. here. That , leads us to this event. I've gone through the City Council. We're here tonight. We end d update the Frank report which employed Ma.c�enzie /Saito to prep ,P was don, in 1980 which was the basis for our submission at that time, They have done that. I believe you all have a copy of that report,.r We feel that the reasons and input that were valid then are just ever so more valid, right now. The land in question is at the very north . end of the City of Tigard I can't believe that we can ignore the surrounding territory, . 's a road ory �: 2l7 they said, eras a buffer lt rrit � Y it is Washington that goes through the middle of a communit . fart of county,' part of it is Tigard, part of it is Beaverton. Thera is a 'l use there that we large regional shogpit�tg, center and large retaw are i fact as owners of that land part and parcel of that community. r � ZC 9 -83 Page APPEAL - PORTLAND CHAIN CPA 12 -8 3 g e The adjoining properties aren't all industrial. Koll Business Park is far from being industri41. It is a wholesale /retail /small business / light industrial typJ of thing. Golf clubs are made there, things like that but they aren't, it isn't "Industrial." The people /landowners down the Cascade are a mixed variety of landowners and users which Lans Stout will address. We feel that the user /owner, Levitz, that we have been fortunate enough to come in contact with, is an excellent user /owner for that parcel of land. It is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, compatible with Toys "R" Us. It is a good owner.. Levitz has a good reputation. We have nice plans for that facility. They have chosen that site •` ,..►ve any other site and don't want to lose it, but they are getting up against a time schedule. They want to get n sit down with the Chain people, negotiate, do so g this done, si something, p with possession p the land g end u � of t without the !.lease and get the stor e in operation. The store is a retail sales store. It is not a wholesale facility per se and certainly isn't a warehouse. They have their warehouse over on r',205, I forget exactly where, and that will remain their major warehouse. They have identified this site as their prime site that they want to use for this regional area for sales, but they are against a time line. We were supposed to have, closed this transaction in late June. We obviously have missed that date and keep pushing on. They haven't, finished any great schematics of the building n g simply y the y don't know whether they can take possession of the land or not. It will be a typical Levitz store which is done well, appointed well, run well. It is a good employer for the City of Tigard. It increases the land value, for tax purposes' that are derived from that, not to the detriment �, of the city and. the other citizens. at , anybody else but �.n' fact to the value o The Portland. Chain site that is there manufacturing site) 'right now is a heavy industrial manufacturer. It has been there for an awfully long time, long before the rest of the civilization caught,; up with it in the present use that's there right now. It isn't compatible in our We don't feel it is ' compatible in as far as land use planning. eyes. +g before and has been outdated by the growth Y; t is something that existed b of the community. Toys "R" Us (their regional man from Seattle could d htf back in Fort, L not attend ton ee, NJ at some conference on toys, g I suppose, but he wanted me to convey the act that they are not happy with the prospects; of living next . to a chain Plant). They bought it thinking there would be. a :retail facility there, and at this moment that is an impossi.bili.ty under the zoning. They had a zone change that they Mere not aware of eith.r. They went to C-5. They haven't fully understood the impact of that, and that's their business, but I'm sato you'll see them in the future: In, summary,, our timing is c'tit`i.c.dl. Tie haste to do something with Levitz; or ti'iey will move roft. Now, the staff report suggested that they move to Highway 99. I have spoken to Levitz about this, and l tan assure You they have no interest it it. There isn't anything : about Highway 99, it is about location, and they absolutely Want. to :� identifier be s4wt th.e �iub of that "�'ashingtort Square (and Z use that as, thy. ) source., and that i s the site they want,, if they can't have it,. Lord knotws where they'll go or chat theyll do, but it has to be a nmaj o error. ' fris feel that we have oa0perated' with the City of Tigard, and initially, of :course,, we wete shocked and bewildered and wanted to stand up and throw rocks and do all the other things that people do I " APPEAL PORTLAND' _ -JAIN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page '4 of 13 when they feel injured, but the process is to come before you, submit the proposal and hope that reason will prevail, as, it did back in 1980. We have every reason to believe that Levitz is an asset to the community and ;a good use for the land, and again the reasons back in 1980 mean just that much more right now. And now Mr. Stout would like to carry on. STOUT: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. My name is Lans Stout. I am a planner for MacKenzie/Saito in Portland. I would like to make several comments tonight and address 4 general points which I think Mr. McKenna initially hit upon. The points I'd like to make are not intended as restatements which were in our P s and I don't want to regurgitate and waste your time right now, but I,think it is important to catch these main topics Planning g p , Position that Portland Chain, as it now exists, incites heavy industrial use, First, from a lannin stand Point, it is our o.,it�.on and as it is defined in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (1 believe it is Section, 12'4): "Light industrial uses are generally compatible ;with other non- industrial uses and have no offside making the large, fiar with Portland Chain and effects. i' I think if you are familiar go vy Product the Y rod it involves sometprett heavy du quipment -- forges, presses, Y Y Y punches, etc. --and there is a certain amount of noise associated with that kind of activity, ,Also, it requires a lot of stuff sitting around outside, and, aesthetically it may not be as pleasing to ':some audiences as some other kind of activity' Therefore, we conclude that it is heavy industrial trial use, and therefore it is not compatible with its surroundings ' as it may have been ,itially when they rezoned. l Secondly, the area has changed dramatically since that area was zoned industrial. It 'Was zoned industrial, I believe, under jurisdiction sometime during the early 196 Washington County's � � during �' that time, of course, Washington Square has coins in, 217 has Since tha � , g q g o ne through, the area has developed as a regional retail center as witnessed by the fact that Toys UR" Us chose to locate there. They are a regional or at least a sub - regional activity. They don't have a store in every community shopping center. They are dependent upon the buyer /consumer who comes from more than just Tigard to shop at their facility. Likewise, the facilities in Washington Square, the office going up on the Greenburg Road area, Roll Business Center, to some extent, e complexes goi is the same way. I believe, that the development in; the Southern Pacific Industrial Park to the north would be in t things, depend upon a 'hat same realm. of thins °sa there are, uses which mmediate. coinununity. That is exactl.... why larger :area, than just this �. y exactly Levitz would to be on this site. As Mr. McKenna indicated, their wareh.ouwe Is ma►.ntaitied in Milwaukie. They are not storing, furniture on this site, it would be a showroom 771th sales s personnel dnd adminis trative personnel, and they will depend upon the regional consumer market to come to this site. Therefore, they are dependent upon being; in an area 'which attracts that type of flow as that type of consumer Pattern. 'That is an important point because l believe the staff report . implied that our position it that there is A, need, ft more commerical, in the area because of Wash ington Su.are.. 'There is a subtle distinction txtere, It is not need, necessarily, however, 'Lt :s an opportunity. APPEAL PORTLAND CHAIN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page 5 of 13 to take advantage of this regional attraction and to provide, activities like Levitz and Toys "R" ;Us, and as Mr. McKenna indicated, Levitz has looked at a lot of other sites in the area and found none that is suitable, given that kind of criteria. Third, from a more technical standpoint, this site, meets locationai criteria for commercial as defined by the Tigard, Comprehensive Plan. It is adjacent to major collector, has direct access to a major collector, it has no residential neighbors, it has access to public transportation, it certainly has high visibility, and we believe that with Levitz there it would be compatible with the adjacent businesses. Fourthly, my last point, is that Levitz would be compatible with its surrounding neighbors. To emphasize that I: would like to show You I, have several copies here and will set them on the table. (displays map) This is 217, Washington Square, Scholls Ferry Road, the site in question here with Cascade Avenue in this location, the office building y Times Publication g locat ed here direcal across Cascade from Portland Chain in the triangle. To the south we have Toys "R" Us the propane facility (inaudible, rustling of map) Immediately and there is tely across the track is the Business Park n additional bank over in this area. The SP Business Park is over in this area and the Datsun facility and warehouse and . creek. In looking at this from the standpoint of relationship of land uses and compatibility, Portland Chain stands out as, an island within this area of more moderate uses, Koll, Toys, Times, what may occur over here and Washington Square • '' It is easy to isolate because (inaudible) and I believe that on that basis the concl,usion v.1-11; be reached that it will be compatible. This concludes the points I. would like to make on planning.I believve Dave Larson has a couple of points on traffic. LARSON: Members of the Planning Commission, my name is Dave Larson. I am a civil and traffic engineer with MacKenzie Engineering in Portland (change of tape) Portland Chain within the neighborhood of 94 vehicles per day, including employees and service trucks. The projected vehicle trips for the Levitz facility would be in the vicinity of g 186 per d��y. In discussing the matter further with the Portland .rips Chain we find that. in better economic times they could expect up to 100 fac tort'. employees' and 30 office employees. That would involve in the neighborhood, oi: 275 trips per day. Assuming no shift changes during the 4-6:00 p.m. 'peak hours the Levitz facility would: get roughly 44 vehicle trips in that 2 hour period. , That relates to about 1 vehicle every 3 minutes entering or exiting the site. In comparison PCB s should generate approximately 41 employee exit trips at their (inaudible) PM peak hour. Therefore the impact on .'street capacity would express this vehicles in PM peak hours roughl equivalent between two. that generate they traffic one an even That asis throughout theta y', lhoweverd they going ,the are oi:ng to have � a peak a` assuming at basis throughout o.enin and closing hours which are 10:00 a.m:, opening and 5 :00 p.'m. pfrOM t e±t 'employees who enter in the morning L ,; their closing he m.o rnixL and � cam._ e in the evening . As is, true Toys ItRI$ Us the majority +o, traffic entering to the Levitz acilrity would enter from Scholls Ferry std. estimating, that ,.., _ come.:. in the vicinity of a50 -80Z of their customer traffic world from ... ade c a tier. short length o f :Case ;. I'err. Rd, eta thus _w'ott�:d. imps t very g S chops Ferry setting the peak hour traffic dewwarld the mix o zoning uses Avenue, � tiffs � � � y APPEAL -' PORTLAND tJAAIN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9-83 Page 6 of 13 industrial and ''commercial, allows the most effective use of the access capacity on Cascade Avenue. Industrial use on top of the industrial uses will continue to keep down the AM and PM peak hour traffic problems. ' Is there anyone who will speak against this proposal? CHAIRMAN: ' Y SKOUTES: My names is John Skour vested interest in this argument. " tes . I have no I am against it. We are talking about a zone change. We're not talking about conditional use. we're talking about a zone change, and I'm here strictly to maintain the integrity of the planning process. I want to ask staff a couple of questions. My testimony is two wrongs do not make a right. All w g we are talking •`ng about, ladies and gents, is economics. These people bought this property. In other words, anyone can come here and say, 'You have to change something Cause they are going to loss a million dollars.' Well, it's all economics. That's what ,a zone change is all about. These People, if you read this file, theY bought the place, in fa ct the pa rcel where Toys "R't Us is at and we've got to get back to some history. That's why we ' relhere tonight. When Toys "R" Us was purchased, that property was for sale prior to that time, and everyone knew it was �I-4 zone. It `was no secret. All you had to do Vas inquire. It was listed by Norris Beggs and various realtors. It was Listed for $1.50 -$2.00 a foot. They e and. sell 'it for $6 a' foot.' turn around and get a zone change $ It is the American way to make money, isn't it? From $2 to $6. Nothing wrong. Row they change? Well, You remember. We had Barclay as did the get the zone Than e. City manager. We had Howard. Howard ran the. City ; of Tigard. If you go back and look at all your maps, Tigard had a comprehensive zone map.,' That was always M -4. Next thing we know, we do some razzle dazzles and we get a zone change. We break the block. What does it mean, breaking the block? Once you break the block and Put in commercial, commercial and industrial is not' compatible. Mr. Larson is a civil engineer. He is not a traffic engineer. He comes out and rattles off some figures. I can rattle' off some figures. Once you change that. , zone Levitz might go broke tomorrow. Eight years ago Levitz almost went broke. Their stock was down to $3'a share.' you change that zone to commercial, we could ha re another Washington Square over there. Once +you break the block, let's face it, the ,ig as well push i out O .a .,,� t you might all the light commercial accounts.' Secondly, k M 4 zone for the City of g Tigard' is mo: ;t lucrative. You can have some retail, you can have office buildings, you can high light commercial. They use the argument we have y Chain. there and make Yalldthernoise heavy industrial General C OK, maybe the ey . until 1989 the have the. lease un 1989. They can stay th they want.• Nobody is complaining. Bee the problem is two wrongs do tint snake a right. No. 1, r. .Mc1enna was s sent the .. y North � belong to, people over there to association, which bel and. we bad the l�tteic b North Tigard Business A onecoth rehen y' the lanning...p...:, p , tell us abut s eve comprehensive plans., Everybody knows we have been wo t' P plans for the last Year., Now he is going to say that nobody notified him and didr lt happen to read the pap er that day: That, s nonsense, . ' 'Row many 'meetings has the I' anning Commission bar on comprehensive plans . We e just adopted two months ago and now we're going to, start changing it. already' That's Poppycock. Let's get down to summarize it. 1 could bring in here planners, atdd' I could have hired guns and they could tell r e this is do t ;good t'lanning, and I could have traffic counts, but that's not 'haw the ga to is ;played, and 1 believe it the integrity of the syste . a 1:. APPEAL PORTLAND CHAIN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page 7 of 13 I agree at times I wonder if it works, but two wrongs do not ;Hake a right. These people knew that when they got that Toys "R" Us they were told and was fully aware that the rest of the zoning was M-4. He can't say now that all of a sudden over tight we changed the zone. We didn't change the zone. How long did the plan take? 6 months, 9 months? How many meetings? He says there was no other location available. Well, apparently G.I. Joes is not going to build. They must have found another location. I had heard that was the only location they could go on down on Main St.. There's Kruse Way, you have the Southern Pacific parcel across the road. That isn't an argument that there is no other location available. That's nonsense. That isn't for you to worry about. That's, the marketplace blame. That's the only place in Washington County for Levitz. I mean that isn't even an issue. ro ert is zoned for they can put In summation, the M -4 zone tha t p p Y �' office building. They can. put in a Koll Center, They can do in a little . worth T Y they n. put offices .w t about $3 a lot with that site. Economicall the can p ffic" a foot. I' guess if they sell it to Levitz they'll get $6 a foot. Again r integrity Planning talking economics but we still we are 11 have ' an x.nte rit of the lann�.n process and we cannot make' exceptions.; CHAI'47.4AN: Any parties wish to speak against this proposal? Now is an opportuity for cross - examination and rebuttal of any of the evidence and testimony presented tonight. Ave there any questions on cross or rebuttal? •c'KENNA: I would just like to ,make a few comments. The lease for the, Chain site does go to 1.989. At .the election of the landlord it can be terminated within 2 years`by written notice. So, Portland Chain is in a precarious• position and that's for their own determination a matter for'the landlord.'. We were not invited to participate' in the input by ' tho Norti igard Business Association which we. were last, winter.. W'e did r_ot rece Ve ^t � �. a' letter, and that's a matter of record, and Mr. Skourtes R initial t�mments ! c of the fast one I take as a pe rssonal front ;Thel . 980 T hparnokc. ye sos u was donr e' p xo p er y through t h� C ommis t h rou g h the Council, throw g h the v� hol e' Prope Channel, this one., We jut w the ru aes CHAIRMAN i y other questions on process One question in my mind. When the Commission acted on, the Toys " Us parcel and made that C-3 did they also act on the parcel adjoining? looked u ', us t is for � 4» 5 acres, ace. in ,1,981 th��t. we . P, J Ito the ordinance according to the ordinance. HA1.1 GK,: My name is Terry 'gate an an attorney. I practice, law at 1200' . Standrad. Plata, Portland. the partnership ; of Schwabe Williamson, Wyatt e number 722 9981_ The intit�.a1, zone facilities Moore. & Roberts, han �.n, 1980-81 was for the total :site. That included both the r��t #, .d`s upon which the Chain plant is' presently located and also the Toys Site, . At the present time Toys, "a' , tts is a C -5, and through the Comprehensive Planning process the Portland Chain' site existing parcel tight now isl c�aangcd back to the, industrial use, but the initial zoning was for the, total site. 1 may have misunderstood, 1 thought there was a comment from the staff that only Toys rw i its BOT0g1Thete were two zone .changes 1 Page $ of 13 APPEAL PORTLAND CHAIN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9-83 HAUCK: Well, no, it was consolidated because the zoning was changed before the land was partitioned. Right, and then it was changed again. 9 HAUCK: 7,n ,the Comprehensive process. I I ? ? No, it was changed again after that. HAUCK: No. The sequence was that there was a zone change that was the annexation. Then there was it came into the city, and at the time it came into the city and the city adopted and approved the annexation at that time the zoning came on under the commercial `ategory and, immediately after thereafter it was partitioned. The partition occurred before the ordinance was ratified by the City Council on the annexation. The annexation ordinance, to my recollection and according to the staff report that we wrote, designated the property M -4. That apparently wasn't tile original intention. So the zone change was adopted about a vonth later to change it to the commercial portion'' where Toys "R" Us is to a commercial designation. (inaudible sentence discussion between 2 members HAUCK: It did not fall through the cracks. We were. very' ^oncerned about site was zoned C -3. The documents reflected that the whole s�.t_ that, and .. it was C-3 because I have looked at them just in the past month. r it. of o inion ve s d� there was ?? just t wander ;wh th s , a Y P I Y HAUCK. first) that we've ever heard that that site was not i.n fact . I t is the C--3 all along. CHAZRKAN z, Any other questions while the s taff is researching that cross-examination or rebuttal or (inaudible)? (Sound of the rap of the gavel). Let's take a 10 minute recess' while the staff loo :s this L r- convene up. �. . I � et us r. convene. the Planning Commiss:�.on meeting. Let the record that we do have !c rd reflect t members of the . , ta y D g sufficient Comission to conduct a Public hearing. During hiatus of the m f to dos the temporary h� eating we. asked the Staff some resea'tch. Has the staff uncovered any ofthe documents that would be appropriate to enter into the record. perh4 s it would be helpful for I. me. to over the n August • the r ant ing bac�C round �xou I have � E�3TON : y s� O g in front o.i ou � � notations on ord�.na��.ce -That was ra � Com�i;ssion did indeed' approve a done chap +� from 1� .4 to C-3. , for a parcel ghat is now both par!1es. Its taro parcels, now It Sias one parcel: P i I ;, �r'o the ante property. he g dares. Oft March 5. the Portland Metropolitan Ara Baundaty Commission nnexed the property into the city. On April 24 the Planning Director ' il� t :fied the annexation hid occurred after ter the mi t)r land, n' approved a minor land partition creating '2 parcels . On Nay 11 City Iounc ra . ' titian. When the City council ratified the etinexatior they set an N-4' ii to IAhtN d`bY,uR t t 1 ^prkLT.M 1 .E� .IIU! F7 ,Yr rF144u Cva1 4r APPEAL. - PORTLAND AIN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page 9 of l3 Qt. zoning, desif nation on the whole area which included these 2 parcels. On May 24, !which is not in your notes a Site Design Review was approved by the Planning Director for 'Toys "R" Us under M -•4. On July 13 the Ordinance 81758 adopted by the City Council approved the ;request for the zone : change from M -4 to C -3 on both Parcels. The reason that I was under the impression that it was only the 1 parcel is the ordinance. only 'speaks to ',parcel, 1 tax lot, which was the original tax lot number. Of cour,w when this was approved it was 2 tax lots, and they had different' tax' lot numbers, but the map clearly shows both pieces and p k original tax lot number which was the whole 8 acres. Then when we were going the Comprehensive Planning process y . s ears to the, and myself made 'the determination that To: s , "R" Us was develo edtas aeremv y P, commercial use to'' make it so as to be conforming to its zone. We decided that : it should have a C-3 designation, and with the input : from the, i North remaining ' ' Tigard Businessmen s Association, that we should have the reman�. .n property be M -4, 'hick 'does relate to a change for that northern piece which had not been developed, or Portland Chain. But that's still M -4 even with this last step, if I understand what you're saying. NEWTON: N It had been changed on July' 1,3, 1981: 99 You said that,', when you were reviewing this with Jeremy that you changed �Lrr+ti"rr‘ts3t'rnir'Toys "R " Us to C -5. The. C -5 designation as opposed to C -3 for my clarificatioici. tEVTON :It's retail commercial. Tiowcver, ' I would like to point out ('excuse. Im?, highways commercial) and we felt that would be more compatible with industrial` rather than retail. I would like to point out that the new Development Code eliminates Ana es C- in,t e o designation. v !, C-3, 5 h toning esign t�.on. E eryth�t�g wild be C 3, so that point's new there. CHAIRMAN: Does that information modify at all your re.comm.endat;Lons to , they; Planning .Commssion? NET�TON :No. We still feel that the designation adopted in. March and again in may to change that prope °c ty to light industrial M -4 is more, appropriate. CHAlIMAN: Now we are still in empirical Gros. - examination. I' would .like to .. ce for cross- . ion: re. open the public � hearing Because of ,the new evidence examnat and 'rebuttal loiltlY,H there any cross -exam. or rebuttal' to any of `th . testimony pr� sented tonight ht including l thn latest information, ' (gavel): fie close the, public ihearitig . Commissionerdin B] . a I have mmi;ed. emotions: )EN : I ion' t know if T share the ' mixed r emo tioaa . ! x 'was. a party to the original tecisio�.. think tahat we re. he , re to d�c� de `3n part really is not, and I think the Staff pLobably agrees. with 'me, from this standpoint, we' re herd to 'decide whet the best use of that Property' is, Certainly' i t light of what has happened in the past ant. that might have some baring on it, but primarily what is the best use for that property and what i:5 appropriate. My feeling is that l don't concur With the staff that the M-4 is appropriate in that area i: I think it S an ideal C�- te site, a64 I thini :. it is appropriate or .t and I would like, to outline the riasons: APPEAL - PORTLAND CHAIN CPA 12 -83 ZC 9-83 Page 10 of 13 Highway 217 is a major highway section. We have a good interchange in both directir'ns now. We didn't have that before when it was made into the other type of zone. We have good access. We have a lighted intersection here, control led intersection be t' ways. From the standpoint . of does it create traffic congestion on traffic safety I don't think it does, I think it is appropriate. Is it surrounded by any residential areas? It is not. It does have access to a major collector arterial. Does it have direct access to public transportation? There is a bus service going back and forth. ! I think that does the site have a high visibility? I think Scholls Ferry Road is just coming into its own and as this whole area develops traffic ps there. is an awful lot c�,f, traf back and forth that is going to be passing the site. I think Washington Square is a regional center. I don't think Tigard can ignore what, is going Washington County. going Beaverton in Beaerton and wh at is g g on over here in I think that has impact in this area. In term s of Beaverton this building here now is a warehouse building/food store and the Datsun thing. I think the warehouse food is indicative of what's happening in the area. Up here we've got the Malibu Grand Prix, which, is the type of use that involves a fair amount of traffic and 'people coming and going, etc. The GAF property is the properly that in the past was industrial property. The plans now, as I understand it, are to convert that into a shopping i!►rea possibly 'with a hotel complex and there are a lot of things that have been discussed. But that property in a sense has a history very si11,1 ar to Portland Chain, It was developed out here when there wasn't anything ,,around, and now it's going through an evolution, and the planning process in part is an evolution. At one time Portland Chain area was all farm fields, and where I live is a farm field. I think it is going through a change. Particularly this section here has good highway access and I think it has excellent view from the highway here, and I think it is an appropriate use. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Commis -Loner. Commissioner Vanderwood. VANDERWOOD: Bo ,'he °d Presentation. y gave a goo p ft �� inappropriate I have some real mixed iiTeeling; about it. I thought that Toys R Us was inappropriate when that lent in there, but I do have some problems about the fact that he was given a O -3 and now he doesn't have it, and :,�obviously he banked on that fact' „ it Although economically that shouldn't. concern us, but it is a real me s s l_ doait t know. CHAIRMAN: Commissioner Butler: Pt7TLER don t have any tai:ted emotions . I agree `with the 'staff, Going bact t'i ?oCat.ions criter a, it fits for the industrial uses like ithouldH. b'e. It t s r :al near a railroad, anti after ` seeing all tht land that got taken out ` of the industrial use go by- the -by ,ten tY�e 'Tigard. Triangle • BD, T ' thn�C it would b�hs�� cote ari ptt�eyu,se of thel land. we and the .0 try kee any indus.tr a have left as 'industrial» .lso p `ng jab being om tacked un�� r icon° y They could; �t °rd�a.bly r.lose' r t airy time "oo..t �'� rct seeing iron the 'e would be; up r rds,. to Jobs there as compared. to Levu , �,, of or 44 obs . l also don, t think and• lr t�hin.k there was. a �i1�ltlt.�,on .� � ,� u :x I. ♦ �,, eaJe... in 'traf.f .c , tat, meat of e is h a Ca 't�ta.i.. S ti. ewmi. it ue�.u::,wu� r N:r APPEAL PORTLAND CPA 12 -83 ZC 9 -83 Page 11 and people cominb in and out. Thats secondary really. The only thing I hatven' t covered . that should be left up to the marketplace is the ''.:ost of the property per square 'foot. a TEPEDINO: I think there'' is a lot of change going on'' in that neighborhood;, and I think part of it is the changing condition.; of the roads and the expansion of Scholls and, other things 'happen;Lng in the immediate area. My pr ob lem is wish 'the roads ". as'! nientioned by Commissioner B utter. drove dow4,there,theloterlday again. IS that a substandard rating? inaudible) TEPEDINO: If that area was developed would that possibly be ' a condition for development on that property? (inaudible) TEPEDINO: The thing that it comes down to is the applicant always hasithe enormous burden` of carrying the case and convincing the Coramission. I am not fully persuaded that he has done that in this case, which means that even though he hasn't done it today he could come forward again in the 'future, and that persuades me not to make a change now, knowing that he has the option to raise the issue again as the surrounding land uses change or the road improve,: I'm sensitive to th fact that there is a willing tenant but as mentioned by one of the people testifying tenants come and go, and we don'': know if it is going to be a Levitz or some other tenant, and once you change the zoue it is changed, and it would be terribly embarrassing to go back and say you had made a terrible mistake and flip it back again, and that's what bothers me about this particular ';application although I do see some advantages to making these changes but I guess I'm just not over that 50% mark. MOEN: I'd like to make one more. comment. I don't think Portland Chain I'd as it is now is an appropriate use the site long term. When I 'bought myi home. in Englewood there was a disclaimer at the time that Portland Chain ,generated noise. I wo.i.ldn't say that they've generated a lot of noise,` It's been very quiet considering the kind of operation they have in there but long term 1 don't think it is an appropriate use of R don t think �it � is a ro riatp; for Toys "R" GIs to be the. sate, and I PP P isolated out there either' I think those 2 properties 'would make a reasonably good commercial developtitent together , and part of the traffic robler could. be addressed b proper entry and :exit. �' Y P P ?? I can see that,: I tend to agree with You Commissioner that 5 years that sy all be (inaudible) 1 think it'is evolving in that direction, and I kind o question whether i.t is fair if it i evoi ing in thst direction I think it .s kind o.f 'arbitrary from the applicants standpoint to say, "I don.'t it's t .rae yet. s >what you think but i you think 'lt.'s going to c tango daw tf e r ad, ''1 think ;basx,cally the interchanges are in and the light .s in, everything's in, we' t n Nave to `ai.t 5 ears . ll do it now. It. 5' kind of ar��trary to • say •we c�aii ° t have i r w ' 'w y 13 Had 1 been on the (e,.,....1..t sion back. in. 1980 1 would have favored heaving t M" 4.. . I tm not persuaded easdn for Changing , I � per c t but a uestion of ustic there. i� a x s.lso t,ael them is �: „� e here.. 1 a.m. � concerned about the a',t that we gi 41 ve it a -3 designation'at one point,, an . d i my mind 1 APPEAL - TiORTLAND CHAIN CPA 12 -83 AC 9 -83 Page 12 of 13 f w a s the Camp ,Plan, My question is on what basis e have taken it away yia th P does one vote to allow 'C -3 if it's a "justice" issue. Is that 'a legal basis .for voting for a z one change? II o that would stand up in term. of terms o NEWTON:In ter of legality I don't know how t to zoning and all that findings because Plan and is supposed the Camp be a document that changes with time. Our concern area that the whole area, should have been looked at when Toys "R" D is th Person' was allowed to go c.omm,ercial. MY 'P t and every ownereor anyone in the area is having :every piece of propertY having, Problems renting or selling coming }� and getting different at h c P I think it�islimportant t zone changes at different ,times. � ascade the freeway and C , that whole specif�:c area that �s bou des ed. as, a little area. They Scholls, Ferry, and that's sort Pfa�keveM pconcern is not so much whether Industrial y c ade different rent eal1, , .mot ..the. � of dif f e pockets it is`�commercal or industrial but that it concern that we had is types of uses, that. it be consistent. the approp riateness of Toys and whether or not it is compatibles with,the other land uses'in, the area, and although we share the co expressed by some of the other commissioners, the outweighing concern more a ro riate ' Toys "R" Us in relatzor; to s ,Pp p t we; had was, what thing tha , letting the. who r ettin le -th�' ng ., or waiting and_l g the other surrounding,. propert_;r o g 'ust ado ted go commercial at some other time and also 'the., fCommissione have an opportunity a Comprehensive Plan, the Council:. and ��meriland L, am concerned that,we to redesignate the whole 'area at that , are setting p recedent in this area 2 months after we finished a Comprehensive hed it as bascially industrial- park area; tot :a elan whieh �estabhs ark area; I light industrial''.or heavy ?ndustrial area, but: an 'industrial p and now i,s eroding away at that byT change.-. 'b le d�. d�.0 �u ) r rmit to � ?? I Toys I ��Er 'CTa would not 'be F e NEWTON:Noy that's why its not designated' for it. ..'. � of the rest of the area, and I in, th e 'Z think you can ma., ntai " integrity t You' h � the north end, and think wha y � ted an island �cr n, th that island, and avr_ done is crea nnt5rane, . e that �0� � � , is past hzstory We vel do� that. : little island in than that ` I think it would: "be more contig our to i11 that ro haste pit, that. I don't think the.rest ofuthe aPpr .P ehe area is to leave way. e: ' time or l any time in the neat Ito change at eh's I CHA iR AN An y a t.her commen1. s on�this i soe. 1. �' ve, f e a roval :of the Comprehensive Plan CPA 12 -83 I o anti _ or the MOEI . I Zone dhange ZC 9 -83 'oeSedP comments, Y ar�d don thet'easonslg ar�`e. in m further i.tli second it. Motion has been madeaodseconded. Any 'SEE'EDIO i � _ Ali ,those gin. favor of the ;�- dscussion? I'll c;�a11. for theu.estion t, eta r and of y on s made and seconded sig �ifyl by saying Ay those opposed � • y %totion failed, tLr i I -i li . nca..1 u . � t �a r econ endation to City �t�T�E�� 1 move � ehdt''' we deny,` a move Tor' I tam . �ehensive "Platt ,�ie,ndment, de.liial of applicant''s request upon P � �nial CPA . -'83 from light ,tidustria1 to 'general commercial and d of A zone change from M -4 to C -3, 'tone, Change 9 -83. APPEAL PORTLAND CAIN CPA 12 -83 AC 9-83 Page 13 of 13 CHAIRMAN: Motion made for denial. Seconded. Further d acussion. BUTLER: Do you ''need my reasoning? CHAIRMAN: No, it's based on staff findings. All those in favor of the motion as made and seconded in favor of denial signify by saying Aye . . . Those opposed . Motion carries for denial. Are there any other " items? Other business then? ?? May I just Point out that I feel strongly that that area of the oen` city should be changed to commerical Comp Plan and Zoning Designation. If you could initiate, come October, another look at this as a larger concern rather than 1 individual piece of property. Are You making an inventory of areas like that? " ?? That's one of our projects to do. We will be doing inventory. CHAIRMAN: Any other business? 0 M1 AFFA1'VIT OF NAILING :gin,:,..,.,,., STATE OF OREGON Count i of Washington ) ss . Cif Tigard I, Diane M. Jelderks, being first duly sworn, on oath despo,e and say: That I am a Secretary for the City of Tigard, Or egon That I serve noticel of hearin g of i the Tigard Planning Carmission of whist the attached is a spy (Marked Exhi.b, t A) d persons on the �'c y' of of the following name pe 19:t:, by mailing to each of them at the address s on attached list (Marked. Exhibit B) , said notice as hereto a de iced in the United States Mail on the Q day of • e I , 198f, postage prepaid. A. f ascribed and 'shorn to before rrr on pi cs 4.4t ched day of hI 1� r *Ad Age_ ARZY PUBLIC OF ORE, -r N • C z 0 -0 0 0 ro Co 0 CT O 0 CD Lo H UV C) CD w. CA • CD • CD C) CD V/ a Z c C9 CD ', CA O :� O .« rn o 3• ,: C• (a, '0) CA CD • `► c -w a) O o CD CD a CowPC7C. 0(1) C> C--1 Z m �0 eo 7-n Q )G3 D;' �� (')0 O. (D CDD S. 0 CD r n CO 't Co CO 0 N ‘6'° NO OcD CC �p c O _CA N - _ �C H`" C 5 = s• roa g0° b co 0 ? H:e4 a? a N � Y•• CD 'O (3) v v Cr) 0 The following ill be considered by the .Tig rrd Planning Commission on Taesda e T rd School D1strrfct�'Board Roo' m -13137 SW Tuesday; August 2, t9 Highway . urt�her infor natk : ^ay be Obtained Irom t,4 ,JA Planning, Director n� 12753 S.K.. . Tigard, Or. 97223 iit,, y'w;.aning 639 -4171. , ; PUBLIC�.A fEAR NGS. . ',4� :: _, 1M' , w,.t gym, : 5.1.E , COMPREHENSIVE,PLAN `A �:END14iEN►'rlfotiitoa `l�tPO . dy #4�M a .t >ry ,.,r, I? . , 4 . o w � 0' ; ' 1,nr ' Y �. N1...p,„:#4411.4:111: elid: :findings- �.4P,' 11,4s " and 1I: 2 bi,,re , l*g. the RYA :�requesE�4o Amend policy ;;� 2 a.M , and�=Implemaentation Strategies 5.2;� •SITE•DESIG f,REVIE p 2 Sunmaerfiweid.Shoppi Center: NPG 4 -. h A n l• • w x r } 1 ` � Yu1N4 F t M1Y 4jt A, request by °Realty - dna ial Services Co. for It modification to*,an ?' appro1vY e - d ` ,p o l anneTd1 ,ie l er velopn ent for the. S uc n erfielct Shopp ing; Cente r.' n 5.3 ZONE GE1 Bbe r snon LrsoLocaed:(Wah. 2S1 10D Tax lots1902,1906 and part 1910)• ' '% H :re" nge rnm, a , tfsep is d lgh t 1" 0570, 10660, 1.060(f 10639, 10750, 1070 and 10500 S.W. North Dakota. ":Wash, Cb. 'Tax' Map 151 34I4 tax lots 2300, 2000, 2500, 26.60, 2760, 2800, 2900, 3000, 3100 and 3200) " 5.4 1COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMEN"T'CPA 8-83x' ZONE CHANGE ZC 11-83 RICHARD STUJRGIS'- NPO#1 A reque fora .Comprehensive Plan', Amendment f�rtim Medium Density. #o High Density, Zone Change from A-12 to A-40 Multi- family residential. Located : 1335 S. . W. Hall Blvd. (Wash. Co. Tax' Map 2S1 2DA lot 4o2), r " , . 5.5 COMPREHENSIVE PL AICAMENDMENT. CP. 2 ZONE CHANGE 9-83 PC141 (Assoc.,/Portland,Chatn NPO #2 request for a Coniprehdn sive Plan Change froth Industrial to General Co rner ial and a ;one Change from Industrial Light to C- 3.•Located: 97.70 SW Seholls' Ferry Rat. '(Wash. Coy Tax Map 1St; 27D15 tax lot 1200)' Written comments are „encouraged. 'Please submit written comments to the Planning Director at the above address iri advance of thepnhlie hearing date. TT6160 — Publish July 11:4983 • ILL tP 0 abd 0 • p hh m CO g curl A Z < o • S C z Cp 1:0 rn SZ Z o M c CD -v' y ►� • i2. CJt C 0.0 CT) 04. to C a w a; , C- fOi July 18, 1983 , PORTWAND CHAIN MANUFACTURING Outline of Additional Information to be Submitted to the City of Tigard 1.' Introduction and History. of Land Use. Actions On Site II. Description of Existing and Proposed Uses 111. Changes in the Character of the area . Relationship to Tigard Comprehensive Plan V. Traffic Impact Analysis GENERAL APPLICATION FORM CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 233'7 Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503)639 -4171 1. GENERAL INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS ,9770 S.W. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Associated Cases: LEGAL 'DESCRIPTION Washington County Tax Ma ISI 27D2 Lot 1200 SITE SIZE 3.71 acres PROPERTY OWNER /DEED riOLDER* ADDRESS ® :•x 41.2 INTERNAL PROCESSING: Accepted for Pre -App.: PHONE 222055 CITY Portland, OR ZIP 972 08 APPLICANT* Same ADDRESS Pre App.:` *Where the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a leasee in with written 'author,A.zat:ion from the owner or an agent of the owner with written authorization. The written authorization must be submitted with this application• REQUIRED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION IS ATTACHED THIS APPLICATION INVOLVES THE FOLLOWING: FEE x Comprehensive Plan Amendment frotaindttstrial , to commercial quasi-- judicial x legislative '. Hearing Date: Zone. Change from t�o!C -3 (C quasi -- judicial x leg, s lat ide Planned: Unit Deese lopment incept plan detailed' plan Subdivision, Major Partition • Minor Partition Design 'Revises Conditional; Use. Variance o Zoning ©rd. trance Title ,;$) Variance to Sod.ivsion Ord' (TipItl �17) Sensitive Land Permit Flo't�dpla:ns` Drainageways' Steep Slopes Other DESCRIPTION: Comp. Plan Designation Z L NPO, No. Zoning District Zoning Map No. Quarter ct.on No GENERAL APPLICATION FORM' PAGE CASE No. CITY OF, TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash,, PO Box 23397 Tig ard , Oregon 97223 - (503 ) 63 9-41 71 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR STAFF TO.r S ATI+DN BE PROVIDED BY APPLIGAId � ,� AFF U'SE ONLY 4. DISTRICTS APP. of Response SCHOOL DISTRICT YPD. �nt Yes No Yes O IS RICT T' and 23J_ WATER DISTRICT T,crard FIRE DISTRICT ;Jington Cougy #1 PARK DISTRICT---..L.%—alatiaaj.11.5 UiIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY - Sewer Available: YES N OTHER�None . PUBLIC 'UTILITIES ELECTRICITY PGE NATURAL GAS N.W. Natural Gas TELEPHONE General Telephone OTHER None PUBLIC TRANSIT (TRI" MET) NEAREST BUS ROUTE AND STOP t87 Scholls:.Fer sad OTHEE INTERESTED AGENCIES (SPECIFY) F. 'VERIFIED AY' STAFF EXISTI LAND LAD USE PLAN r �.SIGNATIOI ZONE O TH Times, Pu alications l. y ial (County) ) p -2 Schols Fer"� I�aad. uria erc C soura eroal -5 oars R Us: Generale` CCimm EAST Highway 217 " Industrial Park' `WashIngt on ..a. ,tare' Coi nerdiel (count WEST' Krill business Center Ind is,trial park GENERAL APPLICATION FO%. - PACE 3 , Ash, 23397 CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash PQ Box 2339 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503')639 -4 171 CASE No '" FFlCT THIS APPLICATION. Please Discuss 9. CHANCES IN THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA WHi� i, A The area has not changed since the previous' 'zone change for industrial to commercial on this site in 1980, except for the construction of the "Toys R Us" store. Please also refer to accompanying 'narrative. 10. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE Lot Area (acres, square feet) 3.71 acres,/161,,607 square feet 11. EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE SITE Use T.►n�r���.a, • . "o._ • hJ- I I. • Square Distsence From Pro ert Line Feet North South East lest; APPx PPx . APPx • Appx • 42 , 12, ' • ' Appx. se, • NATURAL CONDITIONS 12. 'Percent Slope: Less than 10% I3 ; Vegetation Types: tees. rush: Grass: 14. Floodp1ains: �i. Water Courses 1 I Rock Outcroppings 17 Other one Average ,Diameter Percent ;Of Each Site Of Trees Per Size ►I x ' Row much of the :s i r.e is i f 1oodp la .n? What tyl Posed i ye:1ogment. 'Please brie fly descri ;± the proposed e e lapment: pxl ; buildihk.1 'uin Pentland Chain Manufacturing Company will be renovated to accomodate a Levitz ifurniture .store �...,._,,.,.., It GENERAL ICATION FOR — PAGE 4 ` CASE No. CITY OF TIGARD,, 12755 SW Ash, Pa Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503)639 -4171 19 The following is L_J , is not 20. Overall Site Development Residential Commercial Industrial Open Space Other Roads Total required.' No. of acres x Percent of site cagexae Future ng Exist. 3.71 3.71 Future Landscaping • 3.71 c , Future 3.71 ac. Existing. '3.71 ac. Future Landscaping as required 3.71 ac 21. ype of Residential Use and Characteristics N/A 1 of Be dr oams /Uni T of Use #' of _'Units EFF Pro.osed Density_ 22. Where applicable, please explain how the open space, ca non `areas and recreational facilities will be maintained. Not Applicable' • 3. If the project' is to be completed in phases, please describe, each phase of, 'the ',project. Not Applicable Please submit the following with this application: Wrx.t�t, � C Narrative , number as required by Planning Department. See .:; .�erier�il attached more to follow or u►erah p See attached Letter of authoritaCion if applicant ss not nor. N/A 4. Tarr ;gip See attache " for oft wrhe Cher �t its section .is;' to cocap to x�,,�ntif� � ....'a.: .;...Hwn �, GENERAL APPLICATION F ;�..1 PAGE 5 CASE N CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503)639 -4171 THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE, AS REQUESTED EY THE APPLICANT, SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF EACH HEARING. (e.g. Attorney, Surveyor, Engineer) Staff Notice Notice ort Decision of Review Name Mackenzie Saito & Associates P .,C . (Lans Stoutl Street 0690 S.W. Bancroft Street Cit. Portland State Street 1100 S.W. 6th Avenue City Portland, Name Street State Name PCM Associates APPLIGANTMike McKenna PO Box 4162 Portland Ore. 97208 14 .Ar�nr.l.V.I.M— .x...�b..a,. -.. .,... _��_.'..,.n .....:.4. ,... «...?n —.r .. n,....+.w 7,-- ...�,..m.....m...�r.. .+a.w.�..n. { ICKENZIE /SAITO & �j( SOCIATES, P.C. Jul 1.4 19.83 Mr. Bill Monahan, Planning Director City of Tigard 12755 S. W. Ash Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Monahan: RE: Portland Chain M /SA Job 028329.0 Enclosed is a complete application for a plan revioion and zone change for the Portland, Chain site, . s� ubin itted in accord with the recent. action by the City Council and your direction . w;wh re- spec.t to, timing of the submission. Although PCM Associates is the owner and applicant, Mackenzie /Saito & Associates, P.C. will be Pre- paring additional information which could not be adequately assembled due to the short time to submit the application. We expect to provide additional data, within 10 days t so that it may be considered during staff review. It is our understanding that this applicait.ion will be considered by the Planning Commission during, August. Thank ._ You y fot Your assistance. Sincerely, Lans stout Planner tis.mm ccc r. Mika McKenna Mr .` Terry ':E'aubk o rs .s�1J� # ►I`JCf o `[` '7`t "i` ofi� "L4Nb; i `c l ! "' i 44 Oa, 0, /2 44/ b. \ r 1� � y MC !1TEOTS ElGI'JEEPis LANNERS -1+ [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] June 14, 1983 Pk. Michael McKenna, President Simmco propertie0 Inc. First `Farwest'Building 400 B.W. Sixth, Suite 1106 P.O. Box 416 Portland, Or. 97208 rt anc oPer.` • 1411x./400, CI1YOF TIGARD WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON Dear Mr. McKenna,' S am in receipt of your,,. letter dated June 13, 1988, eoncerhing the Corn rehensive designation of the above named property. Your p � Plan de letter was made known to the,Cityy Council during its regularly scheduled meating last night,, however, the. Council took no action. Based upon cur dscu ssion at last nights ` meeting, b, _ 't appears ea rs that cu will e on the June 20, 1983, ,agenda to represent, your position. itcly Williau . A ,Monahan Planning g & Development 12 r l 6 5 i ,a8H' P 8OX 2889"7 I t Al b., OREGON PH; 6894171' FORM Nc,. 964- Sfevens,Ness 'tA., 1r O n 1. {. PORTLAND CHAIN MANUFACTURING CO. a Division of Webster Industries, Inc. a Delaware corporation (formerly Portland Chain Manufacturing Co., a Division of Webster Manufacturing,, corporation),--- _:._ ..._ -- -- a2'.for, �„' ' .nveys and , Inc. Inc . , an Ohio cot aratizo , warrants to FIRS.T..�FARWEST CAPITAL FUND INC -.. , ....:. ..:Grantee, the follow in g described re al property free of encumbrances exce pt as specifically callY set forth herein situated in Wash..ngton _ ..County, Oregon, to -wit: Exhibit A consisting of two pages, attached • 4 is:hereto arid by this reference made a part of this set forth on Ex b , s deed' 1 1 y { • 4J 1' . 4 " DOCUMENTARY -� :-.__ y's _._.�.. . �►� ".� OREGON �.,. ..�. ,, �.,..< : - �4.40REOQN. • •w -, } ` 4 4 ..L - -rte . ,...... . � r... +.. +, iW .;y J, , t „. .. .� ,, . } ...«.,, p...... . '1 �d,44 i . , o-.. 1 44 �••Y.�r� % .� .,. /'c4' "�j )yx` .� '� I. {: �„ , n �' µ_'. HAR2.G'79 . ,. .�.� �' r :•c° ' , ... +7 •4 pR2S't9 4�0 r .� � .. ' 71:-7-:,..',.',.'..-.' 0 . ,�. 4 '. " _� a �_a s 'fir. i ,t w 02.69 :.4.4 _ rl _ _ 4t ._ 4i i • 1 4 4 "t,,. C Y. / S 1. 1' ' V ! t L.a (�i.' X:1 1 M a �' t.' y `• { �•M•`+E'. ,� an�...1 f ,a'. T '•4 r Y 1�'� The said property iS - free"' from' all 4'1161-Fa ' ,. L.•�t,. --1'' - '- =',.z: w:.:„... f .. :2 •-+L = . As set forth on Exhibit.A, consisting of two,pages, attached hereto and by this reference made a part of this' deed. r �.r 4 DOCUMENTARY ,,TAX .1 9400 'I' veysnce ....._ .... ....,........ -{ The true consideration for this can . Here comply with � the requirements of ORS 93.03 s prapart.y :_nr_valu.e..nthec..than money ...-- ..... «4..:........ .�coussts� nf' 4 4 , .7. ....«. .. . 4 ,. .4 a , x . 4.4..4.x4 «4w »4.4. .... .......,44_1......... 44 .1 4 44444 4 1 4. .r .44 44444. ... . 444444444 . ...4 _r a. .I. 4 •.. ... . 444644 grantor's , ...y r 1.1,44 � Tjnne by Qrd � of the board of directors with its corAOr`ata seal ,affixed ono Januar ,., 19.. ( _ Manufacturing PORTLAND CHAIN a Division n Co. , ' a D:tvison';at Webster Manufacturing opo at Industries, r • , D aware Inc..; an- Ohio car oration) By 1 . •, "'1 'fit (Corporate''`S�a1) ���: Seneca ST,AT.� OF OHI' County of 41r By .4..44: 4.4.:.•4.4. . :president •.4444...4..,...a ✓...,..Secretory January 3,1 , .»»... a�.4..7 9. 14»4..4.1.'44. 44..4.+1. +4...11..414..4» -.B 1 4.:Iardha? .4►r�..,w . , »4.4 . 4.+a. "' and C;har.les...4D4.:.4h� �'d ! d that the 'latter ,s who, each being firs Personally appeared 44..... t�...a41 ..1... ! duly sworn, did sav'that the former is the .. re r en an 4 �j Pr TT rn CHAIN !IANtiF'AGTURING CO. a D .visir�n'aac rpoeat of z board f directors;' and ea . , x41. .44. tOi:ticrAL 'SEAL) secretary of .1:. X39 i`2; J , - -1ne x3•- }?G�t we -L � '�3 e ' p , affixed to the foregorng z eek: nerit z3 the corporate seal o . s i cot oraf�on and that said z said instrument to be lib votuntar, act' and sealed 1 � { 4 and deed. r Before: me: .14 stet ion, and that thy: seal instrument was signed of them acknowledged, t } n behglf: of seed corF +oratte�n by author y +,4WARRt'� NTY DEED • Por.tiand 4Cy i' "in fiianti<f acturing Co. i414.44.a44. 144.. 144444:4 44:.. 4141.+: 4..... 2.x11: 4. 4444YN441444444444444Y11.4.14GW V4 +..14441. 4.44..4 »4« lY;s+y.. mot,, g8 w'_:St,,,4(a4Dit .l...,. . t' r6R. 4. t 144'°"". �"5.:+..44u4.. •'4OO}SW S xth SP.Arvrtr: � _4444 ►yei fie *4 4.4.. ..i14Y ♦ ..a. 4x4 ..44444.4441.L.144444LCx44+44f. `Patt1ai d, OR .. :204 4144414' ..N.».4•«... . ♦., .,a4...» ♦ 4 = 4WWNa.4. x44 ?4 +444..Y4..4Fwi44N.1i44x44, .4 CRAkt EE"5,'Atl'bRE554,2�k'... 'After k.N.x4�rding iretusn to, 400. SW p ,,: Y141 .14i1x4M'+..4M..�M114.4.4.4. t 7 3 $ Ja M iHW l�yY X44 «: 444 x44.1 Y trolia 444,IJ• 44x4444 AA' ADnkarss.4; `ll 4.444144L+a..4Ja4444i 44 An a atones is reque ed, all ip.x i�laiem'enh dealt be sent to the taliewin oddkesrt Port. „ttiri,aufctn4 u Jxa444 iyi....44 {,� } �44 44414414 li 4444Y44 44,�4144pu4�4y$�44441x..wr41 41.:i441ii{4YA1 14.41A:tlk3�k tss .44+4444a44yL1W 414' ix:4P a. Notary P ililic for, Y co ?i 7if'i'1. e2fIeTnttiC' "gtrl lri "X1hro ,1� SPACE rIESEIVED IFOR'' R ECoRDER'S Use, STATE OF OREGON` -. certify that the within tru- merit ' was received] for record on the 44441i:W441x44d4x4day of nal.w.iaar wu >.4a..r:.4xc:+u.l� /�:a4...a4y at recorded '! file /reel number 4a 14444.44 44 4x144a+i Record of Deeds of said County Witness my hand and seal o County affixed. 41 11W4.4,4) 4444 444 4444 : 4 4x 4k41t1 41 &44.4k444444Sa1L • eCar rinfyc�er :1414414 Y444A¢rx GitLityr.. Order No. 3 50521 EXHIBIT quarter o situate in q of Section 27, Southwest quarter of the Southeast Section 26, Northwest quarter of Section 35 and the Northeast quarter of Section 34, Township 1 South, Range 1 West cif the Willamette Meridian] ,in •l he 'County of Washington and State of Oregon, and bounded on the West by the Southern Pacific )railroad, on the Northwest by S.W. Scholls Ferry Road, on the North and East bY Cascade Blvd., more particularly described as follows BEGINNING at an iron rod with JSM 'Cap set on the Easterly right -of - way ;of the Southern Pacific Railroad and North 89 °52'50" West 221.2 feet along the North line of 'said Section 34, and North -19°15'3v!.'' West., along the Easterly 50 foot right -of -way line of said "Railroad 180.52 feet from a stone monument found at the Northeast corner of said Section 34; and running thence North '19° 15'30" West, along El.: railroad right -of -Way 328.15 feet to an iron rod with JSM cap set on the Southeasterly spiral curve right- of-way of S.W. Scholls Ferry Road; thence on said spiral curve (chord bears North 33°36'30" East 47.44 feet) 47.44 feet to an iron rod with State Highway can fc;i: SFB 42 +92.24 P.S. (100) marking the Southeasterly 1.00 feet from : center lithe right -of -way; thence ,continuing on 'said line North 33 °33'50" East 101.85 feet to an iron rod with JSM, cap set at the intersection with the South right --of -way of S.W. Cascade thence North 89 °49' East on said right -of --way 269.95 feet to an ," i : -' rod with JSM cap set at the beginning' of a tangent 100 foot radio:: curve; thence Southeasterly y on said curve (chord bears South 55°59'30" East 112.39 feet) 119.35 feet to an iron rod with JSM caw set on the Westerly right-of-way of S.W. Cascade Blvd. 50 feet fro. and parallel to the Westerly right - of-way of Higu:way 217, as monumented; thence on said parallel right-of--way line, South 21°48' East 87.06 feet to an iron rod with JSM cap set opposite an iron rod with State Highway cap found at SH 328 +00 (130 ),/JSM 327 +99.48 (130); thence South T9° 55' ` 25" East ,1x54. 3 i feet to an iron rod with JS ,' cap ut a ' feet to the Point of beginning. set, thence h 70 54 West 446.96,... ., n r.,, u....nc nt ✓.J .y +ails -fl"u.� a ��A,. - -i9i e�� ,S1. a �\ I lb is a � \i, �11♦ _ � �' t'%\A‘‘\4‘\\‘. -"‹ \\\ ,NA\k‘\ - . /,~ X12': 7f ƒ /` \: 2� \\ < . / § \! \ \ \ / \ \\ \r� ¥ } \ *P $ r (r . �� \ \\.. � +K ƒ� \ [ ° \< • 1 ^ - $ %% OL4 ir / 2 l 't > < # /22/ /ter p• f l' G vmen/ i - vewa! /Q !,die' o i'oao /9`-0' "72-M,9 CM/1::: i= (T;,rcall 1.11 To/cd I! I I I I � 15 ° 11 — i99 C19CO (1914- j-; tz .141 i � � � � ,�G %t GB. /?' `D .10 /99°1. X99°= 1gif 191 .` ��' ` ------1 75 19'F� .i9t , "`- „,✓ ETA (9,325 A.C. Pavement fa edg; of rood pavement. e4V i � ylt¢W� NOTE l'oyeme / be - - � eornpa /a:�. � :vifh rnaes of Farfh work in this Gan -ram. edge of' fl lure �crvicc rdad. r •� V rrY�� E.: prov;de. 2 - .3' hlh s �nercr. Imbed in 2'2'42 r ;n! ►�l� •- se and PiT p is w.�Co . Vi` / C ,e041 New wa/. r service valve and rn= 1er box Portland Chain Manufacturing . INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY OF LAND USE The following brief ' narrative will update and expand upon a document entitled "Comprehensive Plan and Zone Change Request ', prepared by R.J. Frank & Associates in 1980. The previous document shows consistency of the Pro Posed p lan /chap g a with. "Fasano" requirements and LCDC Goals, and was accepted by the ' City ; Council in this light. A "Market Analysis ", also included in the. 1980 valid in its assumptions and findings. In In order,,to a edite the current. plan/ 9' P zone change process, an application was submitted to the City of July 15, 1983, with the understanding ' information would be submitted that this additional. infox�ati as soon as possible. The land and buildings known as Portland Chain were acquired by PCM Associates, an Oregon general part -- nership, in 1979. The property is now in the City of Tigard and -may be described as being on the corner of Scholls Ferry Road and Cascade Boulevard t the actual address is 9770 Scholls Ferry Road,, Tigard, Oregon. PCM Associates has a long term lease with Portland Chain & Manufacturing for 3.71 acres of land and the 40,000 sq uare foot" building which runs until. December 31 1989 , however, the Lessor has: the right to cancel the lease on ca- after December 31, 1985, Provided Lessor gives two years ° prior written notice. On August , 1980, the Tigard. Planning Commission approved a plan change on the site from ",Industrial Park" to "General Commercial". The site was! sub- q y to the City (March 1981) , and se t�entl annexed t the zoning was changed from County industrial to City "C -3" in April 1981:. speifically for a s.- gle' large user, prerequisite These islte, Associates � actions were a gate , for PCM. Assoc to further, its long term land ..,, ;1 se objectives for r the notably con versio n of the f aCility to a more�com atible retail a ctivit y . This in end was ,.. identified' during' the City procr.edings ( see staff report reference to "furniture Ctore ") . Upon coin - pletion of the annexation/zoning process, negotia- tions were culminated with Toys s A 'Us' and an agreement reached. .Ln agreement with" Levitz. Furniture was completed in the S rin ; p `� of X983. Unfortunately the legislative plan/zon .ng adoption ,ompleted in 1983 reverted the site to industrial and ,negated the. Previous quasi - judicial actions. The necessity for Levitz to maintain the commercial xtates the la,n zone chan a ;re uest desa;gnation pr'eoi.p � p '� '� ti Portland chain Manufacturing accompanying thi 1r narrative. DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED USES The g existin Portland Chain Manufacturing facility would generally be 'categorized as heavy industrial.` " avy chain for the lumber ' 'The primary product is he industry,, produced with a variety of fabrication! equipment' including welderso' presses,grinders, forges and miscellaneous drilling and • shaping` tools. The workforce otals 7:n office/ administration and 34 in'production The opera- ton req�ai.res about 6 truck trips per day for deliver l of oods and ; removal of roducts. y g P The current I_L zoning on the site• would allow a va riety of light industrial activities, but pro- bably would 'preclude the existing Portland Chain Manui cturing' business due to the potential for off- s:�.te impacts of noise, odor, etc. The proposed C -G designation would allow a relatively wide ,,range of commercial ' activities. However, the intent o ex Pressed in of this proposed change is to p facilitate conversion of the site. to a Levitz Furniture showroom ;._ it is expected .that thi . will involve a general upgrading of the site in terms of landscaping and overall appearance. It is projected that there will be approximate1) 20-25 employees on-site, and approximately 77 customers y modated. See additional per Meek da will . be • a�.co information following. III CHANGES IN ' THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA The area served by Cascade Avenue, and the in nedi i.te surroundings, have changed significantly in recent Years. 'The original industrial zoning, 'which was retsurrected ` in the ` adoption of the new plan and zoning, reflected. an expectation that the area w +quid, develop kith, predominantlyl.ight industrial businesses. However, as an accompanying land use map demonstrates, this has not occured. The land uses in the area include NAME Koll HUsineSS Part Times: Publication Doxol Substation Power' Rents HALA TE office 'Sat•iness office Retail Wholesale'. Retail/Wholesale K • ortland Chain Manufacturing NAME Marx Office/ Industrial Building Siemens /Allis CHARACTER Office /Light Industrial' Office Office/Light Industrial / As Cascade continues toward'Greenburg Road there,.iis also `a mixture :of warehouse /industrial (Mayflower) and retail business (Tire Systems, gas: stations) Although the I-L zoning allows angst of these activities, it does note reflect ;the impact of Koll■ Toys 'P, Us, and 'the ,Times Building on the PCM site. The businesses lus . - industr�.al , p se non,... the major barrier formed by Scholls Ferry Road, surround the, PCM site and make it a non- compatible industrial island, to the detriment of the other land Uses. RELATIONSHIP TO ` TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN There, .are man y,issues addressed b Y the;Ti9 ard i Pad. by the anprehens.a.vn Plan are ,not: im acted current or proposed plan/zone designation, including' c izen involvement, public services, and economic deve.lopment,. All ' of =these genera`1 areas of concern are met by procedural or. technical aspeot s of " the plan and`' its implementation: The issue to be addressed in this _proposal; is whether the site, and the existing and proposed uses, are more consistent With 'vocational criteria for commercial or industrial ' activities- Therefore, the criteria for each will be addressed in detail. Section 12.2 (2) provides criteria for "linear" (general) commercial areas: '�inear Commercial areas are. intended to_ .± . , r pia ' or retai ces p►rova.de: fo " � " 1 � g'oodi� and. servi " The uses classif..�ed as linear commercial' tray involve: drive - .n services, large space users, a., conhbinat'ion cf retail service, ' hol,esale 'and repair services o,r' provide .services •to the. 1. trav�el.�:n4 publi�c:, 'The uses .ran. e' front auto mobile repair arid. serrvices,,' suppply and etuuip -., merit stores', vehicle sa.les,,' drive -in' ,restaurants' to laundry estab ishments,. It' . intended i • that these users b+ adjacent to an arterial or maj or col. .ector street." Portl *nd Chain Manufacturing Comment: The character of the Cascade Blvd. area, as de c r ibed above, clearly i.s ,7onsi stent with this definition. `Although there may be an exception (such as Siemens - Allis) , there are fewer "non- canform,ng" uses in this view then by applying the industrial definition to the area (see below). A. Scale (1) Trade Area,, Varies. (2) Site Size. Depends on .development () p (3) Gross Leasable Area. Varies. oca *ional Criteria I Spacing ca �.on. ) �p g and Lo s. The commercial area, is not surrounded by residential districts on more than two sides." Comment: See above. " (a) The ,proposed area of an existing area shall not create traffic congestion or a traffic a determination shall be probZ�_m. Such:. a �3e . � based on the street and treat existing Projected traffic, volumes, the speed limit, number of turning movement mOvement8 and the traffic generating characteristics of the various types of uses." Comment: See following section. The site shall have direct access from a; major Collector or arterial street. Public transportation shall be available the 'site. or general area." (b) moment �+ccess r oth criter'.a a.re let by Scholls Ferry Lee Carac.teri, st oa (a) 'The site sha, die of a size rhich' can accomodate p� esent and 'pro f ected uses. The P.•;: have ;high v s.blit►. 1 Portland Chain Manufacturing I II " ( 4) Impact Assessment 4a) The • scale of the project :.all be compatible with the surrounding u.ses. • Cb) The ' site "' 'configuration and characteris- tics shall ..be such ,ta.t. :the, privacy of adjacent, non - commercial uses can be ma ntained (c) it shall' be 'possible to incorporate the unique site features into the site design and development plan. (d) The associated lights,, noise and activities shall not interfere with adjoining non-residential uses. Comment: The scale of the planned use of i N p the site s.s consistent with the existing .building's capa- bilities, and the existing. Toys 'R Us and Times Publications activities.. Thee are no non-commercial businesses abutting the site which would be adversely affected, and `there are no unique, site features. Ths'' conversion of the site to commercial use will le.rssen the impact ,of lights and noise. L I Section 12.4 provides criteria for industrial uses: ".II. Heavy Industrial Lands which are areas intended o g�rovide. for itianufacturing, processing aid asseziabling activities. U classification e arses within tht a � characterized: by .large bu:Jldings ,and large storage areas and as (having associated external, effects such as smoke,, noise,, odor, or visual,pollut on." Comment;. The' Portland Chain Manufac ^wring business appears to fit this • category, I as it involves the fabrication ra heavy chain from dimensional steel' with heavy equipment, and tools. T'he 40,000 + square, foot building is supported by a s:ubstantiai' outside. are' a., sand thore are notable -effects bf noise ar►d. odor on adjacent properties. Light Industrial Lands are area intended to ;provide . for manufacturing, processing, assembling and 'rel to office act:iviti.es. ases within this c"lassificaau ion. ar+i of: a size and scale which; snakes them) general ly compatible with other non- industrial uses .k4 b ■ Portland Chain Manufacturing and which have no off site effects." Comment: Although some of the activities in. the Cascade Blvd. area are consistent with this defini- tion, Portland Chain Manufacturing is not- "12.4 1 The '` City Shall Require hat a. Site for .heavy industrial develop mE�nt shall be: (1) Separated by topography established buffers, , trans portation or other non- residen- tial land uses from residen- tially developed areas- (,„21 Located. in gees having rail service, arterial or major col'lector access. . =. Sites. for ` light industrial develop ment shall be: (1) Buffered from residential areas to assure that privacy and the residential character of the area are preserved. (2) Located on an arterial, or collector street and that industrial traffic shall not be channeled through r.eside,n- tial areas. c. 'The site shall be of a site which; will provide for the .short and long range needs of the use..; d. The land intended for development shall have an average site tope - a of lest than 6% rade or grap' y than g � that it can, be demonstrated that through Engineer .nit techniques al'l ;;limitations to development an , the, pr _ o o vision �of ;services, Stan )a �- mitig`a'ted It he demonstrated! th t assocec lights y noise an other, extern l . ects wi eff .lA neat in z�f re y`.rn he M i e �. ��YiW act vties and use on surrounding ' "1 ti Portland Chain Manufacturing properties. All other applicable plan policies can be met." Comment: The site characteristics are generally consistent with these criteria. However, the use characteristics of .Portland Chain do include ate- site impacts of noise and odor. This review of the Tigard comprehensive Plan, and specifically the use characteristic sections and locational criteria n leads to the following con clusions larger h designated 1 � The lay. er Cascade Blvd- area could be ' 'dues "Linear , Commer.cial , rather than Light Line '� In " non-conforming Industrial", with no increase in non -- conform uses. � The FMK site meets s the general locational criteria for Linear Comr., .erc.ial and Industrial. C mercial. use of the site e would be more, compatible with adjacent uses, anderefore more consistent with specific locational and performance criteria than the existing heavy industrial use. 4. If` P Ni vacates. the building, it is 'conceivable that ,a compatible .fight industrial use n glht • occupyr the situ Ho ever g ven the character • of thie addacent, uses, st is clear that, the range of commercial uses (and specifically the. e intended: occupaant) present a, move .coinpa,tib .e land use , pattern. 'TFF" I.0 IMPACT ANAL S I Thy: foll�arin g a �. compare the ec� "sating discussiori wil land u:se conditio,t (P.C.1.;) with the proposed Levitz' Furniture facility which would be allowed under the C--G zone. ; This analysi will offer a realistic evalua :t on of be :fore /after, condit .ot s; although it is ;understood that the I a and CSC zones could. • potentially allow a. wai ler range of acts r�..t es, the • cor mi..ttrr :rat. xt ode by, ;evitz games c�redibilit to the .ieliiood of theiraccupanc. of',' tae s,ite► EXISTING CONDITIONS (P.C.M.) 41 employees.e.82,vehicle trips /day, 6 trucks (pick up products) •12 vehicle trips /day (8-10 trucks per month to ° deliver raw materials not included) total trips per d.ayr 94. ( Characteristics: Aside from.the pickup/delivery trips, these 94 are all peak hour, at the morning and evening rush periods (it is currently a one - shift operation) Nearly all of the Ft'.NS' employees in the Beaverton/Hillsboro area, so access is . concentrate on the Scholl Ferry Road intersection. PROJECTED CONDITIONS (L EVzTz), ._.,._ Hours of operation: Monday through Friday 10:00 1 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Saturday 10:00 a.m. to'6:00 p.m•, Sunday 12:00 p.m. to l 6:00 p.m. Employees: Monday through Friday, 7 sales plus B office ersonnei...' p Saturday and Sunday, 14 sales personnel. Customers: One 'customer /hour /salesperson x 7 customers /hour (weekdays) One customer /hour/salesperson x 14, _ 14 +customers hourw' (weekend Seven eustovers hour 11 h urs vweekda. customers/ ay. 14 Customers,/hour x 8 hour,'' (weekend = 112 ? customers; Trip Generationz Employees,M•15 x trips = 30 trips/ a �Cus.tomers • • 7 ? -'x 2 trips = 154 trips /day trips /da 1'tT� y, TOT L: 18ti6 trips /day Characteristics: The peak hour traffic by Levitz'wil,l the. hi be limited to e1nploy�es p ; rznce g`hest customer volumes are c u ing normally non - working hours. •Truck traffic 'tai l b • .imited to about one Leevitz deliver r truck par dad, ta, exchange showroom, merchandxe thre, ws11 be rio wareht,suse on ,thi s ! situ � ' 'The,t�eekerid volumes are inconsequential ` since they do not , boinc.d.e w t �' any other peaks. DISCUSSION Most traffic for PCM and Levitz depends upon the Cascade /Scholls Ferry Road intersection. This is signalized with left turn movements off Scholls Ferry. If the volumes fcr Levitz are not signifi- cantly higher than PCM' s, no adverse impact on this ,intersection would be expected. Levitz will utilize this facility for showroom only, with no warehouse and no deliveries originating from the site. Therefore, the main traffic volumes will be customers, which will peak at . off rush hour tunes. Weekend volumes are relatively highs but again will utilize the facility at off -peak hours. The total Levitz daily traffic is about twice that generated by PCM. However, employee trips are Tess than half of PC ' s and they do not occur at normal rush hours. Since the peak hour loading is the main concern, it is concluded that traffic condition with Levitz will be improved compared to those with . g'CM f r 1 1 le COl PA:.t OF OREGON The sketch 'below is mode soles for the Sting in locotir,q said premises and thr Cort paely asr:umes Y purpruse of o�_,• nc, ' 'tcty for varia,tions;.if any, in dimensions ond' ocotion aicv iained by octuoi survey, Tay .n. SEE,' )e4- Z2I PU ti0 • It I It rV f Abver?,en( a-ikeivoy oetiyeoli roodpvinify '17 iv* r ' r _ 9'-O' Male fir--Ashy Gall. (Tppiea/) /?_' ia/a/, • CWoti 191° !. r •SSA /'�\ .� • •• �- A.C. /Ven?enf 0-4 /0 edge or rood pavemen /. - NOTE: ee'arerrren! tirade 5.4al' be c..7mpo /o3. a 3I' /h mole$ of edge o!' a/uur4 err ce rd. , V6 L• 1 Ro4.I arE : -0;4dr 2-3' bi h vice pipe 9unrd po o! 5 meter. /mix .n 2 2 ' 2' se and 117.1 ppc r/cor New wo/ r 5errice Sys and ms.`e• box. N.1 C. - $ °' Pub /i6 Ko' NI.G. Arb/ic viewer N.1. _- CURRENT PLANNING FILES' Left. Side Surrounding Property Notice Names for Mailing List C6pies of Letters Sent to Applicant' Articles /Notices from TT Affidavit of �.:Publication Right Side � Narrative Letter of Authorization t,. gal Description s=,41-4- Reports Public Input Ninutes4 of Meetings (Planning Commission,,City Council, Hearings Officer) Maps Ordinance (if applicable) Resolution (if applicable) Notice of Final Action Rick E. L wis, President Y Realt� Pia Service Co. 180'0 S.W. 'rst Ave. S -180 Harr son Sq. Portand, Or 97201 Prestige Prope ties Inc 1! 5306' SW 116t rd 0r °7223 Tigard, 231 IOD 1902 1900 1910 1905 Tualatin De lopment Co. % Roderick nterprises, Inc.' 1820 SW Ver. ont St. Portland, f r. 97219 1800 Willamina Terminal Portland, Lumber 'Co. ales Bldg. Or., 97205 2S1 15 A 3000 Randall 11430 Sly' i urham Rd. Tigard, 0 . 97223 3001 ' TANDALL 11480 SW Tigard, 0 rh am Rd. • ,97223 2S1115BA' 100 WHITE 11540 SW urham Rd. Tigard, r . 97223 500 LINDLEY 16035 S. Pacify Tigard, 0 . 97223 NPO # 6 Phillip Pas eris 8935 S.W. P t ebrook S Tigard, Or. 97223 PCM ASSOCIATES P.O. Box 4162 Portland, Oregon 1 5 1 27DD 1200 PCM Associates PO Box 23069 Portland, Or. 97223 ISI 27DD' 100 Scholls West Building Inc. By Guard Publishing Co. PO lBox 10188 Eugene, Or.' 97440 200 16255 , S.W. 150th Ave. Tigard, Or.' 97223 700 Southern Pacific Industrial Deere. Co. 520 SW Yamhill St. Portland,' Ore, 97204 151 ' 2 6C 1805 TO'''S RI VS Inc. 395 West Passic St., Rochelle Park NJ 07762 1S 1 34A ,?00 ROBT'.5 SO14 1200 SW 13ul1 .Mouta it Rd'. Tigard, Ore. 97223 Mackenzie /Saito &l Assoc., Lanz Stout 0690 ,SW Bancroft St. Portland, Or. 97201 Terry Hauck, Attorney 1100 S.W. 16tli Ave Portland y Or.' 1197204 NPO 2 Mary' Keski 2355 S'�. 173rd Co .rL.- Al a, Or. !7OO6 [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing]