06/17/1986 - Packet r v✓",
1w
TIGARD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, June 17, 1986
7:30 A.M.
PIONEER PIES
1. Review minutes of May 20, 1986
2. Downtown Council - Media West Presentation
Status Report - John Savory
3. Downtown Council Organizational. Report
4. Industrial/Commercial Development Planning Rule - LCDC
5. Developers Presentation
- Update on Builders Square
6. Other Business
7. Adjourn- Next meeting is Tuesday, July 15, 1986 at
7: 30 A.M. at Pioneer Pies
,%W
Economic Development Committee Minutes — May 20, 1086
Members Present: Juanita Caday^ Susan Clark, Dick Cochran, John Savory,
`*r Kathy Budny
Others: Alan Patterson, Doe Dee Harrington, Bill Bur-ton,
Sue Foley' J. B. Bishop, and Bill Monahan
Minutes of April 15 — Approved as read.
Status of the Downtown Council — John reported on the May 19 meeting held by
Committee members, Chamber and Downtown Council members to discuss the
Downtown Council . Membership has not met expectations . Need for better
reorganization efforts was identified. Dick noted that the Council realizes
that it has had problems determining which projects to undurtake and a
direction to go. Lack of staff and volunteer leadership was also noted. The
Council will formulate a lint of goals and projects which are achievable.
That list which will show the credibility of the group that will be used in
membership recruitment. Kathy pointed out that a list was created by the
Committee earlier which should be used an a beginning.
Allan pointed out that J. B. Bishop did not attend the Bankruptcy proceedings
on the 13th. It in an orderly forced bankruptcy. It is possible that by the
end of the year the secured creditors would have title to the property .
The Tigard East project was reported upon. Efforts are underway for
construction this year of a 52,000 square foot supermarket by an operator who
has stepped in now that Howard Williams has banked out.
Sue Foley of Media West made a presentation on the tentative budget and
potential product for a media presentation for us at the I-5 Corridor- fall
seminar. She noted that a large audience would be viewing the presentation at
I-5 but smaller audiences for later viuwingu. A portable, flexible
presentation seems to be needed. A slide program produced for the Committee
'--
short program of 5-6 minutes — is suggested. This program could then be
transferred to video and used later.
Media Went is located in Beaverton and has operated for 14 years . It in a
production and service organization with all services in house. The City
would write the script and take photos . Media West would edit and add
visualization. Suggestion on where graphic tie—inn should be used would be
given by Media Went. Computer graphics and split form capacity can be done by
Media Went. Their video recording studio could be used with volunteer
professional talent from Tigard to prupare the sound track. Pulsing of the
sound track to slides would be done by Media Went. Anything not done by the
City would be provided by Media West. Many high tech and financial firms have
been clients of Media West. A brochure with estimates was distributed
including a proposal with Media West' s attributes. The budget contains
assumptions made by Media Went that 80-1U0 slides with 25% graphics. The Coot
Estimate Summary Sheet was reviewed including responsibilities and tasks.
Cost is $2^837^ a flexible cost based on Media West' s involvement, depends on
number of graphic title slides . Given the target date of September' three
months would be a safe production time to assure sufficient Committee input.
A slide program transferred to video was shown. The Committee will discuss
the video further and get bank to Media Went on the decision whether to go
forward. Possible contributions from the City and Chamber were mentioned
Economic Development Committee Minutes May 20, 1986
Page 2
as well as the Downtown Council. Outside sponsors could be enlisted who then
would receive copies for their use. Updating of the video would be
inexpensive so the usefulness of the video would continue.
John will coordinate the project with Jeanne Caswell and 'Tom Brian who
volunteered to do photography. Volunteers to help with rough draft writing _w..-
Juanita volunteered.
J. B. Bishop was present to discuss development. The Main Street Project has
28 acres . He reviewed the history of the property and development efforts.
Timing concerns prevented Costco from locating on the site in 1985. For the
past three plus years the property has been under Chapter 11 bankruptcy. lie
feels that the property could be taken back by the bank involved in the fall .
Possible piecemeal development could occur with strip retail on the front and
mini storage in the back. JB has been negotiating with K--Mart for Builders
Square, a wholly owned subsidiary of K.--Mart. A Portland store at Jantzen
Beach will be opened in the fall next to G.I. Joe' s . They have narrowed
selection for a wast side store to Main Street and the Moyer Theatre Family
Drive In site. About; 11.0 employees and construction costs will add an
estimated $4 million of value. At issue is timing and the steps involved.
Both are sensitive sites . They need to open by April. 15, 1987 a major home
improvement facility. Main Street is a less expensive site and easier to
develop. To develop the Family Drive In site, the developer would need to
raise the site for visibility.
'Wrr'
The project would go out: the back end of the Main Street site. It would
attract other tenants such as a supermarket. Safeway was mentioned as a
possible tenant through relocation. They would then sub-.-lease their building
for another retail use.
The site decision will be made in 30 days. JB is finalizing negotiations with
Builders Square. 'The developer will meet with the City staff to finalize the
steps needed to develop either site. JB has control of the property now and
could develop it prior to whatever happens in the fall with the bankruptcy
court. JB pointed out that no variance would be requested and in fact the
project would exceed the code standards . Albertson' s, Emporium, and Pay Less
are prepared now for, 99W near Summerfield Shopping Center. So, the existing
Albertson' s center would be rented to new tenants, possibly with Pay Less
remaining as they own their building by Albertsons.
JB is looking for assistance from the Committee to speed up permit processing
from Federal and State agencies as well as City cooperation. The Federal
permit needed normally takes 6 months, given the need for groundbreaking in
August, JB needs the process to be shortened to 90 days. Builder' s Square is
looking for City commitments beyond staff.
Other Business -- Susan Clark announced that Oregon Human Development was
submitted for refunding of a project which is a $120,000 training project for
single parents and homemakers. It will help women to increase skills and get
into the workforce. Limited funds are available so support is needed. So far
+aw 60 women, almost all from Washington County, have been served.
Economic Development Committee Minutes -- May 20, 1986
Page 3
The Committee supported writing a letter. A draft of content will be prepared
by Susan for John' s review and signature. The annual banquet will be on
May 31 with Gov. Atiyeh serving as the guest.
The meeting concluded at 9:00 AM. The next meeting will be held on June 17,
1986 at 7:30 AM at Pioneer Pies.
(2544P)
'�Yrw
Wrr�"
u�
Department of Land Conservation and Development
VICTOR ATI VEN 1175 COURT STREET N.E., SALEM, OREGON 97310-0590 PHONE (503) 378-4926
OOVENrgM
M E M O R A N D U M
May 12, 1986
TO: Interested Persons
FROM: James F. Ross, Director
SUBJECT: PROPOSED RULE ON INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
Attached for your review is a draft administrative rule affecting local
planning for industrial and commercial development in urban areas. A public
hearing on the rule is scheduled for the June 5 Commission meeting in Salem.
A second hearing may be held at the July 24 Commission meeting with a final
hearing tentatively scheduled for the September 11 Commission meeting.
The rule carries out ORS 197.712(2) adopted by the 1983 Legislature. This
statute rral governments to refine their omorQhPncivP plans to
pr uate o ortunities for economic development. The major provisions
of the rule are outline n thea a c ar .
The Department has prepared the rule under the direction of a joint
subcommittee of Economic Development Commission and Land Conservation and
Development Commission members and with the assistance of a Technical Advisory
Committee made up of local planners and economic development specialists.
Based on their comments the Department has identified several issues that are
of special concern in rulemaking.
Application to Small Cities
The Department would like to exclude urban areas of under 2,500 in population
from the requirements of this rule. However, the Attorney General ' s Office
has advised the Commission that it can not adopt such an exemption. Since the
same statute exempts such small cities from the public facilities planning
requirements the Attorney General concluded that had the Legislature intended
such an exemption, they could have applied it to the industrial and commercial
development planning requirements.
The Commission does have the authority to write the rule to meet the diverse
administrative and planning capabilities of local governments. Therefore the
Department is looking for suggestions on how the rule can be written to
provide a more simple set of procedures and requirements for smaller cities.
The Department has already attempted to simplify the rule for smaller cities
in three ways. First, the Level of effort na ded o comply with the rule will
v ry dependin on jurisdiction size and the extent of available informat;nn.
Secon , smaller c1 1 e specific industries
wr.w -2-
th�y-i ntend to ornvi de for becauseof the--limi-ted information avai1able to
thgM. Third, small cities are not required to provide a short-term supply 'of
serviced sites since they are not required to prepare public facilities plans
by the Public Facilities Planning Rule (OAR 660-11 ) .
Reliance on Existing Planning Work
Both the Department and the Joint EDC-LCDC Subcommittee recognize that many
local governments have done considerable economic development planning work.
It is not the intent of the rule to require duplication of this work. The
rule allows local governments to rely on existing planning when:
1 . It satisfies rule requirements; and
2. New information on state and national trends doesn't result in
changed local economic development objectives.
Some Portland area planners have suggested that the rule should allow
jurisdictions to focus their economic development efforts on a specific
category of industrial or commercial use. They suggest rewriting the rule to
allow a jurisdiction to select target i tries first _an __theP conduces the
economic a sis-aud-l-anis-amuentQry for the narrow group of uses it has
chosen to pure. The planners who have o- ffer�!A ttti-s--al--te-rna�i-ve--are
concerned that the proposed rule requires a broad based analysis and inventory
that is either already done in acknowledged plans or would be irrelevant to a
community's major economic objectives.
Inventory of Vacant Industrial and Commercial Land
The draft rule requires that local governm.e tt i nven _Qrvacant-a-nd
rede pable land des i nated for industrial and commercial use. Some
ec
nical Advisory Commlttee mem ers expressed concern that the rule will be
too broad and unworkable if every parcel must be inventoried. The Department
has written the rule to clarify the inventory requirement:
1 . Mappin i rceis or. Several city
p nning directors have suggested limiting the inventory requirement to
sites of five acres or larger in size. They have also suggested limiting
the inventory to industrial sites. The Department is concerned that
leaving out parcels smaller than five acres will exclude the size -of
parcels where most economic development will occur.
2. Inventory information keyed to _mapped sites would indicate site size,
"imfily` ervices and roads and site consfratrrt�-
COMMENTS
Questions about the proposed rule should be directed to Dick Mathews or Bob
Cortright at the Department's Salem Office. Written comments should be
provided to the Department by 5 p.m. on May 27 so that they can be reviewed by
the Technical Advisory Committee and the Commission prior to the Commission
meeting. Written comments received after that date will be hand delivered to
the Commission at its June 5th meeting. The Commission meeting will be held
in Room E of the State Capitol in Salem beginning at 8:30 a.m. A specific
time for the public hearing on this rule has not been set.
JFR/kj/8341DBC/191C
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED
INDUSTRIAL & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RULE
(010) (015) (020) (025)
APPLICATION ANALYSIS POLICIES DESIGNATION OF LAND
(1 ) All areas (1 ) Review state, national Include policies (1 ) Identify number and
within UGB' s and local trend stating economic acreage of needed sites
(rural areasunaffected) information development in each category
objectives.
(2) At first periodic (2) Identify site Urban areas 2,500+: (2) Provide long-term
review after rule is requirements of indus- supply of land (meet
adopted tries likely to locate (1 ) Identify parti- 20-year need in each site
or expand cular types of category)
(3) Rely on acknow- industry and commer-
ledged plan work as (3) Inventory vacant and cial uses anticipated (3) Provide short-term
much as possible redevelopable commercial and desired supply of sites by amend-
and industrial sites ing Public Facilities
(4) Use best available one acre and larger (2) Policy commitment Plan
or readily collectable to provide adequate
information (4) Assess community sites and facilities (4) Protect sites for uses
economic development with special siting
potential requirements
BC:sp
8365D/191C
BEFORE THE L E
LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ,MAY
OF THE STATE OF OREGON ! BARBARA ROBERTS
SECRETARY JF S-WEI
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTION OF A PROPOSED ) NOTICE OF A HEARING ON
INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ) PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL AND
RULE (OAR 660-09-000-025 ) COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RULE
1 . At the Commission's June 5, 1986 meeting, a public hearing will be
held in Hearing Room E of the State Capitol in Salem, Oregon, to hear
testimony on a proposed rule setting requirements for the planning of
industrial and commercial development in urban areas. The proposed rule would
implement ORS 197.712(2)(a-d) which requires the Commission to set more
specific requirements for local economic development planning. The Commission
meeting will begin at 8:30 a.m. No specific time has been set for the
commencement of the public hearing on the proposed rule.
2. The purpose of the rule is to assure that comprehensive plans and land
use regulations are updated to provide adequate opportunities for a variety of
economic activities throughout the state and to assure that plans are based on
available information about state and national trends.
3. Interested persons may present their comments regarding the proposed
rule, either orally or in writing, at the hearing. Written copies of all
comments will be provided to the Commission a week in advance of its meeting
if submitted to the Department's Salem Office by 5 p.m. , Tuesday, May 27,
1986. Comments submitted after this date will also be provided to the
Commission. Those written comments submitted after the date noted above or at
the hearing must include 20 copies for their individual review.
4. A copy of the proposed rule, Citation of Statutory Authority,
Statement of Need, Principal Documents Relied Upon, and Statement of Fiscal
Impact are attached to and made a part of this notice. Copies of these are
also available at the Department's office, 1175 Court Street NE, Salem, Oregon
97310.
5. The Commission Chairman, Stafford Hansell , will preside over and
conduct the hearing.
DATED THIS 9th DAY OF MAY, 1986.
FOR THE COMMISSION:
aures F. Ross, Director
epartment of Land Conservation
JFR:sp — and Development
8349D/183C
PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE RULE
INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVEMENT
OAR 660-09-000-025
STATUTORY AUTHORITY
AW "--J- 1986
BARBARA ROBERTS
ORS Chapters 197 and 183, particularly ORS 197.040 and 197.712(-)1 s RETARY OF STATE-J
ORS 197. 712(2)(a-d) provide:
"(2) By the adoption of new goals or rules, or the application,
interpretation or amendment of existing goals or rules, the
commission shall implement all of the following:
(a) Comprehensive plans shall include an analysis of the
community's economic patterns, potentialities, strengths and
deficiencies as they relate to state and national trends.
(b) Comprehensive plans shall contain policies concerning the
economic development opportunities in the community.
(c) Comprehensive plans and land use regulations shall provide
for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes,
types, locations and service levels for industrial and
commercial uses consistent with plan policies.
(d) Comprehensive plans and land use regulations shall provide
for com atiha� -n or__5p-ecific�—
indus rial and commercial uses.
STATEMENT OF NEED
ORS 197.712(2) was adopted in 1983. This statute requires the Commission to
assure that local plans provide adequate opportunities for economic development
through ". . .the adoption of new goals or rules or the application, interpretation
or amendment of existing goals or rules. . ."
The Commission has reviewed its existing Goals, principally Goal 9, and determined
that a new administrative rule is the most appropriate and expeditious means of
implementing ORS 197. 712(2)(a-d).
PRINCIPAL DOCUMENTS RELIED UPON
1 . ORS 197 and 183.
2. OAR 660 Division 1 , "Procedural Rules, including Model Rules of Procedure."
3. Letter Opinion from the Attorney General ' s Office to James F. Ross,
April 17, 1986.
4. LCDC-EDC ISSUES PAPER "Industrial and Commercial Development Planning
Requirements of ORS 197. 712."
FISCAL IMPACT
The implementation of this rule will require some additional work by cities and
counties as they revise comprehensive plans for urban areas at the time of
periodic review. The amount of work required will vary depending upon the size of
the jurisdiction, the extent of previous planning for industrial and commercial
uses and the extent of new information available on state and national trends.
BC:sp/8346D/1 91 C
INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT DRAFT-MAY 12
'- DIVISION 9
3
4
S (000)-Purpose
6
7 The purpose of this division is to aid in achieving the requirements
8 of Goal 9, Economy of the State (OAR 660-15-000(9) ) , by implementing the
9 requirements of ORS 197.712(2)(a-d). The rule responds to legislative
10 direction to assure that comprehensive plans and land use regulations are
11 updated to provide adequate opportunities for a variety of economic
12 activities throughout the state (197.712(l ) ) and to assure that plans are
13 based on available information about state and national economic trends.
14 (197.717(2) ).
15
16 (005)-Definitions
17
18 (1 ) "Department" : The Department of Land Conservation and
19 Development.
20 (2) "Planning Area" : The area subject to a comprehensive plan
21 including plan policies, map designations, and land use regulations. The
L2 planning area for a city includes the whole area within the urban growth
23 boundary including unincorporated urban and urbanizable land, except for
24 cities within the Portland, Salem-Keizer and Eugene-Springfield
25 metropolitan urban growth boundaries.
26
Page
1 (3) "Locational factors": Features which affect where a particular
2 type of commercial or industrial operation will locate. Locational
3 factors include but are not limited to: proximity to raw materials,
4 supplies, and services; proximity to markets or educational institutions;
5 access to transportation facilities; labor market factors (e.g. , skill
6 level , education, age distribution).
7 (4) "Site requirement": The physical attributes of a site without
8 which a particular type or types of industrial or commercial use cannot
9 reasonably operate. To qualify as a "site requirement" a feature must be
10 required for the operation of the use, not simply a desired feature.
if Site requirements vary from use to use and may include: a minimum
12 acreage or site configuration, specific types or levels of public
13 facilities and services, or direct access to a particular type of
14 transportation facility (such as rail or deep water access).
15 (5) "Suitable": A site is suitable for industrial or commercial use
16 if the site either provides for the site requirements of the proposed use
17 or can be expected to provide for the site requirements of the proposed
18 use within the planning period.
19 (6) "Useable": A site is useable if it is suitable, serviced, and
20 the site is planned and zoned to allow the proposed use(s) either
21 outright or through a land use permit review.
22 (7) "Serviced": A site is serviced if:
23 (a) Major public facilities, including at least sewer, water and
24 roads currently have adequate capacity to serve development planned for
25 the site or are scheduled to have adequate capacity within one year under
26 the provisions of the jurisdiction's public facilities plan and
Page 2
\► 1 (b) major public facilities either are currently extended to the
2 site, or can be provided to the site within one year of a user's
3 application under the provisions of the jurisdiction's public facilities
4 plan.
5 (8) "Redevelopable": A designated commercial or industrial site is
6 redevelopable if:
7 (a) It is currently improved for other uses; or
8 (b) Is largely vacant or significantly under-utilized; and
9 (c) The affected city or county determines that the site could be
10 redeveloped for designated industrial and commercial uses given
11 reasonably foreseeable market conditions.
12 (9) Other Definitions: For the purposes of this division the
13 definitions in ORS 197.015 shall apply.
14
'+hrr
15 (010)-Application
16
17 (1 ) This rule applies to comprehensive plans for areas within urban
18 growth boundaries. Additional planning for industrial and commercial
19 development outside urban growth boundaries is not required or restricted
20 by this rule. Plan and ordinance amendments necessary to comply with
21 this rule shall be adopted by affected jurisdictions.
22 (2) Comprehensive plans and land use regulations shall be amended to
23 comply with this rule at the time of first periodic review of the plan
24 (ORS 197.712(3) ) . Jurisdictions which have received a periodic review
25 notice from the Department (pursuant to OAR 660-19-050) prior to the
26
Page 3
14W I effective date of this rule shall comply with this rule at their next
2 periodic review unless otherwise directed by the Commission during their
3 first periodic review.
4 (3) Jurisdictions which have done extensive economic development
5 planning as part of their acknowledged comprehensive plans may rely on
6 their existing plans to meet the requirements of this rule if they:
7 (a) Review new information about state and national trends and
8 conclude there are no significant changes in economic development
9 opportunities (e.g. , a need for sites not presently provided for by the
10 plan) , and
11 (b) Findings are adopted which explain how existing inventories,
12 policies, and implementing measures meet the requirements in Sections
13 (015), (020) and (025).
14 (4) The effort necessary to comply with OAR 660-09-015 - 025 will
15 vary depending upon the size of the jurisdiction, the detail of previous
16 economic development planning efforts, and the extent of new information
17 on local , state and national trends. A jurisdiction's planning effort is
18 adequate if it uses the best available or readily collectable information
19 to respond to the requirements of this rule.
20
21 (015)-Economic Opportunities Analysis
22
23 Cities and counties shall review and, as necessary, amend comprehensive
24 plans to provide the information described in Sections (1 )-(4) .
25
26
vYww Page 4
,
yww 1 (1 ) Review of National and State and Local Trends. The economic
2 opportunities analysis shall identify the major categories of industrial
3 and commercial uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand
4 in the planning area based on available information about national , state
5 and local trends. The analysis shall describe the current make up of the
6 area's economy, including:
7 (a) The major categories of industrial and commercial activity
8 currently occurring in the planning area;
9 (b) Past and present trends in each major category of industrial and
10 commercial activity; and,
11 (c) The extent to which existing categories of industrial and
12 commercial activity are likely to expand in the future.
13
wwW'
14 The analysis shall include a description of the locational factors for
15 each major category of industrial and commercial use.
16 (2) Site Requirements. The economic opportunities analysis shall
17 identify the types of sites that are likely to be needed by industrial
18 and commercial uses which might expand or locate in the planning area.
19 Types of sites shall be identified based on the site requirements of
20 expected uses. Local governments should survey existing firms in the
21 planning area to identify the types of sites which may be needed for
22 expansion.
23 Compatible uses with similar site requirements shall be grouped
24 together into common site categories to simplify identification of site
25 needs and subsequent planning.
26
Page 5
WW 1 (3) Inventory of Industrial and Commercial Lands. Comprehensive
2 plans for all areas within urban growth boundaries shall include an
3 inventory of vacant and redevelopable lands within the planning area
4 which are designated for industrial or commercial use. The inventory
S shall provide the following information for vacant or redevelopable sites
6 larger than one acre:
7 (a) Mapping showing the location of designated sites;
8 (b) Size of the site;
9 (c) Availability or proximity of key facilities (sewer and water and
10 roads) to the site;
11 (d) Site constraints which physically limit developing the site for
12 designated uses. Site constraints include but are not limited to:
13 (A) Site configuration;
14 (B) The site is not serviced;
15 (C) Inadequate access to the site and;
16 (D) Topographic constraints (e.g. , floodplain, steep slopes, weak
17 foundation soils. )
18
19 (4) Assessment of Community Economic Development Potential
20 The economic opportunities analysis shall estimate the types and amounts
21 of industrial and commercial development likely to occur in the planning
22 area. The estimate shall be based on information generated in response
23 to (1 ) - (3) above and shall consider the planning area's economic
24 advantages and disadvantages of attracting new or expanded development in
25 general as well as particular types of industrial and commercial uses.
26
'*W Page 6
I Relevant economic advantages and disadvantages include but need not be
2 limited to:
3 - location relative to markets
4 - availability of key transportation facilities
S - labor market factors
6 - materials and energy availability
7 - necessary support services
8 - pollution control requirements
9 - availability of key public facilities and services
10
II (020)-Industrial and Commercial Development Policies
12
13 Comprehensive plans for planning areas subject to this rule shall
14 include policies stating the economic development objectives for the
IS planning area. For urban areas of over 2,500 in population these
16 policies shall be based on the analysis prepared in response to section
17 (015) and shall provide conclusions about the following:
18 (1 ) Community Development Objectives. The plan shall state the
19 overall objectives for economic development in the planning area and
20 identify categories or particular types of industrial and commercial uses
21 anticipated and desired by the community. Plans may include policies to
22 maintain existing categories, types or levels of industrial and
23 commercial uses.
24 (2) Commitment to Provide Adequate Sites and Facilities. Consistent
25 with policies adopted to meet (2) above, the plan shall include policies
26
,v' Page 7
I committing the city or county to designate an adequate number of suitable
2 sites and to ensure necessary public facilities through the public
3 facilities plan for the planning area.
4
5 (025)-Designation of Lands for Industrial and Commercial Uses
6
7 Measures adequate to implement policies adopted pursuant to
8 Section (020) shall be adopted. Appropriate implementing measures
9 include amendments to plan and zone map designations, land use
to regulations, and public facility plans.
11 (1 ) Identification of Needed Sites. The plan shall identify the
12 approximate number and acreage of sites needed to accommodate industrial
13 and commercial uses to implement plan policies. The need for sites shall
14 be specified in several broad "site categories," (e.g. , light industrial ,
15 heavy industrial , commercial office, commercial retail , highway
16 commercial , etc. ) combining compatible uses with similar site
17 requirements.
tg It is not necessary to provide a different type of site for each
19 industrial or commercial use which may locate in the planning area.
20 Several broad site categories will provide for industrial and commercial
21 uses likely to occur in most planning areas.
22 (2) Long-Term Supply of Land. Plans shall designate land suitable
23 to meet the site needs identified in (1 ) above. The total acreage of
24 land designated in each site category shall at least equal the projected
25 land needs for each category during the 20-year planning period.
26 Jurisdictions need not designate sites for neighborhood commercial uses
Ajw,, Page 8
ww» 1 in urbanizing areas if they have adopted plan policies which provide
2 clear standards for redesignation of residential land to provide for such
3 uses.
4 Designation of industrial or commercial lands which involve an
5 amendment to the urban growth boundary must meet the requirements of
6 OAR 660-04-010(1 ) (c)(B) and OAR 660-04-018(3)(a).
7 (3) Short-Term Supply of Serviced Sites. Public facility plans
8 prepared pursuant to OAR 660-11-000 - 050 shall be reviewed at the time
9 of periodic review and, as necessary, amended to assure that the number
to of suitable, serviced sites is adequate to meet needs for at least three
11 years in each of following five years (i .e. , in each year there must be a
12 three-year supply of serviced sites) . Estimates of needs shall be based
13 on average annual absorption rates or derived from the plan's 20-year
y , 14 needs projection.
15
16 (4) Sites for Uses with Special Siting Requirements. Jurisdictions
17 which adopt objectives or policies to provide for specific uses with
18 special site requirements shall adopt policies and land use regulations
19 to provide for the needs of those uses. Special site requirements
20 include but need not be limited to large acreage sites, special site
21 configurations, direct access to transportation facilities, or
22 sensitivity to adjacent land uses, or coastal shoreland sites designated
23 as especially suited for water-dependent use under Goal 17. Policies and
24 land use regulations for these uses shall :
25 (a) Identify sites suitable for the proposed use;
26
' +'' Page 9
*Moe 4400"
I (b) Protect sites suitable for the proposed use by limiting land
2 divisions and permissible uses and activities to those which would not
3 interfere with development of the site for the intended use.
4 (c) Where necessary to protect a site for the intended industrial or
5 commercial use include measures which either prevent or appropriately
6 restrict incompatible uses on adjacent and nearby lands.
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
Ow
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 BC:sp/7532D/191C
Page 10
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Members of the Economic Development Committee May 2.9, 1986
FROM: William A. Monahan, Director,
Community Development
SUBJECT: Economic Development Committee Meeting Minutes
May 2.0, 1986
Enclosed is a copy of the minutes from our• Tuesday meeting. I will attempt to
send them to you earlier than I have in the past so that you may suggest
topics for future meetings . Agenda topics can be forwarded to me or
John Savory.
The meeting minutes pertaining to J.B. Bishop' s presentation should be read
with additional information in mind . I talked on May 23rd with William
Bartholomey, 222-...0345, real estate advisor to Builder' s Square. Mr.
Bartholomey called me after he was contacted by Dee Dee Harrington of the
Oregonian. He told me that Mr. Bishop' s site has been turned down by K Mart.
`%W •This was done prior to Mr. Bishop' s presentation to the Committee. In fact,
Mr. Bartholomey told Mr. Bishop as late as Monday evening, the 19th, that the
site was not under consideration.
The Family Drive In site has been approved by K-•••Mart as the preferred site.
Mr. Bartholomey pointed out that: if the costs of development and lease
arrangements are prohibitive, another west side site will. be chosen, however,
it will not be the Bishop site.
My staff held a pre--application meeting last week with Builder' s Square
representatives. I will advise you if a formal Site Development Review
Application is filed.
(WAM:br/2544P)
err