Ordinance No. 92-06 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE No. 92' C
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE (ZCA 92-
01) (ROBINSON) AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City has received a request for annexation signed by Constance
Robinson, who is the owner of the subject parcels; and
WHEREAS, The City Council held a public hearing on March 10, 1992 to consider the
annexation request and to consider zoning designations for the property; and
WHEREAS, on March 10, 1992 the City Council approved a resolution forwarding the
annexation to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government Boundary
Commission; and
WHEREAS, the zoning district designation as net forth in Section 1 below is that
which most closely conforms to the Washington County zoning designation as
provided in the Washington County-Tigard Urban Planning Area Agreement.
I ' THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The recommendation of the planning staff as set forth below is
consistent with policy 10.1.2 and 10.1.3 of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
Tax man/Lot Number Current Zoning Proposed Zoning
281 1OBC/1500 Wash. Co. R-6 Tigard R-4.5
2S1 108D/1200 Wash. Co. R-6 Tigard R-4.5
Section 2: The property meets the definition for a developing area as
defined in Chapter 18.138 of the Community Development Code and
shall be designated as such on the development standards area
map.
Section 3: This ordinance shall become effective upon filing of the
annexation final order with the office of the Secretary of State.
PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after
belng read Ey number and title only, this 11'Ll,_
day
of
__altther a Wheatley, VIty Recq#der
APPROVED: This �V day of ;/ 7 . 1992.
G old/R, ,E arils, Mayo
Approve/dJas�t� for�mJ
C ty Attorney
2.110 .
Date
STAFF REPORT
March 10, 1992
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
TIGARD TOWN HALL
13125 B.W. HALL BOULEVARD
TIGARD, OREGON 97223
{
i
i
A. CPRE; Zone Change Annexation 92-01
E
REQUEST: To annex two parcels consisting of 2.44 and 14.39 acres of
unincorporated Washington County into the City of Tigard, and for zone
change from Washington County R-6 (Residential, 6 unite per acre) to City
of Tigard R-4,5 (Residential, 4.5 units per acre). The applicant requests
that the expedited process be used.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Washington County Residential, 6
units per acre.
ZONING DESIGNATION: Washington County R-6 (Residential, 6 units per
acre).
APPLICANT: Constance A. Robinson
12000 SW Bull Mountain Road
Tigard, Oregon 97223
OWNERS: Constance A. Robinson
12000 SW Bull Mountain Road
Tigard, Oregon 97223
LOCATION: 12000 3W Bull Mountain Road WCTM 2S1 1OBD, tax lot 1200, and
2S1 108C, tax lot 1500.
2. Background Informatics
No previous applications have been reviewed by the City relating to
this property.
3. Vicinity Information
Properties to the north of the site are in the City of Tigard and
are zoned for single family residential development. Properties to
the east are zoned R-40 (Residential, 40 units per acre) and are in s
the City of Tigard. All properties to the wast are single family
lots in Washington County. Properties to the south are in 3
Washington County and are zoned R-6 (Residential, 6 units per acre.'
i
ZCA 92-01 Staff Report 1
)
a. SLte I fo i n and P ocaaal Deacritation
the �
l "dile property to be annexed has one sindgle The property is primay residence with rly
remainder e� the property undovelope
covered by a filbert orchard.
applicant requested that her parcels be annexed via the
The ap_ of Tigard in order to subdivide the
expedited method into the City
properties into 49 lots and to 80rvssewer line is located at the southeastall the lots wcorner ofthe
sewer..Existing
parcel to be annexed.
Comments
District, Tualatin Valley Fire District, Washington
Tigard WaterGeneral Telephone and
County Land Use and Transportation. Jct 23J, Portland
Electronics, NW Natural Gas, Tigard School Distr
General Electric, and Metro Area cosut►inications have reviewed the
proposal and offer no objections or comments.
Tigard Police Department has the following comments:
police depart is concerned about this annexation
The Poli P et another
because it creates two islands, and
atresponee more
in and out situation making police
difficult and traffic enforcement harder. This �
annexation will create islands to the east and north,
' and
the police department and the City will be
criticized for irregular service in the area.
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS i
ia in this case are Tigard ng ArAxeasel0ive 1l1 Policies
The relevant criterService
2.1.1, Citizen Involvement; 6.4.1, Developing
Delivery Capacity; and 10.1.2, Boundary Criteria and chapters 18.136,
ing Area licatin of the
Annexations; and 18.138, setablished/DevelOP
staff ha
Tigard Community Des determined that Y
velopment Code. The g lportions of the Tigard
the proposal is consistent with the reedbelow:
Comprehensive Plan based upon the finding
isfied because theNeighborhood Planning
1. Plan Policy 2..1.1 is satanniOanizat on as wellas
organization and Community Planning rg
surrounding property owners were given not
ioe of the hearing and an
opportunity to comment on the ragaest.
2. atisfied because the annexation will be
plan Pglicy 6.4.1 is s
o-Ment standards g
__ no area on t ha de..:-e-
designated an a.. o----� -
map
2
zCA 92-01 Staff Report
3. Plan Policy 10.1.1 is satisfied because the city has conducted the
Washington County Island Urban Services Study which includes the
subject property. This study indicates that adequate services are
available in the vicinity and may be extended to accommodate the
subject property.
f
4. Plan Policy 10.1.2 may not be completely satisfied because although
there is an existing irregular boundary in this area, the annexation
will add to that irregularity according to the opinion of the Police
Department. The land is located within Tigard's Area Of Interest,
and adequate service capacities can be made available to accommodate
the eventual development of the property as noted above.
It should be noted that the City council could annex the islands
anytime they want to, there is no reason to annex now through the
double majority method.
The planning staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the
relevant portions of the community Development Code based upon the
findings noted below:
1. Section 18.136.030 of the Code is met because all facilities and
services can be made available, the applicable Comprehensive Plan
policies discussed above have been satisfied and the property has
been determined to be an Developing area in accordance with the
criteria in Chapter 18.138 of the Code.
The Urban Planning Area Agreement between the City and Washington
County requires that when annexing land within the City's area of
interest, the City adopt, a zone designation which most closely
( resembles the County plan and zone designation. In this case, the
properties are designated in Washington County for single family
residential use with a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet and a
maximum density of 6 units per acre. The city of Tigard Low Density
Residential plan designation and R-4.5 zone with a minimum lot size
requirement of 7,500 square feet and maximum density of 4.5 units n
per acre are the most comparable to the present County designation.
2. Chapter 18.138 of the Code is satisfied because the properties meets
the definition for an Developing area and shall be designated as
such on the development standards area map..
3. The property to be annexed is currently undeveloped. The planning
staff conducted a study on the implications of annexing the property
as undeveloped land, versus annexing it as developed land.
Implications of annexing the property as undeveloped land%
a. The development would be subject to City development
requirements, and its fees and charges. This would also
include the density, which in the City -_ould be 4.5
units/acre, and in the County, 6 units/acre.
*.. ZCA 92-01 Staff Report 3
i'
b. The City would not have to enter into a contract with the
property owner for future annexation.
i
0. The City would not have to be concerned that the future
residents in this subdivision would oppose annexation.
d. There would not be any issues raised with Washington County
about who should be providing development review services.
implications of annexing the property after full developments
i
a. The City's tax baste could be increased by approximately
$24,137 more than if the property was annexed as undeveloped
land.
b. The property could be packaged with other properties in the
area to make amore logical City boundaries.
C. The City would not have the responsibility of development
review and inspections, or co-ordinating with other
jurisdictions or the neighborhood as the property develops.
d. The property may develop to a higher density, which would be
more efficient in terms of services.
C. RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the findings noted above, the planning staff ,recommends
approval of ZCA 92-01.
PREPARED BYx t
Victor Adonri, Developmant Assistant Planner
F
I
i
ZCA 92--01 Staff Report 4
i