Loading...
Planning Commission Packet - 12/17/1974 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. AGENDA TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION - Regular Meeting, December 16, 1974 Twality Junior High School - Lecture Room 14650 S. W. 97th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon • 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 3.1 Meeting of November 19, 1974 4. PUBLIC HEARING - Zone Change 4.1 ZC 11-74 (NPO #1 Rezoning) A request by the City of Tigard to change the zones on certain properties located within the boundaries of NPO Plan #1 for the Ash Avenue-Downtown area. This Plan affects the area bounded by Pacific Highway, Hall Boulevard and McDonald Street. The pur- pose is to bring the zoning map for this portion of the City into conformance with the land use designations stipulated on the NPO #1 Plan as adopted by the City Council on May 20, 1974. 4.2 ZOA 7-74 (Highway Commercial Zone, H-C) A request by the City of Tigard to amend the zoning ordinance Title 18 of the Municipal Code, to include a highway commercial zone as proposed by NPO Plan #1. This zone is intended for land which the Plan views as most appropriately situated for commercial development serving primarily highway traffic. 5. OTHER BUSINESS 6. ADJOURNMENT Y MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION ( December 17, 1974 Twality Junior High School - lecture room 14650 S. W. 97th Ave. , Tigard, Oregon 1. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL A. All members were present; Planner Bolen and City Attorney Anderson 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. The minutes of the November 19, 1974, meeting were approved as submitted. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - Zone Change 4.1 ZC11-74 (NPO #1 Rezoning) A request by the City of Tigard to change the zones on certain properties located within the boundaries of NPO #1 Plan for the Ash Avenue-Downtown area. This Plan affects the area bounded by Pacific Highway, Hall Boulevard and McDonald Street. The purpose is to bring the zoning map for this portion of the City into con- formance with the land use designations stipulated on the NPO #1 Plan as adopted by the City Council on May 20, 1974. A. Staff Findings 1. Bolen presented the staff findings by summarizing the adopted NPO #1 Plan and explaining the reasons presented in the Plan for the proposed zone changes. B. Testimony and Cross Examination 1. The Chairman read a letter addressed to the Commission from Don Feller of S. W. Frewing St. , an NPO #1 member asking the commission to act favorably upon the zone changes proposed by the NPO #1 Plan. 2. John Johnson, from Randall Construction, said that he was not sure at this time whether he was an opponent or proponent as he did not ful :y understand the impli- cations of the zone change upon his property. 3. Mrs. Ellis, a property owner on the frontage road portion of Pacific Highway, stated, that she and her husband were in agreement with the proposed rezoning. 4. Mr. Van Camp of Air King Mfg. spoke against the proposed rezoning stating that it would cause a hardship on his business. 5. Craig Eagleson of Farm Craft, Inc. , located on Commercial St. , said that he felt railroad industrial property is needed and that the industrial zoning should therefore remain on the property. 6. Joanne Corliss of Tigard Machine said that her company preferred that the existing zoning remain. 7. Mr. Buccholz, speaking for his mother Franz Bucholz, asked if the adopted plan still proposed a road connection between Ash Avenue and Pacific Avenue. Bolen stated that this road was not included in the final adopted Plan. 8. Fred Olson, a resident living on the frontage road portion of Pacific Highway, stated his opposition to the re- zoning saying that there is no need for the proposed recessed frontage road as traffic is no problem. He also stated the following: existing frontage road would work similarly to the frontage road at Canterbury Shopping Center and there are water and gas lines buried along the existing frontage road right-of-way which would have to be moved if a new frontage road were to go in. The rezoning conflicts with his plan for selling his property for his retirement. k,„ 9. Chuck Sterns, owner of property on the frontage road, stated that he does not like the proposed rezoning. 10. John Setniker, an owner of property on the frontage road, said that a change in zone would wipe out his plans to build a repair garage. 11. Terry Hauk, an attorney, spoke for John Setniker and other property owners along the frontage road. He said that the City has the burden to show the need for the proposed C-P rezoning and the suitability of these properties for C-P development. He continued, saying that the staff report does not establish a need for C- P uses. Neither has the staff report established the suitability for this type of use. He stated that to change the zoning to C-P would not lessen strip commer- cial development nor would it diminish traffic congestion. He then stated he did n,t believe that the zone of in- dividual owners ' properties should be changed if the primary reason is that it would be aesthetically pleasing. 12. A question was raised by the Commission as to whether Mr. Setniker's conditional use permit would be voided by a rezoning of his property. City Attorney Anderson stated that it would be voided unless he in some way vests his rights in the granted permit. After answering the question Mr. Anderson continued with a response to the comments of Mr. Hauk, stating that the burden is not PC Minutes - December 17, 1974 - page 2 on the City to substantiate either a community need or suitability in that this is a legislative act as opposed to a quasi-judicial one; therefore, the burden of proof required under the Fasano decision is not necessary. "s 13. Ball commented pointing out that the Planning Commission does recognize the substantial economic rights of the property owners and these are considered in spite of the lack of legal necessity to establish economic proofs. In addition he added that notice had been sent to all affected property owners on the direction of the Planning Commission, even though this is not required by City ordinance. 14. Jerry Cach of Cash's Realty stated his agreement with Mr. Hauk. 15. Don Sable, who said that he was a new resident of Tigard, said that he is unhappy that more economic data was not submitted to substantiate the zone changes. He was also d.oncerned with the loss of industrial land along the railroad track. 16. Herman Porter, newly-appointed Planning Commissioner, who was observing and had not yet filled Barkhurst's position, stated that the Planning Commission should consider that they do have to meet a burden of proof and it was his feeling that this burden had not been substantially met in the hearing. 17. Mr. Kling of S. W. Gaarde Street said that he did not feel a case had been made for rezoning. C. Staff Recommendation 1. Bolen recommended approval of the proposed change with the proposed alterations: ,' 1) the Air King property not be split-zoned and the entire parcel be rezoned M-4 2) that the Randall Construction Co. mini-warehouses remain in M-4 zoning as well as the parcel to the rear and adjacent Fanno Creek 3) that the portion of the Bucholz property described as tax lot number 1500 remain in C-3 zoning rather than being split-zoned between C-3 and A-2. 4) that the new channel of Fanno Creek provide the new zoning boundary as the old channel results in split zoning some lots in an illogical manner D. Commission Discussion and Action PC Minutes - December 17, 1974 - page 3 um 4 0 (14, 1. Wakem said that he served on NPO #1 when all of the points being discussed by the public that night were considered and he felt that the NPO spent a considerable T amount of time and effort to resolve these issues and they were, in fact, resolved in the Plan formulation and public hearing stages prior to adoption of the Plan. He said that in that the NPO Plan was adopted as the land use guide for this neighborhood, these zone changes should now be sent on to the City Council according to the staff recommendation for approval. 2. Ball reacted to some comment by commissioners that possibly this item should be tabled to the next meeting for further consideration by saying that it was his belief that the Planning Commission should act on the item tonight and move this matter to the City Council according to the recommendation of staff. He said he would find additional hearings by the Planning Commission unfair to the property owners who would be required to attend additional hearings and drag this matter for no real constructive purpose. Ball then moved to recommend approval of the proposed zone changes to the City Council according to the staff recommendation. Barkhurst seconded the motion. 3. The question then arose that if the Commission had the prerogative of following the staff recommendation, not requiring all the zone changes proposed in the original rezoning., to be rezoned that this action possibly would not conform with the adopted plan. Bolen pointed out that his recommendation did conform to the adopted plan in that the Air King use is shown as being both in an area planned for industrial and commercial development and an M-4 use would be compatible to either planned land use designation. In addition, the Randall ware- houses are in an area planned for commercial-industrial and the M-4 would also conform to this land use desig- nation. The Bucholz property, now zoned C-3, would remain as presently zoned. 4. Barkhurst said that he wanted to reiterate that the downtown commercial area must survive and should not be crowded out by industrial development and that the area chosen for commercial-professional zoning along Pacific Highway is, in his mind, the best property suited for this type of zoning on Pacific Highway. 5. Sakata stated her agreement :with Barkhurst and said that every property owner had been given the opportunity to be heard on this matter. 6. The Commission voted on Ball 's motion and it passed by majority vote with Nicoli and Hansen voting no. PC Minutes - December 17, 1974 - page 4 • 4.2 ZOA 7-74 (Highway Commercial Zone, H-C) A request by the City of Tigard to amend the zoning ordinance Title 18 of the Municipal Code, to include a highway commercial zone as proposed by NPO #1 Plan. This zone is intended for land which the Plan views as most appropriately situated for commercial development serving primarily highway traffic. A. Staff Findings 1. Bolen presented the staff findings pointing out that the NPO #1 Plan proposes an area of Pacific Highway for exclusive highway commercial use and this zone is proposed in order to conform to the Plan. B. Testimony and Cross Examination 1. No one appeared to testify on this matter. C. Commission Discussion and Action 1. The Commission raised several questions. on this matter concerning: a) the type of uses permitted both conditionally and outright. b) whether more of -the permitted uses should be placed in the conditional use section c) whether the ordinance adequately deals with the site design issues, these being of particular importance to development along Pacific Hwy. 3. In that this item came up at a late hour, the Commission moved to table this item to their next regular hearing when more time could be given to its discussion. 5. OTHER BUSINESS A. There was no other business. 6. ADJOURNMENT A. The meeting was adjourned at 12:40 p.m. PC Minutes - December 17, 1974 - page _5 • Tigard Planning Commission (N Staff Report :' December 17, 1974 Agenda Item 4.1 ZC 11-74 Applicant City of Tigard (: Applicant's Request The City proposes changing the zoning within the limits of NPO Plan #1 to bring it into conformance with the Plan adopted in May of 1974. Staff Findings 1. The proposed changes in zone are necessary to bring the zoning map into conformance with the NPO #1 Plan for the Ash Avenue-Downtown area as adopted in May, 1974, in ordinance form by the Tigard City Council. 2. The proposed rezonings deal with two separate geographical portions of the Neighborhood. These are: (1) the down- town area which includes properties fronting Main, Burnham and Commercial Streets; (2) properties fronting and adjacent "` Pacific Highway. 3. Concerning the Main Street area, the Plan proposes as one of its goals "to successfully improve the viability of downtown as a retail, commercial, governmental and community center for the citizens of Tigard. " As a means of realizing this objective, the Plan states that the existing trend towards industrial development must be halted. Therefore, in order to add breadth to the existing commercial development on Main Street, as well as to direct the development trend to- ' ward the desired commercial uses, proposes changing the Plan tt '; the majority of industrial zoning in the area to C-3, General Commercial. In addition, the industrial land to remain is proposed for the lightest of manufacturing uses, the industrial park, M-4 zone. 1;; 4. The text portion of the Plan includes three policies con- cerning the future development of the downtown as listed r.f: .below: r Policy 22 - Because Pacific Highway is not intended to provide convenience shopping for neighborhood commercial needs the downtown area should pro'- vide this function for the Neighborhood. I Policy 23 The redevelopment of Downtown should be accom- plished in order to make it complementary to , , - ,., i • tel: :, newer shopping areas. Convenience, appearance and the needs of the shopping public should be primary considerations. Policy 24 - In order to accomplish the redevelopment of Downtown, a redevelopment plan must be completed. This project should be coordinated by a committee of local businessmen. 5. Concerning the remaining industrial land in the Neighborhood, the Plan text lists the following two policies: Policy 25 - The industrial area should be developed to the highest standard provided in the zoning ordinance, the M-4, Industrial Park category. Policy 26 - Truck traffic servicing industrial firms should not be allowed to use Ash Avenue when it is ex- tended across Fanno Creek. 6. Since the completion of the Plan by the NPO, the Randall Construction mini-warehouses have been constructed on Burnham Street adjacent the General Telephone property. Change in the zoning of these rental units from M-4, Industrial Park, to C-3, General Commercial, would not allow these buildings to be utilized as intended when constructed. 7. The portion of the Neighborhood adjacent Pacific Highway is dealt with at length in the Plan text and four policies are intended to guide the development of these properties. The Plan's discussion of this portion of the Neighborhood deals with two primary problems: 1) Pacific Highway is a major metropolitan traffic arterial and the development pattern along its route must not conflict with its traffic-carrying capacity. 2) Businesses serving the larger residential community are poorly located on the Highway in that they intermingle thru traffic with local traffic shopping. 8. In order to minimize the traffic conflicts between thru traffic and traffic patronizing the highway businesses, the Plan proposes common parking facilities and driveways as well as on-site circulation patterns which minimize conflicts with highway traffic. In one instance a frontage road is proposed `? which would eliminate the need for curb cuts onto the highway and provide access to businesses from two major access points. 9. In order to resolve the problem of intermingling thru traffic with local shopper traffic, the Plan puts forth the following ;. policy: Policy 21 - Businesses on Pacific Highway should be oriented ,' to the existing traffic and not draw additional traffic from the adjacent community. Convenience ?• or neighborhood centers should therefore be pro- Staff Report - December 17, 1974 page 2 a,.. hibited from locating on Pacific Highway. In order to accomplish this policy, the plan proposes an area for commercial-professional development which begins on the highway half way between Garrett and Frewing Streets and continues southwest to the grange hall on the highway. In addition, the area to the north is planned for highway commer- cial development. This planned highway commercial area is presently developed with businesses serving primarily the needs of persons traveling on the highway, to include gas stations, fast food restaurants, motels, etc. The area designated for commercial-professional development is substantially an undeveloped portion of Pacific Highway, including in the northern section some residences and in the southern section several fraternal organizations and an auto repair garage which is a non-conforming use. The non-retail nature of the commercial-professional uses will benefit this portion of the highway, by not generating local shopping traffic. In add- ition, the community will be benefited by providing an em- ployment area:"within the City. Being a suburb of the city of Portland, employment within the community is necessary to minimize the need for residents to travel longer distances outside the community to employment centers. A final con- sideration made by the NPO #1 during their deliberations was the visual aspects of development along Pacific Highway. It was felt that the development pattern along Pacific Highway would have less of a stripped and cluttered appearance if uses were grouped into separate sections of the highway. For instance, rather than intermingling office and highway commercial uses, if they are placed segregated into separate sections of the highway, the continuous effect of. highway•- busih.esses 'will be 'reddbed_. The non-retail: .areas: wound ::give the portions of the highway reserved for them a less intense commercial appearance and therefore reliere some of the un- desirable visual aspects of strip highway commercial develop- ment. 10. There is a small piece of property zoned. A-2 on 104th Street off McDonald. This property would be rezoned R-7 according to the NPO Plan. This parcel is pointed out in the findings in order that it not be ignored due to its smallness. Staff Recommendation 1. Staff recommends that the subject parcels be rezoned according to the proposed NPO #1 Plan with the exception of the lots now containing the mini-warehouses on Burnham Street and that all of the parcel now containing the Air King Truss Mfg. business be rezoned M-4, Industrial Park, rather than only the southern portion of the lot as shown in the NPO #1 Plan. Staff Report - December 17, 1974 - page 3 • December 6, 1974 Dear Property Owner: On Tuesday, December 17, 1974, at 8:00 p.m. , the Tigard Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at Twality Junior High School, 14650 S. W. 97th Avenue, to consider rezoning certain properties located within the boundaries of NPO PLAN #1 for the Ash Avenue-Downtown area. This Plan affects the area bounded by Pacific Highway, Hall Boulevard and McDonald St. The purpose is to bring the zoning map for this portion of the City into conformance with the land use designation stipulated on the NPO #1 Plan as adopted by the City Council on May 20, 1974. The Plan proposes changing the zoning on your property from its present designation to If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call City Hall at 639-4171. Yours truly, Dick Bolen City Planner DB:ps II • P:" Chapter 18.26 f HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONE (H-C) Sections: 18.26.010 Intent and Purpose 18.26.020 Permitted Uses l' 18.26.030 Conditional Uses 18.26.040 Lot Requirements 18.26.050 Setback Requirements 18.26.060 Building Height 18.26.070 Additional Requirements 18.26.010 Intent and purpose. The H-C districts are designed and intended to provide essential servicing to the traveling public together with certain other highway-oriented and commercial uses providing services and goods to the consumer population of the community or immediate region. It is the purpose of this district to accommodate traveler needs and provide services and goods from locations in proximity to arterials; but, they are established to minimize congestion as well as the adverse influences upon the appearance of the community and adverse impacts upon adjacent residential uses. The H-C districts are permitted where required by public necessity c (�` or convenience, but they are restricted so as not to cause a blighting influence or safety hazard due to their location along arterials and in proximity to residential areas. Particular attention is required to adequate site accessibility and buffers as well as building and landscape appearance. 18.26.020 Permitted Uses. The following are the principal permitted uses by right within an H-C district and all uses must t be conducted wholly within a permanent, fully enclosed building L' (except required off-street parking and loading) : Y (1) y retail business and those retail businesses whose principal activity is to service the needs of the highway 1 traveler or provide merchandise oriented to service from an automobile including drive-in businesses, drive-in ,: restaurants or similar uses , (2) motels, hotels and transient lodging facilities , ' (3) offices for professional services, professions and administrative uses `? Y. (4). commercial schools including art, business, music, dance, professional and trade (5) restaurant, clubs and similar establishments which provide food or drink for consumption on the premises U 30 LI bi • czk (6) institutional uses including religious institutions, institutions for human care, educational and social r- institutions and public buildings and service in- .., stallations. 18.26.030 Conditional Uses. In the H-C zone the following uses and their accessory uses are permitted as conditional uses when in accordance with Chapters 18.72 and 18.84: (1) automobile service stations and car wash, parking garages, passenger terminals and stations (2) automobile and trailer sales area (3) automobile parts, accessory sales (4) automobile repairs, painting and upholstery (5) indoor, outdoor and other theatres (6) lumber yard (7) museums (8) parks (9) tire shop (10) vehicle equipment and trailer rental (11) any business, service, processing, storage or display essential or incidental to any permitted use in the H-C zone and not conducted entirely within an enclosed building 18.26.040 Lot Requirements. In the H-C zone the lot require- ments shall be as follows: (1) The minimum lot area shall be ten thousand square feet. (2) The minimum lot width shall be one hundred feet. (3) The minimum lot width at the building line shall be one hundred feet. (4) The minimum lot width at the street line shall be one hundred feet. (5) The minimum lot width at the street line of an approved cul-de-sac shall be fifth-five feet. (6) No maximum lot coverage 'shall be required. 18.26.050 Setback Requirements. Except as may otherwise be provided in Section 18.12.100, the setbacks for non-residential uses in the H-C zone shall be as follows: (1) The minimum front yard shall be twenty feet, landscaped and maintained. (2) No side yard setback shall be required except when abutting • C a residential zone, a side yard of five feet shall be /et- required. (3) No rear yard setback shall be required, except when abutting a residential zone , a rear yard setback of twenty-five feet shall be required. (Ord. 72-34 0 4, 1972; Ord. 70-32 0 140-4, 1970) . 18.26.060 Building Height. Except as otherwise provided in Section 18.12.110, no building in the H-C zone shall exceed a height of three stories or thirty-five feet whichever is less. Ord. 70-32 S 140-5, 1970) . 18.26.070 Additional requirements. Additional requirements applicable to the H-C zone include, but are not limited to, the following: (1 off-street parking and loading, see Chapter 18.60; 2 access and egress, see Chapter 18.64; (3 Enclosure and screening required, see Section 18.12.080; (4) ' Signs,: advertising signs and sign structures shall be subject to the conditions, limitations, prohibitions and requirements of Title 16, to which particular refer- ence is made; (5) fire zones, see Section 18.12.120; (6) Nuisances prohibited, see Section 18.12.070. (Ord. 71-4 5 7 (part) , 1971; Ord. 70-32 0 140-6, 1970) .