The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Packet - 06/02/1981 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. _ i . . . . .. . . . .... . . ....... .. ..... . . . . ...... AGENI�A TTG�D �I,�NNZNG OONY�iTSS�ON JUNE 2, 1981 -- 7:3Q p.m. Fa+rler �TUnior �Iiqh School, - Lecture Rrxan 10865 SW Wa7xxut Stx�eet, Tiqard, OR I l. Ope.n Meeti,�c� 2. Ro11 Ca11 3. Appxoval. of Miz�utes �rcan P,rev,ic�us Meeta,ng 4. �laruiing Carrcl�,ssion Gca�lmun�,cation 5. Public Hearing: �. Sta�� l�port B. 1�pplicant's Presentati.on C. Public 'Iiestimony� l. Proponent's 2. Oppanent's 3. Cross Examination 5.1 Appeal of Subdivision S 4-81 Da1es' Glenn NPO # 2 5.2 Appeal of Minor Land Partition ML,P 2-81 Girod and Variance 't7 5-81 Gi,rod/11390 SW� 92 NPO # 2 5.3 Ccrrg�rehensive 7�1an gevisian CPR 10-81 NPO # 1 �olicy 28 NPO # 1 5.4 Canditicana7, Use CtJ 4�81 �CC's Aznus�_nts/Ki�ttleson Brc�m NPO # 2 5.5 - Fdem�nd o.� C�tprehensive �1an R,evi.sion CPR 1-81 Willdwbrook N1'0 # 6 5.6 SuY�clivis�.on S 10-81 Winter T,ake/Century 21 NPO # 7 6. Old 8usiness 7. N�w Business 8. Other Business 9. : Adaourr�n�ent MINUTES '�TGARD PLANN7NG COMI�ZTSSION June 2, 19$1 - 7s30 p.m. Fotwler Juriior High - Zec�ure Room 1.0865 SW Walnut Street, Tigard, OR President Tepedino cal'led the meei:ing to order at 7:35. RO'LI, CALL• Present; Bonn, Funk, Helmer, Herron, Kolleas, Owens, Speaker, Tepedino �xcused: Moen Staff: Howax�d, Newton; Ed Sullivan, City Counsel The MTNUTES of the May 5 meeting rvere considered, and on motion of Speaker, seconded by Helmer, were appx�oved as submitted. COMMUN�CATIONS: Staff reported receipt of a number of communiea- tions, nearly all of which had been supplied �he commissa.oners in their packets. Those not so supplied would be considereci when their pertinent agenda items are hearci. The president read the usual statement of aut.hority far and pracedure ta be followed in the meeting. He announced the mee�ing wauld close at midnight, with postponement of those issues not able to be heard by �hat hour. He caJ.led attention to whs�t he characterized as a spirit of Fana,mo�i�y in the city toward certain members of the city council and �taff, and warned that should any slanderous attacks ocaur in this meet3.ng the indiyidual would be e�ected, and if persi.sted in, the meeti,ng woul.d be declared adjourned. Iie then OPEIVED the meeting for PUBLIC HEARINGS. ,S.Z APPEAL OF SIIBDIVTSION S y��81 (DALES'GLENN) NPO #2 Appeal of Planning Director�s appraval of a request by Falcon Canstruction Company td sttbda.v3.de 2.40 acres (the pub].ic notice stated y..11� acre�) into sixteen (16) lots of five �housand (�000�) squaxe feet each at the SW corner o£ QSth and SW North Dakota. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 35DB, max z.ots 55oi, 550�, 55a3, 55�5, 5506� 5507 ana 5508)� Tn lieu of a formal �TAFF REPORT, Howard read a memorandum dated May z6 outlining the history of the zoning and actions and Zack of actian by the previbus oaner, �ogethar rrith a sta�ement of what the real issue appoared to be. T.he memo RECOMMEND�D c�enial of the ap�eal, t.hereby allowing t.he subdivision to pracead as original].y fi].ed. Howard stated t.hera were fourteen le�tters in opposition to the subdiv3.sinn, a7.1 of w.hic.h .had been supplied the commissioners in t.hPir packets� and wh3.c.h ax�e part af t�he xecnrd ava�.lable for review at City I�a11. The ,APPLICANT�S RRFSENTATTON was made by Russell Al.len LawrenGe� i �� ii MINU�k;S F TIGARD PLAI�TNZNG COMMISSION �June 2, 1g81 �; 1'age 2. � pres3.dent of H & L Tn.c., an engia�eering �and swrveying firm, w.ho sta�ed t:hey are asking for t.he same su'�cl�,visio� ahd lott�ng pattern whic.h ,had ' prQViousl3* been approved, t,he onTy change being �t.hat at the request of ! Frar�k Currie, Publ.ic Works Director, the cuZ-de-�ac was el,iatinated, indiaating the street would ultimately be cor�tinued. He stated t.hey were aek�ng for an outright use as zoned� and offe:red: �ro ans.t�ex questions later. PUBT.IC TESTIMONY, all in opposi.tion to t,he construct3.on of t,he subdivieion as planned� wae presented by �he following (those designated by an asterisk :had also subm3.tted letters outlin�.ng the�.r views): - �Gera.ldine Doll, 11390 sW g4th � +�Roger And:erson, ii3�5 sw 94t.n (2 letters) *Wi1li.am Webber, 11285 SW 9Znd *Lebnard Dieker, 11420 SW 94�h (2 letters) � *Basi1 Dmytryshyn, 1�.30o sw 92na *R3:c,hard �urton� 1�.i6o sw g5ta Karl Bewer�ox, Z1360 SW 9�nd *Steghara3.e Franklin� 11315 �W 92nd TheAdore Franiclin, 11315 5W 92nd (He rai�ed the questian, declaxed by the gres�.dent t� be nut of order, V��iether the p7.anning directar has a d3.aect or indi.rect financial intereC�t in the IDc�les� Gleran subdivisioz�. Howard neeart,heless an.swered txo.) *�d 6Yi.l.liarasan, owne� of a ,house at 11315 SW 92nd PrinGipal objectians expressed--some by several peo,pla and ss�me at considexabl.e langth--are summaxized as±`fo�2laws,wi�h the nurat�er expres�ing t,he �artiaular objection indicated in paren�Cheses: j 7.'he confusian aiad a1.leged inaceuracies in the noti.ficat�.on$ sent ('6.) Criticism of in;forraation suppl�.ed (or not supplied) t.he res3dan��s (�) Cancerning traffic: The intersec�tion o� 9�.�1� & Gr�anburg is very diff�.cult beaause , of width of pavementA acciclents cited (l�� Tasraw pavsm�nt on 9y.t.h (16 feet in widt.'h) i� unsuitable for additiona7. traffic (�.) The intorsection af q5t.h & Greenburg is da�ngerous (1) �'Depreciates, value of my praperty" or similar sentiment {one assexted t;his wouZd be by 3�%� �4) Noise and visual pollution� ��people congestion�+, '�.hara�so�,�n�N (4) Houses v�il1 have to be very �mall or ine�cpensive (�) R-5 lots ax�e too sma11. (3) �'inal decision was made prematurely, pr�.or �a April 27 t3) T,egal issue �ha� a condition of the zone c:hange was construction of �he cul-de-sac (2) �ience objectian to .having to coma back again (�:) Council mandated a oul-de-s�a at t�e requ�st o� res�dents in 19'79 (1) �'l�NU`�ES `;�T.CdrARD PLANNING COMMISSION Jurte 2� 1981. l�ag� 3. , Because original develaper did not construct, it s.hould �o back to R-7 zoning (2) T,he following objections were also raised: "Unnecessax°y density�+, '�spot zoning19 Qbjection to R-5 zone c.t�ange �'More �han one ,house adjacent �o my back yard" Lana u�nsuitable for development--natural spr�.ng in winter If allowed, should .hane a si�ht-obscuring fence (],) �� " " °1 �� 1.0 foUt brick ,rlrall (1) "It�s a turkey, if;�s.a turkey" CROSS-�XXAMINA'.PION AND 'REEUTTAL: Rogex Anderson asked w,ho suggested t.he elf.mi.nat3.an of t,he cul-de-sac (responded to in rebuttal). Leonard Dieker asked �he oity counsel .how ttsis could be approve@ in violation of t.he city ardinance. Sullivan rep7,ied the ordinance would .have �to be amended• Zawrence responded �� several issueo: wit.h respect to the cul-de- sac, t.hey .have no feelzngs ei�her way. The director of publia works requestad a,t �hrough �he p].ann3.n� d3.rr�ctar. Wlth respect to the 1ot size, .he p�inted out t.hat �he cu1.-de-sac would reduce t.he size of five Z�ts even further. He raised thQ question� Do the residents want 2arger 7,ots ar �he cul-de-sac? The storm and spring drainage prablems raised have been ar�dr.essed and solved according to accep�able engineering practices. He suggested that the tectimony on the diffi- cu�.ties wi�h the in�ersections a,n t.his farum co�ald well bring �.he prob�em to t.he attentlon o� others in t.he city; that as subdieision developers t.hey .have no con'�ra1 ove,r these prablems. One man in the audience asked how man� square feet woul.d be in the houses. Lavrrence stated .he had not 'been retained �o desa.gn the ,ho�ses. I Gerr pol1 asked wh �:hs de � e y y u lop xs had not gone ta the council first to chan�o t.he orda:nance requir�.ug �.he cul-de-sacc � Lawrence stated I he z ela.�Ss on g�.anni�ng directors� guidance in such ma�texa--they are mutc.h more knowledgeable t.han .he with res�ect to local ordtzaances. I Speakex raised �Ghe question as to the trut.h of the common assertion ' a� planning coramission'.Yrearings, and one made severa7. times in this � heax^ing, tY�at a car�ain type of devalopment would devalue adjoining property'. Mr. Webber agreed it is difficult to determine w3.thout a sale� but argued addi�ional densi�y in this case wauld add to noise and visua�. pollution. Ed Will3.amson asserted as a builder t,hat emaller 114U68S wAU1d a.ndeed lower �he value of adjoining larger homes. He `'I �.ppeared i:o object to t.he l,o�r value of the .hnuses to be built. Speaker pointed out t�he p].anning commissian .ha.a authori�ty only over th� zoning, no� th� va].�ue of buildings;to be built on �Ghe lot� and he felt the btizildex II,hould be a].lowed to bu3.ld as zoned. t`�'� �:� ;: i;;` �� i � `� �.,i MINUT�S TIGARD PLANNZNG COMMISSION June 2� ].g81 Page 4. Mr. Bur�on wanted assurance t.hat the subdivision would not adverse].y affect t,he drainage in t.he neighbor,hood, whic.h ,has flooding problems at present. Lawrence expl.ai.ned in some deta3l t.t�e procedures which wi11 be �sed t� alleviate t.he present situation. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS Speaker stated ,h�s strong objec- t3.on to t,he line o£ argument presented at th3,s and other planning com- mission .hearY.ngs �,hat t.he existing streets (not developed to city etandards) WQU�.d not sustain �he additi.anal traffic imposed by a new devel.opment. He pointed �ut t.hat t.he present residents .have t,he ability t,hrough formation of an LTD to raise the standaxd of �.heir public a.mpr�vements t� t.hose imp�sed on e�rery developer who comes bafore t.he commission. He felt it unfair for suc.h residents to attempt to deny t�he right of develnpment because of t.heir fa3.lure� in an urbani.zed araa, to supply their own urban-level. improvemezi�s. Qarens opined t.he area is kind of a "mis.h mash" so far as type of dwel,lings a.s concerned� and asked if staff felt t�he drainage issue rYhic.h was raised .has been adequately taken care of. Howard responded rui�h an ov�r-al1 view o� drainage sol.utions in t�he ci.ty, and stated t�he residents could, i� t.hey would, fox�m an LTD to .handle t;he probl�m�- whet.her ,it be paving at bad iz►tersect�.ons, sidewalks, street lighting or drainagea Lawrence stated they were tieing in to an existing storm dra�.n�.�e system. Fvzals q'ues�ioned w,hy staff �pproved �h�.s w3.t,hout an adequate f3.ro t�uak turn�around. Haivard st2lt��. there would be a break-away barrier. Funk opined opening 94t,h would gi�te t.he re�iden�s a su�erior traffic pattern. Bann s'tated we are not discussi�� R-5 because it is a fact� ra�her we are looking at w.het,her a cul-de-sac aha11 be constructed or not. Kolleas and Herron and Iielmer stated their concerns .had been addressad. Funk questioned �he break-away barrier t,hrou�h a private individua:l�s garden. Howard stated t.txe �arden ia an a �iedicated public rig,Y�t-of-way. Speaker asked staff to expaqi;` o;n ths request of t.he public works director that the street eventually go t.hrou�'h. Howaxd ' spoke alon.g t.he line that to allow prtlper circulr�.tion, streots should go t,hrou�h--a stand he ,has taken �since 197g. I� :was pointed out t�hs�t ; �.he NPO t�2 map shows �he stree� going t,hrou�h. I � T,he president read fram the staff repor� that if this ap�eal is daniad� t.he staff would prepare an ordinance far adoptlon by �he cit3r council, (remaving t,he cul-de-sac as a paxt of �he subdivis3.on), and t.hat �he residen�e could address �he counczl wa.t,h thc3.r casa. Funk MOVED denial of t.he appeal� basod on �he staff presentati.on and �he evidence subraittecl. Speaker seconded t,he'motian� wh�.ch carr3.ed unanima�is7.y. Commissioner Boz�n wit.hdrew from and took no part in t,he hearing on ;; ztc� y.z. x i' � � r � x MTNUTES `�TGARD P�,ANNING COMMI:SST4N June 2, 1981 Page 5. 5.2 AP�'EkL QF MZNOR LAND PAIZTITION MLF 2-81 (GxROD) NPO �2 � e e b o A eal of Plannin Director s denial o� a r u st J n PP g q Y Girod �o partition tv�o (2) lots into �hree (3) ].ots to, build a Single Family .home on rear 1ot. Proposed l�t sizes are ].3�791 square feet, z4�647. square feet and 7,554 �9uare fc�et. Lats are located at �1390 and 11y.2Q SW 92nd. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 35 DBi Lots 3800 and j900) Howard read t,he brief STAFF REPORT on the appeal, corrocting the designation as � .:• �Y�ai��wnce�.: : .. : �V5-81r and t.hat �he request is for t,he graanting o�' a F�! driveway width variance (ra�her t.han sicie yard setbaak variance). He also read t�he staff report of Final Action on t.he original MLP 2-81. request. T.he AP�'LTCANT�S PRESENTATZON was made by Russell Z,awrence (of �.he previous .hearing), who concurred wit.h the staff recommendation for granting the vara.ance so development caxi proceed. FU13L�G TESTIMpNX, all ir� opposition, wae given by the followi�►g: *** Narman Kolmadin� 11t�g0 SdV 92nd, read e�cer.pts from the Aoclara'�ion at Restric�ions for pogroi►ood R3dge t.tia� cons�i�u�es deed xestra.ctions on all. property in t.hat development. Fie asserted it was l��cause of those res�rictions �hat .he bought origin�ally. as he op�.nad most of t.he present res3.dents did, and p1eG1. re7,uctance to have tp �o ,' to court to enforce them, but wou7,d do so if necessar�ro " `! �a *�*� �onna Sandbo, a.ici.75 sw 9�st� re�err�d to the petit3.ar► of ' !' Marc�h z2 signed by 18 �ei�hbors w.ho falt '�,fihis action is in violation of t�he neclaratiom of Restrictiozis . . , covering Dog�rood Ridge." S.he asserted t,here is no need to bui7.d even a "dream .home�� on this lot--t.here �.s ot.her land ava3.1.ab1e. S.he deplored t,his proposed action as a start on a trend for infil].ing. S.he felt it wou�.d ��undermine t.Yte integrity of t�he nea.ghbor.�ood.�� +►*� J'ohn Sandbo� s�me address' d3.d not feel it is necessary and would affect their� privacy, adverA�ly affect the neighbar:hood. He. � felt t�here are alternatives ot.her t.han bui3ding a new .house. ; �** Karl Bowersox� 11360 SW 9znd� referred at length to conditions i in t.lae deed res�ri.ctions ment3oned by Mr. Kolmodin, and opined considera- ti.on of .having a second house on one of t.hese lots �'an outrage��. ,At t,h3.s poin� Speaker inquired whethex� the deed restrictiona � precl.uded a mi.nor land partition. The question was passed to the city counsel, w,ho opined t,he commission s:hould be coz�cerned vtith t.he gxanting of b,he variance; �hat the approva7. of t.he MLP would not involve �he city in a ].aw su3.t, but that the othar owners could sue 2�r. Girod on t.he basis of t.he dQed restrictions should he attempt to build on t.he lot carved out� Sullivan read the qualifica�ions for grantin� a varian.ce from t.he clty code. i �: ki MzrtuT�s TIGARD PLANNxNG COMMISSTON June 2, 1981 Page 6. ' *�* Geraldine L. Ball, ii5i5 sw 9z$t, raised a question about overal.l. d�ensiby a.n Tigard. � CROSS-EXAMIIdATTON AND REBUTTAL: Lawrence addressed the �foux qual3.fications for a variance in relation to t.his property. He asked where t.he expressQd concern for t.he "integr3ty of the nei�hbor,hocd'� was when tho mi,nor land partition on a lot ad�oining t.he Sandbo�s �ras considerad and granted. Mrs. Sandbo stated t�hey had rece�ved no notice, or �,hey would .have pr�tested. She argued t.hat t�his i].lustrated .her assert3.on t.hat gxa,nting t.his MLP would set a precedent. Jo.hn Sandbo reiterai:ed �his would bo injurious to t.he neighbor.hood. bawrence asked t.he question, "If it is an o�vner�s ri�ht to d� something, w�y should t,his owner not be allot�ed to do so?" COMM______^_ISSION DTSCUSSIUN AND ACTION: Funk questioned the setback-- � was a,t tn t.he ovar.hang of the eavee? (It :3.s to the Youndation.) He opined �he quala.fications for a variance were not met. Owens agreed wi�Ya Funk. Speaker read a para�raph itt �.hs staff report and aeked staff to enZarge on the need for infill. Howard painted ou't every case is different� and t.herefore it is very d�.fEicult to �ormulate a general infi7.l palicy. Speaker callod attention to the need for greater derlsa.ty �.n orcier to make mass trr�nsit work, and opined it was small individual decisions sua.h as t.his tt�at would be required to ac.hieve great�r donsi.�y. f Iie a�reed with Funk t�he pravisions for a variance are not met in this � � caee. � Funk felt the deed restri.ctione should be obserwed because people � bough� because of them. Helmer favored denial--that t.his �.s ncat an " area suitable for '�a ,house in �he back yard". Tepedino, wh3.le sympa- �I �het�.c to �Ghe applican,t, cou.ld n.ot agree .he qualified under t,he provi� �I si.ons for a variance. ;I Ko1.leas thereupon MOVED for denial of MLP 2-81 and Variance V 5s81 �', as praposed. �he motion was seconded by Helmer and carried unanimously. �I - !I A� 9:t}0 t,he pres9:dent declared a ten minute r.ecess� at the con- �i clusion of whic.h Commissio�er Bann rejoined the commission. ), N 5.3 CO�fPREHENSTVE 1�L.AN R�.'VTSIQN CPR 10-81 - NPO �� POLIC�T 28 NPO #1 �, A reguest .from NPO #1 to revise Po11cy #28 .w,hich readet " '"A�h Avenue s.hould be extended r�cross Fanno Creeka enabling ii acaess to t.he Neighbar.hood��s commeroial area wit.hout us3ng �' Pacific Highxay. Des3,gn featur�s should be used to slow il �raffic and malse t�Q street as safe as poesible.A� !i Howard read the STA�'�' REI�OR� and RECOMMENDATION, and ca7.led atten- ' �ion to a number o� letters from residents included �.n the packets. ; i � I MINUTES TIGA�D PLANNTNG COMMISSTON JunA 2, 1987. k�age '7. I He entered into t�he r�corc� two aclditiona�, letters in opposi�ion to extension of As.h Avenue--one from F1.oyd K. Lissy� 13270 SW As•h Drive, and one from Douglas R. Saxon, 1.34.15 SW Village Glen Drive, a memorandum from the c,hief of pol.ice; a copy of park board minutes addressing t.he issue; and a transportation analysis prepared by Associated 'Pransporta- tion �n$ineering and Planning� Inc. All of these werQ stated to be paxt of t.he record and availaBle for review at City Hall. The APPLICANT�S PRE,SENTATION was made in several sections: � �._.__�.. *�'* Gene Ric,hman, 13120 SW Ash Avenue, spoke on behalf of NPO ##l. He a�ked what the procedure would be to appeal t.his matter to the c3.ty council, reepor�ded to by Howard. . Ric,hatan cited a si;atement made by t.he city c.ounsel wi�h respect to NPO #�� cancerning conversion di.stricts-- '�W.hat �he NPO did, t.hey can undo.'� He declared that is w,hat th8y wish to dc��-t:he NPO created a document.includi.ng Policy #28, and no�► they wish to c.hange the policy. He stated t.he narrative and Policy #28 are i.n conflict, and it is t.hoir desire to eliminate �his and ot,her incon- ' sa.stencies through removal af Po:Licy #28. , Rio.hman t�ld of diecussa,ons with t.he police depax�Cmerat� and cited I OPTTCOM and its use in expedita.ng emerger�cy vehicles on Pacific Highway. He asserted ��Deletio.n of Pol:icy #28 w'i11 protect t.he residential ahar• act�r of t,he neighbor.hood; it wi11 insure t.be inte�rit�* and safety of ' �he neig.hborhood.°' He preda.r,ted the nei�hbor.hood would be ruined by putting t.he street t.hrough. He summarized that with �he deletioM of thQ policy, t.he ��sa.fety� integrit� and resident3.a1 ch,aracter of the � NP(1 #1 neighborhaod rrill be preserved. �� w�* Phi1 Edin' 13110 SW As,h Drive, representing "a considerable number of rosidents of t.ho As.h Avenue ne3�nborhood�� cit�d the physical dimenaions o.f As.h Avenue xa.ght-of-way and pavement. He compared �hem with collector etreet standards and asserted 't.he physical limitations of As.h Avenue axe bein� ignored by the city staff and its consultant.�' He �hen compared the very recent traffic study by �Ir. Woe1k with that of Mr. Buttke�s Decemberi 1973 $tudy� and implied it was desi�ned by staff "to make �'ae �tojectad traff�c leysls xr�aere t,he staff wiehes them to be.�� Fis asked t.he commission to reject t�fr. Woelk�s report '�on i;.he basis �hat it fails to incorporate w•hat you need to raake an intelligent decision.�� *** Dave Swenwo7.d, '131�0 SW Aeh Avenue� discussed at len.gGh tra:ff3.c projections on ,�eh Avenue if extended� citi�g Buttke�s pro�ection of g500 ve.hicles per day� and a forecast by CH2M-HilZ of y - 6,000 per day. He quoted sources describing the adverse effec'ts of .high traffic streets in residential. neighbor.hoods. He compared engi�xeering requirements for a bridge across Fanno Creek as compared with the public worlss director�s statement as to ,how the crossing could be con,struc�ed. He stated a proper bridge would require expenditure of MxrN�rs TTGARD PL.ANNING COMMISSION June 2, 1981 Page $. sevea�ty-�ir►e per cen� of the systems development fund. T.he extensions af A�h and Johnsox� St;reets a� propo�ed by staff� .'he assexted, violate Policy �27 and LCAC Goa1 12. He discussed the concept of �'�ood traffic ca,rculation��, which ,has not been dsfined �iy staff i and asserted t.hat �he time to.travel. from downtown to the A,sh Avenne neighbor.hood is high7Ly acceptable. *** Jeff Grahatn, 13290 SW As.h Drive, ��represanting over 1,50 residents on or around Ash Avenue�'� made several observations: t,he staff report offers no ju�tificatiqn �ar the staff�s op3.nion; he took e�tception to �'inding of F'act Nos. 3� 8, 1+�, and Conclusionary Finding Nos. 1 and 3. He notad failure to provide cost of construction and the justa.fication therefor, particularly in v3.ew of �he Waelk forecast of traffic volumes. Ae predicted severe safety problems, 3.ncluding safe�y of t,he area�s c.hildren. Phil Benson� 105�9 SW 54th Drive� Portland, speak�.ng as a praponent, stated .he sold a portion of ,his property because "I didn�t want to see t,he traffic problems created on Ash Street by a l.arge multi�family dea�lopa�gn�. . . . We don,t �vant all t�.ese care �rom t.he praposed shoppin� center go�.ng up and down Aah Strest." He disc�zssed t.he negative impact of proposad traffic volumes on four dup�.exes he proposes to build. � *�*� Doreon Thamas, 13165 SVd Ash Avenue, asserted thexe is no need .foT As.h� Avenue extension, especially to relieve Main Street congestion. S.he wont in�to conaiderabl.e detail, citin� Buttkc�� met.hods and reporto t.he Woelk and at,her repor�s to dacument her view. � PUBLIC TF�5TTMONX: Speaking as an opponent was Dick Woelk of Associated Transportation Engirieeri.n� and Planning, Inc., whn produced �or t.lxe Ci�Gy of Ti�;ard the report "Transpartation Analysis of Extend,ing i As,h .Avenue to Burnam Raad in Tiga.rd, Oregon" dated May 29, i98�.. He gave �.he scope of the report and the assump�ians us�d in it� adding �he unstated assumption t,hat the city would not eattend sewer service i' to parts of t.he area unti]. af�er 1985, the time frame for .his report. i Iie ca].led attention to t.Y�e different assumptiane between .his report and + Buttkets 19'73 report� resulting in. incomparable traffa.c flow figures. � He stated his report considered what is best for the city fxom an I engi�Qerin� standpoint. He described the bases used, and t,he alternatives considered. Wit.h �.he aid of t:he o�erhead pro�ector he went into aon- sider�able deta�.], on the traffic impacts o� axtension az�d nonextension � of streets, with and witk�out construction of the proposed Main Street , Dev'elo�men;�. This :t.led up to t,he study recommendations, essentially� �hat �rom an engineering standpoint if Fiain Street Deve].opment does nat::take > r plaa4, ��.1� only should be extended; if t.he Main S�GrRe� Aettelopment doee � talre pZa�e, both Ash and Jo,k�nson Streets ehould ba extended to pravide � �he most woxkable circu�.a�tion pattarn �ri�h 1ow volumes on residential � �i:xeets. . ;i :Y � �� r, & �i � r�tzr�rT� TTC�AKA PLANNTNG COMNISSTOIJ �ur�e 2, 1981 Page 9. ;i CT�OS�S-�..}�AMINA�ZON .AND k2FaBUTTAI,: A man 3.r� tha aud�.ence asked Mr. Woelk' "Did you or did you not work on a project for Main Street �and II Company" in connec�ion wit.h a �raf�ic study Par t.hem. V�oelk xeplied in i t.he nc��ative, and expla�.raed .his xiartner did .have a managemen� posit�.ott in CH2M-HilZ about four traffic studies ago; that �.he poss3.ble aonfl.a.ct of iz�terest .had been exp�ained to Ti.gard offiaials and was considered :Lnconsequential. I . (At 11.:20 t.he president announced that agenda items 5•4, 5•5 �d 5.6 would not be .heard at �.his meeting� and wi11 be resc.b:ed�zled.) Bet.h Blount, an at�orney in Fores� Grave aaid representing "ths A.sh Avenue group� not t.he NPO'i, .had questions of Mr. Y�oelk with respect to ,h3e study and .ha.s prafese�iqnal quali.ficatione. T.he president ascer- tained that .her line of questioning was a3.med to lead up to hex ques- tioning of the credib3.lity of t,he report. S.he fe'lt it was a repost to support the concept �hat As,h Avenue should be extc�nded, and �hat �he report has some flaws 3.n a.t t.hat �he planning comm3.ssion should be mv��r� af. S:ne questioned �he abil3.ty of �he streets to .handle �hc� Yo7.uuce� of tra,ffie projected. Woelk pointed ou$ neit�her d3.d �uttke�s Y�bp�xt--t.hat queation was not part of .his assignment, but it is a c�,�.estion which could be adaressed. Blo�ant asserted As,h Avenue does not ;la��ve t.he av�ilable right-of-way ta be brought to minor col7.ector standards. She asked several very detailed questions� respanded ta by Woe11t. S.he aske�d t,hat Mr. Kittleson of CH2M-Hill co��Cinue the question3.rag. Kittleson pointed out an area along Hall Hou].evaxd where �.he � numbers w,hic.h shoul.d .have added up to zero didn�ta Woelk acknowledged �� it, sa�ying he didn't know what happened. He admi�ted t,hat in �.h� time fra�me �ll,owed there could be some errars; but over a7.1� t,he circulation �attern and numbers are consistent. Pai: Hutc,hison, C.hairman of NPO �1, quest�oned the increase at k►er intersection and t.he effect of �he new senior center and t,he A.-70,�80 retirement home to be build in the area. Woelk responded that i� was not built� and t:he assumpti.ons co�sider the average anta.c3.pated growth � in t�he s�+eci�'ic zones. Gene Ric.hman pointed out that t.he NPO #,�1 report `; was submitted without access to or analysis of Mx. Woelk�s �°eport. � He questioned w,hy the c3.ty spent city money for t�he repor�. Howard responded. Rir,hman opined wi�h t.he limi.tations placed upan the Woe].k study� it doea not .have muc.h bearing. He ir�quired whet,her Howard .hae ,had discussions wi�h people on Hi7.l Street concerning development along Hi].1. Howard repl3.ed aff3.rmative7.y. CONSMISSION DISCUSSTON AND ACTION: Funk felt t.hat the commission ahould 1.00k ba�or�d the desires of 1�50 peo�le to t.he needs of a11 of '� Ti�ard. He felt �.hat Tigard need�� t,h3s traneportation p1.an� and t�hat ,pah extended is needed. Bonn expressed a need fqr a "back door�� access �', �, � . �;� r' i; �: `I,'• `; � t' �, __. i �� .'1 MINUTES �':I �'TGARD PLANNING C�MMISSTON June 2� 1981 G; Page 10. `'`1 ;<i �o t,he Main Stre�t deve�.opmant, where access to t.he eas� and sout,h wou7�d e d Pac fic Hi hwa . Ka �leas a reed wi�th e lled �rom Main. Stre t ar� �. B b Y pu, g Bonn. Herron sympathized wit�h t.he people an As�h wi�h t.he traffic, but fe]:t the extension is very muc,h need�d. Owens .had a �'c,hal].en�;e01 to the people on Aeh wit.h respect to bearing responsi.b�.7.ity--wY�e� t,hey bought their .homes it was �obvious t�h�e etree� aome day would go somenrhere. Her c,hal,lengo to �he commission, staff and courrcil 3.s ta explora al1 poseible alternatives. S.he d3.d not feel As:h s�hot�ld be extended; t�hat Jo.hneo� should be extended; and that �here �;hould be a g� �d look for other a].t+�xnative� t�hat wouid not impact o� Aah. Speaker po�.nted out t.hat the high��r volumes pro�ected xould ,laave + to 0 on eit.her Iiall or Pac3.fic Highway �f As,h is not extended. T.he � only access to downtorvn by NP0 #1 is via t�he perimi��ers. He asserted t�here should be access t.hrough the middle for �he people in t.he area. He pointed �o t.he preponderance of professiona7. opininn in favox af ; t,his extension: t.he �ire m�rs:ha].1� �he pol3.ca c,hief, the publlc works ' diriector and �,he planning director. He aff�,r�ed agreement wit.h their opinion. Helmer agreed with Speaker, an.d felt As.h shauld be extended. Teped3.no a w.ksile sympat,hizing wit,h �,he A�.h area� �es3.dents, agreed � to t�h� necessity of t�he Ash extonsion. � Speake� MOVED for adoption af t.he staff recornmenda��.on, w,hich h� �ead, based on t.he s�af� repor� and the testimony ,heard in several meeti-ng� 3.n �he laat 2� years at whic,h this su�b�ect has bee.n discussed. Bo�n seconded t,he motion+ J. B. Bi�$hop f�om the audience called atten- tion to an apparent conflict between t,Y�e g�aff recommendation and Findings af Fact No. �.0. A�ter a little d3.scus�ian among etaff and aommissioners� Speak�r modi�3_ed ;his mo�ion' �rith t,he consent of t.he second, to the first sentence of the staff recommendation: "S�aff recommends t.ha� $olicy 28 nat be c,l�anged� and t,hat s�eps be taken i.n �;he near fu�ure to construct t:h3.s e�ctens3.on in conxiec�ion wit.h development in t.he area." T,he mo�ion caxried 7 to 1� wi�h Owens voting no. T,he presiden�t then ac��aurned �he meeting at 11:5?• I � i P'[IBLTC NOTICE ! TIC.ARD PI,AN[�1ING CONY�LLSSION ' JLTNE 2, 1981 - '7s30 p,m, i Fawler Junior �Tigh School - I�ecture Rc�n 10865 SW Walnut Street, Tigard I PUBLZC I�ARTNGS i � � i 5.1 Appeal o,f S�bdiva:sion S 4-81: Da1es' GTenn NPO # 2 � � � , Appeal. of Planning Directors approval of a request by Falcon Gonstruction � C�npany �o subdiv9.de 4.14 acres into sixteen (16) lots of five tnousand ; (5000') square feet each at the SW corner of 95th and SW North Dalcota. � Washington C:ounty Tax Map 1S1 35DB Lots 550]., 5502, 5503, 5505, 5506, 5507 ' & 5508 � a , � 5.2 � A�pea]: o� Minor Land �artition NtC,'P 2-81 Girod NPO # 2 i , Appeal of Planning Directbrs denial of a request by Jon Girod to partition ° twa (2) lots into thre� (3) lots �o build a Single Family hc�ne on rear ' 1ot. Propased 1ot sizes ax+e 13,791 square feet, 14,641 square feet ; and 7,554 square feet. Lots are lacated at 11390 and 11420 5W 92nd. � Wasnington County Tax TKap 151 35 DB Lots 3800 & 3900 � Varianoe V 5-81 Girod/11390 SW 92 NPO # ?. A request �ro�n Jon Gi.rod for a variance to required access width for one lot. Grat�ting variance would result in a nine feet six inch (9' - 6") acc�ss n.inninc� approximately five feet two incnes (5' - 2") fran an existing structure at 11390 SW 92. Washington County Tax Map 1S1 35DB Lc�t 3900. � I � 5.3 Cca�rehensi,ve Plan Re�rision CPR 10=81 �TPO # l Policy 28 NPO # 1 ` ,'I A request from N,PO # 1 to revise Policy 28 whieh reads: {; � "Ash Av�nue should be extended acrass Fanna Creek, enabling access t� to t.:ne Neighborhaxl's commerca.al area without using Pacific Highway. �'. Design features should be used to slaw traffic and make the street � �as sa�e as possible." ��;'� � 5.4 Cond�,tional Use CU 4-�81 KC�s Atmasem�nts/'Kittleson Brcx�m NPO # 2 E r; r� A request by Jeff Chase and Mike K��ey for a conditional use to approve � retail sales of limi.ted time to play various games such as electronic � �." devices, pool fiables and foos ba11, located in the Tigan� Plaza, Suite 102, �, SW Hall and Pacific Highway. 6Vashington County Tax Map 1S1 35DD Lot 2100. (i i', j;� { ;,. , ��' �' [QE h' ( ! � . . .. , . . .. . .... . . . . .. . . . . . . ... ..,�, �'�� ' . � ' � .� . � . . � . . - ... . E -....;.._, . ... .... ....... ......... . .. . . ....... ....... ... .. ..._ .. .. :.... . . . ....��: .. .... ,� . , . ..... .....�... .. �."..,. .:� .... ._.. .. . .... ._,.....�...... . . F.� . .. .. .... k��...... ..� . - . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . � ..... .. u Tigard Pl�ning Cca�nission . • Public Notiqe June 2, 1981 Meeting Page 2 of 2 . , 5.5 R��ttand nf C:�rehensive Plan Revision CPR 1-81 Willowbrook NPO # 6 + A r��nand fram City Council to i-he �'lanning Cce�¢nission for reconsideratiaZ of an approval Qf � Cc7mprehensive l�lan I�vision frcan present NPO # 6 Plan Map zoni.ng (density) classification to Al2 PD & A20 PD Urban Densities "M�.il-l:i.-family resic�entia:l" 3�etw�en Naeve Road to the sout.Ya � and Evangle C�tary on the North, 99W to the w�st and 109th A�enue ta the east� Washingtan County Tax Map 2Sl l0A Lots 4200, 4390, 4402, 4500, 4600, Map 2Sl lOD I,ots 500 an.d 600. . 5.6 Subd.ivisicati S TO-�8]: 'Wint::er T�ake/Oentury ?.1 I�IPO # 7 A, r.�equest by Centur.y 21. for a time extensiarr, new lotting and a minor change to Winter Lake P.�anned vistrict Development located at the east side of 135th anci the west side of 130th. Washington County 'I'ax Map ZSi 33D r.ats 3oCl, 500, 601, 602. � ' � Please run zn the 'I'igat� Tisres an Thursdays May 2.1, and May 28, 1981. 1 .�t "PLANIVING COPQMtSSION' SIGN-UP 5HEE�"'� �TOTICE; ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON �1NY ITE,,"�1 N1UST SIGN Tt�IR NAME :AND � NOTE TI-�IR ADDRESS OI� THTS SHEET. , AGENDA I7,'EM: �,g ACT�ON RIEFERENCE: -- �/(� �'`�I �ti�°4��fi��. , N:1.^1E ADD�ESS �-� " �' s �G��S �,� ,1..�..� l��:s,�'�� /�l� ��----.� �SSQ.,,1� , . �.�tz�c.�- 84�� S, V�l,Cow�w�eM�i�I °°'s�.,+A.�..b� p/t .��t��-�o.�,�� v-�.Nl�. 3 0 3' ��.�'d S�i•p D�+'��,aasa. . 'f..�.ir-,d,+�. AGF:NDA ITEM: ••�,�� ACTIUN REFEREIVCE: ��,�Q- �'�� 1�/'�(�� .N � �� , �1�,�.. !.l- � . � ` � �� c�� , .y �� / � �d ti� _. � . ,{,�? ��.�� ` � � ��' /o � sc�.�r��"��ST ��-,��J , a ,�.��e�� ,,a� �� r?..��_�,�,_�c...�� a ,.�� , �`:�'�'°"�--�' ..._.__1.7�7._�___' J.�.-��G`-G ��.�\I`!� ...._..�. .. / S',.� b o �" �c_,�._._--�_�-�'"°�� .+�''�____, � ---�___. AGENDA TTEM:�� .AC7'ION RE�'ERENCE� � � r Y NAI41E x.DllRESS � � PLANNING COMMISSION ROLL CALL �/�/�� A DA7.'E �(ATTENDANCE) DATE � (ATTENDANCE) DATE �(ATTENDANCE) ' Frank Tepedino • � � Clifford Speaker � i � i �.-�P'e�p'+ � i i . Geraldine Kolleas ' � i • i . , C�y�rF'.Y� i � t . Susan Herron � . � � � � ' c: Richard Helmer ;. i � i i r Jazn�s Funk i i � ; �..._�� i�� Roy Bonn � i t ;; ' � � ;. ATTEND.$NCE) DATE � (ATTENDANCE) ATE �(ATTENDANCE) `' E: Frank Te,pedino �� • . 4 t i � � �' Clifford Speaker � � f? i i i � � i ° �� , i i e �, �� Geraldine Kolleas � � � � 1 i s f' I I I �' Q 5 i I I �" ��' Susan Herron � � � ( ! � I f f;' Ftich'ard Helmer � � � ' i � i James Funk � � . � ' i � � i�y Bonn � � p � � i � �'; ; � � 3 NOTES: • � � ' � � . t. i' � l, �1 _ ' � . � "PLANNING COP4MtSSION SIGN—UP 5HEE^1" ; IAOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TCJ SPEAK ON ANY I�'EM MUST SIGN TE�ZR NAME AND NQTE '.PHEIR ADDRESS ON THIS SHEET. ; , fAGENDA ITEM: S' 3 ACT�ON RE;FERENCE: _ (/L�� /!.�YLV�/ 4 � NAME �1DDRESS :1. � ,1 1O , � t ` �'��..r.�: .� .� �- � • 1 .� _ � AGENDA. I�.'EM:�� ACTTON REFERENCE: _--�`r �S �l�A�l�C�C�..�.� NAN� ADDRESS �. . . AGEIV'DA ITEN�: i ACTION REFERENCE: e __�__�`. � �1 � NAME ADDRESS � �- / S/ o� S � /D � � ��. � i �� S�� '� �� . , I � � _ � ,....:, �..�..:.,... .._ .,... ... . _.. „ .. . . ....., _ .. ... _ .. . . _ . . ..,_ � _ _ .. _ . .., . ._. ; , . � • , � "PI�AN[JING COMt�II5SI0N SIGN-UP 5HEET" 't • . NOTICE: ALL PERS N `r 0 S DES Y IRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAI�IE � AND � NOTE TFiEIR ADDRESS ON THIS SHEET. a ,� 3 AGENDA ITEM; .�, � ACT�ON REFERENCE: � r �/� � � TIAME ADDP•ESS ! '1�1 .. t.�✓. �`! . ' �~ d .��e� s , ii z� � d s .� �. �' �r°� js � � � �� ,� �'�; � � � w�+�� dvr � e � +�3��- �w ? ��`-�-- .� . .�11C S �'�C R 1J 11 Y��_(3, ��-�}.�• �f �1 �, a � � ' i�'� ,8 ��' � .�"SLc/' //�..�''' q�.,. . . � i c �7'a�v e/s 4� r� . i :�.. � � . i c�t � �w*•/So // G� . Z" � ; .� ,� AGENLIA ITEM: , , AC ON REFERENCE: - -�� _.c� I�/ ,!►!.�a►AI�OCt/4 tat /��/S" s s"�;' • -,✓r� ,�- ' , / � An��ss � ; � �r ;, � 3 �..,,�� s s t n�� c � .s r T i � �-ti vy��J .'; t" O � ♦i�. i/�t v,,,t <e � • . �� S ' I � SC.;� /i`ldti. � , �p� � '� �6,�/� // �-s,�",�` s,Gts `I :2.,. �i , � �� ,�,� � ,� � / d s� 'Q� ' � Y� �� 11 _ � ' t ,.—..�,�.. � t ST �► � • �° `� /t O �.S'iJ . ' �A DA I TEM: AC N REFERENCE: �• /� '� �=��- � NAME ADDRESS � I _ cl� ' ✓ � 3 U s C� , s , ��c � � � f� f f a f� !. �I� r c� � ��-v� S��.�,�� ' Jq-s� �� ~� ' o� ___.-_� i � Y �1 t�'"vj ✓ �, l��r ✓ ; O� i lo,► / f 3O 74 s•Lt/, /�� "il�� a �� / �• �? _ �--r-- � ` -7-vi i ` ui . � � �l � w � • 0 /J Il n �� 1 a _ rn. �Qti �� . � ne r��soh �'rfz�w N,�/ zoo s� �ed,k�f �'o,��fa�d D�^e, 9��o� � �e S h Ir s��t� 30; /o,r'il St,✓ �c3A/1ikR t�l✓� �►�e!'s.�..� ?Ttt� �c, 5. �►.N� t �.�t ��.�. �t� s w t�a.�►�.�Q S� � �Q�+�hr.��1 , _. . : �3 /�s�' �'1'`'��c r.�-,��r; i ��ti�.��, °'� y �� / . ��,/,, ' A��----•� �� / �WVy = c �V ` • %�J./ �� /v /�/ / �<f�U� .�^' �� li - I , , i � I ____ . _. _ .. _ , .. ... ....:.. .. . a . S'T.1�,F'k' R�Pc.'�RT .�G�ND� NO. 5,.4 TTG7ARI� PT.,ANN7NG CCaI�II'�SSZON JUI� 2, 1981 7:30 p.m. Fcxaler Jun3.or High-Lectu� F'�nan 10865 5W Walnut, Tigard NU aUB�ISSTC�T QF ADDTTIC�T�L MATERT.AL BY AP'PLZC,AIV`l.' SI�ALL� � MADE AT 3'H�' PU�LIC �',�.RING UNC.�SS T!� APPL7:CANT �S �TEU TO DO SO. 5HOULD �'13TS nCC[1R, L7NR�QTJESr.L'ED, THE ITEM WTI�, B�E rS�IILED TJ�tTIL '.I'EIE FOL:f.fJ4��1G I�;AEt.7.NG. �oa�T: carmzTror�r, vs� cu �-a� rr�c� # 2 KC's T�nusemFnts/`Piqard Ylaza AP�.LIC�T: seff Chase Mike Kimsey �uite 102 - Tigard Plaza Ti,gard, OR 972.23 (.��iNER° MiltAn Bra�m rt Raym�ld Kittlesc�i 301 NW Murray Ft�. Portland� OR 97229 R�QiT.F'�ST: To ratify and approv� Candi.tic�na.7. Use iGr # 102 -- Tigard ��;a�a ta pEr.mit retai.l sates c�f linti.ted ti.zrn to �alay g��s -- e1ec�.rcariic devices, �ol tables and foc�sball. SITE I:pCATION: Ti,qar_d �'la�a S� �-ia.1.1 L�lvd and �aci�'ic Iiighway FVashingtc�n Caunt�� Tax M�� 1Sl 35DD Lot 2100 18:28.Q2Q Cor�dit.iori�.7: Uses. In �he C-3 zone the follcxaing us�s and theii; acc�ssary uses maX be pernv.tted as condi�tional uses when in accordance with Chapters 18.72 arid 18.84: (2) ,Amusein�ant ��t�rp�:ise, including billiard c�r pool hall, bawling alley, baxin� az�n�, danc� hal1, public swiciming poolsr Staf.f. Cca�rent I Since April 1., _1981, this applicant has been 7a.censed by the City. Apparently � the person who issued th�. Business Iac�ense did not x�ealize that an arrwsem�nt oenter was a Candit�onal Use in the C-3 "General CcerR�ercial" zone. I � � S7'1�'F' REPO�fP AC�ENTI�, NO. 5.4 T�GARD PL"P�I�INING QONIMISSION JUNE 2, 1981 CU 4-81 � Page 2 of � , , The City Council, respanding to lccal cancerns, asked the Planning � Director to inv�stigate the situatian. Applicant is request;ra approval ? of a Conditional Use for the oenter. ' I I. FII�II�INGS OF FACT 1) Section 18.28.020 of the Tiga:rd Municipal Code allows aaYtusen�nt centsrs if the Planriing Cananission approved a Canditional Use. 2) Area is zoned C-3 "l�tail CaY[�rcial". II. CONCLI7SIOrIA£�Y FINDINGS 1) The proposed us� is allowed as a conditicanal use in this zone. IIZ.�.. STAFF I�O�ENI]ATiON Staff x�e�uls appraval of ttiis Conditianal Use with the fallc7wing «.bnditians: - 1� �'his use sha11 be in effect far one (1) year fram this date. If the appl.i.cant creates a pub��ic nuisance in the opinion of th� �ol.ice- Chief, this c�peration sha11 be ternu.nated imrediately. At �he erx� of �e C1) year.° �.e owner of this business shall request in writing a ane (1) y�ear extensian by the Tigard City Council. � � �. ' �a � a,nning nirector � _ _ _ MEMORANDUM May 14, 1981 T0: Aldie Howard, Planning Da.rector FROM: Chief of Police SUBJECT: K.C. '� Famil.y Amusement Arcade T have talked with the owner and manager of this business, prior to their opening. The owner has had prior experience in the operation of arcades of this n�ture; he plans to run this business under specific rules of conduct to attract families, not allowing a rowdy environment. As of this date there have been no disturbance ca11,s to this business. There was a theft of empty beer bottles from a tavern in the virinity by two former juvenile patrons nf the arcade, and one careless driving citation issued to a person leaving the park- ing lot at Cen�er Street. At this point in time, I see no reason for not allowing this business to continue. , ��`-.�� U �� r R.B. Adams � Chief of Police I RBA:ac � STAFF R�0�2:C" AC,�N1'�A NO. 5.5 TIG7-�RD PL.z�NNING CQMNiTSSION i Jt7�IE 2, 1981 -- 7:30 p.m. ', k'owler Jwaiar High - Lecture Roan ', 1.0865 STnI Waln�t Street, Tigard I � I N� SLIDA9I5SIC)1V OF ADDITTUI�tAL MAT�RTAL BY APPLICJ.��Z' aT�T�I'a F.S�; MAIIE; AT T'HE PUB.LIC HEARING UNLE.SS 7.'f� APPLICANT IS REQUES'.C.�,'I3 � Up SO. SHOITI,D THIS OGI."'UR� Ui�FZEQUES7."EI�� Z'!� ITF',Ni WILL BE 'I'AL�I,E�"D UN`1'7L THF FOIJ.,C7WI.�VC T]F,�1�I�T�. LX)CICET� F�'MAND COML�RIIi�'NSIVEI;PI,AN I�VTSI�1 C�R 1-81 NPO # 6 Willowbrook - Canter.bury� Heights To l�solve the Density Cansidexations �'ran Gity C_'ouncil to Planning Cc�mission APPLICANT: Gramca Develop�rent �p 4730 SW lyacadam Portland, OR 97201 ��A: Treeland Invest�nents Aase �i�asvar �� 4730 SW�Macadam 1.2995 :3W Pacific Hwy Portland, 0� 97201 Tigard, OR 97��3. Jorn Pc terst7n Wilcox.Erickson & Western C 13455 SW Cresnnr R 4 Box 274 Tic�ard, OR 9722:3 Sherwood, OR 97140 , W�,lli�n Sanc�ers N]U6 Investm�nt.� 23256 Bents Roar� NE 750 Benjami.n Fran}clin Bldg Aurora OR 97002 Portland, OR 9725$ SITE 7ACA'I'TOiV: Betwr-�n Naev� Rc�ad to the South and Evang�.� C7e�r�tary on the North, Highway 99W to the West and 109tk� Avenue to t.he Eas�.. Washingtan County Tax Maps 2S1 1UA Lots 42�0, 439b, 4402, 4500 �nd 4GOQ; an�. 2S1 lOD Lot� 500 and 600. }'F&.'V".LOUS ACTTON On March 3, .1981, the P'larnirig Cc�nissian appr.c�vec� CPR '1�81. Z'hhe primaxy concern of the Ccrimission was that the�r b� a.�sw.�d of r�view ai a�l develo�merit in t�his particular area with z-eference to density. The City Council. reviev,�d CPR 1-81 on Maxch 23, 1981, and x�ernanded the issue to the Planning Cc¢r�nissi.on for density x�eview. It was the opi.nion of the Crninc�l that twenty (20) units per ac� was excessive in relatian to prope.rties included in this request, i I . . . . . . _ . � i _ __ __ _ i 'I � STAFF 1�EPORT I AGIIVDA NO:: 5.5 TIGARD PI,�IING CC�IMCSSIOIV JUNE 'L, 1981 CPR 1-8T Pag�e 2 of 3 STAFF NARRATIVE As proposed the follcxaing cr�anges in the C�rehensive Plan - NPO # 6 Plan would be in effect if tlze Planning Cc�cr�.ssion � approves. The anly change fran the original application is for lot 500 of 2S1 lOD frcen A 20 "Multi-f�nily Residential" to A-12 P-D MaP . , �� "Nb.ilti-family Residential Planned Un�t Dev�lopment . FINDINGS OF FACT: l. Map 2S1 101� - Lots 4200•�& 4390. ZSreeland Tnvestm�nt. Pres�nt zoning Washington Counicy RU-4. 1 .10 acres. NPO # 6 designation, thre� (3) units per acre. Comprehensive Plan �vision request to A-12 �D. , I�cit 44Q�. A. B. Husvar. Present zoning Washingtan County RU-4. . 4�'acres. NPO # 6 designates thr� f3) units per acre. Cc�n7px�ehensive �lan Revision z�ques� to A 20 �il. 7�0�� 45Q0. J. L. & S, Peters�. Present zoni.ng Washington Co�nty RU-4. 1.?.4 acres. NPO # 6 designates three (3) Lma.ts per acre. Ccanp�el7ensi:ve P1�n R�Vision •rec�uest to A-20 PD. T.ot 460Q. Wi,lcox Er�;ckson & West�xn Corp. Present zaning Washington Cauntx k�tJ�4. .76 acres. NPO # 6 designates three (3) units per a,cre. Canpx�Iiexisiv� �P1an Rev�.s�.on request to A-20 PD. Annexatian petit�,on su�tted. Map 251..1QD - Lot 5QQ. NIDS �m�st�lents, Tnc. P�sent zan9ng Washington Coun,ty .i�I7T4. 10.27 acres. I�0 # 6 des�gnat�s �ao (2) units (north) and e,�c�ht C8� units Csouth2 . Ca�rehensive Plan Rrvision request to �12 PD. � Lcit 600. �T`. B. & C, M. Sanders. Present zoning Washingtan CountX RU�-4. 8.27 acres. 1�.'0 # 6 designates twn {2) units (north) and eigfit C8� uni,ts Csouth� , Comprehensive Pl�n Revisian request to A-20 PD. Annexatj,on petition suixni.tted. I�ap..2Sl 10�,. �- . � Lots 4400 & '44Q1, These lots were annexed in 1979. No�Tigard Zc�e . : es gna on as applied for. Mrs. Anders� is not participating in th�,s applicat�on. Nl�p 2S1 1QD -- Lot 700. 1Hr. George cou�d net be found. Froperty not included in tha.s pro-'posT Property outside City. No annexation petition received. .� • - . �, ,_ � : , STAF'F' REPOI�P AC�NDA NO. 5e5 TTC'�ARD PL�ANNING CCY�72SSION JUNE 2, 1981 C�R 1-81 Page 3 of 2S1 l0A - Lots 4100 & 4201. Mr. Annand did not wish to participate in this appl�.catzo�. The NPO # 6 Plan for thi.s area shaws density designations enim�erated ak�ave. Applicants are reguesting the C�nprehensive Plan Revisions en�nerated abav�. 2. A copy of NPO # 6 P1an is made as Exhibit "H°' to this Staff Report. Car��ents an tha.s Plan relativn to thi.s application are made in a general s�atement as follaws: 1. The density issue (Policy 1-2) whi.ch is addressed in the NPO Pl�n is the ma.in i.ssue. Z'he applicants are requesti.ng increased densities. The I�1P0 P1an addresses the conditians to be met for developm�zt. � (Policy3 - 4 � 5 - 6 - 7 - 8} 2. �1�,c serv.�oes: Se�wer is available north to serve lots 4200 and 4390. Tualatin Develog�nt Tnc. will in�tall a line to. 109th and Naeve �tr�et to serv� S�.rf�.eld X�7. Major street impr�ts w��.1�. �e made as dev�lo�_nt talces plaoe. All. proposed developm�nt wi7.1 be a.� Planned Dev�l�nts under Chapt�r 18.56 of the Tigaxrl 1Kunicipal, Code. 3. 'rhe Planned Develo�nent (PD� designati.on allavs a prelimi.nary and general plan review before the Planning Ccmnission, and the City Council must �ravn final �1a.ns. Ample pravisiar�s is made for public ca�rn�at. 4. N�'0 # G ��,an was approved by the Council on Apri1 24, 1978 by Qrdinance No, 78�-27. N:�O .# 6 has not rnet formally since prior to September 1978. - .The last ca�;t received l�y Staff fran NPO # 6 was in response to Staff F�port C.PR 4-79 in the form of a letter fmn Mr. McPhillips, N�0 # 6 Chaixperson. STAFF RECQDM�NDATTON: All develo�xrnnt on these lots shall be hrought before the Planning Ca�missic� as Pl.anned Unit Developn�nts and that the density in each case be revi�wed as a portion of these review processes. �,e .d ning Director , �` _.