Planning Commission Packet - 11/09/1982 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PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and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
NOVEMBER 9 , 1982 - 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 October 19 , 1982 meeting.
4. Planning Commission Discussion
5. Public Hearings
5 .1 Subdivision S 6-82 Century 21 Homes , Inc. NPO # 7
5 . 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT - CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
6 . New Business
7. Other Business
8. Adjournment
T I G A R D P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N
November 9, 1982
Regular Meeting Minutes
1. President Tepedino called the meeting to order at 7:32 P.M. The meeting
was held at Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room, 10865 S.W. Walnut
Street, Tigard, Oregon.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: President Tepedino; Commissioners Clifford Speaker,
Phil Edin, Mark Christen, Deane Leverett, Bonnie Owens and Roy Bonn. Don
Moen arrived at 7:35 P.M. Excused absence: Richard Helmer.
STAFF: William Monahan, Director of Planning & Development; Jeremy
Coursolle, Associate Planner; Diane Jelderks, Clerk Typist.
3. The minutes from October 19, 1982 were considered. Commissioner Speaker
stated he had gone over the minutes with staff correcting miscellaneous
spelling errors. Commissioner Speaker moved and President Tepedino
seconded to approve the minutes as corrected.
4. COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
o Director of Planning and Development Monahan announced he had received
a letter of resignation from Commissioner Richard Helmer.
Commissioner Moen arrived at 7:35 P.M.
o President Tepedino invited citizens to apply for the open position as
Planning Commissioner.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
o President Tepedino opened the Public Hearing by reading the usual
statement of authority for the procedure to be followed in the meeting.
5.1 SUBDIVISION S 6-82 Century 21 Home, Inc. NPO #7
Request for approval of a subdivision on 27.13 acres of property into
110 single family lots of approximately 5,000 square feet each and a
12 acre parcel to be developed at a later date. The property is
located on the east side of S.W. 135th Avenue, south. of Scholls Ferry
Road. (Washington Co. Tax Map 1S1 33 DC tax lots 100, 300, & 500 and
1S1 33D tax lot 300.)
o Director of Planning & Development Monahan gave background information
and made staff's recommendation for approval with conditions. He also
distributed maps of the subdivision.
o NPO REPORT - No one appeared to speak.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
o APPLICANT - Bob Miller, Century 21 Representative, 5164 Boss Ct. ,
Salem, Oregon, stated the zone change planned development had been
approved by City Council by Ordinance 80-56.
He continued that the biggest problem with this development was its
size. Originally, City Council has requested that 3.8 acres of land
be dedicated for a park; now staff is requesting the park to be
developed. They had expected to install water and sewer with Phase I,
which consists of 26 lots. However, park improvements could increase
cost to as much as $88,000.00. He did not feel this is what the City
Council had intended and requested that the Planning Commission delete
this condition, or for the requirement to be placed on Phase II as
Phase I does not come near the park. He requested that Condition
Number One be changed from building permits to occupancy permits.
Streets would be developed with Phase II along with the sewer. This
way construction could be accomplished but would allow time for warmer
weather to pour concrete. He would like to be able to construct Phase
Land take the issue of the development of the park to the City
Council.
o Russ Kruger, 14655 N.W. Hunters Drive, Beaverton, Oregon, stated he
was the owner of the property and had spent considerable time to get
the property annexed and zoned into the City. During this whole
process, nothing was said about improving the park. He felt this was
an unfair burden to place on the developer, especially because of the
economic conditions.
CROSS EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL
o Discussion followed between Commissioners, applicant and staff as to
which lots were included in Phase I of the development, what was
expected as far as development of the park, what was expected to be
completed as far as public improvements before issuing building
permits, what was City Council's intent as far as dedication and
development of park area, and difficulty of bonding for such a large
development.
o Commissioner Moen questioned if the multi-family portion would be
coming before the Commission. Staff responded that the multi-family
portion would be handled through the Site Design Review Process, which
the Director of Planning and Development makes approval.
o Commissioner Speaker questioned if there wasn't a park development
charge that the developer had to pay for the development of parks.
Director of Planning & Development Monahan responded that there was,
however, the City did not have enough funds for development of parks.
o Commissioner Speaker questioned the applicant when he would be
constructing Phase II. The applicant stated that construction for
Phase I would happen in the spring and Phase II would be the end of
next year, but more than likely the following spring.
PAGE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1982
o Lengthy discussion followed regarding developing the park with Phase
II, which streets should be completed with Phase I and which streets
with Phase II, and what was required for park development in
relationship to the Master Park Plan.
o Commissioner Edin stated he had a psychological problem with Condition
Number One; he felt it was too burdensome. He stated previous
developers were not expected to complete full street improvement in
Phase II of the development prior to construction of Phase I. He
agreed with the applicant that bonding for public improvements would
be difficult. He did feel that grading the park area would be
appropriate.
o John Morris, 11900 S.W. Morning Hill, Tigard, questioned if 130th
Street was included to be improved with this development. Discussion
followed regarding how much of 130th would be improved. Mr. Morris
was concerned with the amount of congestion on 130th Street to Scholls
Ferry Road.
o Mr. Kruger stated that 130th was included in the LID study along with
135th, Walnut, Scholls Ferry, and Murray Road.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION
o Commissioner Bonn questioned if there were going to be additional
lots. The applicant responded there would only be minor changes, such
as adjustment of side lot lines. There would be no increases.
o Commissioner Bonn felt there could be some kind of trade off for park
improvement, basic grading and seeding. Park improvements are to be
done when the development is 75% completed.
o There was further discussion regarding bonding and park improvements.
o Commissioner, Leverett had problems with the improvement being done in
one fell swoop. He favored grading and seeding the park area. It did
bother him if the City Council intended one thing to happen and they
did another.
o Commissioner Moen stated in the past public improvements were
completed in phases. Park improvements were being requested by staff
to be bonded. He didn't feel the Commission was in a position to
decide what the intent of the City Council was. The applicant has the
right to appeal. He suggested the staff and applicant get together to
see what the Master Park Plan calls for. He questioned if the
Planning Commission would be seeing Phase II. Staff stated they would
not because of the Site Design Review process.
o President Tepedino commented when a development moves forward the
developer takes risk going through the process, with the burden on the
developer. Dedication of land for a park is fine, but who will pay
PAGE 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1982
for what, and who will maintain it. He felt there was a lack of
evidence in the application showing standards as to what a park is.
He was concerned with what is the developer's requirements. He felt
this was the Park Board's problem. He thought that maybe the Park
Board should do a presentation for the Planning Commission.
o Commissioner Owens questioned if the appropriate number of units per
acre is accurate and appropriate for the zoning. Staff confirmed it
was correct. The applicant stated all lots would be approximately
5,000 square feet.
o Commissioner Speaker moved and Commissioner Leverett seconded to
approve Subdivision S 6-82 based on staff findings and recommendations
with modification to conditions as follows: (discussion followed
regarding appropriate changes in conditions)
CONDITIONS:
1. Public improvements for each phase shall be constructed prior to
the issuance of any occupancy permits.
2. A dedication document including a legal description shall be
recorded with Washington County for the 3.4 acre park land. The
dedication document will be reviewed and approved by the City
prior to recording.
3. The developer shall submit an application for site design review
for Phase II prior to issuance of any Buildings Permits on Phase
II.
4. The applicant shall submit a plan for park improvements prior to
issuance of any building permits on Phase II. The park plan shall
be approved by the Director of Planning and Development in
accordance with presently established park standards. In
addition, all park improvements shall be completed or bonded for
100% of the cost thereof prior to issuance of any building permits
on Phase II.
Motion carried six to two by Commissioners present. Commissioners
Edin and Moen voting no.
5.2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT - CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
o Associate Planner Coursolle outlined the documents and the number of
meetings which have been planned. He explained that these elements to
the Comprehensive Plan were legislative in nature and would require
the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council.
The element being reviewed tonight is Citizen Involvement which
reflects LCDC Goal #1. The element was then reviewed page by page
with Commissioners making comments and corrections.
o President Tepedino requested Commissioner Speaker, as a member of the
subcommittee, to give a synopsis of this report since he previously
reviewed the report.
PAGE 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1982
o Commissioner Speaker stated the only thing he had to add was that he
felt that when development was being proposed on the boundary of the
NPO's that the neighboring NPO should also be notified of the
application.
o Commissioner Moen questioned whether the boundaries of the NPO's could
be changed. Staff stated the City Council had the authority to change
the boundaries.
o Commissioner Moen moved and Commissioner Owens seconded to approve the
draft as amended and forward to the City Council.
The motion carried unanimously by members of the Commission present.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
o Associate Planner Coursolle stated that Commissioners Speaker, Edin,
and Owens are on a subcommittee and would be reviewing the
Comprehensive Development Code prior to the Planning Commission
meeting in which it is considered.
o President Tepedino requested that staff prepare a letter of
appreciation for Richard Helmer and supply him with a list of
applicants for the open position.
7. Meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
D ane� der P ann ngSecretary
A 'TE
F.J. T.pe. no, P anning Commission President
II' (File 0030P)
PAGE 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1982
PLANNING COMMISSION ROLL CALL
MEETING
Date
Frank Tepedino
•
Clifford Speaker )(- •
Don Moen A
Mark Christen / / f tAi
-•■
atAtal earjammieW A
• ? Richard Helmer orC)
'Bonnie Owens
I° Roy Bonn
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9, 1982 - 7 :30 P .M.
FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LECTURE ROOM
10865 S.W.; Walnut Street, Tigard, Oregon
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
5 . 1 SUBDIVISION S 6-82 CENTURY 21 HOMES, INC. NPO # 7s
A request by Century 21 Homes to subdivide three lots
totaling 27 .13 acres. 15. 13 acres will be subdivided
into 110 single family building lots of approximately
5,000 sq. ft. each. The remaining 12 acres will be
developed as multi-family at a later date. The zoning
designation on the single family portion is R-5 single
family. The plan designation on the multi-family portion
is a A-12 multi-family. The property is located on the
east side of S.W. 130th south of Scholls Ferry Road.
(Wash. Co. Tax Map 1Sl 33DC lots 100, 300 & 500 . )
5 . 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT:
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
DATE /1
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIRR NAME
and note their address. on this sheet.: (Please Print your name)
ITEM/DESCRIPTION: 5• / ti.)111-1-ere,
(a- a SLtL3Oa)Is/c)r0 VP() -4a4 7
Covti-uf-46e
PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against)
Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation
+
•Iy' 5 - ri
I
a 4
�-----
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM 5.1
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
November 9, 1982 - 7:30 p.m.
Fowler Junior High School Lecture Room
10865 S.W. Walnut, Tigard, Oregon
November 3, 1982
A. FINDINGS OF FACT
CASE: S 6-82 Subdivision Winterlake NPO #7
REQUEST: For approval of a subdivision on 27.13 acres of property into
110 single family lots of approximately 5,000 square feet each
and a 12 acre parcel to be developed at a later date. The
property is located on the east side of S.W. 135th Avenue south
of Scholls Ferry Road. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 33DC Tax Lots
100, 300 & 500 and 1S1 33D Tax Lot 300)
RECOMMENDATION: Based on information submitted by the applicant,
applicable NPO goals and policies and staff's field
investigation, staff recommends approval of S 6-82.
APPLICANT: David L. Oringdulph
7412 S.W. Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy. #112
Portland, Oregon 97225
OWNER: Russell A. Krueger & George & Donna Scott
4320 S.W. 110th Ave. 12275 S.W. 2nd Avenue
Beaverton, Oregon 97005 Beaverton, Oregon 97005
SITE LOCATION: East side of S.W. 135th between Scholls Ferry Road and
Walnut Street. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 1S1 33D Tax Lot 300 and
1Sl 33DC Tax Lots 100, 300 & 500)
SITE SIZE: 27.13 acres
NPO COMMENT: NPO #7 has not responded in writing to this application
request.
BACKGROUND: On June 23, 1980, the City Council approved a Planned
Development for Winterlake Subdivision. On July 7, 1981 the
Tigard Planning Commission granted a one-year time extension
to Century 21 Homes for approval of the Planned Development
with new lotting and a minor change. On July 20, 1982, the
Planning Commission approved a 6-month time extension for
approvals on Winterlake with the condition that a
subdivision application would be filed within 6 months.
AREA CHARACTERISTICS: The surrounding area has been designated on the
comprehensive plan for single family residential
uses. The property to the south has been developed
as the Morning Hill Subdivision. The property is
vacant.
STAFF REPORT
S 6-82
Page 2
SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is vacant and grass covered sloping to the
east. There are a few trees on the western and
eastern boundaries of the site.
APPLICABLE PLANNING CRITERIA AND STAFF ANALYSIS
1. LCDC GOALS AND GUIDELINES
a. Citizen Involvement - The purpose of this goal is to provide the
opportunity for citizens to be involved in all aspects of the
planning process. In the case of this application, all owners of
record with 250 feet received notice of the time and date of the
public hearing on this matter. In addition, a public notice was
published in the Tigard Times on October 28, 1982.
b. Land Use Planning - All applicable LCDC Statewide Goals and
Guidelines, NPO #7 Plan Policies and City of Tigard Municipal Code
provisions were considered in review of this application.
c. Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources - One
of the purposes of this goal is to ensure the provision of open space
is for area residents. The applican t t dedicating 3.4 acres to be
developed as a part of the existing Summerlake Park.
d. Housing - The purpose of this goal is to ensure affordable housing
and a wide variety of housing types for the citizens of the state.
The subdivision proposed by the applicant offers single family
dwellings on small lots which may reduce housing costs.
e. Public Facilities - The purpose of this goal is to ensure that public
facilities to the site are adequate. Sewer is available from an 8"
line east of the site at S.W. 130th. There is water service in
Summerlake Subdivision to the northeast and Morning Hill Subdivision
to the south. The Tigard Water District assumes that the 6" water
line serving Morning Hill and Summerlake Subdivisions will be
connected via 130th to serve Winterlake.
NPO #7 POLICIES
POLICY 2. Residential subdivisions 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.
POLICY 3. Development will coincide with the provision 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 or county standards.
POLICY 4. 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.
1
STAFF REPORT
S 6-82
Page 3
POLICY 5. In recognition of the need to combat rising housing costs by
facilitating efficient development patterns, "efficiency housing" methods
such as attached single family homes and minimum lot sizes of 5,000 square
feet are deemed appropriate west of 121st when they are included as a
portion of a larger single family development. The intent of this policy
is to provide the opportunity for home ownership not to expand the amount
of rental housing provided for in the urban medium density areas.
POLICY h
OLICY 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.
The density proposed conforms to NPO #7 Plan Policy 5. Public facilities and
services are available to serve the site. The applicant is developing the
project as a planned development to include single family and multi family
units. In addition, the applicant will be contributing to the development of
Summerlake Park with a dedication and improvements on a 3.4 acre parcel.
TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE PROVISIONS
17.16.100 Tentative approval.
(a) Within sixty days of the date of submission of the preliminary plat, the
Planning Commission. will review the plan reports of the agencies listed in
Section 17.16.090 and may give tentative approval of the preliminary plat as
submitted or may modify the plat or, if disapproved, shall express the
Planning Commission's disapproval and reasons therefor.
(b) No tentative plan for a proposed subdivision and no tentative plan for a
major partition shall be approved unless:
(1) Streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plats of
subdivisions or maps of major partition already approved for adjoining
property as to width, general direction and in all other respects, unless
the City determines it to be in the public interest to modify the street
or road pattern.
(2) Streets and roads held for private use are clearly indicated on the
tentative plan and all reservations or restrictions relating to such
private roads and streets are set forth thereon.
(3) The tentative plan complies with the comprehensive plan and
applicable zoning regulations of the City then in effect.
(4) No tentative plat of a subdivision or map of a major partition shall
be approved unless there will exist adequate quantity and quality of water
and an adequate sewage disposal system to support the proposed use of the
land described in the proposed plat.
STAFF REPORT
S 6-82
Page 4
STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION
After reviewing the proposed plat and making a field investigation, staff
recommends approval of S 6-82. Staff finds that the applicant's proposal
conforms to NPO #7 policies and is compatible with the surrounding land uses.
Staff further recommends the following conditions be attached to approval of
S 6-82:
1. Public improvements for all phases shall be constructed prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
2. A dedication document including a legal description shall be recorded
with Washington County for the 3.4 acre park land. The dedication
document will be reviewed by the City prior to recording.
3. The developer shall submit an application for site design review for
Phase II prior to issuance of any Building Permit on Phase II.
4. The applicant shall submit a plan for park improvements prior to
issuance of any Building Permits. The lan approved shall be approved b
P plan P by
the Director of Planning n g and Development.
In addition,
all park
improvements shall be completed or bonded for 100% of the cost
thereof prior to issuance of any Building Permits.
Prepared by: Approved by:
Eli,lildfr th A. Ne n William A. Monahan Dat d
Associate Planner Director of Planning
and Development
pm
(File 0044P)
November 4, 1982
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Department of Planning & Development
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Report: Citizen Involvement
The Comprehensive Plan Report: Citizen Involvement is the first of eleven
comprehensive plan and support documents which will be reviewed for adoption
Briefly, this report contains information about the various ways in which
citizens can get involved in the planning process. It also lists the policies
and implementation strategies which the City and community will use to main-
tain the citizen involvement process.
This report has been reviewed by the Neighborhood Planning Organizations and
the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI}. It was suggested by these groups
that the Citizen Involvement Report be forwarded to the Planning Commission for
public review.
At the end of the Citizen Invovlement Report, staff has included an appendix.
The information for the appendix will be inserted once the report is sent to
LCDC for acknowledgement. Please refer to the table of contents for the type
of information that will be included in the appendix.
Action
The CCI and staff are requesting that the Planning Commission review the Com-
prehensive Plan Report: Citizen Involvement during a public hearing and foward
your recommendation to the City Council .
N
c .
,.
0 N
T
Comprehensive Plan Report
DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
y CITY OF TIQA RD
WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
TIGARD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
JUNE, 1982
Revised October 1982
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
Wilbur Bishop - Mayor Frank Tepedino - President
John Cook Donald Moen
Tom Brian Richard Helmer
Nancie Stimler Mark Christen
Kenneth Scheckla Roy Bonn
Phil Eden
Bonnie Owens
Cliff Speaker
Deane Leverett
COMMITTEE FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
Wilbur Bishop =- Mayor
Frank Tepedino - Planning Commission President
Ronald Jordan - Park Board Chairman
John A. Butler - NPO #1
Bruce Clark - NPO #2
Lou Ane Mortensen - NPO #3
Gordon S. Martin - NPO #4
Chris Vanderwood -• NPO #5
Phillip A. Pasteris - NPO #6
Nancy Robbins - NPO #7
CITY STAFF
Bob Jean, City Administrator
Bill Monahan, Planning and Development Director
Jeremy Coursolle, Associate Planner
Liz Newton, Associate Planner
Frank Currie, Public Works Director
Patt Martin, Word Processor
DRAFT: For Disscussion Purposes Only
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
SECTION Page
Introduction 1
Background 2
Citizen Participation in
Comprehensive Planning 3
Communication and Technical
Information 4
Adoption of Comprehensive Plan 5
Finding, Policies and Implementing
Strategies 5
APPENDIX 8
LCDC approval of Tigard's Citizen Involvement
program and accompanying City Resolutions 8 & 9
Committee for Citizen Involvement
(Members) 21
Neighborhood Planning Organization
NPO #1 22
NPO #2 23
NPO #3 24
NPO #4 25
NPO #5 26
NPO #6 27
NPO #7 28
Revised Neighborhood Planning
Organization Resolution 20
Committee for Citizen Involvement
Evaluation 25
List of Committee for Citizen •Involvement"
meeting dates and agendas 26
List of Neighborhood Planning Organization
meeting dates and agendas
-2-
INTRODUCTION
This report provides background information area a citizen involvement program
for Tigard in relation to LCDC Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement. In addition, it
recommends findings and policies to meet Goal 1 requirements.
The Goal 1 statement reads: "to develop a citizen involvement program that
insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases , of the
planning process".
"The governing body charged with preparing and adopting a comprehensive
plan shall adopt and publicize a program for citizen involvement that
clearly defines the procedures by which the general public will be
involved in the ongoing land use planning process.
The citizen involvement program shall be appropriate to the scale of the
planning effort. The program shall provide for continuity of citizen
participation and of information that enables citizens to identify and
comprehend the issues
This report begins with a brief history of Tigard's citizen participation with
the initial resolutions of the Neighborhood Planning Organizations (NPO) City
Ordinance 75-60, and the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI), City
Ordinance 75-61. It is followed by a discussion of citizen involvement, and
suggests methods for continuing citizen participation throughout
implementation and updating of the City's comprehensive plan.
-3-
BACKGROUND
FORMULATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
Citizen interest in the planning process and the formulation of community
goals began with adoption of Tigard's Community Plan in July of 1971 (City
Ordinance 71-15). In 1973, the City Administrator and the City Council
recognized the need for the formation of Neighborhood Planning Organizations
(NP0): to develop communication channels between the citizens of Tigard and
the city officials increasing the livability of the community.
The City of Tigard was divided into seven neighborhood areas, the boundaries
of which were defined by the Planning Commission. These boundaries may be
altered if agreed upon by the affected neighborhood planning organizations.
In 1975, the City Council passed a resolution formally recognizing
Neighborhood Planning Organization and the Committee for Citizen Involvement
as the official citizen involvement structures within the City of Tigard. The
purpose of these organizations is to act as advisory groups to the Planning
Commission and City Council on all matters affecting their neighborhood and •
city.
The first Neighborhood Planning Organization, NPO #1, had their neighborhood
plat, adopted by the City Council in May of 1974. Briefly, this plan included
the goals of the community which were adopted by the city in the Tigard
Community Plan in 1971, a description of the physical characteristics of the
neighborhood area, a land use map and use descriptions, area problems and
policies to alleviate those problems, traffic generation, and street standards.
Since 1974, the remaining Neighborhood Planning Organization' had their
neighborhood plans adopted by the City Council; the last of which was NPO #7
in February of 1979.
After adoption of the NPO plans, some interest diminished d few of the NPO
groups became inactive. Presently, most of the seven plus members Neighborhood
Organizations meet on a monthly basis to discuss such topics as development
proposals within their area, procedural matters within the NPO Organization
and future planning needs within their planning area inside and outside the
existing city limits, yet inside the Tigard urban planning area.
The City is currently in the process of reestalishing interest of the
membership those Neighborhood Planning Organizations that have been inactive
in the past few years.
In order to ensure that communication channels stay open between the general
populas, the Neighborhood Planning Organizations, the Planning Commission, the •
City Council and the City officials, the Council also initiated a Committee
for Citizen's Involvement. The Committee's goals and definitions were further
revised and updated in 1979. Briefly, this committee includes the chairperson
of each Neighborhood Planning Organization, the Planning Commission
Chairperson, a member of Council/a Park Board member and members of the City
staff.
-4-
FIGURE I
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION BOUNDARIES
II
. . G=. •- alt l>', t I�I!
•
l/GARD 8 V/C//►1/rY ► r .
'L..kg? 7E10,6 Mr-s'qC.",.a.i - .
.. . \ . r.„.„..:.:1)1.1 . .,,,.,. ..
J ,; � � t
I.;
=117c- , e , ,6 .
1.cam? "' ... • - r,,
\gal f51 ", roil • t tH 9.440p 4,N .40,
tc -. i 4,...•-•' • . iv. -1` 4/pf• ' '. "A"4. :::.11:14.:11:il . 4
� i,, ;� °rte r.� \':• +.i U,c r
:fr:,--lr i' „
'III 11 —._.__ rill'. ,
.,,..: 1,..s. : . , -to . . 1
i
a
, -/-719:: ,..' .„.. .
. `' r, Wig, tom a, ; I, `\.,..„; i . ••.1 , •. ,..,..- ..,., /, A • ..
---.4---\\ "--,,-11 .: v.'it;' ,■-r.: .::.
1 ''''' 11 1,1, ,"\ i)' '11 -. '
^ s/ hat.r: , *,, 1 I
•1 _ �;, 111/!!!
1
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
Throughout the existence of the Neighborhood Planning Organizations, the 1
original goals and policies of the Tigard Community Plan and each of the
neighborhood plans have been reviewed and implemented in all aspects of the
land use decisions. As the City of Tigard grew, the overall Community Plan
remained a static document and subsequently the individual neighborhood plans
as adopted became "mini" Comprehensive Plans. While these neighborhood plans
met the immediate neighborhood needs, they did not address or implement the
overall growth needs of the community.
In late 1981, the City Council, staff and the Neighborhood Planning
Organizations saw the need to revise and, update the community's Comprehensive
Plan.
For most of the elements of the Comprehensive plan, staff or consultants will
be collecting data and writing the draft report containing analysis, and
recommended findings and policies, which will be reviewed by the Neighborhood
Planning Organizations, the Committee for Citizen Involvement, the Planning
Commission and the City Council. It is anticipated that these groups will
examine and modify each element draft at the committee and public hearing
levels.
OTHER CITIZEN COMMITTEES
In addition to the Neighborhood Planning Organization, there are several other
active citizen committees in Tigard. Citizens can serve on the Budget
Committee which reviews the annual operating budget for the City, the Park
Board which advises the City on all matters pertaining, to parks and
recreation, the Tigard Downtown Committee and the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency
Advisory Committee which are in the process of reviewing the Downtown
Revitalization Plan. Other committees include: the Library Board and the
Civic Center Committee.
LAND USE EDUCATION
Those citizens who have participated in the formulation of the existing
Neighborhood Plans have received an informal land use planning education.
, it is anticipated that all of those people who became involved with the
revisions of the Comprehensive Plan will receive informal land use planning
education. Although the City does not conduct formal classes on land use
planning, the City officials do conduct work sessions with the City Council,
Planning Commission and Neighborhood Planning Organizations to update and
increase their knowledge on land use matters that may affect the Tigard
community.
-5-
FIGURE II
PARTICIPATION IN THE PLANNING PROCESS
Participants
Public
Planning process steps Citizens Planners officials
1. Assessing community values X 0
2. Determining goals and objectives X 0 X
3. Data collection X
4. Design of criteria and standards X
5. Developing alternative plans X
6. Choosing an alternative X 0 X
7. Detailed design of operational plan X
8. Modification/approval of operational
plan X 0 X
9. Implementation X X
10. Feedback X X X
X = Major role
0 = Facilitating or supporting role
Source: The Practice of Local Government Planning, International City Management Association, 1979.
Citizen participation is continually .encouarged at all levels of decision making in the
planning process: in-house discusssions, administrative(Planning Director) decisions,
Hearings Officer proceedings, Planning Commission public hearings and City Council de
novo public hearings.
COMMUNICATION AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION
All public me��egtings are announced in the Community Calendar section of the
Tigard Times,O''Portland Oregonian and taed-3aarnal. Public hearings and
other citizen sponsored meetings and workshops displayed in these circulations
are often accompanied by a newspaper article explaining the meeting's issues.
Meeting announcements are mailed to all affected property owners and
applicants for all of the public meetings. Through the revision process of
the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, staff proposes to send the
various citizen groups newsletters which describe the Planning Commission's or
City Council's, progress. To encourage attendance at neighborhood meetings
during the revision process, staff is prepared to assist any citizen
organization to advertise these meetings in the affected neighborhoods. All
public documents concerning land use planning are available for distribution,
or on a loan basis from the Planning Department and will also be placed in the
City Library. Minutes of meetings are sent to committees and hearing
authority members, and are available at the Planning Department for public
review.
The technical information available to local citizens includes assistance by
City staff and the published material and files which form the background of
the Comprehensive Plan. Reference material will be available at the City
Planning Department.
-6-
ADOPTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The review of the Comprehensive Plan is initiated at the NPO level. Staff is
encouraged that many of the major issues that affect the City regarding
comprehensive planning can be resolved at the NPO level. At the Planning
Commission and City Council levels, the various Comprehensive Plan elements
will be presented individually at public hearings where additional citizen
comments will be sought. The Planning Commission will be taking all of the
citizen and Neighborhood Planning Organization comments into full
consideration, and after further reviewing each element, will recommend
elements of the Comprehensive Plan to the City Council. The Council will then
review each particular element, modify it, if necessary, and will then adopt
each element and incorporate them into the Comprehensive Plan.
IMPLEMENTION, EVALUATION AND REVISION 001
Citizens will have the opportunity to comment as legislation is developed and
adopted that implements the Comprehensive Plan. One of the major implementing
tools of the Comprehensive Plan will be the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision
codes, which will be revised simultaneously with the Comprehensive Plan
development and made consistent with that plan. Additional public hearings
will also be held for those ordinance revisions. As the Comprehensive Plan is
periodically evaluated and revised, citizens will have the opportunity to
comment prior to the adoption of any amendments of the Comprehensive Plan.
OPPORTUNITY FOR INTERACTION WITH DECISION MAKERS
dw
At the beginning of each fanning Commissio' and City Council meeting, a "Call
to Audience" time is opened for citizens who wish to speak onr at a
designated time during the meeting. ktAtitIRC4
Dates, times and locations of all public meetings are publicized in the Tigard
Times, () Portland Oregonian pity Calendar
sections, along with a brief description of the subject of the meeting.
Minutes of the Planning Commission and City Council meetings provide a written
record of official's response to citizen inquiries.
11144/441 49412-'
FUNDING
The allocation of specific funding for a citizen involvement program has not
been available in the budget for the City of Tigard. Since the initiation of
the Neighborhood Planning Organization, the City has provided a staff liaison
person for each neighborhood meeting, a place to meet and the cost of printing
informational materials for the neighborhood organizations. It is anticipated
that future trends will include a continuation of the City's support for each
citizen group. .: ► 1L'
1 •,�
FINDINGS
o Throughout the development of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, the City has
actively sought the participation of Neighborhood Planning Organization
and other citizens groups.
-7-
o The Neighborhood Planning Organizations and the Committee for Citizen
Involvement have met on a monthly basis throughout the Comprehensive Plan
revision process.
o Continued citizen participation in all aspects of land use planning helps
to ensure that City government meets the needs of Tigard's citizens.
o In order to participate in land use planning decisions, citizens need to
have access to information which enables them to become aware of and
informed about planning issues and City policies. It is essential that
this information be made available to all citizens in an understandable
form.
o Land use planning education is an important method to promote and
stimulate interest in the citizen participation process during all phases
of planning.
POLICIES
2.1.1 THE CITY MAINTAIN AN ONGOING CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND L
ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN
ALL PHASES OF THE PLANNING PROCESS.
Implementation Strategies
1. The City periodically review notification requirements and methods
to determine if they adequately provide notice to affected citizens and
revise these requirements and methods as necessary.
2. The City continue to inform, in a timely manner, all of the
Neighborhood Planning Organizations (NPO) and other citizens groups on all
land use planning matters.. Ck )Njp , 9."*1°
3. The City continue to assist and support anylicitizen group in
providing adequate meeting places, distribution of materials, policy
direction and staff involvement.
4. Additional citizen tasks force shall be appointed by the City Council, as
the need arises, to advise the City with regard to Comprehensive Plan
issues.
2.1.2 THE OPPORTUNIITES FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROVIDED BY THE CITY SHALL BE
APPROPRIATE TO THE SCALE OF THE PLANNING EFFORT AND SHALL INVOLVE A
BROAD CROSS-SECTION OF THE COMMUNITY:
a. THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS SHALL BE THE PRIMARY MEANS FOR
CARRYING OUT THE PROGRAM;
-8-
b. WHERE APPROPRIATE OTHER INVOLVEMENT TECHNIQUES WILL BE USED; AND
c. THE COMMITTEE FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
EVALUATING THE PROGRAM AND FOR WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
ORGANIZATIONS IN RECOMMENDING CHANGES IN THE PROGRAM.
Implementation Strategies
1. The Committee for Citizen Involvement and the Neighborhood Planning
Organizations shall conduct their citizen involvement programs in
accordance with the needs of the Tigard community and LCDC Goal 1
requirements. A review and evaluation of each group's programs and
processes should be reported to the Planning Commission and City Council
on a yearly basis.
2. The City Council, the Planning Commission the Committee for Citizen
Involvement and the Neighborhood Planning Organization shall recommend, as
needed, additional methods for involving citizens in the planning process.
2.1.3 THE CITY SHALL ENSURE THAT INFORMATION ON LAND USE PLANNING ISSUES IS
AVAILABLE IN AN UNDERSTANDABLE FORM FOR ALL INTERESTED CITIZENS.
Implementation Strategies
1. The City shall continue to publish information on land use planning issues
in a form accessible to all citizens and shall use the Committee for
Citizen Involvement and Neighborhood Planning Organizations as the
resources for performing such reviews.
-9-
ti
A P P E N D I X
y, • o
.„
„,,„ ,„,,i,,,,sif WTI”
fiA,...
11\11
, i
1
C,m!rehensive !'Ian ReN®rt
p
i
FINAL DRAFT FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW
CITY OF TIGA R®
WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON
•
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
TIGARD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
JUNE, 1982
Revised October 1982
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
Wilbur Bishop - Mayor Frank Tepedino - President
John Cook Donald Moen
Tom Brian Richard Helmer
Nancie Stimler Mark Christen
Kenneth Scheckla Roy Bonn
Phil Eden
Bonnie Owens
Cliff Speaker
Deane Leverett
COMMITTEE FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
Wilbur Bishop - Mayor
Frank Tepedino - Planning Commission President
Ronald Jordan Park Board Chairman
John A. Butler - NPO #1
Bruce Clark - NPO #2
Lou Ane Mortensen - NPO #3
Gordon S. Martin - NPO #4
Chris Vanderwood - NPO #5
Phillip A. Pasteris - NPO #6
Nancy Robbins - NPO #7
CITY STAFF
Bob Jean, City Administrator
Bill Monahan, Planning and Development Director
Jeremy Coursolle, Associate Planner
Liz Newton, Associate Planner
Frank Currie, Public Works Director
Patt Martin, Word Processor
DRAFT: For Disscussion Purposes Only •
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
SECTION Page
Introduction 1
Background 2
Citizen Participation in
Comprehensive Planning 3
Communication and Technical
Information 4
Adoption of Comprehensive Plan 5
Finding, Policies and Implementing
Strategies 5
APPENDIX 8
LCDC approval of Tigard's Citizen Involvement
program and accompanying City Resolutions 8 & 9
Committee for Citizen Involvement
(Members) 21
Neighborhood Planning Organization
NPO #1 22
NPO #2 23
NPO #3 24
NPO #4 25
NPO #5 26
NPO #6 27
NPO #7 28
Revised Neighborhood Planning
Organization Resolution 20
Committee for Citizen Involvement
Evaluation 25
List of Committee for Citizen Involvement
meeting dates and agendas 26
List of Neighborhood Planning Organization
meeting dates and agendas
-2-
•
INTRODUCTION
This report provides background information on a citizen involvement program
for Tigard in relation to LCDC Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement. - In addition, it
recommends findings and policies to meet Goal 1 requirements.
The Goal #1 statement reads: "to develop a citizen involvement program that
insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases' of the
planning process".
The governing body charged with preparing and adopting a comprehensive
plan shall adopt and publicize a program for citizen involvement that
clearly defines the procedures by which the general public will be
involved in the ongoing land use planning process.
The citizen involvement program shall be appropriate to the scale of the
planning effort. The program shall provide for continuity of citizen
participation and of information that enables citizens to identify and
comprehend the issues".
This report begins with a brief history of Tigard's citizen participation with
the initial resolutions of the Neighborhood Planning Organizations (NPO) City
Ordinance 75-60, and the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI), City
Ordinance 75-61. It is followed by a discussion of citizen involvement, and
suggests methods for continuing citizen participation throughout
implementation and updating of the City's comprehensive plan.
•
- -
BACKGROUND
FORMULATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
Citizen interest in the planning process and the formulation of community
goals began with adoption of Tigard's Community Plan in July of 1971 (City
Ordinance 71-15). In 1973, the City Administrator and the City Council
recognized the need for the formation of Neighborhood Planning Organizations
(NPO): to develop communication channels between the citizens of Tigard and
the city officials increasing the livability of the community.
The City of Tigard was divided into seven neighborhood areas, the boundaries
of which were defined by the Planning Commission. These boundaries may be
altered if agreed upon by the affected neighborhood planning organizations.
In 1975, the City Council passed a resolution formally recognizing
Neighborhood Planning Organization and the Committee for Citizen Involvement
as the official citizen involvement structures within the City of Tigard. The
purpose of these organizations is to act as advisory groups to the Planning
Commission and City Council on all matters affecting their neighborhood and '
city.
The first Neighborhood Planning Organization, NPO #1, had their neighborhood
plan adopted by the City Council in May of 1974. Briefly, this plan included
the goals of the community which were adopted by the city in the Tigard
a description of the physical characteristics of the
Community Plan in 1971, description physical y
neighborhood area, a land use map and use descriptions, area problems and
p o licies to alleviate those problems, traffic generation,,
and street standards.
Organizations had their
Since 1974, the remaining Neighborhood Planning Or g
neighborhood plans adopted by the City Council; the last of which was NPO #7
in February of 1979.
After adoption of the NPO plans, some interest diminished and a few of the NPO
groups became inactive. Presently, most of the seven-plus member Neighborhood
Organizations meet on a monthly basis to discuss such topics as development
proposals within their area, procedural matters within the NPO Organization
and future planning needs within their planning area inside and outside the
existing city limits, yet inside the Tigard urban planning area.
The City is currently in the process of re-estalishing interest of the
membership those Neighborhood Planning Organizations that have been inactive
in the past few years.
In order to ensure that communication channels stay open between the general
populace, the Neighborhood Planning Organizations, the Planning Commission,
the City Council and the City officials, the Council also initiated a
Committee for Citizen's Involvement. The Committee's goals and definitions
were further revised and updated in 1979. Briefly, this committee includes
the chairperson of each Neighborhood Planning Organization, the Planning
Commission Chairperson, a member of Council, a Park Board member and members
of the City staff.
-2-
FIGURE I '
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION BOUNDARIES
• . ,.. '!. ,• . , C , I A •
.
• • /Vw.:91:A_Jlar....16..ge.--it 11...,; • I' . IL/ __.-..-..../2-....-.-j I
1s d ;',
.':. " 'Lk .1 I., • ,! .
" EI -
j C7 rzl.i 1_, ___ I
41\s?
..,.., ...._._ ri
77GARD a VICINITY -
.r -7-1.....,--„i2D
. ,.
.,.... , 1
ii,
A■ .. 1::nF.-, t'r • - .
I•m=?• .. ..,.;i ...: .,
4,2,:::. 00. 400414Ist, Prfe. 601101LAALN CHcsAN
64 IMO'. Wet '7:: 7., .. 1 ''Ell .ii Tr-I,-,
•,:: .... .. ,.t.:,,:.j . .c .citii.,.... . ......---
; , -■"-\-\ s
it...:.di ji I 1
, • -4.1 ' I - : \%. \
L.. ...,,,,,.......,y.. ) `.. — ,
.....1,1; '.......•••1•'‘• eit...,•,. 1.;. 6 ....1.:S\;;, .‘"'... - '' .."44%\, .. 11%1'.' .;.•:•.A. :417-7-1 -...- •.
!. 's• Tr :. I i .
0 ......„. Ett..:-- :--, r—.7-.1. ...7.,-:.- , ) . I ill...? •
t: •• :.. _ ,1=■ =1 .f, = it' i .,1/44 . t.,. .• ../.. .
;. • .. ".301-1 . / \---11-1 '' 1% it -
/ 4
-.. .. -
•
7 , •
• 6/6 .' r
o • g/ N. \ . ‘, 4* :: , -: ORM,
.1•.: - ..,+•:-.=-• ,, :c-L17.,-„,-- 11,...1. 1 glE: :::: ..• .., ;...... . . . _I.:I. .4. • •
, i --- . . . I .r---. 441p .44■'s; i Al; .,, (* -4f,-1::::1] ' '
% e .441 till
ti, ' 21 14 ' .. - , ''''kke......„!1 • .:....,4, 4.4
- ' L.- . r A.• . ,
.,'NN .,. . ••
....
\ - i . ,-
1 ":!
.. :C---.-.71, . . er,..,• - C_
, • -......k a..,..,: .
(1. .,:i.e'liif . e ..-.. -? '-' • -- 1 '. ,.
41.
..: .(7. ; .... 7- •Aizzi A . '..";:•:: . . . .•..4...:I • 5k: •,..E,
- • ....
...... .... , .. ......
3.1,2,%. Tz.,,, --or .., . •
..- ..,.....T.-- ,,- v,,• ._.
---R[----*------ ,„ .: . ii.;..:.:,..4; _!„. , . I
'--------7---- - /I • ' ' . .
7
ir_s-
,,,,,,JK .,,,,, r .42'ir•
.1 . . •
•
„ .,, tl'H.:
r “ '4.,• : It.r)1 ,-gx-j"
,11 1
• i• , ''-viz:: .--.;:-, II .. ...t,
i .....;,-.. 3 c(-4::, ,,,,,r4 . .•... 1 ..,....
.•_.j. . ,1105,...„.._.,_ ,_..... :: - ,. •
T____. ., ,. .„...• if
,...„,. :..„. . (, f
----7-
,
Ili ..,7
•4;2:'
II
...,.,...., ..7 tl)t... '‘ I I ).•n;k1A yll /'''' I-:
.1
\ 1 r
1 t: •e I:'." •'
4, •
I \\,, II ,.,..-i..... ,` "• '. . Ne..X-• ..Ihlii cl;', •
.i., !. - I".,,,,4e ./ , ••,,, ..-
/,.• I
.
.• \ '
L
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
Throughout the existence of the Neighborhood Planning Organizations, the
original goals and policies of the Tigard Community Plan and each of the
neighborhood plans have been reviewed and implemented in all aspects of the
land use decisions. As the City of Tigard grew, the overall Community Plan
remained a static document and subsequently the individual neighborhood plans
as adopted became "mini" Comprehensive Plans. While these neighborhood plans
met the immediate neighborhood needs, they did not address or implement the
overall growth needs of the community.
In late 1981, the City Council, staff and the Neighborhood Planning
Organizations saw the need to revise and update the community's Comprehensive
Plan.
For most of the elements of the Comprehensive plan, staff or consultants will
be collecting data and writing the draft report containing analysis, and
recommended findings and policies, which will be reviewed by the Neighborhood
Planning Organizations, the Committee for Citizen Involvement, the Planning •
Commission and the City Council. It is anticipated that these groups will
examine and modify each element draft at the committee and public hearing
levels.
OTHER CITIZEN COMMITTEES
In addition to the Neighborhood Planning Organization, there are several other
active citizen committees in Tigard. Citizens can serve on the Budget
Committee which reviews the annual operating budget- for the City, the Park
Board which advises the City on all matters pertaining to parks and
recreation, the Tigard Downtown Committee and the Tigard Urban Renewal Agency
Advisory Committee which are in the process of reviewing the Renewal
Revitalization Plan. Other committees include: the Library Board and the
Civic Center Committee.
LAND USE EDUCATION
Those citizens who have participated in the formulation of the existing
Neighborhood Plans have received an informal land use planning education. It
is anticipated that all of those people who became involved with the revisions
of the Comprehensive Plan will receive informal land use planning education.
Although the City does not conduct formal classes on land use planning, the
City officials do conduct work sessions with the City Council, Planning
Commission and Neighborhood Planning Organizations to update and increase
their knowledge on land use matters that may affect the Tigard community.
-3-
FIGURE II
PARTICIPATION IN THE PLANNING PROCESS
Participants
Public
Planning process steps Citizens Planners officials
1. Assessing community values X 0
2. Determining goals and objectives X 0 X
3. Data collection X
4. Design of criteria and standards X
5. Developing alternative plans X
6. Choosing an alternative X 0 X
7. Detailed design of operational plan X
8. Modification/approval of operational
plan X 0 X
9. Implementation X X
10. Feedback X X X
X = Major role
0 = Facilitating or supporting role
Source: The Practice of Local Government Planning, International City Management Association, 1979.
Citizen participation is continually encouarged at all levels of decision making in the
planning process: in-house discusssions, administrative(Planning Director) decisions,
Hearings Officer proceedings, Planning Commission public hearings and City Council de
novo public hearings.
COMMUNICATION AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION
All public meetings are announced in the Community Calendar section of the
Tigard Times, and Portland Oregonian. Public hearings and other citizen
sponsored meetings and workshops displayed in these circulations are often
accompanied by a newspaper article explaining the meeting's issues.
Meeting announcements are mailed to all affected property owners and
applicants for all of the public meetings. Through the revision process of
the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, staff proposes to send the
various citizen groups newsletters which describe the Planning Commission's or
City Council's progress. To encourage attendance at neighborhood meetings
during the revision Process, staff is prepared to assist, any citizen
organization to advertise these meetings in the affected neighborhoods. All
public documents concerning land use planning are available for distribution,
or on a loan basis from the Planning Department and will also be placed in the
City Library. Minutes of meetings are sent to committees and hearing
authority members, and are available at the Planning Department for public
review.
The technical information available to local citizens includes assistance by
City staff and the published material and files which form ta.e background of
the Comprehensive Plan. Reference material will be available at the City
Planning Department.
-4
ADOPTION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The review of the Comprehensive Plan is initiated at the NPO level. Staff is
encouraged that many of the major issues that affect the City regarding
comprehensive planning can be resolved at the NPO level. At the Planning
Commission and City Council levels, the various Comprehensive Plan elements
will be presented individually at public hearings where additional citizen
comments will be sought. The Planning Commission will be taking all of the
citizen and Neighborhood Planning Organization comments into full
consideration, and after further reviewing each element, will recommend
elements of the Comprehensive Plan to the City Council. The Council will then
review each particular element, modify it, if necessary, and will then adopt
each element and incorporate them into the Comprehensive Plan.
IMPLEMENTION, EVALUATION AND REVISION
Citizens will have the opportunity to comment as ordinances is developed and
adopted that implements the Comprehensive Plan. One of the major implementing
tools of the Comprehensive Plan will be the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision
codes, which will be revised simultaneously with the Comprehensive Plan
development and made consistent with that plan. Additional public hearings
will also be held for those ordinance revisions. As the Comprehensive Plan is
periodically evaluated and revised, citizens will have the opportunity to
comment prior to the adoption of any amendments of the Comprehensive Plan.
OPPORTUNITY FOR INTERACTION WITH DECISION MAKERS
At the beginning of each City Council meeting, a "Call to Audience" time is
opened for citizens who wish to speak on any matter at a designated time
during the meeting. The Planning Commission allows for general audience input
on agenda items.
Dates, times and locations of all public meetings are publicized in the Tigard
Times and the Portland Oregonian Community Calendar sections, along with a
brief description of the subject of the meeting. Minutes of the Planning
commission and City Council meetings provide a written record of official's
response to matters heard during the public hearing.
FUNDING
The allocation of specific funding for a citizen involvement program has not
been available in the budget for the City of Tigard. Since the initiation of
the Neighborhood Planning Organization, the City has provided a staff liaison
person for each neighborhood meeting, a place to meet and the cost of printing
informational materials for the neighborhood organizations. It is anticipated
that future trends will include a continuation of the City's support for each
citizen group.
FINDINGS
o Throughout the development of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, the City has
actively sought the participation of Neighborhood Planning Organization
and other citizens groups.
•
-5-
o The Neighborhood Planning Organizations and the Committee for Citizen
Involvement have met on a monthly basis throughout the Comprehensive Plan
revision process.
o Continued citizen participation in all aspects of land use planning helps
to ensure that City government meets the needs of Tigard's citizens.
o In order to participate in land use planning decisions, citizens need to
have access to information which enables them to become aware of and
informed about planning issues and City policies. It is essential that
this information be made available to all citizens in an understandable
form.
o Land use planning education is an important method to promote and
stimulate interest in the citizen participation process during all phases
of planning.
POLICIES
2.1.1 THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN AN ONGOING CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND
SHALL ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE
INVOLVED IN ALL PHASES OF THE PLANNING PROCESS.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
1. The City will periodically review notification requirements and methods to
determine if they adequately provide notice to affected citizens and
revise these requirements and methods as necessary.
2. The City will continue to inform, in a timely manner, all of the
Neighborhood Planning Organizations (NPO) and other citizens groups on all
land use planning matters.
3. The City will continue to assist and support any City Council recognized
citizen group in providing adequate meeting places, distribution of
materials, policy direction and staff involvement.
4. Additional citizen task forces will be appointed by the City Council, as
the need arises, to advise the City with regard to Comprehensive Plan
issues.
2.1.2 THE OPPORTUNIITES FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROVIDED BY THE CITY SHALL BE
APPROPRIATE TO THE SCALE OF THE PLANNING EFFORT AND SHALL INVOLVE A
BROAD CROSS-SECTION OF THE COMMUNITY:
a. THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS SHALL BE THE PRIMARY MEANS FOR
CARRYING OUT THE PROGRAM;
-6-
•
b. WHERE APPROPRIATE OTHER INVOLVEMENT TECHNIQUES WILL BE USED; AND
c. THE COMMITTEE FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
EVALUATING THE PROGRAM AND FOR WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
ORGANIZATIONS IN RECOMMENDING CHANGES IN THE PROGRAM.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
1. The Committee for Citizen Involvement and the Neighborhood Planning
Organizations shall conduct their citizen involvement programs in
accordance with the needs of the Tigard community and LCDC Goal 1
requirements. A review and evaluation of each group's programs and
processes should be reported to the Planning Commission and City Council
on a yearly basis:
2. The City Council, the Planning Commission the Committee for Citizen
Involvement and the Neighborhood Planning Organization shall recommend, as
needed, additional methods for involving citizens in the planning process.
2.1.3 THE CITY SHALL ENSURE THAT INFORMATION ON LAND USE PLANNING ISSUES IS
AVAILABLE IN AN UNDERSTANDABLE FORM FOR ALL INTERESTED CITIZENS.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES •
1. The City shall continue to publish information on land use planning issues
in a form accessible to all citizens and shall use the Committee for
Citizen Involvement and Neighborhood Planning Organizations as the
resources for performing such reviews.
-7-
„,
f.
00000.1.. 0 ea? fliela. gpiwne •
410
AGENDA
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 9 , 1982 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 October 19 , 1982 meeting.
4 . Planning Commission Discussion
5. Public Hearings
5. 1 Subdivision S 6-82 Century 21 Homes , Inc. NPO # 7
. 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT - CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
6 . New Business
7 . Other Business •
8 . Adjournment
•
T I G A R D P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N
November 9, 1982
Regular Meeting Minutes*
1. President Tepedino called the meeting to order at 7:32 P.M. The meeting
was held at Fowler Junior High School - Lecture Room, 10865 S.W. Walnut
Street, Tigard, Oregon.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: President Tepedino; Commissioners Clifford Speaker,
Phil Edin, Mark Christen, Deane Leverett, Bonnie Owens and Roy Bonn. Don
Moen arrived at 7:35 P.M. Excused absence: Richard Helmer.
STAFF: William Monahan, Director of Planning & Development; Jeremy
Coursolle, Associate Planner; Diane Jelderks, Clerk Typist.
3. The minutes from October 19, 1982 were considered. Commissioner Speaker
stated he had gone over the minutes with staff correcting miscellaneous
spelling errors. Commissioner Speaker moved and President Tepedino
seconded to approve the minutes as corrected.
4. COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
o Director of Planning and Development Monahan announced he had received
a letter of resignation from Commissioner Richard Helmer.
Commissioner Moen arrived at 7:35 P.M.
o President Tepedino invited citizens to apply for the open position as
Planning Commissioner.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS •
o President Tepedino opened the Public Hearing by reading the usual
statement of authority for the procedure to be followed in the meeting.
5.1 SUBDIVISION S 6-82 Century 21 Home, Inc. NPO #7
Request for approval of a subdivision on 27.13 acres of property into
110 single family lots of approximately 5,000 square feet each and a
12 acre parcel to be developed at a later date. The property is
located on the east side of S.W. 135th Avenue, south of Scholls Ferry
Road. (Washington Co. Tax Map 1S1 33 DC tax lots 100, 300, & 500 and
1S1 33D tax lot 300.)
o Director of Planning & Development Monahan gave background information
and made staff's recommendation for approval with conditions. He also
distributed maps of the subdivision.
o NPO REPORT - No one appeared to speak.
I
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
o APPLICANT - Bob Miller, Century 21 Representative, 5164 Boss Ct.,
planned development had been g
the zone change develo
Salem, Oregon, stated p p
approved by City Council by Ordinance 80-56.
He continued that the biggest problem with this development was its
size. Originally, City Council has requested that 3.8 acres of land
be dedicated for a park; now staff is requesting the park to be
developed. They had expected to install water and sewer with Phase I,
which consists of 26 lots. However, park improvements could increase
cost to as much as $88,000.00. He did not feel this is what the City
Council had intended and requested that the Planning Commission delete
this condition, or for the requirement to be placed on Phase II as
Phase I does not come near the park. He requested that Condition
Number One be changed from building permits to occupancy permits.
Streets would be developed with Phase II along with the sewer. This
way construction could be accomplished but would allow time for warmer
weather to pour concrete. He would like to be able to construct Phase
I and take the issue of the development of the park to the City
Council.
o Russ Kruger, 14655 N.W. Hunters Drive, Beaverton, Oregon, stated he
was the owner of the property and had spent considerable time to get
the property annexed and zoned into the City. During this whole
process, nothing was said about improving the park. He felt this was
an unfair burden to place on the developer, especially because of the
economic conditions.
CROSS EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL
o Discussion followed between Commissioners, applicant and staff as to
which lots were included in Phase I of the development, what was
expected as far as development of the park, what was expected to be
completed as far as public improvements before issuing building
permits, what was City Council's intent as far as dedicallion and
development of park area, and difficulty of bonding for such a large
development.
o Commissioner Moen questioned if the multi-family portion would be
coming before the Commission. Staff responded that the multi-family
portion would be handled through the Site Design Review Process, which
the Director of Planning and Development makes approval.
o Commissioner Speaker questioned if there wasn't a park development
charge that the developer had to pay for the development of parks.
Director of Planning & Development Monahan responded that there was,
however, the City did not have enough funds for development of parks.
o Commissioner Speaker questioned the applicant when he would be
constructing Phase II. The applicant stated that construction for
Phase I would happen in the spring and Phase II would be the end of
next year, but more than likely the following spring.
PAGE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1982
411 4111
o Lengthy discussion followed .regarding developing the park with Phase
II, which streets should be completed with Phase I and which streets
with Phase II, and what was required for park development in
relationship to the Master Park Plan.
o Commissioner Edin stated he had a psychological problem with Condition
Number One; he felt it was too burdensome. He stated previous
developers were not expected to complete full street improvement-bin
Phase II of the development prior to construction of Phase I. He
agreed with the applicant that bonding for public improvements would
be difficult. He did feel that grading the park area would be
appropriate.
o John Morris, 11900 S.W. Morning Hill, Tigard, questioned if 130th
Street was included to be improved with this development. Discussion
followed regarding how much of 130th would be improved. Mr. Morris
was concerned with the amount of congestion on 130th Street to Scholls
Ferry Road.
o Mr. Kruger stated that 130th was included in the LID study along with
135th, Walnut, Scholls Ferry, and Murray Road.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED •
PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION
o Commissioner Bonn questioned if there were going to be additional
lots. The applicant responded there would only be minor changes, such
as adjustment of side lot lines. There would be no increases.
o Commissioner Bonn felt there could be some kind of trade off for park
improvement, basic grading and seeding. Park improvements are to be
done when the development is 75% completed.
o There was further discussion regarding bonding and park improvements.
o Commissioner Leverett had problems with the improvement being done in
one fell swoop. He favored grading and seeding the park area. It did
bother him if the City Council intended one thing to happen and they
did another.
o Commissioner Moen stated in the past public improvements were
completed in phases. Park improvements were being requested by staff
to be bonded. He didn't feel the Commission was in a position to
decide what the intent of the City Council was. The applicant has the
right to appeal. He suggested the staff and applicant get together to
see what the Master Park Plan calls for. He questioned if the
Planning Commission would be seeing Phase II. Staff stated they would
not because of the Site Design Review process.
o President Tepedino commented when a development moves forward the
developer takes risk going through the process, with the burden on the
developer. Dedication of land for a park is fine, but who will pay
PAGE 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1982
• for what, and who will maintain it. He felt there was a lack of
evidence in the application showing standards as to what a park is.
He was concerned with what is the developer's requirements. He felt
this was the Park Board's problem. He thought that maybe the Park
Board should do a presentation for the Planning Commission.
o Commissioner Owens questioned if the appropriate number of units per
acre is accurate and appropriate for the zoning. Staff confirmed it
was correct. The applicant stated all lots would be approximately
5,000 square feet.
o Commissioner Speaker moved and Commissioner Leverett seconded to
approve Subdivision S 6-82 based on staff findings and recommendations
with modification to .conditions as follows: (discussion followed
regarding appropriate changes in conditions)
CONDITIONS:
1. Public improvements for each phase shall be constructed prior to
the issuance of any occupancy permits.
2. A dedication document including a legal description shall be
recorded with Washington County for the 3.4 acre park land. The
dedication document will be reviewed and approved by the City
prior to recording.
3. The developer shall submit an application for site design review
for Phase II prior to issuance of any Buildings Permits on Phase
II.
4. The applicant shall submit a plan for park improvements prior to
issuance of any building permits on Phase II. The park plan shall
be approved by the Director of Planning and Development in
accordance with presently established park standards. In
Y addition, all park improvements shall be completed or bonded for
100% of the cost thereof prior to issuance of any building permits
on Phase II.
Motion carried six to two by Commissioners present. Commissioners
Edin and Moen voting no.
5.2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REPORT - CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
o Associate Planner Coursolle outlined the documents and the number of
meetings which have been planned. He explained that these elements to
the Comprehensive Plan were legislative in nature and would require
the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council.
The element being reviewed tonight is Citizen Involvement which
reflects LCDC Goal #1. The element was then reviewed page by page
with Commissioners making comments and corrections.
o President Tepedino requested Commissioner Speaker, as a member of the
subcommittee, to give a synopsis of this report since he previously
reviewed the report.
PAGE 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1982
A
o Commissioner Speaker stated the only thing he had to add was that he
felt that when development was being proposed on the boundary of the
NPO's that the neighboring NPO should also be notified of the
application.
o Commissioner Moen questioned whether the boundaries of the NPO's could
be changed. Staff stated the City Council had the authority to change
the boundaries.
o Commissioner Moen moved and Commissioner Owens seconded to approve the
draft as amended and forward to the City Council.
The motion carried unanimously by members of the Commission present.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
o Associate Planner Coursolle stated that Commissioners Speaker, Edin,
and Owens are on a subcommittee and would be reviewing the
Comprehensive Development Code prior to the Planning Commission
meeting in which it is considered.
o President Tepedino requested that staff prepare a letter of
appreciation for Richard Helmer and supply him with aylist of
applicants for the open position.
7. Meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. AD ane a eL - P.ann ng Secretary
7 / /
lirkAillIl&A '
F.J. T-pe.ino, P anning Commission President ..`
(File 0030P)
II
0
PAGE 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 9, 1982
• - :_ 11-- .�
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME
and note their address on this sheet. (Please Print your name)
ITEM,3ESCRIPTION: 5„
r
9
PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against)
Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation