Loading...
City Council Packet - 07/15/1985 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate JULY 15,1985, 7:30 P.M. sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start 10865 SW WALNUT of that,agenda item. Visitor's agenda items TIGARD. OREGON 97223 are asked to be kept to 2 minutes or less; longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by con- tacting either the Mayor or City Administrator. 1. SPECIAL MEETING: 1.1 Call To Order and Roll Cali 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance 1.3 Call To Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or Less, Please) 3. PUBLIC HEARING - BILL & JEAN BALDWIN & RICHARD & SHARON ULLRICH - NPON3 MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 5-85, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT M 1-85, VARIANCE V 9-85 Review of the Planning Commission's decision for denial to adjust and then divide three parcels of 0.29, 0.78, and 1.02 acres into five parcels of ,40,300; 20,800; 8,700; 7,800; & 8,600 square feet and a variance to allow a 20 foot wide driveway width where 24 foot driveway length where a maximum of 100 foot length is required. The property is zoned R-4.5 (Residential 4.5 units/acre). Located: 13500 and 13530 SW 121st Avenue (WCTM 2S1 3CD lots 4400, 4401, & 4500). o Public Hearing Opened o Summation by Planning Staff o Public Testimony o Recommendation of Planning Commission & Planning Staff o Public Hearing Closed o Consideration by Council 4. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE WORKSHOP o City Engineer 5. COUNTY ROAD ACCEPTANCE DISCUSSION/REPORT o City Engineer 6. SIDEWALK POLICY DISCUSSION - ORDINANCE NO. 85- 0 Legal Counsel 7. ELECTIONS/CHARTER UPDATE DISCUSSION o Legal Counsel 8. 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 by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 8.1 Approve Council Minutes - July 8, 1985 8.2 Receive and File Community Development Land Use Decisions t ibo 8.6 Newsletter Draft Approval 8.7 Authorize City Execution Hall Blvd. Baptist Church Compliance Agreement and Bond Acceptance by City 8.8 Authorize Mayor & Recorder to Execute Compliance Agreement for Shadow Hills II Subidivsion 8.9 Accept Deeds and Easements for: o Oregon Education Association - Partial Release of Mortgage o Oregon Education Association - Permanent Slope Easement o Oregon Education Association - Warranty Deed-Statutory Form o Way W. Lee - Warranty Deed-Statutory Form o Way W. Lee - Permanent Slope Easement 8.10 Accept George Scott Permanent Sanitary Sewer Easement 8.11 Authorize Anton Park Partial Release of Bond Money Resolution No. 85-53 8.12 Authorize Elton Phillips Partial Release of Bond Money Resolution No. 85-54 9. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff ;. ._ Resolution No. 85-55 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session'-under the provisions of URS 192.660 (1) (d) & (h) to discuss labor relations and pending litigaticr issues. a 11. ADJOURNMENT 2964A COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 15 1985 - PAGE 1 �r T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES JULY 15, 1985 - 7:30 P.M. 1. _ROLL CALL: Present; Mayor John Cook; Councilors Phil Edin (arriving at 7:38 P.M.), Jerry Edwards, and Ima' Scott; City Staff: Bob Jean, City Administrator; Bill Monahan, Community Development Director; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel; and Loreen Wilson, Deputy City Recorder. 2. CALL TO STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS a. City Administratorrequestedthe following items be considered: ,1 Little League Field Maintenance ,2 Used VehiclePurchase For Building/Codes Enforcement` .3 Summerlake Algae Control .4 Expense Policy Review .5 Resolution Supporting Waterhouse Annexation .6 Position Authorization For Engineering Assistant b. Councilor Scott requested information on the following items: .7 General Motors Update From Jerry McNurlin .8 O'Mara/Frewing Property Owners Concerns For 7/22/85 Meeting 3 VISITOR'S AGENDA a. Tom Noble spoke regarding concerns on MLP 9-85 Director's Decision. He wished to have the half street improvement required at the time of development instead of at the time of the lot split. COUNCILOR ERIN ARRIVED: 7:38 P.M. After further discussion, Councilor Scott moved to require the completion of the half street improvement be a precondition to issuance of a building permit for the flag lot being created. Councilor Edwards seconded by motion. Motion- approved by 3-0-1 majority vote of Council present. Councilor Edin abstained. b. Ms. Karen Butler, 9220 SW Millen Drive, expressed concern regarding sewer billing collection process. After further discussion, Council requested staff report back at the August 12, 1985 meeting. Julie Hadley, 9215 SW Millen Drive and Arthur Soria, 9235 SW Millen Drive, were also present and expressed concern. C. Jack Schwab, 9250 SW Tigard Street, represented Hall Blvd. Baptist Church and expressed concern regarding a temporary use permit for people to live in campers/trailers in the church parking lot while doing volunteer work on the church this summer. Consensus of Council was to consider this item further at the w 7/22/85 meeting. Page 1 COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 15, 1985 YS, 4 PUBLIC HEARING BILL & JEAN BALDWIN & RICHARD & SHARON ULLRICH NPO#3 MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 5-85, LOT LINE, ADJUSTMENT M 1-85, VARIANCE V 9-85 Reviewofthe Planning Commission's decision for denial to adjust and then divide three parcels of 0.29, 0.78, and 1.02 acres into five parcels of 40,300; 20,800; - 8,700; 7,800 & 8,600 square feet and a variance to allow a 20 foot wide driveway width where 24 foot driveway } length where a maximum of 100 foot length is required The property is zoned R-4 5 (Residential 4.5 units/acre). Located: -13500 and 13530 SW 121st Avenue (WCTM" 2S1 3CD lots 4400, 4401, & 4500) . a. Legal Counsel outlined the hearing format and encouraged citizens to be as brief as possible and discuss only those items which were on the record. b. Public Hearing Opened C. Public Testimony: Appellants o Jack Schwab, 9250 - SW Tigard Street. Attorney representing Applicants. Attorney Schwab presented a map outlining the actions taken to date and stated safety was not an issue with the driveways since the fire district had approved the concept. He also noted hardship for the applicants which was not self—imposed. He requested Councilset aside the Planning Commission denial and uphold staff's recommendation for approval. o Mr. Richard Ullrich, applicant, requested Council uphold staff's recommendation for approval. Respondents: 0 Bob Bledsoe, NPO #3 Chairman, stated the City is responsible for planning in areas within the urban growth boundary and encouraged Council to look at the large parcels of land to the south of this area which would allow development in a more uniform manner than requesting a lengthy driveway now. He noted the NPO opposes this development. 0 Bob Bledsoe read a letter into the record from Mr. & Mrs. Shade, 11530 SW Terrace Trails opposing the development. 0 City Recorder read into the record letters from Jack Sterett and Deanna Sterett. o The following people spoke in opposition to the development: Vittz Ramsdell, 11635 SW Terrace Trails, spoke as an NPO #3 member Jim Hargis, 11670 SW Terrace Trails ^. Nancie Stimler, 11525 SW Terrace Trails William Stephenson, 11620 SW Terrace Trails John P. Lee, 11510 SW Terrace Trails Gary DeFrong, 11650 SW Terrace Trails JULY 15, 1985 Page 2 COUNCIL MINUTES —' Rebuttal o Jack Schwab encouraged Council to read the staff's report and note the code provisions which would allow this development. d. Community Development Director stated Planning Commission recommends denial and staff recommends,approval. e. Public Hearing Closed f. Council Consideration o Councilor Edin felt traffic would not create hardship on Terrace Trails Drive by adding up to five homes. He felt the driveway should be limited so that it would not berami, zi street at a later date. o Councilor Scott felt the hardship was self—imposed by the applicants since development possibilities of this land should have been addressed before property was purchased g. Councilor Edwards moved to uphold the Planning Commission decision based on the same facts and conclusions outlined by the Commission. Motion seconded by Councilor Scott. Motion approved by a 3-1 majority vote of Council present. f , Councilor Edin voting nay. 5. TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE WORKSHOP/COUNTY ROAD ACCEPTANCE DISCUSSION Transportation Committee Members Present: Chairman Tom Sullivan: Members; Wilbur Bishop, Lidija Balodis, Robert Kempter, Mark Padgett, Milt Fyre, Joe Schweitz. a. The Transportation Committee discussed with Council the concerns they have regarding the area around Scholls Ferry Road and 135th Avenue. They recommended a resolution be approved to allow the City to acquire jurisdiction of the streets in that area. The Committee also recommended approval of a second resolution to set the policy for street jurisdiction issues and allow them to begin legal steps to obtain jurisdiction from the County. b. RESOLUTION NO. 85-51 A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO SUPPORT ACQUIRING JURISDICTION OF PORTIONS OF 121ST AND 135TH AVENUES AND GAARDE AND WALNUT STREETS FROM THE JURISDICTION OF WASHINGTON COUNTY. Motion by Councilor Edwards, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve. , Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. C. RESOLUTION N0. 85-52 A RESOLUTION OF THE_TIGARD CITY COUNCIL TO SUPPORT ACQUIRING JURISDICTION OF CERTAIN STREETS FROM THE JURISDICTION OF WASHINGTON COUNTY. LY 15, 1985 Page 3 — COUNCIL MINUTES — JU Motion by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor Edwards to 4 ' approve. _Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. d. Chairman Sullivan requested policy direction for the Committee from Council and thanked Frank Currie for his assistance, Council expressed their appreciation to the Committee and encouraged attention be given to the following items: o Continue obtaining jurisdiction of streets from County o Prioritize the street needs for improvements/overlays o Address transportation needs/issues in the Metzger area and recommend ways to finance improvements o Develop knowledge in transportation issues in general. o Report to Council when issues begin to arise and propose solutions b. CITY ENGINEER APPRECIATION a. Mayor Cook, on behalf of the Council, presented a Key to the City_ and a picture of the Windmill in appreciation for the number of hours of volunteer time spent by Frank Currie during his employment by the City. Mayor Cook noted that Mr. Currie has accepted a position with the City of Auburn, Washington, and will be terminating employment with the City 7/17/85, 7. HALL BLVD. LTD DISCUSSION a. City Engineer discussed issues surrounding Hall Blvd. LID project. He questioned whether easements should be allowed over the sidewalk areas for construction/side lot requirements. He noted that this would not be set- as a standard. b. Consensus of Council was to have the Transportation Committee look at this specific issue further and report back with a suggested policy directive for Council review on 8/12/85. RECESS: 10:05 P.M. RECONVENE: 10:20 P.M. S. SIDEWALK POLICY DISCUSSION – ORDINANCE N0. 05– a. Due to time constraints, consensus of Council was to consider this item on the 7/22/85 agenda. 9. ELECTIONS/CHARTER UPDATE DISCUSSION a. City -Administrator stated—the—Attorney---is—awa►t�e--ofetion problems with the wordage of the charter (i.e. state law changes). He also noted that since the City has grown, a change is needed to split the duties of City Recorder and Finance i Director. He questioned when Council wished to consider these items and send to the voters. b. Council requested this item be considered at the 8/12/85 meeting, and they would then decide when to approach the 'voters with the issues. Page 4 – COUNCIL, MINUTES –'JULY 15, 1985 one may request 10. CONSENT' AGENDA: These items are considered disussionto e Any routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: g1985 ' 10.1 Approve Council Minutes July , 10.2 Receive and File_Community Development Land Use Decisions 10.3 Approve Basketball Court Concept 10.4 Performance Auditing 10.5 Library Lease Sorg/Lib. 10.6 -Newsletter Draft Approval - Nall Blvd. Baptist Church Compliance 10.7 Authorize City Execution Agreement and Bond Acceptance by City Agreement for I 10.8 Authorize Mayor & Recorder to Execute Compliance Shadow Hills II Subdivision 10.9 Accept Deeds and Easements far: o Oregon Education Associat o Oregon Education Association- Permanent eSlope Easement lease of ae o Oregon Education Association - Warranty Deed-Statutory Form o Way W Lee - Warranty Deed-Statutory Form o Way W. Lee - permanent Slope Easement lO. Accept George Partt k Partial anent ti 1 Sanitary Sewer Release of Bond - Resolution ement 10.1111 Authorize Antonn Pa No. B5-53 Phillips Partial Release of .Bond . Money 10.12 Authorize Elton Resolution No. 85--54 Councilor Edin, seconded by Councilor Scott to approve a. Motion by .5 and the the consent agenda with the deletion of items 3 - aiddition of SDR 7-85 to item .2. Approved by unanimous vote of Council present. 1 i. NON--AGENDA ITEMS intenance - set over to 7/22/85 11.1 Little League Field Ma 11.2 Used Vehicle Purchase For Building/Codes Enforcement a, City Administrator recommended purchasing use vehicle for codes enforcement. b, Motion by Councilor Edwards, seconded by Councilor Edin to approve appropriation up to $6,000 to purchase late model used compact automobile. Approved by 3-1 majority vote of Council present. Councilor Scott voting nay, 11.3 Summerlake Algae Control a, City Administrator noted his item was not budgetidZpp for algae the 85-86 budget but recommended authorization to spend $ back with a control in Summerlake. Staff will be coming supplemental budget later in the year. ..£ to allow this expenditure now. b• Consensus of Council was Page5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 15. 1985 11.4 Expense Policy Review a. Councilor Edin stated he met with Mr. Lyster last week and discussed various concerns. Councilor Edin advised Council that he has requested Coopers and Lybrand, City Auditors to review the policy and expenses charged. Councilor Edin will keep Council advised of any further actions or concerns. 11.5 Resolution Supporting Waterhouse Annexation a City ; Administrator advised Council that a resolution had been preparedtoindicate Council's support of an annexation request by City of Beaverton for land in the area of Walker Road and 158th Avenue. b. RESOLUTION NO. 85-55 A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF BEAVERTON OF CERTAIN TRACTS OF LAND IN THE VICINITY OF WALKER ROAD AND 158TH AVENUE AND RECOMMENDING TO THE PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION APPROVAL OF SAID ANNEXATION b. Motion by Councilor Edin, seconded by Councilor Edwards to approve. Approved by 3-1 majority vote of Council present. Councilor Scott voting nay. 11.6 Position Authorization For Engineering Assistant a. City Administrator stated staff is currently reviewing the entire Engineering Services function and plan to have a report for Council in August. With the City Engineer change, the Engineering Division will need to study functions and positions. City Administrator recommended Council authorize a regular full-time Engineering Assistant/Draftsperson position in pay range #5 be hired now and freeze any hire in the recently vacated EIT II position (pay range #8) until the study is completed. b. Councilor Edin expressed concern that before the study is completed, the 'decision to replace the EIT II with an Assistant may not be the best move. C. Consensus of Council was to authorize the position of Assistant as outlined by the Administrator. 11.7 General Motors Update From Jerry McNurlin a. City -Administrator will request an update be included in the packet of 8/12/85. 11.8 O'Mara/Frewing Property Owners Concerns For 7/22/85 Meeting a. Consensus of Council was to have City Administrator contact the concerned citizens in the area of O'Mara & Frewing who contacted Councilor Scott and determine what the issues are. This item would then be discussed at the meeting of 7/22 or 8/12/85. Page 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 15, 1985' ": RECESS REGULARCOUNCIL MEETING: 11:00 P.M. 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session under- the provisions of QRS 192.660 (1) (d) & (h) to discuss -labor relations and pending litigation issues. 13. ADJOURNMENT: 11:35 P.M. 6Deputy City Recorder City of Tigard ATTEST: ` r - City of Tigard lwd3015A I s p 5 x Page 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES — JULY 15, 1985 TIMES PUBLISHING C®4-0360 Y N�1e7�644�1 P.O.BOX 3 e 0 PHONE(503)BB4-0380 BEAVERTON,OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising o ❑ Tearsheet Notice �EiVEpi City of Tigard, JUL 2 b 11985 a PO Box 23397 ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Tigard, OR 97223 CITY OF TIGARt? e i AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, as_ COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ' Jac quely,n Ag_ e—ee 1, being first duty sworn, depose and say that A r�thm i mdv�__9 Director,or his principal clerk,of the. �-=s -- ai newspaper of general circulation las �pt��d in ORS 193-0nthe and 193.020:published at__---- aforesaid county and state;that the i of which is he annexed,was published in the e printed copy ccessive and entire issue of said newspaper for —l--Bute consecutive in the following issues: Jul 11 l S. �. L_. guf�a sd ^ t tore me ilii Notary Public for Oregon t�ly CorjWMEx�`.., -�: -,. 920/88 ! �Eea � �a 9 :i ,�a+, TIMES Pl1�Ld�HINIG COMPANY tegai P.O.BOX 370 PHONE(503)6e4-0360 Notice 7-6432 BEAVERTON,OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising ��FIVFQ 1 r. e ❑ Tearsheet Notice f ,� City or city of Tigard A 2 a PO Sox 23337 ' ❑ Duplicate Affidavit RD Tigard, OR 97223 o t AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, jss. Jacquelyn Agee 1, being first duly sworn, depose and say that s r the Advertising Director,or his principal clerk,of the a'newspaperof denerat circulation as defined in ORS 1gin0the } and 193.020;published a* `ra `� aforesaid county and state;that the i Of which is hereto annexed,was published in the a printed copy 1 successive and entiro issue of said newspaper for consecutive in the following issues: 'kjuly 4 , 1985 3 s re ma this July 1 - 1985 Subscribed sn n t4 Notary Public far Oregon f ; MCommission Expires: 9/20/88 AFFIDAVIT 4T -. k yISITpR'S .AGENDA DATE — �S EG [,30A`ITEM #. _.—F,. nL mited' to 2 minutes or less, please ) e sheet f° items. Please sign on the appropriatof on t e agendabut asks thatncil you wishes to hear from you on other issues n - ; your concerns.. through staff. Please. .contact the City first tryto resolve Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. TOPIC ,STAFF CONTACTED NAME & ADDRESS lh C 0 7—T 's 4t ��: ?Tr }� r N, DATE-24/-S—A5-7 — i ATE2 /I wish. to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) , .1TSf4 DESCRIPTION: e t-1 YELP v 9-ss- Appellants (Supporting Appeal) Respondents (Against Appeal) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation Ak.t 1I 1.". l?n✓a fir Y Y-t Lk 6'at �.J CITY OF TIGARD`OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 7/15/85AGENDA ITEM DATE SUBMITTED: July 8. 1985 PREVIOUS ACTION Denial by Planning is ISSUEIAGENDA TITLE: Baldwin/Ullrich Commission on June 4, 1985 ; MLP 5-85/M 1-85/V 9-85 PREPARED BY: Keith Liden REQUESTED BY: City Council DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION_SUMMARY Review of the Planning Commission's decision for denial to adjust and then divide three parcels of 0.29, 0.73, and 1.02 acres into five, parcels of 40,300; 20,800; 8,700; 7,800; and 8,500 square feet and a Variance to allow a 20 foot wide driveway width where 24 ft. minimum width is required; also a variance to allow an approximately 230 foot driveway length where a maximum of 100 foot length is required. The property is zoned R-4.5 (Residential 4.5 units/acre). Located: 13500 and 13530 SW 121st Ave. (WCTM 2S1 3CD lots 4400, 4401, and 4500). ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. _Uphold the Commission's decision. 2. Reverse the Commission's decision. 3. - Reverse the Commission's decision and approve a portion of the application. SUGGESTED ACTION 1585P dmj s �a MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: 'City Council July 8. 1985 FROM: Keith Liden, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Baldwin/Ullrich Lot Line Adjustment M 1-85; Minor Lane! Partition MLP 5-85; Variance V 9-85. On June 4, 1985, the Planning Commission denied a proposal to adjust lot lines and then divide three parcels of 0.29, 0.78, and 1.02 :,: ,,s into five parcels of 40,300; 20,800; 8,700; 7,800; and 8,600 square feet w;. a Variance to allow a' 20 foot wide driveway width where 24 ft. minimum width is required; and a second Variance to allow an approximately , 230 foot driveway length where a maximum of 100 foot length is required. The property is zoned R-4.5 (Residential 4.5 units/acre). This decision reversed the Planning Director's approval of the application on April 26, 1985. At the conclusion of the hearing the Commission was told incorrectly that if the `Director's approval was reversed, the applicant would be entitled to appeal the decision to City Council. Section 18.32.110 (m) of the Code states l that a Planning Commission decision regarding an appeal of a Director's decision is final. The Commission had reservations regarding creation of these lots with access to Terrace Trails Drive. The applicant requested that the Commission at } least approve the Lot Line Adjustment (M 1-85), but the entire package was denied. Enclosed is a copy of the Director's Decision, Planning Commission minutes and final order. Commission transcript, A map showing the subject properties and k: the proposed development, notification list, and the sign-up list from the June 4th hearing. _t F t d - .r kxT CITY OF TIGARD NOCICE OF DECISION t�t MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 5 85 t LOT LIN£, ADJUSTMENT M 1 85 VARIANCE V 9-85 APPLICATION: Request by Hill and Jean Baldwin and Richard and Sharon Ullrich to adjust and then divide three parcels of, 0.29, 0.78. and 1.02 acres into five parcels of 40,300, 20,800, 8,700, 7800, 8,600 square feet, A variance is also requested to allow a 20 foot wide driveway width where 24 feet is required. The property is zoned R-4.5 (Residential 4.5 units/acre) and is located at 13500 and 13530 SW 121 Aver (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 3CO3 Tax Lots 4400, 4,401, .and 4524) DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City of Tigard has APPROVED the above described applications subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the Director based his decision are as noted below. A. FINDING OF FACT 1. Background The subject properties were annexed to the City in 1979. No other land use actions have been reviewed by the City. 2. Vicinity Information The properties to the east on Terrace Trails Drive, one parcel on the west side of 121st Avenue and one property immediate to the south are within the City and are zoned R-4.5 (Residential. 4.5 units/acre). The remaining parcels are within Washington County. The entire area is designated for Low Density Residential development in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Single family residences lie to the north (Woodcrest Subdivision) and east (Terrace Trails). A long, narrow parcel with a residence borders the subject properties to the south. This southern property was originally to be considered as part of this proposal, but it has been deleted at the request of the applicant. 3. Site Information and Proposal Description The subject property contains three parcels and two residences with driveway access onto 121st Avenue. The properties are tong ~: and narrow and they extend from 121st Avenue to Terrace Trails Drive. The property slopes gradually from 121st Avenue down to Terrace Trails Drive. NOTICE OF DECISION - MLP 5-85, M 1-85, V 9-85 - PAGE 1 a - The applicant proposes to adjust the configuration of the parcels followed by a partition of the parcels. The end result will be 5 parcels of 40.300, 20,800, 8,700, 7.800, and 8,500 square feet. The three smaller parcels are undeveloped and a private drive is intended to provide access to Terrace Trails Drive. A variance is also requested relating to the pavement width Code. The Code requires a, 30 foot wide requirement in the City access strip or easement with a 24 foot wide, paved driveway. The applicant is proposing to install a 20 foot wide,drive within a 30 foot wide easement along the northern property line. 4. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division has the following commen-fs a. An easement will be required for the sanitary sewer linea b. A street opening permit will be required to gain access to Terrace Trails Drive. C. Parking should be restricted for 25 feet on either side of the driveway and a 'stop sign should be provided. d. A new mailbox cluster will be required. The Building Inspection Officers has no objection to the request. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has the following comments: a. The vertical clearance for the drive shall be a minimum of 13,.5 feet. b. The driveway shall be at least 20 feet wide and capable of supporting loads up to 40,000 pounds. C. "No Parking" signs are needed along the driveway. d. All portions of the residences shall be within 500 feet of a fire hydrant. NPO N 3 is opposed to the proposal for the following reasons: a. Traffic of five additional houses on Terrace Trails Drive. b. The 20 foot wide private drive will inhibit police and fire district access. C. The small area on Terrace Trails Drive that is north ofthe driveway may be a maintenance problem. ( Several letters have also been received in opposition to the proposal. `-" The concerns related to the additional traffic, emergency access, and drainage. i NOTICE OF DECISION - MLP 5-85, M 1 85, d ,4-85 PACE 2 B. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSCON The review of this proposal is subject to the mpplicable policies in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the relevant sections in the Community Development Code. The criteria relevant to the 'lot line adjustment/partition are Plan policies 2.1.1, 6.3.1, 6.3:2, 6.3.3, 7.1.2, 7,4.4, and 6.1.3. and Community Development Code Chapter 18.50 and Sections 18.96.080, 18.96.090, 18,162,030, and 18.162.060, The Planning staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon he following findings: : a. Policy 2.1.1. is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization was given an opportunity to comment and surrounding property owners ;will be informed of the proposal. b. Policy 6.3.1. , 6.3.2 and 6.3.3 are satisfied because the proposed lot line adjustment/partition is virtually the same as the development in the area. Nearby lots are 7,500 to over 10,000 square feet in size and the lots proposed are all in excess of 7,800 square feet. Also, detached single family residences are proposed for the undeveloped lots C. Policy 7.1.2 is met because the Engineering Division has reviewed the application and has found that adequate water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer facilities are available. d. Policy 7.4.4 is met because the development will be required to connect with the public sewer system. C. Policy 8.1.3 is satisfied because the driveway access can be established in a manner that is consistent with City requirements for sight distance, public improvements, and safe access onto Terrace Trails Drive. The Planning staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable portions of the Community Development Code based upon the following findings: a. Chapter 18.50 is satisfied because the proposal meets the minimum lot size (7,500 square feet) and dimensional requirements of the R-4.5 zone. b. Section 18.96.080 is satisfied because the proposed lots are of sufficient size without including the land devoted to the common driveway. C. Section 18.96.090 is satisfied because adequate lot width is o 10 foot side yard requirement for houses on p:^aposed to meet th "flag .lots". NOTICE OF DECISION - MLP 5-85, M 1-85, V 9--85 - PAGE 3 d. Section 18. 162 030 and 18.16.060 relating to partitions and lilt line adjustments are met because the proposal complies with all applicable City requirements. The relevant criteria for the variance request are Comprehensive Plan policy 7.5.2 and Section 18. 13.040 of the Community Development Code. The Planning staff concludes that the variance proposal is consistent with Policy 7.5.2 because the proposed driveway width of 20 feet complies with fire code standards and the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has no objection provided that the conditions noted above are met.- The Planning staff concludes thatthevariance is consistent with the approval criteria noted in Section 18.134.050 of the Code based upon the following findings: a. The purpose of the minimum driveway width standard is primarily to provide adequate access for emergency vehicles. The fire district has indicated that the proposed width reduction to 20 feet will be acceptable. b. The 24 foot width requirement for driveways also applies - to multi—familyand commercial development which generate many times the vehicular traffic that will result from this proposal.` A small reduction in width that still allows for proper emergency access is appropriate. C. The proposed lots and single family residences are permitted and, except for the four foot reduction in driveway width, all other City standards will be met. d. The variance will have significant impact upon physical or natural systems. To a small extent the proposal will reduce the amount of water runoff. e. The proposed variance is minimal and will relieve the applicant of the expense of providing additional pavement that is unnecessary in this instance. Two remaining issues noted by NPO N 3 relating to traffic impact and yard maintenance are not specifically addressed in the Comprehensive Plan or the Community Development Code. The driveway is proposed to enter on Terrace Trails Drive rather than 121st Avenue because adequate space does not exist between the existing buildings and property lines. Also, due to minor sight distance constraints along this section of 121st Avenue, a driveway at this location (if it was possible) would not be ideal. NOTICE OF DECISION ML-P 5-85, M 1 -85, V 9-85 PAGE 4 ` Terrace Trails Drive is a local street that serves 36 lots. The additional three lots from this proposal will represent a traffic increase of less than 10%. The proposed lot configuration would provide the potential for a maximum of two additional lots for a total of five lots. Even if this possibility materializes (partition approval would be required), the increase in traffic would be less than 15%. This small increase would not result in traffic volumes that are, inappropriate for,a local street. The maintenance of the area on the north side of the proposed driveway will be the responsibility of the lot owner. Considering the current situation, it appears that a homeowner nearby will only improve present conditions C. DECISION The Planning Director approve M 1-85, MLP 5-85, and V 9-85 subject to the following conditions: 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR T'O RECORDING THE PARTITION. 2. Seven (7) sets of plan-profile public improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a registered Civil- Engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to the City's Engineering Section for approval. 3. Sanitary sewer plan-profile details shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. 4. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Section has issued approved public improvement plans. The Section will require posting of a 100% performance bond, the payment of a permit fee and street light fee. Also, the execution of a street opening permit shall occur prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public improvements plans. SEE THE ENCLOSED HANDOUT GIVING MORE SPECIFIC INFORMATION REGARDING FEE SCHEDULES, BONDING AND AGREEMENTS. 5. Parking restrictions shall be posted as required by the City and Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District. 6. The access drive and turn around shall meet Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District standards. 7. A new mailbox cluster shall be provided in a location approved by the City Engineer. H. The "basis of bearings" for the Plat or Survey shall. be County Survey 19,947, which is a part of the Tigard Field SurveyNetwork. NOTICE OF DECISION - MLP 5-85, M 1•-85, V 9-85 _ RAGE 5 9 The partition survey, legal description .ind easemer►t description shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. FHE CITY SHALL RECORD fiil_`,E DO<.UMENT AF fLR rHEY ARE APPROVED AND A COPY SHALL BE FORWARDED TO THE APPLICANT. 10. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date noted below.- < D. PROCEDURE 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: , XX The applicant & owners XX Owners of record within the required distance XX The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization XX Affected governmental agencies 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON May 6, 1985 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. 3. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance _ with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community G Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the CITY RECORDER within 10 days after notice is given and sent. s The deadline for filing of an appeal is 5:00 P.M. May 6, 1985 4. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall. 12755 SW _ Ash. PO Bos 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223, 639-4171. William A. Monahan, Director of Planning 6 Development DATE APPROVED (KSL:dm3/1285) ���+11� ��� ►"y.�I., ---� �J-- I i' ,- -• ,mac' F j . NOTICE OF DECISION'- MLP,-5- 85-, M 1-85, V 9-85 - PAGE:6 lIGARD 111_ANNING Cc�MMIS 1ON KFGIIL.AR MI F.I LNG JUNF a, 198k, 1. President Moen callvd the meeting to order' at 1 35 F)M. Tfie nuret.iny was held at Fowler Junior High LGI Room 10865 SW Walnut. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: President Moen; Commissioners Owens, Butler, ' Peterson, Campbell, Leverett, and Vander-wood. Absent: Commissioners Fyre and Bergmann. 3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES o Commissioner Owens moved and Commissioner Peterson seconded to adopt minutes as submitted. Motion carried by majority vote, Commissioner Vanderwood abstained. 4 COMMISSION COMMUNICATION O Commissioner Campbell stated she had been contacted regarding item 5.2 the appeal of MLP_5-85. O Staff reviewed the Street Vacation for SW 70th north of Hampton. e Commissioner Peterson moved and Commissioner Campbell _seconded to forward_ a recommendation for approval to City Council. Motion carried by majority vote. Commission Leverett abstained. S. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 5,1 APPLICATION FROM CHRIS BEDNAREK FOR APPOINTMENT TO NPO 3. o Chris Bednarek, 14465 SW Hazelhill Drive, stated he had attended a NPO # 3 meeting and felt this would a good point to get involved with the City. o Commissioner Owens moved and Commissioner Butler seconded to forward Chris Bednarek's application to City Council with a recommendation for appointment. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. 5.2 APPEAL OF DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL FOR MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 5-85, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT M 1-85, AND VARIANCE V 9-85. Request to by Bill and Jean Baldwin and Richard and Sharon Ullrich to adjust and then divide three parcels of 0.29, 0.78, and 1.02 acres into five parcels of 40,300, 20,800, 8,700, 7,800, 8,600 square feet. Also a variance request for the required pavement width and length of driveway. Located 13500 and 13530 SW 121 Ave. (WCTM 2S1 3CD, lot 4400, 4401, and 4500). Associate Planner Lidera reviewed the Director's decision, noting a staff oversite regarding the length of the driveway. Discussion followed on how to proceed. 71 �s PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 4 1985 Page 1 1 ' '77 _ s APPI ICANT'S PRESENTAI 10N o Bill Baldwin, 13530 SW i.21st, stated hi- huAd purchased thc• property in } 1979 with the undc!rstanding that thea lot could bo acr.ossod from r either direction: He submitted exhibit showing layout of homes aril the disadvantages of making an entrar,re onto 1213t. He added that the traffic impact would be insignificant and the lot sizes were consistent with surrounding properties. Discussion followed_ z regarding parking/no parking on private drive. z PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Bob Bledsoe, 11800 SW Walnut, reviewed the letter they had submitted as their appeal. He referenced a memo from Aldie Howard which stated that access be provided through to 121st They also opposed approving a variance to allow a driveway length over 100 feet.- He suggested that another road with access through the southern lots would be more adequate. o Jack Sterett, 11680 SW Terrace Trails, supported NPO # 3 position. He did not feel the traffic impact on Terrace Trails would be insignificant. o Deanna Sterett, 11680 SW Terrace Trails opposed the approval. She felt a access for five homes should be served with a road not a driveway and there should be adequate parking so that cars are not parked in the dirt. o Jim Hargis, 11670 SW Terrace Trails Drive was concerned about the length of the drive. He felt the 100 foot limitation should apply, otherwise it would set a precedent for the entire City. o John Keppel, 11695 SW Terrace Trails, opposed and supported previous testimony. e o P. R. McShane, 11530 SW Terrace Trails, supported NPO ll 3 position. He stated a previous request had been denied and this one should also ! s be denied. a Bob Bledsoe, 11800 SW Walnut, speaking for himself, felt allowing the driveway length would violate the principle of limiting driveways to 100 feet. o Marion McShane, 11530 SW Terrace Trails, opposed, she was concerned because the increased traffic would become a hazard for the numerous children who play in the cul—de—sac. o Gary Defrung, 11650 SW Terrace Trails Drive, reviewed the history of the area and opposed the approval. o - John Lee, 11510 SW Terrace Trails, opposed, especially the length of the driveway,- even with no parking sign on one side, he didn't feel people would pay any attention to them. re � : PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 4, 1985 Page 2 Fawn= KnIffmiff�ff n Tony Mr_hasI ine, 11570 ;W Tiar•rar.e Trai Is, opposg!d becaus4- of the \ safety with the number of children who, play in the streets. i _o - Nancie Stimler, 115:)`i SW Terrace Trails, stated she was a Ginty Council member when this property was annexed. She opposed the private driveway because the police would nut be able to enforce the no parking. The property was originally annexed so that they could be connected to City Sewer and as of this date none have connected to the City sewer. She_felt a good compromise would be to allow one lot to fare Terrace Trails Drive. REBUTTAL: o Mr. Baldwin, stated he had tried to get together with other property owners with little success. He had paid out $20,000 toward sewer service. He had meet all the requirement except for the 100' driveway length and 24 foot width. Ne also would continue to live on the property as he would be building a new home. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Discussion followed between Commissioners and staff regarding access to 121st and to Terrace Trails and the sections of the Code which would apply. Discussion on lots developing to the south and the private driveway. o Consensus of the Commission was to oppose the approval. o Mr. Baldwin asked if the Commission would at lease approve the Lot Line adjustment. o President Moen asked if the applicant . could appeal the decision. Associate Planner Liden stated that it was his understanding that if the Planning Commission denied the application the applicant could appeal it to City Council. (Staff Note: It has been determined that the applicant cannot appeal to City Council, he would have to appeal to LURA, Planning Commission decisions are final on appeals of the Director's decision's.) Commissioner Butler moved and Commissioner Vanderwood seconded to deny MLP 5-85, M 1-85, and V 9-85, commenting that further items of this type should be reviewed with Engineering to give an idea of wants being planned. Denial is based upon the following sections not being satisfied in the Community Development Code. 18.108.070 A; 18.162.050 C; 18.164.030 A. 18.164.030 B 2 (?); 18.164.030 C 1; 18.164.030 S; and 18.164.060 a 1. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. z Recess: 9:00 P.M. Reconvene 9:15 P.M. _ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 4, 1985 Page 3 111111111i III!@ 111111i CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FINAL ORDER NO. 85— // PC A FINAL ORDER INCLUDING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, WHICH DENIES AN APPLICATION FOR A MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 5-85, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT_ M 1-85, AND VARIANCE e - V 9-85 REQUESTED BY BILL AND JEAN BALDWIN AND RICHARD AND SHARON ULLRICH. A. FINDING OF FACT I. General Information APPLICATION: Request by Bill and Jean Baldwin and Richard and Sharon Ullrich to adjust and then divide three parcels of 0.29, 0.78, and 1.02 acres into five parcels of 40,300, 20,800, 8,700, 7,800, and 8,17YJ square feet. A variance is also requested to allow a 20 foot wide driveway width where 24 feet is required. The property is zoned R-4.5 (Residential 4.5 units/acre) and , is located at 13500 and 13530 SW 121st Ave. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 3 CO Tax Lots 4400, 4401, and 4500). The findings and conclusions on which the Planning Commission based their decision are as noted b®low 2. Background The subject properties were annexed to the City in 1979. No other l land use actions have been reviewed by the City. The Planning Director approved the above application on April 26, 1985 and this decision was appealed by NPO #3 on May 6, 1985. 3. Vicinity Information The properties to the east on Terrace Trails Drive, one parcel on the west side of 121st Avenue and one property immediate to the south are within the City and are zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 acres0acre). The remaining parcels are within Washington County. . The entire area is designated for Low Density Residential development in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Single family residences lie to the north (Woodcrest Subdivision) and east .(Terrace Trails). A long, narrow parcel with a residence borders the subject properties to the south. This southern property was originally to be considered as part of this proposal, but it has been deleted at the request of the applicant. 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The subject property contains three parcels and two residences with driveway access onto 121st Avenue. The properties are ng and narrow and they extend from 121st Avenue to Terrace Trails Drive. The property slopes gradually from 121st Avenue down to Terrace Trails Drive. _.. PAGE 1 FINAL ORDER AFD, PC - The applicant proposes to adjust the configuration of the parcels followed by a partition of the parcels. The end result will- be .5 parcels of 40,300, 20,800, 8.700, 7,800 and 8,600 square feet. The three smaller parcels are undeveloped and a private driveis intended to provide access to Terrace Trails Drive. A variance is also requested relating to the length and pavement width requirement in the City Code for private drives. The Code requires a 30 foot wide access strip or easement with a 24 foot wide, paved driveway with a maximum length of 100 feet. The applicant is proposing to install a 20 foot wide drive within a 30 foot wide easement along the northern property line. That will be approximately 230 feet long. 5. Agency and WPO Comments The Engineering Division has the following comments a. An easement will be required for the sanitary sewer line. b. A street opening permit will be required to gain access to Terrace Trails Drive. C. Parking should be restricted for 25 feet on either side of the driveway and a stop sign should be provided. d. A new mailbox cluster will be required. The Building Inspection Office has no objection to the request. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has the following comments: a.. The vertical clearance for the drive shall be a minimum of 13.5 feet. b. The driveway shall be at least 20 feet wide and capable of supporting loads up to 40,000 pounds. C. "No Parking" signs are needed along the driveway. d. All portions of the residences shall be within 500 feet of a fire hydrant. NPO M3 is opposed to the proposal for the following reasons: A. Traffic of five additional houses on Terrace Trails Drive. b. The 20 foot wide private drive will inhibit police and fire district access. C. The small area on Terrace Trails Drive that is north of the driveway may be a maintenance problem. FINAL ORDER NO.SS PC - PAGE 2 opposition to the proposal. Several letters have also been received in access. and Theconcernsrelated to the additional traffic, emergency drainage. t g, ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION policies in the- ro sal is subject to the applicable The review of this P Pa Community Tigard comprehensive Plan and therelevant levant to inthehelot line g The triter �. Development Code. 6.3..3, adjustment/partition are Plan Policies 2.1•e�t �e 1Chapter219.50 and 7.1.2. 7.4,4, and 8.1.3 and Community Developm18.162,030, 18.162.Q50(e), Sections 18.96.080, 18.96.090,, 18.108.070(x), 18.162.060. 18,164.030(a). and 18.164.060(e)• Commission concludes that the proposal is consistent with The Planning on the the applicable portions of she Comprehensive Plan based up fallowing findings. Planning 2.1.1 is satisfied because to commehborhoont and aurrounding a. Policy given an opportunity Organization was g pp property owners will be informed of the proposal. ta.3.2 and .6.3.3 are satisfied because the proposed b, PO 6.3.1, the same as the lot line_ ad area. is _virtually in the area• Nearby lots are 7,500 to over 10.000 developmentSed are all in excess of square feet in size and the lots P�"oP° le family residences are � Rrop�osed for theeundevelopeddlotshed sing � Engineering Division has reviewed , C• Policy 7.1.2 is met because the £n9 sewer, the application and hasfound thatavaadequate de a ate water, sanitary and storm sewer faciliti d. Policy 7.4.4 is met se w r system/ access will be required to - connect with the public access can be is satisfied because the driveway e. Policy 8.1.3 requirements established in a manner blic hat ismpro°vements, and safe access onto for sight distance, pu Terrace Trails Drive. concludes that the proposal is not totally Commission The Planning applicable portions of the Community Development consistent with the Code based upon the following findings: a, Chapter 18.50 is s satisfied because the proposal meets the minimum lot size (7,500 square feet) and dimensional requirementof the R-4.5 zone. b Section 18.96.080 is satisfied because the proposed . lots are of ng the land devoted to the common sufficient size without includi driveway. PC PAGE 3 FINAL ORDER NO. "!� - C. Section 18.96.090 is satisfied because adequate lot width is proposed to meet the 10 foot side yard requirement for houses on "flag lots d'. Section 18.108.070(a) and 18.162.050(e) are not satisfied because the parcels did not have 15 feet of frontage on the public street. e. Section 18.164.030(c),(1) is not met because the private drive will exceed,100 feet in length, f. Section 18.164.060(e)(1) is not met because the proposal will not allow for the efficient re-division of the subject property and adjacent lots to the south. C. DECISION Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning Commission denies M 1-85. MLP 5-85, and V 9-85. It is further' ordered that the applicant be notified of the entry of this order. � by the Planning Commission of PASSED: * This A7 4 day of 1985, the City of Tigard, - A. Donald Moen. President Tigard Planning Commission (KSL:p*/1481P) E � Mx FINAL ORDER N0. � k' '..' A-�y' r le IIGA€tD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - JUNE 41 1985 7:30 PM Fowler Jr Hi Transcribed Text from Recorded Transcript 1 1. Meeting called to order. 2. Roll Call Don Moen, John Butler, Dean Leverett, Bonnie Owens, Dave Peterson, Chris Vanderwood, Nancy Campbell answered. Don Moen: First of all Staff , do you have any cancellations tonight? Keith Liden: Unfortunately no. Don Moen: OK. There's a signup sheet at the back of the room for those wishing to speak. It is required that you sign the sheet before your item comes up, preferably right f now. So if you wish to speak this evening. . .we request that you sign up in the back of the room. . .We would ask that particuarly when your item comes up, that if you wish to speak you'd move to the front to speed things along this evening. We appreciate it. We do ask that you keep your comments brief and not to repeat other speakers but try to add new information for the Planning Commission 's consideration. I think this announcement is important this evening, from looking at the schedule. the meeting will close promptly at 12:00 midnight, whether we're done or not. At 11:00 we will review aur status and reschedule any items r i y that cannot be heard this evening, but we're going to try to i_ proceed as quickly as possible. . . to cover all the items and get proper testimony. - With those announcements, we' ll go on to the minutes of the previous meeting_ 3. Motion made, seconded and unanimously passed to approve minutes from May 7, 1985 meeting_ 4. Communications: Anyone. . .communications? Nancy Campbell : I did. In regard to Terrace Trails-5.2. did contact me concerning the procedures. . .how this all worked. . . Don Moen: With that, we'll move on to the Public Hearings portion of the meeting. Diane Jelderks: Excuse me Mr. Moen, I see that you have an item to, deal with under your Planning Commission communication. This is a new item (REVIEW OF STREET VACATION FOR SW 70th & HAMPTON) . I distributed to you copies of a memo from Liz Newton and a copy of a map showing where the street vacation is. This is a new procedure that was instituted through the City Council , where you have to make a recommendation. It 's not a public hearing process. The public hearing process is done through the City Council , but they want you to have an opportunity to look at it. Don Moen: OK, this is for input from the Planning Commission, but riot for taking public testimony_ Diane Jelderks: Correct. (Matter and discussion not relevant to any of the Public (� Hearings items, so not transcribed. ) 4r" Wll 111111M Don Moen: Before opening the Public Hearings I 'd like to read this short statement. Meetings of tl►e Tigard Planning Commission are governed by provisions of Title 2 of the Tigard Municipal Code and ORS Chapter 227. Under those statutes, certain standards are established for the conduct of public meetings. It is the policy of the Planning Commission to adjere to a format in the Public Hearing process that is designed to afford the applicant and any objectors an opportunity to be heard and to allow the Planning Commission the opportunity to obtain factual and Subjective information on which to base its decision. Accordingly, the following format will be used: First, the public hearing will be opened, then the Staff will male its report and recommendations, followed by the Applicant 's presentation. After that there will be an opportunity for input from the NPO or CCI. And then public testimony will be taken, first 'pro' and then 'con '• of the item. After that time there will be a period of time for rebuttals by those in favor of the item, or by the Applicant, of any testimony given opposing. The opposing people will have an opportunity to rebut the Applicant 's presentation earlier in the session, uh, at the time they are giving their testimony. After this time public hearing will be closed, and no further public testimony will be accepted. And I will remind you that you need to sign up in the back. There are some sheets in the back of the room, if you wish to speak. After the public hearing is closed the Commission will have its :r. discussion; take its action. _ A recorded transcript is kept of all Planning Commission meetings, and a transcribed text �N can be made from that record should anyone so desire, but at his or her own time and expense. All testimony offered in public hearing must be identifiable, so before testifying, please address the President of the Planning Commission and identify yourself. Any testimony offered is subject to cross examination or rebuttal , so be prepared to defend your position. With that, we'd like to move on to Item 5. 1.._ 5. 1 REVIEW Chris F. Bednarek 's APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO NPO #3. Dan Moen: Could we have the Staff report please. Keith Liden: This item is to review an application by Chris Bednarek, who wishes to be appointed to NPO #,3, and he's been invited this evening to indicate his reasons for wanting to become a member pf the NPO, and we just ask that you review his application and give him an opportunity to speak:. Chris Bednarek: . . .two different pronunciations. Don Moen: OK. Flow close were we? Chris Bednarek: "Bed-NAR-rick". (laughter) Either one is acceptable at this moment. I guess, well the reason I 'm interested is because of one of the items that actually is on the agenda today, and that 's the Baldwin/Ullrich zone change, F planned development, etc. That affects the area I live in. 3 And it was apparent from discussing with several of my neighbors that we were passing through the meadow and we g learned what was going on, so I did, come to the NPO hearing, 4 u- 3` Y, w�i�3 and.. . it seemed it like it was an opportunity for myself and some more of my neighbors to get involved with, in the decision malting process. . . in our local community. That 's essentially the reason. Don Moen: We appreciate your coming this evening and standing before us and giving us that information. I- think we're pleased that. . .qualified members. And a good of the members of the Planning Commission came from NPO's. Good background to learn there, and we really need the input. Chris Bednarek: Anybody have any questions^ Any other questions? Nancy Campbell : I have a question. Just for my personal knowledge. What 's a Chris Bednarek: Oh, Bachelor of General Studies. Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to appoint ® Chris F. Bednarek to NPO #3. 5.2 APPEAL/MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 5-85, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT M 1-85, VARIANCE V 4-85 HILL & JEAN BALDWIN and RICHARD & SHARON ULLRICH NPO #3 Located 13500 and 135.30 SW 121st Ave. (WCTM 2S1 3CD lots 4400, 4401 and 4500) . Keith Liden: That 's tough to read. OK, 5.2 is an appeal of the Director 's decision for a proposal that involves essentially 3 applications: one is for a lot line adjustment; a minor land partitiono; and for a variance. The Planning Director approved the application to adjust 3 parcels of 0.20, 0. 78, and l acre into 5 lots of 40,300, 40,800, 8,700, 7,800 and 8,600 square feet. A variance was +P :Y a also granted for the required pavement width of a private drive, allowing a reduction from 24 feet to 20 feet. This decision was appealed by NPO #3 on the grounds that the Code prohibits the use of private driveways for 3 to 6 houses that exceed 100 feet in length, and that 's Section 18. 1O8.07O(a) . It ` is also stated that traffic should be directed, in the appeal letter it is stated also, that traffic should be directed to 121st Avenue and that the City has made a previous commitment to that effect. And we've enclosed a copy of the appeal letter. Now up on the wall in red you have the proposed lot arrangement shown, and it 's proposed that tnere would be a driveway going on to Terrace Trails, which is a cul-de-sac which exceeds the City 's standard of 400 ft for the length of a cul-de-sac. As far as the appeal is concerned, the Planning Staff acknor+ledges that an oversight was made regarding the Code provision on the length of driveways, which at least for this proposal would be approximately 2750 ft. The NPO mentions that the driveway length would be 315 ft, and I believe this would be an accurate description of the length of the driveway IF additional lots are petitioned under a separate application; and there is the possibility the driveway could grow longer. Also, (Diane, would you just pass that out. ) the commitment that was being referred to by the NPO was a memo from Aldie Howard, our former--1 don ' t know if he was Planning Director at ' this point or not in 197H--but anyway, a staff member to City Council regarding annex:ation for Lammerman, which 6 s involves this piece Of Property- And there it states that it is suggested that access be provided to 121st , because Terrace Trails is, uses the term illegal cul-de-sac I don't believe it 's illegal ; - it 's non-cotiforming. And that was the suggestion to Council Council approved the annexation in December of '78, and there was no formal action taken by the City saying yes, any future access from this property will have to go one way or the other. This is really mute on that point. In looking at the portion of the variance proposal that Staff overlooked; we have reviewed that portion of it dealing with the maximum length of 100 ft, and we feel that that is justified along with the rest of the application, because of the long skinny nature of the two lots there is basically no way, that you can provide a driveway to those properties without exceeding 100 ft in length. This would be true even if you split the properties in the middle and had half of the lots go to 121st and the other half go to Terrace Trails. You would still exceed that 100 ft length. Also, the Fire District has reviewed the proposal and the Applicant has obtained approval from the Fire Department for the driveway turnaround arrangement, etc. I think with that I 'll close. We also have Frank Currie here to answer any questions. Don Moen: Thank you Staff. Could we have the Applicant , the Applicant 's presentation? Male voice: Well , we just heard it. (laughter) Don Moen: Anyone from the NPO wishing to speak on his? ^t Bob " Bledsoe: I 'm here, however I understood that when you, when a Director's decision is appealed to you, it 's the 1` same as if you're hearing it fresh the first time, so you ought to be able to follow your normal procedure. Female voice: It 's easier to follow. I think it 'd be easier to follow if we do it that way. Don Moen: That 's true. So, the Applicant in this case would be the. (papers shuffled near recorder; could not distinguish words. ) Diane Jelderks: Either Mr. Baldwin or Mr. Lammerman could speak. Don Moen: Could we have the Applicant 's presentation? -Bill Baldwin: I 'm Bill Baldwin of 13530 SW 121st speaking an behalf of my application for the mentioned items. When I bought this property in 1979 it had just been annexed, and a .: developer was going to develop it; but the market was going bads so I bought it from him. And it was discussed at the time, and I was led to believe that everybody assumed that that would be allowed to access to Terrace Trails Drive. Even in the Boundary Commission 's Final Order-, they stated that "these are long narrow lots and often difficult to subdivide, with insufficient room between houses to allow for construction of a street to serve the rear of the Properties. " . That problem still eXis is today. They realized it then, and it hasn 't changed an The Y- T. e same buildings are still there. In fact, all of 121st Street clear up to Rose Vista is stuck with the same problem. The only � way You get t:is ... ......,. .. access is to move an existing building, and I have some pictures and a map to show you some of the clearances so that you can see what 's going on. There are numbers on the map according to the pictures, and .you can see the clearances in between. There is only one possibility there. There is 30 ft clearance from eave trough to eave trough between 2 houses, and you have to have 30 ft easement, and there would be less than 20 ft usable driveway--and it would still be in excess of 100 ft. And, it would be within 5 ft of a person's bedroom window, using that street. On the Terrace Trails access, there is 60 ft wide of property which I have in my possession. On the south side is in excess of 60 ft to the closest structure; and on the north side it 's in excess of 160 ft ! And on 121st Street within 300 ft there is already_ 4 driveways on one side of the street. And I 've been told that the City and the County both wish to minimize the access to major collector street with limited sight distance, and I was told that 121st Street meets that criteria, and they're trying to keep down the traffic, so that 's another reason for going back there. And clear back in 1978, '79 when that was annexed they said there was 1500 to 1800 vehicles a day on 121st Street, and I don 't know what it is now at this present time, but it 's got to be significantly more. The Staff report, they said there would be an additional , if we were only going to develop 3 of those lots there would only be a minimum of 10% increase in traffic on Terrace Trails Drive, and if all 5 lots which ought possibly to be developed there, 9 which only 3 are proposed now, it would be less than a 15% increase on the traffic in that area. If all 5 lots were developed--I 'm only talking abaut 3--but considering 2 cars per family, that would be 10 extra cars on Terrace Trails, and I can 't see where that would be prohibitive, to have 10 _cars in the street. That just doesn 't make sense to me. In the Boundary Commission 's Final Approval they recommended that, the recommended approval stated that "the property owners desire municipal service which only the City has available to perform. The proposed development is in conformance with applicable City, County and Regional and Planning and LCDC goals. That was even clear back in 1979, '78 when it was annexed. Arid all trunicipal services are necessary to develop that property or are available to City or special districts of the City, and the territory to be annexed or part of. There were several engineering problems that we met when we went into there, but we figure we've met all of those. We've met the Fire Department 's conditions. I also have a map where I drew in what we were proposing for the turnaround, and the Fire Department looked at that and said, "No problem. " They said we meet all the, either- way we go there, we can service only 3 of the lots, and if it should develop in the future, they found no problem if all 5 of them were developed. They have access; easy to get in, get out; the road width is sufficient; the length o+ the driveway presents no problem because we did provide the turnaround space. 10 r �e1 Male voice: Sir, 2 additional lots that you're-- Bill Baldwin: Well , these are the two. This is going to be all one piece of property when we get done at this particular time. If he wishes to do something in the future, then--. Wejustdrew these in as possible divisions so that he could do something with that piece of property. Male voice: You own this property here? Bill Baldwin: Right now I own this one piece here, and Mr. Ullrich and I have agreed to trade. . . if this goes about , he will have possession of this and I will have possession of his lower end, and that will make me be in possession of this one piece which I desire to break into 3 lots. Male voice: This would be the turnarocer►d here? Bill Baldwin: This one here, or the Fire Department said we could go here if he decided this could go in. . . .so if he decided sometime in the future, but he has no plans right now, but we could put it here and that would cover that in the future if he wanted that sewer;' no problem. Don Moen: Would you excuse me for a second. Staff, one of the things we lack in this presentation in our pamphlet was a good map of this area. Keith Liden: I know. That one (Lep there) just would not reproduce well . Don Moen: Wel 1 , coul d we take i t down and {pass i t around'' Keith Liden: Sure_ Discussion (muffled) by commission members around map, then Male Voice: I guess both of these possibilities. . .the Fire 1t Department., Bill Baldwin: Yes. I presented that map with both choices " and said now if we do it this way is it alright; if we do it - this way is that alright.. . looked at it and said, "Yes. All of that meets all of our requirements. . .have no problems with that at all . " The private drive as discussed--some people on Terrace Trails Drive thought, "Who's going to maintain the road?" The people that live on the driveway, it 's going to be one of the requirements under the purchase, all who live on that particular drive, they will be required to help keep the drive ' up. And it 's going to be made to local street cross section standards, which will be equal to or better than what Terrace Trails has, so we see no reason, as long as Terrace Trails has been there there's been no problem with it, and so we're going to be equal to or better than that for a driveway. It 's going to be 20 ft wide, hard surface; so that isn 't going to be any problem. The Fire Department required 'No Parking ' signs if we have that narrow of a street , and if we wish to park alongside the street we'd have to furnish additional property, and the lots are big enough to do that. Fire hydrants--the distance of that is within the requirements of the Fire Department. _ The 100 ft length, what I was led to believe, was to give the Fire Department aceess and in and out, or if it was _ in excess of _ 100 ` ft.. .with turnaround so they could drive in; they don 't have to pack their hose or have trouble with access or getting back out once they're in. So, if there is anything else to .y (� a 12 1f that I don 't know what it would be. - Staff also went along • with my citing that the traffic was insignificant impact on Terrace Trails because of the few amount of cars that would be added here. It was also mentioned abOUt a small parcel of land that is kind ,of an eyesore off of the north, which would be on the north side of the proposed driveways, but that is going to be part of the property that will be facing Terrace Trails. That watild be part of their property. It 's like anybody else's property. If it 's part of yours you maintain it; so that 's no problem. There is a neighbor that is possibly interested in doing something about it, but that is really no concern now, because whoever lives there will maintain it. DonMoen: Mr. Baldwin, anything further you 'd like to 'add, You'll have 'a chance to rebut.,. .testimony. You'11 be given an opportunity to speak. _ Bill Baldwin: Well , I was just going through some of the stuff that was in their opposition and their letters to the City. They said that the lot sizes were too small . Well the lot sizes are consistent with all of them in the neighborhood and exceed some of them, so that 's really an insignificance. _ The sewer is going to be extended and that will be at my expense, (That goes along with the City. ) and which aiso can accommodate possibly 3 houses on Howard Drive. There has been some interest shown in that, so that would be an additional thing that would be in my favor. and they seem concerned about the sight distance as proposed to go along with the traffic on Terrace Trails Drive. Well , it 's within 2 or 300' ft of the end of the cul-de-sac. There's not going to be a lot of people whizzing in and out of there. It 's just ;going to he the local people there. It 's not a through street. The NPO stated the 100 ft 'limit. Well even when the 100 ft was put in, the 100 ft limit on the driveway, even the NPO objected to it at that time, at the time it was placed in the Code. And so even they thought it was ridiculous. I don't see how you can put 3 to b houses on a 100 ft driveway and have any sort of traffic" pattern. I just don 't understand that. And then to go along with what the Staff said originally, it doesn 't' matter whether I run off of 121st Street or-Terrace Trails, I still have to have some sort of a driveway to be in excess of 100 ft; and with the pictures that I showed you, I have more clearance with less hassle with existing structures and less hassle with traffic on Terrace Trails as far as the general public is concerned_ So "s I don 't see where the 100 ft is any problem. . . . (tape turned over; may have missed a word or two) I had to have a i comprehensive plan. It 's got here that Planning encourages planned development in developing areas. Well , it 's already a developed area. I 'm just trying to do something with it. I was given to understand that a developing area is one that 's on the outlying area and they have no idea what 's going on- and you have to have a comprehensive plan or planned , z development so you can see what 's going on. I guess that 's 5 alI I have at tIII is particular time. 14 2y Don Moen: I had one question. You requested a, I guess it would be a variance, for a 20 ft as opposed to a 24 ft private. drive_. Yeah, well we could see, with it being a Bill Baldwin: private drive, why would you have to have it 24 ft wide if we provide *No Parking' signs, so that we would not restrict any sort of emergency vehicle access or egress. If we put 'No Parking' signs and the Fire Department folks said that would be acceptable, and if we decide to have parking on one side- or the other, then we provide additional parking area off the hard surface, and then we don 't have to provide the - 'No Parking ' signs on that side, which is easier to do. There is plenty of; room on any of those properties that are proposed lots so you could have plenty of parking on your- own property without parking on a hard surface and violating any of the rules and restrictions. We` ll go on to the NF'O. Don Moen: Thank you sir. Bob Bledsoe: My name's Bob Bledsoe, 11900 SW Walnut, #z. May I see the maps that just got submitted? Chairman-NPO Don Moen: Certainly, You may. Bob Bledsoe: Is this the point. . .the Fire District for the turnaround? Don Moen: I believe this is basically the same map. . . a turnaround here, or here. ` Is there another map submitted that shows all Bob Bledsoe: the lots on 121st Avenue? there's one with the pictures_ Don Moen: Uh, yes, s Bob Bledsoe: You have in our, in Your packets I believe, you have both the original letter we submitted to staffs, and You have our letter of appeal ; which basically I think outlines our concerns. The original letter is near the back of the packet, uh, near the halfway Point, concerning our minutes of our meeting of 4/15/85. .Our letter of appeal was in the packet, attached close to the front, following the Planning submittal . . .We met again; You have received recently; I was requested by Mr. Lammerman to look up the letter which Aldie Howard had written to Council at the time. And the letter says that this Terrace Trails is a illegally long cul-de-sac, being over 400 ft, and for that reason he recommends, at least in the letter sUbMi tted to Council suggests the access should be through 121st Avenue_ In that process of looking` things u I 9 P did see that with the application Mr. Ullrich had suggested that he wanted access to Terrace Trails. The one question I had raised in our appeal was that in the procedure of things, the granting of the access of over 100 ft was required to be done by a planned development. I don 't, uh, at the time we brought this up before during the preparing of the comprehensive plan, we were at that time oPPosed to this general require,nent Now You have it in the law. We do feel it should be accordingly on all Occasions on which it arises_ And it was at that time understood that in a planned developed area You'd have a full hearing of the situation and that that was the mechanism. I understand the appeal for 16 ,4 variances for about 10 or 20% variance off the original standards, and they show here230ft and probably even on f, this fire turnaround he shows the potential for a -15 ft drive. So it is approximately 3 timB3 the limits as specified in the Code, and so the procedure probably should - be a planned development, - which is the way the Code states it, rather than a variance which is what you 're being asked to approve. Again, our other reasons are in the letters we've already submitted. And one thing somewhat in the way of rebuttal of the Applicant, we have suggested and again I think probably the best solution for all of this--not only these 2 lots, but several lots south of these lots which are on this one map with the houses on it (this one, yes) is to bring in another road to serve those, a small road to serve those lots in the back. And I would expect from looking again closer--I originally just had the lots--I would suggest that probably should come through the southernmost of those lots closest to Rose Vista where those have more space than the other ones do. If it 's necessary to move a house, that could be done there. There's area behind there; there is a considerable portion of area which would make--for example, there 's 5 lots, 5-house potential on these 2 lots, and there's another 5 or 7 out there, so you 're talking about a considerable number of houses to be served by opening this area up. And to put in a regular street is not unwarranted request for the scope of houses of that size rather than long slim--if you have a series of private drives coming out--Mr. �.:•x 17 • Bednarek talked about access on 121st. Even if you accommodate this lot, these-2 lots here, you're going to have ` i later on the other neighbors, who are going to want to do something with their lots, and they will have no other place to go except 121st, and you will wind up with maybe'-2 or 3 conditional driveway accesses on 121st. It's much better to make it all together; come out with one regular road with a regular intersection and-a stop sign and the whole works. Don Moen: OK. The next portion of the hearing is for those in favor, and Mr. Baldwin--one of the Mr. Baldwins spoke. I don 't remember which one. Ray Baldwin: I have nothing to add at this time. I was ,lust here in case something came up that I knew more of the history. I could speak later if that 's all right. Don Moen. Very good. You'll have an opportunity. With khat, we'll move on to those in opposition, and I ask you to bear with me as I read this list. Jack Sterett. Would you like to speak? JackSterett. I live at 1Ib80 SW Jack Sterett: My name is Jac Terrace Trails, and I am here to support the NFO Committee on this issue. Preferring to the May b, 1985 memo from the NFO Committee to the Tigard Planning Commission where they unanimously appealed the Director 's approval of this minor Ian partition , I won 't go in that in brevity as. . . (loud 4cugh near• recorder wiped out a few words) but what I want to add is, Terrace Trails is about A 1'!d0 f t cul-de-sac wei th about 30 some homes there, and the proposal is an increase 18 L a of about IS% to Terrace Trails, and I don 't consider that insigrificant. I think ' that 's a fair impact on the neighborhood with traffic and on a private drive coming into our street, and that 's all I have. Don Moen: Thant: you. (Female voice. . . ) OK. You're next on the list. Female Voice: I think that the issue-- Diane Jeldecks: Excuse me, you need to give your name and your address. Deanna Sterett: Deanna Sterett, 11680 SW Terrace Trails. The issue of a private drive not being any more than 100 ft long, I think a valid point is that if you have aceas that"s more than 100 ft long and it 's serving 5 homes you really don't have the right to call it a private drive. It 's a road. And it should look and act like a road and do the things that roads do around our neighborhoods. The petitioner compared his drive with Terrace Trails. . .well Terrace Trails is a very broad street. It has curbs; it has sidewalks; it has parking strips between the curb and the sidewalk. It 's the kind of street that invites the homeowner to get outside. . . (loud coughing near recorder) playing on the roads all the time. We expect to have places to park our cars. We don ' t part; our cars in the dirt. . .we don ' t park the cars on the front lawn like we were out in the country someplace. . .a private drive only 20 ft wide. . . in this neighborhood. Don Moen: Thank you. Marilyn Hargis. ( I ' ll pass to my , C 19 husband Jima) OK. Jim Hargis: My name is Jim Hargis, 11670 SW Terrace Trails. In addition to what the NPO has said and what Mr_ ,Sterett and Mrs. Sterett have already commented on, our concern is the a length of the drive. There is a Code requirement of a maximum of 100 ft. We have relied on that. The whole city of Tigard has accepted the 100 ft drive. We find nothing here that is, causes any requirement that this particular service should be extended beyond the 100 ft than anywhere { else in the city of Tigard. If there is any validity to the 100 ft private drive requirement ma::irnum, then it out to be as applicable on Terrace Trails as it is anywhere else in Tigard. And we would therefore request that the Planning Commission seriously give consideration to _granting a variance on this particular i ssc+S* when the whole city of Tigard may be opened up to this very same thing. If a hundred feet is valid, and it apparently is in the Code at this time, then it 's got to be valid in this particular place. Don Moen: Thank you. John Kimball John Kimball : I just want to reinforce my opposition. I don 't have anything to add. hty address i.s 11695 and I 've lived there since 1979. Don Moen: I guess, McShane. Male Voice: Mr. Chairman, President: I 'm among the lame and p the halt and I ask dispensation from coming dawn to appear F directly. 0 a Don Moen: Can the recorder pick it up'? Diane_Jelderks If he speaks up_ Don Moen: Just speak up so our recorder can Mr. MacShayne: My name is P. R. MacShayne, ' 11S3O SW Terrace Trails. The wife and I' have been residents there since mid 1976. My position is that we support NFO #3 in this matter. And we have been on another horse similar to this a number of years ago when there was an application by ANOTHER developer to push through the extreme end of Terrace Trails into HIS cozy little development. That should be a record somewhere, someplace. I believe that summarizes my position. Thank you. Don Moen: Mr. Bledsoe, you already spoke. Do you want, anotheropportunity? Bob Bledsoe: Maybe later in the cross e�:amination. Don Moen: What's that? Bob Bledsoe: Maybe later in the cross examination or rebuttal . Don Moen: Well , this would be your opportunity far cross --examination of what the Applicant said. . .after that there won't be another opportunity. Male Voice: I 've been wondering about a ` good map of the subject area. From what I hear down there, apparently one doesn ' t exist. Is that right? A comprehensivE Don Moen: There is--we have a map of the proposed development that was not part of our packet' originally; and as a consequence, -I doubt if it was distributed to the { 21 f public_ _ Female Voice: It was available at City Hall for people to come there and loot at. Don Moen: I think that 's reasonable. Go ahead. If you could do that with a minimum of disturbance I 'd appreciate it. Mr. Bledsoe. Bob Bledsoe: Bob Bledsoe, Chairman of NFO 3 again. I counted the number of lots all together on uh, there are 7 lots all together that have this basic deep, very deep lot size. I don't know the depth. It must be close to 400 ft, but they're very deep Lots. And again , you saw on these 2 which are 2 of the narrower ones, you have a potential of 5 lots; the 2 southern ones are even deeper , so there would be -about 4 times that--maybe 20 lots all together.- And there is probably a longer access for building one or two houses directly on Terrace Trails because of the frontage they have. . . (loud coughing near recorder so words missed) a long long cul-de-sac. Don Moen: Mary MacShayne. Mrs. MacShayne: I 'm Mary MacShayne. I live at 11530 SW Terrace Trails Drive_ I agree with Mr. MacShayne. We don 't need extra traffic. There 's a lot of little children on that block. . . (1 oud cough near recor dr�r- ) home z� have little children. We don ' t need the e:: t r A traffic . YOU say it wou 1 d be very little extra traffic. You 're nat telling it like it will be. So I .agree with our neighborhood gruup and we don 't need that extra traffic_. We bought that home because we thought we were a cul-de-sac and there would not be the extra traffic. And I do not believe we need the extra traffic. - .. ,R• Don Moen: Thank you. Gary (De ??) l I believe I can malle myself heard from here. Don Moen: Could you come down here—we can hear you but our recorder can't hear very well . Wehavelimited funds for our tape recording system. My name is Gary De(Frang?) . I live at 11650 SW Terrace Trails Drive; and hopefully I can give you a- Tittle historical perspective on this, because our family was the first family to move into Terrace Trails Drive. And I will try not to talk about things that the chairman of the neighborhood planning group commented on in his memo, which is excellent. But I think in large part, what we're talking about here is, everyone is in favor of. . . just trying to bootstrap because something was overlook-ed initially, and this being the length of the driveway. A comment was made that when the plan was formulated, certain things were contemplated, or that this proposed development was OK*d as it has been proposed to you. When Terrace Trails was platted out and approved, when all the lots were sold, this was not contemplated--for the simple reason to this proposed subdivision comes from a short strip of a lot one of the original owners on Terrace Trails owned. So certainly this type thing was not planned , or was nvL contemplated. Reference had been made to Terrace Trails being an illegally Tong cul-de-sac--which indeed it is, which brings to the fore t.� a again the matter of the traffic, which certainly should be taken into account. Because of the length of cul-de-sac _)n it, there's a great problem right now, the number of home with traffic on Terrace Trails . ve.. This is just going to increase that, so I with most of my neighbors I feel, are opposed to this. Don Moen: Thant; you. Virginia Barnes, Barnes is it? Female Voice: I do not wish to speak. Don Moen: John Lee. John Lee: My name is John Lee. I live at 11518 SW Terrace Trails. And without going over what everybody else has already gone over, I 've just made a few little notes when Mr. Baldwin was up here. And he says that these people will keep this property that this 315 ft driveway is going to be in esthetic, shall we say. Why didn't he keep this property that way now? You ought to take a look at it. It 's an eyesore. And if this is his property development and it 's going to look so nice, why doesn 't he at least chop the weeds down--a little bit of weed hiller . As far as 'No Parking ' signs in a driveway, I suspect that ' ll wort:_ just about as good as a screen door in a submarine. I 've not seen that work anywhere else. You put 'Nci Parking ' signs on 115th and moved the center line all the way over , and they 're still parking up and down 115th---and that 's a well traveled road. What 's it going to be lige up there"' How ofteti is a pot ice officer going to go up there and check that out", I also wouldexpect that if Mr. Baldwin lived on ferrace Trails, `fir a • that -those 10 extra cars would mat-e quite a difference to him; but seeings as how he lives on 12ist I don 't see how it 'd make any difference to him at all . Everything else, everybody else seemed to talk to and I don ' t want to double up on what they say because what they said is really good. Appreciate your time. Don Moen: Tony McCasline. Tony McCasline: My name is Tony McCasline. 1 live at 11570 SW -.Terrace Trails. My opposition to this is solely on the safety to the youth and children that live on Terrace Trails. I 'm a major cause of a number of children. (laughter) And my house next to and the two across frum me accounts for about 14 children. And it goes up and down that way all the rest of the street. With` 5 e>:tra houses, 10 extra cars _ making a minimum of 2 extra trips a day we've got 20 more trips going up there. And those kids all play in the streets. And there's cars parked there, in and out, and it just becomes a very very unsafe thing when you have that many more cars. And I would appeal to the Commission to consider that. Nancy Stimmler: Everything you 've a er wanted to know about Terrace Trails is right here. I 'm Nancy Stimmler. I live at 11525 SW Terrace Trai 1a. Arid , .it the a its„• this property was annexed I was sitting on the City I have the original letter from the Fire District. I have the original letter from Mr. Howard that was in the packet for City COUnci1 . And at the time that this parcel was annexed, and I i have that map also, the property on 115th, I mean on Terrace Trails, belonged to Mr. Burden (sp?) so there was no access to the property known as the Baldwin property or the Lammerman annexation. This map also shows all S parcels, and it was suggested at that time also that development be done all in one parcel , just as Mr. Bledsoe indicated. So, of course nothing was mentioned because there was no (loud ' coughing near recorder so some words lost) . I have all the } papers on Creekside Drive, which is a parcel at the other end of Terrace Trails--and all the maps, a cul-de-sac back to z, back with Terrace Trails off of Gaarde Street Here's Terrace Trails--a coil-de-sac here, a cL11-de-sac here, a cul- de-sac here, and now we're going to put another cul-de-sac s up there.- The Fire District frowns. . . just a minute, I'll T read it to you. At that time, indicated "than within close CJ proximity of the site there are already 3 dead end streets g and a considerable number of dead end cul-de-sacs in this a entire neighborhood. Dead end streets only add to confusion and time of response. To respond when inadequate incorrect addresses are all . . .December 21 , 1978 Fire Marshall drew up a code. cul-de-sac, and to add on to a 1400 ft cul-de-sac another 100 to 300 ft of street access which is private which therefore .the police do not have jurisdiction on, so if they park there there's nothing anyone can do about it. And if there is a fire, that 's too di Grp. Ne�caus>e, who's going to report to the law if police cannotgoon there. . .So, they can put up 'No Parking ' signs, and they can park there, and Z 2s nobody can do a thing about it--not the County, not the City, not anybody. The other thing is, at the time of this original annexation in 1978, the reason for annexation request was to attach to City sewer ; Z houses. . (lost several phrases: head turned +ram recorder)requested sewer--which is in the middle of Terrace Trails. They want to come in; they want to develop this property; they want to use that sewer-- but they still have not attempted to connect, which was the ORIGINAL. reason--not development, not anything-else--but to connect to the sewer. If Mr. Baldwin bought the property after it was annexed and he was misinformed, that is not a fault of the people who live on Terrace Trails. That is his mistake. I 'm not opposed to his developnq and putting in a because he's purchased an easement which does not have any - record of a minor land partition except today on this -3 project. So since 1978 to today it has been illegally minor land partitioned) So therefore, we're supposed to just ignore all this, all the real things that happened. . .Mr.- Baldwin is stuck with this property who wants to put in as many houses as tie can---he only plans - 3 today. But, Mr. Ullrich is going to come in and say, "But Mr. Baldwin said you guys would say it 's OK, so here I am. I 'm stuck with this property and, it 's my money for retirement. " I 've heard 'em all . I 'm sure you 've heard em all . We 've all heard em -. all`: Anyway, I believe that as a compromise, a house facing' Terrace ' Trails with access for a lot woiil d be acceptable; and, I think the rest of the property, including all 5 of 3 7 2 v � these lots, as indicated by NPO Z, would be the way to see it properly developed in a safe and sane manner, and people who buy the houses get what they pay for and not some flag lot looking at the bast, of somebody's bast: yard. I think that the people in Tigard deserve a better quality of life than being shoved behind another house somewhere. Diane Jeiderks: Nancy, I need a copy of that map you've been showing them. Nancy Stimmler: It's .lust a minor land partition map. Diane' Jelderks: OK. That 's ok, it's still undistributed as it stands. I need it. I need a copy of the Fire Department 's letter too, that you read. I 've only got maps here. Don Moen: Did you have anything further? Nancy Stimmler: No, I think that 's it. Sewer for the annexation in '78, the Fire Department. I think that 's pretty much it. Thant: you. If you want anything else I 've got it. Don Moen: OK. That concludes those opposed. The next portion of the public hearing allows the Applicant to rebut. The first time for rebuttal , address specific points that were made by those in opposition to the proposal . Mr. Baldwin, do you have anything at this time? e Bill Baldwin: Well , the biggest thing is the traffic--they keep harping on traffic. put even Staff said if only 3 were developed it would be less than 10%, and if all 5 it would be less than 15%. They say I ought to get together with those C- 2rt T other 5 property owner I had enough trouble getting together with 2! One of them backed out, so I ended up with t together with I. I don't know how they think anybody can ge is 7 other people when there is one person in between that He thinks that big long adamantly against doing anything. - lot is worth something; wry l l , it 's not. And they said the reason we anne"ed was for sewer access that 's in the middle et. of the street. well , it 's NOT in the middle of the stre It's going to cost in excess of $20,000 for me just to run sewer up to those proposed houses, and if they think that 's cheap I guess I.'m in the wrong world. we meet all of the requirements except the 100 ft length al►d 24 ft width. The to have all the property lines set water 's there; we're going back for fire emergency access that 's all taken care Of , parking signs, all that according to the City; all the all of that is all engineering for the sewer , storm drain, covered in all of our proposal .• •And by the gray, the storm drain is supposed to have that driveway low in the center with the storm drain before the water runs on to Terrace Trails Drive, so that wouldn 't be any probleon, running into existing storm drain. If we put 1 or 2 houses down there, if we put 2 houses down on there, or,e of them would still be on a flag lot and it would be a worse configuration than the proposal . So F thin{: they would benefit by what we're proposing now And I 'm not just an autside developer who's to build my own going to do this and move out . I m going house down there. it's not going to be something I 'm lust ,r = 49 ' going to do and run off and leave the neighborhood. I plan on Living there, so I am concerned with what 's. . . (loud coughing near recorder) and how it 's going to be taken care t of. Thank you very much. Don Moen: With that, I 'll close the Public Hearing. And Commissioners. . . (unable to hear) F male Commissioner: Is it, correct that. . . in excess of 100 ft.. .? Keith Liden: Yeah, that was mentioned before. There is a section in the Code for planned development. It talks about instances where planned development is appropriate, or the application of that type of technique, and Section _ 18.60.060(P) says planned developments shall not be allowed f in residential zones located in areas designated as established areas. And that applies to this property in this ? mprehensive plan map. neighborhood. On the coexcept the Commission may approve a planned development within an r established area where the Commission finds--then it has a number of criteria: 1. The development of the land in accordance with provisions of the established area would result in an inefficient use of land, result in removing significant natural features, or result in change of character to the area surrounding a significant historic feature or building. Planned development of course is the most feasible method of developing the area, and cited. . . the copatibility with the provisions of chapter 1892 from the m map. With that , based or, that, with this property there z i ^ w �0 J_ aren't any reasons why it can 't be efficiently developed without a planned development, so it wouldn 't necessarily be hT ° an appropriate way. Male Commissioner: The parcel that is abutting Terrace - Trails, is that owned by the Applicant, or is that an easement? Bill Baldwin: I own that property_ The reason that didn 't show on the original annexation was that that little piece, that property that does give access to Terrace Trailswas already, in the City, and that 's why that did not show on the anne>.ation map. Male Commissioner: One other question. Assuming that, uh would it be possible to put a street off Terrace Trails. _ .? Male Voice: I guess technically there would be enough { room. . .whether he would be enthusiastic about having a public street turn off a cul-de-sac. I kind of doubt it. Specifically, I guess there would be enough room. It takes about 60 feet. A public street would require 60 feet. Bill Baldwin: We only have 20 ft to work with. . . (too far from recorder for several comments--missed) On 121st we only have 30 ft from eave trough to eave trough and you have to have parking strip. (Substantial discussion among Commission and Staff missed because voices too low and fair �tw.iy from recorder. ) Mala Voice: Read that about planted development. Section A arld B_2 Do you want to read that? le. 164.0•=f1)(B) No. A. i A, _ B-2, and maybe C. 9� John Butler: It says no development shall occur unless the development has frontage on approved access to a public street. And then it refers to number 2: If application for approval to road or street right of way not in full compliance with the regulations applicable to the standards, the dedication shall be made. . .and it goes on to say what you gotta do, and it 's got to go to City Council , to get a street in that 's substandard. A public street, right. And then I was looking back in 118. 162.050(C) Lot frontage. Each lot created through the partition process shall have a public right of way by at least 15 feet. Well , it says each lot created by the partition process shall FRONT a public right of way. . . you have to have a public street. Well , according to this. I- could be wrong. -_ Keith• Liden: 'There's another section in the Code that allows an approval authority to use the granting of easements. - (Male voice mumbled long statement far from recorder--missed) Y My point is, the planned development process is discouraged by the Code in the situation. . .the Code is intending to use planned development in developing residential areas where the pattern and zone have not been established. And it does S allow for the use of planned developments in established areas when those criteria are met . Well , it 's just a better case for using a planned development` and then allowing 3., private streets to go the 100 ft, or it 's just the * vdriance. . . in this case.` (Muffled conversation--:aissed) �WXJ�IL MR Female Commissioner: I - have a question of the Applicant. Your property which borders Terrace Trails that you own. How long have you owned that property? Bill Baldwin: I bought it in '79. Female Commissioner: Was that a separate piece of property, or was it: attached to the rest Bill Baldwin: No it was attached. It was all one piece when I bought it--from 121st to Terrace Trails; it was all one piece of property. Don Moen: At one point was that, maybe before you owned it, was that property attached to another piece of property Bill Baldwin: I 'm sure it wa1. Yes it was. My brother owned that piece of property and he bought that some years before that, Don Moen: We're talking about the small , triangular piece of property that gives you access to Terrace Trails. Bill Baldwin: Maybe my brother who bought that piece of . property could answer that question. z Ray Baldwin: Yes, I bought that some 3 years or better ahead of the time that he bought from me_ Don Moen: You bought the whole lot? c Ray Baldwin That whole place was my residence, and I bought that back ground from a person after- they didn 't want it after they had developed. I was there sone t i:ne before they took the duck pond out and put Terrace Trails in. And then i a that piece was left there and this fellow didn 't want it, so yE he sold it to me. Don Moen: That answers my question_ Female Commissioners So, it was bouyht from somebody or' (� Terrace Trails_ That 's what. . . (voice faded out) _tonight e. . ..a.. : t y _the faunal level of appeal , for _thi!i `ChePTwaythis would wool=-would be, if t Planning Staf old the decides to uph 9 _ ..�_ SPiSt�.h!!Z - � ►v,�,,., .en.t!NP NPO #3 .would not be-,-able to appeal tt} v- ,t 'e' City Counr_i l City Council could call thg up ;;:,.M the Planning Commission reverses the P1anninc� �..,...d.. ., _ _ �e�'i"s1 on; then Uie Applicant wi 11 have th your deci si on, �+ut any appellant i neppeal . _ r �--- If we do not 1­:,agree to uphold nth 1M-o`th'er' Words basi carVIV vote against . _ah r• ' n ,R'�e�s has the' right'�o appeal to City Council Don Moen: But if you approve the Applicant 's. . . (voice faded out) . John Butler: On looking this over, whoever looked it over, did you give consideration--I didn 't see this map til tonight, --so--have you given consideration to what happens when these other lots wish to develop? I mean, maybe everybody says no, we can ' t get together and no vo- don 't went to do it right now, but what happens when they ccvme before a=. or before you and say now we iw, :t t0 devE1Iop , ar.d they 're trying to have a little private road dowii here. Flow wc►uld we serve them? r - ` Keith Li den: Ok. One thing as far as the Cade is concerned, the Code does set a maximum of 6 residences on a private get to the point where we're exceeding 6, drive. So if we we'd need to find some other. John Butler: But by filling this up here haven 't we just precluded any access into that other land-? By developing this one private street for this lot here? Doesn't it look like it to you? Keith Liden: Yes I think so. And I thins: the access would have to come someplace south. Also, right now, the next parcel--some of these parcels, these long ones, are still in the County. You have the 2 subject properties, the next ' property south, and from that point on you're in the County. So this at this point is something we don't have jurisdiciton over all of these lots. ' ' Staff , you - Male .Commissioner: Regarding the private street. ed with the Applicant this private recommended that--you agre road of 20 feet was insufficient for parking, but to make it sufficient for parking you needed to add 'No Parking' signs to allow access for emergency vehicles. Is that correct? Keith Liden: - The Fire District added that condition. Now whether 4 ft of additional pavement would change that not I couldn 't say. Four feet in and of requirement or itself did not give parallel space. Whether they would be i ,. comfortable with having half or two-thirds of a car out of the away. . i Dor. Moen: If you were going to have a non-, something that b .. ����-x-;�- sir=.� ,•�-� conformed to the Code, and you were putting in a private drive, you have a private drive that 's no longer 100 ft and no narrower than 24 ft. A private drive as stated here does j not have any sidewalks or any (?) - Keith Liden: Right. Don Moen: I guess I still don't understand, and maybe you can explain. Why the 4 feet? Why can 't he have 24 ft? Would that preclude him from building homes on those lots? Keith Lident No it would not. Don Moen: Is that 24 ft drive allowable to be placed right k along the lot line? Keith Liden: The easement will be right along the line. The pavement itself I believe is intended to have a setback of a few feet Don Moen: That answers my questions. First Comm:'sio'�ner polled: I 'm apposed to the development, and I think it looks like a mistake made back when perhaps when the cul-de-sac was put in, but I think that--my personal preference would be one house, perhaps 2. I think the privte drive 24 ft limit was put there to cause us to look at that , because I think this whole area is going to be a hodge podge of development. . . I would say that 2 houses. . . Nancy Campbell : Y concur with what Commissioner Peterson said. I 'm really concerned about development of this whole area, realizing that Tigard doesn 't have jurisdisction over part every part of it. . . I don ' t know what 's going to happen in- that area. . . (Many comments lost--voice too far away from -'` -76 recorder and too low) tt agree with the other 9 Male Commissioner: I basically g g Ti and would ( Commissioners. I think that if we did this. . . . little look more like Aloha, and I 'd like to see it look a less like Aloha. (Laughter and applause) Don Moen: Order please. basically agree with the other I also Commissioner Owen: � 're between a rock and a hard place trying Commissioners. We to - make a decision on this particular proposal . There must picture on this area. g be some mechanism for the overall p I don't know where else in Tigard there is an area quite like this--on North Dakota and Tig an 't d Street--but I can comments not visualize even in some of those areas how to. . . (( picked up by recorder) . but as John ButlerI was against it when I first saw it, : i, I think s map soon as I saw thi I was even more against it. to be looked at and some planning done now that area needs go on in there--a road, even though it 's for something to part County, will someday be City as we all know. it 's lust Ode that are against something like too many sections in the C this. 3. agree. Chris Vanderwood: I think it 's all been said. I Bill Baldwin: Could I ask one thing before you make Your If you don' t allow the minor partition, final decision? could I at least have the lot line adjustment so that in the. future I will have access to put one or two houses--at least ot line adjustment I could one house down there' With the l k= 37 do that. Don Moen: I think that would have to be a separate--we can't tt _ redesign your proposal , you'll have to submit separately_ Keith Liden: This is essentially 3 applications in one. You may decide to deny the variance; approve thepartitionand lot line adjustment; deny the partition and variance and approve the lot line adjustment; or, the whole thing. Don Moen: Let me make my comments. I 'd like to maize one very briefly. I don 't have a problem with access on this property onto Terrace cul-de-sac. It 's going to have to have access somewhere to develop that , and probably that 's the most (?) out. I do have a problem. I thins: there's a reason why we have a 100 ft length and a reason why we have the other constraints on, to call our - attention to this f- thing. I have a real , I have some problems with this thing. With that in mind, I think it 's appropriate that we have a motion. My opinion is, this proposal submitted to us really ought to be separate parts. . _ . (several comments lost-- voices very low) John Butler: I make a motion we deny MLP 5-85 and M 1-85 and V 9-85; and I further add that I think anything else that comes before the Planning Department should be riven to the City Engineer first so he can study the future of that whole area to find out how best to serve all those lots in case future development does happen in that area. In other words, he may be able to minor partition the lots, but he may not be able to build right at the very front. He may have to leave l room for a utility easement or something into the other lots. Don Moen: OK. That's not really part of the motion. John Butler: Oh well no, but that's just a suggestion because -- Don Moen: I might ask you for some findings that support-- John Butler: OK. 18. 10B.070(A) ; 18. 162.050(C) ; 18. Don Moen: Could .you detail what they are? (Laughter) John Butler: OK. A was the private drive for 3 to 6 houses could not exceed 100 ft. 162.050(C) is each blocs: created must abut a public right of way 15 ft. 18. 164.030(A) is no development occur unless frontage is on a public street. 18. 164.030(B.2) it 's pretty long. _ It says when you're building a long street_ in a development you have to go through the City Council , but that may not be applicable. 18. 164.030(C. 1) Access shall not exceed 100 ft. 18. 164.030(S) Private streets allowed in planned developments in a mobile home part--and it doesn't mention private drive in non-subdivision. 18. 164.060(B. 1) Land development shall be denied if the proposed large development does not provide for the future division of lots and future extensions of public facilities. Don Moen: That 's probably sufficient. Is there a second? (Seconded) All those in favor of the motion made and seconded signify by saying aye--motion carried unanimously. With that we're going to ta)ce ,a 5 minute recess and be back at 9: 10. 39 v c rs 1ii11► Ill r l Ii Ililt rll Ali lli ili ►pr tll ipl tjt 1 jl CTl m irl pl"1 i i t 't Y t 1 t i t Ili t f t i t s i t 1111.111 11� 111 tlt 1 1 111111111111111 Ile tli 1pt ►ll I f- r e f r I �. lipp t I piIpufrrgI_r qI Ic� I)ITI rl.pafl� Irldl r � 1I r f r NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED I'.-__ _ ._..I Z S S 8- _ 7 8 J Q DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN AW THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO - vmw THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL mw --_ - DRAWING. 06 62 8Z L2 8Z,,1 SZ bZ £Z Z2 IZ OZ 61 81 LI 91 51 b� `el_._z1__...'I O' 8 t-...-9---S- b E Z Iaa. a< TMt�liU�uil�llll`Itil�Ilupu��ll iltiIryw _ {I�EIh MARun J-1 —_ .F �s 400 Oc�Fsr -- � 6110, TRACT // ,,AII _ 2 C — .95 ACC-- -301 TRA T °2 � �. AE ze w r �,� ti �9r 's 7 VW AC- RELOC T o - CL UST TR �i_T 3 l _ MEs7" �� ^� j l 27,152 pf NEr l / 87111l2� qf IF 12&9 t .67 AC p �� n pp b4 PROFU 7G✓ C'. PL 11,200 9 ' /F457-6' j �e1 -,r t pw GO _ 9100 NET EXIST.. 12"C.M.P 7 , 0 (f Jq EXIS7, SAN i ry{i`a�a•�r{i9rlr r{eIa{a 1{i�l{i 11r=I{1 1{III{I ILIjITI 7 Ijl !Tl Iji 111 i17 r1 I{I r{s ril 7 i r ._ :, � � �- 1 � �..�� � � ..�, � l �. ►.._�. � r.� 1��{]IIr011 r(r��l'Ia)1{rIIII�Iii1J119lIlIlI111I1111?0' III�IN�1lllili,llrllOrii90lrrl w NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED ....—- I 2 3 4 -- _ 5 _ 6_ - 7 B 91 ?0 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN I. ' THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL - - OE 62 82 LZ 9Z 52 bZ EZ ZZ IZ OZ 61 81 tl 91 Sf bl EI ZI 11 01 6 8 Z 9 S b E Z 1� dal I IN1i 111�119111U1�11u 11ua�Nute�u�rsnl{�I 199 & Un A)!l� .. .. p y _. _.mai .p.--•—«�— .--.- I 1 ®. aIMMom `IIII�11 ® ,,,ns , irisi67�.u; ��i' .• .. te, , ? ;tea p " oil - ':- 11 R i11®off ■iiia men., NEWPIPM _WIW 42, DAN ■.is �� cgsmill . �� ®' ■.tin `ii ■■ ,��'�W • ;:��� w h C E)vc (Sl 1edo nen M tet Ln Lae : o-1- 15 - s E-) ATr& -* 3 - ,.f1�r+lt4�itl+Itr Itl+ttr rtr�t[J Ili,rli_r111111 r1-1JIp Ir1ril_ I1+ g r j.r 17 71! Ijl 7ti r(J 11 f[r 1�1 I {i i 1 I i ! ! r 1.1(i lil rll 1 r r r 1 Till r 1 P r Itl Itl 311 Hr _ I 1jTl•• mjm .P- -p jl.r j1� 1I1 � 1I + It + I1 + � 1 + I � j NOTE: IF dam THIS MICROFILMED �' +. 2 `3 �' __. _ �J s_ 7 B 9 O 11 ._. ... ; DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN 12 ' THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO .'�. THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINALML in � - ---- - C6Z BZ — r SZ bZ EZ Z2 IZ OZ 61 BI LI 9! SI' bl EI 21 II Oi 6 0 L 9 S b a . 1111 Jnr unhurlanluu�wrANu NNlui IItIII{!u - ® !O; A[ dL B-inr�� SEE MAP �.. 'e.,> _ "='eo^ lJ �' \ '+�•. 1700 is.es- _� y 14 ®� 'bb~ ' 25 I 3C8 3 e• 1500 1600 0 • 4700 91%let iii q ^, i 4 6 15 f 5500�i.• M1yiN� s C2 12 4400 C P.. le 294c e° 5400 t 5700 42 ryw 4401 P'� � s o ~ 5 5300 6c 13 2 y 784c `, z `r2 97 QG ° 9 5200- 14 g1 4300 ° �� \° 15 a r T 1 AC - 92 4c. a yzuTRA y soN Na 79311 • I ~ nes a'ss'es Sf�ie•9 ,�ENPC F -C- .5. 4200 nn 4. 6 l•+ r� _ A\" 5 °-�o3 1r 1 �\ o e'ja e J r 1 1"'1 J I �� 5100 5 --�_ r �° 16 (6 5900 4100 s as°zs a ssb��_..—_ °°�/ ��y 2 o: 2 /.02 4c. - 109.0 �B90 +3 _ 19 (GS. No.556 40) ° M89°25'36 w ne9°25'36"w s 7.25'36'E b i 172?7 / - _EAST 2L° _ _ - 5 89°33'W 6T! 4900 V R.50 5000 ,`? 5POO - N 63•00'r 1A -- - - - - - - $77 •e9i E 17 17 ° W W con 100-- s a9°z5 3S E R rR F' m^ s a9°zs'36'E r f8 S ' 179/177 �,0 2.PDAe. . .a ,.g; .. �,xe r92 339-52 fi.9 «7807.... iT050 6�;9 1 y 5d9°25'20E •F ' ' / 77 .1300 T5 •1 a 9j 8 00 da 19 - o 3 @ sw•as'7 679.1' \ I: 7900\ 7 140G TRACT "A / °y1 1y .i �^ 200 ryyry 1�1 �� •AZA aF /•BRAC.. u5 I? s• 18 IC._ No: 13=94) 8000 0 9 7600 ° 1 : ry••ry. 1500 9 y 6. / SO hyo -y• : Wyk p 10 17 e s 69.30'6 660' 8100r r r✓ 1 J 5 r, ss° �;` 2�0 ,�. t ?J ,6,. e A zo 600 700 800 900 • r � �a 6y 7500 /o a 1600 ?O g ►"Te�s oz'. w 1� R y I 2 3 ; o \ •T g 11 5 a/ r e° VA'� ° 9e.a O \ 1 J R n 1 D O �\� f y �i4 as_• .� / 9q 16 f�' 2100 cr z n_ 8623 ;ys wo r. r ^930 °7400 _ 1700 YG ��� o 136.26' 143' 61.63, 4492' ' �L� I �� " 98 Ia CR 2025 Jo.. •w� 100A 8200 P.16N `t • q ry ! p; 15 �o'A••a J 39.73 2000 - ' s69•a6'nr 5 12 Q y s 's 136.66' 143' 92.36' is y' 7200 H q4'1' 1800 2200 2100 2000 +,. °' ", 7300 • 1900 s b 12 ry w 6'9 _ 14 ° 17 ew 16 �: 15 Iy 3�oa.aY 8300 wo 13 1 7 r 1 1 ! I l r l r e t 1 ! i f 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 rjl 11111111 1 (`r j i 1 I 1 i j I 0 1 f l J I ! l I 1.J. jrplIJ1�71) pTi-1l�llil1(1 Il11111 ri ria II!Jill fl Ili [Jillit 1111 ilt rl� rlt Jill rit Ili tlf Ilt Ili r t e r t ill - �m P � T Tl ) I r l � 1 . 1 � f e l � f � l � lll ' rf NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED ----- 2._ 3 4 5 6 7 8 g 0IIAW DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN !2 I -2 THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO - ' Mw THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL - - ulrPudmluulmrImhttaRtrifnalrtld sz ez ez zz la oz sr 81-air srT til lei zr 11os s - - f MARCH � 7 1990 ! 4� _____ - - ��e�� SEE MAAP� -' 25 1 3C8 J by 1700 ' i1.ei' _ .,60 sJJ w 14 1600 1500 \ y �Q` 5600 r r yr t �illde.nvA! 19nl gt'jr, 45 v lo,e V y 4700 14, n 15 55 1 �= n 4400 z•'N ��t, oa Z e ^ewe J ff �2�a o'°� 29 4C w � A �O r y ^ rC 4401 .p 5400 �J�f e•H 5700 84J `Q• _ " 9 c TB Ac !` G 13 A 2 (411 4300 ( 14 .92 Ae f 1 {�-• 2t3 a •E W 15 w 1 A ` r y .5.N0 7930 6r4j o goo- •9 �/\n 4209 s 03 N B9°q 25 TRA 36 W Srs°a PENWE Y S 1 R s d 5100 5 4100 ss 860 2526 f : +Y° 16 ea.n 1.02,4c. 633.6 -- Y0�� f 6 2 ' 5900 2h (CS. No_Ya40) io9.s, u°5 a50 t _�^ 19 _ e X89°23'36-W • Na9°2536"W _ _-Ei ST 2C0 - 5 89°15 w baa " 5 a9`25,3C E N 41y'oa'm a X89°ss E 4900 v a,110 5000 1 " ,��, 100 - - - - - - - R ®I las/rn �o se9°zs WER'A' ap 'P 17' _17 B �C S 09°25 36 E ` n wlr - - - - .- - - _ - - RO 30 ..10.e9 u3 $N A-7800 ,j3 92 339.52 ¢ ql.. rye 4, aye ct tf' f S 89°2s•2°'1: 130 n /i ay 8 7700 / 1300 Y I a� i p 34141•se'm 41as.1' � I 200 7900\ - 7 / row°/140G� OF I.BBAc. TRACT A" ° 15.17 . r \ • tie' 0 9 s 18 •�7 9°�^8000 7600 (C., No,13,593) Oo 1500 f b1~p`�. ....N. 34141e36'm 6110' - �r zo 8 -50 10 r r 1 ^ r sr2 Q "3,, 17 2200 600 700 800 j `� r e,s• !V - . 900 T •0� ma 69 7500 0 J 4 (600 6 f e~ •�' 10 e: g /' 16 ¢ -_ c J o {_. J �\� J y �`4 ry� It g, 5 TV \ m� u - _ •11 ^ acz3 �c' 9ssa is E2100 1341.zt les' alss' <t41a' CR 2025 e'►° —M25 lb 0 7400 p 1700 Y II 3 • 'o• • loOQ 8200 " N [}� - o r� t•/j� �� 1;-.98 1� �e 4 15 3 n �8° 2a 13 = 34141.36'm 5 11111.1111' les 112.1141' 2 32000 2200210 J a 7200 S 1 IBO9.11 1 C r 21 00 W 2000 yea• s: r 7300 !! "• + O a 1900 v b 12 n 17 e« 16 °u 15 ¢ 132.5 132.5 8300oY 14 13 n I II(�f►111 111 II111Iq rI1 1411!I1 111 II1 11T 111 Irl T 1 I 1 1 (' I JI 1 _1 1T1�1TTm�m I p I= R q l I r I I o, i { � 0 { ( I � C � �{. � I-�' � I 11��11111111T{�II�It1�1110111(�hL1�1{Ih�IIIIIII�IIIIIII�1p111II�o1({1I1�1Ir`ry�1F11 w NOTE: IF THIS NICROFILNED ( — -_, 2 3 4 __. _ 5 s_ _ a 8 .. 9 O DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN ' THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO - THE QUALITY OF TIE ORIGINAL DRAWING. __.-- OE 6Z 8Z LZ 8!!2 SZ— bZ EZ ZZ IZ OZ 6t 81 U --ca-f­_Sf b1 EI iE 11 — OI--V _® 9--5 _ b £ — Z I�•a• t< I{Itt�RINtIR _ IfN .nlCRR6R11pnlnnlNldauiWAWL6hult f - 0 M ARCH I ' 7I 199 I" L_,*I "M . UST AJMAP 3C817G0 14 oil YfC* N 1500 5600 A 1600 •f _ rt .q r'• 4700 I I �r �g y s M1' ®.1 • s�e .7 /.y / 2 s o s • Al I •5500 12 e•�' + 4400 .j,s•° �[®N`�4, °� °r w , aM1 294c a 9 5400 ° X5700 M1 aC 4401 E y63 Bola)# P C Q, h 7B 4c. ° P V 5300 6° 13 2 5200- 14 g 4300 �� .° (� )e �>�� 924c 15 6 Is-1 r f 1 T� ` r y z,s„ � w m moo,y w .5.No 7931) • 90 SEy„6 TRACT •C 4200 5 e2 0 E .q �p 99-25'36'w OPEN SPACE �/■�I�� _V J u it, Iti ViJT� 4�. 632 9 411W (� 1 7 • e o M1 •«P' SIGG 5 - z° 4100 9 626 E--� +-. .° 16 1162 5900 693.6 a ?D /.02 4c. nose tie f ' � s o 19 o9sl (CS. N0.51640) - p89°z5'3fi w pe9°zs'36"w s®•zs'3CE ° r -� �EAST 2C0 - 5 89.33 w 6n ° qy� 5000 i 112 77 N 13.00'1 677 Mes•]3E �/a:50 W S1GG >F on �`.r 100-- — _ _ _ _ _ 17 8 17 8 W C sl 17V17T �` w 2.204c- • 589°253$'E _ R A R Ps�o 589.25'3CE e 1 18 RI loz e9 2 _ — — __ _ — _ _ 7600 110 SO ° 92 539.52 - G 3 r1 9 89°25 20't 130^ A m / ^I` a o M1iM1 8 7700 1300 rs x1 14 /'1 Sf9.38'N 57A1' �%6 19 - I : 200 79000 7 TRACT "p % 140G1�3�; I o' zo _ O5M14° qp 9i8 •'t• 'I°\ 7600 (C.; No.•13._'94) P.�. - al ' M11500 ° ci o - � 3f9.36'w {f0• 10 � � xo oo z 1,-r + J� 5 rr r� 33. 17 200 600 700 Boo 900 r f f Yi 7500 a° 1600 zJ?O�`f °� �• b p w v AO a v �� w>8 o r [ (tel o o I 2 (�1 c �\� 3 !�4 a� g 11 5 e Te.A6 �•° g ret r 210Q9e. �. :l :J " C- r 8623 �� E !� Y _ o+ Iuo rr, ^” 0 0 1700 '6 136.x5' 14Y 51.5a' oast ► _-- iso _ 7400 _ � P CR 2025 o' j 1. .9e e ':o• $ 1001D8200 N /y a J o IS w>6• '°'.6s x sfs•a6'r 5 3 12 „ Y 2 39.73 2000 135.16' las' fxse' 3 7200 i \a4ze 1800 2200 21 00 2000 '+, '• F 7300 i a 1900 12 r .. r .• t7 s: q a ? `n p6e 8300 0. �° : 14 13 'q•, o u I6 °0 15 *,I9 I3s.o7 -s a s f s 1100 THAf 1 ' .Tf / :56.20.,.. ......9A........ ,....:.:<iSG..:.:.. .. ,:iG �.. :. �-" - - ,,. '."_'"'�.,�i-..."y..,,:,.,.�„ ..,,, .....; ,.,,-, - _ :•-.-..,=mar..,,,,.. _ _ (Tm�r}1+111tfp,Ef.l�tln f�'�)(I�fti t.�t11�f}t�tll�,_t�''t I]I Jill 11 Jill II} , Iltif�flffitl�llflfli�laf'4j1 y NOTE: IFT'HIS MICROFILMED __—.._..) Z 3 4 __. _ 5 6_ . . '1 7 B g t(raa11}O _.i l 12 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN �I THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO _. THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL - DRAWING. OE 6Z SZ LZ ez SZ—to--ez zZ IZ OZ 6t 8i Li —91 Sf"_. '._._E1zt ---"__O�— 6 9.. -- 9 5 e. � t F r_ �ueun�nnl EnlCaudnR�uu�uu�llRll�f1 - ---_---- n MARCH! I � 190 1 _ 1IMPRO P P PA0 --- --- e ��/l 0�/,�p9� SEE MAP �AIAa .4 COTS 2S I 3C8 / a e 1700 rs.es LTJ s" 14 �..� J�•r 1600 1500 :�'t tp' _ h o H 5600 — - ° I1 4 G 4700 a c h 1 �� s ( .�'' 4'9os. IS 5500 12 '! - ••C 2�9• y�\v O •�OO tv2 4400 'CRY° ,- cl i a 29 Ac 1 " ` 5400 5700m /-®/ �gwc '00 =s 53000 13 2 d 5200- 14 •• 4300 S 18 E A \ B s� .92 Ac 3 �].ez IS e J r r 1 c r 213 e r �� �Om W oQa,9 w `� TRACT 6o S.No 7931) 6j6j N� ~ « 90 -C• C N 1� N89°T3.36•W OPEN SPACE 4200 S •= 03 E 6 /^ r 1� �`� .sffi Ac S r � O b- N1y �'43'J9 F T S T f I e� �1 �IOF/"r o- ,....•. _ ^- $ 5100 4 s .� fite rci 2p 4100 � s .. E _�� r '� i5 ' R� c�� 16 2 ! 5900 633.6 a C o QD� X02 AC ,109.51 - 995 �90 3 h" 19 2 ®W• 1L1d/1 ��p.O IC.$. No.SE<�G) O N89°23'1fi W n85°ZS•76'•W S89^25.76-E m 4900 R 92.77 E_�Si 2C0 — — - 5's 35'w 6T] v-So SOQG f s•00•y] 'W •77 NQ9°13E 8 g a5800 c09 {�- ._ - - - - - - 17 �iE co =Q 2.20Ac a S6fe36'E g' 17 R A TP = I8 �l ..^..•. .. . b ,• ,]050 92 y 7800 'p 339.52 10 E 1 289 S 09 1300�> 130 n I 7700 Tri. s99-35'W 677.1' 1406 i F - 7900 ' TRACT "A/ � 200 or '0 i8 9 7600 (C._ No., 13,594) 8000 o v 1500 m 6 ry I / 09 A r" S69.37•W ago' B a 10 11 17 100 r r I J s]: P `49. ; 2200 20 r 600 700 800 900 r r f J 61) 7500 4 1600 ?dam iQ.F '7 ��-•.m N} 5 d I C) p O I 2 J e JN3 o" .r�4 w�b� 8 11 a 8623 m ry /J, '�36 16. 0c gra v^21009Q.a�°2w u 136.24 14a' 9933' ea92' •° 09.]1' -- ^ 0 7400 a 1700 r CR 2026 °o• 1000. 8200 ; N ° ° IS �- a>r 1a6j = ' 799'76'W •S 12 - 39.73 2000 136.89' 43 92.36 3 " 7200 { �z�z'1800 � 2200 2100 2000 '�Q. �• S? ; 7300 9 m I(Jo0 wYa 12 17 <' 16 0. 15 *,c9 9 iss e7 8300 . ! :0 14 r - 13 l m : 02b � 1100 � 3 rHr=r_r 'a 6 - .:6420...,.. .,.,.9A. .....:• :x...•.#4D....:••....:::� ..•di6.i..n,.. < 1{1 1{L 1{1 I{t I I i l l l l i i i ( I 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 7�(7Ti l i l Yi i 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 T - ^•�� -'� '"'"' --= _ ...�,..,_,,,,..__ - NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED i:_- -._... __ 'L 3 QrJ 6 7 8 9 10 {{ 12 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN _ -.�„ . THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL - DRAWILIG. 9Z SZ bZ EZ ZZ IZ OZ 1 BI 81 tl 9t �Sf 41 -61- Zi....--II-_.-OI • t< MARCM gni oeluu(nalau�uattul Hal;ne{in}�gy. — 1990 C r ko o i20 25 I ' ! PC` got � IP MURA � t !j 910 i �C- --- u► � I t B? tit, 0 _ t I - r1660. r 31p h .-IT ro �, . �V PPR J l — 60 ' N C 1 es noted ForetVE he Copditioos Shoran,Schoe"to ;nal �. � ln.as zcncpErr rs and ./ TUALATIN FIRE D TR T Zo .c ...rg5e •. VF Att rp►(Igi 11`1 1 t Itt 1 r I#i 1 i 1�i ! i 111 1 I i17 T� iii (l ti Tif illi 1 i01 t t >� j ( i i 1tII ! ! I I 11 I S I I LJ-t t E t I I i i a T � mem �. ! rTr� i r I i I.� 1 Til1l0i lir�-i;a i ►li If1 IIIp11lI;�IpII+ptlt i ,t 111 I#t llt 1�1 1�1'elwi! ; . NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED 3 4 -- . ._ 5 6_ .. 7 7S !B 0 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL - - - DRAWING. D£ 62 ®Z L2 8Z 9Z bZ £Z ZZ IZ OZ 61 61--LI 99 Sf b1 'E1 Zi It 0! S 8 L --9 — 8 b E Z jo' P iMljl III Itltl(Illlliltl(Il ItiNH�llllllllll(} + : rs X R c. rip JUL 12 190 ij Lb OK 9 7223 /411 At Y l d�W'Ci C z x N rr J U L 12 1985 JULY 11,1985 TO:TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ULlL!3 L.:jU u L.., J FROM:JACK STERETT 11680 SW TERRACE TRAILS,TIGARD SUBJECT:MINOR LAND PARTITION,MLP 5=85,M1-85,V9-85. GENTLEMEN, THIS APPLICATION FROM BALDWIN AND ULLRICH WAS FIRST REVIEWED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION NUMBER THREE (NPO#3).THE NPO#3 ORGANIZATION RECOMMENDED THIS APPLICATION IN ITS ENTIRETY BE REJECTED. THIS APPLICATION WAS REVIEWED BY THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION ON JUNE 4,1985. AFTER HEARING ALL THE ARGUMENTS THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION DENIED THE APPLIC ATION. GENTLEMEN,THE DECISION BY THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION WAS UNANAMOUS TO DENY THIS APPLICATION. CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS,I AM ASKING THAT YOU SUPPORT THE POSITION OF THE NPO#3 COMM ITTEE AND THAT OF THE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AND DENY THIS APPLICATION. SINCERELY JACK STERETT V- 3 h L S 1 x ra c�r��vaA/� f�Pf't�C,Q►y-!oa✓ t�LP �8.� , /'�/��", 1/�8� o y N t,//o r9,,✓o ff�/I'�/�� G�t�i+�.Nl t "Sloe✓ ,�� G'�`'�'�t.�/� T.�1�' a a MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Bob Jean,_City Administrator Tom Brian, Councilman July 5, 1.98.5 FROM; William A. Monahan, Director, Community Development SUBJECT: County Fee Per Trip System I 'spoke today with Bruce Warner of Washington County, concerning the Fee-Per-Trip proposal which the County has been working on for the past several months. Bruce is concerned that the latest cost estimate be available to you both. The latest cost estimates are: $1100 per single family dwelling unit (Around three times-what is in place now) $1000 per multiple family unit $9 — $18 per trip for commercial retail (Around $4500 — $9000 for a 7-11 store) $60 per trip for office commercial (Around $120 per parking space) These estimates include all county major collectors and arterials. The County needs assistance from the cities to estimate the cost of improving City collectors and arterials. (WAM:br/1576P) �iKaiE`�t _ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council July 11, 1985 FROM: Frank Currie, City Engineer/Deputy Comm. Dev. Dir. SUBJECT: COUNTY ROAD ACCEPTANCE DISCUSSION/REPORT Agenda Item No. 5, July 15, 1985 This item will be hand carried since it is an action or recommendation the Transportation Committee will be discussing tonight, July 11, 1985, at their meeting. y E)vc rs'11cd mt tL,n ILatE. 0-7- 15-85 Af i �I'1r1H1'MHI`IIIr9 4rlHilt t(�.1�d IHI'ill 9�IHIl1 erl�tjl TjT[Tj Jm Irljrll IHTIF1 111 Ij 1jl llt 119-rji 1)I IHf jf ilr r11111111op11 all !r! III !l! I1111la ala Ir! tra art yl a-rl . f `l H '1 H I i s 1' a � _ H I H � H � H � r I e t H NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN 10 THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF T}E ORIGINAL --- - DRAWING. 92 ro ai s �►,aruuflN lZnhN lZtttaaalhHdu,�,1� SLI 101Zz ez zz rz oz sr e+ a sr sr bl er zr :a-e ` s s _ b e z mdWua----------- 'msw A R Girti"r T ! ' F ------- � a-qqo w I NEST R/N UL2FM&jAC CEYIER JO O 'MARA STREET 40 ' -- ' ' LANDSCAPE cm _ I 6 0 STRIP 16-� " 61 8 ' F— TUM LANE a r�� ® a ~' i LANE '- �c �. w of F— � 77p- s4-rip sad�w�l� -4 6. kms.laws c 3 r-ul-f-A R c tl1111I1111111111111111I_-11' 1111111 �(�11111 � i 1 � � 1111111 i�1.! � t_i1P Jilt i t� �`imTmin'�'��1'�'�'�°ln'�1�1 I�+ts�sll�T'�s( �i�l�i�s�s I�I'I�sish'Jp ilTtsli sls +I ftL AM � s s�� sus sls +Is sls sls fel'>►+ 1A I isijlit � I NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED o DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN - THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. __ - � OE 62 QZ LZ SZ SZ bZ EZ 22 IZ 02 6t 81 LI 91 SI bl EI ZI it---_O' 6 ® qi S �slr+wlsNlhw6uiLudaiNlNssha��nnll 111+ -� 91990 _. e / e X ° 3 z h ti 1 0"1 Q N / 0� O's rSW HALL BLVD L + PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY 0 TAX LOT 401 TAX LOT 702 TAX LOT 701 a N \ CITY OF TIGARD ; STURGIS TIGARD CHRISTIANLd ®® o TAX LOT 400 0 t CHURCH ®® Ld + STURGIS ; ®®® Q: \ � ® (— PROPOSED ® TAX LOT 200 STREET ® REOH RIGHT-OF-WAY °A ®o1® ®1�®Eet)i®�®®®®®®t®®®®®®®H�B®19®®®®®tm Q u Q< ®N '� \ O r- L < cr— w_ mm Ld C0 co N � F � 1 v� O 4 � o QO o e CO Nti Q 1 1 SCALE: 1" = 100' LEGEND o F ®moi•®�a�a!®®at�tta>� PROPOSED LID BOUNDARY ° + as om FIGURE A-1 < S.W. HALL BLVD LOCAL STREET IMPROVEMENT N STUDY AREA w _ DISTRICT - PROPOSED BOUNDARY AND Lu w PROPERTY OWNERSHIP N N �..y�sii�ssreio• EXISTING OWNERSHIP BOUNDARY --"_1 f p1$ CONSULTING ENGINEERS ISI S.W.6TH,SUITE 811 PORTLAND,OREGON$7204 �!�(il►�rlr�tlt rlr(lar�lat(tie ria(aIa 414(4!4 tit aji I t t 1 I tat t t c t t f I `„ I�a1t�IN�+lti�ti+�ti+�+la0+lai+h��Ir�ala�n+�ll+�+l,aria(ala�tit�atlllia�rlr'ri�)raa NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED .- ...---.._.( 2 3 4 __ _ S S_ 7 B $� t5 _.)2' . DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN •, " ' THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO " THE QUALITY OF T}E ORIGINAL -. .. DRAWING, 06 6z ez a 92 S2 tames �tlMaltl�INt�1111�i111�I11111Ni�111t�1N ,( a im ....I )yliaS f F- 77) fl d i '___. __-_ ' 1990 r. ---- O'DONNELL. RAMIS. I DATE July 15, 1985 ELLIOTT & CREW ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO Tigard City Council -. 1727 N.W. HOYT STREET PORTLAND.OREGON 97209 FROM City Attorney (503) 222-4402 RE Liability for Damages Arising from Failure to Maintain Sidewalks The Planning Department has requested that I review for the Council the background giving rise to the suggested amendments regarding sidewalk maintenance. The current Code language requires that the property owner is responsible formaintenanceof sidewalks, including the clearing of snow and ice. Municipal_attorneys for many years had assumed that this language protected the local government from lawsuits for injuries arising from failure to maintain the sidewalk because the Code language clearly places responsibility on the property owner. A recent court decision reversed that assumption. The court held that cities are not free from liability unless their codes expressly state that the responsibility to maintain the sidewalk carries with it the responsibility to be liable for injuries caused by failure to maintain the sidewalk. In order to give the City the protection from liability which we earlier thought we had, it will be necessary to adopt the proposed Codeamendments. The policy decision for the Council in this matter involves assigning economic responsibility for injuries. (� If we do not change the language, the City will be responsible. If we change the language, the property owner will be responsible. As City Attorney, we are concerned that we bring to your attention every opportunity to minimize the City's financial risks. For this reason, we have raised the issue and recommended the adoption of the new language. •._ TVR:mch 7/15/85 WmFlrj J CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON OOUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 15, 1985 AGENDA ITEM N: GATE SUBMITTED: July 10, 1985 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENOA TITLE:Director's Decision MLP 9-85 HOP 10-85, HOP 12-85 PREPARED BY: Community Development REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: CITY ADMINISTRATOR POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached are the Director's Decisions for: MI,P - 9-85 Request by T.L. Noble and GlennTurnerto partition a 0.61 acre parcel into two lots of 9,312;and,17,291 sq. ft. on property zoned R-4.5 located at 11565 sW 90th Ave. HOP - 10-85 Request by Richard E. Goldsmith for a Home occupation Permit for an office for computer services in the home on property- Zoned R-12, located at 14958 SW 109th. HOP - 12-85 Request by Harold and Joan Hennings for a Home occupation permit for an Engineering office in the home on property zoned R-4.5, located at 11315 SW Nova Ct. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Receive and File. 2. Motion to remove from Consent Agenda and call up for Council review at a later meeting. SUGGESTED ACTION Receive and file. nil J CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF DECISION MINOR LAND PARTITION MLP 9-85 APPLICATION: Request by T. L. Noble and Glenn Turner to partition a 0.61 acre parcel into two lots of`9.312 and 17,291 square feet on property zoned R-4.5 (Residential 4.5 units/acre) and located at 11565 SW 90th Avenue. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 35DC. Tax Lot 8000). DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City of Tigard has APPROVED the above described application subject to certain conditionE The findings and conclusions on which the Director based his decision are as noted below. A. FINDING OF FACT 1. Background No previous land use cases have been reviewed by the City relating to this property. 2. Vicinity Information The subject property is within an established single family residential neighborhood that is zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre).. Lots generally range from 10,000 to 27,000 square feet in size. 3. Site Information and Proposal Description _ One residence is located in the northeast portion of the subject property, near 90th Avenue. The applicant proposes to create. a' f?Ag lot to establish a new homesite in the rear portion of the property. A 25—foot wide access strip will be provided for this = lot on the south side of the existing residence. 4. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division notes that the remaining half—street improvements along the 90th Avenue frontage should be installed. The Building Inspection Division has no objection to the proposal. B. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The proposed partition is consistent with City Code requirements for minimum lot size (7,500 square feet), access, and setback requirements for the existing house. It should be noted that a house on the flag lot will be subject to the standard front and rear yard setbacks of 20 and 15 feet and a 10—foot side yard requirement. Also, houses on flag lots r are subject to height restrictions contained in Section 18.98.030 of the Community Development Code (copy enclosed): NOTICE OF DECISION — MLP 9-85 PAGE 1 C DECISION The Planning Director approves MLP 9-85 subject to the following {, conditions: 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO RECORDING THE PARTITION. ' 2. Standard half-street improvements (fronting both tracts) including sidewalk, curb, driveway aprons, storm drainage and utilities shall be installed along the S.W. 90th Avenue frontage. Said improvements along S.W. 90th Avenue shall be built to local street standards and conform to the alignment to be approved by the City Engineer. 3. Seven (7) sets of plan-profile public improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to the Engineering Section for approval. 4. Sanitary sewer plan-profile connection details shall be provided as part of the public improvement plans. 5. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Section has issued approved public improvement plans. The Section will require posting of a 1O0% Performance Bond, the payment of a permit fee and a streetlight fee. Also, the execution of a street opening permit shall occur prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public improvement plans. SEE THE ENCLOSED HANDOUT GIVING MORE SPECIFIC INFORMATION REGARDING FEE SCHEDULES,_BONDING AND AGREEMENTS. 6. The partition survey and legal descriptions shall be submitted to' the Planning Director for review and approval. THE CITY SHALL RECORD THESE DOCUMENTS AFTER THEY ARE APPROVED AND A COPY SHALL BE FORWARDED TO THE APPLICANT. 7. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date noted below. D. PROCEDURE 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: XX The applicant & owners XX Owners of record within the required distance XX The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization XX Affected governmental agencies NOTICE OF DECISION - MLP 9-85 PAGE 2 x 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON July 22, 1985 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. 3. Appeal: An!; pay.ty to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the CITY 'RECORDER within 10 'days after noticeis given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal i35:00 P.M. July 22, 1985 4. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397,, Tigard, Oregon 97223,- 639-4171. _ 7/9185 Williaca A, Monahan, Director of Community 0eveloprsent ; DATE APPROVED (KSL:pml1582P) r r T 3� NOTICE OF DECISION —.MLP 9-85 — PAGE 3 CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF DECISION HOME OCCUPATION HOP 10-85 APPLICATION: A request by Richard E. Goldsmith for a Home Occupation Permit for an office for computer services in the home on property zoned R-12. Located 14958 Sw 109th (wCTM 2S1 10AD, Tax Lot 90058) DECISION: ' Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City of Tigard has APPROVED the above application subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the Director based his decision are as noted below. A. FINDING OF FACT 1• Background No previous applications have been reviewed by the Planning Department on this property. 2. Vicinity Information The surrounding property is all zoned R-12 (Multi—Family Residential). 3. Site Information and Proposal Description There is a 1,262 square foot residence on the property. The applicant is proposing to use 30 square feet for the business. The applicant will occupy the remainder of the residence. The business use as proposed by the applicant will not occupy more , than 25% of the residence. 4. Agency and NPO Comments NPO # 6 will be notified of the Director's decision and will have the right to appeal. B. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The proposal meets all provisions set forth in Chapter 18.142 of the Tigard Municipal Code. Y C. - DECISION Home Occupation Permit HOP 10-85 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. There shall be no people working in the home in conjunction with the business who are not residents of the home. NOTICE OF DECISION — HOP 10-85 — PAGE 1 2. There shall be no signs or advertising visible from the exterior of the premises. 3 There shall be no customers or clients coming to the residence in conjunction with the business. 4. The Home Occupation Permit shall be renewed annually. 5. A Business Tax shall be paid annually for the business. 6. There shall be no noise emitted from the residence connected with the business which is audible to abutting residences. 7. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date noted below. D. PROCEDURE 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to:XX The applicant & owners XX_ Owners of record within the required distance XX The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization XX Affected governmental agencies 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON July 19, 1985 UNLESS AN APPEAL -' IS FILED. 3. Appeal: Any party to the decision way appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the CITY RECORDER within: 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:00 P.M. July 19-1905 4. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223, 639- 171. 7-9-85 Wi iaa A. Monahan, Director of Community Development GATE APPROVED (KSL:dmj/1599P) r, NOTICE OF DECISION - HOP 10--85 - PAGE 2 - - - } CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF DECISION HONE OCCUPATION HOP 12-85 APPLICATION: A request by Harold and loan Hennings for a Home Occupation Permit for an Engineering office in the home on property zoned R-4.5. Located at: 11315 SW Nova Ct. (WCTM 2S1 308, lot 3100). DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City of Tigard has APPROVED the above application subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the Director based his decision are as noted below. A. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Background No previous applications have been reviewed by the Planning Department on this property. 2. Vicinity Information The property to the north, east, and west is zoned and developed R-4.5 (Single Family Residential). The property to the south is zoned R-3.5 (Single Family Residential). 3. Site Information and Proposal Description _ There is a 2,400 square foot home on the property. The applicant is proposing to use 200 square feet for the business. The applicant and his family will occupy the remainder of the home. The business use as proposed by the applicant will not occupy more ' than 25% of the home. 4. Agency and NPO Comments NPO M 3 will be notified of the Director's decision and will have the right to appeal. a, ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The proposal meets the provisions set forth in Chapter 18.142 of the Tigard Municipal Code. C. DECISION Home Occupation Permit HOP 12-85 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. There shall be no people working in the hams in conjunction with t . the business who are not residents of the hams. 3 NOTICE OF DECISION HOP 12-85 PAGE 1 s 2: There shall be no signs or advertising visible from the exterior of the premises. (` 3 There shall be no customers or clients coming to the residence in conjunction with the business. 4. The Home Occupation Permit shall be renewed annually. 5. A Business Tax shall be paid annually for the business. 6. There shall be no noise emitted from the home connected with the business which is audible to abutting residence. -7. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date noted below. D. PROCEDURE 1. Notice Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: XX The applicant & owners XX owners of record within the required distance XX The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization XX Affected governmental agencies 2, Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON July 19, 1985 UNLESS AN APPEAL_ IS FILED. 3. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.29O(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the CITY RECORDER within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:00 P.M. July 19, 1985 , 4, Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223, 639-4171. �7 7/9/85 Wil tam A. Manahan, Director of Community Development DATE APPROVED - (KSL:dmj/1590P) NOTICE OF DECISION — HOP 12-85;— PAGE 2 1 CITY OF TIGARO, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM'SUMMARY AGENDA OF- July 15, ;1985 AGENDA ITEM M: ' . July 10, 1985 PREVIOUS ACTION: DATE SUBMITTED: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Hearings Officer acision - SL 6-85, CU' 1-85, CU 2-85, PREPARED BY. Community Development n _{•jt 85 REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT NERD OK: G CITY ADMINISTRATOR: _ w POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached are the Hearings Officer final orders for: SL 6-85 Application for a Sensitive Lands Permit to fill a drainageway on property zoned C-G -Commercial General, (Mercury Development) CU 1-85 - Conditional Use to establish a residential care facility for - approximately 20 persons on land zone R4.5 (Kataline Lorinc) CU 2-85 - Conditional Use to permit construction of additions to existing church buildings on property zoned R3.5 (David Fisher) CU 3-85 - Conditional Use to allow a 1,080 sq. ft. classroom to be rty zoned R-12 (St. AnthonyParish) permanently established on prope ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1, Receive and File. 2. . Motion to remove from Consent Agenda and call up for Council review ata later meeting. F SUGGESTED ACTIO": Receive and file. k a s _ BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD E APPLICATION ) IN THE MATTER OF No. FOR A SENSITEVSLANDS SALBITARYPERMIT TAND ) SL 6-85 RELOCATE STORM SEWER LINE AND TO FILL A ) DRAINAC^WAY ON PROPERTY ZONED ) C-G (Commercial Generals applicant.) Mercury Development Co. • PP The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings � regularly scheduled meeting of June 27, 1985, at Officer at the . g and.. in Tigard, Oregon; the Durham Waste Treatment Plant• sitive lands Permit to The applicant requests a sen allow the relocation of existing sanitary and storm sewer lines and to fill a drainageway on property coned C-G (Commercial d located on the southeast side,of Pacific Highway. General) . an prop more of Garrett Street, p approximately 100 feet south 801, 900, specifically described as Tax Lots 100, 200, 500, 800, 902 Map 2S1-2CB, City of Tigard, County of Washington, State•Qf Oregon; and ublic hearing on The Hearings. Officer conducted a P 5 at which time testimony• evidence and the Planning June 27, 198 , Departmient Staff Report were received; and Officer adopts the findings of fact and The- Hearings ..- conclusions contained in the Staff Report. a copy of which is marked -Exhibit A- and incorporated by reference attached heretos herein; : and NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that SL 5-85 be to the following conditions: and hereby is approved subject page 1 -- SL 6-85 y t 1. A soils report and-detailed grading plans shall be submitted to the City for review prior to issuance of any permits for site work. 2. The City Engineer shall be satisfied that the applicant's proposal for on-site storm retention is adequate to hold runoff to current levels, or at the City's option, the City Engineer shall specify off-site improvement design on • downstream facilities to accommodate increased runoff. 3. Detailed engineering plans for storm drainage and sanitary sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by the City's Engineering Division prior to issuance of building permits. City public improvements shall be bonded for 100% of- the estimated cost thereof prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Site Development Review approval shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. S. This approval is valid is exercised within one year of the final decision te. DATED this day of July, 1985- HEARINGSzZ:ER APP D. TH F \\ Page 2 - SL 6-85 rv , i BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT .TO ) _ESTABLISH A RESIDENTIAL CARE ' ) No. FACILITY<FOR APPROXIMATELY 20 ) ' PERSONS ON LAND ZONED R-4.5 ) Cu 1-85 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) ; ) Kataline Lorinc, applicant. ) The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings °Officer at the regularly scheduled meeting of June 27, 1985, - at the Durham Waste Treatment Plant, in Tigard, Oregon; and The applicant requests a conditional use permit to establish a residential care facility for approximately 20 persons in an existing four-plea residence on* property zoned R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) and located at 11551 SW Greenburg Road, more specifically described as Tax Lot 3001, Map 1S1-35DC, City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon; and The Hearings conducted a public hearing on June 27; 1985, at which time testimony, evidence and the Planning Department Staff Report were received; and The Hearings Officer adopts the findings of fact and conclusions contained in the Staff Report, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A" and incorporated by reference herein; and NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that CU 1-85 be and hereby is approved subject to the following conditions: . . zt Page 1 - CU '1-85 f .r i 1.- Unless otherwise rooted, all conditions shall be met prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Standard half-street improvements including sidewalks, curbs, streetlights, driveway aprons, storm drainage and utilities shall be installed along the SW Greenburg Road frontage. Said improvements along SW Greenburg Road shall be built to major collector street standards and conform to the alignment of existing street improvements. 3,_ Five (5) sets of plan-profile public improvement construction plans and one (l) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to. the Engineering Section for approval. 4. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Section has issued approved public improvement plans. The Section will require posting of a 100% Performance Bond, the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight fee. Also, the execution of a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement shall occur prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public improvement plans. 5. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the ad frontage to increase the right Public along the SW Greenburg Ro - of-way to 35 feet from centerline. The description for said dedicati shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline as established Pago 2 CUAN 1 1-85 .. } by.,Washington County. The dedication document shall be on City forms and approved by the Engineering section. . 6. The existing driveway shall be widened to 24 feet or a variance shall be requested and approved. 7. A revised parking plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. 8. A' landscaping plan for the perimeter of the parking area shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Director. 9. Landscaping material shown in the approved landscaping plan shall be installed prior to occupancy of the residential care facility. lo. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decisiondate DATED this day of July" 1985. HEARINGS R AP OVER: .� TH tr r �c Page 3 - CU 1-85 _r BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ) CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS TO EXISTING ) No. CHURCH BUILDINGS, ON PROPERTY ) ZONED R-3.5, (Residential, 3.5 ) CU 2-85 units/acre) ; David Fisher, ) applicant. ) The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings Officer at the -regularly scheduled meeting of June 27, 1985, at the Durham Waste Treatment Plant, in Tigard, Oregon; and, the matter was continued for a conference call between the applicant, the hearings Officer and Staff which occurred on June 28, 1985, at 11:00 .a.m. ; and The applicant requests a conditional use permit to construct additions to existing church buildings on property R--3.5 (Residential, 3.5 units/acre) and located at 11075 SW Gaarde, property more specifically described as Tax Lot 1100, 1101, and 1200, Map 2S1-3DC, City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon; and The Hearings Officer conducted a public hearing on June 27, 1985, and a follow-up conference call on June 28, 1985, at which-time-testimony, .evidence and the Planning Department Staff Report were received; and The Hearings Officer adopts the findings of fact and conclusionL contained in the Staff Report, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A" and incorporated by reference herein; and Page 1 CU 2-85 Y NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that CU 2-85 be and hereby is approved subject to the following conditions 1. This development may be phased; and unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be met prior to issuance of building and sewer connection permits for the phase under construction: 2. Sanitary sewer plan-profile details shall be provided as 'part of the building improvement plans 3. Sanitary sewerage shall be installed from the 3 church buildings to the public main-line sewer. A sewer connection fee and sewer line inspection fee shall be paid. Plans shall be submitted to the City Building Department for approval. In addition, a surcharge in lieu of participation in the Derry Dell LID shall be paid by any lots which have not contributed to that LID; contributions shall be made prior to a building permit issued for the lot in question. Conditions 4, 5, 6 and 7 shall be designed and a 100% performance bond posted prior to the issuance of any building permits, however construction completing said improvements may occur after issuance of building permits, prior to occupancy, - -within the timeframe required by the City Engineer and the terms of the performance bond: 4. Half-street improvements shall be constructed on SW 110t to the north end of the Garden Park Place improvement on SW 110th. itted for improvements on SW 110th to Design drawings shall be subm Page 2 CU 2-85 the south line of Fairhaven Court. Said improvements along SW 110th Avenue shall be built to minor collector street standards and conform to the alignment of existing adjacent improvements. 5. Half street improvements shall be constructed on SW Gaarde 120 feet westerly from SW 110th to the west line of Tax Lot 1101 on Tax Map 2S1 3DC. Design drawings shall be submitted for public improvements for the length of SW Gaarde in front of all property under church ownership. Said improvements along SW Gaarde Street shall be built to major collector street standards and conform to the alignment of existing adjacent improvements. 6. Five (5) sets of plan-profile -public improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to the Engineering Section for approval. 7. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Section has issued approved public improvement plans. The Section will require posting of a 1008 performance bond, the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight fee. Also, the execution of a street -opening-permit--and--street--dedication compliance-agreement shall- occur prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public improvement plans. 8. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the SW Gaarde Street frontage to increase the right of-way to `30 feet from centerline. The description- for said Page 3 - CU 2-85 dedication shall be tied to the existing right-of-way centerline as- established by Washington County. ` The dedication document, shall be on City forms and approved by the Engineering Section'. Dedication forms and instructions are enclosed. 9. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public along the SW 110th Avenue frontage to increase the right-of-way to 30 feet from centerline The dedication document shall be on City forms and approved by the Engineering Section. Dedication forms and instructions are enclosed. 10. Street Centerline Monumentation 1. in accordance with ORS 92.060 subsection (2) • the centerlines of all street and roadway rights-of-way shall be monumented before the City shall accept a street improvement. 2.. All centerline monuments shall be placed in a monument box conforming to City standards, and the top of all monument boxes shall be set at design finish grade of said street or roadway. 3. The following centerline monuments shall be set: a. All centerline-centerline intersections. Intersections created with "collector" or other existing streets, shall`" e.._set"_i&bn£he cerite"rline altgnmen -of--said "collector" -or other street has been established by or for the City; b. Center ofallcul-de-sacs; C. Curve points. Point of intersection (P.I.) ' when their position falls inside the limits of the pavement otheivise \. ' Page 4 CU 2-85 beginning and ending points (B.C. and E.C.) . d. All sanitary and storm locations shall be placed in positions that do not interfere with centerline monumentation. 11. A greenway dedication shall be filed for a 20 foot dedication for a bike path subject to the approval of the City Engineer regarding alignment;` the path shall be connected to the dedicated bike path adjacent to the property to the north, but shall traverse along the drainageway crossing the subject property. 12. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date DATED this day of July, 1985. HEARING FY'rCER APP VEDm 4. w, Page 5 CU 2-85 .i sr r $. BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION j FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ) No. ALLOW A 1,080 SQUARE FOOT CLASS- ) ROOM TO BE PERMANENTLY ESTABLISHED ) CU 3-85 ON PROPERTY ZONED R-12 (Residential, ) 12 units/acre) ; St. Anthony Parish,` ) applicant. ) The above-entitled matter came before the Hearings Officer at the regularly scheduled meeting of June 27, 1985, at , the Durham Waste Treatment Plant, in Tigard, Oregon; and The applicant requests a conditional use permit to allow a 1,080 square foot classroom to be permanently established on property zoned R-12 (Residential, 12 units/acre) and located at 12645 SW Pacific Highway, more specifically described as Tax Lots 100 and 300, Map 2Sl-2BD, City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon; and The Hearings Officer conducted a public hearing on June 27, 1985, at which time testimony, evidence and the Planning Department Staff Report were received; and The Hearings Officer adopts the findings of fact and conclusions contained in the Staff Report, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A" and incorporated by reference herein; NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY. ORDERED that CU 3-85 be and hereby is approved subject to the following conditions: Page 1 CU 3-85 k s x Via. 1. All conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to permanent occupancy of the classroom building. 2. The location and construction of the building shall-conformwith all Building and Fire Code requirements. The building shall be placed upon a permanent foundation. The application shall obtain all necessary permits from the Building Inspection Office. The building shall be relocated so that it is not parallel to Pacific Highway. It shall be moved so that the length of the structure runs parallel to the southwest side of the classroom building. 3. A landscaping plan including the following components shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval: a. Street trees along the Pacific Highway frontage. b. Landscaping and buffering along the boundary with the commercial property to the southwest. 4. All landscaping material shown on the approved plan shall be installed prior to occupancy. S. All conditions of approval for SDR 26-81 and i CU 20-82 shall be met. 6. This approval shall be effective for one year from the final approval date. The Temporary Use Permit expires on October 10, 1985, and the Code does not allow for any additional extensions. After October 10, 1985, the classroom building shall not be occupied until the above conditions are met. Page 2 CU .3-85 s=N 7. The property. is presently partially served by a gravel driveway. Prior to occupancy, that driveway shall be replaced with either one two-way driveway paved to 24 foot width, or a paved one-way driveway of not less than 15 feet of width. DATED thisda� July, 1985. HEARINGS tFFICER AP VEDc xx ,.. F i E Page 3 - CLT' 3-85 art _CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF DECISION SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SDR 7-85 APPLICATION: Request by Frank E Aszman for a Site Development Review to construct two additions, one of 260 square feet to an existing 1,942 square ' foot building and one of 4,277 square feet to an existing 4,368 square foot building. The property is zoned I-L (Light Industrial) and is located 14915 SW 72nd (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 12AC lot 2000), DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City of Tigardhas approved the above described application subject to to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the Director based his decision are as noted below. A. FINDING OF FACT 1. Background No previous land use applications have been reviewed by the City. 2. Vicinity Information The subject property is surrounded by land that is zoned I-L Y (Light Industrial). Industrial buildings on or near the property line &but the subject parcel to the north and south. 3. Site Information and Proposal Description The property contains two buildings of 1,942 and 4,368 square- feet. A 260 square foot addition is proposed for the smaller building near 72nd Avenue and a 4,277 square foot addition is intended for the larger building situated in the rear of the property.. A paved driveway of 24 to 30 feet in width extends along the northern property line between 72nd Avenue and the rear building. The remainder of the area between the two buildings is gravel. A mobile home or office is situated immediately behind the front building. 4 Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division has the following comments: a. The remaining _public improvements (eg. sidewalk) should be installed along the 72nd Avenue frontage. b. A five foot wide strip along 72nd Avenue frontage. (Tax Lot 2001) has not been accepted for right-of-way by Washington County because of back taxes. This should be resolved prior to issuance of building permits. NOTICE OF 'DECISION - SDR 7-85 - PAGE :2 c. The method for accommodating stormwater runoff should be submitted and approved before building permits are issued. Since directing drainage toward 72nd Avenue is not practical, a_permit from Southern Pacific Railroad may be necessary. The Building Inspection Division has no objection to the proposal. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has no objection to the addition to the building near 72nd Avenue. The District would like to review more concise parking plans to determine if adequate access will be available to the _rear building. Because of its location, this building will require automatic sprinklers. B. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The proposal is consistent with Community Development Code requirements for maximum lot coverage, landscaped area setback, and access. Several aspects of the development noted below will requiremodifications or clarification prior to. initiating construction. Landscaping Although the amount of area devoted to landscaping is appropriate, a more specific plan indicating the placement and dimensions of new landscaped areas as well as the types of planting proposed should be submitted. Landscaped areas and islands must have a minimum width of three feet. Parking The Code requires that 11 parking spaces be provided based upon the total square footage of the buildings. Three marked spaces presently exist between the front building and 72nd Avenue and a minimum of eight additional marked spaces should be established. Visual Clearance The existing sign in the northeast corner of the property is within the required visual clearance area for the driveway and it should be moved. Mobile Home The site plan indicates that the mobile home on the property will be removed. Such a unit may only be used for residential purposes in the I-L zone for a caretaker. If it is intended for office use, it must be inspected to'determine if it can meet Building Code requirements. NOTICE OF'DECISION SDR 7-85 — PAGE 2 C. DECISION The Planning Director approve SDR 7=85 subject to the following conditions: 1 ''UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF` BUILIDNG PERMITS. 2. Standard half-street improvements including sidewalk, curb, _curb cut, driveway apron, and utilities shall be installed along the S.W. 72nd AVenue frontage. Said improvements along SW 72nd Ave. shall be built to City standards and conform to the alignment of existing adjacent improvements. 3. Four (4) sets of plan-profile public improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by -a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to the Engineering Section for approval. 4. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer. details shall be provided as part of the building improvement plans. 5. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Section has issued approved public improvement plans. The Section will require posting of a 100% Performance- Bond and the payment of a permit fee; Also, the execution of a street opening permit shall occur prior to, or concurrently with the issuance of approved public improvement plans. SEE THE ENCLOSED HANDOUT GIVING MORE SPECIFIC INFORMATION• REGARDING FEE SCHEDULES, BONDING AND AGREEMENTS, 6. Tax Lot 2001 shall be eliminated and dedicated as public right-of-way. 7. A revised site and landscaping plan shall be submitted for Planning Director and Fire District approval which contains the following items: a. Location, dimensions and planting materials for all new landscaped areas. Total landscaped area shall equal a minimum of 15% of the lot area. b. -A minimum of it parking spaces shall be provided. C. The sign located north of the driveway shall be relocated outside of the vision clearance area. 8. All parking and driveway areas shall be paved prior to occupancy of the additions. s NOTIGE OF DECISION -:SDR 7-85 - PAGE 3 t 9. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date noted below. D. PROCEDURE - 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: The applicant 6 owners Owners of record within the required distance The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization Affected governmental agencies 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL. BE. FINAL ON UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. 3. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the CITY RECORDER within 10 days after notice is given _ and sent. Thedeadline for filing of an appeal is 4:30 P.m. 4. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223, 639-4171. William A. Monahan, Director of Co unity Development DATE APPROVED (KSL:dmj/1604P) eere.o LJ sl nu Az r I I NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 7-85 PAGE 4 "• �l i CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council July 11, 1985 n FROM: - Donna Corbet', Executive Secretary SUBJECT: Agenda Item 8.6: Newsletter draft This item will be hand carried Monday night. It hasn' t been completed in time to be drafted on the word P processing system. t h - In a combined effort, the annual ►► Town and Country Days event has �zuiBCai I i! been joined by the Tigard Chamber of Commerce, Kelawani TIC- ARD '85 '"` 1 Club of Tigard, Terrific Tigard Kiwanis and others to offer an expanded community celebration. R / FRIDAY night, July 26 from 5:00 ` P.M. to 8:30 P.M. the annual STEELHEADERS SALMON BARBEQUE will be held at the Community Hall on Commercial Street by the Fire Station. SATURDAY, July 27, is the main event: PARADE from McDonald Street to Main Street from 10:00 A.M. to noon. POLICE AUCTION opposite the Police Department at 12:30 P.M. MAIN STREET FAIR with Arts and Crafts Faire, Food Booths, Hot Air Balloon Rides, Beer Garden, Sidewalk Sales, Pre-1960's Car Display, and Children's_Games. The KINGSMEN (Louie Louie!) will entertain Saturday from 2:00 P.M. to 4:00 P.M. on Main Street at the Tigard Feed Store. JOHNNIE LIMBO 6 THE LUGNUTS will be the evening's entertainment for adults and teens. A family, 'atmosphere will be maintained. Showtime from 8:00 P.M. to Midnight off Burnham opposite the Police Station. Beer/Soft Drink Gardens and Food Booths will be open. Town and Country Days started as the City's Birthday Celebration. Tigard was incorporated in 1962. The 1950's-1960'3 theme for this year's CRUISIN' TIGARD '85 is a fitting continuation of this community tradition. The committee emphasizes the family and fun nature of this event. Please join us. U.S.A. INCREASES SEWER RATES The Washington County Unified Sewerage Agency has notified the City of a rate -increase effective July 1, 1985. The charge will increase $1.50 per dwelling unit per month from $9.50 to $10.75 per month. By contract, the City of Tigard must pass on this U.S.A.-rate increase. You will soon begin receiving your bill with this rate increase. Customer service questions on billings should 'still be directed to the City. Questions about the rate increase itself should be directed to U.S.A. at 648-8621. J ' LIBRARY LEVY PASSES: SERVICES EXPANDED After several up and down years for Library Services. the County-wide library levy passage has allowed Tigard to increase library hours 16%, and also to expand reference and childrens library services. Thanks :Tigard! Beginning July 16, the new hours are: 9:30 8:0O Tuesday, Wednesday & Thursday; and 9:30 - 5:00 Friday and Saturday. The Youth Reading Programs for summer are in full swing! If you missed registering for the pre-school or school age programs, you can still participate! An awards party will beheldAugust 1, at Cook Park from 1:30 - 3:00 p,m. There will be the Safety Kids Puppet Show and a drawing! TIGARD ARTS AND GIFTS (T.A.G.) & FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY The Tigard- Arts and Gifts Committee has filed as a tax-exempt private non-profit committee chaired by Council President Tom Brian. Almost $2,000 has been raised so far for artwork and special- purchases for the new Civic Center. A special thanks to the Tigard Rotary who gave $10,000 for the Youth area in the Library and to the Friends of the Tigard Library who have raised almost $6,000 for the Library. That's on top of the G.A.S.S. Rummage Sale that raised about $7,0001 For more information about T.A.G. , contact Donna Corbet, Administrative 4171. About the Friends of the Library, contact Secretary, at City Hall 639- Irene Ertell, Head Librarian at 639-9511. CIVIC CENTER CONSTRUCTION STARTED The Contractor started last month with site preparation. Footings and foundations along with rough site work will continue this month. August act- ity should start to be quite visible as framing and roofing ta:.es shape. The site is closed to the public for safety reasons, t,,.wt progress may be viewed from Hall Boulevard. Watch the Center Loy. in each Newsletter; we'll calor it in each month as construction progresses. , F METZGER C.P.O. FAVORS TIGARD At the invitation of the Metzger Community Planning Organization (CPO), Tigard. Beaverton and Portland met last month with about 100 Metzger citizens Residents concerned about recent County cut-backs and the threat of r possible future reduced Sheriff services wanted more information about City F services and costs. The majority of those polled favored staying as is, but were concerned about o- continuing piece meal annexations of the area and favored more information. Of those expressing a choice if annexation were to occur: 3% favored � Beaverton, 16% favored Portland, and 81% favored joining Tigard. TIGARD AND BEAVERTON COUNCILS MEET On July 10. 1985, the Tigard and Beaverton City Councils held a join meeting to review areas of common interest to both communities. Topics discussed included; Police/Sheriff issues, Emergency Medical Services, 911/Central Dispatching, Fire Services, Annexation and Land Use Plan Coordination, Transportation, Library, Sewer Rates and Storm Drainage. Another meeting has been planned for September on the Scholls Ferry area land use plans. Agreement was reached about the South Beaverton/North Tigard boundary lines for future annexations. Beaverton supports Tigard's active interest in future annexation of Metzger. Tigard supports Beaverton's annexation interests West of Murray Road and North of new Scholls Ferry Road. Both cities acknowledge each other's interest in the future annexation of Washington Square. URBAN PLANNING AREA "— BOUNOARY Q ACTIVE PLANNING AREA i AREA OFINTERESTj' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 15-1985 AGENDA ITEM DATE SUBMITTED: Jules 3,1 985 PREVIOUS ACTION: None ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Hail Blvd. Baptist Church �- Compliance Agree PREPARED BY: John Hagmanf ment and Bond Acceptance by City, authorize City execution//. REQUESTED BY: Development Services DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: !r� #� CITY ADMINISTRATOR: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY 1. The project work site is located on the west side of S.W. Hall Blvd., just south of S.W. McDonald Street, 2. The project consists of a short extension of an existing main-line sanitary sewer, to provide service to the church. 3. Construction plans have been reviewed and approved; the State of Oregon has issued a street opening permits; all relavant fees have been paid to extend said line. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SUGGESTED ACTION Authorize the Mayor and City Recomier to execute the Hall Blvd. Baptist Church Sanitary Sewer Compliance Agreement, and to accept the Performance Bond, in hehalf of the City. 1572P dmj z SANITARY SEWER COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT S ....THIS AGREEMENT datedthis, day of aU1-f�Z.f 198r;, , between the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipality of the State of Oregon, hereinafter termed the "City'', and Half Blvd. Baptist Church hereinafter termed "Petitioner', W I T N E S S E T H: ' WHEREAS, Petitioner has applied to the City for approval of construction of a sanitary sewer, to be known as Hall Blvd Baptisit 'Church Sanitary Sewer Ext. being within the boundaries of an area as described on the attached Plans , and by reference made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard requires applicants for construction of sewers, and appurtenances thereto, to submit to construction inspection, and testing therewithal, to grant public easements,there£or, and requires the payment of fees; and WHEREAS, the City has approved and adopted the standard specifications for Public Works construction by APWA, Oregon Chapter, and the Unified Sewerage Agency specifications for sanitary sewers prepared by professional engineers for Public Worms construction; and WHEREAS, the. public' improvements required to be constructed are incomplete, but petitioner has nonetheless requested that the City permit granting of the property to the public, and the parties herein named desire to protect the public interest generally to assure the public improvements will be installed as required and completed within the time hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premise and the covenants and agree- ments to be kept and performed by the Petitioner and its contractor and contractors surety, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Petitioner shall proceed to complete all public improvements as shown on herewith improvement plan, as approved by the City of Tigard and prepared by pavid Evans Acsnr;arg,� dated Aueust 1984 Said improvements to be completed no later than one 1) year from the date of this agreement, and Petitioner hereby agrees to comply with all standard specifications adopted by this City, or as may otherwise be approved by the Department of Public Works and to use only such material and to follow such designs as may be required to conform thereto. 2. To assure compliance with the City's requirements and the provisions thereof,Petitioner agrees to obtain, provide and tender to the City, a surety bond(s) in fo a roved by the City, with liability in the amount equal to the contract price of $ , prior to issuance of a permit for construction of said improvements; Petitioner s 3 contractor shall be licensed, and insured as required. 3. In the event that the Petitioner shall fail, neglect or refuse to proceed with the work in an orderly and progressive manner to assure completion within the time specified, a upon ten (10) days noticebythe City to the Petitioner and. the Petitioner's surety, and such default and failure to proceed continuing thereafter, the City may at its - option proceed to have the work completed and charge the costs thereof against the Petitioner and the Petitioner's surety and in the event the same be not paid, to bring - an action on the said bond to recover the amount thereof. In the event that such action be brought, the Petitioner and the Petitioner's surety shall be required to promise and agree to pay, in addition to the amounts accruing and allowable, such sum as the court shall adjudge reasonable as attorney's fees and cost incurred by the City, both in the Trial Court and Appellate Court, if any, or the City may at its option bring proceedings to enforce against the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's surety, specific performance of the contract and compliance with the standards adopted by the City of Tigard, and in any event, in a like manner, the City shall be entitled to recover such sums as the court may adjudge reasonable for ,the CiLy's attorney's fees and cost, both in the Trial Court and Appellate Court, if any. 4. Petitioner, concurrent with the execution hereof, agrees to pay the following fees as required' a a. A plan check fee to cover the cost of review and approval of construction plans and inspection of sewer construction (except house connections) in the amount of $ 100.00 b. A permit fee to cover the cost of processing the permit application and performing the inspection of property connection (s) in the amount of $ N/A c. A connection charge ,to connect directly to an existing sanitary sewer, which #` was installed with/without (strike inapplicable word) cost to the Petitioner, in the amount of $ N/A d. A monthly sewer service charge for the use of the public sanitary sewer system. 5. Petitioner, concurrent with the execution hereof, also agrees to pay a surcharge . in the amount of $ NIA as required by that certain contract entered into by the City with for the reimbursement of sewer construction costs pertinent thereto. 6. The City agrees to make periodic inspections as, in the City's judgement, is necessary to assure compliance. 7. The Petitioner agrees to insure that the City receives 48 hour advance notice of commencement of construction and, also, 12 hour advance notice for all requested field inspections. 8. The Petitioner agrees to insure that the Petitioner's engineer obtains accurate as-built (field) construction records of said sewer installation and, also, agrees to insure that the City is furnished with one accurate as-built mylar thereof. 9. At such time as all public improvements have been completed in accordance with the City's requirements, Petitioner shall be required to notify the City of the readiness for final inspection/ upon affirmation by the Department of Public Works that all require- ments of the City have been met, the Petitioner will submit to the City a good and sufficient maintenance bond in the form approved by the City in a sum equal to twenty percent (202) of the contract price to provide for correction of any defective work or maintenance becoming apparent or arising within one year after final acceptance of the public improvements by the City. 10. Upon receipt of certification by the Department of Public Works that all require- � ments have been met, and a one year Maintenance bond, the City Council agrees to = accept the public improvements, subject to the requirement of correction of deficiencies and maintenance for a period of one year. Sewer Compliance - Page 2 of 3 11. That the Petitioner, in consideration of the City's approval of the application to construct a sanitary sewer within the boundaries of easements held by the City, does hereby convenant and agree to save, hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, agents and employees, for and from all claims, demands, damages, and each and every other obligation that can or could arise from the neglect of Petitioner, his officers, agents, contractors and employees, or from trespass upon property outside of the easement area, including attorney's fees and costs, if any, necessarily incurred by the City in defending against such claims, with the intent and purpose that the City shall be made whole with respect to any amounts it may be required to pay to be held liable for in connection with the exercise of the privileges afforded Petitioner to utilize the area within the City's easement for sewer construction purposes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreementpursuant to authority vested in each of them. PETITIONER: (Attached Acknowledgment Hereto) t IlLd CITY OF TIGARD: lja�� -7-IS--Ss Recorder y , 2 F w +ys §a Sewer Compliance Page 3 of"3 6F ORI.riON r'OIM01'ATF, A('h ;C`1'lJ` -;' 1 COLITItY Of Othis jilt, j ::1?I 1 Tt Wn �.tii( Ut it jr -,;i i d duly �,xorn , did a t h;rt. he a.l�c -- — - f;'�,, l .• President , and he, the :,aid � f ;i• ` --- __-- _._- _ -- i s the �eGl'E't ar,: r ' _ � thy. vi Lh . - - name co t . 4 ;.r: al ii':'i �cd to said instriwli tIt _ the >r 1�C)rate <<1_':} j 01t".it ,_ , i,lld I:hi3.t i:1)F' ti:11Ci 111:�t�'tlmoilt waS signed i'n(7 sealed in behalf of .;.yid Cc.,rh ,r.lt.ion by autbo city of itsBoard of Di. : <;t,:rs , and lylA nd lr - T— r acknowledgedsa id inst riai,er;t Lo be the free act. and deed of said Cor pc�r;tt ion IN _fYSTI1,IONY V.11LI EOF, I have hereunto set tri} -m; official seal the dd.-.v and hand and affixed yoar last above vvr. itten. ;- Noor Oregon �y. Iily Coiwnission Eap.i res STATE OF OREGON CORPORATE ACKNONLELi,M} N7 s s. County of --- —`� On this day of before: me appeared and both to me personally mown, who bei_n _ c: I'.v . is t►:(z did sad* that be, the said - Pre- i dent , and he, the said is thr _ of --- named Corporation, and that the seal affixed to said instrument :, s e,l 't e ,. 7 seal of said Corporation, and that the said instrument was signed and sealed behalf of said Corporation byauthority of its r;oard cif Directors, and ncl;no�ilc-died said instrument to he the free ;pct and deed r f s :CorporaIion. Iti TESTItY,ON)' WHEREOF, I have hel eunt�: hand _and ,aif'ixed m�= official seal f:hF, ,�a� r.1d. }l� ar, ]a4 t �tt�ove tura t.L'c for OY :r on _ �'S hlv mi�s 'Yl� AGREEMENT WITH DEPOSITOR AND TRUSTEE ON SAVINGS ACCOUNTS OR DEPOSITS This agreement is for the purpose of fulfilling the requirements of o Compliance Agreement dated Jwnc aP 15tS between the City of Tigard and Nnu &-vv A4,07'.-37'Chwrcl, and is entered into by the Depositor Hall Blvd. Baptist Church and First Interstate Bank Trustee. The undersigned depositor and trustee do hereby assign the right to the City; of Tigard to determine at its discretion the payment of all funds or securities held byF a eof Oreeon, NA ,a as trustee' in the 'amount of ypy9. in Savings Account No. or Deposit No. or Time- Deposit -No.4}90002473 -in- %he-- in accordance with and for the purpose of Bonding street improvements described in the above stated Compliance Agreement. It is_understood and agreed that the First Interstate Bank of Oregon, NA will hold such funds or securities in the amount of until: an authorization or direction for payment in received from the City of Tigard and thattheCity of Tigard has the right to withdraw Prinicipal Funds with City of Tigard signature only, in the event of Non-Performance. All fund deposits shall be renewable at maturity and at rates and terms in effect at the time of renewal, and all interest shall be paid to or accrued as directed by the Depositor notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary. That the account is to remain open until such time as all Public Improvements are completed and accepted by the City of Tigard. Signed and dated at Tigard , Oregon. This 28th day of June c ,�1�9�8�5 Signature of Depositpsl Address P.O. Box 230130 -Tigard, Oregon 97223 Signature of City of Tigard Address ACCEPTANCE a The undersigned hereby accepts the funds or securities deposited. in tier . amount of $ 4,649.00 this 28th day of June , 19 85 and hereby_acknowledges receipt of the Passbook Savings Account No. _, _ ;. or the Certificate for Deposit No. 4390002473 ; or certifies that there-la no Passbook issued for this account. It isfaither agreed that said.account• will be held for the uses and purposes above stated until authorization.,for. disposition is granted by the City of Tigard: Gr Authorized Signaxure--'- � (1444P)' f COLLATERAL RECEIPT: NON NtG(.)I IAbLL 021372 �EYOSITEO, Hall Blvd. Baptist Church June 28 19 85 TME FOLLOWING DESCRIBEO SECURITIES WITH UNMATUREO COUPONS ATTACHED.EXCEPT AS NOTED rSONO OR SNARES OR Z CC RTICKATE PAR L.LU[ DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE m NuMB[Rs DEPOSITED Time Certificate of Deposit X1439-0002473 I in the amount of $4,649.00 at a rate of 7.00%, 2 ! maturing June 28, 1986. 3 5 6 8 NSTRUCTIONS FOR RETURN OF COLLATERAL NO DISPOSITION OF COUPONS Tigard 13RANNNCH4NO. 439 I FIRST ITE =rNK OF OREGON. A. BY Itj)LL tta4-GZ -1706-1-41 ORIGINAL. iJ^ r t,� t �• 2t - �.r- y.� Sts tx,�� ? s, "r �'a .p t�,, ..'���i�'�r! _fs T 3 -c5� c' -✓h 33 s ee<�E- �, ,'.t �".(y-ti r ' }Y'� �' 'C'•3T c-;'e mac,t� s a{.. .� ..}� '" '. - - t'�;'� •�= - ;� ;ra'Rt A ..r 4•i�, A"er y � rt7.; Yty'.>..�+¢Fx;. '�s c � t.. . - -:t3 .,`_y,y+',t`, 'j.r'�Rft31 �'7'L'�f s ' 1 CITY OF -TIGARD- OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 15, 1985 AGENDA ITEM ##: �Q DATE SUBMITTED July 3, 1985 PREVIOUS ACTION: None ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Shadow Hills II Subdivision Compliance Agreement PREPARED BY: Development Services Dept ` Authorize Mayor 6 Recorder to execute in City's behalf. REQUESTED BY: John Hagman DEPARTMENT HEAD OK* CITY ADMINISTRATOR: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY 1. The proposed "Shadow Hills II" subdivision is located west of Pacific Highway and north of Bull Mtn. Road. The preliminary plat has been approved by the City. 2. The attached Subdivision ComplianceAgreementhas been submitted by the developer, as is required by the City, to assure completion of installation of all public facilities within the proposed subdivision. 3. Construction plans are ready to be issued and all required public improvement fee's have been ;paid. 4, The developer intends to construct all public improvements prior to recording of the final plat. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SUGGESTED ACTION Authorize the Mayor and City Recorder to execute the Subdivision Compliance Agreement for Shadow Hills,II in behalf of the City. kJ 1572P dm] n,. SUBDIVISION COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT } THIS AGREEMENT dated the / 77l'l day of ! z 1985 between the CITY OF TIGARD. a municipality of Oregon, ereinafter termed the "CITY", and Blazer Homes Inc. an Oreo� Corporation hereinafter termed *,petitioner". W I T N E S SET1i WHEREAS, Petitioner has applied to the City for approval Cor filing in Washington County. a subdivision plat known as Shadow !-tills II, in Section 10 Township 2 Saute, Ranee 1 :Jest Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon; and WHEREAS, the City has approved and adopted the standard specifications for Public Works construction by APWA Oregon Chapter and the Unified Sewerage specifications for the sanitary sewers prepared by professional engineers for subdivision development; and WHERUS. the public improvements required to be constructed or placed in Petitioner's development are incomplete,_ but Petitioner has nonetheless requested the City to permit progressive occupancy and use of property in the subdivision. and' the parties desire hereby to protect the _public interest generally and prospective-purchasers -of lots in said subdivision by legally enforceable assurances that the public improvements will be installed as required and completed within the time hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and the covenants and agreements to be kept and performed by the Petitioner and its sureties, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: (1) Petitioner shall proceed with the development. with the intent and purpose to complete all public improvements except sidewalks and street trees of said subdivision not later than two (2) years from the date of this agreement, and Petitioner is hereby bound to comply with all subdivision standards as set forth in said Subdivision Ordinance and the standard specification adopted by the City of tigard, or as may be otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and to use only such material and to follow such designs as may be required to conform thereto. Petitioner shall provide certification of installation conformance, via a registered civil engineer, the City prior to City inspection of petitioners improvement work for City tentative and final acceptance consideration. (2) To assure compliance with the City's requirements and the provisions hereof,-fiat t€ems: �--heree+�ekbe—bhe— iky a surety bond in form approved may be required by the City, with liability in the amount of $ 181.435.00 _ Y to be. submitted no the City prior to recording of the final plat. (3) In the event that Petitioner shall fail, neglect or refuse to proceed with the work in an orderly,and progressive manner to assure completion within the time limits, upon ten (10) days notice by the City to Petitioner and Petitioner's sureties, and such default and failure to proceed continuing =` thereafter, the City may at its option proceed to have the work competed and .. 1 Ell charge the costs hereof against Petitioner and Petitioner's sureties and in the event same be not paid, to bring an action on the said bond to recover the amount thereof. In the event such action be brought, Petitioner and 1 Petitioner's sureties promise and agree to pay, in addition to the amounts accruing and allowable, such sum as the court shall adjudge reasonable as attorney's fees and costs incurred by the City, both in the Trial Court and Appellate Court, if any, or the City may, at its option, bring proceedings to enforce- against the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's sureties specific performance of the contract and compliance with the subdivision standards and ordinances of the City of Tigard, and in such event, in like manner, the City shall be entitled to recover such sum as the court shall adjudge reasonable as and for the City's attorney's fees and costs, both in the Trial Court and Appellate Court, if ai,y.. f (4) Petitioner, concurrent the with execution hereof, has deposited with the City an amount estimated to equal rental and maintenance fees with respect to the street lighting facilities within the subdivision, according to Portland General Electric Schedule 091, Option "B", together with a further sum,equal to the estimated cost of providing electrical' energy to energize the street lighting facilities for a period of two (2) years from the date of initial energizing of said lights. Said amount being $ 635.04 (5) The City agrees to make and provide periodic and final inspections which in the City's interest are desirable to 'assure compliance herewith, in consideration whereof the Petitioner has paid prescribed inspections fees.* (6) The City agrees to install street identificationandtraffic signs within the said subdivision, in consideration of payment in the amount of $ 312.00 (7) At such time as all public improvements except sidewalks and street trees within the subdivision have been completed in accordance with the City's requirements, Petitioner shall submit a "certificate of installation conformance to the City to notify the City of the readiness for acceptance consideration inspection and upon notification by the Department of Public Works that the requirements of the City have been met, the Petitioner will submit to the City a good and sufficient maintenance bond if not already provided with the performance bond, form approved by the City, in the sum of $ 36,237.00 to provide for correction of any defective work or maintenance becoming apparent or arising within one (1) year after tentative acceptance of the public improvements by the City. Upon receipt of certification by the Department of Public Works, that all requirements have been met, and a One Year Maintenance Bond, the City Council agrees to tentatively accept the public improvement subject to the requirements for correction of deficiencies and maintenance for a period of one year as hereinabove- set forth. j (8) That in addition to or supplementary of the requirements of the City's Subdivision Ordinance and the provisions hereof, Petitioner binds } itself to conform to the following requirements, scheduling and limitations: *Project Fee $ '-5,603.00 : r Sewer Fee $ 12654.40 — 2 — (a) None of the lots of Petitioner's subdivision as described may be ( occupied for residential purposes until an occupancy permit is -issued under authority of the City and no occupancy permit shall be issued prior to the acceptance of the subdivision and to the time that the sidewalk paralleling the street for each developed lot proposed to a occupied, is installed as a part of the development; provided that all sidewalks as required by the plans and subdivision code shall be installed throughout said subdivision not later than 3 years from the date of this Subdivision Improvement Contract. (b) All landscaping trees on that portion of each lot between the public sidewalks and the curb (parking area) is required, shall be planted in place prior to final inspection and issuance of occupancy permit for each such lot in the subdivision. Provided that final inspection and applicant for occupancy permit occurs within any calendar month from October to April of any _ year, such plantings may be deferred until the next following growing season. In any event, all landscaping and trees in all areas shall be planted and in place within the entire subdivision within three (3) years from the date of this subdivision improvement contract. (c) After tentative City acceptance of the public improvements, the Petitioner agrees to place a W*A- )(x 4M asphaltic concrete Class "B" overlay on all roads within the development; placement scheduling to be approve by the City. (d) Compliance with all terms and provisions specified theretofor said subdivision development by the Council and the,Planning Commission of the City of 'Tigard, Oregon, in regard to variances allowed fromthesubdivision ordinance, conditions specified by the zone use classification and, also, on the approved plat(s) and plan(s). (e) Petitioner agrees to provide for correction of any defective work and/or maintenance becoming apparent or arising during the guarantee period as hereinabove set forth. (9) At such time as all public improvements have been completed in accordance with the City's requirements, Petitioner shall notify the City of the readiness for final inspection and upon certification by the Department of Public Works that all requirements of the City have been met, the Council agrees to accept said improvements for operation and maintenance responsibility, thereinregard, and release the Petitioner's guarantee bond. (10) The parties hereto hereby adopt the form of performance bond, copy whereof is hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, and Petitioner agrees to cause to have said bond executed and filed with the City concurrently with the execution of this agreement at or prior to the time this agreement is executed on behalf of the City. (11) The specific requirements of Paragraph _9 hereof shall for all purposes be included as a `part of the obligation secured by the aforesaid performance bond and the City shall be entitled to recourse thereto in the event of default on the part of the Petitioner with respect to any requirement thereof. 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Petitioner acting by and through its duly authorized undersigned officers pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors has caused this agreement to be executed, and the City acting pursuant to �^wm"Au44en��o-f its Council adopted at a meeting thereof duly and regularly held on the --/-7--- day of 19 _, has caused this agreement to be executed by' i May and Recorder. BLAZER '.i0 S INC. _ By- By- TW yByTW CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON By i Recorder STA E OF .OREGON CORPORATE ACKNOWLFOCI`.,; ss. Cot my of O -.his 27th of June 19 8S before me appeared Dennis L. Derby _ and both to me personally known , wbo being the said Dennis L . Derby is the --.- ` duly sworn, did say that he, -- -- is the Secretary President, and he, the said of Blazer Homes Inc._ the withi* name Cor_1 s 0 • and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the cor- porate seal of said Corporation , and that the said i.nsi.r�ir;ent was s� bn�d >.nd sealed in behalf oBoard of 1�i i t'c-�c�rs , f said Corporation by authority of its and Dennis L_Derby and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said Corpo, at' c,,1 . IN TESTIMONY IIIEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affirmed m�T official seal the da.v send yearlast above written. Notary Public for Oreg Riy Coininission Expires' _- - $ .-' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ,.' COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 15, 1985 AGENDA ITEM #: DATE SUBMITTED: July 5, 1985 _ PREVIOUS ACTION; ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Acceptance of Deeds and Easements PREPARED BY: Frank A. Currie REQUESTED BY: Frank A. Currie DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: �=y=�=-�-r— CITY ADMINISTRATOR POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached are easements and deeds for Right-of-way an S.W. 68th Parkway L.I.D. project. This project has been formed and pre-assessed and is only awaiting all rights-of-way in order to go out for bids, ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Hold until all rights--of-way are in hand! SUGGESTED ACTION t _Accept the attached easements and deeds for recording and authorize appropriate signatures. � ffes•-� ti: t (FAC:br/1575P) f7PM No,4111—PARTIAL MIME OF MORTGAGE—:nd.,idv I or Corpo,op, /'" IC-1 KNOW ALL MEN By THESE PRES $1ENTS, Thar Horace Mann Life Insu " ( an Illinois Corporation having received the sum of ranee Company, 00,00 (One hundred) a+ a partial Payment on that certain mortgage ge executed by Oregon Education Associatio DOLLARS mortgagor dated 2 June Company 19 69 in favor of Horace Mann Life_ Insurance Record of Mortgages for the County of Washiri to mortgagee and recorded in book 745 number 10224 Washingtor) State of Ore on, on lien of said (indicate which), on March 28 g Page 49 , or as file/reel morfgager the following described 1969 , does hereb Premises therein described, viz; Y release from the A tract of land described on Exhibit A attached hereto and part hereof made a and that the remainder of said lands in said mortgage specified shall remain subject In construing this partial release of mortgage, 1 thereto as heretofore. grammatical than s g ge, whore the context so requires, singular irreludea plural and all changes shall be implied to make the provisions hereof apply equally to car In Witness Whereof, the grantor has executed this instrument this. porations and to individuals. if a corperata grantor, it has caused its name to be signed _ order of its .......day of June:... 1985; board of directors. gid and seal affixed by its o#fivers, duly authorized thereto by Hor(deManli.i , e By nr ce Company A. YY.l tit.■.p,ry(wr:auaUae. Do u S ork, V ce Presi etlul o..,.p1p.y�l dent STATE OF ORBt70X, Bye Weber, Assistant Secretary STATE of S San senor County of ..............._........ )am County of.............ng_........ .....Ma. ............................._.._�... . yr...3Q.._...._......,79.$5.......... .......:.............. 19............. Personally PersOndly afrpeared the ab,. named....... .. Appeared o nd -....York ....and being duly sworn not one for the other, did eay r ... .. hof the ......... President and the I assistant .... ................. � that :ms b the .................................seer and acknOw/ed , Belot ted tr1° lotejoina Instru- 17X (�.� Q °tom el ....... orace r.Mann mane to be ..., and that the tea/ affixed to the lore volunhry act and dead. y . ........... of said car ....-....• a eorporallon Before ass; ration and that said toinQ instrument is the corporate asal (OFFICfAL hall of said corporation by author strument was aimed and sealed in be- SEAL) them aeknow/ed Y of its board of directors;and each e- »......._»...,. or instru nt tb be Its voluntary irect set end dead. ..................... Notary Public for Oregon - � , My commission expires: Bots Public for .5... .••..... (OFFICIAL MY commission aspires: Milton J. Wim Partial Release of _ 140RTI %A#-4E ST,A7'B,G)LfiT.p i �198 QX'aC.�... ann. County of ss. Life....... t certify that the within instr "'1�'s ' '� e••- 4Qc11.. n menr u- was received for record on the P x..... .... .:... Z TO EooN T uta TNu day of: .19. 8PAC91 IlaaaAveo POR RQCOA'OINO. at. .O'clock a nd.. �gon Education uLsal. IN COON. in book Corded re . ..on page ' TIES WNQRQ - or as 4 AS SQC &t. Qli fi/elree!number. usrO.t , " "' Record of Mortgages of said County. AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO George I. P.C. Witness my hand and seal of ` g Hansen, P,C, County affixed. 1000 S.W. -Third Avenue Portland, Oregon 97204 Title. BY- By Lc + Deputy. EXHIBIT A PARCEL A A parcel of land in that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36. Town- ship 1 South. Range 1 West. Willamette Meridian. in the City of Tigard. <, Washington County. Oregon. described as follows: Commencing at an old 3/4 inch pipe called the point of beginning of County Recorder's fee No. 80-14679. parcel 111; thence along the east line of said parcel t11 on a bearing (basis of bearings is the Oregon_State Piane Coor- dinate'System) of South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 49S.04,feet to the point of beginning of the land to be descrilied; thence continuing along the east line South Ol degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a'distance of 123.83 feet to a paint in the north line of the Oregon Depart- went of Transportation's right-of-way as described in County Recorder's Fee No. 80-23065; thence along said right-of-way South 87 degrees 54 minutes 28 seconds West"a distance of 73.68 feet to a point; thence along the are of a 32.00 foot radius curve to the left. through a central angle of 73 degrees 10 minutes 34 seconds.an arc distance of 40.87 feet (the chord bears North Sl degrees 19 minutes 11 seconds East,38.15 feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence along the arc of a`316.48 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 19 degrees 13 minutes 13 seconds, an arc distance of 106.16 feet (the chord bears North 24 degrees 20 minutes 30 seconds East lOS.67 ' feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence along the arc of a 299.50 foot radius curve to the left through a central angle of 01 degrees 27 minutes 01 seconds, an arc distance of 7.S8 feet (the chord bears North 33 degrees 13 minutes 36 seconds East 7.S8 feet) to the point of beginning. Containing an area of 0.087 acres, more or less. Parcel 8 A parcel of land in that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36. Township 1 South. Range 1 West. Willamette Meridian. in the City of Tigard. Washington County. Oregon. described as follows: r Commencing at an old,3/4 inch pipe called the point of beginning of County Recorder's Fee No. 80-14679, parcel 111; thence, along the east line of said parcel Ill. on a_bearing of (basis of bearings is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 90.45 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing along the east line of said parcel Ill South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 98.62 feet to a point of nontangency; thence, leaving said east line. along the arc of a 299.50 foot radius curve to the left. through a central angle of 10 degrees 36 minutes 10 seconds an arc distance of $5.42 feet (the chord bears Borth 34 degrees 14 minutes 03 seconds West 55.34 feet) to the point of tangency; thence North 39 degrees 32 minutes 08 seconds West a distance of 114.11 feet; thence along the arc of a 400.00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of IO degrees 24 minutes 41 seconds an arc distance of 72.68 feet (the chord bears North 34 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds West 72.58 feet) to a point in the north line of the land described in County Recorders fee No. 80-14679, parcel 111; thence, along said north line. South 88 degrees 12 minutes 15 seconds East a distance of 72.31 feet to a i point of nontangency; thence. leaving said north line, along the arc of a 340.00 foot radius curve to the left. through a central angle of 04 degrees 08 minutes 14 seconds an arc distance of 24.55 feet (the chord bears South 37 degrees 28 minutes 01 seconds East 24.54 feet) to a point of tangency. thence South 39 degrees 32 minutes 08 seconds East a distance of 95.15 fent to the point of beginning. Containing an area of 0.247 acres. more or less. Parcel C A parcel of land in that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36. Township 1 South, Range I West, Willamette Meridian. in the City of Tigard. Washington County, Oregon. described as follows: Beginning at an old 3/4 inch iron pipe called the point of beginning of County Recorders Fee No. 80-14679. parcel Ill; thence. along the east line of said parcel Ill. on a bearing of (basis of bearings is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West . a distance of 90.45 feet to a point. thence. leaving said east line. North 39 degrees 32 minutes 08 seconds West a distance of 95.15 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a 340.00 foot radius curve to the right. through a central angle of 04 degrees 08 minutes 14 seconds an arc distance of 24.55 feet (the chord bears North 37 degrees 28 minutes 01 seconds West 24.54 feet) to a point in the north line of said parcel III; thence. along said north line, South 88 degrees 12 minutes 15 seconds East a distance of - 78.36 feet to the point of beginning. r Containing an area of 0.082 acres, more or less. ORIGINAL CORPORATION PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT Oregon Education Association, an Oregon nonprofit corporation hereinafter called the Grantors. in consider- ation of the sum of $1.00 dollar and other good and valuable consideration Dy the City of Tigard, hereinafter called Grantee, have granted and con- veyed and by these presents do grant and convey unto the City of Tigard, a perpetual easement for the construction, maintenance and repair, with necessary access thereto, of a slope, cut or fill, occasioned by the construction, operation and maintenance of a public road and appurtenances within the following described parcel of land, situated in the City of Tigard, Washington County, State of Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: Two parcels of land in that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36. Township l South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County. Oregon, described as,follows: Parcel 1 Commencing at an old 3/4 inch iron pipe called the point of beginning of County Recorder's Fee No. 80-14679, parcel III; thence along the east line of said Parcel III on a bearing (basis of bearings is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) of South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 189.07 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence, continuing along said east line. South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 20.64 feet to a point of non- tangency; thence, leaving said east line. along the arc of a 289.50 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 14 degrees 07 minutes 02 seconds, an arc distance of 71.33 feet (the chord bears North 32 degrees 28 minutes 37 seconds West 71.15 feet) to a point of tangency; thence North 39 degrees 32 minutes 08 seconds West a distance of 114.11 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a 410.00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 11 degrees 14 minutes 42 seconds, an arc distance of 80.47 feet (the chord bears North 33 degrees 54 minutes 47 seconds West 80.34 feet) to a point in the north line of said parcel III; thence, along said north line, South 88 degrees 12 minutes 15 seconds East a distance of 11.61 feet; thence. leaving said north line, along the arc of a 400.00 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 10 degrees 24 minutes 41 seconds, an arc distance of 72.68 feet (the chord bears South 34 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds East 72.58 feet) to a point of tangency;,thence South 39 degrees 32 minutes 08 seconds East a distance of 114.11 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a 299.50 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 10 degrees 36 minutes 10 seconds. an arc distance of 55.42 feet (the chord bears South 34 degrees i 14 minutes 03 seconds East 55.34 feet) to the point of beginning. Containing an area of 0.058 acres, more or less. Parcel 11 Commencing at an old 3/4 inch pipe called the point of beginning of County Recorder's Fee No. 80-14679, parcel III; thence along the east line of said parcel III on a bearing (basis of bearings is the Oregon State Plane Coor- dinate System) of South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 495.04 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence along the arc of a 299.50 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 01 degrees 27 minutes 01 seconds, an arc distance of 7.58 feet (the chord bears South 33 degrees 13 minutes 36 seconds West 7.58 feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence along the arc of a 316.48 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 19 degrees 13 minutes 13 seconds, an arc distance of 106.16 feet (the chord bears South 24 degrees 20 minutes 30 seconds West 105.67 feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence along an arc of a 32.00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 73 degrees 10 minutes 34 seconds, an arc distance of 40.87 feet (the chord bears South 51 degrees 19 minutes 11 seconds West 38.15 feet) to a point of non-tangency; thence South 87 degrees 54 minutes 28 seconds West a distance of 17.24 feet to a point; thence North 22 degrees 23 minutes 24 seconds East a distance of 257.75 feet to a point in the East line of Parcel III as described in County Recorders Fee No. 80-14679; thence South 01 degree 47 minutes 04 seconds West. along said east line, a distance of 111.29 feet to the point of beginning. 5 Containing an area of 0.159 acres, more or less. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD that this easement does not convey any right, title or interest to the surface of the soil, nor any other rights except those expressly stated in this easement, nor prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover, provided, however, that such use shall not be permitted to damage or destroy lateral support to the highway, and provided further that nothing herein contained shall grant to the City of Tigard the right to excavate beneath existing buildings or deposit fill materials against existing buildings above the top of the foundations thereof. but is understood and agreed the City of Tigard shall never be required to remove the dirt or other materials placed by it upon said property, nor shall said City be subject to any damages to the Grantors. %t their heirs and assigns, by reason thereof, or by reason of the slopes constructed thereon. or by reason of change of grade at the street or highway abutting on said property. s r„.Cgt VV. p� 0.% efeT 3kCCcA iN CONSIDERATION of the premises, Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its successors or assigns should cause said road to be vacated, the rights of the Grantee in the above-described easement will be forfeited and shall immediately revert to the Grantors, their successors and assigns in the case of any such event. spt TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above-described and granted premises unto said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. The said property is free from all encumbrances except a mortgage with Horace4 Mann Life Insurance Company recorded July 3, 1969, Book 749, page 226. Conditions and Restrictions. This declaration shall constitute a covenant to run with the land described herein and shall be binding on all persons claiming under the grantor and these restrictions shall be for the benefit of and limita- tions upon all future owners of said real property, to-wit: none of the redwood trees existing on the real property, or any replacement thereof, shall be moved, removed, damaged or destroyed. Don by order 0A the grantor's board of directors with its corporate seal affixed on . 1985. OREGON EDUCATION ASSOCIATION; an Oregon non-profit corporation By Executive Secretary Y STATE OF OREGON, County of Multno„ah)ss. April Z 1985 Personally appeared ROBERT CRUMplw, who being first duly sworn, did say ` that he is the Executive secretary of the Oregon Education Association, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said Association by authority of its board of directors; and acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. Before me: G Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires: / Approved as to form this day of 1985. By: City Attorney City of Tigard s Approved as to legal description this day of 1985. y By: City Engineer-- City of Tigard Accepted by the City Council this day of 1985. CITY COUNCIL. CITY of TIGARD. OREGON A, By. City Recorder City of Tigard �x s; S 3 s ORIGINAL WARRANTY DEED - STATUTORY FORM Corporate Grantor Oregon Education Association, an Oregon nonprofit corporation, a corpor- ation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Oregon, Grantor, conveys and warrants to City of Tigard, Grantee, the following described real property free of encumbrances except as specifically,set forth herein situated in Washington County, Oregon, to-wit: PARCEL A A parcel of land in that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Town- Ship 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in,the City of Tigard. Washington County. Oregon, described as follows: Commencing at an old 3/4 inch pipe called the point of beginning of County Recorder's Fee No. 80-14679, parcel III; thence along the east line of said parcel III on a bearing (basis of bearings is the Oregon State Plane Coor- dinate System) of South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 495.04 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing along the east line South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 123.83 feet to a point in the north line of the Oregon Depart- ment of Transportation's right-of-way as described in County Recorder's Fee No. 80-23065; thence along said right-of-way South 87 degrees 54 minutes 28 seconds West a distance of 73.68 feet to a point; thence along the arc of a 32.00 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 73 degrees 10 minutes 34 seconds, an arc distance of 40.87 feet (the chord bears North 51 degrees 19 minutes 11 seconds East 38.15 feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence along the arc of a 316.48 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 19 degrees 13 minutes 13 seconds, an arc distance of 106.16 feet (the chord bears North 24 degrees 20 minutes 30 seconds East 105.67 feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence along the arc of a 299.50 foot radius curve to the left through a central angle of 01 degrees 27 minutes 01 seconds, an arc distance of 7.58 feet (the chord bears North 33 degrees 13 minutes 36 seconds East 7.58 feet) to the point of beginning. Containing an area of 0.087 acres, more or less. Parcel B A parcel of land in that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, descr'.bed as follows: i Commencing at an old 3/4 inch pipe called the point of beginning of County Recorder's Fee No. 80-14679, parcel III; thence, along the east line of said parcel II1, on a bearing of (basis of bearings is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West_a distance of 90.45 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing along the east line of said parcel III South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West a distance of 98.62 feet to a point of nontangency; thence, leaving said east line, along the arc of a 299.50 foot radius curve to the left. through a central angle of 10 degrees 36 minutes 10 seconds an arc distance of 55.42 feet (the chord bears North 34 degrees 14 minutes 03 seconds West 55.34 feet) to the point of tangency; thence North 39 degrees 32 minutes 08 seconds West a distance of 114.11' feet; thence along the arc of a 400,00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 10 degrees 24 minutes 41 seconds an arc distance of 72.68 feet (the chord bears North 34 degrees 19 minutes 47 seconds West 72.58 feet) to a point in the north line of the land described in County Recorders Fee No. 80-14679. parcel III; thence, along said north line, South 88 degrees 12 minutes 15 seconds East a distance of 72.31 feet to a point of nontangency; thence, leaving said north line. along the arc of a 340.00 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 04 degrees 08 minutes 14 seconds an arc distance of 24.55 feet (the chord bears South 37 degrees 28 minutes 01 seconds East 24.54 feet) to a point of tangency; thence South 39 degrees 32 minutes 08 seconds East a distance of 95.15 feet to the point of beginning. Containing an area of 0.247 acres, more or less. Parcel C A parcel of land in that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township I South, Range 1 West. Willamette Meridian. in the City of Tigard. Washington County, Oregon. described as follows: Beginning at an old 3/4 inch iron pipe called the point of beginning of County Recorders Fee No. 80-14679, parcel III; thence, along the east line of said parcel III, on a bearing of (basis of bearings is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) South 01 degrees 47 minutes 04 seconds West , a distance of 90.45 feet to a point. thence, leaving said east line. North 39 degrees 32 minutes 08 seconds West a distance of 95.15 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a 340.00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 04 degrees 08 minutes 14 seconds an arc distance of 24.55 feet (the chord bears North 97 degrees 28 minutes 01 seconds West # 24.54 feet) to a point in the north line of said parcel III; thence, along said north line, South 88 degrees 12 minutes 15 seconds East a distance of 78.36 feet to the point of beginning. Containing an area of 0.082 acres, more or less. Bill The said property is free from all encumbrances except a mortgage with Horace Mann Life Insurance Company recorded July 3, 1969, Book 749. Page 226. Conditions and Restrictions. This declaration shall constitute a covenant to run with the land described herein and shall be binding on all persons claiming under the grantor and these restrictions shall be for the benefit of and limits ry tions upon all future owners of said real property, to-wit: none of the redwood trees existing on the real property, or any replacement thereof, shall be moved, .w removed, damaged or destroyed. The true consideration for this conveyance is 532,729.50 given as credit in the S.W. 68th Parkway Local Improvement District No. 35. Done by order of the raptor's board of directors with its corporate seal affixed on D , 1985. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT GUARANTEE e THAN ANY PARTICULAR USE MAY BE MADE OREGON EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, � OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS an Oregon non-profit corporation INsTMOU. A BUYER SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY By PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY Executive Secretary APPROVED USES. s STATE OF OREGON, County of Multnomah)ss. April1985 4 Personally appeared ROBERT CRUMPTON, who being first duly sworn, did say that he is the Executive Secretary of the Oregon Education Association, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said Association by authority of its board of directors; anal acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. Before me: Notary Public for Oregon G,+ My Commission Expires: �✓ a '� t ='S5 . g 3 -- -7777,ms. e� an =t t �v Approved as to form this day of 1985. By City Attorney - City of Tigard Approved as to legal description this day of 1985. By -City Engineer - City of Tigard Accepted by the City Council this day of 1985. CITY COUNCIL, CITY of TIGARO, OREGON By: City Recorder - City of Tigard mai r 3 j } - WARRANTY DEED - STATUTORY FORM Corporate Grantor Way W. Lee. General Contractor, Inc., a corporation duly organized and Oregon. existing under the laws of the State of n. Grantor. conveys and warrants to City of Tigard. Grantee. the following described real property free of encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein situated in Washington County, Oregon, to-wit: Parcel A parcel of land in that part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 36, Town 4 - 4 pa 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian. in the City of Tigard, Washington County. Oregon. described as follows: Commencing at a point for the Northwest corner of that parcel conveyed to Way W. Lee, General Contractor, Inc., an Oregon Corporation, as described by County Recorder's Fee No. 80-27388. Parcel l; thenceabearing ( sis ba degrees of which is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) of North 8 41 minutes 58 seconds West a distance of 3.92 feet to the point of begin- ning of the land to be described; thence continuing along said line North 87 degrees 41 minutes 58 seconds West a distance of 67.65 feet to a point; thence North 26 degrees 54 minutes 39 seconds West a distance of 131.25 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of 231.00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 41 degrees 08 minutes 18 seconds, an arc distance of 165.86 feet (the chord bears North 06degrees 20 minutes 30 seconds West 162.32 feet) to a point of tangency; thence North 14 degrees 13 minutes 40 seconds East a distance of 101.25 feet to a -of-way of S.N. 69th Avenue as per point which intersects the westerly right the recorded plat of "Way Lee". thence along said right-of-way following an arc of a 123.67 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 34 degrees 14 minutes 05 seconds, an arc distance of 73.89 feet (the chord bears South 04 degrees 45 minutes 53 seconds West 72.80 feet) to a point of reverse curve; thence along the arc of a 221.00 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 88 degrees 06 minutes 01 seconds, an arc distance of 339.82 feet (the chord bears South 22 degrees 10 minutes 05 seconds East 307.32 feet) to a point; thence departing from the westerly right-of-way of S.W. 69th Avenue South 26 degrees 54 minutes 39 seconds East a distance of 1.22 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a 280.00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 04 degrees 43 minutes 15 seconds, an arc distance of 23.07 feet (the chord bears South Zo degrees 33 minutes 01 seconds East 23.06 feet) to the point of beginning. 3 Containing an area of 0.154 acres, more or less. 9 1 wu � Parcel B A parcel of land in that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Town ship 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, described as follows: rthwest corner of that parcel conveyed to Commencing at a point for the No Inc., an Oregon Corporation, as described Way W. Lee, General Contractor, by County Recorder's Fee No. 80-27388, Parcel I; thence along a bearing (basis of which is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) of North 87 degrees 41 minutes 58 seconds West a distance of 71.57 feet to a point; thence,South 26 degrees 54 minutes 39 seconds East a distance of 9.97 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a 220.00 foot radius curve _ to the right, through a central angle of 28 degrees 34 minutes 35 seconds, an arc distance 109.73 feet (the chord bears South 12 degrees 37 minutes 21 seconds East 108.59 feet) to a point of tangency; thence South 01 degrees 39 minutes 56 seconds West a distance of 341.20 feet to a point of curva- _ ture; thence along the arc of a 400.00 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 25 degrees 50 minutes 30 seconds, an arc dis- tance of 180.41 feet (the chord bears South 11 degrees 15 minutes 19 seconds East 178.88 feet) to a point of non-tangency; thence North 01 degrees 39 minutes 56 seconds East along the east boundary of Lot One of the recorded Plat of "Way Lee" a distance of 628.76 feet to the point of beginning. Together with a temporary construction easement for a period of one year for access, egress and construction of roadway appendages, a 20 foot wide strip of land lying west of parallel and contiguous to the westerly line of Parcel A described above. Containing an area of 0.552 acres, more or less. The said property is free from all encumbrances except..... The true consideration for this conveyance is $89,708.50 (Here comply with the requirements of ORS 93.030) given as a credit in the S.W. 68th Parkway Local improvement District No. 35. Done by order of the grantor's board of directors with its corporate seal affixed on 2HLl i 1985. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT GUARANTEE I THAT ANY PARTICULAR USE MAY BE MADE a i OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS .INSTRUMENT. A BUYER SHOULD CHECK By: President WITH THE .APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY �> , PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY . By Secretary APPROVED USES. (Corporate Seal) �`.w. STATE OF OREGON, County of Multnomah )ss. April 1 1985 Personally appeared Way W Lee and Priscilla D. Lee who, each being first duly sworn, did say that the former is the president and that the latter is the secretary of Way W Lee General_Contractor Inc. is the corporate seal of said corporation and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its board of directors; and each of them acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. J (Official Seal) Before me; - Notary Public for Oregon, My commission expires: Feb. 17, 1989 Approved as to form this day of 1985, By City Attorney - City of Tigard Approved as to legal description this day of 1985. By: City Engineer - City of Tigard Accepted by the City Council this day of 1985. CITY COUNCIL, CITY of TIGARD, OREGON By: City_Recorder - City of Tigard .4 CORPORATION PERMANENT SLOPE EASEMENT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT Way W. Lee, General Contractor, Inc.'hereinafter called the Grantors. in consideration of the sum of $1.00 dollar and other good and valuable consideration by the City of Tigard, hereinafter called Grantee. have granted and conveyed and by these presents do grant and convey unto the City of Tigard, a perpetual easement for the construction, maintenance and repair. with necessary access thereto, of a slope, cut or fill, occasioned by the construction. operation and mainte- nance of a public road and appurtenances within the following described parcel of land, situated in the City of Tigard. Washington County, State of Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: ThreeP arcels of land in that part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 1 South, Range 1 West. Willamette Meridian. in the City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, described as follows: Parcel I Commencing at the Northwest corner of that parcel conveyed to Way W. Lee, Sener;l Contractor, Inc., an Oregon Corporation, as described by County Recorder's Fee No. 80-27388, Parcel I; thence on a bearing (basis of which is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) of North 87 degrees 41 minutes 58 seconds West a distance of 71.57 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing along said line North 87 degrees 41 minutes 58 seconds a distance of 20.00 feet; thence North 10 degrees 44 minutes 58 seconds West a distance of 62.70 feet to a point; thence South 26 degrees 54 minutes 39 seconds East 70.00 feet to the point of beginning. Containing an area of 0.014 acres. Parcel II Commencing at the Northwest corner of that parcel conveyed to Way W. Lee, General Contractor, Inc., an Oregon Corporation, as described by County Recorder's Fee 80-27388, Parcel I; thence along a bearing (basis of which is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) of North 17 degrees 33 minutes 57 seconds West a distance of 397.76 feet to the point of beginning of the slope easement to be described, said point of beginning being on the westerly right-of-way of S.W. 69th Avenue as per the recorded plat of "Way Lee"; thence South 14 degrees 13 minutes 40 seconds West a distance of 83.25 feat to a point thence North 75 degrees 46 minutes 20 seconds West a distance cr 5.00 feet to a point; thence North 14 degrees 13 minutes 40 seconds East a distance of 89.45 feet to a point; thence South 39 degrees MKMMUIM !` 15 minutes 56 seconds East a distance of 3.56 feet to a point of {` non-tangency;thence along the arc of a 123.67 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 02 degrees 08 minutes 04 seconds; an arc distance of 4.61 feet to the point of beginning (the chord of which bears South 13 degrees 25 minutes 11 seconds East 4.61 feet). Containing an area of 0.010 acres, more or less. Parcel III Commencing at the Northwest corner of that parcel conveyed to Way W. Lee, General Contractor, Inc., an Oregon Corporation, as described by County Recorder's Fee No. 80-27388, Parcel 1; thence along a bearing (basis of which is the Oregon State Plane Coordinate System) of North 87 degrees 41 minutes 58 seconds West a distance of 71.57 feet to the point of beginning of the slope easement to be described; thence South 26 degrees 54 minutes 39 seconds East a distance of 9.97 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a 220,00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 28 degrees 34 minutes 35 seconds, an arc distance 109.73 feet (the chord bears South 12 degrees 37 minutes 21 seconds East 108.59 feet) to a point of tangency; thence South 01 degrees 39 minutes 56 seconds West a distance of 341.20 feet to a point of curvature; thence along the arc of a 400.00 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 25 degrees `^ 50 minutes 30 seconds, an arc distance of 180.41 feet (the chord bears South 11 degrees 15 minutes 19 seconds East 178.88 feet) to a point of non-tangency; thence South 01 degree 39 minutes 56 seconds a distance of 30.36 feet; thence North 88 degrees 12 minutes 15 seconds West a distance of 9.03 feet to a point on a curve; thence along the arc of a 422.00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 18 degrees 17 minutes 20 seconds, an arc distance of 134.70 feet (the chord bears North 18 degrees 12 minutes 24 seconds West 134.13 feet) to a point; thence South 80 degrees 56 minutes 16 seconds West a distance of 30.00 feet to a point; thence North 07 degrees 09 minutes 32 seconds West a distance of 30.00 feet to a point; thence North 84 degrees 44 minutes 28 seconds East a distance of 30.00 feet to a point on a curve; thence along the arc of a 422.00 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 06 degrees 55 minutes 28 seconds, an arc distance of 51.00 feet (the chord bears North 01 degrees 47 minutes 48 seconds East 50.97 feet) to a point of tangency; thence North 01 degree 39 minutes 56 seconds East a distance 50.32 feet to a point; thence North 60 degrees 34 minutes 33 seconds West a distance of 33.90 feet to a point; thence North 29 degrees 25 minutes 27 seconds East a distance of 64.41 feet to a point; thence North 01 degree 39 minutes 56 seconds East a distance of 50.00 feet to a.point;_thence South 88 degrees 20 minutes 04 seconds East a distance of 10.00; feet to a point, thence North 01 degree 39 minutes 56 seconds East a distance of 192.00 feet to a point; thence North 21 degrees 59 minutes 40 seconds West a distnace of 98.60 feet to a --` point; thence South 87 degrees 41 minutes 58 seconds East a distance of 20.00 feet to the point of beginning. Containing an area of 0.327 acres, more or less. NNl ;T IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD that this easement does not convey any right, title or interest to the surface of the soil, nor any other rights except those expressly stated in this easement, nor prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover, provided, however, that such use shall not be permitted to damage or destroy lateral support to the highway, and provided further that nothing herein contained shall grant to the City of Tigard the right to excavate beneath existing buildings or deposit fill materials against existing buildings above the top of the foundations thereof, but is understood and agreed the City of Tigard shall never be required to remove the dirt or other materials placed by it upon said property, nor shall said City be subject to any damages to the Grantors, their heirs and assigns, by reason thereof, or by reason of the slopes constructed thereon, or by reason of change of grade at the street or highway abutting on said property. IN CONSIDERATION of the premises, Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its successors or assigns should cause said road to be vacated. the rights of the Grantee in the above-described easement will be forfeited and shall immediately revert to the Grantors, their successors and assigns in the case of any such event. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above-described and granted premises unto said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. The Grantor, does hereby covenant to and with the City of Tigard, that it is the owner in fee simple of said premises; that the above described property is free from all encumbrances, and that it will warrant and defend the same from all lawful claims whatsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned corporation has caused this ease- ment to be executed by its duly authorized, undersigned officers acting pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors. Nay W Lee General Contractor I9c, Name of Corporation Preside Secretary STATE OF OREGON ) )s5 COUNTY OF WASHINGTON) 1985 MN and Priscilla D- Lee Personally appeared Wav W sae who, each being first duly sworn, did say ' president and that the latter thatthe former is the secretary of wav w Lee, is the �aneral a corporation, and that .the seal oing instrument the foregt is the corporate seal of said corpor affixed toled in behalf of said - ation and that said instrument was signed and sea corporation by authority of its board of directors; and each of them acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. , (Official Seal) Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires Feb. i , 1984 1985. Approved as to form this _day of By: City Attorney - City of Tigard Approved as to legal description this day of 1985. By City Engineer City of Tigard 1985. Accepted by the City Council this day of CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON By: , City Recorder - City of Tigard i. tx RIl�/T-DF-WAY /-f.4P TAX LOT 2400/ I S / 36 DA W SNWA16710l0 Co. 0RE60AJ CI%N Z.o r / WAY LEE, GENERAL COAMRAC75014,//vC. (030.2 AO N 87'.41•SB` w Z0.00, v7.6'f' /'-/OO' 3.92` 9.97' s N 2/' 96.Go' O/�oo 0 R� ZZO.00 CVJ •� G 0 /209.3,sS N O/• 99'Sb'E C = 9/2' 37'2/' 192.00' LOT ! WAY LEE, GE"q/EJ4AL COM-RACTOR, IVC. P044 aCfC 8 A!• t0'a4' a! ZOO®A NO/'39'36.E SO.Oo' N 29' ZVr'27'E V o C CP C:5 co 0 3Z7 AC it- 2-100 OA N GO' 34. 3!"W P4RCEG B 3� �o 0.552AC r Al o/' !9' OG"E 117.32' Al B¢'4¢'Zd"'E 3a DO` N 01009'58-#V R—422.00 30.00' d 3 06•'SS'zo lw Z- -57.OV C -N0/ •�T4d- E 3'sO'3'G'/6-,w 00.99' , SO.Oo' R� 400.00 2 L- /"OSS'JO" y2.00, C- S//•/$'/9,E 1M Ag'/s'/s" or R v 422.00 �•d3 d` /4• /7'ZO' 'S0.3G 4 - 134.70 G- 10//O' /t 24'/YV a 3-26-85 R/GfIT-OF-WAY MAP TAX LOT 6502/ 3G AD W�►Sf-J/NGTON CO. ORE60/V Q R l29.67 0/Ay r• L 4.�+! R: 123.&7 'B.D5Cie " az.ev' Ix - O.o/OAC:C f © `J 39• J7'Sfi'E s.36° 140 15*400 _. LOT/ i�f N T�•,IG•PO•iV 500' cavam R• 2!/.00 CO44MrRACrOR, / LOT z y © a 4/008110" IroS.® 30w b 20 6502 AO t ai3o9AD s Gi 9z d d d L =39..92 RARC61-A o•J?4 AC; 307 3z' GTONVy7*R[AGTI'ON R� Z80.00 N,t(•'f�'39•W \ d+ 04.43'/S" /sn 25• L+ 2.!•07 G 3 24.33, OI'E O2.TO' n �t 87.4!''1549"W N O.0/4 AC.t s.a At 07. 4/'SQ• IV ��. `-� P 0.a 2400 OA } 6 3T CITY OF TIGARU, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY` AGENDA OF: July 15, 1985 AGENDA ITEM M: GATE SUBMITTED: _July 1:2 1985 PREVIOUS ACTION: Acceptance of Original ISSUE/ACENOA TITLE: Acceptance of Sewer Easement sr-r,rr Pnrm-nent Sanitary Sewer PREPARED BY: Randy Clarno F�`pmp"r REQUESTED BY .Engineering & George Scott DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: �� 'V i'" CITY ADMINISTRATOR: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY George Scott conveyed a sanitary easement to the City as a requirement of his development off S.W. 98th Avenue on S.W. Scott Court. However, the easement fell short of the required distance. Attached is another easement that makes up the shortfall. ALTERNATIVES ODNSIOERED SUGGESTEO ACTION Engineering recommends that Council accept the Permanent Sanitary Sewer Easement. PERMANENT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT George 0. SCOTT hereinafter called the Grantors, in const eration for the sum of -0 dollars ($ -0- ) from the C y of Tigard, ereinafter called Grantee, grant and convey unto the City of Tigard a perpetual easement for constructing, reconstructing, operating, maintaining, inspecting and repairing of an underground sewer line and appurtenances, together with the right to remove, as necessary, vegetation, foliage, trees and other obstructions on the following described parcel of land, _situated in the City of Tigard, Washington County, State of Oregon: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD that this easement does not convey any right, title or interest except those expressly stated in this easements nor otherwise prevent Grantors from the full use and dominion thereover; provided, however, that such use shall not interfere with the uses and purposes of the intent of the easement. IN CONSIDERATION of the premises, Grantee agrees that if said Grantee, its successors or assigns should cause said easement to be vacated, the rights of the Grantee in the above-described easement will be forfeited and shall immediately revert to the Grantors, their successors and assigns in the case of such event. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above-described and granted premises unto said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor(s) has (have) hereunto set his (her) (their) hand(s) and seal(s) this _ day of I 1985. /�fj AaLli George 0. Scott STATE OF OREGON ol ) ss. County of BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this day of 1985, before me, the undersigne Notary Public an or�T State of Oregon, personally appeared the within-named of& E ,S CO .+ -wRo is_7Rnown to me (,�`to be the enticaI individual escribed in and who executed the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same freely and voluntarily. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I h ve hereunto set my hand and seal this- �_, __ day of 1985. Notary Public mor Oregon My commission Expires: Approved as to form this O day of Tcth 1985. By: kyAttorney �LL�zu�� /7 C - it o Tlgard Approved as to legal description this kl)" day of u 1485. , By: l! City - o Tigar Approved this -f daY-of , 1985. CITY CO CIL, CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON B6�Deputy �Cittyecor er - Cit Tigard Cl. Cs kJ a r3= t EXHIBIT A A perpetual easement for sanitary sewer, being 15 feet in width and being a Westerly extension, of that certain easement granted M' to the_City of Tigard on March 18, 1985, as Recorder's Fee No. 85009407, the South line of said easement described as f` follows: BEGINNING at the Southwest corner of that parcel conveyed to George O. Scott by deed recorded October 11, 1983, as Recorder's Fee No. 83037500, said corner also being on the Easterly boundary of the Southern Pacific Railway right-of-way; thence East along the South line of the aforementioned Scott property, 28. 20 feet, more or less, to the terminus of the aforementioned k easement grantedtothe City of Tigard. F OF a �J s Y 2 l f_ 8 1 t oo-��` [T1 { O ' Q eB N l•V+ tD ti s N 0 M 40 63. ' e 1 33• 56 CA 0 nQ �Mto �e ��?� � ! � N •C2 O Q z-) 9� S'i aed m 0 ib A l�� air N \ pp� _yam 4r W Nv w M. 70 70.0E wdb N uN a Nl � v 67.1 90 ti Q S 001use S1 N00.031W 8366 860 100 i 10 87.1 215.6 S 00.03 E 14 .7 ( 16T.8) 9V 1 _4544- ,) P.33 t0. N00.03,W v 1.fQ p� s t-4 8 w 0 UL p o `�O ,O O N 69.S L-L'1 I -4 g Y _ A o b Q e L-L� 8 Rwo O 71.794 ^ w � � 90 90 1498 t 146.71 e — N + V,1 m - '1_�/+y 391!.7 NOO 0s W W L 79.8 n J m i 8 E N - L� pgO I 337.9 SOO.10'E b N g Zb w �y a+ t N <b N }f1 N •0 �1 SSSCNCC ' .0 _ 317.1 SOOe l it, l E � O CI1Y Of 1IGAR0, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDAITEMSUMMARY - AGENDA OF: July 15, 1985 AGENDA ITEM q: d t f DATE SUBMITTED: July 11, 1985 PREVIOUS ACTION: 4/22/85 Council Accepted ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE• Anton Park Project Agreement and Bond. (Phase I) Subdivision - Au:norize PREPARED By: John Hagman Partial Release of Performance Monies REQUESTED BY: Development Services DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: �` �' CITY ADMINISTRATOR: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY 1. Anton Park Subdivision is located on the west side of S.W. 121st Avenue opposite S.W. North Dakota Street. 2. The,subdivision's Compliance Agreement and Letter of Commitment (Performance Bond) provide for the City to authorize disbursement of assurance monies when units of work are satisfactorily completed, provided a minimum of, 20% of the assurance monies are "held back" for the one year guarantee obligation. J. Completion of certain public facility items has progressed satisfactorily, namely: clearing and grubbing, curb installation and storm and sanitary sewer installation 4. Subsequently, the developer is requesting that Council authorize release gf tlha frnnric which aro cncni Finally "set aside" to assure omplP ion o the above items. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SUGGESTED ACTION Authorize Mayor and City Recorder to execute a letter to provide for partial release of Commitment monies in the sum of $108,000.81 and pass the Resolution titled "Resolution' to"Authorize Release of Commitment Funds for Anton Park Subdivision" to document same. a July 16, 1985 RE: Anton Park Subdivision (Letter of Commitment Partial Release) Gentlemen: In the matter of the threemmitment ndred seventy between Washington ral Savings hundred six dollars ($372,306.00) Letter off Bank, and the City of Tigard, Oregon and Custom Homes by Dave, Inc. this is to serve as official notice to allow said Washington of the Federal Sat vintrungs sted to ank to release to Custom Home by Dave, Inc, ; a portion - said Bank. The amount hereby authorized to be release is one hundred eight thousand dollars and eighty one cents ($108,0008 l)• The amount to remain entrusted to Washington Federal Savings Bank as a that all remaining requirements of said performance bond to assure the City Subdivision are completed, shall be two hundred sixty four thousand three hundred five dollars and nineteen cents ($264,305.19). of e This notice shall not be construed to nullifyit isomerely alter an the authorizationtto aforesaid Letter of Commitment in any way; release a portion of the entrusted monies. City of Tigard, Oregon By: Mayor � . By. w City Recorder .. ' (JSHicz/1613P) <s .i CITY OF T-1GAR0, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Q AGENDA OF: July 15, 1985 AGENDA ITEM d" , DATE SUBMITTED 1985 July 10, PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Resolution Accepting Phillips Sanitary Sewer Improvements, PREPARED BY: John Hagman Subject to One Year Maintenance Period REQUESTED BY: Development Services DEPARTMENT HEAD OK: '��?'� CITY ADMINISTRATOR: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY 1. The public mainline sanitary sewerextensionknown as 'the Phillips_Sewer Extension is located northerly of the Tualatin River and westerly of S.W. 10;:t . Avenue. The extension is an intrinsic segment of U.S.A. 's partially constructed Tualatin-Summerfield Interceptor. 2. The line has been installed and tested in accord with City standards avd specifications and is satisfactorily constructed. 3. Items remaining to be completed, prior to final City acceptance, are stated in the attached Resolution. The developer desires to have the City retain 20% of the performance bond monies to assure satisfactory completion of the project and one year maintenance assurance. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED a x SUGGESTED ACTION Accept the public sanitary sewer improvement known as Phillips Sanitary Sewer Extension, constructed within the City of. Tigard, subject to one year maintenance period and specified conditions and authorizing a partial release of performance monies. CITY OF TIGARD: OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: July 15, 1985 AGENDA ITEM M: �4.• DATE SUBMITTED: July :ll, 1985 PREVIOUS ACTION: None ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Automobile Replacement for Building Division PREPARED BY: William A. 'Monahan REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD OK; CITY ADMINISTRATOR: POLICY ISSUE } - INFORMATION SUMMARY The Building Division is in need of a replacement vehicle for use by the Codes Enforcement officer. An appropriation of $8,000 from contingency to Community Development, Building Division capital outlay is requested. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve an appropriation of $8,000 to purchase late model,used compact auto. 2 Take no action. SUGGESTED ACTION 1 ,CO., .y Approve an appropriation of $8;000 to purchase late model used compact auto.. 4`+ t 1 4 S MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Members of the City Council July 11, 1985 FROM: William A. Monahan, Director LVIT"� Community Development SUBJECT: Automobile Replacement for Building Division In May the Building Division hired a third inspector, Dan Blanchard, to perform codes enforcementwork as well as building inspections. The vehicle which has been assigned to him is a 1974 Plymouth, and has ,poor gas mileage efficiency. The Operations Divisien has evaluated the auto and determined that repairs costing several_ hundred dollars are necessary to keep it operational. Given the need for a vehicle, and condition of the present unit, the staff feels that a change should be made now to a newer auto. It should be noted that the individuaa who will be using the vehicle holds a fee supported position. The vehicle is necessary to provide him with the ability to generate some fees which may otherwise go undetected, such as sign fees, temporary uses, and business taxes. The staff has evaluated the need and determined that a low mileage used compact car which provides good gas mileage would serve the purpose. The inspector makes field visits each working day throughout the City. He is required to make frequent trips with many stops. As a result, gas efficiency is important. A low mileage vehicle is preferred so that repair bills can be kept to a minimum. I suggest that the use of compact autos for building personnel is the direction which I would like to pursue as other replacement autos are needed. The present practice of utilizing former police vehicles may not be cost effective, given the wear and tear which the vehicles have experienced and the cost of operation. Since no funds were appropriated in the present budget for an auto, an appropriation from contingency is necessary. I suggest that an amount not to exceed $8,000 be appropriated to allow the Operations Superintendent" to solicit proposals from various local auto dealers to provide a suitable low mileage compact auto for the Building Division. Therefore, the Council is being asked to appropriate $8,000 from contingency into the Community Development Building Division capital outlay budget. �. ;`: (WAM:br/1Fs0OP) CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council July 15, 1985 FROM: Bob Jean, City Administrator SUBJECT: Engineering Services ' We are currently reviewing the entire Engineering Services function and plan to have'a report to you in August. This arises because of Frank Currie's:_departure, but also out of permit-related fee-supported workload increases and the resignation of an Engineering Technician II position. Rather than immediately filling the E.I.T. II (pay range #8) position, we would like to finish our review with Council in August. Meanwhile, our temporary_Draftsman has 'been` offered another job. We'd like to suggest a permanent position as Engineering Assistant/Draftsperson (pay range #5) that fits any of our Engineering Services staffing options, and yet still keeps us up with permit workloads. Recommendation: Authorize a regular full-time Engineering Assistant/ Draftsperson position in pay range #5 ($1260-1680/mo), but freeze the E.I.T. II position until the August Council review. w