City Council Packet - 04/09/1996
77
PP
~ i ~ke~d,.uaawu,.,......~a+.wwti.,~.~.a....,..,.u . e d....,..._ ~..v_. _ -..a_.,...........z ..........,.._.Y....-._~.. _ _ ,i,,...,.....__.-::::a -
[ _0N n;: Tire D I ';_-LML
OREGON
CC
D~~ ~n t
1 230
~
1"IGARD CITE COUNCIL
_ = r
MEETING
April 9,1996
t
Cb 4 -
COUNCIL MEETING WILL E - ~h
TELEVISED
5
fP,
1Aadmj6ccPkd1.doc
t
Hall BNd. Ti 'ard, OR 97223 503) 639-4171 TDD 503 684-2772
13125 SW g 4
t i F ~ 1X:
1r
71
r
FJ
EE
< #
_ y
g - - '
a
. A e ~ ` :.C4`~ to e } r q ;
4a' pus..'= s. ~~~.z+t, }"Z' ,s t ; _ _
.1 I 9
_ z t~
q s x r 3 r _ - - - 7 s` - Ju'~5- tt
yr a 1,
, 11
f , , th~£~" ex a- - ti 7 1 '7
a a i e j.
11-t-l'
T, ~~~sr-r,•,is. ?0. k4,„rz_49'y, 4~+_.. " _ "_Jr;._ _ ~z' i.?
3a t,~,4r, # s _ t,.'. a .x 'p~ i'`" _
s,k 'r i
tom., i'.'; . ; r-~ xix*a r t
m~r%~_,~_ _K_ , " .4 L I - -
R ° r CITY OF TIGARD t sv~ C~
d r _ A7ty ' L i,[.y l: ~a'.'E`~ a G - l
.ii"': -H aip :.:,~i"Y\.A.:c. 'shy > -
~ .
_
i ,7 ~
` { -a.
- ,_;hy"yr_z,:. s ryf `~;e, F<,,:s i `Z j:+•', `:yL, ..:~,~,,`.2 ::3;i
11
} + PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the
j -r
r=4'r v,, v „ : appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the ,g Y F -
Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to ' i ` ~ ~ f R, ` "
, ' "
..;,e be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda b f:" r4-;;
.
4 contacting either the Mayor or the City Administrator. t- k~ ~ ~~M , 11
Y t t
Times noted are estimated: it is recommended that persons interested in testifying ; -%R
F ~ ~ jam"
be present by 7A S p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business
f r agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m.
aFp
y - k_ - 71
$~t 1
Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and }
,-:-a--~r-, 4 .J be 6_J--._J b ~.oa,n on die i•ionda rior to the
- _ _ _ _ -w should be scheduled w. .-vawnu u.22tingS by y p or ay,, ,,1"°~''"" ' ~
~
, Council meeting. Please call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - 1,~,M MR I
Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). x¢ 5
t, J117 Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: - K`~,p ergs,
z Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or heating
s ` Impairments, and ' ~ . _
= ~s _
r Qualified bilingual interpreters. r~~r ~j
4 * r i Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is r`
important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your : Wei Aj' r
s 3 need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone r„'- £`M,
n numbers as listed above: 639-4171, x309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - w~~-
drv a Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). ~ t[H x
c
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA g ,rV' ` , ;i"
1.:
r s. {
, g
a~x U y r - -x ~r~3~ tom, Sx t. Y
' _ COUNCIL AGENDA - - PAGE 1 i ~ 1#
0J
- - iW, s N r F - ' a`x Jr s
_ - - g r'
4.iS"' -
3 x- A - m,^ ec ,suers s' - - 'aprr"-, Ll:rs't ~»,sr . - L- - ,
t - - k '1,, of .rY- C
- - d { _ -
.rte a ;f'- ti 3 - r .t'`- -
k
"T v - k f f
4Y, X43 4 c S_F F
,A R,
SAS i 6 a r
- - "Fv" ~ , , ~ ~ W , -.r , - ~ , - _ , - - _;f ~
11 I
1 a - " ' - -
e~ 'W
-yz'c'.a t ggy k~- _ _ t tc~ _ H - e -S*, - s J 'W tdyE
is 5
e-'~ t, V s~ *f~kF.•~
us24...~€'s'~.a
J'a
'P 1' -1 t - t _ Y _ s T F'- ~1 l`, aS=T'
y *y 2~'i i
Sys' ~ k~ z SF 3
N_ 2
^t4 . e b - r, _ - ,,..c o.-'_ ;5=,..".,~ - - - -~..`,~-~•:=mss` Sk -
may.
AGENDA
a, TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
mggn
'sf{ WORKSHOP MEETING OF APRIL 16, 1996
6:30 p.m._
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
1.1 Call to Order -City Council ~
1.2 Roll Call u 4
t~ 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
j
1.4 Council Communications/Liaison Reports
a y, 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items x
t = s 2. Citizen Involvement Teams (CIT) Communications ex Meeting With CIT
y 2r Facilitators and Staff Resource Teams' ^
3. Report: Portland State University Study on Youth Center
y lack Schwab
4. Visioning Project Discussion
Assistant to the City Administrator and Management Analyst/Risk °t~ Y = s mss,
spa .y y N 5. 3
' S. Update: Metro 2040
f- x a.
• Community Development Director
Ss~a.~hd~e ~1 3 L. h~
`
y x _ 6. Discuss Wetland Mitigation -Bowen Property
ti Y • Community Development Director
7. Water Rate Study Presentation
y u
4~ g Finance Director t s ~ i
c a t x
y ~~x
50
8. Non-Agenda Items 6r~
t
N576"Ef~-WIZ,:0 Z,
r
0101. 01 :VN
Pa Y +F .sAf pit a -
COUNCIL AGENDA - -PAGE 2
`ts•,,tgMR rya`
Ym,N2'Fe'~-'sSa..h-
r pj ~i
- -Hk
t* x:~xf _ _
d^'-
afsd4 s x 1 x-r>Nas2. a
a~«tgh;r
i
,rly?°-~`
Wi 41,
a~~ C{ 5 4 Y r i sr - t rta3,a $2k52 ;R
ff
G - "wf '~Y {Y y 2 'Y _ d r1 - w+% Y't"d~.'M. ""i ,cey t @
+ r
NTR
SONY m! S I ~
try - - .t f r_
F
$ i b 4 x r -e cs Fay
i~'""'~ ...Z .2 Z'~.~' .cam ]a~'
_ ' .q»• N i fit- i(k _ k ^E, n" 4 t, F k j - £x - t'~'7'iz. 'S"'44 `h SR '>•s*'.
` 3 ,
vpmr
<-a- x
y+
s*" nc
fjIX
9. Executive Session: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session
under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), ex (h) to discuss labor
f relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues
$ As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential,
ineeefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present.
4*15~ Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but -
E~ a
must not disclose any information discussed during this session. ,
10. ADJOURNMENT
fi
co0960916.doc
RU,
YAM
-
>s,~~t
1, Wk, MN
i
} E-c
w
s COUNCIL AGENDA - - PAGE 3
Y ij
RAW
kRI
x 1,
4, 77
%g-gg
t~`.M
r'.a v..
I N40
h sy k 4 ,rv t ay-r _ - c s, r, - , t aaR 4 ; %j,z., L -
~F
ffl
s , k ts
t .
My.
y -'~'~`s.d$ka 7a C'3 2 t ) .s- ,;'T ,i` ud:~ S
ar 24"
a 3 It -w :r a at - -rv~.t,xss a,
'Arl
t a x ~t+e -
3 ,r 4 as= a, r _ 5x - _ - a C -'r' s dih +~s~ -
'k rm; z,--M
'~,1 1r.. ~,t~~,t~M1}~£'u ~rl r,'r ~,5" y~ r ~ f' 3' if- a `('r;~' ~a'IP s
.
~ }a
J - 1~
WE- A ~ , - - . - - - - - - of _
INT
~ * .
'^.,~ia. ';rte-^i ' ? #wy - - ...#v.,a_..._..._._....y_..._...,...... ..............<.,sw..'s .u a... v.~....._._ n'L
a~ y -
~i.z~r A ~,'-.r s' , c --t'FS.'.
. 1
ice" L Agenda Item Na.__ 3 .1_ :i, z
1 '
v ua,cE _ ~0C110 r r~
x x < ~ Meeting of _ ~
ii - TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
k I
' MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 _ ~ - I
r ,
In. r, . • STUDY SESSION
~'yt'. J F h ,s f 4- . t
£p fi > Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Jim Nicoll'
~
,¢,v
r > Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Brian Moore, Bob Rohlf, an d Ken § ~%Ei ,
' Scheckla. 14 " •
_::-rXl -s s
11
7 > Staff Present: City Administrator Bill Monahan; Asst. to the City Administrator Liz
Newton; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley; , Ed Wegner, Public Works Director; . _ tit"
1
y Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director; Wayne Lowry, Finance Director;k
7h ` Pam Beery, Legal Counsel; Ray Valone, Associate Planner; Nadine Smith, Senior -.R
Planner; and, Duane Roberts, Associate Planner. - ~•~s
> Others present included John Rosenberger, Washington County Director of Land Use ~ e r i"N ~
& Transportation; Charlie Cameron, Washington County Administrator; and z,
s Commissioner Roy Rogers who arrived at 6:40 m. t mss`t
~ ,
> Discussion: Country Transfer of Active Area Responsibilities _ d'_'• , -P
x 1~fi 3,
John Rosenberger, Director of Land Use & Transportation, and Charlie , ~~~f ~ ` a
° Cameron, County Administrator, addressed the Council
} Mr. Cameron stated that the intent of the County was to provide efficient y$~ FF s e 101 I
14
development services in this portion of the County. He explained that this proposal 3 ,
was made within the context of County 2000 (last updated in 1994) which recognized Y h ~ - 1-
Al,
the County as two separate organizations: one that provided services to all residents
- of the County, and one that provided city services to the city residents in the urban k ~.;Y~ :psi
unincorporated areas of the County (approximately 160,000 people and growing). ~~r3~
Mr. Cameron said the Coun realized it cannot rovide both county-wide and city a t
services; the Board made a commitment to provide county-wide services and tot 11r ` ~ ' F
r to get the cities to assume responsibility for providing municipal services through 11 ~ - 10 annexation. x x, Mr. Cameron noted that since County 2000 was adopted, annexation activity has x = I 1-1 -
ti' ~ - been slow because of cumbersome annexation statutes. He said that the infill r ~ - } -~L . ~ ttt
development within the County urban areas means that the County needs to provide - ,3- ` 41 z t
neighborhood planning services to a growing population.
r - _ -
G S fi
He also referred to the number of state responsibilities in the process of transferring r
to the counties, such as in the area of corrections. f ( y
i -
Mr. Cameron mentioned SB 122 that required the counties to plan for urban n,`~R ~
e services; Washington County decided that the best way to do that was through
1 intergovernmental agreements, such as one to provide development services to t- z - t,
current county areas that fell within Tigard's future boundaries. z ' r ` ~ - F '
N
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 1 ' - r " Ra - r ` '
i } y
8
racy { f y ' - 't 4 O ~ +EFFt -
CxR°~
A t'r ~ k 1''r x' T F
,
Z v.+ '^«W _ <.-p.p -'k l.'6 7 c rt~-3`*.h T`° 4."'q"' V. b~" S G4 -
t> _ _ _ _ s,% ' fF
_ - s,
6 _ dY {M1
> - _ `i, k r
F
-;'~.n~,~,_-,,' ; " ~ % 4~ly "W"", , , , . , _ , I ~ ' _ - - ' ' - N - -
'
i 1 _ _ - ti_.- f- -
d -t X -i. yt t T 4
4_ d - V
h- - _ t _
w<'
- . - ` .,F
m; err 4 - 1 `i -3 C'~- ,
k
L
t # L k 4 7 ,F` 0 7
i f i
t' f'r 11 } r s
-1 ~___1,.11,_.1",___.11 I'l,"r, - "'111 ` I ~ . 21 L~7 ' 'r. ;P I
_ 4EF } j `1
mm~~M , ~ , I . ~ I I
^mM*.+.
_,.u~t_ ..a ..._,4.
S - 1l 4 - { - - _
T
t~_ 3 -
x a_
J q31 7 r-,! t X _ -
~ '-s,,.X k,' , t Y
9 mot„ i k. -
to .~3 u,e _ rte , k , 'e
"vfT-i ~ k a -
- ~
Mr. Cameron emphasized that the County had no ulterior motives in making this , -
i a proposal; their sole interest was to implement County 2000. He said it was vital that f , r
they test how to transfer functions.
F x Councilor Scheckla raised the funding issue, citing law enforcement as an example.
Mr. Cameron said that this had nothing to do with law enforcement at this point. ~
He pointed out that once an area annexed into the City, the County lost its taxing # - #
authority. , ~
L,
'a r "
Mr. Rosenberger stated that the County would contract with the City for urban w
it services such as building, planned development, road maintenance, code g = a -
enforcement, etc. He pointed out that all those services were fee-for-service and that ~
«V the City would fund those services from the fees collected, in addition to the lump _ F x ~ -
rxK
sum the County paid them to handle those services for the County.
fT F v ; Mr. Cameron said that this transaction should be revenue neutral and that the County ; y
needed to start the SB 122 process. He said that the planning issues of intill x ti
development and neighborhood planning were issues of greater intensity, and that § ~ ~ 7
the County could not provide those services. x= S 4
-RF i-x r
ft. i a r
Councilor Scheckla asked if the County Board was completely unanimous about this 1= .J `f ' I
tar,-gy m I _4
proposal. Roy Rogers, County Commissioner, stated that he has talked directly a•t , g &Z
with four out of the five but that the County has not yet voted on this proposal. Het,
commented that this was a sensitive issue on which both sides were moving , 's
cautiously and collaboratively; the County did not want to make a statement without V V g_
consensus from Tigard. "R' k ~ r~ r
r 6g
~a{ n ° r ~
Commissioner Rogers said that the current County Board's position was against -Ig r 1-1
forced annexation. He said that the were ivin out information about the County' s r J
r r y g g s zt
cost to provide services. He reiterated that the cities are better at offering urban 5,_ L- ~k
~ services such as parks, library or planning. .v 7 i
e"
Councilor Scheckla asked why the County wanted to downsize its base and let the Y h, ~
7i7,~,~_-~`,.,~~ cities take over th area. Commissioner 71 becauseeven withet ansfe ng Some functions to theectiesythe county population ~_g 4
' was growing so fast. He said that they were trying to work with the cities to _ s ,
provide the level of service wanted by the citizens. ` ` £ ~ r
r - ~ ~-11 City Administrator Bill Monahan said that the city and county staffs have - h ,"t,,,,
discussed a lot of the details of this proposal. The next step was ann,
intergovernmental agreement (IGA) to take to the County Board and the City , ' 1 g -
1-11.1 + Council. Community Development Director Jim Hendryx stated that they have a. , ' ' S u
done their initial evaluation and were still working with the County about refining 4 , ,~tI
several issues. 4, 'k ~ f -
n -'z
Mayor Nicoli asked if the public process was defined yet. Mr. Rosenberger said, r
f that, assuming that the Council wanted to move forward, they would go to the j' "
County Board next week and then have staff meet with NAC and CPO leadership - ' __;6
- to formulate the public process while working on the technical aspects of the IGA , 3
x at the same time. a
d -
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 2 _ _ x r,< Z
S - - S - -
rx~~ _ - Cn 5 " - _
- - - x -
f
t
- - - - 3
IL , ~ , . , , ~ ,
f
L - - 5 f -
rF a J
Y 1
F
- k- f - - - - -
1 f 9
K
d f -.l.1 - n
/ _ '
At
'
'
- -
-
_._.t __.y .u~..... r~..y t ur.1 -
4 - .T t
1
~ ~ - - ~ , - ~ , , - ~ 11~1577771-
r C -
V
r~~ r_ ; t MFf ,
e Fit - z._ - P
r :,1 Mr. Monahan commented that in drafting the ordinances that would implement this, , , r-, L
3 - Tigard staff wanted to make sure to honor any longstanding agreements already t r , }f 4w, : -
made regarding development, roads, etc.
1
" Commissioner Rogers said that he wanted to make it very clear that the County was s . R? Li -71 N -
not attempting to excuse itself from responsibility in those areas or trying to _
force people to annex. He said that they were trying to implement economies and t
x- efficiencies that would allow the government to provide services to their citizens at y
> R , ; i the least possible cost to the public. f y `
.
? Mr. Rosenberger cited the building construction program as an example of ,j ~
improving customer service. Councilor Scheckla asked if there wasn't a way to r " ,4 €
share maintenance department equipment. Mr. Rosenberger said that they already -c g - 'ir
did that c`
r iic s
Mayor Nicoli noted that Councilor Hunt has been briefed on this issue and indicated , ~ - !
'fi that he wanted to move forward. 0M.
k The Council agreed by consensus to let the staffs move forward. }i7zs3.. -
Y
F > Discussion: Menlor Reservoir Site ~i
.per ~.W ...r. .
Ed Wegner, Maintenance Services Director, reported that the Mentor Reservoir i -
1 has been in the CIP for four to five years, waiting while staff worked on the water r s ~ ~ CZ~1 ,1 I It-.
supply plan. He said that the IWP has heard this proposal and recommended _
a ' forwarding it to Council. He directed Council's attention to the preliminary design ,,5 - - - . ?
z report prepared by Murray, Smith & Associates explaining why they still needed to 'k
- build this reservoir. g t~ n
Phil Smith and CItr'~ Huber vi i iiirr&y, ~fluth and Associates made a ,
x presentation to the Council. ~ , , 1N ,x, e
Mr. Smith reviewed his k { Mfr
qualifications to work on this program in lieu of Hal A y .
Murray, the senior partner who recently retired. ~r.~
` k S Y. 3
t Mr. Huber reviewed the history of the site. In 1986 the Tigard Water District h J
~ " F
(TWD) conducted a survey of the Bull Mountain area which recommended building vvc t
j two 2.5 g illion gallon reservoirs on the south side, and a 2.5 million gallon and 1.5 srt
million anon reservoir on the Mentor site. He reviewed the specifics of the ~Ar r
proposal in terms of building at certain elevations to create a logical progression of _ x 1;
r pressure zones on both sides of the mountain. He said that they identified a potential I'll s - 1 - ~
r ; site for the 550 foot reservoir on Old Scholls Ferry Road at about 154th. fi z Y,4 ~ ,
p -I 1 - 'i A _ ~C ' h
Mr. Huber reviewed the factors they took into consideration in determining whether '
- ~~,~4]~~~i",-~~~;,,~,.~,i~::~~~~~-~~~,,, - ~ - ~ - A -
- or not they could fit a reservoir at that site, including ground elevation, the size of L ,h 4 ~
x the reservoir, the need to replace the existing leaking 800,000 gallon reservoir, and I
' _ the capacity needs of the area for 2.5 million gallons of added storage and G ; ,
u approximately 1 million gallons of replacement storage. ;5 r
u , ti' ` a`
r
ti' t`
` =e CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 3
s sX,"
_i _ 4 - ~
5 1 _ der 3 S3 ;
- t_. 'Y'.
W.I r
-4~,,,-~?'~- - .;,q ,F. ~ - , " . ~ : I I i ,7~ I., : , ~ - - A 2,~ ka T- :e
K t
r Y., s - - a
k, r
1, . y V , a E
S
J. - .r - - - '.'m'~ F X -
a _ - a
} r r T '7
- J,
. I
- . - L -
_.3.
4
#yZ, ar-3 4 > - - - -
-0P ISM -"b - (j, 'CS } - w},- F ~
T33Y 4 aTb1, KI 7t
_ fi[ - Z' c _
' t . -
a Y
' y~{•.`~-
tf' yy„-~-.411} t t'it -
. ~.,t,_
F- ,,-1'1~`:,~
3` Councilor Rohlf asked if there was any way to fix the leaking reservoir and put it „ ~
3 back in service. Mr. Huber said yes. y I
r~7`N back in service. Mr. Huber said yes. '-11"
k YI
. 71-1
r r Mr. Huber reviewed on the map the existing and proposed piping and the 11'1` r . - rv~
° recommended access points. He said that they recommended access from the r, - h„ - W
s,,,.-,~.r,~, Apyndirpe Estates because it had the most direct access to a major street. He = ~
~
rl -.;._;4 } - -
sF reviewed the other two possible access sites, Track G through Boil iviouiuai i
Meadows and Sunrise bane. t° , r A
s a ?adr}
ti
= Mr. Huber reviewed the recommendations in the report, including looking i' - _f
5iu foot reservoir, starting the v.; r= ' k , f>,,
the
immediately for other reservoir cites for -
conditional permit use process at the County, and making capacity improvements to e - `f r~ - A--
the transmission system to insure that adequate water was available. He stated that - < - _t`~r,T
they have gone through the pre application process at the County and determined a a ~ L -
process for the City. ' µ x' `k,
sx 0Ix 5 Z ^ liy 'g 3
1~ 1.
3a 7l ; F { ~5 - - - -
MM I
Mr. Huber pointed out the project cost estimate of approximately $3 million dollars.
He recommended expanding the current discussions with the property owners of the s -
land needed for access. ` t `
Councilor Scheckla commented on the unsuitability of the Sunrise Lane access. Mr.K
,7. 1 "
a,_ , i- rV
-
S° Ha ,her concurred, pointing out the difficulties of that site as the reasons why they
-
were not recommending access through there. y fit
e' -1-rted
that
Associ 1^^~ submit Wner a proposal to the staff fora onsult recommended
_ - ~ k-:x, to rt s` .
servi es; s aff w uld tpresent it toathe
ec
Council on April 23 if it was ready. He reviewed the timeline for the projt,
ion
stating that they hoped to appear before the Hearings Officer with their applicat
in August. 5rh I Y
4?' "tyi
Mr. Monahan reviewed that the general services contract that the City currently had ~
with Murray Smith & Associates did not include this work. He stated that the IWB 1- }
~z "~-I'l.f"'21 -1 , lii~!~~,j
made it very clear that this was a separate project which they wanted Murray Smith r ~ 4s..
to handle because of their knowledge of and previous work on the water system. 1' -
E r r _
x ~s a
> Discussion: Fences and Hedges it -1 {
Mr. Monahan noted the memo in the packet regarding this issue raised by Mr. IIKII t , - ~ s
Larson at a previous meeting; staff recommended that the City not regulate fences A , z ~ i 1
s °h &
and hedges at this point in time for the purpose suggested by Mr. Larson. „1 4,kk a
-1k ;
Mr. Hendryx stated that if the City regulated living fences, there would be a ~ ~ `u ~
resulting cost to enforce the regulations. He said that the City has not documented r~
any of these fences and that the implementation process could be time consuming. e
He said that other jurisdictions have ordinances that successfully regulate vegetation -t ' .
in specific view corridors. > $t~~ -f,
Mayor Nicoli commented that this might be a good situation for a mediator. The 3? `t i
Discussion followed. 1
r - r~ vy`r
-T r CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 4 '
,
b h S _ f 44 >r ~N k[Y~ `l
, r - ~ P
~
l 3 f 4 ,
ti4 _ -r•* 3nx~• - Jr » -.ice -1 5=t"k..94" ><k6:> r >
§ g~,~ as
- F-4 _ _ 't a 4 l
w _d
,'~,t - E i~ - ~ % ~ ~ . : f : ~ ~ ~ ~ -,f - -",~t--, - w
- 4' - , , - ~ . ~ - , ~ ~ , I . ~ ~ - - I ~J ~ ,
r - m s K 'fir -
y. -x- t q 4. ~j
- a - r%
r f _ _ _ - ' Y -
r r
r - f $ - z 5 7 yxr;~a B
~,~L~~~-~,,,,~~~,~,~,v"""-,,'!-"~,~.",-,:r~ - I , ~ , , - ~1- ~ I : ~ I ~ - ~ - --`1:'F~-,:-,-- in,,~ "t, C r ~ r r} x
rt
- Y i- _ C ti
' ~
' -
':'S - v..v. -r.F - -
SWOOMPNWRIA _
9`r t
t }
. , r ,4"R , ~ " i, V-1~ - -
a- } ja< t
$ Uzi- j xs N rc
_ z=7' S
'je f ~ C.s+ -a - ...•..,..a - - ".,savs ..~.z. ' - a r h s - -
4
k aa* R y h t -
v
t .r2w w - - { yx r3 3 d1'2 3 >3,t ,
Mj Councilor Scheckla commented that obscuring views might be a problem with the ~ A
z reservoirs. Mr. Huber said that issue would have to be addressed in the permit =a~
kt t t - process. rf {
7 r
sr y > Agenda Review ~~111tn -
r Mr. Monahan stated that one potential non agenda item was the Western EPS 9 1# { g',
1, Corporation's request for a monopole, if the Council wished to call n^ _ _ ~
f~ > Executive Session: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 7:20 a sr~4A
~ # p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (3), & (h) to discuss labor i r-`=r` ,"k - 11,
` relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. ~ " , , ,T M
11 ~11'~IINII'l > Executive Session adjourned at 7:45 p.m. ra F,` X ~ ,
x k z x
-11 - 4 .1 1
x 1. BUSINESS MEETING -
x 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board " I -
t d
Mayor Nicoli called the business meeting to order at 7:50 p.m. ~ § fr n
e-- -4,- n -.5
1.2 Roll Call - ;
P
b Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli; Councilors Bob Rohlf, Ken Scheckla, and Brian "2 # °r I
Moore. i s^'
x ; ~
Staff present: City Administrator Bill Monahan; Gary Alfson, Acting City Engineer; Y
' i Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Brian Rager, Engineering; Nadine Smith, s
Senior Planner; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; Sandy Zodrow, Human ' - - - ,
Resources Director; Liz Newton, Asst to City Administrator; and, Jim Hendryx, a '
- Community Development Director. ,V - - w,f
- ' -,11 ~1 ~ C E
r - 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance ~ -11
z 1.4. Council Communications/Liaison Reports: None -
€ - 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items "a - E
11. $
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA ;
' Ben Larson, 14465 SW 125th, addressed the Council regarding his neighbor's "living w , r 1i h
fence" of fir trees that has grown to obscure his view of Mt. Hood. He stated that the ~ ~k ~
neighborrefused to maintain the fir hedge at a reasonable eight-foot height, and has ~t., j.- F : t
essentially abandoned his back . hard. He said that without the view of Mt. Hood, his el
property was devalued. _ = 1 , - {
z ; Mr. Larson cited the letter he received from Mr. Hendryx that included the code definition
d of fences obscuring sight and asked why a living fence could not be included in that
rf definition. He asked that the City support his defense of his rights. He said that he thought : , 4~- 3~,~ t
x that enforcement of a living fence regulation would not be difficult. ?k i e
' z'~ F~
f Mr. Larson stated that the neighbor's hedge was also growing out into his private access ~ '
road, and requested that the neighbor be required to maintain the hedge and keep it out of 3 " R ~ t
tw' f ~
= U CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 5 r 3
r z~ ra t -Pi"ir.~., - y
z K ~ ~ -
r
r , r~
a , „ f~, , k -
S °N 5 - x vcv -v a --r,- • gt ,!r-- , a -'L ur` t, J
~ L - - , Lj 0;. , . -
m d,-tT Y, st -,u 3 i - aTM- r -
, , , , ~ ~1
1 x - i
G
.A' `x i t
F - - - - - ~ ."11, - - , -
s,}
JYt k
x}-f s - _ _s-} j r'
.rte i
t
.
{
c_ --a-.i i. Y._-.._.. _ 1Y__a_-_ vii L._ ~i_ _.1 m_ _il.;, ZaL'_1-- .i
.
: ;I.
4, _
I &
b ,
e 1
k
t#a xea -
f_
r .std-sah a - - - - e t
a
L r. a. 'r -
11 ,7 ,apt- - y -V a
3
]raft t,p s g~,, a:„- a k
, k - ~ his space. He asked the City for help in dealing with this issue, reiterating that he simply I
# l wanted the hedges maintained, not removed. 4 ,
*T• t: explain ,t that qh C nnncil did not wish to reopen the controversy surrounding ,
the tree ordinance (which also regulated shrubbery), noting that it had taken two to three z
, 2A + C years to reach an agreement within Lh: imu;,,~y regarding the regulation of trees on
private property. He suggested that Mr. Larson and his neighbor go through the mediation i " ` x y, .,5
process to reach a solution to this problem. -
tera t Mr. Larson stated that he did not feel it was a satisfactory position of the City Council not,
to defend him when they would do so for other kinds of site obscuring problems. He said y *Yl
that this was a solid wall of trees, not a single tree, and that his neighbor's laziness in not -x # °x
maintaining his backyard was destroying the value of his property. He said that he thought T
there should be some kind of protection against allowing someone to build a solid fence in ~ -'a
ri front of someone else's property. 4
, Y
° x 3 Mayor Nicoli said that the Council sympathized with Mr. Carson's position but noted the t , -,t
difficulty the community had in reaching agreement on the tree ordinance. He said that the t - ~ - ~a
Council was willing to see if a solution could be found with the cooperation of Mr. Larson - :y
P, _ and his neighbor. # 5 -
7 <sJ~ GMs - 11
r Councilor Rohlf expressed his reluctance to try to pass an ordinance that would impose 's , -
; regulations city wide simply to address Mr. Larson 's specific problem. He said that he § '
h x would feel better about discussing this situation if the mediation process was tried and didn't ' ° , £
work. M
- 4
'r.J In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Ms. Beery stated that there was nothing
fixes,:
` in the code addressing this issue when it affected only private property. X,~ { xs~ -
li, Ty", , ',I . I
11
I 1P.1 3. CONSENT AGENDA g y ~'11
- - - w .
`
} 3 3.2 RePerve and File:uncil Minutes: February 27, 1996 and March 12, 1996 ~V, Rk -1 11
~ a. City Council Calendar
b. Tentative Agenda M _fiV- 11 - I `
3.3 Ratification of Emergency Expenditure - Repair of Sink Hole at Cook Park ? '
3.4 Approve Listing of the City Council Goals for 1996/97 r~ ~h #
fi 3 3.5 Endorse Changes to the Community Development Block Grant Intergovernmental i - ~ k -
Agreement and Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter t A- i, ' } s .
3.6 Local Contract Review Board: -k y ~t ~ - ~ , i
# b a. Award Contract for Construction of the 109th Avenue Extension and ; -
5 Authorize the City Administrator to Sign the Contract
s 33 a 3.7 Approve Sprint Spectrum Request for a Monopole
I -".~L,~-i,t:~-4-~~~-,~~-'---:~,:,~,-~'~~-~'ll'-~~~~,~'--.'--'~-~'l- .,~~-i,~,~---,,t,~-,,',91 il - I ~ 4
Councilor Scheckla asked for clarification on Item 3.7. Mr. Monahan stated that the lease t
a 5 ti proposed by Sprint to place a monopole on Tigard Water District property included a clause*
r - s that automatically renewed the lease every five years with a 20% escalator on the fee (the u~ Y
industry standard). He noted that the revenue would go to the water fund, not the City of y i t a
Tigard. ' k" p-•
I : ~~--'-,~N,,~,Lt~~-,~,~'i~,%,',.',-~ ~,'i-7~7- 1 . , ~
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 6 ;
r > i - ~
i h
^,tZ r - ,r a ~E
i -r - - ' -,77 .r., s:,,~ ,k r ~ ara7a7 :vim'
t s
11
U - , I - , - 1. .i ~ , , , t~
r; f -a 'W-
C(
'i'l~.i y - - - --f.rfiI
..y t' 4 / tvl
it 3 - d _ ] a{ - t
-~-l y 1
r l.~- .i 4- - C
f ~ 4 -k
~...1-~..c- ~..~a-».i_~3.. t..~_. ..s._h...~. a. 1. _ A_v: ~ .i ~r~. _..i .N~~..-. aL f~.-?_._ .~.Sf. _1...~ _ .x.. .~.c,.. a-_ ___._.~i- _r Y._~.~}a.~.
I -
j~f. -
} 3 , - - - -
k-, . y e~4 i
N
}
r ' "
y[y n-.._~_.._._-....-:..,.~.,.+.+c.s.~..~. ,L --_„v.....:.._.~.vaa_.,y.: - - :A A W1 r$ -
..~•?t
C3.. dd a- - i' t _ 'rte
_ „TY 0
c4 Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to adopt the Consent x i'- _
,x w 9 Agenda. ` N r,
~ 11 1:
~o F = xu?
, ~ i Motion was approved by unanimous vote of Council piroesent.. (Mayor Nicoli and Councilors rH ; -
,is ~
t Rohlf, Scheckla, and Moore voted "yes.") f r44MM
i r
x,_ - ]3 4. CONSIDER REQUESTS FOR CONTRIBUTIONS T • "
f
,'a' 4.1 Tigard Festival of Balloons - Resolution No. 96-18 3 ;"'4" .T <°z.':
q l r' tsy„. - ' F
> Stan Baumhofer and Bruce Ellis, Balloon Festival Board, made a presentation to L `f
# the Council. ,z&W, ~ t~ -
~ '
Mr. Ellis reviewed the expanded scope of the Festival with evening performances ,
a in the park, including music and a stage show. He said that the additional cost tt f ~y n .
, exceeded their initial budget, and asked that the Council grant them additional funds k ` - - T',,
~el
x 4s - -i to continue this Festival that was now in its fourth year. He noted that adding
t' afternoon and evening events would allow more residents of Tigard to participate§ s
K since part of the Festiva] took place in the morning. I
Councilor Scheckla asked what entertainment would be provided under Night Glow. t 1 T'
, 1, 11
Mr, Ellis said that the balloons would be inflated at night as a backdrop for the` m
1~;a.
stage. He reviewed the performers with whom they were currently negotiating,
including Tom Grant, the community band, and the Broadway Rose theater group. v , {
y a _v,e
4 Councilor Rohlf raised the issue of how much money came into the community as
a a result of the Festival last year. Mr. Ellis said that the Festival has committed to N`
L donating any funds generated beyond the budget to improvements for Cook Park. Y'! Y _ -
ti ~Z, n°
In response to questions from Mayor Nicoli, he listed the Tigard service - 1 _ _
_ ' ~ ~ - _ - = i organizations that participated in the Festival He said that the high school booster ?
- - - Ciub railed $29vv -firkin cars iu the utvaTiing acid C„IIid double litat tllt5 year with ;'-,^.'a;-.`;'-`
evening parking. He said that he did not know exactly how much money the 3
organizations made; Mr. Baumhofer reported that the Rotary and Chamber made
` j between $12,008 and $14,000 last year. t ~ '
, Mayor Nicoli commented that the service organizations did make money from this
Festival, as well as the business community from all the out of town visitors. He e
` said that the service clubs immediately returned the money to the community in ; x w
service projects. He said that he supported the request. ' ~
? - a "K5r'
,;'rte. z ,a -hS. J S 'f
Councilor Rohlf cited the Festival's letter to Mr. Lowry, and asked how the Festival s a#'
t. affected the County Daze. Mr. Ellis said that as far as they knew, there were no F a~ "
formal plans made yet for County Daze. "~`}W
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt Resolution ` ' a
x4 No. 96-18. Ipp c - } i
- } F Y yam, t'yx
The City Recorder read Resolution No. 96-18 by number and title. 1{ , . F ,
'~f, fc
- rr a - a '
11 ~~Ng
,z~} xr
"x CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 7
, 1 _ .~,^wM.=o _ ..ax xr.*a c.xxl;.~ x4. gee=Vr...n.«a - - sus- r-r a°~a,,, rs-:u d .za ~r -i,t, ~wr
* - _ F
ra a- - - "mow !J
t y - - - - 4 - p "y
7
St F'''S Y -1
- r t _
`tYr - F r r, of x- 3 y- t e. ,
F £ T 1~ L
d
-L~.~w.i.7 C - - l P Y ,r, 'j
r
F
to - tr i - _
1. f- - ' k
.
1 x
{ - - - _
S - - 2 q 'b
.~t:.vS.i,S.w' e •t .h.... - - ..4 1 ..Z } Y•t"
tf`.j 'Vi-~,~"'s ,Z`r°..+ L ; ;3 - t
G s~,i,v " r-- utyaw.i _ ,.~.~s..,,. ,...c.~-a~.~..,. ..__......~._.,.;-,....-...3._=.~. X,''+-'`1 3
f
nz
31 y _
1
i
s _ t ' 1 RESOLUTION NO. 96-18, A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING CONTINGENCY
_ r IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE TIGARD FESTIVAL OF BALLOONS FOR -4 . r-
- ' a JUNE, 1996. - k
z{ ,
4 r F~
x
i Motion was approved by unanimous vote. of Council present. 'Mayor Nicoli and .
3 Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla, and Moore voted "yes.")
{ '?2 s
> 4.2 Tigard Graduation Celebration Committee - Resolution No. 96-19"~+`
ri
- Mr. Monahan explained that the Committee submitted a request to the Budget I -
Committee for funds for next year but only recently became aware of the possibility r k~ ` 6 ?
of funds for this year. He said that this request was for $500 for this year's event. ,s . ~
'gi - e s #r
t Mayor Nicoli stated that while he has personally supported the graduation party for -r FL rF 6 1111,s ^
the past several years, he did have concerns with giving city money to what was , - ~ , r ,
z essentially a private party; usually the City gave funds to events more accessible to ~ { f '4
the general public. He also expressed concerns over the amount requested.
4 -,q -1, 4
{ J Councilor Moore stated that he also has supported the graduation party for several I ~ -
' years and found the dollar amount requested "light." He suggested donating a larger „h,Ftp;; T
} amount to support the kids in the community and give them something positive to
r n a ~I
do on graduation night. 'mot ~
t
Councilor Rohlf concurred with Mayor Nicoli's concerns with giving money to a ° C , - a t
private party and noted that it could establish a precedent that other schools might 'F, a - y _ - . _
ask the City for money. He commented that on the other hand it was only a small ~Y 4 t ~ t~ d~ n r
0 investment in the youth of the community and that the City did care about its youth. £ u ~~-s'
z ry
Councilor Scheckla expressed his disappointment that no one from the Committee `°i„ -
' appeared before Council to lobby for their request. He said that he could support 1, m c' ~ ~ .1, I
- giving the $500. , - r
h
1~f - 3+
t 3 Mayor Nicoli noted that policy decisions were usually made at the Budget s- '
t 3 Committee. Mr. Monahan pointed out that another consideration was whether or not k 1
`s' this request fit into the arts & events program category in the budget. ~ a" W k
~ x ~ ~ { t
Councilor Moore said that he was willing to support a $500 donation. , ffl s r'.
X~
- ' Councilor Scheckla asked if granting this proposal would take money away from the , --1 " Y
other budget items to be discussed on April 18, Mr. Monahan explained that this Z'J'~ ,t ;1
request was for the present budget and not related to the discussion on the 18th -,T
concerning next year's funding. ~ . , , 4,: ,
. t
Councilor Scheckla noted that Mr. Lowry had informed the Council that the City + ` G S ' t ~Z ,
z f - had received more money from a certain fund than was anticipated. f?e asked if y
11 - 'r I
x $ t t
money could be taken from that fund to suppuii this request. Mr. Monahan said that
a funds could be taken out of the contingencies available in the general fund. He °_z x V
confirmed that the City did receive more revenue from the PGE franchise than t
anticipated.# ~
y CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 8 6 -
3 - L
4 -ah Axe
y 3~r: , 'trs-rsr~e .^•-"'7", - x^' c 1 `.:.f - - `""G a. - ;..~t.sge°a t^. •~...*s'~r,"a~ a~.°.,9" < f-
Y .e ST _ _ l T 'h1 k`p f J
X k,
; - L ~ ~ ~ , , ~ , , , I ~ I - ~ ~ , --1
t,~ ~ v
y.'.. s - - - `n hT
E
s`' r 'z t, it r f z- r
d.k~ 3 7 f d _ y'4 ur .
s'- -fit 2 J f s s:
pFp' t
- I L 1, ~ . ~ :-~T~,~ ~ ~ , 21 ~ ~ ` r~-~,
Y
{
'~w,~ Y rA~ "•-`-~~..~",'.~"'tin~+.-rc^-~-f-rte....+.-.c ^"'.~--r.~
L
I
J. I-, I ~..r. :.+..~_.iv 3,~....~.i ~1.-...- r_A
c
e
f
0
ffi~~ - I-,-- f , ~ " - fottttlt"~~ - ,
'a - I ,~iW~ t , q - t t - t y ¢ ~N s - ter' "x ` - -
' st~s r- e .,m.aa,....~ oet~.fi?S'm
sew 'f~r'{~n, _
yk . t#x.'t t 3T I' _ 3 :a' 7 "y3'< +7
m rf• .wsV.'~, 4.,y,_ _ ft 35 t.v°i::• S T~S I . 11,
, i
- a .y A_,
te'S. 3 Al - i
1. -11 y Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt '
_i } h Resolution 96-19. ,1, -
"The City Recorder read Resolution No. 96-19 by number and title. 11
t e_
+f ~r t
RESOLUTION NO. 96-19, A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING CONTINGENCY ~ " - Y z _
4 ` IN THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE TIGARD GRADUATION CELEBRATION ~ td _ g '
COMMITTEE, FOR JUNE, 1996. -
r
t M,~ i - n ,~,x2,7~" 1`tsv -11
- s - _ Motion was approved by a 3-1 vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli and 'fi 'fix `
.
, ~ Councilors Scheckla and Moore voted "yes"; Councilor Rohlf voted "no.") = ? ~t:_W - -
5. CONSIDER FINAL ORDER - COiv1i-REIME TS_IVE. PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 95- 7,7 , -
n z ai
` 0006 - PHIL LEWIS SCHOOL SITE REQUEST to amend the Comprehensive Tian map ~ ~ ` e
from Public Institutional to General Commercial (C-G) on the Phil Lewis School site. a`, {'-~'riy~ ~ ,i mot;
x y Location: Northwest comer of Hwy 217 and SW 72nd Avenue n * '
a. Staff Report , ri- -
4
{ Ray Valone, Planner, presented the staff report. He reviewed the previous Council1 F d t -
action approving this application with a 4-0 vote and one abstention. He said that Ww * -
the contract purchaser's attorney volunteered to do the findings.ur
f b. Council Discussion <L -
r " , ;
c. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 96-11 R~ ffi'
g
y~ ~qk
Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt~
rr Ordinance No. 96-11. er`
s y
its' a The City Recorder read Ordinance No. 96-I1 by number and title. ,mss -
3 ORDINANCE NO. 96-11, AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND i,'%2, k! ,
CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN , ~ , 11 . F-M
# AMENDMENT BY THE TIGARD TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT, CPA 95-06. t ~1 LL
. Motion was approved by a roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli and ~`d'- ~ 1 ~ f
~ w
Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla, and Moore voted "yes. ~ - Z -
e
} .
6. PUBLIC HEARING -CONSIDERATION OR PRIORITIZATION OF GREENSPACES ~ < ~ - ~ h I. is PROJECTS AND CONSIDERATION OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ~ ~ }k
f € WITH METRO VV , B,_ M_AV Mr
s ? Review of recommendations from the Citizen Involvement Teams, Planning Commission ` }s P t I
4 ; and City Staff. Tigard is entitled to receive $758,000 in local share funds om Metre " r j -A ' E
¢ a. Open Public Hearing i' s } , '
r s> J € 11 _ Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing. z 1,7 Z' 4 F -
E y t
W + r ?fry- i
k r- Esc t - ~ £ k - 1
x _ CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 9x
r
s ~,--r~z`° r
~s r ~ 4t fI C
-M ''y'~k s `A'rr , ` x ",;t } of ,4.. 2 d ''~¢t 'r ' t s' 3 2C s
uK - 11 P g 1 - - _ cr¢ d u.
b
X" -1-yt d_-- _ 1 "i Y'
T
Yi
9 1 - 1 QXj baN
y
v
fad # k L _ } , S L' - l
- 1 & 7 [ 7
Y
Arw..:r~. ;.~1^--.--r.^. ~+.~arrz'-.t^^'._
..q.•m^~v'~
a..~ - _ - fit,
- 4
.-.a.... .1 -ri_ ._a LL ._`.t - ,...`l. _..v._, .L._/:S__. _ t -l_1t h
, k -
, a I
K
1
, ~,4,~,V,-~,~"-,-~1,4~'~'-~,~~7-,4,~ . 1~ - ~ : , p . I ~i ~ M
3a
^ ki` q.yc y.~3L yet F - _ - _ - t: E f' ,
a s a r$ - -
3 , ti - , - - t - j'd _
- - - - - a
s' n'r rfi x
~ 'dam ° u r .
# t - cry z r`- - r -y
t b. Declarations or Challenges ~ fr,
~F1j : s
a h,t alt Councilor Moore declared that he had been a member of the Planning Commission t,z
at the time the Commission made its recommendation to city C'nnnC-il h~~t that he felt a'°
t - - he could participate because of new testimony received by the Council. k- -
r - F C. Staff Report - Mayor Nicoli noted that the Council probably would not take action on this item this K-a
- evening, though they would take public testimony. He explained that the Council k ` Q>' tz -
wanted to buy all the properties on the list and would investigate other funding - Q k - - k,--5 -
sources or mechanisms to do so. o- j ~ f
- -
y i ~
_ Duane Rn~1Pi'tc_ AccnrtakP PI?nnar reyie!wPtl thg cvt!rifire of the $753,006 OF local } z F 'I - z..,,ev
g share funds received from Metro Greenspaces to purchase greenspaces and trail d a'tr~ "I
related projects (no active park improvements included). He said that the staff and ~~'P M7q
U : CITs developed a list of potential sites. He reported that the City has agreed to a -~g,, r~~w z - E 71
$125,000 purchase price for the Fern Street property, the first priority on the list. i-!~ t ` r
& ~
'i Mr. Roberts reviewed the other projects on the list for which they had $663,000 left. ~f~ 7?a't
' : He noted other potential funding sources such as partnership opportunities with " : :x~ •..x~,
g.t * .-'*'~`3V
3ti_ ' y" m
Metro through the regional trail component in the greens aces bond measure and ``r- ' "
_ with Washington County which included two sites of interest to Tigard in its list of ~ - 'l-'
1 ,
projects for its Greenspaces money. Another potential funding source was the park 1 ` * " i ~ - -141-1 11,1 SDC funds which should generate $440,000 per year on an average. -',s 3~ i-
11
Mr. Roberts said that staff conducted a preliminary owner survey to see which ofYl a
the identified target areas were most receptive to selling land and allowing the City ~ ~7<
to develop a pathway. i n ~ -
t
,r. Roberts reviewed the chart fisting the priorities of each CIT and of the Planning j= , u ,77
Commission. He pointed out that the intent of the bond measure was to protect ~'1''>`~ 1- ~ ~ ' ~ ~
buildable land. ° ; "-4 F
- -
?dr. Roberts recommended that the Council adopt the Planning Commission t -
priorities with some modifications, including price changes. He noted that the
neighborhood pledged $32,000 towards purchase of the Bond Street property; the ~ • '.0-1, ~ - . j
Wetlands Conservancy is holding the money has pledged it contingent on the City r t
'
agreeing not to extend the road in the future. x~
' e E- c} r -
~f S -
Mr. Roberts recommended that the City try to partner with the County on the . `'tF 7
r purchase of the 129th site. He commented that Metro officials strongly 1`"- ~ t -
recommended that jurisdictions maximize their potential for receiving regional' `
F corridor dollars, citing the identification of a land acquisition corridor running from t I
Hall Blvd down to the existing trail as a potential partnership opportunity. He said S. x t- -
c that any money not allocated on list projects should be shifted to trails to maximize r_ 3 '
the leverage opportunity with Metro. Q -
_
- - - " C
' k 1`- a` s -
c e CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 10 u d > r r , ` F£
1!r r- kk x,, L. f'
w 4 5 - `q -j ,r ti
J' a - a a r t
zf ' ` 4 4
~r, d - - - Y t;- x~. tF,
fi 3q
[[L~~~ a -
-
'+x 3 - 4 + - k W
-r r' r 1 r:: - rv -jar -tit -
N , S t E { o-bb
o~ -
{
U t - , ~ ~ ' ~ ~ , - . , : ~7'~~ I . ~ " I -
_ -~-vv ....f .`.r y~~ ~ ._.i_ i. c _i,_._._... v.. ~s_ r,__y. l._fl .i_. c:_._._. 5..': . _ :.,t u , .t~
,-N~ W _ t k ;
v a it;
k
s6,
a ~ - - -
M_ 11.11 3
- a - x r
x.23 +i- h. a f ?t z S #
t~i-u _ -
Y { _
' ' - _ i ~
>n _ _ -_au-~_ - -
r x
-r~, r. ''-1. - -i Tzr
F,
d . Public Testimony
Mayor Nicoli opened the hearing to public testimony and explained the hearing - '
3 ti procedures.
tE r -
> Jack Broome, PO Box 26, Tualatin, Wetlands Conservancy Properties Director, ; _
referred to his letter to Mayor Nicoli. He said that when they talked with the Gage - 3 s
sisters about acquiring the property and with others about donating money towards i _
purchasing the property, they pledged to protect all four acres as open space. He ; - w
stated that the Gage sisters have agreed to the bargain price of $150,000 and the y- ; n~~ t
neighbors have pledged $32,000 based on that understanding. He said that the , `
Wetlands Conservancy felt that it needed to honor that pledge. 3 1 _
-x
Mayor Nicoli asked if the Gage sisters had put any time constraints on the offer.
Mr. Broome stated that though their option had expired; he understood that Lhe ~ Z ~ ~ I 1
Gages were still open to the proposal, as they wanted to protect their property. &
1 > Matt St. Peter, 14356 SW 130th, showed slides of the land around 129th and Bull y ~ E J
z'-
Mountain to illustrate the wilderness nature of the property. He stated that he k-%' ,
r supported the Planning Commission's recommendation to purchase area F-3 on 129th
and Bull Mountain, citing as reasons that it was a valuable area and the onl p i"?_-"'4 s:
remaining undeveloped land in that vicinity. He pointed out that the essentially flat _
topography of the site allowed wheelchair access while the rear slope connected the z --y Y , ~
property to another property to the north being dedicated to the City. He said that 1 '
the entire 12 acre site provided the experience of being surrounded by a wilderness r ~ ; a "
t area.
=s ~
11
> Scott White, 14423 SW 130th, distributed a memo dated April 8, 1996 that f'
included a petition signed by residents of Wood Fir Estates requesting 4' `x arv
purchase of s ~
the F-3 forest area on 129th and Bull Mountain Road. He spoke to the purchase of T 1 ;
this parcel as a Tigard issue that would benefit the entire city, much as the other, 11
parks and trails benefitted the city. He stated that the property owners have 1 ~ ~ . i
v
indicated to him that they intended to sell this property this summer, either to the r
City, the County, or to developers. 1,1 -
'~'nr,.r.~ b
Mr. White said that he thought the purchase of this valuable land fulfilled the " W'
Greenspaces initiative. He expressed his appreciation to the Mayor and Council for -
trying to maximize land acquisitions and spoke for maximizing trail funding as well.
He asked that the Council move now, pointing out that the County has also identified 4_
j-1 "I - , ~ . W'- ~ 1,~,
this as a Greenspaces area. He asked that the Council not defer its action to the x ti 4
point where the property was lost. '
t _ 1 g
> Mark Brennan, 14378 SW 130th, spoke in support of the Planning Commission's - v§ t r
recommendation to purchase the F-3 forested area at 129th and Bull Mountain. He
r P said that he and his family moved to the area because of the forested nature of that k
immediate area. He said that with the amount of development occurring, he liked
the City's pursuit of greenspaces and passive parks to keep the beauty of the area. "`t
> Chris Counts, 9600 SW Riverwood Lane, spoke in support of the purchase of the ,V 5
Cook Park parcel (F-2). He thanked Duane Roberts and Liz Newton on staff and
r i
t -
xh ; - CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 11 f
t
r
td - r
- - _ -
x w f F
K- _ _ - h {
- :1, f 3A%t t
k $
y 1
:-It I f- t3' t ik -
j
ti ! - ti 1 +
>i
r' -
y -
-
,12 , - ~ - I ~ ~ : : 1~ I I . I I I . I I . I I , . . I - ~ I ~ I ~ - ~ ; 11 ~ - - ,
7-, ~:Y .a - - _
~4
Ma -
MFG F - t S l,) -
~ c
3. R
.S i,~t}c2 i
"4.~v.- ....._,-,-.e,_....--.---.-..e.-vm ,-i.a-.-----
-N3 p~7 { - -4- -
} - x Z si-.x,
, ^a oi Y `
7
F ' the Friends of Cook Park for their work over the past four to five months to enhance
Cook Park as a resource for the entire community. He summarized the report on . 1
the F-2 parcel that he had presented previously to the Planning Commission and to
the Council. = " J
F..,-
- -
Tr n -
.1 I „i Mr. Counts contended that the parcel F-2 should be purchased with greenspace ,
dollars because it contained sensitive forest, valuable wildlife habitat and had strong _ - _ _
community support. He noted that the 1987 Tigard park plan recommended
. , purchase of parcels such as this to complete the Tualatin River Greenway. He stated w - ,,~-r;'
that this was an ecologically significant parcel 4 t
> Kenneth Steele, 8035 SW Churchill Court, and Rick Weigill, 8110 SW Bond t- ? _i
Street, Friends of Tigard Greenspace, addressed the Council. ~ ' -
° ' ? ,
S x
Mr. Steele stated that they supported the staff recommendation of purchasing 'z~~2~ V k
buildable lands before building trails. He said ,t ~
d ,that he rhnught that in the future [here r' 4+ t~
i would be more money available for building trails from the SDC funds and other n' ---.T=---;w--. -
Y - sources. He pointed out that the F-4 parcel was very buildable, was the only parcel t,Nq Y s4!: , '
with funding from the neighbors, and had a seller willing to sell below the assessed 1 Ai« r
value. He noted that the Gage sisters have been very willing to grant extensions of ,~.:fi>;-~; S , I -
time when the Friends' fund raising efforts did not reach the amount needed; thew ,
c Gages' intent was to see the land preserved in its natural state. $ ` ~ , -
t Mr. Weigill stated that he felt that the Gage sisters saw selling the land below its r,,-.
value as a means of preserving all four acres as wetlands. -
r ~sL~ (d Councilor Rohlf asked what impact would building the road to make the connection -s
have on the money pledged by the neighbors. Mr. Weigill said that many neighbors ; F ate-
1F
would be concerned about that because their primary concern was safety for the x r
children in the area. He said that they did not want to encourage traffic on the road.
Mr. Steele said that part of the bargain included not developing the road, and that LL 'f~ti
the Gages might not be willing to sell it for that price if it included the road. x
> Mike Boyd, 14390 SW 130th Avenue, expressed his support for the purchase of the I{ ' ~'i R. a
F-3 parcel on 129th and Bull Mountain. He said that one of the issues right now in K~ g-
this area was the lack of places to walk; there were no sidewalks on Bull Mountain w,v
Road. He said that he thought it would be advantageous and safer for children and -
- - j pedestrians to have an area where they could walk and/or play. He pointed out that i ~a a
1f they were running out of room up there with all the recent development. yt' t ,f
f, 1
> Mark Vossler, 9500 SW Riverwood, stated that he was there to testify on behalf v" f
of the South CIT. He said that they reached consensus on a strategy of maximum r v>
land acquisition with the dollars as opposed to developing trails with the Greenspaces 5 ~ r ~ k
a money. He said that they favored distributing the money over several projects rather F .
} than using most of it on a single project. He stated that they also favored
partnerships with Washington County on purchasing the larger more expensive I .'I
projects like area F-3. ? r -qtr
` Mr. Vossler reviewed the three proposed sites that the CIT found to be outstanding: t ~ _ _
area F-2 north of Cook Park to complete the Tualatin River Greenway, area F-3 i r
4 R 1'-,
X%~ f .,H I
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 12 ti F
t
~ $F4,
- ,
, a
L h r:
mow. -
0-.1 t -
rt
r
a
1
~~7 i~,-,,,,,~,,~i,f- ~t,~-~-~', L " . , , . - ~ , - - I ~ I ~ - ~ -1-1 I 1. ~ , ~;,z , i,~ " -1 j
s
f- - ~ " ~
- t r
t
r - J~.
f
-
d3M
a a: Sax u_ _ s_
r-
_ rv ti r- S #y
%TIIs'~`uI~V',~
«.s•'3yn--€
s- y ix
t ~ ~_-fit fp~~'c
t 5 rt, with its strong neighborhood support, and area F-1 to complete the Fanno Creek t
corridor.
3 > Brent Black, 15690 SW 82nd Avenue, supported the comments of Mr. Vossler ing
r..^~ support of purchasing the three proposed areas. He pointed out that area F-5 was
t: v%;°°w?= the parcel at Bond Street and 82nd, not area F-3.!
=X'
66 ~L
e. Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing.f
K - f. Council Consideration sz '
Mayor Nicoli said that the Council would consider this at the informal workshop'- -
session next week. He noted that their goal would be to take formal action at the C p~ 9
az- April 23 meeting.
'j > Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting for a break at 9.15 p.m.
- > Mayor Nicoli reconvened the meeting at 9:24 p.m. -
r -rs+syyg mr-g -
7. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) -ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA)
k y 95-0007 PRICE/HIRINGS4
a
!ffie
Price requests annexation of one parcel of 0.41 acres into the City and changing thei • `
comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County Office Commercial to City of r n "I
I
Tigard Professional Office/C-P. Himing requests annexation of one parcel of 0.34 acres ` sYi'S s s~
MR,
into the city and changing the comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County
Office Commercial to City of Tigard Professional Office/C-P. LOCATION: Southeast t
corner of SW Hall Blvd and SW Oak Street.
a. Open Public Hearing
> Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing.
Y,- b. Declarations or Challenges: None s
S
~
C. Staff Report
fir- r- ; Y a z n w_~„F ur.
} Ray Valone, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He reviewed the
location € of the two
Metzger; the vacant north parcel belonged southeast to Dorothy Hirning and Sharron Sargeart
while the south parcel with a duplex belonged to Ira and Linda Price. He said that
Y
A- A
these two separate proposals were combined into one application for annexation. r
Mr. Valone said that the proposal complied with all city policies, met the , k %t t t y
r t requirements of the Boundary Commission for a double majority action, and had
t r adequate services and facilities available to the properties. He stated that the zonings
# f3 S
for the land upon annexation would be Commercial Office. He said that the only
notified party responding with an objection was the Police Department whop j E
recommended that the owner of the south parcel comply with the zoning code
provisions prior to annexation into the city.
~ ~ ~ x ti mac, _
J P'7`
= f z s CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 13 t
' ~ t ~y ~ S-''is, Tom' ~5+' - •
...-q•77-11,,! ,tee sa c^ m
T`a,fi
%
~ T+a
~°:R Sl =r^;; _ - t 7t rNy,-ac+
r A' 'f f J t K
k 1~ t S T,v S F
C., Y R 1. ! 5 f
~ j
a y
y z a x 3~ ;
Rtis ".....~.r.... 1..,.__..._~.. ..,.gym...,.. _ -rx~atT -.+z
r
yo"*!-~
, ANN
a Mr. Valone explained that the back part of the Prices' parcel was used for a tree
r cutting operation that was illegal under the current county zoning of Office
r f 3 Commercial; because of lack of compliance action by the owner, the County was te 4 ,
pursuing an enforcement action against him. Annexation into Tigard was one of the -
three options available to the owner; however, the use was also illegal under the
i City's Commercial Office zoning and would require the City to take enforcement 4
action against the owner.::
Mr. Valone stated that staff agreed with the Police Department and recommended'
- that the owners of the south parcel comply with the zoning code prior to annexing };t
into the city. He recommended that the Council annex only the Hirning property.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the owners have been spoken to about withdrawing their
> tree cutting gneratinn, Mr, Valone -aid that the County talked to them about it. and
a he informed the Prices earlier that the use was illegal in the City. Staff was s
recommending against annexation; however, Mr. Price indicated that he still wanted u ' Ngr
r to go forward with the annexation.?
r
d. Public Testimony
> OPPONENTS > ~x
~J ~ 4ra~sr ~
Terry Wolfe, 10545 SW 85th Avenue, reviewed the various problems he saw with
s5kzR' <a
the property to the back of him. He said that there was now a cliff off the back side
of his property, causing him concern for the safety of his young children and the - t
possibility of landslides. He said that the owner parked large pieces of equipments=2Y ,a m y
7 on the land, and ran the operation 7 days a weeks, 365 days a year, beginning early
in the morning.
_ Mr. Wolfe presented signatures from the surrounding neighborhood disapproving of
i a tree cutting operation at that location. He asked what the City and County
regulations were regarding someone who started a business without filing for r -IRL 5.9
permits, especially when the business turned out to be illegal. He noted thus k
wetllands, ad including the loud noise, traffic 1
devalued properties, of a neighborhood
P Perties destruction presence of a garbage umP• rs ~
v
Mr. Wolfe asked that Mr. Price's business be removed if it wasn't supposed to be, r €i_E _N-V
? r},_~
there, and said that that the damae he has caused to
had vidotaped evidence of the the situtionbors' property be rectified. He
! 1 \Y ; F St k
> APPLICANTS e:,
s
y > Judy Huff, representing Dorothy Hirning, stated that Ms. Hirning wanted r x 1
her property to be annexed so she could get utilities. She said that Ms._ s
j Hirning was not aware of any illegal activity on her parcel but was trying to s ? s3 3
1 determine what was going on.
Y
t
z F
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 14 ; K ° r
a di z ~ _
4,A j
r' 3 r -x s a [
r pp
e^"rAC Y 7 pt - §
4t~L _ _ t R J
7 f ] T_
x
-i r 't v .s-
1Yv R y t - ,
fi
t,..-a - } _
-h.iT .sa `x' :e.im«,..,.~.,.~..v_._..,,.L - .a. ,__.a. !i -.,.i.......<+.l e..
r~ ,I x ' n `•x~ f s y
_ i- - -L 'a .tls~t
~,~"rah `l r [ - t F
3" ,p Yt' " -e - -
r F e„..,,,, "tiY.et!`'w `S,cax..22 ._...d.`.....,,..s.uw... v,...,,.s. - . ...a~ ` - _ .r r
a i S
r
c t s.'`'~t .F $ h j - 4~ 4 ~
A ;S, . l~r- .y. - { _ - kJ'---girl'# :s._. ;L,.:
u t.~~._L", ..,,~tx ':rte";~,K:.:.:e i
µ
Councilor Moore asked why the applications were combined. Mr. Valone said that
r they were two separate requests coming in about the same time that were combined , Y
a "
k
g~ by the staff for ease of processing and cost savings in the Boundary Commission
rt, _ t .L !..r,..2...~ ,
s ' - ' process. r F '
-nz > Ira Price, owner of Lot 2800, stated that he has talked with Mr. Valone. ~ ' -
Mayor Nicoll asked for clarification on what was involved in his tree cutting „ z
: operation. Mr. Price explained that he served residential property owners * r j , - -
- xr, x_.t x.
„ .,-,y:: - who needed trees cut down for whatever reason and then he cut the trees for F- u
firewood. V' - 's of " k
Mayor Nicoli reiterated that Mr. Price had an illegal use on his property that r j ~~V
the City would nursne through the court system to remove from the property. : z j
He asked Mr. Price if he was willin to discontinue the use and move it to ~ `s- r , ~,*L r
g x
1= 4 ' ~
another zone where that use was permitted.
u'
f ' Mr. Price commented that there were other businesses in the City that did
exactly the same thing he did, only they were listed as landscaping firms
r instead of tree cutting operations at the state level. 1 ~F
a vim.-..S„ 't3'~...i
' y,2.
re`?_ _ Mayor Nicoli stated that the staff has advised the Council that Mr. Price's ' ~
:u,,
e Ci would send an officer out to cite Mr. A~-`'+~Y°Cn=t` MM , `ye
use was illegal, and therefore [h ty Price, should a complaint be filed. - ~ * i r ,!r"V, 4
s .4n ,
Mr. Price stated that he would be cuttin himself out of a livelihood. He ' ` ,
4 , contended that just down the street, 50 feet from Safeway, another tree , ~ » '
service operated doing exactly what he did. He said that he wanted to annex y~ *I -
into the City to get better security and services for the duplex on the 1 xF ~ z~
property. He stated that he had not been aware when he bought the property ~ k ~
that he could not operate his tree service on it. He stated that he has since ~ ,
Te, K4 - r~ r ,y
cleaned up the unsightly mess on his property.
r' b ~ r ~
t Mr. Price said that his operation was brought to the attention of the County - , ~ ~'-4 -
b a nei hbor on the east whose roe extended some 20 feet on to his s -
Y g P P rtY r~Z,, Mrs- r a
property (this was done when the flag lot was developed to achieve a 5,000 s~
square foot lot). He said that the neighbor built an 8' x 10' shed on ; - z
n approximately 15 feet of his property, and after the neighbor reported him , 3t 'm ~ ,
to the County, Mr. Price asked him to move his shed. , V t _ ~
? Mr. Price said the County noticed the illegal operation when they came out - 1
to look at the property. He said that the County suggested he annex into [ -1 7j1,7
Tigard which was why he was here. : € z XT& -.j
m
j Mayor Nicoli stated that while the Council had no objection to Mr. Price as a _ Y~-- ~ ~ -
s a resider.[ of the city, they were concerned at the likelihood of immediate , x , - _
court action upon annexation into the City. t x7 rxp % t
Mr. Price stated that he wanted to know why others have been annexed in f'~g
l and he couldn't come in. Mayor Nicoli said that they would have tos 1, '7
r; Y - V1 ; T£,- 1
,F--t, .i v} -
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 15 y%~- - P,.I _
r . ? 4
A s*~" - rye
' -`--•-"--'--;Y - - '°..^,..:e,r.,_, -..tp, -,f~,... .Y.a•~" -YA tip;-
= h ~ O r
> r F
A,3 - k } - ^k -
t
S x 4
} [
t
~ I I I'" ~ , , J , I
,-V,- , - , - - .1~ ~ - , - , ~~,,~,,-,,,,',,S'-~-,~ . ~1
~NIIN "~i'' l
~s Y N - - 4 'k -ftn _F,k 4,, a t
U-, -L - . I I , ~ . , , - . - .1 ~ ~ - , L,~",' ,
„i im " -
;x ~a
P, , •-m-sv •c 2: s _ ~ r""'~'T.r~ - - -r- - 7, .1 °'.-77 . k -lam
3
I" - " - , ~ , - - , ~ ~ I ~ , ~j - Ms
Faffis , - "
i _ .~-.."_„vm..-~...,~.~,.w. r "x , Izss.s.~r• - q ,s
i^ y;"u a,-,~s*# .z t'
X J t
-y E r p
k t i
y
investigate that on an individual property basis, noting the various ways }
k someone might come into the City with that use. I I` 11 ~
T111 4 -
a
Mr. Price confirmed that none of his operation extended on to Ms. Hirning's tt
property; he only stored firewood there temporarily with her permission. It i -
s a i.. a f... w V•....• r of - Fd'f
f - i yk~..-.~ s--~ _ { r has since been r2iiivv'u. iae riiitcu that ills, Himing was in the process o - ~ -
selling her property. r!.
~ r- .
h £ f2 Councilor Rohlf asked if Mr. Price has talked with any of the other
r neighbors about their concerns regarding his operation. Mr. Price reviewed is"}
- the neighbors he has talked to, all of whom appreciated his cleaning up the - ~ • r- ~
` mess. He said that the only complaint he receive'. was from the neighbor ; 3
who built his shed on Mr. Price's property and objected to the cutting down - ~.F ~ ;
M,
+ ~of the trees. He noted that development of the properties was inevitable. He } : ~ ~j- t
stated that he would put up whatever type of fencing was required to improve 4 r'
I 211.! fi~ 1,
i q the property. n a r y x
i
z1 1 ~ _ 11., I
' i > OPPONENTS r°
R
> Mike Davis, 8535 SW Pine, expressed concern at saying that the property ` . r s j
11
€ - x ` was "cleaned up" when there were piles of tree clippings all over the 4v A,, , ~ '3~ ; Pr
- T1 i Y f- - +1-
propeiny. He said that he hoped that there were regulations that would _ , 4;
y prohibit running machinery at 6 a.m., require onsite sanitation facilities for - ~
I _ the workers, and prevent excavation of a property without provisions for the 1 ,
protection of the neighbors' properties. He mentioned concerns about 4, , r - `
F , landslides on Mr. Wolfe's property. , z a
Mr. Davis said that he understood that permits were required prior to f. -
excavation. Though he did not know if such permits had been obtained, he , n
was led to believe b others in the nei hborhood that those cniiits were not
Y g P - 1
} obtained. He stated that he was opposed to the City of Tigard taking on the F 6' ~ ' I% ` a
- in
financial responsibility of lawsuits to evict an illegal business, contending that g ;
F the County should settle the matter to their satisfaction prior to the City's i _ ~
i 1 allowing Mr. Price to annex into the city. ~ T,
? 11,
yt > Pat Kindrick, 10565 SW 85th Avenue, commented that the property ~f i
smelled like a sewer and was covered with gravel, water, mud and chips. t , 3 # ~~v , [
E She said that for the 45 years she has lived here, it had been pretty to look s 0 ~
4 ~ s in that direction but now they can see Hall Blvd with trucks going in and out s " ` 1 k N
+a on a daily basis. She suggested looking at Mr. Wolfe's videotape. is w
> Hazel Lyon, 10440 SW 87th Avenue, stated that the property was an s~
- - ? eyesore and that trucks were parked on the property. She said that she hoped g V j
_ iy something could be done for the neighbors. i4 t
! - k id i Y P-
> APPLICANT , - , .
4 ` > Dorothy Hirning, SW 90th, answered questions from Mayor Nicoli. Mayor x~ t t
F 4 _ Nicoli asked if she was aware that by allowing her neighbor to operate a
r` ,l f portion of his business on her properly, she might be in violation of City i - ,
` 5 S
I ill
I CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 16 _
- "z l s4"~ ` { .
e' - yT 3'(-
5 k T - 1 X-
y 'g--' - , y l ,
a of _ i
{ , _ r ,r rt -
- b Y Y - -4 -t
`x S)- F - R i e
f k , fit, r - _ f1r ) .
x x
irk, r-~ - YA
r - ~V
<.".T..,re.
t
_
-
s '4 8.,,,a z y -
_
?ji 11 yk.-: 1r`~.a Y ip- "'S - - S 't 'ck - _
c`'f. r`>- .w»aw..~:..,~:.: me umu:.maws.a....-' ..,,...s._..._,~ - '4 7 ` ~i `
" ~
yj Y7 "1.. ~ X ''x .t x. t
s t3 , -E-a 8
- ~Q ordinances. Ms. Hirning said that she allowed Mr. Price only to store some , P 1§ ;
s, firewood temporarily on her property with the understanding that it would be -r
yap r ? e v moved as soon as he could move it. z
- -Y,..,-x,. i(i kY it L~4k R-+.PJ-..
I, e. Staff Recommendation
t 14x',~ 4~wkP
- Mr. Vaione said that staff recommended that Council adopt the Vldinauws allotiin°'
only Dorothy Hirning's lot 2801 into the City and excluding lot 2800.
3 _ f. Council Questions a
m4m
r/ g. Close Public Hearing ~ y~ t
4
SKI' _..y... t'-y. ,H•
Mayor Ncoli closed the public hearing. ¢~Yxuv
y Xt{ _ ~aa,{>s s'r -'2 5'F e,;ton. 3.
h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 96-20 & Ordinance No. 96-12 ~~`r
1&_
" Councilor Rohlf stated that he thought it would be silly for the City to take on the w
x~ 1
~ h Ma Gt
- c problems Washington County has already addressed. He said that he supported .
,r allowing in only the Himing property. ' r - f
Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Scheckla, to adopt Resolution No. 96- ay.--
* 20 per Attachment A. F,~ii- t
5 4J' - I x~iT -GM
N
The City Recorder read Resolution No. 96-20 by number and title. . t g
~
RESOLUTION NO. 96-20, A RESOLUTION INITIATING ANNEXATION TO - ,W,
THE CITY OF TIGARD OF THE TERRITORY AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A, - `
° -z q AND ILLUSTRATED IN EXHIBIT B, CCA 95-07. ~ 1
rte..
7~ .1
of "Mayor N; end
Motion was approved by unanimous vote „ Council present. .eo/" .t a ~ ~ ~ k
Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla, and Moore voted "yes.") Kr
~
r Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Rohlf, to adopt Ordinance `mg' z ~ t i
} No. 96-12 per Attachment A.e t 1
e The City Recorder read Ordinance No. 96-12 by number and title. ~ ; ,
'
ORDINANCE NO. 96-12, AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ~ *,~~1
CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND DECLARING AN P W dj, - 3
,a - i''' EFFECTIVE DATE, ZPA 95-07. - t'.' 3 h ]
"
rti ~ I 4 $ Motion was approved by a unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor . ~ ~r Wz ~,E ~ Jr
Nicoli and Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla, and Moore voted "yes.") 4 - # ~a mar E}
Y{ 1 1 } , -
i - f
, 8. PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) CITY OF TIGARD - UNDERGROUNDING &>I,
~ ~ -
I ,E
UTILITIES EXCEPTION t y - z h
" ~S , , - -~-~~,V;,--~ I ~111 I ~ ~
]~,y
- ~a :3, a B
{ A proposal to amend the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.164.120 to add ,
s ~ ~ Sections C and D to provide for exceptions to the underground utility requirement and a fee F t _
C
- s -qt, k ¢ f, ,;`~,T to
k~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 17 , G =E
h E f
- 4 , 7 A .y
? ~ s ; z ~ 'i
^fi S ,k~ d ~ ,t ,q~,w.,.~-.~,...- ,=~vn t+tmF'-,"1"x !WT r! cr7v.u _ a ~,vi3~.hh 7"r Y _
Y
a
h
~
'}'Ltk- s
t 4
E - - " ~ , , , . , 1-`~~- , , -,L~e,~~~, f, ,,~z ,-,Ag,
Z t i .L x`34
~ A Sh _
, - , - , I . ~L , - ~ , , , ~ I i - , --t-t~,- - -~4~ ,
i
r, ;N , ~ , . I--- , " - -14
F ~a3s F~.t r 'x i - r `x4i',r a'"j'>+ , t t
G~S..i,. t .f - r d a.~'x. 4 ?
.~.y - x r F2 x' rP,n ,s'" - r
Cali' L 3 - t l h - 1 Y d-- - w ii - y _
y. g .i
is 9a c 4 -ia
r t
_ ate' r _ -,,I
i
x r - 1J
t
i .
. . " I I - ~ - . ~ . ~ lr~ M , ~R- - - - , - Z~~ -
t i
Iq.. , - - - - f
F•-..t e5 rastaa.-ra~.a
5.
6 4 - -
y" € S ~ Y
- ``r 4
M
'r'te
o Tt 'S.` 4- ,x,1 sf ' ? - _ -
t_
'~"p t Y~ - fir- T..-,
'rr""'azw i~z -t,,„t-. 'aa -,=.,.a,.,,..+>a.ax ;:-..e __...~.'~u~ 71Jvtn.
-3 9 "'S- - -1 }-Y-at S
S `k
£ z~hx in lieu of undergrounding. Zone Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) 96-0001 LOCATION: ~i x 19
1- fi City Wide. ZONE: City Wide. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Statewide Planning ' x~
-7 - f ~ Goals 1,2 and 11; Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1 a., 2.1.1, 2.1.3, 7.1.2 c and , -
- 7.7.1; Community Development Code Chapters 18.30 and 18.164. " g
,
t x - -
M- :,1 a. Open Public Hearing f
M ; Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing. ( y s
~ ~L ' ,~?,7t ~ sU
a M,- ~ ° b. Declarations or Challenges
1'~ALL' _ a~ _ k `til}~'T'ti? ~tR"'y n" :i if 'r^.~ 's
= Councilor Moore declared that he had been the PGE representative who presented 3~ r-„
the original request to the City Council two or three years ago; this might be a 1 ~ t
N -1 5 conflict of interest for him. He said that he also had some concerns about the r { r 4Y - 51 ,
i wording of the proposed agreement. He asked for further Council discussion of this t
4 issue during a study session. x `
pp
£ LP Z !M- I
- ~ Councilor Scheckla asked if there was a rush on this item, pointing out that ~ t ~ °
Councilor Hunt wasn't here. He said that he also had some questions regarding this nw
a
issue. ~ a _
M0 I
Mr. Hendryx said that there was no rush on this; it was something that needed to be F V; s z £°4, Ag
'
cleaned up in the Code. He said that staff could provide whatever explanations the ' M
I Council needed at a study session. q n
_ The Council discussed Councilor Moore's request and agreed to advise Councilor x c. W ~ '
w Hunt of the situation and to set the item over to April 23. i°
' t"*'+,`F,': 9. CONTINUATION O APP^E' AL OF PLR 95-005, SUB" 95-004, SLR 95-007 ;~"-r. ~ _
c (HILLSHIILE WOODS In c~f "r
a. Staff recommendation: City Council withdraw the subdivision application. z~ -
b. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 96-21x d
_ p W, t i
1 Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt Resolution
k No. 96-21. N yy, 1- t
i a M~
The City Recorder read Resolution No. 96-21 by number and title. v , y
RESOLUTION NO. 96-21, A RESOLUTION TO WITHDRAW DEVELOPMENT A ~ - ' i
t APPLICATION OF SUBDIVISION 95-04, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT c{ t
REVIEW, PDR 95-05, SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW 95-07, FOR THE FERN ° w' , , t
, i : STREET METRO GREENSPACES PROPERTY. ~,c Gg.
, ~ The motion passed by a unanimous vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, 'r' k yk . ~i
-C_ Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla and Moore voting "yes. , ~ s F °
s~S
10. DISCUSS WASHINGTON COUNTY COOPERATIVE LIBRARY SERVICE CAPITAL a
LEVY , " -
r i a. Staff Report f({ - ' - ` tt
£ k~Y+ {{(F{(kk y ""F tn,.C,y yE5§;3 r',nliq
Q CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 18 ;1 S
Ott ro r ti v 1- - 4 x ' ~ E
4,h fr~
}fY~" $s drama "i- , n
z' - r r - _ 'r^° - ~.,'s 5 - s i r a, ` r ` °t sr:w- i
. ~f-~_'~-!- " , * ~4""~, ",A.-E~-Z - , _ . 4~ - r, "
of y - - t y d,'-, S S f. Y, - 'b`4- 3.ik'e t-
3 I 1.
5 } - 7 F
5 k- . -3 - 9 9 aptW z.~
f fy
" F i- -'f £ it -
s".5 x P.c , z ! rr'
r
~ a
' i 1 J. 'u ~..t .iii. 7 i
_...~.._t~._. . . r
_ ~ a n.YS.., r.=.l v..~_s..~r ~ . r_ rc _-_~.,s._.. _ -.r x_~ i~. ..u t 2
-
-
V.' 9 dT~~° S" 'L ,r S k f
-n- { 5 r-a- - - - - - - V' - . y' F 'cL ' - ' -
t~•`"`"C Ya4 pY~ -1, y _ _ .._.e._i._.._aa..... Srywatca~•=ss,«:^.'w"aStdv°.ai.+e.v.-...-:..__,_....~.-...,... ; £h,s i`4,rr F -
i' t 2ic'F r'L- .r -.-I :v V ~L bsy { was,.
~ ~ ,t
z
as 3 s,
g 3
m , , i b. Council Discussion and Direction t ;
I,, Fr This iteni was continued to April 23. f 1;.,
.1 - "°7 , -iz:a'"`::-I F~'£.? ~xa;T a4ssz.~-,,-....V-",7: "
11. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION -REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT ORDINANCE "
s ` - - "._X" - -
' AMENDMENT k .
z a. Staff Report X ~4 A Y, `a 5
Q. fly;
11
- ~ - mI Pam Beery, City Attorney, presented the staff report. She stated that the resolution i '
Aksa,_ RY F;x«'._a:'~..,.'1 now reflected the Council's discussions and allowed for an annual fee adjustment at p ~ G-~s,.. , oft
as h the discretion of the Council. She said that the fee adjustment had been mandatory tr ~Wa-, ~
r in the previous draft.; ~ *R,
} - i 7
t a b. Council Discussion _ ~ ~ , F,4''
11 . Ms. Beery confirmed for Councilor Rohlf that this provided for the Council to make 5;,~
_ ; t a determination as to whether or not there would be a return on the investment for ,lk .
- the applicant. She said that when the applicant made his request before Council, that ' *d.~ >r
4 - request included the adjustments. -x
s ` Councilor Moore commented that he thought the changes made the reimbursement x r I_
district were more fair to those who had the district imposed on them. He said that s, ~ .
it seemed odd that they would not have some kind of reasonable return on theirt ~t
- - < ' , investment of funds. 1 y-~- -0~ i
Ms. Beery stated that in the first draft, the adjustment was a given; Councilor Hunt '~-1A s s~ a
had previously expressed concern that the Council have discretion over the ~ . 11
I-, I
adjustment, rather than it being automatic. V . 'a ~I
. a`
"r.
} Councilor Moore stated that the term "annual fee adjustment" implied that the fee ° - .
was adjusted every year rather than set for the entire period of the reimbursement t~
district. Ms. Beery reiterated that the increases would be determined at the r -
beginning of the district and would not change from year to year.
_ ; ;
C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 96-13 ~T §
~
19 Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt Ordinance N „ y,
No. 96-13. r e -^s Yet x
€ ,
The City Recorder read Ordinance No. 96-13 by number and title. j;
- 7-1
5'iT4' 1
r'~
ORDINANCE NO. 96-13, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13.09 ~ '
_ (REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICTS OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE). - - -x _
4 4 r Motion was approved by a unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor t r M
n r i _ - N ; Nicoll and Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla, and Moore voted "yes.") r - '
- A - a c ! E
12. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION - AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TIGARD x ; - ~l t
A fa MUNICIPAL CHARGES CODE CHAPTER 3.16 -PARKS SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT , , YS ~ k~s~ L
AF 97 7 f 1 y YK
r" q. 5 - ! t i
V_ 'rw CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 9, 1996 -PAGE 19 i
-~,-~94 - -t C 1 S'
. fi4 '
p
y`' 4 £ x - ^.~^>3a, ~-.-F, t, 's. ,car yr^-•^'*~, - 'a t
r t. T,_ f 4x ,
l
yl ^s l r ha' my z ,.J sTf
, ,-n ~ [a -~-v -,:1-;" -1,1:-"11.~ `--:-,1` " , E",, s, ~ -
'?fir s, z 't r - , - iz-- > ,N- v3 r .
f`i`t _ t~ _ 11~# ~4-F ~c- a
Y t
}T i .y'wf ? vto -
"J2 tr SS { .d - - Y R
1 F - - J f - i
_q v
-Z 'a
#t& rrf v
3'
c
W`v
1 _ +a 3
A ~ ~ C G it iz~ls-
cA #t -
Mfi
, affillp
yt a. Staff Report
Mme? i Ms. Beery explained that this was a housekeeping measure to repeal a section of the
ate code .de.ed obsolete by the Council's decision reoardinoa narks SDC.. M fs
ZUB
za
- b. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 96-14
."'~,r`y',,:;-:,~5~*ee'x,
4 L~ Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt '
x Ordinance No. 96-14. p `yk i
- The
z _ City Recorder read Ordinance No. 96-14 by number and title.
niv
zr - ORDINANCE NO. 96-14, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL ~ ;
e 4 CODE BY REPEALING CHAPTER 3.16
+ a _-a is
Motion was approved by a unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor
Nicoli and Councilors Rohlf, Scheckla, and Moore voted "yes.")
R;
13. NON-AGENDA ITEMS vi 11T,
``rfiz
47
14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 10:25
a p.m. under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (3), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real
property transactions, current and pending litigation issues.F
15. ADJOURNMENT: 11:58 p.m.
Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder
i f or, City o Tigard` [
Date: "
n k
r= ,r
-Rm
xx x R
5 M' 1 ,s. d
q` F 3-ra r t 5 - f:\recordcftcm1ccmW9.96 q`F,sY t
+ ¢ yam' b sy~~~
Gp~-- ixs r r _
A rtT rc ~s
r + g
F
- ti CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - APRIL 9, 1996 - PAGE 20 , r#s ~ SK
'r{t 4s ~i - x '`t S~ 3
a~ ~ ~~3 a - - - s--z,r- ..G"€..,~-x ^~~-+•,-...®.n:Marna, - e` 'f.
~z r , r~ F
VIM
"A K_
yo~
04
Ax's
N
4
G ^.•--,i--.-r . ~~c -+r•..^st-.....-..r -*.-._++r~--,.~n'__`m""°r"!"'~ 'r-,-' r ~'^'+'7~ --^'!^--+F+-,..+- } t,°.'~_ "`•-~r -i
a r s
{-+E.,am'#aa{-,RMrr
55,
01-
F Y
OR t~,
K, M
NEWSPAPERS, AI~1Ri~, inii Legal
IY E ~CfMUNITY
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 8443 ` "',P" {r 3 c ,AE t
st
S BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 €s^. -1 -
A (1 8 19
rv I
; ;;Y OF TIGARp Legal Notice Advertising
- a°-,`~,Ft> ^ s •City of Tigard • u rears set motice
a , f 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
ar • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit
hh ~ ,
x •Tigard,Oregon 97223-8199
'Accounts Payable:Terry
7,57 jfA;1
rt._, mss' _
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION _
s# STATE OF OREGON, )
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, as.
Kathy GnAPr
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising_ ~s
Director, or his principal clerk, of thdTi ga rrl Tua 7 at, n Times
.,„-s"~•~' x x
Y a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010
in the
4} and 183.020; published at Tigard
'•r3$e aforesaid county and state;, that the „ _ -9
-z# City Council Business Meeting
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the {f
entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and
consecutive in the following issues: max,.. ~
- April 4 ,1996
E ~ -
Subscribed and sworn to ore me this4th day, og Apri 1,1996 _`rx {tQ~ i
OFFICIA~
BUR
j
All r f 3- Notaryblic for Oregon NO AR', j i' IC -OREGON
'
WMM
COMMISSION NO. 024662 {
{ mac My Commission Expires: OMM;SSION EXPIRES MAY 16, 1997
x AFFIDAVIT
rk ,--x ~ r;a U' i ~k~3 ~y ,s'ryR~ r "
W 4,
;rte-S y f Z € k t
F k~
ry ~ 1i
k To
4151
,u•,;~,r.,.•:.~,-~.~5~,..'~sa,;,,__,.=h+..,n ` `a:-,F'~-`fie.. in- :'~.''rs - -z.,r ..;E,, ,:`Ff-_K;t,; ~.r~'r. ~`'~r",
s;rr;.:, ;i,<',` ,2.:r°b xk•: _ ,x•x, r,;~•r.- s. ,k_ _ a~ ;^'t..+,• s:iu7rs. r".d 'a$'~k -
,
w~
MR 'MN -t 2 . "
Ajs^ .~'i,`~~fx;. ys~'a i : -H
w.~-sdh ~`-n
-
s a ss t
ca4y'.ar.~'~~"b y{{ }K,~' ay',y eg Nag
P•„ t t k iF
r M, f '3,[x`7 d x _ ! N.) 4 t 1 7 rv'~i y- TU
~Ff i
:m. d^~., .a H`yyy~, xy _ t 5e t J 5•r 7'3y J+7, `1,*atleiH.w 7
T,T 'T
~~~'~'vi-~-~%"~~•~ ~ Sg ~ z x r- - - a' --tom E, 'e ~s~5'~ ~.y,~~,~s~ ~I ?r
• fi
_r ti:
~ Y
ter-:+. lot t -
t~
.f
l.'
The following meeting highlights are published for your information. Pull
,
+ agendas may be obtained from the City Recorder, 1312$ S.W. Halt
j Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by calling 639.4171,
] CITY COUNC
APRIL IL BUSINESS MEETING _t
TIGARD CI HALL - TOWN HALL
f
13125 S. W. HALL BOULEVARD, TIGARD, OREGON
Study Meeting (Red Rock Creek Ram) (6:30 P.M.)
• Executive Session: The Tigard City'Council may 4-
Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 1) i (d).
(e). & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions,
current and pending litigation issues. }
17
3! V-=aSsiCu`. -uuij Arufai rof Active Area
-
• _ Discussion: Mentor Reservoir Site ttesponsibilities
• Agenda Review • _
I Business Meeting (Town Hail) (7:30 P.M.)
1 Council Consideration: i- - _
• Final Order on the Comprehensive Phi Amendment (CPA)
95-0006 PhMLewis School Site Request: To amend the .
Comprehensive Plan map from Public Institutional to General
Commercial (C-G) on the Phil Lewis School site. Location:
Northwest coiner of Hwy 217 and S.W, 72nd Avenue k z
• - Reimbursement Distriet Ordinauce Amendment =
Public Hearings d,
• CITY OF TIGARD - UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES n
EXCEPTION
-A proposal to amend the Tigard Community Development Code
Section 18.164.120 to add Sections C. and D. to provide for
exceptions to the underground utility require
ment
and a fee in lieu - t ZONE din
ORD INANCE AMEND-ENT
(ZOA)"96-0001
LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: Citywide: APPLICABLE
REVIEW CRITERIA: Statewide Planning Goats 1, 2 and'It-
Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies, l I 1 a, 2.1 1 2 L3, 7,1.2 c.
and 7 7 1, Community Development Code chapters 18.30 andp
• ZONE 'CHANGE ANNEXATION (zCA) 9a-0007 t
Price/Hirning
REQUESTS: Price requests annexation of one parcel of 0.41
acres into the city and changing the comprehensive' plan and
zoning from Washin3ton County Office, Commercial to City of
Tigard Professional Office/C-P. Hirnin
_ tyg
one parcel of 0.34 acres into the ty8~ Ong nrrg°the
comprehensive plan and zoning from Washington County Office )
LOO mmercial to City of Tigacd Professional Offic e/C P.
%
- -
CAON: Southeast corner of S.W. Hai! Boulevard and S.W. r
Street.
• Continuation of Appeal of PDR 95-005, SUB 95-004, SLR
9S-W7 (Hillshire Woods II)
• Consideration of Prioritization of Greens;
laces projects:
Review of Recommendations from the Citizen Involvement - '
' Teams. Plannin$ Commission and City Stan.
Public testimony will @ i
also be taken with regard to selection of projects. Selected pp~ioJects"
will be submitted to lutetro. Tigard is entitled to receive $75(,000 {
in local share funds from the Meyo G=nspaces bond measure E
77W3 Publish April 4.1996. d
~ F t sJ
: - : . ' . - 1. S,r
{
r t
MEW_
§QV4L 'A
~ga
-:fi ~t A.,_ T m7 s-,r S-sR _
%
e
r~."
"
Al F s _tjy w' s xx ;sue;: 73 t E- _t~fr i
y~~~' g§ k p s} Z s z --•a f 7 N f- c_ z .9 a*,..5'$''~
4 ~sn g'
4 3
afl•
fs j~..~ a
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 8 43 3
- ~ ~ 6EAVERTON, OREGON 97076
3 s x Legal Notice Advertising
City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet Notice k
~~r y# - 13125 SP7 Hall Blvd. RECEIVED
s~ , r *tigard,Oregon 97233-8199 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit r N
x 7 i r
~
R 21 19%
Accounts Payable-Terry ° 7'
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION `;t,-~'-~, -
r ? A g- OF OREGON, j
` i COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss ` { f
KathyGn3rdPr
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising' R
Director, or his principal clerk, of the T; ga d-T ,al at in 'times "
x _ and 183 20; published at of general circulation as defined in OAS 193.010
aforesaid county and state; that the in the
z 7 ~F~4 7.OA 96-0001 Underground Utilities
4 _09
} 3 r _ t a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the - a
H entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and
41P ~Rx
-4 M- t consecutive in the following issues: gar pp
Nyy,,h
March 28 1996
a
sr r A ~
z
A y
s . ifs teas Subscribed and sworn to~j re me this 8th day of March, l G'rF1CtAi
x § r Lam( NOTAR` IC - OREGON x - i
Notary Pu c for Oregon COMMISSION NO. 024552 r ~ s S
r ° MY C0
MMiSS10N EXPIRES MAY 16, 1997
K s> e I
1"e t j My Commission Expires: '
s F
z a>r, AFFIDAVIT
YET,
~.r t lime
s. _
R
R, {
A J,
n
.tx i s , E
sa'., F4
-4
2-1, m
tip f
s'`n .y $i ,~Y.~x#pA+'P i{^4
, r-
r. a r°. .f' 4 _ r. p i a s, x F ~~,yY"r ~nc9a+ y +
ffl
s~+~ 1' P ~ ~ f Y' R f I L Z -V fT
4
a'
01
_~.M:~-,fix
'Ar
~Sx"s ter.- YK °•4: ._~......~..-u,.,..~.~..,...,.._.,........~....~ "°'r - t ~y3?
-s
V
74
tr i
a t?i j,M r v, Jjj
C s %
t
x -A
The following will be considered by the Tigard City Council on z _ ` T
ss, , y a~ A l1l]G: v~ 7:3v D..u. .°.r BAs Tigard Ci is Con=
112s 9W Hall Bivd., Tigard, on 97223. Both public oral and
written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter wiil,bo, r
conducted in accordance with the rules of Chapter 18.32 of the Tigard r =Yrxr~
' t Municipal Code, and any rules and procedures adopted by the Tigard City
Council , or rules of procedure set farth in Chapter 18.30
Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at sane point prior to the
close of the hearing accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to
allow the Hearings authority and all the parties to respond on the request,
,
precludes an appeal to the Land Use Hoard of Appeals based at that issue
and failure to spear the criterion from the Community Development . 1 r
at which a comment is directed precludes an
Code or
appeal based that s criterion. Further information is available i 3atl : t t r y x
and may be obtained from the Community Development Duector or City
Recorder at the same location, or by calling (503) 639-4171
PUBLIC HEARING
rv- - . • - CITY OF TIGARD
3 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES EXCEPTION
A' proposal to amend the Tigard Community Development Code Section z z
18.164.120 to add Sections C. and D. to provide for exceptions to the_, r '4 t
i underground utility requirement and afee mlieu of nriiergrbunding. -d G
LOCATION:' Citywide. ZONE- Citywide. APPLICABLE-REVIEW
CRITERIA: Statewide Planning goals 1, 2 and 11; Tigard F t
` Comprehensive Plan Policies 11.1 a., 2.1 1 2 1 3, 7 1 2 c and 7.7.1;
i
Community Development Code Chapters 18.30 and 18.164 { g - G
TT8g33 -Publish March 28.1996:
i4k
4 p t 3 ~ , t A}, `il
;Sd`7Mx k
5 f, l f A"6 ~t X'
ZS r ~ } ~ ~ eY i i L '~9g x+33+•
N0xW_ 3
- i Tk N
~fi t h r d r 3! j r
r E Z '42
-A Yl
r
"
rx i
Mmimr-577- 7_
k, *5
x s ~
-.F3..k e ® y
TZ, Akl
#tw.4 >F T 1 4, .af -7J -4 a {h +
y :mow
2L0 w', 7
~rx
M1
flow
7-M 0
yr } tt qi`;5:°. i } Y' tz
Al,
r
x€r f~ t f L9galT - `
1
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS INC. -
$ r + Notice TT 8436=g,^
-t PHONE (503) fitl4.0360 n
P.O. BOX 370 a '
f rg
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075
Legal Notice Advertising
x a A a °_a
f~ £ a KECEP VFD x
• ❑ Tearsheet Notice
•Cit of Tigard
- 13125 S' Hall Blvd. PRty21996
f i •Tigard,Oregon 97223-8199 ° O Duplicate Affidavit
k x CITY OF TIGARD
•Accaunts Payable-Terry °sr zY
'.tsrt-' i 4 ~p ,s
0, Z,
s 4 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION 9
STATE OF OREGON, )ss v~
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, g M
axY S~+a t I Kathy SnVder
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising - T
~ ~ s s Director, or his principal clerk, of theTf gard-Tna 1 a t i n mymes
Wl_
v a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 a
4 _ and 193.020; publisher! at Tigard in the
aT sa coW0) nt nd stste; that the
~aP95- Price/Hirning ,
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the - Y-
- "-1
entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and
w~ consecutive in the following issues:
X 3 9 ~ X P J yF' S
March 28,1996
vxa-'rr kin Q * I
ir->, „r - xi +sv e i h ,19 ,w.~ ..............~o... ','''Y`" t~c,+ r 4
¢ = Subscribed and sworn to b re me this f 0lt;CIA_
r
BM--3S a3 r t
NO A.fi IC - OREGON 4 !
5 Notary Pu i for regon COR?NISSAN NO. 024552
y g C
My COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 13,1997 d y
My Commission Expires:
Serb 'M s
AFFIDAVIT"NP& Nt
3
s i
t Sr ,a~, J
;,fix ''9`~-,'~%7"
g,„~q> X7'8, 5 s':3- 4'~~.(.. •..25{Ny~ih~ E
44,
5, 09i-Rok-Ow
pt* -
-
, F- V - t
i ate" `F .
-xv
-VIM sr~°a~ r El-
N-N
.zap c '`s, 3f fi y Yk r S-bit~ v4
E 1
a
n=`~~'y zYY
r ~ _ s Y r
s p
A- ME,
- 3. 4 1 4
!Nt
E
~l 71-t
. f Y . .,tiy X . 'M}i k
r
x. S E
~ t ~ 4 }
i t s
The following will be considered by the Tigard City Council on Arrit 9-
sc _ 1996- Rf 7e40 P.M.; at lhr Ti-,d r'tyir r`emnr _ Town vW~l 13'.^
Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is
invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance !E
with the rules of Chapter 18.32 of the Tigard Municipal Code, and rules,
and procedures of the City Council. Failure to raise an issue in person or
by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing on the request or
failure to provide statements or evidence sufficient to afford the ! -
` decisionmaker an opportunity to respond to the issue prior to the close of
the hearing on the request, precludes an appeal to the Land Use Board of
Appeals based on that issue. Further information may be obtained from
the Planning Division at 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, or'
by calling 639-4171.
PU13LIC MAKINGS - i x
ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 9S-0007 PriceJHirning
r REQUESTS: Price requests annexation of one parcel of 0.41 acres into _
the city and changing the comprehensive plan and zoning from E ti r
Washington County Office Commercial to City of Tigard Professional.
Office( -P. Himing requests annexation of one parcel of 0.34 acres into t
the city and changing the comprehensive plan and zoning from 6 1FY -
r ' Washington County Office Commercial to City of Tigard Professional - Asa f -
1 Office/C-P, LOCATION: Southeast comer of S.W. Hall Boulevard and
S.W. Oak Street. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The relevant r y -
I review criteria in this case are Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, citizen _
7 involvement;, 10.1.1, service delivery capacity;' 10.1.2, boundary criteria;' a y' y `
and 10.1.3, zonk! j designation. Community Development Code chapters'
18.136, annexation requirements; and 18.138, land classification of
1 annexed territory. ZONE: Presently, Washington County Office ,
Commercial. -
~ - fi
4 ` C
k. ,G s }'u y
3 , ~1l -I r n
ca
v.: ~ r
~ t
r 1 U ~ t
TM36-Publish March 28, 1996. t P s
. 4 ~
3 ~ rF
"n 0
H'
I'll
, -
y
g
i ii, v -x-,.p c ay - - t - - - -.f - - i
r sr §
a, f xis s':i a
't - 3 ~yx sr
~ rr j3^5....~ -z, t, i x s - 3 i--„z'`» _ 7 J.' r,- ~ ap- -
'z1 :v~ v"'-i"'R '-,z.„tt _ - F t -L z. - -'at .Y' T i ,,...=t
` gas O r a ' 2 t sIt -
~~~'#h. f M Mfr'
- *r ? ~ .
'7' mid `-d, vNA 7ia.!i?:411 I ,Z: -„;;'s'c?.'~ra~;~avt -~4...,
~'~x` CITY OF TIGARD, O1tEGON~„g
s , - AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING ; x s k-~ ,
" IT
i,s
v'cR'SL^'°~,+.= R cN' - 1 `.5 ~lXtg "S!
In the Matter of the Proposed~°
r s,,.t - r s. - - 'J- ..r 2 `dam-
i y !1., W -"i t i`' Y; iy'~rv - - 'ffY 1d- S ~ p -
s
, s > '
z ;1 ` STATE OF OREGON ) ~
s a County of Washington ) ss. ~j , '-A
1 .,4 City of Tigard ) -y A ; 5,7 e<
' i$ *
s - ~ wi
~ -
~
' ~ 1 begin first duly sworn, on oath, ~ = , '
depose and y- k X ~
~k
That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance `
7 Number (s) _ft 1 3 Quo "Ia , q to `~3 9(9 74 .E~~2~
which were adopted at the Council Meeting dated ~ j 9 12b copy(s) z
1. 0-~-~--:~;~~7--~~
of said ordinance(s) being hereto atta ed and by refer cne a made a part hereof, on the _ ~ ~ t
10~ day of N S,-\ . 19 My a u
a i - - `
1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon : -5 -
i
2. Tigard Library, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon g~ ,
" T 3. Tigard Water Department, 8777 SW Burnham, Tigard, Oregon {
r
IV4
- l - _ U s ,f',+t. g
# j`
h
11
T r x x
Subscribed and swom to before me this . 2r' day of 19 C (G
u y ;.1-
- ~t(t~~~~,~,+~~ ny/~~/~ iIt4 x
w4 - Of s ~
FlCiAI SEAL ~r r ~y lei... 1 1 ~K, (,v ~-I, .F~ {
s -F z' y - CONNIE MARTIN T i-~ g, I "
e c j NOTARY PUBLIC OREGON Notary Public for Oregon - I.,..,, r -
r - f _ COMMISSION No. 015877 J _ F. y t-~' -
r 5 - MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 4,1996 ~ z @ -"E
` " { My Commission Expires: k~ N
li~ A- " 'If 1. i
~r ~ 4q
:4J. - a;'~ t! x 4. I:ladm~olaffposCdoe r ii' z x
Qg
ax ,v x x
~ _ s ~,r"
'fa
- 4Vq ;11
d F + Y, - -.'c,°z's'" ""s.•:t.:,~'iC.:" 'w'"' £„,;wa5 4J, `e''n, ^~Y , ,.r'y 'rt 1 f
v~ -
L
1 4a; tr t.t C -U- 4 z f
A - t .H t F I
. 5- 5 r i x' L a
5, s r G v w'
- 11
.,{kh J t - y h- 7"-• is
-,r~ lJ x-'b,..,~r a,. t- ,ef - - r- 5 4f~~`s'
- , -5 $X r - - - 'fix . S-
r
K
t =1 yi1 s f i t y
a LL i
r
fn._. web ...-f~ - - -I 1
~%w~•'Yr,~~-,.s. c1.c.~'i'~ F _.__x - ~..^n is ~'~~T~' x ? f~.,z,
...<..e.'FC.:.. :-...to.......;-.,.,..-.~..c-.~...';u. ...z.......... ...v . --i ,n...i_»......:~...»......,,.....W......_.-... J .t*. `.z~_ -.f . Y,._ - 2~ ~.m.-
`y
,~`E~'L'~~"{;•~~ 'i"+~c z -z - - ''F r -5.,,- e z ~S, .p 3 - ~yk.,+T
.,vs "y-
} 3
~rF x
gf~"~ t tr`'A•s p.a~ggp`::.4.
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 0
, '
ORDINANCE NO. 96- T
r 'f °a AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING. FINDINGS AND COivCLi.iSivivS TO APPROVE A TIGARD
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT BY THE TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL DISTRICT
t{sy - ` (CPA 95-0006).
fs ,~f~tiF
TINA &A.
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a comprehensive plan map amendment from Public Institution to ° General Commercial on two parcels of the northwest comer of State Highway 217 and SW 72nd Avenue;
wr and r t
ift # s WHEREAS, the Planning Division recommends approval of CPA 95-0006; and R_-Aa 4 NR _
t z- r ~-z a'i m'r' ' t, u
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the proposed amendment at its
Zt-
meetings of January 22 and February 5, 1996, and recommends a a
pproval of CPA 95-0006; and
-1 gw Ell
# e ` WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing for the proposed amendment at its meeting of ~,W~
gal
February 27, 1996, and voted 4-0 with one abstention to approve the proposal and direct staff to return
=
with the findings and ordinance.
%
MEAN
?,Sq!;
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: w
a,
SECTION 1: The proposed comprehensive plan map amendment is consistent with all relevant criteria
based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law as noted in the attached final order
Q (Attachment A);
SECTION 2: The City Council concurs with the planning staff and Planning Commission
a_ recommendations and approves the request to designate the parcels as illustrated on the
y attached map (Attachment A, Exhibit A).~ F
a 10
SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the t
Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder.
PASSED: B Un4flitno~ jf
y rote of II Council members present after being read by number and title s
only, this
day of.dr. L .1996.
to 4q
t a r Catherine Wheatley, City eco der ry5 -
APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day g96_ )
es Nicoli, Mayor
~r FF
Appr ed s to
City Attorn / u r
Date,
x l-K ~ t., '4~ re~3k. L - 3
ORDINANCE N0.,96=V iA1rp1nlraylcpa96-06.ord
r
f Page 1 ' r
rg:p
.4.ya _ - r~, mss"=2'~ -a `.,„~r.`"o:~.° ,-~r" iid.,.,, :"°5:rr,;+ ;;."5s: =~a"'+S".,~ . ~r~••+^u%x=°am,. ks',~.~.. ~ ~;~x ~ x-,~ t
e a r- ,F a y
RER
R,i
v + e r xf i
kit ~ k h t F ~ ~ZK x F ~ ~i{ c J
n r
~F
yrw, k.
la
t~,u-r L` - 4 L urJ. S P` L.~u-_.. y a..•~•~--c .,e-ti:ry
MENEM
r-' 7,,~1_ - r"; - .A~ ' e.y~ x+" - "~f Fn'ra~ • y?t"'^•"'1•'?ws pg,z.r ~N'.,.,,,,~;~ ,,q ,t~+,.F.. ""++~5nfixrFp'9ks+„res^eS+' F;::
- , «
s+ rr • ~ , + r r
"An
REZA
~ . "*J ~ y w, C w L
"a "'"Nae \ t r,: f.,r` 'k FPix' Ttx r -
p
'xa5~}^r".,~y F F°': ,.1+-"'7~"M' t ,.y . t . F'•
Nn"
~{_.,r • 1. t. 'T, ' '
R
rYa'L">^$ , r • v.?'" : r+ v;'"f::` a - - : K -~,9,',° '`~u r ','`~l .
Ym
`.+dfi. `;,g-. .,-',51 I <:l `:,'i r.i, +r•TAP~ '~I~~ r'L.
F'"'~^ ~ "„'srAi't••r J" ,6. 4 .i"-,a+ 6M
p~ n ~:'^'=r' =r1 ~ c d
"
Asa . y.,,`vii^. ~ b
kg.
A' ti, u
tT r,Y F a
-AP
':x to `rr_, p
_ ai. r'", ma'y'. "YE"°• ,s+r:., ~ '*d .
MA
1-
.M ,+1
a~ Fe' k 2
•r 1~ s;' ^+.4°' ";ei'' :d; ;`s-.' <:"3 >F~• ;gym Rill -~3 ~A-,^ w4rrb rX~
_ "e. •r\" ~ ::ter °a
N .y r.
f
1.. ^ t
.prw'r r _
rf -
,d - Y"- .f•", S,, t "3 'N:"~ .°1 r 6 `i+ nC,~*•• ~t{~~ h+ Y 7
''tit, n3~ e.C., ,a~.. n.«•`=° +i"
L ..r. ~ . F - ..c x -a.w~, s .w s..v »lp,",«Y.1:v ~ v$t ,-,Ar3r `.,at•-}' a X~1, 6yi
s' ~ ar ~aY ~ S } -,a . t - - - . „ o . a.,+a~:~ rr •:b; t rxr.,
t J
xx ~~',r h- t 5s.i d 4`zra ` _.Y.._....__..-_..-__.._~~ '"x,r 1q'•f 1 ki~'~'•~t'M'y`~aaw
'S t tr`` - r` tc "E
{ r Y s w s to 0 a+ t. R t' a e i yrrtrr"t» b} a
3Y i s- r t,, S t ' ` a" tfw n~'ttettx s ~Yvei a~ Ssz '
- J ,9 f wY f Sr~ 1~ J• ~ ~ ~,G
pp t ~ a> a`' ^
r
\ O Y J
O -
3
rn m
n
m
i
t'
w
-i C
`zv 'L
L
VE
T
a~ D:
A I
w'.
t
••♦72N
+y r t~~
3
I i
iTj
a. i En
co
- t
- H
w'
C s w*
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DEPARTNIENT F
s t! ~ t ~ .>5 i r
t ~ £ ,fir„,. , .m,•~'zm-- T"^^ , , ~ ~4-- ,FFY S 'vtl ' u. '
~_t "'a-' -^r,r "f r.r tk. „o, .,>t- ,r"","i"~;r:.'-,z L,''•+". -'x.,.F,.
'ti, . •~ter ~i °
f
d l~?~ „~t da;~nrr > ~ Err -
x.Ni't A Y {t b.'31. 1 r r+ .F i'
I } 'J^ r K U! 0
a F.r
R,n ( Yf i+ k. fw}r =q,..
>~s . '^iy. `:v^-~° °r.rS . ~r%'."rte p
''F".' '-•t Tnt4 't% ...fir 4C,x i'i~,y+.'lv:,
rY3~' y 'rik'fn•R`r ti`fi>'^- ~~.t, E 'tF, *
'kF n• ~ u
s- R.. .f-+. h'v: _ i` t a S s 3:y1 ;
-'y+~r`k ` f° =d'E - 'L. „t `✓.x":s-,.3'?..:Y ^'t~.
-t.,. .s5r s .L
s» u,
s.
a-') ,f e `,pp .s° ~~tC.,, " 'T. '0"',f' , s,N ru ^ 'eY nV
r.1.'_ nsY 4,~lx e" S.r. °Ct+ >'W '"4-.. .x,,, ,.,~;r. F,. k,e r• ..Ml,
"^A. , ,.d . c , al.+, t r t n?a t°t : #'d' : ~ 'dF , w 1Y :1,. -F ~r : 'l. f c:
" t"1 , .4 :sf ;a vi.?,,;' ik+, r ~M` !3 Y ,7 ~ ~ t~ ,r .fi; t .
'A ~w .m •F.T t_ •u"rvt'+a "~~'+Yn . " `•4'~f ~5. :`F,'+''' , ~;k ~F ..fit „r- .n - '^dr sw',. i~ -,5 ~ U
- I riY
i, ~ , m.t 4 ~ s`t'c 'r ~ v ! air . ~«a;l'~ 4 s,.•.o'i'+-,
n.~.kE'x :k `m'~.'Ei 'f`S•'. 'k4-' Y~' 4 tk t'" r :_'"c"`"s r4„ .^K . `a'~= ` ^ ~`r"' . s r."` ~ r' w :XSaS " 'r t~•?'y .r •d 'A~it. r^y.> ,a r . fr,:a >
dm:" .t'=~ r , Yr.. 5Y 3, ~ w ,a 4i -rc„i•`F'„ - ~F a't,
t', f . d,x h,.a,
','(t ?:r .~rk:,'~- r , «F ✓,s t ,rY'-c,: „`.a • ''S:. .:.s`, 'rr,-,<xka . T
-s. .,wks 5. ray..„,~xm :.,i.". ~..ns,;,s a..,,. ••."f, - - ..u ns ~Y`^v. x6rcrW-.,. 1~, a,'~.6~`` ax"a::•'~,I" n': t~"V'' t ..^7'k .k+r ".i.
,.,C.
'aC.rt .n
TC+* „d-~ ]•.,15 F . , y i yr
i. - .L ,~CS2 P"
a
t"~a.+x. R''ui,e„x, *c :4: `'~•'`Yi `r+&a` _r+: ,w. .~rA, °aaa .,.n ,:Fse~.~ P'.x- ~ „1,{+;A.°:
.y+t ;.,,„>r,* e>,sa. r.,~5'z y' .,:+H?•, Vie" - .r~ 'x,. - F.+. rear"'L^ .an:.,. .at ',.~~.v .'r'x.w -a,., -6a r
-"a , ti, , ~ ,r .'i" ~ acv°. ?~'t,', ,s ;°s'. ,~i tY ,~x,:~y. ~ h,<
r ~ ~
"M-r, ?tf ~iF~.~ a. 4,~,'",• '5 x=•••, ^"'"2~'i'.. ,xr`-"` fi°~~..
} _ 'e. ' f•~ - A~' , ,r,,, ~,.•t, ~ar+ t~,v ` .r F+ae ,>~r. _ `~•s~ ~„w°:
~ F" ~ s. , h " - ~ r..;"'c ` at •r'pn 'fir,,*~, t~~ ..s4;; , 4;{,-, .r`~t ,f,l L'w'°'~r n c t
- rw'~~,. r.4; " 3= r e xrp - ;4,r *t'J ° w . X" `.74~•" ~ €r Y ~ ~ " ~ ~ > ' M~'-a.:.. ' i n:~•p w;-r, . t'K 7 "=w ,
C..:-. '~"r+,. :a" ?a., .•F, :7 Y m,n'rv 't'- s.:, e,. +S ~ 'G'=` k, ,:a ,~'+k"'M,'',ti"kr" r~~ r'~~i-'3. n+
-'u Mx'+ s~"~.• r . i +'....,Eav edy.~' . 3 , , 7 s t, , s„ ^'f .4 Fr „ c,r. ; i3e~^`l,`,fiwds `.m
cm.. .,'d t.~- .,~Jfi• =...zS.= Sr.. st. y+s33 t" ,rrr c ,.•,r,
` r=+-a«:: U'x g: ^E rte,,,,^, h.
1 'a r`~+.', - ~ n St~ ~ • x c'~~s`• t:,,.*„ - -t, -•t, { w°' °»ur .'}Nr a t.
~A•.,..- ,+.;,1,,. 7
<Kuu '.F .F qw 3rt` va,,d.,lrat",.:a .x `'1Kt""t,.;?r4,w ar-,rfY'.. N, "i; `C°.• yy':€`E`.r;.r.., v•..t,:
tw,- , :,1
f lA , , rn" 7_ L ,a„ .^'i' 1r t, .k: •i,•,r. "'r 'ar`.= :er
I 'n9~T' 7 , cry. 'r t?J' i -i'?' T r.V rn -"'-n-rt•-I~ I 'r' .E- i" '^.~•r,1 ~h.. ~ ~
77 ~ Y ~
G w TIT" ~I
C._ , . _ I~ a
`-~a-Y - tra' b ~i(., i - - fir' - 1 } 4.~. - c~Y' k - y ix - - _
'`~+fi~j,-,yZa3' - i x' s t ; j- J°' 3. Y''~ .+'Liw, L
k8 c .ri. xa ,t v r i t t - r ^i as _
d - j 'rt_ rr - -r, J r ` - -r f r~- _z L -F'd c, - if
r S -.t - x... - r z•- ?..~t spy..
T'» -i „~e~:'s~. .,ty~'zr~y a # y3 fi,~- t - _ 4 ,R tai ~ T`~'s~ ~ s -~-~~t ~ _
x ofp - L L. _ - 's u '_'~s1,".ry ~..,s~~
,,.mow.;-. ~~a :s:~~'r- - ..z r~,v?
,:etc.; it:i'~.}S" ~z. a,, M t'"` ' ..e
s F' ,.ice f fli.'~. ^3's' e. zk..,r..: R „
3''w" BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE v''x ='r "
•^.,s x tic - R: n' 3 > -
s CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON t
`~'~"'+yi'ar ~~'Ta^e~ ~ ,s" Fa u~..t_..a:.,~"tud_53~.ak,•'35..
_ In the Matter of an Appiccanon by , ~ ~
_5 r' the Tigard-Tualatin School District ) ~K '~~rk '
~ , 23J For Aporova! of a Cvtnprehensive ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND ~ ~
Plan Ma Amendment From "Public 3~ ~M t s
p ) CONCLUSIONS OF % AW
~~L t - Ins[itutional" (PUB-INS) TO ) k 9 <e
M , "Commercial General" (C-G) at 12615 ) T ~f a
_ a >E:,>
a: SW 72nd Avenu
` I. PRELIMINARY MATTERS
`.`~a;:»xt.---r.~c~. : a ~ y , it °e a a, _ „
r+ A. DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION. rfxr
The application requests approval of a comprehensive plan map amendment from
s :0
' the Public Institutional map designation to the Commercial General map designation on 11.95
~fi
~x ri acres. See Exhibit A. i
B. SITE AND ADJACENT AREA DESCRIPTION. - ;
_ x 3 ~~`-i ,ter
This site contains 11.95 acres. It is located on the northwest corner of State u~ - ,
~ c _
rte, Highway 217 and SW 72nd Avenue. The site is in an area known as the Tigard Trianglelx -
, W ~ - rt,
("Triangle"). The site is a triangularly-shaped parcel that is occupied by the Phil Lewis f -
yx Elementary School. The site is designated Public-Institutional ("PUB-INST") on the Tigard = 3
r
m: i 1
" ' ` Comprehensive Plan ("TCP") map and General Commercial ("C-G") on the Tigard Zoning Map. iy k
aF ¢ y s - _ North of the site is a single family area. The TCP map designates this area as ay; ~5=~ f i
s "Low Density Residential" and it is zoned R-1. The area east of the site (across SW 72nd Mfg
-s z..~x - { - !',=a Wiz,. - s'.'
x Avenue) is designated on the TCP map as "C-P." This area is developed with single family., r } t
gys~T
r r ' + k9M
z homes and offices. Further north of the site along the east side of SW 72nd Avenue area - 3
z+ U:« ~r ?
r
"Medium High Density Residential" and "Low Density Residential" district TCP map - y~ '
i ATTACHMENT A 1 of 40 ¢ t x it
d~ 1 - - PDX1A•_6I71.I 23332-0002 ^s'zs~ *yn, a,,t,
sr
i is ~'*x~i,¢""., 1 k-.
~Txs~~ 4 r+.? er2a s r2 `nry, , ;e ~r ~ r ~ T ~
1 a, r~ ~ x _ ^~'"tca v°.~s;<c: ~~:x:u'~+~mrx a~: ~Y~~ m,,~.:: - ~ ez ~ tr.
~~sc~T.,y' C..r 8 Z ~ r~,h :~*~T '`a -S~v3._y,
s _ ; rk ~°z~ r~ Fria sFi' F
r -t" e x f n -1
'f'3y c~ f ~,°Z,'i 3' - { < rr ,~s a 'z, S v`
i
t
~xk s- d {a
X INV,
r -s,
d."n's~.y,~cs~ax~.x..rt„- } ,s
REY
r
aW'.5. -'y~ i L d '3E J t
q'~tt+~ 'brH l ? ,.r - t : - - - 1 s 'c. ,t r - - t z t~L~ •F
t,~'~~~r=d er. arm. ~t~'„•;-'s`'-° e. rte.-~~s x?9-',ro: r'rv,:a~ .
designations. The area surrounding the intersection of SW Dartmouth Street and SW 72nd
Al a
Avenue is designated "Commercial General" th.. ° a~.r ^ 00 k ' E
IIIaD. :ram' .asawcm+a~e. rx..-
` y asw _ The School District 6-10 .
("District") constructed Phil Lewis in 1957. In 1995, District`
a` ax p L
y L 7qY
ms's patrons approved bonds to construct a replacement school on Bull Mountain. The construction ar° #
b
1,.•.tr
• . nw g._-,r> j>; schedule calls for the new school to open in June 1997. The District will continue to use Phil
Lewis while the new school is being built.x i
VKq 05R
The District decided to replace Phil Lewis for the following reasons;
~Fy s w 1. Commercial development in the Tigard Triangle has reduced the numbers § r~
of students living within Phil Lewis' immediate neighborhood to just 33. The total school r
enrollment
is 375 and the school has one of the District's lowest maximum capacity numbers-- I
S
500--which limits student growth options. AN
z t 2. Commercial development has also produced heavy traffic, which benefits oz,
5
general commercial sites but also creates dangerous walking conditions for an elementary school. Consequently, Lhe District has received a waiver fruili the Oregon Department of Education
1
t regarding minimum walking distances and currently buses all students to Phil Lewis. p,-
5 Na
3. Phil Lewis' location, which is in a major commercial area and therefore ,
£ ? isolated from other residential development, has produced a strong negative reaction from+
r' , s s
k parents who have children bused into the school. t~
r 4 9
- 4. Most of SW 72nd Avenue is without sidewalks. Before and after school h'
r t 3ryx
t ~ s
rk s - and weekend use of Phil Lewis for recreational and public programs is limited for reasons of j * Fk
'mot
~ t.
4 pedestrian safety and general public access. ttt
g ATTACHMENT A 2 of 40 rrrry iii
a
PDXtA :6171.1 -34
5,C002
t -a 2,'d12f v yJx e i
75,
j
-4~~~ "s''~t~,~a ,
sS ids ,y` s t°
v F"
'Pr 711p- q
%
J.,S-f,';'r,~„-3'f,r-"j"'. e'..}b ♦rt~. d'w"`"`r- r '7
1~ xs
~rw
crE-11 , r
N s t,
_ .;Y y r ';'1G. 1
y t wt~.vF~" S' ry f
V_ u
ing; :TA
'
•aw
pe,
5. Phil Lewis' d
" esign makes updating expensive and expansion impractical ®
Y_ 7
for reasons of isYout and location. Although the school was remodeled in 1988, funding~~ F t, - 1 prevented a total renovation and items that still need to be corrected include expensive
yyc-
y~ S mechanical improvements. Expending moneys on these improvements would not be an efficient x~§ alb
to ` Y use of the District's funds when a voter approved alternative--sale and replacement--exists. e
6. The Triangle's commercial growth and the increased traffic on State r L f~
- y Highway 217, which borders Phil Lewis, have produced noise and visual problems. The District }Y -
is forced to keep doors and windows closed at Phil Lewis, although the school has no air
~ -5 3 conditioning.
R~ Phil Lewis' design allows for relatively easy access by trespassers. The
~4 - M e - INP-
c school has outside restrooms and isolated wings that present security problems. The District has found transients in the restrooms in the past. tz~ f~ s s t
1 Y d Y_ h FzF ,y Mob. 2i, f *3 i A 7 _
8. Residential development on Bull Mountain has created a rapid growth area.
There are 600 elementary students living south of Bull Mountain Road who would be served by
s the new school. Conversely, the Phil Lewis attendance zone faces continuing reductions inK
s student population. r
9. The District's planning goals include locating schools in areas of high
y".
b student density with potential for future residential erowth that can be accommodated by the r, r V~
W It.,
z z : schools. The Bull Mountain site meets this soal, but Phil Lewis does not. * 1 a
m a< 10. The District's planning goals include locating schools in neighborhood
settings that maximize community and nearby residential usage of playfields and other facilities.
x
x
The Bull Mountain site meets this coal. but Phil Lewis does not. r t
WMP
a ,k fry ATTACHMENT A 3 of 40 PDXIA-'_6171.1 123451_mo2
c
~
~t r 1
5~~,, !r 4 r r _ _ _ 1 `i'..N..v""•;'7z,,•a L a?3
dh i.~h'+ ~fy^~m'E`r i;,;rr _ ~ 4 ~ Y - ~ ~ ~i4.;.s • ~t: h' t -%tk g''~ '~F ",-f 6"~~ 2 "7
~ z aF
YP'r'Y!, 5&£r`- y, 4 3{ _ _ G$ ~'V 8~ 1^-2
{re p ' >
114
-hA yyP
ass.
v t
f
Ti"
1
fi n js
3-
v
,fie- ~ _ T
.
~ ~ ~ S° -+z Ntl ~4`x - - _ t r k i,- mow` 't r 3 r, -
,~~y,-- _ t _,,s _ -ems'-~sr,. 3s W
I W2.,
59 Y',tr''x,n,.~Y."A-W," c~ st ..l s-..a" 4- ' _ F t~3 tz` r~~~.i`rvn
e -3 zr...
3
~YY`~ y~...y-x,.Ea i rr~,.x t - - L - - T a.tyf~~i ;
_ ..5~#,r37.xx d4. t - - 5 S ryt»f &f.,eTia !.C'ta-'ac--
b
--'R'#- - k _ ~,xtarsw.~et _ 4,'V f~2k Q~},
+i «r'',£ , ,r'rs ,f. v5_: i i ,ysa.r,.~. - 11 '3g ` r .,.L n~5;;ps r '.`a-Q,A uy v_.•St§, Sx. - .
x r1z"t a £ n k i y `'v'im
I - s ` 5.
IF. , I rt , sY
,z„ ~tl* ' ~ q 'y _ 11. The District's planning goals include locating schools so that they are not rl ax
1-11 F" t x directly serviced by an arterial or major collector. The Bull Mountain site, with service from 3 fig.- r -
''M' f- ~ q-_ 7 131st meets this goal. Phil Lewis, which is bracketed by State Highway 217 (arterial) and SW . ~ xx`~ ,
11 "o s~ 3 72nd (major collector) does not. - I ~,,tx r-
3 s' 3 ' 4 C. AREA STREETS. z ` gr
s , i 14
~ t f55 The site abuts State Highway 217, an Oregon Department of Transportation -v xpF -w~{,~ ~ 'j
~J - ah dd f „i GYL ,
t - - l f , Cfi+.~-#' `flu' -1 I .9 I
-fix' , - j' # ("ODOT") facility, and SW 72nd Avenue, a City street. The site's current access is to SW 72nd ~ - -
r
Avenue. The TCP transportation map classifies State Highway 217 as an Arterial and SW 72nd a~_~ µ
w„5 nCeS~' ,S K
-2 j.
. Avenue as a Major Collector. Hampton Avenue, a Major Collector, intersects SW 72nd Avenue s ' -
1
4- ~ v` #
E ti opposite this site. SW 68th Parkway parallels SW 72nd Avenue to the east and is designateds~`
"iiXM
z.a` ,
1 f r 1;
as a Major Collector. Other area streets are Local streets. K
s { t D. PREAPPLICATION MEETING AND NEIGHBORHOOD ME ETIN G. Fs
k k ? The preapplication meeting between the District and City of Tigard staff was held r ~ s r
1
I
A on June 22, 1995, pursuant to Tigard Community Development Code ["TCDC"] 18.32.040.
, x
vn f^
a _ The district held a neighborhood meeting to discuss this application on July 11, m _1
* n 4~'f
I 11
1995 at the District's administrative offices. The District invited members of the East t'~. t I -1
Community Involvement Team the "CIT") and adjacent property owners to attend the t:,
ti < & r~
z 4
--kg 'N',-- meeting. Four persons attended the meeting. None of those persons opposed the request. y - l
{ ` - The District advertised the neighborhood meeting by notice posted on the site and by mailing ,z z 4 l
t - letters to property owners within 250 feet of the site and to the CIT representatives. , P
J ~ - Y _ F - ~,__,L-L '
. _ - * r,, v.F fZ s` Y 3 1 [ J 4 .yY 4 fop C .1 .4'.
11'1=) z«'3 , ' ATTACHMENT A 4 of 40 PDXt.a-26171.1 23452OW2
6 7 r zx his , r
c r
r 'r Ff } mot{ f'
I y r x.,-,, " as , ' ~ "F pia` Y'S*' zu KVa- - 5 , .!,1 + svs^x _"11~r tt~_1 a',a"3. 'z~'.P,- _ we S t- 'I .11- I - £ i
2N "y £,L i t e 5 - E l
M t"' 't; i N - - - 4. ( ~ a - ~ , 14 ..ta d t- -
, ~ - , , ~ - ~ , ~ i _WN ~ . -
I ,
e Z r f 3 J , e R rtt - c, ~ C. r
n x - c fi t t- ^t } . s
< " - 'V~ , :
' , "L I ~ , . ; ' , . - f r, ~
a
F r^
No `7
A
F.~ S3 1 { d_ - i 1 k6 - k3a K3gMXy
'.aP'"~`'a
' tct'.Y1.MtiK -v.T `2r 4 " .s _ t 3. i' S+ -4'" f'k y .
ffic d RA as,£'
fiw.;... E. APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA.
$ a~ n
r The approval criteria for this comprehensive plan map amendment include
_ s applicable Statewide Planning Goals (the "Goals"), applicable policies in the TCP see TCDC
Nil-
18.10:010(A)), OAR Chapter 661, Division 12 (the Transportation Planning Rule), and
o k Zwlxa
standards of the General Commercial District, Tigard Community Development Code aRK#
44
y y ("TCDC") Chapter 18.62.
sts~.
-r F. PROPOSAL.
t
MR-
raE ' The applicant requests an amendment to the TCP map from "Public- "
k~
Institutional" to "General Commercial." The TCP is the preeminent planning document. ~£Q
Baker v. City of Milwaukie, 271 OR 500, 533 P2d 772 (1975). The TCDC implements the
TCP and the two must be consistent. In this case, consistency is achieved by amending the _AA
site's TCP Map designation to General Commercial. Pill
The Public-Institutional designation is not implemented by a particular zoning district. c5µ'
z
# The City Council finds that an elementary school use is not allowed in the CG district. See MM -
TCDC 18.62.62.030. Only a limited number of uses in the CG district could implement they 3 -
r`A.. 4
'
_gj
TCP map designation. These include "civic use types". See TCDC 18.62.030(1). The City
1X® F
b c
Council finds that there is no evidence that a civic use is likely to occur at this site.
r° Therefore, the City Council finds that the TCP and TCDC maps are not consistent because l
k d3vs g t
the CG zoning district fails to fully implement the Public-Institutional TCP map designation.
M ,4*` JYf T 4_ _4 , - This site is appropriate for a "General Commercial" TCP map designation. it
`d _
7 t k_ kx y
",,ffl N1_1
:rF t is a highly visible site with direct access to a major collector and is adjacent to an arterial. The F ' x,e- P
x#~ iw }
'UR
K TCP recognizes that a map amendment is necessary in this situation. The "Community rr r 1 h
,~g ss ATTACHMENT A 5 of 40 eoxfn-26171.1 '3451
oooz g~ E
r fia x
3,.r"' 7^ r } - - °^^'°''°w.nam~'3aa^..sra^ - .„"`xi~.»~x-aims ,s _-~-•z.~.~..4.*e%;,~'""`t ~ '°~'3-~+-~'.~~: c.~3a. vz .~~.s'-~' --x ~ is-'~ f *1q~y~r~ f ~
~~wA„v~F fl `'Fv'Stil ✓ ~ Y ~ _ w 1 - k` j 'T C' _ 'F'. ^ jA~Lm ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ y
~ V s'a'rt;-~,•2r, t~xrt .n~.-, ~.rt~r.?, ;tom„ _ ''x',~Ed`x~~'~'~:x't"~'~„'. r. -~.kr~?"r,ri , ;i'~ R _ -4' a _ t`-1'`° tee'#-
aYt rx ¢ r'~J
44
v
. - - .
- { - r ;);k r - w7, a
T 4.... z r 3'$""#a.>" a''.;" - y < 7 -r - _ rx it a t -
- t 1
n = Oj~N `~a 5 _-:s i:t e t y, - p 3' btti -a` sr, - € 1 r ~f- _
k L x x' z P
-kr- - 7 .act sr- .fir - - - - - r a Vl_ " eW k:5'a-kY
'c ~+'s,`?M a'ru - r ati m~5.., .1 _.,w.. ...M_ °'s'iga' ,.y~ d~ -
In- - , , I(- 3
r a
„
~ r~.,~,,".,? ~ 2M 1
v Utilities and Facilities" section of the TCP has several purposes, including the provision of E i t s s 11
,
r ; f x "
r h ~1.'~ r ui'Mr - -
s r' ~ aporooriately located public and community services and the location of these services where x; - ~w '
rt1-~' ~ 3 Y - w} ciAff~, t~ / x
~ ` e. ~ 3 required services can be achieved. See TCP 12.4(1) and (2). Because Phil Lewis is no longer n € m-P>
~ -rte M suitable as an elementary school site and will be closed, the Public-Institutional map , -
t a . Teti _ _ - , '1,r WuPc
designation is also inappropriate.ax k`
_
s is n- •,A E, 11 I
11
Mr. Martin appeared at the January 22, 1996 Planning Commission in opposition £a 4t.° ' "
E.-
nm_
f~ N " ` , to the proposal- Mr. Martin argued that there is no map conflict and that this site can be y 1 4 ~ ik
- L developed under the TCP designation. The City Council disagrees for two reasons. First, v-
r j gi,- W. Pztzt rya _
} ; there is no zonmdistrict that full im le ents the
ar g y p m "Public-Institutional" TCP map K-1,, -
r
k hs
hn designation. ' -z- , <
+q ~z-.lid' 4~ ._Sa:; -4, RrN , Y
La V Ry'~ .F~
~ ti Secondly, the conflict in this cue is fatal to development of the property, unlike ~ w
11
s the conflict in Baker v. City of Milwaukie, 271 Or 500, 533 P2d 772 (1975). The conflict in"5
r Baker involved a discrepancy in maximum density allowed on the subject parcel. The Bake r
1 J J__-_ 1 the by
Conflict was resolved by developing that property consistent wit 11 h the density recognized by pne
}3 Il_ 7 11 7
< 1 the City of Milwaukie Comprehensive Plan. _ % v
4 s t In this case, the conflict is more basic and goes to the nature of the uses allowed € " 141 +
i' t v 4T#"~
rr7„4~~ _ by the TCP map "Public-Institutional" designation versus the uses allowed in the General- F
r s - i ' + - - '1
A,Zn Z - : I
f ` k Commercial zoning map designation. Since no zoning district implements the "Public- 1 g,
i ~ c
k" ti Institutional" TCP ma desi nation, it is hi hl unlikel to allow develo ment of the ro ert t -1 ~i~x~ r
P $ g y Y P P P Y 11ri~ r s
,P, s ~ where only a single use in the TCP map designation is implemented by the CG district. s
11 _SIN -1 Z - k ! W" E
5,,4 > ~
r
,V z t
g 4r A'; dF is s'^r TP
Y'€. i 3°' yr-k 3 a 3~, tit t.`+,5' " 3 _
.shc 1 , 4
+•n" =r E - s
't - a '-s sF.c-TY' f.:,~n"x. s~+L` ^r' ~ 7
- I r,E 1 - - - , ~~'a .-rte, 7=?e~u a a t
,t w, L t ATTACHMENT A 6 of 40 PDXiA-26171.1 13 51-0OW2 g r
~t'101111'_, OX
,-0 g;
h irll - -a-o-..,-.a..~,w~•ay^u.ea,- 7---~-„'°T`.nw.Kx,~w6+rFM @ 4 011 J'.
Yom{ 4t Wl j,n 1 - - - § V, --~T'.Z y?,a-,,*-
Px t ~...tf e
Y' ,a i-i} r% - - t s," s ~''--'T« Ys r ~ #
t _ _ _ a - - sus..
s s y -s,
* a~ i 4P f, t i L t za f -
zp"4Ra-,ys"{ f ;r"-e f YIr 1t Q1- - k f
+.t`'" '`'e xi.~-~' 111 3 ~ 1 me S
EN A- ,V~5,.~,
, - * - I ~ , , 1, _ _ - l~, ~ I I ~ - - , - i ~ 11 I
g
_ss *tra s 1 --r t
_ - -
r}
~
r
Tp2
ow
y b > "
-tv
t~ '~h1~+T~'r'~' $k s'a t f h yd 4 -max .sF, ,}7c~ +„i--34.z*-~
- MR,
t fro 3~ a^•' ~ 3-R.1~'&..
,rg
_
IN QW,
¢i~ ate - Changing the TCP map designation also furthers several implementation
strategies contained in the TCP's "Economy" section. Economy Implementation Strategy 8
r av- f ~ u
..qF: •`§:c-t`~rs d;:?L.t: s...q: _.:s•`.rc''ri~g,
states: "The City shall target efforts to strategic areas for growth and
t~{}a sw v i diversificanon. Specific areas include the central business district,
v the Tigard triangle, and the 74th Avenue industrial area."
This application provides for the development of a site within the Tigard Triangle ,a..& -
ch^^..l The .o °•dentia.1 .,.o•ket has moved aw-- from
that is no I
Onger neCt1C(! for aii cici~naij a _i
Zak . .L £ ~ _ ~
114-1- a $
" this area. The sale value of the site cannot support residential development. The site cannot Mail
be effectively developed for residential uses. 5
While the site is not suitable for residential development, it does meet the criteria ` , -
{ war
! for the "General Commercial" designation. The site's development for commercial retail use
will have tti°. same or less impact than if the site is developed for office use. Further,
commercial retail development of the site increases the opportunity to generate greater revenue
1-10
r #§4 a for the City, thereby eiv`iancing the City's ability to improve its transportation system. q`
Another justification for the amendment is to reduce congestion on area streets. x
Economy Implementation Strategy 27 provides:
{ "Because access within an area is a significant determinate of~ is
economic location, the City shall develop and put into effect ~a% '
fi t strategies to reduce traffic congestion." I 5~~R
- - - 2 One of the ways to reduce traffic congestion is to encourage the development of rg
y r . z
t uses that create less pressure on the street system. The traffic study prepared by Mackenzie
E ,x u ; Engineering demonstrates that development of an approximately 123,000 square foot commercial ; a Or
NO g
ATTACHMENT A 7 of 40 - a {
PDx1A•26171.1 ?3342-000?
-W WR W,
Z~ 3~` .tom
E• ,.d'~ - 3e.`' _ :.Z„"^m"- ..."-~k~a.iQ#.:-n.~'`S":Y::i..~v~^°m`4:-3~'SrK nT,94:.'35.'rrJ:.;r a«r +r - -d' 4 w ?MAN-
,"''d ~~<S 4 -,?;'sz-' -3a„'c. F• tip- ;»;'~:;-'x ~T-ap:=~~"+~'~~',~~.s.i'rstr9_°.:"" rya r~,.^ ~ ~s
'7
zh'tt
f L
t
r t -ear y.+.,$(``7 nx r ' - it{' c# I1r
F t
{ c* --`xrgar 7 t• r, r - j, _ x Sr - - ~'"s ,
5 1 Y F }~TT~ J.-fry
5- QZ -11,
F'• `I t - f' ~ a~ ",z~ R r - r ~ f - - - + n ~ r ~fx ' yt s
56_ ryf~} :f1 'k4 ~ ~ imf - I ~f E
11
a
Fxa
P
,iQ
&s+`"S~•4 .h-'°~f a-,' fr s`"a,~ Krs •<_„t-~`'--y- - - - r - s 4 t - 'w # - t " '3i X'.~*a. ' -
1C ~ ;4i_~ ~,*,i, 41,_ , , - I , , , . , .
a- aaK ,tr K ' - - z t., i - < 3 r sr1 2y#'a'.s ,~.gj
~,q"4cy. .Sr y r _ z ="c -
D• f'T i < s. , 'v _ -s-- Z !y s.
7 .,~~y 'F - iT•.t "e ~.t,,fS .is ,,,a , _
ri ti PPS.. ve s - - - ` r`k`a"1 ,14 2"^y _ : 'N~,r,, S
,y„ y _ g"',
V °fr ;J retail center on this site will have the same or fewer traffic impacts than would a development ~ 1 W, ? l' ~r
-1 11 ki &?r'sw x s.-,
r v-A..~:..',.x f a 26n rvv, fikr~{" ,~•,~..~~r'' i
o ,,.n," square foot office renter. fi%,a. , _
-,~J1~ ' s ~y s G. PROCEDURAL HISTORY. ¢ j ,
N 4F_
A: ~ t-,it . ~ "~1 ~
,-t.* - 8 `ate ~ " ` v r ,
13 Ste'` - -n F,ice 4~ -x'.--c ` t.
z h The applicant filed the application on November 15, 1995. The Planning 1 ,11 a;
J *4'aR"}M f , 1
'z Commission opened the hearing on January 23, 1996. The Planning Commission Chair read t. ~ ,
r ~ - g
r a
¢h, ` the statements required by ORS 197.763(5). The Chair asked whether there had been any ex4
~-~~6 ~ s '
parte contacts with any Commission members concerning the application. No Commission 4
_L I T",-~ 1 - x ` .
a, t
r:?
f member reported an ex parte contact concerning the application. g
K
Mr. Gordon Martin's representative requested that the record remain open. The gp~•~~r.
E-,-,
t
T l applicant's attorney suggested that the record remain open until January 29, 1996 for all parties t p~
s
WM"' lee
- to submit additional argument in evidence and until February 5, 1996 for the applicant to E q
~ 11
-
Al "tics ;vy.4 '4i',
5 J { F respond with additional argument in evidence. I y,;.~ t 4
1,~
N Y At its February 5, 1996 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended by a
-s s 4
s s
r st unanimous vote that the Tigard City Council approve the application. Commissioner Holland = l .
0.•,i--} yy l
F
f I.
4 moved the recommendation with a second by Commissioner Anderson. > x'
}
z,~~ r a
Y The Tigard City Council opened the public hearing on February 27, 1996. Mayor f 1 ,'W~ I
tom,',
kii - -
€,,~s 1 Nicoli read the statements required by ORS 197.763(5). All five City Council members were ' ' ~ 1 i
~fv- > '
~ ] present. Mayor Nicoli revealed an ex pane contact'with Bruce Warner of ODOT's region 1 ~ " ~ ~ ~i
r,.. t
r
office. Mr. Nicoli discussed the substance of this contact and rovided an opportunity for " y~ F F r
11 i t - -t # w-.!' ' `rte-
r anyone in the audience to rebut the substance of the ex pane contact. No one requested an
y /3
6
tl opportuni[y to rebut the contact. k,
s, ~ 7t'
a-i `'g" - > ~ r te.., ^ t
i - qtr -mss S -r a .ww~ ,td yto , # . {
-0mx~ ATTACHMENT A 8 of 40 ? y ~ _ _
h*~~_ - y n v PDXIA-76171.1 '_3652-0002
- . A t'iT X, -,11 a ~ 1' !
' - ~'c r # r r i"-" sue-.
t~ ~r. 6r , f- -a 3 a'~ m~ 4 i-.11
F ,v .e* I 7 sy- -.z T` ~ F
'gy p.- ~~d - - - ~ ';=xa~'~-.,• r i -
±~v',- - . _
" 11 11
X, -
c ra 'j, _ t o ~ aS, i11 y
s`ue' s ' 4
. r,k 'i, U, ~ , 29
N 3 4
SY' - ,N ~ { xF - ° _`s V y. °~,.*1" 1- 1 - ~Lj Q„ 7 7 i t..,iF c- J
_ u
it ~8- r H _ $ - rF 7
Tv y - $ l k Y ' rt - j R F J- -Y r
~„y ma~yv,, y„m.,hi a.Y.r``~"~'~s 'k- r y-_ sr -,'-'.r';r'r'~, `
E 'R~ 5 y tai a a' D rs, 8-,., "xl A , - j
F'7c`.~ - n. ! C~h fn f7.. t 2 f 9 - y .,i , ; S'i- ~ t
V~+ P 4 -F-2 T S3E J F
Ala 51x if3 r v + - - - ~r s r
Y' ~ -I
,12}r
-~~,~Y'. ~'?g„' ~m:~~i~'~.r ~ _ _.....s } - ~ ~.'2 4. .G-' z:~.y~`c~~a•.c>` ~.3'3r.?•
`5 ~'-~tl#~ -c~c 1 € - x. ' _ _ ~ ~ r _ -r . s r^ ~ r. "_'.5 x~ '~r'4~:€A v~~,. t~, y`_
# ~y 1'~~s• {f n2-- - '.ea3 _ i _ _ - S s S _ ~c° n ~a ;,s~; ~`aa<~_ "~~'r~~'Y -
' - -~~^"v~•5~ °~,~Y,- ~ ~Ya'~-r'+ ;3~. ~ s S ~ } _ ~ - ~ r a xa.,'~e ~ x ~5~ C~ ~ - §,Er' ~
`~.y"•z~.~.>;-,K;r,4,a ,ts Axe fszr { - z ~ _I' ~ ,~-s'~~~~-__--3 ~ v~Ea r
'~a.,~:r d~i~'d'}' ~~C~i~`s~'~ ~+F ~c~ ` a _ ' r - x m '~~i"_;s:., a^~~,i -e~~s.~_ 9~'•;£~''`~~-"'X~~cy~*zwx_
YY:e"y
'T 4 Y- + 4"k~ afYv YF
yF fink
The City Council, on a motion by Counselor Rohlf, seconded by Counselor
KIM
Moore, voted to approve the application by a vote of 4-0-I (Counselor Hunt abstaining).y
}ti II. FINDINGS OF COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA '
A. STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS
+yE- ` s`t <s-c7- ,t '}s-4`' irm`•. r- -
Goal 1, Citizen Involvement:
is~ •v_- - 'zr »s,".Ct>J:s :4`,;rcx% ` 1~1.,:"~a'~ ~ ' d,,< sw.
~"~~"ys~,ssi`,sg=~ .E'-Fig:, - `"~,-,?r",`~~-~~°~~=;?3-~~"•~9
"To develop a citizen involvement program that ensures
E .„rtirt r s aY d
the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the 'Tp~
planning process. '
p x' Citv Council Findings: This Goal is satisfied through the acknowledge TCP and 3{ 0
r s j w; f TCDC which provide for citizen participation. The applicant met with the CIT representatives
and adjacent property owners prior to submitting this application.
2. Goal 2, Land Use Planning:
` sE "To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use
of land and to assure an adequate factual base for decisions"
and actions."
t
City Council Findings: This Goal is met because the acknowledged TCP and
_
h~ TCDC contain provisions implementing the planning process. Goal 2 requires that the TCP
s~ "shall be the basis for specific implementation measures. These measures shall be consistent
t with and adequate to carry out the [TCP]..." This proposal will result in an appropriate TCPxg
map designation for this site that implements the C-G designation.
v
was-~_ Finally, Goal 2 requires the City to coordinate this proposal with other affected rFy
governmental units. Coordination was accomplished during the City's review of the application.
ar~ }
NO,
3. Goal 3, Agricultural Lands:_
n
To reserve and maintain agricultural lands." y
ATTACHMENT A 9 of 40 F r a~ t'
s's rr{• _ Y„r, -fir
V" fi ' t
a ! ? ~ ~
st,
M if
';_:'~,'F i r!{"`.,, -"3
.:`r,~~,e.t,-~ 4 'Yrde`Xf.sa"`4.-'Xi Z' yy y€.. z
S J d n F
°f tai
1366
r'a" vc 4
i a'
t~SV#$v ra ~.G' a -tte r st - w- M1 -,t'i*'rg S
N"-XV Z,
F, a c s'7°'-a~. r'r t d.s •i
Q;N
e~y s:„:.za»,~,v.';^a:~:~.~.:,.:- v "w- _ _ v _='x- - s - - " r•'-= i';`.ny"'`=`_a#~~-.,~4;ir.~,~
33. y r -a• y-^-,`•t'='~•1Ts`.a`i „s- y a' Jq x , - ?~y, ~t'+_ '~yvs,.~?,r -n'~5~ .
24
4fr,
00
AM-~0
-
if s`.
City Council Findings: This Goal is inapplicable because the site is not
r
w N
a 5 t , r~t
h + ' agricultural land. M -
{t r; , ~'l 4. Goal 4, Forest Lands: ONE
d y= 5~yy '
To conserve forest land by maintaining the forest land
' x base and to protect the state's forest economy by malting
14 WO'- possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the ~rk - ! +a
_'?{~;fyr n continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the
leading use on forest
land consistent with sound management
5 r of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources and to ONE-
for recre26Dra1 "
=r _ s provide opportunities and agriculture. RI
City Council Findings: This goal is inapplicable because the site is not forest
r x s land.
gt,
i 5. Goal 5, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural
Resources: E y S
r z~~ "To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic x resources. "F x ;
Mll-
a' 7{ Citv Council Findings: This goal is inapplicable because the site is not
t h designated by the TCP as containing open space, scenic and historic areas or natural resources
}j _ a protected through the TCP.
t 5 4
6. Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality:
j t "To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water''
and land resources of the state."
k . ~ City Council F-mdings: This proposal will not degrade air quality. Commercial
"UM
§ uses are not "point source" generators of air pollution. xa:
a V ,
v x` Water quality will not be degraded by this proposal. Stotmwater runoff will
na either be retained on-site to allow for gradual filtration into the stotmwater system or a "fee in ~r
tu`.-' J tc "-ri - £s'#.v ,g rog - y y'*x {l
IAW
ATT
ACHMENT A 10 of 40 x' x
PD?(IA-26171.1 23452-0002 ~ 'y„,.~-,Y~ ,~.~,,,,~~•tl C
s- -~-a- s - y `tx-`tV .y
"Sil --M
rill _04"VROMMEN
UM, s 6"
i
MI,
"rT 3%fp ! - 3t "~S'~.~ro~.we~.~,...w^^^•^.w,:,~n~-' ~-xr r' 0`''
77
A 43'~53`4y f- +i F, e
%
r ate' > ''-mss4 4 r - " i i - r T tiTi .+y? '
t~l
40
-1771
~~t tl_ z <tr 1-- j' ra I t
'S a ~r'2a r=id ' rri i r' f - _ a r i y ra"'f~ t
iML Lr s T o * ~sxd
z I
Z4 -I
- 354" '£M1Z Y J' ,d 4T' f~' l ] V
r r_ L
i
r_-
v - ~~~'S 1 -9 t t ~i ,f --6, h g F ~ •y ~j
t.., C.~ "c ,.,.,.:zaa. _ >.a w,.._-..n..-..,'.-•--..:W?;a.:m..twS:'r..>_s..:xu.a.`.,s-.i
.~~`Lyp, ~.~-.,.£~ira~,• ~ ~ y. _ t _ _ 6-a~~.a.i~.~'.v.r..~~'D Te
"fx
T`4t'~
m :r Fir _ -3 1 4
~ ~ c~£~~^~"^ ,_w:4, a . _ xmr-'" ,~-.,,~~~•~'-.e - _ _ ~ .1-.tea .7s r~"~~ -may, 4
i * Mks s~
-Fa
z~Ea lieu" of on-site retention will be paid to the Unified Sewerage Agency for water quality
a LS+ 1 ~''dR't534y 'mC4F +
-S iVA. V, M,
treatment. ~a '
. , -
, -'fib e~ c YT;,`r.,..+-,' ~•."s'~ -INN n I
r
.4 & ~
~t {#tah"' The land resources of the state will not be degraded by this proposal. The site
7~'~," 1hy yP f'.-` 'r:'
5 `r• is not in farm or forest use and does not constitute an important land resource for the state. fi • c
I&RihN NN
_ 7. Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: as To Drotect life and pro--- f_ em n..al dw "r s
'sal s"1 a't .n - - - r_ au~caa aTiu •t ~ r~
71$ - hazards." a s
`40 W
t%rnn
- z - City Council Findires: The site is not subject to natural events that could result
'
in injury to persons or properties, such as flooding, erosion, land slides, earthquakes or
s €a q-~y
hazardous soil conditions. This Goal is satisfied.
8. Goal 8, Recreational Needs:
f~
-Y "Satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state .
r £ . and visitors, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of kr
necessary recreational facilities, including destination resorts." r
8.35 a ~~{'t - •Y ~2~` Zl_
r Citv Council Finding s: This Goal is inapplicable because this site is not necessary
,
to satisfy the recreational needs of the state. Moreover, the City's recreational needs of the City .
p
j are far more likely to be satisfied if the City takes action that allows the district to close Phil j F
L \ y7 d t
' Lewis and open a new school with ball fields and other facilities at Bull Mountain. ?n
,
r # 9. Goal 9 Economic Development: - e
s ~
i0 Y
"To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state fife r
for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, i
"M W t, and prosperity of Oregon citizens."~
<y z i
Citv Council Findines: This Goal is satisfied because the proposal prcvides for
rxx
commercially-designated land at the intersection of two major streets. The findings of the TCP,, ;
-X~ "Economy" section recognize that Tigard is an important economic employment center within
b.*h>
'ac•~~rt, jam- ~ i`- ~ ~~~x ,
ATTACHMENT A 11 of 40
si+c nt,,'.
TT,
a`~."ryi $ yes'- + _ _ 4 ♦y, s -~.,1 Y''~'r+ma, 1 j
+h y ,r~`or,.h' rs+' r {!-`b a _ _ a ry, "rT~~d~ - c x
"At
k 4
1 ~Pfr dr ? ky saws i
zE-
c3 _ s E _ t' J- _ a t Si y.
h
-
F,4, `i 'Rr•Yr Y ."tfs ~".T r - - ' - . asr.
a 'y yb'5 _ x I -
, rr ~~4_1001~ ~ , "
,4. a~07 - .-A+.~ r T$ p, r r _ _ s tea' t `L ~.c x.,^ c,r- L
- 13
&a
* z ,
a.W>-a.r x,59 arx`Y„-r~ -
}A
M r
11
i3 °`r~ E k a A~b
141", the Portland metropolitan area. Part of this economic strength comes from the City's location g r, w "
n _
3~ ,.,-_u..," J (5517n%
' ; ,'j and its commercial growth. The TCP implements Goal 9 by designating appropriate areas for ,
r~= commercial development. The TCP "Economy" section also recognizes that proximity to I-5 -
ev's At rt - k, T _
s 4 and Highway 217 "serve[s] as incentive to economic development in Tigard." - ~
,{-7'N.~tYY N 4 _ 9~'' - ,,m gg i.-7 .Tf Tray r
Tnis site is most appropriate for commercial development when compared to other r4. i x #
1 po[ential uses. The City must make some change in the TCP map designation because Phil #
Lewis will be closed and an elementary school is inappropriate at this site. Commercial {
- ~ r~ _ ~J tit ~ -~."W
~ 1 t development makes the most sense at this site because it is adjacent to a major collector street s ;
i
4 ~ - - i and an arterial street, otherwise meets the loca[ional criteria for the "General Commercial" x{ s »
r c.. -~a
""~it j`' ` ` ' designation, and is inappropriate for residential uses because of the proximity to heavily-traveled t ` - g
-t~
rn streets and the lack of intensive transit service to serve residential development. q sue`, f a
M This Goal is satisfied. On " ' ~ ~ a <
- r~ tit c:i °t`J. -s ~.b.,d, s
10. Goal 10, Housin
g s '
tFS..a ass
- "To provide for housing needs of citizens of the state.
3
. F
W_ i
1
a City Council Findings: This site is not needed to meet the City's housing needs.i
t
aF ,:,w s 4 ; ~ckz» r
I-— ki
4 The City currently exceeds the density required by OAR 660-07-035(3), "Minimum Residential r `
r z . ; -
Density Allocation for New Construction." See also TCP 6.1, "Housing Needs" 22. i 5~~r
r ' i x q. moan s
x
~ , u' ~ : .
' 11. Goal 11s Public Facilities Services: tseS ~ ~ '
3,' a
>
h
r "To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient "ter' •
arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a
r i ?
framework for urban and rural development." '
3 3<~ T' ip 1 ate',=" ~,-yr ,1`*'~-ۥw-5
4 r rl f
'iii" - a~-_,, -
~ y .
"t E
i'A ATTACHMENT A 12 of 40 r F` }
vn1n-Zui7i.i 2JajLiAAP P 'k ^7'77,751- , 7
2'i 11
4 t
- f
M 's'o- µ ---an""o'+n.r " - ~4 'A,4 N` Yip, "t~~S `
_ rh-diih P k -
.4 ''?rr.,.x5' + e n7 S ''+kh 'c'S. 4A'j y , i" t J
,M, ~'l-~~,-j~-:Y.,-,~-k;.;~,,1-5~,7"~~ 12 : ~'~'~Z " L~. -1 .1, , I" '--r- - .f., . - ~ ~t~ ,~01§14W ~ ~_-r
--4 ,toy ~ ' a s ¢ u7 r
ss - - - f - _ t _v s - t 5
r
- a,r t -
T.,
q r + - - - 3,-= t -
T
t j 7 G t~ t -3-
"*n n" '"?-x z ~`a, ~k zy, o xr,# ,
'tfi - $ e1 sl rr y- 4+ `z^%- s 7 `t 1 r4 , ! - #
arH'"n'y5,,z, h - a< - - - - k s {3y 1 ^s' s_.s v. ' 3
11 `'A~"'' xn„b.,a..~., r. .~..t 5 - - - x I 1 ` i. ¢4,w- r.
b Y S>
I -~~5.-' - -
v
"Isa a - ° City Council Findings: This Goal is satisfied because the site can be served by ~
I
n ~ N t i appropriate levels of police and fire services, sanitary facilities, water, storm drainage facilities, i ~
Iii Ml~ z -
{ 5 and energy and communications services. ° aA.
.1 ZI
1, C g y, i,..,
m * The Tualatin Valle Fire and Rescue District can provide service to .his s.... t' T he '
j, ,-~Z ;`s. -'rq,, ; :s City can provide sanitary sewer and storm sewer services to the site. The Tualatin Valle Water n= -"-r.
i4i J'
RIM 1, a District has sufficient capacity to serve this site with water. . q
s f{'k4 •",x rye _
m Q Y The Tigard Police Department has commented that the intersection of SW 72nd
R;_
11
- Avenue and State Highway 217 has experienced a number of auto accidents. The City Council N 's
"N F finds that this application should improve traffic safety because of the street improvements ~
'~6 , z'OiM; associated with development and because traffic will be less than office development. w~
as d ~z. ' are` s xe -
- ,i'-a 12. Goal 12, Transportation: r"
H1- Ct.C4 f '
, 11, #s4 ~ C 01 - ~z r "To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and I ,
} c economic transportation stem." , IN - c
a x y~ S1 A i!
21 s L x .
t~^ 7' I > 4 g, City Council Findines: Goal 12 is satisfied if either of the following is fl g
xa "
} l demonstrated:
Y - - a' - { 1 5A 1
? (1) there is a safe and adequate transportation system to serve development ~
. .
"~g $ under the proposed map designation, or t
DEN'
s~ 7
(2) development of the property under the proposed map designation will not
I - ~y r
g create greater or different transportation demands and impacts than , z
Ii. ~''M~k I.
, r.:i
-ter xj.y '.r y_-t -
~ wAi~ 4 ~ development under the existing, acknowledged map designation. Q~ ~ i
z i _ ~,°V`,°.,` This application will not create greater or different transportation demands and X_ g c
. b, _
s I,~ t0 `OMk~
impacts than development under the existing acknowledged designation because of three 3 $0
r s
r , M
,Yf - 5t important conclusions demonstrated in the applicant's transportation study. { t 3
~L- a - "A.1..l,Arum~NT A t j of 40 o e mn, - . ,,'a, f.i k s -
QX1A-26171.1 23? 2...,.._ ,~--•gs--.------~
G. .st lc#t- e! 1.
- In Iv X ,r
.ut`a'd,..+s"'. ,xa° r 3 -.f & s k,~` 3 k
y1,i' p 7`^'T_~-•;.'^»~,-",a,-~^-•,u~a ,>,Lr.."';,"^d_Ls3.--'..',,.. ,.'"..,~~-xs=-- -+s^~ v-;z..Fe>~.a:}'~;,., e, _
u;y5.h'-~r~:~iM:€3 ° -ry _ - - xsr5 erg. ra#'~ far,`?-Y'.~.yryz
C~~;x„y $ t # a - - 4 ~ LL
~r x>'s; f
I
- `111 101 1,
~ 10 ~ I , M" - i;~J _R 21% "I i.~~,~, ~ ,,r-
,~°x s' k -3i^~-- , ,5 - -cam t'm. N,.024 jr
y *lY 5 c fi 4 b t t ,1„ s' ,3 - r fi -s' '"+'~f 1',,t r
£r i
k r a - r n, mss' < x -T- t`''~,ti.au 1 1 Ir -Z .i { x , i sy
- rfya. * * ,k fi~L j ; J - d k G ark
_ F L - .J. -FS' sS.
4
M r rK, ,rE,-~: Sx i
q I`- - . 9~~ - ,-II"I,'--`-,`~`-I' , .
K
- M, , - i
_
r. ~ I I ~ I -~'Al~~l;,~~,'-,'~t~~-~~'~~ti-~",. -~~,~-,V,,'~,~'.,,~~.--,_, - - - - , ~ , , , , - ~
}N -Vgf; C3 C '5 t ' - 5. .t'; YY .2 A 1
C , ~ i' L r _ - r t - , z ,•--see=.i
I -
r -
11
`1 First, the street improvements recommended in the DKS Tigard Triangle traffic
'''i study will allow all Triangle roads to operate ,
at acceptable levels of service ("LOS N - - F
r `-I ~
~ ~Y~~
I g; * F a `General Commercial" designation on this site. x, 5 ~ R
- - € s '
, ~ ~ ~J, ~ ,,'~-.~t,-! V,- -'~"Y"mMM9 ,.Iqz,~ ,
v -
Mr. Ray Valone testified at the February 27, 1996 City Council meeting that the - a
y i 'sr , ' S 1 - I 11
.
, g City plans to adopt recommendations of the I-5/217 subarea plan in order to facilitate a local and ;
g t o s 4~ a -
' r 4 regional solution to the transportation system's needs. Mr. Hendryx, Community Development t -USS ` ~ 11
4 Director, also testified as follows: -z a ~ 11-1 ~ ' 's "
x £ , m ~ -
y
"Within that work program that Council had taken,
? ~ x w action on already to direct staff to proceed, is a component that I "
d
{ would address the I-5!217 linpr;,vements identified that ~ - -
- ro ect and considerati3.
f -on adopt of meat is called the
„ , ~ ' toolbox which includes a number of improvements for the i `
A f streets throughout the triangle and throughout the portion of,_ h
Jf fi Tigard. I just wanted to point that out so the record was clear z tk,-, g
k s :u - that the action had been taken this evening by Council ~
at
- i already." j,„ ~y~ 1W ,tea- x
-ts r .ss.~.... F~~rrhrr, ~~f~= c -
Mr. Hendryx testified to the City Council: n
"Mr. Mayor, it's been conveyed to me both by Mr. Leo
ti tp Huff and Bruce Warner was that provided the City is
f interested, which we have demonstrated for addressing the I- ~,Y I. _
- t 5/217 improvements, going through the process and updating'
' s our comprehensive plan would include those identified `rs t`} ~ ~r 2k - ' improvements, the State is satisfied with the effort the City is - a 3~ 91 .
4 4
} 4„ making towards the showing that adequate public facilities will K * 7 €
x exist out there and there would not be an o osition fromG t i t
s a Y PP-~~
2e I
x Y ODOT with regards to this request." -
-
z M
{
x Finally, Mr. Hendryx testified with respect to improvements in this area: to>'
r~ Y f, "In an effort to improve overall circulation in that ' ; { 1 u a
rh2s vicinity, including the Tigard Triangle, there was a full series l, 4
u = of improvements that were identified-widening 72nd, widening 1 3Y,
~,I -
> <1;1Dartmouth. I'm just going to name a few. Doing some other ? -
h} improvements, like the two fly-overs I just mentioned as well
a * - as a number of other improvements were identified as part of {
l
{F
ATTAC'NMFNT A td of do ,vc,m~... ;F'
I &1- X L- '"xfi t'a - 1 s L~ay~'^i~
w r r
N x 5F
err, - 3 s t q 1 x
N~ SAS 'Yb -1 ' ,1- 1 +L. 1i !Lt tt, t .k
l>51; six _ t -',c ,;f 's_Y -i
A.+` sz- SSA{ It `t Gy-- . T J ~t cy4•~ ~ i i _ ~ Im ~ ,~"I,r. , - , - - - - - -1 - - 1- , , ~ J - L 4 t
Ay z
fi s rjJ r r { 52 t X s, - x 7 {
M i"~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ - , i * ~ r . . ~ ~ z : ~ r,- - M f
l Y
- - Y L-
g
6A 4
Mil
W-V
i,?~M^`~
s'. '3§" 4~`^r d' e.•- + --_F t i t r - r'l '`i'-r y '-4
i. w7-`t;~,;,~E ~ r ~ +~.~,3""pct,~.~6.^'=~-~ao:.d~.s:}=•~L.,:._ _ 'Hy"'y "~G~~ax ` -
.Y
W1, -
the analysis of ultimately needing to be done to meet future
[ transportation needs in that vicinity or in that subarea."
rt, ~ q cM1xr r ~
€ The City Council finds that the DKS traffic study for the Tigard Triangle area C _
completed in May 1995 identifies improvements necessary to provide area roads at acceptable
a
g ON,
levels of service. Testimony by city representatives is sufficient to demonstrate that the street
ee, ~ r na`c 4i t~
improvements identified in that plan as well as the I-5/217 subarea plan will be implemented
Mn "
and, with implementation, area streets will be at acceptable levels of service. 3~ z
h r~ rl a s
-Yt ~ ~ t'L ,G -t5 . v M-4
a t Secondly, without the DKS-recommended street improvements, the level of
(1E4
service on SW 72nd Avenue will be the same even if this site is not developed. The Triangle's
N~k
streets must be improved regardless of what action the City takes on this application.
. s s-
x
} Finally, because the TCP map designation must be changed, the appropriate {
1 s r- : - comparison is to the current zoning map designation on this site, "CG." ixu
~ - -cr r ct.2~h i
The City Council finds that the proposed CG map designation will not create ~r
greater or different transportation demands and impacts in development under the existing, "
'now
acknowledged map designation. Assuming for the purposes of this analysis that the "civic used up, ,
w~ _
- types" permitted by TCDC 18.62.030(A)(1) in the CG zoning district include "public offices" s 3~ N
Mili
fi4fi j s as permitted by the Public-Institutional TCP map designation, then the site could be developed
k
Mr, 7-
with an office use. z
r An office use developed under the existing, acknowledged TCP map designation
would generate 2,890 new trips compared with 4,025 for a 123,000 square foot community
k
shopping center. However, an office use would generate 376 P.M. peak-hour trips whereas the P
shopping center would generate only 375 P.M. peak-hour trips. The City Council finds that any
s ~r x
Fr f i - ad,..rse impact to the transportation system is largely felt during the P.M. peak-hour. The °
ATTACHMENT A 15 of 40 PDXIA•26171.1 23452mo2 r €
4~, ~ .31mk # 4..
§v P - '1
11 _L
3, Fe^*~3t i.
_ ' € 1
',Wy '6's,.,,e ~ t_- y~..^^.,-°^^.~w•r r*^-'"~^..++tm.~9ar .f"ad'r`..r>.E?,+t~ancenie~~:~.t:ac+*r'" "'ST't 5?*--t•, wt rte. ,may aqr'>. -~.r,~~',-~^a.^. r : - Y t ~P r~~~ i -_:t
Yl`
§ C mY r F r r4c&a ;y k
~7FkbF,~*s7'~,µ.p»d'~-t ~ ka{-f.rtd - rt
3`s.~.~- xY'r `J'JfT a p t t t + s r)_ fi} agk f J .7
c mob- r K¢
.y i ~.iSf. } ~e?s P'A i { { l t t.3#>s 3_
O'L
F F f "-x a t-
~iti 'y `"+R ~,r~y ' OWN
, x
'm
, rn. -'t t _ IY Ey,
is &g_
'",rX~,X~,•~,tv`4 ,C~ n yF' Y.r'„yi ~Z - {y _ ~SS - ~ . i i - r
Z~V
r _ existing TCP ma designation will create greater transportation demands than the proposed map
3 1 ` amendment.
}gym The City Council also finds, based on the transportation analysis performed by
in X
+v*}elg;..T'T~v°ei.i%'+:ij~,i-•_-~ _ ~;1?y hFd,~;e#.a q.2 ~.,a..
Mackenzie Engineering that the community sheppg m, center will receive more trips already on N
y3 area roadways than an office use., The City Council finds that the proposal will reduce the
e. rs~
ZI
t number of new trips on the roadways.
ryti t; s
4S The City Council also concludes that the Mackenzie Engineering traffic analysis 4
* ~ ~ ~r*•~ ~ supports various findings as made in this decision. The traffic analysis examined development
of the site with a 123,000 square foot community shopping center and a 260,000 square foot
w
zt f office development. The traffic analysis concluded, for the reasons discussed herein, that the
n -
- Y ' - office development would have a greater impact on the transportation system than would aS#~
t community shopping center. The City Council finds that the traffic analysis is specific to the r p
~ site based on two development models and is based on traffic conditions as they existed when
..sr z,.x....-. '1
rite analysis was pcr-,vi_,u^.,ed Ile City Council finric tbAt this transportation analysis would >a.,•;,a -xs., a
t° > provide no support for other quasi-judicial TCP map amendments.
rFg Furthermore, when comparing an office development with a shopping center } c {
f k ' development, the City Council finds that the proposed TCP map designation has less impact one 4 ,n
State Highway 99W than the current map designation. Finally, the City Council finds that the
Wlkl,
4~ x }
proposed map designation produces less than one-third of the A.M. peak-hour traffic as would
t5 Iwx~. a
' the current TCP map designation. The City Council finds that taken together, the proposal will
[
4F=a~ }F
not create greater transportation demands and impacts than development under the existing,
4
g acknowledged TCP map designation.
` ATTACHMENT A 16 of 40 PDYIA-26171.1 2345mo2 F K k
77, 7
t - i - - - -
{ i' av" s 4 7z s 1
1 f p
- z p r 'kt' i
;Z il
s^"xrs';-S. a r f _ i ?,r{;, -ny rFt s
ter
"4, 4e
]~_z~.__ rte.
g
~ r t,ast"5 FS3" > 3~ ,°'r c --.~.T. _t ` Jl-, r. Yn e - _ x>
a
a ^E k r e -a i z_ 3 I` N-' a s s'h W '"~.vl
F s rzK '2't 1W., 7i° .r.. _ y +~v„tsf.+s. . 5 ® I
i'r f~- ~.s a } u_v-a.:.S -4 ~ F:--- f~-..d k' -~'a'F }.f' 11 §
Ifft t i - Z a' 4 -a rd` rr, Fi. , 4.- ,
mm, ^e'~.
- _ - ax "~°3I>" F} t
- - xti 3 gr-e* Fg - s
N '94' .d~~ a ea n
h- ~~}s :
'm w Office development on this site will result in -greater adverse traffic impacts thana~
Xe<
r#~
-a~ t}w ('nmmrmial (:~annrrol ~iuo:.,.,...:•....n_ _ r
r.., , -.,~,,..--t ,,.g.r,.vu. The YrGpvDCd TCP map designation will lessen the traffic Aga. - '
- , Ti s - k 1 impact on State Highway 99W, reduce traffic impact during the morning peak hour of travel, w,
i~
a€rs_ and create the same number of new trips as would a 260,000 square foot office development.?
_t Ca * The Commercial General TCP map designation will also reduce vehicle trip length I 5 4
1 r by providing area residents (especially residents south of State Highway 217 and east of I-5) with
y x a closer commercial retail center. The City has previously found this reasoning to be persuasive v
ra
~ z - in the case of the Albettson's application on Scholls Ferry Road. See Marcott Holdines. Inc.
V. City of Tigard, Or LUBA ~ ni% (LUBA No. 95-011, October 20, 1995). ,7 ~
f
_ Table 3 of the transportation analysis shows existing traffic plus traffic from ~ 4~` -
y approved development in the Triangle. The intersection of SW 72nd Avenue and the Highway
~~1 I- 217 ramps is currently at a LOS "F". Table 4 of the transportation analysis shows that thew
11 V - 67' - 1,
ate' ~-,d
_ ,f Y - 7 m intersection will remain at this level of service even with the added traffic from this proposal.
~
Table 5 of the transportation analysis shows that the intersections will also be at a LOS "F" if
' i ~
7 .1-1i r ~ the site is developed for office use. Thus, this proposal causes no greater impacts than does the t _
"SL
,4' , . * existing zoning map designation. ' _
r $ r.
T- -t D a?
r The City Council finds that this proposal will not change the impact on the r
i "3 a y k *z~3 t''~..
w ~ transportation system when compared to existing development in the Tigard Triangle and the 4
11, f~ &my- 4 - - ! current TCP map designation of this site. This Goal is satisfied. V"
i f; s r g +Mar~t"af- g '"3 ra F 1
# a~ 13. Goal 13, Energy , " ~ L
d Conservation: ~ f
"To conserve energy." - ~~,w ,r;
E
x,n rte., - - - ,,,f d~
t r. ATTACHMENT A 17 of 40 " e + " t
bffi iy'`r PDYIA•26I7I.1 _3.t52OW2 t -s`"F ro$,x,--
4n`tax-k - rya.' P
r:
Z gs.. gy ~ ,t -u, _ ~ m~>».. s~,.+..,..~-~ -m+}=-+?= -r ;ig• - .n'f ..-,.`.'•erfr'`' z 4,.',.` `w 2;m :id t `r~1 a
*-'t'y '3 3b a' - - - 3 - s.3 1
. ~ xr r v i E[[ h
I I~IIFT~ , - , , ta ,,-:L`__-. . , , ; ' _It-, -1, I I'll,
_jx,er r' fir "7 c ~"a-i, spa 5 rv+'~, ~`r
cYl pxTSxa''srp # _ i ` z - - r - r. - i y -IL - v.,a'~'es rt' r _ l
E.~ ts,C~`{C ~~.6" ifs "F- e ,y i Sr, r 4 t'#• ,a 7 t
11 I ~ < _ a cat Yr _ ,•4`' •x z f 4 5Y ~5 r' r h 1,
F' 3
r tr,} ~c m a* n
a Fh ,Srh g " 2 :s A
, " ~ - , , W i, i", " ,~L~.~'i,~, , . . LIr - 11 -1
r__~~
1~'_ r.~ak.`.~~~ic'~Z.~ ~a~ •~,S y .~i y r~ ,y 3°``Y• ~k .~y~ ~a -b
a~~,~V,~ie~ - ` -7 £ .t ms's `^s~• --c-~'e, F A ~
tl axiw
01p,
~ ~'K~ ~fi,h."y~ .f rAg, ~ rt- ~ s y 7 S i ~"~F 3rs~,a .F xvw3~i9 Yt~.~Y~,k~~ryky+.~ :~a~x=~f:
A-f
MW.
r
s~ rte. RU-1'.'„~-.~~r';;~~a, ~I
AI4~14SW4FU-l "I
...............z City Council Findings: This proposal furthers this Goal because it locates
commercial land near major streets, thereby reducing vehicle trip length. Tri-Met provides
1 transit service along SW 74th Avenue adjacent to this site.
g~x ~7
14. Goal 14, Urbanization:
-6110 a ,
~ To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from
rural to urban land use." ky
g`'°~"'""~s 'Y ,Tr. fi'•',k-~' Syr
City Council Findings: This Goal is inapplicable because this proposal does not i
request an urban land use outside of the Urban Growth Boundary.
L l 15. Goal 15, Willamette River Greenway; Goal 16, Estuarine Resources,
! L.
f L~ Goal 17 Coastal Shorelands; Goal 18, Beaches and Dunes; and Goal
fi 19, Ocean Resources.
City Council Findings: These Goals are inapplicable because none of the 1=
s~
1 r-' 1 affected natural resources is on or adjacent to this site.
IRV
r
CONCLUSION: This comprehensive plan amendment conforms to the applicable
Statewide Planning Goals.
-
x
c ¢ Ni x B. APPLICABLE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
' 1. General Policies. TCP Policy 1.1-2. Implementation Strategy (2):'
"The Community Development Code
wu+ xx
(CDC) shall provide quasi-judicial changes to
the Comprehensive Plan Map which may be tar
v r 4 initiated by affected parties on a semi-annual
t~
~
basis and approved if the City Council finds: "a. The changes consistent with applicable .4
j Plan policy;
~q=z~ b. A change of physical circumstances has kr2~
occurred since the original designation; or ZN+"' (x'.
c. A mistake was made in the original land
a
F"N
use designation."
r a c
ATTACHMENT A 18 of 40
a tt+ ,~.;t ~ POXIA .611.1 23352.0002
qj~ +
X45,+ N2~''..5=3 =gs'-, ~k `5
r' s'°, - a '.t-':} ,5"
-7 77777777~
5 -W
n g t xrk > - `t3 x
> .s~sf ''i r t,: rr ' rs - ; x s -c & t ..y ~~'{vv 15R - u
{
d b S- v- s
2s e z a}k a t e a #S ?
IP,
AI~
-
,sv.<r,,s Z
} 3
t +w" i;-~ s ;y 'c 3 s 1 r x-.r { r a.r. 'ter.' r ~R
^1', ~.nys g - _ - 5~ F x3 tY2` het v K
Y,-`€'~~ ; r" ,,'p f --""'-1_ 2 fi 1I i _ - r _ -r f' - 4 wc'- - "r~, "5 _
.a'L~'i s 3 - f - s _ Fr t f 74 .rte d1~. ; Neff
) -r',
e A~
- Y ~ a ~ ~
a G - 234 ,
t € City Council Findings: TCP Implementation Strategy 1. 1.2(2) provides that the ~2 t , ~ _ 4M
z _1
;%1_01 711 » y.1} City Council may approve a quasi-iiuiu' it j aicial amendment to the TCP map if it finds that the ~ ~ ~¢Y~ .
* + r r proposed change is consistent with applicable TCP policies and a change of physical ci ~ ~lu a
3 rqC
r r circumstances has occurred since the original designation or a mistake was made in the original
~ - ~
Z', N
~
°k 3 ; land use designation. This application demonstrates that the change is consistent with applicable - x _r$`
V I
4 TCP policies. For the reasons shown below, the application also satisfies both the change of r ~
N61' ,
S
_ x { nhvsical circumstances and mistake criteria. =Wz '
,a v-r M y-rte .a - - .I ' - 1111 -r 'a i# >T v.
23'2
r i i
- z ~a A change of physical circumstances has occurred since the original TCP map
p<
designation. The district has decided to close The Phil Lewis Elementary School. Therefore, 4~ A k
a t}` 1423 •c'.~5,--'..-
4 the site will no longer be used for a public facility, so the Public-Institutional TCP map .~V11-1 =
ti ; F ~ Y designation will no longer be appropriate. The City Council can find that a change of physical ~ ~ "
= yr~~ v
t + 1
f r' circumstances has occurred that justifies the amendment to the TCP map.
r Y y k' The City Council finds that another physical change is the change that has u- "Y
w h
e s occurred in the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and its impact on the Phil Lewis lk N-
~ ~ ~ ~ M - School. The Council fmds that this change constitutes a change in physical circumstances which ~g £ "x
- ~~~-,Zlt~..r~~,1,1,-,,-~.,.,~-, , tM-911-
k +
, a has occurred since the original TCP map designation was placed on the site. Substantial wrr
7 ~ s ~
r r" evidence in the whole record demonstrates that the number of school age children has declined
le=
I 11
s z I 3' " 1
v £ $ ' significantly over the past several years in the triangle. The number of students attending the ;4; ~t k r
Phil Lewis Elementary School as opposed to those being bussed to the school from other areas r64,1 1
- tr,a„y zgsS~5'.rz~ 1
t~r I ~ 11
wE i'~'w ~ is low. Moreover, the City Council finds that residential uses near the school have declined ;yam-
-74 'z :u because of commercial development. 1, I ~r
r i ` 5 of s- - - ',r'4 1 r, t
t` ^lE'T-
~ r -n K ATTACHMENT A 19 of 40 PDXIA•-6171.1 23452-"2 r• P r~r, .
fit...., 2 z `d:: ~ 'x - ;
3'zr frf y'.~~^jy' - f
a
i ,F ~-n "'r 1~3 t c•--r•.a- , .m=.++>:..-,~ +axrw •y„=,~vsr .233 a g _ ngr-. ;"'f,.." ~.g°. - q .r„ - _ ~ ; sr kpA~,` 'r r
,y#r 4 My 1 r~s
n - r l~ w a r -C..r s q
G 50 S - - -vT aS y ;S- "
srr'c`„ 'y 7; K e z ,.r, { s - _ -r x- at~~ab ,:'~%p :rz"~~d0 7 - ,r+ IC -
p','1'~4r'y,r ;i_t 'r{ t: - r _a"4~,day°ni: " ~'.i>' ~ x i
t Y s*F')r ~t.~ i
Std z } t rT .r r- i r r z'+. 2sr- y''
E te `'x Ar~~'7~ N "'."o-l"., z' - - , . , W , ~ r .,F. d i ,I ,1 ~~t ~ ' "I , "
j t
- t- z - _ _ n X f-
I I
i-, .F f-- - Y -
r
_ - - -
1
r'~ .i
04
.
d'F, WE
b' fc T¢ b~.aA in w
-gX 2 Nib fii?"~' x`i 3 s-
+s``
ffl
The City Council also finds that a mistake was made in the original TCP map
r,
u designation. This site was originally zoned for industrial use after annexation to the City from
Washington County in the mid-1960s. At some time later, the site was rezoned from industrial
to its current zoning designation. The TCP map desiOgnation, however, was not amended.
The City did not intend for a TCP map-TCDC map conflict to occur. During
xs~
acknowledgment of the TCP in 1983 and 1984, the Land Conservation and Development
Commission (°LCDC") identified other TCP map=TCllC map conflicts and found that the TCr
r A- 3 .
did not comply with Statewide Planning Goal 2 until such conflicts were resolved. See, for
T fl' ~ ' example, "LCDC Acknowledgement of Compliance," dated April 4, 1984 at pages 7-9. This
r r
site is not one of the listed sites as having a TCP map-TCDC map conflict. Therefore, the City
Council finds that it was the City's intent to resolve all TCP map-TCDC map conflicts and that
-M e
this site was mistakenly overlooked.r Ae,
~xx t
` The City Council also fords that the Public-Institutional TCP map designation was
r, mistakenly applied to this site. There is no zoning district that implements the Public- ( s~
{
Institutional TCP map designation. Therefore, the appropriate TCP map designation ought to
have been Commercial General as this application requests.
NO,
The Community Development staff has indicated that the City zoned this property
u r 4 Via? ~s F
{ General Commercial in order to ensure that the Phil Lewis Elementary School did not become $ M Cj l R 3
a ~a
1 a non-conforming land use and unable to be reconstructed if destroyed. However, under TCDC "
A 18.132.040(B)(1)(d), discontinuance of a nonconforming use of land for any reason for six
months or more requires that the subsequent use of the land "shall conform to the regulation1
° specified by this title for the zone in which such land is located. " As noted elsewhere in this t ' Q x~
r
ikk~k
" k~ 1 ' aT "ACr,::a_ t a 20 of 40
PDX1A-1_6171.1 23352-0002 E - {
C-m
F 77777
E y„- 'MMae++'raa.w a`yE. t.p1'~ : 3
r c~ - --,,..,...,"'""'.'""s
r7w~ Psi'
71
t K ~
rYYi« -nr7`_ f 1 r k _ S a',` 7' t r _
r lam` -s-r--~"~ a ~ rr...T+r'°"'"„'_ _..~......--T---c~r4..r- ^~^--;-~F -
A4,
~ S
zip,
M K.
g
44
application, because the TCP map and TCDC trap are in conflict, no conforming use of this site °
i"M 4~ f can be made. Therefore, while the City attempted to protect the site from loss of
nonconforming status, the City has mistakenly failed to apply the correct TCP map designation.
„ h For these reasons, the City Council finds that TCP Policy 1.1.2, Implementation
rg'
~ - ~ awl
~PQM
y Strategy 2, is satisfied.E'
I ~
$ ~ ('nV"ZQ~
' 2. Citizen Involvement, TCP Policy 2.1.1: =
"The City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement'
program and shall assure that citizens will be
provided an
a opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning ;yam
j' process."
MAR,
ON Council Fmdines: The site is located within the East CIT area which was
0 -1
n notified of the proposal. The applicant held an informational meeting on July 11, 1995 to
y explain the application.
s
Notice of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council
were provided to surrounding property owners as required by the TCDC. r _ -
_W R,
hs F All
'MR.
3. Natural Features and Open Space. TCP Policy 3.1.1:
"The City shall not allow development in areas having
the following development limitations except where it can be
M shown that established and proven engineering techniques
k , related to a specific site plan will make the area suitable for the -
proposed development. (Note: This policy does not apply to
lands designated as significant wetlands on the flood plan and
~x~ _
55.
{ ~3 wetlands map.):
r a(1) Areas meeting the definition of wetlandsf k _
under Chapter 18.26 of the Community Development Code; 4k~~ I
(2) Areas having a severe sod erosion potential, x
r { (3) Areas subject to slumping, earth slide or
movement; 4M5 t v
d a
~4~ aoc ATTACHMENT A 71 Of 40 'i ~ x ;
PDXIA-26171.1 23J52-0002 ?
r tn,
I can` .#t:r ' r t z SSs 'an*
_'M,, `°"!'~'',zs--k.7 M-It'w i"°r - °eja':^'s.~~,''>''`a, a`•'k""z%:"~j'.°': ''w''3 dam. e,-'`'~''4'a v+`°'~; :y:.:w"° ,';Z'''S;
.L"'L'k ~S•kl'}_,i q>w } } s'F:PSC=+A ~.W
1+'~ - 4 i 35 Y Yf~ 4
MVI
s _ M a: 4
t ' 4 ~ 7 } at nr:~
y i
~,~.~~s.,.~,grT~,. -3 ~ 'tst t4~~~~*~` _ ~ _ i y 1Y. s, .~a tk~s~',~~"'~Y
o- a x 5~ Ya-
lay»,,. ~t k -
f~ia. „3x t,u z - - 1~- twx1r k-d
may. a- e r a" _ _ ti i Z r ~Fr~, z
} r_ ~ i 5
=,~.v,- s~, t * r r 1 - s - 3 5 r^- - f „z {t y 7~ --s i r ,
a '
fr..~-,.~,_.~_~zr...-. _ r.4 r~~.~ Y ~ _ _ r~L....,c~..-+r`,n,k"' .ter , ~ ~ zsi ~ i
'r'y~.c
W.. -
~Ar sk g.n
aS. 5ua°` xJ3rr
,T r
-Vp
F-as., ON
',1F3+ `)iu aka.;, i. s ~
r a (4) Areas having slopes in excess of 25% or.
(5) Areas having severe weak foundation soils.
City Council Findings: The site has no mapped wetlands, severe soil erosion,
k
slopes exceeding 25 percent, severe weak foundation soils nor is it subject to slumping, earth""; ':a.r 31
slides or movement. Nearby property
is developed with no evidence of development limitations.t~
57C -
r s ~
a 4. Air Water and Land Resources Quality, TCP Policy 4.2.1:
xri1 x_ i w
r# n "All development within the
~
Tigard Urban Planning Area shall
a
comply with s~.' ~azg*d*a
applicable federal, state, and regional water quality standards."
g j Citv Council Findin s This policy will be satisfied through the Site p,.
L f € ~v
Mil
Development review process in TCDC Chapter 18.120 and the building permit process. The °a vy,,~. „
-ir
6 T1 i
* pro
posed TCP map amendment will not affect compliance with this policy. ,
5. Economv, TCP Policv 5.1.1:
oah~ 3a:~ 2t
5# ' "The City shall promote activities aimed at the
z ? diversification of the economic opportunities available to Tigard
residents with particular emphasis on the growth of the local
job market."~e~ -
City Council Fint dings: This proposal furthers this policy by providing for the 7
s redevelopment of a site that is no .anger needed for a public use. This proposal will enhance{ - '
the local job market by providing additional jobs. KT rt `
i 5
s W
6. Economv, TCP Policy 5.1.4:
;41; rE "The City shall ensure that new commercial anda
- industrial development shall not encroach into residential areas
Tit
' that have not been designated for commercial or industrial
y, gi- use.
MEE WK
si i t 4 y s,' p- `tax" f.
City Council Findings: This policy is satisfied because the site is bordered by
W' r~-
r a residential area only on its northern boundary. Commercial retail development can be
,M A - ~
`$s x` ATTACHMENT A 22 of 40
?DY1P. :5191.1 234-52-00r 4
Z,T
94
r an~c
tai c
ITT,
2 .v a'\ry ta- `fix - t- s• f z _
7
red 1
t y
"Pt
-xai~ yx`
%
F 4 - ..d fr
RM ~ k
}4 .
~ sa~~~~'~'"~r"~~~ ; >y- ~ ~ - _ ~ r `cam -,5ym~~•,~u~ Gaza `''j`'t'r'~y'q
-~'~',_"_c•Ls,.""^' gsc _ - 'px`q- - i- ':w.-aE4r` 7'~r~~ -
~sg
b s .
I'M
• developed on this site with appropriate buffering and screening to minimize impacts, if any, to
91 _ the adjacent residential area.
gzl
gr r° ,f
a'~ x
,!s 7. Housing, TCP Policy 6.6. 1:
z
The City shall require:
a,H thti;' "a. Buffering between different types of land uses` '
(for example between single family residential and multiple
family residential and residential and commercial uses and
residential and industrial uses) and the following factors shall
be considered in dete.-mirung the type and extent of the ;
rr x s a required buffer. t o
The purpose of the buffer, for w
t t _ k example, to decrease noise levels, absorb air
g ; ; g r., pollution, filter dust or to provide a visual ror
tt"?._ barrier.
w r,~ "2. The size of the buffer needed in
r e,j~T terms of width and height to achieve the purpose.
t`
"3. The direction(s) from which,
All
' r'4 r 4 - buffering is needed.
zMT
oy' 'RIMER
The required density of the
r' ~rTh u ` buffering.
Y ry4s-t'b ~4~~ 3K - _
115. Whether the viewer is stationary or
{
' mobile.
s t
k , "b. On site screening of such things as service areas ,
fF, and facilities, storage areas and parking lots, and the following
e)r } factors shall be considered in determining the type and extent ;r.
of the screening:'
ifxv .'~4^r'
r
"1. What needs to be screened.
r s
2. The direction from which it is
r fz j~ needed.r
3. How dense the screen needs to be.~g
F ~9r a h,3 - _ - a~.~r3 fk¢
'Ij ~-R~' rya' ~ r „3. - _ A ~r`•~a'k''~'
g a d° ` ATTACHMENT A 23 of 40 r= r
4 n .5K. [
4D-.:R"
'VA
`c i v tam' s
F §~+4 ~_}.T c«.+arrsrxwn s,~a~ ra*^"'A`^,~y:-*?E <f ""T va?;a"_:;<,c"` war+~.~aFw.a25'„7 jB,gq,J'`y~ 'F
4XYZM N- -'T'N,
u- -
Y J m k i ~s•., _q?.._
_ ~t't;"G'`'f^S'' r✓ s 1.. d k' s i ?'+.J-T 4!• Ks, Kp„"'.- x - ,I
u-
Y f Y a' .''l rre g F
YW {~qt~~ S€Y Y Y # T
- J Y
E„ +vX„'~✓{ TMr,f 4~'7di6Y - - 1
0i KRF
_ - - fFy€y " 3 £ (g Y
~5~~•'e*-'1~ v"fir
'rX$~`'.t
V"` . € Y # - S- a } y i AAA a 1 p~, Yt -`y
cs' ir3s P 1 s'. f' - 5 r y c c _C z--++ a"crp p-
# E
JIVI
~/t ,AM 1 b F , Whether the viewer is stationary or )'t
s`u mobile..
Whether the screening needs to be
year round." g F.~ Y 4
S s~ = Y L a~ w g~M
,x
,,y,; City Council Findings: Commercial retail development on this site can 6e'
adequately, buffered from the adjacent residential development on the north. The focus of the LEA
arm ~
A site's activity will be to the south, away from the adjacent residential area. An appropriate a
combination of fencing and landscaping will provide a visual buffer between the site and the
-3 } C-- 5 ~'~.,t -Si~av. .imp - pit ~
adjacent single family homes. k zy
t , z } - The CG district also requires a 20 foot setback when abutting a residential zoning r}+u ]~3~~~r1 _
district. 1C.DC 18.62.050(A)(3)(d). TCDC 18.100.13v(A) establishes a "buffer matrix" that
' requires appropriate screening between commercial uses and single family homes. Development y4 ~ =
x on this site can meet these requirements.=fa
P The - I;e nr ran develop standards to control light intrusion onto the single family homes, late night and early morning deliveries to the stores and to control litter. The
applicant can also provide an appropriate connection along SW 72nd Avenue between the single w
k x71% { A'.i. M _ -
' family area and this site that will encourage walking and biking to the site. -sue
8. Public Facilities and Services. TCP Policv 7.1.2:a x~
"The City shall require as a pre-condition to ~
development approval that. r (1) Development coincide with the availability of
't n adequate service capacity including: 1
(a) Public water,`..
s uX r c
(b) Public sewer shall be required for
_ new development within the City unless the
¢ x
AT'i'nV A.fV1.TT ; 24 of 40 PD%IA•26171.1 273524000? 1`•r - r 5 -
KGV
Y r - x ya ra.' y-r a {
4415-..:=
g I" - y;i. t t 1., J` - K M 1 e~, t F -l ~.rySl 5 d f
'T` n
4 3
c
7 1 -mow
k.S,
1 jc,
. ^'e#z- ;-r ~ r- ¢ ~ J Sy _ a -t P a' r"'L F " --i~'r~ -•t'T-T Z?i#q ~ b~"'~+.n~„5 Ly~~p ¢ .2 -
V4iU 77
"IR
-v A-U1,M5,11-Al 11
N, '
mwng
property is over 300 feet from a sewer line and ED r= -
Washington County Health Department approval
for a private disposal system is obtained; and'?
~e
-
(c) Storm drainage.
&M i
(2) The facilities are:
(a) Capable of adequately serving all Fi j
a - intervening properties and the proposed
development,
HPI'I
p tw~y y- (b) Designed to City standards; and
RIM,
(c) All new development utilities to be e }Y
b - a placed underground."
City Council Finding5: This policy ~ is satisfied because water, sanitary sewer and
li p storm sewer are available at this property. The Tualatin Valley Water District serves the site 4k~
'fit "
x
and has found the water service is adequate. A sanitary sewer line is just to the west and north ~ffi0`
of this site and can accommodate this development. Storm drainage is to the northwest from this
site.
+r -
_ 9. Public Facilities and Services. TCP Policy 7.2.1:k
"The City shall require as a precondition to development
F that:
» AM- ON (1) A site development study be submitted for
r -?u
development in areas subject to poor drainage, ground v~
¢ x instability or flooding which shows that the development is safe &.a
and will not create adverse off-site impacts;=
(2) Natural drainage ways be maintained unless'
submitted studies show that alternative drainage solutions can
r
'M solve on-site drainage problems and will ensure no adverse off- P,
i site impacts,< r~r
r a~, (3) All drainage can be handled on-site or there is an~ i
} alternative solution which will not increase off-site impact;
rc c S z
ATTACHMENT A 25 of 40 PDX1A-26171.1 23452mo2 a F
Tea
-ON "Ni-M
QIM
- yYy'-r'4ez tc
N 45
ORT4 f,
1. yX'e. a? .sa'~- .v .-.`..^+°...nw++.~,c+n=;3?r'c4~w~n+S-MST-#`apfi;-,,:"a~-~•.A",f-'r''f.~'_'#`,_-1fW`>~3s a;.-'`~3 -a.~s,c'~.. t _'i
4sr
~'Y'~5 z-,"'a sue' t - c P s -.s F r r',7a5s~",r'
E' z
y rt=`^z § zsiti ,ey"se. l N - 4 _ d ~ya,'s< 'gMg
+:'r,"`r~'~~,"fMvy„;c~~~.;_`.s'ra cr,#X^»'yuX: :l
n 11
r°tt~rl~~~ a¢sa,t a ¢a »i ft
y~°- s' ~ `s 5• a` E ~t - .eY- a~ - t - z -5`, #}s'~i-k s 'r t
l~'`a,~
?-3m,
5s t ixySs ti's5 y
L 10
'.J}' f -rx airy -
F 14 w" Y y -
r, ,.r~ ` , qtr,, Ar a c - n .4 f t 5 T. i 1 - - - } sT~ r
` ~.4 ,1 - aY f s d $ v - - fi r , a ~'~.,t" , °g vn ,r, v
,`fie'.`. 3-?ra''~,-`x' `~u _.t
"~NI,r`i..,~~ r € - Yt i' k-2- '"~ttr ~+ait
s n
` +z' 4- t - s > F~ - -P t r- _ c- it s.' i mx'~,„r- ~t r?,. - r
66 x F'c _ - - t ra 7' F l,~ "r*'§r mow. ,
..k~ - .c- w - °-...__Vr~ , _ r- hT S,E.L.ter E 3"'S
x, r _ a _ -
M , } n.,q ' 'ry' a a,
q~ r ~ a,~ dux _ F ' pg ~
3
, r "rte ` a -
_ K; ; ...y -,v~.,.,a. - - I.,~
t ~a
` ~ rt a~,
£ ' ~ r ; . _ •Y as P . i ~
.
Y (4) The 100-year flood plan elevation as established V kk k= I
= u 3 by the 1481 flood insurance study conducted by the US Army
s Corps of Engineers be protected; and rL ,g M T
-S{'..5. - .1 (5) Erosion cvi►ti0„ca.,,,, sad Y~"S~ ~f-% _
1 •~..1...:y...•..N be innlt[d.A.e~ a„C 7 na,-f t- : Z ^
s-~,~- j , _r_- p
1 .
~ K--
- of the site development plan."
J-Z ~ ti j ~
City Council Findings: There is no evidence that poor drainage, ground „r4
-`'fi'x , 'T:-~ f r 4i # 1 -
r -
<~t rn instability or flooding are or will be present on the subject property. No natural drainageways5~ ,
'ni z
?x d`
a< , z , A% - ^a exist on the property. Erosion control techniques, if applicable, will be included as part of the me
. f x_ site's development during the site development review process required by TCDC Chapter z5 ;
r~ s ` :3 "
, Kr,.1. ~ uF 4;S 18.120. -
* r 'i :
10. Public Facilities and Services TCP Policy 7.6.1: . e1.
t'1- p
z l "The City shall require as a pre-condition to At a
development that: t' r ¢
li, ` - _ - - _ (1) The development be served by a water system
i, ~ x z A. having adequate water pressure for fu c protection purposes - I
Ek F u
-sz r., ~
i - The development shall not reduce the water *z , b
#
7 u , pressure in the area below a level adequate for fire protection F11-t-11,10"T" y
1
. $ purposes; and ~ .t ~
11
(3) The applicable fire district review all
s
t f aPPlications.""~ 1
7
a r - ti
City Council Findings: Development on the subject property can be served by ;
4 2 t ' a water system with adequate pressure for fire protection. Future land use will not cause water t~ ~ F I
s pressure to be reduced below a level adequate for fire protection purposes. The Tualatin Valley i ?
- Fire & Rescue District will review the site development review plan required by TCDC Chapter g , k
fi
~y7x
; -A
2°
18.120. rt, ;
t S z `t z'c r X. Y B.~ 4`'- t m -
PDx1a-261».1 23452.OW2 ` e 1n 3 g r
26 of 40 -
r' ATTACHMENT A y a ~ 2
S i a? Y G ~ -
a - .fry Y y -9 i _
~ c a s s I a s .a 4~ r
h +a- t ~ ~Y "s,. was ~tR
a < s M rte` s'
, , " ,4~-~3t~.v'~" -_1 ,~,~,4~c-_ -.-!.,J -
vv 4
PK`_W IkY`w T. ;111 k - r - S04" _ , 11 SY ti .1
~ z z ' a g c
, ?'e
M ate"- a -7 i _ ; - i - -
, ~"kT'y - ,y~, 'e~ i
i
3
,v za- y t,j i.' - - t $jC ; fe y y~~ a
" t~C it Y 'fcE t f ?
t Xt a
, , . - , " ~ ~ - , - ~ , - , 'P, 0
I r '
.
nor...: '
n, -
~ r t x
Ff". -et _
AMR
AiaS
_0 ERR
& 4+5
-g. V
gg,
SLlt34 F
J. 1.
Y § 4 t
11. Transportation, TCPPolicy 8.1.1:
, F(;7,~
1 07,
"The Cii shall eau for a safe and efficieni sireci r
'4
roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated
future growth and development."
City Council Findinss: This policy requires the City to plan for a safe and
'?1 z efficient street roadway system that will meet current needs and anticipated future growth and
rxw
development. This is consistent with ORS 197.752(1) which requires:
e' Lands within Urban Growth Boundaries shall be -I ?tcrk~, " i
?<4~ available for urban development concurrent with the provision
MR.
of key urban facilities and services in accordance with locally .
adopted development standards"
xt TCP Policy 8. 1.1 means that the City must take into account development changes and that its a
3 M
P~
transportation system must accommodate these changes.
s The City Council has previously found in the application by Albertson's, Inc. with €
^
afiy4gY, # C` Ski.
respect to a comprehensive plan map and zoning map amendment, that where a proposed
w s redesignation itself will not result in an unsuitable or unsafe level of traffic, TCP policy 8.1.1
rya - ; . is satisfied. The City Council also found in that same case that, while commercial development
xy of the site might be expected to result in some increase in total traffic on adjacent roads as s - t
~r E
w compared to what might be expected under the current designation, the impact on City or
is°r e
C 5 i - W~
'xr regional transportation systems would be beneficial by providing commercial opportunities that~~ tt
r ~ aS=k~~
- h are closer to adjoining residential areas than is currently available and that, therefore, a net t
5Y
t€ + l reduction in total system traffic can be anticipated. The City Council finds in this case that r s >
wi;
4R~
because of the potential for "diverted link" and "pass by" trips to use this site, area-wide 3
transportation impacts will be mitigated and, as previously found, this proposal will have less
r Y
n impact on the area transportation system than the existing proposal.
r ~rt 3 ,7
c
i y l~ + 4 ATTACHMENT A 27 of 40 PDXIA•26171.1 23452-0oo2
X.
MA
-yy~f2-"Y. s.~+C~. -z>L.~ .,.,ek d^ I ,ry. _
r1"~ aSs 3
-km
FR wa - y z -.'a-+,^9, s- ._,.,'„,amat xnca'~-n^-•z ;rte mszrc 3'~ ' l"x =>a .m,~s°-n'"w" ` -5 -52-.~~' fy a3~.r~ F -
-Y 5
r+ t a€ 3 rt
1
w M-,
f i`' a µta -
r vr~° 8
drg%-, %""k'~'s{r' Y,•°' 7,v3
NINNO'AN
v ,
^ v
I
s
14' `4n
US a
f a~ ~`~r~ fy"._si`s•~k x r„yy - ' Jj ~ `r d} - r Y, ~y -
swtrax5.s$`€~-t?~;~1u s yr x,' ; - t f `s - 1 ,,•r''S.'fi°^s, x ,
,,r ^rs x [3 - £ n~ 2i n ~2rao Ng'S.tSS1-y
,,sy~, ,.ems av.a
a ( z' ^4' .
b aYi~~` ~+e'~P~'f :3`en=_F% :iyr t~,4~~.'v`Rti'^`y~• i_.
e.r"X.t ~j.,~rt'$ ~~~i?~?:4 ":yY.,.. n~ .J'ils'v "~e+.+;'w'YV`•it~'a, rn;r-.
^,:i~ k}:E' F}:rah-1„"'~~}~ r~~ i~F~,aFi: - sa=.^•i -
z 1 The City Council also finds that the traffic study and proposal by the applicant
+,x.15 -v
demonstrate that the proposed improveemr nme _ on nn Southwest 72nd Avenue adjacent to this site can 3
- .r K
adequately accommodate the ua,fic expected to be generated by this redesignation.
Further, the City need not show that future plan amendments be timed and
€ v> accomplished in a way that avoids the possibility of temporary safety problems. See Davenport VG_
3 t 7 v. City of Tigard, 23 Or LUBA 565, 578 (1992). The City Council finds that timing concerns= W~
k are unwarranted for two reasons. First, the City has obligated itself to complete a study of the
v
s } x - ; Tigard Triangle transportation system and to implement that study's recommendation. Further,
the City has stated that it will complete the Transportation System Plan required by OAR s ,
Chapter 660, Division 12, one year after the Regional Transportation System Plan is completed.y _
The Phil Lewis site must have a different TCP map designation. The appropriate ' N, A~~~
TCP map designation is one that allows commercial development. The applicant's transportation
ti - study shows that even without this application, unless the City implements the recommended
W
: changes to the Triangle's transportation system, all intersections win operate at unaccepiabie z
levels of service. f y
This application furthers TCP Policy 8. 1.1 in several ways. First, it will provide
t needed on-site transportation improvements, such as sidewalks, bike paths and a transit pull-out
4 and shelter. The site's developer has agreed to dedicate land to improve SW 72nd Avenue ;
adjacent to the site and agree to participate in a local improvement district for improvements to ~a Vi t, r F
* Y p f r. 3'- ~7 f' try 3 - %
SW 72nd Avenue.
k r -
Second, it will provide for a development which has significant benefits over rh 1
e dirty 4 ~a office development. A 260,000 square foot office site will generate 376 trips during the evening
a ATTACHMENT A 28 of 40 u ~f }
4 A PDXIA•26171.1 27452-00012 -jh i xF1
A.£ 'g.,~*• §,-,cg ~ -`::<:~as _ - --->-°----,mod.--mu.~..zr_a^^TM'G `+~#R - _ „ 's-c z
s, i -a 4 c -t fives""
41
t <f - £
-..--~r-`---•~--^ _ LCD. ~~`'w~f.~"t'FT ~v-^s-,.^^•^'.`+,r,- ~ . T• r^r•-o4}~ -i.
I
Mg-!qib ' "s Rc y?
OEM&
~,q r•*.~-1. ~ ~a r s, > 4 - ~ - ~ y'~. ~~''.w.``3 -2 x~9 v~~'..."ur '
°"a'`-~`.2r
t ~ t
g~_ - w:r+r •.t.w..'~...,2arXs'C ~~a - = -l,,, sf3 ex vt.
-4
W A~,
peak hour of travel while this proposal will generate 375 new trips. During the morning peak
M% hour of travel, an office development generates 401 new trips compared to this proposal's 92 y, a
RIM M 1
RRV
A M,
~~~c~`~ new trips. 75a Y
MEW
y Third, the application will provide for development that is capable of supporting _N sue,- _
nom= the cost of an improved transportation system.
x,
Finally, as noted in the section discussing compliance with Goal 12, this
5 application has the added benefit of reducing trip lengths by bringing commercial retail uses Y
f closer to existing residential areas. The development will also "capture" pass-by traffic, which
- does not add new trips to the street system. The City found in the Albertson's application that, -
8.1.1 is satisfied by Providing commercial opportunities closer to adjoining
...CrP Policy
- fi
residential areas than is currently available." This interpretation of TCP Policy 8.1.1 is
,1j r Q applicable to this application, also.
611
12. Transportation, TCP Policy 8.1.3: y
F
"The City shall require as a precondition to development
s a approval that: f
_x (1) Development abut a publicly dedicated street or
£ fi - x? x have adequate access approved by the appropriate approval {
Z- Y
; authority; L
(2) Street right-of-way be dedicated where the streets H
is substandard in width;'"' 1
(3) The developer commit to the construction of the
streets, curbs and sidewalks to City Standards within thex ; k
t v - development; ` G
02
~(4) Individual developers participate in they
improvement of existing streets, curbs and sidewalks to the " • ~ 4.
<nw } 4 3t k extent of the developments impacts; t;s"ter 6
'gAkk
Xi_
Y ""E~''{L'" F
F~ 3~k ATTACHMENT A 29 of 40 PDX1A=6171.1 J452-000'_ ~ ~ t ar
~ fir; E " -z
t-rrf~s".;~`~` c...~'~a,^~~P:' •~xf^i k*X~ai3:' IE.,,:p l
p~~ A-1 04
121
}r 3£•' - an."n.^wrvrS^'t ~.r-~ 5-sY'-~zr.r_ -`5.~.~.
tg a'~ ~w j
CXJ"`.,,~ 1
~:S" +e~.! r xi b 't _ - _ -5 S - yk 4 5 y4u+'
'air
-47
4 v ,"5s 1
O-Z
k - t a j Ag-
~zTl
~a u
r}ys. z _ _ '~-tom' n sent
. `-,.ikt?`; j~ - w t x - -r r _ r"' r s r'r'' s'.~" v7 = s
s'3.ia cz ;c 'ra $ - Y z i, k ~.r r
sm'"sc r -5
-
xr
~.d~ 1st F
=**,',t°'~
I,.,:.
ggg
~S-
~+~~';~~~~?i~~..~
~
s .x°3,5 3¢;ys
R.~Y' (t~/
Street improvements be made an street signs or
}Y.C -
signals be provided when the development is found to create or ~i,~~k
intensify a traffic hazard
t 'W,
VW, yvOMM,
(6) Transit stops, bus turnout lanes and shelters be 3 ~
provided when the proposed us is of a type which generates
OHM k"
transit ridership; _
(7) Parking spaces be set aside and marked for cars a
operated by disabled persons and that the spaces be located as!, SM,
'k close as possible to the entrance designated for disabled" $
2 q. ,?`p°~ / s { persons, and
,Y (S) Land be dedicated to implement the
a bicycle/pedestrian corridor in accordance with the adopted L }2"
plan. '
d City Council Findines: The site abuts SW 72nd Avenue, a dedicated street. The r .
c * _ . applicant has agreed to dedicate additional right-of-way for SW 72nd Avenue and to participate '
~ in a local improvement district for improvements to SW 72nd Avenue.
a 13. Locational Criteria. TCP Policy 12.2.1: j
z
{ 7 '
"The City shall:
MPVR~ 6%i-
r (1) Provide for commercial development based on they ~s
type of use its size and required trade area.,
a
(2) Apply all applicable plan policies ==3-
s
(3) Apply the appropriate location criteria applicable
h 4
to the scale of the project."
"General Commercial. P sir
k- 1
L i _ ( r,
3 General Commercial areas are intended to provide for kr,RM c
major retail goods and services. The uses classified as General , y '
3G t F
hi Y Commercial may involve drive-in services, large space users, a s _;k
r combination of retail, service, wholesale and retail services or 2 ~ RIY-0 ~
RVII~V
r r n , provide services to the traveling public. The uses range from
1 'ayr 43 - , - automobile repair and services, client equipment storage, i
E - I vehicle sales, drive-in restaurants to laundry establishments.
,~-mot ,
i e t- t ATTACHMENT A 30 of 40 PDXIA-26171.1 23352-W0.
`,r' ° 1`"` """r - ~cf+,r,^rq+.~-^ - - .r- r Y`" r.s 1 •1
%
°r-Q~t{~•j~",r`~ ~S_, w ~i -t _ > _ 'k _ + r 4 u w,s t ~ ..#P t-
4Frw.. f i° y,t'tt f s s } - _ r - 1 r s r t.>`7`-~C',~.+p 'r'3d ( 1
- ,rMa^ RI,:;'
1.~,'~ §-.A.' S.`` 'rte r - ♦ ;pr1 y s.y a,; {
dA x0,-''..,.3av k,- - - fit`~ a L 4 z Y 'r~,.`Svr~.
3M, V SZ.a,.
+ f fi'3 -1 x
~3 rots-'~~h~a 3 x.' ` a},, 6~ - 4 - ~
t ! f:Ymi- ! f - - '
r z
r 4 f,
_ 7 tL_S4
S,.~r
N ' " - ax~'rt
¢(r,''i t" z " t i _ s - r § r r. ~r ' k•- ~F-~' t't.f
} F >wK" di =YY
~ y- --t" :S
Mfr
'.,3
~ ,3'S i s. '1 - t ICV - _ 'F .5 t'~ 4 YWs''~nh bl`~~~
",q Z
NO
e
d
A; K
It is intended that these uses be adjacent to an arterial or
} major collector street."
z - ('av ('noon:l F:nd:n TftGo ln^°t°.i n I— rnllrrtnr ctrrPt
-gq
df s Y "(1) Scale ,arc e A.
mg,
"(2) Locational Criteria
a
r;' °A•. "(a) Spacing and Location
y'y?
h.-' saCyy_5'+ wk i-^i"~s.'i3's-.px
4•t'F~rT- t--(i) The commercial area is not surrounded by 144 >f
residential districts on more than two sides." Xrt~
US 2 City Council Findings: This policy is intended to prevent the encroachment of £
*m- commercial areas into residential areas. This site is adjacent to a residential district on only its :.N a 3 ~°i~ w
-s r - a yz
rfr - s
-north side. This policy is satisfied.
fi k 3s ® "(b) Access
„vas °z f y r s~d€rt'N 'S 1 »
(i) The proposed areas or expansion of an
' r existing areas shall not create traffic congestion or a traffic. + ryr,Iz
safQty problem. Such a determination shall be based on street
capacity, existing and projected traffic volumes, the speeds
limit, number of turning movement and the traffic generating ~
1_4 717 characteristics of the various types of users."
Citv Council Findings: The introduction to the "locational criteria" provides:
3 t 0,
- A sYt Z!A
IF, r "It is intended that these locational criteria be construed r,
- in a flexible manner, in the interest of accommodating T
a' } proposals which, though not strictly in conformance with the
fr g, EE
- applicable criteria, are found to be in the public interest and v~x E
Y capable of harmonious integration into the community. Theft )
g } burden of proving conformance of this proposal to the M
t - Comprehensive Plan should vary with the degree of change and
impact on the community: The more drastic the change and the c H i
greater the impact, the more strictly the criteria should be~ F~
` 3r construed." 6
aN~fis s*
The City Council finds that this application is not a drastic change because the
~.4.t fp 1- k~ h h -tT ~ s~ ~f -
gr,
ATTACHMENT A 31 of 40 MIA•26171.1 2345_ ooo: ~ p
°TX9'ST X7,°?va7'vi'r d 4; m^+p".'s-.~-•mh.-r •'ry;,,,.,. _ ova : + F*ti "u -•a ^<?ua,.' -«r-J.Y, *,a• T,"k~x; i r 11 ~il pp 'k •Ga
$r~
W y%
5th 7c -1^~ si" # 9 X4 { n C t~ ae ~J'
t- 3
9 r~ ~ a ~ z A 3~kf'.xk ~ k
Q! 5"i
a7"s
~ fit' a ~r - - _ r y t _R-
7 %
rYSa q'lgk'a-s''rs 3 r^t S' h i u s ~'Yy,trrYr;#- -"'a _
i jx r - - f_
ry ~
S
} y:-- - 1-
41
1 3 X53'
EVE
WAR
3c `i ut j sty
n a
j_g
3 R potential traffic impacts from a C-G map designation was re cognized through land use, y+r`
SN'
l - Y transportation and public facility pofllies included in the or., TCn Th fo
_ ere , v.,niStCrii a t
with this language, it will interpret the locational criteria in a flexible manner.
With respect to locational criteria (B)(2)(a), the City Council finds that the 1 y
-riz s ' 1 k € , '.x
proposal will not create traffic congestion or a traffic safely problem in either the short term or
r z a t
the long term. First, regardless of what the City Council does on this application, without area
Virv l 14 - 1 i w'x f xG~'++
ys ; transportation improvements, area streets will be at unacceptable levels of service. The City
{a'?
" .:p.
.l Council, ands that this proposal will, in fact, improve the level of service by encouraging
improvements to Southwest 72nd Avenue at this location. Further, the City has committed to (t~
SRI-
1 making necessary
transportation improvements in this area. Finally, because of the traffic
Y,3 x } € generation differences between a community shopping center and an office, this proposal will
"R ~re
have less adverse impact on traffic congestion and traffic safety than will the existing, s , = r'
designation.
fi `r This access policy imposes two separate requirements. First, the proposed s~P c~
commercial area access must not create traffic congestion. Secondly, the proposed commercial ~ ~
-z
a nos
yt. area access must not create a traffic safety problem.
The proposed commercial area will not create additional traffic congestion or
increase traffic safety problems beyond the current designation. As demonstrated in the
b
fir, x Y transportation study, area streets will be at LOS "F" without improvements to SW 72nd Avenue z F s
s-' and even if this application is denied. Moreover, this pro
PosaI creates the same or fewer traffic txk~ f
impacts than would an office development on this site. Development of this site with appropriate
x f r traffic improvements will reduce traffic congestion because of street improvements.
ARAN
r' 9^g3 1 ~r 1
jy e. -
ATTACHMENT A 32 of 40 F t '
''h t ac y fi~ PDXIA-26171.1 23152-000?
x 1
a~~, ~ fir' C ' ' ,.-...A•., r~, 7~~ df'~ rysS~rwy,~'3€~1 i n
a*4
yli~
#?„.yT J-~' - - t r .t z, i - t+ " ,r3 r 9r.€ s aye x
H X 3p J ~ t _ _ Y 1tl f 3 - - 5th 3.a T-~ ~
- LRIN
r ~ ~
Now
s r t
NO 6,
fz- _5
A.'. w~ Y d Z ] t - t 2 i C _ _ -i kF - 'J~ C a44 y di - A, }
2-~a t~
td-
" `flit'`.
~.x: s ~ 9 i~,- ~ ~ _ - ~w - L a,~ 'r e~y - ro•'s ~ h-ear -F,~ ate'
-
~
: gl-16 Mi'
'5i s 4
The TCP, Volume I, "Resource Document," defines congestion as follows:r
`'t if -IF
? ME
"Congestion, as defined for the purposes this study, tt
4 ~ dr is considered to be:
4 -x, "(a) A signalized intersection which operates at
9
a level or service D' or worse;
tug<,~`~6T~ E,w' I
111.11 1.1-W 40
? air: "(b) An unsignalized intersection which meets 'a
" signal warrants as specified by the Manual on Uniform _
Traffic Control Devices "MUTCD" '
( )1 and
} } s - = "(c) A section of roadway which exceeds 1,200
vehicles per hour during the peak hour." Volume 1 at 5
r soh - page I-241. a
_ The performance criteria for principal and arterial routes during the peak hour is
LOS "D" and "E". Volume 1 at page I-225. Table 7 of the transportation study shows that
T a r development of the site for a commercial retail center, with improvements recommended by they
DKS traffic study, will result in LOS "D" or better on eight area intersections.
z r 3
J`~r The application will not create or increase a traffic safety problem. Development` -
d , r - rc~
r ` of the siia will result in access points which are aligned with Gonzaga and Hampton Streets on
k~ the west side of SW 72nd Avenue. The Tigard Police Department reports five accidents per~T~
N-I
rr is_ - 4 ate. ~ p c
month at SW 72nd Avenue and Highway 217. With the improvements to SW 72nd Avenue, the
r City Council finds that traffic safety will be improved and the risk of traffic accidents reduced. *1
rx
3 ' - • "(ii) The site shall have a direct access from a major v-,, ~ f
a collector or arterial street." x js~~ rz,
i
s i2 a
Citv Council Findings: The site has direct access to a major collector street.
{ F RZ < s
'~~,JK s ~
N s • -
(iii) Site Characteristics
IRS (a) The site shall be of a size which can
[
#s accommodate present and projected uses." a
i 4, M 11"n
- WE,
15
s ATTACHMENT A 33 of 40
PDX1A-:6(71.3 _U5?.opD? i x 3y fiy, `i!' _s ~}~t w s
i -4,
2- a.
B,g"~~M a r t:. Pia -
r
~w Y4 r y x ay v l 1
4h n~ a _ .r* txav^A°'rxv-,e z rr.5€a' .5;'°v ^a-
14,
WU~
a' ~-S3"'t' c-4
t 'd
'C~ y r f f f f v- Y ?e"~~ p' ^ r T ;7
ytsn.,; ,.~.,ef "a-°'* -rry. .M1•~ ;z, s 1 r - r.,,.« n:A `
b~ f7 t , -"a'L".e~",,'1,~'" d '+t y
4 'Y 4
rflj5 .a„~' ,.e. ^ru ry*-`3 K - _ r z i 4 3 _ r' r« - 4
M-
y.
3
~ S~^a 2~4'y~j~~',rv~.?'2 ~"`}'.e } ~~2 ~~v~ Y "t- }i C 7. i ~'F „Y --'d J f ~~-l$"•~ - ,r ~ g -,z=';yAiy7,°,¢ +:.,a k a lea } 4 x a _ - r t :?Am.!
54, R.
x' F~k~~-'?% -
ate xr : r .,.1
Q V
mi,
a
,k City Council Finding s: The site is large enough to accommodate a minimum +y,~
5 123,000 square foot community shopping center. ra-
r ~ `a4t3 ~r', `
V REP
jg~
l F;4 ~k ; >r • "(b) The site shall have high visibility."~ '
z xs~
At INN
r
_j,Z ,1 - City Council Findines: This site is highly visible from State Highway 217 and ~ 4, x FP;gZzv -.3'..5,n.... r'h'.° .A ate.;
72nd Avenue.
3 }a :
P~w
Psy k_f15 yc 4 q y}y 'L ~i~,a,
3' k • "(c) Public transportation shall be available to the site .
or general area."
,x t Citv Council Finding s: Tri-Met provides service along SW 72nd Avenue via bus
`s x - s li- 3R -A 7R. y
x & .c j s c s :-i
S ;'Y, y • "(iv) Impact Assessment } k
t.•
"(a) The scale of the project shall be
a f compatible with the surrounding uses."
City Council Findings: This site is intended to provide a community shopping
1 j center for Triangle residents and residents in areas to the south and east. The center's mixture{ r
v of stores will allow residents to meet their shopping needs while reducing travel distance. -
f c~t~ a
t{ The applicant has not finalized a site design for this site. However, the site
4 $ N~ f
3a , design will be compatible with the adjacent residential area and will contain less commercial,
square footage than other nearby commercial centers.
C6, 1
• "(b) The site configuration and characteristics shall be 4 's such that the privacy of adjacent non-commercial uses can be
n33 maintained." r y.
v~,, - rte, City Council F'mdines: The privacy of residential uses will be unaffected by this ~,~F.' 1[t{kc -
development. The site's configuration dictates that the center's orientation will be towards Stater` i
s z z ~Ff
{ Highway 217 and away from the adjacent residential area to the north.
rY' L 4 t.-t g x Y7 Ere`i,a1- ~,riro',~V,p.
g f"
'Y!
t re ATTACHMENT A p
: 34 of 40 PDX1A ?6171.1 23452-MOO m e w J'o
,.asps-~._. ~~~:~~-o:~,x• r---r-`~^-
xl
Kgv!
ST,
r 4rRiw#~3„--ic3 xx`,a r} -'4 7 hY~` i
g "R,
W
Err..-.-.~..~-r^"-' r,~--~-^T-r-,F~- - .~.'.~~ti~..l+-_ - i C-_~..P-.-.--.~..~.. _~~~-•-T`..e...r~.a¢„-~.._.~' - _ .#t
Pr
s a~ ~,,,v^ r
V __1 f x - r F
01
F
<a il'.«d'1- a - - t f Sf _ r;W 6^2-x, „N1
ab 'if~ s '
x ' " , '.k" F,` fir' c _ 4 i c ' '•-x t - a. fr r g a 'tx .H
1 -7. F?" 5 3 •m~4 tx'" z .1 .s - - r_- - Y,,. t s' a +.a"S~ 5, a
r } a
A' Z.. $ - : _ r~,' ^"-Aas.'iAa'..3~ - - i {u ' Y a"5'y F'~
¢ - s ~x . N "M
. Sri: } - -;".sue 4,jJ-,k s-
'b
S 1~ ,Vi . "(c) It shall be possible to incorporate the unique site h k' 3~ f13 -
r features into site design and development plan."'
.
1- 17 -
, _
City Council Findines: The site contains no unique features.
w N - $ o "(d) The associated lights, noise and activities shall not e
~31 k~ sac ~ z
° ~ yr -v - { interfere with adjoining non-residential uses." 5 _13 MV- ~a
- c r3's~r -.t
j , P%4' City Council Findines: Li;hts, noise and outdoor activities on the site can be bra YII s •
1
1 minimized. On site lighting can be limited to security• g g g purposes. parkin and si na e Lighting ',i RNA, ~ f
r Y '
,i7 ~
Y tz I s t - can can M designed to fin..., away v Fr..au a..o #.I--- ..:de ..l q"..".ss s4y ...t f
fPp. 1
..Fp-,may; , wi.w a.-ca. i'..,. ~s~ ' 5.
77, 7w. - I
i
" - t No outdoor storage or retail uses are proposed. d
I ,70
: 5
, Retail delivery hours can be controlled to minimize conflicts with the residential
,
£ ,y
„'V.~?,i`ti2w:V _w%t area. .yyfi"n,-42u~'tw~t P~Zt
b$ } Y.S~l~ i Sad-S- .
~Z : C. OAR CHAPTER 660, DIVISION 12 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING I- ~ ,z o e
(T r x
a h I
RULE) - 14 '1
t Ys , * ` _ 1. OAR 660-12-060. ti.1 '
This state admttus*_*anv? nuIP applies to amendments to comprehensive plans, zs .
1~'1"~ functional plans and land use regulations. OAR 660-12-060(1). The rule is applicable to this F
~ ~
a; ~
- j-, F application because it requests a comprehensive plan map amendment. `
{
OAR 660-12-060(1) and (2) provides as follows: a As ~fi
t
ME fi . a j
F $ - h ..-4
- F "(1) Amendments to comprehensive plans, functional ;f,A,~, . ~ ~7- t
3 , rr'h plans and land use regulations which significantly affect a p x
2 11 ~ ' ~ transportation facility shall assure that allowed land uses are -A r", Fa r
'
' - consistent with the identified function, capacity and level of "~~t ,4 ~F
3' service of the facility. This shall be accomplished by either: ~ , T-,~ .
R 3 "(a) limiting allowed land uses to be consistent -1 I _W
- f
`a w with the plan functions, capacity and level of service of
r M k the transportation facility; ~ { 1 _-O
F,,c' aax 7,i 2
j ATTACHMENT A 35 of 40 PDXIA-26171.1 nasz aoa `
s°." _
F§
c 1
fi ~ t'a - ts~ yx Y~l -
j k n % ' 4 ` e+.- Y .,n-w 3u ».:.:::sx s. c.C 3r' -ice " f s " ..;,x i s,'? .:a - _ rr `~2" _ I R' 's . , t; E
, - , U I ~ ~ ~ ~ - , , , 7~ , . ~
~ , j ,
x#+ r
`x - - F,r 3. - -vrh -
r y, O,+~f r- r yF i -f - - k F f "1.~ r
1 fr ' f z _ - i 4 - - - 'fin - Z'' s "''x - { r
}
a , ~ ~ r - -1
;°.Y axe _i.•k "A , - v - -',r, 5 2
r
r r. ,
i
rt~.__-D
1,~3 - - -
r...,.1y Frs%s:''11=
"(b) amending the TSP [Transportation System -
n Plan] to provide transportation facilities adequate to
support the proposed land uses consistent with the --''t r-
t'.s
requirements of this division
=
amp
(c) altering land use designations, densities, or
design requirements to reduce demand for automobile
travel and meet travel needs throw^h other modes.
j z t 3 (2) RUM-
A land use regulation amendment facility if it:" _
(aj changes the functional classification of an
zx s
5 existing or planned transportation facility,
"(b) changes a standard implementing a t, u
t ; functional classification system;
"(c) allows types or levels of land uses which tkk'
or, would result in levels of travel or access which are
' 3G inconsistent with the functional classification of a
x
transportation facility; or -1 •
"(d) would reduce the level of service of the
c n facility below the minimum a acceptable level identified
-z f
z in TSP.
x City Council limdines: State Highway 217 is designated as an Arterial and SW
72nd Avenue is designated as a Major Collector- The City does not have an adopted .f - f r
x w- 9 ors
i _ transportation system plan. The Oregon Department of Transportation ("ODOT") has a highway -
k~ r~ r 2
4 s plan. 4 m
- This application does not propose to change the functional classification of a_
transportation facility or a standard implementing that functional classification system. OAR t:: h r z #E~
f- 660-12-060(2)(a) and (b). The application will allow a type of land use with levels of travel
a k and access that are consistent with the function of an Arterial and a Major Collector. OAR 660- t"-firma z~z
-VW
f €"fi r _ k c st } ~r rr - s 's3 ey> R"R 3
? 12-060(2)(c).
U~V
N, WAW~1'
" ATTACHMENT A 36 of 40 PDXIA-26171.1 234$2 -"2 - 4x "r is^r.sa^rx3 "x..~.-
s
fl
Wy~.grK
S 1 4 i [
rs ~y { 5
T s i w #
'F N
*a 3rrw1t _ k
~ f i ~rdt ~ , _ Y 4 T y
.r~~ ,..-,.-mom„-~ . ~ t'~_cr.. c~~~. r~,i._ ~ ~ `~.S .~Y...~.,~:. t ~ __-..~.zY._ --..~-:r~~.... s_„
z'~n .r'"'_""f' 'S r - y5,y " v ' - - _ r, ' X , v - - F -
s # _ v - Y F ' _
T'ta. Utz ~ +d - f _ _ ~S { x x ~e° x. , , V k - - `z + y
Paz ~-t r -t h - - . i _ ~t -
? + `
P pI a,¢Y c --ii}'4 _ - r ° x 2~ _ rt 3 .,r 'a
11 I V" ` I~' -IL x -2 2.,. ,'`P IS-. y -r " -
'-.T
9 ~ itsȢ'^ 'e -l 4- i - - - -
4~F`^"t } 1. -a- - ✓ m-- i f.. n,- a 4 ~t~Y3 .r~
$i 0;11 I - vo°,ta s i, _ r
- u -
a d5'2y43' b tl?
5i. M1k,+,, $}gy~# "-~,Z;y`,1^ ii>, I
r
Y le, ` 7 a The TCP states that the function of an Arterial is to accommodate trips from one - ,
I ~ , z F community to another. Figure 6A of the transportation analysis shows that the majority of trips s d
to and from this site will use SW 72nd Avenue and not State Highway 217. The majority of . ,,.f
3~.. these trips will also use Hampton Street, which is designated as a Major Collector. Thus, the _ ~
:r
`gi _ state high ..1 Z- .
'(K,, application win have little impact on the way facility. "
a .tom w;~ 4 -5 - - v 3L' a[ 1
: , r fir- , y the proposal's impact on City streets is consistent with the TCP's description of - - {tom
" > ,
a Major Collector, which is to provide traffic connections between neighborhoods and atteriais -
.1
11 I t x Im- s
i and to provide connections within the area to major activity centers such as this. With the
'ty t~~-.rw ~zA 'F",,SStr 1
transportation improvements identified in the DKS study, this proposal will not have a significant - a lY ry
,V A
< <
y ~ ~
? impact on local streets because it will not result in a reduction of the level of service of the
V `V .,4 VIE IS
~ ~ " -
k facility below the minimum acceptable level identified in the TCP. I N RR i
11, g - ' -t r l ~.t1p, ; it 3,*cIt"
OAR 660-12-060(3) requires that if an application significantly affects a~ gF
t~ { s~ r
transportation facility, the significant affect can be mitigated in one of three ways. One way is ~a"
1a ...his ' T - r ,
to amend the TSP to provide transportation facilities adequate to support the proposed land use. ,
s 'I f ,r---. c -
The City's DKS Tigard Triangle traffic study has identified the transportation improvements
-
t _ r_,_-
T 5 4 . -
I
` necessary to serve transportation needs in the Tigard Triangle. This application can satisfy the :0 k
1 +-.x t
= t TPR contingent upon the City's amendment of its transportation plan. The City can amend the w ~~n
`C 1~ s_ s i w r a'
r3 3 Triangle street designations as necessary to support this application. ~f' ; i
The City Council finds that this application will not significantly affect the y -
`a' tY '
Zg. "'TP £ 4 transportation facility for two reasons. First, this application itself will not "reduce the level of f =j
~ k r d
f L= f service of the facility below the minimum acceptable level identified in the TSP." OAR 660-12- ~ , " a
r-swS' *s
SY
. z -z i s 'S -1?
t ti r 060(2)(d). This part of the transportation planning cute focuses on whether a particular ° - t ii ?
s
yy_
I ,i, - 3 a !'G P fit-, l ~
,Mi! Y t' 4 } - ylHN„4i3f%t*'x'-Y S.-
u . - i ~ _ ATTACHMENT A 37 of 40 PDXtA-26171.1 23452-=-, ¢ o r
r lad }
" .u3. "s,?,- G - x r _ .^E.,.-'^^,. r ~mu+..~zu rfx -tea _wa ors -F-''^x :r. i- :,'M'-;7 4' j .-",-c+-"art ' t p t~ x
, a ,eaU-fir: ; - %4 _ - _ s _ i s k r F, I (i,: L. L'. 11
V ! p fad 7 a - -E_ _~gt'._ f~I j
IL' 1 x '
1-'!~ ~,i .--pD , ,,gN;~,,~~-,-.~.-, !~.411~1 U ~ ~~,',~-~Ll~"~,'~.,~.,~',,"~."~'~,~, - , , , , ,t; , - - 'L.,_ r , j,: -r~ ~r '-'.-','~~7 - - I" -X-, I -1
r.
C . e,,., ,,rl -
F A u y~,
s, ,
wT
M- ~e.'•'z.t'.ci { - 3`v'F'3ros.A{'',`3Z Z*sFU'. R_
_ra .ter - y -~e _ 3 ` P, _ h_
-.1 -t«' - ~'f t s - r _ - r - rT r r $
Y
I`e~,~'~',-"- -'~t .I-- -i-I-I . -'.~;I, -1: 'i ' "J - -
= a
v2d - E'
L - - - ----""r"'-` is - 45
{4~3 z 35zv~.r c ' • ,r - y`- - - - i - U M~ti v k~ ' -.4
L~•5 .~~"-,`i k. ..5. S - - ...5 Y obi 3n'~5_ s~.ct '7
-`5r01"S-''hzk .5,?,'.-hz? -UN d i .mss t 1"'S ,ay
Comprehensive Plan Map amendment reduces the level of service below the minimum acceptable
level. The City does not yet have a TSP nor is it required to have one adopted until May 8, xkr~
A. hi
1997. OAR 660-12-055(1). However, assuming for the purposes of discussion, that levels of~ _ZM~
p ~
e` service identified in the record would exceed those idenri ;ed as the minimum acceptable level '
s tet 3j ~ t 2
f~ ~ f .3.r F` f P Ep Yoh-~'~~•" ~ I
r to ;r; in a to be adonted TSP, this application itself will not reduce the level of service on f F sue"` T ~s
v 3 transportation facilities below minimum acceptable levels. The City Council finds that thed ,
t
evidence demonstrates that even without this application, levels of service will deteriorate and
~ >3 3 c
be below minimum acceptable levels. The City Council finds this application, in fact, improves
x levels of service on area roads for the reasons described elsewhere in these findings.~~, #
`L Moreover, even if this application did significantly affect a transportation facility,
r7'~ , L the findings demonstrate that the allowed land use will be consistent with the identified function,
t wv a
, ,s J„ capacity and level of service of the affected facility because the City has acknowledged its intent
a w'
to amend (by adopting) its TSP to provide transportation facilities adequate to support the r°
r - proposed land use system with the requirement of the Transportation Planning Rule. OAR 660-~
L' 12-060(1)(b). The Transportation Planning Rule does not require concurrent amendments and ss
the statements in the record, which function as conditions of approval, are sufficient tom
T
demonstrate that the City will adopt a TSP that will result in acceptable levels of service. The k y r .x, ' r ~t~~4~3Y' ~ +nN f
r r holding in Davenport v. City of Tigard means that the TSP adoption need not be concurrent with E `U
s - rr,
T
_ j this application in order to satisfy OAR 660-12-060(1)(b). x s 3 €
t. n r G
c
4 t y A t'l
The City has coordinated its determination under OAR 660-12-060(l)(2), pursuant nom"
to OAR 660-12-060(3), with the Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 1. Community
rA , {r7, fir'
- Development star.' and the applicant's attorney testified before the City Council on February 27, t, < r t t
r a - ryr~ r
ATTACHMENT A 38 of 40 PDXIA•26171.1 23452-0002 a,~ 4 y s t
't R'n-qv
fe;
}
77
77
e -fit ~ t- t ~ t t~ S 7'a~»I I F
~'x'tixx -h- t - { r< v X
MFe 'i.i.I;'.+ sz a - _ F Et-f'-..Fpx-1`-~'K-t k t !
L r y- a,y _ -,t L s 2 r S°'`,~•
q'i
t4 fix" rf t T - - -S t-- f x t
aria
e ~n~ d,Prz x.. - r r F g ~y 5
r t
A" S,
51 -
P 5-5
W, X-
. i'si^x,+
f r y 7 r' s #C - w # Mks tea; - y ,yki ,
+:u. "?k:, NM i
q 'n i
mgy
RAN
ME
w!g
8] 2 Six-~' +SF~^d{ =W.
°a 1996 that the Oregon Department of Transportation appeared to be satisfied with the
k. A
x 3 w commitments made by the City and acknowledged by City Council as the future Tigard Triangle_
d
planing and transportation improvement effort. A 'k
The City can conclude that the application satisfies OAR 660-12-060.
40
2. OAR 660-12-055(3). s
y~ 41 r' OAR 660-12-055(3) provides as follows:
t a
"Within two years of adoption of this rule, affected cities' '
-54
and counties shall, for urban areas of 25,000 or more, adopts
r~ land use and subdivision ordinannces or =endments by 660-12-
fill
a k 045(3)> (4)(a) -(f) and (5)(d).••
if City Council Findings: This part of the administrative rule requires the City to
~p
have amended its land use and subdivision ordinances to implement OAR 660-12-045(3), `~a~y1t
t R~
(4)(a)-(f) and 5(d) by May 8,1994. The City has met this deadline except for OAR 660-12- y~ k
C 045(4)(b). This section requires connections between new retail uses and transit stops. ORS w~~ n
197.646(3) and OAR 660-12-055(3) provide that an administrative rule becomes directly
t~ 37
t applicable to land use decisions when the rule's deadline is not met. OAR 660-12-045(4)(b) is
h
f 4. t tt AP `
s "
directly applicable to this decision. _
a t e L
` c k OAR 660-12-045(b) requires that new retail buildings near major transit stops provide . 1
for convenient pedestrian access to transit. This rule is inapplicable to this application because
the application does not request site design approval. Nevertheless, this site can meet the rule ~iMR' b
1 s
s - or an implementing ordinance. The commercial retail center can be oriented to a transit stop 5
f rF - on SW 72nd Avenue. f
p. - _ x .mac
a
ATTACHMENT A 39 of 40 MIA263713 .:a45_oooz a r
} ~ t k r
44
IN g TR,
gyw ;i l
go--s A,
MIN A
s€3r a N:~ros x n s - - s ' t ?arx=~a3"* ar~h}
4 C',a f ,f,. f rx t o i r i L'f 4 I- "
. ,fig Fw<~ X7:p -K - s zt - 2 i '.s r"' T. s g $kF
F ' tCn 7i F Y t
'~K+} 'L ,tit ~ °2 L F 4
-
ac,_ 2
-x„ --i ki t x } - } 1 { sa r Y, s. ~z•", _
V-11 rJ
-_~gg~
r?,{~F• ta'` 44,E P '~°'r c
W'M
, IN
z>1 D. TCDC CHAPTER 18.62, "GENERAL CONIMERCIAL" DISTRICT r , - spa _
The site meets the applicable requirements of TCDC Chapter 18.62, "General ~ -s-~•-k~
_;Zk}.3~-i~
Commercial District." TCDC Chapter 18.62 establishes the following requirements for the C-G
-g %q
< zoning district-. 3{ st fi
# a[ a. Permitted Use. A retail use is a permitted use in the C-G district. See I.~
x TCDC 18.62.030(A)(2)(1), "General Retail Sales." r'+' 3
iiioz-
1 ~~a ~k s
b. Minimum Lot Area. The C-G district does not require a minimum lot kIx._ X
at, v area. TCDC 18.62.050(A)(1). k
4 c. Minimum Average Lot Width. The required average minimum lo[ width
iS 50. fc'ct. TCDC io.vc.05v(A)(2). aii[a Siic exceeds the average tTi[iwiliiiii ivi w[u"u`i. R
#
r' d. Other Dimensional Reguirements. Development on this site will comply v
t, with the dimensional requirements of the C-G district including setbacks, a 45-foot
Y r # x maximum height, a maximum 85 percent site coverage, including all buildings and
impervious surfaces and a minimum 15% landscaping requirement. TCDC
z
18.62.050(A)(3)-(6). Compliance with these requirements will be assured through the
fr r site development review process in TCDC Chapter 18.80. >
A4 i V. CONCLUSION 4 r~
t N r
The City Council finds that this application satisfies the applicable criteria fora pi'l
1' F -y
k t comprehensive plan map amendment. }
1 - x'^ j.K - A S - - TFN,.~`'vksn'at•r.. ~3 4
fi l
f ;a ATTACHMENT A 40 of 40 1 5 r
k&-~Y as -3 PDX1A-26171.1 23152-000= F.'j * ''"e'+y mm 'Sa-vx `
# 54 1
R?l
by 7 ? q -'v { a' - Aa "7 4.
' ay Xs $c
~s°"{''sCN'~i t W d 7 - -1 1 e ref 7 q j .P^'4 P -
s.~ ~ 7`~ L.,, - e y, x ar•,. 1 - _ - ca f t e+ 7 -w
f Y b~Y
{--F 1tt - L a _ - 't } #5 f t-- 3 r w4+
F
r ~ ~ z _ r _ ; _ c st
i4 NA-131 -
pi
W 31S, " " i , " ` ; i , ~ ~ ffin ,
3 ; { r
" ai ..."sx~.._si_w_- a~kv_r' S - ' nw . '7-ezfz ~,r",
$f ~ .h' r ~ a t~-- _ - - { .ri ts~ s A e t- ~ ss n
P~ y o-4 ! - F - r5.`i +f, 'u'3,:'"f'-_
, ,07
vl 0K i" ,.12~v'rt arnmau - - '~,.i f 'n a ,w ji
s, Wk,, g -4 1,:10 S ~ 'Viz" r ? -
s CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON a 1. a
s ~ ORDINANCE NO. 96-LA I -.1 j - s
` ,.7 ? , j AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TO APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE AND ~ ~ t
DECLARING AN A,' . 1, } ,,f
_
EFFECT IVE DATE (ZCA 95-0007). K 01
3 -`y
s" ~ - WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on April 9, 1996, to consider initiating s
I,> annexation and to consider comprehensive plan and zone designations for two parcels of land located at
, - ,r `
- ~ n~ 'W"' the southeast comer of SW Hall Boulevard and SW Oak Street Street; and A 4° , s
t' .n~,- rr _ WHEREAS, on April 9, 1996, the Tigard City Council approved a resolution initiating annexation for the 1- I
„ ,Qyp - ; Hirning property only (WCTM 1S1 35AA, lot 2801) to the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Government€ ;
a - $ r - Boundary Commission; and ~ I ° F
Kr WHEREAS, the zoning district designation recommended by the planning staff as set forth in the attached .
r= y'%. staff report and in Section 1 below is that which most closely approximates the Washington County land
'or R
+•z ` use designation,
} +-a chryL" n THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: N `s
j; ~ g - IN
s _ 011,05 r
t vs T SECTION 1: Upon annexation, the affected property shall be designated as follows: , b ~ ,
I A" , rR t
Tax Mao Lot Number Current Land Use New Land Use 40001 0- -
tf 0,100f, ;.IA7
s'. `
~ . - 1S1 35AA, lot 2801 Wash. Co.Office Commercial Tigard Professional Office ~ r
F ~fl , J Q Current Zoning New Zonina i ~ f
~ - , Wash. Co.Office Commercial Tigard C-P
~zTS t%
G SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council,
;k ' signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. I _,I r7_ s r _ X n~
R--' , ~ PASSED: By Uqun7 m~rote of I Council members present after being read by number and title
only, this -day of 96. rte' a'
- " Lg E
f Yk ~y s
Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder ~
n
k
,U . , I -1 APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day 1996.
4
/ ~-AW':,.`~~ i M, - -
} , y.'," 41j- q}, Jam IC011, Mayor t,r ,zt , z'~ ~ E 10 / s ~ App ed a to for o ' " F
f ~ ~ , W_ r
,V u a City Att0 e s « a j~ k
14 -
f f r Date - a 'K, ~
I 1_ ~ I A~ i:Vrp1nVayazca95-07.ord , ;`k'~-ui ~ X a
rC ORDINANCE r
i
Page
r
ed a rrr € z},,t a 11
s°'Y"' .,r rat - 7 ' - !s 7-`vS''~`'.a .v - ? -_,~„f • N,_1 V. - - ~ ,e#s-.
x 'st `4" J$¢l~a^~Tt+3 i' •r ,rte, -
~ ~ t ai ~ v" v ~ x a _
} ? f ,~'y rr }r ~ F 'a z 7,N4t,{s. € a d SFr t - .
1`
"r ,tom 4 tub i
~ar3 .rjN _ - a y t i see ~ Z4 tI,ak1' ° t
-11 :
n, I 1-11 Y , r' k - l - r"r "t - .1 - - l P -r3 a ~ _ 57 - .KY Y~ Lf i+.a _-iw.i.'
7+ A'SY--rz ,~a t,-_ ! i, - y'~3t :t'i w}~
apt? s fi ~ttr
, t
Y NIX~I ~ 7 # r<<a r a( r µi # p i yT
' -3, ^c- `~~`k"'t S ~ t 1 .L } _ 1 e 7 4 ..Y ; ~ is 7
i'x,pQ 7,h17,~xo- 4"j - L Y _ FwKd7'T } Ll
' t '""`,~t r } N i s ,+'f t r { t Lr ' 14 L.I""# `,s; `rw .u -
- " _ 1-1 M " L - I I - -
t~r.4 -tt R - - 4 ' r ° y
_ ~._~v.."c t r~. W_._ Y.~ ~.tit_...`f 1 ._.t s..Y. . Y r -f- _l._._Ifr~ _cL ~2rt[ v:
- ` rT'li.{rl 'C Sty -'c'* 4 - - - , - _ _
`
`t ;Fl ' i W- tt
w',e{'S } Y
$?gam vte Ate, , ,S 1 a,
4 -LS 'a s F x - M d
.F"i"'` 'fir 1.5' t - - - 5
11
M1-X~- L- 2' - p• 1, - - - n'
C 7 f,~- Nf ~X~` h
11-1 ,
L
4 y. - } i .,7 ~ .sua~. m..«aav'Lw,,..1.:;G_t.,.,..,-.:,.wa:. .s: x....w'r -f 's ° UFA
L - r i t r, ;
•4 k~' rtx i i 'a S '~t a -
ia...t EXHIBIT B Nor
C~~ , ?
y%~ L x -t tTl] I c1T/o1tWA® . \71 S k r"k"'n -
3 QL[IjjltjY _ ,,z 1 -
t " x-~'~ -4 I n - - r- 14 - 3-
I•:
}A, i
`
:
^~E i
l
LOCUST I =
' , =
CL x
~Ny _p atie'~.
- - •6r^
xY_`
G
a_
W
F,
- _i~l _
~
- _ ey ,,:~''_;'<i~~`-'rte'
n
- I 91E vx` -
i-
c.
iZgn~*.
G• +F
.
e",
1i
W'`
;a`F-...
0.'a-° h
y. .
- -
C 1!
I..
MAPI.tLt'r s~.
N ~
-11
V
T ,
ow-7,
?e-'=-,
.
-:1111, -x_,, ~ - - - ft..-.' z
f:-
,xae.~
y
= Fv
r>c•: rte.
.
_
~x-,
sue, -
F.
, 4
t
a a
n•'r ._a
x
f
ua
t- .
. .
GO
' 5=
r''.°K ,
' ' 'Y -
•
h
Zi
3x:
,
wi•Y.
a.
:c::
$ t
1
x
:tom,
S
--`'7 ,bF'.:'a;E.,x.-.r.-'ice,:,.,. „>a,,..r
~4,
- :i•:
:
,
&--r
;
='.%r r
,k.
_ F ~ ~
x
,w.
Y
h:~t}~
f}
t:"AY
t c~
f
=a.
t
k 2
t
J
fi.
4
r
:}.`•i l
z r.,
a
- - 'eS:..ybr
3
m
1.
g
,:t,oc 4 x
~ k 4 : `
x
i~
OIAIC
_ ` _
. -
,'S
s
- {
{S } ?fib"^s } r.=b..--•
j~r r
A
xX
E -
{ i
7!" -
S
a is
:•:t.•>
P%100 - .'-,rr 4 fem.
' -uisr
4fi
N
:tny
i
.a;
-7,~~_,,!, 1:~:~~~~ J..L } +
-
r_-.
a
a
E
s -"e- -go-
3
6
h
S
h- 3
Fi4n
Y
d
~i.
j:!:-:.:•:: . y.
hs-.
ig.~.t.rr ♦ 4C
E
SRRU
C
N
a
1-:
, > C
8 r-
tr1 . a ~r -
4' r
'
,I I
: v&, r -L
•:''::.1:
r
jj
a.
::•E•: :-.-:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::]:I:~:~:::i:i:~ ::9
r .t
rl-:'
?3
I::: ::,:::::J::: iic:c
::~i:c:::> i:i t.
. :s f.
- { x c-:
j ?i e
S
-7"i:• . . . . .
-
S
n
•y~ V `
V-: t k
ai.-
:1:•:- :
I ~Y
{
:¢1::: L
r ' . =vm
_ I•::
- 3
4'a~Kv
. . z
. _~V
. .
~•'a I ANNEYATION ANO ZONE CHANGE=ROM
®C OUNTY OFFICE COMMERCIAL TO CITY LP
_ t. O LOMPRE...111' P N
LA - a x
1 _ + Vicinity Map CHANGE FROM COUNTY OFFICE COMMERCIAL ® % •Y-••i••-
~..as t -
5 - - I (Vote: Map is not to scale / ` I uL11~4[fmmen~IwL YrtUf•GSbIONAL I %%,j I [~~,,75'r 1 ~
E
W, N WITHIN TIGARG CITY LIMITS M5- ^~f Y i
X' 4, fa -s r 1 °•-.',-..-m: ',3-• -A - ~ k d..:Ti.e si: "-,x=i - 2- K~ ;3Gf.,~i g
H
1-1
c.3 ~ f S U if t t
4 Y Y
f "Sr F 'rt
71
r
- P - r t CY '
'U _ _ S Y
a T 76 [r-,r ~
S1 5 r' - r
i 1 J - I E', '
r
N l
}j
f
"*Ok 'bt KJO :x f -Y- h - - - - x fir`.
s~ 3n d _
.1 "T .~.m -•Cer. _1 y , x ;u S r f - ' 4 - a ` - -
~_.i ¢ vr`T wC -r, - _ r r - k. St `v a`, 1'c - s-
4.b NO - 3 , -
C t K k s..a t
y,_sl~~ ~s- a_r`v^ - _ x r -r s > x" t'"8"- ~{1 s`.y't` S 3x*-rd,, , 1-4
4~
,,..ka,y~' '"E~ Y,-'"~T4 -t 2 7 - -a _ s ,g.y. '.3°.'~r y
z- tF7 41
, -,.T, - - ~,.F ~
llr xi
y;vvr.s z - s. ar _
I L4" x a - y yr
? - `
' C+ CITY OF TI/GARD~a~`~'' ~
r
~t ,4 x ORDINANCE NO. 13 ~ NE,
F - - - r-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAFM 13.09, RmmURSEMENT DISTRICTS OF THE i t {
11
'51 ~ fr k~ k ~ TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE. ~ - '
11 ~ VVIINREAS, the City Council finds that Chapter 13.09 of the Tigard Municipal Code should be x V
- !s ~ updated; now, therefore: 5 -
f~ f THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: 7 ~
%
. , Se n 1 Section 13.09.010(9) is amended to read as follows: :
. dad .-ice.. tr~f Stet .w~iL._.
* 1 "Reimbursement Fee" means the fee required to be paid by a resolution g,
{ t N,,`, -;,k , * ` of the City Council and the reimbursement agreement. ~ ~ _
a g
-
? ` Section 2. Section 13.09.020, Application for a Reimbursement District is amended to read
k P' " as follows:
°c s, (1) Any person who is required to or chooses to finance some or all e
}xt~ 3
«
k ~ - , of the cost of a street, water or sewer improvement which is available to
provide service to
' property, other than property owned by the person,
} s c
i may, by written application filed with the City Engineer, request that the *11--N
City establish a reimbursement district. The street water and sewer 3
~F _ R
-„~.-q
improvements must include improvements in addition to or in a size - -~'zs s _
's greater than those which would otherwise ordinarily be required in
mgL< l _ 4- connection with an application for permit aPProval and must be available = °
k a Y
~ to provide service to property other than property owned by the applicant. z c
s sz - 1 H Examples include but shall not be limited to full street improvements ~ 4- E _F
T instead of half street improvements, off site sidewalks, connection of
s 3,1t street sections for continuity, extension of water lines and extension of :"lF,R i
F- € `t sewer lines. The City may also initiate formation of a reimbursement ~ El
Y F,'.
district. The application shall be accompanied by a fee as established b
s
¢ r
A, r ~ t'~, resolution, sufficient to cover the cost of administrative review and notice
( v pursuant to this Chapter. z ~3
{ ~ (2) The application shall include the following: a 7_,g *e
r, (a) A description of the location, type, size and cost of the -I , 11
~ ,
r; x ~ public improvement to be eligible for reimbursement.
5i~Q 3 1.~r s I 1 a
, -11 s - M
_ ti c Ordinance No. / ; 1g kF
rc Pag
e i s ~
se,„ z,' tee'
11
111- ~ err r - - K ,
+s f..-r+-...k - :~'wa7tvr ,a,• - ^~r. a'+ - xw'h "€-a:z + ` - x , , 4 , 11 F \ f' ~e^ fir? r'T f -,...-sF r`7'~ , s
a4~ lxt q a i _ p - xd5.,.,,~ t 1h:U r a
as , 3 t ....~I La z 3 ss' ffi E 7
_ ,
'-4 t b ST,y -k,q-'~~ s r P x X y a+ ''Vi''''e t r i
1fir`r, kr - - i ~'4,~~pr F I 3
d a §`r
a'a' `'l` l - ~ _ ` - l . _ a { 4 F -4 r a j z ~ --1 F q
~ A_ , ~ fr~,',* , " I' , _ , - ~ , _
a-: t M- y t
31 I
I t " s. -'N
,
, I _„a
u.,yc., .rr~ _-T ,w,zs s :fit - _ - r... - _ -g t_
- -
J;~ M - v,"l - " .'"t, -Z-~'~.'~' - t- -,~~N"?'Ak~ffi
z _ _ _,d ~ V~ , ~ +Zl~, e '
g # - - f Z - t' --x_ r , -ar -A -
Tw _ - .y 'T..s a~ e y~ t
¢ .p '2 - 4'~'P aft' J 11 L s.-'.t -
tr 4 a-,a4. 1, ~_i - - 4t-f. ah A§f - u
} i P- 'Argue -P i eK ?b S i 1 ,-r' 'a.,x FC, _.,Fd - 05
;I-%F f.. 1 _
- r ' f T M .
Yom` ` ' r'y;' _ - t x ' .ar - i , a
'v>8 L - - -2 > -r - k'. '___...,.c J^,ry 4s°'s s"`tr.tr
s' bSr' Ytiw.. t ,
Z
_ Seer ~ ~ ~
k
- - r~ 1 - (b) A map showing the properties to be included in the j~ ~
T , ~ £ proposed reimbursement district; the caning district for the "t
-11
zaz=-
properties; the front footage or square footage of said properties ,rt
,
t c' 1st S or similar date necessary for calculating the apportionment of the ~ M'Ma ~ & NAlf"
. 1~ ` h' cost; and the property or properties owned by the applicant.
z ..z ~s'I - .e' z1 J 'qx - -tX re 4
(c) The estimated cost of the improvements as evidenced by ~ Wr ~M~ZT, ~ s~ '
1k
f°
a.~ „ bids, projections of the cost of labor and materials, or other s - -
y J r ' f: evidence satisfactory to the City Engineer. ~ ,
t (d) The estimated date of completion of the public
'T
t improvements. <
w
° - } x•; - r
(e) Applicant may request a discretionary annual fee ~
5 ~u f adjustment, which, if granted, will be administered pursuant to '!t- 5 ' - 11
Section 13.09.115. t ~t
M ~ p
} k..15a 3- 4 h 6 -,tom' - t- t ~j o-_+g
t 4 Section 3. Section 13.09.030, City Engineer's Report, is amended to read as follows:
$ 0.'M , fi
h41 w The City Engineer shall review the application for the establishment of a ;
reimbursement district and evaluate whether a district should be - Tsr
r~'.: u
_J ~f established. The Engineer may require the submittal of other relevant I_- M
It.
~ i
~'S. s' ' i - information from the applicant in order to assist in the evaluation. The x ' - IMM, _
p Q Engineer shall prepare a written report for the City Council, considering ~ s
~k c t and making recommendations concerning the following factors: r
R e
, 0t+' r" Ica
t " ^w, s ' 1 (a) Whether the applicant will finance some or all of the cost 11 `
I ~ -r of a street, water or sewer improvement, thereby making service - -i.a #
available to property, other than property owned by the applicant;
(b) The area to be included in the reimbursement district; - F
_ 5_~ -
(c) The estimated cost of the street, water or sewer j ;r~ I
t improvements within the area of the proposed reimbursement
district and the portion of the cost for which the applicant should ~~t
x -x
+-t y r e _
' y a ~ be reimbursed; y5~,~ -
ii ^a ' w ~ a
- 1q (d) A methodology for spreading the cost among the parcels .
T;
v y within the reimbursement district and where appropriate defining > p~~
t
s F a"unit" for applying the reimbursement fee to property which may, I
with City approval, be partitioned, altered, modified, or - -'g' a i I
" L i
s ?k subdivided at some future date. The methodology should include
Ordinance No. lG- l3 s- -11 k
r r - rg., - ` y } - Page 2 , - , < ' -"4 I--- - 1
- -tZ 5 _
#kj yr 1 r s 3* "'S'
t Y yr
y--_
r - ",.~~:r.:reev- at ti~ c am- „^a-»~,a~, r E `iaf G.,
r by ,1 "N - - z?&.
i({ t _ f 1 ~ -1 I
^3yna t" 1~ > "ry - d , _ - Y~'~ yt.rC S -ra , , } 11,
kaf- .rte''} t § -_f kS ai MbSa'X-,~`rr 0
1`*' ,~Ry_T-«' „Z h ' t _ £ r - a J g "t°' h fawt','~?r'§ { ] I
€3- e z °s ~t r i 1 3,
S' _ ' t''`faz +r
EM , - - " - ~ - ~~*L g--'_'~'t-'i.
} -ice j L t C: 1 - Y
Ee i
k - - - - - I S,"J'i
i
v
._cL :ti` _ ._._.rbi v - ..s._. v .1 y,.._
_ .Yi -
11 -
1~ 5,11;
&dsiaw
,
-
L -dpi- iE ik €t - - - -
S
` R3'FSi' uL.' 4. J 't ` - - f -
A 1 F4 J ,F St 4 _ _ r r-
,^"'w A:tt .yTC'v7'sx.'L k ti•IX-- _.!r, _ I` - l -
4 r ,;F R a Y s- i
~Nli i fdY4..t q., & p f P' S ; Y - ~ ,
r - a'a~ - E ''z- 1 - _ - a sL`(°~"' x- F Y t -I.,'a. . -sir' z
s c
onsideration of Lhe cost of the improvements, p b Lions of riot contriu y" =aY~;"1'a''
L f _k
by property owners, the value of the unused capacity, rate-making ' S ` ~ y
Vi a? ~ , a ~ ~H a
?Yy#4_. 4. A, principles employed to finance public improvements, and other s, _ z, k.. -
factors deemed relevant by the City Engineer. Prior contributions 7
i t~ by property owners will only be considered if the contribution was - fi ` NS -
~ b
for the same type of improvement and at the same location fi
(example: asewer-related con"sibution in the same location as a
sewer improvement would be considered, a water-related , Y # , Y '
contribution in the same location as a sewer improvement would `4° a
11
1 ; ~t F Fy not be considered); I
e- , J -
y xs
t~ i i - t } ~
ti--
' - (e) The amount to be charged by the City for administration of , s 1 - _
< the agreement by the City. The administration fee shall be fixed
z`- 'q n: ti. n ---:I ....d Will w I _ .tie roam"Linn S¢~~T+c'~,-c
v. _ by we wajr Ccunc- aa. Will i..
approving and forming
r the reimbursement district ryV The t ;'~-4Kp
dministration fee is due and payable to the City at the time the ' 3~t?
` agreement in Section 13.09.070(2) is signed. ~
-
7 (f) The period of time that the right to reimbursement exists if £ Wr"
the period is less than fifteen years..
j ~ K7
Section 4 Section 13.09.040, Amount to be Reimbursed, is amended to read as follows `4 x ~
_ r
- x L 3.
t : ~
{ 1 (1) The cost to be reimbursed to the applicant shall be limited to the ^I a ' --'fi
cost of construction, engineering, and off site right of way. Engineering f •
shall include surveying and inspection
and shall not exceed 13.5°& of
'nL eligible con_._omr.to, cost. Costs to be re;,; burred for right of way shall x ~ -
be limited to the reasonable market value of land or easements purchased i 5
Ire L x 5
r by the applicant from a third
party to complete off -site improvements. ~
a
(2) No reimbursement shall be allowed for fmancin costs,
g permits or,,
fees required for construction permits, land or easements dedicated by the r~ 6 1
applicant, costs which are eligible for traffic impact fee credits or systems _ " We E
development charge credits, or any costs which cannot be cieazl
4, 1 41 V documented. Y $,"Ry '
.)-x~ J
I (3) No reimbursement shall be allowed for construction costs that ' " - - gf t
occur prior to the formation date of the reimbursement district ~h 4 -
a i
- ~ ~ §rK G
k ix~k~ 't - ,J
.F ~k s-i f L -C y~cW
x xs ~ - ,
z f^ Ordinance No. ~L • 1-3 ' ~ ` i }
Q~- U, Page 3 , , ~ ,
~t L
-.J r - - -
2 Z~ - 1- +'#`l 3 -yam t 1TT` 7
11
b f- r. }'Y -a 4 t'. 4
~
s 7 z ~.f i - n -w!r'-,x --rI , A +a _ --Y.. .?1 ^ ..5.' £e„' >na~ '~:.'*C.^~t' ua vaa. i - c r .ice,
. - it , - 4 .a r e f k iT
4% A i Y F _
~1'4'.'-'-"~. E , , 'e' - ~ , , - " - - - , , "
C -1 J"3 t - ti - 1
1, try, - - ice.,(,
g F G
~E- --4-- , : -
`s
I ~ " :
_ .L - .z _s... ...i.......,f. _.c._. _x, l.Y~~::. ~i~'lc _ _ _ - - - - `-s, 'TJ-^• _ ..1~
' -i;-a
- I- I 11