Planning Commission Packet - 07/21/1983 POOR QUALITY RECORD
PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and
put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the
microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions
please contact City of Tigard Records Department.
POOR QUALITY RECORD
PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and
put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the
microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions
please contact City of Tigard Records Department.
T I G A � D P L A N N I N G C 0 M M I S S I 0 N
SPECIAL MEETING
,Iu1y 21, 19ss
1. President Tepedino called the meeting to order at 7;�.5 p,M„ The meeting
was held at the Tigard School District - Board Room, 13137 SW Pacific Hwy.
Tigard, Oregon.
2. ROLL CALLt PRESENT: President Tepedino, Commissioners Moen, Owens,
Edin, Butler
. ABSENT: Coiiunissioners Vanderwood, Christen and Leverett.
STAFF: Director. of Planning and Development Wiliiam A.
Monahan; Assoiate Planner• Elizabeth Newton;
Secretary Diane M. Jelderks.
3. Planning Gommissioner minutes were unavailable for approval.
4. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATION
o In response to Commissioner M�en's inquiry, Associate Planner Newton
� re orteci that t
p he En lewaod sate had be
g en urchased b t
he Bea
. P verto
. n
Sc
hool District in 1
Y
976.
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
5.1 COMPREHENSIV� PLAN AMENDMEIJT C�A 1-$3 - Community Development Cade.
o Director of Planning and Development Monahan reviewed the procPSS for
the public hearing. Discussion followed.
o Staff revi.ewed documenk page by page, noting changes, additions and
deletions. Planning Commission discussed the following issues;
o Page I-4, 18-20 B. regardai.ng the use of the word void. Deleted the
w�rds "whether inteneional or otherwise," left "shall be void"�
0 18.22.030 - Planning Commission preferred to hear zo�ie changes, which
concurred with staff's proposal.
0 18.30.030 - Time frame for Comprehensive Plan Amendments, twice a
year. The Commissioners favored, a review at I8 months, to determine
if once a year might be sufficient,
RECESS: 9:00
RECONVENE 9:10
�
0 18.50. R-4.5 (7,500 sq. ft. lots). Discussion on changing to 7,U00
sq. ft. l�ts, Consensus of Commissioners was as follows:
Commissioner Edin favored 7,000 to have us conform with other
jurisdictzon,
Gommissioner Moen favored 7,500 as this is half-way between
lO,OQE1 and 5,000 sq. ft. and saw no real reason to change.
Commissioner Owens favored 7,500 sq. ft. since the majority of �
the lots were already developed as 7,500 it doesn't seem fair to
change it to 7,000 just so a developer can squeeze one more lot
out of a subdivisone
Commissioner Butler supported 7,000 sq. ft. , he felt the change ,
would help meet our density requirement, conform with other
jurisdictions and due to the Planned Development overlay most
subdivisions can develop with 7,000 sq. ft. lots. anyway.
President Tepzdino supported 7,500 sq. ft. . He did not feel
' there was enough argument to warrant making a change to 7,000.
0 18.50.03'0 - Page IIZ-23, Mobile Home Parks and subdivision. Issue:
should they be a conditional or a permited use in an R-4.5 zone.
Gommissioners Moen, Edin and Ownes favored havin� them as a
conditional use. Pzesident Tepedino and Commis5ioner Butler f.avored
having them permitteci.
0 18.54.050 C. 5. , 30 ft. setbacks when a attached or multiple family
dwel�ings abut a more restrictive zone. . Commissioners sugported
staff proposal of 30 ft.
0 18.50.050, Commissioner Butler questioned if duplexes were to be
allowed on 7,500 sq, ft. lats or for a duplex the lot requirement be
10,000 sq. ft. as specified in the current code.
The Commissioners supported duplex on 10,000 sq. ft. �ots in a R 4.5
zane. Commissioners Moen and Butler favored having the flexibility
of separate ownershipse However, they di.d not want to change 7,5Q0
sq. ft. lots into 5,000 sq. fte lots. Because of inconsistency in
this section staff would review and revise.
o J B Bishop interjected that the exisL-ing code only requires 10 ft.
frant yard setbacks and 10 ft. side yard setbacks when abutting a
residential zone. He f.elt this increase was excessive.
5t�ff stated they had numer�us complaints from residences abutting
commercial lots that the setbacks were not sufficient.
Bob Bledsoe, NPU �k 3, supported tt�e 20 ft. setbacks.
President Tepedino and Commissioner Butler supported a 25 ft. setback
and Cammissioners Moen, Ediri and Owens were uncertain, they all felt
10 ft. was not enough and 7.eaned towards the 20/25 ft. setbacks.
Discussion followed regarding buftering.
PLANNING C0�1MIS5IONER MINUTES 7-'L1-83 Page 2
�
o Page: III-41, Jim Miller expressed his desire to have transcient
lodging with a restaurant be permitted in a Commercial Professional
zone, especially in the Tigard Triangle.
Lengthy di.scussion £ollowed among the Planning Commission, consensus
being that: transcierit lodging should remain as a conditional use.
Commissioner Moen sugges.ted allowing restauranrs as a conditional use
if on khe same lot or on ad'jacent lot to a motel/hotel.
o Jim Miller also felt thak a 25 ft. front yard setback was excessive
and that the existing code only xequires 10 feet. Lengthy discussion '
followed.
o Bob Bledsae, NPO �� 3 noted that the provision for multi-family above
the first floor in a commercial zone was Ca be limited t� the Tigard
Triange and the Bull Mountain area in NPO �� 3 and this should be
; specified in the code.
Further discussion regarding 10 ft. front yard set backs in the
General Gommercial and Commercial Professional zones. Commissioner
Edin and Moen support a 10 ft. front yard setback, Commissioner
Butler supported a 10 ft. front yard with a 25' sideyard setback.
President Tepedino and Commissioner Owens supported staff's
recommendation of 25 ft,
o Commissioner Owens moved and �resident Tepedino seconded to set the
hearing over to Julp 26, 1983 - 7:30 P.M at Tigard City Hall.
Motion carriedt unamiously by Gommissioner prsent.
o Cammissioner MQexi moved �nd Commissioner Edin second�d to forward
sections thxough 18.64 of Comp�ehensive Plan Amendment CPA 1-83 ta
Gity Council with recommendation for approval alcrng with concer�s and
consensus of the Planning Commission
o Commissioner Butler expressed his concern regarding separating
dwel.izng units between stick built and manufactured homes as being
discriminatory.
Motion carried unanimously by Comm.issioner present.
Meeting adjournmed 1Q:�a0 P.M.
�
Diane M. Jeld r , Secretary
ATT'�S T: ��
I
�:�
anc;is ep dino, President
PLANNING CpMMISSIONER h1INUTES July 21, 19$3 - Page 3
� _ :._
FLAI�NING COI�IISSION DATE �
ROLI. CALL:
Frank Tepedino / �� �
� �
Chris V-anderraood_�' .r
�----
f t
Don Moen_��
Bonnie Owens__�l�r(,oL/
�
Mark Christ�n � � � ;
� �
Phil Edin �
-��' (�� �,���,,.�..,"
� �/ ��� ;
Deane Leverett �
�li�i� '�10����X`
�
� _ _ = - ------ - ---
. � , ., , '' , ,,�;� ; .;;
�a;3 � �`la'� � ' . ?�
�v..�.r.l�S T VLA-�-7 2
Non�rable Witbu.r B�shop Mayor June 2.1 , ti9g3
" John Cook Council ,
" Ken Scheckla Gouncil Interview for m�mb�rship on
, '' Tah Br i an� � Counc i l the NP0 .� .�dv i�ory ,comm i ttee;
. � ���' fma� Scott Counci�a. . ;:' � , ;�•
' � Bob Jean Admini•strator � • `
B i I 1 Monagh�n .D i rector of P l ann i i�g � `� • � :
: ;�r
. ,'
� � .,
� 1 belierre �my ,publi� interview before the planning camnissi�ners was .anoth�er� � "` ;'"",
hum'i 1 i at i n and ma, be , er�sona 11 � dama i n ex er i ence due to' iack of'advance � � ,�, i °
. g' Y , P Y 9� 9. p ��; �
not i f i cat i on of the. ma•ter i a'i to be covered. '
. ;;
AfLer open i ng�.,:remarks� by me, the host i 1 ity.of the i ntarv:o�ew became apparent '� � � '
;�,
' wi�tfi Canmissioners asking questions based on letters to, Ghei�"'��atteritibn , . � . `
objecting to my membership. Six letters of obj;ection of. whi.ch. 'I had no ;;`• ,
advance �warning to prepare. ��
�lo names wer.'Q ident'i f i ed so I cou l.d proper l y reca 1 1 tk�e i�nc;i der�t a 11 edged . '
' i .e. disr.0 tin the meeti'ng. To which I pointed out tFie dual .cFiairmanship
P . 9
.
,
. .
,
i ns taken of lrt ie value in the f�ture:
situat�on •�n my opin�on made any act o t
� i..e. calling a policeman in. John the lst NI'.0 5 Chai:rrt�an was. demonstrati.ng ;
one of his more severe tantr�ums. � believe ,Jeremy oyer reacted in pique.
'(Tli i s k�nci o:f cha:rge can be used down tha l i ne by any se l f s,erv i ng i nd i v i dua 1
or�, g r.oup i n a defamato:ry _r�ay.) �B i 1 1 .B i eker ag,reed w i t�i my vers i on of the
NPO change ,in chairmanship at the time. . �
The cammittee as I assume it is now Composed is focused �very nar.rowly on
neighborhood interests to ,the detriment o� the communit.y ;of. tlie who.le.
Basically, newcommers wanting ta, keep others out, thru dawn �zoning and
other .praGedural dev�i�es. �
At one point dur`i.ng the �NPO 5 in�e�ting wh3ch I a�ttended �the Pla.id Pantry
was referred by one' member as bus i:ness of� that i l ke Demor�st�rat i ng i n my
opinion lack of objectiVity. �
The qual i�y of staff pres�entations was an the low end 'due to•;h�trr.ied and/or . .
lack :of clear� markieig of reference maps together witFi general� waving tpwarC �.`
the mep to. d:escribe a spe�i�ic area on i.C. . � :
I would' Suggest tfiat.NPOs i.f� they .are. Co:.be;of a�y value need • ta be broken `�
� down into Business: and ;resident.ial.�;div`rsions to' o'vercome•.m�ch' of, .the fri:cti�n :, , ;`�. �!
between��sel f i shness`��of 'sqi�e re.s.i�dent.ial ;;member�s and'mer�ti,ers w�i;th a`6u:�i ness : ,,,�t; ,'
who necessari,ly must�co`nsicier� a much b'roade�c pictu.re th'ru� deal.ing :W:i�t'h' .the '` � ,
, publ ic and yovernmen�al�`•orga;nizations. Time and r�su�tts are ,much 'ijn.por:tant;.�,•, �
: 7he NPOs a,s I per�'i'eve them. take far. to� much, t�ime fo,r , the:benef:i'ts ta be ��'
gained. T�me is money: � Wasted time is non-prodvctiv�. �
Final �'.y, �I bel ieve `�th� counci 1 shoui�d look into thi� i.ncitlent, and demattd a� ' :
full 'rePort and take•�fhe.necessary disc}plinar`y measu�es tio iriisure- thi•s t�rpe
of citizen amtiush end.,bushwacking will not be repea,ted in Tigard. . , • . � � � '
, . �•,
er . ' � v
� ,
o n E Srnets , �
� � �0 SW Bo.n i ta , ' � : .,
,- y ,
I
`
I
I
�
I
. I
i
I
I
�r,
ro
I
;x�
a
T I G A R D P I.. A N N I N G G 0 d�i M I 3 S Z 0 !V I�
I
� SPECIAL MIEETIN�
July 21= :L98.3 i
' . I
1. Px�esxd�nL Tepedino e�Yle�d thP tne�ting ta asdes ar 7s45 P.M. . The meeL�c�g
was h�ld �nC th� �igard School Distri�� a IIoard Ftoom, 13Z37 SW Pacifi.c Hwy.
Tig�rd, Oregan.
2o ROLL CALL: ��.ESENT: President Tepedi.no, Commissioraexs Mo�n, Owzns,
Edin, ButZer
AISS�'N7'a �oznzniss�.anex�s Vand�rwood, Chriyten and L,�vexettn
�
STAFL': D�.r�ctos of Flamngng and l��relo�enent Wi�.liam A.
�lonahan; Ass4iate Planne� Elizabet-i� Newt�n;
5ecretary d3iane M. �TeA�i�rks.
I 3. Planning Comrniss�.amer ►riinutes cae�e unavailal�le :Eox approva�.a
� '
�
44 PLANNLNG �C�MM7S5I�JV CO�IUNIC�ATI��t
jo In response to ��n�cnission�r Maen's inq�iry, A�sociaC� Pl.annex Dlewtcan
� rep�rted �hrzt ehe Englewac�d si�e had 'b��c�a puxehased by �:he Ei�avexton�
I School 1��.sta-i�c.L' in 2976.
II
5a PUBLIC HEARINCS
�' — u�zlt Deve1Q �nanl- CodEe
'41 COMPREH�1NaI�S PT.t�N F.1�i�IvDMENT CFF� 1�8:3 �omm y p
S P
o Dir�ctor az Planning and �evelopment Monahan r�eviewe� th� �arocess for
the publie hearing;. Discussion faliot,rzd.
� .
o Staff s.�viewed documer�� ��ge b� p�ge, noting �changesr adsi�ts�ons and
deletioe�s. Planning C�mmissiot2 discuss�ri klze f�illowi.ng issu.es:
Q page I-4, 1.8-�2�J Be regarding the use of the ward rr��d. I7e�.eted tk�e
wards °1whekher i�Centionai or ��h�rwzses19 1.�ft "sha11 b� �raid"s
�
,
0 1�.22.Q3a — P'lannin� Gommi���.on prefer��d to hear zone charages, which
concurr�c! wi.th staii's praposal.
0 3.Sm30.030 — Time frame f.ar Compr�h�nsi�e P3.an .A�mendments, tdTice a
year. The Commissioners �Eavored, a review at I8 month�, to determine
i.f once a �ear might be scxfficiFnta
FtECESS: 9.OQ
RECONVENE 9:10 •
''
/
a Z$.SOtl 1�-4.5 t7,S0U sq. ft. lcsts). Uiscussi.��u ar� cE»ssgin.g to 7,000
sq. ft. lots. Can�enaus of �amrn�ssione�s was as �oZlowst
Gomsnis�ior�er �din favor�d 7,000 to have us canform �ith other
j�-ri�dicCi.on.
Coznmiss�.ocaer Mor�� favor�d 7y500 as �his �.s hal.f°way b�tw�en
l0,QQ0 aezd 5,��0 sq. Et. �nc� sa�a na r��l rea�on to ch.an�er
�amnusss.�rc�r Chaexzs favored 7,50a sq. fto &�Li�C�E rhe majarity c�£
�ihe �.�sts �aere already developed as 7,500 it doesn°C seF�m Eair. ta ,
cl�a��e it to 78�00 ,just �o a dEVelopex� ��n squ�e�e one more lot �
out a¢ a subda.visonv I
Comrnissiane�° �uriex s�.�p�orted 7,Oq0 sqm ito , he felt th� ck��n�� i
wou1� heip �n�et aur d�nsi�:y r.equireme�k, ron���n wi�h ot�er
aux��sdactio��s ar�d du� tc� tr�e I'Ianned Develc�pment overlay most I
� subdx.�ri.sions c�n d�velop witfa 7,000 �c�. �tA Ia�s. a��y�ray. �
�'resid�nt TePer�ic�a suppo�ted 7850U sqo ft. a �ie �zd r�c�t feel
th�x� was ereo�sgh �r�umPnt to warran� mak�ng a ��Carig� Ca 7,00�. �
a 1$.50.030 - Page III-23, Mobil.e Home Parks an.�i subc3ivisinn. Tasue.
shaulci th�y be � cond�.2:ional or a pexz°gnna.Ced use in an �Z�-�o,S zon�.
Comms.�si.oners M�en, Edi.r� an� Ownes favored haaing them a� a
conciitzana�. u�e. Pre�ial�nt ��p�drna aata �itmn�.ssacs�aer Beatler �asre�xed
:�aving them permittec�o
0 1��54�450 Co 5. , 30 ft� s���ackv wh�n � a�tac�ed o� mul.tiple £ami�y
d�ae�lirsgs abut a more ��stx•ietive zon�m o Commisszonegs supported
st�ff proposa.l aE 30 ft,
Y
0 18.5Q.050, Coenmissz�oner Butler questioned. if dupl�xe� w�re to �ie �
a1Los�ed on 7,5(�0 sqe ftd b�t� ox fo� a dupT�� the lo� reqcszregnent be
10,U0�3 sqe ft. �s sp�cs.�ied ��a ehe Uurrent cocie,
Tlie �o�ni�szoners supp����d cdupl.ex on AO,OOU sq. ftm Iots in a R 4e5
xorsee Ca�:�i��s.a�ners Mo�n and 33u�1er favoreri having tk�e f�.�xib�la.r_y
�f s�para��: awn�xstbi�s. Havaev�a•� they dz.d na� war�� tca ��ar►g� 7,50f�
sge fto lots i.�to 5,�0� sq. ��:a lots� Beca.us� o� inconsist�n�y i.dl
t�i� �e�Gi.or� .�Ca€f w�uld r�vzew a�d revisee
n
p, c� J � Bishap inter.jected that ehe exi.�tzn� cad�: cnly rer�ui.�es 10 ft.
� £ront yard setbacks ai�.d ].0 fte side ya�c� s�tback� wl�sert �b��tti�g a�
�'°' residentia� zonP. l�te ���.t this inca�eas� �,r�s �xc�ssiveo
� �
� Staff s�ated t.hey hac� numerous co►nplaints fram re�i�d�n�em abut�ing
"� comanerci�al Iots tl�at the s��t�acks were not sutficient.
�
� B�k� B7.�dsQe, NPJ �� 3r suppox°ted th� 20 £t. setbaekso
i'resident Tepedi.na and C�mmissianer. Butles sugparCed a 25 ft< settr�c�.
and Comrnisuionerg MoEZ�e Edi.n and Oaren� w�re uncerta�ce, tl�ey all fe�.t
IO ft. saas riot ea�ough and leaned towards the 20/25 ft. set�iacks.
Discussz.on �oilow�cl �egardin�, be�ffering.
PI.ANNIi�G COI'�fESSIONBR MINUT�S 7-21-33 Page 2
� I
, ' �
a P�g� IIL--41, Jien TMi.11er expr�essed hbs desa.�:� to : have t�anscient II
ladgang writh a rest�ur.ant be �exmitted in u �ammer��.�1 Pxo�essyonal '
z�ne, es�eci�lly in th� Tz.�;ard �ri�r�g�.e. I
�.engC&�y dx.scussron fnllowed a�nc�ng the P�.a►�r�in� Ga��nis�siorco �onsensus I
b�zn.� th�t transci�n�. la,dgir�� st�a�ulci rcen►x�i�r a� � coreditz.ox�al aa�e.
. . . .
I� Cocn�i�saaner Moen se�ggesk:ed a�.3.owzng resta�uranta a� � coxad�.tbo�tal ease
j i£ or► the s�me la� ar on adjac�nt LaC ta a mokel/hotelo i
� Jim Nliller also Eelt that a 25 �t, front yard setback was �xc�ssi�rp I
�e�d that �:tae existz�ng cade onYy r.equir�s 1C feet. I,em��tay cE�sceass�.n�n
£o d.lar�ed.
o Bob Bledsoe, NPO �� 3 noted Ci�at tk�e prov�.sion fo� mu�.ti°f�mily af�ove
�h� firsC flnor ia� a commercial zane was to be Iim��ed ta the Ta.gard
T�ian�e �r1d �he B�li Mouc�tain area i.n I3P0 �� 3 �rnd tteis sttoul.d b� I
specified in th,e cod.�. I
' £urthea� discussion regarding 10 ft. frpnt yard se�: ba�k� fn the
Gen�exal ��omm��cial an<i Commercisl Prof'e�szonal zones. �m�issi.o�a�r �
Edi� and Moen vupport � IO �t. �a°ont yard setback, C�mmissi�ner �
Butle� sai�portecl a I.0 Eto frant }r�x�d with a ZS' �adeyard s�thack<
Pr�sa.dent Tepedi,.n� and Co�n�ssion�r Uwex�� sup�orted skafi's
recommendatiore of 25 ft.
cs Coa�xnissione� Owens moved a�nd �'resident Tepedin.o seco�a�si ta set �he
�ieaxirxg ov�� ta July 26, �9�� — f;3CD P.M at `Figard �ity Ha1,1�
Motion caxried �inamiou��.y by Commissioxaer prsent,
o Commissxonex Moen mov�d �n�. Cammissi��ner Fdi� s�ca�tded to frarwax�d
secta.on� thxou�h 1�.64 of Com�rehensive Plan A�nert�dx�ent CP�`# 1-83 to
Ci�y Coureci�. with xecaenmensiatACin for dppxoval $�.ong with co�cern� and
consensus o:E the Planni�rg Commis�i.on
' a Cosemiissioner Butl.er �x�Yes�ed hi.s c�ncern re��.rdisa� sep�zat�.ng
dw�l.�ing ue�i�s betcaee�n stick builr and manufa�turQd hames as beiiag
I` diserima.�natory.
I I
Motiar� c�sr.iPd e�nani�nously by �oanraissione� psesent.
Mee�ir�g adjournnied 3.0:40 �'<M.
1'
" Da.ane M. Jsld .r , �e�reta�:y .�.�
AT��S�':
,'
.� --'
�- , � , `
��----
ancis ep din.o, Fresxdent T��^
PLANI�IN� COZ�IISSIONEI2 �4INUT�� ,�uly ZI, 1�83 — Page 3