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.