06/10/1975 - Minutes MINUTES
Tigard Site Development Plan & Architectural Design Review Board
June 10, 1975
Twality Junior High School - Lecture Room
14650 SW 97th Avenue , Tigard, Oregon
1. CALL TO ORDER: Wakem called the Board to order at 5:50 p.m. in
the absence of Chairman Bartel.
2. ROLL CALL: Members present were Cook and Wakem; alternates :
Mann, Kelting
3. MINUTES: Minutes of May 27, 1975, were approved as read.
4. COMMUNICATIONS:
o Bartel, McMonagle and Cook presented a letter, attached hereto,
and made a part hereof, officially resigning from the Design
Review Board and presenting their reasons for resignation.
Cook presented a letter in addition, subscribing to the joint
resignation, but deferring the time of his resignation until
such time as Board member Hammes was able to attend the
meeting.
5. PROJECT REVIEW
4, 5. 1 SDR 13-75 (Willcwbrooke Apartments - Tualatin Development Co. )
A request for review of a 57 unit apartment development on
SW Summerfield Drive, west of 109th Avenue, in the Summerfield
Planned Development.
A. Staff Report
o Staff report (attached) was read by Powell as amended
to reflect submission of density data.
o Staff recommendation was for approval on conditions
that:
1. Additional major scale landscape elements such
as structural shade trees and/or large conifers
in appropriate places.
2. Pedestrian access to apartments be directly from
parking areas.
3. Standard driveway aprons to public street be
utilized.
4. Parking spaces be perpendicular to center line
of access drive.
B. Applicant' s Presentation
Tualatin Development Co. presented the plans for Willow-
,,, Brooke Apartments. Mr. Adams explained the density com-
putation and showed conformance with previous approvals
by the City.
C. Public Testimony
No others were present to testify.
D. Board Discussion and Action
o The Board discussed the problems seen by staff and
staff recommendations included in the staff report
with applicant.
o Applicant agreed to work out implementation of staff
recommendations #1 and #4 voluntarily.
o Board and applicant worked out a solution to the
driveway apron problem utilizing a modified standard
apron.
o Motion for approval (Mann) as submitted, but recom-
mending realignment of pedestrian accesses to apart-
ments and recommending large tree plantings adjacent
to the apartments as recommended by staff.
NOW, o Seconded (Kelting)
o Motion carried
E. Architectural Review
o Motion (Kelting) for approval.
o Motion died for lack of a second.
o Motion (Cook) for approval on conditions that appli-
cant submit renderings or elevations of carports to
staff for their approval to ensure that car ports
are compatible in design with apartment buildings,
and on condition that applicant pay particular
attention to breaking the linearity of buildings with
trees as suggested in the site plan review.
* Mr. Hammes, Board member, arrived and Cook excused
himself.
5.2 SDR 15-75 (Scott Planned Development)
A request for review of a 14 dwelling unit duplex planned
development on the west side of SW 98th, south of Greenburg Rd.
A. Staff Report
Staff report was read by Powell with recommendation for
approval subject to conditions 1 through 5 of staff report.
-2-
B. Applicant's Presentation
Mr. Scott appeared on his own behalf and described the
project and what he was attempting to do with it.
C. Public Testimony
No one appeared.
D. Board Discussion and Action
o Discussion of landscape plan, particularly centered
on maintenance of common areas and necessity for
sprinkler irrigation.
o Discussion of foundation plantings and screening for
outside living areas dwelt on the desirability of
maintaining a constant theme and "easy care" materials.
o Motion for approval (Kelting) subject to staff recom-
mendations except that sprinkler irrigation system
need only be provided in common landscaped areas
adjacent to the entry and in the center islands.
E. Architectural Design Review
o Discussion of roof and siding materials and colors
showed no consensus.
o Motion for approval (Hammes) subject to actual materials
and colors being submitted to staff by applicant before
a building permit be issued.
o Seconded (Kelting)
o Motion carried
5.3 SDR 16-75 (Lincoln Properties - sign)
A request for review of the design and location of a free-
standing sign at Lincolnwood Office Park, SW 72nd and Hampton
St.
A. Staff Report
Staff report was read by Powell with recommendation for
approval of a 32 sq. _ft. sign, relocated to a more
appropriate location.
B. Applicant ' s Presentation
Mr. John Flattery from Lincoln Properties Co. identified
the problem that the applicant was having and described
the sign that they desired on their project.
-3-
C. Public Testimony
„- No one appeared.
D. Board Discussion and Action
o Acting Chairman Wakem briefly outlined the history
of this project in front of the Planning Commission.
Said he felt that signing identification of the pro-
ject was necessary and reasonable, that the problem
that the Design Review Board had related to the lo-
cation and the mass of the sign and said he was con-
cerned that the sign appeared designed to advertise
the project rather than to direct people to it.
o Kelting said he liked the sign but was concerned
about the "rider" signs shown attached.
o Applicant asked what the Board would consider.
o Board indicated a preference for a location away from
the freeway, perhaps at 72nd and Hampton, and a sign
that omitted the real estate company logo and/or other
advertising messages.
o Wakem asked staff if specific criteria for evaluating
signs would be soon available to the Design Review
:
Board.
o Staff indicated it would be.
o Mr. Flatery asked the Board if the consensus was that
the sign as presented was not acceptable.
o Wakem, for the Board, said that the sign as a review
item was not really yet before them, that in this
conference situation the Board felt obligated to
advise the applicant as to its preferences, not as
to whether a particular design was acceptable to
them.
o Mr. Flattery said he would return at a later date for
an approval.
6. OTHER BUSINESS: None
7. ADJOURNMENT: 7:45 p.m.
-4-