The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCity Council Packet - 12/11/2018 74 City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting-Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AND TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DATE AND TIME: December 11,2018 -6:30 p.m. Study Session; 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard-Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available,ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Citizen Communication items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated;it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-718-2419, (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request,the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments;and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers,it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-718-2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (FDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: htto://www.tigard-or.gov/city hall/council meeting.oho CABLE VIEWERS:The regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28 at 7:30 p.m. The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 p.m. Monday 6:00 a.m. l II II City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AND TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DATE AND TIME: December 11,2018 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session;7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard-Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 6:30 PM •STUDY SESSION A. DISCUSSION ON CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY CONTRACTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:45 p.m. estimated time •EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order,the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute.All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less,Please) A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication B. Citizen Communication—Sign Up Sheet 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council)These items are considered routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion.Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: A. RECEIVE AND FILE: CANVASS OF VOIES FROM THE NOVEMBER 6,2018 ELECTION •Consent Agenda-Items Removed for Separate Discussion:Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council/City Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD -CONSIDER ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES -ON-CALL CONTRACT 7:40 p.m. estimated time 5. TIGARD TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY-CONSIDER CONTRACT AWARD FOR TIGARD TRIANGLE EQUITABLE URBAN RENEWAL IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT 7:45 p.m. estimated time 6. CONSIDER RESOLUTION TO APPOINT BUDGET COMMI ITEE MEMBERS 7:50 p.m. estimated time 7. CONSIDER RESOLUTION TO APPOINT AUDIT COMMI 1TEE MEMBERS 7:55 p.m. estimated time 8. JOINT MEETING WITH TIGARD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TTAC) 8:00 p.m.estimated time 9. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER ORDINANCE FOR PHASE II CODE AMENDMENTS (PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS) 8:30 p.m. estimated time 10. INFORMATIONAL PUBIC HEARING: CONSIDER RESOLUTION FOR PHASE II CODE AMENDMENT PROJECT MASTER FEES &CHARGES SCHEDULE 9:20 p.m. estimated time 11. NON AGENDA I 1'EMS 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order,the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute.All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 13. ADJOURNMENT 9:25 p.m. estimated time e City of Tigard _ = Tigard City Council Meeting Agenda TIGARD December 11, 2018 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION A. DICSUSSION ON CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY CONTRACTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:45 p.m. estimated time The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order,the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Sessions may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. Administrative Items Written testimony for Agenda Item No. 9 (Phase II Code Amendments (Procedures and Standards) is attached. Council Meeting Calendar December 4* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 11* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 18* Tuesday Council Workshop/Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 25 Tuesday Christmas Holiday, City Hall and Library Closed—Meeting Cancelled January 1 Tuesday New Years Holiday, City Hall and Library Closed—No Meeting 8* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 15* Tuesday Council Workshop/Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 21 Monday Martin Luther King Holiday, City Hall Closed, Library Open 22* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall February 5* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 12* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 18 Monday Presidents'Day Holiday,City Hall Closed,Library Open 19* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall 26* Tuesday Council Business Meeting—6:30 p.m.,Town Hall Regularly scheduled Council meetings are marked with an asterisk(*). AIS-3697 A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: City Manager and City Attorney Contract Discussion Prepared For: Dana Bennett,City Management Submitted By: Dana Bennett,City Management Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting -Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Staff need guidance on whether or not the City Council wants to provide an increase in compensation to the City Manager and/or City Attorney as a result of the annual performance review and if so what type of increase? STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Staff seek guidance from Council to bring forward for final decision during the December 18,2018 meeting. The key facts section of this AIS covers the ways in which the City Manager and City Attorney contracts differ. In light of those differences,staff recommend the following: City Manager: Council consider and provide staff direction based on the outcome of the performance evaluation and market study,as to what if any changes Council wants brought forward for the December 18, 2018 meeting to the City Manager's contract.The staff recommendation is that if Council desires an increase in compensation to the City Manager,that it consider increasing the amount of administrative leave provided in her contract from 20 hours up to 60 hours per year,in line with other Directors. City Attorney:Council consider and provide staff direction based on the outcome of the performance evaluation and merit pay information provided,what if any changes Council wants brought forward for the compensation of the City Attorney at the December 18,2018 meeting.The staff recommendation is for Council to consider a 7%-10%increase for the City Attorney in light of the fact that there has been no wages adjustment for fifteen months. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Manager's contract provides guidelines for conducting an annual market study. The City Manager's position does not have a standardized pay scale and so compensation is set and/or adjusted as needed, annually by Council.The market study was completed and shows that the current compensation for Tigard's City Manager is slightly below the middle of the market at-1.8%. Mid-market is the placement we seek as our compensation strategy/policy for most City position,with the exception of those that have proven to be difficult to recruit and/or retain. Compensation philosophy suggests that within 5%of the middle of a market, is within market. However, the City Manager's contract is out of sync internally,as Directors receive 60 hours of administrative time annually,while the City Manager's contract only provides for 20 hours annually. Administrative time is provided in recognition for night meetings and other commitments which require time commitments beyond a regular work day for executive level staff. If Council were inclined to make an adjustment to the City Manager's contract,that would be an area of recommendation from Human Resources. If Council made this change is would move the City Manager's market position to just above mid-market,a positive.4%. The City Attorney's contract differs in that the position is on a regular pay scale within the City's pay system. Normally a position on the regular pay scale is eligible for a first merit increase at six months of service and then every 12 months thereafter.The market study for City Attorney was completed upon the establishment of the position,both external market data and internal equity were given consideration when establishing the correct range for the position back in September of 2017. It is typical for merit increases to range between 0% and 5%;although exceptional performance can warrant a higher increase. The City Attorney did not receive an adjustment at the six-month date and is now fifteen months into city service with no adjustment in compensation. In light of that,Human Resources would recommend that Council consider an increase between 7%- 10%,with an eligibility for a next increase December of 2019. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council may provide direction to staff to make no changes in compensation for the City Manager and/or City Attorney,or may provide guidance for changes that are outside of the recommendations from Human Resources. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Council met in executive session on November 27,2018 to review and evaluate the employment-related performance of the City Manager and City Attorney,as allowed by ORS 192.660 2(i). Attachments No file()attached 12/1/ /moo/ S c -7--riJ y c'�-ss/aw SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET 11 47 A FOR _.„1-2__:_111:142‘.......1_)/ (DATE OF MEETING) CITY MANAGER COMPENSATION SURVEY - DECEMBER 2018 City Paid Base Salary Deferred Comp Car Allowance Other Benefits Retirment on Base Total Annual City Manager'18 Population (Annual) (Annual) (Annual) (VEBA,Cell, Life) Salary Compensation Vac/Admin/Sick Albany 1 53,145 165,156 5,780 3,600 2,960 31,033 208,529 260 Beaverton 2 97,000 180,992 0 0 0 28,452 209,444 348 Gresham 110,505 189,514 0 7,895 0 20,771 218,180 344 Hillsboro 3 101,920 213,063 11,760 4,500 5,161 24,651 259,136 344 Keizer 4 38,505 158,434 9,506 4,200 900 21,072 194,111 312 Lake Oswego 38,215 176,259 8,813 4,800 600 36,468 226,940 248 Milwaukie 20,525 157,000 3,925 4,800 780 24,680 191,185 344 Oregon City 34,860 150,024 13,907 4,200 2,400 25,009 195,540 348 Tualatin 26,935 134,700 36,453 4,200 660 28,987 205,000 296 Salem 165,265 220,500 13,230 6,000 0 39,624 279,354 279 West Linn 25,830 146,000 7,300 6,000 0 25,813 185,113 264 Wilsonville 25,250 172,000 6,880 4,800 1,200 33,471 218,351 296 Average 61,496 171,970 9,796 4,583 1,222 28,336 215,907 307 Tigard 5 52,780 177,786 8,889 4,000 1,960 19,557 212,192 332 Difference 4.8% 1 Albany's current City Manager does not take the car and cell phone allowance that is offered to the position 2 Beaverton's data is provided for the Mayor 3 Hillsboro has PERS,but does not pick-up or pay the 6%employee contriubtion for the City Manager,that difference is reflected in the City Paid Retirement number and to a degree in a higher base salary 4 Keizer City Manager does not take the cell phone allowance offered to the position 5 The value of the difference in leave time nets out to approximately 1.1% AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 B - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: December 11, 2018 (Limited to 2 minutes or less,please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda and items on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED ! � t w' Name: �/-..7 1:312-0 Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will /")/77( Oa;(/, help the presiding officer pronounce: 1 Address /2 3 Ze S. W /3/5f Ave, Pe / 71- If City '—ncy c�ru� State Zip 9 72 23 p Phone No. / 7/-2: ..5-7, 3 Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION I:\ADM\CITY RECORDERS\000 City Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\2018\citizen communication 181204.doc AIS-3685 3.A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 Length (in minutes):Consent Item Agenda Title: RECIEVE AND FILE: CANVASS OF VOI'bS FROM THE NOVEMBER 6,2018 FT,ECTION Submitted By: Carol Krager,Central Services Item Type: Receive and File Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Receive and File the official election results for the November 6,2018 City of Tigard election for two city council positions and one mayor position. STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST No action is requested. This is a Receive and File summary for information purposes. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Recorder canvasses the votes as required by the Washington County Elections Divison and a copy is filed with the City Council to officially"Receive and File" the information for the record. The Statements of Votes attached shows: •Jason B. Snider with 41.46%of votes cast received the most votes and was elected to the office of mayor. •Liz Newton with 28.11%and John Goodhouse with 27.19%of votes cast received the most votes and were elected to the office of city council. Attached are the Statements of Votes Cast-City of Tigard and a Statement of Votes Cast by District, as certified by Washington County,and a Tigard precinct map. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments Statement of Votes Cast-Tigard-Mayor Statement of Votes Cast-Tigard-City Councilor Statement of Votes Cast by District-Washington County Precinct Map Official Final Results Page: 1 of 2 Statement of Votes Cast-City of Tigard 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 16:09:01 All Precincts, City of Tigard, All ScanStations, City of Tigard,Mayor,All Boxes Mayor Total Ballots Cast:24883, Registered Voters: 35286, Overall Turnout:70.52% Choice Votes Vote°/, Precinct 400 City of Tigard, Mayor(Vote for 1) 2886 ballots(1 over voted ballots,1 overvotes,407 blank voted),4357 registered voters,turnout 66.24% Marc T Woodard 805 32.49% Jason B Snider 984 39.71% Linda S Monahan 555 22.40% Marland Henderson 124 5.00% Write-in 10 0.40% Total 2478 100.00% Precinct 402 City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1) 6192 ballots(4 over voted ballots,4 overvotes,803 blank voted),8523 registered voters,turnout 72.65% Marc T Woodard 2172 40.33% Jason B Snider 2055 38.16% Linda S Monahan 865 16.06% Marland Henderson 280 5.20% Write-in 13 0.24% Total 5385 100.00% Precinct 404 City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1) 4721 ballots(5 over voted ballots 5 overvotes,545 blank voted),6923 registered voters,turnout 68.19% Marc T Woodard 1416 33.95% Jason B Snider 1645 39.44% Linda S Monahan 853 20.45% Marland Henderson 234 5.61% Write-in 23 0 55% Total 4171 100.00% Precinct 405 City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1) 6721 ballots(4 over voted ballots,4 overvotes,834 blank voted),8912 registered voters,turnout 75.42% Marc T Woodard 1897 32.25% Jason B Snider 2670 45.39% Linda S Monahan 1041 17.70% Marland Henderson 255 4.33% Write-in 20 0.34% Total 5883 100.00% Precinct 409 City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1) 3797 ballots(1 over voted ballots, 1 overvotes,596 blank voted),5564 registered voters,turnout 68.24% Marc T Woodard 954 29.81% Jason B Snider 1402 43.81% Linda S Monahan 657 20.53% Marland Henderson 172 5.38% Write-in 15 0 470/e Total 3200 100.00% Precinct 411 City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1) 542 ballots(2 over voted ballots.2 overvotes,133 blank voted),824 registered voters,turnout 65.78% Marc T Woodard 127 31.20% Jason B Snider 171 42.01% Linda S Monahan 83 20.39% Marland Henderson 24 5.90% Write-in 2 0.49% Official Final Results Page: 2 of 2 Statement of Votes Cast-City of Tigard 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 16:09:01 All Precincts, City of Tigard,All ScanStations, City of Tigard,Mayor,All Boxes Mayor Total Ballots Cast:24883, Registered Voters: 35286,Overall Turnout:70.52% Choice Votes Vote% Total 407 100.00% Precinct 427 City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1) 23 ballots(0 over voted ballots,0 overvotes,1 blank voted),36 registered voters,turnout 63.89% Marc T Woodard 7 31.82% Jason B Snider 7 31.82% Linda S Monahan 8 36.36% Marland Henderson 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 22 100.00% Precinct 428 City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1) 0 ballots(0 over voted ballots,0 overvotes,0 blank voted), 147 registered voters,turnout 0.00% Marc T Woodard 0 0.00% Jason B Snider 0 0.00% Linda S Monahan 0 0.00% Marland Henderson 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 0 0.00% All Precincts City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1) 24882 ballots(17 over voted ballots,17 overvotes,3319 blank voted),35286 registered voters,turnout 70.52% Marc T Woodard 7378 34.24% Jason B Snider 8934 41.46% Linda S Monahan 4062 18.85% Marland Henderson 1089 5.05% Write-in 83 0.39% Total 21546 100.00°r° K kNI'f W.Holiernfc t, Director of'Assessment and Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for Washington County,do hereby certifiy this to be a '! true and c copy of the original. �jj��fi * . .1'.41! i* t Date: }••i Jill+` i By. / / I tj • Official Final Results Page: 1 of 2 Statement of Votes Cast-City of Tigard 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 16:08:18 All Precincts, City of Tigard,All ScanStations, City of Tigard, Council Members, All Boxes Council Total Ballots Cast: 24883, Registered Voters: 35286, Overall Turnout: 70.52% Choice Votes Vote% Precinct 400 City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2) 2886 ballots(2 over voted ballots,4 overvotes, 1594 undervotes),4357 registered voters,turnout 66.24% Bret A Lieuallen 406 9.73% John Goodhouse 1063 25.47% Wil(Bill)Banash 439 10.52% Liz Newton 1168 27.98% Jenny McCabe 873 20.92% A Miranda 202 4.84% Write-in 16 0.38% Write-in 7 0.17% Total 4174 100.00% Precinct 402 City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2) 6192 ballots(3 over voted ballots,6 overvotes,3221 undervotes),8523 registered voters,turnout 72.65% Bret A Lieuallen 937 10.23% John Goodhouse 2612 28.52% Wil(Bill)Banash 1069 11.67% Liz Newton 2460 26.86% Jenny McCabe 1690 18.46% A Miranda 357 3.90% Write-in 27 0.29% Write-in 5 0.05% Total 9157 100.00% Precinct 404 City of Tigard, Council Members(Vote for 2) 4721 ballots(4 over voted ballots,8 overvotes,2271 undervotes),6923 registered voters,turnout 68.19% Bret A Lieuallen 833 11.63% John Goodhouse 1821 25.42% Wil(Bill)Banash 781 10.90% Liz Newton 2031 28.35% Jenny McCabe 1309 18.27% A Miranda 346 4.83% Write-in 32 0.45% Wale-in 10 0.14% Total 7163 100.00% Precinct 405 City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2) 6721 ballots(3 over voted ballots,6 overvotes, 3433 undervotes),8912 registered voters,turnout 75.42% Bret A Lieuallen 947 9.47% John Goodhouse 2860 28.59% Wil(Bill)Banash 1229 12.29% Liz Newton 2815 28.14% Jenny McCabe 1758 17.57% A Miranda 355 3.55% Write-in 31 0.31% Write-in 8 0.08% Total 10003 100.00% Precinct 409 City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2) 3797 ballots(1 over voted ballots.2 overvotes,2145 undervotes), 5564 registered voters,turnout 68.24% Bret A Lieuallen 472 8.67% John Goodhouse 1424 26.14% Wil(Bill)Banash 573 10.52% Liz Newton 1637 30.05% , Official Final Results Page: 2 of 2 Statement of Votes Cast-City of Tigard 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 16:08:18 All Precincts, City of Tigard,All ScanStations, City of Tigard, Council Members,All Boxes Council Total Ballots Cast: 24883, Registered Voters: 35286, Overall Turnout: 70.52% Choice Votes Vote% Jenny McCabe 1036 19.02% A Miranda 278 5.10% Write-in 20 0.37% Write-in 7 0.13% Total 5447 100.00% Precinct 411 City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2) 542 ballots(1 over voted ballots,2 overvotes,380 undervotes),824 registered voters,turnout 65.78% Bret A Lieuallen 67 9.54% John Goodhouse 188 26.78% Wil(Bill)Banash 89 12.68% Liz Newton 193 27.49% Jenny McCabe 118 16.81% A Miranda 40 5.70% Write-in 4 0.57% Write-in 3 0.43% Total 702 100.00% Precinct 427 City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2) 23 ballots(0 over voted ballots,0 overvotes,9 undervotes),36 registered voters,turnout 63.89% Bret A Lieuallen 5 13.51% John Goodhouse 6 16.22% Wil(Bill)Banash 7 18.92% Liz Newton 9 24.32% Jenny McCabe 8 21.62% A Miranda 2 5.41% Write-in 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0,00% Total 37 100.00% Precinct 428 City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2) 0 ballots(0 over voted ballots,0 overvotes,0 undervotes),147 registered voters,turnout 0.00% Bret A Lieuallen 0 0.00% John Goodhouse 0 0.00% Wil(Bill)Banash 0 0.00% Liz Newton 0 0.00% Jenny McCabe 0 0.00% A Miranda 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Write-1n 0 0.00% Total 0 0.00% All Precincts City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2) 24882 ballots(14 over voted ballots,28 overvotes,13053 undervotes),35286 registered voters,turnout 70.52% Bret A Lieuallen 3667 10.00% John Goodhouse 9974 27.19% Wil(Bill)Banash 4187 11.41% Liz Newton 10313 28.11% Jenny McCabe 6792 18.52% A Miranda 1580 4.31% 1,Richard W.Hoberni(cht, Director of Assessment Write-in 130 0.35% and Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for Write-in 40 0.11% `:4%.;a P-11- . Wa hi ng1on County,do hereby certifiy this to be a Total 36683 100.00%. �-: T true and vorr',t copy of the original. Y. i , •.-7:. �. :! Date: � . �1 jG1�. .. iBY.---14-, , 4Nih`.!7 ( *• Official Final Results Page: 1 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts, All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% All District Categories All Districts US Representative,District 1 (Vote for 1)t 360885 registered voters,turnout 69.86% Drew A Layda 10020 4.11% Suzanne Bonamici 158464 64.94% John Verbeek 75189 30.81% Write-in 356 0.15% Total 244029 100.00% Governor(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Aaron Auer 2010 0.81% Nick Chen 4229 1.70% Kate Brown 137886 55.49% Knute Buehler 97286 39.15% Patrick Starnes 5535 2.23% Chris Henry 1161 0.47% Write-in 372 0.15% Total 248479 100.00% State Senator,13th District(Vote for 1),34978 registered voters,turnout 71.72% Sarah Grider 11588 48.71% Kim Thatcher 12165 51.14% Write-in 36 0.15% Total 23789 100.00% State Senator, 15th District(Vote for 1),81892 registered voters,turnout 65.82% Chuck Riley 30770 59.26% Alexander Flores 21037 40.52% Write-in 114 0.22% Total 51921 100.00% State Senator,16th District(Vote for 1), 15402 registered voters,turnout 70.19% Betsy Johnson 7280 78.80% Ray Biggs 1894 20.50% Write-in 65 0.70% Total 9239 100.00% State Senator, 17th District(Vote for 1),75455 registered voters,turnout 72.49% Elizabeth S Hayward 37041 97.52% Write-in 941 2.48% Total 37982 100,00% State Senator,19th District(Vote for 1), 18771 registered voters,turnout 69.28% Rob Wagner 7297 58.86% David C Poulson 5083 41.00% Write-in 17 0.14% Total 12397 100.00% State Representative,24th District(Vote for 1),9155 registered voters,turnout 70.20% Ron Noble 3199 52.26% Ken Moore 2916 47.64% Write-in 6 0.10% Total 6121 100.00% State Representative,25th District(Vote for 1), 59 registered voters,turnout 1.69% Bill Post 0 0.00% Dave McCall 1 100.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Official Final Results Page: 1 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts, All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests, All Boxes Total Ballots Cast:252098, Registered Voters:360885, Overall Turnout:69.86% Choice Votes Vote% All District Categories All Districts US Representative,District 1 (Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.86% Drew A Layda 10020 4.11% Suzanne Bonamici 158464 64.94% John Verbeek 75189 30.81% Write-in 356 0.15% Total 244029 100.00% Governor(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Aaron Auer 2010 0.81% Nick Chen 4229 1.70% Kate Brown 137886 55.49% Knute Buehler 97286 39.15% Patrick Starnes 5535 2.23% Chris Henry 1161 0.47% Write-in 372 0.15% Total 248479 100.00% State Senator, 13th District(Vote for 1),34978 registered voters,turnout 71.72% Sarah Grider 11588 48.71% Kim Thatcher 12165 51.14% Write-in 36 0.15% Total 23789 100.00% State Senator, 15th District(Vote for 1),81892 registered voters,turnout 65.82% Chuck Riley 30770 59.26% Alexander Flores 21037 40.52% Write-in 114 0.22% Total 51921 100.00% State Senator,16th District(Vote for 1), 15402 registered voters,turnout 70.19% Betsy Johnson 7280 78.80% Ray Biggs 1894 20.50% Write-in 65 0.70% Total 9239 100.00% State Senator,17th District(Vote for 1),75455 registered voters,turnout 72.49% Elizabeth S Hayward 37041 97.52% Write-in 941 2.48% Total 37982 100.00% State Senator, 19th District(Vote for 1),18771 registered voters,turnout 69.28% Rob Wagner 7297 58.86% David C Poulson 5083 41.00% Write-in 17 0.14% Total 12397 100.00% State Representative,24th District(Vote for 1),9155 registered voters,turnout 70.20% Ron Noble 3199 52.26% Ken Moore 2916 47.64% Write-in 6 0.10% Total 6121 100.00% State Representative,25th District(Vote for 1),59 registered voters,turnout 1.69% Bill Post 0 0.00% Dave McCall 1 100.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Official Final Results Page:2 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast:252098, Registered Voters: 360885,Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Total 1 100.00% State Representative,26th District(Vote for 1),34919 registered voters,turnout 71.83% Courtney Neron 12152 50.39% Tim E Nelson 479 1.99% Rich Vial 11462 47.52% Write-in 25 0.10% Total 24118 100.00% State Representative,27th District(Vote for 1),42634 registered voters,turnout 72.79% Brian Pierson 8983 30.55% Katy Brumbelow 897 3.05% Sheri Malstrom 19492 66.28% Write-in 36 0.12% Total 29408 100.00% State Representative,28th District(Vote for 1),42336 registered voters,turnout 66.35% Jeff Barker 20789 84.23% Lars D H Hedbor 3680 14.91% Write-in 213 0.86% Total 24682 100.00% State Representative,29th District(Vote for 1),37571 registered voters,turnout 64.60% William A Namestnik 442 1.90% David Molina 9166 39.36% Susan McLain 13652 58.62% Write-in 28 0.12% Total 23288 100.00% State Representative,30th District(Vote for 1),44321 registered voters,turnout 66.86% Janeen Sollman 17459 61.67% Kyle Markley 2188 7.73% Dorothy Merritt 8630 30.48% Write-in 34 0.12% Total 28311 100.00% State Representative,31st District(Vote for 1),7794 registered voters,turnout 69.85% Brad Witt 2873 57.06% Brian G Stout 2147 42.64% Write-in 15 0.30% Total 5035 100.00% State Representative,32nd District(Vote for 1),7608 registered voters,turnout 70.53% Vineeta Lower 2579 50.98% Randell Carlson 269 5.32% Tiffiny K Mitchell 2012 39.77% Brian P Halvorsen 191 3.78% Write-in 8 0.16% Total 5059 100.00% State Representative,33rd District(Vote for 1),32605 registered voters,turnout 75.41% Elizabeth Reye 6735 29.74% Mitch Greenlick 15874 70.09% Write-in 39 0.17% Total 22648 100.00% State Representative,34th District(Vote for 1),42850 registered voters,turnout 70.27% Joshua Ryan Johnston 1558 5.54% Michael Ngo 7041 25.04% Ken Helm 19470 69.24% Official Final Results Page: 2 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast:252098, Registered Voters: 360885,Overall Turnout:69,86% Choice Votes Vote% Total 1 100.00% State Representative,26th District(Vote for 1),34919 registered voters,turnout 71.83% Courtney Neron 12152 50.39% Tim E Nelson 479 1.99% Rich Vial 11462 47.52% Write-in 25 0.10% Total 24118 100.00% State Representativel27th District(Vote for 1),42634 registered voters,turnout 72.79% Brian Pierson 8983 30.55% Katy Brumbelow 897 3.05% Sheri Malstrom 19492 66.28% Write-in 36 0.12% Total 29408 100.00% State Representative,28th District(Vote for 1),42336 registered voters,turnout 66.35% Jeff Barker 20789 84.23% Lars D H Hedbor 3680 14.91% Write-in 213 0.86% Total 24682 100.00% State Representative,29th District(Vote for 1),37571 registered voters,turnout 64.60% William A Namestnik 442 1.90% David Molina 9166 39.36% Susan McLain 13652 58.62% Write-in 28 0.12% Total 23288 100.00% State Representative,30th District(Vote for 1),44321 registered voters,turnout 66.86% Janeen Soliman 17459 61.67% Kyle Markley 2188 7.73% Dorothy Merritt 8630 30.48% Write-in 34 0.12% Total 28311 100.00% State Representative,31st District(Vote for 1),7794 registered voters,turnout 69.85% Brad Witt 2873 57.06% Brian G Stout 2147 42.64% Write-in 15 0.30% Total 5035 100.00% State Representative,32nd District(Vote for 1),7608 registered voters,turnout 70.53% Vineeta Lower 2579 50.98% Randell Carlson 269 5.32% Tiffiny K Mitchell 2012 39.77% Brian P Halvorsen 191 3.78% Write-in 8 0.16% Total 5059 100.00% State Representative,33rd District(Vote for 1),32605 registered voters,turnout 75.41% Elizabeth Reye 6735 29.74% Mitch Greenlick 15874 70.09% Write-in 39 0.17% Total 22648 100.00% State Representative,34th District(Vote for 1),42850 registered voters,turnout 70.27% Joshua Ryan Johnston 1558 5.54% Michael Ngo 7041 25.04% Ken Helm 19470 69.24% Official Final Results Page: 3 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6,2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast:252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Write-in 49 0.17% Total 28118 100.00% State Representative,35th District(Vote for 1),40262 registered voters,turnout 71.38% Margaret Doherty 17830 65.04% Bob Niemeyer 9536 34.79% Write-in 46 0.17% Total 27412 100.00% State Representative,37th District(Vote for 1),18771 registered voters,turnout 69.28% Rachel Prusak 6861 54.40% Julie Parrish 5727 45.41% Write-in 23 0.18% Total 12611 100.00% Judge of the Supreme Court,Position 5(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Adrienne Nelson 147366 98.09% Write-in 2871 1.91% Total 150237 100.00% Judge of the Court of Appeals, Position 2(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Bronson D James 138838 98.00% Write-in 2833 2.00% Total 141671 100.00% Judge of the Court of Appeals,Position 4(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Robyn Ridler Aoyagi 143402 98.30% Write-in 2480 1,70% Total 145882 100.00% Judge of the Court of Appeals,Position 7(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Steven R Powers 140939 98.29% Write-in 2453 1.71% Total 143392 100.00% Judge of the Oregon Tax Court(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Robert Manicke 140665 98.32% Write-in 2407 1,68% Total 143072 100.00% Judge of the Circuit Court,20th District,Position 10(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Danielle J Hunsaker 138155 98.27% Write-in 2432 1.73% Total 140587 100.00% County Commissioner,District At-Large(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Bob Terry 80211 41.24% Kathryn Harrington 113308 58.25% Write-in 990 0.51% Total 194509 100.00% City of Banks,Mayor(Vote for 1),1110 registered voters,turnout 65.68% Peter C Edison 447 89.76% Write-in 51 10.24% Total 498 100.00% City of Banks,Council Member,Position 1 (Vote for 1),1110 registered voters,turnout 65.68% Marsha Kirk 456 96.82% Write-in 15 3.18% Official Final Results Page: 3 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6,2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast:252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Write-in 49 0.17% Total 28118 100.00% State Representative,35th District(Vote for 1),40262 registered voters,turnout 71.38% Margaret Doherty 17830 65.04% Bob Niemeyer 9536 34.79% Write-in 46 0.17% Total 27412 100.00% State Representative,37th District(Vote for 1),18771 registered voters,turnout 69.28% Rachel Prusak 6861 54.40% Julie Parrish 5727 45.41% Write-in 23 0.18% Total 12611 100.00% Judge of the Supreme Court,Position 5(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Adrienne Nelson 147366 98.09% Write-in 2871 1.91% Total 150237 100.00% Judge of the Court of Appeals,Position 2(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Bronson D James 138838 98.00% Write-in 2833 2.00% Total 141671 100.00% Judge of the Court of Appeals, Position 4(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Robyn Ridler Aoyagi 143402 98.30% Write-in 2480 1.70% Total 145882 100.00% Judge of the Court of Appeals,Position 7(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Steven R Powers 140939 98.29% Write-in 2453 1.71% Total 143392 100.00% Judge of the Oregon Tax Court(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Robert Manlcke 140665 98,32% Write-in 2407 1.68% Total 143072 100.00% Judge of the Circuit Court,20th District,Position 10(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Danielle J Hunsaker 138155 98.27% Write-in 2432 1.73% Total 140587 100.00% County Commissioner,District At-Large(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Bob Terry 80211 41.24% Kathryn Harrington 113308 58.25% Write-in 990 0.51% Total 194509 100.00% City of Banks,Mayor(Vote for 1),1110 registered voters,turnout 65.68% Peter C Edison 447 89.76% Write-in 51 10.24% Total 498 100.00% City of Banks,Council Member,Position 1 (Vote for 1),1110 registered voters,turnout 65.68% Marsha Kirk 456 96.82% Write-In 15 3.18% Official Final Results Page:4 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests, All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Total 471 100.00% City of Banks,Council Member,Position 3(Vote for 1),1110 registered voters,turnout 65.68% Erica Harold-Heine 432 96.21% Write-in 17 3.79% Total 449 100.00% City of Banks,Council Member,Position 5(Vote for 1), 1110 registered voters,turnout 65.68% Mark Gregg 464 97.48% Write-in 12 2.52% Total 476 100.00% City of Beaverton,Council Member,Position 1 (Vote for 1),57647 registered voters,turnout 69.72% Lacey Beaty 23479 97.90% Write-in 503 2.10% Total 23982 100.00% City of Beaverton,Council Member, Position 2(Vote for 1),57647 registered voters,turnout 69.72% Laura Mitchell 23210 98.26% Write-in 410 1.74% Total 23620 100.00% City of Beaverton,Council Member,Position 5(Vote for 1),57647 registered voters,turnout 69.72% Marc San Soucie 23232 98.21% Write-in 424 1.79% Total 23656 100.00% City of Cornelius,Mayor(Vote for 1),6156 registered voters,turnout 59.08% Jeffrey C Dalin 2341 96.02% Write-in 97 3.98% Total 2438 100.00% City of Cornelius,Council Members(Vote for 2),6156 registered voters,turnout 59.08% John Colgan 1632 32.87% Andrew E Dudley 1134 22.84% Luis Hernandez 2120 42.70% Write-in 61 1.23% Write-in 18 0.36% Total 4965 100.00% City of Durham,Council Members(Vote for 2),1163 registered voters,turnout 70.51% Gery Schirado 524 47.38% Chris Hadfield 541 48.92% Write-in 31 2.80% Write-In 10 0.90% Total 1106 100.00% City of Forest Grove,Mayor(Vote for 1),14208 registered voters,turnout 65.91% Peter B Truax 5972 91.38% Write-in 563 8.62% Total 6535 100.00% City of Forest Grove,Council Members(Vote for 3),14208 registered voters,turnout 65.91% Karen Reynolds 3598 16.45% Tom(TJ)Johnston 4148 18.97% Malynda Wenzl 4651 21.27% Ron Thompson 3801 17.38% Solomon Clapshaw 2164 9.90% Devon Downeysmith 3248 14.85% Official Final Results Page:4 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Total 471 100.00% City of Banks,Council Member,Position 3(Vote for 1),1110 registered voters,turnout 65.68% Erica Harold-Heine 432 96.21% Write-in 17 3.79% Total 449 100.00% City of Banks,Council Member,Position 5(Vote for 1), 1110 registered voters,turnout 65.68% Mark Gregg 464 97.48% Write-in 12 2.52% Total 476 100.00% City of Beaverton,Council Member,Position 1 (Vote for 1),57647 registered voters,turnout 69.72% Lacey Beaty 23479 97.90% Write-in 503 2.10% Total 23982 100.00% City of Beaverton,Council Member,Position 2(Vote for 1),57647 registered voters,turnout 69,72% Laura Mitchell 23210 98.26% Write-in 410 1.74% Total 23620 100.00% City of Beaverton,Council Member,Position 5(Vote for 1),57647 registered voters,turnout 69.72% Marc San Soucie 23232 98.21% Write-in 424 1.79% Total 23656 100.00% City of Cornelius,Mayor(Vote for 1),6156 registered voters,turnout 59.08% Jeffrey C Dalin 2341 96.02% Write-in 97 3.98% Total 2438 100.00% City of Cornelius,Council Members(Vote for 2),6156 registered voters,turnout 59.08% John Colgan 1632 32.87% Andrew E Dudley 1134 22.84% Luis Hernandez 2120 42.70% Write-In 61 1.23% Write-in 18 0.36% Total 4965 100.00% City of Durham,Council Members(Vote for 2), 1163 registered voters,turnout 70.51% Gery Schirado 524 47.38% Chris Hadfield 541 48.92% Write-in 31 2.80% Write-in 10 0.90% Total 1106 100.00% City of Forest Grove,Mayor(Vote for 1),14208 registered voters,turnout 65.91% Peter B Truax 5972 91.38% Write-in 563 8.62% Total 6535 100.00% City of Forest Grove,Council Members(Vote for 3),14208 registered voters,turnout 65.91% Karen Reynolds 3598 16.45% Tom(TJ)Johnston 4148 18.97% Malynda Wenzl 4651 21.27% Ron Thompson 3801 17.38% Solomon Clapshaw 2164 9.90% Devon Downeysmith 3248 14.85% Official Final Results Page: 5 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts, All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests, All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters:360885,Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Write-in 187 0.86% Write-in 40 0.18% Write-in 29 0.13% Total 21866 100.00% City of Gaston,Mayor(Vote for 1),397 registered voters,turnout 62.47% Jerry Spaulding 146 89.02% Write-in 18 10.98% Total 164 100.00% City of Gaston,Council Member,Position 4(Vote for 1),397 registered voters,turnout 62.47% Mario De Piero 151 94.38% Write-In 9 5.62% Total 160 100.00% City of Gaston,Council Member,Position 5(Vote for 1),397 registered voters,turnout 62.47% Sarah Branch 162 97.59% Write-in 4 2.41% Total 166 100.00% City of Gaston,Council Member,Position 6(Vote for 1),397 registered voters,turnout 62.47% Susan Carver 157 95.15% Write-in 8 4.85% Total 165 100,00% City of Hillsboro,Council Member,Ward 1, Position A(Vote for 1),57662 registered voters,turnout 66.27% Beach Pace 19824 67.33% Eric Muehter 9346 31.74% Write-in 271 0.92% Total 29441 100.00% City of Hillsboro,Council Member,Ward 2,Position A(Vote for 1),57662 registered voters,turnout 66.27% Kyle Allen 19630 66.71% William Fields 2889 9.82% John Shepherd 6677 22.69% Write-in 232 0.79% Total 29428 100.00% City of Hillsboro,Council Member,Ward 3,Position A(Vote for 1),57662 registered voters,turnout 66.27% Olivia Alcaire 22541 97.47% Write-in 585 2.53% Total 23126 100.00% City of King City,Council Members(Vote for 4),4128 registered voters,turnout 71.10% Kenneth W Gibson 1767 25.72% David N Platt 1664 24.22% Micah Paulsen 1617 23.53% Jaimie A Fender 1694 24.65% Write-in 70 1.02% Write-in 28 0.41% Write-in 18 0.26% Write-In 13 0.19% Total 6871 100.00% City of Lake Oswego,Councilor(Vote for 3) Randy Lee Arthur 0 0.00% John Wendland 0 0.00% Hannah Crumme 0 0.00% Emma Burke 0 0.00% Daniel Nguyen 0 0.00% Official Final Results Page: 5 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts, All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters:360885 Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Write-in 187 0.86% Write-In 40 0.18% Write-in 29 0.13% Total 21866 100.00% City of Gaston,Mayor(Vote for 1),397 registered voters,turnout 62.47% Jerry Spaulding 146 89.02% Write-in 18 10.98% Total 164 100.00% City of Gaston,Council Member, Position 4(Vote for 1),397 registered voters,turnout 62.47% Mario De Piero 151 94.38% Write-in 9 5.62% Total 160 100.00% City of Gaston,Council Member,Position 5(Vote for 1),397 registered voters,turnout 62.47% Sarah Branch 162 97.59% Write-in 4 2.41% Total 166 100.00% City of Gaston,Council Member,Position 6(Vote for 1),397 registered voters,turnout 62.47% Susan Carver 157 95.15% Write-in 8 4.85% Total 165 100.00% City of Hillsboro,Council Member,Ward 1, Position A(Vote for 1),57662 registered voters,turnout 66.27% Beach Pace 19824 67.33% Eric Muehter 9346 31.74% Write-in 271 0.92% Total 29441 100.00% City of Hillsboro,Council Member,Ward 2,Position A(Vote for 1),57662 registered voters,turnout 66.27% Kyle Allen 19630 66.71% William Fields 2889 9.82% John Shepherd 6677 22.69% Write-in 232 0.79% Total 29428 100.00% City of Hillsboro,Council Member,Ward 3,Position A(Vote for 1),57662 registered voters,turnout 66.27% Olivia Alcaire 22541 97.47% Write-in 585 2.53% Total 23126 100.00% City of King City,Council Members(Vote for 4),4128 registered voters,turnout 71.10% Kenneth W Gibson 1767 25.72% David N Platt 1664 24.22% Micah Paulsen 1617 23.53% Jaimie A Fender 1694 24.65% Write-in 70 1.02% Write-in 28 0.41% Write-in 18 0.26% Write-In 13 0.19% Total 6871 100.00% City of Lake Oswego,Councilor(Vote for 3) Randy Lee Arthur 0 0.00% John Wendland 0 0.00% Hannah Crumme 0 0.00% Emma Burke 0 0.00% Daniel Nguyen 0 0.00°A Official Final Results Page:6 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6,2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Donald Mattersdorff 0 0.00% Jackie Manz 0 0.00% Massene Mboup 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 0 0.00% City of North Plains,Council Members(Vote for 3),1972 registered voters,turnout 69.37% Garth Eimers 706 25.88% James Fage 684 25.07% Sherrie Simmons 635 23.28% Rickey Smith 643 23.57% Write-in 45 1.65% Write-in 12 0.44% Write-in 3 0.11% Total 2728 100.00% City of Portland,Commissioner,Position 3(Vote for 1),1107 registered voters,turnout 69.20% Loretta Smith 276 46.78% Jo Ann A Hardesty 309 52.37% Write-in 5 0.85% Total 590 100.00% City of Rivergrove,Councilor(Vote for 3),36 registered voters,turnout 77.78% Jeff Williams 18 30.00% Walt Williams 20 33.33% David J Pierce 20 33.33% Write-in 1 1.67% Write-in 1 1.67% Write-in 0 0.00°! Total 60 100.00% City of Sherwood,Mayor(Vote for 1), 12605 registered voters,turnout 71.82% Keith Mays 6116 94.34% Write-in 367 5.66% Total 6483 100.00% City of Sherwood,Council Members(Vote for 3), 12605 registered voters,turnout 71.82% Tim Rosener 5392 33.84% Russell Griffin 5308 33.31% Doug Scott 4811 30.19% Write-in 250 1.57% Write-in 101 0.63% Write-in 73 0.46% Total 15935 100.00% City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1),35286 registered voters,turnout 70.52% Marc T Woodard 7378 34.24% Jason B Snider 8934 41.46% Linda S Monahan 4062 18.85% Marland Henderson 1089 5.05% Write-in 83 0.39% Total 21546 100.00% City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2),35286 registered voters,turnout 70.52% Bret A Lleuallen 3667 10.00% John Goodhouse 9974 27.19% Wil(Bill)Banash 4187 11.41% Liz Newton 10313 28.11% Jenny McCabe 6792 18.52% Official Final Results Page: 6 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6,2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts, All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098,Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Donald Mattersdorff 0 0.00% Jackie Manz 0 0.00% Massene Mboup 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0,00% Write-in 0 0.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 0 0.00% City of North Plains,Council Members(Vote for 3),1972 registered voters,turnout 69.37% Garth Eimers 706 25.88% James Fage 684 25.07% Sherrie Simmons 635 23.28% Rickey Smith 643 23.57% Write-in 45 1.65% Write-in 12 0.44% Write-in 3 0.11% Total 2728 100.00% City of Portland,Commissioner,Position 3(Vote for 1),1107 registered voters,turnout 69.20% Loretta Smith 276 46.78% Jo Ann A Hardesty 309 52.37% Write-in 5 0.85% Total 590 100.00% City of Rivergrove,Councilor(Vote for 3),36 registered voters,turnout 77.78% Jeff Williams 18 30.00% Walt Williams 20 33.33% David J Pierce 20 33.33% Write-in 1 1.67% Write-in 1 1.67% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 60 100.00% City of Sherwood,Mayor(Vote for 1),12605 registered voters,turnout 71.82% Keith Mays 6116 94,34% Write-in 367 5.66% Total 6483 100.00% City of Sherwood,Council Members(Vote for 3), 12605 registered voters,turnout 71.82% Tim Rosener 5392 33.84% Russell Griffin 5308 33.31% Doug Scott 4811 30.19% Write-in 250 1.57% Write-in 101 0.63% Write-in 73 0.46% Total 15935 100.00% City of Tigard,Mayor(Vote for 1),35286 registered voters,turnout 70.52% Marc T Woodard 7378 34.24% Jason B Snider 8934 41.46% Linda S Monahan 4062 18.85% Marland Henderson 1089 5.05% Write-in 83 0.39% Total 21546 100.00% City of Tigard,Council Members(Vote for 2),35286 registered voters,turnout 70.52% Bret A Lieuallen 3667 10.00% John Goodhouse 9974 27.19% Wil(Bill)Banash 4187 11.41% Liz Newton 10313 28.11% Jenny McCabe 6792 18.52% Official Final Results Page: 7 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast:252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% A Miranda 1580 4.31% Write-in 130 0.35% Write-in 40 0.11% Total 36683 100.00% City of Tualatin,Mayor(Vote for 1),14960 registered voters,turnout 71.66% Frank Bubenik 4948 54.43% Paul F Morrison 4075 44.82% Write-in 68 0.75% Total 9091 100.00% City of Tualatin,Council Member,Position 1 (Vote for 1), 14960 registered voters,turnout 71.66% Maria A Reyes 6202 97.90% Write-in 133 2.10% Total 6335 100.00% City of Tualatin,Council Member,Position 3(Vote for 1),14960 registered voters,turnout 71.66% Bridget Brooks 6299 98.15% Write-in 119 1.85% Total 6418 100.00% City of Tualatin,Council Member,Position 5(Vote for 1),14960 registered voters,turnout 71.66% Nancy Grimes 6101 72.86% Chris Burchill 2228 26.61% Write-in 45 0.54% Total 8374 100.00% Multnomah West Soil and Water,Director,At-Large,Position (Vote for 1), 119 registered voters,turnout 75.63% Shawn Looney 36 100.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 36 100.00% Multnomah West Soil and Water,Director,Zone 4(Vote for 1), 119 registered voters,turnout 75.63% Brian W Lightcap 37 100.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 37 100.00% Multnomah West Soil and Water,Director,Zone 5(Vote for 1), 119 registered voters,turnout 75.63% Terri Preeg Riggsby 35 97.22% Write-in 1 2.78% Total 36 100.00% City of Wilsonville, Councilor(Vote for 2),415 registered voters,turnout 58.07% Charlotte D Lehan 130 39.16% Ben West 64 19.28% John Budiao 56 16.87% David A Davis 81 24.40% Write-in 1 0.30% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 332 100.00% Tualatin Soil and Water,Director,Zone 3(Vote for 1),360766 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Thomas Dierickx 134363 98.42% Write-in 2157 1.58% Total 136520 100.00% Tualatin Soil and Water,Director,Zone 4(Vote for 1),360766 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Loren Behrman 62324 39.13% John A McDonald 95531 59.98% Official Final Results Page: 7 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6, 2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% A Miranda 1580 4.31% Write-in 130 0.35% Write-in 40 0.11% Total 36683 100.00% City of Tualatin,Mayor(Vote for 1),14960 registered voters,turnout 71.66% Frank Bubenik 4948 54.43% Paul F Morrison 4075 44.82% Write-in 68 0.75% Total 9091 100.00% City of Tualatin,Council Member,Position 1 (Vote for 1),14960 registered voters,turnout 71.66% Maria A Reyes 6202 97.90% Write-in 133 2.10% Total 6335 100.00% City of Tualatin,Council Member,Position 3(Vote for 1),14960 registered voters,turnout 71.66% Bridget Brooks 6299 98.15% Write-in 119 1.85% Total 6418 100.00% City of Tualatin,Council Member,Position 5(Vote for 1), 14960 registered voters,turnout 71.66% Nancy Grimes 6101 72.86% Chris Burchill 2228 26.61% Write-in 45 0.54% Total 8374 100.00% Multnomah West Soil and Water,Director,At-Large, Position (Vote for 1),119 registered voters,turnout 75.63% Shawn Looney 36 100.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 36 100.00% Multnomah West Soil and Water,Director,Zone 4(Vote for 1), 119 registered voters,turnout 75.63% Brian W Lightcap 37 100.00% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 37 100.00% Multnomah West Soil and Water,Director,Zone 5(Vote for 1), 119 registered voters,turnout 75.63% Terri Preeg Riggsby 35 97,22% Write-in 1 2.78% Total 36 100.00% City of Wilsonville,Councilor(Vote for 2),415 registered voters,turnout 58.07% Charlotte D Lehan 130 39.16% Ben West 64 19.28% John Budiao 56 16.87% David A Davis 81 24.40% Write-in 1 0.30% Write-in 0 0.00% Total 332 100.00% Tualatin Soil and Water,Director,Zone 3(Vote for 1),360766 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Thomas Dierickx 134363 98.42% Write-in 2157 1.58% Total 136520 100.00% Tualatin Soil and Water, Director,Zone 4(Vote for 1),360766 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Loren Behrman 62324 39.13% John A McDonald 95531 59.98% Official Final Results Page: 8 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6,2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters:360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote Write-in 1416 0.89% Total 159271 100.00% Tualatin Soil and Water,Director,Zone 5(Vote for 1),360766 registered voters,turnout 69.77% MattPihl 134193 98.41% Write-in 2166 1.59% Total 136359 100.00% Tualatin Soil and Water,Director,At-Large,Position 2(Vote for 1),360766 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Anna K Jesse 134268 98.52% Write-in 2014 1.48% Total 136282 100.00% Metro Councilor.District 2(Vote for 1),243 registered voters,turnout 58.44% Christine Lewis 38 39.18% Joe Buck 58 59.79% Write-in 1 1.03% Total 97 100.00% State Measure 102(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 140983 58.18% No 101337 41.82% Total 242320 100.00% State Measure 103(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 95947 38.93% No 150482 61.07% Total 246429 100.00% State Measure 104(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 81082 33.62% No 160125 66.38% Total 241207 100.00% State Measure 105(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 78174 31.78% No 167830 68.22% Total 246004 100.00% State Measure 106(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 76851 31.19% No 169576 68.81% Total 246427 100.00% City of Portland Measure 26-200(Vote for 1), 1107 registered voters,turnout 69.20% Yes 624 86.55% No 97 13.45% Total 721 100.00% City of Portland Measure 26-201 (Vote for 1),1107 registered voters,turnout 69.20% Yes 407 56,06% No 319 43.94% Total 726 100.00% City of Lake Oswego Measure 3-537(Vote for 1) Yes 0 0.00% No 0 0.00% Total 0 0.00% Official Final Results Page: 8 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6,2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts,All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout:69.86% Choice Votes Vote% Write-in 1416 0.89% Total 159271 100.00% Tualatin Soil and Water,Director,Zone 5(Vote for 1),360766 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Matt Pihl 134193 98.41% Write-in 2166 1.59% Total 136359 100.00% Tualatin Soil and Water,Director,At-Large,Position 2(Vote for 1),360766 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Anna K Jesse 134268 98.52% Write-in 2014 1.48% Total 136282 100.00% Metro Councilor. District 2(Vote for 1),243 registered voters,turnout 58.44% Christine Lewis 38 39.18% Joe Buck 58 59.79% Write-in 1 1.03% Total 97 100.00% State Measure 102(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 140983 58.18% No 101337 41.82% Total 242320 100.00% State Measure 103(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 95947 38.93% No 150482 61.07% Total 246429 100.00% State Measure 104(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 81082 33.62% No 160125 66.38% Total 241207 100.00% State Measure 105(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 78174 31.78% No 167830 68.22% Total 246004 100.00% State Measure 106(Vote for 1),360885 registered voters,turnout 69.77% Yes 76851 31.19% No 169576 68.81% Total 246427 100.00% City of Portland Measure 26-200(Vote for 1),1107 registered voters,turnout 69.20% Yes 624 86.55% No 97 13.45% Total 721 100.00% City of Portland Measure 26-201 (Vote for 1),1107 registered voters,turnout 69.20% Yes 407 56.06% No 319 43.94% Total 726 100.00% City of Lake Oswego Measure 3-537(Vote for 1) Yes 0 0.00% No 0 0.00% Total 0 0.00% Official Final Results Page: 9 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County, November 6,2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts, All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast:252098,Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout: 69.86% Choice Votes Vote% City of Lake Oswego Measure 3-538(Vote for 1) Yes 0 0.00% No 0 0.00% Total 0 0.00% Metro Measure 26-199(Vote for 1),320408 registered voters,turnout 72.76% Yes 120178 54.29% No 101201 45.71% Total 221379 100.00% Tigard-Tualatin School District#23 JT Measure 34-285(Vote for 1),55380 registered voters,turnout 75.50% Yes 30041 74.91% No 10060 25.09% Total 40101 100.00% i.,Rtaard W.Hobernichti Director of Assessment and Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for Washington County,do hereby certifiy this to be a true and core ct copy of the original. , • Date: �/�. el,J'// i i" Official Final Results Page: 9 of 9 Statement of Votes Cast by District 2018-11-26 Washington County,November 6,2018 General 11:38:12 All Precincts, All Districts,All ScanStations,All Contests,All Boxes Total Ballots Cast: 252098, Registered Voters: 360885, Overall Turnout:69.86% Choice Votes Vote% City of Lake Oswego Measure 3-538(Vote for 1) Yes 0 0.00% No 0 0.00% Total 0 0.00% Metro Measure 26-199(Vote for 1),320408 registered voters,turnout 72.76% Yes 120178 54.29% No 101201 45.71% Total 221379 100.00% Tigard-Tualatin School District#23 JT Measure 34-285(Vote for 1),55380 registered voters,turnout 75.50% Yes 30041 74.91% No 10060 25.09% Total 40101 100.00% i,Richard W.Ifobernichi, Director of Assessment and Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for Washington County,do hereby certifiy this to be a true and corrr ct copy of the original. Date- 12] 1 )/ gy �,,,�� +F A. i�, i t / ' ) ' }!S'_4,"`l a g T i lir Y48 ,ya .l i ! "�- I Voting tZng :i-.1., �� Ili!) .r= i -�'�1 � � �r- R " , �j.__L _t', d t^--,1. r_� �iI ' y .�... 4 .._a�„..... . t......_ ._• i }fir ff_ t--; d _; �p� g � - r " � ..7 Precincts - '4r j I �� 1 l i ` ' � 8'YF't. ii r AL-�-. i-`...)- �, j : .l swnr ,1---j:-. f 1..L._.._ ---4-4--1---1-Lt. v_...... `--. Wilier- ,, m �� i-`-': .:-��c ,-., / '"1''� � �� ._�_ , 349"4T-31 -,_ i,� ` City of 'Tigard,Oregon 4388 ;r t 1 ;� ,—.1I.77 1; + . �.. _ 4a i- .`• ,-,.! —. :2-2' _ "- ,.. )n.-----1'.--rte.�-=.. ' 1 r- --1-.% y._..` _ -t '�..- op,,„------ -,�, (J Precincts J/ „r 3 1 J ` ., _fid. -1---•.J• ate{ •--.—_ '-___/-- t , !t-i---( `� ! )-1 r r`i, - 'II .__R "'. ! • l _i Tigard City Boundary 111 ----. "7------- Y ,, `♦� sc`' f '409,` _� t i I i R 1) 395 A ,e y 4-- - ...��_......_ rr � � Jl f�.. � .T. `...L.;___1_____ � q . ` i � i � � � is 1 m_.411.:__ -,-!--:."7--) fir 3.244 3 '' 4_ c 4 1„_11„. .. `, F-, i- r •�S�"'•�. — ?,� -A, --�-f., ,ar . .,tet ! ,• �, "''eon I ; 41: y _ . X, C Viciniy Map (�^ J .a. r. ..'�r _I.P d`d'I �) ! li. t r 1 1 I ' ,;j 1. _ '•..wegtoa vu 1 r i R� !�.- r • (� '4•, C. , �ikP� ;5%, •w"'- 1 r-' F n t' IQ 1 R�I I 1-'-', � R h� .Y^+• "'''11.-‘,'- r- '" s IL.',I j .e.. -'"'6 " ' •Ls',..'_"-` J r• ,i.tir • .-, 1 • i € i _ m r,lsa0no '•� �' rwwny�•snssyw .• , -1 -. /19/114 J —— ,.<7 A�.!�- (• '� fli J ! 04 a �y j r • i s >I ' R •• 4`14.,.• . lr.. t`-, 1 ! ‘:!-t.r"_' . ! , h r� F7-, *` ,.�o,,. T '1� R {`- ara nrarr ` it 426 I m;' „T !r 1 /./Y)•,'-i------: _ Y ..'/ t , i -� C��„�� = ii, � 'd/' nrlr L-_-. _.,�- T�•a-4h L '. ,_ 1 , ' j\:.? t412.1,+ ,,,..ii _, __ t` ..... ._...i _ � �. / f IsorwcG\\ 1 _ -;.....-,27.7:-.A...,, 6 � � � "t”1 (� t >' �'�� "�'"'thy �42?7 441 c �' f e, fwe�o�A i \ r.� W an _I I F 4-4. I Z i ! lig.. F �, _ r NE / --1 d ; , i_ • � ti !t'i..,, i i.t , i 3 .._ - }:._i is N.s . L t Tas IN-ia I r'.- P...:11-.),. i ,4,;., i_ /Z 16 4 Z.'\,..7- " J !^ i y s, 1 i 1 V!-�d'-),-- - T' g s 1-4 r"T , W Iwry -t'l �t I , ��; ti1 # d4 - � I 1-1 l L , } (___4_ r } t 3i97 l` t '"i I r.' 7�",-;.1,1,',:,-..„------4-4 `i. - i r. i r--,-,,•-i i l_ -- j 411 n ? • w t m. I f- 1-d,Y •-� t_ _— } .i r " * �`r ,1 1 ) _.8 -r1 `;i•t.X "`�r'_ , Scale tt r w *t t r,'"l �.1g�e� i.!11 ...'1 � i bURMANtR '-a -i �, . e Miles ; _..T... r� .' a I 3417,5-'s •''" -,1 l1 C '-fir-' t ,.� `_ 4 e1 1 C __.• a 0.5 t ` i i j W 431 r`, d , /y� �ar . 16 410 ,L. ! `. 477 i��'. P '` -I fr"f'�� " • `� L a y� : i 7_. - �_ 1 Map Created:5/19/2010 V ' 14 w ; �1 -'t'I; ,- _...4 Iii,*--y rr;. t !! -�, Ir .�- , r i✓. _.- 3 ..,,... _.,_,,..- ! 11 1. 423 ` r 3. t-' City of Tigard,Oregon 1 ,. r'. ` --- -- n. sem' -�.. ••i ._•.D 13125 S W H a II Blvd --_ /%/%r 420 jT j .. - T s ff"4 Ro �,- t _3,-1.- -1 -3._.Y- Tigard, 5 3 6 9-4171 tY 42 PJ It .,57.'• TUA!'AT '- _ ' , ' - ! 5-1 4% �'J �-, -n www.t-gard-or.gov L�GSAA Pallt P11gOdM.v2'G.c racesuneMaGYMry_M%Dr1E_almn_tnld.W atlMflg.cadAsl1l7.nps AIS-3582 4. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD-ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES- ON-CALL CONTRACT Prepared For: Joseph Barrett Submitted By: Kelly Burgoyne, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Local Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Contract Review Board Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the Local Contract Review Board award on-call contracts in three professional categories related to small engineering and related service needs? STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends the Local Contract Review Board award on-call contracts across three professional disciplines as identified below for services related to small engineering and related needs. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The city has a robust Capital Improvement Program(CIP) and has an annual need for a wide range of consulting services associated with the public infrastructure of the City—e.g.,the sewer,stormwater,water, parks/greenways,public facilities,and street systems. A number smaller projects within the CIP involve low dollar, short term consulting services and do not use any federal or state monies. Often,the solicitation of these consultants can be a bit time consuming and add time to the project. To combat this,the city created a list of on-call and of record contracts with a number of qualified firms in various engineering or engineering related services that would expedite the solicitation process in early 2017. The process actually involves a more robust and inclusive process than is typically used for these type of projects and has resulted in a better streamlines process for the city. While the majority of the categories are having their option years enacted, staff determined that a few of the services should be resolicted: •Traffic/Transportation Systems Engineering and Analysis; •Environmental Permitting Support Services;and •Special Inspections and Testing Services The city issued a qualification-based request for proposal(QBS) for the three categories of work in mid-October. As with the orginal solicitation in 2017 the intent of the city is to award contracts to multiple firms in each of the categories but no more than five per category. After a thorough review and ranking of the proposals, a selection team is recommending the following vendors be awarded contracts with the city: •Traffic/Transportation: DKS Associates,Fehr&Peers,Kittelson&Associates,Lancaster Engineering •Environmental Permitting: ESA Associates,Pacific Habitat,Schott&Associates,Wolf Water Resources,Wood PLC •Special Inspections -Carlson Testing,Inc.,Intertek PSI,Marterial Testing&Inspection,Terracon Consultants The proposed contracts will,like their predecessors, specifically targeted to smaller, short term projects within the overall CIP Program.These contracts will allow the city to remain compliant with current QBS-rules for contracted work under$100,000 by issuing a task order against the contract. The city has actually conducted a more competitive and open process under this action rather than a qualified-list direct appointment. For larger design projects and major studies with fees expected to exceed$100,000,or that will use State or Federal monies and require a separate selection process,the City will continue to conduct project-specific qualification-based solicitations in accordance with Tigard's Public Contracting Rules. Being selected or not selected on this RFP will not affect any firms'ability to propose on other consulting work for which the City issues a separate,project-specific RFP. Staff does not have a not to exceed contract total identified for the work but no task order shall exceed$100,000. The contracts shall be for two years and work will be shared over the contracts to the fullest extent possible. OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS,POLICIES,MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION The Local Contract Review Board(Board) approved on-call contracts for these and other servcies on February 14,2017. This is the first time the Board has discussed these three new versions of the contracts. Fiscal Impact Cost: Varies Budgeted(yes or no): Yes Where Budgeted(department/program): Multiple Additional Fiscal Notes: The proposed on-call contracts will not have total contract not to exceed amounts as part of the contract; however,no task order issued against any of them shall exceed$100,000. Task orders will only be issued for projects that are budgeted within CIP and Department Budgets. Attachments Nofzle(s)attached AIS-3653 5. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 Length(in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Contract Award-Tigard Triangle Equitable Urban Renewal Implementation Project Submitted By: Joseph Barrett,Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Town Center Development Agency Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the Town Center Development Agency award a contract for the Tigard Triangle Equitable Urban Renewal Implementation project to Leland Consulting Group? STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends the Town Center Development Agency award a contract for the Tigard Triangle Equitable Urban Renewal Implementation project to Leland Consulting Group in an amount not to exceed$370,000. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Triangle Equitable Urban Renewal Implementation project will develop an urban renewal investment strategy to guide public investments,with equitable development as a priority outcome. The strategy will seek to mitigate residential and business displacement pressures and explore opportunities for social equity in all areas: housing,employment,access to goods and services and quality of life. Possible projects in the Triangle Urban Renewal Plan will be evaluated and ranked,and recommendations will be made for phasing.A financial plan will also be produced. Engineering design and cost estimating will be done for the top ranked projects. The city was awarded a$340,000 Metro 2040 Planning and Development Grant to fund this. The consultant team will assist with the following tasks: •Preliminary infrastructure design,simulations,and cost estimating •Public Involvement •Urban Renewal Finance Plan •Develop an Equitable Urban Renewal Implementation Strategy •Property and redevelopment consulting The city issued a Qualification-based Request for Proposal(QBS) for the work in June 2018. The city needed to use a QBS process rather than a traditional Request for Proposal(RFP) for this project as engineering is a QBS-covered service. The city received proposals from two consultant teams •Leland Consulting Group;and •ECONorthwest. A staff selection team reviewed and scored the proposals based on the criteria detailed in the QBS packet (which excluded price,under QBS rules) and found the Leland Consulting Group team to be the most qualified for the work Staff entered into negotiations with the Leland Consulting Group and agreed on a price of$370,000. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The Town Center Development Agency may reject staffs recommendation for award and direct staff to reissue the Qualification-Based Request for Proposal. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Plan DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION This is the first time the Town Center Development Agency has discussed this potential contract. Fiscal Impact Cost: $370,000 Budgeted(yes or no): Yes Where budgeted?: TCDA Capital Improvements Additional Fiscal Notes: The proposed contract will be issued for a not to exceed total of$370,000. The city received a Metro 2040 Planning and Development grant totalling$340,000 for the work and the remaininder will come from TCDA funds. Attachments No files)attached AIS-3606 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 Length(in minutes):5 Minutes Agenda Title: Consider Resolution to Appoint Budget Committee Members Prepared For: Toby LaFrance,Finance and Information Services Submitted By: Liz Lutz,Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting Resolution -Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall the City Council appoint the following to the budget committee: Chris Bence and Heidi Lueb to three-year terms, ending December 31,2021 and Chelsea Nance as an alternate for a one-year term ending December 31,2019? STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Approve the recommended appointments to the Budget Committee. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Due to regularly expiring terms and one member being voted onto the City Council of Tigard, there are two voting positions and one alternate position that needs to be filled on the Budget Committee. The Appointments Advisory Committee (Mayor Cook and Councilor Snider)interviewed nine citizen candidates.The committee is recommending the City Council appoint Chris Bence and Heidi Lueb to three-year terms,ending December 31,2021.The committee also recommends Chelsea Nance as the non-voting alternate for a one-year term, ending December 31,2019. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could decide to not approve some or all of the recommendations.This would require reopening the recruitment. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION NA Attachments Resolution CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 18- A RESOLUTION APPOINTING CHRIS BENCE AND HEIDI LUEB TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE AND APPOINTING CHELSEA NANCE AS AN ALTERNATE,MEMBER WHEREAS,two positions are open on the city's budget committee,and Chris Bence has completed his term as an alternate member; WHEREAS, the Mayor's Appointments Advisory Committee (Mayor Cook and Councilor Snider) conducted interviews of nine individuals on November 14,2018;and WHEREAS, the Appointments Advisory Committee has recommended that Heidi Lueb and Chris Bence be appointed to the city's Budget Committee. In addition,the committee has recommended that Chelsea Nance be appointed as an alternate member. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Heidi Lueb and Chris Bence are appointed to three-year terms on the City of Tigard's Budget Committee beginning January 1,2019 and ending on December 31,2021. SECTION 2: Chelsea Nance is appointed to a one-year term as an alternate member on the City of Tigard's Budget Committee beginning January 1,2019 and ending on December 31,2019. SECITON 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2018. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard • RESOLUTION NO. 18- Page 1 AIS-3611 7. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 • Length (in minutes):5 Minutes Agenda Title: Consider Resolution to Appoint Audit Committee Members Submitted By: Carol Krager, Central Services Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting -Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall the City Council appoint the following to the Audit Committee:Ann McElligott to a three-year term, ending December 31,2021,Stephanie Veal and Larry Acheson to two-year,limited duration terms ending on December 31,2020 and Fli7abeth Gils Carbo to the two-year alternate positon,ending on December 31,2020? STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends approval of this resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Due to the regularly expiring terms and the Ciy Council expanding the role of the Audit Committee to include oversight of performance audits being conducted within the city, there are three voting positions and one alternate position that needs to be filled on the Audit Committee. The Appointments Advisory Committee (Mayor Cook and Councilor Snider)interviewed nine citizen candidates.The committee recommends the City Council appoint Ann McElligott to a three-year term,ending on December 31,2021.The committee also recommends Stephanie Veal and Larry Acheson to the two-year, limited duration positions,ending on December 31,2020.Lastly, the committee recommends Fli7abeth Gils Carbo as the two-year alternate,ending on December 31,2020. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could decide to not approve some or all of the recommendations.This would require reopening the recruitment. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION NA Attachments Resolution CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO 18- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON APPOINTING ANN MCELLIGOTT,LARRY ACHESON AND STEPHANIE VEAL AS VOTING MEMBERS TO THE AUDIT COMMITTEE AND ELIZABETH GILS CARBO AS AN ALTERNATE ON THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. WHEREAS, four positions are open on the city's audit committee;and WHEREAS,Mayor Cook and Councilor Snider conducted an interview of nine candidates on November 14,2018 for the Audit Committee;they have recommended that Ann McElligott be appointed to the city's Audit Committee as a voting member whose term will end December 31, 2021. F.li7abeth Gils Garbo was recommended as the two-year non-voting alternate,whose term will begin on January 1,2019 and end on December 31,2020. WHEREAS,the City Council amended Resolution 12-26 and expanded the Audit Committee membership and responsibilities to include performance audits within the departments of the city. Two new members were appointed on a limited,two-year duration;Stephanie Veal and Larry Acheson will serve from January, 1,2019 through December 31,2020. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Ann McElligott is appointed to a three-year term on the City of Tigard's Audit Committee,ending on December 31,2021 and that Fii7abeth Gils Carbo be appointed as the alternate member of the Audit Committee, ending on December 31, 2020. Additionally two newly created positions will be filled by Stephanie Veal and Larry Acheson.Their two-year term will end December 31,2020. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED:This day of ,2018. Mayor-City of Tigard A'1'1'EST: City Recorder-City of Tigard AIS-3656 8. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 Length(in minutes):30 Minutes Agenda Title: Joint meeting with the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee (DAC) Prepared For: Dave Roth,Community Development Submitted By: Joe Patton,Community Development Item Type: Joint Meeting-Board or Other Juris. Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE This is the joint meeting of the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee (1'lAC) and the Tigard City Council as described in the TTAC Bylaws Section XI,Item C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST No action.Discussion only. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee (1'lAC) meets annually with the City Council to share information and receive feedback regarding Council priorities for TTAC.The TTAC is staffed by Dave Roth (Community Development) and Tegan Enloe (Engineering),and is currently chaired by Ben Gooley. The perspectives of TTAC members represent a diverse but mutually-supported range of viewpoints.The committee plans to provide a brief summary of the past year with highlights of(1) Individual role and contribution to the Southwest Corridor project, (2) TTAC's Pedestrian Bicyclist Subcommittee (PBS) "Slow your Roll"campaign,and (3) Role in providing input and prioritization of transportation capital projects for the CIP.TTAC members will also share their high-level goals for the year ahead,with a particular interest and focus on their involvement in the development of a"Complete Streets"Policy and Implementation Plan for Tigard. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Tigard Strategic Vision: to be the most walkable community in the Pacific Northwest where people of all ages and abilities enjoy healthy and interconnected lives. TTAC Bylaws (2014): SECTION I. CHARGE AND DUTIES A. The Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee (l'lAC) hereafter referred to as the "Committee" shall have no powers except as conferred by resolution,City Charter,Tigard Municipal Code,or the Oregon Revised Statutes. B.The Committee and its members shall conduct itself in a manner that's in keeping with applicable federal, state,and local laws pertaining to conduct and ethics and the City of Tigard Code of Conduct.Any violation of the provisions of such laws shall be grounds for removal from office. C. It shall be the function of the Committee to act as an advisory body to the City Council and city staff pursuant to these bylaws. D.The Committee shall create and maintain a project list,which designates in order of priority,the projects for which city motor vehicle fuel tax revenue is to be used. E. TTAC may serve in an advisory role to staff and Council on a broad range of relevant transportation issues reflecting city priorities and work program capacity including 1.Project prioritization for funding in the Capital Improvement Program 2.Preparation of multimodal transportation system plans and corresponding transportation financing/capital investment programs 3.Developing funding mechanisms and sources to implement transportation projects 4.Traffic safety 5. Input on project development and concept design • DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee(1'1AC)previously held its annual joint meeting with the City Council on: •September 16,2014 •October 20,2015 •October 18,2016 •October 24,2017 Attachments No file(s)attached AIS-3616 9. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 Length(in minutes):50 Minutes Agenda Title: Legislative Public Hearing: Consider Ordinance for Phase II Code Amendments (Procedures and Standards) Prepared For: Susan Shanks,Community Development Submitted By: Susan Shanks,Community Development Item Type: Ordinance Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting Public Hearing-Legislative -Main Public Hearing: Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall the City Council approve a package of legislative amendments that overhauls the city's land use procedures;consolidates and updates site and building design standards for apartments,single detached houses,and development in commercial and industrial zones;consolidates and updates standards for landscaping and screening;and generally updates the Tigard Community Development Code to make it more effective,efficient,understandable,fair,and predictably flexible? This package of amendments is the second part of the Phase II Code Amendment Project and includes a Development Code Amendment(DCA2018-00004),Zoning Map Amendment(ZON2018-00005),and a separate but related Master Fees and Charges Schedule update. STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends approval of the attached Ordinance (Attachment 5) that amends the Tigard Community Development Code and Tigard Zoning Map. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY This package of legislative amendments consists of the following: 1.Text amendments to the Tigard Community Development Code:These amendments make up the bulk of the proposal. Most are procedural in nature,but some include policy changes. 2.Map amendments to the Tigard Zoning Map:These amendments change how the city's overlay zone designations are displayed on the Tigard Zoning Map.They are designed to be consistent with the proposed code amendments.No change is proposed to any base zone designation or to how properties are regulated by the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed text and map amendments are part of a multi-year code modernization project to improve the Tigard Community Development Code so that it is more effective,efficient,understandable, fair,and predictably flexible.Phase I of this project was completed in 2017. It reorganized the code and updated the city's land use review procedures for internal consistency and state law compliance. The first part of Phase II, which Council recently adopted on November 27,2018,updated the city's policies and standards related to missing middle housing and small cell wireless facilities. It also made some additional organizational changes and added provisions to implement the strategic plan.This part of the Phase II Code Amendment Project focuses on land use procedures and design standards for specific types of development. Similar to its counterpart,it also includes provisions to implement the strategic plan.More detail is provided in the Summary of Proposal section below. The Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments on November 5,2018, recommending in a 6 to 1 vote that City Council approve an Ordinance adopting the proposed amendments as determined through the public hearing process.The Planning Commission's recommendation is included as Attachment 1. The full set of attachments for Council's consideration is as follows: •Attachment 1:Planning Commission Recommendation Memo •Attachment 2:Proposed Code and Map Amendments •Attachment 3:Proposed Staff Modifications to Address Public Comments •Attachment 4:Public Comments •Attachment 5: Ordinance and Exhibits (including Findings and Conclusions) Summary of Proposal The entire proposal is included in Attachment 2 and summarized below.All amendments are to the Tigard Community Development Code except where specified otherwise. Chapter 18.20—Administration and Enforcement This chapter was revised to consolidate regulations related to expirations and extensions of land use approvals that were previously spread throughout multiple chapters of the code.Text was also added related to the new procedure for modifications. Chapter 18.120—Commercial Zones This chapter was revised for clarity and consistency and to remove all site and building design standards. Most standards were relocated to the new Chapter 18.320. Chapter 18.230—Apartments This chapter was completely rewritten to provide a comprehensive set of site and building design standards for apartments. Some of these standards were relocated from former Chapter 18.110,Residential Zones; former Chapter 18.220,Residential Design Compatibility;and former Chapter 18.780,Site Development Review. Some standards are new and reflect common regulatory approaches in other cities. Other standards have been removed completely.All standards are clear and objective in order to comply with state law and were developed with input from the Housing Options Task Force and Polygon Northwest. Chapter 18.280—Rowhouses This chapter was completely rewritten to provide a comprehensive set of site and building design standards for rowhouses. Some of these standards were relocated from former Chapter 18.110,Residential Zones; former Chapter 18.220,Residential Design Compatibility;and former Chapter 18.780,Site Development Review. Some standards are new and reflect common regulatory approaches in other cities. Other standards have been removed completely.All standards are clear and objective in order to comply with state law and were developed with input from the Housing Options Task Force and the Development Advisory Committee. Chapter 18.290—Single Detached Houses This chapter was revised to provide minimal design standards for single detached houses,including standards for entrances,windows,and garages.These standards are intended to ensure that single detached houses provide pedestrian-friendly street-facing facades.They were refined with input from the Development Advisory Committee. Chapter 18.320—Commercial Zone Development Standards This chapter was formerly a placeholder. It now contains site and building design standards for development in commercial zones,most of which were relocated from former Chapter 18.120,Commercial Zones,and former Chapter 18.780,Site Development Review. Standards related to adult entertainment uses were relocated from former Chapter 18.740, Conditional Uses. Relocated standards were revised for clarity and consistency and were refined with input from Polygon Northwest. Chapter 18.420—Landscaping and Screening This chapter was completely rewritten to provide an updated and comprehensive set of landscaping and screening standards that are appropriately referenced from other code chapters.Additionally,much of Chapter 18.520,Urban Forestry,was incorporated into this chapter to clarify and simplify how and where development is required to apply the city's tree canopy standards. Chapter 18.520—Significant Tree Groves This chapter was revised to relocate all of the city's tree canopy standards into the updated Landscaping and Screening chapter.The chapter was renamed Significant Tree Groves to better reflect the remaining text, which describes the city's optional procedure for preserving significant tree groves in exchange for development flexibility. Chapter 18.715—Adjustments This chapter was completely rewritten. Over time,multiple adjustments were created to address specific situations where flexibility was needed to address a development standard.Approval criteria for these adjustments were generally minimal or nonexistent.This resulted in a review process that was narrow in application and lacking in meaningful review.The new procedure allows an applicant to request an adjustment to almost any standard in the code,thereby increasing its usefulness as a development tool for both applicants and staff when faced with a legitimate development constraint or unusual situation.The new approval criteria provide an important counterbalance to this enhanced flexibility by requiring applicants to justify their request, thereby ensuring that the adjustment has minimal,if any,impacts and is either necessary or innovative. Chapter 18.740—Conditional Uses This chapter was completely rewritten to provide updated approval criteria,address existing and discontinued conditional uses,and remove outdated or redundant development standards.Any development standards worth keeping were relocated to an applicable development standards chapter.A new approval criterion was added that specifically requires development to support pedestrian access,safety,and comfort. Chapter 18.745—Extensions This new chapter creates a procedure for extending the approval period for almost all land use approvals. While this procedure already existed in the code for some land use approvals,there was no formal method or criteria for processing,providing public notice, or approving an extension. Chapter 18.765—Modifications This new chapter creates a procedure for modifying existing developments and land use approvals through a review process appropriate to the scope of the modification. Currently,only those approvals subject to site development or conditional use review can be modified.All others are required to start over from scratch and submit a full land use application regardless of the scope of the modification.The new procedure is more broadly applicable and allows modifications to the most common types of developments and approvals, namely conditional uses,land divisions,planned developments,and site development reviews. Additionally,while the existing modification procedure allows minor and major modifications,a major modification is required to submit a completely new land use application.The new chapter provides a true major modification review process and requires that only new development or substantial redevelopment of existing development submit a completely new land use application. Finally,the new chapter requires all major modifications to development that exceed a certain project valuation and contain nonconforming structures or site improvements to come closer into conformance with current standards or provide improvements that support pedestrians. Chapter 18.765—Planned Developments This chapter was completely rewritten to simplify and improve the planned development review process.The revised chapter includes an updated purpose,new submittal requirements specific to planned developments,a clear and comprehensive set of approval criteria,and a streamlined approval process.The new purpose describes how the planned development review process provides an opportunity for innovative,creative,and well-designed developments that may be more intense than otherwise allowed by the code in exchange for developments that are thoughtfully integrated into the surrounding community and include features that benefit the public above and beyond what is required by the code. The new submittal requirements clearly describe the kind and quality of analysis needed for the city to effectively evaluate a planned development proposal.Lastly,the new approval criteria allow for greater development flexibility provided the applicant demonstrates that the proposed public benefits are sufficient to warrant the type and amount of flexibility requested. The Planning Commission remains the approval authority for the concept plan,and the Community Development Director becomes the approval authority for the detailed plan,except where the Planning Commission specifies otherwise during concept plan approval. Chapter 18.780—Site Development Reviews This chapter was completely rewritten to provide updated approval criteria and to remove outdated or redundant development standards.Any development standards worth keeping were relocated to an applicable development standards chapter. Various Chapters—Omnibus Amendments The vast majority of omnibus amendments are proposed to improve clarity or organization or are in response to the code amendments described above.The few proposed policy changes are summarized as follows: •Amends lot width, frontage width,and lot shape standards to facilitate the creation of regular shaped lots and to more explicitly prohibit the creation of flag lots in subdivisions. •Prohibits single detached houses and accessory dwelling units in the city's medium-high density R-25 zone. •Allows nonconforming single detached houses to be rebuilt when accidentally destroyed. •Increases the size of banners allowed in the right-of-way in the MU-CBD zone. •Allows all housing types in the C-C zone within River Terrace where approved through the planned development review process. The Home Builders Association (HBA) expressed concern about the proposed lot width amendments during Phase I.After public testimony, Council opted to adopt the Phase I amendments without any lot width changes and requested that staff give further study to this issue. Staff developed the amendments currently proposed in consultation with the Development Advisory Committee,which includes several HBA members. Tigard Zoning Map Amendments to the Tigard Zoning Map are proposed in response to the code amendments described above. They are minor in nature and simply change how the city's overlay zone designations are displayed on the map. No change is proposed to any base zone designation or to how properties are regulated by the Tigard Community Development Code.The proposed amendments are as follows: •Removal of the Planned Development(PD) overlay zone designation to be consistent with the proposed code amendments to Chapter 18.770,Planned Developments. •Change of name of the Historic District(HD) overlay zone to Historic Resource (HR) overlay zone to be consistent with the proposed code amendments to Chapter 18.750,Historic Resources. Public Notice and Engagement Staff provided notice as required by state law and the Tigard Community Development Code.This included two public hearing notices published in the Tigard Times and mailed to the city's land use interested party list prior to each hearing. It also included a Measure 56 notice to all property owners in the R-25 and Neighborhood Commercial(C-N) zones.The former was notified because of the proposed change to prohibit single detached houses in the R-25 zone.The latter was notified because of the proposed change to drive-through services from an allowed use to a conditional use in the C-N zone. As for public engagement,this project sought the input of many different stakeholders due to the diversity of code amendments proposed. •Staff held two meetings with the Housing Options Task Force to solicit input on site and building design standards for apartments. •Staff held three meetings with the Development Advisory Committee.This committee is composed of Home Builders Association members and local public utility representatives. Staff solicited input on all land use procedures,lot width and shape standards,and site and building design standards for single detached houses and rowhouses. •Staff held three briefings with the Planning Commission to solicit input on all land use procedures.The majority of the discussions focused on expirations,extensions,modifications,adjustments,and planned developments. Staff also met with the Planning Commission President separately to discuss aspects of the proposal in more detail. •Staff held one meeting and had numerous phone conversations with a Polygon Northwest representative to solicit input on planned developments,adjustments,and site and building design standards for apartments and development in commercial zones,particularly as they related to the Community Commercial (C-C) zone in River Terrace. Many changes to the proposal were made over many months as a result of the input from these groups.A final set of changes is included in Attachment 3. Staff has already incorporated these changes into the proposal but is providing a strikethrough version of these changes for public transparency. These minor changes are to address concerns raised by the Home Builders Association and Polygon Northwest about the proposed design standards for single detached houses and rowhouses,which were discussed at a meeting held after the Planning Commission hearing on the proposal. Public Comments As of the writing of this report,no written comments were received by staff after the Planning Commission hearing on the proposal.Three written comments were received by staff before the Planning Commission hearing. One property owner provided oral and written testimony at the hearing.All comments are included in Attachment 4 and summarized below. •Two property owners in the R-25 zone sent emails expressing their concern about the proposal to prohibit single detached houses in the R-25 zone. Staff responded to both emails by explaining the proposed policy change in the context of the city's larger strategy to increase housing options for all residents at all stages of life. •James Adkins of the Home Builders Association(HBA) sent an email expressing concern on behalf of HBA members about the proposed single detached house design standards. Staff informed the Planning Commission of the RBA's concerns and staffs willingness to meet with the Development Advisory Committee prior to the City Council hearing to discuss and possibly refine the proposal. •One property owner in the R-12 zone provided oral and written testimony at the Planning Commission hearing on the proposal. Staff responded by explaining that the proposed code amendments were not making any changes to the allowed uses or development standards in the R-12 zone. Since no changes were proposed,property owners in this zone were not sent a Measure 56 notice. Staff provided information about the first part of the Phase II Code Amendment Project,both at the hearing and in a follow-up email,and how it was expanding missing middle housing options for R-12 zone property owners. Public Agency Comments Affected agencies and jurisdictions had an opportunity to review and comment on the proposed code amendments.As of the writing of this report,no comments were received by staff. Findings and Conclusions The proposal is subject to several city,regional,and state provisions.The findings and conclusions that are included as Exhibit C to Attachment 5 document the proposal's compliance with the following applicable provisions: •Tigard Community Development Code Chapters 18.710 and 18.795 •Tigard Comprehensive Plan Chapters 1,2,and 10 •Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Titles 1 and 8 •Statewide Planning Goals 1,2,and 10 OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could direct staff to modify the proposed amendments. Council could also reject all or portions of the proposed amendments. If Council rejects all or portions of the proposed amendments,existing land use procedures and development standards would continue to apply. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS City Strategic Plan Goal 1: Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity City Strategic Plan Goal 2: Ensure development advances the vision DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION July 17,2018-Staff briefed Council on the Phase II Code Amendment Project Attachments ATT 1 PC Recommendation ATT 2 Proposed Code and Map Amendments ATT 3 Proposed Staff Modifications ATT 4 Public Comments ATT 5 Ordinance(Code and Map Amendments) ATT 6 PowerPoint Presentation ATTACHMENT 1 .11111 City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilors From: Brian Feeney,Vice President,Tigard Planning Commission Re: Planning Commission Recommendation on Phase II Code Amendments: Land Use Procedures and Development Standards (Case File Nos. DCA 2018-00004 and ZON2018-00005) Date: November 19, 2018 On November 5, 2018, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on a second package of Phase II code amendments to modernize and improve the city's land use procedures and development standards. After listening to staffs presentation and public comment, followed by careful deliberations, the Planning Commission made a recommendation to City Council to approve this package of Phase II code amendments by a 6 to 1 vote with minor changes proposed by staff. The hearing was attended by approximately four members of the public, one of whom provided testimony. The Planning Commission also reviewed one written comment on the day of the hearing in the form of an email submitted by the Home Builders Association. The Planning Commission asked several clarifying questions during the hearing, suggested minor text changes, and recommended one future code amendment;however, the primary focus of the Planning Commission's deliberations was about process. Did all affected property owners receive public notice of the proposed amendments and should the hearing be continued to allow for more code changes in response to public comment? Public Notice Staff summarized the various notices that were mailed to property owners,interested parties, and the Tigard Times. Staff confirmed that all required notices were provided according to state law and the Tigard Community Development Code. With regard to the property owner who testified that proper notice may not have'been provided, staff indicated that they would contact this owner to clarify the differences between the two related,yet different, Phase II code amendment packages and direct them to the public hearing that involved the amendments that affected their property. Page 1 of 2 l Planning Commission Recommendation to City Council ATTACHMENT 1 Hearing Continuation A few Commissioners expressed a desire to continue the hearing in order to review any possible code changes that might result from staff's ongoing dialogue with the residential development community. Staff explained that any substantive changes would be brought back to Planning Commission and any minor changes would be forwarded to City Council with a note that they had not been reviewed by Planning Commission. The majority of Commissioners were comfortable with this approach. Conclusion The Planning Commission is pleased to forward its recommendation on this package of code amendments to City Council. We believe this proposal will modernize and improve the city's land use procedures and development standards to the benefit of developers, property owners, and the community at large. We look forward to your review of the proposed amendments at the public hearing on December 11, 2018. Page 2 of 2 Planning Commission Recommendation to City Council ATTACHMENT 2 :17 r,„1,77.„ City of Tigard Proposed Code Amendments (File No. DCA2018-00004) Phase II Code Amendments: Land Use Review Procedures Residential and Commercial Development Standards City Council Draft— December 11, 2018 Please contact Susan P. Shanks, Senior Planner, at 503-718-2454 or susans@tigard-or.gov with questions or comments about the proposed code amendments or the code adoption process. ATTACHMENT 2 This page left intentionally blank. ATTACHMENT 2 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The proposed code amendments to the Tigard Community Development Code are divided into three categories. Primary code amendments involve substantial changes to entire chapters. Ancillary (or omnibus) code amendments involve minor changes to discrete sections of existing chapters. Housekeeping code amendments involve updates throughout the entire code and are limited to numbering and name changes. Primary Code Amendments Strikethrough and underline text is used to show the proposed amendments in only five chapters. The remaining eleven chapters contain all new text, as they are either repealing and replacing an existing chapter or proposing an entirely new chapter. Chapter Chapter Title Type of Proposal Proposal Summary 18.20 Admin. and Enforcement Amended chapter NEW PROCEDURE:Adds (strikethrough text) expiration time limits and standardizes for almost all land use approvals. 18.120 Commercial Zones Amended chapter Relocates commercial zone (strikethrough text) development standards to new Chapter 18.320. 18.130 Industrial Zones Amended chapter Relocates industrial zone (strikethrough text) development standards to new Chapter 18.330. 18.230 Apartments New chapter NEW STANDARDS: Provides consolidated, comprehensive, and clear and objective standards for all apartments regardless of location. 18.280 Rowhouses New chapter NEW STANDARDS: Provides consolidated,comprehensive, and clear and objective standards for all apartments regardless of location. 18.290 Single Detached Houses Amended chapter NEW STANDARDS: Adds building (strikethrough text) design standards for entrances, windows, and garages. 18.320 Commercial Zone New chapter NEW STANDARDS: Provides Development Standards consolidated and comprehensive set of development standards for nonresidential development. 18.330 Industrial Zone New chapter NEW STANDARDS:Adds minimal Development Standards standards for landscaping, screening, service areas, and private utilities. ATTACHMENT 2 Chapter Chapter Title Type of Proposal Proposal Summary 18.420 Landscaping and Screening Repealed chapter NEW STANDARDS: Provides updated landscaping and screening standards that incorporate the city's tree canopy(urban forestry) requirements. 18.520 Significant Tree Groves Amended chapter Relocates the tree canopy (strikethrough text) requirements to new Chapter 18.420. 18.715 Adjustments Repealed chapter NEW PROCEDURE:Simplifies process and provides more flexibility by removing limitations on the kinds of adjustments that may be requested. 18.740 Conditional Uses Repealed chapter NEW PROCEDURE:Addresses existing and discontinued conditional uses and relocates all development standards to applicable new development standards chapters. 18.745 Extensions New chapter NEW PROCEDURE: Standardizes extension process for almost all land use approvals and makes process more transparent to public. 18.765 Modifications New chapter NEW PROCEDURE:Allows more types of development to utilize modification process, provides appropriate level of review based on type of modification, and requires major modifications to come closer into conformance where nonconforming. 18.770 Planned Developments Repealed chapter NEW PROCEDURE: Removes the overlay designation in the code and on the zoning map and provides more flexibility and creativity in exchange for demonstrated public benefit. 18.780 Site Development Reviews Repealed chapter NEW PROCEDURE:Streamlines entire chapter by simplifying applicability section and relocating all development standards to applicable new development standards chapters. ATTACHMENT 2 Ancillary Code (Omnibus) Amendments All amendments are shown with underline and strikethrough text. Only those sections of code proposed for amendment are shown. The vast majority of amendments are proposed to improve clarity or organization or are in response to the primary code amendments described above. The few proposed policy changes are summarized as follows: • Amends lot width, frontage width, and lot shape standards to facilitate the creation of regular shaped Jots and more explicitly prohibit the creation of flag lots in subdivisions. • Prohibits single detached houses and accessory dwelling units in the city's medium-high density R-25 zone. • Allows nonconforming single detached houses to be rebuilt when accidentally destroyed. • Increases the size of banners allowed in the right-of-way in the MU-CBD zone. • Allows all housing types in the C-C zone within River Terrace where approved through the planned development review process. Housekeeping Code Amendments All amendments are provided in the attached table and are proposed in response to the primary code amendments described above. Housekeeping amendments are administrative in nature and involve only changes to code numbering and names. ATTACHMENT 2 This page left intentionally blank. Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.20 ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT Sections: 18.20.010 Compliance 18.20.020 Land Use Applications and Development Permits 18.20.030 Violations 18.20.040 Timeliness of Regulations 18.20.010 Compliance A. Compliance. Uses, developments, and construction, reconstruction, alteration, occupation, and use of structures must conform to the provisions of this title. Any officials, departments, and or employees of the city vested with authority to grant approvals must adhere to and require complianceeencennanee with this title; and may not grant approval for any development or use that violates or fails to comply with this title. Any approval issued or granted in conflict with the provisions of this title is void. B. Obligation by successor.The regulations of this title apply to the person undertaking the development or the use of the development and to the person's successor in interest. C. Most restrictive regulations apply. Where this title imposes greater restrictions than those imposed or required by other regulations,the most restrictive or that imposing the higher standard governs. When regulations in this title are in conflict,the most restrictive regulation governs unless stated otherwise. D. Required improvements. A lot area, yard, setback, open space, or off-street-parking or loading area required by this title for a development may not be used to meet the requirements for another development, except as specifically provided otherwise. (Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.20.020 Land Use Applications and Development Permits A. Land use applications. An applicant who proposes a use or development that is governed by this title must obtain approval of all required land use applications prior to establishment or construction. New development, changes to existing development, and changes in the type or number of uses may require a land use approval. B. Development permits. An applicant who proposes a use or development governed by this title must obtain approval of all required development permits prior to establishment or construction. New development, changes to existing development, and changes in the type or number of uses may require a permit. C. Certificate of occupancy.A structure or use may not be used or occupied for the purposes provided in the development permit until the city has issued a certificate of occupancy. Prior to the final completion of all work, a certificate of occupancy may be issued for a portion of the structure conditioned upon further work being completed by a date certain. (Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.20.030 Violations A. Violations. It is unlawful to violate any provisions of this title, including but not limited to provisions relating to a land use approval or conditions of land use approval. Erection, construction, alteration, CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Administration and Enforcement(Expiration of Approvals) Page 1 of 4 Proposed Code Amendment maintenance, or use of any building or structure in violation of this title; or use, division, or transfer of any land in violation of this title is prohibited. Each violation of a separate provision of this title constitutes a separate infraction, and each day that a violation of this title is committed or continues constitutes a separate infraction. B. Responsible party. The responsible party is the person responsible for curing or remedying a violation,which includes: 1. The owner of the property, or the owner's manager or agent or other person in control of the property on behalf of the owner; 2. The person occupying the property, including bailee, lessee, tenant, or other person having possession;or 3. The person who is alleged to have committed the acts or omissions, created or allowed the condition to exist,or placed the object or allowed the object to exist on the property. C. Enforcement. In any case where a violation of this title occurs, such violation constitutes a nuisance and a Class I Civil Infraction as provided in Title 6 of the Tigard Municipal Code. The city may remedy the violation by any appropriate means necessary as allowed by the municipal code and available to the city.(Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.20.040 Timeliness of Regulations A. Vesting. Land use applications are processed based on the regulations in effect on the date an application is submitted to the city as provided in ORS 227.178. If a land use application is approved, development rights are vested when the land use approval is utilized as described in Subsection 18.20.040.G. Vested development rights do not expire unless new land use approvals are obtained and utilized that supersede any preexisting vested rights. B. Modifications. Modifications to pending land use applications that have been deemed complete are processed based on the regulations in effect on the date the original when the first complete application was submitted= unless the modifications-submitted substantially changes the proposal so as to constitute a new application,as-pr-e-vided as described in Chapter 18.710, Land Use Review Procedures. C. Use of new regulations or mapping. Land use applications will not be accepted for development proposals based on proposed amendments to regulations or the zoning map that have not been adopted, or have been adopted but are not yet in effect.Pre-application conferences may be requested and held to discuss implications of proposed amendments. D. Pre-existing approvals. Land use applications for which approvals were granted prior to the effective date of the ordinances codified in this title may occur in compliance with such approvals. E. Conditions of approval. Conditions of land use approval ' :: •: _ . . . .. . : remain valid even if the regulations requiring the conditions men are subsequently modified. Conditions of approval may be amended or removed through the following actions: 1. Upon app al Appeal of the original application;or CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Administration and Enforcement(Expiration of Approvals) Page 2 of 4 Proposed Code Amendment 2. As Submittal of a new land use application that supersedes the original application;, processed through the same procedures as was used to impose the conditions; or 3. Submittal of a new land use application that modifies the original application or condition of approval through the process provided by Chapter 18.765,Modifications;or 43. Submittal of a new land use application that modifies an original condition of approval through the process provided by Chapter 18.730, Director Determinations. The director will approve a modification through this process when one or more of the following criteria are met: - _ . ' -- - -• - - • .. . . a. Violates The condition of approval violates a mandatory federal or state law or regulation;s or b. As a result of an amendment to this title, The condition of approval imposes an objective limitation that is no longer required by this title or is more restrictive than required by this title as a result of an amendment to this title. F. Transfer of approval rights.Approvals of ministerial and quasi-judicial land use applications run with the land and are transferred with ownership. Any conditions, time limits, or restrictions apply to all subsequent owners. (Ord. 17-22 §2) G. Expiration of approvals. 1. Approvals granted pursuant to this chapter expire and are void unless utilized as described below within the applicable time periods. a. For an approval requiring any kind of development permit,the development must: i. Submit and pay for all applicable development permits, excluding trade permits, within 3 years of the effective date of a conditional use, planned development (detailed plan), planned development (consolidated plan), or site development review approval, or within 2 years of the effective date of all other approvals;and ii. Pass final inspection or obtain a permanent certificate of occupancy within 5 years of the effective date of a conditional use, planned development (detailed plan), planned development(consolidated plan), or site development review approval, or within 4 years of the effective date of all other approvals. b. For an approval not requiring any kind of development permit, such as a planned development(concept plan), the development must utilize its approval within 2 years of the effective date of the approval. 2. Approvals expire and are void as specified above unless one of the following applies: a. An extension application is submitted as provided by Chapter 18.745, Extensions. If the extension application is denied, the approval expires on the effective date of the extension decision. b. The expiration date for an approval is specified in another chapter of this title. 3. The following approvals are exempt from expiration: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Administration and Enforcement(Expiration of Approvals) Page 3 of 4 Proposed Code Amendment a. Adequate Public Facilities Exceptions, b. Annexations, c. Comprehensive Plan Amendments, d. Development Code Amendments, e. Director Determinations, f Historic Overlay Zone Designations, g. Nonconforming Use Determinations,and h. Zoning Map Amendments. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Administration and Enforcement(Expiration of Approvals) Page 4 of 4 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.120 COMMERCIAL ZONES Sections: 18.120.010 Purpose 18.120.020 List of Base Zones 18.120.030 Land Use Standards 18.120.040 Land Use Restrictions 18.120.040050 Housing Types 1 1 . . . . ! .. 18.120.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to implement the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan related to land use planning and economic development by: A. Ensuring that a full range of goods and services are available throughout the city so that residents can fulfill all or most of their needs within easy driving distance and, ideally, within easy walking and biking distance of their homes; B. Ensuring that a full range of economic activities and job opportunities are available throughout the city;and C Minimizing the potential adverse impacts of commercial uses on residential uses by carefully locating and selecting the types of uses allowed in each commercial zone. A. P pose. One of the major purposes of the regulations governing development in commercial zones is goals of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 17 22 §2) 18.120.020 List of Base Zones A. C-N: neighborhood commercial zone. The C-N zone is designed to provide convenience goods and services within a small cluster of stores adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Convenience goods and services are those that are purchased frequently, meaning at least weekly; for which comparison buying is not required; and that can be sustained in a limited trade area. Such uses include convenience markets, personal services, and repair shops. A limited number of other uses, including but not limited to restaurants, gas stations, medical centers, religious institutions, transit related park- and-ride lots,and facilities uses with drive-through serviceswinds, are allowed conditionally. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 1 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment B. C-C: community commercial zone. The C-C zone is designed to provide convenience shopping facilities that meet the regular needs of nearby residential neighborhoods. With a service area of about 1.5 miles, such commercial centers typically range in size from 30,000-100,000 square feet on sites ranging from 2 to 8 acres. Separated from other commercially-zoned areas by at least 0.5 miles, community commercial centers are intended to serve several residential neighborhoods, ideally at the intersection of two or more collector streets or at the intersection of an arterial and collector street. A limited number of other uses, including but not limited to car washes, gas stations, medical centers, religious institutions transit-related park-and-ride lots,and uses with drive-through services, are allowed conditionally. C. C-G: general commercial zone. The C-G zone is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office, and civic uses with a citywide and even regional trade area. Except where nonconforming, residential uses are limited to mixed-use developments. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are allowed conditionally. D. C-P: professional/administrative commercial zone. The C-P zone is designed to accommodate civic and professional services and compatible support services, for example convenience retail, personal services, and restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions, and utilities are allowed conditionally. Developments in the C-P zone are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more intensive commercial and industrial areas. E. MU-CBD: mixed-use central business zone. The MU-CBD zone is designed to provide a pedestrian- friendly urban village in downtown Tigard.A wide variety of commercial,civic,employment,mixed- use, apartments,and rowhouses are allowed. • .-- . •-• - - • • • . , • -.••- within this zone is subject to the standards of Chapter 18.650,Tigard Downtown Plan District. F. MUE: mixed-use employment zone. The MUE zone is designed to accommodate a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses, and apartments. G. MUE-1 and MUE-2: mixed-use employment 1 and 2 zone. The MUE-1 and 2 zones are designed to apply to areas where employment uses such as office, research and development and light manufacturing are concentrated. Commercial and retail support uses are allowed but are limited, and residential uses are allowed that are compatible with the employment character of the area. Lincoln Center is an example of an area designated MUE-1, a high-density mixed-use employment zone. The Nimbus area is an example of an area designated MUE-2, requiring more moderate densities. 441 H. MUC: mixed-use commercial zone. The MUC zone includes land around the Washington Square Mall and land immediately west of Highway 217. Primary uses allowed include office buildings, retail,and service uses.Also allowed are mixed-use developments and housing at densities of 50 units per acre. Larger buildings are encouraged in this area with parking under, behind, or to the sides of buildings. • ...• . -- .. . - , - ,. ... • • ..•• -- I. -I. MUC-1: mixed-use commercial 1 zone. The MUC-1 zone, which is designed to apply to that portion of Bridgeport Village (formerly known as the Durham Quarry site) within the City of Tigard, is a CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Commercial Zones Page 2 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment mixed-use commercial zone bounded by 72' Avenue, Findlay Street, and the Tigard, Tualatin and Durham city limits. This site is the subject of an intergovernmental agreement between the cities of Tigard and Tualatin. Pursuant to that agreement the City of Tualatin will furnish all planning, building, and associated development review and permit services for the sitepreperef. This zone is intended to mirror the City of Tualatin's Mixed Use Commercial Overlay District in Tualatin Development Code, Chapter 57. It permits a wide range of uses including commercial lodging, general retail, offices, and housing. Additional uses, including but not limited to major event entertainment and motor vehicle retail fuel sales, are allowed conditionally. In addition to the standards of this chapter, development within this zene is subject to the standards of Chapter 18.620, Bridgeport Village Plan District. J. MUR-1 and MUR-2: mixed-use residential 1 and 2 zone. The MUR-1 and MUR-2 zones are designed to apply to predominantly residential areas where mixed-uses are allowed when compatible with the residential use. A high-density (MUR-1) and moderate-density (MUR-2) designation is available within the MUR zone. • ... . .. - • .• • , ••••-• •- •• - - • - ,ubject to the standards of Chapter 18.670, Washington Square Regional Centcr Plan District. K. TMU: triangle mixed-use zone. The TMU zone applies to most land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional Town Center bounded by Pacific Highway, Highway 217,and Interstate 5.The TMU zone is intended to be an active, urban, multimodal, and mixed-use district that accommodates a variety of housing options and uses, promotes pedestrian-oriented development, and limits new auto-oriented development. ._ .-. •. - ' - •- . • , .•.. . , .•. . . •.. - •.. - 18.660,Tigard Triangle Plan District.(Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.120.030 Land Use Standards A. General provisionsProvisions. A list of allowed, restricted, conditional, and prohibited uses in commercial zones is provided in Table 18.120.1, except for uses in the TMU zone, which are provided in Chapter 18.660, Tigard Triangle Plan District. If a use category is not listed, see sec-ben Section 18.60.030. 1. Allowed(A). Uses that are allowed,subject to all of the applicable provisions of this title. 2. Restricted (R). Uses that are allowed provided they are in compliance with special requirements, exceptions, or restrictions. 3. Conditional (C). Uses that require the approval of the hearings officer using discretionary criteria. The approval process and criteria are provided in Chapter 18.740, Conditional Uses. 4. Prohibited(P). Uses that are not allowed under any circumstance. B. Use restrictions.All allowed, restricted, and conditional uses in the C-N and C-C zones are subject to additional land use restrictions in Section 18.120.040. C. Development standards. The standards for residential development in commercial zones are located in the applicable housing type chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards. The standards for nonresidential development in commercial zones—including mixed-use development with or without a residential component—are located in Chapter 18.320, Commercial Zone Development Standards,and the applicable plan district chapter, if any. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Commercial Zones Page 3 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment Table 18.120.1 Commercial Zone Zones Use Standards-Table C-N C-C MU- MUE WE MUR Use Categories [1] 111 C-G C-P 14. BD MUC-1 MUC 1 and 2 I and 2' Residential Use Categories Group Living R 131 R QL R[ P A A A A A A P {2-} [2] _ Household Living R 131 R 0 R P A A A A A A P {2} {2,3} [3,41 Civic/Institutional Use Categories Basic Utilities Lij A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C A/C [4} {4} f44 f41 f.44 Colleges P P P P A C C C C C Community Services P A A P P A C P A C C Cultural Institutions A A A A A A A A A P Day Care A A A A A A A A A A/C {ALL Emergency Services A A A A A A A A A P Medical Centers C P C C C C C C C C C Postal Service A A A A A A A A A P Religious Institutions C L j C L4/ A A A A A A A C Schools P P P P A C C C C C Social/Fraternal C L j C L j A A A A A A A C Clubs/Lodges Transitional Housing P P C P C P C C _ C C Commercial Use Categories Adult Entertainment P P 1 C P P P P 1 C P P Animal-Related P P P P P A A P P P Commercial Bulk Sales P P A P 4464 A R[24 R{8} R{8} P A/P lly EL Commercial Lodging P P A R494 A A A A A N A Custom Arts and Crafts P P P P R P P P P P R f101 R 1101 [10] Eating and Drinking CA A A R [II] A A A A A R Establishments [12-14] Indoor Entertainment A A A A A A A A A P Major Event P P C P C P C C P P Entertainment Motor Vehicle P P A/C P R[6} P P R{15} R{15} P Sales/Rental [14} A/P [141 Lui [13/ Motor Vehicle P C A/C P C R{--4 R P} P P P Servicing/Repair[151 C 1161 [16] [14} Non-Accessory Parking C C A A A A A A A P Office A P,-FP-1 A A A A A A A R CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 4 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment A [12;-13] Outdoor Entertainment P P A 11 C P P C P P A Outdoor Sales P P A P P P P P P P Personal Services A A A A A A R{71 A R{8} R 11 [1 [12+3] Repair-Oriented Retail A A A A A A R{ -1 R{8} R f84 P 1I 12/ 0 Sales-Oriented Retail A R[1 8] A R A/R AIR R{7} A R{84 R A [11 -9] {a} asi Lu £.2L [1243] /171 Self-Service Storage P P C P R[6] P P P P P A/P Vehicle Fuel Sales C C C P R[6] P C C C P A/P 0 Industrial Use Categories General Industrial P P P P P P P P P P Heavy Industrial P P P P P P P P P P Industrial Services P P P P P P P P P P Light Industrial P P P P P R{21] P P R{21} P _ LE Railroad Yards P P P P P P P P P P Research and P P P P C R{151 R[151 P R{21] P Development /141 /151 Warehouse/Freight P P P P P R{15} P P R P Movement /141 [15,211 /14,151 Waste-Related P P P P P P P P P P Wholesale and P P P P P P P P R P Equipment Rental {15,21} /14,151 Other Use Categories Agriculture/Horticulture P P P P P P P P P P Cemeteries P P P P P P P P P P Detention Facilities P P _ C P C P P P P P Heliports P P C C P P P P P P Mining A A A A A A A A A A Transportation/Utility A A A A A A A A A A Corridors Wireless A/R A/R A/R A/R A/R A/R A/R A/R A/R A/R Communication Facilities [22}/191 _ A=Allowed R=Restricted C=Conditional Use P=Prohibited - • . . . . /11 See Section 18.120.040 for additional land use restrictions. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Commercial Zones Page 5 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment /21 Uses with drive-through services that were lawfully in existence prior to the adoption of the MU_ CBD zone are allowed.All new uses with drive-through services are prohibited. •- •- • -- . Residential uses are allowed on or above the second floor of a mixed-use development where the ground floor contains an allowed commercial use. [(f lA single detached house pre g is allowed where it is located on the same site with an allowed or conditional use and is occupied exclusively by a caretaker or superintendent of the allowed or conditional use. L5/[11- - . - , , . - . -• . : -.•- . . . - . " - • . - allowed. Above-ground public and private utility facilities proposed with development and underground public and private utility facilities are allowed. Standalone above-ground public and private utility facilities not proposed with development are allowed conditionally. LO--544n home Family day care that meets all state requirements is allowed_;—Other day care uses centers that meet all state requirements are allowed conditionally. Ey-64 . •. . - . . - . . • .. - . . .. - . - .•• . development) prior to the adoption of the MU CBD zone arc allowed. Uses that were lawfully in existence prior to the adoption of the MU-CBD zone are allowed.All new uses are prohibited. [P4Allowed provided the use is no larger than 60,000 square feet of gross floer area per building or business. The maximum allowed gross floor area is 60,000 square feet per building or tenant. jf84New retail and sales uses may not exceed 60,000 gross leasable area per building within the Washington Square Regional Center. The maximum allowed gross floor area is 60,000 square feet per use for uses proposed after the adoption of the MUC,MUE-1,and MUE-2 zones. same lot as a Commercial Lodging use. [10] Custom Arts and Crafts uses may not exceed 500 square feet of production area. The maximum area allowed for production is 500 square feet per building or tenant. [11] As accessory to offices or other allowed uses, the total space devoted to a combination of Sale Oriented Retail and Eating and Drinking Establishments may not exceed more than 20 percent of the entire square footage within the development complex. The maximum allowed combined area of sales-oriented retail and eating and drinking establishments is 20 percent of the gross floor area of the other uses allowed by right on the premises. Uses must be within a mixed-use development. Uses may occupy a maximum of Commercial uses must occupy no mere than 50 percent of the total gross floor area within the mixed-use development and is allowed only when minimum residential densities are met. Properties that were zoned commercial prior to March 28, 2002 are exempt from this requirement..- These properties, or lots created from these properties, may develop as a single-use commercial development. The exempted properties arc identified as assessor map number The tax assessor map numbers for exempt properties are as follows: 1 S 135AA-00400, IS 135AA-01400, 1 S 135AA-01900, IS 135AA- 01901, 1S135DA-02000, 1S135AA-02500, 1S135AA-02600, 1S135AA-02700, 1S135DA-01900, and 1S IDA-02000. •- - - - - - - -• - ordinance, may be developed as a solely commercial use with a use allowed in the MUR 1 or MUR 2 zones. f 13] The maximum building footprint size allowed fer any burg eacupied entirely by a eetninercial CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 6 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment commercial uses is provided for properties zoned commercial prior to implementation of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan (3/28/2002). The exempted properties are identified as assessor map number: 1 S 135AA 00100, 1 S 135AA 01100, 1 S l 35AA 01900, 1 S 135AA 01901, 4 S 135DA 02000, 1 S 135AA 02500, 1S 1 35A 02600, 1 S 135AA 02700, 1 S 135DA 01900, and 1 S l DA 02000. On these lots, or lets created from these lots, after the effective date of this dimensional standards of the MUR 1 and MUR 2 zones apply that may limit the ultimate size of /131 .•: - . : • : . ••• • . . . -- . heavy vehicles and farm equipment er storage of recreational vehicles and boats allowed conditionally.Sales or rental of heavy vehicles or farm equipment is allowed conditionally. /14/[l5]Allowed as accessory to an allowed use as long as this use is contained within the same building the Mall Subdistrict, as provided in Subsection 18.670.020.C. Uses allowed only as accessory uses to allowed uses where contained in the same structure and less than the gross floor area of the allowed use, except for motor vehicle sales and rental which is allowed as a primary use in specific locations as provided in Subsection 18.670.020.C. x[21}All use activities . - - . -• . . - . . . . .. must be contained inside a structure except for employee and customer parking . [16] Limited to Only motor vehicle cleaning is allowed only. [17] When combined in single structure, each separate establishment may not exceed 5,000 gross square feet {18] Limited to 10,000 gross square feet in size, except retail food and beverage outlets, which are limited to 40,000 gross square feet or less. - . . _ . .. . . ... .. - . /171 ! • _. • ! •-. . • - . - . • • :! .!! ... • •• . . .. - . . . . ... • .- •• -. • .. •:. . _ • • !.• The maximum allowed gross floor area is 60,000 square feet per building or tenant in all MU-CBD subareas except the 99W-Hall subarea as shown on Map 18.650.A. /181 The maximum allowed gross floor area is 30,000 square feet per building or tenant where the site is more than 3 acres in size. One additional square foot of floor area is allowed for each 4 square feet of floor area occupied or designed for an allowed use other than a sales-oriented retail use. /191{22]See Chapter 18.450, Wireless Communication Facilities, for feEtairements a description of allowed and restricted facilities. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 7 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment 18.120.040 Land Use Restrictions The following restrictions apply to all uses in the C-N and C-C zones: A. Uses must be contained inside a structure except for the following accessory uses: 1. Parking and loading areas; 2. Day care outdoor play areas; 3. Dining or drinking areas where associated with an allowed eating and drinking establishment or sales-oriented retail use;or 4. Sale, display, or storage of horticultural and food merchandise where limited to a maximum area of 5 percent of the gross floor area of the primary use. B. Uses with drive-through services or operating before 6 a.m. or after 11 p.m. are allowed conditionally. C. Each use is allowed a maximum gross floor area of 5,000 square feet per building or tenant except for the following uses: 1. Sales-oriented retail uses primarily involved in the sale of food and beverages are allowed a maximum gross floor area of 40,000 square feet per building or tenant;and 2. All other sales-oriented retail uses are allowed a maximum gross floor area of 10,000 square feet per building or tenant. 18.120.948050 Housing Types A. A housing type is not a use category. It describes a type of development that can contain a household living or group living use. B. A list of allowed, limited, and prohibited housing types in commercial zones is provided in Table 18.120.2. Commercial zones that do not allow any residential uses or allow them only in a mixed-use development are not included in the table. Terms and abbreviations used are defined as follows: I. Yes, allowed(Y). Housing types that are allowed. 2. Limited (L). Housing types that require a conditional use approval or are allowed subject to specific limitations. 3. No,prohibited(N). Housing types that are not allowed under any circumstance. C. Housing types that are allowed or allowed on a limited basis are subject to the standards and provisions of the applicable development standards chapter or applicable plan district chapter, if any. The applicable development standards chapter for each housing type is indicated in parentheses in the first column of Table 18.120.2. D. All allowed housing types may be built on site or brought to the site as a manufactured home. Tiny houses are prohibited in all zones. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Commercial Zones Page 8 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment Table 18.120.2 Commercial Zone Housing Types Housing Types C-G D MUE MUC-1 MUC 1 MUE 2 1 and 2 Detached Dwellin•s Accessory Dwelling Units N N N Y L[1] L[1] L[1] (18.220) Cotta:e Clusters(18.240 N NN N N N Y Mobile Home Parks(18.260) N Ng N Y L[3] L[3] L[3] Sin.le Detached Houses(18.290 L[4 N L[5] Y L[3] IMIENEEM Accessory Dwelling Units N N N Y L[1] L[1] L[1] 18.220 A.artments(18.230) EMil Y Y Y Y Y Y Court and Units 18.250 N N N N N N Y Quads 18.270) N N N N N N Y Rowhouses(18.280) N Y L[5] Y L[3] Mil Y Y=Yes,allowed L=Limited N=No,prohibited [I] • - . -• -• •- •- - • . - - _ _ - - •.. - .Accessory dwelling units are only allowed on sites with pre-existing single detached houses. [2] ' -• - -, ' • -- . •-• . - . - - - . . -, • , - . . - -. •-• . •. . •- .... . •- • - : ! . Mobile home parks that were lawfully in existence prior to the adoption of the MU-CBD zone are allowed.All new mobile home parks are prohibited. [3] ! . - - •-: :- .. •-• ' . . . . . . - . _ -. •-: .•• . . -- . - ' Mobile home parks, single detached houses, and rowhouses that were lawfully in existence prior to the adoption of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan District are allowed. Conversion of pre-existing mobile home parks, single detached houses, or rowhouses to other housing types or uses is subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.670, Washington Square Regional Center Plan District. [4] A single detached house is allowed wed-hat where it is located on the same site with an allowed or conditional use and is occupied exclusively by a caretaker or superintendent of the allowed or conditional use. [5] Only pre existing development is allowed. New construction of rowhouses and single detached houses is prohibited. Pre-existing single detached houses and rowhouses are allowed. All new single detached houses and rowhouses are prohibited. . • :. - ---- . . . . .. . . . . - • ::---- , •• - - .. - !, ' . (Ord. 17 22 §2) �i t ! • • _ . . ■. • • ■. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 9 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment . .. chapter for each housing type. Table 18.120.3 MU& - lam- MUR C C C C Standard C N C—P MUE MUG, 2 1 2 { } Minimum , of 57000-sit 57000 €t Nen None Nen Aleve Nen Nene Alen Minimum Lot 50-ft5tl0 ft Cn ft Width �t �tl- t Nene Nene NeFie Nene Nene Front 20 0441 &ft 0-ft 0-ft 0 ft Oft 0€t 0 ft 10 ft {3} f6} f6} fel fel Street side 20-ft Nen Nen Nene Nene 0€t 8€t El-ft 5 ft 10 t {�} f64 f64 f64 f64 Side 0 0 0 0 Oft Oft Oft Oft Oft [7} fq} f74 P4 P4 Rear 0 O O O 0 0-ft 0-ft O ft 0-ft4.77 0 ft [7, f-7-} f74 P4 8-} 84 Side or rear yard 6119-ir4ing-nwip 20-ft 2.0-ft 20-ft 20-ft 20-ft Nen None Nene Nen Nene restrictive zone Minimum Building Nen None Nene None Nene 2 Nene None Heightstories stories stories TAS xinteni Building 35-ft 3-5-ft 45-ft 45-ft 45-ft 200 ft 200 ft 60 ft 75 ft 45-ft Height Maximum Lot 85% 8044 8 8544, S5% 85% 85% 85% 80% 80% Coverage Mininitan l�dscape 4-5% 20% 15% 15% 15% 15% 1-5-% 4-5-% 20% 20% FnMinifa�] Nene Nen None Nen None { 1.25 1.25 0 6 0,6 0.3 . e_. . ... . ... .. {3] See Chapter 18.670, Washington Square Regional Center Plan District fer additional development {1] A 20 foot front setback is required within 50 feet of a residential zone. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 10 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment {6] The maximum setback is 20 feet. {7] Side and rear setbacks are 20-feet where the property abuts a residential zone except the R 25 and R 10 zones. [8] The maximum setback is 10 feet. [9] Applies to all nonresidential building development and mixed use development that includes a . . _ . • [10] For purposes of determining FAR, the net development area is used to establish the lot area, as provided in Section 18.40.020. [11] See Subsection 18.120.050.0 for maximum FAR requirements. 112] Minimum and maximum density does not apply to mixed use development. development,on or above the-second floor of the structure, at densities not to exceed 12 units per net acre.(Ord. 17 22 §2) 1 . 1 .. A. In the C N zone. Special limitations in the C N zone are as follows: 1. The use must be conducted wholly within an enclosed structure, except that accessory open air sales, display, or storage is allowed for horticultural and feed merchandise only and must constitute 5 percent or less of the floor area of the associated primary use; 2. The maximum floor area is 4,000 square feet; 3. Accessory open air sales, display, or storage are allowed for horticultural and food merchandise only and are limited to a maximum area equal to 5 percent of the floor area of any individual establishment; and 4. Uses operating before 7 a.m. or after 19 p,m. are conditional uses, subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.710,Conditional Use. B. In the C C zone. Special limitations in the C C zone are as follows: 1. Such centers must be developed preferably as a single unit and occupy only one quadrant of the intersection at which it is located; 2. The use must be conducted wholly within an enclosed structure, except for outside play areas for . • , , , • 3. No use shall have a gross floor area greater than 5,000 square feet except for the retail sales of food and beverages, when the maximum floor area shall net exceed 10,000 gross square feet, and all other sales oriented retail,where the maximum floor area shall not exceed 10,000 gross square feet; CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 11 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment /1. Accessory open air sales, display or storage are allowed for horticultural and food merchandising uses only and are limited to constitute no more than 5 percent of the gross building floor area of 5. Accessory open air dining or drinking areas are allowed for approved eating and drinking establishments or retail food stores only. Outside dining areas are prohibited within 200 feet of any developed residential area. Public or private sidewalk areas around dining areas may not be 6. Uses operating before 6 a.m. or after 11 p.m. and drive through facilities are subject to Chapter 18.740,Conditional Use. C. In the MUE zone. Special limitations in the MUE zone arc as follows: developments must not exceed 0.40. Residential uses and Commercial Lodging are not subject to this requirement; leasable area plus 1 additional square foot of gross leasable area of general retail sales use for ach additional 4 square feet of non retail sales use.(Ord. 17 22 §2) D. In the MU CBD zone. Drive through facilities are allowed to continue if the property had one lawfully in existence prior to the adoption of the MU CBD zone. Otherwise, drive through facilities are prohibited. A. C C zone. 1. The following design guidelines are strongly encouraged for developments 4\4411in the C C zone. Conditions of approval of the development plan may include, but are not limited to, any of the a. Building design guidelines. i. The design of buildings within a community commercial development should incorporate elements such as special architectural details, distinctive color schemes, special art, and other features, which are sensitive to and enhance the surrounding area and serve to distinguish the complex from other retail complexes in the city; ii. All buildings within a multi building complex should achieve a unity of design through the use of similar architectural elements, such as roof form, exterior building materials, iii. Individual buildings should incorporate similar design elements, such as surface achieve a unity of design. The sides of a building that face toward a public street should include public entrances to the building and windows to provide visual access to the property,but not teward a public street, should include elements such as windows, doors, CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 12 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment color,texture, landscaping,or wall treatments to provide visual interest and prevent the development of a long continuous blank wall. that faces toward a residential use. Loading areas, if located between the building and the the loading area from the street and sidewalk. 2. Design standards. The following mandatory design standards apply within the C C zone: a. Internal walkways. i. Walkways, 8 feet minimum width,must be provided from the public sidewalk or right of way to all buildings.At a minimum, walkways must be located to connect focus points of pedestrian activity such as transit stops and street crossings to the major building entry (A)Walkways must be provided along the full length of the building on any side that provides building access to the public or where public parking is available,to provide safe and comfortable pedestrian access to the building. (B) On the sides of the building that provide public access into the building,the walkway should be wide enough to allow for sidewalk seating areas as well as pedestrian travel. Weather protection of the walkway should be provided at a minimum at the entrance ar a and, if appropriate,along the entire walkway. surface materials such as pavers, bricks, or scored concrete to enhance pedestrian safety and comfort. b. Other site development standards. i. All lighting fixtures must incorporate cut off shields to prevent the spillover of light to ii. Mechanical equipment,if located on the building, must-be located within the roof form of iii. Mechanical equipment,not located on the building, must be screened from views from the public street, sidewalk, and properties outside the district with a durable, solid wall or fence, an evergreen hedge,or a combination of the above. iv. All refuse and recycling containers within the zone must be contained within structures CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 13 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment structure. v. Bicycle racks must be provided on site. Facilities fora minim of 144-bicycles t be 18.310.050. For each 100 additional stalls, facilities for five additional bicycles must be provided. Bicycle parking ar as shall not be located within parking aisles, landscape areas,or pedestrian ways. It is strongly encouraged that bicycle parking areas be-eevered. vi. The site development plan must incorporate a special feature at the-server of the site.A or water feature. The feature must provide a visual landmark and-seine amount of seating area. vii. Parking areas must be designed to minimize conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular movements. Parking area landscaping must be used to define and separate parking, access, and pedestrian ar as within parking lots. viii. The landscape design for the site must include plantings that emphasize the majer points of pedestrian and vehicular access to and within the site. ix. Site features such as fences, walls,refuse and recycling facility enclosures,and light fixtures must be designed to be consistent with the scale and architectural design of primary structures. Such site f aturcs must be designed and located to contribute to the pedestrian environment of the site development. x. In multiple building complexes,buildings must be located to facilitate safe and properties within the community commercial district, building locatien must be chosen to Consideration should be given to locating buildings closer to the public street with driving area.Corner locations arc particularly appropriate for this treatment. xi. Opportunities must be found for safe,convenient, and pleasant pedestrian connections to existing or proposed transit facilities. Where needed, shelters and layover areas for transit c. Sign design standards. All signage must be an integral part of the architectural design. B. C G zone(Tigard Triangle). See Map 18.660.A for the location of the C G zone in the Tigard transportation facility standards in Chapter 18.660,the use and development standards in Tables 18.120.1 and 3 respectively,and all other applicable standards in this title.All nonresidential development in the C G zone that is located in the Tigard Triangle is also subject to the following 1. Buildings must occupy a minimum of 50 percent of all street frontages along Highway 99W, Dartmouth Street, 72m Avenue,-7I-th Avenue,and 68th Parkway. Buildings must be located at the corners of public street intersections where practicable. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 14 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment setback is 10 feet from a street property line. 3. All street facing facades within the required building setback(0 to 10 feet)must have windows for a minimum of 50 percent of the ground floor wall arca. I. • ..- entire length of each street facing facade. /1. All street facing facades that extend more than 50 feet must provide at least one of the following features: a. A variation in building material; Af . .. �. 5. All street facing facades that extend more than 300 feet must provide a pedestrian entry into the 6. All street facing facades must have at least 1 building entry for each public street frontage. arcade. S. All roof mounted equipment must be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar panels are exempt from this standard. 9. Landscaping, an arcade,or a hard surfaced expansion of the public sidewalk must be provided in meeting any required landscaping. located on the side of a building or adjacent to a public street must be screened from view with a landscaped-area, a. The landscaped area must be constructed to the L 1 parking lot screen standard as provided in Section 18.320.070; and whichever is greater. C. MU CBD zone(Tigard Downtown). See Chapter 18.650 for additional development standards and CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 15 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment design guidelines. D. MUC, MUE 1,MUE 2, MUR 1 and MUR 2 zones(Washington Square Regional Center),Sec Chapter 18.670 for additional development standards and design guidelines. E. MUC 1 zone Bridle Iort Vilia,e . See Chapter 18.620 for additional development standards and design guidelines. Development in this zone is also subject to an intergovernmental agreement between the cities of Tigard and Tualatin.(Ord. 17 22 §2)■ CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zones Page 16 of 16 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.130 INDUSTRIAL ZONES Sections: 18.130.010 Purpose 18.130.020 List of Base Zones 18.130.030 Land Use Standards 18.130.040 Land Use Restrictions • 1 I I . . . . . 18.130.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan related to land use planning and economic development by: A. Ensuring that a full range of economic activities and job opportunities are available throughout the city;and B. Minimizing the potential adverse impacts of industrial uses on nonindustrial uses by carefully locating and selecting the types of uses allowed in each industrial zone. work close to home if they choose. The lecation of land within each industrial zone will be carefully B. Facilitate economic goals. Another purpose of these regulations is to ensure that there is a full range goals of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.130.020 List of Base Zones A. I-P: industrial park zone. The I-P zone provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office, and small-scale commercial uses, such ase.-g,5 restaurants, personal services, ander fitness centers, in a campus-like setting with no nuisance characteristics such as. Only those light industrial uses with no off site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, or vibration., are allowed in the I P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the B. I-L: light industrial zone. The I-L zone provides appropriate locations for general industrial uses including but not limited to: industrial services, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, and wholesale sales activities with few, if any, nuisance characteristics such as noise, glare,odor, or vibration. C. I-H: heavy industrial zone. The I-H zone provides appropriate locations for intensive industrial uses including industrial service, manufacturing and production, research and development, warehousing and freight movement, railroad yards, waste-related businesses, and wholesale sales activities. Activities in the I-H zone include those that involve the use of raw materials, require significant outdoor storage, or generate heavy truck or rail traffic. Because of these characteristics, I H zoned CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Industrial Zones Page 1 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment property has been carefully located to minimize impacts on established residential, commercial, and light industrial zones. 18.130.030 Land Use Standards A. General Provisions. A list of allowed,restricted, conditional, and prohibited uses in industrial zones is provided in Table 18.1320.1. If a use category is not listed.see Section 18.60.030. 1. Allowed(A). Uses that are allowed, subject to all of the applicable provisions of this title. 2. Restricted (R). Uses that are allowed provided they are in compliance with special requirements, exceptions, or restrictions. 3. Conditional(C). Uses that require the approval of the hearings officer using discretionary criteria. The approval process and criteria are provided in Chapter 18.740, Conditional Uses. 4. Prohibited(P). Uses that are not allowed under any circumstance. B. Use restrictions. Day care and commercial lodging uses are subject to additional land use restrictions in Section 18.130.040. C. Development standards. The standards for nonresidential development in industrial zones are located in Chapter 18.330,Industrial Zone Development Standards, and the applicable plan district chapter,if any. Table 18.130.1 Industrial Zone Use Table-Standards Use Categoryies 1-P I-L I-H Residential Use Categories Group Living N N N Household Living [I] R R R Civic/Institutional Use Categories Basic Utilities C[2] C[2] A Colleges P P P Community Services [3] C C C Cultural Institutions P P P Day Care [4] R R R Emergency Services A A A Medical Centers P P P Postal Service A A A Religious Institutions P P P Schools P P P Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges P P P Temporary Shelter P P P Commercial Use Categories Adult Entertainment P P P Animal-Related Commercial A A A Bulk Sales R [5][6] _ P P Commercial Lodging ARf71 P P Custom Arts and Crafts P P P CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Industrial Zones Page 2 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment Eating and Drinking Establishments R [78] P P Indoor Entertainment P P P Major Event Entertainment P P P Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental R A A [5][89][910] Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair C A A Non-Accessory Parking A A A Office A P p Outdoor Entertainment A P p Outdoor Sales P A A Personal Services R[7_] P p Repair-Oriented Retail A P p Sales-Oriented Retail R[78] p p Self-Service Storage A A A Vehicle Fuel Sales A A/C [4-911] A Industrial Use categories General Industrial I p ' A ' A Heavy Industrial P P A Industrial Services R [5] A A Light Industrial A A A Railroad Yards P p A Research and Development A A A Warehouse/Freight Movement P A A Waste-Related P p A Wholesale and Equipment Rental R [5] A A Other UIscCategories Agriculture/Horticulture [1412] A A A Cemeteries P C P Detention Facilities C P C Heliports C C C Mining P p A Wireless Communication Facilities A/R[I•2/3] A A Transportation/Utility Corridors A A A A=Allowed R=Restricted C=Conditional Use P=Prohibited [I] A single detached houseor-mobile-home is allowed . . • . • . •• •• . •• . .. -. where it is located on the same sitelet as the allowed use and is exclusively occupied exclusively by the caretaker,.or kennel owner or operator=and family. [2] - . • , ••, , : . •• - .. : •- . . . • . .. • , • . - allowed. Above ground public and private utility facilities proposed with development and underground public and private utility facilities are allowed. Standalone above-around public and private utility facilities not proposed with development are allowed conditionally. [3] Limited to outdoor recreation on (l) land classified as special flood hazard area, when the recreational use does not otherwise preclude future cut and fill as needed to support industrial zone development outside the special flood hazard area'• : : : : .. .. . : : . . upland; and (2) land located outside the special flood hazard area, when the recreational use is temporary and does not otherwise preclude allowed uses-or conditional uses oth . than rec,eatioftal uses-within-the-base-zone. [4] Family Ie-home day care that meets all state requirements is allowed.; Commercial Other day care CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Industrial Zones Page 3 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment uses Day Care uses are subject to the additional land use restrictions inrequirements of Subsection 18.130.040.A 18.130.050.C. [5] Allowed if all use activities, - . . - . - . - •- .• - must be contained within ^ buildinginside a structure except for employee and customer parking. [6] These limited uses Bulk sales are only allowed in the I-P zone east of SW 72nd Avenue. These maximum allowed gross floor area is uses, separately er in combination, Faust net exceed 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area in a single building, or commercial retail uses with a total of those separated only by transportation right of way. /71 See Subsection 18.130.040.B for additional land use restrictions. [78] The maximum allowed gross floor area of thesesc limited uses,either separately or in combination, ismay not exceed 20 percent of the entire square footage within a development complex. The maximum allowed gross floor area for retail uses is 60,000 square feet Retail uses may not exceed 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area per building or tenantbusiness. [89] These maximum allowed gross floor area of thesesc limited uses, either separately or in combination,is may not exceed 10,000 square feet per lot. [910]This use limited to Only boat sales or rental is allowedonly. [110]Vehicle fuel sales allowed unless in combination with convenience sales, in which case it is allowed conditionally. [124]When an agricultural use is Where adjacent to a residential use,-ne poultry or livestock, other than . .. - . . , ••. must be housed or provided use of a fenced-run withina minimum of 100 feet fromeany nearby residence dwelling unit,except a dwelling unit on the same lot. [132]See Chapter 18.450, Wireless Communication Facilities, for a descriptions of allowed and restricted facilities in the I-P zone. (Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.130.040 Land Use Restrictions A. Day care uses. The following standards apply to all day care facilities in industrial zones, except family day care: 1. The applicant must prepare an environmental impact assessment that documents noise, visible emissions, vibration, odor,glare, and heat from uses within 0.25 miles.A plan and program for day care facilities to provide mitigation on-site for any of the above off-site impacts must be provided. Sound attenuation walls, screening, window covering, shades, and other such means are appropriate means of mitigation and may be attached as conditions of approval. 2. The State of Oregon Child Care Division Certification Section must be notified of the proposed site plans prior to submitting an application to ensure that the plans submitted generally address the permitting requirements. 3. Prior to occupancy of the proposed day care, evidence of certification through the State of Oregon Child Care Division must be provided to the city. B. Commercial lodging uses. The following standards apply to all commercial lodging uses in the I-P zone: 1. The site must be a minimum of 2 acres and a maximum of 5 acres. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Industrial Zones Page 4 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment 2. The site must have access to an arterial or collector street approved by the city engineer with sufficient capacity to maintain adequate access to local businesses. 3. Uses that are allowed in the I-P zone are allowed as accessory uses to a commercial lodging development, provided they comprise no more than 20 percent of total gross floor area of the development. 1. 1 \ . . . . Development standards in industrial zones are provided in Table 18.130.2. 18.130.2 Minimum L of Size Nene Nene Nene Minimum T et 5Q Width -ft 50-ft 5-0-ft Minimum Setbacks Front 35 ft 30-€t 30-ft Street sidc 20-ft 20-ft 20-ft Side [11 0-ft 0 ft 0 ft Rcar[1} n --t0ft0f1t 0ftt Maximum Height - ft t 45-ft 45-ft Maximum Lot Coverage 75% [21 &we, 8 - - ..' •• 25% [2} ee {1] No setback is required except that a 50 foot setback is required on side and rear property lines that abut a residential zone. {2] Maximum lot coverage may be incr used to 80 percent and minimum landscape rerement may be reduced to 20 percent through the provisions of Section 18.130.050.B. (Ord. 17 22 §2) 1 I 1 . . . . A. Commercial lodging in the I P zone. The following development standards apply to commercial lodging located in the I P zone: 1. Lot size must be a minimum of 2 acres and a maximum of 5 acres. 2. The site must have access to be approved by the city engineer to an arterial or collector street with capacity sufficient to ensure that adequate access to local businesses is maintained. 3. Uses that are allowed in the I P zone are allowed as accessory uses to a commercial lodging • • - -• -- -- development, -do ,ent. percent to 20 percent, provided the following requirements arc met: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Industrial Zones Page 5 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment 1. Street trees, as required by Subsection 18.32I.!' !.• ••. .•• • •- - at int tallatien 14 feet; 3. The applicant must provide documentation of an adequate en geing rnai-ntenance program to C. Day Care uses.The following standards apply to all commercial day care u&es in industrial zones: -••• - , • .• ... , _ . - • . ! ..• . . . . _ . • • • ' . . . ...• •• . ... . .. . . - - ' - • . . - • _ • - D. . CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Industrial Zones Page 6 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.230 APARTMENTS Sections: 18.230.010 Purpose 18.230.020 Applicability 18.230.030 Approval Process 18.230.040 Development Standards 18.230.050 Design Standards 18.230.060 Accessory Structures 18.230.010 Purpose Apartments are a type of attached housing within single-story or multi-story buildings. Apartment dwelling units may share common side walls, ceilings, or floors. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards that promote quality development and enhance the livability, walkability, and safety of the community.Apartment development is intended to achieve the following: A. Increase the number of affordable housing units; B. Provide for a variety of housing types that meet the needs of Tigard's diverse population at all stages of life; C. Facilitate the efficient use of land through higher-density attached housing; and D. Support and complement transit services by providing ridership density and proximity. 18.230.020 Applicability A. The approval process and standards of this chapter apply to apartment development in the R-12,R-25, R-40, MUC, MUE, MUE-1, MUE-2, MUR-1, and MUR-2 zones. Additional standards apply in the River Terrace Plan District as provided in Chapter 18.640, River Terrace Plan District. An applicant may elect to apply the approval process and standards of this chapter or of Chapter 18.280, Rowhouses,when proposing rowhouse development. B. The approval process, but not the standards, of this chapter applies to apartment development in the MUC-I zone. Apartment development in the MUC-1 zone is subject to the standards of Chapter 18.620,Bridgeport Village Plan District. C. This chapter does not apply to apartment development in the MU-CBD and TMU zones. Apartment development in these zones is subject to the approval processes and standards of Chapter 18.650, Tigard Downtown Plan District,and Chapter 18.660,Tigard Triangle Plan District,respectively. 18.230.030 Approval Process Applications for apartment development are processed through a Type I or II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.050 or Section 18.710.060 respectively,using approval criteria in Section 18.780.050. CC Draft 02/11/2018)—Apartments Page 1 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment 18.230.040 Development Standards A. Base zone development standards are provided in Table 18.230.1. Table 18.230.1 Apartment Development Standards MUE-2 MUC Standard R-12 R-25 MUE R-40 and MUR-1 and MUR-2 MUE-1 3,050 1,480 1,480 Minimum Lot Size sq ft per sq ft per sq ft per 0 sq ft 0 sq ft 0 sq ft 0 sq ft unit unit unit Minimum Setbacks -Front 20ft 20ft 20ft 20ft loft Oft Oft -Street side 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 10 ft 5 ft O ft -Side loft loft loft loft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft [1] [1] [1] [2] [2] [2] -Rear 20ft 20ft 20ft 20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft [1] [1] [1] [2] [2] [2] Maximum Setbacks -Front None None None None 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft -Street side None None None None 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft Minimum Height O ft O ft O ft O ft O ft 2 stories 2 stories Maximum Height 35 ft 45 ft 45 ft 60 ft 60 ft 75 ft 200 ft Maximum Lot Coverage 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 80% 85% Minimum Landscape 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% 15% Area 80% 80% 25 units 50 units 50 units Minimum Density of maximum densityNone of max. per acreper acre per acre density Calculated using the 25 units 40 units 50 units Maximum Density method provided in None None 18.40.140 per acre per acre per acre [1] Where the site abuts an R-1 through R-12 zone, an additional 1 foot of setback is required for each foot of building height above the maximum building height of the abutting zone. [2] Minimum side and rear setbacks are 0 feet,except the minimum side and rear setbacks are 20 feet where the site abuts an R-1 through R-12 zone. B. Landscaping and screening. All required landscaping, including landscaping used to meet screening or tree canopy standards, is subject to the general provisions of Chapter 18.420, Landscaping and Screening. 1. The minimum landscape area standard is provided in Table 18.230.1. Landscaping standards are provided in Section 18.420.040. Any landscape area that meets the L-2 standard and any required common open space area may count toward meeting the minimum landscape area standard. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Apartments Page 2 o f 9 Proposed Code Amendment 2. Screening standards are provided in Section 18.420.050. Screening is required as follows: a. Service areas and wall- and roof-mounted utilities must be screened to the S-1 standard. Service areas and utilities are also subject to the standards in Subsection 18.230.040.G. b. Apartments that abut an R-1 through R-12 zone must be screened to the S-3 standard along all property lines,except street property lines. c. Surface vehicle parking areas, loading areas, and drive aisles within 20 feet of a street property line must be screened to the S-4 standard. Screening must be provided directly adjacent to the street property line,except where access is taken. 3. The minimum tree canopy standards for the site and any off-street vehicle parking areas are provided in Section 18.420.060. C. Common open space. 1. Common open space is required. The minimum total area of required common open space is 10 percent of the gross site area or 750 square feet, whichever is greater. More than one common open space area may be provided to meet this standard, but any area used to meet this standard must be a minimum of 20 feet in width and depth. 2. Apartment developments with less than 20 dwelling units must provide at least 2 different items from the list below within areas identified as common open space. Apartment developments with 20 or more dwelling units must provide at least 4 different items from the list below within areas identified as common open space. a. Playground equipment or play area for children, b. Sport court, c. Playing field, d. Lawn or garden, e. Covered seating, f. Swimming pool or water feature, g. Plaza or courtyard with permanent seating, h. Gazebo, i. Club house, j. Workout room,or k. Other similar item as determined by the director. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Apartments Page 3 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment 3. At least 50 percent of the dwelling units in a development must face outdoor common open space or a public street. This standard is met when the front door or a window from the kitchen, living room,or dining room of a unit faces the outdoor common open space or a public street. 4. Building facades, including accessory structure facades, that face outdoor common open space must meet the 15 percent window area requirement in Subsection 18.230.050.B or be screened to the S-4 standard as provided in Table 18.420.2. 5. Common open space may not be located in the front setback or include sensitive lands. D. Private open space. 1. Private open space is required for each dwelling unit. Each private open space must be a minimum of 48 square feet in area and a minimum of 5 feet in width and depth. 2. Private open space must be directly accessible from the interior of the dwelling unit that it serves. 3. Additional common open space above the required minimum may substitute for some or all of the required private open space at a 1:1 ratio. E. Pedestrian access. 1. Paths must provide pedestrian access from public sidewalks abutting the site to all required building entrances on the site. 2. Paths must provide pedestrian access between all common open space areas, vehicle and bicycle parking areas, building entrances, and service areas designed for use by residents. Paths within parking areas or along drive aisles are subject to additional standards in Subsection 18.410.040.B. 3. Paths must extend to the perimeter property line to provide pedestrian access to existing or planned pedestrian facilities on adjacent properties,such as trails or public access easements. 4. Paths must be constructed with a hard surface material and have a minimum unobstructed width of 5 feet. F. Vehicle and bicycle parking. 1. The applicable provisions and standards of Sections 18.410.010 through 18.410.050 apply to apartment developments. 2. The standards in Sections 18.410.060 through 18.410.090 do not apply to apartment developments. 3. The minimum and maximum number of off-street vehicle and bicycle parking spaces are provided in Table 18.230.2. Any fractional space requirement is rounded up to the next whole number. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Apartments Page 4 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment Table 18.230.2 Off-Street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Quantity Requirements Vehicle Apartment Size Vehicle Minimum Maximum Bicycle Minimum (Zones A and B) 500 sq ft or less 1 space per dwelling unit 1 bedroom 1 space per dwelling unit I space per 2 dwelling None 2 bedroom 1.25 spaces per dwelling unit units 3 bedroom 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit 4. Apartment developments with 10 or more required vehicle parking spaces must also provide additional vehicle parking for guests. The minimum amount of additional parking spaces is 15 percent of the minimum vehicle parking requirement as provided in Table 18.230.2. Guest vehicle parking must be clearly identified with pavement markings or signs. 5. Apartment developments with 20 or more dwelling units must also provide additional bicycle parking spaces for guests. The minimum amount of additional parking spaces is 15 percent of the minimum bicycle parking requirement as provided in Table 18.230.2. Guest bicycle parking must be located within 20 feet of the street property line and be visible to pedestrians from the public sidewalk in front of the site. Bicycle parking may be located in the public right-of-way with approval of the city engineer. 6. Apartment developments with 20 or more dwelling units must provide all required non-guest bicycle parking spaces inside a structure or under a roof. Required bicycle parking is exempt from the location standard of Subsection 18.410.050.A but may not be located inside individual dwelling units. 7. Surface parking areas, drive aisles, detached garages, and attached or detached carports may not be located between any street property line and a building with dwelling units. 8. Attached garages may not be located closer to a street property line than the facade of a building with dwelling units. Driveways associated with attached garages that take direct access from a public or private street must meet the rowhouse location and access standards in Paragraph 18.280.050.E.3 and Subparagraphs 18.280.050.E.2.a through d. 9. Parking areas located to the side of a building with dwelling units and within 20 feet of a street property line may not occupy more than 50 percent of the total length of the street frontage. Drive aisles without adjacent parking spaces do not count as parking areas for the purposes of this standard. G. Utilities and service areas. 1. Private utility facilities, such as transformers or control valves, that serve a single development must be located below ground unless the functional properties of the facility require above- ground placement. If located above ground,all facilities 1 cubic foot or greater in volume,or with any one dimension greater than 2 feet,must meet the following standards where not wall-or roof- mounted or located inside a building: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Apartments Page 5 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment a. The facility may not be located within 20 feet of any street property line;and b. The facility must be dark in color and painted or wrapped with a non-reflective material. 2. Service areas, such as waste and recycling containers, outdoor storage, and mechanical equipment, may not be located within 20 feet of any street property line, except where located inside a building. H. Lighting. 1. Minimum illumination levels are measured horizontally at ground level. a. The minimum average illumination is 1.5 footcandles for paths, except those within parking areas, which are subject to the lighting standards in Subsection 18.410.040.I. All points of measurement must be a minimum of 0.5 footcandles. b. The minimum average illumination is 3.5 footcandles for required building entrances and 2.0 footcandles for any non-required building entrances. All points of measurement must be a minimum of 1.0 footcandle. 2. Maximum illumination levels are measured vertically at the property line. The maximum illumination is 0.5 footcandles at side and rear property lines, except that the maximum illumination may be increased to 1.0 footcandle where the development abuts a commercial or industrial zone. 3. Lighting must be shielded, angled, or located such that it does not shine upwards or directly onto adjacent properties or sensitive lands. 1. Apartments are subject to all other applicable requirements of this title including but not limited to standards related to streets and utilities,sensitive lands,and signs. 18.230.050 Design Standards A. Entrances. 1. For dwelling units with internal building access, a minimum of 1 entrance per building must be visible and accessible from a public or private street or outdoor common open space. Additional entrances may face drive aisles,parking areas,or service areas. 2. For dwelling units without internal building access, a minimum of 1 entrance per dwelling unit must be visible and accessible from a public or private street, outdoor common open space, or drive aisle that has a curb and path adjacent to the unit. 3. A required building entrance must be at an angle that is no more than 45 degrees from the street, common open space, or drive aisle that it faces. A required building entrance to an individual dwelling unit may exceed this standard where it opens onto a porch or stoop provided the angle is no more than 90 degrees from the street,common open space,or drive aisle that it faces. 4. A required building entrance must be covered, recessed,or treated with a permanent architectural feature that provides weather protection for pedestrians. The required weather protection must be CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Apartments Page 6 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment at least as wide as the entrance, a maximum of 6 feet above the top of the entrance, and a minimum of 3 feet in depth. The required weather protection may project into the minimum front setback. B. Windows. 1. All building facades, except accessory structure facades, must include a minimum of 15 percent window area on the entirety of all facades that face a public or private street or outdoor common open space. 2. The minimum window area standard does not apply to stories with sloped roofs or dormers. C. Facade design. 1. All building facades, except accessory structure facades, must include a minimum number of architectural features from the list below on the entirety of all facades that face a public or private street or outdoor common open space. A building with less than 20 units must include at least 2 different architectural features. A building with 20 or more dwelling units must include at least 4 different architectural features. Different features may be used on different facades of the same building. a. Facade articulation.A wall projection or recession that is a minimum of 6 feet in width and 2 feet in depth for a minimum of half the height of the facade and with a maximum distance of 40 feet between projections or recessions. b. Roof eave or projecting cornice. i. An eave that projects a minimum of 12 inches from the building facade;or ii. A cornice that projects a minimum of 6 inches from the building facade and is a minimum of 12 inches in height. c. Roof offsets or dormers. i. A roof offset that is a minimum of 2 feet from the top surface of one roof to the top surface of another roof as measured horizontally or vertically with a maximum distance of 40 feet between offsets. See Figure 18.230.1;or ii. One dormer for each top floor dwelling unit that is a minimum of 4 feet in width and integrated into the roof form. Figure 18.230.1 Roof Offset [Placeholder] d. Accent siding. A minimum of 2 different siding materials are used, and one siding material covers a minimum of 40 percent of the building facade. e. Distinct base and top. The ground floor is visually distinguished from the upper floors by including a belt course and at least one of the following: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Apartments Page 7 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment i. a change in surface or siding pattern; ii. a change in surface or siding material;or iii. a change in the size or orientation of windows. f. Window area. A minimum of 50 percent window area is included. g. Window shadowing. All windows include at least one of the following: i. Window trim that is a minimum of 2.5 inches in width and 0.625 inches in depth; or ii. Windows that are recessed a minimum of 3 inches from the building facade. h. Balconies. Balconies are included on all upper floors that meet the dimensional requirement for private open space provided in Subsection 18.230.040.D. i. Covered porches or recessed entrances. All ground floor dwelling units with individual entrances include at least one of the following: i. A covered porch that is a minimum of 5 feet in width and depth; or ii. An entrance area that is a minimum of 5 feet in width and recessed a minimum of 2 feet from the building facade. j. Enhanced entrances or awnings. A building that provides internal access to dwelling units includes at least one of the following: i. A building entrance area that is a minimum of 8 feet in width and is either: (A)recessed a minimum of 5 feet from the building facade,or (B) covered with a permanent architectural feature that provides weather protection. The architectural feature must be at least as wide as the entry, a maximum of 6 feet above the top of the entry, and a minimum of 5 feet in depth. The architectural feature may project into the minimum front setback; or ii. A permanent architectural feature above all ground floor windows, such as an awning or series of awnings, that are at least as wide as each window, a maximum of 6 feet above the top of each window, and a minimum of 3 feet in depth. The architectural feature may project into the minimum front setback. 2. The following building materials are prohibited on all building facades, including accessory structure facades, that face a public or private street or outdoor common open space. They may not be used collectively on more than 35 percent of any other building facade. a. Vinyl PVC siding, b. T-1 l l plywood, CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Apartments Page 8 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment c. Exterior insulation finishing(EIFS), d. Corrugated metal, e. Plain concrete or concrete block, f. Spandrel glass,or g. Sheet pressboard. 18.230.060 Accessory Structures Accessory structures are allowed subject to the following standards: A. Accessory structures are prohibited in the required front or street side setback; B. Accessory structures may be located in the required side or rear setback provided they are a minimum of 5 feet from the side and rear property lines and a maximum of 15 feet in height;and C. All accessory structures, including structures required to screen utilities and service areas, and all site improvements, such as fences, walls, signs, and light fixtures, must use materials, colors, and architectural design features that are similar in scale and appearance to those on primary buildings. Chain link fencing and unfinished concrete blocks are prohibited. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Apartments Page 9 of 9 Proposed Amendment Chapter 18.280 ROWHOUSES Sections: 18.280.010 Purpose 18.280.020 Applicability 18.280.030 Approval Process 18.280.040 General Provisions 18.280.050 Development Standards 18.280.060 Design Standards 18.280.070 Accessory Structures 18.280.010 Purpose Rowhouses are a type of attached housing that share common side walls. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards that promote quality development and enhance the livability, walkability, and safety of the community. Rowhouse development is intended to achieve the following: A. Increase the number of affordable housing units; B. Accommodate incremental growth in neighborhoods while preserving residential quality of life; C. Provide for a variety of housing types that meet the needs of Tigard's diverse population at all stages of life; D. Encourage housing that allows residents to remain in their communities and neighborhoods as their needs change;and E. Facilitate more efficient use of land through smaller housing units. 18.280.020 Applicability A. The approval process and standards of this chapter apply to rowhouse development in the R-7, R-12, R-25, MUR-1, and MUR-2 zones. Additional standards apply in the River Terrace Plan District, as provided in Chapter 18.640,River Terrace Plan District. B. The approval process, but not the standards, of this chapter applies to rowhouse development in the MUC-1 zone. The standards for rowhouse development in the MUC-1 zone are provided in Chapter 18.620,Bridgeport Village Plan District. C. The approval process and standards of this chapter do not apply to rowhouse development in the MU- CBD and TMU zones.Rowhouse development in these zones is subject to the approval processes and standards of Chapter 18.650, Tigard Downtown Plan District, and Chapter 18.660, Tigard Triangle Plan District,respectively. D. Rowhouse development may alternatively meet the standards of Chapter 18.230, Apartments to construct this housing type in base zones where apartments are allowed. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Rowhouses Page 1 of 7 Proposed Amendment 18.280.030 Approval Process Applications for rowhouse development are processed through a Type I or Type II procedure, as provided in Sections 18.710.050 or 18.710.060,using approval criteria in Section 18.780.050. 18.280.040 General Provisions All lots approved for rowhouse development in the R-7, R-12, and R-25 zones through the provisions of this chapter will be conditioned to record a deed restriction prohibiting any type of development other than rowhouse development on the lot. This deed restriction cannot be removed except through a land division or lot line adjustment process that brings the lot into conformance with the standards for development of other housing types. A rowhouse deed restriction imposed as a condition of a previous or concurrent land division or lot line adjustment process meets this standard. 18.280.050 Development Standards A. Number of units. A rowhouse development must contain at least two units. There is no maximum number of units,except that in the R-7 zone,the maximum number of units per grouping is 5. B. Density.Minimum and maximum density are provided in Table 18.280.1. C. Lot width.Minimum lot widths are provided in Table 18.280.1. D. Setbacks.Minimum and maximum setbacks are provided in Table 18.280.1. E. Parking. The provisions and standards of Section 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 apply, except for Subsection 18.410.040.E.The following additional standards also apply: 1. Number of spaces. a. A minimum of 1 off-street parking space must be provided for each rowhouse. b. An on-street parking credit may be granted for some or all the required off-street parking as provided in Section 18.410.090. 2. Access. Access to off-street parking areas for rowhouse development may be taken through tandem driveways, shared access, or from an alley. The following requirements apply to each situation in addition to the relevant sections of Chapter 18.920,Access,Egress,and Circulation. a. Tandem driveways. If access is taken from a street other than an alley and access is not shared development-wide,the following standards apply. See Figure 18.280.1 for examples. i. A maximum of 1 driveway is allowed for every 2 rowhouse units, except that each rowhouse grouping of three or more units may include 1 driveway that provides access to a single unit. Shared access is subject to the requirements 18.920.030.C. ii. The minimum width for a driveway is 15 feet, except that a single unshared driveway may be 10 feet in width. iii. The maximum width for a driveway is 18 feet, except that the maximum width for a single unshared driveway is 12 feet. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Rowhouses Page 2 of 7 Proposed Amendment iv. Driveways must be located a minimum of 18 feet apart to minimize vehicle conflicts with pedestrians. Distance between driveways is measured along the front property line. Figure 18.280.1 Access Configuration for Tandem Driveways / ."_........ .4,' / Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse R n Tandem Tandem Dr way Dr way Tandem Driveway Sidewalk-71•---18"—Ai-18"---,14-18"---A'- 15'- -- 18'-714- 15'-,K L ) U L J = L ) STREET STREET b. Shared access. If access for all units in a rowhouse development is shared and off-street parking areas are provided at the side or rear of a rowhouse development rather than at the front of each rowhouse unit,the minimum paved width of the shared access is 20 feet and the maximum width is 24 feet. Figure 18.280.2 Access Configuration for Shared Access IHHH HHH Off-street parking area Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse r i Shared Access Sidewalk7l4—20'—,14- L STREET c. Alley access. If access is taken from an alley,the following standards apply: i. A maximum of one access is allowed for each rowhouse unit. ii. The minimum paved width of an alley access is 10 feet. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Rowhoases Page 3 of 7 Proposed Amendment 3. Location. Off-street parking areas, including detached parking structures, must be located a minimum of 20 feet from any street property line,except alley property lines,where no minimum setback is required. 4. Parking structures. Parking structures in rowhouse developments are subject to the following: a. Detached parking structures must be located a minimum of 40 feet from a street property line where rowhouses provide main entrances. b. The maximum size for a detached parking structure is 200 square feet per rowhouse served by the structure. c. The maximum height for a detached parking structure is 15 feet. 5. Screening. Screening of parking areas is not required, except that in the R-7 zone, off-street parking areas provided at the side or rear of buildings and not in structures must be screened from adjacent properties to the S-3 standard, as provided in Table 18.420.2. The required screening must be provided on the same site as the development. F. Pedestrian access. Rowhouse developments of 5 or more units must provide a paved, accessible pedestrian path that connects the main entrance of each rowhouse to the following: 1. Sidewalks in the right-of-way abutting the site; 2. Common buildings such as laundry and recreation facilities; 3. Parking areas;and 4. Common open space and play areas. G. Landscaping. The provisions and standards of Chapter 18.420, Landscaping and Screening do not apply to rowhouse development, with the exception of Sections 18.420.030 and 18.420.040. The following additional standards also apply: 1. The minimum landscape area standards are provided in Table 18.280.1. All required landscape areas must meet the L-1 standard,as provided in Table 18.420.1. 2. A minimum of 15 percent tree canopy must be provided. The method for determining tree canopy is provided in Section 10 Part 3 Subpart M of the Urban Forestry Manual.All required trees must be a minimum caliper of 1.5 inches at the time of planting and meet the standards in Section 13 Part 2 and Appendix 3 of the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual for soil volume and species. Trees planted to meet this standard are development trees. The applicant must pay the tree inventory fee listed in the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule. 3. The minimum number of required street trees is determined by dividing the length in feet of the site's street frontage by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction,the minimum number of street trees is the nearest whole number. More than the minimum number of street trees may be required along the site's frontage depending upon the stature of trees chosen and the specific spacing standards for the chosen trees. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Rowltouses Page 4 of 7 Proposed Amendment a. Street trees must be planted within the right-of-way wherever practicable. Street trees may be planted a maximum of 6 feet from the right-of-way when planting within the right-of-way is not practicable as determined by the city engineer. b. An existing tree may be used to meet the street tree standards provided that: i. The largest percentage of the tree trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses is either within the subject site or within the right-of-way immediately adjacent to the subject site;and ii. The tree would be permitted as a street tree in compliance with UFM street tree planting and soil volume standards if it were newly planted. H. Waste Collection. 1. Dumpsters are prohibited in rowhouse developments. 2. Waste collection and service areas may not be located in required setbacks and must be screened to the S-1 standard,as provided in Table 18.420.2. Table 18.280.1 Development Standards for Rowhouses Sta ida . , R-7 R-12 R-25 MUR-1 MUR-2 Minimum Lot Size 5,000 sq ft 2,500 sq ft 1,500 sq ft Minimum and maximum per unit per unit per unit lot size are determined by Maximum Lot Size 5,500 sq ft 2,750 sq ft 1,750 sq ft minimum and maximum per unit per unit per unit density. Minimum Lot Width 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 16 ft 16 ft Minimum Setbacks -Front 15 ft 15 ft 15ft Oft loft -Street side 10 ft lO ft lO ft 5ft 10 ft -Side [1] 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft -Rear[2] 15ft 15ft 15ft 15ft 15 ft Maximum Setbacks -Front 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft -Street side 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft Maximum Height 35 ft 35 ft 45 ft 75 ft 45 ft Minimum Landscape Area 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% Minimum Density Minimum and maximum density are 50 units per 25 units per determined by minimum and maximum acre acre Maximum Density lot size. None 50 units per acre [I] This standard does not apply to a common wall lot line where the units are attached. [2] There is no rear setback when the rear property line abuts an alley. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Rowhouses Page 5 of 7 Proposed Amendment 18.280.060 Design Standards A. Height. Maximum heights are provided in Table 18.280.1. B. Unit definition. Each dwelling unit must include at least one of the following on the street-facing facade: 1. A roof dormer a minimum of 4 feet in width, 2. A balcony a minimum of 2 feet in depth and accessible from an interior room, 3. A bay window that extends from the facade a minimum of 2 feet,or 4. An offset of the facade of a minimum of 2 feet in depth from the neighboring dwelling unit. C. Main entrance. The main entrance of each rowhouse must face the street. If a rowhouse has more than one street property line,the entrance may face either street. D. Porches. Each rowhouse in a grouping must include a porch that is a minimum of 48 square feet in area with no horizontal dimension less than 6 feet. A balcony on the same facade as the main entrance may substitute for a front porch,provided that the following are met: 1. The area of the balcony must be a minimum of 48 square feet, 2. The balcony must be a minimum of 8 feet in width, 3. The floor of the balcony must be a maximum of 15 feet above grade, and 4. The balcony must be accessible from the interior living space of the house. E. Roofs. Roofs must be sloped, with a minimum pitch of 4/12 and a maximum pitch of 14/12, except that a roof may be flat if it meets one of the following: 1. The space on top of the roof is used as a deck or balcony that is no more than 150 square feet in area and is accessible from an interior room; or 2. The roof line includes a cornice that extends at least 6 inches from the facade and is a minimum of 12 inches in height. F. Exterior staircases. Exterior staircases to any story above the first story of a rowhouse are not allowed. G. Windows. A minimum of 12% of the area of all street-facing facades on each individual unit must include windows or entrance doors. Window area is the aggregate area of the glass within each window, including any interior grids, mullions, or transoms. Door area is the area of the portion of a door other than a garage door that moves and does not include the frame. Half of the window area in the door of an attached garage may count toward meeting this standard. 18.280.070 Accessory Structures Accessory structures are allowed subject to the following standards: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Rowhouses Page 6 of 7 Proposed Amendment A. The maximum size of accessory structures is 528 square feet; B. The maximum height of accessory structures is 15 feet; C. Accessory structures are prohibited within the front setback; and D. Accessory structures may be located within the side or rear setback provided they are a minimum of 5 feet from the side and rear property lines. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Rowhouses Page 7 of 7 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.290 SINGLE DETACHED HOUSES Sections: 18.290.010 Purpose 18.290.020 Applicability 18.290.030 Development Standards 18.290.040 Design Standards 18.290.050 Accessory Structures 18.290.010 Purpose Single detached house development is intended to provide a desired housing type for individual households. It is one piece of a diverse housing strategy;and integrates well with other housing types of similar scale. 18.290.020 Applicability The standards of this chapter apply to single detached houses in residential zones and to primary dwelling units on lots with accessory dwelling units. 18.290.030 Development Standards Development standards for single detached houses are provided in Table 18.290.1. Design standards for single detached houses are provided in Table 18.290.1. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 1 of 5 Proposed Code Amendment Table 18.290.1 Development Standards for Single Detached Houses Standard R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 MUC-1 Minimum Lot Size 30,000 20,000 10,000 7,500 5,000 3,050 0 sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft Nene Minimum Lot Width 100ft 100ft 65ft 50 ft 50 ft Nene Nene Minimum Setbacks -Front 30ft 30ft 20ft 20 ft 15 ft 15 ft Oft[1] -Street side 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 15 ft 10 ft 10 ft Oft[1] -Side 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft Oft -Rear 25ft 25ft 15ft 15ft 15ft 15ft Oft Side or rear abutting more N/A NIA N/A N4 30-ft 29-ft restrictive zone -Garage(2J 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft Nene 20 ft Maximum Height 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft 35 ft 35 ft 70 ft Maximum Lot Coverage None None None None 80% 80% 90% Minimum Landscape Area 131 None None None None 20% 20% 10% Requirement Minimum Density 80%of maximum density 25 units per acre Maximum Density Calculated using the method provided in 18.40.140 50 units per acre Minimum Parking 1 off-street vehicle parking space per house[4/ [1] The maximum front and street side setback is 20 feet. /21 The minimum garage setback applies to garages and carports. The minimum setback may be reduced to 0 feet where vehicle access is taken from an alley. /31 The minimum landscape area must be planted to the L-1 standard. Landscaping standards are provided in Chapter 18.420,Landscaping and Screening. Single detached house development is exempt from the general provisions of Section 18.420.030. /41 The minimum parking standard may be met with an on-street parking credit. On-street parking credit standards are provided in Section 18.410.090. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 2 of 5 Proposed Code Amendment 18.290.040 Design Standards A. Entrances. The main entrance to a single detached house must meet the following standards: 1. The entrance must be set back no further than 8 feet from the widest street-facing wall;and 2. The entrance must be offset no more than 45 degrees from a line parallel to the front lot line. If the front lot is curved, the offset is measured from a line tangent to the midpoint of the front lot line. B. Windows.A minimum of 12 percent of the area of all street-facing facades, excluding alley-facing facades, must include windows or doors.Door area is the portion of a door that moves and does not include the frame. Garage doors designed for vehicle access may not be used to meet this standard. 1. Windows in a garage door may be used to meet this standard. 2. A maximum of 2 percent of the required window area may be frosted glass. C. Attached garages and carports. An attached garage or carport must meet the following standards, except where vehicle access is taken from an alley. 1. A garage door or carport entrance designed for vehicle access must be the same distance or a greater distance from the street property line as the widest street-facing wall along the same street frontage,except as follows: a. A garage door or carport entrance may extend up to 5 feet in front of the widest street- facing wall if there is a covered front porch and the garage door or carport entrance does not extend beyond the front of the porch. b. A garage door or carport entrance may extend up to 5 feet in front of the widest street- facing wall where the garage or carport is part of a 2-story building and there is a window on the second story above the garage or carport that faces the street with a minimum area of 12 square feet. 2. The total maximum width of all garage doors or carport entrances is 12 feet or 50 percent of the total width of the street-facing facade, whichever is greater. The width of a garage door is measured from inside the garage door frame. Where more than one garage door is proposed, the width of each garage door is measured separately. See Figure 18.290.1. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 3 of 5 Proposed Code Amendment Figure 18.290.1 Garage Door Width .Property Line ._ .�.._. .�._.._._.._. .,.� I I Building I I I I I I Garage I E- x --i • STREET X: Width of garage door Y: Width of street-facing façade 3. The total maximum width of all garage doors or carport entrances may be increased to 60 percent of the total width of the street-facing facade provided that a minimum of 7 detailed design elements from the list below are included on the street-facing facade with the garage door or carport entrance. a. Covered porch: a minimum depth of 5 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall,and a minimum width of 5 feet. b. Recessed entrance area: A minimum depth of 2 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall,and a minimum width of 5 feet. c. Wall offset: a minimum offset of 16 inches from one exterior wall surface to the other. d. Dormer:a minimum width of 4 feet that is integrated into the roof form. e. Roof eave: a minimum projection of 12 inches from the intersection of the roof and the building walls. f. Roof offset: a minimum offset of 2 feet from the top surface of one roof to the top surface of the other. g. Roof shingles:tile or fire-resistant roofing material. h. Roof design:gable roof hip roof,or gambrel roof design. i. Roof pitch: a roof pitch of at least 500 square feet in area that is sloped to face the southern ski'and has its eave line oriented within 30 degrees of the true north/south axis. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 4 of 5 Proposed Code Amendment j. Horizontal lap siding: a minimum visible lap width of 3 to 7 inches once installed. The siding material must be wood,fiber-cement,or vinyl to meet this standard. k. Accent siding: brick, cedar shingles, stucco, or other accent material that covers a minimum of 40 percent of the facade. 1. Window trim: a minimum width of 2.5 inches and a minimum depth of 5/8 inches around all windows. m. Window recess: a minimum depth of 3 inches, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall,for all windows except where a bay window is proposed that meets the standard in Subparagraph 18.290.040.C.3.n. n. Window projection (e.g., bay window): a minimum depth of 2 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall, and a minimum width of 5 feet. o. Balcony: a minimum depth of 3 feet and a minimum width of 5 feet that is accessible from an interior room. 18.290.050 Accessory Structures A. Accessory structures are allowed on all lots with single detached dwellings houses subject to the following standards: 1. The maximum size of accessory structures is 528 square feet on lots less than 2.5 acres and 1,000 square feet on lots 2.5 acres or larger; 2. The maximum height of accessory structures is 15 feet; 3. Accessory structures may not cause the lot to exceed the maximum lot coverage allowed in the base zone; 4. Accessory structures are prohibited min the required front setback; and 5. - .. . Accessory structures may be located in the required side, street side, or rear setback provided they are a minimum of 5 feet from the side, street side, and rear property lines, except for garages and carports, which are subject to specific setback standards for the side of the structure designed for vehicle access. cascmcnte;-and - .. -- property lines a distance equal to-or greater than the height of the proposed structure. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 5 of 5 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.320 COMMERCIAL ZONE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Sections: 18.320.010 Purpose and Definition 18.320.020 Applicability 18.320.030 Approval Process 18.320.040 Development Standards 18.320.050 Design Standards 18.320.060 Additional Standards for C-N,C-C,and C-G Zones 18.320.070 Additional Standards for Adult Entertainment Uses 18.320.010 Purpose and Definition A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards for nonresidential development in commercial zones that promote quality development and enhance the livability, walkability, and safety of the community. B. Definition. Nonresidential development includes mixed-use developments with or without a residential component and single-use developments that contain a civic, institutional, commercial, industrial,or other nonresidential use. 18.320.020 Applicability A. The approval process and standards of this chapter apply to nonresidential development in the C-N, C-C, C-G, C-P, MUC, MUE, MUE-1, MUE-2, MUR-1, and MUR-2 zones. Additional standards apply to nonresidential development in the River Terrace Plan District and Washington Square Regional Center Plan District as provided in Chapter 18.640, River Terrace Plan District, and Chapter 18.670, Washington Square Regional Center Plan District. B. The approval process, but not the standards, of this chapter applies to nonresidential development in the MUC-1 zone. Nonresidential development in the MUC-1 zone is subject to the standards of Chapter 18.620,Bridgeport Village Plan District. C. This chapter does not apply to nonresidential development in the MU-CBD and TMU zones. Nonresidential development in these zones is subject to the approval processes and standards of Chapter 18.650, Tigard Downtown Plan District, and Chapter 18.660, Tigard Triangle Plan District, respectively. D. This chapter does not apply to residential development in commercial zones. Residential development in commercial zones is subject to the approval processes and standards of the applicable housing type chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards. 18.320.030 Approval Process Applications for nonresidential development are processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060, using approval criteria in Section 18.780.050, except where a conditional use or planned development application is required or proposed. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zone Development Standards Page 1 of 7 Proposed Code Amendment 18.320.040 Development Standards A. Base zone development standards are provided in Table 18.320.1. Table 18.320.1 Commercial Zone Development Standards for Nonresidential Development C-N MUE-2 MUC I Standard and C-G C-P MUE and MUR-1 and GC MUR-2 [1] MUE-1 . .... mill 111 Minimum Lot Size 5,000 0 sq ft 6,000 0 sq ft 0 sq ft 0 sq ft 0 sq ft sq ft sq ft Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 50 ft 50 ft 50 ft O ft O ft O ft Minimum Setback -Front Oft Oft Oft Oft 10ft Oft Oft -Street side Oft Oft Oft Oft 10 ft 5 ft O ft -Side Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft [2] [3] [3] [3] [3] [3] [3] -Rear Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft Oor20ft [2] [3] [3] [3] [3] [3] [3] Maximum Setback -Front 20 ft None or None None 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 10 ft[4] Street side 20 ft None or None None 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 10 ft[4] Minimum Height O ft O ft O ft O ft O ft 2 stories 2 stories Maximum Height 35 ft 45 ft 45 ft 45 ft 60 ft 75 ft 200 ft Maximum Lot Coverage 85% 85% 85% 80% 80% 80% 85% Minimum Landscape 15% 15% 15% 20% 20% 20% 15% Area Minimum FAR[5] None None None None 0.3 0.6 1.25 Maximum FAR[5] None None None 0.4 [6] None None None [1] See Chapter 18.670, Washington Square Regional Center Plan District, for additional development standards. [2] Minimum side and rear setbacks are 0 feet, except the minimum side and rear setbacks are 20 feet where the site abuts a residential zone. [3] Minimum side and rear setbacks are 0 feet, except the minimum side and rear setbacks are 20 feet where the site abuts an R-1 through R-12 zone. [4] There are no maximum front and street side setbacks, except maximum front and street side setbacks are 10 feet where the site is located within the Tigard Triangle Plan District. See Map 18.660.A. [5] The net development area, as defined in Section 18.40.020.A, is used to establish the lot area for purposes of calculating the floor area ratio(FAR).Residential floor area in mixed-use developments is included in the floor area calculation to determine conformance with FAR. [6] Commercial lodging uses are not subject to this requirement. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zone Development Standards Page 2 of 7 Proposed Code Amendment B. Landscaping and screening. All required landscaping, including landscaping used to meet screening or tree canopy standards, is subject to the general provisions of Chapter 18.420, Landscaping and Screening. 1. The minimum landscape area standard is provided in Table 18.320.1. Landscaping standards are provided in Section 18.420.040. Any landscape area that meets the L-2 standard may count toward meeting the minimum area standard. 2. Screening standards are provided in Section 18.420.050. Screening is required as follows: a. Service areas and wall- and roof-mounted utilities must be screened to the S-1 standard. Service areas and utilities are also subject to the standards in Subsection I8.320.040.D. b. Nonresidential development that abuts a residential zone must be screened to the S-3 standard along all property lines,except street property lines. c. Surface vehicle parking areas, loading areas, drive aisles, and stacking lanes for drive- through services within 20 feet of a street property line must be screened to the S-4 standard. Screening must be provided directly adjacent to the street property line, except where access is taken. 3. The minimum tree canopy standards for the site and any off-street vehicle parking areas are provided in Section 18.420.060. C. Pedestrian access. 1. Paths must provide safe and convenient pedestrian access from public sidewalks abutting the site to all required building entrances on the site. A minimum of 1 path is required for every 200 linear feet of street frontage. 2. Paths must provide safe and convenient pedestrian access within the site between all buildings, uses, and areas designed for use by pedestrians. Paths within parking areas or along drive aisles are subject to additional standards in Subsection 18.410.040.B. 3. Paths must extend to the perimeter property line to provide access to existing or planned pedestrian facilities on adjacent properties, such as trails or public access easements, where practicable. 4. Paths must be constructed with a hard surface material and have a minimum unobstructed width of 5 feet. D. Utilities and service areas. 1. Private utility facilities, such as transformers or control valves, that serve a single development must be located below ground unless the functional properties of the facility require above- ground placement. If located above ground, all facilities 1 cubic foot or greater in volume, or with any one dimension greater than 2 feet,must meet the following standards where not wall-or roof-mounted or located inside a building: a. The facility may not be located within 20 feet of any street property line;and CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zone Development Standards Page 3 of 7 Proposed Code Amendment b. The facility must be dark in color and painted or wrapped with a non-reflective material. 2. Service areas, such as waste and recycling containers, outdoor storage, and mechanical equipment, may not be located within 20 feet of any street property line, except where located inside a building. E. Lighting. 1. Minimum illumination levels are measured horizontally at ground level. a. The minimum average illumination is 1.5 footcandles for paths, except those within parking areas, which are subject to the lighting standards in Subsection 18.410.040.I. All points of measurement must be a minimum of 0.5 footcandles. b. The minimum average illumination is 3.5 footcandles for required building entrances and 2.0 footcandles for any non-required building entrances. All points of measurement must be a minimum of 1.0 footcandle. 2. Maximum illumination levels are measured vertically at the property line. The maximum illumination is 0.5 footcandles at side and rear property lines, except that the maximum illumination may be increased to 1.0 footcandle where the development abuts a commercial or industrial zone. 3. Lighting must be shielded, angled, or located such that it does not shine upwards or directly onto adjacent properties or sensitive lands. F. Nonresidential development is subject to all other applicable requirements of this title including but not limited to standards related to parking and loading, streets and utilities, sensitive lands,and signs. 18.320.050 Design Standards A. Entrances. 1. A minimum of one entrance per building, or tenant space within a building without internal building access, must be visible and accessible from a public street. Additional entrances may face drive aisles,parking areas,or service areas. 2. A required building entrance must be at an angle that is no more than 45 degrees from the street that it faces. 3. A required building entrance must be covered, recessed, or treated with a permanent architectural feature that provides weather protection for pedestrians. The required weather protection must be at least as wide as the entrance, a maximum of 6 feet above the top of the entrance, and a minimum of 3 feet in depth. The required weather protection may project into the minimum front setback. B. Windows. Buildings or tenant spaces designed for ground floor use by Eating and Drinking Establishments, Sales-Oriented Retail, Repair-Oriented Retail, Personal Services, and Office uses must include a minimum of 50 percent window area on all ground floor street-facing facades. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zone Development Standards Page 4 of 7 Proposed Code Amendment 18.320.060 Additional Standards for C-N,C-C,and C-G Zones A. C-N and C-C zones. The following standards apply to development in the C-C and C-N zones in addition to all other applicable standards of this title. 1. Pedestrian access. a. Paths that provide access from public sidewalks to required building entrances must have a minimum unobstructed width of 8 feet. b. Path surfaces must be visually distinguished from drive aisle surfaces where paths cross drive aisles through the use of durable and low-maintenance materials such as pavers,bricks, or scored concrete. 2. Site design. a. Minimum and maximum building setbacks are met when at least 70 percent of the street- facing building facade is located within the setback area. b. Vehicle parking and loading areas must be located to the side or rear of primary buildings and not between primary buildings and the street property line. c. Vehicle parking and loading areas must be designed and located to minimize conflicts between vehicular and non-vehicular traffic. d. Loading areas must be designed and located to minimize adverse impacts on adjacent properties,particularly those in residential zones or with residential uses. e. Landscaping must be designed and located to emphasize the major points of access into the site and to help define and separate vehicular and non-vehicular circulation within parking areas. f. The following bicycle parking standards apply to the nonresidential component of a mixed- use or single-use development. Where a mixed-use development includes a residential component,the bicycle parking standards in Subsection 18.230.040.F apply to the residential component of the development. i. A minimum of 50 percent of required bicycle parking spaces must be located within 20 feet of the street property line and be visible to pedestrians from the public sidewalk in front of the site; ii. A minimum of 50 percent of required bicycle parking spaces must be covered where the site is located within 500 feet of an existing or planned trail; and iii. Bicycle parking may be located in the public right-of-way with approval of the city engineer. g. Where the site is located on a street corner, the corner area must include a unique site or building design feature such as an angled or rounded building corner, prominent building entrance, permanent seating area, water feature, sculpture, or distinctive paving or CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zone Development Standards Page 5 of 7 Proposed Code Amendment landscaping. 3. Building design. a. All street-facing facades must provide a minimum of 50 percent of window area on all ground floor facades and a minimum of 30 percent of window area on all upper floor facades, except that residential uses on upper floors must provide a minimum of 15 percent of window area. b. All street-facing facades must include pedestrian-scale architectural design features such as awnings, window shadowing, accent siding, roof eaves, projecting cornices, horizontal belt courses, or enhanced entries that are appropriately scaled for the building size and location. Awnings may project into the public right-of-way with city engineer approval provided they have a minimum vertical clearance of 8 feet from sidewalk grade and a minimum horizontal projection of 5 feet from building facade. c. All building facades, other than street-facing facades, that are visible from public parking areas and adjacent properties must provide visual interest and avoid large blank walls through the use of windows,doors,color,landscaping,or wall treatments. d. All accessory buildings, including structures required to screen utilities and service areas, and all site improvements,such as fences,walls, signs,and light fixtures, must use materials, colors, and architectural design features that are similar in scale and appearance to those on primary buildings.Chain link fencing and unfinished concrete blocks are prohibited. B. C-G zone within the Tigard Triangle. The following standards apply to development in the C-G zone within the Tigard Triangle. These standards apply in addition to all other applicable standards of this title and govern in the event of a conflict. See Chapter 18.660, Tigard Triangle Plan District, for additional transportation facility standards and Map 18.660.A for the location of the C-G zone within the Tigard Triangle. 1. Buildings must occupy a minimum of 50 percent of all street frontages along Highway 99W, Dartmouth Street, 72nd Avenue, 74th Avenue, and 68th Parkway. Buildings must be located at the corners of public street intersections where practicable. 2. All street-facing facades within the required setbacks must include windows on a minimum of 50 percent of the ground floor facade. Ground floor facade area is measured from 3 feet above grade to 9 feet above grade the entire length of each street-facing facade. 3. All street-facing facades that extend more than 50 feet must provide at least one of the following features: a. A change in surface or siding material,color,or pattern; b. A wall recession or projection that is a minimum of 6 feet in width and 2 feet in depth for the entire height of the facade; c. A projecting cornice or eave; or d. Other design features that reflect the building's structural system. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zone Development Standards Page 6 of 7 Proposed Code Amendment 4. All street-facing facades that extend more than 300 feet must provide a pedestrian entry into the building or a breezeway between buildings. 5. The area between the building facade and the street property line must be landscaped or include hardscape materials that increase the width of the adjacent public sidewalk through the use of pavers, bricks, or scored concrete. This area may count toward meeting the base zone landscape area standard. 6. Surface vehicle parking and loading areas must be located to the side or rear of primary buildings and not between primary buildings and the street property line. 18.320.070 Additional Standards for Adult Entertainment Uses A. Adult entertainment uses are prohibited within 500 feet of any: 1. Residential zone, 2. Public or private primary,elementary,junior,middle,or high school, 3. Day care or hospital, 4. Public library, 5. Public park, or 6. Religious institution. B. Hours of operation are limited to between 10 a.m. and 1 a.m. C. Windows less than 7 feet from the ground must be covered or screened such that sales areas and merchandise are not visible from public sidewalks. D. Doors and windows must be closed at all times except for normal ingress and egress. E. Any sound transmitted by any means that is audible outside the structure containing the use is prohibited. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Commercial Zone Development Standards Page 7 of 7 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.330 INDUSTRIAL ZONE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Sections: 18.330.010 Purpose and Definition 18.330.020 Applicability 18.330.030 Approval Process 18.330.040 Development Standards 18.330.010 Purpose and Definition A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards for nonresidential development in industrial zones that promote quality development and enhance the livability, walkability, and safety of the community. B. Definition. Nonresidential development includes mixed-use and single-use developments that contain a civic, institutional, commercial, industrial, or other nonresidential use. 18.330.020 Applicability A. The approval process and standards of this chapter apply to nonresidential development in the I-P, I-L, and I-H zones. B. The approval process, but not the standards, of this chapter applies to nonresidential development in the I-P zone within the Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility Plan District. Nonresidential development in the I-P zone is subject to the standards of Chapter 18.630, Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility Plan District. 18.330.030 Approval Process Applications for nonresidential development are processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060, using approval criteria in Section 18.780.050, except where a conditional use or planned development application is required or proposed. 18.330.040 Development Standards A. Base zone development standards are provided in Table 18.330.1. Table 18.330.1 Industrial Zone Development Standards for Nonresidential Development Standard I-P I-L I-H Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 50 ft 50 ft Minimum Setbacks -Front 35 ft 30 ft 30 ft -Street side 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft -Side [1] Oft Oft Oft -Rear[1] 0 ft 0 ft 0 ft CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Industrial Zone Development Standards Page 1 of 3 Proposed Code Amendment Maximum Height 45 ft 45 ft 45 ft Maximum Lot Coverage 75% [2] 85% 85% Minimum Landscape Area 25%[2] 15% 15% [1] Minimum side and rear setbacks are 0 feet,except the minimum side and rear setbacks are 50 feet where the site abuts a residential zone. [2] Maximum lot coverage may be increased to 80 percent and minimum landscape area may be reduced to 20 percent through a site development review or modification approval where the standards in Subsection 18.330.040.D are met. B. Landscaping and screening. All required landscaping, including landscaping used to meet screening or tree canopy standards, is subject to the general provisions of Chapter 18.420, Landscaping and Screening. 1. The minimum landscape area standard is provided in Table 18.330.1. Landscaping standards are provided in Section 18.420.040. Any landscape area planted to the L-2 standard may count toward meeting the minimum area standard. 2. Screening standards are provided in Section 18.420.050. Screening is required as follows: a. Service areas and wall- and roof-mounted utilities must be screened to the S-1 standard. Service areas and utilities are also subject to the standards in Subsection 18.330.040.C. b. Nonresidential development that abuts a nonindustrial zone must be screened to the S-3 standard along all property lines,except street property lines. c. Surface vehicle parking areas, loading areas, drive aisles, and stacking lanes for drive- through services within 20 feet of a street property line must be screened to the S-4 standard. Screening must be provided directly adjacent to the street property line, except where access is taken. 3. The minimum tree canopy standards for the site and any off-street vehicle parking areas are provided in Section 18.420.060. C. Utilities and service areas. 1. Private utility facilities, such as transformers or control valves, that serve a single development must be located below ground unless the functional properties of the facility require above- ground placement. If located above ground, all facilities I cubic foot or greater in volume, or with any one dimension greater than 2 feet,must meet the following standards where not wall-or roof-mounted or located inside a building: a. The facility may not be located within 20 feet of any street property line;and b. The facility must be dark in color and painted or wrapped with a non-reflective material. 2. Service areas, such as waste and recycling containers, outdoor storage, and mechanical equipment, may not be located within 20 feet of any street property line, except where located inside a building. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Industrial Zone Development Standards Page 2 of 3 Proposed Code Amendment D. Lot coverage increase. The following standards apply to all nonresidential development in the I-P zone that propose to increase maximum lot coverage to 80 percent and reduce minimum landscape area to 20 percent: 1. Street trees must be a minimum caliper of 3 inches at planting; 2. Landscape area between a parking lot and street property line must be a minimum depth of 10 feet; and 3. The applicant must provide documentation of an adequate on-going maintenance program to ensure appropriate irrigation and maintenance of the landscape area. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Industrial Zone Development Standards Page 3 of 3 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.420 LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING Sections: 18.420.010 Purpose 18.420.020 Applicability 18.420.030 General Provisions 18.420.040 Landscaping Standards 18.420.050 Screening Standards 18.420.060 Tree Canopy Standards 18.420.010 Purpose This chapter establishes minimum standards for landscaping, screening,and tree canopy. A. The purposes of landscaping standards are to: 1. Enhance the aesthetic and economic value of development and the community as a whole; 2. Unify new development with existing neighborhoods and establish a more pleasant community character;and 3. Reduce stormwater runoff by providing permeable surfaces. B. The purposes of screening standards are to: 1. Soften and screen large-scale structures, parking lots, and other unsightly features from view, especially from the street frontage to create a more pleasant pedestrian experience;and 2. Reduce visual impacts and provide privacy between residential and nonresidential uses. C. The purposes of tree canopy standards are to: 1. Maximize the aesthetic, environmental, and economic benefits that trees provide by preserving, managing, and enhancing existing trees and requiring planting of new trees;and 2. Implement the comprehensive plan goals and policies related to urban forestry. 18.420.020 Applicability A. Landscaping standards. Landscaping standards apply to new and existing development that must provide a minimum amount of landscape area as required by the applicable development standards chapter. B. Screening standards. Screening standards apply to new and existing development with uses or site improvements that must be screened from other uses or the street as required by the applicable development standards chapter. C. Tree canopy standards. Site and parking lot tree canopy standards apply to the following types of new and existing development, except that parking lot tree canopy standards do not apply to subdivisions CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 1 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment and partitions: 1. Subdivisions and partitions; 2. Apartments; 3. Nonresidential development,including mixed use developments; 4. Wireless communication facilities;and 5. Mobile home parks. 18.420.030 General Provisions A. All required trees must meet the city's Urban Forestry Manual(UFM)standards as follows: 1. Street trees must meet the street tree planting and maintenance standards in UFM Section 2 and street tree soil volume standards in UFM Section 12; 2. Parking lot trees must meet the parking lot tree canopy standards in UFM Section 13; and 3. All other trees must meet the tree canopy site plan requirements in UFM Section 10,Part 2. B. Trees proposed to be preserved must be protected in a manner that meets the tree protection standards in UFM Section 10,Part 3. C. Plants that are less than 18 inches in height at maturity, except lawn, are considered groundcover. Minimum container size at planting is either 4 inches or 1 gallon, and maximum plant spacing is either 1 foot or 2 feet on center,respectively. D. Plants that are more than 18 inches in height but less than six feet in height at maturity are considered small or medium shrubs. Minimum container size at planting is 1 gallon,and maximum plant spacing is 3 feet on center. E. Plants, excluding trees, that are more than six feet in height at maturity are considered large shrubs. Minimum container size at planting is 2 gallons,and maximum plant spacing is 7 feet on center. F. Plants listed as invasive or noxious on the Portland Plant List are prohibited. Trees listed on the UFM Nuisance Tree List are prohibited. G. All landscaping required by this chapter, including landscaping used to meet screening or tree canopy standards, must be maintained to applicable industry standards in perpetuity as provided in the most current version of the American National Standards Institute A300 Standards for Tree Care Operations. H. All trees required by this chapter are subject to the city's urban forestry requirements regarding planting,maintenance,and removal of trees as provided in Title 8 of the Tigard Municipal Code. 18.420.040 Landscaping Standards A. Landscaping standards are provided in Table 18.420.1. Landscaping standards must be met as CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 2 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment required by the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards. B. Landscaping or other areas used to meet the minimum landscape area standard must be provided on site and may be met by any combination of the following: 1. Landscaping, including parking lot landscaping,that meets the L-1 or L-2 landscaping standard; 2. Landscaping that meets the S-2, S-3, or S-4 screening standard as provided in Table 18.420.2 where required by the applicable development standards chapter; or 3. Other areas as specified by the applicable development standards chapter. C. Landscaping in excess of the minimum landscape area standard does not have to meet the L-1 or L-2 landscaping standard. Table 18.420.1 Landscaping Standards Standard Requirements Any combination of trees, plants, or lawn with or without other natural or L-1 artificial landscaping elements such as ponds, fountains, lighting, benches, bridges,rocks,paths,sculptures,trellises,or screens. • A minimum of 50% of the total required landscape area must include small, medium,or large shrubs; • A maximum of 50% of the total required landscape area may include any combination of mulch, groundcover, lawn, or hardscape, except that L-2 hardscape areas may not cover more than 25%of the total required landscape area;and • If tree canopy standards do not apply as provided in Subsection 18.420.020.C,then 1 tree must be provided for every 600 square feet of total required landscape area. 18.420.050 Screening Standards A. Screening standards are provided in Table 18.420.2 and illustrated in Figures 18.420.1 and 2. These standards must be met as required by the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards. B. The following items are exempt from the screening standards of this chapter: 1. Roof-mounted solar panels, 2. Above-ground vegetated stormwater facilities, 3. Utility poles,and 4. Accessory structures allowed by Paragraphs 18.210.030.A.2 and 18.310.030.A.2. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 3 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment C. The following additional requirements apply to the S-I screening standard: 1. Screening is required on all sides, except where access is taken. If access is provided by an opening without a gate or door,the opening must be oriented so that it is not visible from a public sidewalk; 2. Screening must be of an appropriate height and width so that the item to be screened is not visible from a public sidewalk. 3. Chain link fencing with slats and unfinished concrete blocks are prohibited where visible from a public sidewalk. Table 18.420.2 Screening Standards Standard Minimum Requirements Depth Service areas: • Sight-obscuring fence or wall Roof-mounted equipment or utilities: S-1 N/A • Parapet wall or sight-obscuring structure Wall-mounted equipment or utilities: • Architecturally incorporated into building or sight-obscuring fence, wall,or structure S-2 5 feet Groundcover and small or medium evergreen shrubs. • Sight-obscuring fence or wall a minimum of 6 feet in height; and S-3 5 feet • Approved trees from UFM Appendix 2— 5 spaced appropriately based on tree stature. • Sight-obscuring fence, wall, or berm that is a minimum of 3 feet in height or evergreen hedge that will be a minimum of 3 feet in height at time of maturity; • Approved trees from UFM Appendix 2— 5 spaced appropriately based S-4 8 feet on tree stature;and • If a hedge is provided, then groundcover evenly distributed along the entire length of the screen;or • If a hedge is not provided, then small and medium shrubs and groundcover evenly distributed along the entire length of the screen. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 4 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment Figure 18.420.1 S-3 Screening Standard • I r 1 Min. 6 ft. fence or wall Property line Min 5 ft. Figure 18.420.2 S-4 Screening Standard 11 Property Line Min. 3 ft. tall fence or hedge Street Sidewalk Min. 8 ft. deep 18.420.060 Tree Canopy Standards A. Site tree canopy standards, which are stated as a percentage of effective tree canopy cover for an entire site, are provided in UFM Section 10, Part 3, Subparts N and O. Parking lot tree canopy standards are provided below. B. An urban forestry plan is required to demonstrate compliance with site and parking lot tree canopy standards and must meet the requirements of UFM Sections 10 through 13. An urban forestry plan must: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 5 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment 1. Be coordinated and approved by a project landscape architect or project arborist,i.e. a person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor, except that land partitions may demonstrate compliance with effective tree canopy cover and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; 2. Demonstrate compliance with UFM tree preservation and removal site plan standards; 3. Demonstrate compliance with UFM tree canopy and supplemental report standards and provide the minimum effective tree canopy cover; 4. Demonstrate compliance with parking lot tree canopy standards, where applicable, by providing the minimum effective tree canopy cover of 30 percent for all parking areas, including parking spaces and drive aisles. Only the percentage of tree canopy directly above parking areas may count toward meeting this standard; and 5. Include street trees where right-of-way improvements are required by Chapter 18.910, Improvement Standards. a. The minimum number of required street trees is determined by dividing the length in feet of the site's street frontage by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction, the minimum number of street trees is the nearest whole number. More than the minimum number of street trees may be required along the site's frontage depending upon the stature of trees chosen and the specific spacing standards for the chosen trees. b. Street trees must be planted within the right-of-way wherever practicable. Street trees may be planted a maximum of 6 feet from the right-of-way when planting within the right-of-way is not practicable as determined by the city engineer. c. An existing tree may be used to meet the street tree standards provided that: i. The largest percentage of the tree trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses is either within the subject site or within the right-of-way immediately adjacent to the subject site; and ii. The tree would be permitted as a street tree in compliance with UFM street tree planting and soil volume standards if it were newly planted. C. Fee in lieu of planting. I. The applicant may choose to provide a fee in lieu when tree canopy requirement is not met in compliance with UFM Section 10,Part 4. 2. If it is not practicable to provide the minimum number of required street trees then the applicant must pay a fee to the city for tree planting and early establishment in an amount equivalent to the city's cost to plant and maintain a street tree for 3 years for each tree below the minimum required. 3. Tree canopy fees provided to the city will be deposited into the urban forestry fund and used as approved by council through a resolution. D. Urban forestry plan discretionary review. In lieu of providing payment of a tree canopy fee when less CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 6 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment than the standard effective tree canopy cover will be provided, an applicant may apply for a discretionary urban forestry plan review. The discretionary urban forestry plan review cannot be used to modify an already approved urban forestry plan,any tree preservation or tree planting requirements established as part of another land use approval,or any tree preservation or tree planting requirements required by another chapter in this title. 1. Approval process. Discretionary urban forestry plan reviews will be processed through a Type III procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.070, using approval criteria in Paragraph 18.420.060.D.2. When a discretionary urban forestry plan review is submitted for concurrent review with a land use application,that requires a Type III review,the approval authority will be the one designated for the land use application. If the discretionary urban forestry plan review is not concurrent with a land use application that requires a Type III review, then the approval authority will be the hearings officer. 2. Approval criteria. A discretionary urban forestry plan review application will be approved when the approval authority finds that the applicable approval criteria are met. The applicant must demonstrate that the proposed plan will equally or better replace the environmental functions and values that would otherwise be provided through payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of tree planting or preservation. Preference will be given to projects that will receive certifications by third parties for various combinations of proposed alternatives such as: a. Techniques that minimize hydrological impacts beyond regulatory requirements such as those detailed in Clean Water Services Low Impact Development Approaches (LIDA) Handbook, including,but not limited to, porous pavement, green roofs, infiltration planters/rain gardens, • flow through planters, LIDA swales, vegetated filter strips, vegetated swales, extended dry basins,and constructed water quality wetlands; b. Techniques that minimize reliance on fossil fuels and production of greenhouse gases beyond regulatory requirements through the use of energy efficient building technologies and on-site energy production technologies; and c. Techniques that preserve and enhance wildlife habitat beyond regulatory requirements, including, but not limited to, the use of native plant species in landscape design, removal of invasive plant species, and restoration of native habitat and preservation of habitat through the use of conservation easements or other protective instruments. 3. Decision. The discretionary urban forestry plan review decision will be incorporated into the decision of the land use application. The discretionary urban forestry plan approved in this section will supersede and replace any conflicting requirements in this chapter; however, all of the non-conflicting requirements in this chapter continue to apply. E. Urban forestry plan implementation. I. Implementation of the urban forestry plan must be inspected, documented, and reported by the project arborist or landscape architect in compliance with the inspection requirements in UFM Section 11, Part 1,wherever an urban forestry plan is in effect. In addition, no person may refuse entry or access to the director for the purpose. 2. The establishment of all trees shown to be planted in the tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan must be guaranteed and required in compliance with the tree establishment requirements in UFM Section 11,Part 2. CC Draf1(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 7 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment 3. Spatial and species-specific data must be collected in compliance with the urban forestry inventory requirements in UFM Section 11, Part 3 for each open grown tree and area of stand grown trees in the tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan. 4. An urban forestry plan will be in effect from the point of land use approval until the director determines all applicable urban forestry plan conditions of approval and code requirements have been met. F. Urban forestry plan modification. Except as exempted in Paragraph I8.420.060.F.1, an application to modify the urban forestry plan component of a land use approval is processed through a Type I procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.050, using the approval criteria in Paragraph 18.420.060.F.2. 1. Exemptions. The following are exempt from a Type I modification application to the urban forestry plan component of a land use approval: a. Removal of any tree shown as preserved in the tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided that: i. The project arborist or landscape architect provides a written report prior to removal attesting that either the condition rating or suitability of preservation rating, as provided in the city's Urban Forestry Manual,of the tree has changed to a rating of less than 2;and ii. A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to removal that reflect the proposed changes to the previously approved urban forestry plan. The revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report must demonstrate how the effective tree canopy cover requirements will be provided by tree planting,preservation,or payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of planting or preservation. b. Modification of the quantity, location, or species of trees to be planted in the tree canopy site plan and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided that: i. The modification results in the same or greater amount of future tree canopy through tree planting as the previously approved urban forestry plan for the lot or tract where the modification is proposed; ii. Payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of planting is not proposed as part of the modification;and iii. A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to planting that reflect the proposed changes to the previously approved urban forestry plan. c. Modification of the tree protection fencing location in the tree preservation and removal site plan, tree canopy site plan, and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided that: i. The project arborist or landscape architect provides a written report prior to modification of the tree protection fencing describing how the proposed modification will continue to CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 8 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment protect the viability of the trees shown as preserved in the previously approved urban forestry plan;and ii. A revised tree preservation and removal site plan,tree canopy site plan,and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to modification of the tree protection fencing that reflect the proposed modifications to the previously approved urban forestry plan. 2. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions the modification to the urban forestry plan component of a land use approval when all of the following are met: a. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that the previously approved urban forestry plan did not account for the circumstances that lead to the proposed modification; b. The project arborist or landscape architect has provided a report and statement certifying that there is no practicable alternative to the proposed modification;and c. The project arborist or landscape architect demonstrates compliance with Subsection 18.420.060.B through a modified urban forestry plan. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Landscaping and Screening Page 9 of 9 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.520 URBAN-FORESTRYSIGNIFICANT TREE GROVES Sections: 18.520.010 Purpose 18.520.020 Applicability 18.520.030 General Provisions 18.520.040 Approval Process 18.520.050 Approval Criteria 1 1 , . 18.520.0650 Flexible Standards . •• ' I • 1 11 • .. . .. . . • • !.! ! ,/ . . . • . • • - . • - . • I . .. • . . • • . . . •. .. • . . - Application 18.520.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to implement the city's urban forestry goals in the comprehensive plan goals and policies related to urban forestry and . - .••---•:-: -- • - - . - provide flexible standards to incentivize the preservation of significant tree groves. . A. Tree canopy cover requirements for new development regardless of the amount of existing trees on site; values arc provided; . - •- - . - - ' .• •- ..' - •-- . . • ' . - . . • arge stature trees and the preservation of existing trees and significant tree groves; development; and process.(Ord. 17 22 §2) -- 18.520.020 Applicability This chapter applies to all sites that contain more than 10,000 square feet of tree canopy within a mapped significant tree grove, as shown on the City of Tigard Significant Tree Grove Map, but not within any sensitive lands identified in Paragraphs 18.510.010.G.1 through 3. A. The requirements of this chapter apply to the following land use applications: 1. Conditional use(Type III); 2. Downtown design review(Type 11 and III); CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page I of 11 Proposed Code Amendment /1. Planned development(Type III); 5. Sensitive lands review(Type II and III); 6. Site development review(Type II); and 7. Subdivision(Type II). B. All Type I modifications to the urban forestry plan component of an approved land-use application as provided in Section 18.520.070. existing right of way or asement. (Ord. 17 22 §2) 18.520.030 General Provisions A. An applicant may request to use one or more of the flexible standards provided by this chapter when submitting a land use application for development. A separate adjustment application is not required. B. The standards in this chapter govern in the event of a conflict, except where the approval authority determines that application of a flexible standard would endanger public health,safety,or welfare. 18.520.040 Approval Process The request to use flexible standards will be processed through the review procedure associated with the specific land use application submitted. 18.520.050 Approval Criteria The approval authority must find that the request to use flexible standards is the least required to preserve the significant tree grove and an instrument or action acceptable to the city permanently preserves the significant tree grove, such as a conservation easement, open space tract, deed restriction,or dedication. l • . .. . . A. Urban forestry plan requirements. An urban forestry plan must: person that is both a certified arborist and tree risk assessor (the -project , except for minor land partitions that can demonstrate compliance with-effective tree canopy cover and soil volume requirements by planting street trees in open soil volumes only; 4. Meet the supplemental report standards in the Urban Forestry Manual. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 2 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment B. Tree canopy fee. If the supplemental report demonstrates that the applicable standard percent effective tree canopy cover will not be provided through any combination of tree planting or preservation for the overall development site (excluding streets) or that the 15 percent effective tree canopy cover will not be provided through any combination of tree planting or preservation for any individual lot or tract in the R 1, R 2, R 3.5, R 1.5 and R 7 zones(when the overall development site meets or exceeds the standard percent effective tree canopy cover), then the applicant must provide the city a tree canopy fee according to the methodology outlined in the tree canopy fee calculation C. Tree canopy fee use. Tree canopy fees provided to the city will he deposited into the urban forestry fund and used as approved by council through a resolution. (Ord.-17 22 §2) A. General provisions. In lieu el-providing payment of a tree canopy fee when less than the standard effective tree canopy cover will be provided, an applicant may apply for a discretionary urban already approved urban forestry-plan, any tree preservation er ming requirements established as part of another land use approval,or any tree preservation or tree planting requirements required by another chapter in this title. B. Application procedures. Discretionary urbane forestry plan-reviews are processed through a Type III procedure, as provided in Section 18.710,0-70, using approval criteria in Subsection 18.520.040.C. When a discretionary urban forestry plan review is submitted for concurrent review with a land use application, as provided in Section 18.520:020,that requires a Type III review, the approval authority will be the one designated for the-land use application, as provided-Chapter 18.710, Land Use Review application that requires a Type 111 review, then the approval authority is be the hearings officer. C. Approval criteria. A discretionary urban forestry plan review application will be approved when the approval authority finds that the applicable approval criteria arc met: 1. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed plan will equally or better replace the canopy fee in lieu of tree planting or preservation. Preference wi11 be given to projects that will detailed in Clean Water Services Low Impact Development Approaches (LIDA) Handbook, including, but not limited to, porous pavement, green roofs, infiltration planters/rain gardens, I. . - basins, and constructed water quality wetlands; regulatory requirements through the use of energy efficient building technologies and on site energy production technologies; and c. Techniques that preserve- and enhance wildlife habitat beyond regulatory requirements, CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 3 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment D. Decision. The discretionary urban forestry plan review decision will be incorporated into the decision of the land use application as provided-in-Section 1-8.520.928. The disc urban forestry plan 18.520.050060 Flexible Standards . •• ' . A. General provisions. To assist in the preservation or planting of trees and significant tree groves, the approval authority may apply one or more of the following flexible standards as part of the land use standards may be requested by the project arborist or landscape architect as part of the land use application process. The flexible standards are only applicable-to trees that are—eligible for-credit towards the effective tree canopy cover of the site. B. Approval criterion for use of flexible standards. The-approval authority may consider modifications for lot dimension standards or site related development standards as part of the urban forestry plan are not required to go through the adjustment process. In order to approve these modifications, the approval authority must find that the modification request is the least required to preserve or plant trees, that the modification will result in the preservation of er an addition-to tree-canopy on the lot, and that the modification will not impede adequate emergency access to the site. - . ._ • applicants in order to preserve or plant trees on a development site. 1. Lot sizes may be averaged to preserve existing trees in the development plan for any land partition under Chapter 18.820, Land Partitions. Lot size may be averaged to allow lots less than the minimum lot size of the applicable base zone provided the average-let area-is net less than that required by the applicable base zone. Lots must be less than 80 percent of the minimum lot size required by the applicable base zone. a. Front setback. Up to a 25 percent reduction of the front setback required by the applicable base zone. Setback of garages may not be reduced by this provision. e -- . .. - base zone. preservation, this flexibility must be the minimum required to achieve the desired effect. For planting, preference will be given to retaining the planter strip and separation between the curb and sidewalk wherever practicable. If a preserved tree is to be utilized as a street-tree, it must meet the criteria found in the landscaping and screening Section 1 8.320.040.F. preservation or planting of trees. For each 2 percent of effective canopy cover provided by preserved or planted trees incorporated into a development-plan for commercial, industrial, or CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 4 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment be granted. No more than a 20 percent reduction in the required amount of parking may be granted for any one development. 5. Adjustments to commercial, industrial, or civic use landscaping requirements may be granted for requirement may be granted. Ne mere than 20 percent of the minimum landscape requirement D. Flexible standards and incentives for the .reservation of si_nificant tree _roves. A significant tree are available when a-development site eentains at least 10,000 square-feet of tree canopy that is part 18.510.010.G.1 3. If any of these flexible standards and incentives are requested,the project arborist following: 4-A.Minimum residential density. The minimum density required for apartments, rowhouses, and single detached houses may be reduced to preserve a significant tree grove. The amount of reduction in minimum density is calculated as provided in Section 18.40.130. Reduction of minimum density is allowed provided that: la. At least 50 percent of the significant tree grove's canopy within the development site (and also not within the sensitive lands types in Paragraphs 18.510.010.6.1 3)is preserved; and 2b. The project arborist or landscape architect certifies the preservation is such that the connectivity and viability of the remaining significant tree grove is maximized while balancing the significant tree grove preservation considerations in the Urban Forestry Manual,;—and c. The significant tree grew is protected through-an instrument er actiea sttbjee i. A conservation easement; ii. An open space tract; iii. A deed restriction;or iv. Through dedication and acceptance by the city. B .Residential density transfer. Up to 100 percent density transfer is allowed for apartments and single detached houses from the preserved portion of a significant tree grove within a development site to the buildable area of the development site. la. Density may be transferred provided that: ai. The standards in Table 18.520.1 are met with the preservation of the corresponding percent of the significant tree grove's canopy within the development site (and also not_within the . •. . 1 1 CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 5 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment bi4. The project arborist or landscape architect certifies the preservation is such that the connectivity and viability of the remaining significant tree grove is maximized while balancing the significant tree grove preservation considerations in the Urban Forestry Manual;and cam.Maximum density for the net site area including the significant tree grove is not exceeded_; and (A)A conservation easement; (B)An open space tract; (C)A deed restriction;or (D)Through dedication and acceptance by the city. 2b. The proposed development may include the following: a . Zero lot line single detached houses for the portion of the development site that receives the density transfer. bfi. The following variations from the base zone development standards are allowed: L(A) Up to 25 percent reduction of minimum lot width; ii.(B) Up to 10-foot minimum front setback; iii.(C) Up to 33 percent reduction of side and rear setbacks; iv.(D) Up to 4-foot minimum garage setback; and v.(€-) Up to 20 percent increase in maximum height. cam.When the portion of the development site that receives the density transfer abuts a developed residential zone with the same or lower density, the average area of abutting perimeter lots must be at least be 75 percent of the minimum lot area of the applicable residential zone. Table 18.520.1 Density Transfer for Preservation of Significant Tree Groves Detached Sq. Ft. Attached Sq.Ft. Duplex Multifamily Percent Tree Grove Percent Tree Grove Percent Tree Percent Tree Canopy Preserved Canopy Grove Canopy Grove Canopy Residential /Min.Lot or Unit Preserved/Min.Lot Preserved/Min.Lot Preserved/Min. Zone Area or Unit Area or Unit Area Unit Area R-1 25-49%/22,500 sq ft (30,000 sq ft 50-520%/15,000 sq ft Not Allowed Not Allowed Not Allowed per unit) 75-100%/7,500 sq ft CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 6 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment R-2 25-49%/15,000 sq ft Allowed with 75%or (20,000 sq ft 50-520%/10,000 sq ft greater tree grove per unit) 75-100%/5,000 sq ft canopy Not Allowed Not Allowed preservation/5,000 sq ft R-3.5 25-49%/7,500 sq ft Allowed with 75%or Allowed with 75% (10,000 sq ft 50-520%/5,000 sq ft greater tree grove or greater tree grove Not Allowed per unit) 75-100%/2,500 sq ft canopy preservation canopy preservation 2,500 sq ft /5,000 sq ft R-4.5 25-49%/5,625 sq ft Allowed with 75%or Allowed with 75% (7,500 sq ft 50-520%/3,750 sq ft greater tree grove or greater tree grove per unit) 75-100%/1,875 sq ft canopy canopy preservation Not Allowed preservation/1,875 sq /3,750 sq ft ft R-7 25-49%/3,750 sq ft Allowed with 75%or Allowed with 75% (5,000 sq ft 50-520%/2,500 sq ft greater tree grove or greater tree grove Not Allowed per unit) 75-100%/1,250 sq ft canopy preservation canopy preservation /1,250 sq ft /2,500 sq ft R-12 Apartment and single detached house transfer allowed at the following densities: (3,050 sq ft 25-49%tree grove canopy preservation/2,288 sq ft/unit per unit) 50-520%tree grove canopy preservation/1,525 sq ft/unit 75-100%tree grove canopy preservation/763 sq ft/unit R-25 Apartment and single detached house transfer allowed at the following densities: (1,480 sq ft 25-49%tree grove canopy preservation/1,110 sq ft/unit per unit) 50-520%tree grove canopy preservation/5,200 sq ft/unit 75-100%tree grove canopy preservation/370 sq ft/unit R-40 Apartment and single detached housing allowed with no upper density limit. (None) C3. Commercial development. Adjustments to commercial development standards in Table 18.320.1 18.120.3 of up to 50 percent reduction in minimum setbacks and up to 20 feet additional building height are allowed provided that: la. At least 50 percent of a significant tree grove's canopy within a development site (and also not within the sensitive lands types in Paragraphs 18.510.010.G.1 3)is preserved; 2b. The project arborist or landscape architect certifies the preservation is such that the connectivity and viability of the remaining significant tree grove is maximized while balancing the significant tree grove preservation considerations in the Urban Forestry Manual; 3e. Applicable buffering-and screening standards in Section 18.420.05018.320.050 are met; 4d. Maximum floor area ratio is not exceeded in the MUE zone as provided in Table 18.320.1 ; and 5e. Any setback reduction is not adjacent to a residential zone_;—and i. A conservation easement; CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 7 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment ii. An open space tract; iii. A deed restriction; or iv. Through dedication and acceptance by the city. D4.Industrial development. Adjustments to development standards in industrial zones in Table 18.330.118.130.2 of up to 50 percent reduction in minimum setbacks and up to 20 feet additional building height are allowed provided that: la. At least 50 percent of a significant tree grove's canopy within a development site (and also not • " _ .. !.! e._. is preserved; 2b. The project arborist or landscape architect certifies the preservation is such that the connectivity and viability of the remaining significant tree grove is maximized while balancing the significant tree grove preservation considerations in the Urban Forestry Manual; 3e. Applicable buffering and screening standards in Section 18.420.05018.320.050 are met; and 4d. Any setback reduction is not adjacent to a residential zone_;and the approval authority that demonstrates it will be permanently preserved such as: i. A conservation asement; ii. An open space tract; iii. A deed restriction; or iv. Through dedication and acceptance by the city. E5-.Residential development. The requirement for 15 percent effective tree canopy cover per lot or tract in the R-1, R-2, R-3.5, R-4.5, and R-7 zones is not required provided that: la. At least 50 percent of a significant tree grove's canopy within a development site (and also not • _ .. !.! !._. is preserved; 2b. The project arborist or landscape architect certifies the preservation is such that the connectivity and viability of the remaining significant tree grove is maximized while balancing the significant tree grove preservation considerations in the Urban Forestry Manual; and 3e. The applicable standard percent effective tree canopy cover in Section 10, part 3, item N of the Urban Forestry Manual will be provided for the overall development site(excluding streets)_; the approval authority that demonstrates it will be permanently preserved such as: i. A conservation easement; CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 8 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment ii. An open space tract; iii. A deed restriction; or iv. Through dedication and acceptance by the city. Fe. The approval authority will use their discretion when considering adjustments Public improvements. Adjustments to Chapter 18.910, Improvement Standards, and Paragraph 18.420.060.B.5, which contains street tree standards, Section 18.320.040, Street Tree Standards, are allowed subject to city engineer approval provided: a. The that the adjustments will facilitate provide preservation and help to maximize the connectivity and viability of a significant tree grove while balancing the significant tree grove preservation considerations in the Urban Forestry Manual i. A conservation easement; ii. An open space tract; iii. A deed restriction; or iv. Through dedication and acceptance by the city. (Ord. 17 22 §2) A. General provisions. An urban forestry plan NI-i-1-1 be—in—effect from the point of land use approval until effect for ach resulting lot or tract separately until the director determines all applicable urban forestry plan conditions of approval and code requirements have been met. Prior and subsequent decisions regarding the planting, maintenance, removal, and replacement of trees when not associated with one of the land use applications in Subsection 18.520.020.A will be administered through Title 8, Urban Forestry of the Tigard Municipal Code. B. In pections. Implementation of the urban forestry plan must be inspected, documented, and reported by the project arborist or landscape architect whenever an urban forestry plan is in effect. In addition, no person may refuse entry or access to the director for the purpose of monitoring the urban forestry plan on any site with an effective urban forestry plan. The inspection requirements in the Urban supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan must be guaranteed and required according to the tree establishment requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual. D. Urban forest inventory, Spatial and species specific data must be collected according to the urban forestry inventory requirements in the Urban Forestry Manual for each open grown tree and area of forestry plan.(Ord. 17 22 §2) CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 9 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment 1 1 „ . . • . . • Application . . - - . . •. -.. • -• .. I , ..• . .• - . -. . • 1 I * • - component of an approved land use application: 1. Removal of any tree shown as preserved in the ee-canopy site-plan and super report of a that either the condition rating or suitability of preservation rating (per the supplemental than 2;and approval prior to removal that reflect the proposed changes to the previously approved urban how the effective tree canopy cover requirements will be provided by tree planting, preservation,or payment of a tree canopy fee in lieu of planting or preservation. and c. A revised tree canopy site plan and supplemental report are submitted for review and approval prior to planting that reflect the proposed changes to-the previously approved urban forestry plan. tree canopy site plan, and supplemental report of a previously approved urban forestry plan provided: a. The project arborist or landscape architect provides a written-report prier to modification of the viability of the trees shown as preserved in the previensly approved urban forestry plan; and CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 10 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment fencing that reflect the proposed modifications to the previously approved urban forestry plan. 5. Maintenance of any trees in compliance with tree care industry standards. C. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve er approve with-conditions the modification to met: compliance with Section 18.520.030.(Ord. 17 22 §2) ■ CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Significant Tree Groves Page 11 of 11 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.715 ADJUSTMENTS Sections: 18.715.010 Purpose 18.715.020 Applicability 18.715.030 General Provisions 18.715.040 Approval Process 18.715.050 Approval Criteria 18.715.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide an appropriate and efficient review process for granting relief from the specific requirements of this title to allow reasonable development or prevent undue hardship. Adjustments are intended to provide limited flexibility for development to address the requirements of this title through alternative or innovative means. 18.715.020 Applicability A. Applicability. This chapter applies to all proposals to adjust an existing requirement of this title. All requirements, such as development or design standards, may be adjusted except as provided in Subsection 18.715.020.B or where specifically provided for elsewhere in this title, such as in Chapter 18.660,Tigard Triangle Plan District. B. Prohibited adjustments.Adjustments are prohibited in the following situations: 1. To allow a primary or accessory use that is prohibited; 2. To change or eliminate a regulation that contains an express prohibition; 3. To change or eliminate a threshold for a review; 4. To change or eliminate any part of an approval process, including approval periods; 5. To change a definition,a method of measurement,or the description of a use category; 6. To change or eliminate any regulations in Chapter 18.510, Sensitive Lands; or 7. To change the required density for a housing type in a residential zone. 18.715.030 General Provisions A. An applicant may seek relief from the specific requirements of this title through one of two types of adjustments. An applicant may either demonstrate that a proposed adjustment will result in development that is in substantial compliance with this title or that a hardship exists and a proposed adjustment is necessary to preclude all reasonable economic use of the property. B. Multiple adjustment proposals will be processed concurrently. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Adjustments Page 1 of 2 Proposed Code Amendment 18.715.040 Approval Process An application for an adjustment is processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060,using approval criteria in Section 18.715.050. 18.715.050 Approval Criteria The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an adjustment application when all of the criteria in either Subsection 18.715.050.A or B are met. A. Criteria for demonstrating substantial compliance. 1. The proposed adjustment results in development that is generally consistent with the purpose of the development standard to be adjusted; 2. If more than one adjustment is proposed, the cumulative effect of the adjustments results in development that is generally consistent with the existing development pattern of the surrounding area and the overall purpose of the base zone; 3. The proposed adjustment utilizes innovative design, results in sustainable development, or addresses a site constraint or unusual situation; 4. The proposed adjustment does not have a greater impact on city-designated sensitive lands than would otherwise occur if the adjustment was not approved;and 5. Any impacts from the proposed adjustment are mitigated to the extent practicable. B. Criteria for demonstrating hardship. 1. Application of the development standard proposed for adjustment would preclude all reasonable economic use of the property; 2. The need for the proposed adjustment is the result of conditions or circumstances outside the control of the applicant or property owner; 3. The proposed adjustment results in development that equally or better meets the purpose of the development standard to be modified;and 4. Any impacts from the proposed adjustment are mitigated to the extent practicable. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Adjustments Page 2 of 2 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.740 CONDITIONAL USES Sections: 18.740.010 Purpose 18.740.020 Applicability 18.740.030 General Provisions 18.740.040 Approval Process 18.740.050 Approval Criteria 18.740.060 Conditions of Approval 18.740.070 Pre-Existing Conditional Uses 18.740.080 Discontinuation of Existing Conditional Uses 18.740.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide an appropriate review process for evaluating and establishing conditional uses to ensure that they are appropriately located within the community,reasonably compatible with surrounding uses,and advancing the community's vision to become a walkable,healthy,and inclusive city. Conditional uses are not allowed by right.Although they may serve important public and private interests, conditional uses are subject to conditional use review because their size,operation,or characteristics require case-by-case evaluation to identify and mitigate impacts to surrounding properties,public facilities,or the environment. A conditional use approval does not constitute a zone change and is subject to any modifications,conditions, or restrictions deemed appropriate by the approval authority. 18.740.020 Applicability This chapter applies to all new or existing uses identified in this title as conditional uses. 18.740.030 General Provisions A. Conditional use approval is required to establish a new conditional use or to substantially redevelop an existing conditional use. Substantial redevelopment is defined as a proposal that involves substantial changes to uses,structures,site improvements,operating characteristics,or original findings of fact. B. Conditional use approvals do not expire once utilized, except through discontinuation as described in Section 18.740.080. C. Conditional use approvals or existing conditional uses may be modified as allowed by Chapter 18.765, Modifications. 18.740.040 Approval Process A conditional use application is processed through a Type III-HO procedure as provided in Section 18.710.070,using approval criteria in Subsection 18.740.050. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Conditional Uses Page 1 of 3 Proposed Code Amendment 18.740.050 Approval Criteria The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions a conditional use application when all of the following criteria are met: A. The characteristics of the site are suitable for the proposed use considering size, shape, location, topography,and natural features. B. The operating and physical characteristics of the proposed use are reasonably compatible with surrounding properties,public facilities,or sensitive lands. C. Any impacts from the proposed use are mitigated to the extent practicable. D. The proposed use is located and designed to support pedestrian access, safety, and comfort on and adjacent to the site where practicable. E. The proposed use complies with all applicable development standards and requirements of this title, except where an adjustment has been approved. F. Adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposed use at the time of occupancy. 18.740.060 Conditions of Approval The approval authority may impose conditions of approval on the proposed use that are suitable and necessary to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties, protect the public from adverse impacts, or advance the community's vision to become a walkable,healthy,and inclusive city.Conditions may include but are not limited to the following: A. Limiting the hours,days, place,and manner of operation. B. Requiring design features that minimize adverse operational impacts such as those caused by noise, vibration,air pollution,glare,odor,and dust. C. Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees,vegetation,land forms, and habitat areas. D. Requiring a front,rear,or side setback larger than that required by the base zone or plan district. E. Limiting building height, size,or location or limiting lot coverage. F. Limiting or otherwise designating the size,number,or location of vehicle access points. G. Requiring pedestrian access within the development and between the development and the surrounding community. H. Requiring additional landscaping or screening of structures,off-street parking, or service areas. I. Limiting or otherwise designating the location, intensity,and shielding of outdoor lighting. J. Requiring and designating the size,height,location,and materials of fences. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Conditional Uses Page 2 of 3 Proposed Code Amendment 18.740.070 Pre-Existing Conditional Uses A. A pre-existing conditional use is any established use currently identified in this title as a conditional use where the use was not initially subject to city regulations when established,but became subject to city regulations through annexation or incorporation. A pre-existing conditional use is the same as an approved conditional use for purposes of this chapter. B. A pre-existing conditional use is not a nonconforming use and is therefore not subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.50, Nonconforming Circumstances. However, any nonconforming development associated with a pre-existing conditional use is subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.50, Nonconforming Circumstances. 18.740.080 Discontinuation of Existing Conditional Uses A conditional use automatically loses its conditional use status when either of the following occurs: A. The property owner replaces the conditional use with a use allowed by right or obtains approval to establish a different conditional use; or B. The conditional use is discontinued for more than one year. Calculation of the one-year period begins on the date of whichever following event occurs first: I. The conditional use physically vacates the location where it was approved to operate; 2. The conditional use ceases to provide the service or activity that was the subject of the conditional use approval; 3. The lease or contract allowing the conditional use to operate at the approved location is terminated; or 4. A final reading of the water or power meter serving the conditional use is made by the applicable utility provider. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Conditional Uses Page 3 of 3 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.745 EXTENSIONS Sections: 18.745.010 Purpose 18.745.020 Applicability 18.745.030 General Provisions 18.745.040 Approval Process 18.745.050 Approval Criteria 18.745.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide an appropriate and efficient review process for extending the time period during which land use approvals are valid and may be utilized. 18.745.020 Applicability A. This chapter applies to all approved land use applications that are subject to expiration as described in Subsection 18.20.040.G but have not yet expired. B. This chapter does not apply to approved land use applications that are expired or where an extension is prohibited or otherwise specified in another chapter of this title. 18.745.030 General Provisions A. An approved land use application is eligible for one extension. B. A complete extension application must be submitted prior to the expiration date of the original approval, but no earlier than 6 months in advance of the expiration date. C. An extension application may not include a proposal to modify the original application or any conditions of approval. D. If an extension is approved, the expiration date for the original approval is extended an additional 2 years from the effective date of the original approval. E. If the original approval included multiple applications, a single extension application may include all applications associated with the original approval. 18.745.040 Approval Process A. If the original approval was processed through a Type I procedure,an extension application is processed through a Type I procedure as provided in Section 18.710.050, using approval criteria in Section 18.745.050. B. If the original approval was processed through a Type II or Type III procedure,an extension application is processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060, using approval criteria in Section 18.745.050. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Extensions Page 1 of 2 Proposed Code Amendment 18.745.050 Approval Criteria The approval authority will approve an extension application when all of the following criteria are met: A. A good faith effort was made to utilize the approval within the specified time period and the need for the extension is the result of conditions or circumstances outside the control of the applicant or property owner; and B. If the original application included a transportation impact study or a sensitive lands report,an updated report was provided with the extension application that showed no significant changes on or near the development site. A letter from a recognized professional satisfies this criterion if it states that conditions have not changed since the approval of the original application and no new analysis is warranted. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Extensions Page 2 of 2 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.765 MODIFICATIONS Sections: 18.765.010 Purpose 18.765.020 Applicability 18.765.030 Review Type Determination 18.765.040 General Provisions 18.765.050 Allowed Modifications 18.765.060 Minor Modifications 18.765.070 Major Modifications 18.765.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide an appropriate and efficient review process for evaluating modifications to existing developments or land use approvals. 18.765.020 Applicability A. This chapter applies to all proposals to modify an existing or proposed use, structure, site improvement, or condition of approval—for existing developments or land use approvals—when initially approved through one of the land use applications listed below: 1. Conditional uses, 2. Planned developments, 3. Site development reviews,or 4. Subdivisions and land partitions. • B. This chapter also applies to all proposals to modify an existing development that was not subject to city approval when developed but would be subject to city approval, through one of the land use applications listed in Paragraph 18.765.020.A.1 through 4 above, if proposed for development under current city regulations. C. This chapter does not apply to proposals to modify a condition of approval where the modification is subject to the provisions of Paragraph 18.20.040.E.4. D. This chapter does not apply to proposals to modify an urban forestry plan where the modification is subject to the provisions of Subsection 18.420.060.F. 18.765.030 Review Type Determination A. The director will determine the most appropriate review type for the proposed modification. In addition to Subsection 18.710.040.D,the director's determination will consider whether the proposed modification involves any of the following: 1. Application of clear and objective standards or approval criteria; CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Modifications Page 1 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment 2. Application of discretionary standards or approval criteria; 3. Exercise of professional judgment about technical issues;or 4. Exercise of limited discretion. B. Allowed modifications involve the application of clear and objective standards that do not require the exercise of professional judgment about technical issues. These modifications do not require land use review. C. Minor modifications involve the exercise of professional judgment about technical issues as they relate to the application of clear and objective or discretionary standards or approval criteria. These modifications require Type I land use review. D. Major modifications involve the exercise of limited discretion as they relate to the application of clear and objective or discretionary standards or approval criteria. These modifications require Type II land use review. 18.765.040 General Provisions A. A minor or major modification land use review is limited in scope to an evaluation of the modification's compliance with applicable standards and the degree of impact, if any, on surrounding properties,sensitive lands,or public facilities. B. A proposed modification involving a nonconforming use or development is subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.50,Nonconforming Circumstances, in addition to the provisions of this chapter. C. A proposed modification that constitutes substantial redevelopment, as determined by the director, requires submittal of a new land use application rather than a modification application. Substantial redevelopment is defined as a modification that involves substantial changes to uses, structures, site improvements,operating characteristics,or original findings of fact. 18.765.050 Allowed Modifications A. Definition.An allowed modification has the following characteristics: 1. It has negligible impacts on surrounding properties, sensitive lands,or public facilities; 2. It does not cause the development to go out of conformance with any applicable standard or further out of conformance if already nonconforming, except where an adjustment has been approved;and 3. It does not alter or contravene any condition of approval. B. Examples.Examples of allowed modifications include,but are not limited to,the following: 1. Increase in open space or landscaping. 2. Interior building modification or change of use that does not require the application of a higher parking quantity requirement. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Modifications Page 2 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment 3. Exterior building facade modification that does not require the application of any design standard. 4. Installation of mechanical equipment that does not involve the removal of any parking spaces or landscaping and where screening standards are met as provided in the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards. 18.765.060 Minor Modifications A. Definition.A minor modification has the following characteristics: 1. It has minimal impacts on surrounding properties,sensitive lands,or public facilities;and 2. It does not cause the development to go out of conformance with any applicable standard or further out of conformance if already nonconforming, except where an adjustment has been approved. B. Examples.Examples of minor modifications include,but are not limited to,the following: 1. Interior building modification or change of use that requires the application of a higher parking quantity requirement. 2. Exterior building facade modification that requires the application of a design standard. 3. Change of use to a restricted use. 4. Change to the site that results in a change in the number or configuration of parking spaces. 5. Minor decrease in open space or landscaping. C. Approval process. A minor modification application is processed through a Type I procedure as provided in Section 18.710.050,using approval criteria in Subsection 18.765.060.D. D. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions a minor modification application when all of the following criteria are met: 1. The proposed modification qualifies as a minor modification as defined in Subsection 18.765.060.A; 2. If the proposal involves the modification of a condition of approval, at least one of the following criteria is met: a. The condition cannot be implemented for reasons outside the control of the applicant or property owner; b. The condition is no longer needed or warranted because circumstances have changed;or c. A new or modified condition better accomplishes the purpose of the original condition. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Modifications Page 3 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment 18.765.070 Major Modifications A. Definition.A major modification has the following characteristics: 1. It has more than minimal impacts on surrounding properties, sensitive lands, or public facilities but does not qualify as substantial redevelopment as defined in Subsection I8.765.040.C; and 2. It does not cause the development to go out of conformance with any applicable standard or further out of conformance if already nonconforming, except where an adjustment has been approved. B. Examples.Examples of major modifications include,but are not limited to,the following: 1. Addition of an accessory use associated with a conditional use. 2. An increase in residential density other than the addition of an accessory dwelling unit. 3. Major decrease in open space or landscaping. C. Approval process. A major modification application is processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.050,using approval criteria in Subsection 18.765.070.D. D. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions a major modification application when all of the following are met: 1. The proposed modification qualifies as a major modification as defined in Subsection 18.765.070.A; 2. The operating and physical characteristics of the modified development are reasonably compatible with surrounding properties, sensitive lands,or public facilities; 3. Any impacts from the proposed modification are mitigated to the extent practicable; 4. If the proposed modification involves development that has nonconforming structures or site improvements and exceeds the project valuation threshold listed in the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule, the development will be improved as required by Subsection 18.765.070.E; and 5. If the proposal involves the modification of a condition of approval, at least one of the following criteria is met: a. The condition cannot be implemented for reasons outside the control of the applicant or property owner; b. The condition is no longer needed or warranted because circumstances have changed; or c. A new or modified condition better accomplishes the purpose of the original condition. E. Modifications to nonconforming development. The purpose of these provisions is to require existing development with nonconforming structures or site improvements to come into conformance with city standards gradually as structures or site improvements are modified over time. These provisions CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Modifications Page 4 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment also give applicants the choice of making improvements that support pedestrians—in lieu of making improvements to come into conformance—in order to advance Tigard's vision to become a walkable, healthy,and inclusive city. 1. Development with nonconforming structures or site improvements is required to come closer or fully into conformance with all applicable development standards when the total project valuation of all proposed modifications equals or exceeds the amount listed in the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule.The method for calculating total project valuation is as follows: a. The total project valuation is based on the entire project and not individual development permits;and b. The following modifications do not count toward the total project valuation: i. Modifications to comply with fire and life safety requirements. ii. Modifications to comply with applicable federal and state accessibility requirements. iii. Modifications to improve seismic resiliency in conformance with state building codes. iv. Modifications to improve or enlarge on-site stormwater management facilities in conformance with Clean Water Services and City of Tigard standards. v. Modifications related to the installation of solar panels. vi. Modifications to remove or remediate hazardous substances. 2. The applicant must demonstrate that a minimum of 10 percent of the total project valuation is being used to bring the development closer into conformance with all applicable development standards,except where: a. The expenditure of a lesser amount brings the development fully into conformance with all applicable development standards; b. No further improvements are practicable as determined by the director;or c. The cost to complete all required improvements exceeds 10 percent of the total project valuation, in which case the applicant must demonstrate that a minimum of 10 percent of the total project valuation is being used to bring the development closer into conformance with one or more development standards of the applicant's choosing. 3. The applicant must complete the improvements required by Paragraph 18.765.070.E.2 prior to final inspection or certificate of occupancy. 4. The applicant may choose to satisfy the requirements of Paragraph 18.765.070.E.2 by providing improvements that support pedestrians in lieu of bringing the development closer into conformance with all applicable development standards. a. Pedestrian improvements may be to existing structures, site improvements, or public rights- of-way; CC Draft(12/11/2018)–Modifications Page 5 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment b. Pedestrian improvements must provide a new site or building element or enhance an existing site or building element. Improvements involving maintenance or repair of existing site improvements or structures do not satisfy this provision; and c. Pedestrian improvements must be located in the public right-of-way or within 20 feet of a street property line. Improvements must not contravene any applicable standard and must fall into one of the following categories: i. Pedestrian access and safety. Examples of access and safety improvements include: (1) building entrances that face a public sidewalk and provide direct pedestrian access to a public sidewalk; (2) paths that connect building entrances to public sidewalks using the shortest practicable route; (3) directional signage and lighting along paths that connect building entrances to public sidewalks; (4) wider sidewalks to further separate pedestrians from vehicle travel lanes; and (5) landscape strips or street trees to buffer pedestrians from vehicle travel lanes. ii. Pedestrian comfort. Examples of comfort improvements include: (1) awnings over building entrances or windows for weather protection; (2) furnishings such as decorative trash cans or benches; and (3) installation of approved trees in the right-of-way or along the street property line to further separate pedestrians from parking areas or vehicle travel lanes and to provide weather protection. iii. Visual interest. Examples of improvements that provide visual interest include: (1) more or larger building windows that face a public sidewalk and provide building transparency for pedestrians; (2)pedestrian-scale architectural features such as window trim, awnings, wall trellises, or any permanent feature that reduces the visual impact of blank, flat, or long building walls; and (3) screening of parking or service areas with vegetation or decorative fencing or walls. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Modifications Page 6 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.770 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS Sections: 18.770.010 Purpose 18.770.020 Applicability 18.770.030 General Provisions 18.770.040 Required Analysis 18.770.050 Approval Process 18.770.060 Approval Criteria 18.770.070 Conditions of Approval 18.770.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide an appropriate review process for evaluating and establishing planned developments. Planned developments are typically large-scale developments or smaller developments on constrained sites that desire or need more flexibility than available through the adjustment process. The benefits of flexibility to a planned development may take many forms, including but not limited to the transfer of density across internal zone boundaries, greater diversity of housing types and uses,increased building height,or increased density. The planned development review process provides an opportunity for innovative, creative, and well- designed developments that may be more intense than otherwise allowed by this title in exchange for developments that are thoughtfully integrated into the surrounding community and include features that benefit the public above and beyond what is generally required by this title. The benefits to the public from a planned development may take many forms, including but not limited to enhanced walkability or accessibility, increased housing options, increased open space, protection of significant tree groves, enhanced sensitive lands protection or restoration, enhanced outdoor recreational opportunities,enhanced public spaces or furnishings, pedestrian-scale architectural features, affordable housing, or sustainable features. A planned development approval does not constitute a zone change and is subject to any modifications, conditions,or restrictions deemed appropriate by the approval authority. 18.770.020 Applicability This chapter applies to all proposed or existing planned developments. 18.770.030 General Provisions A. Planned development review is a voluntary process. B. Planned development approval is required to establish a new planned development or to substantially redevelop an existing planned development. Substantial redevelopment is defined as a proposal that involves substantial changes to uses, structures, site improvements, operating characteristics, or original findings of fact. C. An applicant may choose to submit a single consolidated planned development application or two consecutive planned development applications consisting of a concept plan application and a detailed plan application. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Planned Developments Page 1 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment 18.770.040 Required Analysis In addition to the submittal requirements in Paragraph 18.710.030.C.3, a consolidated or concept plan application must include the information listed below. The graphic illustrations must adequately demonstrate the required information. Examples of graphic illustrations include,but are not limited to,the following: maps, site plans, massing studies, elevation drawings, photo simulations, and digitally created 3-dimensional drawings. Manually created artistic renderings are usually not adequate on their own to illustrate the required information. A. Proposal summary. A written description and graphic illustration of the planned development proposal with enough specificity to convey the overall land use pattern, development scale, circulation network, and housing types and densities. The description must include a statement about the planning objectives to be achieved by the proposal and why the applicant believes the public benefits from the proposal are sufficient to warrant the type and amount of flexibility requested. B. Flexibility request. A detailed written description of all proposed adjustments to development standards and the reason for each proposed adjustment. The description must be accompanied by professional studies or analyses as needed to adequately support the reason for each proposed adjustment. The description must also include a table that lists each applicable development standard and the associated proposed standard in a side-by-side column format. C. Public benefits proposal. A detailed written description of all proposed public benefits. The description must be accompanied by drawings,plans,or details as needed to convey the location,size,and overall nature of each public benefit. Public benefits include features, amenities, or protections that in some way exceed the minimum standards of this title to the benefit of the general public or planned development users. D. Environmental analysis. A written description and graphic illustration of the relationship between the planned development proposal and any existing natural features on the site. The description and illustration must explain how the proposal addresses any existing sensitive lands, significant tree groves, land forms, or other natural features on the site. E. Compatibility analysis. A written description and graphic illustration of the relationship between the planned development proposal and the surrounding community. The description and illustration must explain how the proposal integrates with and responds to existing development patterns through a discussion about the arrangement, location, and massing of all proposed buildings, uses, and site improvements, including streets and paths. F. Land use analysis. A detailed written description that demonstrates the need for or benefit of any civic or commercial uses proposed in a residential zone or civic or residential uses proposed in a commercial zone where not allowed in the underlying base zone. The description must be accompanied by professional CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Planned Developments Page 3 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment D. The proposed development must comply with all applicable development standards and requirements of this title, except as specifically adjusted through the planned development approval process. Planned development review satisfies the requirements for site development or conditional use review and a separate site development,conditional use,or adjustment application is not required. E. If sensitive lands review is required,a sensitive lands application must be submitted concurrently with a consolidated or detailed plan application. A sensitive lands application may not be submitted concurrently with a concept plan application. F. If land division is proposed, a subdivision or land partition application must be submitted concurrently with a consolidated or detailed plan application. A subdivision or land partition application may not be submitted concurrently with a concept plan application. G. If the proposed development has more than one base zone designation, density and floor area standards are calculated for each base zone as provided by this title. H. Density and floor area allocations and increases allowed with planned development approval are as follows: 1. Minimum density and floor area may be allocated anywhere on the site regardless of the underlying base zone designation. 2. Maximum density and floor area may be increased subject to the limitation of Subparagraph l 8.770.060.B.10.b. I. Uses and housing types allowed with planned development approval are based on the underlying zoning as follows: 1. Residential zones.All housing types and civic uses are allowed. Commercial uses not allowed by the underlying base zone may be allowed where appropriately located,designed,and scaled. 2. Commercial zones. Apartments and civic uses not allowed by the underlying base zone may be allowed where appropriately located,designed,and scaled. 3. Industrial zones. No additional uses are allowed beyond what is allowed in the applicable base zone. J. The following development standards may not be adjusted with planned development approval: 1. Minimum density or minimum floor area ratio. 2. Maximum parking ratio. 3. Any development standard that contains an express prohibition. K. Planned development approvals may not adjust the items listed in Paragraph 18.715.020.B.2 -6. L. Planned development approvals may be modified as allowed by Chapter 18.765, Modifications. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Planned Developments Page 2 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment studies or analyses as needed to adequately support the proposed land uses. The description must also include a table that lists each proposed land use category by location. G. Impact identification. A detailed written description of the impacts of the planned development proposal on adjacent properties or the surrounding community that would not occur if the site developed without a planned development approval. If impacts exist, the description must include a detailed mitigation proposal where practicable. 18.770.050 Approval Process A. A consolidated planned development application is processed through a Type III-PC procedure as provided in Section 18.710.070,using approval criteria in Subsection 18.770.060.A. B. A consecutive planned development submittal involves two separate applications. 1. A concept plan application is processed through a Type III-PC procedure as provided in Section 18.710.070, using approval criteria in Subsection 18.770.060.B.A concept plan approval must be effective prior to the submittal of a detailed plan application. 2. A detailed plan application is processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060, using approval criteria in Subsection 18.770.060.C, unless the concept plan approval authority specifies a different review procedure as a condition of concept plan approval. 18.770.060 Approval Criteria A. Consolidated planned development. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions a consolidated planned development application when all of the following criteria are met: 1. All concept plan approval criteria listed in Subsection I8.770.060.B are met. 2. Adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposed development at the time of occupancy. B. Concept plan. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions a concept plan application when all of the following criteria are met: 1. The information and analysis required by Section 18.770.040 is sufficiently detailed and of high enough quality to effectively evaluate the proposed development. 2. The characteristics of the site are suitable for the proposed development considering size, shape, location,topography,and natural features. 3. The proposed development is reasonably compatible with and thoughtfully integrated into the surrounding community. 4. The proposed development includes features, amenities, or protections that exceed the minimum standards of this title to the benefit of the general public or planned development users, and the proposed benefits are sufficient to warrant the type and amount of development flexibility requested. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Planned Developments Page 4 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment 5. The streets, buildings, and site improvements of the proposed development are designed and located to preserve existing, healthy, and noninvasive trees and tree groves to the greatest extent possible. 6. The streets, buildings, and site improvements of the proposed development are designed and located to preserve all natural drainages to the greatest extent possible,except where the applicant has demonstrated that modifying a natural drainage results in the same or better environmental function as the existing drainage. 7. Any impacts from the proposed development are mitigated to the extent practicable. 8. The city engineer has determined that any adjustments to street or access standards do not result in unsafe conditions. 9. The proposed development complies with all applicable development standards and requirements of this title,except as adjusted through this approval process. 10. The proposed development is within the following limits: a. Maximum building height may be increased by up to 50 percent. b. Maximum density or floor area may be increased by up to 30 percent. c. Minimum landscape area may be reduced down to 10 percent. C. Detailed plan. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions a detailed plan application when all of the following criteria are met: 1. The proposed detailed plan is substantially consistent with the approved concept plan. 2. The proposed detailed plan complies with all applicable development standards and requirements of this title,except as adjusted or conditioned through the concept plan approval process. 3. Adequate public facilities are available to serve the proposed development at the time of occupancy. 18.770.070 Conditions of Approval The approval authority may impose conditions of approval that are suitable and necessary to ensure that the consolidated or concept plan proposal is consistent with the purpose of this chapter as embodied by the approval criteria listed in Subsections 18.770.060.A and B.Conditions may include but are not limited to the following: A. Requiring design features that minimize environmental impacts. B. Limiting building height, size, or location. C. Requiring higher quality materials or building design. D. Requiring open space,public spaces,or community amenities. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Planned Developments Page 5 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment E. Requiring separation or screening of uses,buildings,off-street parking areas,or service areas from public spaces or adjacent uses. F. Requiring separation or screening of private residential spaces from public spaces or adjacent uses. G. Requiring pedestrian access within the development and between the development and the surrounding community. H. Requiring pedestrian-oriented design features such as building awnings,ground floor windows and entries,or street-facing facades. 1. Limiting or otherwise designating the size,number,or location of vehicle access points. J. Limiting or otherwise designating the location, intensity,and shielding of outdoor lighting. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Planned Developments Page 6 of 6 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.780 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS Sections: 18.780.010 Purpose 18.780.020 Applicability 18.780.030 General Provisions 18.780.040 Approval Process 18.780.050 Approval Criteria 18.780.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide an appropriate and efficient review process for ensuring compliance with the standards and provisions of this title that effectively coordinates the city's land use and development review functions. 18.780.020 Applicability A. This chapter applies to the following types of development, except as provided in Subsections 18.780.020.B and C below: 1. Apartments. 2. Cottage clusters. 3. Courtyard units. 4. Mobile home parks. 5. Quads. 6. Rowhouses. 7. Wireless communication facilities. 8. Nonresidential developments, including mixed-use developments. B. This chapter does not apply to development that is specifically exempted from site development review by another chapter of this title. C. This chapter does not apply to development that requires or proposes review through the conditional use or planned development review process. 18.780.030 General Provisions A. Site development approval is required to develop a vacant site or to substantially redevelop an existing developed site. Substantial redevelopment is defined as a proposal that involves substantial changes to uses, structures, site improvements, operating characteristics, or original findings of fact. B. Site development approvals may be modified as allowed by Chapter 18.765, Modifications. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Site Development Reviews Page 1 of 2 Proposed Code Amendment 18.780.040 Approval Process A. Residential developments. 1. A site development review application is processed through a Type I procedure as provided in Section 18.710.050,using approval criteria in Subsection 18.780.050,when a transportation impact study is not required by Chapter 18.910,Improvement Standards. 2. A site development review application is processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060,using approval criteria in Subsection 18.780.050,when a transportation impact study is required by Chapter 18.910,Improvement Standards. B. Wireless communication facilities and nonresidential developments. A site development review application is processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060,using approval criteria in Subsection 18.780.050. 18.780.050 Approval Criteria The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions a site development review application when all of the criteria listed below are met. These criteria broadly reference all chapters in this title that contain standards that may apply to the development.The city will identify which standards are applicable through the land use review process and evaluate the proposed development accordingly. A. The proposed development complies with all applicable base zone standards. B. The proposed development complies with all applicable residential and nonresidential development standards. C. The proposed development complies with all applicable supplemental development standards, including but not limited to off-street parking and landscaping standards. D. The proposed development complies with all applicable special designation standards, including but not limited to sensitive lands protection. E. The proposed development complies with all applicable plan district standards and requirements. F. The proposed development complies with all applicable street and utility standards and requirements. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Site Development Reviews Page 2 of 2 Proposed Code Amendment OMNIBUS AMENDMENTS Chapter 18.10 LEGAL FRAMEWORK 18.10.060 Special Designations A. Overlay zones. The following overlays are established in the city: Table 18.10.2 Overlay Zones Over , Zone Name Zone Abbreviation Re�ulatin. Cha s ter Historic e . . Resource HRO 18.750 PD x-88 Chapter 18.30 DEFINITIONS 18.30.010 List of Terms -A- Accessory Building/Structure -D- Drive-Through ServiceFacility Duplex See Dwelling Related Definitions Dwelling-Related Definitions: • Duplex -F- Final ActionDecision Floor Area Ratio (FAR) -G- Garage Garage Setback -L- Lot-Related Definitions: -M- Minimal Use Facilities See Open Space Facility Related Definitions CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 1 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment -O- . • ... _' ' - . . e . • Active Use Facilities • Minimal Use Facilities • Passive Use Facilities -P- Passive Use Facilities Sce Open Space Facility Related Definitions Path-See Transportation-Related Definitions Public Infrastructure-See Wireless Communication Facilities-Related Definitions -S- Substandard Lot Sce Lot Related Definitions -T- Tiny House-See Dwelling-Related Definitions Transportation-Related Definitions: • Alley • Bike Lane • Bikeway • 1Path -W- Wireless Communication Facility-Related Definitions: • Non-tower • Tower 18.30.020 Definitions As used in this title and corresponding administrative rules, terms and phrases are defined as provided in this Section. For additional definitions, see Chapter 18.60, Use Categories; Chapter 18.435, Signs; and Chapter 18.510,Sensitive Lands. A."A"definitions. 7. "Addition" - A modification to an existing building or structure that increases its height, square footage,or lot coverage.A structure is considered an addition only when it shares a common wall and is structurally dependent on the primary structure. See also "Aaccessory structure" and "common wall.'Common wall". B. `B" definitions. 8. "Building height" - The exterior vertical measurement of a building. See Section 18.40.040; Measuring—Height. 9. "Building permit" - Written permission issued by the proper municipal authority for the construction, repair, alteration, or addition to a structure. Also see "development permit.'Development Permit". CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 2 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment D. "D"definitions. 8. "Development permit" - Any permit, such as building, site work, or construction of public improvements, issued by the city's building department for actions authorized under this title. Land use approval is required prior to the issuance of development permits for some actions. 12. "Drive-through servicefac-ility" -A use€aciIity or structure that is designed and intended to allow drivers to remain in their vehicles before and during participation in an activity on the site. F. "F"definitions. 874-. "Floor area" -The gross horizontal area, under a roof, of all floors of a building or structure. See Section 18.40.100. 972. "Floor area ratio (FAR)" - The floor area of all buildings and structures on a lot divided by the total lot area. See Section 18.40.110. 1072."Frontage" -That portion of a development site that abuts a public or private street. G. "G" definitions. 2. "Garage setback"- The horizontal distance from a property line or public access easement to the nearest portion of a garage door or carport entrance designed for vehicle access, whichever is shorter. For purposes of measurement, a carport entrance is the vertical plane between the ground and the outermost edge of the roof 32. "Glare" L."L" definitions. 3. "Landscaping" -Areas primarily devoted to plantings, trees,plantsshrubs, lawn,and lawn with or without - •• . _ _ -• - - _• • • other natural or artificial landscaping elementssupsuch as water ponds, fountains, decorative lighting, benches, bridges,rocks or stone arrangements,pathways,sculptures,trellises,an4or screens. 7. Lot-related definitions: d. "Flag lot" -A lot with less than 25 feet of frontage and two distinct parts:the flag,which is the only area to accommodate a structure and is located behind a frontage lot; and the pole,which connects the flag to the street and provides the only access and street frontage for the lot. The - •- .. . . . . . . . . . •.... _ . .- .• . . Aflaglot may only be created through a lot line adjustment,lot consolidation,or partition process. e. "Front lot line" - In the case of an interior lot, a property line that abuts the street; in the case of a corner lot, the shortest of the two property lines that abut the street;, except a property owner may choose which property line to identify as the front lot line where both street property lines are 75 feet or more in length; except where the narrowest side of a lot is a • - -- -• - -• or in the case of a through lot, the property line that abuts the street with the lowest classification. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 3 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment h. "Lot averaging" -A design technique permitting that allows one or more lots in a subdivision to be undersized, providing provided that the average lot size of all lots in the subdivision is not less than that required by the applicable in-the base zone. o. "Lot width" - The For lots with straight front lot lines, lot width is the horizontal distance between the side lot lines as measured at the minimum front setback point alone each side lot line. For lots with curved front lot lines, lot width is the horizontal distance between the side lot lines as measured at the minimum front setback point perpendicular from the midpoint of the front lot line. See Section 18.40.060 and Subsection 18.40.080.B for m asuring lot width. O. "0" definitions. 4. e. - .. • . . • • •• - - . e . - .. - - - . . . • . - . ..- • . and ecological enhancements)arc allowed. related to the functions and values of a natural area that require limited and low impact site improvement, including soft surface trails, raised walkways, pedestFian bridges, seating areas, viewing blinds,observation decks, informational signage, drinking fountains, picnic tables, interpretive centers, and other similar facilities. Accommodations for ADA access must be facilities. 4�. "Outdoor storage"-The keeping of any goods,junk,material,merchandise or vehicles in the same place for more than 24 hours when not completely enclosed within a building or structure. 56. "Owner" -Any person,agent,firm,or corporation having legal or equitable interest in the property. R. "R" definitions. 4. "Residence" - See "dwelling.""Dwelling". S. "S" definitions. 1. "Setback"(front,rear,side,and street side,and garage entrance)-The required horizontal distance from a property line to the nearest vertical wall of a structure,fence,or other elements as defined by this title.Also see "garage setback." 4. "Square footage"-For lot square footage,see "gross lot area.""Gross lot area".For building square footage, see "floor area.""Floor area". T."T"definitions. 5. Transportation-related definitions: f. "Road" - See "street.'Street." CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 4 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment h. "Street"-A public or private accessway that is created to provide ingress or egress for vehicles to three or more lots,excluding a private way that is created to provide ingress or egress to such land in conjunction with the use of such land for forestry, mining, or agricultural purposes. Also see"Rriiht-of-way." 5. Tree-related definitions: a. "Caliper" -The tree care industry standard for measuring the trunk diameter of nursery stock. Caliper is the average diameter of the trunk of a nursery tree measured six inches above the ground for trunks less than or equal to an average of four inches in diameter(when measured six inches above ground). When the trunk of a nursery tree is greater than an average of four inches in diameter(when measured six inches above ground), caliper is the average diameter at 12 inches above ground:(sSee Figure 18.30.9. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 5 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.40 MEASUREMENTS Sections: 18.40.010 Purpose 18.40.020 Net Development Area 18.40.030 Distances 18.40.040 Building Height 18.40.050 Building Facade Area 18.40.060 Lot Width,Lot Frontage,and Segmented Lot Lines 18.40.070 Setbacks 18.40.080 Flag Lots 18.40.090 Tree Diameter 18.40.100 Floor Area 18.40.110 Floor Area Ratio 18.40.120 Detached Accessory Dwelling Units 18.40.130 Residential Density 18.40.140 Window Area 18.40.040 Building Height A. Building height. The height of buildings is the vertical distance above the base point shown in Figures 18.40.6 and 18.40.7. The base point used is the method that yields the greater height of building. Methods to measure specific roof types are shown below and in Figure 18.40.5: 5. Stepped or terraced building: Measure to the highest point of any segment of the building. a. Base point 1 is the elevation of the highest adiacentadjeining sidewalk or ground surface within a 5-foot horizontal distance of the exterior wall of the building when such sidewalk or ground surface is not more than 10 feet above lowest grade. See Figure 18.40.6. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 6 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 18.40.060 Lot Width,Lot Frontage,and Segmented Lot Lines A. Lot width is measured from the front lot line as shown in the figure below. Figure 18.40.10 Lot Width • I I I I I I I I Minimum front � I setback ti0 point Minimum LOT 1 Minimum ♦ V front j< >4 front N setback setback point I I point • /STREET STREET Front lot line midpoint CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 7 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment B. Lot frontage is measured along the front lot line as shown in the figure below. Figure 18.40.11 Lot Frontage 1 I I I I I L I • • FRONTAGE WIDT}I I FRONTAGE WIDTH I • >. STREET STREET I I I I I I I FRONTAGE WIDTH I >• — • — • STREET CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 8 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment C. Segmented lot lines include one or more lateral changes in direction.A lateral change is measured by drawing a hypothetical straight line between opposing lot corners and measuring the horizontal distance between the hypothetical straight line and the furthest extent of the actual lot line perpendicular from the hypothetical straight line. Cumulative lateral changes are measured by repeating this process for each lateral change in direction and summing all the distances as shown in the figure below. Figure 18.40.12 Segmented Lot Lines \ Total lateral change in . . . A +B=Cumulative . direction of lot line I % lateral change in • �� \• direction of lot line •• • Hypothetical I I • Hypothetical I • •� straight line �� straight line • L. `•�` between I !. ' i! . v opposing lot • � �` opposing lot .� corners .� corners • `. `� • • • 11. .7.1.11.".4%. STREET STREET 18.40.090 Tree Diameter A. Measuring tree diameter. Tree diameter is measured in several ways: 4. For multi-stemmed trees, the size is determined by measuring all the trunks at 4.5 feet from the ground and adding the total diameter of the largest trunk and half the diameter of each additional trunk; see Figure 18.40.19. A multi-stemmed tree has trunks that are connected above the ground and does not include individual trees growing close together or from a common root stock that do not have trunks connected above the ground. Figure 18.40.19 Measuring Multi-sStemmed Trees 18.40.140 Window Area A. Window area is the aggregate area of the glass within each window, including any interior grids, mullions,or transoms. B. Required window area must be clear glass and not mirrored, frosted, or reflective, except where specifically stated otherwise. Clear glass within doors may count toward meeting a window area standard. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 9 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.50 NONCONFORMING CIRCUMSTANCES 18.50.040 Criteria for Nonconforming Circumstances-Situations A. Nonconforming lots. 1. Except as provided in Paragraph 18.50.040.A.2 and Subsection 18.50.040.B and C, development of nonconforming lots and enlargement, extensionmodifcation, or reconstruction of uses on nonconforming lots are prohibited. 2. If a lot does not meet the minimum lot size standardsrequirements of the applicable base zone in • • . 22- :,the lot may: B. Nonconforming uses. 1. If a lawfully established use of land exists that would not be allowed by this title, the use may be continued provided: d. If the use is discontinued or abandoned for any reason for a period of six months, any subsequent use of land must conform to the regulations specified by this title for the base zone in which such land is located; and C. Nonconforming development. 1. Where a lawful structure or development exists that could not be built under the terms of this title by reason of restrictions on lot area, lot coverage, height, required parking, landscaping, or other requirements,such structure or development may remain and its use continued provided it remains otherwise lawful,and complies with the following: b. If a nonconforming structure, development, or nonconforming portion of a structure or development is destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 60 percent of its current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor, reconstruction is prohibited except in conformity with this title. This prohibition does not apply to single detached houses destroyed by accident. If a nonconforming single detached house is partially or totally destroyed by accident,such as by fire or earthquake,reconstruction is allowed; and c. If a structure or development is moved any distance for any reason, it must thereafter comply with all applicable development standards. conform to the regulations for the applicable base zone after it is moved. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 10 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.60 USE CATEGORIES 18.60.020 Classification of Uses D. Use of examples. The"Examples" subsection of each use category provides a list of examples of uses that are included in the use category.The names of uses on the lists are generic.They are based on the common meaning of the terms and not on what a specific use may call itself.For example,a use whose business name is"Wholesale Liquidation"but that sells mostly to consumers,would be included in the Sales:Oriented Retail use cGategory rather than the Wholesale and Equipment Rental use cGategory. This is because the actual activity on the site matches the description of Sales:Oriented Retail use category. 18.60.040 Residential Use Categories B. Household Living. 4. Exceptions: Does not include lodging where tenancy may be arranged for periods less than 1 month. Such uses are - - ••• . •:, . •: •. - classified as either Commercial Lodging or Temporary Shelter. 18.60.060 Commercial Use Categories L. Office. 4. Exceptions: b. Contractors and others who perform services off-site are included in the Office use category if equipment and materials are incidental to the office use and their storage does not constitute 50 percent or more of occupied space;otherwise,they are classified as Industrial Services. S. Vehicle Fuel Sales. 4. Exceptions:Does not include electric vehicle charging stations that are accessory to an allowed use in an off-street parking area. 18.60.070 Industrial Use Categories C. Industrial Services. 4. Exceptions: Contractors and others who perform services off-site are included in the Office use category if equipment and materials storage does not constitute 50 percent or more of occupied space and fabrication or similar work is not carried out at the site. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 11 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.110 RESIDENTIAL ZONES 18.110.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is ' - ': - '. . • . - •• . . to implement the policies of the Ecomprehensive Pplan related to housing by: C. Accommodating compatible nonresidential development—including but not limited to schools, churches, parks, and recreation facilities, day care centers, and neighborhood commercial uses and ether services—at appropriate locations and at an appropriate scales; and 18.110.020 List of Base Zones The names and map symbols of the residential base zones are listed in Table 18.110.1 below. When this title refers to the residential zones, it is referring to the eight base zones listed here. 18.110.030 Land Use Standards Table 18.110.2 Residential Zone Use ale-Standards by right. Above ground public and private utility facilities proposed with development and underground public and private utility facilities are allowed. Standalone above groundpublic and private utility facilities not proposed with development are allowed conditionally. [2] Family In homc day care that meets all state requirements is allowed_; Commercial Other day care uses;freestanding day care centers that meet all state requirements are allowed conditionally. [3] School bus parking on public high school sites is allowed on public high school sites as an accessory use if located a minimum of 200 feet from the nearest property line of any tax lot used fora residential usepurposes. Maximum time limitation is 3 years. An extension to the-ti-Hie l4it is-pessible through a major modification to the conditional use. [4] Allowed conditionally on public school sites. [5] Only park-and-ride and other transit-related facilities are allowed conditionally. [6] Limited to ground-floor level of apartment developments,,ne ed and maximum square footage 2L10 percent of square footage of the building. [7] Wheren an agricultural use is adjacent to a residential use, no poultry or livestock, other than normal household pets, may must be housed or provided use of a fenced run within a minimum of 100 feet from of-any dwelling unit,nearby residence except a dwelling unit on the same lot. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 12 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 18.110.040 Housing Types Table 18.110.3 Housing Types Housing Types R-1 R-2 R5 4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 Detached Dwellings Accessory Dwelling Units(18.220) Y Y Y Y Y Y YNN Cottage Clusters(18.240) NN Y Y Y YNN Mobile Home Parks(18.260) N N L[1] Lj l] Y Y Y Y Single Detached Houses(18.290) Y Y Y Y Y Y 3LN N Attached Dwellings Accessory Dwelling Units(18.220) Y Y Y Y Y Y N N Apartments(18.230) N N N N N Y Y Y Courtyard Units(18.250) NN Y Y Y YNN Quads(18.270) N N L[2] L[2] Y YNN Rowhouses(18.280) N N N N L[3] Y Y N 18.110.040 Densities The maximum demand minimum density standardsfeetuifemefas for the housing types listed in Table 18.110.3 are provided in the applicable development standards chapter for each housing type and calculated using the methods in Section 18.40.130. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 13 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.140 PARKS AND RECREATION ZONE 18.140.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter isParks and Recreation zone is intended to preserve and enhance publicly- owned open space and natural and improved parkland within the city. This zone is intended to serve many functions including: 18.140.020 Applicability The Parks and Recreation(PR)zone is applicable to all city-owned lands intended as parks, open space, and recreational facilities and may be applied within all comprehensive plan designations. City-owned parks, open space,and recreational facilities located in a plan district may retain or receive other than a PR zone designation if it better furthers the goals of the plan district. In addition, other public agencies may request a PR zone designation for areas that meet the purpose of the zone. See Chapter 18.795,Map and Text Amendments. 18.140.030 Other Zoning Regulations Sites with overlay zones,plan districts, inventoried hazards,or sensitive lands are subject to additional regulations. Specific uses or developments types-may also be subject to regulations as provided elsewhere in this title. 18.140.040 Land Use Standards Table 18.140.1 Parks and Recreation Zone Use StandardsUse Table [1] Except water, storm, sanitary sewers, and other underground infrastructure facilities, which are allowed. Above-around public and private utility facilities proposed with development and underground public and private utility facilities are allowed.Standalone above-around public and private utility facilities not proposed with development are allowed conditionally. [2] See Subsections 18.140.040.0 throughand D for use type determination. 18.140.050 Development Standards H. Projections into required yardsExceptions to minimum setbacks. The following may project into required setbacks: 3. UnroofedOpen porches, decks, or balconies n 3 feet or less in height and not covered by a roof or canopy, may extend or project into a required rear or side setback provided the projection does not reduce the width of any setback setback is not reduced to less than 3 feet and the deck is screened from abutting properties. Unroofed pPorches may extend into a required front setback not more than 3 feet.project a maximum of 3 feet into a required front setback. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 14 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 18.200 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A reference to 18.200 Residential Development Standards is a reference to all of the chapters listed below. Chapter 18.210 RESIDENTIAL GENERAL PROVISIONS Sections: 18.210.010 Purpose 18.210.020 Fence and Wall Standards 18.210.030 Exceptions to Setback and Height Standards 18.210.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards that are broadly applicable to all residential development of the housing types allowed in residential and commercial zones. 18.210.020 Fence and Wall Standards Fences and walls may be located within required setbacks. Fences and walls located within required setbacks are subject to the standards in this section. Fences and walls located outside required setbacks are subject to the standards in the applicable housing type chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards. A. Fences and walls in a required front setback may be a maximum of 3 feet in height where abutting a local or neighborhood street and a maximum of 6 feet in height where abutting a collector or arterial street. B. Fences and walls in a required side,street side,or rear setback may be a maximum of 8 feet in height. Fences and walls 7 feet or more in height require a building permit. C Fences and walls with barbed or razor wire are prohibited. D. Fences and walls must meet vision clearance area requirements in Chapter 18.930, Vision Clearance Areas. 18.210.010030 Exceptions to Setback and Height Standards A. Additional setbacks. -. •- .. ._ - . - . . • • .. _ ay,the setback is measured ••- - • . . . • • •- .. . .• _ -•• ' .-. Increased or different setbacks apply in the following situations: 1. Where the ultimate right-of-way width, as shown in the Transportation System Plan, is wider than the current right-of-way widths required setbacks are measured from the ultimate right-of- way width. 2. Where freestanding private communication and utility facilities that are accessory to a residential use and not subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.450, Wireless Communication CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 15 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Facilities,are proposed,such facilities must be set back from all property lines a distance equal to or greater than the height of the facility. Freestanding communication and utility facilities include, but are not limited to, wind turbines and communication towers, antennas, and receivers. BC.Exceptions to minimum setbacks. The following may project into required setbacks: 1. Freestanding mechanical equipment, such as heating and cooling equipment, may be located within any required setback,except that equipment serving apartment developments is subject to the standards in Chapter 18.230,Apartments. 2. Required setbacks for all buildings,except garages,may be reduced for the purpose of preserving healthy noninvasive trees.Required front setbacks may be reduced by a maximum of 25 percent, and other required setbacks may be reduced by a maximum of 20 percent. 3�. Cornices,eaves,belt courses,sills,canopies,or similar architectural features may extend or project into a required setback not more than 3 feet provided the setback is notes to less than 3 feet. project a maximum of 3 feet into a required setback provided the projection does not reduce the width of any setback to less than 3 feet. 42. Fireplace chimneys may project into a required front, side, or rear setback net more than 3 feet provided the setback is not reduced to less than 3 feet.a maximum of3 feet into a required setback provided the projection does not reduce the width of any setback to less than 3 feet. 53. Spee Unroofed porches,decks,or balconies not more than 3 feet or less in height and not covered by a roof or canopy may extend or project into a required rear or side setback provided the projection does not reduce the width of any setback setback is not reduced to less than 3 feet and the deck is screened from abutting properties,. Unroofed',Porches may extend into a required front setback not more than 3 feet.project a maximum of 3 feet into a required front setback. 64. Unroofed landings and or stairs may project into a required front or rear setbacks-enly. 7. Inground swimming pools may project into a required rear or side setback provided the projection does not reduce the width of any setback to less than 5 feet. 85. In the R-12 zone,bay windows and projections with floor area may project into a required interior side and or street side setbacks by 1 foot provided they projections do not: a. Exceed 12 feet in length; b. Contain over 30 percent of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage; and c. Reduce theThe width of the interior side setback is not reduced to less than 3 feet. C13.-E-xeeptiens Exception to maximum height limits. Building pProjections such as chimneys, spires, domes, elevator shaft housings, towers excluding TV dish receivers, aerials, flag poles, and other similar objects not used not designed for human occupancy; are not subject to the building height limitations of this title.Building projections not designed for human occupancy include, but are not limited to, chimneys, spires, domes, elevator shaft housings,flag poles, and antennas and receivers not subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.450, Wireless Communication Facilities. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 16 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 17 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.220 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS 18.220.010 Purpose This The purpose of this chapter is to provide provides clear and objective standards for the establishment of accessory dwelling units on lots with single detached housessingle family residences to achieve the following: 18.220.020 Applicability A. Applicability. The approval process and standards of this chapter apply to attached and detached accessory dwelling units and modifications to attached and detached accessory dwelling units wherever this housing type is allowed as provided in the use and housing type tables in Chapter 18.110, Residential Zones. 18.220.030 Approval Process Applications for accessory dwelling units are processed through a Type I procedure,as provided in Section 18.710.050..-,using the standards in Section 18.210.040 as approval criteria. 18.220.040 Standards F. Parking. 1. In addition to the number of parking spaces required for the primary unit,a minimum of 1 off-street parking space must be provided for each accessory dwelling unit. Lots within 2,500 feet of a right- of-way that includes transit service are exempt from the additional parking requirement for the accessory dwelling unit. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 18 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.240 COTTAGE CLUSTERS 18.240.010 Purpose Cottage clusters are groups of four to twelve detached housing units that are of smaller size than the typical single detached house. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards that promote quality development and enhance the livability, walkability, and safety of the community. Cottage cluster development is intended to achieve the following: 18.240.030 General Provisions All lots approved for cottage cluster development through the provisions of this chapter will be conditioned to record a deed restriction prohibiting any type of development other than cottage cluster development on the lot.This deed restriction cannot be removed except through a land division or lot line adjustment process that brings the lot into conformance with the standards for development of other housing types. A cottage cluster deed restriction imposed as a condition of a previous or concurrent land division or lot line adjustment process meets this standard. 18.240.040 Approval Process Applications for cottage cluster development are processed through a Type 1 - .. • procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.050, using approval criteria in Section 18.780.050. Chapter 18.780, Site Development Review. 18.240.050 Development Standards G. Parking. 3. Location. c. All parking areas, including garages,must be separated by a minimum of 10 feet on all sides from all other parking areas, parking structures, and cottage units on the site. This area must meet the L-2 standard,as provided in Table 18.420.1,except that trees are not required of landscaping on all sides from all other parking areas,parking structures,and courtyard units on the site. 5. Screening. Off-street parking areas not in structures must be screened from the street to the S-4 standard and from adlacentadjeig properties to the S-3 standard, as provided in Table 18.420.2. The required screening using one or more of the following means, which must be provided on the same site as the development H. Pedestrian access. Paths. I. Landscaping. The standards and provisions of Section 18.420.030 apply, except for Paragraphs 18.420.030.A.2 and 18.420.030.A.3. The following additional standards also apply: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments .Page 19 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 1. ' -:.' -. . •. .. '- eCommon courtyards must meet the L-1 standard, as provided in Table 18.420.1 is subject to the standards and provisions of Sections 18.120.030 and 18.120.040. 2. A minimum of 33 percent tree canopy must be provided. The method for determining tree canopy is provided in Section 10 Part 3 Subpart M of the Urban Forestry Manual. All required trees must be a minimum caliper of 1.5 inches at the time of planting and meet the standards in Section 13 Part 2 and Appendix 3 of the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual for soil volume and species. Trees planted to meet this standard are development trees. The applicant must pay the tree inventory fee listed in the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule. 3. The minimum number of required street trees is determined by dividing the length in feet of the site's street frontage by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction,the minimum number of street trees is the nearest whole number. More than the minimum number of street trees may be required along the site's frontage depending upon the stature of trees chosen and the specific spacing standards for the chosen trees. a. Street trees must be planted within the right-of-way wherever practicable. Street trees may be planted a maximum of 6 feet from the right-of-way when planting within the right-of-way is not practicable as determined by the city engineer. b. An existing tree may be used to meet the street tree standards provided that: L The largest percentage of the tree trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses is either within the subject site or within the right-of-way immediately adjacent to the subject site:and ii The tree would be permitted as a street tree in compliance with UFM street tree planting and soil volume standards if it were newly planted. K. Waste Collection. 2. Waste collection and service areas may not be located in required setbacks and must be screened to the S-1 standard as provided in Table 18.420.2asing the standards of Subparagraph 18.120.050.D.1. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 20 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.250 COURTYARD UNITS 18.250.010 Purpose Courtyard units are groups of five to twelve attached housing units that are of smaller size and scale than other attached housing types such as apartments and rowhouses. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards that promote quality development and enhance the livability, walkability, and safety of the community. Courtyard unit development is intended to achieve the following: 18.250.030 Approval Process Applications for courtyard unit development are processed through a Type I . - . .. - • procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.050, using approval criteria in Section 18.780.050. Chapter 18.780, Site Development Review. 18.250.040 General Provisions All lots approved for courtyard unit development through the provisions of this chapter will be conditioned to record a deed restriction prohibiting any type of development other than courtyard unit development on the lot.This deed restriction cannot be removed except through a land division or lot line adjustment process that brings the lot into conformance with the standards for development of other housing types.A courtyard unit deed restriction imposed as a condition of a previous or concurrent land division or lot line adjustment process meets this standard. 18.250.050 Development Standards G. Parking. 3. Location. c. All parking areas, including garages, must be separated by a minimum of 10 feet on all sides from all other parkingareas,parking structures, and courtyard units on the site. This area must meet the L-2 standard,as provided in Table 18.420.1,except that trees are not required. on the site. d. Parking may be provided under the first story of the courtyard units,provided that this parking is accessed from the rear of the building and is not visible from the street. 5. Screening. Off-street parking areas not in structures must be screened from the street to the S-4 standard, . -: .:':. _ . .. -•• as provided in Table 18.420.2. The required screening esing - - - - '•, • , • • must be provided on the same site as the development_: a. Evergreen vegetation, fences, or walls of a minimum heightef 5 feet; or H. Pedestrian access. mss. I. Landscaping. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 21 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 1. ' -:.' •. . •. .. '• eCommon courtyards must meet the L-1 standard, as provided in Table 18.420.1is subject to the standards and provisions of Sections 18.120.030 and 18.420.010. 2. A minimum of 33 percent tree canopy must be provided.The method for determining tree canopy is provided in Section 10 Part 3 Subpart M of the Urban Forestry Manual.All required trees must be a minimum caliper of 1.5 inches at the time of planting and meet the standards in Section 13 Part 2 and Appendix 3 of the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual for soil volume and species. Trees planted to meet this standard are development trees. The applicant must pay the tree inventory fee listed in the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule. 3. The minimum number of required street trees is determined by dividing the length in feet of the site's street frontage by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction,the minimum number of street trees is the nearest whole number. More than the minimum number of street trees may be required along the site's frontage depending upon the stature of trees chosen and the specific spacing standards for the chosen trees. a. Street trees must be planted within the right-of-way wherever practicable. Street trees may be planted a maximum of 6 feet from the right-of-way when planting within the right-of-way is not practicable as determined by the city engineer. b. An existing tree may be used to meet the street tree standards provided that: 1. The largest percentage of the tree trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses is either within the subject site or within the right-of-way immediately adjacent to the subject site;and ii. The tree would be permitted as a street tree in compliance with UFM street tree planting and soil volume standards if it were newly planted. J. Fencing. I. A fence at least cix6 feet in height must be provided at the rear and side property lines,except that a fence is not required in the front setback and along street property lines. K. Waste Collection. 2. Waste collection and service areas may not be located in required setbacks and must be screened to the S-1 standard, as provided in Table 18.420.2using the standards of Subparagraph 18.120.050.D.4. 18.250.060 Courtyard Unit Design Standards E. Windows Figure 18.250. 3 Facade Length Within Required Front Setbacks CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 22 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.260 MOBILE HOMES 18.260.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to establishri�,* standards for the placement of mobile homes in mobile home subdivisions and park developments within the City of Tigard. 18.260.020 Mobile Home Subdivision Standards . . . . .. - _mobile home subdivision proposal must A�.Comply with all applicable state standards and other city standards for subdivisions as provided in Chapter 18.830, Subdivisions; B . Satisfy all the provisions of this chapter; and C3. Be limited to mobile home housing types. All other types of residential units are prohibited. 18.260.030 Mobile Home Park Standards C. Minimum development standards. The mobile home park must meet the following minimum standards: 1. Have a minimum gGross lot area of 1 acre; 2. Have „, street frontage of 100 feet; 3. 14ave-a-miniffiumLot depth of 150 feet; 4. Have a minimum fFront and rear setback of 25 feet; 5. Have a minimum :Side setback of 10 feet, except on a corner lot the minimumstreet side setback is 25 feet; 6. Have a minimum of 60Sixty square feet of outdoor recreation area, suitably improved for recreational use,provided for each unit in addition to required setbacks. Each recreation area must be a minimum size of 2,500 square feet; 7. Have-lLandscapeig area ofcquivalent to 20 percent of the mobile home park area; and 8. Be partially screened from the public right-of-way and adjacent residential areas by a combination of a sight-obscuring fence,vegetation, berm or any combination of the above, except that within the required front setback,any fence must not exceed 3 feet in height. D. Other standards. 14. The maximum number of mobile homes in the park or subdivision is limited to the dwelling unit density for single detached houses as provided in Chapter 18.290,Single Detached Housesallowcd by the base zone. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 23 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 15. Where landfill or development is allowed within or adjacent to the special flood hazard area, the city will require the eensideratien-ef dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjacent tong and within the special flood hazard area. This area includes portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a path, sidewalk, or trail with the special flood hazard area in compliance with the adopted trails plan or transportation plan. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 24 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.270 QUADS 18.270.010 Purpose Quads are groups of four housing units with two units side-by-side on a ground floor and two units side- by-side on a second floor.The units are of smaller size than the typical apartment or single detached house. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards that promote quality development and enhance the livability, walkability, and safety of the community. Quad development is intended to achieve the following: 18.270.030 Approval Process Applications for quad development are processed through a Type I ' - . .. - • procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.050, using approval criteria in Section 18.780.050.Chapter 1 Q 78n Site 18.270.040 General Provisions All lots approved for quad development through the provisions of this chapter will be conditioned to record a deed restriction prohibiting any type of development other than quad development on the lot. This deed restriction cannot be removed except through a land division or lot line adjustment process that brings the lot into conformance with the standards for development of other housing types. A quad deed restriction imposed as a condition of a previous or concurrent land division or lot line adjustment process meets this standard. 18.270.050 Development Standards B. Density. Minimum and maximum densities are determined by the required number of units and the lot size standards of Table 18.270.1. E. Lot coverage.Maximum lot coverage is provided in Table 18.270.1. FE Parking. 1. Number of spaces. a. A minimum of 4 off-street parking spaces must be provided for each quad development. If the lot is within 2,500 feet of a right-of-way that includes transit service, this parking minimum is reduced by half. 5. Screening. Off-street parking areas not in structures must be screened from the street to the S-9 standard. . •: .:• - . .. - - as provided in Table 18420.2. The required screening using - _ - . • .- , • - must be provided on the same site as the development:: GE.Pedestrian access. Paths. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 25 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment HG.Landscaping. The standards and provisions of Sections 18.420.030 and 18.420.040, in addition to the following standards: 1. Minimum landscape area and maximum lot coverage standards are provided in Table 18.270.1. All required landscape areas meet the L-1 standard, as provided in Table 18.420.1. 2. A minimum of 33 percent tree canopy must be provided. The method for determining tree canopy is provided in Section 10 Part 3 Subpart M of the Urban Forestry Manual.All required trees must be a minimum caliper of 1.5 inches at the time of planting and meet the standards in Section 13 Part 2 and Appendix 3 of the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual for soil volume and species. Trees planted to meet this standard are development trees.The applicant must pay the tree inventory fee listed in the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule. 3. The minimum number of required street trees is determined by dividing the length in feet of the site's street frontage by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction,the minimum number of street trees is the nearest whole number. More than the minimum number of street trees may be required along the site's frontage depending upon the stature of trees chosen and the specific spacing standards for the chosen trees. a. Street trees must be planted within the right-of-way wherever practicable. Street trees may be planted a maximum of 6 feet from the right-of-way when planting within the right-of-way is not practicable as determined by the city engineer. b. An existing tree may be used to meet the street tree standards provided that: i The largest percentage of the tree trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses is either within the subject site or within the right-of-way immediately adjacent to the subject site;and iL The tree would be permitted as a street tree in compliance with UFM street tree planting and soil volume standards if it were newly planted. 114. Fencing. 1. A fence at least 6six feet in height must be provided at the rear and side property lines, except that a fence is not required in the front setback and along street property lines. A. Waste Collection. 1. Dumpsters are prohibited in quads developments. 2. Waste collection and service areas may not be located in required setbacks and must be screened to the S-I standard, as provided in Table 18.420.2using the standards of Subparagraph 18.420.050.D.1.. Table 18.270.1 Quad Development Standards Standard 11-3.5 114.5 It :, 1t,12 Minimum Lot Size 10,000 sq ft 7,500 sq ft 5,000 sq ft 5,000 sq ft CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 26 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Maximum Lot Size 11,500 sq ft 9,000 sq ft 6,250 sq ft 6,250 sq ft Minimum Lot Width 65 ft 50 ft 50 ft None Minimum Setbacks -Frontyar=d 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft -Street sideSid'e aci ng street on corner&through 15 ft 15 ft 10 ft 10 ft -Sided 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft -Rearmed 15ft 15ft 15ft 15ft --Side or rear yard abutting 4 15 ft 15 ft more restrictive Maximum Setbacks -Front yard 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft -Street sideSide facing 20ft 20ft 15 ft 15ft lots Maximum Height 30 ft 30 ft 35 ft 35 ft Maximum Lot Coverage 70% 75% _ 80% 80% Minimum Landscape Area 30% 25% 20% 20% Requirement CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 27 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 18.300 NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A reference to 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards is a reference to all of the chapters listed below. Chapters: 18.310 Nonresidential General Provisions 18.320 Commercial Zone Development Standards 18.330 Industrial Zone Development Standards 18.340 Parks and Recreation Zone Development Standards Chapter 18.310 NONRESIDENTIAL GENERAL PROVISIONS Sections: 18.310.010 Purpose 18.310.020 Fence and Wall Standards 18.310.030 Exceptions to Setback,Height, and Parking Standards 18.310.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards that are broadly applicable to all nonresidential development—including mixed-use development with or without a residential component—aliewed-in commercial and industrial zones. 18.310.020 Fence and Wall Standards Fences and walls may be located within required setbacks. Fences and walls located within required setbacks are subject to the standards in this section. Fences and walls located outside required setbacks are subject to the applicable standards in Chapter 18.320, Commercial Zone Development Standards,or Chapter 18.330,Industrial Zone Development Standards. A. Fences and walls in a required front setback may be a maximum of 3 feet in height where abutting a local or neighborhood street and a maximum of 6 feet in height where abutting a collector or arterial street. B. Fences and walls in a required side,street side,or rear setback may be a maximum of 8feet in height. Fences and walls 7 feet or more in height require a building permit. C. Fences and walls must meet vision clearance area requirements in Chapter 18.930, Vision Clearance Areas. 18.310.00030 Exceptions to Setback,Height,and Parking Standards CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Omnibus Amendments Page 28 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment A. Additional setbacks. -. • .• .. - . . . - .. _ .. -• . •- - - . • . • •• .• .. . •. -•• ' . . Increased or different setbacks apply in the following situations: 1. Where the ultimate right-of-way width, as shown in the Transportation System Plan, is wider than the current right-of-way width,required setbacks are measured from the ultimate right-of- way width. 2. Where freestanding private communication and utility_facilities that are accessory to an allowed use and not subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.450, Wireless Communication Facilities,are proposed, such facilities must be set back from all property lines a distance equal to or greater than the height of the facility. Freestanding communication or utility facilities include, but are not limited to, wind turbines and communication towers, antennas, and receivers. BE.Exceptions to minimum setbacks. - _ • . . . • . . - .. . 1. Required setbacks for all buildings,except garages,may be reduced for the purpose of preserving healthy noninvasive trees.Required front setbacks may be reduced by a maximum of 25 percent, and other required setbacks may be reduced by a maximum of 20 percent. 2-i-. Cornices,eaves,belt courses,sills,canopies,or similar architectural features may extend or project into a required setback net mere-Man 3 feet provided the setback is not-reduced to less than 3 feet. project a maximum of 3 feet into a required setback provided the projection does not reduce the width of any setback to less than 3 feet. 32. Fireplace chimneys may project •• . . . .• , . • .. -- provided the setback is not reduced to less than 3 feet.a maximum of 3 feet into a required setback provided the projection does not reduce the width of any setback to less than 3 feet. 43. Open Unroofed porches,decks,or balconies not more than 3 feet or less in height and not covered by a roof or canopy may extend or project into a required rear or side setback provided the projection does not reduce the width of any setback setback isnot reduced to less than 3 feet and the deck is screened from abutting properties. Unroofed pl orches may extend into a required front setback not more than 3 feet.project a maximum of 3 feet into a required front setback. 54. Unroofed landings and or stairs may project into a required front or rear setbacks-eny. CQ.Exceptions to maximum height limits. 1. Building pProjections such as chimneys, spires,domes,elevator shaft housings,towers excluding TV dish receivers, aerials, flag poles, and other similar objects not used not designed for human occupancy;are not subject to the building height limitations of this title. Building projections not designed for human occupancy include, but are not limited to,chimneys,spires,domes,elevator shaft housings,flag poles, and antennas and receivers not subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.450, Wireless Communication Facilities. 2. Any building located in a nonresidential zone may be built to Buildings may be a maximum height of 75 feet in height provided all of the following are met: a. The total floor area of the building does not exceed 1.5 times the area of the site; b. All setbacks are equal to at least half a minimum of 50 percent of the building height of the c-tur-e; and CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 29 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment c. The she site does not abut a residential zone. D. Exception to minimum parking. The minimum number of required off-street vehicle parking spaces may be reduced by 1 space for every 5 percent of effective tree canopy cover provided by preserved trees. The maximum reduction earned through tree preservation may not exceed 20 percent of the minimum number of required parking spaces for any one development. 1 I . . . B. All freestanding and detached towers, antennas, wind generating dues, and TV reeei-ving dishes, CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 30 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.410 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING Sections: 18.410.010 Purpose 18.410.020 Applicability 18.410.030 General Provisions 18.410.040 General Design Standards 18.410.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards 18.410.060 Parking Structure Design Standards 18.410.070 Vehicle Parking Quantity StandardsQ 18.410.080 Loading Standards 18.410.090 On-Street Parking Credit 18.410.030 General Provisions F. Visitor parkin in a artment developments.Apartment developments that require more than 10 parking required is 15 percent of the minimum parking for the use as shown in Table 18.410.2.Additional guest parking must be clearly marked and signed. FG.Accessible parking. All parking areas must include the required number of accessible parking spaces as specified by the state building code and federal standards.Such parking spaces must be sized,signed, and marked as required by these regulations and in compliance with ORS 447. G14.Fleet parking. 18.410.040 General Design Standards E. La d cap' g. Parking areas must be landscaped in compliance with Chapter 18.420, Landscaping and Screening. EF.Surfacing. 2. Off-street overflow parking areas in the parks and recreation Zzone. FG.Striping_ GH.Wheel stops. HI. Lighting, B. Space and aisle dimensions. The minimum dimensional standards for surface parking spaces and drive aisles are provided in Figure 18.410.1 and Table 18.410.2. Table 18.410.2 Minimum Parking Space and Aisle Dimensions}14 Angle(A) Stall Width Curb Length 1 Way Aisle 2 Way Aisle Stall Depth(E) (B) (C) Width(D) Width(D) 0°(Parallel) 8 ft. 22 ft.6 in. 12 ft. 20 ft. 8 ft. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 31 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 30° 8 ft.6 in. 17 ft. 12 ft. 20 ft. 15 ft. 45° 8 ft.6 in. 12 ft. 12 ft. 20 ft. 17 ft. 60° 8 ft.6 in. 9 ft.9 in. 16 ft. 20 ft. 17 ft.6 in. 90° 8 ft.6 in. 8 ft.6 in. 20 ft. 20 ft. 16 ft. {1] See Figure 18.410.1. 18.410.050 Bicycle Parking Design Standards A. Location and access.Bicycle parking is subject to the following requirements: 1. Required bicycle parking aceas must be located within 50 feet of a required or main entrance of a primary building.entrances to buildings; open for use and does not require the use of stairs to gain access to the space. B. Covered parking spaces. 2. Required bicycle parking spaces for nonresidential development must be covered and located within 100 feet of the primary entrance to the a required or main entrance of a primary building on the development site if any required vehicle parking spaces are provided in a structure. BE.Design-requireffiefits. The following design requirements apply to the installation of bicycle-racks: 1. Bicycle racks must be designed to allow a bicycle frame to lock to it at 2 points of contact, except that spiral racks and wave racks with more than one loop are prohibited; 2. Bicycle racks must be securely anchored to the ground, wall, or other structure; 3. Bicycle parking spaces must be at least 2.5 feet in width and by 6 feet in length and have an access aisle between each row of spaces that is at least 5 feet in width -tang. Covered bicycle parking must provide a vertical clearance of 7 feet. An access aisle at least 5 feet wide n*tst be provided . •• :; and 4. Outdoor bBicycle parking spaces facilities must be surfaced paved with a dust-free hard surfaced surface material. CB.Quantity ' '•'• • .• - .. -.' -• • .The total number of required bicycle parking spaces for each use is provided in Table 18.410.2. If the minimum bicycle parking spaces as calculated in Table 18.410.2 is less than two,then the minimum number of spaces is two,except that single Single detached houses, accessory dwelling units, cottage clusters, courtyard units, quads, and rowhouses are exempt from this standard the bicycle parking requirements. (Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.410.070 Vehicle Parking Quantity Standards Quantities E. Parking requirements for unlisted uses. If a use is not listed, a use determination may be requested as provided in in Subsection 18.60.030:x. 18.410.080 Loading Standards Off street loading spaces for deliveries must meet the following: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 32 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment A. Each All off-street loading spaces must have sufficient area for turning and maneuvering of vehicles on the site.At a minimum,the maneuvering length shall not be less than twice the overall length of the longest vehicle using the facility site. Table 18.410.3 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Requirements Parking space requirements are based on square feet of floor area unless otherwise stated. See Chapter 18.650 for parking requirements in the MU-CBD zone and Chapter 18.660 for parking requirements in the TMU zone. Vehicle Vehicle Minimum Maximum Vehicle Maximum Bicycle Use Category [1] (Zone A) [1] (Zone B) [1] Minimum Residential Use ries Group Living See applicable housing type development standards chapter in 18.200. The Household Living residential component of a mixed-use development must use the parking requirements for apartments. Civic/Institutional Use Categories Basic Utilities None None None None Colleges 1.0/5 students/staff 1.0/3.3 1.0/3.3 1.0/3.0 students/staff students/staff students/staff Community Services 2.0/1,000 2.5/1,000 4.0/1,000 0.3/1,000 Cultural Institutions 2.5/1,000 3.5/1,000 4.5/1,000 1.0/1,000 Day Care Home:None Home:None Home:None Home: None Commercial: Commercial: Commercial: Commercial: 2.0/classroom 2.7/1,000 3.2/1,000 1.5/classroom Emergency Services 3.0/1,000 3.5/1,000 4.5/1,000 0.5/1,000 Medical Centers 2.0/1,000 2.7/1,000 3.2/1,000 0.2/1,000 Postal Services 2.5/1,000 3.0/1,000 4.5/1,000 0.3/1,000 _ Religious Institutions 1.0/3 seats in main 1.0/1.7 seats in 1.0/1.3 seats in 1.0/20 seats in assembly area{2] main assembly main assembly area main assembly area area Schools Preschool: Preschool: Preschool: Preschool: 5.0+1.0/classroom 7.0+1.0/classroom 10.0+1.0/classroom 1.0/classroom Elementary/JR: Elementary/JR: Elementary/JR: Elementary/JR: 2.0/classroom 2.5/classroom 3.5/classroom 6.0/classroom SR: 1.0/5 SR: 1.0/3.3 SR: 1.0/3.3 SR: students/staff students/staff students/staff 6.0/classroom Social/Fraternal 10.0/1,000 main 12.0/1,000 main 14.0/1,000 main 2.0/1,000 main Clubs/Lodges assembly area assembly area assembly area assembly area Temporary Shelter 1.0/2.5 beds None None 1.0/5 beds Commercial Use Categories Adult Entertainment 2.5/1,000 3.5/1,000 4.5/1,000 0.5/1,000 1.0/3 seats 1.0/1.25 seats 1.0/2 seats 1.0/20 seats Animal—Related 3.3/1,000 4.0/1,000 4.5/1,000 0.3/1,000 CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 33 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Table 18.410.3 Minimum and Maximum Off-Street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Requirements Parking space requirements are based on square feet of floor area unless otherwise stated. See Chapter 18.650 for parking requirements in the MU-CBD zone and Chapter 18.660 for parking requirements in the TMU zone. Vehicle Vehicle Minimum Maximum Vehicle Maximum Bicycle Use Category Eli (Zone A) [1) (Zone B) [1] Minimum Commercial Bulk Sales 1.0/1,000 but no 1.3/1,000 2.0/1,000 0.3/1,000 less than 10 Commercial Lodging 1.0/room 1.2/room 1.4/room 1.0/10 rooms Custom Arts and Crafts 3.0/1,000 5.1/1,000 6.2/1,000 0.3/1,000 Eating and Drinking Fast food: Fast food: Fast food: All: 1.0/1,000 Establishments [32] 7.0/1,000 12.4/1,000 14.9/1,000 Other: 9.0/1,000 Other: 19.1/1,000 Other: 23.0/1,000 for every 4 seats). - - - [32] Fast food designation includes all eating and drinking establishments with a "walk-up counter" or less than 10 tables in the dining area. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 34 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.430 MARIJUANA FACILITIES Sections: 18.430.010 Purpose 18.430.020 Applicability 18.430.030 pproval Process and Documentation 18.430.040 Development Standards 18.430.020 Applicability A. Relationship to other standards. The regulations within this chapter are in addition to base zone standards the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards. Sites within overlay zones, plan districts, inventoried hazards, or sensitive lands are subject to additional regulations. Specific uses or development types may also be subject to regulations as provided elsewhere in this title. 18.430.030 pproval Process and Documentation A. Approval process. Applications for marijuana facilities are processed through a Type I procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.050,using the standards in Section 18.430.040 as approval criteria. B. Approval criteria. Development subject to the provisions of this chapter must demonstrate compliance BC.Documentation.The following provisions apply at the time of minimum compliance review or a request for enforcement: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 35 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.435 SIGNS 18.435.020 Permits B. Sign permits. .. ! . D. Encroachment permits. In addition to any required sign permits, Chapter 15.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code requires an encroachment permit for any sign allowed in the public right-of-way by this chapter. 18.435.060 Permit Exempt Signs A. Exemptions from permit requirements.The following signs and operations do not require a sign permit but must comply with conform to all other applicable regulations of this chapter and the requirements Subsection 18.435.060.B: 11.Banner signs in the right-of-way in the MU-CBD zone, with the following restrictions: a. The maximum sign area is 140 square feet per sign face;and b. The maximum length of display is 60 continuous days. 18.435.070 Prohibited Signs H. Right-of-way signs. Signs in the public right-of-way in whole or in part are prohibited,except for signs legally erected for informational purposes by or on behalf of a government agency,bench signs allowed by Subsection 18.435.090.B, awning signs allowed by Subsection 18.435.090.E, temporary banners allowed by ParagraphSectien 18.435.060.A.11-199, or signs allowed by Subparagraph 18.435.130.G.1.c in the TMU and MU-CBD zones. Any sign that projects into or is located in City of Tigard right-of-way is subject to approval by the city engineer. Signs may not project into or be located in Oregon Department of Transportation right-of-way. D. Billboards. Billboards are prohibited. (Ord. 17-25 §3; Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.435.100 Temporary Signs A. Applicability.All temporary signs listed in Paragraph 18.435.015.A.44 require a temporary sign permit except for the following: 3. Banner signs in the right-of-way in the MU-CBD zone exempted by Paragraph 18.435.060.A.11. B. Expiration of approvals. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 36 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment C. Standards. Standards for all temporary signs,except balloon signs,that require a temporary sign permit by Subsection 18.435.100.A are as follows: 4. Temporary signs may not be located in the public right-of-way or the clear vision area as described in Chapter 18.930, Vision Clearance Areas, except for bannef&that may be hung across the right 18.435.130 Base Zone Regulations G. MU-CBD and TMU zones.The following signs are allowed in the TMU zone and the MU-CBD zone, except that MU-CBD zoned properties located west of Fanno Creek within the Fanno-Burnham Subarea of the Tigard Downtown Plan District • . ' . . !- . .. . • ' D • . are subject to the residential zone sign standards in Subsection 18.435.130.A and MU-CBD zoned properties north of Pacific Highway or with frontage on Pacific Highway or Hall Boulevard are subject to the C-G zone sign standards in Subsection 18.435.130.B. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 37 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.440 TEMPORARY USES 18.440.040 Approval Process D. Renewal of approval.A temporary use appreval may be renewed once for a-peried not to exceed 1 year. if it were an original application. E. Renewal for temporary residential sales office or model homes. A permit for temporary sales offices and model homes may be renewed on an annual basis in the same manr►er as if it were an original occupancy permits. Chapter 18.450 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES 18.450.030 Uses Allowed C. Installation of accessory equipment shelters. The installation of accessory equipment shelters and related equipment is allowed at or near the base of a tower or structure where collocation is allowed as provided in Subsections I8.450.030.A—and B of this section subject to the following: 2. The equipment shelter and related equipment must comply with the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards:- .. .•.. . •- .. - • ; 3. No previously-approved landscaping may be removed to locate the accessory equipment shelter and related equipment. If any such landscaping is removed, the applicant must replace it with the equivalent quantity and type of landscaping on site,in a manner to achieve the original intent,or to achieve sufficient screening of any proposed new shelter or equipment if the original intent would no longer be applicable. If any removed landscaping cannot be replace on site,then the applicant is subject to a site development review as provided in Section 18.450.040. D. Towers in the I-L and I-H zones. Locating a tower of any height, including antennas, other supporting equipment and accessory equipment shelters, is allowed in the I-L and I-H zones,provided that such a tower is set back from any existing off-site residence by a distance equal to the height of the tower. Any accessory equipment shelter must comply with the development standards of the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards base zone. Towers in the right-of-way are subject to either the small cell standards of Subsection I8.450.030.F or the site development review process of Section 18.450.040. 18.450.040 Uses Allowed Subject to Site Development Review A. Uses allowed. The following uses are subject to approval through athe Ssite Development Preview process of as provided in Chapter 18.780,Site Development Review,using the standards of Subsection 18.450.040.B as approval criteria: 4. Accessory equipment shelter. Installation of aAdditional accessory equipment shelters or related equipment must be screened as required by Subparagraph 18.450.040.B.7.b. if required existing CC Draft(12/11/2018)–Omnibus Amendments Page 38 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment landscaping is removed and cannot be replaced on the site to achieve the original intent, or to sufficiently screen any proposed new shelter or equipment if the original intent is no longer applicable. B. Standards.Any use subject to site development review is reviewed using the following standards: 2. Setbacks. a. Towers designed to collapse within themselves must be set back in compliance with the setbacks of the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards, except that all towers must be set back a minimum of 35 feet from any adjacent residentially zoned lotbase zone; 18.450.050 Uses Allowed Subject to Conditional Use Review A. Uses allowed. The .:: : . .. •: ' •-following uses are subject to approval through a conditional use review,as provided in Chapter, 18.740, Conditional Uses, using the standards approval criteria provided in Subsection I8.450.050.B as approval criteria:. The following uses arc subject to approval under this section: 3. Towers in excess of 100 feet for a single user and 125 feet for multiple users except those located in the I-L and I-H zones,which are allowed as provided in Subsection18.450.030.£D. B. Standards. Any use subject to conditional use review is reviewed using the following: 7. Landscaping and screening. b. When adjacent to or within residentially-zoned property, freestanding towers and accessory equipment facilities must be screened by the planting of a minimum of 4 evergreen trees at least 15 feet in height at the time of planting. These trees must effectively screen the wireless facilities from residential uses. The planting of trees must be prescribed in number by a plan prepared-by a-certified arborist in4ecations that(i)mest-effect4zely screen the wireless facilities from residential uses and (ii)-promote the future survival of the trees while limiting adverse effects of the trees on abutting properties. Existing evergreen trees at least 15 feet in height may be used to meet the screening requirement of this section if the applicantarberist demonstrates that they provide screening for abutting residential uses. 18.450.060 Collocation Protocol E. Applicant's obligation to analyze feasibility of collocation. If a response to a collocation request letter is received by an applicant indicating an opportunity for collocation on an existing tower of another provider, the applicant must make a good faith effort to analyze the feasibility of collocation. This analysis must be submitted with an application for a freestanding tower. A good faith effort to investigate the feasibility of collocation on an existing facility will be deemed to have occurred if the applicant submits all of the following information: 3. Evidence that adequate site area exists or does not exist at the potential collocation site to accommodate ancillary equipment for the second provider and still meet all of the development standards required by the applicable chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards in the base zone; CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 39 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.510 SENSITIVE LANDS Sections: 18.510.060 Expiration Approval Period and Extensions 18.510.060 Expiration Approval Period and Extensions Expirations and extensions of approvals are provided in Subsection 18.20.040.G. A. E piration.Approval of a sensitive lands review expires if: 1. Substantial construction of the approved plan has not begun within a 1.5 year period;or B. Extensions.The director may,upon written request by the applicant,grant an extension o 'the approval period not to exceed 1 year, provided that: periodi-and 3. There have been no changes to the applicable comprehensive plan policies and ordinance provisions on which the approval was based. (Ord. 17 22 §2) 18.510.070 Sensitive Lands Applications C. With steep slopes.The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an application for a sensitive lands review on slopes of 25 percent or greater or unstable ground when all of the following criteria are met: 5. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development,the areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted to prevent erosion in compliance with CWS "Design and Construction Standards"Chapter 18.320, Landscaping and Screening. D. Within drainageways. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an application for a sensitive lands review within drainageways when all of the following criteria are met: 5. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development,the areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted to prevent erosion in compliance with CWS "Design and Construction Standards"Chapter 18.320, Landscaping mid Screening; E. Within wetlands. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an application for a sensitive lands review within wetlands when all of the following criteria are met: 5. Where natural vegetation has been removed due to land form alteration or development, erosion control provisions of the Surface Water Management program of Washington County must be met and areas not covered by structures or impervious surfaces will be replanted in like or similar CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 40 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment species in compliance with CWS "Design and Construction Standards" Chapter 18.320, 8. The provisions of Chapter 18.520,Urban Forestry,must be met; 81. Physical limitations and natural hazards,special flood hazard area and wetlands,natural areas,and parks,recreation and open space policies of the comprehensive plan have been met. 18.510.090 Density Transfer and Reductions A. Density transfer. Required residential density for apartments,rowhouses,and single detached houses may be transferred from sensitive lands using the following methods: 1. The units per acre calculated by subtracting land areas listed in Subparagraphs 18.40.020.A.1.a-c from the gross acres may be transferred to the remaining buildable land areas subject to the following limitations: a. The number of units that can be transferred is limited to the number of units that would have been allowed on 25 percent of the unbuildable area if not for these regulations;and b. The total number of units per site does not exceed 125 percent of the maximum number of units per gross acre allowed f r the plicable base , 2. Units per acre calculated by subtracting land areas listed in Subparagraph 18.40.020.A.I.d from the gross acres may be transferred to the remaining buildable land areas on land zoned R-12,R-25,and R-40 subject to the following limitations: a. The number of units that can be transferred is limited to the number of units that would have been allowed on the wetland area, if not for these regulations; b. The total number of units per site does not exceed the maximum number of units per gross acre allowed . •- ... • . . - .. • . B. Density reduction. The minimum number of residential units required in a development may be reduced if necessary to ensure that impacts on habitat areas are minimized. The amount of reduction in the minimum density is calculated by subtracting the square footage of inventoried significant habitat that is permanently protected from the total square footage used to calculate the minimum density requirement. The approval authority may impose any reasonable condition necessary to mitigate identified impacts resulting from development on otherwise unbuildable land. - . . • _ . . - . ..- •-- • - .. . • . _- . . .. .. -.The approval authority will approve,approve with conditions,or deny the density reduction-adjustment-provided that the proposal will directly result in the protection of significant habitat areas through placement in a non-buildable tract or protected with a restrictive easement. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Omnibus Amendments Page 41 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.620r . BRIDGEPORT VILLAGE PLAN DISTRICT n 18.620.010 Purpose The purpose of this chapterdistrict is to recognize and accommodate the changing commercial and residential marketplace by allowing commercial and residential mixed uses in the approximately 7-acre portion of the Bridgeport Village site that is within the City of Tigard in the Mixed:Use Commercial(MUC- 1)zone.Retail,office,business services,and personal services are emphasized,but residential uses are also allowed.A second purpose is to recognize that when developed under certain regulations,commercial and residential uses may be compatible in the Mixed:Use Commercial zone. 18.620.020 Applicability A. Applicability. The regulations of this chapter apply to the Bridgeport Village Plan District. The boundaries of the plan district are shown on Map 18.620.A,which is located at the end of this chapter, and on the official zoning map,and described by the intergovernmental agreement between the City of Tigard and City of Tualatin,dated March 26,2002. B. Conflicting standards. In addition to - . •-. - •. . . ', - - . -•- . •- other applicable standards of this title,the following standards apply to all development located within the Bridgeport Village Plan District within the MUC-1 zone.The standards and requirements in this chapter govern in the event of a conflict. 18.620.040 Development Standards B. Development standards. 8. Minimum landscape areacequifement: 10 percent. 9. Density and floor area ratio. For the purposes of required floor area ratio(FAR)and residential densities,lot area is the net development area as determined using the process provided in Section 18.40.020. 18.620.050 Signs A. Signs. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.435, Signs,the following standards must be met: 1. Residential-only developments within the MUC-1 must meet the sign requirements for the R-40 zone, Subsection 18.435.130.A; nonresidential development within the MUC-1 must meet the requirements of the C-P zone, Subsection 18.435.130.C. •- . •• . • •.• . _. ' . - . • Section 18.135.130;sign area increases are prohibitednet-ellewed. 3. Freestanding signs are prohibited within the required L 1 landscape S-4 screeninjareas. 18.620.070 Design Standards C. Site design standards. Development must meet the following site design standards. 3. Front setback design. For setbacks greater than 0 feet, landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-surfaced expansion of the sidewalk must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street,the required improvements must be provided on all streets. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 42 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Landscaping must comply with the applicable standard in Paragraph 18.620.070.C.5. Hard- surfaced areas must be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials.Benches and other street furnishings are required.These areas may contribute to the minimum landscapeing area standardrequifements. 4. Walkway connection to building entrances.A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway.The walkway must be at least 6 feet wide and paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are required. These areas may contribute to the minimum landscapeir►g area standardrequirements. 5. Parking location and landscape design. Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. When buildings or phases are adjacent to more than one public street,primary streets will be identified by the city where this requirement applies. If located on the side,parking is limited to 50 percent of the street frontage. When abutting public streets,parking must be screened to the S-4 standard as provided in Table 18.420.2. • . . . . . . . . • _. . .. - • • -- _ .. •-_ - - •-• . .. .. whichever is greater. All other site landscaping must be/An/et/landscaped to Mean L-2 general landscaping standard. .•- _•. - •.• !.! e.-. D. Building design standards. Nonresidential buildings must comply with the standards below. Residential-only and mixed-use buildings where at least 50.1 percent of the floor area of the building is residential must comply with Section 18.620.080. 6. Roof-mounted equipment. Roof-mounted equipment must be screened to the S-1 standard as provided in Table 18.420.2 • ..•. -- .. . • •• . Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. -. •: .. _ . . -- - . .. . • .. • !, Landscaping and Screening.(Ord. 17 22 §2) 18.620.080 Design Compatibility Standards F. Mechanical equipment.Roof-mounted mechanical equipment, other than vents or ventilators, must be to the S-1 standard as provided in Section 18.420.050. .-. . . . . . - _ grenficl-level-view:Screening must be integrated with exterior building design. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Omnibus Amendments Page 43 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.630 DURHAM ADVANCED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY PLAN DISTRICT Sections: 18.630.050 Landscaping Buffering and Screening Standards 18.630.030 Uses are limited to those in Table 18.630.1. The use categories in Chapter 18.60, Use Categories, that are . 1 18.630.040 Development Standards A. Setbacks. Development must comply with the following standards: 3. Development located entirely underground is exempted from setback requirements provided all other requirements of this title arc satisfied,including buffering and screening standards. 5. New structures fronting a public road must maintain a setback of not less than 0.5 of the projected ultimate road width as measured from centerline of the adjacent roadway, utilizing street width provided in Section 18.910.030. C. Lot coverage and landscaping. Development is subject to the following lot coverage and landscaping standards: For development within the administrative and operations subdistricts the maximum lot coverage is 75 percent and the minimum landscape arearequirement is 25 percent. D. Accessory structures. Accessory structures must comply with the following standards: 2. 4 -- _ . . . - . . . 2--- . _ - - • _ • .. except as otherwise regulated by Chapter 18.150, Wireless Communication Facilities, must have setbacks equal to or greater than the height of the proposed structure.A InnElscaped planting screen, around these structures and accessory attachments. Where freestanding private communication and utility facilities that are accessory to an allowed use and not subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.450, Wireless Communication Facilities, are proposed, such facilities must be set back from all property lines a distance equal to or greater than the height of the facility. Freestanding communication or utility facilities include, but are not limited to, wind turbines and communication towers, antennas,and receivers. 18.630.050 LandscapingRuffering and Screening Standards All Nnew development must comply with the required landscaping and screening standards as provided in Sections 18.420.040 and 18.420.050, with comply with the requirements of Chapter 18.4320, Landscaping and Screening, subject to the following exceptions to buffering and screening standards as provided in Tables-18.320.1, and 18.320.2: A. Development in the administrative subdistrict must provide the following screening meet buffer type B along the eastern boundary of the subdistrict, as provided in Table 18.320.2. No buffering or sScreening is not required along the northern and southern boundaries of the subdistrict. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Omnibus Amendments Page 44 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 1. A screen that is 20 feet in width,planted with a six-foot hedge,trees spaced at a minimum of 15 feet and maximum of 40 feet;and shrubs; 2. A screen that is 15 feet in width with a six-foot sight-obscuring fence, and planted with trees spaced at a minimum of 15feet and maximum of 40 feet,and shrubs;or 3. A screen that is 10 feet in width,planted with a six-foot wall, trees spaced at a minimum of 15 feet and maximum of 40 feet;and shrubs. B. Development in the operations subdistrict is subject to a 40-foot wide screen with a six-foot hedge, sight-obscuring fence, or wall and be planted with trees, spaced at a minimum of 15 feet and maximum of 40 feet; and shrubs must meet buffer type F along all boundaries of the subdistrict, as provided in Table 18.320.2,with the exception of the boundary between the operations subdistrict and administrative subdistrict. C. The floodplain subdistrict is subject to a 10-foot wide screen planted with grass or living groundcover. buffer type A,as provided in Table 18.320.2. D. In lieu of these standards, a detailed buffer area landscaping and screening plan may be submitted for the director's approval as an alternative to the buffer buffer--ar-ea landscaping and screening standards, provided it affords the same degree of buffering and screening as required by this chapter. (Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.630.090 Additional Standards for Conditional Uses Within the Administrative Subdistrict B. Standards. Conditional uses within the administrative subdistrict are subject to the following development standards in addition to those in Sections 18.710.030 and 18.710.010: 6. All roof-mounted equipment must be screened to the S-1 standard as provided in Section 18.420.050from view from adjacent public streets Solar heating and photovoltaic panels are exempted from this standard. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 45 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.640 RIVER TERRACE PLAN DISTRICT Sections: 18.640.050 Community Commercial Development Standards 18.640.050 Community Commercial Development Standards Development in the C-C zone is subject to the land use and development standards in Chapter 18.120, Commercial Zones, and Chapter 18.320, Commercial Zone Development Standards, except where an adjustment has been approved as provided by Chapter 18.715,Adjustments,or Subsection 18.640.660.D. 18.640.060 River Terrace Boulevard Development Standards A. Applicability. The applicable development standards in this MI, •- .:: ' .. - .. - .•- apply to all development in River Terrace, except where ..•. - .. . . - . Chapter 18790a adjustment has been approved as provided by Chapter 18.715, Adjustments, or Subsection 18.640.060.D,and except as specified below. B. Building placement and design. 1. The following standards apply to all apartment,rowhouse,and single detached house development that is located on the side of the River Terrace Boulevard ROW opposite the trail corridor,except as approved through the adjustment process in compliance with where an adjustment has been approved as provided in Subsection 18.640.060.D. The following standards apply in lieu of the design standards in Chapter 18.230, Apartments; Chapter 18.280, Rowhouses_; and Chapter 18.290,Single Detached Houses, only for the building facades specified below. a. Rowhouse and single detached house lots must abut the River Terrace Boulevard ROW with their front or side lot lines. i. Lots with front lot lines abutting the River Terrace Boulevard ROW must meet all of the building design standards in Subsection 18.640.070.E18.610.079.1. ii. Lots with side lot lines abutting the River Terrace Boulevard ROW must meet the building design standards for articulation, eyes on the street, detailed design, and garages and carports in Paragraphs 18.640.070.E18.610.0701.1,2,4,and 5 for the facade that faces the River Terrace Boulevard ROW. b. Any building designed for residential use on an apartment development site that is located within 40 feet of the River Terrace Boulevard ROW must meet all of the building design standards in Subsection 18.640.070.E18.610.070.1 for the entire elevation that faces the River Terrace Boulevard ROW,including those portions of the building facade that are more than 40 feet from the ROW. c. Apartment or rowhouse development sites may not include nonresidential buildings or uses (e.g.,parking lots,detached garages or carports, and utility or storage buildings)within 40 feet of the River Terrace Boulevard ROW. 2. The following standards apply to all apartment,rowhouse,and single detached house development that is located on the side of the River Terrace Boulevard ROW with the trail corridor,except where an adjustment has been approved as provided in as approved through the adj-u tment process in CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 46 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Subsection 18.640.060.D. The following standards apply in lieu of the design standards in Chapter 18.230, Apartments; Chapter 18.280, Rowhouses; and Chapter 18.290, Single Detached Houses,only for the building facades specified below. a. Rowhouse and single detached house lots must abut the River Terrace Boulevard ROW with their front, side,or rear lot lines. i. Lots with front lot lines abutting the River Terrace Boulevard ROW must meet all of the building design standards in Subsection 18.640.070.E1-8:640:078.I. ii. Lots with side or rear lot lines abutting the River Terrace Boulevard ROW must meet the building design standards for articulation, eyes on the street, detailed design, and garages and carports in Paragraphs 18.640.070.E48.640.070.I.1,2,4,and 5 for the facade that faces the River Terrace Boulevard ROW. iii. All development must provide at least one walkway connection between the development and the trail a minimum of every 200 feet of River Terrace Boulevard ROW length,or as otherwise required by the city engineer for connectivity purposes. b. Any building designed for residential use on an apartment development site that is located within 40 feet of the River Terrace Boulevard ROW must meet all of the building design standards in Subsection 18.640.070.E18.640.070.1 for the entire elevation that faces the River Terrace Boulevard ROW,including those portions of the building facade that are more than 40 feet from the ROW. c. Apartment or rowhouse development sites must not include nonresidential buildings or uses (e.g.,parking lots,detached garages or carports,and utility or storage buildings)within 40 feet of the River Terrace Boulevard ROW. 3. The following standards apply to all development subject to conditional use approval that is located on either side of the River Terrace Boulevard ROW, except where an adjustment has been approved as provided in . ... . •. • .. . •• . ._ . .. - • • Subsection I8.640.060.D. a. Any building that is located within 40 feet of the River Terrace Boulevard ROW must meet all of the building design standards in Subsection 18.640.070.E for the entire elevation that faces the River Terrace Boulevard ROW,including those portions of the building facade that may be further than 40 feet from the ROW, or as otherwise determined by the approval authority through the conditional use review process. D. Adjustments. An application for an adjustment is processed through a Type II procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.060. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an adjustment application . . .• _ • - .•, • . . •. _ •- . . - . •!, • _•. ..-• , when all of the following are met. 18.640.070 Planned Developments The requirements of Chapter 18.770,Planned Developments,apply to all planned developments in River Terrace,except as modified below. A. Density calculation. To encourage development that is consistent with the design concept for River Terrace Boulevard, the River Terrace Community Plan, and the building design standards in this CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 47 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment chapter, planned developments in River Terrace may limit the land dedicated for public or private rights-of-way,including tracts for vehicle access,to 20 percent of gross site acreage for the purpose of calculating net development area and density as provided in Paragraphs 18.40.020.0 and D. B. Housing types. In addition to Paragraph 18.770.030.1.2, all housing types may be allowed in the C-C zone where appropriately located, designed, and scaled.Any proposed housing must meet the applicable standards of this chapter and the applicable housing type chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards,except as adjusted through the planned development approval process. .. •.. .. . . . _ - ... ' .. .. • - ... . . .. - .. - • .. . .. . . . •• .• - t.! e. .. • -- 1. Lot dimensions. The minimum lot area and lot width standards of the applicable-lase zone do not residential development, or residentially zoned land that is undeveloped is in an easement or tract,must meet the minimum lot area and lot width standards of the applicable base zone. 2. Building height. The maximum building height standard of the applicable base zone do not apply abutting existing residential development, or residentially zoned-land that is undeveloped or is in an casement or tract, must be set back 1 additional foot for every 2 feet of height above the maximum height allowed on the side of the lot abutting the-perimeter. 3. Setbacks. The setback standards of the applicable base zone do not apply to any building on any lot,including those lots abutting right of way,except as follows: in an easement or tract, must meet the setback standard of the applicable base zone or the b. All buildings must meet the minimum requirements of the state building cede-and-fire code. which vehicle access is taken from a public right of way. If vehicle access is taken from a private street or alley, this setback may be reduced to zero feet where proper clearances for net included in Subparagraph 18.610.070.B.3.a, the-applicant -must specify- proposed setbacks on either a lot by lot or area wide basis. a lesser perimeter setback where the applicant demonstrates that a smaller let or lesser-setback will lots described above in Paragraphs 18.610.070.B.1 3. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 48 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment C. Private outdoor area residential use. The private outdoor area requirements of Paragraph 18.770.080.D.5 only apply to apartment development. !. _ . .. ... - . .. - .. • . . . . . . - , - . •. •. - -. ... . . . . E. Sh d p pace facilities.The shared open space facility requirements of Paragraph 18.770.080.D.13 de not apply. In lieu of these reements, the following open-space requirements and development C Common open space.A minimum of 20 percent ofgross site area is required as common open space. Common open space may not contain sensitive lands. The following alternative open space and development enhancements may be provided in lieu of meeting the 20-percent open space standard. These fequirements alternatives are intended to provide the community with added benefits that are consistent with the overall development vision for River Terrace as described in the River Terrace Community Plan and River Terrace Park System Master Plan Addendum. 1. The development must provide parks,trails, or open space that: a. Meets a need for neighborhood parks,linear parks,open space,or trails that is identified in the River Terrace Park System Master Plan Addendum with respect to both location and the plan's level of service standard;and b. Will be dedicated to the public if the proposal is for a neighborhood park, linear park, or trail. 2. The development must include at least three of the following development enhancements: a. Trails or paths that augment the public sidewalk system and facilitate access to parks, schools, trails, open spaces, commercial areas, and similar destinations. Trails and paths must meet all applicable federal and state accessibility standards and be dedicated to the public or placed in a public access easement. Trails and paths in a public access easement will be maintained by a homeowner association. b. Nature trails along or through natural resource areas or open spaces. Trails through protected natural resource areas must obtain all necessary approvals and meet all applicable development standards. Trails must meet all applicable federal and state accessibility standards and be dedicated to the public or placed in a public access easement. Trails in a public access easement will be maintained by a homeowner association. c. Trails,paths, or sidewalks that provide direct access to a public park or recreation area that is no further than 0.25 miles from the development site.Trails and paths must meet all applicable federal and state accessibility standards and be dedicated to the public or placed in a public access easement. Trails and paths in a public access easement must be maintained by a homeowner association. d. Intersection treatments that are acceptable to the city engineer and that elevate the pedestrian experience through art, landscaping, signage, enhanced crossings, or other similar treatments. e. High-quality architectural features on rowhouses and single detached houses that meet the building design standards in Subsection 18.640.070.E.18.640.0704. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 49 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 3. For those properties abutting Roy Rogers Road or River Terrace Boulevard, one or more of the following enhancements may be provided in lieu of one or more of the enhancements listed in Paragraph 18.640.070.C.218.610.070.E.2: a. Long-term maintenance plan administered by a homeowner association that is acceptable to the applicable road authority for any proposed or required landscaping in or adjacent to the Roy Rogers Road or River Terrace Boulevard right-of-way that is not part of a stormwater management facility. b. High-quality visual and noise buffer along Roy Rogers Road that includes both a vegetative and solid barrier component outside of the public right-of-way. c. Park facilities in the River Terrace Trail corridor,including,but not limited to,benches,picnic tables, lighting, or small playground areas (i.e., tot lots or pocket parks). Provision of such facilities may allow the applicant to count the trail corridor as a linear park facility, thus contributing to meeting the city's level of service standards in the River Terrace Park System Master Plan Addendum for both linear parks and trails. The public works director will determine whether the proposed facilities elevate the trail corridor to a linear park facility. DG.Street design standards.The standards of Chapter 18.910,Improvement Standards,apply in addition to the specific provisions for public skinny streets, private streets, and private alleys in Subsections 18.640.080.0 and DD and E. H. Phased development. The provision for phased development allowed by Subseetien 18:770.030.F El. Design standards for single detached houses and rowhouses.The following design standards apply only when to single detached houses and rowhouses where the applicant chooses to provide them under Subparagraph 18.640.070.C.2.eI8.610.070.E.2.e or where required by Subsection 18.640.060.A.: - • - : •• .. • . The design standards in Chapter 18.290, Single Detached Houses, and Chapter 18.280,Rowhouses,apply in all other situations. These standards . . •_ . - - .. - • •. . •.• - . • are intended to promote architectural detail,human-scale design,street visibility,and privacy of adjacent properties,while affording flexibility to use a variety of architectural styles. The graphics provided are intended to illustrate how development could comply with these standards and should not be interpreted as requiring a specific architectural style.An architectural feature may be used to comply with more than one standard. 1. Articulation.All buildings must incorporate design elements that break up all street-facing facades into smaller planes as follows.An illustration of articulation is shown in Figure 18.640.2 below. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Omnibus Amendments Page 50 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Figure 18.640.2 Building Articulation Dorms 1141 III ilia TO= :{cony Porch impa.r.r. Recessed tagade a. This standard does not apply to buildings on lots that have less than 30 feet of street frontage. b. For buildings on lots with 30 to 60 feet of street frontage, a minimum of one of the following elements must be provided on each street-facing facade that has 30 to 60 feet of street frontage. i. A porch that is at least 5 feet deep. ii. A balcony that is at least 2 feet deep and is accessible from an interior room. iii. A window that projects at least 2 feet from the street-facing facade and is at least 5 feet wide(e.g.,bay window). iv. A vertical wall section that is offset by at least 2 feet from the street-facing facade and is at least 6 feet wide. v. A gabled dormer. c. For buildings on lots with over 60 feet of street frontage,a minimum of one additional element from Subparagraph 18.640.070.El-8.640.070:4.1.b must be provided for every 30 feet of street frontage over 60 feet, on each street-facing facade that has over 60 feet of street frontage. Elements must be distributed along the length of the facade so that there is no more than 30 feet between elements. 2. Eyes on the street.At least 12 percent of the area of each street-facing facade must include windows or entrance doors. An illustration of eyes on the street is shown in Figure 18.640.3. Street-facing facade is defined as the aggregate area of all vertical exterior walls measured from top of finished floor at lowest level to top plate or roof eave at highest level,including areas of exterior walls above top plate or roof eave,such as areas within gables,dormers,and clerestories. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 51 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Figure 18.640.3 Eyes on the Street Street-facing windows and main entrance boor . �r.._ 50%of garage door _- ILi 1 1 window area i 1 T ig 1 i a. Windows.Window area is the aggregate area of each window unit measured around the visible perimeter of the window, including the outer window frame and any interior grids, mullions, or transoms. i. Wall windows. All of the window area in a street-facing facade wall, including the side wall of a garage, may count toward meeting this standard provided that the windows are transparent and allow views from the building to the street. Glass blocks and privacy windows in bathrooms do not count toward meeting this standard. ii. Garage door windows. Half of the window area in the door(s)of an attached garage may count toward meeting this standard. b. Entrance doors.Door area is considered the portion of the door that moves.Door frames do not count toward this standard. Entrance doors used to meet this standard must be parallel to the street or at an angle that is no more than 45 degrees from the street. 3. Entrances. At least one entrance must meet both of the following standards. An illustration of entrances is shown in Figure 18.640.4.The entrance must be: a. Set back no further than 8 feet beyond the longest street-facing wall of the building; and b. Parallel to the street,at an angle that is no more than 45 degrees from the street,or open onto a porch. If the entrance opens onto a porch,the porch must meet the following standards: i. Have a minimum area of 25 square feet and a minimum depth of 5 feet, ii. Have at least one porch entrance facing the street, iii. Have a roof that is no more than 12 feet above the floor of the porch,and iv. Have a roof that covers at least 30 percent of the porch area. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 52 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Figure 18.640.4 Entrances I I I1 GARAGE DWELLING 1 I GARAGE ENVE1.UNG I , I UNIT r I I UNIT 1 ra 1 i PIA I III �-t-8 fc mu+n i I rt :� Porch — j I I I 1 S i ". entry l i i Longest 1 11 street facing wall i 111 dofclwel{inguntt I II Front lot line , Front lot line , L.._ ___._..line..-- -------►-----� I-- ------ --•— •----.r.._...._J Firlrwaltc } STREET STREET 4. Detailed design. All buildings must include at least five of the following elements on all street- facing facades. An illustration of detailed design elements is shown in Figure 18.640.5. a. Covered porch: a minimum depth of 5 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall, and a minimum width of 5 feet. b. Recessed entrance area: A minimum depth of 2 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall,and a minimum width of 5 feet. Figure 18.640.5 Detailed Design Elements +�- Roof line offsets j 1. Root eaves Window trim a ,r., - ;. 1 Covered porch Recessed entry c. Wall offset: a minimum offset of 16 inches from one exterior wall surface to the other. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Omnibus Amendments Page 53 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment d. Dormer: a minimum width of 4 feet that is integrated into the roof form. e. Roof eave:a minimum projection of 12 inches from the intersection of the roof and the building walls. f. Roof offset: a minimum offset of 2 feet from the top surface of one roof to the top surface of the other. g. Roof shingles:tile or fire-resistantweed-shingle roofing material. h. Roof design:gable roof,hip roof,or gambrel roof design. i. Roof pitch: one roof pitch of at least 500 square feet in area that is sloped to face the southern sky and has its eave line oriented within 30 degrees of the true north/south axis. j. Horizontal lap siding: a minimum visible lap width of 3 to 7 inches once installed. The siding material must be wood,fiber-cement,or vinyl to meet this standard. k. Accent siding:brick,cedar shingles, stucco,or other accent material that covers a minimum of 40 percent of the street-facing facade. 1. Window trim: a minimum width of 2.5 inches and a minimum depth of 5/8 inches around all street-facing windows. m. Window recess: a minimum depth of 3 inches, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall,for all street-facing windows except where a bay window is proposed that meets the standard in Subparagraph 18.640.070.E4-8,6404704.4.n. n. Window projection (e.g.,bay window): a minimum depth of 2 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall,and a minimum width of 5 feet. o. Balcony: a minimum depth of 3 feet and a minimum width of 5 feet that is accessible from an interior room. p. Attached garage: 35 percent or less of the street-facing facade width,as measured between the inside of the garage door frame. 5. Garages and carports.These standards are intended to prevent garages and carports from obscuring or dominating the street-facing facade of residential buildings.An illustration of garage door width is shown in Figure 18.640.6. a. Garage and carport setback.A garage door or carport entrance designed for vehicle access must be set back a minimum of 20 feet from the street property line. Where vehicle access is taken from a private street or alley, this setback may be reduced to 0 feet where proper clearances for turning and backing movements are provided. A garage door or carport entrance designed for vehicle access must be the same distance or located a greater distance from the street property front or side lot line as the widest than the longest street-facing wall of the building that encloses living area,except as follows: i. A garage or carport may extend up to 5 feet in front of the widestle gest street-facing wall if there is a covered front porch and the garage or carport does not extend beyond the front of the porch. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 54 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment ii. A garage or carport may extend up to 5 feet in front of the widest longest street-facing wall where the garage is part of a 2-story building and there is a window on the second story above the garage that faces the street with a minimum area of 12 square feet. b. Garage door width. The width of a garage door is the width of the opening as measured from inside the garage door frame. i. A dwelling is allowed one 12-foot-wide garage door, regardless of the total width of the street-facing facade. ii. A dwelling may have a garage door wider than 12 feet provided that it does not exceed 40 percent of the total width of the street-facing facade on which the garage door is located. iii. The maximum allowed garage door width may be increased to 50 percent of the total width of the street-facing facade provided that a total of 7 detailed design elements from Paragraph 18.640.070.E18.640.070.1.4 are included on the street-facing facade on which the garage door is located. c. Garage orientation. A garage may face the front or street side lot line on a corner lot provided that the eyes on the street standard in Paragraph 18.640.070.E18.640.070.1.2 is met for both street-facing facades. Figure 18.640.6 Garage Door Width rPropertyLine I � 1 - 7 X.12' allowed. More than 12' allowed when X no more than 40 percent(or 50 percent in some circumstances)of Y. Y; Street-facing facade. • (X measured between the inside of the garage door ' I-- X —I frame) . y I STREET (Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.640.080 Street Design A. River Terrace Boulevard. 1. Design standards for River Terrace Boulevard. Right-of-way width must be 110 feet, plus additional right-of-way as needed for slopes, retaining walls, etc. Right-of-way and improvement CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 55 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment widths may be reduced to lessen impacts on protected natural resource areas. Right-of-way and improvement widths may also be reduced where the city determines that on-street parking adjacent to the trail corridor is not feasible or necessary or where a reduction is otherwise in the public interest as described in the River Terrace Community Plan, River Terrace Transportation System Plan Addendum, or River Terrace Park System Master Plan Addendum. Given the unique nature of this street,the public works director,in consultation with the community development director, will determine the final alignment, right-of-way width, and improvement widths using the following standards as guidelines unless the applicant requests a formal adjustment through a Type II procedure,as provided in Chapter 18.715,Adjustments. -•- !.!:! . . _ .. . . criteria in Paragraph 18.790.030.B.8. All landscaped areas must meet the Public Improvement Design Standards for River Terrace Boulevard. B. Commercial collector. 1. Design standards for commercial collector. Right-of-way width must be 78 feet, plus additional right-of-way as needed for slopes,retaining walls,etc.Right-of-way and improvement widths may be reduced to lessen impacts on protected natural resource areas. Right-of-way and improvement widths may also be reduced where the city determines that a reduction is in the public interest as described in the River Terrace Community Plan, River Terrace Transportation System Plan Addendum, or River Terrace Park System Master Plan Addendum. The city engineer will determine the final alignment, right-of-way width, and improvement widths using the following standards as guidelines unless the applicant requests a formal adjustment through a Type II procedure, as provided in Chapter 18.715,Adjustments. _ - . !.t:! - . _ -.: . criteria in Paragraph 18.790.030.B.8. - ! _e _. _ . . . . . . _ _ . - ' e • D _ - = - - ' ' e.- - = CD.Public skinny streets and private streets. Development sites that have public street frontage on an arterial street upon which they cannot take vehicle access may take access from a private street that meets city standards or from another public street that,at a minimum,meets the skinny street option as shown in Figure 18.910.6.B.Private street standards are established by the city engineer in compliance with Subsection 18.910.030.T. 3. Private streets that are proposed in locations other than those described in Paragraph 18.640.080.C.2-1-8:64-070841D4 must meet all of the standards in Subsection 18.910.030.T. . ... • . • . . .. . . D£.Private alleys.Development sites that have public street frontage on a local street,neighborhood route, or collector street may choose to provide vehicle access through a private alley provided that the alley meets all of the standards below and in Subsection 18.910.030.R. • :•. ..-- . . . •- - .. . . . . criteria in Paragraph 18.790.030.B.8. 18.640.100 On-Street Parking E. Adjustments. Adjustments to these standards are processed through a Type II procedure, as provided in Chapter 18.715, Adiustments.Section 18.710.060, using approval -criteria in Subparagraph 18.790.030.B.5.a. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 56 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.650 TIGARD DOWNTOWN PLAN DISTRICT 18.650.010 Purpose A. Purpose. The objectives of the Tigard Downtown Plan District are to implement the comprehensive plan, Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, and urban renewal plan and ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the downtown. The regulations are intended to: 4. Promote Tigard's downtown as a desirable place to live and do business. Promote development of high-quality high-density housing and employment opportunities in the downtown. 18.650.030 Approval Process C. Approval period and extensions.Expirations and extensions of approvals are provided in Subsection 18.20.040.G. -- ... . . • - • . . . •.. . . . -- .. - . . . .- ... . . will expire if: I. Substantial construction of the approved plan has not begun within a 1.5 year period; or 2. Construction on the site is a departure from the approved plan. period; and E. Phased development. 1. If the development takes more than 1 year, the applicant must submit a phased development time 7 years without reapplying for design review. .• - b. The development and occupancy of any phase is not dependent en the use of temporary public district standard; - - c. The phased development must net result in requiring the city er other property owners to d. The decision may be appealed and must follow the appeal procedure for a Type II decision, as provided in Section 18.710.090. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 57 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 18.650.050 Building and Site Development Standards B. Development standards. Development standards apply to all new development in the MU-CBD zone, including developments using the Ttrack 3 approval process. Table 18.650.1 Development Standards 111121131 Sub-Areas Standard Main Street 99W/Hall Corridor Scoffins/Commercial Fanno/Burnham) (MS) (99H) (SC) (FB) Minimum Lot Size None None None None Minimum Lot Width None None None None Minimum Setbacks 0/5 ft. -Front 0 ft. (5 ft. for frontage 0 ft. 0 ft. on 99W) -Street side 0 ft. LL LL 0 ft. -Side 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. -Rear 0 ft. I 5 ft. 5 ft. Maximum Setbacks -Front 10 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft; 20 ft. -Street side 10 ft. None None None Front Setback 0/m Minimum 0 ft. (5 ft.for frontage 0-4, 0 on 99W) Maximum 10 ft. 20-ft20 ft. Street Side Setback 0-ft, 0 ft. 9-ft: 0- t: Maximum 4 None Nene Nene Side Setback None Nene None Nene Abutting more None None None Nene restrictive zone D ercccir back i n 0-€t 5 ft. 5 ft. -- ter None None Nene Nene Garage-Setbaek None None Nene Nene Building Height -Minimum 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. -Maximum 80 ft. 45 ft. 80 ft. 80 ft. [7] - Ground floor height 15 ft. 15 ft. None None minimum Maximum Lot Coverage 100%percent 90%percent 90%percent 80%percent Minimum Landscape 0%percent[5] 10%pert 10%percent 20%percent Area [4][11 CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 58 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Minimum Building 50%percent 50%pest 50%percent 50%percent Frontage Residential Density(units per acre) -Minimum [8] 25 25 25 15 -Maximum 50 50 50 [6] 50 [6] [5] Parking lots must meet the tree canopy standards provided in Paragraph18.420.060.B.4.Lnndscapi-ng [7] 45 feet within 200 feet of Fanno Creek Park boundary(see Map 18.650.A)or within 50 feet of a low: or medium:density residential zonedistrict. 2. Parking location. c. When abutting a public street,parking areas must be screened to the S-4 standard as provided in Table 18.420.2. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . Chapter 18.320,Landscaping and Screening. 18.650.080 Additional Standards F. Chapter 18.520, Urban Forestry. FG. Chapter 18.910, Improvement Standards. GM. Chapter 18.920, Access Egress and Circulation. HT. Chapter 18.930,Vision Clearance Areas. 18.650.100 Exceptions to Standards A. Exceptions to setbacks.The director may grant an exception to the setbacks requirements in the applicable base zone based on findings that the approval will result in the following: B. Exceptions to parking-requirements. The director may grant an exception or deduction to the off-street parking dimensional and minimum number of space requirements in the applicable subarea-based on the following: D. Exceptions to landscapei-ng arearequi-rements. The director may grant an exception to the landscaping area standardrequirements of this title, upon finding that the overall landscape plan provides for at least 20 percent of the gross site to be landscaped. (Ord. 17-22 §2) CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 59 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.660 TIGARD TRIANGLE PLAN DISTRICT 18.660.030 General Provisions D. In addition to any required land use approvals or development permits, Chapter 15.16 of the Tigard Municipal Code requires an encroachment permit for any privately-owned structures or furnishings allowed by this chapter in the public right-of-way. 18.660.040 Review Process C. Land use review. 4. Adjustment application. An adjustment application is processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060. b. An adjustment application will be approved when all of the following approval criteria have been met for each requested adjustment: iii. Ike proposed adjustment is needed to address development constraints associated with the proposed development site, and the applicant has adequately explained the need and rationale for the proposed adjustment.Development constraints include,but are not limited to,the following: • Lot size, shape, or topography • Multiple street frontages • Protected natural resources iv. proposed adjustment is needed to address transportation network connectivity standards, it and includes,where practicable, pedestrian,bicycle, or vehicle transportation facilities where practicable. Transportation network connectivity standards are provided in Subsection 18.660.090.C.3. v. Ig-he-proposed adjustment is for the removal of a district tree, and the applicant will pay the district tree removal fee listed in the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule unless a finding is made that the proposed development site cannot be reasonably developed without removal of the district tree.District tree information and requirements are provided in Subsection I8.660.070.H. 18.660.050 Pre-Existing Development and Approvals E. Sites with pre-existing land use approvals. 3. Phased developments. Development that obtained land use approval for a phased site development review application prior to the effective date of this chapter is allowed to complete all approved phases as provided in the specific land use approval or as allowed by Subsection 18.20.040.G.without respect to the time period specified in Paragraph 1-8.7.80.030.E.1 provided that the approval has not expired pursuant to Subsection 18.780.030.C. 18.660.060 Land Use Standards B. General provisions. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 60 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 3. D ' • - - .. -- Development with drive-through service is prohibited. C. Land use standards. Table 18.660.4 Use Table Use Category Use-ape CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 61 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.670 WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER PLAN DISTRICT 18.670.010 Purpose 18.670.020 Applicability 18.670.030 Uses 18.670.040 Development Standards 18.670.050 Pre-Existing Uses and Developments 18.670.060 Street Connectivity 18.670.070 Site Design Standards 18.670.080 Building Design Standards 18.670.090 Signs 18.670.100 Landscaping and Screening 18.670. 1100 Street and Accessway Standards 18.670.040 Development Standards A. Compliance required.All development must comply with= 1. Aall applicable development standards provided in this till, -- . .. - .. - :.-,except where an adjustment has been obtained in compliance with Chapter 18.790,Adjustments,and Subsections 18.670.040.0 and D—E.; and 2. All other applicable standards and requirements in this title. C. Phasing of development standards. Developments may use the site development review process to developments must demonstrate how future development of the site, to the minimum development standards established in this chapter or greater, can be achieved at ultimate build out of the site. The and phased time schedule as provided in Subsection 18.780.030.E for developments approved under this section. If a time period greater than that in Subsection 18.780.030.0 is necessary, it may bo . . •- •-• : iginal application with a detailed time line for completion. CO. Density fequiremeats for developments including or abutting riparian setback.Notwithstanding the density standardsrequirements in Table 18.120.3,the maximum residential density and mixed-use and nonresidential floor area ratio for developments that include or abut riparian setbacks is limited to less than 110 percent of the minimum residential density and floor area ratios in all mixed-use zones,except when the following are met: 1. Wetlands within the development are expanded or enhanced in conformance with the Oregon Division of State Lands Wetlands Restoration and Enhancement Program,and if applicable; 2. Fish habitat within the development is enhanced in conformance with the Oregon Division of State Lands Fish Habitat Enhancement Program, and if applicable; 3. The overall flood storage capacity of the 100-year floodplain within the development is increased by 10 percent. If the enhancements described above are approved, or if enhancements are already in existence,the maximum residential density standards shown in Table 18.120.3 and no maximum floor area ratio CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 62 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment standards for mixed-use and nonresidential developments apply. D€. Adjustments to density requirements. The density standardsrequirements in Table 18.120.3 are designed to implement the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. These requirements apply throughout the Washington Square Regional Center Plan District, but the city recognizes that some sites are difficult to develop or redevelop in compliance with these requirements. The adjustment process provides a mechanism by which the minimum density standardsrequifenieftts may be reduced by up to 25 percent of the original requirement if the proposed development continues to meet the intended purpose of the requirement and findings are made that all approval criteria are met. Adjustments—provide flexibility for unusual situations and allow for alternative ways to meet the purpose of this title. 18.670.050 Pre-Existing Uses and Developments A. Applicability. 2. All additions,expansions,or enlargements of existing uses or structures that take place after using the 20 percent addition, expansion, or enlargement exception must be in compliance with the development standards of this title. `- .. .-. . . - •- ' - . .. - • . . . - • . £ I 3. If a pre-existing use is destroyed by fire, earthquake, or other natural disaster, then the use will retain its pre-existing status under this provision provided it is substantially reestablished within 3 years of the date of the loss.The new development must comply with this title. 18. 670.060 Street Connectivity B. Demonstration of standards. All development must demonstrate how one of the following standard options will be met.Adjustments to these standards may be approved as provided in Chapter 18.71510, Adjustments:, - • .. . . , .. - .-• . .' ... • , . - _ - 18.670.070 Site Design Standards A. Compliance.All development must meet the following site design standards. If a lot is 1 acre or larger are met. D. Front setback design. 2. Standard. For setbacks greater than 0 feet, landscaping,an arcade,or a hard-surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path must be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street, the required improvements must be provided on all streets. Landscaping must comply with the applicable standard in Subsection 18.670.070.F.Hard-surfaced areas must be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are encouraged. These areas may contribute to the minimum landscapeing area standard provided in Table 18.320.118.120.3. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 63 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment E. Walkway connection to building entrances. 2. Standard. A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway.This walkway must be at least 6 feet wide and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials.Building entrances at a corner adjacent to a public street intersection are required. These areas may contribute to the minimum landscapeing area standard rem provided in Table 18.320.118.120.3. F. Parking location and landscape design. 2. Standard.Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way must be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings.When buildings or phases are adjacent to more than one public street, primary streets will be identified by the city where this requirement applies. In general, streets with higher functional classification will be identified as primary streets unless specific design or access factors favor another street.If located on the side,parking is limited to 50 percent of the primary street frontage. When abutting public streets, parking must be screened to the S-4 standard as provided in Table 18.420.2. • . . . . ... : . •. •- -. . ••. • • - • .. . -• ..• . _ • .. , • _ •. • . All other site landscaping must be planted landscaped-to thean L-2 gener-al4andscaping standard. - . Chapter 18.320,Landscaping and Screening. 18.670.080 Building Design Standards A. Compliance.All new buildings constructed in the MUC,MUE,and MUR zones within the WSRC must comply with the following design standards. • .•. •••- . •- . 1.- . . ••• . •-• -- criteria provided in Chapter 18.790,Adjustments,arc met. G. Roof-mounted equipment. 2. Standard.All roof-mounted equipment must be must screened to the S-4 standard as provided in Table 18.420.2. .•. . Satellite dishes and other communication equipment must be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels are exempt from this standard. 18.670.090 Signs A. Signs. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 18.435, Signs,the following standards must be met: 1. Residential-only developments within the MUC, MUE, and MUR zones must meet the sign requirements for the R-40 zone as provided in Subsection 18.435.130.A; nonresidential developments within the MUC zone must meet the sign requirements for the commercial zones as provided in Subsection 18.435.130.B;nonresidential development within the MUE zone must meet the sign requirements of the C-P zone as provided in Subsection 18.435.130.C; and nonresidential development within the MUR zones must meet the sign requirements of the C-N zone as provided in Subsection 18.435.130.D. 2. The maximum sign area is provided in Section 18.135.130. Sign area increases are prohibited. 23. The maximum height limit for all signs except wall signs is 10 feet. Wall signs may not extend above the roofline of the wall on which the sign is located.Height increases are prohibited. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 64 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment 34. Freestanding signs are prohibited within required S-4 screening.L 1 landscape areas be substituted provided all height limitations are met. 18.670.1100 Street and Accessway Standards CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 65 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.700 LAND USE APPLICATIONS AND REVIEW TYPES Chapters: 18.710 Land Use Review Procedures 18.715 Adjustments 18.720 Annexations 18.730 Director Determinations 18.740 Conditional Uses 18.745 Extensions 18.750 Historic Resources Overlay-Zone 18.760 Home Occupations 18.765 Modifications 18.770 Planned Developments 18.780 Site Development Reviews 18.790 Adjustments-Text and Map Amendments CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 66 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.710 LAND USE REVIEW PROCEDURES 18.710.020 Summary of Land Use Applications Table 18.710.1 Summary of Land Use Applications Abbreviation Land Use Application Type Applicable Section Review Type ADU Accessory Dwelling Unit 18.220 1 MIS Adequate Public Facilities Exception 18.640 II (inside River Terrace)Adjustment ADJ -Inside River Terrace 18.640 II -Inside TMU zone 18.660 - -Citywide 18.715 ZCA Annexation 18.720 III-Modified, Legislative (N/A) Appeal 18.710 III-various CPA Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment 18.790 III-Modified, Legislative CPA Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment 18.790 Legislative CUP Conditional Use 18.740 III-HO DCA Development Code Text Amendment 18.790 Legislative DIR Director Determination 18.730 I DDR Downtown Design Review 18.650 I,II,III-DR (N/A) Extension 18.745 I,II MIS Historic Resource Designation or Alteration 18.750 II,III-PC HOP Home Occupation Permit 18.760 I,II MLP Land Partition 18.820 II LLA Lot Line Adjustment or Lot Consolidation 18.810 I MAR Marijuana Facility Permit 18.430 I MMD Modification 18.765 I,II PDR Planned Development 18.770 II,III-PC SLR Sensitive Lands Review 18.510 I,II,III-HO SGN Sign Permit 18.435 I SDR Site Development Review 18.780 I,II SUB Subdivision 18.830 H TUP Temporary Use Permit 18.440 1 MIS Transportation Mitigation (inside TMU zone) 18.660 II UFR Urban Forestry Plan Modification or 18.420 I III-HO, Discretionary Review III-PC Zoning Map Amendment III-PC, ZON -Quasi-Judicial(site specific) 18.790 Ili-Modified, -Legislative(citywide) Legislative CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 67 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Table 18-1n 1 _A lrr breviation Applicable Review-Type Section ADU Accessory Dwelling Unit 48.440 1 MIS Adequate Public Facilities Exception 18.610 44 (within River Terrace) ADJ Adjustment Outside TMU zone 0 14 Inside TMU zone 4-8.660 11 Z-GA Annexation Quasi Judicial 420 III Modified Legislative Legislative EPA Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment - Quasi Judicial (site specific) 18.795 444-"edified Legislative(city wide) Legislative CPA Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment 18.795 Legislative CUP Conditional Use - Initial 4-8.740 III HO Major Modification I11 HO - Minor Modification 1 DCA !- • ..••-• .. • • •-• 18.795 Legislative UFR Discretionary Urban Forestry Plan Review 4-8.520 III PC, III HO &IR Director's Determinations_ 18.730 1 DDR `: . - : • !• •,•_• ' - •- 8-658 I, II, III DR MIS . e • . !- .• _ . • ' - . . ! _ . • 1-8.750 III PC - Alteration,Construction or Demolition 14 HOP Type 1 18.760 1 Type II 44 LLA Lot Line Adjustment 18.840 1 LLA Lot Line Consolidation 4-84810 1 MAR ••.. .. .. 4-8-430 1 MUP Minor Land Partition 4-8420 44 MIS Miscellaneous varies varies, PDR Planned Development Concept Plano III PC - Detailed Development Plan III PC S Sensitive Lands Review 4-8.54-0 I, 11, III HO SDR Site Development New Construction 48.780 44 Major Modification 44 MMD Minor Modification 1 SON Sign Permit 18.135 1 5144 Subdivision Without Planned Development 18.830 44 With Planned Development 18.830/ 18.770 Ill PC MIS . .. . 4-8-.660 44 (within Tigard Triangle) CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 68 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Table 18.710.1 Abbreviation Land-Use-Applieation-Type Applicable Review-Type &Mon Temporary Use Permit 4-8440 } UFR . ..• - . - + . x-8.520 1 ZQN _ . . • ••••. - e.. .. III PC - Legislative(City wide) 18.795 Legislative - With Comprehensive Plan Map III ^n. Amendment 18.710.030 General Provisions C. Application submittal. 3. The application must include, at a minimum, the following items. The director may waive items listed if they are not applicable to the proposed application. e. Site plans, landscape plans,grading plans, elevation drawings, preliminary plat,Of final plat, or similar to scale. 18.710.110 Legislative Procedure A. Notice of hearing. 2. A notice of hearing must will be provided as required by state law, and an affidavit of mailing will be included in the record that identifies the mailing date and the names and addresses of the mailing recipients.as follows: as required by state law. notice was mailed to the necessary parties. The affidavit will be made part of the record. the record. 18.710.120 Special Procedures B. Limited land use decisions.A limited land use decision(LLD)is defined and may be used in the manner set forth in ORS 197.015(12). 2. An LLD will be reviewed in compliance with the ORS 197.195.The city will follow the procedures city's Type II review procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.060 except to the extent otherwise required by applicable state law. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 69 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.720 ANNEXATIONS Table 18.720.1 Conversion Table for County and City Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Designations Washington County Land Use City of Tigard City of Tigard Zoning Districts/Plan Designation Plan Designation R-5 Res.5 units per acre R-4.5 Low:density residential R-6 Res.6 units per acre R-7 Medium:density residential R-9 Res.9 units per acre R-12 Medium-density residential R-15 Res. 15 units per acre R-25 Medium-High:density residential R-24 Res.24 units per acres R-25 Medium-High_density residential Office Commercial(OC) C-P Professional Commercial Neighborhood Commercial C-N Neighborhood Commercial (NC) General Commercial(GC) C-G General Commercial Industrial(IND) I-L Light Industrial Institutional(INST) Equivalent to adjacent County Equivalent to adjacent County base zone base zone CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 70 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.730 DIRECTOR DETERMINATIONS 18.730.010 Purpose The purpose of Ddirector Ddeterminations is to resolve situations where terms or phrases within this title are ambiguous or subject to two or more reasonable meanings as applied to a specific property or use, or where this title contains a specific provision for a Ddirector Ddetermination. 18.730.020 Applicability Ddirector Ddeterminations may be issued for the following: 18.730.030 General Provisions A. Director's authority to initiate. The director may initiate a Director Ddetermination on behalf of the city, either specific or not specific to a particular property or circumstance. The Ddirector may also initiate a Ddirector Ddetermination when there is a reasonable dispute or lack of clarity regarding allowed uses on a property. If initiated by the director,no application form or payment are required. B. Director's authority to decline an application. The director may decline to issue a Ddirector Ddetermination. If an application for a Ddirector Ddetermination is declined,the director will respond within 14 days following the date of the request. The director's decision to decline an application is final when the decision is mailed to the party requesting the interpretation. The decision to decline to issue a Director Ddetermination is the city's final local decision. 18.730.040 Approval Process Applications for a Ddirector Ddetermination are processed through a Type I procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.050. 18.730.050 Approval Criteria A Ddirector Ddetermination has no specific approval criteria,except in the following cases: C. The criteria for modification of an e*i ri incl condition of approval are provided in Paragraph 18.20.040.E.4. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 71 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.750 HISTORIC RESOURCES Chapter 18.750 HISTORIC RESOURCESONE Chapter 18.760 HOME OCCUPATIONS Sections: 18.760.060 Revocation mon of Home Occupation Permits 18.760.020 Applicability A. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter apply to any accessory commercial use associated with a primary Household Living use. B. Exemptions. The following activities and uses are exempt from the provisions of this chapter: 1. Garage sales; 2. For-profit production of produce or other food products grown on the premises that meet the agriculture/horticulture use category characteristics, as provided in Chapter 18.60, Use Categories. This may include temporary or seasonal sale of produce or other food productsn on the premises. Farming activities must be consistent ANith the definition of Agriculture/Horticulture provided in Chapter 18.60, Use Categories; 18.760.060 Revocation mon of Home Occupation Permits Chapter 18.790 TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENTS Chapter 18.7950 TEXTMAP AND TEXTMAP AMENDMENTS Sections: 18.7950.010 Purpose 18.7950.020 Legislative Amendments 18.7950.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments 18.7950.010 Purpose 18.7950.020 Legislative Amendments 18.7950.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 72 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.810 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS AND LOT CONSOLIDATIONS 18.810.020 Approval Process A. Approval process.Applications for lot line adjustments and lot consolidations are processed through a Type I procedure,as provided in Section 18.710.050,using approval criteria in Section 18.810.030. B. Approval period. A lot line adjustment or lot consolidation approval is effective for a period of 1.5 Expirations and extensions of approvals are provided in Subsection 18.20.040.G. 2. The final recording is a departure from the approved plan. period not to exceed 1 year provided that: 1. No changes are made on the original plan as approved; within the 1 year extension period;and 3. There have been no changes in the applicable comprehensive plan policies and ordinance 18.810.030 Approval Criteria A. Approval criteria. 1. An additional lot is not created by the lot line adjustment or lot consolidation, and the existing lot or lots are not reduced below the minimum lot size -..' . . ... ' .. • .. • • 2. By reducing the lot size,theThe proposed lots and erexisting structuress}comple with all on the • . . . •- applicable development standardsbase zone regulations. 3. The proposed lots comply with the following: b. The minimum lot width is met. The minimum lot width for residential and non-residential development is provided in the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards.-the development standards for the applicable base zone. The minimum lot width for residential that In the case of a flag lot, the minimum lot width and depth for flag lots is 40 feet and is measured as provided in Section 18.40.080. c. The minimum lot size is met. The minimum lot size for residential and non-residential development is provided in the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 73 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment development is provided in the development standards for the housing types proposed. In the case of a flag lot,the access is not included in the lot area calculation as described,as provided in Section 18.40.080. e. The side lot lines arc at right angles to the street upon which-he-lots front where practicable. Each lot is rectilinear in shape with side lot lines at right angles to front lot lines and rear lot lines parallel to front lot lines,except where not practicable due to location along a street radius or because of existing natural feature or lot shape. Side and rear lot lines must be straight where practicable. Side and rear lot lines that are segmented may not contain cumulative lateral changes in direction that exceed 10 percent of the distance between opposing lot corners. f. Each lot fronts a public right of way by at least 15 feet or has a legally recorded minimum 15 •. . . -••-• . Each lot has a minimum of 40 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of-way, except for the following types of lots: i. Flag lots and rowltouse lots have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of-way; ii. Lots with curved frontages along cul de sacs or eyebrows have a minimum of 20 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of-way as measured along the arc of the front lot line;and iii. Lots at the terminus of a private street have a minimum of20 feet of frontage on a private right-of-way. g. All setback requirements are met.The setback requirements for residential and non-residential development are provided in the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards. development standards of the applicable base zone. The setback requirements for residential development are provided in the development standards for the housing types proposed. 4. With regard to flag lots: b. A e=ee=sight-obscuring fence must be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved access is located within 10 feet of an abutting lot '• : . '.• - ' • 18.320.050. Screening-may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 74 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.820 LAND PARTITIONS 18.820.030 Approval Process A. Approval process. Applications for land partition are processed through a Type II procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.060, using the approval criteria in Section 18.820.040. B. Approval period. •- .. ... . . - - ' . . .. . . . - .. - ••• - • - •• • - • •• • • ' - - ' :Expirations and extensions of approvals are provided in Subsection 18.20.040.G. 1. The partition has not been recorded or has been improperly recorded with Washington County C. Extension. The director will, upon written request by the applicant, grant an extension of the approval 3. There have been no changes in the applicable comprehensive plan policies and ordinance 18.820.040 Approval Criteria A. Approval criteria. 4. All proposed lots comply with the following: b. The minimum lot width is met. The minimum lot width for residential and non-residential development is provided in the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards. that-In the case of a flag lot, the minimum lot width and depth for flag lots is 40 feet and is measured as provided in Section 18.40.080. c. The minimum lot size is met. The minimum lot size for residential and non-residential development is provided in the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards • • . • •- . .. . .. . •- .. _ • . .._ :. In the case of a flag lot, the access flag pole is not included in the lot area calculation as described, as ov-ided in Section 18.40.080. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 75 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Each lot is rectilinear in shape with side lot lines at right angles to front lot lines and rear lot lines parallel to front lot lines,except where not practicable due to location along a street radius or because of existing natural feature or lot shape. Side and rear lot lines must be straight where practicable. Side and rear lot lines that are segmented may not contain cumulative lateral changes in direction that exceed 10 percent of the distance between opposing lot corners. f. Each lot fronts a public right of way by at least 15 feet or has a legally recorded minimum 15 foot wide access easement. Each lot has a minimum of 40 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of-way, except for the following types of lots: i. Flag lots and rowhouse lots have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of-way; ii. Lots with curved frontages along cul de sacs or eyebrows have a minimum of 20 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of-way as measured along the arc of the front lot line;and iii. Lots at the terminus of a private street have a minimum of 20 feet of frontage on a private right-of-way. g. All setback requirements are met.The setback requirements for residential and non-residential development are provided in the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards development are provided in the development standards fore housing types proposed. 5. With regard to flag lots: b. A sereensight-obscuring fence must be provided along the property line of a lot of record where the paved access is located within 10 feet of an abutting lot '• : . '.• • - . 18.320.050.Screening may also be required to maintain privacy for abutting lots and to provide 8. Where landfill or development is allowed within or adjacent to the special flood hazard area,the city will require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjacent toaddjo g and within the special flood hazard area. This area will include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a path, sidewalk, or trail with the special flood hazard area in compliance with the adopted trails plan or transportation plan. (Ord. 17-22 §2) CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 76 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.830 SUBDIVISIONS 18.830.020 General Provisions F. Special flood hazard area dedications.Where land filling or development is allowed within and adjacent to the special flood hazard area outside the zero-foot rise floodway,the city will require consideration of the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjacent tong and within the special flood hazard area. This area will include portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a path, sidewalk, or trail within the special flood hazard area as provided in the adopted trails plan or transportation plan. C. Lot averaging. Lot area or width size may be reduced averaged to allow lots less than the minimum applicable standard lot size . •- •- ... • .. • :. - .-- provided the average lot area or width for all lots in the subdivision is not less than that required . - -- ... ' . . - .. - -•-. All lots created under this provision must be at least 80 percent of the minimum required lot area or width 18.830.030 Approval Process A. Preliminary plat.Approval Process. Applications for a preliminary plat for subdivision are processed through a Type II procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.060, using the approval criteria in 18.830.040. An application for subdivision may also be reviewed concurrently with an application for a planned development,as provided in Chapter 18.770,Planned Developments. B. Approval period. Preliminary plat approval will be effective for a period of 1.5 years from the date of approval. The preliminary plat will expire if:Expirations and extensions of approvals are provided in Subsection 18.20.040.G. 1. A final plat has not been submitted within a 1.5 year period; or C. Extension. not to exceed 1 year;provided that: period; c. There have been ne changes to-t-he applicable ordinance pre.visions en which the approval was based;and D. Phased development. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 77 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment actual construction time period for any phase be greater than 2 years without reapplying for a preliminary plat; 2. The criteria for approving a phased subdivision proposal are: public facilities: i. For purposes of this subsection, a temporary public facility is an interim facility not constructed to the applicable city or district standard;and ii. The phased development must not result in requiring the city or ether property owners to construct public facilities that were required as a part of the approval of the preliminary plat. application and the decision may be appealed in the same manner as the preliminary plat. 18.830.040 Approval Criteria—Preliminary Plat A. Approval criteria. 2. • ... •.• • .. - . _ .• , . •Il lots must comply with the following: a. All Elifyiensiefialdevelopment standards and density requirements for lots are met. The development standards,including density standards:'••-• • .. -••-- for residential and non-residential development, are provided in the applicable development standards chapter in 18.200 Residential Development Standards or 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards. : .. • • . .. . • ... • • . - .• - • . •- -• •-• • - c. The side lot lines are at right angles to the street upon which the lots front, where practicable; and Each lot is rectilinear in shape with side lot lines at right angles to front lot lines and rear lot lines parallel to front lot lines, except where not practicable due to location along a street radius or because of existing natural feature or lot shape. Side and rear lot lines must be straight where practicable. Side and rear lot lines that are segmented may not contain cumulative lateral changes in direction that exceed 10 percent of the distance between opposing lot corners. d. Each lot fronts a public or private street,other than an alley,fer a- width-ef at least 25 feet. Lots for rowhouses must front a public or private street for a width of at least 15 feet. Each lot has a minimum of 40 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of-way,except for the following types of lots: i. Rowhouse lots have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of- way; CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 78 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment ii. Lots with curved frontages along cul de sacs or eyebrows have a minimum of 20 feet of frontage on a public or private right-of-way as measured along the arc of the front lot line;and iii. Lots at the terminus of a private street have a minimum of 20 feet of frontage on a private right-of-way. 4. The streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plats of subdivisions and partitions already approved for adiacentaelieinifig property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the city determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern; and B. Conditions of approval. The approval authority may attach conditions that are necessary to carry out the comprehensive plan and other applicable ordinances and regulations and may require reserve strips be granted to the city for the purpose of controlling access to adiacentadieiffing undeveloped properties. (Ord. 17-22 §2) 18.830.050 Zero Lot Line Development B. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an application for a zero lot line development when all of the following are met: 3. The maximum lot coverage for zero lot line development must not exceed the maximum lot coverage standardfor the base zone;and 18.830.060 Approval Criteria—Final Plat A. Submittal requirements.The applicant must submit the final plat within 1.5 years of the approval of the el; piat .Approval criteria. A final plat will be approved when all of the following are met: 18.830.070 Bond A. Performance guarantee required. As required by Section 18.830.070,tThe applicant must file with the agreement an assurance of performance supported by one of the following: CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 79 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment Chapter 18.920 ACCESS,EGRESS,AND CIRCULATION 18.920.030 General Provisions F. Pedestrian access. Paths for pedestrian access and circulation are required to, through, and sometimes between development sites. Path standards are provided in 18.200 Residential Development Standards, 18.300 Nonresidential Development Standards, and Chapter 18.410, Off- Street Parking and Loading. Additional standards may also apply if the site is located in a plan district. F. Required walkway location. On site pedestrian walkways must comply with-the following standards: in multi building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, facilities. be designed and located for pedestrian safety. Req.' -. . • . - sign posts,and must be in compliance with all federal and state accessibility requirements. brick, other pervious paving surfaces, etc. Any pervious paving-sar€ace must be designed and for safety purposes. Soft surfaced public use pathways may be provided only if such pathways arc J. Minimum access requirements for commercial and industrial uses. 1. Vehicle access, egress, and circulation for commercial and industrial use must comply with the standards provided in Table 18.920.23. Table 18.920.32 Vehicular Access/Egress Requirements: Commercial and Industrial Uses Required Parking Minimum Number of Minimum Access Minimum Pavement Spaces Driveways Required Width 0-99 1 30 ft 24 ft curbs required 100+ 2 or 30 ft 24 ft curbs required 1 50 ft 40 ft curbs required CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Omnibus Amendments Page 80 of 80 Proposed Code Amendment HOUSEKEEPING AMENDMENTS 18.10.030.D Chapter 18.795,Map and Text Chapter 18.790,Text and Map Amendments Amendments 18.10.050.D Chapter 18.795,Map and Text Chapter 18.790,Text and Map Amendments Amendments 18.10.060.C.1.c Chapter 18.520,Urban Forestry Chapter 18.520,Significant Tree Groves 18.30.020.B.8 See Section 18.40.040,Measuring See Section 18.40.040. Height l 8.30.020.T.5.c Chapter 18.520 and the Urban Forestry Chapter 18.420,Landscaping and Manual Screening,and the Urban Forestry Manual 18.30.020.T.5.v Chapter 18.520 and the Urban Forestry Chapter 18.420,Landscaping and Manual Screening,and the Urban Forestry Manual 18.110.030.A.3 Chapter 18.740,Conditional Use. Chapter 18.740,Conditional Uses. 18.140.040.A.2 Chapter 18.740,Conditional Use. Chapter 18.740,Conditional Uses. 18.140.040.D Chapter 18.740,Conditional Use. Chapter 18.740,Conditional Uses. 18.140.050.F Chapter 18.740,Conditional Use. Chapter 18.740,Conditional Uses. 18.140.050.J Chapter 18.310,Off-Street Parking and Chapter 18.410,Off-Street Parking and Loading Loading 18.220.040.H Section 18.40.130 Section 18.40.120 18.240.020 18.120,Commercial Zones Chapter 18.120,Commercial Zones 18.240.050.G Section 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 Sections 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 18.240.050.J.1 Subsection 18.320.050.0 Section 18.210.020 18.240.050.J.2 Subparagraphs 18.240.050.G.5 and Paragraphs 18.240.050.G.5 and 18.240.050.K.2. 18.240.050.K.2. 18.250.020 18.120,Commercial Zones Chapter 18.120,Commercial Zones 18.250.050.G Section 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 Sections 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 18.250.050.J.2 Subsection 18.320.050.0 Section 18.210.020 18.250.060.D.1 Figure 18.250.2 Figure 18.250.3 18.250.060.D.2 Figure 18.250.2 Figure 18.250.3 18.260.030.A Chapter 18.740,Conditional Use. Chapter 18.740,Conditional Uses. 18.270.020 18.120,Commercial Zones Chapter 18.120,Commercial Zones 18.270.050.F Section 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 Sections 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 18.270.050.1 Subsection 18.320.050.0 Section 18.210.020 18.280.050.E Section 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 Sections 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 18.280.050.E.2.a 18.920.030.0 Section 18.920.030.0 18.410.030.F Table 18.410.2 Table 18.410.3 18.410.050.E Table 18.410.2(listed 2 times) Table 18.410.3 1 8.435.130.G.6.c Chapter 18.930 Chapter 18.930,Vison Clearance Areas 18.440.050.A.1 Paragraph 6 of this subsection Paragraph 18.440.050.A.6 18.440.050.A.4 Chapter 18.310,Off-Street Parking and Chapter 18.410,Off-Street Parking and Loading Loading_ 18.440.050.B.6 Chapter 18.310,Off-Street Parking and Chapter 18.410,Off-Street Parking and Loading Loading CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Housekeeping Amendments Page 1 of 2 Proposed Code Amendment 18.440.050.D.4 Chapter 18.310,Off-Street Parking and Chapter 18.410,Off-Street Parking and Loading Loading 18.450.030.B Paragraph 18.450.030.F Paragraph 18.450.030.E 18.450.060.D 18.450.060 Section 18.450.060 18.450.060.F Subsection 18.450.060.D Subsection 18.450.060.E 18.510.020.C.2 paragraph 18.510.040.R.1 Para aph 18.510.040.R.2 18.510.020.C.5 paragraph 18.510.040.R.1 Paragraph 18.510.040.R.2 18.510.080.A Section 18.510.120 Section 18.510.100 18.510.080.B.1 Section 18.510.120 Section 18.510.100 18.510.080.B.2 Section 18.510.120 Section 18.510.100 18.510.080.B.3 Section 18.510.120 Section 18.510.100 18.510.100.A Chapter 18.795,Map and Text Chapter 18.790,Text and Map Amendments Amendments 18.510.110.A.2 Subsection 18.510.130.B. Subsection 18.510.110.B. 18.510.110.B.2.b Subparagraph 18.510.130.B.2.a Subparagraph 18.510.110.B.2.a 18.630.030.A.3 Chapter 18.740,Conditional Use. Chapter 18.740,Conditional Uses. 18.630.080.A Chapter 18.740,Conditional Use. Chapter 18.740,Conditional Uses. 18.650.030.B.2.ii Chapter 18.310,Off-Street Parking and Chapter 18.410,Off-Street Parking and Loading Loading 18.650.080.A Chapter 18.310,Off-Street Parking and Chapter 18.410,Off-Street Parking and Loading Loading 18.650.080.B Chapter 18.320,Landscaping and Chapter 18.420,Landscaping and Screening Screening 18.650.130.A Chapter 18.310,Off-Street Parking and Chapter 18.410,Off-Street Parking and Loading Loading 18.650.130.A.2 Table 18.310.2. Table 18.410.3 18.650.130.A.4 Table 18.310.2. Table 18.410.3 18.670.040.B Table 18.120.3 Table 18.320.1 18.670.070.C.2 Table 18.120.3 Table 18.320.1 18.830.020.J Chapter 18.790,Adjustments Chapter 18.715,Adjustments 18.830.060.B.9 18.830.040.B Section 18.830.040.B 18.910.020.D 18.790.030.B.8 Section 18.715.050 18.910.130.0 Section 18.830.080 Section 18.830.070 CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Housekeeping Amendments Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENT 2 1111 _ , TIGARD City of Tigard Proposed ZoningMap Amendment (File No. ZON 2018-00005) Phase II Code Amendments: Land Use Review Procedures Residential and Commercial Development Standards City Council Draft— December 11, 2018 Please contact Susan P. Shanks, Senior Planner, at 503-718-2454 or susans@tigard-or.gov with questions or comments about the proposed code amendments or the code adoption process. ATTACHMENT 2 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The proposed zoning map amendments change how the city's overlay zone designations are displayed on the Tigard Zoning Map. No change is proposed to any base zone designation or to how properties are regulated by the Tigard Community Development Code. The proposed zoning map amendments are as follows: • Removal of the Planned Development (PD) overlay zone designation to be consistent with the proposed code amendments to Chapter 18.770, Planned Developments. • Change of name of the Historic District (HD) overlay zone to Historic Resource (HR) overlay zone to be consistent with the proposed code amendments to Chapter 18.750, Historic Resources. NG j 1 T_��_ >> { i f t t` t HP �, — _ I Zoning Map t-1::: _ ■, ,P - , J '_i Iiirj M‘i�Rn " 11 r \—/ Effective 09/17/2018 1 , [ailQ� __ -_J RJs it t :1:: ( rcli 11 g gir . _ , ,, , , . ._ , . , f si , R-0.SA `r1-� 1I �r ZonigI � l— < R-12 f in Lot Size Ito SCG I] I 1-."'s R2 20.000M . ...'C'N C P 1 ° i '.Si(PD( s[P - 1 Sq Ft m Lot Size ( D) PR P �r Pp) MUR 2 "" r R-3.5 10,000 Sq Ft Mm Lot Size L.,,) e -- '/. 'R.7)PD) R25(p. �,(PD) ,(PD) 1. C� .� ...i �► 8-32 `�, 3.4.5 7.500 Sq Ft Mm Lot 5xc h /i-osR *` - _ t - ,, -.... -12IPD ( I MUR-1 1 PR R-4.S (PD R-7 .�_2 X I /`� , ,000 Sq Ft Min Lot Size rR-1253.050$qF Min Lot Size fl-25 .5 PD R-3.5 RJ.S N I h i _ _, 1 - _ -L� 1 ',R-12 PR R_2 R-12 RJ.S R-7 '`+`• �) R-251,4805q FC MinLotSKe 1 (RD) IHD) Q? R-251 R-40 40 Units Per Acre + 1 �� /�/ R-7(pDI' R-4.5(I'D) PR ()E - MUR-1 Mixed Use Residential I R-25 "' !j PR (PD) R] , MUR-2 Mixed Use Residential 2 I sam l (-1 �� 1 •'�' 1'1 ' MU-CBD Mixed Use Central Bus Dist /`jyC-; Ci-,Car' R-25(PDQ PR(HD) I P - - R-12 IIIIN C-C Community Commercial •� 41% R-12 _ _ RJ.S IM l-.a� 11 C-G General Commercial 'rte 7 I R_]� (PD) ',, - ' ,-„'T t IIR-7) I t',"''' PD 812 C C-N Neighborhood Commercial ��y-I�-— WA-ENTY '=^' Ste/'+ ' � i 1 ' )� R-4 S < C N CBD 111111 C-P Professional Commercial y - }}I c M n AI Ra(PD)' 'r -ll _�.,f ,.' 1I .-- .-. dol SPD MUC Mixed Use Commer tial A R-is Ivo) r 1 ,, i i-!f R-4.1P ) 1 ,(.. Rzs Al ` -, R4s1 ---i` t .R�25) _\]'' 1 /;; r (pDI . . P Mixed :e Commercial 11 i (PDII .( ! •—i ,' ) TMU Triangle Mixed Use - " MUE(PD) R-25 p yment �! R-0 5� _ _,C_� '- __ 1 RJ.5 c RJ.5 IPD):R-121PD) MUE Mixed Use e E olo R-3.5 �( C-C R./1., • N... PR t `J FR., I-P 1111 MUE-1 Mixed Use Employment 1 II ri R-25 �' J -•, 3-4.5 022J R 12 IIIIIII, MUE-2 Mixed Use Employment 2 L' 1 i _i'i_-71- R-4,5:IHD) R_T 0) R-4.5 V. .. i.,. I ( I-L Light Industrial I t ! I,I 1-l I LR-4.5 R-3.5 j•, '.e I -I-NII 11111 I-P Industrial Park 1 1.-... 'ri _I-� _ i R 7 iF r R 1� r...µ I IIII-H Heavy Industrial PD .. q I -, L -0..,��,R] R"1 (PD) R-2 R-12 r (PD) I-L I - PR Parks and Recreation 1 c. I L. 7. L., 7L 1 CG . . r R-12 ....1 1111111 WA.Cnty Washington County rl -1'R 7IPD) ) I - R 12 PD ' (jy� _� 1^.. - I I I RJs lel R-3.5 (Po) ..R� - 1 Overlay Zones .•1' PR I r I i VXi Historic District Overly g i ` �J I I +� �' c I -1�- /R-25. .) R-3.S(MD) 84.5(POI _ _.. -_. y 1! .3 f ,IPD)' ' 1 Planned Development Overlay RJ.S I _) j 1 I .R-7I 1 'R-3.5, PR . --71 �P I ' rR 7 Ie•r(/ / (PO) R-](PD) FI-7 I P 0 Tigard Gty Boundary FI R-7 R-7IPD) 1 I ,.-- .�1il kli l y C G 1 R-] y Urban Services Boundary R 12(PD) - 1 / Y_ Urban Growth Boundary sl \ / 845 812 RJ.S 7 V _- A 1 c .�r y 7 -l. R-7(PI)) • C-N 1 �/ C-G m I ., III Scale 14 1 I R-15 R-12(HD) I �MR¢S g .. /' R.7_' RJ.S IPD I r o 0.25 0S I 0 j�1. ,L_.--r•� Ras ) r ('''''''' ''''''-`...'''T- ' . �-, ,lr l , I• `4 J '. t I I I P � 1 w7- l d 1PRS 02 i "�___: 8-12 /i 1; P� .PI'ARDMAPS 9q si �� gyp) 1 RI 17 �jj `A��I (I/r� �' jl).... ,` 1 n.Porard.loizz�zo,v MUC-1 V 1 \ PR R_4.51 '-_---. / City o/Tigard,Oregon gh {1 1 if1 13125 SW Hall Blvd ill q... �� _, �� 1 ( / Tigard,OR 97223 �E'{ II �. tjl.__ I J/ µ03 639-4671 !._ ww .Ngard-or.ov '----- ____ '` +1 - it �./�, .7- -� rI 1 I : ti I) J. PROPOSED + � '�.�� `n >1; �! _�` 1 Zo ng Map Jalk Y t _. �� i� -;,� i :. i j Effective 01/31/2019 . 1 1411 . 7 0 4 1 ) .,___. ¢ R-4.5 I - i + City Tigard,Oregon ij i 1111111 ',F � - 1 � Base Zones 0.45 I:Residential Low De .e�t-12 M 2 --t Low-Density ( .. -64V� -2 y ' a I I I_•-. R 2:Residential Low Density U rte`,11tkib, �,Y' ( -.�''J GP ,�. • J � - R-3.5.Residential Low-Density Y (Jl Y R-25 R- R-12 4-45 -- -R-12 - R-4.5:Residential Low-Density 1 ( , "..,,''7/ R-12 R-7 ,9a R-7 R-25 R ~• R-7 Residential Medium-Density Y R-t2 Y Y R-1 --MUR-1 c' -..-�. /`� -L''" / PR 0.'12 R-7 0.-0.g-. < R-12 R-4.5 R-12 R-12 Residential Med um Dens¢y ._ 1(13 R-3.5 R-12 _• A r 1 / R 12 R-4.5 GP' 7 R-25.Residential Modems-High-Density 1 1 Ti� - - 1 // PR ___J.:2-12(HR) R-4.5 C-4''''71-25 23 R R-407 Res dental High-Density 1 _.__. I : R-7R-1• ' _ gs, MUR-I:Mixed-Use Residential I 1 -�� i // R-25 R 7 PR - PR R-7 7.Up , MUR-2:Mixed-Use Residental2 I (1 '-. !` P0.. I-p R-25 _7 " MU-CBD:Mixed-Use Central Bus Dist -. y '-{. /GC PR(MR) RR (`'��7R 2 C-C:Community Commercial r i/ 112 R-12 R-12 PR .- C-G:General Commercial / I - R-25 PR -: �[,T-- ( I R-12 p0. �* I 1 C-N:Neighborhood Commercial _ PR - i C-P:Professional Commercial T_'-- i R-4.5 PR 1 r ' I I( 0.-4.5 PR R-12 C-N MN MUC:Mixed-Use Commercial tl R-7 1 - ��_ PR (FIR) Pfi 0.-2 1 R-25 -.(� _ - PR pk j"/f h MUC-I.Mixed-Use Commercial I YI R4.� -+ ,g I PR - R-12 R-12 f Il R-12 I;-:Ili 1 y -( , .e 1'R-7 PR R-4.5 .. Ph' - R-25 ` TMU:Tnangle Mixed-Use 1 12 R•12 MUE,R C-i AN MUE.Mixed-Use Empoloyment 1 R-7 I- K`I PR - 0.35 COC-G J.5 - : = MUE-I:Mixed-Use Employment 1 11 C-C R-�._ 'az.: R-7 - PR -'. I. R-45 C•G I-p MUE-2:Mixed-Use Employment 11S L PR PR R_7 R) 0..3 s R-12 cl R-45- � 1-, --' - R-4 5(HR) `Q- I L I-L:Light Industrial I _&1 i I ( L."----11 PR R-3.5 R-12 i �'`, : I-P:Industrial Park R-7 tIR-12 1 S I0 Y ' ' 1 PR R-7 ! I• II/ PR PR H. iv' ' in 14-1:Heavy Industrial ._ '! I , 1 -�r'(T`'I I},'R 7 R 1 R 2 R-0.5 R 12 i 10. R-12 I-1 ! bL 1 I� IN PR:P rks and Recreation I,/ I t , )..' �'pq R-7 G-G R-12 R-3.Z(HR) R-7 R-7 I� I. .. III a WA•Cnty:Washington County 11 I +_T -y trij F'-'7 I_"I r I R-25 -PR :1 t1 R-7 [,._ 4 1 1 I 1 I R-45 R-3.5 pq- R-7 p0. r li Overlay Zone II --- ---- q�7 ;I -I R^0 II i 6/X' Historic Resource(HR) 11 I Li_ PR.�j r I •1�/ ( 0.-4.5 R-3.5(HR) PR _ ) .._ s1 R-12 0.4.5 I -•� (� ^lh IR i ` , R-4.5 PR I P eL _ ( ,,,/ �� I 7 I .,I/,, / I� Tigard City Boundary �T"'•""GI 1 1 ,�_l_ / R-12 ,�� Urban Services Boundary h' 1 R-7 I1 '. /I R-25 0.42 R-7 171:0-..-77...-.1� �e�' / / R_7 0..12 I `i V / R 12 ,W. Urban Growth Boundary Ytr-�'lQ a+L"IS _•. - } "`" 0.12 - 12 ��. s ir / 0.12 0.11 • ; _ GK.._.___R-12 • �� Scale I 1 Y l_ z1 1 jV �� p� R-25 R-t2 '+a'- '- +g ,' 0.-4.5 R-4.5 0.-12 I' Miles R-7171- 0.12 R-12(HR) / /, 0 0 25 0.5 L""' E_.:. - PR 0.-4 5 / i^/ 17 ttYYaa i i tY -1 o T�dd}r _-.--,&_ R-12 / ' 1 r " Tj6�M1-gAps g 11 l Ri •-vim /r man caatcu.inn9noia T ." N\l'k-- '\ ''''Iti' Li t ( \ PR 0.4.5/ '/ ` I 101 � City of Trgard,Oregong �' I -i ( 1 !r 13125 SW HaIIBHdI51WY ( I Tigard.00.97223 I�F 1 (-2 _ �n� r, i T }.. w` ' 503 639-4171 ---I 1 ` www.tigard•or.gov PII;NtU ATTACHMENT 3 City of Tigard ' C TIGARD Memorandum To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilors From: Susan P. Shanks, Senior Planner Re: Proposed Staff Modifications to Address Public Comment (DCA2018-00004 and ZON2018-00005) Date: December 11, 2018 Based on public comment received after the Planning Commission hearing on the proposal, staff made the following modifications to the proposed standards for rowhouses and single detached houses. The modifications are summarized below and a track changes version of each chapter is attached. Summary of Rowhouse Modifications: • Clarified access standards to include three options: tandem, shared, and alley. • Changed roof pitch to a minimum of 4/12 and a maximum of 14/12. • Changed language on exterior staircases from "prohibited" to "not allowed" to allow adjustments. • Lowered window standard from 15% to 12%. Clarified that garage door does not count as a "door" for meeting this standard, but 50% of windows in garage door may count toward meeting this standard. • Clarified that there is no rear setback where the rear property line abuts an alley by adding a footnote to the table. Summary of Single Detached House Modifications: • Clarified that window and garage standards don't apply to alley-facing facades. • Clarified that multiple garage doors are measured separately. • Added a provision for garage door width to be 60% of the facade where additional architectural elements are included on the facade. • Added a provision to allow the garage door to be located in front of the main entrance where other design elements are present. • Added a provision to allow frosted glass to make up 2% of the required window area. • Removed the provision that allowed only 50% of garage door windows to count toward meeting the window standard. Page 1 I Proposed Staff Modifications Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) Chapter 18.280 ROWHOUSES Sections: 18.280.010 Purpose 18.280.020 Applicability 18.280.030 Approval Process 18.280.040 General Provisions 18.280.050 Development Standards 18.280.060 Design Standards 18.280.070 Accessory Structures 18.280.010 Purpose Rowhouses are a type of attached housing that share common side walls. The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards that promote quality development and enhance the livability, walkability and safety of the community. Rowhouse development is intended to achieve the following: A. Increase the number of affordable housing units; B. Accommodate incremental growth in neighborhoods while preserving residential quality of life; C. Provide for a variety of housing types that meet the needs of Tigard's diverse population at all stages of life; D. Encourage housing that allows residents to remain in their communities and neighborhoods as their needs change;and E. Facilitate more efficient use of land through smaller housing units. 18.280.020 Applicability A. The approval process and standards of this chapter apply to rowhouse development in the R-7, R-12, R-25, MUR-1, and MUR-2 zones. Additional standards apply in the River Terrace Plan District, as provided in Chapter 18.640, River Terrace Plan District. B. The approval process, but not the standards, of this chapter applies to rowhouse development in the MUC-1 zone. The standards for rowhouse development in the MUC-1 zone are provided in Chapter 18.620,Bridgeport Village Plan District. C. The approval process and standards of this chapter do not apply to rowhouse development in the MU- CBD and TMU zones. Rowhouse development in these zones is subject to the approval processes and standards of Chapter 18.650,Tigard Downtown Plan District,and Chapter 18.660,Tigard Triangle Plan District,respectively. D.-Rowhouse development may alternatively meet the standards of Chapter 18.230, Apartments to construct this housing type in base zones where apartments are allowed. 18.280.030 Approval Process CC Draft(12/11/2108)—Rowhouses Page 1 of 7 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) Applications for rowhouse development are processed through a Type I or Type II Gite development review procedure, as provided in ChaptcrSections 18.710.050 or 18.710.060, using approval criteria in Section 18.780. .050. 18.280.040 General Provisions All lots approved for rowhouse development in the R-7, R-12, and R-25 zones through the provisions of this chapter will be conditioned to record a deed restriction prohibiting any type of development other than rowhouse development on the lot.This deed restriction cannot be removed except through a land division or lot line adjustment process that brings the lot into conformance with the standards for development of other housing types. A rowhouse deed restriction imposed as a condition of a previous or concurrent land division or lot line adj stadjustment process meets this standard. 18.280.050 Development Standards A. Number of units. A rowhouse development must contain at least two units. There is no maximum number of units,except that in the R-7 zone,the maximum number of units per grouping is 5. B. Density. Minimum and maximum density are provided in Table 18.280.1. C. Lot width. Minimum lot widths are provided in Table 18.280.1. D. Setbacks.Minimum and maximum setbacks are provided in Table 18.280.1. E. Parking. The provisions and standards of Section 18.410.030 and 18.410.040 apply, except for Subsection 18.410.040.E. The following additional standards also apply: 1. Number of spaces. a. A minimum of 1 off-street parking space must be provided for each rowhouse. b. An on-street parking credit may be granted for some or all the required off-street parking as provided in Section 18.410.090. 2. Access.Access to off-street parking areas for rowhouse development may be taken through tandem driveways, shared access, or from . ' ..• - . •-an alley. The following requirements belewapply to each situation in addition to the relevant sections of Chapter 18.920, Access,Egress,and Circulation.Sec Figure 18.280.1 for examples. a. Tandem driveways. If access is taken from a street other than an alley and access is not shared development-wide,the following standards apply.See Figure 18.280.1 for examples.a i. A maximum of 1 driveway is allowed for every 2 rowhouse units, except that each rowhouse grouping of three or more units may include 1 driveway that provides access to a single unit. Shared access is subject to the requirements 18.920.030.C. tali. The minimum width for a driveway is 15 feet,except that a single unshared driveway may be 10 feet in width. eiii.The maximum width for a driveway is 18 feet,except that the maximum width for a single unshared driveway is 12 feet. CC Draft(12/11/2108)—Rowhouses Page 2 of 7 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) -, ..Driveways must be located a minimum of 18 feet apart to minimize vehicle conflicts with pedestrians. Distance between driveways is measured along the front property line. e—44Figure 18.280.1 Access Configuration for Tandem Driveways 77 7 7 Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Tandem Tandem Driveway Driveway Tandem Tandem Driveway Driveway 5idewalk-*-18"--x-18"—,--18'—* 15'- 18'— 15'- -- — STREET STREET b. Shared access.If access for all units in a rowhouse development is shared and off-street parking areas are provided at the side or rear of a rowhouse development rather than at the front of each rowhouse unit, the minimum paved width of the shared access wit}1+t is 20 feet and the maximum width is 24 feet. Figure 18.280.2 Access Configuration for Shared Access 1111111 1 1 11 Off-street parking area Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse Rowhouse r I Shared Access Sidewalk*—20.—A‘- ) STREET c. Alley access. If access is taken from an alley.the following standards apply: i. A maximum of one access is allowed for each rowhouse unit. ii. The minimum paved width of an alley access is 10 feet. CC Draft(12/11/2108)—Rowhouses Page 3 of 7 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) 3. Location. Off-street parking areas, including detached parking structures, must be located a minimum of 20 feet from any property line street property line,except alley property lines,where •-no minimum setback is required. 4. Parking structures. Parking structures in rowhouse developments are subject to the following: a. Detached parking structures must be located a minimum of 40 feet from a street property line where rowhouses provide main entrances. b. The maximum size for a detached parking structure is 200 square feet per rowhouse served by the structure. c. The maximum height for a detached parking structure is 15 feet. 5. Screening.Screening of parking areas is not required,except that in the R-7 zone,off-street parking areas provided at the side or rear of buildings and not in structures must be screened from adjekiMgadjacent properties using one or more ofto the : •_ .- , -S-3 standard, as provided in Table 18.420.2. The required screening must be provided on the same site as the development:. b. St*ctures, where the structures are a minimum height of 6 feet. F. PatbsPedestrian access. Rowhouse developments of 5 or more units must provide a paved, accessible pedestrian path that connects the main entrance of each rowhouse to the following: 1. Sidewalks in the right-of-way abutting the site; 2. Common buildings such as laundry and recreation facilities; 3. Parking areas;and 4. Common open space and play areas. G. Landscaping.The provisions and standards of Chapter 18.420,Landscaping and Screening do not apply to rowhouse development, with the exception of Sections 18.420.030 and 18.420.040. The following additional standards also apply: 1. A 1. The minimum of 29 percent landscape must--bearea standards are provided in Table 18.280.1. All required landscape areas must meet the L-1 standard,as provided in Table 18.420.1. 2. A minimum of 15 percent tree canopy must be provided.The method for determining tree canopy is provided in Section 10 Part 3 Subpart M of the Urban Forestry Manual.All required trees must be a minimum caliper of 1.5 inches at the time of planting and meet the standards in Section 13 Part 2 and Appendix 3 of the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual for soil volume and species. Trees planted to meet this standard are development trees.The applicant must pay the tree inventory fee listed in the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule. 3. The minimum number of required street trees is determined by dividing the length in feet of the site's street frontage by 40 feet. When the result is a fraction,the minimum number of street trees CC Draft(12/11/2108)—Rowhouses Page 4 of 7 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) is the nearest whole number. More than the minimum number of street trees may be required along the site's frontage depending upon the stature of trees chosen and the specific spacing standards for the chosen trees. a. Street trees must be planted within the right-of-way wherever practicable. Street trees may be planted a maximum of 6 feet from the right-of-way when planting within the right-of-way is not practicable as determined by the city engineer. b. An existing tree may be used to meet the street tree standards provided that: i. The largest percentage of the tree trunk immediately above the trunk flare or root buttresses is either within the subject site or within the right-of-way immediately adjacent to the subject site;and ii. The tree would be permitted as a street tree in compliance with UFM street tree planting and soil volume standards if it were newly planted. H. Waste Collection. 1. Dumpsters are prohibited in rowhouse developments. 2. Waste collection and service areas may not be located in required setbacks and must be screened usingto the .•:• : : .::. .: .:•S-1 standard,as provided in Table 18.420.050.D.42. Table 18.280.1 Development Standards for Rowhouses Standard R-7 R-12 R-25 MUR-1 MUR-2 Minimum Lot Size 5,000 sq ft 2,500 sq ft 1,500 sq ft Minimum and maximum per unit per unit per unit lot size are determined by Maximum Lot Size 5,500-sq ft 2,750 -sq ft 1,750 -sq ft minimum and maximum per unit per unit per unit density. Minimum Lot Width 20 ft 20 ft _ 20 ft 16 ft 16 ft Minimum Setbacks -Front 15ft 15ft 15ft Oft loft -Street side 10 ft 10 ft 10 ft 5 ft 10 ft -Side [1] 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft -Rear_[21 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft Maximum Setbacks -Front 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft -Street side 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft Maximum Height 35 ft 35 ft 45 ft 75 ft 45 ft Minimum Landscape Area 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% Minimum Density Minimum and maximum density are 50 units per 25 units per acre acre determined by minimum and maximum Maximum Density lot size. None 50 units per acre CC Draft(12/11/2108)—Rowhouses Page 5 of 7 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) [1] This standard does not apply to a common wall lot line where the units are attached. 121 There is no rear setback when the rear property line abuts an alley. 18.280.060 Design Standards A. Height. Maximum heights are provided in Table 18.280.1. B. Unit definition.Each dwelling unit must include at least one of the following on the street-facing facade: 1. A roof dormer a minimum of 4 feet in width, 2. A balcony a minimum of 2 feet in depth and accessible from an interior room, 3. A bay window that extends from the facade a minimum of 2 feet, or 4. An offset of the facade of a minimum of 2 feet in depth from the neighboring dwelling unit. C. Main entrance. The main entrance of each rowhouse must face the street. If a rowhouse has more than one street property line,the entrance may face either street. D. Porches.Each rowhouse in a grouping must include a porch that is a minimum of 48 square feet in area with no horizontal dimension less than 6 feet. A balcony on the same facade as the main entrance may substitute for a front porch,provided that the following are met: 1. The area of the balcony must be a minimum of 48 square feet, 2. The balcony must be a minimum of 8 feet in width, 3. The floor of the balcony must be a maximum of 15 feet above grade,and 4. The balcony must be accessible from the interior living space of the house. E. Roofs. Roofs must be sloped, with a minimum pitch of 44/12 and a maximum pitch of 1214/12,except that a roof may be flat if it meets one of the following: 1. The space on top of the roof is used as a deck or balcony that is no more than 150 square feet in area and is accessible from an interior room; or 2. The roof line includes a cornice that extends at least 6 inches from the facade and is a minimum of 12 inches in height. F. Exterior staircases. Exterior staircases to any €leerstory above the first fleerstory of a rowhouse are pfehilaitednot allowed. G. Windows. A minimum of 4412% of the area of all street-facing facades on each individual unit must include windows or entrance doors. Window area is the aggregate area of the glass within each window, including any interior grids, mullions,or transoms. Door area is the area of the portion of a door other than a garage door that moves and does not include the frame. Half of the window area in the door of an attached garage may count toward meeting this standard. CC Draft(12/11/2108)—Rowhouses Page 6 of 7 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) 18.280.070 Accessory Structures Accessory structures are allowed subject to the following standards: A. The maximum size of accessory structures is 528 square feet; B. The maximum height of accessory structures is 15 feet; C. Accessory structures are prohibited within the front setback;and D. Accessory structures may be located within the side or rear setback provided they are a minimum of 5 feet from the side and rear property lines. CC Draft(12/11/2108)—Rowhouses Page 7 of 7 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) Chapter 18.290 SINGLE DETACHED HOUSES Sections: 18.290.010 Purpose 18.290.020 Applicability 18.290.030 Development Standards 18.290.040 Design Standards 18.290.050 Accessory Structures 18.290.010 Purpose Single detached house development is intended to provide a desired housing type for individual households. It is one piece of a diverse housing strategy;and integrates well with other housing types of similar scale. 18.290.020 Applicability The standards of this chapter apply to single detached houses in residential zones and to primary dwelling units on lots with accessory dwelling units. 18.290.030 Development Standards Development standards for single detached houses are provided in Table 18.290.1. Design standards for single detached houses are provided in Table 18.290.1. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 1 of 6 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) Table 18.290.1 Development Standards for Single Detached Houses Standard R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 MUC-1 Minimum Lot Size 30,000 20,000 10,000 7,500 5,000 3,050 0 so ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft sq ft Nene Minimum Lot Width 100 ft 100 ft 65 ft 50 ft 50 ft None Nene Minimum Setbacks -Front 30ft 30ft 20ft 20ft 15ft 15ft Oft [1] -Street side 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 15 ft l O ft 10 ft Oft[1] -Side 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft 5ft Oft -Rear 25ft 25ft 15ft 15ft 15ft 15ft Oft Side or rear abutting more N/A N/A N/A N/A 30-€t 30- 2-0-4 restrictive zone Garage 12/ 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft Nene2 0 ft Maximum Height 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft 35 ft 35 ft 70 ft Maximum Lot Coverage None _ None None None 80% 80% 90% Minimum Landscape Area 1321 None None None None 20% 20% 10% Requirement Minimum Density 80%of maximum density 25 units per acre Maximum Density Calculated using the method provided in 18.40.140 50 units per acre Minimum Parking 1 off-street vehicle parking space per house 1431 [1] The maximum front and street side setback is 20 feet. 121 The minimum garage setback applies to garages and carports. Where vehicle access is taken from an alley, the minimum setback is reduced to 0 feet where safe clearance for turning and backing movements is provided. [321 The minimum landscape area must be planted to the L-1 standard. Landscaping standards are provided in Chapter 18.420,Landscaping and Screening. Single detached house development is exempt from the general provisions of Section 18.420.030. f431 The minimum parking standard may be met with an on-street parking credit. On-street parking credit standards are provided in Section 18.410.090. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 2 of 6 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) 18.290.040 Design Standards A. Entrances. The main entrance to a single detached house must meet the following standards: 1. The entrance must be set back no further than 8 feet from the widest street-facing wall;and 2. The entrance must be offset no more than 45 degrees from a line parallel to the front lot line. If the front lot is curved, the offset is measured from a line tangent to the midpoint of the front lot line. B. Windows. A minimum of 12 percent% of the area of all street-facing facades, excluding alley- facing facades, must include windows or entrance-doors. Door area is the portion of a door that moves and does not include the frame. Garage doors designed for vehicle access may not be used to meet this standard. - . . . . . • • • _ f I. 1. Windows in a garage door may be used to meet this standard. 2. A maximum of 2 percent of the required window area may be frosted glass. Figure 18.290.1 Street-facing windows and main entrance door 4 A 50%of rara•e door window area E 4 C. Attached garages and carports. An attached garage or carport must meet the following standards, except where vehicle access is taken from an alley. • .. • • w d . •• . . .. / ; CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 3 of 6 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) 1. A garage door or carport entrance designed for vehicle access must be the same distance or a greater distance from the street property line as the widest street-facing wall along the same street frontage,except as follows: a. A garage door or carport entrance may extend up to S feel in front of the widest street- facing wall if there is a covered front porch and the garage door or carport entrance does not extend beyond the front of the porch. b. A garage door or carport entrance may extend up to 5 feet in front of the widest street- facing wall where the garage or carport is part of a 2-stery building and there is a window on the second story above the garage or carport that faces the street with a minimum area of 12 square feet. 23. The total maximum width of all garage doors or carport entrances is 12 feet, or 50 percent 40% of the total width of the street-facing facade, whichever is greater. The width of a garage door is measured from inside the garage door frame. Where more than one garage door is proposed, the width of each garage door is measured separately.See Figure 18.290.1.18.290.2. Figure 18.290.12 Garage Door Width � . 0111 Property —.—.� .�.—.— .�. . I I Building I I I I I I Garage 1116. r I STREET X: Width of garage door • Y: Width of street-facing facade 3. The total maximum width of all garage doors or carport entrances may be increased to 60 percent of the total width of the street-facing facade provided that a minimum of 7 detailed design elements from the list below are included on the street-facing facade with the garage door or carport entrance. a. Covered porch: a minimum depth of 5 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall,and a minimum width of 5 feet. b. Recessed entrance area: A minimum depth of 2 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall, and a minimum width of 5 feet. CC Draft(12/11/2018)-Single Detached Houses Page 4 of 6 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) c. Wall offset:a minimum offset of 16 inches from one exterior wall surface to the other. d. Dormer:a minimum width of 4 feet that is integrated into the roof form. e. Roof eave: a minimum projection of 12 inches from the intersection of the roof and the building walls. f. Roof offset: a minimum offset of 2 feet from the top surface of one roof to the top surface of the other. g. Roof shingles:tile or fire-resistant roofing material. h. Roof design:gable roof,hip roof,or gambrel roof design. i. Roof pitch: a roof pitch of at least 500 square feet in area that is sloped to face the southern sky and has its eave line oriented within 30 degrees of the true north/south axis. j. Horizontal lap siding: a minimum visible lap width of 3 to 7 inches once installed. The siding material must be wood,fiber-cement, or vinyl to meet this standard. k. Accent siding: brick, cedar shingles, stucco, or other accent material that covers a minimum of 40 percent of the facade. 1. Window trim: a minimum width of 2.5 inches and a minimum depth of 5/8 inches around all windows. m. Window recess: a minimum depth of 3 inches, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall, for all windows except where a bay window is proposed that meets the standard in Subparagraph 18.290.040.C.3.n. n. Window projection (e.g., bay window): a minimum depth of 2 feet, as measured horizontally from the face of the building wall, and a minimum width of 5 feet. o. Balcony:a minimum depth of 3 feet and a minimum width of 5 feet that is accessible from an interior room. 18.290.050 Accessory Structures A. Accessory structures are allowed on all lots with single detached dwelgs houses subject to the following standards: 1. The maximum size of accessory structures is 528 square feet on lots less than 2.5 acres and 1,000 square feet on lots 2.5 acres or larger; 2. The maximum height of accessory structures is 15 feet; 3. Accessory structures may not cause the lot to exceed the maximum lot coverage allowed in the base zone; 4. Accessory structures are prohibited within the required front setback;and CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 5 of 6 Proposed Modifications (Track Changes) 5. The minimum side, street side, and rear setback of accessory structures is 5 feet. Accessory structures may be located in the required side, street side, or rear setback provided they are a minimum of 5 feet from the side, street side, and rear property lines, except for J'ara2es and carports, which are subject to specific setback standards for the side of the structure designed for vehicle access. 6. Accessory structures must not encroach upon er interfere with the use-of any adjoining property casements; and B. All freestanding and detached towers, antennas, wind generating devices and TV receiving dishes, property lines a distance equal to or greater than the height of the proposed structure. CC Draft(12/11/2018)—Single Detached Houses Page 6 of 6 ATTACHMENT 4 Susan Shanks From: Laura Pierson <pierson.laurac@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 3:49 PM To: Susan Shanks Subject: Re: Proposed change to R-25 and R-40 code Susan, Your willingness to have a conversation with me on these matters ina civil and even kind way makes your point almost better than your words.You did not have to take the time to respond to my emails. Your openness has given me new hope in our city government.Thank you! Laura On Thu,Oct 25, 2018 at 3:09 PM Susan Shanks<SusanS@tigard-or.gov>wrote: Thank you, Laura,for your additional thoughts.You make some very valid points on two very complicated (and entwined) issues.The only observation I can offer in return is that the market does not necessarily always provide the community with what it needs. I'm not saying that the city always knows what's best, but, unlike the market, our decision-making bodies are composed of Tigard citizens who hold public hearings to consider the different and sometimes competing needs, interests, and opinions of affected stakeholders. Thank you again for your comments. I will share them with the Planning Commission. Regards, Susan P. Shanks I Senior Planner City of Tigard I Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd I Tigard,Oregon 197223 503-718-2454 From: Laura Pierson <pierson.laurac@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, October 25, 2018 2:47 PM To:Susan Shanks<SusanS@tigard-or.gov> Subject: Re: Proposed change to R-25 and R-40 code ATT 4 Page 001 ATTACHMENT 4 Susan, Thanks for responding to me. I actually like the "missing middle" ideas you have, especially the ADU option. Unfortunately, all of those still trap residents in either a renting situation or a HOA(since it is rare for a multi-family dwelling to be free of a HOA). None of these options provide space for the maintenance of vehicles. It would also be more difficult for shift workers to be able to sleep during the day in such close quarters. I guess what I'm saying is that I realize there is a need for more dense housing but that I feel we should not prohibit building more single-family homes in order to allow for other types of housing. As someone who works in SE Portland, I also feel that it is irresponsible for Tigard to continue to increase density without improving its roadway infrastructure. It has become clear that our roadways are at capacity. Is it fair to current residents to build any more housing when the current roadways are not sufficient for the current population? How is it helping those in need of low income housing to provide them a place to live without the means to get to work in a timely manner? Many would say we need to work toward driving less. While this is also a nice goal, I would counter that my commute on transit would take me 2 hours each way(I estimate 1.5 with the max line down 99). How is that feasible on top of a 10-12 hour shift? How is it feasible for my husband to commute by bike when he has to visit muglitple sites throughout the metro area in a day? Many people in our community have similar work situations. So yes, other housing options are lovely! I would have loved one of those options if I didn't need a quiet place to sleep and if car maintenance and transportation wasn't an issue. But please don't force the residence of this city down this path when it may not be what they actually want or need.Allow the market to drive housing options and please, please, build some bigger roads. Laura Pierson 2 ATT 4 Page 002 ATTACHMENT 4 On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 2:02 PM Susan Shanks<SusanS@tigard-or.gov>wrote: Hi Laura, Thank you for taking the time to express your concerns about the code change being proposed. I will share them with the Planning Commission at the upcoming public hearing.The city shares your concerns about housing affordability. The proposed code change may appear to be in opposition to this position, but it is actually part of a larger strategy that the city is implementing to increase affordable housing options for all residents at all stages of life.The sole purpose of the proposed change is to ensure that the city's limited supply of higher-density zones truly supports higher densities, i.e. more dwelling units per acre,which is something that cannot be physically achieved with single detached homes.That being said,we are on the brink of allowing a whole range of"missing middle" housing types that will allow for smaller detached homes, in the form of cottages and accessory dwelling units (i.e.granny flats), in almost all residential zones in the city.You can learn about the city's "missing middle" housing initiatives here: http://www.tigard-or.gov/housingoptions/. I've also copied Schuyler Warren on this email by way of introduction. He is managing this project and would be happy to answer any questions you may have. I believe that the next public hearing on Schuyler's project has been moved from Nov 13 to Nov 27, but double check that with him. Again,thank you for sharing your thoughts on this very important issue. Regards, Susan P.Shanks I Senior Planner City of Tigard I Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd I Tigard, Oregon 197223 503-718-2454 From: Laura Pierson <pierson.laurac@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, October 25, 2018 1:25 PM To:Susan Shanks<SusanS@tigard-or.gov> Subject: Proposed change to R-25 and R-40 code Ms Shanks, I am writing as a resident of Tigard who has lived in a house in the R-25 zone for the last 5 years. My husband and I are very unhappy with the proposed change to the zoning code and would like to lodge our protest to the change. 3 ATT 4 Page 003 ATTACHMENT 4 As lifelong residents of the Portland area, my husnand and I dreamed of buying a home in the area to one day raise a family. Although we were both working, housing prices almost made that dream impossible. We were able to find what many would consider a "starter home" in Tigard. We are so happy with our house,tiny yard and all,that we plan to stay in it and raise our daughter here. As a shift worker,the fact that we don't have a shared wall has made my life significantly better.And no HOA means that my husband can perform car repairs in our garage without fear of penalty. Finally, as our daughter grows I look forward to the ability to allow her to play in our small but private backyard,free from fear of someone walking back there while my back is turned. Yes, all of these things are privileges, but they are privileges that make it possible for us to support ourselves as a working family.A home with no shared walls mean my house is quiet enough for me to sleep during the day so I may work nights, car repairs save us thousands each year, not to mention the amount saved simply in the absence of HOA fees, and a child with a safe place to play is a child that is more likely to thrive. Prohibiting the construction of new single family homes in the R-25 and R-40 zones would mean that other working families like mine will never have the chance to own their own home and experience these things in the Portland area. It means that struggling families will have many more hurdles on the path toward livability. In a time when the cost of a house is continuing to rise in the metro area, I would love to see Tigard to continue to be a place where working families can afford to live in a HOME. I think of my younger brother. At 22 he is working to establish his place in the communiry. On his current wages he may be to afford an apartment but if the supply of single family homes continues to drop and the prices continue to soar, he will not be able to afford a home, even as his wages increase. So please, do not change the zoning rules for R-25 and R-40. Please DO allow builders to continue building small single family homes with small yards so that families struggling just to get by can have a place to call their own. Sincerely, Laura Pierson 4 ATT 4 Page 004 ATTACHMENT 4 Susan Shanks From: Susan Shanks Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 2:47 PM To: 'Tom &Carolyn Moore' Subject: RE: Comment/Questions regarding proposed code change- Prohibit single-Family detachted homes in R-25 zones Hi Tom and Carolyn, I apologize that it has taken me several days to respond to your email. I will share your comment with the Planning Commission at the upcoming public hearing, and you are welcome to observe or testify at this hearing. Staff does not support your suggested approach that the new prohibition only apply to undeveloped land.This would mean that an existing home on a very large R-25 lot would be allowed to subdivide into multiple lots and develop with single-family homes,which defeats the whole purpose of the proposal. The sole purpose of the proposal is to ensure that the city's limited supply of higher-density zones truly supports higher densities, i.e. more dwelling units per acre,which is something that cannot be physically achieved with single-family homes. It is not meant to penalize existing single-family homes,which brings me to your question. In conjunction with the proposed change to prohibit new single-family homes in the R-25 zone,the city is also proposing language to ensure that existing single-family homes in any zone where they are prohibited are allowed to be rebuilt if accidentally destroyed, e.g. by fire or earthquake. You may also be interested to know that the proposed change is part of a larger city strategy to increase housing options for all residents at all stages of life.The city is on the brink of allowing a whole range of"missing middle" housing types that will allow smaller detached homes--in the form of cottages and accessory dwelling units (i.e. granny flats)—to be built in almost all lower-density zones in the city where they are currently not allowed. You can learn more about the city's "missing middle" housing initiative here: http://www.tigard-or.gov/housingoptions/. Please call or email me should you have any more questions. Regards, Susan P.Shanks Senior Planner City of Tigard I Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd I Tigard,Oregon 197223 503-718-2454 From:Tom & Carolyn Moore <tecj.moore@frontier.com> Sent: Monday,October 22, 2018 1:13 PM To:Susan Shanks<SusanS@tigard-or.gov> Subject: Comment/Questions regarding proposed code change - Prohibit single-Family detachted homes in R-25 zones Comment: The change to prohibit the construction of new single-family detached homes on R-25 and R-40 zones should only be implemented for undeveloped land.The zoning for previously developed tax lots should be changed to a zoning classification that fits the existing development. Question: The notice we received indicated that existing single-family detached homes would not be affected by the proposed code change.We have a single family home on land zoned R-25,does this mean that the proposed code change will not ATT 4 Page 005 ATTACHMENT 4 impose any new restrictions on our property?Specifically would the proposed code change affect our ability to rebuild if our house were to be destroyed by fire/earthquake etc.? Thanks, Tom & Carolyn Moore 12427 SW Morning Hill Drive Tigard, Oregon 97223 Phone: 503-590-8088 2 ATT 4 Page 006 ATTACHMENT 4 Susan Shanks From: Susan Shanks Sent: Monday, November 5, 2018 12:28 PM To: 'James Adkins'; Mimi Doukas;fourdconst@msn.com; Tom.Dicianno@polygonhomes.com; andrew.tull@3j-consulting.com; Tarah.DeGeorge@pgn.com; Matt@westwoodhomesllc.com; beh@nwnatural.com; jnennec@jtsnnithco.com Cc: Tom McGuire; Kenny Asher Subject: RE:Tigard Development Code Update-- Public Draft Available Hi James, Thank you for taking the time to spell out HBA's concerns with some of the proposed amendments. Since the first public hearing is tonight, I'm going to do my best to address all your questions and suggestions quickly and clearly. 1. DAC meeting— I'm happy to convene a meeting before the City Council hearing in December. With the Thanksgiving holiday,the best time to meet is the week of Nov 12 or Nov 26. I'll have our admin staff poll members to determine their availability. 2. Effective date—You raise a valid concern, and we'd like to better understand what the actual impact will be to craft the right solution.The tentative effective date for the new standards is mid January. 3. R-7 minimum lot width—It was not within the scope of this package of amendments to contemplate such a change, nor do we think it is a necessary change.A 5,000 square foot lot that is 50 ft x 100 ft is a very standard lot shape and size. The new adjustment process is available to address the need for narrower lots on a case-by-case basis. 4. R-4.5 corner lot setback exception—We understand why you made this suggestion but think that the new adjustment process is a better avenue for addressing this kind of situation than a blanket exception. 5. Windows—The 12% window standard has been working well out in River Terrace, even when applied to corner lots. Windows are an important architectural feature and provide many benefits to homeowners and community members, and 12% is not a difficult standard to meet. 6. Garages -- a. Snout houses have all but been regulated out of existence but could be built in Tigard for lack of any prohibition in our code. b. Garage doors are measured individually from "inside the garage door frame" per 18.290.040.C.3. One two- car garage door would have 1 measurement.Two one-car garage doors would be the sum of 2 measurements. c. Attached 3-car garages dominate the street facade and are not pedestrian friendly. Additional garages on large lots can be accommodated in the rear. d. We disagree that these standards prevent corner lots from having the garage on one façade and the entry on another. Regards, Susan P. Shanks I Senior Planner City of Tigard 1 Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd ( Tigard, Oregon 1 97223 1 ATT 4 Page 007 ATTACHMENT 4 503-718-2454 From:James Adkins<JamesA@hbapdx.org> Sent:Thursday, November 1, 2018 4:21 PM To: Susan Shanks <SusanS@tigard-or.gov>; Mimi Doukas <MimiD@aks-eng.com>; fourdconst@msn.com; Tom.Dicianno@polygonhomes.com; andrew.tull@3j-consulting.com;Tarah.DeGeorge@pgn.com; Matt@westwoodhomesllc.com; beh@nwnatural.com;jnemec@jtsmithco.com Cc:Tom McGuire<Tom M@tigard-or.gov>; Kenny Asher<KennyA@tigard-or.gov> Subject: RE:Tigard Development Code Update-- Public Draft Available Hi Susan, Thank you for sending over the resolution and draft code updates. Will the DAC be convened after this planning commission hearing and before the city council meeting?I think some sort of reconvening of the group would be beneficial to consider all of the changes in the document as a whole. The HBA has a few concerns with some of the updates. Here is a summary of those for the single family residential portion of the updates: What is the proposed effective date of the new codes? This update could be problematic for the design standards to become effective prior to build out of existing plats as home designs have already been completed or are underway and may not comply with the code update. We would think a six month time to implementation, after this resolution passes. Chapter 18.290: The proposed standards would cause some challenges in addressing corner, private drive, flag lot or unusually shaped lots. Table 18.290.1, R-7 zone has a minimum width of 50'which would require a 5,000 sf lot,that the deepest lot depth would be 100'. We would suggest having minimum width of 40' in R-7. Table 18.290.1, R4.5 zone. We would suggest that there is an exception for front yard setback to 15' on corner lots where the garage and front door are not on the same street facing facades. 18.290.040—B Windows: This is problematic for corner lots as they typically do not have 12%windows on side of house and many corner lots have a garage on one side and the entry door on the other side of the house.This would most likely eliminate front gable elevations with design features as this area would count as facade requiring additional windows. This would result in mostly hip roof construction and dormers, suggest measuring facade from top plate of wall down. 18.290.040—C Garages: 2) It is unclear what the intent of this portion of the code change is and where it came from.We find snout house design is not something that is popular these days. 3) Need to address how garage door is measured for multiple doors. This section would eliminate the possibility of 3 car wide garages in majority of R4.5 zoning which is a feature highly desired by owners of new homes in Tigard. The HBA believes this section does not conform to the purpose of this section of the code. This section would eliminate the possible design on corner lots of having the garage on the side of house other than the front door,or limit the garage to 12'. Not sure what prompted this addition of the design standard section of the code update, however as written will limit the design options available to builders and homebuyers. Would a two door garage only count the actual area of door? Or the middle wall area as well? 2 ATT 4 Page 008 ATTACHMENT 4 James Adkins Government Affairs Manager Home Builders Association of Metro Portland t 503.684.1880 I c 503.428.2618 I f 503.684.0588 I hbapdx.org From: Susan Shanks [mailto:SusanS@tigard-or.gov] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 2:08 PM To: Mimi Doukas<MimiD@aks-eng.com>;fourdconst@msn.com;Tom.Dicianno@polygonhomes.com; andrew.tull@3i- consulting.com;Tarah.DeGeorge@pgn.com; Matt@westwoodhomesllc.com; beh@nwnatural.com; jnemec@itsmithco.com;James Adkins<JamesA@hbapdx.org> Cc:Tom McGuire<TomM@tigard-or.gov>; Kenny Asher<KennyA@tigard-or.gov> Subject: RE:Tigard Development Code Update -- Public Draft Available Your welcome, Mimi. And point taken about the graphics. I don't have a specific date for when they will be complete, but we are working on them. If the illustrations are not complete by Nov 5, I will include a mock-up of what they will look like in my PC presentation and will send those out to the group. We opted not to use the word "tangent" to describe how width would be measured for a lot with a curved frontage, but we went with this approach per your suggestion (just described it in a different way). Cheers, Susan P. Shanks I Senior Planner City of Tigard I Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd I Tigard, Oregon 197223 503-718-2454 From: Mimi Doukas<MimiD@aks-eng.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 1:02 PM To: Susan Shanks<SusanS@tigard-or.gov>;fourdconst@msn.com;Tom.Dicianno@polvgonhomes.com; andrew.tull@3i- consulting.com;Tarah.DeGeorge@pgn.com; Matt@westwoodhomesllc.com; beh@nwnatural.com; inemec@jtsmithco.com;James Adkins<JamesA@hbapdx.org> Cc:Tom McGuire<TomM@tigard-or.gov>; Kenny Asher<KennyA@tigard-or.gov> Subject: RE:Tigard Development Code Update-- Public Draft Available Thanks Susan. It looks like you still have placeholders for the lot width diagrams. When will those be complete? I think the graphic is important for decision-makers to understand what is being proposed (the description is rather hard to follow). Thanks—Mimi Mimi Doukas,AICP, RLA—Associate AKS ENGINEERING & FORESTRY, LLC P:503.563.6151 I www.aks-eng.com i mimid@aks-eng.com From:Susan Shanks<SusanS@tigard-or.gov> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2018 12:08 PM 3 ATT 4 Page 009 ATTACHMENT 4 To: fourdconst@msn.com;Tom.Dicianno@polygonhomes.com;andrew.tull@3j-consulting.com; Mimi Doukas <MimiD@aks-eng.com>;Tarah.DeGeorge@pgn.com; Matt@westwoodhomesllc.com; beh@nwnatural.com; jnemec@jtsmithco.com; Mimi Doukas<MimiD@aks-eng.com>;James Adkins<JamesA@hbapdx.org> Cc:Tom McGuire<TomM@tigard-or.gov>; Kenny Asher<KennyA@tigard-or.gov> Subject: RE:Tigard Development Code Update-- Public Draft Available EXTERNAL EMAIL:This email originated from outside of AKS Engineering&Forestry.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Greetings! See attached for a complete draft of the city's code amendment proposal that includes the new lot standards described in the email below and all the other proposed changes we discussed at our meetings. As a reminder,this proposal is part of a multi-year code modernization project to improve the Tigard Community Development Code so that it is more effective, efficient, understandable,fair, and predictably flexible.The proposal repeals and replaces almost all of the city's land use review procedures. It also consolidates and updates standards for apartments, landscaping, and commercial development; adds new design standards for single detached houses;amends lot width and shape standards; and removes the Planned Development overlay zone requirement and zoning map designation. The first hearing on the proposal is Monday, November 5 before the Planning Commission.The hearing before City Council is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, December 11. Your participation at either or both of these hearings is welcome. Please contact me should you have any questions. Regards, Susan P.Shanks I Senior Planner City of Tigard I Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd I Tigard, Oregon 197223 503-718-2454 From: Susan Shanks Sent:Tuesday, October 16,"2018 12:36 PM To:fourdconst@msn.com;Tom.Dicianno@polygonhomes.com;andrew.tull@3i-consulting.com; doukasm@aks- eng.com;Tarah.DeGeorge@pgn.com; Matt@westwoodhomesllc.com; beh@nwnatural.com; inemec@itsmithco.com; Mimi Doukas<MimiD@aks-eng.com>;James Adkins<JamesA@hbapdx.org> Cc:Tom McGuire<TomM@tigard-or.gov>; Kenny Asher<KennyA@tigard-or.gov> Subject:Tigard Development Code Update-- Please Review Greetings! At our meeting last month,we discussed how the city should measure lot width and lot frontage, and I believe I was able to address all of the issues that were raised with the attached proposal. We have not yet created the illustrations to accompany the text, but I wanted to get this in front of you sooner than later.A summary of the proposal is as follows: • Lot width is measured in two different ways to address lots with straight and curved front lot lines. • Lot frontage requirements are increased for standard lots (40 ft)with reductions for flag lots (15 ft), row house lots(15 ft), lots with curved front lot lines (20 ft), and lots at the terminus of a private street(20 ft). • Flag lot access is required through a flag lot pole. Flag lot access through an easement is no longer allowed. • Lots are required to be rectilinear where practicable with an upper limit on how much a side or rear lot line can vary from being straight. 4 ATT 4 Page 010 ATTACHMENT 4 • And finally, it is important to note that where a standard can't be met or more flexibility is desired,this package of amendments also includes a new general adjustment that would give a developer the ability to potentially adjust any of these standards. I welcome your suggestions and questions on the attached proposal in whatever way you'd like to make them, i.e. by phone, email, in writing, or in person.The first hearing on the proposal is Monday, November 5 before the Planning Commission, so it would be great if you could get me your suggestions or questions by Monday, October 22.You are also welcome to submit written or oral testimony on the proposed amendments prior to or at the hearing itself. See the attached public hearing notice for more details. Regards, Susan P. Shanks I Senior Planner City of Tigard I Community Development Department 13125 SW Hall Blvd I Tigard, Oregon 197223 503-718-2454 DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 5 ATT 4 Page 011 ATTACHMENT 4 City of Tigard Attn: The Tigard Planning Commission 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard,OR 97223 RE: DCA2018-00004 & ZON 2018-00005 Subject: Monday, November 5th,2018 Planning Commission Written Testimony: Hello and good evening, my name is Robert Ruedy and I've been paying a very expensive mortgage every month for 26-years on my 1.14 acres of R-12 zoned development land while residing at its location of 14185 SW 100th Avenue here in Tigard. To start, I'd like to reflect on an old saying that"if you want a specific outcome with certainty,just stack-the-deck in favor of that outcome and it will be realized and achieved"... but that methodology is just plain unethical, unprofessional, and potentially illegal for this subject matter being discussed herein. With that said, I have significant concerns regarding how this proposal was crafted, who was to benefit, and who was to be disenfranchised by its composition. It does not appear to be in alignment nor compliance with Oregon State Law as it appears to deliberately discriminate against,and disenfranchise,a select group of citizens and property Owners... that being the remaining few Private Development Property Landowners of the City of Tigard. If an Agency wants to intentionally exclude or bias any particular or specific entity or group of affected parties,this specific effort being testified against herein would be an exceptional example of such an exclusive and biased outcome. The Legislative Amendments proposed for the City's Development Code (TCDC) have numerous flaws in their current form. Such as: 1. It failed miserably to include, or even represent,the participation in its crafting and composition by the most affected parties to these proposed Amendments, namely the many Private Development Property Landowners within the City Limits, and especially those with less than 2 acres of Private Development Land. The City could have contacted these predominately affected Property Owners using its "Available Lands Inventory" Map and readily available contact information related to those affected parties on that map, especially for this and prior related committee assembly, pre-release/submission comments, and especially this hearings' notices towards involvement. 2. The Staff Report "Section III, Background Information and Project Summary" Land Use Procedures specifically refer to Development Standards for Developed and Undeveloped Commercial Properties to "be more fully updated in a future code project after consultation with the industrial development community". But this did not happen as mentioned previously with the non-commercial development community and its Development Property Landowners. Hence,there's a level of inconsistency of procedural outcome within the non- November 5,2018 Public Hearing Testimony on the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Page 1 of 8 ATT 4 Page 012 ATTACHMENT 4 commercial amendments currently under discussion. This similarly relates to all of the "Section III topics," 3. Within the Staff Report"Section IV, Applicable Criteria, Findings, and Conclusions",the Statewide Planning Goal#1 for Citizen Involvement has not been adequately met based on my prior testimony herein. The cross-section of the "Interim Development Advisory Committee" was biased due to its absence of less than 2-acre (aka "tight site") Private Development Property Landowners of Tigard. 4. Additionally within Section IV(and V), it states that "Notice was sent out to affected government agencies by US Postal Service and email on October 16, 2018",just three weeks prior to this hearing,yet nothing was sent out to Private Development Property Landowners identified from the City's"Available Land Inventory Map." This appears inconsistent with the "Notices" Procedures required by law to affected parties in that the government agencies were directly notified through multiple methods for comment, but few(if any)were provided directly to the Private Development Property Sector in any manner, so there appears to be an intentional disparity to the Private Development Property Sector. Hence the Statewide Goal was not adequately satisfied to this respondent due to failures of consistent and direct notification to all affected parties. 5. Additionally within the Section IV (and V) statement identified above, there was no confirmation provided by Staff that those agencies even received the hearing notices,yet the Staff still chose to make their early recommendation to the Planning Commission that there would be no government response or impacts to the City's findings in these subject significant amendments to the City's Development Code. This seems a bit crafty and insincere as to the true involvement by affected parties in this process. Hence,these are not adequately satisfied goals. 6. Statewide Planning Goal 10—Housing: This sections goal has not been adequately met due to government overreach. This overreach extends far beyond the R-25 Zoning District modifications and severely restricts the ability of other Zoning Districts to maximize their density options, which is apparently supposed to be the objective, right? Again,the inclusion of the Private Property Development Landowners would have brought a better solution forward to meeting the Statewide Planning Goal 10 for Housing towards year 2032. If the "goals" objective is truly to provide lesser expensive housing cost options, "overreach regulation" is counter-productive to that outcome. 7. Relating to "Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan,Title 1—Housing Capacity and Title 8—Compliance Procedure", apparently there were no "findings" for the City Staff to weigh-in on following their unconfirmed unilateral attempt to cover the topics within "Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan,Title 1—Housing Capacity and Title 8—Compliance Procedure"( and Section V herein),due to their being no confirmation of receipt nor a "No-Comment" reply from Metro of the "copy" purportedly provided to Metro by City Staff on October 1, 2018,just one month ago. It appears that only the R-25 Zoning District Property Owner comments were specifically and intentionally included and/or November 5,2018 Public Hearing Testimony on the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Page 2 of 8 ATT 4 Page 013 ATTACHMENT 4 considered within this "Staff Finding", which effectively concludes that City Staff failed to provide comment considerations for all other Zoning Districts which were disenfranchised by this and all other proposed Amendments to the City Development Code. Because of these concerns,the subject Metro goals have not been addressed in an unbiased and comprehensively inclusive manner and are therefore unsatisfied achievements. 8. The Tigard Comprehensive Plan: "Goal 1:Citizen Involvement",the Policy 1.1.2 goal has not been adequately met due to the absence of Private Development Property Landowners being involved in each phase of the Land Use process. It was a complicit group assembled to "rubber stamp" the City Staff proposed changes. Instead, it should have been a cross-section of Tigard Landowners, especially undeveloped or under-developed landowners. Unfortunately, it appears a "puppet" committee established to promote a biased desired outcome which is a disservice to existing and future City of Tigard Private Development Property Landowners. It's a "sham" process that needs to be exposed for what it truly is... "Divisive, Unethical, and Inequitable". 9. The City's"Comprehensive Plan Goal 2: Land Use Planning" has not been adequately met as it has been assembled inconsistently in many ways mentioned herein. 10. Policy 2.1.3: This policy has not been adequately satisfied due to non-confirmation of receipt and/or non-response from the other Agencies and Jurisdictions the City Staff purports to have attempted to contact. The City needs to receive a document from each and every agency with a "confirmation of receipt" and whether or not they agree with the changes, and not just rest on an "absence of response" or even a sole (yet unresponsive) "confirmation of receipt"of said notification. 11. Policy 2.1.12: This policy has not been adequately satisfied. "Regulatory flexibility necessary for projects to adapt to site conditions" is not meant to be a "blank check" for over-bearing jurisdiction or overreach by the City, or any other agency or entity for that matter. Please reference my additional comments on this subject herein. 12. Policy 2.1.21: This policy has not been adequately satisfied. The"standards that ensure of high-quality development" are not best achieved through over-reaching agency ambitions, but instead through inclusion in the process by those directly involved in the Land Use Development activity such as the Private Property Landowners and Developers. These parties appear to have been intentionally excluded from the amendment text creation process, even though they are the greatest impacted parties from the outcome of such legislative changes. 13. Policy 2.1.23: "Standards related to open space ensure that developments provide adequate space for outdoor activities and prevent overcrowding of buildings." Frankly, outdoor space in the Northwest, including Tigard, is weather restricted most of the year due to inclement weather. Thinking across the board at residential structures, some need more and others need less outdoor open space. For example:A residential Senior Care Facility likely need less since more activities are indoor year-round, and a school likely needs more even though they are basically vacant during the non-rainy summer time of the year. This policy is also likely in November 5,2018 Public Hearing Testimony on the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Page 3 of 8 ATT 4Page 014 ATTACHMENT 4 conflict with Oregon Department of Health and Human Services (DHS) Facility Siting guidelines due to safety concerns of the eventual new residents. Was the Oregon DHS included in the City's agency notifications for comment? I don't see any evidence of such an inclusion within this City Amendment proposal,yet the Oregon DHS has to approve all Facility Siting locations to ensure those locations also meet their guidelines and requirements. These aforementioned factors indicate that this policy has not been adequately met nor satisfied. 14. Policy 2.1.24: There appears to be a disconnect in the neighborhoods where single-family detached homes are to be impacted by"Apartments". Within the pre-application conferences I've conducted over the past number of years, not one attendee has shown a positive interest in hosting Apartment Development Projects, likely with renters, amongst their neighborhood livability profile. In fact, I've received a strong response of negative comments from those attendees regarding the placement of"Apartments" adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, single-family detached home neighborhoods. There does not appear to be a presence in these Amendments to the City Development Code that would allow comprehensively restriction of public input or neighborhood association influence where application is made for placement of Apartments adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, single- family detached home neighborhoods. It would make sense that such verbiage should be included concurrently to these proposed amendments to restrict neighborhood comment in these instances to meet the City's goals currently being presented in these proposed Amendments. I request that the Planning Commission remand the Staff Report back to City Staff for their revisiting and clarification of these proposed Amendments,and allow participation and discussion by the community about such placements of"apartments" adjacent to, or in the vicinity of, single-family detached home neighborhoods. The Staff Report states that the intent of this policy is to"ensure a FAIR and consistent application of the design standards and provide clarity for applicants", but this does not appear to be what's occurred in these proposed Amendments. Hence,this policy has not been adequately met nor satisfied. 15. Policy 2.2.10: The buffering and screening rewrite in Development Code Chapters 18.420 & 18.520 are overbearing,inconsistent, and an example of government overreach. Due to time constraints on this testimony, I am unable to capture these inconsistencies swiftly enough to make the testimony deadline today, but I'd be happy to assist in clarifying them once given the option to participate in the rewrite by City Staff. This policy has not been adequately met nor satisfied. 16. Policy 2.3.5: The current proposed Staff Report does not take into account private property "deeded view-line obstruction restrictions", "hazard trees" remediation options to parcels adjacent to planned and future land developments, and the potential placement of trees or a storm water detention facility obstacle by a developer to specifically restrict development an adjacent parcel, such as in visual clearance areas for those adjacent parcel access/egress development requirement achievements. Until these aspects,genuine concerns, and other written contents of Chapters 18.420 & 18.520, plus their influences on other Chapters under November 5,2018 Public Hearing Testimony on the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Page 4 of 8 ATT 4 Page 015 ATTACHMENT 4 current amendment and past enactment have been addressed with Private Development Property Landowners, and their adjacent developed or undeveloped landowners,this policy has not been adequately met nor satisfied. 17. Policy 10.1.1: The policy falls to address the concerns and protect the interests of Tigard Landowners, since it only refers to "present and future residents". This policy appears discriminatory and exclusive of many current and future Private Property Landowners, and therefore this policy has not been adequately met until all parties affected by it are considered and represented in its composition and implementation. 18. Policy 10.2.6: Because this amendments process has specifically excluded Private Development Property Landowners in its crafting of the text,this Policy's' perspective is flawed. The Staff Report states that the intent of this policy is to "ensure a FAIR and Consistent application of the design standards and provide clarity for applicants", but this does not appear to be what's occurred in these proposed Amendments and Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy compliance narratives. These proposed amendments are not "Fair"to Private Development Property Landowners, whether applicants or not,and also significantly lack"consistency". Hence,this policy has not been adequately met nor satisfied. 19. Policy 10.2.8: It appears to this respondent that the goals of items A, B &C within this policy are to "ensure" development standards and compliances with the sweeping overreach ambitions of the Planning Department Staff and their overbearing and biased Development Code provisions. But, also apparent is the only thing this policy looks to "ensure" under these amendments is less property development interest overall within the Tigard City Limits, and that will be contrary to the City goals of more housing in any price range. Hence,this policy has not been adequately met nor satisfied. Interim"Conclusion" on Policies: Based on the findings within the Staff Report,this Development Property Landowner concludes that the proposed code text amendment is"inconsistent" with the applicable provisions of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. I request and encourage the Tigard Planning Commission to remand/return it back to City Staff for inclusion of Tigard Private Development Property Landowners concerns, comments, and compromise by the City towards a workable and "Fair"outcome for all parties affected by such significant changes. Additionally, omitted from this Staff Report Proposal for Development Land Use and Occupancy Type Amendments to the Development Code and Zoning Map is any form of summary as to how the "Single Family Housing" definition will be enforced,especially where "Multi-family Use" is being exercised currently in "Single-family Occupancy Permitted" domiciles or residences of the City of Tigard. An example would be the home that has an unusual number of motor vehicles parked in and around such "single-family" properties, with sometimes as many as 20 persons from differing "families" living on the premises, even sometimes in tents, yurts, motor homes, trailers,campers, outbuildings,storage sheds,or otherwise. November 5,2018 Public Hearing Testimony on the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Page 5 of 8 ATT 4 Page 016 ATTACHMENT 4 On a personal level, t purchased the property at my address to develop it and have been diligently working on its Oregon OHS facility siting approval and other elements of financing towards the development of a Senior Care Facility,over the past five (5) years. My efforts have taken me literally many thousands of hours and have cost roughly$400K to this point in time to gain the necessary approvals, preliminary designs and graphic renderings, interested financiers, lenders, post- construction Operators,and otherwise. The comprehensive 104-page Market Study,that I was required to pay for to gain the Oregon DHS Siting approval for such a Use and Occupancy, reflected a compelling outcome of pent-up demand in an under-served area,that being the area of King City, Summerfield, South Tigard,and their surrounding area where over 10,000 aged 55 and up currently reside in their independent living residences. The real problem for these local residents is that there is literally nowhere for them to go within a 5-mile radius of my property for their likely non- ambulatory or other disability"Plan B" if and when they become unable to continue living in their homes,since all current Care Facilities are full-up with "waiting lists"that only continue to get longer. I'm concerned that the proposed changes to the current Tigard Development Code,Zoning and available "Occupancy and/or Use" options for my current R-12 Zoning will be negatively impacting to my ongoing efforts which are currently pre-approved by the Oregon OHS,and circumvent or negate my objectives for my privately owned property. Because of this genuine concern of mine, any "diminished Value"financial damages that I may incur from these proposed Development Code, Zoning and Use changes will need to be fully compensated by the City of Tigard. If nothing else comes out of these testimonies and Planning Commission recommendations, there needs to be a "grandfather clause" in this amended Code dissertation for those like me who have current property development plans in "mid-stream"status to continue forward with our development plans under the Tigard Development Codes and otherwise "that are least restrictive"to our private property development objectives and outcomes. In conclusion to this portion of my testimony: This Private Development Property Landowner strongly disagrees with the Staff Report"Section II, Staff Recommendations" narrative and requests that the Planning Commission rule against the proposed development code text amendments (Attachment 1) and map amendments (Attachment 2) with all alterations as purportedly determined through the review of the Public Hearing Process and make no final recommendation to the City Council regarding its inaccuracies and/or incomplete status until it is remanded back to the City Planning Department for a complete rewrite with the comprehensive inclusion of the City's Private Development Property Owners throughout the rewriting and resubmission proposal process. On an aside... if the City of Tigard chooses to encourage and promote widespread "gentrification", this subject Development Code & Zoning Amendment appears likely to do just that to its oldest, disabled,and/or less fortunate residents by disenfranchising them with no other alternative when unable to reside in their current homes,since the City has no other provisions to allow "aging-in- place" options to reside somewhere close-in-locale to their current residence. Additionally, I've held multiple Neighborhood Meetings regarding my planned Senior Care Facility development, and through these I've received an overwhelming support by neighbors to accomplish my objectives in November 5,2018 Public Hearing Testimony on the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Page 6 of 8 ATT 4 Page 017 ATTACHMENT 4 our neighborhood. Many have even mentioned they'd like to reside there if needing it for their or other family members,"Plan B"! My personal perspective is that these Amendments to the City's Development Code, Zoning, and Land Use options reek of government overreach towards private development property ownership rights. "Land Grabs" by those who don't own it,from those who do, have been addressed in the prior State Measure 37 with regard to basically stealing "private property Land Use Rights", and concurrently their"property values", thru legislative "Amendment". Simply put... it's just"wrong". unethical, and even possibly illegal! So my question to you the Planning Commission is... When is the City of Tigard going to stop legislatively"stealin ' private property Values and Occupancy Type Use from its Private Development Property Landowners? Or will you mandate commensurate compensation to such devaluations? This Private Development Property Owner also takes specific exception to what I'll refer to as"The Ultimate Weasel Clause"within Section 18.770.070 which appears to give the City Planning Department UNLIMITED AUTHORITY over Private Development Property Landowners and their Private Property Development Rights! Meaning"Flexibility"towards"Suitable and Necessary" shouldn't translate to, or be acted upon as, "Unlimited Authority of Control". If the City wishes to buy my property to have unlimited Authority of Control over its Development and Use,that's perfectly fine...just don't continue to disenfranchise me by diminishing the value of it by"stealing" my property Land Use through unscrupulous legislative actions such as this! How would you like it, and how would you feel, if the Public disenfranchised you by"diminishing"your own personal 401K's or PER's Retirements value similarly??? This property is currently my ONLY retirement resource! So do any of you on the Planning Commission really need to push this forward and recommend screwing me out of part or all of my sole retirement investment? This entire City of Tigard Development Code and other aspects"Amendment" process appears to be an intentionally orchestrated "Land Takings"effort through biased legislative process that is disguised as being in the interest of all parties,which it is not. For those who remember A-Boy's litigation against the City of Tigard a number of years back regarding the "US Supreme Court Ruling on Land Takings"...that's where these subject proposed Amendments to the City's Development Code are currently headed, and Tigard Citizens and Taxpayers shouldn't have to be burdened with another multi-million dollar litigation loss from their wallets! In conclusion: The Amendments and Decision Making Process of Chapters 18.380& 18.390 have not been met. Additionally,the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,Section VI was not an inclusive process for all parties affected by these proposed Amendments. This Private Property Landowner recommends,and additionally requests,that the Tigard Planning Commission find against the proposed Development Code"Text and Map Amendments" in discussion with all alterations as determined through review November 5,2018 Public Hearing Testimony on the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Page 7 of 8 ATT 4 Page 018 ATTACHMENT 4 of the public hearing process, and take no action towards a final recommendation of its current text composition to the Tigard City Council,but instead remand it back to the Tigard Planning Department. Without the proactive inclusion and significant on-going public input regarding issues and concerns towards its rewrite from existing Private Development Property Landowners of Tigard,this proposed rewrite of the Tigard Development Code and Zoning Map is comprehensively biased and unfair,since Private Development Property Landowners in Tigard are apparently the unrepresented minority primarily at risk of this and other ongoing"diminished value"actions by the City. Additionally, since there was only a 2-weeks Public Notice for this hearing, I also request that the Tigard Planning Commission keep the record open on this hearing for an additional 2-weeks to receive ongoing comment and testimonies from residents,and especially Private Development Property Landowners,to voice their opinions and suggested changes to these proposed Amendments. Respectfully submitted, Robert E. Ruedy Resident and Private Development Property Owner Email: RobRuedy@gmail.com November 5,2018 Public Hearing Testimony on the Staff Report to the Planning Commission Page 8 of 8 ATT 4 Page 019 ATTACHMENT 5 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 18- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADOPTING THE SECOND PART OF THE PHASE II CODE AMENDMENT PROJECT TO OVERHAUL THE CITY'S LAND USE PROCEDURES; CONSOLIDATE, AND UPDATE SI1'L AND BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS FOR APARTMENTS, SINGT F. DETACHED HOUSFS, AND DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES; AND CONSOLIDA I'L AND UPDATE STANDARDS FOR LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING. (LAND USE FILE NOS.DCA2018-00004 AND ZON2018-00005) WHEREAS, the proposed text and map amendments are part of a multi-year code modernization project to improve the Tigard Community Development Code (TCDC) so that it is more effective, efficient,understandable, fair, and predictably flexible;and WHEREAS, Phase I of this project was completed in 2017 (DCA2017-00003), and the first part of Phase II was completed in 2018 (DCA2018-00003); and WHEREAS, notice was provided to the Department of Land Conservation and Development and Metro at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary public hearing;and WHEREAS, notice was provided to the public in conformance with TCDC Chapter 18.710.110 and ORS 227.186;and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 2018 and recommended approval of the proposed amendments by a 6 to 1 vote;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on December 11, 2018 to consider the proposed amendments;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council considered applicable review criteria and provisions found in the Tigard Community Development Code, Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan,and Statewide Planning Goals;and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council determined that the proposed amendments are consistent with all applicable review criteria and provisions. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The amendments to the Tigard Community Development Code that are attached as Exhibit A are hereby adopted. ORDINANCE No. 18- Page 1 SECTION 2: The amendments to the Tigard Zoning Map that are attached as Exhibit B are hereby adopted. SECTION 3: The findings and conclusions that are attached as Exhibit C are hereby adopted as the basis in support of this Ordinance. SECTION 4: This Ordinance shall be effective on January 31,2019. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only,this day of ,2018. Carol Drager, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of ,2018. John L. Cook,Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 18- Page 2 CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done TIGARD Phase II Code Amendment Project: Land Use Procedures Residential and Commercial Development Standards City Council Public Hearing I December 11, 2018 City-of Tigard Project Overview Development Code Work Program • Multi-year effort to modernize and organize code • Incorporate Strategic Plan code audit recommendations -41W Phase I Amendments 111.111111111 • Major code reorganization • Minor code reorganization • Hou • Land use review procedures Residential standards • Commercial standards • Land use procedures City of Tigard Project Purpose / Modernize and improve the effectiveness of the development code / Advance the city's strategic vision for walkability / Facilitate quality development City of Tigard Guiding Principles Effective Efficient Understandable Fair Predictably flexible City of Tigard Land Use Procedures 18.20 (Expirations) NEW 18.715 Adjustments Repeal/Replace 18.720 Annexations 18.730 Director Determinations 18.740 Conditional Uses Repeal/Replace 18.745 Extensions NEW 18.750 Historic Resources 18.760 Home Occupations 18.765 Modifications NEW 18.770 Planned Developments - Repeal/Replace 18.780 Site Development Reviews Repeal/Replace 18.790 Text and Map Amendments City of Tigard Development Standards Residential Development Single Detached Houses * Modified to address public Rowhouses comment Apartments Nonresidential Dev. in Commercial Zones Nonresidential Dev. In Industrial Zones Landscaping and Screening City of Tigard EXISTING Apartment & Rowhouse Standards • ••. •• •: • Site Development SDR 7. •; •: Review . Standards • . • . . • . C , . (required) ' . • • , . . . •.• .• • •- ••� . • :•. • Compatibility : : Base Zone : : • •• •'•• ., : Standards : : Standards Planned Development •'' ' . ...... . . . . . • :* . * . r . ■ Review ' ' PD ' • . • r • . . . • • • •. r • . • (voluntary) Standards •. •S : •• • • • ''•••.....•••' '••...••• • ••...•• • * Standards overlap (and sometimes conflict) * Standards only apply to apartments and rowhouses adjacent to property zoned for single detached houses PROPOSED Apartment & Rowhouse Standards •.... ,.... . • Site Development ' . •. , ••. , Review • • • , . , • . , a a (required) • Apartment : • . • . . . a. . or : Base Zone •▪ Rowhousea . Standards • Planned Development ▪ Standards • aa a •a a .• a Review •• • • . a • • . . • • a (voluntary) • • • . • . EXISTING Landscaping & Screening Standards Table 18.320.1 Buffer Type Matrix 111121 Proposed Ilse Attached Single Parking Lots Units. Attached Single Multifamily(1-5 Units,& Mobile C-C,C- Existing,Abutting Detached Units),& Multifamily,(5' Home G,C-P C-N MUE I-P, 1-L 1-11 4 to 50 50 Use Single Units Duplexes Units) Parks Zones Zone Zone Zones Zone spaces space:. Detached Single None A C. C 1) (' (. 1. ; ( :). Units Attached Single Units,Multifamily N.,:le I ) F. A I ( (.. ( ( (1-5 Units),& Duplexes Attached Single Units,& A A N,ir!...' ( D ( ( 1 1. I. Multifamily(5, Units) Mobile Home Parks A A if None D C C E F L D C-C,C-G,C-P C C C C \one A A D D None None Zones . C-N Zone C C C C A None A D D None None MUE Zone C ( C C .A A None D D None None I-P,I-L Zones D I) D D .A. A A None D None None I-11 Zone D 1) D D 1) D D n \or, None None Parking Lots C ( C C \um: None None Ni I:: \011,..' \on:" None Arterial Street A A A A None None None A D None None City of Tigard PROPOSED Landscaping & Screening Standards Perimeter ( between incompatible zones) Service areas (from the street) Utilities (from the street) Parking lots (from th treet) 111 t Not Property Line Min. 3 ft. tall fence 41/ or hedge Sidewalk I Street Min. 8 ft. deep City of Tigard Development Standards Omnibus Amendments Lot width and shape Houses in R-25 zone Nonconforming houses Banners in MU-CBD zone right-of-way Housing types in River Terrace GC zone City of Tigard Other Amendments Zoning Map Overlay zones Master Fees and Charges Schedule Separate public hearing Land use application fees Wireless Communication Facilities Future code project City of Tigard Stakeholder Engagement / Housing Options Task Force ► Home Builders Association / Polygon Northwest / Property owners in C-N and R-25 zones Planning Commission / Planning Staff City of Tigard Public Comments / R-25 zone property owners (x2) / R- 12 zone property owner Home Builders Association / Polygon ( Pacific Community Design ) City of Tigard Planning Commission / Nov 5 public hearing / Deliberations summarized in Attachment 1 6 — 1 recommendation to adopt proposal City of Tigard Decision Alternatives Adopt proposal with no changes Adopt proposal with minor changes Continue hearing to a date certain to consider public comments or major changes City ofTigard Thank You. Questions ? SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR - // HBA (DATE OF MEETING) Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland 12-11-2018 Honorable John Cook, Mayor Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Subject:Ordinance for Phase II Code Amendments Mayor Cook and City Council, On behalf of the Home Builders Association of Metropolitan Portland(HBA),thank you for the opportunity to comment in support of the Phase II Code Amendments for the City of Tigard. The updates before you were presented to the Development Advisory Committee(DAC)for review and refinement.Staff has worked with the group to incorporate suggestions for improvements to the Community Development Code Amendments.The reorganization,rewriting and newly established standards of the code improves user friendliness and usefulness overall. Additionally,these changes to the Tigard Community Development Code will provide increased certainty while allowing for some flexibility in constrained situations. Through the DAC,Tigard staff listened to our feedback and incorporated our recommendations into tonight's package of amendments.We appreciate staffs dedication to improving the process and look forward to working with staff to find ways to continue to make improvements with future code amendments. The HBA would urge the City Council to consider the implementation date of the updated code.We would ask that the Council consider adopting an implementation date of March 31', 2019 in order to provide a window of time for residential development community to learn about and comply with the new code requirements. The HBA commends Tigard for their collaborative approach to these standards.As Tigard continues to grow, it is imperative to keep a keen eye on creating a balanced inventory of housing of all types and for all income levels. Bringing together stakeholders across the residential-housing industry is key in progressing toward this goal. Diverse industry stakeholder input will help strengthen our communities and improve policy outcomes in the City of Tigard. The HBA of Metropolitan Portland supports the proposal before you and looks forward to working with Tigard to meet its community development and housing goals. James Adkins HBA of Metro Portland Government Affairs Manager Home Builders Association of Metro Portland 15555 SW Bangy Rd.,Ste.301 Lake Oswego,OR97035 503-684-1880•Fax 503-684-0588 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR - l- U1 Pacific Community (DATE OF MEETING) Design December 10, 2018 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Honorable Mayor, Tigard City Councilors, This letter is written in support of the proposed code amendments (DCA2018-00004) subject to consideration at the December 11, 2018 council meeting. We have represented Polygon Homes on development applications throughout the River Terrace Plan District, and thus we were reviewing the proposed amendments through the lens of existing approvals and future Planned Development proposals in River Terrace. We have had an open and collaborative process with City Staff while reviewing the proposed amendments. We thoroughly examined the proposed code amendments and also solicited input from Polygon's Architect, Milbrandt Architects. Throughout the process of this review, the City has been responsive to our questions and concerns about potential impacts of the code update. We have seen many of our observations reflected in the latest version of the code. We appreciate that Staff has been receptive to our input, and therefore fully support the proposed code amendments (DCA2018-00004). Thank you, cJt!55`r\v\CI.0 Stacy YConner , AICP Planning Manager Mail: 12564 SW Main Street, Tigard, OR 97223 Phone: (503) 941-9484 Website: www.pacific-communitv.com Fax: (503) 941-9485 AGENDA ITEM No. 9 Date: December 11, 2018 TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: Legislative Public Hearing — CONSIDER ORDINANCE FOR PHASE II COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS (PROCEDURES AND STANDARDS) This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 9 Date: December 11, 2018 PLEASE PRINT This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Proponent—(Speaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral Name - •dress&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Tigard City Council Testimony; December 11, 2018 @ 7:30 pm Topic: DCA2018-00004&ZON2018-00005 (incl. DCA2018-00003) 1. I'm testifying that this current Development Code Rewrite,in its entirety,has not been an adequately inclusive process. 2. I'm extremely displeased with it not being more inclusive of the group of property most impacted by the Development Code rewrite,those being the"Development Property" landowner's with less than 2 acres within the city limits. There was no specific effort of significance to include them with notices that so severely affect the irland ownership. It's a disgrace,and a divisive process that's been employed. 3. It seems like every time Igo into the City Planning Department to discuss my plans for my property development,all they can tell me is that my Land Use aspirations don't me et their Development Code Standards. Case in point:"Flag lots"in"Subdivisions" not allowed,yet are allowed within"Minor Partitions". The inconsistency detracts from the City's goals for maximized density. !can provide more specificdetail if requested. Another example is the requirement to have buildings primarily face City streets,and ata perpendicularalignment. Again,this does not lend itself to being in alignment with maximized density. 4. The use of"Weasel Clauses"buried within the Development Code to"pigeon-hole"Land Owners and Developers that are not in conformance with the Planning Department's personal& departmental whims and desires. By providing so called"Flexibility"to the Planning Department and its staff,this opens the door to favoritism,discrimination,disparity, inconsistency,and other ramifications that the Development Landowners have no control over once these legislative nuances are in place. This issue is identified specifically within my written testimony to the Tigard Planning Commission forthis current topic. 5. There appears to be no "definitions"forthe Development Types and Uses. Case in point,what is a "detention"use??? If it's criminal detention,then that needs to be specified to not include detention areas in schools,congregate care centers,safe houses,witness protection,house- arrest,or other type in-patient facilities such as a Skilled Nursing orAcute Care facility. The Oregon DHS has specific requirements for inclusion of"detention"uses within many oftheir use and occupancy categories such as for severe Alzheimer or Dementia patients. 6. The Silver Tsunami is coming swiftly and the Tigard Development Code is severely deficient towards accommodating this market sector. The Tigard Zoning,Land Use, and Development Code needs to have its own well defined Section in the Development Code such as Chapter 18.300, which istied to the Zoning and Land Use, and it needs to be in concert with the Oregon DHS Regulations,State Statutes,and Administrative Rules governing such development and uses. 7. In my last Written Testimony to the City Council,December27th,I provided a number of open sourced specifics on the aging populations and the interwoven aspects relating to the Tigard/Summerfield/King City area. There is nowhere within a 5-mile radius from my property for residents living"independently"to go fortheir"Plan B"should they become unable to live in their current home or apartment. This is a HUGE problem that is onlygettingworse by the year with the Baby Boomers now retiring at an alarming rate of 10,000 per day, along with the SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR (DATE OF MEETING) Tigard City Coundl Testimony ' —��/ Page 1 of 2 Tigard City Council Testimony; December 11, 2018 @ 7:30 pm intrastate and interstate migration of those aged 50 and up relocating from rural-to-urban living environments. 8. I've endured 26 years of the City devaluing my property with legislated land use and development fee changes,and I'm fed-up with it. These included Measure 37/49,Land Grabs or financial extortion by legislation such as the adoption of the Urban Forestry Plan,and general parsing and erosion of Land Use by increased setbacks,impervious surface,a landscaping,and other disenfranchising regulations. If I was testifying on plans to tax your IRA,401K or PERS retirements,how would you feel about that and respond? 9. Please reference my testimony,to the Planning Commission on this specifictopic,dated November 27,2018 10. I request that the Tigard City Council leave the record open forat least 2 weeks for me and others to complete ourtestimonies. Once closed the approval or remand back to the Planning Department and Planning Commission can then be taken-up ata later Tigard City Council meeting. Respectfully submitted, Robert E. Ruedy Resident&Development Property Owner 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard,OR 97224-4951 Cell:(503) 819-7898 Tigard City Coundl Testimony Page 2 of 2 AIS-3699 10. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 12/11/2018 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Informational Public Hearing Consider Resolution for Phase II Code Amendment Project Master Fees & Charges Schedule Prepared For: Susan Shanks, Community Development Submitted By: Susan Shanks, Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Public Hearing- Informational Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing: Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall the City Council approve amendments to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule to maintain consistency between the Tigard Community Development Code and the city's Master Fees and Charges? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends approval of the Resolution (Attachment 1) that amends the Master Fees and Charges Schedule. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Phase II Code Amendment Project included many changes to the Tigard Community Development Code,including several changes to the city's land use applications and procedures. The proposed amendments are necessary to maintain consistency between the Tigard Community Development Code and the city's Master Fees and Charges for land use applications. The proposed amendments are primarily administrative in nature. No new fees or fee increases are proposed,with the exception of assigning the standard Type II review fee to the new extension application adopted as part of the Phase II Code Amendment Project. In some instances, fee decreases are proposed in order to reflect some of the new streamlined procedures adopted as part of the Phase II Code Amendment Project. For example, the fee for an Adjustment/Variance application is currently either$850 or $388. With the newly overhauled Adjustment procedure only one fee is necessary, and staff proposes to charge the lesser of the two existing fees. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could direct staff to modify the proposed amendments. Council could also reject all or portions of the proposed amendments. If Council rejects all or portions of the proposed amendments, existing fees and charges would continue to apply and would potentially be inconsistent with the Tigard Community Development Code. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS City Strategic Plan Goal 1: Facilitate walking connections to develop an identity City Strategic Plan Goal 2: Ensure development advances the vision DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION July 2018 —Staff briefed Council on the Phase II Code Amendment Project Attachments ATT 1 Resolution ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 18- A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH RECENT AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF TIGARD. WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council adopted amendments to the Tigard Community Development Code on December 11,2018 (DCA2018-00004);and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule are necessary to maintain consistency between the Tigard Community Development Code and the Master Fees and Charges Schedule; and UREAS, the proposed amendments are administrative in nature. No new fees or fee increases are proposed,with the exception of assigning the standard Type II review fee to the new extension application that was adopted as part of the code amendments described above. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that SECTION 1: The amendments to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule that are attached as Exhibit Al are hereby adopted. Exhibit A.2 is a clean version of the amendments and is provided for reference only. SECTION 2: This resolution shall be effective on January 31,2019. PASSED: This day of 2018. Mayor-City of Tigard A I'l'EST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 18- Page 1 EXHIBIT A. 1 City of Tigard Master Fees and Charges Schedule FY 18/19 Community Development — Development Services Planning Amendments are shown as follows: Text with bold.italics, and underline is new text. Text with strikethrougli is deleted text. APPLICATION TYPE FEE/CHARGE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITUNITS $ 272 ADJUSTMENT $ 388 ANNEXATION (Quasi-judicial) $ 3,641 APPEAL Type II to Hearings Officer $ 250 Expedited Review(Deposit) $ 300 Type III/Codc Intcrprctation to City Council $ 3,661 APPROVAL EXTENSION $ 388 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT (Quasi-judicial) $ 4,580 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENT $ 12,171- CONDITIONAL USE $ Z248 Ncw or Major Modification $ 7,248 $ 791 DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW Single-Family Building Plan $ 98 Commercial/Industrial/Institutional—New Development $ 388 Commercial/Industrial/Institutional—Tenant Improvements in Existing Development Project Valuation up to$4,999 $ - Project Valuation$5,000 -$74,999 $ 98 Project Valuation$75,000-$149,999 $ 243 Project Valuation$150,000 or more $ 388 DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION/CODE INTERPRETATION $ 794 DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW Track 1 $ 133 Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT A. 1 Track 2 Under$1,000,000 $ 1,855 base i Plus 0.004 x project valuation $1,000,000 and Over(Maximum Fee of$25,000) $ 7,152 bac+ Plus 0.002 x project valuation Track 3 $ 3,763 base+Plus applicable Track 2Typc II fee EXTENSION Type I $ 388 Type II $ 794 HISTORIC OVERLAY ZONE 5,667 New Construction,Exterior Alteration,or Demolition 8-58 HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT Type I $ 134 Type II $ 325 LAND PARTITION 2 Lots $ 4,362 3 Lots $ 5,245 Expedited $ 6,121 Final Plat $ 1,218 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT/OR LOT CONSOLIDATION $ 794 MARIJUANA FACILITY PERMIT $ 774 MISCELLANEOUS LAND USE REVIEW Adequate Public Facilities Exception(inside River Terrace) $ 794 Historic Resource Designation/Removal ofDesignation $ 5.667 Historic Resource Construction/Alteration/Demolition $ 850 Transportation Mitigation(inside Tigard Triangle) $ 794 MODIFICATION Type I $ 325 Type II $ 3 500 NON CONFORMING USE DETERMINATION 791 Page 2 of 4 EXHIBIT A.1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT :: : .,, ' ..- - , . D .::: ' :- ' Consolidated Concept and Detailed Plan $ 10,083 -with Land Division(in lieu of Subdivision or Partition fee) I€-S>bdi isie:,Add$93/lot Concepteal Plan Rcvicw(Separate Hearing) $ 10,083 Detailed Dcvclopmcnt Plan Rcvicw(Separate Hearing) $ 3.50010,083 -with Land Division(in lieu of Subdivision or Partition fee) Add$93/lot PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE Type II $ 325 Type III $ 780 PROJECT/PLAT NAME CHANGE $ 444 RENOTIFICATION FOR HEARING POSTPONEMENT $ 441 SENSTIVE LANDS REVIEW Type I $ 794 Type II $ 3,482 Type III $ 3,761 SIGN PERMIT New aa4-orModification to aft Existing Sign $ 218 Temporary Sign $ 69 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Type I Under 13 Dwelling Units $ 388 13 Dwelling Units and Over $ 794 Type IINcw and Major Modification Under$1,000,000 $ 6,150 $1.000.000Millieft and Over $ 7,989 base+ Plus$6/each$10,000 over$1MftiBien 325 SUBDIVISION Preliminary Plat $ 9,653 Plus$93/lot Preliminary Plat with Planned Dcvclopmcnt 10,083 Plus$93 per lot Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT A. 1 Expedited Preliminary Plat $ 8,140 Plus$93/lot Final Plat S 2,455 Plat Name Change 444 TEMPORARY USE PERMIT Type I $ 388 Special Exemption/Non-Profit Organization $ - Special Mixed Use-Central Business District Zone Rate 1st Temporary Use in a Calendar Year $ 388 2nd Through 5th Temporary Use With Substantially the Same Site Plan Within $ 69 A Calendar Year URBAN FORESTRY Plan Modification $ 764 Discretionary Plan Review(with concurrent Type III review) $ 478 Discretionary Plan Review(without concurrent Type III review) $ 2,945 VARIANCE/ADJUSTMENT Admini3trativc Variance 844 Dcvclopmcnt Adju3tmcnt(includcs TMU Zonc Adjuatmcnts) 3-88 Spccial Adjuatmcnts 388 Type II 8-50 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT(Quasi-judicial) $ 4,580 ZONING ANALYSIS LETTER(DETAILED) $ 794 ZONING INQUIRY LETTER(SIMPLE) $ 116 Community Development — Miscellaneous Development Type II(Major)Modification Project Valuation Threshold* $50,000 Public Works — Development Engineering Tigard Triangle Mixed Use Zone —Fees and Charges Plan Check Meeting Enginccring Pre Screen Conference Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A.2 City of Tigard Master Fees and Charges Schedule FY 18/19 Community Development - Development Services Planning APPLICATION TYPE FEE/CHARGE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT $ 272 ADJUSTMENT $ 388 ANNEXATION (Quasi-judicial) $ 3,641 APPEAL Type II to Hearings Officer $ 250 Expedited Review(Deposit) $ 300 Type III $ 3,661 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT (Quasi-judicial) $ 4,580 CONDITIONAL USE $ 7,248 DEVELOPMENT CODE REVIEW Single-Family Building Plan $ 98 Commercial/Industrial/Institutional—New Development $ 388 Commercial/Industrial/Institutional—Tenant Improvements in Existing Development Project Valuation up to$4,999 $ - Project Valuation$5,000 -$74,999 $ 98 Project Valuation$75,000-$149,999 $ 243 Project Valuation$150,000 or more $ 388 DIRECTOR DETERMINATION $ 794 DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW Track 1 $ 133 Track 2 Under$1,000,000 $ 1,855 Plus 0.004 x project valuation $1,000,000 and Over(Maximum Fee of$25,000) $ 7,152 Plus 0.002 x project valuation Track 3 $ 3,763 Plus applicable Track 2 fee Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT A.2 EXTENSION Type I $ 388 Type II $ 794 HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT Type I $ 134 Type II $ 325 LAND PARTITION 2 Lots $ 4,362 3 Lots $ 5,245 Expedited $ 6,121 Final Plat $ 1,218 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT/LOT CONSOLIDATION $ 794 MARIJUANA FACILITY PERMIT $ 774 MISCELLANEOUS LAND USE REVIEW Adequate Public Facilities Exception (inside River Terrace) $ 794 Historic Resource Designation/Removal of Designation $ 5,667 Historic Resource Construction/Alteration/Demolition $ 850 Transportation Mitigation(inside Tigard Triangle) $ 794 MODIFICATION Type I $ 325 Type II $ 3,500 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Consolidated Concept and Detailed Plan $ 10,083 -with Land Division (in lieu of Subdivision or Partition fee) Add$93/lot Concept Plan $ 10,083 Detailed Plan $ 3,500 -with Land Division (in lieu of Subdivision or Partition fee) Add$93/lot PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE Type II $ 325 Type III $ 780 PROJECT/PLAT NAME CHANGE $ 444 RENOTIFICATION FOR HEARING POSTPONEMENT $ 441 SENSTIVE LANDS REVIEW Type I $ 794 Page 2 of 4 EXHIBIT A.2 Type II $ 3,482 Type III $ 3,761 SIGN PERMIT New or Modification to Existing Sign $ 218 Temporary Sign $ 69 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Type I Under 13 Dwelling Units $ 388 13 Dwelling Units and Over $ 794 Type II Under$1,000,000 $ 6,150 $1,000,000 and Over $ 7,989 Plus$6/each$10,000 over$1M SUBDIVISION Preliminary Plat $ 9,653 Plus$93/lot Expedited Preliminary Plat $ 8,140 Plus$93/lot Final Plat $ 2,455 TEMPORARY USE PERMIT Type I $ 388 Special Exemption/Non-Profit Organization $ - Special Mixed Use-Central Business District Zone Rate 1st Temporary Use in a Calendar Year $ 388 2nd Through 5th Temporary Use with Substantially the Same Site Plan within $ 69 a Calendar Year URBAN FORESTRY Plan Modification $ 764 Discretionary Plan Review(with concurrent Type III review) $ 478 Discretionary Plan Review(without concurrent Type III review) $ 2,945 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT(Quasi-judicial) $ 4,580 ZONING ANALYSIS LETTER (DETAILED) $ 794 ZONING INQUIRY LETTER(SIMPLE) $ 116 Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT A.2 Community Development — Miscellaneous Development Type II (Major) Modification Project Valuation Threshold* $50,000 Public Works -- Development Engineering Tigard Triangle Mixed Use Zone—Fees and Charges Plan Check Meeting Page 4 of 4 AGENDA ITEM No. 10 Date: December 11, 2018 TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: INFORMATIONAL PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER RESOLUTION FOR PHASE II CODE AMENDMENT PROJECT MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE This is a City of Tigard public meeting,subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 10 Date: December 11, 2018 PLEASE PRINT This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record Proponent—(Speaking In Favor) Opponent—(Speaking Against) Neutral Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No. Name,Address&Phone No.