The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Packet - 04/02/1985 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions please contact City of Tigard Records Department. i r i ; � i T'IGARl7 PLANN'T.NC Ct7�1ZSSI:QN AP12IL 2, 1985 - 7.30 I�.M, � 1 FOWLER J'UNIqR HT.GN SCHOOI. ' 10865 SW Walnut ' Tx�ARQ, OR�GON 9727.3 1. Ca�.l to t7rder 2, Rol.l. Cal.l. 3, ApprG�ie minut�s fram pr�uiaws meeting 4. Planning Commissian Cammunicati.c,p 5. PUBL�C HEAftTNG 5.1 SU�pT.VIS�UN S a-�e� and V �.-8�'� MAW�aIl21"k:R Nf�q $t 6 (Gor�tinu�d From March 5, 1985 rn�eting� 5.2 7QNE CHptUGE. ZC 2--•8."a QARWT.SH �URTSS M1lPO �¢ 5 5.3 (:t�NIpREH�N�T10E PI,.AN AM�.NOM�AIT c';PA 4•--85 Z�iVE CP�A�I�E ZC �--85 MA�2�F: 4(RUEGE:I� ��'� � 7 5.4 COPIPRHMFNSTVE PI_AN AMl�IUDIW�I�T �I�A �•--85 ZQNE CHANGE ZC 3��-85 S & J B1J7LI�E.R� NPO # 7 5.4a CQMP12E4d�N�IVE NL.t��! AM1�NpMEN7 C9�A 1�-85 Zc�NE CHAN�E ZC 1--85 K�NflI�:T4�i & L.AVEI..I_F AL.L:CS4N NPO # 1 F,� PLf�NNEO p�VFI.QPM�NT p0 �.•-85 ZQNE CMAEUGE ZC 5�-85 MAT,IV STftk�ET' LANf� C;QFIPpRATIt�N NPO # 1 6. Qther t�usiness 7. Adjaurnment �, 11.A3P + - ..,__ . ._:... . .. _- - _ — � 1":CGARQ PI.ANI�IIUC; C�NiMI��STf�N RHGULAR NI��:'1"ING — ApR�4. 2, 1985 1. Pr�sident Moen c�.l.].ed tt�e m�eti.ng to urder at 7:34 F'�M. The ma.�tinq was held �t Fawlpr Junior High — L�T Raom �- 10865 SW W�1nut. 2. ROI,i... CAf..I..; PRE:SENI": Presi,dent Moen; Comrn9.ssa�n�r• Eiut],ar Fyre, V�1`1(�21"U1qUGI, Herc,�mann, G�mpbPl�., L_euer�i:t, ' Peter�c�n, and OwEns (ar•riu�d 7:45 P.M.} I �'1"AFF: Director af Cnmmur�a.�y Deualu�am�!rit Wil.l.a.am A. �� Mar�ah�n; Assaciate P].ann�r K�itM S. Li.d�n; SOCY��t�ry D�.arre M. 7'elderks. 3. APNRqVAL qF t��NU'1"�S � Cammi.ssa.can�r Vand�rwr�od roaued and �ammissi,r�r�er Can�pb�l.]. s��:ur�ded ta �paprove mi.nu�tes as suk�mitted. Mc�ti.an c:ar•ri�:d tananimausly, 4. CqMr1TSST0lV C;OMNIUN�:GAI"IUIV Uir�ctar o�F Cammur�ity �ev�lr�pment P1anaMan expla�.ned •that i.t i,s nscessary �o hr,lci a secat�d hearing ran Apr:il. 1b, 1985, because of the naamber c��f the Campr�h�nsiv� plan ��pl.ic�ti.c�ns which r��ec1 prncessing, t�].sa, a k�rc��:hure I printpd by tM� '1'a.gard �hamb�r c�f Commer�e was dis�ra.but�d. Fiu� ].ett�rs wsr�e distra.b�ited far Aganda itero 5.6, Main 5tre�t L�nd C�ar�p. 5. PUF�I_�G I��EAI2LI��S 5. 1 SUB[).T.VI:�;I:t'7N S 2.--�85 and VARIf�NC� V J.-�•85 MAWHIRI"�:!? lUf�C7 �' 6. R�r�u�st for pr�limi.nary plat apprc�ual. far� a six lQt sukx�ivi:sinn ar�d to all�w twa 7,125 square fnot lnts where a m9.nimum of 7,500 square feet is r�qaaired. Loca�tQd 968U �3W McDonald St. (WW�:::'�'M ZS1 �,'� lots 104 ar►d 7..OQ) . Associate Pl.ann�r Li.c�en r�vi,ewed the status uf the app),i.c�eti.an and mad� staff's recrymm�ndati�n �Far appraual wi�th �.1 conci iti.ans, ApPL�:CpN'1"'S pRE:S�NT'A"f':I:dN Vern L�ntx, 815q SW 39�h, Pur�l.a�nd, repr�ser�tang th� a��li.cant r�eques�:ec� tF�at Frank �urrie, Ca.ty Enginc.er, adc�ress the iss�GS re,�arciir�g access orita Mcl�oanl.d and the ne�d for the ap�rrava]. af the uariance, Fr•ank Curr•ie stated th�at i�F �Fre Vari�nce was c��nied i.t st�,11 wotald nai� decr�ase th� number c�f driy�ways onto McDona].d. He explaxned th� al.i.gr�m�nt ofi �he existing sidewalk ar�c� the sp�ci.al circwra�st�nces invalued with �hat alignm�n�, He request�d that an a�ld9.ti�nal cond�,ti�n be adc�ed which would release �he �pp'licar�t from any 1ega1 r•ami�Ficatiai�s r��,a�et� ta the nc�gut:ia�a,ons for cond�mnatiun of rigMt-•af—way. He alsa exp].ained th� c�if�Fe�ence betwr�en public �aseaments and raw deciicatians. . PLANNTNG GOMMT:tiST.UN MTNUT'kS April 2. 1985 Page 1 V�rn I_eril:z curiCinuec� thia�: the applxcatia67 is ir� rr,nfor�manc� wii:l� L1�e ��rde and �ha� �M�e Vari.�nce i.s mi.ni,m�l �nd rir,t ou�: of l.i.ne, Reques�ed �he Rl�nning Gnn3mi.ssion grar�t ��rproval.. Dan Si.�.v�y, 62A0 5W �lWrlingl�am, Portland, ra�,resenti.rrg �:h�t a�p).i.can�t, s�appc�rted sta�ff' s recrymm��ciation s1:a�t;�.ng �ti��at i;he sukx�a.visi.un m�e�s the cra.teri.a of th� �ada and tFr�t thi.s i.s the highest arrd b�st use •Fr�r •�t�e �r�pas�d si.x.e. PU�L�C T�'STTMONY -- Na ane a�p�ared to sp�ak PUBI_:�C HEt�i't:LNG t,i�OSk.D i u Consensus of the C;ammissa.c,n was ta suppc�rt the prapasal., i � Cr•ammissianer Owens mouec� and Ccandmissi.c�ner R�ter�son s�crinc�ed to apprav�d � 2.-•e�a wnd V �.-...8�a s�ik�ject •ta the cr�r�dita,ons a.n the s•t�ff r�por•t. �1oc�ifyinc� �r,ndi�ti.r,,�� nurnk��r thrr� by changir�g m�jar to minar. Modi.fying ��g� th�r�e �� Mr� st�ff r�pc,rt to el.i.mi.na�� item b. Pl.an (�olicy 3.1.x. Als�, ac�d CC119d].'�I.Gi'1S numt�er X2. Applic�n� gran� r��].�ase fram �ny conda.ti.c�ns r�el.ated ta pr��va.ouis n�guta.�ti,r�ns for c�i�ic��mnata.r�n raf ri.ght.-.�o1F.�.�ay a.r�i�ia��c� by the �i'�y, Nlo��.an carr�.�ci k�y majori.�y vat�, pr�sid�nt Mo�n vr��i�7g nr�, Commi.s�ir,n�r l3utl.er �bstaining. 5,2. ZOIUE. CHANGE ZC 7__..8�'� I:pRT.S:; IVPO # 5 R�c��t ��or� 1;1�e ;zarrc� d��a.ylr�atican ar� a 3.7 ac�r� parc�l Fram R•-7 (RPgid$nti.�l 7 wnit3/�r,re� ta R�-..�.7„ (R�si.c��ntia]., 17. uni.ts/a�re} . La�cat:�d r,i� �LM� �ast sidQ Qf Hall 83.u�i. , 300 f�Gat s�awth af Rr�ss S�reet �wCTWI 151 12r8, ].�,ts 1].Op anci 9.20(3). f�ssnr.ia�e Plar�r�er I..iden r��viewed t;1ne r�equE�st �Fr�r a ;cr,,rie ch�xr�ye �r�r� made staf�'s recommendatirar� far apprGUal. with ane condi.tian, AI�PI._ICANT'S PRH SH'I�T'A'T;C�RI Ryan, 0'E�rien, re�resenti.ng the appl�cant r�ui.ew�d why �:he applic�nt ' shauld be a]:lowed to rezUne his prryp�r•�y fr�m R�-7 to R�-12. ! .:� PUBLIC TE;S1"IM011�Y ..., N�a orie ap�rearec� t� sp�ak. j PI.)F�I..�C MFARING CI:�Q.�'akQ `; o Cammissi.nrrer L_euErett, Campta�l7.. F'yre, VandEr�wac,d, petarsan, and Mc�En nppo��d the �he x,r,r�P change. C�mma.ssian�r eerc,�mann Favor�d �he � propusal, Co�am3.ssa.aner Ow�ns had mi.xed feeli.ng and Cammi.ssi.on�r 9�utl.er had no cctimment. PL.ANNING C()NIMI�STp1U M�IVU'1"ES April ?., 1985 Page 7 r `, ; � � �§� s° ---= �� Cutrimyssioner I..�uer��Lt m�v�ci �nd Cr��t�m:�ssianer Vwnderwraod �ec�rided ta deny 7.0 7.-•8�'a ba�ed on the fi.r7c��.r�g, th�� 7G�.7.Gy 8.2,.2. and 7,�..2, were rtot s�tisf�.�d, 1"h�� the R�•-�.7., xona.r�g w�s a.napprcapriate to F�av� in �the middle a�F a R.,.7 zrane �rrd �hat tFi� �ceess ta a ma,jar arterial wr�u].d cr�a�te � tr•a�Ffa.c �r�ablem. Mc�tian c;ar�r.iec� by maj�yr�i'ty vai:�c� CommaasionPr 8ergmann and 13utler voted no. 5.� CQMPRFNEN��VE PL.AN AP1FIVpMEN'T �I�A 4--85 7.01�� HAl�ta� ZG 4..85 KRU�GER Request to mave the �ires�nt area desi.gna�:ed C-•N (Ce,m►nerca.al. Neiyhb�rho�d) frc�m the r�ar••thuiestc�r�n cur•ner s�•F thc� prapased 1:�"a�h Ave,/Murray Raad �xter�siran tra th� sautMeast corner of the future Mwrr•ay Rraad/Schal.ls F�rry Rr,�d ir��rsectian. (W�.;"f'M '1.51 3�C, lnt 1C100} . ASSCIGI�'�� Planner l.i.d�i~� reviewer� the �raposal anc� st�ff re�ort ancl mac�e s�afi`f's recr�mmenc�atir,,n �for ��aprr�ual wi.th rane cai�dita.�n. APi�LTCEIIVT`S Pt?ESE:IVT'A'T'�:�N a Russ Kru�qc�r, 35�.5 �W E3arb►ar E3l.��d. Suit� Y-..1. Por�:l.�nd, 97'�Qi., disp].ay�c� �ari aer•a,al. �7a�p �U shr�w h�w they were �rapasinc� �o mouc� the C'.,ommerc ia]. Ne i.ghbr�rh�ad znr�e. PU81,_:C� 'T'H:i'�"TMQflIY o Richard f�c�berr�, Chai.r��r�on NF�p � 7. suppa�^ted tMe prc,pasec� cha��a�e, acicia.nc� tP��t they fr�lt i.n �Lh� fe�tur� there woul.ci b� a n��d �Far incre�sed commerci�l. zan�.ng i,n •that are�. o JQhn Mur•r-is, 11900 SW Mnr�i.ng Ni].1, repreK�n�ing the Mr�r�nii�c� Hi.11 Nomps Qwner Assar,i.ata.an, f�uarec� n�r,ui.r�g the cc.,mmer�ial xon� as far� away Fram the Mar�ning H�.11 Subdivisicao�s as they c�uXd. a Ri.chard OlandPr, R�, 1 8r,x 3b�a, g��varton, had q�aestians regardi.nc� �he drairiag� �nd haw :it w�tal,d affec�t his praper��y. Discussiun fa].lawed bE�ween the appli,r,ant and Mr. Olar�d�r. ca Dena,se Hawks, R�t. 1 B�,x 385, was cancern�d ��ha�t the,y werc� prr,,posi:ng ta extQnd tME road t�rraugh h�r• pro�erfi:y. Presi.dent Maen i,n�Formed hi�r �h�t she wauld hau� ta be c�,r�tacl:�c� and �he wotald have �tca c�iue h�r appre�val be�Fure �hat could happen. Pla�i,.�C I�FAOtTN� �LO�FO a Cansensus of the Camm9.ssian w�s tu support the �p��.ica$ion. �� ammxssi.Uner C�m�bell mr�vr�d ar•�d l:�mmissi�r�er �yre �ecorrded ta fc�rward CNA A-�85 and 7..0 4-•85 to Ci.ty Caunci.�. wa.th a reca�mmendatiol7 for a�pproval subjec�t to �he crrr•it�it�.un ir� •the staf�F repart. Mr�tion ca�^ri�d unanimously. PI_ANPI�CNG CQNINIISS;[QN MINU'1'ES Apri 1 ?, 1985 Page � � -- �..:. ..�u:. .. �._. RECFSS 9:00 �.M. 12��Q�V�NE 9: 15 P.M. 5,4 COMPRE.FIENSIVE' PLRN ANO�NpMEN'1" GNA 3--85 ZOIUE. C;hIAN�GF: IC; 3-•8�'� 8 & J' 8t1TI_,IJ�:RS NPO # 7 Request fi'c�r a Cumprehensi.ue P],ar� Aniendnieri� �rrd 7..an� Change �Frr,m C—I� (�,c3n�m�r�ci,a1 Profession�a�.) t� C.�..G (Camm�r�ial C;eneral) �F�r a 7.9 �cre site. Located soutP7 side c�f Schol.l.s �'es^ry Road, i.mmecia�t�l.y w�gt r�f Greenway Town Ceriter (Wi:;TM 1�;1 �41�C lat 4t30) . ', Assor.i.�t� i�l�rrner t_i.clen r�ui.ewec� tPie staff repar•E: �r�d made st�tf�'s rPC�mmcanciati.on f��r ��prraual. wi�th onc� cc�nditian. I�ds�cussi�n fr�llr�wQd regardi.ng tM� �raf�Fic: si.gnal. at I�c,rtF� p�kat�/Sor�rei7tc, �nd SCF1G�.�.S Ferry f��c�. APpI..:I:CANT'S PR�SE::NTfl�"1:t�N a W�7. Hlewit:t, re�r�s�i°i�ing th� ��y�i].9,cant, r�;ui�wed the hyi.s�r.�ry Uf •tFi� Greenway Tawne t�eri�Eer. N� px�al,ai.neci hraw th�y would li.ke �ra nxpand the cer�t�r as pFi�x� �T.:C; witl�i a ma.x�d us� r,f retai.l. �nd raffice us�s �nd hr,w i�t was n�ecl�c� ��:ra meet th� n��c�s �a�� F�,N r,eic�hbr�rhr�r,d. t•le request�d that tl~iei.r tra�Ffic Er��qa,n��r, Tom I_�ar��st�r, adc�re>s the tr•affic cr,�nc�r�rrs , 0 1"am L_ancaster, exp].aa.n�d I�ic� had drai7� �n i.nde�ender�it traffic s��idy aind r�eua�wed ��he impac,;�� t:l•,� prr.,pc,s�c� cFi�nge wouJ.c� h7au�± an �the �rea, Me fel.t uii.th� ti�r�� di.tiar� a�F •�h» traffic si.gnal at SCI"IG�.�.S f"erry anci Sar�r�nto Ro�c� wr.,Gild mitigat� ar�y ].1'1C1"P..�138 '�1^d'�'F1S' Cb1lAqP.C) k�y this deuel.n�,m�nt. PIJFIf..:�� '�"F S'�':�M(7NY a Ri.chard Hoberg, NNq ,� I' ChairK��rsar�, �xplaa.r�Ed that tFi� IVi��t7 h�a reu9.�wed �this prajPCt. Origir�al.ly �th� ur.��a w�s q,--3 �agairrst the change, hraweuer, �ft�r mr,r� revi�w the uot� had <;h�nged tra b�.1 agai.rix�t �:Me change. They �F�a2t �his WfjU�.C) CI"f?nt'�� s�tri�a c�euPl�r�pm�r�t alang Scha1].s Ferry Road. "f'he NF>0 would ].ike tr� sec tF�i� prr,�a�r��:y r`4?Ciliil:ll'1 �an�;d CP as •th�y ha�i �ier.ic��c� up�ar� duririg i:Me t�rrmpreh�ensive Pl.an �racess, �i �ab J'ohr�sun, S t� J' kiui.].c��rs, partners ir� the d�uca.r�prr�s of Meadc7w Cr�ek A��rtm�r�ts, �xp].ained �thi�� •l:hPy had sel.pctec� �t:hea.r s:it� berause uf thE i.mmeda.��t� �ccess tra retai.]. �K>�ce. Hi.gh quali.t;y apartments and hiyh c�ensa.�:y put a high ci�manc� ui7 r•��ail. sa,tc�s anc� he s�ap�pur�tr�d � makin� addi.ti.r�n�]. retaS.]. �r�perty auaa.].abl.�. 'i � ,T4F'li'1 Murris, Mar�nir�g Ha],1 Ass4c�.aY.i.ran, suqpur•�h;ed �Ms NPc� recammenc�a�i.on, Accar�ding ta th�� C;c,rnpr�hensiue pl�r�, mare cummerca.�]. prc�perty was i7c�� n�ed�d. We felt the ehange u►auld c��a�� a s�trip zan�. ;:`� ;>� F�LANNIIVG CUNIMTSSIUN MxNUT'E�� April. 2, 1985 Page 4 ; i � � =:� . .., t,, _._.._.__ _ FtIw13U'1°TA� u M�1 Hew�.tt, di.stributed phutc�s r�f th� �r�a, � di.�gram of tFie wh�t 'the prapr�sed ex�ansian would l��k like, �xnci an aerial photagraphs depi.c��inc� the Cammerc�.a]. prap�rti.+�s a].ang SchoJ.l,s F'er�ry, frnm Fiwy. �17 to SW Narth Dakata. WU81_.IC NEAf2J[NC CI�.OSE.0 a Discussi.00� frr].l.aw�d r�garc�ir�g surrr�unc�3.ng zr,,nir�g, �ra�Ffic �Fl.ow, ar7d lac��t•ional cr•i.�teri.al (CG" 8 1 A) . a Cr�mmi.ssianers L�ver�•tt, Campk�el�., Berqmanri, and Petersan fauar�d th� praposal. �c�mmissiarrers Fyre, Var�c�erwr,,cad, anc� Mr�En h�td mix�d feeli.r�gs. GommS.ssa.an�r eut�.�r� upposed, he fplt a.t viplated thie lucational criteria. Crrmm�.ssion 4w�ns r�viewc�d �i:h� hi.s•tc�r�y rs�F the Np� ar��d th�i.r Cpl'1GQY'1'I5 ��: the time of th� ariyinal IVPd 7 p1an, � C�rmn�issiarrer Qp►^c�mar�n mrauc�c� ta a�pr�au� and Cramr�issiur��r I..�u�re�t s�cand�d ta farward a rNCammei��i�•ta.�rn fc�r ap�i^r�ua1 to Ci.ty Cawnci.l.. A13n, '�hey directec� s•Caff ��a �t�ke ir�tu Cr�198i.i��Y'al'�].41'1 �r�eviaus �se r�c�uir~em�nts wl�ien tha Gr+�enw�y Tow�e ��nt�r was origi.nally CUCiS'�i"I.IC'�t3(�. iWafiion �aassr�d k�y n�ajr,ri�ty 'vo�e, Cummi�s�.c,r+ers 8utler, Fyr�e, and Owens va�i.ng r�a. 5.5 CqMPF2�:;4�lE:IVSTV�: PL.AN AMEIVC)NiENT' CF�A 1_...85 and "1:QNE: CHANC� ].w-SFa AG..L.IS01� Requ�st ��a a,me�rd �:Mre P1an d�sigr�a�ion fi'r�m �Lhe Cc�ntraT �usiness qistrict tu P1�dium High pen�ity R�sa.denta.al and sGibsec��ently c��anr�i.nq �hc� zc,ne desa.�n�t:ian �Frr.�m d,;F�D (C,�ntr�3. f�usa.nwss Dis�tri�;�) trr R-25 (Resi.denti�l, 2.�'� uni.�s/acr�) �'or � 2 �cre parca..].. Assa�:i�te P1ar�n�r t..id�n r�ai.ewed �h� prn��s�l aryd m�cie staff's re�ummenda.ti,ari fnr a�proua].. t�NPL.,:CCAMT'S Pi2F��ENTA'1°�ON o Kenrreth Allisory, 6445 NE: Ur�ir�n A�e. , Par�t�.and, expl�i.r��c� th�t he had ual.it a ar��m�rrts aind d•a.c� nr��t w�rrt �th� u�lit tr,, br� de��roy�d niee � y � y P by having a carnmerea.al. structure bui.l�: up ta th� �rc�perty ].i.n�. We f�lt hi� property haci rarigxreally b��n zc,rred resid�r�t�.al �nd M� wauld lika •tn hav� a�t rezc�ned tu r�sid�i7ti.a� ta prc,tect tFie li.uabi.li.�y r�f the ��ar•��ments. PUHL.TG TESl"�CMONY o Carol.yn Eadan, NF�4 �` �. Repr�sentatiue, T'hey da.d nr,t hato� a recr�mnrenda�ian as �;h�y h�d nat r�view�d the praject. PL.ANNING COMMT�$T.QN MTNU"I`�:S April. 2, 1955 Page 5 '1' �'�I � �_ . o Jr�e V�n I_om, Arch:i��ect, 34 IVW ist, I�c,r�tl.arrd, sh:�i:ed �fi;h�t �thp appli,c�r�ts K>ri.m�r� CGI"1G�Y'i'1 was bufferin+�, Prasently thei.r� is noth'xng in •Gh� CGC�e tr� pra��c� •�his Y'P.SICI�YI�Io"L�. �ase �Frram �he r�,mm�rci,al use, He w�s alsu canc�rn wa.th� th�� riui.se �r�bl�ms whi.ch wraul.d ba created with comm�rcial ci�vel��mc�nt. a 3B C�i.sh�a�, yA"�0�'a SW 6arbur, Sui.t� 309, 4rJ�qSt�CI the zr�n� char�g� fram 4�Hf� �to resxc��n�ial. Me st�t�c� �that tMe prca�aer•ties wc�re ru�� very w�.de and n�edF�cl �he �k�i.l,i.ty to builc� wi.�h �.Q �Feet af tMre �rc�perty �.i.ne. l-1e r�eu3.�wH�c� the hi.sto�^y r�f Nir. A�.1,is�n sii:�a �nd addeci thi�fi: i:hey wos.ald be �raui.di.ng adequ�,te bu�Fferirrg through the P� requi.remer�t, _ RF:t�U"r"TAL. ' a Mr. All.a.san s��ted that th� Cade was degi.g�7�d ta pr�atect peo�].e �arsd ' fe�.t his �r�r�ants shauld be pr�at�c:t:e�d wYth a �0 �Ft, xetback. , whi.ch is ' what wuulc� be requ9.r�d b�tween a cammerci�a. and rasidenti.a�l x.one. ' pUG�1..:�C H�AR�CIV.�.� l�l_0'.iFD ' o piscussi.an fall.awed wi.tl�y staff on how the si.te had become zori�d CB� � t��.�mmissioner F re mr,ver,� �rid Crainmissic�ner Vanc�er�ood secunc��d tr� � �orw�rd C�A y...�8"a and 7..1'.; ],--85 t;a City Cc�unci.l wa�:h recomrn�nd��i.c�n for ' a�proval. Mratic�n c�rraed k�y m�js,rity vrste. �airrmiss�.arier I..eu�r�•�t, �' Campbel.l., �n�l Ei�rgma�~�n vated na, ' , , �� fi.G PLAIV9UFD i��'11�I..�1P�lFiU'a P� y,�-8�S & ZONF CNANGE �'� 5-85 MA:�N S'1'R�kT I..AI�� i Requ+�st far Cr,n�ept�a�l pl.an a�pravai far � 2:7_�.,000 squ�r�� foUt r�tail. , c�rit�r on a �A.3 acr•e �rop�r�fiy anc� �fUr a Z�r�e Change fr�om R--�.2 (Pq) Resa.d�nti�]., �.? �arri��s/acr�) ta Ck�O (C�ntral. k�usiness Di.strict) for a 3,19 a�re parcpl un tMe sau�th��t si.d� of Ash Strer�t. Assacaate Pl�.nner� L.i,den reviewed the prr�j�ct and mad� sta•Ff's I recrammendatic�rs for Conce�atual apprpval of thP Plann�d Develc�pment and denial af the Zarre Ghange. APPL.:LCANT'S NI�F�FlVTA'�'T(7N o TH Bi.sh�ap, iQ505 5W 8arbur, Sui.te 9Q3, revi.ewec� the ha.s�ory of the prajQCt. id� expressed his ne*.c�c� �ta hav� the Zune Ghang� ta a].].raw employee parki:nc� as wel.l. as parki.ng far th� F'anno Cre�k P�rk. I-i� also �xplained why he n�r.�d GGI'1G��tt.is�li�. appr�aval tar�ic�ht, afi;h�rw�.�e there waul.d be r�a prajNCt. o �ri.gsby Chri,str��Mer, a�F Hrun, (W�reland, Ghristapher Archa.tects, r�eviewPd the la�yaut ��f the �rajeet �nd the desigr� Fcaatur�s �sr�c� tU pratec� tt�e abut•ti.ng property c,wner�. c� JH 8ishop cr,rr�:�nued 't:hat �k:hey w�aul.d be �pplying �Far a S�nsita.ue 1..and� Permi.�. Alsa, tMe pr�ije�:t has mare land, h�,weuer, the rati�a r��F land ta parking i.s decr�as�d has w�ll. as r•at�io nf retai.l spac� ta land has de sc:r�ased. PLANN�NG l':OMNIISS;GUN M:CNUTES Apri1 2, 19�5 Aage 6 a pau� L_arsr�n, McK�n-r,.i,��, Sa9.ta Enga.n��rir�ig, w�s auai.l.�k�].P tn �nswer, enginec�ring questaans. o Keui.n L.angfard, CpStCO, stated th�t th�e C;os�ca wGUl.c� be hi.rinc� ].60 employees, !S5 7� ful.l �tim�a and A!� 96 par�t timQ. A1so �hey wcru].d anly be m�ki.ng d�].i.veri�s be�w��n th�e h�aurs uf 7:pp A�i ai7d ].:QO RM anl.y Monc�ay thr��agh Friday. Comniissi.on�r Qwc�ns left �.2:pQ mi.dn9.gr�t PUBI...:�C '1`F.S"f:�MUNY a Carulyn Ead�,r�, reNresEnting NF�O # 1, explained •�Piat •the NF>0 onl.y re��i�wpd �hi.s praj�ct las•t Fric�ay night. Th�y hac� vot�d 4 to 0 wa.th ane atastentiun agaa.nst the x..ane cMange anci uoted 2 ta 2 wi.th ane abs�:er�tior� Fur carycE�ptiona�. approval. 'i'Mey r�?�quesf:ed •tha�: a cnnditi.an be placed 9.n t;h� staf�F re�nrt that tP�e 6 faot f�nce betw�en �t1ne r�esidenti.al ar�c� cr,mmerci.al �r•�a be in place prir�r• to corrstructa.on, Th�a.r o�h�r cancerns were �Far th� barri�r orr Ash stree�t beir�g r�maved, they fe].�t �the Camm�rcial ar��a should �e k�pt i5alated, and th�t �he stre�ts sh�uu],d M�ve sa.dew�l.ks and bikepath. � Qiscussion follnwed amr.,i-�g Gammission as �:o whether• the hc�arinc,� shc�uld be se� aver. , o Presi.dent Mo�n moued ai�d Gr�mmission�r 4wens 5GCOYICI�C) to se� tt�� mee�ii-►g over tc, a c�at� cer�4:ain. Mp1:a.on fai.].pd, i`rammis�i.�r�er ��ver�tt� Campball, VanderwQad, Fyre, �nd Butl.�r vo�t9.ng r�a. a Di�cussian fallowed r�g�r�ding �hp �on� change. c, Assaciate Pl.anner Liden r�vi.�:w�cl cr�ncerns �From Grrmmiss3.a�er 8ut7,er regarciing Park i�s�wes, F�le r�vi�wad let�ter frrair� Mr 6 Mr�s. Mct3ath, Mrs, & Mr•s. S�ub, Mr. & Nlrs. J'ohinspn, and Bruce Cl.�rk rrf �Me �.canr,ma.� Development Commitfiee, a Jeanrie Caswell., Ti�ard Ghamber of Gommerce, suppurted the �roposal Tar thr�e reasans. 1. Goa�. idenl:i.�Fa.�ci by Chamber and Ee�anUmic Deuelopment is ta establi.sh a h��a�r�7.and �For the cammwrri.ty; 2. rostca wauld provic�e cr�nsum�rs wi.th cast sauinns; and 3. Wauld proui.de �m�].ayment, 'f'hey a].so su�por��d the �one changc� k�ecause it w�uld proui.cie �aarking •Fa� thQ �ar�k and would gius th� cx��y mo�^p p�rk 1and, a Gloria J'ohrrsun, 930q Nii].1 atre�t, appused the xone chang�. She stated th�y had fr��i<,�N�t Mrard i:o y�� thp �rop�r��ty �anQd R��-�,2 ai•id wartited it mai.ntai.ned. She was c�ancernec� �bout the project's traffic �Flaw, air �uality, and rrnisp fac�or. o Emmet Whit�ksr, x3251� SW BurnF�am Ct. , stated th�t ths Cc�stco has limited membersM�ip:, which wbul.d na�t prravi.de shapping f�r �11 resi.dents. Al.so, tMe averag� ac�� of employc�� o�F �ustco are Gd1J.Q�� age ar yo►�nger. Ne wa's alsu cr�ncerneci abau� the rtois� and traffic ci.rcul.atian. P�ANN:�NG I.OMMISSZC7N MTIVUT'�S April 2, 1985 page 7 f � I o J', L.. Gehrong, 9.32.1�'i SW Asht ari,ve, has besn a r�si.dent �Fur 19 y�ars ai�d wan•t�d to k�e sure th�re WOIAa,t� be �ciequatp bu�Ffer�nc� b�tween •the single fam3.ly and can�mercial xr�ne. Ne did nat war�t ta see Ashr Au�. extendpd. Ftl:8U'1°1"AI_ a J'k�' Eia.sh�� reu�.ew�d the dESi.gn af th� pra�ect and how they u�er� pratecting �ti�e sir�gle fiamil.y neighb�rhu�d wi�h buffering. Also tMey wauld be inst�l.'ling sidewal.ks on Ash. The Ash Ave, wauld nut Fae r�moved, a�L•Mer tt�ing� had ta accur� before �F►a�t Gauld Mappen. Ne refe�r�nc� the UEQ repart and �dded that �the laading wnul.d take �l.ace �t l�ast 50 or more f�e� fr�c�m the single family r�exidenti�al. PU�i�.7CC HEARTNG Cl_QSE:C) o Gnmmissi.on�r� Leuerett, Campbel7.. Fyr�.F, Vanderwr�od, �ergmariri, and Peterson, �Pavr�red cr,ncep�;ual appr�ual aric� apprnval of the rnrie charrge with a deed restriction �hat it coulc� onJ.y be develnped as parkio-ig. o Crammis�ioner 8u�ler oppased �the zan� change, and favar�c� �i�� Planned Deu�].apm�r�t, o Cammi.ssi.anar Moen appased �t7e (�lanned q�v�l�prn�nt as ].�cki.ng vi.si.an. H� �Favar�d ��l�re preuiows appro�al, He �F�1� they wF�re rigFrt back tu tt�� big bax and tP7e sea c�� cemen�t cancept. � Cryrnmi3�xaner Vai7derwooc� mou�c� and Commi.ssa.c�rier I_euar��t secanc�ed to a�pravc�d GpY1r��y�Ua��. a�prau�l af Pp 1--85, addi.ng the GQI'1CI].'�7.Ui"1 at; tM� the ixsu�s af grac�ing shall. lae ac�dressed wi�Y:h �tM� Park 6oard and locaf:ior� a•F the pedes�rian bi.ke ��th wr�uld bp coardin�ted. Mati.an carried by +najority vcrte, Cnmmissianers �'yre and Mraen vati.►�g nrs. * Cammissian�r Campbe�.1. maved and Commi.ssianer Lsuer�s�tt �ecanded to appr�ved ZC 5-85 wi�th a �a��' !?�s�trictian to 1ami,� 1:he use r�� the parce]. to parki.ng based fi.ndi.ng that i� m�ets tMe sta�ewi,de c�aa].s �nd sec��.an 18.66,030 �fi the Cc�mmunity I�eu�e].npment Cade. Wlo�tiur� r,arri�d by majari.�y uote, Camm9.ssioner Bu�ler, Maen, Fyre uatin�g na, b, t�TWFR 8U5TNFS5 7. AL�JOUf2NM�'IVT 1:QQ AM �t��• Se�rHtary piane Jelderks �.� ._.W.�.. A�I...T'FST: ' �� A. I�c�nal.d Ma�n, pr•esxdent 116?.P PLANIVTNG CONIMISSION MIf�UT�S Apri]. 2, 1985 Page 8 _ : � _ _ __ __ r DATE + _._..�... � �j. ROZL CALLt �Don Moen � � � � f�'� � John Butler �� . A , �' � Mi1t Fyre �' "`� "�� j Bannie Owens , � , ,g� (� Dave Peterson �w� '� °� ` �- � Ghris Vanderw�od �.I ! � �Floyd }3ergmann � � �Nancy Campbell 4� � t�},�Deane Leverett �y, � r �� ?��s 7-6300 P.O 50X 3?0 PFiOi�fE;503)584-0�60 ,��y�� BEAVERTO?V,QF;EGOPJ 97075 �h�•' �,�� 9��@�� @l�P��B�� ' y.'?, .� '� ,. � Cit of Ti ard �` ��'�'^ Y g � � TQars��e4 PdoYice .,''� P.O. Box 2339'7 �j`��i,� ��b� � e C� D�plic�te A�i�aviY Tigard, OR 972�3 � � � . � _ � � ��¢s��a��ri�� va�f �� a;�r�sz��d t�� #3� ,"a"��e��rax�g ��taissi�� ;��2, 1��,�t�:�A��.,ffiY�¢��v�Ju�€�:�;��F��D��e�€d.��:€, AF�B�A�Al� (�� LiC,4�IC)� �#i�6�S��d�,��rri,€�r��s�,��r�e�pru��t��x��be��sta��ae�� 7� O� Of�E(atJt�, P��r�n L��,3i3'��t��8�t�,-��;�E�y��e�t�1�7��'�t3s��a�[ae, � _��,+�fl°�;€38 9��3.��'�r��i�g6��'4_ C011i�TY OF VVAS9iIPdG�'nPd, �ss. 1�II�L'.��&�ai�l'Ca� ',—�-��—��n �Qr� ��.�,��4/�'8 ��s�'s��f t�i�-��.�_z.�$��s�' �C b�i�g f'srs4 duag+ ��nr�rr�, �L�OS� �Yi(� S�� 1�� I c`SP31 1P1� Adb�'PtlSifl� g��ri�i�T'��'#�"�.I��,�g�g��`�,� H7o�ecYoc, O�P11S ��kP1CIp�I CI�PCi, of 4�� Ti�'a�'cl Times ��r��ira��a;�.:�'��rsE€rt��f� 3usi- a sae�wsp�pet of g�ner�l circula4don as defir�ed isz �RS i 93.�10 '��31�'��a�t��ip�.�ri��i��.�'�2a�trl�a�r a��a��s� an� 193.020; p�abi6shec� 2t Ti��.y°cl_ n th� ��s� ��ll�; ��t�° ��- ��t�ac€� �a� �d�-�5 (��id��, 2� '• ��fa�;�,�r€r��i�`s��I�s�e�ae(��1 �:�� 3oresa'sd cou�ity ae�e9 sf�?e: 4ha��he l�fi i��). A i��l i c� �3 r i I1�S �5��E�I��-�'�PA��€�gZ��ltX4'�B I�io.5 . s �ri�atar� cepy of wehich is her�to ae�e�exed. �nras p�t�ii�P�ed in 4he $�u��°a-��=��£��.s�i�F��,�a��t��$�� 6PY$F�� irsL� o�s�bd ne�s a sr for 1 �2 ��,�'3�r�a'�, � ae��t��a � 3.7�e�:�^c�1�e��a�e��- P P s�eccessids ae�� #.��ti�3�#sl��,��i��u��s��d�t�f�ai��vr�i.�� CO€3S�C�1�ib� iP� @P1� �OIIG�99�� lSSdA�'8: �� $��.��a��2�8). . : ��D��3�L��Iv�2�s�'��3��l3'3��BA�3G�'�� Mar cY� �� . �9 85 �-�5 s"��..��€��a:7. , — ��q�� a� �'C��ag.a�e�� i��c�ara��za��`�.�,�ag� �ar,n �� f�s��s��x�a��aa��-ss�a� �a�G ��x�ia's'Gg��f).a�a --- i��e�1l�c�$e��s�"�a��l�a��e��sa��+aac3n��edia�g� �t�►4��er�.��"�it�t�:€?c�4��1�4�,�ot 4fl0� � .�� L'�// � i% C�33��,�.i3[SI�PF.t`��9P��3a��'tT'��i��-$,��-0I'3��s�3t°a��C � �#�6�a�"��`�.�€^x�1�3��der'� ` �---� r ' ►��x a�r�s��e�?x�.�a��raf a.��.��R��g��sa S��P��9 �� Grmrn � ta�for� rrae �ss Cri 22 i9� � ��o��`��.'�rl� ��3'cc��1�,�� a.ss�e��a8�s��&i��i� �-- � � �§ae��'��3"��era��f�.�ise�..��i Z��aQ€€��'e� ��p�°€s,�l��,.'��'��E'i�`'s4�f��t�l�.��?'dya F;o��: ��a d r1 �� .�� r��`��.�� tv��.— � ot�ry �u�,3ic for OPegor� �%�.'��s��-� � 2 0 8 S ��S�� se a�� id��r��am ��pfa�� - MZ/f;0?id3Y'i9SSl�,a9 �X€DfP�S: � I . �$§5�d�.�.R�� f��v��'r'�E',i�sa��}�b�,i�r`.� "�a��,"�21'�a��[3t�r�:3��E� " �.,.c-ai��`�!�i��r��e��C$��3$S;€��5��a��3��'d9�&�'_�P��:�,$�33) A��7�,A'y�� (��&Eta��12s��LS�e°��Er 3��+��,��}��i��.�;�4�C€� � I��la.��s�a��t��tr��'�� p��r,g�#��'�{� q�pr}��y��'�$'��y. n�",�p��;t�aja�p��;��Qp�+y s�i�y�p��e.�'�rqa[sq�qqyFg��2�; YsTkislF��":�t brTLf4'P$;i'-.zCT'i.�/9�vP.:s?E.47��iFSF�A'.�4se?:.1.72Cf�r'nSC�.b's✓FD�� 3��.�x.��.��:�..� ��w � ��t�"��`��+��'�.��t�e c��g�-�°�� '�°;€��;�,. ��k`��:��'�'��3��i3 ��_- ��r`,. �� a��` L)�\':i'� �� --------- --- --•-- ---�__.__.. TIGARD PI,ANNING CONIMISSION SIGN UP SEIELT KOTICr. : ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK Oid ANY ITEt�I TIUST SICN TEiL:I4? IVAI�IE and note their address on this sheet. (please Print your name) ITENl/bESCRIPTTON: a��l U�SIO�, s _ � �$� Wd�� Y ' ' �� -� I�YI �u� h �'r�� PROPOt1ENT (For) OPPO�TE�Z' (against) Name, Address and Affiliation � Name, Address and At�iliation ✓ �, _�ls�'� ��' � �y �c�f�J ��i �.`�'�;;: � ....-. �`" ��:,�� , l�,,MJ f�%�rLc.v�fv�,�M� _ �i�.�h�� (7�'C. , . NOTICE: ALIo PERSONS DES�RIIJG TO SPE.AIC ON ANY ITErI D�UST SIGN THETk NRDIE and note tt-aei_ address on this sheet. (please Print your name) ITEM jbESCRIPTION: � � � � � � PROPONENT (F'or) OPPONENT (against) Name, Address and Atfilxation � Name, Address and Affiliation r � � � � 2�� -_...,,..__.�_.., , ; ._...__.____. _ _---.-_.._.__ -.-------____ I7ATE �'� �� I G A R D P L A Y�7 N I N G C 0 M M I S S I O N NOTICE: ALI, PERSONS DESIRING TO SPE�l.K ON ANX I'1'EM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME and note� their addxess. on this sheet, (pl�a3e PY'int your n�me) I�'EM/bESCRIP.'TION s � 1 f G� ` � ��+ � � PROPONENT (For) 2�PPONENT (against) Name, Address and Affiliation � Namep Address and Af�iliation // on� S ,v�%�g �.�. 1 � -- `e �..�. -- �� 3�.s`' -� �rr� . /�.� �� t � � � k . � � � � �� : s � � .; � � , . ,: � � F � i �'' � � � � � � �'� �� , ,:, �:, � � �� : � �� 1 _ _ : : �� DATE ��- i`�_� 3�' I G A R D P L A N N I N G C O M M Z S S Z O N NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRIPIG TO SPEAK OIJ ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME and note� the3r address, on this she�t, (ple�se Print youx name) � ' ITEM/bESCRII?'�TON: .� y"' � � ��,�'S A. .� � � j PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against� N me, Address and Affa.liation �� Name, Address and Affil�.ation , , `' r � �( 0 .� � � c�_ � ,��`�--°, -� t •�:� �� .� � `�/�- - � ..�!' ��-a-e��-bt-��tL� l�o ao sw cdtf��«��7",� !�l P,°�7 , �'",�'� �., ` �� " �'�, , \��°�, � I i � �.. .� �... I , DATE • �+��__ �_� G A R D P L A N N I N G C O M M T S S I O N NO"PICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME and note� their address. on this sheet. (please Frin� your name) ZTEM/bESCRIPTION: Fio O � � , ✓ � � � ' � � I SS -� �_�a�, Z� I �s � �II - - � PROP4NEIJT (For) OPPONENT (against) Name, Address and Affiliation � Name, �ddress and p,,f�iliation �'-- � /1�.��Li -�'I'.��'��' �✓1 .�.��/lK. ' - �T,^e 3�3 ,lG� v � s'�✓ ..d�/�i2� �l�/u9 �/',2zg /-��'��l/TL--�.T �6� ,t1i�./ �o/j'l, 34��, w �r� /��J�.�. � � _ L i 1 � . .. . . . . . , . . . ... . . . . ... . .. . }r�.. 1'; }� r��:t�aeaN�ur� �::CTY AF T:CGARi�, QR�.tacJN l"4: �1�mb�rs of �M�e I�lanni.nc� Cnmmisszr,n and N,F�.4. 's Marchi 2g, �.9�8�'� F'Rt�M; Willa.am A. Nlr�nahan, Qirec�tar caf Cammunity �J�uelopm�nt ��`� SURJEC"1": Wr,rksha� with ti�� Ci•ty Caunci.l. The Ci�y (�our►cil arrnuaTly holcis a wurksMnp wiL•h each BGar•d and Committ.se. T'ha.� ye�r the Gauneil Ma� set Mr�r�d�y, A�r�.1 29 �� the date t:o dc�al wi.th �i Plann�i� issues, Pl�as� n�,�e �thi� c�a�e, �s I encuurage you to attenc!. '� At �sa��t m��i.ngs, the Counci.�. has ciirect�d th� da�cus�i.on tc� i.�su�s re].�ted to tM� Cumprehensa.ve Pl.an or tM�ir ��aQ��ial �urr�ep^ns. Yoc� may wi�h ta eunsi,d�r� whiat a.ten►� ar� of p�r�i.cular conc�rn to you, suca� a� c�.arifi.catzon by th�e Coun�iX o�F thsar i�t�r•prefi:a�ian nf s�c'�iuns raf �t:f7� pl�n ar c�ade. qr, you may �:rrak �o t6�e Counci.l. far di.rect�.an cancwrrrir�g athee� i.ssues, � (WAM;br/1�.�5P) ' ''i , ;` i�� _ : . . . :.-_ .. _::_...... 4 ..... . :::. .....�.�, '-- ` -- - _ _. _ . : i � � � � , � p ,Agenda Ite�a 5.1 ! P�.ANPIING COMMI3SIOPI ; April 2, 1985 .M'ErYORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON � i � i? �: T0: Planning Commission March 2fi, 1985 �,' FROMc Keith Liden, A�sociate Planner 1s; SUBJECTs Arlie �'antation Subdivision S 2-$5 and Y 1--85 � ,� The above men��.oned mppl.ication was reviewed on March 5, 19�5, 1�y th� Commission and was tabled due to a number of coracerns. The staff �aas �" �.r instruct�d to reviaw the propasal with the ap�licant and report back to the Comm3.ssion on Apri1 2, 1985, to r�consider Che appllcation. I met �rith Frank a Currie and the applicant on March 12th to take a secon:d loc�k at the i subdivision design. We d3scussed tk►e issues that were brought forward during the hearing. As a result of this re-evaluation, the staff has the following co�ments: 1. Driveways � It i� City policy to min3mize the number �f driveway� oax r,al�.ect�rs and ar�erials. However, new driveways on major str.eets a�°e acceptable if no other pr�ctical alternative exist. Because of the parcels location and configuration as well as the eonst�caints �- presented because of the ravine, the prapoa�d driveways are appropriate. Frank Currie has indicated that individual Ur 3oint driveways woul� be acceptable. 2. Sidewalk The existing sidewalk on McDonald Street was not constructed in the standard location in order to retain the use of the garage for the � house. The design fsar the 97th Avenue/McDonald Street fntersec�i.on f� was completed inclurling the sidewalk location and a pr�cper intersect�,on will be possible. ; 3. Lot Size , The staff continues to recommend approval of the vasianc� for th� , ' reasons noted previously in the staff repart. ` � � � � � w,�:: In summary, the Plamning staff reeommends approval of S 2-85/V 1-$5 sub�ec� ta the conditions listed in the Mareh 5th staff report. C;i- �4 ,4 1127P { ' dm� � ` ( ;; � s � �� .. _ _ '`�i�i _ _ _. �, :; s, ';, � c authorize staff to rcomple�e the final�order and have President Moen sign off on that 'Hfinal, order. Motion passed ux�animously by . Commissioners present. 5.4 SU�DIVISION S 2-85 � VARIANCE V 1-85 ARLIE & IRENE MAWHIRTER NPO �6 6 � , -- 4 Req�est for prelimi�xary plat approva,l of a six lot subdivision with 4 parcel.e �ranging between 7,125 a�d 8,500 square feet and for a VariancE �o `; aYlow two Io�s below the 7,500 square minimum lot si�e of the R 4.5 f (R+�siderxtial 4.5 units/acre). Located: 9680 SW McDonald St. (WCTM 2S1 ; 11BA lot� I04 and 200). j Associate Planner Liden reviewed the ataff report anal made �taff'B i reco�mendatics� for approval wiXh 1�. cmnditions, notin� ttxat in condition j number three, the word ma�or �1'►auld be minor. i i�,ppLICAN'r PRESENTATION o V�rn Lentz, 8150 S6J 39th, Portland, concuxred wiCta the st�ff report and felt all conditions were acceptable. PUBY.IC '�ESTIMONiY o Elise "Vaillancourt, 14140 SW 97th, oppos�d $ranting the variance, she felt this would set a precedent which would a11ow lots to become smalles than necessary. o Stu IC@mdall, 4440 Douglas Way, Lake �swego, r�pge�entifng Ra ortions' opposed allowing six lots as they would �ffect ttae �Zfl � � wh3.clh h�d al�eady� been �ssessed. He ciid not feel the awner would be paying hie fafr share if h� was allowed six lots �nsCead of fiv'e, which they felt he shouJ.d be allowed. REBUTTAL o Vern Lentz, was not sure there is a fairness iseue involved. He felt this proposal was the highest and best use for the land. o Arlie Mawhirter, 14265 SW 80th Place, ownes, etated that it was because of the City's requirementa for street dedicatione, th�t he was requiring the Variance. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioners discussed the alignment of McDonald Stree[, their concern for five new dr•iv�ways access onto McDonald Street, and whether or not there was a legitamat�e need for the Variance. * Commiseioner V�nderwood moved and Commissioner Bergmann seconded for approval of S 2-85, per staff's recommendation. Motion� failed 3 to 3, Commis�ionere Moen, Owene, and Crimptsell voting nn, Commiseloner ' � Butler abstained (property owner within 250'). FLANNING GOMMISSION MINUTES March 5, 1985 Page 4 } * Coromissioner Owens m�vec£ to table S 2-85 and V 1-85, requesting that � the sr.aff and applicant �et together and review the impact that this n�.wiber of access would have on McDonald, posgible �oint access. Motion failed 3 to 3, Commi.esioners Fyre, Vander�rood, and ilergmann vating no, Commiseioner Butler abstaining. o Further discuesion. * Commissinner Campbell ffioved and Commissioner Owens seconded to talale S 2-85 to allow st�ff and appli�ant to review the impact of five access onto McDonald, nnd. to reset the hearing to April 2, 1985. Motion passed by ma�ority of �ommissfonere present, Commissioners Fyre and Vamderwood voting no, Commissioner Butler ebstaining. 5.5 ZONE CHANG� l�NNEXATION ZCA 1°85 AND COMPREHENSIV��AN 4AZR��TDMENT rPA 2-85 GENE ANA VIVIAPt vAVIS j Request to annex �3.19 �cre parcel into the Ci.ty of Tigard and approve a i Comprehensive Plan Amendment from �'ast�ington County Offi.ce Commercial �nd � R�sidential (5 units/acre� MeCzgex Pr�gxess Co�munity Plan designatian to j City of Tigard Comprehen�ive Plan Designation Commercial Pro€ess�ungl and ! Low Densitp Resident�al; and for a Zone Gh�nge P'rom Washington County QC � (0£fiGe Commercisl) and R-5 (Residential) to City of Tig�rd C� (�Commerci�l i Profe�sional) and It°4.5 (Residenti�l, 4�.5/units/scre) �n prop�s�y bounded � by Highway 2i7, SH�I 95th, SW f3�k and SW 89th (WCTM 1S1 35AC, 7�ax I.ot� i01, � 2�009 4500, 4b00, 4700s and 1S1 35AD, Tax Lots 1200, �.300, 140�, and 1500.) f Associate Planner Newton revie�aed the staff. r��ort and mad� �tarf°a 3 recommendation for approval with two conditions. s � APPLICANT'S PRESEPTTATION k o Gene Davis, 10875 SW 89th, stated he had lived on the property for 18 �' years. �le wanted to be annexed into the Citp because th� City Code ; addressess runoff problems beCter than the Washimgton County Code. v Also he had been bur�larized five times aaad would like to be ab].e to a. call the Gity of Tigard Police. � � PUB`LIC TESTIMONY j; o Reid iford, 9970 SW Greenburg soad, CPO 4 ° Metzger Chairman, i supported the annexation. He wa�s concerned thak he had not been properly notified of the hearings He felt the applicant had been the � victim of inaccurate information through the W�shington County � proceas and should be allow�ed to anr+ex and develop in the City of � Tigard. o Hazel Lyon, 10440 SW 87th Ave. Portland, 97223, opposed the � 1 annexation and read her concerns to the Cummissio�n. i r i , � I i , PLANNING CUMMISSION MINUTES March 5, 1985 Page 5 STAFF REPORT AGEI�A.TTE.*� 5 s 4 TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PI,ANNING COI�4IrSSION , FOWLEYt JUNIUR HIGH SCHO�IL - �GI , 10865 SrW• {d�+�� I TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Infoxmation CASE: Subdivision S 2-85, Vari�nce V 1°85 R.EQUES2: Preliminary plat approval for a six 1ot subdivision and to allow two 7,125 square foot lots where a minimum of 7,500 square feet i� required. COA4PktEHE�SIVE PLAN DESI�NATION: Low A�nsi�y Residential �ONING DESIGNATIONa It-4.5 (�esidenttal 4.5 units/acre) APPT.ICA1dT: ,�x1ie and Irene Mmwhirter OWNER: Same i�zb5 sw sotn �ig�� Tig�rd, Oreg�n 97223 LOCATION: 9680 SW Mcik>nald Street (WCTM 2S1 11 Tax Lot� 104 � 200). ' 2. Back$round The subject property was ar�nexed into the City and zoned R°7 in 1979. The Tigardville Heights Street L�I.D. inc�uded this propertye As a result of this L.I.D. , street improvemente on the frontage of tl�e i property has been partially completed. 3. Vicinity Information All of the Burroun�ing properties gre also zoned R-4.5. The ma3ority af the parcels in the are� either contain singl� family residences or are undeveloped. McDanald Street, which abuts the propex�ty on the north, is designated as a ma�or collectore The wes�ern side of the property is � ad�acent to 47th Avenue which is designated a minor collector. 4. Site Informat�fon � � One houee ie situated near the McDonald/97th inCersection �nd a garage, ", that ia to be removed, is south of the residence. The remainder of the property ie undev�loped. A ravine and drai.nageway rums from weat to `� r, eas�. through the southesn portion of the parcelo ', �; i' r', i'' i:; {5 �, STAFF REPORT - 3 2-85 & V 1-85 - PAGE 1 �, � '�'^t`4'.-'.........n'�.1,.,.� .. ».�..:....r�.....��i- . .....� .�.., . .�. r .. . . . ,(i'r,^t" " .' . . ''� . ..__...+ .� ..... .�;. p i � -w.Tx...t . ...�.4,. ..,� t' n'Y ,.• .e-...._ .. ..v... ,:.;,� �..,r..,„ .W.,..�h �gv�,�.;�..� The applic�nt propoRes to establish a �ix lat subdivision for eingle faffiily residence�. All of the lots will hav� direct access to McDonald Street or 97th Avenue. In addition, a variance is requested to permit two lots of 7A125 �quare feet each where the xequires a minimum lot �ize of 7,5�0 square feet. Th� two lots w�th frontage on 97th Avenu� are being conaidered for this vari�ncee 5. A�ency and I�PO Comments The Engineering Division has the following commentse a. An easement or siffiilar arrangem�nt wil.l be nece�sa�y to accommodate the �wimming pool which straddles the property lin� between Lots 1 and 2. b. The dedication of right-of-way along McDonald..,,�,;Street �nd 97tte Avenue was intended to be accomplished as part of the L.I.D.. . • However, City records do not indicate that thfs was eve� finali�ed. This issue shouid be resolved before the fia�al plat is - recorded. Because of the existing street improvement, includi.ng sid�walk that exists along tbe frontage or 97th Avenue and the western 15�D feet of McDonald Street, m 5 foot wide public roadw�ay easement will be acceptable. The remaining frox�ta�e an I�icDonal.d St�eet should meet the right-of-way requirement of 30 feet fsom centerline. � c. Assessments �re outstanding on ttie �SroperLy for the McDonald Stre�t S�nitary S��e� L.IaD. and the Tigardville Heights Street L.I.De. ' An agreement has been reached to allo�w for paymen� of the remaining baiance at thc time of plat approval. � , d. The proposed building sites will �woid the dsainageway� and the portions of the property that exceed a 25X slope. However, because of the close proximity of the sites to the steep slopes areas, soils and foundation reports should be aubmitted prior to receiving bu3lding permitso If the reports indi.cate that landfoxm alteration wi11 be necessary within the drainageway or atea a�ver 25X slope, a Sensitive Ls►nds permit will be required. 4 � i Comments have not been received Erom the Building In�pection Office ox � a the �°ualatin Rural �ire Protection District. � �� NPO � 6 haa not o��ected to Che proposal. ; �' B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION3 4' s! The rel�vant csiteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 'f'. : and 1.0; Tigard Compxehene3:ve Plan policies 2.1.1, 3.1..1, 7.3.1, and ' � 8.1.3; and Chapter 18.50, 18.84, 18.134, and 1$.160 af the Community r', € Devel�pm�ent Code. ° � {`' F:;` ; ��' • STAFF REPOYtT - S 2-85 � V 1-85 - PAGE 2 �; �.'; ;;� yj tss�^r_.�:sr.cr.ir+�r�m,.,'.,,.,t.,�-r,��.r:•:��r�r�r,��t�c4*;m�r-.�.ti.,c.r��c:r-�nx. . ■ _ . �»-�R n.., � , YK` ��'. x'w'.�... ;�,A�'Tt.�,'�^,�R.�`J7'�f.{tQ ))�l"'.. . . , v."v,y •�Y-•, 'T '�rk : . 'r%'�y ' '��"ti'.�'B?'th'fY :il'R.. ;U ....s�.:: . The Planning Staff concludee that the proposal is conei�tent with the applicable Statewide Plann�ng Goals and Guidelinee ba�ed upon the following €ind�.ngs: a. Statewid� Planning Goal � 1 is met because the C9.ty h�s adopted a Citizens Involvement program including review of all development applicationa by the Neighborhood Planning Organiz�tian (NPO). In addition, all publ�.c notices requirements were met. b. Statewide Planning Goal # 2 �.s met because the City appli�ed a�.l applicable Statewide Planning Goals9 City Co�prehen�ive P1an Policies and Dev�lopment Cade requir�ments �o the application. ce Goal # 10 is satisfied because the proposal will provide for housing as contemplated by the City Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Staff has determined that th� proposal a� submitted, or with minor modification�, is consistent with the_�xelevant portions nf the Compr�hensive ?l�n based upon the findings noted below: � ao Plan Poliey 2.1.1 is satfsgied bec�u�� the Neighborhood Plan�aing Organization and �urraundtng property oumers were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on tka�e applicant'e pro�osal. b. Plan Pa cy 3.1.1 is ot s�ti�fied. because the development of �h� p perty will i e constructio hou�e �nd �ewer lines with t�he d nageway d f n area of eteep slope� over �SX. nsitive I�nds e w wi11 be r�eces�ary to � addres� t e is ues. c e P1an Pol�cy 8.1.3 will be s�ti.�fied if tte� pla� is modif ied as sugge�ted by ttae Engineer.ing Divisfon to in�lude a combination nf p�r�anent raadway easemen�s, rigkxt-of-way ; dedication, and str�eet improveffients. The Planning staff hae deteraained that the proposal is conai�tent with the relevant por�ions of the Community Development Code based upon the findings noted beloW: a, Chapter 18.50 of the Code is s�tiefied because the proposal meete all of the requirements of the R-4.5 zone, except for minimum lot size. This i�sue is discussed balow. b. Chapter 18.84 of the Code p$ovides that develop�►ent withfn drainageways and upon steep �1op�s requi.reB a Sensitive Lande review. This can b� heard by the I3earingg bfficer later this month. c. Chapter 18e134 of the Code include five criteri� (Section 18.134.050) for granting a �rari�nce. The appli�ant has addres�ed these criteria in an appropriate ffi�nnero STAFF REPORT - S 2-85 & V 1-85 - PAGE 3 :�tFr"I?�SF'R�7'7R�'I^�i^.g#'rr"srli^.r,.. •c.—.,- J�'�.F��tlr'�.'P?.?cTf.�`TMS%' .�-c+1i�i4'�9;it�n�^r.r��v-Y.nt`-,.,,;,wt, r�YY;n �Xy ,�ry� }�^ � , . . . ..a . ".`l�Tly.l �ili'�1!,'R'.r4I'T:�e�l�%n��t�.'.� . . �..Y.}... : �J:,.;.�wl�n�':4r'�1 !.�,'��.r..'J"• It should be noted that the applicant's responge was based upon the assumption that addition street right-of-way would not be necessary. The right-of�way requirememt proposed by the Engineering Division wi11 result iri Iot sizes of 7,125, 7,125, 7,5�Q, 7,a00, 8,088, 8,08� square feet. The average lot size is 7,4�8 equare feet. The etaff concludes that the variance is still appropriate becsuse of the sffiall deviatio� f�om the lot size standard. d. Chapter 18.160 of 'the Code can be satisfied because the ap�licant �il'1 be able to meet all of the standards for improveme�t of publ�c facillties. C. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findiag and conclusions the �lanning Staff reco�nends approval of S 2-85 and V 1-�5 eubject to the following conditions: 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE NO�ED, ALIL CONDITIONS SHAI.L BE MET PRIOR TO RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT• 2a S��nd�xd half-etreet improeemen�s including con�rete sid�w�lk�. concrete curbs �treetlights, eoncrete driv�way aprons, storm clraix��$e and underground urcilitie� �t►a11 be installed alo�g th� SW McDonald Stre�t franta�e (where such does not now exist). S�icl impuovements alon� SW McDonald Street sha11 be built ta �na�ox callector street standards and conf�rm ta th� al.ignffient of exi�ting improve�ents. 3. Sgandar� half-street improvements including concrete sidewalks, crancrete curbs, streetlights, concrete driveway apra�ns, �torm �irainage and undergrouna� ut�lities ahall be install�d along the S,W. 97th t�venueo Said imprmvem�nts along SW 47th Avenue �hall be built to or eollectar street st�ndards and conform to the alignment of exist�ng �treet improvemeats there along. 4. Five (5) set�lan-profile public improvement construction plan� and one (1) itemized construction cost estim�te, stamped by a Registexed Profes�ional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed public iffiprovemenes s3�a11 be submitted to the en$ineering Section for approvale 5. Sa�itary Bewer lateral (plan-profile) detaile� for provision of ee�rer service to e�ch Iot, shall be prov�ded as part of ttie public improvemen� plans. STAFF REPORx - g 2-85 & V 1-85 - PAGE 4 . �.. � � . .. nr?.��n'� '.-'x.' T4°�'�'ky.��. r n .;ts�;d . 3,� �' . � .t!!rr,7v�!'+;t�;'!C:1 S„ 5'�+:x... .E.h..v.�.�..n...-,�,�,-..nn....�_..� ... . .. !'{ . .. ... } Y ! { � 6. Constructi�n of proposed public improvements sha11 not cammenee until after the Engfneering Section hae issued approved publi�c improvement plans. The Section will require posting of a 100X " Performance Bond the paym�nt of � permit fee and a �ign installation,etreetlight fee. Also, the execution of a street • opening permit or constructi.An complianee agxeemeat sha11 oecur � prior �o, or concurrently with the iesuance of approved public � improvement plans. SEE THB ENCLOSED HANDOUT GIVING MOItE SPE�IFIC INFORMA,TION REGARDING FEE SCH�DUY�ES, �OIdDING AND AGRE�iEI�iTS. , 7. Additiomal right-of-way sha1Z be conveyed as an easemeat or dedicated to the public almng the SW Mc17on�ld S�reet front�ge to provide for public rightrof-�way to 30 feet from center].ine, where only a curb existe and 25 fe�t from centerline where the eidewalk exists. The description for eaid conveyance shall be tied to the exis�ing right-of-way centerline as e�tabliehed by Caunty Survey No. 20,187. The conveyauee docnment(s) shall be on City forms and � approved by Che Engineering Section« FORMS AND YNSTRUCTION S ARF: AVAILABLE A:T CITY HALLo Furtherr, � ao�ner radius of not less ttaan � 15 feet shall b� �o convey�d at the intexeectioa of Mc�nald � Stre�e� � 97th Aveaue. . � t' � 8. Additional right--of-w�y st�a:ll be conveyed as an eae�ment or dedicated to the I'ublic �long the SW 97th Avenu� frou�ag� tc� u psovide for public rightrof-way eh�ll be tied to tl�e exi�tin� { rightrof-way cente�line as e�tabli�hed by County R,oad No. 198�. ` The convey�nce docum�nt(�) shall be r�a C�ty form� and approe�ed by ; � the Engine�riag S�ctiona FORMS AAID INSTItUCT�ORS � AvAIIsAALE AT � CITY HALL. � 9. After review anal approval bq the Planniw:g Airector and Public � Works Direc�or, the Final Plati shall. be recorded with �lashia��oa � Coun�y� , � x 10. A eoils and foundation report shall be submitted prior to issuance � of building permits. If landform alternation is required within the dsainagewgp of area over 25X slope, a Seasitive Lands permit . ' will be required. 11. The approval ie v�lid if exercised within one year of tl.ae final decieion dat�. PREP BYe th Liden AP RO�D BY: William l►. Monahan Asaoci�te Planner Director of Planning & Development (KSLtdm�/1056P) .� , , fi _ ,. ` STAFF REPORT - S 2-85 6 V 1-a5 - PAGE 5 � ; ,c ,} CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSIC�N "` FINAL ORAER N0. 85-(��PC �.. A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSZONS, WHICH DENIES AN APPLICATION ]FOR A ZONE CHANGE (ZC 2-85) REQUESTED BY DARWISH IDRISS. The Tigard �lanning Commission received the above application at a public hearing on Apr31 2, 1985. The Commission based its decision on the facts, findings, and conclu�sions noted below: A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Zone Ghange ZC 2-85 REQUEST: Ghange the zone designation on a 3.7 acre parcel from R-7 (Residential, 7 units/acre) �o �t°12 (Residential, 12 units/acre). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential APPLICANT: Mo Idriss OWNER: Aarwish Idriss 10053 SW Idimbus Ave. 1341 Via Milcumb�es Eeaverton, OR 97005 Solana Beach, CA 92075 �.. LOCATION: East side of Hall i31vd. , 300 feet south of Rass Street (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 12CB, Tax Lots 1100 and 1200). 2a Background No other land use applications have been reviewed by the City. 3. Vicinity Information The surrounding properties are ].arge aereage homesites and vacant parcels ranging f rom 1 to 20 acres in size. None of the ad,jacent properties are presently served by sewer. The area on the east side oE Hall Blvd. immediately ad�acent to the sub�ect parcel is also aoned R-7 and �he land on the west side of the �treet is zoned R-12. These j prap�xties are all within the designated "Developing Are�a" in the 1 Comprehensive .Plan. i I 4. Si.te Information i The property is undeveloped except for a residenee on Tax Lot 1200. It � is flat, wooded, and �free of any �pparent phyaical canstsaints. The ! zone change is desired to allow for a multi-family development in the 1 future. ; �. rt-- 5. A&ency and NPO Comments � The Eng�neering Divi�ion has na nb�ection ta the proposal but it is recommended that additional right-of-way be dedicated along the Ha11 Blvd. frontage to meet the Ci�y standard far arterial streets. Street improvements along the Ha11 Blvd. frontag� will be r�yuired in con�unction with the development of the property. The State Highway Division tias no ob�ection to the request, hQwever, it is noted that additional. right-of°waq a�nd street widening wil� be a eondi.tion of the developwex�t. The Building Inspection Office and the Tigard School District have no ob�ections to the application. NPO ��5 and 4�6 jointly discussed th� propo�al on February 20, 1985. � Concern was expressad by both NPO°s regarding traffic i�npact on Hall � Blvd. �nd the intersectina� with Durham Road and the lack of street improvements performed by the Highway Divisiun. Al.though � qu�rum was I not present, the members of NPO 9�5 recammended denial. Bm FII�DINGS AND CQNCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Statew�.de Planning Goals 1, 2, and 1(�, and Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.J..1, 7.1.2, 7.8.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.2, arzd (:hapter 12, Loc�tioiaal Criteria. � The Planning staff concludes that the Froposal i� partially consistent with tthe applicable Statewide Planning Gos1s and Guidelines based ugon the follow3ng findings: 1. Goal ��1 is met because the City has adop�ed a Cirizens Involvement prQgram including review of all development applications by the Neighborhood Plann3ng Organization (NPO). In addition, a1I public notice requi�ements are �net. 2. Goal ��2 is met because the City �pplied all applieable Statewide Planning Goa1s, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and DevelopmenC Code requirements to the application. 3. Goal ��10 3.s nat satisfied because the proposal will not provide fo�c housing as contemplated by the Gity Comprehensive Plan. The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is p�rtially consistent with the relevant portions of the Comprehensive P1an based upon the findings nated belnw: � 1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satisfi.ed because the I�eighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding prop�rty owner9 were given notice of � the hearing and an apportunity ta commen� on the applicant's y proposal. l � f ; � � ! � i ; � � 2. Plan Policy 7.1.2 i� not satisfied because adequate sexvice t" capacities are not available in the immediate area. �.. 3. P�an Policy 7.�.1 is satisfied because the Tigard School District was informed of this proposal and �xo ob3ections were rai�ed. 4. Plan Policy 8.2.2 cannot be satisfied at t'his time because Tri-Met does not nffer bus service on Hall Blvd. or Durham Road. 5. The Locational Criteria in Chspter 12 of the Plan �re partially satisfied for the following reasons: a. The property is within a "De�eloping Area" which is not ' committed to low density �evelopment, ' b. The parcel has dix°ect aecess to Hall B�vd. , c. Development limitations are not evident. Publ�c facilities ' do not have adequate capaaity to serve' the pr��pexty. d. Public transit is not avaa.lahle. I e. Conveniznc� r�ta.il service is availab�.e a� the Dusha�/Ii�ll II intersection and gener�l commercial and busin�ss cente�� are li 1.5 to 2 miles awa�►. � f. Public apen space i� available neax�by at Cook Park, 1Durlaam �,... Elementary 5ehool, an�d Ti�s�d High School. C. DECISION I Based upon the abova findings and con�lusions, the Planning staff det�ie� ZC 2°85. It is further �r:��d �1-�at fii�►e a�piicant be notified of the entry of thi� order. . PASSED: This �� day of , 1985, by the Planni,ng Commission of the City of Ti�ard. �� `°`��`��ti� �• A. Donald Moen,, Preside�.3t Tigard Planning .Commission ' (KL;pm/1131P) � . STAFF REPORT AGENDA 'LTEM 5.2 April 2, 1985 - 7:30 P.M. ; TIGARD PLANNING COItII�iISSION FOWLE�i JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LGI ' 10865 S.W. WALNUT TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Zone Change ZC 2-85 REQUEST: Change the z�ne designation on a 3.7 acr� parcel fram It-�7 (Residential, 7 units/acre) ta R-12 (Residential, 12 units/acre). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGN�TION: Medium Density Residential APPLICA�iT: M� Idris� OWNERs Darwish Idriss 10053 SiJ Nimbus Ave. 1341 Via Milcumbres Beaverton, �R 97005 Solana Beach, CA 92075 LOCATION: East side of Hall Blvd., 300 feet south of �o�s Street (Washe Co. Tax Mag 2S1 12CB, Taa� Lmts 1100 and 1200). 2. Background No other land u�e applications have be�n reviewed by the City. 3. Vicinity Inforffiation The surrounding properties are large acreage homesites �nd vacant i parcels ranging from 1 • to 20 acres in size. None of the ad�acent a properties axe presently served by sewer. The area on the east side of a Hall Bl�vd. immediately ad3acent to the subject parcel is also zoned R-7 x and the land on the west �ide of the street is zoned R-12, These r properties are all within the designated "Developing are�" in the � CAmprehensive Plam. �! � 4. Site Information i'. _'; The praperty is undeveloped except for a res�dence on Tax Lot 1200. It �{ is flat, waoded, and free of any apparent physical con�traints. The ;i zone change is desired to a11ow for a multi-family development in the �' future. � �, � i� �L� S'i ' `il k�i �� F�� . � . . � � . �� . .. . .. ��:�� i STAFF 3tEPORT - ZC 2°$5 - PAGE 1 �:a ! 5. Agency and NPO Comments The Eng3.neering Division has no ob3ection to the proposal but it is ' recommended that additior�al right-of-way be dedicated along the Hall ' Blvd. frontage to meet the City standard far arterial streets. Street improvements along the Hall Blvdo frontage will be required in ' con�unction with the development of the property. The State Iiighway Division has no ob3ection to the request, however, it is noted that ad3itional right-of-way and street widening will be a condition of the development. The Building Inspection Office and the Tigard School District have no ob3ections to the application. NPO ��5 and ��6 ��intly discussed the proposal on February 20, 1985. Concern was expressed by both NPO's regarding traffic impact on Hall B�.vd. and the intersection with Durham Road ard the lack of street improvements performed by the Highway Division. Although a quorum wa� no� pre�ent, the meffibers of NPO #5 recommended denial. B, FINDIIdGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, and 10, and Tigaxd Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 6.1a1, 7.1.2, 7.8.1, 8.103, 8.2.2, and Ch�ptex 12, Locational C�iteria. The P13nnin� staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelin�s based upon the following findings: 1. Goal ��1 is met because the City has adopt�ed a Citizens Involvement program including review of all development applications by tihe Neighborhood Planning Organization (NPO). In addition, all public natice requirements are met. 2. Goal ��2 is ffiet because the City applied all applicable Statewide Pianning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and Development Code requirements to the application. 3. Goal ��10 is satisfied because the proposal will provide for housing as contemplated by the City Comprehensive Plano The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is coneistent with the releWant portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings ' noted below: i 1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satiefied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comffient on the applicant'a �I proposal. ;!, � 'r � k STAFF REPORT - ZC 2-85 - PAGE 2 � u � ( . 2. Plan Policy 6.�.1 is �atisfied because the zone change will allnw for multi-family development. In 1984 the City approved a zone change from R-12 to R-7 on two parcels totaling apprr�ximately 20 acres at the corner of Hall Blvd. and Durham Road. Also, Bond Park subdivision, located north of Durham Road on either side of 79th Avenue, is a single family development occurring on land ' which ie zoned R-12 and eligible for multi-family devel.opment� This proposal w�.11 help supplement the inventory of land in this I�� area of th� City which is available for multi-family development. I The City of Tig�rd is obligated through the Metropolitan Housing Rule to provide for an equal mix of single family and attached uni*s wi�h an overall deeelopment density of 10 units per acre. The City mus� ensux�e that sufficient higher density areas are available so the intent of the housing rul.e can be met. 3. Plan Policy 7.1.2 is satisfied because adequate service capacities are a�railable in the immed3ate area. Some utility extensions (eg. sewer) will be n�cessary to serve the property, but this can be accomplished as a condition of developing the site. It is recognized that traffic volum�es haee incressed on H�al.l B1vd. and Durham Road. However, add3tional dev�lopment can be adequately served with tt�e existing facilities, 4. Plan Palicy 7.8e1 �s satisfied bec�us� the Tigard School D3stri.ct was informed of this proposal ancY no ob�ections were raised. 5. Plan Policy 8.1v3 w311 be satisfied as a conditinn for development of the property. If an apartment complex daes materialize, it would first require City approval througta the Site Development Review process. The nece�saxy right-of-way ax�d street improvements would be required at that time. 6. Plan Policy 8.2.2 cannot be satisfied at this time because Tri-Met does not offer bus service on Hall Blvd. or Durham Road. However, both streets are arterisl routes and logical choices for future bus service. 7� The Locational Criteria in Chapter 12 of the Plan are satisfied for the following reasons: �. The property is within a "Developing Area" wh3ch is not committed to low density development. b. The parcel has direct access to Hall Blvd. c. Development limitations are n,ot �vident and public facilities have adequate capacity ro serve tine pa�operty. d. Public transit is not available pre�ently, but Iiall B1vd. or Durhaffi Road are logical routes for future service. 4 STAFF REPORT - ZC 2-85 - PAGE 3 � i i e. Prior to development, the Code requirements for screening and buffering will be �equired during the Site Development Review process. f. Convenience retail service is available at the Durh�m/Hall intersection and general commercial and business centers are 1.5 to 2 miles away. g. Yub1�c open space is available nearby at Cook Park, Durham Elementary Schaol, and Tigax� High School. C. RECOMMENDATION Based. upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning staff recommends approval of ZC 2-85 subject ta the following condition:. 1. Additional right-of-�aay sha11 be dedicated to the Public along the Svid. Ha11 B1vd. f.rontage to increase the right-of-wa,y to 45 feet from centerline. The description for said dedication shall be tied to the existing �ight-o�-way centerline as established by the � State o.f Oregon. The dedication docum�nt sha11 be on City fnrm� � and approved by the Engineering Section. 'i I 1�, ` � I � ' °��.�.. � PREPARE Y: Keit Liden PROV�D �Y: William A. Monahan ��' Associat� Planner Dir�ctor of Planning & ' Development i i' ;' �KL:pm/1131P) ' i' , f , �' i i i i i t i � 1 t 1 � � STAFF REPORT - ZC 2-85 - �AGE 4 ' � . _ � STAFF REPQRT AGENDA ITEM 5.3 April 2, 1985 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FOWLER JUNTOR HIGH SC�i00L - LGI Y0865 SeW. WALNUT TIGARD, ORFGON 97223 Av FACTS l. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 4-85 and Zone Change ZC 4-85 REQUEST: To move the present area designated C-N (Commercial Neighborhood) from the northwestern corner of the proposed 135th Avenue/Murray Road extension to the southeast corner of the futu�e Murray Road/Schol].s Ferry Road intexsection. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium High Den6ity Residential/ Neighborhood Commercial ZONING DESIGNATION: fi-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre} and C-N (Commercial Neighborhood) APPLICANT: Russ Krueger OWNER: Marge Krueger 3515 SW Barbur Blvd. Rt. ly Box 792 Suite Y-1 Beaverton, OR 97007 Portland, OR 97201 LOCATION: Between Scholls Ferry Road and 135th Avenue, approximately one half mile north of Walnut St. (Wash. co. Tax Map 1S1 33C, Tax Lot 1000). 2. Background The property wa� annexed to the City on June 12, 1983 and in August, 1983, the City approved a variety of Plan and Zone designations for the property which included Medium-High Density Residential (R-20), Medium Density Residential (R-12) and Neighborhood Commexcial (C-N). In February, 1984, the City approved the relocation of the C-N area from the west side of 135th Avenue to the northwest corner of the proposed intersection of the Murray Road extension and 135th Avenue (CPA 18-83/ZC 14-83). 3. Vicinity Information Except for several scattered homesites, this area between 135th Avenue and Scholls Ferry Road is undeveloped and n�r utilized to a limited extent for agriculture ar is wooded. The land sur�ounding the present and proposed commercial sites is zoned R-25. ; i STAFF REPORT - CPA 4-85 & ZC 4-85 - PAGE 1 ; � � 4. Site In�ormation The existing and proposed commercial sites are undeveloped. The commercial site is intended to remain on the north side of the Murray Road extension and be shifted from the west side of 135th Avenue to the east side of Scholls Ferry Road. A specific development plan has not been formulated. 5o Agency and NPO Comments � � The Engineering Division has the following comments: a. Due ta a drainageway that runs through the property, a Sensitive Lands permit will he required prior to d�velopment of the site. b. Sanitary sewerage and storm drainage provisions will be necessary in conjunction with development. c. Site Development Review approval will be required. d. Additional right-of-way should be dedicated along the commercial area's frontage on Schollr� Ferry Road for a right-of-way width of 45 feet from centerlinem The Buildi.ng Inspection Office has no objection to the request. The State Highway Division 3ndicates that further study will be I necessary before the need for a txaff�.c light can be e�aln�ate�l. A1so, the drainage facilities on Scholls Ferry Road may not b� adequate to acc�pt additional runaff from the site. NPO ��7 recommends approval. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1 and 2, and Tigard Comprehensive Plan policy 2.1.1 and Chapter 12, Locational Criteria. The Planning staff concludes that the propoeal is consistent with the Statewide Planning Gaals and Guidelines based upon the following findings: 1. Goal �� i�s met because the City has adopted a Citizens Involvement program including review of all development applicat�ons by the Neighborhood Planning Oxganization (NPO). In addition, all public notice requirements are met. 2. Goal ��2 is met because the City applied all appllcable Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and Development Code requia�ements to the application. The Planning staff concludes that the proposal is cons3stent with the relevant port�.ons of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: STAFF REPORT - CPA 4-85 & ZC 4-85 - PAGE 2 1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding property owners were given notice af the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the a�plicant's proposal. 2. Locational Criteria a. T�e site will be approximately � acres in eize rather than the 2 acre guideline set forth in the Plan. The 4 acre size wa5 e�tabl3shed when the property was a�n�xed to th� City, This desi�nation was consistent wi�h the Washington County plan which applied prior to the annexation. b. There are no other cammercial properties within one half mile of the proposed site. c. The commercial site will be limited to one corner of the � ; Murray Road/Scholls Ferry Road intersection. d. No significant traffic impacts are anticipated flom this move. 5pecific traffi� related issues w311 be addressed during the Site Develapment Review processe e. The site will, have direct access to an arterial street. f. The eventual development of the commercial center will be evaluated according to the applicable standards in the Community Developmen[ Code. Since th� entire ar�a is undeveloped, establiehing a compatible relationship between uses should not present a problem. Although it is not necessary to cnnsider specific provisians of the C-N zone, it should be noted that Section 18.60.045 of the code states that "no use shall exceed a gros� floor area of 4,000 square feet." A variance must be approved in conjunction with the Site Development Review process in order for this standard to be exceeded. C. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the findings and conclusions noted above, the Planning skaff recommends approval of CPA 4-85 �nd ZC 4-85 sub�ect to the follo�ing condition: 1. Additional right-of-way shall he dedicated to the public along the Lower Scholls Ferry Road frontage to increase the right-of-way to J 45 feet from centerline. The description for said dedication ,I sha11 be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline as ;{ established by WaBhingtori Countyo The dedication document shall be on City forms and approved by the Engineering Section. '� . ._.-�-7 �� . � ,i/�,/ � ; �7 �y�' + a PREPAR BY: eit iden AP IItOVED BY: Wi,ll am A. Monahan Associate Planner Director of Planning & � Development (KL:pm/1132P) STAFF REFORT - CPA 4-85 & ZC 4-85 - PAGE 3 � � Y __ R ; RYAIV C)°�RIEN Planning Consultant i 1134 S.E. 23rd Ave. • Hillsboro,Oregon 97123 • (503) 648-4061 APPLICATION: Comprehensive Plan Admendment and zone change to relocate a neighborhood commercial designation from th� west side of 135th Avenue to the east side of New Scholls Ferry Road. i DATE: February 29. 1985 �I APPLICANT: Russ Krueger LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Northwest and Northeast corners of Tax Lot 1000, Map 151 -33D. LOT AREA: 3, 5 acres for sach designation. CQMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Nei ghborhood Comme.rcial and Medium Hi gh ` Density Residen tial. i ZONINGs CN and R-25. � BACKGROUND The �.ocation of a 3. � acre neighboxhood commercial site is proposed to be relocated in order to accomodate a change in development plans for y the subject property,as you may recall, the applicant always wanted to locate this commercial along Scholls Ferry Road, but was prevented from doing so by Washington County. Current7�y, Washin gton County has na legal � control over this application, because the property is within the Ti gard City Limits. This proposed site is in accordance with the patantial Murray extention. Even if this ex.tention never occurs, the subject property will still be properly loc�.�Led, as a local street will be developed in this l.�cation to provide an interaection on Scholls Ferry Road. SITE DESCRIPTIQN The subj ect property is fairly flat exeept f'or a swale running through the westerly edge of the property. Thi.a swale will be filled and storm water will be piped througk� this fill to Scholls Ferry Road. Eventually, a signa]: will be provided at the southweat corn�r of the property. Surrounding property is developed with a few rural r�sidential houses on ac�eage. There are no development trends in this area, except for 5000 aquare foot lots on the east side. of 135th Avenue. � ; COMMERCIAL LOCATIONAL CRITERIA , The following ia the intent of commercial development i.n, the City � a Page 2 � q i"^0A: Kreuger Plan Amendment and Zor.e Change � �,.�: ,...�..; Comprehensive Plan: 1 . Commercial �.reas be planned at a acale which relates its location, site and type of stores to the trade area to be served. 2. Surrounding reaidential areas be protected from any possible adverse effects in terms of loss of privacy, naise, lights and glare. 3. Commercial centers and uses be aesthetically attractive �,nd landscaped. 4• Ingr•ess and egress points not create traffic congestion or hazards. 5. Vehicle trips be reduced both in terms of the length of vehicle trips and to tal number o f t.rips o COMMENTS OF PLAN TNTENT 'rhis development is within the scale of existing development in the area and the projected trade area. Since limited development has occu.red in the area, maximum protection of surrounding resi.dential areas will be provided. This pr.operty can be attractively developed and adequately landscaped. Access into the site arill be adequate and vehicle trips will be reduced because residences will not be required to drive to other shopping cen�ez•s for convenience goods. A traffic repnrt demonstrating the adequacy of this site was prepared by Bob Keech. � NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TNTENT AND LOCATTONAL CRITERIA The intent of the neighborhood commercial designation is to provide convenience goods which are bought frequently. The range of uses are limited to the tr�.de area. These developments are intended to serve 5000 people and be 2 acres in size. This site i� 3. 5 acres because that was the size previous��r determined by Washington County to be neederi in this area. In the past, the City chose to retain this 3. 5 acrea instead of reducing it to 2 acres. The service area is intended to be one-half mile. Only one site per intersection is allowed and no traffic congestion is permitted. Direct accesa to an art�rial atreet or a collector street o r•+n is required. This access can not direct tr�ffic through local neighborhood ; streets. Th� aite must be large enough to accomodate preaent and future usea. The scale of development ahall bca compatible with the surrounding area, Residential privacy shall be mai.ntained and the unique features " "" of the site shall be incorporated into the de�relopment. Asaociated lights, noiae �nd other activities shall nat interfere with residential �.reas. . Comments - The location of the subject property complies with all of the above requiremen ta and findings. ; ' _ Page 3 Krueger P7.an Amendment and. Zone Change MEDIUM - HTGH DENSTTY RESIDENTIA�; 'RESIDENTIAL LOCATIONAZ CRITERIA 1 . Areas not committed to low density development> 2e Buffered from low density. � 3. �irect aacess to a majar. collector or arterial stx^eet. �.. Not subject to de�relopment limitationsP . 5. Adequate capacity of publie facilities and services. • 6. Public Transit within one-quarter mile. 7. Commercial. within one-quartex° mile. � 8. ,Adj�.cent to public open s�ace. Density Ranges will be dependant upon the following: (1 ) The topography and natural features of the area and the degree of : possible bufferin g from established low densi�y �esidential areas. ; (2) The capacity of �he services. (3) The distan ce from public transit. (�.) The xelationship of the site to existin g neighborhood and general � commercial centers and office and business centerse COMMENTS ON LOCATTONAL CRTTERIA ' The subject property meets all of the above R2� and medium - high density � resider_tial lo cational criteria. COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 'COVE i _ : Both af these designations comply with the s�tandards of the City. Code. 3 There are no dimensional or set back s�tandards that need to he addressed in order to justify theae requests. Both properties are tnore than adequate in size to accomodate the intend�d uses. :� LCDC GOALS � . �; .i Goal 1 . Citizen 2nvolvement will be availabls at the NPO� Planning Commission and City Council Meetings. + Goal 2. An adequate land�use process is already available �n Ti gard. M � � � �;'� ��, ::; �+;:, � . . . . i:�:'.; �i � . `�,� � . . . .... .. . � . . � � ...�. ,� ::��y... ... ��.:;. .ir ,.. :�+�A � Page � Krueger Plan Amandment and Zone Change Goals 3. /+, 6, 13, and 11�, do n.ot apply. Goa'1 5. None of the subject property needs to be preserv�d as open space. Goa1 7. I�TO natural hazards other than limited drainage exi�t on the site. Normal engineering and construction practices wi11 eliminate a11 drainage impacts. Goal 8. Adequate Qpen space and recreational facilities will occux• when development occurs. Goal 9• Adequate Commercial will help i�prove and diversify the local economy. i Goal 10e No housing wi11 be displaced. Goal 11 . Adequate public facilities and services will be available when cievelopment occurs. _ Goal 12. As development occurs, adequate transporta�tion facilities will be provided> � CqNfPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHEN�IVE PLAN # Coordinatiox� with �iashington County - This has and will occur. # Neighborhood Commercial - Concentration of srnall aommercial and per- sonal service uses for daily shopping and related needs of nearby ' residents. . # Citiz.en InVOlvemer}t - This will be available through the notification and hearing process. , # Natural Features and Open Space - The property is not identified for : open space preservatiori and contains no unique natural features in need of preservation. � # Physical Limitations and Natural Hazards - None a�r� located on the property. ? , � " * Air, Water, and Land Resource Quality - Air pollution will be cut by ' closer proximity of commercial uses to residential. No impacts to ' water and land resource quality are anticipated. , # Economy - This application and land development will he:1p improve and diversify the economy of the state. # Housing - This application will have no effect on housing opportunities. # Public Facilities and Services - They are all available. # Transportation - This application will have a positive effect on the Ti�ard Transportation System� It will help implement the improvement of 135th Avenue and the proposed new east/west street connection of Scholls Ferry Road a.nd 135th Avenu�. r R V��sTY !�SpP �l.►�t An�Nrx��.�1r , � �rrY � -r�� -H g ��t , ,r,t, �oo' tm� So+' �DOO' � 3a� � 1 � (pC! . , ` � �, �' � �o � ,y(o� �oe f�t. O a3 ( � 5v 3 00 1 � � 60� 1�,; � boe. 6az �a s �oo 60� �� E o7 goe '�o � �iC,oPt�l� 1 og 4 �GOMMl.R+�d 1 O� lol :;':'�:::`:::;;':•'.`%:;:�;:'<«�:� 'tc�o I 4 a o .,x:<: , �:'�a i .;:...�'��::S'`:•`_''`;": � ... ii`;:[:: . `x'u"'r� :iF."C;:`:ii:':t`;;;::[•,'.'l•'.+f:• � ,�::Fii`,:��;•,''i�:;:'r'•'{;,;,:�:: �Fji.`:�':�''`;;ti'''•.,:i;;�..;;:r��:'::+i.`.s��;;;;it:`'.i:?+;",, O, ,,::�';'.:';;{;:::;i�';�;i.`;:;:�:��;:':;r:�,d;;:;;`Y Ilol (/ �30� + . �lbTl��` . tu� �'r;;s.+�;'�;t`!��:. �� L.o�-AT10 rl � !�� 1 z�, � ('�o� Z iJ 10�0 N � • 0 � � � . . �o� 100 . io� 2oc� �. � . � WAc.N uT STR-E-ET " (� � � �; 1 � _ , � <� _ .. ___ . . —. ...: � .. . _ STAFF R�PORT AGENDA ITEM 5.4 Apri1 2, 1985 - 7:30 P.M. TTGARD PLANNING COMMISSI�DN FOWLER JUNIOR I�IGH SCHOOL - LGI 1.0865 SoW. WALNUT TIGARll, °JREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 3-85 and Zone Change ZC 3°85 KEQUEST: .Amen3 the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designations from C-P (Commexcial Professional) to C-G (Co�mercial General for a 7.9 acre site. APPLICANT: Portland Fixture �o. OWNER: S & J Buildexs 338 NW Sth 5335 SW Murray Blvd. Portland, OR 97209 Beaverton, OR 97005 LOCATION: South side of 5cholls Ferry Road, immediaCely west of Greent•ray Town Center (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 34BC, Tax Lot 400)0 2. Background The sub�ect property was annexed to the �ity along with several other parcele in 1976 (ZC 12-75). The Comprehensiae Plan adopted tn 1983 designated the northern section of property for Comanerc3al Professional and the larger southern partion for Aieciium High Density residential us�. Site Development Review approval for a 304 unit apartment complex on the southern segment of the property was granted in 1984 (SDR 22-84). 3. Vicinity Information The eastern boundary of the sit� ad�oins �reenway Tuwn Center which is presently zoned C-G. The area to the south is zoned R-25 (diesidentia�, 25 units/acre) and construction of the apartment pro�ect has recently been initiated. In� con3unction w�.th the apartmen�. complex, 125th Avenue will be extended along the western boundary of this site as well as the I apartment project. This street will ultimately intersect with North Dakota Stre�t at 121st Avenue. The parcel west of this street extension on Scholls Ferry Road is also zoned C-P. Other parcels to the south are zoned R-7 (PD) (Residential, 7 units/acre, planned development). Scholls Ferry Road and the Cit}� pf Beaverton lie to the north. 4. Site Information The site is presently undeveloped. A four-way intersection wi11 be constructed at the Scholle Ferry/Sorrento Road intersection which will STAFF REPORT - CPA 3-85 & ZC 3-�5 - PAGE 1 include a traffic signal. The proposed Plan Amendment and �ane Change will aTlow for an expanded list of commercial retail activity. 5. Agency and NPO Comments The Building Inspection Office has no ob�ection to the proposal. The State Highway Division has no ob3ection to the request, but, it is noted that curb and sidewalk matching th� facility to the east will be required. The Engineering Division has the following comments: a, 5ite Development Review approval is required prior to development. b. Access to and from the site must be approved by t�e City and State Highway Division. c, Additional right-of-way should be dedicated along the Scholls Ferry Road frantage to provide a right-of-way width from centerline of 45 feet. NPO ��7 is opposed to the proposal and a representative will be pr�sent at the hearin� to comment. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant crit�ria in this case are Statewide Planning goals l, 2, and 12, Comprehensive Plan polici.es 2.1.1, 5.lel, 5.1,4, 8.1.3, and Chapter 12, Locational Criteria. The Planning staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guideline§ based upon the following findings: 1. Goal 0�1 is met because the City has adopted a Citizens Involvement program including review of a11 development applications by the Neighborhood Planning Organization (NPO). In addition, all public notice requirements were met. 2. Goal 4�2 is met because the City agplied all applicable Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and Development Code requirements to the application. 3. Goal ��12 is satisfied because the proposal in conjunction with the new traffic signal will not have a detrimental impact upon Scholls Ferry Road. The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant poxtions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: 1. P1an Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organizatiun �nd surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the applicant's proposal. STAFF REPORT - CPA 3-85 & ZC 3-85 - PAGE 2 2. Plan Policy 5.1.1 is met because the proposal wi11 have a ema11 positive effect upon the number of jobs available to Tigard residents. It is estimated that the subsequent cammercial development wi11 provide between 150 and 200 jo�s. 3. Plan Policy 5.1.4 is satisfied b�cause the proposed change from C-P to C-G will not enlarge the axea presently designated for commercial use and will not encroach upon nearby residential areas. 4. Plan Policy 8.1.3 wi11 be satisfied as a condition for development of the site. Before any commercis.l developmsnt occurs, City approval through the Site Development Review process will be requiredo 5. The applicable locational criteria are satisfied for the following reasons: a. A residential zoning district is only ad�acent along the � southern baundary of the site. b. The site will not create traffic congestian ar related problems wt►fch cannot be remedied by the proposed traffic s3gnal at the Scholls Ferry/5orrento/North Dakota intersection. c. Direct access to an arterial and collector street ie available, d. Public transportation is avail�ble an Scholls Ferry Road. e. Because of its location and the Site Develop�ent Review approval which is required prior to development, a compatibl.e relationship with nearby properties can be maintained. Concern has been expressed regarding the potential this proposal would have for encoura�ing "strip" commercial development along Scholls Ferry Road. Although the Comprehensive Plan does not contain any policies which deal specifically with this isgue, it is the staff°s position that this proposal does nat pose such a threat for the following reasons: l. The site is presently designated for commercial usee 2. The change w�.11 broaden the list of commercial uses perunitted and it will not displace residential uses. 3. Other undeveloped properties along Scholls Ferry Road in Tigard (and Beavertun for the most part) are designed for residential use. Conversion of these lands would require closer scxutiny on the part of the Ci�y. Also, the City ie abligated by the ;' Metropolitan Housing Rule to provide for an equal mix of aingle � family and multi-family residences with an overall density of 10 units per acre. Any proposal to coavert residential land would need to show compliance with this rule. �� , ;" STAFF R�PORT - CPA 3-85 & ZC 3-85 - PAGE 3 � � ,,_ _ _ , A second concern re�_ates to the intent of this C-P des3gnation to provide to medical and other professfonal serv3ces for the general area. This proposal would no� preclude the establishment of these activities since they are permitted in the C-G zone as we11. Also, similar services are established east on 3cholls Ferry Road in Beaverton and appropriate zoning for this activity exists in the Progress/Washington Square asea. C. RECOI�AiENDATION Based upmn the findings and conclusions noted above, the Planning staff � recommends approval of CPA 3-85 an� �� 3°-�S �u�i,��t to the following condition: - 1. Additional right-of-way sha11 be dedicated to �tie Publ.i.c along the SW ucholls Ferry Road frontage to ine�cease �he ri�;htbof-way to 45 feet from centerline. The description for said dedication shall be tied to the existing right-of-way ce?�terline �s est�blished by Washington County. The dedic�tion dacument sha�ll be on City fo�ms and approvetit by the Engineering Sectian. , ~��r''��„'��,y;�.� �REPAR D BY: Keith Liden APPROVED BY: William A. Mon�han Associate Planner Director of Planning & Develapmen� (KL:pm/1130P) STAFF REPORT -- CPA 3�-85 & ZC 3-85 - PAGE 4 STAFF REPQRT AGENDA TTEDI 5.5 April 2, 1985, 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LGI 10865 S.W. W.ALNUT TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 1-85 and Zone Change ZC 1-85 itEQUEST: Amend the Plan designat3on �rom the Central Business District to Medium High Density Residential and subse�uently change the zone designation from CBD (Cenkral Business pistrict) to R-25 (Resi�iential, 25 units/acre) for. a 2 acre parcel. APPLICANT: Kenneth and La Va11e Allison OWNER: Same 6445 N.E. Ux�ion Ave. Partland, OR 97211 LOCATION: 9655 SW McKenzie Street/Par.ific Village Apts. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2AC, Tax Lot 1800) 2. Background On June 29, 1979, the Planning Camm3ssion approved the development of a 10 unit apartment building (SDR 34-79). An additional 4 unit building was approved on September 17, 1984 (SDR 19-84/V 13-84) and construction is expected this summer. 3. Vicinity Infarmation King's Choice Apartments are locat�d to the southwest and that property , 3s zoned R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre). Commercial development d alon Pacific Hi hwa is to the the north. Vacant land zoned locate g 8 Y CBI� which is included in the "Main Street" proposal, abuts the subject property to the east and south. ' 4. Site Informatinn The p�operty is de�eloped with 32 apartment units and it ts anticipated �hat four additional units will be built thia year. �'he applicant i� requesting the Plan Amendment and Zone Ghange so that the development on. tt�e v�cant groperty to the east (Main Street proiecta will be required to maintain a 30-foot building setback from the sub�ect property. The apartments are a permitted use in the CBD and R-25 zo�aes. STAFF REPORT -CPA 1-85 & ZC 1-85 - PAGE 1 � As the Community Devel.opment Code is written, dlevelopments in the CBD zone are not required to provide a setback when ad�acent to property . he Site Develo ment Review ox P lanned that is also zoned CBD T p Development criteria indicates tlnat appropriate screening must be provided betw�en different uses (i.e. commercial and residential) but no I specific standards are given. 5a Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division and Building Inspection Office have no ob�ections to the request. Comments have not been. rece�ved from NPO �fl. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1 and 2 and Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 6.6.1, and Chapter 12, Locational Criteria. The Planning staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicsble Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines based upon the follo�aing findir�gs: 1. Goal ��1 is met taecause the City has adopted a Citizen's Involvement pr�gram including review of all development applications by the Neighborhoud Planning Organization (NPO). In addition, a11 public notice requirements were met. 2. Goal ��2 is met bec�use the City appliecl all applicable Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and Development Code requirements to the application. The Planning staff has determ:ined that the request is consistent with the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies based upon the followin�g findings: 1. Plan Policy 6.6.1 is met because the rezoning would require the application of specific setback standards for the proposed commercial development to the east. Provision of specific setback and screeningg standards between the ex3sting residential use and the proposed commercial development is consistent w3th this policy. 2. The proposal is consistent with the applicable Locational Criteria contained in Chapter 12 of the Pla�n based upon the following findings: a. The land is not committed to low density devel.opment. b. The property is developed and presently buffered from the low deneity residential uses to the south. c. The apartments have direct access to Pacific Highwsy which ie an artexial. d. The property is developed and no development limitations, inc'luding capacity of public facilities, are apparent. STAFF REPORT -CPA 1-85 & ZC 1-$5 - PAGE 2 ,�::� i�� e. Public transit is available on P�cific Hi�hway. f. General commercisl services are available within one quarter mile along Pacific Highway and on Main Street. g. 7he property is in close proximity to the proposed Fanno Creek Park. Finally, it should be noted that the exfst�n� CBD zone allows for multi-family development equivalent to that allowed in the R-40 (Residential, GO unit�/acre) aone. This proposal will reduce the future development potential of the property. This proposal is directly linked to the Main Street developffient which will fmllow th3s item on the agenda. Determining what consitute� adequate scr�ening and bufferin� betwean dif£ere�t land uses is difficult at best. �i�ce this propsal m�ets the �pplicable criteria, the staff is recommending approval. Ho�ever, it is a�so suggested th�t both cases b� heard by �he Commission before any xecommendations or d�cisions are made. C. REC�MMENDATION Based upon thp f�ndings and canclusions noted above, th� Planning staff recommends approval �f G�A 1-85 and ZC 1-85s � __._ /�// p ..� / L'!/� �r_....��I\� PREPARED Yc I�eith Lid�n AP VED BY: William A. Monahan A�sociate Planner Dir�ctor Community Development (br/1133P) �� , ;; �� +; ;; �I :�� . . � � � � . f�l r'� . . . . . .��i9 M1?:i � � . . � � � P-'�1 . . . . � {.,.,, � .� .. � ��>i� t� STAFF REPORT' -CPA 1-85 6 ZC 1-�•85 - PAGE 3 `! � � ii �;, „. ("^ , .. �T' x 6!t}�5 N. E. Union Avenue '� Portland, Uregon 97211 i January 22� 1985 I i C it y o f T igard �i P.O.T. 23397 I Tigard, Oregon �7223 Attention: Keith S. Liden, Associate Planner Gentlemens You will find enclosed our application for a Compre��nsive Plan Amendment and a Zone Change on our property located at 9655 S. W. PhcKengie Street (Tax Lot 1800) on which aur Pacific Village At�artmen�s are lacated, We are requesting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from C�D to ldedium �ii�h Residential and tlae Lone Change grom CBD to R-25. Tt is our understanding tha.t within the las� few months the Westl.and Investment Company requested and recea.ved a sone change from R-12 to R-25 for the Kings Choice Apartments x�hich immediately ad�oins our property on the southwest. It seems reasoriable that we should have the same zoning on aur property. Our units are in excellent � condition and will be available for people to live in for many years. We have 22 one-bedroom apartrnents, and •i�en two-bedroom apartments which vrere built in 1979. 1Ne believe when the soning code was writ•ten it n�as for the protection o� residential property and provided a 30 foot setback to keep commeraial structures and ob�ectionable noise a reasonable distance. Tn submitting this application for a sone change it is not our desire to i.ntensively inorease the density of our apartments. Y � Page 2 - Gity of Ti�ard -- January 22� 198�. The reason we are so concerned about the $oning of nur property is that there is a large undeveloped ar.ea toned fo.r commercial use immediately adjoa.ning our property- on the northeast. lti�e feel that vrithout a �etback of at least thirty feet an.y commexcial �i development af that property would definitely decreas� the liveabil.ity II of our apartments. Yer.y truly yours, ��s�� - ��,f.��r��-� Kenneth Vo Allison rt��?�.�'.P-e-/�C�('JL'..P��..n-c-`. �°°'L . SIIZI t.�PiERS 00 ^ �� ,, ; ,�, � ♦ / C J. V �ti i �oe /74�� # � • �' `'' . 14 p� '�a " °a ' �04 30Ac ° �\ y; x. ,��.� �`1 `e� I 20n '� � , r-.>.; - " �0 8 e� �� '� � � ,,,,.,�,. �—,�^a - ��—' .j6'C�' 6' , i �-' �� 3.._ ' �;�. ., . , a, � : \;,< �?e `r '.' - , , '� - i. ��— �< J :° � -/ 1503 �� ` `; �' � �C �� { 00 \`�' �I � /.��.�ilc e'�, �—�, , . 2! o I��{ �_ ` � x � � - ,34c .�9ssc t` o� '�i�t'�If,lf �' , �� _ �: �`. .- � ^ I °` 5' � � �° � � ,., . '� � 2 '�� ° � � \'It��N�' � Ol � °P i �n t.��c�. �• � . � 2OC�e'+ �, �.�'��I s, �ti �7 _ :io w ,,•. , �P:r�� .25.G � �� *9�4c. � �` «�Y,�s. /�w Sd:J C ��`�I� � �� (� �.o � Far–t�:�+V7.Vvf�rfv Q2�0� �� -�� '� '�� r 1 y � ' � r5 �� s,'� t� ,•�;;:;+. , ,'" , � � ',t, o o ,m . \"�3'� �''�� N '19 ��0 fCSNoii2 �,� •lG'.4c. �\ _,�. �u " A � ��ao .� s�� ► �fGS.nIE2! r� � � o qg,� � . �` `1 , �q�� , � '4,.° �`�� •► �� •��3b \? . ;S r ��1�, r r \ '� s '� ' � ° �e s� � ��. �.rip2 �. + \ / � ; � �_ � ,p \ - / � �� o y� 2.a?4c. ' � ti° � r r �� •�4e ,,,;�' }o e� � � �i .! • ��l �/ a , � �! \� � , � g`�,0� �J,' r "�;�� ;';�03 r � ,,.. � . / .S4.Gc. , o � ..o _ a��g� � � � � �� _ � � • ei•t9, �� e -,J ai � * �\ •,� �r 1��Q • � tyaq i�� 6.�y� � �N � � ! l� / P'ens .�7* �QC. , \ . . y'�� w"s �� r � / = ' � F � � � `a�. � % � � � .• \. � \ / �O � \ \ ,y . � -��,� / • ,,.` ',►� � ` \�� '��geY;�= H �, , ,�' C � / � �,t �' � � � / � ��o�� 1 : ' SEE MAP � d �r •+ Z.S ! 2C8 `' .`.J! y �,• „ / � \, : �? �- `'� . . / . , `` ..\ � � \ \ � SEE MA P ..�;.,, - F. . . _ , � , -_ . .� .�: �� ,f 2s � 2ca : = � �� .. , .. i�wr.i�' `11}"�,'4-Yr.'�r►'s� ��.a.- _ _ ��:{� '�.�„ _l yr:.��- • ��.F '•�,.� .f'k.�FYC�y �. ;f3y y _tr � ML' �`Y• i�u's� -�>-.�p�'ylsp � i�R�i'�.� .. ' �1�� / / �1p C !o� \ � � �� '' .� �� i��S56�� `o� � � � 4 D2 Ac. ''o ' � � . � � ��1 � '�� •�� A. �\ SO � � ,ii J / �� \ 'd e ; � �F" `°� 16�0 � �' F , , \ •a, ; �� .4/AC. ,�a r� . 9r O�� Ip �p� j� �' / r A7�� . I'�V( 'Qj� � I�" . / � � y � J� �.�.4(; ��p � �/. 4� � �. � � . �i ( 6� `'• •J�'�' � � C �� v t o .j. �Q .�4�/1 C °S�6 f ia ��;� �, \�! � p 9 0 ��f � �y�� 4� i .y�� a► �`�� Q 6�1 p � . . . .� ��1y� . . � .�y �/V3 �°� . , ' � �;Ca ./BaQC. �� \ � \�4,�� 7�0 � A� � � `� T\o� 9 � ./:S�� •e � '�g.� �dt8� � gf'\'y�'� 08�� \ o� � , Ag°� p�?/ � e2 � �v'' `�''� � �� \ � 4� � � , � � \\ �yQ�� °y+, � � �aa� x • : `�g ,.' t _ \ � �; �� r e,A � � . � . � �'\` A�q�9 �\ /� f . . . .. � af,� � . p �� r � ` � < . . 9g'�� • ,��ja_` �A�, \ v, �� .,� \\ \1'✓ �s �:� \*S ca � � .�'w�' �b SY ! � s �7►\ /�! , >> � � • � �'��% % � , - � i / •'�•Ra�• � ��b�,j �''o� � . t t > $�� A� ' :;�'� i.'2i�� : ��`� ��, , r �°a 1 ' . a� + * �` ; 1��,�i `y� � ; e ; \ { � ; / w�.,��. � h . . � r.r k w � {. . .. .. . , .�.,y��'� .""'.'�Ti"8 5...r.� . . .. ' �� ! . . . . .. . . . .... _.r . .� . . . . €�� ,,'�kti; `�,� � 1 ,��,. �.• a �. , ,,,� , , . . t. � f . , , . _ k ,.�.�� ,� �; �o � �,_�,:w.il � ��`�. I . � . . � �. . � °f_t�i r.�,�i F, St�j e.��°. �.(c+.;2£3 � . . .. . .♦ 3� �": w ?Lo � F .tiea��+3 k €Y�&c�S'!4� g9' � ,5 .. �. . � ... . .. . � . ty1.' ' � �'.. b E�4.�tp:W,�\;t9t<y'G!9. . � . �. . � " . � � � �'• ..,�a .. . . � Y i�-c� k .-C 1 k r.l Il� �`5��`t.� i.2x�my�.��i � � - �� 0i¢'y ` . . ��r.n� \...1 �$rv'�i.:Yd�R`�1�,��.�:1�'dfvfa�T"�'k,i ' . . ' ' .. . . � . .�r�d+ Y6t �r��Ikz3;( � e!d,!E'��+..�,G4k�t'3�l� �`" .so� � � ��,}s r�.,t�b�s��sa�Ea:46.��rgc 0.6a r�t�� . � � � � .� � � • ' � it�l��7...�.J��..��/. . , '�e, 4 ` ; + +�, r �W::,(f�'IYL�l?e3Uft�,N��COft1P,�NY . , q► ° ; rrU115.UN.BV7hl�HL.F,l7,hSPJY. .,�.J� � . ,. + . , .: . r�rrruk�v�,or�ar�2y ; � - :�' � :� , . , , , „ : , . ,. , , . ,, ; � -� � � � ��r � .. CITY OF TIGARD �'" FINAL ORDEit N0. 85�-� PC A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONSy WHICH APPRQVES APPLICATIONS FOR CONCEPTUAL PLAN APPROVAL (PD 1-85) AND A ZONE CHANGE (ZC 5-85) REQUESTEI7 �Y MAIN STREET LAND CORP. The Tigard Planning Commission received the abov� application at a public hearing on Agril 2, 1985. The Commission based its decision on the factsa findings, and conclusions noted below: A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Planned Development PD 1-85 and Zone Change ZC 5°85 � � REQUEST: For Conceptual Plan �pproval for a 221,000 square foot retail center on a 20.3 acre property and for a Zone Change from R-12 (PD) Residential, 12 units/acre) te� CBD (Central Business District) for a 3.19 acre parcel on the sou�heast side of Ash Stre€�t. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Central Business Dis�rict �-� ZONING DESIGNATION: CBD (Central Busines� District) and R-12(PD) (Residential, 12 units/acre, planned development) APPLICA�VT: Main Street Land Corp. OWNER: Same Suite 303, 10505 3W Barbur Blvd. Portland, Oregon 97219 LOCATION: Southwest corner of Ma.in Street and Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2CC, Tax T�ot 12a0, 1300, 14D0, 1SQ0, 1600, 2200, 2300, 2301, 201 and 2S1 2DB, 300). 2. Background �' On April 26, 1982, the City Council granted Preliminary and General Plan approval as we11 as a Sensitive Lands Pernait for the Main 5treet pro�ect (CPR 8-81, CPR 9-81, and M 2-81). The proposal included approximately 16 acres of land and 174,000 gross square feet of building area. The Planning Commission gr.anted an extension for this approval on May 3, 1983. This extension has expired. '. f'; � 3. Vic3nity Informatian The property to the east is designated as greenway in the Comprehensive t;; Plan and is the site of the Downtown Fanno Creek Park. The properties �;', to the southwest and south are zoned CBD, R-4.5, and R-12(PD) and are =' ��' developed with single and multi-family residences. The properties �long , �� Main Street and Pacific Highway near the north end of the pra�ect are � �.� zoned CBA or C-G and are devoted to commercial uses. ; i' l3 {k' FINAL ARDER N0. 85-� PC - PD 1-85 & ZC 5-85 - PAGE 1 t; �; � k �.: . . . . .. .... . . . . . . . . � . . . .... ..... ._....... �__,. . �_�., ' . �. � . . ..___ .. . .. . ... .. ..... .. . . . ... � . . . . ..�� . . � . .. 4. S�te Informat�on and Proposal Description km1� This site is vacant except for two buildings which W�ii be removed prior �o development. Fanno Creek runs through the eastern section of the property and approximately five acres of the site lie within the 100 year flnod plain. The 19£f2 plan concept has been revised to include a parcel on the southeast side of Ash Street and one other small parcel for a total of 2003 acres> The total gross floor space of this commercial pro3ect wi11 be approximately 221,OU0 square feet. The project is to be completed in three phases with a large retail stare (1139000 square feet) and the public improvements, including an extension of Ash Street thrmugh the pro�ect to Paeific Iiighwsy representing �he first phaseo A seconci acce�s to Main Street is also proposed. The parcel on the opposite s�de of Ash Street is intended to be rezoned from R-12 (PD) to CBD and develop�d as a parking lot. Since the project wi11 involve some fiZling and excavation, a Sensitive Lands approval wi11 be necessaryo This as�ec� of the development w311 be reviewed at a publlc h�aring with the Hearings Officer. 5o Agency and I�?PO Comm�nt� The Engin��ring Division has the followin.g comments: � - a. The proposed access is in general conformance with the previously approved plana b. The detailed plan should discourage or eliminate parking on the Ash St�eet extension and the street leading to Main Street. c. The Ash Street extension should be designed to discourage through traffic into the neighborhood. d. A 90° interssction should be provided for the dead end street that will eventually cross Fanno Creek and join Ash Street on the other side. e. The revised plan will require the approval of a Sensitive Lands permit from the Hearings Officer. ', f. A landscaped buffer should be provided along the street connecting Ash Street and Pacific Highway to screen tine shopping cenker from Fanno Creek Park. The Building Inspection Office has no objection to the proposal. The State Highway Division approved the proposed access on Pacific Iiighway. Additional comments by the Division shall be available at the � hearin�. �� FINAL ORDER N0. 85- d� PC - PD 1-85 � 2C 5-85 - PAGE 2 . I, The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has the following comments: II, � a. The barrier at Ash 5treet should be breakable to allow for emergency access. I b. The driveway on Main Street should allow for inbound traffic. � The Psrk Board has no objection to the proposal. � , Comments have not been xeceiv�d from NPO �� 1. li B. FINDZNGS AND CONCLUSIONS II I The relevant criteria for granting conceptual plan approval in this case I axe Statewide Flanning Goals ly 2, 5, 7, 8, and 9; Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 302.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.2, 3.5.3, 5.1.1, 5.1.3, 6.3.3, 6n6e1, 7+2.1, 8.1.3, 1I..2.1, 11.2e2 and 11.2.3; and Comffiunity Development Code chapters 18.66, 18.80, 18.84, and 18.100. The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicabl� Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines bassd upon the followin� findYngs: 1. Goa1 �� 1 :Ls met because th� C�.ty has adopted a Cit�zens Involeement prngram including review of a11 development applications by the Neighborhood Plannin� Organization (NPO). In � additian, all public notice r�quirements were met. 2. Goal �� 2 is met because the Ci.ty applied a]L7. a.pp�.icable Statewide Planning Goals, City Camprehensive Plan Policies and Development code requirements to �he application. 3. Goals 4� 5 and �� 7 will lbe addressed during the Sensikive Lands review of the project. 4. Goal 4� 8 is satisfied because the site plan is compatible with the Fanno Creek Park Plan. The Park Board has reviewed the proposal and no objections were raised. 5. Goal �� 9 is satisfied because the development will have a positive economic impact upon the downtown area. The Planning Comffiissinn has determined that the proposal, with several modifications, is cansiatent with th�e relevant poxtions of the Comprehensive Plan bar�ed upan the findings noted below: ].. Plan Policy 2.1..1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Plann3ng Organization and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing an� opportunity to comment on the applicant's proposal. 2. P1an Polic3es 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.2, 3.5.3, and 7.2.1 shall �,� be reviewed as part of the Ssnsitfve Lands permit process. FINAL ORDER N0� 85- O7 PC - PD 1-85 & ZC 5-85 - PAGE 3 ` 3. Plan Policies 5.1.1. and 5.I.3 are satisfied because thie �.. commercial center will have a positive affect upon the local job market and it will contribute towards establishing the downtown a� the viable core area fos the cammun3.ty. 4. Plaz� Policy 6.3.3 is not completely satis.fied because the downtown is considered to be an "Established Area" and development occurin� within the area is intended to preserve and enY�ance the character of these areas. The proposed site plan does not provide sufficient setbacks and/ar buffering adjacent to som� of the existing residential uses and therefore the prAject would have a detrimental impact upon these prnperties. 5. Plan. Policy 6.6.1 is not satisfied because no buffertng is shown site lan between some of ttae commercial structures and on the p ad�acent residential build:Lngs. Modifications to correct this d�fieiency are noted below. 6. Plan Policy �.1.3 will be satisfied during the detailed plan and constructed phases of the development. The public streets within the pro,�ect will require a 50 foot wide right-of-way and a 32 foot wide roadway. 7. Plan Policies 11.2.I, 11.2.2 and 11.2.3 are satisfied becau�e the site plan includes the extension of Ash Street to the eastern baundary of the prnject and a temporax•y b�rr3.cade w311 be � installed near Hill Street. This �bstruction will be removed in accordance with Policy 11.2.3. The Planning Commission concludes that with the modifica�ions noted, L-he proposal satisfies the relevant portians of the Com�unity Development Cod� based upon the findings listed below: 1. Chapter 18.66 (CBD Zone) of the Code is satisfied because the proposal meets the minimum standards relat3ng ta setbacks, lot coverage, and building height. 2. Chapter 18.80 (Planned Development) of the Code is satisfied except for Secti.on I8.80.110 (c)(3) and 18.80.120 (a)(3). the staff underatands that extensive gradin$ will be neGessary on th� site, bur a generalized grading concept has not been submitted. The grading proposed in the flood plain may be reviewed during the Sensitive Lands review. The land form alteration to be done an ', the remainder of the site is critical for conceptual revie�a in order to determine the relationship between the new commeretal buildings and the residences to the south and west. Section 18.80.120 (a) (3) is not satisfied because in some casess, na land�caPing or visual buffering is shown between the eommercial buildings and nearby residential uses. Of particulax conce�n are visual impact and the noise froffi loading areas and �� FINAL ORDER N0. 85- D� PC - PD 1-E5 & ZC 5-85 - PAGE 4 i I building ventilation systems. Addi�ional information must be ( submitted to illu�trate how these n�gative impacts will be mitigated. The site contains several large fir trees and one sign.ificant cluster of trees on the western boundary of the proj�ct near Pacifie Village Apartments. S�ction 18.80.120 (a) (3) of the Code require� that trees with a six inch caliper or greater be saved whenever possible. The pxoposed site plan 3ndicates that all exisCing trees wi11 be removed. The plan should be revised to save as man�y of these 3arger trees as� possible. This is particularly true of the trees along the western boundary of the project because of their usefulness as a landscaped buffer. Finally, the requirements for landscaping and screen3ng will vary depending upon L•he decision that is made regarding CPA 1-85/ZC 1-85 for Pacific Village Apartmen�s. 3o Chapter 18.84 (Sensitive Lands) of the Code will be �atisfied during the Sensitive Lands review procass with the Hearings Officer. It should be noted that it is possible that the site plan will need minor revisian as a result of this review. 4. Chapter 18.100 (Landscaping and Screening) of the Code is satisfied except for Section 1�.100.13a which requires a 15 foot wide landscaped buffer when adjacent to an R-4.5 zone. The loading area far the Costco store practically abuts the �,.._ residential property to ttie we�t. The relevant criteria fa�c granting a Zone Change for the parcel on tlie southeast side of �,sh Street are Statewide Planning Goa1s 1 and 2 and ! Section 18.6b.030 of the Community Development Code. The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines based upon the findings below: 1. Goal �� 1 is met because the City has adopted a Citizens Involvement program including rev3ew of all development applications by the Neighborh�'�d Plannin� �rganization (NPO). In addition, all public notice requirements were met. 2. Goal 4� 2 is met because the City applied all applicable Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Polieies and Develapment code r�equi.rements to the application. 'The Dlanning Commission concludes �hat the groposal is consiste�t with the applicable skandards in the Community Development Code bas�d upon the following findings: �< FiNAL ORDER N0. 85- �� PC - PD 1-85 & ZC 5-85 - PAGE 5 � __ _ 1 �i I � `I � 1. Section 18.66.030 of the Code indicates that the sub,ject property as well as the other nearby parcels zoned R-12 (PD) shall be deve�oped in accordance with the provisions of the R-12 zone. The R°12 zone does allow for parking facilities as a conditio�al use. 2. However, the Code does not allow grading to be done in the flood plain. By limiting the Commercial Use of the parcel tc+ parking, the intent of the Cude w311 not be compromised. A Sensitive Lands Permit must be issued prior to construction of the parking lot. C. DECISION � Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning Commission grants ConceptuaZ P1an approval of PD 1-85 sub�ect to the Following conditions: la Sensitive Lands approval will be required for all grading and improvements within the 100 year flood plair�. A Sensitive Lands �p�roval shall be obtained before th� Detailed Plan is submitted for reviewo 2. The grading of the entire sitey including the area within the 100-year flood plsin, shall be revi�wed by the Park. Board. The location of the pedestrian/bicycle path sha1.1 also be reviewed by ' the Park Board prior to finaJ. approval of a design. 3. A Detatled P1an shall be submitted to the Pla.nning Director or Planning Commission (depending upon the Director's findings in condition 2 above) for approval that is in conformsnce with the �ey�uirements in 18.80 of the Code. 3:n addition, said plan sha11 include the following information or modifications: a. Buffering and screening consistent with Sectian 18.80.120 (a) (3) (B) and Chapter 18.100 of the Code. b. Identification and location of roise s�urces within the western portion of the pro3ect and a method for shielding adjoining residences from excessive noise impact�. c. The landscaping plan for the development shall preserve as many trees over six inch caliper on tt►e aite as practical. 4. Specific coYiditions relating to public improvements shall be applied upon Detailed Plan approvale 5. This approval is valid ii exercised within one year of the final decision date. �. FINAL ORDER N0. 85-� PC - PD 1-85 & ZC 5-$5 - PAGE b Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning Commission appro��es ZC 5-85 sub�ect to the following conditionc �� l. A Deed Restriction shall be placed upon the parcel (1S1 2DB, TL 300) limiting the Commercial Use of the property to park3nge It is further ordered that the applicant be notified of the entry of this order. PASSED: This � � day of _��_, 1985, by the Planning Commission of the City of Tigard. v'• ��s.f'-•8' �j� A. Donald Mo�n, Presid�nt Tigard Planning Cammissio� (1136P/dm3) � i i � � I � � 1 i � i � FINAL ORDER N0. 85�_ PC - PA 1-85 & 2C 5--�5 - PA�E 7 I i I _ I , ti �^iAFF REPORT . _ F AGENDA ITEA! 5.6 April 2, 1985 - 7:30 P.M. y' TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LGI 10865 S.W. WALNUT TIGARD, OR�GON 97223 , A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Planned Development PD 1-85 and Zone Change ZC 5-85 REQUEST: For Conceptual Plan approval for a 221,000 square foot retail center on a 20.3 acre property and for a Zone Change from R-12 (PD) Residential, 12 units/acre) to CBD (Central Business District) for a 3.19 acre pareel on the southeast side of Ash Street. COMPELEHENSIVE PLAN AESIGNATION: Central Business District ZONING DESIGNATION: CBA (Central Business District) and R-12(PD) (Residential, 12 units/acre, planned development) APPLICA1dT: Main Street Land Corp. OWNERe Same Suite 303, 10505 SW Barbur Blvd. Portland, Oregon 97219 LOCAT7QN: Southwest corner of Main Street and Pacific Highway (Wash. Coa Tax Map 2S1 2CC, Tax Lot 120U, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600, � 2200, 2300, 2301, 201 and 2S1 2DB, 300). 2. Background On April 26, 1982, the City Council granted Preliminary and General Plan approval as well as a Sensitive Lands Permit for the Main Street project (CPR 8-81, CPR 9°81, and M 2-81). The proposal included approximately 16 acres of land and 174,000 gross square feet of building area. 3. Vicinity Information The property to the east is designated as greenway in the Comprehensive Plan and is the site of the Downtown Fanno Creelc Park. The properties to the southwest and south are zoned CBD, R-4.5, and R-1'l(PD) and are devel.oped with single and multi-family residences. The properties along Main Street and Pacific Highway near the north end of the proje�t are zoned CBD or C-G and are devoted Lo commercial uses. �� } S�AFF REPORT - PD 1-85 & ZC 5-85 - PAGE 1 . 4. Site Information and Proposal Descxipt�on • This site is vacant except for two buildings which will be removed prior to development. Fanno Creek runs through the easC�rn section of the property and approximately five acres of the site lte within the 100 year flood plain. The 1982 plan concept has been revised to include a parcel on the southeaEt side of Ash Street and one other small parcel for a total of 20.3 acres. The total gross floor space of this commercial pxoject will be approximately 221,000 square feet. The project is to be completed in Chree phases with a large retail store (113,000 square feet) aad the public improvements, including an extension of Ash Street through the project to Pacific Highway representing the first phase. A second access to Main Street is also proposed. The parcel on the opposite side of Ash Street is intended to be rezoned from R-12. (PD) to CBD and developed as a parking lot. Since the pznject will involve some filling and excavation, a Sensitive Lands approval will be necessaxy. This aspect of the development will be reviewed at a public hearing with the Hearings Officero 5. Agency and NP� Comments The Engineexing Division has the following comments: a. The proposed access is in genexal conformance with the previously approved plan. b. The detailed plan should discourage or eliminate parking on the Ash Street extension and the street leading to Main Street. c. The Ash Street extension should be designed to discourage thrQUgh traffic into the neighborhood. d. A 90° intersection should be provided for the dead end stree� that will eventually cross Fanno Creek and join Ash Street on the other side. e. The re�ised plan will require the approval of a Sensitive Lands permit from the Hearings Officer. f. A landscaped buffer should be provided along the street connecting Ash Street and Pacific Highway to screen the shopping center from Fanno CrEek Park. The Building Inspection Office has no objection to the pxoposal. The State Highway Division approved the proposed access on Pacific Highway. Additional comments by the Division shall be available at the hearing. I �'.,' ' ;;; ' STAF`F REPORT - 'PD 1-85 & ZC 5-85 - PAGE 2 ! ,` : ' � � _ _._ . �.J, The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection Dis�ri�t has the following comment�: S^ • a. The barrier at Ash StrePt should be breakable ko allow for emergency access. b. The driveway on Main Street shouxd allow for inbound traffic. The Park Board has no objection to the proposal. Comments have not been received from NPO l� la Be FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant crit�ria for granting conceptual plan approval in this ease are �[atewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, and 9; Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3v2.3, 3.4.2, 3.5.3, 5.1.1, 5.1.3, 6.3..s, 6.5.1, 7.2.1, R:�.3, 11.2.1, 11.2.2 and 11.2.3; and Community Development Code chapters 18.66, 18.80, 18.84, and 18.100. The Planning staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applieable Statewide Pl�cani.ng Goals and Guidelines based upon the fallowing findings: 1. Goal 46 1 is met because the City has adopked a Citizens Invol.veffient program including review of all development a�pl.ications by the Neighborhood Planning (3rganiza�ion (NPO)a In addition, all publir_ notice requirements were me�m 2. Goal �l 2 is met because the City applied all applicable Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and Development code requirements to the application. 3. Goals 4� 5 and �l 7 will be addressed during ti�e Sensitive Lands review of the project. 4. Goal 4� 8 is satisfied because the site plan is compatible with the Fanno Creek Park Plan. The Park Board has reviewed the proposal and no objections were raised. 5. Goal 4l 9 is satisfied because the development will have a positive economic impact upon the downtown area. The Planning staff has determined that the proposal, with several modifications, is consistent with the relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: 1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied b�ecause the Neighborhood Planning Organfzation and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and opportunity to comwent on rhe applicant's proposal. 2. Plan Policies 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.4.2, 3.5.3, and 7.2.1 shall be reviewed as pa�rt of the Sensitive Lands permit process. �TA�?Fr,,REPORT � PD 1-85 & ZC 5-85 - PAGE 3 ; , � � . ¢ ,. :G 3. Plan Policies �'.1.1. and 5.1.3 are satisfied because this � commercial center will have a positive affect upon the local job market and it wi11 contribute towards establishing the downtown as the viable core area for the community. • 4. Plan Policy 6.3.3 is not completely satisfied becan�se the downtown is considered ta be an "Established Area" �nd development QCCUY�Ilg within the area is intended to preserve and enhance the character of these areas. The proposed site plan does not pr�vide sufficient setbacks and/or buffering adjacent to some of the existing residential uses and therefore the project would have a detximental impact upon these properties. 5. Plan Policy 6.6.1 is not satisfied because no buffering is shown on the site plan between some of the commercial structures and adjaaent residential buildings. Modifications to correct this defici�ncy are noted below. 6. Plan P'olicy t3.1.3 will b� satis�ied during the detail�d plan and cons�ructed phases of the development. The public streets within the project will require a 50 foot wide right-of-way and a 32 foot wide roadway. 7. P1an Policies 11.2.1, 11.2m2 and 11.2.3 are satisfled because the site pl.an includes the extension of Ash Street to the eastern boundary of the projeck and a temporary barri�ade wil.l be insta�l�ed n�ar Hill 5�reet. This obstructic�n will be removed in accordance with Policy 11.2e3. The Planning staff concludes that with the modif3cations noted, the proposal satisfies the relevant portions of the Community Development Code based upon the findings listed below: 1. Chapter 18.66 (CBD Zone) of the Code is satisfied because the proposal meets the minimum standards relating to setbacks, lot coverage, and building height. 2. Chapter 18.$0 (Planned Development) of the Code is satisfied except for Section 18.80.110 (c)(3) and 18.80.120 (a)(3). The staff understands that extensive grading will be necessary on the site, b�t a generalized grading concept has not been submitted. � The �rading proposed �n the flood plain may be reviewed during the Sensitive Lands review. The land form alteration to be done on the remainder of the site is critical for conceptual review in order ta determine the relationship between the new commercial buildings and th� r�sidences to the south and westo Section 18.$0.120 (a) (3) is not satisfied because in some cases, no landscaping or visual buffering is shown between the commercfaY buildings and n�arby residential uses. Of particular concern are visual impact and the noise from loadtn� areas and STAFF RE°�itT - PD 1-85 & ZC 5-�5 - PAGE 4 ' building ventilation systems.- � AQditional information must be submitted to it'lustrate how these negative impacts will be • mitigated. The site contains several large fir trees and one s3gnificant cluster of trees on the western boundary of the pro�ect near Pacific Village Apartments. Section 18.80.Z20 (a) (3) of the Code requires that Crees with a six inch callper or greater be saved whenever possible. The proposed site plan indicates [hat all existing trees wfll be removed. The pl�n should be revised to save as many of khese larg�s tr�es as possible. This is particularly true of the trees along the w�stern boundary of the project because o� their uaefulness as a landscaped buffera Finally, the requirement� for landscaping and screening will vary depending upon the decision that is made regarding CPA 1-85/ZC 1-85 for Pacific Village Apartments. 3. Chapter 18.84 (Sensitive Lands) of the Code will be satisfied during the Sensitive Lands review proeess wieh the Hearings Officer. It shou�d be noted that it is possible th�t the site plan will need ffiinor revision as a result of this xeview. 4. Chapter 18.100 (�andscaping and Scree�ing) ot ehe Code fs satisfied except for S�cCion 18.100<130 which requires a 20 foot wide landscaped bu�fer �hen adjac�nt to an R-�.5 zone. The loading area for trie Gostco store pr�ctic�llq abuts the residential property to the west. The relevant criteria for granting a Zone Cha�ge for the pare�l on the southeast side of Ash St��et �re Statewide Planning Goals 1 and 2 and Sec�ion 1a.66.030 of the Community llevelopment Code. The Pl�nning stsff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines ba�ed upon the fatndings below: 1. Goal �t 1 is met because the City has adopted a Citizens Involvement program including review of all development applications by the Neighborhood Planning Organization (NPO). In addition, all public notice requirements were met. 2. Goal �/ 2 is met because the City applied all applicable Statewi.de Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and Development code requirements to the application. The Planning staff concludes that the proposal is not consistent w�.th the applicable stardards in the Community Development Code based upon the following findings: �TAF'F REPORT - PD I-85 & ZC 5-85 - PAGE 5 r 1. Section 18.66.030 of the Code .indicates that the sub'ect ro ert as well as the{'other nearb arcels zoned R-12 , p p y y p (PD) shall be � dev�loped in accordance with the provisions of the R-12 zone. A rezoning to CBD would eonflict with this provision of the Code. 2. The R-I2 zone does allow for parking facilieies as a conciitional us�. The parking 1ot proposal could be reviewed as a CondiCional Use along with the Sensitive Lands issue before �he Hearings Officer. C. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning staff recommends Conceptual Plan approval of FD 1-85 sub�ect to the following conditions: 1. Sensitive Lands approval will be required for all grading and improvements within the 100 year flood plain. A Sensitive Lands approval shall be obtained before the Detailed Plan is submitted for review. ', 2. A Detailed Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval that is in conformance with the requiremenes in 18.80 of the Code. In addition, said plan shall include the following information or modifications: a. Buffering and screening consistent with Section 18.8Q,120 (a) (3) (�) and Chapter 18.100 of the Code. b. Identification and locatio�n of noise �our es �� c ithin the western portion of the project and a m�[hod for shielding adjoining residez�ces from excessive noise impactso c. The landscaping plan for khe development shall preserve as many trees over six inch caliper on the site as practical. 3. Specific conditions relating to public improvements shall be applied upon Detailed Plan approval. 4. This approval is valid if exercised within one year ofc the final decision date. Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning staff I� recommends denial of ZC 5-85. i i � ' ��:�ir� �� I I PREPARED B : Keith Liden t1PPROVEA BYe William A. Monahan Associate Planner Director of Planning & ; Development � ± i (1136P/dm3) ' � � STAFF KEPORT - PD 1-85 & ZC 5-85 - PA.GE 6 � ' � lutarch 28, _198� D ��n L1�� city of �i�;ard APR 1 1985 Plannin�; Commission C1TY Ti�ard , 0 r �� TI�A�t) 9 7 z 2 3 P�ANNlNG pEpr, Memb�rs: Rea Main Street Zand Cor•poration Development �D 1-85 and ZC 5-85 As residents of the neighborhood abutin� the proposed development on lower Ash Avenue , we have several questions and comments we feel need your most careful considera�iono . 1) The preliminary plans indicate that the building size is enormous and would absolutely overwhelm the adja.cent residences . To give you an idea of the ma�nitude of the proposed buildin�, it is of a comparable size to the I Bea�rerton Fred Meyers . 2) We believe it should be a condition of the �1 nnina II a b Commission or Council to review design af buildin�(s) . �' A.s we understand now the building is to be a tip up , concrete with brushed surface painted in �, muted beige � wi�hout any break in desi.gn� different colars , ��'£set ' doorways� fascia, and windows . ,�) Comment No. 2 prompts us to c�uestti�on trie fac� that the buildin� has been placed in the correct zor�e . The pr�perty has been zoned as Commercial DeveJ..opment but this ` ' particular bi,�ilding resembles a warehouse, anci is mor� indicative of industrial zonin�. Indeed, it� function is more typi.c�.l of a warehouse . 4) There is also co�cern on roof. screenin� and noise poll,ution. For instance , where will �ir conditioning units be placed. If on the roof, unless some quieting device is used , noise levels could be unacceptable to adjoining homes . Screening of roof so those homes furth�r upon hill wotlid not observe a distasteful tar roof. Shotzld be complimentary to nei�hbo-rhood. 5) Parking lot li�;htin� could also present a problem during eve.�in� hours . We would find it an infrin�ement of our privacy to be illuminated like a neon sign in our back yards which face the development. ' 6) The zone chan�;e from R 12 to CBD zo,nin� would be �,�aitzat Nk'0 �1 policy. The zone R-12 was created as a buffer between cornmercial and residential . 7) Lastly, what is t�ie pro jected traffic impact on a.lr.��acly conf;e,ted str. eets . � i Ya�,e ? These are a Pew of our concerns abo.ut the development and the enormous impact it �vi11 hav� on our n�ighborhood and the ��ualit,y of our personal lives . We have fou�ht long and hard to maintain the inte�rity of this a.rea located as it is next to the Ci�ty of Tigard. We have never been anti-development for. the City, we just want any develop- mPnt to be cornpatible with our sma11 community. Thank you. �7,� �` ��..�, �°� ��,� Mr. and ;�Irs . J . R . lVic Ba.th 1.3115 S. W . Ash Drive Tigard, Or 97�� cc: NPO #1 � . �;'� �, . ;,; E;� • E 4; i f � �, • i; i>. t� ;; � j: s. F: �R � � � � � � � �;�. F; � �___ .___ _ _ _ _ ? _ ___._� , __ _ : G�', � ��•-�y) s�L�,�1 ..�u� ; ;. �3�.�o s<,,� .��,�-ti�G.� ef 7��y��=�, Os��yo� ��.�� . %��-; / �, i� �-�- '�� _ __ �''� � � . ��, . / �C�l�.c� �/!/hn/"��"i �OI-n�/S�fiu ��.. , J J .�,7�� v�' T��r d _ �,�� ,/� ��-�1� DJ-e,o H� �7 2�3 �� : �';1�'�P.� /-8S. 9�zC 5-83 �: �, d�iS�uP ��:� .�7�J-r<f, L�ti d �vr�, .-L-�2ar f- L �,�r-,�-.,�ss,o��c'rs . _ . �G�✓,.5� Jl+7`Gi�-�"�s�i '-"°�!�t'i�.�r� iti!� C�en '�/� /�� ✓ � _._-liti / b I� '�l h-��'�7�� !__�v�1G La I7�� O�?s�o� _'�t�!G/ d Gd �U f_.�C C�M M Sn GY _�/.S C��Qt"O�iR/ .. � l. ,. r .. �J , �. �.�f�.,GP'•C s c� �J e-r�l �?/^��osG� 7��i- Sel�G�f-�/ . /-e`;s o� s , e,9_•� i.-�cr��r� /1-°��;c. rc/o� �t�vb�a.-nJ' T�?�� -�.ac,�c� �'cS�i.,/7�� c�=/C : 01c cs h �j ._S� dGwc��C T�hvc,�(, 7�..C- �J�-v�pnSrc� �O�-o� �'cT I ..Cf/tJ h G� G aS�I'C.c-/ �O �.G!fi__�h S�7f"[�rG•T� �rr� J Y // ' ., CYC•�!G��e� 9�C a Lr C�/G S�./�-CC-f �]�C-.. / .17�s°� �G �'v�srd o �De�S.�S <-i� �-�ti� C�i4-acf!�G / .. ��'o�+-� � —�� ° � ��._��,�.,t—��- �G h!«�CYn . _. ..�or�"i s�, c� �,�,� G o7� ,3c�o. o J� �caC�'� �2 �S' /, .. � �:� l �s r��u.��.�� _ ��y �;_�. �-�� . ' .. �'v�.r es �'��/_�Q�v �-,� r�.r i �`��, ; ..1��-� , =, �/�D_�/ �l b..__ �,-�,�. �-�-o �.. /d � �c_ ct!/ v�c-�I A�`'�-�f �r�-� �.�, r�'H//. ��.-�r�-✓ ��1 i 1 _ � f+��'T� �� v G i-els' j- '�oM-��-,,e��,7-� e�-, ,'�r ... __.. . , �,.ru��rv�<,� • _ _..__ " . __.... ; S/ +�C:t�°/"C� G: .. �� . . _ _ _ ._., ._ � . �