Planning Commission Packet - 11/03/1977 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PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and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.
t�(0 ) 3
MINUTES I
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION/WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARING ON PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
November 3, 1977
Fowler Junior High School - Commons s
10865 S.W. Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon
1
1
1. Call to Order: 7:30 P.M.
2. Roll Call: Tigard — Present: Wood, Tepedino, Sakata, Popp, i.
Corliss t
i`
Absent: Moore, Goldbach
Staff: Bolen, Svart
County - Present: Burns, Fishers, Peterson, Hopkins,
McCreight, Meyer F.
Absent: Mortensen, Raglione, Wyatt
Staff: Schiack, Rosenburger
3. Statement by Chairman Popp regarding purpose and format of hear
ing.
Management Plan: Staff repprt b
4. Staff Presentation of Growth Management p by n
(. Bolen outlining methods of analysis and citizen recommendations
(with aerial slides of the study area).
5. Report from the Citizen Advisory Committee: Alan Jones stated r.
that the citizen committee had reviewed and reacted to al- ;°
ternatives proposed by staff. There was fairly substantial ;'
or unanimous agreement on the recommendations although some
members felt there had not been enough time to really get involved. ;,
The committee had not determined the boundaries of the study area, t.
and some of the members from. Metzger would have preferred that
all of their area be studied as a unit. The committee also
discussed the desirability of requiring services at the time of (.
development. The members from Metzger were concerned that General I.
Policy G (p. 18) did not provide for analysis of all Metzger at ,1
one time in dealing with special service district boundary
issues. The note to Immediate Growth Policy D (p. 19)needs to,
be ccrrected by adding "development and" after "accommodate !,;;
the". 3<
6. Report from Tigard Planning Commission Study Session (October
25, several points raised at the ,''
itemized e al
�. 1977) : Mark Wood itemize s p
meeting:
A. The commission was not especially concerned about the western- ;i';
most part of the study area (western Bull Mountain).
r'
t>
4
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION/WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARING ON PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
November 3, 1977
Page 2
B. There was a sharp division of opinion regarding the des-
irability of more rigid growth controls.
C. In area 9c two large parcels have already been approved for
development and surround some smaller undeveloped lots.
Some of 9c should therefore be included within the 1985
boundary.
D. Future periodic review might show the desirability of al-
lowing development in area 8 prior to 1985 if rapid growth
occurs.
E. Allowing large lot developments on septic tanks in area 11
(Bull Mt. ) was seen to be a real problem:
1. It would be an anomaly to prohibit development in
the more immediate area while permitting it farther
west.
2. There is a question regarding the effects of Bull
Mt. septic tanks on water quality in Tigard.
3. It seems inconsistent to give Bull Mt. special treat-
ment while excluding development elsewhere.
7. Public Testimony:
James Allison, of Sherwood, spoke on behalf of several land-
owners. Would the text of the county framework plan be amend-
ed
under this proposal? (Schlack said yes). Would the general
policies listed on P. 18 apply only to areas designated urban
and urban intermediate? (Schlack said yes) . Allison request-
ed an explanation of the term "framework plan" contained in
general policy F. (Schlack clarified its meaning).
Allison stated that Natural Resource designation was a
radical change for land designated Intermediate Urban for
many years. The proposed plan would relegate the state
housing goal (LCDC Goal 10) to secondary place through
undue emphasis on preservation of agricultural land. It is
- easy to say that boundaries will be changed as necessary.
Who decides when land is too expensive? What land will be (�
allowed to develop and according to what criteria? The county
comprehensive framework plan guaranteed review every two
years (p. 87) but has yet to be revised• as promised. Allison
stated that Bull. Mountain deserves special attention and sub-
mitted a written proposal to accomplish this by amending the
county comprehensive framework plan and adding a Future
Urbanizable Policy F in place of that proposed on p. 20 of the
staff report. He stated that state rules on septic tanks are
stringent enough to prevent any problems on Bull Mountain.
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION/WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HEAiRING ON PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
November 3, 1977
Page 3
. . II
Wood asked Allison if his proposals wouldn't mandate sub-
urban sprawl, and how he could then justify them. Allison
stated that Bull Mountain is a unique area. 'food asked if
his proposals would preculde later higher density. Allison
responded that the die is already cast on Bull Mountain
and it would be unrealistic to expect higher densities later.
Wood asked if he would recommend the same policies for other
areas and Allison said no, only for Bull Mountain.
Are effected landowner (Mrs. McEachern) said that she had
not been notified of the meeting and her land would be
downzoned.
Meyer said that according to the staff proposal some prop-
erties were being in effect downzoned by legislative action
when a quasi-judicial process would be required of an owner
wishing to change the designation. Allison said it was
unprecedented fa' the county to downzone any property by
changing framework plan designations. Schlack said that
every property owner so effected had been notified in-
( dividually by mail. Such downzoning was also not unprecedented
since it had occured in the Cornelius area. Meyer stated
that that case involved a property owner who had asked for
redesignation.
Svart pointed out that the proposed boundaries contained
an excess of land necessary to house the expected population
increase: 225% of that required to house the expected growth
to 1985 and 167% of that required to house the growth between
1985 and 2000. Svart also explained that inclusion of more
land within the Tigard boundaries, relative to similar
boundaries adopted elsewhere in the county, would lead to
higher growth rates in Tigard than are now expected. Future
Urbanizable Policy B (p. 19) would tend to accentuate this
trend toward greater growth if relatively more land is included.
Mrs. McEachern asked how the proposed year 2000 boundary
was located. Rosenburger responded that the power lines
were generally followed because they coincided with the
drainage divide indicating the limits of gravity sewer lines,
according to the U.S.A.
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION/WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARING ON PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 4
Rod Adams spoke on behalf of landowner James Funk, referring
to a letter (dated November 1, 1977) sent to the city and
county staffs and made available to the commissioners.
Owners of these parcels had made investments there. after
adoption of the county plan in 1972, relying on that plan as
a guide to their decisions. Staff should have to prove that
either there has been substantial change affecting the
property or an error in the original plan. Since 1972 the
county has continued to grow at a rapid pace. Staff has
failed to show that the subject property is any different
than that which is not proposed for a change of designation.
Some properties to the east are larger and have a greater
agricultural potential.
Jones stated that the citizen committee had not seen the maps
displayed at this hearing. Svart responded that the committee
had seen only the maps with alternatives and not the maps
with recommended boundaries. Schlack added that the citizen
committee had recommended only a population capacity for the
year 2000 and not a specific boundary; the latter was to y'
be worked out between county staff and U.S.A. , as pointed
out on p. 16 of the staff report. Wood asked Jones if this !
meant the committee had not dealt with specific Natural Re-
source areas. Jones said it had only dealt with population
capacity.
I r.
Henry Roshak stated that 40 acres owned by him and his brother
were redesignated from rural intermediate to natural re-
source and wanted to know why. Rosenburger explained that
this was prime agricultural land, was currently in farm use,
was not needed to house the expected population growth, and
part of it would require pumping in order to be serviced
by sewer. Other reasons for the designations are outlined
on p. 16 of the staff report. The dogleg on top of Bull
Mountain was included because it could be served by gravity
flow in the event of a future health hazard.
Mrs. McEachern asked why all the Future Urbanizable Area
on Bull Mountain was designated Suburban. Schlack said
staff looked at the land both as a resource and in terms of
government' s ability to service. This area was not im-
mediately necessary for urban development, can still be used
for agriculture, and would be the highest cost to service.
Douglas Johnson (Metzger) was concerned about annexations by
Tigard. Bolen explained that this plan does not deal with
that question, which will be handled at a later date. 's
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION/WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION `�;
HEARING ON PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
E
Page 5
L'I'
Marge Davenport (Little Bull Mountain-area 6) was con- 4
cerned that Little Bull Mountain remain as a unique area,
without subdivisions, in the county. I?,
1
Donald Macintosh (area 8) owns 20 acres south of Durham
i
' asked that development be permitted there prior to 1985 .,
if sewer is available. He did not see any reason for ex-
cluding area 8 other than that it could be separated easily
on the map. Svart indicated that one reason is that the
soil there is Class II -- prime agricultural land. Maclntosh
objected saying the parcels are too small to farm. Svart
stated that there are parcels there with agricultural tax
deferrals.
Burns requested that staff provide detailed parcel maps to
the commissioners for areas in controversy. '''
G,
Mike Sheperd, representing two property owners, submitted `.
a letter to the commissioners requesting that each area be t
analyzed in detail. The sub-areas as defined in the staff ,
report groups dissimilar parcels together. Tigard' s �sit- P;
uation is such that all of the study area should be included d,,
within the Urban Growth Area.
t
Meyer asked if the population figures were to serve as t,
limits. Bolen explained that this proposal would manage or
phase growth to meet the demand and would not serve as a ;!
quota.
Tigard Mayor, Wilbur Bishop said "Operation Straitjacket" {
would be a good name for the proposed growth management
plan. Even though the population capacity figures are the
best available, they can't be relied upon because many owners ,,,
won't sell. The figures don't reflect the amount of
available land. The proposed 1985 boundary excludes two ',
developments already approved on Bull Mountain. Problems ,'
will be created along Durham and 135th if areas 8 and part of ¢'
11 are not included within the 1985 boundary. He recome
mended including these two areas to permit improvement of
roads to standard. ,
Burns asked why population figures are any less accurate
than predictions that a given parcel won' t develop because ,
the owner will never sell. He asked for an overlay of the t
planned 135th Street extension for future meetings.
(
+,
R:
9
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMr'IISSION/WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARING ON PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN z.
. t s
Page 6 � ,
i
Bob Monroe, representing Progress Quarries, commended, the
proposed plan for allowing development to take place gradually
from east to west. He said the natural resource designation
would be good for the quarry.
8. Joint Commission Discussion:
Burns did not want to take action tonight and asked for
additional information to be made available by staff on:
A. 135th Street extension
B. Parcelization in disputed areas
C. Relationships of Bull Mountain Interim Develop-
ment Policies to proposed growth management plan. .
A mutually convenient - date for a subsequent joint hearing
should be set following additional staff work.
Meyer agreed with the remarks of Mayor Bishop concerning the
inventory of available land and wished to see some staff
attempt to determine the amount of land really available for i'
development. y. ;
is
Tepedino said staff was doing the best job it could. Con-
troversy should not prevent people : from working together
on ,this issue. Continued citizen input was necessary.
s
Wood saw the need for additional information, including soils, ,
[i
slopes, adjacent uses, and analysis of individual parcels.
He did not understand the reasons for some proposed designa- t
tions since they appear to stop development without permit- s
ting agriculture. In looking at each area he wanted to see
4i
how services would be provided. Does area 8 have agricul-
tural potential? The effect of septic tanks on Bull Mountain
needs to be addressed as well as the question of whether s
the northwest part of area 9 should be included within the s,
1985 boundary. t',
Sakata had difficulty following references to documents she s3
had not seen, including the Washington County Comprehensive c
Framework Plan, Bull Mountain Interim Development Policies, . (:
etc. She also saw the objections to excluding 3-5 acre parcels ,
on basis of their agricultural potential. Wood said perhaps
the citizen committee could look at the proposed year ,b
2000 boundary.
,,,
y
igen
MINUTES
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION/WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
HEARING ON PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
It Page 7
Bolen said this hearing had focussed on the west end of
.Bull Mountain when the plan is supposed to deal with the
entire Tigard community. The issue is timing, not
land use, yet this hearing has bogged down in the latter.
Bolen advised the Tigard Planning Commission to avoid this
by working on the 1985 boundary only and a population ca-
pacity ceiling for the year 2000. The county and CPO #4
should resolve the land use issue and then apply a capacity
figure to determine the boundary.
Peterson objected to the quality of information presented
in the staff report and requested data on existing population
in the subareas and better maps of sewers and the subareas.
Schiack said that if the Tigard Planning Commission was
going to deal with the year 2000 boundary at all, it should
not just suggest a population capacity figure without look-
ing at the land use issues as well. 1
9. Adjournment: 11:00 P.M.
.M
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
NOVEMBER 3, 1977
COUNTY FILE NUMBER: 77-580-M City/County Study of Urbanization in the Tigard
Community.
I. PREFACE:
This report is a product of a cooperative effort of the City of Tigard
staff and Washington County Planning Department staff. The process was
formally initiated in early 1977 when staff meetings were held to discuss
the city's future growth, and to develop appropriate Urban Growth Manage-
ment techniques as required by the CRAG Regional Framework element. The
city and county must develop these policies and'maps by February 5, 1978.
Action on this matter could result in establishment of an Urban Growth
Boundary for Tigard, amendment to the Washington County Comprehensive
Framework Plan, amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and recommenda-
tion of Urban Growth Management strategies to CRAG.
The report which follows utilizes a process designed to (1) analyze
projections for growth in the Tigard area; (2) produce basic assumptions
on which to base further analysis and conclusions; (3) inventory the
existing availability of urban land; (4) determine the need to expand or
contract existing boundaries; and (5) recommend the most suitable areas
for immediate and future urbanization.
It is important to note that the following analysis is based on the
assumption that the population growth projected for the area by the Port-
( land State University Population Center, and by CRAG, will occur and that
it will be physically distributed as described in the detailed assumptions
that follow. It is further assumed that the growth will occur as part
of the Tigard Urban Area. If the city and county should alter these
assumptions, either by changing the development pattern or simply restricting
growth, the following analysis and recommendation would necessarily be
affected. However, recent building permit activity indicates a higher
growth rate in the Tigard Study Area than has been anticipated by the
population projections used in this study. Through the periodic review
process, appropriate modifications to the growth management plan can be
accommodated if necessary.
BACKGROUND
In previous joint urbanization studies that Washington County has undertaken
with the cities of Gaston, Cornelius, and Hillsboro, the study process has
been somewhat different than used with Tigard. Previously, an extensive
public mailing was utilized early in the study, coupled with city-county
staff collection of basic information on the area in question, population,
and community development assumptions. A preliminary report, with no
recommendation, was then reviewed at a joint Planning Commission public
hearing, with formulation of a staff recommendation based on public testimony
as well as explicit study results. i.
In this case, at the request of the City of Tigard Planning Department, a
Citizen Advisory Committee was formed in the early stages of the study.
This committee was made up of residents'of both City of Tigard and adjacent
77-580°M r.
November 3, 1977
Page 2
areas who have been actively participating in the community planning
process through the NPO and CPO programs. The committee system was
requested by Tigard since it had been previously used in Tigard planning
activities, and to simplify the involvement of a large number of people
and interested groups in the process.
The functions of the Citizen Committee included the provision of input
to the staff concerning local residents' opinion on future growth in the
Tigard area, and to help in the preparation of draft Immediate and Future
Urban Growth Boundary recommendations. The committee also provided input
in the development of draft urban growth area policies.
The base data for the study was reviewed, by the committee through a series
of working meetings held on May 31 , September 21 , October 5, and October 17.
The recommendations contained in the staff report are a result of this
working process, and represent general agreement among the committee, the
Tigard Planning Department, and the Washington County Planning Department
on an Immediate Urban Growth Area, a year 2000 (Future Urbanizable Area) popula°
tion projection for the Tigard Study Area, and policies to manage the
growth anticipated in the study area.
DEFINITIONS
Urban Growth Area: Lands designated to meet future urban growth needs
to the year 2000 based upon the most accurate population projection
available and established community goals with respect to community
character (density, service levels, land use mix, etc.) . The primary
use of land within the urban growth area is expected to be urban development.`,;
Urban Service Area: Land inside the urban growth boundary to which each
member and special district intend to provide a full range of urban
services. Once designated and coordinated, the boundaries of the Urban
Service Area shall be used as a basis for future planning for urban
development, facilities, and services. The Urban Service Area shall be
coterminous with the Urban Growth Area.
Immediate Growth Area: Land within city limits and lands outside city
limits which are designated to be developed for urban land uses to meet
the urban land need up to the year 1985.
Immediate Growth Boundary: The outer limit of the area identified as
Urban on the Washington County Comprehensive Framework Plan; and as
Immediate Urban by Tigard.
Future Urbanizable Area: Lands designated to meet the long term (1985-
2000) urban land needs, in addition to the Immediate Growth Area.
Future Urban Boundary.: The outer limit of the combined Urban and Urban
Intermediate Areas as identified by the Washington County Comprehensive
Framework Plan; and as Immediate Urban and Future Urbanizable by Tigard.
Urban Fringe: All lands between city limits and the Urban Growth Boundary.
Tigard Detailed Plan Area: Area encompassing the City of Tigard's 7 NPOs.
)
77-580-M I�I
November 3, 1977
Page 3
Urban Service Boundary: The outer limit of the area to have full urban
services; coterminous with the Future Urban Growth Boundary.
STUDY GOAL:
Mutual agreement between the city and county on a plan for managing and
directing urban development which is in conformance with State and
Regional goals and policies.
STUDY OBJECTIVES:
1 . Designation of sufficient land for urban development so that all uses
can be accommodated and without significantly affecting housing
choice or costs.
2. Orderly conversion of rural land to urban uses in a way that ensures
that high quality, efficient, and economical urban services and
facilities are available at the time of development.
3. Adoption of a system of priority areas for urban development to
guide the phased provision, extension and improvement of urban
services and facilities in the most efficient manner possible.
4. Management of development in areas not yet provided with urban
facilities to encourage development of buildable land with a full
range of facilities already available.
5. Management of development to encourage the in-filling of the urbanized
area.
6. Coordinated city-county planning administration (e.g. , rezones,
subdivision, etc. ) which minimizes future problems in the urban fringe.
MAJOR ISSUES:
1 . In developing methods for determining Urban Service Areas and Immediate
Growth Areas, what assumptions (e.g. , time period) and criteria are
to be used? What weight will be given each criterion?
2. Under what special circumstances or contingencies will boundaries
resulting from application of the developed analytic method be
modified?
3. What will be the respective responsibilities/roles of the city and
county for urban services within the designated areas?
4. How will sub-areas be prioritized for provision of urban services?
5. What minimum level of facilities and services should be provided in
conjunction with or prior to urban development?
6. Should the aim be to manage projected growth or to control total
growth to achieve an optimum level of development?
7. How can growth be controlled or directed without serving as an
exclusionary device?
1 �
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 4
•
H . STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION:
The study area
y (see accompanying maps at the end of staff report) was
delineated in response to the planning area utilized in the Tigard
planning program, and also the area designated as "Urban" by the
County Framework Plan and the CRAG Regional Framework Element. The
study area includes land currently designated Urban, Urban Intermediate,
and Natural Resource on the Washington County Comprehensive Framework
Plan and various designations on the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. In all
directions the limits of the study area are formed by either physical
barriers (flood plains or roads) , existing plan designations, or service
district boundaries.
The study area may be broken down for the purposes of analysis into
various subareas as identified on the vicinity map. Each subarea is separately
evaluated in the report.
III . FINDINGS: (Please refer to maps attached to this report and otherwise
available for specific data on service areas, municipal boundaries, and
other specific information referenced below.) :
A. Criteria for establishment of Urban Growth Boundaries are provided
by the Statewide Goal 1/14:
"(1) Demonstrated need to accommodate long-range urban population
growth requirements consistent with LCDC goals;
(2) Need for housing, employment opportunities, and livability;
(3) Orderly and economic provision for public facilities and services;
(4) Maximum efficiency of land uses within and on the fringe of
the existing urban area;
(5) Environmental , energy, economic and social consequences;
(6) Retention of agricultural land as defined, with Class I being
the highest priority for retention and Class VI the lowest
priority; and
(7) Compatibility of the proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural
activities."
Further, if "agricultural land" as defined by Statewide Goal #3 is
included within an urban growth boundary, it must be shown that the
land either (1) is developed for non-agricultural purposes; (2)
irrevocably committed to non-farm uses ; or (3) justified under
exception procedures of Statewide Goal #2.
B. Population projections for the study area are obtained from the
CRAG "208" Planning Program, as summarized in the document "General
Planning Data and Projections" CRAG, June, 1976.
•
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 5
POPULATION DATA FROM CRAG "208" PLANNING DATA
...
% IN POPULATION
TRAFFIC STUDY
ZONE AREA ACRES 1975 1985 2000
455 25 169 180 212 250
456 all 174 159 50 0
457 1 ,758 1 ,758 3,500 6,200
4S8 11 654 2,854 3,500 4,000
459 H 459 618 1 ,150 1 ,900
460 i, 249 287 350 450
461 " 170 566 300 200
462 " 325 1 ,972 2,400 2,800
464 1. 1 ,436 1 ,147 2,650 3,900
465 35 610 160 210 300
466 all 1 ,606 1 ,644 2,300 3,300
467 " 470 1 ,944 2,350 2,800
468 ii 765 2,686 4, 150 5,300
477 10 324 60 70 85
488 all 135 126 250 350
489 " 321 817 1 ,650 2,200
490 11 321 1 ,440
1 ,800 2,200
491 11 263 2,234 2,650 2,850
492 " 251 1 ,199 3,650 4,600
493 " 184 372 450 500
496 10 48 320 325 380
STUDY AREA 10,160 22,453 33,962 44,565
„ Source: General Planning Data and Projections, CRAG, 1976
(1) All planned industrial ; non-residential transition accounts for population
drop.
•
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 6
C. Assumptions to be used in analysis of population growth and land need
are as follows: ��II
cy�y
1 . Net dwelling units based on detailed plan designations and vacant
land survey.
2. People per dwelling unit - 3.2 (single family) , 2.0 (multi-family) .
D. Priorities for urban growth area delineation are defined by both
existing commitments made by existing planning and jurisdictional
boundaries, and by Statewide Goal #14.
The following general land categories represent a descending priority
for inclusion within the urban growth boundary (each lower category
assumes the preceding does not meet the need for urban land) :
1 . Physically developed or committed to development.
2. Urban on the Washington County Comprehensive Plan, and/or within
the existing city limits.
3. Urban Intermediate on the Washington County Comprehensive Frame-
work Plan and/or within the city.
4. Not Urban or Urban Intermediate and not within the city.
Within these broad categories, individual areas may be reviewed and
prioritized based on existing conditions, potential services and
criteria of adopted policies.
E. Elements with potential for use as urban growth boundaries include:
1 . Creeks with narrow flood plains are good because of their barrier
effect and definability.
2. The edge of a wide flood plain is good in the sense of its
limiting effects on urban land use, but not good in its detri-
mental effect on agricultural management of the actual flood
plain area.
3. Railroad tracts are good because of their barrier effect,
especially with respect to difficulty for residential traffic
crossing.
4. Power lines have good definability, moderate barrier effect.
5. Roads are good in their definability and barrier effect, but not
good in terms of provision of services, since physical improve-
ments usually follow roads.
6. Rear property lines are good in terms of definability and service
provision, but usually provide no barrier effect.
(n)
77-580-M
f
November 3, 1977
Page 7
I;
F. Gross population analysis (see assumptions in finding C) :
Immediate Growth Area (1985) :
Iii
1985 projection (33,962) , less existing population (22,453 -
1975) equals population growth to 1985 . . . 11 ,509 persohs.
Future Growth Area (2000) (includes all Immediate Area) :
2000 projection (44,565) , less existing population (22,453 - '
1975) equals population growth to 2000 . . . 22,112 persons.
G. Responsibility
i
for p public c urban facilities/services is shared by
several government jurisdictions and
agencies ,
with apportionment
as follows: i'
1 . Public Utilities: t
ti
a. Public Water Supply
r.
f"
(1) Tigard Water District t.
(2) Metzger Water District
(3) Lake Grove Water District
b. Sanitary Sewer System
" a.' (1) Unified Sewerage Agency +'
.
(2) City of Tigard
c. Storm Drainage System
i,
(1) City of Tigard
L9
(2) Washington County
(3) State of Oregon (see Transportation Paved Streets)
2. Transportation: `;
j;,
a. Paved Streets e,;
(1) City of Tigard
(2) Washington County r
(3) State of Oregon (Hall Blvd. , Pacific Highway, Interstate
5 freeway, Scholls Ferry Road, Durham Road between Hall
and Upper Boones Ferry Road, Upper Boones Ferry Road
south of Durham Road, Garden Place, Shady Lane) . L
.
,
S'
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 8
b. Sidewalks, Curbs, Gutters (see Paved Streets)
c. Bikeways v.
(1) City of Tigard
(2) Washington County
d. Public Transit - Tri-Met
e. Traffic Control Devices (see Paved Streets)
3. Public Health and Safety:
a. Police Protection
(1) City of Tigard
(2) Washington County
b. Fire Protection
(1) Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District
(2) Washington County Rural Fire Protection District
c. Animal Control - Washington County
d. Street Lighting (see Transportation - Paved Streets)
4. Recreation:
a. Park System
(1 ) City of Tigard
(2) Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District
b. Recreation Program (see Park System)
c. Library - City of Tigard
c. Community Center (see Park System)
5. Schools:
a. Tigard School District #23 - J
b. Beaverton School District #48
6. Solid Waste: Metropolitan Service District
(
f
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 9
H. According to information received from the Tigard Water District,
water service is available throughout the study area (see pg. 26,
.,, map) . It is the district's policy to allow extension of main lines ,
at a landowner's expense, to provide additional connections. Also,
with completion of major facilities in the near future, adequate
reservoir capacity will be available for any level of development in
the study area. Although water sources are a continuing concern,
there appears to be an adequate range of alternatives to avoid major
problems. Water availability is, therefore, not a significant factor
in the location or degree of development.
I . Within the Tigard Urban Growth Boundary Study Area the primary
L. urban service which impacts immediate and future growth in the area
is sewer (see pg. 27, map) . The City of Tigard and the Unified
Sewerage Agency have a contractual agreement for the provision of
sewer service whereby most service lines are provided by the city,
and major facilities by the USA. Also, the city has control over
connection to city lines and sewer improvements in its immediate
vicinity. According to USA, there is adequate treatment plant
capacity at Durham and sufficient interceptor line size to serve
a much greater population than projected. Some portions of the
study area have sewer service at this time, some would require only
trunk extension and others would be difficult to serve due to physical
constraints. Each portion of the study area is analyzed in this
regard in the following section.
J. Sewer servicability within the study area:
Since the Durham Treatment Plant has sufficient capacity to handle
population estimates at least to the year 2000, actual service
availability varies with the following circumstances:
1 . Sewer service can be provided from existing facilities
(interceptors , trunks , and laterals) with individual connections
at the property owner' s expense.
2. Sewer service can be provided with the extension of trunk
and lateral lines at the developer's expense with individual
service at property owner's expense.
3. Sewer service can be provided with the construction of an
interceptor at public expense and extension of trunk and lateral
lines at developer's expense with individual service at property
owner's expense.
4, Sewer service can be provided with the extension of trunk and
lateral lines at developer's expense and construction of a lift
station at public expense with individual service at property
owner's expense.
}
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 10
The following is a brief review of sewer availability in each sub-area
(see pg. 25, map) based upon the above circumstances . -.
Area 1 (City of Tigard)
Within the existing city limits of Tigard, development of the extreme
northwest and southern portions of the city would require construction
of major facilities. Development of the northwest portion will requird
a trunk extension along Summer Creek. Development of the extreme
southern portion of Tigard will be limited until the completion of the
Lower Tualatin Interceptor, trunk and lateral lines. The Lower 1
Tualatin Interceptor is scheduled to be complete to the King City
Treatment Plant in the fall of 1978.
The remaining areas within the City of Tigard can be served by
individual extension of existing lines.
Area 2, 3, 5 and 7
Any new development within these areas that would require sewers
could be accommodated by individual extension of existing lines.
Area 4
Sewer service to this area could be provided by the extension of
lateral lines, at individual property owner's expense, using the
existing trunk and interceptor capacity.
Area 6
Sewer service to this area could be provided from existing facilities
at individual property owner's expense.
Area 8
Sewer service will not be available to this area until after the b
completion of the Lower Tualatin Interceptor, which is scheduled to
be completed in the fall of 1978. After that , trunk and lateral
lines will need to be constructed at the expense of the developer
prior to any new development.
Area 9
Sewer service to the portion of Area 9 on the northeast side of Bull
Mountain could be provided through the extension of existing facilities.
That portion of Area 9 on the south slope of Bull Mountain would
require completion of the Lower Tualatin Interceptor.
Area 10
Sewer service to this area would require construction of the Scholls
Ferry Trunk at the expense of the developers.
' 77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 11
Area 11
Sewer service to both the north and south slope of Bull Mountain
would require major trunk line construction which is currently
identified by the Unified Sewerage Agency as future needs with no
specific time frame identified. Sewer service to the western slope
of Bull Mountain in addition to major trunk line construction would
require construction of a pumping station since the natural drainage
would not facilitate gravity flow. The expense of a pumping station
would be borne by either the developer or property owner.
K. Other urban services, such as parks, police and fire protection,
or libraries are assumed to be adaptable to whatever the urban
growth direction. The provision of schools is a problem throughout
the study area, and is not seen as a factor which would give one
portion of the study area a relatively higher priority for urban
development. However, the in-filling of existing partially developed
areas may be more economical than developing new large areas as
development can be increased to urban densities and existing facilities
can be expanded rather than constructing totally new facilities.
IV. DRAFT ANALYSIS OF STUDY AREA SUB-PARTS: (see map - page 25)
Total
Area 1
Incorporated limits of the City of Tigard
(August 1977)
- Gross vacant building land within the city limits 880 acres
1
- Potential additional dwelling units 4,090 units
- Additional y 11 ,833 o ulation ca acit 11 $ e
p p p persons
- Water service - Tigard Water District & Metzger
• Water District
- Sewer - USA (portions of the city not served
presently)
Area 2
North of the city limits of Tigard bounded by Oak
Street on the north, Highway 217 on the west and
Multnomah County line on the east. This area is
within the City of Tigard detailed planning area
in NPO #4.
- Gross vacant land 61 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 460 units
- Additional population capacity 1 ,088 persons
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 12
Total
- Water service provided by Metzger Water District
- Sewer service provided by USA.
Area 3
North and east of the city limits of Tigard, bounded
by Scholls Ferry Road to the north, Highway 217 to
the east, the city limits of Tigard to the west and •
the south.
- Gross vacant land 94 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 412 units
- Additional population capacity 1 ,260 persons
- Water services provided by Tigard Water District
and Metzger Water District (only portions served)
- Sewer service - USA
O
Area 4
East of the city limits of Tigard. Area 4 is bounded
on the north, south and west by the city limits of
Tigard and on the east by the Multnomah County line.
- Gross vacant land 0 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 0 units.
- Additional population capacity 0 persons
- Water service - Metzger Water District
- Sewer service - in USA District, not presently served
NOTE: NO POPULATION CAPACITY BASED UPON DRAFT NPO PLAN.
Area 5
Metzger - Area 5 is bounded by Taylors Ferry Road to
the north, Highway 217 to the west, Oak Street to the
south and the Multnomah County line to the east.
- Gross vacant land 346 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 1 ,805 units
- Additional population capacity 4,325 persons
- Water service - Metzger Water District
- Sewer service - USA (all area served) ,\
77-560-M
November 3, 1977
Page 13
TOTAL SUBPART
A B C
Area 6
Tuality Homeowners Association -
Area 6 is bounded by the city
limits of
Tigard on the north,
south, and east and Highway 99W
to the west.
• - Gross vacant land 216 126 89 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 883 526 357 units
- Additional population capacity 2,792 1 ,649 1 ,143 persons
- Water service - Tigard Water
District (area served)
- Sewer service - USA (in district
but not presently served)
- Other - Area 6b contains larger
undeveloped parcels.
Area 7
Bounded by the city limits of Tigard
on the north, east and west and the
Oregon Electric Railroad tracks and
the Tualatin River on the south.
- Gross vacant land 196 32 164 acres
-• Potential additional dwelling units 788 130 658 units
- Additional population capacity 2,522 416 2,106 persons
- Water service - Tigard Water
District
- Sewer service - USA (in district
but not served presently)
Area 8
Area bounded by the city limits of
Tigard on the north and east. Pacific
Highway on the west and the Tualatin
River on the south.
- Gross vacant land 198 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 1 ,002 units
•
- Additional population capacity 2,834 persons
tt
•
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 14
TOTAL SUBPART
A B C
- Water services - Tigard Water
• District (only a portion of area
actually served)
Area 9
- Gross vacant land 395 17 115 262 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 952 62 322 568 units
- Additional population capacity 3,047 199 10029 1 ,819 persons
- Water service - Tigard Water
District (portion not presently
served)
- Sewer service - USA (in district
but not served presently)
- Other - Area 9a is substantially
developed, 9b is moderately
developed, 9c is largely
undeveloped.
Area 10
Area bounded by the city limits of
'' Tigard on the east and south,
Scholls Ferry Road on the north
and SW 135th Avenue on the west.
- Gross vacant land 64 acres
1 - Potential additional dwelling units 257 units
- Additional population capacity 822 persons
- Water service - USA (in district
but not served presently)
Area 11
Area bounded by NPO #3 and #7 on the
east, Scholls Ferry Road on the north,
Beef Bend Road on the south and the
study area boundary on the west.
- Gross vacant land 1 ,646 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 5,678 units
- Additional population capacity 18,171 persons
,g
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 15
TOTAL SUBPART
A B C
- Water service - Tigard Water
District (portion of Area 11
outside Tigard Water District
Boundary)
- Sewer service - USA (inside
district boundary, no existing
service)
Area 12
Area bounded by I-5 on the west ,
Multnomah County line on the east,
and the City of Tualatin on the
south.
- Gross vacant land 0 acres
- Potential additional dwelling units 0 units
- Additional population capacity 0 persons
- Water service - Lake Grove Water
District
- Sewer service - USA
" NOTE: NO POPULATION CAPACITY BASED UPON
ADOPTED PLANS.
C
77-580-M
November 3, 1977
Page 16
SUMMARY
The preceding analysis and Citizen Advisory Committee work has resulted in
findings which indicate the appropriateness of amending existing County Frame-
work
Plan designations through establishment of Tigard Urban Growth areas and
policies. The committee's findings and staff findings have culminated in joint
support of a recommendation for an Immediate Growth Area, and generally
with respect to implementing policies.
The Citizen Advisory Committee also established a recommended population
capacity ceiling for the year 2000. This additional population capacity was
set at 11 , 100 persons to accommodate the projected Growth within the study area.
The Citizen Advisory Committee did not recommend a specific Future Urban
Boundary for the year 2000. However, the staff, in cooperation with the USA,
has identified a specific year 2000 Future Urban Boundary that would accommodate
the 11 , 100 persons recommended by the Citizen Committee while still responding
to special Bull Mountain area policies and physical constraints on the provision
of services.
Further, in recommending the year 2000 Future Urban Boundary, the following
assumptions were used:
1 . Within the suburban areas the densities used to calculate the additional
population capacity are based upon the maximum density established by the
Interim Development Policies for Bull Mountain (1 .8 units per acre) ;
2. The suburban area will have sewer available, in addition to all other urban
services;
3. Statewide Goal #3 (Agricultural Land) must be applied in those areas where
agricultural suitability criteria indicate viable long term agricultural use;
4. The USA District boundary and the year 2000 Urban Growth Boundary would be
coterminous.
RECOMMENDATION
1 . IMMEDIATE GROWTH AREA (1985 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY)
Based upon the above information, the staff and Citizen Advisory Committee
recommend a 1985 Immediate Growth Boundary including sub-areas 1 , 2, 3, 4,
5, 6, 7, 9A, 9B, and 10. These sub-areas would provide the additional
population capacity for approximately 25,870 persons, or approximately
142% of the projected population for the year 1985. This would require
appropriate amendment to the Washington County Comprehensive Framework Plan
map to designate this area as "Urban" (as on maps attached as Exhibit B and
D) , and inclusion of the same Immediate Growth Area as an amendment to the
Tigard Comprehensive Plan.
Implementation of this map designation will be through city and county
adoption of General Policies and Immediate Growth Area Policies contained in
Exhibit A.
If
77-580-M
o
November 3, 1977
'Page 17
P
2. FUTURE URBANIZABLE AREA (YEAR 2000 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY)
ii
Based upon the above information, the staff recommends amendment to the
Washington County Comprehensive Framework Plan Map to designate a Future
Urbanizable Area (Urban Intermediate) , and establishment of the same
Future Urbanizable Area as an amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, ;
as depicted on a map attached as Exhibit C and D. This area would accommodate t,'
approximately 36,620 additional persons within the Tigard Study Area,
or approximately 130% of the projected population for the year 2000.
Implementation of this map designation will be through city and county adoption
of General Policies and Future Urbanizable Area Policies as contained in V,
Exhibit A. t
3. OTHER WASHINGTON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE FRAMEWORK PLAN DESIGNATIONS i"
Based on the above information, and to fully implement the preceding t.
portions of the recommendation, the staff also recommends amendment of the ti,
Washington County Comprehensive Framework Plan Map within the study area t.
as depicted on Exhibit D.
•
t.
hl
t`F
t?
ADDITIONAL WORK TO BE ACCOMPLISHED ij
As part of the ongoing process of Growth Management within the Tigard Study `!
area, the Washington County Planning Department and the City of Tigard l
Planning Department will coordinate the preparation of an annexation policy to tl
assist the county, City of Tigard and Special Service Districts. Coordination
of service areas and boundaries will be part of this process. r>
F'
x
t
i
cv
±gaimannI±E±:
1
77-580-M EXHIBIT A
November 3, 1977
Page 18
POLICIES
GENERAL URBAN AREA POLICIES
A. The city and county will coordinate the planning for a Capital Improvements
Program to provide urban services in the Tigard Immediate Growth and Future
Urbanizable Areas.
•
B. Joint standards for roads will be developed so that adjacent and connection
roadways are compatible.
C. A procedure will be adopted by the city and county to assure an exchange
of information on development proposals which may have inter-jurisdictional
impact.
D. The city and county will adopt a joint policy to guide the process of
annexations.
E. Existing flood plain regulations will be enforced and amended as necessary
to insure the prevention of detrimental effects of activities across
jurisdictional boundaries.
F. The county will pursue the enactment of ordinances regulating minor land
partitions, providing rules for resubdivision of large lots, and requiring
framework plans for parcels being subdivided.
G. Special service district boundary issues in the Tigard Detailed Plan Area
will be jointly resolved by the city and county; special service district
boundary issues outside the Tigard Detailed Plan Area will be resolved
through the county's community planning process.
IMMEDIATE GROWTH AREA POLICIES
A. Sufficient land will initially be designated Immediate Growth (County
Framework Plan "Urban") to meet the land need based on the 1985 population
projections, and based on assumptions contained in the adopted staff
report.
B. The Immediate Growth Boundary will be reviewed in a joint city-county study
on at least a two year cycle to assure adequacy of the areas and policies .
C. Changes in the Immediate Growth Boundary may be proposed by the city,
• county, special service districts and individuals in conformance with both
city and county procedures for amendment of their respective Comprehensive
Plans. (County amendment procedure outlined in Article I of the Washington
County Community Development Ordinance.) Criteria for such a change will
be based on adopted city and county policies (see Washington County
Comprehensive Framework Plan, pp. 81-87) , standards of applicable statewide
planning goals, and assumptions contained in the staff report initially
establishing the boundary, especially with respect to need for urbanizable
land and site suitability.
77-580-M EXHIBIT A
November 3, 1977
Page 19
D. All land in the Immediate Growth Area is assumed to be available for
development (and/or annexation) as desired by property owners provided a
full level of urban services are available and if consistent with the
applicable comprehensive plan, zoning, and subdivision provisions.
NOTE: The citizen committee suggested adding, at this point, the phrase
"if full urban services are available to accommodate the
population growth generated by the proposal". The staff has no
objection to this if "full" is changed to "adequate".
E. The city and county, through coordination of capital improvements programming
and cooperation with special districts, will direct all available resources
- toward the provision of full urban services in the Immediate Growth Area.
FUTURE URBAN`IZABLE AREA POLICIES
A. Sufficient land will initially be designated Future Urbanizable (County
Framework Plan "Urban Intermediate") to approximate the land need based
on the year 2000 population projections, and based on the assumptions
contained in the adopted staff report.
B. The Future Urbanizable Area may initially contain less land than that
identified as necessary to meet the year 2000 needs, on the premise that
additional areas may be added during periodic review of the growth plan.
The area initially designated may be greater than that identified as
necessary if it is found that the additional land is, or will be,
appropriate for urban use, in which case there may be a corresponding
reduction in the amount of designated urbanizable land in other parts of
„, the county to maintain an overall balance.
C. Changes in the Future Urban Boundary may be proposed by individuals, the
city, the county, and special service districts in conformance with both
city and county procedures for amendment of their respective Comprehensive
Plans. (County amendment procedure outlined in Article I of the Washington
County Community Development Ordinance.) Criteria for such a change will
be based on adopted city and county policies (see Washington County Compre-
hensive Framework Plan, pp. 81-87) , standards of applicable statewide
planning goals, and assumptions contained in the staff report initially
establishing the boundary, especially with respect to need for urbanizable
land and site suitability.
D. Urban services will be extended into the Future Urbanizable Area consistent
with an overall Capital Improvements Program designed to provide services
as a need occurs for additional urbanizable land.
E. Annexations, zone changes, subdivision, and other administrative actions
which would allow urban-intensity development in the Future Urbanizable Area
will be preceded by county and city comprehensive plan changes to designate
the site in question as Immediate Growth,
YFC
6
75 :0-M E)(i-(113,IT A
November 3, 1977
Page 20
The following special policy was not acted upon by the citl,zen committee, but - I
js .recommeoded by toe staff for application to the Bull Mountaiin.,area. This
policy. was generated through the "Bull Mt. Inter Development PolIcY" study:
Within the Future Urbanizable Area identified as Sub(urban op Map E, the
following policy regarding development Will
„ • • ,,,
Suburban! with a density range of up to 1 .8 dwel,1,1119 units per gross
acre, depending on whether sewers are provided and the relative proportions
• of land with various slopes within each particular developmpot. (Develop-
.ment type - single family dwellings on individual- parcels averaging at
- Jeast 2(4000 square feet, assuming 15% of the gross ter : is used for
streets.) A minimum individual lot size of 20,000 square feet il1 be
permitted where sewers are provided, and 40,000 square feet where they
are not.
. . , .
• I
i)rtft '"It
mp
, • . •
irT)
,-
. • - --- , -
`.• ji / -.--,, , ' ' .,
__
— - .. - - I
....! _ /
. . .
.•.- Ji---- : ...,
:••••••:.:.::::::::::. :••••::::::*si,01 .. •„,..'.......,.*;:i.. •••• ,
.1 1::%'::4:::f'.... 01.1Q 1.11H-V•LIF.::/‘&...): :*•.:, illl
::::::::::::.;:x. ;:•:.••„.' . , .. ',.::,:::::-.. *:::::::::,:.•:.* .
. '1%. **0::::::::.::::::.::::•
•• ••••••...•...4.0
—
•.••.%0.0.40.11%.0.11
, ..
*:....:.: :::144XS)6"';* Ah.: .... :i.i.:•-•:.:•.:.:...... _1
, .
• c•:•:•:•:•14....,,,,,x5 . .,I,: . ...• • la,.
.. ,
_
' ARE., i -1-!--.11\--...:0.•:•::*°::::":.:i:). ---1:‘
BO ND .-
ARY „,..
.-• .•:•:::•:::::::6 ::??5.::,ft.:::.• • •••—1
' t ' "c■:.::::::••••f•••••••:”: ".•:::::::::':::::.:::•:::::::::.:::::::. ''•:::: kAce;:::.:::::: •{:::::::::::::::.:.:.• ..:.-..:.:.: ..
lealOs ':°:::****T•:::::::::::::::•.•*::::::::::::::::•:•:•:•:•:•::: :::;:•,:". "•:: ::::::::::::1::::::0...1.::::::::::* f
gnn 1 ..::;:::::::: ••-... ;c-
. :
°. / :::::::::•:::::::::°::::::?,. :;:::::::,................ „. 'c's1 IT„;::::::*?:::.:::titt:::.
/ ,"......f..?..::::::.*::::,:.if.i1:.;.*::,:::::;i:::::::;::::::::::::::K," .,..‘„ itf;f0A,•:•!..:.:::::::.:.:.:,.;....: :..' j
---
00'1-- --1—— -::::.","■:::*:::::::;e:..... M::::::::::::::*::::".::1:::!PW.7‘7,"*:.s:73(441i,:iii::::ii:..:::::::::•:••1::::::K* I, .
t4:•:':::i*:......4:PP. \43.1, 7.•:•:**:iii::ic.:i'ili ::
. 0 .•:•:*:,:•:::::: ...........:.::::.:.::::;•:-.:... P.A.,::;•A.•:., '.1::::.::::...•.....;. .::::::.::: ,
..., ,4• -, • .........:::::::.??........:::::.:::::::,......::......:..:::::
,, ...,.... , ,----?.. - .:::..:.$::::::::::::-.:::::::::. .......::::::::.:,:,....., ....:: •.::::,:..?..:,..... .64...:: .. .. ,
....„. .....
...x. . . . ••:. .. .:.. . ..„::::::::.... : .. .....,.....i....:. mil.
.,: „.......:::::::„::::::::::::::: ........:::::::,:: , •.........._.;,, •::::......:::::::.:§•:, „:2::„.„
''''.• .::::::::2::::::::m........:. :.:.:„..... .............„..
::::::::::.::-::::::::.,..„..::::•4,„ _ _ ...................„:. :...:::). ...
•
••.• ......„ :::::1 .:. :.:.:. :„,...
. ,..„ Bu 11 Mountain r;i$3:* -V,•:i.?......::. ilie",&:. .i..:.?: iilt.iit:?".! -.:. .:::: ::::::.::.'
.............. .. .::::::::::::::::„:: , . ::?:.:•:.::
. v
................ ...,......... •................. . .. ..........
.....,..
i1 L.•:•:•:•:*•:•:•:. ....-...;•• ........
'b
ii iiiiiiiiiiiii . : ••'•••':•/*:
:'::::::::::::::::::::•::::•::1::.:•::.•;1Z::?;::::•::::••:::.:;:*:;;:;::..:;•$::.:•••:::::::::*:::::::*:•::::•:::.
•:.:
-- * :..4‘:';'',:,,:,,:,•:i'f,$:■
1-4111
. ': ' ''•: ..; __ — ' : ::::::::;;C:•:•:•:::::.
......,+:•:•:•.•' '•'''*••::::•.;sm.
( .,„ r..........
. ..
.1- ;:::::...4::::•:.:•:,• \ ....
........•
•
• '' . ...........x.:•::: As:.- -,-'.,*.` ..• ..
...
. ,.,
., -041iiiik .
-• .- .
— •
...::::".......„..-- . .
OW
•. •,,•• , atirrnmas)
............
cow. t 9,i■ii: '-44111
- (I .
, 6 '
. 1
I
'.
CITY of TIGARD / WASHINGTON COUNTY
t
,
URBAN GROWTH AREA STUDY EXHIBIT B
h'
.':
IMMEDIATE GROWTH AREA
Recommended by Staff 81 Citizen Committee
if
Scale: I" ... 4000'
1„
n Area of Consideration• (Immediate Urban
OCTOBER 1977
(. .." '
2 1.rt.:fi
,,.
1
1.
/
1
.4MINIIIMIIMEMI
r
L ' I .
. ?
_...
I ,A___ _______. ______ ______ ___ __i •
r.1 . \•
T-
I
,
IL_
----- . • :-
-1--". - • 8 1 1 11,1„...r.7„ , i_;.t
1 II
_I
7-/:.\ - . _. . .1. . '-(---.)
,, .. .... .. Alz.::::f...... v1,11,.,....1,049@d-: :::.: lit.4
......
. • 1 :.:::1::::::::::::.:...A.:::::::::::::::i...,......:.:-......,..::-...::::::::... .,..4
- , : • i ...::::::::::.:::.:.:-:::. ..........::::!:: .. -...44:;::::::::::::::::..... ....., ..
i .. i AR h . Niftti , \v7 , & ....,...4z ,....„,.. ..............,....:,:::::.:.:„...:.......:....:... _.
_ ___.,_ - , ...-- ....::::::::::::::„.,„„„„,,,=§fteld 1... .: : J
_ ..,
,vom.....:::::::::::::.....::::::..... ssiffssip .ifziri,- • 3,...k' ::::?..:.....'. 4f
BO NDARY 1 -
. ::::;,,: .;:::::::::...:*
c•J tia48 :::::::::: il.:....i....i.::: ..::: ...:.ii::::: :;:f ...:::::;: .:...:•,...i :b:*.e!•".:. .':::.::::•:.. :::::::::: '.::::::::;:::Xig:...•... ...n.:•::::•:•.:•:: ,
' ■wan:i: ::%.:::::::::::::1,c-ti.::::::::::::'• :::::::::ii:.......::••:.:.::;•:•:•:::::::::::::a f f.'...:''...;; Ili::: :::::......isagro„:::::;‘....:...;'..*.:iii*::::4 :••••, ...._.
. ..,,,., 1.,1;';',:.;;" :::::::::::::::::::::;;; *•.•::::::::;.•',:::::::::;;;;:::::::::;:::::::::::::::''•::•:.*4: ..*::•:•.7.!..:. :::::;:;:):7911...F'...,-.....i*::::::;...:.::
....• III , . ,,,,,.v,,t i:::::-. ::::::::::::::::::::::::: ....4.... ::::::::::::.i...........>::::::::::,..,:::..),...:!. -- - --- - i --- ..„...„...:::::::.:::::::::.:,....f......:
1 "•..:. %N. .. ::::- ::::::::::::::;:::::::::: ::::::::0::::::::*:::.,it::: HohsEDIATE ...:.;,.........„......::::::.::.....:..„-...,..:::::.,. .. ....., s.
. vow :::•
••••• ...... . ::: ,
•
_*„ ::::::•::::::::::::::::: . 'vt.
)...? . ..,■V .., .x.:::::::::::....:,.....-.
.-:.:...... ::::: ::::... :v:MM,, ...;:.:::::: URBAN, . ,:::.:. -....:.............:.:.: .....:.:.:...,
v. ::::::.:.:::::::::: :: : ::::::: :: :::::. :..,....:. .;:::::::........,:....... ...,::•%:::::::::::::..,:...:....„0,..;:. ii::::::::;;;;,::.
..•.. : . :::::::::::. ...:...,,,,..:.....:.:.:...s::.:.:.:>.:..n,,..x.:::::.:.:
gsi:;::::::::: ...,...t.....x......:. ... ;
...„...,„...::,:„,:::
. .."-.., ... As..?sism
..........
-..........:::::::::::::::....4.::::.............:J......:::::A ....\::::. ...::::"".... 'ti __
no .....
vr ••• ".•••-:•:•.•.•:' .:•:,:^:•::::::::::::::::1:::::::::i::::*N‘
- 1I1 :cat: . •
****** **********1•••*******Winly:::::::::::::..111:::•::::"..;:;:;:::.
/..y.....:r:r: .S:.:•,x-::,.............:........,...........;:t............ , .. ......;........:..... .
. • •••• ••••••
Siligggia•
%.-r,...
1 I.:.".:::::::.-•:::::::::•::::::::::::::::.,..::::::::::).:::::::::::::::::::: • ......1:::::.; ..m.:....... >Sc:
' ,...,::::::: ::::::::::::::•::::::::::::::,::::.:.:1:::::*:....;...;:;.....: ,.....:....t............;:::......................ii .
' ..: ''''''''''''':.:.:-:.'-.-:-.--...::,..:.:.:,.......:::::::::::::: ;.: ......... t$ . •
11111111111111
: . ::::::::::::::::::::::.x........................:................., , ...17.....n .... ...,
...
- • = i' ..„, . :. '',":::::::::::::::.:::::::::::;:::::::::::%.:1:::::•.1:::::::1.1.•:;.•::.•::::::::::::::!-.1:1: .,.,.*,..'„„.. .,, ,Hil
' : %.*:°:***: !..*:.':' ':'•••••••••• :.:.:.:.$-..1..:.:.:.......:.
.
;:;:::' '''' -°-'-, :•:.•':•:••••:•:, ......:::::::::,:::.:::::.:::::. "40^ '' . ...—':,
III
1 ;.:••:-.:::': :::::.::::: ::•:::::::::: ::::::::::::::4:::::::::::::;. .4 7,
.. : :Ali :_. ;
:.:.:.* ....ii:::.....:::::-.....:,,,:.:.:.:.,:40.................: .,..,, , i .
. 2
■,11 I
, ... •- -1=i::::,,... . i'
'''..:**'::" 1 fr .....:".■.:::::::•:•:•:•:::::::r.0'\ '444 W
0 44•
.
•::::•* 0 ::•:::•""
.
..°
•.:.:.•
..'. N■g •:::::•*7 NA, r ,Z.:
a r %
if h .4i it, . , .....
MI
t . cr.,.,• Ir..1 I , I...
- ><••■
• *i
URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY *
1 I
I -2.i.t 2 1 r1
11111111 III IIIIIII II 101111 --
i
' N il
ie .--
CITY of TIGARD / WASHINGTON COUNTY ,
URBAN GROWTH AREA STUDY EXHIBIT C
r
FUTURE URBANIZABLE AREA Aiciliih
fi
Joint Staff Recommendation
ll
n Area of Consideration . (Future Urban) Scale: I = 4000'
OCTOBER 1977 '..
,
22
v
I:
—•••-•-••■-
. ., •., . .—--.• t .4._____..--..-.
' . . ----• ! 1 ,
' 0 •-fr
•1 I t
owe, '..." •
I .• ---41 •
.
,/./. . _____i_
.
I\ • ______. .....
_
• : .----7.--.h.) 4t -
1 Si'
i
411 - 1 .;:** ittio iitwir \...,.„...,
.i I ::Arts% -A • ..7.'.gt.:•:•:•:••.......... ..
•........mw•, , .•,..,*,....:-..>.< -
.... .
*.-:•:•:•:•:::•:§:c::: :' : ::::<::34t:' ' ,-.' ..% .1%'• '''‹I'-'.*:•:-'. '
' •74:::: :•::••::•:•::•• •':•..'•:.4:••.':."PA. % .4.kii.\::::.%:-:-.:,‹
____,.x.„.\li
i $1.). % %: x, -.:::;:::40:::>%.:.,.;k,.:„.
_ , *::::: . ::::.,60-00:::;.. *:"*::: *:::Vw:ifi'..
c .
,-,:-..:::::--:.:Azf3g,:wz-Y.:. 4. •::. •..4:\ ...s.p.....,::::::::, .. ..-I,
BY AREA.: \'`a, ;:;.:::....:4'.v,4:""''''' *. _
nv ,,: — --- ,‘,,,..,:t. •-,:,- ,, vh,g,i,.emio __
BO , ..:,..,...,..:...:::. %....i*.. ctzw*s ., .,,.‘,.)&,.0,..:30:_,..,:::?..v,,,.4-..:,:,:;,.:, ',."
BOUNDARY ' 4.'....,..."`'..::"::•:4 '. ,a,:::::::•::•' '' •'..' '. • .....tk:•• X3}?,.SW 456P2,6,9I*19IYi.:::%:;•.: .--,
,. ::.:..: ;.::::: : 4 .:::,..:, .it:::;::::::::::::ikc..4.,.:...:::....gy.t.c..% ";
--
:::::::::::a:.:,:;:.::;•.:::::.&. :§0§:-..:..::.::,..:41:i:::e:1:,.::.; ii. ::.:::: : .:. .,.. .7,.... ,
..x.. ;.-::::::::::::::::: ..*:::::::t.::.:.4:::::::::.:0,;::::: .., . :k.:::::::: .:>:::.::::::::,•_5'3 „A,..:. . 4:4:$1„at . , 4••••'•••:':;••;;-:...r .....::....:,......:: —
. . . . '•• • :. :.:.:, ::.:*: •.:,:. ,i:::......:.•...„ .i.iii...:i..*:::...... .o..:::.i..4.4„„, ,.....
1-
••••:.:5.:.::...":..1k :,:••,•%:"....;,.:"k•-••:"; :•::11:::::::: ii:::: :,:.::::::::::.:.:::::.:::•:<•::::::,17,....:....,....:: .
. :As•c"; 4: •.:-.1::::e.,%.•••.ft
.. •
• ! .N4.':* 41/4%%:....44.••::.:*::::?"•:::::**::::::::4::::::'1)..:::::':::': 'ks6. 51a`„::%:::::••::;::::::::*::,:,..•;,,,:m„:,
,•;40''D; ..,„..,•: 0:•-•:•4•:•:::::.14.;::.:*•:"....:.: ;•:::•kia::i:K: ::::., ••,,,,,.. ..,,,m, ,,,,,e„,....;.......z.z............„...,
--
— ••••••:•:•:•.•:••••••:•:•:•:-. •.:5';',-%% ,I
.*4...... '••,•:•.-.....:••••::.„.;s::......• ..,..........._••.:::•-•:•:•:•:',:::::::„::. .'' .:.:.,...„.:4 .::::.:,...„‘„,?•,,...4.5..•„:%?.•.
"°•,.•4.........%..: •:icr.,.,:•:c•,: *::::41.:::::.,..;:v,
.• , '-.......••"• 1•••••..•::•;•Ci:::•.•:...K••••:•:: :::::.&::'•••••"•;,•.•"••••,•.:i ,181d.0,... ..„4,, •••::::.*:::: :.......c. **....:•:;j:: '
4. fe.r.4.:%,..eX•12,/,'•ic
f.*: :•i*N•:*`:.:1::••• . •••••i:••:•••N•:":;*' •::.:7••• •::'%•\'1%C't *:. ..:::••:::i:i.: :••••'''?•:;k:.i•"", 1
1.•• * ....Ai:WV'),., •••4••••44•*,••• •:::•• ::::f••••:":::•::•••• •• :::C.::••:::•::°:*:°•:*::::•••• .....:::
; \ . 4•'`,Z.?'4"'Ill''',"' '''• '• '•••::•• •• •-•11•.:•::::::::i::•:...•••...\:••:L••::'..V$•
„, i,14 ...,,,,,,,V4,,,intr••,,,.., • ••• :% A:•..-A...... % ":•: . %. .% •.•:•:•:• :::■iii::••.:•...:::•.„ ' .**4::■§:ia•: i: :•.C..k.,••,.......',..;
• • •'••"••• •":"••;IP••.W.:1.:4••:••.:••••.•••
4. '' • • -'s e-, Wel=ii1-1`;?%:'• •.:••:::.%• 40,K,:.:::::$4.. : ..,...:::::::::a..... ....::::::::::: \,'.•:::;::M.:.::;::, ...,%;,*:::‘,;;,:i
.. „ .„,...-.:4.„,'..:_.:4:,'::-..;;;:ii::.::.:,„... : •.•':::.. .::.~.;:::::,...:• : , ?::::::::.:::::i?,;:it:„,y..N.1::::,
--3-.-•;•,•'-- -;',- i''"..'..:•:''''n"-Y:Kr?'%...1::.::::::,-.:,.:5..,,,* :....,%:::...-• .,::.:4,::::::.:-,...gc....::..,,,:.::::::::...:..:......m.. .,,,,
, ..z‘Tirt" ;;%(---,-." -.;,-1-,. i ,,Kw•'r .p,nt.. •••:44..:.:::::. . . ,:•.x......s.,.:., ..... ,.. ..........k.\,............N.- .
:•::?.:•x::::.......:;:;..— • .x.:••::::.. :,.. .,••.........,1 :.::::::,.••..;,...:::.0:::::,:.....,„ .k.,...
"c)11;f:'.g,-. :f;•:',-5/.-//,`\,::,; .:::.::::::::: ...:51.. .:„:-:. ' :...•:::::::::::::: r, :it.,:::.,•-v, ;:',,,e;.*;
f..,.*::•.1 ... :::,... ..,s.,............ ... ..... ... . ..
y"Citic',ss -,..c'..' -' . .cc:••": . %::::: .,„Amw::::';:•• '••!", . , . -';',::..:vm.'•:....,`:•,....:5•::..".•,'•:..,-,7,,, —
4 ...:•et....
' X.Xr,,,.9; %:, ,....'....•:"*.:.....:::;:.::.?*::".....vi,1•*".::*::::::::::.:. . . Nli,..*....:::,...,'
___ - -
'V A......•
i..,,:.K:::::>.k,. .„00.. -%.::::::::::::::% ..-.....„4„.... ,. . I., • ...:...,.„...
mil •8,•14•44corots444
••
• ••.......t• ...X...In. C:•I':ka:'1.4..'::■:1::....•• :•:,:•:•:P454:$‹c:Z. '
, .,••.• •••• •'•:L":•:.::::::
'••••• "•'-'•••••:,**:* ••••:•95•1:•:*:::::.9.•:•:•::::::::.N.4.,:. :. 4..1.1„:A....,...?'
mtualmai ___
• •• • .v.‹.•••••••••••. •• 1::?*>•Z:•*:::::::::$•;:::::::• •:::‘•:::;•:`.. '' Sf•••":. %:.•'•
•.
• 4
• 4 -
••••••
•..:R.,••••V:: :i§.P•••'°4• ..*,:••: :•.::: :Kin••;::::::•3:Ji:ti:;:i:•• •.:0.,::•,,e'
/ 1•:,..!2,41,..,'•; , ,ii I L..z.:'%:4:-. .."•••0•::::,::'A.:3"%',....:S.0 ...... c•-:. :.,..:.::::::•:*K•7;ii*,.; •x.:::::..:::. ,.
.+::,.. : ,,'N'A'...i: ., .%.,:1—X4:::•*:::•:4:
lithium' - ••• •• • • •:•:•:::k:::$.„.: .. .g :,......::::::•$::::•.::.:.::: ..,........„
0.,,ii.•:':.:::Ks):::.:4::„:::0. • . ....::4•:::-.•::::::::x•xtx::••,:
, ...............
,
ii x .....-:•••••.' .:..k.c.,..
-- .z.x•.:::•-::•-• •:,.:::::::,...::.... ... A••4::: .::::••••::::,::::::::•:::::,:::. , . ••'•.:
.... , , , N
) -
..4.,c,;..'Mx. ... \ . ••%,A:k-,..7. %,"",'w•' '6":„..,-., .„:A .w. •A A`"4:44,,,>.•'V'.;,,..
-- - -,-- au,to.„*„.■_ I,
. 17111 '"., 1: ' .... ...-...... ,'"R....1".;;;N: :,R:...•:4,..W.t■,,.:0:.;,:•**,, :
C "'c,, •
11 4,,,:%:•:>.:■.;...0....'..:,• :..it.*:•.....\. •,,:•.a<)F';''•.„.,
--- . ..
....:).5:
4....
: " ...... •-••• *,,:;:::.. , :N... ..... .fopi--•
,, . .
....:::.. . , ,„ .v , ...lc. -• : o
, ..).,4.›
.
OW 1 . .. ..•
ir 4.47 •
I --(' ,
I 0 AM. e
.•..— — t COUM , Llt UN 1 .
; . .... '
7 i •
,
' 4 ' ' .. .*....' _.........,_)
: e
1 1,
• t
'. . ': "1•
,- 1 _. A : :5.
1.11.1.1.1M URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY -, 1 1 /
''..%
CITY of TIGARD / WASHINGTON COUNTY
URBAN GROWTH AREA STUDY EXHIBIT D
STAFF RECOMMENDED:
...
COMPREHENSIVE FRAMEWORK PLAN DESIGNATIONS
URBAN `‘2-11%.13,--1 RURAL INTERMEDIATE .
Scale. III = 4000'
( ...i
OCTOBER 1977 1
t .1 INTERMEDIATE .1f- •.“,
\:::::::::. URBAN INTERM NATURAL RESOURCE
rvci
23 1
l
.,,
I
nsoom
a i! till 0 1111111'� � ` -
� �QYe� ; am l a
_ __— ,„.\ I
44b i 1111 ,i
' 7 + e .en�
_t-J, ��`` v • e %
`�
I
. .. 477, i r
4.•
.'47Y.n.4.%Nr• ... --.'"' „.L.... ..•"-,,,) . ilio, 1\1.4 ---/4„..,..,,,, ,
}r 1:31::::::.?::::::::::::::::
•}: { ref yyd} ::..*:.:.:2.e .,., g
$: �{ frr7 �- f
•}..};., 5};r 4{•'r r _. �. r•
, yr
: !E : !/r*.• .;{:;,,,r� roti •{M''' s!
•• Y " k
11111 i ,{fp ? x 11111111
. ,f `o.
Si
C • VY r 1• -
ii • '14411i. i r k . .,
1—• .*; i I A Aliiij 1 t I.
O.
. ..
.I - .c,ICI •
5 ` a
i{{i
Iwi •�� 7
CITY of TIGARD / WASHINGTON COUNTY it
EXHIBIT E
URBAN GROWTH AREA STUDY
1- ■-„. l'.
SUBURBAN DENSITY AREA
f<
Urbanizabl� = r
(Future Scale I 4000 t..
'REFER TO SPECIAL POLICY pg. 20 OCTOBER I977
, '
f
(_
r.
-_~____' `
, 7 ..1,.. .. /,,,,,, ,,;,,,,v;,,, .5.,, ,,,, t ,.. , ,..,
. . .,,,,4 ,/,./4,.x,. ,... . .,
1 , v, ,,,,,,,,,,i. ..
2, 1 30. •I 19 ,///.7. ',/,'%,,,,8/.,•%,;',/,.;1/2 il/71
, A.,... ; / /-,//,/,7/,..., /
/ 4
Ili t. riVCri"rirT
,-,r/.., . ., ,,,,,opps,,.. ,. ,.., Zaril I,, •iir,-, ..,. ' .
./''-'-''---ZI • ii " \.i, -.. •,, '''' ' ' " '.^^ ' ,. ":",,,, ' .
i C 13 L 77 ,. . ............_ .
1 ,1
. c:-.............„ . ' lerr"--- "'" 7.:IN .... . . :,, ...'--..'.___ . / . 4: Q.., ' 4.:•%',k( •4/.
R ._ _ itz,_I ..opt.. , •-- X.,,e,,t,41‘- .1'- I--;4•0;10i,"'... , jairil3 4. Pla:::: I ..,..-; "(:,'7:4,1 V,;.,1.I;I:i/4,iiir,/:.;:r\o,/,)...1.I tfi..*.i ' e my..4i
P.
,L. . 70 2'
il
ri' 14
URBAN GROWTH AREA STUDY 1
SUBAREAS
'
: / • � ry, /
• r • � ° NO
T _-�°— ;y ' � �i ^o''' BULL RUN SUPPLY -
io r. / .v •savor.
IINl9. i/
v,Iw ro �{t! , //t0 / i j '/i�j/ n 4c4: y°
74' . \'.< ,y i, , ./,.%,''''.„'/7,/, 1/ / / f Ifii, '' '''- vi
T N r Ld V�r 3
. ! , ;s /• / L d mss.:
, 0 , I M i ft IJ?,, . ` , b .-J AL F
,, v •
TU® ( AREA %> / f,a /, i ® ri�amrs vi.I
��/
n '•\ s/ ?.F` -... 4F•N•ib J4 iF iF J�// tI tti _ %O �,�ti���/
y :-li BO LI ND
I • / a •/ 0 /' „rte.r I / y h
5 ,' X41" • ' .*"r'.�r. * y r .---i /""� ' Y; �Im::...
\ << o '� 9 ,:�' :R3eN 'vc r- :y�r"r a:/ ; /j�li.r+ „ C p I ' A Est A ,� , � ,y�`��',n, �: � � d � ed f I mon
�i G °46 = a� taa '' 15P/ I ,`CLACKAMA� RIVER�r`1 ' ,I.:'
OZ
•
1 ' it - - 1_tses _ SUPPLY - * d� . •
• 4
> , ' , ? err,$, a. / ;°'--'° ,_, •
Di •••
I_ I 5 I-�•-��, 1 ' v...4., .. .'Nootwi s�.k3,me . %j;BI t ,,,,,..._____L\
11111 I . 4
nAei it / '
�' 1 il�,��,,f��,� app•p ♦ f 1 r d F�'drp�/ �(, r y P.
•
/r .I I 3:: .., • \��� , � f •,` a$ 3, $
9
1 �;. . '.• ��� _ Y -�, ' v T of bps
i °. , '
�_� , — „ li \\� S c ` t _ ' ''yi? f/t \�q\ '''''''''''.°40-1 .!
. ,..._,....fi. . /3.—_--___—_ ----_,-. . .Q`—�� —�:-- is - ..r ` I UAL ATIN R°. II �' /�".';�.. �f,` , ,q t ryt
n \�•"T/ 11 � '
Cc
. , ' f '} � j
p . -ft r ,,,,,,f.e4 4; ,,,,. 7 ' ,..
nlr
RI
ii
CITY of TIGARD ! WASHINGTON COUNTY ''
URBAN GROWTH AREA STUDY ,,
• „.
WATER SERVICE ,
t
■uUU■ TIGARD WATER DISTRICT BOUNDARY i.
111 = 44001
--.."-..- WATER MAIN (16"or larger) SCale,
E RESERVOIR (I Mgal. MIN.) AUGUST 197Ttia
, * * * * METZGER WATER DISTRICT '
26 f
f
... .... , ' -
• ,„ _. . .... . .. . . . . ,
,'. _ , . .---- ji.___, ---. •
li 'rtf,.''.11"4",.'• ,;',..'" ..."," •''') . '5'.,,,.?'7./."X.0.1 . ". - gi. .; r.
7,,11. ..: 1,'.
• ' i , ' -4(,;;;Z :1 '• ''.• ',/ '//,'''/ % .....-f46,4_. E _ ••
..- , t'r•A'."‘r•et 1,41. ' 4''''0 77
■ '
k •, / % / /;4/ vy ,v .. j 1 isCibu
- - - -/.. •-,;•."v. • .1 • TIT .(4,
'.7=-- I I : ! •. .../• . , ,••••• / /4,2;) t. ,,, •
eta.,• ,', . . ,/i..,-;•;e4Z1 ;,v '7/. 0 _.,," .: il':
o6...' •
iS' •■••.1'.;' :',/;'). 7.• 4- // > • •% el
1* ' )1'1"
' lifr
.., N:9 ' ',' • , %7//'..,.' / //, (/ ■10 ... - _ . SW. . ...
IlChINIER ••4 1 4 4Art 0 R• 1,•%7./.. ....,....; d.1//, / //,,,
' ... „ ., ), .
, -_ I' • ...r rrd t r. 4.44
. /,
. .•..•:‘,., ,,,,,,;,4 , ,'" , .,2 ill ' €.; -
. . I
6ve 0. / - - `■-
;/ / .'
• ; '''' :'/,;"yl/ ' /'
11.____-w..Z.1• I R 0 1,1"4 . • (r) .c. '''', ' -- orr.ii.ii„ . i Latir.r
---4-- - .J. ' '/.1'dgrvW% k - -ii• ' - ... .. . PI
. I STUDY ARE.A. ''," ::?v -,,,, 0.,. ,. ...1U.Ifi,71 ' lot..". f P •--1Pr.:;•"6"6-1
• -1,4 ..... - ". 't,... • „..„, -vms,wr emorpt_rairwis ,,,..
i . les•p;',
' PRIV
,.., BO U ND PkRi . .,',.\;,41, .-- ' , '-"TH.-Ft'-'''.- 7<. IN. .' . 't
'2,'a' la •... . , HITEON ' •-.- -2'. ‘ --0.44, .. 4. . , , .e,,,, ,,,,
,-0,7,,A. . r• ;', •:,:,,;,„
'••"V ,,V\•-• -' -., '•;'''''‘,..;•".....4.,,,,,
• i ''' 'pl-'.L.,,e't•'''''/t ° ,,,,,,,, s, l'!•1*,,,•:`V,k„•.ip r4:4--'t
, . • 4, . .....io , •.., , Ai
1 , I . • - -- , ., „< ;,rvi. •
1 , ,,..3.,,x,,. . . ve°Al
'4 4..kz'•'''' '' ' .41.' - a I '."- — ' '.. . . .f4r d a' • — u L
4„.... ..„„ ., „.„.•,,,„,,,,,.., ••:,„ ,- , "• is .- 1
' ' ' -,
..:....) .,.,;„,.. ,,,...e.„,„ ...„.1,,,:- 4: " 41' LA
' •1: S'a H. OLLS TR. '.,, . l'. .- .f,,.#,,,.. ,i, ,....4.4 .,,,,% .. , _ -
'' .. ., , .,.. , - — m,., .........•.1,,,' .;,,'-lk,; ,
-./ t.6 ' •:";-,:4. ,..;-•0.•/..v.% „1".s.,0-4..,: , - .,".. ,
., .,.. ....t.,. .,,,,,.... . . ,: 4r,,......:,..,, „...%-..,..,>,. , 'xk,..... .• '-'4,...„-i',4 . ,
.„ *0,..,..•.,W.,,,,„,.wgi ,,,x .7 lk,..,"4,2.,,, .t A.Y;.x,....
I 7 •, •
. i . 4...0' -• 4 t A ,„<4,, .-/- -.%:,./ 6.$ fc,. '',..`, r...._•- ','''4''/1‘•
,'Itf 4,;: '' t:','''..'.1,%::":5.-NA. '''', .i ',/.'.• --1"i:
! ' "'IV • 44 '- . .:..,;'4.5 -.,-4.-<' :-.....'}-4,..,4.:,,,,..* , -4. .f.,..,,• .-;,./.,4 ::, -- .'• ,
• essay ,: ..?0,..4.....,c.id,i,,?i, ,›,• .. ...);,4,,A,,...,..vi, s. • /.-.. •.,•t:z .'";.4"
- 4 A/ I° .. 7::,%,irr-ir//1,,';'• ' . ./...'"'.."'.. .. ,,,:'r • ',""' .4/...M'7..,,A'''•
I s. eii,:ii.#:4,„4,r. ir.,::31,04,4•1: ""•':-.,,,,,7,'V.Nt.,,,,..&••,•,,,A
, •
IV)
,..,,•,•44.,
‘ 2.1A A 4' LlgES
..„.„
, I ; ,..'_':-•'44,•_.,?,
■ , •Attr NTr„. ..,44_ _4' 4,.. .4,.,r.'.ji.F.As.N N:.().,31.0.7L. 1.1.V17,,,,):
• . ,...- ,..,..... • (2 .. ", , 4,,,, .5.• „• ',‘,,,•1 ff,,4.. ..
''. '9
I .L__ , ;., /„._. .. ....\ ,.
1 . i ,.., _., i A • 1 •474 ,7..• .., .,,,n1,•;•., .
. .
r 7 ; . KING CITY 1 . . s,•,,„,,,Att.:,•Ai: 1- 4 ,f...:•'1 A'3::.; is*
;
01 . --...... .e - , P.1000.1
6, TREATMENT 1,,,_•.\\,....‘ ...„ DURHAM . . I-
,., ,2' ---..-h I (• -, M 2 0 I I - -- ..?1 1 1 a ft '• FACILITY 4:k't..‘-I,i AI,•4\14'4''.'•'4.•.,"-,',,•', •'..P-•••••'•I,•,.17'1,.:.'".e,--•-.,V',4•,•?"',.,..;4,''.'`T-•REC-A' TM'I'T''E N. T,.\),.
_
''- . '....:• x ',IP" 4 ,,Xi3 ...-,
I _._ I"' ,' , ' ' ''. ' '••••••• t''. /1... I 1.;,,, s.• ' Era /...4,......, .
, .,.
_....„,...,. .. : , ., ., . ... „:,.. .
. • • ' ' 4' ), 4,,,,,,, -,•,- .
, • ' •i .
14 " --_,, 4"f,,,,,,4 0 .•■•\ •'Z..'M A,1f . - CL.•
/ \` '-'''' ••' -JE
. 5 ( 4,(:::--,, ._____________:--7 ,,zi,s,,,,. ' i...,t,'.:‘,. '"" , ..1.___-- --...-k-..c...--;,.. '' Mid '. 7.,. . ..:. :.::,,' '.. ' '4; N ,:•
1 • , 1 i j,, "A,/,', . , • :ik'"........1 4 I, •...
n• I 55 -1,:,, ...t A .
I . c::"._, ' ,r ..:.N ... , $( ''''''..S10,'•. }.44— • i rt ")•° •
„ 4 - . • -.4.•
.2.
' or— c.,, ,,,2 ■i,, 4'4''''114."" .i.4.,/,. ',.
., IC---)Th) 4.,-•:••=7.,:i1„.4, . . • - -, •4 ..," a
,, . st. . •s„. , , / / \ 41,
, - ._-•, . _ '' ' 4'ly4
".. &--16.1 0 . I .-/ A. 1 LIAL••-•. • • •
Cogi JP 0
't I • . It7' /XS'....r, j•!"........' Ply
4.• . •o, ,. 44 44;10./•,,,y/ ,i.',•'1/4 '
*°-,>--t".' -.'/ /4 '. . ,r• i t e , •
„ ■
• •-.
, W 1
: imi__:... sii"944_5 afar 20 • i"Itt. •'1-14 Ar 4! 4•,
-I •■ 2' / /I* . 4 .
. ...'*.• ....f)....r."-. ..":4' // -; c.0,,,-,, , . , •:••,
, r:., ..■.• ,t, ./
, !
CITY of TIGARD / WASHINGTON COUNTY
URBAN GROWTH AREA STUDY
i
MAJOR SEWER SERVICE t
,......,
• ------ u.S.A. BOUNDARY
Iii 1 .,
Scale', I = 4400
(- imosimms MAJOR TRUNK a INTERCEPTOR LINES
. AUGUST 1977
t •••16•1 PROPOSED FUTURE TRUNK a INTERCEPTOR LINES
I:.
-
/ • : . 1•. .. ,___ ...„A_ . tk._ r.... #544.;/14:1;,.); •,'''/4 i.'sli 4 00 t,4) : _440- 7 #. .
.. % 11.11Vei,d66,44 '.. 4 I_ ' III •
-7:-
ilfor •
vocw 1
I ME
_LgfaLa_.
•
I , I
G
wo
_ EI:=1----13 . ,1 •
I
II 1
N,• , / ,,., .- , , ,... „. • .. ,
- - - -,,,/ . .-9. • .
. • .•/'•:-•:1 . ; s ..... .. •
. . ,: ,..,,,,, ,, , u, , ,,.
//,• ox'•,.'./ 1 44/ /
A EAR CI . I I::''/';' .'''.%2;i, : ,
/N. //,/%%4 ,7,,Or/ 0 '... • ..;,..•
iTi" ;II:H-71151-
,,m, •• 1991....1 •; '
,. i '44,74%M. 'MIA. '4.•ye-
. `........•.•:•:*: I
' ' •. •- ,frhr,•"-, , ::
....:.:...- :.:....:.:.:.:.:.
1 . ,si .. ..it ..
•......:.:. . .:.:....x.x.:
1 )..,,, ,e, .;74,
\ ,--11,..,- 2.1.° rfr; //:, ' c'1'41 -', /(/ ‘‘
■•••( '
I ii WI/ I a> . •-e-r ,7 ,941e,..7,•> l''t".\%. 4 .N. ...... . ... ,....... .
I 1.3 AO vir..• . ••• N.
'' " ....
••.06b•;,0 14.$11 gov.'"!':;:M^',1'44%.:
l'‘=-----
stuoy AR E-A. .'4.'i°ver;?-r7',%-fl,■/.. ''.,'..wir''''''''.&,,-„,,,,r'" ',„,' ''':;%kkz- gsgli !.:;c4711'":;•.'19-,'-3°,,,3,,,,';
z ,'.. . ). ,,,,,.g, ' --.!!....z.4.vW- ,:., .,
o til .
ou ND Pal • •• . ...• 0 0 0 ,p,•,,,, >!-,‘•,•,••,,;‘,,,:-.` 54:13,.zk4.•1.,.. ..,,, ,s.471R „, „
...,:•-:.' , :•:•Z°..gr,',K,",,'‘‹-•, •„/ fo•-7:1• • ' ,,,,,___.,. '0 ls,i k , , • ,
,,
• e• 1: 0 0000,.."*`>1‘ : ■' ' ;. ppr4401!•!IP,'N.4:14° ./.'N s:,Yk)-wo2;,,,,f
;"I .O°19.,%.• :?. ' N', oc),,06i :,',.1,('!--„'-:::..;,,„:..,?;:•.ei,. . 4,, ,'Ird,voil,': ' ,a ,
I ,.. ..;c;°;400-c-,:ii..•i.'.°0,;°0o°41„,,-,,,,'-:.',:,; ,-If.4.i.e...:, ,:',A.or!„., ,.,>,.„t'4,5.';',4t,%;;;'1, '...3"1 i-'3 ([:'.:.,''7.' U L
4 .,;-0;;;;00., 0000.0croo•. ,,o,...0.0.700.,.i.,;‘,.,:,, .,, ,.,. .z.,.,„ „ ,,,,tr:. ,;:4:41.0 ,.. ,....
, •,,m , L A l
goo+. `:7 '• , :-'' 'n.... A ,;; ...4../. ..4.y4,•:",..* •,t1 4A.t:3-;,---"t:•
I ;e00.00:000.0,;00;000:00000,,, .;;000.1.0.?..,.,,,:„.. ,,v, A;:t.,,,,,,,,, ,,,..,.., i:til
•
lr,0°0?0°;",:°, . 30 .0;0°00°40000'0000„. ,., `, ' ■ .4"s . r.,.,, ..,,s..a.ti :1,";,;,,,V$10,,,U...>:,,,AM}; '•,/"; ..,,
\
O*0.00.0°0° §ZOZ Tr i'', ■V: M.74384' $°eS,..Y.C4,,/,$';4'fi .,%.
N 1 _
-...:.0:00.0.04,0000,0.0.0.0(00:o000000005,000.0,,A.00.0c.,....;0...,.. 1,... - 21.,),;w ,,,,;:.:5„7,i;::,
- • • ; . ...0.00.0.000.0.00000,, .:00.0:000000000.0c4,0e00400,.4).7:,,,,,, ‘..i.„,,e,,,,,,,,,..-.0.,,,,, K,.. •‹,•:::„,"4144'./:;,..,,,;•,...AA:.!,;.„...,• •.
• .I 1% ;00:000 00:000;00 00.0000:000 00•6to°0 0000.000000:00 000000 00:00:000000:. ...00.00.04...00 0:oc:7:00.02 Z.0 ocroo 0000 000 000 000 0000010z 000 000 00000.olo•00.40.i.1.• ,,.,.,,, ,..r.,:.::_;::,..,,,,n.4 I.re.,7,e.., ,\%,41.:i 1..,:..g;,‘.:. t,.:„:.,.. 7.. i i,,,,="t4„r..:7734:.,,,,„;;,:.,,,..;.,:',...,,,,,:,:...,:s:....., ,..,...
,
- . ,„ •
I .: ''-:.%").°°°°°°'°3')°°°°'''"":3:. o o o(Peg'...0•. '.: . .1"-,-, v•-• :-.,..;..L:•;.....
""""' . .-7------:------ *..•.....o00000000oc000„,.-.:/,,,,,,,. ..Ttolikoap0000000. /.0000000000 , /0,:t
it, ,1 •,,.,"....000.00,000000?......:..0.000_ 4.00000000..,.6000000000000. , //,,,,,r;
•.... .. „..d7.6;0000- 00000.0
,.....-:.:*0 -0.:,.:.7;000,;.: ::.0000.000060;.00...0:0,00000 -,.
.0:.:.000.0.0.0.0000.0000.00viocp..1. ..,::,, ,
7 ..°.0.°40.°:0.00000.,040005:..0001::0.:...0000008005,8003,0.0..0.000.0:, ..s.t. .i _ ,,,:.,:::,,,m6. .2,- ,,,,,.1 • ;,,,,,4 .•• •:,,,.., .-.- 4 .
'', ./. _
- 0 ma ' .o• 0 0000 op .4 A, 13,
0,
.
0 0 . .,..0,000,-,00°0°0°000•
,
...-
r°. , ,
_ _.....
.0 °°°..4•:'.°f: ... • '''. :::::4.'........*■ • , , itflic ...., .....
'0 .... ::•.'.±::......:•11Z2" ',..,:`,•.''',' e"‹...: 11
0.- •i
;!
8 if 1 ; - I lc.1i^-..e''NI .\..\,•■..--i r'..-.-.:4nr:1:.7,:.o:V::w'.,...f,w,.,",,,.i.."0--1•.1•4,1.•.,,•\.0‘_y.‘--=,-N.T.1:1:
en I
>, (1,:.....- -7 1 'l' - / . -■-• 49."400141P f 4\ .,g4/, . ,
, 7:( ,!'. , 4 :.%. _..! •-\:`,:. g c„. 4'4,
=11 ,/- •/.- 7' 70 -00/4 * d
. i"-' 6 -11W1:-4111-..irN Ro. 1 " ,„ , •,./;,, // Zek/A/ i,,,,,-VI; ,114,1,,, °t
mil, .:.- ,.. I SW .....;a■..., ..,..tr‘Vr ".;j,'''.."...'12 RI*
1
1 ,f-----z.
4/9140,
1 ,4' °I
lia. Y1 ..
cor...:111111-1 Sillf" ,, ., rl 9 2 dill r 7 , , ..t(f 4 _ 44„T,/,
/ 7 '
1 r r 9
,.. .
.■ . ._ -O
".,f; 14. -MI / / ,9.
• //
•' t•
1 il
CITY of TIGARD / WASHINGTON COUNTY
URBAN GROWTH AREA STUDY
1
1
COMPREHENSIVE FRAMEWORK PLAN DESIGNATIONS
1
URBAN ii •
.00.0000.000, URBAN INTERMEDIATE Scale: 1 = 4400 1
iir - -^oiw NATURAL RESOURCE AUGUST 1977 ..8 !
w
1
1