07/13/1976 - Minutes A
MINUTES
Tigard Site Development Plan and
Architectural Review Board
July 13 , 1976 - 5: 00 P.M.
General Telephone Building
12460 S .W. It4ain St . - Tigard, Oregon
1 . CALL TO ORDER: Meeting was called to order at 5 : 00 P.M. by
Chairman McMonagle .
2. ROLL CALL: Present Hammes , McMonagle , Cook, Olson and Goldbach.
Staff Present : Daniels, Olson .
3 . MINUTES : Cook moved and Goldbach seconded that the minutes of
June 22, 1976, be approved as submitted. The motion was approved
by unanimous voice vote.
4. COMMUNICATIONS : Daniels informed the Council that Atlas Land Co .
has requested and been granted a later date in appearing before
the Review Board, also the J.A. Atwood Corp . hearing has been
postponed until the settlement of a minor land partition.
5. DESIGN REVIEW
5 . 1 SDR 23-76 (National Safety Comapny)
A request by National Safety Company for design review of
a proposed industrial at 9380 S .W. Tigard Avenue.
A. Site Development Plan Reivew
1 . Staff Report : Read by Daniels.
B. Staff Recommendations :
The staff recommended denial for the following reasons :
1 . An illegal Minor Land Partition was discovered.
2 . Site plan shows fill on the flood plain and one
corner of the building resting on this fill .
3 . Site has a past history of drainage problems .
4 . The parking pattern shown needs adjusting to allow
for city code setbacks and to conviently handle
large trucks .
5. The staff feels that because of the above reasons
further work is needed on the site plan before it
should be reviewed by the board.
C. Applicant ' s Presentation
Mr . J. Skourtes, applicant , summarized his project and
familiarized the board with the location of the site
in relation to the flood plain .
Minutes
Tigard SDP
July 13 , 1976
Page 2
1 . Applicant stated
A. That the corner of the building on the flood
plain would be reinforced.
B. That the proposed building has already been
purchased.
C . Ultimately three tenants will occupy the space.
2 . Applicant disputed the flood plain elevation data
supplied by the staff .
3 . Applicant inquired as to the need of future road
widening, sidewalks and a 20 ' landscape strip .
4. Applicant requested that the three curb cuts be
retained on the plan.
D. Board Discussion and Action
o McMonagle requested a more accurate topography map
showing the creek, flood plain, proposed fill and
the exact location of the building.
o McMonagle suggested that the applicant ' s engineer
contact the City Engineering Department to help
determine the flood plain and to show a cross
section where the building rests on the flood plain.
o Olson suggested that parking spaces 1.7, 16, 13, and
12 be placed on the east side of the lot .
o Cook suggested that research be done on relocationg
the building elsewhere on the site.
o McMonagle stated that the minor land partition should
be resolved before the Board reviewed the plan .
o Goldbach explained the Design Review Board authority
to the applicant .
o McMonagle suggested that the 20 foot landscape barrier
can be satisfied if the sidewalk is located adjacent
to the curb .
o Olson recommended that the staff screen the applicants
more carefully to avoid wasting the time of the
applicant and the Design Review Board.
o Olson moved and Goldbach second that the proposal be
denied based on the difficulties noted by staff and
Minutes
Tigard DRB
July 13, 1976
Page 3
be resubmitted with no fee requirement . The motion
was approved by an unanimous voice vote.
6. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business the meeting was
adjourned at 7 : 30 p.m.