Ordinance No. 00-28 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 00-ag
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAT: AND ZONING
MAP,APPROVING CERTAIN VARIANCES, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
CONCLUSIONS (File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-
00014, 00017, 00018, and 00019)
WHEREAS Applicant Community Partners for Affordable Housing, Inc. has requested
approval of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Map, Zoning Map, and variances
for certain property described as 11159 and 11165 SW Hall Boulevard within the
corporate limits of the City of Tigard, said property also described as Washington
County Tax Assessor's Map 1 S135DA,tax lots 4600 and 4700; and
WHEREAS The City Planning Staff has reviewed the request and has recommended
approval of the same with conditions and the Planning Commission has recommended
approval of the proposal with revised conditions; and
WHEREAS The proposal was duly noticed for hearing before the City Council on
September 26, 2000, at which time the Council heard from the applica:;t and its
supporters, there being no public opposition to the proposal; and
WHEREAS The Council,following such hearing, determined that it should approve the
applications with the recommended conditions of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS The Council bases its approval of the proposed plan and zoning map
amendments and the requested variances as being consistent with all relevant criteria
as stated in the Findings and Conclusions in Support of the same set forth in Exhibit "1"
attached hereto, and by this reference incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS The City Council met on October_10th_, 2000 and voted to adopt this
ordinance granting the aforesaid requests; now, therefore
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The applications for plan amendment,zone change, and variances in file
nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-00014, 000017,
00018, and 00019 are hereby granted and approved in the manner set
forth below.
SECTION 2: The Tigard Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as shown in the
attached Exhibit 2 with the amendment to take place at the time stated in
Section 6 of this ordinance.
Ordinance No.00- IQ
Page 1
SECTION 3: The Tigard zoning map is hereby amended,with the amended map to be
in the form of Exhibit 3. This amendment shall take place at the time
stated in Section 6 of this ordinance.
SECTION 4: The aforesaid variance requests are hereby granted,with the approvals
effective at the time stated in Section 6 of this ordinance.
SECTION 5: The Findings and Conclusions in Support of the Plan Amendment, Zone
Change and Variance requests, as set forth in Exhibit"1"are hereby
adopted as the basis for this Council action.
SECTION 6: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council,
signature by the Mayor and posting by the City Recorder.
PASSED: By±d.\oC�1 k-H' I 1 vote of all Council members present after
being re— ad y umber and title only, this 10th day of October, 2000.
Catherine Wheatley, City Recoftbr
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this 10th day of October, 2000.
fA A"It-4 1/a,
mes Griffi a
Approved as to form:
ity Attorney
Date
IxiWAe\10-10-00 CPAH ordinance.doc
Ordinance No.00-e
Page 2
EXHIBIT"1" FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
(File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017, 000018,
and 000019)
The Tigard City Council finds as follows:
SECTION I: APPLICATION SUMMARY
CASES: FILE NAME: VILLAGE AT WASHINGTON SQUARE_
Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 2000-00002/ZON 2000-
000011VAR 2000-00014NAR 2000-00017NAR 2000.00018NAR
2000-00019
PROPOSAL: A request for approval of legislative Comprehensive Plan Map
amendment from Low-Density Residential to Medium-High Density
Residential, Rezone from R-12 to R-40 and Variances to allow the
following changes:
1. decrease required setback on north sideyard from 35 feet to 10
feet.
2. decrease required setback on south sideyard from 35 feet to 10
feet.
3. decrease required setback on rear yard from 35 feet to 20 feet.
4. change the miramum-parking requirement from 46 to 31 spaces.
The subject property is located on 11159 and 11165 SW Hall
Boulevard, 1 S135DA Tax Lots 4600 and 4700.
APPLICANT: Community Partners for Affordable Housing
P.O. Box 23206
Tigard, OR 97281-3206
OWNER: Cahn Trust
5795 SW Cranberry Ct.
Beaverton, OR 97007
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential
ZONING
DESIGNATION: R-12
LOCATION: 11159 and 11165 SW Hall Boulevard
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA: Statewide Goals 1-19; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 6.1.1,
7.1.2(a&b) 8.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.1.3, 12.1.3; Community Development Code
Chapter 18.370 Chapter 18.380.030, and 18.390.060(G). Metro
Functional Plan.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-(M!14, 00WIT,
000018,and 000019 Page 1
The Tigard City Council finds as follows:
SECTION II: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Site History: The subject parcels were annexed to the City in 1987. The project sponsor,
Community Partners for Affordable Housing, Inc. (CPAH), first optioned these parcels in
May of 1999. Currently, these parcels are located within the area being re-zoned through
the Washington Square Regional Center Plan (WSRCP).
Vicinity Information:_The subject parcel is generally located north of Highway 217 and SW
Hall Boulevard represents the eastern boundary for the site. The site is located within the
area that will eventually be re-zoned for the Washington Square Regional Center. The
proposed zoning for this site is MUR i, or Mixed-Use Residential, 1, which permits
residential development to be built at a density of 50 units per acre and allows some
commercial uses be constructed with a mixed-use project.
Site Information and Proposal Description: Of the subject parcels, tax lot 4700 is .11 acres
in size and tax lot 4600 is .73 acres. The surrounding properties are all zoned R-12, just
like the subject site. The neighboring property to the west is developed as St. James
apartments, which is accessed through a driveway along the north side of the subject site.
The property to the south is developed as a single-family home. Properties across SW
Hall Boulevard are developed as single-family homes, with two apartment complexes at
the intersection of SW Hall Boulevard and SW Pfaffle Street.
SECTION III: GENERAL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The Tigard City Council finds and concludes as follows:
The following evaluation and findings are intended to address both the requested
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and the City Development Code. The relevant
criteria in this case are Statewide Goals 1-19: Oregon Administrative Rule 660-12-060;
Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 6.1.1, 8.1.11, 8.2.2, 9.1.1, 12.1.1, 12.2.1; and
Community Development Code Chapter 18.390.060 and 18.390.060(G).
STATEWIDE GOALS
Citizen Involvement: Goal 1 requires a citizen involvement program that ensures the
opportunity for citizens to be involved in the planning process. Tigard Comprehensive
Plan Policy 2.1.1 and Tigard Community Development Code Chapter 18 provide for citizen
participation and notice.
The Council finds that notice of the Planning Commission and City Council hearings and
opportunity for response were advertised in the local newspaper and request for comments
were sent to the Department of Land Conservation and Development. Notice of both the
Planning Commission and City Council hearings was mailed out to all property owners
located within 500 feet of the subject parcel. Exhibit A is a map of all the properties that
were sent notice of the hearings for this proposal.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Pa4p 2
The applicant is also required to hold a neighborhood meeting to describe the proposal to
neighbors before they can summit their application. Exhibit B is a letter from Sheila
Greenlaw-Fink, Community Partners for Affordable Housing Director, informing neighboring
property owners of the neighborhood meeting. An affidavit of mailing and posting for the
neighborhood meeting was also included in the applicant's packet (refer to Exhibit C). One
of the application requirements is that the applicant hold a neighborhood meeting and send
notice of this meeting to all property owners located within 500 feet of the site of the
proposal. The applicant complied with this requirement.
The Council concludes this goal is satisfied.
Land Use Planning: Goal 2 requires, in part, that adopted comprehensive plans be
revised to take into account changing public policies and circumstances. The Council
finds this goal is met because the City has applied all relevant Statewide Planning Goals,
City Comprehensive Plan policies and Community Development Code requirements in the
review of this proposal. Since the applicant is proposing to construct a higher density of
residential development than is permitted under the R-12 zoning, the applicant is meeting
the intent of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan for this area.
The Council concludes this goal is satisfied.
Agricultural Lands: Goal 3 requires, in part, that adopted comprehensive plans be
revised to preserve and maintain agricultural lands. The Council finds and concludes
that this goal is not applicable because no agricultural lands are involved in this plan and
zoning map amendment.
Forest Lands: Goal 4 requires,in part, that adopted comprehensive plans be revised
to preserve and maintain forest lands. The Council finds and concludes that this goal is
not applicable because no forest lands are involved in this plan and zoning map
amendment.
Open Spaces Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources: Goal 5 requires, in
part, that adopted comprehensive plans be revised to conserve and protect natural
resources and scenic resources. The Council finds and concludes that this goal is met
because this proposal does not affect open spaces, scenic areas, historic areas, or natural
resources. The Council finds that staff reviewed the City's water resources map and found
that no water resources, or floodplain exist on this site.
The following natural resource agencies were sent request for comments: Division of State
Lands, Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife, US Army Corps. Of Engineers, and Unified
Sewerage Agency (USA). Exhibits D and E are Request for Comments forms from,
respectively, the Division of State Lands and USA. Each agency representative stated that
they had no objections to this proposal
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this goal is satisfied.
Air Water and Land Resources Quality: Goal f requires the maintenance and
improvement of the quality of air, water, and land resources of the state. The City of
Tigard complies with this goal through its adopted comprehensive plans and policies
regarding water resources (Tigard Comprehensive Plan Volume 11, Chapter 4 and Tigard
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Page 3
Development Code standard: 18.797). The proposals before the Council do not affect such
compliance.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this goal is s?"isfied.
Natural Disasters and Hazards: Goal 7 requires the protection of life and property
from natural disasters and hazards. This City of Tigard has existing regulations that
address natural disasters and hazards. The subject is not IacGted within the floodplain;
therefore, it appears that no natural hazards would exist for this site or proposal. The
proposals before the Council do not affect such compliance.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this goal is satisfied.
Recreational Needs: Goal 8 requires satisfaction of recreational needs of the citizens
of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary
recreational facilities including destination resorts. The Council finds and concludes
that this goal is not applicable because no recreational issues or destination resort issues
are involved.
Economic Development: Goal 9 requires the provision of adequate opportunities for
a variety of economic activities. The Council finds and concludes that this goal has been
met because the plan continues tO promote opportunities for a variety of economic activities
vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Tigard citizens. The proposed higher density
and affordable housing development will promote economic development because it will
create affordable housing opportunities for local service workers.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this goal is satisfied.
Housing: Goal 10 requires that plans shall encourage the availability of adequate
numbers of needed housing units at various price ranges and rent levels and allow
for flexibility of housing location, type and density.
The Council finds as follows: The applicant is proposing an upzoning from R-12 to R-4O
which will increase the potential for more housing units in the City than currently exists.
Furthermore, the applicant will require future tenants to demonstrate that their income level
is at or below 50% of median income, and therefore they are in need of affordable housing.
This project will make more housing units available and more units available to low-income
individuals in Tigard than currently exists.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this goal is satisfied.
Public Facilities and Services: Goal 11 requires planning and development of timely,
orderly, and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a
framework for urban and rural development.
The Council finds as follows: The subject site has full urban services available to it: police
protection; sanitary facilities; storm drainage facilities; public transit; and transportation
services. When the applicant goes through the site development review application process
they will be required to meet the Tigard Development Code standards for street and utility
improvements. Moreover, the applicant will be required to pay system development charges
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR_2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Page 4
for transportation, parks, sewer, water, and storm drainage. They will be required to make
improvements for their frontage along SW Hall Boulevard.
Request for comments forms were sent to the following providers of public facilities: City of
Tigard Engineering Department, City of Tigard Police Department, Oregon Department of
Transportation, Oregon Public Utilities Commission, US Army Corps. Of Engineers, USA,
Tri-Met, Tualatin Valley Water District, TCI Cablevision of Oregon, US West
Communications, Portland General Electric,Tigard-Tualatin School District, NW Natural Gas
Company, and General Telephone.
Tigard Police Department reviewed the application and had no comments on it (Exhibit F),
Tigaaed Water District had no comments (Exhibit G), Oregon Public Utilities Commission had
no comments (Exhibit H), and USA had no comments (Exhibit E). The applicant received
a letter from the Tigard-Tualatin school district, stating its support for the proposal (refer to
Exhibit 1).
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this goal is satisfied.
Transportation: Goal 12 requires a safe, convenient and economic transportation
system.
The Council finds as follows: SW Hall Boulevard is an ODOT facility. ODOT provided
comments on this application (Exhibit J). ODOT stated in its comment letter that it had no
objection to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and variance.
They have specific requirements as far as improvements that will affect SW Hall Boulevard.
These comments regarding conditions of approval are more applicable during the Site
Development Review process than the comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and
variance application process.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this goal is satisfied.
Energy Conservation: Goal 13 requires that land and uses developed on land shall
be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy,
based upon sound economic principles. The Council finds that the land will be
developed, and the uses on the land will be managed, to maximize the conservation of all
forms of energy. The proposed building will meet the standards of the Uniform Building
Code.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this goal is satisfied.
Urbanization: Goal 14 requires orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban
land use. The Council concludes that this goal is not applicable because urban growth
boundary issues are not involved.
Willamette River Greenwvy: Goal 15 requires protection, conservation, and
enhancement of lands along the Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway.
The Council concludes that this goal is not applicable because Willamette River Greenway
issues are not invoived.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Fite Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Page 5
.............. . .
Estuarine Resources: Goal 16 requires recognition and protection of the unique
environmental, economic, and social values of each estuary and associated wetlands
and, where appropriate, protect, maintain and restore the long-term environmental,
economic, and social values diversity and benefits of Oregon's estuaries. The Council
concludes that this goal applies to coastal areas and,therefore, is not applicable.
Coastal Shorelpnds: Goal 17 requires conservation, protection, and, where
appropriate, restoration of coastal shorelands. The Council concluders that this goal is,
not applicable, as no coastal shorelands are involved in this application.
Beaches and Dunes: Goal 18 requires conservation, protection, and, where
appropriate, restoration of coastal beaches and dunes. The Council concludes that this
goal is not applicable,as no beaches and dunes are involved in this application.
Ocean Resources: Goal 19 requires conservation of the long-term values, benefits,
and natural resources of the nearshore ocean and the continental shelf. The Council
concludes that this goal is not applicable, as there are no ocean resources involved in this
application.
COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
General Policies: Policy 1.1.2, Implementation Strategy 2, requires that in order to
approve quasi-judicial changes to the comprehensive plan map, the City Council
must find: a)The change is consistent with applicable plan policies; and b)A change
of physical circumstances has occurred since the original designation, or c) A
mistake was made in the original land use designation. The Council has already
concluded that this proposal is consistent with statewide planning goals as addressed above
under 'Statewide Goals' and that the proposal will confirm to all applicable Tigard plan
policies and development code provisions for the reasons set forth below. The Council also
concludes that the proposal conforms with the applicable portions of the Metro "Urban
Growth Management Functional Plan"that was approved for adoption on October 24, 1996,
by the Metro Council. In so concluding, the Council notes that the Metro "Growth Concept"
map associated with the Functional Pian indicates this area as a "Regional Center". Since
the subject parcel is located within the Washington Square Regional Center boundary, this
proposed increase in density will meet the intent of the Metro Functional Plan. In addition,
this parcel is designated for 50-units per acre, mixed-use residential density development
under the Washington Square Regiinal Center Plan.
The Council further finds that the proposal meets subsection b of Implementation Strategy
#2: A change of physical circumstances has occurred since the original designation." The
adoption of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan and the public facility and service
changes implicated thereby represent a physical change of circumstance and, once
implemented, will change the potential for development within this area.
The Council concludes that this policy is met.
Citizen Involvement: Policy 2.1.1 states that the City shall maintain an ongoing
citizen involvement program and shall assure that citizens will be provided an
opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The Council finds as
follows: The Planning Commission and City Council hearings were legally advertised.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Page 6
Notice of these hearings were sent to property owners located within 500 feet of the subject
parcel (refer to Exhibit A). The applicant held a neighborhood meeting prior to submitting
their application (refer to Exhibits B and C).
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this policy is met.
Housing: Policy 6.1.1 requires the City shall provide an opportunity for a diversity of
housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent levels. The Council
concludes that this policy is primarily implemented through OAR 660-07, the Metropolitan
Housing Rule. The rule requires that the City maintain sufficient residential buildable land to
provide the opportunity for at least 50% of new units to be attached single family or multi-
family housing and to provide for an overall density of ten units per acre. The Council finds
that the City is currently in compliance with this rule.
The Council finds as follow: The applicant is proposing an upzoning from R-12 to R-40
which will increase the potential for more housing units in the City than currently exists.
According to the applicant's narrative, with which the Council agrees, Tigard is one of the
least affordable cities in the Portland metropolitan area, and one of the most imbalanced
from a jobs-housing perspective. Furthermore, the Council finds the applicant will require
future tenants to demonstrate that their income level is at or below 50% of median income,
and therefore they are in need of affordable housing. The Council concludes that this
project will make more housing units available and more units available to low-income
individuals in Tigard than currently exists. By creating more affordable housing in the City,
the applicant is meeting the intent of this plan policy.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this policy is met.
Public Facilities and Services: Policy 7.1.2 requires that a pre-condition to
development that:
a. Development coincide with the availability of adequate service capacity
including:
1. Public Water; The Council believes the staff report to the effect that the site
accesses public water from Tualatin Valley Water District.
2. Public Sewer shall be required for new development within the City unless
the property owner involved is 300 feet from a sewer line and Washington
County Health Department approval for a private disposal system is
obtained; and The Council believes the staff Import to the effect that the site can
access sewer via a line located in SW Hall Boulevard.
3. Storm Drainage; The Council finds that the storm drainage facilities will be
reviewed as part of the site development review application.
b. The facilities are:
1. Capable of adequately serving all intervening properties and the proposed
development; and The Council finds that adequate facilities will be one of the
review criteria of a site development review application.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Page 7
2. Designed to City standards. The Council finds that, as part of the site
development review process, the applicant will be required to demonstrate that
facilities are designed to City standards.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this policy is met.
Transportation: Policy 8.1.1 requires the City to pian for a safe and efficient street
and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future growth and
development. The Council finds as follows: SW Hall Boulevard is an ODOT facility. MOT
provided comments on this application (Exhibit J). ODOT indicated it had no objection to
the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, zone change, and variance, while noting
that that agency had specific requirements as far as improvements that will affect SW Hall
Boulevard. The Council concludes that these comments regarding conditions of approval
are more applicable during the Site Development Review process than the comprehensive
plan amendment, zone change, and variance application process.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this policy is met.
Transit: Policy 8.2.2: The city shall encourage the expansion and use of public
transit by:
a. Locating Land Intensive Uses In Close Proximity To Transitways;
The Council finds as follows: This application is located in close proximity to transitways.
Bus line#43 runs east west on Locust with a bus stop less than 0.4 miles from the subject
parcel. The #12 bus line on SW Barbur Boulevard runs frequently and can be accessed
within 0.3 miles from the site. A major transit center is located on SW Commercial Street in
downtown Tigard, which is less than one mile from the site.
In addition, a request for comments was sent to Tri-Met, which had no objections to the
proposal (refer to Exhibit K).
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this policy is met.
b. Incorporating Provisions Into The Community Development Code Which
Require Development Proposals To Provide Transit Facilities;And
The existing development code addresses the provision of transit facilities.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this policy is met.
C. Supporting Efforts By Tri-Met And Other Groups To Provide For The Deeds Of
The Transit Disadvantaged.
The Council finds that many of the residents in the proposed project will be transportation
disadvantaged and providing housing near public transit meets this policy.
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this policy is met.
Ene[g3c. Policy 9.1.1: The city shall encourage a reduction in energy consumption by
increased opportunities for energy conservation and the production of energy from
alternative sources. The Council concludes that the Washington Square Regional Center
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Page 8
Plan will encourage reduction in energy consumption by allowing the opportunity for housing
to be located in close proximity to jobs and transit.
According to the applicant's representative, Sheila Greenlaw-Fink, "The applicant intends to
apply for any and all grants and tax credits for weatherization measures which go beyond
code requirements. Additionally, conservation training is provided for residents throughout
the year,focusing on water and electrical consumption and recycling of household waste."
For the foregoing reasons,the Council concludes that this policy is met.
Locational Criteria: Policy 12.1.3: The city shall provide for housing densities in
accordance with:
a. Applicable Plan Policies;
The Council finds that the proposed project is in an area already planned and zoned for
medium density residential development (R-12). A major apartment complex, St. James
Apartments, is located adjacent to the subject parcel.
b. Applicable Locational Criteria;
1. Medium-High Density and High Density Residential
A. The following factors will be the determinants of the areas designated for high
density on the plan map:
(1) Areas which are not committed to low density development;
The Council finds as follows: The proposed project is in an area already planned and zoned
for medium density residential development(R-12). A major apartment complex, St. James
Apartments, is located adjacent to the subject parcel. None of the adjacent parcels are
zoned for single-family(R-4.5)residential development.
(2) Areas which can be buffered from low density residential areas in order to
maximize the privacy of established low density residential areas;
The Council finds as follows: Existing development code has buffering standards. None of
the adjacent parcels are zoned for single-family(R-4.5)residential development.
(3) Areas which have direct access from a major collector or arterial street;
The Council finds the proposed project has direct access to SW Hall Boulevard, an arterial
street.
(4) Areas which are not subject to development limitations;
The Council finds as follows: The subject property is not subject to development limitations,
such as wetlands, steep slopes, poor soils, or flood hazards. No delineated wetlands are
located on the subject site,and the property is not located within the 100-year floodplain.
(5) Areas where the existing facilities have the capacity for additional
development;
According to the applicant's preliminary review, which the Council believes, the existing
sever, water, storm water and transportation facilities have additional capacity for
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
nu�:13,std 000019 Page 9
development. The applicant will provide a detailed analysis of the impact of the proposed on
facilities, as part of the site development review application.
(u) Areas within once-quarter mile of public transit;
The Council finds as follows: Bus line #43 runs east west on Locust with a bus stop less
than 0.4 miles from this site. The#12 bus line on SW Barbur Boulevard runs frequently and
can be accessed within 0.3 miles from the site.
(7) Areas within one-quarter mile from neighborhood and general commercial
shopping centers or business and office centers; and
The Council finds that the subject site is located in close proximity to neighborhood shopping
on SW Hall Boulevard and to shopping centers on Highway 99W.
(8) Areas adjacent to either private or public permanent open space.
The Council finds that Metzger Park is located within %of a mile away from Metzger Park.
The Washington Square Regional Center Plan includes the creation of open space around
the wetlands, approximately one mile to the north of the subject site.
The Council concludes in weighing the above factors that the proposed medium-high
residential plan designation and the proposed R-40 zoning designation are supported by the
positive evaluation of the same set forth above.
B. The following factors will be determinants of the density ranges allowed in the
medium-high and high density planned areas should the City adopt more than
one high density zone.
(1) The topography and natural features of the area and the degree of possible
buffering from established low density residential areas;
The Council finds that the site is flat and should provide adequate buffering; however, the
buffering requirement will be covered in detail during the site development review process.
(2) The capacity of the services;
According to the applicant's preliminary review, which the Council believes, the existing
sewer, water, storm water and transportation facilities have additional capacity for
development. The Council further finds that the applicant will provide a detailed analysis of
the impact of the proposed on facilities, as part of the site development review application.
The Council finds that requests for comments were sent to service providers and no
objections were raised.
(3) The distance from public transit; and
The Council finds as follows: Bus line #43 runs east west on Locust with a bus stop less
than 0.4 miles from this site. The#12 bus line on SW Barbur Boulevard runs frequently and
can be accessed within 0.3 miles from the site.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018.and 000019 Page 10
(4) The relationship of the site to existing neighborhood and general commercial
centers and office and business centers.
The Council finds that the subject site is located within one mile from a variety of commercial
and office centers (SW Hail Boulevard, SW Pacific Highway, SW Locust Street, SW
Greenburg Road, SW Cascade Avenue, and SW Nimbus Drive).
The Council concludes in weighing the above factors that the proposed medium-high
residential plan designation and the proposed R-40 zoning designation are supported by the
positive evaluation of the same set forth above.
COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS:
Procedures for Decision-Making: Quasi-Judicial Corrnprehensive plan Amendments.
Zone Changes and Variances: Chapter 18.390.060 establishes procedures for
consideration of legislative and quasi-judicial changes to the provisions of the
Comprehensive plan, implementing ordinances and maps. Section 18.30.390(G)
lists the factors upon which the planning Commission and City Council shall base
their decisions. The factors and Council findings are as follows:
18.370.010 Variances
C.Approval process and standards.
2. The Director shall approve with conditions, or deny an application for a variance
based on finding that the following criteria are satisfied:
a. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of
this title, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other
properties in the same zoning district or vicinity;
With respect to Variances 1&2, the Council finds as follows: The current setback standard
for sideyard setbacks is 35 feet and the applicant requests the setbacks for the north and
south sideyard be reduced to 10 feet. The proposed setback of 10 feet at the north abuts
a 35-foot bermed and landscaped strip, which then abuts an access road to the apartment
complex. The property to the north, upon which the driveway into the St. James
apartments is located, is over 70 feet wide. The proposed setback of 10 feet to the south
abuts a single-family residence, but is buffered by existing trees and the driveway to the
residence. This boundary is also exposed to the least amount of building area since it
faces the courtyard of the proposed development. In addition, the applicant will be
required to meet standards for providing a buffer as part of the site development review
application.
The Council concludes as follows: When the Washington Square Regional Center plan is
eventually implemented, there will be no required setbacks for the sideyards and rear
yards. Because of the forthcoming changes to the setbacks,there is no material detriment
to the purposes of the City's Development Code or to other policies and standards, which
have been discussed elsewhere in these findings, nor to properties in the Regional Center
area or the vicinity of the subject site.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos.'CPA,2000-00002; ZON 200000001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 9e
With respect to Variance 3, the Council finds as follows: The setback requirement for the
rear yard is 35 feet. The proposed setback of 20 feet at the west abuts the trash disposal
and garage area of a multi-family housing complex.
The Council concludes that, under the Washington Square Regional Center plan, there
would be no minimum setbacks required and the maximum setback would be 20 feet in
the front and zero in the back. Again, because of the forthcoming changes to the
setbacks, there is no material detriment to the purposes of the City's Development Code
or to other policies and standards, which have been discussed elsewhere in these
findings, nor to properties in the Regional Center area or the vicinity of the subject site
Variance 4-The code requirement of the applicant for parking is 46 spaces and the
applicant requests that amount to be reduced to 31 spaces. According to the applicant's
i'iarrative, which the Council believes, the proposed parking count of 31 rather than 46
spaces is a benefit to adjacent properties and the area since less impervious surface will
be developed. According to the applicant's traffic study which the Council believes (refer
to Exhibit L), low-income housing projects require fewer parking spaces than typical multi-
family housing projects. The planning staff had recommended that a condition of approval
for the variance is that the applicant, as part of the tenant lease agreement, restrict each
tenant to one car. The City Planning Commission amended the proposed condition to limit
each unit to one parking space instead of limiting one space to each tenant, and the
Council concludes, as did the staff with the Planning Commission, that this revised
condition meets the need to assure that sufficient parking is available. If more parking is
required, as evidenced by excessive on-street parking or neighborhood congestion then
the applicant will be required to furnish staff with a lease showing where secure space for
added parking is provided. The applicant has agreed to the limit of one car per apartment
unit.
b. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or
shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the applicant has no
control, and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning
district;
With respect to Variances 1,2,&3, the Council finds as follows: The setback requirements
for the R-40 zone of 35 feet at the north, south, and west are sufficiently restrictive to
render development of the site in a manner to meet the Regional Center Plan unfeasible.
One reason for the 35 foot setback is to protect single-family homes; however, all parcels
adjacent to this site are zoned R-12, a multi-family zone, and the surrounding uses are
apartments, a wide driveway, and one single-family rental house. The setbacks proposed
of 10 foot side yard and 20 foot front and rear yards produce a buildable site area of
26,500 feet while the current setbacks would yield a buildable area of only 15,000 square
feet. The current setback would also prohibit the applicant to include amenities such as,
open spaces or a courtyard on this site, which would make it a quality development. The
applicant also contends that, under the current R-12 zone, a minimum of 9 units per acre
would have to be constructed because of the new requirement that new development
must be built at 80% of the minimum density standard. The eventual implementation of the
Washington Square Regional Center represents a special circumstance because the
applicant would not have to build 35-foot setbacks.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Fite Nos, CPA 20Cv-00002; ZON 2000.00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Page 12
With respect to Variance 4, the Council finds that the applicant's traffic study (refer to
Exhibit L) demonstrates that affordable housing projects, such as this one, do not require
as much park-Ing as typical millti_fnmily housing projects. In this case, the Council
concludes that the parking lot would be underutilized if the applicant were required to
construct the required number of parking spaces.
C. The use proposed will be the same as permitted under this title and City
standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is reasonably
possible while permitting reasonable economic use of the land;
With respect to Variances 1,2,&3, the Council finds as follows: The proposed use is
permitted in the R-40 zone. The variance will not result in a higher density housing
development than could otherwise be permitted, but would allow a better designed project
than could be constructed under the current standards for setbacks.
With respect to Variance 4, the Council finds as follows: it would be extremely difficult for
the applicant to create a viable project that meets the minimum density requirements and
the parking requirements without constructing a three-story building, or constructing
underground parking. Building a three-story building and/or underground parking would
be extremely cost prohibitive for this site, and would defeat the applicant's original purpose
of building an affordable housing project.
d. Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic,
drainage, dramatic land forms or parks will not be adversely affected any
more than would occur if the development were developed as specified in the
title;
With respect to Variances 1,2,&3, the Council finds as follows: The development of the
site with the proposed setbacks would not create conditions worse than if developed with
the required setbacks. The amount of land disturbance, trees removed, or traffic
generated will not be greater than would occur if the property were developed in such a
way that it met the setback requirements.
With respect to Variance 4, the Council finds as follows: The proposed site plan, with
fewer parking spaces, will have less paved area creating less water run-off, less traffic,
and a more attractive site.
e. The hardship is not self-imposed and the variance requested is the minimum
variance, which would alleviate the hardship;
The Council finds as follows: The hardship is imposed by the requirement to meet setback
standards that were put in place to protect and buffer single-family detached homes from
higher density apartments. Not only is that not the case in this location, but the City has
adopted a plan that would eliminate the restrictive setback requirements on this property,
once the plan is fully implemented.
With respect to Variances 1,2,&3, the Council finds as follows: The hardship is imposed
by the relatively small site and the restrictions placed on the applicant who is using
government funding for the project. Small sites are normally developed with fewer units.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001;and VAR 2000-000014,000017,
000018.and 000019 Page 13
Under the Washington Square Regional Center Plan design standards, the applicant
would not have to apply for a variance on the setbacks.
Witha a.. "i.,.:.. A ♦6... n.+.,....il n.10 -a fnlln.a : Cinnn #hn nrnien4 Y�iill hc. on
NVith respect LO Vla lance 'T. ll o 'CouncP .n ids ua .vu0v.. vn.vv a _ 1+ of • be w,
affordable housing project, the Council believes the applicant does not need to construct
the number of parking spaces as required ender the current standards. They indicate that
the combination of requirements of minimum density, parking and height restrictions make
it difficult to design a higher density project that creates a desirable living environment and
is economically feasible.
18.380.030 QUASI-JUDICIAL AMENDMENTS AND PROCEDURES TO THIS TITLE
AND MAP
A. uasi judicial amendments: Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be
undertaken by means of a Type Iii-PC procedure, as governed by Section
18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in Subsection D below. The
approval authority shall be as follows:
1. The Commission shall decide zone change applications which do not involve
comprehensive plan amendments;
The Council concludes that it will decide this application, because it is combined with a
comprehensive plan amendment.
2. The Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council on an application
for a comprehensive plan amendment and;
This application involves a comprehensive plan amendment, which the Council concludes
it will decide as part of these combined proceedings.
3. The Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council on a zone change
application, which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive
plan amendment. The Council shall decide the applications on the record as
provided by Section 18.390;
4.
The Council concludes that this application involves a zone change, as well as a
comprehensive plan amendment, and will be determined by the City Council as a part of
these combined proceedings.
C. Conditions of approval: A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial, approval,
or approval with conditions as provided by 18.390.050.
The Council concludes that it will approve this application with conditions and that this
overall standard has been met.
D. Standards for making quasi judicial decisions: A recommendation or a
decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a
quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards:
18.390.060 TYPE IV PROCEDURE
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 Page 14
This land use action involves quasi-judicial amendments therefore, as per Type IV
procedures two hearings, one before the Planning Commission and one before the City
Council were held. IVolice of the hearings was given to properly owners within 500 feet,
as well as to affected government agencies.
G. Decision-Making Considerations: The recommendation by the Commission and
the decision by the Council shall be based on the following factors:
5. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under the Oregon
Revised Statutes Chapter 197;
These standards are addressed in Section 11 under 'Statewide Goals' in this staff report.
The Council concludes that this standard has been met,
6. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable;
The State's Transportation Planning Rule is addressed in 'Statewide Goals' in the Goal
12, which is the Transportation Goal. The Council concludes that this standard has been
met.
7. Any applicable METRO regulations;
The Council finds as follows: In 1996, the Functional Plan designated the Washington
Square Mall and the area around it as a regional center; an area of intense commercial,
office, retail, and residential development. Under the 2040 plan, Tigard is required to
demonstrate how it can comply with the concepts demonstrated under the 2040 plan.
This proposed comprehensive plan amendment and rezone will create the potential for
higher density residential development than is currently allowed. The Washington Square
Regional Center Plan envisions this area to have higher density residential development
and Metro supported the adoption of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan.
According to Metro staff, "[t]his proposal is consistent with Metro's Affordable Housing
Technical Advisory Committee's recommendation to Metro Council...[I]t also supports the
2040 Growth Concept generally and the City of Tigard's Regional Center Plan specifically
(refer to Exhibit M)". The Council concurs with this analysis and concludes that this
standard has been met.
8. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and
These standards are addressed under 'Compliance with Plan Policies' above. The
Council concludes that this standard has been met.
9. Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances.
The implementing ordinances are contained in the Tigard Community Development Code,
which are addressed in this section of the staff report. The Council concludes that this
standard has been met.
As each of the standards set forth above have been met, the Council concludes that these
factors have been met.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS File Nos. CPA 2000.00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000.000014, 000017,
000018,and 000019 page 15
MiaGellamm
The Council finds as follows: Staff received two letters (Exhibits N and O)from a Metzger
resident, Trl iriy Knnwrlac raising concerns with this application. She raises a number of
concerns regarding environmental impacts of this application. As previously mentioned,
no delineated wetlands exist on this site and it is not located within the boundary of the
100-year floodplain. During site development review, the applicant will be required to
address issues of tree mitigation, buffering, traffic impacts, and landscaping. The Council
believes the response to Ms. Knowles' letters prepared by the testimony and
correspondence of Ed Murphy, a professional planning consultant.
Overall Conclusion
The Council co^chides th-at the applicant has met all applicable statewide goals,
comprehensive plan policies, Metro Functional Plan, and development codes and,
therefore approves the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, zone change. With
respect to -the applications for variances, the Council approves the same with
conditions.+The condition of approval relates solely to the variance from the parking
requirements and is that each tenant would be allocated one parking space, or the
applicant would give staff a copy of a lease for overflow parking for this project.
EXHIBITS: -
EXHIBIT A: Map of parcels where notice was sent of application
EXHIBIT B: Letter from Sheila Greenlaw-Fink dated July 26, 2000
EXHIBIT C: Affidavit of mailing
EXHIBIT D: Request for comments from Oregon Division of State Lands
EXHIBIT E: Request for comments from USA
EXHIBIT F: Request for comments from Tigard Police Department
EXHIBf i G: Request for comments from Tigard Water Department
EXHIBIT H: Request for comments from Oregon Public Utilities Commission
EXHIBIT I: Letter from the Tigard-Tualatin School District
EXHIBIT J: Letter from ODOT dated September 1, 2000
EXHIBIT K: Request for Comments from Tri-Met
EXHIBIT L: Applicant's parking study
EXHIBIT M: Request for comments from Metro
EXHIBIT N: Letter from Trudy Knowles dated August 28, 2000
EXHIBIT O: Letter from Trudy Knowles dated September 1, 2000
EXHIBIT P: Letter from Thomas J. Murphy dated August 31, 2000
EXHIBIT Q: Applicant's narrative
EXHIBIT R Additional exhibits submitted by applicants at the September 18'h Planning
Commission Hearing
EXHIBIT S Draft planning commission minutes
EXHIBIT T Letter from Ed Sullivan, dated September 21, 2000
EXHIBIT U Letter from Pietro Ferrari, dated September 19, 2000
Ars„ see
I\Jot-e : 7lea5e See p0nn'totJ ?�t Page-
a 4
"PO1,91plOD Cent,l
e. nm+P3 a-
Y la of-chis c+ctu-
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS He Nos. CPA 2000-00002; ZON 2000-00001; and VAR 2000-000014, 000017, me-,Lf
000018,and 000019 Page 16
R
4z a
v: �1
Ab
a =' m
HALL BLVD
o
s
m
ca
fill
PNM
o so
HALL BLVD
LO�`