Ordinance No. 78-35 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 78-
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO AN APPLICATION BY
HARLEY R. ADAMS FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ZONING MAP OF THE
CITY OF TIGARD CHANGING THE ZONE DISTRICT OF A TRACT OF LAND AT
THE INTERSECTION OF S.W. KATHERINE AND TIGARD STREETS AND DEPICTED
ON WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX MAP 2S1 2BB, TAX LOT 100 FROM CITY OF
TIGARD R-7 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO M-4 P.D. INDUSTRIAL PARK
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND ADOPTING THE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A, B, AND
C, AND FIXING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ?
i
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
_ z
SECTION 1: Finding that the lands hereinafter described have been
heretofore and are now classified as City of Tigard R-7,
and further finding that pursuant to prescribed procedures, the
_ above-stated application was heard in public hearing by the Tigard
Planning Commission on April 18, 1978, and all interested persons
f were there and afforded an opportunity to be heard, and thereafter
the Planning Commission filed its report with the City Recorder,
which recommended approval, a copy thereof hereto attached and by
reference made a part hereof, the Council adopts the followin, !
substantive findings:
A. That the application conforms with NPO #2, as adopted;
and
B. That the applicant has shown a community need for the
r proposed development on the site herein described; and 4
t
C. That it has been shown there would be no adverse impact
from the proposed development on adjacent sites, occupants,
or activities or on the immediate neighborhood that cannot ;
be mitigated successfully by attachment of appropriate
conditions; and G'
D. That with the attachment of appropriate conditions the
provision of services will be readily available on the
site.
SECTION 2: THEREFORE, pursuant to the requirements of Chapter
18.88 of the Tigard Municipal Code, the applicant's
request for an amendment of the Tigard Zoning Map of 1970 to zone
those lands described in the attached Exhibit "A" for residential
planned development is hereby approved subject to the provision
of 18.56, Planned Unit Development Zone of the Tigard Municipal
Code as embodied in or exhibited by the documents submitted and
identified as follows:
n
Exhibit "A" - Legal Description
Exhibit "B" - Stuff Report
Exhibit "C" - General Plan and Program
Ordinance No. 78-
ZC 4-78
And furtf subject to the following conditions:
1 . If substantial construction or development has not
taken place within one (1) year of the effective
date of this zone change the property shall revert
back to the present R-7 zone.
2. A half street improvement to local street standards
be provided along the Katherine Street frontage (to
include meandering sidewalks and, if necessary, curb
to protect the existing trees) .
3. Five feet of right-of-way be dedicated along the
Katherine Street frontage for street improvement
purposes. The improvements shall be designed to protect
the large oak tree at the intersection of S.W. Katherine
and Tigard Streets.
4. That offices will be the primary use, with secondary
uses ancillary to the office uses and subject to the
following criteria.
a. Low traffic generators.
b. Low generators of noise.
c. Non-labor intensive.
d. Uses confined -to storage rather than manufacturing
assembly and processing.
5. That the developer agree to provide joint access with
Tax Lot 200 at such time as that lot is developed by
the Planned Development. Landscaping would be placed
within the area on Tax Lot 100 where the access width
is to occur. In order to assure future joint access
a joii.t access agreement shall be recorded with the
deed of Tax Lot 100.
6. That zero setback be required along the west property
line and five (5) foot setbacks along the south and
east property lines.
SECTION 3 This ordinance shall be effective on and after the
31st day after its passage by the Council and
approval of the Mayor.
PASSED: By ��,�mn, esus vote of all Council members present
this day of 1978, after being
read two times by number and title only.
Recorder City o igard
APPROVED: By the Mayor this .12 h day of 141a,41978.
Page 2
Ordinance No. 78 � � Mayor City of Ti a d
ZC 4-78"
EXHIBIT "A"
' c s
Beginning at an iron pipe at the Northwest
corner of Lot 22 of NORTH TIGARDVILLE ADDITION,
AMENDED, a duly recorded subdivision of t
Washington County, Oregon, running thence
South 0° 45' West along the Tlest line of said
Lot' 22, a distance of 184.3 feet to an iron
pipe; thence South 71° 40' cast 324.3 feet to
an iron pipe at the true place of beginning
of the tract to be •described- running thence
North 180 20' East 306.2 feet to an iron pipe
on the North line of Lot 21 of said NORTH
TIGARDVILLE ADDITION, AMENDED, thence South
89° 23' West along the North line of said
Lot 21 a distance of 116. 3 feet; •thence South
180 20' West 268.43 feet to a point which is
North 710 40' West 110 .feet from-the place of
beginning; thence South 71°. ! 0 ' East 110.0 feet
to the place of beginning, being situated in
the County of Washington, State of Oregon.
t
AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO:
Messrs. Harley R. Adams and
Mr. and Mrs. Richard A. Uffelman
11644 SW Pacific Hwy.
< x
Tigard, Oregon 97223 jp�
00 STATE OF OREQQ D
ry county of washinvon 3S : Y
1, Roger Than* n, Oimctor of Records
and Elections and Ex-Officio Recorder of Con-
veyanew for said eaunty, do hereby certify that
the within instrument of writint vaee received
and recorded in book of records
No.
of aid county
Witness spy hand and seal affixed.
ROGER THOMSSEN, Director of
Records & Elections
m
Auc 18 12 is PH"77
STAVF REPORT
AGENDA 5.2r
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION ���'Y��
April 18, 1978
Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room
10865 S.W. Walnut Street - Tigard, Oregon
f
Docket: Zone Change ZC 4-78
Request: For General Plan and Program Review of an Industrial Planned
Development and Zone Map Amendment from R-7 "Single Family.
Residential" to M-4 PD, "Industrial Park" Planned Development
on a .61 acre parcel.
Location:. Intersection of S.W. Katherine and Tigard Streets (Nash. Co.
Tax Map 2S1 2BB, Tax Lot 100) .
Applicant: Harley Adams {
I. Findings of Fact: i
1. The applicant is requesting general plan and program review
in accordance with Section 18.56.030 of the Tigard Municipal �
Code for a .61 acre industrial planned development at
the intersection of S. V. Katherine and Tigard Streets.
2. The site is designated on the NPO #2 Plan map as "Industrial"
(office) and currently zoned R-7 "Single Family Residential"
3. Section 18.56.010 of the Tigard Municipal Code states that:
Purpose. The purpose of the planned development district is
to provide opportunities to create more desirable environ-
ments through the application of flexible and diversified land
development standards under a comprehensive plan and program
professionally prepared. The planned development district
s intended to be used to, encourage the application of nciv
'techniques and nese technology to community development which
will result in superior living or development arrangements
with lasting values. It is further intended to achieve
economies in land development, maintenance, street systems,
and utility networks while providing building groupings for
privacy, usable and attractive open spaces, safe circulation,
and the general well-being of the inhabitants.
4. Section 18.56.030 of the Tigard municipal Code provides
for general development plan and program approval by the
Planning Commission after receiving approval in principle
of the preliminary plan and program and the applicant has
petitioned for an amendment of the zoning map in accordance
with Chapter 18.88.
S. Applicable language from the NPO #2 Plan text is as 'follows:
The relationship of this property to the adjacent industrial
z
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA 5,2
TIGARD PLANNING C0MIISSION
April 18, 1978
Page 2
• f
buildings (Tigard Industrial Park) renders these
properties undesirable for residential use and it is
recommended that these properties be used for office
-pace with the existing Tigard Industrial Park_ -Offices
should be located on this site with the greatest concern:
for compatibility with the adjacent residences and . .,
should include screening by means of fencing and land-
scaping. In addition, only single story buildings, ..in
scale with -the adjacent homes, should be permitted.
Vehicular access should be gained through the industrial
park rather than putting business traffic on Katherine
Street. A change in zone to permit this office use
should only be approved as- an M-4, Industrial Park zone, k
with an overlying PD, Planned Development zone. This
would ensure that the property would be developed
according to the site development plan approved at the
time of the zone change. A condition of the zone change
should stipulate that if the project, is not constructed, j
both the ISI-4, and PD zones will revert to the original
R-7 residential zone. Once the Planned Development has
expired', the underlying industrial zone could be
developed with any of the uses permitted in that zone.
t
6. On March 7, 1978, the Tigard Planning Commission approved
the preliminary plan and program for this proposed E:
development subject to the following conditons:
1. A half street improvement to local street standards 4
be provided along the Katherine Street frontage
for Phase 1 (to include meandering sidewalks and
if necessary, curb to protect the existing trees) .
2. Five feet of right of way be dedicated along the
Katherine Street frontage for street improvement
purposes. In the• event that the three large
street trees along the Katherine Street frontage lie
within the necessary right of way, the improvements
will be designed to protect them.
3. That the site plan be revised to show offices as the.
primary use in Phase 1, with secondary uses ancillary
to the office's uses and subject to the following
criteria:
a. Low traffic generators
b Low generators of noise
c. Non-labor intensive
d. Uses confined to storage rather than
manufacturing, assembly and processing.
4. That Phase 1 develop with a 301 wide access from
SW Katherine Street. Developer agree to provide
joint access with Tax Lot 200 at such time as that
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA 5.2
TIGAI?D PLANNING COMIMISSION
April 18, 1978
Page 3
tax lot is developed by the Planned Development.
Landscaping would be placed within the area on
Tax Lot 100 where the reduction in the access width
is to occur.
IV. 5. That Phase 1 be required to use a zero setback
along the west property line and 5 foot setbacks
along the south and east property lines with no
increase to the square footage of the building.
This is not intended to provide for a larger
building, but rather more landscaping on the
Katherine Street side.
iII . Staff Findings and Observations:
1. The site is currently occupied by a single family residence
which would be razed to make way for a 10,500 square foot
building. Surrounding land use is industrial to the
north, east and south and single family to the west.
2. The applicant has essentially incorporated into his general
Plan and program the conditions- of preliminary plan
approval with the following exception:
Condition 2.
4
. in the event that the three large trees along the
Katherine Street frontage lie within the necessary right
of way, the improvement will be designed to protect them.
,t
The applicant has surveyed the property and has found that
there are two fir trees well Within the right of way and
would therefore have to be removed to facilitate the t
necessary street improvements. F
III . Conclusionary Findings:
1. The applicant has essentially incorporated into his
general plan and program the Planning Commission require-
ments
equire
ments of preliminary plan approval. ;
. E
2. The proposed single story building is in scale with the
surrounding neighborhood and the allowed uses will help +o
assure compatibility with adjoining properties as
required by the NPO plan. Vehicular access will be gained
close to the intersection of S.W. Katherine and Tigard
Streets, thus helping to reduce the traffic impacts onthe
established neighborhood.
4
I
E
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA 5.2
TIGARD PLANNING C0MMISSION
April 18, 1978
Page 4
IV. Staff Recommendation:
Based on staff findings of fact and conclusionary findings
staff recommends approval of the general plan and program and ..
zone map amendment. from R-7 to M-=4 PD with.the following
conditions:
1. Yf substantial construction or development has not taken
place within one (1) year of the effective date of this
zone change the property shall revert back to. the present
R-7 zone.
2. A half street improvement to local street standards be
provided along the Katherine Street frontage (to include
meandering sidewalks and, if necessary, curb to protect
the existing trees) .
3. Five feet of right of way be dedicated along the Katherine
Street frontage for street improvement purposes. The ;
improvements will be designed to protect the large oak
tree at the intersection of Stix Katherine and Tigard Streets.
4. That offices will be the primary use, with secondary uses
ancillary to the office uses and subject to the following
criteria:
a. Low traffic generators
b. Low generators of noise
C. Non-labor intensive
d. Uses confined to storage rather than manufacturing
assembly and processing.
. 5. That the developer agree to provide joint `access with Tax
Lot 200 at such time as that lot is develop-ed by the..
Planned Development. Landscaping would be placed within
the area on Tax Lot 100 where the access width is to occur.
In order to assure future joint access a joint access
agreement shall be recorded with the deed of Tax Lot 100.
6. That zero setback be required along the west property line
and five (5) foot setbacks along the south and east
property lines.
ZONE CHANGE NARRATIVE
(Katherine Street Group)
r'v
i
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The proposed plan is as designated by the Tigard Comprehensive
Plan, N.P.O. #2. The plan asks for M-4, P-D/Office, which is what
our plan provides, relating to the adjacent residential uses in
bulk, placement and design of the buildings.
COMNUMITY NEED & PUBLIC BENEFIT:
Office/warehouse use is the only appropriate use for this site.
It is on the edge of an industrial area, adjacent to residential,
and surrounded on 2 sides by an existing warehouse. Because of this
warehouse, and, the impact of its large blank walls on the adjacent
properties, residential use is not appropriate.
The community will be benefitted by filling in this "hole" and by
providing a project that relates to the street and to the adjacent
residences. The project will also provide services for the community,
by its occupants, and employment for the community. The fire hazard
will be reduced by providing new buildings, built under U.B.C. , in
Fire Zone 2. The. sanitation will be improved because the project will
connect to public sewer rather than be on septic tanks, and public
safety will be improved by reducing by one the number of driveways
off the site and by providing a wider street with a sidewalk for
pedestrians. The community tax base will also be increased by the
higher value of the proposed buildings.
18.56.020 Preliminary Development Plan and Program
1. PLAN ELEMENTS
A. Proposed land uses and densities
Proposing office and warehouse uses with parking and land-
skaping. We are proposing a total of 24,890 sq.ft. + of
'building of which approximately 2,280 sq.ft. are on the
second floor, a mezzanine level, of the office space. The
second floors occur with 600 sq.ft. Phase I, 560 sq.ft-, in
Phase II and 1120 sq.ft® in Phase III. This leaves a total
ground coverage of office space of 7,920 sq.ft.
The building coverage is broken down according to the table
below:
Phase Site sq.ft. sq.ft. Whse. Total Bldg. Total Blds.
�Pp«� sq.ft. sq.ft. % of Site
I 26,572 1,600 8,640 10, 240 38.5
II&III 35,720 4,320 6,050 10,370 29.0
IV 26,572 2,.000 - 2,.000 7.5
72,310 7,920 14,690 22,610 31,3
+ 2,280 2nd floor
24,890 -total bldg.
B. Building types and intensities
We propose one small office building and one larger building
with both office and warehouse use. The bulk of this building
is warehouse with the office section attached.
C. Circulation pattern Two driveways .with parking off -each end as shown on the plan.
D. Parks, playgrounds, open spaces -
None are provided on this plan, . but it should be noted that a
park is nearby to the south with pedestrian .access through
Karol Court.
- 2 - ,
`• I (fit... .
2 -
E. Existing natural features -
The site is generally level, sloping gently to the south.
There are three large trees on the N.E. corner of the site,
2 firs and 1 oak, apparently in the road right-of-way. We
have shown that these trees would remain and would like to
work with the appropriate agencies in the City to see if
these trees can be saved.
2. PROGRAM ELEMENTS
A. Applicants market analysis of proposed use to be provided as
necessary with the "General Development Plan and Programa .
B. Proposed ownership pattern -
Ownership pattern would remain a:s is, Phase I, Phase II & III,
and Phase IV each owned separately.
C. Operation and maintenance proposal -
To be maintained under private ownership, as shown by Phase I,
Phase II & III and Phase IV,
D. Waste disposal facilities -
At this time we expect to gain an easement through the ware-
house property to the south. We will connect sanitary sewer
to the public line and drain storm water into Fanno creek.
E. Lighting -
Area lighting will be provided on the building.
F. Water supply -
Connect to public water line on Kathrine Street.
G. Public -transportation
None provided,
H. Community facilities -
None provided.
I. General timetable and development -
Phase I to be built within a year and the remaining phases to
follow according to the requirements of the owners.
;� - 3
3
Special Note
Phase I: WrCT=I are shown for the purpose of land use calcu-
lations. Projections on these parcels are without the partici-
pation of •the owner. Based on our experience with the develop-
ment of similar parcels, the percentages of building, landscape,•
parking, etc. , will be the same no matter who develops this
parcel.
• j
z
I
Y
fc`
S
f
r
4 ,
Accompaning the M4 zone change is the additional request to vary
setback requirements on Lots 1 QCJ• and On Lot �bC1 , we
request a zero setback where 20' is required. This is as much to the
advantage of the development of this lot as it is to the adjacent.
Lot This will allow them to have a zero setback also, and
give more of a "flow" to the buildings in their respective phases of
development, rather than a bunch of patchy little buildings developed
lot by lot.
On Lot —=34ap; we show a 10' setback, this actually was intended
to be a 15' . It is our intent to show the proposed building on this
lot as near a residential scale as possible. The 50' setback called
for, front and back, would practically wipe out this parcel of land.
We feel the blending of zones we are attempting to promote is
accomplished both by the reduction of building scale, and the reduction
of setback scale.
i
t
s
it
F
9
.:1 +► INy
Sol
eOwl
F �
an
'1
` MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COIMISSION
April 18, 1978
Fowler Junior High School - .Lecture Room
10865 S.W. Walnut St . - Tigard, Oregon
I. Call to Order:
Meeting was called to order 7:40 Plti
2. Roll Call :
Present: Tepedino, Popp, Quimby, 'Wood, Rossman, Brian
Sakata
Excused Absence: Corliss
3. Approval of Minutes:
The minutes of April 4, 1978 were approved with the following
corrections: Tepedino stated at the top of page 6 "intelligence
or put something over"; ' Wood added two additional comments
under the discussion of the Church of God sign - 1) the
commission concurred that the church's proposed new sign was
acceptable and there was no need to review it prior to
construction and 2) they also agreed that all such signs (new
to replace previously approved ones) should be looked at by
the Planning Commission members.
4. Communications:
Staff stated there were none at this time.
5. Public Hearings:
5.1 ZONE CHANGE ZC 5-77 (Wedgewood) NPO ?
A request by Wedgewood Homes for a preliminary plan and program
review for a Planned Unit Development including 48 multiplex
units, 68 attached units and 232 detached units for a total of
348 units, and a zone map amendment from Washington County
RS-1 to City R7 PD, "Single Family Residential" Planned Development
on a 68.31 acre parcel at .the corner of SIV 135th and Walnut
Streets (Wash. Co. Tax Map_1S1 33D, Tax Lot 700 and 2Sl 4A,
Tax Lot 700) .
A. Staff Report: Read 'by Laws
B. Applicant 's Presentation
Gene Ginther, stated he has a close working relationship
with staff, and that this plan is intended for general
concept approval and the next step (plan and program)
would provide all details stated as missing by staff. He
explained major traff.ice circulation plan and modification
'�
r� .
MINUTES ..
TIGARD PLANNIN -,OMISSION `
April 18, 1978
Page ,2
John Cline, Pres. of Wedgewood Homes
stated that all- .units proposed -will be for sale and no
rentals, referring to a previous development on Murray .
Blvd. as examples of '.the quality of their homes• He
explained the location of townhouses to relate to
Greenway and also to provide indoor-outdoor .pool to
compensate for higher density. He presented slides of
the types of units that were proposedand stated the -
intent of, the frontage road was to provide privacy 'and
eliminate back yards on major streets. He also pointed
out their atteript to blend this development with the
natural environment.
*Wood questioned the impact on the schools stating that
Single Family would be the same as Single Family
Attached.
*Ginther 'stated his comments were based on several studies
(Reedville, Beaverton School District, Lake Oswego)
*Wood asked why the .school children generated by Single
Family a
Attached are the same as Single Family and and if there
was any reason not to assume the proposed larger attached
units would not generate the same children and- traffic
as the Single Family.
*Quimby questioned control of the storm water detention
system..and whether someone would be paid to control the
water release
Gordon McPherson, stated that the system is a passive system
and acts like a catch basin and doesn't require manual
control; he .showed a diagram and explained how the system
worked.
*Quimby asked where the overflow water would go.
*McPherson responded the water would be chanelled to the
natural watercourse from detention ponds. Road system
would also have catch basins which will follow minor
natural watercourse.
*Tepedino asked if the road run-off would be directed up
or downstream from the detention ponds.
*McPherson stated the system was designed to provide for
maximum control the flow depends on the terrain.,
*Sakata questioned the statement of no rentals
*Applicant stated that he could not stop the individual
from renting after he purchased it.
*Wood asked if there was any sort of control which could
be exerted over the conAi.tion of sale to eliminate the
rental problem
*The applicant stated they will only sell one unit per
individual. _
C. Public Testimony:
a. Proponent's
Reuben nacklin, representing Sunamoto:'s asked that
consideration be given to property owner's right to sell
for the highest and best. use.
■
MINUTES
TIGARD INNING( XIMISSION C
April 18, 1975
Page 3
b. Opponent's
Mr, and kfrs. Sch'rauger submitted a letter for the
Planning Commission registering their opposition to the.
placement of multi-units citing increased traffic
problems.
Mr. Selliken also .submitted a letter of opposition.
Richard Bodyfelt, acting for Bonnie Owens, Chairwom n
of NPO n7, submitted a statement in' opposition to the
proposal because the NPO #7 plan has not yet been adopted.
Lavelle Helm, 13280 SW Walnut asked what would be across
from her home, expressed opposition to multi-plex.units,
asked what type of entrance and where would it be from
Walnut, .-asked how many 10,000 square foot lots there
would be.
Laws pointed out where multi-plex units would be and
where access wd'uld be.
Applicant could not say at this time the number and size of
all of the lots and stated that would be addressed in the
general plan and program.
Richard Bodyfelt , questioned the ability of Walnut to
handle the increased traffic and cited dangerous access
to Walnut due to terrain. He also questioned the placement
of multiplexes in a Single Family corner, and stated
he would prefer locating them more centrally in the
development. He submitted a petition reprresenting '52
residents of the area in opposition.
Bibianne Scheckla, 10980 SW Fairhaven Way, opposed multi-
family .units abutting existing single family units and
added that the development was not sensitive to existing
backyards of residents.
John Overbill, 13320 SN Walnut, was concerned over the
impact of the development in relation to the extension of
135th.
D. Staff Recommendations:
Based on staff findings and conclusionary findings, staff
recommends approval of the preliminary plan and program
and that the general plan and program address the following
points when submitted.
1 A half street improvement to county collector standards
(44' pavement 8 foot sidewalks be provided along the
135th street frontage. )
■
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING X111ISSION
April 18, 1978
Page 4
2. A half street improvement to county collector'standards
(40' pavement 8 foot sidewalk or an equivalent
improvement 'per" Wash. Co. Public Works Department)
approval be provided along the Walnut Street frontage.
3. A landscape architect (with acceptable expertise) be
included on the design team Xor the planned development.
:5
4.• A detailed landscape plan be submitted nailing part icularl:,*-_`'
attention to drainage areas, the buffex on SAY 135th and
SIS' Walnut, street trees, sidewalk locations and
landscape islands within the cul-de-sac street's.
5. The street tree and sidewalk plan for.. SW_ 130-th be. co-
ordinated with the Summer Lake.Planned Development.
6. The •,units along SW 135th and Walnut Streets be allowed
a minimum of 12 feet frontyard setback for the house
and 20 feet yard setback for the garages.
7. The applicant work with staff toenlarge the width of
the buffer strip wherever possible.
8. An 8 foot wide asphalt pedestrian path be provided
through the "greenway".
9. The number of attached single family units,
approximate lot areas and proposed setbacks and access
points be shown.
104. That Phase II be subject to Planning Commission review.
REBUTTAL
Ginther, Applicants Engineer, was agreeable to staff
recommendation and addressed some of the concerns raised
in opposition. concerning multi-plexes in .which he referred
to ,the NPO 7 plan and framework plan and he .also addressed
the problems on Walnut.
Scheckla spoke for the people on 129th, having been asked
by Mr. Allori .
E. Commission Discussion:
Wood questioned the validity of the data on school and
traffic impacts based on proposed types of attached units.
He felt there was no reason not to expect similar impact
as detached units; he .felt allowing the full 348 units' as
proposed was a serious question; questioned the-2-story
units backing up to single story; recommended reducing
density back or near the underlying zone and increasing
the size of detention ponds (50% error factor) to ensure
sufficient capacity. Other than that, he was generally in
favor.
f
MINUTES 4
TIGARD PLANNING C011MISSION j
April 18, 1978
Page 5
Rossman, opposed based. on the NPO 7 opposition and statement
of surrounding residents.
• ,T•.
Brian favored the general concept but saw the need for
reducing density and additional open recreation space.
Sakata questioned the density and the very small 3000
square foot lots for multiplex units; also was concerned .
by the impact on Beaverton School District and referred
to ,a letter from Walt White.
Quimby expressed concern for 'school impact; the multiplex
lots were too small; and stated there was not enough play
area for. children within the development.
Tepedino stated all of his concerns had been expressed.
Popp expressed concern for density and up/down units;
impact on the surrounding single family area; favored
common wall units but more single family style area, not
the typical area for multi-units; favored the basic concept
but should be lowered density.and more recreation area,
more single family character and there was a need to
address' a detailed detention system as. part of the final
plan approval.
Wood moved for approval based on staff findings and rec--
commendations and adding the following conditions; 11)
That construction abutting 129th and 200 feet north of
Walnut Street be limited to single family attached or
detached units.
12) The overall density of the project be more closely
brought in compliance with. the underlying R-7 zone.
13) The applicant must show justification for a higher
density than the R-7 zone, but in no case more than 300
units.
14) That the reduction in the multiplex density be used.
to expand the open space area within the development for
both active and passive recreation.
15) That storm water detention be designed to 150° of the
100 year flood limits.
Brian second the motion
It was approved 5-2 Sakata and Rossman_ voting no.
5.2 ZONE CHANGE ZC 4-78 (Harley Adams) NPO 2
A request by Harley Adams for a general plan and program
review of an industrial Tanned development and a zone map
amendment from R 7 "Single. family Residential" to IbI-4 PD
"Industrial Park" Planned Development on a .61 acre parcel
at the intersection of SW Katherine and Tigard Streets
(Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 213B, Tax Lot 100) .
MrNUTES, .
TIGARD PLAN,
C ;ISSJ
.
April 18, 1978
Page 6
A. Staff Report: Read by Laws
B. Applicant's Presentation:
Tom Hamman, Project Architect, spoke to changes from the
preliminary plan and the modified shape of the building
with a better and more flexible design about 200 feet
less floor area which was much lower than the .originai. - 5
C. Public Tbstimony:
None
D. Staff Recommendations:
Based on staff findings of fact and conclusionary findings
staff recommends approval of the general plan and program
and zone map amendment from R-7 to M-4 PD with the follotiving
conditions:
1. If substantial construction or development has not taken
place within one (1) year of the effective date of this
zone change the property shall revert back to the present
R-7 zone.
2. A half street improvement to local street standards be
provided along the Catherine Street frontage (to include i
meandering sidewalks and, if necessary, curb to protect s
the existing trees) .
3. Five feet of right of way be dedicated along the Katherine
Street frontage for street improvement purposes. The
improvements will be designed to protect the large oak
tree at the intersection of SW Katherine and Tigard Streets.
4. That offices will be the -primary use, with secondary
uses ancillary to the office uses and subject. to the
following criteria:
a. Low traffic generators.
b. Low generators of noise
c: Non-labor intensive.
d. Uses confined to storage rather than manufacturing
assembly and processing. -
5. That the developer agree to provide joint access with Tax
Lot 200 at such time as that lot is developed by the
Planned Development. Lanscaping would be placed within
the area on Tax Lot 100 where the access width is to occur.
In order to assure future joint access a joint access
agreement shall be recorded with the deed of Tax Lot 100.
6. That zero setback be required along the west property line
and five (5) foot setbacks along the south and east
property lines.
,
E. Commission Discussion:
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COM!'JISSION
` April 18, 1978
Page 7.
Brian moved for approval based on staff recommendations
and findings.
Wood seconded and the vote for approval was unanimous.
5. 3 ZONE CHANGE ZC 8-78 (C & C Construction Co. ) NPO 3
A request by C & C Construction Co, for a zone map
amendment from Washington Coun :y RU-20 to city CP: .
"Commercial/Professional on a 4.35 acre parcel at the
intersection of Beef Bend Rd, and Pacific Highway (Wash.
Co. Tax Map 2S1 10A, Tax Lot 3900) .
Popp asked for clarification on annexation status.
Laws clarified the Boundary Commission action if final
unless conditioned to voter approval; the Boundary
Comm, on 2/8/78 did not condition approval therefore
constitutes final action.
A. Staff Report : Laws read.
B. Applicant 's Presentation:
Lester Tlarty, representing C & C Mountain Park Health
Care, stated that prior to construction a pump station
would be approved and installed to pump sewer- to a
city line when a gravity system is available.
Becky Mansfield, 16325 Bull Mountain Rd. , administrator
of King City Convalescent Home, stated the need for
such a facility.
Popp explained that testimony would be appropriate E
for the second hearing item on the Conditional Use.'
Fred Anderson, 11550 Bull Mtn. Road, questioned the'
status of the NPO plan and if proposal was to bring
into conformance.
r
Laws stated yes.
C. Public Testimony:
None
I
D. Staff Recommendations:
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusionary Findings,
staff recommends approval, subject to the following
conditions:
MINUTES w
TIGARD PLANNING COIUsIISSIOrI
April 18, 1978
Page8
1. That 10 feet of additional right of way be
dedicated along SLY Beef Bend Road for the portion .
of the property .Where the existing right of way is
only 40 feet; and that the applicant ,file with the .:.
city recorder anon-remonstrance agreement against
a future Local Improvem�:nt District (LID) for
street improvements to SW Beef Bend Road.
2. That no development occur on the site until adequate
sanitary sewer service is available to the site, ;.
E. Commission Discussion:
Quimby made a motion for denial citing the lack of
sewer services available at this time and in the near +
future.:
Tepedino seconded the motion.
Wood disagreed with the motion stated the problem
had been addressed by staff recommendations and can
be handled as part of the development proposal .
The motion failed, with Quimby voting yes.
Wood made a motion for approval based on staff findings.
and recommendations.
Rossman seconded
The motion passed 6-1 with Quimby voting no.
5.4 CONDITIONAL USE CU 8 -78 (C & C Const. Co. ) NPO 3.
A request by
C & C Const. Co. fora conditional use
permit to construct a Home for the Aged ina ,Medium
High Density (Washington County. RU 20 Zone) on a 4.35
acre parcel at the intersection of SW Beef Bend Road
and Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 10A, Tax
Lot 3900) .
Laws recommended tabling the proposal pending resolution '
of sanitary sewer service and asked commissioners whether
they wished to hear the staff report or table.
Applicant wished to have the item heard anyway.
Brian moved to table the item.
Quimby seconded.
!'epedino was generally opposed to tabling saying the
applicant presents the case and takes a chance on denial
and would like to hear the evidence.
' c
HI NUTESI
TIGARD PLANNING COI+PrIISSION
April 18, 1978
Page 9
Wood wished to hear the item and make a decision on
the basis of the evidence presented.
Popp felt the applicant was entitled to hear and be
able to address all the issue not just sewer.
Motion ;failed 4-3, Tepedino, Popp and Wood, voting no-;
Brian, Sakata, Quimby, Rossman voting yes.
A. Staff Report : Read by Laws who also distributed '
Tetters received from the Mayor of King City.
Sakata asked if there was a need for a similar use inter-
pretation prior to acting on the Conditional Use.
Wood asked what zone a health care facility would be in.
It was the consensus of the Commission that it was a
similar use.
B. Applicant's Presentation:
Lester Marty; C & C Const. Co. , and Mountain Park
Health Care, explained what the proposal consisted of;
limited supervision home for the aged, not a hospital ,
not actually an apartment but provides an intermediate
step in housing for the aged at lesser cost than a
convalescent home. He explained what they are milling
to do to solve the sewer issue; provide and maintain
a pump station on an approved basis; they will also
provide any necessary plans to handle drainage.
C. Public Testimony:
a. Proponent's
Norman Glen, Owner of Property, . stated that. they were
under the impression that sewer can be provided by
pump station and annexed to the city to obtain sewer.
b. Opponent's
Estell Cook, 11510 SW Crown Dr. , King City, stated
the applicant has not adequately addressed sewer and
drainage problems.
Beverly Froudy, SW Bull Mtn. Rd. , Chairman of County
i Planning Organization for Bull Mountain, expressed
concern over the Road and a major safety problem at
Frontage Road and Pac Hwy.
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
April. 18, 1978
Page 10
Fred Anderson, 11550 8W Bull Utn. Rd. , stated he was
speaking for the neighborhood.
Popp asked if he had written permission to represent .
them and if not he could only speak for himself. .
Andersop objected to that ruling 'but said he' was here _ ~
for himself anyway and showed slides to explain traffic.
problems at Frontage Road and Pac Hwy. and Beef. Bend; .
also was concerned over the provision of sewer .services
as related to NPO Policy 21 (provision of adequate services)
including storm drainage; he also questioned the height
of proposed structures in relation to surrounding low
density residential; opposed to piece-meal approach to
solving. of problems.
Dan Forest, 8989 SSV McDonald, was not opposed to the
general concept was just concerned about transportation
issues and protection of possible residents (pedestrians)
and they needed more details to adequately judge the
proposal.
D. Staff Recommendations:
1. Since the provision of sanitary sewer to the site .
has not been resolved, staff recommends tabling the
request until adequate sewer service has been
guaranteed.
2. The sanitary sewer service is determined not to be
available, staff recommends denial.
3. If sanitary sewer service is determined to be
available and a lift station is approved, based on
the findings of fact and conclusionary findings,
staff recommends approval, subject to the following
conditions:
a. That a detailed site and design plan be submitted
for Design Review approval, to include access,
parking, landscaping, pedestrian pathways, on-site
recreational facilities (geared to the needs of
the residents) and a signing program.
b. That, prior to submission for Design Review, the
applicant show proof that storm water out-fall
will be accepted by the appropriate agency and/
or adjacent properties, and that the applicant
submit a detailed storm drainage detention plan
for approval by the Building and Engineering
Departments.
MINUTES (�
TIGARD ]PLANNING COHNIISSION
April 18, 1978'
Page 11
c. That a half street improvement be made, to
collector street standards (60 feet of right of
way and 44 feet of pavement), on Beef Bend Road;
and that a street improvement, to State Highway
Department standards, be made to the Frontage
Road.
'Popp entered letter from Mayor-King City - not-
opposed
ot opposed to project, only concerned over.sewer '
and drainage. - .
Rebuttal:
Bob Dietrick - Architect, addressed concerns raised
, in opposition concerning storm drainage can and
'will be controlled not to exceed natural rate, not
high traffic generator, sewer problem has been
addressed at length and is now a political issue
as to the ultimate solution, and building designed
to take advantage of terrain,
Rossman moved for approval with staff recommendation
7#3,
Motion failed for a lack of second.
Wood concerned over traffic problems also height
limitation without knowledge of visual effects.
Favored tabling.
Tepedino stated that Commission must make decision
on evidence presented and should not defer decision
because of lack of adequate submission sewer,
drainage, traffic, safety, height of structure all
not adequately addressed.
Tepedino moved for denial, motion seconded by Quimby.
Wood concerned over denial because most of the
testimony was not in opposition only addressed
concerns for items that could be conditions of
approval.
Popp favors tabling to allow addressing all issues .
Motion defeated 4-3 (No) (Yes)
Popp Tepedino
Wood Quimby
BrianSakata
Rossman
S
Brian moved to table pending the resolution of
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
April 18, 1978
Page 12
sanitary sewer and the- submission by the
applicant of a storm water detention plan. ..
Popp secohded.
Wood requested that the motion be amended to
include an assessment of •traffic impacts and-
ta drawing be submitted reflecting the visual
effects of the height of the buildings to•
adjacent properties.
Motion was approved 4-3 (No) (Yes) 4
Tepedino Wood
Quimby Popp
Sakata Brian
Rossman t
6. Other Business: I
Similar use interpretation on item 5.",. Staff
requested of the Commission to determine if a retail
sales and rental store being proposed at the intersection
of Canterbury Square and Gaarde Street was a similar
use as a hardware or department which are permitted
uses in a C4 Zone .
Herb Jandt explained proposed project, that it would be
considerably smaller than typical rental operation 3,000-
4,000 square feet as opposed to 20,000 square feet -
combined retail/rental.. One area devoted strictly to
ski rental and sales, plus complete hardware/department
store.
Quimby stated she was not sure if it was similar in use.
Sakata stated it should be a conditional use because
she was not sure.
Brian., Wood and Popp felt the use was similar to a
hardware or department store. .
Brian moved and Wood second the motion that the
proposed use be interpreted as being a similar permitted. '
use in the C4 Zone.
The vote was unanimously approved,
6. 1 BELLWOOD REVIEW
A. Staff Report Laws memo from Edwards CDP.
AIINUTESt
TIGARD PLANNING C0AMMISSION
April 18, 1978
Page 13
B. Applicants Presentation: '
Bill Mellonagle, 8905 S.W. Commercial Street, problem
because development approval is so old. Referred to ::
Item 9 of minutes from August 20, 1968 Planning
Commission. They feel the proposal is justified and
only with a .clarification on density -. all other.- items :_:.•
can' be handled in Design Review. >�
Ray Bartel, 10952 S. V. 21st Milwaukie, Architect, s
presented plan showing how staff concerns will be
addressed. Plan based on 12 units/acre as stated by
staff. Density proposed is not out of line with intent
of approved Planned Development that the density
review did not necessarily mean a reduced density.
The proposal is compatible with surrounding residents.
C. Staff Recommendation:
a
The applicant prepare a justification for a specific
density, based upon a more thorough consideration of
existing natural features, adopted city policies and
with attention to the issue of compatibility between
single family and multi-family residential uses.
This proposal to be reviewed by the Planning Commission,
Rebuttal:
McMonagle questioned carrying capacity of land present
A2 density allowing 12/acre this is less than allowed
in 1968. He felt apartments should be intermingled
not segregated - does not see any reasons for judging
incompatible.
D. Commission Action:
L
Popp asked what proposed density is 11.4/ac.
Tepedino saw main issue related to zoning/planning
not being static. New plans/policies have been
developed. The question is who assumes the burden
of the change in policies.
Brian saw considerable difference in applicant's
proposal (1968) with a 2-3 projected time schedule
as opposed to 10 years that the developer assumes
the risk that things will change over time.
Sakata saw need to apply new regulations.
Quimby felt City should not be held to an agreement
or decision made 10 years ago.
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COtI1IISSION
April 18, 1978
Page 14
.Wood stated prior Commission action does not specify
overall density ,calls for third phase density review.
Applicant 'assumes risk over 10 years that. things will
change. Must consider in light of existing plans.
Popp stated he was not opposed to review Would like
to see greenway continued. Applicant should work to
todays allowable densities.
Brian moved for approval of staff recommendation and ...
motion was seconded •by Tepedino.
Passed unanimously.
e
6.2 ASSEMBLY OF GOD free standing sign on S.111. Gaarde
Street.
Staff informed the Commission that the Assembly of
God Church on S. V. Gaarde is proposing to erect an
internally illuminated free standing sign: The
Commission directed staff to inform the applicant that
he must make application for a conditional use permit.
.Meeting was adjourned at 1:00 A.M.
C) rdiC�
a 15�
n � nco- H0.
le ele elr�eio ye}ela sie ele s1-111is s s Y s s i s I s ►1 s i s sTs i Ill e �wk
.. _ � } ( � ( � � r� } �i � r rr�r ��} �}�� }.B 1—�:1 �j_r }��t'�s}s(s}I�1¢#�s}e�aisisli(eit�.a�s�ti�}esti�ele}slels�s�sle(els}ssi�ese}ssers4efes
NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED 1' 2 `� 4 _- _ rJ ..- _._.... .Z.... S 1� -.
DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN ... ...._ _. 11Now
'2
THIS NOTICE, IT IS DOE TO I - ._ _
THE QUALITY OF TW ORIGINALAMM ...-.. _-. -
DRAWING. ®e—6z Be zz 9z Sz vz Sz zz Iz oz sf e9 ti 9t--s�` i E1_.z i_ .of_6._ ..8 — —5---i —E— z .. '.
' IMee�eeM� t
dprI11I}181 e111�U11(teMb11I ,
'L
W �
� Y
-AA,�
r
oil
AZA
RVW
AW
I�
a _
Vit., ��,,� � .• . ;;� �:.� ��-� .,s/IIIJIINuIIEf'/ - ' .r.�►.
Ll/,t. �«•� � � .: .� fir' \Q'� 'i%� �s�=, �"'�'�'.=1+� j f _•� aip� i'
t a• « _` "rr /,/''�� \ f ���r. lIf .. � Fes. `�1 �� l
1� �r., c>:�. �� .�/ `�� ft:•� ,�'�, ,` to �° a!ry: ��jt rr..iiJ(.\ •�.r►.!
CA � \I.: �� �►l �► �� /; � ... l� , , •��14��� �/..
i��� r.. _ �' �:.if-�� Ai '�t�/ \�\�: �y� '- `Ivr *��'�' � �D►e 1) i`r it/.'' \Cf/i- . 1`. -�'�`� �
,ire ►%= /) -. r�`��� ,
a
s
t
"
r
s
* � - _ lair • 3 c
t y fa„w
f F
._. a 1 R - aft ' •y+ ._ f,. •.t t
1
� ,:a:•u i fr�' � � ,1ti A ,fry r+• � � „� ; r
. l
i
I �1.�� � i � � l � �V � i' .617 k� �_ i � � � _��--'�-� � �.• �_
AP
VA
OEM�
jm, tiso:. Y'a'a..+vrs. Ndo•.v!•J�-N f>+'dy CA fM1 ,f� _..._ e. � s �....... +A��}i
III/ lfi�K `f JN "• x.._ 474.44 +` ,/J•yu �ity
I S.W. W[RS
79'" AYf. �
S mum On AV/EY
t
1\
I FUS
F
.... ..::.,,... ..,. _. .'_-_ •_ ...., ...:..^ ., i-.`y.] ,_3.11„_x'
- . .. It 111y�I1p1111lgtlyilgilgl,plltp�gli111`IIg IP�gijlll'171jg14tupltph•JTl l�glllpl tilill�lgtlq Ill it(f Ililll 111 111 1 D 1 I i 1 1 t 1 1 r i 1 1 111 1 1 1 ql lu 1 i lu,.. � -- ... �x ,•,
_ _ I j � �. 1 i llllllllllll�lllllil� I itl
Dn: ---.1 .2 � 3 4 5 8 7 8 9 p 11 1I TOM 2
IMNIUL Is�sss acen mw �I,
DR Ouaurr OF nE IXlIG9W. - -
_ I OE 62 B2 L2 94 S2 1Z E2 Zy IE oa 8t 91 LI 91 Lf YI EI ZI -11 OI 6 9 L 9 s - Y E -a 1— ;
. aldmlhndp+dunLlulwflwlUl t
MARCH' L 1'8
990 �
h ,
_
Pfopsm Ufa
3 q '
Y 1/�•aY1YIi�i=+�1/�1 Y�,�1l+Li�� i
CF ae.ie FV ki A^lr LL �E
� l
- - ---. f
c '
w
n r i
3 •fir� - �� _ ` _\' O }
r
1
F
� r
3
,s
i
�I -rM � �. �`� _�V� � �'°O Y'K EDF- �;a.'i•,'�^� � f� I R� � '1� �'
Ifl A"nK� �
•
.. ::SSR",:.y.•. ��'�^','^ �
N
W
won= ?aaL �II
'vtz:4:
mpftR&vukgmv""U%'-Y-ED- . CONTUUR ammAloift
_
� . .•- � •� .. ... 11 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l l l I l f 1 1((I� 111 1 1 (1!11 1 1 1 1 I l J l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I NI•' � � �y-t+..
.•,zuaF+...+R � ,: t- .«alarms-.`' ,v ,:...:
r k.l..�(11k.Lllkl.11kl�Ik.l11�J.�_P.k��PT jT�kRrIJ L.�lT��11I.1.1�1.111 1 �1P k ll�lklllklil�1111�ij1�II1I1I_�k1I _ ....,.,..:•.;:
IF mss ICWFI0 ,I:______�__ 2 I 3 4 6 8 7 8 B O 11 -I
NM:ow -
Tals aorla,IT Is aE ro
AM lam
TIE QUALDMIMI.ITY OF TIE Of1IGINIL -
: AM
Of DZ DZ a DZ S2 YS fS R IZ 02 61 DI LI fl 01 ZI-- 11 --01 6 D !- 9 — 5---Y Ea 1�
MARCH
.. wriullan�mlLm wpx },,,�, tw..d. U.
11990
!`, }
rn
lap mdlxl 1 lun na6111
-V
i = g
r 3
i_
vi �
14
ID
'``,`--, ,r�'f ��+"��TK'� '.-� �' ,r/: �,./,�"'" ;I• � _ �'"� °�I�Y 1.✓... - = a
--14
ij
LANuSCAFww&E I wJ&L A Nm
NORTH
J)g I I � (``��\+"I r_��1 I�y ,?�• fi i �� \ �.�` jL l _r1, �/An ^. �\e
t
r �
�..e.� ;�II,111/�1111g1'�p1g1i{;ilgl y111p�g11g1 n11g1 lmm m1nR g1(11F 11T n 111 1111111 IV 11 nf1111 n(rll IPI t 11'111111111 P1g111p111',I 1111'1 111 IIg111 V�q�1/Hx.,., tir'- .. �.. .• ;... ,. ..,`
WM: IF Tis MICROFIIAD I:______. .! 2 3 4 _ 5 8 7 8 9 O I I 12
"IM IS LESS CIFAR T M
TILS MOTILE,IT IS m TC
TE pm OF IMLTE ORIGINAL
DIM. -.-...
OE et BZ 112 i2 SZ Y2 EZ ZZ IZ OZ Bt BI LI 91 51 4i fl ZI 11 OI 6 9 2 9 S 4 E Z I-
UMlM11nIMIRIdIIId1111nNu1.1w _
S� 01,199MARCH' -
— i
.14
Aii
3 A
y� (D
go
c�
l 7
v
/ d r
i
\ NORTH PAK& ZI f \
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN V \
PROPOSED UTILITIES \
7 6 '1,'
WM: IF MXIGeFID
D",
,T": ssC
XsCIT s A µ
XMa
4
OF TIE WIDINAI -
--- ---
I,oc oz az ci--sz"sz rz u zz la az sr el a--ei sr' ri el zl a-ol s o i _9 "s r
mdimUmlunbnduuMdwdnolxn +--I
N r , \_MAR I Sl, 121990 �hI'll, _ t
'