08/20/2018 - PacketPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA – August 20, 2018
City of Tigard | 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 | 503-639-4171 | www.tigard-or.gov | Page 1
City of Tigard
Planning Commission Agenda (Revised)
MEETING DATE: August 20, 2018 - 7:00 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard – Town Hall
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m.
3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 p.m.
4. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:04 p.m.
5. PUBLIC HEARING 7:05 p.m.
HASHIMA QUASI-JUDICIAL ANNEXATION - ZCA2018-00004
STAFF: ASSISTANT PLANNER LINA SMITH
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: This proposal is to annex a 0.46-acre property, located at 14305 SW
High Tor Drive (WCTM 2S109BB, Tax Lot 2903), into the City of Tigard. The property owners request to
annex in order to connect to city sewer. LOCATION: 14305 SW High Tor Drive; WCTM 2S109BB,
6. BRIEFING 7:20 p.m.
STAFF: SUSAN SHANKS
PHASE II CODE AMENDMENT PROJECT
7. OTHER BUSINESS 8:20 p.m.
8. ADJOURNMENT 8:30 p.m.
August 20, 2018 Page 1 of 3
CITY OF TIGARD
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes, August 20, 2018
Location: Tigard Civic Center
Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
CALL TO ORDER
Vice President Feeney called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Vice President Feeney
Commissioner Brook
Commissioner Hu
Commissioner Jackson
Commissioner Lieuallen
Commissioner Middaugh
Commissioner Roberts
Commissioner Schmidt
Absent: President Fitzgerald; Alt. Commissioner Whitehurst
Staff Present: Tom McGuire, Assistant Community Development Director;
Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant; Lina Smith, Assistant Planner
COMMUNICATIONS - None
CONSIDER MINUTES
Vice President Feeney asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the August
6 minutes; there being none, Vice President Feeney declared the minutes approved as submitted.
PUBLIC HEARING
HASHIMA QUASI-JUDICIAL ANNEXATION - ZCA2018-00004
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: This proposal is to annex a 0.46-acre property, located at
14305 SW High Tor Drive (WCTM 2S109BB, Tax Lot 2903), into the City of Tigard. The
property owners request to annex in order to connect to city sewer. LOCATION: 14305 SW
High Tor Drive; WCTM 2S109BB
QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STATEMENTS
Vice President Feeney read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial
hearing guide. There were no abstentions; there were no challenges of the commissioners for
bias. Conflict of interest: None. Ex-parte contacts: None. Site visitations: Commissioners
August 20, 2018 Page 2 of 3
Schmidt, and Feeney. No one in the audience wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the
commission.
STAFF REPORT
Assistant Planner Lina Smith introduced herself and went over the staff report and a brief
PowerPoint (Exhibit A). Staff reports are available on-line one week before each hearing.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission find that the proposed annexation (ZCA2018-
00004) meets all the approval criteria as identified in ORS Chapter 222, Metro Code Chapter
3.09, Community Development Code Chapters 18.710 and 18.720, and the following
Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Goal 1.1; Goal 11.1, Policy 4; Goal 11.3, Policy 6; Goal
12; and Goal 14.2, Policies 1-4. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Co mmission
recommend APPROVAL of ZCA2018-00004 to City Council
APPLICANT PRESENTATION – Applicant not present.
TESTIMONY IN FAVOR – None.
TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION – None.
COMMENTS FROM APPLICANT – N/A
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
DELIBERATION
After a very brief deliberation, Commissioner Roberts made the following motion - seconded by
Commissioner Middaugh:
MOTION
“I move the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City
Council of application ZCA2018-00004 and adoption of the findings and conditions of
approval contained in the Staff Report.”
Commissioner Middaugh seconded the motion.
VOTE - All in favor – none opposed - 8-0.
RESULT - Motion for recommendation of approval passes unanimously.
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
R e s p e c t a n d C a r e | D o t h e R i g h t T h i n g | G e t i t D o n e
Hashima Annexation
ZCA2018-00004
August 20, 2018Presented to Tigard Planning Commission
EXHIBIT A
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
City of Tigard
Memorandum
To: Tigard Planning Commission
From: Susan P. Shanks, Senior Planner
Re: PHASE II CODE AMENDMENT PROJECT BRIEFING
Land Use Procedures
Date: August 13, 2018 for August 20, 2018 Meeting
The purpose of this briefing is to provide the Commission with more detail on the kinds of
changes proposed to the city’s existing land use procedures. See below for a summary of the
changes proposed. Several draft chapters are also attached for the Commission’s review and
consideration.
I. EXPIRATIONS – See attached draft Chapter 18.20 (Attachment 1)
Standardizes expirations for (almost) all applications
Avoids “substantial construction” ambiguity
II. EXTENSIONS – See attached draft Chapter 18.745 (Attachment 2)
Standardizes extensions for (almost) all applications
Formalizes and makes process more transparent to the public
III. MODIFICATIONS – See attached draft Chapter 18.765 (Attachment 3)
Provides more flexibility by applying to more types of developments
Provides for most appropriate level of review based on the nature of the
modification
Under consideration: Require nonconforming development to come closer to conformance (not just
not go further out of conformance) with “walkability” standards
EXHIBIT B
IV. ADJUSTMENTS – See attached draft Chapter 18.790 (Attachment 4)
Simplifies the process and provides more flexibility by removing limitations on
the kinds of adjustments that may be requested
Employs two sets of approval criteria depending upon the reason for the
adjustment
V. CONDITIONAL USES – Review existing Chapter 18.740 (not attached)
Addresses de facto and discontinued conditional uses
Replaces specific minor and major modification process with new general process
Deletes or moves all development standards in Section 18.740.040
Under consideration: Add specific approval criteria for “walkability” and ongoing compliance
VI. PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS – Review existing Chapter 18.770 (not attached)
Updates the process related to expirations, extensions, phasing, and modifications
Under consideration: Revise the 2-step process, approval authority, approval criteria, and
development standards to ensure quality development and provide more flexibility
VII. SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS – Review existing Chapter 18.780 (not attached)
Simplifies applicability section
Replaces specific minor and major modification process with new general process
Deletes or moves all development standards in Section 18.780.060
Replaces specific exceptions in Section 18.780.070 with new general adjustment
process
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 1
Chapter 18.20
ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
18.20.040 Timeliness of Regulations
A. Vesting. Land use applications shall be are processed based on the regulations in effect on the date an
application is submitted to the city as provided in ORS 227.178. If a land use application is approved,
development rights are vested when the land use approval is utilized as described in Subsection
18.20.040.G. Vested development rights do not expire unless new land use approvals are obtained
and utilized that supersede any preexisting vested rights.
B. Modifications. Modifications to pending land use applications shall be that have been deemed
complete are processed based on the regulations in effect on the date when the first complete the
original application was submitted, unless a the modifications submitted substantially changes the
proposal so as to constitute a new application, as provided as described in Chapter 18.710, Land Use
Review Procedures.
C. Use of new regulations or mapping. Land use applications will not be are not accepted for development
proposals based on proposed amendments to regulations or the zoning map that have not been adopted,
or have been adopted but are not yet in effect. Pre-application conferences may be requested and held
to discuss implications of proposed amendments.
D. Pre-existing approvals. Land use applications for which approvals were granted prior to the effective
date of the title codified regulations in this title may occur in compliance with such approvals.
E. Conditions of approval. Conditions of land use approval imposed through a land use approval shall
remain valid even if the regulations requiring the conditions have been are subsequently modified.
Conditions of approval may be amended or removed through the following actions:
1. Upon appeal Appeal of the original application; or
2. As Submittal of a new land use application that supersedes the original application;, that shall be
processed through the same procedures as was used to impose the conditions; or
3. Submittal of a new land use application that modifies the original application as provided by
Chapter 18.765, Modifications; or
3. Through a Type I review, only if the condition of approval:
4. Submittal of a new land use application that modifies the original application where the
condition of approval proposed to be amended or removed meets at least one of the criteria listed
below. A modification request will be processed through a Type I procedure as provided in
Section 18.710.050.
a. Violates The condition of approval violates a mandatory federal or state law or regulation;s,
or
b. As a result of an amendment to this title, The condition of approval imposes an objective
limitation that is no longer required by this title or is more restrictive than required by this title
as a result of an amendment to this title.
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 1
F. Transfer of approval rights. Approvals of ministerial and quasi-judicial land use applications run with
the land and are transferred with ownership. Any conditions, time limits, or restrictions apply to all
subsequent owners. (Ord. 17-22 §2) ■
G. Expiration of approvals.
1. Approvals granted pursuant to this chapter expire and are void unless utilized within the time
periods specified below.
a. For an approval requiring any kind of development permit, the development must:
i. Submit and pay for all applicable site and building permits, excluding trade permits,
within 3 years of the effective date of a conditional use, planned development, or site
development review approval or within 2 years of the effective date of all other approvals;
and
ii. Pass final inspection or obtain a permanent certificate of occupancy within 5 years of
the effective date of a conditional use, planned development, or site development review
approval or within 4 years of the effective date of all other approvals.
b. For an approval not requiring any kind of development permit, the development must utilize
its approval within 2 years of the effective date of the approval.
2. Approvals expire as specified above unless one of the following occurs:
a. An extension application is submitted as provided by Chapter 18.745, Extensions. If the
extension application is denied, the approval expires on the effective date of the extension
decision.
b. The expiration date for an approval is specified in another chapter of this title.
3. The following approvals are exempt from expiration: [Need to address PD Overlay Zone]
a. Adequate Public Facilities Exceptions
b. Annexations
c. Comprehensive Plan Amendments
d. Development Code Amendments
e. Director’s Determinations
f. Code Interpretations
g. Historic Overlay Designations or Removal of Historic Overlay Designations
h. Nonconforming Use Determinations
i. Zoning Map Amendments
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 2
Chapter 18.745
EXTENSIONS
18.745.010 Purpose
18.745.020 Applicability
18.745.030 General Provisions
18.745.040 Approval Process
18.745.050 Approval Criteria
18.745.010 Purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to provide an appropriate and efficient review process for extending the time
period during which land use approvals are valid and may be utilized.
18.745.020 Applicability
A. This chapter applies to all approved land use applications that are subject to expiration as described in
Subsection 18.20.040.G but have not yet expired.
B. This chapter does not apply to approved land use applications that are expired or where an extension is
prohibited or otherwise specified in another chapter of this title.
18.745.030 General Provisions
A. An approved land use application is eligible for one extension.
B. A complete extension application must be submitted prior to the expiration date of the original approval,
but no earlier than 6 months in advance of the expiration date.
C. An extension application may not include a proposal to modify the original application or any
conditions of approval.
D. If an extension is approved, the expiration date for the original approval is extended an additional 2
years from the effective date of the original approval.
E. If the original approval included multiple applications, an extension application may include all
applications associated with the original approval.
18.745.040 Approval Process
A. If the original approval was processed through a Type I procedure, the extension application will be
processed through a Type I procedure as provided in Section 18.710.050, using approval criteria in
Section 18.745.050.
.
B. If the original approval was processed through a Type II or Type III procedure, the extension application
will be processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section 18.710.060, using approval
criteria in Section 18.745.050.
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 2
18.745.050 Approval Criteria
The approval authority will approve an application for an extension when all of the following criteria are
met:
A. The need for the extension was not created by the applicant or property owner and a good faith effort
was made to utilize the approval within the specified time period; and
B. If the original application included a transportation impact study or a sensitive lands report, an updated
report was provided with the extension application that showed no significant changes on or near the
development site. A letter from a recognized professional satisfies this criterion if it states that
conditions have not changed since the approval of the original application and that no new analysis is
warranted.
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 3
Chapter 18.765
MODIFICATIONS
18.765.010 Purpose
18.765.020 Applicability
18.765.030 General Provisions
18.765.040 Modifications Allowed Outright
18.765.050 Minor Modifications
18.765.060 Major Modifications
18.765.010 Purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to provide an appropriate and efficient review process for evaluating
modifications to existing developments or approved land use applications.
18.765.020 Applicability
A. This chapter applies to all existing developments approved through one of the land use applications
listed below and proposing to modify an existing use, structure, site improvement, or condition of
approval.
1. Conditional uses.
2. Planned developments.
3. Site development reviews.
4. Subdivisions and land partitions.
B. This chapter also applies to existing developments proposing to modify an existing use, structure, or
site improvement that would have required the submittal of at least one of the land use applications
listed above, but where records of any previous approvals are nonexistent or unavailable.
C. This chapter also applies to any of the land use applications listed above proposing to modify an existing
land use approval.
D. This chapter does not apply to modifications to previously imposed conditions of approval that are
subject to the provisions of Paragraph 18.20.040.E.3.
18.765.030 General Provisions
A. The director will determine whether a proposed modification is allowed outright or qualifies as a minor
or major modification using the definitions in this chapter. The determination of the director is the city’s
final local decision.
B. The director will determine whether a proposed modification constitutes substantial redevelopment and
requires submittal of a new land use application. The determination of the director is the city’s final
local decision. Substantial redevelopment does not qualify as a major modification because it requires
the application of new approval criteria or involves substantive changes to uses, structures, site
improvements, operating characteristics, or original findings of fact.
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 3
C. The scope of review for a proposed modification is limited to an evaluation of the potential impacts of
the proposed modification.
D. A proposed modification involving a nonconforming use or development is subject to the provisions of
Chapter 18.50, Nonconforming Circumstances, in addition to the provisions of this chapter.
18.765.040 Modifications Allowed Outright
A. Definition. A modification allowed outright has all of the following characteristics:
1. It has no impacts on surrounding properties, sensitive lands, or public facilities;
2. It involves the application of clear and objective standards that do not require the exercise of
professional judgment about technical issues;
3. It does not cause the development to go out of conformance with any applicable standard or further
out of conformance if already nonconforming; and
4. It does not alter or contravene any previously imposed condition of approval.
B. Examples. Examples of modifications allowed outright are as follows:
1. Increase in open space, landscaping, or tree canopy area.
2. Interior building modification or a change of use that does not require the application of a different
parking requirement.
3. Exterior building façade modification that does not require the application of any design standard.
4. Installation of mechanical equipment that does not involve the removal of any parking spaces or
landscaping and where applicable screening standards are met as provided in Chapter 18.420,
Landscaping and Screening.
18.765.050 Minor Modifications
A. Definition. A minor modification has the following characteristics:
1. It has minimal impacts on surrounding properties, sensitive lands, or public facilities; and
2. It involves the application of clear and objective standards that requires the exercise of professional
judgment about technical issues; or
3. It involves the application of discretionary standards or approval criteria that requires the exercise
of professional judgment about technical issues.
B. Examples. Examples of minor modifications are as follows:
1. Interior building modification or change of use associated with a restricted or permitted use that
requires the application of a different parking requirement.
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 3
2. Change of use to a restricted use.
3. Change in the number of parking spaces.
4. Decrease in open space, landscaping, or tree canopy area.
C. Approval process. An application for a minor modification will be processed through a Type I
procedure as provided in Section 18.710.050, using approval criteria in Subsection 18.765.050.D.
D. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an application for a
minor modification when all of the following criteria are met:
1. The proposed modification qualifies as a minor modification as defined in Subsection
18.765.050.A;
2. The proposed modification does not cause the development to go out of conformance with any
applicable standard or further out of conformance if already nonconforming; and
3. If the proposed modification involves a previously imposed condition of approval, at least one of
the following criteria is met:
a. The condition cannot be implemented for reasons beyond the control of the applicant;
b. The circumstances have changed to the extent that the condition is no longer needed or
warranted; or
c. A new or modified condition would better accomplish the purpose of the original condition.
18.765.060 Major Modifications
A. Definition. A major modification has the following characteristics:
1. It has more than minimal impacts on surrounding properties, sensitive lands, or public facilities but
does not constitute substantial redevelopment as described in Subsection 18.765.030.B; and
2. It involves the application of clear and objective standards that requires the exercise of limited
discretion; or
3. It involves the application of discretionary standards or approval criteria that requires the exercise
of limited discretion.
B. Examples. Examples of major modifications are as follows:
1. A change of accessory use associated with a conditional use.
2. An increase in residential density other than the addition of an accessory dwelling unit.
C. Approval process. An application for a major modification will be processed through a Type II
procedure as provided in Section 18.710.050, using approval criteria in Subsection 18.765.060.D.
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 3
D. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an application for a
major modification when all of the following are met:
1. The proposed modification qualifies as a major modification as defined in Subsection
18.765.060.A;
2. The operating and physical characteristics of the modified development are reasonably compatible
with surrounding properties;
3. All impacts will be mitigated to the extent practicable; and
4. The proposed modification does not cause the development to go out of conformance with any
applicable standard or further out of conformance if already nonconforming;
5. If the proposed modification involves a site that has nonconforming structures or site improvements
and exceeds the permit threshold specified in Paragraph 18.765.060.E.1 below, the site will be
improved as required by Subsection 18.765.060.E below.
6. If the proposed modification involves a previously imposed condition of approval, at least one of
the following criteria is met:
a. The condition cannot be implemented for reasons beyond the control of the applicant;
b. The circumstances have changed to the extent that the condition is no longer needed or
warranted; or
c. A new or modified condition would better accomplish the purpose of the original condition.
E. Required improvements to nonconforming development. [Under consideration]
The intent of this section is to require existing development with nonconforming structures or site
improvements to come into conformance with city standards over time as modifications to structures or site
improvements are made by property owners or tenants.
1. When the total value of modifications to an existing development is greater than $50,000, the site
must be brought fully or more closely into conformance with the development standards in
Paragraph 18.765.060.E.2 below.
a. Required improvements must be made at the same time as the modifications that triggered
them.
b. The cost of required improvements is limited to 10 percent of the total value of the
modifications. The applicant is responsible for documenting the cost of completed
improvements and may choose which improvements to complete if there is insufficient budget
to complete all required improvements.
c. The total value of modifications is based on the entire project and not individual development
permits.
d. The following modifications do not count toward the total value:
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 3
i. Modifications to comply with fire and life safety requirements.
ii. Modifications to comply with applicable federal and state accessibility requirements.
iii. Modifications to improve seismic resiliency
iv. Modifications to improve or enlarge on-site stormwater management facilities in
conformance with Clean Water Services and City of Tigard standards.
v. Modifications related to the installation of solar panels.
vi. Modifications to remove or remediate hazardous substances.
2. Nonconforming development must be brought fully or more closely into conformance with the
following development standards where applicable:
a. Landscaping standards along street frontages
b. Parking lot and service area screening standards where visible from the public right-of-way
c. Street tree standards
d. Sidewalk width standards, including paved surface in ROW or on private property
d. Weather protection standards for pedestrians along street frontages
e. Window standards along street frontages
f. Building design standards, e.g. entries, pedestrian-scale architectural features?
f. Pedestrian access standards?
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 4
Chapter 18.790
ADJUSTMENTS
18.790.010 Purpose
18.790.020 Applicability
18.790.030 Approval Process
18.790.040 Approval Criteria
18.790.010 Purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to establish an approval process and criteria for granting relief from specific
requirements of this title that have the unintended effect of preventing reasonable development or
imposing undue hardship, where the proposed development continues to meet the intended purposes of
this title. Adjustments are intended to provide flexibility and allow alternative and innovative means to
meet the purposes of development standards in this title.
18.790.020 Applicability
A. Applicability. All regulations in this title may be adjusted using the approval process and criteria
provided in this chapter unless an adjustment is prohibited or specifically provided for elsewhere in
this title, such as in Chapter 18.660, Tigard Triangle Plan District.
B. Prohibited adjustments. Adjustments are prohibited in the following situations:
1. To allow a primary or accessory use that is prohibited;
2. To change or eliminate a regulation that contains the word prohibited;
3. To change or eliminate a threshold for a review;
4. To change or eliminate any part of an approval process, including approval periods;
5. To change a definition, a method of measurement, or the description of a use category;
6. To change or eliminate any regulations in Chapter 18.510, Sensitive Lands; or
7. To change the required density for a development type in a residential zone.
18.790.030 Approval Process
An application for an adjustment will be processed through a Type II procedure as provided in Section
18.710.060, using approval criteria in Section 18.790.040.
18.790.040 Approval Criteria
The approval authority will approve or approve with conditions an adjustment application when the
applicant has demonstrated either that the adjustment will result in substantial compliance with this title
or that there is a hardship that prevents substantial compliance.
A. Criteria for demonstrating substantial compliance.
1. The proposed adjustment will result in development that is generally consistent with the purpose
of the regulation to be modified;
Proposed Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 4
2. The proposed adjustment addresses a development constraint, unusual situation, or otherwise
results in innovative design;
3. Any impacts resulting from the proposed adjustment will be mitigated to the extent practicable;
4. The proposed adjustment does not result in greater impacts to city-designated sensitive lands than
would result if the adjustment was not granted; and
5. If more than one adjustment is proposed, the cumulative effect of the adjustments will result in
development that, on balance, is generally consistent with the existing development pattern of the
surrounding area and the overall purpose of the base zone.
B. Criteria for demonstrating hardship.
1. Application of the regulation in question would preclude all reasonable economic use of the site;
2. The need for the proposed adjustment was not created by the applicant or property owner;
3. The proposed adjustment will equally or better meet the purpose of the regulation to be modified;
4. Any impacts resulting from the proposed adjustment will be mitigated to the extent practicable.
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 1 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
Hearing Date: August 20, 2018 Time: 7:00 P.M.
STAFF REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
120 DAYS = N/A
SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY
FILE NAME: HASHIMA ANNEXATION
CASE NO : Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) ZCA2018 -00004
APPLICANTS/
OWNERS:
Hashima Family Trust
Jason N. and Lisa K. Hashima, Co-Trustees
14305 SW High Tor Drive
Tigard, OR 97224
PROPOSAL: This proposal is to annex a 0.46 -acre property, located at 14305 SW High Tor Drive
(WCTM 2S109BB, Tax Lot 2903), into the City of Tigard. The property owners
request to annex in order to connect to city sewer.
LOCATION: 14305 SW High Tor Drive ; WCTM 2S109BB, Tax Lot 2903
COUNTY ZONE: R-6: Residential, 5 units/acre minimum density, 6 units/acre maximum density
CITY ZONE: R-7: Medium-Density Residential Zone. The R-7 zone is designed to accommodate
attached single -family homes, detached single-family homes with or without accessory
residenti al units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes, at a
minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Mobile home parks are also permitted outright.
Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally.
APPLICABLE
REVIEW
CRITERIA:
The approval standards for annexations are described in Community Development
Code Chapters 18.710 and 18.720, Comprehensive Plan Goal 1 , Goal 11, Goal 12, and
Goal 14; Metro Code Chapter 3.09; and Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapter 222.
SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission find that the proposed annexation (ZCA2018-00004) meets all
the approval criteria as identified in ORS Chapter 222, Metro Code Chapter 3.09, Community Development
Code Chapters 18.710 and 18.720, and the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Goal 1.1; Goal
11.1, Policy 4; Goal 11.3, Policy 6 ; Goal 12; and Goal 14 .2, Policies 1 -4. Therefore, staff recommends that the
Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of ZCA2018 -00004 to City Council.
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 2 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The 0.46-acre site (14305 SW High Tor Drive; WCTM 2S109BB, Tax Lot 2903) is located on the north side
of SW High Tor Drive; north of SW Bull Mountain Road, east of SW 150 th Avenue, and west of SW
Benchview Terrace. According to the Washington County Assessment and Taxation report, the property
was developed with a detached, single -family dwelling in 1967. The property is also occupied by an attached
carport, paved driveway, and associated landscaping. As defined by Washington County Land Use Districts,
the subject property is R-6 (Residential, 5 units/acre minimum density, 6 units/acre maximum density). Upon
approval of this proposed annexation, the subject property will be zoned R-7 (Medium-Density Residential),
under City of Tigard designations.
SECTION IV. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
City: Community Development Code Chapters 18.710 and 18.720 ; Comprehensive Plan Goal
1.1; Goal 11.1 (Policy 4), and Goal 11.3 (Policy 6), Goal 12, Goal 14.2 (Policies 1 -4).
Regional Metro Code Chapter 3.09
State : ORS Chapter 222
CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (TITLE 18)
Chapter 18.710 Land Use Review Procedures
18.710.080 Type III-Modified Procedure
A quasi -judicial annexation is processed through a Type III-Modified Procedure, as governed by Chapter
18.710 of the Community Development Code of the City of Tigard (CDC ), using the approval criteria
contained in CDC 18.720.030 . City Council will make a decision on this application, with a recommendation
from Planning Commission. Additionally, CDC 18.710 requires two public hearings: one before Planning
Commission (scheduled for August 20, 2018), and one before City Council (schedule for September 11, 2018).
City staff followed public noticing requirements, in accordance with CDC Sections 18.710.070 and 18.710.080,
Metro Code Chapter 3.09, and ORS Chapter 222. City staff posted public hearing notices in four public places
on July 30 , 2018 (Tigard City Hall, Tigard Permit Center, Tigard Public Library, and at the subject site); city
staff mailed public hearing notices to all interested parties, and neighboring property owners within 500 feet
of the subject site on July 30, 2018 ; and the city published a public hearing notice in The Tigard Times for
two successive weeks (with publish dates on August 2 and August 9 , 2018 ) prior to the August 20 , 2018
public hearing before the Planning Commission.
Chapter 18.720 Annexations
18.720.020 Approval Process
A. Quasi-judicial annexations shall be processed through a Type III -Modified procedure, as
provided in Section 18.710.080, using the criteria in Section 18.720.030. Quasi -judicial
annexations shall be decided by the city council with a recommendation by plan ning
commission.
This application is for a quasi -judicial annexation, and is being processed through a Type III-Modified
Procedure, as governed by CDC 18.710, using the approval criteria contained in CDC 18.720.030 . City
Council will make a decision on th is application, with a recommendation from Planning Commission.
18.720.030 Approval Criteria
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 3 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
A. Approval Criteria. The approval authority shall approve or approve with modification an
annexation application when all of the following are met:
1. The annexation c omplies with Metro Code 3.09; and
As demonstrated through the findings in this staff report, this proposed quasi -judicial annexation is in
compliance with Metro Code Chapter 3.09. The specific sections of Metro Code Chapter 3.09 that apply to
this appli cation are addressed individually below.
METRO CODE CHAPTER 3.09 LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY CHANGES
3.09.030 Notice Requirements
A. The notice requirements in this section apply to all boundary change decisions by a reviewing
entity except expedited decisions made pursuant to section 3.09.045. These requirements apply
in addition to, and do not supersede, applicable requirements of ORS Chapters 197,198, 221 and
222 and any city or county charter provision on boundary changes.
B. Within 45 days after a reviewing entity determines that a petition is complete, the entity shall
set a time for deliberations on a boundary change. The reviewing entity shall give notice of its
proposed deliberations by mailing notice to all necessary part ies, by weatherproof posting of
the notice in the general vicinity of the affected territory, and by publ ishing notice in a
newspaper of general circulation in the affected territory. Notice shall be mailed and posted at
least 20 days prior to the date of deliberations. Notice shall be published as required by state
law.
C. The notice re quired by subsection (B) shall:
1. Describe the affected territory in a manner that allows certainty;
2. State the date, time and place where the reviewing entity will consider the boundary
change; and
3. State the means by which any person may obtain a copy of the reviewing entity's report
on the proposal.
This proposed annexation is considered a boundary change decision by a reviewing entity, and will not be
processed as an expedite d decision; therefore, these notice requirements apply. City staff determined this
application was complete on July 2 , 2018. Public hearings for deliberations on this proposed boundary
change were scheduled before Planning Commission (schedule for August 2 0, 2018) and before City Council
(scheduled for September 11 , 2018). City staff posted public hearing notices in four public places on July 30,
2018 (Tigard City Hall, Tigard Permit Center, Tigard Public Library, and at the subject site); city staff mailed
public hearing notices to all interested parties, and neighboring property owners within 500 feet of the subject
site on July 30, 2018 ; and the city published a public hearing notice in The Tigard Times for two successive
weeks (with publish dates on August 2 and August 9, 2018 ) prior to the August 20, 2018 public hearing
before the Planning Commission.
3.09.045 Expedited Decisions
This proposed annexation is not being processed as an expedited decision, but Metro Code 3.09.050.D
requires that the standards in Sections 3.09.045.D and 3.09.045.E be addressed.
D. To approve a boundary change through an expedited process, the city shall:
1. Find that the change is consistent with expressly applicable provisions in:
a. Any applicable urban service agreement adopted pursuant to ORS 195.065;
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 4 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
The Tigard Urban Service Agreement is betwee n the City of Tigard, Washington County, Metro, and the
service districts for water, sewer, public safety, parks, and transportation. The agreement outlines the role,
provision, area, and planning/coordination responsibilities for service providers operati ng in the Tigard
Urban Services Area. As addressed under Comprehensive Plan, Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services of
this report, staff finds that all urban services are available to the proposed annexation property , and have
sufficient capacity to provide service.
The Urban Planning Area Agreement between the City of Tigard and Washington County provides
coordination of comprehensive planning and development, defines the area of interest, and includes policies
with respect to the active planning area and annexation. The applicable annexation policies include the
assignment of comprehensive plan and zoning designations addressed later in this report, and
acknowledgements that the city is the ultimate service provider of urban services within the Tigard Urban
Service Area.
b. Any applicable annexation plan adopted pursuant to ORS 195.205;
There is no adopted annexation plan associated with this proposal. Therefore, this provision does not apply.
c. Any applicable cooperative planning agreement adopted pursuant to ORS
195.0 20(2) between the affected entity and a necessary party;
ORS 195.020(2) speaks to cooperative agreements between counties or Metro with each special district that
provides an urban service within the boundaries of the county or the metropolitan district. Examples of
special districts include those for utilities, police, fire, and schools. Upon approval of this proposed
annexation, the City of Tigard will provide sewer and stormwater services to the site , and the City of Tigard
Police Department will provide public safety services, instead of the Was hington County Sheriff’s Office.
City of Tigard will continue to provide water services to the site, and Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue
(TVF&R) will continue to provide fire protection and emergency medica l services to the site . SW High Tor
Drive will remain in the Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District .
d. Any applicable public facility plan adopted pursuant to a statewide planning goal
on public facilities and services;
The City of Tigard Publi c Facility Plan was adopted in 1991, in compliance with Statewide Planning Goals
and Guidelines, and Oregon Administrative Rule s Chapter 660, Division 11. The city makes appropriate
updates to the Public Facility Plan on a regular basis as part of the Peri odic Review process as required by
Oregon Administrative Rule s Chapter 660, Division 25. As addressed under Comprehensive Plan, Goal 11:
Public Facilities and Services of this report , staff finds the proposed annexation is consistent with the
applicable provisions of the City of Tigard Public Facility Plan.
e. Any applicable comprehensive plan;
This proposed quasi -judicial annexation is in compliance with the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. The
specific sections of the Comprehensive Plan that apply to thi s application will be addressed later in this
report.
f. Any applicable concept plan; and
There is no applicable concept plan associated with this proposal. Therefore, this provision does not apply.
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 5 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
2. Consider whether the boundary change would:
a. Promote the timely, orderly and economic provision of public facilities and
services;
b. Affect the quality and quantity of urban services; and
c. Eliminate or avoid unnecessary duplication of facilities or services.
The applicant proposes to annex the subject site in order to connect to City of Tigard sewer. As addressed
under Comprehensive Plan, Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services of this report , staff finds that all public
facilities and services are available to the proposed annexation property, and have sufficient capacity to
provide service. Upon approval of this proposed annexation, the City of Tigard will provide sewer and
stormwater services to the site, and the City of Tigard Police Department will provide public safety services,
instead of the Washington Count y Sheriff’s Office. City of Tigard will continue to provide water services to
the site, and TVF&R will continue to provide fire protection and emergency medical services to the site . SW
High Tor Drive will remain in the Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District .
E. A city may not annex territory that lies outside the UGB, except it may annex a lot or parcel that
lies partially within and outside the UGB.
The subject site is not located outside the UGB. Therefore, this provision does not apply.
3.09.050 Hearing and Decision Requirements for Decisions Other Than Expedited Decisions
A. The following requirements for hearings on petitions operate in addition to requirements for
boundary changes in ORS Chapters 198, 221 and 222 and the reviewing entity's cha rter,
ordinances or resolutions.
B. Not later than 15 days prior to the date set for a hearing the reviewing entity shall make available
to the public a report that addresses the criteria identified in subsection (D) and includes the
following information:
This staff report was made available to the public on August 2 , 2018, more than 15 days prior to the public
hearing before Planning Commission.
1. The extent to which urban services are available to serve the affected territory, including
any extra territorial extensions of service;
As addressed under Comprehensive Plan, Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services of this report , staff finds
that all public facilities and services are available to the proposed annexation property, and have sufficient
capacity to provide service.
2. Whether the proposed boundary change will result in the withdrawal of the affected
territory from the legal boundary of any necessary party; and
The proposed annexation area will remain within Washington County, but will be withdrawn from the
Washington County Enhanced Sheriff’s Patrol District upon completion of this annexation request .
3. The proposed effective date of the boundary change.
A public hearing regarding this ann exation request will take place before Tigard City Council on September
11, 2018 . Council will make a decision on this application, with a recommendation from Planning Commission.
If Council adopts findings to approve Case No. ZCA2018 -00004, the effective date of this annexation will
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 6 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
be upon the effective date of the approving ordinance, and filing with the Oregon Secretary of State, as
outlined in ORS 222.180.
C. The person or entity proposing the boundary change has the burden to demonstrate that the
proposed boundary change meets the applicable criteria.
The proposed boundary change meets the applicable criteria, as demonstrated through the findings in this
staff report.
D. To approve a boundary change, the reviewing entity shall apply the cr iteria and consider the
factors set forth in subsections (D) and (E) of section 3.09.045.
The factors set forth in Metro Code Sections 3.09.045.D and 3.09.045.E have been previously addressed in
this report.
(CDC 18.720.030 Continued)
A.2. The annexation is in the city’s best interest.
As addressed under Metro Code Section 3.09.045.D.2 of this staff report, this proposed annexation will help
to promote the timely, orderly and economic provision of City of Tigard public facilities and servi ces, and
eliminate or avoid unnecessary duplication of facilities or services. Accordingly, staff finds this proposed
annexation is in the city’s best interest.
B. Assignment of comprehensive plan and zoning designations. The comprehensive plan
designation and the zoning designation place d on the property shall be the city’s base
zone that most closely implements the city’s or county’s comprehensive plan map
designation. The assignment of these designations shall occur automatically and
concurrently with the annex ation. In the case of land that carries county designations, the city
shall convert the county’s comprehensive plan map and zoning designations to the city
designations that are the most sim ilar. A zone change is required if the applicant requests
a comprehensive plan map or zoning map designation other than the existing designations.
A request for a zone change may be processed conc urrently with an annexation application
or after the annexation has been approved.
C. Conversion table. Table 18.720.1 summarizes the conversion of the county’s plan and
zoning designations to city designations that are most similar.
CDC TABLE 18.7 20.1
CONVERSION TABLE FOR COUNTY AND CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
ZONING DESIGNATIONS
Washington County Land Use
Districts/Plan Designation City of Tigard Zoning City of Tigard
Plan Designation
R-6 Res. 6 units/acre R-7 SFR 5,000 sq. ft. Med. density 6 -12 units/acre
CDC Table 18.7 20.1 summarizes conversions for City of Tigard comprehensive plan and zoning
designations that are most similar and most closely implement Washington County ’s comprehensive plan
and zoning designations. As outlined in the table above , the assignment of city designations for the subject
property will be based on these conversions, and shall occur automatically and concurrent ly with the
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 7 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
proposed annexation. Under Washington County designations, the subject site is R-6 (Residential, 5
units/acre minimum density, 6 units/acre maximum density). Upon approval of this proposed annexation, the
subject property will be R-7 (Medium-Density Residential), under City of Tigard designations.
CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Goal 1.1: Provide citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate
in all phases of the planning process.
The City of Tigard maintains an ongoing citizen involvement program. To ensure citizens were provided an
opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process, city staff issued public notices for this
proposed quasi -judicial annexation. City staff posted public hearing notices in four public places on July 30,
2018 (Tigard City Hall, Tigard Permit Center, Tigard Public Libr ary, and at the subject site); city staff mailed
public hearing notices to all interested parties, and neighboring property owners within 500 feet of the subject
site on July 30, 2018 ; and the city published a public hearing notice in The Tigard Times for two successive
weeks (with publish dates on August 2 and August 9, 2018 ) prior to the August 20, 2018 public hearing
before the Planning Commission. Additionally, this staff report was made available to the public on August
2, 2018, more than 15 days prior to the public hearing before Planning Commission.
Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services
As detailed in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Public Facilities and Services refer to Stormwater
Management, Water Supply and Distribution, Wastewater Mana gement, Community Facilities, and Private
Utilities. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan’s Glossary includes public safety, parks, and transportation
under Public Facilities and Services. Staff interprets the phrase “all public facilities and services are available
to the proposed annexation area” to mean the services and facilities are currently available and adjacent to
the proposed annexation area, or in the case of stormwater service, is present in the vicinity and can be made
available t o the proposed annexation area through an extension. Therefore, staff concludes that all public
facilities and services are available to the proposed annexation area , and have adequate capacity to serve the
subject site, as detailed in the findings below.
Stormwater – City of Tigard Public Works Department. The applicant is not requesting City of Tigard
stormwater service at this time. However, city stormwater infrastructure either currently exists adjacent to
the proposed annexation area , or can be extended to the subject site. The City of Tigard Public Works
Department reviewed the proposal, and determined there is adequate capacity to serv e the existing property.
Water – City of Tigard Public Works Department . The property is located within the Tigard Water
Service Area. The subject site is currently served by an existing eight -inch water main along SW High Tor
Drive. The City of Tigard Public Works Department reviewed the proposal, and determined there is
adequate capacity to serve the existing property.
Sewer – City of Tigard Public Works Department . The applicant proposes to annex the subject property
in order to connect to City of Tigard sewer. This is consistent with City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal
11.3, Policy 6: “The City shall require a property to be located within the City limits prior to receiving City
wastewater services.” City of Tigard sewer infrastructure is available by an existing sanitary lateral located at
the northern end of the propert y. The City of Tigard Public Works Department reviewed the proposal, and
determined there is adequate capacity to serv e the existing property.
Police – City of Tigard Police Department. The Washington County Sheriff’s Office currently provides
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 8 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
police serv ices to the subject property. If this annexation request is approved, the site will be withdrawn
from the Enhanced Sheriff’s Patrol District , and the City of Tigard Police Department will provide public
safety services to the site. The City of Tigard Police Department reviewed the applicant’s proposal, and had
no objections.
Fire – Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. The subject property is located within the service area for
TVF&R. Accordingly, TVF&R currently provides fire protection and emergency medi cal services to the site,
which will not change with this annexation request. TVF&R reviewed the applicant’s proposal, and had no
objections.
Parks – City of Tigard Public Works Department. The applicant proposes to annex a 0.46-acre property
into the City of Tigard. Staff has reviewed the applicant’s proposal and determined that this request will not
adversely impact the city’s ability or capacity to provide for parks and recreational needs.
Streets – City of Tigard Engineering Division. The subject property directly fronts SW High Tor Drive,
which will remain in the Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District . The proposed annexation
will not impact the existing transportation syste m. Additionally, t he City of Tigard Engineering Division
reviewed t he applicant’s proposal, and had no objections.
Goal 11.1, Policy 4: The City shall require a property to be located within the City limits prior to
receiving stormwater services.
The applicant is not requesting City of Tigard stormwater service at this time. However, city stormwater
infrastructure either currently exists adjacent to the proposed annexation area, or can be made available to
the subject site. The City of Tigard Public Works Department reviewed the proposal, and determined there
is adequate capacity to serve the existing property.
Goal 11.3, Policy 6: The City shall require a property to be located within the City limits prior to
receiving wastewater services.
The applicant proposes to annex the subject property in order t o connect to City of Tigard sewer. This is
consistent with the policy outlined above. City of Tigard sewer infrastructure is available by an existing
sanitary lateral located at the northern end of the property. The City of Tigard Public Works Department
reviewed the proposal, and determined there is adequate capacity to serv e the existing property.
Goal 12: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient, and economic transportation system.
The subject property directly fronts SW High Tor Drive, which will r emain in the Washington County Urban
Road Maintenance District . The proposed annexation will not impact the existing transportation syste m.
Additionally, the Cit y of Tigard Engineering Division reviewed the applicant’s proposal, and had no
objections.
Goal 14.2, Policy 1: The City shall assign a Tigard zoning district designation to annexed property
that most closely conforms to the existing Washington County zoning designation for that property.
The applicable Tigard zoning district designation for th e subject property is addressed under CDC Sections
18.720.030.B and 18.720.030.C of this report.
Goal 14.2, Policy 2: The City shall ensure capacity exists, or can be developed, to provide needed
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 9 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
urban level services to an area when approving annexation.
As addressed under Comprehensive Plan, Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services of this report , staff finds
that all urban level services are available to the proposed annexation property, and have sufficient capacity
to provide service.
Goal 14.2, Policy 3 : The City shall approve proposed annexations based on findings that the request:
A. Can be accommodated by the City’s public facilities and services; and
As addressed under Comprehensive Plan, Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services of this report , staff finds
that all City of Tigard public facilities and services are available to the proposed annexation property, and
have sufficient capacity to provide service.
B. Is consistent with applicable state statute.
As addressed later in this report, staff finds the applicable provisions of ORS 222 have been met, consistent
with this policy.
Goal 14.2, Policy 4 : The City shall evaluate and may require that parcels adjacent to proposed
annexations be included to:
A. Avoid creating unincorporated islands within the City;
B. Enable public services to be efficiently and effectively extended to the entire area; or
C. Implement a concept plan or sub -area master plan that has been approved by the Planning
Commission or City Council.
The subject property (14305 SW High Tor Drive; WCTM 2S109BB, Tax Lot 2903) is located directly south
of the city’s border with unincorporated Washington County. City staff sent invitations to adjacent property
owners along SW High Tor Drive on July 3, 2018 to join i n on this annexation request. The owners of two
properties declined the invitation, and no other responses were received. Annexation of the subject property
will not create an “island” of unincorporated land. This annexation request will e nable public serv ices to be
efficiently and effectively extended to the property. There is no concept plan or sub-area master plan that
has been approved by the Planning Commission or City Council that is applicable to this property.
OREGON REVISED STATUTES
ORS Chapter 2 22 — City Boundary Changes; Mergers; Consolidations; Withdrawals
222.111 Authority and procedure for annexation.
(2) A proposal for annexation of territory to a city may be initiated by the legislative body of the
city, on its own motion, or by a petition to the legislative body of the city by owners of real
property in the territory to be annexed.
(5) The legislative body of the city shall submit, except when not required under ORS 222.120,
222.170 and 222.840 to 222.915 to do so, the proposal for annexation to the electors of the
territory proposed for annexation and, except when permitted under ORS 222.120 or 222.840
to 222.915 to dispense with submitting the proposal for annexation to the electors of the city,
the legislative body of the city shall submit such proposal to the electors of the city. The
proposal for annexation may be voted upon at a general election or at a special election to
be held for that purpose.
222.120 Procedure for annexation without election; hearing; ordinance subject to referendum.
(1) Except when expressly required to do so by the city charter, the legislative body of a city is
HASHIMA ANNEXATION PAGE 10 OF 11
ZCA2018-00004
not required to submit a proposal for annexation of territory to the electors of the city for
their approval or rejection.
(2) When the legislative body of the city elects to dispense with submitting the question of the
proposed annexation to the electors of the city, the legislative body of the city shall fix a day
for a public hearing before the legislative body at which time the electors of the city may
appear and be heard on the question of annexation.
(3) The city legislative body shall cause notice of the hearing to be published once each week
for two successive weeks prior to the day of hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation
in the city, and shall cause notices of the hearing to be posted in four public places in the
city for a like period.
This application to annex the subject property (14305 SW High Tor Drive; WCTM 2S109BB, Tax Lot 2903)
was submitted by the property owners. Additionally, the City of Tigard Charter does not expressly require
the city to submit a proposal for annexation of territory to the electors of the city for their approval or
rejection. Therefore, an election is not required for this annexation application. However, the city is require d
to follow the public hearing and public noticing requirements outlined in ORS 222.120.
Public hearings for deliberations on this proposed annexation were scheduled before Planning Commission
(schedule for August 20 , 2018) a nd before City Council (scheduled for September 11 , 2018). City staff
published, posted, and mailed notice of the public hearings as follows: a public hearing notice was published
in The Tigard Times for two successive weeks (with publish dates on August 2 and August 9 , 2018) prior to
the August 20 , 2018 public hearing before the Planning Commission; public hearing notices were posted in
four public places on July 30 , 2018 (Tigard City Hall, Tigard Permit Center, Tigard Public Library, and at the
subject site); and public hearing notices were mailed to all interested parties, and neighboring property owners
within 500 feet of the subject site on July 30 , 2018.
SECTION V. OTHER STAFF AND AGENCY COMMENTS
The City of Tigard Engineering Division, Police Department, and Public Wo rks Department were
sent copies of the applicant’s proposal, and had no objections.
Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue was sent a copy of the applicant’s proposal, and had no objections.
SECTION VI . PUBLIC COMMENTS
City staff mailed public hearing notices to all interested parties, and neighboring property owners within 500
feet of the subject site on July 30 , 2018 . As of August 13, 2018, no public comments were received.
Attachments:
Attachment 1: Zoning Map
Attachment 1: Zoning Map
Generalized Zoning Categories
Zoning Description
Residential
Mixed Use Residential
Commercial
Mixed Use
Triangle Mixed Use
Mixed Use Employment
Industrial
Parks and Recreation
WA-CNTY
Overlay Zones
Historic District Overlay
Planned Development Overlay
Subject Site
Map printed at 03:49 PM on 02-Jul-18
Information on this map is for general location only and should be verified with the
Development Services Division.
DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES. THE CITY OF TIGARD MAKES NO
WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE CONTENT, ACCURACY,
TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE DATA PROVIDED HEREIN. THE
CITY OF TIGARD SHALL ASSUME NO LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR
INACCURACIES IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd
Tigard, OR 97223
503 639-4171
www.tigard-or.gov