City Council Packet - 07/22/1997
JdGAR®
} of
00GOW
1 ~
out4CIL
f . S"" CITY
-TIGA
I%G
t.
i
22,1997 ~ -
JULY
1
Na
Glt.~ MEE~I%G WILL
cout4
{
.t
5 ;
~ t:~admY°~P~i.doc u
(503) 66a-2772
47223 (503) 634-4171 1DD
OR
T;gard.
11 Bivd..
1 13125 S\N H0
}
~ i
n
CITY OF TIGARD
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
BUSINESS' MEETING
i JULY 22,1997 6:30 P.M.
TIGARD CITY HALL,
1312$ SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OREGON 97223
i
j v.
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 Manager.
mes noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present
°--fy 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in
any order after 7:30 p.m
Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be
scheduled for Council meetings b noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please
! call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
1
Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: i
• Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and
• Qualified bilingual interpreters.
Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow
as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday
preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above: 639-4171, x309 (voice)
or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf).
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
r~
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 1
i
I
- - - A
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JULY 22, 1997
i 6:30 p.m.
• STUDY SESSION
> 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. As you are aware, all
y discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this
meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media
are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information
discussed during this session.
i ¢
i
7:30 p.m. ! , .
1. BUSINESS MEETING
1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
1.2 Roll Call
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications/Liaison Reports
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
7:35 P.M.
VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please)
i 7:40 p.m. I
I 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 10, 1997
3.2 Approve Appointments to the Community Housing Task Force and Approve the
Issues to Review (Council Charge) for Recommendations to the City Council
3.3 Local Contract Review Board
a. Award Street Sweeping Contract to Midstate Industrial
• Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested
to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be
considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not
need discussion.
7:45 p.m. w
4. Update: Development of Proposed Improvements to Summerlake I
City Engineer i -
U
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 2
I
a
{
J
3 8:15 p.m.
5. PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 10, 1997 COUNCIL f
n MEETING) - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (ZOA 97-001) WATER RESOURCES
OVERLAY DISTRICT - A request to amend the Tigard Community Development Code to
add a new section to protect significant wetlands and riparian corridors, which meets the
requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 and the "safe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5
administrative rule. The new section will be titled the "Water Resources Overlay District."
a. Continue Public Hearing
b. Declarations or Challenges
C. Staff Report: Community Development Department
d. Public Testimony (Opponents, Proponents)
e. Council Questions -
f. Close Public Hearing
g. Council Deliberation: Ordinance No. 97- O(O
8:45 p.m.
6. Consider Approval of Atfalati Agreement
City Manager
9:10 P.M.
7. Update: Tree Planting Program
• Public Works Director
i
I 9:15 P.M.
Consider Approval of Franchise Agreement - Firstpoint Communications
Finance Director
Council Discussion
Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 97-_0_1 (Firstpoint) I
9:30 p.m.
I 9. Discuss Council Goals - Staff Workplan
City Manager
10:00 P.M.
I
10. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
10:10 p.m S~rC~ w-~ C' i
, ' c ~ d) " tt-~$ /eat P i
P.M.
r~ J ~l 7 a9
11. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Te Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session under the
provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property
uanaacuu11 tion
3, ClJrfent and pending litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed
by those present Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session,
but must not disclose any information discussed during this session.
10:20 p.m. i
J 12. ADJOURNMENT [
I `~dm\ca@ry\cca\970722.dm
I
I
f COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 3
i
i
'j
J
t
Agenda Item No.
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Meeting of a L 1 1)
MEETING MINUTES - JULY 22, 1997
a
• STUDY SESSION
j > Meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. by Mayor Jim Nicoli
i
> Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Bob Rohlf, and Ken Scheckla.
1 > Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; Community Development Director Jim
Hendryx; Asst. to the City Manager Liz Newton; Legal Counsel Tim Ramis;
and City Recorder Catherine Wheatley. City Engineer Gus Duenas and
Building Official David Scott arrived at 7:30 p.m.
j > Executive Session: The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:35 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.
> Executive Session adjourned at 7:21 p.m.
> Main Street Monopole
Councilor Rohlf asked if the City could mitigate the appearance of the monopole that would
be placed on Main Street. He held that it would not improve the appearance of the downtown.
He mentioned that the application was currently in the appeal time period from the Hearings
Officer's decision.
Bill Monahan, City Manager, said that the Hearings Officer usually did a thorough job on
' the monopole applications. The Council could call up the application for further review but
currently the City Code had no provisions to allow the City to dictate what it would look like.
The Council discussed the exact location of the pole and its utility shack. Mayor Nicoli
concurred with Councilor Rohlf"s concern about its appearance. He agreed with pulling the
item up for Council review.
> Home Occupation Permits
Mayor Nicoli explained that he received a call from the Tigard Times asking about the Code
Enforcement Officer sending a 12 year old boy down to City Hall to get a home occupation
permit and to pay the business tax for his enterprise of making dry cookie mix at home and
selling it in the neighborhood. He pointed out that this was not good public relations for the
City.
Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager, said that staff received a telephone call noting
concern about a flyer received advertising the dry cookie mix and wanting to know if these
,y people paid the business tax. Apparently the boy's friends had distributed the flyers to a
different neighborhood. She said that business tax ordinance does not say that a child is
exempt.
{
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE I
• ~ i
1~
j Ms, Newton explained that home occupation permits were $30 with a half year prorated
j business tax at $27.50. She reported that she clarified for the Times reporter that the business
tax was not new nor an attempt to increase revenue in response to Measures 47 and 50. The
business tax rate has not increased since 1988. Mr. Monahan pointed out that it was not the
boy applying at the counter for the permit but his mother.
1 Ms. Newton said that any non-profit, religious, or fraternal organization was specifically
I exempted in the ordinance from paying the business tax. This included the Girl Scouts and
' high school students raising money through car washes. Mr. Monahan said that staff pursues
whatever complaints they received from citizens. They do not go out looking for children
selling products on the street.
> BMX Course at Summerlake Park
Mr. Monahan reported that a group of kids put together a BMX course in an area in
Summerlake Park; they had cleared of a couple of downed trees. Immediately the course
became popular. That popularity increased dramatically when a neighbor told Channel 2
News about this course built by the kids. Channel 2 did a story on it for their Neighborhood
program. When City staff found out about it, staff evaluated the course and determined that
there were liability risks. However, instead of simply shutting the course down, Ed Wegner,
! Public Works Director, was trying to fit the course into the Summerlake Park master plan
where it could be operated safely with some restrictions.
> Agenda Review
Mr. Monahan informed the Council that Agenda Item No. 7, tree planting program, was set '
over for further review by Planning. He mentioned non-agenda items of the budget
adjustment for the solid waste review and the SW North Dakota Task Force appointments. He
noted some letters earlier distributed by the City Recorder.
1. BUSINESS MEETING
Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
1
Mayor Nicoli called the business meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
• Council Communications/Liaison Reports: None
• Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items l
Mr. Monahan noted a change to Consent Agenda item 3.2. He asked to pull Item 7 for set
over to August 12. He asked to add non agenda items for the budget adjustment for solid
waste review of the curbside commingled recycling proposal, and for the SW North
Dakota Task Force appointments.
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA: No visitors signed in to speak.
• 3
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 2 s -
i 1
f
I
f
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, noted the change in the roster for
Community Housing Task Force: Sally Parks, Metro Low Income Housing Association
President, instead of John Groenwald. (Item 3.2)
Councilor Hunt noted corrections to the minutes.
Motion by Councilor Rohlf, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt the Consent Agenda,
3.1 as modified and 3.2 as adjusted.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, I
Councilors Hunt, Rohlf and Scheckla voted "yes.") i
F
3.1 Approve Council Minutes: June 10, 1997
3.2 Approve Appointments to the Community Housing Task Force and Approve the
Issues to Review (Council Charge) for Recommendations to the City Council
3.3 Local Contract Review Board
a. Award Street Sweeping Contract to Midstate Industrial
4. UPDATE: DEVELOPMENT OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO
SUMMERLAKE
Gus Duenas, City Engineer, reported that the sediment testing at the lake was completed on
i r July 22 but the report would not be out for another week. He reviewed the preliminary
findings: the sediment was 8 to 10 inches thick with a phosphorous concentration level not
present in the native subsurface below the sediment. The high phosphorous content was likely
due to construction upstream and the nutrients contributed by the nutria and the ducks. The
3 lake would probably have to be dredged to remove the sediment at a ballpark estimate cost of l
$150,000. Staff would return with the USA recommendations, options, and cost estimates in t'
September.
Councilor Rohlf asked why they needed USA recommendations if the lake was a City lake. -
Mayor Nicoli pointed out that USA controlled all storm water quality in the County. He has
talked with Bill Gaffey who indicated that USA would work with the City on this issue. Mr.
Duenas said that staff knew that the USA recommendations would be insufficient but they saw !
USA as a source of free expertise and advice on available options. E.
i
Van Camp, 12481 SW Edgewater Court, asked a series of questions regarding the testing,
the phosphorous, and the dredging operation. Mr. Duenas explained that while phosphorous
was a naturally occurring chemical, the high concentrations in the lake were coming from
I somewhere else. The testing was done in two spots in the lake. He reviewed the likely
process for dredging the lake and removing the sediment, pointing out that they could gain 10
1 years of good lake condition through this process. Staff based the $150,000 cost estimate on
their knowledge of dredging and material removal cost based on cubic yardage.
9
j Mayor Nicoli asked if it was feasible to lower the lake even more in the center to extend the
3 lake's life. Mr. Duenas said that it was feasible to do so. He mentioned that USA
I
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 3
i
1
e
recommended dredging the center of the lake to provide a flow way for water during the
summer. Mr. Camp spoke for dredging the edges of the lake, contending that the sediment
} would be higher there than in the center. Mr. Duenas said that they would look at all options.
f
Mayor Nicoli asked the neighbors present if there would be a problem with the City posting
the park to not feed the animals. A woman commented that the park was posted but one sign
read "Do Feed the Ducks." The Council discussed the probability that posting the park would
reduce but not eliminate duck feeding. Mayor Nicoli suggested noticing the immediate
neighborhood and putting an article in Cityscape.
A man who lived on the lake reported his observations that duck feeding has fallen off
considerably, now mostly occurring in the spring with the non-migratory fowl. Another man
i .
said that they chased off the kids who were fixing the "Do Feed the Ducks" sign. He said that I~
the neighbors who lived on the lake would be happy to help however they could. Mayor
Nicoli said that the Code Enforcement Officer could talk to those whom neighbors reported as 1
routinely violating the signs and ask them to stop.
Mr. Camp submitted letters to the City Recorder from people who could not attend tonight's
meeting. Another man submitted information on floating dredging operations that he found
on the Internet.
The Council discussed distributing the sediment test report to those interested (including those
signed up tonight) as soon as it became available. Mayor Nicoli assured the citizens that the _
ducks and nutria would be reduced solely by not feeding them; no hunting would be allowed.
The Council put this issue on the September 23 agenda.
] Greg Collier, 12469 SW Edgewater Court, asked if the discussion on September 23
I included the report results and the staff recommended options. Mr. Duenas clarified that the
options and recommendations to City Council would be discussed on September 23. Staff
would have the report results and staff report available 10 days before that meeting.
5 PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 10, 1997
COUNCIL MEETING) - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (ZOA 97-001)
WATER RESOURCES OVERLAY DISTRICT - A request to amend the Tigard
Community Development Code to add a new section to protect significant wetlands and
riparian corridors, which meets the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 5 and the
"safe harbor" provisions of the Goal 5 administrative rule. The new section will be titled
! the "Water Resources Overlay District."
a. Continue Public Hearing
Mayor Nicoli read the hearing title and opened the continuation of the hearing.
i _
b. Declarations or Challenges: None
c. Staff Report: Community Development Department
Mr. Hendryx noted that Council continued this hearing from June 10 at the request of the
property owners. He pointed out the letter submitted to Council by Dr. Davis.
# CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 4
i
r i
L.~
f~ Duane Roberts, Associate Planner, referenced the report presented by the consultant at
the last meeting. He said that the Division of State Lands (DSL) said that it was a good
ordinance. They did request some minor modifications highlighting DSL's role in
regulating wetlands.
Mayor Nicoli asked what an individual property owner would have to do to meet Goal 5 if
the City did not adopt this ordinance. Greg Wintcrowd, Winterowd & Associates,
explained that a property owner wanting to develop a vacant lot had to meet Tigard's
current regulations and work with DSL to make sure that all appropriate wetlands permits
were obtained. He said that the advantages to the ordinance were greater certainty on the
setbacks and DSL's sign off on the ordinance. He stated that developed property (all
t houses in existing; subdivisions) were exempted from the special setback.
i
Mr. Winterowd explained that the City had to go through this process because it was in
periodic review and required by the State through the Land Conservation and ,
Development Commission (LCDC) to bring its code into compliance with statewide
i Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources.) The City could do this either through a "safe
harbor" ordinance or the ESEE site specific analysis process. In addition, the ordinance
provided a clear and objective way to resolve conflicts in preserving stream corridors and
allowing development. He said that he did not see the current City regulations as clear as
the "safe harbor" ordinance.
Mayor Nicoli asked for a review of all the exceptions in the ordinance. Mr. Winterowd
j said that this ordinance was an attempt for "one size fits all" in meeting the prescriptive
I standard and complying with state requirements. He reviewed the five levels of flexibility
j included in the ordinance.
Councilor Rohlf asked how many miles of streams were in Tigard and what percentage
would be exempted out. Mr. Roberts estimated 10 miles. Mr. Winterowd explained the
different stream classifications: significant, non-significant, fishbearing, and non-
fishbearing. He pointed out that the designation of a stream as fishbearing or non-
fishbearing came solely from the Department of Forestry maps. Councilor Rohlf I
commented that it sounded like most streams in the City would fall within the exemptions.
d. Public Testimony
John Skourtes, Beaverton, said that he has owned property in Tigard for 30 years. He
spoke against public agencies passing another layer of controls on flood plains, streams,
and wetlands. He questioned passing a law filled with exemptions. He argued that the
I Code currently contained enough regulations to protect the streams and wetlands. He
mentioned the Metro greenspace money and suggested waiting to see what Metro did with
i that money before passing this ordinance. He spoke for buying undeveloped land.
Mr. Skourtes pointed out that there was little industrial land left in Tigard. He said that the
exceptions were aimed at residential properties because residents could vote while f
industrial property owners could not, since most did not live in the city. He suggested
tabling the ordinance for a year. He said that he spoke for the other commercial property
owners on 74`h Avenue. t
3 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 5
c -
MEMO
i
,I
I
I
Mr. Skourtes mentioned that USA put in a main sewer line through Fanno Creek 15 years
1 ago. Instead of fixing the creek up, they "gerrymandered" around it. He said that eight
years ago the previous City Manager disbanded the committee of business property owners
he had called together to reach consensus on the 100 year flood plain/wetlands trade offs.
After a year of meetings, they could not reach consensus.
Mr. Skourtes contended that the ordinance was unnecessary and that LCDC would not
arrest Tigard officials. He reiterated his suggestion to table the ordinance.
Dr. Gene Davis, 10875 SW 89'h, concurred with Mr. Skourtes' comments. He stated that.
based on his experience of living near Ash Creek since 1966, he was certain that it was not
a fishbearing creek, whatever the state designation. He asked to table the ordinance until
they verified the designation of Ash Creek. He cited his willingness last year to comply
with the City's request for him to hold off on building a hotel next to Ash Creek until the
master plan for the Washington Square Regional Center was done. He asked the City to
hold off on this ordinance until after that master plan was completed.
Dr. Davis reviewed his mitigation of his property. He mentioned the agreement that there
would be no setbacks for the commercial area but significant setbacks for the mitigated
area. He gave up 6.5 acres of land already. He said that he called the consultant who
helped him with the mitigation, and the consultant said that Dr. Davis' property should
automatically be grandfathered in because he had already done the mitigation. He asked if
his land was grandfathered in or would he lose more acreage every year until the only
thing allowed on his property was a single residential home.
1
Dr. Davis contended that it was not fair to zone his land automatically without a hearing
after the years he has spent mitigating his property. He suggested having different rules
for different zones. He argued that the extensive flooding in Tigard over the past two
years was increased because the retention basin requirements in the City did not allow the
water to run off to the Tualatin River quickly. The result was that the Tualatin crested 12 i
hours after the Willamette. He noted the many beaver dams on Ash Creek that retained a
great deal of water. He spoke for cleaning out the creeks as a means of reducing flooding.
I
Dr. Davis recommended looking for a practical solution to the flooding problems. He said
that he believed that he had a right to have his property grandfathered in. He asked that the
ordinance be delayed. He reiterated that Ash Creek was not a fishbearing stream.
I Gordon Martin, 12265 SW 72" d, said that he confirmed Mr. Roberts' information at the
last meeting that there were no significant creeks in the Triangle requiring the 50 foot
setback. He said that any kind of DSL permits in effect now were grandfathered in.
e. Council Questions
Mayor Nicoli asked what the City's options were if they did nothing. Mr. Roberts said
that they had to do something because they were under state mandate either to adopt a
3 "safe harbor" ordinance or do a ESEE site specific analysis. This was the remaining item
1 of their periodic review. Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel, explained that if the City did
nothing, they opened themselves up to LCDC imposing an enforcement order because the
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 6
I
z
1
a
City was not demonstrating reasonable progress. He said that the most likely enforcement
j order would require the City to do an ESEE analysis for every property in every
application.
Mr. Skourtes contended that the ordinance said that the City had two years after Metro
adopted the 2040 plan. Mayor Nicoli commented that this had nothing to do with the 2040
plan. Mr. Hendryx concurred. He mentioned that the City had to conform to the
Functional Plan criteria within two years but the Functional Plan did not include Goal 5
standards. Currently Metro was looking at a model ordinance for jurisdictions to use in
drafting their own.
Mr. Roberts mentioned that the City did accept a $12,000 state grant to complete the
planning for wetlands. This included a commitment to adopt an ordinance. If the City
failed to do so, they would have to return the $12,000. Mayor Nicoli asked how much
longer did the City have before they had to resolve this with LCDC. Mr. Roberts said that
I he did not know the final deadline.
Councilor Scheckla noted that the two areas of concern raised were 74`h Avenue along
Fanno Creek, and Dr. Davis' property along Ash Creek. He asked if there was any relief
they could give them under this policy. Mr. Roberts pointed out that the property owners
J had the option stated in the ordinance to do an ESEE analysis on their property to develop
specific standards. Either the City could do the study or the property owners could do the
1 study.
1 Councilor Scheckla asked if there was a way to find out if the policy actually hurt these
lz property owners. Mr. Hendryx reviewed the two options that the City had in complying
with Goal 5: the expensive and detailed site specific ESEE analysis or the "cookbook"
approach of the "safe harbor" ordinance. The Council directed staff to do the "safe
harbor" ordinance. However this ordinance did have provisions to allow the property
i owner to do the ESEE analysis himself. E.t
Mr. Roberts pointed out that, in addition to objections from developers that the regulations
were too strict, staff received objections from environmental groups that the regulations
were not strict enough. He cited the argument staff has heard from Fans of Fanno Creek
that Summer Creek is actually a fishbearing stream, not a non-fishbearing stream as I
designated by the state. f
Councilor Scheckla asked if this ordinance had sufficient flexibility to address the
situations raised tonight. Mr. Winterowd commented that the reason to adopt an ordinance
full of loopholes was to get the flexibility to tailor it to specific properties. He reported
that he met with Dr. Davis prior to this meeting and concluded that the ordinance imposed
virtually no additional requirements on his property. Since his property was pasture, not
pristine creek, he could reduce his fishbearing stream setback to 25 feet with stream
enhancements.
Mr. Winterowd confirmed that the state did designate Ash Creek as a fishbearing stream,
although Dr. Davis might be correct that it had no fish in it. He reiterated that the last
i level of flexibility in the ordinance was a property owner doing an ESEE analysis of his f
3 property. This was the same thing that LCDC could require the City to do through an
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 22, 1997 - PAGE 7
a
1