03/08/2005 - Packet Completeness
Review for Boards,
Commissions and
Committee Records
CITY OF TIGARD
Planned Unit Development Committee
Name of Board, Commission or Committee
Mar 8,2005
Date of Meeting
To the best of my knowledge these documents are a complete copy of the official record.
C.L. Wiley
Print Name
V
Signalure
2/19/20113
Date
PD REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
March 8, 2005
Tigard Permit Center
7:00-9:00 p.m.
Agenda
1. Roll Call 7:00-7:05
2. Discussion: Proposed Code Changes 7:05-9:00
3. Additional Agenda Items 9:00-9:15
FREWING COMMENTS ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CODE RUL S 3/4/05
We do not yet have a clean version of the `purpose' rewrite. We have had good discussions, but
I would like to review and have opportunity to voice any more input.
On 6/21/04, I emailed to Morgan several changes I wanted to suggest. The only one we have
discussed is the elimination or limitation transferring density (no conclusions on what should be
our final recommendation). I think that density transfer should be prohibited where open space
is being designated for some other civic use. Such civic use can be natural area, sensitive lands,
buffer along a stream/wetland, or open space, (developed or not). I am aware that this might
limit the total housing capability of Tigard, and so am willing to have city staff analyze the
remaining unbuilt areas of the city and see if Tigard can meet its housing commitments to
METRO with this limitation on density transfer,provided such analysis can be done in the near
future.
The other comments of my 6/21/04 email remain of interest to me, and the committee should
discuss them adequately. We have discussed my interest in distinguishing between the
conceptual phase and the detailed development phase of planned development. I am flexible in
this regard, providing that the public gets notice and can review the conceptual design separate
from the detailed development design.
The following additional comments are provided for committee discussion and judgment:
A In 350.060, an outright allowed use should include designation/dedication of areas as open
space or natural area. U V,.� TrtSw+4'l C, 4yPc 0 -,Jw-- c V"(A sc �ov. 1'40v9k
B Section 350.090 provides submission requirements for the conceptual development plan; a
similar section should be added for submission requirements for the detailed development plan.-I
C Both 350.090 and the new section on submission requirements for the detailed development
plan (comment B supra) should have added to them a statement that these submission
requirements are necessary to determine compliance with the approval criteria of Section 350
and its referenced sections. Without this statement, one might just not submit the required
information and city staff would not have information to judge whether the approval criteria are
met. - wtt1 hGvG SwwL4 ZVL,,k(
D The planned development process involves a number of subjective approval criteria as
distinguished from clear and objective approval criteria(subdivisions, site development review,
�>etc.). Because of this distinction,the `rough proportionality' standards of the Dolan case should
4 N,� not be applicable to planned developments. Tigard and applicants should be able to offer and
yF l demand real estate dedications consistent with the purposes of a planned development, regardless
�r r of land values. The alternative for a developer, who doesn't care about improving the character
�v f of a site, is to use the subdivision process. I would appreciate staff review of the legality of this
matter and committee discussion of the concept.
E At 18.350.030 E, the term `substantial modifications' should be defined.
F Under 18.350.090 B, a new item,numbered 7 should be added, requiring submittal of the
charter of a homeowners association or equivalent, in order to be able to determine whether the
provisions of 18.350.110A.2.b will be met.
f
Please provide committee members with the forms or requirements referenced at
18.350.090.A.4 and 18.350.090.B,where it is stated that the Director has more detailed
requirements for a planned development.
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE CHANGES
For TCDC 18.350.090, add"lot coverage, landscaping area, open space area, location of
buildings, streets, parking configuration, utility easements, landscaping or other site
improvements". This is necessary information to allow determination of compliance with
18.350.030.B.1. -'I � ,(� 14X4,,1 rUJiwJ otktW VU" ,5 rioa rty,,,.,,u,rl o1 J4,jac
For TCDC 18.350.100.A, restate as "The provisions of Chapter 18.360, Site
Development Review, are not applicable to conceptual plans for a Planned Development.
Chapter 18.360 is applicable to detailed development plans for a Planned Development"
to clarify the different requirements between conceptual and detailed development plans
under Chapter 18.350. - I ire, d upl fcu+-�- STA c4/m tq�ov� 14 cAppl
For TCDC 18.350.110.A.1, restate as "The area to be designated as open space and the
proposed conveyance documents of subsection 2 below shall be submitted as part of the
detailed development plan." This will clarify the sequence of information submittal for
open space. In subsection 2.b, the city attorney's review and approval of the terms of
conveyance should be stated as a requirement for approval of the detailed development
plan under Chapter 18.350. '7
For TCDC Table 18.510.2, define Maximum Lot Coverage for larger lot sizes as follows:
"20%, 30%, 40% and 50%"respectively for Rl, R2, R3.5 and R4.5 residential zones to
recognize that Tigard's comprehensive plan desires that such lots retain natural features
wherever possible. (7v4--rtirk(,�t„y J.,,c +�,, ?-P c o m m
For TCDC 18.715.020.A.Lc, add"includinsurface water drainage channels, water
quality treatment facilities and retention po swales and associated dedicated tracts"to
reco ize t at tt ese areas are not able to be developed. outer ccs�k,n� �,� 1��-k��� y e e�
For TCDC 18.715.020.A.2, add"and privately held dedicated open space"to recognize AV
that such space, dedicated to a homeowners association, is not able to be developed.
(D�1Q �oL C �lutur �fo��w1 kl
�,, (N
I� � f
For TCDC 18.715.020.3, delete"When information is not available . . . . (to end of J✓ �`� \�,.1'`'
section)" in recognition that all detailed development plans are required to show
(preliminary plat information)all land dedicated for public rights of way.
For TCDC 18.715.020.A.4, add"including sidewalks and planter strips"to recognize that
these areas are not able to be developed. �A u� U \ ,t 1,,, ���S�- ""'
p We, c.u,A �0 �ov �, Q Z
Delete TCDC 18.715.030 in its entirety.
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMM=E MEETING
JANUARY 4, 2005
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
1. Roll Call
Staff Liaison, Morgan Tracy welcomed the group and opened the meeting at 7:05
p.m. Mr. Tracy called roll.
2. Discussion: Proposed Purpose Statement
Prior to reviewing the Purpose statement language, the committee spent some time
discussing general aspects of Planned Developments. The question of lot size
eligibility remained, but the committee generally found that PD's offer flexibility that
is useful to both small infill lots, and allows master planning of large tracts. The
committee agreed that extra considerations should be added for large lots where the
opportunities exist, contemplating such things as trail systems, transit amenities, and
various land use districts. However, the general principles that guide these large
developments could also apply to small parcels.
The committee also discussed the neighborhood meeting process at some length.
There was frustration expressed that some developers were not doing as good a job
presenting the development concept, offering alternatives, and soliciting suggestions
from attendees. The committee expressed that part of the submittal requirements for
PD's should include the exhibits that were presented at the neighborhood meeting to
assess whether any efforts had been taken to address relevant and valid concerns of
the neighbors.
The committee discussed the issue of whether PD's should be allowed in commercial
and industrial zones, since they are infrequently applied for. The committee found
that although their implementation has been infrequent, there was still relevance to
PD's for these zones (for example, mixed use development, multi parcel master
planning), and therefore they should remain eligible. Several committee members
expressed that there was a lack of review over the methods for home construction
following the plat approval. For example, the use of stepped building techniques,
modified foundation designs for tree preservation, and sustainable practices and
materials used in the construction process.
The remainder of the meeting was spent reviewing and finessing the committee's
changes to the purpose statement from the December 13, 2004 meeting. The
committee generally favored the changes as proposed, with some alterations to
sentence structure and specific wording choices.
3. Next meeting was scheduled for February 7, 2005 but due to a conflict with
Planning Commission's schedule, the meeting was postponed to March 8, 2005 at
7:00 p.m. Staff adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m.
1
Planned Development Review Committee
Meeting Attendees:
Committee Members: David Walsh, Charles Schwarz, Sue Beilke, Alice Ellis-
Gaut,John Frewing, Ron Ellis-Gaut, Gretchen Buehner,
Absent: Scott Sutton*, Bill McMonagle.
Staff: Morgan Tracy, Dick Bewersdorff
*Scot Sutton has been excused from the Planning Commission and is no longer
actively involved in the PD Review Committee.
Distributed: 3/07/05
2
The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are:
1. To provide an alternate means for property development which result in
development more closely approaching the goals of Tigard's Comprehensive
Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider a broader range
of impacts to the city, and
REVISED:
1. To provide a means for property development which results in development
that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of
flexible standards which consider a bread range of and mitigate for the
potential impacts to the city; and
2. To provide alternate benefits (such as increased open space, commitment to
alternative building design, promotion of walkable communities, preservation of
significant natural resources, greater aesthetic appeal, etc.) to the city in lieu of
strict adherence to all other rules of the Tigard Community Development Code,
and
REVISED:
2. To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space,
alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significantco
natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of cow asset
the larger community etc.` to the Gity in lieu of strict adherence to many of the
all-ether rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; and
3. To encourage unique and differentiated neighborhoods (housing styles, use of
open space, transportation facilities, etc.) in Tigard, which will retain their
character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing
neighborhoods through appropriate buffering, and
REVISED:
3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through
architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities)
which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the
characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot
size transitioning; and
4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features
and amenities (trees, water resources, views, etc.) though the use of a planning
procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual
review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a
development to a particular site, and
REVISED:
4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features
and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a
planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives,
conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a
development to a particular site; and
5. To allow an amount of development on a site which will provide some
economic return to the owner and developer consistent with the degree of
negative impact or perceived benefit to neighbors and the general public
resources of Tigard, and
REVISED:
5. To allow consider an amount of development on a site which will provide a
benefit to the owner and developer consistent with the degree of positive or
negative impact to neighbors and to the public resources and facilities of Tigard;
and
dA Scv�
6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural
environment through green building, low impact construction techniques, and an
emphasis on sustainability.
REVISED:
6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural
environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility
construction methods and materials.
Proposed Definitions:
Natural Area. An area of land and/or water that has a predominantly undeveloped character.
Natural areas may be pristine,or may have been previously affected by human activity such as
vegetation removal, agriculture,grading or drainage if such areas retain significant natural
characteristics, or have recovered or been restored to the extent that they contribute to the City's
natural systems including hydrology,vegetation, or wildlife habitat. Natural areas shall be
permanently reserved by common ownership among the owners of a development,
dedicated to the public,or by other appropriate means committed to use for the general
public.
Open Space. Land to remain in natural or landscaped condition for the purpose of providing a
scenic, aesthetic appearance and/or protecting natural processes,providing passive or active
recreational uses, and/or maintaining natural vegetation. Open space shall be permanently
reserved by common ownership among the owners of a development, dedicated to the public, or
by other appropriate means committed to use for the general public.
Active Use Recreational Facilities: Facilities for recreational uses that tend to be more organized
and/or that require a greater degree of site development and conversion of natural area, including
sports fields,playground equipment,group picnic shelters,hard surfaced pathways,permanent
restrooms,accessory parking lots and similar facilities.
Passive Use Recreational Facilities: Facilities for recreational uses related to the functions and
values of a natural area that require limited and low impact site improvement, including soft-
surface trails, signs,pedestrian bridges, seating,viewing blinds,observation decks,handicapped
facilities,drinking fountains,picnic tables, interpretive facilities,and similar facilities.
Memo from J. L Frewing
RECAVED
r r, MAR in 4 1005
OITY GARD
Opj
. 3m.
Pornbnd Gon*rol EkKMc
1
immittee Name ISD �e,�,«,- C0I444f
-3100105
VOLUNTEER SIGN-IN SHEET
Date Volunteer Name HOURS Comments
sib
r► `1
1 Aadm\susank\smarttr.doc