Loading...
Ordinance No. 97-13 Y 4 CITY OF TIGARD,OREGON ORDINANCE NO.97- � aN ' * � � AN ORDINANCE ADDING A DESIGN EVALUATION TEAM TO PROVIDE REVIEW FOR { 3 F ADJUSTMENTS TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS WITHIN THE TIGARD TRIANGLE AND { DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. $ j N - WHEREAS,the applicant City of Tigard requested approval of legislative Text Amendments within 4 � the area known as the Tigard Triangle. Specifically,the request provides a process to allow review by a5rx4 tandards within the Tigard Trianble.Desi n Evaluation Team of requests for adjustment to the design s � t t ' WHEREAS,the City Council conducted a public hearing specifically on the zoning amendments on the r Design Evaluation Team process at its meeting of December 9,1997. w NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: (F ` SECTION 1: The proposed amendments are consistent with all relevant criteria based upon the facts, k ` findings and conclusions noted in the attached final order(Exhibit A); _a SECTION 2: The specific text amendments attached to this Ordinance are hereby adopted and ax �r # approved by the City Council. M SECTION 3: The City Council declares that an emergency exists because development requests have t been on hold throughout a lengthy process as development standards have been developed. The property owners in the area have been awaiting the availability of this ^ . process. t� PASSED: By UQ(tn!!)7X%&ote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only,this �1 day of 60m Ltv 1997. } v z Catherine Wheatley,City Reco r a .x �LA �' a xsw APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day o 1997. F A K es Nicoli,Mayor 00', v Approved as to form: ` x x; ORDINANCE No.97- In - rt Page 1 y i NOW � e .w rX - ,•;-^f'��« rr+',�`�°� :� ,-usf 1 4,,,., +t.,4..r?t�4 s�r .,,tr. .-;5<.. 5`. _� ,�,g „� 0-0"A fix` f+h- l p T ` Y PvS,Y t = k Y 3a d p3�"'y�}�Z}�}ems'#•x� 5� � +5 m{SJ S`�x�t�a� 3' x 6 i 6,�� a za c. V E x5 ill —7 City Attorney ahs 4t} Date :, , S �3_s •t.'j 53�' -0„ ..x vj 6+e'f i:lcitywidebrdinwc.dot Oil 1 r � t t x x 3� €„fie•:. vAdFs , r 91 ORDINANCE No.97-L3 Page 2 ,q , K r 7 pg?", ,'3•t fs � +•�' `s bx .l ' $ y 4�L t s d zap .! s r `� zt°. F tr ' t ti a } a r x v c ay' y, frk MIX—a-1-111 'Q 's4y� f 4z z 'J"' S,{fr,{,S•if ',{ Y' 'rs� y�r•"i 4 N � .�3�iA �t'�.tet V. H � � X. f ��� s t A r` r. :� _ ;� a s ■ Y F xhibi- Ord i CAi1Cf1 a r a s {. CITY OF TIGARD CITY COUNCIL FINAL ORDERno w ' ter' r f TIGARD TRIANGLE DESIGN EVALUATION TEAM PROCESSr� .' s A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS WITH REGARD TO AN ' APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ADOPT DESIGN ;* , mss 4i EVALUATION TEAM PROCESS FOR AN AREA KNOWN AS THE"TIGARD TRIANGLE". 11 " sir A. FACTS �; `. �t 1. General Information k � CASE: FILE NAME DESIGN EVALUATION TEAM-TIGARD TRIANGLE : �+ } WE t Zoning Ordinance Amendment: ZOA 97-0005 `x` a , - REQUEST: Request to add code language to the Tigard Triangle design standards that provides a process for review of adjustments by a Design Evaluation Team. @ j APPLICANT: City of Tigard - r3 13125 SW Hall Boulevard n t Tigard,OR 97223 a OWNERS: Various " LOCATION: Generally,east of Highway 217,west of Interstate 5,and south of State " Highway 99 West. 2. Vicinity The affected parcels are within the area known as the Tigard Triangle. The area isY, r_ generally bordered by Interstate 5 to the east,Highway 217 to the west and Highway 99W �` g to the north. ; - Ar j " 3. Background Information ° On March 11,1997,City Council approved design standards for the Tigard Triangle that k a1=, incorporate specific requirements for development within the Triangle. After several ' meetings with Council it was determined that City Council wanted to retain the standards (' ' and good design in the Triangle,but wished to allow flexibility on how this was achieved. , 1'1011 , } x To add flexibility to the standards while assuring good design,staff was directed by City t Council to create a new process that provides an optional adjustment procedure that includes a new Design Evaluation Team. On November 17,1997,the Planning - . Commission held a public hearing on the proposal and recommended approval. City Council held a public hearing on the proposal and approved it on December 9,1997. „ 3 r ? 4. Site Information and Proposal Description M 'v l r �� �/�'.�'.�,ri� 5 Y "s ., w i ,ry � 4rb :M1 C sThe site is approximately 340 acres in size. The proposed land use action includes a I 1,10 amendments to the Development Code to include an optional adjustment process using a ' Design Evaluation Team for the Tigard Triangle. , �T B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS a ; The relevant criteria in this case are Statewide Goals 1,2, Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1a, t' - 2.1.1,2.1.2,2.1.3,8.1.2, and Community Development Code Chapter 18.30 and adopted design s y Y standards for the Tigard Triangle. , s STATEWIDE GOALS I IM 1. citizen involvement: Goal 1 requires a citizen involvement program that ensures ` g 5 the opportunity for citizens to be Involved in the planning process. Tigard r, Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.1.1 and Tigard Community Development Code Chapter 18 } , q provide for citizen participation and notice. Notice of the Planning Commission and City 7" Council hearings and opportunity for response was advertised in the local newspaper and $ :; request for comments were sent to all CITs and Department of Land Conservation and � . Development. The proposals were subject to a public hearing before the city councilxy which included citizen testimony. That testimony was considered in reaching a final sui3.. dacision. This goal is satisfied. 4 FY ` 2. Land Use Planning: Goal 2 requires that land use plans must be the basis for specific implementation measures and that those measures must be consistent " w t z with and adequate to carry out the plans. Adoption of implementation measures is provided for under Goal 2 and ORS 197. The proposed ordinance requirements fine-tunexri existing adopted and acknowledged ordinance requirements. � x r COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES 3. 1.1.1a.-This policy requires that legislative changes are consistent with statewide t saw Y planning goals and the regional development plan. The findings above address statewide `r 5 j goals. Metro was sent a request for comments and had earlier commented in a letter that they recommended approval.This policy is satisfied. r - 4. 2.1.1-This policy requires an ongoing citizen involvement process. A request for ; x s comments was sent to the East Citizen Involvement Team and was legally advertised. This policy is satisfied. 5. 2.1.2-This policy requires the opportunity for citizen involvement on planning efforts ° E through the CIT process. The CIT notification process has been followed for this zoning „ `{4 ' sf This policy is satisfied. ordinance amendment re�i.�e... p y k 6. 2 1.3-This policy requires that'nforrnatkon on issues be available. The staff report and findings,and proposed ordinance have been available for review since November 5, gr 1997. This policy is satisfied. 7. 8.1.2-This policy requires that the City coordinate with other local,state and federal (. } { The Ci tyhas requested comments from all appropriate agencies. Metro hasjurisdictions. t d sent a letter of support. No other agencies have commented in writing on the specific C �'����� a ,�, �✓ proposals. This policy is satisfied. SM tAW #®R" ;.q r"Y' NUM N AR x 01�" � :E3f r F rit4� ��ay3 r get`* la q t{{ 5y� s Y�y"Y4"^r�i SIV77 R..hE G J } y-ry ■ r s COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTIONS: SR ` ar Design Standards: The proposal to modify the standards to allow flexibility under specific °r circumstances will continue to meet the goals and intent for development of the Triangle in y}kc " f t rthat it provides flexibility while still requiring excellent design treatment within the � n , Triangle. The public process would remain much the same as exists today In that the applicant is still required to hold a neighborhood meeting and the City will still hold a 7 ' a public hearing on the proposal. f4W fiTz� y Procedure for Decision Making: Legislative: Chapter 18.30 establishes procedures for *r s consideration of legislative changes to the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, G� z d implementing ordinances and maps. Section 18.30.120 lists the factors upon which the Planning Commission and City Council shall base their decisions. y�. � ` B. The statewide planning goals and guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised r Statutes Chapter 197. The applicable goals are addressed in these findings Y {� j 9. Any federal or state statutes or guidelines found applicable. No other federal or £ 1 state standards or guidelines are applicable to this applicationY= a 10. Applicable plans and guidelines adopted by the Metropolitan Service District. x� x Metro has stated by letter that the proposed adjustment process is appropriate. 11. The applicable comprehensive plan policies and map. These standards are w , addressed under"Compliance with Comprehensive Plan Policies." ' 12. The applicable provisions of the Implementing ordinances. Having followed the ' =53 L r appropriate procedures and addressed the criteria necessary for legislative amendments to the development code,the proposed design standards are consistent with they " requirements of implementing ordinances. C. DECISION r x # The City Council APPROVES the amendments to ZOA 97-0005. � t * x �z ;� 9 ga5r t.: 3s NNIQ ��,.�?r* �r� ��_•fir 9 4 '� .t �R y .( � M-1 :d �m Nif�', IM I Fol 110 g> i �' F t � ` L rr n r ,® 18.620.090 Design Evaluation A. Purpose. It is recognized that the above design standards are to assist in upgrading and providing consistency to development within the Tigard Triangle. It is C� recognized that different designs may be used to meet the intent of the standards and purpose statements of the Tigard Triangle Design Standards. With this in mind, r applicants for development in the Tigard Triangle may choose to submit proposed projects which demonstrate compliance with the design standards or to request _ �w adjustments from the Triangle design standards and submit design plans for review .` and recommendation by a City Design Evaluation Team. This option allows applicants to propose alternative designs to the Tigard Triangle Design Standards that are consistent with the purpose of the standards. When a structure which has nonconforming elements is partially or totally damaged by fire or other causes } t} beyond the control of the owner, the structure may be rebuilt using the same x <Y" ak structure footprint without receiving an adjustment from design standards. } B. Design Evaluation Team(DET). Evaluation of the adjustment to allow an alternative ' , '` design is made b a three person professional design team contracted b the Ci ' 9 Y P P 9 Y City for professional design review. The DET shall consist of design professionals with « experience in architecture, landscape architecture and civil engineering. This team is charged with balancing the purpose statements, goals and standards of the Tigard Triangle Design process with the alternative proposal submitted by the 8 � applicants. The DET shall accept design proposals that vary from any of the ,; Triangle Design Standards. This process is to be applied only to the Tigard Triangle { Design Standards. Applicants must comply with all other development code standards according to the regular development reviiew requirements of Title lS Of the City code. The DET will prepare a report outlining conditions and recommendations in response to the applicant's proposal(s) for submission to the F Planning Commission within 30 days of meeting on the proposal. ` C. ,Approval Criteria For guidance in evaluating the purpose of the design standards,the DET shall refer to Planning Director's Interpretation!that provides purpose statements for the Y# Tigard Triangle design standards. a, All adjustments to allow an alternative design are subject to the following criteria: 1. Granting the adjustment will continue to meet the purpose of the standard(s)to be modified in an acceptable alternative manner;and rt ' '{ 2. The proposal will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of an ; area and the proposal will be consistent with the desired character of the area;and < 3 usc�z` i ` a J • } « Py 2 « _ _ fir ` - f 3. If more than one adjustment is being requested, the cumulative effect of the adjustments as well as each individual adjustment results in a project which is still consistent with the overall purpose,goals and standards of the zone;and " s: 4. Granting the adjustment is the minimum necessary to allow the proposed use of 7 �� the site; and any impacts resulting from the adjustment are mitigated to the extent practical. D. Review Process. The following steps must be followed by applicants to gain Design t r j Evaluation Review: 4ARLr 1. Applicants choosing the Design Evaluation process must submit a Design ; , 41 - Evaluation and Adjustment request according to a list of requirements provided by � � �a the Director, 2. Members of the Design Evaluation Team are available to meet with applicants ^' � 0 as part of the preapplication process, however, applicants shall pay for the entire } s � ; cost of the review of the Design Evaluation Team. A deposit of$1,000 shall be paidf # : upon application. The applicant will be billed for any additional cost. The DET report shall not be issued until all costs are paid. No request for design evaluation review using the alternative design will be accepted until all costs are paid in full; ZaN � j xxw+Tq I`�'fiib 3. The applicant will receive a review date for a DET work session which shall be within 30 days of Step 2 above. No public notification is required although the review session is open to the public. The review is designed to allow the applicant to present and explain design intent and adjustment proposals to the Design , Evaluation Team. is not intended to be a public hearing and no public testimony will be taken. 4. Upon completion of the CET review and payment of all costs, the DET will , forward a report and recommendations to the Director and the applicant within 30 days of meeting on the proposal. At the request of the applicant, this time period may be extended. 5. The applicant may proceed to schedule and hold a pre-application neighborhood X � s meeting with the adjacent property ovaners at any time during this process according to the provision provided by the Director at the Development Review pre-applications conference required by Chapter 18.32.040. It is recommended that the d r development design to be reviewed at the pre-application neighborhood meeting r x ; S t n include the recommendations of the DET; 6. Upon completion of the neighborhood meeting requirements and receipt of the DET report, applicants may pro to file theappropriate develo mentapplication P PP y PP �x according to the provisions of Title 18 of the Municipal Code. Said application shall x $ � include the recommendations of the DET. oa " x ? IN h ' s OL,a." s 04- A? G Y '1 S t Z1.t,•^Yr'Y ''RNs }art r .A t a { IIII _ r4a mjvv �� F t• 7. Review of a DET recommended plan and/or conditions shall be made part of the , �t staff report prepared by the Planning Director and shall be made available ata 3TC ' ; x$ public hearing before the Planning Commission according to the provisions of 18.32; �{< ' a r 8. The Planning Commission may approve, approve with conditions or deny the a yw development alication considering the DET recommendation and evaluating the � ` Yr N development and the design plan to ensure consistency with the Tigard Triangle �4M Design Standards. Approval of the Planring Commission must also be based on k compliance of the development plan with all other development code requirementsNW WF s�rt governing the application. �i c� � fie.' `>•`�' -� , 'K s5 ALMNAI INSTRANGLME5EVAL.CDE ' �V. — Eh �e it43�� X y Y i eq nA T N w w Wii 1,POOR Ny`:F.� �� r''„F��`�^ if• � ��t �;: X a" WE$„ r2 {re '04 gggy k�J u v