Loading...
Planning Commission Packet - 11/06/1973 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions please contact City of Tigard Records Department. _- ' . ` _ ` - ' ^ � . . -.a^-. .^-.^ � ` � ^ . ` �-� ` ' ' `-.^-- - - • � --_ ___- -__ � _-�~_ -- __ _�__- —� - � �� ~ 5‘4 .�� '� '_�_ / ' ' I \. ' �`' ^ ` ~ I A,`' AGENDA TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting - November 6, 1973 Charles F. Tigard Grade School-Board Room 13137 S.W. Pacific Highway, Tigard, Oregon il Study Session - 7:30 P.M. Public Hearing - 8 :00 P.M. I. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL fi 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES tl 3°1 Regular Meeting of October 16, 1973 3°2 Study Session of October 23, 1973 il 4° PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE Ae=� 4.1 Conditional Use CU 16-73 (Miller) . ` � . ` ~ `~~ A request by Lee & Richard Miller to construct an automotive repair shop in an M-4, Industrial Park zone. The proposed building site is located on the south side of Burnham Street, 125 feet east of Ash Street. The site is adjacent the new police office buiIding. The site comprises .40 acres. (Tax Map 2S1 2| D, Tax lot 2700\ . Staff Findings Testimony and Cross Examination Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action 5^ PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE k G^l Variance V5-73 (Ted Nelson Co. ) 1 , A request by the Ted Nelson Co. to construct an � . addition to their existing building, said northerly addition is proposed to have a 10 foot setback where a 20 foot setback is required. The property is zoned M-2, Gneral Industrial and is located at 14280 S.W. 72nd Avenue (Tax Map 38I 12A, tax lots 100 , 300 501, 201 and 200\ � �_� �� � ~— i ' ^ '� ' ' � x' ° Staff Finding IL, Testimony and Cross Examination Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action 5. 2 Variance -V6-73 (Lee and Richard Miller) A request by Lee and Richard MiLleir to locate an automotive repair building on a property line where a 20 foot side yard set back is required. The property is zoned M-4, Industrial Park, comprises . 40 acres and is located on the south side of S.W. Burnham Street, 125 feet east of Ash Street. The site is adjacent the new police office building. (Tax Map 2S1 2AD, Tax Lot 2700) Staff Finding Testimony and Cross Examination Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action 6. SUBDIVISIONS - Preliminary Plat Approval 6.1 Lake Terrace (Arrow Heating Co. ) Location : North of S.W. Walnut Street and 400 feet east of 121st, adjacent the Brookway Subdivision Staff Finding Testimony Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action 7. SUBDIVISIONS - Variance 7.1 "Summerfield" - Variance on paving width, Location : From S.W. Durham Road 600 feet east of Pacific Highway to S.W. 98thv 1100 feet north of S.W. Durham Road. Staff Finding ` Testimony Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action ' - Page 2 - PC Agenda - November 6, 1973 _-` - \. _ 8. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW ` 8~1 A 8, N International / Location : S. E. corner of the intersection of S.W. Pacific Highway and Garrett Street ' | Staff Findings Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action 8.2 Miller Automotive ` � ^ Location : South side of Burnham Street, I25 feet east of Ash Street Staff Findings Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action 9. MISCELLANEOUS 9,1 Island Annexations Staff Findings Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action 9. 2 S.W. Summerfield Drive-Acceptance of Street Dedication Staff Findings Staff Recommendation Commission Discussion and Action 10. OTHER BUSINESS 11. ADJOURNMENT t , Page 3 - PC Aganda. - November 6, 1973 �~��-~~�- ^ ^ . . =�� � '` ~ MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting - November 6, 1973 Tuality Jr. High School lecture room 14650 S.W. 97th Ave. , Tigard Oregon ` . 1. CALL TO ORDER A. Themeetinguaa called to order at 7:40 P.M. 2. ROLL CALL A. Present: Ball, Lewis, Hartman, Nicoli, Frazier, Sakata, MickeIoon3 Chairman Whittaker; Planning Director, Wink Brooks; City Attorney, Fred Anderson 8 Absent: Barkhurst° 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. The minutes for the meetings of October 16, 1973 and October 23, 1973 were approved as submitted by unanimous vote of the Commission present. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use 4.1 Conditional Use CU 16~73 (Miller) A request by Lee & Richard Miller to construct an automotive repair shop in an M-4, Industrial Park zone. The proposed building site is located on the south side of Burnham Street, I25 feet east of Ash Street. The site is adjacent the new police office building. The site comprises . 40 acres. (Tax Map 231 2AD^ Tax Lot 2700\ A. Mr. Nicoll stated he would abstain on this itam~ B. Mr. Ball stated that before the Planning Commission could hear the request they had to determine if the use was similar to those in an M-4 zone. C. Mr. Brooks read the uses permitted outright and the conditional uses in an M-4 zone. D. Mr. Lewis moved to approve the use as a similar /�� conditional use in an M-4 zone. Mr. Hartman seconded and the motion passed by a majority vote (Nicoll abstaining) - ' ^ , ' ' , (7. k_,- , fi , , < , : , t Staff Findings i lit .. . 1 , A. Brooks presented the staff findings k 1, Testimony and Cross Examination if r A. Proponents i 1. Mr. Richard L. Miller, applicant, testified in k favor of the request. Mr. Miller stated his I request was to build and operate an automobile i repair shop. 1 1 2. Mr. Miller justified his request by responding to the "Fasano" related questions. , 1 3. Mrs. Sakata asked if the repairs would be on I, the engines or body. 1 i' 4. Mr. Miller stated that it would be repair on i engines and chassis. I: , 5. Mr. Frazier asked what provision were made for r, storage. r, C., 6. Mr. Miller stated that there were 9 outside r parking stalls and 6 inside stalls. 4 7. Mr. Lewis asked if any of the dismantled cars would be outside. 1 :i. d S. Mr. Miller stated that the cars would be worked on inside and that no partially dismantled ones E would be outside. tl 9. Mr. Ball asked what kinds of lands the applicant 1: looked for. i 1 t; 10. Mr. Miller stated any land that could be used r; 11: ' for the request. 1 11. Mr. Ball asked what areas the applicant had looked for land. , 12. Mr. Miller stated Tigard because his business was known in Tigard. 6 13. Mr. Brooks pointed out that there is an additional A 0,0 problem with storm drainage on the subject site. i , , , , Page 2 — PC Minutes — 11-6-73 , 2. Opponents 1. No one spoke in opposition to the request. Staff Recommendation A. The staff recommended approval based on the staff findings and adding a fourth condition: ° That the applicant cooperate with adjacent property owners to provide adequate storm drainage. B. Mr. Hartman asked if the storm drainage wouldn' t be part of a local improvement district. C. Mr. Brooks stated that an easement could be all that was necessary . D. Mr. Whittaker stated he didn' t feel that the storm drainage problem needed to be discussed at that time. E. Mr. Frazier asked if item three of the staff' s findings still held. F. Mr. Brooks stated no, it did not. ~~' G. The public hearing was closed. Commission Discussion and Action A. Mr. Lewis moved to approve the request with the added staff condition related to drainage. B. Mr. Brooks asked if the applicant had satisfactorily met all the "Fasano" requirements. C. Mr. Frazier seconded the motion. _ ^ D. Mr. Ball stated that he felt the applicant had produced evidence that there is a community need and that the applicant could not find proper , | Zoning and that the use adheres to the Community Plan. E. Mr. Whittaker asked what the Ash Avenue-Downtown Plan showed. Mr. Brooks stated that the Ash Avenue-Downtown Plen showed the subject area as . Industrial. . ` Page 3 - PC Minutes - 11-6-73 ' . F. Mr. Hartman asked what zone the use is ''r � " -° alIoued in. G. Mr. Anderson stated in the M-2 and M~3 zone. H. The motion was approved by majority vote (Commissioner Nicoll abstaining) ' G. PUBLIC HEARING - VARIANCE 5.1 Variance V5-73 (Ted Nelson Co. ) A request by the Ted Nelson Co. to construct an addition to their existing building, said northerly addition is proposed to have a 10 foot setback where a 20 foot setback is required. The property is zoned M-2, General Industrial and is located at 14280 S.W. 72nd Aveneu (Tax Map 2S1 12A, tax lots 100, 300, 301, 20I and 200\ Staff Findings A. Brooks presented the relevant firdings of fact and read the applicant ' s justification. Mr. Brooks stated the staff had received all the material but had no time to analyze it. B. Mr. Whittaker stated that he would abstain but would conduct the hearing unless there was an objection. Testimony & Cross Examination A. Proponents 1. Mr. Rolland Rose' explained the history of the company. He presented additional drawings illustrating the proposed variance. 2. Mr. Rose' stated that the County had approved '^ the 10 foot variance in 1966 prior to annexation 3. Mr. Rose' explained that originally they had / planned an extending a railroad spur from Fought' s property but Fought had decided against it. 4. Mr. Ball asked how the applicant would use the Gerber easement on the northern edge of the subject site. 5~ Mr. Rose' stated ingress only. Page 4 - PC Minutes - I1-6_73 _ ^. ' ` 6. Mr. Ball asked about the door on the north side of the proposed addition. Mr. Rose' .` stated that the doors would be used only ` in case of an emergency. Mr. Rose' stated ' ' ^ that the applicant had received a letter from Gerber requesting them not to use the northern door~ 7. Mr. Ball quoationedthenGrandfathern clause. 8° Mr. Rose' stated that a hardship was created when they annexed to the City which requires a larger setback. .' . ^ ^ 9° Mr. Hartman asked about the next expansion. | ` Mr. Rose' stated he could not answer the question. 10. Mr. Lewis asked about the 10 foot setback as to whether it would be paved or not. � Il" Mr. Rooe° stated that a greenway would be 3 feet wide and the rest sloped with no parking. i . 12" Mr. Ball asked why the applicant didn' t expand 444.1 to the south instead of the north. Mr. Rose' stated material flow would not allow it. 13. Mr. Lewis stated he knew that item 2 of the staff findings was true because he was chairman of the Washington County Planning Commission at that time. B. Opponents 1. No one spoke in opposition Staff Recommendation A. The staff recommended that the Planning Commission make their decision based on section 18~ 76 of the Tigard Municipal Code. B. The public hearing was closed. Page 5 - PC Minutes - 11-6-73 ` • ^ �• ^ i Commission Discussion and Action A. Mr. Nicoll asked what materials would be used for construction. B. Mr. Roses stated that the new building addition would be the same type of construction as the existing building. C. Mr. Hartman stated he felt that the request met the requirements of section 18.76 of the Tigard ° Munioipel Code. D. Sakata stated she disagreed because she felt they could build to the south instead of the north. E. Lewis stated he believed the applicant had met the requirements therefore he moved to approve the request. Nicoli seconded. F. Mr. Hartman asked about landscaping and Brooks read the requirements. G. Mr. Hartman asked if they would be able to meet (- \, the landscaping requirements. Mr. Brooks said yes. H. The motion was approved by a 4 to l vote (Sakata voting no and Whittaker abstaining) 5~ 2 Variance V6-73 (Lee and Richard Miller) ` ^ A request by Lee and Richard Miller to locate an automotive repair building on a property line where a 20 foot side yard set back is required. The property is zoned M 4, Industrial Park, comprises . 40 acres and is located on the south side of S.W. Burnham Street, 125 feet east of Ash Street. The site is adjacent the new police office building. (Tax Map 251 2AD, Tax Lot 2700) Staff Findings A. Brooks presented a history of the property and pertinent facts relating to the request. Testimony and Cross Examination A. Proponents I. No one spoke y�� B. Opponents ~- 1. No one spoke Page 6 - PC Minutes - 11-6-73 • � ^ � ~~ ` Staff Recommendation A. The staff recommended approval based on their . � findings with one condition B. Mr. Hartman questioned the reading of the 4th finding, and whether in fact the variance requested is the minimum as stated in the 10th finding" C. Mr. Ball asked if the condition of the window was m the Planning standpoint or police? Mr° Brooko stated the police. ' 1 � ) Commission Discussion and Action A. Mr. Hartman questioned the condition because it was such a permanent nature. B. Mr. Whittaker stated that a silkscreen operation had ] been granted joint utilization a year ego. N&� / -�~ C. Mr. Hartman moved to approve the variance based on the staff findings and Mr" Lewis seconded. D. Mr~ Frazier stated finding four should be corrected in that it should read 7 feet more than the existing lot width instead of 5 feet. . ! E. Mr. Frazier asked what physical shape the lot was in when the applicant purchased it. Mr. Brooks stated existing physical shape. F. The motion passed by a unanimous vote with Nicoll abstaining. 6° SUBDIVISIONS 6.1 Lake Terrace (Arrow HeatlngCo^ ) Location: North of S.W. Walnut Street and 400 feet east of 121ot, adjacent the Brookway Subdivision. Staff Findings A. Brooks said that the staff has reviewed the preliminary 1 plat and it does comply with the conditions of the subdivision variance as granted by the Planning ` • • Commission. ^ ` � . ' x�� ��� \`~� Testimony and Cross Examination A. Mr. MoMunagIe of Harris and MoMonagIe Engineering k for the applicant t spoke o e app tin o stating g that his firm had revised the preliminary plat to include the conditions epacifiied by the Planning Commission when the street standard variance was approved. Staff Recommendation A. Brooks recommended approval of the Lake Terrace preliminary plat as submitted. Commission Discussion and Action A. Lewis moved to approve the preliminary plat as submitted. Nickelson seconded and the motion passed by unanimous vote. 7. SUBDIVISIONS - VARIANCE 7.1 "Summerfield" - Variance on paving width, S.W. Summerfield Drive Location';; From S �° Durnham Road 600 feet east . � y of Pabific Highway to S.W. 98th, 1100 feet north of S.W. Durnham Road. Staff finding .8, Brooks presented the staff findings, stating that an unusual hardship would be placed upon the applicant by not granting the request. Testimony and Cross Examination A. Mr. McMonagle spoke for the applicant stating his justification for Summerfield Drive being constructed to a 36 foot pavement width rather than the standard 44 foot width. This was predicated primarily upon the limited access (4 driveways) which is allowed from adjacent properties directly onto 8ummerfield Drive. } Staff Recommendation A. Brooks recommended approval of the variance request. Page 8 - PC Minutes - 1I-6~73 ------ ` __-' ^ �� ' 0 k^~ x ` ~ , " Commission Discussion and Action ,e_ �- A. Lewis moved to approve the variance request and Hartman seconded. The motion passed by , unanimous voto^ 1 8~ SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW 1 8°1 A & W International i Location: Southeast corner of the intersection of , S.W. Pacific Highway and Garrett Street. | Staff Recommendation A. The staff recommended approval of the site ~ development plan with one condition Commission Discussion and Action A. Lewis said that he was opposed to locating an A & W restaurant on this site, but being as this decision had been taken out of the Planning Commissions hands, he would move to approve , the site development plan with the one staff \ �' condition. B. Ball seconded the motion, stating his agreement with _ Louis' s view of the issue. In addition, he requested � staff to verify that the conditions required by . Council with the approval of this conditional use would be met by the submitted site plan. C. The motion passed with Hartman abstaining. . 8. 2 Miller Automotive . Location : South side of Burnham Street, 125 feet east of Ash Street. . Staff Findings A. Brooks presented findings, pointing out that the applicant had not submitted an irrigation plan and recommending minor changes which would bring the submitted site development plan into complete conformance with the Site Development Plan Review Ordinance. ` � ~.�. ' � Page 9 - PC Minutes - 11-6-73 ^ L________ ` . ���` • • - ��� ^~ �~ ^~ ! ] ' ~~ Commission Discussion and Action A. Hartman moved to approve the site development plan with staff recommended conditions. Lewis seconded and the motion passed by unanimous vote. 9. MISCELLANEOUS 9°1 Island Annexations • Location: Derry Dell: west side of S.W. Pacific Hwy. between Park and Gaardo Streets. Rolling Hills: both sides S.W. 72nd Ave. Between Varnes and Cherry Streets. • Staff Report A. Brooks showed the areas under consideration and t related preaen d e findings. [ Commission Discussion and Action � \ ^_ A. Whittaker said that he was encouraged that the • Council had chosen to take action to annex these islands. He suggested that the Planning Commission offer their approval of this action and encourage the City Council to seek the annexation of other areas which are nearly surrounded by the City boundaries. B. Discussion occured concerning Whittaker« o suggestion relative to encouraging further annexations. Ball stated his belief that it would not make any difference what the Planning Commission recommends either on this annexation or ones the Planning Commission sees necessary. In that the island annexations are the items of odncorn at this time, the Planning Commission should not aek the Council to consider other possible annexations. He continued by stating that the Commission' s charge was to consider land usa and the political aspects of the annexation issue should be left to the City Council. C. Ball moved to adopt the staff findings striking the last sentence of finding and recommending to the " _ ~�^ City Council that the annexation be pursued bafor'o the Metropolitan Boundary Review Commission. Commissioner Hartman seconded. The motion passed by unanimous vote. • Page 10 PC Minutes - I1-6-73 `-- ''----�---~--^~- ' ' ^ � � l . ,~ �~� 9. 2 S.W. Summerfield Drive-Acceptance of street right-of-way - dedication. Location: From S.W. Durham', Road 600 feet east of Pacific Highway to S.U. 98th, 1100 feet north of S.W. Durham Road. Staff Findings A. Brooks presented staff findings Staff Recommendation A. Brooks recommended that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council acceptance of the ~' � deed of right-of-way dedication for Summerfield drive with the following conditione� 1. That the minimum right-of-way width be 61 feet. 2. All access to Summerfield Drive shall be restricted and dedicated to the public as per approval by the City Attorney and Planning Director. �'� `w- Testimony A. Mr. MoMonagIo the project engineer spoke for the applicant stating the need for a 60 foot right- of-way. Ha said that phases I and II had already been platted based upon a 60 foot width and that he � saw no reason to add u foot to each side of the street right-of-way . Commission Discussion and Action A. Ball moved to table the item until staff has had additional time to review and provide a recommendation. 'Hartman seconded. The motion passed by a majority vote with Commissioners Lewis and Nicoll voting no. 10. OTHER BUSINESS No other business was considered 11. ADJOURNMENT: I0:28 P.M. Page 11- PC Minutes - 1I-6-73 - - - TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report November 6, 1973 Agenda Item 4.1 CU 16-73 (Miller) Conditional Use For property located in an M-4 Industrial Park zone, on the south side of S.W. Burnham Streets 125 feet east of Ash Street. (Tax Map 251 2ADV Tax Lot 2700) Applicant Lee and Richard Miller .82.21122,21-211.4.121. Conditional Use approval to construct an automotive repair shop in an M-4, Industrial Park zone. 1122.1192222.22i2uati, To construct a 6 bay automotive repair -hop. The structure would include office space, Staff Findings: 1. Section 18.52.020 (Tigard Municipal Code) does not specifically state that automotive repair shops are conditional uses, however said section does provide that the Planning Commission may rule on uses that are similar to other uses described in said section. Automobile service stations, machine and welding shops are such described uses. 2. The subject site is adjacent the following uses: O southeastern side: D.W.D. construction--offices and equipment storage ® southwestern side: City Sewerage Treatment Plant 0 nOrthwestern aide z City Police Offices Rental Dwelling Surrounding zoning on the southside of Burnham Street is M4, Industrial Park, on the north side of Burnham zoning is M-3, Light Industrial . 3. The City Council on July 10, 1972 gave conditional use approval to a "silkscreen operation". Said approval was based on the following conditions That the building be located on the westerly property line. That the Planning Commission review and approve a completed site development plan prior to issuance of a building permit. A permit was issued on the proposed "silkscreen operation", but the structure was not built and the conditional use expired July 109 1973. 4. S.W. Burham Street, adjacent subject prop.rty9 currently has a 40 foot right-of-way. Burnham Street is described in the "Tigard Community Plan" as a collector street with a minimum right- of-way standard of 60 feet. 5. Increased traffic on S.W. Burnham Street caused by the subject and other development, will 6. rdeoe:henoftuture improvement of Burnham to City coll.ctor street stndards0 indicate any area for the provision of outdoor storage of waste material9 such as discarded auto parts, drop box, etc. Such outdoor storage, if viewed from adjacent properties or public streets does mkt meet the intent of development in an Industrial Park Zone. Staff Recommendation Approval of an automotive repair shop as a conditional use in an M-49 Industrial Park zone, said approval based on a finding by the Planning Commission that the subject use is similar to other uses described in Section 18.52.020 (Tigard Municipal Code) Said approval shall include the satisfaction of the following conditions: 1. Dedication to the public of an additional 10 feet of right-of-way along S.W. Burnham Street. 2. The property owner (a) shall agree to support the formation of a local improvement district to bring S.W. Burnham St. to City collector street standards. 3. The applicant shall provide a fenced area for the outdoor storage of waste material commensurate with said applicants needs. Drop boxes, if used, shall be placed out of view of the public right-of-way. Page 2 - Staff Report - Miller a, TIGARO PLANNING COMMISSION 116 Staff Report November 6, 1973 Agenda Item 5. i V 5-73 (Ted Nelson Co. ) Variance For property located at 14280 S.W. 72nd Avenues (Tax Map 251 12A9 Tax lots 1009 3009 3019 201 and 200) AnalalEnt Ted Nelson Company icant°sRcqt To construct an addition to an existing building9 said northerly addition is proposed to have a 10 foot satback where a 20 foot setback is required in an M-29 General Industrial zone. Staff Finding! 1. Applicant9s justification is stated as follows: "Application for reduction of side yard setback from 209-0" to 101-0" is requested because owner originally located plant adjacent to north property line with 101-0" side yard setback adjacent to 301-0" access easement plus 159-0" utility easement all determined in March 1967 in concurrence with Washington County and prior to adoption of Tigard "Planning and Zoning CodealOwner claims hardship because original planning was done on this basis and his manufacturing process requires a 609-0" wide bay. The fact that a 309-0" and 15' easement exists to the north reduces the i pact of future building proximity to the north. 2. The applicant contends he entered into an agreement with Washington County to construct his building to within 10 feet of his property line and that this was prior to adoption of Tigard "Planning and Zoning Code". The applicant has furnished no proof of this contention. The City of Tigard adopted a joint City-County zoning code in 1962. 3. The applicant states a 15 foot utility easement exists. (I No proof of such easement has be furnished. --....Tr,...",...":',.......... , - , i ( ' ' 4. The applicant has not submitted a description of the problems ( inherent in the manufacturing process that describes his hardship. 4 r t 5. The subject property was annexed to the City of Tigard, I; November 11, 1968. , 6. Section 18.76.010 (Tigard Municipal Code) states ". . .the planning commission may authorize variances from the requirements of this title where it can be shown - that owing to special and unusual circumstances related 1, p to specific piece of property, the literal interpretation of this title would cause an undue or unnecessary hard® ' ehiro. .. . In granting a variance the planning commission may attach conditions which it finds necessary to protect cc the best interests of the surrounding property or neigh- borhood and to otherwise achieve the purposes of this title". , i In addition Section 18.76.020 (Tigard Municipal Code) i' states that "no variance shall be granted by the planning I commission unless it can be shown that all the following conditions exist: j. t 1‘ (1) Exception:I or extraordinary conditions applying ( \._ to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, ! '4 which conditions are a result of lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control; I: (2) The variance is necessary for the preservation of a property right of the applicant substantially the same as is possessed by owners of other property in l' the same zone or vicinity; (3) The authorization of the variance shall not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, !, be injurious to property in the zone or vicinity in which the property is located, or be otherwise t.'t, detrimental to the objectives of any city development t, plan or policy; , (4) The variance requested is the minimum variance from 'f,4 the provisions and standards of this title which will alleviate the hardship. , , ..„„ „..., (1 p i Page 2 - Staff Report - Ted Nelson Coe t, , tr, ..i .., 7. The staff does not have sufficient material to k analyze the applicant's request and make a considered recommendations Staff Recommendation Continue item to next hearings, enabling the applicant to submit necessary documentation for review and andylsis by the staff® C Page 3 Staff Report - Ted Nelson Co, TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report November 6, 1973 Agenda Item 5.2 V 6-73 (Lee and Richard Miller) Variance For property located on the south side of S.W. Burnham Street, 125 feet east of Ash Street. The site is adjacent the new police office building (Tax Map 2S1 2AD, Tax lot 2700) Applicant Lee and Richard Miller Applicant°a Regue:t To locate an auttmotive repair building on a property line9 where a 20 foot side yard is required in an M-49 '+ Industrial Park zone. Staff Findinga 1. The dimensions of the applicant's property are 69 x 250 feet. 2. Applicant's justific= tiono "The original parcel of land was divided and the parcel is now too small to comply with set back requirements without imposing '. an undue hardship on builders." 3. The City Council on July 10, 1972 approved a building for a silkscreen operation to be "located on the westerly property line" 4. The proposed automotive repair structure must necessarily have a rectangular configuration for efficient utilization of the structure. The proposed structure measures 32' x 72' . The only possible way to construct such a building on this property, to allow for vehicle maneuvering and future expansion, would be to construct such a building closer than 20 feet to the property line. A 32 foot building, plus 24 feet for vehicular •atnneuvering, plus a 20 foot side yard setback would require a 76 foot wide tom; property. This is 5 feet more than the existing lot width. S. The new City police office is adjacent the westerly portion of the subject site. The City would look favorably upon a structure located on the westerly property line without windows in the structure's westerly side. The City feels such a structure would provide additional security to the police office site. 6. There are special and unusual circumstances affecting the subject property and the literal interpretation of this ordinance would cause an undue hardship. 7. The subjects request is the result of an unusual condition that does not apply generally to other properties in the same zone and vicinity. The condition is a result of lot shape, over which the applicant has no control, 8. The variance is necessary for the preservation of the applicant's property rights, substantially the s=me as is possesed by owners of other property in the same zone or vicinity. 9. The authorization of the variance is not materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, be injurious to property in the zone or vicinity in which th.; property is located nor is the variance otherwise detrimental to the objectives of any city development plan or policy. 10. The variance requested is th> minimum variance from the provisions and standards of this title which will alleviate the hardship. Staff Recommendation Approval of the applicant's request with the following condition; ° No windows shall be placed in the proposed structure that face directly onto the City's police office site, Page 2 ® Staff Report - Miller Variance TIGARD PALNNING COMMISSION Staff Report Subdivisions—Preliminary Plat Approval November 69 1973 6.1 Lake T,-rrace (Arrow Heating Co. ) Location North of Walnut Street, approximately 400 feet west of S.W. 121st Avenue. Staff Findings 1. The applicant submitted a revised preliminary plat to the City October 29, 19730 2. The applicant has revised the preliminary plat to conform to the Planning Commission's subdivision variance action of October 169 1973. 3. The Planning Commission, according to Section 170161008 Tentative Approv:-:1 (Tigard Municipal 6717-71171,117617i-- ode """nay give tentative approv. 1 of the preliminary plat as submitted or at it may be modified or, if disapproved, shall express its disapproval and its reasons therefore Approval of the preliminary plat -hall indic= te the Planning Commission's approval of the final plat provided there is no change in the plan of subdivision as shown on the preliminary plat and there is full compliance with all requirements of this title. " Staff Recommendation Approval of the Lake Terrace Preliminary Plat received by the City October 29, 1973. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report Subdivisions - Variance an November 6, 1973 7.1 "Summerfield"-Variance on paving width (S.W. Summerfield Dr. ) (Tualatin Development Co. ) Location z From S.W. Durham Road, 600 feet east of Pacific Highway, to S.W. 98th, 1100 Feet north of S.W. Durham Road aaff_Lialiaaa 1. The subject variance is a unique situation in that S.W. Summerfield Drive;„ the major spine road through the Summerfield subdivision, is not being considered as a part of each plat. Thus, the street must be accepted by the City in a separate action. S.U. Su,imerfi=ld Drive is constructed, with curbs and gutters, to a paving width of 36 feet. 2. The planning staff (see attached memo) interprets S.W. Summerfield Drive to serve a collector street function and as such, unless approved through the subdivision variance procedure, should be constructed to City collector stre:t standards. These standards require a 44 foot paving width on a 60 foot right-of way. 3. The City Council on February 12, 1973 approved a P-D, Planned Development District on the subject site. Included in exhibit "D" of this approval is a street section of the "spine road" or S.W. Summerfield Drive. Said section describes a paving width of 36 feet on a minimum 60 foot right-of-way. 4. The applicant, represented by Harris-McMonagle Associates, has submitted a petition for variance. Said applicant's petition is attached. 5. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property; the variance is necessary for the preser- vation of a and enjoyment of a substantial property (I right of the petitioner and extraordinary hardships would result from strict compliance with these regulations because of the special circumstances affect- ". ing the property. This is because the approved Planned Development concept was based on a 36 foot wide central collector street, landscaped for visual ammenity, with all development reverse-fronting this facility. To provide wider pavement along this facility would damage the viability of the proposed pedestrian and bicycle paths. The proposed street standard is adequate to carry projected traffic and the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. The proposed street is entirely within property owned by the Tualatin Development Co. and will not be injurious to other property in the vicinity in which the property is situated, Staff Recommendation Approval of the requested variance; a 36 foot paving width where 44 feet is required. 5' Page 2 ® Staff Report ® Summerfield ® paving width variance ' t- R;, ;`, t k+. - � of .;F s ,451 FGt' x'44',4'''-., k '4,',4 ,44..,, 4 .4.. 115''4 2 ,t,,y 37/�tf"+�tU ,y�k 1 vttr ,.,1,.k.,:.,,-.,, '4' t TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION t Staff Report Site Development Plan Review . November 6, 1973 8.1 A & W International Location: S.E. corner of the intersection of S.W. Pacific Highway and Garrett Street. Staff Findings 1. Applicant proposes to remove 3 existing walnut trees 12, 16 and 18 inches in diameter; and two +; apple trees 10 and 14 inches in diameter. 2. The submitted site plan meets all requirements ( of the off-street parking and access and egress chapters of Tigard's Zoning Ordinance With the exception of section 18.60.100 (Tigard Municipal Code) Landscaping, screening requirements. This section reads as follows: "off-street parking shall be allowed in any yard setback, provided that the first two feet in from the property line are maintained in landscaping. . . . The applicant' s southerly and easterly property lines are not landscaped in the aforementioned manner. 3. The applicant has submitted a landscape and site plan of sufficient detail to meet the intent of submission iro standards set forth in Chapter 18. 58 (Tigard Municipal I Code) i Staff Recommendation Approval of the applicant' s landscape and site plan with the following condition: °d1 ° The applicant submit for staff approda1 a detailed " landscape and irrigation plan for the 2 foot landscape f'i,, ' requirement, as set forth in finding 2 of this staff report. {t4' 1' '4 tr=.,' "pig' 4' .,},'' ;:* 1 '�3 l r,''''' F A 31i i'. . TIGARD PLANNI u COMMISSI t4 " i4` Staff Report ,f "� . x,., ` Site Development Plan Review ` ;E , I ,{ e' November 6, 1973 ,`! 8.2 Miller's Automotive Location: South side of S.W. Burnham Street, 125 feet east of Ash Street , Staff Findings: 1. The applicant has submitted a landscape and site plan of sufficient detail to meet the intent of submission standards set forth in Chapter 18.58 (Tigard Municipal Code) , with the exception of an adequate irrigation plan. 2. The landscape area in the nortfisim corner of the subject site appears to have insufficient plant materials to provide living ground cover within a reasonable period of' time.' 3. The applicant meets the off street parking and access and egress provisions of the Tigard Zoning Ordinance with the following exceptions: 0 entrance drive is 20 feet in width where ,__. 24 feet is required. 0 The relationship between parking stalls 3 and 4 should be redesigned to facilitate easier maneuvering of vehicles. Staff Recommendation Approval of the applicant' s sits and landscape plan, said approval subject to the applicant submitting for staff approval a revised site plan reflecting the following revisions; O increased landscape detail of the northeastern portion of the subject site,allowing for a living groundcover within 5 years. o access drive to be 24 feet in width. o rear portion of parking area to be redesigned so , as to allow easier maneuvering of vehicles; landscaping plan to be revised in order to reflect the redesigned parking area. \ t-tc,..4.344....-4,..,,. vs4.--C415,e-q„, 1:1-4\(;)-el'r,A.,4 Lk,/.'.., "1"14-'i:f Coll•fr1.4-416341-1111-1/4' ,ct, r .y S NC 1j ! q L X t. r ; kls t.' , S. The inclusion of the subject islands into the n City of Tigard is a logical extension of City boundaries and consequently City Services. Adequate size sever lines are available to the Derry Dell area, police protection is easily provided and planning f services are already scheduled for the island areas. The areas are developed to urban densities and they are geographically and socially a part of the Tigard Community. Street maintenance and street lighting , services could also be easily and logically extended to �. these areas . , Staff Recommendation Based on the above findings, it is recommended the Planning Commission pass to the City Council an affirmative recommendations' for annexation of the Derry Dell and Rolling Hills islands. it }j page 2 - Island Annexations - staff report r' Y o i Its.. +.sW>•t' i , .s`s A ri r>k"�+�ra� x}�d��" 4'.t ^ � � � t,d�t" 'yA. �++ w' re r.. �+ . R TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION f s� . + Staff Report November 6, 1973 9.2 S.W. Summerfield Drive-Acceptance of Street Right-of-way Dedication. Location: From S.W. Surham Road 600 feet east of , Highway to S.W. 98th, 1100 feet ; Pacific Hig y north of S.W. Durham Road. ,! Staff Findin s '` 1. The City Council on February 12, 1973 approved a P-D, Planned Development District on the subject site. Included in exhibit "0" of said approval , is a street section of the "spine road" or S.W. '` ii Summerfield Drive. Said section describes a paving width of 36 feet on a minimum 60 foot-of-way. ,., 2. No portion of S.W. Summerfield Drive has been dedicated by the platting procedure set forth in Title 17, Tigard Municipal Code or Chapter 92, Oregon Revised Statutes 3. The Planning Commission on October 2, 1973 moved to approve a change of standards relating to the construction of improvements in the right-of-way for S.W. Summerfield Drive. This action related to the width of bicycle paths. The standards approved in said Planning Commission action included the wording "the right-of-way width along S.W. Summerfield Drive shall not be less than 61 feat. " The proposed deed of dedication provides for a right-of-way width of 60 feet. 4. The City engineering staff has reviewed said deed of dedication legal description for S.W. Summerfield Drive and finds said description a true and accurate account of the location of S.W. Summerfield Drive as proposed in the approved Planned Development District. Staff Recommendation That the Planning Commission recommend, to the City Council, acceptance of the deed of right-of-way dedication for S.W. Summerfield Drive with the condition that the minimum right-of-way width for S.W. Summerfield Drive be 61 feet.