Loading...
VAR10-81 V 10-81 SKOURTES, JOHN 1 OF 2 74TH 8 SW BONITA NEI/4 SECTION 14 T2 S R I W W. M . 2S I 14A WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON SCALE I '1 = 2001 CANCELLED rAx 1 ()TS 1300-A1, 401,800,801,101, QY8 200,1102,1201,903, LY LUJ CO Q cr w SEE MAP I I DC _- SEE MAP QT 2S I 2S I I IDD H I 12 — _ I/4 SEC COR 3 BEGIN C.R 2076 - i C./'S 1 d --- — — — — — — 'I L--- TERM L, R '\40 42') ' • 2216.I�' T ffY9z92 � , p- - 105 300 . /64c3I242 - - R 01x1 D CR. 42! Ir 44. 600 ' 500 las o4 � 879. 78 • — — T 7ry T - - - 3n1 302-412s2s�R-2s 8e 2 .75 / 26 Ac /294c C1546Ac 304 - I l . ,e4c 100 t - �t„ 113 76 4c �_ 49 36Ac 1 I t 1 1 3 I o, 3 0 3) U 01C._i•Nu•111f •i o O O 100 04 F•7-. /94C UI - I °�-f a0 N m N 312 4r1-- 411 _ O N N ~ 105 6 55CH 41742 1 a~1 2 16 .1 5 ' 60 55, 400 3 N I ILI 432.5 ISO /. ,"w. I , j _cr In cbat o CI 1 700 iso t 1 I U J 433 WEST O /9.65 AcCO Iv __-------,:.=------ __ N RO 10 R/ W � I I 0 o 1 "' _ f z I ro rn IIcr -- - 'fi _ _ 4 - . . . . 2111 4s h — — ,_ --- -`_,R3 w b _ — -1 0, — I •} 30 i7) 1. I 41100 M = I I w W SCHOOL DIST (ICT 233 ( 4194c ( D a N � "' Z I v N N r-' '°' R/ N - .50, I 0 J 802 I I 0 1r- _ _ 4 3 2-3 -L 9 a C S ,8 3 4 o I n J CZ v z1 ,�51 1 -1 s 620 v r 3 In 1103 ;-. °' -N h SEE M A P p ( 3 02Ac — 209 Q -- - - — -� 1101 N 2S I 146 H a WEST 880' - 934c 0 .I • i 25125 m 0 ik p ScliOI N H N - EAST _ 264 30' •• - W-1 �' •0 �`\ to I 53 1/3 RODS 209 SEE MAP d; � c - -- — --- 1 23. 74 .r ,60 c I 1200 2S I 138 I 1 5.34 Ac. NW COR SHAVER ,ill • 53 / 195 d1 a 30 • ' 9 02 25 1 N - 1J64,7 m I_ v 0 1 � O� t0 ` O OI M A 78 zl 23 — 10 CD 1 N 8 8° 1 I 'E 802. 0' ----3=4.5 4 o—_ N r r- 465 ' 371/3RODS 145 —� 225 I4+84.0 PC " 3"425 - - -- _ 1 EAST 520 .2' 260 82 .75' t 900 ��' 90 4 1 6 R/w _ 1- — - , ► ,� - 7-- / I ..rr"^r.^" 1t c 1171 ' ` - -C' II !,i1:1 : ' 11 1 1 ' .I,!;'l 1111111111114111 - _ - _ _ _ - `_.. 111 II! H tit 111 MIIMH 111111�N/11111 I6111IN: I! _ Y � . . ., iWI11tIN11RlIIn11111NHNI�1I11NIM111111NIMIli11N ....... ..r... w . - 4 u I L, L.611 ' I . ...4 ' u t t .l _ 2(SI.-Z.lir, - - - 2-�-�_QN _ - _ ?1�Q'1 ._- - - --_ -0 _...._ ._ _ 25101' Z51-O'1 . y - --._Z5C 4111 �,` } 1b t7la,'�Iyllr '►J DItW �' . .. _-- - t� _.-�-._. --7_ ____ _.___ --- - - .� - -3 0 - ---- - to I � 404, � tv - 5 Sit AIt•T Ft I 7 , , . ._ _ , -- -. • 1`I✓ 3) N t; 4. ( fe) - , 1+1- -- _1111 ,_ �\ �. • ` , r . --- - • -- 60K6,----:-----1 I ' .. „I V i / i \' IL l/ ' \ 't • \ ` ' I L F�.AS� r 9� \ ' '� -�4 } wMt'�E.� I►J�il�. / I \ /l ! �•!- / �\ _ I LIN�S f I( (,�11 AIt O L Gr�i , .n---N1`-, INK AVIA 01.1 L`� ( �.�v ss�� 1 �� I�AI RPI�S "`L ! 1 LK `, p- rY' II f'€- 6\ -KICK IV1).iil i 01 it so:. _.� 50 u 1,�jA� Otafig ot11L- .1 , i 11 �� 5 t'i. 7 No i C o►1 G. ' LAnS / _ l'J cs f _ _ le„I Z'' -G/L ►'�.W M I. , 4 .coat4-1 ilfic4\toic .4 g-------- I I 1� AG. oN `u Gt':}�NCv rOGk _ ' 1 / ( , \! .,� ti / '3 i . �' 1 M I M �s i In 32" UP. i _'�Gtr 21-01 �c 1:FAMINE .711 1 t.EfRLZyov, f 11 :=y', �F_R w/ Jg" at{{r� T'o \ / -r' tr. 44t. • 1 \ 0 241 C3� E w• (TYP) r' �_1 Al .i , tASL `� \ • i vi, \ \ AL eaD SCE ) - 1 ; 4 LAN v''�GA Q 111 10RAI N'S re eA,.1- c R;�K J �> yZ50' I 11%..... 1 __ - - -3 , - ,.-, ,.c-.►, -1,,,,-174.,e-1 ,-rti,-1 ✓. I I I < tiq________. _ . _110C111t --il\ di W Snl a 5. rJ. �nNJ. ,OT A i-rE pLAINJ / FLOCiZ_ ri...m _-_ ._ . .. _ \.1 a-Z_ °cc UPt 1c'( ,, It 0 LGt.!`,'f RJ C1 lad let 11- 0'' LaT tz,F-_ - tz .)6o .i..4-i, ri- 41\IWL kiarf, EJILoti - in;‘- r, S . FT. �- ` 4 I. fON ry .craR. - of 4P( ALA_ p;MEWSiO!�i4 t�+Jd LONGI lo►.I�� Plz1o2 Tc C�rJSrR�GTI�tJ LAIJDSGAp '+7t.1` - I!`,' ' HiQ. FT. ANp t.lern Y rN4IN OF ANY t71'SGR�'c.PA►JG1L5 E!FOICt- START OF' r1GRrL. y r0� THE 51 � co.,w 65 tet .4 5T!..,L- TAVItJ I - 'I�-Irp ��2 FT 2• E 1NEE� To o*�ra' J MOM 4�; . �G1tTet ' T Sui - k UNIrr1 ro' NIS A.P?1(OVAL PRIOIC TO cosER:cArr tDiJ ore.. Ii: 1SLLATIOt4. ,,,, . \ \ �'� / .4 r- -- T�G/�J I. MC'.TEP ttirSALL rocs-iNc , 7 f.E ON FIQN1 i r�1A.TURAt_ 1 LIIJVISIdle.5f-D 404. FRGf. orrEl-E-TER -100`> S cooie 1�/�V T� l 7 j f./ / 4. FILL Ml\TERIaI. UN.IpC4. FLooR - 1..Ae AIrO PA�/EO ARE...€) TO tr. G.' 9F s/y" 4 CrFUSI.1F� �T �/ �tt`� goo FRrE Of PE�-E ER10&-• MAT riZJAt.S . w / T ►c , T ` - �\ 1 -• / t.'� j 5 rSPua��i'I� GoKlcTC QAC I !Jy TO �F 2'` of c I#�S "c". 1 ____ __ /� m tz Z 30G ' Ac., 405 . - - ---.- \ \ _.--- - -T- :�----� �t� lo. GotJGR(CT� A. Al•i -01 , _ �i� �.� � k+OK K -Tv Go PLY klt TN L 3l2� 77 AC - ' �!7. -. Y . LS . NC�T I F�( rr I IJ EER_ 2� HOU Z p2}D2 '''J LrFG �1tJ i!JG ,vJ`� 1'liUR f QlJltitl hJ I�4PEGT►0�1. --1, -. - 1 - H I C.� �•A ICEINF A�iTM A- i�rjr, W!~L-pro l.;' MC'�I, ( 2",�12"- '/. ) Pl+GFD J Ga:r�TE OF >56. :� V. b�►- °TurR 'EItjF. : ASTM 0.- 14,5 ��t7E 'lp 7EFORr1EP E,ts ,'S . -- "31 i E ' ' I. - 1 ► E) FDoTttJ6 f' * 25(.0 1" lc Zf VA' 5 , MAX. SLJMP 491, 1 i I F.) 'jLA$ f 1 3coo PSI 6) ZS DAYS , MAX. LUMP= 3V ' ^ �-rFEL . AS Prz I.: 4 ft.ANS AtJQ 5f2E.GiF;6A1 :ONS. �� - iteoirstporvi mtrl- : A Arun-( (z; CARTS GF RG vOA RCFLINT 4:1=e55 EIJA MEL" 02 CQJA I. ) Ffetal FaOR Jr, -e-ow p.1161.1.1 AT 1Uir OF Z45 i0. . FT PrR GTAL-. FOR. :2A Cii Cc AT - - $:') APTLY (Z.', at�T , RcDVA \\T'oge2AL':�"C -"5i5 '' i411-; F L,,`ii EhltkMEL ) c . cQUAL 1To j 3n1-N•1G r. or WAL 1-5 A44O .Eit- NC/ A-r KA; - of 'r0- •400 54. FT prg_ 1AL. nix 8.6444 coAr.. :;:, `1• MEG :A.I-1IGRL Cf �EPQ�TE rERkttr . M'.Ct; . Vr-NITIL1\71Gr1 -re p;�e�lipr ^'''• i. OF 6 C.FM. OF `�. FRESH At V. F'EZ DCGU 'i•ttI. ui L``i -To 8E ti/E..1i v lc PE.f i G . ,.V:7-- Gi-I E� F'f.R -21 f.N i ` uo111� MJL PSE `,rJITCL;f_V 1..11-71-i '-i:;,.-.7". ,..\: � lo. Y1-i-1MEINLj '• L'f 4F.YD•P.L1►TE Pri4.1'-, •' Ial. ELc.c...Tit.:ct.:. 5Y 5f•Pnv.I\TE re! t.111.7 • ... \ i IA, I . .% -:\ . ;, .\,.' -3 , ; 1 : \ , t,. 1 DE i •, i[ ALBERT ALBERTR. KENNEJR. E 1 ,)i CnINSUTIf � ENGNEER/P_A NER 236-1551 OR 682- 1 0491 DATE a l' ssts 4 LI JOB NO.0 BZCZif) VI( IHIgY MAS s ` Y11. _" �4.II. 2001 \ c.,' -7/ � �� LOTYCIFINONED SHEET NO. 64 • ...MY+.....,,,. .. .Y ' - i.1`IlltIIIIIII1I1111,I1I1I1p 1tIIIIII1I1I111I1'IIIIIIIIII1IIIII1II1I1 I M I'1't111t1`I1,; 1 01 1111;111111111111111111111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111`IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111111'11) 1 1 , l 1 " NOTE : I F THIS M ICROF 11 ME U ( 2 • f 1 3 4 5 I _ 6 - J8 9 101 11 1 12_ DRAtz NG IS LESS CLEAR THAN t ITY OF THE ORIGINAL _ DRAWING. OE 6Z 92 l7 921SZ fZ EZ ZZ 1Z OZ 61 i 91 L!I 91 SI WI EI ZI '1 II 01 6 9 1 9 S r 0 ''I' EI 2 1"`i" ,111IIIIt1111111111111II(IIIIIIH1I1t111111$611111111/t11111I11N111NI11111t11NN11IN111Mt1I111�1�tIN1t111t1�t11l11N1111U111111111NI1111111IIII111I11111111111111III11I11111111U1111I1111I111111111I1U1I11i1111III1111111I1I1111111I1 thu lmarmilU111111IU1lIIUINIIIIIIIIII�IWI1111 .._. r 1 2 IJANUARY 17 1992 . .� - _ .,..rte.-_�� •-- -r__ _ .._ 1111 411. Skourtes, John V 10-81 74th & SW Bonita 2S1 12A Railroad right of way Augur t 20, 1982 To: Liz Newton From: J. Skourtes Subject: Landscape Plan, whse bldg. 74th & Bonita Rd. A. North side of building: per plans , planting strip along bldg. in front of offices , plants rhododendrons . B. West side of building: per lans low mound of dirt, baridust, low growing evergreens every LAA ten feet. nothing higher will grow because of heat reflecting off metal building with western exposure. Water tap along building to irrigate evergreens until they get established. C. South side: natural vegetation where blacktop and property line ends . D. East side: railroad right of way. E. Noth parking lot: parallels guard rail leading to rail road crossing : no vegetation al ,owed, obstructs angle view of railroad crossing. / WR/SSOC ITIS EALTYLTD p r -5 1 • R. AUG 1 . - August 17, 1983 CH OF 1IGN11U g PLANNING DEPT Planning Department City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: M-3, Light Manufacturing Principal and Conditional Uses for Industrial Land at S.W. 74th Avenue and S.W. Bonita Road To Whom It May Concern: Please send me information on the principal and conditional uses allowed in a M-3 zone. I would also appreciate knowing what other industrial zoning is located in Tigard and also its principal and conditional uses. Could you send me a map designating the specific areas? Sincerely, C14...X1r\SL. AlfrA Wayne R. Potter HALE ASSOCIATES REALTY, LTD. WRP/daa REAL ESTATE SECURITIES & BROKERAGE 320 S W OAK SUITE 301 PORTLAND OREGON 97204 15031222 7000 1 � FINAL ACTION 41111111 STAFF REPORT . ..! SITE DESIGN REVIEW CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 12755 SW Ash WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON Tigard, Oregon 97223 July 1, 1982 DOCKET: Site Design Review (SDR 12-82) John Skourtes APPLICANT: John Skourtes 17010 SW Weir Road OLuvel f.uff, Ute9vi& 97007 OWNER: Burlington Northern Railroad Seattle, Washington 98104 SITE LOCATION: SW 74th Avenue & SW Bonita Road (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 12A, railroad right-of-way, Tax No. for improvement only - 4200) A-1) REQUEST: For a site design review to construct a 6,000 square foot warehouse on a 12,000 square foot lot in an M-3 zone. PREVIOUS ACTION: On February 22, 1982, the Tigard City Council approved a variance request to allow a 10-foot side yard setback in a M-3 zone. SITE PLAN/DESIGN REVIEW: The applicant is proposing to construct a 6,000 square foot warehouse on an irregularly shaped 12,000 square foot lot. The lot as it exists is 12,000 square feet. The proposed building con- figuration meets all of the required setbacks except for the sideyard abutting SW 74th. The applicant received a variance to allow that sideyard to measure 10-feet (Reference V 10-81) . The applicant has not submitted a landscape or irrigation plan. The parking require- mwnt fnr this site ir- 6 spaccc. (1 ::pace for every 1,000 :iyudte Leet 01 tluor area -- Reference Code Section 18.60.120(6) (a) ) The applicant is proposing 70 spaces. A condition of the variance approval was that no access to the site be permitted from SW Bonita. In addition, no access will be allowed from SW 74th directly to the building. The applicant has proposed a 25' access from SW 74th which is 34' back from the intersection of SW Bonita and SW 74th. The proposed access meets the conditions of the variance approval. The applicant is proposing to tie into an existing 8" sanitary sewer line in SW 74th. Water is also available in SW 74th. The applicant proposes to run the storm drainage in a 6" line dawn to Ball Creek. The property owner, as a condition of V 10-81, will have to sign a nonremonstrance agreement for street improvements to SW 74th and SW Bonita Road. As of the date of this report, the City has not received these agreements. This condition will have to be met prior to Building permits for the site. In addition, the applicant may have to dedicate some right-of-way on SW 74th to accommodate the street realignment. 12755 SW ASH P O BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH 639-4171 1 FINAL ACTION STAFF REPORT SDR 12-82 Page 2 STAFF ACTION: Staff approves the site plan for construction of a 6,000 square foot lot at SW 74th and Bonita with the following conditions: I . The following conditions as attached to V 10-81 shall be satisfied prior to i:,suance of Building permits: 4600kommmir. .1. r M► i_ . L > ' m. 2. A landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance of Building permits. 3. The applicant shall coordinate site elevations which meet SW 74th with the street design for SW 74th. The street plans are on file with the City's Engineering Division. 4. The applicant shall apply for a sign permit for any sign to be erected on the site. Prepared by: f,1 a. �_.�,411N� Reviewed by: ii / ldia/� 4 Eli A. Newt ' ,remy M. Coursolle Associate Planner Associate Planner NOTE: Sign below to acknowledge conditions set forth for this project and return to the City of Tigard Planning Department. Failure to acknowledge will re- sult in no further ar_tinn on -hic project with rcca;do ibbudIiue of Building permits or engineering approval. i;7;14.14.0(... r- 43 - g gnature (Property Owner) Date 1. Signaure (Applicant if different) Date E4 KAN('I-4 .1. TEYEDINO A7"1'uKNEV AT LAW t'N tt F:KNI'1'Y MTATI(►N. i•.(). 144 rX M41Y.4 I.4)K'11.ANI►.4114E4;41N971/07 4 III'I('V r:d1:1'7,41.444411:4 RES .4:4,MOO March 4 , 1982 TO: Mayor and City Council Members City of Tigard FROM: F. J. Tepedino Chairman Tigard Planning Commission IN RE: City Council 's Reversal of Planning Commission ' s Denial of a Variance Request by John Skourtes NPO #5 Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members: I am writing to you in my capacity as Chairman, Tigard Planning Commission. A reversal by the City Council of a Planning Commission decision is a significant and serious event. This is particularly true when an Applicant makes public statements indicating his belief that he can, with ease, gain a reversal by the City Council of Planning Commission decisions. All of us labor voluntarily long and hard to make Tigard a better place in which to live. Because of this, it is sometimes difficult to take, as well as offer, criticism. However, may I offer the following constructive criticism regarding the way in which the above captioned matter was handled. It is my sincere hope that the suggestions are accepted in the spirit in which they are offered. Mayor Bishop is to be commended for commencing the Appeal Hearing on this issue by clearly stating that it was an appeal "on the record" . However, as evidenced by the meeting ' s tape recording, irrelevant subjects were raised and discussed and obfuscated the Appellate process. It is evident that the City Attorney several times valiantly, though unsuccessfully, tried to refocus the Council ' s discussion on the Code' s requirements for Variances. Discussions of an Applicant 's background, credentials, effects on tax rolls, actions by neighboring cities, and an Applicant ' s proposed particular use for a piece of property are nowhere to be found in the Variance requirements in our Code. The City Attorney was quite correct when during Council ' s meeting, he emphasized that the Appellate Forum must look to the circumstances of the land rather than the Applicant ' s particular proposed use. Most of us know, I am sure, that the Code requirements on Variances are among the most stringent in the entire Code . If there is a consensus that these requirements do not meet the intent or the philosophy of the City, then perhaps we ought to evaluate modifying this Code section. May I also suggest that the City Council and Planning Commission have a combined meeting led by the City Attorney. Such a meeting could be used as a training experience to improve the performance of both bodies particularly when hearing Variance appeals andher "diffi . lt is-ues" . ours tFul , --\.. X.1 — col . _...... Francis J. Tepedino FJT:bg I I.' — i, .4 • l I .1 1 i ---1 I I cil I o�^ c•.c "- v T no F (1 a cr ? r, y - • j n :� oa •-1 liil cr a w ' O "7 1 ? ' 14 to A Y N A A ti A a to or to f O y0 ' n A 7i M E n G 9. w •ui G. � y T ol c' a v m a o n n 8 H ' • v D. 0 0 0 a H T N 7 ._Y. I \ 9 c °n a\_it r. as < I...4 '" OT b 7 q\ w I c •.,, r0•, �1 r V t7 n s a i A iq D 7 v ~ N y Z r-� N o ., a \\ u V r c u c o n a n a n 7 O .4A A O N M M L' 71 { It N a a. LEGAL NOTICE The following selected agenda items are published for your Information. Further information and full agendas may he obtained from the City Recorder, 12755 SW Ash Avenue,Tigard,Oregon.97223,or by calling 639-4171. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 1 FEBRUARY 22, 1982, 7:30 P.M FOWLER JUNIOR H1GB SCHOOL I.E(TI IRE ROOM 10865 SW WALNUT STREET,TIGAR!),OR • Loaves and Fishes Levy Request +',• • Bikeway Report 1.'1' • Final Order On Variance Appeal By John SkQ irtes V 10-81 I ` • 'fwd Avenue Financing Discussion ' i • GTE Franchise Renewal TT6259— Publish February 18, 1982 t1 : ' . 1 - --- ---- —_--- ----- --- �ytilis.. . il ._ .4rZifk CITY OF TIGARD WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON February 24, 1982 John R. Skourtes 17010 S.W. Weir Road Beaverton, Oregon 97007 Re: V 10-81 (John Skourtes) NPO 45 Washington County Tax Map 2S1 I2A Railroad Right-of-Way Dear Mr. Skourtes: The Tigard City Council passed Resolution No. 82-16 adopting final order with regards to your request for a Variance at their regular meeting of February 22, 1982. Enclosed is a copy for y' r records showing that Council approved the variance with conditions as set forth in Exhibit "A" of the Resolution. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Doris Hartig City Recorder DH:lm Enc. ` — — 12755 S.W. ASH P.0, BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97273 PH 639-4171 • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION r `I.. Jh STATE OF' OREGON, I I 11'r ir COUNTY OF' WASHINGTON, j c • JOHN W. MARLING, n f• b,inf•. first duly sworn, deproce and say that I am the publisher w Ai t.. I .+ ''1�r . ,. . ,,,, of The Tigard Time, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined ��" sts by URS 197 010 and 193 020, r , published at Tigard. in the aforesaid r��unty and A.. yw. state, that the legal notice, a printed copy of which is beret, annexed, was '#` 1 ; f I'• ,' ,' 1 a Iw:, published in the entire issue of said new., , eand 1, t .paper r fr,r tiu-re,.iv "77 consecutive weeks in the follo%Inr• i. FeF ruary 4 , 1982 .i 1 1 d ` s:11(ii,l, tjA":4) . , . , ,, x r,i • t. *, rSuhscribed and sworn to lief ire rue flier. i 1e\ d v k r „ St i . i...', . w: ; J 19 Hit , t" e 1 , 7 1 ---� 'r Jr + t. N.,.,,, 1'uhlir .,f "re Kon ` a' N IN, r„m rn;,stun e1pr re\ �I.# r I 23. VARIANCE APPEAL - V 10-81 - John Skourtes - NPO #5 An appeal by John Skoi. tes of the Planning Commission nial of his request for a variance from the sid :rd setback requirement from 2+ _eet to 10 feet in an M-3 Light Industrial Zone. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 12A, Railroad Right4-+of-Way) . Thin will be an "argument-type" hearing only, pursuant to Tigard Municipal Code 18.88.060(b) . The Council will consider only the record before the Planning Commission, which is on file at City Hall. The Council shall not consider any new testimony or evidence which is not in the record. (a) Legal Counsel recommended Council disregard a letter submitted in packets by Mr. Skourtes from Oregon Pioneer Savings since it was dated after the Planning Commission hearing date. He continued to explain that this hearing was "on the record" only and no new testimony should he accepted. (b) Public Hearing Opened (c) Planning Director stated this request was before the Planning commission and that they voted to deny Mr. Skourtes' request for a variance to the sideyard setback requirements in an M-3 zone. The Planning Commission made the denial based on the finding that the applicant does not meet the required criteria established for granting a variance in that a smaller building could be constructed on the site. He noted that the transcript of the Planning Commission hearing was included in Council packets along with staff reports and the appeal papers filed by Mr. Skourtes. PAGE / -- REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - February N, 1982 1 f (d) Argument : Mr. John Skourtes, 17010 S.W. Weir Road, Beaverton, Oregon, 97007, spoke on behalf of himself. He discussed the issue of sideyard setbacks as it per- tained to zoning and property will in Tigard and other jurisdictions . lie offered a synopsis of his prescnt.,tion before the Planning Commission. Council questioned Mr. Skourtes regarding the size of the parcel , ownership of the parcel , when the parcel will become a lot, willingness of appellant to participate in an LID, and the other designs which were considered by Mr. Skoumtes. (e) Councilman Cook questioned what criteria the Tigard Municipal Code requires for granting a variance. ( f) Legal Counsel read into the record the following conditions as required by Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.76.020: "(4) The variance requested is the minimum variance from the provisions and standards of this title which will alleviate the hardship." Legal Counsel advised Council that they must look at the special circumstances of the land before making a determination if a variance should be granted to eleviate a hardship. (g) Mr. Skourtes expressed concern that Legal Counsel was advising Council to dictate how he must development his land. (h) Legal Counsel advised Council that his intent was not to dictate how the land should he developed, only that Council, according to the rules set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code , should look at the special circumstances of each parcel before determining the variance request. ( i ) Public Hearing Closed ( j) Mayor Bishop stated that the lot configuration is unusual and seems to lend itself to meeting the hardship requirement. He noted that if a variance is granted conc' itions should be attached at the time of Council approval. (k) Councilman Scheckla noted that if parcel were not developed it would continue to be am. eyesore for the community and if developed could become productive land. He also noted that if there were problems with parking, conditions could be placed upon the parcel at a later date to deal with those types of issues. ( I ) Councilman Cook cxpre:.sed concern that Council does not have any guarantee that Mr . Skourtes will develop a warehouse if a variance is granted. Councilman Schect,la stated that Mr. Skourtes has historically built ware- houses and felt comfortable that this would be the case again. (m) Councilman Scheckla moved to instruct staff to prepare a final order approv- ing the variance, based upon discussion by Council . Motion seconded by Councilman Cook. Approved by 2-- 1 majority vote of Council pr.sent , Councilman Cook voting nay. 1'ACh 8 - REGULAR COUNCIL, MLET1NG MIMIUFl- - Fehtuary 8, 1962 S n c � p =d 0 C 'i A C 70 o - r: y '-1 3 -:1 R ° m o 4.1 g] q 5 w d o 3 7 S , 2. •c o � %v . A ^' — a n a `o ; — a ,i o x o , ,? . D C, '^ O w a C. _T OeD o e.C 2t g z Co _ _ < - 3. O r P. a • n n 1 3 d - s 0. s 0 IK�. ` 7 o v v -1 r o r w s ,, z M y C : '< - 0 '' , 7 Z A i - `' c r OD c r c - ,o N. ; N 00 . d ..}1.16 N ' 4 r r II 1.. p at aa. 1 NOM lo Iwo*Owls SA NS OW Cosa --moldor IM ililloontit Roar RIO Mod Wefts*NM IONS SW t loot•TWIN,Oreille• sr,Ii.ION at QOM Pit • Variance — V 10-81 — John Skourtes—NPO#5 An appeal by John Skourtes of the Planning Commission denial of his request for a wit-lance from the sldeyard setback requirement from 20 ft.to 10 ftin an M-,i Light Industrial Zone (Wash.Cn.Tex Map 2S1 12A Railroad Right- of-Way.i This will be an "argument-type" hearing only, pursuant to Tigard Municipal(.ode 18 (b).lb.Gooch will rounder only the record before dWig h IMO r as fila of Citio . ng tl��#Ifl e000ft rfoolio y M Wd IIro Tw— Mase yM► 40, 1I .44.411: 1. CITY OF TIGARD January 27, 1982 WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON John R. Skourtes National Safety Co. 17010 S.W. Weir Road Beaverton, Oregon 97007 REFERENCE. V 10-81 (John Skourtes) NPU It 5 Washington County Tax Map 251 12A Railroad Right-of-way. Dear Mr. Skourtes: This letter is to confirm your appeal to the City Council for Variance V 10-81 on February 8, 1982. This will be an "argument-type" hearing only, pursuant to Tigard Municipal Code section 18.88.060(b) . The Council will consider only the record before the Planning Commission. The Council shall not consider any new testimony or evidence which is not in the record. The Council will follow the following public hearing format: Public Hearing Opened Staff Report and summary of Planning Commission proceedingsby the Planning Director. ARGUMENT: Appellants Respondents Appellants Rebuttal Public Hearing Closed Council Consideration end Action Please contE ct this office if we can he of further •,s:,i:,t ance. Sincerely, %2 tom i54 70-1417 Doris Harty City Recorder dmj — 12 755 S W ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH'639-4171 1 VENDOR ADDRESS T;r,IIr1, (jr ' 4g r �'I� CITY, STATE, ZIP c'TMOF TIGARD DATE -,I P.O. # WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON CHECK ONE: D I have received the following. Please make REQUISITION payment. ( Forward to Accounting.) Received: Date Initials 0 I have ordered the following. Please issue OTHER INFORMATION: a confirming purchase order. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) I have researched the following. Please issue a Purchase Order. (Forward to DAdministrative Secretary.) I want to buy the following. Please research. Return price information to this office. (Forward to Administrative Secretary.) ACCOUNT # QUANTITY DESCRIPTION (Please explain thoroughly) UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAI. AMOUNT DUE $ DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL: FINANCE DIRECTOR APPROVAL: ( for 600 Accounts over $2,500, and all 700 accounts) DISTRIBUTION: White - Pur. Coord. or Accounting Yellow- Department Copy _ _ _ . CITY OF TwA RD WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON December 8 , 1981 John Skourtes National Safety Company 17010 S.W. Weir Road Beaverton, Oregon 97007 Dear Mr . Skourtes This letter is to confirm your request regarding the scheduling of your appeal for Variance number V 10-81 . This appeal has been scheduled for February 8, 198 , City Council meeting. A transcript of the Planning Commission Meeting will be forwarded to you shortly. Please contact this office if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Doris Hartig City Recorder vi Please sign and return this acknowledgement : Z hereby agree to the above stated date for appealing the Planning Commission decision to City Council. Owner App scant (I Udif fe ren T 1 12420 S.W. MAIN P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARO, OREGON 97223 PH: e39-4171 1 1 i r f' I CITY OF TIGARD WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON November 18, 1981 John R. Skourtes National Safety Co. 17010 S.W. Weir Rd. Beaverton, Oregon 97007 REFERENCE: V 10-81 ( John Skourtes) NPO # 5 Washington County Tax Map 2S1 12A Railroad Rigi:t of Way Dear Mr. Skourtes: Please be advised that the Tigard Planning Commission at their regular meeting of November 10 , 1981, denied your requestfor a Variance to side yard set back from 20 feet to 10 feet along S .W. 74th Avenue . ' This proposal was denied based on staff findings , conclusions and the recommendation for denial based on the finding that the applicant had not shown that a smaller building couldn' t be built on the site . Action of the Planning Commission is final unless notification of appeal to the City Council is filed with the City Recorder within 20 days of the Planning Commission Action. If ' e can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office at 639-4171 . Sincerely, • ------__,:7:7-7. 34,1-7 ;e1,11,2,4e Frank A. Currie Planning Director FC:dmj \'----- - - -- -- 1:47, S W MAIN P 0 BOX 23397 TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PH 639 4111 - --_} • (icLl9 -)03 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIGARD, OREGON NOTICE OF APPEAL File No. V 1 . Name : ;,4 ,-..//7/(/ MA: 2 . Address : � (Street/P.O. Box) v , • cci ty) (State) (tip ;ode) 3. Telephone No. : f - , 4. If serving as a representative of other persons , list their names and addresses : � L l i / i , . 5 . What is the decision you want the City Council to review? (Examples : denial of zone change ; approval of variance. ) • 6. The decision being appealed was announced by the Planning Commission on (Date) 7 . On what grounds do you claim status as a party? (See Section 18. 92 . 020 Tigard Municipal Code . ) 8. Grounds for reversal of decision. (Use additional sheets if necessary. ) Your response should deal with the following: (a) Explain how your interest is damaged. (b) Identify any incorrect facts mistakenly relied on in the decision or recommendation from which you appeal . (c) Identify any part of the zoning code or other law which you claim has been violated by the decision or recommendation from which you apeeal . (d) Describe what decision you are asking the City Council to make. Paic_L_uL 2 - _ 9. Estimate the amount of time you will need to present your arpient to the City Council . (The Council will schedule more than 15 minutes per side only in extraordinary circumstances . Each side will be given the same length of time for its presentation. ) Signed : Date : ## ####tt###lr###### #####tti1## # #### ### #M## ##1 ################## ####### FOR USE BY CITY L1/4..)Date and time of filing: - 30 - 3 $ yy- J r Date of Planning Commission decision: jt- / 0 -8 ) Date set for Council consideration: Time allowed for arguments : _ _ per side Entered by : Amount paid : 'a50 . Receipt # : q 77 Page 2 of 2 Notice of Appeal BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIGARD, OREGON NOTICE OF APPEAL File No. 1 . Name: •_ -.i1 /1, , r u :,I, , — / / n i r .. 2. Address : 1-]('1 S 11, 't / r2 v (Street/P.O. Box) (City) (State) (Zip Coder—" 3. Telephone No. : L_.11 : , 4. If serving as a representative of other persons, list their names and addresses : rv , ,j 4�,,.,•I /,� /J rc't, ^ s , n ,, 1,d, 1? it 5. What is the decision you want the City Council to review? (Examples : denial of zone change; approval of variance. ) #4/ ., , 44/4,•t ( 6. The decision being appealed was announced by the Planning Commission on L- 1 (Date) 7. On what grounds do you claim status as a party? (See Section 18. 92 .020 Tigard Municipal Code. ) .41 p,, i 8. Grounds for reversal of decision. (Use additional sheets if necessary. ) Your response should deal with the following: (a) Explain how your interest is damaged. (b) Identify any incorrect facts mistakenly relied on in the decision or recommendation from which you appeal . (c) Identify any part of the zoning code or other law which you claim has been violated by the decision or recommendation from which you appeal . (d) Describe what decision you are asking the City Council to make. , (./ t _ , i .),, ., i ". ,, / /1L i ,,.n,,,, //ir J Page 1 of 2 i 9. Estimate the amount of time you will need to present your argument to the City Council . (The Council will schedule more than i5 minutes_ perside only in extraordinary circumstances . Each side will be given the same length of time for its presentation. ) Signed : )(ft V ,,/ Date : ll 3 el ########################################################################### FOR USE BY CITY Date and time of filing: Date of Planning Commission decision: Date set for Council consideration : Time allowed for arguments : per side Entered by : Amount paid : Receipt #: Page 2 of 2 Notice of Appeal V/ai/ p PUGET CCORPORATION OR o..NooN 7440 S W BONITA ROAD • PORTLAND,OREGON 97223 PORTLAND PHONE:(110x 6304131 TOLL FREE:(600)547.9690 41COLDING ANO DIE CA -TING ..ovember G, 1981 RECEIVED - 9 1981 F'larucin(; Director of TIGARD City of Tigard City hall Tigard, Oregon 972c Dear ' ire: RE: File No. `110-8l We recommend that you deny this variance fox the following reisone. 1. This warehouse will require large trucks to service it and there is not enough room for maneuvering on 74th. ?len we built our plant, we were required to provide euffieient set back to allow tru^.k maneuvering on our property. Nuck parking area asr7ocisted with warehouse operation should be provided on the property on which the warehouse is located and c twenty foot cot back will provide such usable parkin,-* area. :i. If south of this location on 74th is going to develop as ,4 industrial. more traffic will use 74th to ➢onitu and when that happens, 74th will renuire widening and without the twenty foot set back, this will not be pcsribl,:. 4. 74th it currently a gravel road for most of its length and therefore, unsuitable for large trucks. This develonment should not be allowed until decisions are made on how 74th will be improved, widened and or straightened. 5. Desirable ar it is to turn this site into n tax producing block by such a development, a short sighted decision should not be made in thie case. I urge you to look at the long term development of thin area of Tigard. Mink you for your consideration Yours truly, cid ,7-X r i rwr i r G14R �, �4 {.. 1 _ , _ TIGAR ) NOTICE' 01= PUBLIC NOTICE, IREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AT ITS MEETING ON TUESDAY, Novemb0, 1981 , AT 7:30 P.M., IN THE LECTURE ROOM OF FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHnOL, 5 S.W. WALNUT, TIGARD, OREGON, WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: APPLICANohn Skourtes OWNER: Burlington Northern Railroad 7010 S.W. Weir Road eaverton, Oregon 97007 REQUEST: a Variance to the required sideyard back from 20 feet to 10 feet in an M-4 strial Park Zone to allow construction of a warehouse LOCATION: . corner of S.W. Bonita Road and S.W. 74th Avenue (Washington County Tax 2SI 12A Railroad Right-of-Way. ) FILE NO. 81 crel / ° 50 ��' N 1 403 2.790 0 �, 10 ..4 ./en,. 1• d `. 8 X11 7OI tJ lAc g t18 9'W '!0\ w r S T 1 let 6 15 2 2 59 -_N e1°A6 E 1 �`Ac/ O3 ;,� � - S -!— BEG./.0 11 iSti -' (iAMI C '+6Sa RO LB_ Cf Noe I .!1 30NITA 709.46 -- - ♦ 1 — 00 's/i i 1--` , znz.ee/ !,/GS I I \I\ 250 ze)11- .�+� 2000 ' 2800 19 N _ 1901 1 1900 I _ o0.1,,ac S.2tAc. 800 IN NI o 1/1 AC / !f Ac. - /e.Ar 1 . a ' 1901-AI r�, goo /' N \\\ \ Iti.. W N N �z4 e0� cr _'9Q.!d_. -I o. _209 / M1 NB96il[ -1e.4'.- I b ��900 / 0 gE.90Ac 40 • C r 7 . se4•sz_w 587 ° L / . 42-4 10 -- 'T ry O -O ce l 1000 \� �' 1- r / N /esAt /1902 •23-?4 . ISAo n /` ` h Ne9.571 5 P.rf "' -_.—:\ , 2802 1100 , J,00At. 04001 ` qW _� . .IJ1 Ae. Fi 41!.14 ' , at EAST 520 06. 4/1 v.lJ//✓J/!!!/1///!/////l f' -///,,9777 ' • / i/(•+ •, • .1(// it r • • •!Ti' /iz nm'11/iiin/1//ii/n//t/iiiA///////ll7 200 z 01800 • 2101 ....-- SAV COM. corn. \ , J0lt►N FOWNT J.SJAc 1,7Ac. ♦73/309 - 52 20 0 (1J I) / 164c .J 264 +, q is ., 2 I N v \'' 2974040 r l 406. 73 _ _ 0 r . 4 8 2100 IN 13 . t : - n I F N .J.1 Ac M ►- h ` /7 IIS 2X14' a THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF PROCEDUPES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. ANY PERSONS HAVING INTEREST IN THIS MATTER MAY ATTEND AND BE HEARD, OR, TESTIMONY MAY BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD OF THE INITIAL HEARING. SHOULD YOU WIS;T TO APPEAL, A WRITTEN LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE CITY RECORDER MUST BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE TWENTIETH DAY AFTER THE DECISION OF THE HEARING. IF NOTICE TO APPEAL. IS NOT RECEIVED WITHIN TWENTY DAYS, THE ACTION IS VALID. FOR FURTHER INFOP.fl TION, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT 639-4171 CITY OF TIGALD, 12420 SW Main Tigard, Oregon 97223 4 STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5 .4 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 10, 1981 - 7 :30 pm FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL 10865 SW WALNUT STREET, TIGARD No submission of additional material by applicant shall be made at this Public Hearing unless the applicant is requested to do so. Should this occur, unrequested, the item will be tabled until the following Hearing. DOCKET: Variance, V 10-81 (John Skourtcs) NPO* 5 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: Notice published under Planning Commission Agenda in the Tigard Times on October 29, 1981 and November 10, 1981 . Notices mailed to surrounding property owners within 100 feet on October 30 , 1981 . I,PPLTCA:.T : John Skourtes OWNER: Burlington Northern R . R. 17 010 SW Weir Road Beaverton, Oregon 97007 REQUEST: For a variance from the sideyard setback requirements from 20 feet to 10 feet in an M-3 light industrial zone. LOCATION : S .E. corner of S .W. Bonita Road aild SW 74th Avenue (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 12A - Railroad Right of Way) . FINDINGS OF FACT: 1 . The applicant is proposing to construct a 6, 000 square foot metal warehouse on the site. 2 . The applicant is proposing access to the site from S.W. 74th Avenue . At present, there is a Local Improvement District being formed for the improvement of S. W. 74th Avenue. 3 . The Tigard Municipal Code, Section 18 .76 .020 states : "No variance shall be granted by the Planning Commission unless it can be shown that all of the following conditions exist. a) Exceptional or extraordinary conditions applying to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, which conditions are a result of lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the applicant Lis no control ; S'T'AFF REPORT AGENDA 5.5 Page 2 b) The variance is necessary for the preservation of a property right of the applicant substan- tially the same as possessed by owners of other property in the same zone or vicinity; c) The authorization of the variance shall not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, be injurious to property in the zone or vicinity in which the property is located, or be otherwise detrimental to the objectives of any city development plan or policy; d) The variance requested is the minimum from the provisions and standard,7 of this title which will alleviate the hardship. " 4 . The property in question is actually a portion of the railroad right of way and not a legal tax lot. CONCLUSIONS: 1 . Improvements are needed to S .W. 74th Avenue. 2 . The applicant does not meet all the criteria established for granting a variance . Specifically, the applicant does not meet condition Number 4 . The applicant could construct s smaller building on the site and therefore, maintain the required setbacks . 3 . The applicant feels that a smaller building would not be economically feasible for his purposes . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . The Planning Commission could approve the request as submitted. 2 . The Planning Commission could approve the request as submitted with conditions . 3 . The Planning Commission could deny the request. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of Variance V10-81 based on findings as follows : 1 . The applicant does not meet the required criteria established for granting a variance in that a smaller building could be constructed on the site . The question is whether a 40 foot building is the smallest building that is economically feasible on the site . • eef 3th.17.1 Prepaid by Elizabeth A. Newton Approved by frank-A. Currie 1 i'RANSCRIPT uF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING November 10, 1981 - Variance V-10 - National Safety Company Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room 10665 SW Walnut St. , Tigard, OR Present for this hearing: Commission: President Tepedino, Commissioners Bonn, Christen, Herron, Kolleas, Moen, Owens, Speaker Staff: Planning Director Currie, Associate Planner Newton, Ken Elliott cf City Counsel Tepedino: Five point f ,ur: may I have the staff report and recommendations, please? Newton: (Read the staff report. ) Tepedino: Thank you, staff. May I have the applicant's presentation? Skourtee: Mr. Chairman, on this staff report it says, "No submission of additional material --- Tepedino: You sir e, sir? Skourtes: un, excuse me. 1 am John Skourtee, 17U1U SW Weir Road, Wash- ington County, Beaverton-Aloha address. The staff report manse the Statement here, "No admi-cion of additional material by the applicant shall be made at the sublect hearing unless the applicant is requested to do so. If this occurs, the item will be tabled until the following heoriu.-." :an you give me the boundaries of what that maane? reped.n,,: Yea; basically, Mr. Skourtes, is what we are suv.;esting there is that we find the applicant meets with the s;,af' if the cit , and makes his request, her request for the hearing. He/she at that time rias to present the information and documents au that the stall k.an make appropriate publication of that a. that the public will oe .nfurmed as to what the action is going to be, and what tre request is. And in order to preclude surprise on the part ,if ttte _:omsissloners regarding evidence they were unaware of , and also to preclude surprise . on the public by the presentation of evidence or arguments that they were not prepared to analyze --- .;kourtes: This is a standard clause? Tepedino: That's right. :Skourtee: Now, the members of the commission: do you have my letter . . . repedino: We have a letter to the Tigard Planning Commission dated October ?3, 1961, and we have a letter of October 27 --- 1/ A:L.;,;INIPT OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HE:RING november 10, 1961 - Variance V-10 - National Safety Company Page 2 Skourtes: Before I start, I happen to have an aerial map of this site, and I would like t as every one of tce members if they have driven by the site? Are you all aware Jf it? Tepedino: In fact, some of ,o nave driven Ly several times on vme of your earlier presentations. Yes, sir. "wens: (Asked to see the aerial. Some business showing cne site to her and others.) Speaker: Ia that -- is it this one r.ght here, witn access to Bonita, or to 74th? Skourtes: 74th. It is this one rignt here. Tepedino: Now this is the property that nits seer: the .:un..ect of several precedir ; presentatlois? Skourtes: No, this is the one on this side, where they are putting i,. thio planned unit development, over here. See this one over here? Oh, you mean the property I built on? Tepedino: Yes. Skourtee: al,;ht tnere. Tepedino: it's the same property? .;Kuurtes: No, no, no, no, no. It's this property right nere:. The property between the two railroad tracks. This was 1977. . . . . . . Thin is the one ri✓,ht here. (Commissioners identify the site. ) ?epi• Okay. c ,,irtnu: I am sure the members of the Council (si( ) are familiar with the code snich state the four parts . . ( requiremeute applicable for a variance) . . . The staff accept three of the points, so the fourth point that the staff and I am not in agreement with is hardship. I want that under stood prior to . four points you have to have to get a variance. I am not reviewing . . . ( the other three) . . . Tepedino: The hour is late, . . . . Skourtes: The intent of the ord:nances on setbacks were real iv, of course • . . . I mean, the ordinance is a e•.andard one that the average lot is usually a rectangle or trianrle, and you have to agree this is a very unliuc lot . And 1 . you read my letter of October 27, I am here RA an expert witness, and TRANSCRIPT OF TIGARD :L:NNING COMMISSION HEARING November 10, 1961 - Variance V-10 - National Safety Company Page 3 :ikourtes: my credentials as bein.r, an expert witness, I am the owner of (Cont.) fiv ' separate warehouses, and every one of them is a spec warehouse. A spec warehouse is one where you do not have a tenant when you build it. You are gambling that you will find a tenant, so you have to be very careful--you have got to know what you are doing tc build a spec warehouse, otherwise ycu are going to go broke because you can't find a tenant; and want to read out loud my point (g) which more than proves hardship: "The mortgage company will not loan on a spec warehouse that is only 50 feet wide, because the building will not be functional." Now when we design warehouses, we design 12, 1? 12 -- 12, L., 12, 1?c for aisle ways, storage, etc . , etc. That is a standard design for buildini.; warehouses. A thirty foot ware- nouse--50 feet wide ani! 100 feet lon,;, is not a functional warehouse. Ylu have no maneuverability inside the buildinc-. ;how what we are really arguing about is whethe.• we have plantings o: 10 feet or ?O feet along a road that is going to he feeding a steel yarc' . I think you people are aware directly south of this site, Mercer Industries IR puttin.; in a rebar plant. Are you aware of that? Seventy foot semis -- this parcul in rir.ht next to a railroad track. Rir,ht across the street you have another metal building and then have a creek. Tits parcel parallels the railroad track all the way down, and will be the only building on that side of "4th, all the way down to Durham Road. Because if you notice the track -- I think the tax map shows it -- okay? Now my underetandinr, is I .ant have new evidence, I have a letter trom a mort.�age company that will not loan on a 30 foot wide building be.:ause it would riot be econ- oslcall" feasible as far as finding tenants. As I mentioned in my lc :ter, the realitios o: the marketplace proves the nardship clause. Now the point is, I have already paid for the water on 74th-- remember on that other fiasco three years ago, between the tracks? I paid $6,000 to run water down 74th. I recall tae vote on the Planning Commission was eight to nothing against me, and of course we won five to nothing on the City Council. Well, the problss there was access between the railroad tracks. At this point, the problem here Is, if I prove the hardship clause, ten feet vs. twenty feet for the side of the yard-- right next to a railroad track, right next to an Industrial road where steel trucks will be running, no other ouilding on that side of the road for about ',001` feet going south. Now I agree with you if this lot was wider. You have to keep the building (`) feet from the center of the track. I mean Burlington Northern will not let ■e build closer than 2') feet from the center of the track. So right off the bat we are restricted to 11 TRANSCRIPT OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING November 10, 1981 - Variance 'V-10 - National Safety .;ompany ?age 4 Skourtes: fifty Meet. There ' s a dedicated road of 40 feet. So the (Cont.) maximum we can put in is a 40 foot wide building. A 30 foot y 10 foot building just is not functional. secondly, the Stran building that I use come in increments of 10, 10, 10 as far as the width on the main beams, and the mortgage company will not go on a 30 foot wide building: it is too much of a special purpose building to be functional. ::fcondly (sic) you are nut now -- if I put in -- let's say I put a building there 30 x 50, 1500 feet. By the time you pay for the road, the LIJ on the road; you pay for the sewer connection, the water connection -- there isn't, enough square footage to come out economically . You don't have enough square footage. Now I have chosen as my choice--most :f the buildings that i have--I own a couple over on Tiedeman and North Dakota--I usually pick odd lots with triangular -- very hard lots to pick. Now the code was written for . . . (ordinary, rectang- ular lots) . . . basic 10,000 foot c,ia, . buildings; it wasn't built for these odd ball lots that I happen to find, and I think -- I mean -- hardsnip again is one of those ambiguous words like safety. If I asked 10 people wnat safety is, I would get 10 answers. But when the marketplace establishes the hardship--I mean that's dollars and cents--that's a reality of life. Now I am not building a house: I am building a business. Train is an investment props: ty. An investment property, you do to ret a return on your investment. On a house you have aestnotic reasons. It is obvious I have met all the other tnree rules, and I think you should be aware of that, because it is very critical. I met the exceptional conditions, preserva- tion of property rights, 1 nth not injuring anyone; and I feel I have more than set the hardship rule. Let me review my notes, and then it is getting late. This will give you an idea: the average garage on your house is du feet deep. You will build a warehouse 30 feet wide when an average garage is 25 feet and expect to have a Y building and find a tenant? 30 x 150 -- it would be a tunnel. And again , what is the difference whether we have 10 feet of landscaping or 20 feet? One of the problems with a metal building, you have a hot reflection from the sun and it's very hard to keep any plants growing because you ;get the reflection of the sunlight on the plant life. It's very difficult. The beat you can hope for as far as landscaping, to be realistic, with thte reflection tri baridust and very low-lying shrubs. Any shrub that grows up, the reflection off the side of the November icJ, 1 ,J1 - Va.riar._ e !-Lo - Natiooai .'.af ety ,.ma-cny Page Skourtes: steel buildinrr, the sunii.•nt ,ur;t burrs, the plants. Sc you (Cont.) never can have it as well landscaped. ,remember, right text to the road, the Mercer Steel plant is directly south o ' us and is crossing, the railroad tracks teetween the tracks further down on the wve. Speaker: John, what is across the street from this property. In that residential property , I believe? :;kourtes: No. That is all M-3. Up until you cross the creek . . . ( followed by discussion of location of creek and ,leveioument between Fanno Creek and 74th) . . . I think the members ci the Commission saw my tentative site plan, where I would have the doors -- you have that? If you look at the layout and the reason fur my October 2? statement, we are talking the equivalent, because we can go to the property line on the railroad side, of about a 11,000 square foot lc t. . . . (:,om ' lost in change of tapes.) (resumes with a little u%decipherable discussion among Commissioners, including access for semis to the site., Skourtes: Let me tell you who might rent this warehouse: a small sub- (Cont.) contractor like an electrical contractor, or a small service company. And the reason you wouldn't have semis . . ' ecause the property is only 6,000 feet, and because of the access, nobody could get in there. In other words, people who rent warehouses are businessmen and they usually Know what tney need so far as requirements . . . . (A questijo from a:. .nidentifiec: )mmissiuner about a luadinr dock.) Skourtes: No, this would be an overhead door, Inst nu loading dock. . . . use as a warehouse--it's not functional . . fepedino: Are there any other parties wishing to speak in favor of this proposal? Any parties wishing to speak in opposition to thin proposal? Now is the opportunity fur cross-ezaaination and/or rebuttal. (No response to any of these questions.) I close the public hearing portion of this issue. Commissioners? Owens: (A question about the problem for the planning, commission on his building between the railroad tracks.) Skourtes: The problem there was access onto Bonita rload. safe. The access to Bonita Road tetween the railroad crossings was the problem ou that site. °woos: The building itself actually appears to be very close to the railroad track. I guess that 10 foot right-of-way does not apply to the railroad track? TRANSCRIPT OF TIGA;2D PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING November 10, 1981 - Variance V-10 - National Safety Company Page u Skourtee: The Burlington Northern plus Southern Nacific requires 20 feet from the center of the track. Tepedino: Now that the public hearing xs closed, i would like to make a few comments on this. Most of us know we don't always arree with the staff--a meaa,ire of our independence, perhaps. But in any event I partially agree with the staff in that i feel the applicant hasn' t met the required criteria, because the question now is whether the 40 foct building which the applii.ant wants to put in . . . . and the applicant suggesting that the 40 foot building can' t fit on the property and therefore he needs a variance. Now on the flip aide of that, I would suggest that even if a warehouse can' t be put in there, perhaps some other type of development could fit in there; and tnerefore it seems to me that the ,.riterta hasn' t been met In that regard. Anotnor talar; that bothers me is I think also that the appli- cant hasn't carried the burden on the first item: exceptional r extraordinary conditions applying to the property over which the applicant has no control. And again it happens to be my Information that the applicant does have control, be' auee while this particular application may not be the proper one, there may very well be another application; and I would suggest tnat perhaps the problem we are looking at here is economic return that will be somewhat diminished if the applicant must abide with the ?? that is there if he doesn' t get this variance. And I would suggest that in my estimttion he hasn't met the requirements of the variance. It is pretty harsh. I think this is one of the moat harsh requirements of the code; but it's in the code and -- Skourtee: Which ono are you talking about? Tepedino: I am talking about here, item (a) , and alno Item ( 1,) . Skourtee: Noll, this lot existed before jou had any codes. Tepedino: I understand. But I am suggesting the code exists now, and what you would like to do is use the property now under the exietin•' code; and I am suggesting the applicant hasn't carried the burden on at least two of the requirements of the code in terms of getting a variance. Skourtee: Now, wait -- according to the staff report we would be able to argue that point. It wasn' t in the staff report.. Tepedino: Comments are not limited to the staff report, sir, In terms of what we see and the evidence AdIMOOMMil TRANSCRIPT OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING November 10, 1981 - Variance V-10 - National Safety Company Page i Speaker: Mr. President, I would ask staff : certainly in the adminieirative procedures that we are considering, the owner would have to sign the application with the applicant. Did the Burlington Northern si„n with Mr. Skourtes on this? Currie: I oeiieve they did; yea. Skuurtes: Yes they did; it came from Minn .apolie, and it was given to staff. Currie: I might point out that he is referring to this as a lot. It's in actuality a portion of the Burlington Northern right-of- way; it isn't at this time a . Jt--it is a piece of land that could be a lot if the applicant were successful in getting, you know, the setback that he would like to build on. He would need to apply for a minor land partition, but it is a little, perhaps, technicality that doesn't count. Bonn: One of the things that wasn' t mentioned so far is, both Bonita Road and 74th have a 40 foot rizht.of-way; and if that were the case, . (somethin. about fire equipment) Currie: 74th, which is the street from which he is requesting the setback there, will not be any wider than 4+0 feet if the design that our consulting engineer is corrin..; up with fer the 'improve- ment of this street is successful--and I have no reason to believe it won't be. Me are trying to design a street improve- ment within this 40 foot right-or-way for several reasons: ( 1) it abuts property along the railroad for its full length, and (2) he other side of the street is involved with properties that havt. a considerable amount in the floodplain, and we are trying to fit a road in here that meets the needs of the properties on both sides and doesn' t take any property that would yield it almost unusable. Bonn: This is ,going to be one of the exceptions . . . . 40 toot right-of-way? Currin: It will be an exception, I think, in contrast to what Mr. Tepedino said. :hat's one of the things that ullows this to meet portion (a) and ( b) of the variances--that's one of the things we considered were unusual circumstances. Bonn: on the width of the street? Currie: Yes. Bonn: Ard what would be the sidewalk . Currie: 3, that's corro,.t. On the side adjacent to the railroad there will be no access. 'Phare are only two ,accesses approved, 11 TRANSCRIPT OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING November 10, 1981 - Variance V-10 - National Safety Company Page 6 Currie: and tnoy are both in this Mercer Steel site the applicant (Cont.) alluded to. Burlington Northe m is trying, to got rid of all the other accesses all the way down to Durham Road no there will be no a;:cesses across the tracks. Tepedinu: I guess 1 don't understand your point -- Currie: It is--my point is, no sidewalk there on that side. Tepedinu: Maybe I misinterpreted something. My point was that the applicant has a piece of property in mind on whlc} he wants to do something, and he is suggesting that there ire outside conditions over which ne has no control. They are impacted, and these are extraordinary conditions. But the way I inter- preted what ho has said is he isn't having a problem if he wants to put a building of a certain width on i�., and that's what's causing his problem. Currie: (A) does not speak to the shape of the building--it speaks to the shape gnu size of the lot; and I think this is an unusual lot confi,-uration--extremely unusual -n all three aides--it's extremely narrow, extremely long, fronts on the railroad on one side and an interesting confi oration of street on the other side. Tepedinu: Yes, notwithstanding the fact that .he lot is unusual, that there may be other uses for that unusual lot which would not require a variance, because the control that the applicant has over the use -- Currie: Ne atroe in that regard, but we t.ho,Arnt that that was covered under (d) such better than it was in (a) , ru d tnat's -- Skourtos: Any use is going to require the side yard retback. Even if you put a mini storage in there, you are going to want side yard setbacks. You put side yard setbacks, anu you can't even cut in on a mini-storage deal . What can you do with something that is 30 feet wide and can get only two accei:ses on 74th? If I could have accesses all along 74th--remember in the olden days, we had garages and wide driveways the full length of a city block? You know you can get only certain cuts into tho street. Now if you want to give me access all the way along 74th and have a continual driveway, groat. But you know I can' t get a continuous driveway. You are only going to give me two cuts on 74th. Currie: The width of the driveways are established by ordinance, and a provision in the ordinance allows the Public Werke Director to make variances to those widths of driveways. And I would suspect if some type of use were proposed that would require driveways eomewha' continuous--I think we allow TRANSCRIPT OF TIGARU PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING November 10, 1981 - Variance V-10 - National Safety Company Pare 9 Currie: two 30 foot driveways per IOU :oet of frontage. I don't know (Cont.) what the frontage is here, but perhaps we could allow some variance of the driveway widths, especially due to the fact that side of the street is not .*ging to have curbs or sidewalks on it--it's going to be a rural type croas section. Just as a counter to that point. Skourtee: This is an industrial property. You don't have to have a house line to wo-ry about. They are not going to come down and yell at. you. This is strictly; an industrial zone. You have a railro:.d track. You are next to a road. It's submarr,inal property to be ,in with. . . . . the City of Tigard, we do have some confi.:urations that current planning cannot allow for. This existed before the City of Tigard existed. We all like to deal in nice squares and rectangles. Tepedino: But we can't go against the code and say, "John -- " (Both talking at once) Skourtes: . . . . That is my position, and you have already voiced yo,11. opinion. Let's vote on it. It's getting late, and of course I will accept your determination. and if it's against me it's obvious I will appeal to the City Council. I am not threaten- ing anybody, but -- Tepedino: We are used to being threatened--don' t worry about that. (Some lost in good humored laughing and two or three people talking at once. President gavelled for order.) 'fare public hearing is closed on this issue, and I would like to ask the commission for a motion. (long pause.) Commissioner :speaker? Speaker: I think the idea o: mini-storage is something that might go there, and apparently there would be cooperation on the part of the publl' works director. 'therefore--eliminate the therefore--I move denial of Variance I0-61 bated on the staff finding and conclusions and the recommendation, with the finding that the applicant does not meet the required criteria established for granting a variance in that a smaller buildin;; could be constructed on the site. The question is whether a 4U foot building is the smallest building that is ecor.°mically feasible on the sits. Now I have a little quarrel with that, because in the language for the variance, the four things, the economic feasibility is not auppoeel to be considered a factor. But, anyway, I think the statements of staff here -- and I move denial on that basis. Topedino: Motion made for dente' . r;ulleas: Second. TRANSCRIPT OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING November 10, 1961 - Variance V-1O - National Safety Company Page 10 Tepedino: Seconded. Further discussion? I call for the qt•nation. All those in favor of denial of the motion (dic) ttat is made and seconded, signify by saying Aye. Chorus: Aye. Tepedinu: Those uppooed? Voice: No. Tepedino: Okay. May we have a division of the house? I think there was only one No. Aye will be for denial. Newton: Tepedino? Aye Speaker? Aye Moen? Aye Kolleas? Aye Christen? No Herron? Aye Owens? Aye 'Noun? Aye Tepedino: The motion is -- the item is denied. Skourten: industrial property, we pay the taxes. When the City Council approves it, then we will see what you do. Tepedlno: It won' t be the first time. We can only call it the way we see it. (..aid without rancor.) MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING CO:C:ISSION November 10, 1931 Page 7 5.4 VARIANCE V 10-31, NATIONAL SAFETY COMPANY NPO i#5 A request by National Safety Company for a variance to side yard set back from 20 feet to 10 feet along S.W. 74th Avenue. (Washington County Tax Map 251 12A Railroad Right-of-way.) Newton read the STAFF REPORT and RECOMME.IDATION. The APPLICANT'S P1lE.3crTTA1TI0N was made by John Skourtos, 1701 S;7 Vleir Road, Beaverton. Ho asked for clarification of the no additional material paragraph, given by the President. After establishing the exact location and setting of the property, Skourtes stated his assump- tion the staff had no quarrel with the first three qualifications for a variance on this property, and concentrated his presentation on the hardship aspect. He felt the setback ordinances are applicable more particularle' to the ordinary rectangular lot, which this is not. He called attention to the statement in his October 27 letter that mortgae companies will not lend mo.iey on'cpoc'k warehouse only 30 feet wide because it is not functional for ordinary warehouse purposes. He pointed to the railroad track bordering 74th to the south of this parcel, and the Mercer Steel yard farther south. Ho stated "The realities of tho market place proves the hardship." He declared that by the time the LID, serer and water connoction.; had been paid for, the cost would be such that a 30 foot building would not provide enough square footage to come out economically. Ho pointed out this building would be for investment, and on that basis ho felt the unecon- omic aspects of the possible 30 foot building had been proved by the actions of mortgage lenders. He described difficulties with shrubs along steel buildings because of reflection off the wall. There was no PUBLIC TESTIMONY. C0:;,!IS3tO N DISCUZ3ION AND ACTION: Owens got clarification about Skourtes' building nearby between the two railroad tracks. Topedino suggested that while the applicant aeserts a less-than-1+0 foot ware- house is not econoi.:,cally feasible, ho has not demonstrated that another type of building only 30 feet wide could indeed go in there. He challenged the meeting of variance qualification No. 1. Speaker questioned staff whether the owner, Burlington Northern Railroad, had signed this request. (Apparently they did.) Currie pointed out this 13 not a specific lot, but rather a portion of ',he Burlington Northern right-of-way which would require a minor land partition to make a lot. Upon a question from Bonn about the 40 foot right-of-way on 74th, Currie explained tee thinking behind keeping 74th at that point only 40 feet wide. Topedino again brought up the "exceptional or extraordinary conditions". Currie explained these conditions applied to the property, which is in this case exceptional and e;:trenrdinary in shape, and that Tepodino's lino of argument was better related to the fourth or minimum variance from standards require- ment. MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION November 10, 1931 Page 8 There wan discussion of number of access points onto 74th. Currie suggested the Public '.forks Director had authotty to grant additional access points if conditions warranted. Spe..t.cer felt that perhaps pini-storage space might be a use to which the property could be put without a variance. He then MOVED for denial of Variance V 10-81 based on staff findings, conclusions and the recommendation for denial based on the finding that the applicant had not shown that a smaller building could be built on the site. Tho motion was seconded by Kollean and carried seven to one, with Christen voting no. OT:ER BUSINESS: A memo on NPO changes was considered. Bonn MOVD acceptance of the three NPO appointments listed in the veno of November 6 from the .Associate Planner. The notion was seconded by Kolleas and carried unanimously. It was mentioned that a president of the coriscion should be elected to take office for the year beginning January 1, and that this should be part of the order of business at the Docenber meeting. Bob Jean, City Administrator, discussed procedures and tine constraints on the urban renewal agency if advantage is to bo taken of the increment financing mechanism in 1982. After considerable discussion it wan agreed the :'fanning Commission would attend the City Council meeting on November 23, which will include a town hall typo of meeting on the urban renewal issue. Jean outlined his concept of the role of the Planning Commission under the new administrative procedures, and the advisability of conducting a sort of "crash course" for the Commission by the League of Oregon City or other educative organization. The aim is to have tho Connissioa begin work on the comprehensive plan early in 1932. The object will be to pull together or blend the coven NPO plane covering seven separate areas into one integrated plan for the whole city. Currie mentioned the flood plain issue, which needs action in December in order to have Council act on it by the deadline, February 1. The need to consider the draft of adnir.iotrative procedures was nen- tioned. Jean sug tinted Speaker and Ken Elliott confer on the latter's comments on these so a second revised draft ;ould be considered by the Commission. In order to take care of these extra items and still hold the December meeting open for a known heavy agenda, it wan agreed a special meeting of the Commission should be held Tuesday, December 1. The President declared the mooting; AA70UBNED at 11:40. October 27, 1991 TO: 'As. Lir Newton PROM: Tc,hn Skourt.s - Netinne1 Safety Company R3QUBST: Side y'rd setbmck from twenty feet to ten feet in e M-3 Zone for a lot thAt perellele roed end reilroed track for 250 feet , RBPSRRNCR: 19.76.020 Orenting Conditions: Additional input- Minimum verience to elleviete hardship (4) The minimum width n.,:essery for a warehouse building to make the proiect viable And functionnl is forty fest wide. e . All parcels of lend in the urban growth boundary area should be developed to their highest end best use (controls inflation end urban sprawl) b. Mortgage compAny will not loon on a speck warehouse build- ing that is only 30 feet wide beeeuse building will not be functionals not enough meneutereble room inside, in- adenuste tenant response wherein the building will not be marketable. The proposed building is not a bowling Alley. We ere taking A uninue parcel of fellow lend that is merginelly deeireeble to begin with end ere attempting to improve it where it can be productive. The realities of the market ..lace prove the hardship clause. H. This parcel of lend is equivelcnt to e 17,x)00 aq.ft. lot. 6,000 en.ft . of building is et beat most modest. ttEQJEST APPLICATION X FILE # V ' C-/ [GAR[) PLANN'.NG DEPARTMENT 639-4171 FEE RECEIVED j4. 7 2420 Sty Main Street RECEIPT # 122_5( :yard, Or.2gon 97223 RECEIVED BY DATE RECEIVED The "contact person" named in this application will receive all major correspondence from the Tigard Planning Department and that person is responsible for providing same to owner, architects , etc . In this case , the "contact person" is : NAME ` t1 r. 5�:,,u t iE4, PHONE (Bus . ) (Res.) , ' ADDRESS ` if: i (1'1 ( /o i (Street - City-, Zip) )0 I Signature Date / - ',CTION REQUESTED 1'J - r•� I'•-Cp-40 1 i " 11h(1. Divi ) af? S. % fS J, , f Jrt 1-0 I) /,, PLICANT'S NAME c ,, PHONE (Bus . ) Res.) c' y -)DRESS r , J• , ., (Street - City - Zip) COPE RTY .;NER'S NAME t• , ,. h, ,,r IIrL,:r., PHONE (Bus . ) (Res.) PHONE ;Bus . ) (Res.) .JDRESS Street - City - Zip) ROPERTY OWNER RECOGNITION OF APPLICATION (Signature of owner) 'ROPERTY INVOLVED: TA). MAP $ ` I TAX LOT (S) ,f,; r1 n r ,6,,, ,.,• 1 ,DDRESS r , , < ; n ► l 1 l' 'r r r% r 0 AREA MEASUREMENT ' x , S. 'URRENT ZONING f , CURRENT USE V.9(4" r •.PPLICANT' S PROPOSED USE l, ,,. , , ,nt . . . APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS FULLY COMPLETED . . . . U--\ ?0481vmc rte► • r . ;it.v .)t' . iar't ' . ru.inr Conan.. .<,n icit ' rd 't.h •.K 'r, n t... .:t.; f•'it 10 t r '.ot partrllela ro, d n.: r- '1 ro,,o trr:ck for .-,c; f '' :rtincc: 1,'.76.C20 'lrr,nting ::or.aitions (1) Thi lot has existed .J fore the City w..s w•I3 cre,ttid in :902 when the Or' on :'ect.ric a.+. ^cqulred thi.i right of Fxr.• •'_ surrounded by road !Ind railrn•_ed. '::'e have no control. of lut dimnaions. • i':tCP;:i7f :u uTs (2) '.'ithout sid, yard varittnce unabla to !nrovn lot. l..JUR1OUS TC PhOP iTY i.J vICIN1T'Y ( 3) ;:ranting oc side y'.rd vari•ince will r.ot. oe i:. 'Lr` us;• to pro! ,rt y in th,: vicinity becriu:.e •-rotJ-r•ty is 3urrounde by rc, rail ro ,1 .r. TO A:.'�.'VI (6) Toe minimum width nece:+s:.r;/ for a w rehouse . ui ' ding , o rr,.ku the project viable mod ^unct... n•:1 is forty feet w:cic:. :, niviewing he proposed site development adequate ,•rovisIons rvtve 'men >wed ''or off str-iet parking n:rd landscrtpir.,'. ir t r.ia instep e r tdenty foot side yard 'get back r.r•rves no funcyionf.:. ,t ,r 12,000 sq. ft. coverage 5 : > ; 13na:,caping Darr(ing-paving 11 � i (-0,L-( c40 1?, Ak' ' / , / J I VARIANCE REQUEST APPLI('' "ION X FILE # TIGARD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 639-4171 FEE RECEIVED -12420 SW ,Main Street RECEIPT # — - Tigard , Oregon 97223 RECEIVED BY DATE RECEIVED The "contact person" named in this application will receive all major correspondence from the Tigard Planning Department and that person is responsible for providing same to owner, architects , etc . In this case, the "contact person" is : NAME PHONE (Bus . ) (Rra .) r)q4 1u3< ADDRESS (Street - City- Zip) Signature Date ACTION REQUESTED r APPLICANT' S NAME PHONE (Bus . ) Res.) . ADDRESS r ` !1, . , ;,r- 1 ,2_, 1 (Street - City - Zip) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME PHONE (Bus . ) (Res .) PHONE (Bus . ) (Res .) ADDRESS (Street - City - Zip) / PROPERTY OWNER RECOGNITION OF APPLICATION v Burlington Northern (Oregon- Washington ) Inc . R. D. arson Manager- Property Management (Signature of owner] _ PROPERTY INVOLVED: TAX MAP P) 2_ \ ! A TAX LOT (S) Fey' ADDRESS _ l' '12') 1 ' , �% r i AREA MF.:,.;UREMENT 5o X 250 yo),—, CURRENT ZONING CURRENT USE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED USE C, u y h, r • . . APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS FULLY COMPLETED . . . . 020481vmc V 10-81 SKOURTES, JOHN 2 OF 2 74TH & SW BONITA ‘1 1 (!Ql.i f4�QLL�l-C. Ise _"-T-`--no ` 71 �'0 N 502 ^' e y '501 r sent p oi s, 500 • ,uk �. �9 D .^�yAt °+ r� O y ..1 ISO W 1 eorMre oar e.MOOS �' 400 �jli 1 'WV 'r ^I A!Ar a. N I I* -1 et 1 `` SlirQ 90 N I A roe 44 stela c R ssa •- ,..r_ TiTL _—...r- 0MSto 19 r I ` 1 417 At _ - N ;ts\1_1. .f / SEE MAP 4t4Is ' r 1 • _110.13_. _ ; toe 2S 1 ,2 8 Ne ss14."--1 -• X900 '. ` i it/aro/J(1. • 46, '� 11 se.eft'w sere T 1'� / • 1000 4x.�o �\ . 'o• -.., •o '.._,^ / :� 25 • ____ al•74. c 4000 ";• 1902 ` 40 I , 4 `�St" '� - ` 1100 - -LV, \ . 41111.04 4 1 .`,4011 N ...+ ' Qe-.`+(i ..,-,.y, le '200 `: +7�^= 2 v� �8�0. ?1,2, t,-Ar /w -- — trt 10 404 _re' - - - N - � , ! 2M,ie.'4 ,.I, 4 8 ' l;r `l`K, ,3 �' 13 '7 I • 19 � Kamiele' In s Pet -- • r, ' • 2 200 .-r v 9�Ar. (C i N„ ��) I 1'.100 "����t• -�` _' scRr��^ 2 300 •+ r.�.f ai T �. ✓ r •o • : e�A. e 18 •'�- �p ' 22 n I I .. CI le< ` P. rJ 1 2400 ,3..:78 1 r 3o io' w 11« to' ors•. 1400 �•► cc ..____._s `•j •.A• Ac -.J"�_.� 1600 ' 245nO IT . . 2▪. ' ,R4/ICj/4 • iie •, ah,floutN unitJAMIew. . IcI1.IN 0.L.a 411 :I I " CS 300Ilk • • sie.01 's' 'X 25 ' `�...-tet. • -1 .4 ....c., n/ 1 SOO ! I . irlA. kir , • t See.M• 1� I it J ' i .e • \ a• r• _ r • • . I I w si,o (4) Q et t 0 0 _y -•, ...I.. 2 r.‘ �� c.1 40 3 r c.h _ \ N \ ay \ ct %,rLi r t t i ,.. } O Jl o v % t.,1 a w \ a �` v 7t `.r (AI I-.t. ‘?(:41 \ [ 14,.. 1 I \N'' til M s i 0 1 �' 41; W Q i , Q -,, `" CTom .IO ? • V tf ` I i kp Z Q QZ vwt ' sO j H Z 4 -t\� 4- '3 Q M \ 4 4 s „F r. zip, N . .1 1 W W Q \ , r ^ `� '' t t� ._�„ s qr cr- ' } .-4. 0 9 a 3 0 0 u o 0 -4. O O M r O Z'''' ry Z. * 1+; 2 iI - It N 4- 1 4- a .� et ti o "1 1 4oN -AI .1. • n j `•, I r' • -6 9• 'F.1l.66 \ I •!.111s ` . 1t IJ Pa•I3 r 72 Cori. /. P. 00-/f A04 :Liu oo All 41 fh N If .� [ I •• I ' 1 • 93 . 6>9 Pence Cerner Z5-/T•95 • 6t! /t'C/t✓rinte Point �! Jf✓r ?ti,/. 95 f!! ft/!c s Cornsr 71 Px t O. 91.889 1 /6 &re 'Le 17 a• 4 S 91 .8,I ,v fir/e.a- is' /YO a-ff M le p 'PPP' ,I•ed• L ri-iri/t .ew/A.�y 9I•t+•• I /6'1ii/! .5 n'i .4: !}.JN EM.C._ _ _- 1 9e./o! J foe Orove/ Pio ,w I'ie / \\ a 9t•809 J.tied Grort/ Plotlote.f I'[/ ;� a � "'7 C 1 vt •S9' aeoimr��q of itch (5 [f , • *1+ 1 9� •1!s fie[t CorAer lS'Aft No.SO•tin 0 ' ••.,.t , f�. 9,050 . ,1 4'' I COYnrr Osre. 41-0 . Irle/i ?O'Aovil/too/X-//► 1 Ye ..L7I A f.,I /8 Cercr P,�e 32'4 /ILe....Alp. . y''�� ~r••r `.'"•'r"• I 91, •239 L Jhef/'isid Come Citrri 'tote COrhlr, ['J [4". ,i ` \ Leose To Notion/ Solely CO. .e M \ srf re '' .© iw - \'4 • � � rya •• •` tO NI Q fit• • 1 • lc,. 4\•\.... .'..1 Exhibit !l lw• Pis Iii 6.1 . ` i,UHLHiC i U14 ML iTNZ!?N INC. Are 0.t. ., sd 0,. 't • PORTLAND CIVISlOf ertf SUB.Div, ' 1 ° •'` 0 'i 66,.641 T/GAR'p (BON/TA))OR EC ON. \ • r/ y \ 1 OU �.tCroENGINEERING{ . EcA r ' WO' n^Te 6—/s—SI Copies of the attached mailed to the following names (Skourtes Variance) R.M. Starkweather et al c/oMilton O'Brown & R. J. Kittleson 310 NW Murray Road Portland, Oregon 97229 Clarence & Mary McGarr c/o Puget Die Casting Co. 7440 S.W. Bonita Road Portland, Oregon 97223 Caries & DV Carlson & Thelma Froude c/o Clyde V. Jacobson & J.V. Jacobson 790 SE Webber $212 Portland, Oregon 97202 Robin K 6 Elizabeth J. Dobson 14645 S.W. 74th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 Marie B. Louis & George R. Koeber Q320 S.W. 74th Portland, Oregon 97223 Marie B. Louis c/o Gale & Ann Nelson & George Koeber et al 17911 S.W. Lake Haven Drive f Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Harvey & Kim King e" l 1 2 yam-//�� \ TISISPD 4505 S.W. Bernard Drive Portland, Oregon 97201 National Safety Company Route I Box 575H eco' Beaverton, Oregon 97005 j� / (`� ro� William Dieter (, (/ 10365 S.W. Heather Lane Beaverton, Oregon 97005 ) ✓ le,:: L.R. Davis & R. M. & Ivan Starkweather v ✓` 7415 S.W. Bonita Road (1 tJ Tigard, Oregon 97223 ) C (.)4°.°°e { 6 (7) D/ 4 (co - qw1O MI. •0 O 1111. '00411)01111111111w11111