SDR4-76 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PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and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.
•
I rl. . ..�,�- w :.Id+'q�r}.,,JLYAf.:,Me:4K4M �Y..Fi.a.A•«nV,.t„bJ.r ,'4e,.,x..d..>.utw..t:St,�,.-1�,6,+., .,.' ''ir+fl.G,'.rI.4.4,l..lr1'n Yrn,.�..�-1.rwnd er�d+,.t..i,:'A:d:./....a.;,..,U:..;iN.:.";.Y,ciy,•
• .�:a,lw,,.IL .,,.u_,.,�.,. „• ,. ,i. w. ,.,,, —,.':,,,,.�..I.-4,::�,,,,k'.-4i,.w,,,r ...,1 t ';c 14 1�iJt w r'dd,x 4•, r�u 1t ..c..-1 :'
• r, 7r, .,.,, ", wy�, c,.+,.r.r 4 ,..r r q�,.-'-r vim-;� , ?
1 1 ,. 1 'u ' ia r1
SCE 's3rrHE� �`'WA
' �,�'• ;1 �. a De relr pme Y iew`I�S 7? �=' '� ,
y
14365 , Pa �a�, h'Wr3 �1
'1 �"�.� ;y;+rWwu/...4.44,64./ndicwLv nia4+lw:pwWW''-�:WrN ,,.r,-;i.,...n w:,t,k,..H ,.,..MJ...�... 6»...«w,.c�n..,+,w.; .,„,n M,•
Iiyl 1 f r Ia' , ,
• ■ fir ! i f ,' I .
'1
r
1
I 1 III r l
•
r
, ,
4
I' I
. , I
•
'
• ,
•
I
r I
I
r 4I
I r
•, , u^1.�.,,�,' • 4 • ^ m 11 • ' . r. ' ,
•
a
•
•
! .+-Mw::ifYV wM•bk-Y..dn+i4w.:.ww...:.-.nr..-Nan....+nm.Div..».,wrltin;l;.V-L'J61.q,..:..4..:.fQAFi J.nM M+I..ail:hVAAr••1....IfY.«..I.t,....n4%11,.W.,rt..rvi F.Ra1.:•Or r...l.a-.f.....�w.-kl-uWiw�nr:n+1.wl�:x'r,Mw.,w.x,+...tf•✓w...wM.;,+.t:nr,:.sae:4,r-,•4ia n.„,.e:l�,*;1b,•...k...„:7.rt•w:,,7:MMw+1,c.,.'....t/.lwwi':.+bwu4,44.::444.4,44,.,4„-ri..x„"•, ;7+`.4;444...4
,y rf■
.�,
TAGAFtD CITY OF TIGARD
r •,rMG'nk lOt AtIP 1'1 1 '.
P. 0. Box 25557
12420 S. W. Main
Tigard, Oregon 97223
March 22, 1976
Mr. Benno Britz
14240 S. W. 144th
.b
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Reference: File IVo. SDR 4-76 (Big "B's Thriftway)
Dear Mr. Britz: •
Please be advised that the Tigard Design Review Board, at their
regular meeting of March 9, 1976, considered your request for
architectural and site development approval and your S xbmission
was approved, as amended.
Sincerely,
Dick Bolen
Planning Director
DB:pt
Note: The following acknowledgment must be received by the City of
Tigard within) fourteen (14) days of your receipt of this letter.
Failure to return this acknowledgment may result in action by
the City of Tigard. A copy of this letter and your acknowledg-
ment will be filed with the Building Official.
I hereby, acknowledge this letter documenting the action of the Tigard
Design Review Board. I have received and read this letter and I agree
to `'lion here documented and to abide by any terms and/or con-
ditions by attaohed.
•
1 I, y+nrrl,r I•r r.'. '..,.WrX.. .rot J!°ne-. '' Yar.1..+. ."wwe...:a•..>•.
•I I '"++al.�;�'W �VLLT'V' , Y�pWI ” �rYi�al�
3
date
cc Building Official
•
II
I I
I I,'
I
•' 1, f I• �" Yt1'1 CIA w1 N.."•h,r ',fir,. ., n a IW G
A•dY1'w.dW.J,'ri+a..i...� ,.1� ri•�
. ....m,.._. ,..._.... :1..,....,, .wM .. ... .u....t' .� -�"wfd«.,,Gt;»i+:•:+t �
Avoid Verbal Messages A-i
CITY 'OF TIGARD'
• ,
To:. Dick Bolen From: Jerry Powell
Subject: Canterbury Square Date: 3--12--76
4` �. d� a r° T�Ww�
V
At the time of approval of two restaurants and a day care center 1
at Canterbury Square (1970--71). there were requirements in the zoning it .
code for landscaping and screening. The Planning Commission con-
sistentl.y required, in each of three conditional' use permit actions, ;
that a landscape plan be submitted for design review by them; however, `
' there is nothing in any subsequent minutes to show that that was done,
nor is Tom Vadnais (the project architect) aware of any p articular
,
landscape plan being submitted. Also, there is no landscape plan
in the building department's roll file for the proj
r ° ' n r
.�..r. ._............ ., ..,..,.l:.» -..w..,..1...-.........-.., ..»..I.a.ry.....—..,�a,..,n.....4.'...�...._.._.A.r,.l r,.-i.w-..,.n».....ll_,Il«.i�.lr.i.1..,,�,M....... .....,....+1»..�,..�...�....a.1.�.....Y.,,....1...1z..:e. .....4....-„...1...:..,1.,.,... ....w�.nY�u..+ .t �. .+ 1—.,.1
AGENDA
Tigard Site Development Plan. & Architectural Design Review Board
March 9, 1976 - 5:00 p.m.
k
General Telephone Building
Main Street,t, Tigax d, Oreg on
1 CALL TO ORDER:
2. ROLL CALL
3. MINUTES: January 27, 1976, and February 24, 1976
' I 4. CONMUNTCATIONS•
5. DESIGN REVIEW
5.1 SDR 2-76 (Benol/Safeway, Store expansion/Tigard Plaza)
A request for design review of a proposed expansion of the
existing Safeway Store in Tigard Plaza at Pacific .Highway
and Hall Blvd,.
A. Site Development Plan Review '
1. Staff Report
. 2. Applicant Presentation
3. Public Testimony
4. Staff Recommendation
5. Rebuttal
6. Board Discussion & Action
I I
B. Architectural Design Review
1. Applicant Presentation
2. Board Discus.pion and Action
5.2 SDR 4-76 (Big 'tB” Thriftway/Canterbury Square)
•
. I
A request for review of a proposed addition to the service
facilities at the Big nB" Thriftway in Canterbury Square.
A. Site Dev oloprnent Plan Review
l S t ff Re or-t
a
p
Applicant Presentation
3. Public Testimony
\ 4. Staff Recommendation ry
5. Rebuttal
6. Board Discussion and Action
B. Architectural al Design Review
1. Applicant Presentation
y
1
2. Board Discussion & Action
6. OTHER DUSINESS
ADJ0URNMENT
I I
r � . � ' •+rw..♦ e..�..,p+w.ln....varr.4�n..4 j1 �
, ' . ,
•
MINUTES
Tigard Site Development Plan & Architec tural tural Dc i Review Board '
March 9, 1976
1246o S. w. Main St.
General Telephone 'Building
Tigard, Oregon
I
g g
1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman McMonagle called the meeting to order °,
at 5:45 p.m.
2. ' ROLL CALL: Present: Cook, McMonagle, Olson, Wakens; staff: Powell
' \ * 3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of January 27,,�� 1976 end February
24, 1976, were approved as read. -
4. COMMUNICATIONS: None. ra
5. DESIGN REVIEWS
5.1 Benol/Safeway Store expansion/T i gard Plaza
A request for design review of a proposed expansion of'the ;
existing Safeway Store in Tigard Plaza at Pacific Highway
and Hall Blvd.
A. Site Development Plan Review e
1. Staff Report: read by Puwe"l _
2. Applicant Presentation: ,�
1
o Mssrs. Ted Chi less and Dave Sheridan (Safeway)
presented t he amended site plan proposal (in-
cluding the landscaping'. required by the Planning
Commission) .
o Monte Cook asked about the height of the proposed
"screening vegetation" across the rear. r
o Chilless proposed using photinia i behind and d
uni ers 1
in front,
o M`cMona.gle asked about irrigation,
0 Mr. Sheridan responded that an irrigation system
would be provided in the rear and there is a hose
bibb outlet at each corner of, they building,
3. Public Tcs tamon
none
Il, 4. Staff Recommendation: APPROVAL of proposal submitted,
'''\
as amended
•
� , r l I......ur ... , .... ..t .,. I M , . Y.,(,..•
. l 1 , x fr! w.,rr�.w ry 1 I / ,u -
.r
ti
rt e..,....J A--.....«.r e.o..o-w+,wi...:�«........_.,,a.,..,I..1.r..i.A..,.,.u,r...._a........w...,... .kcv.zr_ .a,w.u,.,k,.u:_^d u.M.a.......,.d....a,..,v..a...». .....e. a Ml..,.'... —,
.11111111.11.1111110110.111M .
• . .,. ,w... •.l..A.FJ.r-M• ,a .I-w...,...I.,..n...,T{:,...G»».SiM'V'J-..4.:,..m,..rl GJ.1-✓...v r1:%.-t+..WC,:._i-,If.lA.11._.I.iutt.,,SJ�
W 'K,
page f "
,
_ ,
BRB Minutes i. ,
Ma rch 9, 1976 i ' ,'
•
,, (�
• • 5. Rebuttal: None.
',
6. Board Discussion and Action
o , Metion to apps.ove proposal �as amended (Cook) I,
o Seconded (Wakem)
a o Motion approved Unanimously
B. Architectural, Design Review ,.
1. Applicant Presentation: Applicant described materials 7;
to be used in site expansion. • .
• , , 2. Board Discussion ,and Action I, .
o Motion to approve architectural plans (Cook) •
, o Seconded (Olson) I
o Approved unanimously '
5.2 SDR 4-76 (Big ,TH ' 7hrif tway/Canterbury Square) i
A request for review of a proposed addition to the service
facilities at t he :I3ig "Bfl Thrif tway;, in Canterbury Square. Y
1
A. Site Development Plan Review u
1. Staff Report: read by Powell 1
to
li
2 Applicant Presentation: Mr. Britz, applicant, 1' •
explained the structure would be a 3 sided , }
,. addition to dock area and would help eliminate
an e istinglitter' prblem. , r
3. P blic TestimOn r: 1 one
4. Staff Recommend' iaton .
o IPowell ssuggested sted. some landscaping td break up
the, impact of structure.
I
\„ i o Britz explained he leases floor space only and
I
the owner of Canterbury Square is r esponsible
scapn and ten
common
for `hand � d ��a�.n anoe of e..l�:
areas. . Britz further stated he would he building
�,,
the proposed structure at his own cost.
a Powell then recommended consideration of approval
H
j
ti
1i A „T•1.,
I % ' .Y `& 1 ,i ,' '\ -
"
1, c / • { ` y r 1 Y
.. _..... .,le..,..•,. ..,-,..,,...r..,......-,-r..i_.. . .a,.,a....,._ ........,r'I-.,.,.,.,,.,e,.«._.... _ ... .-, ,...,,,r,. r. ti. Nw.-...r w . a ' '
i ....J..... .t•... ..m.. _ .......i,... «.. M!.i......!,.1 s........-..... 4r,.N ....w..,.H..1._.....+...M...-,.,r«.._,- w r..r_a+'..4 „Y.,.....+•.• v n.,,,,-+.l . 1n .
a..F,... .6J,.._..NI:..a.,:uA..&.NJ•.l..l..n :a3,.
page 3
DRB Minutes
March 9, 1976 t{
I a
on of
of the structure be considered exclusive
landscaping.
5. Rebuttal: None r,
6. Board Discussion and Action
,
o Motion to approve proposed addition to th,e i
service facilities at the Big I! U Thriftway,
(Olson)
o Seconded (Cook)
o Unanimously approved.
B. Architectural Design Review
1. Applicant Presentation:
•
o Applicant stated plans to change colors pro-
posed
in original plan from gold to a color ;
r
matching present structure.
2. Board Discussion and Action
o Further discussion with staff, board and applicant
on dissimilar use of materials and methods of
eliminating visual problems while keeping in
mind the structure is temporary.
O Motion (Olson) to approve e a chitec tural design
e
plan with the following conditions:
1. siding be carried down to 611 from grade •
with screen to grade and facia board that
would be compatible with existing building
2. Gatos that would be sight obscuring. .
7r o Seconded (Cook)
o Unanimously approved .
6. OTHER BUSINESS: None.
I 7. ADJOURNMENT 6 40 Via.m
7Y I
it
It ,',4117111,
f �f, .M.»..,,..........,..,..1._... .,..._t., .,._.,.....,......,...w,,.-._i+i,..,_....a..a...,<...r ..i,_...F....-.».•,!;:J...,.. ..,»a...•.,. ..... .,., .». ..,_i.,,.,s.....a....,.... ..,., .:,w:«.-..._....ra:.+ %i, vW'.xuEM..-..._..U.al,...,.r.,aa,.-i..l«:.,.t...-r...c:.....,_,.....d r.:..'t.....•..»an...:..,awwa:.r,r1 c,.an C
STAFF REPORT
r
Tigard Site Development Plan & Architectural Design Review hoard ; .
•,. i March 9, 1976
SDR 4- 76 ,
Agenda Item 5.2
Site Develo ment
_.,,...�..�.......... „�......�.._Plan Review
e t^4
A request for review of a proposed addition to the service area Ai,1
of Big "B” Thriftway in Canterbury Square. tl;
N I
Staff Findings
o•
1, The service area (present and proposed) here is exposed
to public areas and to direct views from adjacent apart-
ments. It faces ,a day care center located behind Canter-- '
bury•
2. The Tigard Code requirements presently pertinent to C-4
commercial development with respect to landscaping and
screening appear to be basically unchanged from the require-
.
' ments under which this shopping center was built.
3. Design Review for the area to the rear of the shopping
center was part of the approval given A & P Developers
for the daycare center. This was, by ordinance, to have
included landscaping, lighting, etc.
' I
4. Landscape plan was submitted.
5. Staff is concerned by the lack of screening and visual
amenity presently, afforded by the existing developren:t
of -the sub,:,ject service area. It appears l ,'a.`likely to be
improved by the proposed addition.
Staffs : Recommendation
to be advised.
•
I i
....., .. .. ...... .,..... .. :., ,', .. ,, .......-. ....,...,, ..,.-.,. .f,..., i, .i, ,... i. r,.. . .,i ..•r ,i a ., i,i ,✓.1.., ... r.. ,.
' I ' .
•
•
-r i�, r4ar,i,q.7b.xlrrwr+zriuc.a�a;
' �..»L.:...I..!..�.i t t M1s..,«...» u.;-,,...,.»......aC....��,s.ni.,.zvw:.>.. ...,w-.r.....
•
JOB NO 75285
MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
DATE Feb. 26., 1976 _ 0324'S.W.ABERNETHY
PORTLAND, OREGON 97201
TO City of Ticgart PHONE 503/224-9560
Desie is
SUBJECT g t213" T i : ; a open storag'
TF'iANSMITTED HEREWITH:
' PRINTS " 2 � �� G —
• SHOP DWGS
.
SEPIAS __
OTHER .
PER YOUR REQUEST
FOR YOUR USE
FOR YOUR APPROVAL
•
• FOR YOUR REVIEW AND COIVIIENT''
• ' Da 6 P..1811/1" —:.s 1.:Izre recl. 2 4 /. l..._ i .
By
�.r. ..., , .- - .. ...
, 1 i
1
8
n
•
•
.
. ..... r.....•... .... .. �..,�.. MMV.... v.P....... r... .� ..r.r. ...,x..a ..._..n„ ..�,.. .. .�............� n ..�• 4
1
j n
•
v
.,.)..,,l4,....,.,•., «,.,,..,,:L„..,.,,...,",.,.,......-+-1.1....,,,,,',-, ...I�... a..,_A,....,.,,:-... ...4,.-..,,..,.,L,,,,,-..1_,41:,,.:6:..,...',:f.,;.f..il.: _,w..._.<_...f_.,..I.,..« ..«e,:+Ul,1,,I.fltia l a,,,l,..�,.a.G..rc.a,i,,,A.',J ,No-,.,:JG..;•.,,,M: