Loading...
01/05/2009 - Packet 74 '' City of Tigard TIGARD Planning Commission — Agenda MEETING DATE: January 5, 2009, 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard—Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 p.m. 4. APPROVE MINUTES 7:05 p.m. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT 7:20 p.m. PERIODIC REVIEW PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY The City of Tigard has been notified that the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) has initiated periodic review for the community. DLCD is tasked with overseeing the process and focuses periodic review on economic development,needed housing, transportation,public facilities and services, and urbanization.The first step of periodic review is to perform an evaluation of the City's comprehensive plan and land use regulations.An important component of the evaluation is to provide the opportunity for citizen review and comment. This is an opportunity for citizen comment in the presence of the Planning Commission,before the final evaluation is made by the City Council on January 27, 2009. 6. PUBLIC HEARING 7:50 p.m. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2008-00004 MOTOR VEHICLE SALES IN THE I-P ZONE CODE AMENDMENT REQUEST: A Development Code Amendment to amend the text of Table 18.530.1 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow"motor vehicle sales/rental"in the I-P zone as a Restricted (R) use, currently Not Permitted (N),provided (a) such operation takes place wholly within an enclosed building and (b) does not exceed 20% of the floor area of the given development complex. LOCATION: Land zoned Industrial Park (I-P). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial Park. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g.,restaurants,personal services and fitness centers,in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise,glare, PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA-JANUARY 5, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 2 odor,vibration, are permit in the I-P zone. In addition to mandat site development review,design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well- integrated, attractively landscaped,and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.130, 18.380, 18.390 and 18.530;Comprehensive Plan Goals 1.1 and 9.1;Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Sections 3.07.110 and 3.07.410;and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2 and 9. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 9:15 p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT 9:20 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA—JANUARY 5, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 2 of 2 Tigard Planning Commission TIGARD PERIODIC REVIEW PUBLIC COMMENT Agenda Item # Page 1 of Date of Hearing — If you would like to make a public comment with regard to Periodic Review, please PRINT your name, address, zip code & email below: Name: EMAIL: Address: City, State, Zip: Name: EMAIL: Address: City, State, Zip: Name: EMAIL: Address: City, State, Zip: Name: EMAIL: Address: City, State, Zip: Name: EMAIL: Address: City, State, Zip: III City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Tigard Planning Commission From: Darren Wyss, Senior Planner '75`') Re: Periodic Review Date: December 29, 2008 As a result of the cancellation of the Planning Commission meeting on December 15, 2008, the Periodic Review Evaluation agenda item has been rescheduled for the January 5, 2009 Commission meeting. Comment will be accepted from the public on the Evaluation materials that were included in the previous Commission packet. I have included the text from a previous memorandum below. Many local governments are required by state statute to periodically review their comprehensive plan and land use regulations to ensure they continue to provide for the growth management and development needs of the community. This periodic review process also ensures that city plans are consistent with the Oregon Revised Statutes, Oregon Administrative Rules, programs of state agencies, and the statewide planning goals. The City of Tigard has been notified that the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) has initiated periodic review for the community. DLCD is tasked with overseeing the process and focuses periodic review on economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services, and urbanization. Periodic review includes several steps. First, an evaluation of the comprehensive plan and land use regulations takes place to determine what,if any, changes are needed. Second, a work program is developed with scheduled tasks to be followed to make the necessary changes. Third, the work program is carried out. The City is in the process of completing the evaluation step. Staff has used the DLCD evaluation checklist to perform the attached evaluation. State statute also requires the City to provide an opportunity for interested citizens to participate in the evaluation. The City took comment on the evaluation at the November 19, 2008 meeting of the Tigard Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI). No citizens submitted oral or written comments at the meeting. The City will also provide the opportunity for citizens to submit comment before the Planning Commission at its January 5, 2009 meeting. The role of the Commission is to simply provide the venue for citizen comment and the Commission is not expected to respond to comments. The Commission may also submit comments on the evaluation if desired. Planning staff will gather all comments,provide citizens with a written response, and include the comments in the complete evaluation that will be finalized by the City Council at its January 27, 2009 meeting. The City just spent a significant amount of time and effort to complete an update of its Comprehensive Plan,with the exception of Goal 12 which will be updated along with the Tigard Transportation System Plan. Since the update process was coordinated with DLCD, the City's state and regional partners, and included an intensive citizen involvement program, the City does not anticipate a need for an extensive periodic review work program. Nonetheless, some additional work will be needed to ensure continued compliance with state statutes and administrative rules. If you would like more information regarding periodic review,please visit the following: Oregon Revised Statute 197.628-644 http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/197.html Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 25 http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/rules/OARS 600/0AR 660/660 025.html If you have any questions regarding Tigard's periodic review, the process, or the role of the Planning Commission at the January 5th meeting, please feel free to contact me at 503-718-2442 or Darren @tigard-or.gov. City of Tigard Periodic Review Evaluation (DLCD checklist questions) ■ November 24, 2008 .r t GA l u The City of Tigard undertook a complete update of its Comprehensive Plan,with the exception of Goal 12 which will be updated along with the Tigard Transportation System Plan, during the three- year period of 2006 through 2008. The process was completed through of a series of Post Acknowledgement Plan Amendments (PAPA) as allowed by state law. This was the first complete update of the City's original 1983 Plan. The goals, policies, and recommended action measures included in the document take into account the broad range of changes that have occurred since the original Plan was adopted and acknowledged by the state 25 years ago. These current conditions and projected trends are summarized in the Tigard 2007 Resource Report,which provides the substantive factual basis for many of the Plan chapters. Citizen involvement was an integral element in the update of the Plan. The citizen involvement program included many community meetings and public hearings, as well as considering relevant findings from past citizen surveys and 10 years of citizen engagement associated with the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow visioning project. Through these efforts, values and attitudes of Tigard's citizens were incorporated into the updated City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. The update process was coordinated with the Department of Land Conservation and Development and the City's state and regional partners. The City feels the new Comprehensive Plan text language complies with state and regional plans and programs, and the statewide planning goals. The City spent a significant amount of time and effort to complete this update, and it does not anticipate a need for an extensive periodic review work program. None the less, some additional work is needed to ensure continued compliance. The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development Periodic Review Survey Checklist is found below with City responses included. Factor 1: There has been a substantial change in circumstances including but not limited to the conditions,findings, or assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan or land use regulations were based, so that the comprehensive plan or land use regulations do not comply with the statewide planning goals relating to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services and urbanization. 1. Does the economic development element of the comprehensive plan need to be updated? Periodic Review Evaluation 1 City of Tigard The Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 9: Economic Development goals,policies,and recommended action measures were updated through the post acknowledgement plan amendment (PAPA) process during the period 2007-2008. This was part of an overhaul of the entire Plan, one that was needed as the previous Plan language was predominately from the original document adopted in 1983. The old language did not reflect current conditions and circumstances in Tigard and the Metro region. It also did not reflect the aspirations and values of the community and was inconsistent with available data. In 1997, Metro assigned Tigard an employment target of 17,801 new jobs by the year 2017. During the subsequent 10 years,Tigard only added 3,800 jobs in the community. If jobs are added at the same rate for the next 20 years,Tigard will not reach its Metro target. However, the Metro employment target is out of sync with the Oregon Department of Employment data that projects Tigard's employment may only grow by 13,000 jobs by the year 2024.The discrepancy needs addressed. Regardless,not attaining the Metro employment target is significant for the well-being of the community.Tigard is not at a lack for jobs, but a realistic employment allocation will be an issue that Tigard must address with Metro as it updates the household and employment data for the upcoming urban growth boundary expansion analysis. Because Tigard is "land-locked" it is not likely that substantial industrial/employment lands will be added to the City except that which occurs through redevelopment or refill activities. So the addition of a substantial number of new jobs is possible. The City has an adequate supply of commercial land available for both office and retail and services employment. However, a concern for the City is the supply of buildable industrial lands. Roughly 66 acres remain with no heavy industrial zoned land available.The largest section of light industrial and industrial park is owned by one individual and both have development constraints, primarily related to transportation. Tigard is also profoundly affected by the regional economy as there are more jobs in Tigard than residents over the age of 16 in the workforce (State of Oregon Employment Department, 2006). For example, some 70%of residents commute outside the city for work,making Tigard a net attractor of commuters. Tigard is interested in ways to: 1) enhance job density,especially in its light industrial districts compared to what exists today;2) promote redevelopment of the Tigard downtown into a high density employment/housing mixed use urban center;3) increasing employment potential within the 360 acre Tigard Triangle area; and 4) promoting intensive redevelopment along Highway 99W that would be associated with the provision of high capacity transit. New land use tools that allowed/promoted greater employment densities would be the first step toward achieving these objectives. The City has undertaken a basic evaluation of commercial and employment lands,businesses and land-use characteristics, employment, income, and payroll characteristics, and future land use needs to the year 2027. Periodic Review Evaluation 2 City of Tigard A. Does new information on national, state, or local economic trends show any changed circumstances since the plan was last updated? Yes, an Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) would be appropriate. Has the city requested technical assistance and information available from Metro? Yes. Further, does Metro's economic forecasting or trends information need to be incorporated into the plan? Not sure, as Metro is updating the information and the City will need to assess the need to incorporate findings into its Plan once it is completed. The City needs to perform an EOA and if Metro information is available,it will get incorporated. B. Has there been a change in your community's assessment of the types of industrial and commercial businesses that are most likely to develop in your area? No,but this is information that will be reviewed through an EOA. Does your community have sufficient buildable sites that are suitable for these types of uses? Don't know, but the completion of an EOA will provide direction. C. Is your plan out-of-date regarding an accurate inventory of suitable industrial and commercial sites? Yes, but this is information that will be reviewed and updated as necessary during the completion of the EOA. D. Does the inventory of commercial and industrial land identify sites that are available now or can be made available quickly? No, and this information will be updated as part of the EOA. That is, does the inventory address a short-term supply of employment land(i.e., ready for construction within one year of application for building permit or request for service extension)? No, and this information will be updated as part of the EOA. Periodic Review Evaluation 3 City of Tigard E. Does the inventory identify sites needing additional attention in order to make them suitable for industrial or commercial uses (e.g., wetland delineation, transportation improvements, provision of water or sewer)? Yes, but this is information that will be reviewed and updated as necessary during the completion of the EOA. F. Are there sites zoned industrial that are unlikely to develop because of transportation access issues, environmental factors, topography, or other constraints? Yes, transportation is the primary constraint to developing the economic potential of existing lands and increasing employment density. G. Does your community have an insufficient supply of industrial and commercial sites that can be served by public facilities projects, either existing or scheduled to be built within the next five years? Yes, transportation is the primary constraint to developing the economic potential of existing lands and increasing employment density. H. Has your community lost suitable industrial sites through rezoning for other uses? No. I. What plan or regulatory amendments are needed to respond to changes in economic development trends in your community? Don't know, but an EOA will provide direction. J. Has your city coordinated with Metro regarding employment allocated to your community? Yes, and Metro is currently updating its population and employment projections and Tigard is participating in the efforts. Results will need to be incorporated into City plans as needed. One important point is that Tigard is primarily a community of commuters. More than 70% of the City's workforce commutes outside the city and a significant portion of commuters come to the city to work in industrial and commercial venues.Any new economic analysis needs to fully consider the interrelationships of the various parts of the Portland Metro economy. Conclusion: The City will need to update its Transportation System Plan (scheduled for calendar year 2009) and complete an Economic Opportunities Analysis in order to address factors 1, 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 1G, 1I, and 1J. In addition, the City must coordinate with Metro to address the relatively slow growth of employment as related to Metro's total employment allocation numbers for the City. Periodic Review Evaluation 4 City of Tigard 2. Does recent information on population and housing trends suggest a need to update your comprehensive plan or land use regulations? The City has undertaken an inventory and analysis of existing housing conditions. This inventory has determined that Tigard meets the Metropolitan Housing Rule that mandates the opportunity for an overall density of 10 or more dwelling units per buildable acre and sufficient buildable land to provide the opportunity for at least a 50/50 mix of detached/attached housing. Furthermore, the City has determined that it is on track to meet its 1994 Metro Title 1 housing capacity target of 6,308 additional dwelling units. During the period from 1994 to 2006, a total of 3,565 dwelling units (single-family and multi-family) were added to Tigard's housing stock. This leaves a total of 2,743 additional units to accommodate and the City has determined that existing vacant and available land is sufficient to meet that need. No adjustments to the City's land use codes or maps are needed at this time. Housing affordability studies show the whole Portland Metro region's housing prices escalated rapidly during the period of 2000 to 2005. During the same period,wages grew much more slowly. In Tigard,housing prices have increased consistently along with the region and single-family housing prices have outpaced the purchasing ability of those who make the median-family income. This is a broad state and Metro issue and needs to be addressed on a regional basis due to the interrelationship with economic needs in the region. Although Tigard predicts meeting its Metro Title 1 housing targets, the ability to accommodate longer-term housing needs has limitations associated with Tigard being"land-locked" by unincorporated development. However, the City has interest in the development/refill of housing within the Washington Square Regional Center and the Tigard Triangle. Both have mixed use zoning in place to accommodate high density housing.The Tigard downtown also has potential to accommodate a significant increase in housing capacity over what currently exists.The City has been focused on the redevelopment of its downtown for a couple of years and residential housing opportunities remain a primary focus of the planning. Finally,land adjacent to Highway 99W has the potential to accept high density housing if high capacity transit is available at some point in the future. This would include some rezoning,but the City will not pursue such amendments until the final decision is made on the future locations of high capacity transit. Tigard has developed affordable housing strategies consistent with Metro proposals and has a variety of land use districts and implementing regulations to provide a wide variety of housing opportunities. A. Has the city adopted a population projection coordinated by Metro? Yes. Periodic Review Evaluation i City of Tigard B. Has the distribution of household incomes remained consistent in the community since the housing element of the comprehensive plan was last updated? No. C. Are the costs of new housing units affordable based on projected household incomes? No. D. Does the city provide the types, locations, and densities of housing needed by all of its residents? Yes, the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps provide the opportunity for an overall density of 10 or more dwelling units per buildable acre and sufficient buildable land to provide the opportunity for at least a 50/50 mix of detached/attached housing. E. Are buildable residential lands being developed at the rate projected in the comprehensive plan? Yes. F. Is there significant difference between the gross amount of residential lands developed since the plan was last updated and what the plan data predicted? No. G. Has the city coordinated with Metro regarding the expected housing capacity for your community? Yes, the City has determined that it is on track to meet its 1994 Metro Title 1 housing capacity target of 6,308 additional dwelling units. During the period from 1994 to 2006, a total of 3,565 dwelling units (single-family and multi-family) were added to Tigard's housing stock. This leaves a total of 2,743 additional units to accommodate and the City has determined that existing vacant and available land is sufficient to meet that need. No adjustments to the City's land use codes or maps are needed at this time. H. Are your zoning and development ordinances well organized and user-friendly? Yes. Are your residential development and design standards for needed housing clear and objective? Periodic Review Evaluation 6 City of Tigard Yes. When did your community last evaluate its development processes and standards? 1997. Are there provisions that should be amended or eliminated to better reflect your community's vision? No. 1. Have all of your ordinances been amended to fully comply with the Federal Fair Housing Act and state manufactured home statutes? Not sure, the City will need to perform a thorough analysis of the ordinances to evaluate compliance. J. Does your community have minimum density requirements for each zoning district? Does your community have a minimum average density policy for overall residential development? Yes, there is an 80% minimum density requirement as outlined in Metro Title 1 and the City has the capability to meet its Metro Housing Target. No, the community doesn't have an overall density policy, but has the proper zoning in place to be in compliance with the Metropolitan Housing Rule that mandates the opportunity to have an overall density of 10 units per acre. K. Are the zoning ordinance densities consistent with the comprehensive plan? Yes, although the City needs to evaluate duplex lot sizes allowed in single-family residential zones to ensure consistency with comprehensive plan designations. L. Has the mix of housing types(i.e., single-family and multi family) constructed since your last plan update been built as expected? Yes. Are the city's comprehensive plan designations and zoning code compliant with the Metropolitan Housing Rule (OAR 660, Division 7), particularly the requirements for minimum residential density for new construction? Periodic Review Evaluation 7 City of Tigard Yes, the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps provide the opportunity for an overall density of 10 or more dwelling units per buildable acre and sufficient buildable land to provide the opportunity for at least a 50/50 mix of detached/attached housing. M. Have housing providers been successful in satisfying the housing needs of low income citizens and citizens with special housing requirements? No. If not, what actions need to be taken to address these needs? The City needs to take a more proactive role in working with developers and low-income housing providers to ensure these types of housing are available in the community. Zoning regulations are in place to allow the housing to be built, but the market has not dictated construction within Tigard up to this point in time. N. Does the comprehensive plan include a thorough, up-to-date residential buildable lands inventory and housing needs assessment? Yes. Does the buildable lands inventory include the housing capacity attributable to mixed use zones (see 660-008-0020 and 660-007-0018)? Yes. 0. Is there a 20-year supply of vacant or redevelopable buildable land or land with infill potential in the following categories? Single-family-Yes Multi-family-Yes Dorms, prisons, institutions -Yes Government-assisted—Yes P. If a shortage exists in any of the categories above, how will the discrepancy be resolved? No shortage exists. Q. What plan or regulatory amendments are needed to respond to changes in population and housing trends in your community? Periodic Review Evaluation 8 City of Tigard The City does not anticipate any needed changes at this point in time. Conclusion: The City is in compliance with the Metropolitan Housing Rule and Metro Title 1 requirements. The City believes the current comprehensive plan map designations and zoning districts allow ample opportunity for a variety of housing types, sizes, and densities that have been, and will continue to, meet the community's needs. However, the City will need to evaluate factor 2I to ensure consistency with the state manufactured home statutes and 2K to ensure duplex lot sizes are consistent with comprehensive plan designations in single-family zones. The City will not need to address population and housing trends during Periodic Review. 3. Do the plan and ordinances adequately account for limitations on buildable lands from natural resources and hazards? Yes, the removal of sensitive lands is part of the protocol when developing the Tigard buildable lands inventory. Also, the Sensitive Lands chapter of the Tigard Community Development Code addresses development and the regulations regarding natural resources and hazards. A. Have the plan and ordinances been updated to comply with OAR 660, Division 23 (Goal 5 Rule) regarding wetlands, riparian corridors, and wildlife habitat? Yes, the recent updates to the Plan ensure continued compliance with the Goal 5 Rule and the Sensitive Lands chapter (Title 18.775) of the Tigard Community Development Code regulates development impact on wetlands, riparian corridors, and wildlife habitat. The City has an adopted Local Wetlands Inventory (approved by Division of State Lands in 1997) and an adopted Significant Habitat Areas Map (developed as part of the Metro Title 13: Nature in Neighborhoods Program). The City also implements the Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards which mandates setbacks from all stream corridors within the City. B. Has the jurisdiction received any new, updated, or revised information regarding floodway or floodplain boundaries or geologic or other hazards that needs to be addressed in the plan? No, the Hazards chapter of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan is up-to-date and includes reference to the latest data available from FEMA and the Oregon Department of Geology. Conclusion: The City will not need to address natural resources or hazards during Periodic Review. Periodic Review Evaluation 9 City of Tigard 4. Are public facility and transportation plans and financing mechanisms adequate to accommodate planned growth in a timely fashion? Not sure, as circumstances in the community have changed since the Public Facility Plan and Transportation System Plan were adopted. By updating both plans, the financing mechanisms and the accommodation of projected growth will be analyzed and adjusted if needed. A. Has the jurisdiction been unable to provide services for development of residential and employment land according to the schedule in the public facilities plan? No,Tigard has continued to provide the needed services for development. However, the public facilities plan was adopted in 1991 and is out-of-date. Circumstances, such as the City taking over the provision of water, new agreements with Clean Water Services, and new stormwater and wastewater management and master plans, have changed and need to be addressed through an update of the City of Tigard Public Facility Plan. B. Have there been changes to any of the following conditions that were not anticipated by the public facilities or transportation systems plans? • Changes in population, housing, or employment • Urban growth boundary amendments • Master plan updates • Major plan map or zoning amendments • Significant consumers or users that were not anticipated • Facility projects built or delayed • Other Yes, the public facilities plan was completed in 1991, is out-of-date, and relies on data and assumptions that have changed dramatically. It is in need of an update. The transportation system plan (TSP) was adopted in 2002 and incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan and land use regulations, but relies on data from the late 1990s. The TSP is scheduled for update during the 2009 calendar year and will be funded by a grant from the Oregon Department of Transportation. C. Have any of the conditions in (B) above changed to the extent that the plan or the project lists in a public facilities or transportation system plan need to be revised? Yes, both plans need updated. D. Does your list of short-term public facility projects need to be updated? No, the City updates its 5-year Capital Improvement Plan on an annual basis. The information may need to be included in the update of the public facility plan. Periodic Review Evaluation 10 City of Tigard E. Does your community satisfy state and federal standards for the quality of water supplied, quality of water discharged from your treatment plant, and quality of storm water discharge? Yes, the Tigard Water Division conducts an annual quality test for the potable water supplied to the Tigard Water Service Area. The water meets or exceeds all federal and state drinking water standards. Clean Water Services (CWS) holds the Clean Water Act permits for wastewater and stormwater discharge and is currently in compliance with regulations.Tigard completes maintenance tasks and implements the CWS Design and Construction Standards as part of an Intergovernmental Agreement to ensure compliance with Clean Water Act standards. F. Are financing sources sufficient to cover the cost of capital construction projects? Not sure,by updating the public facility plan the City will be able to assess the overall financial needs for infrastructure funding. G. Do the financing sources need revisiting to meet future needs? What actions will be taken to address this issue? Not sure, an update of the public facility plan will be the first step in identifying need and potential sources of funding for planned capital construction projects. Conclusion: The City will need to update its Transportation System Plan (scheduled for calendar year 2009) and its Public Facility Plan in order to address factors 4, 4A,4B,4C, 4D, 4F, and 4G. 5. Is there new information affecting the comprehensive plan that has not yet been incorporated into the plan? Yes, Metro has a number of projects currently underway that could potentially need incorporated in Tigard's plans. They include: an update of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), updating the economic forecast and trends,performing analysis related to urban/rural reserves, and analysis relating to high capacity transit in the region.The City will need to follow the outcomes of these projects and act accordingly. Information related to the RTP will get incorporated into the City's update of its Transportation System Plan in 2009. A. New information provided by state agencies is listed in the attached sheet. Does any of this information need to be addressed in your plan?If so, how? Yes, the Department of Human Services (DHS) has submitted suggested work program elements to protect the City's ASR wells from contamination. DHS recommends identifying the drinking water source areas (DSWA) for ASR wells #1, #2,and #3 and performing an inventory of potential contaminant sources (PCS) for each of the DSWA. DHS recommends using the information to Periodic Review Evaluation 11 City of Tigard develop protection strategies for the ASR wells and are prepared to offer the City their assistance in the development and prioritization of such strategies. A copy of the DHS letter is included as Attachment 1. B. Is there any other new information available from Metro or other sources relating to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services or urbanization that needs to be included in your plan? Yes, Metro has a number of projects currently underway that could potentially need incorporated in Tigard's plans. They include: an update of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), updating the economic forecast and trends,performing analysis related to urban/rural reserves, and analysis relating to high capacity transit in the region. The City will need to follow the outcomes of these projects and act accordingly. Information related to the RTP will get incorporated into the City's update of its Transportation System Plan in 2009. Conclusion: The City will need to incorporate RTP updates into its Transportation System Plan (scheduled for calendar year 2009). Other Metro studies and data may potentially need to be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code. The DHS suggested work program elements should be incorporated into the Periodic Review process. All of these projects will address factors 5, 5A, and 5B. 6. Have changes in local goals or objectives occurred since adoption of the comprehensive plan that require amendments to the plan or land use regulations relating to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services or urbanization? No, the City recently finished a complete update of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan that incorporated current community conditions and values into the goals, policies, and recommended action measures. This update included hundreds of citizen volunteers hours committed to developing a vision for Tigard's future. A. For example, does the adoption of a regional economic development strategy or changes in economic opportunities necessitate modification of plan policies? Not sure, as Metro is currently working on updating the regional economic forecast and trends and the City is planning on performing an Economic Opportunities Analysis as part of Periodic Review. B. Are there new community goals or objectives (or changes to existing ones) that need to be addressed in the comprehensive plan? No, the City recently finished a complete update of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan that incorporated current community conditions and values into the goals, policies, and recommended Periodic Review Evaluation 12 City of Tigard action measures. This update included hundreds of citizen volunteers hours committed to developing a vision for Tigard's future. C. Are there goals, and objectives, or policies in the comprehensive plan that are no longer applicable and should be deleted or amended? Yes, a number of Goal 12: Transportation policies are very project specific and out-of-date. It would be advantageous to remove these from the Comprehensive Plan and replace them with relevant goals, policies and recommended action measures. D. Have all plan policies that obligate your jurisdiction to implement specific provisions of the future been carried out(e.g., a policy to complete planning for a wildlife habitat or historic resource when more complete inventory information is available)? If not, what additional planning work needs to be carried out in periodic review? Yes. Conclusion: The City will need to update its Transportation System Plan (scheduled for calendar year 2009) and perform an Economic Opportunities Analysis. The City may also wish to update the Transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan to remove unnecessary language before the completion of the TSP update. These projects will address factors 6A and 6C. 7. What major activities or events affecting land use have occurred that were not anticipated in the plan, but which may necessitate updating the plan?For example, did a major new employer site in your city, with unanticipated effects on roads, water, sewer, and/or housing supply? No unanticipated major activities have occurred that need to be addressed at this time. Conclusion: The City will not need to address any unanticipated events affecting land use during Periodic Review. Factor 2: Decisions based on acknowledged comprehensive plan and land use regulations are inconsistent with the goals relating to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services and urbanization. 1. Are land use decisions made according to your acknowledged comprehensive plan and land use regulations achieving the purpose and intent of Statewide Planning Goals 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14? Periodic Review Evaluation 13 City of Tigard Yes. A. Have prospective employers passed over the city because permitting procedures were too onerous or because approved plan changed have reduced or eliminated your supply of available and suitable employment sites? No. B. Do your plan policies and zoning regulations provide for the housing needs of the residents of the jurisdiction?Are any housing types needed now or in the next 20 years not permitted in the jurisdiction?Are applications for needed housing getting denied because of discretionary approval criteria or conditional use permit requirements? The City's policies and development code are providing for a mix of housing types in the community that seems to be meeting the needs of the residents. The City allows all housing types anticipated to be needed over the next 20 years and has no issue with needed housing getting denied because of discretionary processes at this point in time nor does it anticipate such an issue in the future. C. Have developments permitted by your plan and code exceeded the capacity of transportation, water, sewer, or storm water management facilities? No. D. Do your plan and code allow development of inefficient land use patterns that increase the costs of public facilities and services and consume an unnecessary amount of land, such as through large minimum lot size standards, no maximum or average lot size standards, excessive on-site parking space requirements, excessive block length and street width standards, excessive yard setback and buffer standards, a predominance of large-lot single-family zoning, no mixed-use development, no provision for accessory dwelling units, or one-story height limits on commercial and industrial development? No, the City's policies and codes have been developed to promote the efficient use of land and the equitable provision of public facilities and services. Conclusion: The City's Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code appear to be achieving the intent and purpose of the Statewide Planning Goals and the City will not need to address any decision-making protocols during Periodic Review. Periodic Review Evaluation 14 City of Tigard 2. Are any of your implementation measures inadequate to carry out the policies of the comprehensive plan relating to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services and urbanization?For example, does your plan identify a targeted employer, but your industrial zone does not permit the use?Has your jurisdiction adopted a transportation system plan, but not implementing ordinances adequate to carry out the plan? No, the City's implementation measures are achieving the intent of the Plan policies. Conclusion: The City's regulations and plans appear to be achieving the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan policies and the City will not need to address these during Periodic Review. Factor 3: There are issues of regional or statewide significance, intergovernmental coordination, or state agency plans or programs affecting land use which must be addressed in order to bring comprehensive plans and land use regulations into compliance with the goals relating to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services and urbanization. 1. Is the level of coordination between the city and county, other cities, special districts, and state and federal agencies adequate to effectively implement the comprehensive plan?Do your urban growth boundary management agreement and/or urban service agreements need to be updated? Yes, intergovernmental coordination has continued to improve over the past few years and the City feels it is adequate to implement the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. The City's service agreements are also up-to-date and do not need attention at this time as the Tigard Urban Planning Area Agreement (mandated by Goal 2 coordination requirements) was last updated in 2006 and the Tigard Urban Services Agreement (mandated by SB 122, ORS 195.065) was last updated in July 2006. The City is coordinating with Metro and ODOT on transportation issues and both agencies will be involved in the update of the Tigard Transportation System Plan in 2009. A. Do you share resources or facilities with other jurisdictions?Are these adequate for all the jurisdictions involved?Do you have agreements regarding allocation of resources, capacity, etc.? Yes, the wastewater treatment facility is operated by Clean Water Services and receives the material collected in the City's sanitary sewer system. The City participates in the Master Planning of the system and the last update found the facilities to be adequate for the anticipated growth within the service district. The City took over the provision of water from the Tigard Water District in 1994. As part of the transfer of responsibility, Durham, King City, parts of Tigard, and parts of Periodic Review Evaluation 15 City of Tigard unincorporated Washington County are served by the City of Tigard. The City coordinates with its partners in the Master Planning of the system and currently has adequate facilities to meet expected future demand, including the newly signed joint water agreement with Lake Oswego. The City also has agreements in place with its partners that outline the roles, responsibilities, and allocation of resources. B. What special districts provide services within your urban growth boundary?Are these special districts participating in your planning process?Does the city have management agreements with those special districts providing services within the urban growth boundary consistent with ORS 195.065? Clean Water Services,Tigard Water District,Tri-Met,Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, and Tualatin Valley Water District all provide services within the Tigard Urban Services Boundary. Yes, these special districts participate in the planning process through the review of both land use applications and legislative amendments. Yes, the City has a signed urban service agreement (last updated in 2006) with the special districts as required by ORS 195.065. C. is the city/county urban growth management agreement functioning to adequately coordinate land use decisions inside the urban growth boundary? Yes, the coordination between the City and County is functioning as anticipated through the Tigard Urban Planning Area Agreement. Some issues exist concerning unincorporated development, but it is an issue that needs resolved at the regional level before making any amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan or Community Development Code. D. Are there other coordination issues that need to be addressed? No, not at this time. Conclusion: The City's coordination agreements are in place and functioning as intended. The City will not need to address coordination issues during Periodic Review. 2. What regional or state plans, programs, or issues affecting land use may call for amendments to the comprehensive plan in order to bring your plan and land use regulations into compliance with the statewide planning goals related to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services and urbanization? A. Have you contacted appropriate state agencies to participate in your periodic review process? Periodic Review Evaluation 16 City of Tigard Yes, the evaluation will be reviewed by the Periodic Review Assistance Team comprised of representatives from the necessary state agencies. B. Has a state agency notified you of an adopted plan or program affecting land use that needs to be addressed in your plan?If yes, what is the plan or program? Yes, the Department of Human Services (DHS) has submitted suggested work program elements to protect the City's ASR wells from contamination. DHS recommends identifying the drinking water source areas (DSWA) for ASR wells #1, #2, and #3 and performing an inventory of potential contaminant sources (PCS) for each of the DSWA. DHS recommends using the information to develop protection strategies for the ASR wells and are prepared to offer the City their assistance in the development and prioritization of such strategies. A copy of the DHS letter is included as Attachment 1. C. Are there housing needs identified in the statewide or county Consolidated Plan that have not been addressed in your comprehensive plan? No. D. Does the plan address the Regional Investment Strategy for your area?Are there actions needed to coordinate with or implement the strategy? No, the City needs to coordinate with Metro during the development of the Economic Opportunities Analysis and incorporate any Regional Investment Strategy into the work. Updates to the Comprehensive Plan or Community Development Code will be based on the outcome of the update. E. How has the city coordinated transportation issues with other local governments and the state? The City participates in the updating of the Regional Transportation Plan, as do all jurisdictions in the Metro area. The City is also scheduled to update its Transportation System Plan (TSP) in 2009 and as part of the scope of work will coordinate the involvement of ODOT, Metro, and surrounding jurisdictions as part of a technical advisory committee (TAC). The TAC will provide input on the issues and recommendations surrounding transportation. Does the plan contain strategies for dealing with access management, new commercial development accessed by state highways, or the potential impacts of any new major transportation system project? Yes, access management and design standards are in place. Additionally, the City recently completed the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan that addresses issues related to Highway 99W, including access management, and intersection improvements. The Plan is being incorporated into the TSP and will also be used as findings in the update of the TSP in 2009. Periodic Review Evaluation 17 City of Tigard Does the TSP call for major improvements to state highways for which ODOT has not agreed that funding for the needed improvements are "reasonably likely"to be provided during the planning period? Yes, these will be looked at during the update of the Tigard TSP and will be coordinated with the Regional Transportation Plan projects list. Does the plan address the state's objective of reducing or stabilizing VMT(vehicle miles traveled per capita)? Yes, these policies and implementation measures will be reviewed and updated as necessary during the update of the Tigard TSP. Conclusion: The City will need to update its Transportation System Plan (scheduled for calendar year 2009) and perform an Economic Opportunities Analysis. The DHS suggested work program elements should be incorporated into the Periodic Review process. All of these projects will address factors 2B, 2D, and 2E. Factor 4: The existing comprehensive plan and land use regulations are not achieving the statewide planning goals relating to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services and urbanization. 1. What other issues relating to the periodic review standards need to be addressed within the scope of periodic review? The City needs to update the Community Development Code Chapter 18.320,Table 320.1. This table outlines the appropriate zoning conversion for properties that annex to the city. The table has not been updated since the implementation of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan and is missing several new zoning classifications adopted by Washington County. The City needs to evaluate and add the necessary Washington County zoning classifications and the appropriate City zoning that will be applied upon annexation. 2. What local issues related to economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services and urbanization would you like to address within your periodic review work program? The City cannot identify any other issues outside of what has previously been discussed. Periodic Review Evaluation 18 City of Tigard A. Has your jurisdiction been successful in complying with the statutory 120-day time limit for final action on development permits?If no, what has been the cause of delays? Yes. B. Do you feel your plan and land use regulations are difficult to implement? Should steps be taken to streamline the plan, zoning ordinance, and permit process? No, the City feels the plan and regulations are working efficiently and effectively. There is no need at this time to streamline any of the adopted processes. Conclusion: The City's Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code appear to be achieving the intent and purpose of the Statewide Planning Goals. However, the City will need to do some housekeeping to update Table 320.1 in the Community Development Code to ensure consistency with the Washington Square Regional Center Plan. Periodic Review Evaluation 19 City of Tigard «/`I"�:(J •` re �n Department of Human Services : Public Health Division 1'' ,e— Theodore R. Kulnn goski,Governor .�:_:� � Drinking Water Program 444 A Street July 14, 2008 Springfield, OR 97477 (541) 726-2587 Ext. Z/ John Goodrich Fax (541) 726-2596 City of Tigard TTY-Non Voice (503) 731-4031 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Periodic Review and the City's ASR wells John, • The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development(DLCD) recently sent a letter to Mayor Dirkson notifying him that the City of Tigard was to begin the periodic review process. The Drinking Water Program of DHS was asked by DLCD to submit recommendations for the City to consider during the review process with respect to their drinking water supply. I have enclosed the letter that I supplied DLCD for inclusion in the packet of information and instructions that the City will shortly receive. I want to draw your attention to the third item, that of Source Water Protection. The Drinking Water Program recommends the City consider developing protection strategies directed towards ASR Wells 1, 2 and 3. The City has invested considerable funds towards the development of this field and adding a layer of protection would seem advisable. A key element of developing these strategies will be the update of the identification of the drinking water protection areas. The initial delineations were performed in early 2005, and at that time, the ASR wells were not fully incorporated in the model (see map within the enclosure). The Drinking Water Program is prepared to provide technical assistance in the City's efforts to accomplish this task. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at the number above or by email at dennis.o.nelson@state.or.us. Sincerely, ,!ennis Nelson Groundwater Coordinator C: Larry Eaton, GSI Water Solutions Enclosure • "Assisting People to Become Independent, Healthy and Safe" An Equal Opportunity Employer If You Would Like This In An Alternate Format, Please Call (541) 726-2587 ext. 21 June 23, 2008 To: City of Tigard From: Drinking Water Program Public Health Division Subject: Periodic Review Evaluation —Drinking Water Issues Cities should use this periodic review evaluation as an opportunity to evaluate their drinking water system. Three drinking water-related issues are provided to help focus the city's evaluation. Water System Planning. A city's Water System Master Plan and must be related to the Comprehensive Plan and land use projections. All public drinking water systems with at least 300 service connections are required to develop and maintain a current Water System Master Plan (OAR 333-061-0060). The city should determine what aspect of its Master Plan to implement during this planning period. The Master Plan should be updated during this planning period if: it will expire; changes in land use or projected population growth are not represented in the current plan; or, existing or projected changes or improvements made to the water system are not included the in the city's drinking water planning for future needs. If the city does not have a Water System Master Plan, the city should develop such a strategic document to guide the city's decision making about the quality and quantity of drinking water it serves. The city's Emergency Response Plan and associated Vulnerability Assessment must be evaluated, and if necessary, modified during the periodic review process. Work Program: Consider these issues under LCDC's Goal 11, Public Facilities. The city should assess its water system (source of supply, treatment, transmission, storage, and distribution) for adequate capacity to meet projected water demands under its Comprehensive Plan. When evaluation future water demands, consider such land use conditions as changes in population, high volume commercial and industrial users, service area, etc. The city should inventory those changes, assess the impact on the water system and prepare responses that satisfy those changes. With respect to water system security (required by the federal Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002), the city should update as appropriate the following aspects: security management, physical activity and security, chemical storage and use, personnel, computer system, etc. as defined in the State Model Emergency Response Plan (OAR 333-061-0064). Drinking Water Quality Compliance. Federal water quality standards under the Safe Drinking Water Act continue to be modified. The city should remain current on the status of existing and new monitoring requirements. Current monitoring expectations by the Department can be reviewed at the Drinking Water Program's webpage (http://oregon.gov/DHS/ph/dwp/index.shtml). A city which has documented or on-going water quality problems has a special challenge to upgrade its drinking water system to meet those standards. Work Program: For this planning period, the city should devise strategies to maintain or attain compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act standards for the long term. For the near term, consider appropriate actions to mitigate or correct known contamination of its drinking water supply through Source Water Protection (see below). Source Water Protection: For this planning period, the city should consider the protection issue under LCDC's Goal 5, Resources. Specifically, the city should consider developing strategies to reduce the risk of contamination of their ASR drinking water sources, i.e., ASR Wells 1 and 2, and their proposed ASR Well 3 (not to be confused with emergency well 3). Work Program: The Department of Human Services Drinking Water Program provided the city with Source Water Assessment Report in June, 2005, which identified the drinking water source areas (DSWAs) for the City's sources, Wells 1 and 2, as well as Well 3, which is now used for emergency backup only. The DWP provided a detailed inventory of the potential contaminant sources (PCSs) that occurred in each of those DWSAs. In addition, the DWP provided an assessment of the susceptibility of the city's water supply to those PCSs. Since the delineations of Wells 1, 2 were completed, ASR testing under ASR Limited License #005 has gone forward with ASR Wells 1 and 2, not to be confused with Wells 1 and 2. Therefore, the water usage values, the specific groundwater model used in that initial delineation exercise, as well as the identified DWSAs, are no longer appropriate (see attached figure, noting the different locations of Wells 1, 2 and 3, relative to ASR Wells 1, 2 and 3). The City should consider developing DWSAs associated with the operation of ASR wells 1 and 2, and incorporate future water usage through ASR Well 3. The new DWSAs will need to be inventoried with respect to PCSs and the susceptibility of the drinking water sources will need to be evaluated. Given the substantial investment that the City has made in developing ASR capabilities for current and future drinking water sources, it would be in the City's best interest to develop protection strategies to ensure that ASR continues to be a viable source of drinking water. The Department of Human Services concurs with the Department of Environmental Quality's comments regarding the development of drinking water protection strategies for the city. The respective drinking water programs of the Departments of Environmental Quality and Human Services are prepared to offer the city assistance in prioritizing their protection strategies and in the specific development of those strategies. For information on Source Water Protection, contact either Sheree Stewart (503-229-5413) at the DEQ or Dennis Nelson (541-726-2587 ex 21) at DHS. For questions or clarification, please contact Dennis Nelson. City of Tigard : Wells/ASR Wells •10111.1 f F--- -t. %i-1-.-.,' "•;;: ... R-11,-,--=:-f. __ ������ ti �. 1 `n ••.P/"-'t 111'...• q'•':1' J --, •'•J• ^�,/, .7 .. '.."� ,`_ •.+_.,.'•/,S I /". ..1 ' .�, ,. ' 1'. -•} /�:■ ''f, i `\''.• ..•..lr�fi. 7^• ..A , .\i.,, •,o. , t o e_ ;i ��' Well 3 . , L } , , ,` '`y ti.��".. to , (..÷._: /]�`I •...N j; 'a... I. SA . )f•.' "t' f4 Y f, 4144.....-----(;46/t 1- ''�1 rj:/r (f11/: :r+..:. �r'4":'-`..=.' t __-.:-::t:.:.,-..:p{j5r�:.CAS �+ .t.•�'�?'�y�� t.j:7i$., s ,.1 '/'�✓ 1 � ^• k'.��it .-t:.. I:- t ,'•fir_`}\ Ij - e •to �t 4 ! ir^• r .,'-'•t , -,..,1.t., . Y,A;,-• l' f II n. j'.•-.t ! ..0 '°i J•f• ^1 \. (4.t,yi.. S :•/.�-.. n :r '� r••11rit it,--..,,„---;‘,. ,,.'1 P .,J'af:•'� �. ,•I 1 ...h••',. '''''..1 ;•••1' �- `'/ i-,�! ),•1 ,1i1ii } li'-h � .t._ p,I i . ;r_ M' 1 r M � n.•X1.1 .5:��.:Qp. �' \ r,) �YYYY.f 111�� ,,,,\,‘ '. 'i. /i. ;� /iJ� I .• T^ I• - 111 ▪:K Y• TI' t � 4) t• -1 /f. ` qr./j.+' ..4`,• 7•JYR�-,1 '� I :.'4,., tiry` .-', Ef_ —ASR 3 11r, i t � 4R[ Z.�'19v .�s \' , 1� Y_. -� ;: 1 III !. ,,- \ _.. is i .,I A',.r = •;,,....,,� - �Ir - {� \•�',!'J '1 -! ,.4 a,. •i v ,-;.„...c:�r I W.l. jC 110'' PI• ,� c •' r ,� 1. l' ., .,.ASR 2 N �.:_ ..00 ,' 1 L\ 4 ice: ,�i 1 r 1 ,* / ,/!'e -! :C Y' l'� #,.'. ``.. .r i ! ;`', /fy .• _ ` '- _= f i` 750 ' /.. ;> . i \ Gy j'J i / `y �4 0 •,fig,1 ,, 1, 1 '_..�1,-;,-,p(11---/r� .�y'•• '� t f --ti' ':i5fli °�..�1 Lf�� . -1.1 t ti �� '1 'p. � '. , 'i'� 3000 0 3000 60))00 Feet l Scale 1:20,000 Location of City Wells: 1, 2, and 3, and approximate location of ASR wells 1 and 2, and proposed ASR 3. Delineated areas based on estimated water use N of Wells 1, 2, and 3, as of June 2005. Drinking Water Program Oregon Department of Human Services June 23, 2008 rill f--- n Tigard Planning Commission Agenda Item # Page I of Date of Hearing I .- S - CPI Case Number(s) O CRR CY - Qo 0014 Case Name(`kokor V 12...-11...k c-k ... eS ■ kLe--1 P-2—On�. G.cle. Arr,(21.0kevvey-t' Location 1 cA'\ X 7s-v■J■ 1rnoL r■al Per.R ( L-0 If you would like to speak on this item, please PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (for the proposal): `�,,,� Opponent (against the proposal): Name: �c��n cxr-r-00.� L Name: Address: ' ' 2_0\ IQ l,J ../I.ekOh �� , Address: City, State, Zip: POt k\o 1 Q 2 `‘] Z 1 City, State, Zip: u� Name: Z�xz �o marN C P of 0 Name: Address: cg:51 SIN) S∎ t,-\ Nie. , Ve._ 1.00 Address: City, State, Zip:PO d a"ck 0 R. 9 1 /al City, State, Zip: Name: ohJ`) � x e e. \P-r Name: �\J1 _ Address: F.0 , _Q_ ` „r` Address: City, State, Zip: a. City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: u r COMMUNITY 1UNITY PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: SPAPEIS The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission on onday .January . 2008 at 7:00 PM at the 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222 • PO Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 1 53125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Box 370• Beaverton, OR 97075 Oregon. Phone: 503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this Email: legals@commnewspapers.com matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060E. The Planning Commission's review I AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION is for the purpose of making a recommendation to the City Council on the request. The Council will then hold a public hearing on the State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS request prior to making a decision. I I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, Further information may be obtained from the City of Tigard Plan- , depose and say that I am the Accounting ning Division(Staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher)at 13125 SW Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223,by calling 503-639-4171,or by Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of email to garyp @tigard-or.gov. general circulation, published at Beaverton, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT(DCA)2008-00004 in the aforesaid county and state, as defined -MOTOR VEHICLE SALES IN THE I-P ZONE CODE by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, th ,i AMENDMENT- REQUEST: A Development Code Amendment to amend the text City of Tigard of Table 18.530.1 of the City of Tigard Community Development Notice of Public Hearing .Code to allow "motor vehicle sales/rental" in the I-P zone as a TT11230 Restricted(R)use,currently Not Permitted(N),provided(a)such operation takes place wholly within an enclosed building and(b) does not exceed 20% of the floor area of the given development A copy of which is hereto annexed, was complex. LOCATION: Land zoned Industrial Park (I-P). published in the entire issue of said COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial Park. newspaper for ZONE: I'-P: Industrial Park District. The 1-P zoning district 1 provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, Successive and consecutive wee ,s in the office and small-scale commercial uses,e.g.,restaurants,personal following issues services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those December 18, 2008 light industrial uses with no off-site impacts,e.g.,noise,glare,odor, vibration, are permitted in the 1-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards C[10-;/ Loa I f „ C11L4 Z in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments �( `�J C will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian- Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Mm n er) friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Subscribed and sworn to before a this Development Code Chapters-18.130, 18.380, 18.390 and 18.530; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1.1 and 9.1; Metro Urban Growth December 18, 2008 Management Functional Plan Sections 3.07.110 and 3.07.410;and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2 and 9. (THERE IS NO MAP TO BE PUBLISHED WITH THIS LEGAL ...WILL — _ ...4,..`` /1 PUBLICATION. THANK YOU) NOTA' ' PUBLIC FOR OREGON TT PUBLISH DATE: 12/18/2008 CNI TTl 1230 My commission expires" . . act( 1 LCD I ) Acct#10093001 Attn: Patty Lunsford ��--.- -��`�-�-�,? City of Tigard D ,e: ;,, OFFICIAL SEAL 13125 SW Hall Blvd f '(-' - SUZETTE I CURRAN I) Tigard, OR 97223 1 ,�C`,;� COMMISSION NO.422662 O 1 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOVEMBER 28 2011 ?) Size: 2 x 6.25 . - -- - --,- Amount Due $104.37 'remit to address above: Agenda Item: (p Hearing Date: January 5,2009 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE v PLANNING COMMISSION 's FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD SECTION L APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE NAME: MOTOR VEHICLE SALES/RENTAL IN THE I-P ZONE CASE NO.: Development Code Amendment(DCA) DCA2008-00004 PROPOSAL: To amend the text of Table 18.530.1 of the Community Development Code to allow "motor vehicle sales/rental" in the I-P zone as a restricted (R) use, currently Not Permitted (N), provided (a) such operation takes place wholly within an enclosed building and (b) does not exceed 20% of the floor area of the given development complex. APPLICANT: Bruce and April Berg OWNER: John and Janice Duncan Northwest Ski&Wake Sports,LLC 9929 NW Upton Court 2801 NE Riverside Way,Suite 200 Portland, OR 97229 Portland, OR 97211 APPLICANT'S Dunn Carney,etal. AGENT: 851 SW Sixth Avenue,Suite 1500 Portland, OR 97204-1357 ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park Zone. LOCATION: Land zoned Industrial Park (I-P). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.130, 18.380, 18.390 and 18.530; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1.1 and 9.1; Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Sections 3.07.110 and 3.07.410;and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2 and 9. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find in favor of the proposed text amendment allowing motor vehicle sales/rental in the Industrial Park zone with a condition that limits the permitted use to boats, and with any alterations as determined through the public hearing process, and make a final recommendation to the Tigard City Council. MOTOR VEHICLE SALES/RENTAL IN TILE 1-P ZONE DI WI ,OPMI NT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2008-00004 1/5/09 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO TI IL PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 1 OF 8 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The applicant owns and operates Northwest Ski and Wake Sports, LLC, which specializes in high-end water craft. The applicant presently operates in the Columbia Southshore area near the airport in Portland's "General Industrial 2" zone. The applicant intends to move their business to Tigard and entered a lease agreement for a building in the Industrial Park (I-P) zone that met the space and functional needs of their business. On learning the proposed use was not allowed in the I-P zone, the applicant applied for a text amendment to permit the use. The applicant states that the business, with a "highly specialized market niche," defies easy categorization, that it is neither retail (low frequency of boat sales) nor industrial (no manufacture or distribution). The business does not require outdoor storage and is not land intensive. The current business includes 3,000 square feet of show room, 3,000 square feet for accessory sales, 2,000 square feet for office/internet sales, and 900 square feet for boat service. The proposed use on the subject site has similar space allocations. The applicant states they have struggled to find suitably zoned land in Tigard. The applicant's business includes boat sales and servicing, retail accessory sales, and office. The I-P zone permits motor vehicle servicing (conditionally), sales oriented retail (if less than 20% of total development complex), and office uses. The City's Use Classifications includes boats in the definition of"Motor Vehicles Sales/Rental" which is not permitted in the I-P zone. Hence, the applicant has proposed the amendment to allow "motor vehicles sales/rental"in the I-P zone for the boat sales portion of the business. SECTION IV. APPLICABLE CRITERIA, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Tigard Development Code Section 18.380.020, Legislative Amendments to this Title and Map, states that legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. The proposed text amendment would apply to the subject property and all other I-P zoned lands within the City. Therefore, the amendment will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter. This procedure requires public hearings by both the Planning Commission and City Council. Section 18.390.060.G establishes standard decision-making procedures for reviewing Type IV applications. The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1) The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; 2) Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3) Any applicable METRO regulations; 4) Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and 5)Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Findings and conclusions are provided below for the five listed factors on which the recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based. STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES Statewide Planning Goal 1—Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal has been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Section 18.390. A notice was mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the project site and the notice was additionally published in the Tigard Times newspaper prior to the hearing. After the Planning Commission public hearing, additional notice will be published prior to the City Council hearing. Two public hearings are held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) at which an opportunity for public input is provided. MOTOR VFI-IICLE SALES/RENTAL IN THE.I-P ZONE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT ICA2008-00004 1/5/09 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO TUE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 2 OF 8 Statewide Planning Goal 2–Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) has acknowledged the City's Comprehensive Plan as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The Development Code implements the Comprehensive Plan. The Development Code establishes a process and standards to review changes to the Comprehensive Plan. As discussed within this report, the Development Code process and standards have been applied to the proposed amendment. Statewide Planning Goal 9–Economic Development: This goal seeks to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health,welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) has acknowledged the City's Comprehensive Plan as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. Consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan Economic Development goal and policies is discussed later in this report. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed text amendment is consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals. FEDERAL OR STATE STATUTES AND REGULATIONS The applicant cites the State Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-012-0060) which requires evidence that the proposed plan amendment will not significantly affect a transportation facility. The applicant identifies the difficulty in using the ITE Manual to estimate the trips that would be generated by the "niche" business, but concludes "the use would have a very low traffic flow. ' The City has concerns about capacity at the intersection of 74th Avenue with Durham Road (adjacent to the subject property). The City is concerned that the proposed development could increase the volume of traffic traveling to and from the site,which could lead to capacity issues at the Durham/74th intersection. The City's Engineering department suggests that the applicant be required to provide trip generation information (such as counts from similar existing uses or a more detailed trip generation analysis) to show that either a) the proposed use would generate less traffic than current uses, or b) if the proposed use would increase trip generation, that there would be adequate capacity at the intersection of Durham Road with 74th Avenue to accommodate this additional traffic. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that approval of the proposed text amendment may result in adversely affecting a transportation facility adjacent to the subject site. However, it is unclear whether the effects would be "significant" enough to be inconsistent with State Transportation Planning Rule in this case, or cumulatively, if applied throughout the I-P zone. Facts have not been provided which conclusively indicate whether there would or would not be a significant affect on a transportation facility. METRO The Urban Growth Management Functional Plan provides tools that help meet goals in the 2040 Growth Concept, Metro's long-range growth management plan. Title 4, Industrial and Other Employment Areas, places restrictions on certain uses in the three designations on the 2040 Growth Concept Map: Regionally Significant Industrial Areas,Industrial Areas, and Employment Areas. 3.07.430 Protection of Industrial Areas. Cities and counties shall review their land use regulations and revise them, if necessary, to include measures to limit new buildings for retail commercial uses—such as stores and restaurants—and retail and professional services that cater to daily customers—such as financial, insurance, real estate, legal, medical and dental offices—in order to ensure that they serve primarily the needs of workers in the area. One such measure shall be that new buildings for stores, branches, agencies or other outlets for these retail uses and services shall not occupy more than 5,000 square feet of sales or service area in a single outlet, or multiple outlets that occupy more than 20,000 square feet of sales or service area in a single building or in multiple buildings that are part of the same development project . . . MOTOR VEHICLE SALIsS/RI..N'I'AL IN THE I-P ZONE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMI?NDMFN'1' DCA2008-00004 1/5/09 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT FO'HIE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 3 OF 8 3.07.440 Protection of Employment Areas. Except as provided in subsections C, D and E, in Employment Areas mapped pursuant to Metro Code Section 3.07.130, cities and counties shall limit new and expanded commercial retail uses to those appropriate in type and size to serve the needs of businesses, employees and residents of the Employment Areas. According to Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Employment Land map, the City of Tigard has no "regionally significant industrial areas," some "industrial areas," and mostly `employment areas." Metro's "Industrial Areas" within the City correlate with approximately half of Tigard's "Industrial Park" zone. Metro's "employment areas" within the City include some or all of Tigard's heavy, light, and industrial park zones, and some general commercial,mixed use employment, and mixed use commercial zones. The applicant's proposed amendment to permit motor vehicle sales/rental in the I-P zone would apply to all of the lands within the City zoned Industrial Park. Industrial Park is comprised of both Metro's industrial and employment areas. Protections of these Metro areas aim to ensure that commercial uses serve primarily the needs of workers in "Industrial Areas" and the needs of businesses, employees and residents of the "Employment Areas." The proposed use, in this case, for a "niche market" of upscale boat owners, would likely be regional in scope. In general, the proposed amendment to permit motor vehicle sales/rental,limited to 20% of a development complex and contained within a building, may be consistent in terms of size of allowed commercial uses, but unlikely that the type would serve only local markets. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed text amendment may be inconsistent with applicable Metro code which limits expansion of commercial uses in industrial and employment areas to a type and size of use that would serve local markets. TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Comprehensive Plan Goal 1: Citizen Involvement Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. The City has mailed notice of the Planning Commission hearing to interested citizens and agencies. The City published notice of the Planning Commission hearing December 18, 2008. After the Planning Commission public hearing, additional notice will be published prior to the City Council hearing. Two public hearings are held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) at which an opportunity for public input is provided. With these public involvement provisions, the proposed zone change is consistent with applicable Citizen Involvement policies. Comprehensive Plan Goal 2: Land Use Planning Goal 2.1: Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. Applicable polices under this goal relate to amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map and not to amendments to the Development Code text. The applicant does not propose an amendment to Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map.Therefore,this Goal does not specifically apply to the proposed text change. Comprehensive Plan Goal 9: Economic Development Goal 9.1: Develop and maintain a strong,diversified, and sustainable local economy. Policy 2: The City shall actively encourage businesses that provide family-wage jobs to start up, expand, or locate in Tigard. Northwest Ski and Wake Sports is a family owned and operated business that likely provides family wage jobs for its owners and perhaps to its employees. The City should actively encourage this business and others to locate in Tigard. MOTOR VEHICLE SALES/RENTAL IN TI II?I-P ZONE DEVELOP MINT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2008-00004 1/5/09 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 4 OF 8 Policy 3: The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made available. The proposed motor vehicle sales/rental use is currently not allowed in the I-P zone. The applicant sees an economic development opportunity in an existing building within the I-P zone and seeks to amend the code to accommodate the use and limit the impacts through size and location restrictions. In this case, the required infrastructure is existing. Policy 6: The City shall promote actions that result in greater, more efficient, utilization of its Metro- designated Employment and Industrial Areas. The proposed amendment would permit an additional use in the I-P zone. As described above, the City's I-P zoned lands are in both Metro's Employment and Industrial Areas. The proposed amendment would allow the applicant to utilize a vacant property, consistent with this policy. Policy 7: The City shall limit the development of retail and service land uses in Metro-designated industrial areas to preserve the potential of these lands for industrial jobs. The proposed motor vehicle sales/rental use would be permitted within a Metro-designated industrial area, but would be limited in size and contained within a building. The policy does not prohibit retail uses but limits them to preserve the potential for industrial jobs. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the Citizen Participation and Land Use goals have been satisfied. The economic development policies are designed, on the one hand, to promote economic activity, and on the other, to protect lands for industrial uses and jobs. Staff finds that the proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable goals and policies contained in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE Section 18.530, Industrial Zoning Districts, establishes procedures and criteria for development within industrial zoning districts. Pursuant to Section 18.530.010, the purposes of these regulations are to: Provide range of industrial services for City residents. One of the major purposes of the regulations governing development in industrial zoning districts is to ensure that a full range of job opportunities are available throughout the City so that residents can work close to home if they choose. The location of land within each industrial district must be carefully selected and design and development standards created to minimize the potential adverse impacts of industrial activity on established residential areas. Facilitate economic goals. Another purpose of these regulations is to ensure that there is a full range of economic activities and job opportunities within the City limits, in compliance with the economic goals of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. "Motor Vehicles Sales/Rental" is otherwise allowed in the I-L and I-H zones, but "Sales-Oriented" retail is not. All aspects of the business would be permitted in the C-G, CBD (conditionally), MUE and MUR (restricted to accessory uses within a building). The applicant could site their business in other zones within the City while preserving the I-P zoned lands for industrial uses. Section 18.530.020, List of Zoning Districts, describes the Industrial Park District: the I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. MOTOR V'EI-IICLE SALI S/RI NTAL IN TI IE I-P'/,ONE DEV'1?LOPNII N1'CODE AMENDMI N'1' DCA2008-00004 1/5/09 PUBLIC FII,;ARING,STAFF REPORT'l TO TI IF PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 5 OF 8 Pursuant to Section18.130.020.C.5.a, "Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental" includes car, light and heavy truck, mobile home, boat and recreational vehicle sales, rental and service. This use is currently permitted in four zones as indicated above. However, if as proposed, the use is limited to 20% of a development and located within a building (no off-site impacts), the use would be consistent with the "small scale commercial use . . . in a campus setting' that characterizes the I-P zone. The proposed text amendment is shown below: DCA2008-00004 CODE AMENDMENT Explanation of Formatting This text amendment employs the following formatting: [Bold] —Text to be added [fit ] —Text to be removed TABLE 18.530.1 USE TABLE: INUSTRIAL ZONES USE CA I EGORY I-P I-L I-H Motor Vehicle Related - Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N R2'4 P P 2These limited uses, separately or in combination,may not exceed 20% of the entire square footage within a development complex.No retail uses shall exceed 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area per building or business. 4Permitted if all activities,except employee and customer parking,are wholly contained within a building(s). A restricted (R) use is permitted outright providing it is in compliance with apecial requirements, exceptions or restrictions. A prohibited(N))use is one which is not permitted in a honing district under any circumstances. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Tigard Development Code. SECTION V. STAFF ANALYSIS METRO Code Pursuant to 3.07.430, Protection of Industrial Areas, "cities and counties shall review their land use regulations and revise them, if necessary, to include measures to limit new buildings for retail commercial uses." The City already limits commercial uses in the I-P zone for such permitted uses as eating and drinking establishments, retail sales and personal services, and bulk sales. The applicant's proposed amendment would add an additional use with similar size and location limitations. The Planning Commission should consider whether the proposed use would otherwise compromise the intended use of industrial-zoned lands for industrial purposes. Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) Regulations If limited "motor vehicle sales" is permitted in the I-P zone, the sale of cars, as well as boats (as in this case), would be permitted. The City has experience with car "dealers" wanting to open offices to practice their trade. The City has a practice of denying these dealerships as "office" uses because enforcing the indoor-only use restriction (for Home Occupation Permits) has proved problematic. The City Staff Memo on DMV Dealer Applications, dated August 26, 2008, outlines the potential conflict and enforcement issues associated with DMV dealer licensing and the location approval requirements requiring local zoning official sign-off. Essentially, if the City signs the DMV dealer license form, the City is approving "displays of vehicles for sale" at the business location. MO'T'OR VEI IICLE SALES/RENTAL IN THE I-P ZONE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2008-00004 1/5/09 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 6 OF 8 The Planning Commission should consider whether permitting the proposed use, even though limited in size and location, could unnecessarily cause a tangle of enforcement situations if outdoor display or storage of motor vehicles regulated by the DMV occurs. One way to avoid this complication would be to restrict the use to boat sales only,which do not require DMV licensing. Notes: DMV regulates the sales of motor vehicles as defined in ORS 801.590: "Vehicle"means any device in,upon or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a public highway and includes vehicles that are propelled or powered by any means."Vehicle"does not include a manufactured structure. The City's Use Classifications(18.130.020.C.5.a)defines"motor vehicle sales/rental"to include car,light and heavy truck,mobile home,boat and recreational vehicle sales,rental and service. SECTION VI. ALTERNATIVES TO APPROVAL No Action — the code would remain unchanged, and Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental would continue to be prohibited in the I-P zone. Expanded Action—Permit Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental in the I-P zone with no size restrictions. Alternate Actions — further restrict the use to include boats only and/or further restrict the percentage of a building that could be allocated to the use. SECTION VII. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF & OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS The City of Tigard Long Range Division was notified of the proposed code text amendment but did not comment. The City of Tigard Engineering Department reviewed the applicant's proposal and provided the following comments: One issue of concern is the potential generation of additional traffic by the proposed use. The City has concerns about capacity at the intersection of 74th Avenue with Durham Road (adjacent to the subject property). The City is concerned that the proposed development could increase the volume of traffic traveling to and from the site,which could lead to capacity issues at the Durham/74th intersection. In the Applicant's Summary Notebook, the applicant correctly notes that the proposed use really does not fit within any of the categories of uses for which the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has collected data in its Trip Generation manual. The applicant compares perhaps the closest use (New Car Sales), which would generate 33.34 trips per thousand square feet of floor area,with a use allowed by current zoning (Office Park), which would have a trip generation rate of 11.42. The applicant then speculates that, because the proposed use would be required to be wholly indoors, it would generate less traffic than currently allowed. While this could be true, the applicant's statements do not provide sufficient information to make this finding. Therefore, if the Planning Commission elects to recommend approval to the City Council, staff recommends that as a condition of approval, the applicant should be required to provide trip generation information (such as counts from similar existing uses or a more detailed trip generation analysis) to show that either a) the proposed use would generate less traffic than current uses, or b) if the pr posed use would increase trip generation, that there would be adequate capacity at the intersection of Durham Road with 74th Avenue to accommodate this additional traffic. METRO, ODOT, and DLCD were notified of the proposed code text amendment but provided no comment. MOTOR VEHICLE SALES/RENTAL IN TI-II I-I'ZONE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2008-00004 1/5/09 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT 1'O TI IF PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 7 OF 8 OVI/d. A ./ 4 /, J4" ' r December 18,2008 P'a' ARE,4 B : a,riTry Tgenstecher DATE ssociate Planner k<Eejoed..„, December 18 2008 APPROVED BY: Dick Bewersdorff DATE Planning Manager Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map of all I-P Zones in the City of Tigard 2. Vicinity Map of Metro Title 4 Industrial and Employment Land MOTOR VEHICLE SALES/RENTAL IN TI-IE I-P ZONE DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2008-00004 1/5/09 PUBLIC III ARING,STAFF REPORT TO TI TE.PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 8 OF 8 1 t Erforr/ t 1R-..5 MOTOR VEHICLE RJ.5 0-. ,z wie ��� SALES IN THE W 1-P ZONE �; / 141w City of Tigard Q ® jj� �� F� .. Oregon r % 1 < . CI $ A. Rd.S Q,s 'T s, A 4/ cD /���j 7� E Subject Zones /, m �� /r,..,,MUE !7!.. Q Zoning Boundaries a 1 p i feel'�'�l�1 / � �� Highway ® Arterial r N \ Street R1.5 Lim ® d v..I j Tigard City Limits I 7 7/\ ii I=1 � / �i Rd.5 �r 1111114L 11.0. -rog , DONALD ST *Kimmel ��l MITA It 11 j,„„,011,..r.P., EL R-72 ® R-45 an 101tlT/4Ri!il R nii RJaas � �� // /I RS°.v lPa IpD) �y ® ■ 111/1=1■111111..111 / 9,/,/ E, SUBJECT � n.xsmo! R-7 R.25 �,R'7 PROPERTY �®% //i iii i; 7,,,,, If Nt. Ip - R-12' ;'0 , API w � nall R4 5 V r `j///• / / ,....%I / IP MI IS j j / 1 vmmnmI�:.sxa*hex the.p:aau orae nep. R.3 R15 , N I R 12 % j =Miff di/1 �_ .:RRY.pp� :.,......... .: .,w... ,: N g.z �I / ' I J ,- _ _�.. Metro III ■ r'l\,( =i� I- �"-- _w 1 Title 4 V ds - c 1i` ...,� Ctir '` ,- p Li Desi ations I r \\ �� y JAL City of Tigard / ` `� j N Oregon I 1 a rZ. 01111111/ 1 / ..r_:1 I �I li 'yam f u �_ \ �% -, .� 1 �It OED % 0R-' Ti i E r • L- r' r__ ,--e":,--i T T C 0 7 - � �� "■r. f f l Rio AI 4 I/,,,g 0 _` Ir 7: -i tiQ ��/ `� l TigardI-P Zone j a st �O�r:> \ I•a;[ j —�rs L — ; .., �� 4�00 .��L /" Metro Title 4 _ _ {- t y ii N 4 Ilia.. Employment areas • 1 �y1 ,, - Industrial areas Itle.„ i., -2-.1:-"\< '� jM "' �� MN Tigard City Bounda ov jo i - ,, f IL ... .. -1-._.yam ;�-- . . Lallil �r I A . hI © i Y f k3 %/// ��_. liT . -r�_ --. ' * �� •� m r//. ••'Iti.worn I q i.J wn thin mup i.c I n _i L, O�OII �• .. - Il i U, 1 •� I �rn�lu7 2W%k swill Ic mdr�a:. J� Ana `,:rf' > , �wq : f/ .cnl i n s ou.ur to alle ih<w Icnl N Ihs sup :P.------......1- ti. . , -_ � ''— ,� - �: _ ,, I 1111 Bill.. i ill pima° IMP 1211 1: I--1-- 11�n. , j/ A ..........., —1 /1./ _ ________: -.L—____4j1Li-- : i , Bruce &April Berg DCA2008-00004 Northwest Ski anc Wake Sports,LLC 2801 NE Riverside Way, Suite 200 MOTOR VEHICLE SALES IN THE I-P ZONE Portland, OR 97211 John &Janice Duncan 9929 NW Upton Court Portland, OR 97229 Dunn Carney, et al, 851 SW Sixth Avenue, Suite 1500 Portland, OR 97204-1357 -6`" ZA()'°\ GR U_ P _ ACKENZIE January 5, 2009 City of Tigard Attention: Planning Commissioners 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 Dear Members of the Planning Commissioners: The purpose of this letter is to provide comments concerning the City's Periodic Review Evaluation,which is scheduled for your review this evening. We support the City's effort to carefully consider economic, housing and transportation issues as they relate to the City's o M compliance with Statewide Planning Goals,especially Goal 9(Economic Development).We ° agree with many of the comments contained in the City's November 24, 2008 response to DLCD's Periodic Review Survey Checklist,and would briefly amplify the following points: a, w E ° 1. Regulatory and other development constraints significantly affect a large portion of — u the vacant industrially zoned land in the City. These constraints include tree a protection/mitigation requirements, wetlands, sensitive lands, site configuration and access.Together,these constraints significantly restrict or effectively prevent industrial o N i development on a significant portion of the industrial land the City's current m comprehensive plan identifies as"buildable." Some of these development constraints a 3 are driven by the City's own code.Overall,these factors need to be better understood on c a site by site basis, and must be factored into the City's Economic Opportunities 4 Analysis,as required by Statewide Planning Goal 9(Economic Development). a) N W L. 2. Because the City is essentially land locked, and because a significant portion of its vacant industrial land is significantly constrained,Metro's employment targets for the City may not be reasonable and should be re-evaluated. Group 3. Transportation and other public improvements necessary to serve the City's Mackenzie, economically significant industrial and employment lands must be given priority in the Incorporated City's updated TSP and capital improvement plan. Architecture Interiors In closing, we look forward to working with you over the coming months as the City Structural undertakes periodic review with respect to economic development(Goal 9), housing(Goal Engineering 10) and public facilities and transportation (Goals 11 and 12). Thank you for taking these Civil Engineering important first steps in the evaluation process. Land Use Planning Transportation Planning Sincerely, Landscape Architecture Locations: 6.1"1.4. Portland,Oregon Rhys Ko ad, LEED AP,Planner Seattle,Washington Associate Vancouver,Washington c: Darren Wyss—Senior Planner 11:\PROJECTS\207033402\WP\LTR\090105-Periodic Review Testimony.doc January 4, 2009 City of Tigard Tigard, Oregon Attn: Planning Commission Re: Periodic Review by DLCD of comprehensive plan, land use regulations, etc. Dear Planning Commission members: We are writing to comment on the current review of the City of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan(CP) and land use regulations (LUR), by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development(DLCD). Our comments are as follows: In 2009, we face daunting environmental challenges here in Tigard and across the region. Rapid, unchecked growth in the past 15 years has left Tigard and much of the Willamette Valley with natural resources that are disappearing or have disappeared due to poor planning and inadequate land use regulations to protect streams, riparian corridors, uplands and associated fish and wildlife. Many plant and wildlife species are being affected by this unchecked growth and inadequate regulations, and now global climate change has been added to this mix. We must ask ourselves, what do we need to do to stop this loss of natural resources and to set up an adequate comprehensive plan and land use regulations that truly protect our precious and dwindling natural resources here in Tigard but also across the state? • A review of Tigard `s newly revised CP shows that this document, especially the Natural Resources and Park, Open Spaces and Trails sections, will not adequately protect, conserve and restore our existing natural resources including State and Federal listed fish and wildlife species. The revised CP had considerable public comment, including input from wildlife biologists with extensive experience of over 20 years. Several citizens, including myself, were on a committee to revise the natural resources section. We were quite unsatisfied with the results; for example, we repeatedly requested there be more than just 1 goal to protect natural resources. We frequently stated it was more appropriate to have goals addressing each area, including goals for uplands, wetlands, fish and wildlife, etc. Staff as well as the PC and City Council refused to make these changes, despite scientific evidence that shows that the adopted CP will not adequately protect fish and wildlife and their habitats. o The phrase, "to the extent feasible was added by the PC to the Natural Resources section of the CP. The addition of this phrase, which was strongly opposed by biologists, citizen committee members and citizens, will severely weaken the CP and make it useless if staff or Council for example, refuse to protect, restore or conserve a resource based on some excuse using this wording. It is so broad it could mean anything, and is not acceptable to the citizens of Tigard. o Tigard currently has adopted and currently relies to a great extent on Clean Water Services regulations, such as stream buffers, to protect natural resources. These land use regulations are very inadequate. For example, a 25'or 50' buffer along any stream is insufficient in protecting the stream as well as the many fish and wildlife species it should provide habitat for. Amphibians, such as the northern red-legged frog (Rana aurora aurora), are found in streams and wetlands, but, it is widely known and has been extensively studied, that this species, as well as many other amphibians, require adjacent forested uplands,up to 1000' minimum from wetland edges, to carry out their life requirements of foraging, cover, and overwintering habitat. The elimination of an upland,that is adjacent to a stream with only a 50' vegetated buffer remaining,would completely eliminate habitat for the red-legged frog, a State listed species, as well as many other species. o Tigard has allowed developers and even the city itself, has eliminated acres of "significant wetlands" in our city. This is unacceptable. Citizens want natural resources protected including these"significant" natural resources. o The Healthy Streams Program, adopted by Washington County, never addressed wildlife needs as it was written, and thus in its current state, is actually harming wildlife by failing to address wildlife needs as staff and others carry out this program. For example, in some areas, riparian corridors are being planted with plants not native to the plant community of the site, are being planted too densely, and are not allowing for open, sunny areas for reptiles to bask, etc. It is apparent that the people carrying out these projects have not surveyed the sites to determine beforehand what species use the area or historically used the area. This is unacceptable to citizens, as this has negative impacts to fish and wildlife for the short and long terms. This program must be put on hold until it has been reviewed and corrected by wildlife biologists. o Tigard is allowing mitigation on public lands without notifiying citizens. This must be corrected. All entities proposing mitigation on City lands must first post a 90 day public comment period so we have adequate time to review the proposal and comment. How can we strengthen our CP and land use regulations? As we discussed above, we need to do many things, including: • Tigard needs to conduct complete inventories of all its natural resources. • We need to increase all stream buffers from 25' or 50' to a minimum of 1000'. • Put a moratorium on all development until all of Tigard has been inventoried. • Follow the guidelines outlined in the Oregon Conservation Strategy which is a blueprint for protecting Oregon's fish, wildlife and plant communities. • Listen to citizens and heed what they say, for they have the wisdom and experience of many years and are the ones who truly care about Tigard's natural resources. • Place a high priority on protecting, conserving and restoring habitat for State and Federal listed species, including all those on the State sensitive list. • Trails should only be built in areas where they do not impact fish and wildlife; they create a huge amount of disturbance to wildlife and bring in unwanted garbage, dogs, etc. In the current economy, we need to be focusing on using sidewalks, marking crosswalks, etc. to get people around the city • All remaining uplands should be permanently protected. • Take out the phrase"to the extent feasible"from the revised CP. • Purchase all remaining wetlands, uplands etc. that are not currently publicly owned. • Adopt stronger land use regulations that specifically and adequately protect ALL of our natural resources. This includes increasing buffer widths, not allowing development on steep slopes, not allowing streams to be piped as is currently happening in the Tigard Triangle, not allowing mitigation unless it can be guaranteed to work and that monitoring of all mitigation be increased to 15 years. • Not allowing mitigation to occur on public lands without a citizen review and comment period. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Susan Beilke Board member, Fans of Fanno Creek Board member, Northwest Ecological Research Institute Summary Notebook Prepared for City of Tigard Zoning and Photos Subject Property 16055 SW 74th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97224 RECEIVED NOV 0 3 2008 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNI 'GIENGINEERING - ir NORTHWEST SKI AND WAKE SPIRTS Dunn • • AT AW s e o ' - LLP October 3, 2008 TY K.WYMAN VIA MESSENGER DIRECT DIAL 503.417.5478 City of Tigard Permit Center 13125 SW Hall Blvd. E-MAIL Tigard, OR 97223 tkw®dunn-camey.com Re: Bruce & April Berg Land Use Application ADDRESS Our File No. BER33-4 Suite 1500 851 S.W.Sixth Avenue Portland,Oregon To Whom It May Concern: .97204-1357 Phone 503.224 8440 This firm represents Bruce & April Berg, dba NW Ski & Wake Sports, Fax 503.224.7324 LLC. The Bergs herewith make application for an amendment to the text of the INTERNET development code. In support of the application, we enclose the following: www.dunncarney.com • completed Land Use Permit Application form, signed by the Applicant (three copies); • completed Basic Submittal Requirements form (three copies); • narrative statement explaining the proposed amendment and how it complies with the applicable criteria (three copies); • copy of the notes of the Berg's pre-application conference (three copies); • as-built plans of the property leased by the Bergs (three copies); • vicinity map(three copies); • check from the Bergs in the amount of$3,493 to cover the filing fee. Thank you for your assistance. Please let us know as soon as possible any additional information that you need to review the application. Si ely your Ty K. Wyman TKW:lbs Enclosures cc: Bruce & April Berg V Member I MERITAS LAW FINS WORLDWIDr INDEPENDENT MEMBER OF MERITAS WITH AFFILIATED OFFICES IN MORE THAN 250 CITIES AND 60 FOREIGN COUNTRIES PRE-APP.HELD BY: ' CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION City( Tigard Permit Center 13125 SW Hall Bled, Ti n74 OR 97223 Phony 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 File# Other Case# Date .©/03/08 I By Receipt# J Fee Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑Adjustment/Variance (I or II) ❑ Minor Land Partition(II) ❑ Zone Change (III) ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) ❑Planned Development(III) ❑ Zone Change Annexation(IV) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑ Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) pg Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑ Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑ Site Development Review(II) ❑ Home Occupation (II) ❑ Subdivision (II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACIIVI • ft OC UR(Address if available) 16055 SW 74th Ave. , Tigard, OR 97224 TAX MAPS&TAX LOT NOS. 2S113AB Tax Lot 00800 TOTAL SITE SIZE ZONING CLASSIFICATION 6.52 acres I—P APPLICANT' Bruce and April Berg — Northwest Ski & Wake Sports, LLC MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP 2801 NE Riverside Way., Suite 200, Portland, OR 97211 PHONE NO. FAX NO. 5 503.281.3160 PRI Y CO8 1 A ORSON PHONE NO. April Berg 503.708.0600 or 503.281.1510 PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) John and Janice Duncan MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP 9929 NW Upton Court, Portland, OR 97229 PHONE NO. FAX NO. 503.297.9026 503.297.9029 'When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS 1 DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS" INFORMATION SHEET. is\curpin\masters\land use applications\land use permit app.doc • • THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments,and exhibits transmitted herewith,are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application,map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH.,OWNEROF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. io/2/0 Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date • Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date • Owner's Signature Date icd-.5erx i ? ■I�. -- — ' Jo/3-/o .. 'cant/ ' :en'/Repre Five's Signature Date c. Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date • • ...,..,,, ::. • '� Mr.. . •• • .. . • . • 8 80 •. . . .. • . . r• . . •• •. •Or.7 h f ,...,8:0:044747.47. IL. u' §czUs tb. wAIIIIAHTi .101.-wrvrryiIHv Fosi ma l ,•wawa ueu,•N CI(i8 m...II, y.Kid.dl(r:..and.HBRtAL!. ,....by.$.r_4R_ko,en undivided one-third intaraetj.. HARGARBT.4..gfE.eqto an undivided ona-third Lett_ .,..... .•p?LE&'MEt 01......'by': rnnrm, JORN ARTIRIR.911,P 1N AMID J8'l1ICE'7 8"D......ti. giisliind'..ied fliEa t,rm•el•e old warrant.la.......................... ............... .................................................... ,........•... • .,.. Grimm.. the lolluwind dneribed real property kayo!entombrnncaa • I racepf no.prcllienlly ter forth herein drowned ln....Nash.'l!' _......»...., ........County,Organ,lo•wilt A certain mill lot in Sections 12 and 13 in Township 2 South, Range 1 West of,the Willamette Meridian, and said tract being in Washington ' ' CountF. Oregon bounded by and beginning at a point on the Section line 2 South, East of Northwest l Range1 WestoftheWillamette Meridian; Town thence (S(outh 26° West 4,90 chains to a stake on the bank of the fill)) creak V 14'30' Eastc5.45dchains of the inathe thence canter8ofth the road; thence North 46°30' East 8.32 chains to a stake in the road; thence North 12° West 1.61 chains to a 'stake near mill race; thence North 54°5' East 75 links to a stake near Mill Pond' thence North 58°15' West 6 chains, more or less, to a fir snag five feet in• diameter; thence South 26° West 4.83 'chains to the place of beginning, r two neon vneharramm rue one aonhrynntT n t•••■Y.r!,.x+,•..e.••••••t H•1°tw..Tar •-•r It �•yuusuwrn•.n..,,o•.+n+.,i \Dn.`tfl.• .+ day a!_November__. ....... .,Y..._BQ. •• �. 't � �i�'� 0 • -• Xt •�, ',y�. .............\ ' ; C l r �� X arm ! ,.. XS `f. • 'l'�� :. �t'.B_"-.' •k-; ' ie a •:..Pyle, Attorney �••�*N II;••'' +"B• C(iesE•t-R:•'Py1i;"Attor y ' Td'Yeiit• STATE OF OREGON,Cou ol..(QG&Ifl 5..J on. .'......../C(!.� .. "..�°^.'i.,IY..Y...Y. :t' P 1 Jr as a individea an Attorne is l+rnvrudq�appeared Ow abort rhwowd 4b1l41:or,.Rr y,-a.i...».., R X......». "pact lot:Abwe..,saseul.P i xlASr r, , . • �••:• ........mud nrhrowlatigrd rlm lurapubal innf,unwvtl to be.hi4 voluntary act and dead. • . ilT.Y1t(:UO 1Y 61 Nanny oldie la;Oregon--My tornndlOknl rnldrre: �-ID'S 17 1)..,,....,, ``.:.C:. r• . IYAIIIIAHTY OHM ' •"•• ..Cheater R.,.fy1er.,Jr,_Bt_Al _._ 1 UUATIO/OMESON C dns11 sewn.• John Arthur Oonoan e•whta: Comm a of Wallington _.-.. . _. ..___.____ __.....______..- " 'Janina Leh. 0uilaart ' low lo.i.°":,;rwl:n'" and eizisllaM wad twOHlelw Mhwrtlw a Con. Ah.,r•hadl,d(lbws nh wooziness for sold wwns do Canby"truly that Mr. b Mrs. Duncan tiro*thin iasndaaanl a(writing was raeelrad -�- ...._ _. ,.••�_.._._.._._...»_..__...._ .....wN•Mro and rseordad In book a,.soda of wId esealy. 1603! SW 74th Ave.__ _ eon Tigard, Oregon,.___973Z3•_,,,µ_.. __ Nrao•ee••e VOL RIMS 7MOM sent.Qn.Na al • • Raawdiri 8lwdena MINE Owd a•hr o.ii,•90,1n1,ell t••nNa5100 V� •'". •,/ AA h.wow. " Abov•d1 _. ..._...._.__ .._.. 5 �•_' Soso ..Above RBI 229780.8 IC • 1900 DEC-0 rN Izt us • � a.er..w„aa.a,. a•. ov .,T.1"'i..'r Yr y.. .1.,, �r.�..rA.I,yhpy.."71:,,.p..}•. ..177...•:77::-- , _ 0•.,r I t L ., a f r O•i .;:.,r , ti r tiisTa( • • -...+.,..,_ . �.�. . • • • !:y ,*. �• t' !:a . t • • • • • THIB DEED IS LIVEN IN FULFILLMENT OP THAT CSRTIAN CONTRACT OP SALE DATED APRIL 12, 1979 AND RECORDEDrAPRIL 13, 1979 in RECORDERS FEE. NO. 79-14180 of WASHINGTON COUNTY DEED RECORDS. nl VK•1/aUrl Kin,Cplr�inr,q rVlp.p/rlvta•1 falrl The wild property I,free front rances accept Sher hie of the public in and to that portion o, the above property lying within the limits of roads and highways, Rights of the public and 01 governmental bodies in that portion of the above described property lying below the high wete mark of Fanno Creek. An easement created by instrument, recorded to Book 839 Pep 963. The l,ur consideration fur liar conveyance IN$..30.0.00,00......(ffrrs comply ry r di eQuIle,nenre of ORS 93.030) \Dn't MN. .,fol dnl•ul._No4egber.•,__.._...».,fA..�II�.»..».. • `V. aa_'_-\it,. ee or . ' e,• Xs \ •• \ • n 9 'dal A X: \ k ■ XI L. s ` ''.. ,' • Win• e R. Pyle, Attorney--., R�c�' ,,//__--LL__--�__ f t. �g�Chedt t R:'Eyli'�"ANYt�or•ey STATE OP ORERON,Coo y.,..CI4C 4 f .S..)as. .',....._!/r!d.-�e_. fl.19.,.P.Y. .••+•f'. Persona/1r epp•wr•d rile nbol•e named.__QI•1let5F_ s...tella..are.....1!!..N..).P_a.4Y...idwtal_s__.•xttotfq�a!-{n ' ind nrkltmrhdird the fore/dolnd frntrtrolelrt to 4r...!i!.-.»rolunfary act and dead. • I,-, ''o,ul k:) Velure nee::....... �:6i.�4r.•a. (...01 .».�, iC- ..` ,,.1(CerrAlit,lilt.1 • Notary ub(le for Onjun...fy aonunisahm erplmr_ - ^ ti.f ...,• E.. •.1 . . .,y` N'ARaAltrr PM/ • ''rr4i;,. 'Blither Rr,_.eylet..a!Fs 6t_Al . p _mast /^^^^ •^•- STATE OP OAeODN 1 this*( MMus;^ Il — :foam jCrehue Doric?n'.._—�.a..Hn'i' County al Shoehh elan ' .—_._.Iepiiii-iai buncea_ .._ ---:•_ I. Apgar llwmfNn.':.0bpnol of Records .an w•..wrr•ry and Elections end fig R• 0111elo .cordar of Con• .•• Altos•.raises resew NI .eyn.c•.for NW aounly,do hereby canals thin Mrs 4 Has. Duncan IM wllhfn Imoom.nt If paling way/v alved •r•e••....... •nd recorded In book of Howe.of sold munry. 16035 8'Yw74th.�!s — _• 'ft rd Oregon 9 223 coup•••o c RoOIn rNOMSe£N,Dina..of ascardle Moderns 7" Unnl••I. 1.•.•••x•d*fits.gx•�aaly •eNf+'. H Anil b.,'tat WA.fxbrdn.adhere --.—. — _ ' r- .Base a Above REt 2297ao-e'ic_ .--""' I980DEC-0 PM 12t 45 - V r a.w..ea.w.1.• ".. ••, r.a :Y..left•.1t t ., . .1• ' W• CO . • t CITY OF TIGARD Date: 3/00 LAND USE APPLICATIONS ' BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS Project: APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL SUBMITTALS. ALL ITEMS MUST BE SUBMITTED AT ONE TIME. ➢ Include this form with submittal packet. The applicant must check the box next to the item verifying that the information is present. Staff will check off the items at intake. ' Three copies of all materials are required for the initial review process. The balance of the copies will be requested once your submittal is deemed complete. > Each packet must be collated. D Plans are required to be a minimum of 24" x 36". D Plans must be FOLDED, rolled plans are not accepted. Applicant Staff Documents,Copies and Fees Required Completed Master"Land Use Permit" Application with property owner's signature or name r of agent and letter of authorization w(ti Title transfer instrument or grant deed ✓ Written summary of proposal Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria(as specified in the Pre- Application Conference notes) • Documentary evidence of Neighborhood Meeting:Neighborhood Meeting Affidavits of 0 + Posting&Mailing Notice,Minutes,Sign-in Sheets �1 cc Service Provider Letter Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2(e) ✓ Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes Filing Fee(see fee schedule) it Preliminary Sight Distance Certification k i Preliminary Storm Calculations Arbonst Report f• c. Traffic Report (if Required) Maps or Plans (Plans must be at least 24" x 36") ✓ Architectural Drawings (elevations &floorplans) - ✓ Existing Conditions Map Kr Landscape Plan Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan n Q Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan �t a. Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan ri A Preliminary Utilities Plan n a Public Improvements/Streets Plan • a Site Development Plan n � Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map Topography Map • n/4 I Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan Vicinity Map > Once your application has been deemed complete you will be notified by the Planning Division in the form of a completeness letter indicating that you will need to provide the following: Two (2) sets of stamped, addressed# 10 envelopes for all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property (the 2 sets must remain separated for the purpose of 2 mailings). Mailing envelopes shall be standard legal-size (# 10),addressed with 1" X 4" labels (please see envelope submittal requirements). Property owner mailing lists must be prepared by the City for a minimal fee (please see request for 500' property owner mailing list form). I:\CURPLN\Mastets\Submittal Requirements CheckList.doc (Updated:20-May-08) , CITY OF TIGARD LA, 1D USE APPLICATIONS 08, ,)9 FEE SCHEDULE PROCEDURE FEE + SURCHARGE ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNITS $115 + $18 = $133 ANNEXATION Moratorium on Annexation fees in effect from 7/1/06(Res.06.36)through 7/1/08(Res.07-13)' $2,177 + $321 = $2,498"- APPEAL Director's Decision (Type II) to Hearings Officer $250 Expedited Review(Deposit) * $300 Hearings Referee $500 Planning Commission/Hearings Officer To City Council $2,189 +$324 = $2,513 APPROVAL EXTENSION $230 + $34 = $264 BLASTING PERMIT $269 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Initial $4,529 +$669 = $5,198 Major Modification $4,529 +$669 =$5,198 Minor Modification $500 + $74 = $574 DESIGN EVALUATION TEAM(DET) RECOMMENDATION(DEPOSIT) _ $1,121 +$165 = $1,286 DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVISION REVIEW Single-Family Building Plan $46 +$6 = $52 Commercial/Industrial/Institution $287 + $42 = $329 HEARING POSTPONEMENT $259_ HISTORIC OVERLAY/REVIEW DISTRICT l' Historic Overlay Designation $3,499 + $517 =$4,016 Removal of Historic Overlay Designation $3,499 + $517 =$4,016 Exierior Alteration in Historic Overlay District $536 +$79 = $615 New Construction in Historic Overlay District $536 + $79 = $615 Demolition in Historic Overlay District $536 + $79 = $615 HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT(ORIGINAL PERMIT) Type I Home Occupation Permit $35 +$5 =$40 Type II Home Occupation Permit $246 + $36 = $282 INTERPRETATION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE $571 + $36 = $607 LAND PARTITION Residential and Non-Residential (3 Lots) $3,247 +$480 = $3,727 Residential and Non-Residential (2 Lots) $2,672 +$394 = $3,066 Expedited. .- $3,819 +$564.=$4,383 Final Plat $777 +$114 = $891 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $416 + $62 = $478 MINOR MODIFICATION TO AN APPROVED PLAN $500 + $74 = $574_ NON-CONFORMING USE CONFIRMATION $236 + $35 = $271 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Conceptual Plan Review $6,496 + $916 = $7,412 Detailed Plan Review Applicable SDR Fee PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE $323 + $47 = $370 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW With Excessive Slopes/Within Drainage Ways/Within Wetlands (Type II) _ $2,097 +$309 = $2,406 With Excessive Slopes/Within Drainage Ways/Within Wetlands (Type III) $2,256 +$334 = $2,590 Within The 100-Year Floodplain (Type III) $2,256 + $334 = $2,590 SIGN PERMIT Existing and Modification to an Existing Sign (No Size Differential) $35 + $5 = $40 Temporary Sign (Per Sign) $17 + $2 = $19 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND MAJOR MODIFICATION Under$1,000,000 _ $3,838 + $567 = $4,405 $1 Million/Over $5,038 + $743 = $5,781 + $6/Each $10,000 Over$1 Million MINOR MODIFICATION $500 + $74 = $574 I • • SUBDIVISION — Preliminary Plat Without Planned Development $4,458 + $637 = $5,095 + $90/Lot _ Preliminary Plat With Planned Development Add $6,211 +$916 = $7,127 Expedited Preliminary Plat Without Planned Development $5,136 + $637 = $5,773 + $90/Lot Expedited Preliminary Plat With Planned Development Add $6,211 + $916 = $7,127 Final Plat $1,428 +$210 = $1,638 Plat Name Change $272 TEMPORARY USE PERMIT Director's Decision $262 + $39 = $301_ Special Exemption/Non-Profit Organization -0- TREE REMOVAL $161 + $25 = $186 VACATION(STREETS AND PUBLIC ACCESS) $1,915 + $274 = $2,189 Deposit - +Actual Costs VARIANCE/ADJUSTMENT Administrative Variance $536 + $79 = $615 Development Adjustment $236 +$35 = $271 Special Adjustments - Adjustment to a Subdivision $236 +$35 = $271 - Reduction of Minimum Residential Density $236 +$35 = $271 - Access/Egress Standards Adjustment $536 +$79 = $615 - Landscaping Adjustment (Existing/New Street Trees) $269 + $40 = $309 Parking Adjustments - Reduction in Minimum or Increase in Maximum Parking Ratio $536 + $79 = $615 - Reduction in New or Existing Development/Transit Improvement $536 + $79 = $615 - Reduction in Bicycle Parking $536 + $79 = $615 - Alternative Parking Garage Layout $236 + $35 = $271 • - Reduction in Stacking Lane Length $536 + $79 = $615 . Sign Code Adjustment $536 + $79 = $615 Street Improvement Adjustment $536 + $79 = $615 Tree Removal Adjustment $236 + $35 = $271 Wireless Communication Facility Adjustments - Setback From Nearby Residence • $536 + $79 = $615 - Distance From Another Tower $236 + $35 = $271 ZONING MAP/TEXT AMENDMENT Legislative - Comprehensive Plan (CPA) $7,742 + $1,144 = $8 8 86 Legislative - Community Development Code (DCA) $3,044 + $449 = $3,493 Quasi-Judicial--(ZON) $2,789-+ $4171—=13, 60 -- ZONING ANALYSIS (DETAILED) $500 + $74 =$574 ZONING INQUIRY LETTER(SIMPLE) $58 + $8 = $66 JOINT APPLICATION PLANNING FEE 100% of Highest Planning Fee + 50% of All Additional Fees Related to the Proposal EFFECTIVE DATE: OCTOBER 29,2003(Updated annually according to Resolution No.03-59) (Resolution No.Q359, Repealing Resolution No.02-38,Repealing Resolution No.98-58,Repealing Resolution No.96-30,Repealing Resolution No.91-01) * -Established by state statute NOTE 1: WITHDRAWN APPLICATIONS: In cases of withdraw of an application;refund of fees may be applicable, less costs incurred, as determined by the Director. Generally, refunds of 80 percent will be made for applications received and withdrawn prior to sending out request for comments to agencies and notice of public hearing being sent. Fifty-percent refunds will be made where notice of public hearing has been sent but no staff report has begun. NO REFUNDS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR APPLICATIONS FOR WHICH A STAFF REPORT HAS BEGUN. NOTE 2: PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: For all Type II, III and IV applications, applicants must submit two (2) sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all property owners of record within 500 feet of the subject properties. The very most current records of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation shall be the official records for determining ownership. Contact the City of Tigard to request 500-foot property owner mailing labels. NOTE 3: LONG RANGE PLANNING SURCHARGE: A Long Range Planning surcharge of .1476 x the application fee has been added by the City Council Resolution No.04-99,passed and effective on 12/28/04. H-\patty\masters\Tigard Fee Schedule 08-09 doc(update effective-7/1/08(no changes)) BEFORE the CITY of TIGARD, OREGON APPLICATION for CODE TEXT AMENDMENT By Bruce & April Berg Applicant's Narrative (October 3, 2008) The Applicant The Applicant owns and operate Northwest Ski and Wake Sports, LLC, which specializes in high end water craft. This business defies easy categorization. It is not retail; given its highly specialized market niche, the Applicant does well to sell one boat a week. Also, retail commercial buildings do not have sufficient door width or ceiling height to accommodate the boats. Nor is the Applicant's use industrial. It does not manufacture and/or distribute to wholesalers. Also, because it requires no outdoor storage, it is not land intensive.' As something of a tweener use, the Applicant has struggled to find suitably zoned land in the City. The Applicant's Proposal The Applicant asks the City to amend the text of Table 18.530.1 of the Community Development Code as shown on Exhibit A hereto. This amendment would allow "motor vehicle sales/rental" in the IP zone, provided (a) such operation takes place wholly within an enclosed building and (b) does not exceed 20% of the floor area of the given development complex. Process Asa Type IV Zoning Ordinance Amendment, this application is governed by provisions of CDC Chapters 18.130, 18.380, 18.390, and 18.530. The balance of this narrative sets forth the approval criteria and our responses to them. ' The Applicant presently operates in the Columbia Southshore area, near the airport in Portland's "General Industrial 2" zone. Its business consists of the following components: • Boat show room (approximately 3,000 sq.ft.); • Boat accessory sales (approximately 3,000 sq.ft.); • Office/internet sales area (approximately 2,000 sq.ft.); and • Boat service (approximately 900 sq.ft.). In the boat show room, there will be approximately 5 to 10 boats in the interior show room area. The boats range in price from $35,000 to $85,000. APPLICATION for CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 1 CDC Chap. 18.380 Under CDC § 18.380.020, legislative text amendments (such as the instant application) are governed by CDC § 18.390.060.G. CDC § 18.390.060.G: The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines Of Statewide Goals, the Applicant finds only the Transportation Planning Rule (specifically, OAR 660-012-0060) applicable to this proposal. The TPR requires evidence that, assuming reasonable "worst-case" development thereunder, the proposed plan amendment will not "significantly affect" a transportation facility. Under Mason v. City of Corvallis, 49 Or LUBA 199 (2005), such an affect can exist only where the proposal would increase the number of vehicle trips that development of the property will likely generate. The threshold question here, then, is whether reasonable worst case development under the motor vehicle sales/rental use category would increase the amount of traffic generated by such development. According to the ITE Manual, new trip ends to an office park would be 11.42 per day per thousand square feet of floor area. To be sure, a motor vehicle dealership would generate more trips (33.34). However, the attendant restrictions (all operations conducted indoors) make such a use infeasible in this zone. Even a car rental agency is infeasible under these conditions. More likely in this circumstance is someone who sells large vehicles to serve industrial deliveries, keeping its inventory off-site. Any such use would have very low traffic flow. As evidence, the Applicant's present watercraft sales operation does most business by internet; indeed, during its slow season can go days with no foot traffic. Any federal or state statutes or regulations The Applicant identifies no federal or state statutes or regulations that apply. Any applicable Metro regulations In 1997 Metro adopted its Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, codified as Metro Code Chap. 3.12. Title 4 of that plan sets forth criteria that govern comprehensive plan amendments affecting designated Industrial land. That provision restricts only the following uses: "retail commercial uses — such as stores and restaurants — and retail and professional services that cater to daily customers — such as financial, insurance, real estate, legal, and medical and dental offices." APPLICATION for CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 2 As noted above, the Applicant's business is not retail, certainly does not "cater to daily customers." Furthermore, CDC Table 18.530.1 does not list motor vehicle sales/rental among the General Retail use categories. Rather, it lists the use within the Motor Vehicle Related category. Thus, the proposed amendment does not violate Metro Title 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies The City adopted its comprehensive plan under the Statewide Planning Goals in 1983. Three plan policies bare directly on this proposal: • Economic Development Policy 9.1.3: "The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is available." • Economic Development Policy 9.1.5: "The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands." • Economic Development Policy 9.1.7: "The City shall limit the development of retail and service land uses in Metro-designated industrial areas to preserve the potential of those lands for industrial jobs." These policies speak to the tension inherent in the regional industrial land use policy. I.e., as the distinction between industrial and commercial blurs, where do we draw the line on allowed uses? Everyone can agree that computer chip manufacturing should be allowed on Industrial land and a discount superstore should not. In this context, it is important to note that, as described above, the proposed text amendment complies with Metro's Title 4. The cited comp plan policies, however, raise a broader question. Given the nature of its landscape, a lot of low slung 1970's vintage industrial buildings, how does the City keep these buildings utilized in a way that does not undermine. Not surprisingly, the Applicant believes that the proposed text amendment will help the City achieve this balance. • The market speaks through this Application. The fact that this landlord found the Applicant to be the highest and best use of it space is substantial evidence that the IP zone in the City is underutilized. The most recent (Q2 2008) report from Norris Beggs & Simpson bears this out. It shows a vacancy rate of about 13% in the industrial/flex market around Hwy APPLICATION for CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 3 217. Recent macro-economic trends (viz., tightening world credit markets) certainly do not portend this number to come down soon. • According to the Comp Plan, "there has been no large scale encroachment of retail/office uses in industrial areas in Tigard." Thus, the City has, to this point, not drawn the industrial/commercial line too much in favor of the commercial, Now, the Applicant certainly does not mean to say "let's open the floodgates and freely allow a commercial land rush on the City's industrial zones." Nonetheless, this fact should give the City some comfort that the proposed amendment will not exacerbate any existing identified problem. • The Comp Plan also says that "the City has little vacant industrial land available to attract new large scale industrial development." This suggests that enhancing the City's ability to increase its job base depends mainly on creating vacant industrial zoned land, rather than on maintaining use restrictions on existing development. CDC § 18.530 This chapter describes the industrial zoning districts of the Code. Although the application seeks to amend the text of this chapter (Table 18.530), it does not set forth criteria that govern the subject application. However, the description of the I-P District does provide some relevant context. I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g. restaurants, personal services and fitness centers, in a campus-like setting:-Onty those-tight-Indus rMMI uses with no off-site- impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. The Applicant's use fits this description well. It is small in scale, creates no off-site impacts, and fits in well to a campus setting. APPLICATION for CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 4 CDC § 18.130: This chapter sets forth the Code's use categories. It does not set forth criteria that govern the application per se. Rather, it describes the "motor vehicle sales/rental" category. DCAPDX n506090_v1 Application Narrative.doc APPLICATION for CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 5 P. _ ,sed Amendments to Development Code Exhibit A to Application of Bruce& April Berg October 3,2008 TABLE 18.530.1 USE TABLE:INDUSTRIAL ZONES USE CATEGORY I-P I-L I-H RESIDENTIAL Household Living R' R' R' Group Living N N N Transitional Housing N N N Home Occupation N N N CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) Basic Utilities CIO CI9 pio Colleges N N N Community Recreation CI9 C19 CI9 Cultural Institutions N N N Day Care R39 R39 R39 Emergency Services P P P Medical Centers N N N Postal Service P P P Public Support Facilities P P P Religious Institutions N N N Schools N N N Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges N N N COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging P N N Eating and Drinking Establishments R2 N N Entertainment-Oriented - Major Event Entertainment N N N Outdoor Entertainment P N N - Indoor Entertainment P N N Adult Entertainment N N N General Retail - Sales-Oriented R2 N N - Personal Services R2 N N - Repair-Oriented P N N - Bulk Sales R4,il N N - Outdoor Sales N P P - Animal-Related P P P Motor Vehicle Related Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental 14RZ,4 P P Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair C P P - Vehicle Fuel Sales P P/C7 P Office P N N Self-Service Storage P P P Non-Accessory Parking P P P Changes in Additions in bold 1 teileariodZuaiglIMu-tcts 18.530-3 SE Update: Proposed Amendments to Development Code Exhibit A to Application of Bruce&April Berg October 3,2008 TABLE 18.530.1 (CON'T) USE CATEGORY I-P II=L I_H INDUSTRIAL Industrial Services N P P Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial P P P - General Industrial N P P - Heavy Industrial N N P Railroad Yards N N P Research and Development P P P Warehouse/Freight Movement N P P Waste-Related N N P Wholesale Sales R4 P P OTHER Agriculture/Horticulture P5 P5 P5 Cemeteries N C N Detention Facilities C N C Heliports C C C Mining N N P Wireless Communication Facilities P/R6 P E' Rail Lines/Utility Corridors P P P Other NA NA P" P=Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted 'A single-family detached dwelling or single-family mobile or manufactured home allowed for caretaker or kennel owner/operator when located on the same lot as the permitted use and is exclusively occupied by the caretaker or kennel owner/operator and family. 2These limited uses,separately or in combination,may not exceed 20%of the entire square footage within a development complex. No retail uses shall exceed 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area per building or business. 31n-home day care which meets all state requirements permitted by right. °Permitted if all activities,except employee and customer parking,are wholly contained with a building(s). 5When an agricultural use is adjacent to a residential use, no poultry or livestock, other than normal household pets, may be housed or provided use of a fenced run within 100 feet of any nearby residence except a dwelling on the same lot. 6ee Chapter 18.798, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition of permitted and restricted facilities in the I-P zone. 'Vehicle fuel sales permitted outright unless in combination with convenience sales, in which case it is permitted conditionally. 8Explosive storage permitted outright subject to regulations of Uniform Fire Code.9Day care uses with over 5 children are permitted subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment in accordance with t • Proposed Amendments to Development Code Exhibit A to Application of Bruce&April Berg October 3,2008 °Limited to outdoor Recreation on (1.) land classified as floodplain on City flood maps, when the recreational use does not otherwise preclude future cut and fill as needed in order to develop adjoining industrially zoned upland;and(2.)land located outside the floodplain as shown on City flood maps, when the Recreation Use is temporary and does not otherwise preclude allowed uses or Conditional Uses other than Recreation within the district. These limited uses, shall only be allowed in IP zoned property east of SW 72" Avenue. These uses, separately or in combination shall not exceed 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area in a single building, or commercial retail uses with a total of more than 60,000 square feet of retail sales area on a single lot or parcel, or on contiguous lots or parcels, including those separated only by transportation right- of-way.(Ord.04-14) PRE-APPLICATION NOTES Bruce&April Berg, NW Ski and Wake Sports September 23,2008 STAFF PRESENT: Gary Pagenstecher APPLICANT: Bruce&April Berg,NW Ski and Wake Sports PROPERTY LOCATION: 16055 SW 74th Avenue. • TAX MAP/LOT#: 2S1135AB00800 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: To change the development code text for the I-P zone in Table 18.530.1 to allow motor vehicle sales as a permitted restricted (R) use (limited in size and contained wholly within a building. COMP PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial Park ZONING: I-P NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A neighborhood meeting is not required for the CDC text change. NARRATIVE Include a narrative that responds to the applicable review criteria.The narrative must contain the text of the applicable review criteria, findings of fact relative to each criterion, and a conclusion as to whether the criterion has been met: (Note: the following list is intended to provide guidance in preparation of your application. Additional criteria may be identified dependant upon the nature of the specific application, or — - e he issues _°- raiseel griither-words;this--is ot-atrexhaustive-list of all cine,_ia.. It is-the — – applicant's responsibility to ensure that all applicable standards are met.) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Zoning Map and Text Amendments 18.380.020 A.Legislative amendments.Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure,as governed by Section 18.390.060G. 18.390.060 Based on the information provided, the text amendment request will be a Type IV Process, with a public hearing before the planning commission. The Planning Commission then makes a recommendation to City Council to either approve the request as proposed, modify the request, or deny the request. A subsequent hearing (or hearings) is then held by the City Council. The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; [Goals 1) Public Involvement and 9) Economic Development] 2.Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3. Any applicable METRO regulations; [Title 1 (Metro Code Sections 3.07.110—3.07.170) — Requirements for Housing and Employment Accommodation,Title 4 (Metro Code Sections 3.-07.410—3.07.440) —Industrial and Other Employment Areas] 4.Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; (Goals: 1) Public Involvement,and 9) Economic Development);and 5. Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances ['11)C 18.130, 18.380, 18.390,and 18.530]. Application Fees for Zoning Text Amendment (Legislative): $3,493. Decision timeline is at least 4 months from receipt of a complete application. The 120-day rule is not applicable to legislative changes. PREPARED BY: • Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner Page 1 of 1 �.. - �aY Y � q l ? 3._ _ 1. *pp . 4. ,., .. .. . „ 4„,...• ::,..,_. 0 .- ....,, , . _:.:, ,, . , i , • „,.. ... , ,,..,,.... . , ..,. ...,, ,t .._ ..,..„ T 4 *Pt.vY , 4 7 �b i 1- _ ..- ' * v., /a; i F A + ,.Y - _ 1 -d` �j�1 /I A_ - , - -..r. .f, - : .' / ■((sk.4, /< ill , . .. % i i_ , _.,,,r, 4.., It 2S113ABDOGOO --.. ,, ;y, f, F - Subject Property Complex Building #1: 16055 SW 74th Av. 10,097 sq.ft /Reception/Internet/Service Area 2,900 sq.ft. Boat Accessories/Sales 3000 sq.ft. Boat Showroom 3000 sq.ft. Service Area-Tenant B-Not NVVSW 1,197 sq.ft. note: retail sq ft of 6,000 sq.ft. less then allowed 6,847 sq.ft. of retail Building #2: 15995 SW 74th Av. 13,970 sq.ft. Office/Flex Space/Loading/Service Area 13,970 sq.ft Area 0 sq.ft. Building #3: 16135 SW 74th Av. 10,168 sq.ft. Office/Flex Space/Loading/Service Area 10,168 sq.ft. Retail Area 0 sq.ft Total Complex Sq.Ft.: 34,235 sq.ft. 20% of Project Complex: 6,847 sq.ft. BONITA ROAD PROJECT INFORMATION ---- — TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 0.0 �aR1A4 INFORMATION KING CITY a I a O A N E1-~M D 2MMIIM ROM , 3 0.1 COVER 6NEET JO4IV D1DVCAN "'WVER/ NICOL I ENCsINEERndG,INC Y 02 NOTE AND 6PECIFIGATIONB 7060 P4L•MER WA A>�jCA�* 9025 5lU.CENTER Sr. r 0_4 &JIL AND CODE INFORMATION 0.4 B'JILpiNG CODE 1NFOR'1AT!ON HEAVERTON.OREGON'97007 TrGARp.ORBGCN 91223 /S03) &®7-7735 1503/620.2086 r..2) SITE I1�O1a Id'ION C(NTACT: JIM ANDREWS DURHAM ROAD I.1 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN pTE IECW / W I T L` . 20 BUILDING PLANS ADDRESS. '6055 5E 74t+ AVENUE �'�'//g 2J FLOOR PLAN r rP INDUSTRIAL PARK \�% / 22 FOUNDATION PLAN wRREN'-ZON.\G 2.3 FRAMING PLANS •� 2.4 ROOF PLAN• CJR2NT USE. ✓ACANT:.OT ;/,� QC 3U) ELEVATIONS °ROPOSED USE FIRST FLOOR IUARENOU5E 1 31 ELEVATIONS SECOND FLOOR OFFICE n 33 REINFORCING ELEVATIONS LEGAL-DESCRIPTION. TAX MAP. 75 1134E3 PURNAM TAX LOT: 800 410 BUILDING SECTIONS SITE AREA, 6.7 ACRES 4.i SECTIONS I✓ROJECt EOUNDARY 26330 SF 5.0 DETAILS / ✓ 5.1 FOUNDATION DETAILS NG Esb... LNG AREA: 7232 SF. �� 53 STTAAIIR AND EBALCONY DETAILS ASPHALT PAVING.. 5550 SF. Ex'5'•'G V� ..ANDSCAPING• 9930 SF '`._•.• PARK,NG: 21 TO*A._ •\7 `,W.6 DESIGN LOADS gT,4NDARD SPACES: 10 1.. ` DESIGN LOADS ADA(.C)SPACES. \C".) I ` ^ � CCMI°AGT. 10 I � , CYCLE PARCING. ' I� \ I fi /, ;• SOIL BEARING 500 PSI f fi / j ROB. DL=15/SF. WILDINglinflMAIKM I 1� / (wAREFIOUSE I OFFICE! SNOW. 29/5F. •DR;F7 EXISTING-- // 16—....S I I SL4I c4-- t' fd3, 3 MECH. .SEE PL AkS H�1%/AG GODS: :997 UJ3C /OREGON AMENDMENTS a POND ;J I ?S U� 1 - ) x g„ 2nd FLOOR/OFFICE • DL 15=SP rDi e , LL • 50PSF BOLDING - 2$'CRY PARTITION • 20 P9F j CCNSTQJGTrON TYPE. CONCRETE MAECNRY I?IIT3 u�, WIND • 80 MPH/EXPOSURE B OCCUPANCY B FI f I 9EI9MIC • ZONE 3/1.10 PROJECT / I CONSTRUCTION: TYPE ✓-+■ I BO!I�ARY •- . DEFERRED PERMITS ELg.crocAL MECNANicAL AND PL1J101NG J CONTRACTORS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR SECURING NECESSARY PERMITS AND/OR MA DURHAM ROAD APPROVALS. I OVERALL SITE PLAN BUILDING PERMIT SET TAx MAP NO 261 113AD ��q ��� TAX LOT NO. 8O0 5,1 AC. BIJLDING SI-ELL LEG I81LITV STRIP O. c� ' 2 3 a 8 8 7 9 a IO I I .2 I3 is 19 17 '8 f9 2'0 21 22 23 2a 25 z6 27 29 29 30 aft 11111 a& Ab. to Subject Property Building #1: 16055 SW 74th Av. 10,097 sq.ft. 41.11,1111 ,.., ..4::',.. .-.:.... r ■ .• ,.S .. Th( , I(»ct tY - - __0„,.. :. .„.....v,, . 1 .= „ . . „,.. :3.. --*:4* :;.; '- - , ,:.-...• :."..'4!,.,.:"',Prd''... -'':;•f.-.r_'‘ :M.'-:.,_,' - . '2*ft.:7*- ,111.:- . ;.•-r-./.47-'...' ..;.■:-."...'`-sf.= , :....,.:!'.: : • NSI • - i, , ,-,-.4-- .1". -:, 4 -.- •-• .f,:: '- 1 Adonst /71- Space i'-, . .f..:i P+ •... ._.....i., -. ..,- .1 •:.e,s, ,.., . ..-. . .... . .7.0, .. .,. -4...e '■ ' . * ..4.,... s , • . . . .i. .. , . . ..,„..„. .,,.. .,... • ,,,_ .,_ .. :,:. ,....._ ..._.,...... . .ii--. . , eNigibblaJ3 • ltd, .i to 'i�. L a- \1 , i P. lit 1♦ 1 ! . 4_ l, 1' . , . ` • i i1• r , ',,,,1 (((ppr�, , 4 1 L M1y 1 +A P � ! �1°ny�s t....,- O;0'''''0•",_itl .1 • riY• l 1 'rt ' , -• „ II• i +' r ./ ll '', ,1+ _ •F 147 ti• �� r .I. . 1 ,.... .:_c -.. s ,.... ,...,.th , l �4;f 4 Vin. r Gir+ t 4 +e I } Y ,_........_ - ,- ,,,._..... .,i.. , Ij 1 a r,+� *n s�'L.a y. • ,�, � ,t, F-,11.4!-.4i ,,r i'', , /� {I. 'I 1 l .�i ��,{., �t/ , i/� r n +k t r . V 4 i1 sum /�, M 7 s W W �a r .,,,./Ns, 7 i O / 4cyiL a -Q "'fit' p�a. ,4';',,fi L ._ , /. ,1, . . fAv, ,,,,...„ , , 1, u) , . . ,,..1 . i.,,,.".. . . ., 1 ......_, _ __,....!. . .„.;.„:/.....,;..„,.fkr:ei„s7.... _., L,,.,� a r r t1�y i� r :i1 A b ,i111 r+ p it ∎1 j Al 44 t, -;f`p,t lt... 1 p { ,_t, ,.�F' .r ' Y -1'• •,. a V ,, ► i o''. -Y . • ,,;'_v r umrnc —\ I pUhllnn R 7 I\���� . _1 R-3.5 RJ 07 ax 02 of ! - zt ton �12' - - 1 72 7 ii � yAry�` R-+PDI � __ _..�1 1 I' —� _� II 1-H I , _ Rr7 f __- 711CI�L1c�Ii1�Ll' R.4{, 1y71 1R-12 L, O.��17�� �L. lr Illy \� M.1 ��� t S J -� 0� ' ,-- I L. Hfi,�I R-12 "l_f Middle I�-_� \} _,. rl_f �- -- w 1 ' u _1 ,..4...,,i.,j„. 1 R-3.5 School H. 1, 'H /li-- _ �l.'11 1 :oi Ir , 'e; =-LLLh LJ IIL'l r� r fi�.l. �11�I- R'a.b 6y � j �4�r{ R-40 (POi 'j�j7 [°.[' 'Pp) - 1-1Rirll'R-4.5 �, .I_J_1 L:H IN' mmplmon pD Elamcnlxy y pi r .,.� `� . I IA ' '11 R� l� _ JI _ -I '-' (PD) \ 143— : R-3.5 R7 <� +v \. ' ---I--it ::2- �� h GG R-7 R-7 n R-25 n / - (PD) `�`Ol R-12 a.7 c)(..1-7—:-/6- ),...\ /^ ■ .� - '�- (PD) R-4.5I1� �.. �- �� to tt id,� � _I i t �L�71_I• CC I ,t to _ "Note 1a 17 murhuy '� Q I " I� 1 ���a"� ��I•l� II II 9 Elementary R-25 School ? 00,40 g��a�-(.� C-G R-4.5 1 • R-4.5 qy �.. I 1!THn..•ti;,1 Subject Property Complex - 4....10,, Street View Traffic More... fwlap� Satellit4e Terrain t •, ...,,, . ._.,;,,.,..;. . ....,,,,:-.,,,,s, ..,„ .,..: ,-..A••• '',..' ',":":-_,"':.,',,,,,,,..:".....®, .- ' ., ;' n..' ,fit , "., ' -v 4 ,, ` .. " `,/I' '�+•. Ada —4 .. y5, ♦ .yvY'., -+� - T"F. t' , r f a a r:' ,#, '4 7, z �i 1S yr - , n s � 3 T aF 11+ 4v"..•-•;*1 4Y YET ti� . � r�`' ..y,yam� y ' + 'r,e M!; 1 , r,� *. "ri• }'°.rl' 1 r'e- z�Y.H' �: ' t.'th�. 1� a nF,e Yf y,,: !. -t "'+1 «:sgr�7r 1'• n j 41 1 : M -•,yam, , f 4*,.. .4 MS°t.;y ,le r r. - '.�1 f'?"3F g1Fi +''I+'b'`_I4+n1' 1 .K.• 't '414.'fir 04.,7 1 + ,.r''1 i +7 ;„4?,.,;*„-:, , ,1 4 rl -- ( ref �j .fa �j 1 {' T.'.+ .�' '-' u`..,°Yr++ ?y ' e* a #.1 �M '}f'4P'". p,,, ,14 7"i ^ 1 f . 4 . .: •4.1! ' �r + 'a� 'M>t• ''R " .'r x � 9o. ••` k,: QQQ "" ' q '{' y;,,9 ` yti+t�'�y ?.. r a, .t p 4 } j° p - mow .gy s 10" ki 4 r rr,i f k ,y . • .F' Pe • i, ' ", u v - �. 'w•n; . . § Al ' -• m; 4 alter} `3 GigitffGi r Metrc:,.Pt;j1aR . .s :. t o t we, N aP J,at; 'd,r"_ t s - r I Ana= %A . , . . . 1 (,,/,/: .,',:• Alimmommi `\ \ S - .76TH.AVE 76TH AVE • i • I /� �.. .i,j � t fi / - _- --/ , 3't 11` i 1•�r r , �AA i \O go i( _ :7' . ® cam . RAG 74TH• ■ • ■ i - \'s \ • • /2\\ , I \ \\\\ \ 1 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes January 5,2009 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall,at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, Fishel, Hasman, Muldoon,Vermilyea, and Walsh Commissioners Absgnt: Commissioner Fishel Staff Present: Craig Dirksen, Mayor of Tigard; Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner; Ron Bunch, Assistant Community Development Director; Darren Wyss, Senior Planner;Doreen Laughlin, Senior Administrative Specialist 3. COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Dirksen was introduced by President Inman. The Mayor took some time to thank the Commissioners on behalf of the City Council and himself for their hard work on the Comprehensive Plan. He complimented them on the work that was done and the quality of the document- which he said was a direct result of all the hard work the citizens, policy interest teams, City staff, and especially the Planning Commission did. He thanked them and gave them each a token of remembrance and appreciation. He presented each commissioner with a personalized pen and a candy filled City of Tigard mug. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES There was a motion by Commissioner Caffall, seconded by Commissioner Vermilyea, to approve the December 1, 2008 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion was approved as follows: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 1 of 9 AYES: Caffall, Doherty,Hasman, Inman,Muldoon,Vermilyea,Walsh NAYS: None ABSTENTIONS: Anderson EXCUSED: Fishel 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS PERIODIC REVIEW PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITY The City of Tigard has been notified that the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) has initiated periodic review for the community. DLCD is tasked with overseeing the process and focuses periodic review on economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services, and urbanization. The first step of periodic review is to perform an evaluation of the City's comprehensive plan and land use regulations. An important component of the evaluation is to provide the opportunity for citizen review and comment. This is an opportunity for citizen comment in the presence of the Planning Commission, before the final evaluation is made by the City Council on January 27, 2009. STAFF COMMENTS Senior Planner, Darren Wyss,introduced periodic review and gave a rundown of what it is. He noted that the City of Tigard had been notified of the commencement of Periodic Review by the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) last May. Periodic Review is a process required by state statute and Tigard must review its comp plan and land use regulations to ensure they continue to provide for the growth management and development needs of the community. The first step to Periodic Review is to evaluate the City's comprehensive plan and land use regulations. DLCD focuses Periodic Review evaluation on economic development, needed housing, transportation, public facilities and services, and urbanization. The City completed the evaluation using the DLCD checklist, and staff is here tonight to accept public comment before the Planning Commission. Staff received written comment from two individuals. These will be incorporated into the evaluation, as will any comments submitted tonight. Staff will prepare a response to all submissions and will send the response to the person who submitted the comments. Based on the evaluation, the City will then create a draft work program to address any needed deficiencies in the comp plan or land use regulations. Council has scheduled Jan 27th to review the evaluation and draft work program. With Council's direction, both will then be submitted to DLCD for review. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 2 of 9 PUBLIC COMMENTS At this point President Inman opened up the meeting for public comment. She noted that no one had signed up to speak and asked if anyone present would like to make a comment. No one from the public had questions. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED 6. PUBLIC HEARING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2008-00004 MOTOR VEHICLE SALES IN THE I-P ZONE CODE AMENDMENT REQUEST: A Development Code Amendment to amend the text of Table 18.530.1 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow"motor vehicle sales/rental"in the I-P zone as a Restricted (R) use, currently Not Permitted (N), provided (a) such operation takes place wholly within an enclosed building and (b) does not exceed 20% of the floor area of the given development complex. LOCATION: Land zoned Industrial Park (I-P). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial Park. ZONE: I-P: Industrial Park District. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, personal services and fitness centers,in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise,glare, odors, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.130, 18.380, 18.390 and 18.530; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1.1 and 9.1; Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Sections 3.07.110 and 3.07.410; and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2 and 9. STAFF REPORT Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner,presented the staff report on behalf of the City. He noted the applicant owns and operates Northwest Ski&Wake Sports, LLC which specializes in high-end watercraft. The applicant intends to move their business to Tigard and entered a lease agreement for a building in the Industrial Park (I-P) zone that met the space and functional needs of their business. On learning the proposed use was not allowed in the I-P zone, the applicant applied for a text amendment to permit the use. Pagenstecher went over the background information, applicable criteria, findings, and conclusions as on the staff PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 3 of 9 report. He noted the staff recommendation: "Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find in favor of the proposed text amendment allowing motor vehicle sales/rental in the Industrial Park zone with a restriction that limits the permitted use to boats and with any alterations as determined through the public hearing process, and make a final recommendation to the Tigard City Council." Pagenstecher went over the five listed factors (in the staff report) on which the recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based: 1) Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines;2) Federal or State Statutes and Regulations; 3) Metro;4) Tigard Comprehensive Plan; and 5) Applicable Provisions of the Tigard Development Code. Pagenstecher noted that a comment letter from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (Attachment 1) which was distributed to the commissioners. He said DLCD does not support the code amendment— they want to preserve the IP zone for industrial uses and they cite the inconsistency with the Metro code. QUESTIONS & COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS (Replies in italics) • One of the commissioners referred to the traffic impact issue. He said that on page 3 of 8 on the staff report, the State Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requires evidence that the proposed plan amendment will not significantly affect a transportation facility. As he understands the description, there's been no evidence provided, but there's been an analysis, based on some assumptions, and then a conclusion. It seems that a potential problem, if approved, is the fact that there is no "evidence" supplied to address the TPR rule. He wondered how that would be dealt with. That is a legitimate concern. • Does this set a precedent? The letter from DLCD seemed to imply that this sets a precedent for all of that type of land, one that is broad in scope —is that correct? Yes — this is a legislative action that would apply to all IP zoned lands. Not just the subjectproperty. • What is our history, in Tigard, of changing zoning for a single business? That's not something usually done. • Where are the IP zoned areas? There are two maps attached. You can see the areas on there. • If the code is changed—is the concern that car lots could come in? It's possible—motor vehicle sales, and rentals, would include all vehicles. • What is the downside of that? From a standpoint of protection from Metro, DLCD, and our regulation previously, we want to preserve industrial land for industrial uses—primarily. But, there are other services in the IP zone that are allowed. • What business was in that building before? Industrial use. • Are there other industrial sites where this facility could be located and meet code? Yes, there are zones that can accommodate that use;however, the applicant had dculty finding the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 4 of 9 building that would accommodate that use in those zones so they found this building type attractive— itjust happened to be located in the IP zone. • If they do this amendment,my thought is that we open the floodgate to any and all operations. • With respect to the finding that this may be inconsistent with Metro's code, what is the potential consequence of allowing a change like this?What's the downside? If thy felt it was important, they could appeal it to LUBA and then we'd have to deal with that. • Development complex—is it defined? Complex could be one building, one property, one use. • Development complex is not defined. It's not clear. Should we consider narrowing that down to be speditc to make sure were getting the scale of what we might permit appropriate? • Is part of the problem the fact that the definition has the boat fall within "motor vehicle sales"? Is there any way we can we move the boat out separately? That is a potential recommendation. You could add a note saying `This use is limited to boat sales and rentals" • Can we pull out"boats" versus "motorized vehicles"? Most people don't think of boats as motorized vehicles —those are cars,motor homes, etc. Is one of our alternatives to make an exception saying it only deals with boats? Yes—you could do that. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION April Berg of 13531 SW Aerie Dr.,Tigard, OR 97223 introduced herself as one of the owners of Northwest Ski and Wake Sports. Jack Hoffman also introduced himself as an Attorney for Dunn Carney Allen Higgins & Tongue LLP located at 851 SW 6th Ave., Portland, OR 97204 Ms. Berg began by saying they'd gone through most all of what the commissioners concerns are during the pre-apps with the City of Tigard. She said they started the process in July and, unbeknownst to them, they and their brokers had information that the property was zoned IL. They said they've been in other IP and IL zones in other cities in the Metro area. She said this particular location was chosen for various reasons. They did a market study. Their business is to sell very high end boats - they could be likened to Lamborghini's. They don't have customers every day. It's a very high end single niche. They sell anywhere from 30 to 65 boats a year. So a buyer is coming in once every 5 days or once every 12 days. In the winter there will be times when people will drop off their boat to have it serviced on Monday and come pick it up on a Saturday. She said we may have 3 or 4 days where there's, frankly, no deposits - and that's not to make my current landlord sitting back there worried, but it's just one of those difficult sales. The reason we chose this location is 3 fold. One - It's close to the center where the market study was done. Two - Based on our buyer profile, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 5 of 9 those people that we would be selling to are already traveling on that road. It's not a new trip for them. They're already going to the high school. The typical buyer is a family buyer— their income range is $150,000 - $350,000. So they are coming and going to Bridgeport or to the high school for games and activities. The third, and probably the most important reason,is the Duncan's building— the site itself. We have to have our boats inside. They're high end and we don't want them exposed to the weather. We have to move the boats easily in and out. This building meets those needs. There are freight doors that work in that capacity. Lastly, industrial zones have become unfriendly to retail environment. This location is clearly very "light" industrial—which is what makes it so attractive. This business will not be an eyesore, but an asset to that area. We've worked with the City on this since July. We want to provide a good product for Tigard. At this point, the attorney spoke to the Commissioners regarding their stated concerns. He said that in terms of the traffic impact and the DLCD analysis, there's no evidence to address the TPR—Traffic Planning Rule. The difficulty with what DLCD said is that there's nothing in the Institute for Transportation Engineer Manual (the ITE manual), that fits with boat sales. If you go through the manual, there's nothing that talks about it. The closest would be furniture sales,which is a large item. We're really talking about form over function. As staff has pointed out,industrial uses are changing and blurring. We're proposing that you look at the effect on the industrial park area—what does this look like? If you minimize it to 20% and the development complex is very small in this situation—less than 60,000 sq ft. and that they're indoor boat sales—then you have a handle on it and you don't open the flood gates. The comment about car lots -well, car lots will not come in if you limit the boat sales. As to whether this does or does not comply with Metro's code— I'm confident that this does not violate Metro Code and we didn't get a letter from Metro to that effect because the employment area restriction from Metro restricts new buildings. The industrial area restriction really talks about big box retail. They don't intend to regulate this kind of small commercial activity. I'm comfortable that that isn't an issue with this Planning Commission. This does not violate Metro Code Title Four. We would support the staff's recommendation in terms of the conditions of limited to boats with the other restrictions as per your instructions. At this point there were a few questions & comments. One of the commissioners noted that he thought this business would be an asset to the area. His biggest concern remains the traffic issue. He said the Planning Commission has an obligation to make a decision based on evidence so he wanted to ask some questions: • What is the business that used this property previously?At this point, the landlord, John Duncan, of 9929 NW Upton Ct., Portland, 97229, spoke to the question. He introduced himself as the owner of the property. He said the previous tenants in the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 6 of 9 building were basically involved in selling c'iltured stone to builders, etc. and there was a lot more traffic coming into the place than these people will have. • How many visits do you anticipate you're going to get from "lookie loo" types or prospective buyers? On an average - two visits. We have an Internet site and a lot of the negotiating and information disseminating is done over the Internet. • What you're essentially saying is that you're averaging on a daily basis roughly one visit to your store per day. Is that correct? I would say that's true. In the winter we can go days without a visit— we'll deal on the internet and the phone— but no visit. • Would you say that the prior user's trips were significantly greater than that? Yes— semi's would come in unloading stone. • How long was that tenant in there? That tenant was in there for two years. PUBLIC TESTIMONY—IN FAVOR None PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN OPPOSITION None APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL None PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED DELIBERATIONS The commissioners deliberated at length. Some of the deliberations follow: One of the commissioners said the intent of Metro was to keep out used car lots and sprawl. He said he likes the project. It will attract people from out of town. Another commissioner noted upscale selling would be a good tenant and citizen for the City. One noted the fact that they're indoors, and that this business might actually reduce traffic from the previous business. Commissioner Doherty wanted to go on record as encouraging light industrial growth in the City of Tigard. She said that looking at where this property is, and looking at the kind of business that's coming in, she's not that concerned about the traffic. She thinks there should be some sort of requirement for a traffic study but this is not a business that will bring in a lot of traffic. It's a very exclusive clientele. So she likes to encourage business coming in to PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 7 of 9 Tigard, but again,with the idea that a goal out there that—we also encourage light industrial that will bring in more jobs into the City of Tigard. One of the commissioners said she was personally conflicted because she thinks that it's a nice business but, thru her tenure, she's seen a chipping away at all of our industrial—it seems it's all going commercial office. She's concerned about the pattern that seems to be being established - about individualizing zoning. She doesn't like the path it's headed down. She's also concerned about the Industrial Zone as an employment base —she's not sure it can be considered to be good for employment. She'd like to see it work but is concerned about the trend. She suggests addressing development complex. There were more deliberations and then a motion was made. MOTION The motion was by Commissioner Vermilyea, seconded by Commissioner Caffall as follows: I move that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council of application DCA2008-00004 and adoption of the findings and conditions of approval contained in the staff report,as well as the amendments that we've made here tonight. Specifically,restricting changing the motor vehicle related sales from a non- prohibited use to a restricted use with the restrictions that were set forth today including limiting it solely to boat sales, such that those limited uses separately, or in combination,may not exceed 10,000 sq ft per lot, and such that all activities, except employee and customer parking, are wholly contained within the building. And also a condition on receipt of a letter from Metro Council to the effect that this use, as set forth in the application, will not violate Metro Code Title Four. (Not in the language of the restriction -it is just a condition of approval.) The motion passed unanimously on a recorded vote; the Commissioners voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Caffall, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Inman, Commissioner Muldoon, Commissioner Vermilyea and Commissioner Walsh (8) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAINERS: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioner Fishel (1) President Inman noted that this application will be going to City Council on February 10th pending the letter [from Metro]. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 8 of 9 7. OTHER BUSINESS There was a request that the Planning Commission Secretary check on whether there is a need to vote on officers this year. She will check the bylaws and see if this needs to be done on an odd or even year and report back to the commission. 8. ADJOURNMENT President Inman adjourned the meeting at 8:49 p.m. \ Doreen Laughlin,Planning Co sion Secretary A'1'1'EST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—January 5,2009—Page 9 of 9 ATTACHMENT 1 SF' � „t% � �„y. Oregon urry `e'er I heodore R.Kulongoski,Governor L..1-1:_- Department of Land Conservation and Development Meg Fernekees, Portland Area(West) Regional Representative Portland Regional Office 800 NE Oregon Street, M/S 18 Suite 1145 Portland,OR 97232 (971)673-0965 January 2, 2009 Gary Pagenstecher,AICP Associate Planner City of Tigard Community Development 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard OR 97223 SENT VIA EMAIL Subject: Local File No. DCA2008-00004 DLCD File No. Tigard 010-08 Development Code Change Dear Mr. Pagenstecher: The Department of Land Conservation and Development received a notice of proposed amendment for the file referenced above. The proposal is to allow "motor vehicle sales/rental" in the I-P zone as a restricted (R) use, currently Not Permitted (N),with some limitations. The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above proposal. We respectfully request that this letter became part of the official record for the above proceedings. We hope you will find the following comments helpful in the city's deliberations on this matter. Goal 12—Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) As we understand the applicant's case, the applicant claims that the requirement to be indoors placed on the motor vehicle sales use in this zone would make most "walk- in" motor vehicle sales unfeasible. While one could argue that the history of large indoor showrooms along the I-5 corridor proves the opposite, the text amendment in any case is overly broad and likely may have unforeseen consequences, both in terms of the growth of large product merchandizing and in traffic congestion. In this regard, the Transportation Planning Rule mandates that all possible "motor vehicle sales/rental" uses in the IP zones city-wide be addressed, not just the applicant's specific proposed use. Goal 9 and Preventing conversion of industrial land The applicant erroneously concludes that Statewide Planning Goal 9 is not applicable to the proposal. Commercial sales of any large merchandise can erode the future viability of industrial uses in the vicinity. The department agrees with this advisory conclusion in the staff report: "The Planning Commission should consider whether the proposed use would otherwise compromise the intended use of industrial-zoned lands for industrial purposes." Similarly, we would urge the Commission such serious consideration as well, particularly in light of the apparent inconsistency with Metro's Title 4 requirements. We appreciate the opportunity to comment and ask for your kind consideration of these comments. To continue the trend of conversion of industrial land is not in the State's or the City's best interest. If you or other city officials have any questions on the above comments, please contact me at 971-673-0965 or meg.fernekees(a state.or.us. • Thank you. Sincerely, Meg Fernekees DLCD Metro Area (West) Regional Representative cc: Tom Hogue, Economic Development Planning Analyst Angela Lazarean, Urban Planner Darren Nichols, Community Services Manager Gloria Gardiner, Urban Planning Specialist Bill Holmstrom, Transportation &Land Use Planner Tim O'Brien, Principal Planner, Metro Tigard panning Commission — ttoll Call Hearing/Workshop Date: (. - 5— CPt Starting Time: '1 O COMMISSIONERS: V Joche Inman (President) / Tom Anderson Rex Caffa11 / Margaret Doherty Karen Fishel Stuart Hasman ✓ Matthew Muldoon Jeremy Vermilyea David Walsh STAFF PRESENT: !'Dick Bewersdorff Tom Coffee it/ -Gary Pagenstecher VRon Bunch Cheryl Caines John Floyd Jerree Lewis Duane Roberts Kim McMillan Sean Farrel ly Gus Duenas Darren Wyss Phil Nachbar Marissa Daniels Todd Prager Voreen Laughlin