The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Packet - 11/15/1983 POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm.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. AGENDA TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LECTURE ROOM 10865 SW Walnut Tigard, Oregon 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes from October 4, 1983 meeting. 4. Planning Commission Communication o Fire Departments 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 3-83 Wayside Inn NPO # 4 5.2 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 4-83 First Interstate Bank NPO # 2 5.3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 17-83 ZONE CHANGE ZC 13-83 Marvin Smith NPO # 6 5.4 SUBDIVISION S 9-83 Bond Park # 2 NPO # 5 5.5 SUBDIVISION PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S 8-83 PD Century 21 Homes NPO # 3 6. Other Business 7. Adjourn Meeting 0224P I T I G A R D P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 15, 1983 1. President Tepedino called the meeting to order at 7:38 P.M.. The meeting was held at Fowler Junior High School - LGI Room 10865 SW Walnut, Tigard, Oregon. 2. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: President Tepedino, Commissioners Butler, Moen, Edin, Leverett, Fyre, Owens. ABSENT: Commissioner Vanderwood (one vacant position). STAFF: Associate Planner Elizabeth Newton (left 8:15) ; Assistant Planner Steve Skorney; Director of Planning and Development Monahan (arrived 8:10) ; Secretary Diane Jelderks. 3. Minutes from October 4, 1983, were considered. Commissioner Edin moved and Commissioner Fyre seconded to accept the minutes as submitted. The motion carried by unanimous vote of members present. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATION • Respresentative from the Washington County Fire Department, Craig Keyes, and Tualatin Fire District, Joe Gruelich, were present to discuss issues of mutual concern. Commissioner Owens arrived 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS • President Tepedino opened the public hearings by reading the procedures to be followed during the hearing. 5.1 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 3-83 Wayside inn NPO # 4 A request for an exception from the sign code to allow the placing of an additional free-standing sign, 100 sq. ft. per face and 30 ft. in height, to identify the Wayside Motel. The property is designated General Commercial and is zoned C-5. Located: 11460 SW Pacific Hwy. • Associate Planner Newton made staff's recommendation for approval with two conditions. • NPO/CCI COMMENTS - No one appeared to speak. • APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION: Way Lee, Owner of the Wayside Motel explained it was their intent to remove the other two signs and replace them with the larger, taller sign. He did not feel that staff's recommendation was sufficent for his needs because the canopy at the mobil station would still block the view of the sign. The motion carried by majority vote of Commissioners present. President Tepedino, Commissioner Moen, Leverett, Owens and Butler voting YES. Commissioners Fyre and Edin voting NO. 5.2 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 4-83 NPO # 2 A request to allow the 6' x 12' First Interstate Bank sign to be raised from 26 ft. to 34 or 36 ft. high. • Assistant Planner Skorney made staff's recommendation for denial. • NPO/CCI COMMENTS - No one appeared to speak. • APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - No one appeared to speak. PUBLIC TESTIMONY • No one appeared to speak. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION • Commissioner Fyre, Moen, and Leverett support staff's recommendation. • Commissioner Edin was concerned with denial because of the previous approval. • Commissioner Owens commented that there was a difference because of the type of business of each applicants. The bank's sign need was less because it attracted mostly people who are local. However in the case of the motel you are attracting out of town people who need to be able to find you. • Commissioner Butler moved and Commissioner Moen seconded to deny Sign Code Exception SCE 4-83 based on staff findings and recommendation. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Commissioners present. RECESS 8:40 P.M. RECONVENE 8:55 P.M. 5.3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 17-83 ZONE CHANGE ZC 13-83 Marvin Smith NPO # 6 • Assistant Planner Skorney made staff's recommendation for approval of the applicant's request. • Director of Planning and Development explained why this item is before the Planning Commission again. • NPO/CCI COMMENTS - Staff stated that they had talked with NPO Chairman, Phil Pasteris and that he had conveyed that the NPO had heard this applicant's request several times and supported the request. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 15, 1983 Page 3 • APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION •- Dean Werst, Attorney for the applicant, supported staff's recommendation. He added they would be dedicating approximately 14 acres of land to the City. • Henry Wong, Developer stated he was available to answer any questions regarding the development. PUBLIC TESTIMONY • Sally Thomas, 16575 SW 85th, owner of the Dairy Farm east of the propoed site, opposed the application. She stated there is already a traffic problem and this development would only increase the problem. She did not feel the site was a suitable location for a development of this type because of the terrain and flooding that occurs. She then read a letter from Tom and Jeannie Perin, 16585 SW 92nd, who also opposed this application. CROSS EXAMINATION AND REBUTTAL • Commission Butler asked how they had come up with 174 units. Director of Planning and Development nt stated the units were not an issu e fo r hearing. hearin . • Commissioner Moen questioned the effect on policy 6.1.1 on this application. Discussion followed. • Commissioner Edin questioned if the applicant would have access on 92nd or on 85th. Mr. Werst explained the access would be on 92nd at the top of the hill, because the 85th access was not wide enough. He also explained how they had come up with the figure of 174 units. • Discussion followed regarding density, the letter from USA and street improvements for SW 92nd. • Commissioner Moen suggested approving the proposal with a Planned Development overlay. • Mag Shaw, 16225 SW 93rd Avenue was concerned with the effect 20 units per acre would have on the area. She also asked what would prevent them from building apartment or putting in a mobil home park if this density was approved. • Director of Planning and Development Monahan stated the application, if approved would only allow 12 units per acre with a density trans for to a miximum of 15 units per acre and the other iasue would be raised during the Planned Development or Subdivison application process. • Discussion followed regarding the LCDC requirement of 10 units per acre. • Commissioner Fyre asked if it would be economically feasible to development this property at low density. Director of Planning and Development stated it would be difficult because of the amount of unbuildable lands. • Lengthy discussion regarding changing the density from low to medium. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 15, 1983 Page 4 COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION • Commissioner Edin moved and Commission Leverett seconded to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 17-83, from low to medium density; and approval of the Zone Change ZC 13-83 to become effective upon Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The motion was approved by unamious vote of the Commissioners present. 5.4 SUBDIVISION S 9-83 Bond Park # 2 NPO # 5 • Assistant Planner Skorney made staff's recommendation for approval with conditions. • NPO/CCI COMMENTS - No one appeared to speak. • APPLICANT"S PRESNTATION - Bill McMonagle, 8905 SW Commercial, stated they had reviewed the staff report and had no problems. They were available to answer any questions. PUBLIC TESTIMONY • No one appeared to speak. COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION • Commissioner Butler was concerned that there was no school impact statement submitted with the application. The applicant stated they had contacted the school and that they had no problems with the proposed development. • Commissioner Owens moved and Commissioner Moen seconded to approve Subdivision S 9-83, with conditions, the applicant's request for a Preliminary Plat of Bond Park # 2, a 24 lot subdivision. The motion was approved by majority vote of Commissioners present, Commissioner Butler voting NO. 5.5 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S 8-83 PD Park Place/Century 21 Homes NPO # 3 • A request for conceptual and detailed plan approval of a Planned Development consisting of 215 single family units. • Assistant Planner Skorney made staff's recommendation for approval of the conceptual and detailed plan with conditions. They are also asking for preliminary plat approval, however staff had not responded in the staff report to that issue. Also, staff had received a call from Washington County requesting that the application be tabled until the alignment for Gaarde Road could be agreed upon between the City and Washington County. The Public Works Director also supported a continuance. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 15, 1983 Page 5 • • NPO/CCI COMMENTS - Bob Bledsoe, 11800 SW Walnut, NPO # 3 Chairman also supported having this item continued. The NPO had many concerns which had not been address including alignment of streets and density calcuations. • APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION - Bob Miller, 5164 Bobs Court, Salem, Civil Engineer for Century 21 Homes. Reviewed the history of the application noting communication problems which had occurred. • Lengthy discussion followed regarding processing of the application. Consensus of the Commissioners was that the there were many difficult issues to deal with and there was confusion as to staff's position on this application. PUBLIC TESTIMONY • Mrs. Rodde, 13745 SW 121st, read her letter into the record opposing the proposed road alignment and requesting the application be denied. • Mr. Gordon Moore, 13535 SW 121st, opposed the proposed application. He stated that Washington County had planned to put the Gaarde Road Extension through the Century 21 Property and that Century 21 was aware of this when they purchased the property. Now, Century 21 is proposing shifting the burden onto his property and others without even contacting them. • Ray Barnum, 14405 SW Hazelhill Drive, respresenting the homes owners in the Bull Mountain area opposed the application because of the density and the gaarde/Murray Road extension. • Discussion followed regarding continuance of the meeting. • Commissioner Edin moved and Commissioner Owen seconded to table Planned Development S 8-83 PD to December 6, 1983, and requested staff to schedule a meeting between Washington County, City Staff, Applicant, NPO # 3 and affected parties to address issues of concern. Also requested applicant to provide a true school impact statement. I The motion was approved by unanimous vote of Commissioner present. 6. OTHER BUSINESS • Discussion followed regarding developing criteria for justifying changes to the Comprehensive Plan. 7. Meeting Adjourned 11:30 P.M. .// . /. rt 4, __ .Diane M. Jeld :, Secretary ATTES . :::-2/) I \ ' e r". ' 44. ■Illwrzliminik Fran is J. epe,ino, President (0227P)PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 15,1983 Page 6 i PLANNI COMMISSION DATE \ 1 e ROLL CALL: • Frank Tepedino 1(4/ 1"'"*Aii:t /f ' A ' A Chris Vanderwood•___ I i® .. John Butler Don Moen /1j S".3091019 Bonnie Owens r Phil Edin 1?t't .° Deane Leverett Milt Eyre r TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL 10865 S.W. Walnut Tigard, Oregon 97223 PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 3-83 Wayside Inn NPO # 4 A request for an exception form the sign code to allow the placing of an additional free-standing sign, 100 sq. ft. per face and 30 ft. in height, to identify the Wayside Motel. The property is designated Genral Commercial and is zoned C-5. Located: 11460 SW Pacific Hwy. 5.2 SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 4-83 First Interstate Bank NPO # 2 A request for an exception from the sign code to allow raising the height of an existing 26 ft. high sign by eight or ten ft. The property is designated General Commercial and is zoned C-5. Located at: 11760 SW Hall Blvd. 5.3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 17-83 ZONE CHANGE ZC 13-83 Marvin Smith NPO # 6 A request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from low to medium density residential and a Zone Change from R-7PD to A-12 to facilitate a 174 unit condominum complex on approximately 8.5 acres. Located: Between Cook Park and Tigard High School of SW 92nd Ave. , (Wash Co. Tax Map 2S1 14A, lot 1000). 5.4 SUBDIVISION S 9-83 Bond Park # 2 NPO # 5 A request for a Preliminary Plat approval for a 24 lot single family residential subdivision on 3.75 acres. The property is designated Medium Density and is Zoned A-12. Located: On SW 79th Ave. off Durham Road (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 12C, Lot 2300). 5.5 SUBDIVISION PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S 8-83 PD Century 21 Homes NPO # 3 A request for a conceputal and detailed plan approval of a Planned Development, consisting of 215 single family units. The property is designated Low Density Residential and is Zoned R-7 PD. Located at: 13900 SW 121st Ave. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 3CC, Lot 401 and 2S1 4 Lot 1400). 0224P Un.LII. l r — a s`° 6.3 -• NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY. ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME and note their address on this sheet. (Please Print your name) 5 ITEM/DESCRIPTION: �' A. al . . . ° 1f./41 .4 AIL )020 * 5/ r I • r A. PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation �� , 1- l / - -7 X-/7,72 4Pr- A111111111111 a,,76,L, .,,,,,az 1 c_..s.e„zpi:E..z_ a'- __. ,, I ______. 1 . ; . 1 I I 1 1 I I It� ' ' 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 AMSCRIPTION: 5. A ` — (/' g3 r + B 5( Q E4c ton, PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation . ; ■ , . ,,,,,,,, i (- is"-0,3 .. NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME • and note their address. on this sheet. (Please Print your name) ITE ESCRIPTION: S.: ® 1 ' • .. 'J ° ,f° 3 5 i' ‘,>9.,1)____Ii_giorteldniklii_____120r, ail Al aftp PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation MJ J / .� � Jvl t' I ( !_ vY . 1 f/ 1 , `'''," 52`c, i/NJ v 6- • >u c-4 j'31- . - /C� -•' �c1 i 2-27 ue5 J / . a/J. 'o` / .•/ s f er .r rr ; i, /r' . ; • .ti - r, l l U1 1 L __ �. �.V-..r __� NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME and note their address on this sheet. (Please Print your name) 5• ITEM/DESCRIPTION: . / — 3 1 PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against) _ Name, Address and Affiliation f Name, Address and Affiliation I. .. . .a ■ W Q ' 1 l ?p 3 a -rn -... 4 3z ,�- I I _ o I ; I , I ,. I i 1 1 - I S-- b-3 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS DESIRING TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM MUST SIGN THEIR NAME and note their address on this sheet. (Please Print your name) ""11. ITEM/b SCRIP ION: 1/467' ( o 5-- 5.5 r% 91 $1-5 -33 PO Po n\e,s Sa.tchost 1)1.1141 A e.$, DEvel otoniett+--- PROPONENT (For) OPPONENT (against) Name, Address and Affiliation • , Name, Address and Affiliation L)A- ,o vf • zy e: / ---' 5c3 -$`-/ '-',5 '' /0- 1 ia )1//).,4,'0 5 (Pe Acqx 4,2A-5,,,,,,, ,-*/,, -., 71;1if--/ '' • , A)r 0 // ro ci '7> I,/ t--e' /tit., '/'" I SMINUMIMMOMM 7 ) ri AC D / ).,' ,v,--.4. /C/4.(7 6{/ A .... i ---' / ,//I,'"'Z) S ) \I j )i ti_i /962 r 1 --- \,..0. ,‘e i NI 1 # 3 01 Ti ,-) ../. .e,-,- 1..e -4- J --' ). ' I L./q 0:5 e-',/1-7/A-e 12,12/n, //16)-• D C..erH PI 44)a II l 'a,S0 • , I 0 A A - . . ' -- . -p i i 1v7__<-5,‘,,),_,, z.4., ,C, sit . I (e,.c m. t ' '3 <WM I /■ f I 0 ( 1 _4' ---------- I / - _ I ••■■■■■•••■■■■■•a •••••■••■•■Manno..., J 3TAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 15, 1983 7:30 P.M. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LGI Room 10865 S.W. Walnut Tigard, Oregon A. FINDING OF FACT 1. General Information CASE: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION SCE 3-83 NPO # 4 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a sign code exception to allow the placement of an additional free-standing sign, 100 square feet per face and 30 feet in height, to identify the Wayside Motel. ZONING DESIGNATION: C-5 RECOMMENDATION: Based on information submitted to the applicant, staff's review of applicable municipal code provisions, and field investigation, staff recommends approval of a sign code exception subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. OWNER: Way W. Lee APPLICANT: Security Sign Inc. 5210 SE 26th Ave. 436 S.E. 12th Avenue Portland, Oregon 97202 Portland, Oregon LOCATION 11460 S.W. Pacific Highway NPO COMMENT: NPO # 4 has not responded in writing to this application request 2. Background On May 18, 1977, a permit was issued for a free-standing sign (364 sq. ft. and 13' in height); on February 15, 1978, a permit was issued for a sign (35 sq. ft. and 6' in height); on August 3, 1978, a permit was issued for a free-standing sign (17.5 sq. ft. and 5'6" in height); and on December 9, 1980 a permit was issued for wall sign (21 feet long and 4 feet in height). B. STAFF ANALYSIS AND REVIEW: The Tigard Municipal Code allows for exception to the sign code as follows: l 16.34.040 EXCEPTIONS The Planning Commission or, on review, the Council may grant exceptions to the requirements of this title, when the applicant demonstrates that, owing to special or unusual circumstances relating to the design, structure, or placement of the sign in relation to other structures or land uses or the natural features of the land, the literal interpretation of this title would interfere with the communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit in terms of the values set forth in the TMC Section 18.59.010. 16.36.040 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES. C-3 , C-3M, C-5; and M-2, M-3 and M-4 industrial zones. Free-standing signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties zoned commercial and industrial. One multifaced, free-standing sign identifying the principal goods, products, facilities or services available on the premisies, shall be permitted on the premises, subject to conditions and limitations as stated herein. A readerboard assembly may be an intergral part of the free-standing sign. Free-standing signs. Areas Limits. The maximum square footage of signs shall be seventy square feet per face or a total of one hundred forty square feet for all sign faces. No part of any free-standing sign shall extend over a property line into public right-of-way space. Area Limit Increases. The sign area may be increased one square foot for each lineal foot the sign is moved back from the front property line the sign is adjacent to. If the street is curbed and paved the measurement may be taken from a point which is fifteen feet from the pavement. This increase in sign area is limited to a maximum of ninety square feet per face or a total of one hundred eighty square feet for all faces. Height Limits. Free-standing signs located next to the public right-of-way shall not exceed twenty feet in height. Height may be increased one foot in height for each ten feet of setback from the property line or a point fifteen feet from the edge of pavement whichever is less to a maximum of twenty-two feet in height. STAFF COMMENTS The exceptions from the sign code for the proposed sign are: height, total sign area, and number of free-standing signs. Currently, there are two free-standing signs on the motel property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed sign. A permit was issued for the free-standing sign that is 364 sq. ft. and 13 feet in height. No permit was issued for the 24 sq. ft. free-standing sign (displaying the word "motel" with a large arrow underneath) located at the driveway entrance on SW Pacific Highway. The motel, which is on commercially zoned property, is allowed only one multi-faced sign. The proposed sign is 30 feet high, which is in excess of the maximum allowable height of 22 feet. STAFF REPORT SCE 3-83 Page 2 The applicant contends that the current signage is not adequate to identify the motel site. After a field investigation, staff agrees that the proposed sign is necessary. The limited access to the motel justifies the need for a sign with directional information for motorists traveling on SW Pacific Highway. Staff suggests that if the proposed sign is permitted, the maximum height should be 22 feet. This height would allow visibility for traffic from either direction. Also, the existing 364 sq. ft. and 24 sq. ft. signs should be removed. The Planning Commission should also weigh the benefits to the community when allowing the additional sign against the effect on the intent of the Site Design Review Provisions listed here: 18.59.010 Purpose of provisions. The intent and purpose of design review is to promote the general welfare by encouraging attention to site planning and giving regard to the natural environment, creative project design and the character of the neighborhood or area. (a) It is in the public interest and necessary for the promotion of the safety, convenience, comfort and property of the citizens of the city of Tigard: 1. To preserve and enhance the natural beauties of the land and of the man-made environment, and enjoyment thereof; 2. To maintain and improve the qualities of and realtionships between individual buildings, structures, and the physical developments which best contribute to the amenities and attractiveness of an area or neighborhood; 3. To protect and insure the adequacy and usefulness of public and private developments as they relate to each other and to the neighborhood or area; 4. To insure that each individual development provides for a quality environment for the citizens utilizing that development as well as the community as a whole. b. In order to prevent the erosion of natural beauty, the decay of environmental amenities and the dissipation of both usefulness and function, it is declared necessary: 1. To stimulate creative design for individual buildings, groups of buildings and structures, and other physical developments; 2. To encourage the innovative use of materials, methods and techniques; 3. To integrate the functions, appearances and locations of buildings and improvements so as to best achieve a balance between private prerogatives and preferences, and the public interest and welfare. (Ord. 77-25 Sec. 10 (part), 1977). STAFF REPORT SCE 3-83 Page 3 Staff feels that the benefits to the overall community by allowing the proposed sign, subject to conditions, does not adversley affect the intent and purposes of this design review criteria. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission allow the sign at 11460 S.W. Pacific Highway in the location proposed on the plan subject to the following conditions: 1. Two free-standing signs be removed: - a 364 sq. ft. sign reading "Wayside Motor Inn" - a 24 sq. ft. sign reading "Motel" 2. The proposed sign's height not be greater than 22 feet. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: r 6143 Steve Skorney, William A. Monahan, Assistant Planner Director of Planning Development (0224P) STAFF REPORT SCE 3-83 Page 4 ME .4*''''■ ,.,. ,,,,,„6 _,„,......,--7„, : -,,--' „ '-e-,'""---;'"".".."'.C.'"--, -"' ----",."—' ` " _,....,,,,'W471V1*--W-riggff°4-' •- • .,..• . -,1.,. t ......e...'.., ,t - ...- .......„.., - . I:•,. , .. 7, ---.tp.-- . . . • .' t i. . ,•••• . R ,, . ...,. .,..,,,,...-..sil,:.,. . ti„....,,,,„,}.4_, ,,9,.., ., ,,,,, ,--'. .... 0 /lib 94 1-n •-mx,.... , , ' I -1--Y --• ,- . j:, -',••••.-._-',1. •,../s;*'-' -, 14,11, .0 /y In I - -...- • - ili.r..g • f ,-- / 1.----7 . .y... IP ........ , . ., . . .' Ill .... . '' fr-r ,. '' ' .4•A -"• •• ti5 , ,.. 7 141 z7 ..t-•- , , • ) H ----1- i-i" - .4., i J---' ....:r-Vi "e2e --) - L. .....- ,- %-''L 5 - ' - -'.. ,5"‘r* -"."-5i . . - 1.5.` - '... 44reA.II,' , 41•44'_ -.- 1 ItA •e 5- •5i---, .1 5,a.= - . - . .-' -„:-•6' ,.„..):::?:,..'r..Z.,... 4 .44/4",_ A. ; ) •,':f =.,-5,:.. _„ __. C...--' jd-.E.---6- Ar 0 77.. ..-- .... .1 ••,a..•. . . , 4c., .:--,,,.;•••..r: .• . s, .: , I —.— "...‹....:- VI/ s--S.-' ./.....c"/ r.,r• (..., :•• \ /./V A/ ' ■.5*•7 4....:".-^1/ ' , 1- 1 - — - .•.0.“1 .. '•.'i4....e,r.1,'.:'.- «,.,.-r 11-e-' - t':'.' ‘...1 "4' • - 4. 1/ ,$ • _ —_ i 1 P..e C-.....;:r,, .... • ] ,.„..,..4.4, I ,i /:')/Ck:' ---1 -- -_-) e"-' .- /_--- .-5‘/ -. --- =:sttA'',. 1:-j-.^-kri.f.r. ". IV. N -.(..:-..,' /*C--"-....-- \---,...4:2, ■ • •-"§--''--, .4:-:-.0•• --.... 45.J-, ., , ...„ S C/44- .6- / ' ...2‘.2 . qff..-5;°,- VItli:4‘4 • ' I I ...- .t.Ai , .1. ' 4.--,/5r;5••■55---' .,.- - 4- 7 -,',:14--tV3I. - ..,..-4:, ' . ' • --„,... `t ' , ...„...„..„..< 1 f 4 , t . "--••• .•" • ‹.--; • .-t‘- i /'•1 1 . , \ -'" 7 ' ::it'....• - ; •-- . 1 \\ .-,% ....'i., '';1 - - ...'.' I -..., 1 , , .1■■• . Z .6..6'E/%/0 5/c ... ........ ,..-x,... c• -.,. t I r"L----------; -.•- t /'/V " -.C/6-,A/ , \ --r• -7 0 ,ii.,,,,47 y.......11f,"' '..E" .//1 , - ' 4'4/,...7e,7--,s-...4. . -----.,••\"/ 2"--.‘F'..4 A/C.t. "-- 4 ..5'0 A/C)7 OA/ . .,''' ..44 VC//7-/47f z r ii - t7 t tt e_.. ,-•-•ft(.__.. a4), - " jer 4.----6- .--- ,...t." - , (7N1 - - W/4 ,. " 5/ C/V • . )/-5 / . • - /v.7--.. ,..4:74e-" ....c,„c-tc/1/ ,, STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.2 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 15, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LGI Room 10865 SW Walnut - Tigard, Or. A. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. General Information CASE: Sign Code Exception SCE 4-83 NPO # 2 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a sign code exception to allow the 6' x 12' First Interstate Bank sign to be raised from 26 ft. to 34 or 36 ft. high. ZONING DESIGNATION: C-5 RECOMMENDATION: Based on information submitted by the applicant, staff's review of applicable municipal code provisions, and field investigation, staff recommends denial of SCE 4-83. APPLICANT: Ramsey Signs Inc. OWNER: First Intersate Bank 4835 N.E. Pacific 11760 SW Hall Blvd. Portland, Or. 97213 Tigard, Oregon LOCATION: 11760 SW Hall Blvd. NPO COMMENT: NPO # 2 is inactive at this time. 2. Background On February 23, 1979, a sign permit was issued for a wall sign 100 sq. ft. in area and 18" in height. On February 6, 1981, a sign permit was issued for a free-standing sign, 72 sq. ft. in area and 26 feet in height. B. STAFF ANALYSIS AND REVIEW: The Tigard Municipal Code allows for exception to the sign code as follows: 16.34.040 EXCEPTIONS The Planning Commission or, on review, the Council may grant exceptions to the requirements of this title, when the applicant demonstrates that, owing to special or unusual circumstances relating to the design, structure, or placement of the sign in relation to other structures or land uses or the natural features of the land, the literal interpretation of this title would interfere with the communicative function of the sign without corresponding public benefit in terms of the values set forth in the TMC Section 18.59.010. 16.36.040 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES. C-3 , C-3M, C-5; and M-2, M-3 and M-4 industrial zones. Free-standing signs shall have certain limitations and conditions when permitted on properties zoned commercial and industrial. One multifaced, free-standing sign identifying the principal goods, products, facilities or services available on the premises, shall be permitted on the premises, subject to conditions and limitations as stated herein. A readerboard assembly may be an intergral part of the free-standing sign. Free-standing signs. Areas Limits. The maximum square footage of signs shall be seventy square feet per face or a total of one hundred forty square feet for all sign faces. No part of any free-standing sign shall extend over a property line into public right-of-way space. Area Limit Increases. The sign area may be increased one square foot for each lineal foot the sign is moved back from the front property line the sign is adjacent to. If the street is curbed and paved the measurement may be taken from apoint which is fifteen feet from the pavement. This increase in sign area is limited to a maximum of ninety square feet per face or a total of one hundred eighty square feet for all faces. Height Limits. Free-standing signs located next to the public right-of-way shall not exceed twenty feet in height. Height may be increased one foot in height for each ten feet of setback from the property line or a point fifteen feet from the edge of pavement wichever is less to a maximum of twenty-two feet in height. STAFF COMMENTS An exception from the height limit for a free-standing sign within a commercial zone is being requested. The First Interstate Bank sign is currently 26 feet in height. This is six feet over the maximum allowable height for a free-standing sign located next to a public right-of-way. The applicant would like to extend the height of the sign to 34 or 36 feet. The applicant has not provided reasonable justification for a sign code exception. Basd on a field investigation, staff feels that the current sign has good visibility along S.W. Pacific Highway (see attachment). If the Planning Commission approves this sign code exception, a precedent will be set for future applicants that do not have businesses fronting on SW Pacific Highway. The Planning Commission should also weigh the benefits to the community when allowing the additional sign against the effect on the intent of the Site Design Review Provisions listed here: 18.59.010 Purpose of provisions. The intent and purpose of design review is to promote the general welfare by encouraging attention to site planning and giving regard to the natural environment, creative project design and the character of the neighborhood or area. STAFF REPORT SCE 4-83 Page 2 (a) It is in the public interest and necessary for the promotion of the safety, convenience, comfort and property of the citizens of the city of Tigard: 1. To preserve and enhance the natural beauties of the land and of the man-made environment, and enjoyment thereof; 2. To maintain and improve the qualities of and realtionships between individual buildings, structures, and the physical developments which best contribute to the amenities and attractiveness of an area or neighborhood; 3. To protect and insure the adequacy and usefulness of public and private developments as they relate to each other and to the neighborhood or area; 4. To insure that each individual development provides for a quality enviromment for the citizens utilizing that development as well as the community as a whole. b. In order to prevent the erosion of natural beauty, the decay of environmental amenities and the dissipation of both usefulness and function, it is declared necessary: 1. To stimulate creative design for individual buildings, groups of buildings and structures, and other physical developments; 2. To encourage the innovative use of materials, methods and techniques; 3. To integrate the functions, appearances and locations of buildings and improvements so as to best achieve a balance between private prerogatives and preferences, and the public interest and welfare. (Ord. 77-25 Sec. 10 (part), 1977). Staff feels that the proposed sign adversely affects the intent and purpose of this design review criteria. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of SCE 4-83. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: i/A3 Steve Skorney, ^illiam A. Monahan, Assistant Planner Director of Planning and Development (0224P) STAFF REPORT SCE 4-83 Page 3 S i v� lif +r Ghc U i w s a C C-�it ►CS' v 4 C S -e c��"t y (,t�,obs u il C t w... F �-C t C 1T' c-3 1-k)-c4- t� —L----r .--'' ':--.-C\4. . ( c '. y . � _ f i Mai \\� 1 ., ■ H. W Tlcst P P C ;.l, r+ee s \\' i1 i - 209 8 # �`' � r / ~\ ii, CC \ 1? 215 P A R KIN G AREA = ` • \ 9 ' %/ �� i---. \ ////' i ,‘ ,/ / I- - ..„. 1 i ,.' -- : ) / / Affp -44:„........... II 16:1 ' iltitiiiirliii ,, t '..,,,,.,„„ :9„ ;:- \---------- - f.i,'1t;�' ' I��III„ ' A V E D - PARK 1 N G 9 '�.�, ..,, . 1 .\-. 3 ,1 ) \ 11u1I,,,.u"' .. G�PAvED ''''.' I !;"'' •5.75 P r,r�x I rl G IIIL..,' ,, \ �Z f hi ,� � . � p 111 � .,... (�' -\.....j..?:\.1 \BB ' iV\ . -. 4$ - 7 .\--1A-' G t-----\ i ■■•• i \ \ , ,-- , STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.3 NOVEMBER 15, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL LGI ROOM 10865 S.W. WALNUT, TIGARD, OREGON A. FINDING OF FACT 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 17-83 NPO #6 Zone Change ZC 13-83 REQUEST: For a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low to Medium Density residential and a Zone Change from R-7 PD to A-12, to facilitate a 174 unit condominium complex on approximately 8.5 acres. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7 PD RECOMMENDATION: Based on staff's analysis of applicable planning policies, Municipal Code provisions, existing land uses and staff's field investigation, staff recommends approval of the applicant's request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low to Medium Density. In addition, staff recommends approval of the Zone Change request from R-7 PD to A-12. APPLICANT: Marvin Smith OWNER: Same 409 S.E. 94th Vancouver, Washington 98664 LOCATION: Between Cook Park and Tigard High School off 92nd Avenue (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 14A, Tax Lot 1000) LOT AREA: 28.27 acres NPO COMMENT: No written comment had been received from NPO #6 at the writing of this report. PUBLIC NOTICES MAILED: 5 notices were mailed. No written comment had been received at the writing of this report. 2. Background None 3. Vicinity Information The surrounding land uses are as follows: Tigard High School to the north, Cook Park to the south, open space to the west, and farm land to the east (zoned light industrial). 4. Site Information The subject site is vacant and slopes to the south. The northern portion is covered by trees, and the southern portion (approximately 20 acres) is in the floodplain area and is covered by grass and brush. B. APPLICABLE PLANNING POLICIES 1. Comprehensive Plan 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. Notices were sent to all property owners within 250 feet of this application. A notice was published in the Tigard times on November 3, 1983. In addition, NPO #6 has been notified of this application. 2.1.3 THE CITY SHALL ENSURE THAT INFORMATION ON LAND USE PLANNING ISSUES IS AVAILABLE IN AN UNDERSTANDABLE FORM FOR ALL INTERESTED CITIZENS. All interested parties are given, at a minimum, 10 days to respond in writing to the application and request under consideration and are encouraged to do so. The planning staff is available to address any specific questions concerning the application or the application process. 6.1.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DIVERSITY OF HOUSING DENSITIES AND RESIDENTIAL TYPES AT VARIOUS PRICE AND RENT LEVELS. The proposal will provide an opportunity for diversified housing type, i.e. condominiums and housing density, i.e. 15 units per acres. This density is far less than what the applicant has proposed, i.e. the buildable land can accommodate approximately 100 units (with density transfer for the unbuildable land). 6.3.3 IN ALL PHASES OF THE DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL PROCESS IN A RESIDENTIAL "ESTABLISHED AREA", A PRIMARY CONSIDERATION OF THE CITY SHALL BE TO PRESERVE AND ENHANCE THE CHARACTER OF THE ADJACENT ESTABLISHED AREAS. The site is located within an established area, but it does not abut single family homes within 200 feet to the east and 500 feet to the west. Property to the east is designated Light Industrial on the Comprehensive Plan Map. 12.1.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE FOR HOUSING DENSITIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH: STAFF REPORT - CPA 17-83 & ZC 13-83 - PAGE 2 1 : - a. THE APPLICABLE PLAN POLICIES. b. THE APPLICABLE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA.. c. THE APPLICABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVISIONS. All applicable plan policies, locational criteria and Tigard Municipal Code provisions have been considered in review of this application. The location criteria to be considered in determining a change to medium density are as follows: 2. Medium Density Residential A. The following factors will be determinants of the areas designated for medium density on the plan map: (1) Areas which are not committed to low density development. (2) Areas which have direct access from collector or arterial streets. (3) Areas which are not subject to development limitations such as topography, flooding, poor drainage. (4) Areas where the existing facilities have the capacity for additional development. (5) Areas within one-half of a mile of public transportation. (6) Areas which can be buffered from low density residential areas in order to maximize the privacy of established low density residential areas. B. The following factors will be determinants of density ranges allowed through zoning in the medium density planned area: (1) The density of development in areas historically zoned for medium density development. (2) The topography and natural features of the areas and the degree of possible buffering from established low density residential areas. (3) The capacity of the services. (4) The distance to the public transit. (5) The distance to neighborhood or general commercial centers and office business centers. STAFF REPORT - CPA 17-83 & ZC 13-83 - PAGE 3 (6) The distance from public open space. The site has direct access to minor a collector (SW 92nd Ave.). The existing Public Facilities, i.e. water line on SW 92nd and sewer trunk line on southern edge of property line have the adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. The site is within one half of a mile of the public transportation. There are no single family homes within 200 feet of the subject site. However, since property to the east is designated Light Industrial on the Comprehensive Plan Map, this would warrant buffering in future. The site is within one half of a mile from a neighborhood commercial center (on corner of Hall Blvd. and Durham Road). There is a public park (Cook Park) immediately to the south of the site. Approximately 70% of the land is in the floodplain. The applicant has expressed his willingness to dedicate some of that land to the City for development or expansion of Cook Park. 2. TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE PROVISIONS: All of the requirements and provisions in the Tigard Municipal Code have been considered in review of this application. C. CONCLUSIONS Staff finds that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change conform to the applicable Planning Policies. D. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA 17-83) and zone Change (ZC 13-83) request as proposed by the applicant. RECOMMENDED MOTION 1 Should the Planning Commission decide to approve the request as presented, the following motion may be made: "Move to forward the recommendation of approval to the City Council for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment from low density to medium density, approval of the Zone Change to become effective upon Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment." V s'CL.ine. ///v/82 PREPARED BY: S. Hamid Pishvaie A' 'RO -D BY: William A. Monahan Assistant Planner Director of Planning & Development (SHP:pm/0218P) STAFF REPORT - CPA 17-83 & ZC 13-83 - PAGE 4 x NARRATIVE This property lies adjacent to Cook Park, Tigard High School, open space and a farm. Approximately 8.5 acres is above the flood plane. The reminder is flat land and is a meadow with springs. The flat area 20 acres (could, no doubt, be a recreation area and used as a soccer field; track; driving range or open area. The remaining is very suitable for cluster housing. A development is proposed for two bedroom single family condominium style residences, and will be affordable to a sector of the population that cannot afford larger single family dwellings. The school and park are convenient for families. The land is not suitable for standard size lots because of the flood plane on the lower 20 acres. The development will consist of 174 units. We believe this type of project complies with all the LCDC goals and is a type of development that enhances orderly and logical development. 1 ■ T 1.1.1 SCHOOL. DISTRICT 23 J i •ss . Z . . I cot - I .. t , • I. s I:: 1103 R • 1 1.01.0. M 1LL� I _ ___ — --I i s • •t!T X10' '0.1 4 • 1� v 25.674 1- - I 1200 .al ; • •1 30 y •I N I. 25 _� Aso..._ _�. .. 14404.0,*Ce.] et 1�14.b 10' w/ 1000 6 30 ta.t7Ac. ' 00 .l0 Ac. o l - I a o 14.7 9 . v it , , •.• • �• . 49 O sus • 1pw` r 0 . Oi Sh • • • . e 479.7!' _ _. _ 1. 4 orwN J." 20+27.0 RT. L . 1400 8' 57R S Ie 127/123 . , . 23 -IC 1 : ,,.....„ ..\. , _ . . . l, h I Cd1►,p,' Thls plat is for}our aid in 1 locating your law!with 1 re,or3nt,e \` to streets and ether parcels. f Whiio this plat is t>oli.vod to c. r f ; 'be col rect, (i;e company assumes 4; / no liability for any loss occuring ; . by ri�auan cat r-iiancn th.^r r`on. . Map Pao,02•5 / HA_ e - , I ..• SRICCO't171.r INSURANCE COMPANY ' Ut 9011 S.Yl.D 11141150.HWY. - • PORTLAND,OR 97225 . . `, r'3 .. _ ISO' Tone Co Re,Ns 2071 --274311, SEE MAP - . 1 moor #.40014' -.._--<7 Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County 150 N. First Avenue ,` Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 i'''s ' �? ,; j] 503 648-8621 i r) 41 17 - //0V / November 7 , 1983 7983 L i l Y PLANN�NG'DARD DEp7 City of Tigard 12755 S . W. Ash Avenue Tigard , Oregon 97223 Attention : City Planning Director Gentlemen : SUBJECT : REQUEST FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 17-83 ZC 13-83 This correspondence neither favors nor disfavors the proposed amendment , but does point out some concerns given the proximity of USA' s Durham Facility . To this point in time we have developed a very good relation- ship with our neighbors at Durham. However , the best operated sewage treatment facility can emit odors from time to time and the nature of the operation does result in unusual noises . In conclusion , we neither support nor oppose this request but would simply like to have the above stated facts considered. Sincerely , 0,4y A a F. I�r a fi m � . Y General Manager SAL :vr I 1. !r P /lb II// 3 F / ,ay 4 pi thd S Y l :' .e- .!'' oitt- Atak 4411 ,„ .„ ; ii ' ha I' ti hJI ft, %a%('a' fl 101 a XE a I I/4 ,digeet A t.1&le dee , t(t,4 4 i i . - iiz. 7 , -f, Ae . le/e4 ie 7 if /06ku peiii . Vid derkw /i' ' hit d ��(//�///JJ. &II i . lat, t r AI (// . f., /,, 'i e4vAlfai Al AI id g?tfil H iid / /I, i , , r . . aigh( e/ , .// / ' 6( 0/6111:4* ,6641, a dafaefrm ,Aeri / '' .i Ø (J d ad ik iiiie k ,i , ‘e ,.ii 4.614, 1* eg 1 c a 0.hee mai, i 74 i A,#.,4 ' . xitool iH, , , Lii/Plit€ #./le , &a i &Nada s a'14 : ,. , -% 1 -6 . - , ; J al i bw .i iailaci til Ade 1 . )/ . /:;i. .,#.4i a, I 1 I / /G (� .!:,1 ' / - 1ii / 5t ' 410 707 75494/4d STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEMS 5.4 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 15, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LGI ROOM 10865 S.W. Walnut - Tigard, Oregon A. FINDING OF FACT 1. General Information CASE: Subdivision S-9-83 Bond Park # 2 NPO # 5 REQUEST: For preliminary plat approval of a 24 lot single family detached subdivision. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential ZONING DESIGNATION: A-12 RECOMMENDATION: Based on information submitted by the applicant, staff's review of applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, zoning code provisions, and field investigation, staff recommends approval of the modification of S 9-83 subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. APPLICANT: Waverly Construction Co. OWNER: Fraces Tousey 11903 Broadacres NE 14660 SW 89th Ave. Hubbard, Oregon 97032 Tigard, Or. 97223 LOCATION: SW 79th off Durham Road (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 12CD lot 1600) AREA: 3.75 acres NPO COMMENT: NPO # 5 has not responded in writing to this application request. PUBLIC NOTICES MAILED: Fourteen notices were mailed. No written comments have been received at the writing of this report. 2. Background On July 12, 1983, the Planning Commission approved Bond Park # 1 subdivision. 3. Vicinity Information The surrounding area is developed as large lot single family residential. To the east, across SW 79th, a 24 lot residential subdivision is being constructed at this time (Bond Park # 1). 4. Site Information The site is vacant, wooded and bisected by a drainage swale. B. APPLICABLE PLANNING POLICIES 1. Comprehensive Plan 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. All owners of record within 250 feet of this site received notice of the hearing in the mail. A public notice was printed in the Tigard Times on November 3, 1983. In addition, NPO # 5 was notified of the application. 2.1.3 THE CITY SHALL ENSURE THAT INFORMTION ON LAND USE PLANNING ISSUES IS AVAILABLE IN AN UNDERSTANDABLE FORM FOR ALL INTERESTED CITIZENS. All interested parties are given 10 days at a minimum to comment on land use planning issues and are encouraged to do so. The planning staff is available on a regular basis to answer any questions on specific applications. 6.1.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DIVERSITY OF HOUSING DENSITIES AND RESIDENTIAL TYPES AT VARIOUS PRICE AND RENT LEVELS. The subdivision of this property will provide 24 single family lots that range from 4300 to 5500 square feet. The applicant states that by utilizing the site at this density (6.40 units per acre), it will be possible to provide affordable housing. 7.1.2 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRECONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT: a. DEVELOPMENT COINCIDE WITH THE AVAILABILITY OF ADEQUATE SERVICE CAPACITY INCLUDING: 1. PUBLIC WATER; 2. PUBLIC SEWER (NEW DEVELOPMENT ON SEPTIC TANKS SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE CITY) ; AND 3. STORM DRAINAGE. b. THE FACILITIES ARE: 1. CAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SERVING ALL INTERVENING PROPERTIES AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT; AND 2. DESIGNED TO CITY STANDARDS. c. ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES TO BE PLACED UNDERGROUND. The applicant is proposing to install public facilities in accordance with planning policies and City ordinances. STAFF REPORT S 9-83 Page 2 7.4.4 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE THAT ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER SERVICE. The applicant is proposing to connect to the Fanno Creek interceptor sewer line. 7.6.1 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRECONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT THAT: a. THE DEVELOPMENT BE SERVED BY A WATER SYSTEM HAVING ADEQUATE WATER PRESSURE FOR FIRE PROTECTION PURPOSES; b. THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT REDUCE THE WATER PRESSURE IN THE AREA BELOW A LEVEL ADEQUATE FOR FIRE PROTECTION PURPOSES: AND c. THE APPLICABLE FIRE DISTRICT REVIEW OF ALL APPLICATIONS. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has been notified of the project, but has not submitted any written comments. 8.1.3 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRECONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT: a. DEVELOPMENT ABUT A. PUBLICLY DEDICATED STREET OR HAVE ADEQUATE ACCESS APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE APPROVAL AUTHORITY; b. STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY BE DEDICATED WHERE THE STREET IS SUBSTANDARD IN WIDTH; c. THE DEVELOPER COMMIT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STREETS, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS TO THE CITY STANDARDS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT; d. INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPERS PARTICIPATE IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING STREETS, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS TO THE EXTENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACTS; e. TRANSIT STOPS, BUS TURNOUT LANES AND SHELTERS BE PROVIDED WHEN THE PROPOSED USE IS OF A TYPE WHICH GENERATES TRANSIT RIDERSHIP; f. PARKING SPACES BE SET ASIDE AND MARKED FOR CARS OPERATED BY DISABLED PERSONS AND THAT THE SPACES BE LOCATED AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE ENTRANCE DESIGNED FOR DISABLED PERSONS; AND g. LAND BE DEDICATED TO IMPLEMENT THE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADOPTED PLAN. The applicant is proposing to improve S.W. 76th and S.W. 79th Streets to approved City standards. S.W. Bond Street will be constructed to City standards. STAFF REPORT S 9-83 Page 3 12.1.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE FOR HOUSING DENSITIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH: a. THE APPLICABLE PLAN POLICIES. b. THE APPLICABLE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA. c. THE APPLICABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVISIONS. The density proposed in the development conforms to those set in the new adopted Comprehensive Plan policies, plan map and interim zoning map. 12.5.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE LOCATION OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES IN A MANNER WHICH ACCORDS WITH: a. THE APPLICABLE POLICIES IN THIS PLAN; b. THE LOCATIONAL CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO THE SCALE AND STANDARDS OF THE USE. 1. SITE CHARACTERISTICS a. THE USE SHALL BE ALLOWED PROVIDED: (1) THE UNIQUE NATURAL FEATURES, IF ANY, CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO THE DESIGN OF THE FACILITIES OR ARRANGEMENT OF LAND USES. The applicant's proposal conforms to all applicable planning policies and locational criteria. C. TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE PROVISIONS SUBDIVISION 17.16.100 Tentative Approval. Within sixty days of the date of 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 given 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 thereof. 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 subdivision maps or 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. STAFF REPORT S 9-83 Page 4 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. D. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of S 9-83 with the following conditions: 1. Seven (7) sets of plan-profile public improvement construction plans and one (1) itemized construction cost estimate, stamped by a registered civil engineer, detailing all proposed public improvements shall be submitted to the City's Engineering Division for review. 2. Construction of proposed public improvements shall not commence until after the Engineering Division has issued approved public improvement plans. The Engineering Division will require posting of a 100% performance bond, the payment of a permit fee and a sign installation/streetlight deposit. Also, the execution of a street opening permit or construction compliance agreement just prior to, or at the time of, it's issuance of approved public improvement plans. 3. Public sewer lines shall be extended to the project boundaries in all directions. 4. The final subdivision plat shall be recorded with Washington County prior to the issuance of any Building Permits. 5. No changes or modifications shall be made to approved plans without written approval from the appropriate City department. 6. The applicant shall improve SW 79th Ave beyond the project boundary to Durham using City Interim Standards. RECOMMENDED MOTION Should the Planning Commission adopt staff's recommendation, the following motion may be made: "Move to approve, with conditions, the applicant's request for a Preliminary Plat of Bond Park # 2 (S 9-83), a 24 lot subdivision." PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: -. -- / �) /` Steve Skorney, William A. Monahan, Assistant Planner Director of Planning and Development STAFF REPORT S 9-83 Page 5 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.5 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 15, 1983 - 7:30 P.M. FOWLER JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL - LGI Room 10865 SW WALNUT ST. -- TIGARD, OR. A. FINDING OF FACT 1. General Information CASE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT S 8-83 PD (Park Place) NPO # 3 REQUEST: The applicant is requesting conceptual and detailed plan approval of a Planned Development, consisting of 215 single family units. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONING DESIGNATION: R-7 (PD) RECOMMENDATION: Based on information submitted by the applicant, staff's review of applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, zoning code provisions, and field investigation, staff recommends approval of a conceptual and detailed plan of S-8-83 PD, subject to the conditions listed in this staff report. APPLICANT: Century 21 Homes Inc. OWNER: Same 7412 SW Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy. Portland, Or. 97225 LOCATION: 13900 SW 121st Ave. (Wash. Co. Tax Map 2S1 3CC lot 401 and 2S1 4 Lot 1400). AREA: 47.81 acres NPO COMMENT: NPO # 3 has responded in writing to this application request. PUBLIC NOTICES MAILED: Seventeen notices were mailed. No written comments have been received at the writing of this report. 2. Background No previous actions on this property. 3. Vicinity Information The surrounding land uses are as follows: To the north is designated low density residential, unicorporated and undeveloped at the present time. To the south is designated low density residential, zoned R-20, and undeveloped at the present time. To the east is designated low density residential, unincorporated and developed as single family residences. To the west is unicorporated land which is outside of the City's urban growth boundary. 4. Site Information Slopes on the site are generally oriented east to northeast, with some interuptions due to stream dissection. The slope range is from 5 to over 25%, the steepest areas occurring along the two stream incisions. For the purposes of this analysis, the slopes are divided into 5 categories: 0-10% 9.5 acres, 10-15% 10.5 acres, 15-20% 13.5 acres, 20-25% 9.5 acres, and over 25% 5 acres. The degree of difficulty, cost, and risk of development rises proportionately as the slopes increase over about 15%. Soils on the site appear to be silts and clayey silts of moderate to poor drainage. Depth to bedrock is undetermined, but it is probably near the surface in the higher portion of the site, while fairly deep in the lower areas. There is evidence of soil creep, stream undercutting of slopes, and small surface landslides on the property. These occurrences are not uncommon in this type of terrain, but nevertheless should be investigated carefully before development occurs. Potential problems observed in the field are evidenced by: leaning and bent trees, erosion of the base of the ravines, broken, warped topography, and escarpments where some shallow slides probably occurred. While the upper portions of the slopes, ridges and terraces appear to be safe for development, the lower slopes and drainages should be investigated further if any changes are done to these areas. Specifically, steep road cuts, removal of vegetation and increased storm water flows into the ravines could create future problems, which can be avoided by undertaking a more detailed geologic investigation at the appropriate time. Surface drainage is directed into two large ravines, both of which originate uphill of the land being considered. The first of these occurs in the extreme western portion of the site. Direction of the drainage is to the east. Consequently, a deep ravine creates a formidable divide between the northwest and southwest portions of the property. This ravine merges with the second drainageway, an even deeper and larger ravine that orients northerly and effectively divides the entire property into east and west halves. This second drainage appears to be spring fed from further up on Bull Mountain, and may be perennial. A long, broad ridgeline parallels the larger ravine, causing surface drainage in much of the eastern portion of the property to mve east-northeast. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 2 Other land forms on the site include a small, sloping terrace in the northeast quadrant, a surface depression created by a man-made excavation and dam along the large ravine, and a second, larger terrace in the southeast quadrant. In summary, the east facing slopes and ravines are the most significant topographic features of the site. Vegetation growth on the site varies considerably. First, the southeast portion of the site is primarily a meadow with scattered trees, including filbert, hickory, fir and cedar. Generally this area has an open character. Adjacent to this area to the west is an old, neglected filbert: orchard. To the north of the orchard is a pasture area, open except for another, smaller orchard and a stand of large, handsome douglas fir. To the west, a dense woodland of Western Chinkapin, Red Alder, Bigleaf Maple, Douglas Fir, Cherry, and Cedar stretches south to north along both sides of the large ravine, and up slope into the southwest quadrant of the site. These trees are important in that they divide the site visually in half, in addition to their value in stabilizing the steep slopes along the ravine. The northwest portion of the property is a large meadow, with a few scattered trees. It is surrounded by woods on all sides, although the woods immediately to the west (off the subject property) are more brush than forest. B. APPLICABLE PLANNING POLICIES 1. Comprehensive Plan 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. Notices were sent to all property owners within 250 feet of this application. A notice was published in the Tigard Times on November 3, 1983. NPO # 3 was notified of this application. 2.1.3 THE CITY SHALL ENSURE THAT INFORMATION ON LAND USE PLANNING ISSUES IS AVAILABLE IN AN UNDERSTANDABLE FORM FOR ALL INTERESTED CITIZENS. All interested parties are given, at a minimum, 10 days to respond in writing to the application and request under consideration and are encouraged to do so. The planning staff is available to address any specific questions concerning the application or the application process. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 3 3.1.1 THE CITY SHALL NOT ALLOW DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS HAVING THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS EXCEPT WHERE IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT ESTABLISHED AND PROVEN ENGINEERING TECHNIQUES RELATED TO A SPECIFIC SITE PLAN WILL MAKE THE AREA SUITABLE FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: a. AREAS HAVING A HIGH SEASONAL WATER TABLE WITHIN 0-24 INCHES OF THE SURFACE FOR THREE OR MORE WEEKS OF THE YEAR: b. AREAS HAVING A SEVERE SOIL EROSION POTENTIAL; c. AREAS SUBJECT TO SLUMPING, EARTH SLIDES OR MOVEMENT; d. AREAS HAVING SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25%; OR e. AREAS HAVING SEVERE WEAK FOUNDATION SOILS. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The City shall designate on a map areas having physical limitation drained, seasonally flooded, ground instability) and shall (poorly Y , g Y incorporate these designations in the Tigard Community Development Code and Map, and shall develop graduated development restrictions according to the distinct characteristics of the constraints and anticipated limitations. 2. The City shall revise the sensitive lands section of the Tigard Community Development Code to identify those areas that have distinct constraints and limitations. 3. The City shall cooperate with other agencies to help identify these areas. 4. The City of Tigard shall provide in the Community Development Code that the City may require site specific soil surveys and geologic studies where potential hazards are identified based upon available geologic and soils evidence. When natural hazards are identified, the City will require that special design considerations and construction measures be taken to offset the soil and geologic constraints present in order to protect life and property, and to protect environmentally sensitive areas. 5. The Community Development Code shall not permit developments to be planned or located in known areas of natural disasters and hazards without appropriate safeguards. 6.1.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR DIVERSITY OF HOUSING DENSITIES AND RESIDENTIAL TYPES AT VARIOUS PRICE AND RENT LEVELS. IMPLEMENATION STRATEGIES 3. The Tigard Community Development Code, through the Planned Development process, shall establish a procedure to allow properties exhibiting physical constraint characteristics, e.g. , steep slopes or floodplains, to develop with density transfers allowable on the site. No more than 25% of the dwellings may be transferred. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 4 5. The City shall encourage housing development to occur, to the greatest extent possible, on designated buildable lands in areas where public facilities and services can be readily extended to those lands. 6.4.1 THE CITY SHALL DESIGNATE RESIDENTIAL "DEVELOPING AREAS," (WHICH ARE NOT DESIGNATED AS "ESTABLISHED AREAS") ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP, AND ENCOURAGE FLEXIBLE AND EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THESE AREAS. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 3. Within the Planned Development section of the Tigard Community Development Code: a. Development will be prohibited on lands not classified as developable as defined in OAR 660-07-140; b. Twenty-five percent of the number of units which could be accommodated on the undevelopable land may be transferred and placed on the developable land; however c. The transfer of the density shall be limited by 125% of the top of the range of the residential plan classification on the developable portions of the site. 4. The Tigard Community Development Code shall also provide for a Planned Development process which encourages innovative design, more efficient use of land, energy efficiency and more flexible development standards. 7.1.2 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRECONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT: a. DEVELOPMENT COINCIDE WITH THE AVAILABILITY OF ADEQUATE SERVICE CAPACITY INCLUDING: 1. PUBLIC WATER; 2. PUBLIC SEWER (NEW DEVELOPMENT ON SEPTIC TANKS SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE CITY) ; AND 3. STORM DRAINAGE. b. THE FACILITIES ARE: 1. CAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SERVING ALL INTERVENING PROPERTIES AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT; AND 2. DESIGNED TO CITY STANDARDS. c. ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES TO BE PLACED UNDERGROUND. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 4 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 3. Where sewer is not available to site, the developer shall be required to extend the services to the site at the developer's cost. The City shall adopt an ordinance providing for partial cost as intervening parcels are developed by the intervening landowners. 4. The Tigard Community Development code shall establish an ordinance which indicates: a. That services shall be extended from property line to property line, including services located in adjacent rights-of-ways; except b. That the ordinance shall allow for the phasing of such services if a development proposal indicates such phasing. 7.2.1 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRE-CONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT THAT: a. A SITE DEVELOPMENT STUDY BE SUBMITTED FOR DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS SUBJECT TO POOR DRAINAGE, GROUND INSTABILITY OR FLOODING WHICH SHOWS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IS SAFE AND WILL NOT CREATE ADVERSE OFFSITE IMPACTS; b. NATURAL DRAINAGE WAYS BE MAINTAINED UNLESS SUBMITTED STUDIES SHOW THAT ALTERNATIVE DRAINAGE SOLUTIONS CAN SOLVE ON-SITE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS AND WILL ASSURE NO ADVERSE OFFSITE IMPACTS; c. ALL DRAINAGE CAN BE HANDLED ON-SITE OR THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION WHICH WILL NOT INCREASE OFFSITE IMPACT; d. THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION AS ESTABLISHED BY THE 1981 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY CONDUCTED BY THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS BE PROTECTED; AND e. EROSION CONTROL TECHNIQUES BE INCLUDED AS A PART OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 7.4.4 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE THAT ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER SERVICE. 7.6.1 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRECONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT THAT: a. THE DEVELOPMENT BE SERVED BY A WATER SYSTEM HAVING ADEQUATE WATER PRESSURE FOR FIRE PROTECTION PURPOSES; b. THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT REDUCE THE WATER PRESSURE IN THE AREA BELOW A LEVEL ADEQUATE FOR FIRE PROTECTION PURPOSES: AND c. THE APPLICABLE FIRE DISTRICT REVIEW OF ALL APPLICATIONS. STAFF REPORT S 8-93 PD Page 5 8.1.3 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRECONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT: a. DEVELOPMENT ABUT A PUBLICLY DEDICATED STREET OR HAVE ADEQUATE ACCESS APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE APPROVAL AUTHORITY; b. STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY BE DEDICATED WHERE THE STREET IS SUBSTANDARD IN WIDTH; • c. THE DEVELOPER COMMIT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STREETS, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS TO THE CITY STANDARDS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT; d. INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPERS PARTICIPATE IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING STREETS, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS TO THE EXTENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACTS; e. TRANSIT STOPS, BUS TURNOUT LANES AND SHELTERS BE PROVIDED WHEN THE PROPOSED USE IS OF A TYPE WHICH GENERATES TRANSIT RIDERSHIP; f. PARKING SPACES BE SET ASIDE AND MARKED FOR CARS OPERATED BY DISABLED PERSONS AND THAT THE SPACES BE LOCATED AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE ENTRANCE DESIGNED FOR DISABLED PERSONS; AND g. LAND BE DEDICATED TO IMPLEMENT THE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADOPTED PLAN. h. LAND BE DEDICATED TO IMPLEMENT THE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADOPTED PLAN. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 5. The City's Tigard Community Development Code shall require developers of land to dedicate necessary rights-o ,rays and install necessary street improvemens to the City's standards when such improvements have not been done prior to the developer's proposals. These necessary dedications may be required upon approval of any development proposal. 11.3.1 THE CITY SHALL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING WHEN PREPARING STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS THAT AFFECT S.W. 121ST AVENUE OR GAARDE STREET. a. THE IMPACT ON THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AND THE ALTERNATIVES WHICH HAVE THE MINIMUM ADVERSE EFFECT IN TERMS OF: 1. REDUCING THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE DWELLING AND THE STREET; AND 2. NOISE IMPACTS. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 6 1/ b. THE EFFECT THE IMPROVEMENT WILL HAVE ON THE TRAFFIC FLOW AND THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON OTHER STREET INTERSECTIONS. c. MINIMIZING THE USE OF THESE STREET AS PART OF THE ARTERIAL SYSTEM FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC. 11.3.2 THE CITY OF TIGARD SHALL WORK WITH OTHER GOVERNMENTAL BODIES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ARTERIAL ROUTE CONNECTION FROM MURRAY BOULEVARD OR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO PACIFIC HIGHWAY. THIS ARTERIAL ROUTE SHOULD BE LOCATED WEST OF BULL MOUNTAIN, AND SHOULD NOT UTILIZE ROADS WHICH PASS THROUGH EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS WITHIN TIGARD. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. S.W. Gaarde Street and S.W. 121st Avenue (between Gaarde and Walnut) shall developed as two-lane roads with pedestrian-bicycle paths, restricted parking and left turning lanes as needed at congested intersections. 2. The undeveloped land along S.W. 121st Avenue (south of Walnut) shall be planned for development in accordance with the locational criteria policies that apply to locating medium and higher densities close to arterials and in accordance with the policies for "Established" and "Developing" areas. 3. The Tigard Community Development Code shall require site development review for any development other than a single or two family structure. The site development review shall include review of street right-of-way and pavement location. C. TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE. 18.56.010 Purpose. The purpose of the planned development district is to allow the planning commission and the city council the opportunity to review large and complex developments within this community. This designation is used to protect sensitive land areas, ensure reasonable conformance to the standards established in the underlying zones, address major transportation difficulties and allow a degree of flexibility not usually associated with development. In most cases where sensitive lands, open space, or park areas are included within a development, that development, whether commercial, industrial, or residential, shall be reviewed as a planned development district. This designation may be applied to both permitted uses and conditional uses in all zones. (Ord. 80-94 Section 1 (part), 1980). 18.56.021 Conceptual review. (a) The planning commission shall review the conceptual development plan and report and may act to grant conceptual approval, approval with conditions or modifications, or denial. Such action shall be based on the comprehensive plan, the standards of this title, and other regulations, and the suitability of the proposed development in relation to the existing character of the area. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 7 A (b) Approval in principle of the conceptual development plan and report shall be limited to the conceptual acceptability of the land uses proposed and their interrelationships, and shall not be construed to endorse precise location of uses nor engineering feasibility. The planning commission may require the development of other information than that specified in Section 18.56.030 to be submitted with the general development plan and report. However, the applicant should be as specific as possible concerning such issues as floodplain use, traffic ciruclation patterns, and density calculations, etc. The more accurate the proposal, the easier it will be for the planning commission to render a decision. In many cases, the conceptual and detailed development plan review process can be accomplished at one hearing. (c) No appeal of a denial of a conceptual development plan and report shall be allowed. The intent of the conceptual review is to ascertain staff, planning commission, and the affected citizens' concerns relative to a particular project. The applicant's responsibility is to address these concerns prior to a rehearing of the conceptual development plan before the Planning Commission. (Ord. 80-94 Section 1 (part), 1980). 18.56.030 Detailed development plan and report. (a) Upon receipt of an application for a detailed plan and report review, the payment of the appropriate fee, and the submission of all appropriate supporting documents, the planning director shall initiate a review of the detailed plan and report. Particular attention shall be paid to the issues developed as a result of the conceptual development plan and report review. If significant differences arise, the planning director may schedule study sessions with the planning commission and the applicant to resolve the issues prior to a public hearing. Thereafter, if the planning director or planning commission agree, the applicant shall proceed to a detailed plan hearing. (b) The detailed development plan and report shall consist of final plans showing the project as it will be constructed. All material which accompanied the conceptual development plan and report shall be updated to reflect the conditions, concerns, and changes brought about by the preliminary review approval. All deviations or variances from the standards prescribed by this title in specific terms, all deviations or variances from the standards and specifications and requirements of Title 17 of this code. which are being proposed to be varied from, shall be addressed in writing with a showing that the public health, safety and welfare will be best served by such proposal. (Ord. 81-19 Section 1 (part), 1981; Ord. 80-94 Section 1 (part), 1980). D. CONCLUSIONS 1. Staff Comments There are approximately 47.81 total acres on the site; of which 42.81 acres are buildable and 5 acres are unbuildable (slopes in excess of 25%). STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 8 The buildable land will allow 193 dwelling units, 43 in Phase I and 150 in Phase II. Twenty-five percent of the number of units which could be accommodated on the undevelopable land may be transferred and placed on • the developable land not to exceed 125% of the allowed density on the developable portions of the site. A density transfer of 5 units can occur (5 acres x 4.5 units per acres, divided by 4) Thus, with the density transfer, the entire project can accommodate 198 dwelling units. The applicant proposes 215 units for the site and indentifies no sensitve land forms within the project - no slopes over 25%. There are no steep slopes in Phase I but Phase II has more slope's over 25% than any similar size area in the City of Tigard. Since the application is for the whole area, the extent and location of steep sloped areas needs to be confirmed by a registered engineer. The application specifies attached units in Phase II. Attached dwelling units are allowed only as a conditional use in an R-7 zone. The Public Works Department reviewed the project and finds the sanitary sewer and storm drainage plan acceptable. However, the Department found the public street plan for the site not designed to City standards. One hundred and twenty-first Avenue should be designed for 60 feet of right-of-way and 44 feet of pavement. Also, no provisions were made for bicycle paths on the extension of Gaarde Street. The Public Works Department found the V-notch private streets inadequately designed. They would like to see the load design of the public streets engineered to City standards. The dwelling units within Phase I will be served primarily by the private loop streets. There will be accesses onto the loops from public streets. The loop streets will be one-way with parking only allowed on one side of the street. The Tigard Police will only go onto the private streets to answer a call. The City Council would have to adopt an ordinance allowing the police to enter private streets to issue traffic/parking citiations. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has reviewed the project and approves of the development with conditions which have been made a part of staff's recommendation. The applicant did not provide the Planning Department with an analysis of existing and proposed traffic circulation patterns for the development. The proposed extension of Murray Boulevard to Gaarde Street will have a major impact on the design of the Park Place development. The Murray Road extension to SW Gaarde Street is in accordance with Washington County's desire for a thoroughfare to SW Pacific Highway. Under the terms of the Urban Planning Area Agreement, the City cannot preclude any transportation options related to the Murray Road extension. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 9 NPO # 3 feels that the approval of this project should leave open the options for a more indirect route, as stated in Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. The applicant feels that the Murray Road extension will place a hardship on the Park Place project if the extension is routed entirely through their property. Frank Currie, the City Public Works Director, reviewed the Park Place project and concluded that the Gaarde St. extension alignment "would seem to shift an alledged hardship from Century 21 land, generally not suited for development, to property owned by others, which seems on the surface to be more suited to development, while adding several hundred feet to the length of the road." Martin C. Nizlek, former Transportation Manager of Washington County, has stated that the applciant should view the option of extending Gaarde Street west to and along the Park Place project's west property line. 2. NPO # 3 COMMENTS 1. South of the proposed development is not zoned R-7 as shown in the application, but is R-20. This fact calls for appropriate ro riate considerations: in particular the need to move the private drive at least 5 feet northward, away from the property line, and to provide some buffering landscaping in this area. 2. The application appears to be specifying a street width less than the standard for Questor Blvd. The application refers to a 32 foot wide conventional street. 3. The 12.58 acres of "permanent" open recreational space is not included in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions as part of the common area owned by the association. 4. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions refers to the rights of ownership as residing with the owners of lots. Are lots 1, 2, and 3 legal lots or is the Declaration referring to a different ownership property? 5. Concerning SW 121st Avenue, the right-of-way standard for collector streets is 60 feet, not 50 feet. Therefore the applicant needs to dedicate an additional 10 feet of right-of-way along 121st Avenue. Also, approval of the project should be contingent upon a half-street improvement of 22 feet of pavement from the present center line including curbs, sidewalks and the stop sign. 6. The applicant's suggestion to extend SW 121st Avenue southward beyond Gaarde Street presents an in appropriate adverse impact on the neighborhoods to the south, which are situated along Bull Mountain Road. Bob Bledsoe suggested that the NPO oppose this suggestion and offer instead, a looping traffic pattern similar to Genesis Loop. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 10 Larry Barnum also testified concerning the devaluation to the expensive homes in the Ames and Shadow Hills Subdivisions if SW 121st Avenue were to be extended into those neighborhoods. The NPO decided by unanimous motion to oppose the extension of SW 121st Avenue, and to offer the alternative looping traffic pattern for those neighborhoods. 7. Without the extension of SW 121st Avenue, there is no need for a left turn lane east of 121st Ave. on Gaarde Street. Two lanes should be sufficient. 8. The intended connection of the bicycle/jogging path to Gaarde/121st is not shown. F. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Conceptual and General Plan of S 8-83 PD with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall apply for Preliminary Plat Subdivision approval for Phase I within one year of Detailed Plan approval. 2. The applicant must improve the intersection of S.W. 121st and Gaarde at least 200 feet north and east to City standards. 3. All on-site streets, curbs, and sidewalks will be constructed to City standards within the development. 4. The storm drainage system for the project will be connected to the existing piped system or a storm water storage system will need to be developed for the site and approved by the City Engineer at the time of Preliminary Plat submission. 5. A detailed traffic circulation study for the development related to existing or proposed transportation facilities on and off site shall submitted to the City a the time of the preliminary plat application. 6. The applicant must apply for site development review at the time of submission of the preliminary plat. 7. If the 24 foot wide private streets are made one-way, parking will only be allowed on one side of the street. 8. Hydrants are to be located at Questor and Gaarde at the 4-way intersection of Gaarde and private streets. (Hydrants shall be approved by the Tigard Water District.) 9. The applicant must provide bicycle lanes on the Gaarde St./Murray Road within the project boundaries. STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 11 • RECOMMENDED MOTION: Should the Planning commission adopt staff's recommendation, the following motion may be made: "Move to approve, with conditions, the applicant's request for conceptual and detailed plan approval of S 8-83 PD. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: j&vim{/ _ Steve Skorney, •'iam A. Monahan, Assistant Planner Director of Planning and Development 0224P STAFF REPORT S 8-83 PD Page 12 19S3 F Rom Sab Aboo l TO `% 2raf 171 aNN/e7 Cokm 17!I6'5,2 S ur;J CC r: P"me'(/ 0 /(//0", - S r- r3 / P (i3,-' P�dre e 12. , Dc .4 , A /1 , -t, .tee/ t Fes .. . C C(-r 7c -y -f hirrt r,.do +c 4J 74/2 S w 4,0. "/T7%/'s 46f �7L.- 154111/7 03- L /4-00 51 4 ) ,A✓1t,z4, lerpr.-vte,11. A771,- "V-e-e_ 64,-e ) e-e-11 i/ve / ` az,?`- /9,8'3 4 f,>€0e.),-6-4._._ _ . . N �' G NPO #3 MEETING MINUTES September 12, 1983 1. Called to order at 7:25 P.M. 2. Roll Call: Present were Bledsoe, Ramsdell(7:32), Smith, Mortensen, and Porter. Milt Eyre has been appointed to the Planning Commission, but he is remaining as a general member of NPO #3. Visitors were Althea Rodde and Betty McCain. Staff were Steve Skorney and Liz Newton. 3. The chairman forgot to bring the minutes of July 25, 1983. 4. Review of Park Place development application by Century 21 Homes. Bob Miller of Century 21 Homes. Bob Miller of Century 21 had said he would attend our meeting, but he never came, although Liz checked the lobby several times. In our review of this application, NPO #3 has the following concerns and opinions: a. The route for SW Gaarde Street to 135th and Walnut is in accordance with the County's desires for a thoroughfare between Murray Blvd. and Pacific Hwy. Under the terms of the UPAA, the City cannot exclude this possibility. However, the approval of this application should leave open the options for a more indirect route, as specified in Tigard's adopted comprehensive plan, including connection to SW 132nd Avenue instead of 135th and Walnut. b. The road alignment of SW Gaarde, including in particular the . termination point of Phase I, should be moved westward so as to impact the Rodde property less (Tax lot 300). c. Steve Skorney reported that the City Engineer would like to see the County standard of a 70-foot right-of-way for Gaarde Street instead of the proposed 60 feet. This is a change from a discussion that Bob Bledsoe had with Frank Curry, in which Mr. Curry said he wanted to see a 60-foot right-of-way with the contingent restrictive easement of 5 feet on each side. NPO #3 strongly supports the 60-foot right-of-way with the contingent easement. d. The County standard for major collector is a roadway designed for speeds of 35-45 mph. The City standard for minor collector is a roadway designed for speeds at 25-35 mph. Since 35 mph is the common ground in this controversy, that is the speed that should be designed for—no more and no less. The radius agreed upon by Frank curry and the County is 700 feet. At that radius the super elevation should be limited to 7% maximum, in order to provide for speeds of up to 35 mph. e. Stop signs should be included at 121st and Gaarde. f. Setbacks on Questor Blvd. should be 20 feet instead of the proposed 15 feet. The purpose of keeping the standard setback in this instance is to avoid discouraging the use of Questor Blvd. as a minor collector. Although designed to local street standards, it is the only road that will be servicing the other side of the ravine and will therefore function as a minor collector. o g. NPO #3 was concerned about the placement of the private road serving units 27-30 on the property line, especially since the land to the south is zoned R-1, which is considerably different than the R-4.5 PD of this development. We recommend moving the private road at least 5 feet northward, and including landscaping between the road and the property line. This area would be a good place to extend the jogging path from Unit 32 to the intersection of Gaarde and 121st. h. The use of the gas line easement as a jogging path and nature trail is not a suitable routing for those purposes. In some areas where the slopes are gradual, the route is O.K. , but otherwise, the route of the trail should be designed with the users in mind, not just for the convenience of the developers. I . 5. Our next meeting will be the regular meeting for October. Our regular meetings will be on the Monday of the first Council meeting of the month. That should be October 3, 7:15 P.M. at Fowler Jr. High School. (pm/0182P) . NPO #3 MEETING MINUTES October 24, 1983 I. Called to order at 7:45 P.M. , the delay being necessary to obtain a quorum. II. Roll call: present were Bledsoe, Fyre, Porter, and Moonier. Excused absent were Ramsdell, Smith, and Mortensen (who was sick). Staff was Planner Steve Skorney. Visitors were Geraldine Ball, Larry and Debby Barnum, J.B. Bishop, Robert Campbell, Bill Clyde , Duane and Julia Ehr, Ralph Furrer, Jo Hobbs, Jim Horsley, Jeanette Kromer, Chuck Lehman, Alex Machin, Lindzey McArthur, Bob Miller--Century 21 Properties, Mark Neer, Eunice Painton, Marty Poorman, Roger and D. Regehr, Bibianne Scheckla, Ima Scott, Mary Stanford, C.H. Stearn, and Joe Van Lom, archetect--along with about 5 others associated with his project. III. Minutes--Due to the delay in starting, review of the minutes will be postponed until next meeting. IV. Review of Joe Van Lom's project on Pacific Highway between Park Street and School Street: The development proposal consists of 4725 ft2 Retail/Automotive next to School Street, a 3260 sq.ft. Fast Food Restaurant--it will be Dairy Queen which will move here from the other side of the highway--, a 5700 to 7100 sq.ft. Retail Shop Building, and a 2400 sq.ft. convenience store next to Park Street. There is a 30 to 50 feet wide landscaped. area to buffer the convenience store from Grant Street. The plan shows two 24-foot access driveways on the highway, one access on Park Street, and a service access on Grant Street. The entire complex is to be design coordinated, and it will be developed under the existing (old) code. The complex will be devided into 3 lots, with different ownership., and therefore may not be built as one phase. To keep a clean appearance the owners will sign a maintenance agreement. The convenience store will apply for an OLCC license. In order to protect the convenience store from loitering, a video arcade will not be allowed. So far the only firm committment is the Dairy Queen. Southland (7-11) and Schuck's Auto Supply have shown interest. This information was given by Joe Van Lom in his presentation and in answer to questions. Almost all of the visitors asked questions and/or made comments about the development proposal. The primary concerns seemed to be traffic safety and the safety of children walking to and from Charles F. Tigard School. In regard to the children, it was agreed that a route other than across the access points -on Pacific Highway is important. There was a division of opinion g pinion anion ' the citizens and neighbors about an idea of opening up the service way to allow pedestrian traffic through the rear of the site. One or two said the children have learned to use Grant Street and there is no need to open up the short-cut again. Problems of liability to the owners 'was mentioned. The representative of the school district mentioned concerns about the back passage in regard to possible attacks as occurred o ' a Beaverton bikepath recentcy. Page 2--NPO #3 Minutes, October 24, 1983 In regard to traffic, several people expressed strong opinions that the, deceleration lane to School Street should be extended, so that cars don't suddenly stop to enter as they do for Wendy's. Also it was expressed that more than just a sign or arrow was needed to guide traffic to the right upon leaving the Dairy Queen, probably some curbing. There was concern about the possibility of an excess of traffic on Grant Street, a4._ 4-6,x . and it was suggested that speed bumps be installed to discourage use as a thoroughfare. Mr. Van Lom was agreeable to all of the above traffic e suggestions. The feeling of NPO #3 seems to be generally good 'in relation to this initial proposal. The motion was made and passed unanimously that NPO #3 go on record to concur with the concerns raised by the citizens and neighbors in attendance, concerning the problems of traffic and safety of children; and that we encourage staff to work with the developer to address these problems., A sign-up list was passed around for those who wished to be notified of the decision of the Planning Director, and several signed it. NPO #3 would of course want to receive the decision. Other items that this writer forgot to include above are: The vegetation in front will be kept low so as not to obscure vision for cars accessing the highway. ThererWill be a solid fence and vegetaion along the rear property line. Mr Van Lom said there were about 106 parking spaces in the plan, whereas only 76 were required (I have counted 99). The proposal ca11s' for a fence along the back corner by school street up to the Auto Supply building, but not along the side of the building, and established st ablished of signs was not g not in front. The placement yet; each occupant would be entitled to at least one sign. The staff will/supply the NPO with a copy of the final site plan as submitted for approval. V. Review of Park Place development application for 47.8 acres at SW 121st and SW Gaarde. Robert Miller of Century 21 Homes presented the proposal. We had seen some of it in our last meeting but Mr. Miller did not come because Planner Hamid Pishvaie had told him the meeting (at Planning Commission) was cancelled. Apparently there was some confusion in communication between Mr. Miller and the planning staff. The application is for single family detached condominium cottages, said to be priced at about $80,000 per unit. For comparison, a conventional development that would normally cost $65,000 to $80,000 could be reduced to the cost of $48,500 to $70,000 by using the techniques employed by Century 21 in this application. These techniques were employed at London Square off of Greenburg Road in Tigard. • This will be a phased development because of City requirements--all they really want at this time is approval of Phase I. There will be a requirement in the Homeowners Association that the grounds be maintained; members of the NPO pointed out the difficulties of actually enforcing those provisions. The one-way private drives will have parking allowed on one side, which they hope will meet staff's parking requirements. • Page 3--NPO #3 Minutes, October 24, 1983 Joe Gruelich of the Fire District said that was O.K. from their point of view. Mr. Miller said that the constraints of locating a major road through the project, which could not be used for individual access, has forced this type of development instead of something more conventional. Herman Porter requested staff to look into the legality of the ownership, not of lots, but of buildings, and also the placing of many single family detached structures on an individual lot; the NPO concurred in this request. Bob Bledsoe noted the following major concerns with the initial application forms, submitted in September, 1983: 1. Page 3, #12; Site Plan Check #A-11; Site Development Analysis Form: Sensitive Land Areas; Narrative--page 2. In all these items the applica- -tion asserts that there are no sensitive land forms within the project area, and that there are no slopes over 25%. This may be true of Phase I, which is mostly in Lot 401, but it is definitely not true of the whole project--Lot 1 400 has more slopes over 25% than any similar size area in Tigard's planning area. Since the application is for the whole area, the extent and location of steep (over 25%) sloped areas needs to be specified and certified by a registered professional engineer. 2. Page 3 #18; page 4, #23; and Site Development Analysis Form. The application specifies attached units in Phase II. This requires a conditional use permit; and either the attached units should be omitted, or else a complete conditional use permit application should be submitted in detail. 3. Page 4, #21 and #23, and the Density Calculation Form. There seems to be serious problems with the number of housing units applied for, both for the total project (215) and for Phase I (43). No density bonus has been applied for, but the application appears to use some of the density transfer provisions allowed in the Comprehensive Plan. The application shows 12.58 acres dedicated as "permanent" open space. (Why is that word in quotation marks on the first page of the narrative?) Some of this land may qualify for density transfer, but that has not been shown. The number of square feet shown in public dedications and public facilities definitely seems inadequate. The area of Phase I is not stated except on the School Impact Statement where it is listed as 9.6 acres; but by subtracting the other areas on the map dated August 15, 1983, one arrives at 8.64 acres--the area should be clearly stated in the determination of the density for Phase I. Planner Steve Skorney said he had calculated 168 units for the total project, and that the density transfer provisions would have to be met in order to achieve the densities shown in Phase I. 4. Page 2, #8 at the bottom of the page. South of the proposed development is not zoned R-7 as shown, but it is R-20; and this fact calls for appropriate considerations: in particular the need to move the private drive at least 5 feet northward, away from the property line, and to Page 4--NPO #3 Minutes, October 24, 1983 provide some buffering landscaping in this area. See item 4g in the NPO #3 minutes of September 12, 1983. 5. The application appears to be specifying street width less than the standard for Questor Blvd. The last sentence on the page entitled, "Park Place Planned Development," refers to a 32-foot wide conventional street. Probably this was part of the basis for the area of public facilities listed in the Density Calculation Form. Questor Blvd. should be clearly specified and built as a standard local or minor collector road. 6. The 12.58 acres of "permanent" open recreational space is not included by the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions as part of the common area owned by the association. In addition, minor problems noted with the initial application included the following: 7. Page 3, #9A. To the north of Tax Lot 1400 is a farm, and to the west of Lot 1400 is vacant. 8. Site Plan Check List #A7 states that transit facilities are not applicable to the application. Bus #45 traverses 121st Ave. and Gaarde Street, and a bus stop and possibly a shelter would be appropriate, especially since the project is for more economical housing. Certainly a bus turn-out lane on SW 121st Ave. should be considered. 9. The school impact statement says there are no phases to the project, while the application itself is for a Phase: I in detail, and a unspecified Phase II. 10. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions refers to the rights of ownership as residing with the owners of lots; are these Lots 1, 2, and 3, or are they something smaller? If so, are they legal lots? Some major concerns with the supplemental information supplied with the applicant's letter to William Monahan, Planning Director, on Oct. 12, 1983, were pointed out -by Bob Bledsoe , as follows: 11. Concerning SW 121st Avenue, the right-of-way for collectors is 60 feet, not 50 feet; and therefore the applicant needs to dedicate an additional 10 feet of right-of-way along 121st Avenue. Also approval of the project should be contingent upon a half-street improvement of 22 feet of pavement from the present center line, and including curbs and sidewalk and the stop sign. (Also, the reduced area of improvements for 121st Avenue probably influenced the density calculations. ) 12. The application's suggestion to extend SW 121st Avenue southward beyond Gaarde Street presents an unappropriate, adverse impact on the neighborhoods to the south, which are situated along Bull Mountain Road. Bob Bledsoe suggested that the NPO oppose this suggestion and offer , Page 5--NPO #3 Minutes, October 24, 1983 instead, a looping traffic pattern (diagram attached) similar to Genesis Loop. Larry Barnum also testified concerning the devaluation to the expensive homes in the Ames and Shadow Hills Subdivisions if SW 121st Avenue were to be extended into those neighborhoods. The NPO decided by unanimous motion to oppose the extension of SW 121st Avenue, and to offer the alternative looping traffic pattern for those neighborhoods. 13. Without the extension of SW 121st Avenue, there is no need for a left turn lane east of 121st Ave. on Gaarde Street. Two lanes should be sufficient. Two minor concerns with the supplemental information supplied on October 12, 1983, that Bob Bledsoe mentioned were the following: 14. Double catch basin inlets will probably be needed to catch the stormwater at the bottom of those steep slopes (8-13%) on the private drives. break u on the private drives probably will soon br up, l The extruded curbs p 5 as has happene<' frequently at Cantebury Shopping Center. The chairman of the NPO read a list of concerns supplied by Vitz Ramsdell on October 22, 1983. Vitz knew that he would be out of town, so he wrote these down for us. Relating to the first two maps attached to the letter of October 12, 1983, from Robert Miller: A. Concerning the right-of-ways and traffic patterns, distinctions need to be made between the following types of "proposal" shown: (1) Actual changes or improvements to be done by the developer, (2) Theoretical changes from city or county street standards, and (3) Theoretical changes that should be done sometime by others. B. Depending on the distinctions made above, there may not be enough right-of-way in the adjoining street to do what the developer proposes for his part of the street. C. Why is no left turn lane shown on SW 121st Avenue southbound at the intersection with SW Gaarde Street? D. What is the status of the "proposed" continuation of SW 121st Avenue southbound to SW Hazelhill Dr. and Bull Mountain Road? If this is more than just a concept, then the adjacent landowners need to get involved in the specifics of the connection before the developer proceeds. E. The intended connection of the bicycle/jogging path to Gaarde/121st is not shown; is it still included? F. Will the ownership and development of the greenway and recreational facilities reside with the homeowners' association or with the City? , . JV _ . . . s,... ._____\H 1,\______r /I 1 . G`r L....) t...., ...,4011 4.40, 4 1 _ 5ec _ 4 J cz.... , cif, , ../ . Li_ .,t, ( ( _..s . "i. .frit v (----. 7.,.\, ------4-7-t----- 1 ,tti I i ...s. 3 W Q • it ti � S v S f CC is s/ - v ril f t 1 Z E.SI 11 l_ ; -----0---)_,-- _ ta a 14 i 4..".1 tet ? S ___________\C: i • i �� 'f9Z1 . I, CL. V,..... 11 , i . rI t, a, / ,, l'" rcC, I � _ • C a 7: 3 o r?04, 2-. (/Z a 1/ R / ' P . 5 F S 3 ` / 1 G l ,2q I ? 8'3 S /2.,/y3 t.v-ewe cam. ctr �c,GG T-�-�-e. 0 z4 , /9r 3 LA,-eve 1/ .. L to .ems cp- "-Leti4,4 $ 4. R 8 view Sf o /�-, -f ' -r C ve y Z' 's PP,-4 f/e re : -'"-epr/-1.11 (4,s0.-0 ,e, t,�® ( 8,v A° t t U iaed fr 4 a- -�- . � 2/ � ) x-71 ' 1 A'/90 . 3 '� $ p? l2 i:7` .�2 Psr. - — /t/f O # w,,'k vAs /Ua v- I¢, /974 ct �o _ j..76 ( .e cam✓ .__ . c� iZ c,✓��c � i",. U-i � .ec ce.. y , 4/19 3 G 21 ' cd..0 °^11-74--"--11 ez-erv-/-eci .4-1p ate d-e-v-chy-:-. . `;14 c-f)"1^16-L-PrAA--5 44.-Are : „ , c.f.va G . Z tit. wry✓ �.o n-e. a+� �', -, 12-74- ceo-eo rr.,Gt4A ) tG.,ct, t „ v9 cc . '4 .4 cu, wti-r- 4' .4 ,, .e ro w ■r tcv ce ctracc.r.;,, • te.4. ,-,mar (A. z ., .z Lot 4-G/ (A ■ c tea` 4 � . . C#;/) , tips 3 iri.„44/ '+ ,,,,ide c r - -c�,-� i�+-��ro v i e,„,7 r cc, /4 v sec.. cc/r D r 7` in P. S tke I i J`Yrg,e C/ -' 1` s p ) d cre 3 /1/ 9 14, vas / A/av, /¢ '9r3 447 'Prrzrf w►c?,€ C ' -17) -Carlo 1:4",r y _ (' er ai+,.€4 ii,e4.7L /e7.vut,1-4%. pJ.sove.e0/ cry% y rye p-IiV✓4W ttter, .4t4 - to tiA- 4 p` --T, 7 ,4-e ,a ceppv-v-ed (ef ei.to y .. - ' perk e te_teat beA„ cetri,11,,,,rd 4,e,a .e-,u2 e,"„f_evvt c(A7 cyrop,i.e.er.6 ,s44" .,e4.124,_e ✓✓VV • (A vu5> t4.-14-A;/- ste,f4'4 ./j/ fAl Sr f _ _1fr,b 3 04/11 v7 1 /1/-air, /1 /``l r optfr - 6, e-te-0-01 ) 4,2tFre,/ v7,„, .0,4.6„ try , . Weee ch4-4iti WuceWc:dua, of c'� p G �,„.(,..€ S .'�u ' _ ; 7�i o�',c��e�C s• wZi / ct- t c ef,t. , . erffreet,,4 t&e,,9`, t(,Le :L W 7 trA, c,s,/,r,,, , cc . W PO 3 u- . _ (4,..e c ee • rt rr-rq At_.,a,. 4 0-0.4, V a 'f G��i AI / fcc�e H. (/ [ v,G��/ v ,• aa/ • i1- ceiro-e4-tom` Oci "pit// Zed rat -z 4I . erz,tif, 2 �✓ - . .e w pc.e. tt,a, u,�„ ., , �?�. % .e /•c l� . No A0/i2 w, 6. p/ri, l A ) ft 1 'a I) �(-1 e A L '7`c1 r c? (^u-7/er / 62 ... / r3 ✓' (`f �.. �r"`f= t,.."1 Cry- .?/6./ri � ..... l._f✓�.., 410 / /..,.... ... ......,, V 5 t" 4`LC a l fed I.i (i1.4 J lei G''v Y(C) r v e T' f,,,J c 9 j ra sSi -ID r w(-1 vP 1 1 > i r a�y� 91' 1761 v v c-.-U.... V1.1 U 414 , b 0 I s ?�D �/� /5 }"'Gtt t/%y`�G>��r f S �1-6,V / P �. aY/(C� S �� E_ to/f/(' r '1a- v- e 0,'a/ a 5 1 ct.v- y 1 y T 2 R 4 V un<n° y 01. Aga Cc, . S ti A` ) 04 T' 50.644 e 1 )%1 ✓1_I�7/ �,A Y )7a ._. %Z-L1 r, G $.e° r- J am. 4,0 5� G1: ) 41.1 11 - r e S ko, e hu let 14 f ci, r, C v r e't„,2 I )3 Ley - -1-0 0 C RD'a(c/P p r e o--1 '-'v CAA c7 ti LA/ 12.1 s) 4-►v'~& V c/ 10 , d ler 1 �(� it,3 v91' v) or/ v /1 et,c 160 y-- 5 17--o C-ems 71 r 11 p-vde. eq," C 0 11"c`e c' 6 r 5, Reac:t'` ^e ° h°e's l' +� f trF ` i r , / 141 a l:' n 5. .. - p r > lc// 1&f /I , _ _ 71,:x. Cf cal '. . ,r6,1.' -c, i' . ,. 5.� -tt7 v ..p /0 , ` ter c' x / C9 v....47 / C c, ---. P.)"// ' 1.=it. /sY 0 1 0 G `3 4 7 2 -c,C.a ..; S6 .- 5- 4 ) ' tt 0C) `,370_ 3 -72 7 9 .CIG , ", 7 r3 SQ ' '� -0 C 3 "7 2 3"7 4 ' _/ ` 00 '3 5 C `3 `) 6 ' 3/ lzi e hew�r 1 R °te{ 10 0 3 4 38s. l0 , 1 ) 00 3 p ? f5" 5-"/ io----c) Jo 1 c72 2_ `3 ''; Cc''' 6 1 CtE 6--i,p,:, 1.,(,9 e/- a.71- f›,:,),, °�,<e. .. e s-a - ✓"- _ J-1-1 e ,r---o L 0 5 ci U v t,/ i .e.... Wit,01,,-o cl .va' as 7" c1° r .0 1i1 11.'. 1 JAI O 1,--1 'jig. . I("fr^ ' /y )/_I,L.(? ._e, C P ti ,S(/ ce ( 'S_ I-A.C(.. c/ot f c' '5 )2 rarj4,1/°-Y 4i. P t..r f./ )` c.' 1:/ ), ..'/a r:7 '3c20 c Ai.ry y-,e 7C ,(, (.61 .1'5 yn,-0. -fd :` /s 0: 1 r-tr vi'04, a r- e e c r"e'v,"` 01 ra vp l .'t _ o 6(7 ill u al p' 9" C- ti-t i�v ery �7 v..�, tea,-/?T e$ a �'" o" o P ,, 1.4,1G 1--rClei 724.14 eithit;ce, /-3 7 --1.,W. /.. .f Ai- azillici Wlivzha,/62JA.tt.-&41 .-?--`,14'4 art/i 22.- /z j4zz4 &Iry q72 ;A 3 . -4.1/`11 , & , )u / z e- % 5-4e4.4.4,5 4 ,,,aai.e.f., *.i,a.e,,,, ,' ±kei ia--4-12-e4. fneitA-Idi-eid--1014/ti-sytel) cai-i-. 40.4-4/77.- /, .:4,i- ie-g44 I,- .2 it-li. - .- -' ‘14:1_14.±.'1' -i"t - / ' - 13-4-°-1't-1"11 u ., -,1°:J- itti,ei.t 1)4'4 ' ciedoi,te, 1 , ' ' ' / ' e Wu , ,,6-4/2,1) „1".._ ye . 4.i.) Of A //Jo,' ' _ 1,‘,4,,e,l,gr' / 4 . * ' / la/E , f'.0t 76 --41-x,,,,,d*-1-4.;Aiel %2a ' G , - ' ' - ..4 2.0---)de, , #1 ' Al li-d--- /744-Aill-/- A- . .4/-t-,a&-,--76-0--"-01, aferriril---)6 �J ,l,t� L� _ , A / �g�GOb 71te- 1.0.4tt ' ' , eth . ,41,4&eeiti - ad-fittli i. z�w ' -ixottitt . , 0 ,,i r 7,1tual : r,. - 0-it-e-ei f &te 9., .g/ de--it.-&-A-ipdi wt_t_ ,,,,,Lt_t___14,4 ,spw, , , ev_y 0,. ..., a_Azezia...4_7a) is-e t/r -; d a-r ) . 7 Q• ' * 11' &.-1 (74-0-"L` RECEIVED NOV 151983 R Of WARD I ¢. . CITYOF TIGARD WASHINGy1ON COUNTY,OREGON GENERAL APPLICATION FORM CASE No. CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397 RECEIPT No. Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503)639-14171 1. GENERAL INFORMATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY: PROPERTY ADDRESS 13900 SW 121st Avenue Associated Cases: LEGAL DESCRiPTIONTax ILot .401 in Sec 3 & 10, tax map 2S1 3 CC and Tax Lot 140 , Sec 4, map 2S1 4, T25, R1W, WM INTERNAL PROCESSING: Accepted for Pre-App. : SITE SIZE 47.80 Acres PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* Century 21 Properties Inc By: Suite 112 PHONE 297-1493 ADDRESS Pre-App. : CITY Portland, Oregon ZIP 97225 Date & Time: APPLICANT* Century,21 Properties, Inc. ADDRESS 7412 S.W. Bvtn-Hillsdale Hwy. , Ste. 112 PHONE297-1493 Accepted for Decision: CITY Portland, Oregon ZIP 97225 By: *Where the owner and the applicant are different people , the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a leasee in Hearing Date: possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner with written authorization. The written Hearing Reset To: authorization must be submitted with this application. 2. REQUIRED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION IS ATTACHED ® YES ❑ NO. Decision: filed & mailed 3. THIS APPLICATION INVOLVES THE FOLLOWING: APP. Accepted for. Appeal: �� FEE FILED PAID Comprehensive Plan Amendment from to By: quasi-judicial legislative Date of Hearing: Zone Change from to _— quasi-judicial legislative + DESCRIPTION: X Planned Unit Development Comp. Plan Designation: concept plan X detailed plan X 1000.00 X Subdivision — 280.0O NPO No. Major Partition Minor Partition Zoning District Design Review Conditional Use Zoning Map No. - Variance, to; Zoning,Ordinance .- (Title 18) Quarter Section No. Variance to Subdivision Ord. (Title 17) STAFF NOTES: Sensitive Land Permit Floodplains Drainageways Steep Slopes Other T TOTAL: GENERAL APPLICATION FORM - PACE 2 CASE No. CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash, PO Box 23397 Tigard , Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT) FOR STAFF USE ONLY Notice of Response DISTRICTS es. pent Received SCHOOL DISTRICT Tigard WATER DISTRICT Tigard FIRE DISTRICT Tualatin PARK DISTRICT Tigard UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY - Sewer Available: YES NO OTHER . PUBLIC UTILITIES ELECTRICITY Portland General Electric NATURAL GAS Northwest Natural Gas TELEPHONE General Telephone and Electric OTHER Storer Cable T.V. . PUBLIC TRANSIT (TRI MET) NEAREST BUS ROUTE AND STOP 121 st and Gaarde, Bus 45 OTHER INTERESTED AGENCIES (SPECIFY) 3. CHARACTER OF THE AREA EXISTING LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION ZONE VERIFIED BY STAFF Single Family Urban Low NORTH Density R-7 Residential souTH Vacant Single �: _ Urban Low R-7 Faml y` Residential Density^` EAST Single Family Urban Low R-7 Residential Density WEST Vacant Single Urban Low Density R-7 Family Residential GENERAL APPLICATION FORM - PACE 3 CASE No. CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash , PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171 9. CHANGES IN THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA WHICH AFFECT THIS APPLICATION. Please Discuss: A. The abutting land to the North and East is established single family residential . The abutting land to the South is vacant. To the West the land is owned by the applicant and is projected to be additional and residential . B. In general, the area is developing urban residential . 10. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE Lot Area (acres, square feet) Site 47.80 acres 11. EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE SITE Square Distance From Property Line Use Feet North ' South East West House 1000 240 50 350 425 NATURAL CONDITIONS 12. Percent Slope: Varies from 8.5% to 12.5% usually with one section to 20% in Phase I . 13. Vegetation Types: Average Diameter Percent Of Each Yes No Size Of Trees Per Size Trees: X 6" Filberts (old) 95% Brush: X 12" Oaks 2% Grass: X 10" Firs 3% 14 ; FlaodpTsins:1" X How much of the site is in f loodp lain?nOne 15. Water Courses X What type? 16. Rock Outcroppings X 17. Other: 18. Proposed Development: Please briefly describe the proposed development: Phase I is detached Single family residential units as a PUD. Phase II will be PUD'attached and detached single family units. GENERAL APPLICATION FORM - PAGE 4 CASE No. CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash , PO Box 23397 Tigard , Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171 19. The following is [Ds is not ❑ required.* 20. Overall Site Development (Drives) Residential Commercial Industrial men Space Other Roads Total No. of acres or square 7.90 acres none none 30.12 acres 5.63 4.15 ac.47.80 ac, feet per use Percent of 16.5 0 0 63.0 11.8 8.7 100% site coverage 21. Type of Residential Use and Characteristics # of Bedrooms/Unit Type of Use 11 of Units EFF. 1 2 3 4 Proposed Density Single family resi- 215 X X X 4.5 nits . • dential 2,3, & 4 bedroom units 22. Where applicable , please explain how the open space , common areas and recreational facilities will be maintained. Homeowners and the Homeowners Association will have direct control over the open space, common areas and recreational facilities and will maintain same. 23. If the project is to be completed in phases , please describe each phase of the project. Phase I will be 43 detached units on Lots 1,2, and 3. Phase II will be 172 attached and detached units on Lots 4 and 6. Please submit the following with this application: 1. Written General Narrative, number as required by Planning Department. 2. Proof of Ownership 3. Letter of authorization if applicant is not owner. 4. Tax Map * Staff will identify for you, whether this section is to be completed. GENERAL APPLICATION FORM PAGE 5 CASE No. CITY OF TIGARD, 12755 SW Ash , PO Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503)639-4171 THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE, AS REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT, SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF EACH HEARING. (e .g. Attorney, Surveyor , Engineer) Staff Notice Notice Report Decision of Review Name Century 21 Properties, Inc. Phone: 297-1493 street 7412 S.W. Bvtn-Hillsdale Hwy., Ste. #112 city Portland State OR. zip 97225 Name Bob Miller Phone: 585-7471 street 5164 Bob's Court South City Salem state OR. zip 97306 Name Street City State Zip i.ame Street /� City ,/ _ Slate Zip /r /1 APPLICANT Centur/y ?1 !fop-rties, Inc. BY: OWNER Century Proberti , Inc > SITE PLAN CHECK LIST The Tigard Municipal Code, § 18.56.020(2) requires that the site plan include the following information when applicable. The enumerated requirements are to be located on a plan drawn to scale. This list is provided to assist you in submitting a complete application. Applicant Staff Applicable Complete ES NO ES NO COMMENT A. IMPROVEMENTS 1. Streets X 2. Sidewalks X 3. Parking areas X 4. Maneuvering areas X 5. Supply delivery X areas 6. Ingress/egress: X points 7. Transit facilities X 8. Landscaped areas X 9. Recreation & open X space areas 10. Drainage areas X 11. Sensitive land- X areas & if appli- cable; a toraphic map is required B. NON RESIDENTIAL BUILDINe 1. Location of building X shown 2. Setback distances X shown 3. Typical elevation X drawings included 4. Access points for X the handicapped shown C. RESIDENTIAL UNITS 1. Number of square X feet & lot dimensions shown for each lot 2. Location of units X shown D. OTHER 1. Peripheral yards are X as deep as required by underlying zone 2. Lot coverage same as X allowed by underlyin zone SITE DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS FORM b a u a U 0 u a) P4 0 0 0 144 al 0 H W C) CO) Gil' 0 CO Q) 0 N U U O N 4.4 ab ab 0 0 0 a) 0 d/ U V] o co •.a 44 44 44 aCl) Sq. ° Landscaping I N Total • U z v Feet w Sq. Feet z c Sq. Feet z oa z w z v z BUILDINGS Single Family Units detached 68,800 16.5 1,312,030 1 344,000 430 10001 0 10001 0 attached or detached 275,200 unit Multiple Family COMMERCIAL List each structure none INDUSTRIAL List each structure none SENSITIVE LAND AREAS Greenway Floodplains Drainage Ways Steep Slopes PUBLIC FACILITIES Streets 180,775 Park or Recreation Area 547,985 Utility Easements 18,000+ Common Areas 1557,463 1557,463 LAND DEDICATED TO CITY List S.W. Gaarde St. 85,500 180,774 121st 1,430 Questor Blvd. 93,844 TOTAL * 2082,237 DENSITY CALCULATION FORMS RESIDENTIAL DENSITY CALCULATIONS 1. Gross square foot area in applicable underlying zone 2,082,237 2. Number of square feet in sensitive land area designated as open space (floodplains, drainageways greenways, or lands having t24 slope or greater) none 25% 3. Number of square feet in public dedications 180,775 4. Number of square feet in public facilities 245.200 (streets, sidewalks, utility easements, etch) subtotal 425,975 5. Subtract the total number of square feet from 2, 3, and 4 above from the gross square foot area. Net Square Feet 1,656,262 6. Net square feet divided by the minimum lot size allowed in the underlying zone equals the density allowed. Net. sq. feet 1,656,262 + Min. lot size allow 7500 + 221 units acres 7. Proposed number of units 215 6. Density bonus allowed (max. bonus = 10%) c 141 ii a Air ®, ENTER THE WORLD OF CENTURY 21 PROPERTIES ••u1 `®,j' October 12, 1983 Mr. William Monahan S„ .4< r.: ).� It yl1 : Planning Director } City of Tigard 0;Et �, L2,P.O. 23397 , ._ 1 { Tigard, Oregon 97223 CITY OF TIGARD Dear Bill: PLANNAG roan Place PD Following our Sept 13 meeting to define a sufficiency of detail necessary for staff to review a conceptual and detailed plan and forward same to the Planning Commission we have prepared the attached packet. I believe that you will find all of the data requested. Our proposal for an authority by the City of Tigard to control traffic on the private drives without the City bearing maintenance responsibility is to place the following statement on the face of the recorded plat or "hardboard" . Each buyer of a unit will then have this in their possession when they purchase. "The 24 foot-wide driveways shown hereon are hereby dedicated to the City of Tigard as easements for streets and utilities. The City of Tigard will assume all rights to control traffic i and parking but will have no responsibility for maintenance. Maintenance will remain the responsibility of the Park Place Homeowners Association." As per present City policy, installation, maintenance and respon- sibility of payment of electrical power to operate the street lights on the private drives will remain the responsibility of the Park Place Homeowners Association. Mr. Joe Gruelich has indicated to that he misunderstood our plans and that either 2-way traffic without parking or one-way traffic with parking on one side will be acceptable on the 24 foot private drives. We still propose the one-way pattern with parking on one side so as to provide more than the minimum allowable parking requirements. Please advise if we can be scheduled on the next available Planning Commission adjenda. Very truly, 14 lad 7K.Robert N. Miller, P.E. CENTURY 21 HOMES • 7412 S,W.Beaverton Hillsdale Hwy.,Sane 112 • Portland,Oregon 97225 • (5031 297-1493 .A:\fl tvirvb.A. 1.\./. vit jt.t.A.\,\ I\1 l'iti Atki\,1‘..\. r\N•-•••..,-, 1 --1( 'Ns. 1, 111.„ V 1\-C1_,,\/\\ ........ "••••....■,.....***\. 41.1 li,jitt( j n ii i;Ili Is,i4�.r ' \ f %- -----_ _ ` :414% 141111"4.-' — 1 , LI ),;., a ) V I-+' =_ ,jam -/�\v—•r At �`� ! ��—_ �. �\ 'W. , r....... .... ‘.... .. .�► -_== ►` �'41, 's ..... r� �' v\%ice 1 ........ __,........______ ____. ,... 1,..„.„. _......z i 1 ,..• .. _. iiial .. ...... . .. 1....____ _ . 7 _ . .... _ ___. . -.;‘,. .(-7. ..t i'• N. I 1:77:■....,........ .' ,,./:‘'', 1 ■IINftwe , IN, .- _1 i ` s ift ' i 4 r iii\- ..-_ ,..‘,.... .......:2,........„zz — - 7 .._-..._ _ _ 1 1. I ...,0140 ... ....40..4•I 1 el le (4') I:lit,,, ..'.o ..':%7.\.': .. ."-Iktkol=-:: .... = .. I 1,11 1 1E7 , 411 il .- - - .--1-1 li' •_ —1 '/I ; ..1 � �� 1' A• !\.... --_ - =ems _` . , ,40.4..„N I l 1 3k.a _ _ . \ • .0 I U MNIIIIIIMMIll i I 17 , l6 e I , I WM. -�-- 1 1 / ' / 1 1 •' lib /8 o+ �° ' ./ 1 Q Z 6 fie 1 M•rr--M—►•' v 1 Iv•fial • 1 / I I / I I / I I / • 1 ? I . 1---- - --- /11: 6 / J W ; I I W 1 I h4—�N 1 —►I 1 °1 1 19 0 1 ' rV 1 ` '` - 1 et `v I IM I I wr� w i I ` m 1 12 I I 1 a • • + 1 • I • 1 I 1 1 V 1 , C I — I 1 I sti /1)‘' I 1 nR\ 1 1 2O I r PP I e ' - I I 4j I 1 1 1 1 , 1 AI 1 1 Oft 1 1 1 I I - 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I • I I I I I 1 b -1------•o' _ O 1 I S W GAARDE ',,,KISrJ ao'rA...• i -- 2°' `LISTS 30'/IhF • 1 RIGHT—OF—WAYS ao:r.a' EXISTING AND PROPOSED TO$"y/I AM■4,4•4 1! I T 1 I I7 1 /6 IQ —_- m. ro 18 i' 0 li 1 u.) i 1 lc/ / ' \IIS cUk. • 1 ., -; I 1 /2 • a i C C 1 h , G 1r' 1 0 G ,�0104 , P L 1 Q p,R K 201 II •• 1 V. I • 44 I l v ti? • of I Z 1 .-.. � 1 I 1 1 It. , ` 1 8e IA■ °► a uip® CZNIN Z. r0RW LAw€ err --� — .— - -S W GA A RD E i PROPOSED wow 4 \I TRAFFIC I PATTERNS I t . , Q �f H____ ,o, I i 0 0 ii . '— '0, * , 0 . , ,.,,ao. .... 0 ,••• 0 0 if , I CI\ 0 0 , • Hi_ 0 if__ * * 0 t 0 0 * _Ai -).)., ,) 1 El . I 1 .., .., a a <> 0 0 _ 11; ; I ij �w i Aliiimin: . — It fi3t ' PROPOSED STREET LIGHTS 24� 20 TYPICAL ROADWAY AND MINIMUM UTILITY EASEMENT TO CITY ' V'-NOTCH CENTER DRAINAGE 6" EXTRUDED CURBS 12 �i7-z `.�' ^.. z.777'�alt ...isSi'.- .'i.+ ..•%si_1 .., '' • �. _ \:"ASPHALT �egISTUV4 Views° , — — _ _ r _ �X "GRAVEL 6.25% S °PE L20�ORIVEWgY ompAcTED SUe4RAOrg 20 20 24 V-NOTCH _ 3 0"=10° 5d STANDARD RIGHT-OF-WAY 20 121 : COMPARISON, AT 10% CROSS -SLOPE; OF V- NOTCH AND STANDARD STREET NOTE: IMPRACTICAL 5' DROP FOR DRIVEWAY ON THE LOW SIDE AND I E ITH STANDARD STREET LARGE AMOUNT OF PAVED NILLS D W • Canterbury y ;�u 'ut`� ' & ..i'f'), _L,' ry rY i ; •t'`• ✓� .. \., GS;r ya ''.7.,t Y '�°,�1�: < .. } t"} 1� ''T-<--j IllipP' '--1r.:' ,-----,p-.- , - , ---._ -,--NIA ..*Tf.":':'::5;,'ir'e '''''WA ---___ .. $_...... .... _....--_:_—.-__::: -; ...7 . ,... . ... .:_, •. ..,. „.4-...,..„,..,..x. b--.k., ,.1- $ _ ..„... , ____.., . ...:.,, .:. _:• :.. . ,_„:..:„....,,,.,. 1 ,._:„.... ...„.;,...., __,,____,.______,..:.,_: , ., . , . . , • --,. -,. ,),, n,f" ; 1 gi li ::::::-.=.7.7:_=_ I, ' : \:,::::---:-...:7''a=,.: 1.r1—_, ,'Ill_ rr:,..s.1,A.,:,,, �1 a H4T n- , r _:a _ / r-- ning `_ � Bedroom M2 Loft Kitchen j (vaulted) Main Bedroom L _ving Room 7 C� Living Room Below f (sunken) - V (vaulted) L__; °_; Canterbury 0 U Upper Floor Plan Canterbury ES Lower Floor Plan Garage Copyright p 1982 by Century 21 Homes,Inc. mamma, •••• • .► Americana . '4 Q ..,., •`"..1.2 k*1 le1Q;C:".3:1'4.1-'.41i t:;4 p e or,,,, .. „.• '1.'; "C'. . 5'..*:''"VA.'Ittl'*f.0%7'..;I'' . ;'•,:31,,,•L..re:4,-; ...1 -N- I i p.i, 4 ‘4, -,1:1,t1•?:el It:: ;.,-,t-W;.4.1,—. )'-' •-L.!•:. ••,, f j •I . ,•. v , .4,feltst•:it.-.47,.•4 s....-... . ''\i/'"I‘•:,'T••!1 of 1......':,.,.'.,'.._','..::;..'','—''*.'''.....','%s. ,' .`.••1'.-'.,s..::..4,.-„7—....-•...1.-.i- ..., \N'.•. %' i . ;,..,....,!-‘„ • • • ..::.■ -.-.;, ;;6:ft.t, , ;i,''',''..1)''''.-,..4:-.2:rf:-.• -,1;1"...r(,,';....*; , ./i :;;;;/I,. Lk-. ,:.,,,...-..- ,,,,....„,s,_,■, °."te .---:- „,---,-,. -:.'._, ■.A.1:4,-,, ,:ire4r,.1,, . .lif., ei:;%;o,,,-•+. 0%•, • ' .,'•,+'' .,-;-------..—.-s.•-10 1•••• A'..6."..,N ... . .:-i. t1 ir l' •:.-,j 4%sus , ,. ‘..,.,• • , •,„ .;s••• 7:-:_V•So.•"'", • .,-,-••, ,,• - , , .:*,...../Wo.1,-4.4 •,11,„:20 or,,,,•,-..,,..-..... , .•. ..0 . .,--,-,-.• 1,,.... ,--.-t,s•• •.:•,--.• - ..... --..:44... ,iv.-1,2, „i„.4.::, ..i.,i.,.44. = • ii. , • . •- - • 11, 0.,.:_..4,..,,,,,..-0-7.--..... ....4. *-'''•' .'..:-t :, .- •'•, .--,--• •. ,t,•. -_,....,,.•• :-..•..• •,"-- qi.r.:-,-,-,.,•>.y. l'\'''WA-16"e mill .- ------- - g i-,-.1-- ,` -- _____.. . .-7• .s : . ..', .',., :-' ',7+,'.• . , k: JOIme•;MI,' ' ' se.. .E L,. _,......_ , . , . 1 •, 1•!\' ;'t '.. Moral ' .. galrn r.,. ,,,. . . , 4,,,.....", , ,,,, , ....1 -ai ZESIIIINU-'ar lie ..y,i • 1 a i. , 1.,- •-:... 1 D000nonn ir:vii,,, . i I i ''''.,, • r-vi. 't,':` ••:--'''',A.-''7'.."7.,r'''' '''' .-:-. ____— a DOODULJUI-1• • ' -41141,4114th' \ A '11 •.4.......1,,,,,,,::?,,• •,...:A.. •-•••••• .. ...,, , ,•„,•-,,I, ",30:44%411,1,41,14,1'111■TiS4'U%L ' IP 41400.4'I 1,; . 41 '41'■IT...- " "1\4' IMIMI 5'4-0-1-61 .. ,,..-,7:037'..'.."-------------,_ 1141111')•..'''' 131101"11iN„, _____ ... 1.,a it% 101„1.,p'.1. 1:111■1, • I'I I''IlDai 411111'CI■1 i'','1 NI y I , ______, .---:_-----=_-__----- ,, ,gi4,4 1 ::_-,..,J-, ,•,;,11,;,. i'' ., - • -.Ai,. ,,,,c-- 1 . ye,„.., 1,,im fi . 1 7 1,,,. . . -. . •. -• , Ar______________7__IN, 1 „yo CMODOD011'NI i VD 5f-' 1 . __ _____ ____ _ g I - i_1,..,,,--.. -ODEJOEKIDD ig Dining II Ft Bedroom 1 • .., •clir gawk --:.'s-7,:,.w... ......_ . 1 1r PI 0-0-. CIO ETEPTI X 1111 • <":61-71,A3:::%44-"I'tr'.'... , _______, ...._...._ K1tChen N -,„;.,,,,,14_,,,, ........ ...• ...,:. ....„.... ........ . ...„..... ........ ,,,:-., . Inn • Living Room 1 t,.. lig N 0 0 vaut ted/sunken) = -- — arm r • IW . M: allit 1 D 1- Loft Main . (vaulted) Bedroom (sunken) ' • Garage grim Norm mu Dining/Living Room 114 Li Americana Below lie Walk-1n Lower Floor Plan Closet • . ,ra um .0, • Americana Copyright 0 1982 by Century 21 Homes,,Inc. Upper Floor Plan - . [ 4 _ Expandable A _ - - . . , • v ' N r _ I - -- L �� el. L.i, ,.sQ li I l,i: ®g∎ je l I =i 'I Q:i' _,[•� r-1nnr , rir_■ t F _ s ?r fall I��AgN�"x e yv- =._.� 4 sr i4.g V - r I• ...">i \. `--4 .(--‘ 't.,... 1,-,\---\11 ..!•••"-•- z ,� • Expandable IIB _t_ q - , �' rli7C]C1l=JCln I _ 3 'nuis f)n .- !nuts w� I � g � �,i7.,,>-,e 11nh a - - I, -, . �.- 4-..'1'z`4�A. ';. �. •• � -_ !'DVS '. o Main ille Family Room ° Living Room ∎1 0 V Bedroom Kitchen - (sunken) II 1 I Closet Expandable II Den \ Floor Plan 1 i �p� Dining •---- 1 L_-I Room x ▪ — --11'- Bedroom#3 Bedroom#2 a i, I44 I Garage • .. I, d I, J d, Copyright cp 1982 by Century 21 Homes,Inc. • r ' 25 -7..,-- ---.2"4"2.•_+-•■,.....$.:-...-4,0,....k, : illillXilliffilail , , , .......x,- _ .,,, ....,r,„ ..„\,,. s Y 1 PROPOSED SITING SECTIONS THRU UNITS SHOWN I,._ 20' --_ 370 .__.- --.----- 13 121 `T Fli _ sr� -- ---- _ J »� • _ x `_- -- 32 �rRtrx ..fi - 390 - - - - _) Nitiori aordrialt■abb. ' L I ,Yrwar2 I " e ' E VENT O 1UNI I P N 1 SS r/ T•Yf)NS I�N , r ROC K10421_tT _ INCN e r I ._ • I • ` ( '110414C01`,1 NVT 11 1 if AND rl ,' f,_... • ..HI STAI)T 7 �•1 RONOC Ill /" Ny I p N. L[NM�N iI !:NA MLOCNI � til .� r•1 r•+n r o1rAl •NET ; �An OAU ulrr I I I f, 411n NO N[A Lv1M05 CORD �G' t: WK[_I LA; / :.41 1 4' 4.l • L I lit_ 1• +• `'r/q r _ / ST OM 1 : 1• a 1• .� • W� HADLUNO S - Sr 400 r'. - SPAUC br i oy._ -- y r 1 r , Sr TOOTH 0400 -T/ T.--1 _ •'4r • • 1 I ...i..14__..--4::,,H., Y/4�11Ta I FIRN WILL '*Wei. T ST G�.. lEr a N :�q� :; ; 1 qC• y I•• ��i •• p r`r,,, l� NOl l ON 1 .NAN.L�. i� J w ®_ 4 \� 1/t A AO me CANNrH S1 .'4,a• { 'f{ IYR t` �} I S(,H041.. Y J {EAU —1 V. nl+I GeV .1Vm�` .H /. Sr f 5 S w • vA M + N�-- 4 i ._- •.• t• •\ 1fl®Apr \.. 51 /•C [ , 8111 tam., 41 1 [AINH•4.,01 ,�I•• ;9r a.,r „rura ! CH[NNV °0L 1 ° w t I O•N0R( '� N T414,R t Ufi1 Too a m lot 1 +Gn,.• ose 511i.pN ar• o r•r wL LVI. i.� 1• r R i UNN100 •40.14 TON OR I'• uA•ROt- - tl 1 N! ON411 I 1 p f G n° 1 i , Cibr _vltr _- •l* S r PIr( 0 i UTTING , .,:^ t T [c •9 qyr 'IA ki rw• mid-p-_lu+ run D.0 !.3•• '°1 z St NN s• • u _ •0 NO MC ROY .. Q OIL•O It( IT/ g IS A4IIILYN[T • ^ • H I ,�W L`N • q OANM[L CT t (4. Art`% +o ^6'.°0 ® ,—,L SAMAR OSS .1 : CITY 0 et 4fit I • •ANLE ° C1TV 4A0.I ",a, A f1UNN y' .I — e • o ° 4 T I G A 0 4 4 [♦. - l4 ALeiRT •Iir .T 0 .+., T40Tt II,._..41.• �♦1 •asICA P 5 ,,,,r.0• C mr III e+ it H[N o T q 1 ,_. ,, ,,-, 4::$ .....,"' ILA r..NI(0.010 ,r JJLt CT• r• Y ��/ MX AY — 0.•r[ �ddll u OAT1De,NC 011040 II � Ct ,• % / t1 II ALwr _ ALIH I{ / / N . ►t Tf :ti ^ ILeN[ i 7 P�1• 0. i )..I R EI J / 41Nr!FL • � 1 I ai•'F • ° ir'T •7• w• vL .40 • rom 'Y ;'v• °I.( o .' r :,w.(11R A •' yI A 'N_ _•\'FW. •0 - --' i c. r I-_I • . .• P/i4 C 0 N E II '1YSUr•r ST phc e TWO rY SAGER/ • LIT+n.. kt /�'^ ` ! " ,,L. I YW�V r1 / � nnorA Av[n. I nGY NO O . I ♦O HILL 4A•.. , •ORRINI Z VI 'T.,""rr"."'ll.' Tiztoe t VI M1; "17 � 8�st�• k �r, s. Y, 1 ' g BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR A SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT FOR ) No. FILL WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOOD ) PLAN OF FANNO CREEK; John and M 2-82 Janice Duncan, Applicants. The above-entitles matter came before the Hearings Officer at the regularly scheduled meeting of September 29, 1983, at the Durham Waste Treatment Plant, Tigard, Oregon, at which time testi- mony, evidence and the Planning Department' s Staff Report were received; and The Hearings Officer adopts the findings and conclusions contained within the Staff Report, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein and marked Exhibit "A" ; therefore IT IS HEREBY ORDERED M 2-82 is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicants and City Engineer shall determine a final grading playa to arrive at a solution which alleviates the City Engi- neers concerns relative to erosion and stream flow direction and gains the same result as proposed by the applicant. 2. A soils investigation by an approved soils engineer of the area to be filled shall be made before and after the filling and exca- vation occurs. 3. The material used for stream bank protection shall be as required by the City Engineer. Page 1 - M 2-82/M 2-83 4. The applicant shall dedicate that portion of the subject property which lies between the old floodway line to the center of Fanno Creek and from an imaginary line extending straight along the course of that line which represents the north side of the building on the existing property, that line proceeding west until it inter- sects the center of Fanno Creek, thence south to the edge of the subject property along Durham Road. The dedication document shall be recorded with Washington County after it is approved with the City. 5. The applicant shall provide a cash deposit to construct a bikeway eight feet wide to City standards, the length of the dedicated property from Durham Road to the imaginary line extending from the north side of the building on the subject property. The bikepath, when built, shall be located on the east side of Fanno Creek. DATED this 'V day -Of- October, 1983. HEARINGS OFFICER A VROVED / lly BETH MASON l ( Page 2 - M 2-82/M 2-83 TUALATIN RURAL FIRE PECTECTION DISTRICT SI W D OPERATING POLICY AND PROCEDURES NW ER 300-12 DATE: 11-1-83 SUBJECT: STREET STANDARDS REVISED: PURPOSE: This SOP is intended to supplement Section 10.207 A,B,C,D, E and F of the Uniform Fire Code as adopted by Tualatin Fire District. POLICY: Tualatin Fire District will cooperate with all cities within the district, Washington and Clackamas counties as they enforce their own adopted street standards. In the case of plan developments, private street, private accessways, etc. where streets are less than the standard 32 feet, the Tualatin Fire District policy will be to encourage the planning departments to require the following: 1. If the streets are narrower than 32 feet, parking will be allowed on one side of the street only The street shall be posted with "No Parking" signs and accessible, adequate, off street parking shall be provided. In no case should any street be less than 20 feet of unobstructed width. 2. In areas•'developed` primarily for single family residential occupancies,,.cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum of 42 feet turning radius (center line). Commercial buildings, and apartments require a minimun 50 foot turning radius C' (center line) . qy 3. Access across parking lots shall. be a minimum of feet .,vt, of unobstructed width. A c ce s S £1r4 + pi k i f . 6l ACrSS pArki&s'rd blo(s mvitwQ pae(c%v,( rS '4 a/lowed moil he a.0' 4. Private streets, accessways, etc. shall be declared fire lanes as specified in the Fire Prevention Code where no parking signs are required by the Fire Cade. Obstructing vehicles will be towed away at the owner's expense. 5. When at all possible cities and counties should be • discouraged from allowing the total length of a dead-end street to be more than 600 feet long. 6. If access cannot be provided on regularly traveled streets, the Chief may authorize emergency access through bicycle paths, pedestrian walkways, etc. Such emergency access must be paved and not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width. The access shall not be camouflaged or barred in any way which prevents passage of fire apparatus. APPLIES TO: Questions concerning this SOP should be directed to your immediate suaervisor. SIGNA TITLE