Loading...
City Council Packet - 11/03/1986 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR NESTING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate NOVRKBER 3. 1986. 6:30 PN sign-up abeet(a). If no sheet is available, TIGARD CIVIC CENTER ask to be recognised by the Chair at the start 13125 SW HALL. BLVD. of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are TIGARD, OREGON 97223 asked to be to 2 minutes or less. Longer matters can be not for a future Agenda by contacting either the-Mayor or City Administrator. 1. REGULAR MEETING: 1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance 1.3 Call To Staff and Council For Non Agenda Items 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or Less Per Issue, Please) 3. PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 7-86 i ZC 15-86 (NPO No. 5) Request by GEORGIA PACIFIC for a Comprehensive Plan 'Amendment from Heavy Industrial to Light Industrial and a Zone Change from I-H (Heavy Industrial) to I-P (Industrial ,Park) on property located at 14030 S. W. 72nd Avenue (WCTM 2S1 IDD, TL 600). o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations Or Challenges o Summation By Community Development Director o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Exaaiamtion 0 Recommendation By Community Development Director a Council Questions Or Comments o Public Hearing Closed :UBLIC Consideration By Council Br/Ra - Approved - Umsaimous 4. HEARING - CPA 6-86 i ZC 16-86 (MPO No. 4) Request by NORDLING, SCOTT, AND MARTIN for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Commercial General i a Zone Change from a-3.5 (Residential 3.5 units/acre) to C-G (Commercial General) on property located at: 7155, 7105, 7065 S. W. Elmhurst Street (WCTM 281 Us, TL 200, 300, 301. 302). I Public Hearing Opensd o Declarations Or Challenges o Summation By Community Devsl.opmsmt Director o Public Testimony$ Proponent*, Opponents, Cross Examination .-*_ -r- o Recommendation By Community Development Director o Council Questions Or Comments o Public Hearing Closed o Consideration By Council Br/Jo Disapproved - 0eaalaous S. PUBLIC BRAZING - ALBERTSON'S - CPA 6-56 and ZC 10-66 (MPO No. 6) Request by James A Rama Jess White; Herbert i Betty Dsyson; H. C. and Any Randall; Garr i Nadine Randall; Donald i JoAns lamdall; Health Resources, Inc.; and William Brownson (ALBRRTSON'S) for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low, Medium High i High Density Residential to Commercial General and a ZONE CHANGE from 140 (Residential 40 units/acre). R-25 (Residential. 25 units/acre) and 1-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) to C-G (Commercial General) on property located mouth of Durbas Road, east of Pacific Hwy- and vast of 113th Avenue. (WCTK 281 153A, lots 100, 200, 300, 400; i 291 15A. lots 2800. 2602, 2900, 3000. 3001. i 3002. o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations Or Challenges 0 Summation By Community Development Director o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Zz.aination o Recommendation By Community Development Director o Council Questions Or Comments o Public Hearing Closed o Consideration By Council Br/Rd Motion to eoatisme to 11/17 Couecil Mating where Public Bearing testimony will be limited to traffic amd density issues - Unamimoms COUNCIL AGENDA NOVEMBEg 3, 1986 - SAGR 1 6. PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 10-86 i ZC 18-86 (NPO No. 7) - Request by BETHANY ASSOCIATES for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from C-P (Commercial Professional to C-P and C-G (General Commercial) and a Zone Change from C-P (Commercial Professional) to C-P and C-G. Located: SE Corner of SW North Dakota Street and Scholls Ferry Rd. (WCTM lSl 34BC, TL 401). o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations Or Challenges o Summation By Community Development Director o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Crone Examination o Recommendation By Community Development Director o Council Questions Or Convents o Public Hearing Closed o Consideration By Council Jo/Ed Approved with conditions - Unanimous 7. PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 9-86, ZC 17-86 (NPO No. 5) Request by UNITED FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial General and a Zona Change from I-P (Industrial Park) to C-G (Commercial General) on property located at: 15995 S. W. 72nd Avenue (WCTM 2S1 12DC, TL 700 & 701). o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations Or Challenges o Summation By Community Development Director o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Recommendation By Community Development Director o Council Questions Or Comments o Public Hearing Closed o Consideration By Council Ea/Ed Upheld YC i Staff recommendation for denial - Unanimous 8. PUBLIC HEARING - PACIFIC WESTERN BANK - TU 10-86 (NPO No. 5) Request for placement of a mobile office building for a period of one year on property zoned CP and located at 7190 and 7150 S. W. Sandburg Street (WCTK 2SI lVC. TL 3800 and 3900 o Public Hearing Opened o Declarations Or Challenges o Summation By Community Development Director o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Recommendation By Community Development Director o Council Questions Or Commute o Public Hearing Closed I Consideration By Council Ed/Br Approved - Unanimous RESOLUTION No. 123A E 9. CONSENT AGENDAt These items are considered to be routine and may ba enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Notion tot 9.1 Approve Council Minutes - September 24 6 29. 1986 9.2 Receive and filet a. Nonthly Departmental Reports b. Boardmauship Workshop Report 9.3 Approve Agreement With State Of Oregon Rat Greenburg & Tiedeman Signal - Authorize Nayor and Recorder To Sign - Ras. No. 86-124 9.4 Approve Request For Revised Speed Zones - Resolution No. 86-125 9.5 Ratify Telephone Poll - Approval SRO Training - Annual Oregon Juvenile Law Enforcement Association Seminar (Rick Paterson, Gary Wayt) 9.6 Approve Travel Request - Annual Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon Conference (Randy Clarno) Br/Ed Approved - Ummnimons 10. NON AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff WDr Approv insursace coverage proposal of combination of two progr"s jr, Yemen (liability) and City County Program (property) for (82,860.00 - Unanimous 11. ADJOURNMENT 11:16 p.m. cw:4233A COUNCIL AGENDA- NOVEBER 3, 1986 - YAP9 2 T I G A R D C I T Y C 0 U N C I L REGULAR MEETING MINUTES — NOVEMBER 3, 1986, — 6:30 P.M. 1. ROLL GALL: Present: Mayor John Cook; Councilors: Tom Brian (arrived at 6:35 p.m.), Carolyn Eadon, Jerry Edwards, and Valerie Johnson; City Staff: Bob Jean, City Administrator (arrived 7:05 p.m.); Bill Monahan, Community Development Director; Ken Elliot, Legal Counsel; Keith Liden, Senior Planner; and Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder Pro—Tem. 2. CALL TO STAFF AND COUNCIL FOR NON--AGENDA ITEMS a. Councilor Johnson requested to be placed on agenda to report on an item concerning the Economic Development Committee. 3. VISITOR'S AGENDA a. Mr. Hal Lyster addressed the Council with concerns he has over the increased retirement and medical/dental costs incurred by the City for the Council and City Administrator in the current budget. He stated the costs are unrealistic and cited figures and percentages of increase. The Mayor advised Mr. Lyster that the Council does not have information or the adequate time to address these concerns at this meeting. Mr. Lyster requested that he be scheduled at a future Council meeting to go over this item of concern. The Mayor advised that the City Administrator shall be informed of the request for this t item to be placed on a future agenda for further investigation. b. Mr. Bill McMonagle spoke on behalf of Mrs. Elton Phillips (16565 S.W. 108th Avenue). When Council approved the Dover Landing Subdivision, all of 108th Street was subsequently changed from a local street to a minor collector street. Mrs. Phillips' concern is that she has 15 mature cedar and fir trees which would have to be cut down if the roadway is changed to a minor collector street because of street-width requirements. Therefore, Mrs. Phillips proposes that S. W. 108th Street be classified as a local street on the portion south of what shall be known as Kent Drive. Senior Planner Liden reported that Planning Staff reviewed this proposal with the City Engineer who concluded that this would not represent a problem. Community Development Director Monahan reported that because the Final Order adopted for Dover Landing stipulated that S.W. 108th Street would be a minor collector street, the City Attorney has advised Staff that any change will require a Public Hearing. The consensus of the Council was that the City Engineer should prepare the necessary maps and documentation for a November 24, 1986 Public Hearing. Page 1 — COUNCIL MINUTES — November 3, 1986 4. PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 7-86 6 ZC 15-86 (NPO No. 5) Request Ly GEORGIA PACIFIC for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Heavy Industrial to Light Industrial and a Zone Change from I-H (Heavy Industrial) to I-P (Industrial Park) on property located at 14030 S. W. 72nd Avenue (WCTM 2S1 WD, TL 800). a. Public Hearing Opened by Mayor Cook b. Declarations or Challenges - none. C. Senior Planner Liden testified that the Planning Commission and Planning Staff recommend approval. They find that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of Comprehensive Plan. d. Public Testimony - Proponents o Mr. Lans Stout, (0690 S. W. Bancroft, Portland, Oregon) representing Georgia Pacific, stated he is present at the meeting to answer any questions the Council may have. e. Public Testimony - Opponents (None). f. Senior Planner Liden recommended approval of this request. g. There was some discussion by Council with staff as to buffering requirements surrounding this property. h. Public Hearing closed by Mayor Cook. i. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Eadon, to make a tentative finding in favor of the request and direct staff to prepare the appropriate document declaring this Council decision for the November 17 or November 24, 1986 meeting. Motion approved by a unanimous vote of the Council present. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 8-66 i ZC 16-86 (NPO Na. 4) Request by NORDLING, SCOTT, AND MARTIN for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Commercial General 6 a Zone Change from R-3.5 (Residential 3.5 units/acre) to C-G (Commercial General) on property located at: 7155, 7105, 7085 S. W. Elmhurst Street (WCTM 2S1 1AB, TL 200, 300, 301, 302). a. Public Hearing Opened by Mayor Cook. b. Declarations or Challenges - None. C. Senior Planner Liden advised that the applicants consist of only those property owners of the residentially zoned areas on the north side of Elmhurst Street. The Planning Commission and City Staff recommend denial of this request on the premise that this proposal is premature. Consensus of the Planning Commission and Planning Staff was that future rezoning should be done on a neighborhood basis (including those property owners on the south side of the street) in order to protect the integrity of the current residential property. Page 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 3, 1996 d. Public Testimony — Proponents: o Gordon S. Martin, 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Tigard, Oregon testified on behalf of the applicants of the Elmhurst zone change request. Mr. Martin distributed to the Councilors a letter outlining the elements of support for this proposal; his presentation was based on the information contained in this letter. He and the other applicants wish to change the zoning of the area noted to Commercial General (CG) so that the existing CG area can be enlarged and thereby improve the marketing possibilities. Mr. Martin addressed some of the Planning Commission concerns given as reasons for their denial of the proposal. These concerns included a desire for a guarantee that access to the property would be from Dartmouth and not Elmhurst (presently a residential street). Mr. Martin felt that these concerns could be resolved and added that 86% of the land in the "Tigard Triangle" is now zoned Commercial. He felt that the Comprehensive Plan has made provisions so that, ultimately, this area can be zoned CG. Councilor Brian asked Mr. Martin if there is a development proposal contingent upon the rezoning of this property. Mr. Martin indicated that there was no proposal pending. Councilor Eadon questioned future projects on this property and registered concern as to how ii would affect the residential property along Elmhurst with regard to traffic and/or buffering considerations. o Joanne Nordling, 2326 Athena Road, West Linn, Oregon testified that she owns the house at 7105 S. W. Elmhurst Street. Several years ago she served on the NPO for this area. At that time, she decided it was holding back the tide" to attempt to prevent this area from becoming commercial. Mrs Nordling said the is in agreement with the zone change with the stipulation that Elmhurst Street shall remain as a residential street as long as as the houses on the other side of the street wish to remain residential. e. Public Testimony -- Opponents (Nona) f. Senior Planner Liden recommended denial of this proposal. g. Council Questions or Comments: o Councilor Johnson asked about the status of the Dartmouth Street extension. Community Development Director Monahan reported that staff is presently doing the engineering work and will come before Council on November 17th to discuss the status of this project. It is hoped that construction will \w. begin next year. Page 3 — COUNCIL MINUTES — November 3, 1986 ,t o Councilor Brian asked about opposition to this proposal. Senior Planner Liden reported that there was at least one resident on the south side of the street who was opposed to the proposal. } o Councilor Eadon observed, and Councilor Brian concurred, that there are citizens who obviously feel that this is their neighborhood and have demonstrated this feeling through well—maintained homes. This proposal does appear to be premature. In order to protect the integrity of the residential area on the south side of the street, the north side should not be zoned commercial at this time. h. Mrs, Geraldine Sall, Chairperson of NPO #4, reported that the NPO recommends denial of the proposed change based on the findings of the City Staff. I. Public Hearing closed by the Mayor. J. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Johnson, to make a tentative finding for denial of the request and direct staff to prepare the appropriate document declaring this Council decision for the November 17 or November 24, 1996 meeting. Motion approved by a unanimous vote of the Council present. 6. POIl111' OF ORM a. Mayor Cook reported that the notification letters for the Georgia Pacific Public Hearing erroneously advised that the Hearing would begin at 7:00 p.m. (Said Hearing was advertised in the Tigard Times to begin at 6:30 p.m.) He asked if there was anyone present who wished to testify for this item but had arrived after the Hearing was closed. No one came forward to speak; Mayor Cook declared the action taken by Council will stand. 7. Kms" TO Tim CITY a. Mayor Cook presented the "Key to the City" to Doe Dee Harrington, reporter for The Oregonian. Ms. Harrington has been reassigned and will no longer be covering Tigard City Council meetings for The Oregonian. The "Key" was presented for "accuracy, balance, and insight in her reporting to the community," { Page 4`- C�OUN CIL MINUTES November 3, 1986 _ v r 8. PUBLIC HEARING - ALBERTSON'S - CPA 6-86 and ZC 10-86 (NPO No. 6) Request by James & Emma Jean White; Herbert & Betty Dayson; H. H and Amy Randall; Gary & Nadine Randall; Donald & JoAnn Randall; Health Resources, Inc. ; and William Brownson (ALBERTSON'S) for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low, Medium High & High Density Residential to Commercial General and a ZONE CHANGE from R-40 (Residential 40 units/acre), R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre) and R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) to C-G (Commercial General) on property located south of Durham Road, east of Pacific Hwy. and west of 113th Avenue. (WCTM 2S1 15BA, lots 100, 200, 300, 400; & 2S1 15A, lots 2800, 2802, 2900, 3000, 3001, & 3002. a. Public Hearing Opened by the Mayor b Declarations or Challenges: o Councilor Eadon declared a conflict of interest due to family involvement in some property in this area; therefore, she will not take part in the discussion nor will she vote on this agenda item. C. Senior Planner Liden advised that the Planning Commission and Planning Staff recommend denial of this proposal. Of primary concern is the removal of approximately 18 acres from medium--high and high residential designations and transferring it to commercial. This would create conflicts with Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.1 .1 which is linked to State Goal No. 10 and the Metro Housing Rules which require: The average density allowed for all undeveloped residential land in the City be a minimum of ten dwelling units per acre. The adopted and acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and zoning provisions meet this figure but do not exceed it. The Staff would be open--minded in reviewing proposals for making up this deficiency, but do not feel a viable proposal has been presented by the applicant to date. Senior Planner Liden also noted that the request is not consistent with 5.1.3 of the Plan which talks about promoting downtown as the primary focal point for commercial activity in the City. d. Public Testimony - Proponents: o John W. Shonkwiler, 5750 S. W. Carman Drive, representing Albertson's, introduced himself and the following individuals: Mr. Don Ouncombe, Real Estate Manager for Albertson's; Mr. Dick Woelk, the traffic consultant on the project; and Mr. Steve Ward, the engineer on the project. page 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 3, 1986 F x Mr. Shonkwiler explained that Albertson's would like to develop a large, convenience shopping center on over 21 acres. This would include a super grocery store, super drug store, a large department store and small convenience service stores. The key issues in Mr Shonkwiler's presentation included: This project is not speculative; Albertson's is ready to build immediately. The project Albertson's wants to do is not compatible with a downtown area primarily because of traffic patterns and unavailability of land. The subject site is not suitable for residential property as it cannot be adequately buffered from the noise, traffic and light generated at the intersection of Durham and Pacific Highway. A transition zone (which would be created by the building of this project) would provide an adequate buffer for adjacent land if it were to be rezoned as residential. Lack of other suitable sites in Tigard is a problem primarily because of access problems to Pacific Highway, The Oregon Department of Transportation has advised that there will be no new traffic lights provided on Pacific Highway. Several scenarios were presented wherein density requirements might possibly be satisfied by rezoning other areas within Tigard. o Don Duncombe. Real Estate Manager for Albertson's, 10230 S. W. Hall, Tigard, Oregon, advised that the present downtown store will close regardless of the outcome of this rezoning request. The Company's Policy is to move away from core downtown areas due to economic reasons. Slides of a similar project completed by Albertson's in Eugene, Oregon were viewed by the Council. Mr. Duncombe advised that every abutting property owner, with the exception of Mr. James Craig, has been contacted and the majority are in favor of the project. o Dorothy Meskel, 16295 S. W. 113th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, testified that she is in favor of the Albertson's request but could not live with apartments on this property. o Larry Eastman, 10420 S. W. Greenleaf Terrace, Tigard, Oregon, stated that as retired developer and appraiser, he feels that this (Albertson's) would be the best use of the property. Page 6 COUNCIL MINUTES -- November 3, 1986 o Paul Hunt, 10320 S. W. Century Oak Drive, Tigard, Oregon, is President of the Summerfield Civic Association. Mr. Hunt reported that the Summerfield community is split 50/50 with regard to this project. In his testimony, Mr. Hunt advised that he does not want to see apartments placed on this property nor would he want to see Albertson's leave the City of Tigard altogether. o W. J. Darm, 10340 S. W. Greenleaf Terrace, Tigard, Oregon 97224, urged the Council to approve this project. Mr. Darm's chief concern was for the nearby retirement community's need for easy access to shopping which would be provided by this project. o Mr. Tom Page, attorney for Royal Mobile Villa, 11200 S.W. Royal Villa Drive, Tigard, Oregon, is in favor of this project. Mr. Page expressed concern that adequate buffering be provided. o Nadine Novatney, Manager of the Summerfield Apartments, 11175 S. W. Meadowbrook Drive, Tigard, Oregon 97224, testified that this project would be an asset to residents in the Summerfield Apartments. o Mayor Cook read into the record a letter, dated October 21, 1986, addressed to Councilor Tom Brian, from Dick Dendixsen of 13350 S. W. Ash Street, Tigard, Oregon. Mr. Bendixsen is in favor of the proposal. e. Public Testimony — Opponents: o Dave Atkinson, 10460 S. W. Century Oak Drive Tigard, Oregon, testified that he does not see the need for another shopping center. Mr. Atkinson is concerned that this project will create traffic problems and urged further study. With all of the vacant retail space currently in the area, he does not think the addition of this project can be justified. o Ken Cheeley, Chairman of the Summerfield Liaison Committee, 15390 S. W. Alderbrook Drive, Tigard, Oregon, reported that representatives from Albertson's met with 160 of the Summerfield residents recently. Early in the meeting, a vote was called for those in favor of this project; about 75% voted "no." Later, after the residents were advised that the likely _ alternative to this project would be apartment buildings, a second vote was called. The tally of this vote resulted in about 50% for and 5076 against the project. o James Craig, 16325 S. W. 113th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, testified that he is not in favor of this project. Mr. Craig is concerned about the density requirements, compounding problems with downtown development, and traffic issues. He also felt the applicants have not satisfactorily addressed the drainage problems which would be created with 15 acres of pavement. Page 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 3, 1986 5 o Vicki Craig, 16325 S. W. 113th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, is i' against the project because of traffic problems. o Alvy C. Fleming, 16280 S. W. 113th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon, is opposed to this project because of traffic safety concerns. o Jane Tye, 15650 S. W. Old Orchard Road, Tigard, Oregon, is opposed to this project because of traffic, noise, and privacy considerations. Ms. Tye is especially concerned with traffic safety on Durham Road. o Riley Sanders, 11115 S. W. Meadowbrook Drive, Tigard, Oregon, is opposed to the project because of noise and security problems. Mr. Sanders feels there is ample shopping and banking facilities available in the area. o Richard Brown, 10580 S. W. Highland Drive, Tigard, Oregon 97224, testified that he attended the NPO q6 meeting in which Albertson's made one of their first presentations concerning this project. At that time, the representatives from Albertson's said they had no plans to close the downtown store. Mr. Brown is opposed to the new location for Albertson's because of traffic problems, the number of vacant retail areas currently in Tigard, and the creation of urban sprawl which is contrary to state land use laws. o Phil Pasteris, Chairman of NPO 06, 8935 S. W. Pinebrook, Tigard, Oregon 97223 testified that the NPO's recommendation was for denial of this proposal. The primary concern is the traffic issue. The traffic study submitted by the applicants needs to be clarified; Mr. Pasteris reported that he found it to be "impossible to read." The density issues are also of concern to the NPO members. o Community Development Director Monahan read into the record a letter from William V. Bishop, P. 0. Box 4154, Menlo Park, California 94026. Mr. Bishop is the owner of Tax Lot 1700, Durham Road, and he is opposed to this development. Cited as reasons for his opposition were the traffic considerations and he does not feel a redesignation of R-40 zoning on surrounding properties would be appropriate at this time. o J. B. Bishop, 3604 S. E. Oak Street, Portland, Oregon, is a commercial property owner in Tigard and spoke on behalf of family members who own property adjacent to the proposed development. They are opposed to this project because of traffic problems. Mr. Bishop feels there is enough property presently zoned for commercial use. o Community Development Director Monahan entered into the record a letter, dated October 16, 1986, from Mr. James F. Ross, Department of Land Conservation and Development, State of Oregon. This letter stated (in part): Page 9 — COUNCIL MINUTES — November 3, 1986 ". . .The applicant's observation. that future upzoning of an adjacent 12 acres to compensate for this loss (multifamily units) is not an adequate response. The city needs to comply with Goal 10 mix and density standards by approval of other amendments at this time to maintain compliance. f. Senior Planner Liden recommended denial of this proposal. g. City Administrator Jean cautioned that the "ripple effect" of the impacts of this project, if approved, should also be considered. Specifically, what would the ramifications be for other areas if the densities and traffic patterns were to be shifted? h. Rebuttal by Albertson's Representatives: o Mr. Shonkwiler asked for an opportunity for rebuttal of the opponents' testimony. His rebuttal comments contained the following. The traffic studies of three different consultants are available for review. Mr. Shonkwiler outlined several proposals wherein he felt the concerns of Mr. Ross of the State of Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development could be satisfied. As to concerns regarding the overdevelopment of commercial land, Mr. Shonkwiler advised that this project is almost 100% committed with tenants (the major anchors have all been committed). There will not be a tremendous increase in truck traffic. The downtown stoma will be closed whether this project is approved or not. Council questions or Comments: o Councilor Brian commented that he thinks this proposal has merit. However, he would like to delay final consideration until he has had an opportunity to study the ramifications of the density redistribution scenarios suggested by the applicant. He also would like a copy of the entire traffic study. o Councilor Edwards said he feels it would be erroneous to attempt to prevent a project from moving from the downtown area because it may "take away" from that specific area. He cannot accept this as a valid criterion for the consideration of denial of this project. Page 9 — COUNCIL MINUTES — November 3, 1996 o Councilor Johnson said she thinks the quality of development the applicant is proposing is excellent. She hopes that this project can be done somewhere in Tigard but has serious concerns about this particular location. Councilor Johnson also commented that a point should be clarified: The City would not really be trading off high-density residential property for commercial property. The proposal is to move the high density over to adjacent property; therefore, it is not "trading" but it is actually "coupling" the two zoning designations. The ramifications of this should be studied further. j . After Council discussion, it was the consensus that they could not vote in favor of this proposal at this time without some clarification and further, information on certain issues. Therefore: o Staff (traffic engineer) was directed to review and comment on the traffic data available. o Stafft on the traffic options impactsfor createddensity any such then transfer. repor k. Legal Counsel Elliot advised that it would be correct to continue this Public Hearing to November 17, 1986 and limit the testimony to traffic and density issues. 1. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Cnuncilor Edwards to continue this Public Hearing to November 17, 1986 at the regular City Councilmeeting; motionssion %hall be limited was approved byf 44-0-•1 v teof thhee density Council present; Councilor Eadon abstained from voting. 9. PUBLIC HEAR CPA 10-96, ZC 19-96 (NPO No. 7) for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Request by BETHANY ASSOCIATES C-P (Commercial Professional to C-P and C-G (General Commercial) and a Zone Change from C-P (Commercial Professional) to C-P and C- G. Located: SE Corner of SW North Dakota Street and Scholls ferry Road (WCTM 1S1, 348C, TL 401). a. Public Hearing opened by Mayor Cook b. Declarations or Challenges - None C. Senior Planner Liden reported that this is similar to an earlier proposal which had been recommended for denial by Planning Commission and Staff. However, this proposal has addressed the previous Planning Commission and Staff concerns and the recommendation is for approval. d, Public Testimony - Proponents: o Gordon Davis, 1020 S.W. Taylor, Portland, Oregon 97205. representing Bethany Associates presented testimony. Mr. Davis' main points were; Page 10 - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 3, 1986 This proposal retains a portion of the site as office zoned property. Market analyses indicate that: 1. Present amount of office zoned property far exceeds current or near future demand. 2. There is a shortage of land zoned for neighborhood-oriented retail. 3. This property is ideally located for expanded retail and a small, neighborhood-oriented office building. Mr. Davis used an overhead projector in his presentation to illustrate how the property would be divided: 1. 1.5 acres would be designated for use as a neighborhood, professional office building (presently zoned for this, therefore, no amendment needed). 2. 1 acre would be designated for use as a gas station. 3. 2.9 acres would be designated for use as expanded retail (i .a. , small anchor: hardware store, auto parts store, home improvements store.) o Richard Boberg, Chairperson of NPO N2, 10660 S.W. North Dakota testified that the NPO members feel that this proposal is well planned. There is at need for this type of development and it will enhance the existing retail space. e. Public Testimony - opponents: o Howard Williams, 12220 S.W. Scholls Ferry Road testified that he is concerned with traffic safety and the access to this property. He is apprehensive that once the property is rezoned that the uses, as are now proposed by the applicants, may not be what are actually put in. f. Senior Planner Liden recommended that this proposal be approved. S. Access, traffic and usage criteria were discussed by the Council. Consensus was that a C-N zone on the one-acre parcel in this proposal would better suit this type of development because of the designation of uses in this zone. h. Senior Planner Liden, in response to some Council discussion, said that staff would prefer not to place conditions on the types of usage for the property. i. Public Hearing closed by Mayor Cook Page 11 - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 3, 1986 j , Motion by Johnson, seconded by Edwards, to direct staff to prepare an ordinance that would change the zoning and reflect a Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the site under consideration as follows: At the corner of Scholls Ferry Road and North Dakota Lane, one acre is to be rezoned C--N; On the east side of the parcel, 2.9 acres are to be rezoned C-G. These amendments are made with the condition that landscaping, buffering and parking requirements cannot be shifted from one zone to satisfy the requirements of another zone. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of the Council present. 10. PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 9-86, ZC 17--86 (NPO No. 5) Request by UNITED FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial General and a Zone Change from I-P (Industrial Park) to C-G (Commercial General) on property located at: 15995 S. W. Ind Avenue (WCTM: 2S1 12DC, TL 700 and 701). A. Public Hearing opened by Mayor Cook b. Declarations or Challenges - None. C. Senior Planner Liden reported that the Planning Commission and Planning Staff are recommending denial of this proposal primarily because: 1. Policy 5.1.1 which encourages maintenance of economic diversity is not met. 2. There is concern that the site is not developed so that it will be able to accommodate the host of uses (and subsequent parking requirements) that can be found in a C-G zone. d. Public Testimony - Proponents: o John Brosy, Planning Consultant with David Evans & Associates, 2626 S. W. Corbett, Portland, Oregon 97201, testified on behalf of United First Federal Savings & Loan of Idaho. A letter from Mr. Brosy was submitted as a hand-carry supplement to the Council packets. Mr. Brosy's testimony to the Council was outlined in this letter. Mr. Brosy showed slides to the Council of the property in question. Presently, the project is within 1,000 square feet of the maximum allowable with regard to leasing of commercial space in an I-P zone. Only C-G users over the past two years .` have been interested in this location which is why United First Savings is now requesting the zone change. Page 12 - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 3, 2986 o Steve Monroe a real estate broker for Bullier & Bullier, 707 1' S.W. Washington, Portland, Oregon 97201, testified that United First Federal is not the original owner of the property. Through a set of circumstances, they now own the project and have found that the I-P zone is overly prohibitive. United First Federal has been unable to attract the types of businesses to this area which are listed as allowable uses. o Craig Hopkins, Chairperson of NPO #5, 7430 S.W. Varns, Tigard, Oregon 97223, testified that NPO #5 is in favor of this s rezoning request. The NPO feels that such rezoning will E enhance community livability and contribute to a healthy fi business climate. e. Public Testimony - Opponents (None) f. Senior Planner Liden recommended denial of this proposal. g. There was discussion of the Council with the resulting consensus that: 1. Council empathizes with United First Federal's dilemma of attracting suitable businesses for leasing of the property; however, Council feels a responsibility towards the protection of the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. A zone change cannot be justified on the premise that an error in judgment was made on the part of the original developer. 3. The development does not appear to have been constructed to satisfy the conditions of an I-P zone. h. Public Hearing closed by Mayor Cook i. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Edwards, to uphold the Planning Commission and Planning Staff recommendation for denial; staff is instructed to prepare the appropriate document declaring this Council decision for consideration at the November 17 or November 24, 1986 regular Council meeting. The motion passed by a unanimous vote of the Council present. 11. PUBLIC HEARING - PACIFIC WESTERN BANK - TU 10-86 (NPO No. 5) Request for placement of a mobile office building for a period of one year on property zoned CP and located at 7190 and 7150 S.W. Sandburg Street (WCTM 2S1 IDC, TL 3800 and 3900). a. Public Hearing opened by Mayor Cook b. Declarations or Challenges - None C. Senior Planner Liden advised that the Planning Commission and Planning Staff recommend that this proposal be approved subject _ to the conditions as outlined in the Staff Report. d. Public Testimony - Proponents: Page 13 - COUNCIL MINUTES - November 3, 1986 o Ned Takasomi, Pacific Western Bank, 11760 S.E. Idleman, Portland, Oregon was present to answer questions by the Council. Mr. Takasomi explained some of the restructuring and consolidation plans for Pacific Western Bank. e. Public Testimony - Opponents (None) f. Senior Planner Liden recommended that this request be approved. g. There was some discussion on setback requirements for this property by Council. h. Public Hearing closed by Mayor Cook i. Recorder Pro Tem read the following resolution into the record: RESOLUTION NO. 86-123A. A FINAL ORDER IN THE MATTER FOR TEMPORARY USE REQUESTED BY PACIFIC WESTERN BANK, FILE NO. TU 10-86, APPROVING THE APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS, ENTERING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS. j. Motion by Councilor Edwards, seconded by Councilor Brian, to adopt. Motion approved by a unanimous vote of the Council present. 12. OMENT AGE l: 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: 12.1 Approve Council Minutes - September 24 6 29, 1986 12.2 Receive and file: a. Monthly Departmental Reports b. Boardsmanship Workshop Report 12.3 Approve Agreement With State of Oregon re: Greenburg 6 Tiedeman Signal •- Authorize Mayor and Recorder to Sign - Resolution No. 86-124 12.4 Approve Request for Revised Speed Zones - Resolution No. 86-125 12.5 Ratify Telephone Poll - Approval SRO Training - Annual Oregon Juvenile Law Enforcement Association Seminar (Rick Peterson, Gary Wayt) 12.6 Approve Travel Request - Annual Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon Conference (Randy Clarno) a. Motion by Councilor Brian, seconded by Councilor Edwards to approve. Approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 13. NON- A ITEMS a. Councilor Johnson reported that the Economic Development Committee has an opportunity to benefit from the expertise of an economic development class from Portland State University. In order to take advantage of this program, she requested that this item be scheduled for an Economic Development Committee workshop discussion on November 24th from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. Page 14 = COUNCIL MINUTES- November 3, 1986 3 4 b. City Administrator Sean advised Council that the renewal on liability and property insurance for the City must be considered at this meeting in order to avoid additional charges to extend the present coverage. The City Administrator distributed an Insurance Renewal Proposal to the Council. This proposal contained three options: 1. City County Insurance Services Program 2. J.G. Newman Company 3. A combination of Option 1 and Option 2 The City Administrator recommended Option 3 in the amount of $82,880.00 as it appeared to him to represent the most coverage for the amount of premium. C. Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Brian to approve Option No. 3, which is a combination of the two programs offered to the City by the City County Insurance Services Program and the I.G. Newman Company, in the amount of $82,880.00. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of the Council present. 14. AD3WRNMWNT: 11:16 p.m. i 1 D - City Record re Pro—Tem — Ci y of Tia rd ATTEST. o — City of Tigard Cw:4286A Page 15 — O©UNCI! MINUTES — November 3 1986 ""3Hlk���ax m� o-�. mac, rc i�•.,._ w:�' .�:,_ ..� .. -.0,j�v._.. AGENDA ITEM M — VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE I 3 (Limited to 2 minutes or less. please) i Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda. but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. NAME 6 ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED J � Y a ' DATE November 3, 1986 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 - PUBLIC HEARING - CPA 7-86 & ZC 15-86 (GEORGIA PACIFIC) Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation Lcw� s t g �y t , DATE November 3 1986 I Wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) �- Item Description: AGENDA ITEM D. k - PUBLIC HEARING CPA 8-86 & ZC 16-86 (NORDLING SCOTT AND MARTIN) Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name,*Address*and*Affiliation *********** Name, Address and Affiliation G„, V g DATE November 3. 1986 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) (' Item Description: AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 - PUBLIC HEARING - ALBERTSON'S CPA 6-86 & ZC 10-86 Proponent (For Issue) opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name. Address and Affiliation /r.` i� wCAR., .�}"� � �6d♦ /�,-r'!L� 1"1 � {fit=r= }E: •j � t._��1 j.Y.'t. / - • �'"•. 6 13r�rWO ICY G7 'tl.4-"�/' }f . 41 Z44 U` DATE November 3_ 1986 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 - PUBLIC HEARING CPA 10-86 6 ZC 1$-86 (BETHANY ASSOCIATES) t# Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation None, Address and Affiliation 1t S �Z�t! ;DATE :November .3., 1386 I wish Lo testixy before the 71,garei City Zouac l on Zhe f+onow3ng 3xem» (Please +pr3>nt :the 3:nfozmaL oa) Item lDescr�pt ons AGENDA JITEM NO.. 7 PUBL :HEARING LSA 9--86 'S ' 7-8b (UNITED FIRST FEDERAL 'SAYINGS) �ktk�kdc�eakicdc�c �k#�k�rk*�rdk#�dtrctak.lcrk 7var rant (sw Issas) ;4kpponsat (Against Issue) fI�1tM�t�ek#rtak+kt,kic+Ac,k�k�k�k+k Ott#Mhk�k krknkikAr�krt�icdk�k ie9k+e# Name,. gess and :E►fflUst3on 'Mame,, Address ;and Afffliatlon "7"43,6 st-3 V c.,�-w s 44 cd '( AA rI► - Ste' 'b e 'cl �z©1 '70? `Sw ��► �� P710 DATE November-3 1986 I sm sh .to testify before the 'Tigard .City Council-on tthe iol°loviog 'item: ';(Please;Print the sinformaEion) ;.Item zDes¢ripUon: AGENDA :ITEM"'N0. -8 TU 10-86 WBL•IC .HMING - :PACIFIC WESTERN .BANK .�p��#�*at*#de*�k�k�1c#�iINIr�nAr��lr�Ar�nAt�ilr�r�iF�r�k#iririt�r*ofe�nArir#�k�kitll�k�r�r�k�Italr�r�k�fMr�Yirir�Ant�R�k#*�'�ririr�r�k�rit�r*ic Proponent ;(Ror rlseu ) QPponent .:((against `Issue) !k#�kk�hir* �AnAMInAr*ilr**irdr�eyt #it#1riNr*�rdr�k�nksArArAr#r*�t*firl��kl��r*sk*#fir*ieiril* "H+ � ,Address .and filiation Name, 'Address and 'Affiliatioa �s 'ill s CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON_ COUNCIL AGENDA-ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 11/3/86 DATE SUBMITTED: 10/22/86 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: CPA 7-86/ PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission ZC 15-86 Georgia Pacific recommendation ac►rouai PREPARED BY: Keith Liden-ff4-�— DEPT HEAD O ifiil ITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY The applicant requested a change in Plan designation from Heavy Industrial to Light Industrial and from I--H (Heavy Industrial) zone to I-P (Industrial Park). The Commission reviewed the proposal on 10/7/86 and recommended approval . Attached are the application, staff report, and Commission minutes. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve as recommended. .2. Deny the request. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION `Alternative'i. a'1 a K '. rte:.. ...... .1,:- �. ::.... ..'.:...:+.... PROPOSAL FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN`'AMENDMENT " AND ZONE CHANGE r GEORGIAPACIFIC SITE d TIGARD, OREGON August 1985 prepared by Mackenzie/Saito::&`-Associates, P.C. O69O' S-:W.'-8ancroft.Street Portl,;nd,''Oregon 97201 b aha TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 . INTRODUCTION Ii. APPROVAL CRITERIA - Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Map Change) A. Statewide -Goals and Guidelines B. Cons-istency with Other Plan Policies C. Locational Criteria in Chapter 12 of the Plan, Volume 2 III. APPROVAL CRITERIA - Zone Change (Map Change) A. Comprehensive Plan Policies B. Locational Criteria in Chapter 12 of the Plan, Volume 2 C. Consistency with Other Provisions of the Community Development Code IV. ' SUMMARY V. ATTACHMENTS A. List 'of Property Owners Within 250 Feet B. Vicinity Map C. Fee D. Indication bf Ownership p? 00 s i.� : ,..._ - a I. INTRODUCTION This is a-proposal to change the Comprehensive Plan designation on the subject site from Heavy Industrial, to Light Industrial, and the zoning for "I-H" to "I- P". The purpose of the change is to establish a range of potential land uses for the site that is more consistent with the surroundings, and to encourage a higher quality of redevelopment and reuse of the site. The site has been developed and used by Georgia Pacific Corporation as a trucking facility and gypsum lab and shop. A portion of the site has been offered for sale for redevelopment. Abutting land uses include several businesses in the Sandberg Street area (zoned "H-I"). these abutting land uses all fit within both the Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial categories. further south, the land uses become primarily Heavy Industrial, but these are some distance from the site. Although application of the "I-P"zone to the subject site would potentially effect the required buffer requirement for future development in the "I-H" zoned areas, the Current site development pattern largely mitigates any hardship of this requirement. Also, the site is separated from abutting properties by a substantial grade change. . The site is visible from I-5 and Highway 217, and benefits from this exposure. It F is anticipated that future site redevelopment will make use of this asset, similarly to adjacent property on Sandberg Street. This proposed change will reduce the amount of land available in the Heavy Industrial Category in the City, and correspondingly increase the amount of land -available for the range of "I-P" uses. A review of the site conditions and its surroundings clearly shows that the range of Industrial uses that would be excluded as a result° of this change (i.e., true "heavy" uses) would not be compatible with the_existing and:potential land use pattern in the area. This change, therefore, -will allow .the property owner the added flexibility of the "I-P" zone, while protecting theabuttingproperties and enhancing the potential of the entire area. The =following material addresses the technical requirements for the proposed change,4and shows that al I policy and procedural standards are met. It is therefore `4 requested that the :Comprehensive Plan be changed from Heavy Industrial to Light ---<lndustrial, and the-corresponding:zoning be changed for "I-H" to "I-P." II. APPROVAL CRITERIA - Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Map Change) A. Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement Citizen involvement is achieved through the overall planning process. The City of Tigard has a citizen involvement program which will be applied to this request through review and comment by the neighborhood association. Goal 2 - Land Use Planning The City of Tigard has adopted a Land Use Plan, which has been acknowledged by the LCDC. Goal 3 - Agricultural Lands This goal does not apply since the site is within the Metro Urban Growth Boundary. Goal 4 - Forest Lands This goal does not apply since the site has irretrievably been urbanized. Goal 5 - Open Space, Natural and Scenic Resources Open space will be provided in the form of landscaping, parking areas and pedestrian walkways. The existing vegetation on the property will be utilized whenever feasible as the site is redeveloped. The view frau Interstate 5 Goal 6 - Air, Water and Land Resource Quality The site is provided with public water and sewer services, thereby maintaining the quality of the area's water and land resources. The development _ facilitated by the proposal Plan Amendment will be subject to DEQ Air and Noise Standards. Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Hazards fi The site's elevation is above the 100 year floodplain, and there are no other { known natural hazards on the property. Goal 8 —Recreational Needs x The recreational needs for the community have been addressed by the Comprehensive Plan, and the site is not identified as being needed for future recreational purposes. -2- Goal 9 -Economy of the Community and State The review of site conditions, which is part of this proposal, shows that the site is not suitable for continued heavy industrial use. Approval of the change will be the first step in the development of a project which will have a significantly positive economic impact in the Tigard area, Goal 10 - Housing The proposed change will have no effect on the provision of housing in Tigard. Goal 11 — Public Facilities and Services A full range of services are available for the redevelopment of this site. These services have been introduced within the preceding section. Goal 12 - Transportation The proposed change from "I-H" to "I-P" may have a slight effect on the actual future use. However, the general magnitude of traffic will be the same. Goal 13 - Energy Conservation The future development of this site will address energy conservation during design phases, including orientation, mass and construction materials. Goal 14 - Urbanization This area is well within the urban growth boundary. The future redevelopment of this site will aid in the urban infill process, economically utilizing public facilities and services already in place. B. Consistency with Other Plan Policies The policies of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan follow the format of the LCDC goals, which have been addressed in the preceding section. C. locational Criteria in Chapter 12 of the Plan Volume 2 The following responds to the Industrial Policies which are applicable to the proposed Plan Amendment. 12.3.1(b) SITES FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE: (1) "Buffered from residential areas to assure that privacy and the residential character of the area are preserved." -3- i t i The site does not abut any residential areas. (2) "Located on an arterial or collector street and that industrial traffic shall not be channeled through residential areas." The site has access directly to S.W. 72nd Avenue, which is designated as major a collector. (3) "The siteshall nbofoa size uand"shape which will provide for short rthe and long g ed The property under consideration will be available for use and/or redevelopment. The site area, about eight acres, is adequate in size and shape for both the short and long range needs for the envisioned development. (4) "The land intended for development shall have an average site topography of less than 6% grade, or that it can be demonstrated that through engineering techniques all limitations to development and the provisioned services can be mitigated." The site meets this criteria, and has been partially developed. (5) "It can be demonstrated that associated lights, noise and other external effects will not interfere with the activities and uses on surrounding properties." The surrounding properties are used similarly to the past and potential use of the subject property. Therefore, the external effects from the future development will be compatible with nearby activities. (6) All other applicable plan policies can be met As demonstrated previously, when addressing the LCDC Goals, all applicable Plan policies are met by the proposal. III. Approval Criteria - Zone Change (Map Change) This proposal will change the "I-H" zoning on the property to "I-P." The information presented previously (Approval Criteria - Comprehensive Plan Amendment) shows the justification for the change. Therefore, this information will not be restated, and reference will be directed to previous statements and site specific information will be presented when applicable. A. Comprehensive Plan Policies The information presented previously in response to the LCDC Goals and icies as they relate to the proposeds is echange.erally In addition he folllicable to the owing policies's Plan maybe separately to addressed: -4- z E_ Housing Policy: This policy is not applicable to the property because the present use, existing zoning and proposed zoning deals with industrial ramifications. Urbanization Policy: Since this property is presently planned, zoned and utilized for industrial use and the proposed use is a horizontal change in use intensity, there will be no effect of the proposed change on the urbanization policy. B. Locational Criteria in Chapter 12 of the Plan, Volume 2 As noted above, the site in question and has available a full range of public services. The responses presented to the "Locational Criteria" for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, as noted previously, are applicable to this accompanying zone change. C. Consistency with Other Provisions of the Community Development Code Any Community Development Code provisions not addressed above will apply directly to the review of site development plans. Since this request is for a zone change, the City will have a further opportunity for review of site development plans through the Design Review process. IV. SUMMARY The above discussion has provided a general site description, explanation of the proposal, and approval criteria have been addressed. It has been shown that the proposed plan amendment is appropriate in light of the review kriteria, and in order to allow a logical site development. Further, the change will not significantly affect the inventory of lands in the City, and will prevent undesirable land use conflicts. The Applicant therefore requests approval of the proposed Plan and Zone Changes. 'r. -5- ZQ - i • AVA%33i1fi �� I1�0011t� M V— L — • t dr 39 i m • y N Eli •�i • J t a d as ra =U� h .i ffi �_ so STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.5 October 7. 1986 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COM'1ISSION TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA 7-86) and Zone Change (ZC 15-86) REQUEST: For a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Heavy Industrial to Light Industrial and for a Zone Change from I-H (Heavy Industrial) to I-P (Industrial Park). APPLICANT: Georgia - Pacific Corp. OWNER: Same 133 Peachtree St. , N.E. Atlanta, CA 30303 LOCATION: 14030 S.W. 72nd Ave. (WCTM 2S1 1DD, T.L. 800) 2. Background Information The Plan for NPO M5 was adopted by the City Council on August 22, 1977, _ (Ord. 77-69). The Plan and corresponding zone designations were Industrial Park (M-4) on the north side of Sandburg Street and Heavy Industrial (M-2) to the south. Both of these zoning districts allowed for commercial office and industrial uses. During the City-wide review of the Comprehensive Plan in 1983, the zoning for the properties directly north changed to C-P (Commercial Professional) and the subject property was designated Heavy Industrial (I--H). Along with the change in the map designation, the list of permitted uses in each zoned was reduced and I-H zone now prohibits office uses. On 1985, several properties to the northwest of the subject property were rezoned from C-P to I-P (Industrial Park) to eliminate the non-conforming status of those properties caused by the 1983 Comprehensive Plan amendments. 3. Vicinity Information Office uses, zoned G-P abut the property to the north and light industrial activities zoned I-P lies the northwest. A small parcel which contains a light industrial facility shares the same I-H zone designation and is immediately to the west. The I-H zoning district s applies to the industrially developed parcels to the south. Access is provided via a driveway to 72nd Avenue, which is classified as a collector street and the I-51217 interchange is adjacent to the eastern property boundary. '1 x4 STAFF REPORT CPA 7-86 & ZC 15-86 PAGE 1 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The property is presently used as a trucking facility, gypsum lab, and shop. The applicant is requesting the zone change to I-P to allow for a wider range of re-development options for the property. 5. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division and Building Inspection Division have no objection to the request. No other comments have been received. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.6.1, 8.1.3, and the Locational Criteria for industrial development (Section 12.3). Since the Tigard Comprehensive Plan has recently been acknowledged by LCDC, it is no longer necessary to address the Statewide Planning Goals. The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: 1. Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the applicant's ( proposal. 2. Policy 7.1.2, 7.6.1 and 8.1.3 are satisfied because adequate service capacity for public water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, fire protection and streets exist. Specific arrangements to utilize these facilities will be made when the property re-develops. 3. Section 12.3.1 has been addressed by the applicant on pages 3 and 4 of the narrative and the staff concurs with the analysis r presented which shows that the proposal is consistent with this portion of the Plan. It should be noted however, that this proposal will effect landscape buffering requirements for future development on the adjacent properties to the south and west zoned 1-41. The Community Development Code requires a 10 foot wide landscaping buffer when development on land zoned I--H abuts =v property zoned I-P and vice versa. Since these affected properties are primarily developed this requirement should not cause any significant problems. C. RECOMENDATION Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning Staff recommends approval of CPA 7-86 and ZC 15-86. PREPA D BY: Keith Liden APP VED BY: William A. Monahan Senior Planner Director of Community (dj186) Development STAFF REPORT - CPA 7-86 6 ZC 15-86 - PAGE 2 e� , E TIGARD PLANNINGER 7ON 1985 REGULAR MEETING to order at 7:38 PM. The meeting was 1. president Moen called the meeting _ 13125 SW Hall Blvd., held at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall Room Tigard, Oregon. Commissioners Owens, Butler, 2, ROLL GALL: Present PresiVandedrwood.ent pand �Newman. Absent: Commissioners Fyre, Peterson, Leverett, and Newton. pl tant ner Staff; Senior Planner Leal Counsel chuck sCorrigananand Deborah Stuar Secretary Diane M elderka. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Newman moved and Commissioner Owens seconded to approve Commissioners present. minutes as submitted. Motion carried unanimously by 4. PLANNING COMMISSION (y�y+W1YICATION Inc., Senior Planner Liden red a letterset over tovithe vanext available ns and Associates, heari 86 requesting that item 5.2 beto President Moen mord t nd October 21st planning ecCommission �i set iteg.CPA PMotion and ZG 17-86 over _ y Commissioners present. carried unanimously b 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTP& ashy DaaNE CH HNC &Amy RaGE dal l O Gary James i Emma Sean White, Herbert Inc. & William t Nadine Randall, Donald &CJoAnn oAAr hensdivalPlan Health tAmendmentc from Low, Medium grownson (ALBERTSONS') High, and High density reside-nG. Located: o g ed Commercial Durham Road,1eeast�Of from R-4O, R-25, & R-4.5 to C 2S3 158A, lots 100, 200, 300, Pacific Hwy., and west of 113th Ave. (WCTM and 400; 2S1 15A lots 2800, 2802, 2900, 3000. 3001, and 3002. applicant Senior Planner Liden distributed new informationHousing Goal and Metro suggesting different scenarios for satisfying Housing ratio. He reviewed the proposal and made staff's recommendation for denial. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Carmen Dr., Lake Oswego, OR 97034, Attorney 0 john W. Shonkwiser, 5740 SW for Rlbertsons' reviewed the project that is being proposed by Ascertains particular site. He reviewed the scenarios and why they had selected this pa the that had been submitted to the Planning Commission to satisfy residential density needs. He stated the project is consistent with City :w policy and fulfills a need. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7. 1986 Page 1 µ9 � t o Dick Woelk, 16016 SW Boones Ferry Rd., Lake Oswego, 97034, Traffic f Engineer for the project, identified problem areas and reviewed several scenarios based on his report. Using a overhead projector he reviewed proposed traffic patterns. Discussion followed regarding levels of service, flow of traffic, signaiization, and the timing cycle. 0 Don Duncombe, Real Estate Manager for Albertsons', 10230 SW Hall Blvd., 97723, reviewed problems with the existing store and why it doesn't belong in the downtown area. He showed slides of the type of construction they are proposing for Tigard. He stated that they had met with the abutting property owners and felt they could satisfy their needs. He expressed his concern that they where required to annex into the City then the staff turned around and recommended denial on their project. Discussion followed regarding what would happen with the existing store and how the need for a new store was determined. 0 Steve Ward, Western Engineering, 7000 SW Varns, Tigard, Civil Engineer, reviewed the site design of the project. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Tom Page, 900 SW Fifth Ave. , Portland, Or. 97204, representing W & F Properties, owners of the Royal Mobile Villa, supported the proposal. 0 Gary Thornton, Civil Engineer, Durham 99W Association (Willowbrook), reviewed the traffic proposal and pointed out their concerns, which Albertsons' had concurred with. : 0 James Craig, 16325 SW 113th, Tigard, 97223, opposed the proposal. His property is directly south of the project and stated that the applicant had not met with him. He had purchased his property with full knowledge of the existing zoning and did not support the change. He was concerned about the noise, lights, traffic, and increase in taxes with increase densities. He felt the signalization should be at 113th and that the access for Summerfield should also connect at that point. He was concerned about drainage problems with the existence of a year round spring. He supported maintaining the existing zoning. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner Newman felt this was a good project but doesn't belong at the proposed location. o Commissioner Vanderwood agreed with staff's concerns, however, she did agree with the applicant that downtown location is not appropriate. o Commissioner Butler also felt downtown was not suited for this development. His biggest concern was the taking away of residential land without increasing density on other sites at the same time. <' o Commissioner Owens major concern was traffic. She was not convinced that level C service is adequate for a shopping center of this size. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1986, Page 2 some of staff's concerns• He commented o President Moen did not supportrt R-40 and that that there had been some thought in designated requi requirements. IPrope f felt the wasn't just plopped there to me it et density it designation is the most appropriate use for the site. R-40a a commissioner Newman moved and Commissioner Butler seconded Councilbased r CPA 6-86 recommendation of denial fo conclusions. MotioZC n 8 ty carried three to two, on staff's findings and Commissioner Butler and Vanderwood voting no. 5.2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA off• ZONE raCHANGE ehensive6 ZC Plan Amendment UNITED FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND Zone and IR from Light Indv.strialt+o 72Commend A commercial ({�i�("n1tA 251 lots 700 Change 701)om I C-G, Located: 15995 This item has been set over to October 21. 1986. 5.3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 10-86, ZONE CHANGE ZC 18-86 NPO # 7 Comprehensive Plan Amendment southeast heastcorePO sC-P to Cand BETHANY ASSOCIATES for a r C G and a Zone Change from C-P to C P and of SW North Dakota and Scholls Ferry Rd. (WCTM ISI 348C lot 401). Senior Planner Eiden reviewed the history of the proposal, explStaff concerns from he previously denied proposal had been addressed• recommended approval. ! APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION representing Great Northwest/Bethany Associates o Gordon Davis, Attorney, P resenting project explaining how it dif f ered from reviewed the componentssal and proposed jCity requirements. He showed the their previous propo proposed plan with the use of an overhead projector. an overhead projector reviewed the o Wally Hobson, Economic Advisorsusing results of the market study they had onducted. 97201, using o Wayne ad projector Traffic Engineer, 512 SW Broadway, Portland, overhead projector reviewed the traffic area studied and their results. criteria to amend the o Gordon Davis. explained how the proposal meets the plan, that it will followed aregardingdverse m the ct,gasn schange that the station being proposed justified.justified. Discussion and phases of the project- PUBLIC TESTIMONY J. A. Paterson, 11605 SW Manzaneta, Tigard, 97223, supported the proposal ° riate use for the area. as being an appropriate o Lee Cunningham 13385 SW 115th, supported the proposal as being a good an appropriate use of the land. His only reservation was the gas station. He did not feel it was consistent with the neighborhood. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1986 Page 3 f o Howard Williams, 12220 SW Scholls Ferry Rd., Tigard, 97223, was concerned that the CP property might be developed into a parking lot. Discussion followed. Staff did not feel this could happen. He also had concerns regarding the traffic. REBUTTAL o Gordon Davis stated he did not feel it was possible to convert the CP area into a parking lot and it was not there intent. As far has the service station it boundaries had been set and Mobile has an option to purchase if the zoning is approved. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner Owens stated that she lived in the area and that the traffic was her number one concern. She opposed allowing another access onto Scholls Ferry Road. She felt if approved as designed the traffic would move through the Meadowcreek apartments. She was also surprised at the results of the study as there appears to be substantial amounts of vacant retail space in the area. o Commissioner Butler stated his main concern was the ingress and egress. He felt if the report is accurate then the change is necessary. a President Moen felt that the CP portion should develop at the same time as the CG. He also supported designated the property PD. Also, there should be vehicular access available to Greenway Town Center without having to go onto Scholls Ferry Road. o Commissioner Vanderwood liked the layout but felt there needed to be an access to the Greenway Town Center. She was not convinced this should be approved. o Commissioner Newman had no comment. * Commissioner Moen moved and Commissioner Newman second to forward a recommendation of approval to City Council with the added recommendations that the property have a PD designation added; that the development of the Commercial Professional take place at the same time as the General Commercial, and that there be a vehicular access to the Greenway Town Center as part of the plan 5.4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 8-86, ZONE CHANGE ZC 16-86 NPO # 4 ELLEN C. NORDLING ESTATE, JERRY & NATALIE SCOTT, GORDON S. & GORDON R. MARTIN, and GEORGE & JOANNE NORDLING - Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Commercial General and a Zone Change from R-3.5 to C-G. Located: 7105, 7155, and 7085 SW Elmhurst Street (WCTM 2S1 1AB lots 200, 300, 301, and 302). Senior Planner Liden reviewed the proposal and because adequate services are not available and there is a compatibility problem south of Elmhurst staff recommended denial. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1966 Page 4 APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Jerry Scott, 7085 SW Elmhurst reviewed why they where requesting the zone change. He asked what justification had be used to changed the zoning on surrounding properties to Commercial. He felt the integrity of the neighborhood been destroyed and had trouble understanding the City's position. o Mrs. JoAnne Nordling, 2326 Athena Road, West Linn, owner of 7105 SW Elmhurst stated she did not want to use Elmhurst as a Commercial Street. When the property developed access would come from the Dartmouth interchange. o Gordon Martin, 12265 SW 72nd, stated they were spending big bucks for the Dartmouth interchange so that property could develop. He recognized the problems with a request to rezone three properties, however, they would not be developing right away, but wanted to be prepared when development could take place. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Geraldine Ball, NPO # 4 Chairperson, stated they would be reviewing this proposal at there next meeting and would make their recommendation to City Council. o Mike Dessert, 7100 SW Elmhurst, was concerned about having General Commercial directly across the street. If felt there should be a universal change or possibly a change to C-P instead of C-G. o David Campbell, 12120 SW 72nd, stated his property was zoned C-G and felt the entire block should be change at the same time or they should have some type of buffering and restrict access. REBUTTAL o Gordon Martin, stated that the alignment of Dartmouth is still under discussion. Also, the Nordling and Scott residences would maintain there residential use for four or five years. He pointed out that currently this neighborhood is already surrounded by C-G. Discussion followed regarding surrounding properties. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Consensus of the Planning Commission was that this was not the appropriate time for these three lots to be rezoned. They favored the entire area being change at the same time. * Commissioner Newman moved and Commissioner Butler seconded to forward to City Council with a recommendation for denial of CPA 8-86 and ZC 16-86 per staff's findings and conclusions. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. 5.5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 7-86, ZONE CHANGE ZC 15-86 NPO # 5 GEORGIA PACIFIC Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Heavy Industrial to C]K Light Industrial and a Zone Change from I-H to I-P. Located: 14030 SW 72nd Ave. (WCTM 2S1 IDD lot 800). PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1986 Page 5 Senior Planner Liden reviewed the proposal and made staff's recommendation for approval. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Lance Stout, Mackenzie/Saito, 0690 SW Bancroft, Portland, was available for questions. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o No appeared to speak. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Consensus of the Commissioners was to support the request. * Commissioner Owens moved and Commissioner Vanderwood seconded to forward CPA 7-86 and ZC 15-86 to City Council with a recommendation of approval based on staff's findings and conclusions. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. 6. OTHER BUSINESS o STREET NAME CHANGES Colony Creek Place to Fanno Creek Place Fanno Creek Place to Fanno Creek Loop Aberdeen Place to Katherine Street Senior Planner Liden explained that these changes were being requested so the plats would reflect what is actually out in the field. Consensus of the Commission was to support the proposed changes. o Discussion regarding November meeting. Election day is the next schedule meeting and the following Tuesday is a holiday for the City. Consensus was to have one meeting on November 18, 1966. 7. Meeting adjourned 11:45 PM Diane M. Jelderks, Secretary ATTEST: A. Donald Moen, President PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1986 Page 6 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 11/3/86 DATE SUBMITTED: 10/22/86 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: CPA 8-86/ PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission ZC 16-86 Nordling, Scott, Martin recommendation for denial PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT HEAD OK 1J Y ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY The applicant requested a change in Plan designation from Low Density Residential to Commercial General and from the R-3.5 (Residential, 3.5 units/acre) zone to the C-G (Commercial General) zone. The Commission reviewed the proposal on 10/7/86 and recommended denial. Attached are the application, staff report, and Commission minutes. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Deny as recommended. 2. Approve the request. k FISCAL IMPACT ' # SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative 1. �� KSL:bsI85 o Howard Williams, 12220 SW Scholls Ferry Rd., Tigard, 97223, was concerned that the CP property might be developed into a parking lot. Discussion followed. Staff did not feel this could happen. He also had concerns regarding the traffic. REBUTTAL a Gordon Davis stated he did not feel it was possible to convert the CP area into a parking lot and it was not there intent. As far has the service station it boundaries had been set and Mobile has an option to purchase if the zoning is approved. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner Owens stated that she lived in the area and that the traffic was her number one concern. She opposed allowing another access onto Scrolls Ferry Road. She felt if approved as designed the traffic would move through the Meadowcreek apartments. She was also surprised at the results of the study as there appears to be substantial amounts of vacant retail space in the area. o Commissioner Butler stated his main concern was the ingress and egress. He felt if the report is accurate then the change is necessary. o President Moen felt that the CP portion should develop at the same time as _ the CG. He also supported designated the property PD. Also, there should be vehicular access available to Greenway Town Center without having to go _ onto Scholls Ferry Road. o Commissioner Vanderwood liked the layout but felt there needed to be an access to the Greenway Town Center. She was not convinced this should be approved. o Commissioner Newman had no comment. a Commissioner Moen moved and Commissioner Newman second to forward a recommendation of approval to City Council with the added recommendations that the property have a PD designation added; that the development of the Commercial Professional take place at the same time as the General Commercial, and that there be a vehicular access to the Greenway Town Center as part of the plan COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 8-86, ZONE CHANGE ZC 16-86 NPO N 4 ELLEN C. NORQLING ESTATE, JERRY & NATALIE SCOTT, GORDON S. & GORDON R. MARTIN, and GEORGE & JOANNE NORDLING - Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Commercial General and a Zone Change from R-3.5 to C-G. Located: 7105, 7155, and 7085 SW Elmhurst Street (WCTM 2S1 IAB lots 200, 300, 301, and 302). Senior Planner Liden reviewed the proposal and because adequate services are not available and there is a compatibility problem south of Elmhurst staff recommended denial. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1986 Page 4 =i APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Jerry Scott, 7085 SW Elmhurst reviewed why they where requesting the zone change. He asked what justification had be used to changed the zoning on surrounding properties to Commercial. He felt the integrity of the neighborhood been destroyed and had trouble understanding the City's position. a Mrs. JoAnne Nordling, 2326 Athena Road, West Linn, owner of 7105 SW Elmhurst stated she did not want to use Elmhurst as a Commercial Street. When the property developed access would come from the Dartmouth interchange. o Gordon Martin, 12265 SW 72nd, stated they were spartiin9 big bucks for the Dartmouth interchange so that property could develop. He recognized the s problems with a request to rezone three properties, however, they would not be developing right away, but wanted to be prepared when development could take place. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Geraldine Ball, NPO # 4 Chairperson, stated they would be reviewing this proposal at there next meeting and would make their recommendation to City Council. t t. o Mike Dessert, 7100 SW Elmhurst, was concerned about having General Commercial directly across the street. If felt there should be a universal change or possibly a change to C-P instead of C-G. o David Campbell, 12120 SW 72nd, stated his property was zoned C-G and felt the entire block should be change at the same time or they should have some type of buffering and restrict access. REBUTTAL o Gordon Martin, stated that the alignment of Dartmouth is still under discussion. Also, the Nordling and Scott residences would maintain there residential use for four or five years. He pointed out that currently this neighborhood is already surrounded by C—G. Discussion followed regarding surrounding properties. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Consensus of the Planning Commission was that this was not the appropriate time for these three lots to be rezoned. They favored the entire area being change at the same time. Commissioner Newman moved and Commissioner Butler seconded to forward to City Council with a recommendation for denial of CPA 8-86 and ZC 16-86 per staff's findings and conclusions. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. 5.5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 7-86, ZONE CHANGE ZC 15-86 NPO # 5 C GEORGIA PACIFIC - Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Heavy Industrial to Light Industrial and a Zone Change from I-H to I-P. Located: 14030 SW 72nd Ave. (WCTM 2SI IDD lot 800). PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1986 Page 5 4 Senior Planner Liden reviewed the proposal and made staff's recommendation for approval. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Lance Stout, Mackenzie/Saito, 0690 SW Bancroft, Portland, was available for questions. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o No one appeared to speak. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Consensus of the Commissioners was to support the request. e Commissioner Owens moved and Commissioner Vanderwood seconded to forward CPA 7-86 and ZC 15-86 to City Council with a recommendation of approval based on staff's findings and conclusions. Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present. 6. OTHER BUSINESS o STREET NAME CHANGES Colony Creek Place to Fanno Creek Place Fanno Creek Place to Fanno Creek Loop Aberdeen Place to Katherine Street Senior Planner Liden explained that these changes were being requested so the plats would reflect what is actually out in the field. Consensus of the Commission was to support the proposed charges. o Discussion regarding November meeting. Election day is the next schedule ". meeting and the following Tuesday is a holiday for the City. Consensus ¢, was to have one meeting on November 18, 1986. 7. Meeting adjourned 11:45 PM Diane M. Jelderks, Secretary ATTEST: A. Donald Moen, President PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1986 Page 6 k. n �Y STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM S" OCTOBER 7, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 8-86 Zone Change ZC 16-86 REQUEST: For a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential to Commercial General and Zone Change from R-3.5 (Residential, 3.5 units/acre) to C-G (Commercial General) APPLICANT: George & JoAnne Nordling OWNER: SAME Eugene Nordling Jerry Scott Gordon S. and Gordon R. Martin LOCATION: 7085, 7105, and 7155 SW Elmhurst Street (WCTM 2S1 1AB. Tax Lot 200, 300, 301, 302) 2. Background Information No previous land use applications have been reviewed by the City regarding these parcels. 3. Vicinity Information The property to the north and west is zoned C-G (PD) (Commercial General, planned development). The land to the east is zoned C-P (Commercial Professional) and the properties immediately south and southwest are also zoned R-3.5 and are occupied by single family residences. - Access is provided by Elmhurst Street which is a 30 foot wide public street and 72nd Avenue, a major collector, is immediately west. 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The subject properties are occupied by single family residences. The applicant proposes to rezone the property to C-G. 5. Agency and NPO Comments n Building and Engineering Division comments will be available at the hearing. No other comments have been received. } DLING/SCOTT/MARTIN STAFF REPORT -,CPA 8=86 NOR - PAGE 1 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1., � 7.1.2, 7.6.1, and the Locational Criteria for commercial development (Section 12.2). Since the Tigard Comprehensive Plan has recently ben acknowledged by LCDC, it is no longer necessary to address the Statewide Planning Goals. . The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is only partially consistent with the relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: 1. Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the applicant's proposal. 2. Policy 7.1.2 and 7.6.1 are not satisfied because adequate service capacity for sanitary sewer and storm sewer do not exist. Sanitary sewer is not yet available to the general area. 3. The proposal does not fully comply with the applicable Locational Criteria in Section 12.2 of the Comprehensive Pian as discussed below: a. The subject property only abuts a residential zone on the south side. b. The proposal will not create traffic problems once vehicles entering and leaving the site get to 72nd Avenue. However, it is unclear how the eastern parcels will obtain access without using Elmhurst Street which is substandard and used by the residents to the south. C. Except for the western parcel (T.L. 200) the subject parcels will not have direct access to a major collector street. d. Public transportation is not available to the site. The closest bus route utilizes 68th Avenue, Hampton Street, and Hunziker Street. e. The individual parcels will be somewhat limited as commercial properties unless they are combined into larger parcels to better accommodate a commercial use. f. The western portion of the subject property will have good visibility from 72nd Avenue. STAFF REPORT — CPA 8-86 NORDLING/SCOT /MARTIN - PAGE 2 bn g• Commercial development on the subject property without the participation of the residentially zoned property to the south will cause compatibility problems for two reasons. First, the onlya major eastern apparent legal access in the parcels to 72nd Avenue is via Elmhurst Street which also serves the residences on the south side of the street. Second, the residents on the south side of Elmhurst will them be totally surrounded by commercially zoned property. } h• The proposal will also adversely affect the the south b the Properties to Y potential commercial development creating privacy, noise, and other compatibility problems. One of the major purposes behind the residential zoning districts in the Tigard Triangle area is to protect the integrity of existing by this proposal This residential street would be significantly changed by th . The proposal is also somewhat premature because adequate utility facilities are not available to serve the site. It should be noted that the City intends to leave the option open to eventually utilize residentially zoned cProperty in the Triangle for commercial development. However, this transition v accomplisheded with the consent of entire will be best neighborhoods rather than incremental approach presented in this application. the 3 C. REC"MMATION Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planni recommends denial of CPA 8-86 and ZC 16-86. ^g staff 7 J PREPARED BY: ei h Liden �L---I•— Senior Planner A PROVED BY: William A. Monahan Director of Community Development 1 (KSL:bsi60) STAFFREPORT — CPA 8-86 NORDLINGfSCOTT%MARTIN — PAGE 3 '111 ' " '� ..,._ • i • - 't ■mail 11 111 MEN =11w H I am I INIMM ■■� : -- SO MINOR ,• �I�N � �� ■ i3liiiiie ■■ ■■ 1 - Elm INS an RIM raw 20 `•��ter„■� � �. ';,u■■■ ■■�t � � �■ � ' � +1� � Ifs► ■ I .� .. -.. , � � ■ur��X111� �; �� ��► ■■■ tri �. r��/t//� rB �■ �r� i i :: ■■.//� /1111 r■ ® ■ ■�� Iry No OWN lo mono � � i■1 iii :� �� :� C. allme RPM 0 OMNI oil Elmhurst Zone Change- Narrative 8/21/86 1. The Elmhurst site is currently zoned R-3.5 and is requesting a zone change to Commercial General. The site is comprised of four tax lots - #200, 3029 301, 300 all on Tax map 2S 11 AB. The total site has 2.76 acres. 2 The Elmhurst site has a future land use designation of Commercial. 3. The Elmhurst 2.76 acre site is surrounded by Commercial land uses on three sides. The site abuts Commercial General land to the North and West and Commercial Professional land to the East. There is Commercial Professional land 200 feet to the South. 4. The Elmhurst site is directly South (within 170 feet) of the Dartmouth Street Arterial Collector. The addition of this site to the existing Commercial General site abuting the Arterial Collector will glue more development diversity to the existing Commercial General site. 5. Commercial access to the site will be from the Dartmouth Street Collector Arterial and 72nd Avenue until the remaining residents (South of ElmNurst Street) ge theiF zone to a Commercial designation. 6. In addition to the required City development setbacks there is a 30 foot wide residential road (Elmhurst Street) which will act as additional buffer to the residents South of Elmhurst Street. The 30 foot Elmhurst Street will onix be used tX residential traffic therefore, development on tW2.76 acre site ort of ElmhurstStreet) w create less adverse Impact on the remaining residents than on their other two sides. There 13 also the possibility that two of the houses North of Elmhurst Street will remain on the site as additional buffer. 7. The remaining 6 residents South of the 2.76 acre site currently abut Commercial General on the West and Commercial Professional on the East and South. 8. The Beveland Street and Gonzaga Street residential developments (13 residents) which is 575 feet South, have changed their previous R-3.5 zone to their current Commercial designation. Elmhurst Zone Change- Narrative 8/21/86 Vit: 1. The Elmhurst site is currently zoned R-3.5 and is requesting a zone change to Commercial General. The site is comprised of four tax lots - 0200, 302, 301, , 300 all on Tax map 2S 11 AB. The total site has 2.76 acres. 2 The Elmhurst site has a future land use designation of Commercial. 3. The Elmhurst 2.76 acre site is surrounded by Commercial land uses on three sides. The site abuts Commercial General land to the North and West and Commercial Professional land to the East. There is Commercial Professional r' land 200 feet to the South. 4. The Elmhurst site is directly South (within 170 feet) of the Dartmouth Street Arterial Collector. The addition of this site to the existing Commercial _ General site abuting the Arterial Collector will give more development diversity to the existing Commercial General site. 3. Commercial access to the site will be from the Dartmouth Street Collector Arteri and 72nd Avenue until the remaining cess is t o m rat Street) ge t r zone to a Commercial designation. 6. in addition to the required City development setbacks there Is a 30 foot wide _r. residential road (Elmhurst Street) which will act as additional buffer to the resi&mts South of Elmhurst Street. The 30 foot Elmhurst Street will onlY be used residential traffic therefore, development ixt t acre to ort of Elmrst tree w create en leas adverse Impact on the remaining residents than an their other two sides. There 13 also the possibility that two of the houses North of Elmhurst Street will remain an the site as additional buffer. 7. The remaining 6 residents South of the 2.76 acre site currently abut Commercial General on the West and Commercial Professional on the East and South. { S. The Beveland Street and Gonzaga Street residential developments (13 residents) which is 575 foot South, have changed their previous R-3.3 zero to their current Commercial deslgnatlon. E i , i s Y k �,-.` �.. ,�- z' a..�a.•1,. „ bat .•..,, i. s .�.` �� 'k- �, a �.. :;, - - �.., ac° �,a 7 ; _ t RECEIVED rr 7130 S• W Elmhurst t _w 1986 Tigard. Oregoa 97223 September 29, 1986 CM OF TIGARD Cm OF TrAn I am in receipt of your Notice of public Hearing on Oct• 7• 1936regarding the proposed zone change from H-j.5 to CG or. Rlmhuret St. I am oppo+aad `o T,=-- QtUarte . this 1a a nas:a resident-La street at present and is located on a dead and street. There is undeveloped -14 commercially sowed property nearby, and I see no need for rezoning A this ares. ?Me would undoubtedly raise the property taxes which ars already blah. As far as raising the value of the property, I doubt that. Commercial enterprises are normally only interested in the land with little or no regard for the value of the house. However, the county would increase the assessment on the land and tax on the value of the house also. If the area is not developed for a long s tise, we would be living in a residential area and paying taxes on a C-G tax rate. Residential property should not be mooed commercial whoa there is F undeveloped property in the area which is already zoned for oomuercial use. Ibis vAmdlessly disrupts the lives of people who are lmg fisc t resideate of the area. Sincerely, g/1 is M. 1pnson Mimi . OMNI �,■, .. �■ ■ ,. ® MIN �11WE _: t 1 1■111115 am ; _ !• '��= " ■It111 ■11MIMI Im oil i sem'=�■= � _111 11 :K■,� ■ 11.�'1■" :Iv : � � ■� ■ ■. . 11 �iiii!'�1a ■■!!� 1■. .rte � � ■ 'nil '1.■. ..�� IBM t q M � ���..�t .■ �� � ..fir IN� i i� WINE lisp Mao ONE 0 Sol'11 U, Ism Nif P, a am OEM m ago WE j ■ m s_ moorr_ �_ OMNI ■1l ■ min ■: ■!�■ r j �. , ., `.. J i•'�w'� � $ N �--�n: 1 �„, of•'r • - �� pw A >j��-}- O 1 1 ! � �1 1 1 �_�-_-1 I i•• __-'t t ; 1 l =� I ..e _ .�. ^ T, ! _ -�--7..,�,� ai- w O - _ -/- - -•� --y y._ 2! 1 , 1Q__-_'!_1 -t' _'t� I 1 i i 1 1H 18 9 M s 3nN3Ad` -1•....► 4i8 `^ x z %� � � •--- _ p'n >r�«. w''6; ill .� 1 I 1 1 1 --R-- � 'moi--t'-L7'>" !! 1 1 �9i� 9j«i&- -� O w 71{; '1 ! I rt'• '�' - �--I 1 J ! 1 1 ! 1 � I IN' Q! _►-- -r ? T X 1 "' � s - - • • • f Z a �'u I 1 � { ! I, R w•! P�,y •' $I 1 _1.E $__ _ I I I I LLL w! _ A• -- - 4pio ain aQIxiA �_a;ais' -A -,`OI_ _ • w! wILI g w _ • wv ---1 1 1 if• 1 1 i r - jltwa H169 Ms s 3nN3AV '4601 �,N/1 Iti q AJ i1 N e- .- 4 1 i 1 Qi t 1 0l C� 1 .- _ �' _ $! ! .i-.-. ._w_ ' 1 1 { i p_-A _� Z'• -__ { 7 � 1 { 1 1 OL ! Ir -- »$ ! ( � 1 1�--�- «- •�Q!-Itl +7 iolr nye » -�- '---»- oie_1_(y,��_ �lyl^tom^N!w! � » -$� � �• -!O� �w S � w w, • •• 1 ( .� L-� �- i 1 41) 46 W } _ s ►ac- V ' '• w r 1�. 1 t � cu R .. T .• i •.� rn. 4, E1 1 e •� a as � 1 � ft t IWd IF J• w, w� •1M -t w. ..w. •UI •.. ,• x CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 11/ DATE SUBMITTED: 10/22/86 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLLE:E: CpA 6-86/ PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission ZC 10-86 Albertsons recommendation for denial PREPARED DEPT HEAD OK L� CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BBY: Keith Liden POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY The applicant requested a change in Plan designation from High, Medium-High, and Low Density Residential to Commercial General and from the R-40 (Residential, 40 units/acre), R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre), and R-4.5 units/acre) zones to C-G (Commercial General). The Commission reviewed the Proposal on 10/7/86 and recommended denial. Attached are the application, staff report, transcript of the applicants" presentation, and Commission minutes. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED �. 1. Deny as recommended. 2. Approve the request. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative 1. KSL:bs185 TIGARO PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 7, 1986 1. ting Was President Moen called the meeting to order at 7:38 P3The 5SW Hal Blvd., held at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall Rosa Tigard, Oregon. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: President Moen; Commissioners Owens, Butler, Vanderwood, and Newman. Absent: Commissioners Fyre, Peterson, Leverett, and Newton. Staff: Seooah Planner Keith Liden,Stuart, Legal Counsel Chucks tant Planner Debbar Corrigan, and Secretary Diane M. Jelderks, 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Newman moved and Commissioner Owens seconded to approve Motion carried unanimously by Commissioners present minutes as submitted. . 4. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATION Inc. , Senior Planner Lidera cold letter over tovithe vaAssociates.ns and next available hearing. requesting that item CPA 9-96 5.2 bePresident Moen moved and Commissioner Newman seconded to sat itemMotion and ZC 17-86 over to the eOcmraisser 21stpresent planning Commission meeting. carried unanimously by S. PUBLIC HERRINGS CPA 6--96, 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ZONE CHANGE ZG 10•-86 NPO N 6 James 6 Emma Jean White, Harbert t Betty Day son. H.C. t Amy Randall, Gary Donald i JoAnn Randall, Health Resources, Inc. i William s Nadine Randall, rehensive Plan Amendment from Low, Medium Brownson (ALBERTSONS') - CamP High, and High density residential to Commercial General and a Zone Change of Located: hof Durham from R-40, R-25, i 2-4.5 to 1 Ave (WCTM 281 15BA, lott00, 2001s 300' Pacific Hwy., and west of and 400; 2S1 15A lots 2800, 2802, 2900, 3000, 3001, and 3002. infoSenior Planner Liden distributed new ying heapplicant Housing Goal and Metro suggesting different scenarios for satsai wW y made staff's recommendation Housing ratio. He reviewed the proposal for denial. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION OR 97034, Attorney o John W. Shonkwiler, 5740 SWr'mectDtha►tLissbeinq proposed by Aibertsons for Albertsons reviewed the prof and why they had selected this particular site. He reviewed the scene rithe that had been submitted to the Planning Commission to satfsfy residential density needs. He stated the project is consistent with City policy and fulfills a need 1986 Page 1 PLANNING CoMpUSSION MINUTES October 7. t o Dick Woelk, 16016 SW Boones Ferry Rd. , Lake Oswego, 97034, Traffic Engineer for the project, identified problem areas and reviewed several scenarios based on his report. Using a overhead projector he reviewed proposed traffic patterns. Discussion followed regarding levels of service, flow of traffic, signalization, and the timing cycle. o Don Duncombe, Real Estate Manager for Albertsons' , 10230 SW Hall Blvd. , 97723, reviewed problems with the existing store and why it doesn't belong in the downtown area. He showed slides of the type of construction they are proposing for Tigard. He stated that they had met with the abutting could satisfy their needs. He expressed his property owners and felt they concern that they where required to annex into the City then the staff turned around and recommended denial on their project. Discussion followed regarding what would happen with the existing store and how the need for a new store was determined. o Steve Ward, Western Engineering, 7000 SW Yarns, Tigard, Civil Engineer, reviewed the site design of the project. PUBLIC TESTIMONY a Toss Page, 900 SW Fifth Ave. , Portland, Or. 97204, representing W & F Properties, owners of the Royal Mobile Villa, supported the proposal. a Gary Thornton, Civil Engineer, Durham 99W Association (Willowbrook), reviewed the traffic proposal and pointed out their concerns, which Albertsons' had concurred with. ro o James Craig, 16325 SW 113th, Tigard, 97223, opposed the proposal. His property is directly south of the project and stated that the applicant had not met with him . He had purchased his property with full knowledge of the existing zoning and did not support the change. He was concerned about the raise, lights, traffic, and increase in taxes with increase densities. He felt the signalization should be at 113th and that the access for Summerfield should also connect at that point. He was concerned about drainage problems with the existence of a year round spring. He supported maintaining the existing zoning. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED bo Commissioner Newman felt this was a good project but doesn't belong at the proposed location. o Commissioner Vanderwood agreed with staff's concerns, however, she did agree with the applicant that downtown location is not appropriate. E o Commissioner Butler also felt downtown was not suited for this 7 development. His biggest concern was the taking away of residential land without increasing density on other sites at the same time. o Commissioner Owens major concern was traffic. She was not convinced that level C service is adequate for a shopping center of this size. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 7. 1986 Page 2 o President Moen did not support some of staff's concerns. He commented that there had been some thought in designated the property R-40 and that it wasn't just plopped there to meet density requirements. If felt the R-40 zoning designation is the most appropriate use for the site. a Commissioner Nein moved and Commissioner Butler seconded to forward a recommendation of denial for CPA 6-86 and ZC 10-86 to City Council based on staff's findings and conclusions. Motion carried three to two. Commissioner Butler and Vanderwood voting no. 5.2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 9-86, ZONE CHANGE ZC 17-86 NPO N 5 UNITED FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial General and a Zone Change from I-P to C-G. Located: 15995 SW 72nd AVe. (WCTM 2S1 12DC lots 700 i 701) This item has been set over to October 21, 1986. 5.3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 10-86, ZONE CHANGE ZC 18-86 NPO M 7 BETHANY ASSOCIATES for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from C-P to C-P and C--G and a Zone Change from C-P to C-P and C-G. Located: Southeast corner of SW North Dakota and Scholls Ferry Rd. (WCTM 1S1 346C lot 401). Senior Planner Liden reviewed the history of the proposal, explaining that concerns from the previously denied proposal had been addressed. Staff recommended approval. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Cordon Davis, Attorney, representing Great Northwest/Bethany Associates reviewed the components of the project explaining how it differed from their previous proposal and meets City requirements. He showed the proposed plan with the use of an overhead projector. o Wally Hobson, Economic Advisors, using an overhead projector reviewed the results of the market study they had conducted. o Wayne Kittleson, Traffic Engineer, 512 SW Broadway, Portland, 97201, using overhead projector reviewad the traffic area studied and their results. o Cordon Davis, explained how the proposal meats the criteria to amend the plan, that it will have no adverse impact, and that the change is justified. Discussion followed regarding the gas station being proposed and phases of the project. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o J. A. Paterson, 11605 SW Manzaneta, Tigard, 97223, supported the proposal as being an appropriate use for the area. 41 o Lee Cunningham 13385 SW 115th, supported the proposal as being a good an appropriate use of the land. His only reservation was the gas station. He did not feel it was consistent with the neighborhood. PLApAlItllG COMMISSION MINUTES October 7, 1996 Page 3 TRANSCRIPT OF APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 6-86 6 ZC 10-86 ALBERTSONS' "Good evening ladies and gentleman, my name is John Shonkwiler, my address is 5750 SW Carmen Dr. in Lake Oswego, and I am here on behalf of the applicant. Also, with us these evening is Don Doncombe who is an officer of Albertsons' . We have a Traffic Consultant, Richard Woelk, and an Engineer, Steve Ward, that will also give some testimony in specific areas related to the application. As was pointed out by the staff, what we are asking for, essentially is a rezoning of the remaining portion in the blacked marked area, thats in yellow, to a zone change of general commercial. Or another way of expressing it is we have some general commercial on the corner there, which is tax lot 100, and we want to expand that to cover the entire area marked in black. Now, what we intend to do is, uh, establish a, uh, multi-use shopping center thats focuses on large convenient types of services. We want to put in a super grocery store, a super drug store, a large department store, and smaller convenient services that would be in conjunction with that. 'The overall project when _ completed would be in excess of 10 million dollars. More likely around 15 million dollars that would be added to the City's tax base. We would also be = providing somewhere in the neighborhood of about 750 or more jobs, both part time and permanent. Now, from a practical consideration, what you have before you is a completely known factor. Albertsons' is, uh, has developed in the City before, uh, Albertsons' has been in the, in Oregon, and in the metropolitan area for a long period of time. They are a known quantity to you, you recognize the quality of their projects and there's no speculation involved. What you see is what your going to get. If these is approved we would immediately go to development, site design review and start construction as soon as possible. This is nothing that is kind of hanging in the wings or what have you, these is here and now. Now, as with any kind of application of 4_ this magnitude, for a zone change and a plan amendment, we have several considerations, that are concerns that ought to be addressed and the staff report has brought some of those out. One that was not emphasized by the staff, but I think we need to address, is traffic and we will have our Traffic Engineer go in more detail about that, but in summary, the scenario number two listed in his traffic study, it has been determined that it works. ODOT, the ivr ALSERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 1 - . Oregon Department of Transportation has approved it. Uh, there will be an additional Engineer, or at least the people who own the business park to the north, which is Willowbrook Business Park, those are shown on the photographs up there, thats immediately to the north of the site. It's at what would be the northeast corner of 99W and Durham Road, uh. They hired their own Traffic Engineer and went over our study with them. Uh we did some adjustments with them, because there are clear problems that existed at that intersection before we ever came on the seen. And we thought, and as it turns out we can, we can make a few adjustments and we can solve problems that existing prior to us be involved and handle those problems and handle the traffic that would be generated off our site. So basically we have, what amount to three traffic reviews that all say that this is going to work. Now the other characteristic, or concern that you should be addressing is the location of the proposed commercial. Now first off, it is an irregular site, you can look at this and see the irregular shape. Since we already have commercial on the corner, when you total up the parameters, thats abutting commercial and abutting, uh, residential, they come out almost the same. Uh, but we have to think, look at the spirit of what the requirement is by the City. The City was suggesting the idea that you don't want to have a, an expansion of { commercial into residential area, where its such a manner that it has so many side abutting residential that you can't adequately buffer it. The impacts are going to be, inevitably going to be spread into the residential area. Well that is clearly not the case in this site. We have almost, we have all of the western side that is abutting general commercial and central business district, related to King City and Washington County designation west of, of 99W. We also have north of the site, uh the Willowbrook Business Park thats already in place; and the remaining portion along Durham Road, if you look at that, the red area, uh, you can see that the area is dominated all the way down straight to, what would amount to the green area as dedicated to general commercial. But there is a portion in there that has residential, which is that white area, between the red and the green. The green area, uh, is open space area thats committed to that at this time. So, in affect what we have is from the site to where any residential units are, its over a 100 feet in distance and you have a substantially developed open space area with burms and vegetation already there. So the, the adverse impact, uh, generated from this are not to be found in the traditional sense of what the ordinance was addresses for a multi side. So I think that we meet the requirements of the ordinance and a ALKRTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 2 fl' _. zo h determination can be reached for that. The other things that have to be addressed here, I think, is that there are considerable problems that exist with this site as planned right now. T`:�t is irregardiess of what we're proposing. The first thing is that tax lot 100, has its own very serious problems being designated as commercial and not being of an adequate size to address that use. Theres no way to provide adequate access to the site as its configured right now. We are to close to the intersection and the signalization of 99 and Durham Road, uh, we cannot turn left onto 99, you can't turn left onto Durham. Uh, in affect to get adequate access to tax lot 100, uh, the most appropriate way is to expand, uh, the commercial from tax lot 100 to the east, which is the block area in yellow, uh, let me walk over there for a moment. This is Summerfield Road and it swings down and curls around here can comes out here on Durham Road. We're proposing to signalization here, and to widen Durham Road with an extra lane and a turn out lane so that we can make this a formal intersection, lighting, and some traffic in and out at this point. Thats the closing you can get to the intersection with 99 and get traffic into the site. So in effect, unless, tax lot 1001% general commercial is expanded there is no way to develop tax lot 100 has general commercial, which is what is was planned for. Tho same thing applies for access off of 99, whats being proposed is the access is right at the border line of tax lot 100, if that isn't expanded southward theres basically no way to got a right turn right out, off of 99, so its. In many ways transportation wise its a land locked piece unless somethings done with it. Another problem with tax lot 100, its clearly not big enough. The only way to develop tax lot 100 as general commercial, is to make it a strip commercial type of use, which clearly flies in the face of the policies in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The whole idea of the policies for general commercial along Highway 99 west is to get Off site, uh, centrally located types of business entities, or park arrangements or center arrangements with full parking capacity and buffering availability off to 99 west. Well that can't be done with the size of tax lot 100 so it needs to be expanded for that purpose. Also, it doesn't have enough depth to develop it and provide buffers for the opposite side, next to a residential. So theres, a real planning problem that exists right now with tax lot 100. Theres also a planning problem that exists with the, with the residential densities designated on the property. Basically you have high density put up right against 99 west and theres no way to be able to adequately buffer that from the noise and lighting ALBERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT page 3 and the activities that come along 99 west and the intersection of Durham Road. That zone, that residential basically should be moved further into the interior and allow for something like what we're proposing, general commercial to be the first transition point, and then you transition to a higher density to the east and southeast and then you transition down to lower densities. That's the normally planning technique. It wasn't used here, and I would assume that the reason being is that, as was eluded to by staff, you were dealing with a housing density requirement before LCDC. Uh, this area was outside the City, and this was the area that was plugged in for increased, uh, densities, residential densities, they were just plugged in there, uh, we had high just stuck all by itself with no transition down to lower, and also, the City's R-20 zone was just bumped up to R-25. So, I think this was kind of like, I hesitate to use the word garbage canned, but, but it was an area that was just shove the densities there to meet the housing needs and sometime in the future we' ll address it more adequately. Well nows the time, nows the time to coma in and deal with these separate zones, put in proper transitioning and there are mechanisms in my memorandum that I spread around. There are several different scenarios that you can deal with the housing issue and maintain the 10 units per acres, in fact, have an extra surplus so that you can deal with other issues that Haight come up before the City in the future. Now the third item is the affect on the downtown or central business district. We also have submitted a memorandum in the evidence package that I have there, in that blue folder, I think it's item number two. The conclusion of that is basically, factually there is no conflict with the downtown area and legally you really should be looking at your ordinance provisions for whats an appropriate zone change. Uh, legally your not allowed to use zoning as a method of restraining trade, unless you had an approval of that kind of a plan from the state, which hasn't occurred hare. But the basic issue that I want to across is factually theres not a problem, what we're proposing for this site is large scale convenience services. Those types of uses are incompatible with downtown because of the traffic problems in the downtown. The traffic network system aren't work with those kind of large scale convenient services. Also, your zoning ordinance talks about large scale convenient services going in on major arterials, theres no way to provide that in the downtown area. Most of the service and most of the customer usage for what we're proposing here are drop in or spur of the moment drive by type of customer usage. What the downtown basically AIBERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 4 needs, because of its traffic configuration problem, is more, you might call it consumer site oriented, or drawing type of services. Smaller businesses that, that are not going for convenience, there going, people will go where ever it is as long as it is within a generalized convenient area to approach. So in essence what we have is that we don't fit in the downtown area, those kind of services that we are proposing wouldn't be going in the downtown area anyway. So we're not competing and we're not drawing away from the downtown area. I would also point out that your Comprehensive Plan talks about these types of services that we're proposing, they should be in general commercial not central business district. The criteria that are imposed for these types of large scale convenient services would really only go in general commercial. So consequently in the balancing. you've legislatively already set your standards and shown a balance that general commercial isn't going to compete against the downtown. I would also point out that if you preclude these kinds of uses from general commercial like we're proposing, then effectively, and say that they can only go in the central business district, where they physically can't, theres not a lot large enough to handle them, and the traffic can't accommodate them, then effectively your saying your not going to have these general commercial services anywhere in the City and that certainly wasn't the legislative intent. Now the fourth criteria, or the concern that needs to be addressed and problem the major one as the staff lead off with this item, is the housing density requirements. Now in our application we had pointed out that what we are going to be drawing out of the area is approximately 659 units. 9y changing it from the housing density to the general commercial. So there needs to be a way of replacing that. Now first off, uh, as staff pointed, you've obtained compliance acknowledgement at 10 units per acres, a little over 10 units per acre. Well since that time as I pointed out in the application, you have had several application where you have approved increase densities for residential use and the total of those have come to 214 units, so in effect you are already over 214 units in excess of what your minimum requirements are. Coupling that with scenario one, which is in the application, but its also scenario one in this handout that I've Wood around to you. Scenario one deals with the small square blue area marked low density R—i through R-4.5. Thats a 12 acre site and if that was increased to R-40, to transition down from the general commercial, the net result it when you couple all the figures together, that would be adding 692 units, which replaces in excess of what we are taking away. So that would AL8ERTSMS' TRANSCRIPT Page 5 work, thats one possibility. Now the staff had some concerns, about physical characteristics of the site, possibly even up to 50 percent couldn't be developed in that way. Also, he pointed out that it is not on Durham Road, now bear in mind that if that was changes to higher density, we have 113th along the side of that. Maybe I should point that out. This is 113th this Durham Road and this is 108th. This is a 30 acre area that is basically undeveloped, if thats fully developed it would require the improvement of 113th, it would then abut a major, or a least a significant enough arterial to meet the requirements and also development of that 12 acres site would require a further development of 113th. So, technically it would meet that requirement. out we're not locked into scenario one either. Uh, what I wanted to lay out is that you have a variety of options available to you. Scenario two identifies the 30 acre site that I pointed out thats medium to high R-25. To speed this along, if that was changed to R•-40, in its entirety it would result in a net gain of 450 units. Coupled with your prior 214 units that would give 664 units replaced. That again is in excess of what we are taking away. So there would be nothing lost, in fact there would be a little gain. Scenario 3, oh by the way, this 30 acres site, there are no development restrictions on that in the sense of physically and access wise. All of that is useable. Scenario number 3 would combine a combination of these two. The 12 acres site, I marked in blue, I identified before, that could be changed to R-12, and that would fit as a nice transition between the medium high and the Royal Mobile Villa which is immediately south of our site. I'll point that out. This is the Royal Mobile Villa site. A mobile home development that has a substantial density. All right if you change the 12 acres to R-12 and you changed the 30 acres to the east to R-40 you would have a total figure, and this a much larger figure, you would have a total figure of 796 units and then if you backed away and said the 12 acres site can only be developed a 50 percent of its density and you took that part out, that would still leave you with 730 units. Far in excess of what we would be taking away with our zone change. In fact that would give a cushion to the City for other types of adjustments that you might want to wake elsewhere in the City. Scenario 4 is another possible combination, the some kind of idea. You could change the 12 acres to R-25, again that would be a better transition for the area. You could change the 30 acres, 20 of it, just the 20 acres between avenue 108 and avenue 113. That's a 20 acres block in the middle there, to R-40 and leave the eastern 10 acres on the east side of 108th just as it so it can transition ALSERTSONS" TRANSCRIPT Page 6 71 down to the neighboring properties. The total net gain from that is 803 units. Again, if you took out half of the density from the 12 acres, as not 4 being fully developable, that still leaves approximately 660 units, again we're meeting the requirements. Now what I've tried to do with those scenarios is show you some kind of options for dealing with this areas residential consideration, a site specific area. In other words if your taking out multi-family and residential area, then maybe you should be replacing it in this area. Another approach is for the City to look at the City as a whole and an example of that is scenario number 5. Looking at the way you have zoned the property, or you set up your zoning categories for residential densities. Also, looking at the fact that you made some adjustments just to meet LCOC's density requirements, in other words you bumped up R-20 and made it R-25, so you don't even have a R-20 anymore. One possible solution you can deal with is you now have two very large gaps in your zoning density aray. You could take the 13 unit gap between R-12 and R-25 and create and knew zone R-18, which is right in the middle. You have a gap of 15 units between R-25 and R-40 and you could divide that and create a new zone R-32. If you then, just as an example of this, you just took one third of the zone thats the lowest, next to those new categories, just took one third of that and put that in the new category, what the result is in scenario 5, is R-14 would now add 474 units to the City, R-32 would add 541 units, coupled with the 214 you already have, that would put you at 1230 units, so that gives the City a lot of area to play with, if you area thinking of the City from a area wide point of view. Even taking out the Albertsons' zone change effect, you would still have over 570 units to play with. Now the staff had pointed out that there some consideration that the City has with re-evaluating the flood plain and the drainage way areas and that might have an adverse affect on housing count and housing densities and this is down the road for the City. This is one kind of scenario that would give you a lot of cushion to be able to do that. So the point that I have here is basically there are several workable alternatives for dealing with this. You don't have to make a housing decision immediately. Because you basically have 17 years left on your planning inventory approach. You have a periodic review that _ comes up, I guess its three years plus from now. There's not going to be a housing crunch in the next three years from the standpoint of your inventory there is, from periodic review and the accumulation and evaluation of all the zona changes that you allow up to periodic review, you've got lots of time n9 n9 ALBERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 7 to evaluate your alternatives and make the adjustments to keep you at 10 units per acres. There are a variety of other factors, and I'll going through these quickly, because they are basically layed out in the application, but they are required under the ordinance. We are providing an excellent access to the site that will not only not create traffic congestion or safety problem, but we're going to eliminate existing traffic congestion at these intersection and safety problems. There have been numerous accidents at the intersection of Durham and Summerfield and putting signalization in there will solve that problem, we'll also be provided direct access to major arterials which is a requirement. Public transportation is at the area. There is a loop, Tri-flet bus service through King City to the intersection 99/Durham. Also, route 43 is down to the east on Durham." President Moen: "Sir, has most of these things been covered in . . . Shonkwiler "Yes, I speed through real quickly." Moen, "We would ask you to do that." Shonkwiler "And also we will be providing full services, uh. I should say full services are already at the site in the sense of sewer and water and they are also pointed out in the exhibit booklet. The final point here is on State Wide Planning Goal number 9 in the Comprehensive Plan Section 5, for Economic considerations. The Albertsons' application will not only be consistent with these policies it will dramatically enhance them to the benefit of the City. As I said before we will be putting 15 million dollars worth of improvements into the tax base, we're going to be adding at least 150 new jobs. There are no supper drug stores, and super grocery stores in the market area. You have a market area as pointed out in the application of over 30,000 people. The census tract 308 only has one grocery store. The nearest combination of this super convenience is really Fred Meyers on the other side of 217. Your talking almost, over five silos away. It is really in another market area because of traffic generation. So these are the reasons why we think we are justified in seeking a zone change on this property. And now the next item that I would like to present is the traffic data for you." ALSERTSONSTRANSCRIPT Page 9 "My name is Dick Woelk, President and General Manager of Associate Transportation, my address is 16016 SW Boones Ferry Road in Lake Oswego. Basically I was hired to do independent traffic study of the site and as a professional traffic engineer we try to look at the existing situations to see what sort of impacts this kind of development is going to have on the existing situations. We went out and did traffic counts in the area, we surveyed the area, and having worked in the City of Tigard for number of years are quite familiar with this intersection and we identified some problems initially going in. Durham Road is one of the major east west corridors for traffic to Tualatin to 217 to 99, it carries high school traffic from Tigard High. Theres a lot of pass through traffic on Durham Road from I-5 to 99 to Newberg and McMinnville. The areas that we identified, number one, there is an existing problem with the south bound left turn from 99 onto Durham Road. During certain period of the day traffic backs and stacks through the existing left turn pocket and creates a problem with south bound traffic on 99. The stacking problems that occur during the AM peak hours when everyone leaves to go to work in the morning, flows towards 99 and you have an existing stacking problem for traffic trying to get out north bound on 99. So, we look at the existing situation and try to identify those problems going in. Then we look at, for example in a zone change, what the existing zoning would be. The existing zoning on this series of parcels, there are 10 different tax lots, all of those tax lots could be developed into multi-family dwelling. The idea behind single development for multi-family each tax lot, if developed independently could have a driveway on either 99 or Durham Road. Each, thats ten now driveways. If they were combined together they might have one or two. By doing a consolidation of all of these tax lots you identify certain access points and in the report I reviewed four different scenarios for access to the site based on a commercial development. The Willowbrook Business Park on the north side hired a independent traffic engineer to look at my report. He identified some things that I retook a look at and I would like to give these to you now. They basically are just clarifications of trip generations from the commercial development. The, all of those calculations that are compiled in the technical appendix are summarized on page 9 of my report and basically what is says from a traffic standpoint. If certain things are done. If the development was in operation today without certain improvements those intersections would fail. They would not operate at what we would call :. a good level of service. Which means a capacity constraint. Number of cars ALSERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 9 going through the intersection becomes a critical factor and that is what we designed to is a capacity ratio of what we call level service D, which in technical jargon is just like pouring water out of a bottle. If there has no restrictions it flows very freely, if it does have restrictions, such as stop signs, a lot of traffic, it slows down, so what we try to do when we look at commercial or any type of development on an existing roadway system. We try to mitigate any impact of that development by providing improvements. I would like to use the overhead here for a second to show basically what we have come up with. . . . . . . . What we are talking about is, this is the site, bounded by 99, Durham Road, 113th is off over here, Summerfield, Willowbrook Business Park. In order to identify the impact, one has to look at the number of cars that go in and out of the development every day. In traffic engineering we look at what we call the PM peak hours, the worst case situation. Thats were everyone is trying to get home and that is usually the highest period of time during the day for traffic volumes. So we identify that as the worst case condition. We then distribute all of that traffic that is generated by the development out onto the street system through the proposed access points, such as the driveway entrance at Summerfield, the other right turn in driveway, and there are one other, two other driveways on 99 as proposed to be right turn in right turn out. All of this weans in bottom conclusion was that if you made certain improvements to Durham Road you could handle, the existing intersection could handle all of that additional traffic. Meaning 99 and Durham would not be significantly affected or the level of service would not be reduced. With the additions of improvements at Summerfield, that intersection would not be critically hurt, as far as operational standards. So basically what we cause up with was the fact thrt in order to slake this development, and to correct some of the existing accommodate that you have there now. There are certain things that had to be don*. Number one, the main entrance tv tho :i t: has to be signalized and in order to s ignai iie this intersection and make it operational certain things have to be done over here to accommodate Summerfield traffic. The Willowbrook, considering its only 20% leased at this time or 30%. They have a great potential of more traffic being generated out of here to this intersection. Currently they only have one lane out and in order to make this intersection work we are proposing to provide them two lanes out. This is in the same consideration, we are widening the whole south side of Durham Road to a point past the main entrance at ` Sumierfield to two lanes. They would be a right turn in, right turn out driveway, provide PAMRT8+0N8TVPASMPT Page 10 y, with left turn into Summerfield for their traffic. A through lane, a through lane and a right turn lane, this would merge back into one lane i approximately somewhere around 113th. It hasn't been completely designed. So, existing you have a right turn in, you have the possibility of two through lanes, through this area. Existing problem is the island. We would modify the island so you would have two full lanes through there. One of the other things that we are considering is if MOT allows us to we would be more than happy to extend the left turn lane on 99 to correct that stacking problem that exist now. When you basically, bottom line recommendation is, with those kind of improvements this development can occur without a detrimental effect to the existing system. But those improvements must be made. The client is more than willing to make those improvements, they are, they not only help the existing town and the people, he's trying to be a good neighbor. They provide solutions to the existing problems. One of things that was brought up by staff was the comparison between high volume convenience type market here versus downtown. Having done several circulation studies for the City of Tigard, specifically on major developments downtown, it was proven time and time again that the existing street system in downtown Tigard could not handle a major high volume convenience market. That is the comparison between the improvements that can be made here to provide solutions to a problem were there are very few solutions to the problems of circulation through and downtown because of 99 and its configuration with Main Street. Those are some of the biggest constraint to development downtown is the circulation downtown. Here, with these, I call them minimum, or minimal improvements, all of those existing problems can be corrected or modified. I would be happy to answer any questions." Commissioner Butler, "Your scenarios, does it cover when you increase the density of these surrounding areas and the flow that they would create? Moolk, "Okay, those, all of those improvements operate at what we call level of C or better, which we use as a design standard, a level service of Q, which Butler, "I know it wasn't to good. C wasn't. If I remember correctly, C or a." ALBERTSONSTRANSCRIPT Page 11 Woelk, "D is at the bottom line, that is the bottom of what you want to design for because level of service E you tend to ball things up. With a level of service C your still mid range. You still not down into the bottom of the level of service range and your not up at free flow, such at a uncontrolled intersection on a Main Street." Sutler, "Your saying this will give you a C with the Aibortsons'? What about the other areas developing. Do they say it should be a C.? Woelk, "Okay, those will allow a significant increase in traffic on Durham Road before they fall into the D category, which is the design phase, so yes there is enough room for all of Willowbrook to completely develop, additional traffic from Summerfield, and whatever takes place to the south off of 113th. With those kind of improvements, yes it will work. Yes? Commissioner Owens, "How many storage spaces would be available on the left turn lane off of Durham onto Willowbrook drive." Woelk, "Okay, right now, its preliminary design, okay now, from Durham into Summerfield into Willowbrook. Right now its design as a 100 foot stacking distance. With a 60, and again it comes back to technical issues such as signal timing, frequency of changes in cycle. Uh, that was designed at a 60 second cycle so you have a high turn over rate and the stacking distance calculated was for four cars and we figured twenty feet per vehicle, so thats 80 feet required during any one cycle period during the day. That allows us . . . . tape ended . . . . . . Commissioner Owens, first the traffic west bound gets to go, then east bound gets to go, and it doesn't last very long. Dust if traffic, what if there was traffic that backed up at the light east bound on Durham so that they where stuck out into Pacific Highway at the time the light changed but the traffic still couldn't go, so now you've got all of the, I'm familiar with the intersection too." Woelk, "Good question. In that the only possible solution to that is that the signals have to be coordinated. The movements of the two signals have to AL.SERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 12 p be coordinated in that, if this traffic where to be stopped, and this traffic where to be going in. You would soon fill this all up. So, this, east bound traffic has to be coordinated with any east bound movement and that is coordination and that can be done very easily. Commissioner Newman, "Whats the cycle timing on the Pacific Highway, left turn to Durham now?" Woelk, "From seven until eight thirty in the morning in operates a 90 second cycle. From four o'clock until six o'clock in the afternoon it runs on a 140 second cycle. So at any one point in time you can wait on the side street for a long period of time in the Ph peak hour." Commissioner Newman, "I'm talking about turning left onto Durham from 99." Woelk, "Okay, right now you have a maximum of 40 seconds available to the south bound to east bound left turn. Now, one solution to that" Commissioner Newman, "Wait a minutes, maybe I didn't make myself clear, how long between cycles, between left turn arrows is it if your turning onto Durham coming south bound on 99." Woelk, "Okay, in the PM peak hour you could wait 140 seconds." Commissioner Newman, "Okay, that would indicate, I guess, by what I've heard you say that then you have to cycle the signal down the street at the same 140 second." Woelk, "You can also do a split phase, where, or a half cycle, where the one at Summerfield operates at one half the cycle of the 99, so it would cycle twice before the 99 signal would cycle." Commissioner Newman, "Except then you and up with people stacked up through that intersection, stacked up against 99. What I'm wondering is why did you then pick 60 seconds as the amount of cycle time to figure how long the waiting lane turning into Summerfield would be." ALBERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 13 Woelk, "Because in a actuated situation you want to make that signal operate as fast as possible. State Highway, which 99 is governed by ODOT and its ( timing regulations on ODOT highways are mainstreet, which is 99 obtains the largest share of the green time. So in an off system traffic signal you try to make that operate as fast as possible and it would be a fully actuated traffic signal so you wouldn't have to sit there and wait for an extended period of time if you wanted to go across, if you came off, turn right off of 99 onto Durham and wanted to go eastbound. So its, its just a better operational characteristic of an off system traffic signal. President Moen, "Okay, I just remind the Commissioners to make sure we direct our questions only at things that are going to impact your decision. If these are things that you need to know then fine. Commissioner Butler." Commissioner Butler, "To ingress/egress on the west side, against Pacific Highway, are they right turn only to go out of the development so all the traffic will have to go out onto Durham if they want to go back up." Woelk, "Yes, that: correct. Current distribution of traffic in that area indicates that it is from the north and south, existing traffic flows that direction and if it where going to stop in or drop :n to the site it would drop in and go back out onto Pacific Highway. So yes, all of the driveways on Pacific Highway are right turn in right turn out." Commissioner Owens, "lire there going to be, on the right turn in right turn out on Pacific Highway, will there be a lane out of the flow of traffic available." Woelk, "Okay, we do not know, at this time, what the conditions of ODOT are going to be for development. We anticipate that they will ask us to put in curb and sidewalks along Pacific Highway and extend that right turn lane further down that: existing right now, and so yes, it would be an additional lane that you can turn out of into the site north bound. So yes." "My names is Don Doncombe, I'm the Real Estate Manager for Albertsons' Inc. , my address is 10230 SW Hall, Tigard, 97223. I will try to make my comments as brief as possible, since time is passing by, I'll direct my remarks primarily ALB£RTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 14 to the downtown core and to why we have selected this general area. We have studied for a number of years, one of the problems we have in our existing store which is in the Downtown core as you know. It has never done very well because we do not belong in the downtown core, number one. Number two, its two small, and number three the traffic configuration and the access to the site is very difficult at best. We have tried the last couple of years to improve our access onto Hall Blvd. and that did not work either. With that in mind we have studied other alternative sites in which we thought we would like to be in Tigard, in fact, we have studied a piece of property that is in downtown area, but based upon our determination. One, we do not fit downtown, we do not belong downtown, we are convenience oriented and so is the complete shopping center that we are proposing to develop and it didn't appear to us that there was a large enough buildable parcel of land to accommodate what we're proposing to do. We studied the area in which we are proposing to build this complex and we had, we're great studiers, we study everything, we know how many refrigerators everybody has, and how many dogs they have and everything else. We don't like to make mistakes. Mistakes from our point of view is very costly and I' ll just through this number out. When we build a new store, when its completed and you stand there and look at it your looking at somewhere around six million dollars. Its very difficult to make a mistake. So we try not to make mistakes. We try to minimize those mistakes as best as possible. We studied this area to determine where we really should be in Tigard. And we've come to the conclusion that theres about 800 or 900 thousand dollars available in this particular area, food dollars and general merchandising, dollars available. Through that, studying where its going to competition and whos doing what percent of the business and what our store is doing and what Fred Meyer and everybody also. We come to the conclusion that theres about 230 to 350 thousand dollars that is leaking, we call it leaking, leaving the area. We don't know where its going. Its either going to Tualatin, McMinnville, Sherwood, Beaverton, we don't know, but its leaking. its leaving Tigard. Based upon that we zeroed in on this particular location. We felt if we had the right development that we could capture or retain those dollars that are leaving the area and going someplace. Grocery store business has change substantially in the last six or seven years. We don't like building grocery stores larger and larger and larger just for the fi sake of building them larger. The demand for certain products and grown substantial in the last few years. I can remember as a small boy, and I'm ALBERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 15 _. ,: . probably older that most of you sitting up there. But when I was a small boy, if you wanted to buy a coke-a-cola, you went and bought a coke, it was in a 10 ounce bottle and it had kind of a green tint to it and kind of a shapely looking bottle, today, you can buy, diet coke, classic coke, original coke, cherry coke, liter bottle, cans, you name it. They have about, fresca, and sprite and it just goes on and on. They have probably have about 25 different items today, where a few years ago they had one. Same thing hold true with pizza. You know theres Tontino's, Gino's, and Sara Lee's and it just keep doing on and we have gondolas of pizzas. So the grocery store business has grown, because of one, demand from the customer to have these products and number two the supplier saying these are our products and you buy them all or you don't get any. So you get kind of trapped and thats rightly so, we should have the products so that people can buy them and conveniently come. I want to address the downtown issue more than anything else. And if you' ll permit me to show just a slides of the type of facility we proposing to build." (Discussion regarding slides becoming part of the record.) Don Duncombe, "I selected that last two projects we built, both in Oregon, now I handle the whole northwest so I eliminated northern California, Montana, Idaho, and Washington. This happens to be in Eugene, Saturday, if your going to go to the Ducks game you can stop by a see it because its in full force. If you don't want to go to Eugene, I have couple at the and that the projects under construction right now in east Portland. But let me just show you, this was before, I will go quickly. They get better. This is while it was under construction, then I have some after, there we go. This is after it starts gets completed. This is the type of project that we have in mind in building in Tigard. Where people can come conveniently, get their hair cut, go to the Barbur, get their laundry done, get there dog clipped, go to the drug store, go to the grocery store; a little deli so they can sit and have lunch and those type of things. And this project is complete and is under operation in Eugene right now on geltline and River Road. Anyhow this is the type of thing. Now this is on the east side 122nd and Division, its under construction right now. Payless just open, I think it was last Monday and you can see its not completed, but this is more in line of the type of thing that we're proposing to do, a lot of brick, lot of landscaping. Something that s blends in architecturally with the surrounding area. We're still under ALBERTSONSTRANSCRIPT page 16 construction there. Walkways are covered, so people can, I stop there so you can just get the type of idea. That does not fit downtown. Its a unit all by itself. As Mr. Shonkwiler mention, the traffic situation downtown does not lend itself to this. I deal almost every day with most of the co—tenants that go with us. I talk to Payless on a weekly basis. I talk to Pay and Pak, I talk to Costco, I talk to Bi-Mart, I talk to Nigh School Pharmacy, I talk to GI 3oes, I talk to all of these people and they talk to me. alone of us will be downtown. We don't want to be downtown, have no desire to be downtown, we don't fit downtown. The store hours of downtown are something like 10:00 in j the morning until 6:00 at night, then everythings closed. In fact if you go downtown in Tigard right now you will find two People open. Payless and Albertsons. We don't belong down there. We belong out in the neighborhood where it is convenient for people to drive in, do there shopping, and drive out. As I mentioned, in just this general area that I'm talking about theres a lot of money leaving. I don't know where its going, I wish I could tell you. The other item I would like to mentioned is that we're sensitive to the property owners, extremely sensitive. I have personally met with every property owner abutting our parcel. I net with Royal Mobile Villa. We have agreed to do certain things to make them happy and I think there representative will testify to that today. we will do that. I have met with Mr. and Mrs. Meskel (sp ?), who own the Property down below where you see the R-1 to R-4.5 and we're sensitive to them and we're going to do what they have asked us to do in the way of buffering and screening and fencing and those types of things. We have also met with the people across the street, Willowbrook and I believe have satisfied their concerns and they will probably testify to that effect also today. We have met with the State Highway Department who has a great impact on this piece of property. I think we have satisfied the needs of the State Highway Department. I don't think they are opposing this at all. I guess what I'm trying to say is that we don't fit downtown, we won't go downtown. Everybody wants to be out where we're proposing to go. We're not a speculator, we do not have to go get financing, its not contingent upon us getting a partner or anything like that. We are a user, we will do what we say we're going to do. We have the capabilities of doing that and have a strong desire to do so. We spent a lot of time and a lot of money on this project already. We came to the City, months ago, opened up all of the things that we wanted to do. We met with staff. Said we would Ciellike to build a shopping center at this location. I kind of feel like we were ALBERTSMS' TRANSCRIPT Page 17 short changed. Treated a little bit unfairly. We had to annex. Told them exactly what we wanted to do. We were annexed in and then we get a staff report that says that they recommend not to approving it. I know its, legally its not tied to each other, but I felt that was kind of unfair, and I'm not taking a shot at staff, I'm just saying that we have been very fair with everybody, up front from day one. All of the neighbors. I'm saying that this is the best project, will do the most for the City of Tigard than any other place that I know of in Tigard. It will provide jobs for people, permanent jobs, we're not like the electronic firm thats laying off everybody right now. We're hiring people, we want to build. Everybody whos coming in here is going to be hiring new people, hopefully they will come from the City of Tigard. We will hire people from the City of Tigard. With that I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. With one stipulation. I won't talk about profit or volume. President Moen, "I had one question, if I might. You said you talked to some of the neighbors, did you, your people have come here and made a number of suggestions relating to trading density and alternate densities. Have you talked to any of the neighbors with respect to that?" Duncombe, "Yes. We told them that is was our recommendation that the density of there property would be increased and I can't speak for them, but I got the feeling from talking with them that that wasn't a big issue with them." Commissioner Newman, "You have a store, sort of downtown now, what will happen to that." Duncombe, "We'll bomb it. No, just kidding. I can't answer that. I'll tell you what has happened at this point. We have a number of alternatives. One is to keep it open. Thats are least desirable option, because it hasn't worked. It hasn't worked in 9 years. Thats about an eleven year old store. We have had contact from a fabric store, we have had contact from a furniture store, we've had contact from a large sporting goods store. All of which fit mach better downtown that we do. The other alternative is to break it up into smaller retail shops, likes what adjacent to us like the golf shop and those types of things. It will not sit as a blight on the City, we'll do something with it." ALBERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 18 s� y.. Commissioner Newman, "How many jobs are there at that store now?" r t Duncombe, "Oh, probably, 50, 50 jobs." Newman, "How many jobs will there be at the new location?" Duncombe, "Over 100, just us." Commissioner Owens, "I guess my questions is relating to the problems that Willowbrook Park has had filling. I'm wondering how calculated is there a need for another shopping area down there." Duncombe, "Our operation will be much different than Willowbrook. Not only that we will enhance Willowbrook. Being across from Willowbrook will probably help them considerably and they may testify to that, I don't know what they are going to say. Willowbrook was done years ago on a scheme that really did not work. The people who originally did Willowbrook, had a complex similar to that in Gresham and it was quite successfull so they came out to Tigard and tried it and it just didn't work it. I think the people who now own Willowbrook have a better concept and they' ll improve Willowbrook substantially from what its been in the past. We will not hurt Willowbrook, anymore than we will hurt downtown. People that we are dealing with in here are not going to go downtown, we're not going to hurt downtown." Newman, "You said you are a convenience store? How do you define convenience store?" Duncombe, Where people can get to you with relative ease by getting in and getting out and I mean within a close proximity of your home, shopping. I don't mean like a 7-11 type operation. People do not like to drive long distances to shop groceries and drugs. Matter of fact 73% of people shop convenience, then they start into price, price becomes a factor. You'll have to ask these two ladies what convenience versus price is for them. But based upon our studies, I told you we study everything, 73% of people shop convenience and we need to be convenient. ALBERTSONS' TRANSCRIPT Page 19 "My name is Steve Ward, I'm with West Tech Engineering, my office is located 7000 SW Varns, here in Tigard. I believe I'm the last of the group, maybe some gentleman has some finish comments." "I just want to make one comment that we have been at this President Moen, le unusual and I for your presentation for over an hour now and thats a litt would like you to press on." 4 Ward, "I'll be very brief. Basically I'm the Civil Engineer on the project. I've been involves: since day one helping Albertsons' with this project. I want to talk about the site design generally and how welogic a�lthe thought d at the, at this site design so you can kind of understand the he things that was important to this project is, as you can process. One of t see we've got a commercial zone in the corner, tax lot 500. When we first looked at this, tax lot 100 has inadequate acce.:s, theres no way to get a full service driveway to tax lot 100. On SW Durham Road you've got the island that prevents you from having a full access. On Pacific Highway, you've got the medium street. So, immediately that, that tax lot by virtue of not being able to have full service driveway is limited in its development. In addition, with a tax parcel that small we end up having a difficult time buffering the .. residential areas. So we logically stretched the commercial zone and ended up with the configuration we have to develop something that we could provide adequate access, adequate buffering. In doing that we've consolidated the 10 lots, that I think that Dick Woelk has talked about that, this, this combines one development, you don't have ten separate developments that are coming and trying to develop the city, in the city, you don't have ten separate driveways. We can have, we can control the development, we can control the internal traffic circulation, where the traffics going in the development and out of the development by combining these 10 separate tax lots. The site layout, basically what we have tried to do, and you can take a look at the big map if you get some time you might take a closer lake. We've set the buildings on the perimeter, on the inside. We've got L shaped buildings and our main purpose for doing that was to, was to screen the residential areas to the south and to the east from the intersection of Durham Road and Pacific Highway as well as the parking. The parking is all in front wrapped around the buildings, you have the buildings and then you have the service areas in the back, and then you go in the residential areas. And that was by design to SCRIPT Page 20 ALBERTSONS' TRAN keep the noise impacts, and mitigate the noise impacts of the parking lot area as well as Pacific Highway and Durham Road. In addition to, to setting the buildings as we have done, we've made special attempts, and you can see the shaded areas are all buffered areas, we've made substantial buffered areas for this development to buffer the residential developments from the commercial development. Some of those are 20 and 30 feet wide for a buffering zone. Those will be landscaped. There will be a fence on the property. It will screen those areas from the residential areas. On final point, as you know, the area to the, to the south and to the east is undeveloped. We've got 113th to the east, when those areas do develop they will be able to provide additional buffering. So we'll virtually have double buffering on the south side for a good portion and on the east side which will mitigate any impacts that the commercial development may have on the residential areas. Thats basically it for the site configuration. Are there any questions? President Moen, "I don't think so." Ward, "John may have some additional comments." John W. Shonkwiler, "Just quickly. We came to this site and it already had existing problems, they have problems with traffic that we're going to solve. Tax lot 100 is basically bad planning on its size configuration, we're going to solve that problem, provide adequate access, take care of the intersection at Summerset (Summerfield) and Durham. Theres a problem with existing housing we can move it back and take care of that the way its layed on 99 west, problem. The commercial that we are proposing fits very in the area, it doesn't detract from downtown as this is factually, uh, theres not a problem with the Central Business District and our use. Traffic movements will work, at level C or better. Also, this is the only available intersection along 99 left of a sizeable, buildable lot, that would provide access onto 99 because ODOT won't allow anymore signals, signalization along 99. So this is it, this fits commercially, and its really the only place that available. Also, Albertsons' , oh, pardon me, in the housing issues by taking, I've shown } several different scenarios that would not only provide for the housing that 3 you an added cushion for any additional we're taking away, but also would give potential problems that you want to deal with later in the planning process. Also, I would like to point out that Albertsons' will show the quality of the ALBERTS0NS' TRANSCRIPT Page 21 u, z work and their, and type of responsibilities that they carry. They are the only ones that have provided substantial landscaping in the downtown area right now at their store. They weren't required to do that, but its the best looking, and they carried out their responsibilities very well. I think that you can rely upon them to do an excellent project at this corner. One that will really enhance the City. Thank you. Any questions?" 3 h y F { S ALBERT$OIYS' TRANSCRIPT Page 22 t .F.,,...,...: ixz,. ,..xi#m-.�..e��'t-,.�.w�.�''..r.,-r,. ,a: ...ia.._., ., .�.as`4".:3c'�?��� � '� 'y'-`•7=:'--r.-�,.,.-,.��. , .'r ,3�l-` :i ,�ti. .��eri:,� a cri N Z 3 cc UA cc ri cc o 4...� �_7i•OI+N `' r 91 t9 g i ti ¢s-isz1� N Ny -441 �� dd ► Z ren r�J set X1985 HISHNAY CAPACltk PRD EDURE F:ANM1Ik6 ANALYSi*" PROJECT: TIGARD ALBERTSDNS INTERSECTIuN: DURiiAM AND MAIN ACCESS DESIGN DAY: FULL DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO 2 ------GEOMETRY ----------------------------------- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. ci Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 1 0 1 1 ii 0 NB 1 0 1 i, 1 0 NB 1 0 0 1 0 0 SS 0 1 0 6 1 0 TRAFFIC VOLUMES----------------------------- Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total EB 104 335 21n 657 NB 76 411 11 498 NB 243 34 122 399 SB 16 36 63 115 LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFTiTHF:U LANES OR A HL:LTILANE APFROACH W TH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURK LANES (O?TIDNAL NGRKSHEEI) .�.yo-N--------~----------- LT •-Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol, In Vol. In Opposing ERUIV Volume Lanes On Volume Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Volume PCElt Vit PCE's (TH+RT) Total ApproachFer Lane in L1+7H Lane Remaining 1vph1Lace Lanes. 411--------2------104 -_ 208------553----------------------------- ---------------------------173 -----277--------- 361 761 553 2 76 152 411 563 1 563 C 0 56 36 1.1 243 267.3 156 423.3 1 423 0 0 423 156 1.1 16 0.6 36 53.6 1 54 0 0 54 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 804 -999 4 1000 & up 5 - —N --CALCULATIONS OF STA?US---------------------- ED LT= 104 NB LT= 243 NB TH&RT= 563 SB TH&P.T= 54 SUM= 667 SUM= 297 NB LT= 76 SB LT= 16 ED TH&RT= 277 NB TH&RT= 156 SUM= 353 SUM= 112 MAXIMUM CAPACITY SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL VOLUMES MAXIMUM SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 964 UNDER CAPACITY--------------------------- 0 TO 1200 UNSER 1201 TO 1400 NEAR Right Turn Check OR ? 11,00 OVER { 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD ALBERTSONS ( INTERSECTION: DURHAM AND MAIN ACCESS DESIGN DAY: FULL DEVELOPMENT MAIN ACCESS ONLY -----------------GEOMETRY --------------------__------------ No. of Na. of No. of No. of No. of !t. Lt.t% Thru Rt.tTh. Rt. Rt,Th,klt Approach lanes Lanes Lines Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 1 0 1 1 0 0 NB 1 0 1 0 1 0 NB 1 0 0 1 0 0 SB 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------TRAFFIC VOLUMES----------------------------- Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total EB 104 335 340 779 NO 76 411 11 498 Na 341 34 122 497 SB 16 36 63 115 LAME DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFTITHRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL NDRKSHEET) ----------------------------- Vo LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Opposing EBUIV Volume lanes On Volume Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Volume PCElt Vit PCE's (TH+RT) Total ApproachPer Lane in LT+TH Line Remaining tvph) Lane lanes 411 ` ~-_2_.~104 208 675 B63 2 442 234 338 442 675 3 76 228 411 639 1 639 0 O 639 36 1.1 341 375.1 156 531.1 1 531 0 0 531 156 1.1 16 17.6 36 53.6 1 54 0 0 54 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 600 -999 4 1000 & up 5 OF EB LT= 104 NB LT= 341 NB THtiRT= 639' SB TH&RT= 54 SUN= 743 SUM= 395 WB LT= 76 SB LT= 16 EB TH&RT= 339 NB TH&RT= 156 SUM= 414 SUN= 172 MAXIMUM CAPACITY SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL VOLUMES 4 `MAXIMUM SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 1138 LOS C ______----—----------—_ 0 TO 1200 UNDER K�q Right Turn Check ADD EB RIGHT TURN LANE 1201 TO 1400 NEAR 1400 OVER r TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Memorandum — Alternatives for Housing 2. Memorandum — Central Business District 3. Tigard Comprehensive Plan provisions 4. ODOT traffic approval letter 5. Supplemental Traffic Report 6. Water service map 7. Sewer service map 8. Roadway improvements map 9. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map 113. Letter from Royal Mobile Villas 11. Tax lot map of Albertsons' property 12. Census Tract 308 data 13. Washington County Resource Data documents g ( 1 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD 2 In the Matter of the: ) CPA 6-86 and ZC 10-86 3 Albertsons' , Inc. Application ) for Comprehensive Plan and ) _ 4 Amendment and Zone Change ) 5 ALTERNATIVE ME'T'HODS FOR SATISFYING THE HOUSING GOAL AND METRO HOUSING RATIO 6 7 1. Scenario No. 1 - Increase density on 12 acres south of 8 Tax Lots 2800 and 2802. 9 This scenario was raised as a potential method in the 10 Albertsons' application at pages 11 through 13. Presently this 11 12 acre site is zoned at Low Density (R-1 to R-4.5 ) resulting in 12 three to twelve units. Changing the zoning to High Density (R-40) 18 would provide a net increase in housing density of 436 units to 14 478 units. Coupling this with the additional units from prior 15 plan amendments and zone changes totalling 214 units, the total 16 additional units from the rezoning would create the potential 17 for 650 to 692 units. By comparison, the maximum number of units 1$ lost for the Albertsons' property rezoning is 659 to 668 units. 19 Therefore, there would be no overall effect on housing. 20 2. Scenario No. 2. - Increase eastern 30 acres from R-25 to 21 R-40 22 To the immediate east of the Albertsons' property and along 28 the south side of Durham Road is a 30 acre parcel of land 24 designated as Med-High Density Residential (R-25 ) . Under 25 present zoning the potential number of units is 750. By increasing 26 the zoning to R-40, the total number of units would be 1,200 or a Page 1 x.y JOHN W.SHONKWILER,P.C. Anom y at Law 16328 8 W.Sufis Ferry Road ' Lake OrwepoOregon 97034 T*190w w 0303)6368119 n �t 1 total gain of 450 units, All of this 30 acre parcel is developable 2 and meets virtually all the criteria for high density set forth in 3 the comprehensive plan and development code. Coupling the gain of 4 450 units with the gain from the prior zone amendment and plan 5 changes of 214 units, the total number of units potentially 6 generated is 664. Again, there would be no overall adverse effect 7 on housing from this proposed change and the Albertsons' plan 8 amendment and zone change. 9 3. Scenario No. 3 Combination of 12 acre and 30 acre changes_ 10 Another alternative is to utilize partial increases in density 11 to both the 12 acre site described in Scenario No. 1 and the 30 acre 12 site described in Scenario No. 2. The 12 acre site could be 13 increased from its present zoning to a medium density of R-12 14 resulting in a gain of 90 to 132 units. 15 In addition, the 30 acre site being increased in density to 16 R-40 would result in a gain of 450 units. Along with the 214 units 17 gain from prior zone changes and amendments, the total gain would 18 result in a potential for 754 to 796 units. 19 The staff identified that there were potential development 20 restrictions on the 12 acre parcel. Even assuming a loss of 50% 21 of the density for that 12 acre site after rezoning, the total 22 gain in potential units would be 709 to 730. 23 4. Scenario No. 4 - A second modification of the 12 acre and 30 24 acre zones 25 Another method of dealing with the zoning increase could 26 involve the 12 acre site being rezoned at R-25 resulting in a Page 2 JOHN W.VMKWILER,P.G 16943 S.Wim. oBooey nat Fs ry Rood Suite 207 L Tk�03'=9 636.81199 1 The 30 acre site to the east could potential gain of 288 units. ( 1 of R-40 on the 20 acre be rezoned to allow an increase in density resulting in a 2 parcel between 108th Avenue and 113th Avenuelhe 215 units from � Combined with t potential gain of 300 units. 4 plan changes, the total number of units 5 prior zone amendment and increased would be 803• on the 12 acre 6 Even with the loss of one-half the density potentially 7 site due to development restrictions as identifiedp 8 gained would be 659. 9 in Scenario No. 3, the total number of units One potential advantage of Scenario No. 4 would be that i 10 between zones and adjacent 11 would provide better transitioning the 12 acre parcel lower density residential areas. Establishing 12 a medium density would transition between Commercial to the 1s as It would also be 14 northwest and low density to the southeast. to the immediate west. In 15 compatible with the medium density rezoning the 20 acres 16 between 108th and 113th Avenues would provide de a 10 acre transition d turn, rez 9 17 east of 108th at a lower density t 18 be more compatible with the lower density residential to t 19 immediate east and southeast• two new zones (R-18 and R-32) 5. Scenario No. 5 - Creation of 20 ort, the City may have a need As identified in the staff rep rovide 21 in an effort to p to recalculate some of its zoning an ratio requirement and 22 olit to meet its metrop 28 additional housing wish to undertake. allow for other adjustments that the City may 24 units _ the number of housing t One potential method of increasing housing character 25 ting the existing 26 without substantially disrupting Page 3 4, JOHN W.5140NK�.P.C. Attorney at 16925 S.W.boons Ferry Road Suite 207 �k�M jj%WU1199 4 I and patterns in the City is to create two intermediate zones in 2 the two major gaps in housing density. There is a gap of 13 a units between R-12 and the R-25 zones. A new zone of R-18 could 4 be created to cover this gap. There is also a gap of 15 units 5 between the R-25 and the R-40 zones. A new zone of R-32 could 6 be created to fill this gap. 7 One potential method for carrying out these adjustments 8 would involve increasing only one-third of the R-12 zone to the g newly created zone of R-18; and the increasing of only one-third 10 of the R-25 zone to the newly created zone of R-32. These 11 adjustments would result in a gain of 474 units for the R-18 12 zone and 541 units for the R-32 zone, or a total increase of 1s 1,015 units. Combining the previously granted zone changes ` 14 resulting in a potential gain of 215 units , the total number of 15 units gained to the City would be 1,230. 16 After deducting the number of residential units that would 17 be lost by approving the Albertsons' zone change to general 18 commercial , the City would still possess an increase in housing lg units of 571 to alleviate the potential reduction in housing 20 densities that might result from the City's reviewing alternate 21 development methods for residential projects involving floodplains 22 and other natural hazards. 23 CONCLUSION 24 In effect, the City has several different methods available 25 to allow the Albertsons' zone change to general commercial and 26 still meet the housing goal requirements. There clearly is an JPap 4 JOHN W.SHONKWILER.P.C. Atkxney Low 16345 S.Weoon�aFerry Road Suits p2007pon L Tek pFrono(503)b36 8119 ., I existing planning problem with the partial commercial and partial 2 high density residential zoning on the Albertsons' property. The g present zoning does not provide an adequate transition and places a.. 4 high density residential units along a noisy and highly lit 5 intersection. In addition, the commercial on Tax Lot 100 is not 6 of sufficient size for development, does not provide enough depth 7 for buffering and is wholly without adequate access. The rezoning g of the entire southeast sector of 99 West and Durham Road is 9 essential for effective planning. 10 Utilizing one of the alternative methods for increasing 11 housing units will provide the City with an acceptable method for i2 meeting its housing goal requirements. Several of the alternatives 13 would also provide additional "cushion" in housing density to allow 14 the City to make other adjustments that might have an adverse 16 impact on housing densities. 16 Respectfully submitted, 17 HN W. SHONKWILER, P. C. is .r 1AN A 9 $, n W. Shon wi er 20 Attorney for Albertsons' , Inc. 21 22 24. 2� , 4 . Page 5 i n JOHN W.MCKVYILER,P.C. Monwy at Law 16375&W.Rama.Ferry Road btt i ;t cs: I BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD 2 In the Matter of : ) 3 Albertsons' , Inc. Application ) CPA 6-86 and ZC 10-86 for Comprehensive Plan ) 4 Amendment and Zone Change ) 5 This Memorandum addresses the issue of potential detriment 6 to the City's central business district by the proposed plan ? amendment and zone change. The conclusion is that, factually, 8 the proposed change to general commercial will not detract from 9 or hinder the central business district as being a commercial 10 focal point for the City. In addition, denial of the Albertsons' 11 proposed plan amendment and zone change cannot be based solely 12 upon a desire to prevent competition against perceived downtown 13 markets and businesses. 14 A. Factually, the proposed plan amendment and zone change will 15 not be detrimental to the City's central business district. 16 Albertsons is proposing a large commercial center involving 17 a major department store, super-grocery store and super-drugstore, 18 along with a variety of other convenient services. The central 19 focus of the proposed shopping center would be drop-in and 20 convenience service shopping. The necessary area for the shopping 21 center is not less than 21 acres. 22 The only large lot vacant land in the central business 23 district of Tigard is not of sufficient size to provide for 24 these shopping services. Richard L. Woelk, traffic engineer, 25 will testify that development of a major shopping center of this 26 size would be impossible in the City's central business district Page 1 - Memorandum JOHN W.SHONKWILER,P.C Attorney at Law 16325 S.W.Boone,Fent Road ` suite 201. T:i.�phonwa jsa©MOregon 811914 j I due to inability of the transportation network to accommodate the 2 traffic generation. $ In addition, the economic history of development in the City's 4 central business district has established that large commercial 5 users consisting of 100,000 square feet or more have not developed 6 in the downtown area. The clearly established history of downtown 7 development precludes the development of convenience oriented com- 8 mercial services. The central business district commercial uses 9 are smaller in scope and focus upon customer services that do not 10 necessitate high visibility from major arterials. In essence, the f 11 history of successful businesses in the central business district 12 limits commercial uses to those uses in which customers are drawn lg to the business irrespective of its location. 14 The development of the Albertsons' property would not compete n 15 with any of the businesses in the central business district. 16 Indeed, none of the proposed uses would even locate in the central -17 business district because of its traffic, visibility and lack of 18 convenient access limitations. 19 Testimony will also establish that major grocery and drugstore 20 commercial enterprises are no longer maintained in central business 21 districts which do not provide immediate access from major 22 arterials. Smaller grocery stores located in central business 23 districts are closing at a rapid rate, and indeed, Albertsons 24 maintains only one in its entire northwestern Oregon chain. As 25 testimony will establish, the reason for this is quite simple. 26 The grocery shopping market has broken down into only two viable Page 2 - Memorandum JOHN W.SNONI(WILER,P.C AtkmW at Low 16325 S.W.Scones Furry PAW Salts 207 Lake Oswego.Oregon 97031 Telephone(503)636-8119 1 categories: super-grocery stores and small neighborhood convenience 2 stores such as "7-11"."7-11". The intermediate size grocery stores cannot 3 compete and are going out of business. 4 B. Legal limitations on discouraging com etition in commercial 5 zoning. 6 The City of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan does not propose a 7 system for providing monopoly protection to the central business g district. There are no calculations of a need for such a monopoly 9 protection, nor are there any policies that detail a method for 10 carrying out such monopoly protection and the ultimate abandonment 11 when such protection is no longer necessary. No such monopoly 12 protection plan has been submitted to LCDC for compliance acknow- 13 ledgment with statewide planning goals . ..:' 14 The Oregon land use regulatory system does not displace 15 competition with a monopolistic or restraint of trade scheme. The 16 Oregon statutes are silent as to any intent to displace competition. 17 Instead, the statutes and statewide planning goals call for 18 aiding and satisfying the needs of the state's economy. The 19 state land use enabling statutes specifically identify tnat the 20 legislative intent to enact these comprehensive land use controls 21 was "* * * not to prohibit, deter, delay or increase the cost of 22 appropriate development, but to enhance economic development an 23 opportunity for the benefit of all citizens." ORS 197.707. See 24 also, Parks v. Watson, 716 F. 2d 646 (9th Cir. 1983) . City 25 comprehensive plans and land use regulations must provide _ 26 "+ + + for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, Page 3 - Memorandum JOHN W.SHONKWILER,P.C. Attamey at Law 16375 S.W.Scones Road Lake Oswego,On9on 97034 TeWphone{ski 636.8119 1 types, locations and service levels for industrial and commercial 2 uses consistent with plan policies." ORS 197.712(2) (c) . Factually, g the proposed Albertsons' amendment and zone change would not 4 include uses that could be placed in the central business district. 5 The size of the site, type of convenient uses proposed, and the 6 level of traffic capacity necessary cannot be provided in the 7 existing central business district. Preclusion of these forms of g convenience services outside the central business district would 9 effectively preclude such services from the City as a whole. 10 In addition, the goal on the "Economy of the State" possesses 11 no language to replace competition, but instead, requires plans 12 and policies to "contribute" to a stable and healthy economy, and 13 that economic growth and activity be "encouraged" in areas of need. fR 14 Oregon Administrative Rules 660-15-000(9). 15 In contrast, where local jurisdictions have sought to restrain 16 trade or protect central business districts by creating a factual 17 or de facto monopoly, these local jurisdictions have been held 18 accountable by the federal antitrust laws. City of Lafayette v. 19 Louisiana Power & Light Co. , 435 U. S. 389, 98 S. Ct. 1123, 55 L. 20 Ed. 2d 364 (1978) ; Community Communications Company v. City of 21 Boulder, 455 U. S. 40, 102 S. Ct. 835, 70 L. Ed. 2d 810 (1982) ; 22 Nelson v. Utah County, 1978-1 Trade Cases (CCH) 862,128 (T. Utah, Z$ 1977). The courts have specifically ruled that cities are liable 24 under the antitrust laws where they act without state authorization 25 to restrain trade by precluding competition against existing 26 central business districts or shopping malls. Mason City Center z { Page 4 - Memorandum JOW W.WONKWILER,P.C. . Attorney of Low 16345 S.W.Boone Ferry Rood Suite 407 Lake Oswego.O—97034 Tdeph..)503)636.8119 m _ Y 1 Associates v. City of Mason City, 468 F. Supp. 737 (N. D. Iowa, 2 1979) ; Stauffer v. Town of Grand Lake, 1981-1 Trade Cases (CCH) 3 n64,029 (D. Colo. , 1980) ; Schiessle v. Stephens, 525 F. Supp. 763 4 (N. D. 111. 1981 ) ; Westborough Mall , Inc. v. City of Cape Girardeau, 5 532 F. Supp. 284, 693 F. 2d 733 (8th Cir. 1982 ) ; Landmarks Holding 6 Corp. v. Bermant, 664 F. 2d 891 (2d Cir. 1981) ; Ross v. Bremer, 71982-2 Trade Cases (CCH) n64,746 (W. D. Wash. 1982). Although 8 the recently enacted Local Government Antitrust Act of 1984 limits 9 damage provisions, the antitrust laws are still deemed to apply to 10 cities and they are liable for attorney's fees and other potential 11 damages arising out of the action that could be raised under the 12 Oregon Torts Claims Act. 13 CONCLUSION 14 It is inappropriate for the City to consider protection of 15 the central business district in reviewing the Albertsons' proposed 16 plan amendment and zone change. Factually the proposed uses do not 17 compete with the downtown area and legally the City has not been 18 given authority under state law to restrain trade in this manner. 19 The appropriate consideration for the zone change is that criteria 20 set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan Vol . II at Policy 12.2.2. 21 This policy focuses in on the specific types of commercial uses 22 requested and limits analysis to the impacts such types of uses 23 would involve. The adoption of the comprehensive plan and these 24 criteria categories already have establish a program which insures 25 that the central business district will not be in conflict with 26 other forms of commercial categories. Page 5 - Memorandum JOHN W.SHONKWILER,P.C. 16323 S.WBoois krry Road SWM 207 �Tdpha»Ij00)b366�19P Respectfully submitted, 2 JOHN W. SHONKWILER, P. C. 3 �- �r1,f 4 XAttor=n;e!y WShonkwiler, OSB# 75337 for Albertsons, Inc. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 is u 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 = 25 26 Page , 6 ` Memorandum JOHN W.SHONKWILER.P.G at Law 16323 S.WW.�loenas FKry Road ts 20V Lake Ow p. 47031 idapbana 0C 616.6119 4 Y mom Oregon State Highway Division DISTRICT 2A MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR P.O. BOX 565, BEAVERTON• OREGON 97075-0565 PHONE 229-5002 September 23, 1986 v,. FRO NO.:032 Steven A. Ward Westech Engineering 3421 25th St, N.E. Salem, OR 97301 RE: Tigard Albertson's 99W at Durham Road The District office has reviewed the traffic analysis for the subject development prepared by Associated Transportation Engineers & Planning and Company, July of 1986. Scenario #3 allowing one right turn in, right turn out access on Pacific Highway and scenario #2 allowing two right turn in, right turn out driveways on Pacific Highway are feasible from an operations and safety stand point. The locations of these driveways, as proposed, will require an indenture of access on the part of the owner to relocate the deeded accesses on this parcel to the points indicated on the plan. Sincerely, Leonal H. Gunderson Asst. District Haintenance Supervisor LHG:mw CC: Keith Liden, City of Tigard Ron Failmezger ri ' x u qb -� , -.roti r ,H.,.�c Ya,�_ ?z • -„r-_ "='�' x a -ax`;.. -,•�e: , �" ex ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 6 PLANNING, INC TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS FOR : TIGARD AUERTSONS ITE SECTION USED: 221 F TOTAL UNITS 669.45 SUNNARY OF TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION OTAL TRIFS 1401 AD3 INDEP VAR TOTAL T • . ;RIPS AN TRIPS CO)91'L (DIFF) #8#t########iia#### � .. 4411.77 6540 2128.23 ANVTE6.6 334 142 -142.225 All ?RIPS 0.5 n 0 1 .IO 67 79 11.155 0.1 IN 267 64 -203.38 0.4 OUT 0.4 0.40 L ``, #at##aaaaatta#t#####aat►###a#taa#a#ata!#####a "K. F4 TRIPS 0.6 401 590 188.43 267 296 18.62 0.4 e.4o.4a iT0.31 co.2 IN s, O:fT 0.2 0.20 134 304 ttfa:aata#tt#t#aat##ttatta##taf#tta#tats##f*a � 4 x:R k � i ICvAkl> WATER DIST, I rr � Ile- re f , ��r 1 e � � r I of k � i tx - �A 9� i +fin r'G_'.,:."..: � _: :�.: � y.«:'.�..�, ... ::r ._�-.._::.. .. ......:.-.� _.-r..•' �:F•.b. g ILL a 4;I 4 i 1 - , :rnc�y��f/ •pn•S �q'ps � a 1 .t3u h a 1 � •TV i i ' Al, Co b 1r t i v 45,00 1 17 wit 1 km rf � MIA LZt.S . C R^ t 1 , tvMaof __'� 1 1 1 t t i 1 { i z fi- ,ROPOWTUVA06=WL Wys s «. �,,, oomcw uAL lawn/LAM �a..►.�r.�.r w+... •T .**M 7 � � 000 kk MIN- 1 , ` 010 Y r s v � c , •' r►L u vi IL s ROYAL MOBILE VILLAS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 112W M ROVAL VILLA DRIVE . TIGARD.OREGON 9= September 19, 1986 Hayden Corporation 900 N. Tomahawk Island Or. ' Portland, Oregon 97219 Re: Proposed Albertson's store 3 shopping center Gentlemen: We. the residents of Royal Mobile Villas, are agreeable to and will support the building of an Albertson's Store and shopping center adjacent to our community, if the following listed provisions, or suitable substitutions, are meet. Our reasons for these provisions are concerns about vandalism!, undue noise, litter, trespassing and esthetics. The following are items we have discussed with Don Doncumbe of Albertsons and would like to we incorporated into the construction of this development: 1. A chain link fence, at least eight (8) feet in height, erected on the shopping center side of the ten (10) foot landscaped buffer required by the City of Tigard zoning. Privacy slats would be required to be installed in the links. A. An alternate would be an eight (e) foot wood fence with treated posts. 2. A ten foot landscaped buffer with site obscuring plantings of closely spaced arborvitae on the !loyal Mobile Villa side of the fence. 3. No aczess gate or other access device whatever, between the two properties. 4. future provision for low profile speed bumps in the roadway between the properties if speeding becomes a problem within the shopping center access roads. S. Satisfactory solution to the possible property line encroachment of residents'mrobiie homes and/or equipment. Y n R Hayden Corporation Page two The following questions refer to the projected businesses that may be in the plans and are much concern to us as we have objections to them all: 1. Is a beer tavern, or any other type of drinking establishment, other than a full service restaurant with a lounge to be incorporated in the plans? 2. Is there any 24 flour business planned? 3. Is a drive-in type, such as a Dairy Queen, for example, with it's attendant litter and hang-out situation, planned? Our proximity to the high school would attract hundreds of students. as well as commuter clients. We would lbertsons, and in return we expect Albertsonsito reciprke to be ocate byQllisteningrs Ato and implementing, our,requests. Our community is comprised of adults with the majority being over sixty-five. Our homes in royal Mobile Villas represent a major investment. Our social activities and caring neighbors fill many hours in a very positive way, we don't want to risk our investment or our caring community. Thank-you for your interest in our concerns. As many of the residents are daily walkers, we look forward to being provided with a well planned area to shop. Sincerely, e " , Ray Rickel President cc: Royal Mobile Villas OSTA President, Meal Miller _ter . .r Tr Y kEGON i'•lcd • SEE YAPas I 100C f �-leek yr SEE MAP ! 2S I IODC j co, «f.9..,. WAS � ffMN•tft !K' a 3001 3000 3002 tac 170 .70 S-7� •• 11! 100 18 b • Z;::.. 2800 2802 o tlOAe. ti • 374 71• LI �` � 4 t'0[AIEMLMT • 18 ?3-78 2803 2801 !.K!As. ` 19 w Ow's • I�/ S .. IF. , ,,` _ rise a•t: � � 19 2700�... s _ � J i s : • tr j J V w !!!• - 2111 1st • 270,3 4170 , 2702 705. 2704 KAa 2.14 Ac 20 • '1, � „a `J �Y�411 6� '� �, dWM— w �e t: •'J Ai ♦ �,� e ham" Y .i. ..: 308 CENSUS TRACT 308 Sample Size 368* Margin of error for an N of 368 + 5.12% SECTION I. CITIZEN PERCEPTIONS OF NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES 1. Length of Residence in Washington County 0 - 2 years = 28% 11 - 15 years = 16% 3 - S years ■ 16% 16 - 20 years = 7% 6 - 10 years = 20% 21+ years = 13% Median Length of Residence 7.50 years A 2. Rating of Neighborhood Livability Worst Place Best Place to Live to Live 4 S 6 7 8 9 10 +l of Households 0 1 3 1 8 7 13 28 1S 26 Median Rating 8.61 3, Neighborhood Has Street Lights and Paved Sidewalks 1 Yes No Streetlights 66 34 Paved sidewalks S9 41 JA 4. Condition of Neighborhood Street Surfaces ♦ Households :i Paved smooth 68 Paved rough 32 Unpaved smooth •• Unpaved rough •• *Due to missing responses, not all percentages are based on a sample size of 368. "Percent selecting category is less than -5% but more than 0%. � k - 2 - i 308 S. Number of Passenger Vehicles Used by Household Members At Least Once a Week % Households None 2 1 43 2 44 3 8 4 or more 2 6. Rating of Neighborhood Problems Not Very Don't Serious Serious Know 1 2 3 4 5 a. Street or highway noise 57 19 13 6 5 ** b. Heavy traffic 58 16 12 6 8 0 C. Streets or roads continually in need of repair 53 12 11 10 15 0 d. Roads impassable due to snow, water 8S 9 3 1 0 C. Poor street lighting S9 8 10 6 15 °* f. Neighborhood crime 53 24 11 3 2 7 g. Trash on streets, lots or property 72 16 9 2 1 1 h. Boarded-up or abandoned structures 96 4 0 0 0 *' i. Occupied housing in rundown condition 87 8 3 1 1 "* j. Odors, gas, smoke 88 8 3 1 '" 0 k. Sidewalk or building obstacles to handicapped 7S 6 4 4 6 S 1. Lack of traffic lights and stop signs 81 6 5 2 S 1 7. Have Neighborhood Park or Public Recreational Facility? Yes = 60% No = 31% Don't know 9% - 3 - jv 308 8. Distance from Home to Nearest Park or Public Recreation Facility - .> Less than 1/4 mile = 12% 11 - 20 miles = 1% 1/4 to less than 1 mile = 23% 21 - 30 miles - ** 1 - 2 miles = 3S� -Over 30 miles 0% 3 - S miles = 15% Don't know 6 - 10 miles = 2% " 9. Rating of Park or Public Recreation Facilities Excellent - A - 18$ None available - 12% 8 - 24% Don't know 21 C = 22% D = 3% Very Poor - F = 1% 10. Ratings for Neighborhood Services Very Very Don't r9. Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Knox k% 1 2 3 4 S Public transportation 13 11 25 20 27 S Schools l5 4 5 1S 43 20 Neighborhood shopping 16 8 10 18 47 *' Police protection 15 8 18 23 28 8 w - Fire protection 16 4 7 18 46 9 Hospitals or health clinics 16 9 16 17 34 8 Libraries 14 13 19 12 2$ 14 ;. Use and Availability of Social Services Service Available? % Households Yes No DK Using Service Day care centers 45 8 46 3 Personal and family counseling 23 7 70 4 Programs for senior citizens S1 4 46 6 Job training 9 9 $3 ** Household services for senior 22 7 72 2 _ and handicapped citizlsns Alcohol and drug abuse counseling 18 6 76 1 Youth services 38 6 57 2 - 4 _ y m` 308 12. Rating of Importance of Social Services for Neighborhood Not $ Very $ Don't : . Important Important Know :. 1 2 3 4 5 Day care centers 34 7 12 9 26 13 Personal and family counseling 25 8 20 11 19 17 `_ Programs for senior citizens 13 4 14 16 42 11 Job training 29 9 15 10 21 17 Household services for senior and handicapped citizens 12 4 14 13 42 15 Alcohol and drug abuse counseling 23 7 13 13 24 20 Youth services 25 7 10 13 31 15 13. Distance Traveled to Shop for Food or Major Appliances Food Items Major Appliances Less than 1/4 mile S% 1/4 mile to less than 1 mile 26% 3% 1-2 miles Slit 24% 3-S miles 18% 46% 6-10 miles 1% 15$ 11-15 miles OAC 8% : 16-20 miles 0% 2 - 21-30 miles 0% 1� Over 30 miles Ot *' Median Distance 1.77 miles 4.44 miles g 14. Households Having Tri-Met Bus Stop Within S Blocks Yes = 84% No ■ 13% Don't know = 4% >N 308 g. SECTION II. CHARACTERISTICS AND CONDITION OF HOUSING r,. 1. Length of Residence at Current Address 0 - 2 years - 4S% 11 - 1S years = 10% 3 - S years - 2S% 16 - 20 years = 3% 6 -10 years = 16$ 21+ years 2$ Median length of residence 3.63 years A 2. Location of Prior Residence .; Other city or area of Washington County = 42%20% City of Portland Other city in Multnomah/Clackamas Co. , 10 "6 v Othercityin Oregon = 1S% Other state 1 Outside continental U.S. 3. Description of Prior and Current Residences Prior Current Residence Residence Single family home 73'1 6 6% Condominium 33 6� Duplex 5% 4% .. Apartment complex - less than 10 units 1% 13% Apartment complex - 10 or more units 11 8% Mobile home 2% Residential hotel 0# 0 Other 2% 1% d 4. Planned Length of Stay at Current Address More than S years 54% 1 - 5 years = 13+1 Less than 1 year - S% Don't know - 29% t=A: .,. - 6 - ti , x fA M P J 308 S. Own or Rent Residence Own = 77% Rent 225 Occupy without payment 1% 6. Year Residence Was Built 1979-80 = 8% 1950-S9 3% 1975-78 = 30% 1940-49 1% 1970-74 = 20% 1939 or earlier 2% 1960-69 = 26% Don't know 10% 7. Estimated Value of House or Condominium $ 0 - $ 49,999 = 9% $ S0,000 - $ 99,999 = 74% $ 100,000 - $ 149,999 - 1S% 9`+ $ 150,000 - $ 200,000+ - 2% Median Value $77,863.94 S. Which Utilities are Included in the Rent? Utility % Rented Dwellings Electricity 4 Gas 4 Water 80 Oil 0 Coal, etc. 0 �z - 7 - 308 Housing Costs 9. utility Costs - Last Month (March or April) Electricity Gas Water Combined $ 0 - 49.99 = 71% 77% 99% 22% $ 50 - 99.99 - 26% 22% 1% 59% $100 - 149.99 = 3% 1% 0% 16% $150 - 200+ _ 0% 0% 3% Median Cost - $35.31 $32.54 $2S.2S $69.03 10. Annual Cost of Oil, Kerosene, or Wood for Heat $ 0 - 100 - 34% $ 601 - 700 = 2% $101 - 200 = 12% $ 701 - 800 - 11% $201 - 300 - 9% $ 801 - 900 = 0% $301 - 400 - 6% $ 901 - 1,000 - 4% $401 - SOO = 9% $1,001 + = 6% $501 - 600 - 6% Median Annual Cost = $245.44 *' 11. Type of Rent or Mortgage Rent SN_ 78) Mortgage N 244) Day-to-day 0% Own free and clear 24% Weekly O% Conventional bank mortgage 34 Monthly without lease 73% FHA or VA loan - 8% Monthly with lease 174 State GI loan = 33% Other = 3% Private contract = S% Don't know = 8% Assumption % S Other = 2f. Don't know = �t 12. Monthly Rent or Payment S 0 - ISO = •9% SISI - 300 = 42% $301 - 4SO = 3S% $4S1 - 600+ = 14% ' Median Rent or Payment $297.42 z� 8 - 308 13. Estimate of Total Monthly Housing Cost - (Utilities + Oil + Rent or Payment) $ 0 - 250 = 30% $2S1 - 500 = S1$ $501 - 750 - 16% $7S1 - 1,000+ = 3% Median monthly housing cost $347.SO _ 14. Estimate of Percent of Monthly Income Spent on Housing 0 - 2S % = 75% 26 - 50 % ■ 18% Sl - 75 % - 3% 76 - 100+% = 4% ) Median percentage = 18% �a 1S. Median Percent of Income Spent on Housing for: Senior citizen households (N - 55) - 17% Widows over 62 (N - 15) - 230 Female head of household (N - S3) - 23% Renters (N = S8) - 26% Homeowners (N - 1S9) - 16% 16. Number of Rooms and Bedrooms in Dwelling Rooms Bedrooms t: One 0% 3% Two ** 46% Three 4% 3S% Four 21% 14% Five 24% 3% Six 22% 0% : Seven 14% 0% Eight 8% 0% -_ More than nine 7% 0% ' 17. Number of Rooms in Relation to Household Size (Read percentages across rows) Number of Rooms Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 Sample Size 1 0 0 1S 36 33 13 3 0 0 (N= 69) 2 0 0 3 23 29 27 13 2 3 (N= 154) s, 3 0 2 0 7 17 29 24 12 7 (N- 41) 4 0 0 0 9 11 18 18 23 21 (N= 56) S 0 0 0 0 0 21 31 26 21 (N- 19) 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 20 60 (N= S) 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (N= 0) 8+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 C1"1- . 2) £ � r - - ACV 9 .r.` .ve�`: �'`Y'�r{',`skt' .,,..a>t:szs:r_. ....:moi-; r-_fe... __ -+•moi �� — m�.. ,.z...c.. 3.'3.€,,x.k _ F. �T 308 ,. 18. Dwelling Size (Sq. Ft.) Less than 200 = ** 801 - 900 = 5% 200 - 300 = 1% 901 - 11000 = 5% 301 - 400 = 1% 1,001 - 1,500 = 42% 401 - 500 = 2% 1,501 - 2,000 - 23% 501 - 600 = 2% 2,001 - 2,500 - 7% 601 - 700 = 1% 2,501 - 3,000 - 9% 701 - 800 = 3% • Median Size 1,358.14 sq- ft. 19. Kitchen & Plumbing Facilities Yes No Complete kitchen facilities 100% 0% Usable sink 100% 0% Usable refrigerator 100% 0% Usable stove 100% 0% Hot piped water 100% 0% Cold piped water 100% 0% Flush toilet 100% 0% Bathtub or shower 100% 0% 20. Source of Water Public system 90% Y Private company = 1% Individual well = ** Other source = 0% Don't know = 8% 21. Means of Sewage Disposal Septic tank or cesspool = 23% Chemical toilet 0% Privy = 0% >, Use facilities in other building = 0% Public sewer = 72% Other = 0% Don't know = 5% - 10 - P� 308 l 4 22. Type of Primary and Secondary Heating System ► Primary Secondary 2L! tem System None 5% 41% E 65% 2% Central furnace with ducts 1% 0% Steam or hot water system 25a 2% Built-in electric baseboard heat ** 0% Floor or wall furnace Oil, gas, or kerosene 1% room heater with flue 1% 42% Fireplaces 2% 10% Wood stove or fireplace insert 1% 2% Portable room heaters 0% 0% Solar heating system 0% Other heating system 23. Fuels Used for Heating and Cooking Heatin Cookie Gas from underground pipes2% S3% Bottled gas ** 0% Fuel oil, kerosene S# 0% Electricity 36 98% Coal or coke 0% 0% Wood 3% 0% Solar heat .a 0 r• 0% Other 3% *• �.; None x s 24. Dwelling Weatherization Don't Yes No Know } Storm doors 40% 60% ** 3 Storm or doublepane windows 64% 35% 1% Attic insulation 80% 6% 14$ Sidewall insulation 72% 11% 17% Under-floor insulation 40% 34% 26% Miscellaneous Weatherization 39% 39% 22$ y Al Milo 3 ¢t r x t� 308 ti 25. Repairs Needed for Dwelling Need Wait " Need This Until Don't Don't Now Year Next Year Need Know Floor repairs 2% 1% 3% 93% 2% Roof repairs 1% 4% 6$ 85$ S% x Exterior painting 2% 8$ 12% 78$ 1$ Foundation/basement repairs OAC 1$ lit 94 5$ Electrical repairs 1% 2% 1'k 93% 3% Plumbing repairs - 1% 5% 3% 87% 2% Repairs to walls 1% 2% 2% 95% 2$ Repairs to heating system 0% 1% 1% 96% 2% Interior painting 1$ 9 160 73% i% Chimney repairs 0% 1% 1% 94% 4% 26. Repairs Completed to Dwelling in Last 12 Months Yes, Don't Know $0 - $101- $251- $ Sol- $1,001- $1,501- No Don't Cost $100 $2S0 $S00 $1,000 $11S00 $2,000 $2,000+ Repairs Know Floor repairs 1% 1% 1% ** *" ** *' *' 89% 7% Roof repairs 2 2% 3�S 1% 1% 0$ ltv 1% 82% 6% Exterior painting 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 82� Foundation/ ** 90 8• basement repairs 1% lis 0'� 0% 0* 0 0%% 0 0% *, 87% 8% Electrical repairs 1% 3% 1% OAC Plumbing repairs 3% 10% 1% 1 1% OAC% 08% 0 77% 7% Wall repairs 1% 2% *' 0% ** 0$ 0 ** 8 8 Heating system 1% 2% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 87% 8#% Interior painting 2% 12% 1% 1% ** 0% ** Oak 77% 6% Chimney repairs 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 90% 8% 27. Additions, Alterations, Replacements, and Landscaping Completed in Last 12 Months Yes No Don't Know Additions 5% 92% 3 g' Alterations 19% 78 3% :. Replacements 12% 82% 6%3S% 60% 6% Landscaping F 7 12 i r. } r - 308 t SECTION III. HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS 1. Number of People and Number of Children Under 18 in Household % of Households % of Households No. of for for People/Children No. of Persons No. of Children None 0% 67% 1 20% 12% 2 45% 15% 3 11$ 4% 4 16% 2% S S% 0% 6 1% 0% 7 0% 0% 8+ It Oak Median Number 2.66 .75 2. Number in Household Currently Employed None = 17% 1 = 47% 2 - 29% 3 = 6% 4+ = w* 3. Percent of Households Indicating Receipt of Funds From: Social Security 38% Estates, trusts, dividends 37% Welfare payments 1% Unemployment compensation 7% Veterans benefits = 7% Pension/retirement 28% 4. Household Composition - Percent Households Having: Husband - wife = 68% Daughter - son = 32% Brother - sister = 2% Mother —father = 2% Other relative = 2% Boarder = to Roommate = 2% Employee = 0% Other non-relative = ** . S. Median Age (includes all individuals; N = 816) 37.92 years 308 6. Minority Composition Households American Indian ** Black 0 Hispanic 1 Oriental 1 Other ** 7. Percent of Households with One or More Non-English Speakers 2% 8. Households With At Least One Member Having a Limiting Health Condition Physically handicapped = 7% Have health condition which limits work - 12% Have health condition which prevents work = 7% Have health condition which limits use of public transportation = 4% 9. Number of Hours Worked Per Week by Employed Individuals (N = 464) 0 - 10 hours = 26% 11 - 20 hours - 9% 21 - 30 hours - 6% 31 - 40 hours - 36% 40+ hours = 20% Varies = 3% 10. Length of Time Individuals Have Been Unemployed (N 61") Less than I month - 15% 2 - 3 months = 10% 4 - 5 months = 8% 6+ months = 67% 11. Location of Work Place (N 376) Beaverton - 13% Hillsboro = 1% Tigard-Tualatin - 33% Forest Grove = 1% Other Washington County = 4% Portland = 36% Other = 13% �� - 14 - 30 8 ~ 12. Distance traveled to work (N = 359) Less than 1 mile = 8% 1 - 2 miles = 14% 3 - 5 miles = 17% 6 - 10 miles = 26% 11 - 20 miles = 30% 21 - 30 miles = 3% 30+ miles = 2% 13. Normal Transportation to Work Car = 78% Carpool = 5% Truck/van = 6% Bus = S% Walk = 1% Work at home = 2% Other = 2% 14. Percent Having a Tri-Met Bus Stop Within 5 Blocks of Work 81% 15. Occupation (N = S27) t' Professional 19% Managerial 13% Clerical ' 18% Skilled blue-collar = 135 Unskilled blue-collar = 10% Agricultural ' ** Housewife ' S% Student 7% Retired = 14% Self-employed 1% 16. Years of Education Completed for individuals Over 18 (N 588) 0 - 8 years = 2% 9 - 11 years 7% 12 (high school graduate) = 3S% 13 - 15 years -28% 16 (college graduate) - 17% 17+ year - 13% Median years of education completed 13.25 years - 1s - N' 308 " 17. Total Household Income $ 0 - 12,500 = 24% ' $12,501 - 25,000 = 33% $25,001 - 37,500 = 23$ $37,501 - S0,000+ = 20% Median household income = $23,000.00 18. Percent Households in Low and Low-Moderate Categories.* Low income 18$ Low-moderate income = 2S% 19. Income Data for Households with Senior Citizens (N = 93) Median income = $16,562.50 Low income households 29 } Low-moderate income = Sl% 20. Income Data for Widows Over the Age of 62 (N = 25) Median income $11,250.00 Low income households 40% Low-moderate income = 80'k 21. Income Data for Female Head of Household (N 81) Median income = $13,571.43 Low income households a 35% Low-moderate income = 62% 22. Income Data for Renters (N • 70) Median income $13,875.00 Low income households = 34% Low-moderate income = 59% 23. Income Data for Homeowners (N = 215) Median income = $26,785.71 Low income households = 13% Low-moderate income 23% *Low income = $10,450 Low-moderate income = $16,700 . x. - - 16 - b... I i A < I � f �•1.. � T �{ :i ri • m X � � { i II.A.14 4/82 Washington County: 1) hold population to a lower figure than projected; 2) locate excess population where it can be served by transit; or 3) encourage land uses that will increase job opportunities to locate west of Beaverton. Other transportation policies state: 1. Medium and high density residential development should be con- centrated along Sunset Highway to encourage the development of mass transit. 2. Medium and high density residential development should be located where there is good access to arterial streets. 3. Sites for rapid transit stations should be acquired at strategic locations in the planning area and should be improved, par- ticularly in Sunset Highway area. 4. The development of loop streets and cul-de-sacs should be urged to discourage through traffic and increase residential privacy. Two proposed policy additions in the West Beaverton General Plan and Zoning Amendment limit access onto arterial and major collector streets, permit access onto major collectors from minor collectors only in residential areas, and com- bine entry points in commercial areas. In addition, the plan amendment proposes i that location, design and alignment of arterial and major collector streets be based on the functional purpose of the street, projected traffic demand, physi- cal limitation and--where practical--existing rights-of-way. The plan amendment also suggests that all arterials and collectors be developed to accommodate transit service. A.4.3 Cites► of Tigard A.4.3.1 Urban Growth Management Strategies The city does not have a specific urban growth management strategy, but some control of urban growth is exercised by the Neighborhood Planning Organization (NPO) planning program and by the city's control over sewer service extensions. The area within the NPO boundaries is substantially greater than that included by existing city limits; the outer boundary of the various NPO planning areas define the Tigard Urban Planning Area. Tigard's present comprehensive plan is made up of the Tigard Community Plan, several NPO plans,• and a housing plan. The various NPO plans designate land uses for both incorporated and unincorporated areas, define the circulation system, and establish development policies and guidelines for certain portions of the planning area. The Tigard comprehensive plan is an "active plan" because it includes specific land use designations and policies for unincorporated as well as incorporated areas; the plan has not yet been acknowledged by LCOC. The Urban Planning Area Agreement between the city and Washington County recognizes that the NPO plans are guides for urban development of the area immediately ,`,' surrounding the city. II.A.15 4/82 Interim annexation policies have been adopted by the city and provide another means for controlling urban growth. These are that: 1. The city will consider favorably the annexation of unincor- porated islands within its boundaries and those areas con- tiguous to present city boundaries; 2. Piecemeal annexations of territory are discouraged and the annexation of compact blocks of land is encouraged; and 3. Extension of sewer lines beyond municipal boundaries and out- side-the planning area will not be approved, except to alleviate health hazards. A.4.3.2 Urban Development Policies A.4.3.2.1 Residential Development. Generally, NPO plan policies support con- tinued development oTsingle family detached housing in order to preserve and/or enhance existing neighborhood character. Plans adopted up to 1977 project full development in a single family to multiple family ratio of 72:28 with a density of 2.2 units per acre (Tigard 1977). This conflicts with METRO urban develop- ment guidelines which specify a full development ratio of 65:35. Some adjust- ments to land use designations have been made in some of the NPO plans to boost the residential density; materials submitted to LCOC for acknowledgement in 1979 do not contain a recomputation of either factor. A.4.3.2.2 Commercial Development. The commercial development pattern of the city is generally linear, located mainly along Pacific Highway (99W) with some minor complementary development along Main Street in the CBO area. This strongly defined pattern along Pacific Highway is a classic example of strip commercial development with all the concomitant effects of visual blight and traffic congestion. Commercial use plan policies are as follows: 1. Encourage clustered commercial development along Pacific Highway and minimize the number of vehicular access points. 2. Revitalize and/or redevelop the downtown (Main Street) area to provide for neighborhood commercial needs. 3. Encourage commercial and professional or office park develop- ment in the "Tigard Triangle" area (e.g. , the area bounded by Highway 99W, Highway 217, and Interstate 5). A.4.3.2.3 Industrial Development. A stated objective in the Tigard Community Plan is to create employment opportunities for local residents. In general, the industrially planned areas of the city are confined to lands adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Opportunities for industrial use expan- sion are somewhat limited and curtailed by the existing land use pattern. Opportunity for new employemnt exists in the "Tigard Triangle" where a 74 acre tract has been designated for the development of light industrial uses (i.e., C_ research activities and the manufacturing of scientific or precision instrument products.) II.C.7 4/82 l i Yx N b C � Y Y d m on ItF,.i v d Y ` N M a 2i O N R A O A m Q ��Niii 4 O C C N it 9 ....r O Qt la n i 9 N v • L Y • • M N � N iIRr M M w• _N Cc! / MN 4 O t J Y N s�p•MOO N C ~ ! b O b O 1 9 rs •p • !i M-1 Al. rU! N 10 oWe Y Ot 01 OI Nl��l N ttpp�V�1yy C Y OI {/� 0 tom. C JN1 1�1 fN�f A ^y Ot �? M f'A FI fit M 1�+!f��1 iN�l r. O ttf - � ^ ~► M � � V � 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • N N N A N RRRR��It .y NfV N b AEO 41 u tt pp po QQ Y j 7C 1 ,- 1.1.3 Table 1: Population Change 1970-1980 for Oregon and selected counties and cities, Area - 1970 1980 is change 1970-1980 Oregon 2,091,533 2,632,663 25.9 Multnomah Co. 554,668 562,640 1.4 Clackamas Co. 166,088 241,919 45.7 WASHINGTON COUNTY 157,920 245,808 55.6 Banks 430 489 13.7 Beaverton 18,577 30,582 64.6 Cornelius 1,903 4,462 134.5 Durham 410 707 72.4 Forest Grove 8,275 11,499 39.0 Gaston 429 471 9.8 Hillsboro 14,675 27,664 88.5 King City 1,427 1,853 29.9 North Plains 690 715 3.6 {` Sherwood 1,396 2,386 70.9 Tigard 6,499 14,286 119,8 Tualatin 750 7,348 879.7 Source: 1980 Census Advance Reports Housing There were approximately 97,000 total housing units in the county in 1980. Throughout the county, the current proportion of detached to attached dwellings* varies from an estimated 49:51 in Beaverton to 94:6 in Durham; the urban unin- corporated area now exhibits a 74:26 ratio of detached to attached residences (see Table 2). * Detached dwellings include conventional single family dwellings on separate lots and mobile homes; attached units include housing such as duplexes, apartment complexes, and condominiums. r. r �. 1.1.4 The condition of the housing stock, county-wide, is generally good, largely because most dwellings were built in the last 20 years. * However, there are many residences throughout the county in need of major structural improvements because of their age and/or other improvements, such as weatherization, to reduce operating costs and energy consumption. Table 2: Washington County Existing Population and Housing- Characteristics - Urban Area. Area Populationa Housing Rates of Detached b Average Residential 1980 Units to Attached Housing Desnsity Urban Uninc. 142,282 54,718 74:26 1.8/net ac. detached d.u. 15-21/net ac. attached d.u. Beaverton 30,582 13,542 49:51 n.a. Cornelius 4,462 1,756 79:21 n.a. Durham 707 242 94:6 2.2/net acre Forest Grove 11,499 4,523 67:33 5.4/net acre Hillsboro 27,664 10,109 75:25 n.a. King City 1,853 1,238 51:49 7.2./gross acre Sherwood 2,386 921 74:26 4.4/net acre Tigard 14,286 6,112 57:43 n.a. Tualatin 7,307 3,025 70:30 8.8/net acre Sources: a. 1980 federal census b. Local jurisdiction adopted comprehensive plans and planning documents, varying dates. Neighborhood residential densities in the urban unincorporated area vary because M development occurred at different times, under different market conditions, and in accord with changing POD (Plan of Development) and zoning designations*. * POD designations were used in the 1981 update of the buildable lands inventory { to ensure consistency with the inventory base compiled in 1977. POD designa- tions will be modified, both in category and the amount of land allocated to different uses, during the community planning phase of the Comprehensive Plan f update process. /9 1.1.5 Under the Low Density Residential (LDR) designation, developed densities now average 1.8 units per net acre; this figure is low due to the large number of one acre and larger lots developed in the county prior to 1977. Since that time single family densities in LOR areas have increased -- in each of the past three years, the median density of new development has exceeded 3.5 units per net acre. This increase in density is explained by inflating land values, housing costs and a resultant preference by housing consumers for detached units (including mobile homes) on smaller lots or lower density attached units such as duplexes and triplexes. In MOR (Medium Density Residential) areas, the average density of attached units is currently about 14.7 units per net acre; the average developed density of attached units in HDR (High Density Residential) areas is 20.8 units per net acre. In both cases developed densities have decreased slightly in the past three years (1977-1980) in part due to the increased construction of condominium projects. This kind of development tends to use more land per unit than do con- ventional apartment projects; at the same time, condominium units help satisfy the desire for home ownership in lieu of the often more constly single family detached home. Buildable Lands: Within the UG8 there are now an estimated 29,600 acres of vacant buildable land*; Table 3 shows the distribution of these acres by jurisdiction and genera- lized planning categories. As illustrated in Table 3 the urban unincorporated area in 1980 contained over half of the county's remaining buildable lands. * Buildable lands undeveloped lands which are outside the 100 year flood A plain, excluding areas with greater than 20% slope. 1.2.6 identifies areas of planning interest and provides an opportunity for the city and county to comment on major land use actions. Beaverton has sub- mitted a city limits plan with no specific planning and development policies for the future urban area. The 1973 Beaverton General Area Plan provides designations outside the city limits, but these are no longer considered valid. Tigard The City of Tigard has no growth management program, however, a major growth control tool has been created through the adoption of the Neighborhood Planning Organization (NPO) plans which establish development policies for the planning area. The city has submitted an "active" plan to LCDC with the outer boundaries of the NPO planning areas defining a desired limit of urban development, and site-specified land use designations have been adopted for the unincorporated area. The UPAA provides a passive mechanism for regu- • lating and guiding growth and provides an opportunity for the respective Jurisdictions to comment on land use actions in the unincorporated portion. F Tualatin The City of Tualatin's plan has been acknowledged by LCDC. The city has a complementary plan and has identified an area of future growth. The city is k actively encouraging development opportunities in an atempt to transform the image of the city from that of a "bedroom community" to a regional retail and trade center. This attitude is reflected in the city's attempt to designate land for commercial/industrial uses that far exceeds the projected demand. An UPAA has been executed between the city and the county calling for mutual cooperation in regards to land use decisions in the planning area. Q t 1J� 3.3.29 _ Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Characterization: This class of uses includes retail stores offering goods and services needed by neighborhood residents on a daily or weekly basis. Office uses are not included. These uses should be grouped on a site of 3 to 10 acres with a gross leasable floor area of 30,000 to 100,000 square feet. These groupings generally require a market area ranging in population from 2-,500 to 40,000 people. Specific consideration should be given to encouraging the development of small businesses and protecting existing small businesses. • Location Criteria: The precise location of these uses should be jointly determined by market factors and the community planning process. Generally, they should be located at collector/collector, collector/arterial or arterial/arterial intersections to allow for exposure and access. Neighborhood commercial centers should generally be no less than 3/4 mile apart. Neighborhood commercial uses should be located on land served by water and sewer lines with a moderate capacity. Development of all four quadrants of-an intersection and strip commercial development will be prohibited. - Community Business District (CBD) 1 Characterization: This class of uses includes comnercial activities, offi- ' ' ces, and moderate to high density housing. These uses should be grouped an �. i a site of 10 to 30 acres with a gross leasable floor area of 100,000 to 300,000 square feet. Commercial uses in a community business district sell a wide variety of goods and services, and generally require a market area ranging in population from 30,000 to 150,000 people. 3.3.30 Location Criteria: The precise location of these uses should be jointly determined by market factors and the community planning process and should complement existing uses. Generally, a community business district should be located at arterial/arterial intersections and on transit routes. Community business districts should be approximately 2 to 5 miles apart. They should be served by moderate capacity water and sewer lines. r Regional Business District (RBD) - Characterization: This class of uses includes commercial activities, offi- ces, and moderate and high density residences. These uses should be grouped on a site of 30 or more acres with a gross leasable floor area of 300,000 to 1,000,000 square feet. Commercial uses in a regional business district sell a wide variety of goods and services and generally require a market area population of at least 150,000 people. Location Criteria: It is doubtful that a need for a new regional business district beyond those already planned or existing in the County, can be pro- ven. If and when the County's population could support another regional business district, its precise location will be determined by an amendment to the comprehensive plan. Generally, a regional business district should be located in proximity to an arterial interchange and on two or more tran- sit routes to allow for access from several directions and by a variety of means of travel. It should include a variety of community uses such as day care, library and other such uses in addition to major commercial and high density residential uses. It should be served by sewer and water tines with moderate to high capacity, and should not cause undue traffic congestion on adjacent streets or on access routes leading to these adjacent streets. >e 0. . • Ito ► u. �sI •i�1 �'. `•,�T+Tj' i J,I�'�� .':.Sym - J `t �)� i %�•�\ or �• 1 j.r►�� J i•-'i. �-tA '�f,A. _1�` � p�/1�. �. �I, \,� �tl�l�p�r� ip :>Y �, �.�f�� ri�A1�, i�••^' •':trw ig 01 -1 ♦ \ �- ����'•;': res. �,"�/ice ` .r.���. . � �� � � � ji�• � FA a y y oor ,�liitu ��1 . �r�•E fir•%•�'��(.+'.1 �!:� .. ►-• ails' . 1 son man WAC ► Sla, ,�/j1►. �:�;��eF►iilkin ltG::�,�i..- :���� M�.ri/�r7)11. ofjkl NMI 14 fflo" I do • • per. "MIM - f �� � ten.` .SII' •. - !. t�.2i:• .ln � � i_I ■ 1 ,./ ■.7��;! �:�ijQ.:�� i�A■..—•ilk�+ �ii►:�\Illh. � M Mlo + wn� .J� ► ^�/• `—T ,. ,., Atolls 1 �� t! _ •ice.�Y_: �`�e-� �1� = Ni.rir=�iii1..«• i -i•, .�� r j � - 11 ►�� j =:.1:111 Hw,.7� E __$: � ;;.;� �li!11� . I .Iit► ,.�,X111.... � a If� -�� •_ �,� +==:AHI hP;j= II�NI i�=� � �p!:��5.����^z � � ,,�' Ali 1.6 Wz­ MME Kill ima "��tan Vt � -r` •�'s��'��{��/,111�'{��I��M'�t q' o� �h\� '_'•f -...`' �, ,�� k =��-' ww".�1rr�l'.i +.{ / w "�•`y��'j; +�`iii 1 �_ �_� ��� T�`���" Vt�`1i�� ��� �` ��" �1 u; \ r._ ■� . I �„•+ P;F HITT � •►\"-�t- i+ � * r y. T ox I 0i SURFACE GY GEM POSOKE er,.:rause- - - •"€" ;� •-��' :� a f.:+ l -F�"" ..i - li.• Lill OCALI Ir-18W ,��■a .Ill . ■■■iu■ __►'���sr- 1 rt " iti Ir11 A : 1- PRO i rrr.. . �,�r• . 1 r i• MUMw;!1►.J/i7.1:'t �•�— —' `;/ �'�\ u`......... f �! �'� w�^'•,,,' Mai �40,25 _ mu 011ie- ��i1 .11 {��iiirlu ►i L'- � _i.1lsr�•.'tib' `-� �►-� fr•r�Il 9li Illi t 1� /' lnlr C � �a ikv tl }ml, �Yiw�iJ r wsf \� znr of: ..:. ■ 1 :, Y. •. , ±, 'r',> / ! ;. , €_ i�. 11 ,Uri! +` s�_ .maw. , �.. -`' .� ,► .� PON .� , tt / ark•' t1aC�����jr�lj�ir/��ww�ia/� i �V�'� r;' i Evrj `.''•.•�✓� = l!+' t. R�;�r!_�. -• sr-"'Ii� ` 1w" a J � •� � � '`r0'i �. �I16"M j�.� , '. r���(s+�i® siti"�! L 1/� '► .F.-.�..,:. .wy(lig •-- . t1 ' I, r�-�11�a. .-'L�r,p. .►_.�; f•J�� � .,.`l.� � . `�iy� .�♦ j�i. .���� �•r',SiMNT `�,f►�l\ .altll `.` '�! 'u j�•� `i� I:af ■ ryr .'♦ :�' \`�,i ..:1'. //\. �t)S�( tt t j y .Ila•\ 11�� r. _�J�IF�,, a �.r..{�!�tri i �17�•:��,� _T� >`,.� � r1�lJti ( ♦. 1,•r."i!{l{ttt'��/`�" I�IAifu Il.;rra/ IrY') �� �y��). -�1. ��� �lL'�� i•'tl�,.�n.'*-i�-j._' ♦ � v 9r+ !!gk-A�.. .: c ��j►J•' a► . I.si i..-._.t~ -';► .{1jR f .i•llli '++ yl.Il � �I•r/- t 440 .y[�Ir Iu ,r•ai �t!1. 1 i .�' �I'" � silU-2 q�Ji#.rci f 4 1 �Ir .�„ / /ri a:Y�r rl y /rr'" �1' ray. r,• rl r � /' ♦ !h�►�� • .r►�R `I►- 1 ., � -�/ !'//��tr1,t ,�i•' �. e /� �/fit_s`�a • �. t• 'o�� �� /�-' 1�1L��t tv � ;�1 p �.i4i �,tl}ttli����� a y�� ' ►.f? � w -j, �Y r� �:e����1_ // a �` t: L_� -ter `• �j `L !/ ti '+fst r a` .{�w�«! lr,.,,:fr'+s\i + "7� „ , �• wi+9 �wM'+. \ �!/ ti f�ll :tr�It =aZ C�1 �wg'�r •� � i 1��/ a.�r+YoUrla!�.� fir_ _i. .`•r..� . tt►t7< a r ��� ►Ir .�1�+ - ��\11�[l 'i. � ����� :.���Eili��I�i7il' r.i k�wl;i.a�.a:�l �IIS/���:.�r���.��� _ �";�.+wa� `� V�� ^�I ! '.:� \,ti'^ /�f�ww.��-tly��« -� , � I u[ _ dwa;I>r.Lr)/)� �� �iw.•r1��. ��; F•+wll..._-�.�/Ii - � M , =.�/�'fii ;•�-�. tc inMOM �t>` \VI � �', ✓1`"�� � : Az � i1ti % l•1i.:\> T i{i:11 !► � ��1 �� �rJ � � rti �i:�t��\�\L1:1�t � .r f/•I: �r!1 i � tllji��l{ i; � ���1 �f r � > ��s�-S� .0■raJ *'.~ rw i� err 1001 611 •r �' �� �"" r• W bur Lam wi t y .��>T'ZjJ/ of�o !? r+ Ild Mr, ; oar AW pm AV TOPOGRAPHY kwrjj 46 104 ■h 1 Ii. -- ��.A..t�.., =_•�`-�;; -%1► lr�ri ''��1 +a INS ^ -� '" i� �''•►����_�` ,'3r.. � - -way r�= ■ filltr " "*4 � ■� � � ��,✓�,,� � rte. low "MAMP ftOOMM AMA �� __ �► +► + �'r/� u�nuu.µ �`��INt 1 11 _�JINII ii� '.iAY 1i•t• :s�•Ci'i� MW i ' !• ilii €moi ...... '/ � • ro-41 IN ONE '�.T_� � t sem..—a��.� � �G�".• ''�` s.i ::tinl AV 4� ' r `�•�T���11� itl�+it H� ��11°E, , r t' ky _Q7 r �i'�l��. �, :i.'!S,= �E tbi��•I' +-;IIIIS� �f r,il� � ••i��� "•+ �� � I11 i ud1sUa 'elMlmt, x .►,:t—`---� �` .�'+5�:r' J�� � _ ��rr • a 111 t � Lt��� + it '4' «�:•. _ ` �I�..{.. X t ���IF ;�-��� �"lig Rik' &4;. `�� �I ''•""-.--�.._ � i 9-1 ;fir► :r - I�i■I► sk EXISTING VEGETATIO k 7 AM 1 ■veeVAN MARSH , cemotocus MEADOW /11low _ �►� �aTsoNs TIOpDIAGRAM V F v • v • v v v m v - .:4 �, � • .1i. lA�• • ` , ISIS r / ♦ + Ails _ •1 i Is � � ��.u*� f •.* i •'� ..ti iii V r $ w�« d e - JCS.-• . � Or .Q �u:zzszzi• , ♦ to C a .+i L•' • 41 On areas designated for industrial uses within the floodplain, conflicting uses will be allowed fully in accordance with policies 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 and the standards set forth in the 'Son-iii the 10knif+ 014'4pior %11' tiro Conunturily Development Code. J. Ravine 108/113 Tualatin Floodalain This resource area is actually part of the Tualatin Floodplain area, yet has a setting much unlike the normal floodplain area. It has, therefore, been considered to be a significant open space, water shed and watland area; and it includes all of the land designated as floodplain, approximately 35 acres. This low lying area is primarily covered with deciduous trees and underbrush with a few marshy areas. It provides a habitat for a variety of small animals and birds while providing a unique open space resource. In some of the areas, the j property owners have maintained the area as lawn. This natural area also functions as a drainageway primarily during the months of higher water concentration. Many of the slopes going into the area exceed 15%, and adjacent to the mobile home park the reinforced slopes are a minimum of 25 percent. The actual floodplain area is less area than the entire resource area. The Tigard Comprehensive Plan indicates that the areas surrounding this resource will be developed for Low Density Residential uses (1-5 units per acre), except for the mobile home park which is already developed at a Medium Density Residential use (6-12 units per acre). These uses may conflict in some ways with the preservation of this .F resource. If the entire resource is preserved, there may be a loss of buildable lands, fewer dwelling units, and additional development costs. On the other hand, land and amenity values might be enhanced, dwellings buffered from other dwellings, and local open space generated. If the conflicting use is allowed unaltered, there may be a loss of wildlife habitat, lower water quality, and additional costs of modifying the area. The staff recommendation for this Goal #5 is that the floodplain and the entire ravine area below the 150 foot elevation mark be preserved in their natural condition, including topography and vegetation. Density transfer from the site will be allowed up to 25% of the density allowed within the resource area. Parcels containing any of the resource site will be required to develop under an approved Sensitive lands permit and the standards set forth in the Community Development Code. K. Durham Elementary School ,. The Durham Elementary School was determined to be a significant historic structure. The school site includes 5.59 acres. Now part of the Tigard School District 233, the Durham School was erected in 1920. In 1951, an addition was added to the facility which now houses classes to the sixth grade. In addition, this school house is the only remaining institutional land mark in the southeastern portion of Tigard. Efforts are continuing to place the structure on the National Historic Register. Y . �. I -102 VIGARD PUBLIC LIBRARY 12568 SAV. MAIN ST. C'i1�fi�,0 *GGN 97223 y: T 1 _ ►V� � i ' `Vl 11 an1 nir tl Ips;� �Y� ������ ax Ir1it . f■ t � - ® �`,•�1=�:T- ����'�� Ilii�_rini�L«. •rm' 3J.Ji�$ ii"/`� - � i -,,'i�l��at� It I�u■i) Ir � �• /; � =i�"s�''��>a�•ii� :,c �.'�'�!J_ ,;, ' �� ZA IZ z� � `�4t'�' : f► au' � lyi�}� y��;` l.,{ • t�-Iill' . . ill�hll�� � ..a` / I t:���►�,,77 - ,1w 0 'Cl1U773} :;{Lt•L, rill i111-3 1 'jr Irnt , "<`�l��:n� r a�'��lit���111i"�.:illlr �II�I��.'1'4, ; `E�L�+..+J it- `` � /�y t'�='-��"•IE'�: �} . r ■ *M_ ^t -,t:Jl�#t 1 ��4ur��: TMo-',.� 34-v 4 `. � �,�..• � j a liatr i � ,.• • III/I+��••i,= i 3vR'$411i1.11 ' ,�1... `e. '.`� r �•�• �r w z� �• •ic'♦ • .RR1Y� •.. � - i�"�i J„ '•n 1 1 �1 , wr• ■.■ ■_� "tI i r ye rji�C�� _ ��t _ � i •TJ ���it � t t t FI•• isme �;�.1� • .-t. .,!rt.1�� r Nitspills J .i1•I•• - . --p r VEGETATIO ,f. 'II ' (Most Recent Figures Available) Washington State of -4 Year County Oregon U.S. TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME (in millions) 1979 $ 2,280 $22,460 $1,927,005 PER CAPITA INCOME' 1979 $10,108 $ 8,887 $ 8,757 k MEDIAN FAMILY INCOME 1980 $26,486 620,952 N/A MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD EFFECTIVE BUYING INCOME 1960 $23,284 $17,162 NIA 1 According to he U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1977 ger capita money estimates for counties and incorporated places in Oregon, the City of Tigard had an estimated 1977 per capita income of $6,995. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Survey of Current Business. State of Oregon Department of Commerce, Housing Division. • Sales and Marketing Management, Survey of Current Business. III. RECENT DEVELOPMENT TRENDS From 1970 to 1980 Tigard underwent a change from a rural community to a suburban community with a strong economic base. The major factors are location and the accessibility to transportation. It is anticipated that recent trends will continue as the available buildable land becomes utilized in response to increasing economic pressures. Tigard intends to channel growth, through its ' land use and public facility construction policies, in a manner which makes the best use of the remaining acreage while promoting the expansion of job opportunities to meet the needs of a growth population. A. Buildable Lands A v=gl build IQ 1awas completed for Tigard in September of SW -JWnUr ME it was round that 270.01 acres of co r_cial-land was availablo as follows: C-G 76.38 C-G(PD) 63.67 (AD CBD 4,00 C-P 108.68 I -143 .,..ter...,. be divided into separate zoning districts. The first area includes all of the CBD north of Fanno Creek, including the "Main Street" development project area. Within this area 40 units per acre(R-40) would be permitted, as well as commercial and office uses. The remaining areas south of Fanno Creek will be limited to residential uses only, 12 units per acre(R-12), and should be considered as a transition area be the___coma�erc a� rrd--the- esbatrlisti "res en a areas ur er o the south. The following chart illustrates the amount of vacant buildable acres for residential uses by zone. Residential Net Acreage No. of Units R-1 5.96 6 . Y 54.23 108 R-i 63.50 191 R-4.5 444.37 2,019 R--4.5(PD) 105.93 477 R-7 76.09 554 R-7(PD) 66.97 482 R-12 200.55 2,409 R-12(AD) 35.88 431 R-20 222.17 4,443 R--20(PD) 11.32 226 R-40 10• 427 OF Subtotal 1,306.57 11,769 _ I 189 NPO #i that ale The needed collector connections within NPO N4 arra 1ura1�`d within ttw 1riN�x Area. The adopted NPO M4 plan indicates the connections for this area are needed to provide job access to the commercial and industrial development areas. These inner Triangle Collector links include: i. A connection between pacific Highway at 78th south to Dartmouth. Although the exact alignment of this collector connection has not n a been determined, it is anticipated the alige�nt till hen Bastin to ithe southerly direction from Pacific mimrhwaymection will be continued existing Dartmouth right-of-way• to I-5 via the proposed I-5/Haines Road interchange. (This interchange is under construction; from 69th westerly to 72nd, 2. A connection in the form of a loop road then south in an easterly to the Dartmouth connection, (Nl above) direction to Hampton;'and 3. A connection from N2 above to Atlanta to be aligned with 68th. To complete the collect or cosystem in llector stare Tria 6le a 69th tend he following streets s ng rea must be upgraded to mind NPO NS-: The collector system in this area is centered around the industrial areas south of Hunziker and north of Bonita. The connections include: 1, A collector between Hunziker and Hall aligning with O'Mara at Hall; and 2. A collector from ki above south to Bonita, east of Fanno Creek. The continuation of Riverwoodn*rhfrom 92nd to o NPO Md area tooth represents the only Minor Collector connection needed from WashiMIM 1Bar j&Irisdi"n nt o Du Road between Hall Blvd. and PaCifi CHi�h,!v• i 2. Durham Road shall opt be considored a major arterial route between I-5 and pacific Highway. 9. Consideration of use of Eide Road as a connector between I-5 and pacific Highway shall be encouraged. I - 234 4. Durham t3oa�i •k—>> ks :�..- t� 9 mnwirws lanes of traffic with the provision ror teftern mnvomont. 5. Truck traffic on Durham Road in excess of 30,000 pounds gross vehicle weight shall be discouraged. NPO #7: Due to the lack of developed areas west of 121st Street, there are a number of ; collector street connections needed in the NPO #7 area. All of the collector connections would be minor collectors. These would include: } I. The extension of Springwood Drive west of 121st Street to 130th; i 2. The extension of North Dakota Stroet west of 121st to Scholls Ferry Road; 3. The extension of 130th from Scholls Ferry Road to 128th, and to Falcon Rase Drive; and 4. The extension of Murray Boulevard to 135th as provided in the NPO N3 section. i In addition to the proposed new collector connections throughout the Tigard Urban Planning Area, it is anticipated that many of the following existing collector streets (both minor and major collectors) may need upgrading in order to adequately accommodate the The streets include: Projected 1990 and 2000 traffic volumes. 1. S.W. 135th from Scholls Ferry to Walnut, including the intersection at both Scholls Ferry Road and 135th; 2. Walnut from 135th to 121st and possibly from 121st to Pacific Highway; 3. 121st from Walnut to Gaarde and a portion of 121st from Scholls Ferry to Walnut; 4. Gaarde from Walnut to Pacific Highway; f S. North Dakota from 115th to Greenburg, including the intersection at North Dakota, Greenburg and Tiedeman; 6. Portions of Bull Mountain Road from Pacific Highway west; 7. Naeve Street from Pacific Highway; 1 S. Portion of McDonald from Pacific Highway to Hall; 9. Durham from Pacific Highway to Hall; 10. portions of Sattler from Hall; f : r T - 235 Current difficulties with transportation systems in the area can be basically categorized in terms of safety and/or efficiency. Since 1971, according to the 1979 Traffic Safety Study, less than 40% of the identified hazards along Tigard streets have been eliminated, leaving many of these hazards to threaten human life and limb. The efficiency of the transportation systems—the ease with which objects and people are moved—is the other basic criterion of its success. In Tigard, many of the major streets are inefficient because most of them have not been improved to their designated standard, or because the designated standards are inadequate to the demands for their use. Excessive demand on limited facilities is responsible for peak hour traffic congestion on several streets. TABLE VI ACCIDENT ftNALY$IS BY INTERSECTION COY OF TIGARO 1981 Intersection Accidents 99W/Hall 23 99W/71st/Villa Ridge 20 99W/Greenburg 15 99W/69th 14 99W/Bull Mountain/Frontage 14 99W/Hwy 217 13 ,. 99W/Fred Meyers Entrance 13 99W/Warner 8 99W/Garden Place 8 99W/McKenzie 7 99W/Pfaffle 7 99W/Walnut 6 99W/Gaarde 5 99W/Park 5 121st/Suamercrest 5 99W/Johnson 4 99W/87th 3 99W/74th 3 99W/Canterbury Lane 3 Nall/Burnham 3 121st/Scholls Ferry 3 Durham/Bu uurnamiUorena 3 72nd/Bonita 3 Source: 1961 Accidents Records, Tigard Police Department. 4. Intersection Problem Identification Accidents occur at intersections for various reasons, no signalization, poor visibility/congestion, high traffic voltnses and speed are among a few. Below ; is a brief discussion of the status of those intersections where there is a high occurrence of accidents. k. 1:- 244 } DIAGRAM V111 PERCENTAGE OF RESIDENTS i.IViNC wI'I'II1N 5 1{1.00KS //! J!//: //////;. 4` // r / • /, f/ NORTH /// s /!//!.'!!/!/// / tt - r•rtrTrr '. ':rs;!/!!////// !!.•_ !!////J/J//// ; tt•T•rTTTTtt tt TTfiTTT/!/////! E ///ITT!//////J t't1TtltttTTTT tTTtTt////!/ ///� It{ttttltttT//J//// rtTTfiTTtT11tT ItN tltfitJJ/lttTr !f/� lltiiliIt ftT1`r'!!J!!Ir'rTt?t':" rtr r L NIINtI t4 TTTt T f 4 iT /!! tlt/tiiiltttTlT/ /!!/ T^TT f T 1 tttT'S'= Nattatt ttittTTTtT tlNttNTttTTtTT//Jt t•t•tt' 1'^•'•rTTIT r1N It it to Is 11 4" 'N1"! T 1"TrTts alt .'. Nti#1ita'P'P9'T'P'hTt:/T t rt t r r rttITt NtoItita"14aa tt•t Go•�•14" ! Tt-r!t• 1TTT1eas.� t TT tti/N11Nalt11 /tiNtt""pit" r•rtt•Pt 'rTttttt ttt taNllaat114,1"""" 1414"aa.NI It"i///p1404ttat'!"1"P'1't'Tr'Pt•'I":'TT tt't' 1ttTTT' t/ M.t��gHgMqq gaMapt ttttllN"a11,104"tt`t/t^t r'rt t Tt ? Tt fifiT rt . ""aitNa"q Np"aap ptii itaNlt14 #1 It1 ,1111 11•tTtttttt T r� tttt I4t4ait"gif04 ap h as It 11tiaalt/N Tt'r.�! rtttttJlrtt ++ r ttt.N.it... 14" 04N 14"14 1 tt//!!tt/1/ tttt r.• r• .• •-r+ "14"""14 14p Nqt to#4 T TTJ/ + +- 4-.•+ .-+ ttt"14 111164 1, /tttt!//1J////J!/!/// 'J//Ttr ' t'ttTN tt 0404",1 1t'R'Tt3�i ttJf////: !!!//!1/JJJ!/ ♦ • +Tttt OUOI 14apq ipp"tlpi 1111/?'!/!//;'/////!//J///1J///: . • + . t�`Oo OOUO tt`t'04M a14pgtsi 000000 TtTaN ga"14pi /J//J/://JJ///////////////!! •• .- . + . ti+` 0000000 tt•114It appM"t //1/!/.'J//!///////////:JJ/// -+ + , • ' '+0000.0000 Tt'fg14t gppaNi 11!11!:J/!/!////J/!//////!!// . •- r • -r+0000000(L: t+t14" ..III / .*!/!/J1/////!.'////!/!/ ' /;>' r • • + • 4"00000001= ttt•"14" 0414""1 11,'11!♦/////!/!//J////// !! 4 ••• a •• • • .• -•r. 000000011 t+1 t ""1t 111 /:!!!!!♦11!!!!!11!!!/! ♦1111//' • - •• # ••4 •OuOuuaOo •: >t'r "t/ . , • s • s• • «.0000000 cittttt+ • /♦i'//!/I//!!//!!/ e ///////+ ♦ . •• • . .• -+ + .•OOd-•a` 0000•t•tt'tt 11// I/!/!/////oP°s //11/f/!/:/ � • • . • •r«. 4. 4, 00000010++ q ter• / J!/ / / ' !Poo //J///.'//;.'/ + 4'.scwotts Fs00000UOOUOt 04"14 + !!!♦!/, "''0 !!!111///!///!;; • • 000uu000a • r+ - a"att" • / t + •• • •-t+ 00000000 "iotarit /////4 +•-#- 000000000 14"14"/1"1 !/000000000 4111Itt/NN11• //OOOODU00 ",1,1"",1,1• / •'Ir/ ! / ///1./ /.'/x'11//////OG t•tt? tttttttt• 11 .'11 . .� •'!! /'CL '!/00/ /t t ttttt• / OttttttttT• TO _ o To sem_ r = ! ,'f/ "' '/'' •' //11 ////1J11 • 00OO+trtttTt- t'�_ tl �`3 `_a _ • s' '! ' /1.'/;//1/! o'� OOUO1t-rtttttT. �:•a_ G TO �9_ e: = O 0000'rtrt•r ttrtr U ), ^ TO 79. t — t .� l1/: 000GUtttttTTrrt• TO 9- ti s it / '/.' // /////:1111 17OUOl11JUTttttTttT• Source: Washington County Planning Department. 253 YS Plan policies have been prepared to preserve the continuity of Tigard's active citizen involvement program and to ensure that citizens will continue to have access to information that enables them to identify, understand, and have input in the planning issues related to implementation of the Comprehensive `- Plan. Additional information on this topic is available in the "Comprehensive Plan Report: Citizens Involvement." FINDINGS o Throughout the development of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, the City has actively sought the participation of Neighborhood Planning Organizations and other citizens groups. o The Neighborhood Planning Organizations and the Committee for Citizen Involvement met on a monthly basis throughout the Comprehensive Plan revision process. o Continued citizen participation in all aspects of land use planning helps to ensure that City government meets the needs of Tigard's citizens. a In order to participate in land use planning decisions, citizens need to have access to information which enables them to become aware of and informed about planning issues and City policies. It is essential that this information be made available to all citizens in an understandable form. o Land use planning education is important to promote and stimulate interest k.—' in the citizen participation process during all phases of planning. POLICY 2.1.1 THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN AN ONGOING CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND SHALL ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN ALL PHASES OF THE PLANNING PROCESS. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The City shall periodically review notification requirements and methods to determine if they adequately provide notice to affected citizens and revise these requirements and methods as necessary. 2. The City shall continue to inform, in a timely manner, appropriate Neighborhood Planning Organizations (NPO) and other citizens groups on all land use planning matters. 3. The City shall continue to assist and support any City Council recognized citizen group in providing adequate meeting places, distribution of materials, policy direction and staff involvement. 2 II — 9 5. ECONOMY { This report addresses LCDC Statewide Planning Goal 09 requirements titled "Economy of the State." The recommended findings and policies have been developed to blend Tigard's individual economic programs into those of the region and state to meet Goal #9 requirements. 3 The Goal q9 statement reads: "to diversify and improve the economy of the state." "Both state and federal economic plans and policies shall be coordinated by the state with local and regional needs. Plans and policies shall contribute to a stable and healthy economy in all regions of the state. Plans shall be based on inventories of areas suitable for increased economic growth and activity after taking into consideration the health of the current economic base; materials and energy availability; labor market factors; availability of renewable and non-renewable resources, availability of land; and pollution control requirements. Economic growth and activity in accordance with such plans shall be encouraged in areas that have underutilized human and natural resource capabilities and want increased growth and activity. Alternative sites suitable for economic growth and expansion shall be designated in such plans." FINDINGS . Through analysis of the economic conditions which affect Tigard, the existing make up of the community, the potential for growth, and the City's interest in assisting existing and new businesses to expand in and relocate to Tigard, the following findings were identified. o The City of Tigard is a sub-element of the Portland metropolitan economic region. o The economic climate of the City, in part, is subject to the influences of external economic forces beyond the control of the City. c The City continues to experience steady commercial and industrial growth despite the national and state economic situation. o A significant amount of commercial and industrial buildable land is available in areas where all services are provided making it suitable for development. o Manufacturing, wholesale and retail activities provide the majority of the�� employment opportunities to area residents. o An increasing regional dependence on electrical, electronic, and instrument related manufacturing employment has occurred in recent years. o There is a need for new and expanded public facilities to open areas for industrial and commercial uses. F o Economic data, particularly that relating to sites available for development purposes, is largely unavailable or not kept up to date. b., II - 29 .3 5.1.6 114E CITY SHALL CONSIDER PRIVATT- i INANCING AY PRIVA11- tW-Vr10P1W,; 7111 COORDINATION W1111 AVAILABLi IUM11ING ME1ttt ,. 10 PROVIDE. 1.11t11 it. FACILITIES TO COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND DESIGNATED ON Tt4E i COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The City's Community Development Code shall incorporate revisions needed to remove unnecessary obstacles which may deter new economic activities. 2. In the process of administering the City's Comprehensive Plan, careful consideration shall be given to the economic implications of all proposed policies, programs and regulations. 3. The City shall identify regional economic needs through interaction with officials of other Washington County jurisdictions and take appropriate action to adjust local policies to respond to their regional concerns and needs. ° 4. The City, along with the business community, shall develop an economic development program aimed at attracting new commercial and industrial development to Tigard while also encouraging the expansion of existing business concerns. S. The City shall participate in the formulation and implementation of a regional economic development progrars for the Washington County area. a 6. The City shall work with the local business community to develop and maintain an up-to-date economic data resource file which will be mad* available to existing and potential Tigard business concerns. 7. The City shall work cooperatively with the business community seeking its involvement and advice when working toward arriving at decisions having economic implications for the business community. t!. The City shall concentrate resources for the revitalization of the Central Business District utilizing Local Improvement District's and a program to encourage private investment. 9. The City shall encourage new development by allowing mom flexible zoning standards within the CBD than are allowed citywide. 10. The City shall develop and 'implement an economic development program compatible with the potentials and constraints of the City and will: a) Aid in the creation and maintenance of now and continuous employment opportunities to afford City residents the choice of working within the City; b) Strive to improve, diversify and stabilize the economic base of the community thus reducing the tax burden of the residential property owner, c) Aid in the effective utilization of the land, energy and human resources; and ]U 31 djProvide for the t mel;y 'depelgpmeUt of a31 'Public facilities and } services and their 4elivery systems.. 1 4 11. Tt►e 'City shall encourage the location :;and tlevelgpment -of economic a+ctimitias wlhi--� ,meet ;the �occupatlonal and temployment :nee:ds of all city re.si"nts. particularly the ;unemploq"d and underemployed. 32. The Comnwnity Devel4Qpm8nt :Code shall ;limit development ton lands ;planned for commefrciAl ,use to commercial .uses. Tiesidential ;uses will be ,allowed above Ow first floor in Selected .zones.. M The =City shall •compile an inventory which identifies all ;parcels of :land zoned for corcial or industrial purposes and aihich identifies a3 T+oe amount and type of development on the land, if :.any.; b) The niece of the owner; c) The public services which ;mve available to the site,; ad) The ;curraent zoning designation; .and e Tom► aessssmw value. ii• The City shall maintain development codes which describe -standards for iandsrapingg and buffering where commercial and industrial uses mbut residential districts. 1S. The City shall work with .Portland -Community 'College to develop straining prograsms as an incentive to :naw industries locating in Tigard ineeding -a trai"ed labor force. IS. The City shall coordinate its planning efforts with the Metropolitan Service District andGrargan Department of Transportation to =ensure *40*Sts access from major arterial routes to <designated commercial and ir+dustrial Aweas. 17. The Tigard Community !Development cCode :shall =designate types of :permitted residential development in C P :and CED commercial •districts. 10. TIhe city shall encourage private landowners toconsider utilizing available bondirq mothods, it addition to private financing methods., to provide puialic facilities to .vacant buildable lands with the :potential for industrial or commercial development. Iii. The City should not preclude any financing aechaniam for the ies+iementation of•Its economic 4evelopment •cibj Lives. 20.. The City Council, 'upon the recommendation ,of Its lrconomic Development C>aaaittee, shall Aeveslop objact4ves,, vritwris,, -and -standards °for detOMining its -availability of banding �mettthods and usa ',of bond proceeds for Private. commemxi,al and industrial ,devel:opment. t - ` 11 32 r K. f ,(S) {Historic 'Overlay :District amendments, -applications .pursuant to,Chapter :18.12. (c) The �Planriing iCommission shall conduct :a public hearing in the wanner ;prescribed lby this -'Chapter and -shall 'have the authoriLy ,,to =approve, tdeny, or :approve with tconditions the _following development applications: (1) ,Subdivision applications _-pursuant -to Chapter 18.160; ,(2„) A quasi-judicial comprehensive plan map except: (A) The ,Planning Commission's function shall be limited to a recommendation to 'the'Council; ?(B) 'T'he Planning Commission au►y transmit their rocommendation in any 'form and a final ordor need not be formally adopted. (C) The Council hearing shall The a de novo hearing and a► final order shal.l 'be formally adopted. (3) A quasi-;judicial zoning map amendment pursuant to Chapter 18.-1130 except -where the zone change application is being 'heard concurrent .With a quasi judicial plan amendment. In such a -situation this zone charge shall be docidtW in the same manner as a► quasi-judicial ;plan amendment. (+!) A developmer►t applieatiun referred to the Commission by the Director; (S) An .appeal of a decision made �by `the Diractor under Suction 18,32.3'10 and subsection .(4) of this section; (5) =A conceptual :planned development ;proposal under Chapter _1:8.80; �(T) Interpratat ions of 'the Tigard Comprehensive Plan or- the adopted ;Community :Development •Code, iT -request"d by the Director or other :interested .persons. 18) Any other matter nut -specifically .assigned 'to 'the Director, the ill anrings _Officer, -or 'City Council under :Title 18 of -the Tigard Municipail Code. t;(9) 'Fhe ;pr6liminary review of ,plan designaxtions arui formai1 Ampow1tion �uf zoning district designations aasad !to -,I&nds annexed :to :the City,, AP peaa E of sign iperrviit3, ,pursuant to+Chapter 18,i11A. ((31!1)) `Sign tCode�axceptions, ipursuant tto(Chapter 48 JIM ((112)) Waniances Ito •subdi i:aAon �taniiarads. x; 3137;1- A40 (i$) °Recommendations to'the'City -Council on annexations. 6 x� •.(1.4)�«Quasi-judicial zoning designations on property to be annexed. (d) :The .city Council shall conduct -a public hearing in the manner .prescribed by 'this ° Chapter• and shall have the authority to approve. deny, or =approve with conditions the following development applications: (1) The 'formal imposition of plan designations made to lands € s►nnexed to the City; (2) 'Matters referred to the council by the Planning Commission y. or Bearings Officer for review under lection ts.32.310(b)(3); (3) Review of 'decisions of the initial hearings body, whether on the Council's own motion or otherwise, as provided -by goction'18.32.310(b)(1)-and (2)• (.,q) Quasi--judicial-plan amendments. (5) Resolutions to-the Boundary Commission for annexation. m 14_31 '400 Consolidation of Proceedings Except as provided .in (d) below, whenever an applicant requests =£' more than one ,approval and more than one approval authority is required =to decide the --applications, the r proceedings shall be consolidated so that one approval >authority shall decide all "s 4pplicmtions in one proceeding. (b) 'In such cases as stated in subsection .(a) above, the hearings shall be held 'by the Approval 'Authority ngoriginal Jurisdiction over one of `the applic&tiuns under section '18.32:090, in the following order of preference: the Council, the comraission, 'the Hearings officer, or the Director. ;;(C) Plan miap amendments are not :subject to the 120-day decision--making ..period .prescribed by state law and such amendmaents m&y 'involve complex :issues; therefore, the Director M shaall ,twst be •required to consolidate -a -plan ma amendment and a Z change or other permit applications requested unless the appli�et -rQquests the proceedings 'to::be consolidai:ud and signs as waiver .of '.the '120-day .time limit-,prescribed ' by state :law for done=_change and permit. applications. r(d) �,Where'there is.:a:consolidation of_.proceedings: The noticeushii1l identify,-each. action to:-be taken; (2) '� ::decision ::on _a -plan =;map amendment :shall ,precede 'the decision--,,on wthe r�arpuadd zZone�:change.:and.other,kac t ion s.=>and, -yL ) parat�; etions-iahallhbeTtaken-onti,each:=applicatson. SIII —441 - is ��• raa ALBERTSONS' , INC. APPLICATION 'FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE (MAP CHANGES) A. LOCATIONAL CRITERIA FOR ZONE CHANGE (Volume 2 , Chapter 12.2) 1. SPACING AND LOCATION The Albertsons' property is not surrounded by residential districts on more than two sides. The subject site is at the southeastern corner of Pacific Highway (U. S. 99W) and S. W. DurhamRoad. Immediately to the west of the side and along the west side of Pacific Highway are general commercial uses. The zoning on these adjacent propertiesisequivalent to the City of Ti.gard•s zoning for '"central business district." Both King -City and Washington County share zoning responsibility for this adjacent area. Washington County's "central business district" zoning extends from Durham Road to an area substantially southof the Albertsons' property and includes Tax Lots 500, 700, 2800, 2700 .and '2600. Generally, the centralbusinessdistrict zoning on these adjacent properties would allow more commercial uses and be mere intensive than the general commercial zoning Albertsons' is seeking on the subject property. To the immediate north of the Albertsons' property is Durham Road and a general commercial zone (C--G) designation by the City af 'Ttgard. This C-G-zone is already substantially developed by a mix of singular commercial uses and -a shopping center-office complex. 2. ACCESS (a) The eroposed expansion of the General Commercial C-G) to the immediate north of Me M Albertsons, propertX sKall not create ra c -congestationlor a .trarric sa e y pro em. Attached to .and:-in support of this application is t a Traffic Analysis prepared by Associated Transportation Zngineering &=Planning, Inc. (dated July 1986) . The report ;.provides -data -and analysis which addresses street capacity, -axisting--and -projected traffic volumes, _speed limitations, number cf. turning movements and site traffic generation. 'For purposes :of:-analysis, the- report utilizes traffic volumes Land -characteristics . on a Uworst 'case" or maximum vehicles possible basis. :Table- 5 -at page 8 establishes that with `full development --of -.the AAlbertsons' property as -,;general -commercial .all existingintersections will -operate at= Level -::of ..Service _C - or .:better. Due to .the ->proposed site =design,. ­signalization : of ,Durham=Summerfield-intersection, :and=.a LL'right turin :pan/sight -_turn - out'_l mitation "for Pacific :Highway, the f. °'B4ge l designation of Albertsons' property as general commercial will fr not -change the level of service traffic classifications for existing intersections nearthesite. Service Level D is generally utilized as the standard for assessing--urban-traffic operations and design of urban roadways. It is alsotheadopted policy of Metropolitan Service District (MSD) to maintain a level of service "D" on its major roadways within the Portland Metropolitan Urban Growth Boundary during peak periods of operation. At Level "D", there generally is at least 10% more capacity for traffic. Existing intersections near the Albertsons' property will -operate, after full development, at .service levels "A" and "C". See, Traffic-Analysis, Table 5 at page 8. At Level TMC", there is 7U— to 30% more capacity for traffic. See, Transportation Research Circular No. 212, Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Transportation Research Board, Academy of Sciences, 1980 and Exhibit „A". As previously stated, the Traffic Analysis was completed using data for a "worse case" application. It is reasonable to assume that full development of the Albertsons' property as general commercial will not reach the "worse case" impact on roadway systems. Traffic generation for the Albertsons' property will not add 100% new traffic to the existing vehicular trips alongs Pacific Highway and Durham Road. Many of the customers to the Albertsons' property will be "drop—ins" already on these roads for other reasons, such as commuting to and from work and shopping. Many of these vehicular trips will involve customers changing their shopping habits and choosing the Albertsons' grocery store or adjacent retail services over other such retail businesses in the area. The Traffic Analysis at page 7 identifies that the total daily trip generation for a 177,600 square foot commercial development would be 7,214 trips and 651 trips at P.M. peak hour. The report notes that at least 40% of the trips could be deemed "drop-ins" and this would reduce the total daily generation by 2,887 trips and the P.M. peak hour by 260.4 trips. In addition, the report identifies that MSD projects that 4 to 6% of all home based trips will be made by transit. As the Albertsons' property isadjacentto major Tri-Met bus routes and scheduled stops, this could create a reduction in daily trips of 288.6 to 432.8 and at PM. --peak -hour trip reduction of 26 to 39. An adjusted projection of trip generation would be as follows: y Trip_ generation with full "Drop-in" and Mass Transit Potentials Daily P.M. Peak Hour Total In out 3,,894 352 170 181 Page_, 2 'e _ I (b) The site shall have direct access from a major collector or arterial street. The Albertsons' property abuts Pacific Highway (U. S. 99W) , the largest major traffic way in the City of Tigard, and S. W. Durham Road, a major collector or arterial street. The attached Traffic Analysis sets forth three possible scenarios with provision for a varying number of access points on both these major traffic ways. See, Traffic Analysis at pages 9-11 and Exhibits 2-7 thereto. (c) Public transportation shall be available to the site or general area Tri-Met bus service to the area includes Route No. 5 running along Pacific Highway and a loop through King City initiated at Durham Road and Pacific Highway. There are regularly scheduled bus stops at this intersection. Tri-Met also operates Route No. 43 along Durham Road with regularly scheduled stops to the east of the site. 3. SITE CHARACTERISTICS (a) The site shall be a size which accommodate Bresent and pro-Tecteduses. The proposed 'general commercial designation and related site development plans will utilize the entire site. The Albertsons' property is relatively level and consists of ten tax lots totalling approximately 22 acres in size. The property has frontage along Pacific Highway for approximately 19100 feet and Durham Road for approximately 940 feet. The property has an approximate depth along Pacific Highway of 725 to 1,220 feet and along Durham Road of approximately 880 to 1,050 feet. There are no physical characteristics of the site that would prevent development as general commercial. The proposed site development plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B", illustrates that the site can easily accommodate a substantial commercial shopping center, include major commercial uses contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan at II-82, and utilize less than 85% of the site coverage. The projected uses include 177,600 square feet of general commercial uses, approximately 870 parking stalls, andprovisionfor landscaping and buffering of at least 15% of the site. Both the physical characteristics of the site and the proposed development plan clearly illustrate that the site can accommodate projected general commercial uses. (b) The site shall have high visibility. _ The Albertsons's property is located with approximately 1,100 feet -of frontage along the largest traffic 4 way in the .City of Tigard, a.e., -Pacific Highway (U. S. - 99W). #> The property also has approximately 940 feet of frontage along the -major:collector -of ,-S. W. Durham -Road. The .site -isgenerally Page_3 h, ii level with the roadway and highly visible to all traffic along these major traffic ways. See, the attached Traffic Analysis, Exhibit 1 for existing traffic volumes on these adjacent traffic ways. 4. IMPACT ASSESSMENT (a) The scale of the project shall be compatible with the surroun ng uses. The Albertsons' property is adjacent to two large shopping center complexes. To the immediate northwest, the King City business center is located and consists of a combined acreage equivalent to the Albertsons' property. The focus of the King City business center is "King City Plaza", which includes a large multi-use structure housing general retail uses and a Kienow's grocery store. Other retail services and four banks are located in adjacent buildings. The general scale of King City Plaza and related businesses is compatible with the Albertsons' property. The proposed development plan for the Albertsons' property is, in fact, less imposing and intensive than the King City business center. A general commercial use entitled "Willowbrook Business Park" is located directly to the north of the Albertsons' sists of six buildings arrayed in property. This development con an office-retail complex setting. Existing uses of these buildings include restaurant, offices, general retail and convenient shopping services. The site is approximately one-third to one-half the size of the Albertsons' property, fully utilized with commercial improvements and does not provide any significant buffering from surrounding uses. The Albertsons' property and both of these large shopping centers share another common development scale factor. All three properties are located and orient their development scale to the intersection of Pacific Highway and Durham Road. The high volume of traffic and controlled access points necessitate that the _ scale of general commercial development in this area must not be "strip commercial,19 but large acreage developments with on-site parking and internal traffic circulation designs. 4 Other nearby uses are comparable in scale with the proposed uses on the Albertsons' property. To the immediate south of the site is a mobile home park/subdivision entitled "Royal Mobile Villas" which consists of Tax Lots 100, 200 and 2600. Total acreage in this planned mobile home development is approximately 40 acres. The Pacific Highway access focus, site utilization and overall project scale are compatible with the Albertsons' development proposal. To the immediate west of the Albertsons' property is a central business district that is about half developed. Total acreage in this central business district is approximately - 28 acres, and thereby, larger than the Albertsons' property. At the } Page 4 southwestern corner of Pacific Highway and Durham Road is a large c vacant parcel of approximately 12 acres. Although smaller, this combined undeveloped parcel would provide a development site comparable in scale to that proposed for the Albertsons' property. This is particularly true since the development of this site would probably be designed to integrate with and be a logical extension of the adjacent King City business center. Farther south along Pacific Highway, but adjacent to the Albertsons' property, is an office complex entitled "Tualatin Valley Professional Center". Next to this planned commercial complex is "King City Convalescent Center", "Cedar Park Manor" (a mobile home park) and "D & M Market" (a neighborhood convenience market). Although partially undeveloped or developed with uses having single lots and accesses, the Albertsons' proposed development is compatible with the combined scale of this western central business district. To the northeast of the Albertsons' property is a large medium-high density residential development entitled "Summerfield." This site is approximately 30 acres in size and is developed generally at a scale of intensity and site design compatible with the Albertsons' proposed development. The remaining surrounding land is generally undeveloped or partially vacant large residential parcels. To the immediate east, there is a large medium to high density residential zone comprising approximately 30 acres. Ultimate development of this district would or should involve a large scale residential planned development with building sizes and site utilization plans of a scale compatible with the Albertsons' development proposal. A similar existing development size, usage and density is the "Summerfield" planned development located immediately north of this district. The "Summerfield" medium-high density residential community clearly establishes the scale for development of the vacant property just east of the Albertsons' property. Finally, to the southeast of the Albertsons' property is a low density residential area consisting of large vacant or greatly oversized residential parcels. This entire area is geograpically isolated from the more intensive uses aligning both Pacific Highway and Durham Road. Access to the area is toward the end of 113th Street. This area generally slopes southward toward the Tualatin River, is not associated with the commercial developments to the northeast and is more or less river oriented. (b) The site configuration and characteristics shall be such a e privacy of allTacent non-commerc a uses can bemanane . The eastern border of the site abuts with 113th Street. Further to the east of 113th Street is an undeveloped medium-high density residential district of approximately 30 acres. The major entrances to the Albertsons' property are along Pacific Page 5 p • Highway and Durham Road. The proposed site development plan illustrates that the sitecan provide e a adeq3th ate depth for a landscaped buffer along the south will also be The adjacent non-commercia fferu protected by a substantial bu strip.ses thThe southern portions of the Albertsons' property are covered with a mixture of nearly mature Douglas Fir and deciduous trees. A buffer areasstrip to f these insure trees may be maintained in these site boundary the privacy of the adjoining uses. The adjacent lands nt tof theseepropertiessshouldeSentaillla undeveloped. Development development approval. Development subdivision or planned proposals for these neighboring properties would be subject to their own buffering requirements under the City's Plan comprehensive non- Plan and Community Development Code. In them the roposealtcommercialVeuses buffer thetriAlberrtsonsn them a P property. site (c) It atures rneo oseisltetoesncnranrateveho menunique uen. _e The site is generally level along the intersection of Pacific Highway and Durham Road and gently slopes southeast from that point. The treed steeper portions of the site are along the The site southern and southeastern boundaries of the si � commercial design will incorporate these site features. complex can be located in an "I. shaped" configurations ring o b lock parking lot activity, noise and lighting properties generally to he south along theeast. steeperIn ddsouthernlaand buffer areas can be provided be eastern boundaries of the site. The major traffic flowran the directed onto Pacific Highway and Durham Road and away f non-commercial uses to the south and east. all(d) The ociated li eta onnin activities v non--reseniea suses. not _n The non-residential uses to the west and northwest are separated by Pacific Highway, a 4-lane state highway with additional lanes fOrturning tootheents northaof tthe Albertsonsa intersection. The properties Durham Road, a major arterial and the property are separated by main entrance to Summerfield and brostreetBusiness also separateded bybylighting and properties are signalization lighting. The proposed uses for the Albertsons' property are the same or similar commercial uses found at these adjoining The non- ed or properties to the north and west. lights, noise and activities will be a willconfo providelandscape properties. In addition, the site will p buffer area along the length of Pacific Highway and Durham Road -.3 Page 6 l to further diminish any potential adverse impacts on these adjoining uses. B. STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment (map change) and zone change (map change) are consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals. 1. Goal No. 1 - Citizen Involvement The proposed Comprehensive Plan and zone change amendments will require a series of public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council as required by the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.32.090(c) and W. In addition, the proposed amendments will not alter the citizen involvement policy identified in the Comprehensive Plan policy 2.1.1 at II-9. The existing public hearing process shall ensure that the citizens of Tigard will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process for these amendments. Finally, the City of Tigard has received compliance acknowledgment from LCDC as to these planning and ordinance provisions, thereby establishing that this review process will be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goal No. 1. 2. Goal No. 2 - Land Use Planning - Goal No. 2 states that each plan and related implementation measure shall be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units. A majority of the site is within the jurisdiction of Washington County prior to the implementation of our annexation application. Washington Count. has not adopted a Comprehensive Plan mapping designation for the site even though it is within the County's urban growth area. Washington County has elected to place primary planning responsibility for growth in this area to the City of Tigard. A determination by the City of Tigard as to a change of use for this property will not conflict or contravene a Washington County goal or presumption for urban needs. In all other respects, the proposed plan and zone change for the subject site complies with the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal No. 2. An adequate factual basis for decision has been presented as identified in the data in Section A above and related facts pertaining to the various goal considerations hereinafter. The proposed changes, as identified 'hereinafter, are compatible with the policies and goals of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Tigard. 3. Goal No. 3 - Agricultural Lands The subject property is not and has not been designated as agricultural lands either under Washington County or City of Tigard planning and zoning. The current use of the property is residential. The subject site and the entire surrounding area Page 's are within the Portland Metropolitan Urban Growth Boundary previously acknowledged by LCDC. There is no conflict between the proposed plan and zone changes with Goal No. 3. 4. Goal No. 4 - Forest Lands The subject site is not and has not been designated as forest lands by either Washington County or the City of Tigard. As stated in subsection 3 above, the land is designated urban and is committed to urban .uses. There is no conflict between the proposed amendments and Goal No. 4. S. Goal No. 5 - open Spaces , Scenic and Historic Areas ana—ffia-Fu-ral Resources There is no portion of the Albertsons' property that is within a designated open space, scenic, historic or natural resources area. Volume II of the Washington Comprehensive Plan Urban Area (June 1982) identifies that the site is not within forest lands (Map 5) nor the 100 year floodplain (Map 4). The entire site is designated as "growth allocation" for a subsequent determination by the City of Tigard (Map 7) . The Comprehensive Plan mapping for the City of Tigard designates the property entirely for urban uses. There is a designation of the stream corridor approximately located at the southeast corner of the site. However, any development of the site and alteration to the seasonal stream corridor would require a hearings process for a "Sensitive Lands Permit". These planning designations and regulations have already received compliance acknowledgment from LCDC. Therefore, the proposed amendments are in conformance with Goal No. 5. 6. Goal No. 6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality The proposed planning and zoning amendments will not adversely affect compliance with Goal No. 6 All waste and process discharges from future development shall not threaten to violate, or violate applicable state or federal environmental annexation on quality statutes, rules and standards. Upon , the site shall be served by a sewerage processing system through the City of Tigard. Correspondingly, storm drainage and waste treatment will also be provided through City systems. A change to general commercial for this site will also involve the same requirements related to indirect sources of air pollution for a site located within the Portland urban area. 7. Goal No. 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards There are no areas within the subject site that are subject to natural disasters and hazards as defined under Goal No. 7. Also, there are no natural hazard characteristics identified .for the site in the comprehensive plans of Washington County and City of Tigard. Page 8 8. Goal No. 8 - Recreational Needs Essentially, there will be no change in the requirements for recreational need by the proposed amendments. The site is not designated under either comprehensive plan for recreational needs. Indeed, the site does not lend itself to the purposes of developing recreational needs. Therefore, the proposed amendments would be consistent with Goal No. 8. 9. Goal No. 9 - Economy of the State The proposed amendments will substantially aid the City of Tigard in satisfying the Statewide Planning Goal requirements for diversity and improvement of the economy of the state. Earlier, the City identified in the Comprehensive Plan Resource Document (Vol. 1) at I-144 that it contemplated "commercial shopping development will occur along Pacific Highway on land zoned commercial which is closer in proximity to residential development than the highway oriented sites. " Since its adoption in 1983, this has clearly proven to be the case. Substantial in- fill of commercial development has occurred now necessitating additional lands to be designated for commercial. The subject site at the intersection of Durham Road and Pacific Highway abuts the leading edge of residential growth areas for the city. This is particularly the case for medium to high density residential as the site is located near the Summerfield planned development and a 30 acre site designated for medium-high density residential to the east. Volume I also provides that "ultimately, individual development decisions will be made on the basis of site availability, adequacy of the site for a particular purpose in terms of size and shape, municipal development standards governing the land, topographical features, availability and capacity of utilities, as well as access to highway and proximity to uses of a similar nature." As identified in Section A above, these locational criteria are all satisfied for this site. There is a substantial absence of vacant general commercial lands of 20 acres or greater in size within the City of Tigard planning area. This is also reflected by the Comprehensive Plan's statement that "the supply of developed commercial space is low, but it is expected that the supply will catch up with needs before long." The addition of this 22 acre site will substantially aid the City in meeting its own economic needs, as well as, aid the state in providing a broader and more diversified economic base. The City of Tigard needs to designate this 22 acre site as general commercial to provide for a more complete variety and selection of commercial uses and services for this market area of the City. As previously stated, the City's general commercial district is very similar to the Washington County and King City community business districts. The Washington County Comprehensive Plan, Volume II, Section 3.3.29 identifies that this class of uses includes commercial activities and offices. It is also z contemplated that "these uses should be grouped on a site of 10 Page 9 ast ( to 30 acres with a gross leasable floor area of 100,000 to 300,000 square feet." Commercial uses in this district are expected to "sell a wide variety of goods and services, and generally require a market area ranging in population from 30,000 to 150,000 people." The proposed Albertsons' development plan covers a site of 22 acres and will provide commercial building square footage of 177,600 square feet. These specifications are clearly within the contemplated large parcel site oriented commercial developments already established to the west and north of the Albertsons' property. In addition, the commercial uses contemplated for this site by Albertsons' would be providing a wide variety of goods and services to a market area having a population well in excess of 30,000. See 1980 Census Reports for Census Tracts 304-308, 310, 318-320, 64-67 and 203. The proposed uses in the Albertsons' development plan include a major regional grocery facility, a department store and other general retail services. There are no department stores within the surrounding general commercial and central business districts. The nearest department store is approximately three and a half miles north on Pacific Highway, i.e. , the Tigard Fred Meyers. There are a variety of commercial uses in a local economy which assume and incorporate a level of direct competition. These commercial services sometimes provide different levels of service for the same products or a different style of the product. Each level and style comprises a portion r" of the total market share. In the south Tigard area, there is ` only one existing general grocery store, i.e. , Kienow's located in King City Plaza. Approximately a mile to the north in Canterbury Square is a Thriftway grocery store. The only other . general grocery stores are located approximately three miles to the north in downtown Tigard. It is well established that the grocery shopping needs of any given community involve competition between a number of different general grocery stores. For a population market in excess of 30,000 people identified in the U. S. Census, there is a substantial absence of general grocery sevices for the market in this area. In fact, there is only one grocery store for all of Census Tract 308. The Albertsons' development plan includes a unified structure with three large users. The third large user would be a large drugstore facility. There is an absence of large drugstore facilities in the southern portions of the City of Tigard. The nearest large drugstore facility is located approximately three miles to the north in downtown Tigard at the north end of Main Street. The Albertsons' proposed development will also provide a substantial temporary construction employment for the site. The development's general construction and specific user alterations are expected to involve employment in excess of 100 people. After completion, the development is expected to provide permanent employment on both a full time and part time basis of A Page 10 approximately 150 people. By the very nature of this community commercial construction and services operation, it is expected that a majority of the employees, general contractors and subcontrators will come from this sector of the metropolitan area. Finally, as this site is well within the Portland metropolitan Urban Growth Boundary acknowledged by LCDC and falls within the Pacific Highway corridor contemplated by both Washington County and the City of Tigard as appropriate for large block general commercial developments, the proposed amendments would be consistent with and would enhance the economy of the state under Goal No. 9. 10. Goa_1 No. 10 -_Housing The redesignatiog of the Albertsons' property as general commercial will eliminate the housing designations for the property. However, an analysis of changes in the City's housing zoning and redesignation of adjacent residential property will enable the City to allow general commercial on the site without causing a conflict with Goal No. 10. After the City adopted the Comprehensive Plan and the buildable lands unit per acre calculations, the City has approved residential zone increases in density. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change 4-84 redesignated community professional zoning (offices) to residential 40 units per acre (R-40). This site consists of 4.3 acres and provides an opportunity for 172 residential units. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 20-84 and Zone Change 13-84 redesignated 2.9 acres of residential property zoned R-12 to R- 25. This represents a net increase in potential residential units of 37.7 or 38 units. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 6-85 and Zone Change 7-85 redesignated 1.5 acres zoned R-4.5 to R-7. This represents a net increase in potential residential units of 3.75 or 4 units. It should be noted that the Statewide Planning Goal 10 on Housing does not require the actual implementation of residential lands at the planned densities. The Goal merely requires that there be an "opportunity" for those housing densities through the various applied classifications. From the. standpoint of calculating consistency with statewide planning goals, LCDC only requires that the zone be analyzed for its "opportunity". It is recognized that some of these three planning and zoning amendments may have developed or committed the lands to lesser densities, but the higher density zoning remains upon- the land. Over a 20 year period, there is the potential for the increased densities to be realized through additional development or reconfiguration of existing structures. Page 11 The total number of units created through planning and zoning amendments above the previously acknowledged comprehensive plan is 214 residential units. The redesignation of the Albertsons' property as general commercial could represent the loss of 659 to 668 units. The site comprises: approximately 11.95 acres as High Density (R-40) with a maximum equivalent of 478 units, approximately 7.11 acres comprising Middle-High density (R-25) providing a maximum of 178 units, and approximately 2.61 acres of Low Density (R-1 to R-4.5) resulting in 3 to 12 units. The total of these separate zoning classifications is 659 to 668 units. Under the planning policy for transitioning commercial uses to residential uses and the existing implementation of that policy through the previously adopted comprehensive plan map and zoning, it would be appropriate for the City to redesignate the approximately 12 acres south of the site to a higher residential density. This 12 acre parcel is located west of 113th Street and directly south of Tax Dots 2800 and 2802. This land is presently zoned Low Density (R-1 to R-4.5). The redesignation of this parcel would then provide a high density transition from the General Commercial on the Albertsons' property to the surrounding uses to the south. To the immediate south is the medium density "Royal Mobile Villas",, and to the southeast is the Low Density zone adjacent to the Tualatin River. The redesignation of this 12 acre site could be accomplished through a City staff initiated update for the City's five year periodic review process required by ORS Chapter 197. The five year periodic review is normally scheduled five years after the City acquired compliance acknowledgment for its Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances. A redesignation of this 12 acre parcel to R-40 would result in the housing opportunity of 480 units. Removing the existing low density zoning potential units results in a net increase in housing density of 436 units to 478 units. As a result of these calculations, the City's reclassification of the Albertsons' property to general commercial would not adversely impact the City of Tigard's housing needs and would be consistent with Goal No. 10. By reclassifying the Albertsons' property there would be a loss of approximately 12 acres of High Density (R-40) residential property. The designation of 12 acres of High Density residential property in the adopted City's Comprehensive Plan mapping represents an identified and verifiable need for a type of housing necessary for satisfying the City's Goal 10 housing requirements. High Density residential is the least acreage category the City provides under its housing classifications. It is therefore necessary that the City replace this '11.95 acre parcel with another approximately 12 acre site. The location and the need for a transitional High Density residential zone next to General Commercial dictates that the 12 acre parcel south of the Albertsons' property be reclassified High Density (R-40). By this reclassification the Albertsons' plan and zone change Page 12 proposal would result in the following calculation: Additional units from prior 214 unit plan and zoning amendments Additional units from rezoning 436-478 units the adjoining 12 acre site Total additional units 650-692 units By comparison, the maximum number of units lost for the Albertsons' property rezoning is 659 to 668 units. Therefore, there is almost no overall adverse effect on housing from the proposed plan and zone amendments. The maximum potential loss overall would be only 9 units or could comprise a net gain of 24 units depending upon whether a portion of the properties would have been developed at R-1 or R-4.5 under its Low Density classification. Therefore, the proposed change would be consistent with Goal No. 10. 11. Goal No. 11 - Public Facilities and Services The proposed plan and zoning amendments would be consistent with Goal No. 11. The redesignation of the property to General Commercial would result in a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services. The site is designated for urban densities as a result of being within the Portland Metropolitan Urban Growth Boundary. Both Washington County and the City of Tigard have designated the site for intensive urban uses. However, under its present location in the jurisdiction of Washington County, the site cannot be developed unless urban services are extended. Full urban services can be extended to the site and immediately utilized upon annexation to Tigard and redesignation of the property as General Commercial. Once annexed, the site can be adequately served with sewer, water and related utilities. Such public facilities and services already adjoin the site and are providing services to both the General Commercial zone to the north and the Central Business District to the northwest. In addition, the southwest corner of the intersection of Pacific Highway and Durham Road is already within the boundaries of the City of Tigard. The City already has a responsibility for the provision of public facilities and services to that site. It is most appropriate and timely for the surrounding properties to annex and be served by the same facilities and services. Therefore, the proposed plan and zoning amendments are consistent with Goal No. 11. 12. Goal No. 12 - Transportation The proposed plan and zoning amendments are consistent with .Goal No. 12 and would aid in providing and encouraging a } safe, convenient and economic transportation system. As identified in Section A above, a traffic analysis has been Page 13 completed for the area and specifically identifying traffic impacts generated by a redesignation of the Albertsons' property as General Commercial. The Traffic Analysis concludes that the proposed plan and zoning amendments would not significantly change the existing Level of Service for roadway networks and intersections. Under scenario 2 of the Traffic Analysis, Pacific Highway and Durham Road would remain at "A►' during A.M. peak hours and at ►►C►► at P.M. peak hours. The intersection of Durham and Summerfield roads would remain at Level "A" at both A.M. and P.M. peak hours. See, Traffic Analysis, Table 5 at page 8. The Albertsons' proposed development plan would involve improvements , including signalization, to the intersection of Durham Road and Summerfield Street. The City's Comprehensive Plan identifies at I-244 that several accidents have occurred at this intersection in the span of just one year. Since the adoption of the plan many more accidents have occurred at this intersection. The installation of signalization at this intersection would significantly aid in eliminating accidents. Such installation of signalization could only occur, from a practical sense, by .the commercial development of the Albertsons' property with the creation of a main entrance directly south of the intersection of Durham Road and Summerfield Street. The City's Comprehensive Plan at I-234 and 235 also identifies that the City has the transportation policies that "the City shall encourage the assumption of jurisdiction from Washington County off Durham Road between Hall Blvd. and Pacific Highway" and "Durham Road shall be improved to 2 moving lanes of traffic with the provision for left turn movements." The accomplishment. of these traffic policies can occur with the annexation of the Albertsons' property and redesignation to General Commercial. These functions would provide the City with an opportunity to assume jurisdiction over Durham Road near Pacific Highway and receive dedication of adjoining right-of-way for needed intersection and roadway improvements without cost to the City. The proposed plan and zoning amendments are also consistent with transportation policies concerning mass transit. The site is already served by Tri-Met bus routes and scheduled stops. Approximately 84% of the neighboring residential units are within five blocks of bus transportation and stops. See, City's Comprehensive Plan at I-253: Census Tract 308, Item�4 at page 51 Citizen Needs Assessment Survey, Washington County. The attached Traffic Analysis also identifies that MSD projects that 4 to 6% of all home based person trips for purposes unrelated to work will be made by transit. This would include trips to commercial shopping areas. Albertsons' proposed development plan would provide for major department, drug and grocery stores at this central location. It should also be noted that the site is adjoined by large tracts of existing and planned for medium to high density residential development. It is reasonable to assume that the Page 14 �e development and usage of the Albertsons' general commercial ( property will encourage pedestrian and bus ridership by neighboring households. This alteration in the traffic pattern should also help to reduce traffic on Pacific Highway and collector streets at intersections north of this Durham-Pacific Highway neighborhood. 13. Goal No. 13 - Energy Conservation The land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles. The same Tigard Community Development Code provisions for energy conservation shall apply to the redesignation of the property as General Commercial. In particular, the development proposal as identified above in subsection 12 would aid in the conservation of energy through the enhancement of more efficient transportation modes and land use patterns, reduction of travel distances between residential and commercial areas, generally ¢ increasing densities of land uses at . the site, and enhancing the prospect for mass transit ridership. These functions of the development proposal support the finding for energy conservation under the City's Comprehensive Plan, Volume II at 62. These provisions have obtained compliance acknowledgment from LCDC, and therefore the proposed plan and zone change is in conformance with Goal No. 13. �. 14. Goal No. 14 - Urbanization The subject site is within the urban growth boundaries of Washington County, City of Tigard and MSD's metropolitan UGB. The urban growth boundaries of Tigard and MSD have been given compliance acknowledgment by LCDC. The zone change that is proposed is merely a change from one intensive urban use to another intensive urban use. The plan and zone change proposal t does not require any establishment or change in the existing urban boundaries. Therefore, the proposed plan and zone change . is in conformance with Goal No. 14. C. CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES The subject site is at a relatively high elevation compared to the adjacent Tualatin River drainage basin which slopes southeast from the site. The site also is not subject to severe soil erosion potential, slumping, earth slides or movement, severe weak foundation soils; nor does it have slopes in excess of 25%. See the attached proposed development plan and Comprehensive Plan Volume I at 29 and 33. Also, the subject site is not within the 100-floodplain as designated by Washington County and the City of Tigard. However, the City does designate a small portion of the eastern boundary of the property as being within a drainage way. Most of this area will be within the buffer strip to be provided for in the development of the site. Any adverse impacts in the development shall have to comply with Policy 3.2.2 identified in the Comprehensive Plan at II-14. Page 15 t: h Given the topographical layout of the site and the proposed location of improvements, this should not provide a significant problem. There are no existing hazards or physical limitations on the site that would preclude its ultimate development. There are no rock mineral resources available at the site as illustrated in Comprehensive Plan Volume I at 29. Similarly, the subject site is not part of a significant wetland or potential location for parks, recreation and open space. There is some Douglas Fir and deciduous trees located on the site. However, the proposed development plan would provide a significant buffer along the southern and eastern boundaries of the subject property where a substantial portion of these trees are located. See , Comprehensive Plan Volume I at 39 and attached proposed sire development plan. 2. Section 4 - Air, Water and Land Resources Quality The City's Comprehensive Plan policies regarding air, water and land resources quality are based upon application of quality standards imposed by the DEQ and other appropriate agencies. As previously stated under Section B for statewide planning goals, development of the site will be subject to and can comply with air quality standards regulated by the DEQ. Extension of water and sewer services to the site will ensure water quality. C. 3. Section 5 - Economy As previously stated in Section B(5) above, the proposed changes are not only consistent with economic goals, but significantly enhance them. In addition to the items supporting economic development listed in that section, the City's policies also support the proposal. The first economic policy listed at II-30 identifies that "the City shall promote activities aimed at the diversification of the economic opportunities available to Tigard residents with particular emphasis placed on the growth of the local job market." At II-29 the Comprhensive Plan sets forth the following finding regarding the make up of employment opportunities; "Manufacturing, wholesale and retail activities provide the majority of the employment opportunities to area residents." As previously stated, the development of the Albertsons' property as general commercial will provide substantial part time construction employment and substantial permanent retail related %employment. It is forecasted that the majority of these employment opportunities would be locally based. The proposal is also consistent with the City's policy on expansion or creation of. new commercial areas. First, the Albertsons' property is part of a mixed use area that combines general commercial in large block developments with medium to high density large block residential development. The lands proposed for general commercial development have not been committed physically to residential development and could not be Page 16 , developed at medium to high residential densities without ( annexation and extension of public facilities and services to the site. Secondly, the surrounding uses commit the area to general commercial development. As previously stated, the site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Pacific Highway and Durham Road. All three other corners are either planned for or physically committed to general commercial uses. In relationship to those corner general commercial developments there are abutting medium to high density residential tracts created to provide a transition to further removed lower density residential tracts. The designation of this property will continue and support the existing development pattern and planning principles in this area. The proposed plan and zone changes would also, thereby, satisfy the economic finding at II- 30 of the Comprehensive Plan: "Residential development in commercial districts complements commercial uses, helps to minimize crime within the commercial districts, provides housing for senior citizens which is in close proximity to shopping areas, and minimizes vehicular traffic which would reduce pollution and conserve energy." See also discussions related to this issue under Section B(12) regarding the direct compatibility between the proposal and transportation goals. Finally, the proposed plan and zone amendments would aid the City in carrying out its implementation strategies, particularly strategy No. 10 at II-31 of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would "aid in the creation and maintenance of new and continuous employment opportunities to afford City residents the choice of working within the City." The City is also directed to implement an economic development program that also "strive to improve, diversify and stabilize the economic base of the community thus reducing the tax burden of the residential property owner."t The provision of 177,600 square feet of retail activity would provide a substantial employment base in the category that the City has designated as "the majority of the employment opportunities to area residents" and would provide a substantial economic base for reducing the tax burden on local residents. In addition, - the proposed plan and zone amendments would aid in effective utilization of land, energy and human resources by providing an appropriate buffer between the busiest major traffic arterial in the City and residential. zones, providing an appropiate commercial use that is not adversely affected by traffic noise and lighting along Pacific Highway, and also insuring that service levels in the traffic corridor would not be adversely impacted. Finally, the proposed changes carry out the finding that there should be a provision for timely development of all public facilities and services and their delivery systems. The subject property is immediately adjacent to existing City public facilities and services already being provided to intensive general commercial uses. The subject property is located within the urban growth boundaries of the City of Tigard, Washington County and MSD. All jurisdictions designate the property for intensive urban development. Intensive urban uses already exist and surround the site on three sides. Immediate annexation, redesignation of the property as general commercial and Page 17 provision of public facilities and services from the City of Tigard is consistent with the City's economy policies and would be a provision for timely development. 4. Section 6 - Housing The proposed plan and zone amendments are consistent with the policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan on housing. The proposed changes, coupled with .a redesignation of high density residential to an adjacent 12 acre parcel, will provide necessary buffering as directed in the Comprehensive Plan policies and ultimately result in either no significant change in the number of housing unit opportunities or will result in a gain of up to 32 units for the City's housing stock. See also, information identifying that housing goals are supported by the proposal identified in Section 8(10) above. Transitioning and buffering planning techniques are important planning functions identified in the Comprehensive Plan housing policies 6.3.1-3 and 6.6.1. The proposed plan and zone amendments would be consistent with these policies and, in fact, would enhance buffering, screening and transitional effectiveness for the area. Currently, the subject property is located along the busiest transportation corridor in the City. The site is also adjacent to two highly intensive general commercial business complexes. The combination of these surrounding uses to the location results in the subject property being inundated with high volumes of noise, light, movement and vibration. The subject property should not be designated for a residential use that would be forced to absorb all of these adverse commercial urbanization and traffic impacts. Instead, the property should be designated commercial to provide a transitional buffer between the traffic and light generation noises and the residential uses and zones to the southeast. Development of the subject property would provide the location of a large single structure to function as a solid screen for the southeastern residential area. The approximately 12 acres to the immediate southeast of the subject property should be redesignated as high density residential or R-40. The combination of these planning techniques would provide a buffer between the noise generation on Pacific Highway/King City/Willowbrook Business Park and the lower density residential designations to the southeast along the Tualatin River. The buffer would consist of a general commercial use which would provide structures acting as a fence line to screen out both noise and sound from the neighborhood to the southeast. From that commercial zone, there would be a residential transitional zone of medium density to the south, high density to the southeast and medium-high density to the east. These bands of screening and transition would then provide proper protection to the more sensitive low density residential areas around the Tualatin River. 5. Section 7 - Public Facilities and Services The proposed plan and zone amendments would be Page 18 consistent with the City's goals on public facilities and services. See, the discussion in Section B(11). As previously stated the annexation is for lands immediately adjacent to highly intensive urban uses and the City's southern boundary. Extension of services to these properties are contemplated by the comprehensive plan for intensive urban development and timely for extension of water, sewer, and the provision of fire and police protection. All private utilities such as natural gas, electric and telephone are already adjacent to the site to the immediate north and west. The provision of general commercial at the site will not adversely impact schools, and in fact, will aid in providing the necessary economic base to the City to alleviate residents' burden for school budgeting. The proposal is also consistent with all other related urban services such as local government facilities, library services, and solid waste disposal and recycling. 6. Section 8 - Transportation The proposed plan and zoning amendments are consistent with the City's policies for transportation. See , the attached Traffic Analysis and the information perta3nng to traffic identified in Section A(2) and B(12) above. The proposed development does abut two publicly dedicated streets that have been constructed in accordance with or satisfy City's standards. The applicant agrees to commit to the construction of such street improvements, curbs and sidewalks as required by City standards for the development. The applicant also agrees to provide intersection improvements and signalization as may be required for the Durham Road-Summerfield Street intersection. In addition, the site and the proposed use are compatible and will enhance mass transit consideration identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan under Section 8. 7. Sections 9 and 10 - Energy and Urbanization The proposed plan and zone amendment are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan policies regarding energy and urbanization. See , Section B(13) and (14) above. 8. Special Areas of Concern The location of the subject property is not within one of the areas of special concern listed in Section 11 of the Comprehensive Plan at II-71 to 76. The site is located in NPO No. 6. In Comprehensive Plan Volume I at page 234 there are listed some development issues for NPO No. 6 that pertain to the site. First, under Item No. 1 the City shall encourage the assumption of jurisdiction from Washington County of Durham Road between Hall Blvd. and Pacific Highway. Also in Item No. 4 the plan states that Durham Road shall be improved to two moving lanes of traffic with the provision for left turn movements. The annexation and redesignation of the subject property as general commercial are consistent with these policies or issues and will enhance the City's ability to assume jurisdiction over Durham E road and ensure improvements to that roadway in the area of its intersection with Pacific Highway. Page 19 �f- u • EXHIBIT "A" SERVICE LEVELS FOR ARTERIAL ROADWAYS s TYPICAL TRAFFIC FLOW CONDITIONS Relatively free flow of traffic with some stops at si#Malized or stop sign A controlled intersections. Average speeds would be at least 30 miles per hour. The volume to capacity ratio would be equal or less than 0.60. Stable traffic Clow with alight Belays at signalized or stop sign can- trolled intersections. Average speed would vary between 25 and 10 ailes per hour. The volume to capacity ratio would be equal or less than 0.70. Stable traffic flow, but with delays at slitnalized or stop sign controlled Intersections to be greater than at level R, but yet acceptable to the motorist. The average speeds would vary between 20 and 25 allea per hour. The volume to capacity ratio would be equal to or less than 0.80. j Traffic flow would approach unstable operating; conditions. Delays at signalized or stop slim controlled Intersections would be tolerable and D could include waiting: through several slenal cycles for some motorists. - The average speedo would vary between 15 and 20 tulles per hour. The .volume to capacity ratio would equal or be less than 0.90. C-) Traffic flow would be unstable with conrpstion and intolerable delays to E motorists. The average speed would be approximately 15 miles per hour. The volume to capacity ratio would be less than 1.00. Traffic Clow would be forced and .hammed with stop and ro operatinr. con- F ditions and intolerable delays. The averare speed would be less than 15 miles per hour. Notes The average speeds are approximations observed at the various levels of service but could differ, depending on actual conditions. Capacity at service level E/F or when volume to capacity ratio is equal to 1.00. Sl �� u liq �00 t F: tiles\ r q 1 . 1' i c�it tl„ .:.pct, 4 ._...- STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.1 OCTOBER 7, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. S TIGARD PLANNING COMPASSION TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 6-86 Zone Change ZC 10-86 REQUEST: Plan amendment from Low, Medium-High, and High Density Residential to Commercial General and zone change from R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre), R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre), and R-40 (Residential, 40 units/acre) to CG (Commercial General). APPLICANT: Albertsons, Inc. OWNER: James & Emma White 10230 SW Hall Blvd. Herbert & Betty Dayson Portland, OR 97223 H.C. & Amy Randall Gary & Nadene Randall Donald & JoAnn Randall fi Health Resources Inc. William Brownson nd t of LOCATION: South of 113th Avenue (WCTMrham �1 1564, TL 100,, east of pacific0,Highway,00, andsWCTM 2800, 2802, 2900, 3000, 3001, and 3002). 2. Background Information All but the northwestern tax lots are within Washington County. An annexation application has been submitted for the remainder of the subject property (ZCA 8-86). It has been approved by City Council and is awaiting Boundary Commission review. Much of the property in this area south of Durham Road is not within the City. However, the area between Durham Road and the Tualatin River is under the planning jurisdiction of Tigard. 3. Vicinity Information The property on the north side of Durham Road and part of the Summerfield development within the area between Pacific Highway and Summerfield Drive are zoned R-25 (PD) (Residential, 25 units/acre, planned development) and committed to multifamily residential uses. The land adjacent to 113th Avenue immediately east and south of the subject property consists of scattered single family residences on small acreage tracts. The properties east of the subject property are within the City and zoned R-25 while the southern parcels are under County jurisdiction and intended for Low Density Residential development in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. STAFF REPORT - CPA 6-86/ZC 10-86 - PAGE i u, . The property south of the subject parcels are also within Washington County and are designated for Medium Density Residential development in 5 the City Comprehensive Plan and are developed with a mobile home park. King City lies on the west side of Pacific Highway. 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The subject property, as noted above, consists of several separate parcels with the majority being occupied by a single family residence. The applicant proposes to change the Comprehensive Plan designation corresponding zoning to Commercial General to allow for the construction of a retail shopping center. If approved, a separate application and review will be required prior to developing the site. 5. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering division has no objection to the proposal and it is noted that specific access, street improvement, storm and sanitary sewer service. and signalization must be addressed during Site Development Review prior to construction on the site. The Building Division has no objection to the request. The State Highway Division states that Scenarios 2 and 3 in the applicant's traffic study appear feasible and that potentially detrimental traffic impacts can be addressed prior to development of the property. Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation made this statement: .The following are our comments on the above-referenced applications for a site located on Pacific Highway, Durham Road, and SW 113th Avenue. Durham Road - Although this road has recently been transferred to the City of Tigard's jurisdiction, as part of that transfer it was agreed that Durham Road would have a 90 foot right-of-way, a 44 foot paved width, and a 600 foot spacing standard. The site pian as submitted for comments does not reflect these requirements. In addition, a concrete sidewalk should be required for pedestrian access. SW 113th Avenue - Dedication of five feet of additional right-of-way. If access is proposed to this street, frontage improvements, including paving and sidewalks, would be required. Traffic Study - The access volumes leaving the site are too low, 3 which could reduce the level of service at 99W and Durham. Within the traffic study, the traffic analyst reduced the trip generation from the center by 40 STAFF REPORT - CPA 6-86/ZC 10-86 PAGE 2 percent in order to reflect the net increase onto the system by taking out drop-in trips. This is i� acceptable, however, reducing the new trips does not reflect the actual volume entering and leaving the shopping center. The actual access volumes would be the "drop-in" traffic plus the new traffic generated by this development. The net impact is that the traffic pattern within this area would be altered because of this development. t i NPO #6 recommends denial of the proposal for the following reasons: d a. The uncertainty of the southbound 99W left turn lane to handle the increased traffic. b. Adverse effect on the zone change upon established residential development. c. Unnecessary commercial development in an area that is adequately served. 8. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The applicant has presented findings which address the Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines and the applicable policies contained in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. A traffic study prepared by ATEP, Inc. has also been submitted. The Planning staff analysis below does not discuss the State Goals since the City's Plan has been acknowledged. The relevant criteria in this case are Plan policies 2.1.1, 4.1.1, 5.1.1, 5.1.3, 5.1.4, 6.6.1, 7.2.1, 8.1.1, 9.1.1, and the Locational Criteria in Chapter 12 of the Plan. The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is only partially consistent with the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: I. Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the applicant's proposal. 2. Policy 5.1.1 is met because the proposal will have a small positive effective upon the number of jobs available to Tigard residents. Since it will be similar to other commercial developments in the Tigard area it will not "diversify" the local economy. 3. Policy 5.1.3 is not satisfied because creating new, large scale commercial development located in the southwest corner of the City will not "improve or enhance" the central business district as the commercial focal point for the City. Although the specific effect of this proposal may be debatable, it is certainly clear the developments of this type will not have a positive effect upon the r vitality of downtown. The downtown has not enjoyed the same STAFF REPORT - CPA 6-86PZC 10-86 - PAGE 3 economic growth which other areas of the community have in the past three years. Spreading commercial activity into areas which were planned in 1983 to be developed as residential, particularly in a project of this scale, would further hold back the revitalization of the downtown. 4. Policy 5.1.4 is not totally satisfied because the eastern portion of the subject property is adjacent to residentially zoned land to the north, east, and south. This is considered to be encroachment as defined in the Locational Criteria discussed above. 5. Policy 6.1.1 is linked to State Goal No. 10 and the Metro Housing Rule which requires that the average density allowed for all undeveloped residential land in the City be a minimum of ten dwelling units per acre. The adopted and acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and zoning provisions meet this figure but do not exceed it. The applicant correctly points out that several rezonings have occurred since the adoption of the Plan which acted to raise the average density of available residential land. The applicant proposes that the density which is "lost" by rezoning this property from R-40, R-25, and R-4.5 to C—G can be recovered by the previous plantzons change actions and by the City initiating a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for High Density Residential development on the parcels immediately south and east of the subject property. Pages 11-13 of the applicant's narrative more (� fully explain this proposition. Though the staff has no objections of a procedural nature regarding taking credit for past density increases on other properties to justify the loss of the R-40 and R-25 zoning on the subject property, the staff has two reservations regarding the applicant's proposal. First, the area proposed for redesignation to High Density Residential cannot meet all of the applicable Locational Criteria because no direct access is available to a collector or arterial street and the area has significant development limitations due to a large drainageway and steep slopes. Second, the City is presently reviewing alternate development methods for residential projects involving flood plains and other natural hazards. The outcome of this review may affect the average residential density figures and the rezoning of this property for commercial use may make it more difficult to meet the City's obligation to Goal 10. Whether the City Council chooses to grant the applicant credit for prior density increase is a policy issue. No uniform policy has been discussed by the City. G. Policy 6.6.1 calls for visual buffering between different uses such as commercial and residential. Although buffering issues are addressed during Site Development Review, it appears that adequate space is available to provide sufficient buffering. STAFF REPORT CPA "6/ZC 30-86 - PAGE 4 �4 7. Policy 7,2.1 is met because adequate public facilities (i.e., water, sewer) are available to the site. 6. Policy 8.1.1 is satisfied because the evidence suggests that the additional traffic generated by the proposed commercial use will not exceed the capacity of Pacific Highway and Durham Road. The State Highway Division and City Engineering Divisions have both reviewed the proposal and no problems are anticipated that cannot be resolved during the Site Development Review process. 9. The applicable locational criteria or commercial general development are partially satisfied for the following reasons: a. The eastern portion of the property is adjacent to 4 residentially zoned property an three sides when adjacency on a maximum of two sides is permitted. Zl b. The commercial development of the site will not create unacceptable traffic congestion as discussed in finding 8 above. C. Direct access to an arterial and collector street is available. A d. Public transportation is available on Pacific Highway. e. Thesize of the site will provide adequate opportunities for ng the proposed project and residential uses. G-1 C. RECOMMENDATION The Planning staff recommends denial of CPA 6-86/ZC 14-86 based upon the above findings and conclusions. 01 r PREPARED BY: Keith Li en APPROVED 6Y: Will am A. Monahan { Senior Planner Director of Community Development (KL.:dj185/dj4) r x STAFF.1 1EPO --,CPA 6-861ZC 10-86 — PAGE 5 � i4 h r Tigard City Council: November 2, 1986 We live at 16285 S.W. 113th. We will be bordered by the Albertsons project all along the West side - Pacific Highway, and all along the North side - Durham Road. We are in favor of the Albertsons project passing. HoweveM because of the land change and since all of our property will be lower, we do have several concerns: 1. We would want Albertsons to be responsible for any excess water overflow or drainage from their property onto ours. 2. We have a small creek which runs year round, with a tiled spring by the creek we use for our garden, lawn and irrigating. We do not want to lose it because of the land change from Albertsons. We feel that any extra water put Into the creek from the Albertsons project will cause the banks to erode and the culvert under our road will become inadequate. 3. We have a shallow dug well which has been in use for at least 24 years. We're not sure if this will be affected, but It is our only source of water for home use. We Mould like this letter to be kept on file for reference in case any of the above concerns cause us problems. If this project passesy we would like to be rezoned to R-12. Sinc ely, othy Mes^� Durwood Meskel ccs Mr. Don Duncombe, Albertsons, Inc. t s .,y �r M 0 c T 3 t 1956 �-�J CITY Of TIGARD PLANNING per. f D e9 r JL � JO-4w- r t �,� Q • �a� r r. Tigard City Council: November 2, 1996 We live at 16295 S.W. 113th. We will be bordered by the Albertsons project all along the West side -- Pacific Highway, and all along the North side - Durham Road. We are in favor of the Albertsons project passing. HoweveA because of the land change and since all of our property will be lower, we do have several concerns: 1. We would want Albertsons to be responsible for any excess water overflow or drainage from their property onto ours. r 2. We have a small creek which runs year round,^ with a tiled spring by the creek we use for our garden, I*wrt� cf►d Irrigating. We do not want to lose it because of the land change from Albertsons. We feel that any extra water put Into this creek from the Albertsons project will cause the banks to erode and the culvert under our road will become Inadequate. 3. We have a shallow dug well which has been in use for at least 24 years. We're not sure if this will be affected, but It is our only source of water for home use. We would like this letter to be kept an file for reference in case any of the above concerns cause us problems. 12. If this project passesjwe would like to be rezoned to F- Sinc elY9 es - othy Durwood Meskel Inc. ccs "r. Dan Duncombe, Albertsons, s tt' 4. . } �+ ► ''+ X486 William V. Bishop RD P.O. Box 4154 CITY ()F TIGA Menlo Park, CA. 94026 PLANNING DEPT- November 3, 1986 Tigard City Council C/o Kieth Liden 13125 8. W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE$ City Council Meeting Nov. 3. 1986. Proposed Albertson devolopment at Pacific :highway and Durham Road. Dear Members of City Councils Commercial development at this location would further deteriorate the traffic situation on Durham Road. In addition, I do not feel a redesignation of R40 zoning on surrounding parcels would be appropriate at this time. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, /00000 William V. Bishop Tax lot 1700 Durham Road Washington County, Oregon 4 t' ^ 13350 S.W. Ash Tigard, Oregon 97223 October 21, 1986 Tom Brian Tigard City Council City Hall S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Toms I feel compelled to express my disappointment in the recent actions of the planning commission with regard to Albertsons Stores' proposal to build a shopping center on Pacific Highway. I want it known that I have no connection with Albertsons, and have no financial interest in any of their projects. My interest is simply that of a Tigard citizen who wishes to see worthy projects raged as we seek an increase in Tigard's financial base and employment opportunities. My understanding is that we can anticipate an time iny as one hundred new jobs, not including construction work, by t the project is completed. I have seen projects similar to the one now being proposed by Albertsons, including their recently finished complex in Eugene, and they are first class. I believe that this complex could add greatly to the opportunity to shop competitively and conveniently for Tigard residents generally, and specifically for those who live in the Cambridge area. Just as important will be the convenience for residents in Ring City whose shopping options now are restricted geographically as well as physically. I'm not clear as to why the project was rejected, but I have a couple of theories. The first has to do with the ongoing myth that we are somehow going to make the downtown area more viable commercially if we limply discourage building elsewhere. Aside from a few downtown merchants, I know of no one who takes that seriously, and fairly recent aborted attempts to attract substantial businesses there seem to confirm the lack of reality in that kind of thinking. There also might be the forlorn hope that a company like Albertsons will continue an unprofitable operation near the downtown area if we make it difficult for them to move. That is even mire naive, and anyone at all familiar with Albertsons' mode of operation would dismiss such a notion out of hand. I understand, too, that the planning commission is afraid that we'll run out of high density space if we permit the Albertsons complex to go in. I an not an expert in such matters, but I find it hard to believe c" Tom Brian Tigard City Council . October 21, 1986 ^; Page 2 that some rezoning of other multi-family space cannot take care of that. It might also be useful to ask those who live in the area which they would rather have, the tasteful and productive project Albertsons proposes, or more of the apartment blight which has so adversely affected other residential areas (ask some of us on Ash Avenue about that). In short, it seems to no that we have looked at an opportunity and transformed it into a problem. I bow to no one in my wish to protect our environment and not let commercial development destroy the livability of our residential neighborhoods. But as one who is a layman with no vested interest and an appreciation for competence and style, I'd like it known that there is considerable sentiment in favor of this devolopmient and that I an part of it. I hope the council will not Accept the commission's recommendation. I an spending a lot of time out of town these days, and I wanted to sake sure that you and the other council members knew how I felt. If it is possible to make this part of the record when the council hears arguments concerning this project, I'd be grateful. Best regards, Dick Bendixsen ^u s, x+ _ _ ilk -+ ash _ Honorable Mayor 4NOW, members of the Tigard City Council: My name is James N. Craig. I reside at 16325 SW 113th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon. My wife and I own 1.6 acres adjacent to the e purchased our property two years proposed development area. W ago as a potential retirement location. We were fully aware of the existing residential zoning and felt that the location and Y. physical characteristics of the subject area made it m unattractive for commercial development. At this point I would like to digress to our qualifications for presenting informed testimony on this proposal. I do this only because a representative of the proponent belittled our statement to the Planning Commission as that of an unqualified layman. While she is not now active in the field, my wife Vicki has been an active real estate sales person in Oregon and an active broker in Arizona. I have been an inactive real estate salesman in Oregon. I have also managed real estate sales, purchase and trading programs with multi-million dollar annual turnover in three western states, most recently in the Tahoe Basin of northern California and Las Vegas, Nevada. I was a key player in a donation of 35 thousand acres of land between Reno and Lake Tahoe to the federal government. I have also worked in and managed road system planning, development, operation and maintenance of road systems for wild land, recreation areas and subdivisions. In one county of residence, I was a member of the Technical Advisory Panel of the Planning Commission as they developed their Comprehensive Plan and Zoning ordinance. We support the recommendation of denial by your Planning Commission for the following reasons: _ First: This planning area has problems complying with a State role requiring ten units per acre average residential density. This is a key, and rather generous standard. New, employment intensive development of existing commercial a zones is needed. Allowing an existing business to vacate a s ,. commercial zone for a residential area only adds to the problems. Second: This proposal does not meet the criteria that commercial development should abut residential zones on only two sides. �,. Third: This proposal does not fit the guideline to promote development of the central town. One or more major F attractions in downtown Tigard will leave to be replaced by what? 64 a r Page 2 Fourth: The proponents claim that they want to leave the traffic problems of downtown Tigard and improve traffic flow at 99W and Durham Road. The loss of business in downtown Tigard is a poor approach to solving traffic problems created by past development. The proposed development would only move traffic problems on Durham Road eastward . The Summerfield junction with Durham Road is too close to 99W for the current volume of traffic at the two junctions. The Summerfield junction should be moved to 113th Avenue and Durham Road should be regraded and widened from 99W to a t point east of 108th Avenue. Fifth: To date the proponents have not even addressed the problems that will be created by fifteen (15) acres of pavement pouring water into the small drainage that crosses our property. This potential problem and the rolling nature of the terrain on the subject property can much more reasonably be dealt with by a residential developer. In summary: Your Planning Commission accepted very sound advice when they recommended denial of this application. We trust that your concern for progressive development of Tigard will lead you to the same decision. Thank you. i November 19 1986 HAND DELIVERED Mayor and City Council City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Elmhurst Zone Change (Tigard Triangle Area) Honorable Mayor and City Council: The property owners of the Elmhurst Zone Change Site are requesting that the zoning designation of 2.8 acres of Residential land directly north of Elmhurst Street be changed to Commercial General. The reason for this zone change is to enable the applicants to enlarge the existing Commercial General site so all property owners can take better advantage of the south frontage on the proposed Dartmouth Street major collector. Enlarging the existing Commercial General site south of Dartmouth Street from 4.1 acres to 6.9 acres, and Increasing Its southerly depth of 300 feet to 500 feet, will greatly reduce the Inherent limitations associated with a limited site size, and promote a wider range of marketing and development possibilities. The Planning Commission's primary reason for recommending denial of the .,. Elmhurst zone change was that tax lots 3009 301, and 302 did not have direct access to a major collector street, and were currently dependent on Elmhurst, a residential street, for their access. The Planning Commission did state however, that the Elmhurst Zone Change Site will be a prime Commercial General site when access to Dartmouth Street is guaranteed. This guarantee would be accomplished after the individual tax lots. in the Elmhurst Zone Change Site were consolidated and combined with the- currently zoned property fronting the south side of Dartmouth Street. r It Is the applicants understanding that If the properties of the Elmhurst Zone `- Change Site are rezoned and combined with the currently zoned Commercial General - Planned Development (CG-PD) property fronting Dartmouth Street, the Elmhurst Zone Change Site will also take on the same Planned Development designation. The Commercial General Planned Development designation on the Elmhurst Zone Change Site will require that Its commercial access be limited to Dartmouth Street, which eliminates the ssibill of Elmhurst Street ever being used for commercial access. This restriction will prevent any commercial traffic on Elmhurst treet that might adversely Impact the residents south of Elmhurst Street. In 1983, when the Residential zone on tax lot 4400 was changed to Commercial General, the tax lot did not have direct access to a major collector street and was In fact dependent an Clinton Street, a residential street, for Its access. The combined tax lots of 300, 301, and 302 have the same access restriction now as tax lot 4400 did during Its zone change to Commercial General In 1983. This condition � sets a strap r g precedent not to deny the Elmhurst zone change based on current access restrictions. t u ✓nom .n Honorable Mayor and City Council November 1, 1986 Page 2 The Planning Commission's secondary reason for recommending denial of the Elmhurst zone change was that the location of Dartmouth Street had not been finalized. The Council should note that during the 1983 Comprehensive Planning Process, the zoning designation of the combined tax lots 4402, 4400, 4300, 101, and 100 was changed from Residential to Commercial General without a finalized location of Dartmouth Street. The only reason the zoning designation of the Elmhurst Zone Change Site was not changed from Residential to Commercial General during the 1983 Comprehensive Planning process, was that prior to 1983 the applicants were on record requesting that their zone remain Residential. Their request was made when the 8 acres of primarily vacant land to their north and 4 acres to the south of Elmhurst was zoned Residential. Now that those acreages are zoned Commercial along with 86% of the rest of the Tigard Triangle, the applicants have accepted the fact that the development trend in the Triangle Is now Commercial. The economics of developing the Elmhurst Zone Change Site by itself are marginal since the value of the on site houses will likely outweigh the value of the land after the houses are removed. If the Elmhurst Zone Change Site could not be combined with the vacant land to the north which fronts Dartmouth Street, the land costs would probably prohibit the sale and development of the site by itself for Commercial uses. The Residential property south of Elmhurst Street has too much value represented In the houses to make the purchase of the land for Commercial uses economically viable at this time. Waiting until there Is a Commercial demand for the entire Elmhurst Residential Area, before changing the zone on part of It, will only unnecessarily inhibit developmerit of the currently zoned Commercial General land that fronts the south side of Dartmouth Street. One of the closing comments by the Planning Commission was essentially that this area Is going Commercial General, It's just a matter of when. Dartmouth Street is being constructed for only one reason, to give access to Commercial General land. The land that has frontage on Dartmouth Street will have the highest demand and therefore develop first. Unless the zone change request from Residential to Commercial General Is granted for the Elmhurst Zone Change Site, the development of currently zoned Commercial General property that has frontage on 600 feet of Dartmouth Street will not be utilized to Its highest potential. Sincerely, Applicants for Elmhurst Zone Change Enclosure. m • Z .1 1 - -4 - -:Ll trio �t +STREET« s stoo + A ,i _ .J 2s00� s_oo_ 3200 32 33 00 1.00. • s rt u. _ _ _ 31 1,r a e OAa S• .. - '�. 1 �" - �1 •-1 - 2200 - 2.00_st ��.. t6_ _ - 30 co R 2 1300 IL +� - _h'1 It ._w�t! L + 3610 •.rao .tion° so01 to Ir Zia* 300• • 3007 390. -. .. / 3.O• _ _. J-7 � T T•T�• Iso •00,•f0 Is : u 1+ is 1 9 1►.w :;vr •;_ N If 3.0• 1 I- 1 1 1 ( . 10024 25, 1 I r Sam 7 - n CLINTON •""•'•••SW CLINTON STREET ..•»•r• « •i 2 a • 7 1 s • 7 sl 7, ' 1 ah70 • ... t T00� ( ( .�1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .«• •000 1f00 3000 3700 ,t00 s a 1 0100 t•oi , ' ; �; �' 17100- - /IQI -34 fttob" 4.00.11 Sao •t$O 17200 ji- r 4700-34 , 11^- 6s -13 -!a- 73100 1312 !r + i 12-0•f0 _ •3 i - - $too-W '_ foo • :+y a+ • * .A A 17 t•o° 3 lad ^. - .} /3 --Ta►..-�. pp sl 1 ry 71 0 awl, c - �(•�T T t"t T f, as .•�.•".>n„s�,— -""' ff r.,.. os to 10 ,fe►,ti•�r . . 1 • 1� •°a° WIRTMQUTH ST _..r':: _ ;: �!- ss•°� sago 1 r 2�° i � 1 � = t ' �1 /w t •• t s.ao a ism_- ys :•oon 1 -.32 y2 30 , `� f - tM•f -�.- _-.r _ Q 2301 K � tf � -_ �. •� '` >)QI 2W1 A - HIO �! -A ., •^- f.r ��� -._. ';_ •'If tdtlits>ostlss'a• n1,1a1s.1 ta�s•,ta,st 1 � • �_ • i i 1 i 1 j i 0 A-_C 1 ELMHURSI - *� 1 • - s N ut•e••• 1 -7- 1 h • a i .c0o +01 S« «�: ' r3. tills 3 • +1.1 t 1• ! 1 ( 1 ' i • 1 1 L . ... •" 1 1 1 T i l l AAA= , ' i 1 1 i i • wr a.w.i.n• •a i ' i j,1-lf+JOp wA SII Z 3f0. -.2+._ 1000 r•- •100 - - •a• e ~ /•gyp r 1 + =I--' -N-• i If00� �. -- • xri �s � 1 � - 1200 I Ialp uur • •M•' - 13 ai°ya,° 1• - - 37 A } a • 1 s 1 If � .rI 'rs 1 ~ T_-1• •C01=f- 1��D •f00 w ww•w •rw•• - t7 , •... WAY - ...•1.• ,•..- — _ 1• - �'^a-T ••l�+s ' j r ra sit sllsslsals•laala• ( ' 1 / 1.• fh� 1 1 his j 18 • :... :'- It {Wy w■ 'fRANRLIjI Ip• �,•t•r '• tb110 i �M ,� M 3 1111 ' 1100,• 1 +�1 1 1 fteoi 1 ' woo!o'• / 1 raw•••Ir•• a tt•tP •w • , t a i s 1 To 1 1 1 1 1 1 n j N ;; s . 1000 sao Is:oi saw a0° 1 i,i i 1 1. } 1 1 t 1 a two - .. w as •.•.,. �.;.. ROAD z D mw slolr'r r I t�3 FrLv went Department of Land Conservation and Devefp o wcran wnr�M 1175 COURT STREET N.E., SALEM,OREGON 973104)590 PHONE (503) 3784926 October 16, 1986 Keith Liden a 1986 City of Tigard 13125 Southwest Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 CITY OF ITIGARD PLANNING DEPT. Dear Mr. Liden: We have received proposed amendments Nos. CPA 8-86/CZ16-86 and CPA 6-86/CZ10-86 submitted by the City of Tigard. This letter is to inform the city that the Department of Land Conservation and Development has concerns relative to the proposed amendments. These amendments would reduce housing opportunity within Tigard's comprehensive plan. Proposed amendment CPA 6-86/CZ10-86 would have a significant impact on the opportunity for housing units, including a large reduction in the number of multifamily units. The'applicant's observation on page 12 that future upzoning of an adjacent 12-acres to compensate for this loss is not an a' quate response. The city needs o wTth`GoaT 10 mix and density standards by approval of other amendme sat tthis time tW)maintain compliance. We suggest that the city monitor the effects of these and future plan amendments with regard to the city's compliance of OAR 660 Division 7 (the Metro Housing Rule). This rule requires Tigard to maintain a housing opportunity of ten units per net buildable acre and a new construction opportunity for 50S attached and 50% detached housing units. With such monitoring, the city can assure its continued compliance and prevent the need for large scale changes to correct deficiencies. Please enter this letter into your record of proceedings at the hearing on these proposals scheduled for November 3, 1986. If you have questions related to our concerns and recommendations, or would like to discuss setting up a monitoring program please contact Jim Sitzman, your field representative, at 229-6068. Sincerely, me s . oss Director JFR:ba/1033FJS/1950 cc: Jim Sitzman, Field Representative Jerry Offer, Review Coordinator (COC File X009-86B and #001-86B (Tigard) On �:,�,• �q85 William V. Bishop P.O. Box 4154 CITY of 11GARD Menlo Park, CA. 94026 PLANNING DEFq* November 3, 1966 Tigard City Council c/o Kieth Liden 13125 S. W. Hal I Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 REs City Council Meeting Nov. 3, 1966. Proposed Albertson devolopment at Pacific Highway and Durham Road. Dear Members of City Councils Commercial development at this location would further deteriorate the traffic situation on Durham Road. In addition, I do not feel a redesignation of R40 zoning on surrounding parcels would be appropriate at this time. Thank you for your consideration. -- Sinceely, r William V. Bishop Tax lot 1700 Durham Road Washington County, Oregon �5:6 •i � .V' h..%-`. � aE '4. duet �,yt � .c�" a[*. w' _ 5 d�a� � �`=- OCT 3 t 1986 C1TY OF TIGAR pL014ING DEFT- do, �' � . �•.,� JL i .--�,1 ��� _ �j �- _ f. -�;Cz;�j Z ., 2n L�Cc..�t>�d-�--� .--�'—'�- ��.�Q ✓Q.t.�',c...� �a J' 3 �e:�-�Y a ,�- ��,�,��� -� �`� � 1 �. � _�- �� ����"-�- ..� moi. ��� ���-- f �'` �`` _ , c� �'�'_ ,cam ��� �� - �L��.... s �" �' __ �►go3e�� eco -s-Lont. i fali)►Ifill III IIIII{t a{riep rlata{r a;a sly rye an t i s t 7 1 ! 1 i i}I o){ { 1 .__ i� � � � -� l `. � .. �T���E�I t.j}! {����li'a--It aft t�t � � � i.��s�alalale�alsle{T'j{r�r{e!r{r't{r�gt srrltlslt{a1ass'e{i,r{rjlleg>N L NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED 11 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN j ' THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO TFE QUALITY OF TFE ORIGINAL DRAWING. 6C 62 8Z LZ 9Z SZ bZ EZ ZZ IZ OZ 6t 81 11 91 Si bl EI- Z{- -1 l—OI g 8 i-- 9--S y - Z is ti iNWilil�Uti�ItiII111e�piileNl�ilFl;ty�if ��- JUJI{�111. r _.- . a i MARun 19 9 0r I k m Y 0 6= Q U l� µms/ W F O Y ID t4 al W / J E � t U W m w 2i 2i / N oi oo�o H rn _ u LL LuI to S. W. DURHAM RD. se u_w cu¢g m — �� Asa 3 " J .r 2 QW U Q w $ a8q z W e N Q V � Z f" C Z o: W F Z W uj CC0 Q c N °- ui t) y w o 0 LL m 0 IY cc a—) Q 2 H wa � w Lu ® z a o U a SHEET OF J ' JOB roUraeEra i iPlrlrl�Irtygl�rplgrlqrJlPlqrlrp�qlll lllq�J�pIIIFJ<(r(Ijl Jrillggl�ItllTif�I�ql;Ilt IPlgr gtlm gl�gr 1!I Ip fll qr qt 111 yl pr rp rp ip IU rp 41 IP rlr rP t`' - .- _ _. ".,–._..,:....:..�.:�....-....:y,_Y r-: J w7TE: IF THIS MIMFIUEO --- - I---- - 2 r `� 4 $ B 7 0 9 o I I I ^ G ISS IC 1E IT CLEAR TIM! - TIE$NOTICE,iT IS OLE 10 THE QUAL OF T ORIGINAL OE 82 82 L2 92 SZ YZ E2 Z2 IZ OZ 81 81- LI 91 -Sf' 41 fl tl II -of B 9 L 9 S ► E Z 1— IS — r ndnnlHuluuhullnuGudHlduxl9dlul�u911 N! Wll�dnn�9uuhidill MARCH - _ :. 7 ;,1990 � ; �, _ ;: . 1I/oN Abtwl #5 a PL,�n I - tt(r1► Ittiata ter ala ate atr ali ali alt tlr Ila I;i t t _ J11 �° 1 _ 7 9 l I- �ti�Tt�mjaP� Ij�lirtffjaT7il.fi�tlrjiti(it��il�r�►ljaatl[�t}Ijt{r alaiilt ilr rtt rlT rti :ti alaI' i ii ®NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMEDDRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THANTHIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TOTFE QUALITY OF TTE ORIGINALlbwgmmL DRAWING. .-. -_ Volk Oe 62 8Z LZ-8z SZ_._ 42 _-ez zZ Et Oz sr et Li 9i 9f b1 a s ZI il 01 6 8 L. 9 5 b 6 z ——--- f: 21990 o - 0o aa0 :. �� ��� �®,��� oA0 a �a •: s ;r - o x �s agog I �® �x v 34 , I II l ZI l III � 1 � o , P ' ... - _ F.F. 175,o*- - F F. 175;01- -I. // L ho: io I yll' j FE E ✓ n cr _ 7 -Z exls / ;4. c5M— /1 / i •' :. •o �b I .a So PhiKING SThLlS jhowu / LL IJoTE: S9ADE17 AZzk TOPOGRAPHIC suxvcr FOR % .1QT)ICA.7 ARECS VJ IT4410 2:l SLOPE ¢¢orZ A2EA5 TO ALBERTSONIS,INC. 1 `• __,,._.. �" � LAIJDSGAPE6. (T`fP,) .'" LOCATED IN N.E./4 OF N.W.VO AND NW.1/O OF H.E /4CFSECI3,T2S,.IW,WN. WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON i c Ia c 26 suve •.a - � PN PRELIMINARY/CONCEPTUAL PLAN CL nRE,+CCJGOBnRNER I �'` _ '° - ^'_%� o C \ •/ ____� CLAFENCEEBAHKEP _ _ I ^.0.15}STH S1HN F3U,'IEII.OREGOB/OU3 .I .�,.0 ' / ,® � ��( ..,-0 © -._. •�-{ I P ONF.5R05n0i a ,e„a •n I I� I �a a -._.•+^. ...... -:..�.>�' - s.rwow..�,smx:�^^.�n^.,'.*'.'•_�,_^•"`�"�^....�.�._..... v.._ � ",;�„_".a"".'_`:^°�'� _.. -_ .\• Plglnt111n:IH NpiHxpplgll,Nlgl Diltll,l glpnWlp19n1tH Ilu�ggngl.qll H IIVtHgnll,Igllltilg11111 Ppl'�Ililll Plq:�g111PJH9,pl'I'I III'putggn-' - _� ._. _.__._._,... .... _. .__..,.,...-�...- ._...._s __—'_.......-._.. .._ wrtI I,*xls xtaorluco - 2 3 4 5 8 7 B B (0 I I I *rG qur„r or tR w,clxMAL ORWOc. _.-__ _ VI LI 9 GI bl I 21 II 0 L 2 Md 117 I 12 LwI�NINN41tl clmduulxulwlwU IulmJuduullNdwr�IlLrobWuulDeN�udwdnldlnllu ulmluu6m; L a . c MARCH 17: 1990 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 11/3/86 DATE SUBMITTED: 10/22/86 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: CPA 10-86/ PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission ZC 18-86 Bethany Associates PREPARED BY: Keith Liden DEPT BEAD OK �CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY The applicant requested a change in Plan designation from Commercial Professional to Commercial General and from the C-P (Commercial Professional) zone to C-G; (commercial General). The Commission reviewed the proposal on 10/7/86 and recommended approval with a (PD) (Planned Development) overlay. Attached are the application, staff report, transcript of the applicant's presentation, and Commission minutes. - ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve as recommended by staff (no PO overlay). 2. Approve as recommended by Planning Commission (PD overlay). 3. Deny the request. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative 1. KSL:bs185 f o President Moen did not support some of staff's concerns. He commented that there had been some thought in designated the property R-40 and that it wasn't just plopped there to meet density requirements. If felt the R-40 zoning designation is the most appropriate use for the site. Commissioner Newman moved and Commissioner Butler seconded to forward a recommendation of denial for CPA 6-86 and ZC 10-86 to City Council based on staff's findings and conclusions. Motion carried three to two. Commissioner Butler and Vanderwood voting no. 5.2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 9-66, ZONE CHANGE ZC 17-86 NPO M 5 UNITED FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial General and a Zone Change from I-P to C-G. Located: 15995 SW 72nd AVe. (WCTM 2S1 12DC lots 700 6 701) This item has been set over to October 21, 1986. .3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 10-86, ZONE CHANGE ZC 18-86 NPO N 7 eETNAav ASSOCIATES for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from C-P to C-P and C-G and a Zone Change from C-P to C-P and C-G. Located: Southeast corner of SW North Dakota and Scholls Ferry Rd. (WCTM ISI 348C lot 401). Senior Planner Liden reviewed the history of the proposal, explaining that concerns from the previously denied proposal had been addressed. Staff recommended approval. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Gordon Davis, Attorney, representing Great Northwest/Bethany Associates i reviewed the components of the project explaining how it differed from their previous proposal and meets City requirements. He showed the proposed plan with the use of an overhead projector. o Wally Hobson, Economic Advisors, using an overhead projector reviewed the results of the market study they had conducted. o Wayne Kittleson, Traffic Engineer, 512 SW Broadway, Portland, 97201, using overhead projector reviewed the traffic area studied and their results. o Gordon Davis, explained how the proposal meets the criteria to amend the plan, that it will have no adverse impact, and that the change is justified. Discussion followed regarding the gas station being proposed and phases of the project. PUBLIC TESTIMONY 0 J. A. Paterson, 11605 SW Manzansta, Tigard, 97223, supported the proposal as being an appropriate use for the area. o Lee Cunningham 13385 SW 115th, supported the proposal as being a good an appropriate use of the land. His only reservation was the gas station. He did not feel it was consistent with the neighborhood. Nap ',. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October'7, 1986 Page 3 concerned o Howard Williams, 12220 SW Scholls Ferry Rd.,to park ing 7223. 1ot�s Discussion that the CP property might be developed a could happen. He also had concerns followed. Staff did not feel this regarding the traffic. REBUTTAL o Gordon Davis stated he did not feel it was possible to convert the CP area into a parking lot and it was not there intent. As far has the service station it boundaries had been set and Mobile has an option to purchase if the zoning is approved. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner Owens stated that she lived in the area and another et the accessonffic to was her number one concern. She opposed allowing Scholls Ferry Road. She felt if approved as designed the traffic would the move through the Meadowcreek apartments. to be substantial was also surpriamountsed vacant at results of the study as there apps retail space in the area. o Commissioner Butler stated curs main concethe change the ingress and egress. He felt if the report is ime as o President Moen felt that thesiPnateditheon spropertY PDhould P Also, theretshould the CG. He also supported designated Town Center without having to go be vehicular access available to Greenway onto Scholls Ferry Road. o Commissioner Vanderwood lilted the layout but felt there needed to be on access to the Greenway Town Center. She was not convinced this should be approved. o Commissioner Newman had no comment. * Commissioner Moen moved and Commissioner Newman second to forward a recommendation of approval to City Council with the added recommendations that the property have a PD designation added; that the development of the Commercial Professional �ro be a place acceat the ss to the time sGroenway the General Comawrcial; and that t Center as part of the plan CHANGE 5.4 ELLEN C NOR PLAN AMENDESTATE, JERRY & NATA CPA 9-96, IE SCOTT, =CORDON S• & GORDON R ELLEN C. NORDLING ESTATE, MARTIN, and GEORGE & JOANNE NORDLING - Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low.Density Residential to 5�anidal Ge ralSW and aatontreeange from M 2S3-3AB to C-G. Located: 7105, 7 lot 300, 300, 301, and 302). Senior Planner Liden reviewed the proposal and because adequate services are not available and there is a compatibility problem south of Elmhurst staff recommended denial. PLANINM COMMISSION'MINUTES October 7, 1996; 'Page 4 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: City Council October 23, 1986 FROM: Keith l.iden, Senior Planner fv SUBJECT: Planning Commission Recommendation for CPA 10-86IZC 18-86 for Bethany Associates As noted on the summary sheet, the Commission recommended approval with the application of a Planned Development (PD) overlay. This was suggested in response to concerns that were raised relating ta: 1. Timing of development phases 2. Type and design of development 3. Parking for C-�G uses occurring on the remaining area zoned C-P The PD overlayrequires review by the Commission and the Site Development T Review process with staff analysis occurs without this designation. The review criteria are essentially the same in either case. The staff recommends that the PD overlay not be used because the review ^f criteria are not significant and the Commission did not offer clear criteria to be used during Planned Development review to address the three concerns Hated above. If the Council agrees with the Commission that some of these issues need clarification, the staff recommends that they be included as part of the ordinance in lieu of applying the PD overlay. j` The beginning of the presentation by Gordon Davis on behalf of Bethany Associates was not recorded because the microphone was inadvertently turned Yoff. The entire presentation made by Welly Hobson and Wayne Kittleson was recorded and transcribed as well as the concluding remarks made by Mr. Davis. Copies of all of the transparencies used in the presentation are contained x . within the Council packet. d j 218 r. Mobil Oil Corporation 1405 ENEA CWAXF.SUM IM9 4 P.O.BOX 4004 OONOORD.CA JFORNIA 9W4.2= TELEPHONE(415)W4-"W October 6, 1986 Planning Commission and City Council City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Reference: Great Northwest Management Proposed Rezone Subject: SEC Schools Ferry Road and N. Dakota Tigard, Oregon Dear Commissioners and Councilors: Mobil Oil urges your approval of the proposed rezoning of the Great Northwest property, SEC Scholls Ferry Road and North Dakota, Tigard, Oregon. Mobil has entered into an option with Great Northwest Management to purchase 1 acre of the property subject to necessary approvals and permits to construct a full service gas station to serve the needs of this fast growing area. The rezoning is essential to allow this use. While we obviously have an Interest in this request, let me give you a perspective on how we see the Scholls Ferry Corridor and this particular site and the need for a full service Mobil station on subject corner. The Scholls Ferry Corridor is one of the highest growth residential areas in the entire metropolitan area. It is the center of a very large residential community that includes portions of both Beaverton and Tigard. However, the corridor has no service station and no land Is zoned for a service station. We have tried to locate a full service gas station in the corridor but have been unable to do so because there is no properly zoned land. The Great Northwest property is Ideally suited to provide central and convenient retail and auto services to the residents of this area. Mobil looks forward to becoming a part of this Scholls Ferry Corridor, the Greenway community and the City of Tigard. Your favorable decision will allow us to proceed and will provide a service that the people in this community need. Thank you, we are also interested in the future of Tigard. Very truly yours, i R.E. eaklend Senior Real Estate Representative REW/ec n October 6, 1986 Planning Commission City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Great Northwest/Bethany Associates Rezoning Scholls Ferry Road and North Dakota Dear Commissioners: Neighborhood Planning Organization #7 is pleased to be able to come before you in support of the proposed rezoning of the property in the southeast corner of Scholls Ferry and North Dakota. Because I cannot attend the hearing, please accept this letter as a further explanation of our support. As the Commissi.o- will remember, this property has been proposed for rezoning before. However, neither the neighborhood, nor the city, have been able to support the previous rezoning requests. However, we now believe the Great Northwest proposal meets the neighborhood's needs and the objectives of the city. It is particularly pleasing to see that this proposal reflects comments we gave Great Northwest after the last hearing. We have reviewed the proposal and the economic and traffic studies. We agree with their conclusions and are convinced that this approach represents the best use of this corner and will finally allow this property to develop f in a way that meets real needs in our neighborhood and community. We are particularly pleased that the proposal includes a gas station. The neighborhood and entire Scholls Ferry corridor desperately needs such a facility. The fact that there is no zoned land to locate a gas station is a serious omission of the city's plan. Denying this proposal will deny us a very important and needed service. r This is the way the planning process ought to be--where everyone has a chance to participate and proposals represent the best of everyone's thinking. This is exactly what we have with the Great Northwest proposal and we urge your approval. Sincerely, ' Q- Y Richard W. Boberg Chairman, NPO #7 10660 SW North Dakota Tigard, Oregon 97223 �s F i n w w October 6, 1986 To Whom It May Concern, In regards to the requested zone change or rezoning of a portion of k= the site at SW Scholls Ferry Rd. and North Dakota; at this time I really do not see a great demand for additional retail space; however, I realize that it is only a matter of time before the site will be rezoned and developed. The plan which has been submitted by Great Northwest does appear to be reasonable and does help fill at least one need for this South Beaverton, North Tigard Area. Sincerely, 01 Fredrick J. Gray f IG oiay c4llley Cat -'rPec C'enterf 12264 S.W. SCROLLS FIRRY RD. `= TIGM, OR 97223 $Ja a 17 BETHANY ASSOCIATES CPA 10-86 ZC 18-86 TRANSCRIPT 10/7/86 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING NOTE; The beginning of the presentation did not record. ;s Then Great Northwest hired Kittelson S Associates. Did I just Gordon Davis, increase my voice. just turned on the microphones." Secretary, "No, I f the Hobson work then, Great Northwest Davis, "0n the bases on the findings o hired Kittelson and Associat Traffic a look how to e, Engineers, then to ta ' issue a center that would deal with some of the traffic hl�e ct Ferry and North Dakota and c could design also Dave Waldron of Commercial rc t would fit the requirements than begWhat I in to mold a specific design concept thaldlike of both the economic studies and the otraffic �President of Hobson and Associates do now it turn it over to Wally Hobs udy then Duane to review with you there findingsu their fromtfindingsir o on economic traffic analysis Kittelson, who will review with y further discussion come with there project, and than I�ecessarybtokamendand cthelplanude by Wally.,' of the standards and criteria n late and I will be brief, I Wally Hobson, „Thank you Gordon. Its getting uh, let me go to my first believe I can summarize this report very quickly, here The market study that we conducted for this property, or with the slideconclusions. First, market study that we conducted we reach three primary the there ;s currently 82 acres that was zoned for office use, within the approximate study area. Which was roughly a five minute driving time site. So theres, currently the inventory's 82 acres. Based on employment actions, provided by METRO, Metropolitan Service District, we estimate prof that theres a need for, over the next 2years, eneed for about 1acres of this Comprehensive Plan, to the year 2005, theres office land. So in the year 2005, we estimate there still be 61 acres of vacant office commercial land." TRANSCRIPT - BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/2C 18-86 Page 1 e President Moen, "One quick question. In your study area within your five minute drive, did you acres include the office parks down near, in the direction of Washington Square, the Koll Business Park, and the ones in Beaverton, to the left, would that include . . ." Hobson, "We didn't include the Koll Business type park because we really feel thats more industrial flex based instead of professional office. No, It did not include that. In my estimation thats a different classification of space. The second conclusion that we reached is that there is definitely a shortage of properly zoned land for neighborhood oriented retail space. As I will show you in the subsequent slides that I have. In 1986 we estimate that this shortage is about 16 acres today, increasing to about 20 acres in the year 2005. The third conclusion that we reached was that the property is very well located for a mixed development with some limited amount of office and an expanded amount of retail space which is basically, we conceive as being an expansion of the Greenway Shopping Center and then a small neighborhood oriented office building. In order to talk about office space I first need to provide a definition of two different types of office space that we looked at. Theres class A office space, which is generally located on freeway interchanges, around large commercial centers, like Washington Square. Major employment centers, like Kruze Way or the Sunset Corridor. This is very highly visible space, it called, we refer to it as regional office space, it serves a, very much a regional market. Generally it serves the needs of larger tenant, in maybe the five to 20,000 square foot range. These tenants are frequently branch offices of national companies who are looking for slot of image exposure, and are willing to pay the price for it. The buildings are often three to five stories, generally rent, in todays market, 15, 16 dollars if there was a good market today there would probably be 18 to 20 dollars and these are typified by some of the bigger office buildings like Center Point, that you see on Kruse Way. The GAF property on Hall Blvd and some of the bigger buildings around Washington Square. There is another class of office space, which we refer to as class B office space. This doesn't mean lower quality space, its just a different type of space that serves a different market. Its not generally located on the expensive land, on the freeway interchanges and so on. But its usually on a pretty major street like Scholls Ferry. It often found near community neighborhood shopping centers such as TRANSCRIPT — BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 2 tee.... r the Greenway Center. It serves a much more local market, its a more of a Community oriented space with smaller tenants in maybe the thousand to two thousand square foot range. The small two, three man attorney firms, CPA, Psychologist, so on and so forth and Gordon talked a little bit about that. So with those, generally the rents of course are lower, in the 10 to 13 dollar range. With those two definitions in mind, I just like to summarize what are conclusions where about office space. First of all in the trade area that we examined we found that theres was quite a substantial oversupply of both class A and class 8 office space. Currently in today class A office space vacancies in this area was 11.2 percent. Class B 16.9 percent. Overall 14 an a half percent. In may opinion this site is not suited for Class A office development. It is not on, it does not meet the criteria. It would not be, also in my opinion, it would not, it would be appropriate, or necessary, or in any forseeable future would not develop out totally as class B space. This would be in excess of $100,000 square feet of space. The need isn't there and you don't generally, it needs to be spread around more, into smaller office buildings spread around throughout the community rather than all in one location. We showed that there is a demand for class B office space of about 369,000 square feet or about 20,000 square feet per year from 1986 to the year 2005. Based on the amount of land its zoned for office, which was the 81 acres, you could build about 1.4 million square feet of office space on this amount of land. So, we're saying that theres an excess supply of about 61 acres or over a million square feet. Another way of expressing this same thing would be to say that there is a need for about 21 acres of this land and then the next twenty years about one acre a year, currently theres enough space, or enough land available at this rate of absorption to last for approximately 80 years. On the other hand our market analysis shows that there is currently a need for about 145 thousand square feet of what we classify as neighborhood retail space today. And this indicates that there is a lot of leakage out of the area and we, This is about 16 acres of land roughly and I think where there is a leakage is really occurring is in the areas of type of retail such as gas stations, home improvement types of merchandise, auto services and parts, hardware. Things like paint and wall paper. Perhaps a fabric store, some of these types of retail uses, they just arn't served in this area at all. So this is where we see a real need occurring. We see this need increasing to about 175,000 square feet which is, h would require approximately twenty acres of land by the year 2005. We also TRANSCRIPT - BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 3 feel that the site is very ideally located for small neighborhood oriented It is located right offices and expanded retail. in the center of of the Scholls Ferry and the Greenway residential areas, which is a rapidly growing area. The population is increasing very substantially. It has very good e envision this as access from two major streets. And again, as I mentioned w Center with complimentary types of tenants a expansion of the current Greenway Dint it makes eminent sense for not competitive cues. From an economic standp the developer of this property to locate the types of tenants that will not retail in the area, because then those retail compete with the existing We feel that this tenants do better and they do better economically. expansion is very consistent with retail trends today which are really more one stop types, one stop shopping. Centers are getting larger, located in one area. We're getting away from the strip commercial and it requires less shopping trips and it just makes alot of sense. It works better, its better benefit to the community. The other thing is the property is already zoned commercial, we're not, this is not a change from residential, we're to again talking about a different types of commercial space here. Just summarize, we do not see that there is a need for anymore land dzoned ed hand office uses, in fact theres a substantial excess of land. On t there is a significant shortage of retail land, currently 16 cres increasing v to 20 acres in the year 2005 and that the property is Y well ated to accommodate a mixed development of a small office building with some a retail and a gas station. That concludes my presentation and I would like sk Wayne Kittelson to step up and talk about the traffic." "My names is Wayne Kittelson, I'm a traffic engineer and principle of Oregon Kittelson and Associates, our office is 512 SW Broadwa ent on andPortland, so what 97201. I told would like to stay fairly brief in my p I'm going to try and do is just focus for you on the traffic related issues that I think are of special relevance to your deliberations tonight. Let me begin, although your probably familiar with the site, iv you jests overtem view where it is. Generally, . . . . with respect to thetransportation hat know probably, is in the southeast quadrant f the serves it. The site as you We're on intersection of Sorrento Road and North Dakota with Scholls Ferry. the west side of 217 and Nimbus Drive and the connection up here focused than Blvd. . The study area that we investigated was a little more that. We concentrated on he area immediately surrounding the site and TRANSCRIPT — BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 4 +r r specifically in the area that you see here. Greenwood Town Center on this side, Meadowcreek apartments are on the south. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The key traffic related issues that we addressed, that I think are of interest to you tonight, include these first, how much site generated traffic is likely to be generated by this, by this site, both under the existing development and the proposed change. Second what is the effect of this additional traffic onto Scholls Ferry/North Dakota intersection, which is the signalized intersection adjacent to the site. Both are in respect to existing conditions, with respect to future conditions and also, and probably most important with respect to its, the adequacy of that intersection or its ability to accommodate both the existing and future traffic volumes. Okay, let me address the first question which is, site generated traffic. This slide summarizes real briefly the volume of site generated traffic that we anticipate from the site, from the parcel, under two different conditions. The first being the existing zoning, the way the site is zoned currently, the second being the way the site would be zoned under the proposal. I should mention because its a little hard to read here that the site is developed, or these numbers reflect PM peak hour conditions. Which is the time period that traffic engineers typically look at as the time when the greatest demand is placed on the street system. What you can see here is that the proposal does increase traffic over the existing condition. However, the existing condition does represent about 60 percent of the traffic that would be generated under this. So, we're not looking at a increase of 450 trips during the peak hour, compared to existing conditions, but only the difference between these two. Now those numbers by themselves are not necessarily too important or too descriptive because they don't tell you to much about how the intersection is operating right now. So for that purposes, put together another slide that identifies for you the total traffic entering the intersection during the PM peak hours. From all ways, from all approaches to the intersection. Under existing and future conditions. Now this slide, what I've done is I've focused on the proposal, so we're looking at 450, this blue up here is 450 vehicle trips during the evening peak hour. So it includes, uh 60 percent of this would be reflective of existing conditions and the remaining 40 percent is added on with the proposal. This slide gives you some idea of the relative magnitude anyway of the additional traffic that would be traveling thru that intersection with the development of this parcel of land. The important question is not so much that there will be additional traffic, because we know TRANSCRIPT — BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 5 µ a m that theres going to be additional traffic, but how well is the intersection going to be able to accommodate that traffic. And for that purpose we go to, uh, the evaluation of the intersections operational characteristics to determine how its going to operate relative to acceptable levels that the City, County, or traffic engineers in general have adopted for intersection such as this one. This slide shows that the intersection will operate at an acceptable level of service, at about, I should mention what we've got here on the wide access here is a volume to capacity ratio, so what your seeing here is, in a sense sort of a percent of the intersections capacity Chats being used during the evening peak hour, or the critical evening peak hour. That maximum acceptable, B over C or volume capacity ratio that we like to see at a intersection, at a urban intersection at a PM peak hour condition is about .95 about 95 percent of its capacity. Well what you've got under existing conditions, development of the site, of the parcel in accordance with its existing zoning, no excuse me, without any development of the existing site, is a .88 B over C ration, 88 percent capacity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The additional traffic is generated by the proposal, is, increases that number marginally to about .9, still within acceptable limits. And I should mention that if the site were developed in accordance with its existing zoning, it would be somewhere inbetween, probably about .89, something like that. Now this third bar over here shows future conditions and takes into account the fact that there is a scheduled improvement for Scholls Ferry Road to widen it through this section to a five lane facility. When thats done you can see the significant effect of that improvement to Scholls Ferry Road to a B over C ratio for this intersection. So theres certainly no level service problem at that point." Commissioner Owens, "What year is the scheduled for?" Kittelson, "Scheduled for 1989. I should also mention before I leave this slide that these calculations are based upon the access design that Gordon showed in his earlier slides, namely primary access coming off of North Dakota, but with a secondary right in right out only on Scholls Ferry. And so what we find in summary is, first that, any evaluation of this intersection or any intersection for this matter must take into account not only the number of vehicles that are entering the intersection but also the capacity of that �j intersection. Thats really the measure of the impact of the proposal. Well, TRANSCRIPT — BETHANY &ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 6 c i when we looked at this intersection within that context we see that the Scholls Ferry North Dakota intersection does have adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed center to development. Uh, both now and into the future. The existing zone designation, and the proposed zone designation result in very comparable impacts, at least with respect to the volume and capacity ratio. And finally the scheduled reconstruction of Scholls Ferry Road by 1989 or to begin by at least 1989 will eliminate the current backups that exist along Scholls Ferry along this section." Gordon Davis, "Let me see if I can now take all of this and wrap it up in terms of standards that we're required to address and that your required to use as a bases for deciding whether to amend you Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan and ordinance lays out essentially three criteria that have to be address. First of all is the change being consistent with the policy and standards of the plan and ordinance. Secondly is the change necessary because theres been a change in the community, or is the change necessary because theres been somehow a mistake in the original plan itself. And thirdly, the standards asks, will there be, if these change is approved, some sort of adverse impact on the community. What we've addressed in our materials that we submitted to you, and I will not be repeating tonight, are how in fact this proposed change does meet a variety of the policies and standards of the plan and ordinance. To the work that Mr. Hobson has done and to the summary that he has presented to you this evening, he has focused specifically on the standards that relate to the needs of the trade area, particular the needs for commercial uses, and the general locational criteria that this particular site satisfies with regard to those needs. On the second question, and that is the question of whether there has been a change in the community that might have in someway warrant this proposed changed. In fact what we know is, and in the material that you have before you describes this in greater detail. Since the plan was adopted in November 1983, there have been 12 amendments to the Tigard plan, involving about 61 acres of land in total, but within the Scholls Ferry corridor which includes of course both Tigard and Beaverton, within just this area, both the Beaverton and Tigard plans have been amended 8 times, involving about 41 1/2 acres, and :t the net result of those changes, just within the corridor itself is that 134 new homes have been added into the plan for both Beaverton and Tigard, within TRANSCRIPT —BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 7 te`,r�c.. - - this area. In addition to those plan changes, a significant other event has occurred. Beaverton School District has declared, within its entire District three School sites with surplus land. Two of those sites are immediately adjacent to or within immediate proximity of this property. One site a 7.1 Tiga acres site is within a half of a mile of the property, in the Whereas City of originally has been sold and subdivide and approved for 33 homes. that was a school site and now there are additional homes being constructed on that property. A second site, which is within 500 feet of the school property, just inside the City of Beaverton, the 25 acre school site and the ith the developer to te is negotiated a development agreement wdevelop eto us to atin for as many as 500 homes. And so these totaled have suggest fact that there has been some significant changes since the plbe a reasonwas to in 1983 and those changes alone would suggest that there may will also ask us, or relook at the other . . . . in this area. The standards ere has been really been allow us to take a look atth, but the question of whether there somehow. And we don't rea an error in the plan lly have to bee v sow what an what we find in this case is that, that in fact there has . The Hodson work has already pointed out to us that theres error in the plan land zoned within the trade area. And substantially excess amount of office thats not been today, but in the year 2005 and well beyond that and even excess of office land this particular site here was still well despite that oriented office suited for some level of small neighborhood nsot°Pmough Secondly, the error in the plan. . . . that there's really been . . . . 33 of them have involved the CP zone, consideration given (tape ended) the office zone, and 33 of those acres have requested and been approved ss the conversion of C—P to some other use. Finally, we're required to $delve affect question of whether or not the proposed change will somehow adv Y the c°nununity. And the principle issue on that is really the issue that Mr. Kittelson has address, and thats the traffic question• °wll willnk what is no adverse analysis has demonstrated to you is that in fact that there service today, the level of service affect from this change. At the level of under the existing zoning, and the level of service of under the proposed zoning is the same. And that should be Scholls not Schools. That the ` reconstruction of Scholls, which is now funded and committed by the state to occur in 1989, will reconstruction Scholls Ferry 217 to Murray Blvd. as a five facility will further increase lane facility; and that that the capacity of } that road and further decrease any of the problems that exist on that road TRANSCRIPT - BETHANY &ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 8 now. And the development of the site under either the existing or the proposed zoning has essentially the same impact on the intersection and that the intersection is really less than six percent or that impact is less than six percent effect to the intersection. And that limited access on Scholls Ferry, that right turn in right turn out, will assure that any accidents, or any impacts that might be associated with traffic are handled in a way thats efficient. And finally, the properties already commercial, and we're really not asking to change that. Let me make one final point in conclusion. We've demonstrated in our proposal that we submitted to you and in the review of some of the key point this evening, that we have met the standards of the plan that are required to rezone the property. We've demonstrated that the specific proposal that we've addressed to you does not have adverse impact on the plan or on the community. And we've demonstrated that in fact there has been uh mistake in the plan if you will, an error in plan, not in whether there should be office on this location, but really how much office do we need and whether there is enough retail. Having demonstrated this, the change would appear to be justified. But in reality we're really not asking you to change the plan. That is we're really not asking you to change the underlying principles and structure upon which the Tigard plan was built. The plan now says that the land between 121st and North Dakota is commercial land. We're not changing that, it will be commercial land if you approve this request. Rather what we're doing is refining the plan as it now stands by allowing a broader range of uses to accommodated on the property, and that broader mix of commercial use are really driven by what a real needs exist in the community, and needs that are going to become more acute in the future. The request then this evening, the refinement of the plan, if you will, is a change that will really benefit everyone and will allow finally this property to be effectively used in meeting the communities needs. That concludes the formal part of our presentation. I have two letter which I would like to give you. We have met on a number of occasion with the tenants from the Greenway Center and with the neighborhood association, and Dick Boberg who is the Chairman of NPO # 7, was not able to be here tonight, but has submitted a letter which he has asked me to give to you. Now I can read it to you or you can read it yourself, but NPO 7 thru all of our discussions, is supporting this request thats before you this evening; and feels, as I think there letter adequately points out, that while they unable to support the request the first time it was before you, that the package that we've assembled this time and the issues that we've TRANSCRIPT — BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Paige 9 �v r address have satisfied the concerns that they expressed to the City and I think were part of the bases for the Council's denial. I have another letter p here from one of the tenants in the Greenway Town Center, Fred Gray, who is the owner of the Alley Cat Pet Center, and he also was unable to be here tonight and asked us to give this to you. Fred expresses his interest that this is probably as good of use of the property, essentially as, as can be expected even those he's not convinced, I think, of Mr. Hobson's work that theres necessarily that much demand for additional retail in the area. That concludes our presentation this evening, we do have in fact let me hand this k one final thing out. These are just simple some duplicates of some of the slides that were on the screens, specifically showing the develop plans and s the proposed and existing zoning. And we're all available to answer questions at this point. President Moen, "I have one quick question myself, and I know the Commissioners would have a couple. Are you proposing basically keeping the property as a unit but just changing the zone on part of it?" Davis, "Thats correct." Moen, "Do you anticipate developing the, both the retail and the office and gas station at the same time or in stages?" Davis, "Probably not, the gas station, as you can see from the letter, the arrangement there is that Mobile will purchase that property and they've entered into a option agreement right now with Great Northwest Management to purchase the land. Thats subject to, obviously, the rezoning and getting the necessary permits. There schedule, as I understand it would call for them to, assuming that the rezoning occurs in the next 30 days. That they would immediately prepare site designs for the property and seek permits immediately." Moen, "I guess my major, I'm more concerned about the retail and office same. Do you anticipate that developing at the same time or in stages?" Davis, "At this point its difficult to tell I think that frankly they would not develop at the same time. Although, if this site plan is the final site —86/ZC 18-86 Page 10 TRANSCRIPT BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19 { u plan, the entry road coming in from North Dakota would be developed, obviously, as the first major piece. Then if the office were to go, then that parcel would be split off for the retail." Moen, "Are we not, in a sense, by adopting this zone, if we choose, if it, if that were our decision, are we not, to some extent locking you into to this kind of plan, because we are picking a spot were we say this is where the office is going to go and this is were the retails going to go." Davis, "Well, to a certain degree, yes, obviously the final design of this may shift that line one direction or the other and we've suggested to staff and asked that, if possible we fix the 1 1/2 acres, and we fix that its generally in this location. But when the final design comes in that line may need to shift 10 feet of 50 feet or 15 feet depending on the specific design. The one acre parcel though is fixed, uh, the specific parcel thats the subject of the option agreement is already been determined. Those line have established and so for all practical purposes this agreement of zoning is really beginning to fix very clearly the parcels and the way in which they would develop." Moen, "Okay, one other question, maybe you can answer this briefly, because it doesn't necessarily impact zoning, but do you anticipate a vehicular connection between the present Greenway Town Center and your center, because on the other plan there was a connection like that." Davis, "At this point we don't, uh, we, I think theres some merit in that, although I think theres mixed opinions. I know when we talked to Howard Williams, and I think address this here in a few moments. He didn't seem to think that that was particularly valuable. I think that the traffic engineers and probably the state from the standpoint of access on Scholls, would like to see that. Thats really between two private property owners as to whether that Comes to pass." Moen, "It may be, yes." TRANSCRIPT - BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 11 Davis, "No, thats the concept plan that involved for the rezoning." r' Newman, "Okay. A simple yes will do, or no as the case may be. But, in the two sections you have, is there anything that we're talking about that says 1.5 acres is going to be CP and 3.9 will be general commercial." Davis, "Thats the request, thats the specific proposal." Newman, "First of all your going to split the property, I mean your going to sell part of it?" Davis, "The one acre is the subject of that." Newman, "Okay. Is there anything that says that this is going to be up in this corner?" Davis, "Yes, thats the proposal. The proposal has some specific lines to it. Now we understand " Newman, "I haven't see it, I mean, maybe its buried in the long report. Because you just said, you just said where the line goes is kind of nebulous right now." Davis, "The way we described it with staff is thats the proposal with those lines. When a final design comes in for the office building, it may be necessary to modify that line by 5 feet or 10 feet depending on the parking." Newman, "Well now, as I understand it, if we, if you get this approved somebody is going to write the lines down. If you want the lines to be five feet one way or another your going to have to go back for approval." Davis, "Well, we're prepared to live with it as is." Newman, "Okay. Then the questions that I have, the access onto Scholls, the right in and right out. How important is that?" TRANSCRIPT - BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 12 Davis, "Well, its very important. And sufficiently so that we specifically asked the traffic engineer to look at that questions and to determine how that might best work and with that, with that work in relation to the impact to Scholls Ferry and he's the one who came back us and said, it will work, if in fact you do a limited access, a right in and a right out configuration." Newman, "Do you have anything in writing about that. I mean, the only thing that we have here, the only thing that I have from the State Highway Division that no objection to rezoning if there is no direct access. ,And it says, the report did not discuss a option with no access." Davis, "We must, in order to obtain permission to have that access, that permission comes from the State. State Highway owns that Highway and they are the only ones who grant permission or not permission to access that highway. They do that on the basis of an access permit and they do that at the time that you submit to them construction drawings. So we will have to prove the f case to them of why that access is needed and how that access works in k relation to the intersection and the impacts in order to obtain that particular access." R Newman, "That I can see. That seems to conflict with the statement that they g have no objections to rezoning if theres no direct access. I mean if they are t the ones who have control, why do they even mention it to us. I'm a little a confused about this. if its not something we need to be concerned about, why is it in there response." Liden, "They were asked about what their response was to the rezoning. I think that they were probably putting that comment in more for the benefit of the applicant to know that they don't necessarily agree with the idea with the idea of having a right in and a right out access, but, they intend to deal with that at the time, as you mentioned it, when we actually have specific development in mind and have the construction drawings and they will need to debate that with the Highway Department. Thats really why we put . . . . several people talking. . . . . Newman, "So anything we do here will have absolutely nothing to do with want access on what streets. Is that right." TRANSCRIPT — BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 13 y; L.iden, "Thats right." Davis, "On Scholls, on North Dakota thats your street." L_iden, "Yes." Moen, "Any other questions, Commissioners?" Davis, "I agree with you thats confusing to me." Newman, "Well, also, because in the presentation somebody says that it has direct access to major roads." Moen, "Maybe." Newman, "Well, thats what the slide said. I, thats what the presentation said." Moen, "Okay. Thank you Mr. Davis." dj/216 TRANSCRIPT — BETHANY & ASSOCIATES CPA 19-86/ZC 18-86 Page 14 s • 1 ! Ic MIas ► ► till 7 1 Noma m R. . ♦ � 1_ '��i�..�ice.•��•�.�� i +��r.�+ ■�+A. • •. it _ f f tttr! i 1 �G r . it 011QbOnQO'4� ��0.04 �� - 1 1 �_ 'tea i�.��.rr.�-.��� (�'�� .w.r..�u• . �■ r, Aso __ _ _ ice O►, .�`�('�i..~ ter► ��� �r !. , lama c ►" e 8 $ �y�r�lr 1 • �t • • • .QTR R!ppO00000bQodQOOq� �i00Q 1 1 � � ►dk �'' • ! , 1 loll • i1 � 41 , M.rNI►��..\u�u/►f�..� ;.•;.;::i0mi .;moi01 e► • pal�Oi�.i� 00,4 �_pl IN viol; lipl� MMIMMMMIIIUIMN�UIIIMIR`�' r k i ap�gQ0000000001 04� +vow* It ' '• t �. ► � �T,rstu�.l�ur��►IM..� �_ 'ter.r.r A .i s '.�.�..�., '-... .A►. +�� i ► ,�.:.VOM � I 4 1 . t • t _ G pOOoe _ �0000ti� � ►iovo �.� _ _ + i 1 • - �'its>�ro►'.� .,�, ,•,. �i��i�r i SIF EL _ '���,���"• rte' Ir . " Na ' � .� IIMIIMMMIMi�111M�IM�rM _ �4 s gal E so mJ 0 g O v d W '0 ®C 0 0 tg ® c C C z00% bco CLI! � - .e.1Cl) Eor= � vsa few ID 0 v ® �- C) V C ` C 0 ® Nr .Jr. p p a6 O U. s co �- Coto w C 45 -E W � � O LU � � 02 ® o � o .G C c a, c N a _ LU W Ec m u ul 0 c O m aei •• c co ® c CO) � � c ac ,� ® E � ` � � � c �v m -� co ® Qw c � oCLC co E 0 �° o sm w ® offco �, a� ._ ® = C `pvC � ® c�0 'FE t0 w L ow � � C � cr O ® � t ® a � � ato CD e � � E2 o o • • o • • • • • • o o • x ti z. } a ui 0 er CL Cc0 o %0-0. ' g c4 a! u3 Cc cc d r cc mt M V ui 0 002 cc we m ii gr � � o �° c ul � vv � 0 .• w LL CO J . lo � W Z = o a06 0 C06 c° m m a o coo c r N Cd 4 w Isy t E { i z O 00 .J Q W cr, ® w in c zU ,o, W4- 41. 0 A z0L UA LIJ z CDw 00 Ul U. •«. c: 0 (a cr !r 10 O .j a . 0 VM ui "t r I" M to VM 3 ,� r ... ' co p Co .r.. IDA .0 CL ". m N LU C tom! • • • • • Z .0 z Z . Q �- N m ® E W � � g Z � c 161J W ,v m L m r 0C �UJ 0 LD 0 LU — 00 � � w 0O m $ m . � _ �C L ® c mi ® LLI m11 c MJ E C ul Z ® tea o � a 0 . lu Co C V co ° S ow c c a � me oc E UJ '. L E 09 CO LL L � w �► � v :p% TM iV M •t us i� r AS t } 4 oc C ago r Ic o C6 ( cc o d IL 0 x<y fi S w SITE VICINITY MAP O Si O � z � r r r _ ��- s STUDY �'JDLXEA .y ° as � SW aQ�O� E 4c �tillMity Town Contac Z: t a i *„ !� V. s .� •.:� ,°'�"y.' „ti,,,,.s�..�.„�_�y-x "'".�.r -yr .�Si=-a..,,.s,v�:s..kT�.*.�-.+.,«+,;.�. ' `'^-„�. -�',�.,�:,r:..,_ �..`„�;',sq'”. `�_�_ . fid-�re'�z.`'�.:3tissw,-•:A _ i 4 I SEND low VON 1�0 •0 0 O c IL t•� z SONS E a ac o a cc low �, ul GOOD c ON IM- c o 0 us ® OWNS ® WNS C .® ® N � CS C womm = p w ON ® 0 NO C a P 0 w �g O M Q' 0 V � dWMM CD m v v W UA r � U. � � U � he o0 C N usN ® as cm (UN )le! wa) 9310IH3N G3lVH3N39-3115 ENO lic X00 r® a:;o �g 04 UA ic IC z OC t. UJ � uj z � 0 `�' x (3 1 FW 1 o � C4 � ; ..m F.0 0 � .3 W z Um o WA < CLO EM4 C) w (n z C) 0$ENO �" a•� u ® o 0 0 a �; (UH )Id IAId) S313IH3A JNIMIN3 "MOI t S ° 0 gi i=01 ociuj ;;w La W° tai 0=4Mj H° Ll" CIO ILI Ul 0 0j (D W o �! Z F. 0 0 X Ongx 3 L 011VH All*Vd` */3NnlOA p O Z JUs us 0CL 3 ce� W Q O ul z N 1�di Z us ul� 0 > Q Z O W ul Z W V cUl V bawl I— W 0 W = 4 Z d F. ILp 916 W Y. W� v 0 0 � � � In m o 19 o a z0 W p V ® W < d O t Z VW! Z W W gc O W Z W Z � A ® � Ul W F- O Z W tQ3 4c c W O $- H W '� N c Z 0 J $ a 0 t? ® V ! Q L Z = lu J z — v ® 44 Ul UJ IL . � Z is a W W F V Z W 3 f}^ f F } m yy® m T m o t�. Cc v CL. S. C. m c ° CL low C+• �.• c aaca c +� _ LLQ C c c m e .. ca tc _ ■ �a CJ r m � � c vm v � m 40 ci } r7 - F' S a £ 5 } R{ 3 i z W LFm U a ® jR Wo Z � � i.. 0 Z ® o L W Z C5 4 EL CL-i .:. i. a to C �LU ome •— Co 0 � ...� 0 p 3 C® m O LU0 � � � �. ti- CO 0 � ® WC C !i g ` m Ca c C = e bw ® O O ."- y C ® O O �p o .� S O C C 0 C4 vi LU � VaWZWWV ,.� r r r r r T T N r N N 44 ad mi ad O! r w 3: iu �. LL1ZZ CL co CL � c ® .�. 06o a ° CL UJr� ,CLO L CD ° O mom 0 E Lu � Lu > E a � ° Z .T0 Lei F-- Z C4EL lu Lu Z cc °° m inc) ema s c E 'v 3 0 ° N m C � cc IL t Imm LLL m ® a, 0 '° �' W LL ,� fS am LD 0y 9L eW . . CC) • • V r N M V WO .� ccg "= rcV O 41- CL CV ® �. . 0 ov 00 co ui AWOLO0 ,O @ ® .0C 00 � ui 000me O mm Ctt � a a ` cobs m.00 coWW ® m0. CO) yto O vie .�. ... � c 0 X coN. 0 0 0 'v C, C L &.0coo co O .o., tO tO = CD C* E L*ui CO r•• -t N! fA = L S. Cc E v v ® ."M .om m xx3mm W a. 0 C wesev ® ONr � 0 m . � M MCOmaCCco CO m 0 . r N sv ,t N son LU c co 1! 0 E R Wc�•� " c m Z o CL Q c N ~ ca 1! E 02 ~ "°r � � � � 0 AW z0 ; (a CCC � oow C ° JIJU Crm06 . 045i!,low cc L iop CL 0. .� ° • 0000 ... ° Usk— cacsv � � m � ° bw Z .0 ° .6 IID 0 C ® aEa •� ui W toJJJ 0 /momJ � .� .o co . e . ■i i • ■ J E a he ■ C4 r. STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.3 OCTOBER 7, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 10-86 and Zone Change ZC 18-86 REQUEST: Amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designations from C-P (Commercial Professional) to C-G (Commercial General) for 3.9 acres of a 5.4 acre site. . APPLICANT: Bethany Associates, LTD OWNER: SAME 5335 SW Murray Blvd. Beaverton, OR 97005 LOCATION: South side of Scholls Ferry Road, immediately west of Greenway Town Center (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 348C, Tax Lot 400). 2. Background Information The subject property was annexed to the City along with several other parcel-. in 1976 (ZC 12-76). The Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1983 F designated the northern section of property for Commercial Professional { and the larger southern portion for Medium High Density residential use. Site Development Review approval for a 304 unit apartment complex on the southern segment of the property was granted in 1984 (SDR 22-84). In the spring of 1985, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change (CPA 3-85/ZC 3-85) proposal to change the designation for the entire property from Commercial Professional (C-P) to Commercial General (C-G) was reviewed. This request was denied by the City Council and subsequently appealed to LUBA (State Land Use Board of Appeals) where the decision was upheld. 3. Vicinity Information The eastern boundary of the site adjoins Greenway Town Center which is presently zoned C-G. The area to the south is zoned R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre) and construction of the apartment project has recently been completed. In conjunction with the apartment complex, SW North Dakota Street was extended along the western boundary of this site as F well as the apartment project. The parcel west of this street extension on Scholls Ferry Road is also zoned C-P. Other parcels to the south are j zoned R-7 (PD) (Residential, 7 units/acre, planned development). (' Scholls Ferry Road and the City of Beaverton lie to the north. STAFF REPORT - CPA 10-86 S ZC 18-86 - PAGE 1 s: } 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The site is presently undeveloped. A four-way intersection (Scholls Ferry/Sorrento/North Dakota) is immediately northwest of the subject property. The proposed Plan Amendment and Zone Change will retain the existing C-P (Commercial Professional) zone on the southwest corner of the site and transform the remainder to C-G (Commercial General). The applicant has submitted an extensive narrative in support of the proposal including an analysis of applicable City requirements, a conceptual site plan, a market analysis, and a traffic impact study. 5. Agency and NPO Comments The Building Division has no objection to the proposal. The Engineering Division states that: a. The traffic analysis should be stamped by Kittleson. b. The City Engineer concurs with the study findings. C. Comments should be obtained from the State Highway Division. 3 The State Highway Division states that: a. The report did not discuss an option of no access to Scholls Ferry Road. This would affect the Level of Service for Scholls Ferry Road. b. No objection to the rezoning if there is no direct access to Scholls Ferry Road. NPO 07 did not have a quorum, but the consensus of the members present was to recommend approval of the request. No other comments have been received. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The applicant's narrative discusses the following items: a. Community Development Code sections - 18.22.040 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Standards for Making the Decision - 18.30.120 Standards for the Decision (Legislative) - 18.62.010 Purpose (statement for C-G zone) - 18.64.010 Purpose (statement for C-P zone) r b. Comprehensive Plan policies - 2.1.1 Citizen participation - 4.1.1 Air Quality -j - 5.1.1 Economic diversity/employment opportunities STAFF REPORT - CPA 10-86 & ZC 18-86 - *PAGE 2 {:h - 5.1.4 No Commercial encroachment on residential areas -- 8.2.2 Encourage expansion of public transit - 9.1.3 Energy conservation -12.2 Locational criteria for co mercial development The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines were not addressed because the Comprehensive Plan has been acknowledged. With the addition of Plan policy 8.1.3, the staff is in accord with the applicant's determination of applicable review criteria. The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with the relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code. The applicant has addressed the relevant criteria in detail and the staff concurs with the findings that are made on pages 8-18 of the report as well as the factual information presented in the market analysis and traffic impact study. In addition to the applicant's discussion, Policy 8.1.3 will be satisfied as a condition for development of the site. Adequate right-of-way dedication, street improvements and traffic controls will be required as a condition of Site Development Review approval. During the review of the previous proposal, the major issues raised by the City related to traffic impact, no change in circumstances since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 1983, and the desire to maintain commercial office land to be available to serve the surrounding residential development. The staff concludes that the applicant has addressed these issues and two variables affecting Scholls Ferry Road have been clarified. When reviewed in 1985, the traffic signal at Scholls Ferry Road/Sorrento Road/North Dakota Street had not been installed and the improvement and widening of Scholls Ferry Road had not been scheduled by the State Highway Division for 1989. The City Engineering Division and State Highway Division concur with the traffic study with the understanding that specific access points will be further evaluated during the Site Development Review or Conditional Use process. When the entire property was proposed to be rezoned, concerns were also raised over -the possibility of a large retail business such as a grocery store that would cause unacceptable traffic conjestion. This modified proposal which would only rezone 3.9 acres to C-G will not provide sufficient space for such a large retail tenant. The applicant has demonstrated that significant changes have taken place since 1983 . The development noted in the report represents a combination of projects that were anticipated by the Plan (eg. Meadow Creek Apts) and unforeseen events (e.g., Beaverton School District sale of surplus land). These have all contributed to a change in the demand for commercial services. The marketing analysis has shown that the demand for neighborhood professional office services (eg. physicians, travel agencies) can be better satisfied with smaller sites in more locations rather than fewer large sites. These office uses are permitted in the C-G zone as well and the proposed rezoning will not prohibit them on the subject X' STAFF`REPORT CPA 10-86 6 ZC 18-86 - PAGE 3 property. Also, this analysis demonstrated that a significant deficiency of commercial retail land and a surplus of commercial office land presently exists in the Scholls Ferry Road corridor. In order to provide appropriate commercial services to this rapidly growing area in Tigard and Beaverton, the two cities have initiated a study with the help of a consultant to address this issue. The findings of this analysis (to be completed by January. 1987) are intended to determine the amount of commercial land needed and give guidance regarding appropriate locations. When asked about this proposal, the consultant did not feel that the study would be "fine grained" enough to provide much insight regarding this relatively modest proposal to determine which of two commercial zones is most appropriate. C. RENDATION Based upon the findings and conclusions noted above, the Planning staff recommends approval of CPA 10-86 and ZC 18-86. PREPAR BY: Keith Li en APPROVED BY: William A. Monahan Senior Planner Director of Community Development `'''' (KSL:d j l89) �Com' 4r STAFF,REPORT - CPA 10-86.6 `ZC 18-86 - PAGE 4 1iI N TT Cr !r - ]tour w, S.r Crrp j lVAM i LANECT Mot l� pt� `i ,�M I` 3 N OM°rrDI1N It ct Ln 1 Dow , �\ :Zs -_`„ -_. _Ll_� CT 't_ !—S cT --. FN 1 7.N- I ,L' M Mcc�CM f N`itl0 S♦ r r / ![ 1 Y !N k ALcr.C[ [-kr{ cT \t rt - i T L 100 s r ;awu arra C' !o' •• s r. s►M cT w /• S r IA^rr A IL 28 27__FTTFTw• 11 .� il� t !w torr•,ort di 33134 w: •--i 5• iA.LPMM moi. _ _ I 0�. 0004 M! "aos �. _ T I t ... .Tc:.r n �d__ J� "'•'•• � Ilill��-�_ r6'-)rr�;++ � c � F rttMO`� u° r_ ;r ~kj�"°� � �� � ( r._ 1.� TAT-Tt ���-1 j•�-J • �_ _ Lr to T s1 Ai tAO ; - .?_ 3111 iu :Aw,.A : � .i - �\ � (�ryr__.-- •_'-moi / 7J L I wl ��LL tr (PD ! . ,r t . ... ot•!t�'Lgr ca �' N8UMMERLAKE'/PMRK !r ruilL� ! �� ICA[tT{_o"i.J 4.5 1 (PD) w !, ,I m SrlwAr.Lw. \r N[iNST L r M (PD) �' •V� w ]w 1 kAr A4[ !r. '\.r 'S .r. • _ r .urn ►I. 34 �l ♦. .� O ktrN[ 4 3isi I I I. i = 0 9UMMEw sw stor. .�,` AAr r1 cy l.w N Cr. v x{L r. uw PL !Of y ] . so s ti > �_ 6 r wrrcNur sr + y E f t[ is gg 4 CENTER 11 A Neighborhood Office and Retail Center A Request to Amend the Comprehensive Plan and Rezone a Portion of a 5.4 Acre Site i at the intersection of SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW North Dakota Avenue Tigard. Oregon .t submitted by Great Northwest Management Company through the development partnership Bethany Associates. ltd. August 1986 f WQ 4 owl h F t F I { f 's { DEVELOPMENT TEAM Owner: Bethany Associates. Ltd. Robert Johnson. General Partner c/o Great Northwest Management Co. 5355 SW Murray Blvd. Beaverton. Oregon 97005 Planning and Development Gordon E. Davis. AICP Consultant: 1020 SW Taylor Portland. Oregon 97205 David E. Waldron & Associates Architect: 135 SW Ash Portland, Oregon 97204 �f Hobson & Associates Economist: 813 SW Alder '. Portland, Oregon 97205 Traffic Engineer: Kitt & Associates 512 SW Broadway �<F Portland. Oregon 97205 - ts CENTER II A Neighborhood Office and Retail Center THE REQUEST Exhibit 1 illustrates the site for the proposed Center II — Neighborhood Office nd is and Retailcornerrof the intersectionaofeSWin size SchollsaFerry Road ed on and t he and SWNorth southeast Dakota Avenue. The site is presently zoned CP — Professional/Administrative Office Commercial. The specific request is to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan Map and the Zoning Map (Ordinance 83-24) to: 1) 1.5 acres -- CP — Professional Office Commercial 2) 3.9 acres -- CG — General Commercial THE SCHOLLS FERRY CORRIDOR The site is in the center of an area often called the Scholls Ferry Corridor. This 2.5 mile corridor extends from Highway 217 west to the edge of the urban area slightly west of Murray Blvd. Scholls Ferry Road is the dividing line between the cities of Beaverton and Tigard. The central portion of the corridor in the vicinity of the site is generally known as the Greenway or Summerlake area. The eastern portion of the corridor experienced significant growth in the 1970's with the major On—The—Green Planned Development in Beaverton and other projects in Tigard and Beaverton. The 11.4 acre Greenway Town Center shopping center was also constructed during this time to serve this growing area. Growth slowed during the early 1980's as it did throughout the metropolitan area. Recently, the corridor has once again become the focus for major development. f This time, the western portion of the corridor has been the center of activity. "In fact, while the Sunset and 217 Corridors have been "hot" for industrial and office growth. the Scholls Ferry Corridor has been hot for residential growth, particularly in higher value multi—family projects. -7 r ti 77 .. � +- �iy j psi ala•-- ; ; .. '+9 t' `�� i dr do- 40. w Llow 6; m. town 1 r11 �: a.• c �: _ lit-. � �" R ,� .► Y ,.L r}� a ON to _ ad & I f ranges in the Scholls Ferry Corridor Since the adoption of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan in November 1983, within one mile of Scholls Ferry Road. (south to Walnut/Tiedeman in Tigard, north to Brockman in Beaverton) a total of 752 acres have been approved to accommodate 6144 housing units/1. In addition, a significant amount of non-residential industrial and commercial development has occurred in the vicinity of Highway 217. While all this change has been going on there have been other changes as well. Since the City's plan was adopted in late 1983. it has been amended twelve times. involving 61.7 acres. Of that amount, 33.3 acres have been conversions , from CP - Professional Office to residential and industrial uses. Table 1 lists amendments throughout Tigard. Looking at just the Scholls Ferry Corridor, eight amendments to the Tigard and Beaverton Comprehensive Plans totaling 41.5 acres have been approved since the Tigard plan was adopted. Table 2 lists these amendments. In addition, in 1985 the Beaverton School District declared three of its school properties as surplus. Two of those properties (totaling 32.1 acres) are within the Scholls Ferry Corridor and both are less than one half mile from the site. The 7.1 acre site in Tigard in the vicinity of SW 115th and Springwood Drive was recently sold and approved for 33 homes. The School District has entered into a preliminary development agreement on the 25 acre Middle School property on Sorrento Road in Beaverton, (approximately 500 feet north of the ,)roposed Center II project). Discussions with school district officials indicate that current plans anticipate 400 - 500 housing units on that property. Table 1 TIGARD PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ZONE CHANGES Since Plan Adoption, November 1983 Change Location From To Acres 7150 SW Sandberg Rd IH CP 3.8 9815 SW Walnut Place R12 R25 2.9 12528 SW Scholls Ferry Rd. R7 CP 1.4 'g 13370-13490 SW Watkins R3.5 CG 2.2 r Pacific Hwy/Beef Bend Rd. CP R40 4.3 11730 SW Greenberg Rd. R4.5/R12 CN .8 10580 SW McDonald R12 CG .5 10855 SW Greenberg Rd. IP CG 2.9 I-5/Carmen Rd/SPRR R12 IP 9.4 sw corner Bonita Rd/SW 79th R4.5 R7 2.5 SW Sandberg Rd./SW 72nd CP IP 29.0 9655 SW McKenzie CBO R25 2.0 k Source: City of Tigard files 4� 1/Beaverton and Tigard files r � �' 2 F 9 Table 2 SCHOLLS FERRY CORRIDOR PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ZONE CHANGES Beaverton and Tigard Since Tigard Plan Adoption. November 1986 Change Project From To Acres 12528 SW Scholls Ferry Rd. R7 CP 1.4 Lantana Meadows R7 R5 13.2 Quint Terrace R7 R5 2.7 SW Scholls Ferry/Sorrento R5 OC 2.5 Regency Height R7 R5 5.0 Hart Meadows R7 R5 3.4 Dobaj Heights R7 R5 4.8 SW Scholls Ferry/121st R5 R2 8.5 5 Source: Beaverton and Tigard city files r i 4 Table 3 IMPACT OF CHANGES WITHIN THE SCHOLLS FERRY CORRIDOR Since Tigard Plan Adoption, November 1983 Change Pro ect From To Acres Net Change 12528 SW Scholls Ferry Rd. R7 CP 1.4 -9 houses Lantana Meadows R7 R5 13.2 +28 houses Quint Terrace R7 R5 2.7 +6 houses SW Scholls Ferry/Sorrento R5 OC 2.5 -18 houses Regency Height R7 R5 5.0 +11 houses Hart Meadows R7 R5 3.4 + 7 houses Dobaj Heights R7 R5 4.8 +10 houses SW Scholls Ferry/121st R5 R2 8.5 +99 houses School Site - 115th/Springwood School R4.5 7.1 +33 houses School Site - Sorrento/Scholls School R7/R2* 25.0 +128-500*houses +295-676 houses *Present zoning would allow as much as 128 housing units on the site. School District plans are not yet finalized although preliminary discussions indicate between 400-500 housing units may be appropriate. i Source: Beaverton and Tigard city files 3 es in Table 3 lists all of the land use chanPlansthat butwere thatnot have occurreddwitheither the he Tigard or Beaverton Comprehensiverd Pla . acholls Ferry Corridor since the adoption ns f thatTleast 30Ot�to aspmuchnas 650he final plan for the surethe lus housing units will have been added into unforeseencorridor asa. result of comprehensive plan amendments and other Two of the plan changes listed on the hDakotae have bothoccurred casesatsmallintersection density of Scholls Ferry and 4 acres and 2 es to residential sites (l'4ffices ordto• accommodatercomparable neighborhoodto office s oriented accommodate existing o office uses. Future Develo ment Trends Within The Corridor Dint to a slowing of growth in new projects in Indications within the industry P Corridor. The explosive growth and the next few years within the Scholls Ferry out although many change in the corridor over the lastapprthree yeasved will is bevcomin& into the market projects that have already been in the next one to two years. For the most part. approved and constructed projects have set the pattern of development throughout most of the corridor and tandnoccupeears will see edfw y he that pattern filled in as projects CENTER II - THE PROPOSAL Great Northwest Management has been a part of the growth of the Scholls Ferry ect Corridor with its recently completed Meadowcr ek Apartmentapns�3O4 ap immediately south of the proposed Center II project. a units and is now over 80 percent filled. Hall in combination with the owners of the Greenway Town Center, and now Origi y on its own. Great Northwest Management has been C articularlywithin this a need for additional retail space wit complementary to the central portion of the corridor and. for uses that are existing Greenway Town as Great Northwest Management was equally convinced would accommodatethat there wsince tno office officesoffices of the size that the 5.4 acre site sou inquiries that developers would even make an offer ffice�nmedeical/dent lsite and tpractices and other small were received were from small o primarily professional practices (insurance, real estate. counselors) who p Y serve the local area. tir5.4 Deton ied in its original request of the city to onvertA he en Associates, Portland sbased CG. Great Northwest Management CocranissionedHobson and economists and market analystsd' to cO retailnspace duct awithin lt eed sg eater Scholls gFe his projected needs far office an =: corridor, That analysis and its findings are presented in Appendix A o t application. ' q 4 In summary however, the Hobson & Associates work arrives at several conclusions: With regard to the demand for and supply of office space-- 1. There is too much built office space in what they call "regional office space" (Class A) and in "community or neighborhood office space" (Class B) within the market area, 2. Of the vacant zoned office land, 80 acres will be used for Class A office space and 82 acres will be used for Class B office space, 3. Existing vacant built office space and the vacant zoned office land are well in excess of what projected population will require in the year 2005 for Class B office space, and 4. Despite the excess of built space and zoned vacant land, the location of the site in relation to the Greenway Town Center, the Scholls Ferry corridor and the road network will support a small (considerably less than 5 acres), community or neighborhood oriented office site. With regard to the demand for and supply of non—grocery retail space-- 1. There is shortfall of 145, 100 square feet of neighborhood oriented 1 retail space to support the needs of the existing population within the market area, 2. There is a particularly acute need today for auto service facilities within the market area, 3. While there is adequate vacant zoned commercial land within the market { area to accommodate the 145,100 square feet of shortfall if it were built today. the vacant land is not properly located to serve today's population and therefore is the reason the land is not being used today. s 4. Projected population at 2005 will use up all of the vacant zoned commercial land within the market area and still be short 19.8 acres to - accommodate the needs of that population, ' S. The site is particularly well suited to meet some of the present shortfall because of its relationship to the Greenway Town Center and its central location to the existing population and the growth expected in the next two to three years. The Hobson & Associates work confirmed the "developers intuition" of Great Northwest but went much further to provide great clarity to exactly how a development program should be put together on the site. 5 However, in the previous request before the city, there had been some confusion f' ibout the possible traffic impacts of the requested change, particularly since ` some of the anticipated improvements (SW North Dakota and the signal at Scholls and North Dakota) were not installed. To relook at this important question and tion to provide GreatallorthwestehioredrKpittelson &f Associcific ates, development program iates, trafficanals for the sitee,, s and engineers. of The Kittelson & Associates analysis theircontained isiarrAppendix at Beveralthis application. In summary. however, conclusions: 1. There is consistent backup at the North Dakota/Scholls Ferry intersection during the 5:00 - 6:00 pm peak period. However. the average stopped delay experienced by all drivers at the signal is less than 15 seconds per vehicle on Scholls Ferry. 2. Traffic volumes and intersection delay rank the intersection at level of service B during the evening peak period, well above minimum design standard (the level of service standard run from "A" where there are essentially no delays to "F" where delays are in excess of 60 seconds--level of service D is the lowest acceptable level for design standards). 3. Scholls Ferry Road is scheduled and has funding committed from both Washington County and the State Dept of Transportation for reconstruction to a five lane arterial between Highway 217 and Murray Blvd. 4. The reconstructed Scholls lwill intersectmaintain ion wellpresent 1990level andof service B at the North Dakota/Schols will eliminate most of the intersection backup. 5. The proposed zone change will generate more traffic than the current zoning. 6. Development of the property under either the existing zoning or under the proposed zoning will have approximately the same impact on the overall operating capacity and level of service of the intersection. 7. Development of the property under either the existing zoning or the proposed zoning will have a minimal impact (less than 6 percent) on the capacity of the intersection. 8. Full access to the property should be from North Dakota with limited, right-turn-in/right-turn-out access on Scholls Ferry. From the Hobson work, ' and specifichthe additional development progdramign of CenterII cfrom emerged and this Kittelson study, KF new request to the City was framed. t, f � • l a� dO�pOq OOd � 1 1 InIN, Nis s •\� , 1 ' �� 1 \ � t oee000v I \�� AN \ \� 'T S M1 .+n2 i Center II Concept Development Plan enter a Exhibit 2 illustrates the Concept Dter loThere are th�ee components to the plan: Neighborhood me Office and Ret 1) A Gas Station/Auto Service Center = 1.0 acres tal 2) A Neigorhood ProfesOriented Space,Office nBuilding or Small 1 or 2 stories = 1.5 acres - 20.000 to 28.000 square feet 3) A Neighborhood Retail Center - physically connected to the Greenway Center with pedestrian walkways - physically connected to the Meadowcreek apartments with pedestrian walkways = 2.9 acres - approximately 40.000 square feet is F Total - 5.4 acres The concept plan has several additional important features: The center is not designed to compete with the existing Greenway Center but rather to expand and complement the existing center consistent with current shopping center development trends and the one-stop shopping concept described in the Hobson work. the site, The center designedto er ,iaccess particularly from heMedowcreekpjectbutalsofromthe housing to be built across SW. North Dakota. The center is designed to have sifrom incial Scholls Ferry Dakota the from North Dakota with limited auto acces Meadowcreek project. With the gas station/auto service center at the North Dakota/Scholls Ferry intersection, access will either be from North Dakota or the retail center--no access will provided directly to Scholls Ferry Road. Center II Implementing the Cone The present zoning will not work krto fulil centerlcaebetbuilhe ewethin thr 11 e CPE- Neither the gas station nor t ACG zone is required to implement this portion of Professional Office zone. the plan. The medical/dental/professional office portionThereforelachanging built in the present CP zone so no change is necessary. built acres he the property from CP to CG will allow the concept to be implemented. It is obvious from inspection of the Concept Development Plan, that the the specific shape and location si nhofoffice center. ThendequestftoeleaveC1.S acres is dependent on the inal es g of the site CP can only be fixed in shape and location when a final center design comes back before the city through Design Review. rt 7 1 The additional request of this application is to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps to indicate a general location for the CP - Office Commercial but that the final exact shape and location of the 1.5 acres of CP be determined at the time of approval of a final Site Development Plan for the property. CRITERIA FOR AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAPS The Tigard Comprehensive Plan outlines general standards for amending the Comprehensive Plan Map and directs the Community Development Code to provide more detailed standards. The Plan's general standards include (Chapter 1. Implementation Strategies, 2.): 1. The change is consistent with applicable plan policies; 2. A change of physical circumstances has occurred since the original [map] designation. or 3. A mistake was made in the original land use designation. ? Section 18.22.040 of the Tigard Community Development Code (Ordinance 85-07) establishes detailed standards that are to be used to make a decision regarding a request to amend the plan and zoning map through a quasi-judicial procedure. A request for such an amendment must therefore address these standards as a part of its application. These standards include: 1. Statewide Planning Goals r 2. Applicable Comprehensive Plan policies 3. Applicable standards of the Community Development Code 4. Evidence of: - a change in the neighborhood or community. or - a mistake or inconsistency in the plan or map as relates to the property 5. Evidence that the change will not adversely affect the health. safety and welfare of the community. Statewide Planning Goals Section 18.22.040 (a)(2) states that statewide planning goals must be addressed in a quasi-judicial amendment "...until acknowledgment of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and ordinances." The city's Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code were acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission on October 11, 1984. This standard is no longer applicable. 8 Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies The city's Comprehensive Plan includes 93 pages of: statements of intent and purpose findings policies directives implementation strategies locational criteria Not all of these materials are applicable to each proposal. However, some of the directly applicable are addressed below. 1 2.1.1 The city shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program and shall i assure that citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Comment: The three implementation strategies assign the responsibility to implement this policy to the city. However, the applicant and his representatives have met once with merchants from the Greenway Town Center to discuss this proposal. A second meeting will be held prior to the Planning Commission. A meeting with representatives of the Neighborhood Planning Organization will also occur prior to the Planning Commission hearing. 4.1.1 The city shall maintain and improve the quality of Tigard's air quality... Comment: Implementation strategies suggest that the city should promote unnecessary vehicle trips by creating an efficient land use pattern that will encourage pedestrian and transit use and will reduce miles traveled for various trips. The Hobson & Associates finding that there is presently a shortfall of 145,100 square feet of neighborhood retail space within the market area suggests that lengthy trips are presently being made to satisfy some of the shopping needs of the immediate area. The addition of the proposed retail space will satisfy some of those needs, shortening some trips and eliminating others because of a greater range of stores available for one stop shopping. 5.1.1 The city shall promote activities aimed at diversification of the economic opportunities available to Tigard residents with particular emphasis place on the growth of the local job market. Comment: The Hobson work clearly shows that the site is unsuitable for Y. "regional office space" (Class A), that both Class A and Class .; B office is over built today, that the amount of vacant zoned ;a Class B office land is substantially in excess of the requirements in the year 2005, but that this site has characteristics that make it suited for a small Class B. neighborhood oriented office. Based on these findings, maintaining the existing zoning will hinder the achievement of this policy. Amending the zoning as s in the request will promote this policy by matching the site with the real potential for accommodating local office uses and thereby employment opportunities. Retail uses for which the Hobson work shows a substantial unmet need, will also promote this policy with its employment. 5.1.4 The city shall ensure that new commercial...development shall not encroach into residential areas that have not been designated for commercial...uses. Comment: The site is presently designated commercial. The requested change will allow a broader range of commercial uses including those uses allowed under the present zoning. The present zoning meets this policy and the proposed zoning will not materially change the relationship of development of the site to the surrounding uses. Surrounding uses include retail commercial to the east, office commercial across major roads to the west and north, and high , density residential to the immediate south. Specific Implementation Strategies that are consistent with the proposed change include: 1. The City's Community Development Code shall incorporate revisions needed to remove unnecessary obstacles which may deter new economic activities. Comment: The Hobson work shows that the present zoning is an obstacle to allowing the property to meet significant market needs within the area. 2. In the process of administering the City's Comprehensive Plan, careful consideration shall be given to the economic implications of all proposed policies, programs and regulations. Comment: The Hobson work shows that existing plan and zoning designations have a significant negative economic implication to the effective use of this site and to the inconvenience of residents in the Scholls Ferry corridor to obtain needed retail goods and services. s' >.` 3. The city shall identify regional economic needs...and take appropriate action to adjust local policies to respond to...regional concerns and needs. 10 Comment: The Hobson work shows an imbalance in the amount of zoned, vacant office and retail land (too much office land and not enough retail land) within the general Scholls Ferry corridor. This is land in Tigard. Beaverton and Washington County, Approving this request will work toward correcting that imbalance and is consistent with this Implementation Strategy. it 10. The City shall develop and implement an economic development program compatible with the potentials and constraints of the City and will: z c) Aid in the effective utilization of the land, energy and human { resources Comment: Effective---not speculative--utilization of land is an important objective in economic development. This strategy is 1 clearly directed toward that objective. The Hobson work shows that the proposed rezoning is not based on speculation but on a real need for additional retail goods and services and a lack of need for office space. 8.2.2 The city shall encourage the expansion and use of public transit by: a. locating land intensive uses in close proximity to transitways. Comment: Two bus lines serve the site. Development under either existing zoning or the proposed zoning will support transit service in the area. However. the Hobson analysis illustrates that the site is not likely to be effectively used because of its inappropriate zoning. Approval of the rezoning request will therefore allow effective use of the site and promote this policy. 9.1.3 The city shall encourage land use development which emphasizes sound energy conservation... Comment: The Hobson work illustrates that a significant amount of the neighborhood retail shopping needs are not being met within the Scholls Ferry corridor. People are finding the goods and services they need by shopping outside the corridor area, making unnecessary trips or extra length trips. Expanding the amount and types of retail services and creating zoning appropriate for neighborhood office needs will promote energy conservation consistent with this policy. 12.2.1 The City shall: a. Provide for commercial development based on the type of use, its size and required trade area. Comment: The city's Comprehensive Plan has always considered this site and the entire section of Scholls Ferry Road between 121st and SW North Dakota as a location for commercial uses. The 3 request does not alter this basic policy. However. the request does, on the basis of a detailed analysis of existing and projected market for office and retail trade, refine the 11 Plan's designation of commercial to more specific types and sizes of commercial uses. The present type and size of zoning is inappropriate in relation to the requirements of the trade area. Specific Locational Criteria 2. General Commercial (1) The commercial area should not be surrounded by residential districts on more than two sides. Comment: A residential district abuts only one side of the site. 4 (2) Access t (a) The proposed area. . .shall not create traffic congestion or a traffic safety problem. Comment: The Kittelson analysis demonstrates that the proposed rezoning does not create a traffic safety problem and that the overall traffic impact is minimal on the adjacent roadways and intersections in comparison to existing and projected traffic volumes and does not change the overall capacity and level of service of those facilities from existing zoning. F (b) The site shall have direct access from a major collector or arterial street. i Comment: The site has full access from SW North Dakota, a major j collector and limited access from SW Scholls Ferry Road, a major arterial. In addition, the site has direct pedestrian access to the residential project to the immediate south, limited auto access from the residential project to the south and pedestrian access to the commercial project to the east. (c) Public transportation shall be available to the site or general area. Comment: The site is currently served by two bus lines on Scholls Ferry Road. (3) Site Characteristics: (a) The Site shall be of a size which can accommodate present and projected uses. Comment: As the Hobson analysis shows, there is a substantial existing and projected demand for General Commercial type uses within the trade area that is unmet by existing commercial centers and cannot be adequately met by zoned vacant commercial land. The site is easily of a size to accommodate many of those uses. 12 _ (b) The site shall have high visibility. Comment: The site is relatively flat and has clear visibility from Scholls Ferry along its frontage and in an east and west direction for some distance. The site is visible north of Scholls Ferry on Sorrento for 500 to 1000 feet. he sitesis fully visible from SW North Dakota. e ble from uses to the west and north. (4) Impact Assessment: (a) The scale of the project shall be compatible with the surrounding uses. Comment: The General Commercial portion of the proposed change will be similar in the scale of buildings. parking, operations, lighting, noise and other factors as the Greenway Town Center e east. immediatelyacent to thehproposed General, whereas h at Commercial zoning center on this site is only 3.9 acres. The residential project to the immediate south isAdeveloped ll of the at the second highest density allowed in the city. residential units are two stories whereas the General Commercial uses on the site will be single story. If the site were to be fully developed with the existing zoning--which the Hobson analysis tells that it won't--the buildings would most likely be two story, generally more massive than the one story retail buildings that will be built with the proposed zoning. The properties to the west and north are zoned for office commercial uses. While smaller sites, the scale of those developments willa compatible withosed thezonGeneral Commercial uses on this site (b) The site configuration and characteristics shall be such that the privacy of adjacent non—commercial uses can be maintained. Comment: As Exhibit 2. the Concept Development Plan illustrates, landscape buffers and good separation can be attained between the commercial development of the site and the apartments to the south. This can be accomplished while also providing direct thereby promoting adestrian and t transportationauto tbetweenions two sues. y efficiencies and other conveniences. (c) It shall be possible ltoincorporate unique site features into the site design and development plan. Comment: The unique features of the site are: k its immediate physical and visual relationship to the �.' Scholls Ferry/North Dakota intersection, its immediate relationship to the high density residential project to the south. 13 its immediate proximity to the Greenway Town Center. The Concept Development Plan illustrates how each of these unique features can be maximized in the design of the center. through features like: . providing direct pedestrian access from the residential area and the Greenway Town Center. . providing limited. but direct auto connections from the residential project to the south into the project. . accommodating a gas station/auto service center at the Schol1s Ferry/North Dakota intersection without interfering with traffic movements. . providing full access from North Dakota where turning movements can be easily accommodated (d) The associated lights. noise and activities shall not interfere with adjoining non—residential uses. Comment: Lighting will be directed primarily to the interior of the site and buildings will tend to screen parking, building and signing lights from the adjacent properties--residential and non—residential. As the Concept Development Plan illustrates, it is possible to confine the majority of auto and pedestrian activities away from the edge of the property, particularly to the adjacent residential property. In addition, the closest residential unit is 50 feet from the property line, separated by a t residential roadway on the adjacent property. Overall, the operating characteristics of the General Commercial areas will be similar to the Greenway Town Center immediately adjacent to the site. 3. Commercial Professional Comment: The site is presently zoned Commercial Professional and therefore meets the general locational criteria for that use. The retention of 1.5 acres of Commercial Professional uses is consistent with those criteria. However. as the Hobson analysis points out, the present zoning of 5.4 acres for Commercial Professional does not meet the criteria for size and location for Class A "regional office a space". Their report also finds that the site does not meet the size criteria for Class S space in that it is too large. Their assessment that a 1.5 acre portion of the site to remain Commercial Professional does meet the criteria for size and location for Class 6 office space--this even in spite of excess of built and zoned vacant office land within the trade area today and still in the year 2005. 14 Applicable Standards of the Tigard Community Development Code fP 18.62 C—G (General Commercial District) 18.62.010 Purpose The Purpose of the General Commercial area is to provide for major retail goods and services. (1) The uses classified as general commercial may involve drive-,in services, large space users, a combination of retail, service, wholesale and repair services or provide services to the traveling public. 1 (2) The uses range from automobile repair and services, supply and equipment stores, vehicle sales, drive—in restaurants to laundry establishments. (3) It is intended that these uses be adjacent to an arterial or major collector street. Comment: The Hobson analysis finds that there is a substantial need today and in the future for retail goods and services in the categories of hardware and building materials, gas stations. drug stores, personal services and miscellaneous retail. They also find that existing space and vacant zoned land cannot meet that need today and in 2005 within the trade area. gg This site is on a major arterial and major collector and meets the locational criteria contained in the comprehensive plan. Given these findings, the proposed zone change meets the purposes of the General Commercial district. 18.64 C—P (Professional/Administrative Office Commercial District 18.64.010 Purpose (a) The purpose of the C—P zoning district is: (1) To provide for groups of business and offices in centers; (2) To accommodate the location of intermediate uses between residential districts and areas of more intense development; (3) To provide opportunities for employment and for business and professional services in close proximity to residential neighborhoods and major transportation facilities; (4) To expand the City's economic potential; (5) To provide a range of compatible and supportive uses; and (6) To located office employment where it can support other commercial uses. (b) The trade area will vary and may extend outside the community. Comment: The site is presently zoned CP and therefore meets these general statements of purpose. However, as the Hobson analysis finds, } 15 a the site does not meet the location criteria for Class A "regional office space". The analysis also finds that the site meets the locational criteria for Class B community oriented office space but is too large in relation to the needs of the trade area for that type of space. To conduct their analysis. Hobson & Associates defined a trade area that did extend outside the City of Tigard. The site is close to residential areas; at the time the Tigard plan was adopted, the site was originally more of a buffer to adjacent residential areas to the north and west--those properties have since been rezoned for office commercial uses; the site is adjacent to a commercial center and will, through appropriate sized community oriented office development. provide employment opportunities adjacent to retail commercial uses and in t close proximity to residential areas. Evidence of a Change in the Neighborhood or Community Comment: There has been dramatic growth in the Scholls Ferry corridor since the adoption of the Tigard plan in November 1983. That growth and its resulting impacts are expected to continue for the next two to three years even though new applications are declining. g'- While this growth is certainly changing the neighborhood and surrounding community, for the most part it was anticipated, if not in pace, certainly in substance, in the comprehensive plans of Tigard. Beaverton and Washington County. However, there have been other changes within the City of Tigard and the Scholls Ferry Corridor. Since the Tigard plan was adopted, it has been amended twelve times. Within the Scholls Ferry corridor, the Beaverton and Tigard plans have been amended eight times. Within the corridor, these eight amendments have added 134 housing units in excess of original zoning and have affected 41.5 acres. Perhaps even more significant than these changes is that in 1984. the Beaverton School District declared two school sites in the corridor as surplus land. A 1.1 acre school site in Tigard, less than one half mile from the Great Northwest site. This property was recently sold and platted for 33 single family homes. > l The second site. a 25 acre middle school site, is located approximately 500 feet north of the Great Northwest site. This major property can accommodate 128 housing units under existing 3 zoning (Beaverton zones all public land although designates such r i land for public use on its Comprehensive Plan). The School District has entered into an agreement with a developer which would provide for up to 500 housing units in the site. 16 5 The result of these plan amendments and the abandonment of these two school sites is the addition of a minimum of 295 to as much as 676 housing units in the corridor, the majority of which (from 227 to 599) are less than 500 feet from the Great Northwest property. These latter amendments will add between 680 and 1800 new residents within 500 feet of the property. None of these changes were anticipated in the comprehensive plan and all represent significant change within the neighborhood--change that is increasing the intensity of the neighborhood within the immediate vicinity of the Great Northwest property. and increasing the demands for retail and personal services of the type that can only be accommodated on CG zoned land. Evidence of a Mistake or Inconsistency in the Plan Comment: It appears that the Tigard Plan may indeed contain a mistake with regard to the amount of CP land that it contains. Two factors seem to point to this conclusion: 1. Of the 61.7 acres that have been the subject of plan amendments in Tigard, 33.3 acres have been converted from CP to some other designation. 2. The Hobson analysis of the market demand for and supply of office land within a trade area in the greater Scholls Ferry Corridor found that there is almost 60,000 square feet of vacant Class B office space today and that by 2005, there will be an excess of 61 acres of zoned office land over the actual demand for that land. It is important to realize that the mistake in the plan appears to be more one of the amount of CP land rather than its location. In fact. the Hobson analysis finds that despite the large amount of excess Class B office space and zoned, vacant land, the Great Northwest site is a good location for a small Class B office building. Rather than 5.4 acres of Class B office space. the Hobson analysis finds that in combination with the zoned office lands to the west across North Dakota and to the north across Scholls Ferry, and with a retail use of the remainder of the site, a 1.5 acre Class B office site will work particularly well on the Great Northwest site. The second error in the plan appears to be in the amount of CG land allocated within the trade area. The Hobson analysis finds that there is an unmet demand in 1986 for retail space of 145. 100 square feet or 16.3 acres of land within the trade area. In addition, the Hobson analysis finds that in 2005, the demand unmet by built space or vacant land will be 19.8 acres. Clearly the plan has erred by underestimating the need for community level retail space and has under allocated appropriately zoned and located CG land to meet the need in 1986 and in 2005. Rezoning 3.9 acres of the Great Northwest site to CG will help correct that error. r 17 Evidence That The Change Will Not Adversely Affect The Health. Safety and Welfare of the Community Comment: The Kittelson traffic analysis finds that while there is more i traffic generated by development under the proposed rezoning than under existing zoning, the difference is small. The Kittelson analysis finds that the actual impact on adjacent roadways and intersections of develo in under existing or the proposed zoning is minimal (less than 6 of the capacity) and is not significantly different. The Kittelson analysis also finds that developing under existing or proposed zoning will not change the existing or projected level of service of the intersection, } The recent installation of a signal at North Dakota and Scholls . Ferry and the construction of North Dakota appear to have already increased the overall safety of this area. The scheduled reconstruction of Scholls Ferry will continue to } increase the general safety and efficiency of the entire area. The Concept Development Plan illustrates how the design of the site can actually work to decrease hazards within the area by providing direct pedestrian access from adjacent residential areas to the proposed center and to the existing Greenway Town Center. x The proposed change will not adversely affect the health, safety(-- and afetyrand welfare of the community, but will enhance the safety and welfare of the area through some of the traffic and pedestrian facilities that will be provided and by providing goods and services immediately available to local residents. 8 _ k 2 A I 4 s 1 APPENDIX A MARKET ANALYSIS OF DEMAND FOR AND SUPPLY OF RETAIL AND OFFICE IN THE GREATER SCHOLLS FERRY CORRIDOR HOBSON & ASSOCIATES E f i z . . Hobson & Associates Urban Land Economics/Market&Development Analysis r MARKET ANALYSIS OF OFFICE AND RETAIL NEED A Site Within The Scholls Ferry Corridor Prepared For: Great Northwest Management ice.. August 1986 813 Southwest Alder Street,Suite 800 Portland,Oregon 97205 (503)226-6616 • r Section Table of Contents Page I INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Office Classifications Definitions . . 2 Standard Industrial Classif ications . . 3 Retail Trade Area . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Projection Period . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Report Format . . . . . . . . . . 4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Summary of Findings: Market Demand for Office: 7 Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . Office Demand: 1986 . . . 7 projected tweed for Office Space 7 Summary Of Findings: Market Demand for 9 Retail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trade Area . 9 Market Demands 1986 11 Current Vacancy Patterns . . . . . . . 11 Market Demand: 2005 . . . . . . . . . 12 II MARKET DEMAND FOR COMM+UNITY-ORIENTED 14 PROFESSIONAL OFFICE SPACE . . . Public Need for Office Market Segment- ation • • • • • w 15 Classifications of Office Buildings 15 Regional Distribution of Office Space 17 Office Space Distribution in the Southwest Suburban Portland Market Area . . . . 18 Market Analysis for Office Space in the Study Area . . . . . • . . . . 19 Study Area Definition . . . . . . . . . 20 Office Space Distribution in the Study Area . . . . . . . . . . 20 Office E nployment Projections 22 Future Office Space Demand . 23 Future Office Development Potential 23 Reconciliation of Demand and Supply 24 i Hobson&Associates -- - r AN Section Table of Contents III THE DIRKET NEED FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL FACILITIES 27 Delineation of the Trade Area . . . . . . 28 Retail Development Potential of the Subject Site . . . . . . . . 30 Demand: Supportable Square Footage . . . 31 Supply; Existing Square Footage . . . . 35 Reconciliation: Current Residual Demand 40 T Analysis of Retail Vacancy Rates in the Trade Area . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Future Demand . 45 Supportable Square Footage in 2005 45 Future Supply: vacant Land . . . . . . . 46 Reconciliation of Future Supply and Demand . . . 51 S � J �A 5 Mbron&Associates ti Table List of Tables 1 Definition of Class a, S and C Office 16 Space . . . . . . . . 2 Summary of Southwest Suburban Office Space �pp construction . . . . . . . • . . . . . . 10 3 Existing Office Space S%Vly,, 'Tigard., Beaverton and Study Area . . . . . • . . 21 4 office Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 5 Vacant Land in Study Area . . _ _ w 24 6 &=Mary of Projected Demand/Sqpplyof Class B office Space in Study Area . 25 7 Profile of Tracie area . . 29 8 Average Annual. Sales and Expenditures for the Trade Area . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 9 Mail Expenditures in the Trade Area and conversion to Retail Square Footage Supportable by Trade Area Residents 33 10 Existing Retail:. Spate Within the Trade Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ 39 11 Retail rootage in Centers in Proximity to the Trade Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 12 Existang Retail Spate Serving the Trade Area 39 13 Analysis of Current Residual Remand for Retail Space in the Trade Area 41 14 Retail Vacancy Rates . . . . . 43 35 Retail Vacant'y Analysis Cates of Vacancy 44 16 increase in Retail Ezpenditures 2985-20:05 46 17 Ca-culAtion of Additional Retail Space needed ty 2005 . . . . _ . . . 47 f t j e :W st iof -Takaes ::Page 8 Inventozy .of land for Potent al Retail Use 49 19 ipotential New Retail .Space ,. `50 .20 Residual :Demand for Retail ;Space.: 2005. 53 �j Iw } t% r - List Of Exbibi�s - OEl?ICE S7iJDY a AREA .FOR PROWS :OFFICE -STYE . .• :. :. 8 `TI RET�!i1t+ FORPROPOSED SHOPPING 10 .:CENTER . . ., ,. .. -• . . III TRADE•AREAS OF:WOR .CENTERS OUTSIDE =RETAIL'TRADE 'AREA AND =MWSMW-ZION OF 36 PARTITION 'METHOD -. .. F; 1 tr �4 x : 1. - , 4 Section I I MT =CTION AND-SUMMARY-OF FINDINGS AMPOSE This -report presents the results of Hobson & Associates' .analysis of the existing and projected demand and supply for office and neighborhood retail space within a market area surrounding a 5.4 acre site at the intersection of S.W. Scholls Ferry and S.W. North Dakotainthe City of Tigard, Oregon. The site is owned by Great Northwest Management and is presently zoned CP (professional office). This report coversthefollowing topics: * The historic and projected -pattern of office building development in thestudyarea. -* The ability of developed space and vacant, zoned land in the study area to meet projected demand for all types of office space. * The characteristics of the site which determine the amount of office space which should be built. * The characteristics of the site which make it attrac- tive for certain kinds of retail use. -. -* The need for -additional retail space now and over the next-20,years-in the study area. DEFINITIONS Certain--technical terminology pertaining to the office and r retail real estate _industry is used- throughout this report. .,An understanding -of the:meaning of this terminology _is important .to,-communicating-the results of this -analysis. -Definitions of this-terminology. follows: E Mbson'&Associates - - Standard Industrial Classifications (SIC) SIC codes are utilized in the retail market analysis to define different classifications of retail goods and ser- vices,* The retail demand for five SIC classifications were analyzed in this report. These classifications were selected based upon their appropriateness for potential neighborhood retail uses on the site and include: SIC 52 (Hardware and Building Materials) , 554-(Gas Stations) , 591 (Drug Stores) , 59 (Miscellaneous Retail) and 72 (Personal Services). These classifications exclude shopper goods such .as automobiles, furniture, apparel, and restaurants, which are more typically found in larger community centers, r6gional centers, and in free standing buildings. Food Stores (SIC 54) were also excluded because the site is not appropriate for a supermarket. 3 Retail'"Trade Area A retail trade area is defined as the geographic area from which the sustaining patronage for a shopping center is _ obtained. As a practical matter, the sustaining patronage generally accounts for 85 to 90 percent of the center's sales.** Projection Period appropriate A 20 year time frame was selected as the period for projecting office and retail space demand since it is the planning period that most government jurisdictions use for their comprehensive plan. * Developed by the Statistical Policy Division of the Executive office of the President of Management and Budget; Goverment Printing office, Washington,, _D9 Co ** -See;_'ILLI,, vn_.inc Develovment _HAn book ..2j1d Edition, ccolluma William g;Resear:ch-pr cede es'." _n2,,__17-20- _aII.$..Roca. Market Research for Shopping Centers (New -York: 1980) . 416bson-Sy Associates off ice Classif ication Def initions Understanding the office space market hinges on defining two classifications of suburban office space which serve different segments of the office market. While these classifications are not precise, they are generally accepted definitions from the Urban Land Institute..* Class A: Buildings which have excellent location near major transportation arterials, are usually at least three stories in height, attract larger regional tenants, are generally concrete and/or steel con- struction, command rents relatively high rents ($16 to $19 per square foot within Washington County), and are managed professionally. Class A buildings draw tenants from a regional market and are often referred to as "regional office space". This type of office development tends to cluster around regional office centers such as Kruse Way, Washington Square, and the emerging Sunset Corri- dor. Class B: Buildings with good location, wood frame construc- tion, professional management and high tenant standards, and includes doctors and related # medical services tenants. Class B buildings are normally one or two stories and are located away from major freeway intersections in areas where land prices are lower and thus, can support the lower rents associated with Class B office space. Class B buildings generally command rents of $10 a to $12 per square foot and serve a local community or neighborhood market rather than a regional market. It is critical to note that the Class B designation in no -way specifies a low quality building, but rather that Class B-apace, such as the new Nimbus Center under construction at Nimbus and Scholls Ferry Road, does not compete with expen- ive Class A space such as Lincoln Center adjacent to w Washington Square. - * Llrban;Land Institute, 0111C2:0eve opm ntZandbaok, -pg. 18, (1982) . ��Hobson£:Associates �2 a n Retail space Needs* Current Demand (1986) 226,600 square feet Less Current Supply (Built Space) 59,900 square feet Less: Allocated Existing Vacant Space 21,606 square feet Current Residual Demand 145,100 square feet € Land Area Supportable Today 16.3 acres Additional Demand by 2005 207,120 square feet Less: Allocated Vacant Land Supply supportable space) 31.700 square feet Deficit (supportable apace) 175,420 square feet Additional Land Needed in Inventory by 2005** 19.8 acres k Class B Office Space Needs Current Vacant Class B Space 59,200 square feet y increase in Demand 1986-2005 for Class B Space (Adjusted for Vacancy) 369,300 square feet Acres Available for Class B Office Development 82 acres Class B-.office Space Accommodated With 40% Coverage 1,428,800 square feet Possible Excess of Class B = Office Space 1,039,500 square feet Excess Class B office Land Currently in inventory 61 acres x s t' * Need for retail-.:space .in five SIC categories:analyzed. ** This only includes the land needed for the five'=SIC F REPORT FORMAT f The findings presented in this report are summarized in the following subsections "Conclusions" and "Summary of Findings". The supporting data and analyses are then discussed in detail in Section II and III of this report. Section II begins with a thorough discussion of Class A and B office space, and the pattern of their distribution in the study area. i i The characteristics of the market which suggest Class B office development as the most appropriate type of office space on the site are discussed. Finally, a demand/supply 1 pro3ection for office space in the study area is presented for the 20 year time frame, 1985 to 2005, and conclusions F are drawn regarding the ability of the area to meet the local community need for Class B office space. Section III presents the results of the analysis of the need for additional retail space in the delineated trade area. The retail development potential of the subject site is analyzed, and the results are used to guide the analysis of supply and demand for non-food retail uses typically found in neighborhood shopping centers. The amount of additional retail space needed now and in 2005 is quantified, and conclusions are drawn regarding the . public benefit which would be served by the development of retail space at the subject site. # s CONCLUSIONS The market analysis shows there is a much greater need for retail space and retail land than for office space and land both now and in the future. There is a market need by the year 2005 for an additional 20 acres of retail land to support the retail needs in the five SIC classifications analyzed. On the other hand, there is a surplus of 61 acres of office land that is appropriately zoned and located for Class B office space development. These market needs are summarized as follows: Hobson£m Associates ;fx 1 The market analysis shows that while e Cheroffiecould ben the t some need for a limited -amount f Class site to serve the local community, there is relatively much greater and immediate need for neighborhood retail space on the property. i The following two sections present the detailed findings of the analyses of office and retail development potential on the site. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: MARKET DEMAND FOR OFFICE: Study Area The market area investigated in the study of local community need for Class B professional office space is the area sham in Exhibit I. To the east, north and south of the subject site, the study area includes all properties within approxi- mately a 5--minute driving time from the subject site. To the west, in the less populated rural area, the study area stretches out along Scholls Ferry Road to include the properties within a ten minute driving time of the subject site. office Demand: 1956 There is currently a high vacancy rate of 11.2 percent for Class A office, 16.9 percent for Class B office space, and 14.5 percent for Class A and B space combined, in the study area. The Nimbus Center, near the subject site, is currently under construction, and will add 26,475 square feet of Class B space to the total supply in the market area. However, 50 percent of the office space at Nimbus Center is pre-leased, in spite of the high vacancy rate for Class B space in the market area. This condition indicates a current desire for some Class B space in the immediate vicinity of the site. Projected bleed for office Space: 2005 The projected need for office space to the year 2005 and the future potential supply of Class B office space in the market area is based upon employment projections provided by the Metropolitan Service District (MSD). This need was -' summarized previously and shows an excess of 61 acres of 7 z `Hobson&Associates 3 f i i Conceptually, a mix of office and retail space is clearly in the best interest of the general public. The proposed retail development will .= I& competitive to the adjacent shopping center, but rather will be an addition to this center which will benefit existing retail tenants by further increasing the diversity of goods offered and stimulating additional "cross shopping" from retail patrons. The concept of some additional retail development adjacent x to the existing Greenway Center is consistent with general trends in the retail industry towards larger centers that provide more goods and services that better meet the needs of retail patrons based upon "one-stop" shopping. In turn, public need is satisfied by eliminating additional shopping trips which results in greater traffic congestion, gasoline t consumption, noise and air pollution, etc. The site is not appropriately located for Class A, regional office space. There is more than sufficient land in t superior regional office center locations around Washington g Square, Kruse Way, the emerging Sunset Corridor, and freeway interchanges on I-5 and Highway 217 to meet the projected needs for this type of space over the next 20 years. 7 on the other hand, the site is too large to accommodate full development as Class B space which tends to serve a more local, neighborhood market area. Even at a relatively modest land coverage ratio of 40 percent (17,400 square feet per acre), the site at full buildout would contain 94,000 square feet of office in several buildings. This quantity of space, coupled with the office space that will eventually be developed on the two sites directly across Old Scholls Ferry and North Dakota, is more office space than what is needed to comfortably support the needs of the local community. The needs of the market would be better served to scatter this office space on smaller land parcels over a larger geogra- phical area. Therefore, the relationship of 1.5 acres of office space (approximately 28,000 square feet) , 2.9 acres of small tenant, neighborhood retail space (41,000 square feet) and 1.0 acres for a gas station on the site is a much more logical and efficient use of the land which better serves the needs of the market. These uses are highly compatible and complementary to one another, existing adjacent land uses, and current zoning patterns for other vacant lands in '- the immediate vicinity. 7^ A ilObSOn�AS.SdClateS L--- y Vancouver L_ Exhibit I OFFICE STUDY AREA • .�, ti FOR PROPOSED OFFICE SITE -,� 1 •. - t I L 4 a r{1 L�• .s /fi• • 4C AWI,A rton �� �• -wr+i+ t r�Mtti sw _ •; _ �'"..Y'tt neer-—�" .y.. :.. �---�_ •. « �� City .r 1 ; . •.,e 5:.= i 11LLL.«��.�orrrRwergm0a .,... tit 58 .M .✓' J,' S � 'L • n _ wns»twToi,to_ ,� ""`� f _ — `� Jai �r�s tl •`�.`'! �•y� '��.+� - - _ r vacant land is currently in inventory over and above the land needed to accommodate the projected demand for the next 20 years. Because Class A space competes in and derives its support from a much larger geographical area than Class B office space, equivalent supply and demand figures for Class A space were not computed. Based on this analysis it is evident there is more than sufficient vacant land, properly zoned and located to accommodate the need for Class B office space in the local market area over the next 20 years. However, this condition does not negate the opportunity to develop a relatively modest amount of Class B space in the local market area on Scholls Ferry Road to serve the needs of the local community, since there is a projected need in the area of s approximately 369,000 square feet over the next 20 years. The various land parcels designated for office use will compete for this demand and the best located sites will prevail. SUMMARY OF FINDINGSs MARKET DEMAND FOR RETAIL P Trade Area The trade area investigated for retail goods for the pro- posed neighborhood retail center is shown in Exhibit II. This trade area is similar to the shady area defined for the office analysis, including urbanized properties within five minutes driving time of the subject site, and properties to the west along Scholls Ferry Road within 10 minutes driving time. However, the boundaries of the retail trade area must reflect the impact of physical barriers such as Highway 217. As shown in Exhibit II, the retail trade area boundary is also constrained on the south, because the downtown Tigard area fully serves the retail and service needs of the popu- lation closest to these Highway 99 and Downtown Tigard retail centers. c' s. .F Hobson&Associates a P 1{ i fit_ �, r, •�� i �r I:Bun.npton � / a L--- f I �• l Vancouver Exhibit II <aw.•. RETAIL TRADE AREA \ FOR PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER •p �, r � 5 1�� vwa i t � �� a.•,.. s � um•n i w'� l•G o . 1� is co Me- RD j �•~'+'� ivy L.+.?>-. ,._-- `.cam r e: i i �Mw � • _.. Q. 7 {F -01 U, i i y _• B 6110.illit '° f �i+•. qa j1 1 7 f �� O•r0 .• 4Nr `pp,• l a� t ' � 1 lieigar 4. ,La� /4 \ .o King c11y -..... . ',,• I u �/ Xes� "vl �- i� Durham I / 41 ryr avr„io:l —�_r• • I.rer..,.o• _./'1 T 1 RtvergrOve '�_ 1i h yy ua a � Ile— She pp0 -:w•SwMGrOM fA _ _ a o S ir' g • Market Demand: 1986 Demand for retail space within the trade area is expressed as the square footage of retail floor area supportable by retail expenditures made by persons residing in the trade area. Demand estimated for five categories of non-food retail and service establishments typically found in neighborhood shopping centers including hardware and building materials stores, gas stations, drug stores, miscellaneous small retail stores, and personal service outlets. This by no means includes all retail goods. As previously shown, the total amount of unserved demand in 1586 within the immediate trade area is approximately 145,000 square feet of retail space. The current need for retail space in the trade area, by type of establishment, (adjusted for existing vacant retail space) is estimated as follows: Hardware & Building Materials 38,000 Square Feet Gasoline Stations 6,340 Square Feet Drug Stores 2,195 Square Feet Misc. Retail 84,260 Square Feet Personal Services 14,200 Square Feet Current vacancy Patterns Within the defined retail trade area, there is vacant retail space of 33,945 square feet, a vacancy rate of approximately 16 percent. The vacancy rate in retail centers on the periphery of the site is approximately five percent. In researching the reasons for the higher vacancy rates in the retail trade area anlyzed, it was determined the majority of vacant space in retail centers on Scholls Ferry Road was positioned in poor locations within the centers and lacked visibility from Scholls Ferry. Other retail facili- ties that showed abnormally high vacancies were in older, somewhat dilapidated shopping centers. Thus, the vacancy rate in the retail centers serving the trade area is not an appropriate indicator of current demand, but rather undesirable space that is not competitive in the market- A place, dN a x In examing the retail potential for the Scholls Ferry Corri- dor and the site, food store space was eliminated as a possibility for a number of reasons. First, there is a much � � 11 u .z Hobson&Associates t k 1 t l t possibility for a number of reasons. First, there is a much better market opportunity to complement existing combined acent retail facilities at Greenway Center so that the Second, facilities function as a large neighborhood center. supermarkets typically anchor neighborhood centers and there is a large, modern Thriftway store in the Greenway Center. Food store anchors tend to be loss leaders in a generato ping center. Because they are the primacy trafficother retail uses, supermarket developers are in a strong negotiating position to purchase land and rent space at substantially lower rates than smaller retail tenants who feed off of the traffic generated by the supermarket. Third, it is rumored a large new Safeway store will be located at a new proposed center near the intersection of Scholls Ferry and Murray Road. Therefore, from an economic standpoint it would be substantially more profitable to develop the proposed retail space for smaller retail tenants. The proposed 2.9 acres of land for retail development is not large enough to build a g` food store and supporting retail space. Market Demands 2005 The net demand for retail facilities by the year 2005 is based on population growth and the amount of properly zoned vacant land available for the development of new retail centers. Based on these two factors of potential supply (vacant land) and demand (increased population) there is curently a significant shortage of land available to meet projected demand, in the magnitude of 20 acres for the five SIC categories analyzed, in the year 2005. This estimate assumes all of the vacant land currently zoned for retail useis fully developed by the year 2005, which is an unrealistic assumption for two reasons. First, as a practical matter, some amount of vacant land of all types in a variety of locations should be kept in inventory or development and land values will be artificially con- strained, which is not in the best interest of the general public. Second, the lumping of all sites together regardless of size, location, existing uses and other ry factors is a "bean counting" approach which ignores whether a particular site is suitable, ready for development, or g even available for development. By ignoring scale effects (many of the sites are less than one acre) , shape, topography, access and quality, the analysis presumes that each retail site would serve the trade area with the same 12. Hobson 6z Associates { SY 4 relative efficiency and intensity as if it were a part of a major activity center. This is clearly an unrealistic assumption--and one which reduces the effective size of the inventory. However,, even given the conservative assumptions { of full development of all vacant retail land by the year 'y 2005• there is still a need for 20 additional acres of retail land to support the projected population growth within the immediate retail trade area of the site. i ,i t{t k $ { v3 -H .& t 13 r; `k f Section II _.: MARKET DEMAND FOR OOMMUNITY-ORIENTED F PROFESSIONAL OFFICE SPACE pC 1 The purpose of this market analysis is to determine the need for small scale, high quality Class 8 office development in the general area of the site. F There is a total of 162 acres of vacant land in the study area which, though under different jurisdictions, is zoned for office development. Vacancy rates for office space in the suburban southwest area are well documented. According to recent information (June 1986) there was a vacancy rate of about 16 percent in the office market study area. Conse- quently, there seems little reason for concern that the study area will be limited in meeting the overall demand for oftice space, and so it appears that the proposal to drop 3.9 acres at the subject site from this total supply will have no negative impact as regards meeting the long-term office development needs of the area. However, in order to accurately evaluate how this supply of existing office space and vacant land relates to the future demand for office space, two important aspects of the market must be understood. First, it is critical to understand that there are different types of office space that serve different markets. The inventory of vacant land for office development must satisfy requirements of all classes of Office development. Second, in order for a large parcel of land to support full build-out of office space, certain site characteristics must be present for the development to be appropriate and feasible. Lacking these characteristics, the highest and best use of the parcel may dictate smaller scale, comple- menting land uses. This market analysis for office develop- ment at the subject site will show that the site's charac- teristics make it best suited for a 20,000 to 25,000 square foot professional office building on 1.5 acres rather than a 75,000 to 90,000 square foot building or buildings on 5.4 acres. °4 14Hobson&Associates Therefore, before proceeding with the analysis of the market for office space, the above two points will be addressed directly, followed by the market analysis of supply and demand for office space in the study area. PUBLIC NEED FOR OFFICE MARKET SEGMENTATION Although office market conditions and future office projects are often described as though the market were homogeneous, there are, in fact, several different types of office space that serve different markets. Office space quality, pres- tige and price range varies from the most expensive and elaborate accommodations for corporate executive officers in high-rise buildings to modest quarters for such users as an !' independent insurance agent. Depending on the geographic, population, and maturity of a market, representation within this range is needed to serve the various members of a business community. Availability of a wide range of office space types is criti- cal to a community's ability to meet the range of business and personal service requirements. Numerous essential ser- vices and small businesses need office space, but cannot afford expensive Class A space. Also, the nature of their businesses may not require the high image, freeway or mid- town locations often associated with top quality office developments. However, these businesses provide important services within the overall fabric of a community. Without the availability of office space for these tenants, a community's business and personal service needs may be sacrificed or less con- veniently available. CLASSIFICATIONS OF OFFICE BUILDINGS According to the off ace, DNvelonment Handbook published by the Urban Land Institute, there are three basic classifica- tions of office spaces Class A, B and Ct their characteris- tics are summarized in Table 1. 15 Hobson&Associates s Table 1 DW3NITIGU OF CLASS A, B AMD C OFFICE SERCE Class A Class B Class C Office Space Off_ Joe geace Office Space market Area Served Regional Local Old Class B space Type of Construction Concrete and WoodfraAe Renovated Steel Same 3 1 to 2 4 stories or 2 or Height stories more stories 60,000 s.f. Amount of woe 25,000- 2,000 to Building or more 40,000 s.f. 20,000 s.f. Rent Levels $14 per s.f. $10-$13 per $6-$10 Per or more s.f. t Tenants Larger, look- smaller= more eaall local %me ofing for image localized, omopanies, & and prestige; more oonoerned professional doing business with cost and groups. i regionally and value than outside of image. region. The key differences among the three building classes are location, building materials, and rents. In a suburban location, Class A space would typically have direct freeway access, have been built very recently and would have at least three stories. Building materials and design commen- surate with downtown office construction is normal. Class B spaceaccessto transportation urban tation networks but otns are low-rise unecessarily fs with reed rt, acre po �. way locations. The rental rate dif ferential between Class B and Class A space of between $6 and $S per square foot per year effec- tively segments the potential markets. Class A buildings typically attract tenants in high profile professions or industries for whom prestige and image are important re- quirements. Class A office space is also important for tenants with regional or larger trade areas. These tenants 16 Hobson&Associates ub often are independent of a specific location but choose their space on a basis of convenience for employees, especially the business owner or manager, building image, and other qualitative characteristics. These tenants often do not depend on the local area for a large portion of their sales or operations. Tenants of Class B and C buildings often select space on the basis of convenience to their local markets. These pro- fessional and service businesses including accountants, insurance agents, local real estate brokers, members of the medical profession, and similar businesses rely on the local market for the majority of their sales. { It is important to keep in mind that often the distinction between Class A and Class B office buildings is access rather than any inherent difference in the quality of the building or development. Excellent freeway locations carry higher land values. Consequently, higher floor area ratios (FAR) and taller structures are necessary to offset the higher land values. Although Class B buildings may have similar building materials, their locations and land prices do not require high FAR's and, therefore, are more typically low-rise but not low quality structures. Class B buildings are less expensive to construct that Class A buildings and, coupled with the lower land prices, therefore carry lower economic rents. The Class B designation in no way signifies a lower quality development but rather that the rents would not be competi- tive with the expensive Class A off ice space (such as the office buildings located around Washington Square and on Kruse Way). The prospective tenants for office space at the subject site will also, more likely, come from the local Beaverton, Tigard and Washington County market rather than from the Portland regional market. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF OFFICE SPACE Studies have been performed on mature urban markets to evaluate the distribution of office space within those mar- kens according to the three buildings' classifications described above. In an article published in 8gA1 Estate . 17 ■■ Hobson&Associates t i proportion of Class A office space to Class B and gevieN, a 4 C office space of 1:2 was found to be consistent in many cities. 1/ 1 he office This consistency of tspace inventory among s at there is a demand numerous urban markets indicate ximately twice as much B pattern in the long�runA Srapproximately and C office space Space Distribution in the office Spa Southwest Suburban Portland Market Area The above cited office space distribution pattern is for mature urban markets. Area cannotecae the be assumed to besuburban en of the Portland Metropolitan mature market, an evaluation was made of standing inventory constructed over time in Th s� ventory isbshown inrthe around the market area. following table. Table 2 SUNY OF SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN OFFICE SPACE CONSMCTION (In Square Feet) Office Space eructed Class A Class B & C _0_ 377,600 1970 - 1975 88000 894,650 1976 - 1980 1,022,900 700_,840 1981 - 1985 1,110,900 1,9731090 TOTAL ; Sources Cushman & Wakefield= Hobson & Associates (1986) . arketing Studies for Office 1/ Lex, Richard A., "M W, Volume 5, No. 2, Buildings," Real (steamer 1975) . 18 Hobson&Associates Table 2 indicates that since 1970, office space construction has totalled approximately 1.1 million square feet of Class A space in the southwest suburban area compared to approxi- mately 2.0 million square feet of Class B office buildings. This inventory does not include the office submarkets typi- cally associated with the City of Portland including Johns Landing and Barbur Boulevard. The inventory includes the submarkets from Lake Oswego and Kruse Way, Tualatin, Tigard, Wilsonville, the Washington Square/Highway 217 corridor, central Beaverton, and the Cedar Hills/Sylvan Heights areas. Table 2 also shows that prior to 1980, there was virtually no Class A office space in the southwest suburban market area. However, since 1980, Class A office building develop- meet has exceeded Class B development by a factor of approximately 1.5 to 1. The emergence of Class A off ice space in the greater southwest suburban area is consistent with the maturation process that has occurred with the development of the Washington County area as a major employment and high } technology center. With this higher market profile and more established business environment, there has been demand for new office space in rent levels comparable to downtown Portland. At the present time, the southwest suburban office market 1 appears to have an inventory of office buildings which is proportionately consistent to the office space inventories of mature urban areas. r MARKET ANALYSIS FOR OFFICE SPACE IN THE STUDY AREA The question posed in specific regard to this comprehensive plan and zone change application is whether there is a future need for office development. This question is posed within the context of future office development in the market area and the need for a mix of office space types. The methodology employed in this market analysis is as follows: 19 Hobson&Associates - 1 1. Definition of study area. 2. Estimated long-range office employment within the study area. 3. Translation of office employment into demand for office space. 4. Evaluation of vacant land available for future office development in the study area and projections of the type of office space likely to be developed in the major office locations, based on existing surrounding land uses, location, zoning, and other factors. p 5. The valuation of potential future distribution of E office space by class and potential demand for office development at the subject site. i Study Area Definition Because the proposed office space at the subject siteis planned to serve primarily a local market, a study area w defined which encompasses an area within five minutes driving time from the subject site in the urbanizeatlated and within 10 minutes driving time in the less pop rural area to the west along Scholls Ferry Road. This study area is shown in Exhibit I in Section I. office Space Distribution In The Study Area Table 3 shows the breakdown of the current inventory of Class A and B office space within this study area, and within the City of Tigard and the City of Beaverton. There are high vacancy rates for both Class A and Class B office buildings. The Nimbus office center, currently under con- struction at Scholls Ferry Road and Nimbus Road, will add an additional 26,475 square feet of new Class B office space. Table 3 also shows that in a relatively smaller geographical area than the Southwest Suburbs, the ratio of Class A to Class B office space can vary significantly from the norm. Substantial new development of Class A office space in the it i study area and in thammount of Class Alimits fa d Tigard l ss Bsspace. n an approximately eq 4 2® Hobson&Associates Table 3 EXIt G MICE SEMM SJPILY TIt m, HFrAVERM AND STUDY ARBA Total Total Total Ratio city or Area QA $ VBC. QUA $ V8C. a $ Vac. A S B City of Tigard 1,142,039 16.8 521,506 16.4 620,533 17.2 1 1 City of Beaverton 1,327,258 16.4 272,890 27.0 1,054,368 13.6 1 ; 4 Study Area 11088,740 14.5 454, 261 11.2 634,479 16.9 1 1.4 n source: Hobson & Associates (1986) . �v i Hobson F Associates 21 1 r Office Employment Projections The Metropolitan Services District (MSD) has developed employment projections by census tract through the year 2005. These forecast cover the entire Metropolitan Service District for Washington, Multnomah and Clackamas Counties. The most recent forecast was published in July 1985. As shown in Table 4, employment for the study area is fore- cast to be approximately 16,191 in 1990. This is an in- crease in the study area of 2,076 over the employment levels i of 1985. Table 4 F OFFICE DEMAND Employment in Office Square Feet ployme � Study Area Total Employment Required {' 1985 14,115 3,952 889,245 1990 16,191 41,533 1,020,033 { 2005 23,928 6,700 1,507,464 Sources Data Resource Center (Metro)t and Hobson & Associates (1986). Total study area employment is projected to increase by an average annual rate of 2.64 percent between 1990 and 2005, to a total of approximately 23,900. This forecast of total employment was refined by Hobson & Associates to cover that portion of new employment that _ could be expected to occupy office space. To evaluate this office employment, a detailed evaluation was performed of four digit SIC classifications for statewide employment data as well as tenant lists of existing office buildings. This ; evaluation was performed to estimate what portion of the basic employment classifications (for example, services, trade, manufacturing, or finance, insurance and real estate) could be expected to require office space rather than retail or industrial land uses. Further refinements were made by evaluating Washington County and Portland Metropolitan Area employment statistics. 5 22 Hobson&Associates This evaluation indicates that between 28.0 and 32.0 percent of total employment will be accommodated in office space in Washington County. The largest portion of this office space tenant base is in the finance, insurance and real estate sectors, but there are additional office tenants in the medical profession, business services, and transportation, communications and public utilities. Based on an estimated 28.0 percent share, total office employment in the study area is expected to increase by 2,748 between 1985 and 2005, as shown in Table 4. Future Office Space Demand r The number of square feet of office space allocated per employee has been increasing gradually on a nationwide basis f for a number of years.* For the purposes of this analysis an average occupancy of 225 square feet of office space per employee was used. As shown in Table 4, based on projected growth in new office employment of 2,748 persons between 1985 and 2005, derived from the MSD employment forecast, there will be an incremental demand for approximately 618,200 square feet of office space within the study area. Future Office Development Potential A review was made of vacant land potentially available for office development within the study area. In the Tigard jurisdiction, the Cp (Commercial Professional) and CBD (Central Business District) zoned lands were inventoried. In the Beaverton jurisdiction, the OC (Office Commercial) and GC (General Commercial) zones were tabulated. In the unincorporated areas of Washington County, included in the study area, the OC zoned lands were inventoried. Table 5 shows the vacant office land inventory in the defined market area. There is a total of 162 acres in the study area currently available for office development. 2/ Urban Land Institute, Qtfe =e?o pn y t 23 Hobson&Associates Of this 162 acres, approximately 80 acres or 50 percent of the total land consisted of large parcels located near major transportation arterials or near existing Class A buildings. These parcels are most likely to be developed as Class A office space. Table 5 VACANT LAND IN STUDY AREA (acres) Total Acres Gross Vacant Acres* 162 Large Parcels, Prime Locations 80 All Other Parcels 82 * 8xcludes the subject site. ( Source: Hobson & Associates (1986) . The remaining vacant parcels available for office develop- ment in the study area are smaller size and are scattered throughout the incorporated and unincorporated area. The sites total 82 acres are considered the most likely sites for Class B office development since they are small and are not near major transportation arterials. Reconciliation of Demand and Supply Based on the analysis of the supply of land available for Class B office development, Table 6 summarizes the projected demand and supply of Class B office space in the market area. A similar analysis was not completed for Class A space; since Class A space derives its market from a much larger geographical area than the market area defined for Class B space. } As shown in Table 6, the projected additional demand for Class B office space in the market area is 369,300 square feet. The current land supply designated for Class B office development in 82 acres which will accommodate approximately 24 Hobson&Associates Table 6 SUIVARY OF ppMECTED DEPAND/SUPPLY OF CLASS B OFFICE SPACE IN STUDY AREA Demand Increase in Gross Leasable Area (GLA) required 1988-2005 618,219 S.F. Less: Adjustment for current vacancy 158 89,642 S.F. Plus: Adjustment for normal vacancy 5% 30,911 S.F. Equals: Adjusted Increase in Demand 559,488 S.F. Potential Increase in Demand Allocated to Class B Office Space (1 : 2 ratio - 668) 369,300 S.F. SuWly Total Acreage in Study Area Available for Office Development 162 acres Less: Portion of Land for Class A Space 80 acres Equals: Remaining Net Area Available g2 acres for Class B Office Development Class B Office Space Accommodated with 40% Coverage 1,428,768 S.F. k Projected Excess Class B Office Space 1,059,506 S.F. (60.8 acres) Source: Hobson Associates (1986) . Hobson�Associates 25 w. 1,429,000 square feet of office space assuming a 40 percent building to land coverage ratio (17,424 square feet of building per acre of land). Thus, when the projected demand of 369,300 square feet is subtracted from the potential supply, based on available vacant land, of 1,429,000 square feet, it can be seen there is a substantial oversupply of land in the market area which is equal to an additional 1,059,500 square feet of office space. This amount of office space suggests an abundance of approximately 61 acres of Class B office land, again assuming a 40 percent coverage ratio. _v � Y sa` 4W 0 I1 + A soelltes 26 g Section III THE MARKET NEED FM ADDITIONAL RETAIL FACILITIES This section of the study evaluates the market for retail space in the community surrounding the subject site. The analysis covers five broad categories of retail establish- meets: - Building Materials and Hardware - Gasoline Stations - Drug Stores - Miscellaneous Retail - Personal Services The analytical technique employed in this section is known as residual analysis. At the conceptual level, a residual analysis determines the degree to which a geographic area is under-or over-served by retail facilities. Basically, this 3 is measured by estimating the amount of retail space which would be necessary to serve retail needs in the area F (demand), and then deducting the amount of existing space which serves the area (supply). An excess of demand over supply indicates an under-served market and the need for additional retail facilities. The organization of this section follows the analytic steps of a residual analysis. First, the trade area for the subject site's proposed shopping center is delineated. Second, retail expenditures by residents of this trade area are estimated and converted into the square footage of retail space needed to serve residents' expenditures. Third, the supply or retail space which currently serves the trade area is determined and subtracted from the potential demand, to obtain estimates of residual demand for the five types of retail facilities noted above. Finally, the future need for retail space is estimated by extending the residual analysis to the year 2005 based on projections of household growth, and the amount of new retail buildings which could be built on land which is currently designated as commercial on comprehensive plans. 27 Hobson&Associates y z z I DELINEATION OF THE TRADE AREA The operational definition of the trade area for the shopping center is: the geographic region from which the sustaining patronage for a shopping center is obtained. As 4 a practical matter, the sustaining patronage generally fff account for 85 to 90 percent of the center's sales. The extent of the trade area is governed by the accessibility of the center, the extent of physical barriers, the location of competing facilities, the limitations of driving time and distance, and the size and merchandise mix of the center itself*. The market area which was investigated for the study of retail demand and supply is the trade area for the proposed shopping center, which is shown in Exhibit II in Section I. This trade area is similar to the study area defined for the office analysis, including urbanized properties within five minutes driving time of the subject site, and properties to the west along Scholls Ferry Road within ten minutes driving time. However, the boundaries of the retail trade area must reflect the impact of physical barriers such as Highway 217 on the shopping patterns of the local residents for convenience goods and services. The trade area boundary to the east is therefore Highway 217. As shown in Exhibit II, the retail trade area boundary is also constrained on the south, because the downtown Tigard area fully serves the retail and service needs of the population closest to these Highway 99 and downtown Tigard retail centers. This area was estimated by Hobson & Associates, utilizing the drive- time computer algorithms available at the Data Resources Center of the Metropolitan Service District. A demographic profile of the trade area is shown in Table 7. These statistics are the starting point for the residual analysis which follows. * See ULI, sbovpina Center QeveloRment Hdbook, 2nd an Edition, pp. 22-24; and McCollum, William J., "Basic Research procedures," pp. 17-20, in R. Roca, Market gAga= g9bMMing Cen ggs (New York: 1980) . 28 Hobson&Associates k k .-- E } Table 7 PROFILE OF TRADE ARBA t 1985 2005 i Population 20,240 23,065 i Households 7,585 9,661 E income* $24,785 Gross Retail Expenditurest $28,944,360 $36,866,376 GLA Potentiaitt 226,603 SF 477,356 SF * 91 80 Census mean household income. { t In SIC categories 52, 554, 591, 59, 72; in thousands of 1986 dollars. tt GLA - Gross Leaseable Area; in SIC categories 52, 554, 591, 59, 72; in thousands of square feet. Source: Data Resource Center (Metro); and Hobson & Associates (1986). F K � } n Hobson&Assadates 29 RETAIL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF 'THE SUBJECT SITE The 3.9 acres at the subject site proposed for retail development is seen as an opportunity to complement the existing retail facilities at the adjacent Greenway Center, so that the combined facilities function as a large neighborhood shopping center. As a corner parcel bounded by Scholls Ferry Road and S.W. North Dakota Street, the site has excellent potential for ietail use. of the 3.9 acres identif ied, 2.9 acres is expected to support an estimated 41,000 square feet of leasable space. In examining the alternative retail uses appropriate for the site, the typical selection of types of stores found in neighborhood shopping centers serving local residents was considered. Supermarkets are typically the anchor for a neighborhood center. However, this is not considered an appropriate use for the proposed site for two reasons. First, the Greenway Center includes a supermarket, and the intention for the proposed site is to select retail tenants which will comple- ment the existing uses at the Greenway Center. Second, 41,000 square feet of space would not be adequate to include a supermarket, unless the entire 41,000 square feet were dedicated to this single use. The average size of supermarkets has nearly doubled during the last five years. Supermarkets built today also stock an increasing range of non-food items, and are averaging a total of 42,000 square feet compared to 33,000 square feet in 1980.* The following _ analysis shows that it is not economically feasible to build only a supermarket on a shopping center site, (unless the raw land is purchased at well below market price). A review of sales consumated over the last three years of parcels for supermarket development indicates that land prices have averaged $5.35 to $6.00 per square foot for raw, graded land. This is considered a breakeven price, allowing the developer to purchase the land and sell it to a national supermarket chain to achieve a return below or at the breakeven rate of return on retail shopping center development of 10 percent. This is well below the rate of return for non-food retail shopping center space of 18 * Trends: Food Market Institute: 185 Update; p.3. 30 Hobson&Associates 4 "s percent. it reflects the dynamics of the current market- place, which currently puts the supermarket at a competitive re demand advantage o act as anchor P r for new shopping centers.otiations because they ingreat The developer takes a below market return, and passes some f the burden of this cost onto other tenants who payhigher rental rates, averaging $11.50 per square foot compared to $5.50 paid ypermarkets. In abil ability of the supermarket to er tenants benefit enef i t from theto attract bene shoppers to the center. In fact, other non-food retail tenants typically pay aibase rent, or a percentage of sales, whichever is greater, t is these rental agreements that make it economically feasible for shopping centers m u tobupside potential whichbuilt for a lly sound attracts rate of return, withP investors to the project. Supermarket tenants land, no such or lease at upside base rate of $5.50 since they either y to $6.00 per square foot. fF Therefore, it would be economically infeasible to locate a supermarket at the subject site. Thus, the following analysis focuses on other non-food retail uses typically found at a neighborhood shopping center. According to the Urban Land Institute's definition, neighborhood shopping centers typica000 uare feet of lly have 30,000 to 100•ulation of 3,000 to leasable space, serve a trade area pop person people,services dandcsmuall outlets stores or for conv spe ialtyeniencgoods goods, personal serve , � DEl�AZID: SUPPORTABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE In this study, the estimation of supportable square footage by residents of the trade area is based on the "expenditure method." Conceptually, this approach involves multiplying the average household expenditure in each type of retail establishment by the number of households in the trade area, to arrive at statistics for total expenditures. The square SEE * Urban Land Institute= Shopping Center Handbook; (1984) . ; 31 Hobson&Associates r Kk ft ` s'- Table 8 AVERAGE ANUAL SALES AND SXPOWITURES FOR THE TRADE AREA Expenditures Sales Per SIC 3'yge of Establishment Per Household Square Foot 52 Hrdwe/Bldg. Materials $502 $79.51 554 Gasoline Stations $11,120 983.10 591 Drug Stores $235 135.80 59 Misc. Retail $1,548 90.70 72 Personal Services $411 74.84 $120.22* Weighted average for trade area. Source. Urban Land Institute, Dollar$ ,A Cents .0f SbMing =:. renters, 1984; 1982 Census of Retail Trade; 1982 Census of Service Trade; Center for Population - Research and Census, Portland State University; w -= and Hobson Associates (1986). �Y Hobson�Associates `;� nr v P, f ' } t . {{F E Table 9 RETAIL Rxpm JTURES IN THE TRADE AREA AND CONVERSION To RETAIL SQUARE FOOTAGE SUPPORTABLE BY TRADE AREA RESIDENTS Supportable Square Footage SIC Title Expenditures Square Footage In Trade Area* 52 Hdwe/Bldg. Mat. $3,807,670 47,889 45,072 554 Gas Stations 81495,200 8,641 8,133 591 Drug Stores 3,782,475 13,126 12,354 59 Misc. Retail 11,741,580 129,455 121,840 3 72 Personal Service 3,117,435 41,655 39,204 TOTAL $28,944,360 240,766 226,603 * Adjusted for 80% leakage into the trade area, and 858 leakage r out of the trade area. Y Sources Tables 7 and 8. 33, Hot�sori= Associates s t 1, PPo footage of supportable retail space is estimated by dividing total expenditures by the average dollar value of sales per square foot in retail establishments. The average sales per square foot and the average expenditures per household in the trade area are shown in Table 8. The derivation of these parameters was based on data from The Urban Land Institute, the U.S. Bureau of the Census, Portland State University; and standard methodologies of retail analysis. It should be emphasized that the figure of $120.22 for "Sales per Square Foot" is not based solely on stores in shopping centers, but is ar, overall average for all types of stores listed in the table. Table 9 shows the calculations underlying the estimates of supportable square footage. The number of households in the trade area (from Table 8) to obtain the "expenditures" columns in Table 9. In Table 9, expenditures by residents of the trade area area converted to supportable square footage by means of data on averetge sales per square foot (from Table 8). The resulting figures are estimates of the amount of retail space-- somewhere--which is necessary to serve the retail demands of the trade area residents. It is unrealistic to assume that all of the retail demands by residents of the trade area will be met by retail facilities within the trade area. That is, some leakage of expenditures is normal. The literature suggests that for suburban locations, this leakage can range from 10 to 20 percent of total expenditures of the types of goods covered in this study.* For this analysis, a "leakage out" factor of 15 percent is assumed. Thus, this study assumes net out- leakage of 5 to 6 percent. The last column of Table 9 shows supportable square footage adjusted for leakage. This statistic of 226,600 square feet is an estimate of the total retail space needed within the trade area to serve demand for the five categories under study. * McCollum, William J., "Basic Research Procedures," pg. 18, in LR. Roca, Market Remi Shoovina Centers. t (New York: 1980). 34 Hobson&Associates SUPPLY: EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE An inventory of standing retail space and vacant land designated "commercial" on comprehensive plans was completed by field researchers from Hobson & Associates during the first half of August 1986. Each site and each facility was physically inspected and measured, and follow-up information was obtained by phone from brokers, owners and planners. The general area which was inventoried is the trade area shown in Exhibit II in Section I. The results of the fieldwork for the standing inventory were divided into two categories: (1) Small retail centers and freestanding buildings whose trade areas are wholly subsumed within the trade area of the subject property= and (2) large retail centers located near the periphery of the trade area whose individual trade areas overlap (but are not co-extensive with) the trade ' area of the subject property. This division is a standard research step in retail analysis. A residual analysis counts 100 percent of the small retail footage within a trade area. However, retail centers which are some distance removed from the trade area under study cannot fully serve the trade area: they serve only a portion of demand. The portion of the trade area which they actually serve must be estimated, converted into square footage, and added to the inventory of space which is wholly within the trade area. This process is technically known as "partitioning" the floor area of retail centers. Exhibit III shows the trade areas of retail centers outside the trade area of the subject site and the extent to which the trade areas overlap. Table 10 shows retail space in small centers and free- standing buildings within the trade area for the five categories of retail use under study. The total is 42,284 square feet of retail space. Table 11 shows the tally of space in major centers. The totals for each center were allocated (partitioned) between square footage which serves the study area, and square footage which serves other trade areas excluding the study 35Hobson&Associates Exhibit III i TRADE AREAS OF MAJOR CENTERS OUTSIDE RETAIL TRADE AREA b Vattcou or AND ILLUSTRATION OF PARTITION METHOD .4 All, = ti UrrOn " £ L�MlTM011A.1 CO % DL. rA$111•(n Cal I � • ra P1i •�-- "`-- k t L...., '`o L t ` Y••Y WM� "ltd=. s- • t 1- Mr b H I1 M r Z • { 4 Jam• f t - AbM - t • 4 '' • 33} n•. a t 5 a B rton �� f _ « b r ` • t�' I = � �j rpm. ak D � rpa I .t tr 1 igar +% ( 8 sw t DurI+Y EGEND ids Fovergrove Tualatin I �. --Greenway G---Canterbury Square -._]( !rray & Sholls H---Hwy 99 Strip - $ 1 -arkside I---Albertsons M :t ---Riverwood J---Allen and Hall T ! l ---Robinson Crossing K---Allen and Lombard L---Hyl and Hills / ---Tigard Plaza €"°� <� _ wAS 101diCO 10 4J D4 � X00q 0 � € i I O o N •rl 41 01 Q O b T1 • n.. f.� 1�.1 0 i N r 0 O r-1 N l+1 8 a O va f _ 4) 83 O tp to wl = to 40 Ln in 4,3 to. o > C2 4= a � Wri Q O +�'[ 0 W ro Ca-r4 • O O o n 'o sV N N 1�C9'CpQ Q s-i r) rl w w 3 g 04 �3cm 1440 o a O CC31 Re C14 0% N � 4 L4%D Ln RI a W t to y cNe rb4 M r- r1 11 a1 400 f o � no +a in Ln C* iw a1 Intlf O 40 39 a toll Ln .p CD S0 in co w a rt rl `0 NP� &W WHO m 44 4A 44 s � °4 7 O E r. O 1Ln AO m O � 1d E� O t o O .8 8 4., �► aao o CD � cj o ri w It. vs o 4) v e0 ai C4 to 41 to 41 CC 44 4J W " 1244 ,4 o4 rq 0 ,4 �Wo � ca :44 41 � m Ln Ln 37Hobson&Associa#es. t "M N O 5 N� 1Nfli 1%D0. m Gpp7� r1 rl en off en i tTf O O� 1�n� O M 1►! Or 4 N in rl fN•f�� 1•f V In ii = i = a _ 0000 N • hn M1 I .yam M yy $ a Y p i _J 1f1 T i R� i en 3 4 ri al 10" &n st vi s � A r .i Al x Al A x ffi pmt�Jl �p f � g a A a in Hobson&Associates 38 4 _ - i' i ` Table 12 EXISTING RETAIL SPACE SERVING THE TRADE ARBA (square feet) Space within Major Center Existing SIc Title The Trade Area + Total Square Footage 52 Hdwe, Bldg. Mat. -0- 2,227 2,2,7 55 Gas Stations -Q- 1,744 1,744 591 I?ruq Stores 3,600 1,822 5.422 q 59 Misc. Retail 22,400 7,395 29,795 72 Perso20 702 nal Services 16x284 84 5 42,2 Subtotal ' 620 Applicable Vacant Space* TOTAL EXISTING SQUARE FOOTAGE ' Existing vacant space of 159,445 square feet is available for al types of shopping center uses. As discussed in the text, the use under study represent 13,56% of total space required by all uses Hence, of the total 159,445 square feet of vacant space (including ne 3 and planned construction awaiting occupancy) , 21,,620 square feet o 13.56% is available for the uses under study. Source: Tables 10 and 11. 4a Hobsan �9 Associates. w area. The partitioned space was summed to yield an estimate of the total square footage in major centers which serve the trace area. This amounts to 17,606 square feet for the five categories under study. Table 12 shows Hobson & Associates' estimate of existing retail space which serves the study area. The totals for "Space Within the Trade Area" were derived from Table 10. The "Major Center Total" is taken directly from Table 11. Standing vacant space, new retail space under construction and planned retail space in the trade area and in the peripheral area serving the trade area totals 159,445 square feet. This is the space available for all commercial uses including retail stores, personal services, financial centers, real estate, insurance and brokerage offices, business services, gas stations, repair shops, professional services, entertainment centers, restaurants, and drinking establishments. This study focuses on demand for only a subset of retail establishments (SIC codes 52, 554, 591, 59) and services (SIC 72). On a regional basis, in Washington Gounty, these five SIC categories have consumed 13.56* per- cent of commercial acreage. Therefore, we assume that only 13.56 percent of total standing vacant space is available for the five categories under study. As shown in Table 12, total vacant existing space is therefore 21,620 square feet. Thus the total standing inventory which serves the trade area is estimated to be 81,510 square feet, as shown in Table 12. R6+00®iCILIATION: CURRMT RESIDUAL DEN= The subtraction of existing square footage (supply) within the trade area from the supportable square footage (demand) within the trade area yields an estimate of need for additional retail facilities. The calculations are shown for each of the five types of retail/'service establishments in Table 13. Significant residual demand is indicated for the retail categories which were included in this study. * This figure is based on analyses of data on establishments from the Oregon Employment Division, the Censuses of Retail Trade and Service Industries, ULI { ( publications and Laventhol & Horwath reports. ZJ ` 2, 40 Hobson&Associates 4 , . _ f tobgo to 41 N�t4 M GO d0 Ln O O O O ��p co MO M 4IJ %D to Ln a s M M O CD �N ��� 11 tp cn o AA �4 GSD eNin+! N�pp eM�N to.04 C� • CO M MO 4i -0 t d 'Q at 0-4 %D C4 10 to�1bm0 U r4 r4 to ,An.4 U a N N,O sad 4i O W g O � 4 &n N O V CA40 �y t tp N M N O a1 1� wp�1 t4�1 N ! 'V' t+ h W 1d a IV to CP C�7 of N -1 to N N lin 9 �1v1 ya [A 4) 40 ir 1 0 w u O d 4) V y j 8 � g 43 i14 O eMl M coN b0 i4'i -A •►t1 0 • 7 VA N j a cpfa 0 .Ni N i0 J.i A .i wl 4J b �� -044 0% IV � ww 0% Q o u A � o � � as y �+ O O d ca 44 44 to 4 40 lu v► v+ 014 ,,4 1-4 w IV to qw a� $ Ln m Ln 0n cR Iiob�on Associates 4' 4 The finding of current, unserved demakid for 145,100 square feet of additional retail space exceeds by 103,O00 square feet the amount of space which will be supplied by Great Northwest Management's proposed retail facilities. Thus, the proposed facilities will fill a portion of the public need for additional retail services in the area. ANALYSIS OF RETAIL VACANCY RATES IN THE TRADE ARBA As shown in Table 14, there are currently 33,945 square feet of vacant retail space in the trade area, representing a vacancy rate of about 15.7 percent. There is an additional 120,000 square feet of retail space planned for a site at Murray Road and Scholls Ferry Road and 5,500 square feet of retail space currently under construction at Nimbus Center. Ma3or retail centers outside the trade area but serving trade area residents have 24,264 square feet of vacant space, which yeilds a vacancy rate of 5.1 percent. Of the 24,264 vacant square feet, 4,152 is allocated to the trade i area population, as shown n Table 11. Table 15 identified these vacancies and categorizes according to probable cause. Vacancy in the Greenway, Parkside and Robinson Crossing Shopping Centers are in spaces which lack frontage on Scholls Ferry, and hence are not visible to passersby. As a result these are undesirable to spaces and are very slow to lease. shoparregdes designed tontersngive have much lower vacancy rates when they the ma3ority of tenants good visibility from the road to attract passing shoppers. The older shopping centers in Tigard show vacancy rates which reflect their age; the Canterbury Shopping Center has 3ust been rehabilitated and should show lower vacancy rates in the future. Table 19 also includes nearly 126,000 square feet of retail space in the trade area at sites which are currently being constructed or yet to be built. Of particular interest is a new center under construction at 3 Nimbus and Scholls Ferry Road. uses at the site confirmed for signed tenants include a bank, a print shop, a parcel s mailing center, a chiropractor, a deli and a Burger Ring restaurant. y"x 42 Hobson&Associates Table 14 RETAIL VACRNCY RATES Trade Area Periphery Retail Vacancy Rate: 15.7% 5.18 t:acant Space 33,945 24,264 Total Existing Retail Space 215,847 473,896 New Space Planned 120,000 Under Construction 5,500 Source: Hobson & Associates (1986) . { i Hobson&Associates 43 r_ i z Table 15 RBUM VAC.A= A YSIS cans OF VAaWC r Lack of Rehab Needed Planned or Under weak Visibility (Older Facflityj Construction Anchor Greenway MAN S.F. Iaarksicle 8,$SO S.F. Robinson Q vmdng 2,800 S.F. x Riverwood 5,995 S.F. Murrav Hulls 120,000 S.F. Nimbi5,500 S.F. 3; gars Plaza 58529 S.F. - tterbury 7,690 S.F. 99 h 5,650 S.F. 27,952 S.F. 18,869 S.F. 125,500 S.F. 5,995 S.F. Sources Grubb A Ellis; moron & Associates (19%). k ta" M `meson&Assc)datfes These findings suggest that the vacancy rate in the retail centers serving the trade area is not an appropriate indicator of existing demand for retail space in the trade area. The causes identified suggest that the addition of well designed retail space in the study area could enhance the attractiveness of locations in close proximity to the sub3ect site as community retail and service centers,, and in the long run enhance the viability of the less attractive ; retail space which is currently vacant. y FUTURE DENAW r This section of the report extends the residual analysis above to the year 2005, the current horizon for Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. It is shown that the excess of demand ! over supply of retail space is likely to persist during the next 20 years--even under optimistic assumptions regarding x the ability of planned commercial land to fill the need for retail facilities in the future. In short, the inventory of vacant land within the trade area appears deficient, and will result in a supply shortfall of 175,,375 square feet of leasable retail space in the year 2005 for the f ive retail categories studied. 2 supportable Square Footage in 2005 E The starting points for the estimation of supportable square k footage in 2005 are forecasts of household growth within the trade area. These projections were provided by Metro's Data Resource Center and were shown in Table 7. Hobson A Associates compared these forecasts with historical trend and found them quite reasonable. The growth of the number of households within the trade area implies growth in retail expenditures. The increase in expenditures of $7.5 million are estimated in Table 16 based on the average expenditures per household by category shorn in Table S. r{r A, 5= c�son-�rlgssociates t e t" yy) F Table 16 INCREASE IN RETAIL EXPIMITURES 1985-2005 (1986 Dollars) Increases in Increases in t Households Expenditures 2,076 $7,456,015 Based on these average sales per square foot in Table 80, and f normal net out leakage of 5-6 percent, the increase of $7.5 million in expenditures implies a need for over 62,000 additional square feet of retail space during the next 20 years for the retail/service user under study. Together with the current unserved demand of 145,100 square feet, this implies a need for 207,120 square feet of new retail space in the trade area by the year 2005. The calculations are shown in Table 17. t FUTURE SUPPLYs VACANT LAND ` Given the finding of roughly 207,120 square feet in unserved future demand for the five types of establishments analyzed in this report, the corollary planning question is: are sufficient vacant lands available now and in the future to fill the need? This question is addressed in this sub- section. The analysis shows that there is not enough vacant commercial land positioned to serve the trade area which can currently fill the supply shortfall. During Hobson i Associates' survey of standing retail facilities, an inventory of vacant land designated "commercial" on comprehensive plans was compiled. As with the inventory of buildings, the areas surveyed included all retail commercial vacant land within the boundaries of the defined trade area. Just as in analyzing vacant space, in analyzing the land inventory, it is imperative to distinguish between "commer- cial" and "retail" uses. Commercial uses encompass a wide variety of activities including retail stores, personal services, financial centers, real estate, insurance and 46 Hobson&Associates A zr- s. F .� i49 re Q(Aj N in at N M r1 O O O.0 d 7 Uqr N M co N M .,{ 44.144 rl .4 0 �� N � 4 O w A Q ii a mitr t $ m ao to 49 c+ 40 �1r•1 N � p41p�� en N OD tet' M O NO� r-ew C4 e-i N M M � cm � C •moi} 1e1 ri N Q 3 Q 3i�+ c4i to y IA q3 m y�� �) 49 4► M ell y > i , G it 1t1 01 OD N O A 41 aiGo OP W M r`R i0 O O &n fr OD ch a M VD N y.0 co N ® CD ere W m a _ N eh rz w ,� U W 95 e» e4 �D Ch C14 iko c" cc 10 e0 %D W Al in r4 r- L4cc M fes► ef! _ M 'U • a • • �1 e00 a N qw v co 04 m qy N N M 94 Q o: en e� cm p aN 4n m t�1 tQ�i 1i7 4 N Ch OD x NAD ADon 0 le = v4 4A ID % IT12 in �` i � w - ti brokerage offices, business services, gas stations, repair shops, professional services, entertainment centers, restau- rants, and drinking establishments. The land inventory in Table 18 represents the total amount of land in the trade area which is designated for all retail commercial uses. In contrast, this study focuses on demand for only a subset of retail. establishments (that is, Standard Industrial Classi- fications 52, Hardware and Building Materials; 554, Gas Stations; 591, Drug Stores; 59, Miscellaneous Retail; and 72, Personal Services). These classifications exclude SIC 53, General Merchandise Stores; 54, Food Stores; part of 55, Automotive Dealers; 56, Apparel and Accessory Stores; 57, Furniture, Home Furnishings, and Equipment Stores and 58, Eating and Drinking Places. Thus, in order to analyze whether the existing vacant commercial land can fill current unserved demand for retail space, a portion of the vacant land inventory must first be not aside to account for the needs of other types of commercial establishments which are not analyzed in this report. Again, the most reasonable way to allocate the land among commercial uses is to examine the pattern of commer- cial development within Washington County. As discussed earlier, historically, the five SIC categories of retail establishments analyzed in this report have consumed 13.56 percent of the commercial acreage in the county.* After partitioning the acreage in the inventory for consis- tency of treatment with existing buildings, 13.56 percent of the "Inventory of Land for Potential Retail Use" (Table 18) is allocated for use by retail establishments in the five SIC categories analyzed in this report. This total is 4.6 acres. The estimate of 4.6 acres falls within the range of 4.3 to 4.9 retail acres estimated to be needed within the trade area. However, several important points need to be made. First, the 4.6 acres is the land allocation for the fie categories of retail need for the next 20 years in the trade area. As will be shown in the next sub-section, this amount is insufficient to serve expected growth during the planning * This figure is based on analyses of data on establisbments from the Oregon Employment Division, the q Censuses of Retail Trade and Service Industries, ULI _ publications, and Laventhol & Horwath reports. 48 Hobson&Associates e- Table 18 IDN'g1 ay of LAW FM POTENTIAL RETAIL USE Acres 1. 155th & Beard 11.3 2. Murray Schools 61% Headland) (west Side) 12.0 3. Sorrento Longhorn 1.6 4. Murray Road Extension 5.0 5. N.s. Corner of Murray s Scholls 4.0 33.9 acres Source: Hobson S Associates (1985). K N" F S K Table 19 POTENTIAL NEM RETAIL SPACE Available Vacant Commercial Land 33.9 acres Percent Allocated to Uses Under Study 13.568 Available Vacant Land for Hardware Stores, Gasoline Stations, Drug Stores, Miscellaneous Retail, and Personal Services 4.6 acres Supportable Gross Leasable Area* 31,745 S.F. * Assumes land coverage ratio of 20% for all but gas station uses. Demand for gas stations is estimated to demand 268 of available commercial acreage, based on historical patterns in Washington County (see text). sot Hobson&Associates i k E 1 1 ' horizon; 4.6 acres cannot cover both an existing supply shortfall as well as growth-induced needs for these five categories. Second, the lumping of all sites together regardless of size, location, existing uses and other factors is a "bean counting" approach which ignores whether a particular site is suitable, ready for development, or even available for development. By ignoring scale effects (many of the sites are less than one acre), shape, topography, access and quality, the analysis presumes that each retail site would serve the trade area with the same relative efficiency and intensity as if it were a part of a major activity center. This is clearly an unrealistic assumption--and one which reduces the &1129 ;ve size of the inventory. Thus, on the basis of a realistic assessment of the inventory of vacant land, there exists a significant shortfall in the quantity, variety, and suitability of commercial land available to fill the immediate need for square feet of retail space. RFOO�iCiLIATIp�i Of FUTURE SUPPLY AND DEPAUD c.F To arrive at as conservative an estimate as possible of residual demand in the year 2005, Hobson i Associates assumed that the 4.6 acres would be developed as retail within the 20 year planning horizon. A 20 percent coverage ratio is used based on the gross site area for all but gasoline stations which have a 4.1 percent coverage ratio. In this conversion, the allocation of vacant land to gas f station use is based on historical patterns of commercial land development in Washington County. The indicated amount of potential new competitive retail space in the trade area is shown in Table 19. The estimate of 31,745 square feet is most probably an overstatement of the retail footage which can be developed on the subject parcels. Unserved demand for retail space totals 175,375 square feet in the year 2005, as shown in Table 20. Thus, unlike office zoned land which is oversupplied, there is a need for additional commercially-zoned land now and in the future. The minimum amount of land necessary to support ) 51 Hobson&Amo cistes the shortfall of 175,375 square feet is 19.8 acres of retail land within the trade area of the subject property, as shown in Table 20. opment of 3.9 acres at Lim SULU—. ait2 The proposed devel would serve the public benefit by reducing this shortfall to 15.9 acres. gyp_ ti �S e4 L! x Table 20 RESIDUAL DEMAND FOR Rm3L SPACE: 2005 (Square Feet) s New Space Needed (Table 17) : 207,120 square feet Less Potential New Space (Table 19) : 31.745 square feet Equals Net Shortfall of Retail Sace by 2005: 175,375 square feet Additional Land Area Needed* 19.8 acres New space needed requires 24.4 acres (Table 13 and Table 17) E less potential new space supportable by 4.6 acres (Table 19) 19.8 acres. Source: Hobson & Associates (1986) . b 53 �x TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS for CBMTSR II Tigard, Oregon 4 a Prepared for Great Northwest Management Cospany 5355 SW Murray Boulevard Beaverton, Oregon Prepared by Kittelson 6 Associates 512 SW Broadway Portland, Oregon 97208 ` August 1966 s, Project No. 87.00 1 TABLE 08 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . • • • • . • • • . • 1 CONCLUSION . . . - 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS . . • • • • • Z study Area Location Surrounding Land Use Traffic Control Traffic Safety Traffic Volumes Current Levels of Service Pedestrian and Bicycle Activity Transit Service PLANNED 11I0HNAY IMPROVEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . 21 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS • Z9 Development Plans and Trip Generation Trip Generation Analysis of Retail Trip Types Trip Distribution Intersection Levels of Service 3005 P.M. Peak Hour Conditions i? REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . E �h �3 x x� Y ' i a{ Y �JJ LIST OF TABLES 1. Level of Service Definitions: Signalized Intersections . 14 2. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections . 18 S. General Level of Service Descriptions for 16 unsignalized Intersections ns • • 4. Level of Service Criteria for Oignalized 18 Intersections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S. Projected Trip Generation Characteristics: 28 Existing Zone Designation. . . . . . . . . . • • . • • • 6. Projected Trip Generation Characteristics% 29 Proposed Zone Designation. . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • 7. Intersection Level of Service Summary: 1986 P.M. Peak Hour Conditions. . . . . . . . 0 • • 99 8. Intersection Level of Service Summary: 1990 P.M. Peak Hour Conditions. . . . . . . . . . 44 i Y } i LIST OF FIGURES 1. site Vicinity Map. 4 2. Study Area . . . . . & b 9. Existing Traffic Control . . . 8 S. Existing Lane Configuration: sN Scholl* Ferry Rd/ SW North Dakota Avenue 9 6. Average Daily Traffic On Scholl; Ferry Road: I;Si 11 6. Existing PAI Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes . . 12 7. Approximate Location of Site Access Drives . . . o Zd 8. Proposed Design for Right in/Right out Access Drive. . . 26 a' 9. Estimated Trip Distribution Pattern: Weekday P.M. Peak Hour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 7 10. P.M. Peak Hour Site-Generated Traffic: i Existing Zone Designation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 11. P.M. Peak Hour Site-Generated Traffic: Proposed Zone Designation. . • • 36 la. Total P.M. Peak Hour Traffic: Existing Zone Designation. 97 18. Total P.M. Peak Hour Traffic: Proposed Zone Designation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 16. Projected 1990 Background Traffic: P.M. Peak Hour. 61 ib. Total 1990 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic: Existing Zone Designation. . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • 42 16. Total 1990 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic: 63 Proposed Zone Designation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . E 1 Y INTRODUCTION Great Northwest Management Company is requesting to amend a portion of the zoning on a 5.4 acre site at the intersection of SW North Dakota Avenue and SW Scholls Ferry Road in Tigard, Oregon to construct a neighborhood office and retail center. This complex will be called Center II, and is expected to be fully completed within the next several years. Kittelson & Associates was retained to analyze the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Center II development on nearby streets and highways, and to determine off-site improvements that might be required to properly accommodate expected traffic when the complex is completed. This report sets forth the consultant's findings pertaining to future traffic volumes and their impacts on the nearby street system. CONCLUSION This analysis concludes that the proposed Center II development can be developed with minimal traffic impacts on the surrounding street system. This analysis also concludes that while more traffic will be generated by the proposed Center II development than would occur with existing zoning, both projects would have a comparable overall impact on the capacity of adjacent inter- sections and roadways. Even though there is currently some backup at the intersection of SW North Dakota and SW Scholls Ferry Road during the evening peak hours under either existing zoning or the proposed change, the intersection will operate at Level of Service 8 or C, which is well above the metropolitan area design standard of Level of Service D. The scheduled reconstruction of SW Scholls Ferry Road will eliminate these backups and will assure a Level of Service B at the SW Scholls Ferry Road/SW North Dakota Avenue intersection through 1990. -1- 3 r c F BXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY AREA LOCATION The site of the proposed Center II development is located near the northern boundary of Tigard (see Figure study immediate diagram identifying the road system that serums the site vicinity is shown in Figure 2. The major roads providing access to the site include SW Scholls Ferry Road, SW North akota Avenue, and SW Sorrento Road. Within the vicinity'Of the wits, two-way, two-lane undivided Nato, SW Scholls Ferry Road is s Arterial providing for east-west travel movements. At separate though no left-turn refuge is provided at midblock locations, left-turn lanes and protected signal phases are generally pro- vided at the key signalized intersections. To the Scholls Ferry Road connects with Highway 217 and Hall Boulevard, and ultimately with Allen Boulevard, Beaverton-Hillsdale link in and Sunset Highway. It therefore represents an imp ortant the overall regional transportation system serving the Tigard and Beaverton areas. Within the study area and south of Highway 217, SW Scholls Ferry Road defines the boundary between the Beaverton and Tigard. SW North Dakota Avenue is a newly constructed roadway that is immediately adjacent to the site's western boundary. It is gen- orally constructed as a gen- two-way, loop road connecting However, in between SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW 121st Avenue. the vicinity of SW Scholls Ferry Road, SW Porth Dakota Avenue widens to provide for three approach lanes. -3- s y� arc o� � o s s o • x Z Q q oiTE VIII MI MAP FigureCenter 1 r t:19 �w N cc �a �soa.F ett t s Qrsenway ra: Town Center L1 A • r < 0 Z i � r 3 ao i� Ir STUDY AREA Flgure Center 11 2 /1uoust IRAs r (¢1 t E r SW Sorrento Road is a major collector that intersects SW Scholls Ferry Road directly opposite SW North Dakota :Avenue. It is also a two-lane, two-way roadway, but provides an additional separate left-turn pocket at the approach to SW Scholls Ferry Road. SURROUNDING LAND USE Current land use surrounding the proposed site consists of a six- ture of retail , office/commercial, and residential uses. The most predominant retail activity within the general site vicinity is Greenway Town Center, which is located immediately east of the proposed site. In addition, a number of other retail establish- ments either exist or are under construction farther to the east along SW Scholls Ferry Road. Several major industrial parks are also located within the general site vicinity. Some of these are already occupied (e.g. , xoll Business Center) and some ar- currently under construction (e.g. , Nimbus Industrial Park) . In addition, a small (2 .8 acres) neighborhood office project has recently been approved immediately north of the site in Beaverton at the intersection of SW Scholls Ferry Road and Sorrento Road. Y The study area also includes several high density residential developments. One of these, Meadowcreek Apartments, is located on the south side of the proposed site and uses SW North Dakota Avenue as the primary access to SW Scholls Ferry Road. This is a recently-completed apartment complex that contains 304 apartment units and is currently at a high level of occupancy. Another major residential development is partially constructed, and is located south of SW Scholl* Ferry Road with direct access to SW North Dakota Street. It is expected that this residential devel- opment will ultimately include 120 single family housing units. rt TRAFFIC CONTROL Figure S identifies the existing traffic control at all major Intersections in the study area. Traffic signals within the study area are located at the intersection of SW Scholls Ferry Road at SW North Dakota Avenue and SW Scholls Ferry Road at SW 121st Avenue. The traffic signal at SW North Dakota and Scholls Ferry was just recently installed, and is operated and maintained by the Oregon Department of Transportation. It is operated by a fully actuated traffic signal controller, and includes separate protected phases for all left-turning movements. Since it is a fully actuated traffic signal that is not interconnected with adjacent signals, the cycle length varies on a continuous basis. However, recent field observations during p.m. peak hour conditions revealed the average cycle length during this time period to be about 85 ,5 seconds. The existing traffic signal at the intersection of SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW 121st Avenue is also operated by an actuated controller, and is not interconnected with adjacent signals. Figure 4 identifies the existing lane configuration at the SW Scholls Ferry Road/SW North Dakota Avenue intersection. As can be seen, separate left-turn lanes are provided on all approaches to the intersection. The posted speed limit on SW Scholls Ferry Road within the site vicinity is 40 mph. There is no posted speed limit on SW North Dakota Avenue between SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW 121st Avenue; however, it appears that average free flow travel speed during the p.m. peak hour is 25-30 mph. -7- t S F 9 r a s o SVi set t t{{ f z Greenway a Town Center a lip ri e f �,p r y. N r MI W LEGEND ® Signalized Intersection O unsignalized Intersection �_j EXISTING TRAFFIC CONTROL Figure Center 11 g u ust 188® -8- Yx i sir► 1 a � a c 8� Soho\�s ff � 4 GIBE Greenway Town Center 00*000 0 A 9 O Z A r N r x f' n , EX18TiN0 LANE C®NFIGURAT10N Figure Center 11 4 Au uat 1888 w9_ 1 1 7 i TRAFFIC SAFETY The intersection of SW Scholls Ferry Road with SW North Dakota Avenue has been the site of many accidents within the recent past. However, previous studies (Reference 1, Z) have concluded that the primary reason for this accident history was the lack of E a traffic signal. Although a traffic signal now exists at the Intersection, it has not been in place for a sufficient length of time to allow an adequate assessment of its effects on accident patterns. However, intersection site distance is good, and field observations during the p.m. peak hour showed no obvious and hazardous traffic conflicts. Therefore, it is concluded that the new traffic signal will substantially reduce the number of acci- dents that occur at this intersection on an annual basis. It is expected that development of this site will have no adverse effect the traffic safety characteristics of the SW Scholl* Ferry Road/SW forth Dakota Avenue intersection or the surroundl ,- street system. Some increase in the total number of accident within the study area may occur in the future, but this will be due more to the increased traffic volumes than to increased hazards. TRAFFIC VOLUMES Average daily traffic volumes on Scholls Ferry Road within the study area were obtained from the Oregon Department of Transpor- tation and through a review of other recent traffic studies with In the area. A summary of the information obtained as a result of these investigations is presented in Figure a. Although this Information reflects 1984/85 conditions, it is also considered to be representative of conditions that exist today. -10- µ - , cc �etr Jx 00 J 5 Sc�o��e � W Cl t . Greenway .�00 1'Z• s :L::?;>: r Town Center Y Q • o as r y -xtr s- 1 a5 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ON SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD: 1954 Ta F09ure Center 11 'August 1996 .,9�s�^' � .3S':�.l.r,�.�cp;z3R,�Gx a. - _,r..c!*h.�T".^_ __•=�`_%SR..'S_: _ _.r�'.S- ? -�?;+`"'���e��'�"a€s"�:'�<<,.xr T �` ^•��'. _ t } r 1► 10 A VN 1e•/� � ��166 GeV on � tl O O �O oc � i Greenway I ' Town Center e z <' 0 � N r } m EXISTING TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES 6:00 - 6:00 PM' 4 Figure Center !i Au uet 198e : -12- To supplement the available data base, K1ttels0n 6c Associates conducted manual turning movement counts during the evening peak hour at the intersection SW Scholls Ferry Road with SW Borth Dakota Avenue. These counts were conducted on Thursday, July 34, between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. Figure 6 identifies the observed 1986 evening peak hour turning movement patterns at this Intersection. The weekday evening peak hour was observed from occur to 5:00 p.m. to s:00 p.m. and traffic volumes during this time period were found to be relatively uniform and high (peak hour factor • .97) . Since the weekday evening peak hour is the time period when the greatest total traffic demands are placed on the surrounding street system, this was the time period that was used In all subsequent analysis. CURRENT LEVELS 08 SERVICE Definitions and Approach Used Level of service (LOS) is a standard developed to quantify the degree of comfort (including such elements as travel time, number of stops, total amount of stopped delay, and impedances caused by other vehicles) afforded to drivers as they travel through an Intersection or roadway segment. Recent research has determined that average stopped delay per vehicle is the best available measure of the LOS at a signalized intersection. As defined within the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (Reference 3) , six grades are used to denote the various LOS; these six grades are described qualitatively for signalized intersections in Table 1. -13- Table 1 Ulm Cr SOMCB r m IIIiTIon (SIGNALLM nrr criaMs) xmml of skavice Traffic Flow Characteristics A Very low average stopped delay, less than five seconft per vehicle. This occurs ager► ym-ogr+assion is c ttreseely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phrase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths new also contribute to low delay. a Average stop delay is in the of 5.1 to 15.0 seconds per vehicle. This generally oc:cuuce with good progression and/or abort cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for 106A, causing higher lavels of average delay. C: Average stopped delay is in the rage of 15.1 to 25.0 seconds per vehicle. These higher delays way result from fair progressim and/or longer cycle lengths. Individml cycle failures may begin to appear in this level. The saarber of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although went' still pass through the Intersection adthout stopping. D Average stopped delays are in the range of 25.1 to 40.0 seconds par vehicle. The influence of congestion becomes mora notieaable. Longer delays way result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle length, or high volume/capacity ratios. Msay vehicles stop, arA the propartion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. 8 Average stopped delays are in the range of 40.1 to 60.0 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression. long cycle lengths, and high volume/capacity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent . jr Average stop delay is in excess of 60 sscarda per, vehicle. This In considered to be ale to most drivers. This condition often occurs with o ereaturstian. It wny also occur at high volume/capacity ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures. Fbor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major eantributirg causes to such high delay levels. " AN lets: A signal cycle failure is considered to occur ane or more vehicles are forced to wait through mo a than one green signal indication for a particular, approach -1a- .T, Y� Table Z LRVZL-08-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Stopped Delay Per Level of Service Vehicle (Sec) A < 5.0 9 5.1 to 15.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 D 25.1 to 60.0 E 60.0 to 60.0 F > 50.0 Sources Reference i i 3 CZ -15- - ;5 ="u_ '•,s+& ,a ,`S-.x, -t;.3.. '`a`;'"y •..r:¢€ Table 9 GBNBRAL LBVBL 08 SBRVICS DESCRIPTIONS FOR QNSIONALI28D INTBRSBCTIONS pp' i LOS General Description ------- ------------------------------------------------- A - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 0 a and 10 seconds - Nearly all drivers find freedom of operation Very seldom is there sore than one vehicle in the queue R - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 10 and 20 seconds - Some drivers begin to consider the delay an Inconvenience - Occasionally there is sore than one vehicle ` In the queue C - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 20 and 80 seconds Many times there is more than one vehicle in the queue - Most drivers feel restricted, but not objectionably so ' D - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 90 - - and 40 seconds Often there is more than one vehicle in the queue - Drivers feel quite restricted -4 ?_ g - Represents a condition in which the demand is near or equal to the probable maximum number , .' of vehicles that can be accommodated by the movement - Average delay per vehicle ranges between 40 and 60 seconds - There is almost always sore than one vehicle In the queue - Drivers find the delays to be approaching Intolerable levels B - Forced flow 3 -- Represents an intersection failure condition that is caused by geometric and/or operational constraints external to the Intersection de -16- ` wt}r�x'� .Kx .,,.c..:':. _ _ "-:«aa.-�..•++9w..v- .,..-:•,.,,.:.....,a ,. s _ - �.e.,:-;z, .....,.z,..,...-.x .,.��; Additionally, Table 2 identifies the relationship between level of service and average stopped delay per vehicle. Using this definition, a "D" LOS is the accepted minimum design standard. The calculation of LOS at an unsignalized intersection requires a different approach. The 1988 Highway Capacity Manual includes a methodology for calculating the LOS at two-way stopped controlled interaections. For these unsignalized intersections, LOS is defined differently than for signalized intersections in that it is based upon the concept of Reserve Capacity (i.e. , that portion of the available hourly capacity that is not used) . A qualita- tive description of the various service levels associated with an unsignalized intersection is presented in Table 3. A quantita- tive definition of LOS for an unsignalized intersection is pre- sented in Table 4. The reserve capacity concept applies only to an individual traffic movement or shared lane movements. Once the capacity of all the individual movements has been calculated and their LOS and expected delays determined, an overall evalua- tion of the intersection can be made. Normally the movement hav- ing the worst LOS defines the overall evaluation, but this may be tempered by engineering judgement. Past experience with the unsignalized analysis procedure 1ndi- cates that this methodology is very conservative in that it tends to overestimate the magnitude of any potential problems that might exist. Therefore, the results of any unsignalized inter- section analysis should be reviewed with this thought in mind. All LOS analyses described in this report were performed in accordance with the procedures described above. Copies of the analysis forms are contained within the project files and are available for review upon request. In order to assure that this analysis is based upon worst-case conditions, the peak 15 minute flow rate during the evening peak hour was used in the evaluation of all intersection levels of service. Thus, the analysis -1T- i Table 4 LEVEL 08 SERVICE CRITERIA for UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Reserve Capacity Level of Expected Delay to (pcph) Service Minor Street Traffic ---------------- -----r--- --------------------------- 30-400 A Little or no delay 300-999 B Short traffic delays 200-299 C Average traffic delays 100-199 D Long traffic delays 0- gg E Very long traffic delays --------------- *when demand volume exceeds the capacity of the lane, extreme delays will be encountered with queuing which may cause severe congestion affecting other traffic movements in the intersection'# This condition usually warrants improvement to the intersection. Source: Transportation Research Board. "Highway Capacity Manual". Special Report 209 (1985) _3 4 reflects conditions that are only likely to occur for 15 minutes out of each average weekday. For the remainder of each weekday, and throughout the weekends, traffic conditions within the study Impact area are likely to be better than that described in this +- report. Findings An evaluation was conducted of existing p.m. peak hour conditions at the SW North Dakota Avenue/SW Scholl* Ferry Road intersection. It was found that the intersection currently operates at an ac- ceptable "B" level of service, and with a volume/capacity ratio equivalent to 0. 88. These findings suggest that while the Intersection is currently operating at an acceptable level, it is nearing its capacity, primarily because of the heavy westbound demands on SW Scholls Ferry Road. Because the intersection is nearing its capacity, congestion and vehicle backups frequently occur in the westbound direction on SW Scholls Ferry Road during typical weekday evening peak hour con- ditions. The primary reason for these backups is the lack of coordination between adjacent signalized intersections and the transition of SW Scholls Ferry Road from a five-lane facility to a 2-lane facility east of the site. Despite these constraints, westbound vehicles on SW Scholls Ferry Road were rarely observed to wait more than one signal cycle in order to pass through the Intersection with SW North Dakota Avenue. This observation is consistent with the analysis results, and indicates that the Intersection has sufficient excess capacity to accommodate the arriving volume. a� f W I PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACTIVITY k Field observations at the study site during the evening peak hour showed very little pedestrian or bicycle activity on the immmmedi- ate study area streets. Specifically, fewer than 28 pedestrians were observed to cross any of the legs of the SW Scholia Ferry Road/SW North Dakota Avenue intersection during the weekday even- ing peak hour. Most pedestrian movements that occurred were ob- served to be related to transit service along SW Scholis Ferry Road. TRANSIT SERVICE Tri-Met provides bus service along SW Scholls Ferry Road viae lines 48 and 87. Line 48 serves between Tigard and Portland via SW Scholls Ferry Road, Oleson Road, Garden Home Road, SW Capitol Highway, and Barbur Boulevard. This service is provided at 20 to 60 minute headways on weekdays. Line 87 provides service between Washington Square and the Beaverton Transit Center at 18 minute headways during weekday rush hours only. Weekend bus service to the area is provided only by Line 48. For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that none of the retail development-generated person trips would be made by transit. In addition, it was assumed that for all office uses, five percent of the daily person trips would be made via transit, and 10 percent of the person trips during the weekday evening peak hour would be made via transit. This reflects Metropolitan Service District existing and projected transit usage estimates for suburban locations within Washington County. -20- M �r PLANNED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS A major improvement project is scheduled for SW Scholls Ferry Road that will widen the existing facility within the vicinity of the site from two to five lanes. The project is contained in both the Oregon Department of Transportation's Six-Year Improve- sent Program and the Washington County Master Street Traffic Improvement Program. It is scheduled for construction in 1989, and will involve widening SW Scholls Ferry Road from Fanno Creek Kest to Murray Boulevard. This project will substantially Increase the capacity of the SW Scholls Perry Road/SW North Dakota Avenue intersection, and will ensure that an acceptable level of service is maintained at this intersection well beyond the year 2000. For the purposes of this report, both the existing and the future lane configuration on SW Scholls Ferry Road are evaluated as part of the traffic analysis. Specifically, it is assumed that SW Scholls perry Road remains as a two-lane facility within the vicinity of the site through 1989, and that the site is built out to the maximum assumed levels prior to 1989. This assumption is made so that the short term effects of the proposal can be evaluated with respect to their impact on existing SW Scholls Ferry Road. In addition, it is also assumed that SW Scholls Ferry Road will be constructed to a full five-lane cross section within the site vicinity by 1990. This assumption is made so that the longer-term effects of the proposal can be evaluated. -21- no other major highway improvement projects are currently planned that might significantly affect traffic circulation patterns ' within the immediate study area. However, several longer tern projects are being considered that could have the effect of further alleviating heavy peak hour traffic demands on SW Scholl* Ferry Road. One of these is the Aloha bypass which is currently under study by the Metropolitan Service District as part of the Southwest Corridor Transportation Study. One of the results of constructing this facility would be to reduce traffic volumes on SW Scholls Ferry Road in the vicinity of and west of Highway 217. a 7 Another project that is being considered is the Hall Street Extension, which would provide a means for drivers to bypass the busy SW Scholls Ferry Road/Hall Boulevard! intersection. There- fore, this project might also reduce traffic volumes on SW Scholls Ferry Road in the study area. Since neither of these projects is yet at a committed level, they are not included in the analysis described within the remainder of this report. *k -22- TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS The evening weekday peak hour impact of traffic generated ,by the proposed development was analyzed as follows: a The placement and size of the planned Center II devel- opment were confirmed. o Background traffic volumes on each key road segment within the study area were estimated for 1990 condi- tions. ( o The total number of future evening peak hour trips, both in and out of the proposed complex, was estimated for completion of the development by 1990 under both the existing and proposed zone designation. o The regional market area relative to major feeder high- ways was examined to obtain an estimate of trip distri- bution patterns within the study area. o Site-generated traffic predicted for the weekday even- ing peak period of 5:00-6:00 p.m. was assigned to the highway network and added to background traffic volumes assumed for 1990 conditions. o Traffic demands on each roadway facility were analyzed to identify any capacity or level of service deficien- cies for 1990. F \, zk :zs -23- si ie C4'.wt. _ —•=Er �.�w'•"'.tt.�,.....-+tan^rvF^ - .'t.' - :r:- ..ee+x!4�^?cn.tare. .+e..m �} E r A detailed discussion of this methodology and the analysis re- sults is contained in the remainder of this section. f DEVELOPMENT PLANS Current site plans are for a mixed use development to be con- structed on the site. Specifically, the proposed development will include approximately 21,200 gross square feet of medical and professional office space, and approximately 41,000 gross square feet of neighborhood rAtall space, and an auto service center. Two access drives are proposed in order to connect the site with both SW Scholl* terry Road and SW North Dakota Avenue. The general location of these access drives is shown schematically in Figure T. The primary access drive will be located on SW North , Dakota Avenue and at least 200 feet south of SW Scholls Ferry ' Road. This will be a full access driveway, and is expected to consist of three lanes, including one inbound lane and two outbound lanes. A secondary access drive, permitting only right-turn-in and right-turn-out movements, will be located on iT Scholls Ferry Road at about the middle of the site frontage, as shown in Figure 7. This driveway will contain a single inbound lane and a single outbound lane, and will be designed in a manner that ensures its use only by right-turning vehicles. A schematic illustration of the intersection design that is being proposed for this driveway is presented in Figure 8, and is representative of a design recently suggested by ODOT engineers. -24- u N Q O ga S Ott c Go* g'N 3 ' a4 > Greenway Town Center :..::.. s ' O Z a 3� 04 LEGEND ® Full access driveway *Right-laIRight-Out Only' driveway PROPOSED SITE ACCESS DRIVES Figure Center IIIN August 9988 .: -25- . ..- .ter r r t r 4 t O V i i 'tL� ZZ 8W mu �O OR b v d 4.3 Y 2 I- d► z W QQ � lb1 aow1--iE y � ZJo 54 16141 w. ' gW 70�MIN. m Goma*: ODOT e 3 PROPOSED DESIGN FOR RIGHT—IN/RIGHT—OUT ACCESS DRIVE FigurJJWJ : Center II 8 Auust 1986�• era �- -26- For comparative purposes, this report also gives consideration to the possible traffic that would be generated if the site were developed in accordance with its current zoning designation. Under this scenario, it is assumed that the site will be developed into a mixed use complex predominantly oriented toward office-related activities. Although the current zoning would allow some land uses with very high traffic generating potential to be located on site, these particular uses were consciously avoided in order to ensure that the analysis would not be biased toward unrealistically high traffic generating assumptions. With these factors in mind, it was assumed that, under the existing zoning designation, the site would be developed into a mixed use complex consisting of approximately 29,150 gross square feet of medical office space, approximately 29,180 gross square feet of general office space, and 9,300 gross square feet of general retail space. TRIP GENERATION The expected trip generation characteristics for the proposed site under both development scenarios were estimated an the basis of information contained in a recent report prepared by the Institute of Transportation engineers entitled "Trip Generation: Third Rditlon" (Reference 4) . This document served as the basis for the trip generation estimates presented in Tables 8 and 6. The trip generation summaries shown in Tables S and 6 reflect several modifications to the information contained in Reference 4. With respect to office-related uses, it is assumed that five percent of the daily and 10 percent of the p.m. peak hour person trips will be made via transit. This assumption is ` -27- k 4 i Table 5. PROJECTED TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS FOR PROPOSED SITE I Existing Zone Designation Generated Trip ands (H) --- PM Peak Hour Sizeof Land --------------------- Land Use Use (GSF) (A) Daily Total In Out Medical Office 29,150 1,510 105 25 50 General Office 29,150 490 75 10 65 General Retail 5,900 Subtotal �r Net additional one- way trip ends generated by the site (D) Notes: A. GSF gross square feet. B. Includes both inbound and outbound vehicles. yG C. Assumes that 5 percent of the daily and 10 percent of the p. peak hour person trips are made via transit. D. Assumes that 30 percent of the trips attracted. -28- Table S. PROJECTED TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS FOR PROPOSED SITE Proposed Zone Designation Generated Trip Ends (B) ------------------------------- PM Peak Hour Sizeof Land ---------------------- Land Use Use (GSF) (A) Daily Total In Out Neighborhood Retail 41,000 4,600 510 250 260 Medical Office (C) 21,200 1,100 75 15 60 Gas Station 1 Station 750 30 15 15 SUBTOTAL 6,450 615 280 335 Net additional one- way trip ends generated by the site (D) : 4,700 450 200 '250 ----------------- Notes: A. GSF s gross square feet. B. Includes both inbound and outbound vehicles. C. Assumes that 5 percent of the daily and 10 percent of the p.m. peak hour person trips are made via transit. D. Assumes that 30 percent of the trips attracted to the retail activities represent drop-in trips that are already being made on the adjacent road system. Also assumes that 50 percent of the trips attracted to the gas station represent drop-in trips. -29- 6 • consistent with County-Nide averages, and is considered to br reasonable given the degree of transit service that is available t along SW Scholls Ferry Road. s f i f Analysis of Retail Trip Types In evaluating the traffic impacts of the alternative development scenarios on the surrounding street system, it is important to realise that for retail activities, there are different types of vehicle trips, and that each type has a different effect on the street system. Generally, there are three basic types of trips associated with any retail/commercial development, which can be described as follows: 1. Drop-In Trips -- These retail trips already exist on the roadways that provide primary access to the new development, and are being made for some purpose other than shopping at the provided retail stores (for example, home-to-work) . Drop-in trips do not result in any increase in background traffic volumes within the study area. In fact, the only impact of these drop-in trips occurs at the site driveway(s) , where they become turning movements into and out of the proposed retail center instead of through movements. Therefore, drop- in trips have no additional effect on the road system beyond the development's driveways. 2. Diverted Trips -- These shopping trips are currently being drawn to other commercial activities that compete with the proposed retail activities, but are redirected to the new retail activities when they open. This re- direction usually occurs because of an improvement in shopping convenience and proximity for the affected drivers. Diverted trips will result in an increase -SO- .r.i.» ......ems ... ..... •-,v_w.>..- t.e �•.. ;v..+..-, rr.n`,.':.. ,..?�-epi'>^.5...i•'+'r..i _ _ .. . ._ _,.. .-. .,: traffic volumes within the immediate vicinity of the site, but will also result in a decrease in traffic volumes at other locations within the area (1.e. , in areas where they used to shop . Therefore, this con- ponent of the generated demand causes no change in the total number of vehicles within the area, even though i It say add to the number of trips in the immediate vicinity of the site. Another side benefit is that by diverting, these trips often cause a net reduction in total vehicle miles traveled on the area-wide trans- portation system. This is a common sense observation, since it is difficult to imagine that many drivers would divert to a new retail establishment in order to travel a greater distance than they did previously. 3. gew Trips -- These trips would not have been made with- out the existence of the proposed retail activities. Therefore, this is the only trip type that results in an increase in the total number of vehicle trips made within the area. These are also the only vehicle trips that represent additional vehicle miles of travel on the areawide transportation system. The trip generation summaries shown in Tables 5 and 6 reflect the fact that a significant percentage of the trip ends attracted to the site for retail activities already exist on the adjacent surface streets (viz. , SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Worth Dakota Avenue) , and are already passing by the site for other purposes. For convenience-related activities such as the proposed service station, it has been found that the drop-in trip type typically accounts for at least 50 percent of all site-generated vehicle $ trips. For other general retail activities that are less . s convenience oriented, drop-in trips typically account for about r. • -31- k , t i 30 percent of all site-generated vehicle trips . These: observations are therefore reflected in the trip generation information presented in Tables 5 and 6. TRIP DISTRIBUTION The distribution of site-generated trips onto the roadway system within the study Impact area was estimated through examination of the anticipated market area and population centers relative to the existing street circulation system. Consideration was also given to observed existing traffic flow patterns during the even- f Ing peak hour. Finally, consideration was given to other trip generation estimates prepared as part of several recently com- pleted traffic impact studies for nearby sites (Reference 1, 2) . On the basis of this Information and analysis, the estimated trip distribution pattern shown in Figure 9 was prepared. As this figure Indicates, It is assumed that 30 percent of all site generated vehicle trips will travel to and from the east via SW Scholl* Ferry Road, 20 percent will travel to and from the west via SW Scholls Ferry Road, 25 percent will travel to and from the north via SW Sorrento Road, and 25 percent will travel to and form the south via SW North Dakota Avenue. It is believed that this distribution represents a best estimate based upon available knowledge of existing and projected condi- tions. XNTSRSBCTION DWRLS OF SMICE 1966 P.M. Peak Hour Conditions Using the estimated trip distribution patterns shown in Figure 9, the tratfic anticipated to be generated under each of the alternative scenarios was assigned to the street system with1 -32- mnrw;,...«+rfw _ ;.r:.a.,or,,.ae:+scxns--..,rx....Y.. _._. ...--.. - ••w.,: -a-.«.:±�ti.. ....,,, _ - _ APPENDIX B TRAFFIC ANALYSIS KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES N r o N t } as Z sIl Greenway Town Center o e N� < 0 y r P N P co Sourc• : Keech s ESTIMATED TRIP DISTRIBUT M PATTERN n Figure ; Center 11 9 IM o Au ust 1988 —33— z_ z f the study area. The assignment of this site-generated traffic to,,.,__ specific road segments and intersections Within the study area is shown in figures 10 and 11 for the two buildout scenarios that were investigated. i This site-generated traffic was then added to observed 1986 even- ing peak hour background traffic volumes in order to arrive at the total projected 1986 traffic volumes shown in Figures 12 and 19. analysis conducted at anal LOS e Table T summarizes the results of the Y the key intersections within the study area and for each of the development alternatives that were investigated. For comparative purposes, this table also includes the existing operational char- acteristics of the SW North Dakota/SW Scholl* Ferry Road signal- ized intersection. As this table shows, it is found that both key intersections will continue to operate at acceptable service levels, even alter site-generated traffic is added. This lindingr__ Is true regardless of the development alternative that id selected, although it should be noted that development under the proposed zone designation will result in a slightly higher volume/capacity ratio than will development under the existing zone designation. Table T also identifies the results of the unsignalized LOS analysis conducted for the new intersection of the site access drive with SW Scholls Ferry Road. These results show that this Intersection will also operate at a very acceptable service level during p.m. peak hour conditions, and will have a substantial amount of reserve capacity available. This finding is true under t both development alternatives that were investigated, and reflects the fact that access at this driveway is restricted to right-turning movements only. -34- e ro 115=MENA*.I so s-..,* so am a Ion---+ +s s 4 1 o Rd c eft � 8W SG . 3 aA s < . :SITE;;: Greenway « �. Town Center 0 r e z < L O 7 ql_ df N V. 3 PM PEAK HOUR SITE-GENERATED ., TRAFFIC: EXISTING ZONE DESIGNATION Figure MCM TM Center 11 10 August 1888 -35- N � t « « « -s oo tf 10 ac o l Ad � o etc • $oho��s F SW ®Menw.y Town Center s ' 0 t • r � Z M E � PM PEAK HOUR SITE-GENERATED . TRAFFIC: PROPOSED ZONE DESIGNATI Figure .:; Center tl u st loss zi11 r a a p l- 4r eo ft-taa aes—mW qw-966 so.�� o e o 126 6 � e • o a : oyes 0 8`N so C~ < ;�IT�: Greenway w Town Center i C O i 'y w Mani el w r Oi TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC:- EXISTING RAFFIC:EXISTING ZONE DESIGNATION Figure �- Center 11 12 - u ust-1088 31 :. e o ao 0 � s sow so ago—No 491m•—e 0.0 so.*► 0001051 � � woo aa, o qr 705m-0- 10ok% v or • o �a $w pre•nway 4 Town Canter • a. s 0 f � � � w r 3 ao x K~ TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC: PROPOSED ZONE DESIGNATION Figure Center u wet 1181111 z �1# Table T. INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY: 1986 P.M. Peak Hour Conditions PM Peak Hour Conditions ------------------------------------- SW North Dakota/ Site Access Drive/ SW Scholls Ferry Scholls Ferry Road v/c Reserve Scenario LOS Ratio LOS Capacity —w-----------------.mow.----- --- ----ter --- -------- Ex1st1ng Conditions B .88 -- -- Full Developments Existing Zone Designation 8 .90 A 567 Full Development: Proposed Zone Designation 8/C .94 A 531 -39- =r E 1990 p.m. peak Hour Conditions Another objective of this study was to estimate the probable operational characteristics of the SW Scholl* Ferry Road/SW North Dakota Avenue intersection under projected 1990 P.M. peak hour conditions. in order to do this, it was first necessary to estimate 1990 p.m. peak hour background traffic volume levels for the intersection. Based on a review of recent traffic volume projections for this area, it was concluded that a reasonable { estimate of future traffic volumes should be predicated upon an 's. assumed 1.8 percent annual growth rate. Additionally, traffic volumes on SW North Dakota Avenue were increased to account for the future development of a 120-unit single family residential subdivision. The resulting 1990 background p.m. peak hour traffic volume projections are shown in Figure 14. The assumed 1990 P.R. peak hour background traffic volumes shown In Figure 18 were combined with the expected sits-generated traffic volumes shown in Figures 10 and 11 in order to arrive at the total projected 1990 p.m. peak hour traffic volumes shown in Figures 16 and 16. A LOS analysis was then performed for the SW Scholls Ferry Road/SM North Dakota Avenue intersection and also j for the proposed site access drive, using the intersection analysis procedures described in the 1986 Highway capacity Manual (Reference s) e it was assumed as part of this analysis that SM Scholl* Ferry Road will be improved by 1990 to a full five-lane cross-section within the vicinity of the site. E Table 8 summarizes the results of the LOS analysis conducted for 1990 p.m. peak hour conditions at each of the key intersections within the study area and for each of the development alternatives that were investigated. For comparative purposes, this table again includes the existing operational charac- teristics of the SW North Dakota/SM Scholl* Ferry Road signalized Intersection. As this table shows, it is found that both lice -40- 0 0 «l l 600-x► •••-sso 40•x � !,r-.o ops o eq « 7 6 6----Nw +fst 1!►s 9 Q d �•icy� ` Gro*nw ay r Town Center o Z • a r 3 PROJECTED 1000 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC: PM PEAK HOUR Figure p Center Must 1986 -91- . - .�.tr.�.wi.-.,...-...+>r.;+._�.--w-«�:.- ...-....�s o.".•r....-._.— .�� - .,.._-...^n..._...a.�:�+ r+•^r.y a"` r e f N tO O A !o'er 01ei e 0®-e• 40-876 t p p 775 ��► ��1 g 10 # 6\ t Q O �a f ti � ;::moi? ?•;�� k S ,t ;W � Greenway .: ¢ Yown Center rt r • r N TOTAL EDESIGNATION- Fig S NATRAFF EXISTING ZONDGION Flgure ` Conter u st lode $ ` -42- 1 Ino a .r s V. � j ` 20.00 ISO sYa•••r •� 955 1 10 o O 1246 o� o a 0coo $ go a � i f } Grroanway Town Center Q3 .c e w T 3 co 3 y � s h TOTAL logo PSR PEAK HOUR Tit IC: PROPOSED ZONE DESIGNATION 4 Figure ��•. Center ti �� k u uet 1086 Table S. INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE SUNKARY: 1990 p.m. peak dour Conditions pb! peak Hour Conditions ------------------------------------- SW North Dakota/ Site Access Drive/ SW Scholl* Perry Scholls Berry Road -------- v/c Reserve Scenario LOS Ratio LOS Capacity -------------------------- --- ___ -------- Misting Conditions H -- pull Developments Existing Zone Designation H .58 850 Dull Development: Proposed BS 11 Zone Designation z l- Intersections will operate at acceptable service levels both with and without the addition of site-generated traffic. This finding Is true regardless of the development alternative that is selected, although it should be noted that development under the proposed zone designation will result in a slightly higher volume/capacity ratio than will development under the existing zone designation. In either case, however, the planned iaprovement of SW Scholls Ferry Road dictates the results of the intersection analysis, and results in a substantial amount of excess capacity. ss: Table e also identifies the results of the unsignalized LOS analysis conducted for 1990 conditions at the new intersection of the site access drive with SW Scholl* Ferry Road. These results show that this intersection will also operate at a very acceptable service level during p.m. peak hour conditions, and will have a substantial amount of reserve capacity available. This finding is true under both development alternatives that were investigated, and again reflects the fact that access at this driveway is restricted to right-turning movements only. V'i b • ...k ?#: •rnrAY�`�M"a+krr..eti 44wr «iMKt': S,.4 .-r..�.hy+w).:a,v,.y-rx«- a« `1 �: x` f i REFERENCES 1. Robert Keech , P . E . "Traffic Analysis for Proposed Residential/Office Commercial Development: Scholl* Ferry Road at Sorrento Road". June 1985 Z, Tom R. Lancaster P.E. "Greenway Town Center Phase I1 Traffic Impact Study". (undated) S. Transportation Research Board. "Highway Capacity Manual". Special Report No. 209 (1985) 4. Institute of Transportation Engineers. "Trip Generation Manual: Third Edition" (1983) 1 X {rMkY^Ri.+2.fP^Ma ai`++yxyyc ♦ ^!^" +`✓; Y M jt Riv':. Tom... - 44 - CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November 3, 1986 _ DATE SUBMITTED: October 22, 1986 x ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: CPA 9-861 2C PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission 17-86 United First Federal Savings recommendation for denial s PREPARED BY: Keith Liden 144 DEPT HERD OK ITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Yes: v INFORMATION SUMMARY The applicant requested a change in Plan designation from Light Industrial to Commercial General and from the I-P (Industrial Park) zone to C-G (Commercial 'v General), The Commission reviewed the proposal on October 21, 1986 and recommended denial. Attached are the application, staff report, Commission minutes, and supplemental information submitted by the applicant. ;;'Fi ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED " 1. Deny as recommended. 2. Approve the request. FISCAL IMPACT _._._. r ;; r SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative i mj/sl :a TIGARD PLANNING CONMIISSION REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 21, 1986 1. Vice President Owens called the meeting to order at 7:38 PM. The meeting was held at the Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Vice President Owens, Commissioners Butler, Leverett, Peterson, Newman, and Newton. President Moen (arrived late). Absent: Commissioners Fyre and Vanderwood. Staff: Senior Planner Liden, Assistant Planner Deborah Stuart. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES President Moen submitted changes for page three, first line, should read, President Moen did not support staff's concerns regarding downtown location alternatives and traffic considerations. Then he last sentence should start with "He". On page four, third paragraph from bottom, the last sentence, second line from the bottom add, a "direct" vehicular access. . . as opposed to just vehicular access. Vice-President Owens noted that the vote had not been included in the notion. Commissioner Newman moved and Commissioner Butler moved to adopt the minutes as modified. Motion carried by majority vote of Commissoner present, Commissioners j Newton and Leverett abstained. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATION Vice President Owens updated the Commission on the status of the Transportation Advisory Liason Comittee and requested they submit any of their questions, concerns, or ideas to her to take back to the Committee. She would keep the Commission updated. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 8-86 ZONE CHANGE ZC 16-86 BULLIER & BULLIER / UNITED FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS NPO N 5 A request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial General and a Zone Change from I-P (Industrial Park) to C-G (Commercial General). Located: 15995 SW 72nd Avenue (WCTM 2S1 12DC lots 700 and 701). Senior Planner Liden wade staff recommendation for denial. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o John Brosy, Planning Consultant with David Evans i Assoc. 2626 SW Corbett, 97201, representing Bullier and Bullier. Explained they would like the -' option to be able to lease to a wider variety of tenants. He showed slides of the area and the site itself. He explained they would upgrade pLAN =G COMMISSION OCTOBER 21, 1996 Page 1 the the access and modify the parking and landscaping to improve the site. He reviewed the history of the site and explained that the buildable lands inventory would not be affected because the site was completed developed. Intent was not to have a 100X retail, however, if they did they still meet Code requirements for parking. They supported, as a condition of approval, limiting the permitted uses (example restaurants). NPO # 5 recommended approval with a recommendation to modify the access. They had a traffic study done which showed the intersection of Carmen and 72nd would operate at a level B service and the intersection of Upper Boones Ferry and 72nd would operate at a level service A. Also, the traffic study recommended combining the two accesses into one, which is what they have done. PUBLIC TESIMONY o No one appeared to speak. o Discussion followed on how the market had changed, how the building fit both commercial and I-P uses, and the modifications being proposed for access to the site. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioner Butler did not support the proposal. He was concerned that with the interest in rezoning the I-P property located near Toy-R--Us to Commercial General and with this request that there would be a shortage of I-P land. o Commissioner Peterson did not support, however, he did feel the access should still be modified. o Commissioner Newman did not feel there was any basis in the Code for granting the change. o Commissioner Leverett favored the proposal. He felt the site is an ideal site for general commercial and that it was an probably an error to have had it zoned I-P originally. o Commissioner Owens was also concerned that other request would follow to diminish the I-P zone. However, she felt the site seemed appropriate for the general commercial use. o Senior Planer Liden commented that NPO N 5 Chairperson had arrived and would like to testify. President Moen arrived a Craig Hopkins, stated they had reviewed the proposal and felt that it was an appropriate zone change. He understood they had to meet Code requirements to make this change and he wanted the Commission to know that the NPO had always considered this area to be general commercial in nature. PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 21, 1996 Page 2 o President Moen, stated that he did not have the benefit of the public testimony and would not be voting, but wanted to comment that in reviewing the history that the fact that the original applicant had asked for a commercial designation for this property and then had been talked out of it is significant and should be considered in their deliberations. o Discussion followed regarding the site development review process and how a general commercial type building could be built in an industrial park zone. Also, the building did fit some industrial park type uses. o Commissioner Peterson moved and Commissioner Newman second to forward CPA 9-86 and ZC 17-86 to City Council with a recommendation of denial based on staff findings and conclusions. Motion carried by majority vote of Commissioners present, Commissioner Leverett and Owens voting no and President Moan abstained. 5.2 ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ZOA 7-86 HOME OCCUPATIONS f Il�G ssYc t.00TO ER: 21. 1996 Now3 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.2 ( OCTOBER 7, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD, TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 9-86 Zone Change ZC 16-86 REQUEST: Plan amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial General and a zone change from I-P (Industrial Park) to C-G a (Commercial General) APPLICANT: Bullier 6 Bullier Realtors OWNER: United 1st Federal Svgs 707 SW Washington Street Box 2268 Portland, OR 97205 Boise, ID 83701 LOCATION: 15995 Sw 72nd Avenue (WCTM 2S1 120C, Tax Lot 700, 701) 2. Background Information The property was formerly occupied by Connie's Market and prior to the final revisions of the Comprehensive Plan in 1983, it was zoned Commercial Neighborhood. During the Comprehensive Plan hearings, the owner requested a C-P (Commercial Professional) zone designation, but after discussion of the possible options available, the I-P (Industrial Park) designation was agreed upon by all concerned. In 1984, a 27,350 square toot building was constructed on the site featuring a parking lot containing approximately 86 spaces and two driveway entrances onto 72nd Avenue. The property owner was aware of the industrial designation and the limitation on commercial use of the property at the time of site development review. Based upon the assumption that the center would contain a small convenience store and deli (not to exceed 20% of the total square footage) with the remainder dedicated to office uses, the canter could meet, but not exceed the City's parking requirements. i. 3. Vicinity Information The subject property is surrounded by lana! zoned I-L (Light Industrial) with the exception of one smaller parcel located immediately to the } southeast which is also zoned I-P. As noted in the applicant's report, a significant amount of industrial development has occurred, particularly to the south of the property. Upper Boones Ferry Road and 72nd Avenue, which are an arterial and major collector respectively, q abut the east and southeast borders of the property. F STAFF REPORT - CPA 8-86 ZC 16-86 - PAGE 1 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The site is presently developed but the majority of the project is not leased. The applicant proposes to rezone the property to C-G to allow for a larger proportion of the site to be devoted to retail activities. 5. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division has no objection to the request provided that one driveway is provided as recommended in the traffic study. This driveway must be aligned with the existing driveway on the east side of 72nd Avenue. A street opening permit will be required. The Building Division has no object to the proposal. The State Highway Division relayed the same statement as the Engineering Division. In addition, it was noted that upon development of the property to the north, a driveway from this project will form a four way intersection with Upper Boones Ferry Road and 72nd Avenue. It is recommended that joint access be provided allowing this property to have access to the signal via the northern parcel. No other comments have been received. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 5.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, 8.1.3, the locational Criteria for commercial development (Sections 12.2), and Section 18.22.040 of the Community Development Code. Since the Tigard Comprehensive Plan has recently been acknowledged by LCDC, it is no longer necessary to address the Statewide Planning Goals. The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is only partially consistent with the relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: I. Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the applicant's proposal. 2. Policy 5.1.1 is not satisfied because this proposal will not enhance the economic diversity of the Tigard area. The subject property is located within the primary industrial area in the City which includes an area from Sandberg Road to the southern City limits and from I-5 to Fanno Creek. This area is important because there is no other land within the City limits or the Urban Growth Boundary that is as well suited for industrial activity from the standpoint of parcel sizes, terrain, transportation facilities, and compatibility with surrounding uses. �k STAFF REPORT - CPA 8--86 i ZC 16-86 — PAGE 2 The City contains significant amounts of developed and undeveloped commercial land, but more importantly, the potential exists for rezoning additional land for commercial use as the need arises. The City will not have the same degree of flexibility with industrial land if more is needed in the future. The reduction of industrial land will act to diminish the diversity of economic opportunities to Tigard residents primarily because it will be extremely difficult to replace. 3. Policf % 7.1.2 and 7.6.1 are satisfied because adequate service capacity for public water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and fire protection exist. 4. Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 can be satisfied if the recommendations made in the applicant's traffic report are implemented. This report has been reviewed by the Engineering and State Highway Divisions and no objections were raised. Along with combining the two driveways into one, the State recommendation for a joint access agreement with the property to the north should be considered. 5. The Locational Criteria contained in Section 12.2 of the Plan are partially met for the reasons below: a. The proposed commercial zone will not abut any residential development. b. With the recommended change for the existing driveways, the - applicant's traffic study has shown that the increase in traffic generation will not have an adverse impact upon 72nd Avenue or Upper Boones Ferry Road. C. Direct access to an arterial and major collector street is available. d. Public transportation is provided by Tri-"et. e. The site should be capable of accommodating existing and projected uses. When the center was constructed, the parking requirement was calculated based upon a small deli and convenience store (with a limit of 20% of the total square footage) with the remainder assumed to be office space. Given this assumption, the center met but did not exceed City parking standards. If the zone is changed to C-G, there is a greater likelihood of having tenants, such as a restaurant, that will cause the center to violate the parking requirements. The site might be redesigned to create a few more spaces, but this would appear to be difficult. f. The site will have high visibility being located at the intersection of Upper Boones Ferry Road and 72nd Avenue. STAFF 'REPORT - CPA 8-86 & ZC16-86 - PAGE g. The physical improvements on the site will not change and therefore the scale compatibility of this project with surrounding properties will be unaffected in this regard. One compatibility issue that will affect adjacent properties is related to the landscaping and buffering requirements found in Chapter 18.100 of the Community Development Code. When industrially zoned projects abut one another, no setback or buffering is required but when the C-G and I-L or I-P zones are adjacent, a 10 foot wide landscaped buffer is ommercial and industrial property. required for both the c The development on the subject property does not meet this standard and any development or redevelopment on adjacent industrial parcels will be expected to comply as well. h. The remaining criteria regarding privacy and incorporation of unique site features are not relevant in this case. Section 18.22.040 states that decisions of this type should be consistent with Plan policies and State applicable Community Development Code provisions and that there has been a change in circumstances or a mistake was made relating to the designation of the property. The all of the applicable Plan and Coda proposal does not comply with criteria as noted above. Also, the applicant's contend that the development which has occurred represents a change in circumstances. The staff concludes that no change is evident other than development which was anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan. C. RECOMPIENDATTON Basad upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning staff recommends denial of CPA 9-86 and ZC 17-86. PREPARED BY: Keith tiden AP EO 8Y: William A. Monahan - Director of Community Senior Planner Development (KSL.:bsi59) ! STAFF REPORT - CPA 8--86 6 ZC 16-86 - PAGE 4 STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 7, 1986 - 7:30 P.M. AGENDA ITEM 5.2 r, TIGARD PLANNING C"USSION TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD. OREGON 97223 A. FACTS I. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 9-86 Zone Change ZC 16-86 REQUEST: Plan amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial and a zone change from I-P General (Commercial General) (Industrial Park) to C-G APPLICANT: Bullier 6 Bullier Realtors OWNER: United lst Federal Svgs 707 SW Washington Street Box 2268 Portland, OR 97205 Boise, ID 83701 LOCATION: 15995 Sw 72nd Avenue (WCTM 281 12DC, Tax Lot 700, 701) 2. Background Information ( The ProPQ1tY was formerly occupied by Connie's Market and final revisions of the prior to the Commercial Neighborhood. Comprehensive Plan in 1983, it was zoned g During the Comprehensive Plan hearings, the aownerfter requested a C-P (Commercial Professional) zone designation, but discussion of the possible options available, the I-P (Industrial Park) designation was agreed upon by all concerned. In 1984, a 27,350 square foot builds ng featuring a parking lot containingwas constructed on the site driveway entrances onto 72nd Avenu approximately 86 spaces and two the industrial designation and the l 10itati n�pon comrty mercial was aware of the property at the time of site development review. Based u assumption that the center would contain a small convenience store and deli (not to exceed 20% of the total square foo dedicated to office uses, the center could meet, o) with the remainder e dimer City's parking requirements. 3. Vicinity Information The subject property is surrounded by land zoned I-L (Light Industrial) with the exception of one smaller Parcel southeast which is also zoned I-P. As notedinthe applicant's red immediately eport, the a significant amount of industrial developmentPp Port' particularly to the south of the has occurred, 72nd Avenue, which are an arterialP y. Upper Boones Ferry Road and orders of the and major collector respectively, abut the east and southeast b property. e{ STAFF REPORT - CPA 8-86 6 ZC 16-86 - PAGE 1 S t ex 4. Site Information and Proposal Descriation The site is presently developed but the majority of the project is not leased. The applicant proposes to rezone the property to C-G to allow for a larger proportion of the site to be devoted to retail activities. 5. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division has no objection to the request provided that one driveway is provided as recommended in the traffic study. This driveway must be aligned with the existing driveway on the east side of 72nd Avenue. A street opening permit will be required. The Building Division has no object to the proposal. a E The State Highway Division relayed the same statement as the Engineering Division. In addition, it was noted that upon development of the property to the north, a driveway from this project will form a four way fl intersection with Upper Boones Ferry Road and 72nd Avenue. It is recommended that joint access be provided allowing this property to have access to the signal via the northern parcel. No other comments have been received. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 5.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, 8.1.3, the Locational Criteria for commercial development (Sections 12.2), and Section 18.22.040 of the Community Development Code. Since the Tigard 1 Comprehensive Plan has recently been acknowledged by LCDC, it is no longer necessary to address the Statewide Planning Goals. The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is only partially consistent with the relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings noted below: 1. Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding property owners were given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the applicant's proposal. 2. Policy 5.1.1 is not satisfied because this proposal will not enhance the economic diversity of the Tigard area. The subject property is located within the primary industrial area in the City which includes an area from Sandberg Road to the southern City limits and from I-5 to Fenno Creek. This area is important because there is no other land within the City limits or the Urban Growth Boundary that is as well suited for industrial activity from the standpoint of parcel sizes, terrain, transportation facilities, and compatibility with surrounding uses. STAFF REPORT - CPA 8-86 C ZC 16-96 - PAGE 2 The City contains significant amounts of developed and undeveloped commercial land, but more importantly, the potential exists for rezoning additional land for commercial use as the need arises. The City will not have the same degree of flexibility with industrial land if more is needed in the future. The reduction of industrial land will act to diminish the diversity of economic opportunities to Tigard residents primarily because it will be extremely difficult to replace. 3. Policies 7.1.2 and 7.6.1 are satisfied because adequate service capacity for public water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and fire protection exist. 4. Policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 can be satisfied if the recommendations made in the applicant's traffic report are implemented. This report has been reviewed by the Engineering and State Highway Divisions and no objections were raised. Along with combining the two driveways into one, the State recommendation for a joint access agreement with the property to the north should be considered. S. The locational Criteria contained in Section 12.2 of the Plan are partially met for the reasons below: A. The proposed commercial zone will not abut any residential development. b. With the recommended change for the existing driveways, the applicant's traffic study has shown that the increase in traffic generation will not have an adverse impact upon 72nd Avenue or Upper Boones Ferry Road. C. Direct access to an arterial and major collector street is available. d. Public transportation is provided by Tri-Met. e. The site should be capable of accommodating existing and projected uses. When the center was constructed, the parking requirement was calculated based upon a small deli and convenience store (with a limit of 20% of the total square footage) with the remainder assumed to be office space. Given this assumption, the center met but did not exceed City parking standards. If the zone is changed to G-G, there is a greater likelihood of having tenants, such as a restaurant, that will cause the center to violate the parking requirements. The site might be redesigned to create a few more spaces, but this would appear to be difficult. f. The site will have high visibility being located at the intersection of Upper Boones Ferry Road and 72nd Avenue. STAFF REPORT - CPA 8-86 6 ZC 16-86 - PAGE 3 g. The physical improvements on the site will not change and therefore the scale compatibility of this project with surrounding properties will be unaffected in this regard. One compatibility issue that will affect adjacent properties is related to the landscaping and buffering requirements found in Chapter 18.100 of the Community Development Code. When industrially zoned projects abut one another, no setback or buffering is required but when the C-G and I-L or I-P zones are adjacent, a 10 foot wide landscaped buffer is required for both the commercial and industrial property. The development on the subject property does not meet this standard and any development or redevelopment on adjacent industrial parcels will be expected to comply as well. h. The remaining criteria regarding privacy and incorporation of unique site features are not relevant in this case. Section 18.22.040 states that decisions of this type should be consistent with Plan policies and State applicable Community Development Code provisions and that there has been a change in circumstances or a mistake was made relating to the designation of the property. The proposal does not comply with all of the applicable Plan and Code criteria as noted above. Also, the applicant's contend that the development which has occurred represents a change in circumstances. The staff concludes that no change is evident other than development which was anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan. C. RECOMIENDATION Based upon the above findings and conclusions, the Planning staff recommends denial of CPA 9-86 and ZC 17-86. PREPARED BY: Keith Liden ApWoVED BY: William A. Monahan Senior Planner Director of Community Development i (KSL:bsi59) p. STAFF REPORT- CPA 9-86 6 ZC 16-86 - PAGE 4 y r Eel �SBii�l!Jill moll ■®■ Ian .� Nov WON •� ■.I Moll Off M n 1101 .■ .1 �I — �� _ ® �: �,,�, �� = lid �1�1►'��.� E 111111 ®films: �i:n■ Inn �ullwntl � . . s 117 man .. ® IIIA µ� f l l APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONE MAP t Amendments From I-P (Industrial Park) to C-G (General Commercial) T23 R1W Section 12DC Tax Lot 700 Bullier & Bullier Realty, Applicant for United First Federal Savings and Loan, Boise, Owner `: J TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Mature of the Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 II. Applicable Ordinance Provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Site Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 III. Findings of Fact. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 IV. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 EX82BIT8 A. Comparison of uses Allowed byRight in I-P and C-G Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 B. Site Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 C. Market Service Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 .J zs i t .s BUL001 C I. NATURE OF THE REQUEST This request is to changs the zoning on a developed two-acre parcel located west of SW 72nd Avenue near its intersection with Carman Drive from I-P to C-G. This zone change also necessitates a comprehensive Plan map amendment from Industrial to Commercial. he parcel lies within the City of Tigard; it is the sits of the recently built "Carman Center." The zoning in the vicinity is shown on page 2. y II. APPLICABLE ORDINANCE PROVISIONS A. The purpose of the City of Tigard I-P District is, in part, to provide areas b .For combining light manufacturing, office and complementary related commercial uses. . ." B. The purpose of the C-G District is, in part, ". . .to provide for major retail goods and services *It is intended that these uses be adjacent to an arterial or major collector street." and I-P zones are C. Uses allowed by right in the C-G listed in Exhibit A. D. The City Council makes a decision on zone changes p. involving a concurrent Comprehensivethe Plan Planning amendment after reviewing Co3mission's recommendation and the record of the proceedings. E. Section 18.22.040 lists three general standards upon which zone map and plan map amendments are to be considered. They are listed specifically and addressed later in this report. r r a 1 �a'P. 'a'lrS..�¢bsr2*k'k'T ^rn _ r ....,Y .s F •� _ _ } ZONING IN- THE VICINITY OF CARMAN CENTER 1 .! � .` i ...�� —�•• — —\.• � =�i fir`-j-�s�1 • : tai l� � \ � � . to - ti .•..ee \;� 1- ��;ti,.. Jr- C-G GENERAL COMMERCIAL �v I-P INDUSTRIAL PARK I-L LIGHT INDUSTRIAL R-4.5 RESIDENTIAL R-7 RESIDENTIAL i SII. Pnmim= D8' Fm= {r A. She subject property is located west of SW 72nd Avenue between its intersecti=on vitt SW 'Caiman Drive and mVper Boones Ferry Mesad. 3t is about 2.00 acres in size. BA 72nd Avenue, Boonss F'erxy and CaZman Drive are all major traffic rterials. mere is s a Tri Met bus stop the southeast propertycorner. B. A 27,350 square foot comxaerci-al building has been Constructed on the sitee. Eighty-eight Percent of the building, or 24,290 :square feet, is not leasable area. C, The site is in the City of 'Tigard I-P zone. It constitutes r=w-:fnly four-fifths of an "island" of laud so zoned; as such, it is bounded on four of its five sides by S--L fLightt Industrial) zoning. I-P zoning on the site was established in 1983. D. he site is located near the center of a -aide band of established and growing light industrial and industrial park land uses situated between interstate 5 and residential areas to the Qwest. R024bly sixty pmt sof this land jbetween SW Bcmit& goad and the south and of the Oregon Business Park) is zoned I-L; another thirty-five Percent is zoned i-P. and lass than five percent is zoned C--G. Z. fte C_G zoned area is located soutbWast of the 3-5 interchange with Carman Drina, whicb is located ronob1y 1.200 fast northeast of the subject site. ' ted• zoned are&t ander. automobile s� statt3 sbwaY- tela F. .tely across SW 72nd .Avenue from the 831bject site is an autos service station and C=vani=enese ate". otberwise, there are no :otbew food or convenience 0Vt3.ets situated vita the vicinity of the subject site. G. Iand loess ar wmd the sits include Office sPace ararehe�a�sing, autobody -I li9'Int industr al- eases: a ve ldi nq SUWIY outlet: and a nursery H. An office ftasnituxe store, a cWy SbOPf and a era Iccated in the cwnteer i t eocw�- A Conveni ro-a t a portiecm of the cotter in the near futmce- ' be dei i and market Vill together occupy about, 4*00D 1r: 3 `g sgLtare test, for About 15 percent -of the nenter's rgross .area.. 3. 'The ccsntsr rhas two deveagped access paints :onto -SW ! -Land :Drive, each of ,which is cnpa]ile .of acao�mmnodatng two-wAy traffic. righty-nine parte X7 of -which are for compact cars, are distributed Ganong =sate landsc4ping, which itself =occupies twenty-IVe ;percent :oaf the site. .Some .large park=ing $paces :have been rCrOstsdo +, xesery d, and marked for use by disabled <drivers. -The site is the Stormer Site .of Connie''s 'Market, a -convenience _wttket that .served .nearby residential aroma kconni6la was -zoned dor commercial use until ,1983., :when the designation :was changed during the legislative :zoning review of the area. The iaanning Commission meeting minutes for January Z7„ 1983:, indicate that-ssEquities Northwest, the awner at the time, -requested a .change trom CCN tc 2F, ,but changed the -request ,to one tar "p Iprotsss cnal/Administrative 'office) at the :.=carting=, since the owners >felt Its pro sected uses were best accomajodated by that aons. `The minutesshow -haat the City -staff said the prgposed ruses would :better fit into a C-5 :zona,-t "the .minutes <don`'t :reflect ',What those uses $ to ,. -The :minutes --state, 2urther, that Fngt�,f -recommends a lht Sndustrial .plan $esLgnation with A :zoning of Industrial -Park _(M- �4) �saommsndat on :was Accepted 'by the =owner;, :and the 3'1aaning =Commission then unanImously vatted to change the :zone an the :site 1G 'The ,not sdaysleped to its _present ;esctwctt Am -9-83.. !.to tor-ego. Business :Park located Qwest 7of BW '72nd avenue ;had Ibeen developed in About avao„ And the 8e4vaZ.cW - nt 1bgt ween 7upper :Boons berry Moad and SW '72nd ►venue 'began In .1983,, at 1 mut. ateo the °va3.nity twas im1mg moviavea- msere in a �zuk tantial :amount of 'undsel yr .unddexuti3jzed indust riall coned ��► I--and iftin In the area.. weport cdon fon the subject .property In fah 18as =by Brock M. Brannan :and _associates sof Mesar nn makes the _ t3:ndi qs -,with rsspsct � ta=he subject ps rty and sits zrket 44 ! 1. :The site .was .original _,y -..intended =for -light ! -industrial -use. 4After -.some -,zarkst analysis, t .was determined that a ..market .niche :existed -for apace that-would also,-support-retail -uses, ,.business ;support •services, and industrial =uses. Thus `the --prpperty ,was -developed as =it Appears, today. 2. The =site -adjacent and tothenorth of the subject site .is to 'be developed zwith 60,000 i -square feet of office space over several years. 3. office and industrial -apace in the vicinity -are 1n plentiful supply; consequently, leasing of such spaces is occurring at an extremely slow rate. Alternatively, competitive retail centers -are leasing atrapid rates. 4 e. Neighborhood shopping centers in the area have "specialty retailers,' as their _predominant tenants. -5. Between March 1985 and -March 1986 no new tenants have been placed in 'Carman Center. 6. The preadominant .market that needs to be addressed ;by the Center is ".:. .users who do not require prime retail exposure but who could benefit -from an area with adequate retail exposure, with the maximum potential coming from customers within the developing PacTrust :Business Park and even the growing .residential population.. ." M. The =realtor -for 'the -site estimates that the ,ideal use mix in Carman-center would be about 60 percent :retail uses, catering to -the daytime population and -the -nearby residential areas, and about ;40 ,percent -office space. -This represents 1.6,410 scp== ,feet sof retail ;space and ='aO 940 square -feet of office apace. The antic=ipated :retail asses -would -.be those -typically -found An neighborhood centers: video xental; convenience market; small ° restaurant; a mak hcna pizza; business services: - and other ;:.businesses -:which would serve ,the :needs <-of -nearby -:industries and -their employees. tz. Ahe 7Me�tropolitan Ber ice -Districts 19ata Resource -Center, s�stilazing:current:census-'and'-traffic ;has ganeratesd a e Market Pxatil-e Report for�an=area roughly :destexmined !-to ;.that which will pPly : z 4,- i, ! carman.,Center ,with -most of'its-:retail trade. The drpport 'indicates that --in -..1985, about 11,250 _ frpersons .,were -employed -within -the -market area. r '(The_,area -.is rshown -in.=Bxhihit '!C�.) Rough .y 4 200 .� _peopie ;are �emplpyed :in ,�the_-portion :of,:the .market area wast -of",Interstate` 5. It-is projected==that the :anti=e -market urea will -employ about -12,500 pepple.-in=1990 And`-16,900 people in' the year 2005. There are, An addition, :about 9,300:•residents in "the "Bua .ness service area. Within the -, larger ,R&sidential service Area, which is ..described -by a two-mile -radus 1 from the site, and which contains ,miles, there were nearly 30,000 .12.6 =square Y .residents and -a total of -about 22,400 employees. E Again, projections to 2005 show =a residential population -of about 51,000, and 40,000 employees within the residential service area. `,k .'professional -traffic engineer' has analysed the u _ 17ppact of the proposed zoning on the adjacent x -street -traffic. The street system presently gates, during the evening peak hour, at a service level of '"A" or `p8", with - "A" ->being the n highest level of .efficiency, and "B" the lowest. with the zoning on the site changed to 2 Neighborhood - Co®mercia.l, °the analysis indicates that the lsvel of service-remains ,at "A" •and "B". f � E Y k 1 d; IV. CONCLUSIONS a - Section 18:220040 directs that quasi-judicial zone 1 change decisions be based on: A. Applicable=Comprehensive Plan policies; w B. -A conclusion that the proposed -change will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare; C. Applicable development standards; and D. Evidence of change in the vicinity. The findings In this report supportthefollowing conclusions, drawn with respect to the :four criteria listed above. A. Applicable Comprehensive Plan policies .� 1. =General Pursuant to Policy 1.1.1 and 1.1.2, the Implemen&atjon strat2gies -for those policies state that'- the -Comprehensive Plan and Zoning V' =:maps will apply land use categories as "follows: wf. General Commercial Refers to areas for auto-oriented and related commercial uses located along major traffic ways. . . "i. Light Industrial - Refers to- areas-deemed appropriate for - ndustria1 activities which :iriclude manufacturing, processing, assembling, packaging or treatment of products from previously -prepared y' materials -and which are devoid of nuisance factors that - would .adversely s affect other_ properties." The---,site being considered is located adjacent to.three:-major trafficways: Carman Drive, SW _72nd ,.Avsnue, and Upper Boones Ferry Road. As ;such, it appears suktad to he general : requireuent for -location along major Y traftaways, especially as deve�;opment in- he vicinity ,increases .the use :of --:those Due a.also to the site-+s : thot^oughfakes. _ _ $ Irelative :distance .trom -residential,:. reas, ..-;it w_appears:to`:;be-, suited=to, fight iasdustrial=.use. EE a� - 3 � } Thus, the site meets the general requirements for both commercial and Light Industrial uses. 2. Citizen Involvement There don I t appear to be any policies under Ci+-i peri Tnvo1vement where the burden of proof of compliance is on the applicant. 3. Natural Features and open Space 3 There are no sensitive natural feature, cultural or mineral resource, agricultural land, or open space issues relevant to this request. f 4. Air, Water and Land Resources Quality This request doss not involve any water or x Air quality, land resource quality issues, ' however, may be minimally improved by providing for some retail uses in the midst of a large daytime concentration of people who would otherwise need to drive to more distant retail outlets for food, office, or convenience goods. a reduction in brut orit contaminants may be contributes to the metropolitan areawide attempt to reduce air pollution. 5. Economy Polio e 5.1.A activities tha aimed e Caty shall - prom a he diversification of the economic opportunities available to T1gaitd residents with particular emphasis placed on the growth of the local job £ ; market." The remaining policies concerning r the Tigard economy don't appear to be relevant to this request. F' Both the owner's original market study for the site and the appraiser's report conclude that a market niche exists in the vicinity of the site for the provision of retail . opportunities, which in themselves provide jobs. There also appears to be an excess inventory of office and industrial space in the Tigard-Beaverton area. Under such conditions---especially considering that there are no serious off-site impacts from either t of the property commercial -or industrial use (which is shown elsewhere in this request)--- I the City's policy for economic diversification is best met by accommodating market demand, which in this cas�itunat ies intthe vicinity is for greater retail opp it of the site. I6. Housing The housing policies are not applicable in this case. 7. public Facilities public facilities policies are not applicable in this case. 8. Transportation The responsibility for policies 8.1.1 and 8.1.2 lies with the City. Policy .1.3, however, contains the following applicable requirement as a precondition to development approval: "a. Development [must] abut a publicly dedicated street heor haveadequate aPProval access approved by authority." The subject site is bordered by SW 72nd Avenue, a public road. Access is gained by either of two driveways, each of which can accommodate two-way traffic, and which were approved by the City during the building permit review process. Pre-application conferences have indicated that the traffic impacts of increasing the retail uses on the site may be enough to decrease the level of service on the surrounding streets; however, a traffic impact analysis by a professional traffic engineer concludes that such impacts will not decrease the efficiency surrounding roads and nearby intersections. The traffic analysisforthis request advises that, for operational reasons, the access points to the site be combined into one 3-lane entrance/exit point located near the middle of its frontage. This change will not affect the level of service off-site. It will lthallow 2 vehicles to exit simultaneously, 9 Iincreasin J - from the sittehe overall efficiency of egress The remainder of inapplicable due to the requirements are development of the the Previously--approved granted accordin to That approval was g those requirements. Policies 8.2, 8.3, 8.4 responsibility for the apPlic nt 8.5 carry no 9. Energy Policy 9.1.3 statesthat "The City encourage land development Bound which and construction.p ' conservation, design decreaseasame way that this zone change decreed, Pollutant loading of the metro olit 1 and diningthe proposal---by bringing shopping opportunities closer to a large an growing daytime population concentration... Willdecrease energy consumption. 10. Urbanization Contains no applicable policies. 11. Special Areas of Concern Under between Section 11.5, Policies require buffering between residential industrial development. dress and adjacent well r Since the site is w s emoved from such incompatible uses, and urrounded ' by buffering is necessaryindustrial zoning, no. 12. Locational Criteria The introduction to the states that Location Criteria It is intended that these construed in a flexible . . .criteria be interest of accommodatin manner, in the though not strictl g Proposals which, the applicable criteria conformance with the Public interest are found to be rat communite and capable of harmonious igration community. . . (P• 77) into the 10 k T, In general, commercial land use designations ! are to be applied according to the following: Commercial areas [shall] be planned at a scale which relates its location, site and type of stores to the trade area to be served. . . Ingress and egress points [shall] not create traffic congestions or hazards. . . Vehicle trips [shall] be reduced both in terms of the length of vehicle trips and total number of trips. . . The site's size and location appear to be well, if not ideally, suited to the 4=6diate r market area, which consists of a large concentration of people at their workplace. it is adequately sized to provide a variety of shopping, dining, and personal business 3 opportunities, thereby reducing the total vehicle miles the community needs to drive in order to complete its normal business affairs. a The site is located so as to allow a large proportion of pedestrian traffic. Finally, the efficiency of the adjacent roads and nearby intersections will not be impaired by the anticipated traffic volume increase. The Commercial Plan designation is to be applied whore it ".. .is not surrounded by residential ah districts on more than two sides." (p.83) The site isnot adjacent to any residential uses. Access concerns are addressed by the following: I. The proposed area. . .shall not create traffic congestion or a traffic safety problem. Such a determination shall be based on the street k capacity, existing and proposed traffic volumes, the speed limit, number of turning 1 movements and the traffic generating characteristics of the various types of uses. ., 2. The site shall have direct access from a major collector or arterial street. y 3. Public transportation shall be available to thesiteor general area. (p. 83) ,�� 11 i Tri Mat provides service through the intersection that is adjacent to the site and which consists of two major traffic collectors. The Traffic Engineerls report submitted by the applicants concludes that the additional traffic generated by the site will not create traffic congestion or a Itraffic safety problem. The ,Site Characteristics require that the site be large enough to accommodate present and future Iuses, and that it have high visibility. The Carman Center is sufficiently visible--without being ostentatious--to traffic progressing through the nearby intersections. In addition, it appears that development in the vicinity in the future will increase the present demand for retail uses in the area. The Xgact Assessment section requires that the scale of the project be compatible with surrounding uses; that privacy of adjacent non- commercial uses be maintained; that unique site features be incorporated into the site design; and that off-site impacts not interere with non- residential uses. There are no unique site features. The orientation of the storefronts toward the parking area and adjacent street will ensure that there are no measurable off-site impacts to non- commercial or non-residential uses. And finally, the single-story structure, balanced by the parking requirements for the Center, is in keeping with the scale of structrues in the vicinity. The Lacational Criteria for Dight Industrial uses contained in Policy 12.4.1 (b) , (c) and (e) are practically identical to those for General Commercial. They address buffering from residential areas; location on a major trafficway; f site size with respect to projected needs; and off-site impacts. These criteria are addressed as above under the criteria for General Commercial. Thus it appears that, all things being equal, the City may designate the site for either use. Given the anticipated increase in traffic use of the site, though, all things are not equal. But, since those impacts appear to be minimal compared to the capacity of the adjacent streets, the City may still designate the site for either Industrial Park or General Commercial uses. 12 in summary, all applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and related criteria are met by the proposed zone amendment. B. Section 18.22.040 (2) requires that the health, safety and welfare of the public not be adversely affected. There are no public health issues involved in this i request. The public welfare is enhanced by providing retail outlets where they will decrease the automobile miles required for dining and convenience goods, and thereby reducing both energy consumption and air pollution. While site-generated traffic will increase use of adjacent streets, such use will not impair the safety of the general public, since the streets and intersections are adequate to accommodate all such increased traffic. C. Section 18.27.040 (3) requires that all applicable standards in the development code be met. The site design and improvements were approved according to code standards prior to construction. _ D. Section 18.22040 (4) requires that zone amendments be approved based on the evidence of change in the t neighborhood or community. Two significant changes have occurred in the recent past which support this request. First, the site zoning was changed from commercial to Industrial Park, thereby largely precluding the historical use of the property for commercial purposes. At the time, uses proposed for the site could apparently fit into either a commercial or a light industrial land use designation. Subsequent market assessments revealed that a demand exists in the area for more retail uses oriented largely to the daytime population. J Secondly, a substantial area of light industrial land has been developed in the vicinity since 1983. This has resulted in both an excess inventory of industrial and office space, and it has increased the daytime population in the area. In effect, the market for the uses allowed in the C� 13 . ' .sy'W'Tom- ,C 5_.h'y ty� Wye 'Y�•! $ .z j. �Ni�F'9C•� ..as;'.:'n � ,aixF,,..L,.•'." :` ie,t._i' '. - r C-G has been expanded by subsequent economic ( activity in the area. In summary, it appears that the locational criteria for I-P and C-G uses are so similar as to be left to the informed discretion of the City as to which designation should be placed on a given parcel. So while the subject site can accommodate both types of uses, the market in the area has shitted over time to demand more commercial opportunities. Accommodating this demand will result in decreased air quality problems, decreased fuel consumption; the creation of new jobs in the Tigard economy; and increased efficiency of land use on the sits. Increased traffic can be accommodated by the newly improved adjacent street and intersections without posing a threat to public safety. In short, all applicable policies and criteria are not by the proposed C-G zone. The applicant urges the Planning Commission and City Council to adopt findings and conclusions In support of this request. tea, 14 t ks y v i EXHIBIT A A-1 COMPARISON OF USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT IN I-P AND C-G ZONES (*: Size restricted to 20% separately or in combination with another *) USES -- !g-G civic uses Public Support facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X Parking facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X Postal services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X Public Safety services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X Public Agency Administrative services . . . . . . . . X Cultural Exhibit/Library services . . . . . . . . . . . . X 1 Lodge, Fraternal, Civic Assembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . X i commercial Uses i Animal sales/services ! veterinary: small animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X large animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Grooming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Amusement Enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Agricultural Sales . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . 00 . . . . . . 0 . X Automobile and Equipment ' Repairs: light . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X Sales/rental: light equipment . . . . . . . . . . .. X X Cleaning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Building Maintenance services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. X Business Equipment sales/services . . . . . . . . . . .. X Business support services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X Communication services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Construction services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Convenience sales and Personal services . . . . . . * X jDay Care facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0000 . . . . * X Cllk 15 _ S A-2 Y USES 1P C-G Commercial Uses (Continued) Eating/Drinking establishments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * X Financial/Insurance/Realty X X jFood/Beverage Retail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x I Funeral/Internment services . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . X General Retail * x Laundry services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Medical/Dental services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X Participation Sports/Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x X j; Personal services * x Professional/Administrative Offices . . . . . . . . . . X X Research services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Vehicle Fuel sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X a consumer Repair services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Religious Assembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Spectator Sports/Entertainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X Transient Lodging . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X o� nom; 5 r h 16 _ a ]Exhibit E� • i • t t t • t� . r 4iVj =4 lk _ EPP RA Own j+' 1► I�. 11 It 7 z O OnoDAVID EVAn3 Ano ASSOCIATES, inc. 2626 sW CORBM FlV'E(1lM • PORTLAM ORE"97201 so3i223 6663 October 31, 1986 BUL001 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: CABG # CPA 9-86/aC 17-86 Mayor Cook and Members of City Council: >.f We represent Bullier and Bullier and United First Federal Savings and Loan of Idaho, applicants for the above numbered case. The following is a brief summary of our main arguments. The request is to change the land use designation of a completely built project called Carman Center, from IP, Industrial Park to CG, Commercial General. The site is on I 72nd Avenue, immediately adjacent to its intersections with s Carman Drive and Upper Boones Ferry Road. We come before you with the active support of NP05. It's chairman, Craig Hopkins, spoke before Planning Commission and u also plans to testify for our request November 3. On October t 21, the Planning Commission, on a 2-4 split vote, recommended denial. Commissioners Leverett and Owens supported our request. Carman Center was designed with the list of uses allowed in the IP (Industrial Park) zone in mind. The IP zone allows 20% retail commercial. The original developers overestimated the projects' ability to attract other allowed uses such as offices, service businesses or wholesale/distribution businesses. Nearly all businesses interested in the complex fall into the general retail commercial category. The CG designation has always been the most appropriate for this site, which is at the intersection of four arterials 4 (including Durham Road) and at the Carman Drive I-5 interchange. The CG designation is also consistent with the =`r historical use and historical zoning designations of the Property. r'J . Tigard City Council October 31, 1986 Page 2 MAJOR FACTORS FAVORING THE CG DESIGNATION * Support from CP05 (recommendation for approval with suggestion of one, rather than the existing two driveways) . * No neighborhood opposition of any kind. * Sufficient off-street parking. A redesign can add 5-8 spaces to the existing layout. The lot will meet code requirements for all likely tenant combinations. * Minimal impact. The site is 100% developed. At issue, assuming that at ideal conditions, 60% of the site would be retail commercial, is the ability to lease approximately 10,000 square feet of additional space for CG uses. The incremental change is very small compared to Tigard's industrial land inventory. * Historical commercial use. This is the former site of "Connie's Market" (Durham Store) for over 30 years until the 1984 construction of Carman Center. Although Connie's was a small store, it was an ideal site for a convenience store. The area was annexed to Tigard in 1976. The site had a City of Tigard Commercial designation until 1983. The NP05 Plan map adopted by the City in 1977 showed "Commercial Retail" here. * Superior arterial intersections. This site, at the Carman/I-5 interchange and the intersection of Upper Boones Ferry Road, 72nd and Durham Road is best suited for CG. IP uses need no such accessibility or central location. Such intersection land is rare and should be retained for its most appropriate use. The Planning Commission was basically concerned with two issues -- precedent for other potential CG conversions, and Plan criteria for map changes. This site has several unique qualifications for the CG designation, not the least of which is the history of Commercial usage and Commercial Plan designations. No other nearby IP site has the same set of circumstances, and therefore the danger of setting a precedent does not exist, if findings reflect these unique set of circumstances. V s Tigard Planning Council October 31, 1986 page 3 Our original written report, which was thorough and was accompanied by a complete professional traffic analysis, a accompani code criteria for map changes. we allege a combination of two factors -- change in circumstances and error. The change inn circofficetancss from construction da despite the is the continued increase extremely overbuilt market. The error is the change to IP rn and the valuable location use, despite the historic patte at these major arterial intersections. Our proposal includes an important feature that J}gproves the existing traffic situation. We propose, as a condition of sone change, to redesign the site with one major (three lane) driveway to be centrally located along the 72nd Avenue frontage. r This engineer. but The redesign ill denhaad ncePour en and by ou site and add 5-8 parking spaces. We also are open to additional conditions to alleviate any perceived problems with the CG designation on this sits. luxam Our proposal of the CG designation for Carman Center makes very good common sense and is also supported by specific Plan change criteria. our offer to redesign the existing two driveways to one central driveway improves the existing traffic to the designation is isin the best interation and ests of the City of Tigard.CG Sincerely, DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. = John L. Brost', AICP Project Manager JLB:lyd r_ CITY OF TIGARD� OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November 3 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: October 20 1986 { ISSUE/AGENDA-TITLE: Public Hearing PREVIOUS ACTION: None TU10-86 Pacific Western Bank PREPARED BY: Deborah A. Stuart DEPT HEAD OK TY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY This is a request by Pacific Western Bank fora Temporary oned Use C_Papproval of a rc al mobile office trailer for one year on property Professional). The trailer will be used as an emergency space solution to an impending merger of Pacific Western Bank and Citizens Valley Bank with Key Bank of Oregon. Should the merger occur, an increase in the site's operational workload of 45 percent is predicted. Other bank acquisitions are also predicted. The company hopes to consolidate its computer and operations service facilities in Tigard and future expansions at the existing site or construction at another location are possibilities. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the recommendation made by the Planning Director for approval subject to certain conditions. 2. Approve the recommendation for approval with modifications. 3. Deny the application. FISCAL -IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the recommendation made by the Planning Director for approval subject to certain conditions. ia24/ial z STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM TIGARD CITY COUNCIL r November 3, 1986 - 7:00 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COP'M4ISSION TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Temporary Use TU 10-86 REQUEST: Request by Pacific Western Bank for a Temporary Use Permit to use a mobile home officer trailer temporarily up to one year on a 3.92 acre site zoned C-P (Commercial Professional) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial Professional ZONING DESIGNATION: APPLICANT: Ned Takasumi OWNER: ACS/Pacific Western Bank _ Pacific Western Bank 300 Pacwest Center 300 Pacwest Center 1211 SW Fifth Avenue 1211 SW Fifth Avenue Portland, OR 97204 Portland, OR 97204 5 LOCATION: 7150 and 7190 SW Sandburg Street (WCTM 2S1 IDC Lots 3800, 3801, and 3900). 2. Background Information In May, 1973 the Planning Commission approved as submitted a site development plan for the existing Pacific Western Bank Service Center (SDR 38-73). In July, 1975 a site development review was approved for the expansion of the parking lot adjacent to the Associated Computer Services Building (SDR 19-75). Another site development review was approved with conditions in October, 1977 for the addition of approximately 11,500 square feet to the Pacific Western Bank Administrative Services building (SDR 33-77); however, not all of the space was built. Finally, in October, 1984, Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change applications (CPA 21-84 and ZC 14-84) was approved for a comprehensive plan amendment and zone charge from Heavy Industrial (I-H) to Commercial Professional (C-P). 3. Vicinity Infarmation 3a Properties to the east, west and southeast are zoned I-P (Industrial Park). Properties to the north and south are zoned C-P (Commercial _ Professional). STAFF REPORT - TU 10-86 PACIFIC WESTERN PARK - PAGE 1 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The subject parcel (tax lot 3800) is 1.78 acres in size. It contains the 14,450 square foot Associated Computer Services building which serves as a data processing center for Pacific Western Bank and other banks. Tax lot 3801 serves as a two-way access drive to tax lots 3800 and 3900. Tax lot 3900 lies immediately to the south of lot 3800 and the Pacific Western Bank Service Center, a 29,042 square foot bank administrative service center is located there. The ACS building presently has 58 parking spaces and the Service Center has 124 parking spaces. The applicant proposes to place a 1440 square foot mobile office trailer on the landscaped southeast corner of tax lot 3800. The trailer would be used as an emergency space solution to an imminent merger of Pacific Western Bank and Citizens Valley Bank with Key Bank of Oregon. The applicant states that once this merger becomes effective, the combined operational workload of the Service Center will increase by 45 percent. The Service Center is presently operating at capacity and additional equipment and/or personnel might create an unsatisfactory and unsafe work environment. Plans for additional acquisitions of banks in Oregon and Washington may double or even triple the operational workload in the next year or two. The applicant states that the company hopes to consolidate its computer and operations service facilities in Tigard. After space requirements have been determined, plans for expansion of the present facility and/or construction of a new building will be submitted. Pacific Western Bank further states that it has contingency plans to lease temporary office spaces in the surrounding area for some of its functions. However, the distribution center, by its function, should be located in the immediate vicinity of the computer and operations service facilities. The trailer will be used by distribution. Sufficient public sanitary facilities already are in place for the new employees and therefore will not be needed. 5. Eency and NPO Comments The Building Division has reviewed the proposal and has the following comments: The proposed location of the trailer would create problems of fire protection on the south and east walls (requiring firewalls). By moving it a minimum of 20 feet away from the southern property line and 10 feet away from the eastern property line of tax lot 3800, the fire protection problem would be eliminated. Building and occupancy permits would be required. The Engineering Division and NPO #5 reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. The Tualatin Rural Fire District did not comment. (� B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are contained in Chapter 18.140 of the Community Development Code. PAGE 2 STAFF REPORT - TU 10-86 PACIFIC WESTERN PARK - Vit.. ... _ .. - �%x The Planning Staff concludes that the relevant portions of the Community Development Code are satisfied based upon the findings noted below: 1. Chapter 18.140 states that the following criteria must be satisfied in order to approve a temporary use for a mobile home in a Commercial or Industrial zone: (A) The need for use is the direct result of a casualty loss, such as fire, windstorm, flood or other severe damage by the elements to a preexisting structure or facility previously occupied by the applicant on the premises for which the permit is sought; or (6) The applicant has been evicted within sixty days of the date of the application from a preexisting occupancy of the premises for which the permit is sought as a result of condemnation proceedings by a public authority, or eviction by abatement of nuisance proceedings, or by determination of a public body or court having jurisdiction that the a continued occupancy of the facilities previously occupied constitutes a nuisance or is unsafe for continued use; or (C) There has been a loss of leasehold occupancy rights by the applicant due to unforseeable circumstances or other hardship beyond the foresight and control of the applicant; and (D) There exists adequate and safe ingress and egress when combined with the other uses of the property; as required by 18.108 Access and 18.102 Clear Vision; (E) There exists adequate parking for the customers of the =_ temporary use as required by 18.106 Off—Street Parking. <1 (F) The use will not result in congestion on adequate streets; (G) The use will pose no hazard to pedestrians in the area of the use; (H) The use will not create adverse off—site impacts including noise, odors, vibrations, glare or lights which will affect the adjoining uses in a manner which other uses allowed outright in the zone would not affect the adjoining uses." (a) The proposal meets the requirements for adequate and safe egress, adequate parking, congestion, pedestrian hazards and off—site impacts. (b) Section 18.140.060 (c)(1)(A) states that the need for the mobile home must be the direct result of a casualty loss. An intermediate change in the corporate structure of a business could be construed as a casualty loss because the business is unable to predict precisely when or whether additional acquisition of banks in Oregon and Washington will occur. STAFF REPORT -- TU 10-86 PACIFIC WESTERN PARK = PAGE 3 4 k �n The Temporary Use Permit can be granted an extension up to one year. b+ However, the applicant should provide some identifiable proof to indicate new construction is planned or a new site is being sought. C. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings subjeectconstoctheifollowing conditioonns,staff recommends approval of T 1. Unless otherwise noted, all conditions of approval must be met prior to occupancy of the trailer. 2. The trailer shall be located to meet all setback requirements of ion f this mit far,Building the thenall Building and FireeCodesrequirements must be applied met. 3. The applicant shall obtain the necessary Building Permit(s) and an occupancy Permit. 4. This approval is valid for one year from the date of final decision noted below. 74- �—�-_ Deborah A. Stuart PREPARED BY: APP BY: William A. Monahan 00Planner Director of Community Aest. Development - ia24/ial _4 ham PAGE 4 STAFF REPORT '= TU 10-85- PACIFIC WESTERN:PARK'- �*- ti RACFIC WESTERN BANK BUILDING AND MANNING 300 Pacwest Center 1211 S.W. Fifth Avenue PortlanCl,OR 97204 5031790-7577 September 29, 1986 City Council City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Temporary Use Approval for Trailer Request temporary use approval to allow the use of a 24' x 60' office trailer at 7150 S.W. Sandburg Road, Tigard, Oregon. The bank is faced with temporary emergency space problems. If and when the pending merger of Pacific Western Bank and Citizens Valley Bank with Key Bank of Oregon becomes effective, the combined operational workload of the Service Center will increase by approximately 45%. This will require addi- tional personnel and equipment. g l: The Service Center building is presently operating at capacity, and additional equipment and/or personnel would tend to create an unsatisfactory and unsafe work environment. The space problems are further complicated by plans for additional acquisi- tions of banks in Oregon and Washington which may double or even triple the operational workload in the next year or two. The organizational concept is to consolidate the computer and operations function of these banks at the Tigard locations. And after we determine the scope, functions, and space requirements we will be submitting plans to expand our facilities and/or construct a new building. We have contingency plans to lease additional temporary office spaces in the surrounding area for some of our functions. However, the distribution center, by its very nature, should be in the immediate vicinity of the computer and operations service facilities. The trailer will be used by distribution. Banks are limited from committing funds for merger expenses before the effec- tive date of the merger. And yet immediately after the merger we must begin to operate as one bank. This creates an emergency situation - beyond the foresight and control of the applicant. A RACVEST SAAIK City Council City of Tigard September 29, 1986 Page Two We expect to have regulatory approval during the review process of this appli- cation and before City Council consideration. We respectfully request that this application be expedited and be favorably considered by the Tigard City Council. Sincerely, PACgIC WESTERN BANK Ned Takasumi Vice President CEnclosure b A.-ti': :a_%.-" x.' IsTar4 BAKK (Ttl lb-Sb) PL� n rlaPli�i• IIJl111 !I!]!I! ili °I! ifo 11111111111 !I! {({ i I I °'t f - I ► ° ° ! a i ° .w_--..:_.._.:.. oRAwlis is y f � �fill � � (. .a � I�t�'j°T'i lip r I ��i� i �_!� i � 1.� I�tl°�pI{1°!f(°!Ii°i!!{til°ia�,IZIaI°(°I!I!t!�°{°Iil�°1l�il°�!I!�°{°�PI°�!I°�r9aEa°i NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED 0 LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF TFE ORIGINAL ,r DRAWING. JL - OE 62 BZ 12 92 SZ 92 EZ ZZ IZOZ 61 8{ [I '91 Sf_._.*,'._-el ° F 77 r M AKr% G rtir -"o Y1111illllflllf°°�LI�lUi61Nf-Ni�iW48�01 _ , � ' _ i 1 . i I! I 10 .r+oc -sir ; a .: .:.'t. .. :a.= r'�Ij '.t ✓.. - 'tib �r..f n. i V r of a f �y i -•'Y � '�"'"-"<. '-ems% 1 r : i-or MA ! , { r � , j_ - LtC-�NT3�C� x C> 1wE�, .M ANTrz-t7 ! C E 1 cEir NJ cu- .'GTS .�i.�1# {a{_A1&t MCUf ITEr"-� ! r t:-4- 4, ja r - ' rte cite. IKINe3 "AX ijc{lk�J RKlhllst r-- -g3 �1 a N1d.P 2s-i=t'f7i 1 IL rep Q f i i �1- w i x ' 51 T E PLA1,-4 / \ • _.__. .,�:; _. :._ ,� _a- ._I" .- 'ten,. r,,.•rs- �m n{rte{►I a{rti{1111111 Ill r{eti{e r{rto{o t{etl{e( I e{rtl(1TiT�I I�{1( P11T(Ri m(m lIr � I `1!Ir ���t -I t I '1 I { � � �ttr � ttilttil , t lit �I NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED t 2 3 4 _ S 6 7 8 0 8 {{ { a DRAWING ISLESS CLEAR THAN ' THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO S THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. OE 8z 9z IF 9z Sz 9z ez ZZ iz--0Z—of—91 ---Li 91 . "S�, .b� ei ZI 'l,.._ 01__ 6 9 ` 9--- 9 b E z ! t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Q '{ OF: October 27.-1986 AGENDA ITEM #: JA AGENDA DATE SUBMITTED: October 15, 1986 PREVIOUS ACTION: ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE, Monthly Re ort_=_ Se tea�ber 198b Cow�unit Dev. Det PREPARED BY: W. A. Monahan REQUESTED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD Oft: CITY ADMINISTRATOR: INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached please find the Monthly Report for September, 1986 prepared by the Department of Commwnity Development. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Accept and place in file. rte' SUGGESTED ACTION Accept and place on file. (095OP/dOO22P) ' a�- F- + _ MEMORANDUM € r: CITY OF TIGARD TO; Members of the City Council October 15, 1986 FROM: William A. Monahan, Director, Community Development SUBJECT: Monthly Report — September, 1986 Durr September, the Department of Community Development was involved in each of the following areas: Building permit activity slowed from the peak activity of July and August. Thirty—seven single family permits were issued, however, exceeding the same periof od 1985. Revenues greatly exceed those generated for the same period during calendar year 1985 and FY 1985-66. The Parks Crew began installation of an irrigation system for Summer Lake Park. In addition, play equipment was constructed at the park with the assistance of volunteer labor. — A new basketball court was poured at Jack Park. Hoopes will be installed in October. — Capital Improvement Projects proceeded as scheduled. A separate report was submitted to the Council on October 13, Engineering fees trended higher than the same three month period for last — year. Fees and charges for September alone almost tripled those collected in September, 1985. Plans for four subdivisions were approved and issued. Codes enforcement and Business Tax collection efforts continued to trend well. of sixty—two notices sent to business late in paying for Business Taxes, 38 replied by making payment. Fifteen now codes enforcement cases were initiated while 34 were closed. Efforts to resolve complaints have been successful. (WAM:br/095OP/0022P) 4- N - Y� 3 BUILDING SECTION - SEPTEMBER COMPARISON (Calendar Year) ng activity for September of 1985 and 1985: Following is a comparison of buildi September 1985 September, 1986 Single Family Permits 28 37 Multi-Family Permits (units) 4 0 Commercial Permits (new) 1 2 Building Permit Fees $ 14,652.50 $ 15,351.80 Plan Check Fees $ 7,785.89 $ 8,214.43 Plumbing Permits $ 3,792.50 $ 9,262.50 Mechanical Permits $ 860.00 $ 2,750.00 Valuation $3,380,450.00 $2,749,418.00 Jan - September 1985 Jan - September 1986 Single Family Permits 214 360 Multi-Family Permits 342 122 Commercial Permits 11 19 Building Permit Fees $ 135,086.17 $ 174.502.66 Plan Check Fees $ 56,785.10 $ 93,889.63 Plumbing Permits $ 68,529.78 $ 56,257.90$ 10,794.50 Mechnical Permits $ 7,748.00 Valuation $34,384,749.00 $39,755,892.00 FISCAL YEAR COMPARISON 1985/86 - 1986/87 Jan. - September 1985 Jan. - September 1986 Single Family Permits 79 135 Multi-Family Permits 10 16 Commercial Permits 4 12 ,. Building Permit Fees $ 41,765.67 $ 67,208.94 Plan Check Fees $ 181803.30 $ 37,212.97 Plumbing Permits $ 11,952.50 $ 23,920.00 Mechnical Permits $ 2,235.50 $ 5,089.00 -- Valuation $ 9,834,250.00 $14,527,988.00 (br/O950P) Y " 't o+. .,.�sr" `rtr«w3'-+s...`—i'`.i?.="+�,�.•ra=. .:a�,o-�.,,,.,..n." a•„�3':'.8'a'.='b.,:.rs'�,. vt. Y NO ! .� .+ M .+ .r .. N A w N N N O N O O b O ♦ O O O O O O O O 8 O a O n1 w w • 10 A i f h f i O 10 i A N M O b �"� rr �"� N N N r 10 • A yOt PI A dH f M w w 1n M N N M �p1 to ! A • to h i f A A i N 10 i M N O b h ill 111 N h N h h C N JI N N QI A i f Mw 1!1 N O 1► Iff A A O i h O b A ID N O 16 A N M It 4rA N • N 10 A N Iti f A OI ! A N 6 N A b h f 10 M iI f n b /n rt f i b Oi w w w f M 111 • O A O w h f +01 M O A q O b O•i P, to M dw .hi b A Ifl N �1 O w A /•il Y! M Obi w n f 1In N f f h 10 A 111 10 N A • t f h A h N b .fi .fn • s x, 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 2 8 8 8 Si 8 a g � 8 N 1 w w N w N N 10 10 f Y 10 w p O h M i A O • h 10 Q O ♦ 111 N M b f A ! 10 F� O f C • w w v O, 10 w w A i w 10 VV W i w1 1!1 wi N 111 N IR A Ip w f b i h M h 10 O w N K N .i+ M • m 8 qq8 8 8 8 8 Q 8 8 8 8Qp 8 8 8 8 8 Q 8 8 8 8 8 8 O f h ^ $ O h M 1 ! M lot f M f A A 10 b M M M N f O 9 'eve 1O ! f A _� ^ pi Y p► N • • A b 10 f G • dt A b h • O f N N O1 h I� 1!1 M i Y h Q M N M M f N M M w N AI M on N b 10 10 N w w� L L L L �1 EL J.1 ■ w ,: ,t .tea a1 � ► � � � � � M � � � � n � . t w f off �D h P .•i N N p w M in d h N N N N • • N N N N O O O O O Q 8 � � p M M A M M R f f f M M M A fiy M M M M ffl M M w �/► N W f f P h w N 1 • N N N !h w w N N N N A N ew M A N 10 • N • M N h • • M N M d E A N H N ` P A w yS • f W O N w O h h •y ^ S a : • O� • h O h r f w1 h M f W h A w rn • A � Ni Q a w « « « « r. n w•i f+•i $ 8 � g � � g g w N a A f► 1� H N « M h w fa N M O A N N n h A Ifl O P N A f f A pp N r N A a H r b h P ftp .•i1 Ns NMpp p Op n • � � w i A N N � M N b N H d1 w �O O A b O as w � ww • A � P fw a �O • • w 4 A N O•i O • W • i A �O w �O >r w h fi' n H � .• Jf M t Mw N A A f r m A w N M f h • P h` ! P. St : a «N h - 0pp w fn t0 N h w • M S M N p w R 3 P N O O �^fl � N M f O N ObM • W h N w f Y� M Mf h M � p` �y Oi ►. M .i �O �O O H• fw A' « N on on 0 A .� M R �O • � .Mi .•i w 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 n R A A P f A .Ni • P A • .Pi M O� N f 11� N44 h app • f � b 04 tl � ^ C N n f h on V4fhD O h ~ .Nn on O�pw w a N OM w .+ P •w in AD AN N M N N L L L L r As CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November 3, 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: October 24, 1986 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Department PREVIOUS ACTION: Monthly Reports PREPARED 8Y: Staff DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN *OK - REQUESTED BY: ICY ISSUE Monthly reports for review by City Council. INFORMATION SUMMARY Monthly reports received to date attached for review by Council. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Accept and file. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Accept and file. - - x- _ _ . _ G MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO. Honorable Mayor, City Council, October 14, 1986 and City Administrator FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: August, 1986 Monthly Report During August several accomplishments were achieved. The 1st being the successful completion of the School Resource Officer assessment center. Officer Rick Peterson was one of two successful candidates and Officer Gary Wayt was the second successful candidate. Officer Peterson has been assigned to Tigard High School and Officer Wayt to the two Junior Highs. Both officers began their duties on August 28th with orientation with school district faculty and staff. The officers will be traveling to Boise, Idaho to observe the SRO program there. The Police Department also completed the process for hiring new officers. Four persons have been notified of their selection and will begin their duties on September 16th. This hiring is historically and socially significant in that Tigard has hired it's first female police officer, Ms. Jeannie Gard, who is currently a correctional officer with lane County. We are pleased to have Jeannie and are looking to her to add another dimension to policing the community. During August the Police Department hosted a community organizations meeting, the Tigard ministries monthly luncheon at which I gave a brief talk on the community based policing philosophy the Department has adopted. In addition, I met with the school board to discuss the SRO program. I've accepted an appointment to the Washington County YMCA board and will begin serving in October. Our goals for September include beginning the Field Training program for new officers and participating in the Neighborhood Town Halls. KJ:b9170 s IN TIGARD POLICE DEPAR7HW AUGUST, 1986 Monthly Report I• Calls for Service: This Month 1.326 A. Obligated PART Time 2 090 2 B. Ncn-Cbligated Time 361.3 II. I (Rjp� A• Homicide No. Cleared Arrests B. Rape = 1=1 -- D. Aggravated Assault2 --------_. . E. Burglary -- -----2-_...._ 1 37 Residence ( 19 ----8-, S Non-Residence f F. 18 ) G. Au Theft ___25 1-_._3._.� 13 H. Arson 6_ ------ 7 TUS: PART I CI.FARAt�ICE RATE: 19.048 1-----26--_ 2_��"�'� III. PART II -- No. BAssault -� B. C1 _. C. Ftaud -- 6-�"-" s'----- D. Hnbezzlane::t """E. ---- P. StolenVandalProperty -- ---- sm G. ktapons { H. PrOstituticnI. Other sex Crimes 1---- ---- J. Drug Abuse —2 K. GG�� L. M. D.U.I.I. Family _'` ""- N. Liquor Laws _-4 ____--�--- ----�---- P. Disorderly Conduct 1 --'-i-- Kidnap Q. All other R. Curfew S. 7 PART IIALSy OIMAN'E RATE: IV. TOTAL CHARGF�a 61 t. V. WOW 12 VI. ' LOSS. $ 62,106 4OTAL PROPS �: $_14_,__499`_ VII. TmmT A' AcCl tg mitigated 33 B. Citations: 370 HBSInJulr�y8 Accidents 12 C. Fatal 0 D. �s: 306 Non M r alis 172 { t Indcoc: 16.50 i q �ab CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November 3. 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: October 24, 1986 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Boardmanship PREVIOUS ACTION: Workshop Re rt `•� PREPARED BY: Loreen Wilson DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY. POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY The Boardmanship Workshop, held October 15th, was highly successful with 19 people in attendance. The minutes of that workshop are attached so you can see the Boards which were represented and the subjects covered. Councilor Johnson and City Recorder Wilson will be working on completing the review of the Boardmanship Manual. They are looking forward to an advanced Boardmanship Workshop in the spring of 1987. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Accept and place on file. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Accept and place on file. a BOARDSMANSHIP WORKSHOP REPORT Tigard Civic Center i' October 15, 1986 7:00 PM The following Boards (Committees or Commissions) were represented by the members noted: Economic Development Committee: Susan Clark NPO py Geraldine Ball NPO pg: Craig Hopkins Harry Saporta John Schwartz Sharon Takahashi NPO 06: Mary Clinton Park and Recreation Board: Betty Golden Planning Commission: John Butler Bonnie Owens Transportation Committee: David Funk Utilities and Franchise Committee: Mike Misovetz Barbara P. Osborne Also in attendance, as interested citizens, were Chris Carpenter (NPO N5) and Marren Jenkins (NPO N6). Mayor John Cook facilitated the Workshop with Councilor Valerie Johnson and City Recorder Loreen Wilson presiding over certain agenda items as noted below. I. Introduction/Overview A. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Cook. Mayor Cook briefly summarized the purpose of the workshop; which was, to give Board members an opportunity to get acquainted with the City organizational structure, to identify the roles of the boards and to define the individual responsibilities of the board members. b. Everyone participated by taking an "Interesting Fact Quiz" which contained questions about the Tigard area and the Boards for the City. 2. Explanation of City Organizational Structure a. Councilor Johnson reviewed the City organizational chart. Especially important for the Board members to know is that the Boards report directly to City Council and are advisory bodies to Council. (Exception for Planning Commission in that they do make some land use decisions which are binding.) Soardsmanship Workshop, October 15, 1996 - Page 1 3. City Council 1986-87 Goals Presentation �r a. Mayor Cook reviewed the current fiscal year's goals. He advised the Board members of the progress to date on the various goals. Goal No. 3, "Coordinate Effective Council—Board and Committee Relations," has received attention in that Council has worked harder this year than they have for a number of years to open communication lines to all of the City's boards. At least one meeting with each Board has been or will be scheduled with City Council during the fiscal year. 4. Review of the Role of the Board/Commission/Committee a. City Recorder Wilson reviewed the State of Oregon Open Meeting Law. Briefly, any time two or more members of a Board meet to deliberate towards a decision, the meeting must be open to the public. Adequate public notice of the meeting must be made and, for the City of Tigard, "adequate notice" equals five days. Emergency meetings (which are defined in the State Law) may be called. If a telephone poll is conducted, the results are not binding and do not become official until confirmed at a duly called meeting. b. City Recorder Wilson advised that the only public officials in the City of Tigard required to file a financial disclosure statement are: Mayor and City Council Members; City Administrator; Municipal Court Judge; and Planning Commission Members. C. A brief outline of the majority of the City's Boards, their membership and their functions was given by City Recorder Wilson. S. Responsibilities and Rights of Board Members a. Resolution No. 75-04 which outlines the attendance requirements for Board members was summarized by City Recorder Wilson. b. City Recorder Wilson went over the purpose for declaring a Conflict of Interest. Main points brought out in this review included the fact that a member may vote on an issue for which he/she has declared a conflict of interest if the member feels that such conflict will not preclude an impartial decision. The Oregon Law requires the public official to give "public notice" of a potential conflict of interest. When a Board member notes a potential conflict of interest, this information must be recorded in the "record" or minutes of the meeting. C. City Recorder Wilson reviewed some of the responsibilities and rights of citizens, staff and board members. It was suggested that a list of these responsibilities and rights be made available to the public in an issue of the City Newsletter. Boardsmanship Workshop, October 15, 1986 — Page 2 (� 6. Adjournment a. The meeting was adjourned at 9:09 p.m. By: Office Assist t II cw/4253A i Soa►rdsmanship Workshop, October 15, 1986 — Page 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November 3, 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: October 21, 1986 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Agreement With PREVIOUS ACTION: Approval of Federal State for Greenburg/Tiedeman Signal Aid Project Requests (Res. No. 86-61) PREPARED BY: Randall R. Wooley DEPT HEAD OKl��`"CITY ADMIN OKw REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE agreement for design and construction of traffic signals at the Approval of a n g 9 intersection of Greenburg Road and Tiedeman Avenue. INFORMATION SUMMARY In June, the Council approved application for Federal funding for traffic signals at Greenburg and Tiedeman. The funding has now been approved. In order to assure compliance with all the conditions of the Federal funding, it appears advisable to have the State supervise project design and construction for us. Attached is an agreement providing for the State to do this work. A resolution is necessary to authorize signing of the agreement. ALTERNATIVES gOMIDERED 1. Approve the attached agreement. 2. Enter into agreements that allow the City to directly administer design me and construction. (This would require establishing some new procedures to comply with Federal requirements). 3. Reject the Federal funding for the project. FISCAL IMPACT No new impacts. This project is already funded as Capital Improvement Program project No. ST-11. 8ULiQEsTE D ACTION Approval of the attached resolution authorizing signing of the agreement with the state. /br169 xi .z Approved: OSHD Staff EDM:bkb ` 9/29/86 Revised: 10/8/86 Misc. Contracts A Agro 8964 LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT INTERSTATE TRANSFER PROJECT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the STATE OF 0K60N, acting by and through its Department of" Transportation, } Highway Division, hereinafter referred to as State , and the CITY OF TIGARD, acting by and through its Elected Officials, hereinafter referred to as "Agency". { 1. By the authority granted in ORS 366.770 and 366.775, the State may enter into cooperative agreements with the counties and cities for the performance of work on certain types of improvement projects with the allocation of costs on terms and conditions mutually agreeable to the contracting parties. The project will be funded with Federal (e)(4) Interstate Transfer funds that will be limited to a maximum of 5640,000. The Agency shall provide all other project costs. 2. Under such authority, the State and the Agency plan and propose to install traffic control signals at the intersection of Greenburg Road and Tiedeman Avenue, hereinafter referred to as "project". The 4 location of the project is approximately as shown on the sketch map attached hereto, marked Exhibit A, and by this reference made a part hereof. The project shall be conducted as a part of the Interstate Transfer (e)(4) Program under Title 23, United States Code, and the Oregon Action Plan. 3. The Special and Standard Provisions attached hereto, marked Attachments 1 and 2, respectively, are by this reference made a part hereof. The Standard Provisions apply to all federal-aid projects and may be gree todthe only yms the andpconditi nscial Provisions. forthh inarties hereto Attachments mutually agree I and 2. + Agency shall adopt an ordinance or resolution authorizing 4. its designated City Officials to enter into and execute this agreement and the same shall be attached hereto and become a part hereof. IN YITNiESS VHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and affixed their seals as of the day and year hereinafter written. This project was approved by the Oregon Transportation Commission ' on July 22, 1986 as a part of the Six Year Highway Improvement Program (page J �i The Oregon Transportation Commission, by a duly adopted delegation . order, authorized the State Highway Engineer to sign this agreement for and on behalf of the Commission. Said authority is set forth in the Minutes of the Oregon Transportation Commission. All except SPECIAL PROVISIONS, approved as to legal sufficiency on September 1, 1983 by Jack L. Sollis, Chief Counsel. APPROVAL. STATE OF OREGON, by and through its Department of Transportation, Highway Division By g on Engineer 8 Y State Highway Engineer 3 Date APPROVED AS TO CITY OF TIGARD. by and through LEGAL SUFFICIENCY its Elected Officials ��-.- sy .. 8y rNQL "yttoviney fi5 y cor or Date //-©zk-8'4S -2- i. x ATTACHMENT NO. 1 SPECIAL PROVISIONS 1. State shall , as a federal-aid participating, prelimi- nary engineering function, conduct the necessary field surveys, traffic investigations, foundation explorations and hydraulic studies, identify and obtain all required permits, and perform all preliminary engineering and design work required to produce final plans, preliminary/final specifications and cost esti- mates, 2. State shall, upon award of a construction contract, furnish all construction engineering, field testing of materi- als, technical inspection and project manager services for administration of the contract. The State shall obtain "Record Samples" at specified intervals for testing in the State Materials Laboratory in Salem. 3. Agency shall conform with requirements of the Oregon Action Plan, and if necessary, appoint and direct the activi- ties of a Citizens' Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory Committee, conduct any required public hearings and recommend the preferred alternative. _ 4. Agency shall prepare any required environmental studies. S. Agency shall, upon project completion, maintain the signal at their own expense and p+yr for 100 percent of the electrical power consumed in the operation of the signal. 6. State shall acquire any necessary right-of-way. Hisc. Contracts 8 Agreements No. 8964 Date 9/29/86 Revised: 10/9/86 y r_ a• 1 3r. ATTACHMENT NO. 2 a, ;` . STANDARD PROVISIONS ; �. JOIN'S �LiOATIQfIS: W off ANNINISTRATION 1. State is acting to fulfill its responsibility to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) by the administration of this project, and the Agency hereby agrees that the State shall have full authority to carry out this administration. If requested by thu Agency, the State will further act for the Agency in other matters pertaining to the project. The State and the Agency shall actively cooperate in fulfilling the requirements of the Oregon Action Plan. For all projects the State and the Agency shall each assign a liaison person to coordinate activities and assure that the interests of both parties are considered during all phases of the project. P.E.& gi TRUC w ENFiINEERIM 2. Preliminary and construction engineering may be performed by the State, the Agency or others. If the Agency, or others, perform the engineeringg, the State will monitor the work for conformance with FHWA rules and regulations. In the event that the Agency elects to engage the services of a consultant to 4 perform any of the work covered by this agreement, no reimbursement shall be made using Federal-Aid funds for any costs incurred by such consultant prior to x receiving written authorization from the State to proceed. Any such consultant shall be selected_using procedures acceptable to the.State and the FHWA, and an agrmwt prepared describing the work to be performed and the method of } payment. REQUIRED 3U70M OR NSNOF FINAKM ASSISTAMM AOREENW: . 3. If as a condition of assistance the recipient has submitted and the U.S: Deparment of Transportation has approved a minority business enterprise affirmative action program which the recipient agrees to carry out, this program is incorporated into this financial assistance agreement by reference. This ,progran shall be treated as a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall betreatedas a violation of this financial assistance agreement. Upon. notification to the recipient of its failure to carry out the approved program, the U.S. Department of Transportation shall impose such sanctions as noted in Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 23, Subpart E, which } sanctions may include termination of the agreement or other measure* that may affect the ability of the recipient to obtain future U.S. Department of Transportation financial assistance. l The recipient further agrees to comply with all applicable Civil Rights Laws, Rules and Regulations, including Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Act. 4. The parties hereto agree and understand that they will comply with all applicable statutes and regulations, including but not limited to: Title 6, USC, Civil Rights Act; Title 49 CFR, Part 23; Title 18, USG, Anti- Kickback Act; Title 23, USC, Federal-Aid Highway Act; Titles 2 and 3 of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970; provisions of 23 CFR 1.11 and FHPM 1-4-5 (23 CFR 140.7); and the Oregon Action Plan. STATE OBLIGATIONS: PROGRAM REQUEST 5. State shall submit a program to the FHWA with a request for approval of federal-aid participation in all engineering, right-of-way acquisition, eligible utility relocations and construction work for the project. NO WORK SHALL PROCEED UNTIL SUCH APPROVAL HAS BEEN OBTAINED. The program sha nc u e services to be provided y the State, the Agency or others. The State shall notify the Agency in writing when authorization to proceed has been received from the FHWA. Major responsibility for the various phases of the project will be as outlined in the Special Provisions. All work and records of such work shall be in conformance with FHWA rules and regulations, and the Oregon Action Plan. AUTHORITY FOR SMVEV 6. State shall prepare an Authority for Survey which will itemize the ( estimate of cost for preliminary engineering services to be provided by the State, the Agency or others, and shall furnish the Agency with a copy of such cost estimate. FINANCE 7. State shall, in the first instance, pay all reimburseable costs of the project, submit all claims for federal-aid participation to the FHWA in the normal manner, compile accurate cost accounting records and furnish the Agency with an itemized statement of actual costs to date at the end of each State Fiscal Year. When the actual total cost of the project has been computed, the State shall furnish the Agency with an itemized statement of such final costs. PROJECT ACTIVITIES S. State shall, if the work is performed by the Agency or others, review and process or approve all environmental statements, preliminary plans, specifications and cost estimates, prepare the contract and bidding documents, advertise for bid proposals, award all contracts and, upon award of a construction contract, perform all necessary laboratory testing of materials, process and pay all contractor progress estimates, check final quantities and costs, and oversee and provide intermittent inspection services during the construction phase of the project. The actual cost of laboratory testing services provided by the State will be charged to the project construction engineering cost account number (prefix) and will be included in the total cost of the project. -2- y. FRiiIE BRIE DESIGN ' .9. State shall, as provided in ORS 366.155,(k), prepare plans and Y specifications for bridges and culverts (structure portion only) at no expense to the,counties. JIMEMCif 0YLI6ATI�: FINAMCE 10 The project applicant_will, prior to the conanencement-of the preliminary engineering and right-of-way acquisition phases, deposit with State its estimated share of each phase. The applicant's share of construction will be deposited in two parts. The initialdepositwill represent 65 percent of the applicant's share, based on the engineer's estimate, and will be requested three weeks prior to opening bid on the project. Upon award of the contract, the balance of the applicant's share will be requested. Collection of advance deposits amounting to less than $2,500 for any phase of project (P.E., RIW) will be postponed until collectively the amount exceeds 52,500 or until the collection of the advance deposit for construction is required. i ' Pursuant to ORS 366.425, as amended by Chapter 365, Oregon Laws of 1979, the advance deposit may be in the form of 1) check or warrant; 2) irrevocable letter of credit deposited in a local bank in the name of State; and 3) deposit in the Local Government Investment Pool accompanied by an irrevocable limited power of attorney. - i 11. Agency shall present properly certified Lills for 100 percent of actual costs incurred by the Agency on behalf of the project directly to the State Liaison Person for review and approval. Such bills shall be in a form acceptable to the State and documented in such a manner as to be easily verified. Billings shall be presented for periods of not less thava one month duration, based on actual expenses to date. All billings received from the must approvedbeby the State Liaison Person prior to presentation to the ' Agency Division Aounting Office for payment. The Agency's actual costs el_ gftiie for federal-aid participation shalt be those allowable under the provisions of 23 CFR 1.11 and FILM 1-4-6 (23 CFR 140.7). 12. The cost records ad accounts pertaining to the work covered by this augment are to be kept available for inspection by representatives of the Stag and the FMA for a period of three (3) years following the date of final v Pa~. r Copies of .such records and accounts shall be made available upon t - d1�L�1TIDN � Agency -agrees that should tine project bencel aed or terminated for reason'. to is completion,, the Agency shall reimburse t#�e State for any mat°:have fin` interred -by the State on behalf of i+fie +ect= 116 tae_tet that ri�at 0-sray ap ri on, or mal: nns#ructf ' »f ill y for which this ;trel inainary _TFT" �- �- 2 '� �y�s�`3w a;. '�` F ,3�' vw` i .:•�,�-. .'� taken is not started by the close of the FIFTH FISCAL YEAR following the ' fiscal year in which this agreement is executed, the State may request reimbursement of the sum or sums of Federal-Aid funds disbursed to the Agency under the terms of this agreement. RIGHT OF URY 15. Agency shall be responsible for acquisition of the necessary right-of-way and easements for construction and maintenance of the project. The State shall review all right-of-way activities engaged in by the Agency to assure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. The Agency may request the State to perform the acquisition functions, subject to exe- cution of a Right-of-Way Services Agreement. If any real property pur- chased with federal-aid participation is no longer needed for right-of-way, or other public purposes, the disposition of such property shall subject to applicable rules and regulations which are in effect at the time of dis- position. Reimbursement to the State of the required proportionate share of the fair market value may be required. UTILITIES 16. Agency shall relocate or cause to be relocated, all utility con- duits, lines, poles, mains, pipes and such other facilities where such relocation is necessary in order to conform said utilities and facilities with the plans and ultimate requirements of the project. Only those utility relocations which are eligible for federal-aid participation under the Federal-Aid Highway Program Manual, Volume 1, Chapter 4, Section 4, shall be included in the total project costs and participation; all other utility relocations shall be at the sole expense of the Agency, or others. The State will arrange for utility adjustments in areas lying within juris- diction of the State and, if the State is performing the preliminary engi- neering, the Agency may request the State to arrange for utility adjust- ments lying within Agency jurisdiction, acting on behalf of the Agency. Agency shall, five weeks prior to the opening of construction bid proposals, furnish the State with an estimate of cost for eligible reim- burseabie utility relocations, based on the plans for the project. The Agency shall notify the State Liaison Person prior to proceeding with any utility relocation work in order that the work may be properly coordinated into the project and receive the proper authorization. CONSTRUCT'IOM i 17. Construction plans shall be in conformance with standard practices of the State for plans prepared by its own staff, and shall be developed in accordance with the design standards published by AASHTO which pertain to the typeoffacility proposed. The latest design standards adopted by AASHTO shall govern the design of highway bridges and related structures. All specifications for the project shall be in substantial compliance with the "Oregon Standard Specifications for Highway Construction*. �'• -4- q s y. GRADE CHANGE LIABILITY 18. Agency, if a County, acknowledges the effect and scope of URS 105,755 and agrees that all acts necessary to complete construction of the project which may alter or change the grade of existing county roads are being accomplished at the direct request of the County. Agency, if a City, hereby accepts responsibility for all claims for damages from grade changes. Approval of plans by the State shall not subject the State to liability under ORS 105.750 for change of grade. CON7RAI.TOR CLAI15 19. Agency shall provide legal defense against all claims brought by the contractor, or others, resulting from the Agency's failure to comply with the terms of this agreement. MAINTENANCE REWMIBILMES 20. Agency shall, upon completion of construction, thereafter maintain and operate the project at its own cost and expense, and in a manner satisfactory to the State and the FHWA. z 3 x s iia 6 os.xin w.....� w D r IU7I M .1 N.•M �= t 4i� • • I I = a �, • i �� �. . 'V ` • N 1 ry wA....r. •`• P ., ,. �.. Doo ���� .. .�•. �p, AU 9052 um � s• ,r- i ..�I.w.. — N �.�•�� y ar � � � .wN.._ • .r MONTam • 4 1 of "' PROPOSED o � PROJECT .N..... ©� - :� M (� Locos. ® lotiN NOW 7 cp it Poona 1 i a ! ....•.. .. Poon„IT • .r '..I ''• PPPPPP � IBIT _-- PON— NULL ..•"� te• S —r � ....i..•sr �,. PPPPPP..• 1011'NTN. ; a..: "!P'�"' I ' .r..... o010 FAU r2l 0 Ut—,, f • , (i #.1 CITY OF TIGARD,_ OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: October 17 1986 AGENDA OF: November 3 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Request for PREVIOUS ACTION: Revision of Designated Speeds on PREPARED BY: Randall R. Woole Certain Collector Streets REQUESTED BY: DEPT HEAD OK J,4v_W --CITY AREDMIN OK Q LILY ISSUE Shall the Council request the State Speed Control Board to review the speed zones on certain streets? INFORMATION SUMMARY It appears appropriate to review the speed limits on various collector streets. In some casae. recent street improvements appear to justify higher cases, development in the area has increased the posted speeds. In other e volumes of pedestrian and vehicular traffic anti lower posted speeds may b appropriate. The new portions of SW 68th and of SW North Dakota have never had a speed study and appropriate speed zones need to be determined. Under State law, the designation of speed zones is the responsibility of the State Speed Control Board. The State Board will conduct the necessary traffic studies and designate the appropriate speeds if requested to do so by the local jurisdiction. Attached is a resolution which will initiate the speed zone review process for several collector streets. These are streets where we have received requests for speed zone revisions from citizen groups and from the Police. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the attached resolution requesting State Speed Control Board review of speed zones on 6 streets. 2. Amend the resolution. 3. Take no action. FISCAL _IMPACT possible minor costs for changing speed signs, as may be directed by the Speed Control Board. SUGGESTED ACTION Approve theattached resolution requesting State Speed Control Board review of speed zones on 6 streets. /br167/brl CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November 3, 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: October 23, 1986 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: SRO Training PREVIOUS ACTION: Requests PREPARED BY: Kelley Jennings DEPT HEAD OK ITY ADMIN OK - REQUESTED BY: David C. Lehr LICY ISSUE Council approval needed for training requests over $100. INFORMATION SUMMARY Annual Oregon Juvenile Law Enforcement Association Seminar being held in Bend, Oregon November 19, 20 and 21. Total cost, including registration lodging and per diem for both SRO personnel equals $382.00. No travel expense incurred directly as officers will use City vehicle. See attached conference agenda for curriculum. This training is conducive to employees' current assignment as school resource officers for the City and School District, School District is in agreement that this training would enhance the program. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve training as requested. Telephone poll conducted by Captain Jennings per City Administrator's direction; obtained approval by three members of Council. FISCAL IMPACT 1. Expenditure of training funds. SUGGESTED ACTION 1. Approve as requested. w CITYOF I ARD EDUCATION/TRAINING REQUEST This form is to be used for conferences, seminars, college classes and other forms of either training or education. Documentation is required, a copy is to be attached to this form. Attachments for mailing may also be attached. A follow u report }} re uir c �a A copy will be plaed in your personnel fid„ DATE OF REQUEST:./ Requested by: Vendor No. : PAYABLE TO: 77522Z- `f"'f Employee request attend [ ] Employer required attend For check run of ( J Mail check [ ] Notify dept. when ready Vendor No. : Vendor No. :�_ PAYABLE TO: PAYABLE TO: sssasswswsssss:ssssssssssssssssassssssssss••,,sssasssssws:s�ssssswsssssaassssssssas Title of Program: institution or organisation Registration Deadline .11�f-!_ Training Dates From: - To: /T/,-Z�,.((.r Describe the purpose: .1 Is this related to ( 0+ current position [ ] reasonable promotion or transfer? Explain: is fVC TRAINING COSTS: [==:F to be advanced [ ] to be reimbursed after attendance • Account No. mount w Registration or tuition......................... �- Travel (mileage, bus, train, airplane, etc.).... .� Lodging............................... .......... Per Diem......................................... Other: - Total saws:::ssssas:ssasssa:assass:assaassssaswsasssss:ssssssassasassssassassssssassa Authorizations: I(employee), understand and agree that if all conditions of education/training policies are not met, I may be required to reimburse the City for any expenditjires mad on my behalf. AV Employee Signature Date D Appropriation b ce: d Manager:r_( � approved [ J disapproved 4t Dept. Head: ] approved [ ] disapproved (explain): �� a w r._ Finance Director: �Y o z t Y I .raa 1 EOS9.007-Gill IOEL6 uo6310 'wa(eS 60E£-6bZ£OS leS '3•S 'laauS f4lagrl SSS ".10d looyoS puelPOd ivautueda0 a>4od uta l �SueZ lµqu►)1zn7 uoH auur :IleJ 40 :oi as j pue uiao j siq l•PWW a not euuojul aux pu ON p sago tlagwaui Hg-Iro ue auio:)aq of ajll Plnom 1 L�j d`Z ajejS Amo Cly ssa-,ppV 6u,peW 1 uotjez}ue6ap/juauluedaQ --In acueN 00•S6S — Ile ST 'PO 1341V ra Wow-uom 00'08S S,agWaW oo St A9 uouel�!tea Pa eAPY 99, 9DNl3H33N0�/WHO3 NOLLVH 91 J3H 'i�0 C;3 Q > '' .�t c o► a a :: O = b ° V) '' o .a 0 �.5 _ co �° d w a'° 3 5 ° .. v, .E Eo a � us � '' w � u " S -- � aaE► ° .Z ° .A °� $•° sem. E .� '� c E e o. ° o10 T To v, _ V� H Vi a C X V L3 to Croce ¢ C £ EAE ec o :i . o .� c d s ~ .u-c o � 3 g�g E A a U 1� 'S ns t•- 3 E .. ar _ c AQ •$ 'O Go t .ylf Obi W E A c t 0COt u d y ocr G •= r C reoV+l CdG V sT C� o E 'or- ch c � � E UA' it y q p N qt�rr V_ d O d rn a ¢ Q = a � c V 'c off+ z � 20 � z G °� 3 g o ¢ c or ;, cyi :.' 3 b .a �, °' p� 'L3 .a o °i E d >, :23 c d V > 0� 3 .c f" d m oc, o -o v' •v > !y c °' va ¢ d .� o.c .q s " i V= C' Z � � y V W o 3 c; 3 Z ( �c 01 o`, Z (x 3 o c a ¢ c, c o > c c v, -o o d} o o y 4 w ? �, 2,: w jcn� wV Z a � ' V "' t0 a p ren $ F ` ` E `� `� 1_ v $in 1:6 d6M �cq s w w0%cd o io � `c _._.. ,,, J O O 'W = z v z J U W - ? j O = as -_ oc c a Z Q - J — � O a i .49 AX It zL- Y r 4• f F ..t x� 'h3 vir i� S'�Y � � i •���� t 'K tiAt 11�99V � dw�'1°,F 4h Z � R �y 0 WW •uy (� Im Y '" r,.R'ta� •^! t� '',�,.� ^� � - '�, +� .tai � *� � �, .' �.3 ," � . r-�r 3�`c i } s iia p1 '` �' i # �p � It " ;�� Na � o ma Aj�C.• �-40 +' W a E +« 'T F4 + {� t k 2 w 4 a s � .1 t"` ^ i." < 1 tao it�ry'.i`.'su� r►, a M « ' t •. �� "` ,In 5{� „p .trf-x t,o +^r - nb 4 "p ,�,11 ♦ _s .r 4"' yie'```b.`_-"3 i« ..i k4. .:"''`t't :'S` a .; s.. * f - 1 � f � 5 [.� y .. r. h MUMMA ---------------- TF i `§t,.-ivi �%N, 12- 1 M 4 ��a-�� ,t�h-r s 'gip miry yal �t� �•c� <� :K km£ ? � `�F t .r a z ��s� fes' �.,. $ �X 7�5 r5 ,F ��j ���"`�•P '.,{ �-. .s� � M t; - '•.�z � -.; � '" "s - r�� 3?i .icy d.� t - �''y�. , 1',,,f t✓ `� .r ��.t t r� nr�tc`s°k'� �y'k�r 44.=fi4'.,,.;.. s a v.' 1�t+v�7.z.., u, " � 't :'w. �« �m.', c -ry~-n6 A- W EDUCATION/TRAINING REQUEST This form is to be used for conferences, seminars, college classes and other forms of either training or education. Documentation is required, a copy is to be attached to this form. Attachments for mailing may also be attached. A follow up report is required. A copy will be placed in yoursonnel file. DATE OF REQUEST: Requested by: t Vendor No. : PAYABLE TO: C3A [;/--T' Employee request attend ( ) Employer required attend For check run of ( j Mail check [ j Notify dept. when ready Vendor No. : Vendor No. : PAYABLE TO:—�� PAYABLE TO: smmsssassssasssssassasssuasssassassssmmassssssu:ssasssaasssasasssssasssasasasssss Title of Program: r*!i-\L„�, ,-„1 Institution or organization Registration Deadline /_�%�r•iii• Training Dates From: -/ - To: - 2! Describe the purpose: _ C l s fir, .✓ J°J"r i' .c_ S`fj1 ;c is+ F /1. �: is i .r N�/�f la►%�l Is this related to current position ( ] reasonable promotion or transfer? Explain: .?s - :4JI't L� /:>"r /c' TRAINING COSTS: tt,;a to be advanced [ ) to be reimbursed after attendance Account No. Amount Registration or tuition......................... Books..........................................• _ Travel (mileage, bus, rain, aijjp ane, etc,) . m Lodging...... ',. IIv�JC-4-4w AC /dtpo Per ........... l06 Other: Total $ ssssssrssssassaaassssssssassssaassasassssaaacsnasassmasaasassasaaaaaaasaasssass Authorizations: I(emplo understand and agree that if all conditions of education/training cies are not , I may be required to reimburse the City for any expe it re ale on�yr�). lf. j f Employee Signature: ' ✓' � Date/) ' r� ' Appropriation ce: ` Y Manager: approved ( j disapproved d� Dept. Hea approved [ ] disapproved (explain) : ✓�_ np �-- i Finance Director: t C s V14 $ A c z 'lm OJLEA INUAL Ar mm�� C", AlEt OTICESEM11 LO F, poST FOR PERS 3 _ ��j y��� i• WW Na ►moww+ O �w07 CL V •WA ►w+ rWW+ N ►~W+ pO (/! Q rn d N� _ Q A o �A 2r C c rnD ,� o c Cc �3 � a; `� it g ? d tp A A > � c x' ftp 5 y � `" o£ O' er t0 O c si. a 5 ro ��, C ro rid .t S A Cr ( = 3 w Cr ° t0 c N kik a c ° A » -. O v E ...laGaS. E (0) Es 3! cC� � �ot^ � o w Q s R. X- a � 0 Q ro ro 7A ? "'Co 3 N Q .� 3 O O QeCn c n ro aA Q ro C --p ••� u4 e� CL C 0 % M M n T to �p O T O "� 7 ti ro .. to O O 1"O ��'; <0 rttAt► .O* "A� ro t1. C L- d D' ro ia. H w n T fi ib 0 A fpr Q !0 C (A c� C •! 0r Ow � m 7QC• ,�7 '2 !LCr H GS Ism-80 '°Q 'Dpi„ REGISTRATION FORM/CONFERENCE '86 Advanced Registration by Oct. 15 Fee: $65.00 Members $80.00 Non-Members After Oct. 15 all —$95.00 Name - U r!;-- Department/Organization _ Mfailing Address �-{•= d .r city State State Zip I would like to become an OJLEA member; ❑ Yes ❑ No f Send me information. Or 4� Mail Tbis Form and Fee to: Call: A Larry Linne Ron Luckinbi Portland School Police Salem Police Department 555 Liberty Street,S.E. 503 249 3309 Salem.Oregon 97301 503.588-6503 MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION NAME.!71644-- � 4� 2-' Y-MEMBER ASSOCIATE MEMBER T)EPARTMENT/ORGANIZATION 'T�'• � t" �cF'1:_ RANK o9 HOME ADDRESS ZZ-7750 J. f /�7rt="Z f3f (rCj. t: PHONE 1243 WORX ADDRESS PHONE---6Z5 — SUGGESTED TRAINING/SPEAKERS/LEGISLATION ---- s i '...r +� �A VIC- _ a a ` r , s:ads �'.t�.:. _ a L•» - � x y.. - C S C C cd y 0 0 3 Q1 M O O � z m " �' c0 O � m3 � � 3mmm `° C Q�CGi• t0 m yc0 s'-� O to a °c, ¢O OC H [ L4 Cb A4 (DH g E ONO O Qd°t p > aFri m ° m .5mmyro X0 .5 �. HISH t 04 � 3mm ,; mmm �' °vn rya a � b A4 V4, �. mm a mw .50- Eim � ' ,� ..7 ami a � 0 .0. O.+O+ '� m a C w m m co c0» V w p y a'Le o ° AS Q• ° C o m A4 T3 C l O w vs O Q t[) -g CCXL 09 m O Q tn'i -�, C w pk b 'a w 0 350 > 21 CD m pb •d > C •`� � � y ASID m C ymm •� b a° H q 0 .93 .►ate y ff�i d C •� o • to tj eggs g � 5 ro- CA ch > 0 D.8 w ' _ C -SVa o rs .k ��A �, � �; � a'> • � '' �` r to x'' �. }yam -tea ,� Y :�y�. LA � * _ •`�'; CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November 3, 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: _ October 22, 1986 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Training PREVIOUS ACTION: None Request P.L.S.O. Conference Services Mana er PREPARED BY: E DEPT HEAD OKTY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY The Annual Conference of the Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon is being held on December 11, 12 and 13 in Eugene this yaar and three Engineering personnel are requesting to attend. All three personnel are either registered professional Land Surveyors or registered interns through the Oregon Engineering/Surveying Examining Board. The conference has- been attended by Engineering personnel in the past and has been very beneficial. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the above training request and allow the Engineering Services Manager and two Engineering Technicians to attend the P.L.S.O. Conference in Eugene for a total cost of $594.50. 2. Reduce the total expenditure and/or attendees for the conference. 3. Deny the request. FISCAL IMPACT An approximate savings of $100 is realized when compared to the approved FY 86-87 appropriation of $700. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends that Council approve the above training request for the Engineering Services Manager and two Engineering Technicians to attend the P.L.S.O. Conference in Eugene for a total cost of $594.50. mj44/mj2 s C17YOF TII ARD t EDUCATION/TRAINING REQUEST ` This form is to be used for conferences, seminars, college classes and other forms of either training or education. Documentation is required, a copy is to be attached to this form. Attachments for mailing may also be attached. A follow up report is required. A copy will be placed in your personnel file. DATE OF REQUEST: October 22, 1986 Requested by: Randy Clarno,. ENG. SEW.—MANAGER Vendor No. : 1 Jon Feigion, ., BillKenney; EW. TBCH. PAYABLE TO: Proessional Land Surveyors of ( X] Employee request attend pion [ ] Employer required attend 13770 esen Street For check run of Eugene,•W 97402 X] Mail check & Registration Fonn [ j Notify dept. when ready Vendor No. : Vendor No. : PAYABLE TO: PAYABLE TO: sssasasaass:assasasa:awsssesoman=�a-:mass::ma:asaaa,asa�s:as��assssassiassssssss �: Title of Program: Professional Land Surveyors of Orecpn Annual Conference Institution or organization Professional Land Surveyors of Orecpn Registration Deadline Nov. 10 1986 Training Dates From:12-11- To:12-13-86 Describe the purpose: To gain knowledge through specific classes and sessions relative to (' surveying and Engineering; Participate in discussions and sessions on Oregon State Prof- essional Registration Board changes and updates and interact with other Public/Private ( corporations on profession improvements. E lam, Is this related to [ X] current position [ j reasonable promotion or transfer? Explain: E TRAINING COSTS: [ X] to be advanced ( j to be reimbursed after attendance Account No. Amount Registration or tuition...Veudpr.1.............. 10-22'400-625 TaT.10 — Books........................................... _•_.�.�--� Travel (mileage, bus, train, airplane, etc.).... - - 624 Lodging....................... ..... 10-22400-674— 294oUU t* 8.00 ea.) Per Diem........................................ 1U-2240U=624 X2.00 ea.) Other: ` Total $ 594.90 asssssyraa��asasosssassass.essass:a:xaa=aaamsassestass:�sasasssssssasa�s���sasasss `:. I Authorizations: I(employee), understand and agree that if all conditions of education/training policies are not met, ay be required to reimburse the i City for any expenditureq on h ,% t Employee Signature: Date Z Appropriation balance: Manager: ( j approved [ j disapproved t Dept.. Head: ( j approved ( j disapproved (explain): Finance Director: IL 3 8& t INSURANCE RE[MAIAL P14CPO&aM City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Novmber 5, 1986 - 1987 0 ar #1 City County Insurance Sertrioes Program General 1 b >;ty Insurance i $300,000 Bodily In3uzY/ �'1�Y Damage `Ps+etnises & operations liability ' 4 'Oontiact al / Perscnal Injury $250 PD deductible R 'Broad Fron Property .$500 false arrest deductible ftegon Tort Claims Act Errors & Omissicns �"Aute=bile.TA ability/Physica1 Damage $300,000 Bodily InjuzY/''p Y `'caw ied and no wwned autos Damage f PzWer-Y.1 ,BviFmnt 7.1 ; 'ioPertY $3,483,829 : with $500 ded replacenent:cost- Zquip�nt 459,326 with $250 ded replaeeioe aI `cost ;" Process Liability $1'000,000 includes false arreett ` cbes notinclue public official E&O :Total Premium $72,105:59 AN98MY F36 2,200:,00 Liability l i �$50,V00 i7GLL t JJ7aYJ.GG1 {.liL �1� r }yam �S, fix 4•.� } t' � w t ry c tY �r 447 is .. •r r. r i 1 v .. + ��--;NO Moonlighting SRJ L�7l�A�iri�aL iiiRLJ•(( •`"S y�� ��1.� a�r�.�� t+{ti'fM Ido_Malfeasance '+ :\{ 1L{l aC't8 def�lvt�.on) t 1 t S rr s ` ; , {i + ,{-'; ! r : No Atkornqy fee covexage , s x G'•}.,! '„}T''�a.1' �:� +',tt i �t r'? ; !. 14 ,r •MJF t q,•jeiti. .a u: .t j krS 4! 2 7 Sit lr r 7 4ii it( r it f e s � ! }arte'7"'St�rY.w��.�f�r:ty i.�t���i !r ” Y {' 8.f 1`} � �•r, ��,� ?`� k.e�..�'�' ,,�MfiiA��t�{t��i`�5�-t'.', �M•+.+ttt�Pr"'.�k�" �rl±�is�:�i •rY���: � "fig,•s� R, , .' ' ,:. +,ekrtu a.ti;.�•ie`,.+, yt }f.� y.rh' ! City of Tigard Page 2 J.G. Piece COnVaW 100,000/300,000 Bodily 1"jury C,meral viability 50,000 property Dam Presses & cparatiC199 liability $500 PD deductible coFtrac}yal.personal Inj ruy Br6ad FOM ProPert,Y Damage Oregon Tort Claims Act ions ��tion / Errors & Qmiss Jury Automobile Liability / Physical Damage 100,000/350,000 Pro000 perty Daowned m and rxx%yAued autos $500 PD deductible p=pextl*' t with $500 ded rePlacmmt oast / $3,483 829 with $250 ded replacement dost y .459,326 Liability $1,000,000 follcwi,,3 form coverage included $85,396.00 Total Premium 2 200.00 Agency Fee 8 ,596.00 Vw pollution Coverage Moan1L ce (wzncigful acts.definition) {. t o ear 1 No of water service or supply 7No Failure to place.insurarx;e (E&O) advantage or profit (E&O) �sr+��.:__.,w ,.���� . ,nage;,No Personal by employes and ex �1� y .1,,-?Doesyjy►��li� .W tlti.r.'� > oDc�es inclu�:.$50,000 :ori.��A�t� f�� coverage i-.t I�T., 1OTw/.ye iric ude by.;C'�ef1t17:t].Ql .. - .., i NO v • f4. .. A...rt (1( I City of Tigard i Page 3 t option #3 A oambinot•inn of both programs ja Newan - Liability City County Program - :Prcpert.Y Total Preudwun $8b,480.00 ]tgency gee 2,200:00 $82,100.00 1985-1986 total,pz+a�aium $81;549.00 *. *" includes several property '•4. � h ,,.a i•.. ♦ kt DDT r �*° .l . �r D n ! ! s t •i f,: Y �,rt�L�St.�"�'rv.i 7�zr t � � � b r b 3't.` � Y �rA } n 1`�i• "F (1� qr 't r� 4 2 � # . \k a' 3 St. r.,. D a � i�"- ..' f''rp°j F .t h� 1�'v�S.y�.c•1s'.�+ .r t I w� 1, � i. '>t �: C _r: ' - � Ly r .. '� .t tM+14 d'fl y� +` "k a.�` 5 �•:.fd lv^N .( 'A • 4 "C a :kt ,D h 1 0 Ki xlt6. =4 n, an f'. t ` .! 5 s aD K,rF{.y�y'T• k` y rx._��,u a�a t.y s r :,D .� y r�itiv.��*,,,5'S- hki 4 pt.+ a 1+t r D - .,D 3{.p^'t :�; J is -; .a •5=ew � 1 T.• � z'!!`":�t 2 - i r v + n t .. :. t,av��iq't'.'yDti{ $Rrt'�``::hY• f