City Council Packet - 07/20/1999 i
• R_ ,^a - „J ;i;:~:r. pe.tr- Jr•a 't }..q, r,.f•'t ~i t !`X :'s3tj r _ 5
,s
t'yr r `r.. ll I: <-~}'ta:V,."r; 1 „.a:ht'LI ,T,,; D+'i4^<"'" r,j..'~'trllir 'tl'^s'ss''3'~?=• •!fi 4''' t .'15j ,t-k+ :r'
3~y,,{.' o/T1 - `?5.., •.f Y. ~'l :y ;r',, 1 Yl 'i
:t ;:1a1` r}^r, `S •y~.,t ~Y.„, .r --'}.tii !'.l. +s,`-'%>,' $ ,"q`'~.~~'ir^{ r,t'~fljt _ _,.LK~-,':a.} 't at
;rf;,,, ~'`r'r}. •si` dr rr. a ..?JV~: v }JY,, TLdt C. • •a i'. b. . J • u1G
l' :a:¢•.. 'f,'`.Y 71rG • Sf{ yr: aF .G.a ,4„d.!,;, y t ,t F K r' ,a l+
• 'i ~ ,,;h,, ,lt,,. e T 4 : S . F , a.f. mn „r, M, , ,i I". ~ :I
. ^:r• 1t ~3 . r -.v •i:''Y,r. s: 5 r S h N aS
.,,y^- .•^C.. ...,t:~gl'ii r'•., r :R :r.,,, t a'Y`,}".-0•, "in
a }s' oL ,,,.1. , r. { •~'.••'^J,.~•r. s.~„JV., .p f'~ t.•• :ri 'Gr'C-r,.. •f# " 3 C«,.•.
j. b..-} i'. < r . war , t+r~. 4..,.. :§t. _ T r7 f S •t` .:r t 'r
+C ..f:f,•. NJ. nr,•'. : , t.'t ,\t'. _.,u „4 ax.. ':{t
1.t a,i' r7 d'M'~. .'Y^,k# . .•T.., :1. ^i
-i R t ne , .7 r•
u1.?" . " S , l a
::,'v [ ..J: Ilk. ' iktt, ':D•ft^,1 ';r ":"/V'." FYt'_r^. ,l Y0,11 n
N, r,Y.7 R{. X'•F Fd "A.- y y~,3,. i' S fY a: • - ~ Y T 4 +Yr,r .~yY N''
,•a...( :~T!'Cr5.1i+.• ♦ern ::Y o}!r!` ,,.f. .)f Jy nfr'. f~ Y.';,;`N+N ~yS
.s ;l(.p d ti•,.' 's, ^'k~+ ' '1 tat ..Yt
. « "f . 1~ k~:.•,1r•r., . `nr.-b L"'WCr,'':f'.i.:5
zsr"+s a'!~' ~h-r!,' rY . 4 . - x:' ` 3 )..'S i e, : 5n:. ..•s'= Z
- A
,-t+ i,.S'Fk4 ~'i`="'~' J,. J r s',r', x~y rr>t e` "r
iN::.;", ,by,, ,t`~e 'S• , y~ 'm a J , q-f r .1
.7~Yr~'''~'`. . Ar:,. y',
5
Ci r` ,s U sx
f. i +7 k t
! ) >'^q'o.{.^r~r,:^i "V,~-' G s. ^.nr\+ "F°. 5,.: ..t n,. y4:~+,,P ~•x, afi_
rr n'c .J`~ f., d r..,1 ;C';%.y :.:',•.rK':p: t.
R., -^ifi' iti'' T^5,.r rv
:clr, rY,,~~y N 6. "
yJ (}t
• -
J
4I4 liw",4, YL.. , W M1 , ( ~1 i, . '71.. {i . ~Jr,, ` :
,'.;'1 -°d r.l ~ . ''F " fd , ryy 1
~r~~ {r.t Yp j`~ 4i ,
S.a i„, ilr+ ,irY'.. • ^ , h^ fl-; r ^rr4a,T it r.,.,,r "
r l *y .r;c
'.".J. A
1 ; - : C arw~ ,t
Y27'.''C^ ' rl.'" ( ni+•:ti.,".;.•'- . .Y . .L -r i4'~t. r..' .r Y'TA':•-r
r •-tiD ~ -1a . y i 4
.r^. . a, I P' oS S" „ .3 . a0.
;f~t _ r•Y:• +r<^ - t"'~''ii' igF S_ _ w ; ~d 4",", iW .M 3 •U".4. .r:.v ,l. "24r..
_ .:,Y'. 3`•'
L.ticif R7 ka :Y 7, t
' ,.t ~}r. ..:4..^,q,;;t'Yi'`i4J;`-':•:;;,r:;, %'t n.,4 Yr ! ~..7inyi;;:rr, :F>»'~ rf", ,tt. . L rfl:y .
io~E::'' } • ` . .T•,.., .a.1ta'_.,,r:r": :.fi ,Ji''s, ,•..2a,-,..Y... K.J:. >.°.:YPM
r)rr !.T•:'-' :L ...-y„-w ,r,. k,c. Y~^✓•t. , y r v'.v.r
,r - - - - - - - - -
.;5j• ° it l,D:;^r, ;.r T-':'n,. ~{t~~j i 'Y '`:'`tl•, •r^c^{": •a!w•.,
.Y T,C• •«•i,1I ,.D fY.;.'i •.y .t. .y:` `•!'.l f• 1ll'•`. ...vl: T",,,,t Yi J /y - wid, -
" ='l.'.; '1'.J";4C~ , Y, n Ff } iti ; ,6',': 1 v..r
b, 1' 17' u'i :Y 2' S.
•='n1'• L5, ir,r 'A. 3+51..k., tit~^• $ •U",, ..y'A" T° r .
,.a' rI,. ^,v:.,;'.' ;.a •4 :x,.ri l,,,- ~z:" x~~'' ;r
> t.. . ~ .•r,.: .t. - . ;4,2Y U'`r", h'k:d. f r'!,•
r.. ,.`,~".;t!r r4. •_l!a)-::' }t. a;;.q „4.:q` .,*e,~:,4.4451"g-, .7 cts ira ,,,,f. eo' s- _ E,11 ,.t. rt
dir. rr• :'If:. vp, ,.\,,n alas. 'f` .q 1
%7'(n':«.7 >'-1!`, -d r• t r .~t ':N J :`r r.. nW x 11.:n.~ :N
;'i'1-1, ;t, tf r3 . rD -rL: '`r t y r ,t,.•. t V. • .v', a -
Ra~q, ..t"r,''ks's}' :5, ,.G••':f„` ..-r :x •.p,.; ;5^- r{. V f9r
,d '•7 :J• Af. - .t,,7 ' .a r, t.
F > . :5 C:
,rJ. r'C• s'
TF
„r ~ '.:ilrvv .4:' , r •
' r= w"rk
- -i`' jJ5..'t•w.,.j'"r'..+!tJtn ; ..r n, .[~r"~r•=r` w,' 'fb.
, " 'M'i-, M. Flub r _
*"i':ce - . ..r'.: I'J: , ° d. -'».'n.•a J, '4'i:'..
' rr
YG i
f, 6" ~ TSB: u . r ,r
fr4• cFr .
r
c
r"a":" ~.a:' he ! r
I r 2 -
- ii 'JDt F G J'
'.i""4 't V. n
b ^ i 4
?J ..re.n 1.
}}R, 'C' r Y :l~ . it ,3 L
f D n 55. yy,~, Ss, -
t Lwt" t- s• -
- b':Y 1 f-v f'~
r, : -w
' .
: i`r` , y " b r.r•r-3..k+••,vsr-» sue,.
^r Aiiit,. .x.tt>. " \ 'x r. i'.•h-.•:ur,h'.:rS,v-6.3.
1 u- ,.J ^.{n:,':'... .r .r r•
'i S 'r c
•'t'-. .tom' ..r,.t t--'.•,. _
q' ' 1 Y::. r,si,
i r~ a
x„ i F° M
~J:~ ~.S+IJ '..Y .,:Jr '=:iF-`4. J..r' . '1~': ,T<L1~ .,.fi= ~.tN,, t,-r.,,~
ey is
V 1,.
- ri• • z • -w-`S•
- sue: t'r:.+.
ti' r
St E
r.
4f , r-4• • b x
•'-.5
f~C+ ':.7 Y ' t?:!'r,'.Y':5,: -,3Ry' '.a r+. '.,,q-, S' is V•
J, ..i. '.5.... ,7 s
:.r ' - <~l ir~ ;:Q f•v :a..... ¢+.•a -yi ' ..~f 5"<: A.."
. l" ',-...ri..,~: _ Ali:J:t. , .
2'' a,yy, - `i"•" . _..1,a:: : a'. ,j ,1: =:1- Y v 1~t,. '-.x'rr- , 7. .11:.Y",• .Ya,J-,"lr., t .rz?!. .:Y~
Y„ :'fir.
r•
a . . : , J
i' 1„''
,ra;, - t .*'y tF
4-
Y-
7• .a", , r Spy
-'h iP 'ri ~ ss "~Y K . f ~ -
ro-
M1 + 1k
t-;`x
6; b t,: Z s
r+... } yYa a ,
LL
, d
:1.,,
i Z
L
t , •..t.r ^,R i
~,J
P.
f 1 H 1t
Y P :i, - ''a
1 '
+^,Rt 2 ,,4s
_ s
n
iA- Y , z
i~~' ~"t r.%- L t
s•.
-'tint:;5::; - . ~ •ri~,
111 .•a? : _ may;;,
=4
,
a' 1
~zr f
L
f
r:, ,
{
yi
3 4.
J ' t
t
- , ~ '•r.a::-';,iM ^i:, ,r.>.,i'"..Y-:~ :7.. ',i^'';~;tr,.... • `trt , .?ti . ..k
-"I I Sr • %-d A ,v Y
_ •r
's ^S; : :•t - . s''-•'t - .t r - ,1,., . *,t
fir. •..t . Jr. •r.-.
r. fs
f
_ ' . 3..
a
a? 11 i'
F tar" "^1' ` i '
d. .
.,t
'#tx .
- 1
r.
tit
F.
tSr•
X , P - '{•a, .`vim=
~'•4
_ ti•
•%;n.. r,
C`
•I ~t , "fJ' Jh
•
1': d4 '
- , rrr -J
to
c
t"
J r + slid . f.#..,.
c~ „ y:
^
2W !t`.
r1y>
y - lt 'te,a,'=fir t jj
Y :
:;2T; s3..
t♦,
WP--, ! * .
r:: `
ra; - ,ti
-:X? - . ,P'; ! , is
Yr
F r _
h,
ir- - .t , ,r.l'. - i.'r ~~,,11--
{ ::'4 7
- 'y n .Tom:
5s: :.M ''.be' •t..
t: 7i l~rr'..: r J~''d . A ,'P
'a :
:r'" : u, r
,U, iJ : _+r3 a 4.'..4:
.
.j
0
1:.' 1
'i. - +j•,
t4.
•y y
_4 ti
1'•
y
r_; 1
aSv L
"1^ -
t
t
r` -
r . r.
s; .1'
t^
y C_. ,.'x _
Ud n:
5 5„
. WO "
Y+ ;1' -
}
'y.,
a.
r, . ~.R .
;:4:f. ` ` iJ-,.a '
''I. I - ~ ~ ' ' `im f :ri'.'R~ 1 1.
,
ni i ? -
rri1 _ ::3 :''i: '
tYCs: - s. ` i .
i_lav ..4 r. f:
.
m
!
Y' a.
tr;•
is.
a . ,
n„
n a
l.r - ~f a
'T cit
1•,
F {
_ ,k>Y
Vii.
;,5f, .f- v.J • - M1,ir.
;r'
i
i1.: - '
l , ~ 3'
f,S,n; r vi
3'' r:
<a .
'!•i5a:
3':
- l V
F :s"
-
a•- -
r
f
d" '
S
♦'t~ i
is
`r - ;rte' 'r;' ; If"
` :S'' SL:' r 3-; n'
1' it f ;,r
1
~f , is:f• .
L
, .
~I . r4,mot
F
~k
1 • '
,iJ
''f
.i5 :
~l~14'.
rC ,r'
rr
'R- ~.1,-
'Y~ t 4. J
I'
- ~i.
I
y';< a r 'at .
i
, •Y
- S.r
t.
r
„7;",, •C
'1"
r't:7
,n Y
'f !
•
`
x', s _l;
y.,,
r. .
`'4. h i
d,Cs t
ti
Y•
.r ':I'. " `.f i'r "L _~'f? mod+. Y:,.G.1,. _
,
S'c' v , t,.. ii ;r.t,.. .
t. - y7;; •7'. •.•rsa. =75-5r
• 3,
d'r'J~
y~i :;n
Y:'
r.
21
x'.:
't;: 4
- i c.•:, ~ %t n, c: d::;: ,.,,r„~`?! Vin..
G
t
ww •r : l
✓
r.]',i.f.r'
Z x
r
a•:
lY
^c ti ,4
."3d
:'r -
t., '3
•.fr-'„•a'..
f
l
i)'
3:'
S,. ;I
r'`,
5r"
~_r; rt
- -j.i
M.
1,
:a i
3 :,r "
f
L'r,'.: a 3 i~ .
Fr t..:t,
<A
F
'Y'"
,2_3.=r.
y.
y.
% 1%':'
3 is
L'
f• 1• S
.Y~
- .t
ti'
fY:, .
i'v
X.,"
, 't
ti .
rA
''i':, e';
t
- ",J'tsi
M 9"'S SF r 1 r•~.,
:h
. .11~ M q ~ -,,-:,1,14~~,~,-~~,,-j,4,,,, I.:"
Ya., J. t . Ly . y:, 3 n~j,, _,q..,•,; , .1 . 'a:S
tj' i .
'21'.
'•a F..' rs...
j^:
.t"
"J.'
~5, nwt ;
mr'i':°,a•.7'_.r :a•-_.• ,,1..,~ 'T, ..•ti,.'i•Sa,'u•, tif;:`:. 11 - J"
r-
.
} }
1f
D
»1
'qa4.
-
}
ti✓'^'
`4=" 5
,.p
- 'r
i;' 5 ::a
•?Y.,.
r K' il:'~i'i ,
r. r
Itf r'
•'r'
s.. rt+' R • f 1 <,v=:.tF,•'° F•. !f 4,r <T=
R
)
_ efC,~ S,,' '.1
L,
:.J S.i::'r•'.Ft's( ` t.'S4i;.. 'ek„--.u.:•:.:t: d: krr`.:":. -:'le. .:-:°;?,a.
,
1 , * , , " - ,•,~~z %
_ - .l`' :'p rv_ ^Y ^."1'..'-rrtr C~ - Y,' C'.a. vas : ri
J5' t y;,J,. ;,cFy,F; s,N .
S,Y: s
4, d.
:r
' T,' k
.jCf,ac1: .'".~,5`:`a':','-a,.-f"+ rf.;,,,;:-,p...,,':, S`9, .max',,... z:..,,`ea{;
.3 ,T, S.
.,L:. - •r' - ^^J~t
''p;Y'•-v3
M% i
'f:.
rt t v~ w
':fi:: L `a;'s ~ f
r:i
•a,
<i.
~
: i
'•`'4-.
.ra.tJ',..;v, rr.f~
1 f ¢t -11 -<r•
r
11-1
r~. f
,'"C +Y44
c a. wPr.
"
_ cop r.•
. ,
..C `-r,•. q{pr, .J -I -4~
x.
y• a S F
- l.-•r V
:
g
, /
.
, i~-,,.,: ,~1`'^ 'fit . .K!
„
A•_
,
3•-..
t
••.1 G 4 Y '~.'.1 S
T ",fir' q+AS:
r'
'r tr
y rt ~.y~
S - .-.,?:-..?4 • 1' 'i'%''':r. 1, -h' Fr; i> r 1
"q- ..1, • ypc, 4 ~pct`~r :q .ir .4'S .t•.,Ra
~Yr' "n V, :•j n 'M?r.i;}•• +:5 1 `ci• 3... yKu.r -+t;v« -
11 i „ r,,, t.. , If, - t'
7
='f k b,~.__
ry~ 3
i" 2''
Z , n i r. h-,.
..y a,fil
. . L
,
- f-
X,
JI't:'- r•9: P', tn, .,R ..Y",- ,3?i} ><a r, A
D,~t F.
"r'" rv.,
~,t' t'ry'' r + _~4 -S.
-°t. .,r~r .,S.h.A^, as'''':'S'i~ -~',j~• ~ F . 1 ~ ,rw : ~
J:.
3 . s,, x4
l.~Y
x~
t Tr~ '~,r _ f °
r'• ' q
r .
4•
. as
t~.
L
L'- a. :.k :'r.,.~r. ~.c.`.9 ."fi ;•r fib. ;+G:.. ~i..
-v • PAD r
,x. ,F ..nc , at!' 'fir h •2.:
b Y SA,
:.r - r
F N.
J 1'
i~! r
: 3'rr
S1 M1'y' 4
~~yy,, '-t':.'I'-'~!le.r .i lea r~ 'a1,
t.jlc'-"•., t„•,~' ,.S i•"1 r•r .y,. ."f. 5'v.' Z:. , A p °f , 5
t., .elf„• ,f 1• r5 •n}. r' . ri{t, 5+/ .r1'V
i•..
,Iklx. ` h n .a•, rd •
hi, . 4 v
rr} ( `I
a
It `
2r
`i
~,~n C!~ 7 :!CL wx,
f` r~° 1 ? r: 6n
L90 c 'r Y,
'1i9-1R9 -f , L -,r, r• a", Y r. ~ e, ,
p , ':v y r~ "'Y J " r`Srt ,r ` +',i:" t~' i0l f. . :`i 1': t., rS. 1,5t•';,.tt'.iz~f iYt. ^ L j: ~t~Y ,i1, Y ~yyS L ^•M ,•Y`4+' ' y
i.. . { ir'J•:: 0., 'I 5:"' _ rwr deY;
,'I . - . r a . , . r ' 1 , : L,S . ' SSs:
tz J. a
Y''C'ti,-t. .•1 .i.~,:!.rb-:.: , L.tr-r._ G~*); ...IY r G t.,+ri' t1
a ' :
- '4~'I;~- .Fyi
? r ~:t: V~ `J t:r.. ,rZ k.t ' 'J:+'r.• .r} tt'' 1 4 ;•'#A~• 'Y
r 4
.,.Z! t f r , . "r"1 .
~'.+FC .,3 b t 'D..
,,Ir,l, , , . ?Is.,Sr .
M1., • ti 4 L?.tQ J • k
)
7 r4. ~A3,.
i,a 4. r.Y, f: " at, q ~~3 (
K
'i~ 11 , s" - 'tR . J k.r
31 . S
ail a
t1
r'1 F ~ •i
. 11-1 qr ~p 1~'
ail , •'X(` , 'S.
r is • ;e°l t.Ji ~`1 J. 'M'• A dJ
p q,. F tF
i F'L a ~ w
I (I ,am:' i• },'..L,"~.`.'' - ,•f• .
f,, ,•:`S q • 4•. .r}'•: i~tG•... .p. . „DRr ~ ' wt 3
A'i~:. ? `'•+tk •'7,. i. r" 5'',>`1 ?'N'. -l'~,. .Ir,;t. 'a5._>iY~r° r ~q,+n,
rxa z s.
~I,^ •sL ir Vi'i`.... S, .J !?:`'Li •.,N ,ts xk. ?r y µttr-'C~irtl `r.. ="Ui:J••'7
I ,i:.ii , -.-c' a. ,'~7:•S, :A :vt +-Y.,' 7;•r: {,,1.: ~,P. ..t .:.qF
r., ..1:. ;Y-4:..tc;i ~ •t• n L
ti • rY>~ w !T, _ I. rl.. i.f.,. k:`i':'w;:r ` l'
SS-,1 Vii-'`h'Y 2 . .f, L`':'t1; i_ ra'~11 J. <Y ' ^ •,(l .a,t•;caa .F.Y d"'t~t'`1' k, i:_~fr yy .r D rlS i`i'
-:t, 4 1. }-,'rnry. Yi j y:
i -tv lrl- i~'s`i:° rya` :~i • •,'`t1(.:,2 4':r'.N:f .q, 4 S •r: er, rt•' .1 is CIS `•,+K 4 7... :b. 10
!'qtr-. :t:. ±t~, .prr+'" i'.Gf;.? -
♦.,t3".: » b . •:,J. t ' ..~,ti:, d~,a(*,Y. ~rF., t' L:tjf~' S.7 r} "t ,flrr
~:J;s.F -4? rt.., Y 4'. L, •'b,
!3,K:?, ,p-. •.r, „J''~;t`~:;'- ;I ~i., ' C: " 5 5 _ :.1.:.:t: s t
1!r'' }•f7W 'R. S:'. .'_ri.~Sl:`~• i'`r„y. :1 r.' 1•!1'`,,fj,, 1~• ~r t
•ISl•.. dr,iM1xkll .it b >'%i;t•i*tt-:., ta; YJi}c;i" - a, +J~':':f' V
t
b .
Revised on 7119199
- A4 -k
CITY OF TIGARD
PUBLIC NOTICE:
Agenda items may be heard in any order after 6:309.m.
Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled
for Council meetings by 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).
Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services:
• Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and
41 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 Via 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
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 20,1999 - PACE 1
III I milli
AGENDA
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
July 20,1999.6:30 PM
6:00 PM
> EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will hold an Executive Session under the
provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (e), to discuss real property transactions. As you are aware, all
discussions within this session are confidential; therefore those present may disclose nothing from
this meeting. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not
disclose any information discussed during this session.
6:30 PM
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
• Call to Order: Mayor Nicoll
• Pledge of Allegiance
• Council Communications & Liaison Reports
• Call to Staff and Council for Non Agenda Items
1A ITEMS CARRIED OVER FROM THE JULY 13,1999, COUNCIL MEETING
• Consider Budget Adjustment No. 2 to Increase Revenues and Appropriations for Award of
Recreation District Feasibility Study - Resolution No. 99-5
• Consider Contract Award to Cogan, Owens, Cogan for Recreation District Feasibility Study
6:35 PM
2. DISCUSSION: TIGARD, SHERWOOD, DURHAM PARK & RECREATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
• Linda Davis - Cogan, Owens, Cogan
7:20 PM
3. PRESENTATION: ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
• Administration Department
7:40 PM
4. UPDATE: WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER PLAN
• Community Development Department
8:40 PM
5. DISCUSSION: TIGARD TRIANGLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
• Community Development Department
9:10 PM
6. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
9:20 PM
7. NON-AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 20,1999 - PAGE 2
1
9:30 PM
8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council WII go into Executive Session under the provisions of
ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (h) its (f) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and
pending litigation issues; ?nd exempt public records. 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 du:ing this session.
10:00 PM
9. ADJOURNMENT
1 AAD MCAT FMCCA\990720. D OC
COUNCIL AGENDA - JULY 20, 1399 - PAGE 3
-1 a
Agenda Item No. 3
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Meeting of 1@S IRS
WORKSHOP MEETING
MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20,1999
> EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 6:03 p.m. under the provisions of ORS
192.660(1) (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt
public records, current & pending litigation issues.
• Mayor Nicoli recessed the Executive Session at 6:36 p.m.
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
• Call to Order: Mayor Nicoli called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m.
• Roll Call
Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Brian Moore, Joyce Patton, and
Ken Scheckla
Staff Present: Asst. to the City Manager Liz Newton; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley;
Public Works Director Ed Wegner; Long Range Planner Nadine Smith;
Community Development Director Jim Hendryx; Associate Planner Laurie
Nicholson
• Council Communications: None
• Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: None
• The Council considered Agenda Item 2 at this time.
IA. ITEMS CARRIED OVER FROM THE JULY 13, 1999, COUNCIL MEETING
1A.1 TO CONSIDER THE BUDGET ADJUSTMENT NO.2 TO INCREASE REVENUES
AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR AWARD OF A RECREATIONAL DISTRICT
FEASIBILITY STUDY - Resolution No. 99-55.
Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to adopt Resolution No.
99-55.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-55, A RESOLUTION TO ADJUST THE FISCAL YEAR 99/00
BUDGET TO RECOGNIZE FUNDS RECEIVED AND APPROPRIATE THOSE FUNDS
FOR A PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT FEASIBILITY STUDY - BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT NO. 2.
Motion passed by majority voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore
and Patton voted "yes"; Councilor Hunt voted "no"; Councilor Scheckla abstained} [3-1-1]
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 1
111.1 CONSIDER CONTRACT AWARD TO COGAN OWENS COGAN FOR A
RECREATION DISTRICT FEASIBILITY STUDY
Ed Wegner, Public Works Director, stated that the Atfalati Steering Committee and the Park
Task Force reviewed and approved this contract presented previously to the Council. He
pointed out that Resolution 99-55 dealt with the financial end of the contract.
Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to award the contract to
Cogan Owens Cogan for the recreational district feasibility study.
Motion passed by majority voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore
and Patton voted "yes"; Councilors Hunt and Scheckla voted "no") [3-2]
• The Council considered Agenda Item 3 at this time.
2. DISCUSSION: TIGARD, SHERWOOD, DURHAM PARK & RECREATION
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Linda Davis, Cogan, Owens, Cogan, stated that her main purpose tonight was to hear what the
Council's issues, needs and concerns were with regard to the feasibility study. She spoke to the
importance of the City of Tigard and the other jurisdictions having the opportunity to influence
the study. She mentioned that the formation of the district required the jurisdictions to approve
resolutions placing the district on the ballot.
Ms. Davis explained that the participants' decision on whether or not to put the district on the
November 2000 ballot depended on the results of the feasibility study. Therefore, they needed
to set a fast pace for the project. She mentioned completing the technical work by November
and returning to Council by December for direction on whether or not to proceed with the
formation of a district.
Ms. Davis referenced a facts sheet she had distributed outlining the processes and procedures on
the formation of a district. She advised the Council that at her meeting next week with the
Washington County Board of Commissioners, she would ask them if they wanted to initiate
formation of such a district, should the participants decide that they wanted the district. She
explained that, under state law, there were two ways to form a district: petition by 15% of the
registered voters in an area or initiation by the County Board of Commissioners.
Ms. Davis explained that the County Board could put the district on the ballot but they could not
approve a district unless it did not have a permanent tax rate associated with it (such as a fee-
supported utility district). She said that they had to propose a permanent tax rate at the same
time that they proposed a district. She :mentioned that a County initiation would cut from three
to four months off the process, allowing more time for deliberation.
Councilor Hunt asked if the vote of an individual jurisdiction located within the district
boundaries determined whether or not it was in the district, regardless of what the other
jurisdictions voted. Ms. Davis explained that the majority of the voters within the proposed
district boundaries determined the formation of the district, regardless of an individual
jurisdiction's vote. She pointed out that with Tigard being the largest jurisdiction, it was
unlikely that a district would pass if Tigard voted it down.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 2
Councilor Scheckla asked for clarification on the financial participation of the jurisdictions in
the study. Ms. Davis explained tb t the six jurisdictions were all financially participating: City
of Tigard, City of Durham, City of Sherwood, Washington County, Sherwood School District,
and Tigard-Tualatin School District. Mr. Wegner referenced the outline in the packet showing
the jurisdictions' prorated shares based on population. Ms. Davis mentioned that the three cities
had to approve by majority vote the initiation of the district in order to be included within the
district boundaries.
Councilor Scheckla asked for clarification on the Tigard-Tualatin School District participating
but not the City of Tualatin. Ms. Davis said that the City of Tualatin turned down the invitation
to participate. She demonstrated on a map where the district boundaries were drawn to include
or exclude the jurisdictions as appropriate.
Ms. Davis asked for Council input on what kind of programs and services it wanted in order to
meet Tigard's needs. She mentioned that she was familiar with the Tigard Parks Master Plan.
Councilor Scheckla spoke to building a center where young people who did not play team sports
could gather. He said that he wanted it to be affordable for people on the poverty level also.
Councilor Patton concurred with building a recreation center to address the substantial portion
of the population (of all ages) who were not sports inclined. She said that they needed to
include a center in order for the district to work for a majority of Tigard citizens.
Ms. Davis mentioned that a wide variety of possible parks and recreation programs available,
from comprehensive programs (like Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District) to mini-parks
or regional parks to programs focused on specific areas. She asked if the Council was interested
in a comprehensive parks and recreation program to provide all the services that Tigard citizens
needed or in a program focused on certain types of service.
Councilor Patton commented that, while a comprehensive program would be nice, she thought
that a phased-in approach was more practical. She pointed out that trying to provide everything
at once would "break the bank" for all the jurisdictions. She spoke to prioritizing within the
various activities.
Councilor Scheckla mentioned a dance center for young people, including food venues and pool
tables. He commented that trying to do too much often meant that nothing worked.
Ms. Davis asked if the Council saw any particular advantage to the City and its citizens in
having a parks and recreation district. Councilor Scheckla said that there has not been sufficient
discussion or public feedback to know if there was an advantage or disadvantage to a district.
Councilor Moore pointed out that a district gave people of all ages more opportunities for
recreation.
Ms. Davis reviewed the two governance methods for a district allowed under Oregon law. She
cited the Tualatin Hills Parks & Recreation District as an example of a "special district" with a
separately elected governing body. She cited the Clackamas Parks & Recreation District as an
example of a "service district" under the governance of the County Board of Commissioners
(who used an advisory board of jurisdiction representatives to run the district). She pointed out
that the two governance structures were both separate taxing entities showing up on property tax
bills.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 3
11111101111
r7tm s. D avis discussed a third method of providing services jointly with other governments
ough an association of governments. She explained that, with this method, the participating
governments contributed funds to operate the parks and recreation program out of their existing
permanent tax rate (as opposed to special or service districts having their own tax rates).
Ms. Davis confirmed to Councilor Hunt that a special district used a public election to elect the
representatives. She mentioned that the district could have wards within it with each ward
voting for its own representative or it could have all the positions at large or a combination of
the two.
Mayor Nicoli reported that, based on his discussions with the County over the past three years,
he knew that the County Commissioners did not want another board under them. He said that
the local govemance notion aline x e`i for . )%otter eloe ;c;nn mal-ino nrncess hecallse the loy
Y al
b" -a r--
citizens made the decisions.
Councilor Patton noted the three items she looked for, regardless of the structure. She
mentioned a reasonable dollar amount for the overhead administrative functions, reliance on the
governing Board to make decisions (minimal oversight by individual jurisdictions), and minimal
hurdles to getting things done.
Ms. Davis commented that the Council discussion focused on a special district. She asked if the
Councilors had a preference for at large or zone positions. Councilor Moore mentioned zone
positions equally distributed in the whole district. Mayor Nicoli concurred with using wards to
get representation from all corners of the district. He suggested that the chairman be an at large
position, similar to the Washington County Board of Commissioners structure.
Ms. Davis asked if the Council thought that there was community support for a district.
Councilor Moore said that he thought that there was. Mayor Nicoli said that he thought that
there was outstanding community support. Councilor Patton commented that the level of
community support depended on the explanation of the kinds of activities involved in the
district.
Ms. Davis mentioned that, on the ballot with the question on whether or not to form a district,
Clackamas County had included a separate question regarding the approval of a bond for capital
expenditures with the specific projects listed out. She indicated that apparently that contributed
to the district measure passing. She asked if the Council was interested in a similar strategy.
Mayor Nicoli discussed fully utilizing existing facilities before building new ones. He pointed
out that the grade schools and junior highs shutdown at 2:30 p.m. He spoke to a parks and
recreation staff using the school facilities after school for a parks and recreation program. He
mentioned that the School District representatives were open to the idea of better utilization of
their facilities. He stated that he was not opposed to obtaining capital to build new facilities (if
they were needed), provided that they could verify that they were not double billing the
taxpayers for facilities.
Councilor Scheckla asked if King City, as part of the Tigard-Tualatin School District, would be
included in the district. He commented that the recreational district was of no value to King
City residents. Mayor Nicoli said that King City was not participating in the study, and lines
would be drawn around them, the same as for Tualatin.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 4
T
Councilor Scheckla stated that he could not know what community support there would be until
he knew what the final boundaries of the district were. Ms. Davis agreed that that was a critical
element which they needed to figure out. She explained that the school districts would
contribute facilities.
Ms. Davis asked how much the Council thought people were willing to pay for a parks and
recreation district. Mayor Nicoli mentioned 30 to 40 cents per $1,000 for operating costs (with
capital funding in addition to that) as a reasonable amount, given the other taxing entities in the
City. He said that people would expect a lot more for 40 to 50 cents. He pointed out that the 30
to 40 cents assumed that 50% of the operating dollars came from fees and 50% from the
taxpayers. He commented that he did not think that that range would pose a problem for the
Tigard road bond.
Councilor Hunt asked if this taxing district would increase 6% a year, the same as any other
taxing district. He stated that he opposed this taxing district because he saw Measure 50 as a
vote to limit taxes. He said that this was merely a way to get around that vote. He mentioned
that another taxing district would hurt those on fixed incomes. He indicated that he would
campaign against the district unless the governance structure chosen was the association of
governments format, with jurisdictions paying for it out of the existing tax structure.
Ms. Davis said that a special district had to establish a permanent tax rate. She noted that under
Measure 50 capital funds and a five year special operating levy were allowed in addition to the
tax rate. She confirmed that the 6% increase for taxing districts no longer existed. She
emphasized that the permanent tax rate could not increase; only assessed values could increase,
and then only by a 3% maximum per year. She confirmed that cities did receive the full value
of new development and annexations.
Ms. Davis pointed out that phasing in a program over time could be difficult because there was
no way to expand the resources other than through fees, grants, etc.; the tax rate was fixed.
s The Council considered Agenda Item 1 at this time
3. PRESENTATION: ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager, introduced John Jackson and Mark Jockers from
United Sewage Agency.
John Jackson, USA Planning Division Manager, observed that the requirements of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) were not new to the Tualatin River Basin: water quantity
management, water quality management, and habitat restoration. He pointed out that Tigard has
participated in water quantity and water quality management with USA since 1990 with the
implementation of its surface water management program. He indicated that the new part under
the ESA would be managing the habitat for the listed fish with more intensity and detail than
previously. He mentioned that USA and its participating cities began discussions of fish habitat,
protection and restoration a couple of years ago in anticipation of the ESA listing.
Mr. Jackson reviewed the fish listings for the Willamette River watershed above Oregon Falls.
He said that the Tualatin River basin had no spring Chinook but it did have steelhead and
cutthroat trout.
Mr. Jackson stated the meaning of "take" under the ESA: to harass or harm the listed species or
any of its habitat that affected its life cycle. He mentioned examples of take, including
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 5
destruction of habitat by building close to a stream, water pollution, harvesting the listed
species, impediments to migration (such as culverts), and spraying pesticides in such a manner
that they got into the stream.
Mr. Jackson referenced the document he obtained from the National Marine Fisheries website
listing a variety of programs local governments could use to avoid taking. He said that USA
d^ :re?~.~ir ; a checklist for use by itself and its member jurisdictions to review procedures
and p.igrams co see if a jurisdiction could be challenged on a take.
Mr. Jackson mentioned the tradition in the Tualatin River watershed of jurisdictions working
together in a collaborative fashion to address these tough issues that affected everyone, such as
the Clean Water Act. He stated that USA expected to work collaboratively to find a reasonable
solution and response on the ESA listings also. He asked the Council to think about its local
response within its city limits to avoid take. He asked the Council to think about how the City
wanted to participate in the watershed response, such as going beyond the take issues and into
fish recovery.
Mr. Jackson noted the discussion draft (compiled by USA at the request of the Washington
County Commissioners) on a project to formulate a response to the ESA within the Tualatin
River watershed. He mentioned the intent of the project as making sure that the response was a
collaborative effort by everyone who impacted the Tualatin River watershed, not limited to a
specific interest group within that watershed. He mentioned involvement from both property
owners and elected officials.
Mr. Jackson cited the motto of the Governor's Salmon Recovery Advisor Jim Martin - "Protect
the best, restore the rest" - as a starting place for figuring out what they needed to do in response
to the ESA. He reiterated that the project would allow plenty of opportunity for citizens to
interact with the watershed policy and the decision makers. He emphasized the watershed focus
of the response.
Mr. Jackson mentioned interacting with the Willamette Restoration Initiative. He noted that the
Oregon Plan out of the Governor's Office and the Willamette Restoration Initiative have already
indicated their interest in moving beyond the avoiding take issues and into fish recovery. He
said that a decision point in the watershed response was whether or not to move into fish
recovery.
Mr. Jackson discussed another question of what kind of forum did the cities want to use for the
discussion: independent city discussions or joint round table discussions? He cited the joint
policy advisory committee formed in 1989 to respond to the total maximum daily load
requirements (TMDLs) as an example of a successful collaborative effort.
! 4r. Jackson noted that, in addition to coldwater fish (cutthroat trout and steelhead) in the
Tualatin River and Fanno Creek, Tigard also had warmwater fish (bass) in its streams that
needed protection, per both the Clean Water Act and the ESA.
Mr. Jackson stated that, while they had no choice but to respond to the ESA, they did have a
choice in how to respond. He reiterated that choosing their response was one of the first
decisions that needed to be made by the affected jurisdictions. He commented that, while they
did not yet know the cost of the response, they did have sortie hints from the Fanno Creek
Watershed Plan which included projects dealing with stream restoration and riparian corridor
restoration.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 6
Mr. Jackson reviewed the good things occurring throughout the Tualatin River basin. He
mentioned the open and viable streams in the basin (as opposed to the culverted streams in east
Portland). He said that water quality was improving in all the streams, with the Tualatin River
hep lthier today than it has been in recorded history. He indicated that the hard work of everyone
has improved the conditions in Fanno Creek and the other urban tributaries. He asserted that
there was no reason why they could not continue to work collaboratively for the ESA. He said
that the Tualatin River and Fanno Creek were community assets needing continued help from
everyone.
Mayor Nicoli spoke to the issue of USA versus Metro having control of the ESA response. He
said that he thought that most of the cities preferred USA as the leader because it was already in
the area and has overseen two successful programs. He mentioned discussion at the Washington
County Coordinating Committee of city representatives meeting to work out the issues
described by Mr. Jackson. He pointed out that individual cities working up individual responses
to the ESA would be a waste of money because the federal government wanted a coordinated
L respv::se
VLLJlIl-tiviue
Mayor Nicoli supported the cities working collaboratively with USA and the County to develop
a watershed response. He commented that he thought that they were set to take the lead in the
state on developing a compliance plan quicker than any other area. He asked if Mr. Jackson
wanted the Council to make comments tonight or to respond with a letter. Mr. Jackson said that
either way was fine, as long as they got a response. He said that they had a 45-day timeline to
talk to all the jurisdictions and to receive input.
Mayor Nicoli suggested that Mr. Jackson recommend to Commissioner Brian that he invite
representatives from all the cities to a meeting within the next 30 days. He commented that one
of Washington County's strengths was the ability of the cities to work well together on regional
issues.
Councilor Scheckla mentioned that Oswego Lake used Tualatin River water. He questioned
how they could protect the fish when Oswego Lake was drained every few years. Mr. Jackson
agreed that the effect of draining the lake was an issue that needed to be addressed.
Councilor Scheckla mentioned an abandoned garbage dump located in the Beef Bend area. He
asked how that sort of thing was cleaned up. Mr. Jackson stated that to hear these sorts of
questions and concerns was why USA would include public open houses in the process.
Ms. Newton asked if Mr. Jackson wanted comments back on the discussion draft. Mr. Jackson
said that the City could return comments however it wished to. He mentioned that they would
return for further discussion within the 45-day timeline.
4. UPDATE: WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER PLAN
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, noted that Planning Commissioners Nick
Wilson, Mark Padgett, and Jim Griffith were present.
Laurie Nicholson, Associate Planner, reviewed the history of Tigard's effort to comply with
the Metro 2040 plan, including the formation of the Washington Square Regional Center Task
Force. She mentioned the purpose of the Metro "regional center" designation as an area of
concentrated mixed-use and high-density development. She explained that the purpose of the
Washington Square Regional Center Plan was to allocate residential, employment, and
commercial densities within Tigard in order to comply with the Metro plan.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 7
n,
Ms. Nicholson stated that she applied for a Department of Transportation grant to fund the
consultant they needed to help them with a project of this magnitude. She introduced the
consulting team of John Spencer (Spencer Cupper), Beth Williams (Kittleson & Associates),
and Elaine Cogan (Cogan Owens Cogan) and Lloyd Lindley.
Ms. Nicholson mentioned that staff developed a task force in order to involve all the interest
groups (27 members). She stated that the Tigard staff has also met with staff from Washington
County, City of Beaverton, Metro, ODOT, and DLCD.
Ms. Nicholson explained that, as part of its compliance with the Metro density targets,
Washington County initially targeted the Metzger neighborhood for R-40 zoning in order to
accommodate 600 dwelling units in an area next to a regional center. She said that the Task
Force reached a compromise with Washington County to allocate the residential density to other
par is of the regional center and to preserve the established single family neighborhood.
John Spencer, Spencer Cupper, observed that Metro expected Washington Square, as one of
nine regional centers, not only to take dense development with a concentration of employment
and high-density housing but also to serve as a focus for regional and state transportation
funding. He commented that this funding would help address the many transportation issues in
the area.
Mr. Spencer reviewed the study area boundaries established by the Task Force to allow adequate
analysis of the transportation impacts. He said that inside the study area there were over 1,000
acres, 18,000 existing jobs, 5,000 residents and 2,300 housing units.
Mr. Spencer mentioned the two basic messages they have heard from the public at the two open
houses: address the transportation congestion in and around the area, and do not change the
zoning in the Metzger area. He said that the people wanted to maintain the single family
neighborhood while encouraging environmentally friendly development. He noted the
comments to improve the pedestrian/bicycle/transit connections to and within the area. He said
that the people wanted to maintain the Metzger school as a community resource, to preserve the
open space and historic trees in the area, and to have a sense of stewardship for future
generations.
Mr. Spencer described the analysis of land within the district. He mentioned the different types
of land identified: land currently in use, floodplains or wetlands, land with environmental
features to be preserved, and land available for redevelopment or infill opportunities. He said
that they found roughly 200 acres available within the study area to accommodate the 9,800 new
jobs and 1,500 new housing units (the amount need to reach both the city and county targets).
He mentioned looking at existing parking lots around Lincoln Center and in the Nimbus area for
possible parking lot structures or new buildings.
Mr. Spencer discussed the density scenario which they believed would best accommodate the
growth allocation within the Washington Square area. He mentioned development occurring at
relatively high densities, both residential and office, on the vacant, redevelopable or infill lands.
He said that in 20 years this area would have 28,000 jobs and 3,800 new housing units (a 55%
and 65% increase over the present respectively).
Mr. Spencer described the final report document that the Task Force was creating as a result of
this process: the Regional Center Plan. He said that it outlined the 20 year vision for the area,
the priorities, and the recommendations for the next steps. He mentioned two other documents:
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 8
a set of draft Comprehensive Plan amendments that would be needed to implement some of the
_ recommendations in the plan, and the creation of several additional mixed-use zoning districts
as a companion to the Comprehensive Plan amendments.
Elaine Cogan, Cogan Owens Cogan, discussed the public process used by the Task Force.
She mentioned the willingness of the different interest groups on the Task Force to work
together to find a solution. She emphasized the openness of the process and the willingness of
the Task Force to listen to each other and to the public.
Ms. Cogan commented that the charts showing the density allocations that the Task Force
agreed on came only after hours of discussion. She mentioned the principles hammered out by
the Task Force, the desire to protect the natural resources, and the work done on the
transportation issues.
Ms. Cogan distributed photos of the open houses held at Washington Square, the Metzger
school, and the Tigard Water Building. She commented that because Jack Ridley was on the
Task Force, he opened up the area under the Food Court at Washington Square for a Task Force
Open House. She emphasized that the hundreds of people who stopped by to give their input
would not have attended a public meeting. She noted the last public open house in mid-
Septembor at Metzger Park. She stated that they tried hard to reach out to people with
questionnaires and different formats.
Lloyd Lindley used a series of graphics to review the issues, concepts and recommendations
discussed by the Task Force. He mentioned transportation as a key issue, circulation around the
mall and around the regional center. He discussed the structure of the community and its
distinct components, including the Metzger neighborhood, a retail core, an employment center,
the other neighborhoods, an open space system, and a commercial center (mixed-use area). He
pointed out that a greenbelt existed almost by default around the center with the existing Ash
Creek and Fanno Creek drainages as well as the golf course and other open spaces.
Mr. Lindley discussed the recommended transportation improvements. He said that they found
a need for transportation connections to the Nimbus employment center and to the retail
shopping plaza on Cascade. He mentioned an extension of Locust Street. He described the
extension of Nimbus as part of the loop system to create another point of north-south access to
the district. He stated that the concept was to find a way to balance the traffic as it related to the
regional system, the neighborhoods, and the internal system in tae area. He mentioned
increasing pedestrian accessibility, bike transportation, and a parks and open space network that
would encourage people to move through the district.
Mr. Lindley pointed out that the Task Force has not changed the density in the regional center
except for higher densities between Oak Street and Hwy 217. He said that they have provided
more flexibility in order to allow a mix of commercial, retail and residential uses.
Mr. Lindley discussed the flood plain and wetlands configuration in the regional center. He
indicated that the Metro map, Title 3 and USA regulations superseded any of their planning. He
referenced two maps depicting the wetlands and drainages identified as part of the buildable
lands analysis.
Mr. Lindley referenced the concept diagram showing the greenbelt as it presently existed
encircling the regional center (with only a few gaps). He noted the people's desire to maintain
it. He spoke to preserving and enhancing the greenbelt with appropriate pedestrian connections
and linkages as well as passive and active park areas.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 9
Mr. Lindley discussed the graphics showing the urban development patterns and transportation
connections. He noted the opportunity for public plazas, a commuter rail train station, a
redeveloped bus transfer facility, and a people-mover system. He indicated the new connection
across 217 linking both sides of the Washington Square mall to the Metzger neighborhood and
to Nimbus Park and the employment center there.
Ms. Nicholson reviewed the next steps for the process. She said that they would have another
Task Force meeting to revise the draft plan. She mentioned the open house scheduled for
September 15 at Metzger Park Hall. She indicated that the Task Force would present its revised
draft plan to the Planning Commission in October and to the City Council in November. She
commented that they would present the plan to Metro in a letter to demonstrate that Tigard has
gone through a planning effort to comply with their density targets and to develop a regional
center plan. She noted that they would also present the plan to Washington County who would
adopt the plan into their Code.
Councilor Scheckla mentioned a concern about sending the plan out before they knew whether
or not Title 3 was adopted. Nadine Smith, Long Range Planner, explained that staff assumed
that the Title 3 regulations in this area would be the same as the existing regulations.
Mayor Nicoli asked how much involvement has the Washington County's Engineering
Department had on the transportation issues. Ms. Nicholson said that staff involved Washington
County in the technical advisory meetings and provided them with the draft recommendations
for their review. Ms. Smith noted that Kathy Lehtola was on the Task Force.
Mayor Nicoli commented that, with regard to bridges over the freeway, nothing would happen
without Washington County's approval. He mentioned that ODOT recently fought Tigard over
putting in overpasses on 217 in the Triangle. He noted the high cost of overpasses. He
questioned the feasibility of proposing overpasses as a good solution, given the small chance
that they would be funded.
Beth Whimple, Kittleson & Associates, stated that the Locust overcrossing has already been
identified in the Metro Regional Transportation Plan. She indicated on the map which overpass
was not in the RTP. She said that it would carry roughly the same amount of traffic and serve to
connect the Burlington Plaza retail area directly to the mall. Mayor Nicoli noted the difficulties
in connecting the overpass to Cascade Avenue.
Mayor Nicoli raised the issue of the commuter rail stop at Washington Square. Ms. Whimple
said that they worked under the premise that there would be a stop in the City somewhere north
of Scholls Ferry. Mr. Lindley stated that the Kittleson engineers felt that the concept was doable
at this stage.
Mayor Nicoli pointed out that Washington Square was the only stop along the commuter rail
line that did not have a natural stop, as the cities did. He spoke to asking Metro for another $5
to $10 million to put in the good connection between the rail line and Washington Square. He
said that a good connection was needed in order to make the line successful. He said that
picking up the ridership out of Washington Square would make the numbers work out.
Mr. Lindley commented that they were thinking along the same lines as Mayor Nicoli discussed.
He mentioned the people-mover system recommended as the transit system to move people
within the district. He said that the bridge would serve as access to the station and to the people-
mover. He described the people-mover system as a small bus system running on a specific route
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 10
on a regular schedule, either on rubber tires or on a fixed guide system. He said that it would
link to the bus transit center and the park system as well.
Mayor Nicoli pointed out that, although the federal government was already interested in
funding a commuter rail line to a regional center, they would be even more interested if the
proposal included a people-mover system that got people out of their cars. He spoke to
including the cost figures for the people-mover system in their final funding request to the
federal government. He said that he thought that both the County and Beaverton would support
it. Mr. Lindley observed that the opportunity here was to link the rail stop to both the jobs and
the shopping activities in Washington Square with the employment centers at Lincoln Center
and Nimbus.
Marie- AadaPtt. Plann_na Vnmm:~°:^.. out tt` t the b 1. r. rfi r
UCI-1cllclaly VL L11Li Ly JJV V1
~a-.., .-b v u, rVaaalvU V{4L L11Ga L11V :g
system under discussion would be the commercial interests at Washington Square and the
centers along Nimbus and Cascade. He asked if there was a plan to share the costs with the
private sector. Mr. Spencer said that, conceptually, the major properties and businesses that
benefited from the system needed to participate in it.
Commissioner Padgett asked if there was an effort to coordinate the transportation
improvements recommended in the plan with either the Tigard Transportation Plan Task Force
or the Transportation Bond Task Force. Ms. Nicholson confirmed that staff would coordinate
the efforts. She mentioned obtaining comments from Gus Duenas and the Engineering
Department as they moved through the process. She pointed out that the Regional Center Plan
was a 20 year land use transportation urban design plan with priority in Metro transportation
funding allocations.
Commissioner Padgett commented that he served on both Task Forces but has not yet heard
anything to do with the Washington Square Regional Plan. He mentioned his concern that the
three task forces might be working at cross-purposes. Ms. Nicholson indicated that the Plan
process was not yet at the point of discussing specific projects. Mr. Spencer agreed that now
was a good time to make sure that each Task Force was informed about what the other Task
Forces were doing.
Councilor Scheckla spoke to Beaverton contributing money to the project also.
Jim Griffith, Planning Commissioner, asked how the 8,000 new jobs and 1,500 new
residential units related to the City of Tigard's overall obligation under 2040. Mr. Spencer said
that they have worked at accommodating all of Tigard's regional town center allocation in this
area. Ms. Smith indicated that the 1,500 residential units were one-sixth of the 6,400 total
residential units targeted for Tigard.
Pat Whiting, Task Force member, asked to present materials discussing wetlands and flood
plains. Mayor Nicoli told her to give the material to the City Recorder. He commented that he
doubted that the Council would look at the material until the plan was completed at the Task
Force level. Ms. Newton said that staff would evaluate the material and determine the
appropriate time to give it to Council and the Planning Commission within the land use
procedures and legislative process.
• Mayor Nicoli recessed the meeting for a break at 8:35 p.m.
• Mayor Nicoli reconvened the meeting at 8:46 p.m.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 11
5. DISCUSSION: TIGARD TRIANGLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Mr. Hendryx mentioned the recent situation in which a property owner questioned the Triangle
standards, specifically with regard to separated sidewalks. He observed that the Triangle
standards were the guiding principles developed by the 'i riangle Task Force for the City to use
in creating a high quality mixed-use employment area in the Triangle.
Mr. Hendryx discussed the guiding principles, concepts, and specific standards in the Triangle
standards. He indicated two guiding principles of high quality development (not big box) and
utilizing the streetscape to create a high quality image of the area. He mentioned the concept of
a pedestrian friendly area. He said that the Task Force members felt it was important that all
development in the Triangle meet the standards, whether converting single family homes into
offices or building new multi-tiiiiiion dollar prvjcCw.
Mr. Hendryx said that the standards required developments to make public utility and street
improvements, in accordance with the Dolan requirement. He mentioned Council's approval of
a payment in lieu of process for those situations in which it was not practical to put in the
improvements, such as a building located too far away from a sewer to connect.
Mr. Hendryx reviewed the requirements intended to create the desired streetscape. He discussed
the building design standards intended to provide variety and interest in the building facade so
that pedestrians would not be faced with a long blank wall. He mentioned the pedestrian
connections required every 300 feet and the requirements to hide all roof top mounted
equipment and to install detailed landscaping.
Mr. Hendryx discussed the Design Evaluation Team process, developed to evaluate variance
requests and possible tradeoffs. He said that the DET has met with half a dozen different
projects over the last two years and achieved compromises that maintained the high quality
development while still allowing for creativity. He noted that the developer paid for the DET
process.
Mr. Hendryx reviewed the list of 20 projects approved and/or under construction in the Triangle,
ranging from retail stores, office buildings, an hotel, medical facilities, and a shopping center.
He presented slides showing streetscapes in the Triangle, including separated and curbtight
sidewalks. He commented that the PacTrust development (frequently held up as an example of
high quality development) had only one owner who set his own standards and carried them out.
He said that, with the hundreds of property owners in the Triangle, the standards were even
more important in setting the image of the area.
Councilor Hunt asked how staff resolved the Landmark Ford issue. Mr. Hendryx said that they
reached a satisfactory compromise of meandering sidewalks. He pointed out that the standards
gave them that flexibility.
Mayor Nicoli asked for an update on the Eagle Hardware site. Mr. Hendryx said that, following
the demolition, Eagle Hardware was held up by a Army Corps of Engineers issue involving a
creek on the site. He indicated that he has not yet heard the resolution of that issue.
Mr. Hendryx showed slides of various projects either completed or under construction in the
Triangle. He commented on how these projects met the standards. He noted the creative design
used to achieve the 50% window requirement on the street frontage of the dental office building
while avoiding windows on the patient rooms.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 12
Mr. Hendryx stated that, because of the standards and the DET process, the quality development
that the Council wanted to see in the Triangle was occurring. He commented on the
phenomenal rate of development. He said that staff would continue to monitor the development
of the Triangle and the impact of the standards. He recommended making no changes in the
standards at this time, as the existing procedures allowed flexibility in the process.
Councilor Hunt asked if there has been any mixed-use residential projects. Mr. Hendryx said
that there has been some interest expressed but the projects never penciled out. He commented
that the Triangle probably was not conducive to residential development.
Councilor Hunt asked if staff has reserved a certain percentage for residential. Mr. Hendryx
explained that the Code required the large projects involving several acres to include residential
along with the mix of retail, commercial and office. He said that the small properties, under one
acre, could develop however the developer chose. He noted that the planners who reviewed
applications on a daily basis insured compliance with the Code.
Councilor Moore asked if the standards caused the development spurt. Mr. Hendryx said that
having stability in the standards encouraged developers who did not want to invest millions of
dollars in an area without knowing what it would look like.
Councilor Moore commented that he had thought that the City allowed Landmark Ford to build
its parking lots partly to provide off-street parking for the employees. He questioned wither
these employees were still using street parking.
Mayor Nicoli discussed his concern that the sidewalk issue had not been resolved at the staff
level. He noted that the entire Council had felt that Landmark Ford had made a reasonable
request. Councilor Moore commented that the Council had approved a plan that did not give
staff sufficient flexibility to resolve such issues. Mr. Hendryx pointed out that Landmark Ford
situation came down to an issue of interpretation.
Mayor Nicoli stated that he still believed that the plan was too rigid to allow for flexibility or
creativity to a certain extent. He said that, with regulations as tight as the Triangle standards,
the same issues would keep coming back. He mentioned his concern at the cost to the applicant
who spent thousands of dollars trying to resolve an issue.
Mayor Nicoli mentioned another issue concerning the staff report on the Babies R Us proposal
and the method of assessment for the traffic lights. He noted that the Council was surprised
with the staff recommendation. Councilor Moore commented that staff did not have the
flexibility to interpret the Code requirements to their liking. He pointed out that the issue with
flexibility in any code was at what point did the flexibility stop.
Mayor Nicoli concurred that staff had to follow the regulations. He asked that staff bring it to
„ the attention of Council when they found a City ordinance or regulation that was unreasonable
and unfair in its application. He spoke to the Council taking the responsibility for any
unreasonable regulations it adopted, rather than the staff taking the blame. He said that the staff
took too much of a hit on the traffic light question; the responsibility lay with the Council.
Councilor Hunt pointed out that they wrote policies assuming certain circumstances. A policy
might not necessarily be a bad policy in and of itself but it could become one in circumstances
foreign to the situation it was written to address. Councilor Scheckla commented that the 3
circumstances triggering the traffic light situation were unique.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 13
Mr. Hendryx said that he looked at these processes as evolving. He described the situation as
the Council deliberating a Code policy (that said the first and the last development in paid for
the improvement), and devising another policy requiring each developer to pay a certain share of
the improvement. Ile said that staff has started applying that policy with effective results. He
pointed out that it took this project to bring this issue to the Council. He said that he was
working with Gus Duenas on how to fund fixing the infrastructure problems in the Triangle.
Mayor Nicoli observed that staff should do its job but also feel free to tell the Council when
something did not work fairly.
Councilor Moore referenced a conversation the Council had with City Manager Bill Monahan
regarding the new rules in operation with every new Council. He stated that this Council
empowered the staff to throw up a red flag when they found something wrong.
Mr. Hendryx pointed out that the Council needed to recognize that with any new and/or strict
standards, there would be people who wanted to stay with the old way of doing things. He
:mphasized that enforcing the standards was necessary in order to obtain a quality development,
even if people walked away from a proposed development because of the cost of compling with
those standards. He commented that if they held on to the standards over the next couple of
years, they would see high quality development.
Mayor Nicoli remarked that he did not think that they have reached the toughest part of
development in the Triangle yet, the redevelopment of multiple single family properties in the
West end as one large development. He stated that he did not propose changing the standards
but he did want staff to bring things that did not look right to the Council.
Councilor Patton commented that it would get more challenging for staff to apply the standards
on a case by case basis as the more difficult developments in the Triangle came in. She spoke to
staff as the best gauge for what did not feel right. She supported staff bringing forward to the
Council situations where strict application of the standards did not allow staff to grant a
reasonable request from the developer.
Councilor Hunt concurred. He observed that the more they adhered to the standards now, the
easier it would be later on. He said that, although he supported bringing up any situation, he
hoped that staff would bring up the really out of line situations as opposed to the marginal
sit'.iations. Councilor Scheckla commented that no matter what they did, someone would not like
it.
Mr. Hendryx reminded the Council that it adopted the Planning Director's interpretation at a
previous meeting. He said that, under the rough proportionality of Dolan, if the facilities were
not in existence and the developers could not afford to pay for them, staff would deny some
developments in the Triangle. Councilor Scheckla indicated that he had no problem with that.
6. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None
7. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 14
"In INEI El
8. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at p.m. under the provisions of ORS
192.660(1) (d); (e), (f), (g), and (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt
public records, current & pending litigation issues.
9. ADJOURNMENT: 9:27 p.m.
~,C Papn ~-t p Oj hu
Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder
yor, City of Tigard `
Bate:
I:WDM\CATFMCCW990720.D0C
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 20, 1999 - PAGE 15
COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC' Legal
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 9452
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97076
Legal Notice Advertising
eCity of Tigard e ❑ Tearsheet Notice ;
133.25 SPA Hall Blvd.
eTigard,Oregon 97223 e ❑ Duplicate Affidavit
E
"Accounts Payable
AFF!DAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON,
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ass. S
1, Kathy Snyder
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising
Director, or his principal clerk, of them; gard-Tualatin Times s
a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010
i
and 193.020; published at Ti gard in the
aforesaid county and state; that the
city council Meeting
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the
entire issue of said newspaper for DUE successive and
consecutive in the following issues:
July 15 1999
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ! 5th day of Jul y '1999
OFFICIAL SEAL
~~~CCCOOO ROBIN A. BURGESS j
Notarylie for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON
COMMISSION NO. 062071 r
My Commission Expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16, 2001
AFFIDAVIT
The followsa gmee iiag highlights am publisbecd fctx your infortuation. Full
agendas i~ , ba obtained from thi, City Recorder, 13125 S.W. Hall
Bouleval iT*0d, Oregon 97223, or by calling 639-4171.
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL .
AND LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD MEETING
July 20, 1999 - 6:30 P.M'
r TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL
13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD,-1 GARD, OREGON
Reports; presentations ahd.updates.to Council on the following topics:.
i e Atfalati ]Feasibility Study e Endangered Species Act, 1
e Joint Meeting of Washington Square Task Force ahol Plannin Coimmis- 1
Sion
e Tigard Triangle Plan Standards
e ~ Executive Session - w ~ , t >
y
e,'9991i. • f
i'$9.452:.; u i 'Jaly 1
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
AFFIDAVIT OF NOTIFICATION
In the matter of the proposed
C ,h any °P o*,,m C &ivr,_p - 71~c)14q 60t,w1C,(STATE OF OREGON )
County of Washington )SS
City of Tigard )
I, n c t , being first duly sworn, on oath, depose and say:
~t0,~ge fern.--
That I notified the following persons by phone or personal contact of the fdeti peval Meetinckfor
the Council Meeting of --'J-LLLL, U copy of sal written notice being hereto
attached and by reference made a part hereof on the G' - day of
CONTACT METHOD: ONE PELF SON AL TE TIME
Tigard Times Reporter at 6 160
AgOlk
Name: k""ln .u2C~ ClS 'y
Oregonian Reporter at 297-8861
or 639-9867
C
Name:
King City R IC ourier 39-5414 PC~~C9 ~ Y~6i ce
Name: -pry) C v u
Subscribed and sworn to before me this o~IL day of 19 q q
OFFl@M SEAL
NOTARY Pt BMA)REGON Notary IIC for Oregon
ea st wo
MY CODdP+ 3;oN 411120 8 MAY. s~soa8, 2= S' ,~,D 3
My Commission Expires: h1q,
Ioginlcathy%aflnot
i
NOTICE OF CHANGE IN MEETING T iiviE
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
July 20, 1999 - 6 p.m.
Tigard City Hall - Red Rock Creek Conference Room
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon
The July 20, 1999, City Council meeting was scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m.; however,
the Council will meet at 6 p.m. for an Executive Session.
The Tigard City Council will hold an Executive Session under the provisions of ORS
192.660 (1) (e), to discuss real property transactions. As you are aware, all discussions
within this session are confidential; therefore those present may disclose nothing from this
meeting. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must
not disclose any information discussed during this session.
For further information, please contact City Recorder Cathy Wheatley by calling 639-
4171 or at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.
ity Recorder
c: Kari Hastings Arguedas Tigard Times ( Fax No. 620-3433)
Emily Tsao c/o Metro SW (Fax No. 968-6061)
Post: City Hall Lobby
Date of Notice: July 19, 1999
is\adm\cathy\cca\notice2.doc
AdMk
NOTICE OF CHANGE IN MEETING TIME
T IGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
July 20, 1999 - 6 p.m.
Tigard City Hall - Red Rock Creek Conference Room
13125 SW Hall ]Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon
The July 20, 1999, City Council meeting was scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m.; however;
the Council will meet at 6 p.m. for an Executive Session.
The Tigard City Council will hold an Executive Session under the provisions of ORS
192.660 (1) (e), to discuss real property transactions. As you are aware, all discussions
within this session are confidential; therefore those present may disclose nothing from this
meeting. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must
not disclose any information discussed during this session.
For further information, please contact City Recorder Cathy Wheatley by calling 639-
4171 or at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.
L2'~~-~ I 2A
ity Recorder
c: Kari Hastings Ar uedas Tigard Times (Fax No. 620-3433)
Emily Tsao c/o Metro SW (Fax No. 968-6061)
Post: City Hall Lobby
Date of Notice: July 19, 1999
i Aadm\cathy\cca\notice2.doc
Aft
07/19/99 16:55 $503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD 9001
ACTIVITY REPORT *z*
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO. 7525
CONNECTION TEL 9686061
CONNECTION ID
START TIME 07/19 16:54
USAGE TIME 00'35
PAGES 1
RESULT OK
Auk
NOTICE OF CHANGE IN MEETING TIME
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
July 20, 1959 - 6 p.m.
Tigard City Hall - Red Rock Creek Conference Room
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon
The July 20, 1999, City Council meeting was scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m.; however,
the Council will meet at 6 p.m. for an Executive Session.
The Tigard City Council will hold an Executive Session under the provisions of ORS
192.660 (1) (e), to discuss real property transactions. As you are aware, all discussions
within this session are confidential; therefore those present may disclose nothing from this
meeting. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must
not disclose any information discussed during this session.
For further information, please contact City Recorder Cathy Wheatley by calling 639-
4171 or at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.
NOTICE OF CHANGE IN MEETING TIME
1 1GAR0 CITY COUNC1L MEETING
July 20, 1999 - 6 p.m.
Tigard City Hall Red Rock Creek Conference Room
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon
The July 20, 1999, City Council meeting was scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m.; however,
the Council will meet at 6 p.m. for an Executive Session.
The Tigard City Council will hold an Executive Session under the provisions of ORS
192.660 (1) (e), to discuss real property transactions. As you are aware, all discussions
within this session are confidential; therefore those present may disclose nothing from this
meeting. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must
not disclose any information discussed during this session.
For further information, please contact City Recorder Cathy Wheatley by calling 639-
4171 or at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.
City Recorder
c: ari Hastin S Arguedas Tigard Times ( Fax No. 620-343
Emily Tsao c/o Metro SW (Fax o. -
Post: City Hall Lobby
Date of Notice: July 19, 1999
is\adm\cathy\cca\notice2.doc
07/19/99 16:53 $503 684 7297 CITY OF TIGARD Q001
ssaass*m~s*axxastxasssazs~~e
ats ACTIVITY REPORT asp
s~aa~s~taasaaasss:aassaat:s
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO. 7523
CONNECTION TEL 5036203433
CONNECTION ID TIGARD TIMES
START TIME 07/19 16:52
USAGE TIME 00'45
PAGES 1
RESULT OK
NO'T'ICE OF CHANGE IN MEETING TIME
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
July 20, 1999 - 6 p,m.
Tigard City Hall - Red Rock Creek Conference Room
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon
The July 20, 1999, City Council meeting was scheduler) to start at 6:30 p.m.; however,
the Council will meet at 6 p.m. for an Executive Session.
The Tigard City Council will hold an Executive Session under the provisions of ORS
192.660 (1) (e), to discuss real property transactions. As you are aware, all discussions
within this session are confidential; therefore those present may disclose nothing fioma this
meeting. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must
not disclose any information discussed during this session.
For further information, please contact City Recorder Cathy Wheatley by calling 639-
4171 or at 13125 SW Nall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon.
i
Item No. For Council Newsletter dated q
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council
FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder
^vA T Cr-: July 10, i 999
SUBJECT: Revised Agenda and Council Items for 1A (7/20/99 Council Meeting)
Attached is a revised Council agenda for the July 20, 1999 Council meeting. Also
attached are two revised council packet items (1A) concerning Budget Adjustment No. 2
and a contract award.
Ask
is-on
AGENDA ITEM # 1A m
FOR AGENDA OF 7/20/99
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Budget Adjustment No. 2 - Increase Revenues and Appropriations for Award of
Recreation District Feasibility Study
PREPARED BY: C. Turner DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Shall Council adjust the General Fund budget to increase anticipated revenues $41,500 and increasing
appropriations in the Park Division contractual services by $56,500, which includes the City of Tigard.
contribution to the Atfalati Recreation District Study of $15,000. The $15,000 was appropriated in FY98/99,
but never paid as the Study was delayed until other parties signed on.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the budget adjustment be made.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
t the June 15, 1999, Council Study Session, Council gave staff direction to act as coordinator for the
ecreation District Feasibility Study. Acting as coordinator means collecting fees from all participating
agencies, managing the contract and making payments to the consultant, as requested. A list of participating
agencies and their level of financial participation is attached.
The FY 99/00 budget did not anticipate the City coordinating this project, and these funds are not currently in
the FY99/00 budget. Council approved a budget adjustment of $15,000 in FY 98/99 for the City's portion of
this project. However, these funds were never paid and should be reappropriated in the current year's budget.
Making this budget adjustment will allow the City to recognize payments from the other participating agencies
and make appropriate payments to the consultant.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Choose not to participate in the Study.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Park & Recreation Services
FISCAL NOTES
General Fund revenues are increased by $41,500, and appropriations in the Park Division Contractual Services
Budget are increased by $56,500. Appropriations include a $15,000 City of Tigard contribution.
DM\CATHY\COL1NCIL%AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY SHEET - BUDGET ADJUSTMENT NO 2 - PARK & REC STUDY.DOC.DOC
Park and Recreation District Feasibility Study
List of Agency Participation
Phase I Phase II Total
Tigard 13,100 4,000 17,100
Washington County` 19,100 5,900 25,000
City of Sherwood 3,400 1,000 4,400
Tigard/Tualatin 3,800 1,200 5,000
School 1istrict
Sherwood School 2,300 700 3,000
District'
City of Durham' 500 200 700
Atfalati _ 8,400 2,600 11,000
50,600 15,600 *66,200
*Please note the attached estimated project cost for Phases I and II, prepared by Cogan,
Owens, Cogan, is $56,500. The $66,200 total contribution allows for additional funding in
case more tasks are added. If all funds are not spent, contributions will be returned in
proportionate shares.
'Signed Intergovernmental Agreements along with funding, or a request for invoice to make
payment, have been received from these agencies.
I:WDh41CATHY%000NCIL%PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT FEASIBILITY STUDY.DOC
Cogan Owens Cogan MBA R&A WM TOTAL Cost
Task Davis Greene Clerical Breithaupt Riley, Zilis ALL
11ourly Rates 85
PHASEI
Task l Boundaries
' 1.1 1 1
1.2 8 = 8
Subtotal 1 8 0 0 0 0 9 $485
as nven ory
2.1 2 S 8
'2.2 0 2 4 6
2.3 21 21 2 44
2.4 2 6 8
Subtotal 23 31 12 0 0 0 66 $3,985
Task Facilitate
3.1 2 4 5 11
3.2 24 24 48
3.3 0
Subtotal 26 24 5 0 0 0 59 $3,610
Task terra rve Programs
4.1 8 8
4.2 4 8 12 24 48
4.3 2 4 4 10
4.4 4 21 25
4.5 4 12 16
4.6 4 2 2 8
4.7 8 16 2 26
Subtotal 34 40 0 41 0 26 141 $ 12,055
Task Governance
5.1 8 8
5.2 7 7
5.3 6 6
5.4 7 7
Subtotal 28 0 0 0 0 0 28 $2,380
ask 6 Public-Feed ac
6.1 4 24 12 X 40
6.2 2 X 2
6.3 X 0
6.4 2 16 X 18
Subtotal 8 40 12 0 X 0 60 $ 12,660
Task conomic Feasibility
7.1 8 8
7.2 2 40 42
Subtotal 10 0 0 40 0 0 50 $5,050
as eve op Consensus
8.1 0
8.2 12 12
8.3 14 14
Subtotal 26 0 0 0 0 0 26 $2,210
Phase I Hours 156 143 29 81 X 26 439
AmL Phase I Labor Cos $ 13,260 $ 7,150 $ 1,160 $ 8,505 $ 9,500 $ 2,860 $ 42,435
6/4/99
~ yAP'
aired Expense:
Mileage Expense 200
Alft Printing & copying 350
Long Distance 25
575
Lump Sum Bid
TOTAL PHASE 1 $ 43,010
PHASE II
Task 9 Finalize Program
9.1 1 4 A
92 4 4 8
9.3 1 5 6
Subtotal 9 5 0 4 0 0 18
Task u ge s
10:1 8 40 48
10.2 4 4 8
10.3 2 8 10
Subtotal 14 0 0 52 0 0 66
'Task 11 eso ions
11.1 16 16
11.2 8 8
11.3 2 2 4
Subtotal 26 0 2 0 0 0 28
as a ge a ena
12.1 2 2
12.2 0
Amok 12.3 6 6
Subtotal 2 6 0 0 0 0 8
TON 13 Public n or na ion
13.1 12 12
13.2 30 8 38
Subtotal 0 42 8 0 0 0 50
Phase 11 Hours 51 53 10 56 0 0 170
Phase If Labor Co $ 4,335 $ 2,650 $ 400 $ 5,880 $ - $ - $ 13,265
Direct Expenses:
Mileage Expense 100
Printing & copying 100
Long Distance 25
225
TOTAL PHASE 9 $ 13,490
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST, PHASES I & 56500
614/99
1'
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
RESOLUTION NO. 99-
A RESOLUTION TO ADJUST THE FY99/00 BUDGET TO RECOGNIZE FUNDS RECEIVED AND
APPROPROPRIATE THOSE FUNDS FOR A PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT FEASIBILITY
STUDY (BUDGET ADJUSTMENT NO. 2)
WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council directed staff to coordinate the contract for a park and recreation
district feasibility study; and
•ttr MT% . A n .t_, • a C .i.. ♦..IrAl [(fin from the fv'ii-v of QhorannrZ ill iv' !"v... i.-
VYI1li+Z%mtta, We fe~.cipa 01 itaituo 60a" Ag w-, a.....,.vvu, •vawaauabwaa vuuly,
Sherwood School District, Tigard/Tualatin School District, and the City of Durham were not included in the
FY99/00 Adopted Budget; and
WHEREAS, the total contract amount of $56,500 was not included in the Park Division budge.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION 1: The FY99/00 Adopted Budget be amended to recognize the receipt of $41,500 from
those agencies participating in the feasibility study.
SECTION 2: Appropriate $56,500 in the Park Division contractual expenditures, for the total cost of
the feasibility study. The City ofTigard's contribution not to exceed $15,000.
AM& PASSED: This day of 1999.
Mayor - City of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
LMDMATHMOUNCIMESOLUTION BUDGET ADJUST NO.2 - PARK AND REC STUDY.DOC
RESOLUTION NO.99-
Page 1
01 Elm,
AGENDA ITEM #
I A L~)
FOR AGENDA OF 7/20/99
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL. AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Award of contract for recreation district feasibility study to Cogan Owens, Cogan
PREPARED BY: Cyndi Turner DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK "Od-
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Shall Local Contract Review Board award a contract in the amount of $56,500 to Cogan, Owens, Cogan for a
recreation district feasibility study?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends award of the contract to Cogan, Owens, Cogan.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
A request for proposal was issued in March, 1999, seeking a qualified consultant to assist with a feasibility
study for a new park and recreation district.
Aftz-
e Atfalati Recreation District Task Force coordinated the bidding process, and made the recommendation to
award the contract to Cogan, Owens, Cogan.
City Council gave staff direction to act as coordinator of this process at the June 15, 1999 study session. Staff
recommends awarding the contract to Cogan, Owens, Cogan, per City bidding procedure 30.125 in our
Administration Rules.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Choose alternate consultant.
2. Choose not to participate in the feasibility study.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Parks and recreation services
FISCAL NOTES
Funds for this contract will be received from the other agencies participating in this study. The fiscal impact to
the City of Tigard will be limited to $15,000 of the total contract. The remaining funds will be received from:
City of Sherwood, Tigard/Tualatin School District, Sherwood School District, Washington County, Atfalati
ecreation District, and the City of Durham.
:W DMWOVIECDISTSUM.DOT
•
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF July 20, 1999
,
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TTME Tigard Sherwood Durham Park & Recreation Feasibility Study
PREPARED BY: Ed Wegner DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Linda Davis, of Cogan Owens, Cogan will be present at the City Council meeting to lead a group interview
process on the Councils thoughts, ideas and questions that need to be addressed prior to making a decision on a
direction for extended park and recreation services.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff would recommend full Council participation in this group interview process for the park and
recreation district feasibility study.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Ot the time Council formed a citizen task force to study the feasibility of a park and recreation district, they
indicated the desire to give input into the process. I have included three handouts for your review that might
provide information and questions you may have. Along with Tigard, the cities of Durham, Sherwood School
District and Tigard-Tualatin School District would be meeting with Linda Davis as they continue with this
process.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
At this time, the feasibility study will address the alternatives of expanded park and recreation services.
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
This is both a City Council goal and Vision Task Force goal to study the feasibility of a park and recreation
district.
FISCAL NOTES
e City of Tigard allocated $15,000 towards the study with the other participants paying a proportionate share.
uywidekumdot
Election Timeline
Atfalati Park and Recreation District
The timeline below reflects two possible methods of initiation: 1) initiation by 15% of
the registered voters; and 2) initiation by Board of County Commissioners. The target
date is the November 7, 2000 general election.
Formation Preparation:
Sept. - Dec., 1998 Organize formation process
Jan. - Feb., 1999 Select consultant to assist committee with formation process
June September, 1999 Determine/ prepare:
o Type of district and governance structure
Park and recreation district program
o Boundaries of district
e Economic feasibility statement
October, 1999 Hold public meeting(s) to discuss district formation
Oct. - Dec., 1999 Final decisions on district formation
Make final determination on formation method A or B
Method A: Initiation by Petition of Registered Voters (Based on statutory timelines
and requirements)
December, 1999 Prepare petition materials
January 14,1999i File copy of petition, and supporting materials with County
Clerk; begin circulating petition
April 10, 2000ii File voter petition (signatures)
File city resolutions of support
Provide bond or security deposit
April 20, 2000 County Clerk verifies signatures
May 10, 2000 FINAL PETITION FILING DEADLINE
May 20, 2000 Final signature verification
July 1, 1999
DRAFT
T IGARD/ SHERWOOD AREA DISTRICT, FEASIBILITY STUDY
Group Interview Questions
July, 1999 t ,
1. What kinds of park facilities and programs-do you have?
77
2. What types of specific programs, either in terms of parks or recreational services do
'C o , eel are needed in your community?
3. Of those, which are the top three?
4. Generally, what Type of district/ programs (e.g., regional, comprehensive,
recreational only) would you like to see a district provide?
5. What.are the advantages and disadvantages to a park and recreation district?
6. Regarding governance structure of the new district, would you like to see a county
service district formed or a special service district? (E#1ain difference)
7. Why?
8. If a special district were formed, would you want to have board members elected by
zone, at -large, or a combination?
9. Do you think there is community support for a park and recreation district?
10. How much do you think people would be willing to pay? ($/$1,000AV)
11. What will you need to know and feel comfortable with to vote in favor of a
resolution of support for a district?
12. What other issues should be addressed In this study?
COGAN
OWENS.
c0CLAN .
FACT SHEET
REGARDING FORMATION OF PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICTS
IN OREGON
Two types of districts:
♦ Special district: separately elected governing body
♦ County service district: under the governance of the Board of County
Commissioners
Who can initiate formation of a district:
♦ Board of County Commissioners
e Petition represeriiuig i5 o of the electors or 100 electors, whichever is greater (or 15
owners of land or the owners of 10% of the acreage, whichever is greater)
Who approves district:
♦ Board of County Commissioners if no permanent tax rate is proposed
Majority of voters if a permanent tax rate is proposed
Legal process for formation for park and recreation districts:
♦ Establish purpose of district
♦ Establish name and boundaries of district
♦ Provide economic feasibility statement, including first and third year budgets
♦ Propose permanent tax rate
o Provide number of members to be on the special district board and method of
election'
♦ File petition not later than 180 days before the date of the general election
♦ Submit to County for review and public hearings
♦ County initiates formation or is initiated by property owners
♦ Board adopts order calling .for election if permanent tax rate proposed
Criteria for approval by county (considerations):
♦ Local comprehensive planning for the area;
♦ Economic, demographic and sociological trends and projections pertinent to the
proposal;
♦ Past and prospective physical development of land that would directly or indirectly
be affected by the proposal;
♦ The statewide planning goals;
♦ Boundaries of benefiting properties
Effective date of district:
♦ If approved by voters, district is effective upon date that County board enters an
order creating the district.
s
7
a
The district may have a 3 or 5 member board. Petitioners shall nominate board members according to
the type of board and method of election chosen (ORS 266).
2 For the November 7, 2000 General Election, this deadline is May 10, 2000.
July 1, 1999
Wo v l'i'
FACT SHEET
REGARDING FORMATION OF PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICTS
IN OREGON
Two types of districts:
♦ Special district: separately elected governing body
County service district: under the governance of the Board of County
Commissioners
Who can initiate formation of a district:
d Board of County Commissioners
a Petition representing 15% of the electors or 100 electors, whichever is greater (or 15
owners of land or the owners of 10% of the acreage, whichever is greater)
Who approves district:
® Board of County Commissioners if no permanent tax rate is proposed
o Majority of voters if a permanent tax rate is proposed
Legal process for formation for park and recreation districts:
Establish purpose of district
o Establish name and boundaries of district
e Provide economic feasibility statement, including first and third year budgets
♦ Propose permanent tax rate
® Provide number of members to be on the special district board and method of
election,
File petition not later than 130 days before the date of the general election
e Submit to County for review and public hearings
e County initiates formation or is initiated by property owners
e Board adopts order calling for election if permanent tax rate proposed
Criteria for approval by county (considerations):
♦ Local comprehensive planning for the area;
o Economic, demographic and sociological trends and projections pertinent to the
proposal,
e Past and prospective physical development of land that would directly or indirectly
be affected by the proposal;
o The statewide planning goals,
Boundaries of benefiting properties
Effective date of district:
o If approved by voters, district is effective upon date that County board enters an
order creating the district.
I
I
1 The district may have a 3 or 5 member board. Petitioners shall nominate board members according to
Aft the type of board and method of election chosen (ORS 266).
s For the November 7, 2000 General Election, this deadline is May 10, 2000.
COGAN
OWENS
July 13, 1999 OGAN
AGENDA ITEM # 3
FOR AGENDA OF July 20. 1999
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Endangered Species Act Presentation
°
PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Newton 610 DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK I-AM
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
A presentation on the Endangered Species Act and its possible impact on the City of Tigard.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Hear the presentation by Unified Sewerage Agency staff on the Endangered Species Act, and ask questions.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
There is some discussion in the region whether Metro should take the lead on the Endangered Species Act.
The Unified Sewerage Agency (USA) is proposing a Tualatin River Basin approach with USA taking the lead
coordination with other jurisdictions.
hn Jackson from the Unified Sewerage Agency will attend the July 20 meeting to present information on the
Endangered Species Act and its possible impact on the City. The presentation will focus on how USA would
work with other jurisdictions to implement the Act. Specifically, USA will discuss identification of issues that
need to be addressed, public education on the ESA, restoration projects, culvert replacement and local
regulations.
A sheet, prepared by USA, of Frequently Asked Questions and Answers on the ESA is attached.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
None
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
No direct vision goal or action committee strategy discusses the Endangered Species Act.
FISCAL NOTES
No cost for this presentation. Future fiscal impacts are not known at this time.
I:\ADM\LIZ\ESA SUMMARY SHEET.DOC
New Endangered Species Act (ESA) Listing and USA
Frequently Asked Questions & Answers
March 23,1999
On March 16, the National Marine Fisheries Service added nine West Coast salmon populations
to the endangered species list, extending ESA protection into Oregon's most heavily populated
watershed. The Tualatin Basin will be impacted by two of the listings-Upper Willamette River
chinook (threatened) and Upper Willamette River Steelhead (threatened).
Q: Are there threatened species in the Tualatin River and its tributaries?
A: Yes. Winter steelhead and spring chinook were listed as threatened.
Some fish inventories have been done, but more data are deeded. These species are in some
of the tributaries now, and were probably more widespread before the basin was developed.
How much of the watershed they populated historically is unknown.
Definitions from the Endangered Species Act
Endangered: a species likely to become extinct.
ANIL Threatened: a species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future.
Q: How will the new threatened species listings impact USA?
A: USA was not caught off guard, and in fact has been preparing for the listings.
USA was formed to protect the environment and the public health. Under the federal Clean
Water Act, USA is charged with protecting the "beneficial uses" of the Tualatin River and its
tributaries, which includes the fisheries. For more than two decades, USA has focused on water
quality issues by removing pollutants from treated wastewater befo:-3 releasing it to the Tualatin
River. Since 1990, the Agency has also focused on cleaning up urban runoff. More recently, the
Agency has turned its attentions to addressing temperature issues, both at the treatment plants
and in stream corridor management.
The ESA requires a halt to the degradation of habitat for species listed as threatened. Fish
habitat is affected by: levels of toxic pollution, dissolved oxygen, temperature, instream cover,
spawning and rearing areas, and passage. USA's current efforts to protect and improve fish
habitat in the Tualatin River and its tributaries will probably intensify as a result of the listings.
USA operates two separate utilities. The sanitary sewer utility collects and treats domestic and
industrial wastewater. And, the surface water management (SWM) utility deals with urban
stormwater runoff to meet water quality and flood management standards. Both potentially
impact fish habitat.
--MORE-
Q: How will USA comply with the new ESA listings?
A: USA will be reviewing its operations that might affect fish and work with our "Partners
for Clean Water" to focus on fish.
USA will continue to assess its operations to determine the impact, if any, of each program on
fish habitat. Examples of current efforts to be even more "fish friendly":
® USA is in the process of expanding our two larger treatment plants. The diffuser
where the effluent enters the river is being designed to be fish friendly. It is better to
do it now, than be told later to retrofit the design.
• During the construction of sanitary sewers or drainage improvements, USA always
looks for opportunities to restore stream corridors. Now these restoration projects
a ~.nnmhonk c4ahili7_.,a4inn
may be more extensive and incruae ennaric,c<<~c~~c a~~u.. ~~~~u~~,.,u..
• USA will strengthen our public education programs and technical support to our
member cities, Washington County, other Tualatin Basin resource agencies, and
volunteer groups as we respond to this listing.
• USA had anticipated the listings and has been preparing for them. The Agency will
take a lead role in convening its member cities, Washington County and resource
agencies to develop a comprehensive strategy to address the ESA listings in the
Tualatin Basin.
The National Marine Fisheries Service staff will work with state and local jurisdictions to develop
tailor made regulations that will support local conservation efforts. Their biologists and
ecologists will work with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to define the critical habitat
areas. Then we can all work together to stop further degradation of the habitat. It is worth noting
that the Oregon Plan goes a step further than the ESA, to actually restoring fish habitat.
Q: Can USA ratepayers expect higher charges as a result of the listings?
A: The costs are still unknown.
Ratepayers can expect what USA has always delivered--the best bang for their buck. USA is a
competitive business, demanding multiple benefits for each ratepayer dollar that is spent.
Whether designing treatment facilities, collection systems, doing watershed planning or planting
trees along creeks, multiple benefits are a priority.
Since 1990, USA's watershed planning has produced a wealth of data on the condition of
stream corridors, natural resources values, and infrastructure elements. USA is ahead of many
other jurisdictions responding to the ESA because we've done so much to comply with the
Clean Water Act.
a The SWM infrastructure includes culverts that might be barriers to fish passage. USA will work
with the city, county or state agency responsible for the culvert to determine whether it should
i be replaced. The process to decide when and hew to make a culvert fish friendly will take time,
a coordination of jurisdictions, and citizen involvement. Washington County has been dealing with
this issue and working with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife for the past year.
s USA is just one agency in a spectrum that ranges from federal bureaus to state, regional, and
local agencies that will work together to comply with the ESA. Although USA is known as a
leader in the Tualatin River watershed, our role is yet to be fully defined. The Agency is
committed to providing the information and technical support necessary to help individuals,
businesses, and grass roots groups comply with the ESA requirements.
--MORE-
Q: How will the new listings affect residents of the Tualatin River watershed?
A: Individuals are the solution to restoring habitat for threatened or endangered species.
People degraded the fish habitat. Every person can help reverse the damage that has been
done. Everyone needs to keep pollutants out of the water, restore stream corridors, and provide
habitat and passage.
Individuals need to alter their daily activities to reduce the impacts on streams and habitat. Each
of the Tualatin basin's 397,000 residents will make a difference. Each person needs to ask:
• Am I polluting the water when I conduct business, recreate, wash my car, or care for
my lawn and household?
Am I removing plants that provide shade along streams or prevent erosion?
® Can I cut back on the use of vehicles and lawnmowers to reduce the pollution that
washes into creeks and rivers?
Stream temperature is subject to the sun, shading, and the velocity and volume of stream flows.
Human activity removes shading, reduces flow, and adds heat through wastewater, hot streets
and rooftops. Industries and households send warm water to the treatment plants. Because the
Agency can't stop heated water from coming to the treatment plants, we will evaluate how
businesses and households can help keep the creeks coca; enough for cold water fish.
Currently, USA releases cool water from Hagg Lake and coordinates streamside planting
projects to shade the tributaries to mitigate the temperature impacts of treatment plant
discharges.
Ultimately, the solutions USA develops with the community and regulators must be reasonable
and doable. For example, its probably too costly to replace all culverts, but we can find out
which tributaries the fish need most and start there. In the meantime, the Agency will expand its
existing programs that encourage property owners to protect trees and shrubs along creeks,
plant more vegetation for shade and protect fish habitat.
March 23, 1999
lamb,
JOB
i
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF July 20, 1999
_
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update on the Washington S uare Regional Center PI
PREPARED BY:_ Laurie N. DEPT HEAD OK ~TY MGR OK w~
ISSUE BEFOIRE, THE CO tNC,If.
Update to both City Council and Planning Commission on the Washington Square Regional Center planning
effort.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide information and therefore staff has no recommendation.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
Approximately one year ago, the Washington Square Regional Center Task Force was formed to guide the
development of the plan for the Washington Square Regional Center. Since that time, a draft master plan has been
veloped. The Task Force is currently going page by page through the document and making corrections and
confirming the recommendations of the document. A memo is attached outlining major issues that have been
considered. Consultants from the planning team will present the draft plan to City Council. This is an
informational meeting and is not intended to be a public hearing. A public workshop is scheduled for September,
with public hearings to follow later in the fall.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Not Applicable
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Growth & Growth Management Goal #1) Accommodate growth while protecting the character and livability of
new and established areas, Strategy #3) Address planning and growth issues associated with the Regional
Center.
FISCAL NOTES
Amh
Mot applicable
i:lc!Wv4del7-20-99 Washington Square Update.swwrtf
JIM
CITY OF TIGARD
Community Development
Shaping A Better Community
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD
-M. Aim W=nr1rvv ('nmm4inihr nevelopment Director
FROM: Nadine Smith, Long Range Planning Manager
DATE: July 12, 1999
SUBJECT: Washington Square Regional Center Master Plan
This memo is in response to your request for a summary of issues that are being addressed as
part of the Washington Square Regional Center master plan study. Since the plan is in draft form
at this time and is still being considered by the Task Force, the way in which issues are addressed
may change with further consideration.
AlItAWetlands
The Task Force has had several presentations and has received a great deal of information on
wetlands and their importance in the area. There has been some confusion over the roles of
various agencies and how wetlands are regulated and the Task Force continues to work through
the best means of ensuring the protection and enhancement of the wetlands in the area. The
issue of wetlands, flood plains, and the role of parks and green spaces in the area are being
extensively reviewed by the Task Force. The Task Force has adopted a "Guiding Principle" that
the plan should "maintain and preserve floodplains and wetlands."
Densities
The Task Force has considered the location of densities and has determined, to this point, that
highest densities should occur around the Washington Square Mall with "buffer" areas between the
highest levels of density stepping down to the existing single-family areas. It has been determined
that the Washington Square area can accommodate the densities that are proposed within Metro's
Functional Plan and can also allow additional density.
Washington County had proposed to up-zone portions of the Metzger area to account for needed
density. After a presentation by Washington County representatives on this issue, the Task Force
determined that there was room for additional density within the study area and that rezoning in the
Metzger area would not be necessary.
a
Memo to Jim Hendryx
July 12, 1999
Page 2 of 2
Transportation Issues
Kittelson and Associates have done an existing conditions report and recommendations as to
solutions. At this point, although the Task Force has not specifically gone over this part of the
report, the recommendations are:
1. To add a crossing over Highway 217 at Nimbus Drive into the Mall area,
211- Extending Nimbus to Greenburg Road,
3. Add a crossing over Highway 217 connecting Locust to Nimbus
4. Create a collector system between Oak/Lincoln/Locust
5. Make interim improvements to add bike and pedestrian improvements to Hall Boulevard with
widening at intersections with future widening to five lanes.
The Task Force is working hard to go through these issues and more. The intent is to get
consensus on the master plan document and to have a third public workshop in September to
present it. Public hearings should then begin in November with adoption in December.
i:\citywi&\7-20-99 Washington Squam UpdatcsurnAf
JULY 2, 1999
raei
tt~
rau
REGIONAL CENTER PLAN
® e
r
ism
WAS H B N GTON SQUARE
REGIONAL CENTER STUDY
TASK FORCE MEMBERS
Janice Aldg, Principal
Metzer School
Tom Archer
Spieker Properties
Kathy Kchtola
Washington County
Ruth Croft
Crest Grove Cemetery
Dr. Gene Davis
Property Owner
David Drescher
Fans of Fanna Creek
Nic Herriges
Nimbus Business
Leo Huff
ODOT
Beth Johnston
Norris Beggs & Simpson
Jon Kvistad
Metro Council
Dan McFarling
Association of Oregon Rail and Transit Advocates
Lyndon Musolf
Lyn Musolf & Associates
Adele Newton
Washington County League of Women Voters
Jim Nicoli, Mayor
City of Tigard
Nawzad Othman, President
OTAK
Steve Perry
Metzger resident
Jack Reardon
Washington Square Mall
Rick Saito
Group McKenzie
Forrest Soth
Beaverton City Council
Ted Spence
Tigard resident
Dave Stewart
Citizens for Sensible Transportation
Pat Whiting
Citizen Participation Organization 4-M
Nick Wilson
Tigard Planning Commission ~,1
WASHINGTON SQUARE
REGIONAL CENTER STUDY
JULY 2, 1999
BLAH BLA" BLAH
7
TABLE DE CONTENTS
1. BACKGROUND 1
2. PROCESS AND STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION 5
Task Force
Public Involvement
Guiding Principles
3. REGIONAL CENTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN 11
Regional Expectations & Growth "Targets
Overall Vision
Urban Design Concepts
Urban Design by Sub-Area
Private Sector Involvement in Delivering the Vision
4. PARRS AND OPEN SPACE 25
The Washington Square Greenbelt
Open Space Network
Parks Allk
Recommendations
5. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN 31
System Needs and Problems
Recommended Improvements
Sub-Area Improvements
6. PARKING STRATEGY 43
Key Findings
Parking Strategies
7 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 49
Next Steps
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code Amendments
Transportation Implementation, Priorities & Phasing
APPENDIX 57
L~ -
'+C~ 1\ h ~ t 7f yl:lt„I. k°..~. ~ ~`h_t". A it ~Y ~ J
~L.a....,.~....._... ~ ''N~ 3r 4 ~S wi i' . }.k Y -°d ~ ~cw~,t+~i' w~s L~ ~ t ~ ~'.3 u ~ ~t.~'Jfi l_
- ~nG~`P._..
A.eF ,".yam. 7 _ Y.,m:: `.s-.. ~ }~u^~+;~` ~ .~Y-~ +'ri ' ~ ;fix=~; _
'fir d~i~?°: qy, ~ ~
~;.z r
S
1
f
y
vs
,J ~
s ~
® _
t
e 9 S t~
4y, IE
i~~~~aa'~~~`
jij!~
S,}
Y"
rt
t
[Errb
C-'`~
1-.
t,i
'r
~I
i
an ir►novativc
transP°rtat~o~1 SYste~ti, t
o a {ocus or►
~ Washis~~toe1 s~luare,
~4~ ! r
,
• f cycisting
preservation 0
ressideatini
siciglil~orh°Ods
t•
° r ,reed svocc s
a rii~g of
y r~;~ionai ~%aeltc'r
it vital
i
1. BACKGROUND
In 2996, Metro adopted a visionary plan for regional The resulting work creates an exciting vision of a dy-
development. The Metro Urban Growth Management namic, compact and interconnected community.
Functional Plan described strategies to make the most
efficient use of urban land in the face of dramatic popu- Residents of quiet neighborhoods as well high den-
lation growth, to create and preserve livable neigh- sity housing will have easy access to nearby jobs, es-
borhoods, and to promote a useful, accessible and free- sential services and tremendous retail resources. The
moving transportation system. major freeway that bisects the
OVERALL VISION planning area will be bridged
One of the key elements of the by overpasses, allowing pedes-
functional plan, often called the a vital regional center serving trians and bicyclists, as well as
2040 plan, was the designation of the needs of Washington cars, to move easily back and
regional centers. These are areas County residents forth throughout the retail
of concentrated commerce, local area.
government and retail services,
and housing served by high-qual- preservation of existing Improved transit - includ-
ity transit. The Washington residential neighborhoods ing the possibility ofa"people
Square area is one of three regional mover" for enhanced circula-
centers in Washington County an innovative transportation tion throughout the area -
d one of nine in the region. service that makes it easy for will help the center accom-
people to reach their modate more people and de-
The 2040 plan resulted from ex- destinations velopment while limiting the
tensive regional discussion about amount of space required for
the future of the Portland met- a focus on Washington Square parking. A ring of parks and
ropolitan area. Once the plan open spaces - linked by bike
was adopted, Metro instructed Mail as a community resource and pedestrian trails - will
local citizens and governments to ensure residents and employ-
determine the best way to create a ring of green space and ees a nearby respite from in-
regional centers given the values, parks easily reached by tense urban development.
interests and needs of residents residents and employees
and businesses. The Washington Square Re-
gional Center Framework
This summarizes the results of a thorough public dis- Plan acknowledges and promotes the important role
cussion about the future of the Washington Square this area plays in Portland's metropolitan area. It
area. It demonstrates the way the people of Tigard also recognizes the distinct development patterns and
and Washington County incorporated their expec- functions already established within the planning
tations for the future into the regional framework area, and suggests ways to build and enhance each
plan. district's unique characteristics.
uaau a,m~ mw
Members of the Washington Square
Regional Center Task Force are
proud to present this vision of the
future to the people of Tigard and
Washington County who rely on
this vital district for housing, em-
ployment, as well as shopping, en-
tertainment and essential services.
J ;xi ~i.~~..i r, J l~ ~ r S5 :.Sa •1 ._r. ifs •f'~~ J .l : + .i . ~ rf k .ta 7' t ~i. ri t,v •
a e ~ t rY ~ t'•rkc.u~i.r~K 1`~>*'~ ffi.! 1.
~~a r... •n 1 ~ ea 't...r,' 4rrS~ 1. r`.r},S t l;',
°;l'ZtCiYq'1d
rh4r'~ir :n
r•
r,r 5r~ 1
''w..f%~~nF4
r~'R PZ
.r;r .
J
!{f! b
r,
firt'?i4
ff I
r.r`~~1 jY rr
Syk
7.'
aYr
S
e~
•
U
~~rv
l ~
i
2. PROCESS AND STAKEHOLDER
PARTICIPATION
As a result of work completed on the 2040 frame- includes 1784 acres, with Washington Square Mall
work plan, local governments in Washington County approximately in the center. The area is bounded
began a study of land use, transportation and other by Fanno Creek on the west, SW Greenburg Road
functions around and 1-fall Boule-
Washington vard on the east,
Square. Progress Downs
Golf Course to
Local govern- the north, and
ment representa- Highway 217
tives agreed on a and Ash Creek
study area that on the south.
f
law
7
r
Study Area
aoq+u a.ru ~nsn
AWL
s
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
TASK FORCE
A continuing task force goal was to engage as many
n 1998, Tigard Mayor Jim Nicoli appointed 23 people as possible in the planning process. To that
people to serve on the Washington Square Regional end, the task force, constituents and staff undertook
Center Task Force. Task force members represent a comprehensive outreach program that included:
neighborhoods, schools, business and property own-
ers, state and local governments and public interest Creation of a project identity, using an attrac-
groups. (See the tirlc page of this document for a tive logo that was replicated on all project
complete list of task force members.) documents;
• Brochures and flyers distrib-
The task force's charge was to uted by task force members and
identify issues and set general inserted in newspapers and com-
policy for recommendations munity newsletters. These prod-
about land use, transportation, ucts informed the community
open space, aesthetics and other about the progress of the study,
issues relevant to development reported on issues arising at task
around Washington Square. force meetings and notified the
Task force members kept in community about public in-
close contact with the organiza- volvement opportunities. AMD,
tions or neighborhoods they
represented to inform others Photo of task force meeting The task force hosted three pu -
about the process and participa- lic meetings, with a final one
tion opportunities. They reported on the concerns scheduled for September 15, 1999. The meetings
of their constituents at task force meetings. were held:
The task force met 14 times beginning on June 3, • September 28, 1998 from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
1998. All meetings were open to the public. Early Approximately 200 people attended, the staff
in the process, members and consultants took a bus received 81 written questionnaires from those
tour of the study area and reviewed areas of interest in attendance.
and concern. • September 28, 1998, 6 to 8 p.m., Metzger
Elementary School. Approximately 16 people
A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) worked attended, and staff received 160 written ques-
closely with the task force throughout the process. tionnaires from those in attendance.
TAC members represent staff of local and state gov- • March 8, 1999, 5.30 - 9 p.m., Tigard Water
ernment agencies that will be responsible for imple- Building. Approximately 90 people attended,
menting recommendations. Jurisdictions include the and they returned 32 written questionnaires.
cities ofTigard and Beaverton, Washington County,
the Oregon Department of Transportation, Metro A compilation of written responses is included in
and Tri-Met. the appendix to this document. Also included are
other relevant documents from the public involve-
ment process.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
In March of this year, task force members agreed on a • Preserve and enhance Metzger Park and
set of principles that would guide development of all consider additional
recommendations. These principals are as follows: parks.
• Encourage environ-
Creation/Preservation of Area Identity mentally-friendly
development.
• Reinforce a distinctive Regional Center ' Try to k2cp historic trees.
while recognizing and respecting the charac- • Build for our children:
ter of the nearby residential community. Have a sense of stewardship.
O n'~ ® m
o ~ O
i o S @ O ✓
irk
I
• Retain and develop quality housing, includ-
ing affordable housing, for all income levels. . Think creatively and be innovative in im-
provingimaintaining quality of life.
• Consider market forces and development
patterns.
- • Maintain and preserve floodplains and
wetlands.
:
• Facilitate transitions from one use to another;
for example, single to multifamily residential
uses.
' rooMtiunrttrwe
Government/Institutional ` Make the community ac-
Issues cessible for all people and
' modes with connections for
• Consider all political O cars, bikes, pedestrians and
boundaries and facilitate transit.
cooperation among ju- { • Maintain a high level of ac-
risdictions. . ' cessibility within and to the re-
• Maintain neighborhood gional center.
schools.` • Use appropriate street and
• Identify and reinforce sr streetscape design.
what makes the learning (educational) envi- Encourage attractive, high quality develop-
ronment viable. ment.
• Promote long-term viability for the area. As-
Transportation sure infrastructure is available prior
to or with development.
• Strive for a self-sufficient, con-
nected transportation system. The Regional Center Plan
• Consider transportation needs Should
for the whole study area. f
• Plan for a multi-modal trans- Be understandable to lay peop
portation system that accom- Be implementable within a rea-
modates increased auto and sonable, staged period of time
non-auto travel needs. w S Help develop a sense of commu-
• Respect and enhance local nity with a common vision, hope
street networks and neighbor- and optimism
hood livability. ( Be based on statistics and facts
• Maintain an acceptable level for population, employment and
of service and safety on regional roads, mini- other factors
mizing the effect on regional roads outside the • Use existing resources as much as possible
study area. • Encourage compatible and complementary uses
• Provide good transportation • Contain solutions to common
access to the rest of the re- problems
gion. Avoid conflict with other re-
s• gional centers.
_t!
tj. x^12
e
s
IAA
s
o
r .
~e~ra~mma712~t
Ili
s
• , ~ 5~ ~ ~r~ v-"g§- ~{~S g`' 5-•~:...Ms.:.~- ro-~_: x-° ?Y ~ t ~ , rrM~~ i ~ i~
.r
it- E S # wI) ail ~ ~ ~ ~ Aa,# ' fi
f t
5 ii'it rY 3 9 t _
_I 'F~ r1`7... .A#L{ 1/°4 1 7'(sF~J Z,.,<f t i]]]
a i r ti 31 ~ E,~ i 't _ ! "-''3 t~~ 3~K •s~.,~ F q ~r ~ ~ _..~_~1 I
~ rf ~ f x~ g; S t ~ 1k
f 1 y ' i
1 r
.
.4
6 is
■
3. REGIONAL CENTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
REGIONAL EXPECTATIONS AND Regional center planning is baser'. on the capacity
GROWTH TARGETS to absorb the following minimum targets:
Metros Regional Growth Framework Plan estab- EMPLOYMENT: 9,804 JOBS
Retail: 1,188 jobs
lished what it called "target growth capacity' for each Office: 8,188 jobs
jurisdiction in the region. The target figures are iden- Lodging: 180 jobs
tifed both by jurisdiction and, more narrowly, for HOUSING: 1,500 UNITS
mixed use areas in each jurisdiction. The goal ofset- ue~:ae.,«... _2530 co is
au.aaw. a.J p co
ting these target num-
bers is for each part cf
the region to be prepared Table 3 in the appen-
to accommodate hous- dix to this document
ing and job growth. summarizes a develop-
ment scenario for the
Working from a variety Washington Square
of options and propos- Regional Center. This
als, the Regional Center scenario includes tar-
Task Force created a de- get numbers for office,
ired development sce- retail, housing and
nario for the year 2020 park development nec-
aimed at ensuring the essary to accommodate
Washington Square the new jobs and hous-
area's capacity to absorb ing unit targets be-
its share of regional tween 1998 and 2020.
growth. The task force
used as a basis for devel- The Washington
opment scenarios the Square Regional Cen-
framework plan's target terTask Force based its
numbers for the City of work on the region's
Tigard. The final num- growth assumptions
bers are larger than those plus the estimates of
indicated for Tigard new development nec-
alone, recognizing that essary to accommodate
the study area includes this growth. The Task
parts of Beaverton and Force also considered
unincorporated Wash- lands which should be
ington County. preserved in their natu-
Buildable Lands ral or enhances state,
MPVINflRI11 KIWI
such as wetlands, stream corridors and flood plains. The following pages describe a vision of planned
Opportunities for development on vacant land, infill growth for the entire regional center and in each of
on under-utilized properties such as surface parking the five sub-areas of the Washington Square Regional
lots, and redevelopment Center. The visions are
possibilities were also intended to help the
considered.From this in- region absorb growth
formation, task force while respecting the
members identified values, expectations
where within the study and choices of Wash-
area growth should oc- ington County resi-
cur; what new develop- dents, employees, busi-
ment should look like; nesses and property
and what infrastructure owners.
was necessary to pre-
serve and enhance liv-
ability throughout the
district.
Natural Resources
i
9
AM,
OVERALL VISION
Many of the basic elements of Washington
Square Regional Center are already in place. '
The area contains one of the state's largest and
busiest retail centers; extensive job develop-
ment in one-story and taller office buildings;
O and an established residential neighborhood
t served by schools and parks.
Vital regional center Focus on Washington
•
square
. It
s
Basing its work on the guidelines in an innovative transportation ser-
Metro's Functional Plan, the guid- vice that makes it easy for people
ing principles adopted by the task to reach their destinations in and
force and a recognition of existing out of the district by auto, tran-
conditions, the task force created an sit, bicycle and on pedestrian
verall vision that calls for: Presevation of existing pathways, with an emphasis on
neighborhoods connecting the sub-areas within
• a vital regional center serving the the regional center;
needs of Washington County
residents for employment, hous- a focus on Washington Square
ing, shopping and professional Mall as a community resource
services; p with public space for non-retail
purposes; and
• preservation of existing residen-
tial neighborhoods with some a ring of green space and parks
infill of single family and duplex _ easily reached by residents and
housing where appropriate; Innovative transportation employees inside the area.
system
A ring of green
tl0101.4 tltltl ~tlM
URBAN DESIGN CONCEPTS
The previous section describes Private property considerations.
briefly the vision for Washing- New land designations will offer
ton Square as a regional center. d' property owners maximum flex-
The following paragraph sum- ibility to transition to higher and
marizes some of the major better uses while allowing exist-
themes that drove d velo-men t ~ ing uses to remain. New streets
of specific design concept ele- will be located on property lines
merits. These are based on the wherever practical. Street plan-
guiding principles established by ning will try to avoid creation of
the task force early in their pro- parcels that will not be economi-
cess. They reflect specific issue cal to develop.
areas and the way the various
geographic sub-areas will inter- Regional/neighborhood charac-
connect. --i terisucs. The regional center con-
tains a continuum of uses, from
Parks and open space. An open Pedestrian-oriented streets surrounding residential areas to
space network preserves and en- the densely developed commer-
hances floodplain, wetland and wildlife habitat ar- cial and employment center. New mixed-use zonal,
eas while creating a green belt around the regional ing designations encourage each sub-area within t
center. The plan calls for preservation of Metzger district to evolve in a way that is relevant to its par-
Park, linking it to other parts ticular context, while supporting a
of the open space by paths and combination of housing, commer-
pedestrian-oriented streets, and cial, retail and employment uses.
enhancement of the Metzger This mix will contribute to the vital-
School as a community re- ity of desirable places to live and
°
source.. work.
i
Innovative features. The design con-
Environmentally-friendly de-
velopment. Most development cept calls for a green belt, possibly a
will be compact, four- to- six- people mover system, over-crossings
story buildings designed on a and other links between parts of the
human scale and preserving ` lI study area, as well as new mixed use
open space, wetlands and flood- l zones. All of these will contribute to
plains. Design will encourage A livable and friendly an enhanced quality of life by encour-
open spaces and streets to cre- community environment aging new developments to integrate
i ate a livable and friendly com- with the heritage and fabric of the ex-
munity environment. isting community.
AOL
K010Y bltf~ ~T101
Housing. The design concept encourages a variety Market forces and development patterns. Regional
of housing types, including single family detached, consumers and developers have demonstrated an im-
duplexes, fourplexes, rowhouses and new multi-fam- pressive amount of interest in mixed-use neighbor-
ily developments. Good bicycle, hoods and developments. Increasing
pedestrian and transit connections land value and transportation costs 'W n and a mix of land uses ensure con- will contribute to the desire of work-
venient links to services and em- ers and employers for proximity of
ployment. housing and work sites. The regional
center's urban design concept incor-
Transitions. Building heights, floor v porates the need for improved trans-
area ratios and potential building portation links, higher density, vari-
design guidelines will encourage " ety of land uses and services and a
workable transitions between dif- quality of environment necessary to
ferent land uses. create a desirable, livable community
in the face of dramatic population
growth.
Aft1k
Good bicycle, pedestrian
and transit connections
The following sections discuss
the way the vision and guide-
lines have been translated into
specific recommendations.
„o,outgnu~nw
URBAN DESIGN BY SUB-AREA
Metro designated the Washington Square area as a Each of these has a unique character, and each serves
regional center in which orderly new development an easily identifiable function within the commu-
and redevelopment would serve many functions for nity. The task force's charge was how to preserve the
Washington County residents. In reviewing exist- existing characteristics of these sub-areas while sl-
ing land uses, the task force recognized that the area lowing and encouraging appropriate new or re-de-
designated "Washing-- velopment. Thi c
ton Square" is actually I task force recog-
five distinct areas: The nized the need to
commercial core; the learn more about
primarily residential the interactions of
Metzger neighbor- these different
hood; the office and J neighborhoods
financial area around - and improve the
Lincoln Center; and social, economic
two areas of flex-office i and transportation
and light industrial de- links between
velopment generally them.
referred to as Nimbus. AML
Although the Nimbus _ The followin
section is essentially ~ paragraphs de-
the same in character f scribe the task
throughout, the Task I force's vision for
Force viewed it as two future develop-
separate areas, as one is merit of each sub-
within the City of area, recognizing
Tigard, the other the importance for
within Beaverton. them to function
il together to create
an efficient re-
gional center.
Subareas
ra.au s.rt.nun
SUB-AREA A: T" E COMMERCIAL CORE AND THE GOLF COURSE.
Washington Square is noted throughout the Port- One of the urban design elements that can contrib-
land region for the Washington Square Mall and ute to an enhanced feeling of community in this
other dynamic retail development. The framework part of the study area is an emphasis on open space
plan calls for the 895 and pedestrian
acres including and amenities to balance
imrncuiaieij% Vuts&%Ac - - increased density.
the mall and encom- ICJ D o o The mall itself may
passing both sides of • a , provide an opportu-
Highway 217 to ac- - nity for developing a
commodate the new public plaza that
highest densities of 1 offer a place to rest,
" • / '
the five sub-areas. sit, read, have lunch
+ o or visit with friends.
In addition to the Concept sketch showing new arterial and infill development in addition, the ur-
mall and existing re- ban design concept
tail, development in calls for expanding
this area should include office towers housing many the existing-plaza next to the transit center and bet-
ew jobs and high density, four to five-story resi- ter linking all the pedestrian areas inside the mall.
ential buildings. This sub-area
will be highly urbanized, with The task force also has proposed
significant transit, pedestrian and creating an entertainment area
bike improvements, as well as en- r within the commercial core. Cre-
hanced traffic access and circu-~ ation of cinemas along the free-
lation. way would be coupled with de-
velopment of a viewing area at the
Today, this sub-area contains - = mall's highest point.
nearly 89 acres of surface park-
ing, of which 22 have been iden- Q - Sub-area A also includes the
tified as potential infill locations. Progress Downs Golf Course. The
These lots represent the single _ task force recommends exploring
greatest opportunity for new de- Atypical sidewalk area the potential of a pedestrian path
velopment in the sub-area. connecting to neighborhoods and
ultimately linking to other open spaces on the
district's periphery.
pjLNw.Y O(R[IRI~f
SUB-AREA B• METZGER
The Metzger area is an es- on Greenburg Road and
tablished residential neigh-
• . ~ Hall Boulevard.
boyhood located east of
Greenburg Road and north 1 Retail development to
of Locust Street: Hall Bou- lR"' meet the needs of imme-
levard is the sub-area's diate neighborhood resi-
northern and eastern a dents will be housed in
boundary. The task force L.r.--•w-- a `,1 two-story mixed-use
agreed that Metzger should r- _ buildings. New buildings
remain primarily residers- O provide parking at the rear
tial, with infill comple- to preserve the pedestrian-
menting existing uses. - - orientation of local streets.
Densities would increase Example of underdeveloped parcels similar to
approaching the sub-areas areas within the Metzger neighborhood Metzger should be a
west end to create a transi- neighborhood that sup-
tion toward Greenburg Road.and ports children and families.
the very high density mail area. Metzger School and playfields
will remain and be enhanced
New building would consist of •
g ~ an important neighborhood aPW
single family units and duplexes. f b set. Metzger Park, although not
Small apartment or condo- in the Study Area, will continue
minium complexes could be built = • to provide open space and recre-
along the periphery of the district ation facilities for Metzger resi-
Building siting is critical to getting dents.
the most out of the land as shown
here.
A simple layout can provide
maximum potential without
crowding.
IM
SUB-AREA C: LINCOLN CENTER
Lincoln Center is characterized by office development. in one or two-story mixed-use buildings. Shops and
It is an employment center housing many professional restaurants will primarily serve office workers.
services and commercial enterprises. Immediately ad-
jacent to this office South of Locust,
park and south of • , the emphasis will
Locust is a mixed- be on residential
use residential and r, S mr; • ate... .aa vc_avYu:"~~~ si
• Ue.;o~,e. 6153®'~b.
commercial area o CR density of about
that has the capacity 0 ; 100 units to an
to house more r s'U~•• ® acre. The residen-
people and provide tial area which will
more jobs and ser- • . `s~`•?` be somewhat less
vices_ dense than the o
;r fice development
The task force envi- will become a tran-
sions the nature of sitional area ap-
Lincoln Center to Southwest half of Area C proaching lash
continue - with Creek and the pro-
ore of the same. jetted green belt
kwil, expand on its role as a com- that will ring the district. Wet-
mercial and financial resource to lands and floodplains, already pro-
Washington County, with con- tected, will become a part of a dis-
struction of new buildings four trict-wide open space configura-
stories or higher. Retail facilities ~r~ •~^,4 tion.
will arise along Greenburg Road 4
t i
_ s
New buildings will be four stories or
f higher in this commercial and
financial center.
rmwuwru rt,or
0
SUB-AREAS D & Es NIMBUS
The main development features in this area are one- The corridor along 217 through this sub-area will
story light industrial and office buildings created to continue to attract retail development.
accommodate
Washington A key to making
County's high tech ,z 't the best use of
industry and related this sub-area will
services. Densities - be enhanced
in this area should =r public transit.
be increased to a o The as force
moderate density .r suggested that if
scale, and it should - a commuter rail
remain an employ- line serves the
merit center. The area, a site close
task force believes to Scholls Ferry
that many of these ' = « t'' Road would be a
buildings have the ' ' • , logical place for a
potential to be rede- station.Mixed-
veloped into more Concept sketch illustrates a mix of commerical, retail and use developme fib
efficient and taller residential uses integrated with a commuter rail station around the st
office and mixed- tion, including
use facilities to ac- outdoor plaza
spaces, are en-
commodate more il,~ o
jobs. The area has r • s couraged.
capacity of new
four-story office o ; Q
buildings as well as
some residential
devleopment.
Concept sketch illustrates a mix of commerical, retail and
rnuuaanunur
PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT
IN ACHIEVING THE VISION
To achieve the densities envisioned here, local govern- determine the extent developers redevelop existing
ments will be responsible for making major infirastruc- land uses or fill in on vacant land and parking lots.
ture improvements that will support access in and out
of the district, provide for greenspace and environmen- The appendix to this document contains specific data
tal protection and ensure other essential services. about available acreage and infill and redevelopment
potential. It also contains charts indicating recom-
Th.e actual block-by-block build-out of the area, mending building heights and floor area ratios nec-
however, will be the responsibility of private devel- essary to achieve specific job and housing targets.
opers. Market forces, financing and other issues will
0 I-a-VINNOW
loom AM
Y~µ m
dim
.k`~'F~ry,. Y` ~ . V .i.•. ~ ti'...._....~_4._tw-.... _~...wrL=.idy1Yi11L~lia'+6{~vZYis~Yaa W~~ - 'i~flaMd•+.L+r-,..
~FFn~`~Ym
VrN'aw i
,`aN s
•'J tY~
(a Ti3
a= fi
t
1
j
k
Y•~rj~
60
' ~rar A'(el
4~~' jykr ~,41~!
~ h;
.
z
~
.
r
.
_ ~
..,s~_a ~
_ ~ ~ .
_4,
- -
T _ ~
~ ,
,~T1T.T.~ 1C .T.T''TT~fT~~`T
rm.r aurtunw.
OPEN SPACE
Open space in any city significantly contributes to The Washington Square open space system would
citizens' and visitors' quality of life. Parks and plazas provide choices for residents, employees and visitors
create a to bike or walk
framework comfortably from
for livability place to place
that knits within the regional
places to- center, reducing die
_eether into number of short
neighbor- trips in autoino-
hoods and biles. Open spaces
c o m m u n i- would also provide
ties. The Fen convenient access
Way in Bos- ' to transit, further
ton, a series reducing reliance
of small and on automobiles.
large parks This all adds up to
linked by a less congestion and
d ream with cleaner air.
onds and
pools, enliv- Today is the time to
ens the com- establish these
munity and places. At no other
attracts visi- point in the future
tors from all will there be the op-
over the portunity to create
w o r l d such a complete
Golden Gate and lasting contri-
Park in San bution to the liv-
Francisco, ability and future of
Central Park Washington Square
and Battery and the City of
Park in Man- Tigard. Establish-
hattan and ing an intercon-
i the mall in Green Belt Map nected open space
Washington system and a green
DC are examples of open spaces that had a profound belt around the center would potentially add prop-
influence on the development and livability of their erty value and attract quality developments that ul-
surrounding cities. timately will create a great place to live and work.
Aft
^.t
uacw arunwr
THE The task force targeted four
WASHINGTON to six acres of wetland and
SQUARE GREEN flood plain areas in the
BELT south just north of 217 for
preservation as parks and
Today, Fanno and Ash open space. These sensitive
Creeks converge in the lands lie within an area that
southwest near North Da- ` is envisioned to absorb
kota Street and the South- nearly half of the regional
ern Pacific Rail Line. These center's projected residen-
two creeks flow through a tial. The task force also al-
variety of \ flood plain and located another four to six
wetland areas that wrap ~4.•;:-:, 1 acres of protected open
.ti
around the west, south, and space along Fanno Creek.
eastern edges of the Re- r' • I~ - '
gional Center study area. The green belt exists today
Progress Downs Golf s~ as an incomplete green
Course, certain forested ar- space ring around the re-
eas around Taylor's Ferry gional center. A continu-
Road and Whitford Middle ous trail system would pr
School create a "green link" around the northern vide access and links to residential, eniployment an
edge. These areas form a natural green belt. commercial districts and provide pedestrian and
bicycle connectivity between destinations in the
Much of the wetland and flood plain areas are on area. The path system would also link recreation
public lands. The City ofTigard manages park lands areas and park facilities such as Metzger Park,
in the southern portion of the study area near where Progress Downs Golf Course, Fanno and Ash Creek
Fanno and Ash Creek join. Other wetlands are pri- and Whitford Middle School play fields. Special
vately owned. treatments along Hall
Bou- levard and across Olsen
Within the western green belt Road connecting to the golf
lies an incomplete pedestrian course are necessary for con-
and bike trail and park system`- tinuity.
that connects the neighbor-
hoods between Scholls Ferry
Road and Hall Boulevard with
the Fanno Creek natural areas.
AMbk
raaui anu nun
0
A trail system around the ments to create a model
edges of the golf course a urban natural area that
would provide pedestrian will benefit future gen-
connections to the club erations.
house, Fanno Creek trail ° o
system, Whitford Middle a
School and to destinations OPEN SPACE
across highway 217. Pedes- N ETWO R K
trian bridges across High_
way 217 north of the Hall - An internal open space
Boulevard overpass and 'O network identifies parks,
south of Greenberg Road plazas, streets and access
would complete the con- ways that provide choices
nections. for residents, employees
and visitors to walk or bike throughout the regional
An internal network of open spaces, plazas, pedes- center. Public plazas provide a variety of places for
trian oriented streets and access ways connect to the community events, farmers markets, festivals and
green belt creating ways for residents, employees and other exhibits that help create a sense of neighbor-
visitors to circulate throughout the center. Wash- hood. Each of the plazas is linked to a system of
ington Square will become, upon completion of the pedestrian-oriented access ways and streets. Public
Wpen space network and path system, a walkable plazas would be located at the commuter rail sta-
place with less reliance on automobiles. tion, in the ranter of and at the east end of the Wash-
ington Square Mall, and
The trail system requires Y ao in the south end near Ash
special design to avoid sen- creek.
sitive environmental and p
habitat areas while provid- The illustration above
ing places for people to sit :.i'•', shows connectivity
and walk. Crossings over through the mall by ex-
Fanno and Ash Creeks a posing the pedestrian
must be sited to prevent ad- promenades between an-
verse impacts on wildlife ® q chors. The pedestrian
habitat and wetlands. A system also provides con-
native plant planting pro- venient connections and
gram should complement frequent service to the
federal and state require- People Mover and transit
~ routes.
PARKS RECOMMENDATIONS
Active community use parks would be located at The City of Tigard should:
Metzger Grade School, Whitford Middle School and
in two other locations within the flood plain - one • seek to purchase lands to complete the Green
along Fanno Creek and the other along Ash Creek. Belt around the Washington Square Regional
These parks would offer active uses such as soccer, Center.
little league baseball, softball, tennis and model boat-
a.,ren r•c fir 1'1~f••17 t,~C
In$T The parks also will contain PisY$rounds. They = Yiiic,:a;c or id.iq"CSt .1
u..~a:."..".........,
u r
parks would connect to other parts of the commu- adjacent to significant new developments that
nity through the open space network. would benefit from parks and open space.
e begin discussions and acquire the rights to con-
struct pedestrian bridges over Highway 217.
• investigate the feasibility of forming a public
private partnership with the mall to develop
the central plaza.
• cooperate with private land owners and the com
muter rail representatives to encourage the op
eration of commuter rail and the development
of a plaza adjacent to the rail station.
o Study the feasibility, alignments and phasing of
a people mover that would provide access to
the open space system, parks and plazas.
/i
',E
,M13
';y
K
4yy~
i~
:';C
:-S ~
-.a 1
:,~pp
~i
LP
a
6
[V, J ~
:t M
~ - s. S.i"' 1~' ~ rl. q~~`-~.~' K• ~t,Q~! G`^. ~1 rv l,f ~mS~ ~ - a~~ ~ ~ F - ~ >r 7 ~
~ 1
~
tlUAYtltlY,IIOY
4. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN
Transportation management is one of the major ar-
eas of emphasis in regional planning. Perhaps there focus on transit. In addition, the task force found it
is no part of the region in which transportation plays important to address barriers to pedestrian access
a more critical role (busy streets, lack of
than in this section sidewalks, etc.) as a
of Washington way to make shared
County. i parking between
complemeriraey
The challenge to uses more attrac-
framework plan tive.
participants was to
i
ensure access to this The following sec-
. ....,.._..f•--
emerging regional T .t Is Y"~- J - tions offer a current
0......._..._..._ (--•--..m._y.!
center ^ t f
center b all trans- .,low analysis of trans-
ortation modes '~WUAW a portation issues
while balancing air t . MAUr ._._..a within the study
s<
~_area anticipate fu-
quality issues, con-
quality
concerns, _ ~N6 °irl~ 1°~ss s5116~Ybzt ture issues and pro-
esiace res allocated reduce vide a variety of
UL strategy
recom- mendations.
parking, bicycle, pe- sx sP,occ ST
destrian and auto r. `
safety, and increased ti R m ti r SYSTEM
3
NEEDS AND
! _....-Ri._al
ARTERIAL
n°urolnuo MAJOR COLLECTOR -
tl ass • MINOR COLLECTOR _
Recommended Roadway Functional Classification
P
40w.4 Q1111~tW1
PROBLEMS
A thorough analysis of existing Road. Approaching these three
transportation conditions in the crossings, only on Hall Boule-
study area was undertaken by the vard and Greenburg Road. have
consulting team. In summary, sidewalks, with bicycle lanes
they found: only on Scholls Ferry Road. The
only bike lanes on the east side
• Traffic coiigesdon. Ivfajor of the Washington Square Mall
roadways in the study area are on Hall Boulevard.
experience significant traf-
fic congestion during weekday peak periods. Transit. The Washington Square Transit Cen-
Highway 217, Greenburg Road, Hall Boule- ter is located in the northeast parking area of
vard and Scholls Ferry Road experience to the Washington Square Mall. This transit
traffic delays. The major capacity constraints center serves as a bus stop for routes 43, 45,
occur at the Hall Boulevard/Scholls Ferry 56, 62, 76 and 78. These routes connect
Road intersection, the Scholls Ferry Road/ Washington Square to transit centers in down-
Nimbus Drive intersection, and the town Portland, Beaverton, Tigard and Lake
Greenburg Road/Highway 217 ramp inter- Oswego, as well as providing service to the
sections. In addition, Highway 217 itself is Tualatin area. A wider selection of transit tooAm,
highly congested. could create a less congested, auto-depende
transportation system within and connecting
• Sidewalks and bike to the study area.
lanes. The majority
of the arterial and \ Future traffic conges-
collector streets in r~ tion. In the future, those
the study area have areas already identified as
sidewalks. Scholls experiencing trade con-
Ferry Road and Hall gestion will continue to be
Boulevard have bike clogged. In addition,
lanes within the other sections of Hall Bou-
study area. High- levard, Greenburg Road,
i way 217 presents a and Cascade Avenue and
major barrier for pe- Oleson Road will also ex-
i destrians and perience congestion. Traf-
bicylists. The only C~ fic estimates do not predict
connections be- congestion on local
3 tween the east and west sides of the highway Metzger area streets directly east of Washing-
in the study area are over-crossings on Hall ton Square Mall.
Boulevard, Scholls Ferry Road and Greenburg
:i
roio.u anunuvr
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
The task force recommends a series of projects to im-
prove access by transit, bi- mercial areas. Some key
cycle, pedestrians and mo- ~t road improvements that
torized vehicles into and
will affect the entire district
throughout the district. 4 " p include:
The following paragraphs
describe those projects that A crossing over High-
the task force feels should wav217 connectin_a-Mm-
be pursued. In cases, the bus Drive to the Mall area.
task force expressed an in- ; ;I Highway 217 is a major
WA~ physical and psychological
terest in specific major ~~14° "'w ..._M..>.....
projects, but members rec- e dividing line in the Wash-
ognized them to be outside. a~u S= ing
ton Square area. The
the scope of work. Those 41
task force recommends de-
are listed below, as well. ' ~y, „ de-
velopment of a two-lane
V!'m"u` road over the highway and
OVERALL the rail corridor providing
DISTRICT 1I motor vehicle, bicycle and
IM PROVEM ENTS uac~p pedestrian access between
uµw~fuNO~rQxisrAC A~~OwAr the Nimbus employment
sow N~CLf THE 1 iENTRTOR 'k\ 1....
• Improvements to - center and the commercial
the regional road- core. The recommenda-
way system. A Recommended Motor Vehicle System tion also calls for a ramp
number of task Improvements to Cascade Avenue. In ad-
force recommen- dition to linking two pre-
dations are aimed viously disconnected parts
at increasing road capacity and reducing con- of the regional center, the over-crossing would
gestion throughout the district. Increased relieve traffic at the Hall Boulevard/Scholls
density will bring more traffic, as well as more Ferry Road intersection and the Hall Boule-
short-term visits for shop- vard/Highway 217 interchange
ping and professional set- - by allowing westbound mall traf-
vices. The vitality of the o fic to bypass these congested ar-
area will depend upon en- eas. Bicycle and pedestrian ton-
suring relatively free-flow- nections would link to the Fanno
ing traffic at major inter- Creek Bikeway.
e
sections, on arterials and
into and out of key com- o Extending Nimbus Drive to
r
A crossing over Hwy 217
.fd(1.4 T.11Tl..Tfp
Greenburg Road. The task force recommends A collector system at Oak-Lincoln-Locust.
construction of a three to four-lane, 35 mph To help traffic move more freely once cross-
road linking Hall Boulevard at the northwest freeway connections are built, the task force
corner of the study recommends improve-
area to Greenburg ments to this street system.
Road at the south The intent is to distribute
end. This project east/west traffic between
will relieve con es- 7 Locust and Oak Streets
)14 /0K
tion on Hall Boule- and improve accessibility
vard and at the % b to the Lincoln Center
Scholls Ferry Road/ commercial district. It
1
Hall would improve access
Boulevard in- '4
tersection and offer a to residential areas for bi-
4: 11
new, direct route Aa~ z . I °I. ' cyclists and pedestrians, as
~ I s m ~ ,
from the north to well as autos. The task
a. til~ .._5_ w waw r.
the south ends of the force recommends that lo-
„
district. With pedes- } • .1" i• cal governments apply
Irian and bicycle im-
provements, this traffic management tech-
~s.
jr niques here to protect
sit, Q
route offers major al- •f.' x' _ a~~ " tj; neighborhood streets (s
ternatives mode ac- discussion on sub-are, _rW
cess for people work- P RXXIwNC+t.wcO+ provements).
i i
ing in the Nimbus
Tu4ipVif •NMfiMf yK~
development. g ^ - w-• Widening Hall Boule-
vard to five lanes between
• A crossing over Pedestrian, Bike and Transit System Oleson Road and the
Highway 217 con- Improvements southern boundary of the
netting Locust to study area. Hall Boule-
Nimbus. The task force recommends build- vard is a state arterial roadway and a major
ing a second overpass over the railroad right- travel corridor through the regional center.
of-way and Highway 217 once the Nimbus Upgrading this roadway will reduce cut-
extension is completed. The Regional Trans- through traffic in surrounding residential
portation Plan already has identified a form neighborhoods and will provide overall im-
of this recommendation. Construction of the provements in traffic flow throughout the
i overpass will offer vital connectivity in the re- area. In the short-term, pedestrian and bike
gional center, as well as relieving congestion improvements are needed.
on Hall Boulevard and Scholls Ferry Road east
7 of Nimbus Drive. Along with pedestrian and
bicycle facilities linking to the Fanno Creek
Bikeway.
rowraaru,nee
■
• Interchange Capacity Improvements at High- • Commuter Rail. The Portland region's expe-
way 217. The Scholls Ferry Road/Highway rience demonstrates that rail service attracts
217 interchange and the Hall Boulevard/ new riders to transit. Creation of a commuter
Highway 217 interchange are both gateways rail system has strong appeal if Washington
into the regional center. Both are extremely Square becomes a more densely developed
congested during peak periods throughout the employment center. Existing railroad right-
day. The task force views improvements to of-way offers the potential to develop com-
these interchanges as critical to alleviating con- muter rail service between Wilsonville and
gestion along Highway 217, increasing access Beaverton, with the possibility of links to the
to the area and helping the district serve its existing MAX system. Currently, a consult-
role as a regional center. The task force rec- ant team is analyzing the potential for such
ommends that these improvements be iden- rail service in an unrelated study. If the study's
tified as significant needs in Metro's High- outcome recommends pursuit of this option,
way 217 Major Investment Study. the task force would like to see this rail sys-
tem serve the Washington Square Regional
• Bike Paths. Increased den- Center, with a station near
sities will bring greater in- Scholls Ferry Road in the Nim-
terest in bicycling, both bus area.
for commuter and recre-
ational. purposes. The task • People Mover. The task force
force wants to ensure that a members were interested in the
bicyclists hwe easy, safe ? I possibility of a circulator that
access to employment, ( would travel throughout the dis-
housing and retail devel- trict, linking jobs, housing, retail
opment, as well as to and services. Members believe
greenspace around the dis- (t such a service would be very valu-
trict. Many of the study[ able, not only to people living
area's busiest streets and l~ and working in the area, but for
bridges anent wide enough people coming in who may want
for installation of bike to combine a visit to the doctor,
lanes in the roadway. In People Mover the bank and the accountant with
this case, an acceptable al- a shopping trip. Determining
ternative is creation of off-street bike paths what this service would look like, who would
parallel to the street. The task force recom- operate it, where it would run and other fun-
mends identifying potential bicycle routes damentals was outside the task force's scope
connecting to existing bikeways, neighbor- ofwork. However, members strongly encour-
hoods and activity centers. Specifically, it rec- age local governments and transit providers
ommends extending the Fanno Creek to pursue the feasibility of such a system.
Bikeway to the east along Ash Creek.
1 •
't.
YC{W1Q111MR 9.
SUB-AREA IMPROVEMENTS
The task force has identified a number of site spe- SUB-AREA A: T"E COMMERCiAL
cific improvements that will enhance the safety and CORE AND GOLF COURSE
atmosphere of the various sub-areas. Each of these
reflect the expectations for increased development The recommendations in this district address pri-
and the distinct characteristics and functions of the marily circulation, transit and pedestrian access to
five districts within the overall regional center. and from the mall and affecting other retail in the
area. They also reflect a desire to include Progress
y t Downs Golf Course into the district-wide greenbelt.
J ~1 Transit Center Amenities. The Washington Square
Mall Transit Center is an important link to the rest
of the region. The task force hopes that improved
pedestrian amenities will make this facility safer and
more attractive to encourage transit use. Proposed
improvements include a covered pedestrian path to
r
[ the mall and better pedestrian links to other retail
and commercial establishments. Tri-Met's Transit
Choices for Livability Study has already identifce
these improvements as high on the community's p
ority list.
ti
Subareas Map
Sidewalks on Greenburg. As development begins
to fill out the area, local governments should build
sidewalks along Greenburg Road. This recommen-
dation is consistent with state Transportation Plan-
ning Rule requirements of sidewalks on arterials and
roar awra.ne.
e
collectors and would improve pedestrian access in Relocate Park & Ride to permanent site. The task
this are that transitions between the financial and force believes that the location of the Tri-Met Park
the retail areas. & Ride at Scholls Ferry Road and Highway 217
adds to traffic congestion by bringing cars into the
Mall Area Street Development. Improve SW district during peak hours. This was originally in-
Eliander Lane, SW Washington Square Road, SW tended to be a temporary site, and the task force
Palm Boulevard and the roadway bounding the cem- recommends finding a new, permanent location for
etery to full street standards, with sidewalks and bi- this facility to avoid its impact on the regional road
cycle lanes. These improve- r system.
ments are key to pedestrian,
auto and bicycle access and Evaluate Pedestrian Cross-
circulation into and -AA-4. ings on Greenburg Rd. and
throughout the retail core. + Hall Boulevard These two
Currently, people have diffi- J t very busy streets are physical
culty getting from one retail and psychological barriers to
facility to another on foot.' pedestrians. The task force
For example, Hall Boulevard ; ''!.=?ms`s? ` recognizes that mid-block
Target customers have no di- ' crossings can help pedestrians
rect pedestrian connection to significantly. However, the
the Mall. L ocr! governments Suggested improvements will make it safer and also have associated disadvan-
ust establish policies to en- easier to walk from one place to another. tages. Task force members
courage private developers to recommend evaluating right-
include these infrastructure improvements with re- of-way impacts, construction costs, impacts on traffic
development. flow and pedestrian demand for mid-block, raised
pedestrian refuges on Greenburg and Hall.
Pedestrian Amenities Within the Commercial Core.
Provide pedestrian treatments such as raised pedes- Evaluate a Golf Course Pedestrian Trail. A pedes-
trian refuges and designated walkways trian trail within the Progress Downs
within the mall's parking areas. Provide Public Golf Course would provide a safe
pedestrian/bicycle connections between walking and exercise area for neighbor-
Washington Square Mall and adjacent re- hood residents and allow more people
tail establishments. Suggested improve- to use this existing open space. The task
ments will make it safer and easier for force recommends studying the feasi-
+ people to walk from one place to another bility of providing pedestrian paths
' within the commercial core and limit the - from neighborhoods to and through -
+ need for vehicle traffic within the core. or around - Progress Downs Golf
Local governments should adopt policies _ - - Course. The trail would be similar to
that encourage creation of these improve- the popular pedestrian path around
ments as redevelopment occurs. Glendoveer Golf Course.
raw sru nw~
0
SUB-AREA B: THE METZGER Boulevard Elements of this strategy might include
NEIG"BORHOOD providing for bicycle access, establishing safer pe-
destrian crossings, controlling speed through signage
The task force attempted to identify transportation and patrols, and building pedestrian paths to adja-
improvements that would protect and preserve this cent neighborhoods.
neighborhood's residential character while offering
residents more commute and recreation options. Sidewalks on Hall. Sidewalks have not been built at
several spots on Hall Boulevard The rask force rec-
Neighborhood Traffic Management. To control traf- otnmends completing the sidewalk system as called
fic speeds, ensure safety for pedestrians and bicyclists for by the state's Transportation Planning Rule. Spe-
and, in general, reduce the impact of higher traffic cifically, complete the sidewalk on the north side of
volumes on neigh- SW Hall Boulevard
borhood streets, the Near Cascade Avenue
task force recom- and the Highway 217
mends pursuing an bridge, allowing pedes-
aggressive traffic trians on the north side
of Hall Boulevard to
management strat- JCL
egy on Locust Street o access safely the south
between Lincoln a - side of Hall Boulevard
Street and Hall - ° and the Highway 2
Boulevard, on Lin- f r over-crossing, usin
coln Street between the pedestrian crossing
r f
Locust and Oak ji signal at Cascade Av-
Streets., and on Oak . enue
Street between Lin-
coln Street and Hall Safe pedestrian crossings are part of an agressive
neighborhood traffic management strategy in Sub-Area B.
r.:.
i
rmwua wnumw
SUB-AREA C: LINCOLN CENTER SUB-AREA D: NIMBUS SOUTH OF
SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD.
This area, a center for financial and commercial de-
velopment, is slated for high density office and resi- Cascade Avenue Pedestrian and Bicycle Improve-
dential development. Adjacent to a residential neir:;h- ments. The task force considered, but did not rec-
borhood, it will be important for this area to pro- ommend, capacity improvements to Cascade Av-
vide easy pedestrian and bicycle access between enue. However, they recognized the need to pro-
homes and jobs. A particular goal is to protect the vide pedestrian and bicycle facilities on this impor-
Metzger neighborhood area from the impacts of in- tant north/south road.
creased traffic, while assuring free-flowing vehicu-
lar movement throughout the district.
SUB-AREA E: NIMBUS NORTH OF
Pedestrian and Bicycle Connections in New De- SCROLLS FERRY ROAD.
velopments. Metro has established goals for the re-
gion to reduce the number of trips by auto relative OSidewalk Completion on Hall Boulevard at Cas-
to those made by transit, pedestrian and bike travel. cade Avenue A short gap exists in the sidewalk on
Pedestrian and bike facilities developed in concert the north side of Hall Boulevard between Nimbus
with new housing and offices will be a step toward Drive and the Highway 217 over-crossing. Complet-
achieving these regional goals. ing the sidewalk will help improve pedestrian access
to the other side of the street by making it easier to
igJ&way 217 Parallel Roadway. The task force con- reach the crossing signal at Cascade Avenue
sidered this as an alternative to widening Hall Bou-
levard to five lanes, which is the preferred option.
However, there is the possibility of building a road SUB-AREA D& E: NIMBUS NORTH
parallel to Highway 217 to provide new access to AND SOUTH OF SCHOLLS FERRY
Lincoln Center and the Washington Square Mall. ROAD.
The task force encourages Metro to review this op-
tion in its Highway 217 Major Investment Study. Nimbus Bus Service. Tri-Met's Transit Choices for
Livability identified bus service to Nimbus work
places as a regional priority. The task force supports
Tri-Met's intention to develop this service in from
one to five years.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEM TREATMENTS
Impacted Travel Mode
vim
Nimbus Bus Service N/A2
Sidewalks on Greenburg Road and Hall Boulevard X N/A3
Transit Center Amenities X N/A2
Sidewalk Construction on Hall at Cascade X $40-50 /sq yd
Evaluate Golf Course Pedestrian Trail x $15-20,0004
Mall Area Street Development x X X N/A3
Pedestrian Treatments in Commercial Core X N/A3
Evaluate Pedestrian Crossings on Greenburg / Hall x X $10-15,0004
Neighborhood Traffic Management x X X $30-50,000
Develop Oak-Lincoln-Locust Street Collector System X
Construction of Lincoln Street connection $8-12/ sq. ft Aftk
Reconstruction of existing roadways $5-7/ sq. ft
Widen Hall Boulevard to Five Lanes x $4.7 million 5
Pedestrian/bicycle Connections in New Developments x X N/A3
Mall-to-Nimbus Highway 217 Over-crossing x X X $15-25 million
Nimbus Extension / Realignment x X X $10-15 million
Locust-to-Nimbus Highway 217 Over-crossing x X X $15 million 5
Highway 217 Interchange Capacity Improvements x $70-100 million 5
Cascade Avenue Pedestrian/Bicycle Improvements x X N/A3
Cascade/Scholls Ferry Intersection Improvements x $5-7 million
Evaluate Off-road, Parallel Bicycle Paths x $10-25,000 4
i
i ' To be used for general planning guidance.
Z Identified in Tri-Met's Transit Choices for Livability Study
i
3 To be incorporated with development and roadway improvement projects.
4 Cost to conduct an engineering/planning study.
5 Cost estimated obtained from the Regional Transportation Plan improvement list
"S'y'~-~ 4~ir 3; ~ ~l - ~ !may _
yr:.~ . •3.`i ^i',~' '`mot n"~- 3~ # .
a I 11
.
s
s `
~1 I'f I'I'I
'_yY
tt 'd
f + ^ r+i
f---~ i1
J j
WIWI-
d p ~pp
N A S -wa" -
1 L ~y `~g ~ ) 1 of
~'"""'°''"".,..,wc~~s.m..,.w.>,u `w•: ~~•,~H °.i e m'>i'`"~ 0' c. f ~ R ~ { R.T` x"a.w» n.w
{ ~A • rTW° ..v+m'sr" >~,yi Tit ~5 M y,,,e ~
`s,. p ~..,°""""nr i~t~e• w~~ (y{H~~ v@kq' ~ ~.4y,. ,~,1r,: ~ Y ~
~,ar,...~.-...«~ ~}.a~ VR ~^N°t r,.wK`>ax ~~,~..w.r'm+.~~r ~,a'NM•r^~S` G 4. Y ~ ,.,.msFH^"~t~ ~„v+r t..q>,. ~ .
ro y
„+~a,,....,~s~y',,~rx<«°""w'''~"~es.,, ~,••.,yv :d ~ 3' y Y ~+r~' .p.
..w•f".. »'.a"" .n>„«+,.w'""_. yz; ~ ~ ? pin,...-.^`" ~ ~r,,•' ~.e
ins ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ .
vt ~>xrwrv- z..M'a'F % ty~~tFT°v:JS a,ns.ux...ar.w ,r "'t
yV am°'~..w> prw^ P'a. w'~iw°"t-~,,.e~^+"'a+'•". aH1"K'-`4.^ a g y,~ `S pa f" J%o,
_1K
sw°
i§ x a as
YM+ t 0
-1 A
r
AKA f/ P f f.f p C.>v ? ~r ~~a.
'+~yyw>.n4 : Swv~py.Y `"r IKY ~ Q x w ~ i k f. i _
i.t 4
1>« J f I ~f
1 u it ?
w'
itv
Sn J f/
s
uuouaunu nur
5. PARKING ST"RAT"EGY
Parking is critical to the success of a regional center. KEY FINDINGS
On the one hand, easily accessible parking - and EXISTING CONDITIONS
the perception that parking will always be available
- is critical to many services and retail facilities. The consulting team analyzed current conditions
Office-based businesses have come to expect adequate in the study area to determine these findings:
parking for their employees, as well as for their cus-
tomers. On the other hand, land set aside for park- • The overall parking supply in the Washing-
ing adds to developer overhead without bringing in ton Square Regional Center is adequate to
direct revenues. meet existing demand.
• Office developments currently experience con-
Finally, the region is committed to increasing the siderable parking pressure during weekday
percentage of transit, bicycle and pedestrian trips for peak demand. In particular, office develop-
daily commutes. This implies creating a strategy that ments on Nimbus Drive and in the Lincoln
will provide enough parking to keep an area com- Center development are effectively full dur-
petitive, but with enough restric- ing weekday peak hours.
tions to encourage employees to Complementary land uses
look toward alternatives to "one present opportunities for shared
person-one car" commutes. parking. For example, restau-
Aft,
rants and offices tend to experi-
e Washington Square Regional ence peak use at different times,
Center Task Force has evaluated making it possible to for these
existing and projected parking different uses to share the same
conditions. From this informa- parking spaces without conflict.
tion, they have agreed on a rec- However, barriers to pedestrian
ommended parking strategy in- access such as railroad tracks and
tended to help the district balance the critical need lack of sidewalks limit the feasibility of shared
to attract businesses, residents and shoppers with the parking in many cases.
long-term goal of managing demand on the trans- The Park & Ride lot southwest of Scholls
portation system. Ferry Rd. and Hall Boulevard is approxi-
mately 60 percent full during weekday peak
periods.
:u
n•o.r •~nn nwr
FORECAST CONDITIONS PARKING STRATEGIES
The consultants used anticipated changes in land uses Key Objectives
to determine future parking needs. They did not fac-
torsn significant new parking, except for that planned The Washington Square Regional Task Force idcn-
with specific new developments, changes in transit, tified four objectives to drive decision-making about
bicyc is or pcdcstrimi travci ur sharcu parking arrangc- parking strategies. They are:
ments.
• Ensure sufficient parking to support economic
• Changes in land uses anticipated by the Wash- activities in the area. In retail areas, customer
ington Square Regional Center plan will in- parking in prime spaces will receive priority
crease overall peak parking demand in the area consideration.
by approximately 90 percent. In some areas, Employee parking demand can and should
parking de- be reduced by encouraging
mand will in- Q fewer single-occupant com-
crease by • mute trips. Parking stratc-
more than gies should be consistent
200 percent. o with other transportation
• Redevelop- improvement elements that
ment on sur- support alternative modgib,
face lots I a g4~ travels.
would elimi- 4go ° ' oo 03 .p, New municipal parking
Hate about h~'a°~ 0. 40 40
C facilities should be provided
8,000 existing s to serve multiple uses, with
p a r k i n g an emphasis on supporting
spaces. economic activities.
• Available parking spaces effectively will be full A high priority is maintaining residential
during the weekday peak periods, even if the parking in existing neighborhoods.
maximum allowable parking ratio is applied.
Parking supply will be adequate for weekend
conditions in the overall study area. However,
high-density commercial areas will experience
weekend parking pressures.
YiOwY O®NIU ~n9.
Y
AEN,
COMMERCIAL/RETAIL PARKING EMPLOYMENT-BASlE® STRATEGIES
Parking management strategies should ensure that Employer-based parking management strategies can
the most convenient parking spaces are available to help reduce parking demand and encourage a vari-
customers and visitors. ety of travel modes.
• On-street parking in commercial areas should • Transit service should be provided to serve.
be restricted to short-term parking to ensure c.A.t.l:,yees i:_ _-11 crered office developments.
adequate turn-over in prime locations. Park- Bus service on Nimbus Drive is a priority and
ing meters may be needed to assure compli- is included in Tri-Met's Transit Choices for
ante and to provide a funding source for fu- Livability plan.
ture parking supply. Nominal parking fees will encourage consid-
• A uniform "way-finding" system should be eration of commute alternatives, and revenues
created to direct customers to any public park- may be used to support improved facilities
ing facilities built in the study area. Direc- for transit, carpools, bicycles and pedestrians.
tion signs posted at the main entry points into This is an option that local governments,
the regional center can use arrows and text to property owners and building management
help drivers find parking as quickly as pos- companies may want to consider.
sible. This can reduce the need for drivers to - Employer-based programs to reduce parking
drive slowly through an area looking for park- demand include:
ing, interfering with traffic flow and creating - On-site bicycle lockers and showers
unnecessary air pollution. • A carpool-matching service, to help employ-
ees find people in their neighborhoods with
whom to drive or ride
• Free or preferential parking for carpools
• Free or subsidized transit passes.
-A,
1
i
d
v
o~ai¢.w w~ruoer
INCREASED PARKING SUPPLE(/ Transportation improvements should focus on re-
S"ARE® PARKING ducing barriers to pedestrian access (lack of safe
crossing areas at streets and railroad tracks, lack of
Any new parking structures or surface lots should be sidewalks, no direct route, etc.) to encourage wal-
located to serve uses with complementary demand ing between different business and, ultimately to
patterns. For example, movie theaters have the high- and from shared parking.
est parking demand on evenings and weekends and
could share parking facilities with offices that need KESiOErv T iAL PMORffV PARKING
the parking primarily during weekdays.
As parking demand increases, the community may
Regulations should require retail spacc to be built need to implement a residential parking priority
into the first floor of any new parking structure. strategy, particularly in the Metzger and Lincoln
Center areas. Such a strategy would reduce con-
Originally, planners intended the Park & Ride lot to flicts between residents' parking needs and spill-over
be at its present location only temporarily. If a new parking from the commercial areas.
lot is sited within the regional center, planners should
consider the following:
• opportunities to serve local demand during
evenings and weekends for such land uses as
movie theaters and churches;
the destinations of primary users (are they com-
ing into the district or leaving their cars to
catch transit out of the district).
All
1qP
.-M M'jM
7 ` •i e IY r 1, M1ly t,,e 7~ ~ 7d :?.s~ , t Nl p~.
• f,- 1 + r..7 r ~lr 1 .7fjy~J`JF-2~°'~+'"n..:, s'~"i±~ 7 ,~ti+. S .~7J} 1 ,
~~'1'r M1R It j 1
r
~7f
f? I..tr3
fdlu
tz' 11_
i4 v` V.
;;,~~%~~~fi°a;• Vii. 3
Ron
r
y
low N, IL
~t -
1 ,
i
AM*
qF
t~
s~
6 ,
i J6
m ~P e
s~w1A1® I i
6• PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation of the Washington Square Regional valuable parking spaces for customers of re-
Center Framework Plan will require the cooperation, tail businesses and service providers.
effort and funding of a variety of public and private • Resident participation in developing traffic
entities. Among the parties involved and the actions management and parking strategies.
required are:
NEXT STEPS
• Cities of Tigard and, Beaverton and Washing-
ton County: The Washington Square Regional CenterTask Force
• adoption of zoning code amendments, park- has prepared a work plan to move the Framework
ing policies, ratios and regulations, compre- Plan from concept to reality. The work plan calls
hensive plan amendments and other regula- for completion of essential activities within eight to
tions affecting private development in the five ten months of approval of the Framework Plan.
sub-areas. Proposed regulatory language, in- Local government officials, consultants, stakehold-
cluding the design guidelines, the comprehen- ers and the public will be asked to:
sive plan and zoning changes, are included in
the appendix to this document; Review regional center plan proposals. Steps
• Approval of key transportation improvements will include:
for regional funding; ° Reaching agreement on specific options
• Cities of Tigard, Beaverton, Washington and proposals for analysis
County, Metro and ODOT development of a ° Conducting detailed environmental
financing strategy - and pursuit of funds - evaluation
to pay for significant infrastructure improve- ° Identifying physical and policy constraints
ments, including road and highway improve- ° Refining final recommendations.
ments, pedestrian and bicycle facility develop- • Refine recommendations for transportation
ment, parking facilities, environmental protec- improvements. City staff and consultants will
tion, parks and open space development, etc.; assess needs, review task force recommer.da-
• Tri-Met action to expand service, upgrade fa- tions and create final recommendations for
cilities and relocate the Park 8c Ride; transportation improvements throughout the
• Private property owner and developer interest study area.
in and commitment to infill and redevelop- • Develop recommendations for stormwater
ment in the Washington Square Regional Cen- drainage. City staff and consultants will as-
ter study area, as well as a consensus on treat- sess needs, review alternatives and create final
ing pedestrian and bicycle amenities, to pur- recommendations for stormwater drainage
sue share parking and follow other develop- throughout the study area.
ment policies that will contribute to the vi- • Refine recommendations for open space de-
sion of a regional center. velopment. City staff and consultants will as-
s Employer promotion of transit, carpool, pc- sess needs, review task force recommendations
destrian and bicycle commuting to preserve and create final recommendations for open
space preservation.
g00.Y WIO RIIW
° Prepare implementation strategies for all pub- Each activity will be conducted with extensive pub-
lic improvements. City staff and consultants lic outreach, through surveys, public hearings and
will refine inventories, recommend new code other tools. The goal is to ensure that implementa-
is
and policy revisions ilo'a~.,a.. loc l g.,,,,... r__ and tion reflects the spirit, intentions and interests of
develop a timeline with action steps. people living, working, operating businesses and
° Complete review and adoption of new regu- owning property within and adjacent to the proposed
lations. Staff and consultants will work on regional center.
revisions of relevant comprehensive plans, zon-
ing ordinances and creation of the Public Im-
provcmcnt Plan with the goal of quick adop-
tion by the City of Tigard.
Prepare financing plan for public improve-
ments. City staff and consultants will review
financing options, including studying the fea-
sibility of establishing an urban renewal dis-
trict. The final product will include an overall
funding and phasing strategy.
• Develop a Transportation Demand Manage-
ment Plan. Transportation demand manage-
ment (TDM) involves looking comprehen-
sively at transportation needs in an area and
developing ways to reduce stress on road sys-
tems, parking availability and air quality. City
ofTigard staffwill work with stakeholders (ma-
jor employers, retailers, property managers,
etc.) to develop strategies to encourage people
to walk, bike, carpool or use transit for daily
work commutes.
Ask,
{
s
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND sities appropriate for the regional center. These
ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS mixed use districts are summarized below. The pro-
posed plan and zoning map for the Washington
To implement the principles and concepts described Square Regional Center is also shown.
in this framework plan, task force members prepared
amendments to the City of Tigard Comprehensive MIXED USE COMMERCIAL
Plan and Development Code. For the portions of
the planning area The purpose of the
within the City of Mixed Use Commer-
Beaverton, and cial (MUC) land use
Washington designation is:
County, the task
force proposes plan To create a dense
and code amend- mixed use commercial
ments in these juris- district that forms the
dictions, to be commercial core of the
implemented sepa- Washington Square
rately by plan Regional Center;
amendment pro-
cesses. To provide opportu-
nities for major retail
The principal goods and services, of-
amendments are to fice employment, and
create new mixed- housing in close prox-
use districts to be in- imity, and with good
cluded both in the access to transportation
Comprehensive services;
Plan and the Zoning
Code. These new • To implement the
districts will support Metro 2040 Growth
a variety of land use Concept and Urban
types suitable for Growth Management
commercial, em- Functional Plan for ar-
ployment and resi- eas within the City of
dential areas at den- Tigard designated Re-
Zoning and Planning Map gional Center.
I
7:WWashi7ngton k plan recommends that land around Mixed use employment districts refer to areas with
Square Mall and land immediately concentrations of office, research and development,
y 217 be designated a mixed use cam- and light manufacturing industrial uses. Commer-
t. Principal development in these ar- cial and retail support uses are allowed, but are lim-
eas would be orrice buildings, retail and service uses. ited. T he zoning would permit residential dieveiop-
A zoning designation of MUC would also allow ment compatible with the district's employment
mixed-use development and housing at densities of character. Lincoln center is an example of an area
50 units an acre. MUC districts would encourage designated MUE-1, the high density mixed-use em-
laroprkisilelinaawirh rnA-;na.vnrlr•r kA,;; A..---1--- t "
a-- - -------o' r---'-a L CU. AJLg ployment -district. The Nimbus area is designated
side the structures. MUE-2, requiring more moderate densities.
MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL
MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT
The purpose of the Mixed Use Residential (MUR) ,
The purpose of the Mixed Use Employment (MUE) land use designation is:
land use designation is:
• To create moderate and high density mixed
• To create a mixed use employment district use residential districts in close proximity to
that is complementary to the rest of the com- other mixed use districts;
munity and the region; • To provide opportunities for a variety of hoqAft
• To provide opportunities for employment and ing types and densities, and to produce th
for new business and professional services in housing in ways that residents have a high
close proximity to retail centers and major degree of pedestrian amenities, recreation op-
transportation facilities; portunities and access to transit;
• To provide for major retail goods and services • To incorporate limited commercial and ser-
accessible to the general public, and minor vice uses within mixed use projects that pro-
retail goods and services accessible to the pub- vide benefits and amenities to residents, but
lic which works and lives within the MUE are compatible with residential uses.
district; • To implement the Metro 2040 Growth Con-
• To provide for groups and businesses in cen- cept and Urban Growth Management Func-
ters; tional Plan for areas within the City ofTigard
• To provide for residential uses that are com- designated Regional Center.
i patible with and supportive of retail and em-
ployment uses. The MUR designation is appropriate for predomi-
• To implement the Metro 2040 Growth Con- nantly residential areas where mixed uses are per-
cept and Urban Growth Management Func- mitted when compatible with the residential use.
tional Plan for areas within the City ofTiaard Areas will be designated high density (MUR-1) or
y designated Regional Center and Employ- moderate density (MUR-2).
ment.
r
irar..rmnua~w
The Tigard Community Development Code is rec- Design standards for pubic improvements, site
ommended to include: design building design, signs and landscaping
are achieved in order to create h;gh quality, ;1ity,
• A Mixed Use Commercial District; pedestrian-oriented developments;
• Both high density and moderate density Mixed ° All areas be subject to site design review;
Use Employment Districts; and ° Limited adjustments, and phasing so that de-
Both high density and moderate density Mixed velopment standards can be achieved over
TT_ . D •,.1 r:..t ~istri:ts time
DG 1\h.0iueaiuw 1
%
• Improvements to pre-existing uses and'devel-
Development standards are proposed that require: opments so that existing residents and busi-
• Minimum residential densities and floor area nesses may continue to thrive.
ratios (FAR) be achieved;
• Limiting certain commercial uses so that a The primary development standards .proposed for
pedestrian-oriented development pattern is each of these new zones is summarized in the fol-
achieved; lowing table.
SELECTED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN MIXED-USE ZONES
MUC MUE 1 MUE 2 MUR 1 MUR 2
imensional Requirements
Minimum Building Height 2 stories 2 stories None 2 stories None
Maximum Building Height 200' 200' 60' 75' 45'
Density Requirements
Minimum Floor Area Ratio (FAR.) 1.25 1.25 0.6 0.6 0.3
Minimum Residential Density 50 units/acre 50 units/acre 25 units/acre 50 units/acre 25 units/acre
Maximum Residential Density None None 50 units/acre None 50 units/acre
~iasswr amn ssruw
Recognizing that protection of natural resources is TRANSPORTATION
an important objective for the regional center, the IMPLEMENTATION, PRIORITIES
task force incorporated the most current :uentificµ- AI\I® PHASING
tions of floodplains, wetlands and water courses
within the planning The recommended
area. Regulations for Transportation Mas-
development within ter Plan for the Wash-
and adjacent to these ington Square Re-
natural resource areas, gional Center de-
consistent with the re- scribes an integrated
quirements of Metro system designed to
Title 3 and rules and serve the needs of re-
standards utilized by gional as well as local
the Unified Sewerage travel, and to encour-
Agency under agree- age a balance of travel
ment with the City of modes. In some cases,
Tigard, apply within the effectiveness of
the Regional Center. A specific recommenda-
figure showing these re- tions would be we4k-
source areas is in- ened by the absence
eluded. other plan elements.
The task force, there-
fore, analyzed the full
set of recommenda-
tions to determine the
highest priority
projects and the most
effective phasing for
their construction.
The priorities and
Natural Resources Map phasing are indicated
below:
noww awn. mo.
■
Key Motor Vehicle Projects vard may not need widening within the study
area. However, this statement is not meant to
1. Highway 217 over-crossing connecting negate other regional needs identified for Hall
Washington Square Mall to the Nimbus of Boulevard
fice developments. This project will represent
the first step toward eliminating Highway Key Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian
217's function as a barrier within the district Projects
and connecting office and retail development
on both sides of the freeway. 1. Nimbus Bus Service. iii-Met has identified
bus service to Nimbus office developments as
2. Nimbus Drive extension to Greenburg a priority, with service to start in one to five
Road. The second major project to pursue af- years. The Cities of Tigard and Beaverton as
ter agreement on the Nimbus-Mall connec- well as businesses along proposed routes
tion is this extension of Nimbus Drove. It should work with Tri-Met to encourage speedy
will relieve congestion on Hall Boulevard and implementation.
at the Scholls Ferry Rd./Hall Boulevard in-
tersection. 2. Neighborhood Traffic Management Mea-
sures. The City of Tigard, along with local
3. Highway 217 over-crossing on Locust Street. residents and businesses, should work together
This second crossing will provide additional to plan and implement traffic management
east-west access over the highway and improve measures along Locust, Oak and Lincoln
connections within the district. Building this Streets. These measures will be critical to pre-
connection before completing the Nimbus serving a safe neighborhood street system. The
Drive extension would limit the over- community should prepare strategies and spe-
crossing's effectiveness. cific tactics as soon as possible to ensure that
measures are in place no later than the open-
4. Development of the collector system along ing of the Locust Street over-crossing.
Oak, Lincoln and Locust Streets. These im-
provements, along with neighborhood traffic 3. Pedestrian Crossings on Greenburg Rd. and
management, will be important in helping ex- Hall Boulevard Traffic engineers, in concert
isting neighborhoods absorb increased traffic. with residents and businesses, should evalu-
ate potential crossing improvements as traffic
5. Hall Boulevard widening. The task force rec- volumes increase. ODOT and the City of
ommends this as the last of its five priorities Tigard should begin cooperating on evalua-
to give the community time to evaluate the tion, design and implementation as soon as
impacts of new development and other traf- possible.
fic improvements on the area. With develop-
ment of the Nimbus Drive extension and the
new Highway 217 over-crossing, Hall Boule-
r~au~ vertu rtur
4. Sidewalk Construction on Hall Boulevard PARKING
at Cascade Avenue The existing gap in the
sidewalk and over-grown vegetation create bar- Shared parking can be a significant asset to mixed-
riers to pedestrian circulation and hinder ac- use areas. Shared parking can occur in several ways:
cess to the sidewalks on the Hall Boulevard
bride over Highway 217. ODO 1 could be- ° investrnei-it uy a single dcVeloper that creates park-
gin building this sidewalk soon. ing for a shopping center or other collection of
uses;
j. Mali Area Street Deveiopment. improve- Investment of public funds for parking struc-
ments of Eliander Lane, Washington Square tures, as has been done in downtown Portland
Rd. and Palm Boulevard that include pedes- and Tualatin;
trian, bicycle and transit amenities can con- Agreements between private property owners.
tribute significantly to better access in the
commercial core. These streets should be The Washington Square Regional Center has great
brought into compliance with full street stan- potential for shared parking. However, as the park-
dards. The City of Tigard should ensure that ing strategy noted, lack of pedestrian amenities, high
the preferred pedestrian and bicycle ameni- traffic volumes, railroad tracks and other barriers
ties are included in the appropriate City codes make shared parking less attractive. Public and pri-
and ordinances. vate investment in sidewalks, street and rail cross-
ings and other pedestrian enhancements would;
crease the potential that different uses (e.g. an offic
building and a movie complex) could share the same
parking spaces.
Shared parking agreements between property own-
ers are fairly straightforward. Although many prop-
erty owners worry about liability issues, owners who
participate in shared parking agreements have found
that liability is not a greater concern with shared
parking than with more traditional parking arrange-
ments.
Metro has published a handbook on shared parking
that contains sample shared parking agreements for
property owners.
t
■
APPENDIX
Meeting Minutes and Agendas, Washington Square Regional Center Task Force
June 3, 1998 • November 18, 1998 April 21, 999
July 15, 1998 December 16, 1998 May 19, 1999
August 19, 1998 (Bus Tour) January 20, 1999 June 1, 1999
September 16, i 770 February 17, 1999 June 9, 1999
June 16, 1999
Washington Square Regional Center Study: Open House Report
Summary of open houses at Washington Square Mall and Metzger Elementary School)
Washington Square Regional Center Study: Verbatim Comments
Written comments from participants at open houses held at Washington Square Mall and Metzger Elemen-
tary School
Notice of March 8 Public Meeting
Press Release: March 8 Public Meeting
Washington Square Regional Center Study Open House Report. Report on Tigard Water Building open house
CORRESPONDENCE
Petition submitted by Elisabeth R. Braam, September 29, 1998
Letter from Michael Neunzert, November 30, 1998
Memo from James Coleman, City Attorney's Office, December 9, 1998
Memo from Pat Whiting, February 17, 1999
Letter from Jim Grimes, Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, March 8, 1999
Letter from Mike Donovan, Metzger Park LID Advisory Board, March 13, 1999
Letter from Nancy Lou Tracy, March 22, 1999
Letter from Michael Neunzert, April 13, 1999
Letter from Dr. Gene Davis, April 14, 1999
Letter from Trudy Knowles, April 16, 1999
Letter from David A. Abrams, May 13, 1999
Letter from Mike Houck, Audubon Society of Portland, May 19, 1999
Memo from Barbara Fryer, City of Beaverton, May 21, 1999
Letter from Ward Rader, Chair, CPO 4-M, May 28, 1999
Letter from Ann Beier, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, June 2, 1999
Letter from Michael Neunzert, June 4, 1999
Letter from Sue Marshall, Tualatin Riverkeepers, June 16, 1999
"The Danger of Building in Flood Plains," written by David Warren, Risk Management Consultant
AGENDA ITEM #
FOR AGENDA OF July 20, 1999 _
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Tigard Triangle Design Standards Update
/f \ 1 IViVK ln..
PREPARED BY: Jim Hendrvx DEPT HEAD OK _ CI Y OK M ~
~ _'.I_V_1
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Council adopted design standards for the Tigard Triangle in the spring of 1997. All developments occurring
within the Triangle are subject to these standards. These design standards address several important guiding
principles adopted for the Tigard Triangle, including creating a high-quality mixed use employment area,
providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system within the Triangle, and utilizing streetscape to create a
high quality image for the area.
The issue before the Council is for staff to provide an update on the design standards and development within
the Triangle.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Afto action necessary.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
All new developments, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in non-single family residential
uses, are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design
standards, developments are required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as
sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public
improvement projects necessary within the Tigard Triangle.
Since the adoption of the standards for the Triangle, several projects have received approval. To date,
approximately 10 projects have been approved and 4 projects constructed in compliance with the standards.
It was recognized that the design standards are intended to upgrade and provide consistency to development
within the Triangle. It was also recognized that different designs may be used to meet the intent of the
standards. With this in mind, applicants for development in the Tigard Triangle may choose to submit proposed
projects which demonstrate compliance with the design standards or request adjustments from the Triangle
design standards to the City's Design Evaluation Team (DET). This option allows applicants to propose
alternative designs to the Tigard Triangle Design Standards that are consistent with the purpose of the
standards.
The Triangle design standards incorporate the following:
® Street connectivity
• Site design standards (building placement, setbacks, frontyard design, walkway connections, parking
locations, and landscape design)
G, Building design standards (ground floor window coverage, building facades, weather protection, building
materials, roof and roof lines, room mounted equipment)
Ci ,n stanrlarrig (zqne3 area limitation, height, location)
• Entry portals
• Landscape and screening standards
• Street and accessway standards (street and right-of-way width, sidewalk location, street tree plantings)
The above standards ask more of developers than the minimum requirements of other zones. The standards are
not unusually difficult to meet, nor unusual from other communities trying to stress high quality development.
They do, however, result in higher standards for development in the Tigard Triangle. The standards are a
"package" that work together to upgrade development. Changing any one standard would result in further
inconsistency in what is actually built.
The standards were developed to create a sense of place rather than a hodge-podge of development. This
commonly occurs if standards are maintained over a long period of time.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
AM-
one
VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY
Goal #1, Community Aesthetics - develop strategies to balance needs of new and infill development with need to
provide protection of defined aesthetic qualities valued by those who already live and work in Tigard. Strategy #1,
Community Aesthetics - balance development and aesthetic needs.
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
IAchywide\sum\0-innglesum I.doc
O
O
O O ~
O
000 0
® 00
Ilm HNi4yx
® ~ Xity of T®
® O
®C®rlmuni Developmeht,..
ty Department
7/21/99
r
mill
r~
ids address several
aid
. SW foT the
Cl1CS ado"ted
Y1t~ldl~` r~~1t
e 1 j~ea lase
h .
, .
uaVIIY
~ atC a h~
~ 9faTe PI,sCapC to CTS 46
~t,~1Z~~~ stye
® area
image
e
i`
7/21/99
AMIkk
i
ent C'O~f 0
evelopn1entS,
rafi expec
en®~ ®ects are
the area.
and ~l~ty of
character ,
4$ uired to ,
e ublic,twc4 tS er
p , 40 1tary sew
ities juch aS
Ik--*pgFYalci
orm*drainage ; tlon ~nt4f~~Mc
water and st 10# pure tramp®rta
uring
®participate in
improvement °
o
,
7/21.199
I~ i II
s e
Place
g4 shall occupy
frontages albiap, maj or and minor a na s eets.
r..oal Suns
l parking ' Parking
Building Building
law-
~a
Mcqor or Mlrwr Arterial Major or Mbior Arterial
M 'or or Mutor Arterial
1 Future Phase
I ®o
~ J~mling ~
i
B-MbW
Major or Manor Arterial
7/21099 ~w
FORM-
I~ ek
v ~ .
~e,tbae~'~® ard-sr~ae
a h aeeess aY
0~1~ yard a e'~ Apr
Fr i of are ~lbuc,% street ®r.
o ~a~dseap nd a p ~ ~
betWec
dal ®d
® dscape dell
• ~ti~~ and ~ ~
10 c
v'
o ~
4
Adak
A
v
?/21/19
AWk
Bu' jesi,,n Standards
ildings gr
hall includgroun oor alla with window , a
. Y
openings.
®4
♦
♦
Ito
s
s~
o v
71211,99 04
0
Ito
Blow,
des Aic
ce a put
.pT°~l
W~Out dln
g
° ° terials
~ in building
- vaiat14n t leaS~f °°t ° other wall
• off-set of a gated °m; 9
ld~g sea
-but P lding s
al reRecte ° .
,pt e than _IV
ct~ra sy ~ e~te f®T MOT
~
Sty facade '.a11
no building . * c° tcti°n
u.~ a pedeStr~ t
-feet with°
0 0
~ o
7.11/99
Ab
low
•
e~~-~r1
hey Proteet" % % ,
~ l
ea o
• Matefials
ent
®L ® r~eess
~~aluatlQ~ Teams p $
DesIgn
® e
t
0 ~
P ~
l ®y
7121/99
iY
tatus
of stan~ar~s ~ ♦
%
once ot,a 4v* %
ove:
:
app"
p
a le liarclware e
cel t
f ice
batter "ffice
Babies "
Olsen Cotes ♦ °
7121/99
aka
a Office
emdY 0
T~i•~°unty Ylotel
eti-vh
. 1Qy~rs Ove ,
Em~ o p
u
otl~ 0flce Office
. z
,
71'21i99
~Te
Aft 'Mom
ate
st
c0
ester
ff~ee
40
arrfoys
• Y
may
4w
o e.0 Me a ~
~n~-S~.ra~~ , ftl
-Nis
F or'ar Lot X~anslo
l' °
L a lamark
zeta of f1e
-e~C~er e~ ~1C~~ o
mc(Croskey
~ ®o
7 /21/139
R
w
wee
All
e.e B
we ~
wee ~
®ee $
~ e
B w 4, e
e
w
g w w e
~ O we
t
♦ l
O♦~
~ O
1 O
t
t ♦
7/21/9g
NNW
f=
Affak
3
Y
f9w~
Y
I
p`R
Y
a6~
V
1 '
1
l R M1Z R ~~~1~, .5 ~ t
i.
k` acGk `x
1 Rl~
[ L
S ~[))N FA
•
rlm
k w
l
3r s
';i.J", yam' 9•^+~ • .2..[~ ?sy
~,'YI •3~ Y+~r R~,r~ '~y.l~k
.M ~Y ~ '+~~':C~ 5 is ` ~ ~ fil
{
~ R{
i 00mommoom
000ow
~I
y:
i _
r.r. -
k:
bt
f 1S K
-r.5 ijyC1. „s
x
7715.
y
7/21 /99 ,
I sr.TrT
ry-rust
t.
{
~I
Y
.
.S.r
7/21/99
66/i~Z/L
~£i r ~
S,c rYu
~
J
s ► .
~'4.',.
~
~ _
::~Y..~ if. ll
y ~n~f
t'
,~S
~Tn 3
t
~t
Y
y ~ ~ n.. ~ f
-
,
r ardwar
7/21/99
K
t 9~' PON -
1 F~' y
~ e
z r 0
1
t \
or • V
s
t r y
Y
C,
w
r`
3
II
079 M
Milli
N
A'--
t
.1.
t
stidv ~
r r ~
Wl~
r t~~ t ct r~
rt k:
s
{
z
d
d
i~
p
ii I 1
M. 4
X1/99
7/
AML
661 F,1L
}
Y~
. tarn. . • r.-' r _
ii yW'~S °;Cx ~Y ~S '~~i,. ~ ."K~ j •g~~.rrs
>z ~ krti S5 ^A>^ ~ „~.S~y-ALT C+„~tx(: +~1
9
a
7
City i
Z
e
djo
III,
t
o`
MIA 11
O
O
7/21199
o !
i
s
V
7/21/99
r
~t
Sr <W:,
•~St~Kc.~~yTt
i-•
p.
5
1 9
1 y
Yy4~
~ •zt'l> ~
dolls
it eOneee
s s gel()ped Stan a ed.
s f ~rc as ~st~sli
Valuati~l~ re am ears.
esig~l f~r
~
ve been 1 %
~~tandards ha ~ ~ed•
. been dards,
suit ®f ~sta~ le
AV
th ~rl
is rem e
° r develop •ll eontlne ds,
~~Xt
gaff v~l le Ids •
impact C % the stands
and the a Changes to 'donee) •
gaff ree w ~e~lbll ~
es a~
i11 ~r®cedur s
~xlst g ~
7/29/99
Agenda Item No. 3-
Meeting of
TIGARD CI'T'Y COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999
• STUDY SESSION
> Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Jim Nicoli
> nouaeil, it esent: Mayor Jim NitiVll, C-Oul-l11VLO 1 affil iiuiat, Joyce PaLoll and ivn SvhvNkla.
> Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley; City
Engineer Gus Duenas; Community Development Director Jim Hendryx;
T
Legal Counsel aounsel Jim Coleman; Associate Planner Duane ~ T?...«e o bo~rt`e•,._,nginee F+ainr Pr
Greg Berry; Associate Planner Julia Hajduk
> AGENDA REVIEW
• Councilor Hunt reported that Jim Duggan of the Tualatin Valley Water District stopped by to
assure the Council that the District still completely supported the Willamette River option,
despite any rumors to the contrary.
• Legislative issues
Mayor Nicoli reported that Senator George of Newberg has resurrected the attempt at the
Legislature to stop Tigard from going to the Willamette. There was now an amendment to a bill
AM. which directed the Department of Agriculture to stop anyone from taking water out of the
Willamette River for drinking purposes, if any substance of any kind that was dangerous to
anyone was found in the river. He said that the a consultant in Salem told him that the bill
would die once it passed out of the Joint Committee because the next group in the process
would not accept it for consideration.
Mr. Monahan noted that Senator George was also supporting a Senate bill to restrict
jurisdictions from reassessing Local Improvement Districts (LIDS) retroactive to 1985; this
could affect the Dartmouth LID. He reported that Chuck Corrigan found that David Hunnicutt,
the attorney for Oregonians in Action who was representing he Martins, was advocating this
bill.
Mr. Monahan said that Representative Max Williams would try to find out if the bill went next
to the House Rules Committee or to the House Land and Water Committee. Mayor Nicoli
suggested contacting members of the House now with regard to SB 1333.
• Challenge to the City
Mr. Monahan reported that they have received a challenge on the City's information
dissemination on water. He said that staff would prepare a response to Mr. Meek. Mayor Nicoli
asked for discussion of the response. He recommended telling Mr. Meek that they did not
intend to stop putting out information but they would immediately forward Mr. Meek's
complaint to the State for investigation.
Mr. Monahan said that staff needed further clarification from Mr. Meek about his request for
copies of information because his request was very general. He emphasized that the City staff
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 1
w
- Moliml
did not advocate for any position on the water.
Mr. Monahan asked if anyone was interested in attending the ethics training in Sherwood on
July 29. He mentioned the Government Standards & Practices Committee's recent preliminary
decision that an employee's use of "Mileage Plus" credits earned while traveling for a
government agency was a violation.. He noted the recent s&-lctions against the Sherwood City
Council for not explaining why it went into Executive Session and for not allowing the public an
opportu ity to speak on the criteria for evaluation of the City Manager. He pointed out that his
contract was on the Consent Agenda tonight.
No Councilors could attend the training.
o Mr. Monahan advised the Council that RoxAnn Brown, Washington County Consolidated
Communications Agency Director, would update the Council at their August 17 workshop
meeting regarding the Agency's activities. He reported that he has attended he meetings where
they discussed Phase 2 of their communication network upgrade. He said that he recommended
that WCCCA make sure that every jurisdiction knew the history of this effort before the group
asked for support of a bond measure.
Mr. Monahan reported that at a later meeting (which he did not attend) Washington County said
that it did not support going out for a bond measure in November 2000. He mentioned that Ms.
Brown and the technical people supported a bond measure but the County thought that people in
the western part of the County would not support a bond measure.
e Mr. Monahan advised the Council that the Tigard Daze organizers wanted to know if the
AM,
Council wanted to be in the parade this year. Mayor Nicoli and Councilor Hunt said that they
would participate. Councilor Scheckla said that he would check his schedule. Councilor Patton
could not attend due to a previous family commitment.
e Mr. Monahan advised the Council of a non-agenda item, which was a request to allow Gus
Duenas to attend the Institute of Transportation Engineers annual meeting in Las Vegas. He
explained that this came to Council for approval because the dollar amount was over $500. Gus
Duenas, City Engineer, stated that this meeting had sessions on neighborhood traffic
management issues and traffic calming. He pointed out that he could also earn professional
development hours (needed to renew his license).
s SW 79`n Avenue
Mr. Monahan asked if the Council wanted to allow public testimony during the SW 79`h Avenue
agenda item. Mayor Nicoli mentioned his concern that a group organized to oppose the 79"'
Avenue improvements might not support a future road bond measure.
Councilor Patton reported that a 79`h Avenue representative has attended the last two Task Force
meetings. She mentioned their suggested option of looking at SW 74th Avenue as an alternative
to SW 79`'' Avenue. She stated that the Task Force discussed that option at the last meeting and
decided not to go forward with it.
In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Councilor Patton said that SW 74 h was the
closest road for which the 79`s Avenue group could identify that would provide the connectivity
between Bonita and Durham. She mentioned their argument that SW 74m was a flatter road with
primarily commercial and industrial development, thus eliminating the residential and
topographical issues. Councilor Patton said that the Task Force discussed the problems on SW
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINIJTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 2
74'h with the railroad tracks and the possible creation of a dangerous intersection because due to
Alft, the potential problems with signalization. Councilor Hunt noted that SW 7e did not have a
signal at either end.
Mr. Duenas said that normally the City waited for a development in the area to do the road
improvements, as has occurred along SW 74'. He held that it did not make sense for the City to
go in and do improvements for the other areas that have not yet developed.
Councilor Patton stated that the Task Force was very sensitive to the issues wit:: respect to the
SW 79`h Avenue neighbors. She mentioned discussion by the Task Force to include a criterion
for neighborhood impact in the overall criteria. She reported that she sensed movement from
some Task Force members to pay close attention in general to the neighborhood impact of these
projects. She commented that she believed that the SW 79 h Avenue group would become more
cohesive over time.
Mayor Nicoli pointed out that the City would allocate a large sum of money in the bond issue to
pay for a large portion of the improvements to the street, thus reducing the amount to be paid
directly from the neighborhood residents. He said that he did not want to risk 10 to 15 good
projects for a street that he could live with for another five to ten years. Councilor Scheckla
concurred.
The Council discussed strategic options. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that Mr. Duenas could
recommend to the Council to use the money for other projects or the Council could direct Mr.
Duenas to pull the project. Councilor Hunt commented that the street did need to be repaved.
Mr. Duenas spoke to using a phased-in approach. He said that they use the bond issue to do two
lanes, bike lanes and minimal drainage while waiting for developers to finish the rest of the
street.
Councilor Patton said that she thought that there was potential with the phased-in approach with
limited improvements and the cost borne by the City. She commented that the cost irritated a lot
of people, as well as the non-remonstrance agreements that many property owners felt the
developer had not told them about. Councilor Scheckla questioned favoring this group
protesting non-remonstrances over any other group in a similar situation. He supported treating
every one equally.
Mr. Monahan suggested handling SW 79''' Avenue through the bond measure by downscaling
the project, not calling in the non-remonstrances, and requiring future developers to do a certain
amount. He pointed out that if the bond measure did not pass, then a future Council would deal
with the project, possibly finding a different configuration that the neighbors would support.
Mayor Nicoli spoke to either making the decision at the City level on when to kill the project or
having a couple of Councilors working with the neighbors to negotiate a project that was
acceptable to the neighbors, the Task Force, and the City. He reiterated that they needed to
make the decision within the next 30 days.
Mr. Duenas commented that the City had an obligation to make the road safe for motorists. He
spoke to the City doing those improvements while leaving the rest for a future LID. He
mentioned that the developers coming in on the northern end would do the necessary
improvements at that end of the street.
Councilor Scheckla pointed out that the neighbors might decide that partial improvements were
good enough for them and never do an LID to complete the improvements. Mr. Monahan
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - XLY 13, 1999 - PAGE 3
suggested asking the City Attorney to look into whether or not the City doing improvements
nullified the residents' obligations under the non-remonstrance agreements to participate in any
future improvement.
The Council discussed the Mayor's suggested course of action. They agreed that Councilors
Patton and Moore would meet with the neighbors within 30 days and bring back a
recommendation to Council.
Councilor Hunt asked if Transportation Plan included the road planned from Hall up to
Hunziker. He spoke to changing the Comprehensive Plan now in order to obtain the most
desirable land for the road route before it developed. Mr. Duenas said that the Hall Boulevard
extension was in the plan. He confirmed that the net result of the Transportation System Plan
update study would be the Council adopting a change in the Plan, including the Hall Boulevard
extension.
Mr. Monahan summarized Council direction was to allow limited testimony tonight but to
request the residents to work through the Task Force.
® Washington Square Task Force Update
Mr. Monahan reported that staff has received numerous phone calls from people asking about
the Washington Square Regional Task Force update scheduled for next week's workshop
meeting with the Planning Commission. He asked if the Council wanted to allow public
testimony. Mayor Nicoli said that he was concerned that allowing public testimony in front of
two governing boards would circumvent the process. He supported allowing no public
testimony and only a limited update.
The Council discussed whether or not to hear an update. Councilor Scheckla questioned doing
so since the Task Force has not yet made any recommendations. Mr. Monahan said that staff
wanted to give the Council and Commission an overview instead of the bits and pieces of
information they were getting from outside sources. Councilor Patton supported hearing the
update and allowing no testimony.
Councilor Hunt observed that in the past the City has had to redo a plan after receiving public
testimony. He-asked if they would be so far down the road by the time they heard testimony
that they would have to redo the plan. Councilor Scheckla reported that the Task Force had only
two unresolved issues at this point: Dr. Davis' property and finding two additional parks in the
area. He said that if the Task Force could work through those issues, then he thought that it
would be a smooth operation.
Councilor Patton mentioned her concern that testifying before the Council and Planning
Commission might be an. attempt to short-circuit the Task Force process. She said that she was
hesitant to step in unless the Task Force itself reached an impasse.
The Council directed staff to present the update but allow no public testimony.
> EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 7:20 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.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 4
7-> Executive Session adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
1. BUSINESS MEETING
1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
Mayor Jim Nicoli called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
1.2 Roil Call
Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla were present
1.4 Council Communications
Councilor Scheckla announced a Community Block Grant meeting and update on the Rite
Center in North Plains this Thursday evening.
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
Mr. Monahan listed the City Engineer's request to attend the ITE Annual meeting as Item
13.
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA
o The Council heard Agenda Item 10, the SW 79`'' Avenue project, at this time.
Mayor Nicoli announced the Council's decision to have Councilors Patton and Moore, the
Council liaisons to the Transportation Bond Task Force, meet with the SW 79g' Avenue
representatives in the next four weeks to try to reach a consensus that satisfied both the
neighborhood and the City. He stated that the Council would take no more action on this item
until after that meeting.
Mayor Nicoli said that any one who wished to could still speak under Visitor's Agenda or they
could wait until that meeting.
Robert Preston, SW 79`b Avenue neighbors
Mr. Preston applauded the Council's constructive action in trying to find a way to resolve this
situation. He commented that he did not think it was appropriate at this time to give public
testimony in light of the Council's decision. He said that the appropriate action for the
neighborhood was to convene the Executive Committee to discuss their issues. He gave his
home and work phone numbers to Councilor Patton. Councilor Patton said that she would
contact Mr. Preston and make arrangements for a meeting between herself, Councilor Moore,
and Mr. Duenas.
Mayor Nicoli stated that any neighbors who did not agree with the neighborhood opposition
could contact the Councilors or staff directly.
STAFF REPORT
Gus Duenas, City Engineer, presented the staff report on the SW 79,' Avenue project. He said
that staff contracted with Century West to design this project with the intention of constructing
it sometime in the next three years. He mentioned the neighborhood meeting held in January
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 5
and the concerns raised at that meeting: the possibility of residents paying some portion of the
costs through an LID and the potential traffic problems resulting from the improvements. He
said that the consultant did a traffic study. He reported that he also commissioned the consultant
to do a study on what kind of traffic they could expect immediately following the street
improvements.
Mr. Duenas said that the consultant has completed 90% of the design. He stated that he asked
the consultants to develop different scenarios for possible LIDs. He mentioned that he had
tentatively scheduled the LID report for the August 17 meeting but felt that it might be better to
wait until after the meeting between the Councilors and the Executive Committee. He said that
staff included this project as a candidate for the Transportation bond. He observed that, in the
Transportation bond, staff wanted projects that would benefit both the City and the residents so
that the bond would be successful.
Mr. Duenas stated that staff intended to hold another neighborhood meeting in September to lay
out the design and demonstrate to the residents how the project would affect individual houses.
He indicated that they would make decisions on holding the neighborhood meeting and
presenting the LID scenarios until after the Councilor/Executive Committee meeting.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Nicoli read the list of those who signed up, allowing those who still wanted to speak to
do so.
e Luther Stohs
Mr. Stohs thanked the Council for their consideration in meeting with the people. He asked if
the City would make the LID scenarios mentioned by Mr. Duenas available before September.
Mr. Duenas reviewed the staff process, pointing out that staff wanted to get the Council's
direction before presenting scenarios that might not be acceptable to the Council.
Mr. Stohs asked if, following the presentation to Council, there would still be opportunity for
public input or was it a "done deal" at that point. Mr. Duenas said that there was always
opportunity for public comment, as nothing was a "done deal" until the Council said it was. He
commented that, depending on what developed from the Councilors/Executive Committee
meeting, either the August 17 meeting would be canceled or the Council would discuss its
options and give direction to the staff at that meeting.
Mr. Stohs asked for an opportunity to understand what would happen before there was less
opportunity for public input. Mayor Nicoli commented that the quicker the Councilors/
Executive Committee meeting happened, the more time they would have to set up a second
meeting to provide more information.
e Betty Gray stated that she had a strong objection to the formation of an LID.
• Raymond Doyle
Mr. Doyle asked what the cost of an LID would be and how the City would divide it among the
people in the area. Mayor Nicoli reviewed the City procedures in the design of and funding
options for an LID. He said that a combination of City funding and LID funding was a
possibility. He indicated that they did not yet know what the hard dollar amounts would be.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 6
Mr. Duenas noted that the earliest possible construction date was 2001, although they would
Mr. uenas noted that the earliest possible construction date was 2001, although they would
know the cost estimate by September 1999. He emphasized that the consultant was in the
process of determining the costs and LID boundary now. He mentioned a CIP status update on
this project available to anyone.
Councilor Patton clarified that Mr. Duenas would attend the Councilors/Executive Committee
meeting to answer technical questions. Mr. Preston stated that it was their preference also that
Mr. Duenas attend. He thanked the Council again for this opportunity to discuss their concerns.
He directed any interested Councilors to their webpage.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor Hunt asked to pull Item 3.5 and 3.6b.
Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to approve the Consent
Agenda less Item Nos. 3.5 and 3.6b.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors
Hunt, Patton, and Scheckla voted "yes.")
3.1 Approve Council Minutes of: May 25,1999
3.2 Receive and File:
a. Tentative Agenda
b. Council Calendar
c. Accept Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for
Fiscal Year Ended June 30,1998
3.3 Approve Appointments to the Library Board - Resolution No. 99-51
3.4 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 1 to provide funding to the Tigard Recreation
Association Resolution No. 99-52
3.5 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 2, increasing revenues and appropriations for
award of park feasibility study (Considered separately - see below.)
3.6 Local Contract Review Board
a. Award Contract for 1999-2000 Pavement Major Maintenance Program - Slurry
Seal
b. Award of contract for recreation district study to Cogan, Owens, Cogan
(Considered separately - see below.)
3.7 Approval of City Manager's Employment Agreement
3.8 Approve a !„ooperative Agreement Between ODOT and City regarding
improvements of the Hall Boulevard/SW Sattler Street Intersection
e Consent Agenda Items Pulled For Further Discussion:
3.5 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 2, increasing revenues and appropriations for award of
park feasibility study.
i
Councilor Hunt discussed his concern that the agenda item described a "park feasibility study"
when in fact it was a "recreation district feasibility study," as described in the information
3 summary. He reiterated that the Council originally discussed this question as whether or not it
wanted to form a recreation district at all. He argued that certain Councilors and staff members
have consistently portrayed it as a foregone conclusion that they would have a recreation district
and looked at how to do it, rather than whether or not to do it. He said that he would vote
against it.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 7
Councilor Patton pointed out that the resolution language conveyed a "park and recreation
district feasibility study." Mayor Nicoli agreed that only the staff report used the different
wording.
Councilor Scheckla asked what happened if the other jurisdictions did not pay their allotted
amounts. Mr. Monahan indicated that Tigard, as the banker for the project, has received one
check already and needed only to send an invoice to another party to receive payment. He
mentioned that Washington County was also sending $25,000 to the program. He said that
Atfalati would make up the difference if someone did not pay their portion.
Councilor Scheckla noted that the list did not include Washington County. He asked for
cla^:I:cation on the two dollar amounts: $41,500 and $15,000. Mr. Monahan explained that,
because Tigard was acting as the banker, staff needed to increase the budgeted amount of
$15,000 to $41,500 to include the money received from the other jurisdictions.
The Council agreed to direct staff to clarify the report and itemize each jurisdiction and its
contribution. (Considered by the City Council on July 20, 1999.)
3.6 Local Contract Review Board
b. Award of contract for recreation district study to Cogan, Owens, Cogan
This item was continued to next week, July 20, 1999.
4. UPDATE: WASHINGTON COUNTY COMMUTER RAIL STUDY
Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, noted that the Cities of Wilsonville,
Tualatin, Beaverton, Sherwood, Tigard, Washington County, ODOT, Tri-Met, and Metro (along
with funding from the 1997 Oregon legislature) initiated a study last year on the feasibility of
commuter rail within the Beaverton to Wilsonville corridor. He reported that the conclusion of
the second study phase was that there were no fatal flaws associated with the proposal.
Mr. Hendryx introduced Bob Post with BRW (primary consultants) and Kathy Lehtola of
Washington County here to give the Council the update recommended by the Steering
Committee overseeing the study.
Bob Post, BRW, presented the update using overhead graphics. He explained that `commuter
rail' was putting passenger service on existing freight operations, a common practice on the East
Coast but only implemented within the last decade on the West Coast. He reviewed the two
options for a rail line from Wilsonville to Tualatin to Tigard to Washington Square to
Beaverton, ending either at the Beaverton Transit Center (15 miles long) or at the Merlo Light
Rail station (18 miles long). He mentioned the objective of connecting to the light rail line.
Mr. Post confirmed that the first phase study found no legal or technical hurdles that would
derail the project. He explained that the ODOT owned the corridor for the southern two-thirds
of the line (from Wilsonville to Washington Square) while Portland Western Railroad owned the
tracks. He said that the Union Pacific owned the northern one-third of the line. He noted that
Portland Western Railroad was the short line operator for the entire length of the track.
Mr. Post reviewed the major conclusions of the study. He commented that this commuter rail
operation would be different from most other operations because the line did not go frorn an
outlying area into a central city area. Therefore, it required trains going in both directions both
morning and evening, instead of one direction in the morning and the other direction in the
evening.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 8
Mr. Post gave a preliminary ridership projection of 2,300 by the year 2015. He indicated that
they hoped those numbers would go up once they used the Metro modeling process to make
their projections. Ms. Lehtola pointed out that 2,300 riders per day worked out to 575,000 trips
a year taken off the roads.
Councilor Patton asked if the projects were based on a no cost commuter rail. Mr. Post said that
they assumed a fare system similar to Tri-Met's in developing their projections. He mentioned
the importance of establishing an integrated fare system with Tri-Met and Wilsonville in order
to allow transfers between the systems.
Mr. Post reviewed the specific questions that this study looked at regarding capital
improvements and costs, plan and costs, impacts and benefits. He stated their
, o'I
recommendation for the final question of whether or not to implement a demonstration project
was not to implement one. He indicated that they did not think that there was any way to
demonstrate the ridership without doing the stations and the track improvements.
Mr. Post stated that the anticipated frequency of service was 30 minutes at a maximum speed of
60 mph in most sections. He mentioned that the Steering Committee wanted the freight rail
operations left intact because that operation served many large employers in the region. He
noted that the average operating speeds of the MAX and Tri-Met bus systems were 22 mph and
14 mph respectively because of their more frequent stops. He pointed out that a 25 minute ride
from Wilsonville to Beaverton during peak hours was faster than most car traffic using Hwy
217.
Mr. Post mentioned the detailed assessment of the line for what needed to be done in order to
last, bring it up to the higher safety standards required for commuter rail. He noted crossing and
track improvements. He commented that the entire corridor was in pretty good shape requiring
general track improvements with some specific improvements at various locations.
Mr. Post said that the average cost on a per mile basis for this project was $2.8 million per mile.
He compared that to the ODOT estimate to add a lane to Hwy 217 at $20 million per mile and
the Max light rail system cost of $32 million per mile. He indicated that it cost less because
they were upgrading an existing resource and adding vehicles. He pointed out that most of the
cost was tied to the vehicles, track upgrades, and addition of siding lines needed to allow
vehicles to pass without losing time. He explained that the Beaverton Transit Center option was
less expensive ($64 to $71 million) because it required fewer vehicles than the Merlo option
($68 to $76 million).
Mr. Post said that the annual operating cost for the Merlo option was $4.4 million (because of
+ more vehicles and longer hours of operation) while the cost for the Beaverton Transit Center
+ Option was $3.9 million.
i Councilor Hunt asked if the $4.4 million was the total cost or the net cost after deducting fare
revenues. Mr. Post said that it was the total cost.
3 Mr. Post pointed out that this corridor was unique in serving two regional centers (Washington
Square and Beaverton) and three town centers (Wilsonville, Tualatin and Tigard) identified in
the 2040 plan. He said that they located each commuter rail station fairly close to the central
area of each of the centers in order to facilitate opportunities to connect. He mentioned placing
the Tigard station directly behind the current bus station. He indicated that they would have to
AMAk go through a public process to narrow down the potential station sites for other areas, like
Washington Square which had five alternatives.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 9
Mr. Post reiterated that, as a transportation solution, this was a lesser cost option for the region.
He noted that existing uses underutilized the railroad tracks which had sufficient capacity for the
operation. He mentioned their belief that most of the trips would be new riders (as opposed to
bus riders transferring to rail) because there was no parallel transit service to this corridor
currently existing.
Mr. Post reviewed the impact of the service on auto traffic. He said that, during the peak three
and a half hours of morning service, the cycle time for the trains passing through any one of the
16 crossings was between 45 to 55 seconds, similar to light rail.
Mr. Post reviewed the next steps. He mentioned identifying funding options, doing an
alternatives analysis to compare this project against other potential projects in the corridor,
further research into costs, operations and impacts, a public process, and design.
Councilor Hunt asked about the discussion of management structure. Mr. Post said that they
recommended keeping the management structure simple because it was a small operation. He
mentioned the options of a new joint powers entity or an existing transportation entity
contracting out operation of the service and maintenance. He said that they found that almost
any model of management structure would work but they had been impressed with the lean
operation of the Vancouver BC commuter rail operation.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the potential prison sites in the Wilsonville area would impact the
ridership. Mr. Post reviewed the possible locations of the Wilsonville station in relation to the
potential prison sites.
Councilor Scheckla noted that 14 people have been killed since MAX went in. He asked what
safeguards the commuter rail line would install to minimize the dangers. Mr. Post said that they
would take all the reasonable precautions in the design that they could to provide for good sight
distance for the train operators. He pointed out that this was predominantly a single track
operation and one fatality on the MAX line occurred when the person became confused about
the trains operating in both directions. Ms. Lehtola pointed out that these vehicles were diesel,
not electric.
Councilor Scheckla asked about the hours of operation. Mr. Post said that the operating hours
would be 5:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. He agreed that they would operate
during darkness in the winter and fall.
Councilor Hunt asked if the line would be constructed so as to allow the possibility of
continuing on to Salem. Mr. Post said yes. He mentioned that the vehicles available for
commuter rail typically were used for longer runs than this corridor. He noted that ODOT
owned the right-of-way all the way down to south of Donald with the tracks going on into
Salem.
5. PUBLIC HEARING - SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE TRANSFER - SCHMIDT'S
SANITARY SERVICES, INC.
a. Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 10
b. Summation by Administration Staff
Loreen Mills, Administrative Risk Analyst, presented the staff report. She said that the City
received a letter on June 7, 1999, from Schmidt's Sanitary Service advising the City that they
wished to transfer their solid waste franchise to Pride Disposal. She noted that Schmidt's has
served the City of Tigard well since the mid-1960s, currently serving approximately 28% of
Tigard's solid waste customers. She stated that the staff review found that Pride Disposal met
the conditions of the Code to be the new franchise owner.
Ms. Mills explained that the Code allowed the Council to attach conditions to any franchise
transfer in order to maintain customer service and a clean solid waste collection system. She
m i ^'"ai^g ^ file
reviewed the four conditions recommended by sia~.i, ,~~.,~u..i..~; ~ requirement that Sch-midt's
is 1999 annual report by March 2000. She discussed the last condition, recognition of the
change in location of operation from Schmidt's current location on Ross Street off Hall Blvd to
Pride's location in Sherwood.
Ms. Mills noted that staff anticipated the franchise fees remaining the same. She commented
that staff did not anticipate any change in the level of service because Pride has also been in the
solid waste business in the Tigard area for years and knew the rules. She explained that the
transfer became effective once both owners filed their acceptance of the conditions of the
transfer with the City Recorder but she was not certain when that would be.
Councilor Scheckla commented that he saw no reason not to allow the transfer, noting that
Schmidt's had run a top notch operation.
Aahk
d. Public Testimony
Larry Schmidt, Schmidt's Sanitary Services, stated that 37 years of hauling garbage was long
enough and he was ready to retire.
Councilor Hunt commented that Pride Disposal would have a challenge to maintain the same
level of quality service as Schmidt's provided.
Councilor Scheckla asked if Mr. Schmidt had any recommendations to improve service. Mr.
Schmidt commented that, with the growth in Tigard, they-could no longer offer the personalized
service they used to, although there were efficiencies in the equipment used today.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the Schmidt's employees would continue at Pride. Mr. Schmidt
said that Pride would absorb his employees.
Mike Leichner, Pride Disposal
Councilor Patton said that, based on previous experience with Pride, she was confident that
Pride would offer the same quality service as Schmidt's.
Councilor Scheckla asked if Pride would donate to Tigard programs as it did to Sherwood
programs. Mr. Leichner said that they tried to be as active as possible in communities. He
described their focus on youth programs, including Special Olympics, high school scholarships,
and a program with the Sherwood Chamber of Commerce that he hoped to expand to the Tigard
Chamber.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 11
o A gentleman from the audience said that he had wondered why the transfer was occurring. He
commented that it was obviously a company sale situation.
d. Staff Recommendation
Ms. Mills recommended adoption of the ordinance transferring the ownership from Schmidt's to
Pride Disposal.
f. Council Questions
Councilor Scheckla declared that he was indirectly related to the Schmidts but he would vote on
the issue anyway.
g. Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing
h. Council Consideration:
Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt Ordinance No. 99-
18.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 99-18, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11.04, SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT, OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO TRANSFER SCHMIDT'S
SANITARY SERVICE, INC., FRANCHISE TO PRIDE DISPOSAL COMPANY AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
Motion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
6. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 99-0001 - WALNUT
STREET/TIEDEMAN AVENUE AREA ANNEXATION
a. Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing.
b. Declarations or Challenges
There were no declarations or challenges. All members indicated familiarity with the
application.
c. Staff Report
Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She noted that the Council
initiated this island annexation in May, directing staff to begin the notification process. She
commented that she has not heard any opposition to the annexation. She stated that the proposal
was consistent with the Development Code, Comprehensive Plan and Metro standards. She read
the additional "whereas" clause that the City Attorney recommended including in the ordinance
(stating the annexation's compliance with the applicable review criteria).
AM,
d. Public Testimony
There was no public testimony.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 12
e. Council Questions
E Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing
g. Staff Recommendation
Ms. Hajduk recommended adoption of the ordinance with the amended language.
h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 99-19
Motion by Councilor Huni, seconucu by Co::neiier Patton, to adopt Ordinance No. 99-19
with the additional material.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 99-19, AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
TO APPROVE AN ANNEXATION, ZCA 99-0001, WALNUT/TIEDEMAN ANNEXATION
AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTIES FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT.
Motion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
7. PUBLIC HEARING - FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT
DISTRICT NO. 14
Adak
a. Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing.
b. Summation by City Engineering Staff
Greg Berry, Engineering Department, presented the staff report. He said that this, the fifth
reimbursement district in the City sewer extension program, would provide service to 18 lots.
He explained that the 19 lots shown on the map broke down into 11 lots annexed under the
previous agenda item and 8 lots previously annexed. He reviewed the locations of the two City
owned lots, one of which had a water quality facility on it, would not need service, and therefore
was not included in the district.
Mr. Berry said that the purpose of the project was to recover the City's cost of installing the
sewers put in at the same time as the intersection realignment project. He mentioned August 1
as the beginning construction date. He said that the sanitary sewer portion of the contract
totaled $260,000. He stated that staff distributed the cost based on lot size, due to the variety of
lot sizes, yielding a cost of 64 cents per square foot.
Councilor Hunt asked if any exceeded the $8,000 cap. Mr. Berry said that in the packet staff
provided a list of those properties exceeding the $8,000 cap.
Councilor Patton asked for clarification on how the $8,000 cap worked. She noted that Mr.
Duenas' memo indicated that a property owner was responsible for the first $8,000 and for any
amount over the $15,000 cap on the City's contribution. She commented that she had not
understood from the discussion that that was how that worked.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 13
Mr. Duenas said that the resolution did include a $15,000 cap on the City's picking up of the
cost of installing the sewers. He pointed out that some of the lots in this district were
subdividable into as many as three parcels, each of which would have its own service.
Councilor Scheckla sooported the staff application of the district. He asked if the owners of the
future subdivided lots would pay only the $8,000 when they hooked up to the sewer in the
future. Mr. Duenas said that the City offered the $8,000 cap only during the first year. Ater
that, the property owners had to pay the full amount in order to hook up.
Mayor Nicoli referenced the property purchased by the City that had a house on it. He asked if
the project would leave enough land out of the right-of-way to have a buildable lot. Mr. Duenas
said that, although there might be sufficient land for a buildable lot, staff did not want a structure
at that location because it was a bad traffic location. He mentioned a possibility of a wooded
area with water and restrooms in the future but he emphasized that they did not want a full
fledged park there either.
e. Public Testimony
o Irene M. Hall, 10675 SW Fonner
Ms. Hall asked for clarification on the City lot that staff told them would not be built on. Mr.
Duenas reiterated that staff did not want that lot built on but they were providing service to it
just in case they needed water and sewer there in the future.
Ms. Hall asked which homes were above the $15,000 cap. Mr. Berry indicated on a map the
location of the three private properties over the $15,000 cap.
Ms. Hall indicated that she owned one of the large lots. She questioned why they should have to
pay more when they had no intention of subdividing their property. She mentioned a proposal
given at a previous meeting to base the distribution on the number of properties rather than on
the square footage. She argued that the cost should be charged to the people when the property
developed, not to the property owner up front.
Ms. Hall asked if any one at the City knew about the original grandfather clause. Mr. Berry said
that he could discuss that with Ms. Hall.
Mr. Duenas mentioned that everyone had to pay the $2,335 connection charge.
Melvin Sunday, 10685 SW Fonner
Mr. Sunday asked for clarification on exactly where the City would bring a stub in relation to
his property. Mr. Berry explained that the City built the stubs 8 to 10 feet into a property from
the main section so that property owners did not have to work in the right-of-way when
completing the connection to their houses. Mr. Duenas suggested that Mr. Sunday talk with
either himself or Mr. Berry about the exact location for his lateral prior to the City installing it.
Mr. Monahan asked for clarification on when property owners could hook on the sewer. Mr.
Duenas said that property owners could not connect until the City finished the project which
would probably be sometime around September.
g. Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 14
i. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 99-53
Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Patton, to adopt Resolution No.99-
53.
Ms. Wheatley noted a correction in the fourth "whereas" clause. It should read "annexed by
Ordinance 99-19," not by Resolution 99-19.
The City Recorder read tlb~.. number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-53, A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER
REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 14.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
8: ADOPTION OF A DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE
DEVELOPMENT CODE
Mr. Hendryx explained that, since the Dolan decision, attorneys throughout the country have
generally agreed that the requirement of the rough proportionality test extended to all public
facilities improvement requirements. He said that, because of the confusion in how to apply the
Dolan decision, he and the City Attorney met to discuss Code provisions and the interpretations
needed to insure consistency with the Dolan decision. He noted the Planning Director's
Interpretations document drafted by the City Attorney and signed by himself. Mr. Hendryx
explained that staff wanted the Council to adopt this document because the courts gave
deference to a City Council's interpretations.
Mr. Coleman commented that this document would provide not only consistency with Dolan but
also internal consistency from application to application as staff turned over. He said that the
document memorialized what the Code provisions meant from the Council's perspective.
Motion by Councilor Patton, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt Resolution No. 99-54.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-54, A RESOLUTION ADOPTING DIRECTOR'S
INTERPRETATION CONCERNING DEDICATION, PUBLIC FACILITIES, FINAL
DECISIONS, NON-CONFORMING SITUATIONS, AND BUILDING LOCATIONS IN THE
TIGARD TRIANGLE.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
9. CONSIDER REQUEST FOR PACIFIC RIDGE TO USE CITY PROPERTY FOR
PRIVATE WETLANDS MITIGATION
Mr. Hend stated that Pacific Ridge and echt Company submitted a joint request
ryx p ~ to use City
park land to mitigate for the wetlands impact of the Autumn Crest subdivision in the Triangle.
He explained that the applicants proposed to do the mitigation on .74 acres located in the Fanno
Creek Park just behind City Hall. He used an aerial photograph to demonstrate the exact
location of the mitigation.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 15
Milli, 11NIN
Mr. Hendryx mentioned Council's adoption in June 1996 of a formal policy addressing the use
of City property for private wetland mitigations. He said that staff evaluated the proposal and
found it consistent with the policy (it would improve natural vegetation in the park and it would
be consistent with the Master Plan for the area).
Mr. Hendryx noted that the City did have authority under the policy to ask for compensation.
He recommended imposing a $14,740 compensation charge on the applicant.. He explained that
this was based on the $20,000 per acre rate recently charged by the Tualatin-Tigard School
District for mitigation on their property. He mentioned that the Division of State Lands found it
a reasonable amount to charge.
Mr. Hendryx mentioned two additional conditions recommended by the City Attorney's office,
should the Council approve the request: an easement agreement with the applicant that
indemnified the City, and provision of liability insurance by the applicant.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
o Marvin Schott, Schott & Associates, 11977 S Tolliver Road, Molalla
Mr. Schott reviewed the history of the Specht and Pacific Ridge projects. He said that both the
projects had permits from the Army Corps of Engineers but did not need DSL permits. He
explained that the State did not have jurisdiction over the Pacific Ridge 200 foot drainage
channel because it was an ephemeral drainage channel. He described the route of the drainage
channel as running from the Landmark Ford's water quality detention basin to the apartment
complex on SW 700' where it entered a culvert again. He indicated that they had to mitigate for
approximately 600 square feet.
Mr. Schott said that the Mr. Petrie's development was located in the old Scholls football area.
He explained that the original wetlands delineation done four years ago identified a 78,000
square foot wetland. During the first three phases of Mr. Petrie's project, they treated
stormwater by sheet flowing it across the pasture which had the unfortunate effect of expanding
the wetland to over three acres. He explained that, because the Corps of Engineers did not
verify wetland delineations until permit applications and Mr. Petrie dice not apply for his permit
to fill in 17,000 square feet of wetlands until recently, the Corps found the larger wetland
created by sheet flowing the stormwater across the property when it looked at the property.
Mr. Schott said that they did get their permit to install a water quality facility to treat the
stormwater and the wetland eventually retreated to its original size. However, the Corps still
required Mr. Petrie to mitigate for the impacts to the larger wetland. He indicated that that was
why they needed to do offsite mitigation.
Mr. Schott reviewed their plan for enhancing-the wetlands by eliminating the reed canary grass
and planting trees and shrubs that would eventually dominate the wetlands. He said that Pacific
Ridge would coordinate with the contractor and Specht would pay its fair share to Pacific Ridge.
He stated that they did have permits from the agencies. He mentioned their intention to use
wheelbarrows and handshovels in the work to avoid tearing up existing paths. He noted that the
permit required them to monitor the wetlands for five years.
Mr. Schott addressed the issue of the City fee. He referenced his letter in the packet. He stated
that, based on his experience in wetland work in the Portland Metro area for 12 years, private
property mitigation permits cost $10,000 an acre.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 16
'fix
o Craig Petrie, Pacific Ridge, 12508 SW Camas, Beaverton
Mr. Petrie asked for clarification on Item 2, obtaining a street opening permit issued by the
Engineering Department. He asked to add the phrase "if needed." He indicated that they did
not know why they would need one. Mr. Hendryx explained that the street opening permits
were a method for staff to track their work. He said that the condition requiring a wetland
easement agreement was an acceptable substitution for that requirement.
Mr. Petrie concurred with Mr. Schott that the fee proposed by the City was not the market
rate. He asked the Council to reduce the fee to $10,000 per acre. Mr. Hendryx noted that
prorated to $7,370 for their .74 acre.
Mr. Schott cony iacd to Councilor Scicckia That they following the Fanno Creel:
Master Plan to enhance the City park into a better ecological condition while satisfying their
mitigation requirements.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the City could hold out for someone else to use this land for
mitigation at the price recommended by staff. Mr. Hendryx said that he could not say one
way or the other. He commented that mitigation areas were becoming more difficult to find.
He noted that eventually the market would bear what it would bear, which might be up to
$20,000. He emphasized that it was the Council's decision as to what fee to charge.
Councilor Hunt mentioned the mitigation bank at Oaks Bottom. Mr. Schott explained that
both the mitigation bank by the Columbia Slough and the one at West Eugene charged
$35,000 an acre. He said that the new bank at Oaks Bottom would charge $50,000. He
explained that the mitigation bank owners have already paid for the materials and labor and
done the mitigation. Companies bought "mitigation credit" against their mitigation
requirements (per the three to one mitigation ratio). He pointed out that, with a $10,000 fee
to the City, their total cost to mitigate behind City Hall came out to about $50,000 (including
the five-year monitoring, planting costs, and maintenance contingency money).
Councilor Hunt mentioned his concern that they not set a precedent of lowering the price.
He noted the extensive mitigation needed at Cook Park. Mr. Hendryx explained that the
mitigation occurring at Cook Park resulted from the development of Cook Park. He
indicated that it was not a mitigation bank situation.
Councilor Scheckla asked if staff could do research to identify the market rate and return to
Council at a later date with that information. Mr. Hendryx indicated that staff could do more
research but he thought it unlikely that they would find anything different. He mentioned
that the DSL staff person said that he has seen fees up to $50,000. He reiterated that it was a
question of what the market would bear.
Councilor Scheckla spoke to having the same playing field for everyone, rather than
lowering the recommended price and then raising it later. Mr. Hendryx said that Council
would be setting a price for today only. He explained that the price set today would
influence who came to the City tomorrow. He spoke to staff evaluating each application on
a case by case basis because the market would change.
Councilor Hunt asked if Mr. Hendryx recommended staying with the $14,000 or did he
think a reduction in price was justified. Mr. Hendryx reiterated that it was a Council
decision. He commented that the benefit to the City from allowing private mitigation of its
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 17
wetlands has evolved beyond the simple benefit of improving the wetlands. Now they have
discovered that the land was valuable and the City benefited additionally by charging a fee.
He said that he stood behind the recommended numbers as reasonable but it was a Council
decision.
Councilor Scheckla asked if having a mitigation site so close to the developers' project
locations was a benefit to the developers.' Mr. Hendryx commented that the developers did
have to stay in the same watershed.
Councilor Patton stated that she was not concerned about a precedent because review was
necessary on a case-by-case situation. She said that she saw a distinction between a
mitigation bank and the City requiring the developer to pay for the labor, plantings and
monitoring. She commented that she assumed that the agreement included a mediation
provision in the event that the monitoring activity disclosed that the wetland enhancement
did not perform as intended. She recommended charging a $10,000 fee for the project.
Mayor Nicoli commented that, although he understood the economics of land cost, he still
looked at this as someone offering to improve the City's property for free. He said that he
was struggling with charging them anything. He pointed out that the higher fee the City
charged, the longer it would take to attract developers to enhance the numerous wetlands in
the City that needed enhancing. He noted that this was the first time that the City has
charged a fee. He said that he could see both sides of this issue.
Councilor Hunt spoke against giving the land to the developers for free because doing so
would turn mitigation property into a political football.
Councilor Scheckla supported Councilor Patton's compromise proposal of $10,000.
Mayor Nicoli spoke to putting the fees charged into a dedicated fund to purchase wetlands or
open space. Mr. Hendryx said that he had assumed that the money would go into the
dedicated park fund.
Councilor Scheckla asked Mr. Coleman if he saw any problems with this issue. Mr.
Coleman said that he has not heard any disagreement on the conditions or additional
recommended conditions; the only issue was compensation.
Mr. Petrie commented that he did not think that the City should give away the land for free.
He said that he hoped for a reasonable number.
The Council discussed what a reasonable fee would be. Mayor Nicoli supported Councilor.
Patton's suggestion of a $10,000 fee. Councilor Patton clarified that she meant $10,000 for
the project, not per acre. She said that she also wanted the money to go into the parks fund.
Mr. Hendryx confirmed that they had a parks capital fund.
Motion by Councilor Patton, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to approve the staff
recommendation to allow Pacific Ridge and Specht Company to use City property for
private wetlands mitigation with the following modifications: to include the
modification that Community Development Director Jim Hendryx indicated about the
Sensitive Lands permit and the easement, and that the applicant pay the City the
amount of $10,000 and that those funds be placed into the park fund.
CITY COUNCIL. MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 18
Nil
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
10. 79TH AVENUE PROJECT STATUS REPORT
The Council discussed this item under Agenda Item 2, Visitor's Agenda.
11. COUNCIL GOAL UPDATE
Mr. Monahan noted the quarterly report to the Council on the status of Council goals.
12. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
13. NON AGENDA ITEMS
13.1 CITY ENGINEER ATTENDANCE AT INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEERS ANNUAL MEETING
Motion by Mayor Nicoli, seconded by Councilor Patton, to approve the request for the
City Engineer to attend the training for the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Cancelled
15. ADJOURNMENT: 9:50 p.m.
Attest- Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder
y4gd
Date:
1:1ADMkCATFMCC 90713.D0C
Affik
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 19
Agenda Item No. 3,1
Meeting ofaq 1r._
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999
• STUDY SESSION
> Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Jim Nicoli
> Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Joyce Patton and Ken Scheckla.
> Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley; City
Engineer Gus Duenas; Community Development Director Jim Hendryx;
Legal Counsel Jim Coleman; Associate Planner Duane Roberts; Engineer
Greg Berry; Associate Planner Julia Hajduk
> AGENDA REVIEW
• Councilor Hunt reported that Jim Duggan of the Tualatin Valley Water District stopped by to
assure the Council that the District still completely supported the Willamette River option,
despite any rumors to the contrary.
• Legislative issues
Mayor Nicoli reported that Senator George of Newberg has resurrected the attempt at the
Legislature to stop Tigard from going to the Willamette. There was now an amendment to a bill
which directed the Department of Agriculture to stop anyone from taking water out of the
Willamette River for drinking purposes, if any substance of any kind that was dangerous to
anyone was found in the river. He said that the a consultant in Salem told him that the bill
would die once it passed out of the Joint Committee because the next group in the process
would not accept it for consideration.
Mr. Monahan noted that Senator George was also supporting a Senate bill to restrict
jurisdictions from reassessing Local Improvement Districts (LIDS) retroactive to 1985; this
could affect the Dartmouth LID. He reported that Chuck Corrigan found that David Hunnicutt,
the attorney for Oregonians in Action who was representing he Martins, was advocating this
bill.
Mr. Monahan said that Representative Max Williams would try to find out if the bill went next
to the House Rules Committee or to the House Land and Water Committee. Mayor Nicoli
suggested contacting members of the House now with regard to SB 1333.
• Challenge to the City
Mr. Monahan reported that they have received a challenge on the City's information
dissemination on water. He said that staff would prepare a response to Mr. Meek. Mayor Nicoli
asked for discussion -of the response. He recommended telling Mr. Meek that they did not
intend to stop putting out information but they would immediately forward Mr. Meek's
complaint to the State for investigation.
Mr. Monahan said that staff needed further clarification from Mr. Meek about his request for
copies of information because his request was very general. He emphasized that the City staff
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 1
did not advocate for any position on the water.
Mr. Monahan asked if anyone was interested in attending the ethics training in Sherwood on
July 29. He mentioned the Government Standards & Practices Committee's recent preliminary
decision that an ernployee's use of "Mileage Plus" credits earned while traveling for a
government agency was a violation. He noted the recent sanctions against the Sherwood City
Council for not explaining why it went into Executive Session and for not allowing the public an
opportunity to speak on the criteria for evaluation of the City Manager. He pointed out that his
contract was on the Consent Agenda tonight.
No Councilors could attend the training.
e Mr. Monahan advised the Council that RoxAnn Brown, Washington County Consolidated
Communications Agency Director, would update the Council at their August 17 workshop
meeting regarding the Agency's activities. He reported that he has attended the meetings where
they discussed Phase 2 of their communication network upgrade. He said that he recommended
that WCCCA make sure that every jurisdiction knew the history of this effort before the group
asked for support of a bond measure.
Mr. Monahan reported that at a later meeting (which he did not attend) Washington County said
that it did not support going out for a bond measure in November 2000. He mentioned that Ms.
Brown and the technical people supported a bond measure but the County thought that people in
the western part of the County would not support a bond measure.
e Mr. Monahan advised the Council that the Tigard Daze organizers wanted to know if the
Council wanted to be in the parade this year. Mayor Nicoli and Councilor Hunt said that they
would participate. Councilor Scheckla said that he would check his schedule. Councilor Patton
could not attend due to a previous family commitment.
Mr. Monahan advised the Council of a non-agenda item, which was a request to allow Gus
Duenas to attend the Institute of Transportation Engineers annual meeting in Las Vegas. He
explained that this came to Council for approval because the dollar amount was over $500. Gans
Duenas, City Engineer, stated that this meeting had sessions on neighborhood traffic
management issues and traffic calming. He pointed out that he could also earn professional
development hours (needed to renew his license).
e SW 79`n Avenue
Mr. Monahan asked if the Council wanted to allow public testimony during the SW 79`'' Avenue
agenda item. Mayor Nicoli mentioned his concern that a group organized to oppose the 79"'
Avenue improvements might not support a future road bond measure.
Councilor Patton reported that a 79`'' Avenue representative has attended the last two Task Force
meetings. She mentioned their suggested option of looking at SW 74th Avenue as an alternative
to SW 79"' Avenue. She stated that the Task Force discussed that option at the last meeting and
decided not to go forward with it.
In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Councilor Patton said that SW 74°i was the
closest road for which the 79`'' Avenue group could identify that would provide the connectivity
between Bonita and Durham. She mentioned their argument that SW 74d' was a flatter road with
primarily commercial and industrial development, thus eliminating the residential and
topographical issues. Councilor Patton said that the Task Force discussed the problems on SW
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 2
OEM I
74'h with the railroad tracks and the possible creation of a dangerous intersection because due to
the potential problems with signalization. Councilor Hunt noted that SW 740' did not have a
signal at either end.
Mr. Duenas said that normally the City waited for a development in the area to do the road
improvements, as has occurred along SW 70. He held that it did not make sense for the City to
go in and do improvements for the other areas that have not yet developed.
Councilor Patton stated that the Task Force was very sensitive to the issues with respect to the
SW 79`h Avenue neighbors. She mentioned discussion by the Task Force to include a criterion
for neighborhood impact in the overall criteria. She reported that she sensed movement from
some Task Force members to pay close attention in general to the neighborhood impact of tiesc
projects. She commented that she believed that the SW 79,' Avenue group would become more
cohesive over time.
Mayor Nicoli pointed out that the City would allocate a large sum of money in the bond issue to
pay for a large portion of the improvements to the street, thus reducing the amount to be paid
directly from the neighborhood residents. He said that he did not want to risk 10 to IS good
projects for a street that he could live with for another five to ten years. Councilor Scheckla
concurred.
The Council discussed strategic options. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that Mr. Duenas could
recommend to the Council to use the money for other projects or the Council could direct Mr.
Duenas to pull the project. Councilor Hunt commented that the street did need to be repaved.
Mr. Duenas spoke to using a phased-in approach. He said that they use the bond issue to do two
lanes, bike lanes and minimal drainage while waiting for developers to finish the rest of the
street.
Councilor Patton said that she thought that there was potential with the phased-in approach with
limited improvements and the cost borne by the City. She commented that the cost irritated a lot
of people, as well as the non-remonstrance agreements that many property owners felt the
developer had not told them about. Councilor Scheckla questioned favoring this group
protesting non-remonstrances over any other group in a similar situation. He supported treating
every one equally.
Mr. Monahan suggested handling SW 79`x' Avenue through the bond measure by downscaling
the project, not calling in the non-remonstrances, and requiring future developers to do a certain
amount. He pointed out that if the bond measure did not pass, then a future Council would deal
with the project, possibly finding a different configuration that the neighbors would support.
Mayor Nicoli spoke to either making the decision at the City level on when to kill the project or
having a couple of Councilors working with the neighbors to negotiate a project that was
acceptable to the neighbors, the Task Force, and the City. He reiterated that they needed to
make the decision within the next 30 days.
Mr. Duenas commented that the City had an obligation to make the road safe for motorists. He
spoke to the City doing those improvements while leaving the rest for a future LID. He
mentioned that the developers comi]Ag in on the northern end would do the necessary
improvements at that end of the street.
Councilor Scheckla pointed out that the neighbors might decide that partial improvements were
good enough for them and never do an LID to complete the improvements. Mr. Monahan
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 3
suggested asking the City Attorney to look into whether or not the City doing improvements
nullified the residents' obligations under the non-remonstrance agreements to participate in any
future improvement.
The Council discussed the Mayor's suggested course of action. They agreed that Councilors
Patton and Moore would meet with the neighbors within 30 days and bring back a
recommendation to Council.
Councilor Hunt asked if Transportation Plan included the road planned from Hall up to
Hunziker. He spoke to changing the Comprehensive Plan now in order to obtain the most
desirable land for the road route before it developed. Mr. Duenas said that the Hall Boulevard
extension was in the plan. He confirmed that the net result of the Transportation System Plan
update study would be the Council adopting a change in the Plan, including the Hall Boulevard
extension.
Mr. Monahan summarized Council direction was to allow limited testimony tonight but to
request the residents to work through the Task Force.
Washington Square Task Force Update
Mr. Monahan reported that staff has received numerous phone calls from people asking about
the Washington Square Regional Task Force update scheduled for next week's workshop
meeting with the Planning Commission. He asked if the Council wanted to allow public
testimony. Mayor Nicoli said that he was concerned that allowing public testimony in front of
two governing boards would circumvent the process. He supported allowing no public
testimony and only a limited update.
The Council discussed whether or not to hear an update. Councilor Scheckla questioned doing
so since the Task Force has not yet made any recommendations. Mr. Monahan said that staff
wanted to give the Council and Commission an overview instead of the bits and pieces of
information they were getting from outside sources. Councilor Patton supported hearing the
update and allowing no testimony.
Councilor Hunt observed that in the past the City has had to redo a plan after receiving public
testimony. He.asked if they would be so far down the road by the time they heard testimony
that they would have to redo the plan. Councilor Scheckla reported that the Task Force had only
two unresolved issues at this point: Dr. Davis' property and finding two additional parks in the
area. He said that if the Task Force could work through those issues, then he thought that it
would be a smooth operation.
Councilor Patton mentioned her concern that testifying before the Council and Planning
Commission might be an.attempt to short-circuit the Task Force process. She said that she was
hesitant to step in unless the Task Force itself reached an impasse.
The Council directed staff to present the update but allow no public testimony.
> EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session at 7:20 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.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 4
7Executive Session adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
1. BUSINESS MEETING
1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board
Mayor Jim Nicoli called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
1.2 Roll Call
Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla were present
1.4 Councii Communications
Councilor Scheckla announced a Community Block Grant meeting and update on the Rite
Center in North Plains this Thursday evening.
1.5 Call to Council aud- Staff for Non-Agenda Items
Mr. Monahan listed the City Engineer's request to attend the ITE Annual meeting as Item
13.
2. VISITOR'S AGENDA
o The Council heard Agenda Item 10, the SW 79h Avenue project, at this time.
Mayor Nicoli §nnounced the Council's decision to have Councilors Patton and Moore, the
C-- :-l liaisons to the Transportation Bond Task Force, meet with the SW 79"' Avenue
representatives in the next four weeks to try to reach a consensus that satisfied both the
neighborhood and the City. He stated that the Council would take no more action on this item
until after that meeting.
Mayor Nicoli said that any one who wished to could still speak under Visitor's Agenda or they
could wait until that meeting.
o Robert Preston, SW 79'h Avenue neighbors
Mr. Preston applauded the Council's constructive action in trying to find a way to resolve this
situation. He commented that he did not think it was appropriate at this time to give public
testimony in light of the Council's decision. He said that the appropriate action for the
neighborhood was to convene the Executive Committee to discuss their issues. He gave his
home and work phone numbers to Councilor Patton. Councilor Patton said that she would
contact Mr. Preston and make arrangements for a meeting between herself, Councilor Moore,
i and Mr. Duenas.
i
1
Mayor Nicoli stated that any neighbors who did not agree with the neighborhood opposition
could contact the Councilors or staff directly.
s
STAFF REPORT
Gus Duenas, City Engineer, presented the staff report on the SW 790' Avenue project. He said
that staff contracted with Century West to design this project with the intention of constructing
it sometime in the next three years. He mentioned the neighborhood meeting held in January
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 5
fi
and the concerns raised at that meeting: the possibility of residents paying some portion of the
costs through an LID and the potential traffic problems resulting from the improvements. He
said that the consultant did a traffic study. He reported that he also commissioned the consultant
to do a study on what kind of traffic they could expect immediately following the street
improvements.
Mr. Duenas said that the consultant has completed 90% of the design. He stated that he asked
the consultants to develop different scenarios for possible LIDS. He mentioned that he had
car to
but ta ♦1... that ♦ ' might
tentatively scheduled the LID report for the August 17 meeting but ,.2lu it,
wait until after the meeting between the Councilors and the Executive Committee. He said that
staff included this project as a candidate for the Transportation bond. He observed that, in the
Transportation bond, siaff wanted projects that would benefit both the City and the residents so
that the bond would be successful.
Mr. Duenas stated that staff intended to hold another neighborhood meeting in September to lay
out the design and demonstrate to the residents how the project would affect individual houses.
He indicated that they would make decisions on holding the neighborhood meeting and
presenting the LID scenarios until after the Councilor/Executive Committee meeting.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Mayor Nicoli read the list of those who signed up, allowing those who still wanted to speak to
do so.
® Luther Stohs
Mr. Stohs thanked the Council for their consideration in meeting with the people. He asked if
the City would make the LID scenarios mentioned by Mr. Duenas available before September.
Mr. Duenas reviewed the staff process, pointing out that staff wanted to get the Council's
direction before presenting scenarios that might not be acceptable to the Council.
Mr. Stohs asked if, following the presentation to Council, there would still be opportunity for
public input or was it a "done deal" at that point. Mr. Duenas said that there was always
opportunity for public comment, as nothing was a "done deal" until the Council said it was. He
commented that, depending on what developed from the Councilors/Executive Committee
meeting, either the August 17 meeting would be canceled or the Council would discuss its
options and give direction to the staff at that meeting.
Mr. Stohs asked for an opportunity to understand what would happen before there was less
opportunity for public input. Mayor Nicoli commented that the quicker the Councilors/
Executive Committee meeting happened, the more time they would have to set up a second
meeting to provide more information.
Betty Gray stated that she had a strong objection to the formation of an LID.
Raymond Doyle
Mr: Doyle asked what the cost of an LID would be and how the City would divide it among the
people in the area. Mayor Nicoli reviewed the City procedures in the design of and funding
options for an LID. He said that a combination of City funding and LID funding was a
possibility. He indicated that they did not yet know what the hard dollar amounts would be.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 6
Moil 11111E 1111111111
Mr. Duenas noted that the earliest possible construction date was 2001, although they would
know the cost estimate by September 1999. He emphasized that the consultant was in the
process of determining the costs and LID boundary now. He mentioned a CIP status update on
this project available to anyone.
Councilor Patton clarified that Mr. Duenas would attend the Councilors/Executive Committee
meeting to answer technical questions. Mr. Preston stated that it was their preference also that
Mr. Duenas attend. He thanked the Council again for this opportunity to discuss their concerns.
He directed any interested Councilors to their we'opage.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
v^v.r^.,-;1^r T-Ttwrit acl{Prl to r- mill Tte
---m 3,5 and 3.6b.
Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to approve the Consent
Agenda less Item Nos. 3.5 and 3.6b.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors
Hunt, Patton, and Scheckla voted "yes.")
3.1 Approve Council Minutes of. May 25, 1999
3.2 Receive and File:
a. Tentative Agenda
b. Council Calendar
c. Accept Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for
Fiscal Year Ended dune 30, 1998
Ask 3.3 Approve Appointments to the Library Board - Resolution No. 99-51
3.4 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 1 to provide funding to the Tigard Recreation
Association Resolution No. 99-52
3.5 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 2, increasing revenues and appropriations for
award of park feasibility study (Considered separately - see below.)
3.6 Local Contract Review Board
a. Award Contract for 1999-2000 Pavement Major Maintenance Program - Slurry
Seal
b. Award of contract for recreation district study to Cogan, Owens, Cogan
(Considered separately - see below.)
3.7 Approval of City Manager's Employment Agreement
3.8 Approve a Cooperative Agreement Between ODOT and City regarding
improvements of the Hall Boulevard/SW Sattler Street Intersection
Consent Agenda Items Pulled For Further Discussion:
0 3.5 Approve Budget Adjustment No. 2, increasing revenues and appropriations for award of
park feasibility study.'
Councilor Hunt discussed his concern that the agenda item described a "park feasibility study"
7 when in fact it was a "recreation district feasibility study," as described in the information
summary. He reiterated that the Council originally discussed this question as whether or not it
wanted to form a recreation district at all. He argued that certain Councilors and staff members
have consistently portrayed it as a foregone conclusion that they would have a recreation district
and looked at how to do it, rather than whether or not to do it. He said that he would vote
Adh against it.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 7
u
Councilor Patton pointed out that the resolution language conveyed a "park and recreation
district feasibility study." Mayor Nicoli agreed that only the staff report used the different
wording,
Councilor Scheckla asked what happened if the other jurisdictions did not pay their allotted
amounts. Mr. Monahan indicated that Tigard, as the banker for the project, has received one
check already and needed only to send an invoice to another party to receive payment. He
mentioned that Washington County was also sending $25,000 to the program. He said that
Atfalati would make up the difference if someone did not pay their portion.
Councilor Scheckla noted that the list did not include Washington County. He asked for
clarification on the two dollar amounts: $41,500 and $15,000. Mr. Monahan explained that,
• at, 1, ,„Lug etwff nPwr~gl~ to incrA ee µ1,e UUA
because Tigard was acting aS El c vcuuav., , a. vu~j_ti~GU i11i1VUiIt o1
$15,000 to $41,500 to include the money received from the other jurisdictions.
The Council agreed to direct staff to clarify the report and itemize each jurisdiction and its
contribution. (Considered by the City Council on July 20, 1999.)
3.6 Local Contract Review Board
b. Award of contract for recreation district study to Cogan, Owens, Cogan
This item was continued to next week, July 20, 1999.
4. UPDATE: WASHINGTON COUNTY COMMUTER RAIL STUDY
Jim. Hendryx, Community Development Director, noted that the Cities of Wilsonville,
Tualatin, Beaverton, Sherwood, Tigard, Washington County, ODOT, Tri-Met, and Metro (along
with funding from the 1997 Oregon legislature) initiated a study last year on the feasibility of
commuter rail within the Beaverton to Wilsonville corridor. He reported that the conclusion of
the second study phase was that there were no fatal flaws associated with the proposal.
Mr..Hendryx introduced Bob Post with BRW (primary consultants) and Kathy Lehtola of
Washington County here to give the Council the update recommended by the Steering
Committee overseeing the study.
Bob Post, BRW, presented the update using overhead graphics. He explained that `commuter
rail' was putting passenger service on existing freight operations, a common practice on the East
Coast but only implemented within the last decade on the West Coast. He reviewed the two
options for a rail line from Wilsonville to Tualatin to Tigard to Washington Square to
Beaverton, ending either at the Beaverton Transit Center (15 miles long) or at the Merlo Light
Rail station (18 miles long). He mentioned the objective of connecting to the light rail line.
Mr. Post confirmed that the first phas e study found no legal or technical hurdles that would
derail the project. He explained that the ODOT owned the corridor for the southern two-thirds
of the line (from Wilsonville to Washington Square) while Portland Western Railroad owned the
tracks. He said that the Union Pacific owned the northern one-third of the line. He noted that
Portland Western Railroad was the short line operator for the entire length of the track.
Mr. Post reviewed the major conclusions of the study. He commented that this commuter rail
operation would be different from most other operations because the line did not go from an
outlying area into a central city area. Therefore, it required trains going in both directions both
morning and evening, instead of one direction in the morning and the other direction in the
evening.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 8
Mr. Post gave a preliminary ridership projection of 2,300 by the year 2015. He indicated that
they hoped those numbers would go up once they used the Metro modeling process to make
their projections. Ms. Lehtola pointed out that 2,300 riders per day worked out to 575,000 trips
a year taken off the roads.
Councilor Patton asked if the projects were based on a no cost commuter rail. Mr. Post said that
they assumed a fare system similar to Tri-ivies s in developing their projections. He mentioned
the importance of establishing an integrated fare system with Tri-Met and Wilsonville in order
to allow transfers between the systems.
Mr. Post reviewed the specific questions that this study looked at regarding capital
improvements and costs, operating plan and costs, impacts and benefits. He stated their
recommendation for the final question of whether or not to implement a demonstration project
was not to implement one. He indicated that they did not think that there was any way to
demonstrate the ridership without doing the stations and the track improvements.
Mr. Post stated that the anticipated frequency of service was 30 minutes at a maximum speed of
60 mph in most sections. He mentioned that the Steering Committee wanted the freight rail
operations left intact because that operation served many large employers in the region. He
noted that the average operating speeds of the MAX and Tri-Met bus systems were 22 mph and
14 mph respectively because of their more frequent stops. He pointed out that a 25 minute ride
from Wilsonville to Beaverton during peak hours was faster than most car traffic using Hwy
217.
Mr. Post mentioned the detailed assessment of the line for what needed to be done in order to
Adrak bring it up to the higher safety standards required for commuter rail. He noted crossing and
track improvements. He commented that the entire corridor was in pretty good shape requiring
general track improvements with some specific improvements at various locations.
Mr. Post said that the average cost on a per mile basis for this project was $2.8 million per mile.
He compared that to the ODOT estimate to add a lane to Hwy 217 at $20 million per mile and
the Max light rail system cost of $32 million per mile. He indicated that it cost less because
they were upgrading an existing resource and adding vehicles. He pointed out that most of the
cost was tied to the vehicles, track upgrades, and addition of siding lines needed to allow
vehicles to pass without losing time. He explained that the Beaverton Transit Center option was
less expensive ($64 to $71 million) because it required fewer vehicles than the Merlo option
($68 to $76 million).
Mr. Post said that the annual operating cost for the Merlo option was $4.4 million (because of
more vehicles and longer hours of operation) while the cost for the Beaverton Transit Center
Option was $3.9 million.
Councilor Hunt asked if the $4.4 million was the total cost or the net cost after deducting fare
revenues. Mr. Post said that it was the total cost.
Mr. Post pointed out that this corridor was unique in serving two regional centers (Washington
Square and Beaverton) and three town centers (Wilsonville, Tualatin and Tigard) identified in
the 2040 plan. He said that they located each commuter rail station fairly close to the central
area of each of the centers in order to facilitate opportunities to connect. He mentioned placing
the Tigard station directly behind the current bus station. He indicated that they would have to
go through a public process to narrow down the potential station sites for other areas, like
Washington Square which had five alternatives.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 9
Aollhk
Mr. Post reiterated that, as a transportation solution, this was a lesser cost option for the region.
He noted that existing uses underutilized the railroad tracks which had sufficient capacity for the
operation. He mentioned their belief that most of the trips would be new riders (as opposed to
bus riders transferring to rail) because there was no parallel transit service to this corridor
currently existing.
Mr. Post reviewed the impact of the service on auto traffic. He said that, during the peak three
and a half hours of morning service, the cycle time for the trains passing through any one of the
16 crossings was between 45 to 55 seconds, similar to light rail.
Mr. Post reviewed the next steps. He mentioned identifying funding options, doing an
alternatives analysis to compare this project against other potential projects in the corridor,
further research into costs, ope:-eions and impacts, a public process. and design.
Councilor Hunt asked about the discussion of management structure. Mr. Post said that they
recommended keeping the management structure simple because it wGs a small operation. He
mentioned the options of a new joint powers entity or an existing transportation entity
contracting out operation of the service and maintenance. He said that they found that almost
any model of management structure would work but they had been impressed with the lean
operation of the Vancouver BC commuter rail operation.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the potential prison sites in the Wilsonville area would impact the
ridership. Mr. Post reviewed the possible locations of the Wilsonville station in relation to the
potential prison sites.
Councilor Scheckla noted that 14 people have been killed since MAX went in. He asked what
safeguards the commuter rail line would install to minimize the dangers. Mr. Post said that they
would take all the reasonable precautions in the design that they could to provide for good sight
distance for the train operators. He pointed out that this was predominantly a single track
operation and one fatality on the MAX line occurred when the person became confused about
the trains operating in both directions. Ms. Lehtola pointed out that these vehicles were diesel,
not electric.
Councilor Scheckla asked about the hours of operation. Mr. Post said that the operating hours
would be 5:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. He agreed that they would operate
during darkness in the winter and fall.
Councilor Hunt asked if the line would be constructed so as to allow the possibility of
continuing on to Salem. Mr. Post said yes. He mentioned that the vehicles available for
commuter rail typically were used for longer runs than this corridor. He noted that ODOT
i owned the right-of-way all the way down to south of Donald with the tracks going on into
Salem. .
5. PUBLIC HEARING - SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE TRANSFER - SCHMIDT'S
s SANITARY SERVICES, INC.
a. Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 10
Omni
AML b. Summation by Administration Staff
Loreen Mills, Administrative Risk Analyst, presented the staff report. She said that the City
received a letter on June 7, 1999, from Schmidt's Sanitary Service advising the City that they
wished to transfer their solid waste franchise to Pride Disposal. She noted that Schmidt's has
served the City of Tigard well since the mid-1960s, currently serving approximately 28% of
Tigard's solid waste customers. She stated that the staff review found that Pride Disposal met
the conditions of the Code to be the new franchise owner.
Ms. Mills explained that the Code allowed the Council to attach conditions to any franchise
transfer in order to maintain customer service and a clean solid waste collection system. She
reviewed the four conditions recommended by staff, including a requirement that Schmidt's file
is 1999 annual report by March 2000. She discussed the last condition, recognition of the
change in location of operation from Schmidt's current location on Ross Street off Hall Blvd to
rttuo iucatioii in Sher'.Jood.
Nis. Mills noted that staff anticipated the franchise fees remaining the same. She commented
that staff did not anticipate any change in the level of service because Pride has also been in the
solid waste business in the Tigard area for years and knew the rules. She explained that the
transfer became effective once both owners filed their acceptance of the conditions of the
transfer with the City Recorder but she was not certain when that would be.
Councilor Scheckla commented that he saw no reason not to allow the transfer, noting that
Schmidt's had run a top notch operation.
d. ]Public Testimony
Larry Schmidt, Schmidt's Sanitary Services, stated that 37 years of hauling garbage was long
enough and he was ready to retire.
Councilor Hunt commented that Pride Disposal would have a challenge to maintain the same
level of quality service as Schmidt's provided.
Councilor Scheckla asked if Mr. Schmidt had any recommendations to improve service. Mr.
Schmidt commented that, with the growth in Tigard, they could no longer offer the personalized
service they used to, although there were efficiencies in the equipment used today.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the Schmidt's employees would continue at Pride. Mr. Schmidt
said that Pride would absorb his employees.
o Mike Leichner, Pride Disposal
Councilor Patton said that, based on previous experience with Pride, she was confident that
Pride would offer the same quality service as Schmidt's.
Councilor Scheckla asked if Pride would donate to Tigard programs as it did to Sherwood
programs. Mr. Leichner Said that they tried to be as active as possible in communities. He
described their focus on youth programs, including Special Olympics, high school scholarships,
and a program with the Sherwood Chamber of Commerce that he hoped to expand to the Tigard
Chamber.
Adk CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 11
A gentleman from the audience said that he had wondered why the transfer was occurring. He
commented that it was obviously a company sale situation.
d. Staff Recommendation
Ms. Mills recommended adoption of the ordinance transferring the ownership from Schmidt's to
Pride Disposal.
E Council Questions
Councilor Scheckla declared that he was indirectly related to the Schmidts but he would vote on
the issue anyway.
g. Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing
h. Council Consideration:
Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt Ordinance No. 99-
18.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 99-18, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11.04, SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT, OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO TRANSFER SCHMIDT'S
SANITARY SERVICE, INC., FRANCHISE TO PRIDE DISPOSAL COMPANY AND
DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
Motion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
6. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 99-0001 - WALNUT
STREET/TIEDEMAN AVENUE AREA ANNEXATION
a. Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing.
b. Declarations or Challenges
There were no declarations or challenges. All members indicated familiarity with the
application.
c. Staff Report
Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She noted that the Council
initiated this island annexation in May, directing staff to begin the notification process. She
commented that she has not heard any opposition to the annexation. She stated that the proposal
was consistent with the Development Code, Comprehensive Plan and Metro standards. She read
the additional "whereas" clause that the City Attorney recommended including in the ordinance
(stating the annexation's compliance with the applicable review criteria).
Aft,
d. Public Testimony
There was no public testimony.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 12
MIEN IN ME 110111
e. Council Questions
E Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing
g. Staff Recommendation
Ms. Hajduk recommended adoption of the ordinance with the amended language.
h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 99-19
Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Patton, to adopt Ordinance No. 99-19
with the additional material.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. 99-19, AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
TO APPROVE AN ANNEXATION, ZCA 99-0001, WALNUT/TIEDEMAN ANNEXATION
AND WITHDRAWING PROPERTIES FROM THE TIGARD WATER DISTRICT.
Motion was approved by unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.
7. PUBLIC HEARING - FORMATION OF SANITARY SEWER REIMBURSEMENT
DISTRICT NO. 14
a. Mayor Nicoli opened the public hearing.
b. Summation by City Engineering Staff
Greg Berry, Engineering Department, presented the staff report. He said that this, the fifth
reimbursement district in the City sewer extension program, would provide service to 18 lots.
He explained that the 19 lots shown on the map broke down into 11 lots annexed under the
previous agenda item and 8 lots previously annexed. He reviewed the locations of the two City-
owned lots, one of which had a water quality facility on it, would not need service, and therefore
was not included in the district.
Mr. Berry said that the purpose of the project was to recover the City's cost of installing the
sewers put in at the same time as the intersection realignment project. He mentioned August 1
as the beginning construction date. He said that the sanitary sewer portion of the contract
totaled $260,000. He stated that staff distributed the cost based on lot size, due to the variety of
lot sizes, yielding a cost of 64 cents per square foot.
Councilor Hunt asked if any exceeded the $8,000 cap. Mr. Berry said that in the packet staff
provided a list of those properties exceeding the $8,000 cap.
Councilor Patton asked for clarification on how the $8,000 cap worked. She noted that Mr.
Duenas' memo indicated that a property owner was responsible for the first $8,000 and for any
amount over the $15,000 cap on the City's contribution. She commented that she had not
understood from the discussion that that was how that worked.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 13
Mr. Duenas said that the resolution did include a $15,000 cap on the City's picking up of the
cost of installing the sewers. He pointed out that some of the lots in this district were
subdividable into as many as three parcels, each of which would have its own service.
Councilor Scheckla supported the staff application of the district. He asked if the owners of the
future subdivided lots would pay only the $8,000 when they hooked up to the sewer in the
future. Mr. Duenas said that the City offered the $8,000 cap only during the first year. After
that, the property owners had to pay the full amount in order to hook up.
Mayor Nicoli referenced the property purchased by the City that had a house on it. He asked if
the project would leave enough land out of the right-of-way to have a buildable lot. Mr. Duenas
said th.,. 1t1,,....t..t ,
a....Ourg . u'cre alig-lit ce sufficient land for a buhdabie lot, staff did not want a structure
at that location because it was a bad traffic location. He mentioned a possibility of a wooded
area with water and restrooms in the future but he emphasized that they did not want a full
fledged park there either.
e. Public Testimony
o Irene M. Hall, 10675 SW Fourier
Ms. Hall asked for clarification on the City lot that staff told them would not be built on. Mr.
Duenas reiterated that staff did not want that lot built on but they were providing service to it
just in case they needed water and sewer there in the future.
Ms. Hall asked which homes were above the $15,000 cap. Mr. Berry indicated on a map the
location of the three private properties over the $15,000 cap.
Ms. Hall indicated that she owned one of the large lots. She questioned why they should have to
pay more when they had no intention of subdividing their property. She mentioned a proposal
given at a previous meeting to base the distribution on the number of properties rather than on
the square footage. She argued that the cost should be charged to the people when the property
developed, not to the property owner up front.
Ms. Hall asked if any one at the City knew about the original grandfather clause. Mr. Bent' said
that he could discuss that with Ms. Hall.
Mr. Duenas mentioned that everyone had to pay the $2,335 connection charge.
Melvin Sunday, 10685 SW Fonner
Mr. Sunday asked for clarification on exactly where the City would bring a stub in relation to
his property. Mr. Berry explained that the City built the stubs 8 to 10 feet into a property from
the main section so that property owners did not have to work in the right-of-way when
completing the connection to their houses. Mr. Duenas suggested that Mr. Sunday talk with
either himself or Mr. Berry about the exact location for his lateral prior to the City installing it.
Mr. Monahan asked for clarification on when property owners could hook on the sewer. Mr.
Duenas said that property owners could not connect until the City finished the project which
would probably be sometime around September.
g. Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 14
i. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 99-53
Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Patton, to adopt Resolution No.99-
53.
Ms. Wheatley noted a correction in the fourth "whereas" clause. It should read "annexed by
Ordinance 99-19," not by Resolution 99-19.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-53, A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SANITARY SEWER
REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT NO. 14.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
8: ADOPTION OF A DIRECTOR'S INTERPRETATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE
DEVELOPMENT CODE
Mr. Hendryx explained that, since the Dolan decision, attorneys throughout the country have
generally agreed that the requirement of the rough proportionality test extended to all public
facilities improvement requirements. He said that, because of the confusion in how to apply the
Dolan decision, he and the City Attorney met to discuss Code provisions and the interpretations
needed to insure consistency with the Dolan decision. He noted the Planning Director's
Interpretations document drafted by the City Attorney and signed by himself. Mr. Hendryx
explained that staff wanted the Council to adopt this document because the courts gave
deference to a City Council's interpretations.
Mr. Coleman commented that this document would provide not only consistency with Dolan but
also internal consistency from application to application as staff turned over. He said that the
document memorialized what the Code provisions meant from the Council's perspective.
Motion by Councilor Patton, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt Resolution No. 99-54.
The City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-54, A RESOLUTION ADOPTING DIRECTOR'S
INTERPRETATION CONCERNING DEDICATION, PUBLIC FACILITIES, FINAL
DECISIONS, NON-CONFORMING SITUATIONS, AND BUILDING LOCATIONS IN THE
TIGARD TRIANGLE.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
9. CONSIDER REQUEST FOR PACIFIC RIDGE TO USE CITY PROPERTY FOR
PRIVATE WETLANDS MITIGATION
Mr. Hendryx stated that Pacific Ridge and Specht Company submitted a joint request to use City
park land to mitigate for the wetlands impact of the Autumn Crest subdivision in the Triangle.
He explained that the applicants proposed to do the mitigation on .74 acres located in the Fanno
Creek Park just behind City Hall. He used an aerial photograph to demonstrate the exact
location of the mitigation.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 15
Mr. Hendryx mentioned Council's adoption in June 1996 of a formal policy addressing the use
of City property for private wetland mitigations. He said that staff evaluated the proposal and
found it consistent with the policy (it would improve natural vegetation in the park and it would
be consistent with the Master Plan for the area).
Mr. Hendryx noted that the City did have authority under the policy to ask for compensation.
He recommended imposing a $14,740 compensation charge on the applicant. He explained that
this was based on the $20,000 per acre rate recently charged by the Tualatin-Tigard School
District for mitigation on their property. He mentioned that the Division of State Lands found it
a reasonable amount to charge.
Mr. Hendryx mentioned two additional conditions recommended by the City Attorney's office,
should the Council approve the request: an easement agreement with the applicant that
indemnified the City, and provision of liability insurance by the applicant.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Marvin Schott, Schott & Associates, 11977 S Tolliver Road, Molalla
Mr. Schott reviewed the history of the Specht and Pacific Ridge projects. He said that both the
projects had permits from the Army Corps of Engineers but did not need DSL permits. He
explained that the State did not have jurisdiction over the Pacific Ridge 200 foot drainage
channel because it was an ephemeral drainage channel. He described the route of the drainage
channel as running from the Landmark Ford's water quality detention basin to the apartment
complex on SW 70`h where it entered a culvert again. He indicated that they had to mitigate for
approximately 600 square feet.
Mr. Schott said that the Mr. Petrie's development was located in the old Scholls football area.
He explained that the original wetlands delineation done four years ago identified a 78,000
square foot wetland. During the first three phases of Mr. Petrie's project, they treated
stormwater by sheet flowing it across the pasture which had the unfortunate effect of expanding
the wetland to over three acres. He explained that, because the Corps of Engineers did not
verify wetland delineations until permit applications and Mr. Petrie did not apply for his permit
to fill in 17,000 square feet of wetlands until recently, the Corps found the larger wetland
created by sheet flowing the stormwater across the property when it looked at the property.
Mr. Schott said that they did get their permit to install a water quality facility to treat the
stormwater and the wetland eventually retreated to its original size. However, the Corps still
required Mr. Petrie to mitigate for the impacts to the larger wetland. He indicated that that was
why they needed to do offsite mitigation.
Mr. Schott reviewed their plan for enhancing the wetlands by eliminating the reed canary grass
and planting trees and shrubs that would eventually dominate the wetlands. He said that Pacific
Ridge would coordinate with the contractor and Specht would pay its fair share to Pacific Ridge.
He stated that they did have permits from the agencies. He mentioned their intention to use
wheelbarrows and handshovels in the work to avoid tearing up existing paths. He noted that the
permit required them to monitor the wetlands for five years.
Mr. Schott addressed the issue of the City fee. He referenced his letter in the packet. He stated
ANL that, based on his experience in wetland work in the Portland Metro area for 12 years, private
property mitigation permits cost $10,000 an acre.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 16
WIN 11111111 11111111111110
Craig Petrie, Pacific Ridge, 12508 SW Camas, Beaverton
Mr. Petrie asked for clarification on Item 2, obtaining a street opening permit issued by the
Engineering Department. He asked to add the phrase "if needed." He indicated that they did
not know why they would need one. Mr. Hendryx explained that the street opening permits
were a method for staff to track their work. He said that the condition requiring a wetland
easement agreement was an acceptable substitution for that requirement.
Mr. Petrie concurred with Mr. Schott that the fee proposed by the City was not the market
rate. He asked the Council to reduce the fee to $10,000 per acre. Mr. Hendryx noted that
prorated io $7,370 160r their.74 acre.
Mr. Schott confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that they were following the Fanno Creek
Master Plan to enhance the City park into a better ecological condition while satisfying their
mitigation requirements.
Councilor Scheckla asked if the City could hold out for someone else to use this land for
mitigation at the price recommended by staff. Mr. Hendryx said that he could not say one
way or the other. He commented that mitigation areas were becoming more difficult to find.
He noted that eventually the market would bear what it would bear, which might be up to
$20,000. He emphasized that it was the Council's decision as to what fee to charge.
Councilor Hunt mentioned the mitigation bank at Oaks Bottom. Mr. Schott explained that
both the mitigation bank by the Columbia Slough and the one at West Eugene charged
Aft $35,000 an acre. He said that the new bank at Oaks Bottom would charge $50,000. He
explained that the mitigation bank owners have already paid for the materials and labor and
done the :mitigation. Companies bought "mitigation credit" against their mitigation
requirements (per the three to one mitigation ratio). He pointed out that, with a $10,000 fee
to the City, their total cost to mitigate behind City Hall came out to about $50,000 (including
the five-year monitoring, planting costs, and maintenance contingency money).
Councilor Hunt mentioned his concern that they not set a precedent of lowering the price.
He noted the extensive mitigation needed at Cook Park. Mr. Hendryx explained that the
mitigation occurring at Cook Park resulted from the development of Cook Park. He
indicated that it was not a mitigation bank situation.
Councilor Scheckla asked if staff could do research to identify the market rate and return to
Council at a later date with that information. Mr. Hendryx indicated that staff could do more
research but he thought it unlikely that they would find anything different. He mentioned
that the DSL staff person said that he has seen fees up to $50,000. He reiterated that it was a
question of what the market would bear.
Councilor Scheckla spoke to having the same playing field for everyone, rather than
lowering the recommended price and then raising it later. Mr. Hendryx said that Council
would be setting a price for today only. He explained that the price set today would
influence who came to the City tomorrow. He spoke to staff evaluating each application on
a case by case basis because the market would change.
Councilor Hunt asked if Mr. Hendryx recommended staying with the $14,000 or did he
think a reduction in price was justified. Mr. Hendryx reiterated that it was a Council
decision. He commented that the benefit to the City from allowing private mitigation of its
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE, 17
wetlands has evolved beyond the simple benefit of improving the wetlands. Now they have
discovered that the land was valuable and the City benefited additionally by charging a fee.
He said that he stood behind the recommended numbers as reasonable but it was a Council
decision.
Councilor Scheckla asked if having a mitigation site so close to the developers' project
locations was a benefit to the developers.' Mr. Hendryx commented that the developers did
have to stay in the same watershed.
Councilor Patton stated that she was not concerned about a precedent because review was
necessary on a case-by-case situation. She said that she saw a distinction between a
mitigation bank and the City requiring the developer to pay for the labor, plantings and
monitoring. She commented that she assumed that the agreement included a mediation
provision in the event that the monitoring activity disclosed that the wetland enhancement
did not perform as intended. She recommended charging a $10,000 fee for the project.
Mayor Nicoli commented that, although he understood the economics of land cost, he still
looked at this as someone offering to improve the City's property for free. He said that he
was struggling with charging them anything. He pointed out that the higher fee the City
charged, the longer it would take to attract developers to enhance the numerous wetlands in
the City that needed enhancing. He noted that this was the first time that the City has
charged a fee. He said that he could see both sides of this issue.
Councilor Hunt spoke against giving the land to the developers for free because doing so
would turn mitigation property into a political football.
Councilor Scheckla supported Councilor Patton's compromise proposal of $10,000.
Mayor Nicoli spoke to putting the fees charged into a dedicated fund to purchase wetlands or
open space. Mr. Hendryx said that he had assumed that the money would go into the
dedicated park fund.
Councilor Scheckla asked Mr. Coleman if he saw any problems with this issue. Mr.
Coleman said that he has not heard any disagreement on the conditions or additional
recommended conditions; the only issue was compensation.
Mr. Petrie commented that he did not think that the City should give away the land for free.
He said that he hoped for a reasonable number.
The Council discussed what a reasonable fee would be. Mayor Nicoli supported Councilor .
Patton's suggestion of a$10,000 fee. Councilor Patton clarified that she meant $10,000 for
the project, not per acre. She said that she also wanted the money to go into the parks fund.
Mr. Hendryx confirmed that they had a parks capital fund.
Motion by Councilor Patton, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to approve the staff
recommendation to allow Pacific Ridge and Specht Company to use City property for
private wetlands mitigation with the following modifications: to include the
modification that Community Development Director Jim Hendryx indicated about the
Sensitive Lands permit and the easement, and that the applicant pay the City the
amount of $10,000 and that those funds be placed into the park fund.
aft CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 18
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
10. 79TH AVENUE PROJECT STATUS REPORT
The Council discussed this item under Agenda Item 2, Visitor's Agenda.
11. COUNCIL GOAL UPDATE
Mr. Monahan noted the quarterly report to the Council on the status of Council goals.
12. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
13. NON AGENDA ITEMS
13.1 CITY ENGINEER ATTENDANCE AT INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEERS ANNUAL MEETING
Motion by Mayor Nicoli, seconded by Councilor Patton, to approve the request for the
City Engineer to attend the training for the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli,
Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.")
14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Cancelled
15. ADJOURNMENT: 9:50 p.m.
Attest *Cathe Wheatley, City Recorder
yor, City of T, i/g d
Date: it O I 1 C/W
I: ADM\CATFMCC 713.DOC
I
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 13, 1999 - PAGE 19