City Council Packet - 07/16/1991
l
CITY OF TIGARD
OREGON
AGENDA
PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an
agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up
sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be
recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that
agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to be
two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for
a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or
the City Administrator.
• STUDY SESSION (5:30 P.M.)
Discussion Items
a. Water Study Proposals
b. Triangle Study
C. Fence Permits
d. Street Vacation Process
• UPDATE - TUALATIN VALLEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (6:30 P.M.)
• President Mary Tobias
1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 P.M.)
1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
1.2 Roll Call
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.3 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please)
3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one
motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion
for discussion and separate action. Motion to:
3.1 Approve Council Minutes: June 11, 18, and 25 1991
3.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar
3.3 Approve Employment Agreement - City Administrator
3.4 Approve Special Assessment for the Lincoln/Locust Local Improvement District -
Resolution No. -
3.5 Authorize City Administrator to Enter into Agreement for Development of a Tigard Triangle
Master Plan - Resolution No. 91-_
3.6 Approve Appropriation of Contingency -1991 /92 Budget Adjustment for OSHA-Required
Safety Equipment - Resolution No. 917_
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 16, 1991 - PAGE 1
4. PUBLIC HEARING - PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION HEARING FOR A PORTION OF
SW 90TH AVENUE, NORTH OF SW NORTH DAKOTA STREET
Proposal for vacation of a portion of S.W. 90th Avenue was initiated by the City Council on
May 21, 1991 at the request of Charlotte and Daniel Cook and Charles Hing. Any interested
person may appear and be heard for or against the proposed vacation of said public right-of- '
way.
• Open Public Hearing
• Declarations or Challenges
• Staff Report
• NPO Comments
• Public Testimony: Opponents, Proponents
• Staff Recommendation
• Council Discussion
• Close Public Hearing
• Consideration by Council: Ordinance No. 91-
5. PUBLIC HEARING - PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION HEARING FOR A PORTION OF
SW 135TH AVENUE SOUTH OF SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD
Proposal for vacation of a portion of S.W. Scholls Ferry Road was initiated by the City Council
on May 21, 1991 at the request of Bill and E. Aleen Gross. Any interested person may appear
and be heard for or against the proposed vacation of said public right-of-way.
Staff recommends this public hearing be continued August 27, 1991.
6. CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDING PARKS SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE TIGARD
MUNICIPAL CODE PROVISIONS
• Community Development Staff Report
• Council Discussion
• Council Consideration - Ordinance No. 91-
7. CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDING LIBRARY BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES AS OUTLINED
IN THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE
• City Administrator Report
• Council Discussion
• Council Consideration - Ordinance No. 91-.-
8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
9. 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, current and pending litigation issues.
10. ADJOURNMENT
i H:REC0RDER\CCA\CCA716.91
t
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 16, 1991 - PAGE 2
Council Agenda Item 3.1
T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I -L
MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1991
• Meeting was called to order at 5:41 p.m. by Mayor Edwards.
1. ROLL CALL
Council Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Valerie
Johnson and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly,
City Administrator; John Acker, Associate Planner, Ron Bunch,
Senior Planner; Loreen Edin, Administrative Services/Risk
Manager; Ken Elliott, Legal Counsel; Ron Goodpaster, Chief of
Police; Wayne Lowry, Finance Director; Ed Murphy, Community
Development Director; Liz Newton, Community Relations
Coordinator; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; and Randy
Wooley, City Engineer.
STUDY SESSION
WATER STUDY PROPOSAL: Staff members Pat Reilly, John Acker and
Loreen Edin reviewed the top three proposals for a water system
study. After discussion and reviewing the elements of the
proposals, Council consensus was for staff to perform reference
checks on two firms James M. Montgomery and Murray, Smith &
Associates.
TRIANGLE STUDY: Ed Murphy reviewed this item as proposed in
Consent Agenda 3.5. The study would conduct a land use analysis of
the Tigard Triangle that may result in proposed changes to the
current Comprehensive Plan. This planning effort will further the
Council's goal of "promoting a balanced economy and enhancing the
vitality of the community, creating a stronger sense of identity
and strengthening the quality of interaction with citizens."
Last fall, the Benkendorf Associates Corporation was selected by
staff as being best able to complete the desired work. After
discussion, Council consensus was for concurrence with the staff's
recommendation to enter into a contract with the Benkendorf
Associates for services to create a Master Plan for the Tigard
Triangle as outlined in the Scope of Work.
FENCE PERMIT: Staff members Ed Murphy and Dick Bewersdorff
reviewed a staff memorandum overviewing the proposal to change the
Development Code with regard to fences. Development Code
regulations restrict fences and walls in a required front yard to
three feet in height. A change to the height regulation, along
C CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1991 - PAGE 1
f
with other minor modifications to the Code relating to fence
locations and heights are being proposed.
It was recommended that the City's fence regulations be revised to
allow fences up to eight feet in height in front yards adjacent to
arterial and collector streets except where clear vision
requirements must be met.
In addition, it is proposed that the clear vision requirements be
modified to restrict fences where topography limits vision. The
fence regulations should also be changed to eliminate the
requirement for a two-foot setback for corner side yard fences.
After discussion, council consensus was in agreement with the
general recommendations of staff with the exception that they would
like to see fences allowed up to eight feet in height in any front
yard. There would be no fee; however, fences over 3-feet in height
would require a staff review to assure clear vision needs are met.
An eight-foot fence would require a building permit.
Staff will take this issue to the NPOs and Planning Commission for
their review and comment prior to a public hearing before Council.
UPDATE FROM TVEDC PRESIDENT. MARY TOBIAS: Ms. Tobias reviewed the
status of the Western Bypass process. ODOT is still in their
public comment phase. There was discussion on Washington County
cities and potential impacts if the Bypass is not approved. Ms.
Tobias urged the Council and citizens to attend an ODOT open house
on July 17, 4-8 p.m. at the Tigard High School. The purpose of the
open house is to present information and receive feedback on a
range of possible strategies to address north-south and
circumferential travel in Washington County. Also, Mayor Edwards
will visit with the Mayors of Tualatin and Sherwood to coordinate
efforts and show support for the Western Bypass.
Ms. Tobias said that TVEDC will be contacting the Economic
Development Committees for several cities. TVEDC would like to
work in an advisory capacity with these Committees.
Mary Tobias is also a member of the Metro Charter Commission. This
commission has been established to produce a Charter for the
Metropolitan Service District which will include the structure of
METRO, and scope of authority/responsibilities. A series of public
meetings have been held throughout the tri-county area: Multnomah,
Clackamas and Washington. The Commission has not reached any
decisions at this time.
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE (EMS) POLICY BOARD REPRESENTATIVE
Council consensus was to support Tualatin Mayor Steve Stolze as the
area's representative on the EMS Policy Board.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1991 - PAGE 2
BUSINESS MEETING
1.4 NON-AGENDA: Mayor Edwards advised he has received numerous
contacts about the traffic islands installed on S.W. North
Dakota Street. He requested that staff inspect the proximity
of the cars parked around these islands; there have been
reports that the narrow passageways are a safety hazard.
2. VISITORS' AGENDA:
• John Self, 7929 Bonita Road, Tigard, OR testified of
problems with ^onstruction on Bonita Road.
Communication, he advised, on what is going to happen
with construction has not been good. Problems included
removal of fences, contractor activity on the recent 4th
of July holiday, and vibration of construction. He noted
he has had contact with the Engineering staff which has
been helpful in controlling some of the problems.
• Jan Paris, 7947 Mara Street, Tigard, OR concurred with
the concerns outlined by Mr. Self with regard to
construction on Bonita Road. She also noted the pounding
and vibration of the construction and the advice she
received to "construction-proof" her home. She asked
that the City be more responsive, if there is damage to
homes, other than to advise homeowners to contact the
Contractor's insurance company.
City Engineer responded to Council questions and advised that
there had been problems, initially, with the contractor as
noted by the neighbors. Engineering staff is regularly on
site monitoring the Contractor's work. Staff has also visited
with neighbors both individually and at a neighborhood
meeting. He advised it was his understanding that the
problems were resolved. After further discussion, council
asked the City Engineer to set up a meeting with the
neighbors to work on the problems described by Mr. Self and
Ms. Paris.
3. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by
Councilor Schwartz to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:
3.1 Approve Council Minutes: June 11, 18, and 25 1991
3.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar
3.3 Approve Employment Agreement - City Administrator -
Resolution No. 91-52
3.4 Approve Special Assessment for the Lincoln/Locust Local
Improvement District - Resolution No. 91-53
3.5 Authorize City Administrator to Enter into Agreement for
Development of a Tigard Triangle Master Plan - Resolution
No. 91-54
i
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1991 - PAGE 3
r
i
f
3.6 Approve Appropriation of Contingency - 1991/92 Budget
Adjustment for OSHA-Required Safety Equipment -
Resolution No. 91-55
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council
present.
4. PUBLIC HEARING - PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION HEARING FOR A
PORTION OF SW 90TH AVENUE NORTH OF SW NORTH DAKOTA STREET
Proposal for vacation of a portion of S.W. 90th Avenue was
initiated by the City Council on May 21, 1991 at the request
of Charlotte and Daniel Cook and Charles Hing.
a. Public hearing was opened.
b. There were no declarations or challenges.
C. Community Development Director reviewed the staff report
submitted to the Council in their meeting packet. Staff
recommended approval of the vacation request.
d. Councilor Johnson questioned Section 2 on Page 2 of the
proposed Ordinance. This section provides for an
overhead easement; however, she expressed concern about
future underground easement needs. Consensus was to add
language to provide for an underground easement.
t e. Public testimony: None.
f. Public Hearing was closed.
g. ORDINANCE NO. 91-18 AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE VACATION
OF A PORTION OF SW 90TH AVENUE LOCATED NORTH OF SW NORTH
DAKOTA STREET, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY,
OREGON.
f. Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor
Schwartz, to adopt Ordinance No. 91-18, with the
amendment that wording be added to Section to on Page 2
to provide for and easement possible future underground
utilities.
The motion passed by a unanimous vote of Council present.
5. PUBLIC HEARING - PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION HEARING FOR A
PORTION OF SW 135TH AVENUE SOUTH OF SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD
Proposal for vacation of a portion of S.W. Scholls Ferry Road
was initiated by the City Council on May 21, 1991 at the
request of Bill and E. Aleen Gross.
Public hearing was continued to August 27, 1991.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1991 - PAGE 4
Ell!
6. CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDING PARKS SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
~ TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE PROVISIONS
a. Senior Planner Ron Bunch reviewed the staff report. The
proposed ordinance would repeal ordinance No. 87-71 and
adopt a new Parks System Development Charge (SDC)
Ordinance and bring the City into compliance with state
statute. The ordinance, if adopted, would not increase
the Parks SDC at this time. Staff recommends these
revisions be made when the "Ten Year Park Improvement
Program" (Parks 2000 Action Plan) is completed.
b. ORDINANCE NO. 91-19 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF
TIGARD PARKS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE; REPEALING
ORDINANCE 87-71; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
C. Motion by Councilor Schwartz, seconded by Councilor
Johnson, to --do pt Ordinance No. 91-19.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council
present.
7. CONSIDER ORDINANCE AMENDING LIBRARY BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES AS
OUTLINED IN THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE
a. City Administrator Reilly reviewed the staff report. The
Library Board has recommended revisions in the following
sections of their Policy Manual:
Section IV, Reconsideration of Library Materials
• Section VII, Privacy of Records
• Section VIII, Meeting Room Use
• Board Responsibilities (Part of the Policy Manual
as well as TMC, Chapter 2.36.040)
The proposed revisions will more accurately reflect
current procedures and, in the section on Privacy of
Records, compliance with state law.
Council complimented the Library Board for their
continued proactive approach in their role.
b. ORDINANCE NO. 91-20 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD
MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC), CHAPTER 2.36.040, OUTLINING THE
LIBRARY BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
C. Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor
Schwartz, to adopt Ordinance No. 91-20.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council
present.
i
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 16, 1991 - PAGE 5
a
C S. NON-AGENDA: (See Mayors comment in item 1.4 above.)
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into
Executive Session at 8:45 p.m. under the provisions of ORS
192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real
property transactions, current and pending litigation issues.
10. ADJOURNMENT: 9:00 p.m.
C
At a atherine Wheatley, City Rec der
ayo , ~61tV`xsf Tigard
Date : Lac GI / ,L.Jt~
h:\recorder\can\ccm716.91
4
t
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 16, 1991 - PAGE 6
1
Y
eS
r a
TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Le
981 Tr 7007 ;
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360 Notice
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075
,e i
Legal Notice Advertising
• • ❑ Tearsheet Notice 7V'
City of Tigard • ❑ Duplicate AM
PO Box23397 ;
• Tigard, Or. 97223
1
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
}
STATE OF OREGON, ) =Eff
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss' '
I, Judith Koehlery
being first duly sworn, depose and say(iat i a[n the Advertising i°"T "
Director, or his principal clerk, of the t gar S
a newspaper of general circulat' a as efined in ORS 193.010 r'
t k h and 193.020; published at arg in the
oresal c un a sta;e; that the
&unci`~ ~tu~dy eetzng ,
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the q' mho ,o
entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and
consecutive in the following issues:
July 11, 1991
r
+a `k
~ .2
11111 1151
Subscribed and swor to before me thisllth day of July 1991
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commis 'o xpires:
k
AFFIDAVIT
AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE: 7/16/91
(Limited to 2 minutes or less, please)
Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The
Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda,
but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff.
Please contact the City Administrator prior to the start of the
meeting. Thank you.
AME & ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED
- 0 1- 4;W g2
n 7 9 9117 1,4 f .s e r~
4
I
Please sign in to testify on the following:
r
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4 DATE: 7/16/91
PUBLIC HEARING - PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION
HEARING FOR A PORTION OF SW 90TH AVENUE -
NORTH OF SW NORTH DAKOTA STREET
PLEASE PRINT
NAME & ADDRESS NAME & ADDRESS
C
r
s
t
' CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
In the Matter of the Proposed
nai & nlvs c1-1S Gt-(q 4 ct1-old
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Washington ) ss
City of Tigard )
I, Q. begin first duly
sworn, on oath) depose and say:
That I posted in the following public and conspicuous
places, a copy of Ordinance Number (s) q t - l;~ c, - I ci 4
r ( C,- which were adopted at the Council
Meeting dated '-I I 1~olci copy (s) of said ordinance (s) being
hereto ac ed and'by reference made a part hereof, on the oc =Z_
date of 1991.
( 1. Tigard Civic Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon
` 2. Washington Federal Saving Bank, 12260 SW Main St.,
Tigard, Oregon
3. Safeway Store, Tigard Plaza, SW Hall Blvd., Tigard,
Oregon
4. Albertson's Store, Corner of.Pacific Hwy. (State Hwy. 99)
and SW Durham Road, Tigard, Oregon
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ~ ~ ddate of ,
19el-/.
Lac,~~
Nota Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires: c3 -S'r73
h:\logih\jo\cwpost
ri
1
i.
Y
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
V ORDINANCE NO. 91-IS
AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF SW 90TH AVENUE
LOCATED NORTH OF SW NORTH DAKOTA STREET, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD,
WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON.
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council initiated this vacation request on
a May 21, 1991 in accordance with Section 15.08.040 of the Tigard
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, this portion of S.W. 90th Avenue is a dedicated public
right-of-way, giving the public rights over the land for street and
utility improvements; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this vacation is to vacate an unimproved
portion SW 90th Avenue that is no longer needed because access is
available to all abutting properties; and
WHEREAS, the property owners Charlotte and Daniel Cook and Charles
Hing support the vacation; and
WHEREAS, Portland General Electric requests an overhead easement
for the existing pole and anchor presently in the right of way: and
( WHEREAS, all other affected service providers, including utility
companies and emergency services, have reviewed the vacation
proposal and have no objections to it; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with ORS 271.100, the TMC 15.08.110 the
Council fixed a time and place for the public hearing and the
Recorder published notice and posted notice in the area to be
vacated; and
WHEREAS, notice has been mailed to all property owners abutting
said vacation area and all owners in the affected area, as
described by ORS 271.080; and
WHEREAS, The Council, having held a hearing on July 9, 1991 finds
the public interest will not be_ prejudiced by the vacation as
provided by ORS 271.120 and TMC 15.0-8.130; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds it is in the public interest to approve
the request to vacate the unimproved portion of SW 90th Avenue
located north of the intersection of SW 90th Avenue and SW North
Dakota Street.
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOrFS:
C ORDINANCE NO. 91- ~b PAGE 1
F -
r -
SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby orders the vacation
of the unimproved portion of SW 90th Avenue located
north of the intersection of SW 90th Avenue and SW
North Dakota Street, as described on the attached
"Exhibit A" and shown on the attached "Exhibit B",
and by reference made part hereof.
SECTION 2: The Tigard City Council further orders that the
vacation by subject to the following condition:
-
I 1. The applicants shall responsible for u~ le for
providing an overhea easement for the
existing pole and chor presently in the
right of way. tvr.0; 1VY ,
~o EVA► CrCL' d- l.t&tUTres
SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective on the 31st day Le~
after enactment by the City Council, approval by(~mun
the Mayor, and after a certified copy has been tv-L
recorded with the Washington County Clerk,7JL,/,q(_
Assessor, and Surveyor.
PASSED: By _ UMOLO.'lMUc 5 vote of the Council members present U' `f
afte being read by number and title only, this L~& day
of , 1991.
~iC]
Catherine Wheately, City Recor r
t-
U.01day APPROVED: This of , 1991.
Gera . Edwards, Mayor
A oved-- as o o
Dat
F
ORDINANCE NO. 91- r0 PAGE 2
C
i
j
r
f -
EXHIBIT "A"
A tract of land located in the D.C. Graham D.L.C. No. 52 in the southeast
quarter•of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian,
City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, described as follows:
Beginning on the east line of Lot 25, Graham Acres, a recorded plat,
Washington County Plat Records, at its point of intersection with the
southwesterly right-of-way line of Oregon State Highway 217; thence South
00017' West, 160.25 feet on the west right-of-way line of SW 90th Avenue
(formerly Heintz Avenue) to the point of curvature of a twenty foot radius
curve to the right; thence southwesterly on said twenty foot radius curve (the
chord bears South 45055'35" West, 28.11 feet) 31.16 feet; thence North 89034'
East, on the north right-of-way line of SW North Dakota Street, 90.0 feet to
the point of curvature of a 20 foot radius curve concave to the northeast;
thence northwesterly on said 20 foot radius curve (the chord bears North
45004'35" West, 28.46 feet), 31.67 feet; thence North 00017' East, on the east -
right-of-way line of said 90th Avenue approximately 110 feet to said
southwesterly highway right=of-way line; thence northwesterly, on said highway
right-of-way line, approximately 70 feet to the point of beginning.
sb/1745D
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
[RAID suRvr-_raR
OP.FG jy
- ~tAAY ~a•sas
JON T. FEIGION
1F2252
'`~'s u 7Cn t so
a
os A„ a
00•
3900 3.~i7 A.
Ufa
Ac
.62
so
of y- by w o
2600
Z
a
30 27 ti 4° GRAHAM
f 26 LO-TS 13re
ti
105
.602
1OA~ 260%
2603 w 7c
25 0 0
28 ° r~
29 ,,~~✓r~J 23 - x
T 10o is
40
os ZS a o°ao, X
Jos - a rr•,~ 0,
.Q4.43 c ffAMAti zoo ypr
Amp 130 p.1 "C. 34 Kt IN 2700
JOKE c NtC z7 oz
No Wra 10249 114 a 66Ac-
•
rr/.'U. X p W
• vs~ ~ sNm
' p z0 AL ~
2200 ~x o 0 2 200 °o
t * SS9~3'► w z
7 x ~r
y 270i
n _
.39Ac. a C$• 4975 -t
Cam- " 200 z
O`
30 n w 200 462.33
_ 2100 ~ o ~ ` >re9.34w p69°s4 a ~
•
2 i
4,± ._.7.-► 1T3. 96 \ 2~ Ac. a:
sew 603 \ m
• ~ N
CD .24 Ac-
or.1~ 288
, 300 ° r Z 9• I r~+
120 1}J o,
t t Cj? 2000 w 2602 00
i r
3 a .26 Ac' ~ as
X.40 p M 73.64 W
~ w 1~ 4 40.473.3 NIL a Sd- C 162.1 .„n
0
569 4•MR 6489 SQ o
329.2 464.9 66.3 2Q N
49 1v ° a 224.6 3000 z
r r~ 2 Ac-
\ 2900 a W + ` a
L~ .65Ac• = C
14
444 •
r: 2603
x
/ CITY OF TIGARD, OR
t ORDINANCE NO
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF TIGARD PARRS
SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE; REPEALING ORDINANCE 87-71; AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Tigard City Council hereby finds:
A. ORS 223.208 and 223.297 through 223.314 grant the City
the authority to impose system development charges (SDC) to
equitably spread the cost of essential park land acquisition and
capital improvements to new development.
B. The purpose of the Parks SDC is to impose an equitable
share of the public cost of park land acquisition and park
development upon those developments that create-the need for or
increase the demands on capital improvements. The Parks SDC is
separate from and in addition to any applicable tax, assessment,
charge, fee in lieu of assessment, or fee otherwise provided by law
or the cost of complying with requirements or conditions imposed
upon a land development. The Parks SDC is to be considered in the
nature of a charge for a service rendered or to be rendered, or a
charge for facilities provided or to be provided.
C. The Parks SDC is a charge upon the act of development by
whomever seeks the development permit. It is a fee for service
because it contemplates a development's receipt of essential
municipal services based upon the nature of that development. The
timing and extent of any development are within the control and
discretion of the developer.
D. The Parks SDC is not intended to be a tax on property or
on a property owner as a direct consequence of ownership of
property within the meaning of Sec llb, Art. XI of the Oregon
Constitution or the legislation implementing that section.
E. Even if the SDC herein imposed is viewed under Sec llb,
Art XI of the Oregon Constitution as a tax against property or
against a property owner as a direct consequence of ownership of
that property, it is an incurred charge within the meaning of that
Section and the statutes implementing it because:
1) It allows the owner to control the quantity of the park
services by determining the extent of development to
occur upon the property.
2) It allows the owner to determine when park services are
to be initiated or increased by controlling when the
development occurs.
C PAGE 1
v
r
3) State law and the ordinances of this city require the
owner to provide certain basic infrastructure services to
the property when it is developed for human occupancy.
The provision of these basic services, including park
facilities, are a routine obligation of the owner of the
affected property and essential to the welfare of the
community.
F. The Parks SDC imposed by this ordinance is based upon the
cost of providing existing or planned for capital improvements and
does not impose a charge on persons not receiving a service and
otherwise imposing a burden upon the City's existing capital
improvements.
G. Given the mobility of the population and the geographic
size of the City, most park improvement projects and land
acquisitions benefit new development regardless of where in the
City it occurs. Development is occurring throughout the City and
no single area of the City is experiencing or has experienced such
a high level of new development as to require SDC revenue from
development in one area to be dedicated to that same area. It is
more cost efficient to use SDC revenue from new development in the
entire community to finance the growth related portions of park
capital improvements and land acquisition based upon city-wide
priorities rather than to hold the SDC revenue generated in one
area of the community for improvements in just that area.
H. Among the basic services which the City provides are park
facilities. These are facilities which are necessary to maintain
an adequate level of recreational space and facilities as specified
in the Natural Features and Open Space Element of the Tigard
Comprehensive Plan. These facilities may include but are not
limited to mini-neighborhood parks, neighborhood parks, community
centers, and other recreational facilities which include but are
not limited to athletic fields, playgrounds, restrooms and picnic
facilities, hard court areas, and pedestrian and bicycle pathways.
I. Whenever the City Council has authorized an
intergovernmental agreement which permits the City to impose a
Parks SDC outside the city limits, the Community Development
Director may establish the methodology, and after its adoption by
Council resolution, impose the charge and collect and expend the
revenue as if it was for City park capital improvements.
Section 2: As contained in this ordinance, the following
definitions shall apply:
Development: Development means constructing a building or
making a physical change in the use or appearance of a
structure or land which increase the usage of any capital
improvements or which creates the need for additional park
capital improvements.
{ PAGE 2
r
t
i
Public Improvement Charge: A fee for costs associated with
capital improvements to be constructed after the date the fee
is adopted. This term shall have the same meaning as the term
"improvement feel, as used in ORS 223.297 through 223.314.
Qualified Public Improvements: A capital improvement that is:
a) Required as a condition of development approval;
b) Identified in a capital improvement plan, park plan or
any other facility plan intended to guide the development
of public infrastructure.
c) Not located on or contiguous to a parcel of land that is
subject of the development approval.
Reimbursement fee: A fee for costs associated with capital
improvements constructed or under construction on the date the
fee is adopted.
Systems development charae: A reimbursement fee, a public
improvement charge or a combination thereof assessed or
collected upon issuance of: 1) A building permit; 2) A
development permit for development not requiring the issuance
of a building permit; 3) A permit to connect to the water,
sanitary sewer, or storm sewer systems.
Section 3: Cost of Complying with the Conditions of Land Use
Approval are Separate:
The cost of complying with the requirements or conditions imposed
by a land use decision are separate from and in addition to the
Parks System Development Charge, unless the improvement required
qualifies for a credit under this ordinance.
Section 4: SDC Compliance with State Law:
The revenues received from the Parks Systems Development Charge
shall be budgeted and expended as provided for by state law. The
accounting of such revenues and expenditures required by state law
shall be included in the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report required by ORS Chapter. 294. The capital improvement plan
required by state law as the basis for expending systems
development charge revenue for park capital improvements shall be
based upon the attached Exhibit "A" which also identifies the
methodology which is used to establish the SDC.
PAGE 3
i•
Section 5: Exemptions From the Parks SDC: The following are
exempt from the Parks SDC:
1) Any development which does not increase the need for or usage
of the City's parks facilities. This shall include any i
modification to a dwelling that does not increase the number
of dwelling units within the structure or does not change the
use of the structure.
2) Whenever the impact of individual developments presents
special or unique situations such that the calculated fee is
not proportionate to the actual impact of the development, the
feepayer may opt to submit an alternative fee calculation
study addressing whether the development provides public or
private facilities which provide additional public parks
capacity or which lessen demand on public facilities. The
study shall be prepared by qualified professionals and the
methodology shall be consistent with the best professional
process.
The study and supporting documentation shall be submitted to
the City Administrator who shall consider the study and
determine whether to adjust the fee. The adjustment may be up
to 25% of the calculated charge for-the project. The decision
of the City Manager may be appealed to the City Council by.
submitting a written appeal within.60 days of the decision.
Section 6: Collection of System Development Charge: The Parks
System Development Charge is payable upon the issuance of:
a) A building permit; or
b) A development permit for development not requiring a
building permit.
If development is commenced without an appropriate permit, the
Parks SDC shall be payable upon the earliest date that a permit was
required.
The Community Development Director or his/her designee shall
collect the system development charge from the permittee. The
Director shall not issue any permit until the charge has been paid
in full.
Section 7: SDC Credits:
A credit shall be given -for the cost of a qualified park
improvement associated with a development. The credit provided for
by this section shall be only four the parks system development
charge. The credit is transferable and can be used against parks
charges for other developments within the City but must be used
within five years of issuance.
/ PAGE 4
l
Section 8: Parks SDC Appeal Procedures:
1) A person aggrieved by a decision required or permitted to be
made by the Community Development Director or his/her designee
or a person challenging the propriety of an expenditure of r
system development charge revenues may appeal the decision or
the expenditure by filing with the Community Development
Director's office a written request for consideration by the
hearings officer and by paying a $235 appeal fee. Such appeal
shall describe with particularity the decision or the parks
system expenditure which is being appealed.
2) An appeal of an expenditure must be filed within two years of
the date of the alleged improper expenditure. The methodology
shall not be at issue when taking an appeal of an expenditure.
3) An appeal challenging the methodology may only be filed within
sixty (60) working days following passage of the resolution
adopting a methodology.
4) The appeal shall state:
a) The name and address of the appellant;
b) The nature of the determination being appealed;
C) The reason the determination is incorrect; and
d) What the correct determination of the appeal should be or
r how the correct determination should be derived
An appellant who fails to file such a statement within the
time permitted waives his/her objections, and his/her appeal
shall be dismissed.
5) Unless the appellant and the City agree to a longer period, an
appeal shall be heard by a Hearings Officer within 15 working
days of the receipt of the notice of intent to appeal. At
least 10 working days prior to the hearing, the City shall
mail notice of the time and location thereof to the appellant.
6) The Hearings Officer shall hear and determine the appeal on
the basis of the appellant's written statement and any
additional evidence he/she deems appropriate. At the hearing,
the appellant may present testimony and oral argument
personally or by counsel. The rules of evidence as used by
courts of law do not apply.
7) The appellant shall carry the burden of proving that the
determination being appealed is incorrect and what the correct
determination should be or how a correct determination should
be derived.
8) The Hearings Officer shall issue a written decision within 10
working days after the hearing date and decision of the
hearings officer shall be final.
PAGE 5
3
9) When the appeal challenges the system development charge
methodology, the Hearings Officer shall prepare a written
report and recommendation an submit it to the Community
Development Director for presentation to the Council at its
next regular meeting. By Council resolution, the report and
recommendations of the hearings officer shall be approved,
modified or rejected and different methodology adopted. The
implementation of any change in methodology shall be suspended
until the Council has acted. Any legal action contesting the
Council's decision on the appeal shall be filed within 60 days
of the Council's decision.
Section 9: Parks SDC Methodology:
The methodology used to establish a Parks SDC shall consider the
cost of then-existing facilities, prior contributions by then-
existing users, and other relevant factors identified by the
Community Development Director. The methodology shall promote the
objective that future system users shall contribute an equitable '
share of the cost of then-existing facilities. The methodology
used to establish the public improvement charge shall consider the
cost of projected capital improvements needed to increase the
capacity of the park system to which the fee is related.
i
Hereinafter, the methodology and the associated systems development.
charge(s) may be changed by the City Council by resolution. j,
t The Community Development Director shall review the methodology
established by this ordinance after. it has been implemented for
four months and shall report the result to the Tigard Parks and
Recreation Board and the City Council or such other public body of
the City concerned with the impact of City imposed charges and the
cost of capital improvements financed in whole or in part by the
systems development charge. Following that review, the Community
Development Director, upon findings that conditions are such that
warrant changes to the methodology, shall propose such revisions
for consideration by the City Council.
Section 10: Systems Development Charges Established:
A Parks System Development Charge is hereby imposed upon all new
residential development within the City as follows:
a). Single Family Dwelling.. .....$500.00
b) Manufactured Homes on Individual Lots ...$500.00
C) Multi-Family Units ...$300.00
d) Spaces Within a Manufactured Home Park ...$250.00
The methodology used to establish the above system development
charges, which is attached as Exhibit "A", is also hereby adopted.
PAGE 6
L
Section 1]_ Repeal of Ordinance 87-71:
Ordinance 87-71, attached as Exhibit "B" is hereby repealed.
Section 11: Declaration of an Emergency: i
Because of the need to have new development bear its equitable
share of the cost for public facilities, the matters herein
contained concern the public welfare, and in order to allow its
order implementation, an emergency is declared and this ordinance
shall become effective upon its signing.
PASSED: By ( ►'1QVA 1 n I0-k5 vote of all Council members
present after being read by number and title only, this
I day of diL~ , 1991.
C 'ne Wheatley, Cit Recorde
APPROVED: This CX day o , 1991.
Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor
f Aprr. das to fo
l
C htfoEnhy/
\~4,4AA'1-14
Date/
C PAGE 7
rd/sdcfindl.prk
r
EXHIBIT "A" PARKS SDC METHODOLOGY
CITY OF TIGARD:
YEAR 2000 PARKS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS LIST
Based on 1991 Land and Facilities Standards and Costs and
Assuming a Population Growth of 10,700 persons
Component Emi.sti_ng Amount or Cost Cost
Standard Facility Units P/Person
Required
Parks - Land Acqusi-
tion and Development:
- Community, 4.03/Acre/ 43.12 Ac. $40,000/Ac. $161.20
- Neighborhood, 1,000 pop.
- Mini-Parks
Basic Park Improvements:' .50 sq. ft. 87.77
Facility Requirements to Maintain
1991 Standards:2
Softball/Baseball .069/1,000/pop 1 $57,0003 ea. 5.32
ball Diamonds
Multi-Use Hard .069/1,000/pop. 1 7,700 ea. .71
Courts
Soccer Fields .10/1,000/pop. 1 64,800` ea. 6.05
Playground .34/1,000/pop. 4 20,000 ea. 7.48
Equipment Sets
Horseshoe Court .068/1,000/pop. 1 500 ea. .05
Picnic Shelters .068/1,000/pop. 1 10,000 ea. .93
Restrooms .34 fixtures/ 4 10,000 fix. 3.74
1,000/pop.
Total Possible Park System Development Charge Per Person $273.25
'Basic Park Improvements include grading, basic irrigation,
primary pedestrian paths, lawn development and landscaping. $.50
sq. ft. is the estimated current standard of improvement.
'The facility amounts have been rounded to the nearest whole
number.
'The actual cost of constructing a softball diamond is
approximately $1.20 per square foot. In this case the basic park
improvement cost of $.50 sq. ft. has been taken into account.
' A regulation soccer field costs about $1.20 sq. ft to
construct. The cost per facility has taken into account the $.50
sq. ft. basic park improvement cost.
t
EXHIBIT "A" Continued:
System Development Charge By Type of Unit
1) Single Family Unit (2.626 Persons Per Units * $273.25 = $717.56
2) Manufactured Homes on Individual Lots (2.626 Persons Per Unit
$273.35) = $717.56
3) Multi-Family Units (1.858 Persons Per Unit * $273.25) = $507.70
4) Manufactured Home Spaces in Manufactured Home Parks (1.858 Persons Per
Unit * $273.25) _ $507.70
rb/sdcnewrb
'Average household size as per 1987 Portland Metropolitan
( Statistical Area estimates and information from the Portland State
l University Center for Census and Population Research.
s'
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 87- 'f
C AN OR111:NANCE Of 1*11E TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AMENDING SECTION 3.16.030 OF THE
)TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES - PARKS AND
RECREATT.ON FACILITIES, AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WIIFREAS, a systom development charge is imposed on new residential development
to acquire, dovrlop, and expand additional park Arid recreation facilities: and
WINiRFA;, t•he charges currently in effect- have riot- been adjusted since 1984
even though costs associated with acquisition, development, and expansion of
park and recreation facilities have increased: and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a park plan as approved by the Park
Board that sets forth the costs related to park facility expansion: and
WHEREAS, a survey of neighboring communities indicates that the City of ej
Tigard's current systems development charge for parks is well under the J
average of ether City's in the area; and
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council desires to remove the formula for determining
charges from the Tigard Municipal Code and to set the charges by resolution
From this tine forth.
THE CTTY OF T.IGARD ORDATNS AS FOLLOWS:
Section t: 'Section 3.16.030 Formula for determining charge' is amended by
deleting the existing language and adopting the following
replacement language:
"3.16.030 Determination of charges. The Tigard City Council
shall set the systems development charge by resolution."
Secl.ion 2: This ordinance shall be effective on and after January 1, 1988.
PASSED: Ry L-knC~r, 1moy~s vote of all Council members present
after being read by number and title only, this day
of 1987.
APPROVED: This 7 X-oreenl. Wilson, City Recorder
~ f
day of 1987.
Thomas M. Brian, Mayor
Approvad as to form:
_ Lti-~~J -C C,tr->1
t tt-orney
l Date
1 cs/1900D
ORDINANCE NO. 87.-_2L_
i
C
t
i
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
C
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC), CHAPTER 2.36.040,
OUTLINING THE LIBRARY BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the Tigard Library Board has reviewed the Library Policy Manual
which includes reference to TMC 2.36.040 - Board Responsibilities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the changes proposed by the
Library Board to restate the duties and responsibilities of the Board;
and
WHEREAS, the Council is in agreement with the Board's recommended
changes which will more accurately reflect the duties of an advisory
board and how the Board carries out its' responsibilities.
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 2.36.040, Board--
Responsibilities, is amended as outlined in the attached
Exhibit "A."
SECTION 2: This -ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its
passage by the Council, approval by the Mayor, and
posting by the City Recorder.
l PASSED: By unanimous vote of all Council members present
after being read by number and title only, this
day of , 1991.
W
Ca in Wheatley, City Record-f-
L~L
APPROVED: This day of ; 1991.
Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor
A p ved as to fo
Ty ttorne
I(~ 1 t
Date
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
Page 1
EXHIBIT "A"
The Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 2.36.040 currently reads as follows:
2.36.040 Board Responsibilities. The library board shall have
the following responsibilities:
(1) To advise the city administrator and city council of findings
and concerns relating to the management, control and operation of city
library facilities;
(2) To formulate for recommendation to the city council, rules,
regulations and policies as deemed desirable for the governance,
maintenance of order, safety, operation and utilization of library
facilities and to monitor the application of all adopted rules,
regulations and policies;
(3) To monitor the operation of the library for the purpose of
identifying any deficiencies in the level of service being provided to
the public and to recommend to the city administrator and city council
appropriate remedial actions where deficiencies are fund to exist;
(4) To make recommendations to the budget officer regarding
financial needs of the library during the preparation of the annual
budget;
(5) To encourage and support active volunteerism in support of the
use and improvement of the library facilities;
(6) To ascertain the library needs of the community and to present
to the city council evaluations and recommendations to present to the
city council evaluations and recommendations regarding needs and desires
as expressed by library patrons;
(7) To perform such other duties and to provide such other advice
as the council may request from time to time in furtherance of the goal
of providing the best library service to the public as is possible under
the constraints of available revenue, space, manpower and other public=
resources.
The foregoing wording shall be replaced in its entirety with the
following:
2 36 040 Board Responsibilities. The library board shall have
the following responsibilities:
(1) To represent the library needs of the community and
communicate those needs to the City Council;
(2) To recommend library policies as deemed desirable in the
operation and utilization of library facilities to the Council;
f (3) To encourage and support active volunteerism in support of the
use and improvement of library facilities;
(4) To advise, as the council may request, in furtherance of the
goal to provide the best library service to the public as possible
within the constraints of available resources, space and manpower.
H:\login\cathy\Hbrary
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
Page 2
r
t
E
G2cICCA - Sf ~ ScsSi tn'1
7/l 14l
PROPOSALS FOR WATER SYSTEM STUDY
After reviewing the four submitted proposals, three are clearly superior and deserve further consideration. The following is a comparison of the
top three proposals. Elements of the proposals that are pertinent to selection are compared, followed by information concerning the organizations
and/or individuals in the organizations.
Proiect Understandinv
Economic and Engineering Services James M. Montgomery Murray, Smith & Associates
succinct and to the point. They exhibit an Detailed explanation of what is needed by the Right on target in terms of what was asked
understanding that this study is a decision city including existing circumstances and for in the request and what was talked about
making tool rather than an "engineering information on each element. Exhibits in meetings. They did their homework by
study" as well as what information is understanding of the need for a decision collecting and referencing 13 available
required for that decision. making tool and suggests that studies, maps and documents that could be
"institutional/legal issues" are a part of useful in the study.
this study. They also suggest that impacts
of City withdrawal be considered.
Firm alifications
Economic and Engineering Services James M. Montgomery Murray, Smith & Associates
Firm has been in existence since 1978 and has Firm was organized in 1945 and has 33 offices Firm was organized in 1980 in Portland and
completed numerous water system projects some throughout the U.S. and 6 permanent foreign has completed numerous water related projects
of a similar nature to what is required for offices. Firm specialty is water related in the Northwest since that time. Conducted
Tigard. In addition to Portland, the firm engineering and they have extensive relevant the same type of study for the City of
has offices in Washington State, British experience. Portland prior to City assumption of
Columbia and Washington D.C. operation of 10 water districts.
Method of Approach
Economic and Engineering Services James M. Montgomery Murray, Smith & Associates
The study is broken into nine separate tasks Suggests creating a City Review Committee Suggests an approach that follows but
including a final report. ' The study begins comprised of Pat Reilly, Randy Wooley, one or elaborates upon the City's outline as
with an initial Project meeting with two council members and John Acker with the identified in the request for proposals. They
representatives from the City and each water option of including representatives from the will prepare and submit to the City seven
district to discuss the goals of the study water districts, and the Cities of Durham and technical memorandums sumo izing the
and to gain a common understanding of project Ring city. findings of each major work task. A technical
No NMI
issues. Two progress meetings and a The project is broken into 13 tasks with an
presentation of the final report to the City initial meeting and four review/progress review meeting will be held to review the
council are also called for. Generally meetings culminated by a presentation of the content and findings of the memorandums prior
accepted engineering and rate-making methods final report to the city Council. They also to preparation of the final report. The
will be used. One work task is to review include review of organizational, final report will be presented to the City
financial, legal and institutional issues institutional and legal issues which, again Council, City Staff and interested public
which we would need to determine if we want we would need to determine the correct agencies, in particular the affected water
done now or in a future phase. timing. Four "task reports" would be prepared purveyors.
during the process that summarize particular
tasks. In addition, a draft report will be
submitted for review prior to preparation of
the final report.
Project Team
Economic and Engineering Services James M. Montgomery Murray, Smith & Associates
The project team consists of five qualified The project consists of five qualified The project team consists of four qualified
individuals; four with engineering individuals: three with engineering individuals, all with engineering
backgrounds and a financial analyst. backgrounds, one with administrative backgrounds.
background and an attorney.
Budget
Economic and Engineering Services James M. Montgomery Murray, Smith & Associates
$28,750 as defined in scope of services A range of $29,380 - 39,940 depending upon a Estimated fees of $38,150 based on their
final determination of scope-of-work and understanding of the project and the proposed
level-of-effort that would be determined scope of work.
through discussions with the City after
consultant selection.
Other Information
Economic and Engineering Services James M. Montgomery Murray, Smith & Associates
This is the firm that has conducted most of This firm is well known nationally for water This is a rather small local firm with a
the studies undertaken by the Tigard Water related work. Ed Tenny, former director of solid background in waterworks. None of the
District. EES and Gil Meigs, the proposed the Portland Water Bureau, is on the project project team has any known connection with
project manager for the Tigard project, are team working on e v a l u a t i n g either water district.
involved in the regional water source study institutional/organizational aspects of the
sponsored by the Portland Water Bureau. study plus analyzing water supply issues.
low
each g°Yond the
ea H. Montgomery if Tigard assumes
Seryjces and Jam entities national
and Engineering of impacts to othfirmgring range from tin-between.
of Economic Bata a review ine- The is Proposals M Montgomery sugg can determ and Enginee that wo 1d be useful
sale. conomic Produce roduct
well organized PrOp° issues - James •water indn to as far as sized to a good P
Ail firm , of in the Smith F, Aasocia with raid-
s submitted reePonaive anizationalthon4ht have the ability of experience to
eat a look at org :e al orda,
and sugg s. All firms the local firm of Murray, track rec dt on
info
M d bYebe rmati
physical system based on the resources an
of the water SYett~omery to the alified and dS can met as
operation highly a firm that has that our nee
prominence of James • Montgomery are all the study, 21 f
. firm so
viduals on the prefect ndence of flexibility o a flexibility, we °
d City• the credibility and intat phase, and 31 this rk
to the negotiate and ,+O
implementation p Given
into the otiated at our discretion- rtunity to
other factors to consider , ifdnecessary, sed Or neg there will be OPP°
h on this work, be as PYOp° In any case,
follow thr°u9 ,cork could b t our needs' and that staff begin
is gathered* that the Scope-Of- to better fit the project. for Tigardr
stated Scope-of-work roceed stem study
reV68t sent to these firms altering the scope as we P lete the water SY era if
The with the idea refine the study Suited t0 cO1°p and rate Pay
Select a firm to further r the firm befit anizations
ith the chosen firm selected as the City, other erg
a Montgomery be ended because, the way-
Jamea M- is recomm implications to
along
eceasarY
Staff recommends that James M. Montgomery JMM would consider
to egotiate a contract- the study, shape the study as °
1 changes
n the nature of system* to review and re- and organizational
altering~ent of the water le pportunitY withdrawal
Without significantly mana9 ° iremente for
I. the City were to assume manner that allows ~Ap
such as legal and Procedural reY°
They approach the study in a participatory
2• assessment of implementation issues
The protect includes an
3. that may be needed.
waterpro-com
7/16/91
C
LIA A I~I 11A I E
y
~vEI.
LED Dm I C D
CoR
P
` July 1991
DATE: May 15, 1991
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Mary L. Tobias
RE: President's Report
April 15 - May 10, 1991
This month much of the staff's time was spent following two major issues
at the legislature: auto emissions and urban renewal. In addition, we
tracked the Transportation Planning Rule through its adoption by LCDC.
Casino Night was our most demanding program and the 1991/21 budget required
the most administrative time.
PROGRAMS
REGIONAL PLANNING
As the implementation of Ballot Measure 5 moved closer to completion at
the legislature, the issue that emerged which is of concern to TVEDC and our
members (particularly the local governments) is the status of tax increment
financing for urban renewal. We continued the work that was begun last
month to support local government in urging the House Revenue & School
Finance subcommittee to adopt new language that would not jeopardize the
outstanding bonds for existing urban renewal districts and would enable
cities to continue to use tax increment financing as a mechanism for funding
infrastructure development in the future. To my knowledge, TVEDC was the
only private sector organization that provided testimony on the bill. We
worked with the cities of Tualatin, Beaverton, Hillsboro and Tigard and with
the League of Oregon Cities in presenting our support.
The legislature has passed and the governor has signed SB 298 B-
Engrossed, the bill that establishes the METRO Charter Committee to draft a
home rule charter for the Metropolitan Service District. I have been asked
by the cities of Washington County to serve as their representative on the
committee. The committee has just begun to meet for the purposes of
organization under the leadership of Hardy Myers, chairman. METRO has
indicated that they would like the committee to have a charter to the voters
in May 1992. In order to accomplish that goal, the committee would have to
complete its work by September of this year. There is general skepticism
among the committee members that this can be done. It looks like the
earliest a charter could go to the voters will be in November of 1992.
The Council for Economic Development in Oregon (CEDO) held a regional
meeting in Salem in April. Invitees included representatives from the
public and private sectors of Benton, Lane, Lincoln and Linn counties. This
regional briefing explored some of the ways start-up companies are being
assisted through start-up incubators in Benton County and the advantages of
C business recruitment networks as exemplified by the Willamette Valley
Economic Alliance. Speaker of the House Larry Campbell gave an informal
briefing to update us on issues before the legislature including the TVEDC
"TVEDC President's Report
April 15 - May 10, 1991
Page 2
distribution of lottery funds for economic development. Delna Jones brought
everyone up to date on the implementation of measure 5 and on the urban
renewal bill. Senator Joyce Cohen gave a briefing on higher education,
particularly the future of higher ed in the Portland metropolitan area. ,
TVEDC Chairman Pat Ritz and I did a presentation to the Washington County
legislative delegation at their monthly brown bag lunch this month. Pat
brought to their attention our interest in the air emissions bill, urban
renewal, higher education and affordable housing.
The State Agency Council on Growth in the Portland Metropolitan Area met
for a full day retreat this month. I attended this meeting as an observer
and felt somewhat reassured at the end of the day that the council is
becoming more focused and directed. Governor Roberts attended-for part of
the session and she plans for the council to continue to meet. In fact, the
governor asked that the council explore expanding its interests to include
other growth areas (e.g. Bend). Certainly, the agency directors are still
asking the questions that they began to address last year - who should
direct growth management in Portland, should there be a change in governance
in the Portland area, should the state take a stronger role, etc. However,
I do believe there is more consideration being given to the role that local
government plays in local service delivery.
At this time, we are still waiting for the Board of Commissioners to
reconstitute the Economic Development Task Force Steering Committee. We are
hoping that the project will be back on track by July 1, 1991 so that we can
complete the Economic Development Plan by the end of the next fiscal year.
We still think there might be merit in consulting the county about
restructuring the process and basing it entirely in the private sector. As
we noted in February, this would mean that we would have to carefully
analyze the funding and staffing issues that changing the process would
necessitate.
I presented quarterly briefings at the Durham, Beaverton and Hillsboro
city councils this month. The issues of auto emissions and transportation
were of particular interest to the councils.
The PDC Marketing Portland Coordinating Council met this month to discuss
the impacts measure 5 will have on the members. In addition to analyzing
the direct impacts of Mea''aure 5, the council got a status update on urban
renewal from PDC's staff attorney and Hillsboro's David Lawrence.
i
i'
i
TVEDC President's Report
April 15 - May 10 , 1991
Page 3
ISSUES MANAGEMENT
Western Bypass: ODOT has been presenting the Statement of Purpose and Need
for the Western Bypass Study to Washington County and the cities for
adoption. This document defines the transportation problems in Washington
County and essentially says there is a purpose to conduct the Western Bypass
study and there is a need to solve the transportation problems defined to
date. STOP has been at all of the meetings where ODOT has appeared and
objected to the interpretation put on the data by the study consultant team.
I was unable to attend all of the council meetings for this issue, but I did
appear at the Beaverton, Hillsboro and Tualatin councils and spoke in favor
of the study.
1000 Friends of Oregon has hired a prestigious group of consultants for a
three year study of the changes that can be made in land use patterns in the
region. The purpose of the analysis will be to demonstrate with specific
recommended changes in densities and land uses that we can accommodate
growth in the region without having to build new highways (e.g. the Western
Bypass) to avoid congestion. TVEDC board member Jim Standring has been
asked by 1000 Friends to serve on the steering committee for the study and
l ie has accepted that position. Mike Wert, ODOT's bypass study project
manager, is serving on the technical advisory committee for the study. We
have asked Henry Richmond, 1000 Friends of Oregon to speak about the study
at a quarterly meeting and he has accepted for the September meeting.
Transportation Planning Rule: LCDC adopted the Transportation Planning Rule
this month. TVEDC raised concerns about a specific section (660-12-065 (6)
(g)) of the rule that as it is written makes building of the Western Bypass
impossible. I met with Susan Brody, Director of DLCD, about that section of
the rule and it, was her opinion that the bypass would be blocked by the
section, but that the facility could then be taken through the exceptions
process in the rule and if it met the exceptions test the project would go
ahead. TVEDC questioned whether the bypass couldn't be held to a strict
interpretation of the specific section or at the least challenged on this
section which would put the'project back into the courts at considerable
expense in time and money for legal work. Susan did not think that could
occur, but agreed to get an Attorney General's opinion on the issue. When
TVEDC learned that the AG would not be issuing a formal opinion, but only a
verbal, informal opinion of the process as designed in the rule, we asked
some of our members for their opinions. Two of our member land use
attorneys felt that since the bypass has such strong, organized opposition,
our interpretation would be a likely outcome. I raised this point again to
DLCD staff and the commission at their meeting in Eugene. To take note of
the commission's intention when adopting the rule, the motion to adopt
included notice that section 660-12-065 (6) (g) was not intended to block
he Western Bypass. However, I will not feel comfortable with the rule
,ntil I have seen the motion entered into the official record of the
commission's meeting.
ii
TVEDC President's Report
April 15 - May 10, 1991
Page 4
i
OUTSIDE MEETINGS
In the report period, TVEDC was represented at the following outside
meetings or events:
PRESENTATIONS
Beaverton City.Counti7. - Quarterly Briefing & Western Bypass
Hillsboro City Council - Quarterly Briefing
Durham City Council - Quarterly Briefing
Tualatin City Council - Western Bypass Support
House Energy & Environment Committee - HB 2175 Air Emissions
House Subcommittee Revenue & School Finance - Urban Renewal
REGIONAL MEETINGS
Washington County Transportation Coordinating Committee - Monthly meeting
PDC - Coordingating Council
Portland State University - President's Council
- President's Council Executive Board
CEDO - Regional Meeting/Salem
- Executive board meetings
- Board meeting
METRO/Urban Growth Management Study - Technical Advisory Committee
METRO/Joint Policy Advisory Committee Transportation - 8B 2175
Washington County Public Affairs Forum - Weekly meetings
- Board of Directors
Governor's State Agency Council - Annual Retreat
METRO Charter Committee
Hillsboro Chamber of Commerce - Monthly Meeting
Washington County Legislative Delegation - Brown Bag Meeting
HB 2175 Working Group - Auto Emissions
Land Conservation & Development Committee- Transportation Planning Rule
TVEDC SPONSORED ACTIVITIES OR EVENTS
f
1-5 Breakfast Forum - "Oregon Road Finance" (Ted Calouri - State
Representative)
Times Article - Growth Problems Won't Be Eliminated So Easily
Business Briefing Breakfast - Meridian Park Hospital
Casino Night
i
' TVEDC President's Report
April 15 - May 10, 1991
Page 5
PRESS CONTACTS
Oregonian/Tony Green - Casino Night
Business Journal - Western Bypass
Michelle Trappen/Oregonian - PSU President Ramaley
INDIVIDUAL CONTACTS
During the reporting period TVEDC staff contacted or were contacted by
the following members and associates on TVEDC business:
Susan Brody/DLCD - Oregon Transportation Planning Rule
Delna Jones/State Representative - Transportation Planning Rule
Ted Calouri/State Representative - Transportation Planning Rule
Tim Ramis/0'Donnell Ramis Crew & Corrigan/ METRO Charter
David Lawrence/Hillsboro - Urban Renewal
BJ Smith/LOC - Urban Renewal
Jim Craven/AEA - HB 2175 Air Emissions -
David Knowles/METRO - BB 2175 Air Emissions
Bonnie Hays/Washington County - Update
Chris Piper & Keith Lyons/KBNP Business Radio - Membership
Mark Nicklas/MCI - Corporate Membership
Wendy Edwards/First Technology Credit Union - Update
Bob Rivera/New England Life - Membership
Leslie Wherry/World Affairs Council - Internation Trade Delegation
Henry Richmond/1000 Friends of Oregon - Land Use Patterns Study
Blanche Schroeder/Portland Chamber - Update
John Holloway/Bolliger, Hampton & Tarlow -Business Briefing
Matt Taylor/Great Northwest Management - Western Bypasss
Kris Hudson/Governor's Commission on Higher Education - Speakers
TVEDC COMMITTEE STAFFING
The following TVEDC boards and committees met during the reporting period
and were attended by staff:
Board of Directors - Retreat
Executive Board
Issues Research Committee
Transportation Committee
Membership/Programs Committee
Casino Night Committee
I-5 LEADS Club
DATE: February 16, 1991
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Mary L. Tobias
RE: President's Report
January 14 - February 15, 1991
This month we spent a great deal of time and effort gearing up for the
199, legislative session. 'Our efforts included initial reviews of the bills
that had been introduced and evaluating the extent of our efforts at the
legislature. In addition, we reevaluated the budget at the mid-year point
and began to program any needed mid-year corrections. Finally, we began to
look at our programs at the staff level as we are getting ready to put
together the 1991/92 budget for the board.
PROGRAMS
REGIONAL PLANNING
The passage of Ballot Measure 5 and the efforts of the legislature to
design new property tax law to implement the measure were of primary
interest to TVEDC and many of our members. TVEDC was asked to speak on the
impact of the property tax limitation on business and the Oregon economy at
the Tigard Rotary and the Tualatin Chamber of Commerce. Because so much is
uncertain at the present time, much of what we can say at-the present time
is anecdotal. However, some of the unease in the state is becoming apparent
from the conversations we have had with various business owners in the
region. There i.s growing concern that business will be asked to make up
some of the revenue lost to both the state and the local governments through
the implementation of measure 5. Proposals for increasing fees and business
taxes are appearing at every level. Although in some cases, increased fees
to cover the direct costs of government programs can be justified, we see
the need for our cities, counties and the state to thoroughly analyze any
additional fees and taxes to be certain they accomplish the goals for which
they are assessed. This will be an issue that will need a great deal of
attention throughout the balance of the legislative session and throughout
the biennium.
The Council for Economic D•evelopmen_t in -Oregon (CEDO) held a regional
meeting in-Coos Bay in early February Invitees included. the public and
private sectors from Coos, Curry, Douglas, Jackson and Josephine counties.
The regional meeting focused on the role of the Port of Coos Bay in the
Oregon economy. At the board meeting which followed the regional briefing,
I raised the issues of a sunset provision on the implementation of fees and
taxes during this time of urgency for dealing with revenue shortfalls from
implementing measure 5. I also brought to the board's attention, the
problems attendant to HB 2175, the air emissions bill. CEDO's Legislative
Committee will review both of these issues and bring a recommendation for
action to the executive committee's meeting in March.
TVEDC President's Report
January 14 - February 15, 1991
Page 2
This month the PDC regional marketing campaign moved into the fundraising
phase with the first of several regional meetings designed to draw attention
to the campaign and to inform the business community throughout the greater
Portland area of the importance of building an external image for Portland
and the r-egion. TVEDC, the Sunset Corridor Association and the City of
Beaverton participated in -a Washington County meeting and each o-f us
presented a -part -of the regional marketing campaign-- -r.&oiy. -I am-not aware
of any dollars raised from this meeting, but there was strong interest in
the coordinated approach to marketing.
At this time, we have not made any progress on the County's Economic
Development Task Force project. The Board of Commissioners is in the
process of completing the committee restructuring process. With the passage'
of Measure 5 it seems to be even more important to have a coordinated county
wide effort to address economic development programs. However, also in view
of the problems attendant to measure 5, it.might be best if we consult the
county about restructuring the process and basing it entirely in the private
sector. This would mean that we would have to carefully analyze the funding
and staffing issues that would arise, but I am inclined to believe this is
P the only way to proceed at this time.
` I presented a quarterly briefing at the Durham City Council meeting this
month. Again, Ballot Measure 5 is the predominant topic for discussion.
One of the concerns for this council is the issue of funding education at
all levels.
Portland State University President Judith Ramaley has established a new
President's Council, an advisory committee comprised of PSU administrators
and business interests to address the role of the university in the
community. Dr. Ramaley has asked me to serve on that committee so that
Washington County's interests will be addressed. I have also been asked to
serve on the executive committee for the Council. Because the future of
higher education in Oregon is of paramount importance to economic
development, I have agreed to both of these requests. it appears that
higher education is going to-undergo some severe budget cuts in this
biennium. Because the general public is unawa-r-e of the -impact post
secondary education plays in the economy,_I believe it is very important
that TVEDC takes a leadership role on this issue.
In addition to higher education, the community college program in the
state will suffer program reductions as a result of measure 5. I met with
PCC Rock Creek Executive Dean Betty Duvall to discuss the early -information
she is getting on budget cuts. Because of the cutbacks in the colleges and
universities - especially the tuition hikes and the enrollment lids - it
looks as though the community colleges will have to assume an even greater
responsibility for providing the first two years (undergraduate level) of
( zollege for many Oregon students. This will become increasingly difficult
with fewer or severely limited dollars.
µ TVEDC President's Report
January 14 - February 15, 1991
Page 3
ISSUES MANAGEMENT
Western Bypass: The Western Bypass Study is continuing to proceed on
schedule. State Senator Paul Phillips and Representative Ted Calouri have
both expressed frustration with-the length of time the study is taking.
OD-OT staff has gone back through the federal requirements for the project
and feels that the first two years , of t-he process can be -shortened -b.y
approximately two months. However, ODOT does expect litigation when the
first stage of the process gets to some of the land use decision points. In
addition, 1000 Friends of Oregon is reported to have hired a consultant to
look at current land use patterns in local comprehensive plans and decide if
they can be changed to avoid the construction of a new highway. In my.
opinion, it is still very possible that the ODOT study will not conclude with
a recommendation that the Western Bypass be built.
Transportation Planning Rule: The Transportation Committee has scheduled a
briefing on the proposed rule for their February meeting. Bob Cortright,
DLCD staff, has been invited to update the committee on the recommendations
they will make to LCDC. We have continued with our analysis of the rule and
some of our primary concerns deal with the economic impacts the rule imposes
on business versus the fiscal impact on local or -regional governments. It
seems likely that most of the costs that will be incurred to move toward a
heavy emphasis on non-auto modes of transportation and facilities that will
support these modes will be borne by the business and development
communities. Although the implementation of land use planning requires
economic analysis, most of the work that is done seems to be primarily
fiscal impact analysis on the implementing governments. There is a big
difference between fiscal impact, as I am using it here, and economic
impact. TVEDC will provide testimony to LCDC on some of our concerns with
the rule at the March meeting of the commission.
Other: DEQ's proposed HB 2175 on air emissions continues to be a focus for
our current efforts. We have issued a TVEDC Alert on this bill and have
generated considerable interest from our members. A major problem with the
bill with respect to fees for auto emissions is that it essentially gives
the EQC a blank check for assessing-fees for anything they feel might be
reasonably linked to the au-to. In our opinion, this is -not the correct
F approach to take in trying to find solutions to the problems attendant to
auto emissions. However, following conversations with the American
Electronics Association lobbyist, Jim Craven, we have learned that it is
important to their industry that some form of the industrial source
emissions legislation be passed out this session. The TVEDC Legislative
Task Force is working on this bill and will recommend an action to the
board.
E
f
TVEDC President's Report
January 14 - February 15, 1991
Page 4
METRO is finishing the plans for their second annual urban growth
conference. Last year's conference consensus has been used as the basis for
establishing the Regional Urban Growth Goals and objectives and is being
touted by METRO as representing the will of the region. The problem with
this is that last year's conference was sadly lacking in representation from
the bu-siness community. We issued-our first TVEDC .Alert on this year's
conference. Again, th-e response-to this information tool has been 'very
positive.
MEMBERSHIP/PUBLIC EDUCATION PROGRAMS
The February I-5 Breakfast Forum featured Charles Cameron (County
Administrator, Washington County) speaking on the impact of ballot measure 5
on county government. Once again, we had a full house with approximately 50
people attending. Senator Paul Phillips opened the program with a
legislative update. Certainly, by the time Paul and Charlie finished,
everyone in the audience was fully aware of the uncertainties with which
Oregon is faced. The program for the March Forum will be "Measure 5 and Our
Schools" with the superintendents of the Sherwood, Tigard and Beaverton
school districts presenting.
The first Tualatin Valley Dialogue for 1991 dealt with an update on the
Tualatin River cleanup and a discussion of who will bear the costs. New
data is being analyzed by both DEQ and USA on phosphorous levels in the
river at the headwaters of all the tributaries. Early findings show that
many of the streams have higher levels than those required by the standards
at these headwater points. The question becomes, if the data holds through
the remainder of the research, can the standards be lowered to meet the
levels found in nature. DEQ staff feels that this is a real possibility.
We found ourselves without a place to hold the Dialogue this month and
turned to a member of the board for assistance. Bob Berger, GTE Northwest,
came to our aid and GTE agreed to host the Dialogue at their Cornell Road
office. -
Greg Van Pelt ISt. Vin-cent Hospital & Medical Center) hosted a Business
Briefing Breakfast in January. Greg presented an overview of St. Vincent's
five year--:capital =improvement-•p-rogram• and a -short.history of-t~he hospital.
Bonnie Hays and Mayor Larry Cole also presented updates on their
jurisdictions. Interest in the breakfasts remains high and the key now is
to continue the required follow-up.
we are continuing the membership renewal campaign. This should be
completed (for the most part) by mid-March. Then our attention will turn to
an aggressive membership recruitment effort. It is imperative that we bring
some new corporations into TVEDC. The continual expansion of the membership
is important to maintaining effective programs.
TVEDC President's Report
January 14 - February 17, 1991
Page 5
Planning is going forward for Casino Night 1991. We have an enthusiastic
committee and they are proposing an exciting event. We plan to have tickets
ready for sale by the first of March. The biggest problem, currently, is
finding a location that will hold the event.
ADMINISTRATION
Staff spent a great deal of time evaluating the income and expenses of
the corporation in the year to date. With the advent of budget time for
both TVEDC and our local government members, we want to have a sense of how
we are doing in relationship to our projections. The early analysis points
up the importance of increasing the membership base over the next four
months. Without increased income from dues, it will be essential that we
cut our program costs.
It is also important that we begin to look at ways to create new income
from special projects. Staff will look at several alternatives and present
{ these to the board at the annual retreat.
A board task force (Pat Ritz, John MacDonald and Mary Tobias) reviewed
expected revenue versus anticipated expenses and prepared a report for the
board of directors January meeting. Preliminary analysis of the figures
shows that we will end the year almost exactly on budget. It will be
important to continue to watch costs closely during the second half of the
fiscal year.
TVEDC will have a full page ad on the inside front cover page of special
Times Newspapers supplement to be published in late February. The cost for
the ad will be paid by the income from a Times Newspapers membership and two
member sponsors - Barbara Sue Seal Properties, Inc. and Tektronics. This ad
will stress the importance of public-privatte partnerships and TVEDC's role
in providing this important linkage.
i
TVEDC President's Report
Asi. 14 January - February 15, 1991
Page 6
OUTSIDE !MEETINGS
In the report period, TVEDC was represented at the following outside
meetings or events:
-PRESENTATIONS
Tigard Rotary Club - Measure 5 and Economic Development
Tualatin Chamber of Commerce - Measure 5
Durham City Council - Quarterly Briefing
REGIONAL MEETINGS
Tigard Chamber of Commerce - Legislative meeting
- Consulting on business survey
Washington County Transportation Coordinating Committee - Monthly meeting
Delta Airlines Lunch - Inaugural flight for Portland/Nagoya route
PDC/TEAM Portland - Subcommittee on regional meetings
- Washington County business leaders breakfast
Portland State University - President's Council
President's Council Executive Board
CEDO - Regional Meeting/Port of Coos Bay
- Executive board meeting
- Board meeting
ODOT - Citizens Advisory Committee/Western Bypass
METRO/Urban Growth Management Study - Technical Advisory Committee
METRO/Joint Policy Advisory Committee Transportation - EB 2175
Washington County Public Affairs Forum - Weekly meetings
- Board of Directors
Business-Education Compact - Monthly meetings
Portland Chamber of Commerce - Metro Area Chamber/Corridor Association
Executives meeting - Measure 5
Washington County Visitors Association - point Executive Boards
Washington County Community Action Organization - Mardi Gras
TVEDC SPONSORED ACTIVITIES OR EVENTS
I-5 Breakfast Forum - "Challenges of Measure Five" (Charles Cameron -
County Administrator, Washington County)
Times Article - Does Oregon Still Offer Competitive Advantages for Business?
Tualatin Valley Diaglogue - "Tualatin River Clean Up After Measure 5...Who
Pays?" (John Jackson/USA and Don Yon/DEQ)
( Business Briefing Breakfast - St. Vincent Hospital & Medical Center
t
Fi
E
1
TVEDC President's Report
January 14 - February 15, 1991
Page 7
v
PRESS CONTACTS
Times Publications/Publisher Steve Clark - TVEDC ad in special publication
Oregonian/Tony Green & Jerry Tippens - Regional and statewide cooperation
Oregonian/Tony Green - -Update o-n TVEDC -
Oregon Scientist - Economic development & -higher education
Times Newspapers/Matt Buckingham - Air emissions bill
INDIVIDUAL CONTACTS
During the reporting period TVEDC staff contacted or were contacted by
the following members and associates on TVEDC business:
Mick Sinnerude/Norris Beggs & Simpson - Industrial land available
Bob Alexander/Forest Grove Cornelius EDC - Transportation issues
Joan Pasco/Gresham Chamber of Commerce - Regional economic development
Chuck Frost/Tektronics - Westside Light Rail legislation
"David Lawrence/Hillsboro - Westside Light Rail legislation
Walt Peck/Washington County - Westside Light Rail legislation
Blanche Schroeder/Portland Chamber of Commerce - Measure 5
Carol Clark/WCVA - Agency coordination
Bonnie Hays/Washington County - Update
Debbie McCabe/GTE - Marketing Portland program
Judith Ramaley/PSU - Portland State University President's Council
Chief Jack Snook/Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue - Update
Jeff Johnson/Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue - Update
Rollie Kornick/Accredited Brokers - Business relocation
Tom Markgraph/Barney & Worth - Oregon Roads Financing
John Holloway/Bolliger, Hampton & Tarlow - Update
Betty Duvall/PCC Rock Creek - Update
Joan Smith/Washington County Historical Society - Living History Farm
Steve Petersen/OEDD - Statewide issues re economic development
Paul Phillips/Senator - Legislative briefings
- TVEDC Interdependency Study
Yvonne Addington/OEDD - TVEDC Interdependency Study
Janet Young/Tualatin - Business relocation
Diane Perry/Dotten & Associates - Governor's Conference on Growth
Kris Hudson/Governor's Commission on Higher Education - Speakers
Cliff Clark/Forest Grove Mayor - Air emissions bill
Jim Craven/American Electronics Assosciation - Air emissions bill
Bill Knox/UPS - Air emissions bill & Clean Air Act
C
t
i TVEDC President's Report
January 14 - February 15, 1991
Page 8
TVEDC COMMITTEE STAFFING
The following TVEDC boards and committees met during the reporting period
and were attended by staff:
Board of Directors
Executive Board
Ad Hoc Finance Committee
Issues Research Committee
Legislative Task Force
Transportation Committee
Membership/Programs Committee
Casino Night Committee
I-5 LEADS Club
i
i'
S'
May 21, 1991
TO: TVEDC Board of Directors
FROM: Mary Weber
REGARDING: Information Services/Summary of Activity
INFORMATION REQUESTS
March 26, 1991 through May 20, 1991
PCS Computer Corporation
Huntington, CT
Jim Goede
General area information
Lori Enright
Beaverton
Subarea demographics for market analysis
Valley Times
Tigard
Leslie Constants
Foreign investment in the Tualatin Valley
Bill Parks
Beaverton
Area employers,directory of manufacturers
Referral to OEDD
METRO
Portland
Elaine Schmerling
Area contacts for recycling programs
Winerton & Walberg Builders
San Francisco, CA
Donald Leyman
Demographic and market information
Page - t
Anne Marie Steigers
Portland
Employment and population forecast.
Beaverton Area Chamber of Commerce
Beaverton
Area growth rate and population projections
The Word & Image Works
Lockport, IL
Thomas Hoffer
Market information
FURUKAWA (cable mfg, co.)
Peachtree City, GA
Steve Caron
Area information - "Doing Business in Washington Cty" packet
xeieried ro PDC
Jane Sterrett, Consultant
Portland
Area information: working on USA bond proposal
t
t
I
F
T'
Paee -
March 26, 1991
TO: TVEDC Board of Directors
FROM: Mary Weber
REGARDING: Information Services/Summary of Activity
INFORMATION REQUESTS
February 23, 1991 through March 25, 1991
Macadam & Forbes
Portland
Mike VanDenburgh
Employment data, largest employers - for hotel development
feasibility study
National Mortgage (lender)
Dean McCluskey
Portland
Employment data, largest employers - for hotel development
feasibility study
Oregon Realty
Larry Roland
Tigard _
Demographic information for preparation of a marketing plan
for a residential development in Tigard
Washington County
Chairman Bonnie Hays
Hillsboro
"Doing ,,business in Washington County" binder
Wade Price
Portland
Market information regarding companies in credit reporting
business - referred to OMBA
February 27, 1991
Alp-
TO: TVEDC Board of Directors
FROM: Mary Weber
REGARDING: Information Service/Summary of Activity
INFORMATION REQUESTS
January 30, 1991 through February 22, 1991
Stellar International *Holdings (Swedish based investment company)
Seattle
Dean Trenery
Washington County market information
Benner Research Group
Beaverton
Michele Piper
Census data
Professionals 100
Lake Oswego
June Green
Information on tax rates under Measure 5
The Chambers Group (Management Consultants)
Seattle
Claire M. Meany
Area developments
Ken McBean
Calgary Alberta
Area information, specifics on housing costs
Sig Unander (small business owner)
Cornelius
Area developments
Northwest Appraisal Corp.
Portland
Chuck Atkins
Washington County statistics
C
"Tip" regarding Apple Computer plans for a new facility
Referred to Portland Development Commission
Zlx~z
NY/
' . TUALATIN VALLEY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
April 15, 1991
TO: Britt Ferguson
Deputy County Administrator
Washington County
FROM: Iary Weber
Program Manager
Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corp.
REGARDING: Summary of Activities
Per the terms of our contractual agreement, TVEDC is
providing a summary of the activities it has performed
during the quarter January 1 through March 30, 1990.
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITY
(1) Economic Development Plan Preparation
Because of the passage of Measure 5, county staff has not
been able to, move the project ahead as anticipated. The new
members of the Community Committee have not yet been
approved by the County Commission..
2) Business Development Assistance
T Marketing Portland Committee
Mary Tobias participated in the'Coordinating Council's
monthly meeting which focused on the regional marketing
Portland campaign.-
10200 5.W Nimbus Avenue • Suite G-3 Tigard, Oregon 97233 • (503) 620.1142
P3oa _ 1
Requests for Information
TVEDC provided information about Washington County to the
following companies and/or individuals:
Evergreen Community Development Association (non profit
development company backed by Zion's First National Bank,
Salt Lake City)
Seattle
J. Stanley Miner
Referral: local contacts for SBA 504 and 7A loan programs
Beaverton Chamber of Commerce
Beaverton
List of leading employers in the Tualatin Valley - for
insertion into the chamber's directory
North by Northwest (relocation consulting firm)
San Francisco
Richard Dow
Washington County demographics, industry profile and
regional assets
Oregon Regional Primate Research Center
Beaverton
Jim Parker
Leading employers in the Tualatin Valley
The Dalles School District
The Dalles
Marge Smith
Regional demographics and economic indicators
Norris Beggs & Simpson
Portland
Mick Sinnerude
Available industrial land in the T4alatin Valley
Alpha & Omega Financial' Services (financier)
Prairie Village, Kansas
Tracey Mahaffey
Washington County information for investment evaluation
Stellar International Holdings (Swedish investment group)
Seattle
Dean Trenery
Washington County information for investment evaluation
l
t
s
t
Page - 2
Neumiller & Beardsley (engineering firm)
Stockton
Barbara Nordine
Information on local economic development activities
Evergreen Community Development Association
Seattle
J. Stanley Miner
Regional governmental and district boundary information
Benner Research Group
Beaverton
Michele Piper
Census data
Professionals 100
Lake Oswego
June Green
Information on tax rates under Measure S
The Chambers Group (management consultants)
Seattle
Claire M. Meany
Area developments
Ken McBean
Calgary Alberta
Area information, specifics on housing costs
Sig Unander (small business owner)
Cornelius
Area developments
Northwest Appraisal Corp.
Portland
Chuck Atkins
Washington County statistics
"Tip" regarding Apple Computer plans for a new facility
Referred to Portland Development Commission
Macadam & Forbes
Portland
Mike VanDenburgh
Employment data, largest employers - for hotel development
feasibility study
National Mortgage (lender)
Dean McCluskey
Portland
Employment data, largest employers - for hotel development
feasibility study
Page - 3
Oregon Realty.
Larry Roland
Tigard
Demographic information for preparation of a market plan for
a residential development in Tigard
Washington County
Hillsboro
Chairman Hays
"Doing Business in Washington County" binder
Wade Price
Portland
Market information regarding companies in credit reporting
business - referred to OMBA
(3) Economic Development Coordination
T Business Association's Executive Network
TVEDC attended monthly regional Business Associations
Executive Network meetings convened by the Portland Chamber
of Commerce. Mary pointed up the importance of proposed
user fees and taxes associated with air quality emission
controls and the potential impact these fees could have on
business retention efforts in the Tualatin Valley. t
T Economic development coordination
Mary Tobias briefed the councils of Tualatin, Wilsonville,
Sherwood, Forest Grove, Tigard and Durham about economic
development activities and issues in the Tualatin Valley.
Mary Tobias met with local representatives of urban renewal
districts in the region. Mary briefed specific members of
the House Revenue and Finance Committee on the importance of
tax increment financing' to economic development efforts in
the Tualatin Valley.
Page - 4
COPY FOR YOUR
INFORMATION
TUAiATIN VAUEY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
March 20, 1991 ,
Representative Delna Jones
Chair, House Revenue and School Finance Committee
State Capitol
Room H-475
Salem, Oregon 97310
Dear Representative Jones:
TVEDC in its leadership role in economic development for the
Tualatin Valley recognizes and supports the commitment the
House Revenue and School Finance Committee has demonstrated
in regard to the review of HB 2550. The task presented to
the legislature by the passage of Ballot Measure 5 is
formidable. The corporation acknowledges the complexity of
the task required to define the very general terms of
Measure 5.
TVEDC has advocated alternative funding sources for schools
in our state. However, the corporation opposed Measure 5 in
the November election. TVEDC's opposition centered on
unseen consequences of this initiative. I am sure the
committee through its efforts has discovered many of the
unfortunate consequences.
At this time TVEDC wishes to express concern about urban
renewal and tax increment financing. The collection of tax
increment financing needs some clarification as a result of
Measure 5. Tax increment financing is an important source
of revenue to fund infrastructure development for
deteriorated or underdeveloped areas across the state. This
financing tool is important to the revitalization efforts of
our cities. Urban renewal projects are part of economic
development not only in Portland, but in the -cities of
Hillsboro, Tualatin, Roseburg, Albany and Beaverton.
Ballot Measure 5 severely limits the tools that local
governments have to fund needed services and facilitate
economic development. At the same time_local property tax
revenues are totally dependent on assessed value. Urban
10200 SAX: Ninnbus Avenue • Suicu G-i • Tigard. Orugon 9-223 • (503) 620-11-43
o
i '
revenues are totally dependent on assessed value. Urban
renewal and tax increment financing are one of the only
mechanisms left to solve the problem of providing
infrastructure while maintaining stable assessed value.
Because of the weight of HB 2550 and need to get this
legislation to the floor of the house, the urban renewal
portion of the bill was deleted. We understand that it is
the committee's intent to introduce separate legislation
regarding the clarification of urban renewal and tax
increment financing. The corporation understands-the
decision of the committee and lends its support to th'e
drafting and tiopely passage of a bill clarifying urban
renewal and tax increment financing. Like budgeting for
schools and government, planning and budgeting for urban
renewal and tax increment financing is a time sensitive
endeavor. We urge the committee to consider legislation as
soon as possible.
Again, the corporation appr=eciates the effort and commitment
the committee has shown in this process. If TVEDC can be of
service, please contact Mary Tobias at 620-1142.
Sincerely,
C .
H. Pat Ritz
Board Chairman
cc: Representative Larry Campbell
Representative Fred Parkinson
1
i~ -M
COPY FOR YOUR.
INFORNAYIOH
- - TUALATIN VAU EY
ECONO~~tIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - -
March 8, 1991
The Honorable Fred Parkinson
Chairman, House Energy and Environment Committee
Salem, Oregon
Dear Chairman:
The Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corporation (TVEDC)
is a non-profit organization working to foster a positive
economic climate and to facilitate a high quality employment
environment in the Tualatin Valley. TVEDC represents-a
public/private partnership between 120 corporations and 11 local
governments that actively work together to solve regional issues.
In accordance with this mission, the corporation is compelled to
respond to the proposed legislation (HB 2175) which establishes a
statewide air pollution emissions fee program in Oregon.
TVEDC recognizes the importance of assuring that air quality
within the state of Oregoyi-meets the standards set by the 1990
Federal Clean Air Act. It is not in our own interests, nor in
the interest of the state generally, to ignore the requirements
of the federal Act. To do so would only provide grounds for
litigation and increased costs. We further recognize that many
different sources of air pollution exist and that they must be
{ addressed in a manner consistent with the needs of the people of
Oregon and the federal clean air standards. HB 2175 is an
8
t 10200 S.V6: Nimbus Avenue • Suite G-3 • Tigard. Oregon 9'223 - (503) 620.1142
attempt to address some of the many air emission sources and work
toward assuring statewide compliance with the Act.
However, we believe that bringing such divergent air
emission sources together into one piece of legislation may
impede the progress of the bill and the state's obligation to
comply with the Clean Air Act. Each of the emission sources
identified in the legislation touches a different part of our
state and its population, and the proposed limits affect
lifestyle, quality of life and the livelihood of Oregon's
citizens in different ways.
Today, TVEDC's primary concern is with the sweeping
authority granted to the Environmental Quality Commission (EQC)
C under Section 8 of HB 2175. In order to move ahead needed
portions of this bill, we recommend that Section 8 be deleted
from the bill and be considered as a separate piece of
legislation.
The section of the bill relating to vehicle emissions
(Section 8) simply says: "The emission fee shall be assessed
on motor vehicle emissions. This fee.shall include a statewide
component and a regional component for ozone nonattainment to
address the significant portion of ozone precursors emitted by
motor vehicles." The bill does not list the amount of the
statewide or the regional vehicle emission fee. It merely
proposes a formula to be used to establish a fee. Nor does it
r state the purpose for which the fee will be used. This language
is vague and essentially constitutes a blank check to the EQC and
the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for assessing any
vehicle emission fees they deem necessary through the
implementation of administrative rules.
As one example of the types of fees that could be created,
let us consider the parking fee. DEQ recently circulated a draft
regional fee proposal that would apply to those areas of ozone
nonattainment (currently the Portland metropolitan area). The
DEQ proposal included a parking fee in the amount of $15 per
month on employees in a nonattainment area that do not currently
pay for parking and who work for employers of over 100 people.
The fee program could affect up to one-half of the employees in
the Tualatin Valley and raise up to $25 million per year in
revenue. The department indicated this program could reduce peak
period regional vehicle miles traveled and auto emissions about
25 percent.
This approach may work as an incentive to reduce vehicle
miles traveled in areas with adequate transit service. However,
transit service in the Tualatin Valley is almost non-existent and
in the majority of cases no viable alternative to the auto
exists.
Radial lines from downtown Portland to Washington County
have long been established as the main routes for the area's
transit system. Although many people are able to use these
radial lines to access their jobs and shopping, recent studies
demonstrate that an even greater percentage of the total
population travels within Washington County. In the last 10
f
years the percentage of people who live and work solely within
the county has grown from 65 percent to almost 80 percent. Few
i
intra-county transit routes exist, or are planned, to serve the
population that lives and works within the Tualatin Valley.
The Tualatin Valley is home to some of the region's largest
employers. Many of these local companies and local governments
have been working with Tri-Met to establish shuttle lines from
transit centers to their businesses. Many companies have flex-
hours for employees so auto travel is spread throughout the day.
Washington County and other areas of the Tualatin Valley have
been working diligently to secure a westside light rail line.
Even with these efforts, we recognize the need to further reduce
auto dependency and vehicle miles traveled.
This points to the complexity of the issues surrounding the
reduction of motor vehicle emissions. However, an open ended
authority to set auto emission fees without legislative oversight
is not in the best interests of the citizens of Oregon. Rather,
we should all - business, industry, policy makers and
regulators - work together to draft clear policy with reasonable
objectives. The costs of achieving these objectives should be
assessed equitably on those of us who cause the emissions that
need to be reduced. It is for this reason that TVEDC believes a
vehicle emissions reduction program should be established
legislatively, not administratively. We.recommend to the
committee that the vehicle emissions portion of the legislation
be dropped from HB 2175 and drawn as a separate bill.
Much of the remaining legislation in HB 2175 is important to
the state's compliance with the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act and
should not be held up because of the complexities surrounding the
fee for the reduction of vehicle emissions.
TVEDC looks forward to working with DEQ and the committee to
establish a workable program to reduce vehicle emissions in the
Portland metropolitan area.
Sincerely,
Mary L. Tobias
President/CEO
r
f
2
NW
TUALATIN VALLEY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
R E S O L U T I O N
WHERE AS:
the Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corporation's
stated objective is to provide private sector leadership and
representation on major regional issues affecting economic
development in the Tualatin Valley.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors of the Tualatin Valley Economic
Development Corporation recognizes the importance of
assuring that air quality within the state of Oregon meets
the standards set by the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors further recognizes that many
rr different sources of air pollution exist and that they must
1. be addressed in a manner consistent with the needs of the
people of Oregon and the federal clean air standards.
However, we believe that bringing such divergent air
emission sources together into one piece of legislation, HB
2175, may impede the progress of the bill and the state's
obligation to comply with the Clean Air Act.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors acknowledges that auto emissions
are a significant contributor to air pollution and as such
must be dealt with to ensure a healthy environment in the
state and our region. $owever, the vague language
pertaining to auto emissions in the air emissions bill, HB
2175, does not effectively address the issue of auto
emissions.
THEREFORE:
the board of directors supports the air emissions bill,
HB 2175, with the exception of the sections on auto
emissions. Further the board of directors recommends to the
C legislature the portion of the bill relating to auto
emissions be pulled and developed further as separate,
specific legislation.
March 27, 1991
10200 S.W. Nimbus Avenue • Suite G-3 • Tigard. Oregon 97223 , (503) 620-1142
MEN
TUALATIN VALLEY
EC0N0~IMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
R E S O L U T I O N
WHERE AS:
the Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corporation's stated i
objective is to provide private sector leadership and representation
on major issues affecting economic development in the Tualatin Valley.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors of the Tualatin Valley Economic
Development Corporation believes that a balanced transportation system
is essential to the long term economic health and liveability of the
1'uaiatin Valley.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors believes that maintenance and improvements
have been delayed on many of our state roads, highways and bridges in
both urban and rural areas of the state. Further, that growth demands
are adding to the unmet need for road and bridge improvements. We
must preserve the public investment in the highway infrastructure.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors is concerned that the availability of
revenues to cover both growth demands and the unmet backlog
requirements for road and bridge maintenance is increasingly
inadequate and reported to be a $20 million shortfall.' To ensure the
system of roads and bridges statewide meets future needs and enhances
liveability through Oregon, we must identify additional revenue.
WHERE AS:
- the board of directors supports the use of gasoline tax revenue
to maintain the state's roads, highways and bridges and that an
increase in the tax is necessary. to continue to keep pace with
maintenance needs.
WHERE AS:
. It is the opinion of the board of directors that revenues derived
from an increase in the State gasoline tax' should be dedicated solely
to road, highway and bridge maintenance and improvements. Further,
that existing revenues generated from the gasoline tax should continue
to be''used solely for purposes of highway and bridge improvements.
THEREFORE:
the board of directors supports the recommendations of the Oregon
Road Financing Committee and House Bill 3559 which would increase the
State gasoline tax by two cents over each of the next four years
(1992-1995) and an equivalent increase in the State weight/mile tax. }
May 21, 1991
10200 SAX: Nimbus Avenue • Suite G-3 • Tigard, Oregon 9-223 • (503) 620-1142
f TUALATIN VALLEY
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
R E S O L U T I O N
WHERE AS:
The Tualatin Valley Economic Development Corporation's
stated objective is to provide private sector leadership and
representation on major regional issues affecting economic
development in the Tualatin Valley.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors of the Tualatin Valley Economic
Development Corporation supports the development of a
strong, diverse economic base in our region while ensuring a
quality environment for job development.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors believes that a living history
museum would enhance this region's efforts to promote the
tourism industry and provide an additional destination for
conventioneers.
WHERE AS:
the board of directors supports the development of a
living history museum on farm and forest land because such ,a
low density development would be compatible with surrounding
farm and forest uses while.providiftg public access to open
space. In addition, surc-h a land use could provide an
excellent transition between dense urban development and
' farm use land. Further, the board believes that such a
development, if sited in an urban area, would be an under-
utilization of urban land.
i
THEREFORE:
the board of directors supports the passage of HB 2795
which would allow the development of living history museums
/ on lands zoned Exclusive Farm Use.
t~
F March 27, 1991
10200 S.%X'. Nimbus Avenue • Suite G-3 • Tigard. Oregon 97223 • (503) 620.1142
Ir
RIE TIMES Week of APT" 1117, 1991
g bee?
uso in
How dense, should, our ho
strutted densities were determined houses or other attached dwellings
Washington County has been in the 1980s through citizen par- and mandated minimum densities
described as the state's hot spot for tie'. tion in the local planning for development. ipa
growth in both employment and process. The policies that, guide • Many individuals and groups
population, tts ' these land use plans are Oregon's who subscribe to this philosophy of
ies, density Utete livinthe also support
One feature our current growth s Your ' statewide planning goals, 19 goals higher
cycle is the innccreasing density at B U S.1 i~ @ SS
automobile. These policies include
which urban development is occur- that constitute die framework fora polic
ring. Local residents are shaking Mary Tobias, statewide program. There is a model held by many taxation or fees for services, like toll
their heads in h disbelief ar over the in- "is. project encompasses a full planning professionals - which is roads or parking fees at places of
tensity which this area, and other being carried forward by special in- employment throughout the region.
areas in n die Tualatin Valley, are range of housing types, including terest groups - that U.S. urban In this article we are not taking
being developed. large homes on very small lots and development should mimic any position on the issue o greater
A good example of what is hap- high-density apartments with neigh- European cities. Housing is located deensi ies. The quest to is currency
Tuning can 11 seen in the vicinity of boyhood shopping within walking atop businesses and small houses rehold th values th are
flected in local land use plans, or
217, ey is Economic experiencing si Develop- distance. are built close together or are at- re we want c live in a European-
Roa Corp.'s office. Scrolls Ferry When people set these projects, tached to one another. There is a
ment Tualatin Highway Valley
man assume thadevelop ers are neighborhood grocery within walk- style city with much higher densities
have
Road, from Murray Boulevard g- Y overbuilding, In reality , they may be than we have now?
of can walk everyone's
and co mcial ns single-family building under the allowed number in g distance of everyone's home. are
nswerin technicians t is hese and concerned questions Uhat bureaucrats a few
employment bicycle populated to their a TVEDC
and commercial construction. of units per acre. The intensity at People
making
g ,
Murraylhill represents a newer which the land is converted to urban places
and drafting rules
style of neighborhood development. use has been planned. The con r
model mass transit sys- policy and regulations decisions
Euopean + ,
that will impact how toms enjoy higher ridership, and our communities look and function.
dependency on the private auto is It is our concern that this is being
less than in the U.S. done ,without.,Lhe benefit of public
Still, it is viewed by some that. in at.
the current level of development in - p
our region is not dense enough and Tobias is president of
that die answer is smaller single- Mary
family lots, much more infill, alter- Tualatin Valley Economic Develop-
native housing stock, like row meat Corp.
funding..chotces.
loca
ere. re County tween the citizenry and the
provemen of
ts'ia Washington. provide an excellent , example For example, much discussion
This is the third, and last, in .,a lace
series of articles presenting. the local government; and its • citizens . has taken p
public p regarding traffic
hoseY choices 'that accom- working together td decide what ant congestion, highway construction
-
pany growth and growth manage- it's Your x> ° provements are most important and reduced reliance on the auto.
usOness what costs are acceptable and how Among thesolutions proposed are a
meat to best pay for getting the job done. $15 pollution tax to be paid at the
In the first article of the series, in Washington County,
we presented the lifestyle choices parking spaces
associated with increasing urban Maly Tobias developers worked with local t ~s or taxessvehicle the ~ parks g region tat
densities and the protection of farms • . bout . A•
dates remains to be borne at the gpay g for improvements robleniassociatedof throughout rivate task force is being as-
and forest land. local level. with new development. New public/p
Next, we addressed the choices The passage of Measure 5 contribute to upgrading ad- sembled in the Portland metro area
Washington County residents must Legislature with a Projects
make as we adopt a public policy presented he acent roads by paying hefty system to ddrsst ee iss Sues. free
of ta lunch,
that promotes the reduction of directive xat n change and the school state's sys- J there wili • always be choices be--
transit ridership. in., tern ance. development charges and traffic demand s [c tw~° priorities and
automobile use and an increase in• clean air and water pact fees. how we fund
" New. federal To address increased road capacity, the - region voted to : our solutions.. The best way to make
This final article addresses the is- standards require the state to d in- these policy decisions is for all of us,
to work together private citizens;
sues of the dollar costs build another light rail line. Voters
choices.• c ease fees stricter with polluiion . or
of payment as these policy control: The Oregon Land Conser. in Washingtor County supported i"- local 'and governments. " We are all
pay the . r
are made. partners in Oregon's future.
Price tag is vation and Development Commis- ;creased taxation constructtown: t
In our private fives, a p l -dooisions-mmaineto~t-"j? rrNld srobiaSTMc'
goods l`y t>o n~°~ lpte a transpo ' match for
attache In~si
le, tha requiros:a' M Man ~,po.iW- s. Ratw.~gAp'aurfi~ i;.. , , 'Prestc Dep f
tcent~Jreduction::;:vehicle:miles'b`bc~ma e. EachFoi`'t~tem`cittttbest'b~':, 7►lalatsnrVa!(ey:E~
d to each of the scrvicvs we dictosc to ;buy., y, • 20,,
in our public.liv~ the local govern-~, pe tors over the next ''addressed through a partnership be- mane Corporatirin::
ment services we choose come with ' traveeadfor'this region rs. a price tag. No matter how trite it 39 Haw do we fund the shortfall?
may be, "there is no free lunch." The hest ,way to shove these
Currently, we are faced with
problems is for the citizenry to work,
resolving the conflicts between ex- P
ternal policy pressures and our own • in partnership with local policy
desire for control of Our future. makers to determine priorities, ac-
Politically, this is the conflict be- cep table costs and ' appropriate?
tween state/federal mandates and mechanisms for paying for the solu-
local .control. State and federal man- The MSTiP-1 anb •MSTIP-2
dates are eliminating local policy programs for funding local road im-
options, but the cost of these man-
d~y ~e ~5 ~ ors ~tsc~5ia+~
71ic. I q i
! MEMORANDUM
l CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Pat Reilly, City Administrator
FROM: Ed Murphy, Director of Community Development
DATE: July 5, 1991
SUBJECT: Fence Requirements
OVERVIEW
Summary: Development Code regulations restrict fences and walls in
a required front yard to three feet in height. A change to the
height regulation, along with other minor modifications to the Code
relating to fence location and heights are being proposed.
Policy Implications: The proposed changes would make it easier to
construct a fence over 3 feet in height in a front yard in certain
circumstances, (i.e., no variance would be required), which should
make some homeowners pleased. On the other hand, it may encourage
more fences over 3 feet in height in front yards along certain
streets, which may not be as aesthetically pleasing to the public.
The proposed regulations would also enhance public safety relating
to vision clearance; and remove an unnecessary restriction on fence
location on certain lots.
Financial Impact: There would be negligible financial impact
through the reduction of variance applications and fees.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City's fence
regulations be revised to allow fences up to eight feet in height
in front yards adjacent to arterial and collector streets except
where clear vision requirements must be met.
In addition, it is proposed that the clear vision requirements be
modified to restrict fences where topography limits vision. The
fence regulations should also be changed to eliminate the
requirement for a two-foot setback for corner side yard fences.
(See Exhibit "II" Proposed Ordinance)
ANALYSIS
Background: Recent questions regarding when and where fences can
be built have been discussed by the City Council. The Council
requested that the Development Code provisions regarding fences be
reviewed. The development code requirements pertaining to fences
are covered under Chapter 18.100.090 and are attached as Exhibit II
to this memo.
Issues: Staff discussion identified various issues relative to
fences :
• The code requires a two foot setback for any fence
abutting a street side yard. There appears to be no need
for this requirement. Fences built according to this
requirement also tend to leave unmaintained strips
adjacent to streets.
• There are sometimes clear vision problems at an
intersection near the crest of a hill. These are
compounded by the construction of even a fence as short
as three feet.
• Fences are allowed along rear lot lines abutting a street
while they are not allowed along the front lot lines
abutting a street. In this case, it is possible to have
a situation with a row of six to eight foot rear yard
fences along a street, then no fences higher than three
feet, and then another row of six to eight foot rear yard
fences along the same street.
• Fences over three feet in height cannot be built without
a variance in defined front yards, which is virtually
always approved in situations along busy streets,
therefore creating an unnecessary expense of both the
applicant's and the public's time.
1 Fences are not allowed in the right-of-way. Any work in
the right-of-way requires a Street Opening Permit.
Public Interest
The question of what is in the public interest in regard to fence
requirement needs to be asked.
The purposes for fences range from decoration, privacy, and
protection to the definition of boundaries. Fence heights have
been traditionally been controlled for aesthetic purposes and to
allow visibility for police patrol. Fences heights on side and
rear yards have been controlled for the purpose of maintaining
light and air.
Taller brick, rock and cement walls along front property lines were
rather common many years ago. Clear vision areas at street and
driveway intersections are important safety considerations.
Control of fences for safety purposes is a logical public interest.
Some cities, such as Tualatin, do not have fence requirements for
single family dwellings. The Tualatin Planning Director has
indicated their city has not encountered any problems without the
requirements.
Any construction in the right-of-way is reserved for public
purposes. Any activity in the right-of-way needs to be controlled
so that it does not interfere with a public purpose. Activity in
the right-of-way, what can occur there and the permit process for
those activities are separate issues not addressed in this report.
In reality, it appears that the majority of issues relating to
fences in Tigard have been because the city controls the location
and height, not because the public has requested the control. It
is also true that hedges are not controlled and there are many
instances in the city where they serve the same purpose and
function as a fence where a fence is not allowed.
Alternatives
• Change the development code to allow fences in all yards
to a height up to eight feet excluding clear vision
areas. This approach would leave the choice up to the
property owner. Clear vision requirements would make
front yard fences unlikely in many cases because of the
requirements relative to driveways.
• Allow fences to a height up to eight feet in the front
yard along all streets listed on the Comprehensive Plan
Transportation Map as Arterials, Major Collectors or
Minor Collectors, subject again to clear vision
requirements. This approach would continue to control
aesthetics in most residential areas but would also allow
fences or walls to be constructed where traffic, noise
and privacy considerations could be more of a problem.
• Retain the existing code provisions. This would indicate
that the present requirements are consistent with the
city and community needs and philosophy.
Conclusion
Because of the clear vision requirements at driveways, many would
choose not to build a front yard fence. The major risk in the
proposed approach is a long row of front yard fences or individual
front yard fences that may not be aesthetically pleasing.
The Development Code should be changed to allow fences or walls to
be constructed higher than three feet in height in front yards
along major streets.
Suggested Procedure
1. Discuss concepts with the City Council for general policy
guidance.
2. Assuming the Council wishes to see some changes in the current
ordinance, direct staff to submit a proposed change to the
Development Code to the NPO's and Planning Commission.
3. Return to the City Council with proposed amendments based on
the recommendations of the NPO's and P.C.
Exhibit "I"
18.100.090 Setbacks for Fences or Walls
A. No fence or wall shall be constructed which exceeds the
standards in Subsection 18.100.090.B. except when the
approval authority, as a condition of,approval,- allows
that a fence or wall be constructed to a height greater
than otherwise permitted in order to mitigate against
potential adverse effects.
B. Fences or walls:
1. May not exceed three feet in height in a required
front yard or six feet on a corner side yard or
eight feet in all other locations and, in all cases,
shall meet vision clearance area requirements
(Chapter 18.102);
2. Are permitted outright in side yards or rear yards
to a height of six feet;
3. Located in a side or rear yard and which are between
six feet and eight feet in height shall be subject
to building permit approval;
4. Located in the front yard or corner side yard and
which exceed the height limitation shall comply with
the setback requirements for structures set forth in
the applicable zone; or
5. Located within a corner side shall be no closer than
two feet from the property line, and shall satisfy
visual clearance requirements. (Ord. 89-06; Ord. 85-
14; Ord. 83-52)
411
4
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 91-
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND PROVISIONS OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE PERTAINING
TO FENCE REQUIREMENTS, SECTION 18.100.090 AND CLEAR VISION REQUIREMENTS,
SECTION 18.102.020.
WHEREAS, the City of Tigard finds it necessary to revise the Community
Development Code periodically to improve the operation and implementation of
the Code; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tigard Planning Commission reviewed the staff
recommendation at a public hearing on July , 1991 and voted to recommend
approval of the amendment to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a publid hearing on August , 1991 to consider
the amendment.
THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Community Developemt Code shall be amended as shown in Exhibit
"A". Language to be added is UNDERLINED. Language to be deleted
is shown in [BRACKETS].
Section 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the
Council, approval 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
, 1991.
Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder
APPROVED: This day of , 1991.
Gerald R. Edwards, Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
Date
C
i
ORDINANCE No. 91-
Page 1
EXHIBIT "II"
18.100.090 Setbacks for Fences or Walls
A. No fence or wall shall be constructed which exceeds the
standards in Subsection 18.100.090.B. except when the
approval authority, as a condition of approval, allows
that a fence or wall be constructed to a height greater
than otherwise permitted in order to mitigate against
potential adverse effects.
B. Fences or walls:
1. May not exceed three feet in height in a required
front yard along local streets or [six feet on a
corner side yard or] eight feet in all other
locations and, in all cases, shall meet vision
clearance area requirements ( Chapter 18.102);
2. [Are permitted outright in side yards or rear yards
to a height of six feet;] Are permitted un to
eight feet in height in front yards adjacent to any
designated arterial, major collector or minor
collector street and, in all cases, shall meet
vision clearance area requirements ( Chapter
18.102); Permission shall be subiect to
administrative review of the location of the fence
or wall.
3. [Located in a side or rear yard and which are
between six feet and eight feet in height shall be
subject to building permit approval;] All fences
or walls greater than six feet in height shall be
subject to building permit approval
[4. Located in the front yard or corner side yard and
which exceed the height limitation shall comply
with the setback requirements for structures set
forth in the applicable zone; or]
[5. Located within a corner side shall be no closer
than two feet from the property line, and shall
satisfy visual clearance requirements. (Ord. 89-
06; Ord. 85-14; Ord. 83-52)]
18.102.020 Visual Clearance: Required
C. Where topogranhy or vertical curve conditions can
contribute to the obstruction of clear vision areas at a
street or driveway intersection, hedges plantings
fences, wall. wall structures and temporary or permanent
obstructions shall be further reduced in height or
eliminated to comply with the required clear vision area
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3. -Z
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Coun
FROM: Patrick J. Reilly, City Admini trator
DATE: June 3, 1991
SUBJECT: COUNCIL CALENDAR, July - September 191
Official Council meetings are marked with an asterisk If
generally OK, we can proceed and make specific adjustments in the
Monthly Council Calendars.
July '91
4 Thur 4th of July Holiday - City Offices Closed
*9 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30)
*16 Tue Council Study Meeting (6:30)
*23 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30)
August '91
13 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30)
20 Tue Council Study Meeting (6:30)
27 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30)
September 191
2 Mon Labor Day - City Offices Closed
6-8 Fri-
Sun Tigard's 30th Birthday Celebration
10 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30)
17 Tue Council Study Meeting (6:30)
24 Tue Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30)
cccal
Council Calendar - Page 1
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3 3
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 9, 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: June 25, 1991
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Approve City PREVIOUS ACTION:
Administrator Employment Agreement., j
/ . PREPARED BY: C. Wheatley. Recorder
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY:
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Consideration of draft Employment Agreement for Patrick J. Reilly, City
Administrator.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approve the resolution and agreement as proposed.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The attached agreement was drawn up by the City Attorney's office and
reflects consensus reached between the Council and Administrator during
previous discussions.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
Approve the resolution and agreement as proposed.
FISCAL NOTES
4
1
f.
r
k
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3,q
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 9. 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: _ June 26, 1991
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Authorization to PREVIOUS ACTION: June 25, 1991,
Issue Special Assessment Bonds fo-' Ord. 91-16 Spreading Assessments
Lincoln and Locus LID PREPARED BY: Wayne Lowry
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK / REQUESTED BY: Wayne Lowry
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Shall the City Council authorize the issuance of Special Assessment Bonds
for the Lincoln and Locust Local Improvement District?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Resolution.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The City Council by ordinance 91-16 dated June 25, 1991, spread the final
assessment among the participating properties in the Lincoln and Locust Local
Improvement District in the amount of $405,369.62. Property owners have
indicated their intention to apply to pay assessments in installments over a
ten-year period.
General obligation bonds can no longer be issued in their traditional form
because the unlimited authority to levy taxes is severely limited by Measure
5. Rather than risk a portion of our taxing capacity on these bonds, we have
chosen to issue special assessment bonds which are secured solely by the
assessment payments to be received from property owners, not from the taxing
authority of the City.
Special assessment bonds have been allowed in Oregon for many years, however,
due to the Bancroft Bond option, not many have been issued. In fact, 'this
particular issue may be the first series of such bonds publicly sold in
Oregon since Measure 5. We are confident, however, that these will sell well
in the market due to the extremely high assessed value of the commerical
property in the LID. Authorizing the sale of Special Assessment Bonds will
provide financing for those electing to pay in installments and will provide
necessary funding for the Bond Anticipation notes used for construction of
the Improvements which mature on September 3, 1991.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve bond issuance.
FISCAL NOTES
1. Provides funding to pay off maturing bond anticipation note.
S
}
i
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM: 25
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: ~ 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: November 5,1990
ISSUE/AGENDA TI E: Contract for fe - PREVIOUS ACTION:
sional servic r Triangle-Plan / PREPARED BY: John Acker
DEPT HEAD O CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Ed MurTUhY
PO I. Y ISSUE
Should the City conduct a land use analysis of the Tigard Triangle that could
result in proposed changes to the current Comprehensive Plan, zoning or
development standards for this area? If so, should the City accomplish such a
study by contracting for the services of a consulting firm to supplement the
efforts of the staff and Planning Commission?
This planning effort will further the Council's goals Of "promoting a balanced
economy and enhancing the vitality of the community", "creating a stronger sense
of identity" and "strengthening the quality of interaction with citizens".
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Tigard Triangle area is largely undeveloped or underdeveloped, and as such,
presents an opportunity for high quality development/redevelopment in a highly
visible location. Establishing a master plan will help assure that this area
develops in a planned, high quality manner.
When last considering this issue, City Council decided that individual Councilors
would meet with local developers to discuss the Triangle's development potential.
Those meetings have now been completed, and the results are summarized in the
attached memo.
The proposed development plan will be accomplished by creating a number of
development scenarios and then refining these scenarios into a single development
plan. The result will be a report explaining a development strategy with
descriptions of key elements and their effects on the Triangle and on surrounding
areas. The plan will outline necessary public improvements and their general
cost, and public and private roles in the development process. There will also
be large scale color graphic depictions of the development plan. This material
will be the basis for developing an implementation strategy which may include
policies, comprehensive plan amendments, special development standards, a capital
improvement plan, or open space plan for the Triangle.
Last fall, the Benkendorf Associates Corporation was selected by staff as being
best able to complete the desired work. The Benkendorf Associates is a well
known professional planning firm that has a history of successfully completing
similar projects.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Authorize the City Administrator to enter into a contract with The Benkendorf
Associates Corporation for planning and design services to create a Master Plan
for the Tigard Triangle as outlined in the Scope of Work.
2. Do not proceed with master planning effort in the Tigard Triangle at this
time.
3. Complete a land use analysis, but do so using "in-house" resources instead
of contracting for the services of a consultant.
4. Enlarge the study to include a transportation analysis as well as a land-use
analysis.
FISCAL IMPACT
1. The contract calls for payment to the consultant in an amount not to exceed
$20,670.
- - - SUGGESTED ACTION
Authorize the City Administrator to enter into a contract with The Benkendorf
Associates for services to create a Master Plan for the Tigard Triangle as
outlined in the Scope of Work.
tricont.sum
i
f
4
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Pat Reilly, City Administrator
FROM: Ed Murphy, Director of Community Developmen
DATE: June 14, 1991
SUBJECT: Tigard Triangle Master Plan
I. OVERVIEW
A. Summary
A proposed contract with Benkendorf Associates has been submitted to
the City Council for approval. Should the Council approve the
contract, a land use analysis of the area referred to as the "Tigard
Triangle" will begin.
B. Policy Implications
The implications of proceeding with a land use study is that the
current comprehensive plan designations, zoning patterns or
development standards may not be appropriate for either the market,
the natural features of the area, or the public need. Therefore,
there is probability that some changes to the current plans or
standards will eventually be proposed for consideration by the
Council.
C. Financial Implications
The consultant fee for master planning the Triangle area as outlined
in the attached Scope of Work is $20,670. There is $17,-500
identified in the proposed FY 91-92 budget and $7,500 in the FY 90-
91 budget for the Triangle master plan.
D. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City enter into a contract with Benkendorf
Associates to create a master plan for the Tigard Triangle.
II. ANALYSIS
4
A. Background
The idea of completing a land use analysis, or master plan, for the
Tigard Triangle has been discussed for some years now by the City
Council, Planning Commission, NPO, Economic Development Committee,
Chamber of Commerce, affected property owners and others.
-1-
i
.a
The City Council last discussed the master planning issue of the
Tigard Triangle in November 1990. A scope of work was drafted for
development of a master plan for the Triangle and a consultant was
selected by the staff, and recommended to the City Council. At that v
time the Council decided not to proceed with master planning but to
meet individually with local developers to ascertain the development
potential of the Triangle.
Over the past few months, City Councilors and staff have met with
numerous developers. The purpose of these meetings was to get a
developer's perspective on the potential for development in the
Triangle and to identify types of activities that the City might
undertake to make the area more attractive for development.
The following summarizes the most common themes of those meetings:
•t
• An area of agreement among all developers is that there is
presently little potential for office development in general,
and class "A" offices in particular are unlikely in the
Triangle in the long run. The overriding reason for this is
apparently that financing for speculative office buildings is
nearly impossible to obtain and, because of overbuilding, the
rate of return even on occupied buildings is not worth the
investment. Furthermore, there are more suitable locations in
this region to build offices than the Triangle, so if and when
the financial climate changes, the Triangle will not be in a
position of competitive advantage.
• Access to and from an area is extremely important to a
prospective developer, particularly for retail. Access into
the Triangle from the major highways is a key factor to its
development. Many emphasized the importance of building
Dartmouth Street and improving 72nd in order to stimulate
development.
• Many of the developers thought that multi-family housing might
be possible in the Triangle at a density of up to 25 units per
acre, particularly in areas where there could be natural
amenities such as Redrock Creek or wetlands. The idea is that
if - the appropriate type of multi-family development occurs
first, the Triangle becomes an active place both during the
day, evenings and weekends, creating a sense of security and
liveliness. If this happens, there will be a greater
probability that developers will look to develop the area with
other uses. It was also pointed out that it takes a longer
time to develop an area with a single type of use than an area
of true mixed use.
• The aesthetic appeal of an area was mentioned several times as
a selling factor to prospective tenants and therefore
important to developers. Streetscapes and landscaping are
particularly important in setting the tone on an area.
-2-
I
Several suggested that the expense of creating an attractive
streetscape (Dartmouth) with street trees, lighting and
landscaping would be invaluable to the image of the area for
the foreseeable future, such as done on Kruse Way. j
• A magnet user will attract further development; agglomeration
is becoming more important. A development with small shops is
unlikely in the present economic climate. A large destination
retailer is probably necessary in order for further
development to occur.
• Most developers thought that a master plan would be beneficial
because it would: 1) stimulate interest in development in the
Triangle; 2) create tools with which development could be
managed; 3) establish a "feel" for the quality of
development desired and, 4) indicate a long term commitment by
the City.
• A suggestion by several developers was to build in some
flexibility in the zoning or uses allowed so that the existing
market can, to some extent, be accommodated. The master plan
should establish the framework but be flexible enough to
accommodate future circumstances or ideas.
• Some developers suggested that some form of marketing might be
considered. This should occur only after there is something
to market such as a master plan, infrastructure improvements
t or landscaping improvements.
In view of what was learned from developers, the proposed scope of
work has been adjusted to better reflect the developer's perspective
of need.
B. Alternatives Considered
1. Complete a land use analysis for the Triangle that reviews
alternative land uses and design standards by contracting with
a land use/design consulting firm, with the staff providing
technical support.
2. Do not complete a land use analysis for the Triangle. Assume
that presently allowed land uses and development standards are
generally appropriate. Any proposed changes will be considered
on their individual merits. In this case the City will respond
to situations as they develop.
3. Complete a land use analysis, but do so using in-house
resources instead of hiring a consultant. Although this could
be done to a degree, it was felt that, a) it would shift staff
away from other projects that are also important; b) a private
sector consultant would have a depth of both land use and
-3-
design expertise that staff does not; and c) the study would
not have the same degree of objectivity, boldness and
credibility as it would with an outside consultant's input.
4. Enlarge the study to include not just a land use analysis, but
a transportation analysis as well. It was concluded by staff
that, although this may become a component later if the need
is apparent, that work should be done under a separate
contract, perhaps parallel to the land use study. It was
further concluded that the land use analysis should proceed
any further transportation analysis.
III. CONCLUSION
Based on conversations with developers it is likely that at least a
portion of the Comprehensive Plan for the Triangle area is not correct
relative to present economic conditions of development and natural
features within the Triangle, and therefore a review of some alternatives
would be appropriate.
Staff has concluded that a land use study should be undertaken at this
time, using the services of an outside consultant; that there may be a need
to complete additional transportation studies in the future, but that any
transportation studies necessary should be completed under separate
contract or "in-house".
Staff further concludes that Benkendorf and Associates are the most
t qualified firm to complete this study, and that right now is a very
appropriate time to proceed with the study.
trimemo.sum - 6/14/91
F
-4-
FG
T
i
g
r ~rli
_ ~ t~ a~ie ~tudr
~ Frei -Current
.and l se
E
H t ~ t
~3C9~t
~('ESid~"T;~=
f
Qther uses
Yi~l lol dole ! ■ol nprfualr
ties tofrpi lel ly I11 Ci li of
Tl~erd elllloifp ifoprgllt
~ lelersotiee Syelen (CIS)
eeilean. IfNrsoliee
portreyel More soy Ic
inlnld to It lard rill
H E R T H addiUoul teeleicel
enl/or 9nletprotoE lro
j dais of dedfrsined ly
Ilo Cfly of Tigard.
' ~ (YP9EYlN9)
9 tI00 (It/12/90)
~ ,
7-16-91 AGENDA #3.5
1 OF `
.
s ~
i . ~
_ i ~ ~ - e
~
~n l~
,
~ t. s q
r .
~ 1 ~ ~ ,
f~
,
~r
1 ~ - ~
r ~ 4a ,7~ _ u~ ~
{ ~ ,
, .
r
.T. ~ ,
v...~_._____---~ ~ m
- ~ _r. a ~ ~t, . , ~ ,t
.
_.w~ _ r -tip-_
~ ,
t x. 1
r
j
_ _ . a
~ i
t i
.
~ ~
r
.
-
w ~ .r _
,
r - ~
„
-a;;
. ' 7 -
4:
rr \ .
}°~p
i'.r
° vs
1
-
-~i l ::;i
J.
- _ +
e~
> ,
~rW
A
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM -3.6a
N )
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 9. 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: June 26, 1991
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation of PREVIOUS ACTION: June 25, 1991.
Contingency - 1991/92 Budget 91Z92 Budget Adoption
Adjustment PREPARED BY: Wayne
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Operations
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Shall the City Council approve the appropriation from contingency in the
Sanitary and Storm Sewer funds for the purchase of OSHA-required safety
equipment.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Resolution.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Both the Sanitary Sewer and Storm Sewer maintenance crews routinely have a
need to dig trenches more than 5 feet deep to make repairs to sewer and storm
lines. Recent OSHA requirements require shoring shield equipment which the
City does not have. The specific type of equipment necessary for this
application is not available at rental yards.
In order to continue the maintenance and repair of such lines throughout the
City, it will be necessary to purchase a shoring shield system to be shared
by both crews. The cost of the equipment is estimated at $8,000.
This equipment was not included in the proposed budget because the detailed
requirements from OSHA were not known until after the budget process was
complete. Apparently there was some confusion between OSHA and the
distributor as to exactly what piece of equipment would comply with the
requirements. The equipment being proposed will bring the city into
compliance with the new safety rules.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve resolution.
2. Do not approve.
FISCAL NOTES
1. Appropriates $4,000 of contingency in both the Sanitary and Storm Sewer
funds for a total of $8,000.
2. Certain repair work would have to be contracted out.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM q
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 9, 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: April 5. 1991
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Vacation PREVIOUS ACTION: Two previous
re uests for vacation of this R-O-T rtion on SW 90th Avenue.
r PREPARED BY: Planning Staff
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK F.EQUESTED BY: Property Owners
ISSUE RE THE COUNCIL
Should the City Council vacate a portion of SW 90th Avenue located north of the
intersection of SW 90th Avenue and SW North Dakota Street?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recomended that the City Council approve the attached ordinance thereby
approving the vacation of a portion of SW 90th Avenue.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Council initiated this vacation at a meeting held on May 21, 1991.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of this vacation at a meeting held
on June 17, 1991.
Daniel and Charlotte Cook and Charles Hing, petitioners, request City Council
approval to vacate a portion of the SW 90th Avenue right-of-way adjacent to
properties they own at the corner of SW 90th Avenue and SW North Dakota Street
(see accompanying map). This request differs from the two previous requests
to vacate SW 90th Avenue north of SW North Dakota Street because the previous
vacation requests included a portion of SW North Dakota Street located east of
SW 90th Avenue. If approved the previous requests would have created a
landlocked parcel at the east end if SW 90th Avenue and adjacent to Highway
217. The subject request does not create a landlocked parcel and appears to
be in the public interest. The recomendations of the appropriate reviewing
agencies have been reflected in the proposed condition(s) of approval.
Attachments include: 1) a legal description (Exhibit "A"); 2) a vicinity map
showing the location of the proposed vacation (Exhibit "B").
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the attached ordinance approving the vacation proposal.
2. Amend and approve the attached ordinance approving the vacation proposal.
3. Deny the attached ordinance and vacation proposal.
4. Take no action at this time.
FISCAL NOTES
t! All fees and costs have been or will be paid by the applicant.
RP/90-sum.cc
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder
DATE: July 2, 1991
SUBJECT: Council Meeting - July 9, 1991
The Public Hearing on the vacation of right-of-way for a portion of
S.W. 135th Avenue will either be recommended to be continued to a
date certain or withdrawn.
cwc72.91
C
r
E
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 9, 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: June 25, 1991
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Consideration o4 PREVIOUS ACTION: The Parks System
a Revised Parks System Development/,4 Development Charge was established
Charge to ComDM\v with State Lam " in 1977 and amended in 1978, 1987,
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK and October, 1990.
' PREPARED BY: Ron Bunch, Sr. Planner
REQUESTED BY: Ed Murphy, CD Director
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
The issue before the City Council is whether the City should repeal Ordinance
87-71 and adopt a new Parks System Development Charge (SDC) Ordinance which
would bring the City into compliance with ORS 223.297 - 223.314.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached System Development
Charge Ordinance.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The 1989 Oregon State Legislature adopted a comprehensive state law that
requires Cities to revise their SDC ordinances by July, 1991. The new
legislation provides a uniform framework that all local governments must
follow to collect and expend SDC fees. Adoption of the attached Parks SDC
,)rdinance would bring Tigard into compliance with this law. The law also
requires that the City adopt a methodology and a Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) by which to set the SDC. Staff has prepared a methodology and a CIP,
which is attached to the proposed ordinance as Exhibit "A". This information
indicates that in order to ensure future Tigard residents enjoy the same
level of park areas and facilities as current residents, the SDC would have
to be increased by about $200.00 a unit over current levels. This would be
$718 for single family units and $508 for multi-family units. However, the
ordinance does not increase the Parks SDC at this time. Rather, staff
recommends these revisions be made when the "Ten Year Park Improvement
Program" (Parks 2000 Action Plan) is completed.
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
1) Adopt the proposed Parks SDC Ordinance and continue the current SDC
charges.-
2) Adopt the ordinance but adopt other charges than those proposed.
3) Adopt neither the ordinance nor the increased charges.
FISCAL NOTES
1) It is estimated that, adopting the ordinance and continuing the current
charges would result in SDC revenues of about $150,000 for Fiscal Year
1991-92. This is based on 300 single family residents being built.
2) Adopting SDC's which would provide the 'same level of park areas and
facilities to future residents as what currently exists would result in
an additional $65,000 of revenue for FY 1991 -92 based on the above
assumptions.
-:b/ccsumprk.sdc
t
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Pat Reilly, City Administrator
FROM: Ed Murphy, Community Development Director
DATE: June 26, 1991
SUBJECT: Parks System Development Charge Ordinance
Adoption of the attached Parks System Development Charge Ordinance
would bring Tigard into compliance with the System Development
Charge Act (ORS 223.297 - 223.314). Associated with the ordinance
is a parks capital improvement program (CIP) which is required by
the law. The CIP and associated methodology indicates that if
future residents are charged the same amount that current residents
have invested in the system in order to maintain the current level
of service, the following SDC increases would result.
a) Single Family Dwelling: $717.56 up from $500 per unit.
b) Manufactured Homes on Individual Lots: $717.56 up from $500
per unit.
C) Multi-Family Units: $507.70 up from $300 per unit.
d) Spaces Within a Manufactured Home Park: $507.70 up from $250
per unit.
The current standard and how much current residents have invested
in the system is illustrated by the attached Figure 1.
However, staff does not propose to increase the parks SDC fee at
this time. Rather it is recommenced to continue the current level
of SDC charges until staff completes the "Ten-Year Park Improvement
Program" (Parks 2000 Action Plan). At that time, changes to the
SDC would be proposed based upon a detailed study of Tigard's
current park facilities and a detailed development program. Also,
waiting to adopt new SDC's until this planning effort is complete
would give Tigard's citizens and the development community an
opportunity to participate in the process.
The SDC fees will continue to be charged only against residential
development. The park system components included in the SDC are
neighborhood and community parks and facility areas such as
baseball and soccer fields. The 117 acres of greenways and
wetlands which are controlled by the City were not used as part of
the SDC methodology and CIP. At this time it was decided only to
include those parks which are accessible and for the most part
useable or which could be made useable for both passive and/or
active recreation.
msdcpat.rb5
FIGURE 1
CITY OF TIGARD:
INVESTMENT IN EXISTING PARK FACILITIES
AMOUNT PER PERSON AS PER 1991 POPULATION ESTIMATE OF 29,300
Component Existing Standard Component Charge
Standard Units Cost P/Person
Parks - Land Acquisition and Development:
- Community 4.03/Acre 1,000/pop. $40,000 per acre $161.29
- Neighborhood (118.146 Acres)
- Mini-Parks
Basic Park Imnrovements:l $ .50 sq. ft. 87.82
Existina Facilities:
(2) Softball/Baseball .07 1,000/pop. $57,0002 each 3.89
Diamonds
(2) Multi-Use Hard .07 1,000/pop. 7,700 each .53
Courts
(3) Soccer Fields .10 1,000/pop. 64,8003 each 6.63
Unlighted
(10) Playground .34 1,000/pop. 20,000 each 6.82
Equipment Sets
(2) Horseshoe Court .07 1,000/pop. 500 each .03
(2) Picnic Shelters .07 1,000/pop. 10,000 each .68
(2) Restrooms .34 fixtures 1,000/pop. 10,000 fixture 3.41
(10 Fixtures)
Total Park Land and Facilities Investment Per Person ................$270.81
parkinvs.rb6
Basic Park Improvements include grading, basic irrigation,
primary pedestrian paths, lawn development and landscaping. $.50
sq. ft. is the estimated current standard of improvement.
2The actual cost of constructing a softball diamond is
approximately $1.20 per square foot. In this case the basic park
improvement cost of $.50 sq. ft. has been taken into account.
3 A regulation soccer field costs about: $1.20 sq. ft to
construct. The cost per facility has taken into account the $.50
sq. ft. basic park improvement cost.
E
t
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM !
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: July 9, 1991 DATE SUBMITTED: June 14, 1991
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Revisions to PREVIOUS ACTION: Adoption of Library
Libra Policy-Manual and TMC Ch e Policy Manual 1988
2.36.040 PREPARED BY: Irene Ertell
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY: Library Board
POLI Y ISSUE
The Library Policy Manual as recommended by the Library Board and approved by
the City Council in 1988 was reviewed by the Library Board this first quarter
of the year. Four sections are being presented for revision, with the fourth
requiring a revision to the Tigard City Municipal Code, Chapter 2.36.040.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The four sections recommended for revision are: Section IV, Reconsideration
of Library Materials; Section VII, Privacy of Records; Section VIII, Meeting
Room Use and the City of Tigard Municipal Code, Chapter 2.36.040, Board
Responsibilities. (This section of the Code is included as a part of the
JPolicy Manual.) The proposed revisions will more accurately reflect current
procedures and, in the section on Privacy of Records, compliance with ORS
192.501. Please see attached memorandum to City Administrator, dated
April 26, 1991 for detailed information.
-
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Adopt revisions.
2. Do not change Policy Manual adopted in 1988.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Adopt the four revisions as presented in the attached proposed ordinance.
C'
n:word\library\ieesumag
F
t
F
e
f,
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Pat Reilly, City Administrator
FROM: Irene Ertell, Library Director-
DATE: April 26, 1991
SUBJECT: Revisions to Library Policy Manual
At its April 11, 1991 meeting, the Tigard Library Board voted to revise three sections
of the Library Policy Manual which was adopted in May 1988 and "Chapter 2.36.040
of the City Municipal Code.
Section IV Reconsideration of Library Materials, was expanded to reflect more
accurately the way in which complaints are handled at present and to present a clear
line of responsibility for handling these complaints. In asmuch as the complaint
form, "Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials," becomes a public document
once it is filled out and signed, this fact will now appear at the bottom of the form.
"Signature of Complainant" has been changed to "Signature." These changes were
reviewed with City Attorney, Tim Ramis.
Section VII, Privacv of Records, was revised in line with a change in ORS 192.501
which no longer prohibits disclosure of patrons' reading records if "public interest
requires disclosure." This too was reviewed with the City Attorney.
Section VIII, MeetinLy Room Use, applies to the Library's Quiet Room. The changes
were made so that the library's policy conforms to the city-wide policy.
The last revised item concerns Library Board responsibilities. The Municipal Code
in Chapter 2.36.040 "Board Responsibilities" lists seven responsibilities. The Board
has reduced this to four which they believe accurately reflects the duties of an
advisory board and is a more precise description of how they carry out their
responsibilities. They would like to see the Code revised accordingly.
Each of these revisions is attached with copies of the original. If there are no
problems with the revisions to the three policy statements, the changes will be made
as appropriate. If the change to the Municipal Code is approved, the appropriate
steps will be taken for that revision.
POLMEMO
word\library
7
i
IV. RECONSIDERATION OF LIBRARY MATERIALS:
A's the Library strives to provide books and other materials for the interest,
information, and enlightment of all people in the community, it' is inevitable
that there will be disagreement on the merit of various items. The Library
selection staff is not able to read or review each item before ordering,
though it utilizes as much as possible recognized review Sources. If a patron
or a group objects to any item, they will be furnished with the "Request for
Reconsideration of Library Materials" form (see following) which must be
filled out before reconsideration will be given.
The Library Director will examine the item in question, checking reviews and
determining whether it conforms to the standards as stated in the Selection of
Library Materials. The Library Director will decide whether to withdraw or
restrict the material in question and will write to the complainant giving the
reasons for the decision.
If the complainant wishes to contest the Library Director's decision, the
"Request for Reconsideration of Library materials" may be presented to the
Library Board for review, by letter or by making prior arrangements to be on
the agenda of a Library Board meeting. The Board will consider the complaint
and the Library Director's recommendations. The Library Board will make its
decision based on the standards as stated in Selection of Library Materials.
C
s
l
0020L -11'
/L(~-GcJ Ca7~
PART IV. RECONSIDERATION OF LIBRARY MATERIALS:
As the Library strives to provide books and other materials for the interest,
information and enlightenment of all people in the community, it is inevitable
that there will be disagreement on the merit on various items. The library
selection staff is not able to read or review each item before ordering, though
it utilizes recognized review sources as much as possible.
Recognizing that we all have a right to disagree and question, the Library staff
will try to determine initially if the individual or group is seeking information
as to why a particular item has been selected or if they object to the
availability of the item and wish to have it removed from the shelf or to
restrict access.
If the individual or group is only seeking information, the matter should be
handled informally by a professional librarian. This is an opportunity to
explain the public library's mission and the guarantee of our freedom to read
under the First Amendment.
If the individual or group objects to the material being available and wishes to
have the material removed from the library, then they will be furnished with the
'Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials' form (see page 12) which must
be filled out before the item will be reconsidered.
The Library Director will examine the item in question, seeking reviews and
determining whether it conforms to the standards as stated in the Selection of
Library Materials. The Library Director will decide whether to withdraw or
restrict the material in question and will write to the complainant giving the
reasons for the decision.
If the complainant wishes to contest the Library Director's decision, the
'Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials' may be presented to the
Library Board for review either by letter or by making prior arrangements to be
on the agenda of a Library Board meeting. The Board will consider the complaint
and the Library Director's recommendations. The Library Board will make its
t decision based on the standards as stated in Selection of Library Materials.
If the complainant contests the Library Board's decision, the matter will be
referred to the City Council.
t
F
Ye
3
VII. PRIVACY OF RECORDS:
L ry person has a right to inspect any public record of a public body in this
state except as otherwise expressly provided by ORS 192.501 to 192.505.
Patron registration is a public record and not exempt by ORS 192.500.
Public library circulation records showing the use of specific library
materials by named persons are exempt from disclosure under ORS 192.410 and
ORS 192.500. Such disclosure would clearly constitute an unreasonable
invasion of privacy.
4
Any problems or conditions relating to the privacy of a patron through the
records of Tigard Public Library which are not provided for in this policy
statement should be referred to the Library Director who after study and '
consultation with the Library Board and/or Legal Counsel, shall issue a
written decision as to whether to heed the request for information. (Policy
based on "Policy on Confidentiality of Library Records," adopted by the
Council of the American Library Association, January 20, 1971; revised July 4,
1975, by the ALA Council.)
i
i
+S
i
C_
002OL -15-
~~..(i000 o Ld~c~
PART VII. PRIVACY OF RECORDS:
The public library circulation records showing the use of specific library
materials by named persons are conditionally exempt under ORS 192.501.
ORS 192.501 exempts a specific type of record information "unless the public
interest requires disclosure in the particular instance." Though libraries are
exempt from disclosure, exemption does not prohibit disclosure.
The Tigard Public Library believes that the disclosure of a person's record
showing the use of specific library materials is an invasion of privacy.
Therefore, unless 'public interests" can be shown, the Library Director will
refuse to disclose such records. The Library Director will refer all such
requests to legal counsel who will advise the Library Board and City Council on
an appropriate response by the Library Director.
Ns%v rd\llbrary\lbypol
r
1
c
1
r
f
i
VIII. MEETING ROOM USE:
a
ll/
T~.e Tigard Public Library provides a meeting/study room for library-sponsored
or co-sponsored programs and meetings which meet the Library's civic,
informational, educational, cultural, and recreational service goals. When
not in use for library activities, the meeting/study room is available to
local community organizations and committees under the following guidelines
approved by the Library Board. The Library Board neither approves nor
disapproves of content, topics, subject matter, or points of view of
individuals or groups using the meeting/study room.
1. The room is available for nonprofit, educational, or cultural groups or
individuals who wish to study.
2. Groups may schedule a regular meeting time. Groups with a regularly
scheduled meeting will be notified if a special situation arises and will
be asked to reschedule a certain day to accommodate any special meeting or
event.
3. A group may not charge admission for a meeting or event.
4. Generally, educational or training conferences, workshops, planning
sessions, etc., need not be open to the public and will not be publicized
with library events. Admission fees or collections may not take place,
but registration fees for materials or tuition may be collected in
advance, off the premises.
The meeting/study room is available for use during the hours the library
is open. A program or meeting may not continue past the closing hour for
the library. Special arrangements can be made for the use of the room
when the library is closed to the public and library staff is in the
building. The room is not available on days the library is closed and
library staff is not present.
6. Simple refreshments may be served in the meeting/study room, provided the
room is left in the condition in which it was found and users bring their
own utensils and supplies. Notification must be made ahead of time if
refreshments are to be served. The group will be charged for damage
incurred to furnishings or carpet during the meeting. No alcoholic
beverages are allowed on the premises.
7. No smgking is allowed in the library.
8. The Library Board or the City of Tigard is not responsible for accidents,
injury, or loss of individual or group property while using the meeting/
study room.
9. Specific rules governing the use of meeting/study room will be established
and supervised by the Library Director and Library staff.
C
0020L -16-
. ~.c-c-a laid
MEETING ROOM USE
The Tigard Public Library provides a meeting/study room for meetings which meet the Ubrary's civic,
informational, education, cultural, and recreational service goals. When not in use for library
activities, the meeting/study room is available to local community organizations and committees under
the following guidelines approved by the Ubrary Board. The Library Board neither approves nor
disapproves of content, topics, subject matter, or points of view of individuals or groups using the
meeting/study room.
1. The room is available for nonprofit, educational, or cultural groups or individuals who wish to
study.
2. Groups or individuals may schedule a regular meeting time. The Ubrary retains the right to
cancel or relocate a meeting upon 24 hours notice.
3. The meeting/study room is available for use during the hours the library is open. A program or
meeting may not continue past the closing hour for the library. Special arrangements can be
made for the use of the room when the library is closed to the public and library staff is in the
building. The room is not available on days the library is closed and library staff is not present.
4. No smoking, food, or beverages are allowed in the library.
5. CITY LIABILITY
All groups or individuals using the Ubrary meeting room agree to protect, indemnify, and
defend the City, its authorized agents, elected and appointed officials, and all employees
against any and all claims as a result of persons attending any function at the facility. This
provision includes any expenses incurred by the City defending any such claim. The City, its
elected and appointed officials, and all employees will not be hold responsible for any lost or
stolen articles, clothing, etc., as a result of persons attending any function in the building.
USER LIABILITY
The City recognizes that a certain amount of wear will occur to the meeting room over the
course of normal use. However, in the event the above maintenance guidelines are violated,
the user will be liable for the following charges:
1. Repair or replacement of equipment or facilities damaged due to neglect, vandalism, or
misuse.
2. Cleaning expense incurred to clean up the room if not left in the same condition as found.
6. Functions occurring in the meeting/study room must not violate any City Ordinance or disrupt
' normal Ubrary activities.
7. Specific rules governing the use of meeting/study room will be established and supervised by
the Ubrary Director and Ubrary . staff.
;ad PJ91
0020L -16-
4
2.36 _046
the mayor, subject to confirmation by =he city council,
shall appoint a new member to serve for the duration of the
unexpired term.
(3) No person may serve more than two full consecu-
tive terms on the library board, notwithstanding prior
appointment to•an unexpired term. After a one-year interval,
a former member who had served two ter-m- may be reappointed.
(4) Members of the library board shall receive no
compensation. -
(c) Meetings. The library board shall meet at least
six times a year and every meeting of tine board shall be
publicized in advance and shall be open to the public.
(d) Officers. The library board shall, at its first
meeting after July 1, 1977, and at least annually thereafter
elect a chairman and a chairman pro to=. The chairman shall
preside over the meetings of'the board. The head librarian,
or his authorized designee; shall serve as secretary to the
library board and shall keep. accurate records of all board
meetings which records shall be made, available-to the city
administrator, city council and interested public.upon re-
quest. (Ord. 84-35 551, 2•, 1984: --'Ord.- 77-57 51, -1977: Ord.
72-30 53, 1972).
Zr.36040' Hosxd---Restoii'siblities The -library board
shall have the following responsibilities:
( (1) To advise the city administrator and city council of
findings aLhd'concerns relating to the management, control and
operation of city library facilities;
(2) To formulate for recommendation-to the city council,
rules, regulations and policies as deemed desirable for the
governance, maintenance of order, safety, operation and utili-
zation of library facilities and to monitor the application
of all adopted rules, regulations and policies;
(3) To monitor the operation of the library for -the
purpose of identifying any deficiencies in the level of ser-
vice being. provided to the public and to recommend to the
city administrator and city council appropriate remedial actions
where deficiencies are found to exist;
(4) To make recommendations to the budget officer re-
garding financial needs of the library during the preparation
of the annual budget;
(5) To encourage and support active. volunteerism in sup-
port of the use and improvement of the library facilities;
(6) To ascertain the library needs of the community and
to present to the city council. evaluations and recommendations
regarding needs and desires as expressed by library patrons;-
(7) To perform such other duties and to provide such
other advice as the council may request from time to time in
furtherance of the goal of providing the best library service
l
26 (Tigard 9/84)
2.36.050--2.40.020
r
to the public as is possible under t-he constraints of avail-
able revenue, space, manpower and other public resources.
(Ord. 77-57 52, 1977: Ord. 72-30 54, 1972).
2.36.050 Donated funds. All fur_ds donated to the city
for library purposes shall be subject to the same rules,
regulations and expenditure control as applicable to appro-
priated funds; provided, however, that such donated funds
shall be accounted for under the caption of *public library
donations," and such funds shall be subject to expenditure
only for the purposes for which donated, except that funds
received from donors without specific limitations as to use
may be used for general library purposes. (Ord. 72-30 55,
1972).
2.36.060 Fees. (a) users and patrons who reside in
or have their business in the city limits of Tigard shall
not be required to pay a library privilege fee, but shall be
liable to pay such fines or late charges as may be pre-
scribed by resolution of.the council.
(b) All fees and charges received shall be accounted
for as general fund receipts under the heading of "public
library." (Ord. 84-35 53, 1984: Ord. 76-55 51, 1976: Ord.
72-30 56, 1972).
Chapter 2.40
NOMINATING PROCEDURE
Sections:
2.40.010 Petition--Form-
2.40.020 Nomination acceptance--Form--Furnished by
city recorder.
2.40.030 Filing dates--Mayor.
2.40.040 Filing dates--City cour.cil.
2.40.050 Filing dates--Extension in case of weekend
_ or holiday.
2.40.010 Petition--Form. The form of nominating peti-
tion for all candidates for elective positions within the
city shall substantially conform to the form designated•by
the Secretary of State. (Ord. 86-05 51, 1986: Ord. 64-19
51, 1964).
2 40 020 Nomination acceptance--Form--Furnished by
city recorder.* The city recorder Is- authorized and directed
* Exhibit A is on file in the city recorder's office.
29 (Tigard 8/15/86)
Geti.-
IBRARY BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES:
The Library Board shall have the following responsibilities:
1. To represent the library needs of the community and communicate those needs
to the City Council;
2. To recommend library policies as deemed desirable in the operation and utilization
of library facilities to the Council;
3. To encourage and support active volunteerism in support of the use and
improvement of library facilities;
4. To advise, as the Council may request, in furtherance of the goal to provide the
best library service to the public as possible within the constraints of available
resources, space and manpower.
wcrd&brarfXbpol
z
I
t
's