Resolution No. 96-70 3
CITY OF TIGARD "
k, {,
S 1
RESOLUTION NO.96-'�-70 {
A RESOLUTION BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
CONCLUSIONS TO DENY AN APPLICATION FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
e 'AMENDMENT(CPA 96-0006)AND ZONE CHANGE(ZON 96-0001)REQUESTED BY DR. - s
� DAVISIFOttEIGN iviISSiGN_ � ti
{ ' WHEREAS, the applicant requested a comprehensive plan map amendment from
Low-Density Residential to Commercial Professional and-rune change from R 4.5 to CP of a 4.54 ,,x ,4
acre parcel located on the south side of S.W.Oak Street,between S.W.Greenburg Road and S.W.
Hall Boulevard.
j WHEREAS,the Tigard Planning Division evaluated the application and recommends denial;
WHEREAS,the Tigard Planning Commission considered the application at its public hearing on es`=
October 7,1996 and recommends denial;and
WHEREAS,the Tigard City Council considered the application at its public hearing on October 22,
1996.
C
j NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: '2�k
Section I: The proposal is not consistent with all of the relevant criteria as noted in the t
attached final order(Exhibit A). r '
Section 2: The City Council upholds the staff recommendation for denial of fie ,,,y."....,.,.ve
plan map amendment and zone map change as set forth in Exhibits A and B. �s s
�s 3
-c„ou Too City Council,theretore,orders that application request CPA 96.0006(ZON 96-
0001 be DENIED,and further orders that the City Recorder send a copy of the£mal
order as a Notice of Final Decision to the parties in this case. '`
a
PASSED This day of ;1996. Nell
g_
Ma -City of Tigard �
ATTEST: j
ity
order-City ofTigard 0
{
RESClLUTION NP 96-�
P_ i
� A L
{
t h
° RMI
CITY OF TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
FINAL ORDER
x
A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS WITH REGARD TO AN
APPLICATION FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUESTED BY DR.
r } - GENE DAVIS. 1 4e x
x ymoyj"'
A_ FACTS
F �k
1. General Information
CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change CPA ='
96-000620N 96-0001 ;.,.
xr>.
REQUEST: Amend the Comprehensive Pian map and change the zoning '
from Low-Density Residential(R 4.5) to Commercial- xa?
Professional(C-P). a ;;
APPLICANT: Dr.Gene Davis
Foreign Mission 3
10875 S.W.89th
Tigard,OR 97223
�x
OWNER: Same
REPRESENTATIVE: Dave Seigal t
t
W&H Pacific
8405 S.W.Nimbus Avenue
Beaverton,OR 97008 4,,
LOCATION: Southeast of S.W.Oak Street,east of S.W.95th,north of
Highway 217(Map 1S1 35AC,Tax Lots 3500,3600,3700;
v
` Vicinity
2
The affected site is a 4.5-acre parcel which is part of a larger parcel that the
applicant wishes to develop. The remaining-9.71 acres are zoned Commercial-
Professional(CP)::The affected site is generally vacant,except for some single i
family houses along the southside of S.W.Oak Street.3800,and 3900)
1
^�a�n
3. Background Information
The subject parcel was annexed to the city in 1987,as part of the South
Metzger Community. Washington County zoned this area as Low Density
Residentia„consequently,the City annexed this area as Low Density Residential
(R-4.5)to conform to Washington County's zoning. »..
This site is part of the property that was included in the President's Parkway
project,a proposed urban renewal project. When city council approved the plan ++
for the urban renewal project,the site in question and other surrounding properties,
were rezoned from Low Density Residential to Commercial Professional. When
the urban renewal bond measure for the project failed to obtain voter approval,city
council repealed the President's Parkway Urban Renewal Plan on August 2,1990. j
Since the general consensus of the neighborhood planning organizations and I ,
j citizen planning organizations was to change the Plan for the area back to what it
was previous to the President's Parkway proposal,the city council subsequently
changed the zoning back to Low Density Residential.Their decision to change the
zoning back became effective on September 10,1990.
4. Site Information and Proposal Description
v
The applicant requests a comprehensive plan map amendment from Low Density
Residential to C-P(Commercial Professional)and a zone change from R-4.5 to C- €
P on the 4.54-acre site. A written narrative and transportation analysis have been
submitted by the applicant in support of the request. If the proposal is approved,
the applicant wishes to develop a restaurant and also this rezoned property will I
aiiow,Ina applicant to re-orieni iie already approved motel on tine adjacent parcel.
A written narrative and transportation analysis was submitted by the applicant and ;
is included as part of this staff report.
5. Aciency Comments
Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation has commented
on this application (Exhibit A),indicating that they do not support the proposed
plan amendment and zone change due to the impacts that the land use change
will have on S.W. Greenburg Road(refer to attached letter dated September,25
1996).
The Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT)has reviewed the applicant's
- traffic study and has concerns regarding the impacts of the plan amendment and
'
2 _.
zone change on the surrounding transportation facilities, specifically, the
intersection of S.W.Greenburg Road and S.W.Washington Square Road.Their
comments are included in a tetter dated August 26,1996(Exhibit B). Because of
the potential impacts of the uses allowed in the C-P zone,they cannot support the
plan amendment without conditions; however, they had no concerns with the
impacts of the proposed specific development plan on the transportation system.
' Based on the information received from Washington County and ODOT,the City
Engineering Department recommends in a memorandum dated,September 25,
1996,(Exhibit C)that the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone
change be denied.Aside from the transportation issue,Engineering finds the rs
proposal acceptable with regards to water and sanitary sewer.Storm drainage
and storm water quality issues would be addressed during a site design review
application.
Metro has sent comments,dated August 27,1996,supporting the proposed plan
amendment and zone change (Exhibit D). Ray Valone,of Metro,states that the
:. proposed Davis plan amendment and zone change will help meet the density
targets and allow a mix of land uses for this area,which is classified as a Regional
Center in Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan. The letter also
states that Metro currently does not require local jurisdictions to bring
comprehensive plans into compliance with regional policies and implementation
measures.
Widmar Pacific,owner and developer of Washington Square,submitted a letter on
October 7,1996(Exhibit E)supporting staffs recommendation of denial.The
letter states that:"[wjhiie Winmar continues to be a strong supporter of
development within the vicinity of the Greenburg Road/Hwy 217 interchangn,and
we fully expect to continue our commitment to development of our Uvashington
Square properties,we also recognize that any such development should be
undertaken in a planned manner and with extraordinary regard to the ongoing }
public facilities and services. The letter also expresses concern that the allowed iE
uses under the Commercial-Professional zone could not be supported by the
planned transportation system. Y
The applicant's representative, Dave Seigel of W&H Pacific,submitted a letter on
October 7,1996(Exhibit F)including language for a conditional plan amendment.
He said that if a condition was placed on the plan amendment limiting the land
use,then Washington County's concerns would be addressed and also that the
applicant is willing to place a deed restriction on his property that would limit the
land uses allowed on the property.
3
3
r � .
Scott King submitted a letter on October 7,1996(Exhibit G)to clarify his previous
letter. The letter outlines conditions that would need to be placed on the plan
amendment so that the County could support the plan amendment. His letter
states that the plan amendment would have to be conditioned to a specific number
of trips.
Pat Whiting of CPO#4 submitted a letter on October 7,1996(Exhibit 1)supporting
staffs recommendation of denial because of potential traffic impacts and
environmental impacts.
Tri-Met,Tualatin Valley Water District,and the Tigard Police Department had no
objections to this land use application.
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The relevant criteria in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 1.1.2(2),2.1.1,5.1,5.4,
6.1.1,8.1.1,8.2.2 and 12.2.1(3);Community Development Code chapters 18.22,18.32
IJ and 18.62;and Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 660,Division 12. t
a
1. 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 change is not consistent with all applicable comprehensive plan policies. As
discussed below,policies 8.1.1,12.2.1(3)(2b)and the Oregon Administrative Rule
(660-12-060)are not satisfied.
k ``v
The applicant claims b)and c)of this criterion are satisfied in two ways.the'
-increasing.levels of traffic congestion,being located in close proximity to intensive
commercial land uses,and noise represent a change of physical circumstances,
and that these physical conditions reflect a mistake in the existing plan i 4,
designation and,in addition,this property was zoned from residential to C-P for the'
presidential parkway project and the zoning was changed back to residential when
funding for the project could not be obtained. Furthermore,the applicant questions
the suitability of this area forsingle family residential development.
Staff does not agree with the applicant's argument that increasing levels of traffic .:
and noise represents a change in physical circumstance.The surrounding physical
circumstances i.e.,Highway 217 and Washington Square were present when the
' i a
5
4 "a
... .......
properties were annexed to the City of Tigard as residential. The City assigned
zoning of Low Density Residential(R-4.5)to the area so that the annexed area
conformed to Washington County's zoning for this area.
Since the City of Tigard is growing rapidly,there is probably 'increasing levels of
traffic and noise in many parts of I igard.If we follow the applicant's logic,many
parts of Tigard should be upzoned to commercial because of the increasing traffic
and noise.
What may be considered unforeseen is the intensity of development in the
existing,adjacent areas that are zoned Commercial-Professional. It may not have
been anticipated that Lincoln Tower and the Unisys building would be built
adjacent to this Low Density Residential area. The unanticipated development of
the high intensity commercial uses, adjacent to the subject site, represents a
change in physical circumstances and this physical change meets the criterion of
Policy 1.1.2.
Comprehensive Plan policy 11.8_5 placed a condition on the President's Parkway
project which stated: "...If for any reason the President's Parkway Development
Plan is not adopted,[t]he City Council will hold a public hearing to determine the
course of action regarding land use within the area in order to re-evaluate
the-..Comprehensive Plan Amendment (which changed land designations in the
area from Residential to Commercial Professional)." Since the neighborhoods
supported changing the zoning back to residential, City Council approved
jchanging the zoning back.Since that time,the area has been designated as part
f of the Regional Center associated with Washington Square. Although Metro's ",_
Functional Plan has not yet been adopted,the city has agreed with the Regional
Plan designation for this area to this point. Since the area is included in the ?
Regional Center,a physical change has occurred and,therefore,it is a mistake to "
have Low-Density Single-Family uses in this arca. A physical change has
occurred and therefore the proposed land use change satisfies this comprehensive
plan policy.
2. 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 policy is satisfied because the
surrounding property owners were given notice of public hearings related to the
proposal and given the opportunity to comment on the proposal. As previously
mentioned,a group of neighbors submitted a letter to staff,dated September 24,
1996, stating their opposition to the proposal (Exhibit E). The notice.for the
Planning Commission and City Council hearings were sent to surrounding property
owners within 250 feet of the affected property, posted at Tigard City Hall and
f
5
advertised in a local newspaper. In addition,the applicant provided notice of and
t4 conducted a neighborhood meeting on July,18 1996 for property owners within a
250-foot radius of the affected property and other interested parties.
3. Policy 5.1 states that the city shall promote activities aimed at the diversification of
the economic opportunities available to Tigard residents with particular emphasis
placed on growth of the focal job market. This policy is satisfied because
development of the site as a commercial professional use may employ local
residents.
4. Policy 5.4 states that the city shall ensure that new commercial and industrial
development shall not encroach into residential areas that have not been
designated for commercial or industrial uses. f
t
c �
The applicant states that the site should not be considered an area for Low-
Density Residential housing for the following reasons:the property was previously
approved for redesignation as Commercial Professional, this neighborhood has
already been severely impacted by adjacent commercial development and nearby ;z
roadways;and the redesignation of the subject area may assist redevelopment of
underdeveloped parcels in the area.According to the applicant,the rezoned parcel
will make the land use compatible with the adjacent parcel to the west and the
land use change would be in conformance with the Region 204O land use concept
which designates this area as a Regional Center.
Metro, C Exhibit p
( )supports this proposed land use change because the
=.1 Commercial Professional use would be compatible with the Region 2040
-; Regional Center designation for this area and would become a focus of compact
development and redevelopment. Although Metro currently does not require local
compliance with the 2040 plan,the designation of the site as a regional center has
been acceptable to Tigard thus far.Since this area is designated for a mix of
commercial and employment uses under Metro's plan,staff believes that the
applicant has met the requirements of policy 5.4.
5.: Policy 6.1.1 states that the city shall provide an opportunity for adiversity of r°
housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent levels. This
_criterion is primarily implemented through the Metropolitan Housing Rule (OAR
660-07)which requires 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 proposal does not bring the City out of compliance with the requirements of
the housing rule,which applies primarily to attached dwellings. Staff has checked
C
6
r ,
data regarding the requirement for housing opportunities and found that the
m proposal would slightly decrease the housing opportunity for single family
detached housing. Therefore, Staff agrees that the applicant has satisfied this
policy requirement.
6. Policy 8.1.1 states that the city shall plan for a safe and efficient street and
roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future growth and
development.
The findings from the applicant's traffic study are as follows:
a. 1999 maximum project site build out with existing zoning is expected to
generate approximately 4,694 daily,636 AM peak hour,and 596 PM peak
hour trips. The 1999 maximum project site build out with the proposed
changed zoning is expected to generate approximately 6,900 daily,896 AM
peak hour,and 823 PM peak hour trips_ The actual development proposal
is estimated to generate 3,450daily,365 AM peak hour,and 384 PM peak
hour trips.
b.All of the signalized intersections under both zoning scenarios would
operate at level-of-service(LOS) Dor better in 1999.
c.The levels of service at all the unsignafized study area intersections are
LOS D or better in the AM peak hour for both zoning alternatives. /n the
PM peak hour,the levels ofservice are LOS F for a/1 the unsignafized
intersections under both zoning alternatives with the exception of the S-W.
Greenburg Road/S.W.Oak Street intersection which operates at LOS B
under both zoning alternatives.
d.Although all of the study area intersections on S.W.Greenburg Road are
projected to operate at LOS D or better in the two build conditions,existing
field observations,made by the applicant,indicate that the S.W.Greenburg
traffic experiences progression problems through the corridor. These
s g problems may be parially a , byt„- c - urg Rc—d
widening project from the Highway 217 Southbound tamps to Washington'
Square Road.However,signal coordination improvements should still be
considered in 1999 with or without the project to further enhance traffic flow.
e.All of the study area intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or
better in 1999 with the actual development,except for the unsignafized
intersection of S.W.Hall Boulevard and S.W.Oak Street In the PM peak
hour the eastbound and westbound traffic at this intersection will operate at
i LOS F. This deficiency is due primarily to the eastbound and westbound
left tum movements conflicting with heavy northbound and southbound
traffic volumes on S.W.Hall Boulevard. As the delays become significant,
- traffic will divert to the signalized intersection at S.W.Hall and S.W.Locust
Street.
r ;
r. The proposed project access is the southern leg of the new intersection
that would be created with the extension of S.W.Lincoln Street to S.W.Oak
Street. The applicant says that the most efficient design for the project
access is two outbound lanes and one inbound lane.
At the City Council hearing on October 22,1996,testimony confirmed and the
applicant did not dispute that an off-site street connection as described in point(f)
from their traffic study would be required. Testimony also confirmed that there is
no way to assure this street connection will occur.A condition of the hotel
development on the property adjacent to the site in consideration is the extension
of Lincoln Street,as indicated on the City's Transportation Plan map.
Therima
p ry affected roads are S.W. Greenburg Road and S.W.Hall Boulevard.
S.W.Greenburg Road is under the jurisdiction of Washington County and they
i have commented regarding this land use change.According to the Washington
? County Senior Planner,Scott King:
"This traffic analysis should be based on the year 2005,which is the
planning horizon for County Transportation Plan The 1999 analysis
[submitted by the applicant]does indicate that in the P.M.peak hour link
volumes on Greenburg Road between Washington Square Road and the
Highway 217 ramps will exceed the 2005 planned capacity for this link
under both the existing and proposed land use scenarios with the
proposed zoning scenario adding an additional 113 p.m.peak hour trips
over the existing zoning(Figs. 15 and 17 from Parametrix
Traffic Study). In addition,the intersection level of service analysis
suggests to the County that individual movements at intersections of this
link of Greenburg Road(see page 10 and 13 of the Parametrix Traffic
Study)will not operate at acceptable levels of service...[B]ased on the
evidence in the record for this request,we find that this request would
"signtticantly affect"the planned capacity,and possibly the acceptable level-
of-service of S.W.Greenburg Road. Washington County recommends that } ;
the City either limit this plan amendment to the P.M.peak trip levels-
identified for the subject site under the R-4.5 land use scenario,wait for the
region to develop a transportation system and new level-of-service standard
.which would allow higher densities under the Region 2040 Concept,or
reject this request"
S.W.Hall Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of ODOT and they have commented
on this proposal. As previously indicated,the intersection of S.W.Hall Boulevard
and S.W-Oak Street will operate at level-of-service F in 1999 for left-turning
movements. According to the applicant this problem can be remedied through
traffic diverting to the signalized intersection of S.W.Hall Boulevard and S-W.
8
j
Locust Street.Staff discussed this option with Christy Hitchen of QDOT. She
agreed that the diversion of traffic to the S.W.Hall Boulevard and S.W.Locust is
an acceptable approach to allow left turns through this intersection_ However,the
letter from ODOT stated that the proposed plan amendment and zone change
could not be supported because the land use change,without conditions attached,
would degrade key intersections in the area.
Ji
City Engineering concurs with the recommendations forwarded by both
Washington County and ODOT and adds that no mitigation has been proposed for
solving the problem with the intersection of S.W.Greenburg Road and Washington
Square Road.
Based on the concerns raised by Washington County,staff finds that applicant
cannot meet Comprehensive Plan Policy 8.1.1,unless the plan amendment and i 'y
zone change is limited to the number of trips for the proposed development.
, t ,
Placing a condition on the plan amendment and zone change would be difficult to
enforce.If the applicant sells the property,there would be no mechanism to
ensure that the buyerwill put in a use that will not exceed the number of trips
conditioned on the plan amendment.
Staff--!so notes Washington County's comment that their transportation planning
horizon is 2005 and that the applicant's transportation analysis did not project
traffic volumes out to 2005,but only to 1999.
Public testimony at the October 22, 1996 City Council hearing confirmed and the
applicant did not dispute that an off-site street connection as described in point(f)
from their traffic study would be required. Testimony also confirmed that there is
no way to assure this street connection will occur.A condition of the hotel
development on the property adjar-ent to the site in consideration is the extension �
of Lincoln Street,as indicated on the City's Transportation Plan map.
7. Policy 8.2.2 states that the city shall encourage the use of public transit by locating
land intensive uses in close proximity to transit ways. This policy is satisfied
because locating a professional commercial use at the site would support public
transit in the Washington Square area.
8. Policy 12.2.1(3)provides the locational criteria for designating land as professional
commercial on the plan map. The locational criteria can be construed in a flexible
manner in the interest of accommodating proposals which are found to be in the
public interest and capable of integration into the community. The burden of
proving conformance with the criteria varies with the degree of change and impact
on the community.The applicable locational criteria with findings are as follows:
`
9
,I
I
............
(1) Spacing and Location
(b) The comm r ia1 r a is note rro nd d by residential districts on more than
two sides This criterion is satisfied because the triangle shaped site has
residential uses on only two sides. The property on the adjacent,west side
is zoned Commercial Professional, while the adjacent properties to the y z
north and east are zoned residential.
(2) Access
( €
(a) The proposed area or expansion of an existing area shall not create tr ffi c a=
congestion or a traffic safety problem Such -termination shall b baca�
X
on street capacity,existing and prof t d traffic volumes,the peed limit
number of turning movements and the traffic generating characteristics of ?
j the various types of uses As stated under Finding #7, the applicant
cannot meet this criterion.
(3) Site Characteristics
� l
(a)
IhQ ailg,shall be of a size which can acggmmQdate present and projected
needs. This criterion is satisfied because the site is large enough,4.54
acres, to accommodate the applicant's proposed 6,000 square foot
restaurant and also to allow the applicant to re-orient the already approved
motet on the adjacent parcel. The applicant plans to incorporate parts of
the existing wetlands area and other natural features into the proposed site
plan.
(b) lba aitehall have high visibility. This criterion is satisfied because the
southern portion of the property is bounded by Highway 217.
(4) Impact Assessment t
(a) The ggrifiguration and rharacteristics shall bg auch that the primacy o
' adiacent non commercial uses fma be maintained. The ability of the site 3
design to ensure the privacy of adjacent uses would be evaluated during
review of a specific development proposal.
(b) it shall be possible_toincorporate th miq sit f atu Ma into the site
desion and developmot I� The site does have significant wetlands that
10
4 E
zE
are part of the city's natural resources inventory. During site design review,
the applicant will have to address preservation of wetlands.
(c) The associated lights noise and activities shall not interfere with adjoining
non-residential uses. The potential effects from the noise, lights and
activities of a specific project would be evaluated and mitigated during the
site development review process.
9. Section 18.32 of the Community Development Code sets forth the procedural
requirements for review of quasi-judicial plan amendments. The application has
been processed in accordance with code sections 18.32.020, 18.32.050 and
18.32.060;a hearing has been scheduled with both the Planning Commission and
City Council according to 18.32.090 (D) and (E); and the requirements for
notification of the hearings have been met according to 18.32.130 and 18.32.140.
10. Section 18.22 of the Community Development Code sets forth standards and
procedures for quasi-judicial amendments to the plan and zoning district map as
i follows:
A. 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:
r ;.
1. The applicable comprehensive plan poli„ies and map designation and the E
change will not adversely affect the health safety and welfare of the
community. The applicable plan policies related to the proposal are
reviewed above under section B(Findings and Conclusions).
7
2. The statewide lap nning goals adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes }
Chapter 197 until acknowledgment of the comprehensive plan and
ordinances. The Tigard Comprehensive Plan has been acknowledged,.
therefore specific review of each statewide planning goal is not applicable. I
Notice of filing this proposed amendment has been provided to the
Department of Land Conservation and Development for comment at least
” 45 days prior to the final decision date.
3. The applicable standards of any orovisigI2 of this code or other applicable
implementing ordinance. Code section 18.62 (Commercial Professional
District)contains the standards for the C-P zone. The subject site could
meet the standards listed under"dimensional requirements"and"additional
requirements" for a development. Specific future site development
improvements would be reviewed through the site development review
and/or subdivision process to ensure consistency with the standards in
section 18.62.
4- Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or
inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates Ito the
ptgpeM which is the subject of the development aAplication. See above
under B.1.
t
x
11. Oregon Administrative Rule section 660-12-060 requires that plan amendments be
consistent with identified function, capacity and level of service of affected
transportation facilities. S.W. Greenburg Road is under the jurisdiction of
i Washington County.Highway 217 and Hall Boulevard is under the jurisdiction of
ODOT.
Washington County has commented and indicated that the proposal does '.
significantly affect the planned capacity,and possibly the level-of-service for S.W.
Greenburg Road. The proposed plan amendment will generate unacceptably
high volumes of traffic on S.W.Greenburg Road.
s
According to ODOTs letter,there are no issues with the function, capacity, and
level of service for Highway 217. The intersection of Hall Boulevard and S.W.Oak
will function at an unacceptable level of service in 1999 for eastbound and
westbound left turns. The applicant indicated that this problem can be remedied
by cars diverting to the intersection of S.W.Hall Boulevard and S.W.Locust Street,
which is signalized. Staff asked ODOT engineer Christy Hitchens about this
approach and she indicated support because it will have no negative impacts on
the intersection of S.W. Hall and S.W. Locust. One potential problem with trips
diverting to S.W. Hall and S.W. Locust, however,is that there will be more cut
t through traffic created in the neighborhood. w
Because the projected volumes for 1999 are unacceptably high for Greenburg
Road,the applicant cannot meet the criteria for the Transportation Planning Rule +
(680-12-060).
5
= 12. Conclusion
The current proposal is a request to amend the comprehensive plan and zoning
maps to allow any use under the C-P (Commercial Professional) category.
Approval or denial of this request is not contingent upon the impact of a particular
commercial use, but whether any use allowed under C-P meets the relevant
review criteria listed above. Staff finds that all applicable approval criteria to
support a comprehensive plan amendment and zone change have not been
12
satisfied. Comprehensive Plan policies 8.1.1,12.1.1(3)(2a)and OAR 660-12-060
3 w are not satisfied by the applicant. Though Comprehensive Plan policies 1.12(2),
2.1.1,5.1,5.4,6.1.1,8.2.2 and 12.2.1(2)(1a)are satisfied for the development of a
6,000 square foot restaurant, these policies have not been satisfied for all
allowable uses under the Commercial Professional category and C-P zoning.
Washington County and ODOT could support the plan amendment if it is
conditioned to include only the proposed plan for development. Although a
conditional plan amendment and zone change would allow the proposed land use
change to be in compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule(660-12-060),
additional enforcement requirements would be placed during site design review
which may be difficult to ensure compliance. City Engineering notes that no
method of enforcing a condition of approval has been proposed that would place
traffic volume limits on development beyond those permitted by the proposed
zoning. Should the property change owners,there would be no mechanism
to ensure that the new owner would limit the land use not exceed the trip limit.
1 As indicated in the Washington County letter,the issue is timing. Although the
applicant's development meets the local land use criteria and Metro 2040 land use
criteria,the transportation system is currently not in place to support the land use.
C. DECISION
The City Council DENIES Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 96-0006/ZON
96-0001 based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions.
$�s.
AP
jl
13 q,