The URL can be used to link to this page

CU14-68POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. 400 GRIFFIN- BRAYSON Conditional Use (CU 14-68) Bellwood File 1 of 2 AFFIDAVIT OP PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, Joseph Schafer being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the publisher of The Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193,020, published at Tigard, in the aforesaid runty and state; that the legal netice, a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was 55. 1. published in the entire issue of said newspaper for consecutivn weeks in the following issues October 11 4 18, 1978 2 successive and tur Sub:scribed and sworn to before me this _lath. day of , .'c).g.tpber 78 ° My cernoilssion expires •••,.. 41, 44, 142: p.i>e I`Pte74 Notary Public of Oregon 46MMISSION rPIIs vow $16.45 . , ■ , z f NOCe IS hereby given that the 'City cto couto.will ty? tie. the following at Qwier ltinior ig ) SobOol Leature i d- ,9 re. go . , . •C) 4+117,1r4o, Itillli; • ; 7 An appOtti by City Council Of the Planning Conirnission approval of a re. 1st by rtayrnond 3. Bartel for density etyof Phase III of the °Bellwood Planning 'Development at 124th & north of Wal,,,nit Wash. Tax Map 2S1 4AA, part of To* Lot Which decision has been appeale4 go,, he City Cotton% Ile hearing will be a fall evidential t ring. Both proponents and oppo. ts will be given nn opportunity to gi evidence and to cross-examine, PUBLIC NOTICE ZONE CHANOZ Ze 18.711 (John , itnueppel) NPO 3 A request by John, itnueppel for Z0110 map amendment from County tCity11.10 "Single Penally goei- dehtlai''' for a .56 Acre parcel at 114th south of °garde (Wash, Co, To,. Map 281 itiA. Tax Lot 3001), ZONE CHANGE ,ZC 16.78 Med. gewood Iletireinent Center ) NPO 6 A retitta41 .bY 141,149t Iton at Victor L. illks5/1 "' k MOM • • wK.wM� +000mod rwJw.w•wrr•N' ••riq..arwwmar.wrfw hI r+.d. 'AFFIDAVIT J PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, 55, I, ..... ................ase.ph.Sohafe.t being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the publisher ................... of The Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, published at Tigard, in the aforesaid county and state; that the legal Notice, a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was 2 published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ........... successive and co.isecutive weekv, in the following issues -S frteinb er 2.7 —a•r d Ook o-ba- .11, (S gnat Subscribed and s v'drn to before me this ar 78 October My commission expires ••••••••••••••°• r: ....day of.....,.4_ Notary Public of Oregon COMMISSION PtilE sl 0 eri al' CITY OF, TIGARD PUBLIC NOTICE -4. Notice is hereby given that the City Council will consider the,, following at Fowler 'Junior. High School. Lecture: Room, 10865 SW Walnut, Tigard, Ore_, gon, on October 9, 1978 at 8:00 p.mw APPEAL ,. PEAL --- ZONE CHAN - I.,aaa "NPO No, 7 . An appeal by City Council of the Planning Commission approval of a re- quest by Raymond./ Bartel for density review of Phase III of the Bellwood Residential Planned Development at SW 128th & North of Walnut (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 4AA, part of Tax Lot ..100), which decision has been appealed to the City Council Testimony will be limited to sur inia . - �,, tion of previous statements.. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVI- SION -, Annexation Plan.Ar nendment to the Tigard Community Plan, in the form of an Annexation' Plan, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REV!- "• SION -- Economy Plan - Amendment to the Tigard Community Plan in the .form of an Economy Plan. All interested persons may appear,,-, and be heard regarding said proposals, BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Loreen R, Wilson City Recorder proternn TT 3881 ° -- Publish: Sept, 27, Oct.. 4, 1978 dsi ti.. A '11, • M . APPEAL - ZONE CHANGE ZC 11-68 (Bellwocd Park Subdivision) NPO #7 An appeal by City Council of the Planning Commission approval of a request by Raymond 3. Bartel for density review of Phase III of the Bellwood Residential Planned Development at S.W. 128th & North of Walnut (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 4AA, part of Tax Lot 100), which decision has been appealed to the City Council. Testimony will be limited to summation of previous statements. (a) Council noted that this item would be heard on October 23, 1978 due to insufficient transcripts for summation hearing. 10. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVISION - Annexation Plan - Amendment to the Tigard Community Plan in the form of an Annexation Plan. (a) Council noted that this item would be set over to future date for hearing because item is still being considered by Planning Commission. 11. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVISION - Economy Plan - Amendment to the Tigard Community Plan in the form of an Economy Plan. (a) Council noted that this item would be set over to future date for hearing because item is still being considered by Planning Commission. 12. ORDINANCE No 78-59 AN ORDINANCE RATIFYING, CONFIRMING AND RECORDING CHANGE IN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF TIGARD BY THE BOUNDARY COMMISSION, ORDER No. 1278, INVOLVING LANDS OF SHERWOOD DEVELOPMENT ANNEXATION, SECTION 12, T2S, R1W, WLM., WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, RECORDING EFFECTIVE DATE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. (a) St.cond Reading of Ordinance. (b) Motion by Councilman Mickelson, seconded by Councilman Cook to approve. Ordinance No. 78-59 approved by majority vote of Council on second reading with Councilman Scheckla voting Nay. 13. ORDINANCE No 78-60 AN ORDINANCE RATIFYING, CONFIRMING AND RECORDING CHANGE IN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF TIGARD BY THE BOUNDARY COMMISSION, ORDER No. 1279, INVOLVINC LANDS OF MUDRINICH TAX LOT 500 ANNEXATION, SECTION 10,112S, 1(1W, W.F., WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, RECORDING EFFECTIVE DATE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. (a) Second Reading of Ordinance. (b) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Mickelson to approve. Ordinance No. 78-60 approved by majority vote of Council on second reading with Councilman Scheckla voting Nay. 14, ORDINANCE No, 78-61 AN ORDINANCE RATIFYING, CONFIRMING AND RECORDING CHANGE IN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF TIGARD BY THE BOUNDARY COMMISSION, ORDER No. 1280, INVOLVING LANDS OF McT)ONALI) ANNEXATION, SECTION 2 & 11, TIT, W.M., WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, RECORDING EFFECTIVE DATE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. (a) Second Reading of Ordinance, (b) Motion by Councilman Mickelson, seconded by Councilman Cook to approve. Ordinance No. 78-61 passed by majority vote of Council on second reacting with Councilman Scheckla voting Nay. 15. ORDINANCE No. 78-64 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH ANI) SANITATION ASPECTS OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, GRANTING EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISES TO PROVIDE SOLID WASTE SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY; CREATING NEW PROVISIONS; REPEALING ALL OTHER ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS TN CONFLICT WITH THIS ORDINANCE, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. (a) Motion by Councilman Mickelson, seconded by Councilman Cook, to approve. Apporved by unanimous vote of Council. 16. RESOLUTION No. 78-79 A RESOLUTION OT THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL CONFIRMING ADOPTION OF PLANS FOR THE TRAF'F'IC SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PROJECT (T.S.M.) FOR S.W. PACIFIC HIGHWAY AND AUTHORIZING THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (0.D.O.T.) TO INITIATE 'REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PROJECT PLANS. (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 17. RESOLUTION No. 78-80 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL HEREBY AUTHORIZING ITS REPRESENTATIVES TO ACQUIRE FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY FROM THE OREGON STATE AGENCY FOR SURPLUS PROPERTY UNDER THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS LISTED ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORM. (a) Motion by Councilman Cook, seconded by Councilman Nickelson to approve. (b) City Administrator noted this would simply mE1ko the City eligible to purchase federal surplus property at the Oregon State Agency for Surplus Property. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. 18. RESOLUTION No. 78 -81 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN NORTHERN PINE SUBDIVISION) SUBJECT TO HEREIN SPECIFIED CONDITIONS. (a) Motion by Councilman Mickaison) seconded by Councilman Cook to approve. (b) City Administrator recommended approval. Approved by unanimous vote of Council, 19. ACCEPT THE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS AND AUTHORIZE EXECUTION BY MAYOR AND RECORDER PRO-TEM. Ilc:el.troe Subdivision Sanitary Sewer Easement by Tigard Water District, Garden Park Place Easement #1 by Barbara J. 0eer. (a) Motion by Councilman Cook) seconded by Councilman Scheckla to approve. Approved by unanimous vote of Council. PAGE 4 y COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 9) 1978 a •. VER9ATIM CRANSCRIPT PLANIV"G-COMMISSION HEARING OF SEnTEMBER 5, 1978 \\, 84LWOOD III APPEAL Tspidinu: OK. Thank you. The next item is the opening of the meeting to the public hearing. Prior to doing that I have a statement which I will read and ,make part of the public records. The meeting of the Tigard Planning Commission are done by Division of Title II, the Tigard Municipal Code and ORS227. Under those statutes, certain standards are established for the conduct of the public meetings* It is the policy of the Planning Commission to adhere to format in the public hearing process that is designed to afford the applicant any objectives and opportunities to be heard and to allow the Planning Commission the opportunity to obtain sufficient factual and subjective information in which to base it's decision. According to the following format will be followed. We open the public hearinrj and I call to the staff report and that's l'ollowed by the applicant's presentation. Then we call for public testimony on the issue being heard, first pro, those for, and then con, those against the argument being heard. I then call for staff recommendations and then that's followed by rebuttal and cross examination. I than close the public her4ring and once the public hearing is closed no further testimony from the public will be allowed except under special situation'. For example, requests by a specific staff member or member of the commission. After the public hearing is closed, I call for commission discussion and action and that will end the consideration of that item. A recorded transcript is kept at all planning commission meetings and the transcribed text can be made from that record should anyone so desire at his or her own private cost. All testimony offered in a public meeting must he identifiable, so before tevAfying, please address the chairman of the Planning Commission and identify yourself, and I might acentuate that that's for the purpose, not only for the Commission members but also for the tape recorder. Any testimony offered is subject to cross examination and or rebuttals, so be prepared to defend your position. All actions of the Planning Commission must be based on findings under Provision of ORS, Chapters 215065 and generally those findings will be made with respect to particular conditions or circumstances of the site and the proposal and will address the following points: Comprehensive Plan Performance; Changes in local conditions or previous or supporting applicants requests; Impact on adjacent properties and on the communities; Availability of other suitable locations: Impact on public services and facilities and ccmmunity needs, Inaudible said, I open the public hearing, and incidentally, before I do that sE—Fat people are not sitting here waiting for item) to be heard that have teen deleted from the agenda, let me stop for a moment and inform everyone of the following changes. Item 5.2 Subdivision 58-78 Scholls Summer Lake that was originally put on the agendas 5.2 but we were later informed that it was deleted and the present status, staff, is what ,1-1 6,2 on Scholls Summer Lake? Is that on the agenda for tonight? New Voice: "That's deleted." Chairman "It has been deleted'?" New Voice: "Summer Lake, yes." Chairman: "OK. Item 5.2 subdivision Scholls Summer Lake has been deleted from consideration from tonight's meeting. Also deleted Inaudible is Item 5.5 Subdivision S-2-780 Sierra, request by J. Alan Paterson that was originally put on, later deleted and the present status staff'?" Staff: "It is on." PAGE TWO BELLWOOD III Apr Chairman: "It is back on the agenda ?" Staff: "Yes, it is." Chairman: "OK. Question for the public record: Was adequate notification given to the affected part of the community ?" Staff: "We did make public.... New Uoice : "Yes,yes we had, ah Tigard Times, I guess.. Chairman: "Did you also mail out..." Staff: "That's correct. It went on at the period allocated for normal notification." Chairman: "Ok." Staff: "And ah, at the time of the staff felt that it should be deleted was after the date that the notification had been given out and then again we reconsidered that it does need a public hearing, so proper notification has been given." Chairman: ''I see. And the people that were notified, were they informed that it was deleted? I'm concerned about Inaudible ." Staff: "No, ah, notification want out that it will be a public hearing on the subdivision." Chairman: "Ok. Well, why was it deleted? May I ask that as well ?" Staff: "The staff feeling, or understanding that the subdivisions are to be reviewed in house by the staff and then again reconsidered because it is in a flood plain area and therefore under that administrative approach it needs to be reviewed by the Planning Commission, so again it is on the agenda." Chairman: "One additional item, Item Inaudible Zone Change, Summerfield, Al Inaudible , Commercial Center at Summerfield, and that is, has been added to the agenda?" Staff: "Yes, it has." Chairman: "And adequate notice was made and posted in the Tigard Times ?" Staff: "Again, yes." Chairman: "Ok. A call for Item 5.1 May I have the staff report, please," STAFF REPORT BY SELh3Y Tepedinc: "That' ,5 the conclusion of the staff report. ►' Chairman: OK, thank you. May I have the presentation by the applicant ?" Stan Martinson: "Mr. Chairman, my name is Stan Martinson and I'm a lawyer in the firm of Holt, Wright, Johnson, Pentegrass,Hoffman in Portland. We want to a hearing 3 weeks ago. I think most of the cummissioners recall. Ah, there was an initial hearing and density review in April 18 PAGE THREE _BELLWOOD , CAL of this year. A numbeP of conditions were recommended at that time that the owner and staff get together and work out. In July or this year a final plat had been submitted and is now pending for approval. On August 15th the most recent hearing was held at which time this staff report was not accepted by the commission. Appropriately so, its left a number of questions unanswered, and a number of citizens questions were raised which the staff or which the commission wanted further investigation and input. It sent the staff back home and the applicant to do its homework to get together and agree either on a plan or agree upon what the issues are and whet the areas of disagreement might be. This staff report recommends, ah represents, the agreed position and a position which the applicart will agree to and does agree to. The area, the primary area which addressed, which was addressed by the citizens, I feel, was the disinclinat.l.on to add additional multi-family units in the area, minimize those units. Mr. Bartel, the architect and land planner, will explain the details to you and answer your questions as to the details, but as to that area, the number of units is reduced from the time of the previous staff report as opposed to the previous staff report, and I think a major point is that its agreed that the applicant will, that the developer will develop those units in a way in which they will be most desirable for condominium living and individual ownership. Items 5 and 6 of the staff recommendations discuss this particular point. The design and landscaping of the area so as to promote condominium living and individual ownership. I spoke with the city attorney, Mr. Bailey, by phone this afternoon, ah confirmed with him that our understanding is that we the applicant is charged with by this recommendation to promote in all reasonable ways the development of the design and landscapings so as to promote condominium ownership, but the city does not wish to get in the business of monitoring land sale transactions as to who they are sold to and how many are sold to a particular individual and the market conditions must apply to the point in time when the units are sold, but, in any case, I'm here to answer questions. Mr. Harris, the engineer and surveyor is also here to answer questions and Mr. Bartel will make a brief explanation. Ray Barteig °My name is Ray Bartel, my business address is 10962 SE 21st, in Milwaukie, We have limited all issues in our representation to the Planning Commission to those asked by the Planning Commission of us at Lhe last Planning Commission meeting. Specifically, in relationship to schools, police and fire protection, traffic and public response and emotion that was generated at that particular hearing. Basically, again as stated in the staff report, the schools were at capacity, but the school systems says that they can accomodate the children that would be added to the school system. The police and fire department are only concerned about the ability to control and access en interconnection between this project and the project to the east that is curvt3ntly before you in another meeting. In regards to traffic we are filtering through existing street systems and because of that filtration through existing street systems, we are not really impacting the traffic problems that exist along Walnut. In regards to public response and talking with the staff, basically, all the units originally were one story tucked into the hillside some with garages underneath. We have done one other thing. We have limited all building sizes to duplexes which will give ground coverage as well as height more in relationship to single family homes. The design review specified by staff we are in complete agreement with which, in essence, established a condominium design and asks for some very specific items such as a definable front and rear yard, covered parklng, and exterior materials that will be reflected of the natural environment PAGE FOUR BELLWOOD III AL AL that these buildings sit in. The natural vegetation on the side and t. . grades are being respected, city housing and greenway policies are being adhered to, Basically, as I said, the units will be designed as con- dominiums. The one issue that Mr. Martinson brought up...the exact sales date of these will reflect marketing conditions between 1972 and 174. Anyone who tried to sell a condominium was very unsuccessful. The last two years its been very good; so we are committing ourselves to the design and to design review and basically in regards to the staff report and the resubmitted plan, I don't believe the staff will find any reason why the additional density being asked for should not be adhered to or should not be granted as well as the Planning Commission giving additional density, we are, in fact, giving up ground to allow a greenway to be interconnected. Greenway wasn't forseeing back in 1968 that conceptually would be a benefit to the area. And thats basically all I have to say. You have a drawing before you.. You can see, basically, th=) revisions that have been made. Tepedino: "Thank you, Mr. Bartel. Are there any other proponents that wish to be heard on this matter? Are there any opponents, those opposed to this item that wish to be heard on this matter? Sir." Dennis Murphy: I live at 12750 SW Marine Court. I believe this impact on the traffic is understated here. Was it said that 128th would go through? I don't, I didn't understand that. Selby: "It's our understanding that with the project design 128th will link up with the southern portion development of Summer Lake Sub- division, and therefore,eventually feed out onto 135th." Dennis Murphy: "The reason t say that is 128th the traffic impact was, I believe, lightly passed over because Walnut, 128th is the only access right now where they intend to build and if it doesn't go through every bit of traffic will that goes into Bellwood goes into 128th or 121st. The other thing is, there are no sidewalks on Walnut and I don't know is any of you live in Bellwood but any of the children there who go, that school bus lets out at 121st and they have to walk that road up there and I don't believe that problem was addressed; and also, I feel that we, the people who live in 8ellwood, shouldn't start committing our kids to busing because of the school impact. I feel that, I don't know, you mentioned total units, you said 78 additional u-its?" Selby: "There's a total number of 75." Dennis Murphy: 'To be built?" Selby: "That's correct." Dennis Murphy: "What was the original...am I out of order asking the..." Tepedino : "Well, what I'd like to do is limit this period of time to testimony and what I'd like to do is at a later time ask for cross examination and rebuttal, so, if you have further questions I'd like to ask you to hold them and if you have some testimony we'd be glad to have that entered into the record right now. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Any other testimony at this time?" Tepedino: "Yes, sir. Chairman: "Go ahead." PAGE FIVE BELLWOOD III A 'AL Taylor: Don Taylor, 12625 SW 128th. I agree with Mr. Murphy because if I'm not mistaken, Mrs. Conies brought up at the last meeting that they were going to take the traffic impact count on 128th. The Monday and the Tuesday after our meeting here they had a traffic meter for two days. They didn't have it on a Saturday and a Sunday overnight where these guys race back and forth on 128th and I don't feel that the traffic count at that time was sufficient to give a report to the Commission on the heavy traffic." Tepedino: "Thank you, Mr. Taylor. Any other opponents wish to be heard at this time? Thank you. Bonnie Owens: Bonnie Owens, 12450 SW Summercrest Drive Tigard, and I'm Chairman of NPO 7 which Bellwood is in. I just wish to state that while the NPO 7 Committee has been updating itself on Inaudible . We are not opposed to the development in general but we do wish to make our feelings known or our thoughts known that it does exceed the density for urban medium density which is in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and we would rather see it kept to the density which would ceit it down 20 units." Tepedino: "Mrs. Owens, may I ask you if it does exceed which you feel is an appropriate criteria why NPO 7 does not oppose it? Was there some discussion on that point?" Owens: "Ask me the question again, please." Teprdino: "Did you feel the development as its shown in the drawings exceeds a certain criteria which you may feel irrelevant, why does NPO 7 not oppose it, then?" Was tbEre some discussion ''as to...I take it is if you're not opposed to it you're in favor of it Owens: "We knew that when the NPO 7 began, we were aware that there would be urban medium density in that area, so we are not opposed to urban medium density development in that area and from what we've been informed the different criterias they have been asked to meet, the way it looks like its going to be developed, so I guess we are opposed to it with the 20 additional units. Let me state it that way." Tepedino: "Ok. So NPO 7's opposed to this proposal that includes 20 additional units." Owens: "I suppose that's the best way that I can put it...being stuck in this framework of having to say we're either opposed or not opposed." Tepedino: "Thank you, Mrs. Owens. Are there any other people that wish to testify noVin opposition to this proposal? Yes, sir." Bill Raznick: "My names Bill Raznick, 12770 SW Katherine. I've been to a Pew of your Planning Commission meetings) and one of th3 things that has impressed md is that when there is a new development there is usually a fair amount of effort to put the multiple family dwellings near a recreationsal area. The recreational area for Bellwood is in the center of the complex. Putting multiple family dwellings with a minimal amount of recreational area on the outer edge of it causes the residents in that area to go across other peoples' properties or a lot of pedestrian traffic in the street to take advantage of the park in the center of the community. And I do have at a later time a couple of questions Inaudible ." PAGE SIX BELLWOOD III Ara, L Tepedino: "Are there any people that need to be heard on this issue in opposition at this time? This is the opportunity now for crosn exam- ination and rebuttal any testimony they have heard. Is there anyone who wishes to raise issues as to cross examination and rebuttals or questions. Yes, sir." Ray Bartel: I'd like to clarify two points that were brought up. Number one...we are adding 16 units. We had asked for an additional, uh, we had asked for an additional 20 at the last meeting, and going to the duplex complex, uh, concept, we have dropped 4 units from the last meeting, so we are now asking for an additional 16 units. This project also is part of an overall planned development, the overall planned development density will not exceed the urban medium density. Considering the size of single family lots and also the park, 6 acre park that was dedicated originally at the outset of the project. Also the density that we are specifically asking for on this site is in direct relationship to the density of single family houses bordering it and in some cases, there's less. We are at 7 units per cre, and were able to accomplish that by having an efficient private road network in there. That's how we were able to accomplish the density on that land. But if you take gross land and compare it to gross land, we have fewer units on this site abutting single family lots." Tepedino: "Thank you, Mr. Bartell.. Are there any other comments or questions or cross examination or rebuttal. Yes, sir." Dennis Murphy: Mr. President, I have a question for Mr. Bartell." Tepedino: "Could you give us your name, please." Dennis Murphy: "Dennis Murphy. When you plan to build in this area, what other streets besides 128th will you be able to get into, off Walnut?" Jim Harris: Mr. Chairman, my name is Jim Harris. I'd like to Inaudible a question to Mr. Bartel. 128th has been programmed for a long time to go through from Walnut Street to Scholls Ferry Road. Its been on the comprehensive plan. Bellwood was designed around the comprehensive plan and Summerplace,which is just north of Bellwood, will accomplish this. This person was asking how long this would take place. I don't know. If they go through the same problems that we're having, it will take quite a while. There are other streets, though. You do have other outlets with other developments going in. You can go in through Brookway and there's going to be a street that will be extended this year; in fact, its already approved. I do know about that and the school district is going to do it and our firm is doing the engineering on it and it will be improved by say this time next year that you can go through from Brockway right out to 121st on Katherine St. extension. Then, as these other developments progress, there will be all kinds of ways the traffic will diffuse and the load will be taken off Walnut. There's no doubt about it. In fact, I would think, to be perfectly honest, is the way to relieve the load off Walnut is to get some of these streets constructed to Scholia Ferry Road to 121st, to inst." Tepedino: "Are there any other points of cross examination and rebuttal? Bonnie Owens: I, Mr. Oaeoel, would be interested in little bit further description of the type of units. When you ,say condominium, condominium PAGE SEVEN BELLWOOD III ,EAL living and duplexes, I'm not sure in my mind exactly what to visualize. I mean, I know what duplexes are." Bartel: "Ok. The site slopes will be coming in with a common driveway. The units that are on the uphill side of the slope will have garages below thsm se that at the rear of those units they meet grade. The units on the iou'er side of the slope will have garages and carports in front of they. They will be about 4' off the ground with decks facing the greenway and bicycle path. We're talking about units that will probably run between 800 to 1000 sq. feet, so combined into one building we're talking about a structure 1600 sq. feet to 2000 sq. ft." Owens: "These are the duplexes you're talking about or is this..." Bartel: "Yes." Owens: "Ok. Now, what about the condominiums ?" Bartel: "That..." Owens: "That's it..." Bartel: "Those are all the..." Owens: "So all the structures are going to be ?" Bartel: "Bight. Now submitted on the wall up there, you can see the smaller areas to the upper right hand corner of that first plat, that is the revised plat. Those show the areas that will be deededl :flee *Aple underneath the buildings. The remainder of that particular lot will be maintained by the association of those Inaudible. One point that I think, there's cross se.,Lion which the staff has residential structures on both sides of single family, the tax structures on both sides will be above the Inaudible. That is, they will not be, they will not be the equal to height or below so that were not creating any large mass of buildings." Tepedino : "Any other comments Inaudible." Don Taylor: 'tI would like to hear the commission's report as to the traffic impact on Walnut end 128th that was brought up at the last meeting that they were going to have." Tepedino: "Staff Inaudible." Selby: "Yes, I do have a report here by our engineering department. Unfortunately, the machine that was placed for the count of ADT after average daily traffic on 12Bth blew up on its second day run. Our apologies for this impact. Therefore, we are not, at this time, oapable of giving you some sort of a count on 128th. The major issues, however, is that the traffic flow on the major streets that will take the impart of any development thats going to happen in that general area Walnut, at this time, is capable as it is built now...Walnut is capable of handling 3,500 cars a day according to the countie's level of traffic capabilities. We have between 122nd and 123rd, we have 3,320 cars. That's going away from Bellwood to the major traffic areas flowing towards the city area of Walnut. Between 124th and 128th we have 2,614 and between 129th and 132nd, 10556 which means the traffic count is dwindling as you're going towards from 130 on 130 on Walnut to 135th. So even the most Y,� /YY1d �ad.W .m YY w. 1 u 0 • 4 • .1 PAGE EIGHT BELLWOOD III P 9EAL major impact is below the standards as the county sees Walnut's capabilities at this time. Should Walnut ever be developed to its full improvement it will hold 14,000 cars per day as a major collector." Taylor: "I'm not interested in 3,000 cars on Walnut, I'm interested in 30000 kids on sidewalks." Selby: "The school district needs to address the concerns an those sidewalks. The fact that the county has not replayed sidewalks on Walnut is a concern that the school district has .nd that they have their policies on what is safe for student. The efore, they will bus students to the schools that would otherwise have to walk in unsafe areas. In otherwords, they have a policy that they will not allow students to walk in unsafe areas; therefore, if its not pasable by pbdestrian needs, they will bus them to schools and this would eliminate or, not eliminate, but give some remedy to the fact there is no sidewalks on Walnut for pedestrians. Student safety is at first handled with the school district." Tepedino: "And that lies within the jurisdiction of the uh..." Selby: "Of the school district in that city. Yes, sir." Tepedino: "Are there any other questions or cross examination or rebuttal?" Yes, Sir." Bill Reznick: I'd like to ask...it's not clear to me...were all the structures in the proposed addition duplexes?' Tapedino: "Would the applicahlt like to address that?" Bartel: "Ok. The issue is a little complicated. What is happened, if you have been following this, is we hove an existing project approved in 1968. Phase III, it was felt certain areas of Phase III were interrupting a potential greenway that was being developed in two bordering projects. Phase III includes, included at one time 42 single family houses as well as the garden apartment area. We have eliminated two of those single family houses to allow the greenumy to interconnect, so we are proposing a land use plan similar to what was originally approved and that includes 40 single family homes as well as 36 condominium structures...condominiums." Razniek: "All the dwellings are along 128th are single family?" Bartel: Hyesall Reznick: "Thank you." Tepedino: "Would you point it out on the map there Inaudible." Bartel: "The map we have here is what is the original approved pre- liminary plat. It has been modified. It has been modified and this specific area the boundary lines her show the layout of the old preliminary plat. This was an area that would not allow this greeplway to interconnect and was also an area in which the grade was steep and with there being a significant stand of trees in this area, the staff was concerned that those trees would be endangered if any cite grading was done. So we pulled those lobo back away from ;hose trees to allow the greenway to interconnect. We have, in essence, corverted by designation along this revised preliminary plat, the designateo areas will be plated and v. PAGE NINE BELLWOOD III A' AL and those areas will be condominium design. This is an enlargement of that particular rrea showing all of the structures basically as duplexes and the upper structures with parking underneath and the lower structures with parking up front. As we stated before, the areas lirectly contiguous to single family areas are a matching or less density.128th Avenue is right through here. Corliss: "And then Katherine?" Bartel: "Ka'cherine?" New Voice: "No, going through near the development. Bartel: "Katherine Street. Ok. Katherine St. near the development here. This is our extension...the entire area here. The only area that does not exist is this area right here. Katherine St. is up here. Ok. Karen...Katherine's here, I'm sorry. Katherine's here. Katherine cul-de-sacs. Corliss: Inaudible Bartel: "It stops right here." Corliss: "Yah, I know it does, but its not going to continue to." Bartel: "Correct. Correct." Harris: "Mr. Chairman, could I clarify that just one minute. I happened to be around while this took place. At the time we wanted to run Katherine St. clear through and tie in with Katherine St., and the Planning Commission at that time felt that it shouldn't go through, and there should be a jog in it and it should go around to Marie. I don't remember if it was the Planning Commission or Planning Staff and we argued this at great length and we felt that it should go through and it didn't. We was cul-de-saced in Bellwood and there's a bubble in Brookwey and now to get back on the Katherine St. you have to go down to Marie St and back to Katherine St. again, which might break up the...I'm not going to argue with the merits of it, but the reason that it didn't go through is that. Now it will be extended from the east edge of Brockway subdivision. The school district is extending it and it will, I don't know what you want to call it. Now because it will start out as Katherine St. and will end up tying into Lynn St. so it will be Katherine St." Tepedino: "Thank yo,J, sir. Any other come ts, cross examination, rebuttal Inaudible . right now?" Steve Graham: Mr. Chairman, my name is Steve Graham, 1305 SW Bell Ct. I'd like to eel< the applicant, Mr. Bartel, if I have this correct, in my mind, that what we're really saying is that for the privelege of the community having a few bushes along the greenway, we get about 20 more living units in the neighborhood." Tepedino "Would the proponent/applicant like t'j address himself again?" Bartel: "I disagree with the way you're stating this. Is made, uh, we're proposing to interconnect a greenway per what we have been told is city policy and I would think that with my client assuming the lOpYDVement end and maintenance of that I would not say that he is PAGE TEN BELLWOOD III AR( L getting an additional 16 units for some scrub bushes. He is getting a development in an area which economically enables the city to reap the rewards of someone going in and having the money to go in and implement something that the city deems desirable for the improve... for, for the benefit of the entire community." Tepedino: "Thank you. Are there any other comments or questions or cross examinations or rebuttal...gentlemen in the back." Norm Jackson0Yes. My name is Norm Jackson, -1275 SW Katherine. I would like to know if the only reason the greenway exists will be there is that because of the drainage problems you can't got build on it anyway. That's not true?" Bartel: "We're not, we're not building any drainage area." Jackson: "Well, that's the reason for the greenway then, isn't it? So you're not, in essence, giving us the greenway...you can't build on it." Bartel: "We're not, we're not building on it." Jackson: "Yah, but you're saying well, you're giving as a present the greenway. You can't build on it anyway because of the drainage problem." Bartel: "Ah, that's not..." Harris: "Mr. Chairmen, could I, ah, reply on that? There is a couple things I "link that historically we have to talk about is that in 1968 when this was approved, the greenway was established as on the eaat side of this plat. And that was the only greenway, and you can look into the comprehensive plan, the general plan the city has. It Lentions Bellwood; in fact, it mentions Bellwood specifically does agreeing of this plan of developing greenways. Now, all of a sudden, the city has decided to change that with no public hearings or anything else, the city has decided I'm not saying these people...I guess, we'll have to say the former staff..,what 1 don't know, all of a sudden, they came up with the idea that we need another greenway down another drainage area. Prior to that there was going to be no greenw?)/ down that drainage area... that drainage area is rather insignificant. It really isn't a large .drainage area. It happens to be swale that can be very well handled and doesn't carry a lot of water. Now, all of a sudden, we come up with this big problem that wetre encroaching into the major drainage area. It isn't a major drainage area. It was never considered a major drainage area and the only reason that this greenway policy is come up is because the other developers have gone around Bellwood, which was already approved and they decided thaf it would be nice to have a greenway through something that was already approved. We've said, "Fine, we'll compromise." That's what we're saying." Tepedino: "Thank you, Mr. Harris. Are there any other questions or comments on cross examination or rebuttal?" Harvey Stone: "I live in Bellwood. I propose that maybe they should hold up building these condominiums until the Planning Board hears how many hundreds or thousand units they're going to put in on the fringe of Bellwood. How do wo know they're not going to put a high rise in there within the boundary lines or all over toward Scholls Ferry Road. PAGE ELEVEN BELLWOOD III PEAL And all the traffic in .the whole world can be moved down here." Tepedino: "Any other comments, the gentlemen in the back,..." Nancy Stimler: "I live at 11525 SW Terrace Trail and when he, one of the gentlemen spoke about the condominium plan Inaudible, he indicated there's a private drive that services them. Is that correct?" Bartel: "Ti; s correct." Stimler: "How wide is the private drive and what's the access into the multi family units Inaudible consider the police and fire services that are going to affect the area?" Bartel: "I can't, I cannot remember the axact width right now. The width was determined by...." AT TH;S POINT, TAPE TURNED OVER, SOME CONVERSATION LOST Stimler: "It's the Inaudible. Tualation Vaney Fire District and they have to come in off of 128th to get into this area for fire protection. Now, so if, in the future, the subdivision, whichever,is this going back into Bellwood, will also be serviced by Washington County will be able to come through this access from the one development to the other and how wide is it and will it be also a convenient way for people to shortcut out of these people's property because its a public easement?" Bartel: "We've had discussions I've had with staff in regards to the width that the fire and police department were going to ask for was 30 ft, They, staff has told me that they will require the project to the west to carry the same dedicated easement that ours will so that, that interconnection will exist there. The opportunities exists ?pi through traffic, automobile traffic, to go through, although no one Has discussed at this time whether, to this date, whether that will be recorded on the plat, making it legally binding for everyone." Stimler: "Ok. And the last meeting which you recall,you and I stood up there at the map and I asked you..."Is there going to be a way out of here for the people who live in Bellwood?" and you said, "Yes,they're going to give them bridges to get out and from there it cuts into the other development to connect to it." Right? Now maybe we weren't hitting just quite eye to eye because I have understood that there was going to be a straight access out in that direction." Bartel: "We had proposed one at one time and were shown on the last map that you saw up there. I, it will be there, and I don't know what..." Stimler: Bartel: Stimler: 1i1kaii -. Bartel: Tepedino •11: Harris: "It won't be Inaudible a maintained public street." "It will be maintained by the property owners." "But, it won't be a city street." "No, it will not be a city street." "Are there any other comments, rebuttals, or cross examinations?" "It might be a point in Mentioning that if you would, uh, I think PAGE TWELVE BELLWOOD III -PEAL the problem is when you start looking at this, is that Summerplace right to the north, yah, Summerplace is at the...Summerlake, uh, TDC is doing Summerplace to the east. Summerlake, right to the north is, does have some cross streets where 128th would tie in if you go around it. I mean, it's not a street that's going to shoot straight through and become like trying 'co get on Katherine St., I guess, to get to 128th onto Katherine, back to Katherine again. But, there are 'wo accesses. We're going to make emergency accesses through for the rire department and the police department and their request and we'll go to the Inaudible ." Tepedino: "Thank you, Mr. Harris. Are there any other comments or questions, cross examination, rebuttal and such?" Murphy: "There's a couple things I would like to ask the staff..." Tepedino: "That's Mr. Murphy." Murphy: "Yes, Dennis Murphy You said it was the school's responsibility for the sidewalk..." Selby: "No, I did not say that. Excuse me if I indicated such. It is school's responsibility and they have met this, the substandards policy, that would eliminate any hazardous situation for student—pedestrian, and because they have to, the school district has to live with the fact that there is no sidewalks on Walnut...have taken upon themselves to finance charge to bus the students who would have to walk on Walnut to the schools. It's not their responsibility building the sidewalks...however, it is their responsibility to live with the fact there is no sidewalks and therefore maintain student's space for students who come from developments that are approved by the city and county and to live with the fact of the road conditions. And, they are meeting that responsiblity to busing and through other alternatives such as student housing." Murphy: "Inaudible ...I've lived there for five years and my children have to get off at 121st off the school activity bus and walk down Walnut, and that's a fact." Selby: "If it's your concern for safety for your students, you ought to address the school board and I don't mean that facetiously, sir. I just mean that that's the jurisdiction of the school district needs to address." Murphy: "The problem is not only school, you know. I don't know if you're familiar with that that much, but the people who live in Bellwood... their children if they want to catch a Tri Met bus, they have to walk along to 121st. It's the only real way to get up that street is to walk down that street and there is no sidewalks. They think it's only just a school problem. The other thing that I wanted to ask the gentlemen here... I asked the question a little bit earlier if you were going to use 128th to build with and he said there would be streets interconnecting all that but I, if everythings going to go down 128th, most of the traffic goes there now, I think your figures...you had a counter right up 128th and right before it, right? If you subtract those two figures, you had one, that ought to tell you what turned down 128th even though the meter..." Selby: " Well, the traffic engineer...4now give me thosm figures because he thought they were invalid for that short length of timb. We ran those meters for one week and that's something that you need registration for to run at least Monday to rriday and then the weekend count. We ran it just PAGE THIRTEEN BELLWOOD IJ APPEAL Monday to Friday because we felt we wanted to consider the flow of a workday. In whatever information when the machine broke up, it scratched and destroyed all information that was on the tape." Murphy: "May I ask you a question? Do you feel that's an adequate analysis of the traffic on 128th?" Selby: "I give you no defense as to what the traffic there is on 128th because of the machines breakage and I cannot defend whatever 128th's volume is." Murphy: "I just get a feeling that you're going to start building on 128th because that's really the only place..." Selby: "Well, 128th needs to be considered as a traffic feeder system feeding developments onto the major arterials and that's the major streets, the major collectors are the ones that, the biggest considerations for what an impact of a subdivision gives a city as planners view it. Because we only have your inner traffic streets such as your subdivision streets and 128th is still considered that...there's only consideration to feed under those people who'd be living in the area, and how they turn out, left or right, on Walnut and 135th and how they travel through those areas are the biggest considerations. Not to say that we're not concerned about the inner traffic of the developments; however, it is unusual to find situations where innter traffic streets such as 128th that feeds in the subdivision would be overcapacitated because its only built there for the purpose of feeding subdivision developments, and its very unusual to my knowledge that we ever find such streets overcapacitated. Murphy: "Inaudible you have a counter on, for 128th, and you just stated those figures..." Selby: "No, excuse me, not on 120th. The only thing on 128th..." Murphy: "No, it wasn't working on 128th...1I understand that. But you had one...I drove by and looked at the counter...you had one right prior to 128th, between 121st and 128th. And yo'i had a counter right after 128th. That's what told you what went up towards 135th. My question...if you take those two counters and subtract them you will get the traffic that turn on 128th." Selby: "Well, if that be the case, then I would have some 2,300 cars. Murphy: "Turning on 128th?" Selby: "Well, if that be the case. I don't know if I agree with that kind of deduction." Harris: "What he said is that the difference between what you took at 121st and the difference went past 128th, should give you...What he said is what turned into 128th is what he was saying, and it couldn't be over about a 1000 cars a day." Murphy: "Well, there was a counter right after L21st on Walnut and there was a counter right after 124th, and there was a counter right after 128th. The difference between those two figures has to be what turns..," II PAGE FOURTEEN BELLWOOD I APPEAL Selby: "707 cars would be the calculation." Murphy: "And that was not a weekend, they just,.." Selby: "That's from Monday to Friday." Murphy: "Monday to Friday. And what I'm saying is now we're going to have all the building going up and all the trucks and everything..." Selby: "And if I may ask just for a test.,,." Harris: "Well, 707 is.." Selby: "I don't know if'that would be a fair calculation because I think that its suppose to be by ADT count and we cannot use any kind of calculations to describe that. I'm sorry the machine failed." Bartel: "Mrs Chairman, Ray Bartel. In regards to what the gentlemen said before he, at the prior meeting, he did ask whether or not construction trucks would be using 128th. He was told by, I believe, Mr. Harris, that construction trucks from Summerlake would not be using 128th. I believe that was the statement because you had figured out that basically..." Harris: "I have nothing to do with Summerlake. I said that logically it seemed like they wouldn't use 128th." Bartel: "Right, right." Murphy: "Will Summerlake be built ahead of this time? I'm lost..." Harris: "Who knows." Murphy: "Will then, if you build first,will you come in on 128th?" Harris: "To be perfectly honest with you, yes. There will be construction trucks running on 128th and I'd like to say that everybody that lives along Katherine St., that all the people that live out in front of that, the same thing happened to them. So all of you people that live on Katherine St. should go out and%hank everyone that lives south of you there because they had to suffer through your development." Tepedino: "What I'd like to do now is to, I want to make sure everybody's got an opportunity to be heard, but I'd ask that those who wish to speak try not to repeat testimony or questions, cross examinations already profered because we have a number of other items. And again, I'd like the people that want to speak on those items to have an adequate opportunity to be heard. So with that, Nancy, do you have some additional questions ?" Stimler: "Yes, I just have a question to ask. According to the paper, this is a zone change hearing...is that right? And then it says 'density review', Is that right ?" Tepedino: "That's right. It's a zone change..." Stimier: "What zones are we changing ?" Selby: "May I address that, please. At the time that the last hearing PAGE FIFTEEN BELLWOOD IL ,PPEAL was made in 1968, according to files that I've been able to indicate from, all this was resolved under the zone change with the subdivision and at that time the minutes stated that at the time that Phase III of Bellwood would be developed the issue of density would come about. And, so it is density, in fact, and only in that that we are considering tonight. We are not considering Z011e chdnge. However, that's just a title...Zone Change is a title. It's nilL the fact that zone change..." Bartel: "Ok. In regards to clarifying that the fact that this was published as a zone change is something that we initially responded to back in April saying why is it published as a zone change. And they said, the response was hhat it is not a zone change...that we have filed it that way because it is labeled that as an identification number. The ZC68 refers only to the identification number of the event that happened in '68... has nothing to do with announcing another zone change." Tepedino: Well, it, its the way that I understand it and the staff can correct me. That's the way essentially the way it brings to my mind... it was a zone change initially, with one item left to be resolved at a later date, and that was the density in Phase III. So now the appearing density in Phase III has to go under the title 'Zone Change" Selby: "That's correct." Stimler: "So, the density review is what we're doing and the original density was for 20 homes or 40 homes..." Bartel: "42." Stimler : "42 homes and how many Bartel: Stimler: m18. And we're now asking for...?" Bartel: 1140." Stimler : 'tend...?" Bartel: tt36.” Stimler: ttOk. I was wondering..." Bartel: 'tan I, heh, if you're going to do that can I continue the clarification?" 5-Limler: "Ns) I just waited to make sure that I understood... ft Bartel: "We're offering this, rather than demanding what we had before." Harris: "We'll take what we had before." Bartel: °We'l% take what we had before which was 42 and 18." Harris: "All they have to do is sign the plat. Everything has been submitted to the city) all the committments, the bonds) everything else is sitting there. All it takes is Mr. Tepedinots signature on the plat and we won't be back here again.' PAGE _SIXTEEN BELLWOOD I APPEAL Stimler: "I'm not arguing. I just wanted to make sure that I had the right numbers, which you were after because you've talked about 40, and 60 and all these different numbers. Ok. " Tepedino: "Are there any other questions or comments, cross examinations or rebuttals on the matter concerned?" Bill Renick: Some quick comments. What traffic counts you do have were taken during a vacation...drainago at that particular area over a year ago was considered as significant to affect Summerlake and the development of that later caused some plans at Summerlake to change so I don't think it's insignificant, but I'm not qualified to tell you how significanti it is. And I guess that I would like to see some recommendation that says the individual homes be sold rather than rented." Tepedinc: "Ok. Thank you, sir. Are there any other questions, comments, cross examinations, rebuttals? Yes, sir." Jack Gallagher: I live on 128th. Would the developer kindly tell me exactly where 128th and 121st is in that site plan. My eyes arenfb that good to see what you have up there." Bartel: "128th and 121st?" Gallagher: "Correct. And where are the signals on Walnut. .?" Bartol: "Walnut St. is right here, 128th down on the south, right through here, 121st is down here." Gallagher: "Where's Scholls? Is that on your side...?" Bartel: "No, no its way down Inaudible from there." Harris: "You see that road in the city map. You can't. You'd have to have binoculars..." Bartel: "Lxcuse me, over here..." New Voice: "I didn't see it over there..." New Voice: "This general area would be 128th...ft Gallagher: "Where's your developments?" Bartel: "The heavy line drawn around this area right in here is Phase and III of Bellwood. The area right in here is left vacant along this map* right now, is Phase III which we are proposing right now." Tepodino: ;"OK. Thank you, sir. Any other questions, comment,cross examinations or rebuttals, new matteL? Yes, sir." John Dlumer: "I'd just like to ask Mr. Bartel if he could identify the the person or group that's forcing his firm in the citizenery to accept ramifications of the agreement since 1968.11 Bartel: "it additionally started with the prior staff and i was we were sent to the Planning Commission in .mid April challenging our right... PAGE SEVENTEEN BELLWOOD APPEAL it went beyond the density review. It challenged our right to develop Phase III as planned. And the, as shown on the preliminary plat, the Planningf,Commission in April basically upheld the staff's decision." Blumer: "Would it be fair to say that your experience to date that either you or the involved citizenery that you heard from really cares a damn about that greenway ?" Bartel: "The citizenery that I heard from I would have to say that I agree with you. However, there are two significant property owners that are not here who may or may not agree with you....I don't know." Tepedino: " I would like to inject something there too. That's this gentleman's opinion who represents the developer. The greenway has been part and parcel of Tigard's plan for a number of years, and since the NPO people have been involved actively in the NPO..." Harris: "Mr. Tepedino, I take e, :ception to .that.. Inaudible." Tepedino: :Let me finish my statement. And you may take exception to that, that's your perogative, but the greenways been under discussion for quite some while. Take a look at the NPO plan. They may have changed some locations. There have been numerous opportunities,I think, for the citizenry to get involved with the NPO planning, or with the other groups that are involved with that kind of job,development here in Tigard. Also recognize that there's been an appreciable period of time for between the time of today and when these people first came forward. It's been 10 years...is that corrects-Pi Selby: "That's correct." Tepedino: "Ten years is a long time. I don't know how many people in the audience have lived in Tigard for 10 years but that's a long time... and things change in 10 years, So, I think when you have to let..." Ok. What we lawyers want to say that Inaudible there's always two sides to the story. Ok. I think that's enough being said on that. Would you like to...'?" Harris: "Yes, Mr. Chairman, in 1971 was when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in the city. Bellwood then has adopted to the plan. The Bellwood development states right in the plan...you haven't adopted one since. What do we live by7 We live by new rules that come up every night or do we live by whets published and whets adopted by the council ?" Bartel: "Mr. Chairman, I'd like also to say that since April I have asked staff to show us, show us the policy that mandates this greenway and no ones ever shown us that." Tepedino: "Any other comments or questions? Yes, sir." Bill McMonaglet I have one statement to make relevant to the comprehensive plan of 1971..is that when a planned development or its change of zone is made, if no other judicial action is made by the governing bodies that enact those legislative changes of land use...that, in fact, the Bellwood Plan is a plan that should have been adhered to by Summerlake and the additional plan that was approved...inappropriately, I might add, to the west of Bellwood. Consequently, what you're really asking Bellwood to do is to say "hen, 10 years have gone by. Ok.o fine, 10 years have PAGE EIGHTEEN BELLWOOD L APPEAL one by, planning concepts have changed. 0k. We don't disagree with that. And you're asking us to comprimise and we're not disagreeing with that. But, in the process of trying to agree with you, you're hasseling us, and that does tend to raise a person's hackles because what happened 10 years ago if it was set forth, and that's what it is, its almost like saying that your house being in the zone of some specific density 10 years ago, today is all of a sudden judged to be illegal...and really, that can't be the case. You have already spoken once or your predecessors have. Today, you have to live by it. Now, all we're sayingwOh yes, today you have to say...0k, fine. Reasonable people can come to reasonable agreements. Now, how do we go about doing that? We don't sit around and snipe at each other. We work together to try and accomplish a common end. And all I hear tonight, all I hear tonight is common sniping. I don't hear any common agreement. Let's get together and figure out how in the hell we're going to solve the preblem. Let's not sit around and snipe at each other about how much traffic is on Walnut. Walnuts been inadequate since the date it was built. It wil) be inadequate until this town gets together and decides to pass a levee to improve the danm thing." Quimby: "Bill, you're familiar with those new houses at Chamberlain Lake?" McMonagle: "Yah, I am." Quimby: "Now, how close do they sit to the road? What is the amount of space between the house and Walnut?" McMonagle: "You're speaking of Walnut Creek?" Quimby: "Right." McMonagle: "There's 20 "lot of minimum setback from the dedicated right- of-of-way line which is 30 feet so there'd be, thei-house would be 20 feet from the right-of-way line and would be 60 feet from center line of the road." Quimby: "60 feet from the center line...?" McMonagle: "That's correct." Quimby: "Because he was talking, staff was talking earlier about the improvement of Walnut, you know, so it could carry 14,000 cars, you know, and at that particular spot its carrying 3300 now, and I was$ whic my question was that I was trying to get set in rry mind whether Wala1L 4, ever could be widened to the point that it would accommodate this in; vars, knowing that you live down in that area, I felt that you were pr r,, better qualified to tell me what the setback was. I know when I go thfn, •y to Beaverton, I think that's a pretty stinky road through theru" McMonagle: "True. I doubt very strongly if Walnut will ever be designed to handle 14)000 cars a day. I think that's somebody's pipe dream. I don't think Walnut will ever do the job. I really don't. I think 121st in a north-south direction east-west through Tigard is primarily 1/3 inter- traffic between the city of Tigard) the shopping center downtown, and what nave you. The major traffic on Walnut between 121st and 135th filters pretty much evenly and will filter pretty much evenly pretty much half way, and its all going to go to Scholls Ferry, to Washington Square) areas like that...you're going down to Girards to shop or where ever you're going to go...grartted, its going to handle some automobiles. But when you start speaking about 14,000 tripe per day, everybody all of a sudden goes, "My PAGE NINETEEN. BELLWOOD I, APPEAL God, 14,OCJO automobiles." But it isn't happening within an hour." Quimby: "No, but I wanted..." McMonagle: "Look at the traffic counts on Pacific Highway." Quimby: "Yah, but :these houses that are placed so close to the road of course precludes the widening of Walnut to handle this type of traffic." McMonagle: "No, they don't preclude. They provide for it. Those houses that were built in the area that you're talking about were built with the understanding that, and provided for the dedication of the additional right -of -way to widen Walnut to its eventual right -of -way to where it could handle the kind of traffic that has been projected here this evening by the staff." Quimby: "They do, they do have the right -of- way ?" McMonagle: "Based on those calculations of what Walnut is suppose to handle in its overall system when you talk about 128th, and 121st and all of these other streets, you know, can you imagine what the Indians must have thought when everybody started moving to the west from the east, you know. Heh, you can't stick those through hers, you know. Now that's what the Indians said, and we got the big war about it...right. We're still in a war here tonight. All I'm simply saying is that, you know, it isn't going to be built in a day." Quimby: "All we're trying to do, Bill, is to get some good factual information on which to base our decision. I hear some argumental tones coming from some of your group, too, and we're trying to avoid this. We want to make our decision based upon fact and not on emotion." McMonagle: "I agree with that..." Quimby: "That's why I asked you, and thank you for your information." McMonagle: "Fine." Tepedino: "Ok. Are there any other questions on cross examination or rebuttal or new matter only`? May I have the recommendation of the staff, please." Selby: "Staff recommendation...the staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: 1) That the developer receive approval from the city engineering prior to construction, and especially in regard to the effect that the construction may effect existing grades approval; 2) An agreement and bond shall be executed and submitted to the city for approval prior to recording of the final plat; S) Construction and building plans shall be submitted to yhe city's building department for approval prior to any construction occuring; 4) A site drainage plan must be submitted and approved by the building department prior to issuance of a building permit; 6) That the common wall units be designed and landecapted as follows: Subject A: Provide individual housing entry cour,tways; Subject B: Provide individual front or backyard space; Subject C: Provide individual garage or vehicle cover and adequate visitors' parking space with proper traffics circulation; Subject D: Landscaping shall be designed and implanted in a manner to provide sound buffing between housing units, yet not restrictive to police PAGE TWENTY BELLWOOD IIL( 'PEAL surveillance; Subject E: Exterior physical building materials shall reflect the cohesive natural environmental atmosphere, roofing, siding, paint materials, etc.; Six: That the common wall units be condominium designed and that the developer agrees to promote individual ownership; Seven! Construction and building plans shall be submitted to the police and fire department jurisdictions for approval prior to any construction ; Eight: That the developer, and or homeowners' association of those units which are frontage to the greenway be responsible for the maintenance and vitality of the greenway; Nine: That the developer clean out the dead or dying vegetation and remove litter and unnatural matter from the greenway which is within their projects boundaries prior to the building department's approval for construction; Ten: That the greenway be dedicated as an easement fo the city and be maintained by the owner or home owners association; Eleven: That the developer execute an agreement or dedication to the city with the appropriate fire and police department to construct upon their approval, an easement for emergency access between developer's project in Morning Hill which would Inaudiblq. subdivision property with full improvements as directed; Twelve: Thaf—the developer will phase his construction and as approved by all the utilities companies prior to construction." Tepedino: "Does the proponent/applicant have any comments on the staff recommendations conditions?" Bartel: "We agree 100% with the staff recommendations." Tepedino: "Are here any comments or questions from the public on the staff recommendations conditions?" Joe Bailey: "Mr. Tepedino, I'm Joe Bailey, the City Attorney. I guess I'm not really public, but I'm afraid I might not get another chance. I'm concerned about Paragraph 6 because I don't think even if we had the right to pass an ordinance that woulo give us a tool to do that, and I question whether we do, we don't have such an ordinance now and we don't have any enforcement people or tools to enforce a limitation like number 6. Number 6 is the one that says, that obligates the developer to promute individual ownership. I think we exhausted our tools when we insist that he design the property so that the design encourages individual ownership and particullltrly so that its platted so that individual ownersi4p Inaudible." Tepedino: "Bill, do you have a problem since the deveinper Ing to it, just deleting the first part of that, Item No. 6, the de': 01 ,q0,rees to promote individual ownership...you've had, have you had sons difficulties with that?" Bailey: "No, that still,•.if you take off the second sentence, vhere's nothing, there's nothing wrong with No. 6. It's just the second sentence that I don't think we've got the tools to handle." Tepedino: "Ok. So you're saying strike the sentence beginning with... and that ending with individual ownership." Bailey: "Yes." Selby: "Mr. Chairman, may I ask a cluestion also?" Tepedino: "Ok. Just a moment so this...0k, staff can you yourself from that suggestion by city attorney?" PAGE TWENTY—ONE BELLWOO II APPEAL Selby: "I understand that 6 should read that the common wall units be condominium designed...and furthermore, Mr. Bailey, may I ask if we can put a stipulation there...that the condominiums/individual units will be platted so that they could be sold sometime d9 an individual basis?" Bailey: "Yes, that...you've expected that haven't you?" Bartel: "I'm assuming that that map marked up there as the preliminary plat is an exhibit and they are shown platted on the exhibit." Harris: "Could I make that very clear right now, Mr. Chairman, is that the way we exhibit that up there right now we would like when this is approved we would like that to be our preliminary plat so the replatting of that particular lot...you understand what I mean?" Tepedinol "No, run that by me again...I'm not sure what you're saying." Harris: "Ok. We have a plat in right now, alright? And, our plat, excuse me, our plat is going to be modified a bit in this area up in here because we're going to cut out some Inaudible and plant a greenway, right. Our problem is right now is that, as :you can well appreciate, we don't know exactly how these units are going to be placed. What we would like to do is go out and we'd like to revise this, but it looks like this with the road coming in through her and cutting these lots out, and by this greenway right through here. And go ahead and plat this lot as lot, I don't know...make it 7, and on the final plat the city, I don't know, lot No. 136 or something like that. And then what we'd like to do is to submit to you, this is the preliminary plat and before a building permit that is issued on any site in here, we have to come in with the final plat to the city that will designate exactly where every structure is going to be placed. But we can't do that at this time became we dontt have the design you know, and you know where this is going to go. We don't have much choice.f" Tepedino: "Ok. Then I take it, staff, that Item No. 6 will read t All common wall units will be condominium designed and individual platted. That's fine with the staff that the common wall units will be condominium designed and individually platted. Does the applicant concur?" MoMonagle: "Yah. Would you not use the word "platted" because under the Unit Ownership Law, the State of Oregon, platting is inappropriate. If you would that it would conform to the Unit Ownership Statutes of the State of Oregon, State of Oregon instead of platting it will be appropriate, because a condominium in not a plat." Tepedino: McMonagle: Tepedine: "You say again, Bill, unit ownership. qinit Ownership Statutes." ",Any problems with that, Joe?" it Bailey: "Out 1 didn't have any trouble with platted, either." Tepedino: "Ok. If there are no further comments, suggestions or questions... yes) sir." PAGE TWENTY—TWO BELLWOK II APPEAL Bill Raznick: "I don't understand the comment that was just made. You could, in fact, sell the, this is not the case in this development, but you could, in fact, sell the upstairs of the building as a unit individual ownership with no ground attached. Is that..." McMonagle: "That's the essence of condominium..." Raznick: "And 1, I thought 1 understood the development to be such that there will be identified a piece or ground that 18 owned by one part of the dwelling and a piece of ground that would be cwred by the other part of the dwelling and that's the way I would like to see it." Tepedino: "You're saying modify tho condominium aspect to something other than condominiums?" Harris: "Mr. Chairman, put it right back to plat. It won't be sold as condominiums, it will be sold as individual units like townhouses. If anything, there will be a common wall, there will be duplexes. If each unit is sold, they'll be sold as individual units. It will not be a condominium." Tepedino: "Individually platted." Harris: "Right." Selby: "Mr. Chairman..." Harris: Do you like that Mr._1112221112121_________?" Selby: "Is it not the understanding that there to be only one story and not two story units whatsoever." Bartel: "I'm assuming those exhibits that are bei6g submitted." Harris: "Yah, we expect that to be a preliminary plat." Tepedino t "Ok. I'm going to close this public hearing and riot accept any more public testimony and then we turn it over to the decision and commission members, Commissioners, we'll start with Mr. Smith." Smith: "I have quite a few questions." Tepedino: "Fire away." Smith: "Ok. First part of the questions to staff. You're overall Bellwood Subdivisions based on the underlining zoning, what is the total number of dwelling units we have in that area? As a PO which has to have its units derived by the underlining zone. Correct?" Selby: "It my understanding that with the present zoning as it is for that area, that there's 12 units per acre." Smith: "Do you have the total figure?" Solby: "That could be allowed for that acreage?" Tepedino: "Could you derive one within the next ten minutes?" Selby: "Yes) 1 can, thank you." PAGE TWENTY-THREE, BELLWC( III APPEAL Smith: "Ok. Generally speaking, I think I can appreciate what the developer is trying to do he.7e in changing the staff recommendation lifalEil2111. think that what I tike exception to is the tE dis of the density. I think thats primarily what we're talking about here. There's more peripheral issues, and I don't really care to address any of them. I'm sure that other members here probably will. As I have the numbers, you are in the process of getting lislatlaiL12), here in the city additional greenway area sod bike path. You are essentially requesting that the city permits you to build 18 additional units." Dartel: "16." Smith: "Ok. The question that I have to pose is whether or not that is a fair tradeoff in terms of your additional costs to providu that greenway verses the detrimental effects to the community of adding those additional units. And I kind of have to look at the dollars and cents situation. I have a pretty good idea what it costs to put in a bikepath. And I find it difficult to see that justify your 16 additional units." Bartel: "I want to clarify that you are submitting misnformation in your statements. We're giving up two lots that are valued at 020,000 a piece..." Smith: "I'm not, I'm counting total units, lots and your parking type units, and what*you're saying is that the difference is 14 units. But I don't count 14 units." Bartel: "No. All Ifim saying, all I'm saying is that we have two issues. One is to provide the greenway the city has asked us to these single family lots. The '68 zone change stipulated that we had a right to go back for a density increase." Smith: "I understand all that. The question bringing up is a trade- off. You people claim bhat you have the right essentially to build this subdivision as you initially intended in 1968. Ok. And now you're asking for an increased density. My assumption is that you're reciuesbing an increased density because your current costs to provide something additional that the city's asked for and 1 see that as a trade-off. The question I ask is your additional costs for the bikepath and whatever greenway improvements you make in terms of that verses 16 units, I see a really a big gap there." Bartel: "There's not. On that .pecific issue." Smith: "I would like, I would like to see a statement from you people as to your costs in terms of providing greenway improvements, those improvements which are not normally have taken place anyway beca"ee of the park developmert because when I look at this dupp,ex type apartments here which essentially are so close to the greenway that I find it hard to associate the greenway landscaping as being separate from the structure landscaping. So, I say the real difference, the real difference in cost between your constructing the greenway bikepath. Arid I'd like to see that figure if you care to he able to add 16 units. Erom my experience, I see a significant defference. I don't see it as a fair trade-off. Personally, I don't think thLt the people living in that neighborhood, I think they're getting shorted, based on 16 units or even on 14 units. I think we're looking at something two or three times a Pair trade-off." Martinson: "But Mr. Bartel has mentioned, and I'm not sure you can fully PAGE TWENTY-FOUR BELLWOr- III APPEAL appreciate this-that part of this common line is giving up 2 individual lots valued at $20,000 a piece." Bartel: "Ok. I'll say 14 units. We're still, in my opinion', we're talking about a ratio of 2 to 3 times." Martinson: "We're asking for..." Bartel: "We're asking for 2800 more. A quick calculation, lose the two lots and path, we're asking for, and based upon a dollar value calculation, we're asking for one addition-1 unit more trade-off." New Voice: About one sentence that is inaudible. Bartel: "The other issue is we have, we have come back since April and we have specifically answerud every specific issue asked by the Planning Commission in regards tell demonstrate how the project works with the terrain; how it works with the vegetation; how it functions with the traffic which some people are concerned about. I've answered all of those specific disagreement..." Smith: "I have no disagreement with the staff recommendations. I will go along with your peoples' agreement to adhere to the staff recommendations. The only thing I question is: you're asking for 14 or 16 more units in order for the neighborhood to have a greenway and I think that the neighborhood is going to go along with that and a very serious question in my mind is whether its a fair trade-off." Bartel: "I would not, I would not agree that that's what we're asking for. I would never agree that that's what we're asking for. In other words, you know, when we're talking here we did ask for specific things and to state them as that, takes Ell the facts that we have presented and twists them around. It means something else, and I wculd never agree with that." Smith: "Ok. Essentially then, the concept that you people are asking for a density review for increased number of units, you're saying that is, that that verses adding an additional greenway is not the issue, but something else is." Bartle: "Well, Mr. Smith. Smith: "I see that as the prime issue here, and that's what I'm addressing." Martinson: "I think the issue that is presently before the council is: Is the staff recommendation going to be approved which does request an increased density, yes. There is another latent issue, you might say, which is the final plat based upon the original plat which is pending, has not been approved or disapproved as I understand. But let me try bo fill in the figures for you just a little bit because you found the figures hard to believe. We understand thalots to be of value of 9200000 a piece. Will you, will you accept at that figure? You know, I'm not trying to pin you down to having accepted it, but let's say that that's what it is. The multi-family units, I understan d, can be developed at a profit to thu developer of some 113000 per multi-family unit. You take 3000 times 14, you come up with $42,000, i believe. You've already got an offset of Ti40,0000 add to that the cost of the bikepath and it PAGE TWENTY—FIVE BELLWOC III APPEAL comes very close." Smith: ilek. I'd ike to do just a, to get this moving here. I'd like to pass on to the next member. Why, I'd like to say this...that I personally would like to see your request for an additional units, significantly more of a compromise than what you're presently asking for. I do believe that you should have the right to some additional units for the cost of putting in the greenway and I would support you in that respect. I simply don't support the quantity units that you're asking for." Tepedino: ILLIDEj.,L2.) Commissioner Brien." Brien: "I guess first on the good side, I think I can appreciate that they're single level and the duplex are shared wall construction is called for in (Inaudible plans offered in first year housing. I think shared wall construction concept is a good one. However, I tend to agree with Commissioner Smith that there is a density. One question that popped into my mind, and you're saying you're giving up 2 lots at 32O,OOO a piece. I agree there, but at the same time by breaking it into shared wall construction for individual sale you're in fact, gaining 16 single family...." AT THIS POINT, CHANGE IN TAPE Bartel: "Ok. (Inaudible) response to the program here simply that our calculations to the value of these 16 lots is $3000 per lot. No, no, no... I don't mean, I don't mean the value of the property, I mean that what he can gain by building the home and selling it. He owns the property anyway so what its worth its worth." Brien: "Well, I think basically rather than cover the same ground that Commissioner Smith did, I agree with the need for further additional compromise, to perhaps instead of 16 additional... 10 (Inaudible.) Finances are the only issue and they should be looked at more openly. I mean things I don't see. I think providing the diversity of housing is here, I don't see the benefits to the community at this point at this density being reached. I don't see that the density is sufficiently, has sufficient rationale behind it, insist that we test community benefit." Tepedino: "Ok. Thank you Commissioner Brien. Commissioner Funk." Funk: "Well, being relatively new to this town, I really can't take exception to anything that Mr. Bartel has presented here tonight." repedino: "Ok. Thank you. Commissioner Speaker." Speaker: "We sat through two meetings and heard a number of very concerned citizens and it seems to me this may be kind of a summary. The traffic is a problem. Probably part of it is Walnut St., which has no sidewalks. I would certainly sympathize with the people there; however, I feel this; that what has happened is that Bellwood leapfrogged develooment nf infqrvening land. Had it moved smoothly on out from developed land there would have been sidewalks along Walnut St., but there isn't, so its something that they'll have to bus youngsters and take the transits down the street unless they can prevail on...who owns it, the county? Walnut? Maybe they could bring some pressures there. The drainage, I think is a problem, but I strongly suspect that staff has worked with the developer to put greenways in areas that might prove difficult to build on. Somobodi/ has mentioned wo heard both nights, about crime. PAGE TWENTY-SIX BELLWOOD'II APPEAL Presumably because of density, but it seems to me that that is, I won't say, not without, it certainly is a consideration. But, I think in our function as the Planning Commission it is irrelevant end that the consideration should be taken up with the city througl- the police department. I think probably the biggest thing is that the greenway trade-off may not be acceptable to the residents for the increased density. I am also new on the commission, but I think I would have to rely on the professional expertise of the staff that should we say made the trade-off. In otherwords, they know what good planning is, and that this is in their judgement what should be. Then one other thing was brought up that,and our attorney spoke to it also, is that people, residents apparently prefer owners rather than renters for neighbors. But again, our concern is the supply of housing to meet certain standards that we have to be guided by. I don't know, I'm .knclined to agree with the staff recommendation, but before a motion is made I hope that we can get an agreed reading on )this Item Number 6." Tepedino: "Thank you Commissioner Speaker. Commissioner Quimby." Quimby: "Ralph, I have fa couple of things that I'm concerned about. One I'll take exception to...the fact that they would only get a 0200 profit on each unit because when this property was purchased previous to 1968, property in the city of Tigard was very inexpensive. I know, I purchased some, too. I think that this is very much ah, preferable to the apartments. I like the idea of the one story, hopefully single owner, single owned common wall dwellings. I don't like the density trade-off either. But, that I thinks going, you know, two of the other commissioners have already spoken about. I understand, now correct me if I'm wrong... I understand each one of these duplexes will have its own sewer hookups. Right? It will not have just one sewer line running in serving both duplexes..." Bartel: "My understanding the last townhouse that was platted such as this that I gave you in the vicinity, that was correct." Quimby: "Because its my understanding by reading some state statutes that unless they do have separate sewer lines that they cannot be sold as individual units. I read this just recently in a 1000 Friends of Oregon paper. When they were talking about condominiums that this is something that I wanted to have clarified." Bartel: "It's my belief that townhouses must, platted such as these, must have that. I refer to condominiums (Inaudible) clarification. It's impossible to think that the condominium towers in dowk„own Portland have a separate sewer hookup." Quimby: "You changed the concept from condominium to townhouses," Bartel: "Right." Quimby: "men you do agree, Ray, that it would have separate hookups?" Bartel: ")'es, yes." McMonagle: "Mr, Chairman," Tepodino: "Ok, Mr. McMonagle," PAGE TWENTY-SEVEN BELLWO- III APPEAL MoMonagle: "I'd like to clarify only to the extent fr clarification that the statutes that you're quoting...I believe you're quoting inaccurately... Only to the extent that if there is no other provision for sewer main- tenance, from innerconnected units of common walls that each individual unit be connected separately. So, a number of units can be connected structurally but be connected commonly as long as there is in fact a convenant and restriction applying to the maintenance of that inner- connecting facility." Tepedino: "Joe, could you address yourself to that?" Bailey: "fah, we did that in Summerfield. I don't remember the exact statutes." Tepedino: "Commissioner Corliss." Corliss: "I share the concerns of most of the people in Bellwood on traffic. I don't think that we can penalize this developer though, because it's a city problem. It's not just this development's problem. I'm not going to be concerned about the Pact that there aren't any sidewalks for the children because if this many people would turn out and show this muchconcern, they're going to get one built very soon. And, I think that if we both get something up there that would help on Walnut Inaudible that would be, I think, what 116th. And I'm sure that will come very soon and I think that the city will probably work with them. So, the school situation I think also will take care of itself and the number of children. I have a couple of concerns. I'm especially concerned about Item, Recommendation 6 from staff and I'm concerned about recommendation 5. And this is the first time that we have got into the area of design review on Planning Commission and I'm wondering if this is an area '„hat we need to be bothered with right here. I would like to see condition 5 excluded entirely." Tepedino: "You'd like that refered over to Design Review?" Corliss: "Well, I think that it was just a natural place for it, but I don't think that we have a right to sit here and tell him what color to paint their houses." Tepedino: "Thank you, Commissioner Corliss. Any other comments? Commissioner Roseman." Roseman: "I'd rather not cat my vote at all. I think after nearly 2 hours of talk there's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other and I couldn't make my mind up. There's been too much conversation." Tepedino: "Ok, The only comment I would have is Item 2 in agreement... the rest of the staff is asking for an agreement. I don't know what, it doesn't say in the agreement too much...agreement in a bond... and I'm not sure what you mean...how much and for what, I guess those are the only..," Selby: "Excuse me for not being more clear on that. The agreement refers to the type of development that will gu on in place of the building permit and the bond is to secure the building permit approval. It's gone to the building department. I understand it is the director of building department that is the kind of language. I'll ask him to make it more direct next time, but it is something that he wishes to be PAGE TWENTY-EIGHT BELLK, III APPEAL describbd in the recommendation." Tepedino: "Ok. Hearing the testimony pro and con, cross examinations with which was had some the staff recommendation and the consideration by the commission, do I hear a motion by some commissioner." Speaker: "Well, Mr. Chairman, could we clarify that Provision Number 6... just what will the languags be. Apparently, there's some distinction between townhouses and condominiums that is not too clear yet." Tepedinci: "Staff, would you like to address yourself to that question?" Selby: "Yes, it is my understanding with the guidance of Mr. Bailey that the 6 should read: That the common wall units be condominium designed and that there will be a plotting of individual living units. That's clearly just what would come under discussion, not to indicate whether or not to be townhomes or condominiums, but rather that the plot be individually plotted and recorded therefore." Tepedino: "Commissioner Brien." Brien: "Mr. Chairman, wouldn't it be more clear to say common wall units shall be duplex in design and something. These are very Inaudible. Inaudible kind of clouds Inaudible. We're moving completely out of condominium category. I think we should not Inaudible." Topedino: "Joe, what's the significance of changing that word from condominium to duplex?" Bailey: "Well, a lot of you have an advantage on me because I wasn't here the last time, but I understood in talking with Ken, our staff, and then later in talking with the various people on both sides that one of the concerns was that the Planning Commission should do everything poesible to encourage the units be built, so as to be desirable for individual ownership. One family unit owning the unit it lives in as opposed to having properties be designed so as to encouragb the ownership of an entire duplex. And, I understood this language in 6 to be intended to convey that it would be designed so as to make that more likely. I have a lot of questions about how you do that but I don't knew very much about building designs. I would assume that if you were really going to set out to do that honestly what you would do is create as much division between the two units as possible while retaining single wall construction. The divisions having to do with landscaping, the symmetry of the building and so on and try to separate the entrances; but those aren't the issues that you can deal with very well. I think it's right to worry about how much the word condominium conveys, but do you think that flirly describes what people had in mind...when that word first came into the proposition?" Selby: "Ys and no. Yes, in that they mean that they want somebody who...that the unit would be built so that it would be conducive for individual ownership. Townhouses, at this point, describe such an early term no one has some comprehension as...H Oartel: "Duplex was the other word we were talking about." Selby: "Duplexes. Another way of stating it would be: Ark_ that common wall units be individually plotted which can be Inolvidually PAGE TWN Y -NINE BELLWKI III APPEAL --\ plotted and so like that, you could buy one or two more owners." Tepedino: "The question is raised Joe, is that we already have adopted recently an ordinance covering common walls." Bailey: "Yah, we do, permitting the sale of half of the duplex, making some what would otherwise be variances in our lotting program in order to permit those salea. This, as I understand it, it intended to go farther and actually requires as a design feature to property, that the design be such as to encourage it not merely Inaudible. But, I don't suppose you're confused about this, but I feel a little bit on a limb about what I said earlier about not being able to enforce the restriction on sales. The fact that you can permit those sales doesn't say anything about prohibiting them, and we just don't.. we don't have any enforcement." Tepedino: "Well, unless somebody has some other ideas, I propose that the vote stand the way it's marked up here on my sheet. Staff, you may havP some other markings on yours: That the common wall units be condominium designed and individually platted. Is that what you had? And, if not, let's try to resolve that now and move on." Speaker: "Mr. Chairman, I move adoption of the staff recommendation that the conditions as stated with the deletion in 6 of the second sentence." Tepedino: "Ok. And that would. .item 6 that would read how...?" Speaker: "Well, just the way you read it." Tepcdino: "Ok. That common wall units be condominium in design and individually platted. Commissioner Conies had some points on plotting. Is thLt part of you motion." Speaker: "No, no. I'm happy with S." Tepedino: "Ok. The motion made, do I hear a second?" Brien??:"I'll second iu." Smith: "Ok. Motion made and seconded. Discussions." Smith: "Mr. Chairman." Tepedino: "Yes.: Smith: "It may not be appropriate at this time, but I wonder if we could ask the applicant if he would be at all interested in proposing the compromise before this goes to vote in terms of the number of units." Tepedino: "I prefer not to open that to discussion and com;promise. I think we should let it stand or fall as its presented on it's merits. If is passes Inaudible. Ok. Motion made and seconded. Any further discussion on this? Ok. Hearing none, I call for ddestion: All tn as in favor of passage with the staff recommendations as modified by Commissioner Speaker in Item Number 6 signify by saying "Aye". Group: "Aye." PAGE THIRTY BELLWOOD III( PPEAL Tepedino: "Those opposed." Group: "Nay." Tepedino: "May I have a count, please." Mackenzie: "Bk. Rossman." Rossman: "No vote." Tepedino: "He abstains. " Mackenzie: "Cornea." Corl,ies: "No." Mackenzie: "Tepedino." Tepedino: "Aye." t" Mackenzie: "Quimby." Quimby: "No." Mackenzie; "Speaker." Speaker: "Yes." Mackenzie: "Funk." Funk: "Yes." Mackenzie: "Siren." Brien: "No." Mackenzie: • h." Smith: "No.'s Tepedino: "Can you call it out ?" Mackenzie: "It's a draw. How could that be? No, it can't be," Tepedino: "I believe the counts 4 to S with one abstention." Mackenzie: "Yah." Tepedino: "I think the counts 4 to 3 with one abstention." Mackenzie: "Yah," Tepedino: "Ok. It's denied 4 to 3, one abstention." Mackenzie: "Yah." Tepedino: "You have the right to appeal and to talk to the staff on those procedures." PAGE THIRTY -ONE BELLW00[ II APPEAL Bartel: "Mr. Chairman." Tepedino: "Yes, sir." Bartel: "The motion...' was a motion. .what happens to our plot ?" Tepedino: "Well, your request for the density review based on your proposal has been denied." Bartel: '''But that was never..." Tepedino: "Now, wait a minute..» Bartel: "I have the letter in my file from Mr. Ken Weber in response to a Letter by Mr. Martinson, and it says: In considering Inaudible final plat seueral significant changes in municipal policy, comprehensive planning, physical environment or review by the Planning Commission and therefore, the approval of your development is referred to the City of Tigard Planning Commission for September 5, 1978. That was by a letter from Mr. Ken Weber sent to Joe Bailey, Frank Tepedino, Hilary Madkenzie and Ken Selby is part of this agenda." Tepedino: "What's your point?" Bartels "My point is you haven't referred to that at all...you've referred to only the compromise solution. I submit this letter as the plat being ignored and we have documentation saying it would be considered. Tepedino: "Well, I take it that...I guess I'm confused...we considered your application..." Bartel: You considered... this was never our application. This was a compromise. There were two issues, always before the Planning Commission, and no one has addressed the other issue." Tepedino "You mean the applicant didn't present the other issue? I don't understand what your argument is." Martel: "Everytime, everytime we have addressed the other issue that response was given and that letter says that you will consider the other issue." Tepedino: "Well, I guess that will have to be put to our legal council." Bailey: "I don't understand any more than you do, rrank. You saying, you're saying now take u!--J whether the original 210 unit density proposal should be approved or not." Bartel. "What we're saying is we have submitted a hardboard for approval as I'm standing here to clarify. We have submitted a hardboard for approval under all due processes of city ordinances." Tepedino: "Don't give me the argument: Just tell me the facts." Bartel: ttOk. The fact is, we have submitted a hardboard for approval. Mr. , sent a letter to the city saying, ''Why Martinson asked a letter, hasn't our hardboard been approved... ?" PAGE THIRTY—TWO BELLWOO II APPEAL Bailey: "That's good. Are we talking about the 210 units..." Bartel: "Yes, and we received a letter back from Mr. Weber saying that it would be considered tonight." Bailey: "And, now, questioning what answer is "Is the 210 now approved by the Planning Commission." Bartel: "Right. Or the alternatives. Right, or the alternatives. We're after a deoision,is what we're after. The alternative has been denied. Mr. Blair saying that the other one would be considered." Bailey: "Well, I don't..." Speaker: "Mr. .Chairman..." Selby: "Mr. Chairman..." Tepedino: "Inaudible a little discussion here. We had a motion on the floor made and seconded for approval based on staff recommendations with a modification as stated by Commissioner Speaker and that was denied 4 to 3 with one abstention. I take it that's the action that was presented to the Planning Commission tonight and that's the decision of the Planning Commission." Tepedino: "Do we have a problem with that, Joe?" Bailey: "fah. I think he's...I went back through the '68 file which I understood what was on tonight's agenda to be a request for density review. Now, he provided us with a specific preliminary plat or drawing of some kind, but by the agenda of what's here is density Teview. When I talked to Mr. Martinson today and when I talked with Ken earlier, it was in my mind that the whole range of possibilities clear down to what he would he entitled to under the base zone action, clear up to what he had asked for...which was 230 was available to the Planning Commission to deal with, which you are dealing with the review of the density he Was asking for I appreciate that its really hard to get these things in any kind of formal posture where anybody knows whets going on, but I think...I think although proceeduraly we may never have got to the place where that was clear. I think legally that whole range is available to the Planning Commission at this time. I think you can, I think you could tell him tonight what density you would allow and he can then submit a specific drawing at a later time." Tepedino: "I see. But) I tell you what the Commission's done here if I understand the procedural aspects. Based on this submittal of 40 homes and 36 duplexes, that's being denied." Dailey: "That's turned down, ye h." Tepedino: "Now, I don't think the Planning Commission can come forward now and invent an alternative." Harris: "Mr. Chairman..." Dailey: "I think under this circumstance you can. This is really a maverick." PAGE THIRTY—THREE ©ELL.WC III APPEAL Harris: Mr. Chariman, could I...I was here when it was approved in 1968 and from the Planning Commission and I know how it was approved and I know why it was approved, and I know why the reason for the density was approved. One of the reasons was at that time one of the partners, which is no longer partner in this development, felt that as things developed around the that possibly a density review would be required. It was requested by the applicant...the density review...not by the city. 210 figure was set by the city. The third phase review was requested by the applicant. Now, all we're sayings is "fine, if you want to sit with the 210, fine, then leave it exactly the way it was and which.we have submitted a hardboard and all the bondn and everything so that it could be signed by the Chairman of the Planning Commission at any time and we could put it at record. If you don't want to do that...if y through there , if you ou want a yreenway ou want to go with the modified plan, we will compromise. That's all we're saying. We would just as soon do it the way it was originally approved. We feel that we were not taken into consideration when the other 'things were done around us. It was just ignored, that this was even in existence. This is all we're saying. Give us one or the other and this is the thi d meeting... fourth meeting...and all we're asking for is the decision...which way do you want? Do you want to compromise or don't you want to compromise ?" Tepedino: "Well, range of alternatives, ah then I take it what we can doproceedurallyis to...although his first application has proceedurally denied, then we might illicit from the Planning Commission members their alternatives. And, so this first application has been denied. Commissioner Smith, do you have a proposal for an alternative ?" Smith: "Yes, I would accept an alternative with some conditions the staff has presently requested, with the exception of the.. «instead of the...I'm presently counting 16 additional units. Stretching a little bit. I would go for 8." Tepedino: "Ok. Commissioner Smith recommends approval of the proposal with staff findings and recommendations as modified however by recommending...will you say that again so I can write it down. You're saying what..8 additional units in lieu of..." Smith: "That's 8, no, that's 8 additional units over and above the 210 of the original plat, of the original proposal." Tepedino: "This 210..." Smith: "I'm going to base it on that number, and not get involved in whether they're single family dwellings or duplexes or what. I really don't care which type of units they are(Inaudible. ) Tepedino: "8 additional units over the 210 originally approved...is that your statement ?" Smith: "Yes. Inaudible." Tepedino "With the staff findings and recommendations... ?" Smith: "Yesi that is..." Tepedino: "As modified by Commissioner Speake as to Number 6? Oki Commissioners. Commissioner Brien." PAGE THIRTY -FOUR BELLWO( III APPEAL Brien: "I find that Commissioner Smiths has expressed the kind of compromise that I think more closely approaches the density. It still Inaudible for duples type Inaudible which I think allows tt'a developer a fair return, yet reduces the traffic and density and approaches the community's acceptance." Tepedino: "Ok. Thank you. Commissioner Funk, do you have any comments to add ?" Funk: "Am I to understand that if we don't reach a compromise, these people have a program that's acceptable to the city or initiate.. Am I to understand that if we don't reach a compromise on this, that you have a plan that's ready and acceptable to the city ?" Bartel: "We...it's not acceptable to the city. It's ready." Funk: "Pardon me." Bartel: "This...this thing were going through now was generated because the first plan was not acceptable. No wait a minute." Harris: "The reason that we're here now is that our first plan was usurped by the developments around. The city did not take into consideration that, that this was already approved and so we submitted a final plat, and the city said, "No, wait a minute...you can't do that because it doesn't fit in with the other two developments." And we said, "hey, now :wait a minute. This has been here for 10 years." And they said, "no, no, that doesn't matter, how about compromise ?" So we said, "Ok. We'll make a compromise." This is the third meeting now still haven't reached a compromise. That's what we're saying..".so, we either go with the compromise or we go with the original plan...that's the way ',Is look at it." Funk: "Well, I guess what I'm asking. ..can you go forward with the original plan ?" Harris: "Yes. Hey, we've got the hardboard down there ready to sign," Bailey: "There's a question about that." Funk: "There's a ques ;ion ? " Bailey: "Inaudible. You bet." Funk: "So if we design based on this greenway, we might end up with something less?" Bailey: "You might end up with a law suit." Funk: "That's right, that's what I mean. So we're talking about 12 families...12 wire families...in that unit, is that correct? 12 units. From 218 to 250. Is that correct ?''I make a recommendation that we go with the 2210 units," Topedino: "Ok. So your position would be that..." Funk: "We should settle for the greenway that we've got." PAGE THIRTY -FIDE BELLWOO III APPEAL Tepedino: " Greenway, plus the 230 units...Now that's over 20 over the original 210, his original proposal." Funk: "I understand that's exactly whats been submitted here tonight. Am I correct ?" Bartel: "No, it's been, 228 has been submitted her tonight." Tepedino: "It's been 228, that's what I have. Right. Greenway plot 228. So you're going as its originally..." Funk: "There's 75 additional units. So we're talking about..." Tepedino: "228. Ok. Commissioner Speaker." Speaker: "I'm inclined to agree with Commissioner Funk. I feel that our concerns as a Planning Commission should not be with the profit that the developer can make out of something. Afterall, he is responding to the market and I think that's outside...it should be outside our scope. But rather, that our concern should be with good city planning and providing a range of housing that with the increase that t'he developer would like has presented to us tonight. I think it lends itself." Tepedino: "Thank you. Commissioner Quimby." Quimby: "I have a question to ask Joe. Joe, what you're saying is that we have to abide by a decision that was made 10 years ago. We hear developers come in all the time and 1 can see some sitting here tonight that will tell us that the climate of Tigard has changed, so therefore, things that were not allowed 10 years ago should be. What they're saying since we have to abide by a 10 year old decision...does this mean that once someone comes in and has a subdivision approved that he can go 10, 15, 20 years without doing anything? That we have to abide by or the ordinance that says that they must work on this within a given range of time." Bailey: "1 can't remember the language of that ordinance, Eleanor. I'm sorry. I think that this situation is different, and I haven't been back through the ofd records. But 1 think that by asking for density review that the developer back at that time got themselves into the position where we have a right to insist on density review as well as th_e developers insisting on...and that's why Bob or Bill and Jim rind I smile at each other when I said I thought that there was a question about that." Quimby: "Thank you, Joe. I'll go along with Doug and rom on lowor density." Tepedino: "Ok. Commissioner !"orliss." Corliss: "I'm in favor of the lower density, but 1 don't think that we have the right to sit here and bandy about numbers. 1 think we can go either or. I vote for lower numbering." Tepedino: "So, you're proposing then..." Corliss: "To go along..." Tepedino: "With Commissioner Smith..." Corliss: "No, no, no, no. .but the alternative should be 210." a::a.ery +e,.pi, PAGE THIRTY—SIX BELLO& II APPEAL Tepedino: "So you're Luggesting 210 as originally approved?" Corliss: "Well, it has to...my feeling is that it has to be one or the other." Tepedino: "210 originally approved or the other is what? I want to make sure I get it down right." Corliss: "228 other two numbers." Tepedino: "228." Corliss: "But he's, he's adding the greenway and I don't think inaudible." Tepedino: "Commissioner Speaker, ah, Rossman." Rossman: "I'll abstain from commenting(inaudible.") Tepedino: "Ok. Well, my feelings are that the staff, the city employs professionals to work with the developers and there's been a lot of work done on both sides. I make no comment as to the quality (Inaudible). It seems to be worked on both sides. There's certainly a lot of confusion. This is an unusual request, certainly, and you don't see this kind of thing and rather than...rather than me picking out an arbitrary number that I reel more comfortable with for some reason or another, I have to, I have to lean toward what the staff has been, is recommending, and their agreements with the developer. Now it may be true that we didn't get all, get all the city might have been able to get under different circumstances, but sometimes you cut a bad deal and that's the way it is. I don't know this is a bad deal or a good deal. I think it is a deal and it's an agreement between the developer and the city staff and I would be somewhat hesitant and trepidatious of getting in the middle of it now and making a decision from this standpoint, from this forum and changing numbers from 16 additional units to some other number. It may be good for the city to do that. On the otherhand, I'm not sure whether it is or not, and if it is, I'm not sure how much better. So, my own personal inclination is to go with the staff recommendation as modified on Item 6 and let it go at that. What I'd like to do is now ask for a vote. The first one was made, seconded and failed, and I'd like to ask some of the commission members perhaps if they would like to moke a motion and see if they could come up with some proposal." Funk: "Mr.Chairman, may I ask a question?" Tepedino : "Sure." Funk: "If you, if we make a proposal will it be acceptable to these people on this negotiated basis, or will they strive for their initial plot map that's lying there waiting to be officiated, and if it's not, then we'll have a legal process." » Martinson: "We're not in a position to be able to acuept it tonight. We're not the owners of the property. We have to go back to the owner to gain his authority, which we don't have." Funk: "What's the process after that...if they say they don't went it?" PAGE THIR fY- -SEVEN BELLWj ) III APPEAL Quimby: "They can appeal." Tepedino: "Well, they could sue, I guess." Bailey: "They'd have to appeal first." Speaker: "Appeal to whom ?" Quimby: "City Council." Tepedino: ''So, in essence, we're passing the buck then Bailey: "Ah, we always pass it." Tepedino: "Those who are clapping can leave their names up here and apply for our Planning Commission." Martinson: "What Mr. Bartel was requesting was a decisioni yes or no and as to the final plat which has been submitted since July which goes at the 110, now, if you want to approve a higher number that's fine, too. But, if you don't approve that higher number, we are asking for a decision on the original planned plat as submitted." ►► Tepedino: Harris: Tepedino: "That's the 210... " "Bartel, we need a decision. We need a decision." "Ok. Well, we can get a decision on the first thing. Ok." Oartel: "Well, we need a decision that can give us the opportunity to appeal. You haven't given us a decision that we can appeal. If you want to appeal, you know, go back to your original, try us on a compromise number. We have to go back to our client and discuss the situatiri." Smith: "Mr. Chairman." Tepedino: "Do I have a motion for ah..." Smith: "I would like to. make a motion that we request the applicant to come back to us with a compromise." Tepedino "Wait a minute, now.' McMonagie: "Why don't we do this like "Let's Make A peal." Tepedino: "Wait a minute, now. Ok. We have a motion to approve..." Smith: "The motion is: The applicant come back to us with a compromise density." Murphy ?? " Mr. Chairman, may I ask a..: ?►► Tepedino: "No, you can not. We have to address the motion. Ok. The motions made. We as the applicant to come back with a compromise plan, is that what is is ?" Smith: "Compromise density as planned." Teper;ino: "Ok. Motions made on the floor. Do I hear a second ?" [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] • PAGE THIRTY-EIGHT, BELLWJ III APPEAL Brien: "Second the motion." Tepedino: "Ok. Motions made and seconded and discussion. May I hear some discussion? Let me jump in the middle and add some discussion. I ''think if you send, and I can understand why Commissioner Smith would like to do that. The problem we're having is that we've got the ball on the other side of the court. I'm not sure that serves in the interest of the citizenery or the applicant or ourselves. What I would prefer to do is to give the applicant a firm position of the Planning Commission and then have you choose to do 'what you will with that decision. Whether he wants to appeal it or not, or whether he wants to agree with it or not or nay other remedies he may have in h ~.s mind. I prefer that kind of action. I think that would help also in my submission to clarify the issue. The issue is very complex here and somewhat muddled. And so, that's my, that's my suggestion and comments. The motions made and seconded...any other comments by the Commissioners?" Funk: "Would it be inappropriate to ask for a"10 minute recess, or would that be a closed hearing if 'e took ourselves aside ?" Smith: "Mr. Chairman, I would like to withdraw my motion in favor of one which would be more specific in its terms. At the moment) I wish n6t to make that a motion." Tepedino: "Ok. Second. It was seconded. What was the condition of the seconder ?" Brion: "I seconded it for discussion." Tepedino: "Ok. So you withdraw the second as well. Do I hear a motion on the floor ?" Brien: "Mr. Chairman, is there any staff comment as to the rationale of what the impact is between 210, 230, 218? It is getting a bit arbitrary point. It's, I do feel that obviously our vote indicated that 228 is more dense, I think, necessary or reasonable. And I always get very nervouse p±cking a figure out of a hat like 218. 210 app9ars, apparently, (Inaudible) contrary to city policy involving greenway. So, staff, do you have a comment?" Selby: "Thank you, I do have a comment. in reviewing what is density and numbers...you can't pick on a number per say unless you judge what its impact is going to be on the surrounding areas. So you review a said number that was brought in by the proposed development on such circumstances as it would lie on a piece of paper, giving the information... such as the location geographically. Whether or not its in a flood plain, whether or not its in a slope area. What is the drainage? You answer those and you find out if that particular kind of development, type of unit, number of units can fit in that geographical location. We have picked some arbitrary numbers as to codes for setbacks and zoning areas, twelve per an acre and situations like that and they've met those requirements, and they will meet them in and site design review as far as setbacks. Then you request traffic. And again, the staff felt that although any further car movement, vehicle movement on tht traffic is certainly going to be adding to the situation of a poor situation on Walnut, 135th and 125th. It is definitely going to be a bad situation and cannot really be related to just one development. Plus the developer, through some legal means, is going to get us back some complimentary funds through the r • ' 0 PAGE THIRTY-NINE BELLW0g III APPEAL systems development to help offset those impacts. We reviewed the school situation and again, that has to be addressed through a different agency in which they are addressing the situation. And all the situations, all the concerns,for instance like crime again. I've talked with the police staff and the police feel that its the kind of design and the kind of layout of common wall units or single family or apartments, whatever, as to proper lighting, proper visibility to the road circulation through your developments that can help curtail crime. So we've tried to meet these in the staff recommendation, and the staff would be hard put to defend whetheyr or not 210 should stay, 200 should be the unit number or 238 or 28. So we do not deal with just numbers between 1 and 8, 10 and 8 or whatever and we go more for just the overall impact and see what kind of criteria that has been 'developed." AT THIS POINT, TAPE WAS CHANGED. Smith: "Mr. Chairman, I think that this is a little bit out of order. think that we have addressed the issue here and that was a request for a density review. They have proposed a density which we have turned down. I think that at this point in time it is up to the applicant to decide what they want to do and that, I think that we have given our opinions and gone far beyond what le really appropriate at this meeting." Spea*er: "Mr. Chairman. Then does that mean that he can, in all good conscience, go to the city and say, "Look, it was 210, we'll go with that." Is that what we are approving? By rejecting the staff's recommendations?" Tepedino: "Well, if I.understand Mr. Bailey's statement, there is some question as to whether that can be done." Bailey: "I take the position that they can, but I haven't been through 1968 yet. I'm on this a little late to tell you that we'd win that law suit." Tepedino: "Commissioner Corliss," Corliss: "I move acceptance of applicant's 230, and, no 228 units with greenway based on staff's recommendations, modifying Number 6 to leave out the second sentence, and modifying Number 5 to include with approval of design review submission to design review." Tepedino: "Ok. Motions made for approval based on staff findings and commendations with the modification of Paragraph 6 as previously oed and also modifying Paragraph 5 submitting these Items to iew. Is that right" re discus design rev Corliss t "MmHm." Speakers "I'll second the t motion." Tepedino: "Motion made and seconds d. Do we have any discussion?" Quimby: "I would like to (Inaudible), Frank. Now is staff still making these design review decisions......4.;;.....or are they back where they belong with the Tatizen group that was really was intended to be." Tepedino: Selby: "It's my understanding that the Planning Commission can so d that the design review be with the Design eview Board rather than irect • PAGE FORTY BELLWOOD UV •PEAL just with the in house design review. utherwise, it would be just in house, so if you show desire, so desire this plat thuH with your recommendation would then go to the Design Review Board." Quimby: "I'd like to make a recommendatiOn that it go to the Design Review Board and not the staff." Tepedino: "Ok. Maker of the motion? Was that your intent?" Corliss: "Fine, great." Tepedino: "Ok. So the motions made..." Brien: "Ir. Chairman, I have a..." Tepedino: "Let me see if I can try and get the motion through. The motions made for approval based on staff findings and recommendations with the modification of Paragraph 6, modification of Paragraph 5, that the design and landscape Items be submitted for approval to the Design Review Board, and Mr. Speaker will you secJnd that?" Speaker: "I second that." Tepedino: "Ok. Motion made and seconded. Discussion. Commissioner Brien.° Brian: "I don't want to get into the gamesmanship but I understand that Mrs. Corliss voted in favor of the previous motion which failed, and I don't believe this motion is substantially different than the previous if you want to raise that." Quimby: "Joan voted against it the first time around." Brien: "Did you vote against it?" Joan: "Yes, I Quimby: "Yes, she did." Tepedino: "Ok. Well, any other discussions? Any other discussion? Hearing none, I call for the question. All those in favor of the application as it stands with the staff recommendations and the modifications as proposed, signify by saying "Aye." Group: "Aye." Topedino: "All those opposed." Group: Tepedino: "May I have a count, please, Rossmal: "Abstain. One no and one abstain." Mackenzie: "Corliss." Corliss: "Yes." Mackenzie: "Tepedino." PAGE FORTY :,ONE, BELL WOO[, II APPEAL Tepedino: "Yes." Mackenzie: "Quimby." Quimby: "Abstain." Mackenzie: "Speaker." Speaker: "Yes...yes." Mackenzie: "Brien." Brien: "N Mackenzie: "Smith." Smith: "No." Mackenzie: "Ok. Two no's and..." Tepedino: "Two abstains." Mackenzie: "Four ayes and two abstuntions." Tepedino: "Four yeses, two no's and two abstentions. It passed. Brien: "That's right...majority of those voted..." Tepedino: "It passed. Ok. " Brion: "No it...have the majority of those voted...members present... Inaudible city ordinances ?" Tepedino: "Joe, give me a reading on that, will you." Bailey: "Well, the ordinance we've got only applies to the city council. It has to ah...the majority has too.." Tepedino: "The majority vote..." Bailey: "Yes, T think its, I think its present and voted, ah, on the City Council, which the ordinance is directed to, its present and voting and so abstentions get us in a jam there. I think they have a different effect." Quimby: "I, may I, may I change my vote? I'm just as tired of arguing with Ray and Bill as they are arguing with us. I don't feel that we have any great compromise. But I' l.l_, I'll change my vote. And ah, I'll go yes, just because I don't think...and the only reason I'm doing this... I want this clear...is I don't think its fair to ask them to come back again. I think we've asked them to come back enough times. We've spent enough of their time, we've spent enough or ouA:. time. We have a lot of city business to attend to and as long as we're talking about Bellwood at every meetiNg, we're not going to get on to the rest of these people that we have to make decisions for. And for that reason, and that reason only, I'll uhange my vote to a yes." Mackenzie: "Ok. So it would be,..." PAGE FOIWT—TWO BELLWOOD r, T. APPEAL Tepedino: "May I have a rollcall of the votes again, please." Mackenzie: "Ok. Rosam8n, abstention. Corliss, aye. Tepedino, aye. Quimby, aye. Speaker, aye. Funk, aye. Brien, nay. Smith, nay." Tepedino: "Ok. If we add it up to me that sounds like what, 6..." Mackenzie: "Urn..," Tepedino: "6 yeses." Mackenzie: "Mm, hm. 5 yeses, 2 no's and one abstention." Tepedino: "Ok. Motion carries. .I d like to call for a 5 minute recess. Ok. Five minute recess (Inaudible)," nom -April ,25, 1973 Raymond J. &rtei 10952 8: r 21st,"v ttooff 3 :Lil aukie r Oregon 97222 RE: Bellwood X3eview Dear M r. Bartel: Please be advised that. the Tigard Planning Comm ssion at their regular moeting of April 18, 1978, reviewed your Tensity proposal for Phase III of the Bellwood Residential Planned Development at 120th and Walnut Street and subject that review to the following condition 1. The applicant prepare, a justification for a specific (:density, based upon a more thorough consideration of existing natural features, adopted city policies and with attention to the issue of compati.W ity between single family and multi-family residential uses This proposal to be reviewed by the planning Commission Sincerely, 'a hn Laws Associate Planner `.s /.1b NOTE: The following ar'z ow1edgment must be received by the City of Tigard within fourteen (14) days of your receipt of this letter. railure to return this acknowledgment may result in action by the City of tw tain carbon copy 2o ' your Tilos and return thef ri d. 1i , reby mcknowled a thiA 1 :t •? t; r df r ; r. entit g the action of k. h . 'Pittard Plani in% ! on :in:18 � `± s A . I have :ry'ecd iv'e and reaf: letter. Date MEMO To: PLANNING COMMISSION From: NANCY EDWARDS, COMMUNITY DESIGN PLANNER Re: ZC 11-68 Reason for Planning Commission Review: Arplication has been made to design review for the apartment units in Phase III of Bellwood PD. According to the ordinance adopting the PD, "Phase III of the development will be open for review as to density prior to improvement of the area." Status of Planned Development:Bellwood.PD was approved in September 168 The first two phases have already been constructed. 18.56.170 Construction time period-Extension If substantial construction or development has not taken place within one year from the date of approval of the general development plan and program, the planning commission shall review the district at a public hearing to determine whether or not its continuation in whole or in part is in the public interest, and if found not to be, shall recommend to the city council that the planned develop- ment district on the property be removed. The city council, at the request of the applicant, may grant an extension of time if justifiable. Since construction has taken place, the PD approval is active. . Documentation that*exists on the approved density Ls as follows: in the minutes of the meeting, a representative for the applicants states that there was a total of 210 units (see minutes). The approved preliminary plat specifies 155 single family lots and two apartment areas with no density specified. Existing Density: Phase 1 and 2 consist of 107 single family, 6 duplexes (12 units) and 33 apartment units for a total of 152 units. Projected Density: Phase 3 projects 42 single family units and 52 multi-family units for a total of 94 units. If this number is approved, the total number of units for the PD would be 256. Items to consider in determining density: a) Planning concepts have changed since the original approval. the apartments will be an island of multi-family surrounded by single family.Unless access is provided through the Wedgewood development all traffic will funnel onto one local street. b) Topography: As can be discerned by the attached map, the majority of the single family lots and the apartments will be located where there are grade problems and where they will impact a natural drainagewati. There is no evidence that topo- graphy was properly considcrod during the initial approval. If constructed as shown, it would be in conflict with two policies from the 'Tnvironmental Design and Open Space Plan" Policy 3; "The city vdhall restrict alteration of natural drainageways unless it can be demonstrated that the benefits are greater than thd detrimental effects, Other jurisdictions MEMO Re: • 11-68 Page 2 i in the Fanno Creek basin shall be encouraged to do the same." Policy 7; Retain the 100 year flood plain of Fanno Creek, its .tributaries and the Tualatin River as an open preserve (greenway) . The Greenway shall be established as the backbone of the open space network and when a direct public benefit can be derived, i . e + , when adjacent resi- dential development, the greenway should be developed for passive•recreation and pedestrian /bike travel. c) Phase III would also be detrimental to the greenway system as approved for the Summerlake PD and as projected for the Wedgewood development. d) The drainage way contains several large specimen fir trees as well as. other natural vegetation. Since the surrounding land was used for farm cultivation, these trees represent the only significant vegetation in the area. The extensive grading that would be necessary for phase III could be detrimental to their survival. e) It is staffs conclusion that the approved density for the PD was 210 units. The applicant is proposing 256 units. Before any density number is established, the carrying capacity of site should be studied thoroughly. Staff Recommendations: Staff therefore concludes that the condition to review density was attached because the applicant and city realized that future con- ditions (eg. development plans for adjacent property) could impact the approved density. The attachment of this condition was apparently intended to provide for future flexibility when development of phase III commences, Staff therefore recommends that: The applicant prepare a justification for a specific density, based upon a more thorough consideration of existing natural features, adopted city policies and with attention to the issue of compatibility between single family and multi- family residential uses. This proposal to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. City of Tigard Tiard City Hall TiEard, Oregon RAYMOND BARTEL A I A Re: Bellwood Planned Development Gentlemen: ARCHITECT AND PLANNER 1120 S.E, 21st, MILWAUKIE, OREGON 97222 (503) 659-3988 April 11, 1978 1%, "40 6) uoivo At your request, we are submitting the apartment plans for Phase III to you for Planning Commission review. We wish to stress the following points at this time. 1. There is no oues'bion of land use tn this matter. 2. The proposed design respects the qualities of the site and the proposed single family homes to surround the project. It is our understandin'i that Oregon State statute and municipal ordinances imply that he approval of a preliminary platt carries with it a binding responsibility to approve the final piatt with desip;nated land useedescriptions. In this situation, the land. use and platt that was approved in 1968 was of a higher land use density than we are now proposing. The submitted plan responds to the site and to the character of the area. All units are one story; with building offsets Giving units an individual character. The majority of buildings and drives are placed at a diagonal to the grade;., to ease grade pro- blems. Two unit prototypes are submitted which respond individ- ually to the two grate siting situations. Subc,rade parking is used in some ay:6,as to allow a reduction of bui1din and asphalt coveruf;e. In summary, ie feel our proposed plan is the best use of this site c,,ne resnds to the site in the best possible manner, „inturely, ) 1,..LiwoAd U. Bartel tJ bb ec: j. W. Bradson 4111111/1111•1111MIR February 8, 1973 Montgomery Contractors 2216 Sal. 50th Avenue Portland, Oregon 9721 Re: Bellwood Terrace Apts. Ga. Karen St. Dear Mr. Montgomery: This letter is in response to your request for an occupancy permit for Building "EM of the 13el1vocx1 Apartments. After reviewing the approved site plan, our letter dated December 44, 1972, stra your letter rlated November 15, 1972, it is apparent that there is a lacL of understanding concerning the standards of the Tigard Zoning Ordinance. Specifically., the Zoning Ordinance requires site development (paving, curbing, striping, landscaping, fcncing, etc.) to be completed prior to occupancy of apartment, commercial or industrial buildings. All of the above items have been started.,;but none completed. Your on letter of November 15, 1972 has not bean followed. To this date, occupancy has bean allowed vithin all buildings except °IP because of the progress made. However, rigid adherence to Zoning Ordinance standards could have held up occupancy on all of the buildings. In other words, we feel we have been more than generous up to this point in allowing occupancies based on your intent to meet zoning requirements. Another very important concern is that the original approval of the apartment use for your p;:operty vas granted under the conditional use provisions of the Zoning Cirdinance.amand, the subsequent approval, by the Planning Commission of your site • • • • • Montgomery Contractors February 8, 1973 Page 2 development Igen was part of a larger planned residenti Community. tit The following items must be completed prior to occupancy of Building "D: • 9.91212Ilon of flasis along the east property line and at entrance. The east property line can be provided with a dense evergreen screen instead of a fence..due to slope problems. You might also remember that you agreed that a fence along the south property line (adjoining the City park) *would. :*„i important for privacy. Also, you felt that an extension of your oide. walk to a gate, and then into the park, would be a tremendous value to the apartment complex• 2220.2Iion oUstvalia in accordance with the approved site plan. It is °till understood that lawn will be installed this spring. Nothing ham been done within the planter islands in the parking lots for example. 3. galipet dittaaa in parking lots and driveways. Both are close to completion. Lottm4=9,2111 to toper into driveway apron. Ga'ba.i container enclosures. The two containers to be located near each parXing lot 8boul4 be fenced in. 6. (aslitiall along sidewalks. Itm tot sure if lighting was considered in the site plan, but you should consider NOW form of ground level light posts) • • • r • • Montgomery. Contractors February 8, 3.973 Page 3, Xtems (5) an4 (6) vill not hold up /Wilding vote occupancy) but eve just °reminders". Please feel free to contact me if you have any quostions concerning the matter. 3incerely$ Asy Panela City Pl,armer ha. ... JQcoeber 4, 172 Wintoomery Conixactor6 2216 00E. 50th Avenue lortland) Ore)n 97215 Re: Bellwood Terrace Apt. 6 4 4 axon :ito Dear 3im: A °Ito Inopeetion and rovlow or your letter dated Novcmber 150 "1)72 revealed 2everal deilicioneia; In Ate dovelopoent. Occuoney varl allowed in Building "\" on the beio o± your letter—which indicated that gencIng, tree 1lantiu40 planter icllando0 driveway on and pc.rkin6 lot Aring vouid be conpleted Iv December 1) 1972. To this datep only the ctriping and apron have been completed. The following items must be =plate rtor to requeoto tor any further final intipeotione and occupancy. permitrit 10 Fencing tround per%ing lot ena Buildityyl "A" anti "B" (lone property line) 2. Inotallation of tree and brub planting in accord with the aoroved oite plan (include° planter lialandEs) 34 Driveway ovorlay (to taper into driveway apron) 4. Inotallation of mailb us 5, FanOing around pool )0, Completion of patio fencinao Gtairway :railings) took islaws uplift' sinks (before occupancy of each building) • • • Montgor-xy Contractors December 4) 1972 Page 2 X3L addition) the Beaverton, Piro District aaa not approved the apartment buildings and ec/storage building for occupancyo Their approval will be necessary before any further occupancy requests. Xt is understood that lawn installation will not be completed until Ole spring. /our efforts to complete the above deticiencies will be greatly appreciated. Please teal free to contact this office if you have any quotions concerning the matter. Sincerely) Robert P. Hill Building Official Mitts CONSTRUCTION AND RENTALS MONTGOMERY CONTRACTING G CO. 2216 S. E. 50th AVENUE PORTLAND, OREGON 97215 November 15, 1972 City of Tigard P. 0. Box 23557 Tigard, Oregon 97223 YOfr EPION E i -5153 Attn: Bob Hill, Building Dept. Re: Apt "A" 12650 S. W. Karen Dear Sir; We will complete the following items within fifteen (15) days, and would like to have permission to rent the units in Apt. "A" before completion of these items: Fencing Stripe Parking Lot Planter Island Tree Planting Driveway Apron Plant Lawn Area by Spring Planting Time Very Truly Yours, MONTGOMERY CONTRACTING CO. GHFjw George H. Fisher Superi ntendant J. W. Brayson Builder, Inc. 7603 S.E. Powell Blvd. Portland, Oregon 97206 Dear Mr. Brayson: This letter is to inform ou wer service is aVailable to all lots within the 'vision through Loran Heights Interceptor, Tp The sewer hook-up fe, per lot uld be $400 to the Oit: Tigard and $150 to L n Heigh Interceptor, Inc. Please fool 00 t4111.- s office if you have any further Aions concerning the matter. April 79 1971 Re: AvailabilttKof sewer ice in Be. ood vision Sincerely, Ray Rangila City Planner RR:fs Ausust 2 r4 Jama:10,11i1 t C;505 (4 Qo zij1 Otrcot TIcard, procon 9 Dear Thio le to offlially notity,,you that your rcquont to oovv.itruct 4 geet oldowalko tkl',tho Bollwood Plannod - OubdivIolon wan allppo*od by the Plvl!ic and Zoninc Coton O# Aunt po:lo 1969. you hay() cluedtlons pettal,n1rc to 41.0 rfl(tt( nicame fool free to °all* r,,,Itnocrely# W1111 Wied City Planner August 20* 1969 Mro aames Am Harris Consulting amine :,, 8901 S.W. Commercial Street Tigard* Or .. tort 97223 Bear Jim* Thank you for your letter regarding. your Ilion " desire e 1 o change a tae sidowatk widths in the Bellwood Sub isLQn from 5 feet to 4 feet WU have nevi the subject of amending nditi 1 uses with + ; t... Attorney r Anderson. I s opinion' at the 1��oco ss involve depends upon th t of the proposed a aIte nto Specifically* the sal Changing the widths oe a sideWalk aPproved by a pr oue p ee residential condi t onai use ia, in our opinion* . i ed a minor Change. We are therefore going to ask the V1 and Zoning C ou ni sign to consider the subject by . ; A ., w n1 to meeting Wednesday eve r nLng, August 20th* I ' e ?la n ., 4 , Zoning Commission concurs* we Sri 11 forwtard a wri n rem ration to that effect to the City Council for its • eiderati by ,a motion can Monday eveninrj• August 25th. Xt might be to answer t a fo s W Q attend both e(stings* if passible„ ions should they arise. We have re c ‘.141y been .. ked by " *'aye Chamberlain whether or not he eeould proc immadi ly with the oonot uction of a me er line to serve his elopment around his home* Ai you will recall from your prow U 4ork, the line serving vin that area must t b sized sufficiently to handle flat's from the drainage asin mouth of Walnut Street up into bull MOuntain. Originally* you had planers on a 10" Newer line. Jo. as usual, is in a, big hurry and doe* not feel he Wants to be burdenec$ i :h the extra cost of a 10" line. Re ther e fare has come up with a edheme that sounds like it might have some merit* A would like to build an 0 '° 1in a p the one side of the lake neap eat his home and* at a later date* build a so coed 8" line serving James 11. Harris ote 8/20/69 Page 2 the easterly shore of the lake. These two lines would ultimately connect somewhere south of the lake* presumably also south of Welnut Street. Obviously* at the north end o the lake* these two 8° lines would also have to connect into a 10- or 12.-inh in prior to emptying into the existing trunk across Vtterson's property. In any event* 14 Joe is desirous of proceeding with this project' we will have to have complete engineering plans tor' both lines. These will have to be submitted to the Onvironmental Quality Control Commission before the construction starts. Please let me know if Joe contacts you regarding this proposal. $incerel yours* hen smaVb oo: with C. Thompson City Ungineir Maly ;tied V City Planner alloor■■• JAMES R. HARRIS Consulting Engineer 8905 S.W. Commercial Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 Telephone: (503) 639.7705 August 13, 1969 Mr. Steven Teller City Administrator P. O. Box 23557 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Steve: RECEIVED AUG 1 1969 CITY OF TIGARD Under the present Tigard subdivision code the required sidewalk width 0 in Bellwood subdivision is 5 feet. • 4 A 5 foot wide sidewalk and a 34 foot wide street with 6 inch thick eurbe leaves a 2 foot wide platting strip between the curb and sidewalk. The narrow 2 foot strip makes it very difficult for utility installation behind the curb and also for platting of the required trees along the streets. On behalf of my client, J. W. Brayson, I request that the City consider reducing the required width of sidewalk in Bellwood to 4 feet. This would create a 3i foot wide planting strip which would benefit both the tree planting and utility installation. cry truly urs„ James R. Barris Milo° CXTY OF TIGARD PUBLIC NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the City Council will consider the following at Fowler Junior High rtchool Lecture Room, 10865 SW Walnut, Tigard, Oregon, on October 9, 1978 at 8:00 P.M.: APPEAL APPEAL - ZONE CHANGE ZC 11-68 (Bellwood Park Subdivision) NPO #7 An appeal by City'Council of the Planning Commission approval of a request by Raymond J. Bartel tor density review of Phase III of the Bellwood Residential Planned Development at S.W. 128th & North of Walnut (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 4AA, part of Tax Lot 100), which decision has been appealed to the City Council. Testimony will be limited to summation of previous statements. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVISION - Annexation Plan-Amendment to the Tigard Community Plan in the form of an Annexation Plan. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVISION - Economy Plan- Amendment to the Tigard Community Plan in the form of an Economy Plan. All Ilterested persons may appear and be heard regarding said proposals. TT Publish 9/27, 10/4/78 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL ;1CCLCCI,C4 v Loreen R. Wilson City Recorder pro-tem • 't Gaifin and Lrayzolt P.O. Box 23587 iccird, Oregon, 9722 Soptombor 27, i963 Ro: llenoning Ordiannoo Zo. 68.87 Goalem nt This i to oordirm rcooipt cg Ordftulnoo 68.•67 si6nod by 0,14 criffiu Qua 4 • Drgyncti u000ptinc oonditions cct Xo7o1h in the or(J.nv,aoo ith ro:5ptct to r.c6nin.A-, yarr prtporty0 If I my ho-: o.,7? Alritt,r notJintnlov, on VArl wyttov plom oo. fool troo 10 cor,l, on mn. ;4174uwool,' lartic City Reoorder I jj Griffin and Brayson P. O. Box 23$07 Tigard, Or,gon 97223 Gentlemen: September 160 1968 Re: Rezoning Ordinance 68-67 The Tigard City Council at their regular meeting September 90 1968 panned Ordinance 60-67 rezoning the therein described property, subject to conditions and requirements of the developer. You discussed with Council the conditions and requir m n and stated they wore acceptable. X am therefore enclosing a copy of the Ordinance and request it be signed and returned to the City. if you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to call on me. Lance Doris Hartig City Recorder To Pr 4� Septembt 6, 1968 Tigard City Council om: Tigard Planning and Zoning Commission ubject: A request for a change from S -R (Washington County Suburban Residential) to R -7 (Planned Residential) on a 50 acre property in the vicinity of SW Walnut and 130th by Brayson and Griffin, applicant owners. Planning and Zoning Commission Action: The Commission unanimously approved the conditional use for Planned Residential the following conditions: that the preliminary plat dated August, 1968, be accepted with the exception that the lots shown as 28 through 34 be developed as garden apartments instead of the area labeled lot 21. zone change with the Development with 1. 2. that the public access to the park be guaranteed to the City on the existing road easterly along the subdivision to S.W. Walnut Street until such time that this road is improved. At this time public access shall be made by the developer, meeting the approval of the City Staff, 3. that the park land be donated to the City as shown on the preliminary plat, but also including lot 21. 4. that the park land be cleared of brush by the de- velopers and the area in the vicinity of lot 21 be leveled during development of the surrounding lots and graded as shown in the attached City plan for improvement by the developer dated August 15, 1968, 5. that improvements be made to the park as shown in the City +s plans dated August 15, 1968. Playground equipment meeting city approval to be installed by the developer and his cost not to exceed $1,500., 6, that the public walkways be lighted with low wattage lamps and paved 6 feet in width with concrete and planted 2 feet on each side with low- growing shrub- bery--plans for both to be approved by the City Staff, 7. that the major arterials in the development (128th and 127th) be planted with trees (one per lot, 11/2" caliper, Cleveland Norway Maple or equivalent) along the entire length within the development. 8. that the street right --.of -way be improved to City standards as designated in the stab- division ordinance including asphalt, curbs, sidewalks, street lights, and underground utilities, with exception that the cul -de -sac street width may be 28 feet. 9. that Phase xll of the development will be open for review as to density prior to improvement of the area Emily Wied Planner CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ZONE CHANGES & CONDITIONAL USE Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council in the Council Chambers at City Hall in Tigard, Oregon on September 9, 1968, at 8 o'clock p.m. with respect to the following applications for zone changes and conditional use: 1. Applicant is Q. B. Griffin and James W. Brayson, 13015 S. W. Pacific Highway, Map 2S1 4A, Tax Lot 100 Present Zone Washington County S -R; Requested Zone R-7 with proposed Planned Residential and Conditional Use 2. Applicant ,is Richard O. Fimmel, 14600 S. W. Hdffarber, Map 2S1 12B, Tax Lot 1700, Present Zone R-7 (Residential) Requested Zone C-4 (Commercial 3. Applicant is Robert C. Moore, 12575 SW Grant, Map 2S1 2BB, Tax Lot 1900; Present Zone 11.7 (Residential) Requested Zone A-2 (Multiple- Family Residential) All interested persans may appbar and„ be heard in favor of or against the said proposals. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL ' Puhlish TT August 29, September 5, 1968 August 26, i968 Mt. Qat, Griffon P.O. Box 25570 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mt. Griffon: a zone change-conditional lase from Washington County This is to officially notify you that your request for S-R to R-74lanned Residential, was approved by tlitc' Planning 84 Zoning Commission on August 20, 1968, with the following cionditionst rl Li) 1) 2hat the preliminary plat dated August, 1968 be accepted with the exception that the lots shown as 2E through 34 be developed an garden apartments instead of the area labeled lot 21. 2) That public access to the park be guaranteed to the City on the eaisting road easterly along the sub-division to S.W. Walnut Street until such time that this road is improved* At this t%me public access shall he made by the developor, mooting the approval of the City Staff. 3) That the park land be donated Lo the city as olhown Oh the preliminary plat, but also including Jot 21. 4) That the park land be cleared of brush by the developers and the area in the vicinity of lot 21 be leveled during development of the surrounding lots and graded as shown in the attached City plan's for improvement by the developer dated August 15, 1968. 5) That improvements be made to the park as shown in the City's plans dated August 15, 1968. Playground equipment mooting City approval to be installed by the developer nad his cost not •emceed 0,500. mi Page 2....., 6) That the public walkways be lighted with low wattage lamps and paved 6 feet in width with concrete and planted 2 feet on each side with low-growing shrubbery— plans for both to be approved by the City Staff. 7) That the major arterials in the development (128th and 127th) be planted with trees (one per lot, 11/2" caliper° Cleveland Norway Maple or equivalent) along the entire length within the development. 8) That the street right-of-way be improved to City standard* tls designated 1,n the sub-division ordinance including asphalt, curbs, sidewalks, street lights° and underground utilities, with exception that the cul-de-sac'streot width may be 28ft. 9) That Phase III of the defelopment will be open for review as to density prior to improvem nt of the area. The Tigard City Council w11 set the date for th.Ar public hearing on tho one change. You will be not4ofied of this date. If you have any questions ao erning this matter, please Abel froc, to call. Sincerely :Maly Wied Planning Administrator TIGARD PLANNINu.AND ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, Tuesday, August 20, 1968, 8:00 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: A. Present: John Perry, Charles Woodard, Jim Aitken, Clarence Nicoli, Elton Phillips, Everett Severson; members, Alan Paterson, Chairman; Keith Thompson, City Engineer; and Emily Wied, City Planner. B. Absent: None. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Minutes for the July 16, 1968, regular meeting were approved as written. 3. APPLICATIONS FOR ACTION: A. Zone Chan e and Conditional Use: Brayson and Griffin, Applicant Owner - Developers. A request for a change from S- R(Washington County Suburban Residential) to R -7 (Single Family Residential) Planned Re- sidential on a 50 acre property in the vicinity of S.W. Walnut and 130th. 1. Staff recommendation for approval with conditions 2. Public Hearing a. Mr. Q.H. Griffin, applicant, spoke in agreement to all the conditions of the staff recommendations and sug- gested that the item indicating park improvements be amended by the addition of a statement that the de- veloper's cash outlay for play equipment be limited to $10500 and that the equipment would be bought and in- stalled by the developer, meeting City staff approval. b. Mr. aim Uarris,, Engineer for the developer, spoke explaining the proposed three phases of development which now show aE total of 210 units. He requested that the third phase, which he projects to be 2-3 yrs away in development, be left open for review as to density when the area is ready far development. Commission discussion and action a. Commission agreed with the staff recommendation and amendments suggested by the applicant and engineer. a . 1 ,, •a ( 1( 0. b. It was moved(Aitken), seconded (Phillips) and un- animously passed by vote of the Commission that the staff recommendation be approved as amended: the application for conditional use for Planned Residential development under R-7 classification be approved with the clear understanding that the property is not ap- proved for R -7 generally and with the following con- ditions 1. that the preliminary plat dated August, 1968, be accepted with the exception that the lots shown as 28 through 34 be developed as garden apartments instead of the area labeled 1o+: 21. 2. that the public access to the p'trk be guaranteed to the City on the existing road easterly along the subdivision to B.W.Walnut Street until such time that this road is improved. At this time public access shall be made by the developer, meeting the approval of the City Staff. 3. that the park land be donated to the City as shown on the preliminary plat, but also including lot 21. 4. that the park land be cleared of lrush by the de- velopers and the area in the vicinity of lot 21 be leveled during development of the surrounding lots and graded as shown in the attached City plan for improvement by the developer dated August 150 1968. 5. that improvements be made to the park as shown in the City's plans dated August 15, 1968. Playground equipment meeting city approval to be installed by the developer and hid cost not to exceed $1,5a0. 6. that the public walkways be lighted with low wattage lamps and paved 6 feet in width with concrete and planted 2 feet on each side with low - growing shrub- bery- -plane for both to be approved by the City Staff. that the major arterials in the development (128th and 127th) be planted with treee (one per lot, 11" caliper, Cleveland Norway Maple or equivalent) along the entire length within the development. 8. that the street right -of -way be improved to City standards as designated in the sub- division ordinance including asphalt, curbs, sidewalks, street lights, and underground utilities, with exception that the cul-de-sac street width may be 28 feet. 9. that Phase XII of the development will be open for review as to density prior to improvement of the Page 2- August 20, 1968 rein. I • PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Augus 20, 1968 Item 3-A ZONE CHANGE AND COIDITOW, USEAPPLICATION: from S-R to R-7 PLANNED RES IDENTIAL APPLICANT: Brayson and Griffin 13015 S.W. Pacific Highway P.O. Box 23578, Tigard, Oregon PROPERTY INVOLVED: vicinity of S.W. Walnut and 130th (map 4251 4A tax lot 100) sin' OP PROPERTY: 50 acres STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The City Staff recommends approval of this application for a conditional use for Planned Residential development under the R-7 classification with the clear understanding that the property is not approved for A-7 generally, and with the following conditions: 1. That public access to the park be guaranteed to ti: City on that existing road easterly along the subdivision to S.W. Walnut Street, until such time that this road .s improved. At this time public access shall be made by the developer, meeting the approval of the City Staff. 2. That the park land be donated to the City as shown on the preliminary plat, but also including lot 21. J. That the park area be cleared of brush by the developer and the area in the vicinity of lot 21 be leveled during develop- liken4-.. of the surrounding lots to a grade compatible to the development grading and seeded with grass. 4. That improvements be made to the park as shown in the City's plans dated August 15, 1968. 5. That the public walkways be ligheed with low watbage lamps and the walkways paved 6' in wieth with concrete and planted 2' on each side with low-growing shrubbery.-plans for both to be approved by the City Staff. 6. That the lots shown as 28 thru 34 in the preliminary plat be developed as garden apartments instead of the area labeled lot 21. 7. That the major arterials in the development (128th and 127th) be planted with trees (one tree per lot, caliper, Cleveland Norway Maple or equivalent) along their entire length within the development. 8. That the street right-of-way be improved to City Standards as designated in the subdivision ordinance including asphalt, curbs, sidewalks, street lights and underground utilities, with the exception that the cul.de-sac street width may be 286. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OI' OREGON, COUNTY OP WASHINGTON, Jr being first duly sworn, depose and say that r am the publisher ... .......... �, of The Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined by ORS 193,010 and 193,020, published at Tigard, in the aforesaid county and state; that the leg' notice, a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, % as publishers in the entire issue of said newspaper for ......tfl...... successive aril cor,secutive weeks in the follt,Wing issues .. �. Sigi ute:�a✓'........— ........... CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OP PUBLIC HEARING ZONE CHANGE. ;IOTICE IS 11E 134k GIVEN that a Public uea}jing will be + held by the Tiger ' ]Tani fiwand zoning Comrnlsalon atrrft all • in Tigard, Oregon, on .A4 t 20, ' 1968 at 8 o'clo+ek P. P.M. with respect tothOfolloWingahplica,+ Hen for a . a t�hangei t Applic t is Tr.„ Q,�3t Grli- Yin, 1 and S.Wt Walnut, Niap 2SI' 4A, Tait Lit 100, Preaant one S R Suburw ban itesidentiat) It quest. ' ed Zone ` -7 (dingle' ranmilyy Residential). . All Interested pet ons' may Weer and be heard in favor. of or against the add prepaid. BY ORDER or ViE VLA.Iv, NG & ZONINO COMMISMO V , J. i Jinn cPaterson, Chairman Planning and Zoning .Corninis- Sion 19. " MY r!n►tMIISIoN EXPIRES NOVEM9M 1R, 1908 My commipsidli expires .. �.... . ... 19 .> AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ST 'TE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, SS. I, _ being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the publisher ._ of The Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, published at Tigard, in the aforesaid county and state; that the legal notice, a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for successive and consecutive weeks in the following issues j, 4 ...... (Signature) 5,tibmibed alt sworn to before me this .. . day of LJ Notary Public of Oregon . My cOMMISS10/1 expires --#/:Y...C..P.141.1.4.0h..EXPIRES-NREMBVI 18,1000 ......••••■•••••••■■••••••••• I CITY OF 'WARD NOTICE OP PUBLIC HEARING Z.., CIANdg et10 tIL 40.1.1triZer 'GIVEN that a !„. 11 Roaring von be held gard Planningand Zoning tkpj lesion at City Hall In Tigardyrovon, on August 20,, 1968 at 8 o'clock P.M. with respect to the following applieS. lion for a zone change: Applicant OM - tin, 130th and'S,W, Walnut, Mp 2S1 4A, TO Lot 100, Present Zone S4 1 (MO!. botpooldefitia), nocootst, Warty.li-7(9ingle Family o8identis1). intorostod persons may be heard La favor of or lot* the said proposal. BY ORtmt.OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSIbil J. AHEM PatCrsoh, ChairmanC Planning and 'Zoning Commis- sion TT-122 Publish TT Auirsat. 8, 1 15, 1960 • • a • • ,• • •• • CITY OP TXGARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ZONE CHANGE Notice is hereby giVen that a Public Hearing will be held by the Tigard Planning and Zoning Commission at City Hall in Tigard, Oregon, on AugUst 20, 1968 at 8 o'clock P.M. with respect to the following application for a zone change: Applicant is Mr. Q. B. Griffin, 130th and S. W. Walnut, Map 281 4h, Tax Lot 100, Present Zone S4 (Suburban Residential), Requested Zone R-7 (Single Pamily Residential). All interested persons may appear and be heard in favor of or against the said proposal. av ORDER OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION J. Allan Paterson, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Publish TT August 8, August 15, 1968 ri * 1963 Mr. Q. B. Griffin 130/5 13.14. Pacific Oighwey P.O. Box 23587 Tigard. Oregon 97223 Dear Mr. Griffins 0n Thursday, May 16, 1968. the Tigard Planning and Zoning commission planned reeidential sub -comoittee. tonativelY ap- proved the general concept of your proposed PR design. In addition, they made the follwing suggestions* 1. That there be an Additional street plug 'designed to provide through acces, from that property locatod nonth of the proposed Pg. 2. That there be street lights installed in accorAtince with the City of Tigard and Portland General Stec stanOlrds. That there be some redesigning of 10 ahapes and lot 40(10$64 Varticularly those lo4s which AiNt described ai . bottle lot, or have a ratic or particularly narrow design. 4. hat all stree‘t islands be eilUaivated. . That the part be illproy,4 to a usable standard before completion of the VA. and priciA: to cities' acceptance for maintninance. That all streets Within the PR be logically named and properly signi4 to the standard specified by the City of Tig„Ard. 7. That there bo/sone arrangement for public walkways and/ or greenbelt Strips so as to connect isolated area of the PR with 414 proposodpar%6 At the Planning and Zoning psi meeting on Thursday. moly 21, 1068, there *411 he an informal discussion df this proposed plan. This will enable the Comminaiono die a boat, to formulate opinion,' on the proposal. 4 officially Before the design ca' be offlolalLy approved, we are required to hold a public he ing and to hive placed in our files, the site plrAns, ardhetectral renderings, landscaping plans. guar - tr antoos of faithful prformando. and written and graPic agre moots on required im ovemontse e- moutond 44TO u 0 TO *1U T004:09Pil ,$n0/ AtualoouTo oulop 04 plx4Toott +ou op oluel sub mon4x0; AU* ookuR no4 ;x "8961 °CM 0u00 UO Tu401144w 10T010 u04 oATB AvotATeou00 ptuo0 u010,01110=0 AuTuoz PW Suiuuuld �Z 4 ebuTvosim vuou ont4 xo; 040X00p og4 uo PoovId 04 04 0t4T4 uT P0TT6400 aT uoT410040;uT 044 ;3: .00m ramxou u ;0 olootil uutm buTunuum surp4 omom ou poutogoau T0T4u0Pplem pouund go; inuomogimbex 044 PuT; ITT" uoZ AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ss, Hush mor.filV r a being fiPst duly sworn, depose and say that I am the publisher ..... of The Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined by ORS 193,010 and 193,020, published at Tigard, in the aforesaid county and state; that the legal notice, a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was 2 published In the entire issue of said newspaper for successive and consecutive weeizs in the following issues MarOh 28, 8,4, dit-M (Signature) Siibtferit50 itif sworn to before me this ij„th day of m 14. V.1 ; IlifikeeomIniissibh expires ____ILICC9IMIS..§101ii0.113.0..NeltatIER 18, 19et Notary Public of Oregon 1968 CITY k3IGA-17,121 NOTICE L10418-ARING1 AN'NnATAtI PROPOSAL Lands of SA. tf li, STgEgg ;140WAVD S. GASS OT UX, be- thg a !part Of graham Acres ,11114visiOn 104, sEcitlow T1S W'ashington • county, Oregon NOTTOS 114R GIVEN, that pursuant to Section 222,0120 1 end Section 222.170 Oregon Re- Viseci Statutes, and Ordinance No. '68414 enacted by the City t$Ouncil of Tigard at its regular meeting of March 11, 1968, a public hearing will be held by t the City Council at the City:Ran at 8;00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time, On 1VIontlaY, the $ day of April, 1968, whereat register- ed voters and other Interested parties may appear and be heard with respect to a propoSal to annex the following described lands to the City of Tigard: tieginning at the Northeast corner of the JOlui 14, Hicklin D.L.C. No. 54 IN SVOTION 35, VS, R1W, W.IVI, AND Rup. XING thence, S89 344CV/ a distance of 500.00 feet, to the beginning point of County , Road No 1766; theride north. erly along the centerline of, formerly Heintz Ave., 182 feet more or less to a point on the south right of way line of the Beaverton Tigard High- way, saidpointbeingapprdii mately station 881 plus 10; thence Northwesterly, along the south right of way line to the West boundary line Of the David a. Graham AL,C.; thence N 00 27' g; 203 feet to the Northwest corner Of Lot 31 Graham Acres Tract; thence S 89a 07' E a distance of 1067.7 feet to a point on the gasterly line of the E.C. OrAttn D.14.C.; said point ain being the:, Northeast °onto, of lot 12 of said sub- divislan; thence, S 17' W along Said line 357.14 feet to the southeast corner Of the A C. Graham A L. C. #52; thence S 88° W a distance of 230.3 feet to the true point of beginning. Dated this 11 day of March, 1968 13'Y ORD811 Oto THE CITY COUNCIL, DORIS HARM City Recorder (TT1420 Publish March 28, April 4, 1960 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY Or WASHINGTON, SS. . Hugh MeGilvra being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the publisher ..... of The Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, published at Tigard, in the aforesaid county and state; that the legal notice, a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 2 successive and consecutive weeks in the following Issues March 28, & April 4$ rf, „, (Signature) orolifi„p, . 4th .‘SOIsiC*XpV"An'O'skvapt to before me this ...... day of • ‘icA 68 • 4 • 47 ;.; .... e: .... .. Notary Public of Oregon '1 7 14 04 • 4 My colnnifs'SiOxpires ........161_001411SSION-gXPIRtS INOVEMBER 19, 19 worommarimminormsawrommermiworamirlmmemini 1968 V•••••..•••••••V,VVVIMMMIPM CITY OF TXGAtU NOTICE OF PITELIC HEARIN& ANNEgATION PROPOSAL Lands a SARAH E. STEELE & TIOWArip S. GASS ET T.TX, be- ing a part of „Graham Acres ,$ Subdivision . MOTION 35, T1S, R1W, Washington COunty, Oregon •NOTICE Is HEREBY GIVEN, that pursuant to Section 222.120 and Section 222.170 OregonRe- vised Statutes, and Ordinance No. 68.44, enacted by the City Council of Tigard at its regular meeting of March 11, 1968, a public hearing will be held by the City Council at the Cityllall at 800 p.m. pacific Standard; Time, on lvionday, the 8 day of April 1968, whereat register. ed voters and other interested parties may appeartand be heard" ()ith respect to a proposal to annex the following described lands to the City of Tigard Beginning at the Northeast corner of the John L. D.L.C. No 54i SECTION 35, W.M. AND NINE thenca, S89° 34' W a distance of 800,00 feet, to the beginning point of County\ Road No. 1766; thence north- erly along the centerline of, formerly Heintz Ave., 182 feet more Or less to a. point op the south right of way line of the Beaverton way, said point being approxi. mately station 381 plus 10; thence Northwesterly, along the south right of way line to the WeSt boundary line of the David C, Graham 10.L.C.; thence N 00 27' E; 203 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 31 Graham Acres Tract; thence S 89° 07' j . distance of 1067.7 feet to a point on the Easterly line of the D.C. Grahatt 1).L.C.; said point also being the Northeast corner of lot 12 of said sub. division; thence, $ 0° :17* W along said line $57.14 feat to the Southeast corner of the 1). C. Graham I/ L. C. #52; thence 8 88° 52' W a distance ot 230.3 feet to the true point of beginning, Dated this 11 day of March, 1968 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL. DORIS HARTIO City ReeOrder (TT-1429 Publish March 28, April 4, t968) 4 CITY OF TI6ARD NOT/CE OF PUBLIC HEARING ZONE CHANGE Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing will be hold by the City Council, in the Council Chambers at City Hall in, Tigard, Oregon, on April 8, 1968, at 8 o'clock p.m. with respect to the following application for zone change: Appliciant is Estate of Erwin T. Wills, deceased, Q. B. Griffin and J. W. Brayson, address of property: Walnut Ave. approx. 500' W. of S.W. 121st Ave.; Map 2S1 4A, Tax Lot 100, Present Zone: County S.R. (Suburban Residential); Requested Zone: City R-7 (Residential),. All interested person may appear and be heard in favor or against the said proposal. PUblish TT April 4, 1968 8Y ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Doris Hartig City Recorder E 6 /TY axi iJ¢ N tTIyCE �ixFry�fpyM�', {Air /��yj' ANNEXf'%+ ICN PRO' #OSAL + S Lands Of SARA l' B.'STI 3LE & HOWARD S. As ET WC,, be- 11'4 a Part of Graham Acres Subdivision, in SECTION 36, T1^, 1iW, Washington County, Oregon NOTICE 18881188Y GIVEN, that pursuant to Section 222.120 and seet1on 222.170 Oregon He- vtscd Statutes, and Ordinance No. 68414 enacted by the City doiseci`l of Tigard at its regular meeting of March, .1.l:, 1968, a public beftting will be held by the City at the City xl;;ll at '8t0 0 p.m. Pacific Standard Tittle; on Monday, the 8 day of April, 1968, who ''ea;t registers ed Vetere and other interested parties may appear and be heard with respect to a proposal to annex ''the following described land's to the City of Tigard: 43eg1 ing at the Northeast corner of the John L. r icklin Na, 54 IN SECTION 33, RIW, W.M. AND RUN- NINO thence, S89° 34' W a distance of 500.00 feet, to the beginning point of County Read No. 1766; thence north» erly along the centerline of, formerly Heintz . Aveo, 182 feet more or less to a ;olnt on the south right of way line the^Beaverrton Ti ward High* way, said point being approxi- mately si'.tion 381 plus 10; thence Northwesterly, along the south right of way line to the West boundary line of the David C. Graham D.L.C.; thence ` N 0° 27' 8; 203 feet to the Northwest earner of Lot 31 Graham Acres Tract; thence S 89° 07' B a distance of 1067.7 feet to a paint on the Easterly ine of the. D.C.e Graham D.1.„C.; aid point) also being the Northeast) corner of lot 12 of said sub- division; thence, S 0° 17' W along said line 337.14 feet to the Southeast earner of the B. C. Graham D. L. C. #52; thence S 88° 52' W a distance of 230.3 feet to the trriteVw;t,t of beginning. Dated this 11 day of March, 1968 BY ORRDBR,C10 THE CITY COUNCIL. l~J S 11A1 TIG City Accorder (' '''r ..1,4 9 „ P1ul llieh mod Z8, Apra 4, OM (,) NOTICE OP PUBLIC HEARING CITY OP TIGARD ZONE CHANGE Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Tigard Planning and Zoning Commission in the Council Chambers at City Hall in Tigard, Oregon, on March 19, 1968, at 8:00 P.M. with respect to the following application for zone change: Applicant is Erwin T. Wills Estate and the property is located on 121st Street, Map 281 4A, Tax Lot 100, 50.03 Acres. Proposed one change is from Bounty 8.R. (Suburban Residential) to City R-7 (Residential). All interested persons may appear nd be heard in favor or against the said proposal. Publish March 7 and 14, 1968 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION a. Allan Paterson President CITY b TIGARD 12420 S.W. Main St. Tigard, Oregon Tel 639-4171 Name of Applicant ra s ite/ e/t4/ Application No. APPLIf CATION F 0 i ZONE CHANGE 1,77777 ;11'2H""H Telar."*".7"1 Ti U State PROPERTY INFORMATION „ , Present Zone Proposed, Zone j: Map /- 469 Tax Lot //e)e2 Book Page Address of Property Area of Property (acres) ...1•01.01.4.1.••••■•••100...1•101 Existing Buildings (type & ...a.. Deed Rest.*rictions n'HOW p 1 el 1,, f Lt: i I Reason for Zone Change ' _ . ititutiattatto. ate. .A•141..14.**14 •••••0•1111,4•1*•.*11*.•••••**1•1"Aib711,15••■••••■•*10.1440** I Name of Proposed Developer ••.•10.,41-41........••••*••••••• • •••••-.*S1.1•04,24.*•■•••.1. Date of Sic natur di.Vjafr .c;?-6‘,44A,--t-441 61.44#1W Application g of Owner for the Estate of Erwin T. Wi11, Deceased. raw 1.1 0,, lat. tat kat; tatt tut too pas 10,11 .3 4..e.1 .,.. ata, att itts it, a., P.0 Iteee .7 .41114 a.t. tat otta tita keek teal 4. W. I. P. MY P.N. 4. 044 art tat. at. tat. Receipt to jita„:74_ Received by et--Lct& iv? ct L t I ict g e For Planning 84 Zoning Commission Action On 19 , at 7:30 P.M. ete..14e/ Cl—t,rt-rol TA.001, REAP'65 formerly Pacific Title Insurance CO. TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF OREGON 955 N, E CANYON ROAD • BEAVERTON, OREGON 07005 PHONE 644-1194 Order No. 359405 February 9, 1968 PRELIMINARY REPORT FOR STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY $ 87,500.00 STANDARD LOAN POLICY $ 3, 3, Walker Realty 4950 N. E. Union Portland) Oregon We are prepared to issue title insurance in the form and amount shown above insuring the title to the land hereinafter described: See attached Exhibit "A" for leml de.3cription. as of February 5 , 19 68 at 5 00 P M., vebt in HELEN FREEMAN, au to an undivided one fifth interest; MARGARET DAFAL, as to an undivided one fifth interest; EARL MARSH) as to an undivided one fif- th interest; ERMAN TAYLOR, as to an undivided one fifth interest; and GRA4.1 Dt:GOULpSTONi is to an undivided one fifth in4restir asdtlenets in common. suu,eot to t e ustut "prinee. stipu ations an. exceptions appearing in such Corm po cy and a so e. following: 1. An easement created by instrument, includimr, the terms and provisions thereof, dated October 30, 1952 recorded December 31, 1952 in Book 340) pale 145, Washington County Records, in favor of Portland General Electric Company. 2. Proceedin%s pendiri under Probate No. 11-215) in the administration of the estate of Erwin T. Wills, deceased. Grace D. Gouldstoneowas appointed executor with power to sell, however, return of sale and order of conrirmation will be required. Attorney for Estate ?red A. Anderson. 3. Easement for road and access purposes bein4 all that portion of the herein described tract of land lyin in 3ection 3; said easement beinq; described in that certain tract of land devised to Alfred Pell in the Estate of proceedins of Erwin T. Wills, deceased) Probate No. 11415. 40 The inchoate dower or curt%ay interests of the respective spouses of vestees, if they are married. ORDER NO, 359405 This Row is preliminary to the isSudiied of a of itI. itioutdricii arid .hall become null and void urtlibli a policy ii Nowt, cold the full premium therefor paid. [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] Page 2 Order No. 359405 NOTE: 1967-68 taxes paid in the amount of $10523.34. Account No. 2C1 4A 100 23-8. (Affects other propert4 a13o.) NOTE: We find no judpento or United States Internal Revenue Liena atsainat Q. B. Griffin or Opal L. Griffin. Your very truly, TEANCAMER1CA TITLE INUTRANCE CO. vm/Jir Victor D. Bender) Mana;er Exhibit "A" Order No. 3.9405 Beginniri s. at a point marking the Northeast corner of Section 4, Town- ship 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Waehinfeton County, Oregon; runnin thence South alone the East line of said Section 4 a distance of 1295 feet) more or leas, to a point 25 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Northeast Quqrter of t!le Northeast Quarter of said Section 4; thence Eat 75 feet; thence South parallel to the Section line between Section 3 and 4 to the center line of Mil1er3 Ferry Road; thence Westerly following the centerline of said road to the East line of said Section 4; thence North along the East line of said Section 4 to a point that 13 466.7 feet North of the Southeaet corner of' the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the North- east quarter of said Section 4; thence West 466.7 feet; thence South 466.7 feet to the South line of the North half of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of eaid Section 4; thence Wept eLon the South line of the North half of the Southeast quarter or the Northeast quarter of said Section 4 a distance of 457.3 feet, More or lees, to a point that is 264 feet west of the Southwest corner or the Nertneast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast querter of said Section 4; thence North 660.0 feet, lore or less, to a pcint on the South line of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of tne Northeast quarter of said Section 4 that is 264 feet West of the routh- east corner of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 4; thence West elm; the South line of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of tae Wrtheaot quarter of said Section 4 a dietence of 400 reot, more or lose, to the South- west corner of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast querter of the Northeast quarter of' said Section 4; thence North 1320 Peet) v.-lore or less, along the west line of the Northeast quarter of the Northeaat quarter to the North line of said Section 4; thence East 130 feet, more or less, tothe place of belinnimgt Together with a non-exclusive eacement tr a rietlt of way and casement for road access and utility purposes over the follewinl; described tract cr land, to wit Beinnin' at the Southeast corner of the Northca;_t quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Washineton County, Orevn; running thence North along the section line 206.7 feet; thence West at right angles to the section line 50 feet; thence South parallel to oaid Section line 400 feet; thence East at right aneles to the Section line 50 feet; thence North along the section line 1933 feet to the place of beieinning. Page 2 Exhibit "A" SAVE AND EXCEPT the following described tract of land, to wit; Beginning at a point markinii the Southeast corner of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 4) Township 2 South, Range .1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Washin4ton County, Oreon; running kthence North along the section line 2067 . r'eet; thence West parallel to t North line of said section 4 a distance of 660 feet; thence South parallel to the East line of seid Section 4 a distance of 400 feet; thence East parallel to the North line of said Section 14 a distance of 660 feet; to the East line of said Section 4; thence North 193.3 feet to the place of bezinnin. FURTHER SAVE AND EXCEPT that portion of the above described tract of land lyin, within the 5oundaries of public roads and hi3hways. • v •i CITY '1:1C`:,11T,O.) 12420 "t Tigaxd, Ciro,?,rino 972 3 Nam of •ppl,cant.7„. 5O o.4 Address of Propr:__ APPLICATION 'OR ONE CEMNGt RINIE4 CHECX A P t rifff. 3.. I • . 3...• • .4.4. 4.-3 • %O..... 133 6i 046„...0ALL . • • . 4swiketkui.da L5sAs, 624.441aaLgt1i4LIiitoc) Prr.it 04,41.2.11t. -- • City. Rocorder; Free id: Aprlication nata Chechedg ........0J4A1A1117fS Cn P1 noaua foz Pr1.111ic Uearlrico 54)11W - ° Requested Zone eiodm*Atialsjati4 Lecif a Description k_clatbroitza42.0_ Applif.*Jant notified of Planning and '7,fionthg Actf.ong Applicant Notified nf liv.!or/Comwi Actiong On Fayor/(!ounc„ i1 cr*.mda fra- YLcartnc: tt,491.6. 1:110: ap. 0.333 10, .4- .13 Al4 CI, A. . 4,14 0. ot... 30.4 4.34 “104 is. Avo 11. LOot •Ara .41 A. *I •Ago w. A A itly A.A 4.14. .11 .1,1 OA. .3 0.3.3t140.333.0133. tar. r -Or rrl• ArY,4 Otthty: Neter. thr 1.1;fct On Traffice.; Vap Comment! Yd. V-. *At Width CIhricl 4 Adjacent T,onls:_a_ hOjacent Uses: Plln Lcc,uvacy: Y.:aSeMentS: itur: 3103 AK. ‘20 Jim "sit ./ 1. . .1 IS. w. A.., . AA Test al* Is. Ast. CAI 4.1 a.m. go. Ms. hoi poi us. .n4 Mot an, W.. toLossia.t. AAA MAI go. t. ±f l'occ,rartnntla Li on I 14 A..A A 1•#. 1\ t J■4464...ALI.L.3.4,0 61644....+ANA:ktaila • 3. Commi-SsIon-di-seus-sion-ittd-action. - - a. Commission agreed with the staff recommendation and amendments suggested by the applicant and engineer. b. It was moved (Aitkin),' seconded (Phillips) and unanimously passed by vote of the Commission that the staff recommendation be approved as amended: the application for conditional use for Planned Residential development under R-7 classification be approved with the clear understanding that the property is not approved for R-7 generally and with the following conditions 1) that the preliminary plat dated August, 1968, be accepted with the exception that the lots shown as 28 through :M be developed as garden apartments instead of the area labeled lot 21. 2) that public access to the park be guaranteed to the City on the existing road easterly along the sub- divisioh to S.W. Walnut Street until such time that this road is imprOved. At this time public access shall be made by the developer, meeting the approval of the City Staff. 3) that the park land be donated to the City as shown on the preliminary plat, but alto including lot 21. 4) that the park land be cleared of brush by the developers and the area in the vicinity of lot 21 be leveled during development of the surrounding lots and graded as shown 1n the attached City plan's for improvement by the developer dated August 15, 1968. 5) that improvements be made to the park as shown in the City's plans dated August 150 1968. Playground ectuipment meeting city approval to be installed by the developer and his cost not to exceed $1,500, 6) that the public walkways be lighted with low wattage lamps and paved 6 feet in width with concrete and planted 2 feet on each side with low-growing shrubbery--plans for both to be approved by the City Staff. 7) that the major arterials in the development (128th and 127th) be planted with trees (one per lot, 11/2"caliper, Cleveland Norway Maple or equivalent) along the entire length within the development. 8) that the street right-of-way be improved to City standards as designated in the sub-division ordinance including asphalt, curbs, sidewalk, street lights, and underground utilities, with exception that the cu1-de-sac street width way be 28 feet, 9) that Phase III of the development will be open for review as to density pzior to improvement of the area. A,M `L 1c1:! .{$ Hatis y G1 Y,fSIA'f that pursuant to Section 222.420 and Sect1on 222470 Oregon rte. vised Statutes, and Or+dinahce 'o. 68.8 erg.cted by the qity Council of Tigard at its regular r meeting of February 26, 19 8, a public hearing Will be held y the City Council at- the ty Hall at 8:00 port. Pacific St lard 'Tine, on Monday', the 25 day of March, 1968, whereat registered, voters and other Ax- terested parties may appear and . be heard with respect to a prc posal to annex the follow described lands to the City Tigard; 13eginnini g at the southw corner of Sectio 2, T2 111W, 'J4�.N,C,, ashingt County, ;Oregot.) runnin_ thence Nl 06 E along the west line of said Section 2 a disw tance of, 155i.0 feet to t40 true point of beginning; thence Ni°06'E a distance of 228.4 feet to a point; then N89 °29'E a distance (4131 feet to a point on the wept line of a 50 foot road ded& Dated to the public and 4` corded in book 407 page i9 of said County Dead Recopil thence 81006'W a distance of 228,4 feet along the wq.st line of said road to a poini; thence 889 °29'W a.distance of 181.45 feet to the true point of beginning„ Dated this 26 day of trIebrItall4, 1968. EY ORDi R THE CITY COUNC mug a x City Hew or Publish' March 7, 1 ,11, 1908.x; • CITY OF TICARO 12420_ „v.!a2n Ticyard, Orogono 97223 A PPT,YMT ION 4 Nam of APP1' t Add :."eS of LTopertr t Nedelai--jicte — C APPLICATION FOR ONI cHAN"Gn REVIEW cnECX LEI! ProleFY,- City Rncordr1 FL Paid: Aprlicat-lon r.),Tt,a Chuctt,_. c41 Cn P1 n S.; Pohl c Hearinci P471 to '1 HL:702.: 231 PP' icant Not ified Acton, Ham. Kaasoof000dOoti tiao..4141sitwoovroo Requested Zone Lega 1 Des cr ipt on t Ch_cipoi Ithin Oralp;JA) Applicant Notifie0 of P1 anning and ?,oning Act!,on: On Va yor t1 c iit fo iuJ1 tu iY 1711c! t M O.,O, pan Pao PP• apii it. max oto WM Sp. *pa au- MO M. Ct. ,Ot MOI oa ■au• Om Mo YOS MO Yob OM psi it. .t.1 tois Pm at Ma MO fLOO do. MO Oa MO Ea• Emo al Ea air r /Co rinci 1 .*****clawo-zasnruar r.3 Widt h: •ax or* 4.4a.r..../r1+1.1........*orgrawadv.ria***11.41,,orems, • orroora***.• Foroo...****, Ifct On Traffic !t Map Commcnt ororl***U .4% lark. otaY**61.,,.."....***oak ol*o...4** .111,,MOOmaaaasM,Ora,O, *......***..r....4.troral.eso—,,,ratrukattati41.14toMaivt....4.:****0***Javro**Al*ra.****■ra _,OuloOMoMmoomoilaniat,OMMOrOoMOMMOM:aoamOOMMOMOOM vao..-waraMala■Mommol*amorrohaaidaolabooMistoOMMaamosoo• Mama Adjacent riJonils Aajacont 3 it a Plan Accuracy Ea s umonts Picturo: ...AP- iwthiii Poittiti ot vitt**, *ftisor,. • opo.• 1.*:. *no cra.,*21. ogt.s. tpr ar. rt. a1 adt Eal• *4 la la a E.. a a Pk, 444. ** +Jo* t*** larY■ in OM Pits Am/ U. los*, Mtn witti tOpt glata pat atm P.1 toe, .** ism P. II. NY0 1111■.■ rok. W osaiillt. ISM U.. a.. 14..9 'Aaff 17ocommndationt tata.fam.M,MatiamMOOMMoitMorailmoMMOramol000t ei g al000lsomaaa,OM,.. aaaa- - EEE. tatlion . . • • J,1, CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE No. 68 - AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A ZONE CHANGE WITH RESPECT TO THE LANDS OF THE ESTATE OF ERWIN T. WILLS, Q. B. GRIFFIN AND J. W. GRAYSON, in Section 4, T2S, R1W, W.M. TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON WHEREAS, the hereinafter described lands, by action of the City Council of the City of Tigard, Oregon, pursuant to the Zoning Code of said City, have heretofore been limited in the use to those use permitted by said Code, under, and have been classified and zoned for, Suburban Residential and WHEREAS, pursuant to prescribed procedures, the owners of said lands have applied to the City of Tigard for reclassification of said property and change of zone, thereof to permit the use thereof for City R-7 (Residential) purposes, and said applichtion hag been duly publicized and public hearing held by the City Planning Commission on aaton19.4_190 , after due and legal notice; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended approval of said one change to the City Council, and due and legalNotice of City Council hearing having been given by publication in the Tigard Times, and the City Council having heard same at its regular meeting of April 8, 1968 and the Council finding that no public detrriarn-E will result from granting of said petition, and that it is in the public interest that said zone change be arproved, and the lands re-zoned from NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: That the following described lands be, and the same are hereby, zoned as R-7 for use in accordance with the R-7 (Residential) classification of the Zoning Code of the City of Tigard, which Zoning Code with respect to the R-7 classification is by reference herein made a part hereof: Beginning at a point marking the Northeast corner of Section 4, Town- ship 2 South, Range 1 vest of the Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon; running thence South along the East line of said Section 4 a distance of 1295 feet, more or less, to a point 25 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 4; thence East 75 feet; thence South parallel to the Section line between Section 3 and 4 to the center line of Millers Ferry Poad; thence Westerly following the centerline of said road to the Eaet line of said Section 4; thence North along the East line of said Section 4 to a point that is 466.7 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the North- east quarter of said Suction 4; thence West 466.7 feet; thence South 466.7 feet to the South line of the North half of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 4; thence West along the South line of the North half of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 4 a distance of 457.3 feet, more or less, to a point that is 264 feet wet of the Southwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of noid Section 4; thence North 660.0 feet, more or leEs, to a point on the South line of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 4 that is 264 feet West of the South- east corner of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 4; thence West along the South line of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of laid Section 4 a distance of 400 feet, more or less, to the South- west corner of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 4; thence North 1320 feet, more or less, along the west line of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter to f;he North line of said Section 4; thence East 1320 feet, • 11, more or less, to the place of beginning. Together with a non-exclusive easement to a right of way and easement for road access and utilty purposes over the following described tract of land, to wit: Beginning at the Southeast corner of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon; running thence North along the section line 206.7 feet; thence West at right angles to the section line 50 feet; thence South parallel to said Section line 400 feet; thence East at right angles to the Section line 50 feet; thence North along the section line 193.3 feet to the place of beginning. SAVE AND EXCEPT the following described tract of land, to wit; Beginning at a point marking the Southeast corner of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon; running thence North along the section line 206.7 feet; thence West parallel to the North line of said section 4 a distance of 660 feet; thence South parallel to the East line of said Section 4 a distance of 400 feet; thence East parallel to the North line of said Section 4 a distance of 660 feet; to the East line of said Section 4; thence North 193.3 feet to the place of beginning. PURTHER SAVE AND EXCEPT that portion of the above described tract cf land lying within the boundaries of public roads and highways. Section 2: This ordinance shall be effective on the 29th day of May after its enactment by the City Council of Tigard, Oregon. PASSED: By unanimous vote of all Counci1 members present, after being read three times by number and title only, this day of 1968. rga176617-7.-ury of T gard APPROVED: By the Mayor, this day of 1968. ORDINANCE No. 68- ..4 W..* 'ffair'FF-Zaf y �ra • tg, h 60 f 1 ,��aCO N " +M1! i s a 00141 ,o EH�M.4 Y ?' Ear .71§- J�4 � .a yp ` F •4Y 7,9. 7� f r tr, 7/31/P r l ot, E VP9'f O 0 Z 40 ,49 9 M,4t' 0 t s 0 P V 1e . • 9.9x2 j 3,et °ose N • i 22 You have to do hk that in all the and we wouldn't have to be here and 3veryting. He's not trying to get more units - he's not trying to change the program. He'd be happy to go with the original plan - 18 apartments, and all the single family units. But we've attempted to work out a compromise, but unfortunately and I wasn't speaking with tongue in cheek although it might have seemed that way in the beginning - it truly is unfortunate that staff has been decimated recently by retirement, etc., and I think the report came up garbled. It's just exteemely unfortunate - if we had a few more days maybe we could have pug it togetherm and make it And to make just a couple of other comments - some people have expressed concern to appear about the Oregon Primary and I certainly sympathize with that, I have kids of my own, but I'm Who else would like to speak Maaanamaaaa My name is 12305 S.W. am having a problem trying to understand whether the builder wants to put more less or the same number of apt units as originally planned. 11.2ingleA Cause there are different figures given in the report in' t Tigard Times. Thank you maym Can you answer that for me.now. Basically, we are approved for uh, under the original concept for 42 additional single family and 18 multifamily and the staff has criticized where some of the single family lots are at. So we are discussing dropping some single family and adding some additional multifamily units. So what is the total now? The total? The total of each in the newest plan you have. 40 of each. What was it before 42 and 18. So you are adding 32 apts. 22 apts. 22 apartments. Then the second comment 1 have is to reinforce Eau what the first gentlemen .said about - - "Jack Park is very nice but it is also a place that I would not want my children :to go to after dark. •The swale is a giarog, is a place wkarexcadax that the older miaitiAxim teenagers use for drugs uh, and we leave right across the last line of houses from that. Uh, the majority of the people who are invovled in drugs 'ome from the apartments and the duplexes. And so 1 think 1 haw to be an opponent for adding any more apartments. Although it is not fair to label people who live in apartments FAs Anyone el se wishing to speak in opposition of this? Yes Sir, What is your name? My name is 122 S.W. 127th I also have.a questions about the additional density of the multi unit in the bellwood addition uh, The density on 128th the wegewood acess was passed by and alomost neglected. I can assume that 128th will become the major access uh, in and out for this additional housing. Additionaly uh, I Ao tcoWonfused I understand now its we are talking about 40 units munit awellings. Is it 40 40. Yes Okay does that not,betoiag the percentage up tonamitifamitymulti unit density in the bellwood addition to what. Does the planning commission now---- - The percentage pieLza base uh, absolutely . someone asked weaver question Waver - no I don /e, ca.,/na /9/2-Ltitt, Has the planning commission considered that density? and it corresponds to the surrounding ------ That is why wgxmclocklaxaxkomigkkxkm one of the reasons we are here tonight to kokulxxxknsitim.:ny take all the testimonies we can and makaxaxdomisiom and try to make a decision based on facts and some of the reasonably-------- - ------- My names is Bill Giebel I live at 122855W Bellwood court Uh, I want to discusss the density the density. My question is does the traffic impact have to be addressed. Does Washington County been apprachedxaszkomkkaximpankximmxWaimik towards the impact on Walnut? Uh, does that have to be addressed legally? Traffic c,onsiderations is one of the features we look at I don't know if staff, have you had any recent chance as the additional traffic on Walnut. CLAZ>s Waver nor in fact i have'nt really done this report, This is the one that aidie did basically. Does the applicant have any additional information on the impact on the on Walnut and 128th? traffic Chairman I can say this, that uh, the I my name is Jim Harris uh, du--------- I did sit down in one meeAng and was asked iixicka by the former planner Mr. Bolen to step down to city hall one day and talk to him about the wedgewood development and uh, -------- There was representative there from the coutnyt and we were talking about Walnut.4 and talking about the traffic patterns and what the polic department and fire department could handle. and after all j--t\discussiona, uh, we it ended up that the county had a few recommendations to make. Now I would like to impress on you 151/A4 preliminary plat of bellwood has been approved for practically 10 years The other developments around there may be causing an impact, whether or not these things were taken into consideratio,a as far as bellwood xasx at the time it was approvedwre taken intt consideration. Uh, I am abo what is happening in bellwood and what is happening in Wedgewooded what is happening in Lutz's developmen the Thing is is bellwood seemed to being sitting there and planned completely around and not taken into consideration that we do have approved preliminary plat paid the fees on and uh, and are ready to record it. Thank you Mr. Harris My name is Hal Steadman I live at12740 S.W.cWalnabcdtbceelb Place which adjoins -xxxxxxxxxadtsimixkkexpxopo. or abuttly adjoins the proposed development. I would like to say that in my opinion that Walnut kkak as it stands now is not in any shape or condition to handle the extra traffice invovIed in bellwoowd III let alone any toher of the other subdivisions proposed there. Uh, the swale has so lgihtly conceived by the-Bligneer---. If you lopk,A6twl,p. fact it is so &C\ Steep that you have that I think you ONI'EllWnte .. Its surely parallels the swale that is in the plinkk cook park that is unusable. It was given to the city as a park area. Right now, uh, you might be able to walk down there but generally smmaxkima I see sometime you cannot walke in there because of water and uh, mosquitos ithadochang acoandc or anything that hang around there. are fairly treacherous. Also 1 would like to say that the uh, uh, in light of what Mr. Bishop's imitaxitimixof earlier contention on his leaving that phase 4 of his phase project foxxfluckkexxkixtrexkmxsaa open for further discussion y in time to see how that his uh, plan would fit into the neightborhodd c", needs at that time 3 or 4 years down the road. Uh, I relate that to 4:\ V our needs as a neighborhood there we oppose to having anymore (4 apaztment units going in phase III bellwoowd. Uh, additionally i would like to say that the uh, Mr. Grayson has not been all that responsive the citizens needs to ot property in bellwood and I =mod :dm wouTd—strraroUsl-F-Iook- . his contractor for the last couple of years in phase II bellwood to see if he really 1,8 a a responsive contractor in in that light to uh, even allowing pliasaxin to have a phase III in uh, Tigard. Thank you Mr. Steadman. Anyone else The gentlemen in the green shirt. My name is JOHN Taylor 12626 S.W. 128th Ave. I have been a resident of Bellwood since 1970 and seen an increase in homes from 15 -IRR to approximately 100 in a cad&na in a half mile radius �i t on from Walnut Street. There is no sign where 127th intersects 128th and many of the people who are coming from their apt house area and down below make the sweep and going south on 128th to walnut it is a speed trap, We have no signs at the entrance of jack park on 127th and there should 49- Taylor - signs ti.ere for entrance to any pa_ . There is approximately 20 children under 13 years of age in the two block area from 127 in the cul-de-sac to 128th to Walnut and I see nothing but confusion and I have seen two hit and run automobiles accidents on 128th and as the gentlemen mentioned Walnut is in no condition to carry it because does even have sidewalks now up in that area for the children to walk to school and ride their bikes to school. Thank you sir. Thank you Mr. Taylor. This gentlement her I am MyxmuyExis Dennis Murphy ± 12750 S.W. Marie Ct. I concru with the traffic situation on Walnut and is also seems to me that uh, if Mr. Brayson developed this property boxed himself in to use 128th it was a poor development plan at that time and I would think that is aproblem he should have to resolve . The other thing is that there are as the geneltmen mentioned there are no sidewalks on Walnut and I know that my children get off EWA schoolbus down there and we just don't need any more traffic. If you come home from work at dusk donw Walnut you are imoky just, you are lucky you miss the kids. I mean there is just no place to walk we just dont need any more children there. I would also like to ask did you mention in the uh, your report that there 'might be a sewer impact on this development? Weaver - no Thank you Mr. Murphy you may be seated. Gentlemen in the back. My ame is Bill Giebel and I would like to finish my statement I feel that we should adddress that staff should address the traffic impact due to its effect on 128th the condition, the physical CCY condition of Walnut the radius of the turns on 128th to Walnut uh, , A 0- I think the city has a responsibility to address these matters when approving a plat ontocounty road. Again, the pedestrian, there \ T is a terrible pedestrian problem there and ilis-±4ra_17-med light I would like to ask the developer is he ±scabq going uh, carry the bike path or walkway through to jack park uh, through the bellwood court. Sir I would like to withold the cross examination rebuttal until after the testimony is taken -- Mr. Chairman my name is steven graham kimm a resident of the beliwood subdivision 12305 SW bellwood ct. The proponents of this regurest it have spoken uh, perhaps - -staff and planning commission they apparently t43Yrk had some problems=--------. I have had my own 1 tried to gown down and find out what was going to be proposed and I found a secretary that said well, its matinteek* phase 11 well I lived in the are, for about '1 1/2 years and phase III to me may as well just be I don't know much about building uh, if the rOd`ftrWils or whatever is not my bag probably i8 not even---------- in bellwood cour± I found out about this through a very small announcement in neighbors sewer that there is going to be density review well I did not know what a density review wan but i figured that I had beeter find out.4)Back to my trip down to the planning commission I talke with Mr. Howard ItISXXX who is apparently the one did the work on this and who is not here tonight Isgamatmonckh mgerticitamomx we have another gentlement who is here but did not work on the plan it seems a little strange. Steven graham - d I asked Mr. Howard what 'he situation was and he said well, ito already been approved and .iei is really not much you can do about it. And I said why are we then going through this. He said well there are some changes. T And I said what exactly has been approved. and i was trying to find out two things. What has been approved and what changes are being requested. I am still not sure I have found out. He could not tell me what had been approved. But he did say that it will all be made clear when the staff report came out. It was supposed to be out on Friday and as the gentlemen proponent noted it cam out today. So I looked at the report it says that the proponent of this change are propoisng an additional 40 units okay that as not bad First genetlemne that got up tonight talked about 42 plus an unspecified number maybe 18. To me that comes to 60 . And Mr. Bartel got up and he said well 40 ma single family units and 40 multifamily units that comes to 80. Now if I go back to the planning commission report it says only proposed 40 additional�„,�it does not say anything about 60 and it does not say anything abou `'50. And I would submit that the painning commission ahock report is probably erroneously unless my addition is off or has not been explained fully and if it has not been explained fully to me it P—oblably has not explained fully to the people of beliwood and I would like not to see it approved. Thank you Mr. Graham, I Aro-( Can I aks you to hold your applause until we are Are there any other person who wish to be heard this evening. Yes ma'am My name is Shirley Brans and I live on Marie Court. Ub )(maybe this is just something that ---------children think about. 0 he% are all those kids going to go tc school? I know there is Onew not going in not too far but khege we so over croweded now in Tigard that that new school is not going to keep that much egg of a burden of the school -- ------ Staff did we get any imput that you know of from the school distrait? Weaver - no we didn't I'm Nancy Stim1r, and I live at 11525 S.W. Nan,ey- fttmier- Itve -at -ii525 S.W. Terrace Trails. However, since these gentlemen are here involved in a discussion that originated in 1968 and we feel that they have an inherent right to that plat was preliminarily at that time and they should here just have gratis to come in and we would accept ± what was going on. Since 1968, NPO #7 was formed, developing NPO 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and the rest of them, and the other people on the other NPO's I remember and granting we each had to make adjustments. Some of those are marked in the large landowners -- 35 acres, and so forth. xeae Because the character of the neightborhoods have changed since 10 years ago. The d �elopment that occurred in Leron Heights .n in Merestone, Englewood, and some of the other ti g that have happened since the 10 year old plat change the need for The three -phase program is terrific, but I can't imagine at the time of this three -phase project was approved, that the Planning Commission at that time knew that it was going to be a ±exlOyear open end contract. And z have some question as to the Mac validity of allowing a 10 -year old pact or project to go through Planning at this point when we've struggled so hard to upgrade planning's system here k with the NPO's and the Comprehensive Study's that have been done, and the hard work done by you Planning Commission members, and the homework, and going out and studying these projects - walking the gound, and everything else that's going on, and suddenly you're going to say "OK, 10 years ago they made a decision and your stuck with it ". 1 really think that the reality of it is questionable. Thank you Mrs. Stimler. Any other party to be ,:h heard at this time. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I'm Jerry Able ?, and I live at 12785 S.W. Murray Court and I have a question to the Commission, and that is - Has there been any studies done on any of the traffic patterns on 128th or 124th, in say the last 10 years. It appears to me that there has been a considerabl amount of development in that area, and there is two access streets for people to get onto Walnut. One's 124th, which probably is one of the most difficult intersections there is *xand in the City for anyone to get out probably in the morning, or late afternoon, and this additional density problem we are having on 128th appears to only have 128th as the access street to this particular development. And I was wondering if any studies have been done on either one of those streets at this time particularly 128th, as this is the street that this gentlemen earlier was talking about as being no access. -? We did a study a while ago on Walnut/ K. Weaver - I'm sure there are traffic studies I don't have them available to my Able Well then, let me ask this question, do you plan on reviewing any of those traffic studies before you make a decision on tonight's proposal? - --- ---- Uh, that would be speculative on my part, and we'll have to wait for a decision by the Commission Members we that in full consideration, Sir, I am saying that maybe that could possibly be one of the considerations I'm sure it will probably come up. Coleen kakxim Graham, the developer talks about the legality p of the plat as approved 10 years ago, but it seems to me thht he's changed the plat. That he :Jut asking for approval of the plat as it was but the approval of 22 additional units. He stands to make a good deal of money just from the increase in what he'11 sell the land for now as opposed to what he could have sold it for 10 years ago, number one, and number two, if he puts 23 additional apartment units on there, it seems unfair that we should have to bare the environmental costs for his making money on 23 addidionalxapga apartment units. Thank you, other comments? Marie Dennis Murphy on/ Nd Courtz2zz- I sit here really in utter fear to think the Planning Commission. with every questions that has been asked about the school impact, every single question, there's been no study on - I just sit here in utter fear that this decision will be made on that basis and I just hope it won't. Harvey Stone, 12600 SW Bell Court - I contend with Jim Brasen, when he originally ak started this project, had no intention of putting any multiple units in on his original plans originally submitted to you people. And the only reason he ever did start putting in multiple units was because he got in a financial bind and he had to sell some of his property, then he started changing zones, and now he's trying to change the zone on this one place was zoned for houses why don't he build it all under the same zone that he bought the property for and had it zoned in the first place. I'd like to ask the to hold the applause. This is a public hearing, and we are all hook here pretty late and we've got a bunch of volunteers up here that we value too much to . I understand there is a lot of emotional business involved with this, but emotions sometimes get a very counter- active feedback and we don't want that We appreciate your input we just hope that the best we really lake to give. We are still on the testimony stage, so before the end of the testimony stage, we are going to read koxthe staff report and then w open up the discussion to cross examination and rebuttal, so if anyone has any questions as to any of the testimony received, you will then have an opportunity to present those questions, or rebuttal. Any additional public testimony? Sir, Yes, Tom Christeson, 12585 SW 128th, and I'd just like to add my comments on traffic problemsffito axx , We get all the noise all hours of the night coming around the corner, plus I can never get out of my driveway in the morning to go to work. You can't tell it, but during the evening hours when you want to go somplace. Thank you Mr, Christeson. Any other comments? Testimony from opponents or Proponents at this point? I'd like to call the staff recommendation, please. Ken Weaver. First of all, Yid like to comment that I've only, as mentioned before, been here a week, so (voice -- Hope that means youre not getting ready to leave) K.W.I've thought of it. That could be a development, too. I have basically pieces of the p reports of prrvious people, so I would recommend, based on not knowing the densities and questions on school, that one - eidher table the matter until another time, certain, and gather this information, or deny the application. Thank you staff. b • Open the meeting now to cross-examination, and rebuttal. If anyone has any questions that they would like d to direct to the representatives as to the testimony of either the proponehts, or opponents thasis the opportunity you have to questions here. My name is Larry Hoffstetter, on S.W. 127th. One question is doe Who is going to maintain the Greenway. Is it going to be maintained like Art Lutz's fiasco down on Englewood, and you know, they are talking about preserving the trees in area What kind of treesin the area are you preserving, I didn't know that there were slzyxixees that many trees out there. Are you directing that to the proponents? Yes. How do you feelxahex 7 The program in Tigard has been as you get into the City. The City has a big love of Greenways, so youx give them greenways, and they never maintain them. Uh, we gave greenways r- we gave a lot of gleenwa.ys, and so 1 guess if that's what you want, you, get them. The City's one request is and the city's the one that wants the deed to it. And, sometimes we mention about cost for development which in this case, there was in fact -- there was quite a sum of mosey spent donated by Mr. Grayson to improve hhat greenway that is now Jack Park. I, as far as ... as long as I'm up here and, I would like to make one comment on 128th. 128th always has been programmed in the overall general plans the City, of Tigard to go completely through to Scholls Perry Road and, of course, with the -, which is to the north being stated is lower Schothls Ferry Road -- Walnut to Scholls Ferry Road - that will relieve Walnut quite a bit, I would think. There is also some other streets planned wthth the general plan plans, the traffic on Walnut. Thank you Mr. Harris. Are there any other requests... My name is Hal Schedule, 12740 SW ��. The original plat as 1 understand it from Mr. Hoffman was for 210 dwelling units. And he said under the law the City was bound by carrying forward . I assume it comes in all 3 phases. However, as I add it up, 1 see that we ended up with counting it with 232 units rather than 210, so it seems to me that Grayson was not following through with his end of the bargain, if the City in fact said OX you can have 210 units, then let' s go aya ahead and have 210 units. Now as far, as I'm concenned, 1 don't mind Mr. Grayson developing this phase 711, I object to having any apartments in that area. Thank you Mr. Schedule?'??. Iu there, is there.... Mr. Chairman, to what you su4gested that he's proposing an entry to some units. As a way of comprimising and allowing the City to have a greenway, they wish to have, Grayson, Crew and Bartel attempted to come up with a program where he wouldn't lose as many lots as he up progr would lose as if the City had agx greenway and just wiped out as individual lots, so he's be happy to go with the final plat that has been submitted, that he believes he's entitled to Staff Report read by Weaver ZC 11 -68 for a density review of Phase III of the Bellwood Planned Development location southwest 128th and north of Walnut (Wash. Co. Tax Map part of Tax Lot 100) The applicant is Raymond J. Bartel Findings of Fact: 1. Bellwood Parking planned development subdiv7sion was approved Septeber 1968. the first two phases have already been constructed documentation exists on the fx ±xt f audience - could ycqdxkilimasexxpak speak up please/ We cannot hear you. Would you move up forward please. We don't have a microphone The Bellwood planned sub. was approved in sept 1968. The first two phases have already been constructed documentation that exists on the approved density is as follow: In the minutes of the meeting representing for the applicant states that " there was total of 210 units. The approved preliminary plan specified 155 single familyt lot and two apartment areas with no density specified. The existing gexks density. phase I and phase TI consist of 107 single family units and 6 six duplexes or 12 units and 33 apartments units for a total of 152 units. The porjected density for phase III proposes 40 additional units. If this number is approved the total number of units for the planned development will be192 units. The apartments would be an island of multifamily dwellings surrounded by single family unless acess is provided through the Wedgewood development all traffic will funnel onto one local street. The proposed apartments are located on grades ranging from 20 % -14% at the steepest grade and 8 -2% at the most level grade. It is possible that they could impact the natural draingaeway. Polic # form the NPO #1 "The City shall restrict aii alteration of the natural drainageways unless it can be demonstrated that the benefits are greater than the detrimental affects. Policy 7 contain the 100 years flood plain of fanno creek its tributaries and the Tualatin Riber as local preserve or greenway. The greenway shall be established as the backhoe of the open space network and when a direct public benefit can be derived for example when adjacent residential development is provided the greenway should be developed for passive recreation and pedestrian bike travel. The drainageway consists of several large specimen fir trees and as well as other natural vegetation, Since these trees represent the only significant vegetation in the area,X (this is out of the Plan - the existing grading that would be necessary for phase III would be detrimental to their survival) . To conclusioriary findings: The planning dept. has alread y approved a the application forxtkephas e III to greater density. in 1968. and the planning commission. The applicant has reduced the density of the apartment complex and revised the site plan to preserve speciment trees and allow for more open space. Tile bike parh gmxxaItotgxkke is proposed along the greenway and 3 The ixgt In Light of future development surrounding the apartments staff feels xudxxixgxkliextieRskg that the reduced density is warranted in keeping with the best interest of the site. Weaver - May I have the presentation by the applicatn please. I am Stan m,,+rtingson we represent the builder J.W. Brayson & Inc . due the circumstances' am sure that available unitl noo) day. that the result we came to some inaccurancy and some confusion and we would like to clarify that aszbestzaszwozean if we can. As part of that I would like to distribute to the members of the commission simply our point of view in terms of khi x the perspectthagive in the postiion of the owner. Which is simply a guide to Which is simply a guide and outline to the brief comments 1 will make. With me here alas is me raymond barterl axxh *teeJ who is architect land planner who will speak on behalf of the owner. and Mr. James Harris Engineer /surveyor who will be able to answer your questions if you have any. Martinson the preliminary plat was cpproved in 1968 as planned residential development to be developed in 3 phases with certain conditions. Those conditions included: The dedication of a park a 6 acre park. Chaning the cexka ±a location of certain multifamily units which had been planned for one location changed to another. Paying for certan park improvements and other conditions. As requested builders engineer Mr. Harris phase III of the development was left open cdensity review g.st3xmx of - -- apts. prior to final dev lopment. Phase I & 2I have not beeaxoomptetedxicaxpaxt now been completed and park has been dedicated and improvements in the parkhave been completed paid, for and all the conditions have been meet. In 1977, the builders land planner approached the planning commission staff to discuss the density of the multifamily unit in phase III we were given the verbal comittement of 52 units.in the devleoper's plan based upon that again we again returned to the staff that the committment did not stand up and the staff advised hime of new greenway which -- -u --- which is represented by the green strip you see on those displays and it was also indicated to owner and planner that was going to whiwipe about a dozen ±eka lots single family lots and the apartment complex. Well Some dismay and out of a sense of frustration the builder then simply resubmitted a ±cnaxp ±aa the final platy a p5k final plat in July of this year which Martinson - I will speak about the staff report later well um well everybody ,what the staff has been faced with tatniy. - -- - W --�- recently, and I beleive---- It is our position that that final plat of which I have a fiaat copy here I am not certain that the commission does have a copy is enfact before the commission for review, appxexat of approval or denial this evening. '-- the owner is entitled to We believe to approval as a matter of law aax2xmay as may have well -- from the statue of Oregon revised statute /ZOO in part which says "Approval approval of a- --- - -- which is the preliminary plat in this case shall not constitute final acceptance 404 Martingson - of the plat until the proposed subdivision or partition for recording. However, approval by a City or coutny xas such a tentative plan shall be binding upon city or county for the purposes of prepartional plat or map and the city or county may require only such changes in the plat or map khaltxaxe necessary to be in compliance with the terms of as are this approval of the tentative plan for the this proposed subdivison. That statute has been construed in recent a recent case of case of versus Dayton 29 Oregon Court of Appeals 761 1977 case. In regard to the statute that case says " more significant approval of the tentatve plan is binding on the City under ORS 92.040 and there is nothing in ORS 92.010 R2xifilax and 92.160 which would prevent the subdivider from then proceeding with construction. Filing and recording of the final plat -- necesarry to enable the subdivider to seel the property. Or as 92.040 provides that approval shall be binding upon the city or county for the purpose of the prepariont of the plat or map. The apparent intent of this condition is to enable the subdivider to proceed with his project including not only the prepratory steps to filing the final plat but acutal construction with the assurance that the City cannot later change its mind. In addition ORS 92. states that no retroactive ordinances shall be adopted parden me. no retroactive ordinances shall be adopted under ORS 92.010 and 92.040. Well considering that the owner has done all that he was required to do under the preliminary plat approval, that --- dedicated the park exklaxdod expended his fundsmad xakaimse and reliance upon the committment on the preliminary plat we feel that the City is iegaity both ethically and legallxbond to approve final plat as submitted since it was substantirconform with the preliminary plat. Now Mr. Brayson is responsible to the concerns of the community. he has spent a great deal of time and money --- in dealing with the staff and attempting a compromise. 44,agpromise was --- Mr. Bartel together with Aldie Howard whunfortunately not here this evening. with Mr. Weaver um teporarily on the planning staff. Worked together and came up with a compromise which preserves all the tress creates the greenway given up a couple of lots to the greenway and includes a reduced number of multifamily u4tits. in the area near the greenway, Mr. Bartel will spea 15 in a>4:few minutes and explain the lay out to you. We think thatknhe descrepancV1Which appear illtxekxx in the report are just xxxxxxxemaimoixoculflasiligxklan waxidaiRkmift unfortunately more of a result of confusion asd than an disagreement. We think that Rhockhegansm,epunmien there is an agreed plan between owner and staff but frankly in my ibpdinalc opinion it is not hard it is not easy but difficult to determine what is being recommended in this particular report, It is even difficult to read. Um I donit know if Mr. Weaver has talked with Mr. Howard you can correct me if I am wrong but our understanding is that it was the intent of the staff to recommend approval of the entire phase 111 development which would be both single family units and multifamily units and that ther would be 40 of each. Unfortunately the staff report does note read that way and Mr. Howard iE not here to confirm it. and maybe Mr. Weave can 1 am not sure. •A'b But tha445 jiNN one understanding which ---- improve entire final bellwood'III area not just the apt. area. Secondly, staff recommendation #2 which is uh,, that the approvetthe uhithe uh)the recommended subject to the condition that the arrangement be made 1:*$ Martinson •- to c, .nnect loca or through acs ,s to the apts. Two accesses are recommended for safety. We are happy to do that but t seems to call for acts' beyond our control l it does G'cca11 fo a yond the owern. Uh becaus W d e ood RxR RR it which is a dams isffip tneighboring developmenr'su `s �anttiially after Brayson'' Uh does .rovide for such a through a streetwwe will be happy to connect up - - - -°-• 6ff for us to be burdened with the responsiblity that requiring Wedgewood to connect up wot&ddc will be impossilbe. We would have no way to force Wedgewood to do that. If we can reconcil that problem exx of recommendation #2 and if we can agree that t1 entire Phase III of Bellwood being considered then we also support. what I 1' to call the on oche ~staff 4T- •c—'compromise plan the recommendation of the staff and we would withdraw the final plat which was submitted in xiy July and xe if we can'is reach agreement on that we must repsectively request -a8/or final plat as presently submitted as no other alternative Mr. Bartel will now respond or explain the layout oxxxixoxmskaxs esx and respond to soxsexxsxwkxsh certain concerns that were raised by the staff - d My name is Ray Bartel, i am a architect my business address is 10952 S46,; 21st in Miwaukie, Last kkisxissse y± time this issue was before you, there ax xsmexmaw were some new members hems who were here 1 believe at that time there was some confusion on the part of the planning commissioners exactiily what they were looking at . And I will try to clarify that know with ,0 , o'"' exhibits that are here The area basically that am outlining now is uh the area of the bellwood sub. the area to the west is the new proposed morning hill the area to the north is the new proposed summer lake. The project was approved in this area in 1968. The 1971 comp plan reflected the greenway which is now implemented in this location. Uh it went one step further in the compl. pl&.W that designated the park as 'designates the park that was uh dedicated as part of the approval of this project. The compl. plan does not show this greenway and does not speak to this greenway in any way. Uh, during the development of the two porjects we becamexsa aware thatthese were going on only through discussions with staff. Mr. Grayson was not notified . of the hearings in these cases. Uh, we have now taken a good look at both plans and we have determined that khsxeztyif the city feels that it is desirable we can impsokiskaxsok interpact a new agreenway we can uh, add improvement and we can tie thisvapen that open space tpgether. This plan basically reflects on a large scale between how we will be doing uh, an ared, that staff had concern of in the original staff report was an areas ±nx right in here of steep grade, linehdicated in red show a street and xs$wx the old lax lots that we have - --- over avoiding that area of steep, }'grade. The specimen trees which staff speaks of are located inthis vicinity 311110110N here uh, we are keeping all of the the not only the construction work but taking a all of they the earth grading and early ----- occur in that location and moving away from that locaztion. The lower plan /reflects the the proposed uh 40 unit apt project there all single story apts. uh i there -� nd grad me of the uphill units hav have parking the lower units have parking n front of them. they have decks corresponding looking out into the center greenway and &an going through the area. In restrospect to how we comply with the surrounding area uh, are we compatible with this type of land use or are we not Uh, - -- bicycle path going through here which goes reasonably close bartel - to the bottom of the swal uh, this area of the,AAnd on the uphill side of the'swale is slightly larger tharsingle family lots we are proposing off of that. There are 11 single family lots in our plan we are proposing 8 one story units, 8 Rex one story units on an area of ground larger than this single family area. In regards to the total development in this vicinity xxotudxagairt directly around again in compasssing approximately the same amount of area this areas single family and attached housing witiokxiAxheilagxpxoposedx114xexisx2Rxxxiksx which is uh, being proposte here there are 38 units contiguous to this site and we are proposing 40. We are at a density of 7 units to the acre which is basically coresponding average to the surrounding area. Uh, The type of units are directly similar and directly compatible -xxxxx for what is being proposed to koxkkat the to the west , the units to the eastAP we have fewer units on our property. Uh, Briefly I would like tab summarize a response that I have prepared in regards to titte,"140,,tAQ's% staff reportNrerc paapie of april which is partly reflecting the new staff report uh, and agains state how ww we respond all the items that were requrested. I. All single family lots as shown in plat revision and pulled away from areas of difficult grade 2, No lots or buildings tomakedxiRxmlyxdxaimago are located in any drainage area or drainageway, 3. All specimen trees are now in open space ground and free from site graidng areas and construction areas 4. Concern that the apartments are an island surrounded by single family the proposed units arexxinioxximmy one story with no ------ to them individual character the majority of the units are designed to simay place simply . Again there are 11 single family homes on the east of the drainage force Am on the same side we are placing •8 attached dwelling units 3 less than the single family aree. Totaling all the units single family in bellwood and morning hills kkaxia we are compatible demAty. MsthilnksMshaues This summarizes I think what I have said are there any questions.? Someone said okay thank you Mr. Bartel someon1 asked bartel question? will Bartel - no apt use oan be built on fill. The only thing that will happen the drainage swalecoccc occurs in the center also over 31ele.hed bicycle path. We will be taking some areas of land and cutting out to create,j'Autkingxpialteam some of these parking plateaus and also to creatdWsubgarde parking. There will be no fill no uh i no repositiontW\ of dirt other than removing certain areas to create plateau such as this and this. someone asks bartel question? bartel - no 1 have got a question Mr. Bartel. The swaie4 you speak of tAiNetty, is that uh, is that part of ------- system going through Tigard what is that/ Mr. Bartel - uh, the land comes to a sloe akxkkitax4ixamitiom this direction thcbocdtbvecbthon.and this direction. •1 • • ' r. Bartel - it carries surface water uh, it carries very little water, Mr. Harrison will relate bockkexkumulkxofxwakax directly to the amount of water that it carries. It carries probably heavy storm water uh, at peak periods.it is not carry much water at &11. Is it a - --stream? Bartel It is not a stream. There is no stream. There is grass growing at the bottom of the swale. The steepest parts that the staff referskoxlmxklaoxama to are the area heRxiiyxxookakad of the heavily vegetated area. That is were the 20% slopes occur. There is no sign of errosion, 'chose trees are stable if there was an erosion problem it would affect the trees. some asked bartel question. Bartel - It eventually ends up uh, down in the summerlake someone asked Bartel another question Are there any other proponent's •ho wish to be heard on this issue. by Are there any opponent's who wish to be heard fxom the city. My name is John Boomer, I live at 12610 S.W. Katherine and 1 will be in the neighborhood and on the street joining ------ going to be built. One of the real dilemas everyone here is faced with is that fact that we are having a situation come about that was granted XvISUR approval some 10 years ago. and none of us here or anywhere else could visualize the growth of OR city of tigard has gone through in the past 10 years. I think also one klax of the fortunate aspects of the of tlait: dilemd°that we have the same developer kkakx as I understandVniginally conceiv iR0o. the clea of bellwood 1, 11, 111 some 10 years ago and iiiinhe processkAp of concluding the development. 1 think it isttmportant aspect of the full situation is to perhaps kel take into consideration the historical significance of bellwood as it ex4Atance ixxicko as a neighborhood. Uh, probably other people herewmight speak to other problems 1 am very uh, aware of certain aspects of bellwood and there are a few things i find very significant, 1) Bel;w94Idk has historically been the most crime ridden neighborhood inWaggVai 2) Bellwood I has been the singular most neighborhood of residents of juvenile criminals withhin the City of tigard as a concentration. The uh, makeup of the neighborhood is uh, single family dwellings duplexes and apartments and the 235 homes that edominant in that era when the development first first become a reality. 1 think it is impautiumilxickakxithcAlgiiavtg unfortunate that the builders waste any uh, a problem area that he-having to legally perhaps having a granted access to the piece of property that is subject to symphetical and more considerations as far as living conditions.today. 1 do believe however, that if we cannot rescind his right to build any multifamily dwellings at all the commission has an obligation to insist khaxxamaix that they remain the very least minimal. by law that they can offer. Thank you Boomer .....ozovars.trros,••-• 4 • ZONE CHANGE 68-2 Present Zone S-R Requested Zone R-7 ITEM No. 3 1. PRESENT OWNER Erwin T. Wills (Deceased) Administrator of the Estate - Trace D. Gouldstone 2. LOCATION OF :PARCEL UNDER QUESTION a. The parcel abuts S.4. Walnut Ave. , approximately 500 feet West of 121st Ave. b. Tax Lot 100 c. Map 2S1 4A 3. SURROUNDING ZONE PATTERSN See attached map 4. FORECASTED DEVELOPMENT The long range plan designates particular area as low dens%ty residential. The developers plhln is to subdivide the entire 50.3 acres. 5. LAND CHARACTERISTICS The lot is 50.3 acres in area providing enough land for approximately 250 single family homes. 6. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The city staff recommends approval of the zone change request. i ' .•■ .... ag.ex..,.,,,........,....................-.1.4,44mr..--,......man,m,-....-....,.......c...,,,,,..... • 4 • . o 4 ii. h y�� Washington County, Oregon, , be- Station 40 T2S, R1W, ,° .rye' yj�jy at the Northeast corner of said section, thence S 0°081W r t; thence Wept 'para1:.e7. with the North line of said section 4664,E feet; parallel with the East line of �#66.'� feet; thence South ps,x►a West 4 66. feet to the North line of County Road #934; o� n thence th s a North t t� 47e3feettoap .'�t north line of County Rd.93 s 5 thence z ,1el to the East line of said section 660 feet totaepn Erwin thence 89°4 y �$Q'�1'W; 4C35 feet, fore or «less, to the West line North line of. 'L'; ,; thence N 0°26'E 1346 feet, more or less, thence East along the North line of said Section i '132505 eet, more or less, . to the point of beginning; described portion thereof: g ,nning at a point of the r c� tine of the NE1 /4 ot. Seo. 4 , T2S, R1W,, . .M. ,' arshington Couz , M ",� h. 206 , 7 feet from the ao theast corner or the N 1/. 0 H , �VIC .ti Of Said , :,:, 4; thenoe . Wert parallel with ne :,tt 60 Litt ta. a punt' rr , , e -mt,Sout4 par4114 i, + he AT aid se -4 "'0 5,r r t 10 r1 eot Qfl r ^(iRX rW d r4 ry �M. *. W,�..r�9,.•� IA }i .''� + r, F 1 ' A e. no e 1Q Vint o f 1 M 1 y4 �. tart aiy s 1 � iL 1�' , „,4j t hma e ++Vou1ty RQ�r,0}} w#th10 VA, ,F 1, �1t) ,,yas;4 n ounty, Oregon, n"Ortherly a o n ,5 1a7t line of Station ^ � . z ��th lin� o .Sec e 3, and being ant 1346 feet 5:+ tt;'th Of the, A f` to the Wash nft 'Tax Lot 100, 2$,i, YA:a0a0rOint on �e �' tor •, yyy P' AF'�� +� � t } ��1�{ {�j }yy� R"T� 1M 0 � b'+ � Si '�1 �'._� A•, �4h her o 1� r � K'�s N 7; 117YYY _ t �y X a{ S' i� , 1 r + yIMF� � ap r a s r f S (. r - a .t .' ;t” ".'J .:rF. . A VrA"ie , .. ✓'i :M'a'' . ..i .'.girt <. `ro 121 gig kge. SECTION CORNER = riSAMO CirY Stanal 15 mAre ttv.Tio r 1;.1 rivotyz. OF A.3(i5TIN.;; IN LW,ig., SAID PREMISES AND MOT A 5U.W. CITY OF TIGARD it315 SKETCH /5 MAD SOLELY on TN! '1,11:;;POS?... OF At‘.7:71/■‘1. It4 LCCA/1:: ',Alb Mi AN NOT A 6111i,WV CITY OF TIGARD DESCRIPTION neannin3 at a point ilarkin the Nolotheast iorner of Section ohip 2 South., flan' o 1 West of the Willamtte Nyridlan, WashintOon ' Cuunty„ OPOOfl; runnin,r, thence South aim:: the Eaot lino o 1:4iatd Suction 4 a distance of 1295 feet, wore OX' lose, to a point 25 root North et the Southeaot COVIler of the Vortheaot Quarter of the Northeast liaeuter said Section 4; thence Eaot 75 foot; thence South parallel to the .:ection line between :200t1okl 3 ani 4 to the contor lino o Anloe;; 1.'epvy Road; then,ae Westerly Vollowin(; the centerline or s(Aid rciuo to t Eaat line of oaid Section 4; thence North slon the Ealt line of Laid 'oction 4 to a point that io h66.7 ?Get 00eth (-W tt L;ont,0-LA COraOr oe the NorthowA, quavter of the Souneast QLIOV[;01' oe thu Au'Ah- eaot qusrtur of naid Section 4; thonco West 4660Y voot; 46.6.7 feet to the South line oP the North hale or tqo Southoast (Icketer ce the Dorthenot (intoner or naid rection 4; thence ',loot a tho South liAlo of the Worth h 1 of the Southecolt qunrtor of thu Nopt1 ea3L quarter or said Section 4 a distance ue h5743 eooto Hore or lose, to A point thot iL 64 feet woot of the F7)tithut corner of' the NortneLht, quarter 0t the Southeaot quwotc,r of tho Northeast quar';er .;0o;ion h; thence Nopth G(0.0 7-A,0.6, wive OP les:32, to s. point Ule 11110 of the Seuti:wo:A quLvtov or the Northeast quarter of Lnu r':Jrtnetiot quarter of 6aid Section 4 that is 264 feet Uo;3t oe iai(1 !.'o4ith- ePist COVUCP Or the Southweot qt;olitcp 02 the r iC333 iUe ue thu !:coleast quarter of zaid '.!cction 4; thence WeJt u the Louth VLW3 Of; the Soothwest quartmi of is,no N3lethoaot quete cif tno 0,.1,thoot LlertoL' oeid Section 4 a distance oP 400 i'ect, ToK,o ur 1(J, to the :Atn- we3t covner o1 the Southwoot quarter of tne NJx-t%eat quovter oe tne Vurteast qutwtor of said Section 4; thence North VTAO feet, 13, J3 t}3( wcst iihe eV the Northeaot t3 t,( u° the N(W'61U t14,t0!.' to the North lino o' oaid Soction 4; utio;o6,0 eucA;, lore tp::1 less, ,totho place or boinnlo,. T,A;other wi t;I L non-c7eluolve u tvT acce3h and utility puppo:wi ovur the f,J114,11FIL du:10.$,,qbud t:y, 13;6, to 1 the Southw,Ict tAvner oe tnektito,t uavtev of the Ouvtheast quaver wr Section 4, ioiiL ¶ t1OUt4,9 1 '40i k; or the V:111L1o1 113 1Levt6lan, Wa3hintovi (Juvhby, Oreon3 PtUkAilIP; LO..1100 North alon the section 1100 .A6dY jAjAb tO the sootiJn line 50 foot; thence South perollul to lino 400 Veet; thonco East ot ri-;ht anaec to the, 1u1 03 1,he 50 'foet3 thence North alon-.:; the oeeLIJ nhe lyilJ Coot Ht,ee oe 1)0 12.11232s0 A' Exhibit "A" Order No. 3591410 Be;innin.7; at o point markin.:r the Southeast corner of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Rane 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, WashimIton County, Oreon; runnin3 thence Nortn alon,1 the section line 2067 . reet; thence West parallel to the North line of said Section 4 a distance of 660 feet; thence South parallel to the East line of said Section 4 a distance of 400 feet; thence East parallel to the North line of said Section 4 a distarce of 660 feet; to the East line of said Section 4; thence North 193.3 feet to the place of beLL.innin-,;. TOVTHER WITH an easement for road and access purposes across the de;cribed tract of lanu, to wit; Be3innin;# at the Southeast corner of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 4, Township 2 South, Rane 1 Wea_t of the Willamette M':!ridian, Washington County, Orenn;.runnin! thence North alonl the Section lino 25 feet; thence East 75 feet; thence Sout parallel to the Section line between Sections 3 and 4 to the centerline of Millers Ferry Road; thence West alon t:le centerline of said road to the East line of said Section 4; thence North alonl the section line to the place of be?;inninz. eI .1 1 '� rr +O N 06°40'[+ • s trootialw 264' ' 113264' 1 MbtMt4l1 • b 0l NI • 666 2S 1 ` .3 0... v � 1 ,t 1 1 y,, w y.. --„r . fir. ;+y r r, : 1 ROAD J'.Ji� ;t.iv�J I iVC 2.131 Nr�t��22�E 814 . �,,4 ,,, ,4 .. i i t 0 'rl�I / �■ ° i'. J +414, S. CJ/IIC, 1 S.......2 -....- .......J I 8 1„w W w V1 �Ir '1 ...ter N „ fj:lk ELGIN y + 463.2 r;G i 1 ,ail, /.. 1.120Q QO I kOo Nis "��x cv41�„ 1, ?. 4c1 I i5i�i ° ',� "` 3.1.aa, 1 �4 ° (rlp'�c C i h� +q �I�. ��' �`�r� 11i,,.rJ 1 ray 11 �w...�� 1 1500 Sty, `n444/ inter i,l L 4'1 I i' M 4 f `•,,,,.1 w fry vi -✓ ,e J .4.l 9. 0 r. 1 et td 0 i ,mil( ' I Y :1,tJ w,dY 11, Exhibit "A" at a point markin.; the Northeast corner ", ;:h1r, Sooth, Rec 1 WO3L of the 4il1alf,tte 0reon; runnin,4 thence South alor'y lino o47 o sto!.,ance of 1295 feet, more or leas, ..;c) : point caot corner or the Northehot luir.er of the Of oc,;d ‘tion 4; thence East 75 feet; tnenoo loetl -o ''ootio lino between Section 3 anU 4 to the eenoer line oe.' Yorri ,;oao; thence Westerly fo•lowin,; the centorlie or line of said Section 4; thence Nortn elonl the 'ection 4 to a point that i3 .466.7 feet North or ehe CO2r o to,e Northeaot quarter o the ,7outhest quarter quarter of said Section 4; thence West 46C,7 feet; thehoo %,o,o .4.„5.7 feet to tne South line of the North half of toe :',00theaot rser of te no.rtseAot quarter of on1,1 Section 4; thenoc Tht.! North half of the Soothcaot ,oarter of t. Nort, artur of said Section 4 n distance of 457,3 'eet, a ocTht t;htt 1.; 264 re.et wet of the oorne: or Southo.nst qua:ter of the 't at ':t.r:t100 4; thence North 6CC,0 feet, !lore or loo:o, line or the Southwest clrter of the Northepot qut,rter of rort'aers.% qoarter of ,aid Section 4 that is 264 fe#?% *:est Jr the 'o,to- eAst cornor or tne Southwest quarter o northenot qurtor ,f nort.loa.ot quarter of oaid ':'eetion 4; theme 4eot olohl thr :ine of tse :c.‘,.'*•,thwest quarter of the northeaot gunner of N „.liortLv salA Section 4 a diotance of 401 feet, llore or leoo, to tho corher of the Southweot quarter of the Northenot qo.orter o !oe Nort,:e.7..ot quarter of said Section 4! t:,chce North tr west line of t!te Northeaot quarter or the ',:oot eot quarter to the North line of sold See.;ion 4; thence East 1 foet, niore or less, to 'ale place or te;innin;, To;er 0..th a non-exclusive ecselent to a ri!ht, of way o,:•-oent for road access and utility purrosos OV0P the follo.oin (er; ract loo,A, to wit: PeIinnin At the outhc,..io', corner or th..3 quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 14, Towno,hip 2 Souo'h, 1 f1e6t of the %illamettc Meridian, Washin4ten Col,htv, Ore,n; runhIn: thence North alen,,, the section line 20C.7 feet; thtl'acc ar;10 to he section line 50 feet; thence South parallel to calu Sect;io.1 line 400 feet; thence t000t at ri;ht anles to tie -;ection line 5t) feet; thence North alon* Jeetion line 1)3,3 rent to the bo AV Ap,i0 toXCFrt the 1 ,ssono ot o oo:,nt tse cornoo of the :,,or,o qu-,o,e4- of tie quarter Jr Solos , ,O0000h, or j,;6 • ; ohehoo rorth ..,..!10tr 1111U °C:C!:,; Line cx ion 14 a ltne or (1.,to1 cf... to Nor.,:n line or '„o lloo of 31,1.1. that portion witoi the bounriaries or pt.blic roTo '2ha Th r 0 .y A , t f VOUS' TO DE-LIVE INA EMPLOYEE to whom, 44% aid 1-4-1 De !Ivor ONLY t s Wher itoliVerOtt L.1 to oildressoo l vbarces related for these services) Iteeelka the litolstglifiD NO, 0-54110 D ipi ole fle.terlbed below. F AbDRESSEMfor aterdl be pod AO • W WHERE DELIVERED (emly requester0 • • [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing]