City Council Packet - 01/24/1983® ORMUM NEW I maim
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an
REGULAR MEE•TINC AGENDA agenda item needs to sign their name on the
JANUARY 24, 19832 7:30 P.M. appropriate sign-up sneeLisi . Ii iio s:;=at is
FOWLERJUIYIGR HIGH S::H OL Provided, ask to be recognized by the Chair.
LECTURE ROOM
1. REGULAR MEETING:
1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance
1.3 Call To Staff, Council & Audience For Non-Agenda Items Under Open
Agenda
1.4 21st Birthday Party Video Tape - Present To Council
2. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be
enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request
that an item be removed for discussion and separate action. Motion to:
2.1 Approve Payment of Expenditures and Investments $ 374,680.84
2.2 Receive and File:
• December, 1982 Financial Report
• Memo From Chief Adams re: Tigard School District Activities
Letter from Summerfield Clubhouse Estates re: Police Response
• 72nd Avenue Settlement Agreement
• Memo From Linda Sargent re: Status Report on Garbage Rates
2.3 Approve and Authorize Appropriate Signatures:
• Street Dedication & Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Limited Use
Easement - F.I.G. Holding Company - 68th & Parkway
• Street Dedication - Ted L. Millar - SW Gaarde Street & 99W
2.4 Approve OLCC Applications As Follows:
• Silver Palace, 14455 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard, Disp. Class A
9 Pizza Caboose, 11670 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard, RMB
• Ron's Green Valley Tavern, 12470 SW Main, Tigard, RMB
• Scholls Thriftway, 12280 SW Scholls Ferry Rd, Tigard, PS
• Albertson's Food Center #544, 12060 SW Main, Tigard, PS
• Prairie Market #412, 8950 SW Commercial, Tigard, PS
• Willowbrook Restaurants 11525 SW Durham Rd, Tigard, R
q Pietro's Gold Coast Pizza, 13405 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard, RMB
Fred Meyer, Eve's Restaurant, 11565 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard, R
o Fred Meyer, Grocery Supermarket, 11565 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard-PS
2.5 Approve DWD Warranty Deed
3. ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION HEARINGS - REOPEN AND CONTINUE TO 1-26-83
3.1 74th & Durham
3.2 North Dakota
3.3 Bechtold
e Associate Planning Newton
4. JADCO APPEAL - REOPEN PUBLIC HEARING AND RESET TO 2-28-83
e Planning & Development Director
5. SIGN CODE REVISION - TITLE 16 - ZOA 3-82
A request by the City of Tigard to revise the Sign Code, Title 16 of the
Tigard Municipal Code.
• Public Hearing Opened
s Summation and Planning Commission Recommendations, Director of
Planning and Development
% Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination
• Public Hearing Closed
• Consideration/Action by Council
0 ORDINANCE NO. 83- Adopting Sign Code Revision
- - anal�v•±_„ _ - _ -
mg , low-
6. ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - TITLE 18, ZOA 10-82
A reauest by the Cit_v of Tigard to revise Section 18.84.030 3 (d)
r'.egzr^iTbUse �rY«.....��•..___ _J C_.?_� .s-cu .a.- a va.i..
o ..o - .rw. •... . ..-.. ..v -. tea•
oroanl 7-at•7 nn
0 Public nearing Opened
• Summation and Planning Commission Recommendations, Director of
Planning and Development
• Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination
• Public Hearing Closed
• Consideration/Action by Council
• ORDINANCE NO. 33- Adopting Temporary Use Revision
7. RESOLUTION NO. 83- Initiating Tigard Triangle Annexation
• Associate Planner Newton
8. BENEFITS RECOMMENDATION, DISCUSSION
• City .Administrator
9. FINANCE DIRECTOR/CITY RECORDER FUNCTIONS, DISCUSSION
• City Administrator
10. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC HEARINGS
10.1 Natural Features and Open Space
10.2 Transportation
• Public Hearing Opened
• Public Testimony
• Public Hearing Closed
• Consideration/Action by Council
11. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of Non-Agenda Items identified to the Chair
under item 1.3 will be discussed at this time. All persons are
encouraged to contact the City Administrator prior to the meeting.
12. ADJOURNMENT
L
PAGE 2 - COUNCIL AGENDA - JANUARY 24, 1983
T I GAR D CITY COUNCIL_
Kt(;Ul.At Ci:. .'-i"iitll-, MINUTES jA-•---- ��- ;;;� �-•-••
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Wilbur Bishop; Councilors John Cook, Tom Brian
(arriving at 7:35 P.M.), Kenneth Scheckla, Ima Scott; Frank
Currie, Director of Public Works (arriving at 8:45 P.M. ) ;
Doris Hartig, Finance Director/City Recorder; Bob Jean, City
Administrator; Bill Monahan, Director of Planning and
Development; Ed Sullivan, Legal Counsel; Loreen Wilson, Office
Manager.
2. FLAG PRESENTATION
(a) The Commander from the Tigard American Legion Post #158 presented the
Council with a flag and stand for use by the City.
COUNCILOR BRIAN ARRIVED: 7:35 P.M.
3. COUNTY COMMISSIONER INTRODUCTION
(a) Mayor Bishop introduced Commissioner Lucille Warren. Discussion
followed between Council and Commissioner Warren regarding the
extension of Murray Blvd. CAmmissioner :Marren requested letters from
the City regarding the concerns be forwarded to the County. She also
stated that she would pursue the issue at the County level.
4. APPROVE PAYMENT OF EXPENDITURES AND INVESTMENTS $ 374,680.84
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
5. RECEIVE AND FILE
o December, 1982 Financial Report
o Memo from Chief Adams re: Tigard School District Activities
o Letter from Summerfield Clubhouse Estates re: Police Response
0 72nd Avenue Settlement ,;reement
o Memo From Linda Sargent re: Status Report on Garbage Rates
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to receive and
file.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
6. Approve and Authorize Appropriate Signatures:
a Street Dedication & Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Limited Use
Easement - FIG Holding Company - 68th & Parkway
o Street Dedication - Ted L. Millar - SW Gaarde Street & 99W
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve and
authorize appropriate signatures.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983
_ as
a ;row
{ ON
7. APPROVE OLCC APPLICATIONS AS FOLLOWS:
O Silver Palace, 14455 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard, Disp. Class A
O Pizza Caboose, 11670 SW Pacific R-w^,y. ,
o Ron's Green Valley Tavern, 12470 SW Main, Tigard, RMB
o Schoils ihriitway, 12280 SW Scholis Ferry Rd. , Tigard, Pg
O Albertson's Food Center #544, 12060 SW Main, Tigard, PS
o Prairie Market #412, 8950 SW Commercial, Tigard, PS
s
o Willowbrook Restaurant, 11525 SW Durham Rd. , Tigard, R
O Pietro's Gold Coast Pizza, 13405 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard, RMB
o Fred Meyer, Eve's Restaurant, 11565 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard, R
O Fred Meyer, Grocery Supermarket, 11565 SW Pacific Hwy. , Tigard, PS
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to approve.
i
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
}
8. CALL SPECIAL MEETING FOR 2-2-83 and 2-7-83.
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to call special
Council meetings. t
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
F
9. TABLE AGENDA ITEM # 2.5 TO 1-25-83
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to table agenda
item # 2.5 (DWD Warranty Deed) to January 25, 1983.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
10. TABLE AGENDA ITEM # 7 TO 1-26-83
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to table agenda
item # 7 (Tigard Triangle Annexation Resolution) to January 26, 1983.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
11. STORER-METRO PRESENTATION
(a) A representative from Storer-Metro appeared and presented Council
with a video tape of Tigard's 21st Birthday Party.
(b) Mayor Bishop thanked Storer-Metro and stated this would be viewed by
the Council at a future meeting.
12. ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION HEARINGS - REOPEN AND CONTINUE TO 2-28-83
(74th/Durham, North Dakota, Bechtold)
(a) Public Hearing Opened
(b) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scheckla to continue
to February 28, 1983.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
PAGE 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 7.983
(c) City Administrator stated he would renotify people of the new hearing
date by advertising in the newspaper.
13, TAnrO APPEAL - REOPEN PUBLIC HEARING AND RESET TO 2-28-83
(a) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Scott to reset the
public hearing to 2-28-83.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
14. SIGN CODE REVISION - TITLE 16 - ZOA 3-82
A request by the City of Tigard '_o revise the Sign Code, Title 16 of the
Tigard Municipal Code.
(a) Public Hearing Opened
(b) Director of Planning and Development advised Council that the
Planning Commission recommended approval of the Sign Code as
submitted. He noted that Linda Sargent and Ed Walden were present if
Council had any questions.
(c) Public Testimony:
o Mark Zimmel, 12925 SLS Katherine, representing Mercury Development,
offered support of the use of reader boards in the City.
o Fred Shelton, 12244 SW Sc:.olls Ferry Road, a store owner in Greenway
Towncenter, also supported reader boards.
(d) Public Hearing Closed
(e) Administrative Assistant, Linda Sargent, detailed the changes in the
text for Council.
(f) ORDINANCE NO. 83-01 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TITLE 16, SIGN
REGULATIONS OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL
CODE, ADOPTING THE 1983 SIGN CODE,
PRESCRIBING REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS,
PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION: AND
ENFORCEMENT, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
(g) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to adopt.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
15. ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - TITLE 18, ZOA 10-82
A request by the City of Tigard to revise Section 18.84.030 3 (d)
regarding temporary use applications filed by certified non-profit
organizations.
(a) Public Hearing Opened
PAGE 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983
Wim _ IM
ment stated that the Planning
Zrd Development- (b) Director of Planningp
_ Commission unanimously approved submission of this to Council and
were recommending the additiocx of tempi,— a� =�=--- -_--'
-re-
certified non-profit organizations be allowed a fee waiver.
NEW
(c) Public Testimony: No one appeared to speak.
(d) Public Hearing Closed
(e) ORDINANCE NO. 83-02 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.84
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES, TITLE 18 OF
THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE AND DECLARING
AN EMERGENCY.
(f) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to adopt.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
16. BENEFITS RECOMMENDATION, DISCUSSION
(a) City Administrator presented Staff's recommendation for proposed
changes to the benefit package offered to employees of the City.
(See attached summary of recommendations. ) The Administrator
requested Council approve the recommendation for budget purposes only.
i (b) Lengthy discussion followed regarding the Benefits Task Force
Committee's report.
(c) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to adopt
staff's recommendations for budget purposes only at this time.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
(d) Councilor Brian requested the City immediately submit application to
withdraw from the Sccial Security System. Staff to report back on
action taken and procedures.
17. FINANCE -'IRECTOR/CITY RECORDER FUNCTIONS, DISCUSSION
(a) City Administrator stated that the increased workload of the City has
made it necessary to split the Finance Director/City Recorder
position into two separate positions. He stated that Doris Hartig,
who currently holds the position has decided to fill the City
Recorder position. The Administrator requested approval from Council
to start the hiring process to hire a Finance Director by 4-1-83.
(b) Lengthy discussion followed regarding the cost of the newly created
position, the salary range for the Finance Director and the need for
quarterly reports on the position split and productivity savings.
i DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS ARRIVED: 8:45 P.M.
PAGE 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983
(c) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to support the
recommendation of the City Administrator to split the Finance
Director/City Recorder position and cap the Finance JireC_Or pUisie`'4i'
at $30,000/year salary.
®a
Approved by 4-1 majority vote of Council, Councilor Scott voting Tay:
RECESS: 9:05 P.M.
RECONVENE: 9:20 P.M.
18. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - NATURAL FEATURES AND OPEN SPACE
(a) Public Hearing Opened
(b) Associate Planner, Jeremy Coursolle, submitted a new map setting out
the greenway/floodplain areas in the City and presented a memo with
staff recommendations for changes in the Natural Features and Open
Space Element (as follows). Associate Planner also noted that the
Planning Commission recommended approval.
The proposals are as follows:
1. In Policy 3.2.1 delete (2)(b) and (c). It appears that these two
criteria place those affected properties into a hardship
situation, requiring them to prove that there are no
alternatives. I wonder if it is possible to actually prove there
are "no alternatives on site." In addition, these criteria may
eliminate a trade-off situation between the City and those
industrial or commercial properties adjacent to the floodplain but
still undeveloped. The trade-off would be possible development in
the floodplain with channel improvements to Fanno Creek, which are
desperately needed (reference 1981 CH2M Hill Master Drainage
Plar_).
2. Insert #3 under 3.2.1 which would read "Those areas specifically
designated by the City Engineer to be buildable areas." This
would further clarify which areas are developable and which areas
are not.
3. In Policy 3.2.2 (a) there appears to be some confusing language
pertinent to the "water storage capacity" question. It is my
understanding after discussing this issue with Frank Currie that
"retention" may be construed from the word "storage." It may also
be construed that equal areas of cut and fill must be made in
order to maintain water storage capacity. The following language
would clarify this issue:
"a. The combined effect of water capacity and stream flow of the
floodway adjoining the site be maintained;. .. . ."
4
PAGE 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983
s
i
1
z
4. The word "changes" in 3.2.2 (b) infers that any changes could not z
occur upstream or downstream. If channelization was to occur this
a� -- r-A hut
a^positive ..ay.
r�
Staff believed the intent was to guard agai-Clbt auvcioc ivaF--
following language would clarify this issue: s
"b. Engineered drawing and documentation proving there will be no
upstream or downstream adverse impacts on properties in the
floodplain area."
(c) Public Testimony:
E
Vittz Ramsdell, 11635 SW Terrace Trails - :VPO #3 Member, suggested
that the Element be more specific in the planning of park sites.
Ms. Geraldine Ball, 11515 SW 91st Avenue - representing DiB, Inc. and
herself, read letter and introduced it into the record discussing the
Landmark Ford property and noting that it should not be shown in the
floodplain on the map and the geology of the triangle site.
Mr. .john Skourtes, 17010 SW Weir Road, Beaverton, discussed several
areas in the element that were of concern to him dealing with the
watercourses in the City and the treed areas in the greenway areas.
Ms. Chris Vai:derwood, NPO #5 Representative, stated that buffering
along Fanno Creek was essential for residential properties in the
area and wants to encourage development of industrial properties
along the greenway areas without offering a harmful impact to the
neighborhoods.
Lengthy discussion followed between staff and Council regarding park
site designations and the protection of neighborhoods while
furthering economic development in the City. Staff also advised Ms.
Ball that the map would be changed to show the proper delineation of
the floodplain around her property.
City Administrator stated that the adoption of the Comp Plan is not
the end of a process but the first step. He has spoken to the Park
Board and they will be updating the policies in the Park Plan and
then the Capital Project Plan will be developed to implement the Comp
Plan. >
Lengthy discussion followed regarding the minority report submitted
by staff.
(d) ORDINANCE NO. 83-03 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE NATURAL
FEATURES AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF THE
TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
PAGE 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983
(e) Motion by Councilor Cook, seconded by Councilor Brian to adopt.
_---d Pd by Council-or Rrian to table Policy
sm
('nii�n�i 1 _
(g) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to amend the
Following:
Page 47 - Finding #5: "The City's Park System Development Charge is
acquired through new development and is used solely for park
acquisition, development or capital acquisition. Park maintenance is
paid for through the City's general fund."
Page 47 - Policy 3.6.1 (c): "Development of additional neighborhood
parks will have a lower priority for public funding and are
encouraged to be provided by the private sector within planned unit
developments and maintained by homeowners associations."
Page 47 - Policy 3.6.1 (d): "New mini parks have the lowest
development priority and should be supplied at the developer's or the
neighborhood's expense and maintained by a neighborhood association
created as part of the development process."
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
(h) Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 83-03, as amended, was approved by
unanimous vote of Council.
(i) Councilor Brian requested Council give staff some direction as to how
policy 3.2 should be amended. After some discussion, consensus of
Council was to have Mayor Bishop and Councilor Scheckla represent
Council on a subcommittee to study the issue and report back. Chris
Vanderwood and a representative of the development industry were also
suggested as members.
19. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC HEARING - TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
(a) Public Pearing Opened
(b) Public Testimony:
o Mr. Dave Atkinson, SW Century Oak Drive, Stated he takes exception to
Durham Road being set out as a collector street. Council requested
he put his statements in written form for the meeting of 1-25-83
since he would be unable to attend.
o Letter from Jon Fessler was received stating his objection to the
transportation plan as proposed.
PAGE 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983
i
(c) Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Cook to continue to
1-25-83.
Approved by unanimous vote of Council.
20. OPEN AGENDA: Consideration of leon-Agenda
under item 1.3 were discussed at this time.
20,1 Mayor Bishop requested Council note a letter directed to the Mayor
from the State Highway Division 1-5• rHeaalsogadv e ed North
co ncilTigard/south
this
Tigard Interchange project on
issue would be discussed in greater detail at Tigard City Hall on
January 31, 1983 at a 10:00 A.M. news conference.
EXECUTIVE
SESSION: Council went into executive session under ORS 192.660
21. EXEC litigation.
(1)(h) to consider pending g
22. ADJOURNMENT: 11:40 P.M.
d
-City Recorder - City of Tgar
{
ATTEST: `
Mayor - City of Tigard
PAGE 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983
�• _
Ey
U)
O
U
x x w x
U3 > 2 >r Ei ca r� a E-4
z H ca '�
woo w H
w WG W W Wz H Ergo E-1 E+
E-+ E-4 M: H E-1 < O U H
cn < x � a w w oxo ztx - w z
W HCG O0 HWS-+ i-• (s� rl W '-' _
r-4 G] f rs v ;
Q HI X X W w w � w w 0 O FC o
w w :,
Lr) Ea
a• n pi cv r14. - r
_
a, .o a CO o ti
t/T� ry cty < yr u H —
! x U) w w
H
3 a a O W E1
� U3 -1 0X4 z H w
a � � � o ca
H w < w a
� > w w wo2E-, � wcn a 2 w
w , , ,.._, H a w x w a s z
x ca ca a� a a
r� az a
z wz a� caxn awtea H
r�� Lx
F:4 U) U) FtwU o o z
U) w w FCCas w >+ U xO w >+ aa. a w " a
o >+ E-4 a
00w x Q o a U) E- U]
H z 00
_
w£wwaa
H a H
" EHO a A wH teaHs
>+
vaz'
O E- a z
z z P4 U <
S O H
a4 H W H
CD
t as E-4 H H Ei Ow ~ z z O
G. < H < W E+ w O E+
U) o E-1Um ' HL0wa, HW
>+
L) U) HU E4
a cEooU Z "
U aC:) C> w oa
>+ >+ < 0 > 0 >+
O L) w L) aW W wa � Ei o - Z W O � HHW'
Wa a0 H cn iH-l0 UUPa+ QU OH CD LO E4 Oa+ H ZQ'
H
E amw 0x x Cl 0x a t t rOa w Ln C-4 a ww � a
It-
0
Q
a E-1 O
E H 00 w w
a E4 H a x x
w
U) a a z U E- a
w w o ff H ca
W c`o � w c`-'na s aw
� �
to I
Ix a >,
W U w w W z F4 0 A C] o M
a >' H w
H cn zLn ZH
w w x o x` o yr H a s
w
c�
a
E4 w w >+ a Ei
ri > E-' z
w 0 oU
z � w
,a a H
x ..`
ca E- Q x w H
z
_ z U
CL4 E-1
w wn U) n a x
x
Da to January 24, 1983
I wish to testify before the Tigard City
L-"--=
_ (Please print your name)
1.3 Call to Staff, Council & Audience for Non-Agenda Items Under Open Agenda
Name, Address & Affiliation Item Description
Af o d'3 lh Ti�,�11 G.QQD T2�Ra,a-Lo -7i►?��Y aTi•�.
V
C4f11 tYcr-c" �o
--�-,�
liff'u nnbtT l° ` -
Item Description: 5. SIGN CODE REVISION
"TLE 16 - ZOA 3-82
oponent (for) Opponent (agains t)
ne, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation
i
i
i
r _gig5`V� yTo nc o r
_ ( the following item: (Please print your name) ;2 C1
l teia Description: L lA
t- L6" WLMuT .DI NT
TITLE 18. ZOA 10-82
)ponent (Eor) Opponent (against)
ae, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and ?affiliation
I.
C
i
r.i v<-.. .,eKr. .w,rt-++•?.�..:r.w:i•Mt;+.+rs-a:.-^�K9!gawait'"'+'T-rl:++<'.•
st�^"t� 'te's`t 'fjrbefor" �ie TarEi ty" ounci)N on
the following item: (Please print your name) I Lt
® Item Description: 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC HEARINGS
E j Natural Features & Open Suace
)ponent (for) Opponent (against)
ie, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation
63�S.W 70 —Jr✓ i T e
L FF 2 V PJ9 G✓ ' 'G
I
f
f
f`
\. klkF
t.
LEM ----- Mw -
i
1/24/83
is
PAYMENT OF BILLS FOR COUNCTL APPROVAL f
PROGRAM BUDGET
Community Services
T
Police 27,246.93
f
Finance & Records 3,585.05
t
Municipal Court 884.81
Library 1,676.88
Social Services 2,373.64
Total Community Services 35,767.31
Community Development
Public Works 19,4-42.83
Planning & Development 2,063.33 �
Total Community Development 21,506.16
Policy & Administration
Mayor & Council 257.91
Administration 1,418.36
Total Policy & Administration 1,676.27
City Wide Support Functions
a
Non-departmental 10,816.86
Misc. Accounts (refunds & payroll deductions, etc. ) 17,661.19
DEBT SERVICE
Bancroft Bond & LID Expenses 203,506.10
UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY
Contract 83,746.95
TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS WRITTEN 374,680.84
ro
w N N N of CD
r
In
rss
1!1 d rn co
L1 GD 1 O aD -t ul r O
f.' w O N O of � ' T r 00 W
a, �
1'54
El
U
W
0
�.-11
H
E
O 1 S n r
O O � u1
U W r H M co MLn
r
L'i N N O
H H clw N
W O M
N 11 11 II II II 11
O O O O
O O
W CO �D O .o N In
� 0 O
tc•1 M r M N
Y r
0 ,f +
.d t t t t
y 1 1
'^ ,iO1
a v o co Ln
I co n �c
M M M n d. M O lD n O1t0 10 C1 N
m kl n In O
N r4 H H V' O N c1 v .--1 n C 1 CO 01 O
CD ri n co n a O l0 N
N
01
N
d
U �y
Sa Si yU,.�
y y O
N
3 4j Yui N
4j (D e w
In N E' p 3 vii w En
m to a� a`j
ro m y y rn a ro `a
4j 4j w
41
to v d al tr E"
y
p H
4 N U r-1 N M V' ul
( a
Ca I O an In In r-1 r-1 r-I N N
fA r-I r-1 "I
N N N N C.; W N N N
i
ro
O N T N O d
c-4
-T d N n .--I rfl r1 u'1 p
` w Il -. N OD - N ^ �
N� N O I Ln
p
C
O
N W Ol cl) rn ^ N M C` N
� 1p �tl rn n d co� N a,
C O c,y
r--i Ol O .7 Ln u'1 CO u'1 M M r--I O
r-I r-1 N GD
E+
O
cQ
a
a
z
0
E Q
M H f1i
E 1n W
- O
Ln oo
lO N N
cn In
O
1-1 W p
W H + cn
O II II II II
It
II
C)
W d IT O O p O
00 p p
( x o l
W N
N N
l
I }} }c3 In -4 col
OIn OCO IP V' Vr d' Ol
N'-I Ol I� I. V' r-I Ill In
I A t0 ri r-i O M N
ON OD
ON r4
43
r'
N to 10
y
rd
ta
+[, N N y ed trM C l y N
Ia
m
U O Pal ri r-1 rl .-1 W .i 11 1-1 r-1
N
A
ryr.
N
brn O o co n M .O m .o
q n O Ic N
N (+l 'CIn
G M O c0
11
�O7 s
Q
H w
m O
7 H m p O
N U O O
y cl N G
�O Lr)
q � 11 11
Z 11 p O
a
x p CIL Ci
/ w c
+
O O O O N O
O O Ln O O O O W
q m C O O O t` m
.
mr-1 OD p O O O O O O O N M 04 V' �"I r-I
h O F OD
1 N
Q1 r-1
r-1
G
O
-.i
J-1
ro
►1 rU/ H W
d 44 w i
�.1 m O W
U
yy �(r7� d
7
(Z� O O V 7y .ui rl r1 m
N rJ d y rn
..-1 m 'O O C '�v r0 +J C H $4 N N N
U E N C43
�.1 C oo d Ci m ri C O d+ .ry
rL 10 Pi c -A ka -1 A N 4J �` � a a U $ b -� '� y
00 ow x v'° a'i orao G
o W w a
A F.. U V' O r-1 N e-1 r-1 ri N Ln %0 CDN N N N c'� m
en
�p �p �p
U 1 1 1 1 1 '1q 1 1 a1 1 `o 1 `o �Q 1
wz .� .� .d � .-1 .� .� r, .a .� rl •� •'; �;
w ri ri U w v v v v a� v v v v v v v v v v v v
N co (71 co c cn
t'1 co SID 01 n GD
O S oc cD
1, nl �O Cf 01 S C) f+f M �D
f 1 In N N
Id
.o.
O N N
Ul l
F. N ifl S N i/1 cn n O
4jn n
n if'1 t` I S
1 S
3.4
U
l
E-
Z Z O
W N
H
W
i E
N 0 O 3
~ [] O N
ti UT.. "iiS Ln
H O U C-4
N~ n V�j N
W of
X ll 11 II
W
�. O cD L O
O c+1 O
Y1
y4 N N
b } t t
fh
cn W O N
M O O O O O N 0 C, N n O N
pp O O O O
ft� M Im rf V' V' Of O 01
O 01 t� l�
m N N
10 fn N ' N
03
rl
O
N
N N
'O b
O O
.i W43 4J
cu
a F'
W >, cif N P 71 H N
N u U rdtr &
N $ U til iJ to it J-f VU N i3 V OI
rn
4p1 -•�q+ oCo w +�.+ `a� U ►Ci H w �r
G) O d O H $ F.. W C] O O H O
o
EI Af�+3 v v v uNi N m o 00 fA
E.
v V d d v d V C C @ 0 3A fn
EDE
O an
,
� o
1 '
u
m
d
r
In
ii
H c+1
U
W
Lp
z
0
H
E IvEl1 O
co 'r
H V] W
U O% C
7y N co
O �T
H N N N
Ln
z
12,
w n u
W rn .o
� s o
d rn o
b N d
Ul
W
M n
ap 01 c}
1 V' m
N
m ,! N
� ISI O
C
t
En
P
cc D UU
xW G
W �
q
O � O
C9
t0
3
F
Rim-
7
MEMORANDU`'I
`s
fi
January 13, 1983
TO: City AdministracoriCity %vuitc_i
FROM: Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Special Events
RE: Tigard School District Activities
Sir:
Throughout the school year the police department is asked to provide
security and traffic control at special events; i.e. , athletic events
and dances.
The manpower directed to this activity is th-a Police Reserve element,
and they are paid by the School District for their time. This last
year, due to increased attendance of at home football games, there was
a slight impact upon the swing shift personnel for traffic control
after the games. When regular personnel were available, one or two
patrolmen were assigned to a traffic control activity at the end of the
( game for approximately a half hour.
If there are any additional questions, please advise.
Respectfully,
2a c.i
B. Adams
Chief of Police
RBA:ac
L
1983
Tigard,Oregon
11205 s.W. Summerfield Drive for the active retired
Tigard, OR 97223
Pt,one: 620-8160
January 11, 1983
Robert Adams
Tigard Chief of Police
9020 SW Burnham
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mr. Adams:
We want to express our thanks to the Tigard Police
Department for the prompt response and gracious manner
In which your department continually serves us.
So few times we fail to express it verbally, but we
are impressed with the way your men handle every phase
of their job. it is sincerely appreciated by us at Summer-
field Clubhouse Estates.
Sincerely
Donna & Bob Monroe
Managers
DBM/bip
January 19, 1983 a
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor & Council
FROM: Linda Sargent, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: Status Report on Garbage Rates
On August 23, 1982, Council adopted a new rate schedule for solid waste
disposal effective October 1, 1982.
The following is a status report on rates in neighboring communities for
residential customers.
JURISDICTION RESIDENTIAL RATES/
ONE CAN/PER WEEK
Washington County $6.y5
Hillsboro 5.45
West Linn 5.15
Forest Grove 5.25 Curb/$6.35 Yard
Tualat-:z 5.85
King City 4.35
Beaverton 4.80
Tigard 6.95
Effective January 3, 1983, the rates will increase by 20¢ as metro is charging
haulers a convenience fee to finaa—e the cost of landfills and transfer
stations.
Attached please find communication from Schmidt's and Miller's Sanitary
Service regarding the issue of the convenience fee. This issue is scheduled
for Council consideration at the meeting of February 14, 1983.
LS:ch
(O447A)
C_
MEIN
January 10, 1983
To the t:^ayor and City Council Members of Tigard;
I would like to discuss at your monthly meeting T:ITRC' s
most recent actiois; namely, the Clackamas County Recycling and.
Transfer Center (' -no) .
You, the City Council, may not think this facility has any
effect on your City. Ilr=RO' s actions affect all the cities and
unincorporated areas of Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington
counties.
CRTC was supposed to have opened January 1, 1983. Due to
building delays CRTC will not open until March 1, 1983. NITRO
is going to start charging all garbage haulers a "convenience
charge" as of January 1 , 1983. This charge will add an additional
$1 .47 per ton for disposal of solid wastes.
METRO is charging all refuse haulers in the Tri-County area
to pay for this facility. However, only the haulers in Clackamas
County will be able to use the facility. The haulers of Multnomah
and Washington counties must pay, but will not be able to unload
their trucks at CRTC .
Washington County has authorized the passing of this charge
on to the customer. This convenience charge ($1 .47 per ton)
works out to an increase of 20¢ per can per month.
My company belongs to the .,Washington County Garbage Haulers
Association. I would like to discuss what action this Associa-
tion has decided to take with regardto METRO' s rate increases.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Yours truly,
14P,N J e/ 2�'I i C��/
Larry dchmidt, Vice-president
Schmidt' s Sanitary Service, Inc.
mill
1
Phone 2MAY4= Phone 6
644-6161 544-6161
i�'t W-.!. ��r����h� SS�uj&e
��.
.7P!!40lrscY VViiiv 2;=" ----Contract—Monthly
a
5150 SW Alger St
Beaverton, Or 97005
December 31, 1982
City of Tigard _
Honorable Mayor Wilbur Bishop
& Council Members
Your city collectors are asking you to review this material.
Please understand that a pass thru would not increase our
hauling profit margin. It would only permit us to collect
Metro's additional fees (Beginning January 3, 1983) . We have
contested Metro's figures to no avail.
It appears that we have no alternative but to pass Metro
charges on to the customer.
Please let us know as scop as possible of a work session
or what it will require to approve our request of the pass thru.
Thank you.
CARL R MILLER, President
MILLER'S SANITARY SERVICE, INC.
---
�-
i
X�iDY�Y�ib�
Phoneme 644-6161
Sa
c. .. C
SM _ntract—Monthly —
a
5150 S.W. Alger
Beaverton, Oregon 97005
December 22, 1982
GARBAGE DISPOSAL COSTS INCREASED
Metro Service District notified garbage hauling industry of Metro's
final rate structure December 10, 1982.
Effective January 3, 1983, the rates charged at disposal facili-
ties in the Metro area will go up- Increased costs of operating St.
John's Landfill in compliance with State and Federal regulations
and the cost of a new solid waste transfer station to replace Rossman
Landfill has required Metro Service District to raise disposal rates.
Metro estimates that the new disposal rates could add 20 to 35 cents
per month to your residential garbage bill for weekly service. Commer-
cial or industrial customers can estimate new monthly rates using
conversion factor seven cans to the yard or 1.40 to 1.54 cents increase
per month of each yard container. Drop boxes can expect a 30 to 60 cent
per yard increase.
ULING RATES WILL REMAIYZ THE SAME. THE ADDITIONAL
PLEASE NOTE OUR HA
CHARGE IS TO PAY FOR METRO FACILITY. WE ARE ALSO USING THE LOWER FIGURES
THEY ESTIMATED EXCEPT OUR FIGURES SHOW COMPACTED DROP BOX WILL REQUIRE
$.84/-FD TO REMAIN AT PRESENT LEVEL OF RETURN.
We also do not think it is fair to collect the transfer station fees
when the station is not open for business.
The convenience fee 1.49 per ton to be also applied to those using
the Clackamas Transfer Station is also unfair. That station is no more
convenient than the landfill has been for Clackamas County operators and
public.
St. Johns operators and the public will also pay transfer fees of
Clackamas County transfer station but no convenience fee.
Maw
TABLE 6-1
L� x�
RECOMMENDED FULL UNIFORM RATE
Full Uni=orm Rate
Regional
Transfer
User Class Base Rate User Fee Charge Total Rate
Commercial $10.33 $1.68 $1.47 $13.48
Public: Car 3.15 0 .54 2.31 6.00
Truck 3 .90 0 . 54 2.31 6.75
Extra Yards 1. 58 0 . 27 1.15 3.00
Convenience Charge
CTRC Only 1.49
Commercial 0.50
Public: Cars and Trucks 0.25
Extra Yards
Regional Charges Regional
Transfer Total
User Class User Fee Charge Charge
Commercial $1.68 $1.47 $3. 15
Public: Car & Truck . 54 2.31 2.85
Extra Yards . 27 1.15 1.42
Price Each
Tire Disposal Rates
St. Johns $0 .20
Passenger (up to 10-ply) 0.90
Passenger Tire on Rim 2.00
Truck Tires 2.00
Small Solids
Truck Tire on Rim Dual
Tractor Grader Puplex , 7.00
Large Solids
CTRC $0 .35
Passenger 1.05
Passenger Tire on Rim 2.50
Truck Tires 2.50
Small Solids
Truck Tire on Rim Dual
Tractor Grader Puplex, 7 . 50
Large Solids
6593B/317-19
09, 16/82
6-3
car aw
t
f
i
5--
e
i
t
e
s
i
f
{
0"'.fa �„�,y.....,6 ..._....�- ► fig• j'he ttefa f�gp_plements"the �..e.�...�► a
t 8 3
=�-vsrt►rtt. the _ z g •� �� _ � � t _
b4 a'lot cleaner .� Y
o f we G Y =t _ W being> e #.no longer bean$$tl1 W
built of}T owtt�tltY ::. addition.
Faced ► in fees'A.
PFba h nieraon tion costs. f ip�n statio g a�
:. Forr `�V axle. lt $e 'Meow
tet
reg '# should,pass .. the
Haat tfie . t>seY to 'tt t�e timin8 of ttWuew+ � �.
3t*, fee"wheic it(the new ;
firer Lo thele customsera. _ ed A „I= •t think It`s jal to collect
Service plstrlet has impos on is oPetatioQ► sand.'
"fhe Zee ted thrbu8lwut th*": transfet! °�Q
solid wade gen+ com r ,om the heels of a Sept•
ma 6 it ;1.47-� ;d.aew trap w e 'i'he,ttwug ;' *y; "terjoo't Ve just -
cr �es!nc- Po Ba March �`rate in`cr°sa '
t sch a_ ;e ted
- yyent to tiu�:�►� �Q�� a he is
• an:ha �; Thqugh
'he i �g ' t
.-. 4'tp C claw chatgCs:IV anoWer W W-7--k.'
yrs e
* # she ether hs sAew -
t1je in►pacte YtW x:
y xe as cow ,oto##sir cu ► ttc ope ns:.
�Ia
,ope '
?4 . •sl ., trt thii'lun;,::. �4, r YhYt
u *im corpoxx�a�•
irawi
r
r
r�
MENN;
ti i Z H r; i .3 r _..
Route 11OX
Ds•
Q11 U'." pas.Sed an or(-. ,--ianc;-
e% _ _ '.i seating a nevi regiona
transc • -:gar r + . ... _ � ) inure-sec? user ft2e
cessar to I.r �� �`_ >prv3 of c.reparing th,:,
ground i 0'' the :'.lc i<.c3. unser :=L �r?cvclinq C entF_r --!nd
l;••;tti>,r..,+e, . possible' energy recovl--y fac;i1iThe new r.f!gional.
transfer char g,
th ,-::-ratinq and capit::1t
costs ol� Handl_ amass -ans' er ar,7
r:,•sicer.t�
The new fees_ tak•_ �f�c,t , al:-'.,i- ,_ �, 1983 ' znclo: +_ at
ret"sed Laser fee f:�rn_, f,ir you o begin using on
v`
January 3 . 1'h ' :Zc;ti f0frr, 1 the regional tranr,fc.r
,�k•,r�ic;' charge :end 1'1C;;:"35<-•Ci l ?- �c=.�>, Vie new fee schedule :-s
OU~lil•t���'. i n 't'3k' l E'
Calculation o` - - - F' nd Tr - _ —`—_ c harms=
R. th ;_ublic and _r� m, :i .rl user:, -. _e charged :he useL fey--
-ind transfer I private car at your
ate ill be c`:arc- .iI " hase c s.-osas. rate ?lus the . 5
yr�r' :tinir. tw ./sr6 mi r.iinuri
fi ansf r -hang r rE , Jt:t i _. leh.Lci.£'S acre ch.]rged
$i . A i -� rc3.iS� 17 :e e- rimer trig, pl::n
tes .,era rata . 3i,.i.ona: cl;bic yard , pubii,_
:+ . F• t h� i1..,1;...1i r ,arC7ecl . 27G t]Se f,,
a �cr l a;_
ia1 v h i t i_s charged
your site's base rate plus . 251, user i ,e and . 22G per yard
t:ransf•�r cbargt--- or a total of_..47C per yard. A commercial
vehicle with compacted waste is charged . 431, user fee and
. 38¢ transfer charge *ger yard orai of _ 81r_per yard
plus vnur base rate.
T-1c,,v e!nh
C,. r a n e r o r a -o'
t o"I al
user lee and q1 . Pe!:
Eacli mont-h ' S USef 1- (--,e :,i nd charges are due at
20t1i of tiie fCl1cWiW; I-P-Ontll- For example ,
January ' s charges are due by February 20 , 1983 . If you
have any questions about the new charges or the revised
user fee form please call Terilyn Anderson at 221-1646 .
Metro :taff will he you to discuss the new
for.. _ .
5
or-.-
S i n c e r t:I
Norm W-etting
Operations Mana;!4,-
.4W/TA/sr-
7114B/D.l
Attachit,.ent
-CzrrM77- ^711n p•., aenr3a item No. 9 -- --
Meeting nate December 21 , 1982
INFORMATIONAL REPORT ON THE DELAY OF THE OPENING
OF CLACKAM.AS TRANSFER AND RECYCLING CENTER AND
THE SUBSEQUENT IMPACTS ON METRO'S DISPOSAL RATES
Date: December 14 , 1962 Presented by: Dan Durig
FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
Introduction
The delay in opening the Clackamas Center will have impacts
on solid waste collection and disposal rates across the
metro region. This report is intended to provide back-
ground information to the Council regarding this problem.
This delay impacts the basic assumptions incorporated
into the rate structure adopted by Council in November,
making the adopted rates incapable of meeting revenue
requirements. The changed assumptions and possible
solutions will be discussed below.
There are two important impacts you should be aware of
with the opening date of CTRC moved back to March of 1983 .
Impacts
N
First, the_si� ated waste flow to be disposed of at
St. Johns wil=ecrease by approximately 46 , 000 tons
during the period January - February, 1983 . Less waste
will go to St. Johns since material will not be transferred
from CTRL for this two month period. waste-_� waG anti-
cipated to be placed in St. Johns b direct haul a� a
result o an' G closing i also be lost. This
loss of waste flow will cause the per unit tonnage dis-
posal rate paid to Genstar to increase by approximately
$,3_QQ-p-e ton for this two -month period. This increase
is due to a sliding rate scale- inc u ed in the Operations
` Contract. Our analysis indicates that to cover this loss
of revenue, it would be necessary to increase the base disposal rate by $ .65 per ton over the course of the
12-month period.
The other effect the delay will have is to decrease
the cost of CTRC operations due to being open ten
months rather than the anticipated twelve months.
This results in a decrease in the revenue required
to be generated by the regional transfer charge (RTC)
as this charge was designed to spread the operating
costs of CTRC over all solid waste disposal sites
in the region that receive solid waste from the
District.
Options
Three approaches are outlined below which address the
lost revenue caused by the delay in the opening of CTRC
until March of 1983 .
1 . The first option is to simply implement the
adopted rate schedule January 3, 1983 as
planned and authorized by Ordinance No. 82-146 .
This would include the collection of the base
disposal rate ($10 .33/ton) , the user fee ($1.68/
ton) and the regional transfer charge ($1.47/ton) .
If this is done, there will be a net shortfall
of as much as $82 ,700 over the course of the
12-month period. This is a direct result of
the fact that unit disposal cost at St. Johns
increases as flow decreases under the Operations
Contract.
2 . The next option is to restructure the disposal
rate and regional transfer charge to reflect
the anticipated decrease in flow to St_ Johns
and changes in operating. cost at CIRC. In
effect, the disposal charge would be increased
to reflect the increase in our Operations
Contract unit cost. The regional transfer
charge would be decreased (but collected ef-
fective January 3 , 1983) to reflect the
reduction in operating cost at CTRC by
opening in March instead of January. If
both rates were put into effect on January
3 , 1983 , and collected throughout the 12
month period, the disposal fee would have
to increase $ .65/ton ($10 .33 to $10 .98/ton)
and the regional transfer charge would 'de-
crease by $.23/ton ($1 .47 to $1 .24) . The
net effect would be to increase Metro's--over-
t
all rates for the 12-month period bar $ 42/ton.
aim@=
110
This would result in the St. Johns rate going
from $13 . 48/tu71 Lo $i3 . 9v 1-on
January 3 , 1983) while the CTRC rate would go
from- $14 . 97/ton to $75 . 39/ton (effective on
openinq) . The C:'1`RU rate includes the $1 . 49/
ton convenience charge. No loss of revenue
is expected under this option.
3 . Finally, it is possible to increase the- base
disposal rate $ .65/ton as noted in Option No.
2 and simply wait and institute the full
regional transfer charge as° adopted in
Ordinance No. 82-146 ($1 .47/ton) when CTRC
opens in March. The only difference be-
tween this approach and Option No. 2 would
be that rather than collecting the total
regional transfer charge monies at .a re-
duced rate_ ($1 .24/ton) over. a -12-month
period, we would be collecting a similar
amount df money at the original rate ($1 .47/
ton) :in a -10-month period, beginning in
March of 1983 .
The result of this would be to have a St.
Johns rate of $12 .66/ton during January
and February, increasing to $14 . 13 effective
March of 1983 and continuing through December
of 1983 . The CTRC rate would be $15.62/ton ,
starting in March when the facility opens.
No loss of revenue is expected under this
option.
EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the adopted rates be. implemented as;
approved in Ordinance No. 82-146 to be effective January 3 , 1983 -
While this approach results in an anticipated revenue shortfall
of a maximum of $82 ,700 , it does avoid the time constraint
that would be involved in amending Ordinance No. 82-146 on an
emergency basis. It also recognizes that the delay in t e
opening of the CTRC is a short-term, two month problem and
can be handled efficiently in this manner. It should also
be noted that the uniform rate approach adopted by Council
is not adversely affected by this decision. On the contrary,
it would be a reaffirmation of a uniform rate approach. In
closing, it should be noted that all publicity and information
we have made available to the industry and public indicates
that Option No. 1 will go into effect on January 3, 1983 .
J -
�!U .��} -
i
Thus, we are not in a position of sending different signals at
this late crate to the hauling industry and public if we permit
Ordinance No. 82-146 to take effect on January 3 , 1983 , although
iCI:CJS3LSitCl-�Ct
t-_L V!! L_ 11JG �.i18 _L j1- t�Y 1_..1 V11 riiii Ica.ii_7...Le viii
dependence on the St. Johns Contingency and will result in the
loss of revenue for Metro; we feel that the preceding reasons
for choosing this approach outweigh the revenue loss.
The use of Options Nos. 2 or 3 would result in considerable
confusion to both the industry and public and would most
certainly complicate our efforts in sending out accurate k
and timely information.
DD:pp
12/141/82
- f
i
Q'
_t
t
i
f
JIM
O'DONNELL. SULLIVAN RAMIS
CANVY OIIICK
' ATTORNEYS AT LAW 18, N.GRANT.SUITE 202
MARK P.O'DONNELL
CANBY.OREGON 97013
EDWARD J.SULLIVAN BALLOW & WRIGHT BUILDING
f 5031 266-1149
TIMOTHY RAMIS
1727 N.W.HOYT STREET
KENNETH M.ELLIOTT
COR!rJIJ_C. 51-IFRTCIN PORTLAND,OREGON 97209 SALEM o►Ilcc _
W . 037_-3402 EouIT 9.r_c cR TER
STEPHEN F.CRE
STEVEN L.PFEIFFER 530 C�,N TER ST-N.E.,SUITE 240
RL r..V alp,.I Tn PORTLAND OFFICE SALEM.OREGON 97301
( ... \JV.i = -5191 1
October 6 , 1982
Clerk of the Court
Washington County Circuit Court
Washington County Courthouse
Hillsboro, Oregon 97123
Re: Industrial Contract Carriers v. City of Tigard,
Case No. 82-1010C
Dear Clerk:
I
Enclosed for filing in the above-entitled matter are the
following:
1 . Covenant Not to Appeal
2- Memorandum of Settlement Agreement
3 . Public Statement
Sincerely,
Edward J. Sullivan
EJS:mch
enclosures
cc: Mr. Paul Rask
City of Tigard
c�
i
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
2 FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
3 INDUSTRIAL CONTRACT CARRIERS, )
INC. , an Oregon Corporation ;
4
Plaintiff, ) NO. 82-1010C
s )
VS. ) COVENANT NOT TO
6 ) APPEAL
CITY OF TIGARD, a Municipal )
7 Corporation of the State of )
Oregon,
a
Defendant. )
9
U RECITALS
1 Industrial Contract Carriers, Inc. ( ICC) brought
2 this Writ of Review against the City of Tigard (Tigard) in
3 this court on July 6 , 1982. ICC sought judicial review of
4 Tiqard ' s proceedings in the establishment of the SW 72nd
5 Avenue area Local !;..provement District No. 21 .
6 The court allowed the Writ and required the City
7 to make a return of the record for the court' s review.
8 ICC filed its brief to support its contention that
9 the proceedings establishing the LID were legally defective
° and therefore should be declared null by the court.
21 The court heard oral argument from counsel for the
2 respective parties and on September 14 , 1982 the court
~3affirmed the proceedings roceedin s establishing the LID.
24`_ ICC still has a right to appeal the Circuit
2s
Court' s decision and announced its intent to do so.
26 Tigard and ICC, however, have compromised their
Page One - COVENANT NOT TO APPEAL
I differences and have made certain agreements ref
.� reflect-ed in
2 the Mutual Compromise and Release dated September 22, 1982
3 which agreement is incorporated into this Covenant.
4 IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING, Industrial
5 Contract Carriers, Inc. hereby covenants and agree: with the
6 City of Tigard that ICC will waive any and all rights it has
7 to that appeal of the court's decision of September 14 ,
a 1982 .
9 DATED this 22nd day of September, 1982.
10 INDUSTRIAL CONTRACT CARRIERS, INC.
11
12 — r
13
HYMA SADOFF, Pre dent
14
LAW OFFICES OF PAUL J. RASK, P.C.
15
16 i
17 By:
AUL J. AS ,
1s Attorney for Plaintiff
19
20
21
22 Presented by:
Law Offices of Paul J. Rask, P. C.
23 15405 SW 116th
Suite 201
�. King City, OR 97223
25 620-7247
26
Pat` Two - COVENANT NOT TO APPEAL �r
r '
MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, Industrial Contract Carriers, Inc. , an Oregon corpora-
-
orpora-
tion, hereinafter referred to as "Z .C.C. " ; has contested the
validity of the establishment of , and assessments for , tele ,
Avenue Local Improvement District of the City of Tigard, here-
inafter referred to as "City" , Local improvement District
No. 21; and
WHEREAS, the parties are amenable to settlement of the above
matter under the terms and conditions herein set forth, and to
the waiver of any appeal from the Final Order and Judgment of
this matter as contained in Washington County Circuit Court File
No. 82-101OC;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between I -C.C. and the City of Tigard
as follows:
I . City agrees that the following cost estimates for the
improvement of 72nd Avenue, through Tigard L. I .D. project No. 21 ,
shall , with the exception of acquisition of rights-of-way or
easements for the project, not exceed the following:
Construction $1 , 625 , 000 . 00
Estimated Cost of Acquisition of 155 , 000 . 00
Rights-of-way or Easements
$1 , 780 , 500 - 00
Legal ,
Administrative & Engineering Costs 274 , 500 . 00
Total Expenditures $2 , 055 , 000 . 00
If the costs allocated above for construction and for legal ,
administrative and engineering exceed the cost estimates listed
above, City shall bear such excess costs.
City further agrees to expend every effort to reduce the costs of
acquisition of rights-of-way or easements , recognizing that the
costs of such acquisition in excess of $50 , 000 will be assessed
against benefitted properties, and shared, as described below, by
the City. The parties recognize, however, that the costs of
right-of-way or easement acquisition in excess of $50 , 000 is not
under the sole control of the City and shall be assessed under
the formula described in City of Tigard Ordinance No. 82-13 .
2. City agrees that the City shall assume twenty-fl-ve per-
cent (25%) of the total expenditures incurred in undertaking the
improvement authorized by the City for Local Improvement District
No. 21. For example, if the total costs of right-of-way and
easement acquisitions are $1.55,500 , the City' s share of the
project would be $513,750 .
1 - MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
�0�9i•�!q�g w.:. :, �spa. e�.��=s��� _''�----
1
i
r
Zn consideration of the performance of this Agreement by I -C-C - 1
the City shall pass an ordinance by which it assuupon es the passageofsuch
shaze of pra��=t
--sty as described above . Upon p
ordinance and the signing and delivery of cite t-ovc==' 't Not o
this
by r =C-C. , throz gh its authorized representative,
ffimm
Agreement shall be i= full force and cl1 -
to reimburse I-C-C- for its costs and dis-
3. City agrees ' s fees, incurred herein in the
bursements, including attorney
amount of $13 ,950.
4 . City and I .C.C. , by and through its authorized agent,
Mr. Hy Sadoff , agree to undertake jointly an effort toward
donation of rights-of-way and easements in lieu of City purchase
of the same, thereby reducing total project costs for L. I .D.
Project No. 21 which would otherwise be charged to benefitted
property owners and the City.
5. I.C.C. agrees to execute a warranty
deed to donate a
ten (10) foot right-of along the length of its frontage on
S.W. 72nd Avenue. Such donation shall be made without consideration.
6. I.C_C. agrees to execute and deliver to the Tigard City
Attorney on or before 5: 00 p.m. on Friday, September 24 , 1982 ' a
the
Covenant Not to Appeal the Final Order and Judgment Of entitled
Washington County Circuit Court in Caneo - o81c1o01oration,
Industrial Contract Carriers ,
Inc. ,
Plaintiff , v_ Cit of Tigard,
i ard, a municipal - bycorpothe 1Tigard f Cityn -
Such covenant shall be in the form apP
Attorney_
7 . City agrees to accept a duly executed and completed -
application for payment In installments under the BancroftBonding
Act. Such application shall be in a form approved by
City Attorney and shall be executed an deFrili`,eSeptemberred to e24 ,g1982.
City Attorney on or before 5: 00 p-
8 . City releases any claim that it might have against I -C-C-
on account of releases bringing that petition for the writ of review_
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands
day of September, 1982.
INDUSTRIAL CONTRACT CARRIERS , INC.
CITY OF TIGARD
By:
By:_. Hy Sad
Mayor /
By
By: aul J Rask, P•C-
�-by AttorneyOf Attorneys for Industrial
Contract Carriers , Inc.
2 - MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
stews► �ta�f��e�4d�=��.�"`s-- - -
PUBLIC STATEMENT
All legal contro'vers=es involving SW 72nd Avenue
Local Improvement District No. 21 have been compromised and
settled, it was announced today by representatives of the
City of Tigard and of Industrial Contract Carriers, Inc. ,
the Tigard business which brought a writ of review against
the city early in July.
The first step in the litigation was resolved in
favor of the city by Circuit Judge Hollie Pihl of Washington
a
F
County on September 14 , 1982. ICC had a right to appeal of
Judge Pihl ' s decision which could have prolonged the litigation
r
a
involving improvement for several more weeks.
Tigard and ICC came to an agreement over the
principal disaqreement between them, that of the total .
assessible cost to the property holders in the District.
The agreement between ICC and Tigard states that
the city will make every good faith effort to keep assessments
against the property holders to $1 . 5 million, including the
costs of the acquisitions of rights of way and easements. �
Both parties agree that the costs of those acquisitions are E
undeterminable. Based upon the preliminary estimates
made by City Administrator Bob Jean, acquisitions could be
kept at a 'Leval satisfactory to both ICC and Tigard. `
In the spirit of compromise and in order to allow
the project to continue unimpeded, Hy Sad off, president of
-1-
Industrial Contract Carriers, instructed his attorney to cease
work on the appeal . This clears the way for the city to finance
t. •ct i r,n through cancioft Bo^di^g _ ?'he presence of
the cons �..
litigation in any public works project puts a serious impediment
in the way of the sale of these general finance obligations_
One further important aspect of the settlement between
Sadoff' s company and the city was that Sadoff donated a 10 foot r
right of way along his company ' s property abutting SW 72nd Avenue
to the city without charge. It is ICUs hope that by making this
gesture that other commercial property holders along SW 72nd
Avenue would make similar donations of rights of way or easements
to help bring the total assessible cost within the projected $1 . 5
i
million range.
Sadoff announced that he had heard that other commercial
property holders would make similar donations if others would do
SO. He expressed the belief that his donation would motivate {
others to follow his lead.
i
Jean stated that the city is delighted with the
settlement and that he could sense a new spirit of cooperation
from other property holders along the highly controversial
LID District.
"It ' s an unusual case of litigation" , Jean said. "Both
sides won. The property holders get a very much needed improvement f
and people who hold Mr. Sadoff' s point of view get this improvement
at ;:ost consistent with the price range that the property holders !
felt the City promised them early on in the proceedings.
We are both delighted. "
-0-
v
I
E m N •--1 N
H G O rn
O p [r
L m M
VI H 00 N
I ^ i
o _-.r .o 00
00
N•.XA m (� DD
O+ M
M 00 01 00a,O+
Cl �
•
•-+ t� N M +O O ^ N�^I
N
•U 0,0 co m N 00 N N I
71 m G �/1 O
(0.
�!.
N N '
Na, c4 d N O O N '
U] O
.3 C:3 oo lo- N to +O O+ •--i OI
M O+ vn I
N N
O ul M j
•?3 n .n •--+'
,n
Mw al
=3 ^I
I:
u. Ln
iI
}• N u'1 1�
HO W'Oco
d M
Fy •N co a m co rn
W _ +
Cx!] O rn �
�] L C M M O�1
y C•c7-b pIo M n
E-+ „d,•1 O O
Ln
Q U W' W
W p7
O Cl O
F N C C O O
r1 N W O 7 W
U W O C W +O N N ;
F.. m
O �n
Cl N �7 I� •--�
aj
.H OJ w ✓1 O
CA [y Cn N N
H C•C
b > N II
waEn
I
O' 00 M
iy M In a0 t\ M
w n ir1 uy r• w O+ :•
Cl d ^ w ^ M
C G +D O M N O, zl- ol 00 +p
� W u'1 •--I N � c0 rN+ � � p
Nn d u1 M O N u'1 N a0 M O N N M •-d O O\ •'•�
N �O Ln O V1 ^. �l if1 O�
. •.Ci O C w N w o. M +O w O O
gN Vl O M M oo -t Q, .-1 00 -7 Co N M N +O +D OO M �7 M W
N +--1 co M w N M +O �Y N t` O -„I M m
U v N L N Ln 00
N N N •�-I
m u
u >
o N
14
r4
W O d C m L C pp N
u +� w = u v w •n g E v m 6 v Q
m •o al P4 O > H
td 7 r+ u • n1 !L' >. H H H C. N •� 0. U H O W
to H H m GJ U > H N W m 0. E L 7 •ed 7 d O m I r+
F 7 H u 04 W •.� b O L = " E " C
m CI' H E Gn .� •c�0
H .m O tL' W C - C L •p N H >+ W v E-
PO
H
Pq C b m -1 k U O C H O d m •2t n W >� p >
W W M G - M L d .O 41 m m d W V H d d
_ Ca co m F u C C > b m d H u H N �C a+ O
'con
L U L co '...1" C N H d b 00 61 •u G/ O N H m
H P4 0. m m H H f••I 7 w m •O C 'D 3 w F L H
/ W W t E b Gl O) d a+ N b H m N �6 .--I Ol w u 7 u •.•t O Ol 6
y x m a� C E > O C .0 C m u o M k .-7 rA m O O
N F t0 C m .4 C H O u O W U 7 C •-I
6 0 U .� W F pn C.7 d In 5 W O
T to �l N
H
L ro ifl co N
Cn L
A
i
® cli `
G X N ui O
N rl Cl � N
u, co olo
co
W
S �
.0 N O O tN'1 i
N W C W w 1
0. W G �
cq .y W N N
co l
N CO po to O ul
r-1 --� U'1 L'w V1 �D
D O
N O co S O v S
cn W N N
O Si Si
O
N N 7
W W W
M n
co t�
co p T w
H O r T
cu 7 N S
W
N co
oo N d 1 I
W H i I
N 6 6 7 fl C N
T
O Ow -aQ NC O
H H w o � S M m
U O cd W
O W
U ro J rn N r+
N N N O
U N N S ^
En HIn
C13 :3 O
N o N
L C•.c c"� O
waw �
T
N
N c+ia Ln lo w ,• w ..
N
N W M N In �O
n 4 O N pp T N
N d n•1 S c l O S v 1� T
dO O w w
OC .O N OD O �--� CO
O) W oo a0 � Ul uY S S N T
O T S .--� c+1 .+l Wcli
S v •-+
U v N N r--� N �4 •--I \
N W
N u
co W �j p�. p.
b H C > X
T a7 u 'Ni U ra w R' V N o0 a W
V] >+ N Pa W W 'b b N N •� 6 N H C W W C ^
•E4 E+ e-4 N '+ T O O X N "� W C N •� H H
N H ? ro H U C1 ro s !' d O U C H N
ro
w Pw oG n C G .c x U ro a a o 014H D H '•°� .o •.�, c7 > G
1F•/ U W M 'C U O W •p ro N b L w H w N 7 .-+ W
•..+ N W G F W > w w -Xi .1 W C N C v
PC W a W 7 ¢ L W H W ro H L a u
O F-4
H •.-1 H N 4+
u H .a u b H N W W G 1 L b ro H H N
G s+ w o tWWo W o W > G C u 7 H >
,4 O w ¢ d Phi A A A rp0 CO A U W' w ` a H C.O.) w W U U O
v
E ry
). c
cm
<a w
u v v
e) y C
Vn G W
\ 4+
a) 7I
rn W
C13 U C
R rd W
w •C
V) O
4
O a D
n Ca,C
-T ^
S N
W MO
w 7 cn G H
HU a' W S
H �
C] N
Z
w y Cl)
U O
W C N C 10
A C1 a W M
Z W
2 C]
z
nw
10
J W P y F u H
C>
F )+ C•'� v0'i
y N
> L'
W cl
N a>) .0 ^
W X W a U N
"a
F N a7 H H W C) 1� S Cl S O
V) w ^ �D N t� N M O M M W V1
cu
N OO O
C C �--� N O O ^ C)r.3 ra C-4 00 •-� N N S
H F � S
(yam a) H r4 "1 O O N O N M M "O O N ^
O O C N — N M O M ^. M O L M ll Vl w N
U W •"'1 O 77•�� �O �O O w N c0 O•
E N G I N co to N .-a N '-1 O O t� O ^ r+ M
U v 0 S Vl M r1 N N S H
S H S
M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O S N O O
a) vl M v'1 O O C)
u cI vl O O O O 0 N a\ M O C O C M O O
U N �)•f O\ O, �Il �O Ln Vl O .+ N N
'O OD Co N O M S'H S M
cn V� S N H .•+ N
O� ON e4 N O a0 O V1 S �o N co un M
1 a) O O N ^
1� M f� N O N N ^ ^ S N S Vl N H M O ^
B•.Ci cn
H N M Vn N N M a0 OJ Vl co O OJ S �"� v v 1 DD H
NM `p N M
r•I
P4 PC1
V) �
W
1"•1a) cu=
X
ur U ..Gd X r- u '� p a w F sT+
y Z
N a) W > H • � U )+
W > of > d N 10 .0 a)
w a a+ W a CdX m ..0 3 w .ap V] N PG •..
v, ar m > •o u cn •o t •-+7 0 a
o A
yTj u N u Ln
H U a.+ F d a z > GJ O N >U > > G
Q) x d 0 a)w p .0 •�
CL W O tv a) }+ O 0 L H W x 1 I ELL 7 O CO $4
7 a, G a) I V) cn a)co N V) In £ a)
ctf 00 v' co 7 a.+ 'C y W' x x u"
ww n
M c00 A. 4ux cu L)
W a. a F ) .oC
aN S C]H
Z I 1ON
.--1 NO O� e-� N M S v1 %O 1� co O O 010 H N M
.'>• O O O O .-•1 �•-� H r-1 H H �--� r) r•1 rl r•1 r� N N N N
[y O M M M � M M M M M M M M M M MM M M M M
v
HC 00
O 10N
u 9
N L
m
O
•r-1 y
U v O N r
N d w
j 8
Q! 'O
N 7 �
N W
.a ul
O
xi u G
m v
a x w
u•0
N O r
w N
o p o0
O •�
c R G r
�U wl N
T In
1J In
N 7 G ol
u W W
H $1
Z v
W �P+
X I u1
W G N C o
A
Q W o04 W
Cl
N
s wca 4 w 17
u W' Z
J W N
. O Nc
1+ G••+
Ha, > rHJ
a4 ai t
x w CN,
W ..�
dy �•.'i oo r N
H co f•1 �O r O
C] G G
H F b
fY+ d Co Ln C> �fl .--1 CD N LO u4
O� O .--� O t'1 .--I N O t+1 L/1 r+
O O G ^ O r+ W of Oo "O W N
O O
U W E N C -4 N IO C'1 �r-1 Vl N N (1 cn
UO cn r-1 -7
O O O O O O O O O O O
iy O O O O O O O O O O O O O r
N m O O O O �4 O O O O O O rn
" m O O O O
N 1 O O O O �--� O d
00 N n O Co N
b
4qQ 0+
r-1
I d N 0•l OD cn O, 1 O� 0o ul V1 T �--4 c3 N Vl
LD
�O M �--r O Ol 01 �O 00 N O C•1 Ln
U --r
G N m c!
O 0, w 00 07 � coW
C •� OCO r. O4 cn cn -T N N d N cn
O r N N r
D4 c d 4
cE Gf C N ..Ca N
of .G G N N c0 y V!
aj W w O
ur y i N y N y w d
'E o
U
W d N N U y •.CI O
W L+ O H 'd 7 )' C d u
N N to O N . W F
y 5 G W al
w G 7 w 'O ro
CIN+ H •.+ O O �'+ u V y O ?L u 0 al a
.-�+ .y u •.C+ u m G v v u o o m m a L H o
w a w o w v o r+ c� N N G p w n N y
ra N cn O,
p th cel M M O J O
cn en cvi cn c+�
+1 t•1 f•'1 c'�l M C', O
t1
t
z
N
ccc�Q!
}� N
J •+
CQ
ro
In Y. d
p j{
r+ L
ro w 9
y y G
W d W
fn �n r
3 c N O O
Q 7 O ul N
N W N O
§§f
b O O
tx V
C CD
w a w
cn
o M s
N a
o v
n d G p
ro ro 7 N
T
L
to Cry G O O
� aa, O o 7
O,-f ) a W
F
F
Z N
W
04
k W
W U
a) b b
p G7 ro C
d p C W
W
VI p
W Z
Z W a l
W y N al
~ W F L N u
aZ rnF p
O £ ro 7 G
3+ G•�
f F o a) fcar
Z b 7
i2 a) a) t
w a �
W x
C•m �-+ CA M C', O o
F d of O
ro o n
N L pp 1 M M �O �/1 M N �7
a)b r+ M u'1 .. .. r
W W a) 7 M VI f.-I �--� N CO O r
Z 5 C3 W
FC� F d
p O G .M•1 M O .rfl O M O O CYN Lr% d O OF r
U W •rl O > .--� M f/1 N Nt j O w E . a0 `D r
O}'. O M N u'1 O -,7 N �--� �D e-1 M N W O r
N of N 7
U N
O O O O On O O O O O
O O o0 O O O O O O
y O O O �+'1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
C O O r O O O O O u1 • ,
OD N M O O O .•+ v\ U'1 Ln v1 rn C% O 00 O
N O O M
:3 C" N M O� N r+ .N-� N r+
4 M
O O N O
1
1 u 'o ffl M co d O Ln O O F r
C U o 00 w w " � O M N w M O Cl c''1 ^ C w
-.� 00 G CcO �O d
B M cc
.--1 4 C7 00 r N N � N rf ./1 N
W
LC M N
L
U W+ v1
G C OD a) O � u
c� O •o
ro
In 00 V d U ~ .Q ""� 7 _ ; U .--f N
4 u G
•.+ 7 G G A �-+ N a 10 F N
G O E W a
a) u6 E a a, 7 `) v v G w
4 W d 00 U a) G a) m H N �, N L ro 00 1 C o
a) 10 y a) L' N ro Ql al
U .c
:5 C 3 u ro r L u W Z G yU x ami G t .+
m cn [on N o y W U d W W '�W O ro cw Z U U £ O C p O N
N d L+
Z
cn
U
•-f �--, N .o Zo ZO ZO .O .O �D .O lO O w fC w w w w O
m O� rn
O en M M M M M M M M Q, M M
O M M M M M M M m M M M M M
M
'o
B ❑I �� rn
r a o rn 1I
O\.
•N !l1
N y C N a,
to T
Ia.
G W N rn rn
( .. W
t m O y
t+ I O O
d
Ga LL W '
In •.
N �
O °v v
T �I
U O C N C
O O C SII
N
O A
z E
W y
W A �I I
Cl -cls
'd J7I
n
¢ o aw `^
wIn
.� m
co
LO
y V
v IV
w V] L Gl I
. > s m x
F sa W L l -F N
.. p IV 7
l+ C•.-1 �O �O
F b >
J Z n
(y IV N .0 N N
W t\
�O
10 cn
_W W U W co
ti
►+ F
a Nn
O O C ^ cn O N Ir O 01 N{ N
o+ cn cn rn rn
05 p n -,j,
U v co N n w
cn, cn
O O O yI vl .D S O a` 1 c•'1 O r+l v
O O
IV �l O O 9 a w C, O� Il v T
bD N O O N O� �p N �Y N 1
w •--i til N O� 10
W .a N •-� � �
C1 .n
1 M O en
/ •.1 00 C cn oo n H O O cn �O .O o, r Ln �O O M
1 M C n1 .-+ N O In c% w Cn c0 i ' c+1
IV ca
w S.1 'Il CO t+) .--1 N N f+l c+l O1
C 0. •O
E w C N a
v
to w a cn m z
W .r- H N
W m N > C w d W •� G C E a
G N F C U P] d O [c'7 L .= L N _ 0 ..]
�+ s+ •.+ v m W b al
w V1 u W Gl b F d N cA H
O d u i-] U 7 b wN to Gl 71 to O
b O , p d H
C W u V
0. O
H `� ►� O rn W U w U
O O O O O O v m X 0.
d
CIO
E cc
Ill
0 C
u ro
V] l+ OD W
N N
U C1
vaiCcb o 0
~ � 1
vv
v �
[n W
111
co u
aro. a w
0
L.
h D
r C
O W
T I
u I
{rN W 7 ro C
G rn O O 7
CLI a)
H l+
C d
W 13
W C] fl d
d A a 3
W
� o
W Z y�
yO W U NI
W J Ol
ro x
tir
u u
ry
ro rn
O I{I
. c G I
F >aj
ro
J Z
W x r l
F +
d N H �D N O CD N O1 t h cn O
ro M
N y N d O N -1 O �1 J• OO
p G C O O, [n
W Wai O m O O O
FLn .--1 h r+ N co
co GD
O� D
a v
o W •� O N -%+ a O CN^1 C. n m �n
Oi N S N cel O �l d O t�1
E N C O D\ cn in N h ul O Ln O o oD
05 O O Cn r. h H O O .•.+ �D O �--�
CU S O
N (1 H �Y O D\ O r 10 r Ln '� u1 Q� r to �Il r GD .D
.--� N O N Cn LD D1 W '- O W r 1 N
w cA w w w w w w w w w w w w w
w I m h 1� -Y' m m O r h N S N N O r h r S
OO N O O N ✓l N h -S .-+ CY N S �-. N H
•p OO .-+ in .-. Lr N •--� In 1 O
7 0.
Ci r•. .� N
1 d N rn S �D co .--� r S r h In CO S .O
H rn ,� O 00 a. 1 r �'1 Ln h
•.G.1 OD G Qi 00 00 oal
Vl �O N N O� t'�1 N1 -L
O W ^. O N w N �n
ro G ro Qo h M Do H 'D Ln r N -7 N N h h r '7<r cli
O
O! N 10 H W •--�
a W H N
G
P G
.O4 L N N
W C L N 41 N N 6 T O
U N C ND•u 4, $ OG
..1 N A C .m > C CIOu "�
"i C L C L
d O
1H.I U 7-i N .S O ..G.I CO'J N N C N U
a ca h
ai V •.� 3..
•�r. u d cox o ro m W
`� N .V. L ••ro+ .moi C O T CHl U ci N H a O Y x b rd
wa G C pN T u C O u v tE N N O O W
H p0., w `£O la
M 114 W Utu/I ¢ V] [n W P. W a U co
QH' u
d H PN N N .--1 O r•1 •wl
W10R.
N '1
U
0
6
i
2 0a I
cn /+ cn =.
A ^ O I
a,
n N iO
V V O DI O
V N G O N N ^ v
< W Cl c+1
rn i
V C Vl X11 I � I S
O W
N W N N 'p
b
b E
Cl
w VC n
i
L
En.0 � N O^D S.
En
N N lo
7+W O 1
to
p G to �I
t0 tC 7 N N
U W N
Y
t w O }
U W[++ � N
H H
A N
Z
hl r
cn
% U u
G A 0 C N C-
•O 7 N
}
��
O N � �
:oz7 vs W x rn _ R
O
'o
r
.�G ctl 7 G rn O
Z 'd >•N T �Y
l rn
6 m �
c N
H O O
y �
94 ba
d b
C C
01 7
C7 W
N H
d cn O N
O i-.
V W N N r
cn cn
U v o
Ln o Ln �I
Q\ N
d c1 d O
Y W
Q% O � m
N
O Q� Vl
W r-1
u'1 O
1 d cn clj c=)
Lri
O O
-.Gi 00 C • n O c+l O
nl G lO t * r O ao
r
a m "°
u
N
.--4
�n
> x
aCi o a+ w
w
` G G b r7 H W
cmL
O 01
?2- L 0 O O H > 1 >+ C
QI lJ = w O w L v
N
w 3-� $.
>
sa
H iL O E-4 F H U O
O�
m
E ro
H C
p•H
L N
ca w
cn H
Q
� y
U m b
m d W e
m •o I �
3 C
U 7
cn W
W
�L •O
H U C
W G 7 1
1
E
L •n
� p
H
H 'S.
O
•� ty
m M
£ U
n
W
z �
N L �
O C•0•O �
'Zit O O 7 a+
1 N UW W M
x 00
W a,
i H
m
,1 d O 7 C
O U cr v.
oj
W Cl
a,
O
rn
y' O X 1• .,
J cn E•W N
A
••d-. Z m d
2n � W C M
cn
W W C) O O I 1 1 1 1 N 1 I 1 1 CC) 00
rn d O
O M O 1`
co
F M d N O O O O O Ir O O O O vw M O C •-+
H N v1
r+ CD M 1
7 O G C .O
U W U W �
1O co O 1 1 I 1 1 aN N 1 1 O 1 I S c+'I OD Ln O
m O d
O ,...1 M �7 N O O O O O L/1 O O O O O ✓1 rn w C C .-•� F
.n EC W M I %O 1 1 rn '� N t
O £O F `7 N M tl
U v d
•r
X w
a. w
m m
1: a w
L
U T 1
m H
W H v p m cn t
W N m U u E-
U ti A G 1-•i m rn
~ cn X O m O •.+ al >,
m 41 U .1r C ..a
m t > H O a H I 7 ami FmW+ PN SE
X N > C
> y � co N 7 m cn I
M •.� m rn •.� m d F H C ...7 .--i > 1 CO•d C cO W
H W ,-7 W .•7 GS m m M > "U aml a .0 1 7 7 m .•. m m
y `a i >+ u x c7 +•+ F fxm C .-•c v7] v] cn I w •� S G
N cn T T T M .] •-� fn
m m P. H m O. H O m H O m L .--i H m a+ a.� H Z b 1•
N O. > co m O > cn m m L m O ++ C m m '� C ^ m W 00 "� m
m O m �•+ ?L •.•1 ca >• .X 1: of to o• N 7 y b m b 7 7 .0 U rn .+� •••+
X H O U •� H O U ••••1 +� O y • • " " O O m y m O O
VJ 0 rw .A H W Cl. .7 F M O C y U .3 cn U S W W U U U O .] W n. CO O
a H I 1 I W N
W 1 1
.--� N a� .-•1 N !1 M d . �D O a, a, M
N N M a� .-� N M M
O O O O r1 r-a ""� .""� "'� •"� '••� ."'� N N N N O M M M
MM 'n M cn .-•� M M M M M M M M M M Mm M m( M M
M M
M
v
E!
o
ro•cu
y � O
0
ro M
u v o + m
C) v: C a0 �
G M 7
y d w rn M
/ O M 00
O —
V r O
O O M
d
.d
Y O O
w U N O O
co ci +
w x Ln
W 0
l)O O
1'' O
"tea O N
ro ro
�U �
T d
+) m
ro
V) o x _ M
O
H
H �p
z u r
2. ro
w O
awt
N x w
W
A c3�
Z
6 y,
� y M
H ro X w
y W y M L
w u cn E+
> ar
E.3
y rl W OD
a >
w > w
0 0 M
/r7 C N rn
zz W xrn
� w
w
F o o r+
•E C C �Y d M O
to w i� w
M N M
x
o r
'D o C, 0o ao 0
Om n 00 .•+ N .4 O GO Ln V•1 O� Q� n O O O
•.1 O.••a ^ f .-i a0 O N DD ^. M O n c N M N �7 r
p H G 1
O�.. O M N Cl) _7 O� M M6� ao N
V) N
W W
(, a p >
d H N+
W W W
V) N
w .yi C G w F u v v
w C7 ro .e C O a M w
h w w w C x o0 O •-� C M G d GO
r 0 1 c" , Ha x •+ ..� y o e Qyl �+
w L = - w w H 7 is L ro •.+ H C7 ++ ro
y u] M M M tl0 NU ro u L y O s
Ey .. r7 M y . y w y ro M L o •./ U U +•+ M U
H M w d rn Q. > w w M C -v x G) — .r N •. Y 7
W y H > b N Ol QI u M •.+ M O w .+ a C > >
k b x x w w d ro M W w a a C w w O •.+ d
7
10 C y C4 w d a) a 6 O w 0/ 3 •'� A .-' N
W H C b cn yE d U rn w o a
W C W x ro w ro C W co V C H
L W O w w H w •.+ H O w V C w w H •.j •.' w M M w
V) w O d y V >+ OJ O ?G !J H N P: ro b •.-/ N w Cl .-+ L ?L .S 0)
W 7 y 3 ro ro y -o •^ w u O y .c d .a p C 3 3 3 ? oD M w w
M Its
N V rn H V) y x U W w cn cn H O V (n y N V) u7 W w U M w w O
w o
.-1
N O,
tl•r to .-r 'D N M d V1 ID ID IO ro CO rT
O M O M M M O m cO cn cn cO `n cO cO v^ m cO cO
� .n �O M M M M M M M M M M M M
M M M
E �
H C
0—•ca
u N
V7 i+
y N oc
a N C 0O
d m 7 00 �
In
7 O
� b
1+ U G
c0 d C
R. Ar W '
L •r
V] O
l
O b
c d G
co c7 7
� U W
n
a
� T
-a u
O G ca b
Z 7 N G
W O O 7
3. U W W
x `^
W
i
d I
v N C
Z N
W U
u
•mit q v I
z m X sw e'.
1J m L
p Q cn H
W
Z D .-•� N 00
x v >
i w a
coal W ^
Z 5 .-•ccn N 'r N
H F N Ln QO r-1 N 01 n
.9 I�. 01 Ili
n
7 0 G C O c� cn N o0
U CUJ W
N
co
c.
.9
p E c rn
Ln co
EI CJ
O O n w Lr 13i ll d N
U v O -T In N
00 01 v f`•) N
N
r-1
N .
N
a W
cn O cL p
W N W N p W
z N Fo Hca U L W C N M y C
0 dv c) �l3 W w W w •.+ w N W N
.. •o X b 1+ H W •O ¢ a
a cpc W co - W d •N+ N O O m G H
w cl F U U 2 O a cIaz� N .0 C G u W Cl O O
H 7 .--� Nrj) v W O '++ OG N w •E •Go W w N +� F
y L N to i N 'J —4 m
N O w N O d W H O d N
U m w w 7.+
z cu .O U Gl RI w w O G Gl r+ w N U .
CI C1 D t
L c0 W Sa H H H L RI d O
w w z o z o o h a H a a a o N N
I I
O co cn co co co cop Q� a\ O O O O O O
co In C'1 c" m m cif c, cn cn O d �7 t �7 d
fel c., 1
v
6 �
H c
Cn H
0
m H o 0
V QJ "O
d ul 7 pp 00
( G] < W
3 GI
U
v! W
b
x �
mv
yxc:.
o
H
.. y
o 'v
a
n
y
T
cvv
X
O
� I
V b
1 0 C
_! O 7
z
:> i v
x I A x H
N )
o
O F �
w
z m II
� G I
y U V H
F fl > 9
Z 0
Cd .)
v]
�! w —
O
O N a0 O 00 �7 00
O N �
c H w al w N O of
x d C 1 t+l �--� O 01 7 �O N O f`•1 �
O C 7 I GD N .-4 c`
•p (+1 �7 I
c! O
C T O\ M O O n n W N O " n �7
..a o .--1 O N OO O d O N
.o N C ^ w 01 d N o0 of
o .L O Ln c9 O QA -t to N O cnu oo c4 Cl V4
I
r-1
N
w H
M C u u °a m
w a ° r' A m a
w C! d v!
p] H L N d .A H L W C = 4 C •.� C1
L to H 'O •O > H
C H ..r .4 A G w IL oo y > (n 7 O y r7
H U w xi. .d O C C u- G �9 x N + W x ti
d NV! bo 6 w a !.+ w v F O .� x b T
U of a. T G .d TJ > U C C 3 'O -- F' H co L p d
v u — H .� u •.+ d o o o oj uoj m co m o c a! •-+
b u C V lo m -.+ C H U U C.7 En a! W W P+ o' U A H
co -. H .. .+ c o M.
U G C p U ? O T C >
.+�. O ..a o n r+ co •.r v •.-� .-+
.--� N c•'1
w a
U
O
A
OD �7
0.rq 7
C
`b N
N
i
m v C Illt Y,
W C W
4
Lo O^ Q� m 1�
1+ N
f p O
O •O Obi O� 0� 00 g.
z
r r 00
Zx] O O 7
W c
O1
F H
1 1 1 O t
• co
1 I p O O O
z u
1 1 1
W M
O Q Y al H a!
L C O N
O N
F W
d d t•1
14 G•.Gi �O �O
y w w w Ncli
N N N
(1 t 1 c+1
s O W a E
t� O
.fl
O
N ^ N
D E C 00
El p O O W
U v N N r
t
C EEE
f, 7
•O W
7 ti
Nm
w
al w a1
.a al •0 T U i+ N H
al O L O N
N 0 a, L4 m C G v
En
W t C4 G C
aG L N. O .t1 %
3po fll W E-4
w W
W W H
O O f+ Q S+ L
W .a u 3J D W v 'O
z w m m O nr D
C4 y 1. Y. d t+ C G u W ?4 G
>C C F w w aai vi 6 E O W u
O .-+
y a a >
W F m 0 H D 0. a o H N >
F R. O F 5 A O 7 0
O H U
i
STRE.E'1 i;EUICATO,%
1,NOW al.L M-.\ Bl' -rBF F PRESENTS, That I . 1 I .G. Holding Company. a California corporal-Lon
r .C:• r :,I '_cd granLCr(s), for tht- sum of $1 .07 ONE DOHA _) consrituti^g
rt ' :j :J, do hr rebs to t-';r Ft'hl _
l.: c[- r?t-Jn for t il'.:
b
_ rte -
E
inappI icni,t,: p.rr!- t pOrpetual r •rc t.•r Lt ;..
rt-ad :,r ., _r_ ,urptis o z C ! . _c, und(er, ,,:oitg :i: . til: rh1n r'.- foIit.t.rir.� z
(See Attached) i.
l ]his street dedication supersedes original streeL dedication recorded in Book 1073
Glades 82 through RE, on %larch 12, 1976 at 10:4`r All. r
t
(
_d . . a 'a: r _r.:.-.. and icar _cl
-_app I i, .. F,a`r ) i: . i,• , ;, y
f.. . .- . r.,c d-
E
t
c.oVt:"Sr— s that- I-E d.'. t.C.= �.6:: .i"� 1 -.:r '.ct_ 1r'F� ..
rise - Co g::nnt h:� ���• ---Z� '"it.�:i_ +ti�G. �� .. __ -•j .
l
:N 'v. 1'<[: W'. RBOP, h-• grant .. . ( ) ]-'as (haCc) ;':CrcU^ - L _ S t r' 3fifl�. j
'- �
-_,Graham K. Ritc le (SEAL) rank P. p.lZel_l (SEAL"
Vice"- •resident (SEAL) Secretary i•SF:At.i l
kSFAL iS::AL )
-- l
(SEAL) _(SEAL.i
i
i
4
STZtTE OF CAC FoR N /A
ss.
Count•; of LOS f}NC,ELE-S )
O• tt:i� _� T� day of PEG EM8/dR
ly before me. appeared
Rf,�1"A� k )?,t 77c r11� and �rr�,NK P G�Q/'1P8FL�-
hath r• p�rsunativ known, who being duly sworn, did -Say that he, the said
pER �_ is the ,�'/C� president, and he, the said
PERSD � _ is Lhe ScLtctary of
Lh:: within named Corporition,
and t:.st. tn_ :_c. l affixed Lo laid .nstruuivnt is the c.crporat� .:, al of said Corporation,
-.aid Corporation b
and Lh3t :'•_• :id instrument w�:•: signedanti tieaic•d to t.chalt ; }'
autte;:_iL•y ct its Board of and %Cq/F-
and
"C/q'¢NK P � 4/7PRF,4L aci-now]edged said ir.:z' L:tnenL to be the free
,. -j+:d d,- =d cf ssid Corporat:..)n.
g1YI111111YIIMIIUNIIYIWYYWYYYi10/YRIIIIYYYYYYYUYUYWYYYIYYIINIVIIIU * _�,.i..• �
I CLMONY WHEREOF, Z ]csv� h1areunto =_e
OFFICIAL SEAL � •
FRANK W. SEKE� hared and affix.--d by official s= a1 the day
NOTARY PUBLIC•.:ALIFORNIA wr i t ten.
PRINCIPAL OFFfCE IN
• LOS ANGELES COUNTY
My Commission Expires May 22, 1984
�t01YMIMYMLWYYIN111YYlYYtYY111YIlYYIYYYIIYYYItRYIIYYYYYYYYYYYIMYMiY No to ry Po b l i c Lor -f+L.-
�
, c- 5 My Cotrcnission Expires ZV4_-1 ..Z-
Corpr,rz.t.. Ac._..C.wid&ement
Review-,d as ti: form this �cl day of L��E L- + 9 =•
BY=_.
City�Fit orn y - City of Tigard
Revi-wed :AS to legal description this day of ��== =��r^r 19 e�Z
By:
Appr ,.d t l i . _ day of c>•�aA.c, 1Q •
CICY OF TIGARD, OREGON PLANNING COMMISSION
Y: e�
Cia1rman
AFFRCMED A%ND ACCEPTED . . i.s _ day of , 19 _+ by
rest:!- .;f tile 1•igard City Council.
Witness my hand
City Recorder; Tigard, Oregon
s -
Street Dedication
A strip of land for road E,urposus beim situated in thc souttIeast
1/4 of Section 1 , T. 2 S. , R. 1 W. of the .i llam(:tte t-tciidian,
Washington County, Oregon, being a part of Lots 7, 8, Ind 9 "Varns
Acres" , being more particularly described as follows to-wit:
Beginning at a 5/8" iron rod in the southerly right. of way line
of vacated Irving Street, which iron rod is the northwest corner of the
herein described roadway and bears South 88°51 ' 36" West. 10.00 feet,
South 0000134" East, 30.00 feet and North 88051 ' 38" East, 8.00 feet from
the southeast corner of Block 39, "West Portland Heights". From said
place of beginning; thence South 0003'40" West, 393.60 feet to a 5/8"
iron rod and a point of curve; thence southeasterly along a curve to the
left having a radius of 50.22 feet, thru a central angle of 63026' 15" ,
a distance of 55.60 feet to a point of tangent; thence South 63022' 35"
East, 58.79 feet to a 5/8" iron rod and point of curve; thence along
a curve to the left having a radius of 516.22 feet, thru a central
angle of 26038109", a distance of 239.98 feet to a 5/8" iron rod and
point of tangent; thence North 89059' 16" Fast, 279.25 feet to a 5/8"
iron rod in the westerly right of way line of Interstate 5; thence
North 1019109" West, 38.00 feet to a 5/8" iron rod; thence leaving said
westerly right of way line, South 89059116" West, 278.39 feet to a
5/8" iron rod and point of curve: thence northwesterly along a curve
to the right having a radius of 586.26 feet, thru a central angle
of 27027106", a distance of 186. 02 feet to a point of co;:pound curve;
thence northwesterly along a curve to the right having :+ radius of
119.93 feet, thru a central angle of 62037' 18" , a distance of 131 .08
feet to a 5/8" iron rod and point of tangent; thence North 0003'40"
East, 332.73 feet to 15/8" iron rod in the southerly right of way
line of vacated Irving Street; thence South 88051138" :'. st along said
southerly right of way line, 68.00 feet to the place of heg.inning.
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHWAY
LIMITED USE EASEMENT
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that ( I .G. llo! linrl Cnn,p<uiv , , C:,lifornia cor��r�rat ic,n
hereinafter called grantor, for no consideration
other than acceptance of the obligations hereinafter described by : -0 grantee, do hereby
give and grant, subject to the terms and provisions hereof, to the ;pity of Tigard, a
political subdivision of Washington County in the State of Oregon, i,ereinafter termed grantee,
an easement to construct and maintain as an appurtenance to a rood designated S.W. 68th
Parkway a pathway on, over and within the following described lands
of the grantors subject to the conditions hereinafter stated:
(See attached)
This limited use easement supersedes original limited use easement submitted to
City of Tigard.
The rights and easements herein granted are subject to each and all of the following
conditions and limitations and reversions:
(1) That the use of the above described area shall be limited to the construction,
maintenance mid use thereof for a pedestrian and bicycle pathway and for no other public
purpose and ir: the event that the said area shall be improved, utilized, or maintained
by the grantee or by any other public body for any other purpose, all rights herein granted
shall revert to and revest in grantors, heirs and assigns.
(2) That grantor does hereby reserve the right to utilize th.-: said area for all
private lawful purposes which do not unreasonably interfere with o-- are not inconsistent
with the uses thereof by the grantee and the public for the purpost:s herein stated.
(3) That if, at any time, grantee or any other public body shall undertake proceedings
tr improve the present S W 68th Parkway and by reason
thereof grantee, or any other public body shall seek to acquire from. grantors, heirs, or
a_�igns, by negotiation or condemnation right-of-way area additional to that heretofore
vested in the public with respect to said S W 68th Parkway
low
all rights herein described shall revert to and revest in grantor, heirs and assigns,
effective with the initiation of such proceedings and the just compensation to be paid
by said grantees or any other public body for such additional right-of-way area shall be
determined as if this instrument t- idnot been executed and to the same extent as if the
rights herein described had not been granted.
IN WIt4ESS WHEREOF grantors have executed this instrument for the uses and purposes
hereinabove set forth. \- _
d a of ��LP�F�r' 19 Z- .
/W�.ttnness Qur s and deals this Y
Crahprmn K. R' ie (SEAL 1 Frank P. be (SEAL)
Vice-:'resident (SEAL) Secretary (SEAL)
(SEAL) (SEAL)
For a considerati&6, the mortgage lien on the above described properties is hereby
.jade subordinate to the easements above granted.
dated this da� }' of 19
By
Mortgagee
Title
STtiTF: nT' e*41F0R141 R )
s s .
County of L.os /�stt_,FA-RS_) On this � T.�!_ day of rJ,EC6�r3cR •19 g�-
before me appeared �t;a R�=rc ,F_-- and
G'.a�P B'4L _-__ - both to me personally
known, w o Bing c- 1 'y sworn , chid -say tFiaE-lie,
is theyiC< President- : and 11C_ , the slid
is the Secretary Of '..��!
the within named Corporation, and that the s--al affixed to s Y instrument is
the corporate seal of said Corporation , and that the said instrument was
signed and sealed in '-jehalf of said Corporation by authority of its Board of
Directors , and / '#M"ge►1 'and SPANK �• CA�/�7PBEdL,
k. R�_Zct1�`---- -- -- -
acknowledged said in �-strument to be the free act and deed of said Corporation.
msantaopap�nteuuuo�pauuoeaw�gtaanawueirueamc�uum I P� 'i�l::i`!'I:SIO fv Y W l l L•'R L•'O F, I have hereunto set my
_ OFFICIAL SEAL
' FRANK W. SEKELA = hand and affixed my official seal the day
NOTARY PUBLIC-CALIFORNIA and year last above written.
PRINCIPAL OFFICE + Y
LOS ANGELES COUNTY 3
My Commission Expires May 22, 10984 3 —
�wnMrWWawruwawanawmanamnnmiinnurenn�mmm�mmnuxnnunnxunnaummm t r V 11 a-)1. - _
SWUiB41.AIM ®awe
The City abovt named hereby accepts the foregoing grant, and agrees to comply with
ich and every term and condition thereof.
CITY OF TIGARD
By:
Mayor
By:
Recorder
STATE OF OREGON )
ss.
County of )
On this day of , 19 before me appeared
and
both to be personally known who, being duly sworn, did say that he, the said
is the Mayor, and she, the said
is the Recorder of the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal
corporation, and the said and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipal corporation.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal,
this the day and year in this me certificate first written.
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
I'
REI WON
I edestr-i.,in and 11 icyc Ie Pathw;-1v L imi Led Us(' I ;):;P",C,It
A 9 L ri 1) t)t Uind, 1').00 fei-L in 1 w i dO 1 t t1a t Pd I I i "Wri ion 1
T . 2 S. , R. 1 W. of the
Willamette Meridian, Wa,;hin(jtoii COtAr I Ly ,
Oregon, being a part of "barns Acr(,s" , 1)eiiiq mort• p.irt.iCLJ11,i1-1y
des.cribed as fol lovis, to-wi t :
Beginning at a 5/8" iron rod in t-hi, vJ11Y 11110
of S.W. Irving Street (vacated) , which point [)Cal'!; '10UH) 8811"1 , 38"
West, 10.00 feet, South 0'-)00' 34" Fast, 30.00 Feet. and Nnrth 88051138"
East, 8.00 feet fro,,, the southeast. corner of Mock 39, IIVJesL Portland
Heights". fromsaid place of heqinninq; Lhence South 0 0 03'40,, West
along the westerly right of" way line of S.W. 68th Parkway, 393.60 feet
to a 5/8" iron rod A a point of curve; thrru-e alont] ,;;Ii(J right of way
line on a curve to the left, having a radius of 50.22 feet, through
01) ance Y- .(A - a point of
a central angle of 63 ,6' 15" , a d i!;t� of ) H feet to i ,)
tangent; thence SouLh 63022' 15" last. along !,-tid right of way line,
58.79 feet to a 5/8" iron rod and point Of Curve; thence southeasterly
along a curve to the left, having a radius of 516.22 feet, through a
central angle of 26038109", a distance of 239.98 feet to 5/8" iron
rod at a point of tangent; thence North 89°59' 16" East along said
Southerly right of way line of S.W. 68th Parkway, 279.25 feet to a
5/81' iron rod in the westerly right of way line of Interstate 5; thence
South 1019'09" East along said westerly right of way line, 5.04 feet;
thence South 12058' 11" West along said right of way line, 10.27 feet;
"hence leaving said westerly right of way line, parallel with said
southerly right of way line of S.W. 68th Parkway and 15.00 feet distant
from when measured at right angles thereto, South 89"59' 16" West 276.79
feet to a point of curve; thence northwesterly along a curve to the
right, concentric with said southerly right of way line of S.W. 68th
Parkway, having a radius of 531 .22 feet, through a central angle of
26038109" , a distance of 246.96 feet to a point of tan(jent; thence North
63022135" West, 58.79 feet to a point of curve; thence northwesterly
on a curve to the right, having a radius of 65.22 feet, through a
central angle of 63°26' 15", a distance of 72.21 feet to a point of
tangent; thence North 0003'40" Fas! , 393.29 feet. U) the southerly
right of way line of said S.W. Irving Street (vacated): thence along
said southerly right of way line, North 88or-1 ' 38" E--1!J-, 15.00 feet.
to the place of beginning.
Containing 15,34 nquiirc- feet- more or less.
.� aA-MRAN
FILE REFEREL:CE T:
P.DD RESS: TAX MAP. a S TAX LOT:
STREET_' DEDICATION,
:C` _kLL BY THEE SE PR.SEfTTS, THAT
hereinafter called grantor(s) , for the su-m of $1.00 constituting the actual consideration
for this deed, do hereby give, grant and dedicate to the Public, its successors and assigns,
a perpetual right-of-way and easement for street, road a.-id utility purposes on, over,
across, under, along and within the following described real premises in Washington Coun`y, Oregon
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A"
To Have and to Hold the above described and dedicated rights unto the Public for the uses
and our-ooses hereinabove stated.
The grantor(s) hereby covenants that he (they) are the owner(s) in fee simple and have a
good and legal right to grant his (their) rights above described.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantors) have hereunto set his hand(s) and seal4s-)-
this S. day of 19 xz.
(SEAL) (SEAL)
(SEAL) (SEAL)
(SEAL) (SEALL)
(SEAL) (SEAL)
STATE OF OP.EGON ) SS_
Ccunty of
On this3eq day of 19�Q personally appeared the above named
and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act and deed.
Before me:
Notary Publi for Odegon
My Commission expire:
F
t
� r
4
- rp
�z
Xf�
y�
.._ter• r. '�:
`c
tom:
NOV"..'-'``
3'`s-ex�L� '-^��'r`u�'�- zY s-�.-z,.-♦'.,a; � i' •Y '�` '� -�,- +f ��SJ' f t £�.yi'�'' '
z" 1.�>-.....r•r�[ �c�s �Y •ran,l� `-�"�.� �-�._: ,x<<c,a r. �s '�� '.'�+''.'rt = u'Rj s aye.:� �`"',,,� ,� �����.�,'�i >,.->
.,.�,.. _. �.f.Qom, �+��: Yy. .y. "x• -+t.;:a. �..s." d' � :ss, `.r, ". .�o'r��.s n" ,�,.i �-x'y�- '-:,Sze '�v.�?, f h,.R�°ti n.. ''�T i "�`
94
-SM a-- . =c'--�a.'r�`ir'��%x:...,,c�,x;�a'*.�.'�-.1rS:1�".�_' ��. —�_A�idx%s.�...�: �x�,,..,���=�r"#'r�t.a�'?-.•��'�,+..s.y.,Rr3�Fir 3,,�,r�`„s-°i.r '.,'h15-�,citti�'.z".r x�4�'��.x�:
+x.�.T.c.s�''iy�'•�_l.�g,t yv,".`:"'��'}�iT;(t�o'
..
f
s at4� °Xan 12 J ca v-, .!: as
ua ry,. a
�� �h�aK�}� ��
'� ..;..sem 4 ro.�icr.'s�L.r .hr .1:=[ 4• � x .F�d ' #����'c--o'fIt rty"ice'N�
j'^WR
,.
-
�' f�-�,�'��-'-9-'.`"'.�-w�}.�_ �xi+.t ''�"' '>`����:,t'�• `- .iti'Sie.,y��`2�r``4 . ����-'y
F .?. Y ;Lf:M�+'s_2.�a+t-� � t'"�t.`�1�. �,;- t�,...- �x 4 y� :;��i 3.u�'r yt _ x � i °y� .t,�, "4♦-"rzY� t
•Y 61 _J vS�x "-7 r r_ c j k y _'t ''� �,"y, .�--c w� •� E�.;.���.'r��/#.���*` r x S' '�.J
< "F'•'> f✓.. d � 'r -t' r .% f '-r r r '�'�-.'�. y "f :- 1 - e �z�v- t+?',� K— _
.''g:l: ipd
r-
t
a
® 7 0
• REFERENCE FILE #
ACC 2ANCE
?o: as to legal dascriotion tris 1Z day of 19 -
BY:
��-11 City Engineer - City of Tigard
A_proved as to form this 2 V day of 1`3 -
BY: .
Citic Attorney - City of Tigard
AaP rove d this -aay of 19
BY: �.
^airperso - City of Tigard, Oregon Planning Ccmmission
?kccepted by the Ci tv Council this day of 19
BY:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
STATE OF OPEGON ) SS.
,.cy of )
;,n. t.ds day of 19_, before me appeared
and both to me personally known who, being duly sworn, did
sal that he, the said is the Mayor, a_-id he , the said
is the Recorder of the CITY OF LIGARD, a municipal Corporation,
and the said and acknowledged
zhe said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipal corporation.
IN TESTIMON-Y W-EREOF, I have hereunto set my ;sand and affixed
my official seal, this the day and year in this my certificate
first written-
Notary Public for Oregon
My Com-mission Expires
Pa e 2
m QV
•�-�1�.tit��`••• � S��� i 1 Q�FR�w�`-J S� � :.s 2F ; � Yi �t � � ' ~ j•: _'Y N � s r�r��..�.+o,_�..
r y� •:•=w �'2!� ,� �' z r��`;�irr ,r f'-; >f w c �, ~^`�r"�.! ��t r;� F � ?.-.• - �-�..--...:_.w..��~;~L�-���
F :.T-t'f'• V ,z ti> . - j:` .•7:•t` r v - •X' .YG!: _s t fes. "'f -"'� 'i ti,,AW
S_ x �s �.1 y� r" v� r:Y =pp T1 -''•T'l. t :�a# -.:=F Jas ! ;
rte. �� Lm.[,T��!tJ�i{ '9a. c� �(�t- :.•C�d�'7:t�a .Y�(x. �r'� 11�ry.,'/� i-� �. ... � _
•-.t 1 _`> •� q Sj".�� L :`i` �i � •:.r{�V,'' '�- �� �� .t r{ a� �s.Y�ti •a J
t v - i.,,ti_.t 1 _ a••_,,.r`�,-a-._� r" r ��. �'_'��fRL-. i�, r
6 -� s •�. l..f�i°` .t.! lr ��ryyy P.y'.� �.t+ ?-7 t � \.'r 'til•; yy-r;rs . _ r
,.�y �y'a.��.art3s
r• r .LYS<' � >t 4[;; �z-Y;,,:''`t-t � -10i.,,�� ,•.mss-• # �^'> •-
1. f
:i-a..l-[ STX - L` : ,✓�E
tv''%Y'F �� .�• �'j; u�s�-'+tT�t Y.-- ,.;,••.��'-'�•lt ;�.y1�.,P. �w ..�= I.- .Yv:_ •}•• �.t YC � y•i i - /y6 �y
cr.a=Y _ -ti `t' �.5�- F "•'��`j•_i a� sic ti. � ��*`..r
_ i4�•i t - :f,'1. _ - '� _ <.� } .SV �t,. } 4 � >> L'-A� < �✓ .1t _ _ !' •iJ 7
c< i t l;` � ,t:�r1F �f': 'i•'� �y�° .i'� 'A,,� �,�yaL r_�;� - �� '� i a�'l
•ti�. �4r7`�'l''���"� .,F �� Qom. r_:`s5'� �„t �; `l��-r•{.� 3��'aft �. � � r„� -
'� r i G•r -:1 vj� ,�;.Ptt'r• ,�. �vr - �� .�1,,. �x,���.a .1.�.�r. L Yt K��+ � '�- -
�„�:---<ti' �• �-.� i;�r •� -.� '�, >�3 v>73.- �sjwi � � !tP �L�� a � i„ k t�. ;.�• _
'} :A4
rY. t� > rl �S� jt'i.Y�d ,., � J E`- L tt- 3 ^`- 4.•' �-T �. l .
_i�� t���•�"'��y ���•.'1?� ;'�`.M`�r.ij ;�3cy �•'♦ 'i`. _ +. � r3 #S� _ rs'� .''- -
1 a at��? _ i7.e
T7
;'3'r r\. `tr.x`� � 71`tt �t. i��}�l(,l.�JE .yy. .�- Jt •.S-/�y � T•TE��({x '_ -41�: r�� �� �- �',•q`
L r v,�'l a"�'r",y�y�, -< � > ',•+ i L 'i• -ti 1._• [..d 'Y yc � � t�:' its ,t s._ r� �ty .r!-Y1 p:�_� t— .:
1,. •2'Cft.'[ '' >"�}�- t,'j.+K�S.i�'`t,��l-t._� wo:i��Y� Y 7 mor ���'.� '� Z ,5...r t`.y. ��'�f��i'�a;�i3s-. G ''.c• .�
C' k Y' �Y •� t r i+ r�s a X w r a �f..-v,2 �-�7 'w�, _ w � i• c 1. 'r - 1 '
ftt
•-!+r'��� aJr h j{�.y�-.,�y'�+�4�-[�f,��s� ��• �-�'f •s's�.i� Y�'>t�'k�.�'!v'i}��' r �'4 `'`a j 'r'K{.: er 'fit •�'r'. �: y. r +�'Y�. (.'�� �• `:
.r-•.("�'• r i`
a - ].' �[ ^ '�; ] � SJ�� 1. - ,> � � ; t •�
r .. �tr ]� ��, r-.�t i ;.F':yt•"'�' y t �J: � h:- a`'�l:`�Yf'r n.'`� -•...0>iJ t r ?1.c ..7:� r '�'3-
•j1f��-7_µ;� .-' .. s%��h��,, h.T..'h- ��`.�,,'r..`..-.at' ,� � •t �ra[�. .� - :�. 5' x;r.''rC.r�:. >
`"� �(��'�'-54c�+1-a -t,J i{F.J 5� r� '+G ;GT. Gam•. � yR��.�.M�{s'."sn���w•t -�:�ir�.jE�'T'r-..T �:; � y -•f �Fz��.. j_
�''�"' a`"�'•}Y ^�",�, t :t. �•�. Y _ t ti.2' �.::
''�`?r�'P'' c����rt'YTE i �'•�3••e� t��'4 _ 1''�• � 7
���i<:`t... P' F r ?"'. z -� z moi' �`_a'� � ,� r.'.,r'-yr-��'4•'.c�lt 35 ' S ,- - ' t' a$'i s ~�'�r �,.
Y: �' �:{ �'S" `t �-� �4'`.. •,� zy ..� �.[t t-, _ D- z r< y!..'r,[.r ..a �-� .--t�`l. .F �:
'C .r s. >,a;. � �-S`"�;i �ti.,�. _ _ib,".{��- moo+--�•
M �*'�``. �.� w - ` a i�r ^, � i' -;y s.. "�u.� ry f i p •'"�` '�1 µy��i si
ialk`z _ .a's� t;._► 'g1"�'r•J�'r{ ,s>�+`. �, '�( +:�'` �• �+•_.r.-%w � �x•,«.�5.�%:}>�a�,-�.>`�o•f�-.�iS-:, ._x��� • Y�.T��n•.t
.'�' -• r'Jy74 . J fli"_a;5 � - �; Ly ["� �t�� �. �� � ';�t�'''�' •`�.�t�l�_ `"?�' is"i:-�� •t
rt •d' ' - Jc {1,>� F •4'+ _eirG. _ -'^'1!;,;f 'Ki .•K t,.
9.
�"'• aces'< f k _ 3i�'•7 '[cay:FT4
Y '�Y � 3.� D,;\ � � '!,T-1 � r"�+L' .5:. ,,,r.rr� _�jY Yj�•C` .e 4~'�� M�`� � .r''fT7Y }_ � �•t �•'
'` r �''j, r. _ �f �•.�"�n.[6 }t�;��t4S:�j��r Yu .'�^;� 'rf��.�`k,
r - r
��t 1
.u.
v � .�y- ate
For � ho�o
MOM-
Ex hI �D � � S
� She E (Dunc* i
Fl in
�.
NEW PW MW womm
MEMORANDUM
January 17 , 1983
TO : City Administrator/City Council
FROM : Chief of Police
SUBJECT : OLCC License Renewals
RE : #1 . Silver Palace
14455 S . W. Pacific Highway
#2 . Pizza Caboose
11670 S . W. Pacific Highway
#3 . Ron ' s Green Valley Tavern
Sir :
The above named businesses are requesting renewal of existing
licenses ; there is no change in status of the license or owners .
It is recommended that the renewals be approved and forwarded
to O .L . C . C .
Respectfully ,
.'B . /madams
Chief of Police
RBA : ac
MEMORANDUM �.
t �(
January 20, 1983
TO: City Administrator/City Council
FROM: Chief of Police
SUBJECT: O.L.C.C. License Renewals
RE: #1. SCHOLLS THRIFTWAY
12280 S.W. Scholls Ferry Road, Tigard
#2. ALBERTSON'S FOOD CENTER #544
12060 S.W. Main Street, Tigard
#3. PRAIRIE MARKET #412
8950 S.W. Commercial, Tigard
#4. WILLOWBROOK RESTAURANT
11525 S.W. Durham Rd. , Tigard
#5. PIETRO'S GOLD COAST PIZZA
13405 S.W. Pacific Highway, Tigard
#6. FRED MEYER - EVE'S RESTAURANT
11565 S.W. Pacific Highway, Tigard
#7. FRED MEYER - GROCERY SUPERMARKET
11565 S.W. Pacific Highway, Tigard
Sir=
The above named businesses are requesting renewal of existing licenses;
there is no change in status of the license or owners.
It is recommended that the renewals be approved and forwarded to O.L.C.C.
Respectfully,
R.E. dams `
Chief of Police
RBA:ac
F'.
i
WNW NON
1`
Avoid Verbal Messages
CITY OF TIGARD '
To: Chief Adams From : Doris Hartig
Subject: OLCC License Renewals Date :_ January 17, 1983
Please review and have recommendation ready by Thursday, January 20th so that we may
include them in the packets for the January 24th City Council meeting. Thank you.
y.
Scholls Thriftway Pietro's Gold Coast Pizza
12280 SW Scholls Ferry Road 13405 SW Pacific Highway
Albertson's Food Center #544 Fred Meyer - Eve's Restaurant
12060 SW Main Street 11565 SW Pacific Highway
Fred Meyer - Grocery Supermarket
Prairie Market X1412 t
8950 SW Commercial 11565 SW Pacific Highway
Willowbrook Restaurant 1. k:
11525 SW Durham Road '
x
1
1•.
r
1^
i
�rr
k.
f:
b
a - �
January 20, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Loreen Wilson, Office Manager QW
SUBJECT: Agenda Item 2.5 for 1-24-83 Packet
This item will be hand-carried to the meeting by the Director of Public Works .
1W
C `
i
' January 20, 1983
mEMCRANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: William A. Monahanujoy1
Director of Planning & Development
SUBJECT: Jadco Appeal
Staff received the attached letter from John A. Duncan of Jadco Chemical Ltd.
relative to Hearings Officer Order Number M 2-82. Mr. Duncan's appeal was
originally scheduled for November 15, 1982 but was held over with the intent
that it would be heard after the Comprehensive Plan process was completed.
Since the plan is now under consideration and it will not be final by January
24, 1983. the appeal will be reset for February 28, 1983. Mr. Duncan's letter
expresses his consent to this change.
Staff Recommendation:
In order that the Jadco Chemical Ltd. Appeal may be considered in relation to
the policies established in the revised Tigard Comprehensive Plan, staff
recommences that the Jadco Appeal be reset to February 28, 1983.
pm
(0458A)
C .
i
( ��C�%�.-� lam-✓
H�M�GP
G
January 10 , 1983
City of Tigard
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Attn. : Bill Monahan
Confirming our phone convaYsation regarding change of
hearing date from January 24th, 1983 to February 28th, 1983
The above date change is satisfactory to me .
Sincerely,
John A. Duncan
1
C
JADCO CHEMICAL LTD.
"Specializing in Formulated Chemicals" '
- (533)684-0044
i
16055 SY1.74,!-. AVENUE PORTLAND,OR 97223 !
M
. 7-
P
G� October 19, 1982
To: Planning Director City of Tigard
From: John A. Duncan
Subject: Appeal findings . of hearing officer case No. M-2-82.
Decision rendered October 7, 1982.
Please process my appeal to be heard after inconsistencies within
The Comprehensive Plan have been effectively refined and clarified.
Reasons:
a. We are not affecting flood plain.
b. Findings of hearing officer based on a document that
at best is inconsistent and not in accord with pending
comprehensive plan.
C. Confiscation of property without due process.
d. Land 400 feet west of subject property owned by applicant
is more than adequate for future greenway.
e. Staff, after thorough review of facts, recommends
approval.
Additional information to be furnished prior to appeal hearing.
Enclosed please find the applicable Appeals Fee.
c Sincerely,
Join A. Duncan
JADCO CHEMICAL LTD.
"Specializing in Formutaied Chemicals'
(503)684-0044
16055 S.W 74th AVENUE PORTLAND.OR 97223
1
CI1Y OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 83-
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING '1I1LE 16, SIGN REGULATIONS OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL
CODE, ADOPTING THE 1983 SIGN CODE, PRESCRIBING REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS,
PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRAIION AND ENFORCEMENT, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds that after proper legal notice a public
hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 4, 1983,
and at that meeting all interested parties were afforded the
opportunity to be heard and to be present and rebut evidence with
respect to the proposed changes to Title 16.
SECTION 2: Having considered the recommendation of the Building Department
Staff and the Planning Commission and having entertained testimony
with regard to those recommendations, the City Council has found
that changes should be made to Title 16, Sign Regulations, of the
Municipal Code of the City of Tigard.
SECTION 3. Therefore, Title 16, Sign Regulations, Municipal Code of the City
of Tigard, shall be adopted as in AppeQ&I x A.
SECTION 4. Repeal: Title 16, the 1982 Sign Regulations of the Tigard
Municipal Code is repealed.
SECTION 5. Severability: The sections of this ordinance are severable. The
invalidity of a section shall not affect the validity of the
remaining sections.
SECTION 6. Inasmuch as this ordinance is necessary to protect the general
welfare of the people of the City of Tigard, this ordinance as
exhibited in Appendix A, must be made without delay; therefore an
emergency is hereby declared to exist, and their ordinance shall
become effective immediately upon passage and approval by the City
Council.
PASSED- By the City Council by vote of all Council members
present after being read two times by number and title only, this day
of 1982.
City Recorder - City of Tigard
Approved: By the Mayor this day of 1982.
Mayor - City of Tigard
ORDINANCE NO. 83-
(0447A)
MIMM
Appendix A
Title 16
SIGN REGULATIONS
Chapters:
16.04 Purpose, Title
16.08 Definitions
16. 12 Permits
16.24 Nonconforming Signs
16.28 Removal Provisions
16.34 Hearing Procedures and Exceptions
16.36 Zone Regulations
16.40 Special Types of Signs
16.46 Temporary Signs
16.48 Administration
Chapter 16.04
PURPOSE, TITLE
Sections:
16.04.010 PURPOSE AND SCOPE.
16.04.020 SHORT TITLE.
16.04.010 PURPOSE AND SCOPE. The City Council finds that to protect
the health, safety, property and welfare of the public, to improve the
neat, clean, orderly and attractive appearance of the community, to
improve the effectiveness of signs in identifying and advertising
businesses, to provide for safe construction, location, erection, and
maintenance of signs, and to prevent proliferation of signs and sign
clutter, and to minimize adverse visual safety factors to public highway
travelers, it is necessary to regulate the design, quality of materials,
construction, location, electrification, illumi:ation and maintenance of
all signs visible from public property or from public rights-of-way.
This title shall not be construed to permit the erection or
maintenance of any sign at any place or in any manner unlawful under any
other ordinance or state or federal law.
16.04.020 SHORT TITLE. The ordinance codified in this title shall be
known as the "Sign Ordinance" of the City of Tigard and may be so cited
and pleaded and shall be referred to herein as "this title."
—��
4
r:
Chapter 16.08
DEFINITIONS
i
F'
Sections :
16.08.010 Generally
16.08.020 Area
16.08.03C "A"Board
16.08.040 Bench Sign
16.08.05G Billboard
16.08.060 Business
16.08.065 Building Official
16.08.070 Business of outdoor advertising
16.08.080 Construct s
16.08.090 Cutout
16.08.095 Design Review
16.08.100 Display surface
16.08..105 Electronic Information Sign
16.08.110 Electrical sign
16.08.120 Externally illuminated sign r`
16.08.130 Face of a building
16.08.140 Flashing sign
16.08.150 Free Standing sign
16.08.160 Freeway-oriented sign �s
16.08.170 Frontage �
16.08. 180 Ideological sign
16.08.185 Immediate or Serious Danger
16.08.190 Incidental sign
16.08.200 Incombustible material
16.08.210 Industrial park
16.08.220 Internally illuminated sign
16.08.230 Maintain
16.08.240 Nameplate
16.08.250 Nonstructural trim
16.08.260 Off-premises sign
16.08.270 Outdoor advertising or billboard sign
16.08.280 Person
16.08.290 Plastic material
16.08.295 Political Signs
16.08.300 Premises
16.08.310 Projecting sign
16.08.320 Projection
16.08.330 Reader board sign
16.08.340 Roof sign.
16.O3.350 Rotating or revolving sign
16.08.360 Sign
16.08.370 Sign structure
16.08.380 Temporary sign
,6.08.390 Uniform Building Code
16.08.400 Wall sign
2
a —
16.08.010 Generally. For the purpose of this title , words used in
the present tense include the future, the singular number includes the
plural, "shall" is mandatory and not directory and "building" includes
"structures" except "sign structures."
As used in this title, unless the context requires otherwise, the
following words and phrases shall have the meanings set forth in this
chapter.
16.08.020 Area. "Area" or "area of a sign" means the entire area
within any type of perimeter which encloses the outer limits of any
writing, representation, emblem, figure or character. The area of a sign
having no such perimeter or border shall be computed by enclosing the
entire surface area within a parallelogram or triangle, then computing
the area thereof. The area of all signs in existence at the date of
adoption of this title, whether conforming or nonconforming, shall be
counted in establishing the permitted sign area of all signs allowed for
an individual business on a premises. Where a sign is of a
three-dimensional or round or irregular solid shape, the largest
cross-section shall be used in a flat projection for the purpose of
determining sign area.
i
16.08.030 "A Board. "A Board" refers to any double faced temporary
sign which does not exceed twelve square feet per side.
16.08.040 Bench sign. "Bench sign" includes a bench designed to seat
i
people which carries a written or graphic message.
r
16.08.050 Billboard. For "billboard" see "outdoor advertising sign,". 2
E
i'
16.08.060 Business. "Business" includes all of the activities Y
carried on by the same legal entity on the same premises and includes 1
eleemosynary, fraternal, religious, educational or social organizations. Y
"Legal entity" includes, but is not limited to, individual
proprietorships, partnerships, corporations, non-profit corporations,
associations, or joint stock companies.
16.08.065 Building Official. Officer or designee of the City
empowered to enforce the Uniform Building Code.
16.08.070 Business of outdoor advertising. "Business of outdoor
advertising: includes the business of constructing, erecting, operating,
using, maintaining, or leasing outdoor advertising signs.
16.08.080 Construct. "Construct" includes every type of display in
the form of letters , figures, characters, representations.
16.08.090 Cutout. "Cutout" includes every type of display in the
form of letters, figures, characters, representations or others in cutout
or irregular form attached to or superimposed upon a sign or advertising
sign.
16.08.095 Design Review. "Design Review" means the process set forth
in the Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18.59.
3
f
16.08. 100 Display surface. "Display surface" includes the area made
available by the sign structure for the purpose of displaying the
advertising or identification message.
16.08. 105 Electronic Information Sign. Electronic Information Sign"
includes signs, displays , devices, or portions thereof with lighted
changing messages that change at intermittant intervals by electronic
process or remote cc_itrol. Electronic information signs are not
identified as rotating, revolving, or moving signs.
16.08.110 Electrical sign. "Electrical sign" includes any sign
utilizing electrical wiring.
16 08 120 Externally illuminated sign. "Externally illuminated sign"
includes a sign illuminated from an external light source.
16.08.130 Face of a building. "Face of a building" includes all
window and wall area of a building in one or more parallel planes.
16.08.140 Flashing sign. Flashing sign" includes any sign which is
illuminated by an intermittent or flashing light source or which is in
any other way animated so as to create the illusion of movement without
actual physical movement or the illusion of a flashing or intermittent
light or light source. Flashing signs do not include electronic
information signs.
16.08- 150 Free-standing sign. "Free-standing sign includes a sign
erected and mounted on a free-standing frame, mast or pole and not
attached to any building.
16 08 160 Freeway-oriented sign. "Freeway-oriented sign" includes a
sign primarily designed to be read by a motorist traveling on a highway
designated by the Oregon State Highway Department as a freeway or
expressway; specifically, these shall be Interstate 5, and Oregon Stnte
Highway #217, and shall not include U.S. Highway 99W.
36.08.170Fr2ntage. "Frontage" includes the length of the property
line of any one premises along a public roadway.
16.08.180 Ideological Sign. "Ideological sign includes signs which
communicate a political, moral, or philosophical comment or religious
statement which does not promote any commercial interest or refer
specifically to a particular ballot measure to be voted on in the next
election.
16.08.085 Immediate or Serious Danger. "Immediate or Serious Danger"
includes:
W Whenever any portion of the structure damaged by fire,
earthquake, wind, flood or other causes ; and member or appurtenance that
is likely to fail , or become detached or disloged or to collapse and
therby injure persons or damage property.
4
(2) Whenever any portion of the structure is not of sufficient
strength or stability or is not so anchored , attached or fastened in
place so as to be capable of resisting a wind pressure of one—half of
cr.:r �i c-r in the Uniform form �:slld lrl2 Code for this type structure or _
..r____
similar structure and will not exceed the working stresses permitted in
the U.B.C. for such structures.
(3) Whenever the loaction of the sign structure obstructs the view
of motorist traveling on the public streets or any place , and thus cause
damage to property or thereby injure persons.
16.08. 190 Incidental sign. "Incidental sign" includes signs
advertising or identifying associated goods, products , services or
facilities available on the premises, including, but not limited to,
trading stamps, credit cards accepted or brand names.
16.08.200 Incombustible material. "Incombustible material" means any
material which will not ignite at, or below, a temperature of twelve
hundred degrees Fahrenheit during an exposure of five minutes and which
will not continue to burn or glow at that temperature when tested in
accordance with standards established in the Uniform Building Code.
16.08.210 Indu.r-rial park. "Industrial park" means a parcel of land
which complies wit , the lot requirements set forth in Section 18.52.080
of the Tigard Municipal Code.
16 08 220 Internally illuminated sign. "Internally illuminated sign"
includes signs with an internal source of illumination where the light
source is not visible from the exterior of the sign.
16.08.230 Maintain. Maintain includes to permit a sign, sign
structure or part thereof to continue or to repair or refurbish a sign,
sign structure or part thereof.
16.08.240 Nameplate. "Nameplate" includes signs identifying only the
name and occupation or profession of the occupant of the premises on
which the sign is located.
16.08.250 Nonstructural trim. "Nonstructural trim" includes the
moldings, battens, caps, nailing strips and latticing, letters and
wal'Fways which are attached to a sign structure.
16.08.260 Off—premises sign. "Off—premises sign" includes any sign
including, but not limited to, a painted sign, temporary sign, permanent
sign or outdoor advertising sign, which sign advertises goods, products
or services which are not sold, manufactured or distributed on or from
.ie iremises or a sign which advertises a business or facilities not
Loc:l _ed on the premises on which the sign is located.
16 08 270 Outdoor advertising or billboard sign. "Outdoor
advertising sign" includes a sign constructed, erected and maintained by
a person licensed to engage in the business of outdoor advertising and
which sign is an off—premises sign supported by a substantial permanent
sign structure with a display surface or display surfaces primarily
designed for the purpose of painting or posting advertising message
thereon at periodic intervals, and where customarily, although not
exclusively, the use of the display surface is leased to other persons.
Sometimes referred to as "Billboards".
16.08.280 Person. "Person" means individuals , corporations,
associations , firms , partnerships and joint stock companies.
16.08.290 Plastic material . "Plastic material" includes those
materials made wholly or partially from standardized plastics listed and
described in the Uniform Building Code or approved plastics which have
been approved by the Underwriters Laboratory for use in construction of
electrical signs.
16.08. 295 Political signs. "Political Signs" are signs promoting or
opposing a candidate or measure in a specific election.
16.08.300 Premises. "Premises" includes one or more lots on which
are constructed or on which are to be constructed a building or a group
of buildings designed as a unit.
16.08.310 Projecting sign. "Projecting sign" includes signs other
than a wall sign which projects from a building.
16.08.320 Projection. "Projection" means the distance by which a
projecting sign extends from a building.
16.08.330 Reader board sign. "Reader board sign" includes any sign
with changeable copy as message, except electronic information signs.
16.08.340 Roof sign. "Roof sign" means a sign erected upon or
directly above a roof or parapet of a building or structure.
16 08 350 Rotating, revolving or moving sign. "Rotating, revolving
or moving sign" means any sign, or portion of a sign, which moves in any
manner.
16.08.360 Sign. "Sign" includes an advertising sign, outdoor
advertising sign, on-premises sign, display, temporary sign, temporary
sign display, message, light (other than a device used primarily to
illuminate a building or a premises) , emblem, device, figure or
mannequin, painting, drawing, placard, poster or other thing that is
designed, used or intended for advertising purposes, or to inform or to
attract the attention of the public, and includes , where applicable, the
sign structure, display surfaces and all other component parts of the
sign.
16.08.370 Sign structure. "Sign structure" includes any structure
which supports or is capable of supporting any sign as described in the
Uniform Building Code. A sign structure may be a single pole and may or
may not be an integral part of a building.
16.08.380 Temporary sign. "Temporary sign" includes any _cign, "A"
board frame, banner, or advertising display which is not permanently
erected or permanently affixed to any sign structure, sign tower, or
building and which is not an electrical sign or an internally illuminated
sign and does not have changeable message characteristics.
6
i
E
i
E
i
i
16.08.390 Uniform Building Code. "Uniform Building Code" means the
most recent structural and specialty Oregon Uniform Building Code as
i
adopted by the Oregon Department of Commerce, and which Uniform Building
Code , by this reference, is incorporated in this title to the extent of
specific citations thereof in this title.
f
16.08.400 Wall sign. "Wall sign" includes any sign attached to, z
painted on, or erected against the wall of a building or structure, with
the exposed face of the sign in a plane parallel to the plane of the wall.
t
f
e
7
Chapter 16. 12
PERMITS
Sections:
16. 12.010 PERMITS REQUIRED
16. 12.020 APPLICATION
16. 12.030 FEES
16.12.040 INSPECTIONS
16.12.050 EXEMPTIONS
16. 12.060 REPAIR, MAINTENANCE, AND CHANGE OF COPY OF LAWFUL SIGN
16.12.010 PERMITS REQUIRED. No sign shall hereafter be erected,
re-erected, constructed, altered or relocated within the city limits
except as provided by this title, and a permit for the same has been
issued by the Building Official. A separate permit shall be required for
a sign or signs for each business entity and a separate permit shall be
required for each group of signs on a single supporting structure. A
separate permit shall be required when it is proposed to remove a sign
from its supporting structure for its repair and maintenance. Separate
structural permits under the Uniform Building Code shall also apply. In
addition, an electrical permit shall be obtained for all illuminated
signs, from the enforcing agency, subject to the provisions of the State
Electrical Code.
16.12.020 APPLICATION. Application for sign permits shall be made in
writing upon forms furnished by the Building Official. The application
shall show the location by street and number of proposed sign and the
name and address of the owner and sign contractor or erector. The
following information shall accompany the application:
(1) A minimum of two copies of plot plans , drawn to scale, and a
scale drawing of the sign. The plot plan shall indicate the location of
the sign, all buildings, property lines, existing signs, streets,
driveways and overhead power lines on the premises.
(2) The scale drawing of the sign shall show sign dimensions, the
colors , materials, height above ground, source and intensity of any
illumination and the construction showing size of footings, anchorages,
and welds.
(3) The Building Official may require engineers ' calculations for
sign construction, anchorage and footing requirements, including wind
resistance and seismic forces, all in conformance with the requirements
of the Uniform Building Codes. All sign structures on or near a building
shall conform to the State Fire Life Safety requirements and the Uniform
Building Code requirements of the building, structure or area where it is
erected.
( (4) All electrical illuminated signs shall bear the Underwriters
Laboratory label or equivalent.
16. 12.030 FEES. Each applicant for a sign permit as a condition
precedent to granting of such permit, shall pay to the city with respect
to the proposed construction, alteration or relocation of a sign for
which a sign permit is required as follows:
111111111111111 8
Permit Fee
Sign Area ---
$10
0 to 25 square feet
—
over 25 to 100 square feet $25 plus $10 for
over 100 square feet each additional
100 square feet or
fraction thereof
$100
Maximum permit 10
Re-inspection IU
Temporary sign (ea. sign) 25
Planning Commission Review Fee
Subsequent fees and amendments to fee schedules shall be changed by
City Council by resolution. These fees are in addition to any fees
charged by the City under the Uniform Building Code. Where work for
permit is required by this Code is started or proceeded with
which a p the fees specified in the above table
prior to obtaining said permit, a
shall be doubled.
All permits shall expire within ninety days of issuance when it has F
been determined by the Building Official that no work has been done on
rior
the work authorized by said permit. Such permit shall y renewed,
wiPhout
to expiration date, for up to an additional ninetythed a licant to the
additional charge when requested n writing by 1ppto any action
Building Official. This renewal o�. . �n shall not apply not
granted by the City on non-conforming others Uniform Building is section
which shall also
alter the renewal provisions o
remains in effect in addition to the provisions of this title.
16.12.040 INSPECTIONS.
(1) General. All construction work for which a permit is required
shall be subject to an inspection by the Building Official per the
Uniform Building Code and this title. A survey of the lot or proposed
location for sign erection may be required by the Building Official to
verify compliance of the structure with approved plans. Neither the
Building Official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expen tenial
other obligations, entailed in the removal or replacement of any
required to allow inspection.
It shall be the duty of the person doing
(2) Inspection requests.
the work authorized by a permit to notify the Building Official that such
work is ready for inspection. The Building Official may require that
every request for inspection be filed at least one working day before
such inspection is desired.
( (3) Required inspections. Reinforcing steel or structural framework
of any part of the proposed structure shall not be covered or concealed
without first obtaining approval of the Building Official.
1
{
a
F
(A) Foundation Inspections shall be made after all
required excavations , form work, bolt settings are completed and ready to
receive concrete.
(B) P--11 anchorages shall be left exposed for inspection.
(C) Electrical inspection shall be made by agency issuing
electrical permits. _
(D) Final Inspections. Final inspection shall be called
for by the applicant when all work is completed. This inspection shall
cover all items required by the Building Official under State law or City
ordinance such as the locations, landscaping if required and general
compliance with the approved plans and requirements of this title.
16.12.050 EXEMPTIONS. (A) The following signs and operations shall
not require a sign permit but shall conform to all other applicable
regulations of this title and the provisions of subsection B of this
section:
(1) Signs advertising exclusively the sale, *:ental or lease of
premises on which the signs are located; x
(2) Memorial signs or tablets, names of buildings and dates of
erection, if either cut into any masonry surface or constructed of bronze
or other incombustible material;
(3) Signs denoting the architect, engineer, contractor, and similar
information concerning a subdivision or development and placed on the
construction site;
(4) Signs denoting one time clearance sales of household goods (e.g.
f'-
a garage sale) ; _
(5) Signs promoting or opposing a candidate or measure in a specific
election; •.
(6) Ideological signs.
(7) Signs of temporary nature advertising events or products for
sale for non-profit organizations.
f
(B) All signs exempt from permit requirements under subsection (A) of
this section shall meet the following requirements:
(1) The sign shall be erected on private property with the consent
of the lawful possessor of the property and shall not be placed on
utility poles or in the public right-of-way.
(2) The total area of signage per parcel shall not exceed 6 square
feet in single family residential, 12 square feet in multi-family zones, �}
15 square feet in C-4 zones, and 70 square feet in other zones, £
regardless of the number of signs.
(3) At least one sign shall be permitted per parcel of land;
additional signs on such parcel shall be spaced at least 50 feeX apart in
residential zones and 30 feet apart in nonresidential zones.
10
(C) Signs exempt from permit requirements under Subsection (A)(1) , (3) ,
(4) , and (5) shall be removed within 10 days from the end of the event
displayed. Thus, signs under Subsection (A)(L) shall be removed 10 days
from sale, rental or lease. Signs under Subsection (3) shall be removed
within 10 days of completion of construction. Signs under Subsection
(A)(4) shall be removed within 10 days of the end of the clearance sale.
Signs under Subsection (A)(5) shall be removed within 10 days of the
subject election.
16.12.060 REPAIR, MAINTENANCE, AND CHANGE OF COPY OF LAWFUL SIGN The
sign permit provisions of this title shall not apply to repair,
maintenance, or change of copy (including, but not limited to the
changing of a message on a sign specifically designed for the use of
replaceable copy). All other provisions of this title shall apply. The
exemption provided by this section shall not be applicable to unlawfully
erected or maintained signs.
11
1
Chapter 16.24
NONCONFORMING SIGNS
Sections:
16.24.010 DEFINED - CONTINUANCE
16.24.020 CONTINUOUS - EXCEPTION
16.24.030 LOCATED ON PREMISES ANNEXED TO CITY
16.24.040 ALTERATION, RELOCATION OR REPLACEMENT
16.24.050 TYPES REQUIRING CONFORMANCE WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF
TITLE'S EFFECTIVE DATE.
16.24.010 DEFINED - CONTINUANCE. Except as provided in this chapter,
signs in existence on March 20, 1978, according to Ordinance No. 77-89
and No. 78-16, which do not conform to the provisions of this title, but
which were constructed, erected or maintained in compliance with all
previous regulations, shall be regarded as non-conforming signs which may
be continued until March 20, 1988 (ten years after date of ordinance). ¢
16.24.020 CONTINUANCE - EXCEPTION. Signs in existence on January 11,
1971, which do not conform to the provisions of this title, but which
were constructed, erected or maintained in compliance with all previous
regulations, were regarded as non-conforming signs and could be continued
for a period of ten years from January 11, 1971. All such signs which
were not brought into compliance with the standards in Ordinance No.
77-89 and No. 78-16 and the extensions granted are now in violation of
this title.
16.24.030 LOCATED ON PREMISES ANNEXED TO CITY. Signs located on
premises annexed into the City after January 11, 1971, which do not
comply with the provisions of this title, shall be brought into
compliance with this title within a period of ten years after the
effective date of the annexation.
16.24.040 ALTERATION, RELOCATION OR REPLACEMENT. Any sign which is
structurally altered, relocated or replaced shall immediately be brought
into compliance with all of the provisions of this title, except the a
repairing and restoration of a sign on site or away from the site to a
safe condition any part of a sign or sign structure for normal
maintenance shall be permitted without loss of non-conforming status.
16.24.050 TYPES REQUIRING CONFORMANCE WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF TITLE'S
EFFECTIVE DATE. Signs in existence on the effective date of this title
which do not comply with provisions regulating flashing signs ; use of par
spotlights or rotating beacons ; rotating and revolving signs; flags,
C banners, streamers or strings of lights ; (or temporary or incidental
signs) shall be made to conform within ninety days from the effective
date of this title.
4
f.
Chapter L6.28
SIGN REMOVAL PROVISIONS
Sections:
16.28.010 NON-CONFORMING SIGNS
16.28.020 ABANDONED SIGNS
All signs erected in violati n of the requirements of this title from
the effective date of this ordinance shall be removed immediately by the
owner or erector. If the erector or owner does not bring the sign into
compliance or remove it by the time noted by the Building Official 's
notice to remove, the erector or owner may be cited into court under TMC
16.48.030.
16.28.010 NON-CONFORMING SIGNS. All signs erected after the
effective date of this title, which are in violation of any provision of
this ordinance, shall be removed or brought into conformance, upon
written notice by the Building Official.
All signs which do not comply with this title, but were erected prior
to the effective date of this ordinance, shall be removed or brought into
conformance within 60 days from written notice by certified mail given by
the Building Official or duly authorized representative.
If the owner of sign, building, structure or premise fails to comply
with the written order, the Building Official or his authorized
representative may then cite the owner into court subject to Chapter
16.48 of this title.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Chapter 16.24, Non-Conforming Signs, provides for certain time
limits and other conditions for certain signs as described
therein.
2. Any sign that by its condition or location presents an immediate
or serious danger to the public , by order of the Building
Official, it shall be removed or repaired within the time he may
specify.
In the event the owner of such sign cannot be found or reft,ses to
comply with the order to remove, the Building Official shall then
have the dangerous sign removed and the owner cited for
non-compliance and recovery of any damage or expense.
3. Temporary Signs: All temporary signs shall be removed or
repaired as provided in Chapter 16.46 of this title.
16.28.020 ABANDONED SIGNS. Any person who owns or leases a sign
shall remove such sign and sign structure when either the business that
it advertises has discontinued business in the city or the business that
it advertises is no longer conducted in or upon the premises upon which
such sign is located. If the person who owns or leases such sign fails
13
to remove it as provided in this section, the Building Official shall
give the owner -if the building, structure or premises upon which such
sign is located, sixty days written notice to remove it. If the sign has —
..ot been removed at t.,e expiration of the sixty days notice, the Building
Official or his duly authorized representative, may remove such sign at
cost to the owner of the building, structure or premises. Signs which
the successor to a person's business or busines,' .ocation agrees to
maintain as provided in this title need not be rem -^, !in accordance with
this section. Cost incurred by the Building Of:.cial, or his duly
authorized representative, may be made a lien against the land or
premises on which such sign is located, after notice and hearing and may
be collected or foreclosed in the same manner as liens otherwise entered
in the liens docket of the City.
Chapter 16.34
HEARINGS PROCEDURES AND EXCEPTIONS
Sections:
16.34.010 APPLICABILITY
16.34.020 LIMITATION ON SEEKING PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING; STAY
16.34.030 HEARING PROCEDURES
16.34.040 EXCEPTIONS
16.34.050 EXPIRATION OF EXCEPTION WHEN UNEXERCISED
16.34.010 APPLICABILITY. The following persons may, upon payment of
the appropriate fee, be heard by the Planning Commission under TMC
Section 18.84.050(b) and related sections :
(1) Any person who has been ordered by the Building Official to
remove a sign, alleged to be in violation of this title;
(2) Any person whose permit to erect or alter a sign has been
refused or revoked under this title;
(3) Any persons seeking an exception from the provisions of this
title;
(4) Any persons adversely affected by a determination of
nonconformity by the Building Official under Chapter 16.24 of this title;
(5) Any person otherwise adversely affected by a determination made
under this title.
16.34.020 LIMITATION ON SEEKING PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING; STAY.
(1) No hearing before the Planning Commission shall be granted from
an order or determination under TMC Section 16.34.010(1) , (2) , (4) and
(5) unless an application be filed within 10 days of such order or
determination being made known to the person seeking review, and unless
that person be substantially affected or aggreived by the order.
(2) Application for hearing shall not stay the action of the
Building Official unless the applicant requests a stay and after
appropriate notice and hearings, the Building Official determines that
specific public safety considerations outweigh the delay of the action
for the hearing and review process.
16.34.030 HEARINGS PROCEDURES. Except as otherwise specifically
provided in this title, the provisions of the TMC Chapter 18.84 shall
` govern hearing procedures under this title.
15
16.34.040 EXCEPTIONS The Planning Commission or, on review, the
Council may grant exceptions to the requirements of this title, when the
applicant demonstrates that , oweing to special or unusual circumstances
relating to the design, structure, or placement of the sign in relation
features the land, the
t0 other StrUCtureS Or land uses Or the natural Lca..ui2S ..� .. •-•• ,
literal interpre-ation of this title would interfere with the
communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit
in terms of the values set forth in TMC Section 18.59.010.
16.34.050 EXPIRATION OF EXCEPTION WHEN UNEXERCISED. When the
Planning Commission (or, in the case of review, the City Council)
approves an exception the rights thereby given to the applicant shall
continue to exist and to belong to the applicant or any other owner of
the land for a period of one year from the date of final approval. If,
at the expiration of one year from the date of approval, construction of
the structure or initiation of the use giving rise to the need for the
exception has not begun, the rights given by the exception approval shall
terminate without further action Ly the City, the Planning Commission, or
the City Council. Said rights shall also terminate at or after the
expiration of one year from approval if, though commenced within one
year, construction ceases and is not resumed within sixty days.
r
16
asps+®� � . om
c3
CHAPTER 16.36
ZONE REGULATIONS
Sections:
16. 36.010 GENERALLY
16.36.020 SINGLE FAMILY OR RESIDENTIAL ZONES
16. 36.030 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES
16.36.040 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES
16. 36.050 COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL ZONES
16.36.055 C-4 ZONES
16. 36.060 OTHER REQUIREMENTS
16.36.010 GENERALLY. Except as provided in this title, no person
shall install or maintain any sign in the City in the zones listed in the
following sections. Reference to zones are those established by or
pursuant to the Community Development Code.
16.36.020 SINGLE FAMILY OR RESIDENTIAL ZONES. No sign of any
character shall be permitted in an R-5, R-7, R-10, R-15, R-20 or R-30
zone except the following:
(1) Nameplates. Sign bearing only property numbers, names of
occupants of the premises or other identification of the premises not
having a commercial connotation not exceeding a combined area of four
square feet.
(2) Real Estate Signs. One on-site temporary sign for each street
frontage offering the premises for sale, lease or inspection by the
i
public provided that the total area of such sign does not exceed six
square feet in area. Such signs may also be modified to indicate that
the property has been sold.
E
(3) Permanent subdivision identification signs. One ground sign, at
each entry point to the subdivision from the public right-of-way, with
the site properly landscaped, denoting the development name and not
exceeding thirty-two square feet in area. Illumination may be approved
as long as it does not create a public or private nuisance, as determined
by the Planning Director considering the purpose of the zone.
r
(4) Real estate directional signs. Temporary real estate signs
advertising an open house and located off the premises, limited to a sign
area of six square feet and a maximum dimension of four feet may be
erected and maintained, provided the display of such sign shall be only
during those hours the property is available for inspection. No other
off-premises directional signs shall be allowed. No permits are required
for such signs, but the Planning Director may establish reasonable rules
and regulations to prohibit. sign clutter, erection of unsafe signs, or
` other problems in connection with the erection of real estate directional
signs. Such rules and regulations shall be on file with the City
Recorder.
(EFk
tty[
f
17
(5) (A) Free--standing signs for religious assemblies and
ede:cational institutions in residential zones shall be limited to 16 feet
in height and 65 square feet in area per sign face.
(B) Religious assemblies and educational institutions are
permitted to have reader boards but not in excess of the allowable sign
area.
(C) Wall Signs. Wall signs shall not exceed five percent of
the front wall area and not be permitted on side or rear wall.
16.36.030 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES. No sign shall be permitted
in an A-12, A-20, A-40, A-70/80PD zone except the following:
(1) Permanent residential nameplates identifying the premises.
Total signing on a premises shall not exceed one square Foot of area per
dwelling unit.
(2) Incidental signs. Such signs shall only be permitted when
attached to a permanently affixed sign structure or to the wall of the
building.
(3) Real estate signs. One outside sign offering the premises for
sale providing that the total area of such sign does not exceed twelve
square feet. Such signs may be modified to indicate that the property
has been sold.
(4) Nonresidential signs. One illuminated or non-illuminated sign
iot exceeding six feet in height and 65 square feet in area per sign face
identifying any nonresidential use permitted in a multiple family
residential zone, if such use has been approved under the conditional use
process.
(5) Real estate directional signs, free standing and wall signs
shall be the same as paragraph 4 and 5 of Single Family residential zones.
16.36.040 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES. C-3, C-3M, C-5, and M-2,
M-3 and M-4 industrial zones:
Free-standing signs shall have certain limitations and condition
when permitted on properties zoned commercial and industrial. One
multifaced, free-standing sign identifying the principal goods, products,
facilities or services available on the premises, shall be permitted on
the premises, subject to conditions and limitations as stated herein. A
readerboard assembly may be an integral part of the free-standing sign.
Free-standing signs.
Area Limits. The maximum square footage of signs shall be seventy
Csquare feet per face or a total of one hundred forty square feet for all
sign faces. No part of any free-standing sign shall extend over a
property line into public right-of-way space.
18
d
Area Limit Increases. The sign area may be increased one square foot
for each lineal foot the sign is moved back from the front property line
the sign is adjacent to. If the street is curbed and paved the
measurement play be taken frV li a pv^iiat w::ic its fifteen feet '-),in
pavement. This increase in sign area is limited to a maximum of ninety
square feet per face or a total of one hundred eighty square feet for all
faces.
t:
Height Limits. Free-standing signs located next to the public
right-of-way shall not exceed twenty feet in height. Height may be
increased one foot in height for each ten feet of setback from the
property line or a point fifteen feet from the edge of pavement whichever t
is less to a maximum of twenty-two feet in height.
Wall Signs.
c
Allowable Area. Wall signs, including illuminated reader boards, may
be erected or maintained but shall not exceed in gross area fifteen
percent of the building frontage occupied by the tenant. '
Y
Wall signs may not project more than eighteen inches from the wall or
extend above the wall to which t'-'-
)y are attached.
In buildings where one or more tenant(s) occupy a portion of a
building which does not include any portion of an exterior wall having .
exposure to a public street, allowable wall sign area will be computed in
th-e, following manner: each tenant not having building frontage may have :
as,_,iall sign on the wall having street exposure (front wall) provided it
does not exceed in sign area that portion of sign area permitted that
front wall tenant having the smallest proportion of allowable sign area.
In this type of building the allowable proportion of front wall sign area
shall be computed as fifteen percent of the total building face. A wall
sign program shall be established for all multi-tenant buildings, no new
permit shall be issued until such a program is established. On
pre-existing buildings, each new tenant will adhere to the established
program.
Ii it is determined under the design review process that the wall
sign's visual appeal and overall design quality would be served, an
additional fifty percent of the allowable sign area may be permitted. No
copy will be permitted, however, in the additional area permitted. For
purposes of this subsection, "copy" includes symbols, logos, and letters.
Painted Signs. Wall signs painted directly onto the wall surface t
shall not exceed in gross wall area fifteen percent of the face of the
building they are painted upon, and the vertical dimension of the sign
cannot exceed twenty percent of the height of the wall.
Real Estate Signs. One free-standing or wall sign will be permitted
(� offering the premises for sale or rent. Total area of such sign shall
not exceed seventy (70) square feet.
19
16.36.050 Commercial-Professional Zone (CP) Signs Permitted.
(1 ) Ther- shall be not more than one square foot of sign area for
each one hundred square feet of floor area within the building or
buildings to be identified. All signs shall not exceed fifteen square
feet per face or a total of thirty square feet for all sign faces if both
faces are used.
(2) No sign shall project above the roof line or extend over a
public sidewalk or right-of-way. All faces of signs shall be parallel to
the face of the building upon which the sign is located and to which the
sign pertains.
(3) Signs may be painted or otherwise applied directly to a wall
providing such sign is an integral part of building design and approval
is obtained for such sign under the design review process.
(4) No billboards shall be permitted.
(5) Special types of signs per Chapter 16.40 this title may be
approved under the desing review process.
Signs in a planned development district for the specific F..rpose of
advertising the premises for sale or rent, site identification, ,,ilding
identification, tenant identification and traffic direction may be
permitted in such planned development district as approved in the general
plan subject to approval by the Planning Director, providing that an
integrated sign theme is carried out compatible with the overall
development and consistent with the approved general plan and program.
16.35.055 C-4 Zone Signs Permitted.
(1) The ac_: of all signs shall not exceed fifteen (15) square feet
per side, or a total of thirty (30) square feet for all sign faces if
more than one face is used.
(2) Free standing signs may be permitted in lieu of building mounted
signs, subject to specific approval under the design review process.
(3) Special types of signs per Chapter 16.40 this title way be
approved subject to a specific approval under the design review process.
16.36.060 Other Requirements Which Shall Apply to Commercial and
Industrial Zones. If it is determined under the design review process
that the sign's visual appeal and overall design quality would be served
while maintaining the intent and purpose of this title, an additional
fifty percent of the allowable sign area and twenty-five percent of sign
height may be permitted. No copy will be permitted in the .additional
area or height. For purposes of this subsection the word ''ropy" includes
symbols, logos, and figures, as well as letters.
Each free-standing sign shall be surrounded by an area set aside to
protect the sign from vehicles negotiating in the parking area of the
4
20
g-
�Y
business to which the sign relates, and the area set aside shall be
landscaped. The size and shape of the area set aside and the landscaping
shall be represented on the plot plan required by permit and shall be
subject to the review and control of the Planning Director or his agent, r
under the design review process. on existing sites where a landscape
island is not feasible, the minimum clearance between the lowest portion
of a free-standing sign and the ground shall be fourteen feet in any S'
vehicle maneuvering area.
v:
No free-standing sign, nor any portion of any free-standing sign,
shall be located or project over any portion of a street , sidewalk or
other public right-of-way or property unless an exception has been .
granted.
When a premise contains more than a single tenant but is not defined ;
as a shopping center, the provisions of a free-standing sign shall take
into consideration the need for providing a signing system which is
harmonious in appearance and legible. The building owner shall provide, g:
at his own expense, a common support for all tenant signage. Up to an
additional fifty percent of sign copy area may be permitted under the
design review process so as to adequately identify the separate tenants
when determined that the increased sign area will not deter from the €
purpose of this title.
Y:
�d..
Shopping centers or industrial parks, defined as areas of not less than
eight business units and consisting of not less than four acres, shall
establish a single signing format. The sign shall include the complex ;
name and street number. Up to an additional fifty percent of sign area
may be permitted under the design review process to adequately identify
the complex when determined that the increased sign area will not deter a
from and purpose of this title. This increase should be judged according
to unique identification needs and circumstances which necessitate
additional area to make the sign suf =^iently legible. When a shopping
center or industrial park has more than one main entrance on separate P`
frontages, a second free-standing sign may be allowed under the design
review process. The two allowable signs shall face separate frontages
and are not intended to be viewed simultaneously.
21
Chapter 16.40
SPECIAL TYPES OF SIGNS
Sections:
16.40.010 FLAGS, BANNERS, AND SIMILAR ITEMS
16.40.020 PUBLIC UTILITY SIGNS AND SIGNS REQUIRED BY LAW
16.40.030 SIGNS NOT DESIGNED TO BE VIEWED FROM ANY PUBLIC SI'REE7
OR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
16.40.040 CERTAIN SIGNS PROHIBITED
16.40.050 FLASHING SIGNS AND SIGN ILLUMINATION
16.40.060 OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS
16.40.070 BENCH SIGNS
16.40.080 INCIDENTAL SIGNS
16.40.090 POLITICAL SIGNS
16.40.010 FLAGS, BANNERS, AND SIMILAR ITEMS
(1) Prohibited Display of Flags and Banners. It is a violation of
this article to erect or maintain strings of pennants, banners or
streamers, festoons of lights; clusters of flags, strings of twirlers or
propellers, flashing or blinking lights, flares, balloons, and similar
devices of carnival character. Exceptions:
(A) National, state, and institutional flags properly displayed;
(B) Seasonal decorations and generally recognized holidays;
(C) Pennants and banners approved as temporary signs.
16.40.020 PUBLIC UTILITY SIGNS AND SIGNS REQUIRED BY LAW. Nothing in
this title shall prevent the erection, location or construction of signs
on private property where such erection, construction uz location is
required by any law or ordinance nor shall any public agency or utility
be prohibited from erecting signs on private property when otherwise
permitted.
16.40.030 SIGNS NOT DESIGNED TO BE VIEWED FROM ANY PUBLIC STREET OR
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. Nothing in this title shall prevent the erection,
location or construction of directional or instructional signs on private
property when such signs are solely designed to direct or to guide or to
instruct pedestrians or vehicular traffic while on the parcel of real
property on which the signs are located. No sign permit or fee shall be
required for such signs.
16.40.040 CERTAIN SIGNS PROHIBITED.
(1) Unsafe signs or improperly maintained signs. No sign shall be
constructed, erected or maintained unless the sign and sign structure is
so constructed, erected and maintained as to be able to withstand the
wind, seismic and other requirements as specified in the Uniform Building
Code. No sign shall be constructed, erected or maintained in violation
of the maintenance provisions of this title.
22
(2) Signs at intersections. No sign shall be erected at
intersections of any streets in such a manner as to materially obstruct
free and clear vision nor shall any sign be erected at any location
where , by reason of the position, shape or color, it may interfere with, --
obstruct the view of, or be confused with, any authorized traffic signal
or device; nor shall any sign be erected which makes use of the word
"stop", "look", "danger", or any other similar word, phrase, symbol or
character in such manner as is reasonably likely to interfere with,
mislead or confuse motorists.
(3) Obscenity. No sign shall bear or contain statements, words or
pictures in which the dominant theme of the material, taken as a whole,
appeals to the prurient interest in sex or is patently offensive because
it affronts the contemporary community standard relating to the
description or representation of sexual material which is utterly without
redeeming social value.
(4) Obstructing signs. No sign or sign structure shall be
constructed in such a manner or at such a location that it will obstruct
access to any fire escape or other means of ingress or egress from a
building or any exit corridor, exit hallway or exit doorway. No sign or
supporting structure shall cover, wholly or partially, any window or
doorway in any manner that it will substantially limit access to the
building in case of fire.
(5) No off-premises sign shall be permitted in any commercial or
industrial zone, except outdoor advertising signs, as regulated in other
parts of this title. Off-premise signs may only be approved by the
Planning Commission through the exception procedure established by
Section 16.34.040 of this title.
(6) Strings of bare lights shall not be constructed, erected or
maintained within view of any public street or public right-of-way. This
subsection shall not apply to lighting displays as described in 16.40
;1)(B) .
(7) Roof signs of any kind are prohibited, including temporary signs.
(8) Revolving, rotating or moving signs of any kind are prohibited.
16.40.050 FLASHING SIGNS AND SIGN ILLUMINATION.
(1) Flashing signs, exposed reflective-type bulbs, strobe lights,
rotary beacons, par spots, zip lights or similar devices shall be
prohibited. Exposed incandescent lamp which exceeds twenty-five watts
shall not be used ou the exterior surface of any sign so as to expose the
face of such bulb or lamp to any public street or public right-of-way
with the exception of electronic information signs.
(2) The surface brightness of any sign shall not exceed that
produced by the diffused output obtained from eight hundred milliampere
fluorescent light sources not closer than eight inches on center.
23
16.40.060 OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS. Outdoor advertising sign
regulations shall be as follows :
(1) Zones Pe nnitted. Outdoor advertising signs shall be permitted
only in a C-3 commercial zone or M-2, M-3, and M-4 industrial zones.
(2) Height. The maximum height of an outdoor advertising sign shall
not exceed thirty-five feet from the ground level at its base.
(3) Size.
(A) The maximum sign dimensions of an outdoor advertising
sign shall be twelve feet in height and twenty-five feet in length
(excluding supports and foundations) or a total maximum sign area of
three hundred square feet per face.
(B) Outdoor ad-vertising signs may be increased in area to
fourteen feet in height and forty-eight feet in length or a total maximum
sign area of six hundred seventy-five square feet per face where
permitted as freeway-oriented signs.
(C) On freeway-oriented signs, cutouts may project beyond
the display surface and may add up to one-third additional area of
permitted display surface and further may extend five and one-half feet
above, four feet below or two feet to either side of the display surface,
provided that the thirty-five foot maximum height limit is not exceeded
by such cutouts.
(4) Locations Permitted.
(A) Outdoor advertising signs shall only be permitted to
locate on and orient to US Highway 99W (Southwest Pacific Highway) ,
Oregon State Expressway No. 217, and Interstate Freeway No. 5.
(B) Outdoor advertising signs shall not have more than one
display surface facing in the same traffic direction on any one premises.
For the purpose of this provision and for the purposes of applying
tha spacing limitations or density limitations which follow, a single
outdoor advertising structure on which two display surfaces are attached
back-to-back shall be considered as one outdoor advertising sign and with
one display surface facing one traffic direction.
(5) Outdoor advertising signs shall not be located within three
hundred 'feet or another outdoor advertising sign on the opposite side of
the street or highway or within five hundred feet of another outdoor
advertising sign on the same side of the street or highway. For purposes
of applying this limitation, distances shall be measured as a radius from
a sign. Where two or more signs are in violation of these spacing
provisions, the first lawfully constructed, erected and maintained shall
be permitted to remain.
(6) Outdoor advertising signs shall have all metal structures ;
provided , however , that the display surface or display surfaces and the
stringers use for the support of the display surfaces together with
cutouts may be made of other materials.
(7) Outdoor advertising signs are not permitted as roof signs.
(8) Maintenance - standards generally of outdoor advertising or
billboard signs. All signs, together with all of their supports, braces,
guys and anchors shall be kept in good repair and shall be maintained in
a safe condition. All signs and the site upon which they are located
shall be maintained in a neat , clean and attractive conditions. Signs
shall be kept free from excessive rust, corrosion, peeling paint or other
surface deterioration. The display surfaces of all signs shall be kept
neatly painted or posted.
16.40.070 BENCH SIGNS. Bench signs shall only be permitted at
designated transit stops in commercial, industrial, and multifamily zones
where no bus shelter exists. There shall be no more than one bench sign
per allowable transit stop. Placement of the bench sign shall not
interfere with pedestrian traffic or traffic vision. Application for a
bench sign shall include the signature of the affected property owner and
proof of liability insurance.
16.40.080 INCIDENTAL SIGNS. Incidental signs shall not exceed twelve
(12) inches in height and eighteen (18) inches in width and shall be
limited to four (4) signs attached to a permitted free standing sign.
Incidental signs as described above, are permitted as wall signs. The
total combined area shall not exceed six (6) square feet.
16.40.090 POLITICAL SIGNS. Signs relating to the nomination and
election of any individual for a political office or advocacy of any
measure to be voted upon at an election shall be allowed under the
following conditions:
(1) Such signs shall be temporary in nature and shall be removed
within 10 days after the election.
(2)Such signs shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet in residential
zones and thirty-two (32) square feet in all other areas.
(3) No political sign shall be erected within or on any public
property or right-of-way or affixed to any pole , post or standard located
within or on public property or right-of-way.
25
_ce�ceir lmae a --
}
Chapter 16.46
TEMPORARY SIGNS
Sections:
16.46.010 AUTHORIZATION.
16.46.020 ISSUANCE AUTHORITY.
16.46.030 REQUIRED CONDITIONS.
16.46.010 AUTHORIZATION. The Building Official shall be empowered to
authorize temporary signs not exempted by Section 16.12.050 of this title.
The Building Official shall attach such conditions to the issuance of
a permit for a temporary sign as may be necessary to assure
discontinuance of the use of the sign in accordance with the terms of the
authorization, and to assure substantial compliance with the purpose of
this title.
16.46.020 ISSUANCE AUTHORITY.
(1) The Building Official may issue temporary sign permits which
shall terminate within 60 days from the date of issuance.
(2) No permit shall be issued for a period longer than 60 days , but
a permit may be renewed by the Building Official upon a showing of good
cause for the continuation of the temporary permit.
16.46.030 REQUIRED CONDITIONS. Applicants for temporary sign permits
shall submit such evidence as may be required to enable the Building
Official to determine that one or more of the following conditions exists:
(1) The need for the temporary sign is the direct result of a
casualty loss ;
(2) The applicant has lost Leasehold occupancy rights ;
(3) The need for a temporary sign is to bring to the attention of
the public a special sale, a special service, or a special event which is
compatible with the business ;
(4) Types and locations of temporary signs shall be as follows:
(a) The total number of temporary signs shall not exceed
four (4) for any one business at any one period of time.
(b) The total area of one sign shall not exceed twelve (12)
square feet.
(c) See definition 16.08.030 Temporary Signs for type approved.
(d) Location shall be as approved by Building Official. Sign
clutter, blanketing, and shabby appearances of signs shall be avoided.
26
Elio
r
Chapter 16.48
ADMINISTRATION
x
1�.
Sections: `
16.48.010 SIGN PERMIT AUTHORITY
16.48.020 ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY - RIGHT OF ENTRY
t
16.48.030 VIOLATION - PENALTY
16.48.010 SIGN PERMIT AUTHORITY. All applications for sign permits
shall be submitted to and be approved by the Building Official.
16. 0
48. 20 ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY, RIGHT OF ENTRY. The Building
Official is authorized and directed to enforce all of the provisions of
this title. All signs for which permits are required shall be inspected
by the Building Official. Upon presentation of property credentials, the
Building Official or his duly authorized representative may enter at
reasonable times any building, structure or premises in the City to
perform any duty imposed upon him by this title.
16.48.030 VIOLATION PENALTY. Any person who violates any of the v
provisions of this title, upon conviction, shall be guilty of a
misdemeanor and such person shall be punished by a fine of not less than
fifty dollars and not more than three hundred dollars per offense.
Persons convicted of violating a provision of this title shall be deemed
guilty of a separate offense for each day during which the violation
continues.
r.
s
k
6
27
k'
Y-
A LW
January 20, 1983 R
z;.
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Planning Staff flW'l ;
SUBJECT: Temporary Use Application. Waiver of Fee for Non-Profit Organizations :
ZOA 10-82
During the Christmas Season, several non-profit organizations, such as the Boy
Scouts and Tigard Kiwanis, made a?plication to the City for Temporary Use
Permits to sell Christmas Trees. The fee for a Temporary Use Permit of this
type is $50.00 per month. Non-profit organizations are not required to pay a
business tax. It is staff's feeling that the $50.00 Temporary Use Application
fee is a hardship on these non-profit organizations and should not be
required. Therefore, staff recommended to the Planning Commission that the
Administrative Procedures Section of the Tigard Municipal Code dealing with
fees be amended as follows:
(d) Fees
The Council shall adopt by resolution a schedule of fees reasonably calculated
to defray the expenses of the administrative processes of Title 17 and 18 of
this chapter. The Council may waive any fee upon timely application and shall
charge no fees for city-initiated applications, Neighborhood Planning
Organization appeals or request for review; or Temporary Use Applications
filed by certified non-profit organizations.
At their meeting of January 4, 1983, the Tigard Planning Commission voted
unanimously to recommend the above language to the City Council for adoption.
pm
(0458A)
i
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 83-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.84 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES, TITLE 18 OF THE
TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 18.84.030 3(d) of the Tigard Municipal Code is hereby
amended as follows:
(d) Fees
The Council shall adopt by resolution a schedule of fees reasonably calculated
to defray the expenses of the administrative processes of Title 17 and 18 of
this chapter. The Council may waive any fee upon timely application and shall
charge no fees for city-initiated applications, Neighborhood Planning
Organization appeals or request for review; or Temporary Use Applications
filed by certified non-profit organizations.
Section 2. Inasmuch as it is necessary for the peace, health and safety of
the people of the City of Tigard that this amendment be made with the least
possible delay, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, and this ordinance
shall be come effective immediately upon passage by the Council and approval
by the Mayor.
PASSED• By the City Council by vote of all Council members
present, after being read by number and title only, this day
of 1983.
Recorder - City of Tigard
SIGNED: By the Mayor on this day of , 1983.
Mayor - City of Tigard
(0458A)
Wall M�
E-i
Cn
O
x w x x
U) >+ z >+ Exi x U >+ &A >+ H a
o ao az Q Q aE z az az -- ca FZ4
U wC4 w w wz < w woo W H
E-i H H E-+ E-f0 Q � � PxO U H
U zw zx w w z o zao � a - w z
H Xa Xa r� W X W FC XaV} XwV} Cr.
O a O -- O -- < o
H
U) aN 134 r) H P aN U] aNr- aoM E-i Ln
a N P.+ M O G a4 " O a %.D a 0 O t`
V} V)- FC V} Z 2 < V} U FC V}
i x U] U) w
a a xH
>+ 0 0 0 w E-+ H W
H U U z w m Q D
Q Q arX4P > w z z z
� > w w WOZ &4 w w a
rz, H H H a w o a x w
a a cnnco ow a z
o a z a4 x • Z -- a w o
cW a < < U) F:4Cn cn < a ca x a+ >+ w i
z ca 2D z x W. w < wU c� z :E: O z
Z rz, a w w x �� U x H O w a U a
W Z0 ooa Z0 00 W. l0Cf) HDU] Ei a
E4 � Zo oa OWaE w z w w H
O E-+ H Z U cn a Ei a w a E-+ w Ei �C a cn
Q U z z Z Z �.. a s z < �. a [z H -
zw � O w w a w w : a4 W U) V--I U U w
w (Z a H 2 H m Ca ;> E1 < Z H C7 rz H H w
a E-4 w >+ w >+ w U H r 4 Fc W Cz4
i s Ei E-+ X4 H E-i x H H z z H O U) >+ z
O C!1 O FC r J �, F:4H C H H FC W E-, rz, O H �L
U U] H U H U U] < a � C7 fZ a H W >4
w o w vl a Cn E g'' w 3 w w U) a E-i
w a F--H �-4 -1 U U O O U
U >i >+ fY fZ >+ fZ KC Cl > O p4 >+ O o H C4 CQ O a
w o U < w w UFC a w w a < F�C E-+ o o E-4 cn o ff E-1 H
H UC) 04 ax Q H Oen " E-1 PaaH Z �
E 'WJa 0 = H cn a0 UUa � U
� a � ox � cl ox U o � Lr) C4 w Xa o �-+
W W a 3 x o a 3 F< I f M a a a w w m a
w
O
w a cn
�-, 0 w a w
Cf)I z a F-4 � � z
H a W
U) al >+ < u] x H 0
PQ w Cf) a w H w
P4 o a < a
3 w U
UCAS cL' a � >4 >+ oFC4 H
w w = l< F:4 ora
w cn 0Q Q CD � � w
o a H Cf) z
as < m o0 z xH
GU W O x l0 l0 V} H H a
w
w
U
H w W a
H > >
W O O > H W
W U U W ri H W
w x a a
x a.
a E x F w H
U) w E1
W rZ H-� H H W
x co ca a a
®ate
!1
s v v
H
O
K
n
.ai
3 �
m d U d 01 W 41 01 N
F a K K G C O O O O C
Z x O 9
0
CD
.O
C
7
Q K
H �
.4:0 wtCD
01
C C O G C G
�! C
py G O O O O O O O O
F PC.z O !G Z Z Z Z Z Z Zcn
Z Z
7 N
N
Cl)ot as co 1 m m m id
i1 +� y
N 3 .O m m C. N mG C q m d co
o e a a .I o v a o o re a a a
r� K O O a N 4 Aj 0 L �+
V
U 7
00
a K m
x c o +
N O K 6N N O O N Ln
00 O
C:J a CLdF FC z AC Q x x 14 00 Q! N 1-4 Qu rl rl r� r"1 N N
U
we
N m o
M .e+ o +C.3 we
.� en o rn .-q
Gzl W IC .O K < x x co W K v Q, .0-1 r+ .+ r+ '+ N v+
m
m
14
w tf K W o r► as ao o K B �+ .4 r4 *4 +-I N v+
v+ K
.o Q+ an < Q,
1-4ini
o
CH�a go v+ a b
3 F Co. U e HOu"+ F m
r+ Irl r+ '4
..7 64
,0� O 1.4
C7 a'i M
N pN, 61 •
U N CO O V M �i ►�-1 O 6 O
H 01+ N cd 1.4
m 3 Q C a N .� ..2 a
0�'
0 0 0 0 0 0 � a o 0 0 0 0 0 o x
(:)vc (Sl 1fd T)
M tttL'n NAL 0I -2y -S3
ATr& s
111111111 � I°i°8°I11'i'I°'ia'r°l'mi{ypI'p I flip I't'ITT°791Jill)_°J1i1l°lil1lgrT11°I°lel(PI°�°1°�°1°f°I°��1X031°iil��io°�°li�ai+'o�°�°iijil°`°°��°'°E°I°�ii°�F°� .�
NOTE: IF THIS MICRDFILMED ---- - � 5 6. 7
DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN
THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO
THE QmLITY OF TrE ORIGMAL
DRAWING, —
of 62 8z- Lz 8z sz sz EZ zz lz oz Gi 81 ii--91 S6i 2i -11--of---e— ® [ -9 5 ___10 -__e._ _z °�
�nol°udu°fluid°eeelunieta°liml�ua��nifJi#t!s°ii}sln°tJut°ltns�taand r�luglp } jlp��°�l°,N _ p {Illt�wn
M AIR" Gns" 71 1 ) .LU90 All
t
lo q 1:.
.............
IIII
..........
..........
:::i:**' . ...... ........ .......
4�— ......
... . ... .....
j t
. .......
...................
. ....... .
1.6
.. ....... .....
....... . ... ... ..
. ...........
..... ......
.. ...........
4 V4
............
12........
4-
..........
................
... 1.. . .............
444
..................
------------— ......
..........
oa
.............
.............
.. ............
..........
. ......... ...............
1 j 1 t
............
...........
.......... . ..... ......... ...........
.... ........ .. ............
.............
.............
...........
................ L Na
..........
NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED l 2 3 4 5 6 7 118 9 I10 II 12
DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN
THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO
THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL
DRAWING.
OE 62 8Z Z2 9Z SE 42 E2 22 IZ 02 61 91 Ll 91 SI tl el 21 11 01 6 a L 9 S b E a INYalw
01111111111111 mill 111111111111 1111111 111111111uhlillill I 1111il""hilihn. 'Raw.
---------------
M-ARCH 7 91990
�> _..
AWL� MW
WORN
January 24, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Finance Director/City Record, Split
CONFIDENTIAL, COUNCIL INFORMATION ONLY
First, I recommend that we split the Finance Director/City Recorder position
and phase out an Administrative Assistant position. The annual long-term
direct cost of this change is approximately $5,000 per year in today's
dollars, if no other changes were to result. It is reasonable however to
expect most, if not all, of the following improvements to also occur:
e Improved cash management of principal and interest investments for
1%-2% per year increase, or $7,500-$15,000/year revenue increase;
• Productivity and system improvements in the Finance/Accounting areas
equivalent to 1/2 - 1 full time position, or $10,000-$20,000 per year;
w Improved management of City personnel and retirement systems and
costs; which if only 1/2% better on the $2,200,000 total Personal
Services would be $11,000 per year; and
e Improved purchasing of both Materials and Services, and of Capital
Outlay items, which on $1,200,000 per year at 1/2% better would yield
{ $6,000 per year.
e So, total direct cost is $5,000 per year; and total indirect savings
is $40,000-$52,000 per year.
Second, I recommend that we implement the change as soon as possible, by April
if possible. The -_,change would have to be within existing budget
appropriations. April` June is a particularly active period this year, also
the new Director's first six months from April - September would present the
most number of issues to which to evaluate the individual's performance during
the probation period:
• Accounting Information Management System (A.I.M.S. ) study and changes ;
e FY 82-83 close-out;
o FY 83-84 budget, levy and start-up;
e LID project close-outs;
e FY 82-83 audit.
Third, I recommend we use the approved FY 83-84 Pay Plan for salary purposes.
That would put the City Recorder at the $30,000 top step, still subject to
formal Pay Plan adoption and retroactive adjustment. The Director's salary
would be advertised from $25,000 - $32,000 depending on qualifications,
realistically looking for someone around $30,000.
BJ:lw
t
�+ s�re ,,���wee l�►�[� --- —
January 20, 1983
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Doris Hartig, Finance Director/City RecorderG"
SUBJECT: Function of Finance Director/City Recorder
The City Administrator and I have been reviewing the department work load and
the diverse nature of the Finance Director and City Recorder
responsibilities. It is our conclusion that the current combined position
should be split in order to give proper attention to the different and
important areas.
I was asked to decide which of the positions I wanted to pursue at this point
of my career. I considered the challenge of the Finance Director position and
the additional pressure and stress as a Department Head and made the decision
to take the Division Manager position as City Recorder. My decision is based
on what I felt is best for myself personally in this stage of my career and
what is best for the City. I will help to make the transition as smooth as
possible.
Attached is an organizational chart and outline of major responsibilities of
the Department as the City Administrator and I are recommending. You will
also notice some of the functions formerly assigned to City Administration
have been transferred as operational responsibilities to the Department. The
City Administrator and I recommend this decision be implemented as soon as
possible.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Finance Director and City Recorder duties be split as
attached and that the Finance Director Department Head position be filled as
soon as possible, approximately April 1, 1983. The Department would be
redesignated as "Finance and Services".
DH:lw
• H
oG U
v o0 z m
C
+�
� o —4 —A O
O a H U oD w+ -4 U)
U H ^ C O .^ .,A C,
�� a) cw U iJ 0 • 4 4-, cn .0 N
.-1 L Op -H C1.
U cwn C �j C $4 G cn
>> H O ca 7 O •r-, G O
iJ z U )a O 4J ..G O ca
a U • G. U .a a) •-4 co m
fZ z O 6 N G (3) +-J
O O • ,-4 4-3 A 7 co
Wz � � o cu o E -4
>r H £ co a) •.4 G C C C +J
H A w Cmc: > (n —4 co as cn U
FV z z O > G •rG-, fn M ca
z o v .. o rw a C
H cn .0 b U .•a O ^b
U i-, R. JJ O b a)
U3 W O 7•+ C ,-+ aJ A. U iJ G tap
M En P y co w g 3 o co ::j W �
O O 4-J w s-+ -10
., i.,
G j O -4 0 Q) U L4 A }4 r-,
R: s • ,J O ca 14 a) C ca
co W A c+-, b a) O +J
C
m .0 j C O U Co -4 6
S+
•,G, O P O v) a) w "I CO
O
a1 •.-c Q1 U T ci Ca.
U •> a 0)Ste•, N U� !
v
a) cn G
•�
-4 p. N O H E +-r G C
A
a) C-3 ..Ci w b � u! a) •� a)
CJ] G
L O a) +J U L r.., -I a)
I •.
U—� Gi V co 0U} ' o 6 �p t. , v
o U >, cu ca a. G to
Aucn ca n a E Q))
( wA W • W cv F-, a) ;o a) �, U co -m p CO O
H > UI u) Ua) P 1J >, @ cu a co
Uw om "4 aC 'd � u Q, °C° b ,� Z COC
z w a A o
z A to •ri o o n0 v •.4 C
p • a) w u G1. C A rn ro r-4 En a)
m •.4 to ^ 3 b G
w
m Q) b0 a) U cn F+ O h0
•a H >+ C w O a) a) U W
tJ w O c0 w •ri L+ a)
y .+ .,q G P.r♦
A-) 4-) U 14 .G b Q. N v •.GC
U " (2) L y 4 =; a) ,[-- m
54 Ej a) co w (L) 3 H -f--
--f j_jU G O U (1) \ ca U
A c > > -0 •. 4 a) cUn 7
G "a U)
co .Gi � to >, O u a) Sa
C w -W ,J CO 2J i.., r, a) " O
•.i 7-4 G C 1-+ •r I CO W C A-)
w .0 O C O O U i•, u) U
iJ C1. O A. A. +-+ >> a)
cu C7. U to G. a) C t) •d N
H O VC] d FO U) L U U ca ;:I
l4
Q) ..
CO
co w
Gw co
H w
W
04
p>4' O w
C H v] O
z 4j W H H W
C4 04 C7 OH � H A O
{ z co O A O a r
~ u 04
1•_. � u W U F c
zA z a cn U
U • z
U H
-CC w
DEPARTMENT RESPONSIBILITIES BY DIVISION
FINANCE DIRECTOR
Division Administration
Accounting System
Cash Flow/Investments
Bond Sales
LID's/Grants/Special Project Accounting
Dept. Mgmt./Work Programs/Performance Reviews
MFOA Certification
Budget Preparation/Control
Audit
Financial and Mgmt. Information System (DP)
Long Range Financial Planning
ACCOUNTING MANAGER
Division Administration
General Ledger
Accounts Receivable/Payable
LID's/Grants/Special Project Accounting
Assessments/Billing
Sewer Billing
Audit Preparation
Payroll/Benefits
Petty Cash
Inventory/Fixed Assets
Budget Preparation Assistance
Reconciling Bank Statement
Cost Accounting Labor Contracts
Special Reports (Fed. Rev. Sharing, Pensions, etc. )
OFFICE MANAGER
Division Administration
Word Processing System, Use/Programming/Training
Ordinance Writing and Resolutions
Council Support, Minutes/Agendas
Public Information/Notices/Support
Deputy City Recorder
Equipment, Building Maintenance
Purchasing/Bids
CITY RECORDER
Division Administration
Council Support, Minutes/Agendas/Ordinances
Codification Update
Central Files
Elections
Purchasing/Bids
Personnel
Litigation
Insurance, Claims/Risk Mgmt./Safety
Municipal Court
Non-Dept. Budget & Control
Oaths of Office
Public Information
sow
AMM
MM
�FCE�V
JA 2
41983�lTy
3
Janunzy 23% 71983 �F 710A9n
TO: Doris Hartig, Tigard City Recorder
Bill Monahan, Tigard Planning Director
FROM: Neighborhood Planning Organization Three (NPO #3)
The Tigard Planning Commission decided to continue its public hearing on
CPA 15-82 to Thursday, January 27, 1983. This will cause the City Council
ect, which is the Comprehensive Plan Map, to
public hearing on that sub
have to be rescheduled from January 26, 1983 to a later date, probably
Tuesday, February 1, 1983. During the first part of the public hearing
on Saturday, January 22, 1983, NPO #3 proposed a transfer of density
within its area, but was rejected by the Planning Commission, with a major
reason given that there was a lack of notification.
Therefore, NPO #3 requests that any published notice of the continuation
( of the meeting to the date of January 27, 1983 and any published notice of
the rescheduled public hearing of the City Council on CPA 15-82, Comprehensive
P]a n Map,shall include notification of the possibility of change in land, use
designations for the properties marked with red and green in the accompanying
map. For the red area (denoting change to residential high density) we
believe the properties affected are lots 3700, 3800, 380, 3900+ and 3680 on
Washington County's tax map number 2 S 1 10 A. We do not know the lot numbers
of the properties marked with green (denoting change to residential medium
density); but the maps in the office: of the Planning Director have: this
information. Thank you for your assistance.
Bob Bledsoe, Secretary M20 #3
7.
3
r
MAIM-
s`
MEMORANDUM
t
t
TO : Members of the Planning Commission and City Council
FROM: William A. Monahan, Director of Planning & Development 1
DATE : January 20 , 1983
RE : Comvrehensive Plan Map — Correspondence concerning
proposed revisions .
r
During the past several months my staff has received numerous
requests from NPO ` s , property owners and members of the public
requesting that further consideration be given to the Comprehensive
Plan designation given by staff to individual portions of the }
Comprehensive Plan Map . In some instances staff has found that k
s
errors were made , as a result , we concur with the recommendation
put forth .
In order that the Planning Commission and City Council are
given the opportunity to review and consider each and every
proposal , staff has assembled the attached list of correspondence
grouped by NPO affected . Staff proposes that the issues be
taken in the order showy_ allowing citizen input to salient points
where appropriate . Staff is prepared to react to each proposal
with a recommendation.
i
A
z
�s
a U r
cHn a �
zx
0Ew,
E-, ti N N N N N N N N N
wa a a f:4
�, a a a a
Ln a a
vii a a a a a a a a a a a° a a° ►�
z
0
H
4
2 2 N N N N N N N N N N rl
Kc UN N N O U N N U N N
, ca
,- H Z
a cn I,-
U
w r4 �4
A -rl N -rl -rte, N •rl -rl •ri -r-, -e-I -rl �
a
aro b •ri b 'C3 0 t1 zs 'U 10 'C 'o
a�
a
a�
co c0 ttf td cd 0 O Un
2 cz � � c�6 fo ca N as a
H Sod
r{
wo o o o o 0 0 44 O O x
0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 X 3 3 AA AUa r
U U A mU N cn w cn cn U U O U FC
01
a
z
O O o O
N N N N
O h h h h
a
2 O rtf cd cd rts
tOi� ai A O O O O
O r-4 r•+
(a 0 co O E-0 U) O H C7 C7 C7 0 c7 5
a W a ►� N •r4 0 �s as as -r+ ..0 0
aw ° S aha 1fa
t: a. t-.) z a w 4 a.
I N N N N N N N N m
CC) ap pp pp oo N CO 00 N N N QO � O
x co co 0o w
�— OO O - O CO
' w H co rl l`7 �, r N r l0 r O r
N 9 U U U U
A 04 04 04
f=+ 0 y N U O O N N U N
OI to v� cn UD cn O Z z A O A A h h
e
-- AMMEMSP-04
AUG 251
82
GARD
CH y
P1_ANS4�
'
2 . If 4.,. CCS
� Lo 6S . �
-41
J
12 91M OREM
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION #1
1 SEPTEMBER 1982
OPENED MEETING:
ROLL CALL: PRESENT-7 ABSENT-0 STAFF REPRESENTATIVE-Liz Newton
COMMUNICATIONS/OLD BUSINESS
A) Riinutes of last meeting read and approved .
B) Reviewed August CCI meeting and presented NPO report form.
C) Discussed SDR 11-82(Oak Hill Investment Corp. )
AGENDA:
A) Discussed Planning Area Zone Viap. Ten area residents
were present to discuss the proposed change of Omara St.
property off of Lake and Hill St. in response to an NPO
letter. All residents at the meeting were against changing
the zoning from R-4. 5 to R-12PD. The following were some of
the reasons against a change from the residents and other
NPO members: 1) NPO #1 Plan Policy #6; "The single family
character of the area designated on the plan map as urban
low density residential is viewed as a positive assert to
be retained" . 2) NPO #1 Plan Policy #15; "Apartments
should be located to produce the least adverse affects upon
single family areas" . 3) NPO #1. Plan Policy #16; "Avoid
locating apartments where access can be gained only from
residential streets" . 4) Residential development in the
new Central-Business-District(Urban Renewal Area) is to
have minimum housing densities of 15 units per acre which
has not been calculated into the overall NPO housing den-
sity. 5) The multifamily units would detract from the
"residential character" of the existing neighborhood. o)
Area residents bought their homes with the knowledge that
adjacent land was zoned for single family residences. To
change the zoning now is unfair to the present residents.
7) This change benefits one property owner over the ob-
jections of all others in' the area. 8) Concern was expressed
on increases in traffic, student school loads and over-
taxing of existing facilities. 9) NPO #1 still maintains
that the area remain zoned R-4. 5 with an added PD status
because of the area' s large size.
B) Public Facilities and Services Comprehensive Plan
Discussion. Delayed until next meeting. NPO members did
not receive the Plan until the meeting.
C) Election of new officers. Motioned-Seconded-Approved
to elect John Butler as Chairperson. Motioned-Seconded-
Approved to combine position of Vice Chairperson and Secre-
tary. Motioned-Seconded-Approved to elect Harry Owen(NOTE
SPELLING OF LAST NAKE- ) as Vice Chairperson/Secretary.
D) Comprehensive Plan input from the public: None
OTHER BUSINESS:
A) Ralph Appleman discussed the implications of the CBD
(Central Business District) zone. It contains a wide
range of business and residential uses.
B) Motioned-Seconded-Approved to adjourn the meeting.
NEXT MEET IN :CnqM_l 82
Chairperson son O 1
r
copy to e�C - 7.Y so8lle
GITy OF TIGARD
pLANNING DEPT.
1
Elea E. Palmer
9320 SH O'Mara St.
i
II Tigard. OR 97223 OO
it-
. er� -
1
September 7 , 1982
RECEIVED
SEF - g 1982
Mr. Jeremy Coursolle
Tigard Planning Staff CIY OF TIGARD
City of Tigard
Tigard., Oregon, 97223
Dear Mr. Coursolle ,
This letter is about a proposal to change 17. 88 acres of
land ajacent Omara Street from 42 housing units per acre to 12
units per acre. Seventeen times twelve is 204 units. There is
only about seven to ten acres out of the 17. 88 acres that can be
built upon because of the Flood Plain. Instead of 12 units per
acre there would be 20 to 29 units per acre. This would cause a
tremendous impact on the character of the surrounding low density
single family neighborhood. How would you feel if you bought a
home in a single family residential area with the land around you
zoned single fs•,.ily. We bought our home in this single family }
area because we were assured that this area would stay low density,
not changed to high density apartments.
sf
Please oonsider all of the citizens of this single family {
residential neighborhood who would be deceived. These people
purchased their homes in this area with the understaiiding that
this neighborhood would stay low density single family. Also,
consider the impact and shock to all these people with an increase
of crime, noise pollution and heavy traffic volume which would
exceed the 1500 cars per day limit for a local residential street.
This would ruin the character of this single family neighborhood.
The N.P. O. #1 book, page 5, says that apartments in Tigard
out number the houses. On page 11, it says that future develop-
ment sould be sensitive to the concern of the citizens. Page 16, '
policy #6, says the single family character of the area designatedti'
on the plan map as urban low density residential is F-iewed as a
positive asset to be retained. On page 21, policy 16, avoid
locating apartments where access can be gained only from local
residential streets.
In closing, please consider us, the citizens of Tigard, who
s;
bought with the understanding that we would be in a single family
residential -area because it was zoned that way. Please do not
change the character of this single family neighborhood. Please
put yourself in our position as we are the ones who would suffer
if it were changed to high density. Please leave our area single
family residential so as to retain the character of the neighborhood. €
Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
CSincerely,
_ w.zo
RII
SEP 4J1982
CiTY OF 1"11G'RD
CANNING DEP?'. .
/ /5 �
1 i
�� _ r_,�-
. f
rj`1' 1 1yu1 C.Lucy•A. Saab, Saub
13213 SW Burnham Ct.
T -ard , Oregon 97223
LI'31 31 �fW September 10 , 1982
Planning Staff ,
Planning Commission
and the City Council
City of Tigard . Oregon
Attention: Mr. Jeremy Coursolle
Gentlemen:
As you know. the principal topic of discussion at the NPO #1 meet-
ing held at Tigard City Hall on September 1. 1982 was your Planning
Staff's proposal to change the Zoning classification of a tract of
land abutting the north line of O'Mara Street, Said proposed change
to be from the present low density zoning of Single Family residences
to that of medium density Multi-Family units.
It is our understanding that this ownership comprises 17.88 acres and ,
If zoned for medium density residential, would. qualify for 214 dwell-
inm units ; even though compressed into a "buildable area" totaling
but 7 to 10 acres of the entire ownership. A change in zoning classi-
fication, to medium density Multi-Family units would be counter to and
incompatible with Neighborhood Plan One, Policy 6 , viz : "The single ,
family character of the area designated on the plan map as urban low
density residential is viewed as a positive asset to be retained. Proj-
ects propc,aed for this. area must be judged according to effects upon
this character." . It would also be counter to Policy 16 which reads
"Avoid locating apartments where access can be gained only from local
residenti_a? streets." . Unfortunately. we are already burdened with
this latter situation in the form of the 36-unit 2-story Philadelphia
Square kpartments located on Ash Avenue and Hill Street.
The owner of the subject 17 .88-acre tract has not suffered a hardship
for lack of development inasmuch as this land is on the tax roll as
pasture land and has been utilized as such in recent years . Nor, has
the owner been deprived of developing it as low density single family
residences in keeping with the existing zoning classification as shown
on the plan map dated May 1974. Land on the opposite side of O'Mara
Street was so developed five years ago.
The undersigned Are abutting property owners to the subject 17.88-
acre tract. We bought our home in good faith and reliance on Neigh-
borhood Plan One and its attendant policies.
is
C. R. & Lucy A. Saub
Letter 09-10-82
(Page 2)
It would be unjust and a disservice to the other property owners in
this area, especially to the abutting owners . not to retain the pres-
ent low density zoning of Single Family =.-sidences for Subject 17.88-
acre ownership. To permit development of medium density Multi-Family Pr
units on subject tract would depress the market value of the adjacent
properties and deprive the owners thereof of the ammenities attendant
to a low density zoning of Single Family residences that they have a
right to expect.
We feel that the City of Tigard should not penalize adjacent landowners
by making a zoning concession for a given landowner as a means of ac-
quiring land for the "G�reenway" .
We agree with Mayor Bishop's remarks appearing in the September 8 ;1982 . `
edition of the paper "This Week" to the effect that it is important
that Tigard grow up nicely and that a good family environment be kept :
also. that there's been very high population growth pressure that has
to be kept in check.
We note that the Tigard Planning Commission earlier this month responded :
favorably to the objections voiced by NPO ##6 to a zoning change on a
4-acre tract, proposed by the Robert Randall Company, and retained the
low density R-7 zoning instead of going to a higher density R-5.
h
We urge that you retain the R-7 low density zoning classification of
Single Family residences for subject 17.88-acre ownership in keeping
with Policy 6 of the Neighborhood Plan One map dated May 1974_
t
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
g
Sincerely.
f
F
i
Y
�yF
6'
i
P E T I T I O N
TO: kc
Pgp
Planning Staff , NG
Planning Commission Q�C�
and the City Council
City of Tbgard , Oregon
.z
SUBJECT:
Plea for retention by Tigard City
Council of R-7 zoning on land on
O'Mara Street , delineated herein.
We. the undersigned petioners . hereby implore the City of Tigard
governing bodies to adhere to and abide by officially approved
NPO #1 . Policy 6. The traffic flow on O' Mara and Frewing Streets
and Ash Avenue is already heavy enough without exposing these r
streets to a potential of 200 Multi-Family units comprising
2-story apartments , etc . Further, to change the zoning to a r
higher d esity would- adversely affect and devaluate adjacent prop-
i
ertles. More on our objections is set forth below.
s
Eao h of the petitioners herein ask for ample advance notice of
any meeting to be held by the Tigard Planning Commission and/or
E'
City Council for the purpose of deciding this matter.
F
i
4'
��(� . �� V , •\ ��E��-- tel'
i
\\x
In the nett few months Tigard will adopt a newcomprehensive plan as;
mandated by L��D�. cart of t.1c Plan there ::ill :lsc be anew zone
posed to be changed from
plan_ The above shaded arca is ,pro4L hoL'sino
units per acre to 1.2 units per acre-
We,, the undersigned, are opposed to this zoning change for the following
reasons:
1) We feel that multiply family dwellings in this area would not be
in keeping with the rurtal atsmosphere of the surrounding neighbor-
2) hood;
The increase in traffic would greatly tar the existing roads
of iP
this area;- 4 properly nw
3)
Existing utilities are inade nate to erly serve multiple
family dwellings in this area; p
�. 4) We feel that rezoning the above area would be out of character
with the rest of the neer comprehensive plan_
16
44
A A�� `YI,a= r � 33
latzs 4�_�14__ .LtU Crv'►}'Y1u1,�_6�____
6 20 — O ZS 0 S u: 0 cQrQ S \ -
-4 J' 2-0 FT
3 v c2k._.
_ •i��-, " _ �`� �,t�,^u ����. �'`��n 'J`�S''/�c+:� _ S�J Vii_�l� .�fZi.Q!1� �-_ -__
ON
November 18, 1982
CM111®F TIGA RD
WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON
John Butler, Chairman
Neighborhood Planning Organization sl
9760 SW O'Hara Street
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear John:
Per our work program. the City is now in the process of addressing those
written comments submitted from all of the local interest groups. We are
pleased to review the work that your NPO had accomplished in a relatively
short period of time, and we look forward to working with NPO *1 to resolve
the issues that will affect the City in the next couple of years.
This latter is divided into two parts. The first section addresses the need
for a City-wide comprehensive plan, and the second section addresses those
specific issues submitted by your NPO.
A CITY-NIDE PLAN
As you are aware. there is a continued frustration over the fact that the
existing NPO plans will be repealed, and replaced with a city-wide
comprehensive plan. It is becoming more evident that the need for oae
city-wide plan is crucial for Tigard's planning efforts. The following
reasons are cited, although there are many rationales behind this thought.
First. the City needs to set policy for all aspects of land use issues. The
current NPO plans speak to single family and multiple family areas. location
of commercial areas and street standards. but fail to direct the City on
facilities planning (e.g. , sewer, drainage. etc.) . future road improvements.
urban expansion, coordination with other agencies and the implementation
measures that must be considered to keep all of these ••growing pains" at the
least cost to the citizens.
Second. all of the seven NPO plans claim that Tigard will grow to a population
of 115,000 people. However, none of the plans indicate when this will happen.
if ever. and what physical and geographical constraints will be used to permit
such a population. Or, on a facetious note, do we care? Again. the City
needs to set a policy direction city-wide.
Third. the City believes that many land use issues affect the City as a whole
and the NPO's could be the bodies that could assist the City in resolving
these issues. At a minimum these include: redevelopment oft land both
residential and commercial, economic development, transportation, parks and
open space. etc. There has been a lack of city-wide planning in . scent years.
and the City fears that if the necessary systems and review processes are not
in line. each development could result in a headache for all concerned. This
could potentially discourage future economic development in the City.
12755 S W ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD.OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171
Page 2
NPO IR1 COP42iSAITS
Hous iniS Element •rt
The first few comments address your questions about the existing Housing
s that will be made
Element draft. The remaining comments review the revision
to the Housing Element.
In Chapters I and It. I saw no specific questions from NPO *I. In Chapter III
III-I on page 40. The table reads $19
there was one question regarding Table
for property taxes and $123 for insurance for monthly rates. This is an
error. The corrected table reverses these figures.
57 there is a question about the amount of y.
In Chapter IV Table IV-2. page
existing vacant land designated R-7 (7.500 square foot lot s) 'urehist too high
'11'11m.15.28 acres. Correct me if • wrong. I believe this fig
These figures were based on a land survey that was conducted in the summer of
1981. We are now in the process of updating the vacant land survey to comply
with the proposed land use map. It is the City•s belief that not all of the
on O'
land that is to the south of 'the vacant "triangle property O'Mara is in
the floodplain as now shown. and therefore. a Portion of that property will be
Included in the vacant land survey. The property has also been included
within the T.U.R.A. Downtown Ares.
The vncant "triangular" property will be shown as medium density in the
newspaper tabloid. The underlying zoning will be proposed as R-7 (the
existing R-5) . We believe that the locational criteria will permit such
change because of the property's proximity to the downtown area. and the fact
that O•iiara is proposed as a "minor collector street.- We believe more
discussion is needed concerning this property.
On page 66 under "Ordinance R*.d_`sions_ there is a question about reducing the
lot area for duplexes. Because there are two units on one lot does not
necessarily mean that the lot area must be doubled in size. For example. in
Foot lot would be adequate lot
the existing R-5 zone. s 6.500 or 7.000 square
area to mite a duplex. because the units are attached and two of the sideyards
are eliminated. In addition. duplex units are often smaller (sqc-pare footage)
than conventional single family houses.
Besides inserting. the revised policies into the Housing Element; vacant
buildable land survey will be updated; the projected po2ulation will be
capacity related to zoning; the implementation
revised to show a holding
strategies that definitely will not be used will be omitted; and more
'-character- language will be added to the introduction. (meaning the character
and quality of the community) .
DRAFT COZQMNITY DEVEL OPMECUT CODE
18.04.100 A number (3) will be added to included the Neighborhood Planning
organizations.
5
Page 3
18.10.515 Density transfer is being proposed to add ince:itive to the
development process and give clean and concise criteria to
determine density. rather than Planning Commission discretion.
18.13.030 The existing rationale of the variance process is to allow for
variations in development if certain criteria can be met. These
criteria relate to physical aspects of development. It is
difficult for a jurisdiction to set "standard" criteria related to
economic aspects of a development. However. if you have some
suggestions please contact me.
18.21.090 Accessory Dwelling Unit. During the drafting of this section we
neglected to incorporate apurpose» paragraph which would clarify
the intent of accessory dwelling units. In addition to that
needed explanation, we have also decided to incorporate the
Accessory Dwelling Uait section into Section 18.41.0 ACCESSORY '}
DEVELOPMENT. Wo. believe this will add more continuity to the Code.
18.25.020 (11) This criterion was extracted from a model ordinance e
developed by the American Planning Association. Their explanation
was that the provision provided another safeguard existing
residential areas, and would provide for a more diverse area.
Granted, this is not a mandate of conventional homes. but we
believe this provision would give more acceptance to the concept
of manufactured/mobile homes on individuals lots. g
18.32.020 "Clinic Services" should read "Civic Services".
18.33.010 Refer to policy 6.3.1. I'm not sure what this means.
F
18.33.020 This section does include Hospital and Spectator and Entertainment:
Other
Fanno Creek - This is separate issue from the CBD. If you'll note Section
18.32.020(2)(B) Community Recreation does include parks. However. development
along the Fenno Creek floodplain is addressed in Sensitive Lands.
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES
Septic System: As you are aware the County did permit septic systems on
smaller lots CI believe 10.000 square feet) . This provision has become, and
will continue to become. a problem mainly because of the permeability of many
of the soils in the Tigard area iS slow. caucing systems to overload and fail.
DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - POLICY DOCUMENT
r
The City is charged with zoning land within it's City ligKits. This
responsibility includes. in accordance with LCDC Statewide Planning Goals.
providing for different types of land uses.
( P.
F
1
FA
• k�.
1:
Page 4 '
a.
Section 3 - Implementation Strategies *l: This provision will be based on f
existing park and open space plans, which are inadequate. After the
Comprehensive Plan is compieced, the City Council will be reviewing the ;A
direction that the City of Tigard will take regarding open space. Thio may y
alter our current standards. but we'll have to wait and use. In addition. the
existing zoning ordinance does require open space for each multiple family
developments.
t
Section b - Implementation -Strategies *2a: This provision may not be
necessary if *2b is adopted.
Section 7 - Policy 7.5.1: I'm not sure what your question is in this respect. 4
Section 10 - Policy 10.1.1: Again. I'm not sure what the question is about
annexations, however, your questions may be answered in policy 10.1.3.
Section 11 - My understanding is that the correct organization should be as
follows:
11.1.1 Ash Avenue should be extended across Fanno Creek, enabling access
to the neighborhood commercial area without using Pacific
Highway. Design features shall be used to slow traffic and make
the street as safe as possible. Ash Avenue shall be designated a
minor collector in conformance with the comprehensive street
plan. Design features and mitigation measures shall hold traffic
volumes to the middle limits of s minor collector.
11.1.2 Improvements to Sol Ash Avenue from SW Hill to Fenno Creek shall be
constructed as condition of development of adjacent properties.
The street improvements along with the development of a major
commercial site will increase traffic on Ash. A barricade shall
be placed at Hill Street approximately at the end of existing
pavement to protect the neighborhood residents from the commercial
traffic.
11.1.3 Methods of mitigating the traffic impact on the neighborhood shall
include in the following order of improvement construction:
a. That the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment shall benefit the
surrounding neighborhood as determined by the Tigard City Council.
b. Improving SW McDonald Street to interim maintenance standards to
encourage traffic from south of McDonald to use McDonald to exit
to Hall and/or Pacific Highway.
C. Improvements to the residential portion of Ash from Hill to
Frewing. These improvementscin
ss
could include tiited parking.
delineation of traffic lanes and sidewalks on one or both sides of
the street.
d. The extcnsion of SW Hill to SW O'Mara and/or the improvement of SW
Ash from Frewing to Garrett.
- S
p
Page 5
e. The extension of SW O'Hara to SW Hill parallel to SW Ash.
E. Removal of the barricade in place on Ash Avenue at SW Hill.
g. Improvement of SW O'Hara Street to interim maintenance standards
to encourage an alternate route.
h. Installation of traffic inhibitors to the residential portion of
Ash if and when traffic volumes exceed the middle range for a
minor collector. Traffic inhibitors include but are not limited
to planting islands, speed bumps, buttons, turning restrictions,
load limits and enforcement.
The insert "a" from Ordinance No. 82-11 seems to tie out of place and does not ;
fit in with the rest of the policy. Perhaps you could explain this. _
I hope I addressed your comments, if you have additional comments please
contact me.
Respectfully. V.
y='
Jeremy Coursolle
Associate Planner '
is
a
s
JC:lw
(0447A/9/13)
S
a
r
E
i
F
E9
t
€E
t
i
c
h b o r h o o:;
I:roni: !'lannini,
To: m.a c a/ it a
-concernin.-: t!pdate on the zone chan?e oL' ttie Lrianrujar lan,:
7,,(:),-th o O:nara abut tine :'. ill and !.:AIPLe � tree l.
In a letter Fated le November 1982 Ti�ard. Associate Planner .
.Jeremy Coursolle , has reconsidered the density of the Omara
property. He states, "The vacant -triang,ular" property will be
shown as medium density in the newspaper tabloid( 23 November
1982 edition) . The underlyin: zoning will be proposed as
( the existing
This action decreases the density of dwelling units to about
one-half oLf that originally proposed(R-12 to R-7) but is still
about double the present zoning of 0-4. 3-
Further information
can be obtained by coming to the 1 December 1982 NPO I'll meeting
at Tigard city Hall at 7: 30PP-1. A staff representative will be
present at this meeting.
it
urther information on the new Tigard Comprehensive Plan
can be obtained at Tigard City Hall or the Ti-ard Public Library .
S,oeciE'ic questions can be directed to the Tigard Planning Staff
by phoning '39-4171 . Public hearings on the new Comprehensive
D
Plan will begin at Fowler Juni-Cr High School on 7 December 1982
at 7: 30PLO .
Of
!PO #1 Chairperson
Q-77
K,43
N
December 11 1982
Mr,/John Butler, ChairpersonNOV 3 0 1982 U
Neighborhood Planning Organization No. 1 1?
Tigard, Oregon, 97223. CITY OF TIGARD
Dear Mr. Butler: PLANNING DEPT.
We understand that the Tigard Planning Staff is recommending
a zone change to R--7 for the Omara Farm Area with a medium density
classification on the Tigard Map. That area and all the surround-
ing area is now all low density single family residential. If the
zoning is changed from low density to medium density, a contractor
could come along and request a change from R-7 (seven units per
acre.) to twelve units peracre which is allowed in medium density.
A maxium density of 12 units per acre would be apartments and/or
other multi-family dwellings.
The residents in this area bought their homes here because
the area was zoned low density single family residential and a
change ' to medium density-which allows a maxium of 12 units per
acre instead of 5 units per acre which is the maxium allowed in
low density would betay all the home owners that bought in this
area. These homes were purchaded in this area with the understand-
ing that this area was low density single family residential
because it was zoned that way. If a zone change to medium density
iq •.11owed, it would ruin the character and livability of this and
tri.. surrounding neighborhoods.
The Tigard Comprehensive Plan Book, page 33 , Policy No. 6.3.1 ,
says= Designating on the Plan Map those portions of the city
committed to Residential de'velopment and within the "established
areas- , new development will be of the same type and density in order
to protect the character of existing neighborhoods.
-In closing, how would you feel if you bought a home because
you wanted to be in a low density single family residential area
with."-the City Map showing the surroung ing area zoned for low density
and ,then along comes a zone change to more than twice the density
that it *as zoned for originally. Please keep zoning; at low
density with a maxium of 5 units per acre.: which is only two less ,
than R-7 which the Tigard Planning Staff is requesting. We need to
preserve the character, quality and livability of our single family
residential neighborhoods. Please keep Low Density.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration,
Sincerely,
CoPYL Paul and Gloria Johnson
Mir. Jeremy .
Tig d Planning Staff
City of Tigard
Tigard, Oregon, 97223.
J.-
December 6, 1982.
Page One of Two
.. i_�rard Plannin Staff
Tigard Planning Commission
Tigard City Council
City of Tigard , Oregon, 97223 .
Dear Members :
PART ONE. . . . .CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
This letter is pertaining to the zoning changes and the
boundry line of the Central Business District (CBD) .
In NPO #1 book, page 44, it says Fanno Creek nrovid s a
natural buffer between the neighborhoods residential and busipa,-a
a]-strict. I have a map from the City of Tigard , exhibit 6, which
shows the CBD line coming across Fanno Creek and the Greenway into
an established residential areaalong Hill Street which is a low
density single family area and going on southeast along the Green-
way adjacent another low density area of the Greenway. The' CBI)' Line
should be adjusted to the other side of the Greenway where the
Central Business District is located so the ow asnsity single
family area; will have Fanno Creek and the Greenway as a buffer
between them and the high density CBD line as stated above in the
`PO W1 book. Also, an adjustment could be :Wade to remove the new
proposed shopping center near Main and Ash f,om the residential
area. It is very vital to maintain Fanno Creek and the Greenwav
as a buffer to retain the character of the establis.nai low density
sintile family neighborhoods .
PART TWO. . . . . ZONE CHANGES
There are some low density single family home areas that are
proposed for a higher density. Four units per acre to seven units
per acre and some areas even higher including apartments . The NPO
Tl boo'_ , page 5 , says that apartments in Tiaard out number the
houses . On page 11, it says that future development should be
sensitive to the concern of the citizens. Page 16, Policy T says
the single family character ofthearea designated on the plan map
as urban low density residential is viewed as a positive asset to-
.
e retained . Low density is 1 to 5 units per acre. Medium density
is to 12 units per acre including apartments. The residents in
the low density areas such as the Omara farm and all of the sur-
rounding areas were zoned single family low density with 4 units per
acre . The proposed 7 units per acre on the Omara triangle would be
a 75% increase and some other areas even higher.
The residents in these low density areas bought their hones
with the understanding that their homes and the surrounding area
would be single family low density because it was zoned'that way on
the map. If these zones are changed , it will betray all of these
residents who purchased homes in this low density neighborhood. It
would ruin the character and livability of this and the surrounging
neighborhoods. The Tigard Comprehensive Plan book, page 33 , Policy
No. 6. 3 . 1, says new development will be of the sane type and density
in order to protect the character of existing neighborhoods.
Page Two of Two:
Please consider us the citizens of Tigard who bought homes
with the understanding; that we would have Fanno Creek and the
Greenway as a buffer between us and the Central Business District.
NOT have the buffer between us destroyed by moving the CBD line
across the Greenway into a single family low density neighborhood.
Please keep the CBD line on the other side of the Greenway buffer
where the businessdistrict is so we can retain the quality ,
livability and character of our existing and establishctd
neighborhood. By putting yourselves in our position ii buying a
home in a low density residential area because it was ed that
way on the map, you will understand that we are the ones who will
suffer if the zones are changed to higher density.
In closing, please leave our residential area low density
single family, so we can retain the character of our neighborhood.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
Since7 ely,
Paul and Gloria Johnson
December 9. 1982
Tigard Planning Staff
- i and Planning Commission
Tigard City Council
City of Tigard . Oregon , 97223•
Dear Yembers:
FANNO CREEK CREENWAY AND FLOODPLAIN
In NPO f#1 Book . page 44, it says Fanno Creek provides a
natural buffer between the neighborhoods residential and business
district.
Why should the Planning Staff want to take in the Greenway
and Flood Plain for the Central Business District? The CBD calls
for high density. Do they want to fill in the flood plain and
make it high density? Are they proposing to throw out all of the
existing codes which now protect our Greenway and Floodplain areas?
The ::p0 41 Book talks about the important reasons why we
should keep the Greenway and Flood Plain on Page 3 . 12 . 44. s
and 47.
1. as a buffer between the residential area and the central
district.
"'he Planning Staff has the CBD lime coming; across the
3reenway adjacent to a low density sinZle fam!V, area which
will destroy the Greenway and Flood Plain buffer.
2 . The NPO #1 Book states that filling; in the Flood Plain
w8uldD. create flooding, and insurance rates for floods would
3. The Greenway trees and vegetation helps purify the air
and puts oxygen back into the air.
4. The Greenw«y is very vital fQr birds , water fowl and wild
life which helps keep down tPCe population of mice , rats
and insects .
The CBD line should be moved to the business side of the
;Jreenway to protect the Greenway and to preserve the low density
single family residential area. We should -maintain the codes we
now have which protects the Greenway and gives a_bLffer to the
single family low density residental areas . Once the Greenway and
:-Iced Plain is destroyed , a very vital part of our environment
is lost forever.
Thant you for your time and consideration ,
erj1j�:
Paul and Mori jo ns.on
�r
P E T I T I O N 4
t
Tigard . Oregon
December 1982
TO:
Planning Commission
and the City Council
City of Tigard . Oregon r"
�z
SUBJECT:
Preliminary "Tigard Comprehensive Plan
viz ; CPA 15-82 ; ZC 19-82; ZOA 9-82 ; and s
r.
CPA 14-82, of at.
'Je. the undersigned petitioners . hereby 11::plore the City of Tigard
governing bodies to retain .the -pres.ent zoning of lowfiensity single .6-
family residential on Tax Lot 400 , Section 2 . T. 2 S. . R. 1 W. , WM.
comprisinz 7 .17 acres and abutting the north line of Omara Street.
x
Also, that the contiguous 10.71-acre tract . Tax Lot 500 , retain the
present "Park" and "Greenway" designations ; and , that any portion of :
the "Park" not so retained be designated LOW density single family
residential . Further, that a portion of the southerly boundary of
the Central Business District be moved northward so that the southeast
corner at Hall Blvd . would be either at the north line of the church
property or at Fanno Creek, and then traverse Fanno Creek upstream 3
to its intersection with a projectiorr• of Ash Avenue , thence following
said projectlon southwesterly to re-connect with the balance of the 4
CBD southerly boundary extending northwesterly to Pacific Highway at
McKenzie Street .
adopted b
The foregoing requests are in accord with the NPO #1 Plan ado_ 7
the City Council on May 20 . 1974 and recognized as complying with the
requirements of a comprehensive plan per Chapters 197 and 227 of the
Oregon Revised Statutes . Aforesaid Plan recognized Fanno Creek as a �
natural buffer between the Neighborhood °s residential and business g
areas. The Plan also provided that the single family character of the
area desimnated on the Plan Map as urban LOW density residential be
viewed asa positve asset to be retained . 'this concept is contin-
ued in prelimirary�EPA 14-82 , Section 6.3 .1 . which states that the City E
shall direct its land use actions toward the maintenance of the pre-
scribed density for residential areas .
Pallure to revise a portion of the CBD southerly boundary as above
recommended will adversely affect preservation of the greenway and
flood plain area by inducing the authorization of land-fill within
the flood plain area and . in the case of residential units , construc-
tion of HIGH DENSITY which the CBD Zoning commands ; as +well as other
C 3D uses which also would be totally incompatible with the LOW desity
single family residential area.
We urge that you grant the above pleas in order to maintain the mar-
ket value of the adjacent properties Pi:% to enable the petitioners
herein to realize and benefit from the ammenities attendant to the
already established LOW density zoning of singlelfanily residencies
that they have a right to expect.
Petitioners herein also plead for revision of that portion of pre-
liminary CPA 14-82 treating with certain proposed street extensions .
I . e . . eliminate the proposed extension of "SW Omara to SW Hill par-
allel to SW Ash" and instead call for the extension of SW Hill on an
easterly traverse connecting with SW Omara near the Senior Citizen
Center. We feel that this would much better serve the community.
Future development proposals should be sesitive to the concerns: of
citizens for their own immediate environment as well as to the well-
being of the City as a whole.
We agree with Mayor Blshopts remarks appearing in the September 8 .1982 .
edition of the paper "This Week" to the effect that it is important
that Tigard grow up nicely and that a good family environment be kept ;
also, that there has been very high population growth pressure that
has to be kept in check. /
Thank you for your consideration in these matters . 1160
December Tigard
Petitioner Date Phone Address
i l
Z I- / 1. 1 �.
rage une oI i'wo
f
Paul and Gloria Johnson
9300 S• W. Hill Street
Tigard , Oregon, 97223.
January 10, 1983
T.Q.R.A.
Tigard Planning Commission
Tigard City Council
Tigard , Oregon, 97223.
Dear Members :
This letter is pertaining to the (CBD) Central Business
District, The Fanno Creek Flood Plain and the Single Family Low
Density Residential Areas.
The City of Tigard used to send out letters of notice if
there was going to be a meeting concerning a zone change or
construction of anything larger than a house adjacent to single
family homes. We were not notified about this CBD line coming
across the Flood Plain and Greenway into our single family
residential neighborhood. We would have been at the meetings if
we had been notified.
There should be a City Code requiring letters of notice -to
be sent to home owners when meetings are going to be held con-
cerning a zone change or construction next to single family homes.
The map shows the CBD line coming across Fanno Creek and the
Greenway into an establised single family residential neighborhood
along Hill Street.
The CBD zone in the new Tigard code book, to be reviewed,
Code 18. 32-020 says the minium residential is fifteen (15)
units
per acre and we understand that this has been changed to 20 units
per--acre and 40 plus maxium. This should not be allowed adjacent
low density (4 units per acre ) establised areas.
The Tigard Comprehensive Plan Book, Page 33, Policy No. 6.3. 1
says new development will be of the same type and density in order
to protect the character of existing neighborhoods.
We cannot believe that the City would call the Flood Plain
part of the Central Business District and bring
a high density
area next to an established low density neighborhood.
NPO #1 Book, Page 44, says Fanno Creek provides a natural
buffer between the neighborhoods residential and business district.
The CBD line should be adjusted to the otherside of the Greenway
where the Central Business District is located so there will be a
buffer as stated in the NPO #1 Book. 3
There is a Petition with 160 names on it of citizens, tax--
payers and homeowners of this area of Tigard that requests the
CBD line be adjusted to the other side of the Greenway and Flood
Plain.
Page Two of Two
It is very vital to maintain Fanno Creek and the Greenway as
a buffer to retain the character of the established low density
single family neighborhoods.
We have been to meetings of the Planning Commission and the
City Council when contractors could not build in the Flood Plain
and they would donate to the City that part of their land for
Park Areas. . .Not Central Business District.
We have seen the water so high in the Flood Plain that it
was like a lake with ducks swimming around. The water was >r
almost up to the Philadelphia Square Apartments and the duplexes
across thestreet from our house so we cannot see how the City
can call the Flood Plain part of the Central Business District. {
We believe that the taxpayers and the homeowners should be
i
heard and protected.
F3
NPO #1 Book. Page 17. Policy #7. says duplexes should be
buffers between multi-family and single family areas. This
policy should be maintained in our new City Code Book to protect :
the sintle Family neighborhoods.
In closing, please do not forget those 160 residents who
have requested that the City adjust the CBD line to the business
side of the Flood Plain and Greenway so as to protect the low
density single family homes and retain the character of the
established neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and consideratioti,
Sincerely, if
Paul and oria Johnson
E
i
f
z
r
cE
f
E
s�
E
s
i
E
i
Jan 17, 1983
' 8800 S. W. 57th Ave.
Portland, Or. 97219
City of Tigard r .' I iJ
P.6. Box 23397 J Tigard, Or. 97223 JP fd 1 1 ? ;�
Attention: Mr. Monahan, Director of PlanninCI1Y OF IIGAHD
PLANNING DEPT.
Dear Bill:
It was a pleasure to meet with you at the TURA
meeting on the 13th of this month. It is regrettable
but I realize that as a public speaker there is is a
lot left to be attained on my part.
Enclosed are some copies from a report made by the
buyer of Air-King who hired General Appraisalfor this
in 1980. This buyer has defaulted on our contract so I x`
am taking the property hack and he turned the report
over to m,3.
Land useage in the central business district of
Tigard does not seem to have changed appreciably nthe r.
last three years. I sold Air-King in 1979.
Before sold it, I considered putting in commercial rental units {
and moving the truss manufacturing operation to a less
valuable parcel. Upon investigation I was forced to the
conclusion that going commercial would not be economically s
viable. The main reason was competition from not only
present but planned units along Highway 99 which is roughly
the mrth end of Burnham. There is no prospect of a short- x
age of commercial units now or in the foreseeable future and
they would be more desireable. 1
Sheet 14 from the appraisal report comes to this same
conclusion. Fixing the focus on commercial zoning for the f .
old Air-King property would not benefit the City; as a � s
prac.tical matter of economics it would have exactly the
opposite effect and we would both be losers. Continuation
of the present zoning would not commit the City to approve 3
any application. The present zoning is somewhat unique and
it does give the CLty the last word when it comes to an indus-
trial application on this piece of property.
Accordingly Iwould trust that you ca_ rcommendlthat E
the present zonpingfor the old Air-King property
eft
unchanged.
Very truly yours,
Van S. Camp
GENERAL APPRAISAL COMPANY
AIR KING MANUFACTURING CORPORATION
TIGARD, OREGON
HIGHEST & BEST USE
Highest and best use may be defined- as that legal use most likely
to provide the greatest net return or highest present value.
The environment and primary zoning both dictate no other reasonable
land use than in industrial occupancy. While a part of the land
would permit, by zoning, a commercial use, such a use is not par-
ticularly desirable, nor would a low quality of commercial use be
likely to develop higher land values.
-14-
GENERAL APPRAISAL COMPANY
AIR KING 'MANUFACTURING CORPORATION
TIGARD, OREGON
d,
ZONING AND PLANNING
The zoning map for the city is not normally used except for
verifying conformance of a property with requirements of the '
zoning ordinance. A Comprehensive Plan for the city was adopted
in September of 1979, forms the basis for permissible land develop-
ment , and realistically supersedes the zoning map.
Industrial zoning generally follows the rail line through the I
city, but some industrial districts are found to be related to
Highway I-5 interchanges.
There are thrJeneralsor1Heavys
2Industrial
1.13 - Light Industrial
N14 - Industrial parks .
Except for permissable occupancy, setbacks and permissible height r
of improvements are fairly similar at all industrial districts.
The subject is located in an M3 Light Industrial District , per-
mitting a broad range of industrial activity ,
requiring lots
minimum 60' in width and minimum area of 6, 000 sq. ft . ( .14 acres) ,
with no maximum lot coverage specified. Front yard setbacks is
required as 30' , si-deyards 20' , rear yard 20' except no rear yard
setback is required when the property abuts a railroad right-of-way .
Building heights are restricted to the lesser of three stories i
i
or 35'
-11-
GENERAL APPRAISAL COMPANY
AIR KING MANUFACTURING CORPORATION
TIGARD, OREGON
NEIGHBORHOOD DATA
The immediate area surrounding the subject property is pre- I
dominantly industrial in character, but includes some residential
areas converting to commercial/industrial through conversion in
occupany of single family dwellings. The principal commercial
area of the city is only a long block to the northwest ,- but this
commercial activity is a strip development along Highway 99W, and
there are no indications of this retail commercial land use ap-
proaching the appraised land. The trend in expansion of retail
commercial activity is toward the west end of Main Street where
an 111, acre shopping center is proposed .
A mini-storage unit is located across Burnham Avenue, with most
land to the northeast , east and southeast purely industrial in
character, interrupted only by greenspace along Fanno Creek .
t
-7-
I
� I
GENERAL APPRAISAL COMPANY AIR KING VIANUFACTURING CORPORATION
TIGARD , OREGON
SITE DESCRIPTION
The appraised land consists of two contiguous parcels and one
small separate parcel located at the northwest corner of the
intersection of S . 11. Hall Boulevard and S - W. Burnham Avenue in
the city of Tigard , Washington County, Oregon .
The location is a half mile south of the central business district
at Main Street which borders Highway 99W, in an area primarily
devoted to industrial land uses.
The property contains a total area of 5 . 16 acres per county records,
5. 18 acres in accordance with records in the office of Air King
Manufacturing Corporation , the latter assumed as correct . The two
ax lot 2000 and part of lot 2100, total 5. 05
contiguous parcels , t
acres, the separate small triangular parcel across Burnham Avenue
;s . 13 acres per dimensions indicated in company records . The
principal plantsite has about 593 ' frontage plus 260' frontage on
Burnham Avenue, about 350' in depth to 564 ' of frontage on the
rail line at the north boundary, all illustrated on site plan
following.
The present buildings, plus yard activities, parking and storage
occupy the entire site, with no land as surplus for possible disposal .
Southwest Burnham Avenue is improved with 28 ' wide pawing, no curbs
or sidewalks= in a 40' to 50' right--of-way. Two rail rights-of-
-being
ights-of-
•being 50' Beide
way are located at the north boundary of the site,
-8-
e
i
I
GENERAL APPRAISAL COMPANY i
AIR KING MANliFACTL'RING CORPO,`tATION
TIGARD, OREGON
f
3
SITE DESCRIPTION
Oregon Electric Railway and 80 ' wide Southern Pacific Railroad.
No rail spur currently serves the site; there is evidence of an
abandoned spur along the north boundary, eater, sewer, gas, power
and telephone services are available to the site.
The land is level , and at grade of adjacent streets, gravel sur-
faced for drainage, traffic and storage purposes.
i
i
i
t
it
t
-9-
=Mai _
--- -- -
Q ,
z
w
w O
EE•+ C-) p+
v� a U
o w o
cn H U
w a s as o o a. H .� a
U) O U U C7 U U U 1-1 a U
O
H
E-+
a H N N N
C14 U)
w U a �4 x
a W W a3 L
O W RC1
U
O RS :
00
>1
�4
4-) >ra a ami o o
C) cn U N O x -4E+
N d' �ri 'Lf S-r �}
Lry r- 0
C7 Q O
�F H #j= ty' H � 5-1 a4 W 31
z Q 4-3 ::S rO =$ 4-) N r0 O a) cn
o rz Ln o .Q Q z
W M r 1 C «S G O C O U3 «S rI)
a U W N U (1) cil U 't3 U N
z -4 X W (1) N N Q) Qk O a) 3 N LO
Z 04 fo CD
E-4 C7 C� U L� E-4 0 z E-4 U] U .
N k
-4 >s N
N 1n C
Sr O U Q •1 E N 4
Ur-J13 -4 -c . w a)
a; o Q) rn �
r-i > v o
�+ a s� N w
N H rn o "
((S r-Irl N a) f6 �-4-k E
ca � :2: O W O z U � 4 H (0
.-i P N 3
mow/ :y o .$I --4O N O p
W x crn Z Fr a t4 W G G4 W o z a U s
N N N N N
co 00 w N w 00 M M M M M M
pC, _ 00 M M 00 00 00 m 00 00
00 OD
EA Ln a1 - N t`
N N N 00 N N - N CO a1 COE-1 W `-
M [� r �- '- N N
w U v o a) ci a) ru (a cc ru ra
o o o z Q Q Q r-3
1
a
1
a�Y ami. ft` qp ...�91•y�: , - '� ._,-t:... .. .. l'�TY+P' ��' y �ii v. � t{c i'i'.
J � /
f - ,� o . • / - � � - .ate
. - �, - 3 sow
o.
kLt ,..ti• }7 z r�, ,�',�`,tfi��ir-1 .•. r!" ,i'Jt°iCR'rrS' ,1.� •� ti
>': '!. r� ._ "tiC�y.C r�� 1 �� t.. e��is -�, t ++�'�_ 5 r ' .y r.. f•-�• d .;Q
).w7.}jr •fnr +,- r - .• ,:'r, :'y r f- ?-�//��s3 ,,- - A/ 1'X+ /y�A^/`zt - .: - ♦+
-fy ! •l �.y. f.. - 5 Zj�.`�(• :.AYJ'vOVt ober
-'% -L51'd Tdk y. iC�y -_ >.�. rs#.i C -Z.. �.~L •�..�. 7^� _ � C
•� '�.- t•1L•i .qy �f S� l � � y r
M $ s� j.�q
..'Vy V4�.oto J•f��~ � 1innJ.rinOLVD
�p 4Ya®nV.
Mot
P.rsV
J[ e�v� � 6 y�y9�]22 � �., �• F_.�. .�� ¢�`w 6534- ..a. !• - i ;< i y � .4Y_ t .1'Y :?.
6ygOS� � o,��r+7�`5�0.5"�-M'��,C.�� 1 1 •��.�,,y,f:4�S{LT fCi ..� r 40.
••�cSC✓'r'75,��1,Ji.-v..�%y, �.r r+Xs.• �.` ►` •92 �` .�j,_� �` � •v� ...
De ar-f �� !4= � Y 6 R Ma+f{L e=? "mo
. �� T ? �n>z ,�• -t:*.,•'3 "�"�'�' y.' _
�-+b'r�
Aa prcpe tyn_own®rsin . hoc y of �Tigard�# we vaou3.d like 'goonfrecord t
; s requestiugtYi�it2 ® Ci:tgf Tgrdm4taYa the cuirrent zoning;`af_
a '=
="f4profei;sona7:=eoier-ai�al�''gcr :our :proper fag` specified-�belowsr �_�� _ tt
�•- -.,y.r szti•"r =.1-«t t: -C 7 � ..� •S' - - - - r .i
Map �lt 35DA}-x
r c
400 f2-
_ 1 Tax -Lot
--Sincerely,
Suburban,Investors
_ Woodrow Hughes
Davi Hughe
Wil * a Bl
chard S er
Denn s Thomas
Cg
sit
�•f• " ti �,..� -"�• r?r ' ,rAtAwaw«•d�uw's�iw7 WWo1GECCMrA►hrOaEGON_. -• .•� 1✓ i•-s -�. ` .�.
f, ;. 97605 `°�t '�
712012 S W CANYdFi ROA �SEAV�R..;UN,Aft 4 �t •-- �'b� �r '
t ,t. t `�.:� .•Y�.- _ .t t a • 3 W1 000 d + "'' .s ' 'f -• _'1.t i1•,-'` 2 r2+1f'`�''��# ' -Y£�y..�.^
S}L't ..���1" L � �rs� - c:.a" '-"•�i 'r p• ' w S.'. c`.75�r,,,�3 t.�. t'7 -Y�.7.YJ..S i. •w i�"'L; jW-i.. ...-s-F' t •�; •Ct 4.
Y
•.�`jl'�1t��xs�..1 s -.-.a't�'�"7i, /a•+. � t::'� .1... {-earfr� "^`:. }fa" -e-`x'�i'!^iin!izY "st'' J:1.' -;,Y.+r.� '�!� ..k`r"i-'-�;•_ i „•_']�:. 4
Sy
'+ar86��'�'4 f: lV�o,�� - :.�+••.-�' '�:• ri.t � a;. '� y trt .y •`�= 53. _ u BILAP: at..: �.- � �✓r'„'�•► � i_.
ISIO �.: :M ♦ %:. "�' .� x- --_.i•.35'1' - 1.
'� a;,, :s .d.+• t ]r i���` � rw-'R� tT >��'`x.o �a•v y- ve.-+. �-�r��_F„�p,�� }{.�•
:p�•'8t' ,:;}?AR •c? ,,�� .3v t ��,F"yt;` � `..,. -Y� + .�- - - 1.k �fi .;� '.'Y?E' '_rtC *' _} f...
f z i 3c. a �� erg; a �.n;afs5 tcc.� t4 p�SL"r
3 r sem' . "'rte, tS?•,e s• t a. [�'Et, `. r 3....o i
yam, � w,--:• �•• 7t
:i - w �� i�':A► .�._?'.:Lr-PO• q• t.�'+t ' ✓,�,}y i �'Y-+rtx ti�..'._ riFS�::•�•'ak���,r���3 �'t•Y`�. £r•�' n j=�ir'4j J:-.. t
,:L, ��y+_k .� aaaia =•t9,.F �x may' x•- 5,' ,- 5r— y=,' �, —`�' UN,
S
�!`'3t' - .. ;!� Y�y ` 4`, cv^'��Y �'� Yl�t•+'a 17. �i - O YrN '�'S'4_ �"i.iy t
�••` *Y`h
�•� •h.-.r�� � )�' f _ _ Y � Y i�:aa.- ,yi4'gF J yw�,�'..._�.'-i 5'r°� •:_b�".� y Y._
+t�tR�-Ye. �y �-�,c..1Y-J -�^�' t •l�,_t- �.-�.r :�. .� ti�y���_'' ^�.ti�' � ���T--�.� ed`!�'t�a` ��_t �• _ ..
•-'' ��tc•.;:r-�-:�- r.Rt -.1. '� f�� t..'i'�f� -".�'i"'`•v:C _iw..'v.: .'l.C�sl•' - � 4 tr alp .� d1 �, �.
i.'ti.--- ln�;a.f:�L•�'�`t-�t•,4„'.f-• "it-= ,_R..•c,fe.' ae}� _ � J � ic"e n�.,�r k�!"'ty'1,'�i ;.1 1 ZF t �.. — ��
•1 -tt .� !•.!A-. -{ �t i �R � � _ ••:.� x..
LAS,Ac.' ;
{�
200.64 O _
Nesow
e �• o� �, ``{A
I.
5327 :68
v +
:.=•a 273.Gl�- of .- ,= ... _ f.
20 N89*30,30-E• 162.7 W,
350! 0
r .504C
8019
0 f
_ - - 25 203.96 \1700
v Ns8•W
20 _ 3500,
_ - �� � ___XXX///•••
t H a •5OAc.
NSI .�
_ 1600
r
MAP o �\
= W
350C „w .1400 �\ 22
pp
1 z Na�
Z.47 Ac. •'
pZ iO H -"rte•••.
- ,�• N •� 1500 .
` � � � — N88•W � -� s
S \ 300'AIL -
1300
t
Y... o e ``►`r — _ _ soo aim 1' . 23 -
so
\ - - - - —
W \`
J e 3 C.S. 3060 10' ze :
EAST 301.9•
} " 23 NsswW 209.76 _ \ __ S09•li W 302.1
234.70 t,
4.5
a99.aT.s�°TS SEE MAP' !S t 3500
i r N2�0ou of65
140
%t- Ci O` �'e�l•^•?wl;_i - ".-...�
. -- ...-�.:�r:. - -,i: Y - - ""'::T:?Ce %.�:•" �: �:3'
-•ice .�. -ir;t.y..• .--+r.:-.'-+—.:crv,_...•;•;':'•;*�.�.' `
DEC 3 1982
Roger M. Betanich
o �, �� - po o -��D - - o o CITY OF TIGARD
811 Skinner Building, Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 623-6230 PLANNING DEPT.
November 29 , 1982
Mr. Jeremy Coursolle
Associate Planner
CITY OF TIGARD
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 98223
Re: Proposed Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map;
Property Located at Greenburg Rd. & shady Land
1S135BC, Tax Lot 200
Dear Jerry:
Enclosed is a letter to the Planning Commission
which I would like entered into the Public
Record during the Hearings concerning the
proposed Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map that
effect the subject location.
Please contact me should you need any .additional
information, since I would be pleased to did cuss
this matter further with you should I e able
to be of any further assistance.
Very trulganich
Ro er M.r
RMB/s d
enc.
1
J
Roger M. Belanich
811 Skinner Building, Seattle. Washington 98101 (206) 623-6230
November 29 , 1982
Planning Commission
CITY OF TIGARD
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 98223
Re: Proposed Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map;
Property Located at Greenburg Rd. & Shady Lane
1S135BC , Tax Lot 200 _
Gentlemen:
)
Concerning the proposed Comprei::_,r-sive Plan Map review, I wish
to make reference to the above property, shown in red on the
attached assessor' s map, marked "Exhibit P_, " and the land use
specifically proposed for this property. The current classifi-
cation
lassifi-cation and background is as follows :
Comprehensive Plan: General Commercial
E
NPO #2
a
Zoning: C-3
Use: Vacant; Design Review Submitted for retail buildings .
E
Planning History:
The undersigned has owned tais property for ten years and
has been continuously involved with compatible interaction with
the community, the City of Tigard, and Washington County for over
eleven years concerning the use of this property and that of
the surrounding community. In 1971, this property, plus the adja-
cent property now owned by Mobil Oil, were zoned R-7 Washington
County. (See "1971 Original Zoning" attached as "Exhibit B. " )
A request was made by me to Washington County for rezone, to C-2
General Commercial . The County Planning Director refer=i-ed action
on the matter to the City of Tigard as being within Tigard' s
"sphere of influence. " The City of Tigard had not defined land
t
(continued. . . ;
- icy .0X -rigaru rin1u1JLX19 x01tuuiSS.Lp11
November,
page'•two -.
use for the properties bordering Highway 217 and Greenburg Road
west of the interchange and wished at that time to resolve the
entire land use issue for this area. This was of particular
interest for two reasons: Washington Square was about to be
built, and the City wished to annex that subject area into the
city limits.
The City Planning Director, Ray Rangila, urged the community to fund
a land use study as a guideline to a revised Comprehensive. Plan for
this area. The undersigned, together with other .property. owners
within this area, funded approximately $6,000 . for an outside con-
sulting firm to study this area for the City Planning Department.
This study became-known as "Shady Lane Land Use Study. " A copy
of the body of the study- is enclosed as. "Exhibit C. "
After a total period of one year of study, and total community
involvement, the City recognized this study as the basis of land
use for thirty-five acres east of- -Highway 217 bordering Greenburg
Road ( and later adopted it into the Comprehensive Plan of the City
of Tigard) . Thereupon, the City recommended to Washington County
that the R-7 zoning of my property be changed to C-2 General Commer-
cial (see letter from City of Tigard to Washington County, marked
"Exhibit D" and Staff Reports of July 11, 1972, marked "Exhibit E") _
The rezone was approved August 1, 1972.
At a later time in 1977, the City Planning Director, then Dick Bolan, 3
requested me to annex into the City, which I did on February 8,
1978, bringing Mobil Oil also into the annexation (see "Exhibit F" ) _
Thereafter, I cooperated with the City to organize an approach to
annex the Cascade Industrial Park into the City.
k
- a
In May 1978, I was required to rezone the subject property, since
after the annexation the zoning classification had not been changed.
The Planning Commission unanimously approv;.;a the zoning as C-3 in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. (See attached Application
and Tigard Staff Report, May 2, 1978, and Planning Commission Hearing, R
marked"Exhibit G" . )
Currently, I have submitted an application for Design Review of the
property in conformance with the C-3 zoning. The study plans for
that application have been underway for approximately 2;5 months. g
It is most appropriate and within the concepts of good planning
that the Comprehensive Plan for the subject property remain General
Commercial. It should be emphatically rtoed that the property
has never been a part of Cascade Industrial Park (see Cascade Annexa-
tion, attached at Exhibit H. ") In fact, the size limitation of
51,000 square feet does not lend itself to industrial type use.
Furthermore, the property is not oriented toward Cascade Park, but
is clearly oriented toward the interchange, Greenburg Road, and
the commercial land uses making up the intersection. This is the
manner in which the property has been community analyzed, County .
(continued. . . )
t
8
�a M �M
_., City -of-.Tigard_ Planning C6cw4bssi.on
_ ..._ LYbvember;:29, 1982
page three
r"
{
zoned, Comprehensively Planned, annexed, and City zoned.
It is my request that the property remain in the Comprehensive
Plan as General Commercial. '
Very truly you
70fger M. 'Be anich
if
RMB/s d
enc. y
r;
ns
c
+n
tom•
f
i
mom 7 �g — -
I S I 3 5 B C
y
'tF )' /Y/ � T
MAP
I 3SBB l
89.49• M 1027.1: o
G63.SS 859.5 % -- -- --J
1)LOp f
180.®
_ 300 o
20 l� q' •T
f /
^' /.43 Ac /./B,1aA.• c.
b
�Jp • �
.;
H 3 �
3-71 ti �•j, ,
W / �X •'
14 60
o Ip \
. •t. Y i
140.0
400 .OS Ac.
2)9.33
Ir O a • d /
4•t I fA 1
a O
4 K. 6.50 O
1� e9•49• E 22o •s
N 69•49•E 801.24 N I;Y ..... 94.30 N 69, y-/ >c.ft.J e�
0 '2r p4
T Ac.
91.35
I oee SEE MAP
I S I 3M D
3 - 64
cl,
0 0 0
w
'CSO• �
YO WX ACCOUA-fl
5 •8.3T•ta0E2 w 2
260.09 !S
2.p.e) Bsl ,+
358 zoo
1000 j
o �s9Ar. oet ?
w
� \ I
� I
"I
,.s
Ilt�a0. s1�=� -- .
ao �
_ _
Q
:. �=�:• cirr cam= �'i��,c� �z.¢.s.s�iic�G cc��i�.�ov
v
_
n�
t --
-" !.- t-S E
_ �:�__-__�:- -:i`J=•=�- -✓rix- :�tL-f:-
�Qr --- - -- -
-- -_- - - - ----- ---�. •�-r_
---_—=_-_- --- -= -=-:7- _------ I
-- _ - I _ - -- _•- --
,� t f �
���aw_�e�.....�..,Q=•-.�3.= �*ems
� r
I
E
I
t r
11 obil Oil Corporation 1711 13TH AVENUE S.W.
SEATTLE.WASHINGTON 98194
December 8, 1982
City of Tigard Planning Commission rfT
'P. 0. Box 23397 3 1582
Tigard, Oregon 97223
ATTENTION: Mr. Jeremy Coursalle CITY OF TIGARD
PLANNING DEPT.
S.S. #19-757
SWQ HWY. 217 AND GREENBURG
TIGARD, OREGON
Gentlemen:
It has been brought to my attention by Mr. Roger Belanich, the
adjacent property owner, that the city is considering changing the
existing commercial zoning on Mobil's property to an industrial zone.
We strongly object to any zone change on Mobil property on the NEC
Greenburg and Cascade Road, tax lot 100-lS1-35 BC, containing
approximately .68 of an acre. This property has always been com-
mercial since it was ar.nexed into the City of Tigard .
The service station is there to serve Hwy . 217 and Greenburg inter-
change. It is as close to the interchange as possible. Subject
property does not in any way relate to the Cascade Industrial Park
up the street.
Mobil did not receive any notification you were considering this
property in any way. Our Northwest District address is :
Mobil Oil Corporation
P. 0. Box 81146
1711 13th Avenue S.W .
Seattle, WA 98134
Any city business regarding this property should be sent to the
above address to the attention of Bob Minassian, Area Manager.
Very truly yours,
M IL OIL CO PORA I
i�
. Weaklend
Sr Real Estate Representati e
i
REW:maw
ID #5272A
14 December 1982 C1 ®F T11VA
RD
WASHINGTON GCT.JNTY.OREGON
Bob Minassian, Area Manager
Mobil Oil Corporation
P.O. Box 81146 RE: 1S1-35BC, 100
1711 13th Avenue S.W.
Seattle, Washington 98134
Dear Mr. Minassian:
This letter is in response to Mr. Weaklend's letter dated December 8, 1982
regarding the Mobil gas station on Greenburg Road in Tigard.
As you may be aware, the City of Tigard is required to update its comprehensive
plan and land use regulations,-Including a new zoning map, to comply -with state
requirements. Most of the properties in the city will retain their current
zoning classifications. _.After reviewing the record with X'r. Roger Belanich, we
realizedour error in indicating an industrial classification for your property.
(Even if the industrial designation was approved for the property, the current
use would not become nonconforming.)
I have attached maps which show the proposed commercial. zoning designation for the
Mobil gas station.
The City's notification requirements does not include sending separate notice to
every property owner, when the entire city map is under consideration; however,
we will send you notice of the public hearings that will be occurring in
January, if you want us to. Currently, these meetings are scheduled for the
18th, 20th and 22nd of January, before the Planning Commission.
If you have any further questions,. please contact 'me.
Sincerely,
i
Jeremy M. Coursolle
i
Associate Planner
CITY OF TIGARD
Enclosures.
r
I
f
I
12755 S W.ASH P.O.BOX 23397 TIGARD.OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 �•
I — s �• pw w�-••
00/
nnsa
ProPosa
`� �/ • /� / Y n� y" sem." -�� - - - -- - - - _ •• -
I •tee �• ... �•a b :•?EC CCVC.Col .
Cm
123-72
Ct••L:L W2 ____ • t
+50-9� _ - _� -•i••- -•-
,...� W
t...�.. . 1 r
.•a.- _ . ,.{.t4.-a•..i1 / 1Cx[::twt •�
o i� • q i 1 � (
71 fact
AREA TO BE ANNEXED
\
Kt • tot .. - '
— .�1 Y.at 1..I _• • 1� ,?J\-` f(!Yap IS
•> Ftl � / hl7•R.O
`\\ s Ia l
Itoo 1 �SQr ,:�� ,+ '1 ••
• Yllr �I.s � •
23-6
• cs 11•• •7f[L {OI ISIS!.• r _ _ —•....
too
24
,. !
CITY OF TIGARD ° 9200 ' - �", 1-
'' A R
• _ 23-62 �,,. •�
`{,: '' _ CITY OF T I GARD .'
- 23-66'-+ � ♦ .bs % },{710• !" /•• 11�J�/ t1
S ` I' t /••/ / I/I'{ •�•I 10.1
PROPOSAL NO. 1667
CITY OF TIGARD ! .� .�
ORD];NA24tE NO. AUNEXATION `� PC ��
..
'LCA 81 _ _ - — - — — —
..V
'•testi K. �}, M - :(- -'•'�.J-� -�'.tC:' g:. ...,�; ,
s r��l' iK T.:s�.SL f ,j.% i:.� ".ci d d.� I-i� i � �:~ "w,{L�-T¢��y,�T i-►G;Tn3"-.`.M^' ' 4; K K, 1..
t L.
tc;-,Ter Sf . �l�t' y�'. ,� c-:•cY ,:;�:. ' ' R.-. _ + t - •y iui13`�!' s 7(z,.
• ` -'� 4.
- Z4�r��•-c Tars � `y`j��-�;r•.'G�"+•.fT'•lt »it S tet" -{ �-+`+t'�,'ii
7.
'J�.'c�i.C7N�YRiJ J v 1 �9,98.101 206)'t7W4XwT/ L.} - ?-• ..
71
_. .- _ sal � -:�';y�' _ "�kxi�� a.f..�V' -� l 1Y:VV � •t�-�•'- -
Ofw'S11`+��� *Ri:ar.�?Li:•?yt�s%-~-== t•.:J��-sa.�,Ac_
D
DEC 2�' 19a2
CITY. OE TIGARD
PLANNING DEPT.
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL AND CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
DEC 2`i' i982 1�
In the Matter of )
I IGARD
PROPOSED CHANGE FROM TIGARD ) PETITION IN SUPPORtMY U NG DEPT.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP OCTOBER 1582 ) RETAINING PRESENT C-Pe;:Wntk
PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION HEARINGS )
EXTENDING SIX LOTS SOUTHWESTERLY )
OF GREENBURG ROAD and FIVE LOTS )
NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH )
SIDE OF GREENBURG ROAD, )
Lots 1 through 6, inclusive, KINGSTON )
ADDITION; and Lots 100 and 200, Tax )
Map 1S 1 35DC
The undersigned owners of the above designated lots hereby record the
opposition of each and all of them to the following proposal under consideration
by the City Planning Commission:
(1) Change from present Commercial-Professional comprehensive plan and
zoning designation to MED, Medium Density Residential. The said lots are gen-
erally now, and have been for years past, devoted to Commercial-Professional pur-
poses, although some tracts have also served for individual residential purposes.
(2) Those tracts lying northerly and abutting upon Greenburg Road for
several blocks northwesterly from Center Street, as well as the lots lying between
Center Street and Pacific Highway West, for many years past, have been devoted to
Commercial-Professional or commercial uses, and for ready identification, some of
the particular uses are enunciated:
(a) Oregon Bank;
(b) Bissett Medical Clinic
(c) Leonard and Margaret Davis Dental Building;
(d) Center Court;
(e) Frahler Electric;
and on the south, Greenburg Plaza.
(3) Center Street, thougziout the expanse in question, and Greenburg
Road from its intersection with Highway 99W northwesterly, are utilized as
collectors and arterials and are not suited within that area for residential
uses. Moreover, the proposal to change from the present Commercial-Professional
to Medium Density Residential cannot be justified from any rational outlook.
OWNER: DESCRIPTION OF OWNERSHIP:
(Tax Lot or Lot and Block No.)
Address:/
Address: 6�
_ `
Address: l� .� ,
Address:
Address: gJ�p� ��ti / 1�-7712 .O�e+-�-�
7 4x
?Address: /Y�O �Gv i �/VVL
1
J
+3
> n' "- � 11 ` {t -:a f ..1,� r - t � .� > +. � � � r'• wr llr�,C �ysAMA P
1 C k t t i t y f 4: /• a' w, *J'F .E i _ .d� .f' fJt,Il Yl•/ (� k/
.. VVVV ���aa/// s. «,:•'L 66}}...,♦./'.
' -r t:.� of t._ +i .W:FI r -�. +; .Zt. �: -r q f`�.,:r•�:s' S �P',E x -� r .. '" � ` i } . :E� :�� a y.? qs`K,��� )� ._
4+ '• • 3A. u�"F•L.C'-tRrl/J,
jf'j: �� .� i 1 Z.t- �I>;C �..�.r{�•,, �r�.v y�]_-. -x _tel�7�t:C .. J•. _ � t ,r,. r'+'r-J.-..�.�� rt r �'�.',��� •t' ..
�t �, QC+t' •r+3�. tai:.
-+'ry- .f.�.�,�xi.�'+3-'v t •'s � !,.r �'��z5 :c,�.. k-.; •..Pi y-t•`�,+ r ,.rY�;•�?,r >;.. .O �� j • '+,^ °:=i� y;.ny # _ ti:._ _
�Sf �q �` i i �' F y4 Y -�.a`+ n ''�,r,�t �olt/�rs'�Sr a i { y.• ��.`N t.:
.�,j:. X.t ^.Ea .':Yt�1r.r it "' .ft,,•5 S7- i - '�� � {
.. .'�-�..rr:a.• s *- r 'tm-::2 s:71n-� l3, y.S,- y. .j„c a k. r.,�, �+i�1.gr .7`,:.'�:Y• �' _:�'
�y' J •'.?,_s't'i. '£ - *..i:^ .uv; 3;i..:.3t:...'t•� _2• >L� �)• � +- _* ..�.t�=• lrsL .�ri:::Y{h S :L�-i•{t.- 4:a>::+ •..'�r ,.5-. 'FYt=+.:.i> 5`G. L=. Yf yt�,.na .'.�/' _
S''�' * t'r=Et,• y-'z,-+': - R cY, {_�•..,a+ r^'S•. b, :a,,.r .n �' - r xx'F c.. :s:3..,r,
^r >�xf;;�i....: • ,.s-�s f �!^t r•1 .3�<t�'� �%�"�'� .��:}as :•R'�M >Y ;t?.::•r ri;o r 1�% r% �.3 ti '�ver s.r� �,`. ���},��,, ��'
a.•S.r�:'�.•a.«e,I,+}^}?rLrr�t�},'�:-a�t.Y�9>Y�.�'.?t��_=x>3R:2.•-t'.e�. �,a r,i,f,_��,.�.*_qr;J•:•.sa•4.,:••'.`r'i".y. c.�s-grya`c.�.�,i,'h1t1,.+{..'�'r,{,:�DS•�S1r, �-te-,�r•7�._"�a-.t:,,f4>;y.y?.+.,,_a-'1f.S�;'--3•C�,+.../C.,. isM�lsn.,,xRZ�"`:lia�oq.{ft�.'4f�Ct ry§L�4,s,.i.r+S:i'a.t rId T'4-iFs1-�.•ttr"t`=sT-''.'.crit.y*F'l•t'-krt•.,•yr�}.-Jy'wr+sriLn'zC�r ..tb,;h�:.ta'.bk.�.[b
tF tVi
_i!f . • +�- � r :a 4ta�E.y'3•tC'.s�?�g't,w:L'+,=�.r:p!.'T�t--b-4 an-r:'l^j'3�sL.d,y�4s-�.YY..'s7�-E_'1i".'rT•:en.y•�S• �'t`.e4_=y��i`:1''s+�a.tsiG±++ytq.r?J..:t-�'^y'.ie>•�h'l.j'S'�ti~�Yt•r'.,"�rt.srS:�s.:.�,+-r"Stit.•:•ei
^Me...
•-
di��•'a�-i..�i.���r�r4a�-,tf* Y;a' w7- `}IL3 T,���� WON
r� 3' i:ct*M � 'ff'a..'� ,y
_..c4- r` .: x .,r.;'-r-� 4�' ::t -t- •li -. ? _ --+C'^'-
. i,S,t..i-..? tF
-r^.3.t�s` .:A , 9 Y-rr'�r�. `-Si .a,�., +�-"M'W 'b•i"4�.J' +Y.,,� >t t: -_
�:Yi,iT+A.d•SA, - „ac'`La> •.�� T��,6��.f:.�✓ 'ftl.%.�:n.� ,b 7--1=tet- 4 n' `p Y' 1s `�a� ;'L'. �Y�irt:_>-`_."1` `f` .r l 5 a �.. „��3�.x;.
CC 1. }•r. '���•K=�.. T�r, lht.e�1 �-�7� -. �.r �r-.'7 f s t f 'SK�»'sq`�+�j(r`� ? w'�
^vir}i t:�qa-�•>.� .a �:�'.s. � _ s - • - yrl�,3y..s7,r�n ey.-�.L t�„� � ..a-eir�t�w.err. j3r� 1� ��`�c.f'.1.z�..yer
ILL:; �'� - _ �•�•#,'#y +. r`�Z'+'s. .x.�u3 "�c t"C rte•' ' z'''"s `1'�-y :1"ai'.'1S 3r1i,.� �2. ".+ ic-_ -*�-r
Yvyb•& fit.' rc.9 ti. -Y` t -?t[xnal+r'+ orf.+ -y'''`�' ': r' ��.'sf•.''E ��. ...c - -�d� �.^r r�''+,r .m
}-��3 •_-,.z>n ?'v-� � 4 � s �' �` ... r rte}`v>•s 1+, s, ��,, � -
'+ yy "< T�'�t*..0-ar��+rr � `4'�r+ ,e?,Gi pc '•�'y c't� �' a' +• �s��_'.�_
s -
C
�j�� �` -�' w• � wd• - '+�`;r2Sd�I+�p++ll�C[��^^'�' zeta S••• 4'•�... rRl� �,".y�"3���.:?�;�5� '.sT-1 ������
`{Y.��b._. _ a���a�r>: � "' _ 2.u._,c,• 3 >.�rrx�� rk '�J �>..�c.,�t4�+ +.� �ba.'�s- tt +-,-a' "-��
•.y.vim:-iia • w.. E •*-e_� s�� -i y czt�y.r — £. : y,,,`z:ivi�C�. t�"C ,e + L:n t'L`.:.^ F3 r i s=• Y 5 rt .,,a, zS ~R.�.�.�� -if 4 {N� L...ry. `..r�s.ti -s J� rr4.o..^..y r - _ -�-7 't`-!
e y'- Y- 4., �ri:.i •`•`.f+.`1.5 ', F. *,4r..a 3 t.'�' '�"•' � r '�p� y
f �s�ct.f'c--n - i. +.a.>+ at'%a.a x ic,a .,c.-. .�V<o•`• akk..�,�;�s�2��, < .,,�
�r �++ �: ar"�s 47,. w .y":f1L-fe/' _"v � r v-%� JJ. ��� _Lc � •��'->r.,.... y
'n va:w -`'-F>•'t.-sY. _ �.r't'J a� 'j 'S��Pa±�� �•R � �.' tt • ••t_ �t' �� �r�T-'�,�.rr�1..Y1�''•'i 1"rx�„�"�
LA n ,..l..... - _^:f;' �•= �' 4.. i?rf_ah r -- -+ .z y _ ie Z -'E�.r a-. f... _ -
•�,t� y.- -."• F%<ti.�!s` `• �SC'�s ri� ra�r•-k 3�;;: y�-'iyi+t r x r�►!�”` _ �' �''��`: �-.
Y
- Y• "�
� • I
—a
- � o ^► t�.,��65� Fi ' r�..ats4
.t��'fr`iu i+ �Y4.C+.+}.+{=� �. _„ .i ��aS{ '4t••t.��' �y'.�+...�'`¢'�+''+ `.sf��:,: X+i` ,q�� +,wtY�.��i7 -rrEtT��.q."--��-, *C�+.: -
:'�3-,, d•'� a' _ - +i. •;` '-;k+-,° ,,,c. t,} `�V''`•"S^3��t3: a�' :t'., �:
i.a-�! -- '3:_ 1. s a � ".sr i ttj.ra;{, f � .,a. ST ,wa_. •>�;1. rt kt" ��,.�' t.S ,7'r. Z
...•_.s.`k � ;� '` •t. "i: •L-.-.ria�YAr-�cc ��.1+. .:. 'mak.-• r +S._.
�stsl'f �� •t F• 1 ��i-ci_A c �•St,1:roF�}{a;�' -tntr ate •_
r �� it s� ,h � �u}� ay ali` iy� t t •t
T{ ,:} 7 •� 'ti.- } a t- d F „Jx�>� V=7�y`2�'_ 5 {- 'EF r.,� r a:, a
' ,ds' x r.MR f,�t•`v t a �� 1 -,�', r .� r. {{ .,t?'
700
U
JA.N 55 19 8 -�
CITY OF
TIGARD
/
PLANNING DEPT•
/
p�Ul G1L�1 t�Kl \ i jJr
to '
"0
• O -J
APPROX. 290*CAST OF
SW COR-GRA,tAI.I �• K '�-
VVYi
O.l C. NO.52
CR0�452
IL
6 yy/1 •c t•
oro `
a
��,yr
Se : % � O X99' C. CE
�`'Y✓ 700 ` 1202
Q,o / `89AC,
C.S. NO.6163
CO
• 1" •� -
J. S 74. Zg6 a %.P
O
JO_ 7
z/ - -
8 0 0 •..• ' �•`a.6
693
• 3,t,L �C •
/60Ac. N vim/ / 'o - - - - - - -� - - -
,SSS/797,; \ 5 .9� :S'C
1+7.29
o
EE MAP (C.S•No.II987) /
1S 1 -25C /e •r
1201 .aY
.40Ac.
900
o .55Ac.
z
7 _ _ "
1 ''~ 1001
17A
c.c J• � �i.
a ��
4
:-rIRA
`
MINE apes
Hill ts Joe
11 OR
IN one
Pr
® W
ONE ■■
� � 1
1! •0
lwn
,. �..- ■ 111
V two
•
"
t i illi" � � ;� I��T*moi �. . !•
• / Vito .
•fes C. t� tt�0� 1 ;i. '
Ull
0
�.., ��3� rte\ �'� , �'_L1.� 1'� �`���:•I���_� ,•_�!+,=moi
Ab
�y�,� ►. i POP % �� ".� � • � ,'moi- �j � � '
``� iT=:�! . �•��.s►_ 91!x' 3 ����. .�.,� irla
��■�
w.'". . .
�4^ IJ99�C
OR
r-+ 2-
January 7, 1983
Mr. Jeremy Coursolle u
Associate Planner JAN 1 19 QJ
City of Tigard
CITY OF TIGARD
PLANNING DEPT_.
Dear Mr. Coursolle,
We, Mr. and Mrs. K. Paul Dahl of 11665 S. W. Greenburg
Road in Tigard (Tax Lot 2600) at this time respectfully
ask that in the comphrensive replanning of Tigard our
property be changed from R-5 to light commercial. This in
our feeling would take in small business or doctor and dental
offices.
We feel that this zone change would fit well into
existing properties. There are properties within a two
block radius that have been changed from residential to
business.
The properties that have businesses in them now are as
listed:
( 1 ) THE HOUSE ON POOH CORNER at 11935 S. W. Greenburg Rd.
( 2) THE TIGARD CLINIC OF NATURAL THERAPEUTICS & PREVENTIVE
MEDICINE at 8945 S. W. Center Street
( 3) THE COMMAND PERFORMANCE at 11895 S. W. Greenburg Rd.
Please send us a written reply on whether this requested
change isiaccepted or rejected.
Thank you, �1
Mr. and Mrs. K.P. Dahl
RECEIVED '
:7t9azd Mnta JAN 1 r 1983
Acyie,Xtiuv��0���'
Of
/�� /� (''�7/� j / ��/CITY OF TIGARD
7 - Vatuta Ji2E2a1aF_uELci and ��'LEVEntLVEc/�IEJLCCnE
i$aa�, l� c90g722� • 503-620-2535
S945 _Scu" ecntz% cSticct ® � aN_`
�k=TRtX:�
15 January 1983 r
City of Tigard
Planning Commission Re: Zone changes
Tigard City Hall
Tigard, Oregon 97223 Down-zoning Center street C-P to Med .
ATTN: Jerimiah Coursdale {
Planning Director
Dear Sir:
On 14 Jan 83 at 11 :00AM a call was placed to your office, with a Diane (secretary)
advising that citizens were not able to see you, therefor a letter is being written
to express my feelings as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment of the United States
Constitution. Let it be so ordered this document be read into the minutes of the
meeting (in my absence) , to become a permanent part of such record, as provisions
guaranteed under the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, in concert with the
Oregon State Constitution are involved, in addition to other issues. -------------
The property located at 8945 SW Center was purchased in good faith in 1977, having
advised my Realtor to find commercial professional property in this area. The zoning
allowed for Light Commercial and Professional Offices.
ADVANTAGES for Having zoning left- INTACT :
1 . Close oroximity to existing commercial/professional use occupancy structures
2. Close proximity to Hwy. 99 (Pacific Hwy.) -approximately 200 lineal feet
a. noise level 1977 considerable making area mildy unfi'. for residential
b. noise level 1983 increasing ( 100,000 vehicles per day pass on Hwy-99)
making the area more unsuitable for housing/residential
c. noise level 1985-1990 plus will render the area tQ'o noisy for quiet
enjoyment of real property when used aj� a residence
DISADVANTAGES for Down Zoning of this C/P area
1 . The writer spent Thousands of dollars to upgrade the existing structure
into an office.
2. The investment should be considered for safe-guarding as the investment was
made in good faith
3. This investment, as well as any investment should be considered in a positive
nsidered as a just return �on ec investment
light- with future appreciation co .
4. Down-grading this property location will not only lower any appreciation
it will lower the value of the property for the future, BECAUSE--
the traffic noise and pollution are increasing by the year!
r;
Tigard,City of Planning Commission 16 Jan 83 page 2 of two pages
fY
5. The area between Center street and Hwy 99 is ill fit for residential, will be ,
commercial etc. when developed, with the opposite side of the street to remain =
commercial and Professional.
Article V of the U.S. Constitution so states, that no person-- shall be deprived
of life, liberty or the process of law: nor shall private property be taken for public J
use without co^:pensation. Article IV involves the necessity of "Due Process of Law".
"Fundamental ideas found in both the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments is a Restraint, w
Upon the Federal and State Governments, respectively.
The clause affords protection against arbitrary and unfair procedures in judicial
or ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS which affect the personal and property rights of a
citizen, requiring a notice of a trial etc. etc. '
CONCLUSION:
In my opinion, any arbitrary administrative changes to the Commercial/Professional
zoning on my property and to the property owned by the others involved would not
only involve a loss of future value, it would require any future owners to have to
live in the structure located at 8945 SW Center and listen to the INCREASE in noise ;
plus smell the steady INCREASE in pollution and fumes from the Pacific Hwy.
on a 24 HOUR BASIS- as the zone change Calls for Med. Density i.clising Units!
The drafters of this document humbly beg all involved to leave the zoning as it
exists- the property WAS PURCHASED IN GOOD FAITH.
Respectfully submitted,
R.M. Finley, N.D. �I Nellie J. Fi In ey,y G i;
cc:; Mayor Bishop- City of Tigard, Oregon, and others
i
I hereby acknowledge receipt of this document _ , Jan 83 _ AM
s
i
3
i
t�}
F
€g
K:
RECEIVED
cy,� X�xtv�,o��
�i 9a zc� ��i rzi c JAN 1 9 1983
s7
o CITY OF T(GAR�
�, - �J V REI.LZLLL �iZEZQ�ELt�GC1 RYLd �ZEVEYL�LVE�EdGCL12E
5945 e�(_W ecntet .sheet (_7C9azd, (9%r90rt 97221 • 503-62o-2538
C74 -_
19 January 1983
City of Tigard
Planning Commission
Tigard City Hall
Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Our Letter of January 15, 1983
Zone Changes - Down zoning Center
ATTN: Jerimiah Coursdale C-P to Med
Planning Director
Dear Sir:
Please include the following data and information as an extension to our
15 January 1983 letter -especially applicable to Page 2, Paragraph 2
regarding Fundamental Ideas, Judicial and Administrative Proceedings, etal:
The Superior Court of the United States in Lynch v Household Finance Corp. ,
405 U.S. 538552 in 1972 said:
"The dichotomy between personal liberties and property rights is
a false one. Property does not have rights. The right to enjoy
property without unlawful deprivation, no less than the right to
speak or the right to travel, is in truth, a personal right whether
the property in question be a check, a home. or savings account.
It is, in fact, a fundamental interdependence which exists between
the personal rights to liberty and personal rights in property-
Neither could have meaning without the other. It has been found
unreasonable and unconstitutional under all due process clauses,
that restricts the freedom of a person to make use of their private
property.
I'm confident, . too, that you will be interested in the following excerpt
from the "CITIZEN'S GUIDE TO INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION
OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA." It was prepared by the U. S. Senate Sub-
committees on constitutional rights of the committee on the Judiciary,
Ninety-fourth Congress: Second Session, from the Fifth Edition. It is
available from the U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.
The excerpt is from page 15. Quote:
"Fundamental Ideas found in both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments is a
Restraint, upon the Federal and State Governments, Respectively.,
The clause affords protection against ARBITRARY and UNFAIR PROCEDURES in
Judicial or Administrative Proceedings which affect the "PERSONAL AND
PROPERTY RIGHTS OF A CITIZEN". Notice of a hearing or trval which is
timely and adequately informs the accused of the charges against him is a
basic concept included in "DUE PROCESS". The Opportunity to present
evidence in one's own behalf before an impartial judge or Jury, to be
AME10
— w�eyarar�w' r�
�i9Qzd l i,ntc
�cya� Xcatv,�o��
7 �J V Qt�t'LQL Jf2E2Q I�2EiLtLLTs QI2d �ZEVEnECVEEdGCGnE
�i�rMF \ .ir�J�4V 5445 o2EnEEt eSttrzt • 349atc, (!):Egorz 9722j • 503-620-2535
Page 2
City of Tigard Planning Commission
January 19, 1983
presumed innocent until proven Guilty, by legally-obtained evidence and to
have the verdict supported by the evidence presented are other rights repeatedly
recognized within the protection of the DUE PROCESS CLAUSE.
The DUE PROCESS CLAUSES of the F-§fth- & fourteenth Amendments also provide other
basic protections whereby the State and Federal Governments are prevented from
adopting Arbitrary and Unreasonable Legislation or Other Measures which would
violate individual rights. Thus CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ARE IMPOSED on
Governmental Interference with Important INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES -- such as freedom
to, enter into contracts, to engage in lawful occupation, to marry, and to move
without unnecessary restraints".
"The Fifth Amendment requires that, WHENEVER GOVERNMENT TAKES AN INDIVIDUAL'S
PROPERTY, THE PROPERTY ACQUIRED MUST BE TAKEN FOR PUBLIC USE, AND THE FULL VALUE
THEREOF PAID TO THE OWNER. Thus, the Government CANNOT TAKE PROPERTY FROM ONE PERSON
SIMPLY TO GIVE IT TO ANOTHER. However, the Supreme Court has held that it is
permissible to take private property for such purposes as Urban Renewal, even
though ultimately the property taken will be returned to private ownership, since
the taking is really for the benefit of the community as a whole. PROPERTY DOES
NOT HAVE TO BE PHYSICALLY TAKEN FROM THE OWNER TO ACQUIRE FIFTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION.
IF GOVERNMENTAL ACTION LEADS TO A LOWER VALUE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY, THAT MAY ALSO
CONSTITUTE A "TAKING" AND THEREFORE REQUIRE PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION. Thus, the
Supreme Court has held that the disturbance of the egg-laying habits of chickens on
a man's poultry farm caused by the noise of low-level flights by military
aircraft from a nearby air base, lessens the value of that farm and that, accord-
ingly the LANDOWNER IS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION EQUAL TO HIS LOSS".
Thank you for considering these U. S. Constitutional Issues which are backed by
the Oregon Constitution.
Respectfully submitted, /� t
/rA s4 .�� fs� • E1
7
R. M. Finley, N. D. Nellie J. inley
1
CC: Mayor Bishop, City of Tigard, Oregon, and others.
I hereby acknowledge receipt of this document , _ Jan 83 P.M.
i
RECEIVED '`
y_.
JAN 1 1983 `
R.a.Grays co. CITY OF TIGaRD
R
WCOr15TrUc-ric3 1 '
January 18, 1983
Tigard Planning Commission
Tigard City Council
RE: Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District Revisions - N.P.O. #2
Dear Sirs :
The two members of N. P.O. #2, Mary Keski and Bruce Clark, held
a meeting with the North Tigard Business Association for the pur-
pose of reviewing the above-referenced documents . It was the F
concensus of those present that N. P.O. #2 should recommend that ..
properties along Cascade Street should be designated as industrial
on the proposed plan map. The same designation should be applied
to the industrial area between Fanno Creek and the railroads along
Tiedeman Street .
p
It was further concluded, based upon the proposed zoning district ;
permitted uses listing, that all of these subject properties were r
best zoned as industrial park, rather than light industrial.
It appears that all of the existing uses fit under the proposed
listing of permitted uses in the industrial park district. Thus ,
existing uses are protected, while a broad range of new development ,
with appropriate landscaping, can be accomodated in conformance
with the city' s economic development strategies .
In a separate issue, the group discussed Mr. Ed Lilly' s property f
located at the south-westerly quadrant of the intersection of
Greenburg Road and N. Dakota Street. Group concensus was that
the property is not appropriate for residential use due to the
proximity of high traffic volumes and the limited size of the
parcel. It is the group ' s recommendation that a commercial/pro-
fessional designation be placed on this site with appropriate
landscape buffering between the apartments located to the south
and with appropriate access/egress restrictions .
ti
Yours truly,
Bruce P. Clark
\V b k
P. O. B O X 2 3 5 1 6 PORTLAND, OREGON 97223 P HONE (5 0 3) 6 3 9-6 1 2 7
' E .
i In }t
t' 6 'r -at L a ' -2'Fa w•fY"�.:�� .rl•f i� -.t J.
it t. 'v� L •• rvy 7:n."�'yy y.Yr y. -t' s ._rte l.,sTf i.YQ�.L ry '_' t 4 s eL " f.
ra1•�,. T. J �. v c S[..��ar�^,.•L,i�fr• �i r _ a s. r C•c i ) tir.•.�..�
t L f, r � t _Y �3�t �,f�?ik' ` �1 �• a 3 Y.)
�4=' i "° -f �--.��� i.S c} �i� Q+;• 7a -c:T:�.3 ° afi s+t - c-� �). A s r yn r � :F� r sct
`•� '�:J_ .ek.if•)`7. f-x' L�' �c'..�� �. ?•"- _r e} .:_ rel � r rs1 �-��iti-`c� 'S .•', �; r r 7 ,. ,
Y� 2;vCj` r) Y✓ "- i r i ":: r,.T ti t 41 a Su-.'S YY 'lY s :>> J'a µ, ._' •
r.a.. 'T. t �• e -'C�. .3_•ii"r. ;if,,,�- '•'Yn� S •'-•, r 1 ,s,- .s a;� z -. .� -: $1- .- r 1• 4-74w
% � s'vkt',yly7q�..�ra!S�,•�d..•f. yr r-y3 fiy �= 1. s� Yia � ht. t-: `" est :r:r;.CV-f."t�• -,r• rcy y t`d7:r -uyF', •L, .t ► ` '1 KI- - --
�'4+r aS'ri,-)'`'t.�9'Z rJyf `" ♦ _ ''I!;: r -r, .;Z�.-[_ •'¢ .R.{^I+vs '' ` t4-M yk'" 5r"s -..-•v r' .
,,.X p'+; eat`. FJ y,i.s -9_twP Y�. -- �:S r �i '�.� ..M�ti.�ry�$Yr v'')' R++�. r4 "•n�',�: .t'ti1y r."..rf�y':f-�3'i�',�;
:.r�•"" -�� ._F.:y •i, yi•.•c�-j.�y,rry-�'•;..' } p ++,.n..'T2*`7' �",- r'.:�JSN,. i2r"'�. .'Y. ay,ty., sfr fS.i „ay .4 frrk ,r .rt�.��.i
s. �:,• P1 ry.. rt, .�..� n--•�'s7 i`-tt' .#• • .a�'� '�.`�,•„ �y•'1f �'RY fir-'+i-•:i�`i +. rT✓_..:,.tix4�.
rr
i X;,:..1 P{.� <h bu t }x�.r: r rv..: 7. � ..g � : ��._4.9�ti-t„3 .rl' _r �^ � �rY +a� �et ,,.�•
yf" rxt t,t�,,e�t b it r2' d�J'' $ �, +mac# ash , �,: rS. 1r� ' Ltd c i.: X04 +r T. ✓
:,� v�''>�eri[�ix1�• �- ��' � ��sd'w 'fy .,yazr, tSy14Sy] i1 •C.. - 'firlF � r �' ;'i -Yr'..}�C•�t' _�•-r:
rrf� � �;�ti.f.'3�;- ...'.`'a[ , .\ - 4 s)Y`f'3v ?d ti t•''r�, � i ,zr 'K' � ..
s -tx�E; !+� :S. �-t '�'+��� �.. <'4 s- 'y.r N����F e p: �� r•r .y ��.o j i y ,s z r _rat.. p T.
� ..P• � � -'•'.:. �. :.r- �a-..eJ•ya�•us�.!•_'a},r a,E.j:-' � tea':-^ra.:3.1"f. S,.-'9 's'�-••�'': s
`Y[ ny.l:_s4 r xby ;j-s,,,'a`3^'l �)' b y_ y. � •Na��,t.rsr....ry�; �-a... c.i ,rzTn•' 1�:-t `I �=Har' f... � ..) ire?#' s'�:?%s"'r. � -K'. _
a ',}, �'•..th•..� . .� -'»- , n' �' .:' t•z..r..r rt.z{..._2-. t!`f... h. a'rs•. ar-t> _.c• osK.-.k ars- ,g.. ?e .
�,..: r:�-rla 1, S71... e a -,..+3t.. } • .J '7a ..,r._ YSr' {�y �Cr n !'1',,-,. r3.'"x:.. Y .,.^sr i,..%Y .✓� v+�'
a k4 yr^+ i p*' 1-1 �.-ti.r pa-•- �7 KrS�r- y�� elf F:>i - s:;�J::s: �ti�t,•��' a f.t.+' 4r 1• 1-rr':.kyA....7`s12k'. ,5!•L`� a i t Y1 mac.. S y y- A r
p..S +s . yi.-''.4"C+�. 1. '•' r .YX a gek: F Ss�� .� xMY•� lc$ rti.rfj.;' 4.Y t _ f;,;,�-e,-. ..f•J-t q""'r`" y.a,L s s-:4 +',•4.::
a
+�r•�'r7T�-.���},�,+�''#. ?sr,:d .���ii�k af•.rwes: J 3�'i.rt. �-t"t�FfY i,� `r°r: G .;i:•.L '�fa" •y. �t��,f �`r�sw i :xi C s�f �5 NR � j..,. ••".fi'y u.-
_1�\41t)Y_ .T .`. 'C. ,4J. "„' .�r+:C�m.i f 4 _ y�"4•!i zH_„rr .Cl:t�int•.•,+'t:?:. :x..• c_-.:`"v__ r r ,�:k 3
_'{a - M^. 'P'�as'c�� .+':4.- 3. .,_+�,' {'' {i:'r.y t iS�S-� � 4.p..e`:Z.•e�_k�Y` `y .�'-7+. '�:
;.,/.�`,-•Mi. "s=7 ' ..y -i;2:tea' ';c.:., _t `�a1� -i, x'?' ri� ai t;} C:f.:.,•C'�`'?�a::_.. :a�� "Mp ro.;� yi �Ci•+'1 �,•�_� i ✓- -
:r'.tN�%I'�:b .rJf�._ r+ �.=r;. ���_, .a�••�st_3�_-= �'L?'..`-- S'�,.r�c�T. •� :.wr,a5' .��.�� •F :�k4�'ii JY�„•::.�s�n`�1 ti� r� x�'i��`1 t.� sr�' �" '#_-,...���
f i 1�•'+'� /E``-'taY'�3%f:!Y.r��'-.Z�. •�,F>'03'^v�{i�- �•y 1sv.Si i-A� �'�"'n.�'.a r r�3"^fi'�•�l.�k�_,'7-•R1-.Sy�Sr.`.[r-..�}-.�'�` {" .:� a - ,,s'a r. -1 y C- - i, 3'-'yi:
j "_r. �. a t - -.ei ��.. g K 4• ♦ a- fTR 1 y � r � a - a "`:. r a ��
y .��:-a• "r„5'•='' yrs - n e. ,,r !- '"'� ...r +..,••`y •�.< �� t.� � 3:A +-.r k-r-' -.
� _ ����r{y'�^yC`&.r'1..� t� � r•s �.,i,.s. r, t„ u�' h•v �
r�t�'- r v 'fit?_'!• - - e`� t`f t„ Y' '`L� "+ 'y,; �sfe�•LLa� v�'+`'-r+i£ ��S. +J •r. � f �3•:A r d S .+�-��.
'-
'may�}i) i its .s � s '-i/ -irery t•}C(r .'��'SLKIn�R ni y,Ti ,�_�-�.1' ,cj� L _ �,. .t u f al i � �, :i,.,•.
- �%J er-as•.y-:� -€!. Y.r• •"{':l � .,>t�:,�.� � s .t� 7brY 4 {e3 ---1�-r Y4 -ar i^ �,;.•5.
,y_r. .::st•9'a��cs_-�:3SL,,.� .t'. •�. .•�• :'�*1...��.',J��a��,y_:�.. yam+l�f�y��-Crt ��,t��.frf1.�r•7f�''.+�,'2p is-.r. x � -Y�{.y-skaY° s � _� ,fir+
��;L.ta�rp,�&�--• �'��y __ �t� -`.. '�� '�•�:9. S �`?n `z.a�' r��� � �;,���ecF r�: } ., y x r�r , �:3 r �=•�-a.
•'l:# ~A,f'".. •�)�0 _ 'L'• }s,_-E�_ixy, •YY ``y..}ri.,�r rr7 .•N 1.t�T� r f t. - '.i Y..` Y.... c i
- F 4✓ t+ x t r t v ry i 4
s ;ax !'eoy w` "j._ "
a' t wt's' r
�:�-. e r� yr•••.. ._s. y_ '!ate"., S rs
��'al"•`'Y"3F,%LY'� '•.�•�:r .>sc�•x•'f`r4'yiaii?r.3 a,1,�7.i + �. ' �' rw �15� r ((�� -F, --i'-s:�K("��afy:- -
r1j Yryc xY' •�• 'P _ • - - • .; •.-s � - S_• �1`r!^'__•t"cf 4}.=43ry� rarzJ"Lr. ",.".^�
.ta 3wt�y�x�.•C4 r •; 3 1`.' ..l h1-.-. y
F C•-�Lr:�,�-v4 �3'.s.� T.. :�• 'ava�-r.•�F� a' -•�-.c`"-.�F?s'aF.+` �'`i•s�.'"�,t��c�'r�`lS�•Cr�x'�,f�+r,�:�x m�.,� � �-t, � -,5: 4 4t �:x ��.� V�,j �-_
) ��tl:-.�hs `�L��,,-� ��_- ..?� s,:.,,_;, ar•� ,.5:. E2, , { ^� r�li��*_ r.�,�"�r 1 ,Y� 4 `.'p• `.ti;.r.i:T '�.4,1� .. ,� :.t. . �:,i�•'r ` _ t
^4 ��lr-•'''x�. "C ,-`: r"' �S•Cy'�a •".u�-�oi'tap'�'y�':��a'�i _:.�: �+r:--�r-i`�P"t,-:'ta?".t ia'� 3�` itt -r. f. •-.a -ems `'r G 7.a lxix.� ¢� _
':_.a,�J .G•.�r �,-.saw "�.r t�- ^.X YiS-'! 2:�VfG ��if5-�sf�'b,�e' `f2? L!•`FC+rs3.'� ;F r.� -� .'1'j -fir•' yr7,.!? �•' s..,L"c^'�rf.'i C '!..A..r'y'a .
�...i. 7rvi Y �+.aJ""S>_ir�"`e�Y^ �� �r . t-•'-• �,t�: tom- '�"�t ,.}� w� i.
���• `.'�J��` S'"d-�'i J� ��`E:•,s�'_' •:f.. *4 '.• ..• . ••s • f L rf'••f`:��i. V''Z ....M:.•.. .+*-
_y-:� 1 •SJ _ •97
- :' drS' •��� � `F`'��/iZ •..4.• •t:� x x S� �r =,c�r'�r �f. �t�` �, w" �.�,���'�'r'�'
Y •Y
moi.) ,tr ,,`r -t.�-<.. `.. rat{sh.1..� ,9a.. L '�f�r -'r��E� i /.'-'I+`3 a a_w .�. ^ie r"i '.. �s-.."' •�,e ttr,'4 r'.`:g'
�{P�.y^� `+',a�a.r��s-f;�.: ;i�' '� •;r"t:'�f .��.I,�x'=..t to k g,E��•#„R •ft'.. "�v'yr 4+ �.i ��:.'c'c���a.. _��L h i�:�n5 _ �>`'1�:�`��� e�'tw,
•F+s.W'aiY%a�Ls'' �t r}ave_ C n,
�n�i
�•,'X :t �. �-t - `t t r �• � :(1. �,y,�.Y•_4.S_ y.. L. -t �` 'SA. z r ••n t.T•..
.r-• tits-r '-�`�s.-w��'r'�.• '-t'. {'Fii•••.- ,•e"� -- t�� C� a :-'Gy ?� �•. #""`�..' �,Y - 3
�, - �-,�,a� stG{�x.(�'trn yasirha:1�� ,t�•` +� �y1GP r •i�tr..�cu�'•k'rYY:.i°t`�c r ti � ��
-:s'fi '� +Tas'•S 1�re f. F.�+ r ya. �S Y k(4,y��- 1 !rr•1 i ya's > ':nWft -` �T �.
,�� � -ct�ry, SL•r, ?a,•. ssr�rr♦ •'S�- ':yvcaY�..,�r I } �:�r fr
�104.
i>_l�� " 3�'�' .:t� �{j,�..`�c±�.y .N••�-��-?'f' •rr, �3
' s•;ls•, :`�= i1�' o.:! �...9 li_S u'd•-rr >�_r .a •t�},.'.r'd+•:t '. +-� w� ,','J _•µse 4�`,r� ± y. ' r,•.+a_ t.rfJ.''A;l.::�.`:-
' �....^:r...��`.ZS�s k r �. .r*: t- Z �.'r•*r.!`�e�-f1r h. ,,i n t.t:1`T �.. v��S �r -- 4% •� -
"Tri.-.�a�•_ _" _ ��-— �� ---- -
a�wstQete �� �T®se®nam®®
ROOUEBROOK CORPORATION
^January
3, 19
Mr. Jeremy Cousolle- _
Associate planner
City of Tigard -
12755 S.W. Ash 7
Tigard, Oregon 97223
RE. property located at intersection of '!'iedeman and Greenburg
Road
Dear Mr. Cousolle:
We are one of the properties recently annexed into the
City of Tigard. We wish to have our property changed from medium
L
density apartments to light industrial while the Citrof
aration
is going through their General plan Amendments andpreparation re pratusly zoned
for submission to the L•C.D-C• The property
light industrial by the County. We.have five buildings housing
ten units located on the south side ofr he prophe erty.
and
We have made many attempts to imp
improve our clientele to very isiattriangular hapeil. The eason for with roadshon
request is that our property
two sides and a railroad. The industrial uses are located along
the western and northern boundaries.
The surrounding properties of multi-family are either further_
away or at a different level. Upon reviewing the ,property, You
.• :-.
will notice that the- property is very flat and at road level while ; _ ,
the apartments to the south are 8 to 10 feet above the road and have =•,-
traffic_ on -Tiedeman is noisy because of
much more of a buffer.- -The :
trucks starting up at the intersection.:. .
We will be
I would •like to visit with you about this change.
in the near future and would like to go
calling for an appointment :
to the property with you- If there is any additional information
you would like to have, please call and I will -immediately respond._':: .
-- r
_ - - Very
trulynS yours,
- -- - - -. _ _ Cir �--�5 � - •J7• -
Y
-- - - - Edward B. Lilly,,
ESLsItm
, 7t Ob0 E.A. ACCtw •CVO. 4[AVE NTt?�:.-ORCa O(Y B)OOE _7CtEPNOw is t64E1 <t9-Edt7=- •• � - - -
�It4�M1
• F
7
January 18, 1983
P
Mary A. Keski, AEP
Manager
Siemens-Allis, Inc.
P.O. Box 23385 r
Portland, Oregon 97223
Dear Mary:
I have dropped the attached letter off for your review. After looking
at the Tigard General Plan and Zoning, we have decided to go with industrial
park for the designation on our property. We believe this will make us more
compatible in the industrial area and allow a small office with some storage
as explained in the attached letter. We would also provide for some other
types of industrial uses which we feel would be more compatible in the `
general overall area than a commercial office use.
z
If you and Bruce would please review this and if it meets with your
approval, please forward your approval to the City of Tigard by Friday,
January 21, 1983. I wish to thank you and everyone in your committee for
your cooperation in this matter.
Very truly yours,
Edward B. Lilly
EBL:nm
encl.
CC* Bruce Clark
2
l
t
- / I
/ l
/ - A '
;r
_i
North Tigard Business Assn .
c/o P.O. BOX 28885 TIGARD, OREGON 97221
January 21 , 1983 I
City of Tigard ` 79.j
12755 S.W. Ash �11JJ
Tigard, Oregon 97223 ` �30N
\G�K�
Attention: Mr. Bill Monahan G�1�NN�NG OEp�
Planning Director P�
Dear Mr. Monahan:
First let me thank you and Jeremy Coursolle for making a
presentation on the Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning District
Revisions to our Business Association on January 12.
The information you presented to our group which includes
two members of NPO #2 (Bruce Clark and myself) was very helpful
to us in reaching consensus as outlined below.
The North Tigard Business Association recommends that
properties along Cascade Boulevard be designated as industrial
on the proposed plan map. The same designation should be
applied to the industrial area between Fanno Creek and the
railroads along Tiedeman Street.
We further conclude, based upon the proposed zoning district
permitted uses listing, that all of these subject properties
would be best zoned as industrial park, rather than light
industrial. It appears that all of the existing uses fit under
the proposed listing of permitted uses in the industrial park
district. Thus, existing uses are protected-, while a broad
range of new development, with appropriate landscaping, can be
accommodated in conformance with the City ' s economic development
strategies .
In a separate issue, our group discussed Mr. Ed Lilly' s property
located at the south-westerly quandrant of the intersection of
Greenburg Road and No. Dakota Street. Group consensus was that
the property is not appropriate for residential use due to the
proximity of high traffic volumes and the limited size of the
parcel. It is our understanding that Mr . Lilly is seeking to
have his property designated as industrial park. We see this
as a usage compatible with the surrounding area and give it
our support.
Very truly yours,
Mary A. eski
Chairperson
FM
`' j ` '" 12 `� �� January 17, 1983
CITY OF TIGARD
PLANNING DEPT.
Mr. Jeremy Coursolle
Tigard Planning Commission
City of Tigard
P. 0. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mr. Coursolle:
In reference to the Comprehensive Plan for Tigard, I support the
existing recommendations of the Planning Commission as they pertain to
the property located at 10525 S. W. Tigard Street (Washington County Tax
Map 151 34D Lot 3400) containing approximately 10.89 acres. The "Notice
of Final Decision" for a minor land partition for this parcel was filed
by the Planning Director on August 18, 1982 under Case #MLP 5-82.
T support the existing plan, particularly the higher density use of
the portion of this parcel lying west of Fanno Creek for the following
reasons:
1. The close proximity of the business section of Tigard, the
concentration of commercial use properties in the Washington
Square area and the iii:,re recent development of the Scholls Ferry
Shopping Center.
2. The light industrial use of the property lying easterly of this
parcel and the school district's ownership of the property lying
south of this parcel .
3. The existence of Fanno Creek which runs north and south through
the eastern portion of this property consisting of approximately
3 acres of floodplain, creating a greenway which compliments the
higher density use of adjacent property -- utilizing the land,
both the greenway and the multiple housing area, for its highest
and best use.
4. The multiple housing units would be a good transitional use of
the property, separating the industrial property on the east side
from the single family residences on the west and northwest areas.
��-WIIIIMRIW Hill
Mr. Jeremy Coursolle -2- January 17, 1983
5. The number of acres in this parcel will permit the degree of
flexibility in design that will enable a high quality of
multiple housing development.
6. Sewer and water and public facilities and services are available
W'_i a main sewer line running through the property. Approximately
tnree-fourths of an acre will be dedicated for the widening of
Tigard Street.
My interest in this property covers many years beginningnts ein1936 whenboth died, mI
moved to this property with my parents. Since my pa
interest today is as trustee for my mother's estate, representing six
beneficiaries including myself with a one-third interest. I have seen many
changes in this area during these 47 years and today, in consideration of the
above factors and the changes I can see in the future, I agree with the
existing recommendations of the Planning Commission that this property lying
west of Fanno Creek be zoned medium density for use for multiple housing units.
Sincerely,
� 7
Forrest L. Cowgill
Rt. 4, Box 354A
Sherwood, Oregon
\
\ §
� / \ \
n � U Z
~ � 0 \ 0 co \
U) / § §
o G -
§ § `
� b v v \
a
0
E-4 { .
«
� .
aq )
h
/ \ § \
/
(
/
» » {
n o ::s _
( q `
(
§
m `
04
>1
{
x !
c !
. co (
|
� !
/
to
§
�
R
2 . a ,
C14 n
0 |
{ | �
. �
M0 rd
}
i
. �
1
James Moellman
I
Mary Ann Banky
Trustees for Emily Moellman
12570 S.W. Brookside
Tigard, Oregon 97223
City Of Tigard 2 November 1982
Attn: Jeremy Coursolle
PRef: Tax Map 02S12BD
Planning Department
P.O. Box 23397 Lot e : 9960 S.W. Walnut St.
2200
Tigard, Oregon 97223 Address
Tigard, Oregon
As owners of the referenced property, we agree with and support the
City of Tigard Planning Staff proposal that the property be zoned
commercial as shown on your Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map.
im Moellman Mary Ann nky
NOV 15 182 L
CI-I Y OF TIGARD
PLANNING DEPT.
l(r=AGER-SL_F_ ICaH-r C=C3MF3^NV
MANUFACTURERS REPRESENTATIVES ■ MARKETR'IG CONSULTANTS
7235 S.W. TERWILLIGER PORTLAND. OR • 97219 • PHONE 244-4136
J
January 7, 1983
City of Tigard Planning Dept.
12755 S.W. Ash
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Planning Dept:
Your commercial zoning of the house at 9960 S.W. Walnut this month would
very much be appreciated. We have to move out of our present office by
February 1st. I have made an offer to buy the house and it has been
accepted. We could move in right away with your approval.
The Yeager-Sleight Company is a manufactures representative company that
has been in business for 25 years. We employ two people plus myself.
All of our business is carried on out side of the office. We intend to
use the main floor and basement for our offices. I plan to rent the up-
stairs to another small business in the future.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Robert Af, Dalton
YEAGER-SLEIGHT CO.
RD/lj
t
vow y
Q
z
w
rL4 O k:
Q U
Ei W 4
cn cz
OH W .� .ro -� •rel U
U) E+ Y4 ?U4 � � �4 U
c9 a °'
N
ar14 0 a a • 0 a 0 0
U) O
z
O
H
z
7- 0
W W U
q }y
P4 -
o �
U H H H H H H H U H
O }
N O N U a) N a) O
I
.-I r♦ ri ri ri r-I .--I ri r 1 r-
tr ZT t7+ tp IT tr rp Cr
ro m
U
. ro 0
,� -r-1 rq -ri -•'I -.-I -rl -r-I r--I
41= tom+ E-c P H H E-+ H E� E-c E-4 p
W S4 }4 �4 S4 S4 74 34 54 S4
O U co «Y co ca ro m ro M ccf
U H Ei H H P H H P H c`I
z
O
N
O
U U : U .-I-I
RS to torci ro 04 -r-i 'cl
N UUP4 a U G a N
41 CQa-r I~ W x 4-) 0 In
(L) I~ (1) to X v N (1) ''U N
O a (1) A 1 N I~ A 34 ro
wa a a M ah �
N
ro
N N M M M M M M M
OO co GO OO 00 00 aO co 0
�--
M M O N N d' 00 cn O
N
�. o A h h h h ti h ►-3
theobert S E P 2 0 1982
a�d ll CITY OF TIGARD
company PLANNING DEPT.
Kristin Square•9500 S.W.Barbur Blvd. • Suite 300• Portland,Oregon 97219• (503)245-1131
' I
Telex #360557
September 16, 1982 `
Mayor Wilbur Bishop and Members of- the City Council
Chairman-Frank Terpedinno and Members of-the Planning Commission
c/o Mr. William'Monahan, Planning Diz,�ctor
City of Tigard
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Re: RC-809"- Tigard Triangle Property
Tax Lot 2200, Map 1S1 36CD
Gentlemen:
As you know The Robert Randall Company has recently submitted an f
application to the BoundaryCocmnission for the annexation of the
6 acre parcel located at 11722 S.W. Pacific Highway to the City
of Tigard. The completion of this annexation will result in
bringing thi_;..final key undeveloped piece of land in the Tigard
Triangle into the City.
We know the City is now fully involved in developing its
comprehensive plan, an effort we support because when a well
thought out and flexible land use plan exists.' in a community
it enhances the opportunity for private endeavor to successfully
Lring economic development to that community. So it is important
to inform you of what plan designation and zoning we feel should
be applied to this property.
We think that a consensus clearly exists among all the parties
involved in the development of a plan for the Triangle, that its
prime assets are accessibility, visibility and flexibility. The
accessibility, of course, is produced by its location between
major highways. The properties in the area are visible either
from 217 or Highway 99. The reserve of undeveloped land in the
area produces the flexibility that would be so attractive to a
variety of potential users of the site.
t
.r
Mr. William Monahan
September 16, 1982
Page 2
i
Recently, we have been involved -in negotiations-.with a major insurance
company seeking .to..develop their regional. headquarters in this areai -
.tlnfortunately-because. of -the "uncertainty regarding-- Tigard Is comprehensive
plan for the Triangle; particularly..-the apparent -controversy regarding -
the area's transportation plan; they were unable- to consider this site
as a potential location.
However, we think that several-of .the insurance company's needs and
desires should be kept in mind as you finalize -the-planning and zoning
for this area. Their number one priority in the selection of a
location for such a project, is it's close., within walking distance
preferably, proximity to restaurants,. banks and office support
commercial facilities.
For this reason'we believe that a zoning designation for the front
bortion of *ur property, within approximately 200 feet of Pacific
Highway, which-permits the -independent development of -these facilities
would be appropriate as a logical continuation of the current type
of development along Highway 99. It would also bean enticement to
prime tenants for an office park and. light industrial development
which could potentially be developed in the rest of the area.
Our opinion is that on land up to a distance of 600 feet from Pacific
Highway an office commercial use should be emphasized. Beyond that
distance from the highway.-we feel the constraints_ o£.topography, .
particularly the drainage situation, indicates a light industrial
land use would be best, considering the cost of development given
these constTnints. -
We have seen preliminary plans which indicate an Industrial Park
designation is-being considered -for our property. We do not oppose
such a designation for the area since each of the uses we envision
for the area is permitted under such a designation. However, we
would oppose such a designation if it resulted in a limitation on
the independent development of any of those uses. We definitely
fell that flexibility, the right to independently develop each
seperate use, is essential to the economic success of the Triangle's
development.
For the same reason we are concerned about proposals being made by
some parties that any development of the area would be contingent
on the complete construction of a major transportation network in
the Triangle. We support the development of a plan providing for
this transportation network and we have understood the NPO plan for
this area was the ultimate general guide for the transportation
system.
t
Mr. William. Monahan
September 16, 1982
Page 3
However, the NPO.-=..pian; makes ,it clear it was.not:, intended to :be a:
consra
tint on•-thd.- ivxdual development of property,prior to the-,t
construction':af:; �ie'systeia if access to.-the. de•.elopment and .any
one of the-major-roads; `particularly Pacific Fiigliway . could be
made safe and functional: Considering the.variety;_of.'ownerships
and land use situations .existing in the Tr iangleD';we;think. the
retention of such a.:goI" is the only logical_course. : Eaich project
should be -subject` to:-review on this standard--as-1-we1-1 -as. on its
fulfilling obligaiions;to- the development-of--.the over-all transportation
system.
We sincerelyappreciate the opportunity 'to share: our views- on_this _
matter witfiyou;and''your' consideration of them.
Very truly'yflurs,'
R444-7__9_ -�-
John T. Gibbon
Secretary/Counsel
i
cc - Doug Seely
Steve Janik
JTG/tu
�rz! �(
December 3, 1982 G C 31982
Cl-ry OF TIGARD
PLANNING DEPT•
Jeremy Courselle - Associate Planner
P.O. Box. 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Reference: Proposed Zoning IL to CL
Dear 'Ir. Courselle:
We would like to request that the city of Tigard consider highway
commercial zone in lieu of "IL" for the area adjacent to and south
of S.W. Pacific Highway. Our property lies presently in the area
proposed to be zoned "IL`' which is designated on the maps as
area 23-81 tax lots 1801 , 2000, 2001 , 2002, and 2100, map is 136
Co.
It is our intention to construct a family entertainment center on
the above mentioned lots and in order to do this, it requires a
C-5 (highway commercial ) zoning, therefore, we respectfully
request that a highway commercial zoning be considered for this
area.
Thank you for considering our request.
Very truly yours,
Glenn W.. Bethune
Architect for Invest-A-Venture
E
s
Z
1
i
C
the obe-rt
aall
Jcompany
Kristin Square•9500 S.W. Barbur Blvd. • Suite 300• Portland,Oregon 97219• (503)245-1131
Telex 0360557
December 3, 1982 p�NN,�G, DEPT'
Mr. Jeremy Coursole, Associate Planner
City of Tigard
12755 S.W. Ash
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mr. Coursole:
We have reviewed Mr. Bethume's proposal for the property to the
east of our property in the Tigard Triangle. We agree with his
position that plan designations other than IL should be consid-
ered for the area. Specifically we think it is appropriate that
a highway commercial designation for a portion of the area with-
in the Triangle as well as other designations be seriously
considered.
Sincerely yours,
John T. Gibbon
Secretary/Counsel
JTG/tmu
® INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES. SITE LOCATION
Home Office Portland Office
The Equitable Center Suite 320 R .,D 17090 S.W. Arkenstone
530 Center St. N E • Salem. OR 97301 Portland. OR 97223
(503)581-8904 JAN 13 �Cj (503) 639-7183
CITY OF TIG@
PLANNING DEPT January 10, 1982
Mr. William A. Monahan
Director, Planning and Development
City of Tigard
P. 0. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Bill:
The purpose of this letter is to urge the planning commission and city council
to give favorable consideration for a commercial zone impacting the property
presently owned by Alex Finke (enclosure) and in the process of being purchased
by my client, Irrfest-A-Venture, Inc.
It is my understanding that the mayor and city council are concerned about
downturn in business activity due to the recession, and have hired you to
agressively pursue economic development on behalf of the community -- in
addition to your planning responsibilities. Perhaps it should be pointed out
that economic development stimulus may come, at times, when the normal course
of approval procedures inhibit such stimulus because of hearings and delays.
Such delays have confronted my client in another city and, as a result, the
project was "pulled out" and is now being considered in the City of Tigard.
We have no intention to abuse the normal processes; however, an offer for '
the purchase of the property was made last October 28. Therefore, we request
every consideration by the commission and council to consider our project I
and zone change to commercial on January 22 for the following reasons: }
1
1. Invest-A-Venture's family entertainment project will provide
new "economic blood" to the business community because of the
multiplier effect or turn. over of dollars from out-of-town
and greater metropolitan consumers being attracted to the
facility.
2. Tigard's reputation will certainly be enhanced as the
place" in the Pacific Northwest for family entertainment.
f
3. As the president of an industrial real estate company, I
am aware of tentative industrial projects in nearby commimni-
ties that will enhance the industrial base--thereby adding
to increased spending possibilities via employees for
consummer goods and recreational activities. It is con-
ceivable that travelir.a executives and management, would
INDUSTRIAL REALTORS SERVING THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST (.
MEW
Mr. William A. Monahan
City of Tigard
Page 2
bring their families when visiting in the metropolitan area
in order that they could spend most of the day at my client's
facility while "Dad or Mom" is at work attending meetings.
4. The project we-.tea provide the impetus for a general "face
lift" among commercial businesses along Highway 99 within
the vicinity of my client's facility.
5. Wholesome family recreation would be a welcome addition to
Tigard as opposed to the alternative forms of recreation
which tend to create problems for the police and fire depart-
ments in terms of teenagers Zathering in unsupervised areas.
Our project would be supervised, no alcolhol or drugs would
be perrnited, and grandparents, parents and children of all
ages would have flue in a safe environment.
The entire project cannot move forward until a commercial zone is designated.
We have already extended the time frame in which our offer to Mr. Finke
will remain in effect, but my client simply cannot keep their investment r
backers interested on a lengthy basis.
We appreciate your cooperation and support of the project.
Sincerely,
AZA&74��
40
President
DDS/cjs
P.S. I failed to mention that the Randall Company is also supportive of a
commercial zone for their adjacent acreage.
cc: Mr. Merrill Haddon €
C
1
SIT "A1. Seller {
kxhibit "A" is attached hereto and made a part hereof the Sale Agreement & Rece pt
For Earnest Money, No. 15161, dated October 29, 1982, and outlines the subject
property in yellow herein described, to wit: Sec. 36CD, 1S, 1W of the W.M.
comprising tax lots 2100, 2001, 2002 and 2000.
—s sez�•;�, t t r I
IJ
• O O ✓-
01
j � � �: ; i`O O s c � • 1 '
T {: !
_... �,,.. � �� ',�,. .�Q i" is C_ � .��(.• z•ti1
a ••y-T.a v� B - I
& '610kk
`l ► w-i
rr
'�S �� ® to a •� �� •a�T -__�.'^r;- — _ ; ::g -
10
lir kx�
1
�r
January 12, 1983
K7, \V/Tw�
Mr. William A. Monahan JAN 1 19F3 LU
Director of Planning and Development
The City of Tigard CITY OF TIGARD
PO Box 23397 PLANNING DEPT.
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: Finke Ownership Consisting of Map 1S1W, Section 36 CD
Tax Lots 2100, 2001 , 2002, 2000; 2S1 1 BA, Tax Lots 102
and 151 located in an area known as the Tigard Triangle
Dear Mr. Monahan:
Thank you very much for the time you spent discussing the above-
mentioned property. As was mentioned in your office, there is an
offer waiting for your decision. I have been in ownership of the
property for approximately 18 years. I have, on several occasions,
as your files will no doubt indicate, come to the City with proposals
to try to develop my property. For 18 years I have had delays from
the City. First, regarding the utilities, sewer, water and,
secondly, traffic problems. I have, on many occasions, addressed all
of the problems with this property that had to be remedied prior to
development. I have always met with delays.
As we discussed in your office, the proposed comprehensive plan
framework map that you gave me regarcing the City is prohibitive to
my development. As you indicated, the plan from the proposed I-L
zoning to be changed to a C-L or commercial designation zoning would
be not only beneficial to the City, but also to my proposed
purchaser.
Tigard has been a bedroom community to Beaverton and other areas for
a number of years. This change in the zoning (which has been
approved by NPO-u) would revitalize the area. My proposed
development would enhance the other properties. Robert Randall, the
owner of the property located due west, has already indicated that he
has no problem with my proposed development and, in fact, is very
excited about the prospect. I have already dedicated the area
necessary for the road to service this area. The City has indicated
by the placement of the light on 99 that they wish the development to
proceed through my property. This area needs a "face lift",.that my
development will provide.
A commercial use as opposed to an industrial use, makes much more
sense, both economically and aesthetically.
There are vacant industrial properties and developments throughout
not only Tigard, but the metropolitan area.
Mr. William A. Monahan
January 12, 1982
Page 2
Empty warehouses will not revitalize this area. Ultimately, they may
lease, but the problems, particularly as it relates to traffic, will
outweigh the advantages.
I appreciate that the staff will recommend the proposed change to
zone my property C—L. The proposed development on my site will
increase traffic. Rather than on a strict Schedule, the egress and
ingress into my property will be spread over the entire day, as
opposed to heavy traffic at peak traffic hours. The developers are
most anxious to receive this designation. They have assured me that -
they plan to start development as soon as this zoning is instituted.
Hopefully, we can proceed as rapidly as possible, keeping in mind
that it has been an 18 ear wait for me. We do not want to lose a
developer for the City. The City of Salem is actively soliciting the
prospective purchaser of my property with many incentives to get him
to develop in Salem. I am sure you appreciate that the City of
Tigard will be bringing in a good qualified development which will
benefit Tigard by increasing jobs and a revitalization of the area.
I appreciate the staff' s approval of this recommendation and should
you need any further clarification, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Ajgx Fin
bsf
1\�
C-
�sahgo.
^^gg gg w RL
z
. b a z � ! � iP
Sm t 21-1
va - Ips _
�� p—
st
®® nem W �.L7- y►� �.
_.
94 aF 36
CL
o - �jj p spy. y
v
�j
03
v.+ - >� g '��!v� ars la°�•� 3 ^t ,: - Ra�3�y_.� o�L�.9
0 _ s `� = .e3s
Co
_ewt .2n
iff 3 •g412
a C6
14.
4 1j.
__ ••: �•.. t 'tom- ..
111 -a all
'PM10 cc
s
Ica
• •-_ � �' Y r 999'iii a V v •AA � � fl
- s ��
l:l I Y 14 i iGAKD
PLANNING DEPT. �
Wit=:>�:c�:�•:-:-:�-o:::_.:-:os::.��:�-„�:�-c.,•:- .. -. � - - - _ - ./�J "2� -_ )
*-tel
.wrarrc a
ii-Mi mom
pp
3 tl hV
3nq3t W;
� }
S
L
IRE I
' k
•I
' . I
\ Q
I
FIN
I �
\� '�I•
' to
--t
TTr—
rn
�.
- \
lo:a—
pu—
AGA M S
ti
1 _
d L 41 E n M S m __
HANS H. GRUNBAUM. D. V. M.
11744 S. W. PACIFIC HWY. T� �J{
TIGARD• OR. 97223 JAN•1
TELEPHONE 503 639-1186 _
CANI 1 7zi��z�
(P,h4NV�N�-G[�VLT-
PLANNING DEPT.
January 14, 1983
Dear Mr. Coursolle,
It is my understanding that the properties owned
by Mssrs. Finke and Randall in that area loosely known
as the "Tigard Triangle" are being considered for change
to CL.
If such a change is effected, I would appreciate f
your considering similar zone changes for the property I
which I own in the same area.
SincerelyO"t M/
Hans H. Grunbaum
i
I
1
1
mom
he ober t
JAN 1 t3
nandall CII Y Jf ►IGHKD
company PLANNING DEPT.
Kristin Square • 9500 S.W. Barbur Blvd. • Suite 300• Portland, Oregon 97219• (503) 245-1131
Telex 0360557
January 18, 1983
Mayor Bishop and the Members of the City Council
C/O Mr. William Monahan, Director
Planning and Community Development Dept.
City of Tigard
P. 0. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mayor Bishop and Members of the City Council:
On January 26, 1983 you are considering adopting zoning for Tax Lot 2200
1S1 36CD, the property within the Tigard Triangle which our company owns.
As part of the process of annexation of the property you are proposing
to adopt C-5 and M-4 zoning for the property.
The proposed zoning conforms with current comprehensive plan type maps,
which the City has for that area. The Randall Company has, of course,
notified you in the past that its plans for the property include the
independent development of restuarant and retail services to support
a commercial office facility on the remainder of the property. Depend-
ing on the specific needs of the tenants in the offices, we also anti-
cipate that some warehousing space may be constructed on the property.
Given your current plan status the C-S and M-4 zoning designations pro-
posed for the site are appropriate. In light of that status, we have
submitted an application to have the zoning placed upon the property,
however, this request should be modified in the event that you adopt
your new comprehensive plan designations.
After careful consideration of the various alternative designations
available we have decided that a Linear Commercial zoning designation
should be applied to our entire property upon the adoption of the new
plan. As we read the proposed Community Development Code,jit appears
I POW —
s ,_ T 7 Cj
Mayor Bishop and the Members of the City Council
1
January 18, 1983
Page 2
t ti t(ail,KU
,NG DEBT•
that all the uses we envision for the site are permitt� l't�s s within I
this zoning designation. This plus the fact that split zoning desig-
nations on a parcel of land often create design difficulties lead us
to believe that it is best to apply the Linear Commercial designations
to both our property and to the property immediately to the east of it.
Sincerely,
John T. Gibbon
Secretary/Counsel
JTG/cl
i
i
s
l
i
t
t
F
f
�F
f
p�p
63
t
j _
12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue
Tigard, Oregon 97223
January 19, 1983
SLO, �.
�• �-
William A. Monahan J
Planning DirectorCity of Tigard
12755 S.W. Ash
Tigard, Oregon 97223
clear Mr. Monahan:
I understand that a request to change the future land u-se designation on the City of
i igard's Comprehensive Plan Map has been made for certain parcels of land located
in the NPO #4 area west of 72nd Avenue.
The planning staff has advised me that each property owner must submit a request
in writing to change their property's future land use designation on the new
comprehensive plan.
I support the conditions set by NPO #4 for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map
change dealing with future land use designations. One of those conditions being
that approval of the comprehensive plan map change should only be granted if
conformity in land use designations is maintained for the area west of 72nd which
is now designated as Industrial Park.
If the Planning Commission and City Council is going to change any parcel's future
land use designation in the said area to General Commercial, I hereby request that
the following properties have their existing future land use designation of Industrial
Park be changed to General Commercial:
Map 2S 1 IBA, Tax Lot 401, 3.70 Acres.
Map 2S 1 IBA, Tax Lot 101, 6.01 Acres.
Map 2S 1 IBA, Tax Lot 300, 14.58 Acres.
Sincerely, f
Gordon S. Martin
906-SM - E� -
ANQERSON. C11'R'MAN SC ANDERSON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
'.IC--ARD PROFESSIONAL. CENTER
B065 S. W. CENTER STREET
P. O. BOX 23006. TIGARD. OREGON 97223 I
639-1121
i
FRED. A. ANDERSON
DCRRYCK H. DITTMAN
ROGER F. ANDERSON
January 20, 1983
Planning Director
City of Tigard
Re: Tax Lot 100 in 2S11BA
We represented Mr. and Mrs. Dietzman in the contract of sale of
the above-referenced real property. Mr. and Mrs. Dietzman hold title
to the property subject to the contract.
By letter of January 14, 1983 they informed me that they would be
very happy to agree to have the future comprehensive plan changed to
general commercial on the above-referenced tax lot.
Very truly yours,
ANDERSON, DITTMAN & ANDERSON
Roge F. Anderson
RFA:ko
. 2 �
_ / � 4
\
: % ƒ 3 {
2 f
/ E-
n
- {
/ d a b \
3|
0
�
\ U) c \
�
~ \ �
a q }
\
/ Z cn U q
&
{
afa -
E -1 ] \
@ f {
n o $ 2 � CL4 \
q 0 § �
r z 0 ca
�
rO
0 0 1 \
R q 2 § \ §
0 (
U O a m @ m [
2
[
i En � (
� � I
2
@ §
@ w 4 . [
U)
tn ul k
§ U (
2 Ln LO w m
2 . 1 (
r k z a4 04 v
� � r {
C14 cn n
b m m o oco
[
� C14 %0 / r-
m
in A 0 z C t '
[
. [
2„ ., as=� ',4 `, - �cO�.tob'er �•a. 1982 ��u - �'- - �
lY1 - 1 t• - - _-t�i� J .. _ .i. ..
771;-
vjq
-_, r :Zizs�Tewton ,
Ssbciate Planner `• _P: - vy �-
,'Y =City:-bf--Tigard
.'O-:Bo" 23397;
.Tigard_ _ Oregon :9.7223 _ t
Dead. Liz-..
_.' Thank you. for your letter of September-:23:s.: 1982
regarding the iworkings of :the City Staff -on ,a=-rev-is ed ,
Comprehensive Plan. . Needless to say, we. are.-.very much
interested and in support of- the medium-density, multi-
family residential zoning for our property. -.Please
keep is informed as to the times and dates ofthe public
hearings ..
-e -truly yours,
E"%r,S.i''�'s 'k��-Sr'•!: %=_.•:•-r' *%ti :'"� :. 'f-s-.K: -.kit-;:. •.:. _s.-•i•..:...s!- ,.'s:: _ . - .s _ t':'r=iar-Lt:c.3x ir .`•i.'�ti.3`
- i
irs. Jo eph-.Torres
3 80 Armitage Ct. E.
; ilsonville , Or. 97070
682-0500.
00-1 4-
CITY
CITY OF TIGAD
PLANNING DEPT.
- IZ
November 2, 1982
CI`i1f OF TIGA ID
WASHINGTON COUNTY.OREGON!
Chris Vanderwood, Chairperson
Neighborhood Planning Organization #5
14345 SW 80th Place
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Chris:
Per our work program, the City is now in the process of addressing those written
comments submitted from all of the local interest groups. We are pleased to re-
view the work that your NPO had accomplished in a relatively short period of
time, and we look forward to working with NPO #5 to resolve the issues that will
affect the City in the next couple of years.
This letter is divided into two parts. The first section addresses the need for
a city-wide comperhensive plan-;-and the second section addresses those specific
issues submitted by your NPO.
A CITY-WIDE PLAN
As you are aware, there is a continued frustration over the fact that the
existing NPO plans will be repealed, and replaced with a city-wide comprehensive
plan. It is becoming more evident that the need for one city-wide plan is
crucial for Tigard's planning efforts. The following reasons are cited, although
there are many rationales behind this thought.
First, the City needs to set policy for all aspects of land use issues. The
current Ni-O plans speak to single family and multiple family areas, location of
commercial areas and street standards, but fail to direct the Ctiy on facilities
planning (e.g. , sewer, drainage, etc. ), future road improvemetns, urban expansion,
coordination with other agencies and the implementation measures that must be
considered to keep all of these "growing pains" at the least cost to the citizens.
Second, all of the seven NPO plans claim that Tigard will grow to a population
of 115,000 people. However, none of the plans indicate when this will happen,
if ever, and what physical and geographical constraints will be used to permit
such a population. Or, on a facetious note, do we care? Again, the City needs
to set a policy direction city-wide.
Third, the City believes that many land use issues affect the City as a whole
and the NPO's could be the bodies that could assist the city in resolving these
issues. At a minimum these- include: redevelopment of land both residential
and commercial , economic development, transportation, parks and ope6 space, etc.
There has been a lack of city-wide planning in recent years, and the City fears
that if the necessary systems and review processes are not in line, each develop-
ment could result in a headache for all concerned. This could potentially
discourage future economic development in the City.
. . . Continued . . ,
12755 S.W.ASH P.O. BOX 23397 TIGARD,OREGON 97223 PH:639-4171 1
boom-
CHRIS VANDERWOOD
November 2, 1982
Page Two
NPO #5 DISTRICT MAP ISSUES
After reviewing your submitted revisions, we believe that most of your proposed
changes have merit and will be incorporated into the City's district working
map. The specific calculations have not been completed, however, at first
glance it appears that the density calculations will not be substantially
altered.
The only proposed change that staff is uncomfortable with at this time is the
requested change from C-N to R-7 on the corner of Hall and Bonita. Due to the
complexity of this issue, we believe that it should be resolved at the Council
level as soon as possible. It is really a separate issue from the rest of the
City's comprehensive planning efforts. We urge you to continue to work with
Liz Newton on this matter.
The remaining question staff has concerning your submitted comments is your
claim that Colony Creek and Waverly Meado4� are "already surrounded by higher
densities." Colony Creek currently abuts other single family residences on
large lots that will eventually redevelop to their density capacity once the
market permits such changes. In addition, Waverly Meadows abuts Bonita Firs
to the west, which is the only development in close proximity to Waverly Meadows.
The remaining land abutting Waverly Meadows is either vacant or will be redeveloped
as the need occurs.
If you have any further questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
CITY OF TIGARD -
Jeremy M. Coursolle
Associate Planner
JMC : Cmv
- .� 'D --��. r4 .•fit?. �6+y..,?a. .• tet• — _':. _}: ..
t
A.
IL
J lha
MAE
Ab
'� ` \
r�
_ 'i __ I •fl• dd(r ,reamer. -./
mw
12
I �� ._.- ,•�- `\� ��� .._ .. : _q _ L_ � � ' e0.
1 �
�.i �•V �: TY�"LtJ- ,CY•
•• X
MIX
�^�'����`F-{K" a � .G- ;i����'�� r.L �K 3`�4�a :i -�{i va'^rYl�,r-i}'��u F"`r7^�wt� ,i•r", �:.s �, ':
r - 2kjr, d t . ` r3 Cy7
qp1 Lt
���'
n
zke
it.
01
• f /�
-
_____
i�-0:-5 . IG2-
---------;-��2�� -gyp�--�------._ .
mm7
ae7' `-i
N�. r� 'af��.��'1�,4 4.�.. �-��i.-'a'� ���,� - � '�.ri -'t+r�•_ ?- F ..i Yw �� _ '+•'��.� � �.{ _�'R]r"" ` �}^" --'Y�,.'S�•�� 2
i
1------ - ------- - ' - -
_-CUnO��i2_��
i
r
r
--
_11.. GlnCL2 ---- -- - --- -- - ---
- Gv1h - ----
-- _
OF f `�
--- - -------------------'--- --�z �-�-� A-2 --
1
r
. �.y; .. ro�.�.Ls z' �y,.ta s�:�: r� 3-♦ � {w.L: - �..+.. r]' � � irk � 2 .SI .V�^ ^x{viz J� h+�i .' [ �
'�fi.-�.. �- �C�,+--�''.1 r M• � '`t =s��,�.:a. �"- - t .1..^.-. '>.t.i-r ��`'�yr'L+.0 -
-
a
a
Sy.i •lt..: F.. !. y/ S. _ - - t - _ - y•.�'-/j - J S:' '-,,`
I
r
i
i
i
�j
i
. i
r
• - � J� mac' G''.I.� 7hGo �il�'�-- �
G
7CL17G�
.r t -" k♦ �.. SF Y,.r- 4d�� .s s.F: �,� -. .. __� - ... a....•, _ �=.�/tC'tII — - .1.. 3 4
I
-._...---- -- ---- --------- - - -------- --- ----- -------
1/7
T
t
1 G� /�PiC!�-lGP�2 -✓LC-2 • �G�{ v-Gl..Go_ . 11i1 GGL_
�m
��r..�'ty.. 1_.-.°�' rt .. ♦ x -- - r �y. - s i, _ � 2s l.�rrl 'fr .��y�, 'C s - �;, ��J.'S�^- y
�t
I
----
--
- e.
_ - - ---- -
1� ..��Imo/ _��.o•- x•1.3_ � _� _���ic� _ - -
- _._ _ _ __ .✓JGGG'ii�1�71-�/r� -�w�_ ✓l.�a/�LLo//�Llt� ,�lr�.G�_
A®wrsi��sarrrr ���w[��m-`" --
r
--- -- --- ---
�-- ----
-- -- -���
- ---
- ---------
�--- ---__ . ---- - ------ _ ---...--�������� Vie_--...���,� '
+ - --
------ -
_ _ _ rte '�����P---�� _=�� ..������,��P
_ ��� _
�� _c��`�
- _ h - � .�
//
� _ �
7 ,� ., � � �
.` J fiti��-� ✓L��=Y_J�iy[.E�i 01.�__��G�/J�-7._��4_.-- � i
./ - - � E
t
- - / � i
__ �/ �
�E'lE �L�. Gf���l�� �_ Yom_. .=.Gr���ll� €
i � `
G� � i
- - ---- -
� -
__ -- --�-------i--- - -------�------ ----- __----- �---- -�--- - ------ - -------- - ��e-.�-n���___.__� �
r'
WwIW
rc:
Y;
------- ----- ------ �� � � ham_- ---
1 1
- -- sae -
-
It
- - --
_ - z�niem� � i 9Yh IBIh�I�AAiThd'i'�RTh7iRiiNlhlfiAM
i
k
i
q
_ L '
6
3
- fy
r {
_ E
3
�Ec G 1982
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF TIGARD
FROM: NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION #5 PLANNING DEPT.
RE: COMMERCIAL-NEIGHBORHHOD DESIGNATION AT BONITA ROAD AND HALL BLVD.
DATE: DECEMBER 6, 1982
Be it recognized that the Neighborhood Planning Organization #5 (NPO #5), organized and
acting within the authority of City of Tigard Resolution No. 82-13, dated February 22, 1982
having conducted public meetings in the exercise of our responsibility as an advisory body,
representing the citizens, residents and property owners in the area as designated for
NPO #5 herein submit a modification to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map.
Recent proposed development of the property on -the corner of Bonita Road and Hall B.lvd.
(Exhibit All has raised an awareness among residents that this property is subject to- f
cc„unercial development . The majority of local response has indicated ti;at such develop-
ment would be inappropriate .in relationship to the adjacent residential areas. In keeping
with the city's policy of protecting the character of existing neighborhoods we would pro-
pose that this area -be redesignated from its current commercial designation to medium
density residential , R-12 zone.
.ne commercial designation of this site was originally one of three planned for NPO #5 as
proposed by staff and adopted in the comprehensive plan in 1977. (Exhibit B) The
commercial designation for Bonita Rd. and Hail Blvd. as cited in the plan text was for the ;
purpose of serving as a neighborhood shopping center.
The plans objective in providing a commercial site at this location were:
1 . "Establish a small limited commercial center in proximity to the residential
• development that will serve the immediate shopping needs of neighborhood
residents."
Discussion: Prior comprehensive plans and zoning actions pursued a policy of
convenience .shopping pockets" to break up and divert residents from the down- r
town Tigard area. A number of items would indicate a difference in the current
community needs and desires.
a. ) An extensive Tigard Downtown Revitalization Pian has been proposed
for the purpose of enhancing the downtown business community, causing
future economic development and support of current business.
b. ) With the development and growth of the full service shopping centers
in downtown Tigard at several locations and the Pacific Highway corridor
in general, the residents' shopping needs are adequately mat and for
most, does not require travel of over two miles.
c. ) Further, recent development of late night convenience stores at several 5
neighborhood locations already serve to augment the other more traditional
shopping centers. (Exhibit C)
P
Asa result of the above cited factors the "shopping needs of the community" are
already being adequately served by the existing facilities.
K
COMMERCIAL-NEIGHBORHOOD: Page 2 -
"2. "To encourage pedestrian shopping .and minimize vehicular traffic to community
shopping centers."
Discussion: Again there are several recent factors that would tend to mitigate
e current validity of this statement.
a. ) The advent of various signalization efforts, new and improved facilities
and future street developments will in themselves accentuate the flow of
traffic in and out of the downtown area.
b. ) The improved service of Tri-Met to the neighborhood area provides an
excellent alternative to both pedestrian and vehicular traffic to the
downtown area.
c. ) The residential development along Hall Blvd. and Bonita Rd. to date has
created an increase in foot and bicycle travel. As-a result it has be-
come apparent to local residents that the existing facilities to accommo-
date pedestrian travel is insufficient to deal with the existing flow let
alone the potential increase that current commercial development at this
site would cause. Although one could argue that such improvement will be
made in the future we feel this does not adequately address the concerns
of current residents who would be faced with the immediate risks.
3. "To protect adjoining lower intensity uses from the adverse affects of noise,
bright signs, vehicular traffic and visual blight that are often associated with
commercial development."
Discussion:
a. ) Stop and go activities associated with certain types of commercial
development combined with the potential for late operating hours would
riot enhance the tranquility and serenity of the surrounding neighbor-
hood development.
b. ) Commercial development may result in undesirable advertising and facility
lighting particularly disturbing to directly adjacent residents.
c. ) There is a concern amourg residents that certain types of development
would be conducive to gathering or loitering points resulting in an
undesirable effect on the surrounding neighborhood.
d. ) In addition, residents are concerned that this may introduce the potential
of some types of criminal activities that heretofore have not been present
in the area.
SUMMARY:
Where as thereis no other commercial development in close proximity but rather significant
residential use established in the area raises the questions of compatibility. Some if
not most types of commercial development allowed could have a detrimental effect on the
neighborhoods identity, integrity, serenity and tranquility. The enviroment sought by
most homeowners and residents in a neighborhood coul ' be significantly and adversly affected.
We are not opposed to positive economic development p •ograms, however, we are supportive
ar the position taken by many residents of our NPO that this property is an inappropriate
s a for business activities. There are numerous other locations which can enLance the
communitys' future and the service of the citizens without damaging the neighborhoods and
the welfare of the residents. Therefore we request that the Planning Commission recommend
this site be redesignated from it current commercial use to a residential medium density 2
use of R-12.
15
- lawop
t
or
c I 7
,.p • t..����+its � � i i � a�
'c ! � � I I '. � �++ ♦°_;'per! (! / � ��
WA"■
11 11S
SON
r �� ���• ��,La�.'UNIII
J err 111:.
MEN
r
=: LLI
S
WE ago# fk
MPO e S I'LF4�S TEXT
THE PLIu4
i
/ The following plan narrative describes the intentions of the Neighborhood 111"uiing
Organization and the City of Tigard with respect to the future development of th-s
Neighborhood. It is a "policies plan", providing guidelines for development in tate
form of policy statements. These -pglicies, the accompanying text, and the plan rt-an
are to be consulted jointly when evaluating development procosals. These proposals
includL zone change requests, subdivision proposals, changes in the street system,
or any proposal requiring public agency review.
This plan is a means of guiding development in order to achieve desired purposes or
goals. This section therefore begins with the statement of goals provided in the city-
wide. Tigard Community Plan. These goals provide the basis and describe the broad
purposes of the Neighborhood planning effort and have been included in his plan
in their entirety_ The Neighborhood is a portion of the larger T,gar_d C_-c-t-lunity r
and these goals serve to relate this part to the whole.
Go-kLS ER0.3 THE TIC-SURD CO:U4UNITY PLAN (As adopted in 1971)
1. The City intends to limit the ultimate population of the planning area_ The
comore:►ensive plan provides for a maximua¢i population of aro-and 115,000 people_
There are four categories of residential density, ranging from a suburb--n
density of 2 families per acre to a high in selected areas of up to 40 families
per acre. This range of residential densities is intended to provide a variety
of living environments that will accotrznodate the housing needs of different
family size and income. The density of population influences the character of
residential areas and determines the demand for public facilities and services
in different parts of the city. The citizens of the co..mamity should knave the
density of development that is planned for different parts of the city as it
affects their own neighborhoods. City officials need to know the de-mands for
different public facilities- and services in different parts of ,the city.
2. The comprehensive plan recognizes the estaiblished character of existing
neighborhoods. and seeks to preserve and enhance existing neighborhood values..
Future. development proposals should be. sensitive to the concern of citizens
for their ocrn inuuediatet environment as.,:uel _.as to. the we Ll being bf-the city as
a. whole,.
B, Cki site• recreatibn space ad well- as pedestrian and bicycle access to parks,
schools and convenience shopping.
C_ The siting of buildings to minimize the visual effects of parking areas and
to increase the availability of privacy_
POLICY 16. Apartments should be located to produce the lease adverse effects upon
single-family areas. Development criteria should include:
A.
His a ng'Wb1'"za�aii� o awd§cages igy .fecicing=,:and::di:stap}ge.
�
B. Compatsbility;..af�.dasigp;:rzcognizing�:tha�eoQf.licts=;o�r�ass, a;ydheight
_
be tweem,apartment:_.buildings,:and_.hnuse s_i
This plan allocates all urban medium density development to one area; the
triangular shaped property between Fanno Creek, Hall Boulevard and Bonita Road.
This area contains approximately 74 acres of developable land (deducting the flood
plain area in the Fanno Creek Greenway) and therefore has the ootential of containing
ego multi-family dwelling units. This area was selected for multi-fa.:.ily development
because of its being adjacent to a major thoroughfare, mall Boulevard, and J_Ls
adjacency to the Fanno Creek Greenway which will provide open space relief for this
mediu_n density residential development_ In addition, the placement of apartments
in -this area will accoplish a stepping down o£ the intensity of land use by providing
m
a graduation from the industrial development east of Fanno Creek to the single family
development west of Hall.Boulevard and south of Bonita Road_
COMMERCIAL DEVBLOp,LENT
Cor,•.mercial Development is necessary to meet the needs of the residents and emalo��es
for goods and services. The major commercial facilities are located just beyond the-
boundaries.-.of- NPO 45 and will. serve the majority of the demandgenerated- in th"
areao,..Koweve_r.,-r•thx�e-.small�..a eas of�..�coamerci4LL development are designated-6 '.the-.ylan
m ros swee ewi� sr®ae
} are- a• . n er2detion.:o6 Half Boulevard and Pacific Highways thC,.:ntersect10
Page 9
ter= m®� .��.�e�
Sanitad,' r CI..FiA1�.-,;:
The commercial development at Hall and Pacific is- actually part a `
the strip commercial development along this portion of the .highway and does not
/actually relate or orient itself to this neighborhood.
The t-.ao remaining commercial areas do orient themselves to the neigh:iorhood, and
are located for ease of access by residents or employees of the area_ a
designation. at Bonit�m. and:.fiab intended,,_ o
t .serve. a� 1. eghbprhgd; hop��ingGenter.
at,
Typical businesses an:-this-center might-.incicide a::'smaZl :.food;market ori
delicatessen, a: barber, shop, .a: beauty, y salon-, and:: self service laundr
I;i.ePIS=s.
objective in: providing.;commercia3,:at-.-this,.location,are: to_,v,
��Establi.sh a small limited cca•Rercial centE in proximity to the residential
development that will serve the immediate shopping needs of neighborhood
residents.
Z' g Tb' encourage' pedestriai= 'shopping and'aninimize�veiticeylar traffii't�'`ronvscty
shopping..centers,g
39g To;:pro.tett:adioi�ing.;-Aowe�'-intens1ty•uses-:from the:::adverse�'aff�t��-oE,noise,
bright; signs,;vehicular- traffic: . and visual. blight` than=az�-often
associated: witW coMud'ercial -3eveiopment,.
v The couLmercial development designated for the intersection of Upper Boones Ferry
and 72nd is intended to serve the needs of the developing 72nd industrial area..
Typical businesses would be restaurants and/or a delicatessen and service establish-
ments such as banks and barber shops.
POLICY 17. As existing businesses are renovated and new ones are constructed, t_he site
design review staff will encourage high design standards: Compatibility of land-
. J
scaping, architecture and signing will be sought_ -
POLICY 18. Require the placement of utilities undergound in neva developments and
seek means of placing existing above ground utilities underground.
• �� 1 ♦: L:"v_�"'• .w.[ us�t � � t:p ' a -tbe[`•d11 s"�,ai-r��
Aw
.. v '� � rq►t OF _ .[ ��'�' t .: � �-.
t Duct CT •����- �4 �` a J ( t t < < -
tM faiAOVM C4 �r t.R,OA[ �• R• 'r �.�.f.w
1: �? .A.sT.N w c i � B • It IIIA 'p_
a VL fi •♦ cT a••• r ♦ �•� 1t.w♦R. T
T 6.01.®AN2AN A t./1
RORTN TA
ciw /y..
(\ w.OUaN
t [IC r6 at•C i
FSL ♦ " < r A Z Y 5 0 1 ♦ 6T CO %Ir•
R. IewIR P -
tf s < I 1
t.a. r �ylO 01p 1� S.W.LEVs e. PG\ n •�<' k �Jti
_ N
iAr16.«.tATN6m E•' � a i .[ - M IJ + 1 1 �� a ° ti
< € wOODWAr°
tt a �$ F�Tw,/�,y[r = : ,iN ° ^ ♦ t ° zF+r♦ �s.� ^4 s.x.QAC _sT < °a g�
wL � ► oh4f- sa a1o.,f 7j[O ' ti31c
[ a� w. '• M11 lLI J 2.1T 1 r l�OUL a� rC,' g t.w.M 1 � 1
a,r. • �• N N R w'•L l l OOS X51, C �+OSO t.w.�Fa1• N[_ ��
ST 8, I
' i S' , _; crla T anrT��'�\ ¢ w�P ♦ c. �cL a T { ri
N i t.4. TIrID000w-
�I BARE ` �T 1 s. B:wDI d awt.,y r �e t♦ r� \ �c 'rk ylr rrra w• z♦ap�_ w �. 1
I .i t t. •a- e- r MANS OF p Lrrs T; 1 a E•
,A\
\-� _ ' .r 4r rf CDIFr[ecF I v, ? TIGARD ` 5 ^I A Toff c I s IT
.a;-LAs•
�c.w.A AT r < ��1 i "'r/tiscCr ca[w r waL ♦ ioarc ry . 11 I fL LPA
1 < • r c �N[w c �Dl�DE r `S•�jst 'yt•���` /J � t� ��>��ar ` w ��a i s� �,`
B VO S•.o E G 7 ;' - j ! f r.VAiNf f
t.x. tTN =
= o r Q.".FI L g,
W.
Erfa
1 �t FAI AVEN=
t'
t.T 'ETA w�<••,u FA~ VE ft �•{f ' f w [D Ew I ¢ •. �. I
/8����
RE*
} t S 1 i
_ DC(�ST/MTK LN ar i •LLVINgLYIER •1
r r t o t
S T
S' Eia sE w•C�^ '.'• «.LAYOrAAK YEA f
T�''/ a= `- �> < N _ G AMNO ER
c T s 4a > < e w r .� 6tiMITR
S LUY ILOw 1e CT _r!• t'C w. I[N c.w-cT = .� v.(A if1 i<.. .EENcrA` i'11wom LdIow-
6 Lf a > > w.Iw EX t.r..:�hEZ LC^ eT IID m t w. tONiTA
F R O rct "1•i< < •�TrA[/Jl', «i et _J / \ •f•
R K t[Z L11MIn N _ M � a > a• 1�'�.. .i{ twtwtl
•�� w D u Au[� t-K�1af _ I • .\ I CT—/-
.e r- E tTlr tLTq.'» » �r�� VIDOOC.tT I , q �swA I tp
.4 s p t5Y C O pT-HDtI cTx 'pw B."[VEAIIE ST�l
0 I 6OwTE fa.AM TN L[fl1E i E41NG 4c/T-"y tT�r• I !� ` o I
,t`• �_.�._.--LLLLLL[[[[II M OR PA CTS D%.na.wYi • re ss T 1 ,//- ♦� .0
v Q• 1Ea0UcrT ~•If1. �Aw.to ' oP U/tai--.t4 1E S• T!'^`ICi
= Jr = MR
tP a OOaYUAIvp i •) Y' 6T� AIIRI♦-GT aVE
OI
o�:ca a N iCA.r � -urlr r �. e �o f act•~ � � a tl a t•}�•dr- 'I 1, •�[
t rSE
Y ? yr
YARrNA 1 +•
T V g
Kep6 CITY .� A )< ` .i XrcAr° -- -- �--> 3..
J rpin
Q c
_ e+� Qr f c f sLrwo
nr 1 e AL _ w3'(`��r cy ,t B 1.MNOALEQCT 1,r 1. (..
'+. VILLA® d�1IOP�IIK O I I.W11TEV�«S"CT a. '-
DwaCO /r A wi -�/ 1 DI
S.BI���NDLE CT
<nl�� t �'�j �.or.•. ..Of+a`IHEIFLD rCT
C
t INOl A7 O+
♦:
ItCAA
o-
z<C~ � v"IL3D �fi �L^�:,:-•-j:T- J\/ ted"`•JE`� 'm - f T.I� 4
�t. rLLow 1 ~e 1 IEAM �a �r >�ci
& r trl I,cG p p
<C7 a .w �at• • [ er' YTL Uts• � i`•Ar
•, a.w.NAZH•IIoIK � ti V •� �. �T _ F —y�.1f w x w NT-:.
HAM
T - �'�> 1 � •�.R wA O ' i ...��wl r. 1� t N l •aA
°1 a = u r �'P..•f le _�i ° 4r.aET"s
S.W.4111LiT9N < ` z s `4 C ♦ „8.0 t.w.Y4[r�NJ��aiu
1 d. 8 71 Fi r-wWLCo �iT ":1
_ t, rAT1AT.� t C O =
r L • wNC C�&-•F
i Ct
J _W, a t.RYsot to
cy
A♦` I PEit6R0YT ''X
B --- 11 IL 1p,R.Y1NN(SltiLliT
7xim 113 1-r �• • S.W.my EAG ETIII
TYALATIH '
< <
CAPITAL CONSULTANTS,INC.
Investment Counselor 1
Capital Center
2300 S.W.First Avenue L� i y rr I kamKU
Portland,Oregon 97201 PLANNING DEPT.
(503) 241-1200
January 14 , 1983
Mr. Bill Monahan
City of Tigard
P. O. Box 233
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Re : Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map
Your Meeting Date January 22 , 1983
Trademark Plaza
7185 S. W. Sandburg Street
Tigard, Oregon
Dear Mr. Monahan:
It has recently come to my attention that the City of Tigard is
having a series of meetings in an effort to have a unified city-
wide land use plan. CCI Real Estate Equity Fund owns 14 pieces
of commercial property throughout the Pacific Northwest . Two of
them are influenced by this comprehensive plan. Specifically, it `
is the building mentioned above, referred to as Trademark Plaza ,
that we feel is in an area that is being improperly zoned. Attached
to this letter is a copy of your map on which I have circle- the 1
area that I think is being improperly zoned.
The City is proposing that the land on the north side of Sandburg
Street be light industrial and the property to the south of Sandburg
be heavy industrial . This seems quite preposterous in that on the
north side of Sandburg there are all offices and on the south side
of Sandburg there are both offices and very light industrial . It
is , therefore, our recommendation that the zone be changed so that
everything to the north of Sandburg be C-P which is professional
office and that for a few hundred feet south of Sandburg the zoning
should be I -L (light industrial) .
Would you please make sure that this letter is read at the meeting
of January 22 , If you have any questions , please do not hesitate
to contact me .
�i7erely,
� L
0"ovA
/js James F. Crumpacker
Attach. Assistant Vice President
l
cc : Mark Meyer ;
i
_
1 ` '��ii � •� � Iii � .is' ii�11N.
to
IMF
. v ;ONO*
._�
1•
4. a10
J.-(.
�� `� �:, ■
• ���' �
.�„ , -
r -
•
t
- r
f 00
1. L- V®Y& associates-inc.
Z N
7095 S.W.SANDBURG ROAD, PORTLAND,OR 97223-8082 503/620-7065 soc�At..
January 17 , 1983 JAN 18 1983
CITY OF TIGARD
PLANNING DEPT.
Mr. Jeremy Coursolle
City of Tigard
Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mr. Coursolles
It is my understanding that the City of Tigard is
having a series of meetings in an effort to form a compre-
hensive citywide land use plan. A building owned by our
profit sharing plan lies on property which I believe is
being improperly zoned. Attached is a copy of the Compre-
hensive Plan Map with the property in question circled.
Our address is 7095 SW Sandburg Rd.
The Cities plan proposes to make land which lies
north of Sandburg Road light industrial and to the south
of Sandburg Road heavy industrial. The area is currently
made up of professional offices, with some light industrial.
Is is our recommendation that the plan be changed to remove
the heavy industrial designation for the property on the
southside of Sandburg Road. Professional office to the
north of Sandburg Road would also be our recommendation.
Sincerely,
Mark T. Meyer
Controller
MTM/pjf
enclosure
_ Sales and Merchandising to the Food and Drug Trade =
PACIFIC NORTHWEST - t
I'M
W O >4
4
E,/^1 w�/
vI W I N
:j
O w En �4 �4
4) `
CSD E-4
Q)
W W C k
UU' a 3 U IT
.r.. ?.:.
W O
cn 01 a Rs
,-q rC5 J
O >+ -r,+ E (1)
H +t U 'L3
Y
FC N .0 (L) —4 N
FC C7 r cd Q)
:
-4 164
r—lH � .0 O4-1
P` w E a) 4-)
• 0 'O 'Cf •,i n
rt -rt Q) —4 to
OFC as W a) a)
U � EE E S4
w
O
4-3
N
Q) 'J �4
.t E-
4-) \ A
H ul r3 O -x
z (a �E: �4
w
cc
O z y U> , aa)i x
04 � #4a a � o
U - a
z
5
FC O O
4-) e i
c
z� -.a
a zs
cn o
0
0+
N
OO 00 M €
x _ ao
w
� o CN
H C%A
w r
E7! a f
In of A to h
V
JAN 1'i 1983
"- z- CITY OF t IGARD
PLANNING DEPT.
Uw%nd investment co a REALTORS
January 12, 1983
Planning Commission
City of Tigard
12755 S.W. Ash
Tigard, OR 97223
Re: Approximately 20 acres surrounded by Royal Mobile Villa, Pacific Hwy. ,
and the Tualatin River.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The purpose of this letter is to call your attention to an area that is
inside your planning area but outside the City Limits and blocked from an-
nexation by the fully developed Royal Mobile Villa.
The current county zoning for this area is B-2 Commercial on the south part
and RU-20 apartment on the north. The current Tigard plan calls for mixed
use commercial residential on the south and medium density residential on
the north.
For reasons outlined below I urge the city to plan this entire area for
low scale commercial uses. While most, if not all land owners and residents
of this area agree with this request, I can only officially speak for my
2.31 acres on the north side of S.W. Gravens Street.
This parcel was approved by NFO 6 for a mini-warehouse development by
unanimous vote after much discussion at several meetings this last spring
and summer. The n-tighborhood believed such a low intensity use would impact
their area much less than a multi family development.
I did not pursue the matter further because at that same NPO meeting the
city planning staff distributed a preliminary draft for the new comp. plan
that showed our property and the acreage to the south as all Commercial
Linear. Just recently I was surprised to learn the area is now ed
propos
to be medium density residential.
I was told by your staff that while originally they felt the site was
appropriate for commercial they changed their minds for these reasons:
Portland, Oregon 92225 Branch Office 292-4425
150 3 297-2 a42 3 S.W. Canyon_Road Property Management 292-9254
50 :--
MM
Page 2
1) This would create an isolated pocket of commercial.
2) There are other sites in the city better suited for diverse commercial
activity.
3) "The County" wants to limit strip commercial along Pacific Hwy.
Of course these points and this decision merit full discussion but to
highlight the arguments I will comment that:
1) A 20 acre pocket of commercial is much more viable than a 20 acre pocket
of residential. The fully developed Royal Mobile Villa and its gully
that forms our Eastern boundary prevents this site from any direct
access to schools , churches and other neighborhoods. It simply can
not meet minimum criteria for a residential neighborhood.
2) It may be true there are better commercial locations in the city and
on Pacific Hwy. but this is certainly a good one for low intensity
office professional type uses.
3) The county recently approved a commercial use directly across Pacific
Hwy. from our property on a 1 acre site with less than 250 ft. depth_
Our site has more than 750 depth and plenty of room to co-ordinate
access to and turning-merging lanes on to the highway. We do not fit
into any planner's definition of "strip" commercial.
I could use reams of paper with more points why this location is not feasible
as residential but is viable as commercial, but in order to keep this letter
readable I will close with a request that you consider the points below
and then as met? provide any more information you need in order to make
an informe decision.
Sincerely '
Fre ick J. Hoene
Owner of Tax Lot 1200 2S1 15B
A) Our long narrow site had caused all apartment layouts to be rejected
by Washington County Design Review.
B) Because of Royal Mobile Villa and its flood plain maps and aerial photos
do not truly indicate the isolated nature of this area.
C) All modern development fronting on Pacific M7y. has been commercial.
Residential on a highway must be on a large enough site to create
buffering. j
D) Our proposed uses would have lower impact on neighborhood character
and use of public facilities than an apartment development..
E) Conditional Use and Design Review procedures insure compatability.
F) Pacific Hwy. at this location can handle traffic. -One way in- One way
out and warning light at median break.
Page 3
G) Nearby residential development both inside and outside of Tigard has
been at higher than average densities. Thus there is a need for service
facilities such as this as well as Justification for eliminating a minor
amount of residential land.
H) Existing zoning and plan would allow the likes of: auditoriums,
hospitals, lodges and professional offices.
I) The quality of existing structures on Gravens Street - including a large
metal building operating as a commercial use at the back end - precludes
quality residential use of our property.
i
Dow NMI
jC
' December 28, 1982
W
JAN 51982
Mr. Bili MonahanCITY OF TIGARD cc: Phil Pasteris
City of Tigard PLANNING DEPT. WPO #r6
P. O. Box 23397
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Dear Mr. Monahan: '
We the undersigned residents of Picks Landing and
Copper Creek are very concerned with the Preliminary
Comprehensive Plan as it designates the zoning of
the property to the East and West of our developed
areas. To the East the maps indicate medium density,
and on the West the maps indicate medium high. At
the time many of us purchased our property, all
t
adjoining land was zoned as ours - low density. We
believe the higher density zoning will negatively affect _.
the character of our immediate neighborhood and the
reasons we moved to this development.
The area to the East is small and could not have a
large impact on the city' s density quota. It is not i
necessary to sandwich a very small medium density area
in between too much larger and existing low density areas.
On the West there is no transition density from low to
medium high, and there is ample undeveloped land further to
the West, which would not boarder highly deve-Loped loin
density areas. If higher density must go in our general
area, we believe there are better ways to locate this x
property to affect the lowest number of existing low density
residents.
I
We are willing to work with our NPO and the City Planning
Department, but feel the zoning of these two properties, a
as is, is entirely unacceptable and unfair to existing °
residents. We request th properties mentioned above be r
zoned low density.
Sincerely, J��. c�c� '
l/ ����I,� L-�f- � L'41 E
NAME ADDRESS �/V g
�� . � 'i i ��,.�,�' rL �=�'y:��• SCC' �'�i;'�'r {,�:��;� ►
ar
L '
January 19, 1983
Tigard i-lanning Commission.
City of Tigard
12755 S5/ Ash Street
Tigard, Cregon 97223
Attn: Liz Newton
Dear Commission. i::embers:
It is our understanding twat the Cit- of Tigarc? r+il_ he h:-vin. hearings on
the zoning of properties= in Tii;ard. ;e, as owners of Tax lot 1000,
iiashinton County Assessor's :::air 2 S1 14A would like at this time to request
the zoning of our property be changed to allow a higher density. This property r-
r
consists of approximately 20 acres which lies below the 10C year flood plain g.
and asap roxin;�tely 8 acres= •;f usable, buildable higher land. We have been plan_-ing
on dedicating the 20 acre Portion to the City of Ti -,ard for use as part of Cook
park.. Trois portion cont-ins some exceilent natural habitat land and is adjacent
to the )ark. A higher derisity zoning would allow us to fully utilize the
remaining approximately 8 acre portion at it's highest and best use.
;!e are making triis request: in writing at this time, but -i.e will have a
representative at your mee tings, or :vE vi-ill be present ourselves. Should you
have any questions, please call our attorney, Jean C. ;erst, Tualatin Plaza,
Tualatin, at 692-490Ci- if you are unable to conta:.t ?air. Werst, please call
Peggy Gensman, our agent, aL 692-3050.
Very truly yours, _
:.is. Neva Elliot
John ':,'illiamson
h1arvin Smith
cc. Dean C. •;erst, ;ttof--F-; F
6tewart Title, :Jicki York
%l ``;-`;v rip--( �, .•''�� s
t
i
f
t
1
c
!� J i
C1TY OF T IGARD
PLANNING DEPT
2
w
wo
� U
H W
U) a t
z
oa
Hw
E-4 E-4
[n H
W W
c�
U) p
x
2
O
H i
� C7
a cn
2-71 04
o �
U
y
d` r
M fJ�
N
r
� O
O
r1 O
r U o
2 LO
H
z +� 4J
W. 0 0
2 x x
O ti
O U H
a
z
yF
3
h� 4-) {
W
0
H
0+
O co > p
a 0 v
w ri z
N M
OD 00
w
H o �
E-s M
A of z h