The URL can be used to link to this page

09/21/2009 - Packet " City of Tigard TI GARo Planning Commission — Agenda MEETING DATE: September 21, 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. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:08 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 7:10 p.m. 5.1 CONTINUED - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004- THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Review approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout, as well as visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) (duel) attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. The two existing single-family residences will be removed prior to development. Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive;Washington County Tax Assessor's Map 2S101BC, Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONE: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. 6. Downtown Code Amendments —Workshop I 8:10 p.m. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 9:1()p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT 9:20 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA— Se s tember 21, 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 1 • PLEASE SIGN IN HERE Tigard Planning Commission T I G A R D Agenda Item # 5 1 Page of Date of Hearing 12-1 fOc\ Case Number(s) Q U (2_ OODC) I Case Name v ■` a -e� �� L © L( Location I lc O -6 Jk-o( I Dr . If you would like to speak on this item, please CLEARLY PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (FOR the proposal): Opponent (AGAINST the proposal): Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Agenda Item #5.1 City of Tigard T I G A R D Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner Re: The Village at Knoll (PDR2008-00004), Continued Hearing for Proposed Concept Plan Date: September 14, 2009 The Planning Commission continued the August 18, 2009 hearing for The Village at Knoll until September 21, 2009. The Commission raised several issues including the availability of sufficient parking and articulation of the proposed open space. In response, the applicant has provided additional narrative and a revised site plan for inclusion in the Commission's packet for review in advance of the hearing. Additionally, the applicant plans to provide additional documentation at the hearing including examples of the Rock Wall and a Profile View of the interior Open Space Area. 1 The Village at Knoll Additional Narrative for Planning Commission Based on Comments from 1"Appearance Note from Applicant: During the Planning Commission Meeting on August 17th,2009,we presented to the planning commission a concep plan for a planned development that would take our existing 2.74 acre site and transform it into a multi-generational community centered on a Residential Care Facility (RCF), "Elite Care at Knoll". This 2.74 acre site was to be divided into 1 RCF lot, 6 detached single family home lots, and 8 attached family home lots for a total of 15 lots on the property. At the first meeting we were asking for a very small density bonus that would allow us to take the project from 14.7 lots to 15 lots to maximize the use of the site. The biggest challenges to our site always have been two sided. First, the constraints that are placed on development currently by multiple jurisdictions including Cleanwater Services, Tualatin Valley Fire, and the City of Tigard make a smaller infill site a challenge to develop. We have received approval of the site from CWS and TVF&R, and hope that the Planning Commission takes the changes that we have made based on their suggestions as sufficient to meet the requirements of the concept plan approval process. The second challenge to this site, and something that was addressed by the Planning Commission, is the slope of the site, and how to correctly grade the site for usable open space, sufficient parking, and to ensure that general site conditions can be met. Our updated concept plan has 2 major changes. First, the elimination of two lots (old lots #10/11) at the center of the lower section of attached housing along the lower road between the alley and the roadway. The removal of them two lots allows for an additional 4,000 SF approximately of open space (increasing the total from 20%to approximately 23.5%of the site) and will reduce the potential parking and road use loads for the entire project. The second major change is the elimination of the attached housing units as a result of the elimination of the two lots. There will now only be 12 stand alone single family residential units, and each of these units will have garages/parking spaces added as outlined in the parking section. We feel that our re-structured concept plan sufficiently addresses all of these issues, and hope that the Planning Commission agrees with our thoughts. We have attached an updated site plan along with basic information on the types of open space, usages, and essential layouts as requested by the Planning Commission. Assuming the Planning Commission moves forward with an approval, we will adjust the additional plan requirements including storm, sewer,landscaping, etc. accordingly based on the additional comments of the Planning Commission when we submit the detail plans at a future date. In summary,we feel that we are presenting a viable option for us as a development team, for the City of Tigard, and the surrounding neighbors that will enhance the community while establishing a true multi-generational community. Comments from the Planning Commission on August 176,2009: The comments that were made by Planning Commission members and staff during the initial concept plan review meeting seemed to focus on four main items. We will attempt to address each of these questions in sequence including the initial conditions proposed during the first concept plan review, and the changes that have been made to address the concerns of the Planning Commission. • Parking, including the quantity of parking, off-street/on-street parking, staff and resident parking, garage space and locations, driveway depths, and community event parking • Open Space, including the quantity of open space (20%to meet the requirement), quality and use of the oper space, slope of the open space • Density Bonus including the granting of, the conditions that come out of granting the open space, and the additional lot that could be created. Also included in this were the setbacks and the housing styles and yard spaces This item essentially has been removed from consideration given the reduction in requested number of total lots from 15 to 13. • Narrative Comments from Staff including the use of the PC Toolbox and the "Purpose" detail from chapter 18.350.010 in the code. Parking Requirements Initial Concept Plan Parking Information The initial concept plan that was turned in had the following parking spaces located on the site: • 4-5 Spaces located under the RCF for Staff/Resident Parking • 6 Spaces located directly in front of the RCF for Guest Parking • 6 Spaces located to the South of the RCF along the street • 14 Garage "Inside" Spaces—one for each house • 12 Outside Off-Street Spaces—one for each house with exception of corner lots The comments that were made on the parking included the following: • Ensuring that the driveway dimensions were at least 18' on each driveway to ensure that cars could park without being in the alleyway. As an alternative, make them less than 7' so it is obvious that there is no parking in those spaces • Questions about where the visitors to the SFR and attached homes park • Subtract one lot and use for parking o Another comment about this not really helping, but parking still an issue • Friends for the SFR and large group gatherings—where does everyone park? • How will residents park their cars (not sure about residents of houses or RCF) • Other comments in general about the parking without being specific to single issues, more of an all around concern with the number and location of the parking spaces Parking Plan Modifications on the Updated Concept Site Plan We have made the following modifications to the parking plan in accordance with issues brought up by the Plannin€ Commission: • Addition of 1 Space along with the reconfiguring for easier access in/out in front of the RCF for Guest Parking • Addition of 6 Spaces to the South of the RCF along the street • Increase from 14 Garage"Inside" Spaces to 21 Garage"Inside" Spaces o We are working with our architects on the design of the single family residences. Each house along the Knoll Street Frontage (Lots 1-6) as well as lower level Lots 8, 9 and 11 will have double car garages built into the natural slope of the site. Each of these double car garages will be full width double car garages, not tandem spaces. In addition,the change in site plan for Lots 7, 10 and 12 will have full depth single car garages. Previously, all houses only had single car garages. • Increase from 12 Outside Off-Street Spaces to 21 Off-Street Spaces o The increase in width at the base of the garages will also allow for cars to be parked off street on eacl of the lots. Lots 1-6, 8, 9 and 11 will have double wide parking spaces located behind the garages, and Lots 7, 10 and 12 will have the location of the houses reconfigured to ensure that the driveways are at least 18 feet deep to allow for one car in the garage and one car in the driveway. **Net Increase of 7 community Parking Spaces along with 19 Individual Parking Spaces along with the elimination of 2 complete buildings** Notes on Parking: We believe that the combined increase in parking for community of 7 spaces(effectively increasing by 50%to a total of 21 spaces (including the 2 between lots 8 and 9)will assist with the overall community parking. Given the slope of the site and the grading constraints along with the required roadway and walking widths,there are few options on this site to continue to increase additional parking. This leaves a total of 19 community parking spaces and 5 spaces under the RCF for staff/resident use (As a note, we currently only have 1 resident in our existing Tigard community that has a car on campus for the same number of residents) We also believe that by eliminating 2 houses, we will decrease community parking requirements due to sheer volume of people being reduced in the community. We also believe that having double car garages and double spot: behind the cars will allow for friends and visitors to park in those spaces in addition to families who may have more than 1-2 cars—although having smaller 2 and 3 bedroom units will also assist with this. The increase of 19 parking spaces combined with the elimination of the 2 residential units will assist in the potential parking problems. Open Space Requirements Initial Concept Plan Open Space Information The initial concept plan that was turned in contained the following information regarding open space for the site: • Total Open Space of approximately 20%(I believe the figure was just over 20%) including: o Passive Use Areas of 6,288 SF • Shared Outdoor Areas of 4,200 SF (Code Requires 300 SF per 3 Bedroom Unit) o Minimal Use Areas of 18,516 SF • Ponds and pathways on the upper level outdoor/passive use areas • General Use areas in front of and between the common parking • Passive Use areas at the outer edges of the site including open space and landscaping areas The comments that were made on the open space included the following: • Scale of the open space seemed very small • Hard to tell what the open space is really going to look like • Open space should be addressed in more details • Would like to see more about the open space but can be looked at in the detail plan Open Space Modifications on the Updated Concept Site Plan • Elimination of Old Lots 10 and 11 (at the center of the site) allow for approximately 4,000 SF additional space (lot size was approx 5,125 sl but part was already used in landscape/open space calculation) o This change increases the open space to approx 23.5%from the original 20% • Removal of these two lots allows for a gradual tier of the center section to allow for park-like features in the center section as well as landscaping areas to allow for the edible gardening that is prominent in the Elite Care communities. • Removal of two lots and elimination of"density bonus"removes the need for additional open space interpretation of the code during preliminary discussions as there are no questions about granting density bonuses based on the "quality"of the open space. o Detail plans will most likely require additional information regarding the formal layouts of these spaces • • Restructuring of the pathways at the Knoll facing property including removal of the ponds allows for an approximately 4,000 sf. fenced common area at the entrance to the site for kids play area, grass area,or othei use o We would like this area to remain very open to the homeowners for future use—depending on the mix of the community, we can provide potential options such as play structures,picnic tables, gazebos, or other areas depending on the community needs Notes on Open Space: One of the major concerns with open space that was addressed by the commissioners was brought up as a result of the request for the density bonus increase, and whether the open space was usable open space. Throughout this planned development,there are pathways that surround the entire site—each of which will have edible gardening planted throughout as part of our gardening process. We have done the same at our Elite Care project in Milwaukie to much success—residents,family members, and the neighborhood walk through the site and eat the blackberries, raspberries, blueberries, and other edible plants throughout the year. In addition,the two newly designed areas create additional community space. The large completely open space at the front of the site along SW Knoll, which has been reconfigured, and we now propose to be fenced in to allow for a margin of safety without having it open into Knoll or the sidewalk, is a large space that will allow the neighborhood to utilize the space for a variety of options including a play structure and surrounding area, central gazebo/picnic area, open grassy area for general play, or a variety of potential options. The central wedge shaped space between lots 3 and 4 has the water feature removed, and either a future water feature, open space, bench area, or other feature will be installed in this location. Finally, the space directly in the center of the site (Tract A on top of it) is now approximately 8,000 SF of open space not including the 7 parking spaces at the base of this. This space will have 3 distinct tiers to it to ensure that there are flattened, level spaces to the building. The top tier that abuts the sidewalk and alleyway will have a gentle slope from West to East(Left to Right) until it hits a retaining wall. This space will be used for additional edible landscaping, planting, and other passive uses. The space between the two retaining walls will be flattened, and will be used as a large level open area for use in picnics, community events, gardening, or other areas as designated by the community at large. The area directly abutting the retaining wall will be landscaped, as will the area abutting tht second retaining wall (again moving East to West). The third tier will be a flat spot adjacent to the parking that will be used specifically for the gardening program through Elite Care. The retaining walls will be 42" or less in height to ensure that they do not have to be formally engineered. These retaining walls will most likely be made of recycled concrete (we will have pictures at the Planning Commission meeting on September 21st)keeping with our theme of LEED certification,recycling and sustainability. In addition, all plants on site will be edible plants used for both the residents and the neighborhood as a whole. Overall, we feel that making these two substantial changes to the site, especially by reducing the site by two lots removing the criteria for bonus density greatly improves the viability of this site in terms of open space. Although we lost two lots, and the higher density, the overall site conditions improve with these two options. Planned Development Overlay Purpose This is an item that was addressed by the associate planner on the project, Gary Pagenstecher, and we felt that it was important to walk through the 6 items outlined in this section as an addendum to our initial project narrative that wa submitted prior to the initial Planning Commission Meeting on August 17th Chapter 18.350.010 has a six-fold purpose that we will attempt to succinctly address here since many of these points were addressed throughout the narrative as well as during the presentation on August 17th. 18.350.010 The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application offlexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City We believe that the property development here includes numerous flexible standards including reduced lot sizes(the average lot size is less than a typical R4.5 zone, but the overall number of lots remains the same), reduced street widths,rolled curbs to allow fire access, alleyways, common tracts with open space, common parking, and the inclusion of the RCF as the centerpiece of the development. 2. To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities,preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; We believe that we are adding the benefit of usable open space in this development, the preservation of a natural area(originally created through old storm drainage of Park 217 business center),the planting of additional healthy trees and the removal of unhealthy trees. The rolled curbs and continuous pathways that allow for residents of the neighborhood to have additional walking paths, while also integrating this new planned development with the neighborhood as a whole is a benefit to the community. In addition,by increasing the density through LEED developments, the sustainability of the community will be an improvement to the surrounding neighborhood. 3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; The Village at Knoll is a very distinct, different, extremely unique neighborhood. Intergenerational living is something that is talked about on a national level,but is currently being actually developed very rarely. The community that we are developing is truly intergenerational,with single family homes surrounding a RCF that will house elders for the last 3-5 years typically of their life. The project will be residential in nature,and the RCF will also have a residential feel to the buildings as seen by the pictures that were provided during both the submittal and the presentation. The benefit to the city of a increased density development that is not reliant on either the success of the elder care of the success of the single family homes,but the combined successes of the two distinct components of this neighborhood allows for long term benefits to the City of Tigard. In addition, by transitioning the development from the single family homes along SW Knoll, where there are existing houses,to the lower section of the lot which will house the RCF, closer to the industrial/commercial sites to the North and East of the project, a buffer of sorts will be naturally created from the existing neighborhood and transitioning through our site. 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis,presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; This site is very difficult to develop, as seen through the presentation and the discussions on the previous pages. The slope of the site, combined with the existing conditions are a challenge. Many of the trees on site are damaged, rotten, falling over, or non-native invasive species that will be removed and replaced with healthy, natural, well maintained trees. Those healthy trees that remain will be able to grow more naturally without the invasive species, and the natural area at the north end of the site will be preserved to ensure that there is a natural water drainageway in that area. Cleanwater Services has already signed off on the project, as has the City Arborist, and the Landscape plan presented by our landscape architects provides a buffer to the adjacent properties along with a very detailed planting plan to ensure that trees grow mature and healthy on the site over time. S. To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; During the original development analysis of this site, a minor density bonus was requested, and subsequently has been removed from the requested development. We are developing less than the maximum of lots that are able to be built, while maintain services that the City of Tigard will need to have in order to maintain it's population as they age into retirement and assisted living ages over the next 20-30 years. In addition, this development allows the developer ample opportunity, allows the neighbors a site that is both buffered and accessible to them, and allows for increased services located within the City. 6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. (Ord. 06-16) We feel that the LEED certification that we will receive (the last 2 communities have both received the LEED Platinum designation) allows sustainability like few other projects across the country currently. In addition, using the design of the project and buildings to increase parking, decrease footprints, and generally re-shape the traditional development will allow for a sustainable community that the City of Tigard can be proud of. SUMMARY: We have spent considerable time taking into account the two main items that were addressed by the planning commission; open space and parking, and look forward to our presentation on September 21St, 2009 to fully walk through these ideas and the associated re-configuring of our site plan. We look forward to comments by the planning commission,the neighbors, and staff regarding this updated site plan. / S' LEGEND: pI E armor.,.9�Y aJ /,, ------.---...C._,_`l 0""` "" cox 77 -� ---Q-_ O smut.= ca 1: i - �j -. � °' I`� ��;� N.\` ITF INF•)RMATIUN• 4 n a •�` ` lM4T a r.'r.cn M2 9+R noecs 1U01 .« ro ? + Ire •I 9 n •i r�i+ . . t ) "W 1�5`, ,\; � ``�� /ter` O err as MO RUM®GmYI•6ssm Sr 6II.+Cl +� ~, �A TUCt 1,\ `�'7C%. tl .U°'.s m wfr lu1'J¢I • Y--..", r .;/ f 1 �. Racer1 I \ ' TOO rOt Ot.WIG 0.^a.-oP1 •ix1��04 '. (1 s ` .\\\\ xr1 MRl01Gt ru •m,�o s •'�` \ may`t CO a c ; (eeae Ma mi5-tx wOSM AeD uM1S. • • ,,>, .40 O Jv r� ea O ��. :2020 .112 sr 2.177 1,0s ° J.9t9 S„ O/�� . �\v • t� pi �`. x]A 1x.1 .01. / { l, �• 2.173 11J• • �t{�n`� I I O^ War-MM.1'rM ro'� TRACT[ !�� W 1,711 31 470 irdir PR OM 401 COMM .at" \ 'ift^ Q // ` 0 ter s r AMC 6000. 5mrrr 9Mx 17x1105 w JQ (wz Cr sirzl fx>s«s1rt7 • , o.a ,r M9r_eeM,.9 a�-r�.�sspan AI ] I , M 1P] / '• � 1 , y „ •,.'� O 0.e1r9 LL1f1 C relax NOM S9[[+5 SD(vrR Ue.E1ra2.•M7.0.x95«59L y r�� r 0 S M.'(A C«e[RCM 3/0 t IW'. r�+r j Qa W2� itm 0/WC LW ♦ 77 `\ \` R M � /.11 O O[1111 9.veac/MA r . `' ` ...{q•- •` ee W O motto core YrY M+MEa aj-. ;�-` PARKING: •~... O tors 1 N4 f-.SNIXT/10+(2 a W.I.)0•o Mwn TOM I NN 6-J«r.YK2SACR(2 N C+M(L i Q'M«M+eY) J ./,'• •' tots 13-•7.3 07.74 Cava• - TRACT r-2110.WOK S YK25 7: � 1-1 . • GRAPHIC SCALE r 0 15 JO AO f x MIT I FOR REVIEW ONLY °" A,"" NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION an ten. lzems. " AMR. ��" �e CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN Z T e c ENGINEERS Inc.I -nom 11• 1.128+ 0au IIN1 r w _x x c+ Cbd - Slrad�o - SJncyiry FOR: WCR COMPANY 0:17r 3737 S.E.OTt.•vE..PORTLAND.OR 97202 0z KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY .,,•a• Mom (503)235-8745 Fox (503)233-78e0 Emoo xtecox:ecel4mee•scorn TIGARD. OREGON CO.1 COWLS 12/31/2010 2501 OAR[ 9-10-09 ftC CMI TIRE -122.+Cl.Oa'C • 1 ■ NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER NO. 2009-03 PC BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION u FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD A FINAL ORDER APPROVING A LAND USE APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN. THE COMMISSION HELD PUBLIC HEARINGS TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON THIS APPLICATION ON AUGUST 17TH AND SEPTEMBER 21ST 2009. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS BASED THEIR DECISION ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER. (Includes a 5-week extension) 120 DAYS = 11/19/2009 SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL CASE NO.: Planned Development Review(PDR) PDR2008-00004 (Concept Plan Review) APPLICANT: Northwest Ventures Group, Inc. OWNERS: William C. Reed&Lydia Lundberg Attn: Mark Reed 2300 SW 103rd Avenue 2401 NE MLK Jr. Blvd. Portland, OR 97225 Portland,OR 97212 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting Planned Development Concept Plan Review approval for development of a 2.83-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths, water features, and visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) attached (duel) single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. Two single-family residences currently exist on the property and will be removed prior to development. Concept and Detailed Plans are reviewed separately by the Planning Commission with a separate decision on each plan at separate hearings. This application is for the Concept Plan only. LOCATION: The property is located at 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; Washington County Tax Assessors Map 2S101BC,Tax Lots 00301 and 01500. ZONES/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATIONS: R-4.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. (PD): The applicant has proposed a planned development overlay designation to accommodate the proposed private street and lot configurations on the subject property. The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1) To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; 2) To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal,and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; 3) To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-((1(X14) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORI)FR NO.AX19-03 PC PAGE 1 OF 17 character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; 4) To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis,presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; 5) To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements,which will balance the interests of the owner, developer,neighbors, and the City; and 6) To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.350 and 18.390. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission finds that the revised concept plan meets the applicable approval criteria of the Tigard Community Development Code and that the proposal will not adversely affect the health, safety and welfare of the City. The Planning Commission, therefore,APPROVES the requested Land Use Application based on the original application submittal as amended by The Village at Knoll Additional Narrative for Planning Commission and the revised Conceptual Site Plan(Sheets C0.1) and Concept Grading Plan (Sheet C1) for a 13-lot subdivision including 12 single-family detached dwellings and a 24-bed residential care facility. CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID FOR 18 MONTHS FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The subject site includes two single-family houses located on two adjoining parcels totaling 2.83 acres, zoned R-4.5. The roughly square-shaped site slopes significantly across the diagonal with a northeastern aspect, from a 200-foot elevation at SW Knoll Drive to approximately a 154-foot elevation at the property's northeast corner.The site contains three significant mature trees fronting SW Knoll and other typical residential landscaping. Vicinity Information The site is located generally east of SW Hall Boulevard and north of SW Hunziker Road, more specifically along the east side and outside corner of SW Knoll Drive. Commercial development borders the site to the north, industrial zoned roperty to the east, while residential development borders the subject site to the south and west. The site is part of an island of land zoned R-4.5 containing 2D parcels, each with a residence. The area is bordered by C-G to the north, I-L to the east, I-P to the south, and CBD to the west across SW Hall Blvd. Three of these parcels aloeg SW Hall Blvd have recently been rezoned to Mixed-Use Residential - 1 (CPA2008-00012) and are within the ISowntown Urban Renewal District. Proposal Description The applicant is requesting Planned Development Concept Plan Review approval for development of a 2.83-acre site with a '5 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped-paths, water features, and visitor parking for the site. The site will be comprised of six (6) single-family homes, eight (8) attached (duel) single-family homes and a two-story 14,712 square foot footprint Residential Care Facility which will house up to 24 residents and staff. Two single-family residences currently exist on the site and will be removed prior to development. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00(04) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009)-03 PC PAGE 2 OF 17 SECTION IV. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS The Tigard Community Development Code requires that property owners within 500 feet of the subject site be notified of the proposal, and be given an opportunity to provide written comments and/or oral testimony prior to a decision being made. On June 19, 2009 the City sent a request for comments to applicable special districts and local and state jurisdictions. On June 26, 2009 the City posted the site with a notice of development review. On July 27, 2009 the City provided notice of hearing to neighbors within 500 feet and to interested parties. On July 30 , 2009, the City published notice of the public hearing in the Tigard Times. Staff has not received any written comments, to date, from neighbors regarding this application. The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on May 24, 2007. Thirteen persons were in attendance.As recorded in the applicant's meeting notes, the issues raised at the meeting primarily concerned the impacts the development would have on the adjacent neighbors on SW Knoll Street including grading of the site, street improvements, traffic control, and the character of the buildings. The major concern was the potential traffic impact on SW Knoll and what sort of traffic calming would be applied. SECTION V. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The applicable review criteria for Concept Plan review are contained in Community Development Code Chapters 18.350,Planned Developments,and 18.30,Decision Making Procedures. This staff report is limited to the review of these sections and contains a staff recommendation for the Commission's decision on the Concept Plan, pursuant to Section 18.350.050. The following sections will be addressed later upon application of Planned Development Detailed Plan review: 18.350 (Planned Developments) 18.510 (Residential Zoning Districts) 18.705* Access, Egress and Circulation) 18.725 nvironmental Performance Standards) 18.745* andscaping and Screening) 18.755 • ed Solid Waste&Recyclable Storage) 18.765* Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements) 18.775 Sensitive Lands Review) 18.780* Signs) 18.790 ree Removal) 18.795* ision Clearance) 18.810 Street and Utility Improvements) *According to Section 18.350.070.3 of the Planned Development Chapter,these chapters are utilized as guidelines,and strict compliance is not necessary where a development provides alternative designs and methods that promote the purpose of the PD Chapter. DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES (CHAPTER 18.390): The applicant has applied for a Planned Development Concept Plan review. Type III procedures apply to quasi- judicial permits and actions that contain predominantly discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission with appeals to the City Council. The applicant held a pre-application conference, consistent with 18.390.050.A. The applicant's submittal included the required information, including an Impact Study for the proposed Village At Knoll, consistent with 18.390.050.B. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CHAPTER 18.350) 18.350.010 Purpose: The six purposes of the planned development overlay zone are listed in the description of the applicable zone on the face page of this decision. 18.350.020 Process: A.Applicable in all zones. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 3 OF 17 The planned development designation is an overlay zone applicable to all zones. An applicant may elect to develop the project as a planned development, in compliance with the requirements of this chapter, or in the case of a commercial or industrial project an approval authority may apply the provisions of this chapter as a condition of approving any application for the development. The subject site is currently zoned R-4.5. The applicant has elected to develop the project as a planned development and, therefore, is required to address the provisions of the Planned Development chapter. B. Elements of approval process. There are three elements to the planned development approval process, as follows: 1. The approval of the planned development concept plan; 2. The approval of the detailed development plan; and 3. The approval of the planned development overlay zone. The applicant has applied for review of the planned development concept plan. At the time of detailed development plan review the applicant must also apply for approval of the planned development overlay zone (PD). C. Decision-making process. 1. The concept plan shall be processed by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.350.050. This staff report and recommendation to the Planning Commission is limited to the concept plan review criteria listed below. The Commission shall make a decision on the proposed concept plan. Review of a detailed plan will require a new application and Planning Commission hearing. 2. The detailed development plan shall be reviewed by a means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by 18.390.050, to ensure that it is substantially in compliance with the approved concept plan. The applicant has applied for review of the concept plan. A separate application and hearing are required to review the detailed plan to ensure it is substantially in compliance with the approved plan. 3. The planned development overlay zone will be applied concurrently with the approval of the detailed plan. The applicant must apply for the (PD) overlay to the subject property at the time of detailed plan review. 4. Applicants may choose to submit the concept plan and detailed plan for concurrent review subject to meeting all of the approval criteria for each approval. All applicants are advised that the purpose of separating these applications is to provide them clear direction in developing the detailed plans. Rejection of the concept plan will result in a corresponding rejection of the detailed development plan and overlay zone. The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. 5. In the case of an existing planned development overlay zone, once construction of the detailed plan has been completed; subsequent applications conforming to the detailed plan shall be reviewed under the provisions required in the chapter which apply to the particular land use application. This standard is applicable once construction of the detailed plan is completed. This standard is meant to apply to future modification or expansion of an existing plan. 6. If the application involves subdivision of land, the applicant may also apply for preliminary plat approval and the applications shall be heard concurrently with the detailed plan. The proposal does include subdivision of land. Application for preliminary plat approval shall be heard concurrently with the detailed plan review and approval. 11 IE VILLAGE A'I'KNOLL(PDR200S-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL OR1)I R NO.2(109-03 PC PAGE4OF17 D. Concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed plan. In the case of concurrent applications for concept plan and detailed development plan, including subdivision applications, the applicant shall clearly distinguish the concept from the detailed plan. The Planning Commission shall take separate actions on each element of the Planned Development application (i.e. the concept approval must precede the detailed development approval); however each required action may be made at the same hearing. The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. FINDING: The applicant has applied for concept plan review only. As shown in the above analysis, the applicant's proposal is consistent with the applicable process standards of the planned development chapter. 18.350.030 Administrative Provisions: A. Time limit on filing of detailed development plan. The concept plan approval expires after 1-1/2 years unless an application for detailed development plan and, if applicable, a preliminary plat approval or request for extension is filed. Action on the detailed development plan shall be taken by the Planning Commission by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using approval criteria in 18.350.070. The applicant has applied for a concept plan approval only. The Planning Commission may approve the concept plan if it fords that it meets the approval criteria. The concept plan approval expires after 1-1/2 years unless an application for detailed development plan or request for extension is filed. B. Zoning map designation. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Commission. The zoning map shall be amended to indicate the approved planned development designation for the subject development site. The approval of the planned development overlay zone shall not expire. The applicant may apply for detailed plan review and for application of the overlay zone. The planned development overlay zone application shall be concurrently approved if the detailed development plan is approved by the Planning Commission. C. Extension. The Director shall, upon written request by the applicant and payment of the required fee, grant an extension of the approval period not to exceed one year provided that: 1. No changes have been made on the original concept development plan as approved by the Commission; 2. The applicant can show intent of applying for detailed development plan or preliminary plat review within the one-year extension period; and 3) There have been no changes to the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions on which the approval was based. An extension of the Concept Plan approval is not applicable at this time. The applicant states that an extension is not anticipated, but if market conditions warrant, the applicant will file for an extension. D. Phased development. 1. The Commission shall approve a time schedule for developing a site in phases, but in no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than seven years without reapplying for conceptual development plan review. 2. The criteria for approving a phased detail development plan proposal are that: a) The public facilities shall be constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase; and b) The development and occupancy of any phase shall not be dependent on the use of temporary public facilities. A temporary public facility is any facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard. 7'I II?V1L1..AGE vi KNo1i.(P4)R2 w s-(xNNi.4) PI..A\\I\G(:O\1N1ISSIO\I I\.Ai.0RD}:R\O.3094)1p( P.AGI'.5 OF 17 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant intends on actively pursuing financing for the development based on the approval of the Concept Plan. It is anticipated that lots 1-14 will be developed and sold in sequence depending on the market conditions on the completion of the development. The applicant will be operating the Residential Care Facility (RCF) on lot 15. The general development schedule is planned to proceed on three phases, with the Detailed Plan being driven by triggering factors as outlined below. It is the applicant's intent to proceed with the detailed planning and site construction as expeditiously as possible,given current weak market conditions. The following phases are dependent on the market conditions, bank financing, availability of contractors, and saturation of the housing market. Phase 1: Site Development: Start Date: March 1,2010 End Date: July 1, 2010 The site development portion of this project will include the following items: • Demolition/Deconstruction of existing buildings at 12360 and 12390 SW Knoll Drive; • Site Work including removal of any trees as specified by landscape plan; • Site Work including grading of lot; • Installation of all utilities including: • Storm water Facilities; • Sanitary Sewer Facilities;and • Water Facilities; • Installation and final grading of all roadways (not alleys); • Installation of site sidewalks adjacent to roadways (not interior side abutting homes). Phase 2: Construction of Residential Care Facility: Start Date: May 1, 2010 End Date: August 1, 2011 The construction of the RCF portion of this project will include the following items: • Construction of the general building; • Site Work for Lot 15 including parking area and re-paving of existing access to Park 217; • Reclamation and final planting of Natural Resource Area;and • Planting and final landscaping of Lot 15 and all areas NE of the lower roadway. Phase 3: Construction of Single-Family Homes: Start Date: July 1, 2010 End Date: December 31,2011 The construction of the single-family homes portion of this project will include the following items: • Construction of the single-family and attached single-family homes; • Final Site Work for Lots 1 through 14 including remaining pathways, alleys and sidewalks; and • Final landscaping and site work for Lots 1-14 and Common Tract A. E. Substantial modifications to concept plan. If the Planning Commission finds that the detailed development plan or preliminary plat does not substantially conform to the concept plan, a new concept plan shall be required. A modification of the Concept Plan is not applicable at this time. F. Noncompliance. Noncompliance with an approved detailed development plan shall be a violation of this chapter. Compliance with an approved detailed development plan is not applicable at this time. G. Issuance of occupancy permits. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved detailed development plan including landscaping and recreation areas before any occupancy permits are issued. However,when the Director determines that immediate execution of any feature of an approved detailed development plan is impractical due to climatic conditions, unavailability of materials, or other temporary conditions, the Director shall, as a precondition of the issuance of a required permit, require the posting of a performance bond or other surety to secure execution of the feature at a time certain not to exceed one year. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR200 8-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 6 OF 17 Issuance of occupancy permits is not applicable at this time. FINDING: The applicant has applied for concept plan approval only. At the time of detailed plan review the applicant intends on applying for the (PD) overlay zone. The applicant is proposing a two-year three-phase development plan. The proposed dates for these phases may be unrealistic with respect to the Planned Development processing time line and on market conditions. The proposal is otherwise consistent with the applicable administrative standards for planned developments. 18.350.040 Concept Plan Submission Requirements: A. General submission requirements. The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050 and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. The applicant included information required by Section 18.390.050 as shown in the findings above for the Decision Making Procedures section of this report. The additional information required by 18.350.040.B is shown below. In addition,the applicant shall submit the following: 1. A statement of planning objectives to be achieved by the planned development through the particular approach proposed by the applicant.This statement should include: a) A description of the character of the proposed development and the rationale behind the assumptions and choices made by the applicant; APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The proposed Village at Knoll development will create a 15-lot subdivision plus 1 common tract including single-family homes, attached single-family homes, and a Residential Care Facility (RCF) that will house up to 24 residents along with live-in staff. The RCF will be the focal point of this development meant to encourage and facilitate intergenerational involvement. The project will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community including all single-family houses as well as the RCF. The single-family homes will be located closest to the street front along SW Knoll Drive. The attached single- family homes wit follow, and the RCF will be located at the point on the property furthest away from the existing street. The Design Team conducted an Opportunities and Challenges Analysis of the property in order to frame the context for the planned Development Concept Plan. Challenges • The number one challenge presented by this sit is the slope of this site. Refer to TOPO layout section. • The site shape and setbacks limit the efficiency of site use. • There is a sensitive area buffer boundary at the northeast corner of the site. • The Right-of-way dedication reduces the buildable site area. • The proposed private street reduces the buildable site area. • The mitigation of trees for this site will increase project cost. With the strong slope of the site it will be impossible to save the trees we otherwise might during excavation. Opportunities • The site slope will be used to our advantage by using the grading to slope the storm water drainage to a bioswale on the eastern property line. • We will design the Residential Care Facility (RCF) on lot 15 to act as a retaining wall for the site. Visually from the street level,the RCF will only appear two stories tall. • The sensitive area on the north eastern corner will give a great buffer from the Park 217 Business Complex. • With having to remove most of the site's existing trees, we will be able to put new landscape trees to encompass the development and give a great buffer to the adjacent properties. b) An explanation of the architectural style, and what innovative site planning principles are utilized including any innovations in building techniques that will be employed; THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 7 OF 17 APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The single-family homes will be designed with craftsman features including front porches, attached garages, colorful designs and exterior accents. The six homes at the top of the hill will have attached garages accessed by an alley creating a vibrant street area. There are mature trees on the site that will be retained to create an older community look and feel to the neighborhood. The attached single-family homes will also be designed with the same craftsman features as the free standing single-family homes. The attached homes feature zero lot-line common wall construction with attached garages for each unit. The garages are accessed from a rear alley. The RCF will be designed in the same manner as the houses, similar to the existing project currently being constructed on SW Grant Street, and ones that have been operating in Milwaukie (Oatfield Estates) for the past six years. The RCF will have 24 suites for elders [+6 employees] for a maximum of 30 total residents within the building. There will be landscaped paths and water features throughout the common tract for community access and usage. The common tract will also include visitor parking for the site. The Village at Knoll has two very distinct components of development; the Residential Care Facility and the Single-family Homes. We will describe the intentions of each separately for additional clarification. Residential Care Facility_: The Owners of the existing property,William Reed and Lydia Lundberg,have spent the past eight years developing a forward thinking concept for the future of elder care, Elite Care. Elite Care will be the operating company that will run the facility, and will be in charge of the long term upkeep of the project. Current Elite Care projects include Oatfield Estates, a 72 unit project located at the top of Oatfield HiIl in Milwaukie and Fanno Creek, an identical project to the one being proposed located on SW Grant Street in Tigard. As the owners of the existing property will retain ownership and management, there is a long term thought process to the development of this project. Shortcuts that might be taken by other development teams in the construction of the facilities, site improvements, building styles, and landscaping will not be taken to ensure the quality of building and the atmosphere for care. Please go to www.elitecare.com for more information on the philosophy and management style of Elite Care. Single-Family and Attached Single-Family Homes: The owners of the property will be developing the site for the 14 lots. The contractor for this project, R&R Energy Resources,is jointly owned by Bill Reed and Billy Lenz. The lots will not be sold out to individual builders, and by maintaining the construction "in house",it will allow for the architectural styles, building quality and size to remain constant throughout the project's construction timeline. R&R Energy Resources has built approximately 125 homes over the past 5 years including multiple projects for HOST Development (www.hostdevelopment.com), Blueberry Lane (www.blueberrypdx.com), as well as being the contractor for the Elite Care building at Fanno Creek in Tigard. c) An explanation of how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as expressed in 18.350.010: The applicant did not provide a specific response to each of the six purpose statements of the Planned Development Chapter. Instead, the applicant has referred the Commission to the Project Description, Architecture/Landscaping, Statement of Intentions, and the Opportunities and Challenges Analysis sections of the Applicants'Narrative(pages 5 - 8),which have been included within this report in (a) and (b) above. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City; and To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 8 OF 17 To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitiomng; and To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis, presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; and To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; and To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. d) An explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. The applicant did not provide a specific response to this criterion. Instead, the applicant has referred the Commission to the Project Description, Architecture/Landscaping, Statement of Intentions, and the Opportunities and Challenges Analysis sections of the applicant's narrative (pages 5 - 8),which have been included in (a) and (b) above. 2. A general development schedule indicating the approximate dates when construction of the planned development and its various phases are expected to be initiated and completed. The applicant identified their three-phase plan, as shown above in the Administrative Provisions section of this report, to occur over a two-year period through 2011, depending on market conditions. 3. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the planned development. The applicant intends on actively pursuing financing for the development based on the approval of the Concept Plan. It is anticipated that lots 1-14 will be developed and sold in sequence depending on the market conditions on the completion of the development. The applicant will be operating the Residential Care Facility on lot 15. B. Additional information. In addition to the general information described in Subsection A above, the concept plan, data, and narrative shall include the following information: 1) Existing site conditions; 2) A site concept including the types of proposed land uses and structures, including housing types, and their general arrangement on the site; 3) A grading concept; 4) A landscape concept indicating a percentage range for the amount of proposed open space and landscaping, and general location and types of proposed open space(s); 5) Parking concept; 6) A sign concept; 7) A streets and utility concept; and 8) Structure setback and development standards concept, including the proposed residential density target if applicable. The applicant's narrative and plan set provide the required applicable information, including a Cover Sheet (C0.0), Conceptual Site Plan (C0.1), Preliminary Grading and Erosion Control Plan (C1), Preliminary Storm Plan C2), Preliminary Sanitary Sewer and Water Plan (C3), Preliminary Plat (C4), Existing Knoll Drive Profile (C5) , Topographic Survey (1'P), PUD Open Space Concept Plan (L1), Tree Preservation and Removal Plan (L2), Storm Water Pond (L3), Landscape Plan Details (L4), Landscape Planting Plan (L5), Landscape Materials Specifications (L6). C.Allowable uses In all residential zones, an applicant with a planned development approval may develop the site to contain a mixture of uses subject to the density provisions of the underlying zone and the density bonus provisions of 18.350.070.A.3.c. The following uses are allowed with planned development approval: a. All uses allowed outright in the underlying zoning district; b. Single-family detached and attached residential units; c. Duplex residential units; THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2(x)8-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 9 OF 17 d. Multi-family residential units; e. Manufactured homes; f. Accessory services and commercial uses directly serving the planned development only and which are customary or associated with, but clearly incidental to the uses permitted in the zone, such as gg Cpersona services,preschool or daycare,and retail uses less than 5,000 square feet in sum total; ommunity building; h. Indoor recreation facility; athletic club, fitness center, racquetball court, swimming pool, tennis court or similar use; i. Outdoor recreation facility,golf course, golf driving range, swimming pool, tennis court, or similar use; and j. Recreational vehicle storage area. The applicant has proposed single-family detached and attached residential units, consistent with the uses allowed in all residential zones with planned development approval. Group living, including residential care facilities restricted to five or fewer residents, is permitted by right in the R-4.5 zone. Group living with six or more residents,as proposed,is otherwise permitted as a conditional use. 18.350.070.A.3.c: Chapter 18.715, Density Computation and Limitations. Unless authorized below, density shall be governed by the density established in the underlying zoning district, using the minimum lot size established for that district. Where a project site encompasses more than one underlying zoning district, density shall be aggregated for each district, and may be allocated anywhere within the project site, as deemed appropriate by the commission. Sheet CO.1 of the applicant's plan set includes a density calculation for the subject site: 2.83 acres (123,425 square feet gross) less 12,522 square feet for the private street and 315 square feet for right-of- way dedication for SW Knoll = 110,588 square feet net developable area. 110,588 square feet/7,500 square feet/lot = 14.75 lots (max). The Commission may further authorize a density bonus not to exceed 10% as an incentive to increase or enhance open space, architectural character and/or site variation incorporated into the development. These factors must make a substantial contribution to objectives of the planned development.The degree of distinctiveness and the desirability of variation achieved shall govern the amount of density increase which the Commission may approve according to the following: (1) A 1% bonus for each 5% of the gross site area set aside in open space, up to a maximum of 5%, is allowed for the provision of active use recreational open space, exclusive of areas contained in floodplain, steep slopes, drainage ways, or wetlands that would otherwise be precluded from development; (2) Up to a maximum of 5% is allowed for the development of pedestrian amenities, streetscape development,recreation areas,plazas, or other items from the Planning Commission's Toolbox." APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant will be asking for a 5% density bonus under section (2) for pedestrian amenities. In track "A" in the open space between the four attached single-family houses the applicant plans on building a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill for the community to use as a recreational area. The density calculation with the density bonus is reflected on the site plan on sheet CO.1. Density bonus: 14.75 lots x 5%density bonus = .74 lots. 14.75 + .74 = 15.49 = 15 lots (max) FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicant's narrative and plan set contains all of the general information required for a Type III-PC procedure and the additional information required by 18.350.040.B. In addition, the applicant has provided a general development schedule, a statement of intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of the planned development, and the additional listed information for concept plan review. Staff suggests that the proposed schedule would be difficult to meet considering, among other things, the review process for detailed plan review would likely extend past the proposed March, 2010 beginning date. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 10 OF 17 The applicant's narrative is ambiguous with respect to planning objectives. On page 8 it appears that the applicant refers to the purposes of the Planned Development Chapter as the planning objectives. On page 12 the narrative refers to an unidentified page number for the listed objectives. While not explicitly stating objectives, the Project Description does state that "the RFC will be the focal point of this development meant to encourage and facilitate intergenerational involvement. The project will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community . . ." Staff finds that these objectives could provide substantial community benefits and would be worth consideration under the purposes of the Planned Development chapter. The applicant's narrative provides a cursory description of the character of the proposed development, rationale behind the assumptions and choices made, architectural style, innovative site .planning principles, and innovations m building techniques. The applicant has proposed the minimum 20% open space facility and proposes a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill for the community to use as a recreational area. The applicant proposes craftsman style features for the proposed detached and attached homes including front porches, attached garages, colorful designs and exterior accents. The applicant states the project will incorporate LEED platinum building techniques and methods throughout the community including all single-family houses as well as the RCF. However, the applicant does not provide any insight into how the arrangement of buildings and the resulting open spaces would be used by the community (in particular, the shared outdoor recreation area required for residential use), whether the proposed minimum open space is adequate, or how the quality of the craftsman construction and detailing would rise to the level of "innovation"or employ LEED standards. Further, the applicant did not explicitly address how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter or provide an explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox. Therefore, the Planning Commission should consider whether the proposal has sufficiently addressed the concept plan submission requirements. The applicant has proposed a 15-lot subdivision but only 14 lots are allowed under the R-4.5 zone. Therefore, the applicant has requested a density bonus to increase the density allowed by approximately 2%, even though 5% was requested. The Commission should consider whether the proposed gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill make a substantial contribution to the objectives of the planned development and provide the degree of distinctiveness and desirability of variation to merit any bonus. In addition, the proposed residential care facility (RCF), with greater than 6 residents, is not a use permitted outright (by right) in the R-4.5 zone. Therefore, the proposed RCF use would require additional conditional use review to ensure the use is compatible with other use in the vicinity and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding use and ublic facilities is minimized. The applicant's narrative does not provide a description of the RCFpfacility in terms of height, bulk, detailing, fenestration, or roof line. This review would be processed concurrently with the Planned Development Detailed Plan review. 18.350.050 Concept Plan Approval Criteria: A. The concept plan may be approved by the Commission only if all of the following criteria are met: 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for areas of open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant has provided a Concept Plan (Sheet L1), which includes specific designations on the map for areas of open space. The Concept Plan and this compliance narrative provide descriptions of the intended level of use for each sub-area, and how they relate to other proposed uses on the site. The Concept Plan specifically protects and enhances natural features of the site,particularly the Natural Resource Area on the northeastern property line. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement with respect to the identification of open space and the protection of natural resources on the site. However, the applicant does not provide insight into how the open spaces would be THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING CONLMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 1101:17 used by the community or whether the proposed minimum 20% open space is adequate given the intensity of use, density proposed,and significant slopes underlying the interior spaces. 2. The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection,preservation,and/or management. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Site Plan (Sheet C0.1) identifies areas of the site where significant natural resources have been delineated. The method for maximizing protection, preservation, and enhancement are outlined within this compliance narrative and visually displayed on the various plans. STAFF'S RESPONSE: The applicant has included the recommendations of Clean Water Services Service Provider Letter for enhancement of the vegetated corridor at the bottom of the site. In addition, trees have been identified for retention at the top of the site, as roposed in the applicant's Arborist Report. The Cite Arborist has commented on the proposal (see Other Staff Comments on page 15), suggesting there may be osier trees worth protecting and others that have been retained that could be removed as invasive species. 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space buffers. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The concept Plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, primarily through compatible street layout and architectural style. The plan also provides a landscape transition between the abutting residential neighborhood and the project. Buffering and screening details will also be provided along adjacent properties, as detailed on the landscape plan (Sheets 1.1-L6). STAFF'S RESPONSE: The applicant's proposal does integrate the proposed development into the neighborhood in several important ways including the placement of single-family detached dwellings of craftsman design adjacent to SW Knoll and the placement of the RCF to the rear of the site to minimize the scale and impact of the development as experienced from the public street. In addition, the open space buffers that include mature trees and water features located between the proposed single-family detached dwellings and SW Knoll provide an easily accessed amenity to the neighborhood. Further, the side yards of the dwellings of the two abutting properties look out on the proposed passive use facility. It should be noted, however, that the proposed frontage along SW Knoll is not to standard and will need to satisfy the appropriate radius standard per Washington County. 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridership, such methods may include separated parking bays, off street walking paths, shorter pedestrian routes than vehicular routes, linkages to or other provisions for bus stops, etc. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Plan (Sheet C0.1) identifies methods of promoting walking paths around the site and including separate parking bays,bicycle parking,and off street walking paths. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement. However, the applicant has not addressed transit ridership. Trimet's #78 bus line, linking Lake Oswego with Beaverton includes two bus stops within 300 feet of the project boundary on SW Hunziker at the intersection with SW Knoll. Sidewalk improvements along the three intervening lots on SW Knoll and applicable upgrades to the bus stops should be considered to mitigate for the impacts of the proposed development and promote walkability and transit ridership within the neighborhood. 5. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general arrangement on site. In the case of projects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Plan (Sheet C0.1) identifies the proposed uses and their general arrangement on the site. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDRN)08-0O004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 12 01 17 STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement that the proposed uses and their general arrangement on site have been identified. However, the density of the residential units represented may be problematic. The average lot size of lots 1-14 is 2,903 square feet, or 39% of the base zone standard of 7,500 square feet in the R-4.5 zone. As discussed in the Additional Discussion Areas below, the proposed private street design is in conflict with fire and safety standards and the City's street design standards, which may necessitate reducing the number of lots to accommodate the larger street and alley sections. 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The Concept Plan (Sheet C0.1) demonstrates that development of the property pursuant to the plan will result in a development that has significant advantage in that it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the R-4.5 Zoning. The Plan protects and enhances the highest value natural features of the site. The Plan provides additional amenities and pedestrian oriented features that enhance the development project and the neighborhood generally. STAFF'S RESPONSE: Staff agrees with the applicant's statement with respect to the proposed concept plan providing significant advantages over a standard development. Notwithstanding the difficulties with the proposal, the plan would fpreserve neighborhood livability at overall densities consistent with the R-4.5 zone, while protecting natural eatures and providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. FINDING: The proposed concept plan provisionally meets all of the Concept Plan Approval Criteria and, therefore,may be approved by the Commission. However,as indicated in the Toolbox, the concept plan should reflect the maximization of opportunities where the objective is design excellence. It is the express intention of the concept plan review that the concept is entirely open for discussion. Staff supports the main objective of the applicant's proposal, to provide an intergenerational development utilizing LEED standards for development and therefore, does not recommend denial. However, as indicated in the findings for this report, staff is not comfortable recommending approval of the proposed planned development. Staff recommends that prior to approval of the concept plan, Commissioners consider the findings in this report and the issues raised in the following Additional Discussion Areas section, in addition to any others they may have,in order to provide the applicant with clear direction in revising the proposed concept plan and developing the detailed plan. SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AREAS 1. Concept Plan Submission Requirements. The applicant did not explicitly address how the proposal relates to the six purposes of the Planned Development Chapter or rovide an explanation of how the proposal utilized the Planning Commissioner's Toolbox.Therefore, the Planning Commission should consider whether the proposal has sufficiently addressed the concept plan submission requirements. For example, the Purposes and-Toolbox provide for: Such added benefits as increased open space in the City, alternative building designs, and aesthetic appeal, The applicant has proposed typical craftsman designed structures with unnamed LEED features. There is no indication in the submittal materials how aesthetics is being addressed. The applicant suggests that development control will be assured by the owners/builders and offers links to prior projects to demonstrate their quality. Land use permits do not ensure ownership as the permit runs with the land. Therefore, the quality of the project must be expressed in the land use proposal and assured through THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 13 OF 17 • conditions of approval. For example, aesthetic appeal could be proposed for the distinctive features of the common areas such as the ponds, paths, stairways, and retaining walls, which should be constructed or faced with natural or natural appearing materials;retaining walls should not exceed 4 feet in height. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. The applicant proposed LEED Platinum design of the proposed residences and RCF. However, it is unclear whether the project would seek the LEED certification or just incorporate elements of the LEED Platinum standards. Without additional clarity there would be no assurance that innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials would be integrated into the project. Proposed open space should be commensurate with intensity of the density within the development. As proposed, with the 2% (5% requested) density bonus, the average lot size of lots 1-14 is 2,903 square feet, or 39% of the base zone standard of 7,500 square feet in the R-4.5 zone. Under the Open Space section, the Toolbox suggests that the degree of open space should be commensurate with the intensity of the density within the development. However, the applicant has proposed just the minimum 20% open space. The Commission may consider increasing the open space allocation by not granting the density bonus,reducing the size of the RCF, or propose the applicant pay a fee in-lieu or offer an off-site location. Note: As discussed under the "access" issue below, the proposed private street design is in conflict with fire and safety standards and the City's street design standards, which also may necessitate reducing the number of lots. 2. Natural Resource Preservation. As the comments received from the City Arborist, below, indicate, there may be opportunities to preserve additional trees or groups of trees. In addition the Commission may wish to consider requiring the applicant to remove Hawthorne trees #8 and #21, which they have scheduled for retention, because the species is listed as invasive by Clean Water Services. 3. Grading. The applicant's Grading Plan (Sheet C1) shows mass grading for the proposed access and water quality facility in Tract A. However, it does not show how the 14 lots or common open space areas would be graded. The character and quality of the passive use and shared outdoor recreation areas of the site may be adversely affected by the grading necessary for the proposed development. For example, the proposal is to include an area for common recreation and feature a gazebo, park bench, and BBQ grill. However, besides the pathways and water features shown on the Conceptual Site Plan (Sheet C0.1) there is no apparent plaza area to accommodate them. The interior open space slopes between the proposed dwellings are approximately 15%with no indication in the application materials on how this would be addressed. 4. Lot frontage. The applicant has proposed single-family detached lots (lots 2 thru 5) without frontage on a public or private street. Pursuant to the Lot standards in Section 18.810.060.B, these lots must have a minimum of 25 feet of frontage (unless reduced by the Commission). The proposed development plan shows approximately 95 feet between the private street ingress and egress, which may have to be widened to accommodate the required frontage. The frontage on SW Knoll will also be affected by the street design standards for corners (Washington County "eyebrow") which are not shown in the proposed site plan. To preserve the proposed. passive use open space in this area, an easement would be required over the front portion of the affected lots. 5. Access and Street Design. The section for the proposed one-way private street loop does not meet the design standards for private streets (20 feet wide with curb and 5-foot sidewalk). The code only provides for one-way streets for multi-family developments and not for single-family. In addition, the applicant proposes alley access to the back of the single-family detached units and the front of the single-family attached units. The alley is shown as a 12-foot access way in an easement over the abutting properties, while Table 18.810.1 requires 16 feet in width. Section 18.705.030.I.3 requires private residential access drives be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code. As shown in the following comments from TVF&R, the fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided (however, if the buildings are sprinkled, variations from the road design standards may be approved). The street design issue is complicated by the short driveways of Lots 7 thru 14 (2 to 18 feet) with access on the private street.The Planning Commission THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 14 OF 17 may grant deviations from the street standards, if sanctioned by the City Engineer, when it can be shown that public safety will not be compromised. This issue should be resolved prior to Planning Commission approval. SECTION VII. OTHER STAFF COMMENTS The Tigard Police Department commented that they have no objections to the proposal. The City Arborist provided the following comment: Concept plan approval criterion 18.350.050.A.2 requires that: "The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management." Trees may be deemed "significant natural resources" due to species, size, and condition. The criteria for significance may be specified as follows: Species—Oregon native Size—Greater than six inches in diameter Condition—Good health and good structure According to the project arborist and landscape architect, the following trees meet the above criteria: Tree Number Tree Type Trunk Diameter Action 1 Oregon ash 13" and 20" Preserve 2 Oregon ash 7" and 20" Preserve 3 Oregon ash 45" Preserve 4 Oregon white oak 17" Preserve 5 Oregon white oak 30" Preserve 7 Oregon ash 18" Preserve 9 Oregon white oak 35" Preserve 11 Oregon ash 16" and 23" Preserve 12 Oregon ash 10" Preserve 13 Oregon ash 16" and 12" Preserve 14 Oregon white oak 32" Preserve 15 Oregon ash 20" Preserve 65 Oregon ash 12" Remove 66 Oregon ash 10" Remove 67 Oregon ash 6" Remove 68 Oregon ash 8" Remove A total of 16 significant natural resource trees (native trees in good condition) exist on site. Of these trees, four are scheduled for removal due to their location within building footprints or driveways. These four trees are clustered together and could potentially be preserved if the site design were significantly altered. However, the value of accommodating four more native trees would need to weighted against preservation costs by the Planning Commission. One more consideration for Planning Commission would be to require the applicant to remove the Hawthorne trees scheduled for retention tree #8 and tree #21). These trees are listed as an invasive species by Clean Water Services due to their habit of forming dense thickets and displacing native understory species. Their seeds are primarily spread by fruit eating birds. Planning Commission may choose to waive mitigation requirements as an incentive for invasive tree removal. SECTION VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Transportation was notified of the proposed development but did not comment. Clean Water Services provided a general comment letter dated July 1, 2009 addressing sanitary sewer, storm water, erosion control and sensitive areas. In addition, CWS issued a service provider letter with conditions of THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.N09-03 PC PAGE 15 OF 17 approval dated February 13, 2008 (CWS File No. 05-002606) requiring mitigation for the vegetated corridor encroachment. Tualatin Valley Water District provided the following comment: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue endorses this proposal predicated on the following criteria and conditions of approval: 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD EXCEPTION FOR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER PROTECTION: When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the requirements for fire apparatus access may be modified as approved by the fire code official. (IFC 503.1.1) 2) AERIAL FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 30 feet in height. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building,and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. (IFC D105) This requirement applies to the access roadway from the Park 217 Business Park. 3) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD WIDTH AND VERTICAL CLEARANCE: Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (12 feet for up to two dwelling units and accessory buildings), and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. Where fire apparatus roadways are less than 26 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are more than 26 feet wide but less than 32 feet wide, "NO PARKING" signs shall be installed on one side of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. Where fire apparatus roadways are 32 feet wide or more,parking is not restricted. (IFC 503.2.1) The fire district does not endorse the design concept wherein twenty feet of unobstructed roadway width is not provided. The fire district will not endorse the design of this project. In a previous conversation with the applicant regarding the feasibility of a one way access roadway (SW Knoll), we approved a design concept serving a 24-bed residential care facility. We did not discuss or approve parking within that narrow roadway or the inclusion of one- and two-family dwellings within the project. 4) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS WITH FIRE HYDRANTS: Where a fire hydrant is located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. (IFC D103.1) 5) NO PARKING SIGNS: Where fire apparatus roadways are not of sufficient width to accommodate parked vehicles and 20 feet of unobstructed driving surface, "No Parking" signs shall be installed on one or both sides of the roadway and in turnarounds as needed. 6) SURFACE AND LOAD CAPACITIES: Fire apparatus access roads shall be of an all-weather surface that is easily distinguishable from the surrounding area and is capable of supporting not less than 12,500 pounds point load (wheel load) and 60,000 pounds live load (gross vehicle weight). You may need to provide documentation from a registered engineer that the design will be capable of supporting such loading. (IFC D102.1) 7) TURNING RADIUS: The inside turning radius and outside turning radius shall be not less than 28 feet and 48 feet respectively, measured from the same center point. (IFC 503.2.4&D103.3) This requirement applies to all roadways shown on the submitted drawings. 8) GRADE: Fire apparatus access roadway grades shall not exceed 10 percent. Intersections and turnarounds shall be level (maximum 5%) with the exception of crowning for water run-off. When fire sprinklers are installed, a maximum grade of 15% may be allowed. Adequacy of fire apparatus access shall be evaluated from the point beginning at the first due fire station to a point within 150 feet of all structures within the development. The approval of fire sprinklers as an alternate shall be accomplished in accordance with the provisions of ORS 455.610(5). (IFC 503.2.7 & D103.2) P THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR2008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2009-03 PC PAGE 16 OF 17 COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS- REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The required fire flow for the building shall not exceed 3,000 gallons per minute (GPM) or the available GPM in the water delivery system at 20 psi,whichever is less as calculated using IFC,Appendix B. A worksheet for calculating the required fire flow is available from the Fire Marshal's Office. (IFC B105.2) 9) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS- REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: The minimum available fire flow for single-family dwellings and duplexes served by a municipal water supply shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. If the structure(s) is (are) 3,600 square feet or larger, the required fire flow shall be determined according to IFC Appendix B. (IFC B105.1) 10) FIRE HYDRANTS—COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS: Where a portion of the building is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. This distance may be increased to 600 feet for buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system. (IFC 508.5.1) 11) FIRE HYDRANTS—ONE-AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS &ACCESSORY STRUCTURES: Where a portion of a structure is more than 600 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured in an approved route around the exterior of the structure(s), on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided. (IFC 508.5 .1) 12) FIRE HYDRANT NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION: The minimum number and distribution of fire hydrants available to a building shall not be less than that listed in Appendix C,Table C 105.1. 13) FIRE HYDRANT DISTANCE FROM AN ACCESS ROAD: Fire hydrants shall be located not more than 15 feet from an approved fire apparatus access roadway. (IFC C102.1) 14) REFLECTIVE HYDRANT MARKERS: Fire hydrant locations shall be identified by the installation of reflective markers. The markers shall be blue. They shall be located adjacent and to the side of the centerline of the access road way that the fire hydrant is located on. In case that there is no center line, then assume a centerline, and place the reflectors accordingly. (IFC 508.5.4) 15) FIRE HYDRANT/FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION: A fire hydrant shall be located within 100 feet of a fire department connection (FDC). Fire hydrants and FDC's shall be located on the same side of the fire apparatus access roadway. FDC's shall normally be remote except when approved by the fire code official. (IFC 912.2) This requirement applies to the residential care facility. 16) ACCESS AND FIRE FIGHTING WATER SUPPLY DURING CONSTRUCTION: Approved fire apparatus access roadways and fire fighting water supplies shall be installed and operational prior to any combustible construction or storage of combustible materials on the site. (IFC 1410.1 & 1412.1) PASSED: THE 2V DAY OF SEPTEMBER,2009 BY THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. b01*-- Jodie Inman,Planning Commission President Dated this 304-14-%. day of September,2009. THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL(PDR22008-00004) PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO.2(X)9-03 PC PAGE 17 OF 17 nwyenlcures 5roup IVnC The Village at Knoll Additional Narrative for Planning Commission Based on Comments from 131 Appearance Note from Applicant: During the Planning Commission Meeting on August 17th, 2009, we presented to the planning commission a concept plan for a planned development that would take our existing 2.74 acre site and transform it into a multi- generational community centered on a Residential Care Facility (RCF), "Elite Care at Knoll". This 2.74 acre site was to be divided into 1 RCF lot, 6 detached single family home lots, and 8 attached family home lots for a total of 15 lots on the property. At the first meeting we were asking for a very small density bonus that would allow us to take the project from 14.7 lots to 15 lots to maximize the use of the site. The biggest challenges to our site always have been two sided. First,the constraints that are placed on development currently by multiple jurisdictions including Cleanwater Services, Tualatin Valley Fire, and the City of Tigard make a smaller infill site a challenge to develop. We have received approval of the site from CWS and TVF&R, and hope that the Planning Commission takes the changes that we have made based on their suggestions as sufficient to meet the requirements of the concept plan approval process. The second challenge to this site, and something that was addressed by the Planning Commission, is the slope of the site, and how to correctly grade the site for usable open space, sufficient parking, and to ensure that general site conditions can be met. Our updated concept plan has 2 major changes. First, the elimination of two lots (old lots#10/11) at the center of the lower section of attached housing along the lower road between the alley and the roadway. The removal of these two lots allows for an additional 4,000 SF approximately of open space (increasing the total from 20%to approximately 23.5% of the site) and will reduce the potential parking and road use loads for the entire project. The second major change is the elimination of the attached housing units as a result of the elimination of the two lots. There will now only be 12 stand alone single family residential units, and each of these units will have garages/parking spaces added as outlined in the parking section. We feel that our re-structured concept plan sufficiently addresses all of these issues, and hope that the Planning Commission agrees with our thoughts. We have attached an updated site plan along with basic information on the types of open space, usages, and essential layouts as requested by the Planning Commission. Assuming the wrrr:tcespiat [um I 9=;1''[6 Mi ? 1I HF M[t !1 P. rd octl,:rir [If'. '.I�". I O'.8; Planning Commission moves forward with an approval, we will adjust the additional plan requirements including storm, sewer, landscaping, etc. accordingly based on the additional comments of the Planning Commission when we submit the detail plans at a future date. In summary, we feel that we are presenting a viable option for us as a development team, for the City of Tigard, and the surrounding neighbors that will enhance the community while establishing a true multi-generational community. Comments from the Planning Commission on August 17th, 2009: The comments that were made by Planning Commission members and staff during the initial concept plan review meeting seemed to focus on four main items. We will attempt to address each of these questions in sequence including the initial conditions proposed during the first concept plan review, and the changes that have been made to address the concerns of the Planning Commission. • Parking, including the quantity of parking, off-street/on-street parking, staff and resident parking, garage space and locations, driveway depths, and community event parking • Open Space, including the quantity of open space (20%to meet the requirement), quality and use of the open space, slope of the open space • Density Bonus including the granting of,the conditions that come out of granting the open space, and the additional lot that could be created. Also included in this were the setbacks and the housing styles and yard spaces This item essentially has been removed from consideration given the reduction in requested number of total lots from 15 to 13. • Narrative Comments from Staff including the use of the PC Toolbox and the "Purpose" detail from chapter 18.350.010 in the code. Parking Requirements Initial Concept Plan Parking Information The initial concept plan that was turned in had the following parking spaces located on the site: • 4-5 Spaces located under the RCF for Staff/Resident Parking • 6 Spaces located directly in front of the RCF for Guest Parking • 6 Spaces located to the South of the RCF along the street • 14 Garage"Inside" Spaces—one for each house • 12 Outside Off-Street Spaces—one for each house with exception of corner lots The comments that were made on the parking included the following: • Ensuring that the driveway dimensions were at least 18' on each driveway to ensure that cars could park without being in the alleyway. As an alternative, make them less than 7' so it is obvious that there is no parking in those spaces • Questions about where the visitors to the SFR and attached homes park • Subtract one lot and use for parking o Another comment about this not really helping,but parking still an issue • Friends for the SFR and large group gatherings—where does everyone park? • How will residents park their cars (not sure about residents of houses or RCF) • Other comments in general about the parking without being specific to single issues, more of an all around concern with the number and location of the parking spaces Parking Plan Modifications on the Updated Concept Site Plan We have made the following modifications to the parking plan in accordance with issues brought up by the Planning Commission: • Addition of 1 Space along with the reconfiguring for easier access in/out in front of the RCF for Guest Parking • Addition of 6 Spaces to the South of the RCF along the street • Increase from 14 Garage "Inside" Spaces to 21 Garage"Inside" Spaces o We are working with our architects on the design of the single family residences. Each house along the Knoll Street Frontage (Lots 1-6) as well as lower level Lots 8, 9 and 11 will have double car garages built into the natural slope of the site. Each of these double car garages will be full width double car garages, not tandem spaces. In addition, the change in site plan for Lots 7, 10 and 12 will have full depth single car garages. Previously, all houses only had single car garages. • Increase from 12 Outside Off-Street Spaces to 21 Off-Street Spaces o The increase in width at the base of the garages will also allow for cars to be parked off street on each of the lots. Lots 1-6, 8, 9 and 11 will have double wide parking spaces located behind the garages, and Lots 7, 10 and 12 will have the location of the houses reconfigured to ensure that the driveways are at least 18 feet deep to allow for one car in the garage and one car in the driveway. **Net Increase of 7 community Parking Spaces along with 19 Individual Parking Spaces along with the elimination of 2 complete buildings** Notes on Parking: We believe that the combined increase in parking for community of 7 spaces (effectively increasing by 50%to a total of 21 spaces (including the 2 between lots 8 and 9) will assist with the overall community parking. Given the slope of the site and the grading constraints along with the required roadway and walking widths,there are few options on this site to continue to increase additional parking. This leaves a total of 19 community parking spaces and 5 spaces under the RCF for staff/resident use (As a note,we currently only have 1 resident in our existing Tigard community that has a car on campus for the same number of residents) We also believe that by eliminating 2 houses, we will decrease community parking requirements due to sheer volume of people being reduced in the community. We also believe that having double car garages and double spots behind the cars will allow for friends and visitors to park in those spaces in addition to families who may have more than 1-2 cars—although having smaller 2 and 3 bedroom units will also assist with this. The increase of 19 parking spaces combined with the elimination of the 2 residential units will assist in the potential parking problems. Open Space Requirements Initial Concept Plan Open Space Information The initial concept plan that was turned in contained the following information regarding open space for the site: • Total Open Space of approximately 20%(I believe the figure was just over 20%) including: o Passive Use Areas of 6,288 SF • Shared Outdoor Areas of 4,200 SF (Code Requires 300 SF per 3 Bedroom Unit) o Minimal Use Areas of 18,516 SF • Ponds and pathways on the upper level outdoor/passive use areas • General Use areas in front of and between the common parking • Passive Use areas at the outer edges of the site including open space and landscaping areas The comments that were made on the open space included the following: • Scale of the open space seemed very small • Hard to tell what the open space is really going to look like • Open space should be addressed in more details • Would like to see more about the open space but can be looked at in the detail plan Open Space Modifications on the Updated Concept Site Plan • Elimination of Old Lots 10 and 11 (at the center of the site) allow for approximately 4,000 SF additional space (lot size was approx 5,125 sf but part was already used in landscape/open space calculation) o This change increases the open space to approx 23.5%from the original 20% • Removal of these two lots allows for a gradual tier of the center section to allow for park-like features in the center section as well as landscaping areas to allow for the edible gardening that is prominent in the Elite Care communities. • Removal of two lots and elimination of"density bonus"removes the need for additional open space interpretation of the code during preliminary discussions as there are no questions about granting density bonuses based on the"quality"of the open space. o Detail plans will most likely require additional information regarding the formal layouts of these spaces • Restructuring of the pathways at the Knoll facing property including removal of the ponds allows for an approximately 4,000 sf. fenced common area at the entrance to the site for kids play area, grass area, or other use o We would like this area to remain very open to the homeowners for future use—depending on the mix of the community, we can provide potential options such as play structures, picnic tables, gazebos, or other areas depending on the community needs Notes on Open Space: One of the major concerns with open space that was addressed by the commissioners was brought up as a result of the request for the density bonus increase, and whether the open space was usable open space. Throughout this planned development,there are pathways that surround the entire site—each of which will have edible gardening planted throughout as part of our gardening process. We have done the same at our Elite Care project in Milwaukie to much success—residents, family members, and the neighborhood walk through the site and eat the blackberries, raspberries, blueberries, and other edible plants throughout the year. In addition, the two newly designed areas create additional community space. The large completely open space at the front of the site along SW Knoll, which has been reconfigured, and we now propose to be fenced in to allow for a margin of safety without having it open into Knoll or the sidewalk, is a large space that will allow the neighborhood to utilize the space for a variety of options including a play structure and surrounding area, central gazebo/picnic area, open grassy area for general play, or a variety of potential options. The central wedge shaped space between lots 3 and 4 has the water feature removed, and either a future water feature, open space, bench area, or other feature will be installed in this location. Finally,the space directly in the center of the site (Tract A on top of it) is now approximately 8,000 SF of open space not including the 7 parking spaces at the base of this. This space will have 3 distinct tiers to it to ensure that there are flattened, level spaces to the building. The top tier that abuts the sidewalk and alleyway will have a gentle slope from West to East (Left to Right)until it hits a retaining wall. This space will be used for additional edible landscaping, planting, and other passive uses. The space between the two retaining walls will be flattened, and will be used as a large level open area for use in picnics, community events, gardening, or other areas as designated by the community at large. The area directly abutting the retaining wall will be landscaped, as will the area abutting the second retaining wall (again moving East to West). The third tier will be a flat spot adjacent to the parking that will be used specifically for the gardening program through Elite Care. The retaining walls will be 42"or less in height to ensure that they do not have to be formally engineered. These retaining walls will most likely be made of recycled concrete (we will have pictures at the Planning Commission meeting on September 21st) keeping with our theme of LEED certification, recycling and sustainability. In addition, all plants on site will be edible plants used for both the residents and the neighborhood as a whole. Overall,we feel that making these two substantial changes to the site, especially by reducing the site by two lots removing the criteria for bonus density greatly improves the viability of this site in terms of open space. Although we lost two lots, and the higher density,the overall site conditions improve with these two options. Planned Development Overlay Purpose This is an item that was addressed by the associate planner on the project, Gary Pagenstecher, and we felt that it was important to walk through the 6 items outlined in this section as an addendum to our initial project narrative that was submitted prior to the initial Planning Commission Meeting on August 17th Chapter 18.350.010 has a six-fold purpose that we will attempt to succinctly address here since many of these points were addressed throughout the narrative as well as during the presentation on August 17th 18.350.010 The purposes of the planned development overlay zone are: 1. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigard's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the City We believe that the property development here includes numerous flexible standards including reduced lot sizes (the average lot size is less than a typical R4.5 zone, but the overall number of lots remains the same), reduced street widths, rolled curbs to allow fire access, alleyways, common tracts with open space, common parking, and the inclusion of the RCF as the centerpiece of the development. 2. To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the City, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code; We believe that we are adding the benefit of usable open space in this development, the preservation of a natural area(originally created through old storm drainage of Park 217 business center), the planting of additional healthy trees and the removal of unhealthy trees. The rolled curbs and continuous pathways that allow for residents of the neighborhood to have additional walking paths, while also integrating this new planned development with the neighborhood as a whole is a benefit to the community. In addition, by increasing the density through LEED developments, the sustainability of the community will be an improvement to the surrounding neighborhood. 3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitioning; The Village at Knoll is a very distinct, different,extremely unique neighborhood. Intergenerational living is something that is talked about on a national level, but is currently being actually developed very rarely. The community that we are developing is truly intergenerational, with single family homes surrounding a RCF that will house elders for the last 3-5 years typically of their life. The project will be residential in nature, and the RCF will also have a residential feel to the buildings as seen by the pictures that were provided during both the submittal and the presentation. The benefit to the city of a increased density development that is not reliant on either the success of the elder care of the success of the single family homes, but the combined successes of the two distinct components of this neighborhood allows for long term benefits to the City of Tigard. In addition, by transitioning the development from the single family homes along SW Knoll,where there are existing houses, to the lower section of the lot which will house the RCF, closer to the industrial/commercial sites to the North and East of the project, a buffer of sorts will be naturally created from the existing neighborhood and transitioning through our site. 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape features and amenities (trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis,presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review) that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site; This site is very difficult to develop, as seen through the presentation and the discussions on the previous pages. The slope of the site, combined with the existing conditions are a challenge. Many of the trees on site are damaged, rotten, falling over, or non-native invasive species that will be removed and replaced with healthy, natural, well maintained trees. Those healthy trees that remain will be able to grow more naturally without the invasive species, and the natural area at the north end of the site will be preserved to ensure that there is a natural water drainageway in that area. Cleanwater Services has already signed off on the project, as has the City Arborist, and the Landscape plan presented by our landscape architects provides a buffer to the adjacent properties along with a very detailed planting plan to ensure that trees grow mature and healthy on the site over time. S. To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the City; During the original development analysis of this site, a minor density bonus was requested, and subsequently has been removed from the requested development. We are developing less than the maximum of lots that are able to be built, while maintain services that the City of Tigard will need to have in order to maintain it's population as they age into retirement and assisted living ages over the next 20-30 years. In addition, this development allows the developer ample opportunity, allows the neighbors a site that is both buffered and accessible to them, and allows for increased services located within the City. 6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public facility construction methods and materials. (Ord. 06-16) We feel that the LEED certification that we will receive (the last 2 communities have both received the LEED Platinum designation) allows sustainability like few other projects across the country currently. In addition, using the design of the project and buildings to increase parking, decrease footprints, and generally re-shape the traditional development will allow for a sustainable community that the City of Tigard can be proud of. SUMMARY: We have spent considerable time taking into account the two main items that were addressed by the planning commission; open space and parking, and look forward to our presentation on September 21St, 2009 to fully walk through these ideas and the associated re-configuring of our site plan. We look forward to comments by the planning commission,the neighbors, and staff regarding this updated site plan. 11 /\ % I , � �, s Ayc i VICINITY MAP AP� ,^ f� ¢/(.- MP.6 i L PDR2008-00004 pPG�F —MP 5 1 1 ---i5 P- ' , y''1 � ~ THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL 'fir.5,,y` �� Y `'- -pi.ri Lberty Peat r MAIN gT a 5 110 yI h yl, x f , S��s '> f 0 Subject Site f i \--- .1---r--- \."-2 \ dk- -1 vz ...3, A - 2:-.ilett ' ' %'.\'A - - lir 0. •c• IJ K ' - Tig rd KNOLL G S OR 251�1B..IJ3:1€= s _ 1,,,* 2S1 018C0150r , r Knez Weand . ,/' '-: -0E91 W4pi r VII 1.____D -___ / • v..y..://<N,s .;:leolow / . i ---, i 4111rt"'....,...), *414, ______I r ____ : • °``' \��\ [R/ j / �� L____ I information on this map is tor general location \i/"Po�,, ---T only and should be verified with the Development j I Services Division. 1 //� -� 1 . -yG t_ +—�_ Scale 1:4,500-1 in=375 ft `' �> .. 41? _) f""�—ter Map printed at 19-Jun-09 U9.4fi AM il ��1' �{,7' i� ��L f/ ~� DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES-THE CITY OF TIGARD - - 1 - , I MAKES NO WARRANTY.REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE _ \ t ti I CONTENT,ACCURACY TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE ,� tt� `7 DATA PROVIDED HEREIN THE CITY OF TIGARD SHALL ASSUME NO ,� ,,,� ` ?1- II LIABILITY INFORMATION ORMATION ERRORS.ROVIDED REGARDLESS OF NOW CAUSED THE:'' ,,,t. `� City of Tigard e 13125 SW Hall Blvd TIGAR AP5 Tigard,OR 97223 a �,+ r"° f r M 503 6394171 - O 5' www.tigard-or.gov 71GAHD OF TIGARD Approved l.,><I ",nditionally Approved i I F w only the work as described in: r_RMITNO. Pe)R?6.GR-oc 'oy Sue.t.envr Is,.Fo(low I I Attach I 1 Joh Ad'r _ F> — _Date: t r • / S' LEGEND: a / n wt9x wow saom 1 �`� I /,,. `�` _ v_1 — arm INFORMATION __•I y n b G MOM .,^tom :ii. .4• iy . ,O tu,V m.ac u.* \\‘'... \V ..,,-- ` R.372.6..(111.1. e°0-M.a ad.Kt In a / .* s.n.e io.1.196)\ I r�t,V,," \ •', J' ..O.M/li N[E 10'196)�� ,:, , ;' , \ .y- 1 rotK .L 0;21x.1 - ,l0 9`\.:�'..`` � , it ``x .21 \t, S. 1421 1.2 I. .......7—; \` Y.\y 0 _ 1 ..\... 12.17 BM VVJ�JJJ\\ \ RV 1 ♦ 1 2.723 21>> ,.,,.2.\� \ �� \). ' O' wu-.�'0om ro„n ' x�],,.xo >.yv i.'„a TOR A ft.OQIO•!r•® \\,� �� J �' OIO!fl.RMllp 'Cr B �,'F6 . -17aa WI CIO1601/MOO ...OD.0e,lATm9 Mt •• ` `�, 0^ (3¢ ) an a 91q ,Y1HT].cv`ei, ,rt O + r .,�' '� / � ,J t.n.AC,wf-210fµw .,,� 211. . � it A, U .µ,T. (ro Cwe.cw 112 s.¢+�1...5..wwu r..�...-m.a 9R — OMOM 01.5ea ca [{ -�_ PARKING: // J'�I.... wR,till a-• 3 w � O .9wus/Im Ix w cw.cr.:w o,mtw+r) /1 UM 9 WU,x •9WC6/101 Ix x G.A.C..,w x w DMw1.Y) /1/1/ 116!,3-•SAMS(OM.CO./ .7 mo 212.l !l i -. GRAPHIC SCALE / ° JO% 1or:, FOR REVIEW ONLY ° NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION `�` W = ..nna CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN No Ilk ZTec ENGINEERS Inc =- `2'° ..7�_ Civil — Strvsm ,y ral — Svrrey,l 1°° FOR: WCR COMPANY mui, '"0 3737 S.C.9TR AVE.,PORTtONO.OR.97202 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY P1ron.:(S.C. 235-5795 FO..D.OR 233_7999 4 Emoil:xtecOrteceny,neen.com TIGARD, OREGON O.1 rSNR6'3/],/ID,0 P,Lt 03ir .-,0-0. nr 2.2...1.1. µt .0 • CITY OF TIGARD Approved IJ( I indiaonally Approved f 1 F it only the work as described in: F-.9UNITNO. PDR2io4 -uorlJ'f See letter to:Follow— I Attach JLb.Adlre '` at* b, fCC�CT.—Date:9/2tlo9 1J / = s �wx 0 �r t AMC __ � . `` \` �• ` 1RS.1muA m sum. IIER \`\\\ � r:ra.suwi was © r. �'jL_ ��A �� ,�v ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY SECTION n —VIr Nrr--ift:::::-.-- .01,,,. 1..,,..- Itai:4 .2.....4 -..4:,.,' ,Yaqm� F,NN, 277► - 7 21.-L--_-,,------,,, iii far ems: �'I 1 ' *)::. '.....c . i .‘„ \:). „. -....„,,,./V MINIUM& -.....''',::••:;i:.1c‘.„.„, , 10 fil . 11 iiitt AVA» -... /�o i!� .. M1 , I 1' , \„ \\- \\., ° �`f �' GRADING KEYNOTES'I /Akikril# 15 7[ :t :j rG� �'. I I / O n.0 ir',4-./ ../.'>,...1 •1 '''i -'''• fill' / "Irliti iiiir I 1'\ 4..\ ,t\\'h\\ '\y� sy1 l.`" �>ti(�iSld �y�:��lll `.: .. 0 asn... \ i �1 !•77ia70'�'0l s��e/ i., 0 O rrtnsrtnu \—`, r,\ �A._ tt ''� p mieanuonn v1 4- il ,, —sf�' /iii{ - O r?�- 1` .1 o ?. w...a.2�a .� ' D' T �i ,,4." .` . , r it 4 `� ,, I u.0 ssvu J /f 'r�./ L .4460[.' I SECTION A-A 'tiC�Gi�17 • / A vou ix+n ,au SOIL r.s KN. O j„ s GRAPHIC SCALE )/�I( o _ BENCHMARK: ' DIAINS IA ID It 0,et WM WED ON Orr A NM ■/r OK sua mcvmaaa CEng Or WNW 'yl, rnm• ac ! ocwA•Isan 91,JA•WOO MY IOW NIL..M SX...LL S1R, /1 /'t/.•--.>' °".a : 1 maMEW n.1.. FOR REVIEW ONLY WPM.` �` NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION it f r: �=-— ..a, CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN ... RJR �' " -"�",.m. J f� ZTec e c ENGINEERS Inc Civil – Structural — Surveying VD FOR: WCR COMPANY "40 • -- ��,�� m��— 3737 5.E 8711 A9E..PORTIM10.OR.97204 Poona:(503)235-8795 roa:(503)233-7889 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY 4 Email:7acomc00000xrorn TIGARD: OREGON �+ EXPIRES'.1/31/2010 ROT MIL 0-,0-00 me GO n1[:Lr3...C,.On " City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: President Jodie Inman and Members of the Planning Commission From: Sean Farrelly, Senior Planner Re: Downtown Land Use Regulations and Design Standards Date: September 14, 2009 The Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments are scheduled for a Public Hearing before the Planning Commission on October 19, 2009. Two workshops will be held prior to the hearing. The September 21st workshop will focus on the general approach of the proposed code and the specifics of the new zoning classification and comprehensive plan designations. The October 5th workshop will focus on the proposed Chapter 18.610 Design Standards for the new zone, and such code elements as Off-street Parking and Loading Requirements and Definitions, as well as a chance to follow up on any other questions that the Planning Commission members may have. Background The basis for the proposed code amendments is in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) and the Downtown chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Accepted by Council in 2005, the TDIP was the result of a broad based community effort to foster a vibrant urban village in the Downtown. One of the recommendations of the TDIP was to revise and update the land use regulations for Downtown. The Downtown chapter of the Comprehensive Plan was updated in April 2007. Starting in September 2007 a subcommittee made up of members of the Planning Commission and the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) worked with staff on developing the draft code. In 2008 a state Transportation Growth Management grant was obtained to provide for professional review of the draft code by a land use consultant and the creation of graphical illustrations of the design standards by an architecture firm. The consultants tested some of the code provisions on specific Downtown sites, identifying some issues, while confirming the overall feasibility of the code. Several suggested changes were incorporated into the draft. The consultants made a presentation to the Planning Commission after completing the review in May 2009. The City Center Advisory Commission reviewed the revised code over the summer of 2009 and, after recommending several additional revisions, endorsed the draft code in its present form. 1 Public feedback was obtained from two open houses held in July 2008 and July 2009, attended by a total of approximately 80 property owners,business owners, and other stakeholders. General Approach The Downtown Tigard Code Amendments have incorporated some "form-based code" elements into the framework of the existing Tigard Development Code. (Form-based codes are land use codes which emphasize the physical form of development to create a consistent public realm.) The code amendments are intended to maximize flexibility in the location of land uses while requiring high quality architectural design. Sites in the zone are generally left open to commercial, residential, or mixed use development. Design standards vary depending on the type of building. Mixed use/commercial have more detailed standards (to require a storefront façade appearance) than residential developments. The standards generally promote a pedestrian oriented development form,with buildings oriented to the street and parking lots required to be to the rear or to the side. The code will encourage a more urban form of development than is found elsewhere in Tigard. Minimum parking standards have been relaxed. Shared and private open space requirements for multi-family developments in the MU-CBD zone have also been reduced from what is required in the existing Site Development Review chapter. Summary of New Downtown Land Use and Design Regulations Below is a summary of several code provisions.Page numbers refer to the Proposed Downtown Code Amendments Draft#5.) MU-CBD Zone and Comprehensive Plan Designation The new Mixed Use- Central Business District(MU-CBD) zone will encompass the entire Urban Renewal District and seven adjacent properties. These properties are currently zoned CBD, CBD(PD), C-G,C-P, R-4.5,MUR-1,R-12(PD), and R-25 (see Maps A and B.) The properties outside of the URD boundaries include two properties associated with the "Fanno Creek House" on Hall Blvd. Additionally, the Main Street Village Apartments site, and four adjacent properties currently zoned CBD (PD),will be rezoned MU-CBD (PD). Like the existing CBD zone, a wide range of uses: retail, office, residential, and mixed use will be permitted. Mixed use development would be permitted on the north side of the Hall Blvd. and 99W intersection (currently commercial only General Commercial (C-G) zone.) Consistent with the current CBD zoning, new industrial uses and most auto-oriented uses will not be permitted. Tthose that exist at the time the code is adopted can continue. Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair has been classified as a conditional use,where the CBD zone previously only permitted motor-vehicle cleaning. The proposed MU-CBD Zone Land Use table can be seen on pp. 11-12 of the draft. 2 Sub-areas The MU-CBD zone is further divided into four"sub-areas" (see map on p.19.) While the range of allowed uses is uniform throughout the district, development standards such as building height, landscaping, and setbacks are defined by the sub-areas. Organizing the regulations like this will help create a more consistent public realm within the sub-areas. For example, the properties on Main Street are restricted to three floors and can have zero setbacks,while properties at the Hall and 99W intersection will have a height limit of 8 stories and front setbacks of 10 feet. (Specific development standards are found on pp.19- 20 of the draft code.) Restricted Uses The code seeks to reduce the creation of additional non-conforming uses as they can create difficulty for businesses in financing, insurance, etc. Land uses that are no longer permitted outright have been in most cases classified as "Restricted" specifying that if the use existed on a property before the adoption of the new code it can continue as a conforming use, but new uses of this kind elsewhere in the district could not be established. For example, auto sales will be a Restricted use. The one property in the zone that currently has this use can continue it, even if the business changes hands. If this business desired to build a new building they could develop one consistent with the design standards. However,if a new use was established on the property, then the old use could not be reestablished at a later date. A database to track this will be created and maintained by staff. Non-conforming Uses and Development For uses that are already non-conforming (such as light industrial uses),provisions call out that all existing development may continue (and,if destroyed,be re-established within one year.) This differs from the existing Development Code which in most cases requires a discontinued non-conforming use to be reestablished within six months. If a renovation is planned for an existing building, only the renovated portion would be required to meet the new design requirements. So an addition to an existing development would have to meet the design standards, but the rest of the structure would not have to be brought into compliance. Maximum and Minimum Density The proposed maximum density in the MU-CBD zone is 50 units an acre,with 80 units an acre allowed in an overlay zone centered around the Commuter Rail. The proposed minimum density is 25 units an acre for residential development (15 units an acres in the Fanno-Burnham sub-area to allow for attached single family.)There is no minimum density for residential components of a mixed use development. This compares to the current CBD zone which permits a maximum of 40 units/acre and a minimum of 32 units/acre for multi-family housing (12 units/acre maximum for single family attached). 3 Decision Making Procedures The proposed code includes three new decision making procedures to implement the new code. The Design Review Compliance Letter would be a Type I Procedure similar to the Minor Modification under Site Development Review. Specified renovation projects would apply under this process and the clear and objective Design Standards would be used as the approval criteria. Downtown Design Administrative Review would be a Type II Procedure similar to the Major Modification process. Larger renovation projects and new building construction would apply under this and the clear and objective Design Standards would be used as the approval criteria. A Type III Procedure would also be available-Downtown Design Review. This process would provide the opportunity for well-designed projects,which cannot meet the clear and objective standards for building and site design. The discretionary design objectives are written as qualitative statements. Unlike the clear and objective Design standards, there are typically many acceptable ways to meet each design objective. The decision making authority is the Design Review Board. After Design Review Board approval, or with a concurrent application, a type II review is necessary for compliance with additional chapters listed in 18.610.025. An applicant can address design review requirements through a combination of satisfying certain Design Standards, and in instances where it elects not to utilize Design Standards, satisfy applicable Design Objectives. In such a case, the public hearing and decision will focus on whether or not the project satisfies the requirements of the applicable Design objectives only. The make-up of the Design Review Board is not specified, but potentially in the short term this would be a sub-committee of the Planning Commission, and as more development occurs in the Downtown, a separate Design Review Board body would be established. It is important to note that development within the MU-CBD zone would not be reviewed under the Site Development Review chapter, but the new Development and Design Standards chapter and specified chapters in the Development Code (Street and Utility Improvement Standards, etc.) 4 Proposed Downtown Tigard ,Ipi 19 TIGARD Code Amendments 4* Aii ,, ,.. ' 41. .;i t 4 t ■ v • IMP-' : - 4 • Oft ,..-y - ...r."- rt�a�p 9 5 _› -1 iiall i ..,410,444, 1,,,,ri GIs, I I I . .,;4 ,U1,nr,,ro i Luki 0 ui0 l.s® 1m S 0010,......-----moi NIN� .:?'�ti �� 1111 �•T i" lei,` '►�i11�1 fir' ' IG.• 'w 4t - _ ,�--_�=''_=` �./---------- ► I��S�,•.X11;��II�.�t, � r wpm, i _ u��i� ,p��,,iiiiii�� 1. II iti iIN col+4o R� �� 5 ��i �'w'p I iPf • 1 h411�it! �� efiA ::'1I %��41 i Mei�;in alai !4- _ l_s,;.i!"i , , ' 11 N �7�rU ite U b A"Nfi r`tali 'l-t—4• - m ,. - —..,.... .....„. VI .... L....„..„.., - \ `� .�i��/DWI OW.' ,AOs0-4w,-- r ■ Introduction The proposed Code Amendments are intended to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan.The Special Planning Areas- Downtown chapter of the Comprehensive Plan establishes the policy framework for necessary code amendments.Plan policies and concepts will be implemented by amendments to the Community Development Code. Development code amendments fall into two basic categories: 1. Amendments to the existing code section: Decision-Making Procedures (18.390) The proposed amendments establish 3 new decision making procedures: Design Review Compliance Letter (Type I), Downtown Design Administrative Review(Type II) and Downtown Design Review(Type III-C). Commercial Zoning Districts (18.520) The proposed amendments modify Commercial Zoning Districts (Chapter 18.520). These changes establish a Mixed Use-Central Business District (MU-CBD.) It would replace the Central Business District(CBD) zone and expand the zone boundaries to include all properties in the Urban Renewal District—which are currently zoned Central Business District (CBD), General Commercial (C-G), Commercial and Professional Commercial (C-P), R-12(PD), 3 MUR-1, and R-4.5. The zone will also encompass seven properties adjacent to,but outside the URD-zoned CBD (PD) and R-12 (PD.) The following chapters will be updated as they apply to the new zone: 18.120 Definitions 18.130 Use Classifications 18.310 Summary of Land Use Permits 18.745 Landscaping&Screening 18.765 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements 18.780 Signs 18.795 Visual Clearance Areas 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards 2. New code section: Tigard Downtown District Site and Building Design Standards and Objectives (18.610) The Tigard Downtown District Site and Building Design Standards Chapter is a new section of the development code.The chapter includes a map designating the four design sub-areas of the larger MU-CBD zone and their corresponding development standards (building height,setbacks,density,etc.)The chapter also includes building and site design standards,requirements for special areas and sites,and provisions for adjustments for specific conditions.The site and design standards are triggered when application for new development is made. Deleted section indicated by cross-outs. Sections added to existing chapters indicated by underlined and bold. Staff commentary appears in shaded box on right side. DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments I 1 ► Part 1: Amendments to the Existing Code Sections Chapter 18.390 DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES SECTIONS: 18.390.010 Purpose 18.390.020 Description of Decision-Making Procedures 18.390.030 Type I Procedure 18.390.040 Type II Procedure 18.390.050 Type III Procedure 18.390.060 Type IV Procedure 18.390.070 Special Procedures 18.390.080 General Provisions 18.390.010 Purpose A.Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a series of standard decision-making procedures that will enable the City,the applicant, and all interested parties to reasonably review applications and participate in the local decision-making process in a timely and effective way. Each permit or action set forth in Chapters 18.320—18.385 has been assigned a specific procedure type. 18.390.020 Description of Decision-Making Procedures A. General. All development permit applications shall be decided by using one of the following procedure types.The procedure type assigned to each action governs the decision-making process for that permit,except to the extent otherwise required by applicable state or federal law.The Director shall be responsible for assigning specific procedure types to individual permit or action requests,as requested.Special alternative decision-making procedures have been developed by the City in accordance with existing state law,and are codified in Section 18.390.070. B. Types defined. There are four types of decision-making procedures,as follows: 1.Type I Procedure. Type I procedures apply to ministerial permits and actions containing clear and objective approval criteria. Type I actions are decided by the Director without public notice and without a public hearing; 2.Type 11 Procedure.Type II procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that contain some discretionary criteria.Type II actions are decided by the Director with public notice and an opportunity for a hearing. If any party with standing appeals a Director's Type II decision,the appeal of such decision will be heard by the Hearings Officer; 3.Type Ill Procedure. Type III procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that predominantly contain discretionary approval criteria.Type III actions are decided by either the llearings Office(Type III-110)-or the Planning Commission (Type III-PC),or Design Review Board (Type III-C)with appeals to or review by the City Council; 4.Type 1V Procedure. Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy.Type IV matters are considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decisions made by the City Council. C. Summary of permits by decision-making procedure type. Table 18.390.1 summarizes the various land use permits by the type of decision-making procedure. 2 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 Table 18.390.1 SUMMARY OF PERMITS BY TYPE OF STAFF COMMENTARY DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURE TYPE PERMIT/LAND CROSS-REFERENCE(S) I(18.390.030) Accessory Residential Units 18.710 Development Adjustments 18.370.020 B2 Design Review Compliance Letter(Track 1) 18.610 Home Occupation/Type I 18.742 Landscaping Adjustments •Existing Street Trees 18.370.020 C4a; 18.745 •New Street Trees 18.370.020 C4b; 18.745 Lot Line Adjustment 18.410.040 Minimum Residential Density Adjustment 18.370.020 C2; 18.430; 18.715 Nonconforming Use Confirmation 18.385.030A; 18.760 Parking Adjustments • Reduction of Minimum Parking Ratios 18.370.020 C5c; 18.765 in Existing Developments/Transit Imp. •Reduction in Stacking Lane Length 18.370.020 C5g; 18.765 Signs •New 18.780 •Existing 18.780 Site Development/Minor Modification 18.360.090 Temporary Uses • Emergency Uses 18.785 •Seasonal/Special Uses 18.785 •Temporary Building 18.785 •Temporary Sales Office/Home 18.765 Tree Removal •Removal Adjustment 18.370.020 C7; 18.790 •Removal Permit 18.790 Wireless Communications Facilities—Setback 18.370.040 C8b; 18798 from Other Towers II(18.390.040) Access/Egress Adjustment 18.370.020 C3b Conditional Use/Minor Modification 18.330.030 Downtown Design Administrative Review 18.610 (Track 2) Historic Overlay •Exterior Alternation 18.740 •New Construction 18.740 •Demolition 18.740 Home Occupation/Type II 18.742 DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments I 3 TYPE PERMIT/LAND CROSS-REFERENCE(S) Land Partitions' 18.420.050 STAFF COMMENTARY Parking Adjustments • Reduction in Minimum Parking Ratios 18.370.020 C5a; 18.765 • Reduction of Minimum Parking Ratios 18.370.020 C5b; 18.765 in New Developments/Transit Imp • Increase in Maximum Parking Ratios 18.370.020 C5d; 18.765 • Reduction in Bicycle Parking 18.370.020 C5e; 18.765 •Alternate Parking Garage Layout 18.370.020 C5f; 18.765 Sensitive Lands Permits • In 25%+Slope 18.775 •Within Drainageways 18.775 •Within Wetlands' 18.775 Sign Code Adjustment 18.370.020 C6; 18.780 Site Development Review •New Construction 18.360.090 •Major Modification 18.360.090 Subdivision Without Planned Development' 18.430.070 Variances 18.370.010C Wireless Communication Facilities— 18.370.020 C8a; 18.798 Adjustment to Setback from Residences Appeals to Hearings Officer 18.390.040G ILIA Conditional Use (18.390.050) •Initial 18.330.030 Hearings Officer • Major Modification 18.330.030 Sensitive Lands—Within 100-Year Floodplain 18.775 •In 25%+Slope' 18.775 •Within Drainageways' 18.775 •Within Wetlands' 18.775 II1B Historic Overlay—District Overlay— 18.385.O10A; 18.740 (18.390.050) Removal of District Overlay 18.385.O10B; 18.740 (Planning Planned Development—With Subdivision— 18.350.100; 18.430 Commission) Without Subdivision 18.350.100 Zone Map/Text Change/Quasi-Judicial 18.380.030B HIC (Design Downtown Design Review(Track 3) 18.610 Review Board) (18.390.050) IV Annexation 18.320 (18.390.060) Zone Map/Text Change/Legislative 18.380.020 'These may be processed as either Type II or III procedures,pursuant to Section 18.775.020 DandE. [The rest of Chapter 18.390 is unchanged] 4 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 - Chapter 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS STAFF COMMENTARY SECTIONS: 18.520.010 Purpose 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts 18.520.030 Uses 18.520.040 Development Standards 18.520.050 Special Limitations on Uses 18.520.060 Additional Development and Design Guidelines 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts A. C-N: Neighborhood Commercial District. The C-N zoning district is designed to provide convenience goods and services within a small cluster of stores adjacent to residential neighborhoods.Convenience goods and services are those which are purchased frequently, i.e., at least weekly; for which comparison buying is not required; and which can be sustained in a limited trade area.Such uses include convenience markets,personal services and repair shops. A limited number of other uses, including but not limited to restaurants, gas stations, medical centers, religious institutions, transit-related park-and- ride lots and facilities with drive-up windows,are permitted conditionally. B. C-C: Community Commercial District. The C-C zoning district Is designed to provide convenience shopping facilities which meet the regular needs of nearby residential neighborhoods.With a service area of about 1.5 miles,such commercial centers typically range in size from 30,000 - 100,000 gross square feet on sites ranging from 2-8 acres. Separated from other commercially-zoned areas by at least one-half mile, community commercial centers are intended to serve several residential neighborhoods,ideally at the intersection of two or more collector streets or at the intersection of an arterial and collector street. Housing is permitted on or above the second floor of commercial structures at a density not to exceed 12 units/net acre, e.g., the maximum density permitted in the R-12 zone.A limited number of other uses,including but not limited to car washes,gas stations, religious institutions,and transit-related park-and-ride lots,are permitted conditionally.In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the C-C zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated,attractively landscaped,and pedestrian-friendly. C. C-G:General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini- warehouses,utilities,heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations,are permitted conditionally. D. C-P: ProfessionalVAdministrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g.,convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. ._ _ •. . .. 1 1_• ... ;• • , .. . . .; ; • • , i i.. j'. ' • 1 111 ; DRAFT 45 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 15 .: • I : I : : I STAFF COMMENTARY :I , •••1 , i I---, • I: , 1 : �: : ;/ - , _ , • . E. MU-CBD: Mixed Use-Central Business District. The MU-CBD zoning district is Section E: designed to provide a pedestrian friendly urban village in Downtown Tigard. The Central Business District(CBD) A wide variety of commercial, civic, employment, mixed-use, multi-family zoning district will be replaced by and attached single family residences are permitted. New development and the Mixed-Use Central Business redevelopment is required to conform to the standards of Chapter 18.610. District(MU-CBD). The new land E. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment, The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a use categories for the MU-CBD will majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use employment district be inserted into Table 18.520.1, bounded by Pacific Highway(Hwy.99),Highway 217 and 1-5.This zoning district permits a the"Use Table."For Table 18.520.2 wide range of uses including major retail goods and services,business/professional offices, Commercial Development Stan- civic uses and housing;the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 dards, the CBD column will be units/acre,equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses,including but not replaced by a column for MU-CBD limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions,medical centers,schools, with an asterisk directing the user utilities and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is to the Downtown Design Standards recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the chapter,for specific development Triangle,it is still important to 1)support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest standards for the sub-areas of the extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and zone. transit trips even for those who drive.The zone may be applied elsewhere in the City through the legislative process. G. MUE-1 and MUE-2: Mixed Use Employment Districts. The MUE-1 and 2 zoning district is designed to apply to areas where employment uses such as office,research and development and light manufacturing are concentrated.Commercial and retail support uses are allowed but are limited,and residential uses are permitted which are compatible with employment character of the area.Lincoln Center is an example of an area designated MUE- 1, the high density mixed use employment district.The Nimbus area is an example of an area designated MUE-2 requiring more moderate densities. II. MUC: Mixed Use Commercial District. The MUC zoning district includes land around the Washington Square Mall and land immediately west of Highway 217. Primary uses permitted include office buildings, retail, and service uses. Also permitted are mixed-use developments and housing at densities of 50 units per acre.Larger buildings are encouraged in this area with parking under,behind or to the sides of buildings. I. MUC-1:Mixed Use Commercial—1. The MUC-1 zoning district,which is designed to apply to that portion of the Durham Quarry site within the City of Tigard, is a mixed-use commercial district bounded by 72nd Avenue, Findlay Street and the Tigard,Tualatin and Durham city limits.This site is the subject of an intergovernmental agreement between the cities of Tigard and Tualatin.Pursuant to that agreement the City of Tualatin shall furnish all planning,building and associated development review/permit services for the property.This zoning district is intended to mirror the City of Tualatin's Mixed Use Commercial Overlay District (TDC,Chapter 57).It permits a wide range of uses including commercial lodging, general retail, offices and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a minimum density of 25 units/acre and a maximum of 50 units/acre. Additional uses, including but not limited to major event entertainment and motor vehicle retail fuel sales,are permitted conditionally. In addition to the standards of this chapter, development within this zone is subject to the standards of Chapter 18.640. J. MUR: Mixed Use Residential Districts,The MUR zoning district is designed to apply to predominantly residential areas where mixed-uses are permitted when compatible with the residential use.A high density(MUR-1) and moderate density(MUR-2) designation is available within the MUR zoning district. (02-33) 6 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 • 18.520.060 Additional Development and Design Guidelines A. Development/design guidelines in the C-C zone. STAFF COMMENTARY 1. The following design guidelines are strongly encouraged for developments within the C-C - — district.Conditions of approval of the development plan may Include,but are not limited to,any of the site and building design guidelines deemed appropriate to be mandatory. Existing Cock•. a. Building design guidelines: (1) The design of buildings within a community commercial development should incorporate elements such as special architectural details, distinctive color schemes, special art and other features, which are sensitive to and enhance the surrounding area and serve to distinguish the complex from other retail complexes in the city; (2) All buildings within a multi-building complex should achieve a unity of design through the use of similar architectural elements,such as roof form,exterior building materials,colors and window pattern; (3) Individual buildings should incorporate similar design elements, such as surface materials,color,roof treatment,windows and doors,on all sides of the building to achieve a unity of design.The sides of a building which face toward a public street should include public entrances to the building and windows to provide visual access to the activity within the building.The sides of a building which face toward an adjoining property,but not toward a public street,should include elements such as windows,doors,color, texture,landscaping or wall treatment to provide visual interest and prevent the development of a long continuous blank wall. b. General site design guidelines: Loading areas should not be located on the side of a building which faces toward a residential use. Loading areas, if located between the building and the street,should be oriented away from the street and should be screened to minimize views of the loading area from the street and sidewalk. 2.Design standards:The following mandatory design standards apply within the community commercial district: a. Internal Walkways. (1) Walkways,eight feet minimum width,shall be provided from the public sidewalk or right-of-way to the building(s). At a minimum,walkways shall be located to connect focus points of pedestrian activity such as transit stops and street crossings to the major building entry points; (2) Walkways,five feet minimum width,shall be provided to connect with walkways or potential walkway locations on adjoining properties to create an integrated internal walkway system along the desired lines of pedestrian travel.The width of the walkway should be commensurate with the anticipated level of pedestrian activity along the connecting walkway. (a) Walkways shall be provided along the full length of the building on any side which provides building access to the public or where public parking is available,to provide safe and comfortable pedestrian access to the building; (b) On the sides of the building which provide public access into the building, the walkway should be wide enough to allow for sidewalk seating areas as well as pedestrian travel.Weather protection of the walkway should be provided at a minimum at the entrance area and,if appropriate,along the entire walkway. (3) Walkway surfaces for walkways crossing parking areas shall be designed to be visually distinguishable from driving surfaces through the use of durable,low- maintenance surface materials such as pavers, bricks or scored concrete to enhance pedestrian safety and comfort. b. Other site development standards: (1) All lighting fixtures shall incorporate cut-off shields to prevent the spillover of light to adjoining properties; DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments I (2) Mechanical equipment, if located on the building, shall be located within the =NV` roof form of the building or enclosed within a screening structure,the design STAFF COMMENTARY of which is consistent with the design of the building; (3) Mechanical equipment, not located on the building, shall be screened from views from the public street,sidewalk and properties outside the district with a durable,solid wall or fence,or an evergreen hedge or a combination of the above; (4) All refuse and recycling containers within the district shall be contained within structures enclosed on all four sides and which are at least as high as the tallest container within the structure; (5) Bicycle racks shall be provided on site.Facilities for a minimum of ten bicycles shall be provided for developments having 100 or fewer parking stalls, notwithstanding Section 18.765.050. For each 100 additional stalls, facilities for live additional bicycles shall be provided.Bicycle parking areas shall not be located within parking aisles,landscape areas or pedestrian ways.It is strongly encouraged that bicycle parking areas be covered; (6) The site development plan shall incorporate a special feature at the corner of the site. A special corner feature can be a landscape feature, seasonal color planting area, sculpture or water feature. The feature shall provide a visual landmark and some amount of seating area; (7) Parking areas shall be designed to minimize conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular movements. Parking area landscaping shall be used to define and separate parking,access and pedestrian areas within parking lots; (8) The landscape design for the site shall include plantings which emphasize the major points of pedestrian and vehicular access to and within the site; (9) Site features such as fences,walls,refuse and recycling facility enclosures,and light fixtures shall be designed to be consistent with the scale and architectural design of the primary structure(s). Such site features shall be designed and located to contribute to the pedestrian environment of the site development; (10) In multiple building complexes, buildings shall be located to facilitate safe and comfortable pedestrian movement between buildings. On sites which are adjacent to other properties within the community commercial district,building location shall be chosen to facilitate pedestrian and vehicular connections to buildings on those adjacent properties. Consideration should be given to locating buildings closer to the public street with entrances to the buildings from the public sidewalk,with no intervening parking or driving area.Corner locations are particularly appropriate for this treatment; (11) Opportunities shall be found for safe, convenient, and pleasant pedestrian connections to existing or proposed transit facilities.Where needed, shelters and layover areas for transit vehicles shall be incorporated into the site development. c. Sign design standards: All signage shall be an integral part of the architectural design. 1 :.:1 O . . . , : , 1 . 1. •: p. , I. - pill et ^ : ' :1 w . , . • : I i 1..1 ejreteLiftril *,facility-nruk6 of the area,pursu.tid tu CLaptcr 18.810 a.,dtkrmilied by the Di,coot . / : .,1 t • ,n 1 /" , i i. : : .1 1 1 :' . . . : : , 8 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2109 • " STAFF COMMENTARY N. : Section B.1: ' ' ' ;. . :.' ° -we The language of Section B.1 will be • - . :. : . . , ; . deleted as the new Chapter 18.610 : - •:':• ; ;w: : ' ;n - ` :: ., ; ; ';ri r• : -:', replaces it.• . • .r - - i .-- . 'vi . ' :: ; ;, ,;, . • . " , . . i - strnetureparking; Section B.2: (2) The development shall facilitate pedestrian/bicycle circulation if the site is In the current Development Code, . ; °i . ••• ., • : .' ° .. . . ; : ': - six properties are specified to be al- ,;• ..' ; ...' ' • -- : .- --- ----i - - i :••-. lowed to continue to be utilized for . '. . . • - .- . '-.:. : : I-P Industrial uses after the noncon- :: V. .• .. forming use limit of six months:this . . : ; '. • will continue, with the exception el r . .• . •. ..r. . . .' ..•, , 6.9 ° - ; of 2S 1 2A tax lot 4700,which has ' ; .. : - : '. : . . .. ' ,i ' . ; ; '.. changed uses from 1-P Industrial to :, r: ' . . ; V. - , commercial(currently a ballroom {b) Separation of auto and truck circulation activities foam pedestrian areas, dance hall.) These properties will ' i i :• :.' ' ; . : retain their status and this section - -- ••• - - •- : will be moved to Chapter 18.610. ' .•' •. . .' • .'. a. . . i r, : •. :. . .: t, The tax lots are the home of Verizon, and- Magno-Humphries,B&B Printing, . - ;:- .; :, i,: •; • ; .. ;; • • ': • •• • 111 .1 : Ferguson Enterprises,and KEI circulation-areas Embroidering. :. : : .. be grouped together. Regulate shared acccss where appropriate. Prohibit lighting wl.ielrsl.ines-on adjdee..t p.•ope.ty, ';, ; ' ..' . • • :••-•: : . I . B. MU-CBD (Downtown) See Chapter 18.610 for additional development and design objectives. •, : . .'•• ..fi. be utilized for I-P Industrial-ties nfteNheuonconforming use limit of six months:Map 2S • . : - ::, . . i 11 . i : , 'is .. . 1 , ;. .. .. .. C. Washington Square Regional Center. See Chapter 18.630 for additional development and design guidelines. DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 19 ..Y;.. I in, iii. i ■ i •1212 ritil, imMr,up!∎,� r,�;�. STAFF COMMENTARY j �.. 'll,'� �ry ,C-G ��i�� @�`1�� r_ The zone encompasses all of the Urban�♦`i? ',� /= �:D Urban Renewal District,plus those vs, �,��.., other properties that are currently .,- �, k, ♦ ■ -v� zoned CBD-PD and the two 4,,4 ► .4∎ 44 `t_ .•'• ij'7•_ properties of the City-owned Fanno N. •� � > ' ♦ ♦ , ��►� .�� `��♦ $`04,...0%/A10:. Creek House. �'� `L,, �, v71 The zone change will require the CBp) , •', �1 1 adoption ofa new map with the new ` J4 Comprehensive Plan designation �-1►, �� r Mixed Use Central Business District.tp Zoning Classifications 1 ) Urban Renewal Boundary Urban Renewal area City of Tigard O Zoning Boundaries Oregon T.._. —— Existing Zoning �f 1 ri=�I/U• -- 1 T 4 dill -I Awl,. ), ,;. •;. - nape. .-ter `41*A"< �.. /-11.:. - ..<s\., 1 -ar\ <...-:/e .e\ 1 ✓ - (rte' '< MU-CBD .• • ji•.: __*, , I'll°41 Z4 404.4\: \ I._ A, At_ '%, 1 "fiS;--=;14-.. _----1 :).\\1\ 4--, . Proposed Zone 10 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REV1SED9/2/09 • Proposed Land Use Table— MU-CBD ZONE (to be integrated with Table 18.520.1) STAFF COMMENTARY Use Category Present Present Present Proposed The table displays the three CBD Zone C-G Zone C-P Zone MU-CBD Zone* existing commercialzoneswithin the Urban Renewal District and Residential compares their permitted uses Household Living R"17) R cm R(13) P with the new MU-CBD zone. Group Living P C N P Transitional Housing C C N C Home Occupation R R R R Housing Types Single Units Attached P N/A N/A P Multi-family Units P N/A N/A P Manufactured Units P N/A N/A P Mobile Home Parks,Subdivisions P N/A N/A R ill Civic(Institutional) Basic Utilities C N C C Colleges N N N P Community Recreation P N N P Cultural Institutions P P P P Day Care P P P P Emergency Services P P P P Medical Centers C C C C Postal Service P P P P Public Support Facilities P P P P Religious Institutions P P C P Schools N N N P Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges P P P P A new use category, Custom Arts and Commercial Craft work, was added because the Custom Arts and Crafts - - - P Tigard Development Code includes Commercial Lodging P P R(vo P production of artwork and musical Eating/Drinking Establishments P P R('5) P instruments in the definition oflight Entertainment Oriented Industrial use. This new use category Major Event Entertainment C C N C distinguishes small scale art and Outdoor entertainment P P R use C craft production from large scale Indoor Entertainment P P P P industrial type production. Adult Entertainment C C N N General Retail Sales Oriented P P R 06) P Personal Services P P P P Repair Oriented P P N P Bulk Sales N P N R lia Outdoor Sales N P N N Animal-related N N N N Motor Vehicle Related Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental C P/C 0Z1 N R ill Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair R(IS) P/C 0Z1 N C Vehicle Fuel Sales C C N R 1x1 Office P P P P DRAFT k5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments I 11 Use Category Present Present Present New MU-CBD r' Zoning CBD Zoning C-G Zoning C-P Zone* STAFF COMMENTARY Self-service Storage N C N R Non-Accessory Parking P P P P Industrial Industrial Services N N N N Manufacturing and Production Light Industrial N N N N General Industrial N N N N Heavy Industrial N N N N Railroad Yards N N N N Research and Development N N N C Warehouse/Freight Movement N N N N Waste-Related N N N N Wholesale Sales C N N N Other Agriculture/Horticulture N N N N Cemeteries N N N N Detention Facilities C C N C Heliports C C C N Mining N N N N Wireless Corn.Facilities Pm 131 P/R 131 P/R 131 P/R 141 Rail Lines/Utility Corridors P P P P Other C 1i91 C NA RUN Footnotes: •All development subject to Chapter 18.610 Downtown Urban Renewal Standards and Map 18.610X [31 See Chapter 18.798 Wireless Communication facilities [111 A single-family unit providing that it is located on the same site with a permitted or conditional use in and is occupied exclusively by a caretaker or superintendent of the permitted or conditional use.Multi-family housing is permitted as part of a PD [121 Cleaning,sales and repair of motor vehicles and light equipment is permitted outright;sales and rental of heavy vehicles and farm equipment and/or storage of recreational vehicles and boats permitted conditionally. 1 131 Multi-family residential units,developed at R-40 standards,only in the C-P District within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road [141 Restaurant permitted with restriction in size in conjunction with and on the same parcel as a commercial lodging use. [151 As accessory to offices or other permitted uses,the total space devoted to a combination of retail sales and eating/drinking establishments may not exceed more than 20%of the entire square footage within the devel- opment complex. [161 May not exceed 10%of the total square footage within an office complex. [171 Single-family attached and multi-family residential units,developed at R-40 standards,except(R-12 PD) 1 181 Motor vehicle cleaning only 1 191 Drive-up windows are permitted to continue if the property had one lawfully in existence prior to the adoption of the MU-CBD designation.Otherwise,not permitted. JX1 Only for properties that were lawfully in existence(as permitted,conditional,or Planned_ Development)prior to the adoption of the MU-CBD designation. Table 18.520.2 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MU-CBD zone will have footnote "see Table 18.610.1 and Map 18.610.A for development standards" 12 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT t15 I REVISED9/7/09 I Part 2: New Chapter STAFF COMMENTARY This is a new section.For readability, text is not underlined. Chapter 18.610 TIGARD DOWNTOWN DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN Development and Design Standards STANDARDS are intended to provide greater flexibility in the types of uses that 18.610. 010 Purpose and Procedures may be allowed through the tradi- A. Purpose. The objectives of the Tigard Downtown Development and Design Standards are tional zoning code. The reasons are to implement the Comprehensive Plan, Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, and Urban to: Renewal Plan and ensure the quality,attractiveness,and special character of the Downtown. • Provide a greater range of land The regulations are intended to: use opportunities anywhere in 1.Facilitate the development of an urban village by promoting the development of a higher the downtown. Tigard's objec- density, economically viable, and aesthetically pleasing pedestrian oriented downtown tiveistopromoteredevelopment where people can live,work,play and shop for their daily needs without relying on the of the downtown and wishes automobile.The quality and scale of the downtown urban environment shall foster social to ensure that a wide range interaction and community celebration. of compatible uses can locate 2.Encourage the integration of natural features and the open space system into Downtown anywhere within the MU-CBD by promoting development sensitive to natural resource protection and enhancement; district addressing the relationship to Fanno Creek Park; and promoting opportunities for the • Bemore responsive to the real creation of public art and use of sustainable design. estate market. 3.Enhance the street level as an inviting place for pedestrians by guiding the design of the • Create a functional, well- building"walls"that frame the right-of-way(the"public realm") to contribute to a safe, designed, and economically high quality pedestrian-oriented streetscape.Building features will be visually interesting viable Downtown district. and human scaled, such as storefront windows, detailed facades, art and landscaping. • Bstablislx,unified and cohesive The impact of parking on the pedestrian system will also be limited. The downtown design character streetscape shall be developed at a human scale and closely connected to the natural • Provide options to develop environment through linkages to Fanno Creek open space and design attention to trees a wide range of business and landscapes. enterprises and housing 4.Promote Tigard's Downtown as a desirable place to live and do business. Promote opportunities. development of high-quality high density housing and employment opportunities in the Downtown. 5. Provide a clear and concise guide for developers and builders by employing greater use of graphics to explain community goals and desired urban form to applicants,residents and administrators. B. Conflicting Standards. The following standards and land use regulations apply to all development within the Downtown Mixed Use Central Business District.With the exception of public facility and street requirements,if a standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code,the standards in this section shall govern,even if less restrictive than other areas of the code. C. Applicability. 1.New Buildings and Redevelopment: All applicable Design Standards apply to new buildings and related site improvements. 2.Expansion,modification and site improvements to existing development: An addition,expansion,enlargement,modification,and/or site improvements associated with such lawfully preexisting uses and structures shall be allowed provided the applicant for such proposed project demonstrates compliance with the applicable development code standards.Only those Downtown Building and Site Design Standards applicable to the proposed expansion,modification or site improvements to the existing development shall be applicable. DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 113 3.Design standards do not apply to the following projects: • Maintenance and repair of a building,structure,or site in a manner that is consistent STAFF COMMENTARY with previous approvals and/or necessary for safety; Section D: • Projects undertaken to bring an existing development into compliance with the There are three potential approval Americans with Disabilities Act; processes or"tracks"for an applica- • Exterior painting; tion to get reviewed. Track 1 and 2 • Any exterior project that doesn't require a building permit; use the clear and objective Design • Interior remodeling; Standards as the approval crite- • Temporary structures/uses(as defined in Chapter 18.785); n a. Track 3 uses the discretionary • Any project involving a pre-existing single family residential building or duplex(that Design Objectives as the approval is not being or already been converted to a non-residential use). criteria. D. Downtown Design Review Approval Process 1.To achieve the purpose of the Downtown Site and Building Design Standards,there are Specified renovation projects may three methods or"tracks"to apply for approval: use Track 1,an Administrative a. Track 1.Design Compliance Letter provides for a Type I review process,using the clear review, which is similar to the and objective Design Standards.It is intended for smaller building and site renovation existing Minor Modijlcationpmcess. projects,which meet the threshold of 18.610.010.E.1. b. Track 2.The Administrative Review track provides for a more complex process(Type Larger renovation projects and new II) that requires staff review utilizing clear/quantifiable standards. It applies to new building construction may use Track development and renovation/remodeling projects listed in 18.610.010.E.2. 2,an Administrative review similar c. Track 3. The Design Review Board Track provides for a Type III review process to the Major Modifcationprocess. through which a Design Review Board determines compliance with the Design Objectives. After or concurrently with receiving design approval, a project will be The Track 3 process provides the administratively reviewed as a Type II decision for all other applicable standards(Type opportunity for well designed III if a Conditional Use) projects, which cannot meet the 2.Designing a project to the Design and Development Standards would result in an clear and objective standards administrative review process. However, the applicant, at their option, may choose to for building and site design. The use Track 3 with the Design Review Board. An applicant can address design review discretionary design objectives are requirements through a combination of satisfying certain Design Standards, and in written as qualitative statements. instances where they elect not to utilize Design Standards, satisfy applicable Design Unlike the clear and objective design Objectives.In such a case,the public hearing and decision will focus on whether or not standards, there are typically many the project satisfies the requirements of the applicable Design Objectives only. acceptable ways to meet each design E. Procedures objective.Propels would need to 1.Track 1:Design Review Compliance Letter using Design Standards meet the Development Standards. a.Applicability: (1)Addition,elimination,or change in location of windows that does not decrease The decision making authority is the the minimum required window coverage. Design Review Board.After Design Review Board approval or with a (2)Addition,elimination,or change in location of entry doors and loading doors. concurrent application,a type II (3)Addition of new and change to existing awnings, canopies, and other mounted review is necessary for compliance structures to an existing facade (4)For commercial and mixed use developments, modification of up to 15 percent with additional chapters listed in on-site landscaping with no reduction in required landscaping. Modification 18.610.025. refers to changing the hardscape elements and the location of required landscape An applicant can address design areas and or trees. (5) Modification of off-street parking with no reduction in required parking spaces or review requirements through a increase in paved area. combination of satisfying certain (6)Addition of new fences,retaining walls,or both. Design Standards,and in instances (7)Changing of existing grade. where it elects not to utilize Design (8)An increase in the height of the building(s)less than 20%; Standards,satisfy applicable Design Objectives.In such a case, the public (9)A change in the type and location of access ways and parking areas where off-site hearing and decision will focus on traffic would not be affected; (10)An increase in the floor area proposed for a nonresidential use by less than 10% whether or not the project satisfies or under 5,000 sq; the requirements of the applicable (11)A reduction in the area reserved for common open space and/or usable open Design Objectives only. 14 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 space which does not reduce the open space area below the minimum required IMMIF MINN • by this code or reduces the open space area by less than 10%; STAFF COMMENTARY b. Process and Procedure Type: The Type I procedure, as described in Section 18.390.030 of this Code, shall apply Section E.1 and EZ to an application for Design Compliance Letter. The decision making authority is Adopted from Site Development the Director. The applicant must show compliance to the Design Standards prior to Review Chapter 18.360 major issuance of the Design Review Compliance Letter. modification evaluation criteria. c. Process and Approval Criteria: Removed the following types of The Director shall approve,approve with conditions,or deny an application based on projects: finding that the following criteria are satisfied:the applicable Building and Site Design 1. An increase in dwelling unit Standard(s) for the project (Section 18.610.30) and/or the applicable Additional density,or lot coverage for Standards(Section 18.610.035.) residential development; 2.Track 2:Administrative Review with Design Standards 2. A change in the ratio or number a.Applicability:A Track 2 review will be required for one of more of the following: of different types of dwelling (1)All new Development except those listed in Section 18.610.010.E.1 units (2)A change that requires additional on-site parking in accordance with Chapter 7. An increase in vehicular traffic to and from the site and the (3)A change in the type of commercial or industrial structures as defined by the State increase can be expected to Building Code; (3)An increase in the height of the building(s) by more than 20%; exceed 100 vehicles per day; (5)A change in the type and location of access ways and parking areas where off-site 10. A reduction nimu ect amenities traffic would be affected; below the minimum established (6)An increase in the floor area proposed for a nonresidential use by more than 10% by this code or by more than excluding expansions under 5,000 square feet; 10%where specified in the site (7)A reduction in the area reserved for common open space and/or usable open plan: space which reduces the open space area below the minimum required by this a.Recreational facilities; code or reduces the open space area by more than 10%; b. Screening;and/or b. Procedure Type: c. Landscaping provisions. The Type II procedure,as described in Section 13.390.040,shall apply to an application using the Building and Site Design and Development Standards.The decision making authority is the Director. Applicants are required to identify how their proposed site/building plan meets the design standards,through architectural drawings,illustrations,graphics,photographs, a narrative with findings and other materials that demonstrate how the proposed development implements the intent of the design standards. c. Process and Approval Criteria: The Director shall approve,approve with conditions,or deny an application based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied: 18.610.030 Building and Site Design Standards and Additional Standards 18.610.035. 3.Track 3 Discretionary Design Review Using Design Objectives a. Applicability: (1)Any project,at the applicant's option.The applicant may also choose this track if a project is unable to meet a clear and objective standard. b. Procedure Type: Applicants are required to identify how their proposed site/building plan meets the intent statements of the design objectives,through architectural drawings,illustrations, graphics,photographs,a narrative with findings and other materials that demonstrate how the proposed development implements the intent of the design standards. The Type III procedure, as described in Section 13.390.050, shall apply to an application using Discretionary Design Objectives.The decision making authority is the Design Review Board. Projects receiving approval must also undergo review for land use,engineering,and building approval. c. Process and Approval Criteria: The Design Review Board shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments I 15 application based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied: 18.610.050 Building and Site Design Objectives. STAFF COMMENTARY 4.Adjustments and Variances — a. Variances and adjustments as outlined in Chapter 18.370 may be granted for the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone, the Development Standards 18.610.020, and for the Additional Standards (18.610.035) Variances cannot be granted for building and site design standards in Section 18.610.030. Instead, A limited number of exceptions to applications unable to meet a standard should use the Track 3 Discretionary Design the standards that may be granted Review using Design Objectives. are listed in 18.610.045. b. For applications using Track 3,variances and adjustments may be only be granted for the provisions and regulations of the underlying zone,the Development Standards (18.610.020), and for the Additional Standards (18.610.035), not for the Design Objectives themselves. E Downtown Design Review Submittal Requirements: 1.General submission requirements.The applicant shall submit an application containing all of the general information required for a Type II procedure,as governed by Section 18.390.040,or for a Type III procedure,as governed by Section 18.390.050. 2.Additional information. In addition to the submission requirements required in Section Sections P through Kadapted from 18.390,Decision-Making Procedures,an application must include the following additional Section 18.360 Site Development information in graphic,tabular and/or narrative form.The Director shall provide a list of Review. Currently,projects in the the specific information to be included in each of the following: Tigard Triangle and Washington a. An existing site conditions analysis; Square undergo Site Development b. A site plan; Review and review with the design c. A grading plan; overlay standards,Projects in the d. A landscape plan; Downtown will meet the standards e. Architectural elevations of all structures;and of this Section (and the additional f. A copy of all existing and proposed restrictions or covenants. chapters listed in 18.610.025, but 3.All drawings submitted with applications for development using Tracks 2 and 3 shall be need not undergo Site Development stamped by a registered architect. Applications for landscaping projects only may be Review. stamped by a registered landscape architect. Applications that require engineering or transportation reports must be stamped by the appropriate specialist. G. Approval period. Approval by the Director or Design Review Board shall be effective for a period of 1-1/2 years from the date of approval.The approval shall lapse if: 1.Substantial construction of the approved plan has not begun within a one-and-one-half years period;or 2.Construction on the site is a departure from the approved plan. H. Extension. The Director shall, upon written request by the applicant and payment of the required fee,grant an extension of the approval period not to exceed one year;provided that: 1.No changes are made on the plan as approved by the Director or Design Review Board; 2.The applicant can show intent of initiating construction on the site within the one year extension period;and 3.There have been no changes to the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and ordinance provisions on which the approval was based. 1. Phased development 1. If the development of a site takes more than one year,the applicant shall submit a phased development time schedule for approval by the Director.In no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than seven years without reapplying for design review. 2.The criteria for approving a phased development proposal is that all of the following are satisfied: a. The public facilities are constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase; b. The development and occupancy of any phase is not dependent on the use of temporary public facilities.A temporary public facility is any facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard; c. The phased development shall not result in requiring the City or other property owners 16 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 to construct public facilities that were required as part of the approved development h proposal;and STAFF COMMENTARY d. The Director's decision may be appealed as provided by Section 18.390.040.6. No — notice need be given of the Director's decision. J. Bonding and Assurances 1. Performance bonds for public improvements.On all projects where public improvements are required the Director shall require a bond in an amount not greater than 100%or other adequate assurances as a condition of approval of the plan in order to ensure the completed project is in conformance with the approved plan;and Section 18.610.015: 2. Release of performance bonds.The bond shall be released when the Director finds the Section A is based on the Washington completed project conforms to the approved plan and all conditions of approval are Square Regional Center Design satisfied. Standards(Section 18.630.030).The 3.Completion of landscape installation.Landscaping shall be installed prior to issuance of section addresses nonconforming occupancy permits,unless security equal to the cost of the landscaping as determined by uses and structures in the Down- the Director is filed with the City Recorder assuring such installation within six months town district.It has some digerences after occupancy: with Section 18.760,Nonconform- a. Security may consist of a faithful performance bond payable to the City,cash,certified ing Situations.Additions and check or such other assurance of completion approved by the City Attorney;and modifications of existing noncon- b. lithe installation of the landscaping is not completed within the six-month period,the forming structures are permitted.As security may be used by the City to complete the installation. the proposed development standards K. Business Tax Filing would create many nonconforming The applicant shall ensure that all occupants of the completed project,whether permanent developments, the proposed code or temporary, shall apply for and receive a City of Tigard business tax prior to initiating requires only the addition or modi- business. fication to the structure conform to the new code requirements.For 18.610.015 Pre-Existing Uses and Developments within the example,for an application to add Downtown District windows to the facade of an existing A. Applicability. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 18.760.040 (Criteria for building would only have to meet Nonconforming Situations),land uses and associated development in the MU-CBD District the window standards(window coy- that were lawfully in existence at the time of adoption of these standards may continue as erage, trim,etc.)and not the other lawful uses and developments. façade standards(awnings,etc.) 1. Land uses and associated development that were in existence at the time of the adoption of the MU-CBD district and Chapter 18.610 may continue on the property. Additions, The proposed code also permits expansions, or enlargements to such uses or developments, shall be limited to the nonconforming uses and structures property area of said use or development lawfully in existence at the time of adoption of to continue ifdestroyed,as long this ordinance, ,2009. as it is reestablished within one 2. If a pre-existing structure or use is destroyed by fire,earthquake or other act of God,or year.Section 18.760 permits only otherwise abandoned then the use will retain its pre-existing status under this provision 6 months. Washington Sq.specifies so long as it is substantially reestablished within one (1)year of the date of the loss. 3 years to reestablish,but only B. Standards for Projects Involving Existing Single Family and Duplex Dwellings if destroyed by fire, earthquake, 1. Existing single family buildings and duplexes used for residential purposes are exempt or other act ofgod. The proposed from the standards. language would allow up to a year 2. For projects involving preexisting housing units used for non-residential uses the to reestablish an abandoned use. applicable standards are:18.610.020.Building and Site Development Standards,including The reason for the more permissive the applicable sub-area from Map 610.A, 18.610.030. Building Design Standards for standard is to lessen the likelihood non-Residential Buildings and 18.610.035 Additional Standards. that buildings would stand empty C. Existing nonconforming industrial structures and unused during the expected Existing nonconforming industrial structures at the following locations may continue to be transition of downtown. utilized for I-P Industrial uses after the nonconforming use limit of six months:Map 2S 1 2AA tax lot 4700,Map 2S 1 2AC tax lot 100 and 202,Map 2S 1 2AD tax lot 1203,Map 2S 1 Section C carries over from the 2DB tax lot 100,and Map 2S 1 2DA tax lot 300. existing CBD regulations, with one previously listed property removed 18.610.020 Building and Site Development Standards (the property where the Ballroom A. Sub-Areas:The four sub-areas located on Map 610.A and described below have different Dance Facility is now located.) DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 117 setback and height limits in order to create a feeling of distinct districts within the larger Zone. STAFF COMMENTARY 1.Highway 99W and Hall Boulevard Corridor sub-area is intended to create a"pulse- point" along the Highway 99W corridor. Located at the intersection of 99W and Hall Blvd., the area has the high traffic and visibility to draw potential retail customers from the region.It will also serve the potential for future high capacity transit in the corridor. The area will accommodate higher levels of vehicular circulation, while maintaining a pedestrian scale at the ground-floor level of buildings. It would allow development of mixed use and retail buildings that could vary in scale from one-story retail-only buildings,to mixed use buildings up to eight stories tall with retail on the ground floor and residential and/or office uses above. 2.Main St.—Center St.:The sub-area is centered on the City's historic downtown Main Street.It is intended to be pedestrian oriented with smaller scale development that would function like a"traditional Main Street."A pedestrian environment would be improved with a continuous building wall broken only intermittently. New buildings in the sub- area must include ground floors with commercial storefront features. Residential and commercial uses are permitted on upper floors. 3.The Scoffins St.—Commercial St. sub-area is intended to provide an opportunity for higher density residential as well as an employment base comprised of civic, office and commercial uses in the areas of Commercial Street and Scoffins. Residential only buildings,office/commercial buildings,and mixed use developments are all permitted. 4.The Fanno—Burnham St. sub-area provides an opportunity for medium scale residential or mixed use development.Compatible mixed-uses(live-work,convenience retail, office and civic uses) are encouraged on the frontage of Burnham Street. The area in proximity to Fanno Creek Park will be an opportunity to create a high quality residential environment with views and access to the natural amenity of Fanno Creek Park. Building heights will step down to three stories so as not to overwhelm or cast shadows on the park. 18 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/7109 • ' Map 18.610.A t � ma . ,,, • N STAFF COMMENTARY Final= MIN ir\l'i) , 1 OPP" ,-,‘ �� I. ' Map 18.610.A shows the location of an r RY�M,�� ■�/ ►k� If \ I the sub-areas.Each sub-area has E! to M distinct height limits and setbacks. 1 g RIII • _ era .\►�� The development standards are `� 9 � i► x, '�� ` r rl iii\\ - listed in Table 18.610.1 below. The • `� �4 I _�� sub areas are centered on existing �� ,��/� _ r `� ,� streets, but also account for the j �;�, . , potential development of future MO a En�// streets. Z.; /, - '--..- '/ , 1\ ■ All of the uses displayed in the / •• ••••• 18.520.1 land use table are� 1::::;,11:::::$$$M,,,,,. � � �, permitted in all of the sub-areas. ♦..•♦.a. ♦ ♦ .•♦ •••♦♦ + ---4. / ->.--,,.. )■ ___., \\. 1`,. \ y ---' \ ' f\ �. Ak- / Proposed MU-CBD 4<-44 Sub-Areas . < cj.l r"an Renewal Uistrxd I 7 97 w/"HaP .. _ I I Sco rms-Cornmeroal IMam-Cter . .� 4 1 .'> I ur \ Fanno-6umnam / . \ _ ...�♦g-Ution Area Ove 1aY i'I[`\ 4�I , 1r- :: z: ;`��, f`� I' Note:for standards for development surrounding the future public plaza see Section 18.610.040.Special Requirements for Development Bordering Urban Plaza B. Development Standards. Development Standards apply to all new development in the MU-CBD zone,including developments utilizing the Track 3 approval process.Variances or Adjustments may be granted if the criteria found in Chapter 18.370 is satisfied. 1.Development standards matrix.See Table 18.610.1 and Map 18.610.A DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 119 Table 18.610.1 MU-CBD Development Standards Matrix'.' ' STAFF COMMENTARY STANDARD SUB-AREAS Main Street 99W/Hall Scoffins/ Fanno/ (MS) Corridor Commercial Burnham (99H) (SC) (FB) Front Setback Minimum 0 ft. 0/10 ft. (1 ft. 0 ft. (10 ft.for frontage on 99W) Maximum 10 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. Side facing street on corner&through lots Minimum 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. Maximum 10 ft. N/A N/A N/A Sideyard Minimum/Maximum N/A WA N/A N/A Rear Setback Minimum 0 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. Maximum N/A N/A N/A N/A Building height Maximum height is provided in Minimum 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. stories and feet. The limit shall Maximum (stories/feet) 3 stories 8 stories 6 stories 5 stories be in stories, however having the (45 ft.) (120 ft.) (90 ft.) (75 ft.) maximum expressed in feet allows (3 stories/45 ft. for flexibility in actual story heights, within 200 ft.of tuhile providing a hard cap. Fanno Creek Park boundary(see Map 610.A) or within 50 ft.of low or med.density residential district.) Ground Floor Height Minimum 15 ft. 15 ft. none none Site Coverage Maximum 100% 90% 90% 80% Minimum Landscaping' 0%5 10% 10% 20% Minimum Building Frontage 50% 50% 50% 50% Residential Density(units per acre) Minimum Density applies to residential-only development(not mixed use) Minimum 25 25 25 15 Maximum 50 50 50' 506 1 This table does not apply to existing development.All New Buildings in the district must meet time development standards,including projects using the Track 3 approval process. 2 For standards for development surrounding the future public plaza see Section 18.610.040.Special Require- ments for Development Bordering Urban Plaza. 3 See also 18.610.045 Exceptions to Standards in the MU-CBD zone. 4 In the MU-CBD zone,required landscaping can be provided on roofs. 5 landscaing/screening requirements for parking lots must be met. 6 Station Area Overlay permits a maximum of 80 units per acre(See Map 18.610A) 20 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 STAFF COMMENTARY 2. Parking Location: a. Parking is allowed on the side or rear of newly constructed buildings.If located on the side,the parking area shall not exceed 50%of the total frontage of the site. b. Parking is set back a minimum of 10'from the front property line. c. When abutting a public street, parking areas must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L-1 standard. d. Where a parking lot shares a property line with an adjacent parking lot,the landscape requirement along the shared property line is not required. •••• '09••••0• '1••.-.•odoo•ood••dd• i 19.004 o t Mi • I • 0 •• 0 ® © 4 • I • • I • r I o I • e e Q i e • i i 0 -- O 0 ®Parking on the side or rear of buildings Q L-1 landscape standard Q Max.50)i of site frontage 0 Landscape not required along shared prop.line o Min.10'setback 0 See Ch.18.745 for screening and landscaping requirements 8.2 Parking Location DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 121 3.Rooftop Features/Equipment Screening a. The following rooftop equipment does not require screening: STAFF COMMENTARY (1) Solar panels,wind generators,and green roof features (2) Equipment under two feet in height b. Elevator mechanical equipment may extend above the height limit a maximum of 16 feet provided that the mechanical shaft is incorporated into the architecture of the building. c. Satellite dishes and other communications equipment be shall be limited to 10 feet in height,shall be setback a minimum of 5 feet from the roof edge and screened from public view to the extent possible. d. All other roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be shall be limited to 10 feet in height,shall be setback a minimum of 5 feet from the roof edge and be screened from public view and from views from adjacent buildings by one of the following methods: (1) A screen around the equipment that is made of a primary exterior finish material used on other portions of the building or architectural grade wood fencing or masonry; (2) Green roof features or regularly maintained dense evergreen foliage that forms an opaque barrier when planted. 3 • v N P ° O 10 feet met.equipment height m Egwpment set heck min.10 feet B.3 Rooftop Features/Equipment Screening O 111L Seem made of primary exterior finish material.wood.or masonry B.3.d.(1)Rooftop Features/Equipment Screening(architectural screen) 22 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT t5 I REVISED9/2109 STAFF COMMENTARY ts7 ° o1��: ,a. •Green roof features wnh evergreen foliage B.3.d.(2)Rooftop Features/Equipment Screening(vegitative screen) 4.Other Exterior Mechanical Equipment. Other exterior mechanical equipment on the site (electrical boxes,etc.) shall be screened from view from adjacent ROW,public spaces, and parking areas by one or a combination of the following: a. A screen around the equipment that is made of a primary exterior finish material used on other portions of the building or architectural grade wood fencing or masonry;or b. Setback from the street facing elevation so it is not visible from the public ROW;or c. Dense evergreen foliage that forms an opaque barrier when planted that will be regularly maintained. 5.Landscaping and Screening. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.745 the following shall also apply to the screening and landscaping of parking and loading areas: a. The minimum dimension of the landscape islands shall be four feet and the landscaping shall be protected from vehicular damage by some form of wheel guard or curb. b. Landscape islands shall provide a minimum of 1000 cubic feet of soil volume per tree.This may be achieved through open soil (see definition) area, root paths (see definition)to open soil areas,or covered soil areas(see definition)specially designed to support root growth.Soil depth will be assumed to be three feet. c. Tree species shall be large stature/broad spreading at maturity and chosen from the Tigard Street Tree List unless otherwise approved by the City.If the use of large stature trees/broad spreading trees is precluded by building lines,trees shall be the largest size possible given the available space. d. Irrigation shall be provided for all parking lot trees and landscaping via an automatic irrigation system. e. Soil volume calculations (see definition) shall be provided for each tree. Soil specifications (including amendments and composition of imported soils) and irrigation details shall be provided on plans prepared by a licensed landscape architect. f. Prior to final approval,the project landscape architect shall certify that parking and loading areas have been planted per the approved landscape plan and the provisions of this Section. DRAFT tt5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 123 STAFF COMMENTARY 18.610.025 Street Connectivity Section 18-610-025 A Downtown Circulation Plan will be Section to be held until completion of Downtown Circulation Plan. adopted together with the TSP update (in progress.) The Circulation Plan will include a map with designated new streets and bicycle/ pedestrian connections, which new development will be required to provide for The Plan will laso include special street sections for the MU-CBD zone. 18.610.030 Building and Site Design Standards A. Create Vibrant Ground Floors,Streetscapes and Rights-of-Way;Provide Weather Protection;and Promote Safety and Security. Intent,Design standards in this section are intended to foster vibrant,inviting streetscapes and sidewalk-facing ground floors and entryways.They are also intended to create buildings that are easily accessible to and provide protection from the elements for pedestrians. They also will help ensure that the ground floor promotes a sense of interaction between activities in the building and activities in the public realm.Building and site design should also address crime prevention through defensible spaces lighting, and features that allow observation and"eyes on the street." 24 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 • 1.Street Facade M a. Street-facing facades shall be built in proximity to the street. This standard Is met when STAFF COMMENTARY at least 50 percent of the ground floor front building elevation(s)is located no further from the front property line than the maximum front setback standard established in Table 18.610.1;and,where maximum street-facing side setbacks are required within the Main Street Subarea, at least 50 percent of the ground floor street-facing side building elevation(s) is located no further from the street-facing side property line than the maximum street-facing side setback standard established in Table 18.610. 69199v000dvao6ie6.d boa 6,d , o O 0 � O o oe 0 o . • e I o e I o j Building I e I 8 I o 0 0 --- 0 0 • +O • e∎ - C Q Mmdmum setback ine Lot frunboge (�Mn.50%,dstreet-feciig bt MM.occupied by buidiig facade at setback foe A.1(a)Sheet Facade b. Buildings more than 3 stories are required to step back six(6)feet from the building facade at the beginning of the fourth(4th)story. ® .r 0 W.6 settuxk A_L Street made DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 125 2. Primary Entry a. For Commercial/Mixed Use Buildings STAFF COMMENTARY (1) At least one entry door is required for each business with a ground floor frontage. (2) Each entrance shall be covered, recessed, or treated with a permanent architectural feature in such a way that weather protection is provided. (3) All primary ground-floor common entries shall be oriented to the street or a public space directly facing the street,not to the interior or to a parking lot. b. For Residential Buildings (1) Entry Door:The primary public entrance to each building unit shall be covered, recessed,or treated with a permanent architectural feature in such a way that weather protection is provided. (2) All primary ground-floor common entries of multi-family buildings and individual unit entries of attached single family units that front the street shall be oriented to the street or public right-of-way,not to the interior or to a parking lot. 3.Windows a. Ground Floor Windows for Non-Residential and Mixed Use Buildings: (1) 60%minimum ground floor window coverage for street-facing wall(Minimum window coverage includes any glazed portions of doors) (2) Ground Floor Window Transparency.All buildings with non-residential ground floor windows must have a Visible Transmittance(VT)of 0.6 or higher,with the exception of medical and dental offices which may have tinted windows. b. Ground Floor Windows for Residential Buildings: (1) 30%minimum ground floor window coverage for street-facing wall(Minimum window coverage includes any glazed portions of doors) c. Upper Floor Windows/Doors for All Buildings: (1) 30%minimum upper floor window coverage for each floor of the street-facing wall. (Minimum window coverage includes any glazed portions of doors) (2) The required upper floor window/balcony door percentage does not apply to floors where sloped roofs and dormer windows are used. (3) Upper floor windows shall be vertically oriented (a minimum vertical to horizontal dimension ratio of 1.5:1.) d. Window Shadowing for All Buildings: Windows shall be designed to provide shadowing. This can be accomplished by: recessing windows 3 inches into the facade and/or incorporating trim of a contrasting material or color. 4.Weather Protection For Non-residential and Mixed Use Buildings: a. A Projecting Facade Element (awning, canopy,arcade,or marquee) is required,on the street facing facade of the street with the highest functional classification. b. Awnings/Marquees/Canopies may project a minimum of 3 feet and a maximum of 6 feet from the facade(a maximum of 4 feet into the public right of way) c. The element shall have a minimum 10 feet clearance from the bottom of the element to the sidewalk. d. Awnings must match the width of storefronts or window openings. e. Internally lit awnings are not permitted f. Awnings must be made of glass,metal,or exterior grade fabric(or a combination of these materials) 26 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT a5 I REVISED9/2/09 PROMO V lit PFICPEFIrt Lit M;- ■IIuI I STAFF COMMENTARY ji IJ l �.:LLe.St r l 1 I 1 1 ni 1 . y __ a I c d a iota d Ill it _ - • i� r i s .1 b ®Primary entry doors oriented to street or public space 0 Primary entry door oriented to street or public space Q Entrance is covered and/or recessed behind facade ®Entrance is covered and/or recessed behind facade Q Max 6'balcony/deck projection 0 Min 3';Max 6'projection Q Min 10'clearance O Max 6'balcony/deck projection Q Mm 30%windows ©Min 10'clearance U Upper windows vertically oriented A Min 60%windows A.2-4 Residential(Only)Building ®Min 30%windows ®Upper windows vertically oriented A.2-4 Commercial/Mixed-Use Building DRAFT 45 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 127 B. Cohesive architectural facade standards. Intent. Build and expand upon Downtown Tigard's architectural character by incorporating STAFF COMMENTARY cohesive and repetitive architectural elements into the ground floor of street facing facades. 1.Architectural Bays for Non-Residential and Mixed Use Buildings Divide the street facing ground floor of commercial/mixed use storefronts into distinct architectural bays that are no more than 30 feet on center. For the purpose of this standard, an architectural bay is defined as the zone between the outside edges of an engaged column,pilaster,post,or vertical wall area. J I _ I of I J ___I ___I A Li _i 1 _, —ail 0 1 -_ , . , , e ,..,..........___,...._. „ ............. , ., . , , 1 i, . .. , •• t. , ., , , ,, 0 ,I , „ ,, 0 NdMKtutal by 13D man on center A El In u,p,uynrii r 0 rransom wnclows 0 Ground boa oonao.vii 0 Column/piaster/post 0 13'"'''V. 0 SW bamlisto.elront Irene 8.1 Architectural Bays 28 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT$15 I REVISED9/2109 • C. Integrated building facade standards. Intent. Build upon and improve Downtown Tigard's architecture by creating an attractive STAFF COMMENTARY and unified building facade that encourages ground floor activities, and creates visually interesting facades and roofs. 1.Non-residential and mixed use building facades a. Non-residential and mixed use buildings Tri-Partite Facades Non-residential and mixed use buildings two stories and above shall have three clearly defined elements on the street-facing facade(s);a base (extends from the sidewalk to the bottom of the second story or the belt course/string course that separates the ground floor from the middle of the building).;a middle(distinguished from the top and base of the building by use of building elements);and a top (roof form/element at the uppermost portion of the facade that visually terminates the facade).A tripartite facade creates a unified facade and breaks up vertical mass. • I I I 1 11 • I I f 1 ll --y. m Base m Be*cowse/strm6 course in-..4“1,11e" B Pogecting corn.;po.p,i ®'lop' C.]Integrated Building facade(Commercial/Mixed-Use Building) DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2109 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 129 2.Residential Building Facades AIME a. Unit definition. Each street facing dwelling unit shall be emphasized by including a STAFF COMMENTARY roof dormer or bay windows on the street-facing elevation, or by providing a roof gable or porch or balcony that faces the street. b) Trim detail. Trim shall be used to mark all building roof lines, porches,windows and doors that are on a primary structure's elevation(s). I I - L _ 1. I II I I II l - 0 �.:r. Uhit O Sasatroana bog winla• O Strait roan*Forth o Saeatraana ealcrri O Tm,,imply:rl met less perhm.■1n03►t a,, cco' C.2 Integrated Building Facade(Residential Only Building 3.Roof Forms a. The roof form of a building shall follow one (or a combination) of the following forms: (1) Flat Roof with Parapet or Cornice (2) Hip Roof (3) Gabled Roof (4) Full Mansard Roof (5) Dormers (6) Shed Roof b. All sloped roofs(other than full mansard roofs)exposed to view from adjacent public or private streets and properties shall have a minimum 5/12 pitch. c. Sloped roofs, shall have eaves, exclusive of rain gutters, that must project from the building wall at least twelve inches. d. All flat roofs or those with a pitch of less than 5/12 shall be architecturally treated or articulated with a parapet wall that must project vertically above the roof line at least twelve inches and/or a cornice that must project from the building face at least 6 inches. e. When an addition to an existing structure or a new structure is proposed In an existing development, the roof forms for the new structures shall have similar slope and be constructed of the same materials as the existing roof. f. Green roof features and/or rooftop gardens are encouraged.As part of the development permit, applicant shall execute a covenant ensuring the maintenance of any green roof.The covenant shall be approved by the Director on City provided forms. 30 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 101 roof Hi;i�:! Cables+I',:! Full mansard roof Dormers Shed roof 1111 ii ® MN 111 Li,-, EFAMI STAFF COMMENTARY 0 f U 1 _J 1` - 0 Parepevoornice mud raged min.IT lento*/ ®Eaves most project min.12'from face of building o Parapel/cormce must project min.r from face of building o ram.5/12 pitch on sloped rotas C.3 Roof Forms D. Create Street Corners with Strong Identity Intent.Create a strong architectural statement at street corners.Establish visual landmarks and enhance visual variety. 1.For non-residential or mixed use buildings at the corner of two public streets or a street and public area,park or plaza(for the purposes of this standard an alley is not considered a public street) incorporate one of the following features: a. Locate the primary entry to the building at the corner. b. A prominent architectural element,such as increased building height or massing,a cupola,a turret or a pitched roof at the corner of the building or within 20 feet of the corner of the building; c. The corner of the building cut at a 45 degree angle,or a similar dimension"rounded" corner. d. A combination of special paving materials,street furnishings and,where appropriate, plantings,in addition to the front door. I H Pi . ;:I r7∎ `I) IL I i •Primary entry door to the building located at corner ti l Prominent architectural element within 20'of the _ corner of the building 0 Corner min 10'from street corner and cut at f� _ ' s +� 45 degree angle 1 ,SFr ��I m Special paving patterns,street furnishings,and plantings near front door dr ,...-.---- 0 A.2-4 Commercial/Mixed-Use Building DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 131 E. Assure Building Quality,Permanence and Durability Intent. Use building materials that evoke a sense of permanence and are compatible with STAFF COMMENTARY Downtown Tigard and the surrounding built and natural environment. 1.Building Materials a. The following exterior building materials or finishes are prohibited: (1) Vinyl siding (2) T-111 or similar sheet materials (3) Plain concrete block(not including split faced,colored,or other block designs that mimic stone,brick,or other masonry) Foundation material may be skim coated concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. (4) Mirrored glass F. Open Space/Public Plaza Intent:Assure adequate public,private and shared outdoor space Section F 1.Mixed use and Commercial Developments greater than 60,000 sf. The required open space for multi- a. Development projects with site areas greater than 60,000 sf shall include at least one family projects have been changed public space with a minimum size of 600 sf. from the existing SDR standards b. Public spaces shall be abutted on at least two sides by retail shops, restaurants or (Chapter 18.360) to allow a more services with windows entrances fronting on the space. urban form of development. 2.Mixed Use Buildings with Residential Units and Residential Only Multi-Family Developments 80%of multi family units in a a. Private Outdoor Space:For all residential only buildings and mixed use buildings with development are required to provide more than 4 residential units: private open space, which allows (1) A minimum of 80% of the dwelling units in a development shall have private more flexibility in the design of open space,such as a private porch,a deck,a balcony,a patio,an atrium,or multi family buildings. other outdoor private area.The private open space shall be contiguous with the 32 sq.ft. ofprivate open space is unit in a single area. required,reduced from the SDR (2) A minimum of 32 square feet of private open space is required.The open space requirement of 48 sq.ft. must have a minimum depth of 4 feet. (3) Balconies may project up to a maximum of four feet into the public right-of-way. (4) Balconies used for entrances or exits shall not be considered as open space except where such exits or entrances are for the sole use of the unit. b. Shared Outdoor Space for Mixed Use Buildings with Residential Units and Multi-Family Buildings: In addition to the required private outdoor space, multi-family buildings and mixed use buildings with more than 4 residential units shall provide shared open space(e.g.,courtyards,roof decks or garden,play areas,outdoor recreation facilities, indoor recreation room,and/or similar space) that is equal to or greater than 10% percent of the development site,except as follows: Minimum required shared outdoor (1) Credit for Private Open Space. Up to 50% percent of the shared open space space will be 10%of the site area, standard may be met by providing additional private open space, such as rather than 200 or300 sq.fl.per balconies,porches and patios(above what is required in 18.610.030.F.2). unit as required in Chapter 18.360 (2) Credit for Proximity to a Park. A shared open space credit of 50% percent Site Development Review. may be granted when a multiple family development is directly adjacent to an improved public park. (3) Credit for up to 100%of the shared open space standard may be met by paying a fee-in-lieu.The fee will fund parks and/or plazas within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. (4) Shared outdoor recreation space shall be readily observable to promote crime prevention and safety. 3.Private Open Space for Single-Family Attached Dwelling Units: a. A minimum of 100 square feet of private open space per unit such as a private porch, yard,a deck,a balcony,a patio,or other outdoor private area is required. G. Additional Requirements for Single-Family Attached Dwelling Units 1.Garage entry garages and carports shall be accessed from alleys,or otherwise recessed behind the front building elevation(i.e.,living area or covered front porch)by a minimum of 10 feet. 32 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 18.610.035 Additional Standards STAFF COMMENTARY Applications must conform to all applicable standards in the following chapters: • Access Egress and Circulation see Chapter 18.705 • Environmental Performance Standards see Chapter 18.725 • Exceptions to Development Standards see Chapter 18.730 • Landscaping and Screening see Chapter 18.745 • Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclable Storage see Chapter 18.755 • Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements see Chapter 18.765 • Sensitive Lands see Chapter 18.775 • Signs see Chapter 18.780 • Tree Removal see Chapter 18.790 • Visual Clearance see Chapter 18.795 • Wireless Communication Facilities see Chapter 18.798 • Street and Utility Improvement Standards see Chapter 18.810 18.610.040 Special Requirements for Development Bordering Urban Plaza These requirements are a floating The Urban Plaza is listed as a catalyst project in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and zone"that will take effect when Urban Renewal Plan. Developments on the parcels that directly abut the location of the new the property for the Urban Plaza is plaza will expected to be in keeping with the character of the plaza New development that is secured. built concurrently or subsequent to the construction of the plaza will need to conform to the following standards (in addition to the other applicable standards in this code): • The building must be minimum of two stories and a maximum of four stories. • No parking lot may abut the plaza • The buildings shall follow the building and site design and development standards for Commercial and Mixed Use buildings in the Main Street Sub-area. 18.610.045 Exceptions to Standards A. Exceptions to setback requirements.The Director may grant an exception to the yard setback requirements in the applicable zone based on findings that the approval will result in the following: 1.An exception which is not greater than 20%of the required setback; 18.610.045 adapted from Chapter 2.No adverse effect to adjoining properties in terms of light,noise levels and fire hazard; 18.360 Site Development Review 3.Safe vehicular and pedestrian access to the site and on-site; 4.A more efficient use of the site which would result in more landscaping;and 5.The preservation of natural features which have been incorporated into the overall design of the project. B. Exceptions to parking requirements.The Director may grant an exception or deduction to the off-street parking dimensional and minimum number of space requirements in the applicable zoning district based on the following findings: 1.The application is for a use designed for a specific purpose which is intended to be permanent in nature, e.g., senior citizen housing, and which has a demonstrated low demand for off-street parking; 2.There is an opportunity for shared parking and there is written evidence that the property owners have entered into a binding agreement to share parking;or 3.There is community interest in the preservation of particular natural feature(s) on the site, public transportation is available to the site, and reducing the standards will not adversely affect adjoining uses,therefore the public interest is not adversely affected by the granting of the exception. C. Exceptions for private or shared outdoor area.The Director may grant an exception or deduction to the private outdoor area and shared outdoor recreation areas requirements, provided the application Is for a use designed for a specific purpose which is intended to be permanent in nature (for example,senior citizen housing) and which can demonstrate DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 133 a reduced demand for a private outdoor recreational area based on any one or more of the following findings: STAFF COMMENTARY 1.The development operates a motor vehicle which is available on a regular basis to transport residents of the development to public open space or recreation areas;or 2.The required square footage of either the private outdoor area or the shared outdoor recreation area may be reduced if together the two areas equal or exceed the combined standard for both. D. Exceptions to landscaping requirements. The Director may grant an exception to the landscaping requirements of this code, Section 18.745, upon finding that the overall 18.610.050 landscape plan provides for at least 20%of the gross site to be landscaped. Track 3 is available as an alternative way of review that ensures projects 18.610.050 Building and Site Design Objectives (to be used with that are unable to meet the design Track 3 Approval Process) standards will have good design A. Applicability principles. All development using the Track 3 Approval Process must demonstrate compliance with the design objectives listed in 18.610.050.C.The development must also meet the development The Building and Site Design standards of Table 18.610.1. objectives are qualitative B. Approval Criteria statements, with multiple ways Applicants are required to identify how their proposed site/building plan meets the intent of accomplishing They are based statements of the design objectives,through architectural drawings and a narrative. on the intent statements from The design review body will make findings that the intent of the design objective has been met. the Design Standards section. The Applications using the Track 3 process must also show compliance with the development application would address each standards set forth in Section 18.610.020 and Table 18.610.1 applicable objective through a Concurrently or after Design Review Board approval, the application will be reviewed for narrative graphics,and architectur- compliance with the other relevant chapter sections,as listed in 18.610.035 al drawings. The decision making C. Design Objectives process is Type 111 with the Design Each design objective has an intent statement followed by photographs of development Review Board as the decision mak exemplifying the objective. ing authority. 1.Create Vibrant Streetscapes and Rights-of-Way;Provide Weather Protection; and Promote Safety and Security Concurrently,or after Design Review Intent.Foster vibrant,inviting streetscapes and sidewalk-facing ground floors and entry Board approval, the application will ways. Create buildings that are easily accessible to and provide protection from the be reviewed for compliance with the elements for pedestrians. Ensure that the ground floor promotes a sense of interaction other relevant chapter sections:land between activities in the building and activities in the public realm. Building and site use,street, utility, issues,etc. design should also address crime prevention through defensible spaces, lighting, and A Design Review Board may consist features that allow observation and"eyes on the street." ofa new volunteer board,appointed • , . - ,• • by Council or a subcommittee of the �. Planning Commission.A potential t+ P " configuration is five members with . Vt L' • at least three involved in architec- I jt lure, landscape architecture,or a • design specialty. 00 j1 t The photos are included as examples $ of development that exemplify the .: e. : objective. F . ort-..-- , ,iiis ,r t ,a, , ot r it `� V 34 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2109 2.Create Cohesive Architectural Facades I Intent. Build and expand upon Downtown Tigard's architectural character by STAFF COMMENTARY incorporating cohesive and repetitive architectural elements into the ground floor of street facing facades. Relate to the horizontal facade articulation and massing of sur- rounding development and/or utilize building and site design elements that connect Fanno Creek Park or extend natural elements to the Downtown. 'Iv 1 I 1 —. tnn�: r Ill Ili . 06 Mill 11111 -. - -- * ' • .rt S NIN 1 4 3 I 4 .:: -,' -,,,,_ 1 , r, a . i < • 11:l3'' 1:' 111) . p 1 ` ` , 1 . y 3.Design Buildings with Integrated Facades Intent.Build upon and improve Downtown Tigard's architecture by creating an attractive and unified building facade that encourages ground floor activities, creates a visually interesting facades and roofs. 1' I I -l I: f 4 iiiill—lig b 1 I I I I w„ I I l i I l P ■ k 1 ! ult101116 t tllj1ll -, , , t•F �� IHIIII(11 9I1!jJI! ' W11111 1 V r t I rr,`., I,Ill ! . n, 0 a air- DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 135 i ► `' STAFF COMMENTARY 1AAl- j i, i •I _ 1 f fi w a t, w. ii!,1 I Nor 4.Create Street Corners with Strong Identity Intent.Create a strong architectural statement at street corners to create a strong identity and opportunities for activity.Establish visual landmarks and enhance visual variety. Trio it l ar, 4 �1 . 1t I ,�i4. .ki I I 10 i. ) k. :k1„,, :rDRfM1JE + 1 •, -1 'I 1. r SALE! I 1I � - 0FF t ?P'''' .. I '•z: . Gi - 36 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT 115 I REVISED9/2/09 5. Assure Building Quality,Permanence and Durability F Intent. Use building materials that evoke a sense of permanence and durability and are STAFF COMMENTARY compatible with Downtown Tigard and the surrounding built environment.Windows,doors, roofs,and weather protection shall appear to be an integral part of the building design.I N4 ."4 fi t' VII . ' I . , 111111 d 1 l r h i. It iw -# - , ' "---t " \, I isl, t 'WI P . - \ I . , f_- 1 y l 1.. i ;»e; e • •• ` . • 6.Provide Adequate Outdoor Spaces Intent:Assure new residential units have adequate private and shared outdoor space. DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2109 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments I 37 18.610.046 Signs ' A. Sign standards. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.780 of the Development STAFF COMMENTARY Code the following standards shall be met: 1.Zoning district regulations-Residential only developments within the MU-CBD zone shall meet the sign requirements for the R-40 zone 18.780.130B;non-residential developments 18.610.46 Signs within the MU-CBD zone shall meet the sign requirements for the commercial zones, Most existing CBD and C-G sign 18.780.130C,and the additional requirements below. regulations are retained with some 2.Sign area limits—The maximum sign area limits are: exceptions. a.Freestanding signs:70 square feet per sign face or a total of 140 square feet for all sign faces. b.Wall Signs:shall not exceed in gross area 15 percent of nay building face on which the sign is mounted. c. All other signs area requirements shall follow 18.780.130C. 3.Height limits—The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs shall be 20 feet 4.Sign location — Freestanding signs within the MU-CBD zone shall not be permitted within required L-1 landscape areas. 5.Blade Signs a. One blade sign(above the walkway and under weather protecting awnings,marquees, and parapets)placed at each entrance to a building is allowed. b. Vertical dimension of a blade sign shall not exceed 1.5 ft and the width may not exceed 90 percent of the width of the weather protection,for a maximum sign area per sign of 4.5 sq.ft. 18.610.047 Off-Street Parking c. Height of Sign:The distance from the sidewalk or grade up to the bottom of the sign Requirements shall be at least eight feet. Development in the MU-CBD have d. Illumination:The blade sign may be indirectly illuminated. significantly reduced parking 6.Projecting signs—A projecting sign not greater than 32 square feet per face or a total minimums in expectation that other of 64 square feet for all sign faces can project up to four feet into the public right-of-way modes will be increasingly used. with a 10 foot clearance of the right-of-way. Properties in the Main St and Center 18.610.047 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements Sub-area will have no minimum A. Parking Standards.New development in the Downtown must conform to the requirements required parking to preserve the of Chapter 18.765 with the following exceptions. existing street wall on these streets. 1.Multi-family Units:In the MU-CBD zone the minimum parking requirement for all multi- family units shall be 1.0/DU. Adequate provisions for barrier free parking shall be as In addition, in the existing Chapter required by the State Building Code. No visitor parking is required. Bicycle parking 18.370 Variances and Adjustments, requirements shall not be reduced. an additional 40%adjustment in the 2.All Other Uses:For all other uses the minimum off-street vehicle parking requirements minimum parking requirement may shall be 75%of the total computed from Table 18.765.2.Bicycle parking requirements be authorized if: shall not be reduced. (1) Use of transit,demand 3.Main Street-Center Sub-area: Properties in the Main Street-Center sub-area (shown on management programs,and/or Map 18.610.A) shall have no minimum vehicle parking requirements, except that any special characteristics of the multi-family units shall have a minimum of 1.0/DU. customer,client employee or resident 4.Fractional Space Requirements: In the MU-CBD zone, when calculating the total population will reduce expected minimum number of vehicle parking spaces required in Table 18.765.2. fractional space vehicle use and parking space requirements shall not be counted as a whole space. demand for this development,as 5.Motorcycle/scooter parking may substitute for up to 5 spaces or 5 percent of required compared to standards Institute automobile parking,whichever Is less.For every 4 motorcycle/scooter parking spaces of Transportation Engineers(ITE) provided,the automobile parking requirement is reduced by one space.Each motorcycle vehicle trip generation rates and space must be at least 4 feet wide and 8 feet deep.Existing parking may be converted to take minimum city parking requirements, advantage of this provision. and 6.Further Adjustments: As provided for in Section 18.765.070.E further adjustments to (2)A reduction in parking will not parking standards can be applied for. have an adverse impact on adjacent uses. 38 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 18.120 Chapter Definitions Design Related Definitions STAFF COMMENTARY 1. Arcade—An exterior covered passageway along a building facade that is open to the street frontage. These definitions were largely adapted 2. Awning—An overhead cover extending above the sidewalk (usually above windows from the City of Canby's design code. and doors) as a shelter and/or sunshade. They will be integrated into the 3. Band — Any horizontal flat member or molding or group of moldings projecting existing Definitions Chapter slightly from a wall plane and usually marking a division in the wall. 4. Bay— (a) Within a structure,a regularly repeated spatial element defined by beams or ribs and their supports(b)A protruded structure with a bay window. 5. Belt Course—A horizontal band or molding set in the face of a building as a design element(also called a string course). 6. Canopy—A covered area which extends from the wall of a building,protecting an entrance or loading dock. 7. Chamfer—To cut off the edge or corner of. 8, Column —In structures, a relatively long, slender structural compression member such as a post,pillar,or strut;usually vertical,supporting a load which acts in (or near) the direction of its longitudinal axis. 9. Cornice—Decorative projection or crown along the top of a wall or roof. 10. Eaves —The lower edge of a sloping roof: that part of a roof of a building which projects beyond the wall. 11. Entry—The space comprising a door and any flanking or transom windows associated with a building. 12. Frieze—A decorative horizontal band.as along the upper part of a wall in a room; often used for signage in modern buildings. but derived from classical architectural principles. 13. Marquee—A permanent roof-like shelter over an entrance to a building. 14. Medallion —A decorative element set into the upper portion of a building facade periodically,typically aligning with columns or pilaster. 15. Parapet —A low, solid, protective screening or decorative wall as an extension of exterior building walls beyond the roof or deck level. 16. Pilaster—An ornamental or functional column or pillar incorporated into a wall. 17. String Course—A horizontal band or molding set in the face of a building as a design element(also called a belt course). 18. Transom—A horizontal glass plane,typically encased in a wood or metal frame that separates the storefront from the upper facade. 19. Turret—A very small and slender tower attached to a larger building. 20. Visible Transmittance—A measure of the amount of visible light transmitted through a material (typically glass).Information about visible transmittance typically is.or can be,provided by window manufacturers. Landscaping related definitions: 21. Open soil—An unpaved area of soil surrounding a tree, which contains existing, new or amended soil. 22. Root paths—Constructed paths that use aeration or drainage strips to give roots a way to grow out of the tree space and under pavement in order to access better planting soils.Root paths can connect tree spaces and adjacent green spaces. 23. Covered soil area—An area of soil that is under pavement and specially designed to accommodate tree root growth. Design methods include structural soil, sidewalk support and soil cells. 24. Soil volume calculations —Sum total of soil volumes from each design method used for a tree.A soil depth of 3 feet is assumed.Soil Volume (cubic feet) =Open soil area(length x width x depth) (feet) +Covered soil area(length x width x depth) (feet) + Root path length (feet) x 0.25 + Green space area (length x width x depth) (feet). *Include only applicable soil areas and design methods for each tree, DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 139 Use related 25.Custom arts and craft work -- Manufacture of crafts art. sculpture,pottery. stained STAFF COMMENTARY glass. musical instruments and similar items produced without the use of a mechanized -- assembly line. 40 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2/09 Chapter 18.745 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING STAFF COMMENTARY Table 18.745.1 BUFFER MATRIX In keeping with a mixed use downtown, different uses will generally not need to be buffered from each other, with the exception ,o of parking lots. Jc *! Jr) V vg Vs co R CJ j C1.-•NCI Za :Zs c v Q C .1 h ( ar CVIIP!W 4, j o o> om m N° o F� m .� 4 z E m o W g 0 0 y � s 2 ` o j a % C �tr f o k EXISTING/ABUTTING USE O. y Q Q c° 2 .e - 2 0. `° Detached Single Units, Manufactured Units — A C C D C C E F C D Attached Single Units and Multifamily, 1-5 Units, Duplexes A — B C D C CE F CD Attached Single Units and Multifamily,5+ Units A A — C D C CE F C D Mobile Home Parks A A B — D C C E F C D Commercial Zones (CC,CG, CP,CIO C C C C — A A D D — — Neighborhood Commercial Zone (CN) CC C C A — A D D — — Mixed Use Employment Zone (MUE) CC C C A A — D D — — L i g h t Industrial Zones (IP,IL) D D D D A A A — D — — H e a v y Industrial Zone (IH) D D D D D D D D — — — Parking Lots C C C C Arterial Streets A A A A — — — A D Note 1:See Table 18.745.2 for alternative combinations for meeting these screening requirements. Note 2:For projects within the MU-CBD zone the following buffering is required: A) Proposed parking lots must have a buffer to level"C" (Parking lots abutting parking lots do not need a buffer). B) Proposed uses in the MU-CBD zone that abut a residential zone must have a buffer to level"C." DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 141 Chapter 18.765 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS STAFF COMMENTARY Table 18.765.2 MAXIMUM m In addition, in the existing Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments, MINIMUM Zone A Zone B Bicycle an additional 40%adjustment in the Multifamily Units DU<500 sq ft: none none 1.0/2 DUs except minimum parking requirement may 1.0/DU(M) elderly,which is be authorized if 1 bedroom: 1.25/DU(M) 1.0/20 DUs 2 bedroom: 1.5/DU(M) (1) Use of transit, demand 3 bedroom: 1.75/DU(M) management programs,and/or [g] special characteristics of the customer,client employee or resident population will reduce [7]Please see Chapter 18.610.047 off-street vehicle parking minimum requirents expected vehicle use and parking in the in the MU-CBD zone. space demand for this development, as compared to standards Institute 1 � 1• : � • ;.; ;;; ;; ;, ;;_ of Transportation Engineers N\ - I 11 1 �11 � 1 ; : ; ;; - :-; ; ,,,,:'1 (ir E) vehicle trip generation ; ;;:; . ;. ;:; ; ;, a.; _ ;; ; ;, ;; ; ■, _ rates and minimum city parking • - ;, ; •;-- , •; requirements,and ,11,11 ; ; ;1 ; ;; : : 18.765.2. (2)A reduction in parking will not have an adverse impact on adjacent ]x] In the MU-CBD zone the minimum parking requirements for all multi-family units is uses. 1.0/DU. 18.765.070.1. Developments in the MU-CBD Zone Please see Section 18.610.047 off-street vehicle parking minimum requirements in the in the MU-CBD zone. 42 I Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments DRAFT#5 I REVISED9/2109 r STAFF COMMENTARY Chapter 18.780 SIGNS Change reference from CBD to MU-CBD DRAFT#5 I REVISED 9/2/09 Proposed Downtown Tigard Code Amendments 143 Matrix Comparison of Existing Development Code with Proposed Code for Downtown Tigard MU-CBD Zone Existing Development Proposed Code Code Maximum CBD: 80 ft. commercial, 60 Determined by sub-area building height ft.residential • 3 stories: Main St.,Adjacent to Fanno C-G/C-P: 45 ft. Creek Park • Elsewhere 5-8 stories Maximum CBD and C-P : 40 units per Up to 50 units per acre. Station area overlay Density acre permits up to 80 units per acre. C-G: residential not permitted MUR-1:no limit Minimum Multi-family residential: Multi-family residential: parking Studio: 1 space/per dwelling 1 space per dwelling unit requirements unit 1 BR: 1.25/DU Other development: 2 BR: 1.5/DU Other minimums 25%reduction from existing 3BR: 1.75/DU Code. Main Street: Adjustments: No required parking for commercial 20%adjustment in minimum development parking can be applied for Adjustments: 40%additional reduction available Design Standards None in Downtown Extensive standards encouraging pedestrian oriented development Required 15%-20% Determined by sub-area Minimum • 20%- Fanno/Burnham Landscaping • 10%99-Hall and Scoffins-Commercial • 0%-Main St • Required landscaping can be on roof. Projections in the Not permitted Awnings,etc. up to 4 feet(10 feet minimum ROW clearance) Required private 48 sf per unit 32 sf per unit(minimum of 80%of units) open space Required shared 200 sf per unit • 10% of site area. open space 300 sf per 3 BR units • Can be reduced by increased private open space and/or paying fee in lieu. Signs • Freestanding signs: Same as existing regulations,except: maximum 70 sf.with • Freestanding signs : 70 sf absolute (increased setback up to maximum 90 sf.) • Wall/awning/projecting signs: Max 15 • Wall signs: Max 15%of % of wall area(can't be increased.) wall area(50%increase • Add blade signs regulations (one 4.5 sf) with review.) Required Required between • Within zone: Only required for parking Landscaping commercial and residential lots. Buffer uses within the zone • Required if abutting residential zone Non-conforming If discontinued,must be If discontinued,must be reestablished within 12 uses reestablished within 6 months months. rug, A ,..„._,..,... .. .. „,.,..,..f.,.._ .. 1044 I Ii� ;,...„„c,,, .,!, . c-P Existing IIISIA,,„, �'�:�!�,� 11��1■ 1 � �. - Land Use �� Designations El _ • _� 411112 a, ./ �-+ City of Tigard S �•;�.�� / I�t � 1 , : Oregon _ IAA, w� ` p rig 01 r R-7 ■ I ; zoom Classifications bT �,� �r:•:: ■? I - _ t .. -(� CC CommuMy Commercial ", ' '..,� �,''�`� V 't. General Commercial 15-- ---- IMO ':N Neighborhood Commercial :',-P Professional Commercial 2 v��7 - ,• •5 36 I. Heavy lmdtnwl D:brcl gip�� . .. 6 qL Q� _ 11 Lplp Industrial I-P Industrial Park ® MUC Mixed Use Commercial MUC-1 Mixed Us*commerce t MUE Mixed Use E.O.M., MUE-t Mead the Emgoynrera t ...,,, s_- girl _ MUE-2 Mired Use Employment 2 '✓/ -,\'' \` MUR-1 Wired Use Residential 1 NI' i \ j MUR-2 Mred Use Residential�.� ,. \ 1P! - !•--- � , , �� R-1 ]0000 Sq Ft Mn La Sue R? 20,000 Sq Ft Mn Let S¢e_ !'4.;144/4_.'4*, �� ,e S � /f �pp� - - R35 [0,000 Sq Ft Mm Lot Size yt • R-4.5 7.500 Sq Fl Min Lot Sue � v A ` i R 7 5 000 Sq Ft Mln Ld S¢e \ � 7 , R-12 JOSO SgFl hMn LN S¢a R-4.5 ^.� . ',� y �V ,•� R-25 aB05gF1WnLaSee C , r f . R-40 aO Units Per Acre .�,� r i' ^� ,, (POI Planned Development Overlay \�'.. . ;�„- / `r . / `\ IMDI wslwrc Dlstrlq Overlay �PQ v�. CBD 3' ' \, Comprehensive Plan Desmnations ` C ,F"r. y �J ‘.1.- `\!y, ..... �``+y , Central Business Qstrlct Community Commernal Tualatin Valley Geewcinaneiew • v` ow% Fire • Neianbo hiod Di merilal >' CBD & : mere—renCerm.e■..al v \e' PD Rescue \ -L 1t 9.v bduahwl ' J+ t Li M Industrial v:§ V C-N \.- Low Dena Resiemtel G ,:•0›.� a� Medium Gainsay Residential AA \ t Medum-Mgn Density Revdanhal .�f\` 0! \ High Denidy Residenhel 0/ �\� y - AM.ed Use Cornmercul Mi.ed Use Empbymenl �, . - - R-1 2 - ` nu.ee use Empbvment t 4 �•# (PD) , TI ar r NM Mn.d use EmPkwmem 2 Kik Yak �. �.�'aie,, `r Mred Use Residential2 hM.ed Use Residential ' '• ��•.%-'4. •4' Hall I"i a I Open Space PubNc Institution ‘rffiVitt I . - a Nerd cM Larets ` J 2„ •_ � - I Ts.ld Boundary \ • .� �. Ai Tigard,. • �' N Senior' . .�� M �� `��S�yC �'; Center I' Tl9ard•.►�I �% ..�i J (PD) G �. us.ten API:• �, ♦ ', i_i_ , _Library W 111111 gnu L.-Vit.& Aim Illinimistsg. magi ........... • ,Ito M ' Y IS. 1 71111 TRIO =21 mu jilM-IIE*alit IRml 1 1 .11.,,,,:■ . C-P Proposed �' i �,�4 r��I1/ii: �1 ,.J11 M , - Land Use ��f� ��'li`�u " :�'l �� Desi nations �_ Im o mail. 1��II.• ■ : •�/ go , S g—.� � ��11 -i■ � "-I i�= '� City of Tigard ,�• IL arl..111i111�T..�� r L1 ' _ . 4 ... ^ �/�1r Oregon �� , rig - ! �,_ Zoning Class t ications. ., , . \ .\ M-CBD. ,• � f' I 35 + He. �-• FL LgI-P me. *. MUC Mu<EUs•Com weial MUC-1 Mned Use CsesenweiI 1 Ml1E 0.YxN UN EnRbpsrra i;:; MUE-1 Mued Uw Empbynwd t MUE-2 Mc ee Uaa E00/0yTMR 2 MUR_1 Meed Use Re44004511 MUR-2 Mered Ilse ReaWnar2. j�t ,�,/` _ y� a R-1 30.000 SR Alan Lel See \ -Kix / / -•5 R-2 20.000 54 Ft Mel Lea 50e• .•1xi;• E f \ / _ rya J R-3.5 10.000 Sq Min Lay SW/ . / •,$ <v C�, ,4k1 ,�$4 / f` • RJ.S 7,500 SC a AM Lay Save 411 /40,4411,.I•.. %, _ \\ , !. R-7 5.000 54 ft Min Loy S¢e R-4.5 �� ' . " ,` \\*\ �• R-I2 7.050 sa a WIC/050e R-25 1,4110 Sd a Mtn Le1 Sete `�' R-40c! MUD`� �A3 'S (PD)• 'PD1 IHD1 C4rnD- - cerye.,lcpn.,.rpw >. R-12 a phhprhood Commercial Fire Pio,esvonalCavrr . MU—CBD to> & �y \ - Heavy Ineus ' a� � (PD) Resc'. LgMIMUelnal �Jr (<•aeVA - /, y- _" _ Low Dense)/ReaAentml L�i Medium Density ResMentrel `` �<4 Medium-Nigh Density Residential Nigh Densiy Reudental / r, /2� Mixed Use eom Commercial V\ Mued Use Employment r / R-12 ` Wired Use Empoymenl l �. IN / 401025 .:le , (PD) nM1xee uee E mploymem 2 , '1 I naxae Us<Resie.Miel 1 ". 4'N 1PP ie . \ 1 : : . Lk<ResMenM1<I2 ' Open space��t ;4'4'4 . Puetc mslnulnn Nerd CM Lanes 40 01410. ' � �:� � `:: - - -1 l 1 a Toxic;Boundary iii'�'� .��r, �� .:�;,. ��.,, N enior ♦� O ` . e— Center TI�alrti C-G .-��►- % ,% �� ` ;.(PD) ll i ,,•.. .ik ,♦ I,I'•p,, - • uc t.n �41 • .Library Oki ,.v,.,y. 1111111∎r ... 4 1 R 12 am Tigard Planning Commission — Roll Call Updated May 14,2009 Hearing/Workshop Date: C -Z(-O '‘ Starting Time: COMMISSIONERS: 7 Jodie Inman (President) David Walsh (Vice President) Vv. Tom Anderson ✓� Rex Caffall / Margaret Doherty Karen Fishel Stuart Hasman Matthew Muldoon Jeremy Vermilyea Timothy Gaschke (Alternate) STAFF PRESENT: Dick Bewersdorff Ron Bunch Gary Pagenstecher Doreen Laughlin Cheryl Caines John Floyd Jerree Lewis Duane Roberts Kim McMillan Sean Farrelly Gus Duenas Darren Wyss Todd Prager Marissa Daniels CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes September 21, 2009 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, Hasman, Inman, Muldoon, Vermilyea (arrived after roll call), & Walsh Absent: Commissioner Fishel, Alternate Commissioner Gaschke Staff Present: Community Development Director Ron Bunch Asst. CD Director Susan Hartnett Senior Planner Sean Farrelly Associate Planner Gary Pagenstecher Senior Administrative Specialist Doreen Laughlin 3. COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Doherty announced that she'd been appointed to State Legislature and that she prefers to stay on the Planning Commission if she can, and if her schedule allows it. If not, she will give notice in plenty of time to appoint someone else. Commissioner Walsh reminded the commissioners that the Urban Forestry Master Plan would be arriving a bit earlier than normal and he urged the commissioners to take some time to read through it prior to meeting on the 5th. President Inman reminded them that they had an email from Doreen Laughlin earlier with a link to that document—should they want to look at it on- line. 4. CONSIDER MEETING MINUTES 8-17-09 Meeting Minutes: President Inman asked if there were any corrections, deletions, or additions to the minutes; there being none, President Inman declared the minutes approved as submitted. 5. PUBLIC HEARING Cont'd [Judicial] 5.1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2008-00004 - THE VILLAGE AT KNOLL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 21,2009—Page 1 of 5 REQUEST: The apl....cant is requesting Planned Development RL _w approval of a Planned Development Concept Plan for development of a 2.74-acre site with a 15 lot subdivision including one common tract featuring landscaped paths and water features throughout,as well as visitor parking for the site. President Inman read from the Quasi Judicial Hearing Guide. No commissioner wished to abstain or declare a conflict of interest. No one in the audience wished to challenge any member of the Planning Commission for bias or conflict of interest. No one wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the commission. There were no ex parte contacts reported and no site visits. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Gary Pagenstecher said he didn't have a staff report but that the applicant was here to address them and to present further information in this continued meeting. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Mark Reed of NW Ventures Group, Inc., and applicant for the concept plan review, spoke about the changes since the last time he was before the commission. He distributed two handouts (Exhibit A). Referring to the August meeting, he said at that time it had sounded as though the Planning Commission liked the Knolls concept and the basic ideas for the plan; however, two main issues came out that needed to be addressed. One was parking and one was open space. He said they ended up eliminating two lots out of the planned development. So now, instead of having 14 single family homes in which 6 of them were detached, and 8 of them attached, they now end up with 12 detached single family homes. So there is no longer attached housing. The bottom line is it added 5,000 sq ft of essentially pure open space back into the project. He went on to describe the tiering of the open space - 3 levels —with the third tier as a flat open space. There's the possibility of community gardening. He then distributed photos of their existing facility in Milwaukee (Exhibit B). The photos showed how some of the sloped areas were used - from a planning standpoint. It showed, among other things, some examples of the recycled concrete walls that they use. He said from the open space percentage,when they initially did this plan, the minimum was 20%. He said they are currently at almost 23.5% - so they gained 3.5% of the site— essentially to open space—without taking away any of the other amenities of the project. In addition, by decreasing the two lots, they are no longer asking for the density bonus. The second item was parking. Reed noted that they'd asked their engineers to go back and help them redesign the houses. Now most of the houses have 2 car garages with two spaces behind it—essentially doubling the amount of off-street parking for every resident in the community. He went on to explain about garage set-backs and how they'd reconfigured the parking in Tract A so that there's not a greater than 180 degree turn into some of those spaces (which the old plan had). He said they'd reconfigured the lower portion of the site so the parking was re-angled, making it much easier for the residents to go through. In addition, those parking spaces ended at a wall so the parking doesn't go into general open spaces —it goes to a retaining wall. Also, on the lower portion of the site, they've added 6 additional parking spaces, so they end up with a net gain of 7 additional parking spaces - and PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 21,2009—Page 2 of 5 a net gain of 19 off-street .,paces with the garages, and the recon—oared parking driveway areas. And they also deducted 2 houses. So, essentially, they're taking away 15% of the potential people coming into the neighborhood with the loss of those 2 houses, while adding 26 total parking spots to the project. He said that with this new plan, the final product has more parking, more useful open space, and one that will be better for all the residents of the community. QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT (answers in italics) The commissioners thanked Mr. Reed for the good work and effort they'd put into this new plan. • You mentioned that all the homes have a 2 car garage or— most of the homes have a 2 car garage? I believe it's 9 of the 12 lots that have them. Ifyou look on the plan marked CO 1(Exhibit A) there are little square box numbers behind each house. The one indicates a one car garage, and the one car behind it. The 2's are 2 car garages, 2.spaces behind them. There are 3 that have single car garages and those are corner lots where you can't really get a turning radius to get a two car garage in there. • You also mentioned you are not going to do features on the open space? You say you'll leave it up to the future homeowners to decide what to do. Will there be any funding of any future projects for the homeowners? Yes. I think we'd have a very hard time selling the lots if we say `good luck in fundingyour own center area."So I think part of the HO association documents that would have to be done— there'd be a preliminary amount set aside essentially for the homeowners as the homeowners show up. • Did you consider townhomes at all as a way of keeping density? We looked at them. The challenge is they get so close together—you decrease the amount of parkingyou can have for each individual home because you end up with a single-car garage on each one of them going through and then you end up with kind of the same problems we had with the original plan where you end up with more homes with less parking. When you increase the open space and take out that 5,000 sq ft of available lot square footage, it makes it real difficult to be able to have the houses be wide enough to have a two-car garage. There was some discussion about the alley variances although it had been already covered at the last meeting. Pagenstecher said he would check with the City Engineer on design and get some clearance up front during the application. • Commissioner Vermilyea said "I would suggest we make the recommendation to the Engineer that we allow variance to 12 feet on the alleyway." Inman said we can also very easily expect that this gets addressed before we come back with the detailed development plan. I'm personally fine either way. Reed said `2 think from our standpoint, if there's a note that can be made that the Planning Commission is in favor of it,per as long as the City Engineer signs off on it. I would love that to be in the record because it's a lot easier to go to the City Engineer saying "Hey the Planning Commissions already said they would like that, if its possible— can we figure out a way to make it work?"Rather than going to him blindly without recommendation." PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 21,2009—Page 3 of 5 Thank you again for listei.ig to us and for your new presentati& . We appreciate the efforts you all went through and your patience in coming back to us. • One thing I appreciate with regard to the photographs you sent around (Exhibit B) that you have at the other facility, especially with the kind of multi-generational group that you're having, I particularly enjoy the raised beds. Seniors can garden that way. This is good! Yes— they're srpeczfically designed for wheel-chair accessibility. There are a lot of residents who are 90 years old and up and in wheelchairs that can't get out to garden. Here the garden is accessible— they can get in front of a bed—it works. They feel part of the community. • Is it going to be posted "No Parking"? IYIe can.Absolutely. We figure that's necessary access for fire / emergency vehicles if needed. If parking is allowed there, none of those TVF&R vehicles would be able to clear that area. That would be my suggestion - absolutely no parking and a tow zone so that it is kept clear. That would be no problem. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN FAVOR: None PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN OPPOSITION: None APPLICANT'S REBUTTAL: None PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:33pm DELIBERATIONS • I was probably the most vocal last time around on this issue and I have to say they've addressed everything I had asked them to address and points I raised. I'm very,very satisfied with what I see and it's obvious they took us extremely seriously. I like everything I see. I have no objection, but would like the opinion of the City Engineer with regard to the alley issue we spoke about. But I certainly support this. • My gut feeling about the project is much better now. There's more flexibility—more space —places for people to visit without affecting the surrounding area. I'm very pleased. As far as the alleyway— I like the sidewalk in the middle. I would prefer we keep the sidewalk there. • This is a great plan. Thank you. I'm very pleased. • As far as the alleyway, I really like the idea of the sidewalk in the middle, so I would prefer that that stay. I agree with Commissioner Walsh that there might be some PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 21,2009—Page 4 of 5 technical reason' y the City Engineer is looking for than _ foot width but, if possible, I would prefer that we do keep that sidewalk there. MOTION A motion was made by Commissioner Doherty, seconded by Commissioner Vermilyea as follows: "I move for approval of application PDR2008-00004 Village of the Knoll, and what will be included in that is what we discussed tonight in the staff report and the information we got at the last hearing and in the revisions presented by the applicant tonight." The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote, the Council 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) 6. WORKSHOP I Downtown Code Amendments Senior Planner,Sean Farrelly,went over his PowerPoint in detail (See Exhibit C). QUESTIONS OF STAFF There were some general requests asking Farrelly to delve a bit further into some of the topics he'd brought up such as the sub-committee, the design review board, the MU-CBD use table, etc. 7. OTHER BUSINESS-None 8. ADJOURNMENT President Inman adjourned the meeting at 8:22 p.m. • • _ L"---.„ Doreen Laughlin,Planning Co s 'ssion Secretary AITEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 21,2009—Page 5 of 5 Exhibit A _ 7.... , o ~a .---.----r- I \-or siONANIE WOO . . •••. \:,. , WOO CROF :,..:, , ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY SECTION of_46t...../.-au.,.‘..\\:..\ , _ ''''‘-,‘s ,.•Z:'\. \ . „ - . " o.Olf'`.. .- ". ".'•, "nOr ow—moir illIbff — . :::\ s, -,• • .:___-:—_, i r 471 I tilg 1W it4i ' :-.-'- ' „'-::\ . ,•,•%. , . - a IN 0 -- At t", 11 0•=00 la= AO 10 o OF 0 .... 0 AY trp '-i•Z '''q•"4,'‘;',%,:lv*i4A ., It-14\:-::::,-:::.,,...L..\.;:/ ' Itrir/.• ". 80 fa 'It o**"...4-, ' V ,'',•L: •''',`... '10.4-s-'', ,4, , : IIP gy 46,44, 44},GI! A • GRADING KEYNOTES i .% 'Ver.,t.,.. ,.,„rift If , •..,.% ., .' 0 2 AI lo F n you .I. d ' ' '. . ' ' '. 40 , t ■ '' ; , •''''' 0.1 n WO. 0 3 n ou. 7 F-1 ion= . , '..t!,,":A: „ ':,.it --- • t-. em Am. ...t.fr .4,,,1,1 ' /:40j1,11 , ,, IS IT ou. t ' '1' +.110e<,r ‘'him:""' ' 1 i 2OFDSMO11. ROOM Odom fitiff,,, ,, . WI 0 MA NIS En=Fr Mt=S..= • ., • ' '1111114'41'`‘"-'1F. AI •Afiaf ;4 k 4etif `---:-41 '' / .. i ,„,ner,„. k.. 1....„..... 10n 'r'i' 1"11bilr, _A. 1 iNASItille on sum = OAO.,nonw,rx umgt.„,,- • ■ ■-Itt ..7, 77 FA.k....,..._ , fin , A • -- Foy •.., is irou. IS nol ...A,_441. 4-2'4 '' lik i • ...-- -~•°""k-''.1441 *v ' SECTION A—A ........tuff no.ow ono 10 APO . ---"Mellii,', i \c.1•4 0 GRAPHIC SCALE . BENCHMARK: t 0 OF 33 SO -WOO anoTO6 AK 10 fit OFT it a....MO 0 Ow OF ION • ., i, 1-11.1g-I .Cky Elmo=MO MO a al=IF•kli co=OF IMO= Mr,N.1111. ■ilr."Insor - '.. along-AS/5 Or fax =I=AWN pan pal.IKON Of it as MO ILSI OF OK= O.•WI* o„..._ =MOO=TM =OF Oa.a•F........a Ion= 0.•WM , _ FOR REVIEW ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION =ow CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN ..... oar .0„..f....._ z 2..... ZTec ENGINEERS Inc. _ ,.. REOSION WVA. S' ..P.' C.= - StroCtor= - SOFoCrog FOR: WCR COMPANY NM it KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY ,C1 mono ...,, I """' P.24"(50.315.1;.:,5-.712,5:RnAm'.nrgen....r. (r•73,..n TIGARD. OREGON )293372-14189 COWS 12/31/20,0 as LEGEND: :: ' © 2010© w mac a as O 0 • . .. - �` x,,, FAIT INFORMATION er • n T '( °° 12320 Ml DX IGNA a > � :�v ,m`0, , l /sf 7.5031,111,01501 �i ONE. tar 00300 d ' k:jT S NATURAL NESDARCES NONE 6 , ..<\1 ` i 1 10•Ee1 mm Mrs•rx MORN KM u•m•10) 1,9 rz NrA m,u REA A LANDSCAPE MOM . f, .p ] Q Ja[ (�n.) •�A r5 FT.) '''Ss:") . •a a�,t V'. .r r 1,4 w?o 1.13 oz 3316 511 1.60 R]B ar Ih �■ :r'� 1 1600 iiii ` ., � � �� .�. 1 1203 'e1'i iiii ./ f. 1 1 zaw m, tae, . • O z Er Ro.•.oEaunax 10 n n. 1 n.»a 0.n0 1,1.4 NOM , , ( WV r( ` M1r-wnr.mwu_ r a iaas uR - PAOPo56 CURB Aral fYC® .pk^ ] NEW 5 R.PUBLIC SOLYI...EYEflFBR011GOR'�' 0 � %5'` 'J O 1.5 ET.RAWER (sox Cf SeE) (32i OR SIiE) STREET CdXI=EM AT O :j... '.' R - '1. O 10 fi.AC NNE-OOM,INN 1j R tl :. • O O RUMEN UAL C AIOC NORM 15.SCPWNS,ORR➢YAK,vMxNG.>A Or SIIF '--1,/, y�'3,. . % f 1y ewAONrc(fa cONERCw SIDE). II I ( ' '>7 © '7I O Marl LEVEL°401C EMT ♦ , /• maom 00 w1mRr«SIDE). :-/ i ra t2 101• , i O NNE rwwlxc R i. .,f �q4� '>,� B0 FENCED OPEN SPACE RAY/REA y PARKING: `:-- • O UM r 16811°-,svra3/EOr(x w CAME.s ON ORNEWIrh• �, r NUNS r MU 12-3 OR,sPrOESMr(z w vNrOE. ON R ON oRxEntl f�C ID15 15-,SPACE(UNDER COVER) TRACT'A'-MUG PANNE 10 sPYSs t GRAPHIC SCALE 0 15 30 e0 '-":0" FOR REVIEW ONLY °" '°' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION En N,e.m m j°' rr• ,» '"� RN. wNNP, CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN bR e eB" ' ty,' ° ZTec ENGINEERS Inc szen° taaa Civil - Slrucluroi - Surveying 'nlu FOR: WCR COMPANY '-3D IA R'��,..�"'A Phone.y(503j 235-8795 3 PORTLAND,a(503)233-D7889 KNOLL DRIVE PROPERTY 4 emNu::1•eo:e•<.9rnR•r5.<IDm TIGARD, OREGON ,m C/0.1 EXPIRES 12/31/2010 'LOT lNil.O-ID-uR 100 CAL n11.0004id Uwe .. • (2:1 ! 40 W ' : t.,.• 1,'t..1111 6 . s 1,, ' , 1 ' •- /1 4 ' , r. ,-;' i . (id,•4 . ...,.... , . . c. ait‘ 4,.. LA .f,'. It( -,,,■. A.ir"''''.4 N . -,,,„. • * IV ri-• ' !I • --.., •...% •1 f _ \ I, 4,, ,. kNok, ' 1 'r • .., \ .. , ' . \ . i 4,4, • , „4 i ,., ,i,,„ ,., , N 1 A 1. t• itir '‘ . , 4. , : ■ ••r S .'i i: .,1 iit 40, i• \4* ' 47: It .4114-1 /:111 t —,,,NZ4k. ' k4 ‘,10 X• A\N\l„ _ N - / A4114*k .....,.. •• ... ,, 6-17 1 , -1, . P)-- -1... . -i.,r. ' ci, A• 't ,. '.,-„•=i AL . .rr, . ' .1 *_ - k.;.- .• ' ..t ... ,,t, )1 l'' ,4 , I I r" ,I,:',"i',..-7 6 1 ••••• ' '•'. IF r 1 • . 44 . I .4 .11: '' - \I '" • ' • ..11.-.- ' it it 110— V) . — ----if Pt 11 - ---x-vm,c,--- 4 c , , t., 1 11 ,,..... Atii. f, ' , -• ' ork;:‘, ...--4, ‘," : . de....,., , -, it • -• '','• 0 i...,. V ....--.... • us li Nib i,N, - 1,....,.. kik t 4/ ,,.s, ••' 're' :' 1, ' • i• ..• I -...4. ,,L • ) ( . k 8 Nir......... . °' . li ki I . ,, , ..... , !,,' Silk , , _ ,.for‘k i- ,,,.:,: ,. ,, 1 /I I , 1 ' I k' " •,M1 .1, .• - .. • pr' ' e-, • ,. .c .... . \"l ! 6.. ,• . r" ,. . ' AN • ,,. .,..1•,,, - - .-11 ,..,', • • s ..; 1..V.Jp. ... 4 * 4:-.,.,..‘; :Its‘..--/N'''' ; ." _ 'kt l'', ..., ,1' • :, ..,:f! * \ • " ' ' ' ' IN* - '\- A ' 1- .. . - 1'4 1, A •. „,,,,..,.. ... „..... g^ V .■ " , _ , i i 1 I '■ i t -,t1 . I A •'s .,-"; i 14 4 k' ••y-• •---'..;_Nti„, V 1 ' ' -1, •3„-- I ... 1. , , ‘h ''‘'' r.6' ' Isi • r •-11` ‘ ' .4.-- ' - - . , '.16. 061. „...,....6, ih, , p • -,!I ',,, 0,i , ''''''1•4-t -_., .:'t •.',.11 ..,_ •••e'i-;••11'..5'. . -,. •- •••••• I, - - , •kii- , * 1. ' •;• ' .. -s' ... * . ,:.. -., , 14: . 5, i - ..1„,,, . .....,„ ,„,,..„ .• ‘, , • 4, ' -4 ti, , 4 ,,' .1.1t-- 't • • ,r. ,F •••,it•' ,,, -111.‘I , , '.•_^ At , .4. 4 ,1.1 Do , ,.,,,,c,2 ro, - ,. , •, . , .K. •...''' '' , , I 'St .f. •.' _N- i;:•'...- -‘5I.-- ..:- ---,-.. • 4( s -. ., , ...• - , t , -. -. -.4.-.4./. ' tl, . . „„ t „t• , ,.s. ■ . : li; if- • , . ... i - 4„,,,, , , -4 1 k,1.' • . 'VP '5, \ 70'-.1t, 4 , ' _.. ... . . 14. ,,,, ..• . ■- 3. , . 6. .4• ,. .6 ...6. A 4,1 % .... 1-416 , ,...11 -1 , ,tr.1 _),,P1' --- ,r .. ,..,-.• ' ".- if \ t ,r • • - ••=t(writ'---r,. - .{,t,•,, .,, .1f '''-‘ ---1 .•-'' . V..#1.4-..,4 k-•iii :II 'A ) , , ?. ''qj 1 ' i:,7 I. S,,,,trt.it • .,•1.4- sew k4 . --- # .11.,:J. 1 , P . t. .T.,,, , -';-..-.,l'' 'if i '--•: ,,'•,. i IA •111- ;1.2.' "IV ,, •Tz..1. 7 •• -t..w. -,... 4 . --1. 'it71- ,-,_tte"''''''' • '• '.... ., ,.......,%; .4r. • )14.... - . , ,,, I i- i , 4, • IOW''''''41"141-4*- 111thtlti-- , 4'14,* t*1* c'rs - *' ' ' '' ' ., . .,..... ..44 .16 , . r t ii‘i'• • • •-•••,••-. 'N...^ ,' . • A 4-..,• 4 .$V ,,,,. ,), . •,. , , ,, ‘,, • ..- , - nnsirg-wii . f 1 . .• ,. - AA,' 41 .e _.• _...2,•,,,,4 • , , -, • , ,te .. lt.t. , •,,,,,,,.,. r _.2 ... ,,,,,,,....... . - . . ..1,- ... .... _ , -...., • 1...,. , , . ... , el.. '',i'''. . , . 1 t, , . '')'pi..,. ....• . -'0, ,t- .0;t V -.IN)4h0; ' N 4 V.,A,4_, , ■ .„ , • -... ... 1 -.--.......A...• " ■ dY i- ., I. 4"?'41, 1••:;111-4,'' 10 t '471...' 'Witt- - • -' i .., 4.*,,,,0. •.,.• • - .41. • - ' 14_4: .,,.;,,.- . ,,-' .1.. WPT61,J.', '0 i ,•• bi . , p i , , , ,,,,, N.el. . --* .t.-. c t -IA it,- (O. . , ) . ,;,•../11 in . — _ '.‘,...ketabk, ,s,,:I ti- , ' ,•AC:.., ,. 'AF,.."--7.W.,-,),.., . , , .. • . Vfili • ..--i AiNtri.44. i . 4.., c r ' ' ' ' ‘ r---.T...- , • -. -._.,4 - :•41 .7. ' 'r, ■,',; ' ,' ; 1 -- 144:1L r#II' - 1 • ' 4 — -, - ....*,fit - - • 4 ., , ,,, .ri . .$40,.••• , „ . -P.,..#,,,I • ,Ls.... • • ' ,,, . ,' 1 I 1 - . -vo• , ' .1,411. . ' +.1,. ,- -- .•.. r •-0 i',... :.. •-s , , . , . .. .. , "...i '',..._ 1- - te , ,. . .,,..,:: -,A.,.-.., ;or ..r- „, ...,,,i5`-y. .-,(-4•;;..: r-os-- • , ike, . , ,41$7”. r .1Tc.' V.:4r ,',A , . e•-:..-:-----.7.,, ., ,,, )7, - '" ,. . . , • , . 1 4: ••, IYAN- .1-4Cir-I...P. ,, .-•••I..IC,.•- , •,, 141,. • V . - 0-1)-' !Y 'it . .1 . ,..•NAS..\,‘ .40.11,y., . •••• •P' 411...----7-7.-- -." — n%' . • :, "-', ' '•24116 ,-.01.. - • ,.... -"' • les. .P. ••' ../' ,,,1 . 'sly. ■li% .,,,,,,'IPA, , la I . ,4,, ,• 'NI .r......i.iiilit r , ---.--It -_,... T. ' -.. ' ' ), • , 1 r•-s-• • r• ,...1.'1', ci -14, I, r!)'-'11-.' -, -..-_,,r - -, ., •t. -‘ .•.! I I' ', .. "i .' ..e..,. - ft . •t,-.71...' . 1 'l ......r, ' • kik. "irk ^ •'. ‘ , A . it . • •„. _ .4.-.• -•-•" '... • I tp, . ,, Ir ,040 ' . , 4 id, •, , . ....% 4 ,,,A1 ,,,rr.,•1......" ,,' - ' .41 . C "IV I * .'• .. A 'Alm'. %, 1.-1 s •,..,„Fill, -,-, ,,..,1 A,. 1 1, 1 ' , ' .• .4)':,,,,A,( '. •ic ..1 ..,...„,.. • A ' . ' ., , • .,... 7,.-. - ..71..• i., d . , 4• r -, ...... . . ',•' -n'' -"i.l. ' 1 ' n' • • . ha 1 eirp74-% : . 1 „.000,,,..Is ‘,„ ....,1; ..„ ' ./ ..1 c‘. • . , ,r \\‘ i ;,,/ 4. . ti _ ,I i 1.".. ,/' ,- i ' " ....4.4,.41)4.1-...- -, t ,,,,, ,,,.. •f., ... .._, .I \L:,?:k •1 I Jjjjj 11\-.-'' , i jirporAre A , f 4 , ,. ,, , , r, )-r ' /e. . r 0 , .......„.., . -,-,_ 414[14 . i-----. ..-- '' .4,,,,b;.- „if: "":„..,-;0.0.4,, , 4„:„..,114'114tr, '..;\''....,'-':,ilit'f/r4.:"1-1,11°:,',,-1.'-'44,,\41.--"..- \ ........" ... ..---_,-,:t.11".: 1:--fr:14.-1-1.:::::'...'''f'' • i/. , WIT._ , .1 ,,,,,.....4,....„ ‘ 1 , _ r, i r , . . 0, i_ ,_ y T : 1 I .0C- < . if-As \- 0 IiiTC .,... . j 5 .,} if k' , ..... ..•0' •�"r rte_ P j•• ` - .+!'. _�. , ley JJilrr: - �_ .• ` _ S. ,,�... fit,.. • ' !ill 1 ' • ' = ` 'Lliill\ -elor, '/ '*::4 .... ....'' • • inI r,,, • , i 41, . p. .. • . 40., , . ,. ,. , ' \ • 1 11 • ' '- , 74• °, � 14` w 1 1 t Of r ' r ., fr,..1 • _1/4, , k . 11■' .' , i•! ',1,' vV,' vivtit,0- ‘.. t " I, ,. . • ,r ' 0, .1T., ., . A I, . ,, ,,,i0 y ... . ,i, , . , , , ,••.• • AI • . tio• -4) it , i .21 a.i �. i . . y.,„, . , . . . , ,„,. ` �r 1111111110114114: T.; r , i \. r A . ', 1 1 iot ,. ..t 4.. . , .. -I It ." • , .., 1.'„ --04 ) It I,' •, ' I 1 4 . .. „... _ ..... , 4, ... i,..,4 e' 'jar sC.,I' � ` �' ..% lb , , . ‘, . - •■;. 0 ,. •Ir,. ,,..Age,i: -9,......... , — . !P..— _ * �: h t �1 ■ a. ) -I ltiw••• vii`Q-2;-. "" S' lit " - - 1114'6111*A . ' 1• k ' •.. zz-.- -t.' 1111417rir u �1'�r,r 4 1` v a P. l • , 'V. `' ,6 '', k ., I ; , I'1 4 - _ � ' çt\ ' `• . ..- , s 1r . _.,L7.....' 1 41-* Vs'. . 4 4:tel.s ' 4 '. • 1 'ism‘. ‘ .•.' V;iL / ` . ' . .'e,-' •d' .4-°,14'•T' _t' , 1 . N.,. `1'. 'r , r. ;___ ,- : • -L • a 4 1.� K k Y• • L 9 c \ � 1.- , .. N'. • 11 • • n� r� ti,1 , . , . ,. ,„",,;,i ' , .. . . • . i. . i • t . .i• i I ; , t . . „,..,........ , . Lt ., ` + ., 'i. .. ♦ *T SST S .....„44„,„ /` ; h , r }= , ..,#,,,:,4,, t r _ ..' -■• ''' -- -...*- •V IR% -* c , Tr f '''.‘, •-"Ii. VV.' •tt4 f,y,S .. .ta►+w� 1 'tt.i iw� ,4, ' f of+1 �' I ''s• t • fa:'_, ••fit ._`t. J• +r. w ...''�f•�_� :.�t - '?..�' w `, ` •-r-Cci P•"^•• _ . k.- • , CI ,I, ; ' . - ; ..1) . .:7,01 % 4—;,:'.* - 4!, . : . ‘ .Z; , ... , •• , T_ , •is" 4 , . I ' i. '. ---'s• -,,...-.• --r,ije„of. _t•171 7 4 . tea- !' .O! d# 1 , � r1 i ` f I k .y . �I,I . i ts t, k -../ '' ., .4zo, '•-4.... -.._ -- , 4.4k--. ,,,r ,...•- l, ,‘'.'--. ‘ .-,. 414 y x , .ir ,o,„ "74. .; 1 xi . 'K / '40,. .. „• \4 ,., •_rte t" 4. ' a1. ,,. y i •rte'' +�p alf_ f � }•� "�•'.`•x.. i. I EI I. R aY ' 4...,i,,vctt.k ,. iq J t.J Shy - 11°-a'814,4.1111/41S- -.. .. " '' - '''4 ".';110 \;'.•,-,84. . I 4-‘ 1 .. ,` , 1,�. X..1 , + + { 1 ''. 11 t fli I I A 1 i -._ Ilk, - . . _ . , a ' ��, `.•1 Itil ..44,.. .. . , I . t ‘ -� a ,kV-...-r.-,`,,, ,. � - ,.. 1 ,, , 76.., I ? . I .., AI ‘ ' .. Ak- , ..,. . 'S \ '.t.;,.0'I''' - ‹. \ ,..,-. ,vir - . -. l r, �� d ; a . , AI ■ 'g 6 it'lil w `■ Lam^.,, 4 i s � �r I J , a l' Vf� �; J p.J l ' I. ..■ IS. - i _ . . Ilikir' . -.'AVM.14 't \ n i' %I Ilk A ■,4 k., ..,.,..";., - • -- .- , • *I'..t\i. . .‘•..,- , .. ..,;', , - ---,, - , •t: "1, -,. - ir .,„4, , -,,,,,, . ..„3 s .- , •. ---4• „Jill!.A : •Aho 4 ,, •: ....oovii .1, .,,1,. 4/tr., J., 4,, • ,,,,,,w',.. A Jill • : : . .', .-.... Y ' v / k ... ,.........:,;4 - ', '1%,tr:',*- ••1/4 '1:11 sis-s• I ta ,, gi„,'iii\ 1.111140,of ',`.; --)il • '"..- .-.. - -.-:•, •• ' )1, . ' 94^ . • I \I\ A t 4 ° lir ti 1, ",i,-4V4e. ill .. ), • Ink *• r,, If, olotts% 44"•' e - ‘‘. . , 1,.. - ., .- tl■ r IV. 111:. kV P ill 4. , , 4 o.)11 . .v. 4% 1 1 era I 11 i 4); 1- • .. . -; - r: , e •/' 1, ''okt ' '4. .'t .s:. . ' i 41, ' • ( 0 If . 4 4 It, i! .- A. - . 4 , , A "Iv •, _ . • 0 ; ' . , 11/4 ' 'W , 40.• \ 1, ,1 4111.,..„ k, ' .,.1, . . . 4 .7 ....! . 4 - -''. ns) , r;,r,_, _tewk%.,i% v.• ).-N 1. -, . ._ rt ' . ' '-- ' tiii-k)iro.tlj*:° • • .2N. „...i e*,/ b■X - !-' s' ' :,t, . 7+ <'' '%'1,11'-* 8V • , • -, . . ,_ .44 , 1%. .0, , ''' ; :r i 7- 1 . 4, -H- r .;, 4 ....,...mi: •,w,,„, . ,le, , , •„ , .,... , , .... . .., i ) 1 iv •e,': /- :, * . .,4 I', . ,.,, ...a . , _ . 1• ,ii. !.. . , . ' •- ish....‘ if ,,, , . ' IN '4.'' .... ‘ Y ,.,i ., 1, .,, -: Jiy-ilt. ''''4 , 'Ir.71, 1•-• . 4 T \ ., 4 4.‘ ■••• 1t s,-t•4"-.,,:1.1,7t 311i•AA.,-.,t-::::.''4.:e4-'"'';I..:"-.4.,,;l4-,.,:'i,'-.._T.-._;.•„.-,r1 i%-'1.'I•l7.i”'''',''.. .--.,p,:",: `..., ••'1,11-' „. S d,,,.N ' k -` t- •..41 S_k I p .,,•,L- ,.-\• \ ,v -. - . 1- NI ' k':i4.a Pilf•''' -"t--\i , •1 —. 1 .,,,, ,i'•...-,, ';'‘...t...,•'-rlf- -) ■ ;;-;,, ...,-,He3 -4 , ■I'lLs I ill 1 "•N.... 'It s 1--14„.1/1,..,,,,,i 5 i'.• 1:`,„ "°''''.•-•'.--7‘"! '.' -.1' t I - ..11/ • ' t..A. ‘‘ 1 ki. , ",,,..1!1,0c'' . , • ''. ' ;- . . 6:X.411■.\ 7 t• -•Jit. s . . . - • P.'-or, 7.,-ri.,; -4..1. "Y•,;zi ,t. .4 A .1411 I • k ' 140.- • . ,14.- ,--• ...e -., : :, , -.---._ 1 r F '-` .47, 61- --?). g ,•,-- , ' isi , ,m.„. . A.rill' 1 - 4 -11"...4111 = -.'.,-' -.,..---"'2:7;r:'.i.-:',_!IT! i ,.....k . • .e.„,• _ , -tii\ .,A, ,,, %., ,. .e 4 i -. ' J..' .' , i - • f'14;,"7.* ,.I, V! ' ' . .—I 1,‘ _,. 4." \4 . ,t, ' .• ;el ,,,",.,,,L\J .. 1 c ' , iv' " ,, 1 1U ilek. .A . 1.- ' . Ah • • '4% 7'4 . '.'..''-'' 4.4 *b / , . ' •, "# , ''''i. .'zi• '.1-r...II"' .. I .' * i - ....... %."'-' •--' ". tt Alir alas 1 %'' 1 'kr. rt , -, '1-;i5 ',;it- .4,,'• A.- . ., kr.. „ .,‘ ...,,, Ni...,!...!-. .-, Li. -iv\ _ ..- ,.. .- 'k"'•. f, 4., 6:_,:',it I 1.7# 1. . •, Alt‘& % ‘ lal•1. * .- -i. • r -4. •—•Zk . '11.14. '4, "T 1' sr-- -.,11 ' '4-... ' - • 114"),N, ,"1 'at. -- • ' , • - ' ''-i• . . . ,... . .ilkIll'I,4**_.4, _.,....4_ . •-441. 4 si Pi rt A l 14'44 g ‘. i i-itp • : - pv-; t‘ '.. • .=-.CI ;140:_, . ,- i -- . .... • ' - A s ... -•Lli,-.L'i•' -. -I -..... .?-41. • 1'i-'"4.s.... •' . 4 ' ..„.•..,/,, ..„ . . ., .-., 1,_ '-'1"C. itpL, .10P J ' ' At. .° .10- ■ 4 ,1.'"'S tki 11" . N,..; ; '- -*; • *14k4 - r.'`' ,-; 4 '. • 1,.... • 1 - SI. grolikp . - A , l ,- . ., . . , A ' ',.::. , Y v..t.o. % 7 .••• • it„. ' .4.." i• ••le A-4 .... I. -..IP 1,A.,t. •• l4% . ' 4,1 •re.•• . 4 .0 ' i , ., .4l4._.; t• , '' 'Ir:I )Cv- .0 ' . , .4 t I , .. At •- - • • In:- . .,T . - • ,t'' '''''+..„,-'..".ger.' ' .' t it ■••■.'• °'- IL,40• . ' • ' a 'air - 40 I ' 1".••,i ,--1....!`- •..., • / XI.A.,. . - . . • • 'I. ‘II ‘,.1 A 6 i -. T'•—.4^1 - '..4.•.4".-44.,•„,,N',.,,4,o ....'.—..,i..s.h i,tI i rt.-c•',i.,.-4-..4.'t i••••i S'•.'1“,1.■',,,.:•:s,P';,,.,-,.,,4..,,,,.. ,..i,.....,f..-......,"......4,.-......,,.,_.l•„',‘:1s,:,i''i,-'t.'',-.'°_r 4,.:i.,,.,,,,,'*.o kc.-.,_?,•.',4 10,,7 4,_,r,,•/.5i..,.•.,.„-.,I,•l:,,.1.k_.,.'r.,i...,A,tr-t•,o..,.-,.-,.t.,.I.,,”,„y-.1.:.4..,.:.1.,.-_.7i;,,t&1i:'r-,-e,.-•i'.•r i.-.5.„. iq:‘,,4i,_.,'',••...1 t”',_:'0,•.,,•,,,4,.-,1-...•%'■.4,.,,NV.,•,.'.,.r e:.)•3'.'*.,-•.._,1t 1',. r ''■,..,'4..-i--...• ,-...0,. -1.1' , . . , . ',7„. ;1 Wt 1 r 4 o'f ) i k ... /11 - •,,, . -'4.51 ' '' . ';',, ...... 1 '.\Am.' 3 171:• ,r P „, .t"••‘ " .A1 '„#,2,14- I.. = • .-14- •vi - ! ''''..t..*•)-7*.tf"?' r;,..-^-'e .4 0' , '4...1 ‘. l'r .' :...'' ; '''' -4,-r■lei -,.1411,4t1 ' -', ...:4"Zs,. ' ''''' •'yt • ' I,••,"... • .4. -N,'4,,. r,, ,. r. - ., ,,• N. ,, ,. -*NK. • 1.1,...,,t-,,,.. - :).. 'fit; Z.■ i 1k. . ii % ,,,,.., -k;A:::il.ic..; ‘ . air.._4, ,. . . , -'.'!" 111:4.4 - -.''''.4%.i :S1191004,1114. ' ‘ • . '.1 '... .''' --.-. ' •■ ‘.. ',,.."-''....- e',„7f.-1." ' -''. ■' . y ,, • i-.‘f'Ill . .,-4' ' . ,_,„ A‘ t . . ,...-4-'• ' ,.. & ' . 1,., 4 • .-1.• • 4 ...I t 4. • 4 t 1',..i -, •' ,,,..• ' 41 , ,s..„t! ;4(14 3 '• •,•"•• 7 i,,' • •,r‘ :. 414 • ,O...,,,,, , , ,I•1 , ••t4NOW f ./., l'e :P..,, ' . , : .'' , 41..,, , 0:, :''4'3-''' '. - i''‘', •JA.-•, ' 'i •"" 4-o • ..1 -,, ■ r-. J.,',- • 4-••• ,.• oidx fkr1,- .-; . 4, ,4,h.,.. '... ,A, '--4'::, • NIIII. ... , I . . arT NA. - r-- 1 P"..1 , •• .s •.1.'IC ' ... ' , ' :.., te,',w ,. I / /..,.. , ,. ,, - , •,,,,..4 ,,,,,.. . , - • .-1:''. -.•—....,..41....;.„:„ ,7',,N,„i..•.:','"1,1,',"4,',4;li.Nt '‘'',11,., - '' ,—'.., ''• — . ' _ . s' 'i _.., 6,...„....,_ e , . ,..... . I.1 •.i 1'Llie. ' -k-e,114...*i,1'1,14:- i ' • •10---- 1 ,-,„,, -,. 1.' 6, -11. 4 • '-of' -.-„ '.:_-,—1' .- 4. ' , . .,,, . ., ,-'4•14 ,1-,,"4' . 1%. , , . ly ..! . ,,„/L I \I • , „ , ,, , I - 16 , . , ., ,,,orfr.' iii,i..,„, •1!,4 , ,1 ''fi :, . i -- -- 1 .4* .'?% i -# ' ' ' ' . ,. .. t ,,, — ---.1.1.,- '• / '- (. , .. „ • • 4 "... ', . , • I P)• • l •'. . -P- •..'' ,) . , '5 4 ' , ', 411,;,1-'1., N. 4, ,f',.., ., ' -,J1J1.;l'•`'. ' ., ,. 0 , -.Atript .,' ,fr_e,„*"•4„4,::'r -,'''''' ' ', / 1111 - ( , ., .._ ..,..„...,4, ,, ; ..,.._ t a •/ 4 4' 4'1110,1 , . -4111604., , , ':.4 i '''.! ■•4, 1. ,\ \ ' ' A.$ ''''` ) , IL ''• '.. ' •4''./1!. .' :.:'''' '1 . .s ' ' — 44.; .:7 .1i 4 il •5 IN • . / . .' . 2 rig • u. .4- • t ... . •P's:''' .. *ra 04 '- ' '.4. '••• A 5 175 • 'II' ..,'.. 1": i .• t' ''''--.'. tk 4y , ' .,..., ,i,-;. .,' .• ••,,, IP .,,,, . 0.. ,ii.‘.. . f ,... I', . .. ,,-. . „. 1,,,-1.4'1411q • .,-:., . All''' i' t t• .8 ,1• ' , If ■ . .. f /.., . ,I----4. i ,i- , , '',,,,,, . .4.14 jr..... • , :„, f.. .,... .-..it, ,,,,,,. V , A' 1 .. ,I - 4°111'--.47=-84-: . • e .". • i . /I —_—_,.. r"., . iviA.4,.,11, ,,,. ,),..s ..% _ ,441 `-• 1:; T " IF .ir . t• '44 P A. 4°1t IcI -If dr -.- ‘,..;/ ..5..... r 7 . , •4 r" / rc , 14 Y t 1 • / ' . v°,X. i4,iiii,.1 i., .• , 4 . 4 I 4 Ni ' ,--,41 r ii • -.■■.- •'4 , ■ , s X ..4 4i 1 4\ • -;,mh- , • -, le 4' ,..■•■ b I . ) Jr 4,. . .1/4 ,A11 .1116.es (■:.__<.-7•1'. ! {414, '' 1..:i 8 i't 11,,,tio I.' sttl'. Ar'...4 1.., - .- _ • ..it° "1 / `‘)18-•".‘1 , • / ' ) -• .1"* / F• 81 ,:J.' • I 4 ./,'I18', _ \• • z Ili me , .r. • )5‘' ‘) 1 1 • .P:" 48,t l;1 .: -1 ) %lie , 4.1 ■ t', . .. -. , ■ , 4,- / k •41,,,• .p. 'INAII ,i")141,....t g 4,,,,,, A(". •_ ,, - I'. • . . . it i . ' ..1.'," 8 ...b. ,:„I• \ o,I.F., A' • 4 P1/44 1 ■ ''''■1/4 , I t s1 rif 4 ■ 'i ' 1 , i 41 • * 0,* ,.... ...., • A •■" ' ti' i II / is . 4 v a imm,... . , 4# x ii 4; r'.. f {r" 1 i .u,,4 'l,' ■ } r.I: 1 ,'+ y.. r � . r 1 1 Or:',..% 44 • ' ;t'; I ' I.!>'I. 4... 7 1 r1 .. ' \ ( , ,,, , . i '.- ,'.1.1,, ••,, 1„:4h, r \\\ ..,,,, ,,,,,. , --.." ' t. di * • I .'.4.fr .- 1 • 1 - ) , TQ i J. it ill iit 1 1 — , tell ... . 1 I 0.„1.:,,- -4.:,' iii, 1 1 I/1.' t . , ( , r« ,,; ' 1, 4 f. ! a ■I I 1 01.1 • • / a1 ., t-i Exhibit C , i ,... 4 i 4c :::.,,.. ifi\ \\ ,.i 1::::` Downtown Land Use LI': =.y � I�' ,. and Design Standards ..-:-..„ :------ ,,-.....,----AA,../4- ► + ' - Code Amendments Planning Commission Nosilip 4 { .•~ 1- Workshop Presentation -W-,-. r: , � ` ` . �' y f;%' Sean Farrelly, Senior Planner �'? ,�; a. f ;,�, `� September 21, 2009 .6;,,. . ,�_ c-..i,e.:,V.-.?" 'el '-.,.„- -- +4( ,.. . } .\k .. \ II //';t' e 1"1 c �y - A Ac :. TIGARD Code Amendment History • Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) called for revising code for Downtown • Downtown Comprehensive Plan Chapter adopted by City Council in 2007 to implement the TDIP. • CCAC members expressed a desire for form- based code elements in the new code • Draft code developed by staff working with members of CCAC and Planning Commission Code Amendment History • Open Houses in July 2008 and July 2009 • TGM Code Assistance completed in May 2009 (consultants reviewed draft, tested code by creating example site plans, and created graphics. ) • CCAC reviewed, revised, and endorsed, July 2009 Proposal : • Comprehensive Plan Amendment • Zoning Map Amendment • Development Code Amendments : o New Zone and Design Standrads o New Chapter 18.610 Downtown Development and Design Standards o Amendments to 18.120 Definitions 18.390 Decision Making Procedures 18.520 Commercial Zoning Districts 18.745 Landscaping & Screening 18.765 Off Street Parking & Loading Requirements 18.780 Signs Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Existing Designations Existing Comp Plan tar- R_, `' R.- -- 1 , i Designation: ;*4 Central Business if t ti - ;2a— District 'y .3P . . . r /6/ R 5 Existing Zoning i iL „>'?') '4■ N P - - Classifications: •CBD and CBD (PD) : 4".\.. -A.: CBD �-P Mixed use zone allows pt 13(2 r r Tualatin Valley / cBO '� �;. Fire �* corn., res. up to 40 Rescue '{ - (POI A.. units/acre ; R_25 •C-G : Commercial only R-12 R-12 •C-P . '•�w%�� >. {, •R-12 (PD) • • # * •R-4.5 Tigard ` . --; Q r I senor � •MUR-1 (CPAH • •• (PM \,, project) ''%, A ��* \*/ Csty � 11_1_ ' I 1 1 ! Lary I_� \\\\• Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map --- R2 C_P Proposed Designations Comprehensive Plan 1.-0/ ; I. Designations: R_.5 _ R"; �` Mixed Use Central . ; i Business District iris - %' ..e, - . - - 3043)---6, 14 ,\. de ' --' replaces Central Business District. *4p Agild 1 _` � MU-CBD tilr IL"----' Zoning Classifications: Tualatin Valley i MU-CBD and MU-CBD l�i) Flre \ ,_ MU-CBD F;rte (PD) „ �P�) Rescue ,\ All properties within the Downtown Urban .•R- 0y . ` ' •�'. 4hj` R'1j Tigard 1 Renewal District, City I•0 .0 • Hall plus 7 additional �� • ,4•*+ ��, T a adjacent properties. . r\\,. + f �� N f eni r -- -- City Proposed Development Code Amendments • Incorporates form based code elements while fitting into existing Development Code • Allows denser, more urban development (50 units/acre and overlay of 80 units/acre) • Design standards are much more comprehensive than Tigard Triangle or Washington Square • Encourage high quality new development and renovation, while allowing existing non- conforming development to remain viable. MU -CBD Sub-areas . i : h Main St. — Center St. nw�aa ' i. • .\j:1, A\--- c • Burnham St- Fanno Creek 11 4r. �Y � ,:� . , y ,,,•• � , • Commercial-Scoffins -a . �` • 99W Hall o" . :. f�, •• '•',f•'`'•' f *` •°'' : Each district has different .'•�•. °� setbacks and height Iimits. // .r•4♦,•yb`,: :: ••: 40 0,. ,,N;*,:::• • iii• .: . ♦ O: ' x!00 MU-CBD . Creates more consistent . Proposed «public realm" within each MU-CSD /„. '�` Sub-Areas ---' >-<4.-...A- : ••< Liman Rersxai pstoC ' � sub—area . I I Scollns-Camnu.oa i ,Main-Center � _-FanoBumnam SOlcn Nea NON �, t _ TIGARO OREGON r :�{: m.s.rn... �� r !f , . i� 011„,gp--, . . Station Area Overlay ....„).;.,.... .........,. ......._„.. - i=„- t • Pro ertes within approx. .1/ , •#• �• •+ 750 feet of WES Commuter F4; Rail Station Transit Center: • f..fir. . - ## 444. 44`* 404 . + L i 80 units a n acre proposed ... \ � ,•;.. + � # i. . ' `, + �• . 1 to be permtted .> _%... \\ 7;•, ;40\ •4_ -4,, ;,� ,! ' • Encourage transit oriented ,. � �.i•+.,.,.,. ..,. . �lit\�.,;�. .�.• development ,-e� •, .:•'f 4 iii:'•, +,. +�l+i• by �++�►• +• + v ►,� ., ,►•,,,, ., , r .fly#• • * ., \••+. .� . MU - CBD Use Table • Uses permitted are very similar to existing CBD allows a wide variety of retail, office, and residential uses. • Motor Vehicle Serving Repair reclassified as a conditional use . • New uses of Custom Arts and Craft Works created to allow small scale art and craft production MU -CBD Use Table • The proposed code seeks to reduce the creation of additional non-conforming uses as they can create difficulty for businesses in financing, etc. • Land uses that are no longer permitted outright have been in most cases classified as "Restricted" • "Restricted" in this case means that if the use existed on a property before new code adoption it can continue as a conforming use . New uses of this kind elsewhere in the district could not be established . Applicability of New Standards • Development would be reviewed under new chapter rather than Site Development Review. • Certain projects exempted from review ( maintenance, painting), all others require review. • New buildings must meet all standards • Existing development : Only those Downtown Building and Site Design Standards applicable to the proposed expansion, modification or site improvements to the existing development shall be applicable. Non —Conforming Uses and Development • For uses that are already non-conforming (such as light industrial uses), provisions call out that existing development may continue (and, if destroyed, be re-established within one year. ) • This differs from the existing Development Code which in most cases requires a discontinued non- conforming use to be reestablished within six months . Review Procedures • Downtown Design Review — Track 1 — Type I administrative review for facade renovations and "minor modifications ." — Track 2 — Type II administrative review using clear and objective standards and graphics. New buildings and "major modifications." — Track 3 — Type III discretionary review. Decision by design review body. Next Workshop : October 5 • Design Standards • Other proposed amendments that differ significantly from existing Development Code ( minimum parking standards, required private and shared open space ) • Research any Planning Commissioners questions • Planning Commission public hearing : October 19 ("N-• C 0 4- ) w D CI • f L f V '. _• '.ice, r---- y a ---7- ,- r— II -LP t .-- ' '/ s - rr - ' - - 7tk olli'0, ,,,:ikvAlir ..04- ,,,,y.,,._ . .., , .„er .41,,..- ' 4*. ) ..s. )its, .--4•7›..-- ' -*::.4.--.... „- , , 11121 - �. v , ,.'��si .f ‘ , � ,fir r4 ]X71 L � ♦t. .4_ se .! '' #<*. € s � � t � d• p� r / s. b ,1,*;..,. ` 40. + �E�V1= F ,:..440044/, ,- i 11-11""11'''''''-re. � l _ s f C... -/ "N c,,,, 4 ,- .....