Loading...
09/23/1975 - Packet AGENDA Tigard Site Development & Architectural Design Review Board September 23, 1975 General Telephone Building Main Street, Tigard, Oregon 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. MINUTES: September 9, 1975 4. COMMUNICATIONS 5. DESIGN REVIEW - 5.1 (Request of Planning Commission) Planned Development Design Review PAYLESS SHOPPING CENTER A review of a proposed shopping center at SW Main St. and Scoffins. 5.2 SDR 16-74 (Renewal) Hiranport Co. /7585 SW Hunziker 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Tigard Site Development & Architectural Design Review Board FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Pay Less Shopping Center site on Main Street DATE: September 23, 1975 At their September 16 meeting the Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plan and program for the proposed Pay Less shopping center on Main Street. In agreeing to consider more detailed plans in a public hearing on October 7 , the Commission instructed staff to take the site development plan to the Design Review Board for their input on the site design aspects of the plan. In requesting assistance, the Commissioner' s expressed recognition of the Board ' s special design qualifications and suggested that on this and future Planned Development Zone Changes that a team approach be used. This team effort separates the consideration of the Pay Less project into two categories-- land use issues and site design issues. The Board has already discussed this project with the developer in an informal session and has a basis of information to operate from, making it unnecessary to go into a detailed description of the proposal. Following this informal meeting, plus a subsequent meeting with staff, the developer submitted a revised site development plan. This revised plan is essentially the same as what the Board saw at their last meeting with the exception that the buildings have been stagered to give a less monolithic appearance to the facade. This is accomplished by placing the Albertson 's front twenty feet closer to the Highway than either Payless on the south or the leaseable retail area to the north. Parking is shown in front of Payless but not Albertson ' s.' When considering a site design it is useful to categorize the separate issues to be resolved, and the remainder of this memorandum is therefore arranged accordingly. 1. Arrangement of Buildings on Site--This issue was given considerable attention at the Board ' s last encounter with this plan with some apparent preference for a diagonal placement of buildings or for separated buildings. The developer, when presenting his proposal to the Planning Commission , referred to the Board ' s comments in this regard and went on to explain why paralleling the buildings to the Highway would be the best site design. In summary his reasons were: Page 2 A. plan produces the greatest number of parking spaces; also the greatest number near the entrance of either Payless or Albertson ' s B. this position of buildings on the site gives the best visibility from Pacific Highway. Staff recognizes the importance of the reasons given for the proposed site arrangement of buildings, especially the fact that this produces the most efficient site utilization. However,while this arrangement produces the greatest number of parking spaces (421 as compared to approximately 350 for a diagonal arrangement) there is a question concerning the number of parking spaces Which D. E. Q. will allow subject to granting an Indirect Source Permit. Mr. Cook posed this question at the last meeting and staff preceded to contact D. E. Q. regarding the number of spaces they would probably deem appropriate. D. E. Q. informed us that the maximum parking ratio usually considered is 5 spaces/1000 square feet gross leaseable area. This ratio. assumes an overflow on 3 days a year (Thursday after Thanksgiving, weekend before Christmas) and full conditions 15-17 days. At this rate the proposed project , assuming 70 ,000 sq. feet G. L. A. would be allowed a maximum of 350 parking spaces. If D. E. Q. does limit the parking as they have preliminarily proposed, the advantage of the site producing 421 parking spaces is lost. If D. E. Q. does retain the 5 space/1000 rule, other building arrangements which produce less parking spaces are then possible; or if the Board agrees with the developer ' s objective to make the building more visible from the highway , more landscaping could be placed in the parking lot. 2. Landscape Plan--The landscaping shown on the preliminary concept meets the code standards in terms of total area required, 10/ of site. The Board could most assist the Planning Commission in this area by establishing objectives for the landscaping to accomplish. These objectives should deal with : A. means of mitigating the impacts of the large parking area. B. methods of providing landscaping around buildings to compliment their size and exterior materials. C. plan materials which offer a seasonal variety. D. screening of service entrances from view of streets Iftw and to protect adjacent properties. Page 3 3. On-Site Traffic Circulation--The proposed traffic circulation plan is very efficient and results in a minimum of wasted space for driving ailes. However, again referring to D. E. Q. ' s limitations , perhaps the traffic circulation pattern need not be that one which produces the maximum number of parking spaces. In addition, more concern could be shown for pedestrian movement. 4. Building Design--No architectural plans have been submitted at this time but it is desireable that some guidelines be provided the Planning Commission The developer has stated that an extensive use of wood on the exposed surfaces is anticipated.