The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Packet - 05/20/1975 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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 T.ig�,rd Planning Commission May 20, 1975 - regular meeting �.' Twality Jtznior High School - Lecture Room 14650 S. W. 97th Avenue, Tigard, Ore�on 1. CALL TO ORDER. 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES April 22, 1975 - study session "� May 6, 1975 - regular meetirrg 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.� Conditional Use CU 9-75 (Lawrence Whitaker) A request by Lawrence Whitaker to allow a cabinet shop as a con:ditiona� use in a C-3 zone at 13565 SW Pacific Highway (tax lot 600, Wash. Co, tax map 2S1 2CC) . 4.2 Conditional Use CU 7-75 (Randal� Construction Co. ) A request by Randall Construction Co. to allow multiple con- � diti.onal uses in an Industrial Park (M-4) zone on a 5.56 acre ` parcel at 8900 SW Burnham St. , known as "Security Storage" (tax lots 2200 and 2300, Wash. Co. tax map 25�. 2AD) - previously tabled. 4.3 Zoning Ordinance Amendment ZOA 1-75 A request to am.end previously considered ZOA �-75 to include the creation of a new zone designation �or portions of the C-3 zone and amending gsneral pr�visions to include restrictions on high traffic g�nerating estab�ishments (referred by Council) . 5. SUBDIVISIONS Sl 74 Preliminary Plat Approval A request for approval of a preliminary plat for Phase III, Summerfield Planned Development, located at and. near SW Highland Drive and 109th Ave. 6. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN NPO l�elegate Selection Process ; An. inforrnational hearing to seek community input on the process � to be used for selection of NP0 delegates in the ��Tigard Triangle�� and 72nd-Rolling Hi�ls area (NPO's 4 and 5) 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOI7RNMENT ..� .� . _::,.._. _ J - a��,�e ac��k<<.i-�� ' � . � I , • ; a MINUTES �� TIGARD PI,ANNTNG COMMISSTON MAY 2Q. 1975 - REGUT,AR MEETING TW'ALT2Y JR. HI�H SCHOOL 14650 S.W. 97TH AVENUE, TIGARD, OREGON ; ; ; 1. �AI,L TO ORDER: The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:40 PM. 2. ROI,I, CAI�I�: Commissioners Ball, Hartman, Nicoli, Popp, Porter, Saka�a & Whitt�ker present; Staff - Powell� Bolen 8c Cit Attorney Anderson. Y Comr�ission�r Hansen arrived late. 3. APPROVAI, OF MINUT�S: . Minutes of May 6 were not yet finished. . Porter asked deletion of statement in minutes that he had suggested a proportional voting scheme - Chairman WYiit�taker directed s�aff to review the taped minutes a�nd make appro- pr3ate changes. * COMMUNICATIONS: Chairman Whittaker directed the agenda to be amended to consider �� Item #fi first. �`a � �- 6. COMPREHENSIYE PIrAN (NPO #4 & #5 Delegate Selection Process) �y A. Staff Report: „ . Bolen read a memorandum from st�►ff recommending a method � anii process for NPO delegate selection. . The methodo�ogy used by staf� and the v�ting rights of ��+ members was discussed by the board. `� B. Public Testimony & Discussion 1. Paul Warner, resident of 72nd Street asked clar3fication � of NPO �� status. F 2. Mike Oberho�fer (Farmer's Ins. ) spoke in favor of the ` �� proposed me�mbership distrf'bution. � t 3. Fred Fields (Coe Mfg. ) asked how th� distribution had been ? arrived at. � �� Bolen responded that the process was lst to establish the � number of inembers then to insure the participation of each ' affected interest group by designating S delegat� ch�lir, then to assign the remaining chairs by proportional numbers taking care to avoid probabl� tie vote sltuation�t. .--�-�-�._ . , , . �-- . . A ��... � Sl . . . , pag� � FC Minutes � Mag 20, 1975 4. Mr. Warner asked' if the groups would meet tagether or remain independen�t. . Bolen �r�sponded they could handle��meetings e�ither way, but �hat that would be larg��y up to the NP0's. 5. Ghairman Whittaker spoke ta the difficulty that the ' commission had had wi�h previaus NP0 formations, 6. Mr. FieYds said he was interested and wanted more informa�ion. 7. Mike Oberhoffer asked if the NPO plan would invalidate the "Triangle Plan�� and if a new plan eould be more speedily adopted tha� the Triangle Plan. 8. Ghairma:n Whittakes s��d the commission preferred a "citizen generated'� plan. �� C. Gammis�ion Action: I Consensus was that the p�ocess and �ethod developed by staff I, would meet th�e needs in the sub�ect NP4's and would meet re- '�, quirements far eitizen Farticipation. �� 4. PUHLTC HEARINGS 4.1 Conditional Use CU 9-75 (I�anr�ncP Whitaker) �� _ A request bq Lawrence Whitaker to a11ow a cabinet shop as a conditional use in a C-3 zon� at 13565 �W Paci�ic Highway ('��x Lot 600� Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 2CC.) A. Staff R�port: Read by Powell (dated May 6) B. Public Testimonys l. Mr. Whittker (applicant) testified on his own behalf introducing a site plan ar�d addressing conformance with the comprehensive plan. 2. Joe Greulich (Fire Marshall) apoke on �onformance of th� pro�ect with the fire code. 3. No 4ne spoke in opposition. 4. Staff recammended approval. C. Commission Discussion � Action: � . The commission discussed parking with th� applic�nt. . B�11 askea the applic�int if he could carry the necess�ry .�m��ance. .. ,,. � , , .� _ _ _ �-- : , page 3 ' PC Minutes May zo, �975 � �. , . Motion for approval (Porter),. . :.Seconded by Hartman. . (:arried b�r unanimous vote. 4.2 Conditional Use CU ?-75 (Randall Construction Co. ) � A request by Randall Construction Ca. to allow multiple conditional ; uses in an Zndustrial Park (M-4) zone on a 5.56 acre parcel at 8900 j SW Burnham. Street, known as "Security Storage" (tax �ots 2200 ana 2300, r Wash. Co. tax map 251 2AD) - previously tabled. � A. Staff Report: � � . Powell read staff report citing memorandum from ;i City Attorney. r . Anderson explained his opinion more fully. � �j . Hall asked Anderson if he meant that �he applicant would ; have to ask �he Planning Commissian for m4di�'ic�tion of " his Conditional Use permit for every change in use, intra-pro�ect shifting of tenants, remodeloing, addition, ;� etc. tha� he (the applicant) under took. ? �..w,.: �; . Anderson said that generally that would be true - a Gondition- al use permlt is a specific per�mis�ion to do samething in ' a particular plac$ arid under certain conditions. t�� H. Public Testimony: 1. Steve Mosinski (Randall Construction Co. ) reiterated their �� request and said that the applicant would agree to: ��{,� ,: a. Pla�e limits on kind and scale of the tenant business. ;s'; b. Strietly control location within the building af ;:� incompatable tenants. �� 5 c. R�clesign the parking layout per a site �,ap (E�il��t G) '�� so that approaima��tly 96 cars could be parlced. �=' r;� d. Limit number of occupants to 20 �stablishments. '.� 2. Joe Greullch entered his letter into the records (Eachibit H) . E {:� 3• No one spoke in oppo�ition. t=� 4. Staff recomu�ndation read by Powell: Denial of the conditional #��, � use request� but allowing storage as a conditio��l use in � buildings A and B (the smaller ones) or11y, and requiring �� the following condltions tt� be met bg the occupant of ��1 building C. �� k� � s.j , �� _ � , , � �, ` Page 4 � 1�C Minutes ' May 20, 1975 � �` 1. No less than 1500 sq. ft. of continguous floor area i may be leased to any one ten�nt. ' 2. No more than 20 tenant spaces may be leased or us�d ! concurrently. � 3. The maximum floor area emgloyee/floor area ratio �hall b� � one employe� (occupant) per 600 sq. ft. of gross leased ? floor area. i 4• No fire wall shall be penetrat�d by doorways, ventilatiom � ducts, windows, or any other openftzg. 5. No retail or wholesale �a3es activities or customer s�rvice to be r.onducted on site exceFting th�t purely ineidental ' to a permitted use. " 6. No outsi�le storage of ma#erials, vehicles, waste or ; debrls wi�.l be permitted on site. 7. No overnight parking of vehicles wi11 be allowed. ' 8. No more than one nameplate of less than 10 sq. �t. , mounted flat on the building wall above the window line will be permitted fo r each enterprise loeated in said building. 9. The pro�ect sha11 be resubm3tted to the Tigard Design Rev3ew Hoard :for approval of a new site plan and land- ° scape plan �ollawing the applicant's redesign of �' access, parking, landscaping and screening and provisian of appropriate screened locatians for solid waste i �< collection. Such additional improvements as may be �� ;,,, required by t�e Design R�view Baard shall b� executed ' before �any additional oc�cupancy may be permitted in the pro�ect. Site design standards and criterta to be appli�d by the Design Review Board. will be such �hat: ;, 1. Length af bui].dings and asphalt areas ar.e broken up or �; ma8k�d at approp�iate intervals. ' 2. Adequate parking is provided such that a parking slat 3s ` ave3lable on a one per each employee of m�ximum ' allowable employment and at l�ast one additional space per each establishment -- a11 parking to be appropriately � designated. 3. Adequate maneuvering space is available for e�ach aperational , loading door. 4. A�proach: .� to�� SW Hurnham will be redesigned to reflect � the need.s of the changed use. 5. Appropriate sight obs�uring screening is provided. � 6. An irrigation syste� adequate to ensure survi�val of all � ; landscaping is provided. � � � C. Commission Discussion and Action: E Popp asked the applicant why they had proposed offices i � and re�trooms in each space i.n the building. i �: i . Appl�cant r�r�tponded that it had been done gor flexab�ility. � � ; . Ba1l� stated that he felt the staff recommendation� exceeded � what::�� the applicant had asked and that the comm3$sion cotnld i � f " b J Pag� 5 `� 'y�_ PC Minutes ' May 20, 1975 `� onl.y rvle on the applicant's sequest. . Motion for Denial {Hartman). . Seaonded (Hansen). . Carried. 4.3 Zoning Ordinance Amendment ZOA 1-75 � A request to amend previouslq considere.d �OA 1-75 to include the creation of a new �one des3gnation for portior�s of the C-3 �:one and amending general provisions to include restrd�ctions dn high traffic generating establishments (referred by Council). A. Staff Rep�rt on C-3(M) Proposal: 1. Bolen read staff report. 2. Chafrman asked that the staff recommendation be read !! inasmuch as this was a legislative �nearin�s ; , � 3. Staff recommendation: approaal of the changes referred. ? 4. Cha3rman Whittaker e�cplained it�rther what the �tatus of � �' ZOA 1-75 was at the Council. level. , �L.� B, Public Testimony: . Bdb Greenwood (SD-23J) testified in opposition to designation of the "pld Fowler�� site as part of the C-3 (Highway) zone rather thah identifying it with Main Streete C. Commission Discussion and Action: � �i 1. Chi.i.rman Whittaker asked commissioner Hansen if he was intend- ; 9 ing to participate in the discussion in view of h2s electior� y to the School Board. ° 2. Han�aen stated that his election was not official and that he �� would garticipate. !' i 'i 3. Porter said he felt the school site was indeed part of � Main Street. � i ; q�. Bal7. �l�sagreec�. i i 5. Hartman pointed out the "new" C-3 �one (Pacific Highway) was 1 most appropriete for large sites yet undeveloped and that the Fowler site '�hould be put with the C-3 (Highway). � 6 Hansen sa�id that he felt the staff had been biased by the �' City's unsucc�ssFul bid for money to build a cific center on the s�.te. '�. Bolen pointed out tha� the civic center pro�ect had .not been a Planning Department pro�ec�, nar waa the staff necessarily 9 P�ge 6 � � `�.... PC Minute s � Maq 20, 197� ' `�.. in favor of that particular developmentwconcept. �. Whittaker pointed otxt thet �uch a center would have been a conditional use, and would hav� had to go through �he sam� pracess that a shopping center or grocerg store would have to go through, �nd that as far as communitq dev�lopment was concerned, the Buchols property at the south end of Ma�,n, and the School District property at the �Yo�rth end are I the two most s3gnificant sites in Tigard, and ought to be � treated carefully. I� 9. Motion to adopt as drawn (Ball). . Second (Hartman). 10. Motion to amend to include Fowler site in Highway designat�,d area (Hansen). Seconded (Nicoli) Gluestion (Hall) , Failed - (tie vote, lacked ma�ority) Nay - Ha11, Hartman, Sakata, Whitt�ker �;:� 11. �1ue�tion, orig�nal motion (Whittaker). Failed -� (tie vote, lacked ma��rity) Nay � Hansen, Nicoli, Popp 8c Porter � lc^. Hansen said he felt that the City owes the School District some cooperation. 13. Motion to talble to the 27th of M�y for consideration at a study session. (Ball) Seconded (Pop.p) 14. Popp said he felt that the Main Street grea was mare in need of "protg.ctive 2oning" than the Highway. 15. Question (Sakata) Motion carried, (Hansen against) D. Staff Report on the "high traffic generators�� amendment. . Staff report was read by Bolen. . Citq Attorney Anderson pointed out e�n amb3gutty of the proposed ordinance ar�d suggested that i��/be tabled until � after the election qn the proposed charter a�endmeAt. E. Public Te�timony: No one was present to speak. ... _ _ _ _ i,� � � f Page 7 • `s� PC Minu�es ` ' " May 20, 1975 � F. Commission Discussion and Action: , Hartman said he disagreed with Mr. Anderson - that he ferlt ! ; ;' it ought to be dismissed. i- . Chairman Whittak�r said he felt it ought to be oppased `' actively by the planning commissian. . Moti�on to table (Ball) Seconded (-Hansen) Carried (unanimous) . Wliittaker said the question was whether the commission ought to go on recQr�d opposed to the propoaed ordinance revision and the proposed charter amendment. _ . Cha��rmar� polled the commission, Porter disagreed. . Chair.mAn asked the City Attorney to read the memorandum he had earlier alluded to. . Ball suggested that the commission could go on reeo�^d opposed to the l�iiellot measure (char�er a,mendment)be:sed on its findings that tl�ex•e• was°.>a .poten'tial ,��e�g�. prob.�,em and that it was conceived without proper consideration of land use criteria. � �:� �� . Moved (Hartman) ; Seconded (Sakata) § Carried (Porter against) ;�+ 5. SUBDTYISIIN S � f S1-74 Preliminary Plat Approval � � A r�equest for approval of a preliminary plat for Phase TII, Summerfield Planned Development, located at and near S.W. Highland Drive and 109th Avenue. ;� A. Staff Report: � . Staff repnrt was read bq Pcawell, with recommendation for � approval sub�ect to conditions of ZC 5-72. k 0 B. Comm�.ssian T�iBCUSSion and Action: i ;' � . Moved to apprbvr (Hartman) ' Second�d (Hanser�) i Carried (UManimous) . � � 7. OTHER HUSINESS. None 8. ADJOURNMENT: 11:30 P.M. ��.,� NOTICL; OF PUBZ,IC HEARING CTTY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSZON Notice is her�by given that public hearings will he held by the Pl�.nning Commission of the City of Tiga�rd in the 'rwality Junior Hi�h S�hool Lecture Room, �.4650 SW 97th Avenue, Tagard, Oregan. Said hearings w3.11 occur on May 20, 1975, at 'T:30 p.m. and wi13. concern the fol�.owing: � c� A request by Randal7. Construc�ion Co. , Tnc. to allow mu].tiple conditional uses in an Tndustrial Park (M-4) zane on a 5.56 � acre parcel at 8900 S�N Burnham St. , known as "Security Stora��" (tax lots 2200 and 2300, Wash. Co. tax map 2S� 2AD). (previously tabled). a A request by Lawrenee Whitak'er to allow a cabinet shop a� a conditiox�al use in a C-3 zone at 13565 SV�I Pacific Hwy. (tax . lot 600, Wash. Co. tax map 2S1 2CC) . o Proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinarice of the City of Tigard, creatin a new zone differentiating between General Commercial (C-3� properties located on Pacific Highway and those 7.ocated in the Main Street area; in addition, an amend- ment to the General Provisions Sectian (18.12) which would restrict certain high traffic generating us�s wi.thin 750 f of eet . schools. o The Commissio�. will Y�e seeking assistan�e from businessmen, property owners and residents on how to canst3tute th� member- ship os" the to-be-for�med Neighborhood P�,anning �r�anizations � #4 and #5 for the Tigard Triangle and 72nd - Rolling Hi11s area. All persons having an interest a.n these matters are invited to attend • and be Y�eard. � ;�� ,.� ,. � Publish TT May 1�., 1�75 �i I ;� 1 , � : � � . � � � . . ' .. � � �. . . . .. � . � � � �� `�� . . . . . . . . . . . . . � .. . . .. . . . . . _ . .. . . . � . . . -:':1 � . .. . � � � � . .� � � . .. . . ' . . . � ..�'-'� . . . � . . . . � . . . . . . ..�,.� . . . . � . . .. .. �� : . � .. . . � . � . � ... � . �� .,�I � � .. . . . . � � � . � �� . �� . , . . . . . �.�.. . - �.�..,�I . . . .. . .. . , .i . � . . . , ,. , .�.. ,{ ... .. .. _. . . ... � .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . � „51 . L'� i� Staff Report Tigar.d Plann.ing Commission � May 6, 1y75 Item 4.3 CU 9-75 Conditional Use for a cabinet shop in a C-3 zone at 13565 SW Pacific Hwy. (tax lot 600, Wash. Co. tax map 2S1-2CC) Applicant Mr. Lawrence Whitaker Applicant's Request permission to operate a cabinet shop as a conditional use in a C-3 zone � Applicant's Proposal see letter attached Staff Findin�s l. The Plannin Commission has determined that a cabinet sho II', � P � � may be allowable as a conditional use in a C-3 zone. .�.. 2. Applicant proposes to use presently vacant commercial space �II . in a building with shop space downstairs and an existing apartment upstairs (occupied by the owner-�essor) . . � 3. Existing curb cuts and driveway aprons are not built to City standards. � 4. Applicant's proposal letter addresses the questions per�taining to community need�, neighborhood a.mpact and services. 5. The Ti�ard Community Plan specifies that this area is appropri�- ately residential-commercial. Proposed changes to the Community 'I Plan by NPO #3 include redesignating this area as commercial. 6. The planning department estimates parking required for this 'I est�blishment (based on commercial standards) to be about 8 or 9 cars. � � �'�� 7. The general character of this Portion of Pacific Highway is of deteriorated highway commercial �and use mixed with deteriorating housing, several other vacant and/or abandon:ed �ommercial structures, al�. indicative of an area ready for redeve�opment. A large amount of vacant land, no longer u�ed �I for agriculture but not yet developed and appa�ently ausilable, I � is further indication that a marked transition could occur in this vicinity. : � � j �,w, ,�,.-� � � �� _�� _ � � ' ' ;;:i 8. Access to Pacific T�ighway is hazardous f'rom this �ite. The' ` � �, driveway approach is not defined-an,d clearance for backing . from a parking place without backing into traffic is minimal. 9'. This proposal, if approved, would be "subject to Tigard site development s�:andards in the C-3 zone,which are applicable to all projects in a C-3 zone and to a condi,tional use in any zone. Variance or excep�ion to strict conformanoe may be ; in order here if the Planning Commission were to find it �o °! be in the comrnunity's interest that this building and site be I occupied and maintained. - ` " Staff Recommend,ations to be advised after close of pub�ic hearing � _�i � �. � ., S�t�ff Report - May 7, 1975 = �.tern 4.3 - page 2 . � „ . .. , _ � , , ; , ,.:.. ... . � � , ._� _ � , : � ,� _ . _. . .., � _ . � :, ,�,,, . _�� -.� � ��,,�,�.��, i _ ,, . ' �.< �..- , � r ; - �. Y. , Y � � . � c, . � � } ��i,, V� `�. � r ', f � a P '` � ' � � —.. @r �,,.,�,..,_ . . � �,� '� `�, , �\ " J!' CF3. \ S.,� i ' i �` �� _ � . �: � p, ` C B � � � t \ r o . � � � . i � ,\�� `a-� � � �,� B R. � `- ,�� O \. /� ` � � . _ �� _ �� ; ` L I � �. .. _.. � �'1�1^� , � � ��,� � . . . � �� 1 I 1 � � � � � � -� '\ \��- \�•�,-.�` �� , �\ B 8 � N � ~�r I ', .✓rr� Y� �, ��\ � �� \... ' � � O �Y . . . .�I \ 99 �` � � � ' ��-j"" �` \��_'�'�' r" ._ �.. � \ , � � V � f .� \ i �' w.,..rr'� P V C .. � �� rr r � '\� \ � ` �� •� ; --�`�---__.�..� , � � � �t. ` ��, , �-.� \.__ � Q I ,. ; . K � ��--�.,�` '� I B.B. ! � � ''� ��-�� ' r � r�� \ ' � � �._ � \ �_ � �. � , � � i -�� /y 250 � � ` .� `,.,.` .� � �,.� � � _, \� PAVED � _ \ � � � ; \�,,�' \ �� .�. . � -� • �: . ' j ` / �� . ,, _ �� DIRT / ��`� `..' �'� � + P. K. �5.5 � ✓;''_'� '•. � _ � '! � �, ' , B FZ ' 257.92 . s' � . — 1 , p , �_• . _ � �� , � : , � � . �� . � � L..- o . � , ' . ? PAVED ` . - . � �� ' �• �� ' � � � � / \ ~t ` \ �"� /' r�,�. h . f � � � 259�2 � �, �.-� . \ , \ -_ �� { O�, �1 l y\\_,'� . �� J , / S.P. � \ � ' ,/ �` ... ..�,� � , `�._,.�.. �. ,., � + / �LZ� � � 250 �� , r`�, ^. �' � �� _.� �A_V E D _ � �,,,,r.�+r�' -r-` r r-ti, ___�_� � 2".::;�-.''�. �Y X "" "`'r M.H ��_...,.'„�-.:,.�-,. � � � �'�� .. / �,, X C7 ..., � 4' � r� � � ' � � ' .:t . . � i �� ',;. � ;1:� 2 50.2 �`�-., '' ,�r,�•, ' - ., , • i I �, � , . . ` � —�-1 ' ' � � . �.�� t� � i _ , ,,,,, , . . �_ _ . N� �. 4 k 13Q17 S.'1V. 6�r�.. �.1&c� Port].and, Ore��n 97219 April 21 1975 �'a Ci.ty of Ti�ard �lanning Commi�sion and City Cou.i�cil� I w9.sh to equip and operate a modern cabinet shop atc 13565 N,p�. �aci�ic Hi�hway- T;Lg�rd, �regon, I will operate woodworkin� machinery such a� : saws , pl�ner� lathe � dril� press , welder, shaper, aix operated nailers , and the other necessary harld tool.a , both olectric and maniaa].� and saw and tool sharpening mach- inex�p I will manuf�eture custom c�,binets and requested pieces o�' �urniture �rom stock dimension lumber� including plywood� and �orrnica-li.ke mater- ials . F rom normal stoek lu.mber, I will cut pieces to the customer's speci�3.� cations , �'ar him to do a project in his home or in ar:q shop, ana I wfi�ll �r�.ve gersanal instruetinn on how to best assembl� his pro�ect and the propc�s� use of tools for this , I will pr�vide tor h�s use same of the basic tool.s . I will h�,ve on display, a:nd tor sale , cabiraets , amd cabinet materials such aa ; hinge� y pulls , nails � li.grts , brads , glue, formica, ceramic� �` son��e d�mension lumbPr, same pl�wood, some paneling�, �n.d a small amotxnt - of. light ga��e metal. .A.11 of thi� wiil be sto.red �.nsi.de the shop axea� I feol thi.Q tyue a� sho� surely ful�ills a commla.ria.t.y need. To my kno- wled,��, therP is no cabSr.et shop in the Tia�.r, d or �ortl�nd ares, whl.ch. wi ].1 a�ter ta ar�d encou.ra�e the ' ° do it yauxself- dror� in type of cust- � amer, " IaTy sho�a wi11 not only encourA�e these cu�tomexs , but I will ��rson.al..t� instruet them on the best wa,y to accomplish their i.ntended �ob. T wi1,l, cut �or tY!em piec�s to assemble , from lu.m�ber they bring to the shop , or �rom mater� al I havo on hand� I believe my sho� will be � mu.ch needed encou.ragement to everyone wi�h- ing to dc� a pro�ect on their own. � will a.11ow them to draw from my 30 years of experience. I be],ieve my shop will result in nersons doing the �obs they ha.ve �.11- owed themselves to xut off A,�ec�.use of 1�.ck o� tools , and know-how„ Aa these people nrogxess on their v�riou� proiects , T'm sure �he mexc- hants in the Ti�ard area wi.l1. bene�i,t fxom sales they make o� �'urn�.tu�e, fi�tures etc. I have 1o�ked �he Ti�zaxd a•re� over care�ully, and thare is no other building available. � This particular buil.ding is available , ar�d i.t doe� have the space T need to succeas�'t�lly o��rate the type o�' sho,p I intend. � T��T�l.�sE S�+',Fa F�AGIi; TtN�) � _ _ . � . _ . , . . , . . .. : M' o � i �. . � � � � �. . ... . t..„. PAGF TW0. uy'. r� ; Cab�.net ehop at 13565 �S.W. �rxc��i c H�,ghway- �'3.�axd, Or��on. � I ex�ect some of our ol.der c�t�zens will �requ�nt rny aho�, and this partieu,lax location i� easy far ar�yone to l.c�aate, tYtexe are no steps to climb a.nd a d�.�ab.Led nexson would ��.� �.b ease ca1,],iz�� he.r.e . Two toilet fae�ltties �,re �n, �nd a.rP on the main lenal- no steps « ��, The Pa��i.ng �.s of� the street arid is la-rga enou�h for e��ht cars , �,snhs alt paved� A.d.di.tion�l off the s�reet parkin� �o� �ix eare ia �ratrel;� T c�n see no a�vaxsa ef�ect on ad�acent pro;aerties � nr ad�acent :ne�.gh- borhoodse There �vi11 be no �zix p�iLution- I have noth�.n� bo burn. There w� ll be no odor, �thex thr�n �,roa vaxnish or ��int T mi�ht spr€�y on �, �ini�hed c�btnet, �rza this v�i11 be w�i.thin �he shop, There wil.l be l�.ttle i.� any z�oi,�e, bee�,u�e the na�.se :from a running tool wi.l.l be tnuf.fLed by the sh@�p walls themselves. The btziLdin� will be pain�ed insi.de �nd out�ide, which w�.11 �reatly increase the �.fitxaet�,vaLles:� of bhe appear�nce of the building as contr- aste,d with 3.t'� present a�pe�,rance. There is no rleed foy any addi�ional public services , �ervices are a11 �aresent�.y in, and are �.dequa�o as pxov3.ded.. �,;: A.ri est�.m�ted thirty cars nel• d�,,y will. v�.s�t tho shnp, �ccag3.ona1ly a ].oc�.l delivexy truck will brin� nateri�l. �o the shop. Thesv trur,ks wil.1 ta4te r�bout th:irty rninutes to unLo�.d and bo c�ri the�.;r way. There i� spa.ce �or aff the s�reet unl,oadin�. � R�spect�ully. , . G�-. . . . ► . . . � . � . wxence Y1�iitakex 3217 S.TN. 63rd. P,Lace ortland, Ore�on 97219 �hone 639- 1589 � w , .,--, •.r..w-r,,,,,,�-��.; ■:. ... , .._::� �-< �,':: _ �. . .., ., _. __� ,.. , . ..��. �.., . . _ . � . ,. .,..,_ . �. , . . �_ .. ,. �.n. ..� � �,. .� �,"...�.r�,.r�� . .H . . -.b . `�..�'��' �'"�.�u � . Tigard Planning Commission ��.. 5taff Repc�rt Agenda Item 4. 3 ApP,licant City of Tigard ApRlicant's Fi'equest To cansider an oz�dinance which would restrict high traffic gener.ators Within 750 feet of schaals. , � S�taff findings 1. This prapersal is the result of a presentatian made to the Gity Council �y several City residen�s Wha s�ated a need for such legislation. ; Thp City Council intended to hear this item as part nf the revision to the C-3 zorte but was informed by the City's legal aounsel, Fred Ahderson, that tha.s matter must first be heard by the Plannins Comtnission and a recommendatian made to the City Co�ncil as required in the Oregon Revised 5�atutes of any land us� related matters. �' 2. The attached '"exhibit 1�" is a copy of the ordinance section considex�ed by the CQ��'ncil and this consiti�ues the material to be consid�red by thQ Planni�7g Commission. In regard to "exhibit A", the staff makes the followin� � abservati.ons: A. City legal counsel stated at the April 28, 19?5 ; City Counci�. meeting where th.is matter Was considered that, as written, there is an ambiguity as ta tihether it applies to both public and private sahools and tha� no crite�ia 'I have b�c�n provided for the us� of ?5D feet 'I, which he therefore finds as being arbitrary. 8. In response to the concerns of legal counsel, this ordinanc.e should apply to both publia and private schools. In answering the criticism that the 75n feet is arbitrary it becomes more difFicult to provide rigid criteri,a. The eitizen proponents s�ate the reason fnr s�sing ?50 Feet is to ba that the Tigard I�unicipal Gode allows city blocks to be no longer than 1,200 feet (17.32;020� and � 75Q' f�eet rep�esents .someWhat more than a Tigard City block. � �` �, _ ,m r � . . 1(�f�� jfV��,,E�r,�� . . � . W � ' W.�.4 � `9.�� . ��L � It is the ,judgement af staff that appropriate ... . criteria should relate �o the pedestrian trafFic patterns asgocia�ed wi�fi schools. �or ins�ance, the dis�ance that students are required to walk al.ong a ma,jor street befare gaining access into the residential asea servad by the schoo.� could be a consideration. Irr the case of sch�ols located on Pacific Highway �this dis�ance is relatively short while gchools such as Pfii1 Lewis on 72nd Avenue ; o� the High School on Durham Raad this cauld j represent a much greater distanc'e than 750 feet. '! Another ciiteriort for consideratian is the j attractive effect that certain uses have upon students. It is Knawn �or instance, �that ; the Circl,e K f�ark�t on Walnut draws students � from the Charlea F. Tigard elementary scfiool, � a street distance of more than 1,000 feet. Therefore; the 75iJ feet may 'be appropriate in � some cases and not in others. As With most � attempts ta set down a prQCise numbar in an ; o�cdinance, choosing the co�rrsct number or at ?, least the number that Will in mast instances k fulfill the need is no simple ta'sk. � �_ C. Because this ordinance represents an effort to regulate high traffic generating businesses it is necessary to defin� tfiis type oP use. Notice that section b of �'exhibit A" attempts to do just that. The vehicular vnTumes used are fram comments made to the staff by Car1 But�ke. Ne suggested that a high trafFic '� genera�or defini�ion could begin with uses ' generating 100 vehiole tri:p ends ��r hour up � to 250 UT�/h. A� the loW �nd a representative w use is a grncery store and oh the upper end �, a very successful drive-in business c�f some ; type, usually a restaurant is an example. � N�tice th�t 15q VTE/h has been used. The ,; figure chosen betWeen 100 and 250 U7E/h repre- `�'; sents an attemp� to scseen out the higher `,'� traffia generators, but no claim is given as �� to the validity of this choice. >; The proposed ordinance a,lso lis•Cs B land use � categories in an effor� to defa.ne high traffic � generating. uses. In �this regard, the Gi�ty of ' Cambridge, �lass. reaentty developed the foilc�wing ; definitions and criteria for high traffic generating 'restaurants �hich the commission � � may find of us�a in consa,dering 'this issue. City of Ti,gard - Agenda Iitem 4.3 Pac�e 2 ,. _ ,�. , . ..,,.� . .. .,.- �'.. ,. - �. ..;:., , . . _ _ , _ . .: _ , . . : � , 4 � ��. � F 1 "Autamobile arient�d fc�od serv.ice establishmen�. ; �' A faorJ sorvice estab:lishment Which provides j';. a greatr�r numb�r of p�rking spaces than is i; required by the Zoning Ordina�ce. ` , �; t �ast order fc�od. �; _ ,;: Foac� which is �a) primarily intended fnr im-- $� media�e consumption i�ather than Par �se as z' an ingredi.ent in or component of ineals; �; (b� available upon a short waiting time; �' t: and (c) packaged or presented in such a manner F; ' that it can be readily eaten outside the �:� premises where it is sold. r' ?'R Fast order food establishment. �� . . .. . . . . . . � . F;, An establishment whose primary business is �3 : the sale of �ast order faod for consumption - on or ofF the premises. F�; i(�ah�FaF9h9F�3E��?F�E�3F�E9E#aF9E�E�3E9EaEiF�IE��E9F3F�3FiF�3faFaE�3EiEdE�3F-lE�hdE9F-�9F�3E9E ' '�';', Ar�icl,e I, 5ectinn 5 � - �; � In considering Special Permits Por Fast �rder �,� Establishments and Automobile �riented Food �� Service Establishmen�s, the 8aaa°d of Zona.ng t Appeals sh�ll give c:ansidaration, in addition � �, tn the above requireme�ts, ta the following: >> . F 1R (a) Impact on �raffic and parking. �; _; b The exist�nce Qf nther s,imilar uses in �� c � the same service area. �<! f:� ��; (c) 5ensitivity to the visual and physical �; aharacterista.cs of the particular locatian. �,; ;:; (ci) Fulfillment of a need in the neighborhood ��' or in tha City. ,' p; (e) Reliance on �alk-in �rade as opposed to �,, drive-in or automobile related trade. " �:: a D. The staff wishQS tn point out that the praposed �,' - qrdinance affers a review capability bu�t does �: not prohibit any uses out right. �,� {, �> S�aff Re��ommen�datio�n �-' �r To be presented fnllowing public testimohy �� };: � � � �� z f' City af Tigard - Agenda Item 4.3 Pa�e 3 �: � - � q ;. , ., n �,,,, �.. EX.HIBIT "A�' � �. Section 4: That a section be added to Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 18.12, General � Provisions, numbered 18.12.130 and entitled "Land Use Restrictions Within 750 Feet of an Elementary or Juniox High School" and to read as follows: 18 12.130 Land Use Restrictions Within 750 Feet of an Elem�ntary or Junior High School (a) For a distance of 750 feet, measured in all directions from an elementary or junior high school, high traffic generating uses shail be reviewed according to . the procedures established in Chapter 18.72, Conditional Uses, in order that the Planning Commission may d�termine whether or not a threat to the safety of students attending the subject school may result. (b) High traffic generators subject to the provisions of this section are , defined as any land use which has a total volume for all driveways, in excess of � 150 vehicle trip ends per any hour when school children are present. Uses generally found within this category are: l, drive-in facilities for banks and�restaurants 2. shopping centers 3. apartment compl�xes of 300 or more units 4. offices having more than 50,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area 5. majox medical facilities 6. industrial land use generating truck traffic (c) Any land use choosing to locate within 750 feet of an elementary or junior high school shall make application according to Chapter 18.72, Conditional Use, when the Planning Director finds tl�at a use may be defined as a high traffi.c generator pursuant to the standards established in (b) of this section. In the course of considering an application, the Planning Commission may require the applicant to submit information concerning the traffic generation potential of a i proposed use, methods o€ providing access and egress and other pertinent information which the Planning Commission may find necess.a'cy 3:n order to properly evaluate the pending application. � �'.. ._._.. .. . . ;.. :.. . ... . ...... . ,. . . .��. . .. . ,.. .,..... ,,.., ..., .... ._... , . .,,.� � � � � � �� . ��I � Staff Report �� . • � . �. , • � TIGARD PL�TIVIi�'G, COT�'fISSTON +,. ,- -May 20, 1975 • . . -'�_: Agenda I�tem 4.2 CU 7-'75 (Security Storage) Conditional Use . on a 5.�6 acre M-4 zoned site, pres�ntly dev�loped in "mini- warehot�ses" known as "Securi�y Storage" at 8900 SW Bur...nham St. (tax lots 2200 & 2300, Wash. Co. tax map ?_Sl ?_AD) . Applicant • Randall Construction Co. Applicant's I�equest to .aJ_low: . � '�A. Automobile service s�.ation to include the au�Lomotive related servi.ces of auto repairing, customizing and restoring, body and fender work, painting and upholstery. i B. Furniture manu�'ac�uring to include, combined assembly, ware- II housing and distribution plus the re�'urbishing of used stock. � '��. • . C. Machine shop, w�lding shop and contractor's office. . ' � ' � � , 4 D. Tool and hardware manufacture . E. Warehousing and wholesale dis�;ribution. " , all of which ar� conditionally permitted in an M-4 zone. • � Applicant's Proposal � To lease i;h� larger spaces developed for "mini-warehous�s" in the developrnent as comrnercial-industrial spaces to small businesses, par�i;icularly crafts. . . Staff Findings • l. Present land use of the site is predominantly storage, althou�h sev�ral small enterprises that are permitted uses in an M-4 zone have already located in the project. ' 2�. Surrounding land use is mixed light and medium indus�t;rial. � 3. The ar�a is ident,ified in N. P. 0. #1 Plan� as Commercial- Industrial. i��, . . - -- � : _ _ - _ , . . ,. �.. r-_.. � , ,,. � , � , . , _ .. . � :.. � . .; ._ . ,: . _,:... :. ; ... � ,:. . ;, . ,.� ,..._ ; ' � 1 . , j o , • � . � ..��, !+. Compatibility�of different activi�ties wi'��nin �Lhis pro ject is more a func-irion of the scale of operations, the traffic ,_. generation pot�ntial and nuisances such as noise and air � , �ollution cr�ated of and by each �nterprise, than it is relat�d to specific activities. Retail sales other than those incidental to a �light rnanufacturing enterprise clear- ; ly would require more parking arid ti�rould �enerate rnore j traffic than can be provided for on the site. Whol�sa�e ; distribution or freight Ureakdotian activities are not 'com- j ��atiUle ��rzth �he traffic generation of the pro ject. Businesses �ahich provide customer servic� of a drop-in' nature would similarly be inappropriate here. High em- ployee/floor area ratios would similarly overtax the � . traffic handling capability of the proj�ct and the parking space availab]_e. � j . � 5. Compatibility of building occupancy classification �under provisions . of the uniform building code is a probl�m �h� ; buildi_ng department has already encountered with r.espect to this project. � � �r �, 6. There are no adequat� ,provisions on the site for solid ti � waste disposal. . �i� � 7. Site design wii:h respect to �arking, access, landscaping '� and screening �is not acceptable for commercial-�industrial use but is, in s�i;aff ' s opinion, r�mediable Uy a combina�;ion r� of strict performance standards and some site r�--desi�n. � � �� °` 8. Buildings "A" and "B" provide no sanitary facil9.ties, in- . ,; sufficient parking and are not app�opriate for commercial . '� or industrial use. {`' � � 9. Any free-standing pro 'ecting signs or other rojecting ' i'i building accessories �mechanical units, etc.� would en- • 3;'', croach on necessary access and maneuvering space. '�' �; ;, l0o Flat mounted signs , rooftop signs, window signs allowable '; � under the Sign Code could be an a�sthetic problem. Visual - '� display or advertising on this site �is inappropriate� to the us�s allosaable. . • � + �.1. An opinion rendered by the City Attorney suggests that unless the applicant abates totally his existing conditional use, any change, whether otherwise a permitted use or not, would require an additional hearing before the Planning Commission under Ch. 18.72. Under a strict inter�retation, this may mean that Randall's present conditional use, since it aPplies to the whole project, creates an. obligation on th� part of the own:er to apply for a hearing for each and every activity locat�.ng in the project that is not purely "storage�'. � Staff Recommendation . to be given after plzblic- testimony pc Staff Report - P�ay 20, 1975 - item `4.2 = page 2 . i � ,_ . _.. .. : ;: , _ ., _ , _ . _ , , .. . 1� �x rr�6��r� «,� <, ��; _ �_ . �:.' �;.. , ,' 4242 southeast milwaukie avenue • portla�;"' �regon 97202 • telephone 233-4656 I �, '�,- i i the obert r . . �� i;ll �. company �,�, Property Management Division �'� . 4, March 12, 1975 �!, �'I , T0: CITY OF TIGARD, PLANNING COI�IISSION ��!' FROM: THE ROBERT RANDALL COMPANY � 'r � k; RE: REQUEST APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE � F, TAX LOTS 2200 atid 2300, BURNHAM TRACT -' �': In regards to the "Fasano" requirements the following request is submitted: �'I 1. An existing project entitled "Security Storage" located in the Tigard �, Industrial Park is zoned M-4 and has an approved condition�.l use pe�nit � �or use as a mini-warehouse. Although this conditional use is beneficial, 1' we are experiencing difficulty in renting all of our units for this one '' purpose. Yet, we find there is much consumer demand for the larger units, il especially those with office/restroom space. Therefore, we are requesting �' I''� the following conditional uses: � A. Automobile seruice station to include the automotive related �'� ��, services of auto repairing, customizing and restoring, body ��' and fender work, paintin� and upholstery. B. Furniture manufacturing to include combined assembly, warehousing and distribution plus the refurbishing of used stock. ' i C. Machine shop, welding shop and contractor s off ce. I D. Tool and hardware manufacture � E. Warehousing and wholesale distribution. i 2. The rec{uested conditional use zoning is in conformance with the City of Tigaxd's adopted comprehensive plan. i 3. Community needs for office/workshop/warehouse space is quite apparent. Contractors and small businessmen have to work out of garages and other � facilities located in residential sections and other improperly zoned areas, ' simply because there are no other facilities available. A modestly priced unit which could afford the lessee a total business package,while not placing the cost of doing business out of range� would certainly benefit all � in need. 4. There have been no changes in conditions, to our knowledge, that would not justify a change in the zoning (conditional use) for this piece of � property. The current surrounding land use arid street capacity, and the present sewer and water are adequate to serve the proposed uses. �r _ . _ , _. .. .,.. , . . . ,...... ,.:_,.... ......_._;�, ._. :._:,.. ,,..L_.,..., .._..:.:..::.._�.. :_,.. .��...,_,:.__. .... .<..:.;�.. . ...:.,�.. .._.._. .... .....,. ...,...._._ , _,.,�._...,. _.:a::< ._.....�_ .,_._,..,....� . _.. , ._.. .._,.. , a......,... . _..... , ' . . . � � � ,. � ' . . . � . � T0: CITY OF TIGARD FROM: ROBERT RANDALL COMPANY Pa�e 2 ' � ' �,,.. 5. The location for this zoning actian is particularly suited for the I proposed purposes because it is already developed. With little modification it could serve a11 the local needs. �I , 6. The proposed zoning (conditional use) wi].l have minimum changes in the I adjacent neighborhood and on the adjacent properties. Currently all the , d' c a �a ent properties have been developed into industrial and warehouse properties and our proposed zoning would not change the current trend of development in this neighborhood. 7. Public services would be little affected by the proposed changes in that water and sewer is already developed. The project, as it exists, � requires normal police and fire protection; however, the proposals might ' have a tendency to increase fire protection. It would require no school,, public transportation, a.r hospital services. Therefore, the overall impact these changes would have on public services would be minimum. I This proposed zoning change (conditional use) would have no adverse impact li on the community, but would be helpful for its economy. I Respectfully, I THE ROBERT RANDALL COMPANY �, I'� �: '' l ! A 1 �s�. �• W� � 1 � Steven P. Mozinski,��r. Property Manager � � . , .,...:, , _: ,. _ _ . , .., _ .- �;, � � r � �X�i�a�r`'c� K t. ,� , � , � V �, �. . �, 4. Chairman Whittaker stated his agreement with the motion but also �'; �ffered his concern for the rear portion of the lot which is now 4,' ��, zoned RU-4 and is in fact land locked. He then encouraged the owners [ �Y~ to work with the property owner to the north of the development ta I, accomplish some means of access in order to deveLop this property as E: F', � � urre�ntly zoned. �'; t: , �..i 5. The otion was passed by unanimous vote of inembers present. � d Devel.o ment District: Extension of Construction �` 5. PUBLIC HEARING Planne p , � , Time Period. � � �' 5.1 Planned Develo ent District - Time �xtension: zone change 9-31-71 (Wallace Johnso A request by Walla e E. Johnson to extend tha construction time period for a Planned Deve pment District comprising 1.23 acres;..at bhe southwest corner of the intersection of S.W. Tigard Street and S.W. i' Grant Avenue. (Tax Map 2S1 2BA, Tax Lot 800). A. S taf f FS.ndings l. Brooks informed he Planning Commission that the applicant, Wallace � Johnson, h•as �wi drawn his request for extension of the construction : time per .od. i;, �� ; B. Commission Discuss on and Action ' fl ��a 1. Mickelson mo d that the staff recommendation for withdrawal of the 1'y �"" Planned Aev opment Aistrict be accepted. Hartman seconded and the } motion pa d b animous vote of the members present. , � 6. PUBLIC HEARING itional Use t � 6.1 Conditional Use - CU 2-74 (Randall Construction) � i'� (,; A request by Randall Construction Com�any, Inc. to al.low a warehouse ` use in an M-4, Industrial Park zone. Subject property comprises 5.56 �; acres �south of S.W. Burnham Street, approximately SUO £eet east of S.W. ;! Ash Avenue. (Tax Map 2S1 2M, Tax Lots 2200 and 2300). ' �; ; , . �; A. .Staff Findings� � . ;: 1. Brooks presented the stafi findings pertaining to this request. � . � k . B. Testimony and Cross Examination �. . t Proponents �s . �3 1. John Johnson, from Randall Construction Company, spoke for the request, �, providing the following informations a a. That the proposed warehouse facility would require a minimum of { ` . public services, to include p�li.ce protection as the facility will ` have a security guard living on the premises. � PAGE 4 - PC MINUTES - FEBRUARY 5, 1974 � _ � ,.�, ._ _ . ._ ,, , .. . ..� M. .. ., � _ _ . . „_., . �, . � , . . . ,. �_�,, : � . � � . �� . �. ., ,�e _ � �- ^ b. There would be no conflicts with adjoining uses. ,�- ' c. The proposed rental warehouse space will provide a community benefit �� . because there are no similar facilities in the Tigard area and this will alleviate the existing problem of boat and trailer storage on City stxeets. ' Cross Examination a. Hartman asked Mr. Johnson if it were likely that the spaces being � rented would be used for purposes other than storage, such as rebuilding antique cars or rock group: practicing areas. b. Mr. Johnson replied that this depends on the management o£ this type of facility and what their restrictions are, but that "yes" other uses such as auto repairs, etc. could take place in the rented stora�e areas. � c. $arkhurst asked the floor area of the buildings being proposed . for the site. � , d. Mr. Johnson replied that 110,000 square feet of storage area is planned for the site. e. Barkhuxst aslced when construction �ould begfn. f. Mr.. Johnson replied immediately. ��, g. riickelson asked if these buildings were completely enclosed and supplied with utility services. I , 1 h. Mr. Johnson said that each space will have its own door, such `'� as a garage door and will be supplied wi.th power, making possible the use of a space heater. However, otiher utility services suc.h � as water would not be available. i. Chairman Whittaker asked if 107, of the site area had been landscaped. I j. The Planning Director responded that there was not a 10'/. requirement in the M-4 zone and this was there£ore not a consideration on the site plan. ; k. Sakata asked if this facility were similar to the one on Allen Blvd. in Beaverton. 1. Mr. Johnson replied that it was. m. Hartman stated his opinion that the presentation by the applicant has not established a changing condition which would ,justify the conditianal use. • I � Opponents � , r�'� a. There was no one present in opposition to the request, �� i PAGE 5 - �'C MINUTES - FEBRUARY 5, 1974 ; - �. ; i a . _ _ . , .�.;,. � ; ,, :..��, . ,,�.� ,.__...._..� _..,_,. ._� ..,,.,.. . .., . . _.:..�, . , _ .. : . a _ .. .,..., . . .. _ �_ _ . _ ,., . �.. � . . ' . . .. . � � � : � � �� '� ' ^ �,.,. . l.. .. . . � C. Staff Recommendation �' µ conditions. PP 9 �; 1. Staff recomme�nded`a rovaL of the condit3.ana1 use re uest wit;h �,_. � � � �� 2. Barkhuxst asked Lf the quarters for the security guard were allowed �� in the M-4 zane. �',, � 6, 3. Brooks replied that a dwell.ing for a security guard was a permitted �� use in khe M-4 zone. � ' � �� D. Commission Discussion and Action f' � � � � � ii 1. Hartman moved to approve the request sub�ject to the three recommended �'� staff conditions. � �! �?. � � i�� a. That the property �wner(s) will support the formation of a local improvement district so as to construct S.W. Burnham Street to �� City collector street standards and that the property owner(s) ��I shall execute a recordable convenant. '� ,t b. That the proper�.y owner(s) shall submit, for approval by the�Public Wnrks Department, a storm drainage 'plan for the subject propexty. .� 1 c. That the proposed use be subject to Site Development and Architectural ; Design Review. Said review to re£lect the proposal's effect on + adjacent sipgle family development and allow only the minimum number of �) curb cuts necessary to allow aclequate access to the proposed use. 7� ��,,,,;; 2. Nicoli seconded, and the mo[ion passed by unanimous vote of those � r.�members � 6.2 Conditional Use - CU 3-74 Vermil e and Raz � ) . Y � �:,, A request by H. P. Vermilye to� allow residential and commercial glazing �<' in a C-3, General Commercial zone. The subject site comprises .11 acres �; and is located at 12500 S.W. Main Street (Tax Map 2S1 2AC, Tax Lot 600). t;. � ,f,; A. Staff Findings . �A' t:'. 1. Braaks presented the staff findings. B. Testimony and Cross Examination c� �k' Proponents ti��' � '�.'��: la a. Mr. Raz was present and stated that he had not prepared a presentation ,�i for khe Planning Commission but could answer any of their questions. �, �� Cross Examination �� . , i;, a. Chairman Whittaker asked what type of business wou�ld be conducted � �, � on the site. �� r� ["�: � � ' �s. f^ PAGE 6 - PC MINUTES - FEBRUARY 5, 1974 ��, . — ' . , � � � � � � . :��, ,� ��...__ � , ., �� _ - � �.�ye�,w., + • �}.. �,��11 Q1 y" L`� �' . , , . . � � TIGARD PLANNING Gu1vU�1ISSI0N i x'�" Staff Report �� ' ��, Februazy 59 1974 Agenda It�m 6.1 ' • , CU 2-74 (R�ndall Constructfon) � ConditionaZ Use � For property compriaing 5.56 ac�es laca�ed sc,u�th af S.W. Rurnha�m Sr�aet a roximatel 500 feeC �;ast of S.W. Ash Avent�e 88�0 S.W. aa�tn.h�m S r� PP Y , t� .e�. (Tax Map 2S1 2AD, T.a�c Lota 2200 & 2300). Appl.ic.�nt • � Rat�dall CansC�uction Cornpany, �rac. A licant's Ae �u�ati Apprc�ved �a ,�1Lc�w a wA�r�:ha�x�e as e aondit�,��x�L wse in �x� M�4 Indu��r3+a1 Pa.rk xane. A��1ic$nt's P�rapowaL ' Ta can�tr�ct rnir�t��v��r�k�c�r�sc,s �n the �ub�cct p�z�p�r�y. . (�. sG�:r� F�.�,ai,ng� 1. S�e �,�t�ctted r��p fur �he ��ist;i,»g ;�'r�ti'e'i�.xag �x►d L�xr�d u�we� rc�l�stt�n�hip�m. . x. 7'he ap�lia�,n� ha�� r��i,t�a�d � wx�i:r�xa x��:�p�riSe �o �hd �'F�,�s�t�o" gu�.��9.�n�a. (S�e �t;�ich�d.) � 3. Z'he �f,�� c;r�ar��e�,C1y �c>nt�i,aa twa :si,;ngrr. f��i.Ly dw�lli,�� d,�n��ir�ti S.W. Arxz��,h�m Stxert. � 4: The Tittard C,�s�'t+uni�,,v Ple�n d�:ai�gne��oe tha e�rb,�tat �rea f.ar Qammerai�l Ia�dun�x�taL uee.�T,he purpaec of �hie c�aeaifioati�r� i• tio pexmf,� in thi� a�.dc:� part �� t��e C�.ty a m,ixture r�f bu�ine.ra And Ligh� o� 1i�nit�d indu�txiai u��a that Kra camp�tib].a and that da not �E�►aiiy fit iut,a a plann�d sh�ppi�ng odn�a�." The Ob��:ct�,vaa, Pa�,l.aied & St„�ndarde af tik�ie� cLaaaific�tton ara ae Eallowa� Ob��a��,ve - Ta cunc��nt�r�te !,n R ni.ngl,a 1�ostl�c,n b�usia�he�� tihati p�rovtd� �pFaf.ali,z��d gaade end a�rv�ic�e ta r�,qu�,r� au�door etor�ge c�r diaplay c�re�. Typia�i estr�bliAltt�estte axn �ut�amabile, boax� �nd mobila hn�m� daalex�hi��, farm and h�mvy sq�uip�,�,nt a�le�e mnd •arvica outil��e, canet�ructiian mat�rial c►utleta, and gs�den e�ar�e. Policiee and S�aradard� �� 1. Der��, n��e far �hie ur a�e az�ea�e nee�r hi her-tntdr.eS g P A 6 ty u�a�t euch �• otr�ar car.ranerci�s� ar ��nrJu�triai di,e�rLa��. � � _ _ ' , � �:----- • • � �. 2, F�.'�,-:;�.�a�e th�.loc�tior_ of. new b�asin��s z.� th�"�`S ca�egcsr� in the a?-e,s tha.t adj�ins M,�in Strest. In �ci�it:ion; E��aurag�: ce�C,�in �xiMti.�^g ,,,, ewt,�.blishments ��esez�tly located in Gkr��r p�.rts c�f TigArd to rel�e:��e ; �..' in thF M:a3.n Street a�Fa. � 3. F.stahZish high design: standardG for s��-�i�:� �,€�d �,pp�a�ar��e, incl.gr.di*�g t.he Landsc�.pi??g of setback are�s and the @e�ign�;ti;:,� cf �.cceUs p��?rs. 5. ThE pre].imina�ry �nd ��na,d�pted Ash AvF?��:�D�wn.#:cs�n. N�ighb�:c•�r�ed PZ,�n desigr_ates th� subjE�ct: site for Ge�cnmer�ial �:rzd:�st:xial Use, s�.a�ing it is to "p�av�3.de a t��:�?siticaES fram the coc�7n�r��.ia1 area to th�: no�Lr a�d �}�e in.d�:sCrial are:a to t:hF S�u�h ��?d to z;��i.s:��3.n a rnzxttxre o£ �;�mpa:�.3.b1� � inde�st:•s'ial �.nd cot?�me:�°cial uses."� , : i b. The wta£f fi.nds thc �.ppl�.ca�at's prap�sal �c.an£erms t�o �t�r,t.h t:he Ti,�ard '' Cc�mmunit��!�P1Gn and to trse Ash Av�.nu��A�taa?�:crw� Np�.ghborhood Plan, ' 7. ThEre is no sim:ilar fa:��.lity witk►i*.? the imn!ediate Tiga?°d aY°e�., As these ' faeili.�:i�;s a�,re �ric�ted to �p��tm��at ,�.r�d �nr:�ll husi��sW stcsr�.�e e:�d Ti�G.'±°d c�antairs a Laxge perc�ntag� af apa�tmFnts 4nc.i �:m�ll b�xsa.�e�s9 f�l�e ��:3ff ! £ee?s there is a cut��'tt��ity *!�€�cl �e+r the prc�p�s�8 fa�z.?it;y. ; a t 8. The sz�e �.s cer!t��;.��1y ?c�c�t:�;�l �or �ot�e�L��l �rs�xs, ks�w�v�x, �h� aPP1ic��a� f � h�.s r_ot st,�t�,d th�,t c,�?z�� si��a?��'Ly ��r��;d �,it:es cae�e c�n�i�3�?��.. � � 9e Aff�ct o�x the adjace*�t c.c�m.�u�ni�:y w�1� b� rr!�.r.�.z.m.�l bec��W.e adj��r�t�t La?�d � �uses �� cc�mpatib3.e, S�+me �.c�.n.f??c;t cnay U�.��r with. �h�e wi��?e f�,m�.�y � �r�s�.d��.es 1�c.aL-ed adjac�:z�t t,hE �uL�j�r.t si�;.ea i � � � l`°°�° 10. S.W. R��n.ts�m 5�:reet i� ?ocated witt.�.n_ a 50 f.o�t ri�h�tmaf-way, 'rtue Tigard � Cot.n.n!r.at�z.t P7an desi.g�±�fi��s S.W. B��t��aaEn. St;�e�t a c.sZl�:�tar �y��E��. wi�.h � a T_±in3.mt�c�! b0 f.cot ��.gh��£�w�,y. T�aiz•ty fe�t c�f ri.gh�.Wc��'�way exi�ts c�n the � so�zt•h sidc: �f S.W. �tP•�°r�t-i�.m S�;r�Et �:�+��.�asdi.zg f��;�cn th� C.��i�:c.rli�ne tio t.t�� ,^ubject p�r�p�>.rty. Ne.� a�di�:iundl �-igh��af-��.y �cc��a��i4:��as� is �:�c�:s�sary �ram �he s�tsject prc�p��+�y, ii, IES�re�,sed trr�ff'ic will ac.c:�r an S,W. ��r?�ram S�:�y�et a� a �'estalt af the prop�sed d�velopment, conseq�.�x�tLy th� prnpe�ty owner(s) shovld participate in the improvEment of S.W. Bu�nham Street to a.11ow ad.eqta�te puhl.ic faeiliLies to serve the subject site, . As per�k traffic flows to �he sw�bject site w3:11 be re�.a�ively Zaw ax►d there is a neEd �a minimize ttae n,umber af. accec� pc�ints aZong S.W. Bcsx�nham Street sa as to �acilita�t:e f'ut>u�re traffic fZows, d�iv�way �cce�s Whou�.d be minimized, 12, Stozm drainagE h�,s been a dlfficult prabl.«-�m in this vi.cini�ye The sitie is poorLy d.rained, Staff Recomm�.?�dati�n App?-oval of the applicant's req»est, s�+.bje�t tc� i:he fc�llowing cc��i�3itiors4 � � ��'� � L, That th� propezty awr�E�s(s) w�.11. st��p��.�t th� fom..a.tio� of a �.c�c�1 i�-�p�rcav�cnent � � dis�?-icL s� �s Lo c.CaI15�:`L'U(:C S.W. B�r.nham Stx�eet to Gity collECtm�' street � y' � �-�� sta.r.da�ds ar_d tt�at t�.he property r,wner(s) s?��.11 Exec�#�e a ��ec�•wd�b l� I. cc�v�.nant, ' �I ; Page 2 - Sraff Report - 2-5-74 _ . . . � � 'k , . :. ; ,�.. _ il _ : f . ,_ _ . . _ , ' �-�,��-ll�C.3 t�r" �`�� . • � � � . . � - �AI�TDt4►LL�COIaTST�i�JCTION CO., INC. . ._ _ _ Reat Eatate Inveatm¢nlr and Aparlment Construelion ' 4242 S. E. MILWAUKfE AVENUt • PORTLAND.OREGON D720Z • ' . 294-�s67 . _ �'"�;.. � . , ' ---� January 14, 1974 � � � � To: City of' Tigard, Planning Commission � From: R.andall Construction Cd., Tnce � � � Re: Tax Lotts 2200 and 2300, Burnham 'I`ract � Condit�.onal Use Request Application � In xegards to the "Fasano" requirements: . • a) the specifie purpose of our proposed zoning action is to request a � conditional use to construct mini-:warehouses on an existing 1�--4 zoned . progerty which is industrial. � �b) . the requested conditional use zor:�r�g is in conformance with the City of • Tigard's ac�opted comprehensive plan. • c) the requested proposed zone change does fulfill a community need for the � proposed use of mini-warehouses. The public need would be best served by allowing our proposed use on this particular piece of property. �, � d) there have been no changes in conditions to our knowledge that would not justify a change in the zoning (conditional use) for this particular I pie�e o£_property. -The current.surrounding land use and street capacity, the� availability of sewer and water ar� adequate to serve the pY�oposed development and its proposed uses. _ � e) the proposad loca�ion for this zoning action is more .suitable than the other cuxrent locations in the city zoned to allow our proposed use.. �� The public need would b� best served by this particular location because of ats unique centralized location in the middle of a large industrial• and mul�.i-family housing area. ''. f) our proposed project development will have a minimum change in the neigh- . borbood adjaGent and the property adjacent. The current zoning of M-4 would allow numerous��types o£ industxial development. Our proposed mini- , war ehouses would fit into this picture. Currently all of the adjacent properties have been developed into industrial or warehouse properties ' and our project would not change the current trend of development in this �� neighborhood. � � � � . g) the ty�es of public services that are necessitated. by our proposed zone f � change would be that we would require li.mited•sewer and water service and . nor�al fire and police protection. Our proposed project would require no school, public transpoxtation, or hospital services. Therefore, the over- ,. � all impact this project would have on public services would be minimal. � � . `� h) thi.s proposed conditional use zoning request would have no adverse impact on �he community. . �.� �c � � ��u �� . Owner � �� ALL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. John L. Johnson, vice pxesident , �_ .�,. . . , ..... . .:..... � . . .,. . : ,. ,,._,...,_ .::,.. ..„ ._. ..�. .�.�:,_., ,. � _...._� __ . . . _ .� �,._... _�.... ._.. _. .. .,..... .��. v �' � � ��` � . 2. Tha� the pr�per ty awner(s) shal l �ubmi t, for approval by tkae F�ub l i.c ''� WGrks DFpa.,:��sF��t, a stoxm dr3inage glan for �h� s�bject ��ap�?�Y.y, �_ .. 3. ' Th;�t th� p��r,,s4d t.,,e he s�b,jECt to S-i te D�velc�pm�aa�t a:nd A,rchitF��u•r�l• �� D��ign REViEw. S�Sd review to reflect the propc�:s�l°� Ff��t c�n arljac�x�t single fami.ly devel.apment and all.aca or�l.y t�he rni�.icr�um �±�.mber of curb cut.� �' nece.ssa�-y to allow �deyuate access to th� p�wnpo�Ed uGe. iG } � � � � � � �;< � � � � ��:' � � � �� E: ,. • �7 �' ,�, t. � �� ;a . � #_' t:; t.;; � � • �4.7 �!i �; �� i�� FI r� . �� ` �. k� � x �� > I': . � � � � � . � . . Y,. � i � � . ` . � .. . f�: TS (ty !:: � . . . . . . . :�� . . . . . .. .:r� � }�' ��• 4 "� . . . . .. � .. . . . ..� . � Page 3 - Staff Repart - ��5-74 � ` � - �;� - �' P1ay 7, Z375 '� . �', I�l1?At0 TQs City Ac�mzn�i�tsator � Attn: P].anni*.�c� D��,�artment il �, Z'k201+Ie F'lnci�rson, Uit�man & An�3c�rson :iUw3J':.:C'S: C<_>I'CUP'2Lid'i' CO�tDI''PIJi7iiL'� Ar,I1J ?'i3i2S�`1ZTTr;;J ,i mp.acm u:�i� -- x��,}z1�:cr•rr.,r,xe�c �rs�s � !; Thi� vri11 r+�s��orsc? t� J'�ra1.cl rovA>..13,'3 rc�;,Ltc�st o� .Apri:L 2.9, 1975, P.or 7.�c�a1 an�su�ean•t tiaith re�p�a� t� 1:11� al�o�r� �ere�renr.c�cl ;�LyU;jc�cts, and ��ze nral�+.lens h�r�ina�ter cllscussE��3. i '?'hc� '.'laryiiinc7 Corrr.z3G�ion, liavixig grlxii�c;:1 i�ne owner'c rE�rLLiznet ' �or r,asi�3itiona� �ase o�E a tc��al traet in ran �i-4 a.nne ancl aut'ioz•i�ed �l�e con:3t�ixai:i.c�n c�y mi?ii-stor�re warc:hou�.ing gtalls s�arac� tiM� ' ae;e, no�,r a.s eon.ri.7.<�>.rinc� •the ��roF�:�iety �:G �r�� cavmer's t.�ro�ogal ? •tc� I.cas� unit� fox• vr:triau�� permittecl, as *nrr�ll a� othc�r., cundii;ional us�s no� ��vi�usl.y contern�alate8. �� :Lnh.eie:nt in thzs pro�aos�.1 arp matt:r.r� collcernii�g zvailablo Y L�arkinn, tra�ric, fire �,�roi:c��t.ion, accF.�:>, scre�ninc� �.nc� otla�r as,�ects wlaich r.1n �� c�i=re r:Lsc: to un�1L�� }�rohlems in connec�ion u�i�'s� �h�� urc o.� t?i� �r.��erty tor mini�star�r�� ,lzrpos�s. Tt is our va.�w fit�at cl°�ancJes or a7.�eratioiz� in au�l•��ri•r.��i r.az�cli�ional us�F recluixe proc�clura7. romi�J.ia.izce o�ii:l� C1zaG�ter 1,5.72 0�!� t?�e TirJar�i r�ttnirir�al Coete wiL•kiout rFaya;°d �o whet.hc:.a� c>r n�� the ciiange znvolvee who.l].y o� ;�ar�ially p�:rt�ti.�:ted usa ur usi�s or other or r?if�cren� aonclitional us�s. J�:a �,m const,rac� .+ectir�nw 13.72..01''3 �nd 1F3.7,'_.Q20 oi: f:lt� `Pic3aa;d �tuniciTaa]. C.oc��., 1n;� rla�x,�e in r� �rev�.ously aut;,aoz'i�,�:c{ ex�.st- , ing u�e ir�uUi� lae uI1G subj�:ct of a xe-au}�l.:icat�.�zz }�y the oianer or qpera�a� anc� mu�� be submit-ted to a h��zin„ anr3 th� attter ��ro- c�c�uxa� �.s�,��c�s of- conditional izs�s. If +hc; site :Ls inaplara��ri�te , �or. t2z� Zaur}?os�a .�or �olsich �he chAnr�e;a ar•e l�rol�o9ea, the Plazining Cai:unis�:ic+n r.�ay r7eny 1��roval.. on,� o:: t-.',in ir.her.esii: aonc3itions o£ �he c.�rant�.zlq oP n conc3iti�zxal us� i� tYiat� s7ar,h tzc�r i.: conrlii:ioned ur3on com��lilnc� wit}� �th�� .nac31�1t roc�F rec�i�ircments, an.c:l if a opYld�.t�.Ot1E1� �,s� nz��:tntt�a.�� tr�o�-a.2�� oY ��z� ��:.a:�. ��a�t �.5 totally disc;ai�i:inuec? �ritbcaut any cuntinuing uttli.ration Lor any cond3.tzo�al �r�r��a��, than only uroulcl S:Ji� c�vmer or uperator be in - a 1agaZ �osit?r�n, 47�.{:}IOLl'}' Iylannin�,� CorimmJ.ssion a�:r�r.�val, to re-est�b- �.1.81] L1t�C:8 )y4x'TCI�t..�.f'.�, Otl'�Y:�cr�7�. a11C).1 7:BSL7�.'l'. P7C�Ll�.ca� d'E C(.�l]x'SC?i 1a^ sul�;}c!o� tq t:�e rai:her ;?xovi�i.c�n;� oa: �hn Cnde coa�c�:ir:;.ng ar�Piii:eetural revirt�w, clesic;n rev9.ev�, etc. T�V1.�h r.egr�c�eL• to fi.lic st:,ec:itz.c qu��s�ion an �U 4ali�tlier t1Y� k'1.z�nning Co'mmissi.on majr izaPo�� cc»YC�a.ki,�ns na•E �:�L- Lorth ii�. th� �I'i.�ard Z�Iunica.pa�. CodH on 1�ez:r:titteci us�a, our view a.s �lyat t7�a T'1ann�,n�,� Co;m»i,s�iaa� may nc�t ini�asta aoz�cxi4�.oax: on pez�nittod use� � exaept itxcident to or cnr�nr-.ct�cl t��3.i:h rec�ttest i:ar a�nx�o�val vt t2te ��.annincJ Couan9.:�s3�.on �ur�six��.ni: �a arzy of •I:'x�: zonincj or lancl uso r�gu].�t:ions ai the C9.ty� ��o�l�rax c�ndi�ianal uses, varianocs, ��rt�.�ioning• r.rr. srxi�r�ivi�ion of laz�ds, et�r, � I� I I � y � � � ,, Fr � � �`w s� � 'z Page 2 ,: I�emo ta C3ty Aciminiatrator �; �tten�ion: i�l�r►na.nc� ne�aari:mc�nt " May 7, 1975 i, :y � �} �s notr:c� above, aA�y �xoG7osa7, tc� altor. or convar� a F�r�- �scis�ing cc�i�ditional us� to a pc�rr�iitted us� tuoulc3 recyuira Planninc,7 � Corzanis�;ion, a�provaJ., �xec��>t, iri our vi.ev�, in thc caac af a �o{:a]. � terrnination o£ tho conc�itional us� inaiclexzi: to a tota�. convexaion � �f th� ��nt�al i:ract �ha �. �or��i�t�d use. ? I� thc�rc: are o�:l��r ru�stioits wJ�•lah �a� hav� £ailwcl. ta Fn�n- •Eion, *�lea:�� f��:L .free to ac�nin aon�3ci: us. � L'� > � FFoct. . r'anc�er n �"�1:pritl �' :r s'. i ] F Y � '`��,. . '�i �il �', a � fS � „�,�4 v � � ' � - �� .. � . . . � . . � . . . . . . �� . .. � ... . ,. . . . , , � . , . � . � � . . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , � � .Y � � . � . . .. . . .. . . , � �. �F,_ �'� �'. (Security S1;orage) C -'�5 �` �� , ,. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: � � Denial of the conditional use request, but al�.owing storage as a '�� conditional use in bui�.dings A and B (the smaller ones) only, and requiring the following conditions to be met by the occupant of building C. �� 1) No less than 1500 sq.. ft, of contiguous floor area may be leased to any one tenant. 2) No more than 20 tenant spaces may be leased or used concurrently. 3) The maximum floor area employee/flo�r area ratio shall be one employee (occupant) per 600 sq. ft. of gross leased floor area. 4) No fire wall shall be penetrated by doorways, ventilation ducts, windows, or any oth�r opening. 5) No retail or wholesal_e sal,es activities, or customer servicE to be conducted on site excepting that purely incidental to a per- mitted use. 6) No outside storage of materials, vehic�.es , waste or debris will be permitted on site. 7) No overnight parking of vehicles will be allowed. �_ 8) No more than one nameplate of less than 10 sq. ft. , mounted ,', flat on the building wall above the window line will be per- mitted for each enterprise located in said building. 9) The project shall be resubmitted to the Tigard Design Review Board for approval of a new site plan and landscape plan f'ollowing �i the applicant's redesign of access, parking, �.andscaping and ' screening and provision of appropriate screened locations for solid waste co:llection. Such additional improvements as may be required by the Design 'Review Board shall be executed ber�,;� any additional occupancy may be permitted in the proje�t• Site design standards and criteria to be applied by the Design Review ,�I Board will be such that: , l. length of buildings and asphalt areas are broken up or masked `:I� at a�propriate intervals "�i 2. adequate parking is provided such that a parking slot is available on a one per each emp�.oy�ee of maximum allowable employment and ';'i at least one additional space per each estab�ishm�nt -- a11 parking t� be appropriately designated. � ;'I�� i!I 3. Adequate maneuvering space is available for each operational E�' loading door ?a� ��-� 4. Appr�ach to SW Burnham will bE redesigned to reflect the needs of �'I the changed use. �� ,, i', � : � i , � � .� f ;-, �: � . � � . f�..; . . . .�.��.�i �.: �5. appropriate sight obscuring screening iS provided �',i f �, 6. an irrigation system adequate to ensure surviva�. of al.l !; landscaping is provided ' �.. � ;. i? � } ;:�� , . ` � �s a �;� i.'; !; ,; k, : � t �,, � � 't �`I E; {i �,; � � � � � �� i''� ,;�� 4�i i-� i;, � t?�, �,�i y . . . . . . . � � . . . . . �� A 2 � . . � � . .. . . .. . . . � � � . . .. . . �� :. �� .. . � � � � � . . . . � : 4^�1'�, � . . . . �� . . � .. . � ��F . , .�., . . . . . . .. . . .. � � . . .:,.�,� . . . �.� 1 � �. . . . . .. . . �� .. . . .. . . � . . . . .. � . . �.... . ..,. . . ... �. .. . ... . .... � .. ,. . .. . � . . . . .. .. ........ .. . .�:. . ' � .. . � ... � . . . . . . . . . � . .. . .. . �'�� f, � . � i^;^ �� P �� t�=:.:. � P. Staff Report `'' Tigard Planning Commission. ;.; � A�enda Item 4,3 May 20, 1975 � ZOA 7.-75 ;I' ; Zonin� Ordinance Amendment A modification of the original ordinance arnendment to revise the C-3 zone. Applicant City of Tigard Applicant's Request The Tigard City Council, in considering the revision of the C-3 zone as proposed by the Tigard Planning Commission, has suggested that the revised zone only apply to properties �.ocated on Pacific Highway and that properties in t�.e Main St. area remain under the existing C-3 zoning provisions. Staff Findings � 1. As the Commissioners will recall, revision of the C-3 zone was foun.d by the Planning Commission to be necessary due to the circumstances existing on Pacific Highway, such as high traffic volumes, nu.merous curb cuts and a general development pattern ; found by the Commission to be in conflict with the objectives !+ and purposes of the Tigard Community Plan and the specific plans formul.ated by the citizens of Tigard in the NP� p�.anning process. Specific �indings included that continued use of Pacific Hwy. for both local shopping and arterial transport would result in its becoming nonfunctional, that arterial comme•rcial land uses could be accomodated within appropriate limitations and that the continued well being of the City of Tigard depended largely on appropriate development of the highway. As a result of the unique planning problems presenting themselves on Pacific Hwy. , the Commission revised the C-3 zone according to the following objectives: A. Control the placement of high traffic generating land use. , B. Provide site design criteria which wi�.l minimize traffic conflicts and improve highway appearance and compatibility with ad�jacent residential development. '" C. Discourage the p�acement of neighborhood convenience ;�, commercial wY�ere it may result i,n an inappropriate mixture of �.ocaJ. shopping traffic and t�.rough traf�ic. �. 'i - D. Al1ow p�.acernent of commercia1-pro�essional office uses in ;a locations specified most appropriate for that use by the t` adapted NPO pTans and the Tigard Community Plan. �` (.; �� . , � ,., ,_ - , : . ._ , .. .., ,.. . . , . Y ��, 2. In that the Planning Commission found it necessary to revise the C-3 zone due to the specifi.c problems existent on Paci.fic Highway, the City Council., in their deliberations on the pro- ' posed revision, question.ed whether this shouJ.d app�.y to the Main St. area which does not represent the same situation as seen on the highway. Main St. is a commercia� street intended to provide access to commercial properties serving the community. In contrast to Pacific Hwy. , its function is not to carry through arteri.al traffic. 3. The NPO #1 Plan, which is the adopted "Comprehensive Plan" for the downtown area, states that the downtown should function as a retail-commercial, governmental and community center for the citizens of Tigard. Most significant is the fact that the downtown is in.tended to provide a neighborhood convenience shopping �unction in direct contrast to the discouragement of this kind of activity i on the highway. Therefore, the plan's inten.tions for the down- i town are very different than for Pacific Highway. � • ; 4. The C-3 revision has been accomplished in such a way as to pro- � vide the City with a reva.ew �apability and, as written, does not prohibit outright any uses previously permitted. What it does do, however, as a result of praviding thi,� review capabili�Ly, is add more conditional uses and reduce the number of uses per- ; mitted outright. � The staff finds that, applied to the Main. St. $ area, this review capability is unnecessarily encumberin�. Activities which, in staff' s opinion., should be encouraged to locate on Main St. may be needless�.y discouraged. Of greatest �- significance are the neighborhood convenience commercial uses such as bakeries, hardware stores, etc. The NPO #1 Plan finds the downtown a desirable location for this type of use. The staff is concerned that by requiring a conditional use permit; for such uses when unnecessary, we may: (1) expend unnecessary staff and Planning Commission time to review the application and/or g (2) discourage enterp�ises from locating on Main St. either through �� the added administrative time and expense or through fear ,of an �� uncer�tain outcome before the Planning Commission. � � 5. The Planning Director attended a luncheon of the Tigard �Develop- ''� ment Cooperation, an association of Main St. businessmen, where ' he was asked to dpeak on the proposed C-3 revision which the '� Commission previously sent to the City Council. At this meeting he was informed that the Main St. businessmen were concerned that � the pr.opQSed revision was appropriate as it applied to the highway, but did not serve the needs of the Main St. area. , � Staff Recommendation � ;. �; Staff recommends that the Main St. area re�main under the pres�nt ' C-3 zoning category and that this be established as a new zone ; cal�.ed C-3M and applied to the property which is shown on the " attached map. �'� f� �,. ��, PC Staff Report � May �0, 1975 - item 4.3 - page 2 � '-., ., �. :. . . �.�.. . . . . . .. . � .t^ . . . . .�..... �'� � ";.'� '� �,�1�x4`;=`��r(�iu.cy�,.��Z rth ,�',�„pij��'� 'w r�.^`.;:' , w C +► _ � i 1 <� ? �C i`f'n� �< �� x �� `^^ � . � ---...-�.,,� 1r"��t��fi�', ��!J }',_r+7„TF��' �ek L N. � ,+.;`�'�' ��'� `-t' r `� :� � L w s � _, ,; � � � ^� , � ��, �� sw ' ` �b� .�: ° t, , . ,; �'� ,.� ,,i�� .� ��;�� u ; �,. �r <._'��. i t � . � J •. I '��)�'� '�'.,c,ti • �...k . —. i . :' $ '`. �� i � a � ;';� .; ... � O <i�,rat��, � ¢u��. , '"�'�ta�k��'�;��,r� � � ,F•�.... '�''`'f � -.�, ..i < D �� ,..�ti��,.�.,+.�� '"�y� � ,'�,j{�'},� ;�a�.r�,Y�y.."'�y3i��+�.s' �,,1.. �� _ * •k_�� z � `��X�� j 9�'gAf��r1k �y� Y p � � S . - r . '� �'re . � �*� x N r � �'� ' t �t�i� :, ___�� C C -- - ��d...`��,�~�� .�`.,TM�r.=��`��4a��,��,�..,. �:�,o,;�.,, y�� t, i�r a -�` -..a d� L`, zr �, ��,; ✓ ��k "� �f( ��e" -�s s,nr,�t. ' "s�r's y`fi�.' 5-C! Y i . v y {, a b� '�, hdSf'h ��,�c"� ��-J',.t�� i. �-„�� +. t,��rf -er. C i3'�� '4'��b1 '� { t Ei"kf ,y�.A �t9 � � . 1� : W �"�?n�`�'�4��1. M!T 99' Y9 F 5� 1,x`�y�' �T N ,�A Y,�. y' 1-"*-�� j} � '�Y. Z GrY � 1 1: � } k"� i `� '� 5t.��'�1'` :,�� y�a h a��s3� �` a ��i �4�„11' 4'�.syr�d'h�wr 5 �d • �t3�'F"� �'�«� x +` , - ��1�`��i�� 7��v��.i ��3 .'�cFE��`4�, f�-�t��.��" L '. � . -- u ��,'y,��{�a�+'�:r'�,+�sJt'}�r>i t M.�'�Y�v.�*�h:,i �S^ �� i.: . >.,,�'. _ '�..rt-.r. �r�.1K�i�a.�r r a ti� ty,e�..-�+�,, 4,�'"�� . . 3 .�7.� o r,'�� .�t t�. yi .:�2t,..,,� d�`�Y.a'�'" +�.:�� af�.. 'c7� e .. "��a.�. .-��,�zrv ' . !�.s��,Y,'t�.. .a1t f:.L F'.k�.� ..,a-!?$.'�..:. . F`�. � � �.�5;,� t W I��°"°' .�w ."Y'��"�`�` "'�'' M�� "r� t`3,,.�� >"`�ai .` �' w.w�'��rz''1 y�� +tt? -�.�.��y�'xi rl'. � ti-r ..��' } � �iR �,F x ��f-��FY'��'ar ��'"� a'�'at'�'�tx�` � ¢ . � .. ��A• � � ��'' �` ,` ��"�'`��4�1tl'q'�r��•"�'s�s, r�-' �� Y.� r .,f. ;r, N. 2 `tii .�7" 4e*d� �F_��<y� ��i ��S=�r�.y +�;�' r < � � �. ,�,� ��.h � ;� � �� , ��,.. 7,� v ` S ,,t'3'��r�xNi,�,q�`�. �,�a• ''y*{�Y.�.e�i�� ,fi�3..7,. �"s� - '.. ,L� , �t. 4 p 'Y V ��... � , �.I � �}� � � ?. .s. .�, � ��T�� ti't S�. � � S��.�� °"c��•�A i-��'j � z �ty . . �.�` s V l�' ��"-�'.:',d.f^ e'.s . c �J j`�e`�r t+ �a ��tti-i? `s�� . y �. !,'`,`',.� � � �,�, •��t�� '�*rli �� ;r� �\ � �'t. ti_ i k �.q:rL �'t l.�i;',:x. . ` 4 �` }�. .A � � '.i � ��'G 5� '�y t`'� S�ly"�'c . `s�l 'r' `'�' °� 4,-N�r�r ik ,[ ' o.(:�:, 'Y :f ..�'` - �.�� K �. �". -ly, M1:,��` �.� Y :;G�`�n:I Ryp 'V I/ �+Qj�{ p 1.N "'9f y t � ' ��' � �... 4 �. Y µ' t L "y.{t'�''p A' "K i"f � .�+'. 6 � �J � ��4�f��;H�'! � �1Nx�4' ��r;��' Ly.�� .{ A 1 \� `Ck��.��jrK,T'`��v� �+��: '�'1� .. ,�\ � ��a�.�,(�w ;�'V�� r%�':.� 1""S��V�'�,:};q! ,1 ._._ � ,�' n � u t.r,� N � �*r '�- c .,��+�t:� O J �_.. ��"' � � M1t, ,` . t. �' �� r` �' � . ��a� �c �•: `��'�� '� �,!� �� s��fa ti�� . /. ��.',��s��'`!i 1�,."�:5:' 4 M �`� 4�{ � S', ,��i� a�,��` � %, w ,� , �.��; ,.�,�; � f r, � : ; �.�h , ,�.?,�,; ��,p�� p ` �� a��:�r� s� / � � � s � �" �n� � � „ ,� �• ; > ;�� j _ ,. ,� ;�:"�;-��'� � , � ;:d �. a ,.'4� � � � , �, � G� � e ^`\ y r"�� at ;'�M r -� . °��y��,� � � £ � .��K�'�� t � \ � i r � s� '•p�� / � ( � M� 1 r Q x j� �'�� v" / �I� �V� 1 V��Q•'�S ��k� 1 }U! \ / � i�,�� +�x l�Xi�'� '{ -V�+ � �y! F j� �yry '�'�, rFjS)'}.�. R� 1f. .�, ��"`+�,��r. r'k r !�T#�ye Y,i�71 u,,.�,/�C��F�S��ar", , \ "�,.: �: �z. . � �.�r��F.� fl`�.'{ ��''" �.��'�My�' .�,.r„�v / \ S�� / +ZJr t � �,y �,'r' '. l x^p �x.1•'�'<� ,�s��n�-,� � f �4y'h�e i4i > 4.P� ry�i}wr^��'i , I �}'��^r��,� d;qM��+�,�e v7 � \ ?�„i s�,� ',"1 �'u a�. , ,t�l�'�'`�`.:' r.r''� Fy ,�� ,�� S r . *• JF. ,r r?'� �r��,,;�, .� / r.� �:°•" t�,�' � *� P / ' � O ��` . � s� — � � ,�� y% � � � N • ;: . . , : r . �, STAFF' REPORT Tigard Planning Commission May 20, 1975 Agenda Item 5 S 1-74 Preliminary Plat Approval • for a Phase III subdivision of a P.lanned DevelopmPnt (�ummer- field) at and near SW 109th and Summerfield Drive (tax lots 100, 200 �nd 300, Wash. Co. tax map 2S1 IODD) Applicant Tualatin DevelopmPnt Co. AppTicant�s Request preliminary plat approval for 24 lots of approximately 4500 sq. ft. each and approximately 700' of streets (SW 109th, SW Highland nrive �nd SW Highland Court) , including the relocation of SW 109th Avenue Staff Findin�s l. In September, 1974, the Tigard Planning Commission approved a preliminary plat for "Summerfie�d Phase III, Number 5" , �_ which plat was substantially identical to the now proposed "Summerfield Phase III, Number 6�� south of SW Summerfield Drive. The portion of the plat to the north of Summerfield Drive was not approved and was supplied primarily for in- formation purposes at that time. Tualatin Development Co. is now reapplying for the entire trace as shown on the preliminary plat attached. 2_. The submitted preliminary plat is consistent with respect to street width, right-of-way widths and apparent intended cross sections, particularly with the approved Planned Development plan and program. 3. The area platted was previously desigr�eted as ��town house". Staff feels that the proposed change to sin,gle family use is consistent with the overall develapment plan. 4. Street standards in thP Tigard Community Plan specify a 400 ft. maximum length cu�-de-sac and a 40 ft. minimum radius "turn. around". 5. The Summerfield Planned Deve�opment as approued by the City ! provides a maximum density for the total (201 acres) develop- ment area of 6.25 dwelling units per acre, or 1250 total dwelJ.ing units, further limited to a total population not � exceeding 2400 persons. , . . , � ._ � ��i � , _ � Y , . , f� . . � . � . . . .. � . . . .. ., . . ��,, . . . . . 6. Exceptions to �the R-7 lot specification in the zoning � code that were approved with the PD approval are: typical lot size of 4000 sq. ft. (50 x 80) with 10 foot front yard setbacks, 4 foot side yards �nd 8 foot rear yards. 7. The required 45 ' dedication from the centerline on SW Durharn Road is required as a condition of the PD approvaJ.. ,� 8. Staff notes that the bike/pedestrian trail provided adjacent Durham Road does not presently extend westerly beyond the edge of Phase I development and ends at the , edge of this p1at. 9. The proposed preliminary p�.at conforms with the intent and purpose of the Tigard Community Plan as part of a �� .residential planned development. l0. The Unified Sewerage Agency is now requiring a �.5 ft. sewer easement. lI. The utilities companies are requiring a 5 foot graded easement. Staff Recommendations Approval subject to all conditions, covenants and restrictions ' �M applicable to '�Summerfield�� as of this date. � � ,; �.; ��: :. �,:: �C Staff Repor�t - May 20, 1975 - page 2 - item 5 ' _ __ .. : . � , . �r _ , —.-_--.� . , _ . _ n ^"A .W..,. . � ,�.1�,; . .� '� �j( y� , . . . v^ti � � �T�� . � � 'Y�,�,. , f�ii 3��x'�.yy, � '�± � � � ��< <�';� ' � � Memorandum '�t To; Planning Commission From: Planning Depar�tm:ent Subject: C-3M Zoni.ng District for the Downtown Area Date: May 23, 1975 At the May 20, 1975, Planning Commissi:on meeting, staff presented a proposed division of the existing C-3 zone to separate the dowza.°town area from the revised zone being considered for Pacific Hwy. The Planning Commission agreed with the findings presented by staff describing why the downtown ara� should be in a separa�te zoning district than conunercial properties on Pacific Hwy, ; however, there was disagreement concerning whether or not the Fowler Jr. High si.te should fa1.� under th� proposed �'� - of i cu in .this matter the ma'or dis- C 3M zone. In the process d s ss g , J � cussion revolved around the appropr.iate zoning for the Fowler site. Reasons for p�acing the proposed C-3M zone on the Fowler site, as expressed by four of the P�anning Commissioners and a representative from the School District, can be sumrnarized as �ollows: l. The City shouJ�d cooperate with other governmental bodies, in this case the �'chool �istrict, and put Fowler in the C-3M category as reque�ted. Not to do so could make the site more difficult for the District to sel].. 2. This site is part of the "downtown" , having frontage on Main �` St. and on Scoffins and should therefore be included in the �� C-3M zone. 3. The Fowler site should be considered different�y from the Buchholz property because it has access to Hall Blvd. from Scoffins. The Buchho�.z site only has access to it from Pacif ic Hwy. Therefore, the Fowler site could be approximately zoned C-3M, while the Buchholz site C-3. � The Planning staff and half of the Planning Commissioners present felt i that the Fowler and Buchholz sites should both be separatE from the 1 C-3M category and the following reasons were provided: 3 l. Both the Buchholz and Fowler sites are large parcels of � developable commercial land directly accessible from Paci:�ic �I Hwy. , being at either end of Main St. where it intersects Pacific Hwy. The development of these sites has serious � ' implications for both the future of Main St, and Pacific x Hwy. at this location. F�r instance, either of the sites � could be developed into high traffic gen:er�ng uses which � may necessitate P�anning Commission review in order to assure � that safe and ef�icient vehicular access can be provided. Tn f addition, these sites should both be developed in order to '' compliment the '�downtown" , as conceived in the NPO #1 Plan ; and not in a manner that wou7.d be detrimental to its economic j viability. Both sites should be deve�.aped in an integrated ; �� fashion with the "downtown", rather than being totally oriented i to Pacific Hwy. The review capability offered by the con- ; ditional use process will aid the Planning Cornmission in ! ; I . , , . , ;. , ,, . . . , �, .�... TM' �., achieving these ends. �fr`' 2. The City Counci�. has requested the Planning Commission to �°° cansider retaining the existing C-3 zoning in the Main St. ' ar.ea because it is compatible with the existing deve�.opment , pattern. For instance, restaurants which locate on Main St. are not of the fast food type. �n addition, the lotting pattern is already estab�ished. into small parcels and the 30,000 sq. ft. minimum proposed in the revised C-3 zane �vou]�d not be approprzate. Again, the Fowler and Buchho�z sites ' present a much different circumstanc.e, bo�th being very likely ta attract highway oriented businesses and both representing large �ots which could 'be divided inta small units. As a � re�ult, the larger lot size requirement of the revised C-3 zone is appropriately applied to these properties as are the i inclusion of high traffic generators in the conditional use I category, . i � 3. The revised C-3 zone, which staff finds the proper zoning � for the Buchholz and Fowler sites, provides the Planning � Commission with a review capability` while n.ot excluding � outright any uses which were previously possible. Staff firids the protection af�orded the communi,ty by the conditional � use process to be no greater than necessary to achieve : the � , City's adopted planning objectives and policies. The School , �. District has abjected to the revised C-3 zone because it would F unduly encumber their property for purposes of offerin� it ; � �'or sale. Whi1.e i.t is true that some uses previous�.y allowed r �,.� , outright wbuld come under Planning Commission review, the same will be true for all other properties located on Paci�ie Hwy. and any business wishing to locate on the highway wi7.l be can.franted by the sazne ordinance provisions, placirig the Fowler and Buchholz sites in an equal7.y competitive position ' with a�.l other properties visible and accessible from Paci�ic Highway. �I }� �, 4 � � � � �� x , � � i: ; �,, $. � � � � � l' . . � . . . . . . . ". t, I t � a : f � � , �. �' _ � � f Memo to PC - 5/23/75 - :Page 2 .