The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Packet - 09/08/1981 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. AGENDA TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 - 7:30 p.m. Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room 10865 S.W. Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon 1. Open Meeting 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes from Previous Meeting 4. Planning Commission Communication 5. Public Hearing A. Staff Report B. Applicant's Presentation C. Public Testimony 1. Proponent' s 2 . Opponent's 3 . Cross Examination 5 .1 Sensitive Lands Permit M 3-81 USA Sewer Truck Line NPO #7 5 .2 Comprehensive Plan Revision CPR 12-81 Preliminary and General Plan Review, Alpha Engineering NPO #6 1 5 .3 Zone Changes ZC 23-81 Frank & Eurma Hartwick NPO #4 ?' A. _ _ _ . B. Conditional Use CU 10-81 Frank & Eurma Hartwick NPO # 4 5 . 4 Zone Change Planned Development Preliminary Plan Review ZCPD 24-81 Losli NPO # 4 A. Sensitive Land Permit M 4-81 Losli NPO #4 h; 5.5 Zone Chan Plann ve op ent 25-81 Bonita Indus a1 P�r NPC� �` k A. Sege Lind Permit M 5 Bonita Industrial Park 5.6 Comprehensive Plan Revision Preliminary and General Plan Review CPRPD 13-81 The Meadows NPO # 7 5.7 Conditional Use CU 11-81 Shari's Restaurant NPO # 4 5. 8 Conditional Use CU 7-81 Cecil Boone Park NPO # 5 AGENDA Page Two TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION 6 . Old Business II. 7. New Business A. Discussion of Administrative Procedures 8. Other Business 9. Adjournment September 2, 1981 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Planning Department RE: Schedule for Planning Commission Hearings The following schedule will be observed for Planning Commission Hearings and cut-off dates. All Hearings will be at Fowler Junior High School, 10865 S.W. Walnut, Tigard at 7:30 p.m. HEARING DATES CUT-OFF DATES NOVEMBER 10, 1981� OCTOBER ER 23, 1981 �4, DECEMBER s / u7�� • JANUARY 12, 1982 DECEMBER 18, 1981 FEBRUARY 2, 1982 JANUARY 15, 1982 MARCH 2, 1982 FEBRUARY 12, 1982 APRIL 6, 1982 MARCH 19, 1982 MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 - 7:30 p.m. Fowler Junior High - Lecture Room 10865 SW Walnut St., Tigard, OR President Tepedino called the meeting to order at 7:35. ROLL CALL: Present: Bonn, Christen, Moen, Speaker, Tepedino Commissioner Owens arrived at 8:40. Excused: Helmer, Herron, Kolleas Staff: Howard, Newton; Ken Elliott representing Counsel Ed Sullivan The MINUTES of the August 4 meeting were considered, and on motion seconded and carried they were approved as submitted. COMMUNICATIONS consisted of the minutes of the September 2 meeting of NPO #1. The inventory of citizens sheets on eight applicants for positions on NPO #6 were passed among the Commissioners. The President stated the draft of the administrative procedures prepared by Legal Counsel would not be considered, but urged they be studied before the next meeting. The President then opened the PUBLIC HEARING by reading the usual statement of authority for and procedures to be followed in the meeting. He stated that Agenda Item 5.5 had been withdrawn and would not be heard. 5.1 SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 3-81 USA SEWER TRUNK LINE NPO #7 A request by the Unified Sewerage Agency for a Sensitive Lands Permit to construct the Scholls Sewer Trunk Line for S.W. Tiedeman West to S.W. 121st Avenue. (Washington County Map 2S1 3AA, Tax lots 100 and 101; 2S1 3AB, Tax lots 100 and 300; 1S1 34,DG, :Tax:lots 3601.,. 3602,•3500 and 1200; 1S1 34CD, Tax lots 100 and 1201.) Howard referred to his brief memo to the Commission, and read the Summary Statement submitted by the Unified Sewerage Agency (USA). (This did not constitute a staff report.) He stated engineering draw- ings thought to be available by this time are not yet available, and referred to a map of the project on the wall. Bob Cruz of USA acknowledged their application may have been a little premature, due to an incomplete understanding of the require- ments for the sensitive lands permit. PUBLIC TESTIMONY was presented by -- 1, MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 Page 2. *** Dale Ott, 11900 SW 116th, who recognized the project would go forward, but objected to the alignment indicated on the sketch USA submitted. He pointed out that the alignment indicated would impact a number of large trees. He suggested an alternate route which would eliminate at least two crossings of the creek and lessen the impact on large trees, illustrating his proposal on the map. *** Charles Whipps, 11880 SW 118th, who distributed copies of excerpts from TMC Chapter 18.57. He objected strenuously to the sketches submitted as qualifying for the documentation called for by the ordinance. He urged approval not be given until complete engineer- ing drawings have been submitted showing there will be no change in the flood level by reason of this construction. Howard stated the hearing was called on the assumption engineer- ing drawings would be available, which they were not, and that there was no staff report nor recommendation. Cruz stated the full engineer- ing drawings would be available in about two months; that there had been informal meeting with the property owners, and numerous meetings with individual property owners regarding easements. They did not want to prepare engineering drawings until they had established the easements. After some further discussion on alignment details, the President closed the public hearing portion on this issue. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Speaker MOVED tabling until the engineering drawings required by Chapter 18.57 are available and USA is able to discuss the route in the detail contemplated by the ordinance. Tepedino seconded the motion. Howard offered some conditions, but it was felt that these would automatically be taken care of before the • applicant's return to the Commission. The motion to table carried unanimously. Ken Elliott, representing Ed Sullivan, City Legal Counsel, stated his firm had represented Alpha Engineering, the applicant on Item 5.2, in other matters but not on this one. Discussions of the possible conflict of interest within his firm indicated there was nothing which would disqualify him from serving as the City's Counsel in this hearing. 5.2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVISION PRELIMINARY AND GENERAL PLAN REVIEW CPR 12-81 ALPHA ENGINEERING NPO #6 Howard read the STAFF REPORT and RECOMMENDATIONS, and pointed out the physical features on the map on the wall. The APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION was made by Hans Vatheuer of Alpha MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8,- 1981 Page 3. • Engineering, Inc. , 1750 SW Skyline Blvd., Portland. He stated the staff report clearly outlines their request, and offered to answer any questions. There was no PUBLIC TESTIMONY. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Moen inquired about the .housing patterns in the other phases of the development, illustrated by Howard on the wall map. Tepedino commented that much of the remaining open land in Tigard is floodplain, and urged the Commission to be very sensitive to the issues of development in these areas because of possible adverse effects. He reported there are photographs showing recent floods higher than projected by the US Corps of Engineers in their study of the area, and again cautioned careful consideration of these floodplain issues. Speaker questioned the 10 foot access to the flag lot (which con- forms to code requirements) , and commented that back yards of three duplexes are within the floodplain. This is permitted, according to the pertinent ordinance; but when Pick's Landing was heard some time ago, the Commission requested the back yards be reduced so all private ownership would remain outside the floodplain. Tepedino recalled a similar case elsewhere where back yards were permitted in the flood- ' plain, but fences were prohibited. Since here the back yards would be at the very top of the flood and no impediment to stream flow is involved, no such condition was thought necessary. Moen questioned whether the layout is appropriate, and felt there should be a better arrangement of the units, possibly with a little less density. After some further discussion and comments by Commissioners, Christen MOVED approval of Comprehensive Plan Review CPR 10-81 together with Preliminary and General Plan Review, in accordance with the staff report and recommendations (including 15 conditions), with specific findings that the development as proposed complies with Policies 3, 4, and 5 of NPO #6, and that the back yards shown in the floodplain in the preliminary plan are permitted by Chapter 18.57.030(A) of TMC. Bonn seconded the motion, which carried four to one, with Moen voting no. At this .point Commissioner Owens arrived. 5.3 ZONE CHANGE ZC 2 -81 CONDITIONAL USE CU 10-81 FRANK AND EURMA HARTWICK NPO #4 A request by Frank and Burma Hartwick for a Zone Change from C-3 General Commercial to C-5 Highway Commercial; and a request for a Conditional Use for an office warehouse. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 18], 36DB Lot 2400.) MINIMS TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 i . Page 4. Howard read the STAFF REPORTS and RECOMMENDATIONS for both requests. The APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION was made by Frank Hartwich, the owner, who agreed with the staff reports and recommendations. No PUBLIC TESTIMONY was offered. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Speaker questioned the purpose of the zone change, since the same conditional use is available with present zoning. Howard explained the zone change was to bring it into conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. Bonn MOVED approval of Zone Change ZC 23-81 and Conditional Use CU 10-81 based on staff findings and recommendations. The motion was seconded by Moen and carried unanimously. The President at 8:47 declared a five-minute recess. 5,4 ZONE CHANGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN REVIEW ,GFD 24, lr SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT M 4-81 - LOSLI NPO #4 A request by Donald and Howard Losli for a Zone Change Planned Development Preliminary Review and a request for a Sensitive Lands Permit to build within drainageway at 8105 SW Hunziker (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 1BD, Tax Lot 300). Howard read the STAFF REPORT ,and RECOMMENDATIONS. The APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION was made in three parts, all by staff of-Mackenzie/Saito and Assoc., 0690 SW Bancroft St., Portland: *** Philip McCurdy stated their purpose was to get approval for construction of a new building and an addition to an existing building in the floodplain; and that the proposed improvements will not be detrimental to the adjacent or downstream properties, but rather that the improvements should actually lower the 100 year flood level• on this and adjacent properties. He gave an overview of the project with the aid of a map on the wall. *** Tom Wright addressed Policy 25 of NPO #5, stating the proposed uses are light industrial rather than commercial, and there= fore the restraints indicated by the policy do not apply. He stated the requirements for sensitive lands ed with li permit have been complied P_ and that staff agrees with the applicant that extensive open space is not necessary in this area on this development. . . t • MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 Page 5. *** Dave Larson, Civil Engineer, discussed the engineering g aspects of the property and the drainage basin and adjacent Y ro� ert He p P pointed to the increase of approximately 160 cubic yards of additional flood storage, and the improvements to the drainage channel which will improve its carrying capacity. *** Mr. McCurdy told of a meeting with the Planning Director after receiving the staff report with recommendation for denial of the sensitive lands permit, in which meeting information and materials were submitted addressing the Director's objections. He stated it was their hope to commence drainage improvement work and construction of the concrete pad prior to the site design review. He told of meetings with the engineers for adjacent properties, and reported they were in accord with what is proposed on this property. He emphasized there would be no detrimental effects from the development as proposed to adjoining or downstream property. PUBLIC TESTIMONY in favor was presented by Christopher James, son of Art James, Engineer, 300 Jackson Tower, Portland, the engineer for adjoining property. He suggested culvert improvements in Hunziker Road would improve the drainage from the applicant's and adjoining property. The senior James suggests studying improvements in the passage of water under Hunziker Road in relation to the need for retention facilities upstream, and that the water flow arrangements for the two properties should be harmonized. He suggested also that in the event of a.100 year flood, Hunziker Road could sustain damage by reason of its serving as a dam, which is an aspect the City might Wish to look into. CROSS-EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL: Tepedino inquired concerning efficacy of the improvements upstream from Hunziker Road, -which really had not been addressed by the engineers. Speaker inquired the rationale for recommending denial of the preliminary plan review, but enumerating conditions to be met prior to the general plan review. HoWard reported the alternatives open to the Commission, the current state of dealings with the applicant, and that the 13 conditions represented his concerns as Planning Director. Speaker inquired about Condition .5 for dedica- tion, which Howard stated could be stricken as not pertinent. He then recounted some of the history of past negotiations on properties in the area, citing lack of cooperation among the parties at times, and stated that in view of the definitely negative stand the Commission has taken in the past on developments in the floodplain, he would recommend denial unless there was a definite preponderance of evidence that a proposed development was beneficial to the whole community. Tepedino commented that this is a prime example of what should not be done in Tigard. He felt nothing had been shown by the applicant that would be beneficial in the management of stream flow and that would U MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 Page 6. justify siting a building in the floodplain. Owens inquired of James the relation of the Hunziker Road situation to the drainage problem. James was uncertain, but felt his father might write a letter expressing his thoughts on it. Moen explored with Mr. Larson the relation of the present con- striction to flow of Hunziker to the improved stream condition contem- plated by the development. Larson stated there would be greater retention under the proposed plan. Moen commented it would be pretty late to ask for site design review after the drainage work had been done and the building pad constructed. Gary Thornton of MacKenzie/Saito discussed the stream character- istics of Red Rock Creek (very low velocity), and the effect of improve- ments to the culvert in Hunziker. He affirmed the soundness of their plan, stating other engineers agreed with their views. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Speaker commented that while information from the applicant may be adequate, the city's staff, including the Public Works Director, have not digested it sufficiently to render a recommendation, either favorable or unfavorable. Until that happens he felt the Commission is not in a position to pass intelligently on it. Therefore Speaker MOVED for tabling until staff can come back with a recommendation for approval or denial, based on full consideration of material submitted by the applicant, especially as called for by the sensitive lands ordinance. Tepedino seconded the motion. After a little further discussion, the motion passed five to one, with Tepedino voting no 5.6 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVISION, PRELIMINARY AND GENERAL PLAN REVIEW CPRPD 13-81 THE MEADOWS NPO #7 A request by Bruce Kamhoot for a Comprehensive Plan Change from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-5PD, and a request for a Preliminary and General Plan Review for property at 106th and S.W. Black Diamond Way. (Wash. Co. Tax MapaS1 34AD, Tax Lot 2600.) Howard read the STAFF REPORT and RECOMMENDATIONS, and called attention to the fact that the recommendation is for approval of the comprehensive plan revision and preliminary plan review only, with the applicant to return for general plan review after the concerns of the Commission had been addressed. The APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION was made by Bruce Kamhoot, P. 0. Box 222, Lake Oswego, who stated his object in the development is to provide affordable housing--under $50,000. He stated the conviction j'+ • MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 Page 7. this can be done with manufactured housing on an R-5 lot. He disting- uished the manufactured housing from the usual mobile .home. He objected to the dedication of lands in the floodplain. PUBLIC TESTIMONY in favor was given by E. M. Writer, 1215 SE 88th, Portland, a consultant in the field of manufactured and mobile housing. He emphasized that manufactured housing .has advanced drastic- ally in recent years. He compared the cost of regular and manufactured housing, stating that young people and some retired people can afford only this type of housing. He discussed the building requirements, and stated requirements that would have to be met in this subdivision. He suggested that if those who complain about manufactured housing would carefully examine some examples of modern manufactured homes, they would no longer complain. PUBLIC TESTIMONY in opposition was presented by -- *** John Manning, 11095 SW 106th, who presented a petition he obtained containing the signatures of 15 persons in the immediate neighborhood opposing the project. He stated their primary concern is that the development would have a "very adverse effect" on the • neighborhood, which is all single family dwellings. He objected that this project would go right in the middle of the single family neigh- borhood. Another concern was the impact of Fenno Creek on the project. He objected to increased density--R-7 to R-5. He stated there are no parks in the area, and that this site is used as a park, and that the development would impinge upon the use of the area as a park. He expressed concern for increased traffic on what is now quiet streets. *+** Britt Weatherhead, 11005 SW 106th, directly across from the proposed development, pointed out that the proposal represents a 63% increase in households on a dead end street which is now serving k7 lots. He observed the proposal is inconsistent with what has been approved in the past, citing the paved path, basketball courts, etc. He urged the development be "scaled down" to something more comparable to the neighborhood. *** Barbara Priest, 10710 SW PonderosaPlace, who reviewed the past planning in the area, some of it by Washington County. She felt this development "would have a lot of bad effects", citing access to Fenno Creek through her property, heavy use of the area as a park, as wildlife habitat, and the flooding problem with Fenno Creek. She questioned where the floodplain would be located according to the Corps of Engineers study. She enumerated parking problems along Black Diamond Way, and suggested there would be problems if parking for only one car was provided per lot in the development. She wanted to know what is happening along Fenno Creek. MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 Page 8. *** Marian Maddox, 10800 SW 108th Court, who reported she had been told by the original owner, Bill Robinson, that 106th should go all the way through, and questioned the status of that street through this property. She reported her visits to some of these manufactured homes in the Salem area. She agreed they looked good, especially with good landscaping; but she objected to the sameness about them, which made them look like a mobile home park. She especially objected to the lack of sufficient garages which, she felt, would compound the parking problem. *** Rod Steel, 11025 SW 106th, who raised the technical question of building on recently compacted earth fill over old sewerage tanks. *** George Priest, 10710 SW Ponderosa Place, who stated that high density developments "invariably" devalue adjacent properties. He objected to lack of separation of this development by screening, fencing, or any other means, from the neighborhood. CROSS-EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL: An objector questioned how much of the proposed development is in the floodplain. Howard reported this was not addressed by the applicant, and accordingly prompted his recommendation approval be given only to the preliminary plan review. Howard then addressed the issue of park and greenway along the entire length of Fanno Creek in Tigard, and discussed the street plugs in the area, which with development will provide better circulation. He enumerated the substantial park areas in that neighborhood, and the desire of and ability of the City to acquire and control the greenway. Howard discussed at some length Goal 10 of LCDC and the impact it is having and will have on the City. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Owens stated that NPO #7 (of which she was formerly chairman) had decreed certain areas should be developed on smaller lots to provide more affordable housing. Christen assured the audience that the Commissioners are not arbitrarily trying to force something on any neighborhood, but that the Commission has guidelines it must follow and goals it should aim for, and that the process has considerable opportunity for citizen input. Bonn called attention to the lack of information on the floodplain and sensitive lands. He praised some mobile homes he has visited. Moen commented that economic• conditions in the last year had brought smaller lot developments before the Commission, and reiterated the opportunity for citizen input in the planning process. He voiced his disappointment at the proposed configuration of this development, stating it looked very much like a mobile home park, and felt the developer can do better. To make it really compatible with the neighborhood he suggested attached double garages instead of carports if possible. Speaker recounted a visit to a very nice manufactured home of MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 Page 9 friends who financially could have had any kind of home they chose. He wondered at the objection of a single family neighborhood objecting to development of more single family residences, and agreed with Howard that we are going to have to reconcile ourselves to living with or on smaller lots. Speaker MOVED approval of Comprehensive Plan Revision Planned Development CPRPD 13-81, together with approval of Preliminary Plan Review, based on the staff report and recommendations with particular reference to the findings that the application conforms to Policies 2, 4 and 6 of NPO #7; to Sec. 18.20.130 of TMC relating to mobile/manu- factured home siting; and to the purpose and intent of LCDC Goal 10 to provide for more affordable housing. Bonn seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. 5.7 CONDITIONAL USE CU 11-81 - SHARI'S RESTAURANT NPO #4 A request by Ron Berquist for a Conditional Use to construct a restaurant in a C-5 Zone at 11675 S.W. Pacific Highway (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 36CD, Tax Lot 100) . Howard read the STAFF REPORT and RECOMMENDATIONS. The APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION was made by Mark Bergquist of the Shari Company, 7100 SW Hampton, who stated his company had been searching for a suitable site for a restaurant in Tigard for 2i years. PUBLIC TESTIMONY in opposition was presented by Robert Powers, owner of the Tigard Pizza Caboose and the Tigard Bowling Center, approximately across the highway from the proposed site. He cited the already existing restaurants in the area, and detailed the present traffic and access problems. CROSS-EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL; Mr. Bergquist cited favorable experience of restaurants , clustering as a sort of "restaurant row", which appears to help the business of all of them. Howard illustrated on the map what is planned for traffic control on the highway, and control of the flow on Pfaffle and the developments which will take place on either side of the proposed restaurant. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: Owens MOVED approval of Con- ditional Use CU 11-81 based on findings of facts, conclusions and recommendations in the staff report. The motion was seconded by Christen. Moen inquired as to the adequacy of parking. Howard stated the code permits joint use of parkinot, as in this case with the bank lot adjoining. The motion carried unanimously. • MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 Page 10. 5.8 CONDITIONAL USE CU 7-81 - CECIL BOONE PARK NPO #5 A request by Dave Hall & Co. for a Conditional Use to construct single family attached units in an R-5 Zone. The property is located on the North side of Durham Road 625' East of Hall Blvd. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 12C, Tax Lot 5100). Howard read.. the STAFF REPORT and RECOMMENDATIONS, to which he added as Condition 4, "Sewer service shall be installed to the site prior to the issuing of building permits." He explained the formation of an LID in the area is now being worked on. The APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION was made by Ryan O'Brian of Bancroft, Peterson & Associates. He agreed with the staff report and offered to answer questions. PUBLIC TESTIMONY in favor was given by -- *** Dave Hall, the owner, who explained the intent was to provide affordable housing, constructing stick-built homes which will be an asset to the community in the $50 - 60,000 price range, common wall, smaller lots. *** Ed Cotter, 8065 SW Durham Road, who saw no objection to the development as proposed, but who expressed much concern about traffic on Durham, especially in the vicinity of the Durham School. PUBLIC TESTIMONY nominally in opposition was presented by Gertrude • Gage, owner of Tax Lot 4300, who had questions on the terminology, and commented on the great increase in density as compared with present housing in the area. She wondered what this would do to her tax assess- ments and what it meant in terms of increased density on other parcels. CROSS-EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL: Newton of Staff responded to Mrs. Gage's principal questions. Howard reported on the possibility of an LID for improvement of Durham between Serena Court and Hall Boulevard in the relatively near future, and the future prospects for improvement of Durham to the east. He predicted that while Durham may be designated as a collector, development in the area will generate arterial levels of traffic. One consequence could be a light at the intersection of Durham and Hall. Speaker and Staff discussed the severe pedestrian problem, espec- ially to the Durham Grade School, and there was a,litt.e discussion wondering if it would be necessary to have a school student injured or killed to inspire needed improvements. Mr. Cotter and Staff discussed possible cooperation with the school authorities. Howard welcomed any sari MINUTES TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 Page 11. input from citizens such as he to the School District. The 40 foot right of way, now undeveloped, was discussed, and it was ascertained there would be a street plug at the west end of the east-west street. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION: There was discussion among Commissioners on various details of the development. Moen questioned the width of the lots. Discussion followed, with the conclusion that the lotting must conform to City standards or it is not approved. Speaker MOVED approval of Conditional Use CU 7-81 with the four Staff Recommendations, based on findings as follows: the site is zoned R-5 on the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and NPO #5 maps; that TMC 18.20.020 allows single family attached units on 5,000 square foot lots as a conditional use in that zone; that the application conforms to Policies 2 and 8 of the NPO #5 Plan; and that it furthers the objectives of LCDC Goal 10 calling for affordable housing. The motion Was seconded by Owens and carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS: The President called for action on the applications of eight individuals for membership on NPO #6. On motion made and seconded, the eight individuals were unanimously recommended by the Planning Commis- sion for appointment by the City Council. The President called attention to the schedule of Planning Com- mission meetings through April of 1982. He commended study of the draft of administrative procedures prior to the next meeting. J. B. Bishop reported on the progress of negotiations between Main Street Development and the Staff, and he stated there would be a meeting on Thursday of this week with the State Highway people, after which he felt it would be possible to resolve the outstanding issues with Staff. He requested that a special meeting of the Planning Commission be held on October 20 to hear the Main Street Development application only, because of the complexity of the issues and the importance for downtown Tigard. The feeling on the Commission was not in favor of a special meeting for any applicant. It was recalled the situation was left that the applicant and Staff would resolve a number of issues, after which Staff would put the item on the agenda. Mr. Bishop feels resolution of these issues, particularly the traffic problems, is imminent; that both sides would be ready for a public hearing by October 20, and that after addressing concerns raised at the hearing the applicant would be able to ask for approval of the General Plan Review in December. (Note: There is no December meeting scheduled.); The scheduling of the matter was left up to Staff. The President adjourned the meeting at 11:23. i L„ [ . . . [ . ' . . . . . . \ . ( .. \ PLANNING COMMISSION ROLL CALL MEETING \ Date 5eip of /��/ Frank Tepedino � Clifford Sperm V. . \ Don Moen ( § Geraldine Kolleas \ . Mark Christen \ _ Susan Herron 5/ /� . ' \. Richard Helmer 4 � G \ ' Bonnie Owens E 0 Roy Bonn . \, / \ / \ \ « / G / / \ \ \ \ \ . < � \ \ t CITY OF TIGARD PUBLIC NOTICE TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 - 7:30 p.m. Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room 10865 S.W. Walnut Street, Tigard PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 Sensitive Lands Permit M 3-81 USA Sewer Truck Line NPO # 7. II A request by the Unified Sewerage Agency for a Sensitive Lands Permit to construct the Scholls Sewer Truck Line for S.W. Tiedeman West to S.W. 121st Avenue. (Washington County Map 2S1 3AA, Tax lots 100 and. 101; 2S1 3AB, Tax lots 100 and 300; 1S1 34DC, Tax lots 3601, 3602, 3500 and 1200; 1S1 34CD, Tax lots 100 and 1202.) 5.2 Comprehensive Plan Revision Preliminary and General Plan Review CPR 12-81 Alpha Engineering NPO # 6 A request by Alpha Engineering for a Comprehensive Plan Revision from R-10 to A-12PD on 8.2 acres on S.W. 92nd Avenue South of Kneeland Estates Subdivision. (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 14A, Tax lot 900). 5.3 Zone Change ZC Conditional Use CU 10-81, Frank & Eurma Hartwick NPO # 4 A request by Frank and Eurma Hartwick for a Zone Change from C-3 General Commercial to C-5 Highway Commercial; a request for a Conditional Use for an office warehouse _ - - - _ - Tax Map 1S1 36DB lot 2400). 5.4 _Zone Chan ge Planned Development Preliminary Plan Review ZCPD 24-81 ; Sensitive Lands Permit M 4-81 Losli NPO # 4 A request by Donald and Howard Losli for a Zone Change Planned Development Preliminary Review and a request for a Sensitive Lands Permit to build within drainageway at 8105 S.W. Hunziker (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 1BD, Tax Lot 300) . r' 5.5 Zone Change Planned Development ZCPD 25-81 Sensitive Lands Permit #' M 5-81 Bonita Industrial Park NPO # 5. A request by Raymond Kittleson for a Zone Change from M-3 to M-3PD and a request request)fiDA a �pi�r W' low a road and parking in the 100 yeaool lae `property s looted at 7415 S.W. Bonita (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 12A Tax Lots 700 & 1400) . . PUBLIC HEARINGS Page two 5.6 Comprehensive Plan Revision, Preliminary and General Plan Review CPRPD 13-81 The Meadows NPO # 7 A request by Bruce Kamhoot for a Comprehensive Plan Change from Washington County RU-4 to City. of Tigard R-5 PP and a request for a Preliminary and General Plan Review for property at 106th and S.W. Black Diamond Way. (Washington County Tax Map 1S1 34AD, Tax lot 2600) 5.7 Conditional Use CU 11-81 Shari's Restaurant NPO # 4 A request by Ron Berquist for a Conditional Use to construct a restaurant in a C-5 Zone at 11675 S.W. Pacific Highway (Washington County Tax Map 1S1 36CD Tax Lot 100). 5.8 Conditional Use CU 7-81 Cecil Boone Park NPO # 5 A request by Dave Hall & Co. for. a Conditional Use to construct single family attached units in an R-5 Zone. The property is located on the North side of Durham Road 625' East of Hall Blvd. (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 12C Tax lot 5100) . "PLANNING COMMISSION SIGN-UP SHEET ' NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME AND NOTE THEIR ADDRESS ON THIS SHEET. / , AGENDA ITEM: 5, / ACTION REFERENCE: 443—0/ ULI A l e vier r?LiA'i G/ NAME ADDRESS i /IP a ,:. rA I,, ,... ____ .. , '....0 '1, O //90 ter ._ /1 /51-7,..i� acs „/,- i a'a ,s� $" 4de4,P .Yw«..,. f-,,,,..-c,if..ry,'"'� 1�4'k,,.A ! f !i}3 -'°` '1 �!/J. /4- .1..,,rd,1A" ,✓ .� •y;`.�..-, ..•L,•�'l'':'i t s' ! AGENDA ITEM: .5 2- ACTION REFERENCE: cif R I1 -,e31 ld?z � iiJ • , if NAME ADDRESS AGENDA ITEM: 5, ,/ ACTION REFERENCE: Z-C Jam. -c9I °. /._ ' NAME ADDRESS I . . . "PLANNING COMMISSION SIGN-UP SHEET" NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME AND NOTE THEIR ADDRESS ON THIS SHEET. • AGENDA ITEM: __45, ¢ ACTION REFERENCE: 7(jFD 2.1---g/J M 7 °e/ l�5U NAME ADDRESS t* (11 'Ct itt ttfj tZP\'1 1:Pr)? ('' . 12-Ottel tg, 14j t VOA 1,i z-v-.-.L_.?Af-so-a.. i r . ... 4 - t, .ti- -•--f ?lir: AGENDA ITEM: . , ACTION REFERENCE: CF' P/) /J? 9/ ihe)✓be vIdYVS 01` :M .-A- \.-1 t: X1,0''_ r, ck, ((�j ) (2i,c(' _---' NAME IV� D.RE�aS ) ' C�rf'�'.7'2 k A 'I-- , &eta I , ad if *1' /°70 s a) jai /, 4 .". s. . 4 �:., l0? U % , Al.:4•r/./%__ . ?_ ' JP / - ,L/ s S -_ -- 1 . garafe av . .. ' /A-Z 5 c'i 1' --8. - 61/ hi ~� ,/t/Y z -.,,k �4.e.-4 — /6 F \-' S 41 ` 0 F---4 , `( C� U F A „ 0 °' o A 1 ' , 2_ A. v `I `)/Z 4,i,„,- 41y-a/C . P-7 .r • Iz: ,f-e- rvr-w ✓zcx 9•7v 0 s ? 3 AGENDA ITEM: T ACTION REFERENCE: /.44.' 5 NAME ADDRESS .may J ' 3 e&' - R cu ,Q ,,,..r.„.<.../ 1 2'd"-- S",1(/ L liA,i2/.f E , s/ 7764 /a 1 13w.S . 7100 s' Ho,ti.,P. ' 'Ft 9 s"e- ll . ' 7 If h/u k+e. ,®S S t,,1 -CIA 4 kc d O. / Q I /5 "PLANNING COMMISSION SIGN-UP SHEET" NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME AND NOTE THEIR ADDRESS ON THIS SHEET. AGENDA ITEM: _6:f:3 ACTION REFERENCE: /j(,) 77-9/ C ��i/ 4r4/4/ G + NAME ADDRESS ,91Q0 7-7-27,f 6e9 G v�v�i� c� f7�i9•s-- "'Pi). y . ogdl:j - "JP R000 ei ...C;f7*kg /40 Ng s/"2--=-0- AGENDA ITEM:j, 2' ACTION REFERENCE: CFA: /0 %( NAME ADDRESS /44.-s" /.7s-c9 • AGENDA ITEM: ACTION REFERENCE: NAME ADDRESS • • 6 ' MEMORANDUM P TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Planning Director SUBJECT: M 3-81 Sensitive Lands Permit application of Unified Sewerage Agency. (USA)) On July 7, 1981 this item was brought to you without detailed engineering plans. You requested that Staff obtain engineering plans and re-notify tl affected persons to allow them an opportunity to comment. Staff did this and the issue is before you again. The Summary Statement is very complete. A representative from USA will be present at our meeting to answer any questions you might have. Sincerel. , re Aldie Ho P ing Director • k{{ (see map reverse side) } _ _.• • , . .., - • • • . „,,..ft” ,I.L.1.1 ,, .i.. 05:-'",11 I. 7....r),r !,.,4, rt.,... ,..T f .....„ i..... .. .. ,T... ...,,,.. ,, ,, ;I A (•.,,...' ... . tY:-.—.1 it.) i; I .1 ---1.?). [11 f,ti ',.:,:.!•..-'i' :i,- H ,a I:1 4,"-..L..'7 ...sa e.;k\ A ,5,----1 hy\:4 :1 '44'•.,1,t, ‘' ,,:_..r"1.;/Li Li \....,..,,:.:1/ it_a•...,4 ...- .1 Kt1,:i.) U t4, U.k:t,.':,' Li Ni.d d A i.,,,„2-,.— tc...,,i0 V.,--41 0 ‘,•,/11 `..t..2=la \Li iJ q-!,:•-fl , t • . i . 1 — 1200 1S 1 3■1C0 -- C t , c i 34D ,- ,--y---1---, , --.Ll.. ... I •-• > I < 1350 d..\Vei lc 1202 ' i 14 \A ti S.W. KATHER1NE ST. i I 1 1 1 1 ' -=,,f__i 7 3 6 01 ..... __....—..-.7---- ///:4ft_t „..-... 2S 1 3AB 25 1 BAB .r. ..fl.......::::--3--2.-.--,--- A, .' 7— I''4 300 - 100 \ .""• . — . - \. :N__.:— --,.—_ . ''''''-; ''.':*',:' • .. .../ .. r . L.,. :..:.. -, . ....: '7- , • *----- 2S I 3AA —1 .,.,,'...:...s.--,-- IL i—1 _--- J 1 .......i. 101 --- CREEK . . ,-- • • I 1 S:W. WALNUT ST. I 1 -----) r----- .• . • • • . , • • • • • .• • • • . . . • . • • • iimmi•E••■• SUMMARY STATEMENT FOR APPLICATION OF SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT The following is a summary statement regarding the effect that the installation . of the underground sewer pipe will have on the flood plain area: • The proposed work consists of constructing a major undergound sewer pipeline. No dikes, dams, permanent fills, or permanent excavations are required or allowed as a part of the proposed work. Diversions • or rechanneling of the stream will not be allowed. The physical character of the flood plain will not be altered. Areas disturbed by the construction will be shaped, graded, and restored as near as practicable to their original ground elevations and contours. Filling or wasting of excess material within the flood plain will not be allowed. The proposed work will not hydraulically affect the flood plain capacity. Since filling or wasting of. excess material will not be permitted within the flood plain, no land use not already permitted will be established. • Contractors are required to take whatever precautions are necessary to prevent damage to or hazard to any structures adjacent to the • construction areas, and must also comply with OSHA requirements pertaining to hazards of health, safety, and welfare. No immediate . or long-range hazards as a result of the project will affect adjacent • properties. Since no filling will be permitted within the flood plain, no impacts or public safety problems associated with subsequent high water in the project area will occur as a result of the proposed work. During construction in all traffic areas, the contractors are required to comply with the State of Oregon and Washington County traffic control and .safety. requirements. During construction in nontraffic area's, the 9 9 contractors are required to notify property owners 48 hours in advance of con struction on their property. Clearing ahead of the trenching operations will be limited so that the entire .9-mile long project area will not be cleared when the project begins and be left unrestored until it is completed. Backfilling, cleanup, replanting, and reseeding behind the pipe laying will also be controlled within specified limits. These limitations on clearing and restoration will minimize the length of disturbed area and the amount of time which an area is impacted. Considerable emphasis has been given to redeeding and replanting in an effort to reestablish essential plant growth necessary for wildlife use and to minimize erosion. Areas along the project have been classi- fied as residential pasture land, cultivated fields, and creek banks. • 1 f ( ' r• Topsoil must be removed and replaced throughout the entire project. Al] areas disturbed by the contractor, whether presently seeded or not, will be reseeded upon completion of the backfilling operation to provide for grass cover to prevent erosion. The preponderance • of land along the project route is Tigard School District property, residential , pasture land, or cultivated fields. Pasture lands and cultivated fields will be reseeded and will not change from their original use as a result of this project. No significant land use change is anticipated within the limits of the project. I C ' j STAFF REPORT i; AGENDA 5.2 I TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION '; j September 8, 1981 7:30 p.m. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LECTURE ROOM ;'', 10865 S.W. Walnut Street, TIGARD 1 DOCKET: Comprehensive Plan Review. (CPR 10-81) Kneeland III on 92nd Avenue. i APPLICANT: Alpha Engineering, Inc. OWNER: Larry Grayson Construction Co. ?' 1750 S.W. Skyline Blvd. 8946 S.W. Barbur Blvd. Portland, Oregon 97221 Portland, Oregon 97219 APPLICATION DATE: July 8, 1981 SITE LOCATION: Washington County Tax Map 2S-1-14A Lot 900 NPO # 6 REQUEST: A Comprehensive Plan Review from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard two (2) units per acre (NPO # 6 map). The City of Tigard A 12 Multi-family with a Planned Unit Development (PD) designation. Applicant is further requesting preliminary and general plan review of an A 12 PD for 22 units (11 duplexes). PREVIOUS ACTION: S 13-77, ZC 12-77, ZC 21-78, CU - 36-78, S 7-79, S 14-79, S 8-80, S 11-80, CU 23-80. 1 STAFF COMMENTS: The Park Board has reviewed this ro osal on Ma y 28, 1981. P P approximately 3.7 acres is in the floodplain lain adjacient to Cook Park the past the Park Board's policy has to trade-off an increase in density for dedicated park land. Kneeland I and II to the North of this parcel ,t have been approved and construction of single family detached units is ['' progressing now. Riverwood Lane from Picks Landing and Copper Creek a subdivision to the West will be continued through this development to ' S.W. 92nd Avenue. The slope of the ground is an important concern. A f; i,. small pond has been created at the top of the hill and adequate drainage facilities must be installed to protect downtown property. The development r will take place within the 100 year floodplain, therefor a Sensitive Land r Permit is not required. FINDINGS OF FACT: C i3 1. NPO # 6 Policies are appropriate as follows: . r; 1. Residential subdivisions will be developed with paved streets, }y curbs and gutters, street lights, and walkways, according to City or County standards. All utilities will be placed underground. j"; 2. Development will coincide with the provision of public streets, water and sewerage facilities. These facilities shall be (a) capable of adequately serving intervening properties as well as G} the proposed development, and (b) designed to meet city or county (!1 standards. • i. { _. r. • • STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.2 Page 2 E. r FINDINGS OF FACT: (continued) 3. Planned unit development will be encouraged on tracts large enough to accommodate ten or more dwellings. Planned unit development will permit a degree of flexibility in design that will enable a higher quality of development in accordance with zoning standards. • 4. When developments are proposed in the urban low-density area for sites which include identified natural features worthy of preservation,T the planned development concept shall be utilized if the Planning Commission determines it the best method for preservation. 5. The maximum overall density of development will be 12 dwelling. units or 29 persons per gross acre. This amounts to a standard of 2500 square feet of land per dwelling unit allowing for streets and other open space. Some areas will have a lower density owing , to topography or existing development patterns. r 6. Apartments should be located to produce an optimum living environment for the occupants. Development criteria should include: A. Buffering by means of landscaping, fencing and distance from commercial areas and major traffic carriers such as Pacific Highway. B. On site recreation space as well as pedestrian and bicycle access to parks, schools, and convenience shopping. C. The siting of buildings to minimize the visual effects of parking areas and to increase the availability of privacy. 2. A full line of Urban services are available to this site. 3. Cook Park has been created by action of the City Council and expansion plans include a portion of this parcel. The Park Board has reviewed this proposal and has agreed to a Trade-off of high density for the dedication of park land. 4. No development will take place within the 100 year floodplain of the Tualatin River. No Sensitive Lands Permit is required. CONCLUSION: 1. This parcel is suited for multi-family development as proposed. Increasing the density is in conformance with the policies included in the adopted NPO # 6 Plan. 2. The public street dedication will take approximately two (2) acres,. the park dedication will take almost four (4) acres which leaves about three (3) acres for development. The public is more than compensated for allowing an increase in density on the remaining land. STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.2 y Page 3 !' j. is STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this Comprehensive Plan Review and Preliminary and General' Planned Unit Development Review, with the following conditions: 1. A subdivision plat shall be filed with the City in conformance with ii Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 17. - Land Partitioning Ordiance. , 2. A detailed site drainage plan related to the pond to the North shall. be submitted to/approved by the Public Works Director prior to the issuance of any Building Permits. i 3. No development shall take place within the 100 year floodplain of the Tualatin River. k i 4. All land within the 100 year floodplain shall be dedicated to the City. r 5. The Public Works Director shall review with the developer a method of erosion control on the Northern slope to 93rd Avenue cul-de-sac. 6. A concerted effort shall be made to retain the large trees on this site. 7. Half-street improvements shall be made to S.W. 92nd Avenue. f' 8. A "Street Plug" shall be installed on the Western terminus of S.W. Riverwood Lane. • 9. No Occupancy Permits shall be issued until all conditions placed upon this development by the City of Tigard have been satisfied and inspections verifying this have been carried out by the appropriate department. 10. No changes will be made to approved plans or specifications unless formal application is made to the appropriate City department and changes are approved by that department. Application for changes will be ri� made in writing and shall include applicable drawings. H l' 11. Grading and construction plans for all work in public rights-of-way 3 and all other public improvements shall be prepared by a registered t' professional engineer in accordance with City standards, and shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review. . r; All public improvements will require a Compliance Agreement and must be (design) approved by the Public Works Department, and must be either }: (1) fully and satisfactorily constructed prior to the recording of any minor land partition, public dedication, final plant, or issuance of Building Permits; or (2) bonded to the City for 100% of the estimated cost thereof prior to the recording of any minor land partition, public dedication, final plat, or issuance of Building Permits. ggp 12. All proposed utilities shall be placed underground. Street lighting installations shall be approved by the Public Works Department. . ' in bi Wk D t I STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.2 Page 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS (continued) 13. A metes and bounds legal description and map shall accompany a dedication of public rights-of-way, parks, open space or floodplain areas and shall be prepared by a registered engineer or land surveyorer. 14. All street and parking areas shall be concrete or asphalt. All sidewalks shall be concrete. 15. No Building Permits shall be issued until the expiration of the twenty (20) day appeal period from the date of approval. Aldie Howard Planning Director • G_ STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.3 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION - September 8, 1981 7:30 p.m. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH - LETURE ROOM 10865 S.W. WALNUT STREET, TIGARD No submission of additional material by applicant shall be made at this Public Hearing unless the applicant is requested to do so. Should this occur, un- requested, the item will be tabled until the following hearing. DOCKET: Zone Change, ZC 23-81 (Frank & Eurma Hartwick) NPO# 4 APPLICANT: Frank Hartwick OWNER: SAME 2710 S.W. Vista Drive Portland, Oregon 97225 REQUEST: For a Zone Change from C-3 General Commercial to C-5 Highway Commercial. SITE LOCATION: 11640 S.W. Pacific Highway (Washington County Tax Map 1S1 36DB Lot 2400) FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The applicant's property is designated as C-5 Highway Commercial on the NPO # 4 Plan Map and the Comprehensive Plan Map. • 2. Applicable policies from the NPO # 4 Plan Text are as follows: Policy 22 - Highway oriented commercial businesses should have priority use of Pacific Highway frontage because they are dependent upon the volume of through traffic for their business. t' 3. Sewer Service and water service are available to the site. • c CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed zoning is compatible with other uses in the area and conforms to the Comprehensive Plan and the NPO # 4 Plan. 2. In accordance with the Tigard Municipal Code reference section 18.59.030,. the applicant shall apply for Site Design Review before building on the site_ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recomends approval of Zone Change 23-81 based on findings as follows: 1. The applicant's request is in conformance with the NPO 1/ 4 Plan Map and the Comprehensive Plan Map. 411.1.1117 STAFF REPORT ZC 23-81 Page 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (continued) 2. The proposed C-5 Highway Commercial Zoning conforms to Policy # 22 from the NPO # 4 Plan which reads as follows: "Highway oriented commercial businesses should have f' f-' priority use of Pacific Highway frontage because they are dependent upon the volume of through traffic for their business." . Prep�r c. by Elizabe�t}/ Newton Approved by Aldie Howard E' �/ 1' Assistant Planner Planning Director 3, t 1 l 1 1 • ty 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.3A TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 - 7:30 p.m. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH - LECURE ROOM 10865 S.W. WALNUT STREET, TIGARD No submission of additional material by applicant shall be made at this Public Hearing unless the applicant is requested to do so. Should this occur, unrequested, the item will be tabled until the following hearing. DOCKET: Variance, V 9-81 (Frank & Eurma Hartwick) NPO II 4 APPLICANT: Frank & Eurma Hartwick OWNER: Same 2710 S.W. Vista Portland, Oregon 97225 ki REQUEST: For a Variance in the setback requirements in a C-5 Highway Commercial j' Zone to permit construction of a building. LOCATION: 11640 S.W. Pacific Highway (Washington County Tax Map 1S1 36DB lot 2400) ,1 FINDINGS OF FACT: • 1. Tigard Municipal Code Section 18.76.020 states that: nj "No variance shall be granted by the Planning Commission unless it can be shown that all of the following conditions exist: (1) Exceptional or extraordinary conditions applying to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, which conditions are a result of lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the applicant has no control; (2) The variance is necessary for the preservation of a property right of the applicant substantially the same as possessed by owners of other property in the same zone or vicinity; (3) The authorization of the variance shall not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title, be injurious to property in the zone or vicinity in which the property is located, or be otherwise detrimental to the objectives of any `s City development plan or policy; (4) The variance requested is the minimum from the provisions and standards of this title which will alleviate the hardship." 2. There are other properties adjacent to this parcel which are characerized by the same narrow, long shape. (See attached Tax Map) STAFF REPORT V 9-81 Page 2 CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant does not meet the four conditions required for approval of a Variance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of Variance 9-81 based on Findings and Conclusions as follows: The applicant does not meet the four conditions required for approval of a Variance. Prep- ed by Eli :beth New on Approved `•ldie Howard Assistant. Planner Planning Director 1 • • is STAFF REPORT . I AGENDA 5.3B TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION ' September 8, 1981 7:30 p.m. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LECTURE ROOM 10865 S.W. Walnut Street, TIGARD DOCKET: Conditional Use, CU 10-81 (Frank & Eurma Hartwick) APPLICANT: Frank & Eurma Hartwick OWNER: Same 2710 S.W. Vista Drive Portland, Oregon 97225 APPLICATION DATE: August 14, 1981 SITE LOACTION: 11640 S.W. Pacific Highway (Washington County Tax Map 1S1 36DB lot 2400) NPO 1P 4 REQUEST: For a Conditional Use in a C-5 Highway Commercial Zone for an Office/Warehouse building. PREVIOUS ACTION: None FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The City of Tigard Municipal Code allows office warehouse as a Conditional Use in a C-5 Highway Commercial Zone. (Reference code Section 18.36.020; Ordinance 80-5 S 2 (part) 1980) . CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed office warehouse is compatible with other uses the the C-5 5 ! Zone located along Pacific Highway. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: - 1. Staff recommends approval of this Conditional Use based on Findings of k! Fact as follows: The City of Tigard Municipal Code allows office warehouse as a is Conditional Use in a C-5 highway Commercial Zone. (Reference Code Sections 18.36.020; Ordiance 80-5 S2 (part) 1980) . l' Staff recommends the following condition be attached to approval of this condtional l' Use 10-81: 1. Applicant shall apply for Site Design Review prior to the issuance J'' of Building Permits. I; AP" i4 fe /4,6 4.• L 'P Prep ed by Elizabet Newton Approved by Aldie Howard r' Assistant Planner Planning Director i' 4 STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.4/5.4A TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 26, 1981 - 7:30 p.m. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH - LECTURE ROOM 10865 S.W. Walnut Street, Tigard No submission of additional material by applicant shall be made at the Public hearing unless the applicant is requested to do so. Should this occur, unrequested, the item will be tabled until the following hearing. DOCKET: Zone Change Planned Development, ZCPD 24-81 (Losli Inc.) Sensitive Lands Permit M 4-81. 4 APPLICANT: Donald A & E. Howard Losli 8015 S.W. Hunziker Road Tigard, Oregon 97223 OWNER: SAME REQUEST: Approval of a Zone ,Change for City of Tigard M-3 to M-3PD, a Preliminary Plan Review and a Sensitive Lands Permit. • SITE LOCATION: 8015 S.W. Hunziker (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 1BD, Tax lot 300, PREVIOUS ACTION: On November 30, 1976, Tigard Design Review Board approved a loading dock, ramp and fencing to the industrial site on S.W. Hunziker Street. (File Number SDR 42-76). FINDINGS OF FACT: • 1. The site is designated as M-3 "Light Industrial" on Tigard Comprehensive Plan and zoned M-3. 2. There is one existing building on the subject site. The surrounding land uses consist of S.W. Hunziker Street to the South, Park 217 to the North, and Industrial uses to the East and West. 3. Access to the site is provided off S.W. Hunziker which is a Major Collector with a Sixty (60') foot right-of-way. 4. The subject site is located in a Sensitive Lands area (floodplain), this requires special use permit for all the proposed uses and activities proposed by applicant. 5. Applicable policy from the NPO # 5 Plan is as follows: Policy 25: Limit the amount of commercial development to occur in the industrial area, allowing only some growth of existing retail and service commercial in the area. •=1101•IMINIk 1 • r`. STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.4/5.4A Page two 6. The proposed development in the Sensitive Land area does not comply with the Tigard Municipal Code, Sensitive Land Chapter 18.57, Sections 18.57.040 - 18.57.060 - 18.57.070. 7. Sewer is available to the site off S.W. Hunziker. Water is also available. CONCLUSIONS: • 1. The site is in a Sensitive Land area. 2. Both sewer and water are available to the subject site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appproval of Zone Change from M-3 to M-3 PD. Staff recommends denial of Preliminary Plan and Sensitive Lands Permit. This decision is based upon Environmental Design and Open Space Plan Policy 3: The City shall restrict alternation of natural drainageways unless it can be demonstrated that the benefits are greater than the detrimental effects. Other jurisdictions in the Fanno Creek Basin shall be encouraged. to do the same. Policy 6: Require a site development report, eg. hydrology, soils, geology, for major projects in designated areas; and a statement reflecting methods to be used to minimize the runoff erosion impact of the development on the surrounding area and downstream properties. Applicant is requested to meet the following conditions prior to the General Plan Review. • 1. The large warehouse (structure) be removed from the site plan and only the smaller addition to the existing structure with associated parking be shown on the site plan. 2. A complete drainage plan with specific details regarding flood storage excavation shall be submitted to the Public Works Director. Plans shall be approved by the Public Works Director prior to the Review of the General Plan. 3. The applicant shall apply for a Site Design Review prior to commencement of any work on the site. 4. All the construction work in the floodplain shall be supervised by the Public Works Director. 4 5. As is required in Planned Unit Development, the Applicant has to dedicate the upper portion of his lot to the City for open space purposes. 6. No Minor Land Partition shall be made in reference to this project unless formal application is made to the City of Tigard Planning Department and the Minor Land Partition is approved and recorded. 7. Grading and construction plans for all work in public rights-of-way and all other public improvements shall be prepared by a registered professional engineer in accordance with City standards, and shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review. 8. A metes and bounds legal description and map shall accompany a dedication of Public right-of-way, parks, open space or floodplain areas and shall be prepared by a registered engineer,or land surve1mrer. 9. No Occupancy Permits shall be issued until all condition placed upon this development by the City of Tigard have been satisfied and inspections verifying this have been carried out by the appropriate department. 10. No changes will be made to approved plans or specifications unless formal application is made to the appropriate City department and changes are approved by that department. Application for changes will be made in writing and shall include applicable drawings. 11. All proposed utilities shall be placed underground. Street lighting installations shall be approved by the Public Works Department. 12. All street and parking areas shall be concrete or asphalt. All sidewalks shall be concrete. 13. No Building Permits shall be issued until the expiration of the twenty (20) day appeal period from the date of approval. 9.1) • �yy� // f Prepared by S. Hamid Pishvaie Approved by Aldie Howard Planning Intern Planning Director • ii STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.6 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 8, 1981 7:30 p.m. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH - LECTURE ROOM . - 10865 S.W. Walnut Street, Tigard 1 DOCKET: Comprehensive Plan Revision Planned Development CPRPD 13-81, (The Meadows) 0 NPO # 7 " is l • APPLICANT: Bruce Kamhoot OWNER: Unified Sewerage Agency f 20 Green Ridge Court Washington County Adm. Bldg. ,'. Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 150 1st Street Hillsboro, Oregon 97 ii APPLICATION DATE: August 20, 1981 , SITE LOCATION: S.W. 106th and S.W. Black Diamond Way (Washington County Tax Map 1S1 34AD Tax Lot 2600) {? REQUEST: For a Comprehensive Plan Revision from Washington County RU-4 to City of Tigard R-SPD. Also, a request for a Preliminary and General Plan Review. tt; l' FINDINGS OF FACT: ij 1. The site is presently zoned Washington County RU-4. The site is designated k R-7 Urban Low Density on the Comprehensive Plan Map. The NPO # 7 Plan Map designates this site as R-7 Urban low Density. 2. The applicant proposes to create a subdivision on the site with manufactured a housing on 5,000 square foot lots. fi 3. Applicable NPO # 7 policies for the proposed development are as follows: Policy # 2 "Residential subdivision will be developed with paved streets, tl f curbs and gutters, street lights and walkways according to City or County standards. All utilities will be placed underground' Policy # 4 "Planned Unit Development will be encouraged on tracts large ? ' enough to accomodate (10) ten or more dwellings. Planned Unit r Developments will permit a degree of flexibility in design that '; will enable a higher quality of development in accordance with t,' Zoning standards." (` Policy # 6 "The single family character of the area designated on the Plan Map as urban low density residential is viewed as a positive asset to be retained. Projects proposed for this , area must be judged according to affects upon this character. E 4. The subject site slopes gradually to the Northwest. 5. The surrounding land uses include residential to the. South, West and East. ,° The Koll Business Center lies to the North. 1a i- „a r • STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.6 Page 2 6. S.W. Black Diamond Way and S.W. 106th Avenue designated as local streets on the NPO # 7 Plan, The Comprehensive Plan Map and the Draft Comprehensive Street Plan. 7. Sewer is available from an 8" line in S.W. 106th. Water is available f' to the site. 8. Section 18.20.130 of the Tigard Municipal Code reads as follows: 18.20.130 Mobile/Manufactured home siting. a. Definitions. "Mobile/Manufactured home" means a structure transportable in one or more sections, each built on a permanent chassis, and which is designed to be used for permanent occupancy as a dwelling, hereinafter refered to as a mobile home. b. Local Government Responsibility (1) Mobile/manufactured home subdivions and/or planned developments shall be permitted in all single-family residential zones consistent with the current subdiviion and Planned Development requirements and standards of sub-section (c) of the section. (See attached Exhibit A.) 9. A portion of the 7.31 acre site is within the 100 year floodplain. The applicant shall dedicate all lands within the 100 year floodplain to 1 the public. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Mobile Home Subdivisions are allowed in a single family residentail zone. 2. Sewer and water are available to the site. 3. The applicant has agreed not to develop within the 100 year floodplain. 4. The applicant proposes 30 lots on the property. The plan does not show lot sizes or the total acreage to be developed and the acreage that lies within the 100 year floodplain, 5. A strEet plan showing the proposed connection to and improvements of S.W. 106th and Black Diamond Way should be submitted to and approved by the Public Works Director. 6. There is a brick building on the site presently which should be removed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Revision and Preliminary Plan Review based on Findings of Fact as follows: 1. Section 18.20.130 of the Tigard Municipal Code allows Manufactured Home Subdivisions in single family residential acres. ' ' STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.6 Page 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (continued) 2. The request conforms to policies .2, 4 and 6 of the NPO # 7 Plan. Staff recommends that following conditions be attached to the approval of the requested Comprehensive Plan Revision and Preliminary Plan Review: 1. The applicant shall return to the Planning Commission at a later date for General Plan approval with information as required in Section 18.56.030 of the Tigard Municipal Code. 2. The applicant shall apply for Subdivision approval after General Plan Approval. / /7/411:4/ • / • 1 t Pre.ar-d by E izabeth ewton Approved • •ie Howard Assistant Planner Planning Director . 18.20.130 K� 11 1 • E, A , Li-. (i (c) Mobile Home Siting Regulations. (1) Mobile/Manufactured Homes on Subdivision or Planned Development Lots. In addition to the standards of the zone in which the project is located and other standards of the ordinance, a mobile home as a subdivision and/or planned development lot, shall meet the following standards : (A) The mobile home shall have an Oregon insigne with . a date not previous to 1972. No reconstruction or equipment installation shall have been made to the mobile home unless it has been state approved as evidenced by an appropriate insigne. (B) Mobile homes shall be installed under the pro- visions of the administrative rules adopted by the Director of Commerce and administered by the State Building Code . Division. (C) The mobile home shall have a water closet, lavatory and bathtub or shower as an integral part of the unit. (D) The mobile home shall have a kitchen,, area. (E) The mobile home plumbing shall be connected to the public water supply and public sewer. . (F) The wheels of the mobile home 'shall be removed when the unit is installed. . (G) In the event a mobile home is removed after in- stallation, the property owner, shall within sixty days either replace the mobile home with another approved mobile home or remove the foundation, mobile home accessory structures and , other structures on the property and disconnect sewer, water and other utilities. The city (or county) may make the removal and disconnection and place a lien against the property for the cost of the work if the owner fails to perform the work within the allotted time. (H) The mobile/manufactured homes shall be owned by the owner of the lot on which it is installed. • • (I) Except for a ' structure which conforms to the • state definition of a mobile home accessory structure, no ex- tension shall be attached to a mobile home. (3) The mobile home shall be double wide or wider. • • (X) The mobile home shall have a roof with a minimum slope of sixteen percent (2 :12) , and shall have a composition or shake roof, or other roofing materials approved by the plannin ' department. . (L) The mobile home subdivision or planned develop- ment shall be screened from the public right-of-way and adjacent residential areas, by a sight-obscuring fence, vegetation, berm or any combination of the above as approved by the planning com- mission. (M) All •lans for mobile home subdivisions or `/ planned deve • . e n st •e eard at a regular meeting of the J� p arming commission followin• the •roce.ures of Chapter : . 84. / t Mobile Home Park. A mobile ome park shall be built to state standards in effect at the time of construction . and shall comply with the following additional provisions: ( . • 265-1 (Tigard 1/15/80) • 18,20_130 t.t I The mobile home park shall occupy at least 4, = (A) park will five acres. Evidence shall be provided that the p (B) squired by eligible for a certificate of sanitation as r be g state law. ace provided for each mobile home shall be ' (C) The space ed with piped potable water and electrical and sewerage proved connections. . onnections. The number of spaces for mobile homes shall not (D) for each acre of the total area in the mobile home exceed six not more than fifty park. (E) A mobile home shall occupy space provided for the e:�clusxve use x contiguous sp o of s ace ofthe cc the co of the mobile homes and exclusiroaofa p and provided vi d for the cf of tenants , such as � provided for the common use park shall be located •� areas for r (F) No mobilelhomecin1the p (F) mobile home or from a • ' `` in the park. No mobile home accessory closer t?usn fifteen feet from another No a mobile accessory space general use building or structure on shall be or other than ten ace. closer than ten feet from bonea'mobilechome rsp;r1 shall be or other building or structure building building or structure shall bew feet No twenty mobile home ®r Other t Property boundary feet of a public V twenty ( boundary• park shall meet _ of another Property mobile home permitted in the pa h l the following standards as determined by an inspection the 4II di official: t building ( i) It shall have a state insigne indicating : Oregon state mobile home construction s andards f cnmeffecte with Dreg 4 in effect at the time of ulamentcinstallationlm degafter manu- r for reconstruction of equipment which may s facture; andin deterioration h ii) Notwithstanding �� other ca us�, neglect, accident o= `y nerve occurred due to misuse, ,ci home shall meet the statepstandards for mobile home the mobile h the insigne; shall insigin a water closet, lavatory construction evidenced by z (iii) x�, a-1- other food pc>pdr= slY shower or tub, and a sink in a kitchen or s tion space. Mobile homes shall be installed under the pro- (H) adopted by the Director of visions of the administrativet�elSateoBuilding Code Division. Commerce and administered by in the park shall be named (I) Each vehicular way appearance to those `j and marked with signs which are similar in app used to identify ntif public streets. A map o ftheand named vehiaularr- ways shall be provided to the fire department lent. Ss 265-2 (Tigard 1/15/80) 4 STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.7 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION September 8, 1981 . 7:30 p.m. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LECTURE ROOM 10865 S.W. Walnut - Tigard, Oregon DOCKET: Conditional Use, CU 11-81 (Shari's Restaurant) APPLICANT: Ron Berquist OWNER: Lasal Land Co. of the Northwest 7100 S.W. Hampton Suite 201 707 S.W. Washington Tigard, Oregon 97223 Portland, Oregon 97205 APPLICATION DATE: August 14, 1981 SITE LOCATION: 11675 S.W. Pacific Highway (Washington County Tax Map 1S1 36CD Tax lot 100) NPO # 4 REQUEST: For a Conditional Use in a C-5 Highway Commercial Zone to construct a restaurant. PREVIOUS ACTION: On August 24, 1981, The Planning Director approved a Minor Land Partition on Tax lot 100 creating two lots. On December 15, 1980, the Planning Director approved a subdivision creating two lots and extending S.W. 78th south from Pfaffle to Highway 99 W. On September 30, 1980, the Planning Director approved Site Design Review SDR 24-80 for the development of Tax lot 100. On August 25, 1980 the Tigard City Council approved a Zone Change from C-3 General Commercial and A 2 Multifamily Residential to C-5 "Highway Commercial". FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The Tigard Municipal Code was amended on August 11, 1980, to allow restaurants as a Conditional Use in a C-5 Zone (Reference City Ordiance 80-64) . 2. Applicable NPO # 4 policies are as folows: Policy 22. "Highway oriented commercial businesses should have priorty use of Pacific Highway frontage because they are dependent upon the volume of through traffic for their business. Policy 24. "Development shall coincide with the provisions of public streets, water and sewerage facilities. These facilities shall be (a) capable of adequately serving all intervening properties as well as the proposed development and (b) designed to meet City of County standards. cv C � STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.7 Page two CONCLUSION: 1. The proposed restaurant use is allowed as a Conditional Use in a C-5 Highway Commercial Zone. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of CU 11-81 based on Findings of Fact as follows: 1. The Tigard Municipal Code was amended on August 11, 1981 to allow restaurant as a Conditional Use in a C-5 Highway Commercial Zone. (Ordinance 80-64.) • I Staff recommends the following conditions be attached to the approval for for CU 11-81: 1. The Applicant shall apply for Site Design Review prior to the issuance of any Permits. 2. The Applicant shall apply for a Sign Permit prior to the issuance of Occupancy Permits. de Pre a d by Elizabeth A Newton Approved by 'le Howard Assistant Planner / Planning Director - -_~-__ ` _ ------ - - ' � . ' - � � 1 V• ' 4 41411 ..... i ---1 ,---' Willirli-01 4Ipllpo.''s....-NN..ss.N.NNN -...--- ... 1 . ea. '''‘. ' tri, I si , - 1 --r- .. - ',410 1. - —I i . . I ..), ',., / [ %. " 1 ... . 4 /4 6 L , / . r.,, Alp,•0/ .• It..:.' /-- ' 111/ . ;, - J. •' v 1 Akiir ....._.... ._11 . .•• --,---...---.. Crl‘' -IL , • 9 lit 1 _ ... n_..... °,1 elt OF ., '.. 1gF k.., A 1.0 1 I 1 P:I''',,,:l'',''' STA U: 1,. STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.8 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 8, 1981 - 7:30 p.m. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL 10865 S.W. WALNUT STREET, TIGARD DOCKET: Conditional Use, CU 7-81 (Cecil Boone Park Subdivision) APPLICANT: Dave Hall & Company OWNER: Same P.O. Box 938 Beaverton, Oregon 97005 !` APPLICATION DATE: June 12, 1981 SITE LOCATION: North side of S.W. Durham Road approximately 625 feet East of S.W. Hall. (Washington County Tax Map 2S1 12C Lot 5100. REQUEST: For a Conditional Use in an R-5 "Single Family Residential Zone" '' for single family attached units, on 5,000 square foot lots. PREVIOUS ACTION: None ' FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The site is zoned R-5 on the Comprehensive Plan Map and the NPO # 5 Plan Map. 2. The Tigard Municipal Code allows single family attached units on 5,000 square foot lots as a Conditional Use in an R-5 Zone. (Reference Code Section 18.20.020). 3. Applicable policies from the NPO # 5 Plan are as follows: Policy # 8 Within the Urban Low Density Residential Area allow duplexes on lots less appropriate Eor single family homes to include locations at street intersections, adjacent major throughfares and as buffers between non-residential and multi-family and single family areas. Policy # 2 Residential Subdivions will be developed with paved streets, curbs and gutters, street lights and walkways according to City or County standards. All utilities will be placed underground. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposed single family attached units are allowed as a Conditional Use in an R-5 Zone. 2. Sewer will have to be available to the site prior to subdivision approval. 1 1 F STAFF REPORT AGENDA 5.8 Page 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Conditiona Use 7 -81 based on findings as follows: ; 1. The Tigard Municipal Code allows single family attached units on 5,000 square foot lots as a Conditional Use in an R-5 Zone (Reference Code Section 18.20.020). Staff recommends the following conditions be attached to approval of CU 7-81: 1. The applicant shall apply for subdivision approval. 2. The applicant shall apply for Site Design Review for the single family I attached units after subdivision approval. 3. Approval of Conditional Use shall expire after one year if Subdivision approval has not been granted. st :;;;!1‘ .:.. /' OP Prep red by Eli a� . Newton Approved by A 'oward Assistant Planner Planning Director ctor 0 1 • r' ADMINISTRATIVE PROCED, Section 18. 84 . 010 Purp.., The purpose : this chapte is to establish procedures under Titles 17 an. 8 for the al of development applications, tOML-the = • :1 of quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendments and for appeals or review of decisions. Section 18. 84 .020 Definitions As used in this chapter: (a) "Administrative action" means a quasi-judicial pro- ceeding: 1. Pursuant to a portion of Titles 17 or 18 of the Tigard City Code in which the legal rights, duties or privileges of specific parties are determined, and any appeal or review therefrom; or 2 . So provided by ordinance, rule or order adopted by the Council. (b) "Appeal" means a request that an initial decision be considered by a higher authority for either a de novo hearing or for evidence in addition to that considered by the maker of the initial decision, depending on the type of action and the appli- cable provisions of Titles 17 or 18 . (c) "Approval Authority" means either the Hearing Body or the Council, depending on the context in which the term is used. (d) "Commission" means the Manning Cmmission of Tigard, Oregon. (e) "Comprehensive plan" shall have the meaning set forth in ORS 197 .015 (9) , shall embody the elements listed in the state-wide land use planning goals pursuant to ORS 197 . 240 , shall include text and maps, and is comprised of a general plan and neighborhood planning organization plans : (f) "Council" means the City Council of Tigard, Oregon. (g) "Development application" means any application for approval of a development proposal required by an implementing ordinance or this chapter to allow a man-made change to real estate, including but not limited to, the construction, al- teration or use of buildings, to allow the division of land, • 1 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ■ creation of public or private streets or ways , mining, excava- tion, and to allow any other activity specifically regulated by the provisions of this ordinance. (h) "Director" means the Planning Director of Tigard, Oregon. (1) "Initial hearing body" means the Manning&mmission or the hearings officer appointed by the Council. (m) "Implementing ordinance" means an ordinance adopted to carry out the comprehensive plan, including but not limited to, the provisions of Titles 17 and 18 . (n) "Quasi-judicial action" means an action which involves the application of adopted policy to a specific development application or amendment, as provided by this chapter. (o) "Review" means a request that an initial decision be considered by a higher authority on the basis of the record made before the initial hearing body. Section 18 .84 .030 The Application Process (a) Who May Apply 1. Applications for approval required under this chapter may be initiated by: (A) The owner of the property which is the subject of the application; (B) The purchaser of such property who submits a duly-executed written contract or copy thereof which has been recorded with the Washington County Clerk; (i) "Final action, " "final decision, " or "final order, " means : (a) With respect to the Planning Director, a decision made under Sections 18 .84 .050 (a) and 18 .84 .150 of this chapter, ap- pealable to a further approval authority, and subject to Council review. (b) With respect to the Hearing Body, a decision made under Sections 18 .84 .050 (b) or 18 .84 .100 to .140 and 18 .84 .160 to .240 and subject thereafter to Council review. (c) With respect to the Council, a decision made under Sections 18.84 .050 (c) or 18.84 .240 to. .330, or both, and subject to a Petition for Rehearing. 2 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES � m•.�k ems:,. ...,,......n,.,.. ,..>.-... ., ._. .,.,i....a'-y::'�. (C) A lessee in possession of such property who submits written consent of the owner to make such application; or (D) Resolution or order of the Council or Planning Commission. 2 . Any persons authorized by this chapter to submit an application for approval may be represented by an agent who is authorized by such a person to make the applica- tion. (b) Pre-Application Conference Required 1. The applicant shall be required , to meet with the director or his designee for a pre--application conference . 2. At such conference, the director or his designee shall : (A) Cite the applicable comprehensive plan policies • and map designation; (B) Cite the applicable substantive and procedural ordinance provisions; (C) Provide technical data and assistance which will aid the applicant; (D) Identify other policies and regulations that relate to the application; and (E) Identify other opportunities or constraints that . relate to the application. 3. The failure of the Director to provide any of the information required by this Section shall not consti- tute a waiver of the application of the standards, criteria, or requirements to the application. (c) The Requirements for Making an Application - Refusal of an Application 1. The application shall be made on forms provided by the director as provided by Section 18 .84 .040 (a) (1) of this code. 2. The application shall be complete, and shall contain Ithe information requested on the form, address the appropriate criteria in sufficient detail for review and action, and be accompanied by the requisite fee. 3. The director shall not accept: 3 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • �T (A) Incomplete applications or applications not accompanied by the requisite fee; or (B) Applications which the Director determines cannot !` be acted upon initially within forty-five (45) days due to such considerations as the complexity of the application or the status of the agenda, except where the applicant has consented to a longer period for action. (d) Fees The Council shall adopt by resolution a schedule of fees reasonably calculated to defray the expenses of the adminis- trative processes of Titles 17 and 18 and this chapter. The Council may waive any fee upon timely application and shall charge no fees for city-initiated applications or Neighborhood Planning Organization appeals. 11 fi Section 18 .84 .040 Duties of the Director } (a) The Director shall : 1 . Prepare application forms made pursuant to the standards M; contained in the applicable state law, comprehensive plan and implementing code provisions; 2. Accept all development applications which comply with • the provisions of Section 18.84 .030 of this code; 3. Within forty-five (45) days after accepting an applica- tion pursuant to this chapter: (A) Give notice as provided by Section 18 .84 .070; (B) Prepare a staff report which relates factual data related to the application to the applicable standards and criteria. The report shall include a summary of the factual data relied upon, a statement of the applicable comprehensive plan provisions (policies and map designations) which are applicable and, if only a portion of the applicable policies or standards are applied, the reason not all applicable policies or standards were applied, findings of fact and conclusions supported by the facts relied upon; a recommenda- tion for denial or approval and where necessary to implement the comprehensive plan or provisions ' of the implementing ordinance or to protect the public, conditions to approval shall be recommended pursuant to Section 18 .84 .110 of this .chapter; • 4 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • (C) Make the staff report and all case-file materials available seven (7) days prior to the scheduled date of the administrative action to all persons entitled to notice under Section 18 .840 .70 or otherwise made a party to the proceeding under Section 18 .84 .140 of this chapter; (D) Act on the development application pursuant to Sections 18 .84 .050 (a) and 18 .84 .150 of this chapter or cause a hearing to be held pursuant to Sections 1 18 .84 .050 and 18 .84 .160 of this chapter, unless the applicant has requested or consented to a delay; 3. Administer the hearings process pursuant to Sections i 18 .84 .160 through 18•.84 .240 of this chapter; 4. Maintain a register of all applications which have been filed for a decision. The register shall at all times identify at what stage the application is in the process; 5. File notice of the final decision in the records of the Planning Department and mail a copy of the notice of the final decision to the applicant and all of the • parties. The notice of the final decision shall contain the information set forth under Section 18 .84 .130 (b) of this chapter; 6. Maintain and preserve the file for each application. - The file shall include, as applicable, a list of persons given notice and a copy of the notice given pursuant to Section 18 .84 .070 and the accompanying affidavits, the application and all supporting information, the staff report, the final decision, including the findings, conclusions and conditions, if any, all correspondence, the minutes of any meeting at which the application was considered . and any other exhibit, information or documentation which was considered by the hearing body with respect to the application; and 7. Administer the appeals process pursuant to Sections 18 .84 .240 through 18 .84 . 330 of this chapter . Section 18 .84 .050 Approval Authority . (a) The Director shall have the authority to approve, deny or approve with conditions under Section 18 .84 .110 the following development applications in accord with the provisions of Section 18 .84 .150 of this chapter: 5 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES A ..:..,,,.w,+.w•...,..... _. .....,.... ,.. W ,._....,:.:: ..,.,.w.w.........,...i..v,»...,.„wn..s..,d.;.,.,.a...0.✓.w:( ,:vm,.,,«,:r:n.c., w..,..,.:.,J....wx,:.:.......ow.;o.;..,.e.w.:;Sve:w....r.w..,-x..wi_...a...a,..fxan.uw..,:.:,..._..:._ • 1 . Subdivisions and major Land Partitions under Chapter 17. 07 and other applicable provisions of Title 17; 2. Minor partitions under Chapter 17 .07 and other applicable provisions of Title 17; 3. Conditional use permits under Chapter 18 .72; 4 . Variances under Chapter 18.76; 5. Sensitive Lands permits under Chapter 18 .57; 6. Design Review applications under Chapter 18•.59 ; 7 . Temporary use applications under Chapter 18 .80 (see attached) . (b) The following matters shall be heard by the Hearings Body pursuant to Sections 18 .84 .160 to 18 .84 .240 of this chapter: 1 . A quasi-judicial comprehensive plan map amendment under Chapter 2 . A quasi-judicial zoning map amendment (a zone change) under Chapter 18 . 98; 3 . A development application referred to the Hearings Body by the Director pursuant to Section 18 .84 .150 (a) (3) ; 4 . An appeal of a decision made by the Director under Section 18 . 84.250 (a) or (b) of this chapter; and 5 . A Planned Development proposal under Chapter 18 .56 , except as provided above; 6 . Interpretations of the Comprehensive Plan or Titles 17 and 18 referred by the Director or requested by an interested person under Chapter 18 .84 .250 (a) ; 7 . Any other matters not specifically given to the Planning Director or Council by Titles 17 or 18 . 4 (c) The following matters shall be heard by the Council pursuant to Sections 18 .84 .160 to 18 .84 .330 of this chapter: ti 1 . Initial Plan or Zone designations , or both, made upon annexation to the city, or within one year; 6 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • 2 . Matters the Hearings Body refers to the Council under Section 18 .84 .160 (d) ; 3 . Appeal or review of a decision by the Director or Hearings Body, whether upon the Council 's own motion, or otherwise, as provided by Section 18 .84 .250 to .330. (d) Alternative recommendation for zoning map change 1 The Hearings Body may consider an alternative means of avoiding the zoning map of Tigard, in addition to that proposed in the application upon the decision of the do so, or upon its own motion. Planning Director to , g P Such alternative zoning map change shall be considered only if: 1 . Notice of such alternative be given as part of the Judicial Hearing Notice; 2. The alternative classification be in the same general category (e..g. , low density, medium density, high density residential; industrial , commercial , etc .) ; and 3 . The findings and conclusions in the decision justify such an alternative. 8. Extensions of time limits for filing final plats under Section 17.06.085 or for phased development under Section 17. 06.090. 9. Extensions of the limits for Planned Developments of up to six months under Section 18 .56 .170 . Section 18 . 84 . 060 Consolidation of Proceedings (a) Where an application is filed for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment, and in connection with the same property, another application for an action listed in Section 18 . 84.050 is made, the matters shall be consolidated into one proceeding and heard as if it were listed in Section 18 .84 .050 (b) ; provided, however, if the matter is one over which the Council has jurisdiction, the matter shall be heard under Section 18 .84 .050 (c) . Section 18 .84 .070 Notice (a) Decisions by the Director 1. Notice of an impending action on a development applica- tion pursuant to Section 18 .84 .050 (a) shall be given by the Director in the following manner: 7 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES 1 • (A) At least twenty (20) days prior to the date of final decision set forth in the notice, notice shall be sent by mail to: t 1. The applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the property which t is the subject of the application; 2. All owners of record of property within two hundred and fifty (250) feet of the property; 3. The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization, if active; 4 . Any governmental agency which is entitled to notice under an intergovernmental agreement entered into with the city which includes provision for such notice; 5 . Any person who requests, in writing, and pays a fee established by the Council. 6 . All parties to the proceeding if an appeal be taken. • (B) At least twenty (20) days prior to the date of C final decision set forth in the notice, notice shall • be posted by the applicant in a conspicuous place on the property which is the subject of the de- velopment application and in two other conspicuous places in the immediate vicinity of the property. The notices shall be provided by the Director. The word "conspicuous" means that the notice is visible and the word "Notice" can be read from a public right-of-way. The applicant shall file an affidavit of posting which shall be made part of the administrative record. (C) A notice published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the city at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of final decision set forth in the notice. An affidavit of publication shall be made part of the administrative record. (b) Commission and Council Decisions 1. Notice of an impending Administrative Action pursuant to Section 18 .89.050 (b) and 18 .84 .050 (c) shall be given by the Director in the following manner: 4 8 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES s. l' (A) At least twenty (20) days prior to the scheduled hearing date, notice shall be sent by mail to: 1', (! 1 . The applicant and all owners or contract purchasers of record of the property which I> is the subject of the application; 2 . All owners' of record of property within two E. hundred and fifty (250) feet of the property; 3. Any affected governmental agency which has is entered into an intergovernmental agreement , with the city which includes provision for such notice; - 4 . The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization, if active; +' } , 5 . Any person who requests, in writing, and pays a fee established by the Director; and t, 6 . All parties. to the proceeding if an appeal be taken. I < (B) At least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing, I notice shall be given in a newspaper of general fi , circulation in the city. An affidavit of publication shall be made part of the administrative record. ' i (C) At least twenty (20) days prior to the hearing date, notice shall be posted in a consp icuous p lace on the property which is the subject of the application and ' in two other conspicuous places in the immediate I word "conspicuous" means ' The p vicinity of t he property. that the notice is visible and that the word "Notice" ! - can be read from a public right-of-way . The Director shall file an affidavit of P osting which shall be made part of the record. Section 18 .84 .080 Contents of the Notice (a) Notice given to persons entitled to mailed or published notice pursuant to Section glhall include the following information: 1. The number and title of the file containing the application and the address and phone number of the Director's office where additional information can be obtained; 9 .- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES mr- • 2. A description of the subject property, reasonably calculated to give notice as to its actual location which shall include, but not be limited to, the metes and bounds description or the tax map desig- nations of the Washington County Assessor's office; 3. The nature of the application in sufficient detail to apprise persons entitled to notice of the • applicant' s proposal; and 4. In the case of a Decision by the Director as provided by Section 18 .84 .050 (a) , the date the decision will be made and a statement that: (A) An datt-Ln to the proposal, filed in writing before the proposed decision is final shall cause a public hearing to be held; and (B) Sets forth the last day on which the decision of the Director may be appealed. 5. In the case of an Administrative Action as provided • by Sections 18 .84 .050 (b) and 18 .84 .050 (c) . the time, place and date of the public hearing, a statement that public oral and written testimony is invited, and a statement that the hearing will be held under rules of procedure adopted by Council and available at City Hall. Section 18 .84 .090 Mechanics of Giving Notice and Failure to Ieceive .Notice (a) The records of the Washington County Assessor's office . shall be the official records used for giving notice required by this ordinance, and a person's name and address which is not on file at the time the notice mailing list is initially prepared is not a person entitled to notice under Section 18 .84 .070 of this chapter. (b) The failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not invalidate the action provided a good-faith attempt was made to notify all persons entitled to notice. The, Director shall file an affidavit of compliance with the personal notice provisions of Section 18 .84 .070 of this chapter. • (c) Personal notice is deemed given when the notice is deposited with the United States Postal Service, Published notice is deemed given on the date it is • published. Posted notice is deemed given on the date it is posted. 10 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • rr (d) In computing the length of time that notice was given, the first date notice is deemed given shall be excluded and the day of the Administrative Hearing or Decision by the Director shall be included unless the last day falls on any legal holiday or on Saturday, in which case, the last day shall be the next business day. Section 18 .84 .100 The Decision Process of the Approval Authority (a) The decision shall be based on consideration of the following factors: Proof by the applicant that the application fully complies with: 1 . The applicable comprehensive plan policies and map; 2 . The applicable standards of any provision, of this Title or Title 17, or other ordinance standard or provision of the Tigard City Code which implements the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. (b) Consideration shall also be given to : 1. Proof of a change in the neighborhood community or a mistake in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development; and 2. Factual oral testimony or written statements from the parties, other persons and other governmental agencies relevant to the existing conditions , possible negative or positive attributes of the proposal or factors in subsection (a) or subsection (b) (1) , above. (c) In all cases, the decision shall include : 1. A statement of (a) the applicable comprehensive plan provisions (policies and map designations) . and implementing ordinance provisions (standards and zoning designation) which were applied; (b) if only a portion of the applicable policies or standards were applied and parties to the pro- ceeding asserted that other policies or standards were applied, the reasons that not all policies or standards were applied; and (c) why the action complies with the plan and criteria; • 11 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • 2 . The findings df fact based on evidence in the record and conclusions of law based on the findings made. (A) The findings shall state' what were found to be the facts and how the facts relate to the factors set forth in Section 18 .84 .090 (a) ; and (B) The finding shall be supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence in-the whole record; w,: (C) The Conclusions of Law shall set forth the reasoning process from the facts found and the criteria applicable, the relationship between the two and explain how the deci ion was made in the light of the criteria applied to the facts; (D) The Approval Authority may: i. Adopt findings and conclusions contained in the staff report; ii . Adopt findings and conclusions of a- lower tribunal; iii: Adopt its own findings and conclusions; iv. Adopt findings and conclusions sub- mitted by either party; or v. Adopt findings and conclusions either with or without modification which it directs staff to prepare upon making a tentative decision upon review and an opportunity for all parties to comment upon the same . (E) The decision may be for denial, approval or approval with conditions where conditions are necessary to: i . Carry out the Tigard Comprehensive Plan; ii. Carry out the intent and purpose of the applicable implementing standards of the Tigard Code or ordinances; 12 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • • • iii. Protect the public or surrounding property from possible deleterious effects of the proposed use; or iv. Assure that adequate public services are provided as a part of the development or to assure that other required improvements ' are made. (F) The final decision shall be a decision which is in writing and which has been: Formally adopted and signed by the Approving Authority other than the Director in the case of an Administrative Action and filed with the Director and the City Recorder within ten (10) calendar days of the formal is adoption of the decision; or ii. Signed by the Director in the case of a Decision by the Director and filed as a final decision within ten (10) calendar f- days of the signed decision. Section 18 .84 .110 Conditional Approvals - Failure to Fulfill Conditionsti (a) Conditions of approval shall be fulfilled within the I,Y ' time limit set forth in the decision; or, if no time limit is set forth, within one year . Failure to a' fulfill any condition of approval within the time limitations provided may be grounds for revocation of approval, after notice and an opportunity to be heard :' as an administrative action. (b) Changes, alterations or amendments to the substance of the conditions of approval shall be processed as a Cf new administrative action. ;x r (c) The conditional approval may require the owner of the , property to sign within a time certain or if no time is designated, within a reasonable time, a contract with the City for enforcement of the conditions. The 1 I Director shall have the authority to execute such contracts on behalf of the City. If a Contract is . required by a conditional approval, no building permit shall be issued for the use covered by the applications until the executed contract is recorded in the real property records of Washington County and filed in the County Records. Such contracts shall be enforceable against the signing parties, their heirs, successors, 4 13 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES and assigns by the- City by appropriate action in law or suit in equity for the benefit of public health, safety and welfare. (d) A bond, in a form acceptable to the Director or, upon appeal or review, by the Commission or Council, or a cash deposit from the property owners or contract purchasers in such an amount as will assure compliance with the conditions imposed pursuant to this Section • may be required. Such bond or deposit shall be posted prior to the issuance of a building permit for the use covered by the application. Section 18 .84 .120 Denial of the Application - Resubmittal% (a) An application which has been denied and which on appeal has not been reversed by a higher authority; including the Land Use Board of Appeals, LCDC, or the courts, may not be resubmitted for the same or a substantially similar proposal or for the same or substantially similar action for a period of at least twelve (12) months from the date the final decision is made denying the application. Section 18 .84 .130 Notice of the Final Decision (a) Notice of a final decision shall be filed in the records of the Planning Director within ten (10) calendar days after the decision is signed and shall be mailed to the applicant, all parties to the action, and shall be available to members of the Hearings Body, and members of the Council. (b) Notice of a final decision shall contain: 1. A statement that all requested notices under Section • 18.84.070 have been given; 2 . A statement of where the adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained; 3. The date the final decision was filed; and 4 . A statement that a party to the proceeding may seek appeal or review of the decision. The statement shall explain briefly how an appeal or review can be taken, the deadlines and where information can be obtained. 14 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • (c) The final decision may grant the application with respect to less than all of the parcel which is the subject of the application. I Section 18 .84 .140 Establishment of Part Status -- Standin• to Appeal or Review (a) Party status establishes the right of a person to pursue !' an appeal or review, and any person shall be considered a party to the matter if: '? 1. The person appeared before the Approval Authority either orally or in writing in an Administrative Action proceeding or appeared in writing before the Director in a decision made by the Director; and 2. The person is a person entitled as a matter of right to notice and hearing or is a person whose interests are adversely affected or is a person who has been aggrieved by the decision. Section 18 .84 .150 A Decision by the Director (a) Pursuant to Section 18 .84 .050 (a) of this chapter, the fi Director is authorized to make certain decisions , and no hearing shall be held except where : 1 1. A written objection to approval of the development . application has been filed with the Director prior to the date the final decision is scheduled to be made as set forth in the notice. In such case, the application shall be treated as if it were filed under Section 18.84 .050 (b) of this chapter; 2 . An appeal is taken pursuant to Section 18 .84 .250 of this chapter within fourteen (14) days after notice of the final decision is given; or 3. The Director has an interest in the outcome of the decision or due to some past or present involvement with the applicant, other interested persons or in the property or surrounding property, and cannot render an impartial decision, in which case the application shall be treated as if it were filed under Section 18 .84 .050 (b) of this chapter. (b) A decision made by the Director shall be made in accord- ance with the provisions of Section 18 .84 .100 of this Ordinance, and a record shall be made which shall include: 15 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES 1. A copy of the application and all supporting infor- mation, plans, exhibits, graphics , etc . 2. All correspondence relating to the application; 3. All information considered by the Director in making the decision; 4 . The written findings, conclusions and decisions of the Director; • 5. A list of the conditions, if any are attached to the approval of the application; and • 6. A copy of the notice which was pursuant to .Section 18 .84 .070 (a) , and accompanying affidavits, and a list of all persons who were given mailed notice; and 7. A signed statement by the Director stating the nature of any past or present involvement with the applicant, other interested persons or the property if the Director makes a decision, and if there could reasonably be expected to be a challenge to the fairness of the decision. (c) A decision made by the Director shall be final unless : 1. A party to the action files a written appeal with the Director within fourteen (14) days after notice of the final decision is given, as provided by Section 18 .84 .240 to 18 .84 .280 ; or 2. The Hearings Body or the Council, on its own motion, orders review within fourteen (14) days after notice of the final decision, as provided by Section 18 .84 .250 . (d) The Director shall give notice of the final decision, as provided by Section 18 . 84 .130 of this chapter. (e) The Director may grant the application with respect to less than all of the parcel which is the subject of the application. Section 18 .84 .160 An Administrative Action - Hearings Procedure (a) Pursuant to Sections 18 .84 .050 (b) and 18 .84 .050 (1) of this chapter, certain actions are classified as Administrative Actions and the Approving Authority shall have the authority, pursuant to Rules of Procedure adopted by the Council, to conduct a public hearing; and 16 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • 1. Determine who qualifies as a party. 2. Regulate the course, sequence and decorum of the hearing. 3. Dispose of procedural requirements or similar matters. 4 . Rule on offers of proof and relevancy of evidence • and testimony. 5 . Impose reasonable limitations on the number of witnesses heard and set reasonable time limits for oral presentation, cross examination of witnesses and rebuttal testimony. 6 . Take such other action appropriate for conduct commensurate with the nature of the hearing. 7 . Approve or deny applications or approve with conditions, pursuant to Section 18 .84 .110 of this Ordinance. (b) Unless otherwise provided in the Rules of Procedure adopted by the Council, the Approving Authority shall conduct the hearing as follows : 1. Announce the nature and purpose of the hearing and summarize the rules for conducting the hearing; 2 . Recognize parties; 3. Request the Director to present the staff report, to explain any graphic or pictorial displays which are a part of the report, to read the findings, recommendations and conditions , if any, and to provide such other information as may be requested by the Approving Authority; 4 . Allow the applicant to be heard on his , hers or its own behalf or by representative; 5. Allow parties or witnesses in favor of the appli- cant's proposal to be heard; 6. Allow parties or witnesses in opposition to the applicant's proposal; 17 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES • • 7. Upon failure of any party to appear, the Approving Authority may take into consideration written material submitted by such party; 8 . Allow the parties to offer rebuttal evidence and testimony, and to respond to any additional evidence. The scope and extent of rebuttal shall be determined by the Approving Authority; 9. Conclude the hearing by announcing officially the public hearing is closed; and 10. Make a decision pursuant to Section 18 .84 .090 or take the matter under advisement pursuant to Section 18 .84 .180 of this chapter. (c) The following rules shall apply to the general conduct of the hearing: 1. The Approving Authority may ask questions at any close of the hearing,time, before the cl , and the g answers shall be limited to the substance of the question; 2. Parties or the Director must receive approval from the Approving Authority to submit directly questions to other parties or witnesses or the Director; 3. A reasonable amount of time shall be given to persons to respond to questions; 4 . No person shall testify without first receiving recognition from the Approving Authority and stating a full name and address; 5 . The approval authority may require that testimony be under oath or affirmation. 6 . Audience demonstrations such as applause, cheering and display of signs, or other conduct disruptive of the hearing shall not be permitted. Any such conduct may be cause for immediate suspension of the hearing; 7. No person shall be disorderly, abusive, or disruptive of the orderly conduct of the hearing; and 8 . The hearing body may refer- any matter for Council action on the record made before it. 18 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES . • ti. Section 18. 84 .170 Ex-Parte Communications with Approval Authority (a) Members of the Approval Authority shall not : 1 . Communicate, directly or indirectly, with any party or representative of a party in connection with any issue involved except upon giving notice and oppor- tunity for all parties to participate; nor 2 . Take notice of any communication, report, or other materials prepared by the proponents or opponents in connection with the particular case unless the parties are afforded an opportunity to contest the . material so noticed. Section 18 .84 .180 Continuation of the Hearing Notice S g (a) The Approval Authority may continue the hearing from time to time to gather additional evidence, to consider the application fully, or to give notice to additional persons. Unless otherwise provided by p y, the Approval Authority, no additional notice need be ,"' if the matter is on�.a.nued hearing he given of the c g continued to. a date certain. • Section 18 .84 .190 Subpoena or Deposition of Witnesses (a) Any person wishing to subpoena or depose witnesses to . an appeal may do so by application to the Director not less than seven (7) days prior to the hearing and a f° showing that the witness resides in Oregon, is unable or unwilling to appear and the testimony is material and relevant upon approval by the Director. Applica- f tion for subpoenas or depositions shall be made after proper completion and inclusion of those fees applicable e to civil cases, to the Washington County Circuit Court. Section 18.84 . 200 Evidence (a) All evidence offered and not objected to may be received unless excluded by the Approval Authority on its own motion; (b) Evidence received at any hearing shall be of the quality that reasonable persons rely upon in the conducting of their everyday affairs; t `'; 1 (c) No person shall present irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly i ~ repetitious testimony or evidence; Z,.,.`{ i' l 19 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES i'' • p 0, , (d) Evidence shall be received and notice may be taken • of those facts in a manner similar to that provided for in contested cases before state administrative agencies pursuant to ORS 183.450, except as other- wise provided for herein; and (e) Formal rules of evidence, as used in courts of law, shall not apply. Section 18 .84 .210 Official Notice (a) The Approval Authority may take official notice of the following: 1 . All facts which are judicially noticeable. Such noticed facts ' shall be stated and made part of the record. 2. The Comprehensive Plan and other officially adopted plans, implementing ordinances, rules and regulations of the City of Tigard and the compre- hensive plans and implementing ordinances of other planning authorities within the Metropolitan Service District Boundary. (b) Matters officially noticed need not be established by evidence and may be considered by the Approving Authority in the determination of the application. Section 18 .84 .,220 Participation in the Decision-Voting (a) Each member of the Approval Authority shall be impartial and any member having any substantial past or present involvement with the applicant, other interested persons, i property, or having any pre- hearing property or surrounding p operty, h g y pr hearing contacts, shall state for the record the nature of their involvement or contacts, and shall either: 1 . State that they are not prejudiced by the involvement or contacts and will participate and vote on the matter; or 2 . State that they are prejudiced by the involvement or contact and will withdraw from participation in the matter. In the event of a challenge to the impartiality of a member of the approval authority, the remaining members shall decide the issue of participation. Such challenge shall be raised at the earliest possible opportunity.. 20 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES Mr (b) An affirmative vote by a majority of the members of the Approval Authority who are present is required to approve an application or to amend, modify or reverse a decision on appeal. Section 18 .84 .230 Record of Proceeding (a) A verbatim record of the proceeding shall be made by stenographic or mechanical means. It shall not be necessary to transcribe testimony except as provided for in Section 18 .84 .300 . The minutes or transcript of testimony, or other evidence of the proceedings, shall be part of the record. (b) All exhibits received shall be marked so as to provide identification upon review. c The official record shall include: 1. All materials, pleadings, memoranda, stipulations and motions submitted by any party to the proceeding and recorded or considered by the Hearings Officer as evidence; 2. All materials submitted by the Director to the Approval Authority with respect to the application; 3. The transcript of the hearing, if requested by the Council or a party or the minutes of the hearing, or other evidence of the proceedings before the Hearings Body; 4 . The written findings, conclusions , decision, and, if any, conditions of approval, of the Hearings Body; and 5 . Argument by the parties or their legal representa- tives permitted pursuant to Section 18:84 .290 at the time of review before the Council; 6 . All correspondence relating to the application; and 7. A copy of the notice which was given as provided by Section of this chapter, accompanying affidavits and list of persons who were sent mailed notice. Section 18 .84 .240 The Effective Date of the Decision Appeal or Review (a) Any decision made under the provisions of this chapter shall become final fifteen days from the date notice of 21 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES the final decision is given, as provided in Section 18 .84 .130 of this chapter, unless an appeal or reivew is taken pursuant to Section 18 .84.250 of this chapter. Section 18.84 .250 Authority to Appeal or Seek Review of a Decision (a) Any decision made by the Director in the interpretation of the comprehensive plan or its implementing ordinance, as provided by Chapter 18 .84 .050 (b) , may be appealed to the Council pursuant to the authority granted by Section 18 .84 .050 (1) of this Ordinance by: 1 1. Any party to the decision within fourteen (14) days of notice of the final decision; or 2. The Hearing Body or the Council, upon its own motion, by resolution filed within fourteen (14) days of notice of the final decision. (b) Any decision made by the Director on a development application as provided by Section 18 .84 .050 (a) may be appealed to the Hearings Body by: 1. Any party to the decision within fourteen (14) days of notice of the final decision; 2. The Hearings Body or the Council, upon its own motion, by resolution filed within fourteen (14) days of notice of the final decision. (c) Any decision made by the Hearings Body as provided by Section 18 .84 .050 (b) may be appealed by: 1. Any party to the decision within fourteen (14) days of notice of the final decision; 2. The Council, on its own motion, by resolution filed within fourteen (14) days of notice of the final decision. Section 18 .84 .260 Notice of Appeal or Review (a) The Notice of Appeal or Review shall contain: 1. A reference to the application sought to be appealed or reviewed; 2. A statement as to how the petitioner qualifies es a party; 3. The specific grounds for the appeal or review; and 22 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES - 4 . The date of the final decision on the. action. • (b) The appeal or review application shall be accompanied by the required fee. (c) The appeal or review shall be limited to the grounds listed under subsection (a) (3) of this section. Section 18.84 .270 Persons Entitled to Notice on Appeal or Review Type of Notice (a) Upon appeal or review, notice shall be given by the Director as provided by Section 18.84.070 of this chapter. Section 18. 84 . 280 Notice on Appeal or Review (a) Notice shall be as provided by Section 18 .84 .080 of this chapter. Section 18 .84 .290 Type of Appeal or Review Hearing - Scope of Review (a) The appeal of a decision made by the Director under Section 18 . 84 .050 (a) and Section 18 .84 .150 of this chapter shall be de novo and conducted as if brought under Section 18 .04 .050 (b) . (b) The review of a decision by the Approval Authority by Council shall be: 1. Confined to the record of the proceedings as provided in Section 18 .84 .230 of this chapter; is P • 2 . Limited to the grounds relied upon in the Notice of Appeal as provided in Section 18 .84 .260 (a) of this chapter, and conducted in accordance with the provisions of Sections 18 , 84 , 100 , 130 , 160 to 210 ', of . 230 to .250 ..of this chapter. 3. The subject of written argument only. Such argument shall be submitted not less than five (5) days prior to Council consideration. Section 18 .84 .300 Transcripts (a) The petitioner for appeal shall request that a transcript be made of the proceedings before the Hearings Body. j The Director shall estimate the cost, and the person , requesting the transcript shall bear the cost. The person making the request shall deposit the estimated ' 23 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES A cost with the Director within five days of requesting the transcript, and any excess shall be returned. (b) Failure to pay the costs of the transcript shall be grounds for dismissal. Section 18 .84 .310 The Council Decision - Time Limit and Authority to Change the Decision (a) The Approval Authority shall act upon the appeal within 60 days of filing unless such. time limitation is ex- tended with the consent of the parties; provided that, unless otherwise ordered by the Hearings Body or Council, the Director shall take such appeals/ in the order in which they are filed with him; and (b) The Approving Authority may affirm, reverse or modify the decision which is the subject of the appeal; however, the decision shall be made in accordance • with the provisions of Section 18 .84 .100 of this chapter; or (c) The Approval Authority may remand the matter if it is satisfied that testimony or other evidence could not have been presented or was not available at the hearing. In deciding to remand the matter, the Approval Authority shall consider and make findings and conclusions respect- ing: 1. The prejudice to parties; 2. The convenience or availability of evidence at the time of the initial hearing; 3. The surprise to opposing parties; 4. The date notice was given to other parties as to an attempt to admit; and 5 . The competency, relevancy and materiality of the • proposed testimony or other evidence. Section 18 .84 .320 Council Participation in the Decision and Voting (a) The provisions of Section 18 .84 .220 of this chapter• apply and, in addition: 1. Only those members who have reviewed the entire record shall vote; and 24 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES p 2. A majority of the members of the Approval Authority must vote affirmatively to amend, reverse or remand the decision. (b) Upon failure of a majority of the members of the Approval Authority to agree, the decision which is the subject of appeal or review shall stand. Section 18 .84 .330 Final Council Action; Effective Date; Notice of Rehearing (a) Council action on appeal or review, known as a "final order, " shall be effective on the fifteenth day from the filing of the Council action with the City Recorder, unless the Council otherwise provides in its final order. (b) The final order of the Council shall be stayed upon the filing of a petition for rehearing, which shall be filed within fourteen (14) days of the filing of the Council 's final order and contain the matters set forth in Section 18 .84 .260 . No fee need accompany such petition. (c) The Council shall decide whether to grant such a petition at its next regular or special meeting. (d) No person failing to apply for such Petition for Review shall have been deemed to have exhausted administrative remedies . It is the purpose of this section to provide parties every remedy possible, prior to further legal challenges . To that end, the filing of a Petition for Review is a condition precedent for further administrative or judicial review. . (e) No time period for challenging Council action shall commence until the Council has disposed of the Petition for Rehearing. (f) Within seven (7) days of the filing of the final order of Council, or upon a final order on the grant of a petition for rehearing, the City Recorder shall give notice of the final order to all parties to the proceed- ing, informing them of the date of filing, the opportunity for further remedy by petition for rehearing, the decision rendered, and where a copy may be found. 25 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES