Planning Commission Packet - 02/18/1975 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PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and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.
.:. , _ ,_ _. . _ , � _ _ ,:,: I
- - ` �
'�:
� AGENDA
TIGARD PLANNING CONiMISSION I
�`� Regular Meeting FeY�ru�ry 18, 1975
�.._.
Twality Junior High Schoal - Lecture Room
14650 S. W. 97th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon I
;' 1. CALL TO ORDER
" 2. ROLL CALL II
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meetings of January 28, 1975 and
February 4, 1975
4. PUBLIC T�:EAR.INGS
4,1 Conditional Use (CU 2-75, 3-75, 4-75) all in Tigard
Industrial Park, an M-4 (Industrial Park) site on S. W.
Tigard Avenue.
A. Staff Findings
B. Public Testimony
C. Staff Recommendation
D. Commission Discussian & Action
�.
4.2 Minor Land Partitioning - (MLP 1-75)
Partitionin.g a C-3 zoned parcel on S. W. Pacific Hwy.
into 3 parcels for the purpose of leasing land to in-
dividual devel.opers.
A. Staff Findings
B. Public Testim�ny
C. Staff Recommendation �
D. Commission Discussion & Action
4.3 Establishment of a Planned Development District and a
Zone Change (�G 5-75) changing an R-7 zoned parc�l on
S. W. 98th Ave. south of S. W. Greenburg Road to A-2 (PD) .
A. Staff Findings
B. Public Testimony
C. Staff Recommendation
D. Commission Discussion and Action
4.4 Recommending Amendment of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan
for the area known as N. P. 0. #1 (CPR 1-75)
A. S,taff Findings
B. Public Testimony
�.. C. Staff Recommendation
D. Commission Discussion and Action
�, ,
.__.,, . .. ,, . ,._ ,, . ,: . , > _ . . ,_. ... _ _.r,
_. ;
. . �_.. _.
..- � g � � �,�
.. . �." '4..". �
1
4.5 Zone Change (ZC 11-74) changing the zoning map in that �'
are� known as N. P. 0. #1 to conform to the Comprehensive �j
�„ P1.an. I'
r,
A. Staff Findings t
B. Pi�.blic Testimony ��
C. Staff Recommendation �i
D. Commission Discussion and Action �
5. OTHER BUSINESS
�
6. ADJOURNMENT
E!
;:
f
i
m
a
i':
K
� �.. -��� �.
�i
, {;
4
�.
tp}
I;
�f
e
�1
�:
�,.
• �,
M
�F
fY
I
�1
�
�'
�
f��
�
PC Agenda - February 18, 1975 - page 2
. . . . . . . . � . , . . . . . . . .-
, � ._�; . . . :.�. .. , ... .. . ... .. . ,:.... . . ._. . �..:.- ... � ...: .._ ...... . ..... ..._. .�.:... .�
I;�
�
3i
, ,. �
'' �`'�.,�.,� �. � ��..
MTNUTES . � i'
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION ''
,
February 18, 1975
�.
Twality Ju.nior High School - Lecture Room
14650 SW 97�h Avenue, Tigard, Or�gon .
l. CALL TO ORDER - Th� meeting was cal.�ed to order� at 7:3� p.m.
2. ROLL CALL - A11. members were presen.t and staff inembers Bo1en and
Powell
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the January 28, 1975, and February 4, 1975, meetings
were considered. The minutes of the January 28, 1975, meeting were
amended to show that Geor�e Penrose of NPO #1 and Commissioner Alan
Popp were present.
4. PUBLIC HEARING
4.1 �Conditional Use - CU 2-75, CU 3-75, CU 4-75
All above located in Tigard Industr�_al Park, an M-4 {industrial
park) site on SW Tigard Ave.
A. Staff Find
in s
�
�_. 1. Powell presented the staff findings pointing out that all
three conditional uses are in �he same industrial park and ;
have therefore been gr�ouped. into one staff report. ":;i'
If
Testimony and Commissi�n Action in the followin.g minutes are separated ,
in�to separate requests. '
� u ic Testiman - Stardril� Co. „.
B. P bl y
1. Bob Steuben of Stardrill described his company' s operation
saying that they supp�.y well drillin� rigs and components to
operators. He said the used rigs, which have been stored
on the premises, are in the pr.ocess of being repaired and
resold. This was s�i.d to be their busiest time of the year
and it is rare that 5 used vehicles will be stored at one
time. It was stated that the Stardri�l Co. , with the co-
operation �f the industrial park owner, would be wil.ling to
provide a screened area for we�.l dril�ing equipment. `'
;i'
2. Joe Schult3r, from SW Johnson St. and across Farin:o Creek �;
from the p�oposed use, stated his opposition to a�.lowing ,'•
the outside storage of vehicles in that the property abuts
a residential a,rea.
�::
�r;�
3. Roy Shaw of 10005 SW Johnson also stated his opposition to >:
�: the request saying that anything which makes additional rK
;.,�;
���
�
�2.
����
c�,;
��
,
�
��,,.
, � , ,
�
_ _ . , > _:
.. ;,
. �
f; �
, �;� � �
noise for the residential area he found objectionab�.e.
C. Staff Recommendation �
�;. �
l. Staff recommen.ded approval of the use with storage area to '
'be provided screening the sight of stored vehicles and as
approved by the Design Review Board. ;
Da Commission Discussion and. Action
,;
1. Bal�. stated that the applicant had not attempted to meet ;
the burden required by "Fasano�� and the request should be
denied. When asked what particular item should have been i:
addressed, Ball replied that the applicant had not in any way
shown that his requested outside storage would not be detri-
mental to adjacent residential uses.
2. Hansen said that he c�uld vote to approve the wholesale
distribution use, but not the proposed outside storage.
3. Ball moved to deny the conditional use request, Har�man
seconded and the motion passed by majority vote with Popp,
Hansen, Nicoli and. Whittaker voting no. �
4. Popp queried the other commissioners as to whether their vote
meant they disapproved both outside starage and wholesale
distribution.
( _ 5. Ball responded that the reason for his motion was tha.t the `�
`� applicant had not provided. the proper burden of proof, not ;
because he necessarily disapproved of the request. Buts
in order to approve the request he would need more infor- �
mation than the applicant had made available at the he�r�ng. -s
G.
�:.
B. Public Testimony - Wood Stove ;
i:
1. Mr. Tofflemeyer described his Wood Sto`ve fabricating process �
and stated there would be no outside storage nor would noise ;
levels exceed acceptable standards. ;
�s
2. No one spoke in opposition to this request. �'
r,
C. Staff Recommendation s�'
,��
;;'
1.. Staff recommended approval of the request. ;``
i�
k,,
D. Commission Discussion and Action `:
�
1. Popp moved for approval of the request and Hartman seconded. �3
,,
The commission vote was unanimous on the motion. �+
tr
�:
B. Public Testimony - Tru-Door f{
��
{:<.
hi item was tabled to the next m:eetin because the a li- ;x
1. T s g PP
� cant was not present to present his case. Moved Wakem, �
seconded Popp, vote unanimous. �
PC Minutes - 2/18/75 - page 2
_.-.,_ : . .. _
, � t
4.2 Minor Land Partitionixag - MLP 1-75 �'i
�i. Partitioning a C-3 zoned parcel on SW Racific Hwy. into 3 parcels ,
� for the purpose of leasing land to individual developers. ii
A. Staff Findings 'I
�
lo Bolen presented the staff findings whi.ch described the
proposed lot areas and means of providing access. ;
B. Public Testimony �
�
1. Mr. Jack Robertson, the property -owner, spoke for his !
request stating �that he had already signed a 21 year lease
with the McDonalds Restaurant Corp. and he wished the I
commission to permit the partition�.ng so a building permit �
could be issued. In addition he said that there had been
some discussion of not allowing McDonalds to use School St.
as an access point and he said that this is a publi.c through
way and they should have the right to utilize it for access.
2. Larry Haugset, the realtor, asked the commission not to deny
access to School St. , but rather to leave this issue to the
Design Review Board who were responsible for reviewing the
sitP development plan.
3. Cliff Ashley, NPO #1 Chairman,. said that he was speaking as
a private citizen and that he was concerned that the pro-
posed McDonalds is incompatiblP with other uses in the area
� such as the School site, that t�emendous amounts o_f traffic
would be generated and the site configuration just didn't
seem to lend itself to this intense of a�.u��::� �c,'�
C. Staff Recommendation
1. Staff recommended ap�roval of the a�plicant's request with
the condition that 5 ft. be dedic�ted to Grant Ave. and
that acc;ess be provided to lot ��B�� from Pacific Hvay. only.
D. Commission Discussion and Action
l. Hartman stated that access should not be denied to School
St. but possibly should send rer,ommendation to the Design
Review Boarc� that this be considered.
2. Popp moved that the request be approved with the following
conditions:
a. that 5 ft. be dedicated to Grant St.
b. that no entranceway be made to School St.
The motion died for lack of a second.
3. Hartman moved to approve wzth the recommendation that 5 ft.
'� be dedicated to Grant St. and a recommen,dation be sent to
PC P�Iinutes - 2/18/75 - page 3
,_ . . ., .. . . _.
, ,., . .
�
�
' o `�, . ; �
f
the Design Review Board that access not be allowed to "'
Schoo.l St. (if_ legally feasible) . Popp seconded the i.
� mo•tion. '
,
4. Sakata stated he.r concern that joint access with the station !
not be allowed. �'.
5. Porter stated his concern that to partition the properl;y to '
allow the development of a McDonalds Restauran.t at the
location adjacent a school site would be a safety hazard
due to �he high traffic volumes generated by such a use.
He continued saying that the �'purpose" section of the sub-
division code requires the commission to consider public
safety when approving subdivisions and partitions. He then
stated that'he was in opposition to allowing this p�rtitioning ., `
for the McDonalds use in that it wou�d jeopardize the public F
safety.
6, The commission voted on Hartman's motion and it passed by a
majority vote with Porter voting nay.
4.3 Establishment of a Planned Developmen.t District and a Zone
Change (ZC 5-75) changing an R-7 zoned parcel on SW 98th Ave.
soth of Greenburg Rd. to A-2 (PD) .
A. Staff Findings
l. Powell presented the staff findings re]_evant to this case
�°-- pointing out that it conforms with both the Tigard Community
Plan and the NPO �2 Plan. ;
B. Public Testimony �,
1. Pat,Thomas, the project planner, presented this proposal to
the commission addressing the various "Fasano" items and '�
pointed out that the proposed density will be 7.7 dwelling u
units per acre, below the 12 dwelling units allowed in the '
adopted plan. �:.
�
2. There was no one present to speak in opposit:ion to the request. ;
C. Staff Recommendation '
�-
�
i.
l. Staff recomrnended approval of the request with the conditions (i
that: '''
a
'�
a. �f the PD is not implemented, it wi�.l revert to the R-7 ��
zoning. '�,
�i,
�:
b. The owner dedicate 10 ft. right-of-way to SW 98th and �;'
sign an agreement to participate in a Local Improvement �%
District. �y
�'` �,�
c. Variances be permitted as stipulated in the applicant' s
submitted plaz�ning program.
PC Minutes - 2/18/75 - page 4 ;�
<�
. �
�,
d. That density be controlled by the ,site development
pl�.n which specifies 7.7 dwelling units per acre.
��.
D. Commission Discussion and Action
1. Whittaker pointed out that this site is less than the mini-
mum specified for a planned developrnent in the City's code ;
� which is 4 acres; hovJever, as he pointed out, the Planning
Comrnission does have the capability to consider PD's of �;
less than 4 acres if it so dESirss. He then asked the
commissioners if they agreed that this proposal does merit i
being considered. The commissioners did cancur that the
proposal does have merit. ;
: 2. Ba11 said he wanted to see the density of 7.7 dwelling units :j
per acre attached to the PD and asked the applicant, Mr.
Scott, if he agreed to this density restriction. Mr. Scott �
replied that he did agree to this c3.ensity.
3. Hansen moved to approve the zone change from R-7 to A-2,
with the subnnitted PD, b�sed upon the staff findings and
including the staf� conditions with the exception that the
density be based on 7.7 dwelling u:nits per acre and not
according to the depiction. on the site plan and with the
addi�ional condition that a maintenance agreement be
required for areas to be held in common ownership. Ball
seconded the motion and it passed by unan.imous vote.
�, � 4.4 Recommending Amendment of the Tigard Comprehensive Paan for ;
the area known as NPO #1 (CPR 1-75) ;
A. Staff Findings �
1, Bolen presented the staff findings for this item which in-
cluded a summary of the joint meeting between the NPO #1
and the Planning Commission. He pointed out that using
the resolution of the City Council which specified certain s;
concerns and testimony which had been offered at previous
meetings a revised plan was developed. This plan was dis- �
played in graphic form for everyone at the meeting and Bolen
pointed out the changes from the previous plan.
B. Public Testimony
l. Chuck Stearns said that the existing frontage road on
Pacific Hwy. should remain and should hook into the hi�hway �:'.
for easy �ccess. ��
4
2. Craig Eagleson, owner of Farm Craft Chemicals on Commercial wa'
St. , presented two maps that hs had prepared for the ��
commission showing the one being proposed and the land use F4`
pattern that he would like to see shown, which included ��
his parcel as the only industrial parce7. on Commercial St. �}
� He then presented a history o� his business. ��
if
€�i;'
��,
s�
��
� PC Minutes - 2f18�75 - page 5 � � ���
�
�
_ ;,
�
� . ��,. � ��
� � �� :
�.
3. Chuck Stearns spoke again stating tha-t the proposed change t
�" from C-3, general commercial, to C-P, commercial-professional, �
would take value from his property. i;
4. Fred Olson, who lives on the Frontage Rd. , stated his oppo- �
sition to the pr�posed C-P uses and said that there are �
alread four lots with C-3 uses in the area so proposed. G
Y �
;�
5. Jess Mason, a realtor representing Mr. 01son, asked. the �`
commission to be objective and to see a change from C-3
to C-P as a "down" zonin�. He then stated his belief that '�
the property car�.not be marketed as C-P in �that no demand
exists.
6. Cliff Ashley, NPO #1 Chairman, p�inted out to the commission
that this rECOnsideration had come about because the means
to accomplish the plan's objectives were nat acceptable to �,
the Council. He then asked the commission to again con-
sider the plan objectives, especially in terms of controlling
s-�rip commercial development on the highway and to see if
the proposed means were not appropriate. He cancluded that
more plans are changed by zoning pr�essure than zoning is
changed by planning pressure.
C. Staff Recommendation
�. Staff recommended that the revised plan be adopted. `
�, �. r
D. Commission Discussion and Action �
�
l. Hartman stated his su�port for the Commercial-Professional �
proposed use on the hig�.way and his feeling that the staff �
fin.dings had shown that a de�inite communi.ty interest exists �
to controT continued strip commercial development on the ;�
highway. I:;
,r
2. Hansen stat�d his concern that NPO's do not actually deal ��
with the real problem of tra�.�ic congestion on the highway. F'
3. Nicoli stated his agreement with Hartman that the area �r:
shown for Commercial-Professiona� uses on the highway is �;
in the community interest but said that Farm Craft should �;;�
remain in an industrial zone.
E;:
4. Hartman stated his agreement with Nicoli in that Farm Craft `
should remain indu.strial. '�'
i;
�',:
5. Wakem said that commercial zoning on Commercial St� met the e;;
plan objectives and should therefore be recognizeci. l;�;
1';
6. In response to a statement leaving Farmcraft zoned industrial �
� and zoning the other parcels commercial would resu�t in spot �t,
� zoning, Ball replied that the issue is not spot zoning, but �;.
�3
�:'
t;`
PC Minutes - 2/18/75 - page 6
x
_ _ _ ,_ _ __,�
. . .
, , . ,
�r- _ . �
. . . � . . � . .. � .. � . � . . . ,j
t
. M k�. ��k ' .
rather the functional relationship of Commercial St. to
Main St. The commission should be applying land planning
criteria to this matter and if they were, this would lead
�=l them to the conclusion that comrnercial zoning is appropriate.
7. Hartman moved to adopt the revision for Burnham Street and
le�,ve Commercial St, designated for commercial use and Ba11
seconded.
8. Hansen moved to leave Commercial �t. in industrial zoning
ancl Nicoli second�d. The motion lost by a majority vote.
9. The commission then voted on Hartman's motion with the
majority voting yes and Nicoli voting n.o.
10. Wakem then moved to adopt the revision which would make al1
of the Buchholz property retail�-commercial. Hartman II
second�d and the motion passed by unanimous vote. i
11. Popp said that in the frontage road portion of the highway I�
he would like to see the front�,ge road connected with the I
new street proposed to go from Pacific Hwy. at the poin-t of
the Heinz Repair Shop back to Ash Avenue connected. In �
addition he said that he recognized that there might be
some lo�s of property value with the �roposed commercial I
professional use, but that this was definitely within the ��
public inter�es�t and was therefore in favor of it. He then ;
made a motion that the fxontage road be connected on the '
�.._ south to provide the safest connection possible with the j
proposed new street. Sakata seconded and the motion passed j
by unanimous vote.
12. The commission next discussed. the k�eat type of proposed
zoning to deal with -the problem of strip commercial develop-
ment.
13. Porter suggested that �the commission shou�.d construct an
entirely new zone applicable specifically to Pacific Hwy. '
to protect the hwy. as much as possible from uses which '
would be detrimental to it.
14. Ball moved that the p�an be accepted with the proposed ,i
cnmmercial-professional uses in the frontage road portion t
of:'Pacific Hwy. Pr�pp seconded stating that possi'�ly the
C-P� zon� is somewhat restrictive but that it does provide �
a proper type of zoning for this area until a possibly
refined type of zone as suggested by Porter cauld be '
deve�oped.
� I
15. The commission voted on Ball's motion and it passed by �
majority vote with Hansen, Porter and Nicoli voting no. �
i
4.5 Zone Change (ZC 11-74) ehanging the zoning map in that area �
� known as NPO #1 to conform to the Comprehensive Plan.
PC Minutes - 2/18/75 - page 7
_ _ ,
�. � . . _ ' '
. . —�..�.�__,r—�w� . . .. . . . . . . ,. . . � . . . .
�.�,. . �: � . ;:. ,y � �.�. , .� _. . .. .... ....... ...�.�..,.,. ..._.. , , .._.... ...�._. .,.,.
. .��...`:,.. ...�;. .., '!�, ... .,. . �,:� .., �.,...., .... .r� . .-�� .. .... �'... ,::< '.., . .
_ , t._
. . . ..i . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
� . e . . � . . � . . � � . � . .. ..
. . . �.,�„ . . . � .
� � h.,•' � . . �
v � � . . . �x . . . � � . � . � . .
.. . '°k.�. . � . � . �.�. . � , � . .
A. Staff Findi.ngs
�N
° 1. Bolen pres:ented the staff findings pointing out that the
praposed changes do conform to the revised NP0 #1 plan.
B. Public Testimony '
�. No testimony was given on this item.
C. Staff Recammendation.
l. Staff recommended that the zoning be adopted as conforming
to the revised plan..
D. Commission Discussion and Action �
• l. Hartman moved that the zoning be changed to conform to the
amended NPO #1 plan. Wakem seconded and the motion passed '
by majority vo�� with Hansen vot�i.ng no and Porter abstainin�.
5. UTHER BUSTNESS - There was no other business.
6. ADJOUR.NMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 11s45 p.m.�
�_.
��
PC Minutes - 2/18/75Y��-� `Pag� 8
�.,-- _ - — - .L '�
�. ,.OT�CE DF pUE�f,IG HEARING
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING CO�II�IS�ION
No�.�ce i� her��y �iven th�� p�blic hearings �ill, be held by the P1�nning
Cammis�ir�n nf the �ity o� Tig�rd fn the TweS.i�y Jun.io�c Wigh S�hool Lectu��r _
Room, 14650 S.W. 9fith Avenue, Tigard, Oregon. Seid hessingg wi1;1 occur an
February �18p 1975 a� B:i�C� p.�� end will concern the fol,lowing;
: Requ�at by Stai>dri11, Company for a condition�r u�a p�rmit �e� a11,�w ��
who�,esale distribu�a.can and qutside storage on 1��4, Zndustrial Park �3
�c�nad sit� loca�ed a� 9�Q6 5.W. Tigard Avenus (Tigard Indus�ria� _
Park)• ;�
. Request by R« D« TaPf.lemr�yar fa� a c�nditional. uso perm�t tc� allo�t {
�'�b�ioatic�n �rtd d;istr.ibution oP metal staves, on a i��-4s Irtdustriel
park zdned g.ite lo�ated at 9806 S.W. T;fgarci Avertue (T�iga�d 'lnduetr.���. �'
park� .
, 1
• R�q���� �y '�ruaoox Inc. Por �a cnnd�.�for�al u8e pexm�.t �o alZaw
assemb�.y of pre-nung dt�ax units on a t�-4, Zndustria.l Park zoned
�ii�� �.�catad a� 98Q6 5.W» Tigard AveMUe (Tigard Ind�st�rial Pa�k), -,
c
. R��uest by Geo.rg� Scot� For a zon�e chang� of Tax Lot �.UOfl mnd p�r� ''�
��' �'ax l,at 1CIQ.�, �►ap 7.�1 35CL1,'�,app�oximatel,y 50� •Fec�t south af
Gx�eenburq I�aad �n S.W� 98th �varlu� �z�om R-�7 �o /t-2 p1,ar�neti de:va�op- �
ment,
,�
. C��sa,d�,.ation �i f�ea,g�ir�c���ood �,��n ��, r"a� ich� ;! � �
�r sh Ausnue�Da�n���ara �,,
/�r�aa Th� �f fec�c�d �x�6a is bour�ded by Paci�ic Nigh�ay� Nd�1 ��.vd�� �
and McDonal.�i S�ree�. The �ropa4ed plan � .i.s a �c�vi,sipn of th� Pl�n ', ti��
fnr tha,s area which E�as adnp�ecl by th� �`�.g�xd City G4unci�. on ' �
�lay 20, .197�., ! �
"� �
. To re�lassi�'y csr�a?n �.anrJs witha.n the bnr�ndax��e� nF Nh0 Plan f�,l, �
being bo�.�nded by Pacific Highway, Ha�,1 8oule�ard anrJ Mct7c�na�.d Y�
� /lvenue, tc� Gonform to the �omprehensive p1.an fo� �ha area Whi�h wfll t;;
i l�e conside�red as the previcaus agenda if;�m�
�
A1I persons t�avir�g an in-��rest in these matt�rs a�e a.nvited ta at�enr! and �
b� hesrd.
�
�
�
;
,
�,
;
1 _... ,� ��
F ... �' �
� # ���.��-�'k`°"` ��.,t�
� � �,.� �ti � � � �
TIGARD PLANNING C0{�I�ISSION
Staff Repost
� , February 18, 1975 ,
Agenda Item 4. 1
CU 2-75
Conr�itional IJse
of a portian of an M-4 zoned site known as Tigard Industrial
Park (tax map 2S1 2BA, tax lot 3D0)
Applicant
5tardrill Co. (Robert Stuben) - CU 2-?5
AppliGant's Request
ta a.�.law whal.esalr� distribution and outside storage of
he�vy equipment.
5taff Findings
1. Tigard industrial P�rk is presently 75-8q� developed.
5ite de�ign of the industria.1 park itself is subj�ct
to Design RevieW. Overall sit� planning has therefor
b�en prev�.ausly mddressed and appraved by the T'igard
� 5ite q�sic�n and` Architectura�l Review Board.
2. Wfiolsesale da.�tribu�ion is a conditiona]. use ir� �n
i��4 zane. Outside storage is a conditional use in
an �i�4 zcrne when essential and incidental to a
permitted use. '
i
3. No appreciable impact on trafPia gertesation of th�e �
indus�rial park a.s anticipated. {
�
i
4� Adequate park�ng appears to t�e provided for employse !�
an�i business parking. i
5. Stardrill Co. has a problem providi�g acceptable �
au�side storage Por heavy equipment periodically �
taken in trade on new equipment wfiich they dist�ibute. �
Their p�aminant location at the entrance tp the �
�ndustrial park contributes to the problem �s they i
store their equipment in parking stalls adjacent to �`
and in conPlict with the internal accesg roads in the 1
inciustrial park. !
6. Chapter 18. 52. 060 requires that all permitted outside !
storage be screenad by a sigfit cabs:curing fence �t least
6 ft. high. Stardrill has been notified of this require-
� ment and fias indicated its Willingnes� to Work out � �
rea�onable solution.
. � . � . . . . . . ... � � . ...I
.. . _,... .„ . _. .. . ._. . .. _ .. .� .., , .,. ... ... . .._ �_.. ._. ,_ , i..__ 4L.:.�
� . .. �m:,. ,..' . . .
i �
' . � ��:.� 1 �s� � .
7. The presen� us-es in the indus�rial pask, the conditional
uses proposed and the park conform to present zoning
� and to the 7igard Gommunity Plan. N. Po 0. �2's proposed
Plan agrees als�. Present i�nd use in the vicinity of
' th� industrial park is residential, but has also been
de'signat�d as future industrial in the Tigard Community
P1an.
;
8. This condition'al use request wi11 not aff.ect the impact
of the industri.al park on c�mmu`nity services.
9. 5ome visua�l impa�t from the outside storage could
result dependin� on wher8 it is located and hoW
i� is ser�ened.
Staff Reca'rt�mendatiot�s
�o be made •after public tes�imony has been heard and the
hearing c�.oses.
Necore�mendec� Conditions afi` AP�roual
,
CU 2�-75 �S�ardrill.)
lo Nrrang� with d�veloper, sub,ject ta sa.te development plan
revi��, to pravids sight obscux�ing screaning for those
piece� of heavy equ�pment that cannat be stnred inside.
A11 parking requirements are ta be met and the compound
�- to be provid�d must not either obstruct traf'fic ci.rculation I
or u�vrp required parking.
2. Any heavy mechanical wark dane on ar to heavy equipment
rawned ar lsased by the campany will be conducted inside I
�he building or will be dane els�.where �ifP-site.
�
� '
pC 5taff Report - Febxuary 18, 1975 - Stardrill - page 2
, �� �, �. � _
�`' �i-�� _ ' " " is�. � �
- t
�9 S.W. KAT' `RINE ST. '
�---,�-._.
� ; � �, � . . : - � `
�
{ � �� �/� D � � f,� !� BRr '
� I !� , �/,✓//O �� . ��/ � X '
,_x � x � ��,f �.` 65.09
- D � � .
� �
r. � � �
� S. 1
' • i
X - ���N�1 � '�'�t� M'�
. x � p�,rA
.� • ,� ���
. X , � �
lBO � � � �_
. .� f ►'r� yT�� - /% j� �
+ �f isp �� � �� /
� _ , . - . . '.,_ �� � � :
_�_�.�..�....---- � x�/ /��
e�� , � /� `'' � � �
M.H. 9 l �/
c , . ,� f/
�so � � x �1 � �
c.e. -
O - • Fi�L AREA , /; i�� / � ,
� ,
• . x ' � .
, . � �
' � x xS� �:
-�. ` ;
..• .
.� �'
...
.�..
�. �so �
. ` � � �� \
14 8.2
\ � k . �
. X � � 150.3 `o�
_ � �
14 8.2 � �� X ��
x ' �` � ,{.
FOLL s��
9.S ` A�iEA _ � �4T.7
� X
ae.2 iaT.S • � � � �.., ``
X .� M.H. X �� � ;�
♦\` � ,
� '/
.�
F. . �� � BRUSH�
O
• � ; :
. �-
, . _
�e-.._.___ __ y.s.._...�.,.�,_. - ,..�.
.-. _
_..�. ,.,.>- ,_�,,,,,,,��a..�..�. :�.:.,�., � .W.... __ _...__
i
� . . • . � , • ' .
� ''
. 1 � :/ ��,r� — ��..w •�-�-- , •'Z ,
�� .�~ • f/�J � •�ji�' �'�sie;� ' ..�« � � �. •�:...�� '. , .;
, � �� � . ��� g� • . �.�f' �.��; _` {1'� I • '
/ e. �� `� w �i�l��r e . �� ���� �� •� . � � . . . .
� • •' _ ,-��.: t �� �� �� • ��� ,,1�!• � � � . . i
- �� � �t �� ..��"�•'�t•r,�r.�� �, l.� � � . � . . � _
�' ��„, �t1�t: ��xsti�jtiy,k��. �i. : . . i
::;'�,".�,'.:';ce;:�'i:t:d;:''�'�'i':s:'ts::::::s'•;::: ,,.s� '� f .��. S • �� �
`�'• . . ;::�r4':;::s:::;i:;t:�:s:;::i't::::i:::;:°:::;:i;:�;;:;::tiHtu., ..f�+�',t ; o � �� o
. . - �•.�w/ � �;��. ;..4•. ����:.. :;SSt;:�l�4S�` • O q , �l � , ..
.1 •� !� �; ' �,�L:S::�t'�i'��.5'���:�^ i �c � er . . . .
I. J p• �S� s l�41:t1' t�y�,.�.; . _ • , �
. � • � �J;.. �{; �. :;t�;"' '�.t;�• ti .�!:�r,t , . .
;.5;: .;1�1.• •
(
.i�R��
.��
:�'O •
�
.t..
1
tt•
;�:. ..�f.�•• •
�t.•
•�O /�
�•'�:' • •
.����
.�j.b:: �
S:�S / �
-�.•
•
- A
•
�5:����L��`.'y�l.,S:'„.��,•���;,C'•.S;S71::qC:�;1:;;S;t�"..;...y...... ♦
.f;: .;5.� .:SS" / ♦ �p .
\ 9
/ ? .
. . �!�y"S•°.°��:.:�.�.°".��L::..��'�'�.'•S'L•...nl.o.• .
� ,,. .:,:� i � _
, ..,. .;s.:..ti.•
:....,::
...��.': �
.:t:. �:t�:
n .
.x: . . .
/
� �
�'•�7`�':
���
t.�
o �
:;�i1�;°•�:�
ti
°��"++;:: .
•
�:�'• -
�
� •
i:�i:•:
�
. :+5'r.�:
. .
k
,1
♦
.a's':
/
�
�'a
��s
�'
y
a
. �'t+�� ��
:�;�:
.,.
..�ti: .i
i
�
•
,g
�::
�.
�,e L�.: ''�►,,� � ,•` � .�, ';° "4"�'�`.' a� �, ; '
� ', b � � N .
. �.
o . ,
.��i .� . .
:►.. �,, O � o ��
� �x ,. L., �. H = �' '"E
� i $� C' .,�wJ, �\, � •.� $ ; •
4.. �� �� `�' �Ztl ' � , : + , � � ,
L �..�, ' '.j�,, •�.
•> t .r w � �.� w-.. � ` ..rt'y�{r.(.�r , w y ti w N�a'••j J��. �.�� I"� 1 •
jj ..• � l�. � 7 /� L� Y L
. . �� ;y�� .M •• «'�• y�� �9� ` / 9 .
. � ''a ,� c � �� �� "•• � � •�,
. ;�. � � t �t. �t� '� ��a '�I� . � �
. � g ` ••t �'* �• ' �Q �•r,P � �/l� (y��.y . �. - i
� . . . ��'' � . •:r. ��y�� t� •9�► N� . ' � • 1 ��i/� . • 1.
� . ' � w� . � � :, °� � \. •, ,,,` `Y • .. +� / � . .
. . �� • �I •t: T ♦ �� �
�^I '������ y. L��.��;� ��. t,�V� � ` �,.` , �• � .
I ,:� r � �, �•''t'� `` • •/` �••; . �: �: �• �
,.�1�'.. :J' �- 's♦ . J �
"s'�.::
. ` - .
• l • ��=�
�� �
.
���
.
� / �. �s.; " 9-� V „�:�1 � ` • e :` ,
� h {. � �t� � u.i �� •• ���
,� . r � • . : � �
� • •
I� � o ti ' 1 , • ��t � ���.• � '� • q �
. �� !. ti • � \ ) G.r � �y'� . Q��•���%��i� j • i C� �� � ..
�� ��.�a � 'n� n � „Nr 4 +i��• �� ��ti� ��
� � ,......� . :it;:: � t \T ��j. �i�+rr!•
.$w � t, .� ;�• (/1\ / +r, i .!a
�� � - L� ^•.e ...,4'. y : :C�. � :� • `I ro� . � •M . .
�. '� ' . 1•'�.��,__, l,.�f .. .Y•.i . � • • . �i , • . �1.. � .
�.,t...��� ' •�. . •� � �.� ��� O
. 1 �! i =� f: �. .. • � �'71 !�(/'• r tp ��v ' � - . • �.
t
• '. - ' Q ��� �; %1� o� �.� �1.� �� �3 ` � ' i(.:y ' .
, t i § � �. . o. . � 1 m . :
• �. .• _ ��'e � • � �� w� L a�� d i�� • ��� J•/�A. � '
#� � 1 � � � b � . � � �� �'�� �'°� I,� _ ~ �yf�I' _ ,
� .r �. .� d' � • �. : ^' • �4t. b'
. 47� u � a � `` � • , � .
� � ��7I lo✓ (;"�0�� :� � y •� ,,'�+0 f l� •� �! �+.li e Y��r+ "�s�.• -. .
t
� � . i` � �; � � . . .. ..
�
• v,� � • .. . .
. �. . • �_ "� a �-�.
.
. . .
� �
, . . ° ,--
. � . S!�.`� .
�w.
T�CGARD PLANNING COM1�iISSION
f , Staff Report
�`� February 18, 1.975
A�enda Item 4.2
MLP 1-75 (Robertson Minor Land Partitioning)
Minor Land Partitionin�
A request by Jack Robertson to divide his property (�ta:x lot
300 on tax rn�ap 2S1 - 2CB) into two separate parcels.
Staff Findin�s
l. The subject tax lot 300 presently has fron.tage on three ;
streets; I'acific Highway, School Street and Park Street.
(see attached map) . The applicant proposes a nearly i
equal division of the property into a 40,OOQ sq. foot �
t
lot on pa.rcPl B and a 31,000 sq. ft, on parcel A (vis. {
map) . The minimum lot size permitted in the C-3 zone is
6,000 sq. ft. j
,;
q
2. Each lot being formed will have access to the City street i
system meeting City code requirements. App�ication has
been made to the �State Highway Dept. to place two drive-
� ways on Pacif ic Highway, on.e of them to be shared with �
��- ' �the adjacerit Standard Oil service station. ,
3. Section 17.28.090 of the subdivision ordinance states,
"Whenever existing streets adjacent to or within a tract
are of inadequate width, additional right-of-way shall be :
provided at the time of subdivision. " This section also '''
applies to minor land partitions. In this case, the only j�
street not having sufficient width is Grant Avenue, 40 ft. ��.
where 50 ft. are needed. This would require a 5 ft. �'
d�dication to Grant from the applicant' s property. While �'
School Street is only a 20 ft. right-of-way, t�lis .is '�
actually an easemer�� and not a pub�ic way and no dedi- ?
cation is required. In fact, the Public Works Dep-�. has �4
stated a preference to see School Street closed because
its inadequate width presents a traffic hazard. �d;l
�
� � Staff Recommendat�on � � �'!
t5-'
Ef
1. Staff recommends approval with the condition that �jr'ft. ��
be dedicated to Grant Avenue and that acceas be provided �R;
to lot B from Paci�ic Highway only. ;,
��
��
i.,
�y
i;
�' ��
�;�
���:
r
�';
�
_� , , , .: . . .. ��,.. ._,�
�w ,: .
k ;.,. : _
_ . . _. . _ _ _ _
' : .. ,: �. .:
- � ;
• '�,� . � �
�
� � �
�;
Property Description ,
. ,
A 40,000 square foat parce? of land, being a portion of F
Lot 33, North Tigardville Addition, a plat of record in '
Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 �Jest of the W111amette
Meridian� Washington County, Oregon. said parcel being mor�e �'
particularly described as follows: �
� ;
E3eginning at a point that bears South 45° 00' blest along the }
northwesterly line of said Lot 33. 10.00 �eet from the most i
northerly corner thereof; thence South 45 00' East along �
� the southwesterly line of an easen�ent to School District �
� No. 23J, recorded September 5, 1972 in Boak 885 at Page 951 , �
, 21�.01 feet to the westerly right-of-way line of S. W. �
Paci fi c Hi ghway; thence a1 ong S. W. Paci fi c Hi ghway on Lhe f
arc of a 2904. 7� fogt radius curve fio the left with a chord �
• that bears So�ath 37 41 ' S5" West, 136.28 feet, a� arc �
distance of 136.29 feet to the most easte rly corner of the +
property leased to Standard Oi1 Company May 25, 1�60 and �
recorded in Book 436 at Page 583; thence North 55 14' 50"
West along said Standard property, 110.04 feet to the most ;
northerly corner thereof; thence South 35° 29' 30" West '
. along said Standard property, 56.56 feet; thence North 45° �
00' West parallel with the northeasterly line of said Lot 3?,
�' 129.45 feet to a point gn the northwesterl�r line of said '
, Lot 33; thence North 45 00' East, 210,53 feet to the point j
' of beginning. ,
1 �. Subject to an Ingress/Egress easement to the Standard 011
:.ompany, dated October 14, 1960 and recorded in Book 436 at '
` Page 583. I
Subject to a 5.0 foot slope easement to the Oregon State
Highway Commission. dated July 18, 1952 and recorded 1n
Book 335 at Page 70. • �
�
`` � ���� �� ��.�� . .._....;.. .�_ � � �
�. u ��� t �,. � � _,_ � __.... _. _
� � -
.,.,
.. ._
.. � ___ , t �
. _�_..,.._--- ti
. �`., i
��_,,,__.—.___..� �5
, °_, `�-•�.....
, a! c,c�r. �j
�'. , ,,00,
�;
. , '�oo' � ;
y �;
. ��
� ; '600' � : y �i
n � �,000 , . ,.� o `�
•., � ; i' ` p
�., , �• �.�
_ . � � �C � I.
; ,••, , Fa
.• . , �
• `!/DO' •-• � ' � '�� `SQO' t�
..�•. ,
4.�
, .t
. �� . .. . . % � � . . ` .. .
.. �� � � � . f . . � � . � .. i . s
i . � ; ti
�/zoQ� , :, .¢oo `� ,
; ;,, �.,'
� � �--,--}
e — � �
� � ,._,`• ' (;
,. ,
�L . � � , t•.Z//�� � !f
'�� '�,. .�,�' ``�` .i00' � �' �f ��
, ; .. �s � � �,;
. �v s`� ��
�, �` ����
..� � � �,
v � ��
, � �
q �
��. � ,5 j
�. C�xrs''�,�3 �,, `
,�o�' ;�oi.�i' �
�—'` � ,_,.1------i�- ; �.
. J f'�R7'L��lD � ` �;
�C f�� ' : ; �'.
- � jy, . PiqC�� � �
S•
. ��
. � � � ����
�
�
�
�
�C/�i�` /�'a�o
y
• �.S'C.9lE•' /„ �/OD'
� /
, .
. . �
�. �
TIGAI�.D PLANNING COMMISSION
{�„
Staff R:eport
�.- February 18, 1975
Agenda Item 4.3
ZC 5-75
Zone Chan�e and Estab7�ishment of a Planned Development District
for a duplex planned development in an. area (presently zoned
R-7) south of Greenburg Rd. on S. W. 98th Ave. (tax lots 1000
and part of 1001 on Map 1S1 35Cd)
Applicant
George Scott
Applicant's Request
l. -to be allowed to establish a planned development of dup-
lexes in an A-2 zone
' 2. to be allowed a zone change to A-2 from existing R-7
3. to vary subdivisian code requiremen�Ls as specified in his
preliminary plan and development program narrativee
� Sta�f Fin,din�s
l. Th.e size and shape of the site proposed is such that the
best use of the site may b� accomplished by� �the method
chosen 'by the developer. The alternatives a.re either to
place a cul-de-sac on one lot line creating an awkward
development pattern or to assemble enough adjacent parcels
to allow a loop subdivision.. 1VTei-thex� alternative offers
any particular advantage to the public. '
2. On. site retention or other drainage disposal is not addressed
in sufficient detail in the submitted plan and should be
addressed in specific and detail in the preliminary plat.
3. Surrounding properties are older, smaller single family
homes on very large sites. This project will more than ,
doub�e the number of families using S. W. 98th at the
present time.
4. The project conforms to Tigard Community Plan wnich identifies I
this area as "medium density" and to the proposed NPO #2 I
Plan which also designates the area appropriate for medium
density residential.
5. It should be noted that NPO #2 has proposed ex�ension of
� SW Center from the southe�ly end of SW �5th to the southerly
end of SW 98th, alleviating the problem created by 98th
e�, � : '
terminating as it does without cul-de-sac or connection
more than 1000 ft. from its only intersection, at Green-
burg Rd.
�;,,
6. Applicant's request, although asking rezoning to A-2,
speci�'ies that his project density wil]. be less than 7
units/�ross acre. A-2 zoning ordinarily allows 12 units
per gross acre.
7. Due to provisions of Tigard zoning code requiring develop-
ment within one year of the first stage of the projECt
or vacation of the planned deve�.opment district, staff I
sees advisable that no zone change be ef�e�tive if the
proposed PD be vacated.
�
8o Water and sewer are availa'ble at the site.
9. Impact of the population of the project on school popu-
1.ation appears negligab�e.
10. Statements required of the prop�nent of an action. such as
this under provisions of the "Fasano" ruling appear to
be satisfactory as to form.
1'1. There appear� to be no undesirable economic or environ-
mental impact from the proposed ?� .roject.
Staff Recommendation
�
To be advised
�
PC Staff Report - February 18, 1975 - item 4.3 - page 2
�,:�:., _ : _ �.,. _..:w :���. _ w�.�. n�.�v ._._
. . �
. . -_-- _.__ j: ._� . _- .� -�-�- . - -- . .�,a.,..� _. .. ,. .. � _ .�s.�. , _,. . ... �
. .,- � : ,
, . „»_J � � J_
anrlanr ��� •----- ' � /i � -
_.. . . — _ -
. . . . :,.., k_ r__r.e� L'6.�r� �.. �,a::..n�..n, } „ � .._._ _.._. _- - � ------•---- -- .
^�' ------_.. ..._..._ N15.. ,.::. _,,.r. � .���+eAV '` 'H
. �:.� ... ..- ... .. .. � , t is6 � MS
�'r �.n �.�M1 i+ps Y Mn . ?� ! . �f'� t _ ��Tf 7T' �_�- .
� �. . - � ' _ + .' � _ � � ^ 'I ti) I •��- � .... -�--��.+..r.� .:.. � , .
. - - . _ �. :�S..� '`.: � I o. =I o� Z � � L
+. .. �' t a VA/tO. � f _
. .: . � � ' ' �� � ~ . � ���n.� 84 �«�_ � + � ~ (__'�l N '?:� '��a� �s4 - ..
�, cr � r r� �i=- � . � p: ;,', _ � '.., �L,:r;� ; ►=^ �—�-j �
� . � �y g o. $ ��� +I � .1� � ��` ! � � -^(.'�-� `i .J Y (�,'�•w � � z . � .
- - ` _ � - - - ;� ' �..-•--'��'.'�^'-- ' •3 ^ � \�J ���7 r�^.� �i J�-!;.�='� ' 1 � -
. .�:». . »' - U - �(�, �'�� a•t:�,�.�r.,�-o'u ��:3 �_� � �o w — � �
- , !' ; _ }' 0 i°`= •:I_= __ .;;C �3J t� 'O ��'.�.';,���:3 i •� �
• s �; 's� : . ti7 ' c� � � - � � �� � '•' � '��
. ' - `==f: ' , Q � :i. � Q b t � w �_o_ , _3...�. ' Q
i �_ � �.�..,.._ + �'- : Q
' F;�.t = = f g �' U ,� � ., .. j
� '^� i j$z � �i t �.._.� � ti_8 ;�g t� : � �+s
� '°� �:
CQ.. 7` � °'.
. . .� '� , i . ��w �.�w� w��Q VI M S [. �� , ..•.���-... ' n i�..� 'V�.•• �\.. . � .•. ��� .
. ' �� .. .. . �� . . ..... �r...�.,.�_ .�
�s . - ° w , . y i N: ° �' '�g. U •
� ¢�% � _ = t � €� d :� ., �
r
' S: . ��—, } y`���.• � M'��' «'1- '�a ' � �� �. � . ' � • U� g - Z �
. . y� .;'�'� i � �: . �,� a' r� ,. ,� "'� r. � �
p ^� °n•� !i s �Q -�� � ----- /,- --- ^ �� �J. r � .
. \ �ili O j� j . z � _;� _� " •" , � (,� . L
. . ' \ �T-� � . . '�� �u � . � � • _` 1 �.�
q s �� , iL! i Qr ��" , w ~ � 1.t1 ' � �' � D
. . ,. � 4.;`'i p+ • . T s:Y r� L� •i,�.n ���w�. � •��a•,� u. t� ' -
. . \ x ..... �;,�,:.T-���j a � �ti �" �� "o•'^ 'e o� U• �°o:• o� o c� o� � oy ��� . � �. � .
.. \ ,y .� _ i.� i `j'q� � ,°'Ai �' � •.. �� _� _ _ „ �w°` °oR. Sw: �� �
. • \��+y� y :i 4 i� ..... ,,:::�..�«.• ��i ...a �� � a—..w-3/1{1 -s . ..�, 1 t^ • i ,Iti86 MS • Z •�
. --� --�---- .–——T�' �. � . . t ,.�.., ' •:�.:��:,__: .., .._ � -, 3
. ��~�'�, � �N!� `I Z:�.�� } �i .:•� _� � _ - C-V—
�; " �' `� ' �`' `' i � u1
\ � v�, •;j � _� ;;� $� � • '• z . ; �_
\�a'�� i';; { l�= �; .� �' .� . � � �' 4 � ? �
I . y�y r ` \ i. .�:� �• 't� �'� - .4 �
` ,•` +�s `x w ��r�p�•K �`p w �I
,\ � �,�tif` �'J•� �%il 1..�.iC 4= �� � 11�. � �
� ± � \ �✓ ~' t ~�� Y" • • . ••' . f� I
� '' ...� ` � M:i ' JQ; /*' �i
`-...i' • ' � � �:y. »r/� . •�•}' .� .(�;� � �
. . ��/� .M..T � � \�` . • ' O' ��% �
. . . ' . .�.+- ' 1. �. ''' .Yi �sy�r+'� ,�\4'L '►\ �i I �.��� /._
.�� N V .� ? i }C�µ� s \� :� � ,,,s �QP��F� / �1 �
�. � s i;;� ~'�r , \,,:% � . �:\� �I - ��(-- �
' � °`n • -n i ° .� ' ' � .�-..SyJ` S��R� ./- o�� • � ' - " I
� � . - ' ,�.�SOV �=••_ 'a�
. . . • i� - / , y ��• `! _ . .
. . : . . .' " _` / . • .
y
. • L
. . ' • �S , �.. ' _ - '
.
_ � . �
� .. �
. " �� �.� ... � t . s + � . .t . � .. .- . . ... ' . . � . .� '' _ _ _ _ _ . . ..._ _ ..; ,_.-
`i �
. e �
. pi�w �ru�+aay , ..� "__`... �.�: ....�J I i ' �c'c�.ari � _.......d � ..: . .. .. ,._ � w�errs �li�� i
.M. �. . ��.b . �. . . . . . -
. . . . �.. . � . ;... � � .
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
�> Fe�ruary 18, .1975
Agenda Item 4.4
CPR 1-75 (N. P. 0. #1 Plan)
Comprehensive P�an Revision
To be consi�.ered are revisions to the N. P. 0, #1 Plan regard-
ing lands within the Downtown on Burnham and Commereial Streets
and also lands on Pacific Highway
Applicant
Ci�,y, of Tigard
Staff Findin�s
l. The N. P. 0. #1 Plan was adopted by the City Council zn
May of 1�74. The need for revising the Plan bPCame necessary
when the City Counci�. found certain rezoning proposals
contained in the Plan inappropriate. The Plan was sent
back to the Plannin� Commission _for revision with a r�so-
lution outlining Gouncil concerns in January of this year.
On January 28, 1975, the Plannin.g Commission and N. P. 0.
#�: held a joirit meeting to consider poss�.ble plan revisions
�w- (see enclosed minutes of January 28 meeting) . The Plan
revision concerns three separate areas and the remainder
o�' the staff report will deal with them individually (also
see attached resolution) .
I THE DOWNTOWN �
" �
i
�
A. N.P.O. #1 Plan Objectives �
i
1) to success�ully improve the viability of Downtown as a �
retail-c�mmercial, governTnental and community center ;
for the citizens of Tigard �
i
�
2) Because Pacific Highway is not intended to provide con- ;
vena.ence shopping for neighborhood commercial nee:ds :
the Dc�wntown area should provide 'this function for the �
Neighborhooci (Policy 22) . �
i
B. Means of Accomplishing Objectives �
�
1) In order to retain, as well as improve, the existing �
level of commercial and governmental services avail-
able in the Downtown, it is important that new develop� "
ment; be of this type and a�.so that existing businesses �
� are not converted to industrial uses. Therefore, areas j
#
,.
�
�
c
_�
�
. . . .
. . ...,. ,. ,,.« n:H .. ... .::.. �
� � — :_— —
" � e
f° , i
�'... y �
zoned for industrial use which are now being used �
commercially or vacant land which could be devel.oped
commercially, are proposed to be reserved for commer-
�.- cial use. These lands are those properties presently j
zoned M-3 on Commercial Street and the two vacant �
parcels (tax lots 200 & 5300) south of Main Street on
Burnham Street. Previolzsly the P1.an recom:mended
commercial zoning on Burnham as far south as the Air �
King Co. and Randall mini-wa•rehouse; properties. This �
revision recognizes the existing industrial development i
on Burnham and prop�ses commercial zoning only on those ',
properties which present the greatest potential for �
helping to achieve the Plan objectives. '
II The Buchholz Property
A. Plan Objectives
l. to prov�_de developable commercial land at the west
end o�' Main Street while minimizing conflicts with
the adjacent x,esiden�ia�. area
B. Means of Accomplishing Plan Objectives
l. A11 of the Buchholz property (tax lots 1500, 200�, 2100,
and 22U0) are proposed to remain in commercial zoning
and special concern given to the need for screening
the adjacent residential area when development of this
� property does occur. .
III PACIF'IC HIGHWAY CON�'IERCIAL AR.EA
A. Plan Objecti�res
1. that the carrying capacity and safety of persons
traveli.ng on Pacific Highway should be the highest
priority concern when considering the types of develop-
ment to be allowed adjacent to the highway
2. Persons occupying the residential portions of the
neighborhood shou�d not be required to vEnture onto
Pacific Highway to satisfy their everyday shopping
needs.
3. The Plan must shown concern for the type of commercial
shopping environment being creat,ed for the citizens
of this community. One-stop shopping and parking for
convenience commercial goods and services such as '
groceries, variety goods, cleaners, etc. being pre-
I
o n in er a of uch u es amon hi hwa �
ferable t a tersp s 1 s s g g y
commercia� uses strung along Pacific Highway. i
4. to provide employment opportunities within the City '
� near residential areas
B. Means of Accomplishin;g P�.an Objectives for Pacific Highway
PC Staff Repor-t - February �.8, 1975 - �item 4.4 - page 2 '
_ . T .__. �
�� .. . _ . •
�. �
1. rezoning that portion o�' Paci�ic Highway not already
� developed int;o highway commercial business to exclude
zones allowing neighborhood convenience commercial uses, ��
principally super markets and businesses offering goods
and services which norma�.ly ally themselves sn�ith this
type of us� (specialty shops) . The continued retail
commercial development of this highway� has grave con-
sequences for its future ability to meet the eor�.flict-
ing demands being placed upon it to service as both a
market place �or motorized shoppers and a major mst-
ropolitan arterial route, The inevitable result is
excessive congestion upon the highway and businesses
which actually became "traffic blighted" because the
exposed highway location they once sought has become
a poor place to do business due to �he di:fficulty of
getting in and out of their site.
Carl Buttke has spoken to the probl.em of attracting
additional traffic to the Highway in wor�. he has
recentl com leted for N. P. 0. • which i develo -
Y P #3, s p
ing plans for the other side of Pacific F3ighway.
'�Pacific Highway can be expected to be severely
overloaded with traffic north of Walnut Streete
I
This overloading ancl. resulting congestion could
cause motorists to drive throu�h N. P. 0. #2 and
�" #3 to avoid delay and congestion. Improved
�- public transportation in the area and to the
southwest could help reduce this traffic over-
loadin . Also it a ears that there ma be
g � pA Y
too much �eneral commercial space allocated alon�
Pacific Hi hwa cau�in sho in tri s to be
attracted to the area rom other nei�hborhoods.
Tf this could be replaced bv more �eneral office
space, the amount of traffic on Pacific Hi�hway
could be reduced and some work trips could be
shortened in len�th by providin� more diverse
types of employment in the Cit.y. ��
2. The frontage road, proposed to be recessed to the
rear of the properties on the original plan, is now
proposed to remain in its existing location, but closed
on the west and extended to Garrett on the north.
�
PC ,Staff Report - February �8, 1975 - item 4.4 - page 3
s...,._ _ _ __ , . . ..._.r. ,,,. .. .. :.. . .....
�
� . . . ,
� � . i
�... ' . �. .
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON �
� RESOLUTION No. 75- 5
�., .
A RESOLUTION REFERRING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOCtJMENT ENTITLED "NEIGHBOR-
HOOD PLAI3 #1 FOR THE ASH AVENUE-DOWNTOWN AREA" TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AND NETGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATTON FOR RE-STUDY AND POSSIBLE REVISION.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 13, 1975, where testi.mony .
� , was offered by affected property owners who objected to the
—�ezoning proposals of the NP0 #1 Plan.
��-IEREAS, the City Council found merit in some of the facts presented in
objection to the proposed re-zoning,
NOW, THEREFOftE, .
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL that the ��NPO #1 Plan for the
Ash Avenue-Downtown Area�� be referred to the Planning Commission
and Neighborhood Planning Or�ganization #1 for re-study and
- possible revision with attention directed to the following
areas:
l. The Downtown and most particularly, consideration of the
proper relationship between commercial and industrial land
� uses. On Burnham Street the existing industrial develop-
ment pattern should be viewed as a reality not likely to
be changed by the act of re-zoning. � Conversely, an
Commercial Street the predominant development patterrx is
currently commercial in character and re-zoning could
appropriately reflect existing and proper future commercial
px�operties.
2. Pacific Highwa study should be directed �o the proper
development o vacant parcels to meet the objectives set
down by the NPO #1 Plan text while also considering the
desire of affected property owners to enjoy the maximum .
. fr.eedom in useage of their property to the• extent com-
patible with the public interest; that the existing front-
age road should be extended bei;ween Garrett soutti to the
Heintz Volkswagen property which would eliminate curb
cuts and dangerous access to Pacific Highway and this
property could remain C-3 Commercial or could"possibly be
C-4.or C-P>
3. Multi-�familv Density Areas proposed behind businesses
fronting Pacific Highway should be re-examined to see if
a potentially desirable extensio� of downtown commercial
property is not being lost and if a residential living
envirorunent is not, in some cases, being proposed too near
Pacific Highway, a major traffic arterial.
(._
PASSED by Council on the 27th day of January, 1975.
"��T��(i'ic-a'� G(• �.�.L.✓L.f.. •�
- Mayor - City of Tigard . -
ATTEST:
, . f'� '' .
/.� i-.yLL.. v/ G .i�� L
Recorder - City�o� Tigard ,
CResolution No. 75-5 I
. I
,�.:�'�i'�4;,R...,R......,. .�,.., , : / � '
'wnit�M �.riri �A•yw,.� . .� � . .• , • .. � � . . � • ,
� ;`
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
� February �.8, 1975
Agenda Item 4.5
ZC 7,1-74 (N. P. 0. #1 Rezoning)
Zone Change
A proposed zone change to bring certain land.s within the
boundaries of N. P. 0. #1 into confarmance with the N. P. 0.
#1 Comprehensive P1an
Applicant
City of Tigard
Staff Findin�s
1. These rezonings are proposed for properties stipulated on
the attached exhibit, for the purpose of bringing them in-
to con._formance with the N. P. 0. #1 Plan which is being
considered as the previous agenda item.
2. The basis for rezoning is provided in the accompanying staff
report for N. P. 0. #1 Plan revision (CPR 1-75) . Rather
�- than reiterate these points, Commission members are asked
to refer to the CPR 1-75 report as findings relevant to
this request.
Staff Recommend.ation
To be provided following public testimony
� �
i
i
I
I
�
�.: � ,
Recommended Conditions of Approval
I � CU 2-75 (Stardrill)
1.. Arrange with developer. , subjec;t to site development plan
.review, to provide sight obscuring screening for those
pieces of heavy equipment that cannot be stored inside.
All parking requirements ax�e to be met and the campound ,
to be provided must not either obstruct traffic circulation III
or usurp required parking.
� : 2. �n:y heavy mechanical work done on or to heavy equipm�nt
owned or leased by the company wi11 be conducted inside
the building or will be done elsewhere off-site.
CU 3-75 (Wond Stove)
l. Noise levels will conform to perforznance standards estab-
lished by the State of Oregon Environmental Quality Com-
mission - (vis. Noise Control R.egulatinns CH 340, Oregon
Administrative Rules� .
2. App�.icant will conform to building and fire codes with
respect to access within an.d partitionin.g of his space
or as his con:tract with developer may provide.
CU 4-75 (Trudoor)
� l. Applicant will conform to n.oise control regulations of the
State of Oregon Dept. of Environmental (�ua�i�ty�
2. Permit will be valid only for assembly of pre-�hung door
units. No manufacture of mi11 work or operati�n of wood
rriilling machinery is to be permitted by this conditional
! use permit except as incidental to the assembly o� door
frames and mortising of incidental hardware.
�
�