Planning Commission Packet - 05/21/1974 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PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and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.
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PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and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.
�`
AGENDA '
Tl'GI-1RD f�LANNING CQf'I�lI�5I0N �
Regul.ar �IeEting, P�lay 21, 1974 '
Twa.li�y �unior High Schaol--l�c�tur� room
1�E650 S.I�1. 97th Av�nue, Tic�ard, Oregon
1.p CAL.L. TO QRbEFi
2 . I�OLL CALL
3. I�f�PROVAL QF I�XNIJTES
3. 1 �lanning S�ssian of Apri1 24, 1974
R�gular �loeting of �I�y 7, 197�i•
4. MIBCELLANEOU5
G�. l Concept Pl.an Review ZC 5-72 (Summerfield)
R�quest for appcoval of �the {�hase 1. apartmant comp].ex
within the "Summerfiel:d" developm�nt. Subject site
is ].oca�;ed approximately 1Q00 f'�ei; east oP the exa.sting
��gai;�house" anr� between S,W, purham (�oad and 5.W. I,
SummorfielrJ Drive �
�
Si;aPf Findings
TeStimony
StafF Recommendation
Commission Di�cussion and Ac�tion
4. 2 5ign Code Appeal i
ti
5CA ?_-7�} (Llebber Dance 5�rudio) ;��
/1 requ::�si: by lJ�hber partce 5tudio, located at 11632 ��
S,W. Pacif'�.c Highway and adjacent the Family Driue-In �
7heatre, to vaxy a pravision of Ti.t1e l6 (T:iga�d Ihunicipal g
Code) with r�spect �t,o off-premise signs. �
Staff Findings �
TPSt,i.rnony
Staff Rec�mmendation
Cnmmission Da.scussa.on and Action
�ti. 3 Tn�.erprotation of Use
f� G-74 (Wooderd)
R r�qucst by Gea�al.d FI� lJoodard to declare Applianc�
Repair as a similar use wYthin e C-3y General Commercial
�` zonQ.
�.. _ ,
--��-_.�.--..� , ,
5tai'f Findings
�, Tas�cimony
. _..
5taff Recommencia�l-.ion
Commissa.on Di�cussion �nd Rction
_
5. SUBQIUISZONS — I�inor L�nd Partii�a.ona.ng
5m1 Stalick proper�y
Lc�ca-1,ion: ].2130 S.W, Tiedeman St,reet
(Tax �1ap 251 3A(�, `fax Lot 500) t� -
5taf`f F�inda,ngs
Testimony
5��afif Racomm�ndation '
,
Commission Da.scu�sion and Action
�. 2 T & W Cqu.ipmen�� Co, and Joe Fought �rc�per�ty '
Loc��.ion; S.W. Sandbu.rg S�tre�t, south of Toro Company
�,
(Tax (''lap 2S1 1DD, `fax La•L- 7Q0)
S�Laff Findinc�s
'Testimony
5taff Rocommenda�ion
Commission Discuss,ion �nd Action
�'' 6« OTHEF� BU5ZNE55
?o ADJOl1RNf�ENT
f�ar�e 2 �- ,�g�nda � PC — 5-21, 1974
�:`
�� , .: �.s__ „
� �
---�
' ' TIGARD pLANNING COM�IISSION
I�ay 21, 1974
Twality Junior High �chool - lecture room
�`• 14650 S.W. 97th Nvenue, Tigard, Clregerh
l. CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting Was called �to ard�r, at; 7m4�� P.�i.
2. ROLL CALL
A. Present: 6arkhurst, Her�man, I��a�ck�,�.san, Nicoli,
Sa4cata, Hens�n; Chairm�n �,h�.�taker,
staff inembers, B�ooks and p�len, and
, City A�torney, FTed A�de�����
8. Abeent: Ball and Frazier
3. APNflOVAL OF' �IINU7ES
3.1 Planning seeaion af Apri1. 1�, �.�'7G�
Regular I�eeting of I�ay "7, �.g74
A. The minutes of both mee�ir�c�� �¢�r� apprauad
as submitted. '
�
4. �1ISCELLANEOUS � �
4. 1 Concept Plan Review ZC 5-74 (Su�nm�rfield) �
Request for approval of the �hase � �partment complex
�,,.:; within the "Summerfield" deuelr�pcner�to Subject site
o existin
is located apprnximately 1000 fee�; ea.st f the g
"gatehouse" and between S�W� ���6���� Road and SeW.
Summerfield Drive.
Staff Findings �
�
A. 6rooks presented �the s�:a.�f f.i.r�d��gs rel.evant F
to this case wh?ch �.nclt�ciecl a printPd si�mmary �
of past Planni.ng Comtn:����,on car�s�.d��ation of ¢
this item. �
�
k
Staff Recommendat.�on ;
t
A. Brooks gave h.�s recomm�neia�:i,c�n f�x app�oval which �
included a list of s�.x c�rsda.f.�.c��aSQ �
,�.
�
Testimony
A. Ray Bartel, the pr�j�ct a�°chat�ct, etated his
agreement with the �t��'F �ecomt�eroda�tior� with t�he
exception that the curlas t�e F!c"1�.1.6`E`� -f3C.� yP�.�.OW for
the extent of the ma�ro tra��'�c� lanem T,n addition
he thanked th�e staffi f'o� •the c�pp�rtunity to meet
with them prior to the Plat�r�a.ng Comrna.ssion meeting
to discuss �he propased px�oj�c� �r�d �ork toward a
� solution tn the pr�ava.ora� pr�k�l.em� �i�eci by the
Planning Commission�
, ,
' ,
� ! '
� : _
,
�� . �. v:. .._.,� _ .. _.;_ .,� . �.�.� �_.
� �
.
_
.
. �. Fred Andersan queationed the �ording of the st,aff
recomm�ndation sta�ing that no paTking Wil�. be
alloWed in tfie main traFfic lane. He �aid this
�4 ; wording may lead to some diffioul�y in interpretation
at a later date and suggeated that the Wording ' be
; changed ta main roadi�ay.
� - C. Whittakes recommended that rather than refering
to the traffic lane as the main roadWay that
Wording `be added to th� condition that ha parking
be allowed as designated on exhibit ��A; and the
�, site plen be thusly marked.
D. Whittaker asked if any provision could be made to
enforce the no parking requirement.
E. Braoks said that there is no way for the oity t'o
enforce a no parking requirement on this traffic
lane. �
F. F'red Anderson sairJ that an easement could' be
requised for ,the traffic lane and the City co:uld
pass an ordinance precluding parking on the private
streets in the dovelopmsntv
G. Whittaker asked f�r, Anderson if' the Pl.anning
Commission could act with a condition of th'eir
approval tfiat such an easemsnt be gran�ted:
�-� Gommission Discussion and Action
A. Barkhurst moved to approve the submitted concept
plan accorciing �o the staff recommended conditions
amended by the staff as follows.
1. The main traffic lane as described in exhibit
"A" sha11 be a paved surface 28 feet wide,
except a't the entrances to S.We Summerfie�d
Drive where said main traffic lane 'shall be
24 feet wide for . a distance not to exceed 6D
feet from the right-of-way of S:.W. Summex�field
Drive. Access to tfie main traffic lanes f'rom
S.W. Summerfield Drive shall be over driveway ,
aprons constructed to City standards. ''j
;
2. No more than 60 apartment units may be constructed �
upon and utilize a msin �raffic lane as described ,
by exhiL�it !'A", u.nless an emergenoy acc;ess has'
been constructed to a11ow the movement of
emergehcy vehicles onto the main traffic lanes
at or neai the termini of �he main traffic
lanes as showh oh the appravecl co'ncept p1an.
� Page 2 - FC I�inu�tes - �lay 21, 1974 .
_ _ . _, ._ __ _ _ . . . . . ,.,
�::,
r
i::
� �,,
' 3. No vehicular backing movements sha'll be �`i
allowed direc�ly into the mai.n traffic f;�
lanes as desicri.bed by exhibit "A'�
G.
�-,.. 4v No parking shall occur within any portion of �',
the main �raffic l.ane as dESC�ibed by exhibit ,�
"A" and said traffic lane shall be marked with
paint and signing designating said traffic ��;�
lane as a no pa�kzng area, � �1
�,
5. That the property owner (s) dedicate to the }''
Public an emergency access easement at the ��
southerly terminus of the easterly main
traffic lanem A dedicat.ion document sha1.1 r
t-�
be submitted to the City Attorne for his �1
approval. The property own�r (s� shal.l construct �{
an emergency aacess way within said dedicated �i
emergency. access easement, said way sha11 be ','
constructeci to stand�x�ds approved by the City :
r
Public Works Departmente �
6. The property owner (s) shall. submit, to the �`
City and Cnun�y a drainage study and plan of
the subject sitee Said study and plan shall ��
be subject to the approval of the City arid ��
County Publ.i,c Works Dept� �
�
B. The motion w�s seconded by Hartmane �
�'' C. �Ir. Anderson s�ated his wish to gc� on record as
being opposed to the motion made by I�r. Barkhurst
as a point of 1.awe He stated it is quite possible
that this area will later be made into condomina.um
units and the private ownership �f individual units
will in effect circumvent the subdivision ordinances
D. Hartman moved to amend Barkhurst' s motion to include
a negative easement for the tnain traffic lane,
allowing free passage while prohibiting obstruction �
by parking along the perimeter. Hansen seconded
this motion.
E. �Iickelson asked Anderson if he was in agree�ment with
Hartman' s amendment. �
F. Anderson said yes he was, if it could provide the
city suffiGient police powHr tb ticke� parked cars.
� G. (�ickelson asked Hartmah if thxs were �he intent
of his motiono
H. Hartman said yes �.t waso ,
�:
Page 3 - PC �linutes - I"ay 21, 1974
. . �...,y . ,,,.,.. .._ . .,,,, . .... .. __,a.
_ _. _ . . _ � _
. , ..�. _. . _:. ,
.. _. . . . . _
�
,
.. ._ ... :.:. ,...,
.
'' I. Gary Reid of the Tualatin Develppment Company
stated his concern about the mechanics of
setting up the proposed easement and stated his
� objection to the City Attorney ' s statement
� that he was opposed �o the r�riginal motion as
a poin� of law.
�. Ray Bartel stated tha� no park�.ng was' indicated
on the original exhibit showi,ng �he main txaffic
lane and that no parking is the desire of the �
developero Bart�1 stated the concept itself, '
which inoludes parking bays will ineffect prevent �
on-street parkings
�
K. �oe Greulich of the Tualatin Rural Fire P�TOt�ction
District, suggested that the traffic lanes be
named and the units be numbered according to the
metropolitan num6ering system to facilita�e the �
Fire District loca�ing a premise during an �
emergency. �
L. The Planning Commission voted on Hartman' s motion
for amendment' and it passed by majority vote �
with Barkhurst voting �o. �
�
� � ' � � �
I�, The Commission then voted on Barkhurst' s motion �
and it passed by a rnajority vnte of the memE'bers �I
present. "
��;,,�'
N. Following the Planning Commission' s action, Joe �
Greulich asked to be recognized and asked the
Planning Commission if �hey weren' t taking a
step backward .by al.lowi.ng a 28 foot access drive
to serv�e 5U00 square foot 2 story buildings. ,
0. Whittaker replied thidt the area in question is �
part of a planned development where age restriction
have been imposede This is therefore a u'nique �
circumstance and the Plann�ing Commission is not
hereby establishing a precedence for all. mUlti- �
family development W1�hlh the Gi.ty of Tigard. ,
. r�
4. 2 Sign Code Appeal �
SCA 2-74 (Webber Dance Studio)
A request by Webber Dance Studio, located 1163� SoW.
Pacific Highway and adjacent the family drive-in
theatre, to uary a provision of ta.tle 16 (Tigard
I�unicipal Cocle) with respec� to off-�premise signs.
' : �
,
�
�. � � ����
Page 4 - PC f�inutes - �tay 21, 1974 �
,
i� , , �;. ;, ...:. .w_;
Staff findings
Am Brooks presented the selevant s�aff findings
�, and showed sliaes which dep�cted the planned
sign location as well as su�rouhding signs,
buildings, �nd access ��iveso
B. Gary Reddeway, the p�oject a�chi�ect, presented
the proposal and asked that the m�nimum clearance
below the sign be reduced from 10 feet to 7 feeta
C. Brooks sa.id that the Zoning Or�inance requir�d vision
clearance 20 �ee� back fr�m i�tersections foT a
distance above the gr.ound f�om 3 to 10 feet and
the request for a sign at 7 feet would require
a variance applicationm
Commission Discussion and Action �
A. Hansen moved t� al1oW the sign as permitted provided
• , it meets the v�sion clearance requirements of the
�`• •_ zoning ordinance and based upon the finding that
. the applicant has proven a need for his business
� to have a sign in an easement adjacent Pacific.
Hig�hWay and by s� doing the public safety will
not be jeopardized and the s�gn wi11 in fact be
in the puh].ic in�erps� by identifyi�g this business
and eliminate cnnfusian for traff�c seeking its
location on the highwaym
�-
B. Sakata seconded the motion and it was passed by
a �un�nimousvote of '�he commission present.
4. 3 Interpretation of Use �
�1 6-74 (Woodard) ,
A request by Gerald No Woodard to declare Appliance �
Repa�r as a sima.lar use within a C-3, General Commercial
Zone .
Staff Findings
A. Brooks presented the staff findings •releuant
to this case.
testimony
A. Oerald Woodard spoke zn favor of the request. saying
that it was his intent to operate from a s�tructure
behind the Art Center West on �lain _�treet for only
a short perind of �imeo In addita�coh, he said
that parking has been made avail,adle by the property
owner.
�
. Page 5 - PC �lihutes - may 21, 1974
.-�.. .___,_ _ ,
, ` 8taff Recommendation
A. Brooks recommended that the Planning Commission
declare appliance repair similar to automotive
� repair as al],owed in the C-3, Gehoral Commercial
and �I-3, Light: Industrial zones. Thus, appliance
repaira should be a conditional. use within a
C-3, General Commarcial zone and a permitted use
within an �I-3, Light Industrial zone.
Commission Discussion and Action
Am Hartman moved to approve the request according to
the staff recommendationv I�ickelson seconded and
the motion passed by unanimous vote of the members
present.
5. SUBDIUISIONS - (�inor Land Partitioning
5.1 Stalick Property
Locationo 12130 SaWe Tiedeman Street
(Tax (�ap 2S1 3AA, Tax Lot 500)
Staff Findings •
A. Brooks presented the staff findings relevant to
this case.
r Staff Recommendatinn
\._
A. Brooks reoommendod approval of the a�plicants
request subject to three conditions.
Testimony
A,a� Roger Stalick, the applicant, was present and
asked the Planning Commission what the non-remonstrance
LID agreement as recommended by staff entailed.
Bo 'Whittaker explained the'-non-remonstrance LID
agreementa
Cm Stalick asked if there would be any compensation
for existing large trees which would be removed
by widening of Tiedeman.
D. Brooks replied pr�bably not,
E. Anderson suggested that rather than requiring a
10 foot easement rot�d-way to serve the �ear lot
that the rear lot should have fee title nwhership
�
,
� Pdge 6 - PC I�in�utes - �lay 21, 1974
�..
��
axtending to �h� "fi�daman r�.ght�,-of-waya Ha
a1,so su�gas�ed tha� �ha,� be wa�cd�d �unn3�ng a�
��,gh� anq,�,es �';ram �he et�aa� �a au�o�,d n�ck�n�
�he wa,d�h dawn a,� � d�;et;�nc�a ��am �t�eat r�,ght-
c�f-Waya
D, S�a7�a,ck �ai,d �he b�nk h�e�,� ��1�ased �ha �aa� ,�o�
f�om �h� mo����ge ancJ �u��e�°�ec� �ha� �,� ms�y be
d,i,FP�,au�,� �o haue !�h,�,� add�,�.�Are�:� �,0 �'o4t , ����,p
relaa��ad�
G. I�r. qnd���an a��,d �h�,� �,� �houl,d no� ba d�.f��.cu�.t
�o exAau�� �h�,a �dd�.�,�on�� �e,�eea� �'ram �h�
mor�gage, bUt �,P �he b�nk wou�d nat ���L�aa�a �hie
10 foat a�tac�ip he �ugge���d an �aaaemen� be �equ��ad
as propo�ed by �he et;s;fPo
Commiesian D.�acuae�on �nd Ac�i�on `
A. Barkhua�st mov�d t� ap���va �h� �equest baeed
upon �t�ff f.x,nd.inge �nd �,cco�d�,ng �o the s�aff
renr�mmAnda�.�,on with th� ch�nges suggest9r� by
the City atto�ney:
�� 1. The property oy�ner (s) sha11 dedicate an
easement to the public for road at�d utility
� purposes a strip of land ad,jacerit and parallel
the eastern right�of=�ay line of SoWm T� edeman
Street 10 feet wide at the southern boundary
of the subject pxoper�y widening to 20 feet
wide at the northerly boundary of tf�e subject
propertym
2. The prnperty owner (s) shall agree to par�icipate
in a ,1oca1 impravement district fnr the purpose ;
of constructing SvW� Tiedeman Street to City �I
collector street standards and shall. �xecute
a recordable covenant running wi.th the land. �
3o Parcel "B'� sha11 have a minimum teh foot wide '
fee title access way from SsWe T�.edeman Street
adjacent, parallel and northerl.y of the south
property line of P�,rcel "A" as described by
exhibit ��A�� of the applicant' � submis�i.on.
Said fee title access ��y shall be made a �
par� of Pascel ��8��. � ��
Be Hartman secanded Barkhu:rst's mo�ion and �� p�ssea
by unan�.moe�s v�te of the members present.
�'
502 T & W Equipment Coa and Joe F'ought Property
Locationm SatJO Sandbu�g Street, south of Toro Company ��
(Tax. I�ap 251 ,�DD, taX lot 700)
;I�
Page 7 - PC I�inut`es - �lay 21, 1974 i
. . _. .
�.� -.- , . .. . ..- ,. ,-i
,. . _.
, � Sbaff Fa�ndings
A: Brooks_ presented the staff fs,ndings relevant to
this caseo
�<..:
Testimony
A. Representatives� of' '�he applicant were present
concerning this mattero
Staff Recommendation
�
A. Brooks, receommended approval of the I�inar Land �j
ested b the ro ert oWner. `'
partitiohing as requ y p p y 5
��
CommiSSion Discussion and Actz.on �
��
Ao Hansen moved that the (�inor Land Partitioning be �;
�pproved according to the staff findzngse �;
��
� �� � � � � ��,��
B, 5akata se�or,ded and �he motion passed i�y a ,�.
unani.mous vote of tfne memtaers present. }�
!;,
5. ADJOURN'�IENT � �;
�
�;
1:-
�
�
�
�
r
�
i.
�
_ G
t
�
f
!
�
Page 8 — PC i�inutes — I�ay 21, .�974 �
�� i
_. .�.,., ..�. -, „. .,.:, . ._.
„ ,
� ''
<. �„ �
�.,
��
TIGAI�D PLI;NNTNG C01`�f�'lIS5TON
St�f�' I��pnrt
P9a y 2]., �,�7�a.
t�gerida Tt�m 4. 1
ZL" 5-7?_ (�iamm�rfie�,dj
C�ncept P:Lan Revi�w
�'or phase ona apar�tment complex within t,he "Summe�fi�7_cJ"
dev`1o�men�.. Su6jec�L si.�e locat�d ��proxima�tely 1000
�e�i� eas�: of the Exi�ting rrgatehause�' �nd b��ween S�W.
Durham Raad and S.1,1. SummerPield Drive�
A p�i c a__A___n�:
f�ay Sartel �or �he Tualatin Devel.opment Company '
i
(��,pp�.ican�.' s_ C,e�cues� I
- �
R�va.ew and approval of xevised concept plan, inc�uding �
approval ofi clensity, traffic circul�tion pa�L�cern,
drivow�y widths and parking ra'Lion so the appl.�cant
�;, m�.y �aroc��d with wor!<inc� drawing and fulfill canditions
plac�d u�on '�he "Summerfield" Pl�nneci Developm�ni zone
ch�nc�aa
Si;afF Findinrr�ss
1� For historic�l perspective, please nate ,�t�tachod l
stiaPf r�ports �nd minu�.os of' the fo1.J.owi.ng mee•k.ing: �,
�
° Apri.l 2, 1974� �'
�
2. fihis itom was t�bled at �he Pl�nning Commission,
April 2, 197�� rQgul�r m�eting `�o �'al.law pa�pvision a�
additional information °rorn the fixe m��rsh�J.l end
to allow the s�;aff t� fu�t-hez� reseaz�ch �he n��d �F'or
pav�ment wid�:h minimums.
3. The staff' Ihas met on two occassions wi�h r�presen�tata,v��
oi' the Tualatin Devel.opm�n� Co. �nd tho 7ualatin Fire
(�is�Lxic�: to di.scuss the adequacy of emexg�ncy access
�nd the adequacy af proposed �cc�ss dr�.u�s.
/� mee�ing was also held i�ith �he Ca,�y Fl�,tarney to ci�termi.n�
� if � ma jor part�.ta.oning w�s occuring. Af-t�r. c�ns�,der�l�l.e
discussic�n, i� was de�ermine� th�t i;h� �rUject da�s no�
� presentJ,y con��i•tute a ma jc�r partitioning. As the prn ject
�.� not a ma jor part.i,tioninc�, tho access and c�c�rass
s�L�ndarrJs of �he �oi7inc�. cod� ap{��.y un�.�ss, in this' ca��, .
othex �tandarcis a�� sp�ciPa.ca�,.�Y ���xovecl t�y �Lhe F��anning
Comrtiiss�.on. pleas� s�e attached acc�ss ancl ec�r�s� stand�rr�'s,
,<�
� ,�
°�
_—.-,-.--,.� , - .
,. , > :.: . � .
., , , � .w . .., ,.;. . � ,
..
, .. : .._- .. . . .. .. :..:. � .. .
��. ....
,. �x � .
�.. {
� .. b . . � � . . .
S�affi Rocomm�nd�tion
Af�ter considera�le tl��ught and cnnsid�ra�L-ion, i:aki,ng ini�o
�,.; accau�t the standards o�' �Lho zanii�g ordinaiic�, �he safe'L-y
af' �:he �ub jeat pro j�c-�'s �Futuz�e residents and discussion
with �he Fir� {�arshall ahd re�resentati�ies ai= �hc Tuala�tir
Develc�pment Cn. , •the staff r.espec�fully recomm�ds the
dp��]..icarit's submitted conce�t pl�n I�F app.ro�r�d sub j�ct
to the satisfactian of Po17.owing described conc�itions :
1. �'he mai.n trafific lan�s sha1,1 be a peved surfaco
20 f aet wi�ie, excep�; at the entrances �o S.W.
Sum�te�fiald Clri.v� wherE s�id m�in traffic 7_ane sha1.1
be 24 f�et wide �'ar a dis'tance not to �xcead 60
fee�: from the right-of-way of 5��.1. Summerfield Dx�iue.
l�cc�ss ta the main traffic lanes from S«W. 5ummex�Fz.eld
Drive sha11 be over driveway aprons constructed to
Ci-Gy s�andaxrls.
2. �lo rnore �Lh�n 6� apartmen�t units may be cons�ruc�ed
upon and uti,lize a main �ra�fic l�ne as shawn an the
app�coved cor�ce�t plan, unless an em�rg�ncy access
has been cons�.ruc�ed to a1,1ow the movement o� emergency
vehicJ.es on�;o -L•he main �traf'�ic l,anes at ar near
the �:ermini nf the main t�af�Fic lanes �s cho��n on
the approveci aoncept �].an.
3. Pdo vehicular backa,ng mnvements sh�11 be aiioW�d
� ciiaec�tly in�o the main trafPic lanas, e;tcep�t in the
�t;nrmini area of each main traffic 7.ane.
4. No parking sh�ll occur within ai�ty por�ion af •L-he
mair� �raffic lane �nc� sa9.rJ �;raffic tane sh�ll be
marked wi�L-fi paint �nd signinc� d�signating said
•traffia lane as a nti patil<ing area.
5. Tha�; the pxoperi�y awner (s) cl�dicate to �he (�ub�.ic
�n �:m�rg�r�cy access Eas�menL at th� southerl,y
�orrninus oi' �I�� eas�l;erl.y maiii �ra�'fic lane. A �
dedicat:ion docurn�n�L shr�l�, b� sul�rna.tted �o �.he Cit
Attorney For his a�prova�.. The property o�rner (s� 1
sha�.1, construc�� �n einerg�ncy access way wi�;hin
said dQda.ca�:�d emcrgency acc�ss easeme�t, said way
sha].l be. cons�rUcteci �o s��ndazds approved 6y the
Ci�y f�uhlic tJarks Depar�ment,
6. The p�oper��y awner (sj shaJ.1 �ubmi�;, �o the City and
County a drainage study and p].an o� the �ubj�c�
sa.tc;. 5aid study and p1.an sha1.1. �e sub jecL to the I
ap�rov�1. of `the Ca.ty and Caunty pub7,ic lJorl<s D�p�t.
.
,
,I
� Page 2 - 5t�ff Repar� - PC - (Summerf�.e.lr�) a-21-?G.
f ^
. � p �1 . :1,� . . ..
I
� ��u � �) (b) VPtiicular access and egress fo� ifamily resi- II
,� dential uses shall not be less than the (.� �:�ing: '
MINIMUM
DWELLING NUMBER MINIMUM bi.i ��..1NI PAVEMEN'1'
UNITS REQUIRED WIDTH 4. �7ALKS ETC.
�
3-19 l . 30 ft. . � : cl surface �
�ament over
� `�' °, of required
;s.� ���:�ss width; no
• �,'�, ias or side-
� w•:� �l:s required.
20-�49 1 ' 40 ft. 1�,� : d surface �
, �.�; >��rner►t over
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �::, : of required
� ����ss width; no
' i. ,r i.�s or side-
' or 2 ' 30 f t. .� , ;i;s require�.
50-100 1 50 ft. i,., � �t surface
}- ° �'s.�ment 36 feet
� L•. ''r.:; curbs re-
- c,a�.� ; ;��d; side�-
c��.' ;iRs not required.
(�� ,� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e > . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
" or 2 40 ft. 1`���rri�surface
i.>:3tYt-�ment 32 feet
t•r.� �,i.��; no curbs
r ��ac.��i�.red; side-
� +hr�x I_i;� not required.
over 100 as required as required c�s a-�quired bX
by planning by planning pJ.�r►ning commis-
commissian commission sit��ri,
(Ord. 70-32 §200-2, 1970) .
18. 64.030 Minimum reauirements--Commps-r:::i.�l and indus-
trial uses. Vehicular access and egress :E������ commercial and
industrial uses shall not be less than th�� �c�1,�.owing: .
REQLTIRED MINIMUM
PARKING NUMBER MINIMUM MtN1'Nit;tM PAVEMENT
SPACES REQUTRED WIDTH S:1DI�aWALKS ETC .
, 1�99 1 30 ft. hard surface
' - �avernent over
8U� o£ requir�d
acc�ss width;
� na aurbs required;
�.`� �1 .
�� . � •
302
,
e. That the greenway dedicat�on 1i�.e be defi�� '�e li.ne st�own on
�` ' tt�e submitted site pl.�n adjacent Fanno CsE i:.his land be
�� � dedicated to the publice
f, That the portion of �he site Lc�cated in t.l�; , �ta�ay be reCuxned to fts �
natural gradee ti:
Fraz3ex seconded and the motion passed hy u�az�i.�=� vata of tk�e members �'.
present,
��
'1
10.2 Concept Plan Review - 2C 5-72 (Summexfieid.) `I
�i
Reques t for approval of tihe phase 1 apar t�n�xa L � �� �r tioi thin the "Sun�ner- �l
field" development, Subject site locatsd ap�� � ' :ly 1000 f�eet eas� of the '
existing 'ga�tehouse' $nd between SW Durt�.am Rc��.�� � �� '��1 Summerfield Dri�e4 p�
i.
A. , Staff k'indings il
� � � � � � C'i
F:;
1. Brooks presented the sta£f findings relev��+� ' � �1,�,s casee �I
,;
B. Staff Recommendation '�
'�
1. Staff recomm.ended tabling agenda itecn to �aJ �:��: rk�e applicant suftici�nt `{
t3me to revise tka� subject concept p].an tc� i��- ��ac�l.e the foll.c,wings ;;�
� a. A loop traffic circulation sy��st�m9 al��_�,�a�J���E; Graff3c to en�.er fihe sit� ����,
from S.W. Summerfield Drive and circea�,+zi 4� s i�.r.ough the entire site S..
�_ on the "Main TraffiG I,anes'', �r
� r�
b, No backing movements shall be 8�,i�Wea ��ri�:.rx t 1ie "Main Tra£f ic Lanes�', C:�!
r
,��
Form�]. approvul of the concepe pla:n should l�e r=��(a�ject to the following �j
eonditiono
�,,
� ,,;
That the applicant submit, with �he �et��.a.�:c3 site development plan� �.;
. a drainage study and plan acceptable to rk1� City and Washington i::
� County Public Works Departments. F�
Y����
C. Commission Discussion a�d Action °�
i,.'
. t,i
1. Chairman Whittaker askEd the project archit�c�:.� �tay Bartel, to present �:
� the proposed changes to the Cotrrcnission, '�'
2. Mr. Ba�,�el pointed out the changes based upon t�k�e Tualatin Developmea�t
��y'
G�x�ao�C�.�ion's inability to retain a parcel vi ����d on Durham Road. 1
.� �;
�3. Ball said that he would abstain from deliberata,x�� on this i:tem, �'!
. , ,,... _ '��
4. Frazier moved to table the 3.tem accarding to �:he staff recommend.ation
to allow provision af additf:onal infoxmat�.nn �rom'.t;he fire marshall �::
and to allow the st�£f to further research the a�eed for pavement "`•
width minimums as required by th� Tigard M�xlia.cipal Gode, �:.
F�.�:,. 4'�'
5. Nicoli seconded, and the motion pasaed by major�.ty vete with Bax�ithurst �,.
voting NAY. ,�i
M
:,,;?;
PAGL 10 - GQ!�lISSION MINUTES • APRIL 2� 1974 , , k'
�;.
�
� , ,
. . ,�..
. , . . �
n
tt�ril 2, 1974
Agenda Item No. 10.2
i ZC 5-72 (Summerfield) ,
�'
? Concept Plan Review �
� I � �
� FoX phase one apartment complex within the "Summe•c; � �:�velopment. Subject
� site located approximately 1000 feet east of the e.?- , '�;�tehouse' and .
' between S.W. Durham Road an�d S.W. S�mmerfield Driv��
� ApPlicant
i Ray Bartel for the Tualatin Development Cornpany,
'� �plic�nt's Request
i Review and approval of revisec� concept plan, inclu�i� �,roval• of density,
� traffic circulation pattern, drivewaY widths �and pa7 � ��, x�z�tio so the applicant
� may proceed with working drawings "and fulfill the c:crr�s��.t ir,xis placed upon the
"Summerfield" Planned Development zone change. (See Hct��t.l•ied October 2, 1973
staf£ report).
Staff Fi.ndings
1. On October 2, 1973, the Planning Commission actecl tc.7 ��pprove the
original concept plan for Phase 1 "Summerfield" apartr��r�r��5. (See attaehed �
`'' staff report & minutes of October 2, 1973 meeting).
� �, 2. The applicant�s current concept plan should be cc�r�seti��red a new request
� � for approval.
�'� . .
• . 3. The applicant's proposal incl.udes all of Phase L �n�:3. ra portion of Phase
2 �apartment development as shown in exhibit "D" of ti��E=. A'�G District appraval.
��.�
' 4. The lake indicated in said exhibit "D" has been eL3.rnir�ated in �the applicant's
:{ proposal. �
I '
�
, 5. Density - The �roposed density of 14.3 dwelling uni�s per acre con£orms • �
with previous information submitted to the Planning Gonun:�5sion as part of the
: � General Development Plan and Program. i
� 6. The City Engit►sering staff and the Tualatin Rural i�ire District are currently l
� reviewing the subject concept p1an. Their comments �r��a.l. la� availabls �on April '
I, 2, 1974. ;
1 '
� 7. Circulation & Driveway Widths - The proposed dev��lQprncrit contains 160 units �
with a potential of housing 400 persons at 2.5 persons E�f�r. unit. 104 units
� and 260 persons will be located on the easterly access clrive, an 820 £oot
�� cul-de-sac. SecCion 17.28.110 of Tfgard's SuUdivision Orclinance states "a ;
cul-de-sac shall be as short as possible and in no event shall be more than 600 !
feet long." �
l
� � The "Main Traffic Lanes" described for major access inko the subjeet un3.ts are E
�' proposed for 34-27 foot paved widths with no parking. T}re City cannot enforce �
! parking requirements on private property, Access to the subject units will be
; via private dri,veways. The City requires e 34 foot paving width in a standerd �
s�.ngl.e family subdivision, wiCh parking allowed on both sides� �
, €
, ,
. {
�
� ' • . �
.� �¢ �_ra� ,..x ,�.r.ror. n��c ar. .i��:.. . .�� . .-... . ...-,, „�.e•wwu, ai.,+7�ec- r.ecr,.�rr .n+.: a,i �.�s ,:ns.c,:�,. anuf�.,ve.�tnr m��..,+,�:,..�i. . ,'�.� , .�..��:{
� �� .n tJo. iU.l . .
� More fle�cible access is necessary for emergency veti r� adequately
, �erve Che subject site's populati�n. �
;�� '
'; $. Parking Rat3o - The applicant proposes 2.2 par? �res per dwelling
� unit. This is well above most pa�king standards f� �Mfamily units & will
� provide adequate off-street parking. The City's s' �'or A-2, Multi-Family
! development is 1.5 park3ng spaces per dwelling un�! '
i 9. The project shall be developed 3n accord�lnce w; 5�andard unles.s
' otherwise appraved on a spec3fic slte plan by the k'• . {���i�:xb Commissian. ,
1 ,
� ° The proposed apartments wiLl be coristructed t� 4G�r� TMi�r►dards provided
by Fixe Zone 2. �
�
; .,,,
� ° 8�ction 18.24.040', Tigard Municipal Code, reads "�al:rtn buildings are grouped
� as one project on one �ract of land, rhe rni�����z����� =liskance between
; two buildings at any given point shall not be 1f: � ' '�.,n the sum oE the
' i required side yards connpwted separately fo•r eac.�� �� <.li.ng at that poi�nt. '
! 'There are several points on the proposed site t�' � ��ak do not meet
I , ' this criteria.
I �y
10. Drainage - Washington County is concerned about :. �r: ���? drainage as related ��
; to the carrying of storm water southerly from �he sul,�: c:G. site across Durham �
' Road. They cite the need for a drainage study ancl kaik��r ta deal with storm �
drainage from the subject site.
f Staff Recammendation
`�.
Tabling agenda item to allaw the applicant sufficient: t."s�r�e to revise the
sub,ject cancept plan to include the following: ; �
1. A loop tiraffic circulation system, allowing traffic ta enter the site
from S.W. Summerfield Drive and circulate throug]1 tt�e entire site on Che
' "Main Traffic Lanes". '
�,� ,
�
j 2. No backing movements shell be allowed o�to the "Main Txaffic Lattes".
F`ormal, approval of the concept plan should be sub�e�k �o Che following condi ti.on s
'Chat the applicant submit, with the detailed� site development plan, a
drainage study and plan acceptable to the City end W�a�ington County Public
Works Departments.
� i � �
� �
',� .
_i � ' ' �� �
.
� � . _
�4 � � � � � � � � � � � �
� _
, . �,t.,,. . . . ..�
.. i. _„�„ � ... . „�.yu. .� . .,.� ... ,..1 ., �..�.:xa+r.d�rw:.,..e,a�. ,.. ._.. .:�....�. .,.....,.«�.wr�-,ea.«,.. .,..e,..:y-m . ......:.
t=i" ,
, . . ..'.. ,�... . . , yt ... , ., �.,. . .. . , . . , _.� ' .:�' ''�'�`�f�.�..._'�➢
., ., „ .. � >. ,., .::
_ _ . ,. _..:
�.'.
TIGARD PLANNING Cb�1�lISS1ON
StaFf Report •'
h1ay 21, 1974 ,
, Agenda Item 4. 3
, �I G-74 (Woodard) '
;,Interprstation oP Use
A request by Gerald I�. Woodard to dec'.1n��� ' ;��:�plianco
Repair�� a permitted use in a C-3, Gene��.;� � �`!�mrnercial zone. '
! 5taff Findinqs
1. Section 18.28.010 Permitted U:�es ('1 ' � a I�Iunicipal Cade)
in the C-3 zone, subsection 2 cJQ, � �,.�� "Appliance
' Store (incidential. repairs only)�� �+ :�armitted uso. -
No other reference is made in the ! •- �I Zoning CJrdinance ;
to appliance repair. `
' 2. The conditional use section �f th� i: �� ��ne and the
� permitted use section of the �i-3 zr.,+��� a����ritipn
�' "automobile repairs�'
3. Section 18.12. 03Q Authorizatian oF ::� � +i .l.ar Uses, states
"The planning Commission may rule i;i� � ' r� use, not
speca.Pically named in the allnwed �i�=t < <af' a zone,
shall be included among the a11c�W�c:i �i ��:�; if the use
• is of the same genoral type and is �i� � l.�r to the
allowed uses. However, this sectinr, ���t;:�s r�ot
authorize the inclusion of e use sp�+{�. � t' i.Ually listed
in another zone. ��
Staff Recommendation
The Planning Commission should decl.�re P1r:.��E7liaroce Re�air" �
similar to ��Automotive Repair" ss a11.a��E�c1 .i n the C-3, �
GQneral Commercial and I�-3, Light Indus ti.+ r�.l. zones. This, !
"Appliance Ftepair" should be a conditio���� i �ase within a 1
C-3, General Commerical Zone and a perrna Li;c�ci use within �
the (�-3, General Indus�sial zone. �
�
{
e
� . �
; s , �
: �
� �
,,��;
'� �
� '
A, � .. � � . '�
�
�( ... � � �-M4e� 1nre,x.'v'r• r7"' v, r . � M :�:�
.,. .. .,. �u .,h�:�w..o....0 r �t ��.� . � �» • .
. ... .� . -� �. , ..«�r ,.r.�. . v
. .. . � . . : .�,. si, j
.� . . � ,._: ..... .......:
��i
TIGl�RD PLANNING COm�1ISSIQN
� Staff Report .
�...
�lay 2T, 1974
Agenda Item 5. 1
(�Lp 2-74 (S�alick Property)
' �linor Land Partitioning
For prnper�y located at 12130 S.W. Tie�1�}r,� ,�, ,�reet
.
Tax �1a 2S1 3A1�, Tax Lot 5Q0)
;
�
P
Staf f F'indings
1. Tho a�plicant prnpnses to spl�.t �x5.:>�� � i�rJ 1'ax
Lot 500 into 2 lots. An exis�:inc� s�i r���� ;? Pamily
residence wi11 remain on the parcal. � � ���i�ing -
; on S.IJ. Tiedeman. The applicant E�cF�� ���� to
; con5truct a single family rosirJencr, � + f�e
newly created parcel.
2. Aacess to the new7.y createc� 1c��; is �� � � •��;.�ed
vi� a ten foot easement from S.I.J. i ���tlri.
The applicant proposes to run t,�atcr �.?lectrical
. util.ity lines in said ten f'oot eaGE��� l:c� the
41 newly created lot. The applicant �� � ��s acca�s
� , � to an existing sewer wi�hin the C.la�c�� �:Le Subdivi�ion
to the south by utilizing oxisting �.�� � � ik;y easements
� within said subdivision. The app��.�: '��!� f�.roposes a
( ` 5 f'oot utility easement along the sc�!i �.tir��:ly boundary
� of the newly crea�ed parcel. A1.1 r��r:c1C,;��ry public
u�il�ities are available to the subj�r,i; siGe.
�, `i 3. S.W. Tiedeman currQntly has a �t0 Poo�; r. ight-of-way ,
' ; adjacent the subject site, where 60 Pon� is necessary.
S.W. Tiedeman is declared a city co11�r:Lor streEt
with a minimum 60 faot right-of-way wirJ�l°� standard.
In addition a hazardaus curve exi'st� c�n S.W. Tiedeman
immediaLely north of the subjec�. propcLty that
requizes additional right-of-way Por a�r�.ightening.
Improvement of this curUe will incr�7�� �the northerly
site distance from the subject site, �:I��u� creating
� saFer access and ogsess to and from- �I•i�� subjec�
site. There is .a future need to imp��c�vr-� S.W. 7iedeman
'.� Street tb City collector Street star��:J��,cis.
, .
' � 5: The sit� is designated Lirban Low Dens.i,�L•y Residential
� on the Ti�ard Community Plan and is zar�eci f�-7,
� Single, Family R�sidontial. The creat�cl lots wi1.1
exceed the minimum lo{; size requiremeni;s oP the
� R-7 zane and the proposed dev�lopmen� conforms to
; : �he Tiqa�rd, Community plan and exista.ng xaning.
;�.
i
�
;
4`.:.. . . . � .. . . . . . ' . .. . .�:. �. .. ,. ..� . .;
•
_ _ __, _ __ _ _ _ _. i�
i
I
S�aff Recommendation I
�.�, A�proval of the applicants reque�t to � �wo parcols
of existing Tax Lot 5D0, Tax �lap 2S1 31. � d a�proval
subject to the applicant satisfying th� +wing condii:ions
�rior to issuance of buildir�g permits c��> = subject property.
' 1. The property owner (s) �ha11 d�dicF� r easement to
'�� the public for road and utility pur:, • : o strip
� oP land ad jacent and para11Q1 {:he c:� ' i r� right-of-
' way line of S.W. Tiedeman 5troe•L J.CI � f-�:,i; wide at i:he
� southern boundary of the sul�ject pl•r.�;,�.�� {;y widoning
� to 20 feet wide at the norther. ly br�r��„i-,,,y of tFie
subject property.
' ' 2. The property owner (s) sha11 agreo tn F!�7rticipate in
� a local improvement district f'or �;hc; �,�_�L�pose of
` ' constructing S.W. Tie�lem�n 5�r��t �L-r� �.i.i;y callec�tor
� ! street standards and sha1l executa a r�F�c:n�dabla
� covenant running with the land.
;
3. The proper�y owner (s) shall submit i"r�r• approval of
the City Attorney easement documentc� itr�r;essary,• �o
create a 10 foot wide pernetual ����c�zrr!r�r�� for access '
and utility Purposes to parce]. ��8" ;,:; ��roposed by �hr�
' property owner (s) and that the pro��+ t ; ,� owner (s) �
� also submit for approval of tt�ie Ci,�y llt,l;orney
�,, a 5 foot wide perpetual easement For. ul-.il� ty purposes
ad jacent and parallel the southern L,c���r�cl�ry, of. .,parcel
. "Qt' as proposed by the applicant. Su�,f� approved �
; nasement documents shall be then reru��c,ic�d wi�h
the County Recorder of lJashingtnn Cu�.in�y and proaf
. furnished bfi auoh recording.
' ' �
I` � '
i
����� � �
• ,
, �
;
;
;
' �
Pag� 2 - Staff Report - PC - Stalick Property ,
���
� � ,
f;
,
.�..... . ,..x:_,.,�k[ ..�...m4��lr�fc�n ,...tui. .�Wa�a-s-�.�.��M. .C�...��:� . �i. ....�� ..�..--h,t�T.�li th.. ,w.:�:. : ... . � , a vrl�
�.l . ' .. . -., ..... .... . . .•.n.. .. � . � . . . .��
...... . . .L,.Li .��w:�..
_ , ,.
� �:.. ?TGARD PLANNINC CO(�I�ISBION
StafF Report
�Iay 2�,, 1974
Agenda Item 5.2 ,
�ILP 3�74 (T.&W. Equipment Co. and Jos: Fougl•�t. '>
I�inos L�nd Partitionang
For px4perty located on S.W. Sandburg �� � ����1, i
immediately south of Oregon Torn Dist��.t,��� :-,r. s
. Company (Tax �lap 2S]. 1DD, Portion of Tr�.^� � +��: ?00)
Sta�f F3.ndinqs
._r_..____
1. All necessary pi�blic utility a.mprn�r�•+�� ���l.s axe
available to the subject site.
2. Access is available to �he subject via
S.W. San�dburg Street, said street ci� � ' � ��Led to �he
public and canstructed �o City st�i���. �1�:�.
'�. The subject site is designated GenE�� � �;ndustrial
by the Tigard Community Plan and ' is r��d I�-2,
�. General Industrial. The proposed �_i •E� s ��ublishing,
� and distributors, conforms to the ��� � <and
standards desczibed within �he 1�-2q <<�:•��r�ral
Industrial seotion of the Tigard (�I�.+�� � � � ���a7. Code.
5taff Recommendation
Approval af the minos Land Partitianing �s �ceques�ed
by the proper�y owner (s) .
�
, .
_.._ .
_ . .�_. . _, _ ., �_- _ _ __ .,, . ,::..t...__-�.: .>,�.u