09/09/1975 - Minutes MINUTES
Tigard Site Development & Architectural Design Review Board
September 9, 1975
General Telephone Building, Main St. , Tigard, Oregon
1. CALL TO ORDER: 5:20 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: Cook, Kelting, Hammes, McMonagle, Wakem
Olson arrived at 6:10 p.m.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of August 26, 1975, were approved
as read.
4. COMMUNICATIONS: None
5. PROJECT REVIEWS
(Due to lack of quorum as yet for item 5.1, Farmers Credit
Union, staff requested that item 5.2, Tigard Times, be taken
first) .
5.2 SDR 28-75 (Tigard Times)
A request for review of a proposed office remodeling at
SW Main St. and Burnham St. (former Post Office bldg. ) .
A. Site Development Plan Review
1. Staff Report: read by Powell. Slides were shown.
2. Applicant Presentation: Joe Shafer of the Tigard
Times was present to answer questions.
3. Staff Recommendation: Approval as drawn with screen
planting provided in the space adjacent the loading
dock and diagonal parking channels in the rear of
the building.
4. Board Discussion and Action
o The Board discussed the proposal, requested review
of the slides and then agreed to adjourn briefly
to inspect the site as it was 50 ft. away.
o Following inspection of the site, a brief dis-
cussion of the curb and sidewalk in front ensued.
o Moved to adopt per staff recommendations (Kelting) .
d Seconded (Hammes) .
o Motion to amend Kelting motion (Cook) to include
conditions of applicant' s restoring the former
curb cut in front of the building to a standard
sidewalk and curb and that he fill the narrow
curb cut adjacent the entrance on the Burnham St.
;ow side.
o Motion to amend seconded (Wakem) .
o Motion carried 4-1, Kelting against.
o Motion to approve with amendment carried unani-
mously.
B. Architectural Design Review
1. Applicant Presentation: Charlotte Olson, designer
of the remodeling, described the proposed remodeling
for the Board.
2. Board Discussion and Action
o Motion to approve (Cook) .
o Seconded (Kelting) .
o Motion approved (unanimously) .
5.1 SDR 27-75 (Farmers Credit Union/Hawes, St. Clair, Miller,
Cook and Tollen)
` A request for review of a proposed 6000 sq. ft. office
building at SW 67th Avenue and Hampton St.
o Due to their involvement in the project, members Cook
and Wakem excused themselves from discussion and in-
dicated they would abstain from participation in this
review.
A. Site Development Plan Review
1. Staff Report: Read by Powell.
2. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Cook, representing the
architects, described changes that they had made in
response to staff' s recommendation and discussed the
site plan and landscape design.
3. Staff Recommendation: Not presented.
4. Commission Discussion and Action
o Moved (Hammes) for approval.
o Seconded (Olson) .
,. o Carried (unanimously) .
DRB Minutes - 9/9/75 - page 2
B. Architectural Design Review
1. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Cook showed the
,;JAW Board a model of the building and described
colors and materials to be used.
2. Board Discussion and Action
o Moved (Kelting) for approval.
o Seconded (Hammes) .
o Motion carried (unanimously) .
6. OTHER BUSINESS
6.1 PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL FOR A SHOPPING CENTER AT SW MAIN ST.
AND SW SCOFFINS ST.
o Staff introduced the topic and provided the Board with
background information and the reasons for staff' s
bringing this review before them at this time.
o Dick Ehman, architect representing Payless (the appli-
cant) , presented his proposed site plan and described
the criteria and standards that he had used in develop-
ment of this plan.
o Hank Hummel, representing the applicant, described Pay-
less ' concerns with site design and discussed the
applicant' s concern with their acceptability to the
Boards and Commissions of the City of Tigard.
o Design Review Board discussed the proposal, questioning
Mr. Ehman on design points involved in his proposed
plan.
o Concern was shown with respect to the "street" through
the project and the impact that use of that street
would have on the project itself.
o Olson and McMonagle questioned the applicant concerning
alternative layout concepts , particularly ones that
would avoid a direct front exposure of the buildings to
Main St.
o Mr. Ehman explained that he had tried the diagonal
orientation, but both grades and excessive distance to
parking spots had ruled it out.
o Cook expressed concern with the placement of the wide
expanse of parking between the building and the street
and asked if the number of parking spaces was allright
with D.E.Q.
o McMonagle asked if it would be possible to place the
DRB Minutes - 9/9/75 - page 3
buildings apart, more or less diagonally on the site,
with access to Sambo ' s and Hall run between the
buildings.
o Wakem said he felt landscaping would possibly be a
critical dimension in site development.
o Mr. Ehman explained they had tried several alternative
layouts and the one presented was the only one that
would fit their site development criteria.
o Cook expressed his concern that the sole criteria he
saw evidenced appeared to be the use of the parking lot
and maximizing its effectiveness.
o McMonagle expressed an opinion that diagonal orientation
of the bldgs. on the site he felt to be preferable and
that adequate grading of the site to eliminate excessive
grades would be inexpensive and well worth the effort.
o McMonagle also asked if the applicant would consider
developing more fully his alternative in that con-
figuration.
o Cook said he felt that a more innovative approach must
be used for this site and he felt more thought should
be given to the proposal.
o There being no further business, the chairman asked
for adjournment.
7. ADJOURNMENT: 8:10 p.m.
DRB Minutes - 9/9/75 - page 4