04/04/1974 - Minutes MINUTES
TIGARD SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Regular Meeting, April 4, 1974
Twality Jr. High School, Lecture Room
14650 S.W. 97th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon
MEETING TIME: 700 P.M.
Prior to the formal opening of the regular meeting of the Site Development Plan
and Design Review Board, those members present and Bruce Clark, the City
Administrator, carried out an informal discussion relating to the responsibilities
of the Design Review Board. Discussion related to the Design Review Board's
authority and the Council's desire for the Design Review Board to decide such
things as color on the building and placing conditions on design review approval
relating to signs. Mr. Clark stated he desired that the Design Review Board get
off to a good start and related his concerns about community reaction to Design
Review Board actions. Design Review Board member, Tom Whittaker stated that he
felt that the Board should not be a political body. Mr. Clark stated that the
Design Review Board was selected on the basis of how each member would vote in
certain situations. Mr. Clark also related that he felt that color on doors
was too strong a concern. Mr. Bartel'. said that the concerns of the Council.-and
Mr. Clark appeared to be caused by a misinterpretation of the facts when related to
the actual discussion and decisions of the Design Review Board relating to colors
on doors and conditions on signs. The informal discussion then ended and the meeting
was formally called to order at 7:55 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Ray Bartel, Monte Cook, William McMonagle, Jon Kelting,
Tom Whittaker.
Absent: Phillip Edin and Alan Mickelson.
2. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DESIGN REVIEW
2.1 SDR 6-74 (R. A. Gray & Company)
A request by R. A. Gray & Company for a review of a warehouse structure
to be located within the Tigard Industrial Park at 9920 S.W. Tigard
Street. The site is located within an M-4, Industrial Park zone.
(Tax Map 2S1 2BA, Tax Lot 300).
Site Development Plan
A. The staff related staff findings and concerns as stated in the staff report.
A general discussion of the project then followed. The general discussion
was related to the items addressed in the staff report. In addition, the
question of garbage collection was addressed by Mr. Whittaker. The question
of exterior lighting was discussed as well as the spacing of the ivy ground
cover as proposed by the applicant and questions as to use of the structure
related to traffic access and parking requirements. The staff then read the
staff recommendation and further discussion followed concerning the staff
recommendation. Whittaker then moved to approve the site plan as submitted
with the condition that the applicant provide a 65 foot setback from the
right-of-way line of S.W. Tigard Avenue. Cook seconded the motion and the
Jim- , vote was unanimous for Whittaker's motion.
Design Review
A. The applicant explained the structure and that the architectural style had
p SDR MINUTES -2- April 4, 1974
been changed from the existing buildings so as to match the character of the
future pole office buildings to be constructed at the rear of the property.
Design Review Board members discussed the building materials related to the
face of the building adjacent the residential side of the proposed structure.
The applicant agreed to revise his plan to include an exposed aggregate building
face on the side of the structure facing the residential area and to also
carry the existing facia around the east end of the building adjacent the
residential area to provide a uniform character around the entire building.
There was a general discussion involving the lighting of the building add
the signing of the individual building 'spaces. Whittaker stated that he
felt that the main object of the Design Review Board was to define
objectionable features and that the view from the public right-of-way was
a major factor. McMonagle expressed concern about drainage from the
roof into storm drains. The applicant stated that the subject structure's
downspouts would drain directly into storm drains. Further discussion occurred
concerning mechanical equipment on the roof, but felt that it would be
placed far enough to screen any such mechanical equipment. Cook suggested
the applicant submit a cut sheet to the staff if mechanical equipment is
sufficiently above parapet height. Whittaker then moved that the building
be accepted as sham approving of the applicant's change in his plan to include
exposed aggregate and typical building facia on the eastern 41de of the
building adjacent the single family residential area. Kelting seconded the
motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of Whittaker's motion.
3. The meeting was formally adjourned at 10:51 P.M.
4. After the formal meeting, there was informal discussion concerning the ability
of the DRB to speed up the derision making process regarding each case. It was
suggested that a work session be held prior to each DRB meeting to discuss
informally each project in detail. It was also suggested that each member of
the Design Review Board could perhaps address himself to his technical
specialty such as engineering or architectural considerations. The length of
staff reports was also discussed. It was suggested that the staff mark their
concerns directly on the plan and cause any ordinance reference made by section
number without actually stating the specific ordinance in the staff report.
,