The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Packet - 02/04/1975 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. � �s ,�.� ��,+�r�,�i,�m'a AGENDA `� t �,�� ` TIGARD PLANNING CQMMISSTON Regular Meeting, Febru�ry 4, 1975 �� Twality Junior High School - Lecture Room �.4650 SA W. 97th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon �. ' CALL T0 ORDER �. ROLL CALL 3'. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: meeting of January 21, 1975 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS � 4.� Subdivision, S 1-75, Englewood Phase II, south of S. W. Scholls ' Ferr Rd. and west of S. W. 1?_1st St. (continued from January � 21st� A. Staff Findings {vis. staff report, January 21st) B. Testimony C. Staff Recommendation � ' D. Commission Discussion and Action 4.2 Misc. M 9-74 (Flood P�ain Special Permit) , fill nver Howe Lee �` property on S. W. BLirnham in the Tigard Flood Plain District (continued from November 7, 1974) , A. Staff Findin�s (vis. staff report November 7, 7:974) B. Testimony C. Staff Recommendation D. Commission Discussion and Action 5. Presentation of Preliininary Pl.an and Program, �roposed Planned Deve'lopment for George Scott, located south of S. W. Greenburg Rd. on. S. W. 98th Avenl�e {tax lot 1000, tax map 1S1 35CD) 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT � I; ` �� ;��. ..V .... ._._. ..� � �- i,.... ,.. . „ . _ _ , , �a, MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION �: February 4, 1975 Twality Junior High School. - Lecture Room 14650 S. W. 97th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon l. CALI� TJ ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Chairman Whittaker 2. ROLL CALL Mem�ers presentt Hansen, Nicoli, Popp, Porter, Sakata, Wakem, Chairman Whitter and staff inember Powell 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the January 21, 1975, meeting were amended to show that (item #3) discussion was cut off by Chairman Whittaker and (item #7) unanimous ballot was moved by Hansen. Minutes were then approved as amended. 4. PUSLIC HEARINGS 4.1 Pu.blic Hearing (Subdivision. Prelim:i.nary P�at) S 3-74 Continued from January 21, 1975, to allow appl.ican-t to submit ��--' alternate lot arrangement and entrance to tiS, . W. Schollwood Cto from S. W. Hazelwood rather than �rom S. W. Springwood Drive (see minutes of January 21, 1975) A. Staff Findings Staff findings remained substantially unchanged from staff report of January 21, 1975. Staff noted that the alter- native scheme presented also met code requirements and eliminated staff reservations con.c�rn�_�g the aligrunent of S. W. Hazelwood loop intersection with S. W. Ashwood Ct. and concerning the entrance of S. W. Schollwood Court on S. W. Springwood Drive. Applicant had also taken the opportunity to identify the utilities easemen� on S. W. 115th as requested by Staf:f an.d to clarify the location i, of the pedestrian path through the multi-family residential area contiguous to lots 8-19 of the proposed plat. B. Testimony l. Proponents: representing applicant offered to make any explanations that may be requested � 2. Opponents• none - , . r, . . . . . ..< < , ,., _ , . . _ .. . , _� �: _ f i� �. C. Staff Recommendation: �' Approve alternative #2 with conditions as previously • amended: l. that all pertinent conditions set �'orth in Oidinance 73-17 be faithfull.y adhered to 2. that the applicant provid.e a cletailed landscape plan in accordance with Ch. 18.56 and 18.58 TMC before final plat approval - such plan will reflect the con- ditions in "1" above. 3. Street and right-of-way widths must all conform to Chapter 17.28.080, TMC. 4. Cons-truction plans for street improvements will be re- viewed and approved by Tigar.d Public Works before con- struction may be started. 5. Additional right-of-way be granted along the multi- family tract at such time as the multi-�amily area is developed. 6. The applicant will secure the proper and timely approvals from the Oregon State Highway Department for improve- ments to S. W. Scholls Ferry Road. � 7. Access to multi-family tract may not be within 100 ft. of Scholls Ferry on 121st. 8. Construction and landscaping of S. W. Springwood Drive I will be compatible with the 50 ft. section of Springwood 'i in the Pha�e I development. 9. The applicant will include temporary easement develop- ment o:f 115th Avenue in this Phase II development. 10. A 5 ft. easement for uti�ities be provided along a11 lot �� lines excepting only that should a building be built across such an easement and the easement is not in use, ' the easement may be vacated. D. Commission Discussion and Ac�ion l. Commissioner Porter asked if there was still a request for a variance to a�low a sidewalk on one side of S. W. , Haze�wood loop and if there would be sidewa�ks on S. W. Schollwood Ct. ' 2. Staff responded that the variance would now only apply I to the portion of S. W. Hazelwood loop between S. W. Springwood Drive at the east and S. W. Scho�lwood Ct. � on the west and that Scholl.wood Court would also have w sidewalks on both sides. PC Minutes - February 4, 1.975 - page 2 .E ._ : _ _ _,., ,_ , .,,; . . .. ,. ��.. . � 3. Moved (Popp) , seconded ( Nicoli ) to approve � sub�ect to recommended conditions4 (prelimin.ary glat & variance) . 4. Motion earried, unanimous 4.2 Pulali.c Hearing on Flood P1ain Fil1 Permit M 9-74 Continued from November 5, 1974, meeting to allow the City to secure an engin:eer's opinion on the proposed project and to �llo�a the applicant sufficient tirne to provide a more detai�ed p�.an. A. Staff Findings ' Powell presented the st�ff report (q. v. � , pointing out that while the City had sought engineering assist- ance frorn the U. So Corps af Engineers, �he appliaant had failed to produce engineering of sufficient detail to re�criew. B. Testimony l. Proponents a. Mr. Alex Arseniev of Sleavin-Kors engineers, wh� d.eveloped the "concept proposal" asked �the Commission to approve the permit based on the �.:° applicant' s submission so tha't the applicant could find a purchaser who might have the resources to carry out the proposal. b. Mr. Jerry Cach stated that he 'd been trying to sell the site for severa� years but could find no takers due to the flooding problem. 2, Opponents: none appear�d " � C. Staf� Recommendation Staff recommended denial, finding that the applicant had not furnished a sufficient application or sit� plans as required by ordinance ( "Fasano'� declaration not adc�ressed) D. Commission Discussion and Action 1. Whittaker stated that filling seems possible on the proposed site but that there seems to be insufficient informatian to base a decision upon. 2. Nicoli stated that drawi.ng required. � 3. Porter wanted to know what th� appl.ication was for and what the effectof the Commission's action would b�• PC Minutes - February 4, 1975 - page 3 _ _ , , , . . . . . �. _ . . ��. � 4. Moved (Porter) to table until suclz time as appli- „-.: cant returns with a "well-conceived plan�' that � addresses adjoining topography and provides enough information on which to base a d�cision. Mr. Porter also asked that it be made part of record that the Tigard Planning Commission would favorably consider such a pl�n. Second (Wakem) , carried un:animously. 5. PRESENTATSON OF PRELIMINARY PLAN AND PROGRAM, Proposed Planned Development for George Scott, sou�h of Greenburg Road on �S. W. 98th Avenuee , A. Pres�ntation Jerr Dra oo AIP lanner resented lan an.d r� ram for � Y g > > �� P P p g the applica.nt, George Scott. ; 1 B. Comma.ssion niscussion ( Whittaker asked if �the gross density anticipated by the � developer was in �onformance with the Comprehensive Plan 1 and if any impact of the project on the proposed extension � of 98th to S. W. Center St. had 1aeen looked at. Chairman � Whitta:ker askecl that a description of surrounding land use � be �u.rnished; that the relationship of the owner-developer ?; to the project be identified (wil.l he live there, does he r intend to sell units, rerit them, will he be responsible �ww for maintenance, etc. ) ; that the developer meet with NPO #2 to determine their feeling about the plan. 6 DETERMINATION OF LAND USE CLASSIFICATION 6.1 C-3 zone � P� A. Staff Report �; ; Staff read memorandum dated February 4, asking that the � Planning Commission determine if an "automotive machine �' shop" is an. allowab�.e conditional use in a C-3 zone. i' B. Commission Discussion and Action � z ; F �. Sakata stated that non-conforming uses ought to be � phased out. � 2. Chairman Whittaker said he thought that the Planning � Commission ought to look at expansions of conditional � uses and allowed non-conforming uses. 3. Concensus obtained that an automotive parts and machine � shop must �e an allowab�e conditional use i.n a C-3 � zone. � �` ' 6.2 M-4 zone C A. Staff read memorandum dated February 4 asking if pre- ; PC Minutes - February 4, 1975 - page 4 ��.. hung door fabrication were an a�lowable conditional � use in an M-4 zonP. �L� n. Commission Discussion and Action l. Commissioner Nico�i asked that the word fabri- cation be tightened up to read "assembl,y". 2. Concensus obtained that '�assembly of pre-hung doors, not including door manufacture or wood milling�� would be an allowable conditional use in an M-4 zone. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meetin� was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. �. � PC Minutes - February 4, 1975 - page 5 _ —�,R...�-„� , _ _.. :.; ,. � . � ;:. _ :. _ �, .a �n:di� � d ��e ,��al� '�:, w�I ��:: `*" c l . l � TIGARD PLANNING COf�'I�ISSION Staff I�emorandum February 4, 1975 From: Jera.ld f�. Poweli Subject: Determination of Land Use classification in an I�-4 zone Under prqvisio�s nf chapter 18. 52. 020 � 13, Tigard �lunicipal Code, any use held by the planning commission to be similar to the ex,�licity identified conditio�al uses allowab'le in 3n �I-4 zone may be granted a conditional use p�rmit. Nn application for a conclitional use permit has been rec�ived for a fabricator of prehung doors to locate in Tigard Industrial: Park. An interview held today with the appZicant has revealed that ' his intention is to assemble premilled door jambs, doors, and hardware in�o prehung units. No wood maahining or milling iloweves�, should be allowed in this zone. �' It is the staff ' s contension that this activity is less intensive than furniture manufacturing or any of several other activities allowable eithe� outrir�ht or by perm.it in the I�-4 zone. Staff .rEquests that the above activity be allowec� in an 1�-4 zone as a conditional use, implying no permit or pric�r apprnval is here gi.ven but �tliat applicata.r�n ma�� b� �ecCp•tod. i , , i � � ia�. ;: ,_. , .. . .: ... . --�--.--_- , _ . _ , ,� ._, ,.� . _ . , . __ . � ...� _, . � �� P��. , ��: � TIGARD PLANNING COMMISS70N' STAFF MENlORANDUM � February 4, 1975 SUBJECT: Determination of Land Use Classification in a C--3 zon.e. An app�ication has been received for a business license for an "Auto Parts and Machine Shop'� establishm:ent at 13578 S. W. Pacific , Highway (Heinz Volkswagen Service occupies the building now and will also continu� to occupy it) . !� Auto parts sales and automotive repairs are bath conditionallf � a�lowed in a C-3 zonee ' ; Machine �hops are alTowed by conditional us� permit in an M-4 zon.e � and are al�owed out.right in an M-3 zone. , ; There ar� pxesent]_y at least two such shops operating in Tigard on � sites zoned C-3. One is in a partion o� the Goodell ARCO service ! station/garage/carwash on Main Street and the ather is in an Auto � parts store �� 87th and Center St. Neither af these establishments t is a conforming use in staff's opinion. It appears that each is � prepared to claim that they pre-exist zoning in Tigard (if, in y fact, they don't claim ta have founded the place) . The point, however, is that there are severa� question.s to be resolved by � the Plan:ning Commission. The first question is whether a machine shop is allowable in a C-3 � zone. Ts any machine shop, whether automo�ive or farm maahinery � less intensive or no more intensive than other uses a.11owed in a C-3 zone? Is a machine shop c�mpatible in such a zone? What im- pact do�s such use have ori the use, present or future, of adjacent � sites? � � In this particular case thereis an additional question. Heinz has been allowed status of an outright use because the bus barn that • preceeded him had. been there before the zoning �ordinanae and the � City held that Heinz establishment was just like the establishm-�nt � that had originally been "grandfathered". Now, along comes the � applieant seeking shelter under Heinz 's grandfather c�ause. The b question is, does Heinz 's grandfather c�au�e extend to another � different establishment? � [ ,. , i I �l I � , � _` „ . ; . .., ,: �� w r. ,:, .>.,:. ;4 �6� . . TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Staff R�port �. February 18, 1975 Agenda Item 4.1 CU 2--75, CU 3-75, CU 4-75 Conditional Use of portions o:f an M-4 zoned site known as Tigard Industrial Park (tax map 2S1 2BA, tax lot 300) Applicants Stardrill Co. (Robert Stuben) - CU 2-75 Wood Stove Robert Tofflemoyer) - CU 3-75 Trudoor, Inc. Darren Dodson) - CU 4-75 Applicants ' Request to al�ow wholesale distribution and outside storage (Stardrill) ; fabrication of inetal appliances (including welding) and distri- bution of the f'inished product, a patented wood stove (Wood Stove) ; and assembly of pre-hung doo un.its in an M--4 zoned industrial park (Tigard Industrial Park) . �`- Staff Findin�s l. Tigard Industrial Park is presently 75-80% developed. Site design of the industrial park itse�f is subject to Design Review. Overall site planning has therefor been previously addressed. � I 2. '�Trudoor" and "Wood Stove" will apparently share some common facilities. Some conflict may exist between occu- ; pancy classifications which should be addressed by the applicantse � ; 3. No appreciable impact on traffic generation of the in- dustrial park or on circulation within the park is antici- pated. 4. Adequate parking appears to be provided although some con- ' flict is possible with the anticipated development of Tigard III which will introduce new construction, adjacent to the "Trudoor" and ��Wood Stove" sites. 5 . Stardrill Co. has a present existing problem with provision of acceptable outside storage of heavy equipment which they base on the site. Their prominant location at the entrance � to the indus-trial park contributes to the prob�.em if they continue to stare their Equipment in its present usual location. r i � i , _ _ , � _ _ , i� �, . 6. Chapter 18.52.060 requires that all permitted outside storage be screened by a sight obscurin.g fence at least 6 ft. high. Stardrill has been notified of this require- �.�: ment and has indicated its willingness to work out a �e- asonable solution. 7. A11 three actiUities appear compati�ble with the design and present occupancy of the project with the possibl.e ex- aeption of the reservation cited by staff ir� finding #2 of this re ort. P 8. Tk1e present uses �.n the industrial p:ark, the c;onditional � uses proposed and the park conform to present zoning and to the Tigard Community Plan. N. P. 0. #2's proposed Plan agrees also. Present land use in the vicinity of the industrial park is residential, but has also been desig- nated as future industrial in the Tigard Community Plan. 9. The cumulative e�fect of these conditional. use requests will not affect the impact of the industrial park on the community and do not appear to generate addi�;ional impacts of their own. 7.0. No increase in demand for public services or other impact on public services will result from these activities. Staff Recommendations to be made after public testimony has been heard and the �� hearing closes �„ . PC Staff Report - February 18, 1975 - item 4.1 - page 2 . ---- -- — � � � . �,� � °. �� ss. . `. � 99 S.W- KATHERfNE ST. ` X, ' �.. � � y` � _ . ' y � � �� /� o � � � �� e�. I �I � � . ��, �// . � �o � o X � l� X I X Q �� .` 65.09 c: D � / � x � /� �� is. � � , � M.H. X X � \�� l60 , r I /� '� �/ � s ��' �� ' �� %/� � i� � so � � �� . - _ �_ _� �� , r � � Q� - x�� '% � ° ' � . 'rft_� p // / M.H. � � O cJ�i X /�� / 150 �C.s. J FILL AREA � �� J ' . ' � // 1 X \ ' � �I x � x� �� _ , . , `\. \. ` �' �so � ` \ � � r• - ` \ / ,� � ., � k • '�'� f iasz � , X � � t30.3 �� \ x � � � 14 XZ , �� + � � FfLI � �/ -`, � �� ( 14 7 7 - •. 41�'.S A R E!i � �,,.�_X � a( 1 �� " X8.2 147.5 � �� / �... .. '� M.H. X . � � �� ._...�� ; �\\\ i . � � BRUSH . " -" p • - r _��_._.^.__..:__:.._�_.._.�a...�.__._._..;�._.._.v___�,:. _...__�_. �. '.� _ _—_ �: .. ;, .; - _, E • z; ! -- ��...�� `V — --- — �'—_v... _ .�_ � ;-— ' t'� � U , / • •��i. --.•�+_ - � °�' A• . / rl�/J � .�'.��,. .«. 5�1� ,� I ' ' � � � . .�� ^ s� .�, ; r � ! c _ ,. . _ (i!�• � tU ,. = ,,; . :�i..'r s' � ':r.�� j ` � `,��,,,,�" ` . , ,�;. �..;�' . 1 I � . .�S �-� o, , .� � } � . �tn� o, t • � 1�+ � /^` . . 1 /�• •�� S ~s��Yl •/�.. • . . . � .. . . . . . r��. �-.� �Srytt � • - : � � 4 �\` � ��. - . ; rl ' �7� � r s �= SY � �.:j�61� �� O � \,, � .. � . ``_ � Z / . O�r� • . � . �� , ��5,.-�./ �� '., xyyj ,i � �yl: � •�. . n ,� . o� .� � . . .' . . ! . .1.�� ► �a � S lW . . . � � � . . .. : , � ;" x v� F�y`S+� � �� : � i ' . fC• � . t .�tC '' Y�. � -:� . ♦ . �` . . . '; 'y �ia� � s.,� i . .`� w ti �� a : t�t = 'xw'' z 4 � � •, � .../ •.. I� �'.. �IS '�' ;v iV � `�\: _ . . . . /� � ��'' � • g�' .y�� a� •,'C . l s � , � � � �� • ..� , 2 � � % k '` � . • �j/' L�" y � ; - . . , � e � � �,. � o ` �%'�',, .� � ,. -s t t Yrs� � � ~ ~ w I � � � ' � �+Z !A y yk t �� '.�� ,� ��k ,( � � . ��i . ♦�`, '� �� :r Y� � ..--� �N- � �.�ylfY,�� y 1� ► y�1� l�,d �,r • ..9� }1 � . n' ``. '�`Y � ` ��I• �1: r (� . . . . ,. �•YS�p � �� {�F � �• � � �t� �� . . , , . � ��y, �`"'f C f r �. * •'�} �f .�,• . '� , . .1� 4yR y�. 1' � `��o +� at7 , , . � � �} 1�,..� . • o. 4r, . , . . . Q , .. ` � O.0 • . # . .� : „ � i��Y` . b. � `�. . � ' � t. I � , ; .• .. ��• ( �. . �� -• � ' �` N � - ��• . . •.Lq� � �•�• ..� ',e � •. . . � �� . � � ��• � • ? -.i►�i' � /` ,� (" ••+•'•. y: � .�y' ��, ,•':�` • � � �' � � ��,` � .. �. 1: �+ �� ,.� � Y ,� �, y� r-. O``,� ��'��• � G�` ''� � � �• ;', �+ V 1��D''� ` ` � � _� '•' • 'I I�� • � � �'� '� � ` `•` � .~�� "��" � � �� 4k' j'� ' �� '� •�a � 1 yy 0; ` I �� y,' �y4'��\��"'1{\�� 1 �•``�� . � . (� � w�� . \/ �� ,•.�` � � .•il��1 ( I�7�e� / `� . v � �\ JI��I ; .� ..,.� ' a . �'� ��..,oT � � �+ /��! v4 r.- !� < � -$� . e .� • . s �1 » _ •., � �.. �..��;.: �s..::. � :��. 1 ° �r -' + ' •,.. . : ..... .. . .... . . ��Y'� ��. � �. � �� e ��.`'��'".+'"� . C.. i �'� ;.a2► ,'o� • . ; �� i r' : • . , '. � � �� ,• N '� � a �- :5. �� Y �-. �� I� , 1t��O � � t 4 w ' s .s• � �� r � m ,. .. . ': o� p a.� i . � � � .: •� 1, �r�� • I�a �n • �� 'Y �( . ;1 'i � .f �I 4 � �• �� •� �� 4�aj• � e�� 3/�b►� , � � .��.�. .� ' �. . , �, . , .c� . � ,. l� w �,L'�f�O� r,�'`lOt�'}�� ` ' � � :. �``'~ \ ,� m � �.�,�. ; . t1 . _ - � _ . I ' ? � � � �� ° :� � ° ..y �$/ � .I��..�d`,5�. � � l��j'� r.� . {V' TIGARD PLANNING COMM��SION � Staff Report (Addendum) �` February 4, 1975 "� Agenda Item 4.2 M 9-74 Flood Plain Special Permit (landf�:ll) for a landfill in the Flood Plain District within the flood , plain of Fanno Creek at 9110 S. W. Burnham Street (tax lot 200, Washa Co. tax map 2S1 2AC) � I Applicant Howe Lee Applicant's Request to permit the filling of floodable land in the Fanno Creek flood plain in order to provide a developable building site , Staff Findin�s (see also staff report and minutes of PC meeting �� November 5, 1974) l. No new information has been presented by the appli.cant. ! 2. The engineers "concept presentation�� may have some merit; � however, an engineering evaluati.on is not possible without ', explicit and detailed plans. 3. Staf�' has consulted with Mr. Bill Acre, Chief Flood Control Divi.sion, Portland, District, Corps of Engineers. In his opinion, the project could be completely innocuous if i ro erl desi ned. The Corps will provide review of con- , struction drawings and sxte plan when they are available. !i 4. "Filling�� is prohibited in the Flood Plain District as � identified in Tigard Ord. 74-50. Filling may be permi.tted, however, "pursuant to special permit granted �by the Planning Commission based on findings as by Section 18.56.060 provided". Furthermore, standards for the submission of an application are contained in � .060 of that ordinance. Tl�e "Concept _ Proposal" submitted does not meet those criteria. Staf� Recommendation to be given following pub�ic testimony ! i - I � , � i � � .. �. ., �� - . . .. . . .. . .. .. .. . . . . . . . ��: .,:�-� Y . . �: - . .... ..�: .. _ _ _ _ � _ . . � 1 � ' TIGARD PLANNING COMMZSSION Staff Report �,lF November 5, 1974 Agenda Item 4.2 M 9-74 (Howe Lee - Fill Permit) Flood Plain Fill Permit ' Request by Howe Lee, owner of property located at �110 S. W. Burnham, for a permit to �'-3�1-� lands presently situated within the 100 year occurrence flood plain, Applicant's Probosal To excavate the portion of his property adjacent Fanno Creek and deposit this material adjacent Burnham Street in order to create a developable piece of property above the 100 year flood level (see enclosed engineer's report) . Staff Fir�din�s l. Al1 of the applicant's property, 6.8 acres, is located within the ].00 year occurrence flood plain as defined by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers in their document entitled, Flood Plain Tnformation Tualatin River and Tributaries Washin tori Coun�, Orepon, June 19 9. This study provides the basis � for flood plain identification as referenced in the Tigard �' Flood Plain and Fill Ordinance No. 74-50 adopted in August of this year. 2. The property is presently zoned M-4, Industrial Park, a11ow- ing light industrial uses. .A small portion west of the old Fanno Creek bed is zoned J�-2, apartments. (See attached map for surrounding zoning) . The adopted Ash Avenue-Downtown Plan proposes that the zoning on this property be changed from M-4 to C-�, General Commercial. �Vhile the property is currently zoned for industrial use, the overlying Flood Plain zone precludes development for this purpose. (See enclosed Flood Plain Ordinance, Permitted Uses, section 18. 57.030) . The permitted uses are limited to those which do not obstruct water flow or impair storage capacity. For example, parking areas, roadways, farmlands and various recreational uses. Prohibited uses include filling and per- manent structures. As a consequence of the Flood Plain Ordinance, the applicant is un.able to use any portion of his 6.8 acre parcel as presently zoned. 3. As mentioned in the engineer's report, the channel of Fanno Creek has been realigned as part of the Unified Sewerage Agency's interceptor project to eliminate several bends, with the result of improving its flow capacity. It is (, possible that improvements made this past summer• will re- I _ . ' � _ duce the flood hazard to this and other properties in future years; howcver, this possibili.ty can only be de- termined by detailed analysis of �he entire Fanno drain- ! �i age basin, a stuciy which the Corps of Engineers anticipates 'F comple�ting in the near future -�- hopefully within two years. � 4. The City Planner, with the assistance of -the Public 1tiTOrks � . Departmen�t, has reviewed the study submitted by Sleavin- Kors Engineers and concludes that the proposed site develop-- ment concept does not violate the intent and purpQse of the Flood Plain Ordinance. The staff does consider tYie sub- mitted plan a concept, however, and a condition o� granting __ __ a � ermit should specify that detailed plans an�s ecifications P p for a site grading 1an be submitted for approval of the � P City Public Works Dept. before any .phase of the site develop- � ment can begin. This grading plan should comply ti.th the � standards of the American Public Works Association and ' Chapter 70 of the 1973 edition of the Uniform Building � Code, both of which have been adopted by the City, The � submitted plan should include a sufficient number of cross sectional di.agrams to enable the Publiu Works Dept. to j properly determine compZianc� with the Fload Plain Ordinance I and any conditions imposed by the granting of a fill permit. � 5. In addition to the engineering aspscts of the proposal, i its environmental effects must also be considered. Of ' primary concern to the staff ares 'a �6 A. replacement of vegetation �to prevent erosion B. compatibi�ity with the proposed Greenway System The first concern will require ground cover as we11 as � trees to protect the ground surface �rom erosion. The ��, second matter als� implies the nEed for vegetation, but �� topography must also be considered. For instance, the ��; surface characteristics of adjoining property should be f,; related �o this site. Th.e Community Plan and the NPO #1 "` Plan both stress the need for retaining the natural "' features adjacent Fanno Creek and its tributaries. These i;'; features include vegetation, hills, rills ar�d stream banks. � !� The proposed project, in order to produce a flood water � �� storage basin, would remove the upper portion of the ' �'� eastern stream bank and create an essentially flat, low �' piece of ground 450' long and averaging 350' ira width. � While such an area would function we1.l as a storage ; basin, it would be detrim�ental to the Greenway System. " This situation could be remedied by retaining the east- �� ern stream bank and providing a more natural surface in � the storage area to include small hills with treP plant- i ings, etc. In order to retain the stream bank, means } must be provided for returning flood waters from the ` storage basin to the stream channel. This can be achieved � � � r � PC 5taff Report - November 5, 7.974 - page 2 - Item 4.2 � _ } f � . , ;, �.. � • by providing openings in the bank which would allow �,. waters to enter the storage basin in time of flood and to � later recede as the flood level subsides. . 6. The City presently possesses a 25 ' easement for pathway Purposes across the Crow Engineering proper�-�Y ta the south. A similar easement is desirable on thi� property to allow for a path located on the stream bank. Pedestrian �, access to this and adjoining propert;ies a.s of irrportance ` because of the anticipated Ghange in zoning t� prov�.de for �� commercial uses. By this means, walk-in trade from the adjac�ent residential area, where several acres of apart- _ � ment developments are planned, will be facilitated. 7. The staff is aware that in order to comply with the above- � stated environmental issues, the applican�t will be removing less material from the area to be excavat�d and as a re- sult, diminishing the size of the area which can be fil.led. 8. In that this is the first request to be reviewed by the Planning Commission for a fill permit, the staff wishes to point out that approval can only be granted following th ur ose and int t ommi ion that e en findin s b the C ss p p i g Y of the ordinance has been adhered to (section 18.57�010) and according to the guidelines provided in section 18.57. 060 (3a & b) . �,,�: Staff Recommendation Staff recommendation will be given following the receipt of - testimony by the Planning Commissiono i � PC Staff Report - November 5, 1974 - page 3 - Item 4.2 �r _ __ - ;. _, � � � y , . � . � . /�,^�,.� • ' renewal with the condition that on-site recreation areas such as patias be screened from visibility and that no driveway entrances be permitted on Tiedeman. Street. Nicoli seconded and th'e motion passed by unanimous ' vote. � . � 4.2 M 9-74 (Flood Plain Fill Permit); -- Howe Lee Request for a permit to fi�7: -lands presently situated within ' � the l00 year occurrence flood plain located .at 9110 S. W. Burnham Street (tax map 2S1 2AC, tax lot 200) . i A. Staff Findings l. Bolen presented the sta�'f findings which in summary ' stated that all of the applicar.►t's 6.8 acre parcel is located within the flood plain and a fill permzt is ' necessary to use the property aocording to i�;s M--4, Industrial Park zoning. He pointed out that the engineering study prepared for the applicant by Sleavin-Kors Engineers does present a concept for providing an area of developable land adjacent Burnham Street without inhibiting the flood cagacity of Fanno Creek. He said a concept had been presented r� but not a detai�ed site grading and development plan. In concluding, Bolen stated that �he applicant had addressed thP engineering as�ects of developing the I property, but had not adequately dealt with '�the question o� its effects upon the environment (vege- � ' tation, topography, etc. ) along Fanno Creek and the { proposed Greenway system. B. Testimony and Cross Examination � l. Alex Arseniev, the applicant's engineer, said that • he was available to answer any questions the commission might have. � � C. Staf� Recommendation 1. Bolen told the commission that he saw two courses of action which they could follow in deciding the appli- cant's request. These were: a) tabling the request to allow the a�plicant time to submit a plan dealing with the environmenta7. issues raised by the staff f�ndings or, b) approval with the conditions that: {��. , • � 1 - A detailed site grading plan b� submitted to the Planning Commission prior to the beginning PC Minutes - November �5, 19`�4 - page 3 �. .. 6 . .� �... . � . � �:, ' � . l ^ ., . , �'° of construction, meeting the requirements stated by staff in finding number 4 which asked �;hat the plan conform to the APWA and UBC chapter 70, . radin and filling standards. g g . 2 - that this grading plan deal with the environ- • mental issues raised by the staff in firiding , f ive � I � 3 - 25 feet be dedicated to the �city adjacent the new channel creek to provide for the path' as part of the greenway systemo D. Commission Discussion and Action l. Hartman said that the repart submitt�d by the appli- cant's engzneer was nothing more than a sketc�.. He then moved to table the .request u.ntil such time that . a more �detailed plan could be submitted to the Plann- . ing C'ommxssion which would deal with the concerns raised by the staff findings. Sakata seconded the motion. ?_. Ball said that Hartman's motion did not .go far enough f � and he raised the question of how does the Commission intend to monitor appl�ications of this sort when they do not possess the necessary engineering expertise. He stated that section 18o57e060 of the Flood Plain Ordinance provides the City the right to hire an en-- gineer to evaluate an application and stated his con- ! cern that this should possibly be done in this aase. � 3. The Commission voted on Hartman's motion and it passed �by majority vote with Nicoli voting no. 4. Ball moved that the City engineer review the application � with tne staff and if they are not able to properly � review the technical portions, � then the City should � hire an- engineer possessing the necessary qualifications � to do �oa Hartman seconded and the motion passed by ' unanimous votee 5. Bal1 said that the NPO #1 group should be contacted � concerning this item in that th�y had considerable int�rest in the City adopting a flood plain ordinance. 5. MINOR LAND PARTITIONING 5.1 MLP 7-74 (Taco Bell/Dunkin Donuts) '- � Request to partition the existing tax lot at 11634-36 S�. W. Pacific Highway which presently contains the Taco Bell and • PC Minutes - November 5, 1974 - page 4 - : F