Resolution No. 90-22 CITY OF TIGARD_ ORRC-ON
RESOLUTION NO. 90-;a
IN THE MATTER OF THE T.DOPTION OF A FINAL ORDER UPON CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF AN
APPE":L OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE A SIGN CODE EXCEPTION ARD
VARIANCE APPLICATION (SCE 89-14/V 89-33) PROPOSED BY LANDMARK oRD (JIM
CORLISS).
WHEREAS, the Commission reviewed the case at its meetings of December 19, 1989
and January 30, 1990; and
WHEREAS, the Commission approved the application with modifications to the
original proposal (Final Order No. 90-03 PC); and
WHEREAS, this matter came before the City Council at its meeting of March 26,
1990, upon the vaguest of the applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Council reviewed the evidence related to the applicant's appeal.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the requested appeal is APPROVED and the Planning
Commission decision is amended based upon the facts, findings, conclusions, and
conditions Of apprc-ral noted in Exhibit "A".
The Council further orders that the City Recorder send a copy of this final
order to the a£plicant as a notice of the final decision in this matter.
�_d
PASSED: This _� day of April, 1 O.. 7
r`
fl- I ''4
�'Gcrnia
R. wards, Mayor
City Of Tigard
ATTEST:
Tigard City Recorder 1-7
SCE 89_14.RES/kl
RESOLUTION NO. 90�a PAGE 1
I
EXHIBIT "A"
A. FACTS
1. General Infnrmation
CASE: Sign Code Exception SCE 89-14, Variance V 89-33
REQUEST: Request to allow four free standing signs with a sign face
area 510 square feet where two signs with a sign face area of
230 square feet are normally allowed. Three of the signs are
to be freeway oriented. The individual size (per face) of
these sia_ns are as follows: 64.65 square feet, 154 square
feet, 287.13 square feet along I-5 and 40 square feet to be
located on a different frontage.
APPLICANT: Landmark Ford Inc.
12000 SW 66th
Tigard, OR 97223
OWNERS: Jim Corliss
9750 SW Inez
Tigard, OR 97224
LOCATION: 12000 SW 66th Avenue (WCTM 281 1AA Tax lot 100)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial General
ZONING DESIGNATION: C-G (Commercial General)
2. Background Information
The southwest portion of the property was annexed into the City on May
24, 1978. The western and northern portions of the property, with
frontage along 68th Avenue and the Dartmouth Street were annexed into
the City on March 30, 1981. The section of the property which includes
the Landmark Ford building and the existing signs was annexed on April
8, 1983.
On May 12, 1986, the City Council approved a Sign Cade Exception
anplScation (SCE 2-86) to allow a fifth freea2an69ng sight of
approximately 25 feet 11 inches in height and 151 square feet in area
per side where one freestanding sign with a 70 square foot area and 20 �
foot height was permitted (prior to the sign code amendment in 1988).
The Council approved the application subject to several conditions
including the removal of off-site signs, the removal of a 73 square
foot, 20 foot high freestanding sign, and the removal of any remaining
non-conforming signs by March 20, 1988.
RESOLUTION NO. 90�Q PAGE 2
On March 23, 1987, the City Council approved a Sign Code Exception to
allow some off-site temporary signs to be used until September 1, 1987,
4 (Case No. SCE 13-86).
3. Vicinity Information
66th Avenue and I-5 are immediately east of the subject property. One
parcel zoned C-G (Commercial General) is located immediately to the
southeast. All other properties in the immediate vicinity are zoned C-P
(Commercial Professional).
4. Site Information and Proposal Description
The subject property has frontage on 66th Avenue, Dartmouth Street, 68th
Avenue, and Franklin Street. The Landmark Ford building has frontage
and access onto 66th Avenue and the following signs are located in the
vicinity of this building:
Freestanding signs
a. "Ford", 1:,4 sq. ft., 35 ft. ht.
b. "Landmark Ford"/electronic readerboard, 151 sq. ft., 26 ft. ht.
C. "Body & Paint", 21 sq. ft., approx. 8 ft. ht.
d. "Service", 21 sq. ft., approx. 8 ft. ht.
e. "Enter", 4 sq.ft., approx. 3 ft. ht.
Roof sign
f. "Landmark Ford", 179 sq. ft.
Wall signs
g. "Daihatsu", approx. 36 sq. ft.
h. "Body shop", approx. 50 sq. ft.
Temporary banner
i. Ford products, approx. 26 eq. ft.
The applicant originally intended to install the signs listed above in
the general information section of this order in a series of phases.
After discussing the proposal with the applicant at the December 19th
isca isiy, Ll— CVs:Lnuii tabled the case for the next nearing date for
the purpose of allowing time for the applicant to meet with the staff to
develop an amended sign proposal that would be more consistent with Code
standards.
RESOLUTION NO. 90-.�;_) 'PAGE 3
The revised proposal presented by the applicant at the January 30th
hearing included the addition of a 98 square foot Daihatsu sign to the
`.. existing Landmark Ford sign (151 eq. ft.) for a total of 249 square
feet, the retention of the 154 square fool Ford freestanding sign, the
Installation of a 40 square foot freestanding sign near the corner of
Dartmouth and 68th, the limitation of wall signs on the mite to 106 of
the wall area for the used car center and new car showroom end 66 for
all other buildings. The applicant also proposed an alternative to the
Daihatsu sign addition "any using a 57 rather than the 98 square foot
sign for a total of 208 square feet.
.. ...ria,.a .s na d ecaura h Codes only allows for one freeway
oriented sign with�amaximum size of 160 square feet per side and 35
feet in height; and for one additional freestanding sign facing another
street frontage, with a maximum size of 70 to 90 square feet and 20 to
22 feet in height, depending upon the setback from the property line.
The revised proposal includes a freeway oriented sign, a freestanding
sign with orientation towards I-5, and a second freestanding located on
a different street frontage.
5. Acencv and NPO Comments
The Engineering Division, General Telephone, State Highway Division,
Portland General Electric, and Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District
have no objection to the proposal.
The Building Inspection Division indicates that permits and an engineer
approved detail for the sign footings will be necessary.
No other comments have been received.
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
As proposed, a Variance is necessary to approve this proposal because it
goes beyond the basin_. Cods vaquirements for number and size of signs, as
•woll as the allowances that are available through the Sign Code Exception
process. The Variance criteria which are relevant are listed in Section
18.134.050 (A) of the Community Development Code:
1. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purpose
of this title, be in conflict with the policies of the Comprehensive
Plan, to any other applicable policies and standards, and to other-
properties
therproperties in the same zoning district or vicinity:
2. There are special circumstanc+rs that exist which are particular to the
lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances which the
applicant nas no control and which are not applicable to other
properties in the same zoning district;
3. The use proposed will De the same as permitted under this title and
City standards will be maintained to the greatest extent that is
RESOLUTION NO. 90-%
reasonably possible while permitting some economic use of the land;
�., 4. Existing physical and natural systems, but not limited to traffic,
drainage, dramatic land forms, or parks will not be adversely affected
anymore than would occur if the development were located as specified
in this title; and
S. A hardship is not self imposed and the variance requested is minimum
variance which would alleviate the hardship.
The City council fines that the nrnpc,oal __ ___siLtent with the _wove
variarce criteria for the following reasons.
1. The purpose of the Code is to reduce the amount of sign area and
numbers of signs within the City limits in order to provide for an
aesthetically pleasing environment. The proposal will allow more
freestanding sign area along the I-5 frontage but the total amount of
signage on the property will be limited, as noted in the conditions of
approval below, in a manner consistent with the intent of the Code.
2. There are Special circumstances with respect to the size and amount of
street frontage of this property which justify the allowance of two
signs along the I-5 and 66th Avenue frontage of the size proposed.
3. The total amount of proposed signage is consietent with the intent of
the Code standards and therefore the Council finds that the proposal
will comply with the Code to the extent reasonably possible.
4. Existing physical and natural systems would not be affected by this
proposal.
C. DECISION
The Cita. Council approves SCE 89-14/V 89-33 as amended by the conditions of
approval noted below:
1. Prior to erecting any signs, sign permits shall be issued by the
Planning Division. STAFF CONTACT: Viola Goodwin, Planning Division,
539-4171.
2. Sign permits shall be obtained for the Daihatsu wall sign and
directional sign on 68th Avenue before any other permits are issued.
STAFF CONTACT: Viola Goodwin.
3. The applicant shall be permitted to construct signs on the property in
accordance with the following:
a. One freeway oriented sign with a maximum area of 208 square feet
per, face and a maximum height of 35 feet;
b. Retain the existing Ford freestanding sign (154 sq. ft. per face);
RESOLUTION NO. 90-�-- PAGE 5
C. No other freestanding signs along the I-5/66th Avenue frontage,
with the exception of directional and temporary signs;
d. Construct a new 40 square foot per side, 6 foot high freestanding
sign located near the Dartmouth/68th intersection; and
a. A limitation of wall signage on the property to SOLE of the wall
area for the used car center and new car showroom buildings a-ad 68
of the wall area for all other buildings on the property.
a_ The ..znco nfo m i,ng yah-a&uajfk Ford roof sign shall be removed or modified
to conform with Chapter 18.114 (Sign Code) of the Community Development
Code prior to April 8, 1993. STAFF CONTACT: Viola Goodwin.
5. The temporary banner located along the 68th Avenue frontage shall be
removed or reduced to a maximum of 18 square feet. STAFF CONTACT:
Viola Goodwin.
THIS APPROVAL IS VALID IF EXERCISED WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE FINAL APPROVAL DATE
NOTED BELOW.
RESOLUTION NO. 90-._2 PAGE 6