City Council Packet - 10/17/1988 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate
STUDY AGENDA sign--up sheet(s). If no sheet is available,
E- OCTOBER 17, 1988, 6:30 P.M. ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start
H TIGARD CIVIC CENTER of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are
E+ 13125 SW HALL BLVD. asked to be to 2 minutes or less. Longer matters
E-+ TIGARD, OREGON 97223 can be set for a future Agenda by contacting
either the Mayor or City Administrator.
6:30 1. STUDY SESSION MEETING:
1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
1.2 Call To Staff and Council For Non—Agenda Items
6:35 2. JOINT WORKSHOP — Utility & Franchise Committee
7:30 3. DISCUSSION WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY COMMISSIONER ROY ROGERS
8:15 4. NON—AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff
8:20 5. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive
Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to
discuss labor relations, real property transactions, and current and
pending litigation issues.
8:30 6. ADJOURNMENT
cw/7114D
y .
COUNCIL AGENDA — OCTOBER 17, 1988 — PAGE 1
Revised 10/14/88
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an ,;
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate
STUDY AGENDA sign—up sheet(s) . If no sheet is available,
OCTOBER 17, 1988, 6:30 P.M. ask to be recognized by the Chair at tho start
TIGARD CIVIC CENTER of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are
r 13125 SW HALL BLVD, asked to be to 2 minutes or less. Longer matters
TIGARD, OREGON 97223 can be set for a future Agenda by contacting
either the Mayor or City Administrator.
1. STUDY SESSION MEETING:
1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
1.2 Call To Staff and Council For Non—Agenda Items
2. JOINT WORKSHOP — Utility & Franchise Committee
3. NON—AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff
3.1 74th Avenue Development Policy Discussion
3.2 Heliport — Lincoln Tower Building
3.3 Noise Standards
3.4 Tigard Marketplace
4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive
Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to
discuss labor relations, real property transactions, and current and
pending litigation issues.
5. ADJOURNMENT
cw/7114D
COUNCIL AGENDA — OCTOBER 17, 1988 — PAGE 1
i
TIG A RD CITY C O U N C I L
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES — OCTOBER 17, 1988 — 6:30 P.M.
1 . ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Tom Brian (arrived 6:39 P.M.
Councilors: Carolyn Eadon, Jerry Edwards, Valerie Johnson (arrived
7:40 p.m. ) and John Schwartz; City Staff: Pat Reilly, City
Administrator; Wayne Lowry, Finance Director; Jill Monley, Community
Services Director (Arrived 6:42 p.m. ); Ed Murphy, Community Development
Director; Catherine Wheatley, Deputy City Recorder; and Randy Wooley,
City Engineer'.
2. JOINT WORKSHOP — UTILITY & FRANCHISE COMMITTEE
a. Utility & Franchise Members Present: Chair Gerry McReynolds,
Rebeckah Barrett, Donald Jacobs, Daniel Walsh, and Eldon Wogen.
Also present were ex officio members Mike Leichner & Larry Schmidt,
and former Utility & Franchise Committee member Mike Misovetz.
b. Solid Waste Rate Increase (Metro Pass Through) . Items of
discussion included:
o Haulers had been guaranteed (in their franchise agreements) an
8-12% profit range.
o The City had no control over the rate increases set by the
Metropolitan Service District (ME-FRO) .
o City rates were set by a formula developed for the City of
Tigard by the Utility & Franchise Commission and staff. This
formula attempts to equate increases from METRO (which are based
on weight) to individual users (i.e. , what to charge for a
32—gallon can) . Chair McReynolds noted Tigard's method of
calculation was more sophisticated than some of the surrounding
communities; increases from Tigard were lower than many of the
other cities.
(Community Services Director arrived: 6:42 p.m.)
c. Tualatin River. Items of discussion included the following:
o Chair McReynolds advised that solutions concerning Tualatin
River water quality would not be available in the short term.
o Storm drainage issues were under study by a Washington County
Task Force. Chair McReynolds advised that treatment of storm
drainage could be costly.
o Chair McReynolds suggested one of the assignments for the
Committee could be the review of Tigard`s current storm drainage
system (i.e. , update inventory) . City Engineer advised there
had been a delay in completing the Storm Drain Master Plan until
it had been determined how to coordinate this assignment with
land use planning. He noted that the possibility of two
committees (i.e. , Planning Commission) working or, the storm
drainage issue should be avoided.
o CH2M Hill had completed a study of Tigard storm drainage
facilities a few years ago. Policy issues concerning
channelization and the fastest methods of getting water off
property had been reviewed at that time. These issues should be
revisited.
Page 1 — COUNCIL MINUTES — OCTOBER 17, 1988
o Budget concerns were discussed. City Engineer reported
immediate problems (i.e. , household flooding) had been addressed
during the last two budget years. No dollars for capital
projects had been provided.
d. Franchise Renegotiations. Chair McReynolds updated Council on s
franchise renegotiations. The City Attorney's office was now r
taking the lead on this issue. Finance Director advised that
Pacific Northwest Bell' s agreement should be available for Council
review in late November with other utility agreements to be
considered in the future.
e. Mayor thanked Utility & Franchise Committee members for their work
to date.
r
Council Meeting Recessed: 7:10 p.m.
Council Meeting Reconvened: 7:15 p.m.
r
3. NON AGENDA ITEMS
i
3.1 — 74th Avenue Development Policy Discussion.
a. TF►is item had been tabled from the October 10, 1988, Council
meeting. City Engineer reviewed the packet material: 4
Following an appeal hearing on September 12, 1988, the Council
directed staff- to prepare a policy statement regarding
half"—street improvements on S.W. 74th Avenue. During testimony
on the appeal, speakers pointed out that a development had
occurred in 1984 and that the question of half—street
requirements had been considered at that time. Staff- had
reviewed the 1984 file along with material presented at the
September appeal hearing.
After discussion, City Engineer advised he would prepare a #
resolution for Council consideration at their October 24, 1988 e
council meeting outlining Council policy in accordance with his
recommendations contained in his report.
C
3.2 — Heliport — Lincoln Tower Building
i
a. Community Development Director summarized this item. He a
reported that the Hearings Officer heard the Heliport
Conditional Use Request for the Lincoln Tower Building on
July 8, 1988. This would be the only rooftop heliport in
Washington County. To reduce the impact to neighborhoods, the €
Hearings Officer's findings rioted that helicopter flight
patterns should be over the Washington Square Parking lot and E
Highway 217. Also, the Hearings Officer stated that hours of
operation be limited to 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) rejected the
application noting that the number of round trips must be
reduced. The developer, Trammel Crow, advised they would
voluntarily comply within the DEQ standards.
Page 2 — COUNCIL MINUTES — OCTOBER 17, 1988
Discussion followed with Council noting their concern that the
public perception had been that another hearing would be
scheduled to review this conditional use further. (Note: A
letter of concern was submitted to Council from CPO 4 and has
been filed with the packet material. )
(Councilor Johnson arrived: 7:40 p.m. )
At discussion conclusion, Council consensus was to request the
Hearings Officer reopen the hearing. The purpose for this
hearing would be to formalize into the Conditional Use Permit
the requirements set forth by DEQ concerning the maximum number
of flights per month. Further, Council asked that the
applicant be asked to voluntarily limit activity to five days
per week (no activity on Saturdays/Sundays) .
3.3 — Noise Standards.
a. Community Development Director advised he had polled other
cities concerning their regulations with regard to noise
standards. Generally, DEQ's noise level limits were also the
limits set by these communities. He advised that Tigard's Code
was less restrictive than the DEQ requirements. He reported on
the City of Eugene's approach which divided noise standards
into three categories. Discussion followed with regard to
special problems created by contiguous commercial and
residential areas; i .e. , should separate standards be developed?
b. After discussion, Council consensus was to refer this issue to
Planning Commission for review with regard to a possible
amendment to the Development Code concerning noise levels for
commercial property abutting residential.
3.4 — Update on Tigard Marketplace
a. Community Development Director advised that the developer was
still working on the parapet wall issue; i.e. , visual and noise
buffer for neighborhood. He noted not all of the parking lot
lights had been corrected, but were planned to be addressed
soon.
3.5 — Transportation Safety Bond Measure
a. City Administrator outlined several options available for
dissemination of information concerning the Transportation
Safety Bond Measure (for November 8th ballot). Council
reviewed schematic drawings and text outlining staff's
proposals for handouts and newspaper advertisements.
After discussion, Council consensus was to purchase half—page
ad—space in The Ore og nian, Tigard Times, Courier, and the River
City Press. The information prepared would be placed in the
last issue before the election in each of the newspapers.
Council noted that the content of any advertisement and
hand—out material would be subject to review and approval by
the City Attorney.
Page 3 — COUNCIL MINUTES — OCTOBER 17, 1988
3.6 - Home Occupation -• Parking of Log Truck
a. Councilor Edwards asked for clarification concerning a recent
Home Occupation permit wherein a log truck would be allowed.
Community Development Director advised the permit provided that
only one log truck would be permitted. The site is on acreage
and the truck would not be parked on the street.
3.7 - City Administrator reviewed business items with Council,
including a reminder to register for League of Oregon Cities as
soon as possible. He also requested Council review the draft
update letter to residents in the 135th LID.
4. ADJOURNMENT: 8:57 p.m.
Approved by the Tigard City Council on November 21, 1988.
Deputy Recorder - City df Tigard
ATTEST-
-Po {�
Mayor - City of Tigard
cw/7998D
Page 4 - COUNCIL MINUTES - OCTOBER 17, 1988
•
•
•
►l1 9 ��a.c -
�•�. • :..
-¢r+ d .,t+ ,'x{ �f<•� ,,, ,r�s4>.,d„4. ai{,4'�9�.,r}Y� s3- ;j `v` -
-
Am
-
r,� �sr
� -..�*a Ll •`L n2��rZtX t� �t j � ^"fit s-f W -4-�-YF.M .�fi r�179,<•.Ke.P" ,Y �„err y�'��
.;P,..�i'a� "t 2� f s..r to�"rL+ �r� ���iC is yd7 M% s. ,• !i.'x.F G !�n��ra _
�btyj#{�SI�'?�
+S '1'�fic` it r{rY f/Flrr6r rfr
f S(r ria-~•,l�+t L+,�r'��'h 7 i�N
..c'4Y��
_ � E�itM�i�.r�� 11 1t wT_. +` � � L. >_ p .>• �f.>, rn.,�.-r t, .� �
•• :• •
_ I A •
IRMO,P-2,4
WMAW"ll
� -
%�:-T *' '�L";'SM�+t}'das"a�w'�. ,,,y'� �-�bw�•h�l '�wa,. � ���t� T g
fi7� 4ai 1.;a`7 ii
1tE
C� ti Y rf..41i KxRdA -0.T . Nyrf-�'� L3hgM3" r 5`..c 8
Ir+� \- m S.atiYC y 4r,y a
34A.7-
k� 1 j1'r1a-c'}tf �lta�E�`i >> 1 Y) �i 1 6t 'n Y '�1`� 1..1t Pi� 1'r'j l�v:•t:
�rrq r }� 2 i \•-yi'1^-7�/� r.;.ya4. 11'� ��S r��� �°( f J �� i �
-M:a
s � q
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Respond By
FROM: Wayne Lowry, Staff Liaison to
Utility and Franchise Committee A� For Your Information
DATE: October 10, 1988 _Sign and Return _
3
SUBJECT: Workshop of October 17, 1988
The Utility and Franchise Committee is scheduled to meet with the City Council
in a Study Session Workshop on Monday, October 17, 1988 at 6:30 p.m.
The following items may be discussed:
o Garbage rates and dump fees
o Tualatin River
o Storm drainage
o Franchise negotiation update
cn/7467D
CITY OF TIGARD, ..OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: GGtGber-1t-,_t'9_" DATE suBmirFED: October 3, 1988
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Half—Street PREVIOUS ACTION:
Policy on SW 74th Avenue
PREPARED BY: Randall R. Wo
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN 01<1 REQUESTED BY
POLICY ISSUE
Establishment of a half—street policy for development along SW 74th Avenue
between Bonita Road and Durham Road.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Following an appeal hearing on September 12, 1988, the Council directed staff
to prepare a policy statement regarding half—street improvements on SW 74th
Avenue. During testimony on the appeal, speakers pointed out that a
development had occurred in 1984 and that the question of hall'--street
requirements had been considered at that time. Staff has reviewed the 1984
file along with material presented at the September appeal hearing. A summary
of this material and staff recommendation is contained in the attached report.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
As stated in the attached report.
FISCAL IMPACT
SUGGESTED ACTION
That the Council, by motion, adopt the recommendation of the attached report.
br/7287D
A REPORT" ON HALE—STREET POLICIES
ON S.W. 74TH AVENUE
BETWEEN BONITA ROAD AND DURHAM ROAD
The Question:
On September 12, 1988, during a hearing on an appeal of a decision of the
Hearings Officer, the Council heard considerable discussion of street
improvements as conditions of development on S.W. 74th Avenue. Following the
hearing, the Council directed that a clear policy be formulated to guide
future decisions regarding street improvements as conditions of development on
S.W. 74th Avenue between Bonita Road and Durham Road.
Background:
S.W, 74th Avenue runs along the west side of the Burlington Northern
Railroad tracks between Bonita Road and Durham Road. The adjoining property
is zoned for industrial use. Portions of the roadway have been paved .but much
of its length still has only a gravel surface.
In 1982 a local improvement district was formed to pave the roadway for a
distance of approximately 1,500 feet south of Bonita Road. The LID provided
only interim roadway improvements consisting of a 24—foot wide pavement. The
pavement thickness was less than the thickness which was recommended by the
consulting engineer for a roadway in an industrial area. There is some
correspondence in the LID file indicating that property owners were to execute
waivers of remonstrance against a future LI:D for the purpose of completing the
roadway improvements. However, it appears that no such waivers were ever
recorded.
In 1983 the City adopted new code provisions relating to development,
including TMC 18. 164.030, which requires half—street improvements and
establishes standards for the street improvements. TMC 18.164.030 requires
that half—street- improvements will be provided as conditions of development
except where the City Engineer determines that the required street improvement
would not be timely. The code section also establishes minimum pavement
thicknesses.
In 1984 the Puget Corporation requested approval to expand their existing
industrial building on 74th Avenue at Bonita Road. As a condition of
approval, the Planning Director required half—street improvements on 74th
Avenue in accordance with TMC 18.164.G30. The requirement of half—street
improvements was appealed by the applicant and the appeal was he,'--d by the
Planning Commission and the City Council. By Resolution No. 84-74, the City
Council upheld the Planning Director's requirement of half—street improvements
on 74th Avenue. Pavement thickness requirements were not stated in the final
order; however, it appears that staff required only local street standards for
pavement thickness on the 1984 project.
In 1988, the Puget Corporation again applied for an exansion of its
facilities. The Hearings Officer approved the proposal with conditions. One
of the conditions required half—street improvements abutting the project. The
Hearings Officer required that the half—street improvements be constructed to
the greater pavement thicknesses required for commercial streets in accordance
with TMC 18. 164.030. The Hearings Officer further required that the existing
pavement adjoining the project be over•layed to bring it to a structural
pavement section equivalent to commercial street standards. The requirement
of greater pavement thickness was appealed by Mr. Sohn Skourtes, a property
al, the City Council upheldfo
owner within the 1982 LID. After hearing the appe
the requirement forhalf--streetimprovements but deleted the requirements for
additional pavement thickness. The Council added a requirement- that the
applicant sign a waiver of remonstrance, agreeing to par-ticipate in a futur-e
improvement district to provide additional pavement thickness . The Council
indicated in its decision that the conditions placed on the Puget Corporation
development- were not intended to establish a precedent for other future
developments along 74th Avenue.
Options:
A review of the record and a review of testimony in the 1988 appeal
suggests three options which might- be considered as a policy for future
conditions of development along 74th Avenue;
1. Require half.-street improvements and require that the improvements be
built to full commercial street pavement standards in accordance with
"TMC 18. 164.030(z); require that the existing pavement be
reconstructed or, overlayed to bring it to a structural section
equivalent to the commercial street standard.
2. Require half-street improvements be built to local street standards
and require a waiver of remonstrance to a future LID to increase the
pavement thickness at such time as the additional pavement thickness
is needed due to increased truck traffic volumes.
3 . Require only interim standards similar to the 1982 L..ID with pavement
section constructed to local street thickness standards .
Discussion:
Records of the 1982 LID are poor. Clearly extensive discussions occurred
between property owners and the City regarding the interim street improvement
standards used. Unfortunately, those discussions and any resulting
understandings are not well documented. However, iL does appear that there
was an expectation that property owners would provide additional street
improvements at some future date after more development had occurred along
74th Avenue. Any agreements made in 1982 would appear to apply only to
properties within the LID.
In the 1984 Council decision, it is clear that the Council intended that
the half-street requirements of TMC 18.164.030 be applied to new development
along SW 74th Avenue. However, those requirements were interpreted to mean
improvements to local street standards and did not require the additional
pavement thickness customarily associated with streets in an industrial area.
In 1984 no waiver of remonstrance was required for future pavement overlays.
S.W. 74th Avenue serves an industrial area. When the area is fully
developed, it is reasonable to expect a substantial volume of heavy trucks to
be using this roadway. The commercial street standard in TMC 18.164.030
provides for an additional pavement thickness to be used in commercial and
collector streets in order to accommodate truck loadings. However, currently
the traffic volumes on 74th Avenue are quite low. Deferring the additional
pavement thickness to a later date is not likely to cause any maintenance
problems until the truck traffic volumes increase substantially along the
street:.
Although waivers of remonstrance have been used frequently by the City to
allow improvements to be deferred, it has proved difficult to collect on the
waivers. Ownerships change and new property owners are not always aware of
the waiver requirements . To collect on waivers, the LID must usually be
initiated by the City rather- than by property owners. Because the timing of-
LID improvements is not tied to property development, the I...ID timing may not
be compatible with the financial. planning of the property owners .
Recommendation:
Based on the above information arid discussion, it is recommended that
future development- projects along SW 74th Avenue between Bonita Road and
Durham Road be required to make street: improvements as conditions of
development as follows:
3. . That properties outside the 1.982 LID (SW 74th Avenue Local Street
Improvement District No. 27) be required to make "two—thirds street
improvements" to commercial street standard per. -tMC 18.164.030(2) .
"Two—thirds Street improvements" means half--street plus one travel lane,
adequate to provide for two--way traffic.
2. For properties within the 1982 LID:
t A. That half--street improvements be required to local street standards.
B. That the property owner execute a waiver of the right to remonstrate
against a formation of a future local improvement district formed for
the purpose of increasing the street- pavement thickness to commercial
street standards.
C. That it be understood that: the future improvement district will be
formed at such time as truck traffic volumes along SW 74th Avenue
warrant the additional pavement thickness.
3 . That any development: likely to generate substantial volumes of heavy truck
traffic may be required to construct additional interim street
improvements adequate to accommodate the expected truck traffic.
Submitted September 30, 1988
By: _
Randall R. Wooley, City Enginec.,
br/7287D