Loading...
10/02/2006 - Packet o • AGENDA 1,1 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION i OCTOBER 2, 2006 7:00 p.m. TIGARD CIVIC CENTER- RED ROCK CREEK CONFERENCE ROOM 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD T I GARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 4. APPROVE MINUTES 5. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE WORKSHOP: INITIAL FRAMEWORK 6. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE- Continued from 9/25/06 • NATURAL RESOURCES REPORT 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURNMENT • • Tigard Planning Commission - Roll Call Hearing Date: JO- Starting Time: r) COMMISSIONERS: Jodie Inman (President) Gretchen Buehner Rex Caffall Patrick Harbison Kathy Meads ZZ Judy Munro (Vice-President) Jeremy Vermilyea David Walsh STAFF PRESENT: Dick Bewersdorff Tom Coffee Gary Pagenstecher LRon Bunch Cheryl Caines Denver Igarta Emily Eng Duane Roberts Kim McMillan Beth St. Amand Gus Duenas Phil Nachbar I/Sean Farrelly • • CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes October 2, 2006 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Red Rock Creek Conference Room, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Buehner, Caffall, Harbison,Meads, Munro,Vermilyea, and Walsh. Commissioners Absent: Staff Present: Tom Coffee, Community Development Director; Ron Bunch, Long Range Planning Manager; Denver Igarta,Associate Planner; Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner;Jerree Lewis, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Tom Coffee introduced Ron Bunch, the new Long Range Planning Manager. Ron will develop a 2 year work program involving the Planning Commission. The secretary advised that there will not be a meeting on October 23rd. Commissioner Buehner reported that Sean Farrelly will summarize the latest activity of the City Center Advisory Commission. Commissioner Buehner also reported that the Transportation Financing Task Force went to Council 2 weeks ago to discuss the proposed gas tax. Council directed the Committee to go forward with a public involvement program. There will be 2 meetings in November and then a public hearing. The goal is to implement the gas tax by the first of the year. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES It was moved and seconded to approve the September 25, 2006 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0. Commissioners Harbison and Walsh abstained. 5. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE WORKSHOP: INITIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—October 2,2006—Page 1 • • FRAMEWORK Associate Planner Sean Farrelly gave a PowerPoint presentation on land use and design guidelines for Downtown Tigard (Exhibit A). The presentation summarized recommendations of the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC). He reported on current property uses and proposed uses as envisioned in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (I'DIP). Farrelly advised that the'I'DIP recommends changes in the Development Code to implement what is in the TDIP. He noted that the CBD is a flexible zone,but it does not have any guidance for new development. If development code changes are not made, there may be redevelopment in the Downtown that is not consistent with the TDIP. The goals of the CCAC recommendations are to support the TDIP, allow a flexibility of uses, and ensure that housing would be an element of the Downtown. The CCAC recommended several Development Code amendments, 6 new land use zones, and a comprehensive series of design guidelines. Residential uses would be allowed in all zones and required in 3 zones. Farrelly described the 6 new zones and summarized the land use recommendations. Height limits require a 2 story minimum and varies up to 8 stories. The CCAC recommends retail square footage limitations of 60,000 square feet in the MUC zone and 20,000 square feet in the MU and MUE zones. Farrelly advised that there will be outreach meetings with property and business owners. There will also be focus group meetings to discuss specific language. Farrelly noted that the CCAC recommended comprehensive design guidelines. The Commission would like to have a "traditional" Main Street character without having a specific "theme". They want to be as flexible as possible. Commissioner Caffall believes that flexibility could lead to mass confusion. He thinks a theme or construction design would give more uniformity. Commissioner Buehner advised that the CCAC discussed "form- based" zoning which would address this. It controls what people can do in terms of design. Farrelly reported that design guidelines would provide unity in pedestrian friendliness, windows on the ground floor, and protection from the elements, but not get into such specifics as building materials and building design. Commissioner Caffall said that if there aren't specifics as to construction material, fascia fronts, etc., there is an opportunity for "hodge-podge". He believes this would be a mistake. Tom Coffee noted that these are recommendations of the CCAC and the Planning Commission can agree or disagree with the recommendations. President Inman doesn't want to have something that's very vague—it makes it difficult for the Planning Commission to ensure a complementary look. Commissioner Buchner advised that the CCAC will be discussing design recommendations more in the next couple of month. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—October 2,2006—Page 2 • • Lisa Olson, Downtown Task Force and Downtown Streetscape Committee member, advised that staff has been taking pictures of various areas to help the CCAC visualize different design elements. She said many of the CCAC members want to be flexible enough to allow for innovation,but still maintain some kind of uniformity. Staff will come back to the Planning Commission in November and December to discuss alternatives. There will be a Planning Commission public hearing in June, 2007 for the proposed code amendments. The Commission would like a draft document that shows the existing code language as well as the proposed changes. Lisa Olson advised that the Burnham Street and Commercial Street projects are implementing the guidelines of the TDIP. 6. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE— Continued from 9/25/06 • NATURAL RESOURCES REPORT Associate Planner Denver Igarta continued his discussion on the Natural Resources Report (Exhibit B). Three resources were the topic of his current discussion: streams and riparian areas,ground water, and minerals. Wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat will be discussed at the next meeting. Igarta reported on the coordination involved with water quality, flood management, and habitat. He advised that Clean Water Services is heavily involved in storm water and sanitary sewer for Washington County. They implement natural resource protections for surface water. Igarta identified streams in Tigard on a map and advised that 4 of the streams are classified as major, fish-bearing, streams: Tualatin River, Fanno Creek,Ash Creek and Ball Creek. CWS recently reported that there are game fish species in Summer Creek. As a result, Summer Creek will be re-classified as a major stream. Igarta reported that ground water is a source for drinking water and other purposes. It also recharges wetlands and streams during the dry months. The City has a 5-year limited license from the State for a testing program of an aquifer storage recovery (ASR) system. The City uses this as a reservoir. Water is purchased and injected into the reservoir during the winter months and then withdrawn during the summer as needed. The City currently has 2 ASR wells, with plans to have up to 6. When the State determines that pumping of water is exceeding long-term natural replenishment, they restrict ground water withdrawal by designating critical ground water areas. The City has a critical ground water area in the western half of the City. The City has 1 ground water well and 2 ASR wells in this critical ground water area. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—October 2,2006—Page 3 • Tom Coffee reported that one of the options the City has for getting water rights is to negotiate with Lake Oswego,which gets their water from the Clackamas River. It was also advised that the Tualatin Valley Water District has decided to build pipes for water from the Willamette River. The pipes will go through Tigard, so there may be an opportunity to tie into these pipelines if needed someday. Currently, there is a charter amendment in Tigard that requires a citizen vote to use water from the Willamette River. Igarta advised the State focuses on the value of minerals or materials below the surface of the earth. In terms of Goal 5, the focus is on extraction of mineral and aggregate resources (materials used for road construction). Tigard currently does not have any sources of aggregate resources. Igarta reported that about half of Tigard's soil is rated as moderately well drained; the other half is rated as poor or somewhat poor. Soil permeability is mostly rated as slow or moderately slow. Commissioner Vermilyea reported that an area close to Tigard doing some core-sampling brought up clay from 60 feet below the surface. Commissioner Buehner noted that there are several artesian springs on Bull Mountain. 7. OTHER BUSINESS At their next meeting, the Commissioners will discuss the vacant liaison positions to the Committee for Citizen Involvement and the Tree Board. Tom Coffee asked how Commissioners came to be liaisons on other committees. It was advised that Council didn't have time to serve as liaisons themselves, so they delegated that responsibility to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Vermilyea said new Planning Commission applicants should be told about the requirement to serve on other committees. He also believes this is not achieving the goal of more public involvement;it's creating an insular environment and other citizens other than Planning Commissioners should serve on these committees. Coffee will look into it. 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:46 p.m. '• / 0 L' ' ��•i. Je -- Lewis,Planning C.mmission Secretary v ode AT1EST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—October 2,2006—Page 4 • • Downtown Tigard Land Use and Design Guidelines Project Planning Commission Presentation • '",.,'.5,-,-. ,. rte>..>Y" ,• Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner Long-Range Planning City of Tigard October 2,2006 :i✓ Downtown 3'' .q-1 Current • f' f" -a : Conditions ,' <1.=:_:;-,=,5:?_):::. '' /'< '. •Current Zoning: f'a.:.,„..›.4-';' ,�\ ,,,;',././.;.,f/ 1 CBD,C-P,C-G,and r'i;, ;. . •"1 ! R-4.5 P MU q, f I 1/ :1. t - AS'�r'7z P d',x.LA` —' K 1 Zonlog Cb t mom. o■ ••■..•.,..r ■ cam....a,m b ..rte„ ...w.... Cs,cmre P.nom.;ukF '-�':- I--- UrbmNemalDm=,i. � dll Downtown Current m.rr: : is r ;_ Conditions O ,, /. s 1 •Current Property Use /, �� � (approximate percent of Oai .Q tax parcel area) } .,.,.. /J-- 51%commercial �, 4-- 4, ._ �; 32%civic use :* 10%residential • , -e! 5%industrial 1 • • Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) ✓ •Envisions the eventual f n creation of a vibrant, C'`' compact,mixed-use area • \,J' .ta` a with housing, retail and employment opportunities. o i, _� •TDIP recommends Illif • Development Code gig -;-=g ==_ _ ; revisions Need for Development Code Changes • CBD zone is flexible, but provides little guidance for new development • Recent downtown development has not always been pedestrian-friendly • New development might be inconsistent with catalyst projects, including housing City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) Framework Recommendations Goals: • Support TDIP • Flexibility of Uses • Ensure new housing development Recommendation: Development Code Amendments • Six New Land Use Zones • Comprehensive Design Guidelines 2 • • M = '^ Recommended Land " ♦ Use Map: ; G‘ , 6 New Zones ZI �'° ;= �., �-= • Mixed Use Commercial • Main St Mixed Use - + h ,r .� ;,; ? t • Urban Creek Mixed +' ; Use Residential` • Mixed Use Residential Fanno Residential • Mixed Use Employment CCAC Land Use Recommendations: Summary • New zones implement the TDIP • 5 mixed use,one"residential only"zone • Residential allowed in all new zones, required in 3 zones • Medium-high density(30-43 units per acre)is specified-possible density bonuses for amenities • Height limits-2 story minimum,varies up to 8 stories.99W view corridor • Retail square footage limitations-60,000 sf in MUC,20,000 sf Main St MU and MUE CCAC Land Use Recommendations: Potential Issues • Support of Property Owners • Boundaries of zones • Measure 37 • Friendly to Development? 3 • • CCAC Design Guidelines Recommendations: Purpose: • Ensure high quality of building and site design • Address orientation to open spaces—Fanno Creek Park/Urban Creek Corridor • Address"traditional"Main Street character (without a specific"theme") �.....__�_ .__fir-`�:_• CCAC Design Guidelines Recommendations: Summary Design elements addressed: • Site Design • Design Transitions from public to private space • Building Design Enhance Views Sustainable design Activate corners and sidewalk levels Provide weather protection Integrate signs and roofs CCAC Design Guidelines Recommendations: Issues �._ . • Format • Qualitative vs. • Quantitative • Implementation • Development- friendly? . 4 • • Additional CCAC Recommendations • Sustainable development a high priority 9 i V ice; • • Parking-limit size+ . visual impact, incorporate sustainable features -=m• dIsrp cW fraa arm • Evaluate"form- based"codes Project Timeline Planning Commission • Nov.-Dec.-Planning Commission sessions on ° alternatives • Jan-May 2007-Updates • June 2007-Planning Commission Code Amendment hearings Other outreach: • Oct.24/25-Outreach meetings with downtown property/business owners • February 2007-Stakeholder focus groups • May 2007-Open House Questions, feedback? i• 5 • • c-f . Comprehensive Plan Update Natural Resources Topic A' SENSIiP1E•OETLMDS.;'` ,a s.,' s A!�O L OUIFE AREA ''- , DO DOGS .f'OR FISHING-' .^ �. ALLOWED ' - y 1111ifii,,,, Denver Igarta,Associate Planner Statewide Planning Goal 5 Oregon's 19 statewide planning goals are the framework for local land use planning programs To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. Provides guidelines for local governments • Inventory natural resources • Identify the most significant resources • Take steps to protect them 1 What's Included? " * `rity‘4." • Streams and Riparian Areas /' • Wetlands • Fish and Wildlife Habitat • Groundwater " • .4t:' : • Minerals •;31'-tr..±;e22_12,.?. j Coordination to Address Goal 5? • State Agencies • Metro Regional Government • Clean Water Services • Washington County /Tualatin Basin Partners 2 • Metro-Area Policies • Metro Title 3: Water Quality, Flood Management and Fish and Wildlife Conservation • Metro Title 13: Nature in Neighborhoods Topography Tigard Area Terrain Features AVM • r r 1. • S 3 • We All Live in a WATERSHED Tigard Area Subwatersheds ASH CRE. - �•SH C'•EK S HTEO. • ASH CREE SUMMER CREEK KRUEGER CREEK MNNO CREEK DERRY DELL CREEK BALL REEK TUA • RIVER • Natural Resources Overview September 25: • Streams and Riparian Areas • Groundwater • Minerals (Geology,Aggregate Resources & Soils) October 16: • Wetlands • Fish and Wildlife Habitat 4 • • STREAMS FUNCTIONS • Aesthetic Amenity ' ��' ""'° • Recreational ; • Ecological -4 • Storing/conveying surface water • Modulating flows ,- 'fix. • Removing pollutants • Habitat for aquatic ecosystem • Corridors provide connectivity for terrestrial habitat STREAMS COORDINATION • State Agencies • Metro Title 3 & 13,water quality, flood management and habitat protection • Clean Water Services (CWS): to protect local water resources (D&C Standards —vegetated corridor) • Tualatin Basin Partners for Natural Places, alliance of 10 Cities,WA County,THPRD, CWS & Metro 5 • STREAMS STATISTICS & FINDINGS • 13 Streams —spanning 30 miles • Largest stream: Fanno Creek approx. 15 miles (6.5 miles within Tigard)...drains an area > 32 sq. mi. • 11 of 13 streams are tributaries of Fanno Creek • Impacts of increased impervious area: flooding, stormwater runoff, channel alterations,water pollution, declining ground water levels, etc. STREAMS STATISTICS & FINDINGS (cont.) • "Fish-bearing" streams classified as "major" streams: Inhabited by anadromousor game fish species or listed species under the federal or state endangered species act. • 4 streams are currently classified as "major" streams: Tualatin River,Fanno Creek,Ash Creek(South Fork),Ball Creek • Stream added: Summer Creek 6 • • STREAMS STATISTICS & FINDINGS (cont.) • Riparian area: Transition zone from an aquatic ecosystem to a terrestrial ecosystem...contributes to water quality, soil stabilization and healthy fish and wildlife habitat • Riparian Corridor setback for major streams • Annual flows > 1,000 cfs = 75 ft setback E— Tualatin River • Annual flows < 1,000 cfs = 50 ft setback <— 4 Streams • Developed subdivision lots = 25 ft setback STREAMS MAP STREAMS 1:7 r`f.•'b a •'""` iii iv /2) 7 • • GROUND WATER FUNCTIONS • Source of drinking water - —• Household, commercial& «MjMN' industrial uses _'`�'�'===t "•+ b.:_.: -- • Irrigation • Discharge to surface water Source Groureereter aux.IM Grwwsln Fanadm granhele o ▪replenish wetlands, sustain stream flow GROUND WATER COORDINATION • Oregon Water Resource Department • Designates "significant groundwater resources" (i.e. critical groundwater/restrictively classified and wellhead protection areas) • Authorized a testing program to store water in an aquifer on Bull Mountain • Wholesale sources of drinking water: Portland Water Bureau, the City of Lake Oswego, the Joint Water Commission and the Tualatin Valley Water District 8 • • GROUND WATER STATISTICS & FINDINGS • When pumping exceeds long-term natural replenishment the State restricts ground water withdrawals by designating Critical Ground Water Areas. • City currently operates 1 ground water well and 2 aquifer storage recovery (ASR) wells with a maximum combined production capacity of 4.5 MGD. • The City's ground well and ASR wells are located within the Cooper Mountain and Bull Mountain Critical Ground Water Area (CGWA) declared by State in 1973. GROUND WATER STATISTICS & FINDINGS (cont.) • Tigard does not possess a supply of drinking water within (or outside) its borders with the capacity to meet local demand (2005 - 2.2 billion gallons per year). • Impervious surfaces and impermeable soils may restrict the natural recharge of ground water aquifers 9 • • GROUND WATER MAP COOPER ,i-:ILL M¢,CGWA Lase o I R t CHEH.LEM MOUNTAINGWIA l . ._ SHE2WOODWILSONNLLE GWLA MINERALS FUNCTIONS • Addresses the suitability of materials below ! > w the earth surface for • Vegetation growth • Supporting built structures • Storing and conveying ground water 46, } • Mining -1; -V:::;;;-.-=== • Soil stability and permeability influence: • Other natural resources (including ground water& streams) 10 • • MINERALS STATE GOAL 5 RULES • Focus on extraction of mineral and aggregate resources and coordination DOGAMI. • Significant aggregate resources: meet ODOT specifications for base rock. MINERALS STATISTICS & FINDINGS • The City's only aggregate resource site (the former Durham gravel quarry) was abandoned in the early 1990s. • Soil characteristics and underlying geologic formations influence the relative stability and permeability of the soil. • The degree of slope also affect the amount of run off, structural stability and the risk of erosion. 11 • • MINERALS STATISTICS & FINDINGS • Drainage classification: How well water moves through soil. 60 - 50 40 30 20 10 0 Excessively a Well drained Moderately Well drained Sanewtrat poaly Poorly well drained somewfiat excessively drained drained MINERALS STATISTICS & FINDINGS • Soil permeability 50% ---- - 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% • 20% 15% 10% _ 5% — 0% Very Rapid Rapid Moderately Moderate Moderately Slow Slow Very Slow Rapid 12 • • MINERALS FINDINGS • 42 % of the City's soils are poorly drained. • Roughly half of the City's soils have slow to very slow permeability. L i 11 ,ijii pl\ic V V U 0 13 • r3 II Q MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Planning Commssion FROM: Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner RE: Downtown Tigard Land Use and Design Guidelines Project DATE: September 26, 2006 Background: In May 2006,Tigard voters approved the Urban Renewal District for Downtown. The next phase for the City will be to implement the projects called for in the Urban Renewal Plan and Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP.) The City Council-adopted "Work Program for Downtown" calls for the development and implementation of Community Development Code changes, including new Land Use regulations and Design Guidelines. The Development Code changes would help carry out the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and the Urban Renewal Plan. The TDIP envisions a vibrant,compact, mixed use "Urban Village" with new housing, retail, recreation, and employment opportunities. The future Downtown will support a multi-modal transportation system and use land more efficiently. This will help fulfill the Downtown's status as a Metro-designated Town Center. Problem Statement: The Tigard Urban Renewal District consists of 194 acres and 193 tax lots. It is predominantly zoned for commercial use,encompassing lands in Tigard's Central Business District (CBD), General Commercial District (C-G) and Professional Commercial District(C-P). In addition to commercial lands, small portions of residential property on the east side of Hall Boulevard and adjacent to Fanno Creek is located within the R-4.5 Low-Density Residential District,R-12 (PD) Medium- Density Residential District and R-25 Medium High-Density Residential District. (See Map A for current zoning and Map B for current Land Uses.) The largest area, (the original Downtown Plan area) is zoned CBD,which permits commercial and residential development. Although Industrial uses are not permitted,the code specifically identifies six tax lots to continue their nonconforming industrial uses. While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown,the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. As a result,the area has developed without many of the pedestrian-oriented qualities specified in the Plan. For example, recently constructed buildings have parking lots or blank walls fronting the sidewalk rather than pedestrian-oriented main entrances. New development would probably still occur in the Downtown area,even without code changes. However,new buildings could lack the qualities preferred by the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. The resulting development might not • • These guidelines go beyond the development standards contained in the zones and regulate more aspects of new development, such as the architectural character and design quality of buildings and sites,including the pedestrian environment. Whereas the Design Standards found currently in the Development Code for the Tigard Triangle, (Chapter 18.620) and the Washington Square Regional Center, (18.630) are straightforward,quantifiable requirements (e.g. 50% of the ground floor wall area must be windows), many of the CCAC's guidelines are written as qualitative statements of broad concepts ("develop building facades that create visual connections to adjacent public spaces.") These type of guidelines are meant to allow flexibility in achieving the guideline. A major issue to be decided is the method of administering such guidelines. The design elements that the CCAC address are: • Site Design-Park/Open Space • Design Transitions from public to private space • Building Design Enhance view opportunities Encourage sustainable building design Design corners that build active intersections Differentiate the sidewalk level of buildings Develop flexible sidewalk level spaces Integrate roofs and use rooftops Integrate signage Weather protection Scale/design Some of the recommended guidelines would apply to the entire district, some only to particular zones. See the Downtown Design Guidelines Matrix (Attachments 2 and 3) for the specific recommendations. 3.Additional Recommendations The City Center Advisory Commission recommends that"sustainable" design practices be encouraged in site or building design in the Downtown. "Sustainable" refers to the use of natural methods of addressing environmental concerns such as storm water runoff, habitat restoration,or building materials. The initial framework also provides specific guidelines for parking,an important aspect of a changing downtown. The matrix contains recommendations for parking, including limiting its size and visual impact and incorporating sustainable design features. See Attachment 4 for the specific recommendations. Process: Staff will work on developing alternative ways of achieving the CCAC recommended regulations, and specific language.A first step will be outreach meetings with downtown business and property owners in the last week of October,which will ask for feedback on the CCAC framework. In addition, small focus group sessions ("Downtown Dialogues")will be arranged with stakeholders. The first will be with property /business owners,and a second round with developers. These meetings will provide a"reality check"of the draft code revisions. • • ir*T:41:"flitiffilllia *VI #4 . *a:WI interdepartmental 1es:tea Meatmas 'CCAC , .„.. _ Planning Commis:5On Presentations . . . . . . " t " " •-• • „ ,„ ilninale Code Ame.nehnent Csty5,ounsil _ : ... • Public Outreach Activities Property/Business Owner Ouveach t t o t• . . . Hoissa . . . „ 0:her outreach . . Other Related Projects F?eFine Cireniatien Plan For C.....sedsmtasict - r r Creak Cr_VrtdOr...74?-5-iliTiTr S C....,..i•eask Bark. Vla.....ster Pfan _sr - • .1* • • . • • * 0 .Vi •\_••.' ..:5 .. .. • • . , - • • • • • . „. . • • '"'-': i i.•*:...•: •..'•'..••... ... •. • ,: I..-'.. I .. •... . .-••••• „ 1 ...•••.... . •*1 •`,....:' •• i• • ' .,. : )1 .• :••:. , . ''.. • '•••'C').'''''''''' ' Ii .o..„.. .,.. , • . . : . • • • • ,,,•1:°' . • \ i ...., •••,; • : • • •••,1 f„..„,, I • .. : i )•'.. .. • .•. .• . • •• . • .: . . • , , . . . • . . . . • ,..„,..‹.„,, • ..,,,\ '',. .1 '.., •. „ .. . • • • • . ...'""', 1 l• .. • . . • . • . • .• . , 24---•-•.. • • •\\..„„x-4"•'•.-••• 1. .., .•—•••••1.. „ . • , . , . . . . • • • • ' \ , • . ... • • .• . ••••,.'s•> . •••„ ..,/). \ ••••4*---- .\>)C.••*: • . „ . . • . . .. •<", ,,,—, ,,„, •., . . •• „ . . . • . , . • / , ••••(::\•: ,. . • 4.. ..,- / . • . . .• • 4.\-- • . ••••\,.... • • '••V••••••. ••: / • 4,. '• „ . .. •-••.„• • s... •••• „•. .. . • • •, i ,..,- ,,../ ''.....• / •••••••• ‘4.•••,-- , // //* '.... „•... '••\<1 ,•••"' - •• ..."'•• / 1.••1 „."••••• s..,‘,/ . .. ..,•• . .,.. .. ,... / .... ../ . ...• ..' „•••• . . • • -...../.• /// • • „,„, .. .. •: .'..•.. • •••... • .,.,• ,.... .• • • • , . . , • i 1 • • . : \ . —: . . • • .••• • • .. ''•• . • . • . • .......... •...,„,._ .• •• .• ... . •••••••-•.•••••'•• . . •. • • • • . .. • • • • . . . . . . •• • • • • I I : I I MIXED LIS COM 9§W&HALL BLVD MAIN ST Mi'VED USE MIX E() USE RESIDENTIAL. :KV • / 'MIXED USE EMPL9VMENT SARNO PARK RESIDPiTIAL . • Attachment 1: CCAC Recommended Downtown Land Use, Density, Height Matrix / jui / / /`gym a Of4s s +� I 1 Land Uses / Density/ Height /° $ 1` J` 1` Land Uses Mixed Use(MU) GF Retail-Office/Res.above x x x x GF Retail/Res-Office above x x x x GF Retail Required x x Residential Required x x x Retail Single Use x x x Office Single Use x x RES Single Use x x x Height Minimum 2 Stories x x x x x x Max 4 stories x x x Max 6 stories x x Max 8 stories x Density Residential--Single Use:min: 1 unit/1450 SF; Max:1 unit/1000 Sf (30 u/acre to 43 u/acre): Up to 65 units/acre with density bonus provisions x x x x x x FAR Minimum FAR 1.5:1 x x x x Setbacks/Recessed Bldg Entries Provide Residential/ Mixed Use Landscape setbacks 3'to 10' x Encourage Recessed Bldg Entries for Pedestrian space x x • • Attachment 2: Downtown Design Guidelines Matrix- CCAC Recomendations CC° Design Element k0 / �� Jtz, .4- .4- • Site Design--Park/Open Space Provide access to Park at viewpoint locations x x x Provide access transtions to Park/midblock accessways x x x Integrate ecological concepts in site development x x x x x x Integrate stormwater management in site development x x x x x x Integrate viewpoints,overlooks public gathering spaces at points of entry x x x Incorporate outdoor lighting that responds to different uses(SWDG--B2- 1) x x x Permit uses that are complementary to park/open space views x x x Orientation to open space x Incorporate open space,cluster development,pedestrian access x Provide accessways to interior open space/transitions to park from public sidewalks x Incorporate sustainable design practises x x x x x x Design transitions from public to private space _ Develop transitions between private development and public open space (CCFDG-C6 p113) x x x Use site design features such as movement zones,landscape elements, gathering places,and seating opportunities to develop transition areas where private development directly abuts a dedicated public open space (CCFDG-C6 p113) x x x Incorporate recessed entries along sidewalks(CCFDG-C6 p114) x x Incorporate private outdoor spaces as transitions to public space (CCFDG-C6 p115) x x _ x x Develop a sequence of transition spaces to the building(CCFDG-C6 p115) Use gathering areas and/or landscaping to define transition areas (CCFDG-C6 p113) x x x x Provide clear transitions from public to private spaces(CCFDG-C6 p116) x x x x Building Design _ Enhance view opportunities _ Develop building facades that create visual connections to adjacent public spaces(CCFDG-C1 p 92) x x Orient windows,entrances,balconies,and other building elements to surrounding points of interest and activity(CCFDG-C1 p 93) Size and place new buildings to protect existing views and view corridors (CCFDG-C1 p 93) x x x Use design principles and building materials that promote quality and permanence.(CCFDG-C1 p 97) x x x x x x Establish Traditional Main Street Character x Integrate the different building and design elements including,but not limited to,construction materials,roofs,entrances,as well as window, door,sign,and lighting systems,to achieve a coherent composition (CCFDG-05 p 108) x x x x x x • • Attachment 3: Downtown Design Guidelines Matrix -CCAC Recommendations o� 0C Fa F h /6, mDesign Element . .4- .4- Encourage sustainable building design Encourage LEEDS buildings and/or"green architecture" x x x x x n egra e s orm wa er managemen w overa s e an eve opment design x x x x x Encourage the incorporation of Eco Roofs x x x x x Encourage multi-functional storm water systems such as roof gardens, planters,that infiltrate water naturally x x x x x Design Corners that build active intersections Use design elements including,but not limited to,varying building heights,changes in facade plane,large windows,awnings,canopies, marquees,signs,and pedestrian entrances to highlight building corners (CCFDG-C7 p118) x x x Locate flexible sidewalk-level retail opportunities at building corners (CCFDG-C7 p118) x x x Locate stairs,elevators,and other upper floor building access points toward the middle of the block(CCFDG-C7 p116) x x Differentiate the sidewalk level of buildings Differentiate the sidewalk-level of the building from the middle and top by using elements including,but not limited to,different exterior materials, awnings,signs,and large windows(CCFDG-C8 p122) x x x Develop flexible sidewalk level spaces Develop flexible spaces at the sidewalk-level of buildings(CCFDG-C9 p124) x x x Integrate roofs and use rooftops Integrate roof function,shape,surface materials,and colors with the building's overall design concept(CCFDG-C11 p131) x x x x x Size and place rooftop mechanical equipment,penthouses,other components,and related screening elements to enhance views from Highway 99W(CCFDG-C11 p31) x Develop rooftop terraces,gardens,and associated landscape areas to be effective stormwater management tools(CCFDG-C11 p131) x Integrate Signage Integrate signs and their associated structural components with the overall buildings design concept(CCFDG-C11 p131) x x x x Size,place,design,and light signs to not dominate the visual environment and provide human scale.(CCFDG-C11 131) x x x x Weather Protection Develop integrated weather protection systems at the sidewalk-level of buildings to mitigate the effects of rain,wind,glare,shadow,reflection and sunlight on the pedestrian environment.(CCFG-B6 p 84) x x x Scale/Design Prevent large-scale retail/service uses that can overburden the Downtown's transportation system and that are out of scale with the neighborhood. x x x x Require active uses in ground floor spaces x x Reinforce street,as a small scale retail district with specialty retail (require retail and encourage specialty shops on ground floor level) x Encourage neighborhood retail services in Downtown(Ex.bonus provisions) x x Where permitted,encourage small scale office with pedestrian compatible scale x Where permitted,encourage larger scale office that is auto accomodating,but pedestrian oriented - - —_ x_ Encourage private development of plaza/open space x Discourage buildings which visually dominate adjacent residential areas x x x Require 15%window coverage for upper-floor facades x x x II • Attachment 4 CCAC Recommended Parking Guidelines/Commercial Size Restrictions `ao� ��c 4ot my �Q�o/11 � m m 1 y Parking Guidelines/Commercial Size m4 J J Restrictions �+ Parking Requirements Limit the size of new surface parking lots x x x x x x Encourage"shared use"of parking facilities x x x x x x No off-street parking required for retail uses x x x x x x All parking must be located to the rear of buildings x x x x x x Parking in the rear must be screened from streetview x x x x x x Encourage parking to locate within structures x x x x x x Exempt 50%of above-ground structured parking area from FAR reqs(applicable to sites greater than 100' depth x x x x x x Reduce the visual impact of parking x x x x x x Reduce the visual impact of parking areas from sidewalks,streets,and especially from adjacent residential zones x x x x x x Allow parking permits for residential parking on public streets(long-term) x x x x x Restrict parking access along the street to create a continuous building frontage,and minimize pedestrian/vehicular conflicts x x Insure a higher standard for parking areas in commercial zones adjacent to residential zones including the following: x x x Provide pedestrian access that is protected from auto traffic x x x Insure that vehicle access does not enter through neighborhoods x x x Improve and soften the appearance of parking areas; x x x Design parking lots that use sustainable design and materials including;pervious pavement, bioswales,native plants,extra shading x x x Reduce the amount and rate of stormwater runoff from vehicle areas; x x x Reduce pollution and temperature of stormwater runoff from vehicle areas; x x x Minimum landscaping:30%of lot area; Minimum landscaped width:10' x x x Require large canopy trees with coverage (full-grown)of 80%of lot area x x x Commercial—Single Use Restrictions Prevent large-scale retail. Service uses that can over burden the district's transportation system over burden transportation system and are out of scale with neighborhood Max.Size:20,000SF x x Max Size:60,000 SF x • • � MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Planning Commission FROM: Denver Igarta, Associate Planner RE: Proposed Planned Development Language on Density Transfers DATE: October 2, 2006 During the discussion on Habitat-Friendly Development Code Amendments at the Planning Commission's September 25th meeting, staff was asked to provide the proposed code amendment language for the Planned Development Chapter as it relates to density transfer. As noted at the meeting, Tigard Development Code Section 18.715 currently allows for 25% of the unbuildable area within sensitive lands (i.e. 100-yr. floodplain, steep slopes, drainageways) to be transferred to the remaining buildable land areas. Below, please find the Tualatin Basin recommendation from the Program Implementation Report, as well as excerpts on "density bonus" and "approval criteria" from the proposed Planned Development code amendment, for side-by-side comparison. Density Transfer Provisions: Tualatin Basin Goal 5 Program Implementation Report: Recommendation At a minimum, all jurisdictions should consider allowing all development potential to be transferred from a qualified Habitat Benefit Area to the remainder of the development site; provided that the transferred density shall not more than double the density allowed on the buildable portion of the site. Proposed Planned Development Code Amendment (18.350.070.A.3.c.) The Commission may further authorize a density bonus not to exceed 10% as an incentive to increase or enhance open space, architectural character and/ or site variation incorporated into the development. These factors must make a substantial contribution to objectives of the planned development. The degree of distinctiveness and the desirability of variation achieved shall govern the amount of density increase which the Commission may approve according to the following: (1) A 1% bonus for each 5% of the gross site area set aside in open space, up to a maximum of 5%, is allowed for the provision of active use recreational open space exclusive of areas contained in floodplain, steep slopes, drainageways, or wetlands that would otherwise be precluded from development; (2) Up to a maximum of 5% is allowed for the development of pedestrian amenities, streetscape development, recreation areas, plazas, or other items from the "Planning Commission's Toolbox." • • Approval Criteria for Planned Development Applications: Planned Development Code Amendment (18.350.050) Concept Plan Approval Criteria A. The concept plan may be approved by the Commission only if all of the following criteria are met: 1. The concept plan includes specific designations on the concept map for areas of open space, and describes their intended level of use, how they relate to other proposed uses on the site, and how they protect natural features of the site. 2. The concept plan identifies areas of significant natural resources, if any, and identifies methods for their maximized protection, preservation, and/or management. 3. The concept plan identifies how the future development will integrate into the existing neighborhood, either through compatible street layout, architectural style, housing type, or by providing a transition between the existing neighborhood and the project with compatible development or open space buffers. 4. The concept plan identifies methods for promoting walkability or transit ridership, such methods may include separated parking bays, off street walking paths, shorter pedestrian routes than vehicular routes, linkages to or other provisions for bus stops, etc. 5. The concept plan identifies the proposed uses, and their general arrangement on site. In the case of projects that include a residential component, housing type, unit density, or generalized lot sizes shall be shown in relation to their proposed location on site. 6. The concept plan must demonstrate that development of the property pursuant to the plan results in development that has significant advantages over a standard development. A concept plan has a significant advantage if it provides development consistent with the general purpose of the zone in which it is located at overall densities consistent with the zone, while protecting natural features or providing additional amenities or features not otherwise available that enhance the development project or the neighborhood. Planned Development Code Amendment (18.350.070) Detailed Development Plan Approval Criteria A. A detailed development plan may be approved only if all the following criteria are met: 1. The detailed plan is generally consistent with the concept plan. Minor changes from the concept plan do not make the detailed plan inconsistent with the concept plan unless: a. The change increases the residential densities, increases the lot coverage by buildings or reduces the amount of parking; b. The change reduces the amount of open space and landscaping; c. The change involves a change in use; d. The change commits land to development which is environmentally sensitive or subject to a potential hazard; and e. The change involves a major shift in the location of buildings, proposed streets, parking lots, landscaping or other site improvements. At the September 25th meeting, Planning Commissioners expressed concerns that the Tualatin Basin recommendation on density transfers may result in development which is incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Design standards for transferring density, and perhaps a higher-level of review, may be required to ensure an adequate degree of compatibility. The Planning Commission decided to not support the proposed amendment to allow density transfers at this time; rather, to return to this issue at a later date,when more time can be devoted to the development of appropriate design review standards.