Loading...
04/13/1976 - Packet AGENDA Tigard Site Development & Architectural Design Review Board April 13, 1976 - 5:00 p.m. General Telephone Building 12460 SW Main St. , Tigard, Oregon 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. ROLL CALL: 3. MINUTES: 4. COMMUNICATIONS: 5. DESIGN REVIEW: 5.1 SDR 8-76 (Bishop - Main St. Office Building) A proposed commercial building which will stand in the place of two dilapidated wooden structures on the south side of Main St. at the railroad tracks. A. Site Development Plan Review 1. Staff Report and Recommendation 2. Applicant's Presentation 3. Board Discussion and Action B. Architectural Design Review 1. Applicant's Presentation 2. Board Discussion and Action 5.2 SDR 5-76 (Carpenter Duplexes) A request by Gordon Carpenter to construct a 32 unit apart- ment complex on a 2.83 acre parcel on SW 98th St. , south of Greenburg Rd. and directly north of SW Scott Ct. A. Site Development Plan Review 1. S taff Report and Recommendation 2. Applicant's Presentation 3. Board Discussion and Action B. Architectural Design Review 1. Applicant's Presentation 2. Board Discussion and Action 5.3 SDR 9-76 (Van Lom-Kraxberger/Englewood Apartments) A request by the Van Lom-Kraxberger Partnership to construct 50 apartment units on a 4.96 acre parcel on SW Scholls Ferry Rd. at SW Springwood Dr. in the Englewood Planned Development. A. Site Development Plan Review 1. Staff Report & Recommendation 2. Applicant's Presentation 3. Board Discussion and Action B. Architectural Design Review 1. Applicant' s Presentation 2. Board Discussion and Action 6. OTHER BUSINESS: 7. ADJOURNMENT: STAFF REPORT Tigard Site Development & Architectural Design Review Board April 13, 1976 SDR 8-76 PROJECT REVIEVI (Bishop - Main St. Office Building) A proposed commercial building which will stand in the place of two dilapidated wooden structures on the south side of SW Main St. at the railroad tracks. STAFF FINDINGS 1. On March 16, 1976, the Planning Commission approved a set- back variance for this location. The variance allows the building to be within 1161' of the property line. In this case the property line is 8' behind the sidewalk edge and the applicant proposes to landscape this portion within the public right-of-way. 2. The landscaping shown adjacent the building and parking area is more than adequate; however, some plant types and plant spacings have been specified which will result in over- crowding as the plants continue to grow. Also, the choice of low plantings (Mugo pines) at the rear of the parking lot could be altered for higher growing evergreen plants which would tend to screen the view from Main St. of the rather unsightly rears of the businesses backing up to the rail- road right-of-way from Commercial St. 3. There are two telephone poles along the railroad right-of- way which this plan requires moving. One of these poles is proposed to be placed within the sidewalk area. It seems more advisable to move this pole approximately 4 to 5 ft. back from the curb line and into the landscaped area to avoid conflicts with pedestrian traffic. 4. The principle area of staff concern in relationship to this project is the configuration of the parking area shown adjacent the building. The Board will note that a parking area is also specified directly across Main St. adjacent the Commercial St. right-of-way. The parking area adjacent the building is extremely restricted for turnaround traffic movements. This narrow width could easily be accommodated if a drive-thru arrangement were possible, such as into the Savings & Loan parking lot. However, as designed, the parking lot requires cars to turn around in a curb-to-curb width of 29 ft. The standard for a parking lot with one access point is 43 ft. , this space therefore being deficient in width by 14 ft. It is unfortunate that an access was not attainable from the Savings & Loan Bank adjacent his property. In the staff's judgment, without drive-thru access, a maximum of 3 parking stalls can be provided in the 35 ft. width available. These would be 30 degree angled page 2 DRB Staff Report 4/13/76 'maw stalls having a channel width of 17,411 and an aisle width of 121 for a total of 2914". This standard does meet the newly-revised parking standards for the City of Tigard. The end of the parking lot would then be used for a turn- around space and no parking would be possible in that area. In staff's judgment, this use requires 10 parking spaces and this additional space must be provided off-site in the area proposed across Main St. , adjacent Commercial St. The Submitted plan shows five parking stalls. If the Board concurs with staff that a maximum of 3 parking stalls are possible adjacent the proposed building, then an additional 3 stalls must be provided in the area adjacent Commercial St. In this parking area staff would recommend a drive- thru arrangement employing angled stalls along the west property line (railroad right-of-way) . In this way, several more spaces could be accommodated with little additional asphalt. 5. No landscaping or irrigation plan has been submitted for the parking area adjacent Commercial St. STAFF REPORT Tigard Site Development Plan & Architectural Design Review Board April 13, 1976 Project Review SDR 5-76 (Carpenter Apts. - SW 98th) A request by Gordon Carpenter to construct a 32 unit apart- ment complex on a 2.83 acre parcel on SW 98th St. , south of Greenburg Rd. and directly north of SW Scott Ct. STAFF FINDINGS 1. On March 2, 1976, the Planning Commission approved a zone change request from R-7, single family residential, to A-2, multi-family development, for the property in question. On March 29, the Council ratified the Planning Commission action. , 2. The zone change approval included the following conditions: 1) That a 10 ft. right-of-way be dedicated to the City of Tigard for future street widening. 2) That the applicant waive his right, for the next 10 years, to remonstrate against the formation of a local improvement district to provide public improvements in the right-of-way of SW 98th St. 3) The applicant shall submit a detailed plotting of the stand of trees for use by the Design Review Board when reviewing the site development plan. 4) That a safety fence be constructed on the property line adjoining the railroad right-of-way. 3. The submitted site plan and landscape plan do not make reference to the substantial number of large trees currently growing on the property. However, since the enclosed plans were submitted for Board review, a survey of the existing trees has been submitted to staff. This disregard for the existing 6n-site vegetation when developing the site plan is of concern to staff in that the substantial amenity which these trees represent should be incorporated into the pro- ject design. The survey of existing trees submitted by the applicant shows only those trees in the middle section of the property. A substantial stand of trees also exists near the front of the property behind the existing house. Buildings 9, 10 and part of 8 will be in .the middle of the predominant stand of trees. Mr. Carpenter has submitted a plan showing where chanes could be made to preserve some trees. However, staff finds this planning "after the fact" to save some trees to be an unadvisable method of site k*W planning. page 2 DRB Staff Report April 13, 1976 SDR 5-76 4. The access drive is 24 ft. wide, with a perfectly circular 45 ' radius cul-de-sac at the terminus. The Tigard access requirements for a 32 unit multi-family development are 32 ft. 5. The number of parking spaces shown exceeds the requirements by four. 6. The front yard setback is shown as 20 ft. , however, the 2 story building (#1) requires an additional 10 ft. of setback (total of 30 ft. ) . 7. A fence is required between the applicant's property and the R-7 zoned property to the north. This fence should be 6 ft. high for privacy and of a substantial construction. Plans should be submitted for Board review. 8. The Site Development Chapter of the Zoning Ordinance requires 7,100 sq. ft. of recreation area for a 32 unit apartment complex. The landscape plan shows a lawn play area of approximately 2400 sq. ft. Otherwise, no recreation area or equipment is specified. 9. No drawings have been submitted depicting the design of the garages. 10. Mr. Carpenter has stated that sewer service may be pro- vided through the Scott duplex development to the south, rather than connecting with the line in 98th St. If this alternate connection were made, a revision of the site development would be necessary. At this time, no alter- nate development plan has been submitted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the site plan be denied and that the applicant resubmit a plan dealing with the issues raised in the staff findings. A revised site plan should take into consideration the existing trees on the site and capitalize upon them. STAFF REPORT Tigard Site Development & Architectural Design Review Board April 13, 1976 DRB 9-76 Van Lom-Kraxberger/Englewood Apartments) PROJECT A request by the Van Lam-Kraxberger Partnership to construct 50 apartment units on a 4.96 acre parcel on SW Scholls Ferry Rd. at SW Springwood Dr. in the Englewood Planned Development. STAFF FINDINGS 1. A different project design was approved by the Board 13 months ago. 2. Multiple family use of this parcel was approved in 1973 as a portion of the Englewood Planned Development. 3. Several conditions of the PD approval apply to both these sites and to the streets adjacent to them. These conditions, as extracted from exhibit IIBII of Ordinance 73-17 are: (1) That a program for development of the open space be submitted. This program could phase open space de- velopment with the construction phases of the project. As each phase is completed, the open space to be developed as part of that phase should be developed VANW prior to issuance of occupancy permits, unless security equal to the cost of the improvements as determined by the Planning Director, is filed with the City assuring such installation within six months after occupancy. "Security" may consist of a faithful performance bond payable to the City, cash, certified check or such other assurance of completion approved by the City Attorney. (3) That site development plans and the architectural design of the multi-family dwellings shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits, to insure compatibility with the single family neighbor- hood. (4) That a landscaped earth berm be installed along 121st Ave. and Scholls Ferry Rd. to help provide privacy for dwellings adjoining said streets. Plans for the berms and landscaping shall be approved by the Planning Dept. and implemented prior to occupancy of affected dwellings. (6) That 5 ft. be dedicated to the City along 121st Ave. and 10 ft. along Scholls Ferry Rd. ,� to provide adequate right-of-way width for future improvements. (9) That deciduous shade trees be planted in the traffic island planned in the center of Englewood Rd. between page 2 DRB Staff Report 4/13/76 item DRB 9-76 SW Scholls Ferry Rd. and the southern terminus of SW Dellwood Loop at SW Englewood Rd. (10) That, in order to promote maximum public safety for pedestrian and bicyclists, the applicant shall provide a minimum three foot wide landscaped separation between the proposed traffic way and sidewalks in the proposed SW Englewood Rd. right-of-way. Additionally, the applicant shall provide a minimum six foot wide meander- ing landscaped pedestrian/bikeway along and separated from the paved portion of SW Schools Ferry Rd. This facility and its landscaping shall be coordinated with the landscaped berm recommended by the Planning Com- mission. Plans for the berms, landscaping and pedestrian/ bikeway shall be approved by the Planning Department and implemented prior to occupancy of any adjacent apartment dwelling units. All sidewalks and pedestrian/bikeways within the project shall have a smooth transition with streets constructed within the project. This is in order to facilitate the movement of bicycles and wheel chairs throughout the proposed development. (11 ) That the areas designated for apartment development be limited to a density of 11 units per gross acre. (14) The developer will provide adequate right-of-way and financing to accomplish left turn traffic movements at the intersections of SW Schools Ferry Rd. and SW Englewood Dr. and at SW Englewood Dr. and SW 121 st Ave. 4. The Chairman of the Planning Commission has authorized staff to construe condition #3 to refer to the Design Review Board rather than the Planning Commission in that the Design Review Board has since been delegated the site development plan and architectural design review authority held previously by the Planning Com- mission. The Design Review Board, in this case, however, may not interpret the conditions of the Council in approving the Planned Development, but would have to return any exception to those conditions to the Planning Commission for their approval. 5. All conditions of the Planned Development approval appear to have been met. 6. The parking lot is within the center of the development and at its widest point comprizes 110 feet. While the amount of open area provided around the buildings is an attractive feature of the proposed design, the expanse of interior asphalt is excessive. SDR staff report - 4/13/76 - page 2 - item 5.3 Page 3 DRB Staff Report 4/13/76 t item DRB 9-76 The provision of car port structures, would tend to reduce the impact of this much asphalt, as would additional evergreen plantings. 7. The bike path along S.W. Schools Ferry should include dedication of an easement for public use to avoid any liability to the property owner. 8. The location of the pool and recreation facilities adjacent the single family portion of the subdivision could prove to be a nuisance factor to the adjacent homes. 9. The two story units adjacent the single family homes will place second story balconies and windows behind the single family homes. While the distances from the houses will vary from approximately 70 to 100 feet the elevation remain approximately constant across this distance. Therefore, single story buildings appear more appropriate in this area. 10. No exhibit has been made concerning the 5 ' fence to be constructed along the property line. Staff is concerned that this be a substantial and attractive fence and be 6' high to provide the proper privacy. 11 . A children's play area has been depicted but no equipment has been specified. 12. The landscape plan is stated by the designer as being preliminary and an irrigation plan has not been submitted.