Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Packet - 01/05/2021
rEi City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD ,____ TIGARD CITY COUNCIL&LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE AND TIME: January 5, 2021 - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: Remote participation only. See PUBLIC NOTICE below. PUBLIC NOTICE: In accordance with the City of Tigard's Emergency Declaration related to COVID-19 and Oregon House Bill 4212,this will be a virtual meeting where Council and staff will participate remotely.There will be no in-person public testimony during this meeting. How to comment: •Written public comment may be submitted electronically at www.tigard-or.Rov/Comments.All comments must be submitted before 4:30 p.m. the day of the meeting. 'If you prefer to call in,please call 503-966-4101 between 6:30 and 6:45 p.m. to be placed in the queue. We ask that you plan on limiting your testimony to three minutes SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: http://www.tigard-or.gov/city_hall/council meetinz.php CABLE VIEWERS: The first City Council meeting of the month may be shown live on Channel 28 at 6:30 p.m.The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 p.m. Monday 6:00 a.m. City of Tigard • Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL& LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATE AND TIME: January 5,2021 - 6:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: Remote participation only. 6:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE TO COUNCILORS HEIDI LUEB AND JEANETTE SHAW 6:30 p.m.estimated time 3. CONDUCT COUNCIL PRESIDENT ELECTION 6:40 p.m.estimated time 4. PUBLIC COMMENT A. Written Public Comment B. Phone-in Public Comment C. Follow-up to Previous Public Comment 5. CONSENT AGENDA: (Local Contract Review Board) The Consent Agenda is used for routine items including council meeting minutes and approval of contracts or intergovernmental agreements. Information on each item is available on the city's website in the packet for this meeting. These items may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Council members may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. 6:50 p.m. estimated time A. CONSIDER A CONTRACT AMENDMENT TO RCH STUDIOS FOR UNIVERSAL PLAZA ACTIVATION, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT B. CONSIDER CONTRACT AWARDS FOR ON-CALL WATER SYSTEM ENGINEER AND HYDROLOGIST OF RECORD C. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT FOR FANNO CREEK TRAIL ALIGNMENT STUDY D. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF COMPETITIVE BIDDING EXEMPTION AND FINDINGS FOR CACH RESERVOIR AND PUMP STATION •Consent Agenda-Items Removed for Setarate Discussion:Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council/Town Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 6. CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 6:55 p.m. estimated time 7. QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER ORDINANCE APPROVING RIETMAN ANNEXATION (ZCA2020-00002)7:00 p.m. estimated time 8. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.04.110 FOR A BUSINESS LICENSE SUPPORT PROGRAM 7:15 p.m. estimated time 9. RECEIVE COUNCIL TRAINING ON EMPLOYMENT LAW 7:25 p.m. estimated time 10. NON AGENDA ITEMS 11. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order,the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute.All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 13. ADJOURNMENT 7:45 p.m. estimated time AIS-4454 2. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Administer Oath of Office to Councilors Heidi Lueb and Jeanette Shaw Prepared For: Kathy Nyland, City Management Submitted By: Caroline Patton, Central Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting -Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall new Councilors Heidi Lueb and Jeanette Shaw be sworn into office? STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that new councilors receive the oath of office at the first official meeting of their term. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY With the terms for Councilors Tom Anderson and Heidi Lueb set to expire on December 31, 2020,the City of Tigard placed two council positions on the November 3,2020 ballot. The two candidates with the most votes were Heidi Lueb and Jeanette Shaw. The Honorable Judge Michael O'Brien will conduct a virtual swearing-in ceremony for the new councilors.They will be invited to give remarks after their oaths are administered. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments No file(s)attached. AIS-4455 3. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Conduct Council President Election Prepared For: Carol Krager, Central Services Submitted By: Caroline Patton, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall Council elect a new City Council President? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommend Council elect a Council President to serve for a two-year term, ending in December 2022, as provided by the City's Charter. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard Charter states that at its first meeting of each odd numbered year, the Council will elect a Council President from its membership (Chapter IV, Section 18). The term is for two years, ending on December 31, 2022. The Council President will preside over meetings and perform the duties of the office of Mayor in the Mayor's absense. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments No file(s) attached. Carol Krager From: Liz Newton Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 6:41 PM To: Carol Krager Subject: Re: Council President Vote I vote for Councilor Lueb. Councilor Newton Sent from my iPad On Jan 5, 2021, at 6:27 PM, Carol Krager<carolk@tigard-or.gov>wrote: This might be easier for you on Agenda Item No. 3 - Conduct Council President Election. When the mayor directs you to, you can just reply to this email with your vote. Thank you. Carol DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules "City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 Carol Krager From: Heidi Lueb Sent: Tuesday,January 5, 2021 6:41 PM To: Carol Krager Subject: Council President Heidi Lueb Thank you Carol! DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules "City General Records Retention Schedule." li 1 Carol Krager From: Jason Snider Sent: Tuesday,January 5, 2021 6:41 PM To: Carol Krager Subject: RE: Council President Vote I vote for Councilor Lueb. Jason Jason B. Snider, Mayor City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 718-2476 (direct) (503)810-0269 (cell) iason@tigard-or.gov www.tigard-or.gov From: Carol Krager<carolk@tigard-or.gov> Sent:Tuesday,January 5, 2021 6:27 PM To:#Councilmail <councilmail@tigard-or.gov> Cc: Kathy Nyland <kathyn@tigard-or.gov>; Kathy McAlpine <kathy.mcalpine@tigard-or.gov>; Shelby Rihala <shelbyr@tigard-or.gov> Subject: Council President Vote This might be easier for you on Agenda Item No. 3 - Conduct Council President Election. When the mayor directs you to, you can just reply to this email with your vote. Thank you. Carol DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 Carol Krager From: John Goodhouse Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 6:41 PM To: Carol Krager Subject: Re: Council President Vote I vote for Councilor Lueb for Council President. Tigard Council President John Goodhouse 971-212-7533 Sent from my iPhone On Jan 5, 2021, at 6:27 PM, Carol Krager<carolk@tigard-or.gov>wrote: This might be easier for you on Agenda Item No. 3 - Conduct Council President Election. When the mayor directs you to, you can just reply to this email with your vote. Thank you. Carol DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules "City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 Carol Krager From: Jeanette Shaw <Jeanette@shawfortigard.com> Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 6:43 PM To: Carol Krager Subject: Council president vote Caution!This message was sent from outside your organization. Allow sender I Block sender Heidi Lueb 1 dot__ i+e frt. 4-4A rir f eil Pw61i6_ CO 01 nte f,iTIGARP Meeting of the Tigard City Council January 5, 2021 Written Public Comment Received Submitted By Date Received Subject 1. Jo M.Underhill 1/2/2021 Need for COVID-19 Testing for Disadvantaged Tigardians 2. Ellia Kim 1/4/2021 Share& Care/Homeless Issues for nearby businesses 3. Denny Rasmussen 1/5/2021 Supportive of exemption to competitive bidding process for Cach Reservoir project. Carol Krager From: noreply@revize.com Sent: Saturday,January 2, 2021 12:29 PM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments This sender is trusted. Name=Jo M. Underhill EmailAddress= Address = Tigard, OR 97223 Topic=COVID-19 Testing for Disadvantaged Tigardians Yes, I support=Yes FeedBackText= Hey all, I don't know if this is in your wheelhouse,but if it is, please listen. If it isn't, I hope you can push it to someone who can help.There are very few COVID-19 testing sites in the Tigard area that take people who are uninsured and without a car for a drive-thru option.The closest free one I could find is a county testing site 6 miles away in north Beaverton.We need something closer.Thank you! Jo Client IP= 172.56.42.94 1 Carol Krager From: ellia kim Sent: Monday,January 4, 2021 8:02 AM To: Carol Krager Subject: Share&Care/homeless issues Caution!This message was sent from outside your organization. Allow sender I Block sender Hello, My name is Ellia Kim, an owner of Tigard Donut located at 13815 SW Pacific HWY suite#80, and I and my husband been and run the business for almost 15 years in Tigard. My shop is located right next to the church and Share&Care( please find attached link). We and my customers have had lots of unsafe issues with the homeless.They come to Share&Care Every Monday, Wednesday, Friday to get some governmental aid Checks for them. So it's been more and more those people tend to stay overnight at Gaarde Plaza next to the church, (church subleasing to Share&Care?not sure about but sure about lease involved in two parties),this morning was one of this case. Furthermore,they always asking for money from my customer and pee and dit,the needle used in the back parking lot. Last summer,one homeless with a loud threatening voice invaded my shop and grabbed lsoda,and ran away.They're getting more aggressive. Everyone is very sensitive to health and safety issues in this Pandemic.The church may also need to have the lessee (share&care)to support their finance but not this way.This is a family neighbor,not a business area. I don't know how to solve this or who can solve this ongoing unsafe issue...but I tried to comment on this to the council members of the City. Thank you Ellia Kim 1 I" a - ‘, '1 I a i / 0 . t Ifi ' • 0 /0 * ... ...... 44 /111 5. i .4. .1- • 4i • i. * illirium..... 7.:',7,...• it .... if 0.. ....,.. ,, ,... . ., ...... I* - -,,-...„„„,........ 4. ‘ 4 ' N IL II ta - 4, - . . ....: 4/0 it 1St „,,,,i. 11111111 *WV , ., 0.1. IIP' 11 • • 1.0.11 - - .• 0 • . ... a , , • ••• 4.••'.0,-,/ •••:-.' .... $ . . • I 1 1 t r, • ,. J , 4 •• .• • . . 2 https://g.co/kgs/twWMEF https://shareandcarehouse.org/ Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 3 Carol Krager From: noreply@revize.com Sent: Tuesday,January 5, 2021 8:07 AM To: Carol Krager Cc: Caroline Patton Subject: Public Comments This sender is trusted. Name=Denny Rasmussen EmailAddress= Address= Topic= D. Consider Approval of competitive bidding exemption and findings for cach reservoir Yes, I support=Yes FeedBackText= I support the decision to exempt competitive bidding as it sounds like the scope and complexity of the project may require a particular company's expertise. I would like to add that this facility will permanently alter the natural landscape of one of these two beautiful properties so many of us walk everyday. I would like to ask council to consider a Elizabeth Price Park like concept for this project,where the reservoir can be filled in and park space can sit on top. Client IP= 174.204.197.93 1 AIS-4500 5._ A. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Consider Amendment to RCH Studios Contract for Universal Plaza Activation,Design, Construction and Project Management Prepared For: Christine Moody Submitted By: Christine Moody,Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Local Contract Review Board Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve Contract Amendment#1 to RCH Studios for additional work performed on Universal Plaza Activation,Design, Construction and Project Management? STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Staff Recommends that the Local Contract Review Board approve Contract Amendment#1 to RCH Studios in the amount of$471,070. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Universal Plaza, a community gathering spot in the heart of downtown,is planned to open in late 2022. On February 25,2020, a consultant team lead by RCH Studios was awarded the design and activation contract. The contract includes the following tasks: •Conceptual Framework Design Plan- September 2020-November 2020 •Activation of the temporary plaza-July 2020-December 2021 •Schematic Design and Cost Estimates-December 2020- February 2021 •Design Development-February 2021-April 2021 •Construction Documents-April 2021-August 2021 •Land Use Approval Submittal-August 2021-October 2021 Currently the contractor has wrapped up conceptual design and the activation development (activation deployment will continue through December 2021).As reported to the LCRB at the February 25, 2020 meeting, RCH Studios needed to complete the plaza concept design before bringing sub-consultants on for water feature engineering, structural engineering, and specifications for lighting,irrigation, and electrical systems.With the opportunity to review the concept design, the subconsultants are able to provide refined costs and the contractor is able to finalize the scope for these tasks. This amendment includes the sub-consultant's construction document tasks,unanticipated costs for design and engineering of restroom facilities and the additional RCH Studios scope for permitting and construction observation that was contemplated but not covered in the original contract. Construction of the plaza is on track to commence in January 2022. The final cost of the amended contract will not exceed $472,000. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The Local Contract Review Board may choose to not approve the contract amendment and issue a solicitation for the permitting and construction observation work. This would cause a significant delay in the project schedule as well as project management issues for the city and RCH Studios. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS City Strategic Plan 2020-2025 Priority 3—Ensure development advances the vision. Objective 3.1: Pursue land development that maximizes public health benefits while increasing connection between people and community destinations Action G: Invest in public spaces that equitably serve the city's diverse residents,workers, and visitors Objective 3.3: Understand the effects of development on vulnerable Tigard residents and mitigate these impacts within projects and over time. Action A: Increase access and participation of community members who are historically underrepresented in city processes and committees. 2019-2021 Tigard City Council Goals Goal 2: Invest and connect key areas of the city to promote economic growth and community vitality. Strategy 2.2: Continue to make Downtown Tigard a place people want to be by making substantial progress on projects that attract new residential and business investment: •Design and engineering of Universal Plaza City Center Urban Renewal Plan Goal 4B: Develop urban spaces that will provide active and passive recreational opportunities for pedestrians and attract residents and visitors to downtown. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION February 25, 2020 LCRB approval of the professional services contract. Fiscal Impact Cost: 472,000 Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where budgeted?: FY 20-21 Capital Improvement Plan Additional Fiscal Notes: Attachments No file(s)attached. AIS-4516 E, B. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Contract Awards - On-Call Water System Engineer, and/or Hydrogeologist of Record Prepared For: Christine Moody Submitted By: Christine Moody,Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda- LCRB Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the Local Contract Review Board award on-call contracts for three work categories to support the City's water system? STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board award contracts to Carollo Engineers, Inc., GSI Water Solutions,Inc., and Portland Engineering,Inc. in support of the City's water system for a total contract term not to exceed five years. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard owns and operates a public water system which supplies potable water to the Tigard Water Service Area (1WSA),which includes approximately two-thirds of the residents,businesses, and public institutions within the city limits in addition to the unincorporated area of Bull Mountain,and the cities of King City and Durham, Oregon.The City provides an average of about 6 million gallons of water per day to a population of nearly 64,000 and includes both residential and commercial users. The water system program has an annual need for a range for consulting services. Several smaller projects within this program involve low dollar, short term consulting services. Often,the solicitation of these consultants can be time consuming and add significantly to the project schedule.To combat this, the City has issued a formal Request for Proposals (RFP) to select qualified firms in the work categories of: •Water System Modeling&Analysis, •Aquifer Storage&Recovery System,and •Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System. On October 5, 2020 the City issued a Qualification-Based RFP seeking services of a consulting firm with demonstrated success in project management, concept planning and engineering,preliminary and final design, and construction engineering and field services for water-related infrastructure. On October 27,2020 eight proposals were received.A selection committee reviewed and scored proposals and after careful consideration,including pricing evaluation, staff recommends that the City award contracts to the following firms for the designated category of work: •Water System Modeling&Analysis—Carollo Engineers,Inc. •Aquifer Storage&Recovery System—GSI Water Solutions,Inc. •Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System—Portland Engineering,Inc. The proposed contracts will be of an on-call nature in which services are requested as the need arises, therefore there is no guarantee as the actual amount of work to be assigned under any contract. Work performed under these contracts must be authorized via written task order. Compensation for each task order will be determined through negotiation with the contractor based on the scope of work,the estimated hours for performance of the work and the contractor's rates. The maximum compensation for a particular task order cannot exceed$250,000. For larger design projects and major studies estimated over$250,000 the City will issue a standalone RFP. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The Local Contract Review Board may choose to not enter into these on-call contracts and ask that staff issue an RFP for each project. This would result in extended timelines for future water system projects and those that are currently underway. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS The Water System Master Plan on was adopted by Council on December 8,2020.The Water System Master Plan included a multitude of projects that are projected to occur over the next 20 years,with multiple smaller-scale projects slated to take place in the next five years. Council Goal 1 -"Ensure the City's continued financial stability and sustainability while providing mandated services. Seek ways to fund and increase services valued by the community." DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Fiscal Impact Cost: Varies Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where budgeted?: Multiple Additional Fiscal Notes: The proposed on-call contracts will not have maximum dollar limits,however,no task order issued against any contract can exceed$250,000. Task orders will only be issued for projecs that are budgeted within CIP and department budgets. Attachments No file(s)attached. AIS-4523 5- C. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Consider Contract Amendment to Fanno Creek Trail Alignment Study Prepared For: Christine Moody Submitted By: Christine Moody,Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda- LCRB Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve contract amendment#3 to GreenWorks,P.C. for additional work needed on the Fanno Creek Trail Alignment Study? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board approve contract amendment#3 to GreenWorks, P.C. in the amount of$44,177.00. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY There are numerous gaps in the Fanno Creek Regional Trail within Tigard city limits, some of which are currently in final design and will get constructed in the coming years. This will leave a final gap in Tigard from SW Bonita Road to the Tualatin River,known to some as "the missing link." The purpose of the Fanno Creek Trail Alignment Study is to determine a recommended trail alignment for this final segment. The City hired GreenWorks,P.C.,through a competitive Qualifications Based Selection RFP to complete this siting study, including conceptual design and cost estimates. This will then position the City to seek funds for design, easement acquisition, and construction to connect all portions of the existing Fanno Creek Regional Trail and provide a safe, comfortable, enjoyable, and reasonably direct travel experience for community members who see walking or cycling as a viable transportation option in this area. Implications of COVID-19 and an elongated project schedule,including assisting the City in creation of a robust on-line virtual open house in lieu of a traditional in-person style open house, did not leave adequate budget to complete the conceptual design and cost estimate tasks,which were the final tasks of the original scoped work. In addition, the level of analysis that is now deemed to be warranted where the trail alignment options parallel Fanno Creek just south of SW Bonita Road and go underneath the Durham Road bridge that crosses Fanno Creek is substantial. In order to complete this project a contract amendment for additional scope and a schedule extension are needed. The additional work tasks include: •10% Design of preferred trail alignment •Cost estimate of preferred trail alignment •Bonita Road segment study •Durham Road bridge study •Flood elevation mapping •Technical report documenting the results of the study OTHER ALTERNATIVES The Local Contract Review Board may choose to not approve the contract amendment.This would cause this project to be put on hold indefinitely, as the originally scoped work and Bonita Road and Durham Road studies would not be completed. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS City Strategic Plan 2020-2025 Priority 2—Create a well-connected, attractive, and accessible pedestrian network. Objective 2.2:Tigard's pedestrian network is attractive, accessible, safe and well maintained. Action B: Design the trail system to serve both recreational and active transportation purposes. 2019-2021 Tigard City Council Goals Goal 5: Enhance walkability and pedestrian connectivity. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION December 17,2018 LCRB approval of the professional services contract. Fiscal Impact Cost: 44,177.00 Budgeted (yes or no): No Where budgeted?: 425-Parks SDC (Q2 Supplemental Request) Additional Fiscal Notes: The additional budget appropriation associated with this proposed amendment is coming from the 425 Parks System Development Charges (SDC) fund in lieu of the 415 Transportation SDC fund. The additional appropriation is being requested in the 2nd Quarter Budget Supplemental. If the 2nd Quarter Supplemental Budget is not approved,there are sufficient appropriations in Parks SDC in FY 2021 as staff has identified CIP 92057 Fanno Creek Trail Amenities as a project that can be slowed down or its scope decreased,if necessary to complete the Fanno Creek Trail Alignment Study as proposed. The additional appropriations to bring the Fanno Creek Trail Amenities project whole again will then be requested in the FY22 budget,if needed. Attachments No file(s) attached AIS-4520 _ D. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Exemption to Competitive Bidding and Approval of Findings for Cach Reservoir and Pump Station Prepared For: Christine Moody Submitted By: Christine Moody,Finance and Information Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Local Contract Review Board Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the Local Contract Review Board exempt the Cach Reservoir and Pump Station from traditional low bid and allow Alternative Project Delivery? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board (LCRB) approve the findings and allow an Alternative Project Delivery (APD) method rather than low bid for the solicitation and contract of the Cach Reservoir and Pump Station. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard owns and operates a public water system which supplies potable water to the Tigard Water Service Area (TWSA),which includes approximately two-thirds of the residents,businesses, and public institutions within the city limits, the unincorporated area of Bull Mountain, and the cities of King City and Durham.The TWSA is currently expanding to include the River Terrace area as development occurs along the city's western boundary. Three (3) of the city's five (5) pressure zones are involved in this project and include the 410-foot, 560-foot and 713-foot pressure zones.The 560-foot pressure zone is currently split into eight subzones with seven being fed by the 713-foot pressure zone through pressure reducing valves (PRV) stations. The last Subzone (G) is currently fed by Price Reservoir which was constructed in 2010. Due to topographic limitations and distribution deficiencies, these subzones are currently not hydraulically connected. With projected growth in the River Terrace area and water storage limitations of the 713-foot reservoir, the City plans to design and construct the new 3.0 million-gallon (MG) Cach Reservoir at one of two sites in western Tigard. The two sites being considered for construction are Sunrise Park,north of the intersection of SW 150th Avenue and SW Sunrise Lane, and the Cach Nature Park,located on the west side of the 15100 block of SW Sunrise Lane. These sites are each currently owned by the City and are at elevations suitable for construction of a new reservoir to serve the 560-foot pressure zone.The estimated project cost including construction and engineering is approximately$25 million. The City has contracted with Kennedy Jenks (KJ) to provide professional engineering services and construction management services to serve as the owner's representative for this project. As part of the work under that contract KJ provides technical guidance for water related infrastructure improvements. Through evaluation of project documents,information and field services,KJ assisted the City in determining the best delivery method for the Cach Reservoir and Pump Station project. Staff evaluated different design and construction delivery methods taking the following into consideration: •Project challenges •City of Tigard resources and technical expertise •Project delivery alternatives and their features •City and State compliance review •Evaluation of advantages for each delivery alternative Due to a combination of complexity, size of project,and overall schedule, staff have chosen a Progressive Design Build (PDB) delivery method.As required under Oregon Revised Statute 279C.335, all public improvement contracts must be competitive low bid except if a Local Contract Review Board exempts the project and approves findings in support of an APD,as follows: *The exemption is unlikely to encourage favoritism in awarding a public improvement contract or substantially diminish competition for public improvement contracts. •Awarding a public improvement contract under the exemption will likely result in substantial cost savings and other substantial benefits to the contracting agency that seeks the exemption. In approving the findings, the LCRB shall consider the type,cost and amount of the contract and,to the extent applicable to the particular public improvement,the following: oHow many persons are available to bid; oThe construction budget and the projected operating costs for the completed public improvement; oPublic benefits that may result from granting the exemption; oWhether value engineering techniques may decrease the cost of the public improvement; oThe cost and availability of specialized expertise that is necessary for the public improvement; oAny likely increases in public safety; oWhether granting the exemption may reduce risks to the contracting agency,or the public that are related to the public improvement; oWhether granting the exemption will affect the sources of funding for the public improvement; oWhether granting the exemption will better enable the contracting agency to control the impact that market conditions may have on the cost of and time necessary to complete the public improvement; oWhether granting the exemption will better enable the contracting agency to address the size and technical complexity of the public improvement; °Whether the public improvement involves new construction or renovates or remodels an existing structure; °Whether the public improvement will be occupied or unoccupied during construction; °Whether the public improvement will require a single phase of construction work or multiple phases of construction work to address specific project conditions;and °Whether the contracting agency has retained under contract, and will use contracting agency personnel, consultants and legal counsel that have necessary expertise and substantial experience in alternative contracting methods to assist in developing the alternative contracting method that will be used to award the public improvement contract and to help negotiate,administer and enforce the terms of the contract. The City published a public notice and held a public hearing on December 16, 2020 as required under ORS 279C.335 to allow for comments on the draft findings. Three contractors attended the meeting and did not have any comments on the findings as presented. The final Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation and Findings Report is attached as Exhibit A. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The Local Contract Review Board may choose not to approve the findings and exemption and ask staff to investigate other procurement methods. This would delay the start of the project by several months. COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS City Council Goal 3—Ensure Tigard grows and develops in a smart and inclusive manner. Water System Master Plan Addendum-River Terrace Community Plan. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation and Findings Renort EXHIBIT A Kennedy Jenks 421 SW 6th, #1000 Portland, OR 97204 503-423-4000 Cach Reservoir & Pump Station Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation and Findings Report December 02, 2020 Prepared for City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 KJ Project No.2076013*00 Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction and City Goals 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Project Goals 2 1.3 Project Delivery Challenges 3 Section 2: Project Delivery Alternatives 4 2.1 Progressive Design Build (PDB) 4 2.1.1 Summary 4 2.1.2 Structure and Attributes 5 2.2 Construction Management General Contractor(CM/GC) 5 2.2.1 Summary 5 2.2.2 Structure and Attributes 6 2.3 Fixed-Price Design Build (FPDB) 7 2.3.1 Summary 7 2.3.2 Structure and Attributes 7 Section 3: Exemption for Competitive Bid Findings 9 3.1 Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 9 3.2 ORS 297.355 Competitive Bidding - Findings 10 3.3 City of Tigard Codes and Regulations 14 Section 4: Delivery Method Evaluation 16 4.1 Choosing By Advantage (CBA) Selection Process Summary 16 4.2 CBA Worksheet 167 4.3 CBA Conclusions 168 List of Figures Figure 2.1:Progressive Design Build Contract Structure Figure 2.2:Construction Management General Contractor Contract Structure Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir Table of Contents (cont'd) List of Appendices A. Project Site List of Abbreviations APD Alternative Project Delivery City City of Tigard CBA Choosing By Advantage (Decision Making) CM/GC Construction Management General Contractor FPDB Fixed Price Design Build GMP Guaranteed Maximum Price KJ Kennedy/Jenks Consultants Inc. MG Million Gallons NTP Notice to Proceed ORS Oregon Revised Statutes PDB Progressive Design Build PRV Pressure Reducing Valves TWSA Tigard Water Service Area SOQ Statement of Qualifications RFP Request for Proposal TM Technical Memorandum Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir ii Section 1: Introduction and City Goals 1.1 Background The City of Tigard (City)owns and operates a public water system which supplies potable water to the Tigard Water Service Area (TWSA), which includes approximately two-thirds of the residents, businesses, and public institutions within the City limits, the unincorporated area of Bull Mountain, and the cities of King City and Durham. The TWSA is currently expanding to include the River Terrace area as development occurs along the City's western boundary. Three (3) of the City's five (5) pressure zones are involved in this project and include the 410- foot, 560-foot and 713-foot pressure zones. The 560-foot pressure zone is currently split into eight subzones with seven being fed by the 713-foot pressure zone through pressure reducing valves (PRV)stations. The last subzone (G) is currently fed by Reservoir 16 which was constructed in 2010. Due to topographic limitations and distribution deficiencies, these subzones are currently not hydraulically connected. With projected growth in the River Terrace area and water storage limitations of the 713-foot reservoir, The City of Tigard plans to design and construct the new 3.0 million-gallon (MG) Cach Reservoir(Reservoir 18)at one of two sites in western Tigard. The two sites being considered for construction are Sunrise Park, north of the intersection of SW 150th Avenue and SW Sunrise Lane, and the Cach Nature Park, located on the west side of the 15100 block of SW Sunrise Lane. These sites are each currently owned by the City and are at elevations suitable for construction of a new reservoir to serve the 560-foot pressure zone. Appendix A includes a figure of the overall area. Sunrise Park site is currently vacant and owned by the City of Tigard Parks Department. The proposed tank footprint at this site is located on a gently sloping hillside approximately 700 feet north of intersection of SW Sunrise Lane and SW 150th Avenue. The slopes to the north, northeast, and northwest of the reservoir site become steeper with distance from the site, as the hillside dips into several gullies and ravines. A portion of the proposed footprint is covered in heavy brush and large trees, with the remaining portion occupied by low grass. The Sunrise Park site was occupied by several residential properties prior to circa 2008; however, historical aerial photos indicate that the proposed reservoir footprint at this site does not overlap with previous structure footprints. The Cach Nature Park site is located on two parcels owned by the City of Tigard Public Works Water Department. This site is occupied by one single-family home that the City currently leases to a tenant renter. Construction of the proposed reservoir at the Cach site would require demolition of the house. The Cach site is bounded by residential properties to the south, north, and east, and undeveloped Cach Nature Park lands to the west. Due to a combination of complexity, size of project, and overall schedule, the City desires to evaluate alternative project delivery (APD) methods with an integrated approach that allows for collaboration to deliver best value to the City. This evaluation considers: • Project Challenges Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 1 • City of Tigard resources and technical expertise • Project delivery alternatives and their features • City and ORS Compliance Review • Evaluation of advantages for each delivery alternative Two workshops have been held with City staff that included representatives from procurement, engineering and operations. • Workshop#1: Alternative Project Delivery Knowledge Share—The goal of this workshop was for City staff to gain a better understanding on benefits of APD related to Schedule, Risk and Best Value. Topics included: o Review of project delivered in the region using APD o Code requirements o Alternative methods o Advantages of each method o Communication expectations o Lessons learned The workshop concluded with KJ presenting a condensed version of the Clean Water Services Upper Tualatin case study given at the Pacific Northwest Clean Water Association annual conference in 2019. This project was delivered through Progressive Design Build and was a good example of collaboration and how it resulted in an innovative trenchless crossing of the Tualatin River. • Workshop#2: Preliminary Findings Workshop— Based on the evaluation criteria developed by Kennedy Jenks and the City, the preliminary findings were reviewed with feedback from City Staff for consensus building. The results of these workshops are presented in this memorandum with a final recommendation developed by Kennedy Jenks. This TM will also serve as the findings report based on ORS and City criteria to request an exemption from competitive bidding requirements. 1.2 Project Goals During the project kick-off meeting, the following project goals were identified by City Staff: • The Cach Reservoir and Pump Station is to provide resilience and flexibility to the water supply system. Incorporating flexibility for future uses is particularly important and should be considered early in design. • Smooth construction process with respect to neighbor issues, permitting, safety, and cost. • Incorporating a change management process that manages change over the life of the project. • Good communication and relationships with neighbors • No surprises relative to cost, design and construction issues. • Project implementation on a short schedule as the system has storage deficiencies in the 713-foot pressure zone. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 2 1.3 Project Delivery Challenges The following challenges were identified at the project kick-off meeting: • Lack of City resources to manage a large and complex project. The City currently has one project manager for water infrastructure projects. Based on the size and complexity of the Cach Reservoir and Pump Station Project, the PM will not have enough time to effectively manage design and construction phases. • Lack of technical expertise specifically related to reservoir, pump station and pipeline design. • Traditional delivery method would likely involve multiple design and construction procurements and contracts to manage. • The need for communication with stakeholder input to ensure public acceptance. The primary issue for each site includes: o Cach Nature Park: With homes directly adjacent to the site, construction activities will cause disruption. o Sunrise Park: The siting of a reservoir conflicts with the original plan to develop the park into recreational fields. The park also experiences significant pedestrian traffic due to a series of trails in the area. Site challenges also present difficulties when considering connection requirements to the 560-foot pressure zone. • Traditional delivery method would require an extended schedule for multiple construction procurement packages. • Construction risks associated with geotechnical conditions may cause higher than expected costs and potential delays. • Delivering best value on a complex project that will serve as a backbone for the City's water system. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 3 Section 2: Project Delivery Alternatives 2.1 Progressive Design Build (PDB) 2.1.1 Summary Progressive Design Build is a stepped, or progressive process that uses a qualifications-based or best value selection process to retain a designer and a builder under a single contract. Following selection, the owner and design builder then "progresses" a design and contract price collaboratively. PDB features include the following: • The design-builder is retained by the owner early in the life of the project and typically prior to when the Basis of Design has been established. The design-builder team can be contractor led, engineer led, a joint venture of the two, or an integrated design builder. • The design-builder delivers the project in two distinct phases: Phase 1) Preconstruction: Includes development of the Basis of Design, field investigation and studies, 30% design, 60% design, permitting, constructability review, cost estimation, risk identification/mitigation and the negotiation of a firm Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)for final design and construction; Phase 2) Construction: Includes final design, engineering services during construction, procurement of materials/equipment, procurement of subcontractor services, construction, permitting and commissioning. • The design-builder is generally selected primarily on qualifications. Price for the pre- construction phase can also be a factor for selection. Final project cost/price and schedule commitment is not established as part of the selection process. The unique aspect of PDB is that the design-builder first collaborates with the owner to create or confirm the project's basis of design and project requirements. Design decisions are based on cost, schedule, quality, operability, life cycle and other considerations for which the design- builder provides ongoing, transparent estimates to ensure the owner's budgetary and schedule requirements are being achieved. At the point in time where the design has been advanced to an appropriate level of definition that aligns with the owner's requirements, the design-builder will provide a formal commercial proposal (including the overall contract price)for Phase Two services. The proposal is often established when the design is approximately 60 percent complete, but it can occur anytime (including as late as 90 to 100 percent design completion, or as early as 30 percent design completion), depending on the amount of control the owner desires to maintain over the design, the amount of price contingency, and other aspects of cost, schedule and risk allocation. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 4 2.1.2 Structure and Attributes Contract: As shown in Figure 2.1, a single contract is held by the City with the contracting team that may either City of Tigard I eht r,,1en be led by the contractor, engineer or a joint venture. Procurement: A single procurement step is required for Design Builder selecting the design build team. This procurement may include up to three phases: 1. State of Qualifications (SOQ): Following the Design Engineer Construction SOQ, typically three teams are shortlisted to Subcontractors propose. 2. Request for Proposals (RFP): Each shortlisted team is asked to submit an approach, understanding and cost associated with the Preconstruction phase. Figure 2.1: Progress Design Build and Fixed-Price Design 3. Final Interview: Each team that submits a Build features a single contract with the design-builder. proposal is interviewed with a focus on team, experience, and approach to executing the work. Collaboration: PDB requires a high level of collaboration between the Engineer, Owner, Owner's Representative and Contractor. The design progresses in a manner that provides opportunities for review and feedback from all stakeholders allowing for a best value approach to delivering a project. Feedback also includes external stakeholders such as permitting agencies and the public. Construction Pricing: The end of the preconstruction phase is marked by the development of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). Unlike conventional Design Bid Build, the level of effort for the engineer in the preconstruction phase is defined by the contractor to develop a GMP with a high confidence level along with requirements to secure necessary permits. Under PDB, GMP's are typically developed at 60% design. After the GMP has been established between the Owner and Design-Builder, a second contract (or amendment to the preconstruction phase contract)will be executed for construction to include final design and engineering services during construction. 2.2 Construction Management General Contractor (CM/GC) 2.2.1 Summary The CMGC project delivery method allows an owner to engage a construction manager during the design process to provide constructability input. The Construction Manager is generally selected on the basis of qualifications. During the design phase, the construction manager provides input regarding constructability, schedule, pricing, risks and phasing to help with design decisions by the owner and engineer. Between 60% to 90% design completion, the owner and the construction manager negotiate a GMP for the construction of the project based on the defined scope and schedule. If this price is acceptable to both parties, they execute a contract for construction services, and the construction manager becomes the general Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 5 contractor. CM/GC features include: • Contractually, this delivery method is similar to conventional DBB as the owner holds separate contracts with an engineering firm and separately with a contractor. The Owner typically procures the CMGC contractor following the development of a basis of design report and 30% design. • The CMGC delivers the project in two distinct phases with: (a) Preconstruction Phase which includes constructability review, cost estimating and schedule development. During this phase, the CM/GC will solicit bids for construction packages for the development of their overall GMP. Similarly, with PDB, the GMP is negotiated between the Owner and the Contractor. The GMP does not include consulting fees or any engineering services during construction, as these services are facilitate through the owner's contract with the design engineer; (b) Construction Phase to include construction and commissioning of the project. • The CM/GC is generally selected on qualifications. Price for the pre-construction phase can generally be a consideration as well. Final project cost/price and schedule commitment is not established as part of the selection process. 2.2.2 Structure and Attributes Contract: As shown in Figure 2.2, the City of Tigard would hold separate contracts with the City of Tigard Ketrinithipeks engineering firm and the CM/GC. Procurement: Two separate procurement steps are required for this delivery method. The first is selecting an engineer to provide professional Design Engineer CM/GC services which would follow the City's qualifications- based procurement process. The CM/GC selection is similar to PDB with the following phases: Constrtactiiort. 1. State of Qualifications (SOQ): Following Subcontradors the SOQ, typically three teams are shortlisted to propose. Figure 2.2: CM/GC features a contract with the Design 2. Request for Proposals (RFP): Each Engineer and a separate contract with the Contractor. shortlisted team is asked to submit an approach, understanding and cost associated with the Preconstruction phase. 3. Final Interview: Each team that submits a proposal is interviewed with a focus on team, experience, and approach to executing the work. Collaboration: During the development of the Basis of Design Report and 30% design, collaboration between the City and Consultant would follow a similar process as DBB. Following CM/GC selection, a higher level of collaboration is required that allows for input on constructability, cost estimation and schedule. Feedback may also include external stakeholders such as permitting agencies and the public. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 6 Construction Pricing: The end of the preconstruction phase is marked by the development of a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). Under CMGC, GMP's are typically developed between 60 and 90% to allow for the contractor to bid out sub-packages for integration into the GMP. After the GMP has been established between the Owner and contractor, a second contract (or amendment to the preconstruction phase contract) will be executed for construction to include construction and commissioning. 2.3 Fixed-Price Design Build (FPDB) 2.3.1 Summary Fixed price design-build is a method of project delivery where the design-builder will propose the scope, schedule and budget early in the procurement process. FPDB is typically used when project requirements have been well defined, and the scope of work and performance requirements have been sufficiently developed. At the proposal stage, the design-builder agrees to design and construct the project based on a description of the project requirements or on a conceptual design provided in the procurement documents. Performance-based requirements often drive the overall project, proposing teams are encouraged to incorporate innovation that results in cost and schedule savings or to develop an approach that results in best value for the owner. FPDB features include: • A greater level of effort by the owner to define the overall project that may include field investigation, conceptual design and permitting. A technical package is typically provided as part of the solicitation documents • Innovation at the RFP stage to differentiate proposers • Price Certainty at the end of the procurement stage • Selection is based on a combination of innovation, price and qualifications. 2.3.2 Structure and Attributes • Contract: Structure is similar to PDB as shown in Figure 2.1. The City of Tigard will hold a single contract with the design-builder. • Procurement: A single procurement step is used with three phases. Due to the level of detail required in developing detailed proposals, the procurement phase is typically longer than PDB or CM/GC. 1. State of Qualifications (SOQ): Following the SOQ, typically three teams are shortlisted to propose. 2. Request for Proposals (RFP): Each shortlisted team is asked to submit aa scope, schedule and price based on performance requirements and/or a conceptual design. 3. Final Interview: Each team that submits a proposal is interviewed with a focus on team, experience, and approach to executing the work. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 7 • Collaboration: Due to the high level of project definition at the procurement phase coupled with a fixed price at the end of procurement, the level of collaboration following design build team selection is low. This results in lower resource demands on the City but also reduces the level of input as the design progresses. • Construction Pricing: With FPDB, cost and schedule is set at the end of the procurement phase. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation & Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 8 Section 3: Exemption for Competitive Bid Findings 3.1 Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) ORS279.300 Policy on Competition states: It is the policy of the State of Oregon that public improvement contracts awarded under this chapter must be based on competitive bidding, except as otherwise specifically provided in ORS 279C.335 (Competitive bidding) for exceptions and formal exemptions from competitive bidding requirements. ORS 279C.330 "Findings"defined(2) states: As used in ORS 279C.335 (Competitive bidding), "findings" means the justification for a conclusion that a contracting agency or state agency, in seeking an exemption from the competitive bidding requirement of ORS 279C.335 (Competitive bidding) (1), reaches based on the considerations set forth in ORS 279C.335 (Competitive bidding) (2). ORS 297.335 Competitive Bidding (2) states: a local contract review board may exempt a public improvement contract or a class of public improvement contracts from the competitive bidding requirement of subsection (1) of this section after the local contract review board approves the following findings that the contracting agency submits or, if a state agency is not the contracting agency, that the state agency that is seeking the exemption submits: (a) The exemption is unlikely to encourage favoritism in awarding public improvement contracts or substantially diminish competition for public improvement contracts (b) Awarding a public improvement contract under the exemption will likely result in substantial cost savings and other substantial benefits to the contracting agency or the state agency that seeks the exemption or, if the contract is for a public improvement described in ORS 279A.050 (Procurement authority) (3)(b), to the contracting agency or the public. In approving a finding under this paragraph, the Director of the Oregon Department of Administrative Services, the Director of Transportation or the local contract review board shall consider the type, cost and amount of the contract and, to the extent applicable to the particular public improvement contract or class of public improvement contracts, the following: (A) How many persons are available to bid; (B) The construction budget and the projected operating costs for the completed public improvement; (C) Public benefits that may result from granting the exemption; (D) Whether value engineering techniques may decrease the cost of the public improvement; (E) The cost and availability of specialized expertise that is necessary for the public improvement; Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 9 (F) Any likely increases in public safety; (G) Whether granting the exemption may reduce risks to the contracting agency, the state agency or the public that are related to the public improvement; (H) Whether granting the exemption will affect the sources of funding for the public improvement; (I) Whether granting the exemption will better enable the contracting agency to control the impact that market conditions may have on the cost of and time necessary to complete the public improvement; (J)Whether granting the exemption will better enable the contracting agency to address the size and technical complexity of the public improvement; (K)Whether the public improvement involves new construction or renovates or remodels an existing structure; (L)Whether the public improvement will be occupied or unoccupied during construction; (M)Whether the public improvement will require a single phase of construction work or multiple phases of construction work to address specific project conditions; and (N)Whether the contracting agency or state agency has, or has retained under contract, and will use contracting agency or state agency personnel, consultants and legal counsel that have necessary expertise and substantial experience in alternative contracting methods to assist in developing the alternative contracting method that the contracting agency or state agency will use to award the public improvement contract and to help negotiate, administer and enforce the terms of the public improvement contract. 3.2 ORS 297.355 Competitive Bidding - Findings (A) How many persons are available to bid; Findings: Upon approval of competitive bidding exemption by the City of Tigard's Contract Review Board, a letter of interest will be sent to potential bidders with preliminary project information for confirmation of interest prior to releasing the solicitation. The purpose of this letter is to raise project awareness and allow formal teaming agreements to be made. Based on preliminary discussions, market research shows multiple interested parties and it is anticipated that a minimum of 4 teams will respond to the RFQ. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 10 (B) The construction budget and the projected operating costs for the completed public improvement; Findings: The estimated project cost to include construction and engineering is approximately $25 million +1- 50%. Relative to operating costs, implementation of the project is not anticipated to require additional staff and has the opportunity to improve overall efficiency as the 560 pressure zone will be served by a reservoir designed to service this area. Currently water is pumped to the 713 pressure zone for distribution to the 560 zone through a series of pressure reduction valves. This project has the opportunity to reduce overall operating power. Alternative Project Delivery (APD) can reduce the overall schedule by eliminating a procurement period and enabling portions of the design and construction to overlap. Construction pricing is also developed prior to final design allowing for construction cost certainty and enabling construction to start early. APD allows for the contractor to provide early constructability input, identification of risks and input on mitigating risks. With the opportunity to mitigate risks and the appropriate allocation of risk, overall project costs will be reduced. (C) Public benefits that may result from granting the exemption; Findings: Expected benefits from alternative delivery include; 1. Best Value: With a greater degree of collaboration between the contractor, engineer and the City, the project will incorporate City preferences and long term goals. 2. Design to Budget: With integration of a contractor into the design team, cost estimates will be developed early in the project. This will ensure a design to budget approach and that the project will stay within the CIP budget. 3. Shorter Schedule from Delays: As a member of the design team, the contractor will have a better understanding of project features and mitigate risks associated with schedule delays. A shorter schedule will reduce disruption to the surrounding community. (D) Whether value engineering techniques may decrease the cost of the public improvement; Findings: At each delivery milestone, the design-build team, owner's representative, and City Staff will have the opportunity to review the deliverables and develop VE concepts. The concepts can be geared towards savings on construction related costs, risk, and schedule all of which impacts the overall project cost. Techniques would include design review, cost estimating, materials selection and schedule optimization. (E) The cost and availability of specialized expertise that is necessary for the public improvement; Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 11 Findings: Designing and constructing an AWWA D-110 prestressed concrete tank requires a specialized team. Expertise is necessary for the construction of the concrete tank, permitting and addressing the geotechnical conditions. Engaging teams early at the project development stage and integrating the contractors ability to schedule labor further in advance of NTP on construction ensures the availability of the necessary expertise. With design-bid-build, contractors may not choose to bid on projects due to shortage of labor or availability of subcontractors. (F) Any likely increases in public safety; Findings: Rather than low bid, APD allows for consideration of Contractor Safety Records as an evaluation criteria. Contractors and their key subcontractors will be required to provide their Experience Modification Ratio (EMR). The evaluation criteria can also include the contractor's approach to keeping the public safe during construction. With trails present in the area and high pedestrian traffic, APD will provide the opportunity to bring safety during project initiation and ensure that appropriate measures have been incorporated during construction. (G) Whether granting the exemption may reduce risks to the contracting agency, the state agency or the public that are related to the public improvement; Findings: The design and construction of the Cach Reservoir and Pump Station is technically complex and requires an experienced team. With a qualifications focused approach, as opposed to low bid, risks can be mitigated by emphasizing experience over low bid. The RFP will require teams to submit relevant project experience and references as part of the selection criteria.. APD also allows the contractor to provide constructability input and identify potential risks for the engineer to mitigate. This project represents the largest project in the City's CIP. As such, cost over- runs are a significant financial risk. With APD, the contractor will develop early cost estimates and continue to refine project scope and budget that will ensure that the budget will be maintained. (H) Whether granting the exemption will affect the sources of funding for the public improvement; Findings: The project is funded by The City of Tigard from revenues generated by water sales. Granting this exemption will not affect the sources of funding. (I) Whether granting the exemption will better enable the contracting agency to control the impact that market conditions may have on the cost of and time necessary to complete the public improvement; Findings: Within the Portland area, multiple water infrastructure projects exceeding $1 Billion in construction have the potential of impacting market Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 12 conditions and the ability to complete the project on time and within budget. These projects include the Willamette Water Supply (Pipelines, Water Treatment Plant, and Reservoirs) and The Portland Water Bureau's Bull Run Filter Plant and pipeline projects. As a result, significant shortage of labor and increases in material costs is a potential risk. APD allows the opportunity to mitigate these impacts through appropriate scheduling, early work packages such as equipment/materials procurement, and reduction in overall escalation. (J) Whether granting the exemption will better enable the contracting agency to address the size and technical complexity of the public improvement; Findings: APD will better enable the contracting agency to address the technical complexity with the ability to procure construction through a qualifications based selection process. As owners representative, Kennedy Jenks also offers experience in the design of reservoirs, pump stations and pipelines to provide guidance and value engineering to the City and overall development of the project. APD will better enable the contracting agency to address size, relative to staffing requirements, through the use of an owners representative that functions like an extension of staff. Project management and timely reviews will be critical to meeting delivery milestones. In addition, the owner's agent will also be providing basic construction management services to represent the City's best interest. (K) Whether the public improvement involves new construction or renovates or remodels an existing structure; Findings: Major project elements include: 1. New 3MG Reservoir 2. Replacement of the temporary pump station at Reservoir 13 with a permanent pump station facility to feed Reservoir 18 and provide emergency flows to the 713-foot pressure zone. 3. Potentially a new Pump Station at Reservoir 18 for emergency flow to the 713-foot pressure zone. 4. New pipelines to hydraulically connect Reservoirs 18 and the 560-foot pressure zone. (L) Whether the public improvement will be occupied or unoccupied during construction; Findings: Reservoir 18 is a new facility and will be unoccupied during construction. Reservoir 13 is an unoccupied facility but receives regular site visits from O&M staff. During construction, City staff will maintain operations and will need to coordinate with the design-build team to ensure safe working conditions are maintained. The Design-Build team will also coordinate construction activities with City Staff to mitigate risk of service disruption. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 13 (M) Whether the public improvement will require a single phase of construction work or multiple phases of construction work to address specific project conditions; Findings: Construction of this project may be separated into smaller phases to take advantage of labor availability, materials pricing, seasonal related construction challenges and low water demand periods. The advantage of APD is the ability for the contractor to bid out sub-packages to take advantage of favorable market conditions. (N) Whether the contracting agency or state agency has, or has retained under contract, and will use contracting agency or state agency personnel, consultants and legal counsel that have necessary expertise and substantial experience in alternative contracting methods to assist in developing the alternative contracting method that the contracting agency or state agency will use to award the public improvement contract and to help negotiate, administer and enforce the terms of the public improvement contract. Findings: The City of Tigard has no recent experience with APD and also has limited resources to manage this complex project. The City has retained Kennedy Jenks to provide assistance as an Owners Representative with substantial experience in alternative delivery to include projects with City of The Dalles, Clean Water Services, The City of Bend and Portland Bureau of Environmental Services. In addition to their APD experience with public agencies, Kennedy Jenks also has technical expertise in the design of Reservoirs, Pump Stations and Pipelines and will provide technical reviews input throughout design. Legal assistance will be provided by the City Attorney or by an independent legal firm with the appropriate expertise as needed. 3.3 City of Tigard Codes and Regulations 4.3.1: Tigard Municipal Code 2.46.030 (A) states: The City Council will be the local contract review board ("board"). Findings: Authority has been established to satisfy ORS 297.335 Competitive Bidding. 4.3.2: City of Tigard — Local Contract Review Board Public Contracting Rules (January 2020) Section 10.105 states: The City may enter into public improvement contracts without competitive bidding if the contracts involve design or construction management or require expertise beyond normal construction work. Findings: See per ORS 297.355 (2)(b)(E) findings in section 3.2 of this Memorandum. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 14 Section 10.115 Class Exemptions states: A. The Board may exempt certain public contracts or classes of public contracts from the formal competitive process requirements by amending these rules upon approval of the following findings: 1. It is unlikely that such exemption will encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or substantially diminish competition for public contracts; Findings: See response to ORS 297C.335 (2)(a) and ORS 297C.335(2)(b)(A) findings in section 3.2 of this Memorandum. 2. The awarding of public contracts pursuant to the exemption will result in substantial cost savings to the City. In making such findings, the Board may consider the type, cost, amount of the contract, number of persons available to bid, and such other factors as may be deemed appropriate; and Findings: See response to ORS 297C.335 (2)(b) sections B, C, D and E findings in section 3.2 of this Memorandum. The exemption otherwise substantially supports the public interest in a way that could not be achieved under existing rules. Findings: See response to ORS 297C.335 (2)(b) (C) findings in section 3.2 of this Memorandum. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 15 Section 4: Delivery Method Evaluation 4.1 Choosing By Advantage (CBA) Selection Process Summary CBA is a decision-making process developed by Jim Suhr that focuses on the relative advantages of each alternative rather than the negatives. For projects where best value is a goal and low bid does not govern decision making, CBA ultimately leads to better decision making through collaboration and consensus building. CBA is applicable to all types of decisions from simple to complex. The method most frequently used consists of a spreadsheet format that includes attributes and a scoring criterion to numerically choose among two or more mutually exclusive alternatives. When performed, CBA provides a visual and open decision-making process that can be used to memorialize outcomes and serve as a reference on how a project evolves. CBA provides a systematic and transparent process that involves key stakeholders and allows for the reduction of biases when interpreting information. After alternatives have been developed, the advantages are agreed upon and scored relative to defined factors. Not all factors are equal and an important feature to this system is collectively developing the importance of each factor. After all of the advantages have been determined and appropriately scored, they are summed to provide a total weighted score. With design-bid-build and using a typical decision-making process, cost is a consideration that biases an outcome and often drives decision making. An alternative that has the greatest advantage may not necessarily be the selected solution. In CBA, cost is a factor, but other factors have an opportunity to differentiate alternatives. Focusing on these advantages will lead to best value for the City of Tigard. In summary, CBA provides for an open and transparent decision-making process that takes into account all internal stakeholders such as engineering, procurement and O&M staff. It also serves as a document to memorialize decisions and better understand the facts behind a selected solution. A value-based decision-making process can be a significant tool in alternative project delivery that results in best value. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 16 Section 4.2: CBA Workshop Alternative Delivery Method Selection-Scoring Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Factor Weight Progressive Design Build Construction Management General Contractor Fixed Fee Design Build How many persons are available to bid Common in the region with>4 proposers expected Common in the region with>4 proposers expected Less Common in the region. Advantages/Importance 4% Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Some Advantage 3 The construction budget and the projected operating costs for the completed Contractors engaged at project initiation allows opportunity for innovation,VE,and Contractors engaged at 60%design allows opportunity for innovation,VE,and cost Accurate pricing dependent untechnical documents during RFP process.There isa public improvement cost estimation to manage overall budget and risk. estimation to manage overall budget and risk. greater level of unknowns(nsk)when pricing protect.Contractors generally factor risk in overall pricing.Pricing is established early in project. Advantages/Importance 4% Most Advantage 5 Some Advantage 3 Least Advantage 1 Public benefits that may result from granting the exemption; Best Value realized through collaboration with City.Design to budget accomplished Best Value realized through collaboration with City.Design to budget accomplished Best Value through design innovation.Price certainty established early in the project. through ongoing cost estimating.Shorter schedule to mitigate public impacts. through ongoing cost estimating.Shorter schedule to mitigate public impacts. Shorter schedule to mitigate public impacts Advantages/Importance 8% Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Delivery milestone(BOOR,30%,60%)provide an opportunity for City Staff and KJ to Whether value engineering techniques may decrease the cost of the public review deliverables and provide VE concepts.Contractor input at project initiation Delivery milestone(30%and 60%)provide an opportunity for City Staff and KJ to No opportunity for VE as price has been defined at the SOQ/RFP stage. improvement;Provides for opportunity of Innovation allows for innovation. review deliverables and provide VE concepts. Advantages/Importance 8% Most Advantage 5 Some Advantage 3 Least Advantage 1 The cost and availability of specialized expertise that is necessary for the AWWA 4110 tanks are common in the region.Through contractor outreach and an AWWA 0110 tanks are common in the region.Through contractor outreach and an AWWA 4110 tanks are common in the region.Through contractor outreach and an public improvement; SOQ process,specialized expertise is available in the area to deliver project SOQ process,specialized expertise is available in the area to deliver project SOQ process,specialized expertise is available in the area to deliver project Advantages/Importance 8% Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Through qualifications based selection,safety can be made part of the scoring Through qualifications based selection,safety can be made part of the scoring Through qualifications based selection,safety can be made part of the scoring Any likely increases in public safety; criteria Collaboration allows for better O&M input Opportunity for input from staff criteria Collaboration allows for better O&M input Opportunity for input from staff criteria for construction sequencing. for construction sequencing. Advantages/Importance 4% Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Some Advantage 3 Whether granting the exemption may reduce risks to the contracting Allows for early identification of risk and risk allocation during GMP.Qualifications Qualifications based selection ensures experienced design build teams Single Allows for early identification of risk and risk allocation during GMP.Qualifications agency,the state agency or the public that are related to the public based selechon ensures experienced design build teams.Allows for design to budget. contract mitigates performance nsk for City.Early fixed pricing mitigates nsk of cost Single contract mitigates performance risk for Cit based selection ensures experienced design build teams.Allows for design to budget.over-runs Single contract mitigates performance risks. improvement(Opportunity for Risk Reduction) g e g p y g e g p Advantages/Importance 8% Most Advantage 5 Some Advantage 3 Most Advantage 5 Whether granting the exemption will affect the sources of funding for the Project funded by revenue from water sales Project funded by revenue from water sales Project funded by revenue from water sales public improvement Advantages/Importance 2% Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Whether granting the exemption will better enable the contracting agency PDB en team earl the t.Earl k packages deo opportunities to General Contract engaged the project Earl k packages de Pnce and schedule established earl t with subcontractors already to control the impact that market conditions may have on the cost of and Sages yin project y wor pac ges prow ppo gage yin prole y wor pac ges provi y in procurement y take advantage of market conditions opportunities to take advantage of market conditions. established.Changing market conditions won't impact cost or schedule. time necessary to complete the public improvement(Schedule) Advantages/Importance 8% Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 Most Advantage 5 Whether granting the exemption will better enable the contracting agency Qualifications base selection will ensure ezpenence team will be selected.Owners Qualifications base selection will ensure ezpenence team will be selected.Owners Following team selection,demand on Cityis lower.Qualifications base selection will to address the size and technical complexity of the public improvement Advisor operating as extension of staff will help support City on technical issues Advisor operating as extension of staff will help support City on technical issues ensure ez help support team will be selected.Owners Advisor operating as extension of staff will supCity on technical issues. Advantages/Importance 4% Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 Most Advantage 5 Whether the public improvement involves new construction or renovates New Reservoir,reuse/new pipeline,rehab of PS at Mentor New Reservoir,reuse/new pipeline,rehab of PS at Mentor New Reservoir,reuse/new pipeline,rehab of PS at Mentor or remodels an existing structure Advantages/Importance 2% Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 Whether the public improvement will be occupied or unoccupied during Properties are unoccupied.Menlor reservoir requires regular 0&M visits. Properties are unoccupied.Menlor reservoir requires regular 0&M visits. Properties are unoccupied.Menlor reservoir requires regular O&M visits. construction Coordination will be required during construction. Coordination will be required during construction. Coordination will be required during construction. Advantages/Importance 2% Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 Whether the public improvement will require a single phase of Construction of this protect may be separated into smaller phases to take advantage Construction of this protect may be separated into smaller phases to take advantage construction work or multilephases of construction work to address of labor availability,materials pricing,seasonal related construction challenges and of labor availability,materials pricing,seasonal related construction challenges and Performance and schedule based project delivery.Changing market conditions will p low water demand periods.The advantage of APD is the ability for the contractor to low water demand periods.The advantage of APD is the ability for the contractor to not impact price or schedule.City will not little input on delivery schedule. specific project conditions bid out sub-packages to take advantage of favorable market conditions. bid out sub-packages to take advantage of favorable market conditions. Advantages/Importance 6% Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Some Advantage 3 1 Whether the contracting agency or state agency has,or has retained under f contract,and will use contracting agency or state agency personnel, consultants and legal counsel that have necessary expertise and :City of Tigard has no experience with API and also has limited resources to manage :City of Tigard has no experience with API and also has limited resources to manage :City of Tigard has no experience with API and also has limited resources to manage substantial experience in alternative contracting methods to assist in this complex project.The City has retained Kennedy Jenks to provide assistance as an this complex project.The City has retained Kennedy Jenks to provide assistance as an this complex project.The City has retained Kennedy Jenks to provide assistance as an p g Owners Representative with substantial experience in alternative delivery. Kennedy Owners Representative with substantial experience in alternative delivery. Kennedy Owners Representative with substantial experience in alternative delivery. Kennedy developing the alternative contracting method that the contracting agency Jenks also has technical expertise in the design of Reservoirs,Pump Stations and Jenks also has technical expertise in the design of Reservoirs,Pump Stations and Jenks also has technical expertise in the design of Reservoirs,Pump Stations and or state agency will use to award the public improvement contract and to Pipelines and will provide technical reviews input throughout design Pipelines and will provide technical reviews input throughout design Pipelines and will provide technical reviews input throughout design help negotiate,administer and enforce the terms of the public improvement contract Advantages/Importance 4% Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 PDB is a collaborate process.Goal is to get input from City staff from BODR through PDB is a collaborate process.Goal is to get input from City staff from BODR through Collaboration at development of technical requirements for project Following Provides opportunities for City to have input an design development of GMP. development of GMP. receipt of proposals,opportunity for City to influence project decisions is lower. Advantages/Importance 8% Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Least Advantage 1 Provides ford ortunities to mitigate cost over-runs and or allows for cost Lady collaboration with contractor,relative to constructability,allows for design to Collaboration with contractor,relative to constructability,allows for input at the 60%Fixed Fee developed early.Cost over-runs are a risk due to unknown conditions at PP / budget approach.Trade partners may be on board to provide costs through design level.More difficult than PDB to provide meaningful change.Plans/Specs further time pnce is established.As scope is defined associated with unknown conditions can control. milestones for better pricing. developed for trade partner's bids. be difficult to mitigate Advantages/Importance 8% Most Advantage 5 Most Advantage 5 Some Advantage 3 Opportunity to effectI manage change Due to the nature of progressive design build and continuous VE.Change is normal. Due to the nature of progressive design build and continuous VE.Change is normal. FMB team operates under a fixed price.Change only influenced by unknown Focus must be made on change management. Focus must be made on change management. conditions.Qty/ORep can focus on public outreach. Advantages/Importance 8% Some Advantage 3 Some Advantage 3 Most Advantage 5 PDB requires input regularly from City staff This requires engagement on a weekly POB requires input regularly from City staff This requires engagement on a weekly Time demands form City Staff through Construction basis through attendance of workshop and weekly meetings.Drawing/Spec reviews basis through attendance of workshop and weekly meetings.Drawing/Spec reviews Following receipt of fixed price from contractor,engagement from City staff is less from input on VE and best value is an important part of their process from input on VE and best value is an important part of their process Advantages/Importance 4% Least Advantage 1 Some Advantage 3 Most Advantage 5 Total Importance 3 Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation & Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 17 4.3 CBA Conclusions Kennedy Jenks and City staff held a workshop on November 25, 2020 to review three alternative delivery methods for the Cach Reservoir and Pump Station Project. The Factors evaluated are presented in section 4.2 and were based on ORS criteria and City Goals. Based on our collaborative review and general discussion, Progressive Design Build (PDB) is the recommended alternative to deliver the Cach Reservoir and Pump Station Project. The following conclusions summarize workshop findings: • All delivery methods are suitable to address project requirements. • All delivery methods are suitable to support selection largely based on qualifications to support best value and mitigate delivery risks. • All delivery methods are unlikely to encourage favoritism or substantially diminish competition. Based on preliminary outreach efforts, several teams have been identified and all expressed interest independent of delivery method. • Through the CBA process, participants concurred that PDB offered the greatest advantages specific to meeting City goals. The following summarizes the advantages of PDB: o PDB is the only delivery method where the contractor is on board during the development of the Basis of Design Report. The contractor will provide input on constructability and identify risks to support early design decisions. Early contractor input also offers the best opportunity for design innovation. o PDB supports collaborative delivery with City staff to ensure Operation & Maintenance preferences are incorporated into design. o PDB provides a single point of responsibility to the City. A single contract mitigates performance risks for the City. o PDB allows for a single procurement step to reduce overall schedule. o With early cost estimation by the Contractor, PDB provides the best method to support a design to budget approach and mitigate cost surprises. o PDB supports neighborhood engagement and communication outreach to improve public safety and minimize risk. Alternative Project Delivery Evaluation &Findings Report, Cach Reservoir 18 1-A E_G.ifiaf4 l.iY:.1 !' E 1 1fl.1.. A , -. '..% a' A["•IC MI.Ad,i7mi5i..i` dliti.i:,iefir07[r- - c, t h . Rel 9 Appendix A: Cach Reservoir & PumpStation ` ' ' .L. ,,,It.ii 1� '" Project Site ". °.. �. 'M111 1 1.';5,: . ,,10 . , :: 1, y � �p.�, sem. °' r v,', �'' f...fiI j �. � ;` -c � Tai eIl 44 7 '4 1 • 'j„,-0,,, -. - ,•,1,;"!'' 1: , ',T" • . 'i ' 11'..'...4...,,,,-t-'1.i.,. '- -1.=,,' Ii-a.,„ ..,ie• ,..' ' -1r.',..7..2- i'cin - it- .L Ili"' . •• A ':-.1111•61'44 ''' .4'74. ' ' "„arr.-i': ' ' :,'"''-' 1 t 1,Flit' �, r �e •� • r.' •;MJF ! III _i.2 4 ')'..iii. A. C ►L ry '‘oAllr,c,k, zr FL .•-• - ,i1.- ''' ...l''-, * ., ,4 ti.,:- 44._..„ ..?' I , 1 !!?3 •T er 2 + ,••. F' • • µ• t 4:I r. ! +*•y kir' - ..Y';'• y '. -� • 71 ,�} 7 1. Iy _7,77 !,• :+�}' ie7. f`>M1 _ �- - d;. I ,• 'F ,'�,►'to ,,3•'�'Y gi-�F - F" A i;E i�le 4-ail r •lr 1-7A. �'•t �/r 4' - • �,[ir, � ! �r'y� , y 4_ ... c' '•a►'r`. . • _. f_ # r, 164.,407 7 '41.0/1, A- INA ..r lb:I!''41 t•QM ' '. '.0t.r..q•*-rii.. 1 • ' 1 sl'- ''-' ,:-. . , iie:#. 0'; ' -I . '•- 0,:,,i , -f ''4" � ,rjr3Lr' \•;;;...Le4 . = + JS r ti X > •F r,YF• f A' ; ' r s. J. �il �` 4C'. 4, Rla+ [� .. - j•"TJ f%, , '� `�,' T, • • ��"- -' j ' [� 'R-4 •P r•--Y. � - fir er � '. ... ,r _ r r • '!mss r. ". F. r`s • x ,}- �n4., /.,;' 1 f r S " ,. �.. ^-'� • �.� ‘;j, ia ` — - - '4 -`• _ _ T y ni,• ey tAti t. : . 1".:E.....rrl� .F � ti { uo' ,rk .• .*�- f �J' I. `ti ,' ,,e ' , :. •' ....„ ! sem..,...iir, ,. t'% , giliVI Lrar r4.'- rfcf: i .. _ _ :. •• rJki-�i OIPP"7j1 S �i y a a. w� p` 1 A_, •',...,4,. � '1 • I ��T (fik AT -4 F � 4;if ilir*, 'W." . --7'11 it c �r R s y'' r t j 4' r r, 1� re• 1-e•.. ��r1 c' ' P .► ' - :r- - r tf�.'�"*rr'::.. w5 a r r Zf� t -' , A • Google Earth -� . _ ._ r '� '. , 4 •u � • �. �;/t �� .J .�'Jk r 4.v 1•. ., j, .s , 3 ,r7 :4. -.-., N ©202b Google i .�;{._ ' t -� , �. Ar.; ._ _ 0 i ft W �" - AIS-4482 6. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: CONSIDER RESOLUTION APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Submitted By: Nadine Robinson, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Resolution Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall City Council appoint three members to the Committee for Community Engagement to fill current vacancies? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends the City Council approve a resolution to appoint Committee for Community Engagement members. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Committee for Community Engagement by-laws allow for up to 15 members. The committee has three vacancies due to the expiring term limit of one position, one member moving out of Tigard and a third member resigning for personal reasons. In October, the city recruited for new members through the city's website and social media. The city received 13 applications for the committee. Councilor Newton and Central Services Director Robinson interviewed eleven people for the vacant seats. Following the interviews, they recommended reappointment of Connie Ramaekers and appointment of Dr.John Chung and Ambre Nielsen to four-year terms. OTHER ALTERNATIVES City Council could choose not to appoint the recommended candidates and direct staff to reopen the recruitment. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS The Committee for Community Engagement's responsibilities are oversight, accountability and policy direction on program design for citywide community engagement activities. This includes reviewing, commenting and making recommendations on specific plans for community input, feedback, education and information. These responsibilities directly support Strategic Plan Priority 1.3 (b): Provide information and communication methods in various formats that are accessible and easy to understand for every customer, and City Council Goal 4: Enhance two-way communication to understand community priorities and involve the community in the decision-making process. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION City Council last appointed members to the Committee for Community Engagement in June 2019. Attachments Resolution CCE Applicant Bios CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 21- A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING CONNIE RAMAEKERS AND APPOINTING AMBRE NIELSEN AND DR JOHN CHUNG AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT WHEREAS,the bylaws of the Committee for Community Engagement call for appointing up to 15 members to the committee; and WHEREAS, the committee currently has 12 standing members, with three vacancies to be filled by eligible applicants who reside, own property, own a business or work within the City of Tigard's Urban Services Boundary; and WHERAS, committee liaison Councilor Liz Newton and staff liaison Nadine Robinson interviewed eleven applicants for the committee vacancies, and WHEREAS, Councilor Newton and Director Robinson recommend the Council reappoint Connie Ramaekers and appoint Ambre Nielsen and Dr.John Chung to the committee. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Connie Ramaekers is reappointed to the Committee for Community Engagement as a member for a four-year term, effective January 5, 2021 through January 4, 2025. SECTION 2: Ambre Nielsen is appointed to the Committee for Community Engagement as a member for a four-year term,effective January 5, 2021 through January 4,2025. SECTION 3: Dr. John Chung is appointed to the Committee for Community Engagement as a member for a four-year term, effective January 5, 2021 through January 4,2025. SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2021. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO.21- Page 1 s MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Mayor Snider and City Council FROM: Nadine Robinson, Central Services Director RE: Committee for Community Engagement recommended applicants DATE: December 21, 2020 The applicant pool from the Committee for Community Engagement recruitment was one of the best we have had. There was diversity in age, gender, race and geographic location. Luckily many of them had applied for other committees where we hope they will have an opportunity to participate. Our recommendations for four-year appointments to the Committee for Community Engagement are: 1. Ambre Nielsen who is newer to the city having lived here for a year and a half. She has marketing experience and feels she can leverage her skills to help improve the city's communications. She is eager to learn about the city and how it runs. She also wants to learn what the community values. She sees the CCE as collectively doing the best job for the city. She would like to see residents engaging more in local places and things like Main St and the Farmer's Market. 2. Dr.John Chung, a local dentist, who has operated a practice in the city since 2016. The CCE bylaws allow non-city residents who are business owners in Tigard to be members of the committee. Dr. Chung has engaged in volunteerism by donating free dental work for non-profits. He indicated he thinks this is a great time to get to know people and to help by providing input about what he thinks is best for the community. 3. Connie Ramaekers is a 40-year resident of Tigard and a CCE incumbent. She indicated she likes the community aspect of the committee and thinks the issues they review are the ones the community is interested in. She indicated a willingness to take on more on behalf of the city and suggested assigning members work. Connie is an active committee participant with thoughtful comments and a demonstrated commitment to sharing what she learns. Connie is also affiliated with the Tigard Tualatin School District and the committee benefits from hearing about school district programs. AIS-4470 7. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Quasi Judicial Public Hearing: Consider Approval of Rietman Annexation (ZCA2020-00002) Prepared For: Lina Smith, Community Development Submitted By: Lina Smith, Community Development Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Ordinance Business Public Hearing - Quasi Judicial Meeting - Main Public Hearing: Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall Council adopt an ordinance to annex a 0.75-acre property located at 14715 SW 133rd Avenue (WCTM 2S109AC, Tax Lot 600) into the City of Tigard? The property owners desire to connect to city sewer and are therefore requesting to be annexed by the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST The Planning Commission recommends City Council approve the proposed Rietman Annexation (ZCA2020-00002) by adopting the attached ordinance. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The subject property (14715 SW 133rd Avenue; WCTM 2S109AC, Tax Lot 600) is located on the west side of SW 133rd Avenue, north of SW Beef Bend Road, and south of SW Bull Mountain Road. The adjacent properties to the north and west are under Tigard's jurisdiction and the adjacent properties to the south and east are part of unincorporated Washington County. The property is currently developed with an existing single detached house with an attached garage, paved driveway, and associated landscaping. As defined by Washington County Land Use Districts, the subject property is zoned R-6 (Residential 6 units per acre), and upon annexation, the property would be zoned R-7 (Medium-Density Residential), under City of Tigard designations. On December 7, 2020, Planning Commission held a virtual public hearing to consider this application (Case No. ZCA2020-00002). No public testimony was submitted at the hearing. After a brief deliberation, Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of this annexation to City Council. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Adopt findings to deny the application. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments PowerPoint Ordinance Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done • TIGARD Rietman Annexation ZCA2O2O-00002 Presented to Tigard I January 5, 2021 CITY OF TIGARD Zoning Map z City of Tigard, Oregon 0 o Generalized Zoning Categories z Subject Site Zoning Classifications R-7 ❑R-1 Residential Low-0ensrty 0 R-2 Residential Low-0ensrty 0 R-3 S Recidentia ILow-Density 0 R-0 S R acid ant is!Low-Density F R-7 Resdential Medium-Density 1-< R-12 Recidentia l Med is m-❑ensrty r.R-20 Residential Medium-Hih-D ensrty t R-00 Recidentia l High-0ensrty r'MOR-1 Mined Use Residential) ▪MUR-2 Mined Use Reaidential2 ▪MU-C130 Mined Use Central 13 us❑et ▪C-C Community Comm arc is l ▪C-G General Commercial - ❑C-N Neihhorhood Commercial U C-P ProfessionalCommercial ▪MUC Mined Use Commercial MUC-1 Mined Use Commercial]. �TMU Triangle Mined Use ae�ers o^ L. • 511:: r • L. T • Sde 0.04 Alda ti I • —. 0 - 2 COM Mu NI,DEr r OPMr NT or PA RTMr NT Cny of Tigard 13125 SW Ha I l Blvd ;� Tiga rd,OR 97223 • Map Crevled [5031 539-4171 11.1]&2120 www Tigard-or gov TIGAR❑ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 21- AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING ONE (1) PARCEL OF LAND TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 0.75 ACRES AND ONE-HALF OF THE ADJOINING SW 133'AVENUE RIGHT-OF-WAY,APPROVING THE RIETMAN ANNEXATION (ZCA2020-00002), AND WITHDRAWING THE PROPERTY FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT, WASHINGTON COUNTY ENHANCED SHERIFF'S PATROL DISTRICT,AND WASHINGTON COUNTY URBAN ROAD MAINTENANCE DISTRICT. WHEREAS,the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(4)(b),ORS 222.125,and ORS 222.170(1) to annex contiguous territory upon receiving written consent from owners of land in the territory proposed to be annexed; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard is authorized by ORS 222.120(5) and 222.520 to withdraw property which currently lies within the boundaries of the Tigard Water District,Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District,and Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District upon completion of the annexation; and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 7, 2020, and Tigard City Council held a public hearing on January 5,2021,to consider the annexation of one (1) parcel of land consisting of Washington County Tax Map (WCTM) 2S109AC,Tax Lot 600 and adjoining right-of-way,and withdrawal of said parcel and adjoining right-of-way from the Tigard Water District, Washington County Enhanced Sheriff s Patrol District, and Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District;and WHEREAS, pursuant to Metro 3.09, ORS 222.120, and 222.524, notice was given and the City held two (2) public hearings on the issue of annexation into the City on December 7,2020 and January 5,2021;and WHEREAS,pursuant to ORS 222.524, the City must declare the withdrawal of the annexed property from the Tigard Water District, Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, and Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District;and WHEREAS, the Tigard Community Development Code states that upon annexation, the zone is automatically changed to the City zoning which most closely implements the City's comprehensive plan map designation,or to the City designations which are the most similar;and WHEREAS, the annexation has been processed in accordance with the requirements of Metro 3.09, and has been reviewed for compliance with the Tigard Community Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and the annexation substantially addresses the standards in Metro 3.09 regulating annexations;and WHEREAS,the Tigard City Council has carefully considered the testimony at the public hearing and determined that withdrawal of the annexed property from the applicable service districts is in the best interest of the City of Tigard. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby annexes the subject parcel and adjoining right-of-way as described and shown in the attached Exhibits "A" and"B",and withdraws said parcel and ORDINANCE No. 21- Page 1 adjoining right-of-way from the Tigard Water District, Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, and Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District. SECTION 2: The Tigard City Council adopts the "Planning Commission Recommendation to the City Council" (ZCA2020-00002) as findings in support of this decision; a copy of the recommendation is attached hereto as Exhibit "C", and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3: City staff is directed to take all necessary measures to implement the annexation, including filing a certified copy of this ordinance with Metro for administrative processing, filing with state and county agencies as required by law, and providing notice to utilities. SECTION 4: If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity does not affect the other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application,and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. This City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof and intends that the invalid portions should be severed and the balance of the ordinance be enforced. SECTION 5: Pursuant to ORS 222.120(5), the effective date of the withdrawal of the property and adjoining right-of-way from the Tigard Water District, Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, and Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District will be the effective date of this annexation. SECTION 6: This ordinance will be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. In accordance with ORS 222.180, the annexation will be effective upon the effective date of this ordinance and filing with the Secretary of State. PASSED: By vote of all council members present after being read by number and title only,this day of ,2021. Carol A. Krager,City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of ,2021. Jason B. Snider,Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 21- Page 2 MSAKS ENGINEERING&FORESTRY,LLC 12965 SW Herman Road,Suite 100,Tualatin,OR 97062 AKS Job#8439 P:(503)563-6151 I www.aks-eng.com ENGINEERING&FORESTRY OFFICES IN: BEND,OR - KEIZER,OR - TUALATIN,OR - VANCOUVER,WA EXHIBIT A Annexation Description A tract of land and a portion of right-of-way, located in the Northeast One-Quarter of Section 9, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, Washington County, Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most easterly southeasterly corner of the plat "Wilson Ridge" and also being on the west right-of-way line of SW 133rd Avenue (25.00 feet from centerline), said point bears South 89°54'00" East 2.00 feet from the southeast corner of Lot 7 of said plat; thence along the easterly extension of the south line of said plat, South 89°54'00" East 25.00 feet to the centerline of SW 133rd Avenue; thence along said centerline, South 00°37'00" East 240.00 feet to the easterly extension of the north line of Document Number 97026952 and also being on the City of Tigard city limits line, and the Point of Beginning; thence leaving said city limits line and continuing along said centerline, South 00°37'00"East 140.00 feet to the easterly extension of the south line of said deed; thence along said easterly extension and the south line of said deed,North 89°54'00"West 298.80 feet to the southwest corner of said deed and also being on said city limits line, said point bears South 89°54'00" East 129.00 feet from the southeast corner of Tract 'C' of said plat; thence along the westerly line of said deed and said city limits line, North 30°10'10" East 161.76 feet to the northwest corner of said deed; thence along the north line of said deed and the easterly extension thereof and said city limits line, South 89°54'00" East 216.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described tract of land contains 36,034 square feet, more or less. Bearings for this description are based on Survey Number 16,834, Washington County Survey Records. 12/2/2020 itREGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR 1/7441 OREGON JANUARY 9. 2007 NICK WHITE 70652LS RENEWS: 6/30/22 EXHIBIT B A TRACT OF LAND AND A PORTION OF RIGHT—OF—WAY, LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST 1 /4 OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON I - )Th—'\ 46b6i, X- ILSON RIO �Oti N LOT 7 r 5.39'54'00"E 25.00' RO\4,0 / S89'54'00"E 2.00'—.- \1 • POINT OF 25'1 COMMENCEMENT o SE COR "WILSON RIDGE" I N \ I SW NICOLE _ - LANE 0 1 / 0 POINT OF BEGINNING DOC. NO. - S89'54'00"E 216.00' i • . 96108423 � 0 0 d a ��� DOC. NO. TRACT 'C' OF o97026952 z`' "WILSON RIDGE" moi o AREA=36,034 SF± o = o SW 132ND_ N TERRACE 1> S89'S4'00"E DOC. NON89. 'S4'00"W 298.80' ��� 129.00' 0 W M, 91001003 cv) Z r W LEGEND ,. E cn CITY OF TIGARD CITY LIMITS LINE I 12/2/2020 PREPARED FOR REGISTERED SHAWN AND JORINE RIETMAN SCALE: 1"=100 FEET N PROFESSIONAL 14715 SW 133RD AVENUE 161 LAND SURVEYOR TIGARD, OR 97224 100 0 20 50 100 (la ! 1 ANNEXATION MAP EXHIBIT O-EGON JANUARY 9, 2007 AKS ENGINEERING & FORESTRY, LLC DRWN: WCB NICK WHITE 12965 SW HERMAN RD, STE 100 AK CHKD: NSW 70652LS TUALATIN, OR 97062 AKS JOB: RENEWS: 6/30/22 503.563.6151 WWW.AKS-ENG.COM 8439 DWG:8439 20201202 EXB I EXB1 EXHIBIT C Hearing Date: January 5.2021 Time: 7:30 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO THE II '' CITY COUNCIL • FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: RIETMAN ANNEXATION CASE NO: Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) ZCA2020-00002 APPLICANTS: Shawn C. and B.Jorine Rietman 14715 SW 133rd Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 OWNERS: Same as applicants PROPOSAL: The property owners request to annex a 0.75-acre property located at 14715 SW 133' Avenue (WCTM 2S109AC,Tax Lot 600) into the City of Tigard,in order to connect to city sewer. LOCATION: 14715 SW 133'Avenue WCTM 2S109AC,Tax Lot 600 COUNTY ZONE: R-6: Residential 6 units per acre CITY ZONE: R-7:Medium-Density Residential APPLICABLE The approval standards for annexations are described in Community Development REVIEW Code Chapters 18.710 and 18.720;Comprehensive Plan Goals 1,11, 12,and 14;Metro CRITERIA: Code Chapter 3.09; and Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapter 222. SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission finds that the proposed annexation (ZCA2020-00002) 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, Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL of ZCA2020-00002 to City Council. RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 1 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The subject property (14715 SW 133' Avenue;WCTM 2S109AC, Tax Lot 600) is located on the west side of SW 133rd Avenue, north of SW Beef Bend Road, and south of SW Bull Mountain Road. The adjacent properties to the north and west are under the jurisdiction of the City of Tigard, and the adjacent properties to the south and east are part of unincorporated Washington County. The property is currently developed with an existing single detached house with an attached garage,paved driveway, and associated landscaping. As defined by Washington County Land Use Districts,the subject property is zoned R-6 (Residential 6 units per acre), and upon approval of this proposed annexation, the property will be zoned R-7 (Medium-Density Residential),under City of Tigard designations.The applicant requests to annex into the City of Tigard in order to connect to city sewer. On December 7, 2020, Planning Commission held a virtual public hearing to consider this application for annexation (Case No. ZCA2020-00002). No public testimony was received at the hearing. After a brief deliberation,Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of this annexation to City Council. 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: Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 222 CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE(TITLE 181 Chanter 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 December 7,2020),and one before City Council (scheduled for January 5,2021). 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 November 16,2020 (Tigard City Hall,Tigard Permit Center,Tigard Public Works, 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 November 9, 2020; and the City published a public hearing notice in the Daily Journal of Commerce for more than two successive weeks (with publish dates on November 16, 2020, November 23,2020,and November 30,2020) prior to the December 7,2020 public hearing before Planning Commission. City staff also posted the public hearing information on the City of Tigard website, and the staff report was also posted on this website more than 15 days prior to the public hearing before Planning Commission. Chapter 18.720 Annexations 18.720.020 Approval Process A. Quasi-judicial annexation applications are processed through a Type III-Modified procedure, as provided in Section 18.710.080. Quasi-judicial annexations are decided by the City Council with a recommendation by Planning Commission. RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 2 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 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 this application,with a recommendation from Planning Commission. 18.720.030 Approval Criteria A. Approval criteria. The approval authority will approve or approve with modification an annexation application when all of the following are met: 1. The annexation complies 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 application 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 parties, by weatherproof posting of the notice in the general vicinity of the affected territory, and by publishing 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 required 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 expedited decision; therefore, these notice requirements apply. City staff determined this application was complete on November 5, 2020, and notified the applicant on November 5, 2020 that deliberations on this proposed boundary change were scheduled before Planning Commission (scheduled for December 7, 2020) and before City Council (scheduled for January 5, 2021). City staff posted public hearing notices in four public places on November 16, 2020 (Tigard City Hall,Tigard Permit Center,Tigard Public Works, and at the subject site); city staff mailed public hearing notices to all necessary parties, and neighboring property owners within 500 feet of the subject site on November 9, 2020;and the City published a public hearing notice in the Daily Journal of Commerce for more than two successive weeks (with publish dates on November 16, 2020,November 23,2020,and November 30, 2020) prior to the December 7,2020 public hearing before Planning Commission. City staff also posted the public hearing information on the City of Tigard website, and the staff report was also posted on this website more than 15 days prior to the public hearing before Planning Commission. 3.09.045 Expedited Decisions RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 3 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 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; The Tigard Urban Service Agreement is between 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 operating 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 area, 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 195.020(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,instead of Clean Water Services. SW 133`d Avenue will be annexed into the City of Tigard to the centerline of the right-of-way.The City of Tigard Police Department will provide public safety services, instead of the Washington County Sheriff's Office. City of Tigard will continue to provide water services to the site, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R) will continue to provide fire protection and emergency medical services to the site, and Tigard-Tualatin School District (TTSD) will continue to be the assigned school district for the site. d. Any applicable public facility plan adopted pursuant to a statewide planning goal on public facilities and services; The City of Tigard Public Facility Plan was originally adopted in 1991, and updated in 2019, in compliance with Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines,and Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 660,Division 11. 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; RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 4 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 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 this 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. 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 site, 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,instead of Clean Water Services. SW 133rd Avenue will be annexed into the City of Tigard to the centerline of the right-of-way. The City of Tigard Police Department will provide public safety services, instead of the Washington County Sheriffs Office. City of Tigard will continue to provide water services to the site,TVF&R will continue to provide fire protection and emergency medical services to the site, and TTSD will continue to be the assigned school district for the site. 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 charter, 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 posted on the City of Tigard website and made available to the public 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 site,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 RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 5 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 The proposed annexation area will remain within Washington County, but will be withdrawn from Washington County's Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District and Urban Road Maintenance District upon completion of this annexation request.The subject site will also be withdrawn from the Tigard Water District upon completion of this annexation request. 3. The proposed effective date of the boundary change. A public hearing regarding this annexation request will take place before Tigard City Council on January 5, 2021. Council will make a decision on this application,with a recommendation from Planning Commission. If Council adopts findings to approve Case No. ZCA2020-00002, the effective date of this annexation will 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 criteria 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 promote the timely, orderly and economic provision of City of Tigard public facilities and services, 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 placed on the property is the city's base zone that most closely implements the city's or county's comprehensive plan map designation.The assignment of these designations occurs automatically and concurrently with the annexation. In the case of land that carries county designations,the city will convert the county's comprehensive plan map and zoning designations to the city designations that are the most similar. 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 concurrently with an annexation application or after the annexation has been approved. Within the Washington Square Regional Center, the assignment of city comprehensive plan and zoning designations will be as provided in the Washington Square Regional Center Phase II Implementation Plan, dated June 29, 2001, Figure 4 Adopted Zoning Designations. 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. RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 6 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 CDC TABLE 18.720.1 CONVERSION TABLE FOR COUNTY AND CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS Washington County Land Use City of Tigard Zoning City of Tigard Districts/Plan Designation Plan Designation R-6 Res. 6 units per acre R-7 Medium-density residential CDC Table 18.720.1 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 will occur automatically and concurrently with the proposed annexation. Under Washington County designations, the subject site is R-6 (Residential, 6 units per acre). Upon approval of this proposed annexation,the subject site 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 November 16,2020(Tigard City Hall,Tigard Permit Center,Tigard Public Works,and at the subject site);city staff mailed public hearing notices to all necessary parties, and neighboring property owners within 500 feet of the subject site on November 9,2020; and the City published a public hearing notice in the Daily Journal of Commerce for more than two successive weeks (with publish dates on November 16, 2020, November 23, 2020, and November 30, 2020) prior to the December 7, 2020 public hearing before Planning Commission. City staff also posted the public hearing information on the City of Tigard website,and the staff report was also posted on this website 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 Management, Community Facilities, and Private Utilities. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan's Glossary includes public safety, parks, and transportation under Public Facilities and Services. As detailed in the findings below, staff finds that all public facilities and services are available to the proposed annexation area, and have adequate capacity to serve the subject site. Stormwater— City of Tigard Public Works Department. The applicant is not requesting City of Tigard stormwater service at this time. However, city maps show there is an existing 12-inch stormwater main located adjacent to the property,in SW 133" Avenue. Accordingly, city stormwater facilities have adequate capacity to serve the subject site. Water— City of Tigard Public Works Department. The subject property is located in the Tigard Water Service area, and is currently served by an existing eight-inch water main in SW 133'Avenue. Accordingly, city water facilities have adequate capacity to continue serving the subject property. RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 7 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 Sewer— City of Tigard Public Works Department. The applicant proposes to annex the subject site 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 eight-inch sanitary main and an existing sanitary lateral located at the front of the property,in SW 133'Avenue. City sewer facilities have adequate capacity to serve the subject site. Police— City of Tigard Police Department. The Washington County Sheriff's Office currently provides police services to the subject properties. 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. Fire — Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue. The subject properties are located within the service area for TVF&R.Accordingly,TVF&R currently provides fire protection and emergency medical services to the site, which will not change with this annexation request. Parks — City of Tigard Public Works Department. The applicant proposes to annex one property, totaling 0.75 acres in size,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 fronts on SW 133Td Avenue,which will be annexed to into the City of Tigard to the centerline of the right-of-way. Accordingly, the subject property will be withdrawn from the Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District. The subject property is currently developed with an existing single detached house, and it is not anticipated that this annexation will generate additional traffic, or negatively impact the City's existing transportation system. 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 maps show there is an existing 12-inch stormwater main located adjacent to the property, in SW 133' Avenue. Accordingly, city stormwater facilities have adequate capacity to serve the subject site. 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 site in order to connect to City of Tigard sewer. This is consistent with the policy outlined above. City of Tigard sewer infrastructure is available by an existing eight- inch sanitary main and an existing sanitary lateral located at the front of the property,in SW 133' Avenue. City sewer facilities have adequate capacity to serve the subject site. Goal 12: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient, and economic transportation system. The subject property fronts on SW 133" Avenue, which will be annexed to into the City of Tigard to the centerline of the right-of-way. Accordingly, the subject property will be withdrawn from the Washington County Urban Road Maintenance District. The subject property is currently developed with an existing single detached house, and it is not anticipated that this annexation will generate additional traffic, or negatively impact the City's existing transportation system. RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 8 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 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 the subject property is addressed under CDC Sections 18.720.030.B and 18.720.030.0 of this report. Goal 14.2, Policy 2: The City shall ensure capacity exists, or can be developed, to provide needed 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 area, 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 area, 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 (14715 SW 133rd Avenue; WCTM 2S109AC, Tax Lot 600) is bordered to the north and west by the City of Tigard,and is bordered to the south and east by unincorporated Washington County. Because the subject site is surrounded on two sides by the City of Tigard, this annexation will not create an "island"of unincorporated land, and it is not necessary to include the adjacent properties in this annexation request. This annexation will enable public services to be efficiently and effectively extended to the subject 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 222— 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 RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 9 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 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 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. The owners of the subject property(14715 SW 133'Avenue;WCTM 2S109AC,Tax Lot 600) submitted an annexation petition to the City on October 28, 2020. 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 required 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 (scheduled for December 7,2020) and before City Council (scheduled for January 5,2021). City staff posted public hearing notices in four public places on November 16,2020 (Tigard City Hall,Tigard Permit Center, Tigard Public Works, 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 November 9, 2020; and the City published a public hearing notice in the Daily Journal of Commerce for more than two successive weeks (with publish dates on November 16, 2020, November 23, 2020, and November 30, 2020) prior to the December 7, 2020 public hearing before Planning Commission. City staff also posted the public hearing information on the City of Tigard website, and the staff report was also posted on this website more than 15 days prior to the public hearing before Planning Commission. SECTION V. OTHER STAFF AND AGENCY COMMENTS Pride Disposal was sent a copy of the applicant's proposal, and had no objections to the proposed annexation. Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue was sent a copy of the applicant's proposal, and had no objections to the proposed annexation. 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 November 9,2020. As of December 15,2020,no public comments were received. RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 10 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 Attachments: Attachment 1: Zoning Map SECTION VII. CONCLUSION The proposed annexation meets all applicable approval criteria, outlined in CDC Chapters 18.710 and 18.720; Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.1, Goal 11.1, Policy 4, Goal 11.3, Policy 6, Goal 12, and Goal 14.2, Policies 1 to 4; Metro Code Chapter 3.09; and ORS Chapter 222. Therefore, Planning Commission recommends approval of this annexation to City Council. �``-- December 15. 2020 PREPARED BY: Lina Smith Assistant Planner ._(�`� December 15. 2020 APPROVED BY: Tom McGuire Assistant Community Development Director RIETMAN ANNEXATION PAGE 11 OF 11 ZCA2020-00002 Zoning Map City of Tigard, Oregon 27 Generalized Zoning Categories Subject Site R-7 Zoning Classifications R-7 ❑ R-1 Residential Low-Density ❑ R-2 Residential Low-Density ❑ R-3.5 Residential Low-Density ❑ R-4.5 Residential Low-Density ❑ R-7 Residential Medium-Density ❑ R-12 Residential Medium-Density ▪ R-25 Residential Medium-High-Density ❑ R-40 Residential High-Density ❑ MUR-1 Mixed Use Residential 1 • MUR-2 Mixed Use Residential 2 ▪ MU-CBD Mixed Use Central Bus Dist ❑ C-C Community Commercial _ • C-G General Commercial ❑ C-N Neighborhood Commercial t^+ ▪ C-P Professional Commercial fn ▪ Mixed Use Commercial ▪ MUC-1 Mixed Use Commercial 1 ▪ TMU Triangle Mixed Use � t'c'n Ln Data is derived from multiple sources The City of Tigard makes no warranty,representation,or guarantee as to the content,a acy,timeliness o completeness of any of the data provided herein The City of Tigard shall assume o liability for any errors, inaccuracies in the i hod formation provided regardless of yI„ w caused 0 +` + ._.. _ .. L Scale: 0.04 Miles O I.- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd .111 Tigard, OR 97223 '.`. Map Created: (503) 639-4171 I 11/06/2020 www.tigard-or.gov TLG11F[D AIS-4479 8. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Legislative Public Hearing: Business license Support Program Prepared For: Lloyd Purdy Submitted By: Caroline Patton, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Ordinance Business Public Hearing - Legislative Meeting - Main Public Hearing Yes Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Shall the Tigard Municipal Code be amended to create a limited business license fee waiver to support entrepreneurs of color and historically underserved business owners starting businesses in Tigard? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends City Council amend Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 5.04 to implement a one-year business license fee waiver for new business owners who have successfully completed a business training program. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY This amendment creates a one-time, one-year business license fee waiver for business owners who have successfully completed a business training program with one of the City of Tigard's business advising partners. Proposed changes to Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 5.04 are included in Exhibit A. A one-time, one-year business license fee waiver supports new business owners, especially historically underserved entrepreneurs, by incentivizing them to take advantage of free and low-cost business advising services available from business advising partners like Micro Enterprise Services of Oregon (MESO), the Oregon Association of Minority Entrepreneurs (OAME) and Adelante Mujeres. Organizations like these are closely connected to entrepreneurs of color with a strong history of program delivery and so this program supports Tigard's strategic efforts at becoming a more equitable city. Small business owners can receive training from a variety of advisory organizations and in so doing, build a support network for their new business. The list below includes examples of business advising partners that offer training programs. Business Advising Partners & Programs (examples) Adelante Mujeres - Empresas Small Business Development Program or individual workshops Hacienda CDC - Empresarios business development program Hispanic Metropolitan Chamber— Business education workshops or recurring advising sessions Mercy Corps Northwest - Small business training workshops Micro Enterprise Services of Oregon - Credit 101 course Oregon Association of Minority Entrepreneurs - Small business workshops Oregon Entrepreneurs Network—Business education workshops SCORE Association - Small business workshops or recurring one-on-one advising Small Business Development Center (SBDC) - Business assistance training programs and recurring one-on-one advising The City of Tigard's economic development team has been working with these business advising partners since 2019 through programs like Los Empresarios de Tigard- a business support program for Hispanic entrepreneurs in Tigard. The organizations referenced in the list above offer the training, support, and technical advice that new business owners need, and help entrepreneurs navigate the start-up and growth phase. Any entrepreneur thinking about opening a business should be able to find an advising partner from this list that they feel comfortable working with. Currently, the city receives between 10 and 25 new business license applications every month. Very few of these business owners seek support from a business advising partner. A one-time, one-year fee waiver could help change this trend and set Tigard entrepreneurs up for success. Initial estimates indicate the city may forego between $2,000 and $6,000 in revenue annually from new businesses earning a waiver on their first-year business license fee. In exchange, the program should improve the likelihood that a new business stays operational due to skills development and support from their business advising network. To be eligible for a one-time one-year waiver for either their first or their second year of operation, a new business owner must provide proof of successful completion of a business assistance program, financial education workshop or recurring advising relationship with an approved business advising partner immediately before or during their first year of business in Tigard. Tigard's Economic Development team will coordinate with the region's business advising partners, starting with the list above, to implement this program. The Economic Development team meets regularly with these business advising partners to connect them with local entrepreneurs through webinars, trainings and business support programs. The addition of this program will require an extra two to three hours of Economic Development staff time per year with each business advising partner to structure a process that works with their business advising program. It will require an annual check-in and review with each partner in subsequent years. Finance and Information Services Department staff will run an annual report of participants and foregone revenue. The annual workload impact for Finance staff is expected to be minimal. The program would initially run for three years as a pilot project to gather data on business participation. It would include an annual staff review and adjustment option during the first three years and each year thereafter, to determine the program's impact and costs. Finance and Community Development staff will track participation and the amount of business license revenue waived over the first three years of this program and use that information to make decisions about the program in subsequent years. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council may consider variations to this program, including: 1. Decrease the initial three-year trial period to one year. 2. Reduce the amount of the business license fee waiver to 50 percent. 3. Limit eligible business to those with less than five employees. The staff recommendation does not include alternatives 1-3 for the following reasons. A three-year program trial/assessment period provides time to communicate this new program to businesses and coordinate with existing and new business advising partners. It also allows sufficient time for businesses who need to complete training to do so and still be eligible for a waiver because some business trainings are offered on an annual or bi-annual schedule. A full business licensee fee waiver provides a small incentive to encourage a business owner to sign up for a training. It will, in some instances, be equal to or less than with the expense they incur for that training. A smaller fee waiver amount may not be sufficient to encourage participation in a training program. Participants in this program will likely be small business owners with a low number of employees. Picking a cutoff point based on a number of employees is arbitrary and limits the benefit of the program -- connecting new business owners in Tigard to advising services. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS This program is consistent with council's direction to incorporate equity into a wide range of city programs: The Strategic Plan focus on equity, and specifically Strategic Plan Priority 1, Objective 2 - "Enhance data-informed decision-making to solve problems,pursue opportunities for improvement, and develop innovative solutions for equitable outcomes." Strategic Plan Priority 3, Objective 3.1 Action E - "Ensure all businesses can easily connect to resources that help them grow and add value to the community." DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION This proposal was first discussed on December 8, 2020. Fiscal Impact Cost: 0 Budgeted (yes or no): no Where Budgeted (department/program): FIS Additional Fiscal Notes: The fiscal impact on business license fee collections will be calculated after the first 12 months of the program. On any given month, the City of Tigard typically receives between 8 and 24 new business license applications. If five businesses participated each month (an aggressive estimate), annual revenue foregone would be less than $6,000 annually. After the initial three-year trial period, business license fees can be adjusted to make the program revenue neutral, based on data collected over the preceding three years. Attachments Amendment to TMC 5.40.110 Exhibit A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 21- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 5.04.110 REGARDING A BUSINESS LICENSE FEE WAIVER WHEREAS,Tigard City Council wishes to amend the Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 5.04.110 to create a limited business license fee waiver;and WHEREAS, such a fee waiver incorporates equity into a wide range of City programs and aligns with Tigard's equity-focused Strategic Vision;and WHEREAS, the City's Strategic Plan seeks to "Ensure all businesses can easily connect to resources that help them grow and add value to the community;"and WHEREAS, a one-time, one-year business license fee waiver supports new business owners, especially historically under-served entrepreneurs, by encouraging them to take advantage of free and low-cost business advising services available from business advising partners. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Tigard Municipal Code 5.04.110 is hereby amended to read as follows (additional text is underlined and deleted text is shown in-strikcthrough): 5.04.110 Business License Required but Exempt from Business License Fee. A.A non-profit business is required to obtain a business license,but shall be is exempt from the business license fee.The city:than will issue a business license,without requiring the payment of any business license fee therefore to any persons or organization for the conduct or operation of a nonprofit enterprise,either regular or temporary,when the city finds that the applicant operates without private profit,for a public,charitable,educational,literary, fraternal or religious purpose.A person or organization operating under nonprofit exemption shall must operate the nonprofit enterprise in compliance with the provisions of this chapter and all other applicable rules and regulations. B.A business that fulfills the reapirements below may be exempt from the city's business license fee for one year. 1.To be eligible for the exemption.a business owner must provide proof of successful completion of a business assistance program.financial education workshop.or recurring advising relationship in either the six-month period before the business is required to apply for a business license or during the business'first year operating in the city.An eligible and credible business advising partner must be approved by the City of Tigard's economic development manager. 2.A business that completes an eligible business assistance program in the six months before the business is required to apply for a business license.may be exempt from its first year's business license fee if approved by the economic ORDINANCE No.21- Page 1 development manager. 3.A business that completes an eligible business assistance program during its first year operating in the city.and has not already received an exemption.may be exempt from its second year's business license fee if approved by the economic development manager. SECTION 2: If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity does not affect the other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. This City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof and intends that the invalid portions should be severed and the balance of the ordinance be enforced. SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the council, signature by the mayor,and posting by the city recorder. PASSED: By vote of all council members present after being read by number and title only,this day of ,2021. Carol A.Krager,City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of ,2021. Jason B.Snider,Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No.21- Page 2 5.04.110 Business License Required but Exempt from Business License Fee. Existing Tigard Municipal Code 5.04.110 Business License Required but Exempt from Business License Fee. A non-profit business is required to obtain a business license,but shall be exempt from the business license fee.The city shall issue a business license,without requiring the payment of any business license fee therefore to any persons or organization for the conduct or operation of a nonprofit enterprise, either regular or temporary,when the city finds that the applicant operates without private profit, for a public, charitable, educational,literary, fraternal or religious purpose. A person or organization operating under nonprofit exemption shall operate the nonprofit enterprise in compliance with the provisions of this chapter and all other applicable rules and regulations. (Ord. 07-15; Ord. 88-13 §1) Proposed Changes 5.04.110 Business License Required but Exempt from Business License Fee. A. A non-profit business is required to obtain a business license, but shall be exempt from the business license fee. The city shall issue a business license,without requiring the payment of any business license fee therefore to any persons or organization for the conduct or operation of a nonprofit enterprise, either regular or temporary,when the city finds that the applicant operates without private profit, for a public, charitable, educational,literary, fraternal or religious purpose.A person or organization operating under nonprofit exemption shall operate the nonprofit enterprise in compliance with the provisions of this chapter and all other applicable rules and regulations. (Ord. 07-15; Ord. 88-13 §1) B. A business that fulfills the requirements below may be exempt from the city's business license fee for one year. 1. To be eligible for the exemption. a business owner must provide proof of successful completion of a business assistance program. financial education workshop. or recurring advising relationship in either the six-month period before the business is required to apply for a business license or during the business' first year operating in the city. An eligible and credible business advising partner must be approved by the City of Tigard's economic development manager. 2. A business that completes an eligible business assistance program in the six months before the business is required to apply for a business license.may be exempt from its first year's business license fee if approved by the economic development manager. 3. A business that completes an eligible business assistance program during its first year operating in the city. and has not already received an exemption.may be exempt from its second year's business license fee if approved by the economic development manager. AIS-4504 9. Business Meeting One Meeting Date: 01/05/2021 Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes Agenda Title: Receive Council Training on Employment Law Prepared For: Dana Bennett, City Management Submitted By: Dana Bennett, City Management Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Shall the Council receive Employment Law Update Training? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Council is asked to listen to the update, ask questions and learn/refresh their knowledge about laws that impact hiring and employment practices for the city. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The topics that the training will cover include the following: • Categories for protection under the law •What it means to discriminate against an employee • COVID-19 and related potential discrimination that can occur •What it means to discriminate against an applicant OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments PowerPoint 'syy-i Ia —� City of Tigard Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done Employment Law 101 Refresher Course 1/5/21 " TIGARD City of Tigard Employment Law Refresh The topics we will cover in this quick course: • Categories of protection under the law • What it means to discriminate against an employee • COVID and related potential discrimination • What it means to discriminate against a candidate City of Tigard EEO Law: It is a violation of employment law to discriminate against an employee or applicant on the basis of the following: Race Color Religion Sex National Origin Disability Age (Retirement) Genetics III City of Tigard Other Pertinent hmp1oyment Laws • Federal/State Family Leave (FMLA/OFLA/OR Sick) • Federal USERRA/Oregon Veteran's Preference (Military Service Protections) • Oregon Equal Pay Act City of Tigard What is Discrimination against an employee: Making employment related decisions or recommendations based in whole or in part on a protected status Hiring Termination Job assignment Project/Team opportunities Promotions Job location Time off Training H'xception if due to an ADA accommodation City of Tigard Why are we covering this today: Updates in the law, combined with some comments that have been made which demonstrated a need for refresher training • Underlying health condition (when assumed) Perceived Disability under ADA • Retirement referenced (when no notice has been given) Age Discrimination • Comments made about or to a person regarding their protected status can be discriminatory (age, race, color, religion, disability, etc. in categorizing an individual) Potential violation of any of t h e Di sal mi n at i on Laws • Concern for ability to do the full job duties following an accident or surgery (despite a clearance from their doctor and no outward signs of difficulty) Perceived Disability under A D A City of Tigard What about COVID — Staff with underlying health conditions how can we help them • Underlying health conditions cannot be assumed or presumed or discussed with staff unless they initiated it • If outward symptoms are documented that suggest a medical/health condition is impacting job performance, immediately contact HR — Do not talk to the staff member about a perceived health condition! • Do not speak with others (managers or supervisors) about a perceived health condition, call HR • If we accommodate a staff member, we are barred by law from disclosing that to other staff, despite how artificial and fraught with issues that may be City of Tigard What can we say about - health conditions & accommodations: Only what the employee has specifically authorized you to say and only to those they have specified (preferably in writing) • When responding to other staff about perceived special treatment of an accommodated staff member - / "Please know that "X" (schedules, workloads, duties, etc.) are determined in a fair and equitable manner with consideration, as appropriate, to individual circumstances" / "I'm sorry but I am not at liberty to share information with you about the circumstances related to other staff members." / "Any information about that situation is private and I would ask that you respect the privacy rights of your co-workers" City of Tigard Discrimination against a candidate: Making selection related decisions or recommendations based in whole or in part on a protected status • Scoring an applicant lower as a result of a protected status. / It can occur due to bias, which is generally based on prior experiences and are often unconscious on the part of the evaluator. The impact of bias can be reduced through awareness. / HR runs a brief video and talks about bias prior to each interview to help reduce this factor. In the new year a fuller implicit bias program will be ready for roll-out. / As an evaluator, all notes written in conjunction with an interview should always be job related and linked to the candidate's ability to perform the job, notes are discoverable should there be an issue later. City of Tigard It is discrimination against a candidate when they are evaluated low due to: • Perception that the candidate would not be able to handle physical aspects of the work given their age or weight, limp, or other observable attributes (Age/ di sabi l i ty di 9cri mi nation) • Perception that the candidate is too old to adapt to a new technology or be innovative (Age discr i mi n at i on) • Concerns about the impact that balancing distance learning for their young kids will have on their availability for work, in light of COVID (Discrimination — protected l eav es) • Perception that the candidate is not a good fit, may not work well with the team — always ask yourself why - if you cannot document it you cannot rate it (L i kel y di seri mi nation — could be age, national origin, sex, religion, etc.) City of Tigard Interview Do's and Don'ts • No questions that would seek to illicit any candidate's protected status • No follow-up questions that would seek to clarify a candidate's protected status, even if the candidate alluded to it in a response to a question • If a panel member asks a follow-up that is related to a protected status, as politely as possible, interrupt, do not allow the candidate to respond and redirect the conversation back to specific job related information. • If a candidate raises a protected status such as a disability or health condition, the panel should quickly redirect the conversation back to specific job related information and let the candidate know that such information will not be considered as part of the interview, but that they should feel free to contact HR if they have questions. / HR will do any needed follow-up later should a question regarding accommodation need to be addressed City of Tigard Questions