Loading...
City Council Packet - 04/25/2000 C-r- f F TIGARD OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL FETING APRIL 25, 2000 COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOT BE TELEVISED iAadmyo1ccpkt3.doc 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Revised 4/19/00 Y TLG2ArD~ } COd. CIt. 3` APR$i: 2 ti fV® p`` ,fi,30``PM~ 1 CITY OF TIGARD 7'iG,ti9 Cil( I-fACI: '13] 25 S1N HALL~fOL'~'D,:. j, ~ , TIGARD, C'REC;tI~I 57223 F PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings 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: Y Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and ® Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date at the same phone numbers as listed above: 639- 4171, x309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA a APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 1 Mill AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING APRIL 25, 2000 6:30 PM i STUDY SESSION > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) 8T (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt public records, and current and pending litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. > Briefing on the Status of the Building, Electrical Inspection, and Urban Services Funds > Discussion on the Scope of Work - Water Supply System for South Fork and the City of Tigard 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council 8t Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:40 PM 3. PROCLAMATIONS: a. Proclaim the Week of May 7 - 13, 2000, as Be Kind to Animals Week 7:45 PM 4. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 4.1 Approve a Resolution Authorizing Interim Financing for the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District - Resolution No. 00 - / COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 25, 2000 a PAGE 2 M~' 1111111 4.2 Approve a Resolution Declaring the Need to Acquire Property for the Purpose of Constructing the Gaarde Street Improvement Project (Phase 1)- Resolution No. 00 - 4.3 Local Contract Review Board a. Award of Fire Hydrant Replacement Contract to All-Ways Excavating b. Award Contract for Embedded Crosswalk Lighting System on 121" Avenue at Katherine and Lynn Streets to EC (Electric Construction) Company, inc. C. Award Contract for the Construction if 118' Court Storm Drainage to Kasey Cooper Excavation, Inc. • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 7:50 PM 5. PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) - ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES (ZOA) 1999-0003 The applicant is proposing a Zone Ordinance Amendment to change the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow daycare uses outright or conditionally in all industrial-zoned properties. LOCATION: All Industrial Zones, Citywide. ZONES: Light Industrial, I-L; Industrial Park, I-P; and Heavy Industrial, 1-H. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 5 and 12.3; The Metro 2040 Plan; and Statewide Planning Goals 2 and 9. a. Continue Public Hearing from April 11, 2000 b. Declarations or Challenges C. Staff Report: Community Development PepQ.rtment d. Public Testimony: Proponents/Opponents e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Questions g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Resolution No. 00- 8:20 PM 6. CONSIDER ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR LOCAL TELEPHONE SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY NEXTLINK, OREGON, INC. a. Staff Report: Finance Department b. Council Comments/Questions C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 00- 20 COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 3 8:30 PM 7. PRESENTATION ON THE ANNEXATION OF BULL MOUNTAIN AND OTHER NON-ISLAND AREAS a. Staff Report: Community Development Department b. Council Comments/Questions 8:45 PM 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ON COMMUNITY/CULTURAL EVENT SPONSORSHIP FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 a. Staff Report: Administration and Finance Departments b. Council Comments/Questions C. Council Decision: Council motion identifying which events shall be sponsored City of Tigard events and how much the C of Tigard will contribute for Fiscal Year 2000/01 9:00 PM 9. PRESENTATION ON THE STATUS OF COOK PARK EXPANSION PROJECT a. Staff Report: Public Works Department b. Council Comments/Questions 9:30 PM 10. CONSIDERATION OF PARKS GRANTS a. Staff Report: Public Works and Community Development Departments b. Council Comments/Questions C. Council Decision: Council motion identifying which projects would be acceptable for staff to submit grant applications. RCS X01 9:40 PM 11. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:45 PM 12. NON AGENDA ITEMS 9:50 PM 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) K (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, exempt public records, and current and pending litigation issues. As you are aware, all discussions within this session are confidential; therefore nothing from this meeting may be disclosed by those present. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend this session, but must not disclose any information discussed during this session. 10:00 PM 14. ADJOURNMENT 1: ADM\CATHY\CCA\000425.DOC COUNCIL AGENDA APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 4 Excerpt - April 25, 2000; Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes Agenda Item 6 Noting Correction that Ordinance No. should be shown as No. 00-20. (mil Hugh text to be deleted; underlined text to be added.) 6. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR LOCAL TELEPHONE SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY NEXTLINK, OREGON, INC. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to approve Ordinance 00- 4-7 20. The City Recorder read the number and title of the ordinance. ORDaTANCE 00-004-7 20, AN ORDINANCE GRANTING NEXTLINK OREGON, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, A FRANCHISE TO CONDUCT A TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO PLACE POLES, WIRES AND OTHER APPLIANCES FOR TELECOMMUNICATION PURPOSES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THIS AGREEMENT AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Motion was passed by unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") [5-0] Attest: enne Wheatley, city ecor r AAA A .0 ayor, ity, f i r Date: ~/-e./?,/ 3 [V/ I:\ADM\CATHY\000NCIL\TEXT OF 4-2 -00 CORRECTION TO MINUTES.DOC Agenda Item No. Meeting of CD , l 3 • Da TIGARD CITY COUNCIL eo rrec~c~cl ?1131ol MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 cQe i2cle 13 • STUDY SESSION > Meeting was called to order at 6:30p.m. by Mayor Jim Nicoli > Council Present: Mayor Jim Nicoli, Councilors Paul Hunt, Brian Moore, Joyce Patton, and Ken Scheckla. > Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; City Engineer Gus Duenas; Finance Director Craig Prosser; City Attorney Tim Ramis; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley; Community Development Director Jim Hendryx; Public Works Director Ed Wegner; Associate Planner Julia Hadjuk; Building Official Gary Lampella; Associate Planner Duane Roberts > Briefing on the Status of the Building, Electrical Inspection, and Urban Services Funds Craig Prosser, Finance Director, advised the Council that the recent downturn in building activity has negatively affected the Building, Electrical Inspection and Urban Service Funds. He explained that their projections showed the Building Fund ending $150,000 in the red this fiscal year, the Electrical Inspection Fund ending $57,000 in the black this fiscal year but $10,000 in the red by the end of next fiscal year, and the Urban Services Fund ending in the red by $80,000 at the end of this fiscal year. Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director, explained to Councilor Scheckla that the Homebuilders Association's appeal of the City's proposed fee increases did delay the implementation of the only fee increases proposed for these funds since their inception in the 1970s to September 1999. Mr. Prosser reviewed the administrative steps staff was taking to reduce expenditures, including not filling the three vacant positions proposed for elimination in next year's budget and updating the allocation bases for policy and administration costs. He mentioned the fee increase proposal slated for Council review in May, which was included in the projections. Mr. Prosser reviewed the options available to fix the problem. He recommended that the Council authorize a direct transfer of funds from the General Fund to the Building Fund to offset the projected $150,000 negative balance, instead of the General Fund loaning the money to the Building Fund. He indicated that he did not think that the Building Fund would be strong enough to repay the loan within one year, as required by state law. He recommended building a cash transfer of $10,000 from the General Fund to the Electrical Inspection Fund into the budget for the next fiscal year. Mr. Prosser recommended that the City ask the County for $100,000 to offset the negative balance in the Urban Services Fund this fiscal year, and for another $125,000 for the next fiscal year. Councilor Hunt asked if the City/County agreement included the County agreeing to take care of the difference between the amount they projected that the City would receive and what it actually received. Mr. Hendryx said that the agreement allowed for re-evaluation of the situation every year and the opportunity to get out of the agreement between March and July. Mr. Monahan stated that he has set up a meeting between City and County staff to negotiate this matter. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 1 Mr. Prosser noted that the negotiations could continue beyond June 30. He recommended, in that case and if the County indicated a willingness to provide the money, that the Council authorize a loan of $100,000 from the General Fund to the Urban Services Fund. He suggested looking at opting out of the agreement if the County dragged its feet. Councilor Moore observed that the City's leverage was that the County did not want the City to opt out of the urban services contract. Councilor Moore asked if staff foresaw this downturn as a long-term or short-term situation. Gary L.ampella, Building Official, indicated that the hoimebuilders themselves did not see a prolonged downturn similar to what occurred in the 1970s/early 1980s. Mr. Hendryx noted the intense subdivision activity going on at this time as developers set themselves up for the future. He mentioned that the City faced a new situation: land prices were increasing so fast that a developer holding on to his land for two years and then selling it could make more profit than if he developed the land. Mr. Hendryx confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that the only revenue the City obtained from the Bull Mountain area was through the permitting process. Councilor Scheckla spoke to the County setting aside the SDCs from that area for the City's use when the area annexed to the city. Mr. Hendryx discussed the option of differential fees between the county urban services area and the city. By majority consensus, the Council directed Mr. Prosser to proceed with his recommendations. Mr. Prosser advised the Council that the 69`h Avenue LID fund was likely to overspend its budget authority, probably because the budget had not matched the projected expenditures. He suggested handling the matter through a supplemental budget amendment. Councilor Moore asked what caused the overrun. Bill Monahan, City Manager, mentioned the unexpected land acquisition costs occurring during the condemnation process with Mr. Pierce. Gus Duenas, City Engineer, noted that the original $900,000 budget was short of the projected $1.2 million in costs (without the land acquisition costs). Mr. Prosser explained that the only way to correct the situation was through the supplemental budget process. > South Fork Scope of Work Ed Wegner, Public Works Director, referenced his memo discussing the two phase project proposed by Murray Smith & Associates to pursue the option of working out an agreement between South Fork Water Board, City of Tigard, City of Lake Oswego and West Clackamas Water Commission with respect to joint usage of the Clackamas River water. He said that Tigard's share of the first phase (developing a memo of understanding to set basic elements of the eventual IGA prior to any engineering work) was $10,250. He confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that they split the total $41,000 cost equally between the four agencies. He mentioned that staff would return for another $26,750 for Tigard's share of Phase 2 of the project, the engineering study. Mr. Wegner reviewed the process Murray Smith & Associates would use to identify the issues and work out a solution. He mentioned the $31,000 Tigard paid towards the feasibility study conducted by the Joint Water Commission as a comparative. Councilor Hunt asked how the Sizemore initiative could affect the water situation. Staff explained that raising the water rate would require a vote in a November election during an CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 2 son MEENNEWWWW ME== 1111110M even-numbered year by the same majority as passed the initiative. Mr. Wegner indicated to Councilor Scheckla that staff could not set a timetable for when the City might get water because the other agencies drove what happened, not Tigard. Mr. Wegner encouraged the Councilors to attend the Intergovernmental Water Board meeting on May 10, with its scheduled presentation/discussion of the Joint Water Commission proposal. He mentioned that staff invited the City Councils of Durham and Tualatin, as well as the Tigard Water District Board, to attend. He commented that the Councilors were noticed if they were absent. > Growth Management Caucus Mr. Monahan recalled the question of whether the City should continue its membership in this group at a rate of $4500 per year. He reviewed the basis of the fee allocations (base fee of $900 for less than 500 residents), as requested by Councilor Scheckla. He pointed out that none of the members have said that they were not renewing. He mentioned the benefits of speaking with a common voice, mutual review of problem areas, previews of what other communities were doing, and showing solidarity. He confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that they could re join later if they wanted to. Councilor Moore commented that, as the Council representative, he saw no reason to continuing with the group because neither the Council nor the staff received benefit from the group. The Council agreed by consensus to discontinue the City's membership in the Growth Management Caucus. > Administrative Items Mr. Duenas referenced his memo discussing the Erickson Heights subdivision developer's request to open Lady Marion to prospective homebuyers traffic while continuing to route construction traffic via Royalty Parkway. He indicated that the developer's desire was to separate the two types of traffic. He mentioned that staff received calls from the neighbors with respect to this request. He stated that the conditions of approval dealt with what would happen after the streets were ready to be opened; they did not address what happened during construction. Mr. Duenas said that he thought that the developer's proposal to retain the barricades on Kable, Hoodview and Naeve while opening up Lady Marion to prospective homebuyers made sense. Councilor Moore asked why they did not keep Lady Marion closed and force everyone to use SW 109`''. Mr. Duenas conceded that that was an option but pointed out that it mixed the passenger cars in with the construction traffic. Councilor Patton commented that most developments mixed the traffic. Councilor Hunt asked what the objection was to the developer's request. Mr. Duenas said that the Lady Marion residents, used to living on a dead end, did not want the traffic. He held that staff, working with the developer, could adequately monitor the situation to prevent construction traffic from using Lady Marion, and make adjustments as necessary. He confirmed to Councilor Hunt that they needed to keep the other streets barricaded to discourage construction traffic from using them. He indicated that staff expected completion of the streets in a year, following the second lift. The Council discussed the proposal, noting concerns over adequate monitoring, and treating the streets unequally. Councilor Moore indicated his leaning towards funneling the traffic through CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 3 Royalty Parkway and SW 109`h, leaving all four of the streets barricaded until all four could be opened at the same time. Mayor Nicoll commented that the Lady Marion neighbors had objected to a permanent situation, not a temporary one. He said that he could support the developer's request. Councilor Hunt suggested that the Council review the issue again in six months, sooner if the City received complaints. Councilor Moore mentioned an option of moving the Lady Marion barricades only after the three model homes were built and then only sufficient to allow circulation around a limited area. The Council agreed by consensus to direct staff to incorporate the Councilors' suggestions into the proposal. > Mayor Nicoli adjourned the study session at 7:30 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board Mayor Jim Nicoll called the meeting to order at 7:38 p.m. 1.2 Roll Call Councilors Ken Scheckla, Paul Hunt, Brian Moore, Mayor Nicoli and Joyce Patton were present. 1.4 Council Communications: None 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items Councilor Scheckla asked for an update of the building sitting off Hall Blvd. 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA o Randy Norgart, 10466 Lady Marion Drive Mr. Norgart mentioned being awakened at 5:30 a.m. this morning by construction traffic on Lady Marion. He read a letter he distributed to the Council, recalling the City's process regarding the Erickson Heights subdivision and the agreements reached with the neighbors to treat the streets equally. He argued that the developer's proposal to open Lady Marion in advance of the other streets violated the conditions of approval. Mr. Norgart said that the developer has done no work to build the sidewalk and install streetlights on Kable Street (Condition 10). He asked the Council to keep all the streets closed until all of them could be opened at once. He noted the subdivision access off Royalty Parkway. o Pam Lyle, 10341 Lady Marion Drive Ms. Lyle indicated that she spoke for the other residents on Lady Marion. She confirmed the construction traffic on Lady Marion at 5:00 a.m. this morning. She reported that, since finishing the paving on Lady Marion, the construction traffic has used Lady Marion whenever it wanted to, moving the barricades as it pleased. She questioned why Lady Marion should have to take the marketing traffic when Mr. Sebastian built none of the CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 4 homes on their street. She stated that the traffic on Lady Marion has increased tenfold since the easily avoided temporary barricades were put up. o Jeannie Nyquist, 10042 SW Lady Marion Ms. Nyquist concurred with Mr. Norgart and Ms. Lyle's comments. She emphasized the neighborhood's expectation that the streets would open at the same time in order to distribute the traffic burden equally. She asked the Council to honor the spirit of the agreement reached a year ago. Mayor Nicoli reviewed the Council's discussion of this issue during the study session. He indicated that most felt the developer's request was reasonable, to separate the potential homebuyer traffic from the construction traffic. He said that staff told the Council that they would monitor the situation daily to keep the construction traffic to the one access point. He commented that the report of the construction traffic at 5:30 a.m. indicated that Mr. Sebastian had more work to do with his construction people with respect to accessing the site. He indicated that Council would review the request in six months, earlier if the system did not work properly. Mr. Duenas stated that keeping the construction traffic to the one entrance at Royalty Parkway was an enforcement issue that their onsite inspectors would make sure did not happen again. He noted the Council direction to keep Lady Marion barricaded until after the model homes were finished. He commented that staff had the authority to make any changes or to terminate the approval if the developer violated the agreed upon conditions. Mayor Nicoli mentioned moving the barricades on Lady Marion to the other side of the model homes as opposed to removing them completely. Mr. Duenas agreed with Councilor Hunt that the developer needed to beef up the barricades so that they could not be easily moved. Councilor Hunt stated that the Mayor's summary was accurate with respect to the Council discussion but the testimony has changed his mind because the neighbors were correct in the description of what was agreed upon. Councilor Moore indicated his support of leaving all the barricades up until the second lift was done and then opening up all the streets at the same time to distribute the traffic as equally as possible. Councilor Patton commented that, although the developer's proposal would be nice in a perfect world, the reality of construction traffic at 5:00 a.m. argued that the construction traffic would go where it wanted if no one was watching. She spoke in support of treating all the streets equally. Councilor Scheckla concurred with Councilor Patton that the construction traffic would go where it wanted to without onsite supervision. He disagreed that staff would be able to police it. The Council agreed by consensus to direct staff to inform the developer that it wanted all four barricades to stay in place until all four could be removed after the second lift, and improvement of the barricades to prevent their easy removal. Mr. Duenas confirmed that the developer intended to start sidewalk construction on Kable Street as soon as early May. He mentioned receipt of bids for streetlights also. CITY COUNCIL, MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 5 o Pat Whiting, 8122 SW Spruce Ms. Whiting apologized to the City and the Council for her misidentification of the ending time of the Council's January 25 meeting in her April 14 letter. She concurred with the staff correction that the Council meeting ended around 9:30 p.m. She indicated that the testimony that ended around midnight occurred at the November 15, 1999, Planning Commission hearing on the Washington Square Regional Center. Ms. Whiting referred to past issues about staff and consultant conduct while members of the public presented testimony on matters that they considered serious and life impacting. She said that a consultant referring to the public as "skeptics, deniers and realists" and the staff expressions of amusement during public testimony was unprofessional behavior and not in the spirit of developing a sense of community. She pointed out that many citizens were not used to public speaking or dealing with governmental matters. o Mark Mahon Mr. Mahon complimented the Council and staff for the spirit of cooperation evidenced in the joint meeting with the School Board at the last study session. He mentioned more efficient use of taxpayer dollars and lack of duplication of services and activities between the two major governmental bodies in the city. 3. PROCLAMATIONS a. Proclaim the Week of May 7 - 13, 2000, as Be Kind to Animals Week Mayor Nicoli said that he would sign the proclamation later in the evening. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Councilor Scheckla asked for information on Item 4.3.a. Mr. Wegner explained that they used an open door dollar amount for the project (a not to exceed amount) because they bid it on a time and material basis due to the unknowns surrounding replacement of some of the fire hydrants. He indicated that staff compared the prices for the individual hydrants provided by the other bidders to conclude that the City was getting a good deal from this contractor. Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion was approved by unanimous voice vote of Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") 4.1 Approve a Resolution Authorizing Interim Financing for the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District - Resolution No. 00-17 4.2 Approve a Resolution Declaring the Need to Acquire Property for the Purpose of Constructing the Gaarde Street Improvement Project (Phase 1) - Resolution NO. 00 - 18 4.3 Local Contract Review Board a. Award of Fire Hydrant Replacement Contract to All-Ways Excavating b. Award Contract for Embedded Crosswalk Lighting System on 121" Avenue at Katherine and Lynn Streets to EC (Electric Construction) Company, Inc. C. Award Contract for the Construction of 118`h Court Storm Drainage to Kasey Cooper Excavation, Inc. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APD TL 25, 2000 - PAGE 6 5. PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) - ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES (ZOA) 1999-0003 The applicant is proposing a Zone Ordinance Amendment to change the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow daycare uses outright or conditionally in all industrial- zoned properties. LOCATION: All Industrial Zones, Citywide. ZONES: Light Industrial, I-L; Industrial Park, I-P; and Heavy Industrial, I-H. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 5 and 12.3; The Metro 2040 Plan; and Statewide Planning Goals 2 and 9. a. Mayor Nicoli reconvened the public hearing. b. Declarations or Challenges: None c. Staff/Applicant Report Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner, recalled that the Council continued the hearing in order to allow themselves time to review the applicant's packet, which staff had inadvertently left out of the Council's packet. She reiterated the staff and Planning Commission's recommendations to deny the request, based on the limited amount of industrial land remaining in the city. She noted that the Code allowed daycare uses in all zones (with restrictions) except light industrial and heavy industrial. She referenced the map in the packet identifying the amount of buildable industrial land. Ms. Hajduk clarified to Mayor Nicoli that the Code allowed daycares in up to 20% of a development area in an industrial park zone. Councilor Scheckla asked why Tigard did not allow daycare uses in industrial zones when other cities did. Ms. Hajduk explained that the Tigard Code did not allow those uses while other cities' codes did. d. Public Testimony • John Brosy, land use planning consultant representing an industrial property owner in the City of Tigard Mr. Brosy discussed the applicant's compromise proposal to amend the Code to allow commercial daycare uses as conditional uses in the light industrial and heavy industrial zones. He referenced their suggested Code amendment language on page 2 of his letter. Mr. Brosy pointed out that almost all the surrounding jurisdictions allowed daycare uses as either outright or conditional uses in their industrial zones, recognizing the complementary function daycare provided to the industrial workers. He referenced Statewide Goals 9 and 12, protecting industrial uses while allowing complementary uses in order to enhance the community. He argued that Tigard had not tried to intentionally exclude daycare uses from its industrial zones; rather, it was an oversight compounded by a concentration of industrial zones in the southeast part of the city without commercial zones nearby where such uses could be located to serve the workers' needs. Mr. Brosy argued that the staff's concerns with respect to the industrial land supply were not warranted, as daycare uses occupied less than one acre of land and tended to locate in a pattern similar to schools spread throughout the community. He mentioned their CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 7 expectation that only two daycares would locate in the industrial zones, should the Council make this Code change. He held that the lack of daycares in industrial zones placed the City of Tigard at a competitive disadvantage to other cities with a more realistic modern approach in locating daycares next to industrial uses. Mr. Brosy discussed the market for daycares in industria: zones. He held that a reason that the market has located only one daycare use in an industrial park zone in Tigard was because industrial park daycares were hidden within in industrial area and unable to market themselves adequately. Mr. Brosy emphasized that the proposed Code language allowed the City to retain control over daycare uses through the conditional use process. He said that they were willing to work with staff, using their proposed language as a starting point. Councilor Scheckla noted that large businesses in industrial areas in other cities provided in-house daycare facilities for their workers. Mr. Brosy indicated that, ender the Tigard Code, that would not be allowed unless the business were located in an industrial park zone. He cited the example of Fred Meyer purchasing land across the street from their southeast Portland office and contracting with a commercial daycare center to provide that service to their employees and others in the area. He reiterated that, under the Tigard Code, even if the daycare were located on the same property as the business, a similar situation could not happen in Tigard. He spoke of the demand in the Tigard area for daycare located close to places of employment. Councilor Scheckla asked for information on daycare operations. Mr. Brosy said that they were generally open five days a week from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. ■ Elaine Greer, Tigard worker, Wilsonville resident Ms. Greer recounted her difficulties as a single working mother in finding appropriate daycare in the Tigard area when her company relocated her from Kirkland, Washington, to Tigard. She said that she had been used to daycare conveniently located in the industrial areas. She commented that she moved from Tigard to Wilsonville because Wilsonville was the where she found a daycare provider. She described the additional stresses placed on workers and families by daycares located far away from their places of employment. She indicated that she represented the numerous families who wanted another daycare located close to their work place. She concurred that designating land for a daycare would complement, not detract, from the businesses in the area. Ms. Greer indicated to Councilor Scheckla that she has always wanted to live and work in Tigard and have her daycare here but circumstances forced her to move to Wilsonville when she could not find daycare in the Tigard area. e Nancy Chin, co-owner of Durham and Wilsonville Learning Trees Ms. Chin stated that she turned down on average three to four families every week looking for daycare. She mentioned noticing a month ago that these families were all from the Tigard area. She indicated that 80% of the people inquiring into the Durham Learning Tree approached her because the facility was close to where they worked. She spoke to the importance to parents of being close to their children. CITY COI NCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 2S, 2000 - PAGE 8 Ms. Chin explained that an industrial park situation did not contribute to the safe, secure and nurturing environment desired by the parents for their children. She mentioned the high prices they would have to charge at such a location. She asked the Council to consider finding a solution to the problem of the lack of daycare available in the Tigard area close's the workplaces. Councilor Scheckla asked for operational information about daycares. Ms. Chin explained that the state regulated the number of children allowed in a daycare per the square footage of the facility. She said that the Durham Learning Tree was licensed for 98 children from a year and walking to 10 years old. She confirmed that the state also regulated the amount of inside and outside play area. ■ Jim Blackwell, co-owner of Durham and Wilsonville Learning Trees Mr. Blackwell stated that the state required 35 square feet inside for each child and used a ratio of the total attendance to determine the size of the outdoor play area. He confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that they took appropriate precautions to protect the children and to provide a safe, secure outdoor play area. Mr. Blackwell presented a map identifying the locations of the existing commercial daycare centers in the Tigard area in relation to the industrial zones. He stated that the seven schools offered potentially 500 spots but, as of today, only had four openings and long waiting lists. He argued that this area had a significant need and no way to meet that need. He pointed out that some daycares charged very high rates because of the high demand and limited supply. Mr. Blackwell described the industrial park environment as cement walls, cinderblocks and long buildings, an unattractive environment to mothers looking for daycare. He explained that daycare needing a softer environment was a reason why daycares have not located in industrial park zones. He presented several pictures illustrating the look of the Learning Tree centers, something that parents wanted. Mr. Blackwell stated that for three years he has searched for a suitable daycare site in the industrial zoned areas, and finally found a reasonably priced piece of land in a good location with an owner willing to work with a commercial daycare to provide for the needs of the workers. He reiterated that the Durham Learning Tree has had a waiting list for four years. He explained to Councilor Moore that the red dots on the map were the businesses that he has personally contacted, which endorsed a nearby daycare. Mr. Blackwell reiterated to Councilor Scheckla that only this one site in the industrial area met the criteria of size, location, accessibility and price. He commented that it made no sense to operate a daycare center offering an unreasonable tuition price. He noted that this site was near a community church. Mr. Blackwell explained to Councilor Scheckla that they built the Durham Learning Tree in an industrial area because Durham allowed daycare uses as a conditional use in their industrial areas. He confirmed that they would build the same type of building in Tigard if allowed to do so. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 9 0111,11011111111 ■ Milt Brown, industrial !and developer and owner Mr. Brown discussed the changes over the last 30 years that have resulted in the need for daycare conveniently located to places of employment. He pointed out that people no longer had relatives close by to baby-sit; working parents needed commercial daycare. He mentioned that industrial land users now asked about the availabiiity of daycare in the area. He said that they welcomed Mr. Blackwell with open arms when he proposed a daycare in their area but were shocked to discover that the City of Tigard did not allow it. He emphasized that daycare in the industrial zones would help develop the land for industrial uses. He urged the Council to amend the Code to permit something that would benefit all interest groups. ■ Greg Leo, 11938 SW 25'h, Portland, representing Learning Tree and Tri-County Industrial Parks Mr. Leo spoke to the City taking advantage of this opportunity to develop a finely crafted policy to allow daycare as a conditional use in industrial zones. He reiterated that doing so would improve Tigard's competitive position by providing for a real need in an increasingly diverse labor market composed of both parents. He spoke to good daycare close by the workplace as reducing the stress on working parents. He referenced the City's concern about the erosion of its industrial base but noted that daycares took up only a small portion of that base. Mr. Leo urged the Council to look at the conditional use option, noting that the Planning Commission did not consider this option because the terms of a conditional use were not specifically delineated until tonight. He mentioned using the process to determine a needs test for the number of daycares allowed and their locations. He referenced Mr. Brosy's document as identifying the issues to be addressed by a conditional use process. ■ Mark Mahon Mr. Mahon spoke in opposition to the zoning ordinance amendment. He cited the shortage of industrial land in Tigard at this time. He :mentioned that one of Tigard's larger private employers was considering moving out of Tigard because they did not have enough room to expand their overcrowded facility, resulting in the loss of many jobs. He asked why more daycares have not been built if there was a shortage of daycares in Tigard. He referenced his wife's daycare business in stating that there was a shortage in daycare for the six-week to 18-month old age range but there were openings for the older kids. Mr. Mahon stated that he did not find it appropriate to take what little industrial land Tigard had for daycare uses. He argued that Tigard's industrial zones were not large islands where workers had to travel long distances to find the zones where daycares were pennitted. He held that daycare was available, although not necessarily easily available. He indicated that he had not had to travel long distances to get to a daycare before his wife went into the daycare business herself. Mr. Mahon explained to Councilor Scheckla that his wife's in-home daycare facility was allowed eight children, and had openings in the older range. Councilor Scheckla commented that when a daycare was filled up to its licensed limit, then it could not take CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 10 MEM any more children. Mr. Mahon reiterated his question as to why there were not more facilities built where they were permitted if there was such a high demand for them. Councilor Scheckla mentioned the difference in the cost of land. Mr. Mahon asked if they set zonlag ieguiaiions by the cost of land. e. Staff Recommendation Ms. Hajduk recommended denial of the requested zoning ordinance amendment. She said that, even with the conditional use, staff felt that conditional use was simply another process. If the applicant met the conditions, then they received approval. She mentioned staff's preference that the Council allow daycare as an outright use if it intended to approve daycare as a conditional use because that process did not afford any additional review beyond that required by a site development review. f. Council Questions Councilor Hunt observed that staff's main objection appeared to be the reduction in the amount of industrial land. He asked if Tigard had land available elsewhere in the city to rezone to industrial. Ms. Hajduk said that creating more industrial land might be possible but they would have to look at the balance of jobs, residential housing units and employment that the City was required to provide. g. Mayor Nicoli closed the public hearing h. Council Consideration Councilor Hunt spoke in favor of allowing daycare uses in industrial uses. He commented that daycares did not necessarily need the aesthetics of a Learning Tree facility to operate successfully, citing a daycare by Albertson's located in a brick building. He cited the large number of one-parent families who needed daycare. He concurred that a daycare located near to their place of employment was a big advantage to parents, especially those who had to use public transportation. He stated that he was more interested in the good of the parents than he was in businesses getting the industrial land. Councilor Scheckla observed that the site identified for a daycare has sat vacant for sometime without development and could continue to sit vacant if not used to meet this need. He referenced the state mandate to reduce vehicle miles traveled as a reason to locate daycare close to the areas of employment. Councilor Patton said that, while she understood staff's concern about the limited amount of industrial land available in Tigard, she supported allowing daycare uses in industrial zones. She discussed the impossible situation of childcare for many working parents. She held that they could not build daycare facilities fast enough to accommodate the need, even if only located in commercial areas. She referenced the daycare facility located in the federal building in which she worked as convenient and reducing the amount of time the parents spent away from their work site on childcare situations. Councilor Patton said that the daycare market would self-regulate the number of daycares in the industrial areas in consideration of cost-effectiveness and viability. She disagreed that they would be using up that much of their limited industrial lands. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 11 111111 111 mill 1 111a 11111101M I --ticiior Moore stated that he had no strong feelings one way or the other. He l licrU that h-e -aw_u t plar-ti n„at;rv over convenience itcA tht when his kids were in daycare. • ~ quality Ha did not see the travel issue as unreasonable, given the size of the industrial area and the location of the nearest daycare. He agreed that daycares would regulate themselves. He stated that, although he leaned towards supporting the staff recommendation, he would support the majority Council decision, as the other Councilors did make some strong points. Mayor Nicoli concurred with Councilors Patton and Hunt's comments. He discussed his concern that they place conditions on a daycare use in an industrial area so that an existing business would not be negatively affected by the location of a daycare close to it. He mentioned that an existing business generating loud noise would have to bring its site into compliance with the DEQ noise regulations if a daycare located near it. He held that that was not fair to allow a reverse effect on the existing industrial uses. He said that he was more concerned with the quality of life of the parents than with how much industrial usage went on. Councilor Patton pointed out that the first provision of the proposed conditional use language stated that the proposed use would have significant adverse effects on nearby industrial firms. She commented that she did not agree that the Council should allow the use outright; she saw value in putting some conditions on the use. Mayor Nicoli indicated that that clause rewritten would address his concerns. Councilor Scheckla asked for the City Attorney's opinion. Tim Ramis, City Attorney, mentioned the possibility of as use under prescribed conditions,' a concept falling in between an outright use and a conditional use. He indicated the need to develop objective performance criteria that the permitted use had to meet. The Council discussed what issues were of concern with respect to preventing a reverse effect on existing businesses, mentioning noise and environmental issues in particular. Mayor Nicoli suggested language to condition the us° to require consideration of a significant reverse effect on existing businesses due to a regulatory requirement from a government agency that allowing a daycare use could create. He emphasized that if allowing a daycare use would shut down or cause major financial harm to an existing business, then the City had a responsibility to protect the existing business. The Council agreed to continue the hearing to the June 20 Council workshop meeting in order to allow staff sufficient time to research the matter and to present a concept to the i Council. Mr. Monahan said staff would schedule time on the June 27 agenda for i Council action. Ms. Hajduk asked for clarification of Council direction. The Council indicated that the permitted use with prescribed conditions suggested by Mr. Ramis was an acceptable alternative to a conditional use. s CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 12 *6. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR L OrQi, TELEPHONE SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY NEXTLINK, OREGON, INC. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to approve Ordinance 00-4-7. The City Recorder read the number and title of the ordinance. ORDINANCE 00-004-7 20, AN ORDINANCE GRANTING NEXTLINK OREGON, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, A FRANCHISE TO CONDUCT A TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO PLACE POLES, WIRES AND OTHER APPLIANCES FOR TELECOMMUNICATION PURPOSES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THIS AGREEMENT AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. Motion was passed by unanimous roll call vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Hunt, Moore, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") [5-0] 7. PRESENTATION ON THE ANNEXATION OF BULL MOUNTAIN AND OTHER NON-ISLAND AREAS The Council agreed to continue this item to the May 9, 2000, meeting. The Council considered Agenda Items 9 and 10 at this time. 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF COMMUNITY CULTURAL EVENTS SPONSORSHIP FOR FY 2000-2001 Mr. Monahan referenced Resolution 00-01 (Attachment A), asking if the Council wanted to grant sponsorship t, ' ° following five community events: Fourth of July, Festival of the Balloons, Broat" )se, Train Days and Holiday Tree Lighting and Civic Center Decorations. He note( ..on-profit organizations sponsored the first three events while the City sponsored ti.- two. He suggested, should Council approve the first three sponsorship applications, that staff return on May 9 with all the community event applications for Council review. He emphasized that approving the applications did not grant funding; staff would bring the resolution for the levels of funding of sponsorship to the May 9 meeting. Mr. Monahan reported that the social service applications came in at $133,600; the Budget Subcommittee recommended granting $78,100 to nine agencies. He indicated that $43,000 remained unallocated of the $125,550 target set by Council for funding community events and social services (1% of the general fund). He stated last year the City granted $10,000 to the Festival of Balloons, $10,000 to Broadway Rose and $7,500 to 4th of July for a total of $27,500. The Council agreed by consensus to approve sponsorships for the three non-profit organization events. * Ordinance No. amended to read Ordinance No. 00-20, as corrected by Council action on February 13, 2001. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 13 Mr. Monahan mentioned the Balloon Festival's request that the City fund a potable water line in Cook Park for use by the vendors during the event. Mr. Wegner explained that the City would not have to pay an SDC, given the minimal use expected of the water line. The Council granted authorization to install the water line. Mr. Monahan asked for clarification on the term of sponsorship. Councilor Moore mentioned the language proposed during the original discussion to offer an unlimited term with one-year notice of renewal or non-renewal. 9. COOK PARK Mr. Wegner mentioned that the staff presentation on Cook Park was set out in the Friday Newsletter. He reported that staff would have another engineering contract in May and hoped to have the construction documents ready to go out with the bidding on the wetlands mitigation in June. 10. STATE GRANT PROPOSALS Mr. Hendryx reviewed the state grant program for local projects (acquisition, development or rehabilitation of parklands). He explained that local jurisdictions could apply for two sizes of matching grants: up to $50,000 and from $50,000 to $250,000 (with 50/50 matching funds to reach the total). He said that the grant cycle for the small grants was annual while the cycle for the larger grants was biennial. He mentioned the State's expectation that any property purchased with grant money be open to the public for recreational purposes, as opposed to land banking. He noted the costs associated with property acquisition: insurance and minimal improvements. Mr. Wegner reviewed the specifics of the Cook Park grant application to complete more quickly the improvements on the East side already scheduled in the master plan (parking lot, restroom, picnic shelter, tot lot). Mr. Roy indicated that the grant for Woodard Park would pay for two playgrounds. Councilor Patton asked how large a grant staff would request for Woodard Park. Mr. Roy indicated an amount of $150,000 to $175,000. o Chris Beek, Trust for Public Lands Project Manager Mr. Beck introduced Geoff Broach, a local colleague from the Trust. He presented the Trust's new proposal for the two $250,000 grant applications allowed to the City each biennial cycle (see handout). He mentioned the letter that the Mayor wrote a year ago to the legislative delegation in support of the M66 program in general, and the Cache Creek property in particular. He reiterated that the second property was the Bond Street property at Hall and Durham. Councilor Hunt asked that the presentation be stopped because the Council has already voted this down three times before, and they were crowded for time to get the Council business done tonight. Mayor Nicoli noted that this proposal was different from what the Council heard before. Mr. Beck asked the Council to temporarily reprogram the Fanno Creek trail money to the state grant application in order to leverage the state money. He stated that the Trust would commit its time and energy to identifying replacement dollars for the trail project. He held that the task was not that challenging, as the Trust was a large national organization receiving millions of dollars in grants and foundations. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 14 NMI 1111 1011 Mr. Beck indicated that if the City did receive the state grants, then t' he Trust would return with an update on their efforts in either securing the money or identifying a clear path to the money. He explained that the City made the decision at the time of the grant award on whether or not it wanted to accept the grant. He reiterated that the project required no City money. He expressed his confidence that the Trust could locate the replacement dollars. Councilor Scheckla commented that the Trust did not know how long it would take to find the replacement dollars whereas the City had money programmed for the trail to construct during this year's construction season. He said that he did not want to wait an extra year. Mr. Beck reiterated his confidence that they could find the money in a timely fashion. Councilor Hunt pointed out that any acquisition of land did bring minimal costs to the City of insurance and improvements. He noted that the City was already having trouble caring the property it currently owned. He asked where the money would come to take care of additional property. Councilor Scheckla said that the City was not filling staff positions because it was trying to save money. He stated that he has voted three times against this property acquisition and he would do so again tonight. He indicated that he has walked the property and would not support its acquisition no matter how many times it came before the Council. He indicated that he could support the staff proposal for grants for Cook and Woodard Parks. Councilor Moore argued that with the Trust proposal, the City ended up with additional greenspaces at no acquisition cost to the City. He pointed out that the City has been told many times that it was deficient in greenspaces. He explained that, although he supported capital improvements, he believed that it was more important to acquire the lands in which the City was deficient. He held that the City lost out on many greenspace properties because of lack of foresight by the Councils in the past 10 to 15 years to purchase the land at a lower cost before the developers bought it. He mentioned this Council's struggle over the past few years to purchase greenspaces, and at the higher costs. Councilor Moore conceded that this property might not be at the top of the City's list for acquisition but he pointed out that it moved up on the list every time the City missed out on purchasing another piece of property. He reiterated that the City ended up with property on Durham, on Bull Mountain and leverage to obtain property adjacent to the new elementary school. He held that the last property in particular would benefit the School District, the proposed recreation district and the Tigard citizens. Councilor Moore stated that, as much as he favored capital improvements, he could not stand by and allow land to disappear that the City could purchase for greenspaces as opposed to leaving it to the developers. He said that he continued to support the grant application as an opportunity to provide the City with more of the greenspaces it lacked. Councilor Scheckla reiterated his opposition to the properties because they lay outside the city limits and he did not want to wait 15 years for the residents to decide to come into the city. Councilor Moore observed that by not purchasing land outside the city limits, the City ended up developing property within the city limits without greenspaces. He argued that if the Councils had had the foresight 20 years ago to purchase lands outside the city limits, then the City might have the greenspaces now and not be in a deficit situation. He held that it CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 15 was the Council's role to identify the future as well as the present. He pointed out that Bull Mountain was in the City's future, as it lay within the City's area of interest. He remarked that in 10 to 15 years people would ask why this Council did not acquire property for greenspaces when it had the opportunity to do so. He reiterated that, regardless of whether the property lay in the County or the City, the Council had to look to the future needs of the city. Councilor Hunt noted that he had walked the Cache Creek property and told the Council that he did not want it, and the Council voted that it did not want it at that time. He said that he could not see buying property that they did not want just because someone would pay for it. He held that they were buying themselves a lot of headaches. Councilor Moore referenced Max Williams' letter, in which Representative Williams mentioned his discussions with the County about accepting the maintenance cost of the property. He emphasized the potential that the City could obtain a greenspace that it did not have to do anything with. He commented that the natural state of the Bond Street property meant that the City would have little to do beyond clean up and trails installation. Councilor Scheckla pointed out that it was wet half the year. Councilor Moore noted that they could develop much-needed wetlands. Councilor Patton expressed her appreciation to the Trust for returning with a proposal that addressed her previously expressed concerns and for its willingness to find funding for the Fowler Trail. She asked for clarification on whether the program allowed for the temporary and conditional reprogramming of money, given the statement that the funding had to be certified with the grant application. Mr. Broach noted that nothing was in place until the City actually accepted the grant. Mr. Hendryx explained that "funding must be certified" meant that the City had to provide certainty to the state that it had the matching funds. He said that what Mr. Broach meant was that if the City had the certified money available, and other alternatives came up between now and when the grant came in, then the City could substitute the alternative money. Councilor Hunt asked what money would the City be certifying that it had. Mr. Hendryx said that the City would have to earmark money, such as reallocating the Tiedeman path money. He confirmed to the Councilor that if the City said that it had the money available for the grant, and the alternative funding did not come through, then it had the Tiedeman path funds available for the grants. Mr. Hendryx explained that the City did not have to identify a particular pot of money in its guarantee that it had money available for the matching grants. He said that when it came time to accept the grant, the City could match the grant, using money from whatever pot of money it chose. Duane Roberts, Long Range Parks Planner, indicated that the money was supposed to be budgeted. Mayor Nicoli asked how many years did the City have to purchase the land, once the State approved their grant application. Mr. Roberts said that the State wanted all projects completed within two years. Mayor Nicoli noted that they had the option to budget either $150,000 in one year or $75,000 per year for two years. Councilor Hunt asked if the State required the City to budget the money before it certified it. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that the City could replace the money it budgeted for the grants CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 16 (such as $150,000 from the general fund) over two budget years, using parks SDC or other funds brought in, like those from the Trust. Councilor Hunt asked for clarification from the City Attorney on the requirement to budget the money when the City did not have it budgeted. Mr. Ramis indicated his understanding that the City had an obligation to budget the $150,000 initially before certifying the funds. He said that the point the Mayor was making was the City's ability to amend the budget over two years. He mentioned hearing the Trust say that the Council could also opt not to accept the state grant because it did not have the backfill money available. Mr. Beck indicated that if the City could not provide the matching funds for whatever reason at the time of the grant award, then the Council had the discretion to refuse the grant and the State would award it to another applicant. Mr. Ramis commented that, from his perspective as the City Attorney, that was a key feature. Mr. Roberts pointed out that the City had to decide shortly after the grant awards in July whether or not to accept the grant. Councilor Patton pointed out that the short timeframe for the grant acceptance gave the Trust little time to locate the alternative funding. Mr. Broach said that the Trust understood that. He pointed out that the State did not meet its January deadline to produce the grant application deadlines. He commented that the State might or might not complete the grant awards for this new program by July. He stated that the Trust has already begun the process to look for alternate funds; it would not wait for the assurance that the City would get the grants. Mr. Beck confirmed that the Trust wanted to show the Council a clear path to the alternative funding (with a high degree of certainty) at the time of the grant award. Councilor Hunt asked if the Council had to budget the money now before certifying that the City had the money available. Mayor Nicoli pointed out that no jurisdiction would have the money budgeted because the rules came out in April and most fiscal years ran from July to July. Mr. Ramis said that he did not know if the meaning of the rule was that the City simply certified that it had $150,000 in general fund money available for appropriation or if it had to go through the supplemental budget process and actually assign the money. He concurred that that point needed clarification. Councilor Scheckla asked what happened to the $150,000 for the Fowler- T iedeman trail. Mr. Roberts said that staff has identified greenspaces for the trail and scheduled it for this year. He commented that the City had to spend down the greenspaces funds by the end of this year per the IGA. Mr. Hendryx confirmed that one option proposed was to reprogram the trail money temporarily. Mr. Hendryx explained that staff presented the proposal for the two grant applications described in the staff agenda summary (per Council comments) while the Trust has presented an alternate proposal for the two grant applications. He indicated that staff recommended its proposal. He stated that staff did not bring back the Trust's proposal; the Trust brought it back. Councilor Patton commented that she felt at a disadvantage because she did not participate in the workshop discussion last week due to illness. She said that while she read the information on the capital improvement projects, she was focusing her efforts on Representative Williams' letter, the other letters she has received from citizens this week, and the other information provided chronicling the City's involvement. She indicated that she saw the Trust's revised option as potentially giving the City everything it wanted for a minimal amount of money. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 17 Councilor Patton reiterated her concern about certifying the money from the general fund. She commented that she would feel more comfortable if the Trust would guarantee that it would find the funds for the trail, although she understood that it would bend over backwards to find them. She stated that she strongly favored greenspaces. She indicated that she did not want to endorse the capital improvement projects. She said that she leaned towards the Trust's revised proposal, given that the City could say `no' in the event it received the grant award. She informed that Trust that, should the Council decide to support its proposal, she would `haunt' the Trust about the trail funding because the bad timing of the grant applications put the Council in an awkward position. Councilor Hunt asked why Councilor Patton did not feel comfortable moving forward with the staff proposal at this time. Councilor Patton indicated that she preferred to proceed with those capital improvement projects as planned. She confirmed to Councilor Scheckla that she has looked at both properties and was familiar with the Bond Street property, having lived in the area. Councilor Scheckla said that one could not adequately see the properties without walking them. Councilor Moore asked if the City could re-apply for the smaller parks grant next year and the larger parks grant in two years, should whichever grant proposals the City made fall through. Mr. Wegner said that they could do so but noted that the City had to complete the Cook Park wetlands by March 2001 because that was when their three-year wetlands permit ran out. Councilor Moore asked how staff had intended to fund the Cook Park improvements prior to the grants. Mr. Wegner said that they were going to do the improvements piecemeal over the next three to five years. Councilor Moore observed that it would take one to five years to complete the process either way. Mr. Wegner commented that the advantage of the grant was freeing up capital money for other parks projects, and the rapid completion date. Councilor Moore remarked that those projects would still be here in several years while the opportunity to purchase the property would be gone. Mayor Nicoli stated that he leaned towards purchasing the land. He noted that, since the State simply wanted the funds certified for two years, the City could do so and proceed with the trail construction. He indicated that, if nothing went right, the Council could decide to walk away from the grant or find the -honey to backfill over the next two years. Councilor Hunt asked what happened with the staff's capital improvements proposal. Mr. Wegner indicated that staff would continue with its original plan to do the projects in a piecemeal fashion over the next three years, using SDC funds. Mr. Roberts reiterated that they could reapply in two years. Mr. Wegner concurred that they could apply for another parks project in two years (such as Summerlake Park) but he reiterated that they could not wait two years on Cook Park. Mayor Nicoli asked for clarification on the Trust proposal, noting that it had two grants but discussed three pieces of property. Councilor Moore explained that the Stanley property owned by the Trust was the leverage property for the grants to buy the Gage property and to option the property next to the elementary school property. Mr. Beck confirmed to the Mayor that they could not break the grants into two different pieces. He explained that the donor of the Cache Creek property challenged the Trust to use his donation to leverage state grants for the Bond Street property and the Conklin property option. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 18 lnillollialill =======J Councilor Scheckla recalled that three years ago the people in the area of the Gage property had offered to put up money towards its purchase but when the City waited and looked at the property for eight months, the money was not there at the final hour. He contended that those people made the same argument that the property would be gone if the City did not purchase it. He held that the staff kept bringing this back, despite the Council voting it down several times. Councilor Moore clarified that staff did not bring this property back to the Council on its own initiative. He stated that he asked the staff to allow the Trust to return with this alternative proposal because it was different than the proposal the Trust brought the last time. He indicated that if it had been the exact same proposal, he would have told them not to waste their time but, as it was different, he felt it was only fair to bring it to the Council. He emphasized that this was not a staff request. Mayor Nicoli called for an end to Council discussion at this time and called for public comment. ■ John Draneous, Bull Mountain resident Mr. Draneous conceded that there was a sentiment to build trails but argued that these people were offering the City an opportunity to acquire valuable land at no cost. He held that the property on Bull Mountain would develop if this proposal did not happen. He stated his opinion that the City could build trails on land it already owned at any time without an appreciable change in cost but buying this land was only possible today. He referenced Councilor Scheckla's comments about the Gage property still available after three years but reiterated that the Bull Mountain property would not be available in three years unless the economy took a nosedive. He stated that there was no park space on Bull Mountain. Mr. Draneous suggested that the Council take into account the discussion of the annexation of Bull Mountain (even if it was postponed). He commented that the Bull Mountain residents would want to know what annexation to the City provided to them, given that their taxes would increase if they annexed. He held that the City having park space in the area would stand it in good stead with respect to annexation. Councilor Scheckla reiterated that he would make support parks in the Bull Mountain area upon annexation. Mr. Draneous said that the City needed to persuade the residents to annex; if the City allowed all the land on Bull Mountain to develop, then there would not be any park space there. Councilor Scheckla referenced the situation with Walnut Island in which he contended that the residents accepted all the improvements the City made as part of an enticement for annexation yet opposed annexation until they had no other recourse. Councilor Moore pointed out that the Council needed to decide tonight on which grant applications to support because staff had only three days left to submit the grant applications. He stated that he did not want the City to lose out on an opportunity for grants for either land acquisition or capital improvements. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to support the grant applications as outlined by the Trust for Public Lands. 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] CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 19 Mr. Monahan noted that the motion granted direction to the staff to proceed and to the mayor to sign the application. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to support Resolution 00-19, as revised by staff. The City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION 00-19, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL TO THE OREGON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS GRANT PROPOSAL FOR ACQUISITION OF THE STANLEY PROPERTY AND THE BOND STREET PROPERTY. Motion passed by majority voice vote of the Council present. (Mayor Nicoli, Councilors Moore and Patton voted `yes;' Councilor Scheckla voted `no.') [3-1] Councilors Hunt and Scheckla left the meeting. The Council considered Agenda Item 8 at this time. 11. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Canceled. 12. ADJOURNMENT: 10:39 p.m. Catherine Wheatley, City c rder Attest: d Brian J. Moore, Council President Date: 6_13.66 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -APRIL 25, 2000 - PAGE 20 mill 11111 1~0111111 COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS, INC. Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice TT 9633 BEAVERTON. OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising • City of Tigard ° ❑ Tearsheet Notice 13125 STI Hall }Blvd. ° Tigard,Oregon 97223 ® ❑ Duplicate Affidavit *Accounts Payable m a r a AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. 1,_Kathy Sn yrl _r being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising a Director, or his principal clerk, of th&l garfl-T ua 1 i n T,,mes x a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard in the aforesaid county and state; that the Review Proposed Public Hearing ZTrancpnrtai- inn T2nnrl Measure a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 011H successive and consecutive in the following issues: April 27 , 2 0 0 0 =Z I ! [TMYSubscribed and sworn to before me ta_y of Apri 1, 2 0 0 0 Notary Public for Oregon i My Commission Expires: + AFFIDAVIT - s u' The follcits►$ 11s ideeed b~ Ti er cif on Thee days at °kiw*~ at dii! Tigard Cite Cerikf Town Hall 1Yooai;.14p2 W Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral,and writ- ten testimony-is inAted. The.'public heaxmgs+on this matter wiill be con- ducted:in accordance with the rules of ORS 227.120, Chapter 18.390 of 1 the Tigaid.Municipal Code, and rules and procedures of the, Tigard City Council Failure to raise an. issue in person or by letter ats6me point prior, to the close of the hearing.A66ompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to allow the Hearings Authority, and all the parties to respond, on the request, precludes an appeal, and failure to specify the criterion from the Com- munity Development Code or Comprehensive Pian at which a comsrient is direet.°d, precludes an appeal based on that criterion. Further information may be obtained from the Sngineering'Dopartment;at 13125 SW Hall Blvd„,Tigard; Oiegon 97223, or by calling 539=41'71, extension'369. P.UBIdC IIEAItIll1G ITEM The Tigard City toc~acik•w:Il sev~ew -tiffs 1?lua~osrag Ga11ss1or~.~td- Z'w art~portattt i :$end Tgak Force'a rzcottlme~attatvt,~lPpt' a transpoitatton bond traeasureije`1lowin streets have been proposed for improvement Ca de to 121st), 121st Ave., (Walnut to Tiedeman); Walnut`Stiedemdn to 121st), 121st Ave. (Gaardeto Wal- nut), 98th/Durham signalization, and Fonner Street (with a modified design). Alternative projects have been added to the list for implementa- tion if bids are favorable, or if partnerships and other sources of funding are found. The projects in order of priority are Commercial Street Sidewalk (Main to Lincoln), Burnham (Hall to Main), Tigard Street (Main to Tiedeman), Tiedeman (Greenburg to Tigard St.). The bond measure is being proposed for approximately 16 million dollars: TT9633 - Publish April 27, 2000. . CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING In the Matter of the Proposed STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, begin first duly sworn, on ozth, _96 a& )&Ag kA depose and sa : That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number (s) n n - " 0 0 -a which were adopted at the Council Meeting dated L4 -45 -6 f3*S-23-D 0 copy(s) of said ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the _ day of 200A 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Library, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 3. Tigard Water Department, 8777 SW Burnham, Tigard, Oregon Subscribed and sworn to before me this _ day of , 20 CSo i Notary Public for Oregon OFFIaa. SEAL ' NOTARYPL WISE ry My Commission Expires: . ~T 3 Comm I3.SION NO. 320= MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEB. 11, 2003 Mai CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 00- AD AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO NEXTLINK OREGON, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, A FRANCHISE TO CONDUCT A TELECOMMUN'l-CATIONS BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO PLACE POLES, WIRES, AND OTHER APPLIANCES FOR TELECOMMUNICATION PURPOSES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THIS AGREEMENT; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, The ten-year franchise for the communication facilities and services provided by NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc., described in the title of this ordinance is now before the City Council for approval. The Council believes that the franchise should be approved under the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and by this reference made a part hereof! THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The terms and conditions of the attached franchise agreement, Exhibit A, are hereby approved and adopted as part of this ordinance as is specifically set forth. SECTION 2. The Mayor is authorized to sign the attached agreement on behalf of the Council. SECTION 3. Because of the need to have stable telephone communication and the need to have a stable revenue flow to the City from franchise fees, an emergency is declared and this ordinance shall take effect upon its passage. SECTION 4. The City Council determines that the fee imposed by this franchise is not a tax subject to the property tax limitations of Article XI, Section 11 (b) of the Oregon Constitution. PASSED: By Un0.><i~V%%6 vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, thisaSt" day of I 2000. ai "a Catherine Wheatley, City Record 0. 200 APPROVED: This -day of- J s Nicoli, Mayor oved as to form: Zp Vityy t torneDate ~F4 t 0 I:%ADhACATHYI000NCILW EXT LINK ORD.DOC ORDINANCE No. 000 Page 1 EXHIBIT "A" A franchise agreement between the City of Tigard and NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc., a Washington corporation. SECTION 1. Subject to the other terms and conditions set forth in this document there is hereby granted by the City of Tigard to NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc., (herein referred to as "Grantee"); its successors and assigns; subject to the development ordinances and regulations of the City, the right and privilege to conduct a telecommunications business within said City, or such other public property as may come within the jurisdiction of the City during the term of this agreement for the purpose of furnishing, telecommunications services as defined in State and Federal Law. This grant includes the right to erect, construct, place, replace, reconstruct, lay, maintain, and operate poles, wires, switching equipment, amplifying equipment, fixtures, facilities, appliances, structures and other devices including, but not limited to, electronic, optical and mechanical devices customarily associated with Grantee's function, and purpose of serving as a telecommunications utility. This franchise is granted solely for the privilege of providing telecommunications services as defined by State and Federal Law. 'this franchise does not include the right to conduct the business of providing a "cable system" as defined in applicable law. Should the Grantee desire to provide a cable system within the City, it must comply with the City's regulations relating to cable communications in force at that time. SECTION 2. It shall be lawful for Grantee to make all needful and necessary excavations in any of said streets, alleys, avenues, thoroughfares and public highways. SECTION 3. The Grantee shall file with the City Engineer or designee maps and materials showing all proposed underground construction work to include the installation of additional facilities or relocation or extension of existing facilities within any street, alley, road or other public way or place within the corporate limits of the City. The City will review the materials submitted and notify the Grantee of any City requirements. For repair work or other work not considered underground construction as stated above, the Grantee shall, if possible, notify the City of the location and general description of the work before beginning work. All work shall be done in a reasonably safe manner taking into account City standard traffic control procedures and in accordance with requirements of applicable federal laws, state laws, or City ordinances. In emergencies, such filings shall be submitted within thirty (30) days of completion of emergency construction work. SECTION 4. When any excavation shall be made pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance, the Grantee shalt restore the portion of the street, alley, road, or public way or place to the same condition to which it was prior to the excavation, reasonable wear and tear excepted. All such work shall be done in strict compliance with the written rules, regulations, ordinances or orders which may be adopted from time to time during the continuance of this franchise by the City Council or City Engineer or as may be otherwise provided by law. The City shall have the right to fix a reasonable time within which such repairs and restoration shall be completed and upon failure of such repairs and restoration being made by Grantee, City shall cause such repairs to be made at the expense of Grantee. SECTION 5. The Grantee hereby agrees and covenants to indemnify, save harmless and defend the City and its officers, agents and employees from any and all damages, costs and expenses or claims of any kind whatsoever, or nature, arising from any injury to persons or property by reason of the negligent act or omission of the Grantee, its agents or employees in exercising the rights and privileges granted hereunder and by this franchise. SECTION 6. The City, by its properly constituted authorities, shall have the right to cause the Grantee to move the location of any pole, underground conduit or equipment • belonging to Grantee whenever the relocation thereof shall be for public necessity, and the expense thereof shall be paid by the Grantee. Such charges shall comply with state statutes and administrative rules. Whenever it shall be necessary for public necessity to remove any pole, underground conduit or equipment belonging to Grantee or on which any wire or circuit of the Grantee shall be stretched or fastened, the Grantee, shall, upon written notice from the City, or its properly constituted authorities, meet with the City Engineer and agree in writing to a plan and date certain to remove such poles, underground conduit, equipment, wire or circuit, at Grantee's expense, and if the Grantee fails, neglects or refuses to do so, the City, by its properly constituted authorities, may remove the same at the reasonable and documented expense of the Grantee. The costs associated with the removal, relocation or extension of Grantee's facilities at the request of a private developer or development shall be bome by such private developer or development. z SECTION 7. All notices and approvals required under this Agreement shall be in writing. The co Grantee shall provide the City with the name, position and phone number of Grantee staff that can be contacted for administration of this Agreement and for H contact with construction-related questions and comments. All notices and other communications to be given pursuant to this agreement shall c~ be deemed to have been duly given (i) upon delivery, if personally delivered to the person served or to an officer of the corporate party being served; (ii) two (2) days after mailing, if mailed by United states certified mail, return receipt requested, ~111101111 NMI postage prepaid; or (iii) one day after mailing, if delivered by overnight carrier, delivery receipt requested to the parties at the following addresses: Such notices and approval shall be directed to the City as follows: City Engineer, City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 Such notices and approval shall be directed to the Grantee as follows: NEXTLINK Oregon Inc. ATTN: General Manager 9000 SW Nimbus Beaverton, Oregon 97008-7131 Facsimile Number: 503-241-8156 Telephone Number: 503-972-6863 With a copy to: NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc ATTN: Legal Department 1000 Denny Way, Suite #200 Seattle, Washington 98109 Facsimile Number: 206-315-6320 SECTION 8. Upon request of the City, the Grantee shall provide available plans and locate any underground conduit or equipment belonging to Grantee, as required for the preparation of construction drawings. SECTION 9. Whenever it becomes necessary to temporarily rearrange, remove, lower or raise the wires, cables or other plant of Grantee for the passage of buildings, machinery or other objects, Grantee shall temporarily rearrange, remove, lower or raise, its wires, cables or other plant as the necessities of the case require; provided, however, that the person or persons desiring to move any such buildings, machinery or other objects, shall pay the entire actual cost to Grantee of changing, altering, moving, removing or replacing its wires, cables or other plan so as to permit such passage, and shall deposit in advance with Grantee a sum equal to such cost as estimated by Grantee and shall pay all damages and claims of any kind whatsoever, direct or consequential, caused directly or indirectly by changing, altering, moving, removing or replacing of said wires, cables or other plant, except as may be occasioned through the sole negligence of Grantee, Grantee shall be given not less than ninety-six (96) hours written notice by the party desiring to move such building or other objects. Said notice shall detail the route of movement of such building or other objects over and along the streets, alleys, avenues, thoroughfares and public highways and shall bear the approval of the City. Such moving shall be with as much haste as possible and shall not be unnecessarily delayed or cause Grantee unnecessary expense or waste of time. SECTION 10. In consideration of the rights and privileges hereby granted, Grantee agrees to pay to the City five percent (5%) of the gross revenues derived from exchange access services, as defined in ORS 401.710 within the city limits less net uncollectibles. Such payments shall be made to the City every six months for the life of this agreement on or before March 15 for the six month period ended December 31, and September 15 for the six month period ended June 30. Such 5% payment will be accepted by the City from the Grantee also in payment of any license, privilege or occupation tax or fee charged for regulatory or revenue purposes. The 5% payment is not accepted in satisfaction of payments due to City for the failure of Grantee to perform any of Grantee's obligations pursuant to this franchise agreement including but not limited to Grantees' obligations to bear the cost of repairs under Section 4 and the cost of relocation under Section 6. The City shall have the right to change the percentage of gross revenues set forth above, on a non-discriminatory and competitively neutral basis, at any time during the life of this agreement provided it has made such notice in writing at least 180 days prior to the effective date of any change. The City shall have the right to conduct, or cause to be conducted, an audit of gross revenues as defined herein. Such audits may be conducted at two year intervals beginning two years after the effective date of this agreement. The City shall conduct the audit at its own expense. Any difference of payment due either the City or Grantee through error or otherwise as agreed upon by both the City and Grantee, shall be payable within sixty (60) days after discovery of such error. SECTION 11. The rights, privileges and franchise hereby granted shall continue to be in full force for a period of ten (10) years from the date this ordinance becomes effective. It is understood and agreed that either party may terminate or renegotiate the terms of this agreement after 180 days notice in writing. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the day of its passage and approval. This ordinance shall be subject to any and all State or Federal laws and regulations. Grantee shall not assign or transfer this franchise without the written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; except that upon written notice to the City, Grantee may assign this franchise without the City's consent to any entity that Grantee controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this franchise should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this franchise. This franchise is subject to the provisions of applicable law, rule, or regulation, including without limitation the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and any applicable law, rule, or regulation. --WNW pp~ SECTION 12. The Grantee shall, within thirty (30) days of affective date of this ordinance, file with the Recorder of the City its written acceptance of all the terms and conditions of the ordinance and if not so accepted by the antee, this ordinance shall be void. DATED this o(J day of L , X000. OF TIGARD 'ON, a Muni 'p Co r ion By: iviayor James Nicoli ATTEST: Catherine Wheatley Oity Recorder i i i i i 1 ACCEPTANCE OF FRANCHISE WHEREAS, the CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, under date of , 2000 passed ORDINANCE NO. , entitled as follows, to wit: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO NEXTLINK OREGON, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, A FRANCHISE TO CONDUCT A TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREG:PON, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO PLACE POLES, WIRES, AND OTHER APPLIANCES FOR TELECOMMUNICATION PURPOSES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS- OF-WAY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THIS AGREEMENT; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc., the Grantee named in said Ordinance, does for itself and its successors and assigns accept the terms, conditions and provisions of Ordinance No. and agrees to be bound thereby and comply therewith. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc. has caused this instrument to be executed by its officers as below subscribed this day of , 2000. NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc. By Received by the City of Tigard this day of , 2000. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO.00- ~ 1 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO LEVEL 3 A FRANCHISE TO CONDUCT A TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO PLACE POLES, WIRES, AND OTHER APPLIANCES FOR TELECOMMUNICATION PURPOSES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THIS AGREEMENT; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, The ten-year franchise for the communication facilities and services provided by Level 3, described in the title of this ordinance is now before the City Council for approval. The Council believes that the franchise should be approved under the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto, and by this reference made a part hereof. THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The terms and conditions of the attached franchise agreement, Exhibit A, are hereby approved and adopted as part of this ordinance as if specifically set forth. SECTION 2. The Mayor is authorized and directed to sign the attached agreement on behalf of the Council. SECTION 3. Because of the need to have stable telephone communication and the need to have a stable revenue flow to the City from franchise fees, an emergency is declared and this ordinanoe shall take effect upon its passage. SECTION 4. The City Council determines that the fee imposed by this franchise is not a tax subject to the property tax limitations of Article XI, Section 11 (b) of the Oregon Constitution. PASSED: By X1'1 ' Ori)"j vote of all Couppil members present after being read by number and title only, this c2,3- day of , 2000. atherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: This r! day of , 2000. -James-Nk*fr, zryw Approved as to fo Brian Moore, Council President V f City Attorney S Z75 0 a Date EXHIBIT "A" A franchise agreement between the City of Tigard and Level 3. SECTION 1. Subject to the other terms and conditions set forth in this document there is hereby granted by the City of Tigard to Level 3, (herein referred to as "Grantee"); its successors and assigns; subject to the development ordinances and regulations of the City, the right and privilege to conduct a telecommunications business within said City, or such other public property as may come within the jurisdiction of the City during the term of this agreement for the purpose of furnishing, telecommunications services as defined in State and Federal Law. This grant includes the right to erect, construct, place, replace, reconstruct, lay, maintain, and operate poles, wires, switching equipment, amplifying equipment, fixtures, facilities, appliances, structures and other devices including, but not limited to, electronic, optical and mechanical devices customarily associated with Grantee's function, and purpose of serving as a telecommunications utility. This franchise is granted solely for the privilege of providing telecommunications services as defined by State and Federal Law. This franchise does not include the right to conduct the business of providing a cable system as defined in applicable law. Should the Grantee desire to provide a cable system within the City, it must comply with the City's regulations relating to cable communications in force at that time. SECTION 2. It shall be lawful for Grantee to make all needful and necessary excavations in any of said streets, alleys, avenues, thoroughfares and public highways. SECTION 3. The Grantee shall file with the City Engineer or designee maps and materials showing all proposed underground construction work to include the installation of additional facilities or relocation or extension of existing-facilities within any street, alley, road or other public way or place within the corporate limits of the City. The City will review the materials submitted and notify the Grantee of any City requirements. For repair work or other work not considered underground construction as stated above, the Grantee shall, if possible, notify the City of the location and general description of the work before beginning work. All work shall be done in a reasonably safe manner taking into account City standard traffic control procedures and in accordance with requirements of applicable federal laws, state laws, or City ordinances. In emergencies, such filings shall be submitted within thirty (30) days of completion of emergency construction work. I I SECTION 4. When any excavation shall be made pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance, the Grantee shall restore the portion of the street, alley, road, or public way or place to the same condition to which it was prior to the excavation. All such work shall be done in strict compliance with the rules, regulations, ordinances or orders which may be adopted from time to time during the continuance of this franchise by the City Council or City Engineer or as may be otherwise provided by law. The City shall have the right to fix a reasonable time within which such repairs and restoration shall be completed and upon failure of such repairs and restoration being made by grantee, City shall cause such repairs to be made at the expense of grantee. SECTION 5. The Grantee hereby agrees and covenants to indemnify, save harmless and defend the City and its officers, agents and employees from any and all damages, costs and expenses or claims of any kind whatsocver, or nature, arising from any injury to persons or property by reason of the negligent act or omission of the Grantee, its agents or employees in exercising the rights and privileges granted hereunder and by this franchise. SECTION 6. The City, by its properly constituted authorities, shall have the right to cause the grantee to move the location of any pole, underground conduit or equipment belonging to grantee whenever the relocation thereof shall be for public necessity, and the expense thereof shall be paid by the grantee. Such charges shall comply with state statutes and administrative rules. Whenever it shall be necessary for public necessity to remove any pole, underground conduit or equipment belonging to grantee or on which any wire or circuit of the grantee shall be stretched or fastened, the grantee, shall, upon written notice from the City, or its properly constituted authorities, meet with the City Engineer and agree in writing to a plan and date certain to remove such poles, underground conduit, equipment, wire or circuit, at grantee's expense, and if the grantee fails, neglects or refuses to do so, the City, by its properly constituted authorities, may remove the same at the expense of the grantee. The costs associated with the removal, relocation or extension of Grantee's facilities at the request of a private developer or development shall be borne by such private developer er development. SECTION 7. All notices and approvals required under this Agreement shall be in writing. The Grantee shall provide the City with the name, position and phone number of Grantee staff that can be contacted for administration of this Agreement and for contact with construction-related questions and comments. Such notices and approval shall be directed to the City as follows: City Engineer. City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.. Tigard Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 SECTION 8. Upon request of the City, the grantee shall provide available plans and locate any underground conduit or equipment belonging to grantee, as required for the preparation of construction drawings. SECTION 9. Whenever it becomes necessary to temporarily rearrange, remove, lower or raise the wires, cables or other plant of grantee for the passage of buildings, machinery or other objects, grantee shall temporarily rearrange, remove, lower or raise, its wires, cables or other plant as the necessities of the case require; provided, however, that the person or persons desiring to move any such buildings, machinery or other objects, shall pay the entire actual cost to grantee of changing, altering, moving, removing or replacing its wires, cables or other plan so as to permit such passage, and shall deposit in advance with grantee a sum equal to such cost as estimated by grantee and shall pay all damages and claims of any kind whatsoever, direct or consequential, caused directly or indirectly by changing, altering, moving, removing or replacing of said wires, cables or other plant, except as may be occasioned through the sole negligence of grantee, grantee shall be given not less than ninety-six (96) hours written notice by the party desiring to move such building or other objects. Said notice shall detail the route of movement of such building or other objects over and along the streets, alleys, avenues, thoroughfares and public highways and shall bear the approval of the City. Such moving shall be with as much haste as possible and shall not be unnecessarily delayed or cause grantee unnecessary expense or waste of time. SECTION 10. In consideration of the rights and privileges hereby granted, grantee agrees to pay to the City five percent (5%) of the gross revenues derived from exchange access services, as defined in ORS 401.710 within the city limits less net uncollectibles. Such payments shall be made to the City every six months for the life of this agreement on or before March 15 for the six month period ended December 31, and September 15 for the six month period ended June 30. Such 5% payment will be -accepted by the City from the Grantee also in payment of any license, privilege or occupation tax or fee charged for regulatory or revenue purposes. The 5% payment is not accepted in satisfaction of payments due to City for the failure of Grantee to perform any of Grantee's obligations pursuant to this franchise agreement including but not limited to Grantees' obligations to bear the cost of repairs under Section 4 and the cost of relocation under Section 6. The City shall have the right to change the percentage of gross revenues set forth above at any time during the life of this agreement provided it has made such notice in writing at least 180 days prior to the effective date of any change. The City shall have the right to conduct, or cause to be conducted, an audit of gross revenues as defined herein. Such audits may be conducted at two year intervals beginning two years after the effective date of this agreement. The City shall conduct the audit at its own expense. Any difference of payment due either the City or Grantee through error or otherwise as agreed upon by both the City and Grantee, shall be payable within sixty (60) days after discovery of such error. SECTION 11. The rights, privileges and franchise hereby granted shall continue to be in full force for a period often (10) years from the date this ordinance becomes effective. It is understood and agreed that either party may terminate or renegotiate the terms of this agreement after 180 days notice in writing. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the day of its passage and approval. This ordinance-shall be subject to any and all State or Federal laws and regulations. SECTION 12. The Grantee shall, within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this ordinance, file with the Recorder of the City its written acceptance of all the terms and conditions of the ordinance and if not so accepted by the Grantee, this ordinance shall be void. DATED this ~3D day of Majia , 2000. CITY OF TIGARD OREGON, a Municipal Corporation By: _ -Maye -4 Council Presl7ent Brij' MQPM ATTEST: >'O -E! 4YA7a Greer A. Gaston, -Em ide, Deputy City Recorde M-IMM011110 NSA ACCEPTANCE OF FRANCHISE WHEREAS, the CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, under date of , 2000 passed ORDINANCE NO. , entitled as follows, to wit: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING TO LEVEL 3 A FRANCHISE TO CONDUCT A TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO PLACE POLES, WIRES, AND OTHER APPLIANCES FOR TELECOMMUNICATION PURPOSES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF- WAY; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THIS AGREEMENT; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, Level 3, the grantee named in said Ordinance, does for itself and its successors and assigns accept the terms, conditions and provisions of Ordinance No. and agrees to be bound thereby and comply therewith. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, _ has caused this instrument to be executed by its officers as below subscribed this day of , 2000. By ' Received by the City of Tigard a this day of , 2000. N Agenda Item No.-------------- r - E Meeting of q-- -5.0 o W - Tvlilrc~~lssaaates, lnc. E1g~ieerslP'ianners 1215. Salmon, Se A0 . Port A Oregon 91104. FHOVM2r9010 F1,C 50}22x9021 April 12, 2000 Mr. Dan Bradley General Manager South Fork Water Board 15962 S. Hunter Avenue Oregon City, OR 97045 Re: Scope of Work and Agreement for Water Supply System Plan for the South Fork Water Board,' h,: City of Tigard, the City of Lake Oswego and the North Clackamas County W ter Commission Dear Dan: In accordance with our disL ussions at our meeting on Monday, we have prepared the final scope of work for the project. The work under Phase 1 of the project, Participant Commitment, will develop a.:: _iernorandum of understanding between the parties prior to proceeding with the major engineering work that will be accomplished under Phase 2, Preliminary Engineering Plan. Phase 1 will include some engineering work that is necessary to support development of that memorandum. Under Phase 3, Financial Plan, financial c^nsulting assistance will be provided as desired to the participants in developing financial plans individually and/or jointly. The final scope of work is attached along with the fee breakdown for the project. The participants agreed to initially fund Phase 1, Participant Commitment, in an amount not to exceed $41,000. Phase 2, Preliminary Engineering Plan, will be authorized and proceed only upon the development of a memorandum of understanding between the parties. A preliminary scope and budget is provided for Phase 2 with the understanding that the participants may wish to review the scope of this phase prior to proceeding. It was agreed that Phase 1 of the work will be scheduled for completion by August 30, 2000. Upon successful completion of Phase 1 and timely authorization to proceed. Phase 2 will be scheduled for completion by the end of this year. Mr. Dan Bradley April 12, 2000 Page 2 The participants agreed that the South Fork Water Board will be the contracting agency for this study and that each participant will fund 25% of Phase 1 ($10,250 each). We will prepare a monthly billing to the Board and notify on your behalf each participant of their share of each billing. Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. (MSA) will undertake and complete the work on a time and expenses basis not to exceed $41,000 for Phase 1. The work will be accomplished in accordance with the attached Standard Provisions of Agreement and will be billed in accordance with the attached current Schedule of Charges (1/2000). We very much appreciate you confidence in MSA and our project team and we look forward to working with you and your water system partners. We are prepared to begin work immediately upon your authorization. If you have any questions or need any further information, please let me know. Sincerely, MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. Philip H. Smith, P.E. President PHS Jld Enclosures 'Sent 0y: MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN 503 228 7385' ; 04118/00 10:38AM;JyJFjuL-#822; Page 1/5 e~ S5+ Mc 0eV*r1X0rlis 209 SW Oak Street Agenda Item No. Puke zoo A Division of Portiane OR 97204 Persons Brinckerholl 503-228-7352 =1Op Meeting 01 t4 Jd Quads a Pougias, Ina Fax. 503-228-7365 WAPS FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Bill Monahan, City Manager Kirni lboshi Sloop COMPANY: DATE: City of Tigard 4/18/00 FAX NUMBER: TOTAL. NO. OF PAGY.'S INCLUDING COVER: 684-7297 5 PHONE NUMUM SENDER'S REFERENCE NUMBER: 639-4171 57282 RE: Growth Management Caucus Membership XAS REQUESTED NOTES/COMMENTS; Bill - attached is the information that you requested in your voice mail, including: • A list of all current members of the Growth Management Caucus, including their dues. A list of the jurisdictions that have indicated they are rejoining the Caucus for the fiscal year 2000-2001. 1 have also attached the workscope for nett year as reference. Please let me know if 1 can provide any additional information. 1 will be in the office through Thursday this week, and Monday through Wednesday next week. Over m Century of Engineering Bicelftnce Sent by: MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN 503 228 7365 ; 04/18/00 10:37AM;JetFas #622; Page 2/5 Allocations for Growth Management Caucus Dues Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Current Mernber Jurisdictions Fee Category Membership Fee -12 months Beaverton 6 $5,400 Clackamas County 9 $8,100 Gresham 6 $5,400 Hillsboro 6 $5,400 Lake Oswego 5 $4,500 Oregon City 4 $3,600 Portland 9 $8,100 Sherwood 2 $1,800 Tigard 5 $4,500 Tualatin 4 $3,600 Troutdale 3 $2,700 West Linn 4 $3,600 Special Districts' Boring Fire Districe $500 Oak Lodge Sanitary 3 $2,700 Clackamas River Water 3 $2,700 Clackamas County Utilities 3 $2,700 Unified Sewerage Agency 3 $2,700 Tualatin Valley F&R 3 $2,700 ' ""All member jurisdictions are assessed a fee that apportions the annual costs of operation on the basis of each jurisdiction's population. The base fee is $900. The fees are apportioned based on population as follows: less than 5,000 residents Base 5,001 to 10,000 residents 2 times base 10,001 to 15,000 residents 3 times base 15,001 to 30,000 residents 4 times base 30,001 to 50,000 residents 5 times base 50,001 to 100,000 residents 6 times base 100,00! to 150,10 rc idents 7 times base 150,00 to 300,000 residents 8 times base over 300,000 residents 9 times base Special Districts are set at a fee of 3 times the base. Boring Fire District is unable to contribute the full amount of the dues. We have had a long-standing a8reemetnt with them to contribute less based on circumstances. EN on I'm 11M E NINE Sent by: MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN 503 228 7365 ; 04/18/00 10:37AM;Jet& #622;Page 3/5 Growth Management Caucus Members Fiscal Year 200D-2001 Curremt fEY 1999-2(100) Member Turisdictions Mernbershi•L Renewed FY 2000- 2001! Beaverton Clackamas County Gresham Hillsboro Lake Oswego Oregon City Portland Sherwood Tigard Tualatin Troutdale West Linn Special Districts Boring Fire District Oak Lodge Sanitary Clackamas River Water Clackamas County Utilities Unified Sewerage Agency Tualatin Valley F&R 1 a i i As of April 17, 2000. Although not all jurisdictions have responded, we do not have any indication that any current members will not be rejoining for the upcoming year. If membership does change, the workscope, and schedule; niav be adjusted, with approval from the Caucus members. We will not change the dues. Page 3 'S-nt by: MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN 503 228 7365 ; 04/18/00 10:38AM;JetFeac #622; Page 4/5 DRAFT- March 2000 STAFF SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED 1-0 THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT CAUCUS McKeever/Morris, a division of Parsons Brinclcerhaff FISCAL YEAR: jt1LY 2000 TO JUNE 2001 ISSUES • Resolution of the 1998 UGB decision appeal. How will LUBA rule? • Resolution of the recent HBA appeal of the 1999 UGH extension decision. Will the Supreme Court demand that Metro expand 1he UGB? • Urban Growth Boundary Expansion. Which lands should be added to the UGB in 2000? • Urban Growth Report. What will the current research indicate abDut the region's growth rate and redevelopmentlinfill rate? How should the Growth Report be linked to the UGM Functional Plan? • Periodic Review. Will the next UGB expansion decision occur through periodic review and what are the impacts if it does? • Funding for Local Implementation of the UGM Functional Plan and Regional Framework Plan. Are there regional options available to help finance Metro required planning? • Funding Of UGB Expansion Area Planning and Development. What affect should the availability of infrastructure funding have on the approval of UGB amendments, urban reserve concept plans and zoning proposed for urban levels of development? • Goad S. What is the Title 3 Functional Plan language related to Goal 5? How should it be incorporated into Title. 3? How should the new Title 31Goal 5 language be linked to the 4(d) rule language? • Regional 'T'ransportation Planning Coordinatiowt'Transportation Issues. How will the RTP affect other land use planning programs? • Fair Share Implementation Strategies for Affordable Dousing. Should housing allocations be mandatory or advisory? is a real estate transfer fax a feasible funding option? • MPAC Functions. How can MPAC function more efficiently and effectively with other local governments and Metro? WORK LOAD ALLOCATIONS 1. Regular meeting attendance at Metro Meetings, including Growth Management Committee, Council, MTAC, and MPAC. Percentage of overall budget: 10% 2. Written meeting highlights via timely faxes for all meetings (i.e., Metro Growth Management, Metro Council, MTAC, and MPAC} Percentage of overall budget: 30% r Page 4 'Sant Ley: MCKEEVER/MORRIS EPSTEIN 503 228 7365 ; 04/18/00 10:38AM;JaffiK #622; Page 5/5 3. Briefing sheets prepared on key issues as they arise Percentage of overall budget: included in number 2 above 4. Briefing of Growth Management Caucus MPAC members before the MPAC meetings Percentage of overall budget: 10% 5. Testimony delivered or prepared for participants as needed for presentation before Metre Growth Management Committee and Council Percentage of overall budget: 5% 6. Coordination of research with participants in the Growth Management Caucus and others Percentage of overall budget: 10% 7. Research and analysis of key Metro documents Percentage of overall budget: 10% S. Individual communication/coordination with liaisons designated by each of the participants Percentage of overall budget: 10% 9. Conversations with individual Metro Councilors Percentage of overall budget: 5% 10. Project Management/Admin. (tray include meetings of all participants as needed) Percentage of overall budget: 5% Page 5 - c~U r~r tee..: r a-rt, 1 erL- CITY OF TIGARD Engineering Department SbapingABetterCommunity MEMORANDUM MEMORANDd~M CITY OFF A IGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone 503-639-4171 Fax: 503-624-0752 TO: City Council Bill Monahan, City Manager -w~ FROM: Gus Duenas City Engineer DATE: April 25, 2000 SUBJECT: Erickson Heights Access During Construction Period The Erickson Heights subdivision pro;cct is well underway with the street system laid out and the first pavement lift already installed. The homebuilding effort is in the initial stages. The developer is in the process of securing permits for three model homes immediately east of the Lady Marion entry into the subdivision. The intent of the developer is to bring the construction traffic into the subdivision from Royalty Parkway at the southwest corner of the project. The prospective homebuyers would be brought in through the Lady Marion entry at the northeast corner. All other connection points would be barricaded until the project is completed and the 2"a lift of pavement is placed. (See attached drawing). This approach makes sense to us since it separates the prospective homebuyers in passenger vehicles from the construction traffic. The issuance of 50% of the building permits for the subdivision is imminent. After issuance, we expect a significant increase in construction activity throughout the subdivision as the homebuilding begins in earnest. We do need to control the construction traffic and ensure that it does not access the subdivision from streets (especially Kable and Hoodview) that may suffer damage from heavily loaded construction vehicles. The subdivision approval conditions and supporting documents stipulate that all the streets would be open to traffic after the street system is completed with the 2nd lift installed. However, access during construction is not addressed. The developer's proposal to separate the two types of traffic during the construction period makes sense. I recommend approval of the Developer's proposal. However, please note that we have received phone calls from at least two of the residents along Lady Marion objecting to this access proposal. This memorandum is to let you know about the Developer's proposal, about the objections by sonic of the residents along Lady Marion, and to provide the background for more extensive discussion of this matter during tonight's Council meeting. Attachment Frocks®n mum t1e fights e Snbdiveslan 8 - c~ a3CO- Model Horne ~ntr9l I Lady Marion St m f g Model Horns Al d fioodview Or CD o Q O ~ d l6 Z existing garracades Kable St Kabie St Construction Yraffic N maeee St AGENDA ITEM NO.2 - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : April 25, 2000 (limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve y~,~ur concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. r~ C7 NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED C~ I~ r~ S 13 e c.fc e a o 0. / p iZ tc s w q 2 z -66o Pte.,, r-~.,~-l-s :feu ~v ~i. v ! f (oNc • , 1,43 J/i sw .Ca lea r AV- VISIT'OR'S AGENDA Page 1 WEN LIla~lvv April 25, 2000 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97224 Dear Council Members: The purpose of this letter is to bring to your attention a violation of the approval conditions regarding the Erickson Heights subdivision. As you are all aware, the Erickson Heights subdivision was approved by City Council over one year ago after several lengthy council meetings with many neighbors of the proposed subdivision and its Developer. Attached is a copy of the approved site plan. Because the development of the subdivision involved opening up four previously barricaded local streets that adjoin the development; there was much objection about the traffic/street connections the subdivision required. As expected, representatives from all four streets made attempts to keep their respective streets closed. In fact, one street (Kahle) was able to convince the Planning Commission that their street should remain closed. Outraged by the Planning Commission's selective treatment of street closures, the remaining three streets appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council. City Council responded to the Commission's special treatment of one street by requiring all of the streets adjoining the subdivision to be opened. This decision was accepted by the neighbors and work commenced on the development in the fall of 1999. Now that the subdivision infrastructure is nearly complete, internal decisions have been made that are in conflict with City Council's original approval. Effectively, the City has agreed to a request by the Developer to keep all of the adjoining neighborhood streets closed, except Lady Marion until the subdivision is completely finished which is not expected for at least one year. The City's explanation for the early opening of Lady Marion is that the Developer wants to use Lady Marion for exclusive marketing access to the development's model homes, and to provide a means of keeping the marketing traffic separate from the construction traffic? Tigard City Council April 25, 2000 Page Two This decision is in direct conflict with the City Council's original approval and building codes. It allows the Developer to start building homes prior to the substantial completion of the subdivision and allows selective street closures specifically prohibited by the original subdivision approval. Please investigate this seemingly blatant disregard for the approval conditions set forth by the City Council and the concerns voiced by the neighbors of the development. Once you have investigated this situation, I am sure you will agree. The original decision to open all of the streets is still the correct decision. However, if the developer or the engineering department requests closure of one street because of incomplete improvements, all streets should remain closed until the improvements are complete. The site has complete open access from its main entrance off Royalty Parkway that will adequately serve marketing and construction traffic during the time it takes to finish the improvements to the subdivision. Sincerely, Randy I~fdrgart 10466 SW Lady Marion Drive Simi Styx-ii. ♦ ,=We OL S a,•. 4 W Rlv al rrvoc rat d :ti >r Pam" a •u 'cown 7 /r >er Ntl110 K (el•* RJ! aa•►AYRa .1m O=a wf to btt♦A !K R/d tY PI.OR %W or a mV. ~t//• "A" tt WA" Rt, I& Lmw b+/w bt Nr 9I IAtow •~i.C 'rya ' ►~'i.. . s4 ROr<n r•R~YY - dMOm aRQiRrROYOex! a w enm 1L- e'ottxaS aR+Cwa. ftttW uwM #A4 t Y•Ad Mwf• w ' p Fa •M' r ~ V-•Y 4••1 MCII O Wf am"Rok aSi•a' a a:• . r aw iaa z ~ ...~atr w.r+rw tmcK s - •t acran WIVO 11 SPtMU •-42'. se• ~ 60le/W w •fwr 0 f •AaaRassat moose av'soluesa aura •a ••oa '~lj 2101 00 MWENG 4p > or & 1 T/L 201 ~ 1 « j1 F.) AIL l.w. AOY 14ARION DA. e:' - t .w. U8Y MAw10N OR. f t N 1 1 • T/L 2 n aH w ( • a 1 °~we a 11 ki-oc:3 N N • ~i o~~ T1t~ 1990 z ~ g Ilu s~-n nA ~ ~ 1 ♦ lld « N 11 t^ w. ~ i ►•ooo~vrow. ' 1 M w ` M 1 s•r_ _ iii / ~ A d tr ! . r „ N aM hll to ~~~~:5-~~ a '••--s.w. IfAeLE sr. w i A 1 e • ~ F C 1 ~ n .A . • • • • • N I S.w• KAOI"r. . A u av w a ♦ tt i tt (A Z a ~ ~ •pM - t t w ' ~I I1 t~ % I n pW /,'0 0 0~ • ~ }~s i~ 1 /N ~ - . ~1 1. ~ ST. 1 ^ v _ It { a as a of fS&P ' CASE HOW) & CASE NAMFISk ERICKSON SITE PLAN SUB 96-0009 HEIGHTS PDR 9600 1 0 SUBDIVISION 1IT MAP N Pat Whiting 0 8122 S.W. Spruce Tigard, Oregon 97223 April 25, 2000 Tigard City Council c/o Brian Moore Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: City Council Public Hearing Date and Time referenced in letter of April 14, 2000 - incorrect reference. Dear City Council: I would like to submit for the record my apology for misquoting date and time reference in my letter of April 14th and referring to the public hearing date of the City Council. On page 2 of my letter, I sighted the City Council public hearing for public testimony of January 25th concluding at approximately midnight. Today I received a packet from the City showing that that particular meeting concluded at 9:35pm. I stand corrected. It did conclude at 9:35pm. I referred to the City Council as having only one public hearing with public testimony taken. That is correct. When I referenced the hearing ending at approximately midnight, I should have referred to the City Planning Commission hearing of November 15, 1999. In a previous letter from the the planning department of the City of Tigard the time of the City Council was correctly stated as around 9:30pm. The issue at hand is the question of how the public is referenced and how city staff conduct themselves before a public that is attempting to give testimony regarding what they consider extremely serious and life- impacting. To have a consultant hired by the City describe the public attending the meeting prior to their sharing of testimony as "skeptics, deniers and realists" and to have a staff person during public testimony exhibit expressions of amusement when some community members spoke was taken by members of the public as unprofessional and not in the spirit of developing a sense of community or giving proper time to those who try to convey their thoughts and concerns regarding a major undertaking of a regional center within their existing community. I personally attended the Planning Commission Hearing which took testimony and the City Council Hearing which took testimony. You are dealing here with people's homes, famili s, investments and businesses. It is a serious underting. Again, my apology for referencing the incorrect date and time. Respecfully, Pat Whiting ' Agenda Item No. 3 Meeting of 2-522 PROCLAMATION Be Kind to Animals Week ~~}T WHEREAS, we should be continually aware of the quality and depth the animal world brings Into our lives; and WHEREAS, the beauty of an eagle soaring over a canyon, the thrill of a whale rolling, up in the sea, the majesty of an elk on a distant ridge make our lives fuller and richer; , and i 1r.~ re WHEREAS, the animals Oregonians keep as pets also greatly enrich our lives - they P provide companionship to their owners, give protection to some and a reason for being to a few, and justifiable joy to all who appreciate and cherish them; and WHEREAS, our pets' freely given love and loyalty deserves our recognition, .-Er mi" appreciation and acknowledgment. Z HOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT 1, ]im Nicoll, Mayor of the City ofx Tigard, Oregon, do hereby proclaim the Week of May 7 - 13, 2000 I Be Kind to Animals Week Rye in Tigard, Oregon and urge our citizens, businesses and organizations to join in this 1 i` observance. l G Dated this day of 2000. yt: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Tigard to be affixed. of . ]im Nicoll, Mayor City of Tigard r.:. ' 7mui Attest: City Recorder y{,, ~ o n Agenda Item No. Meeting of 14. QS-X MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Craig Prosser`; Finance Director RE: Revised April 25, 2000 Council Agenda Item DATE: April 19, 2000 Attached to this memo is a revised agenda item for the April 25, 2000 Council Agenda. The attached resolution authorizes a Bond Anticipation Note (BAN) for the Martin assessment in the Dartmouth LID. The original resolution set a not-to-exceed amount of $1,950,000 for the new BAN. This was the principal amount of the existing BAN which is coming due on May 1. The City has been paying interest on the existing BAN and needs to recover the amount of interest paid. This amount needs to be added to the principal amount of the new BAN. The revised resolution therefore sets the not-to-exceed amount at $2,100,000. The City is tracking expenses so that all costs can be charged back to the Martin property once the legal dispute has been resolved. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF Apri125, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: A resolution authorizing interim financing for the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District in an amount not to exceed $2,100,000. PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR. OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Tigard City Council authorize the issuance of a Bond Anticipation Note to provide interim financing for the portion of the Dartmouth LID assessed to the Martins? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this resolution. INFORMATION SUMMARY A Bond Anticipation Note (BAN) with US Bank was issued on November 30, 1998 to provide interim financing for the portion of the Dartmouth LID assessed to the Martin property. The Martins objected to their assessment and filed a case in court. The suit has been proceeding through the courts, and the Martins and the City are attempting to settle the case. No settlement has been reached, however, and the BAN is due for payment on May 1, 2000. Since the Martin suit has not been resolved, the City has not received payment from the Martins. Because the City has not received payment from the Martins, the City does not have funds to pay off the BANs when due on May 1, 2000. Because the City does not have funds on hand to pay off the BANs on May 1, the BANS must be extended or refinanced. The attached resolution authorizes an extension of the US Bank BANS for a period of not more than 18 months and authorizes the City's Finance Director to set final terms and conditions. The BANs will be pre-payable so that they can be paid off early should the Martin suit be settled before the new Notes mature. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED There are no alternatives to this measure. If the existing BANs are not extended, they will be due and payable on May 1, 2000, and the City does not have the funds to pay the amount due. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY i N/A FISCAL NOTES The existing BANs total $1,947,677.98. The increased amount for the new BANs includes accrued interest due. AGENDA ITEM # 14, a FOR AGENDA OF April 25.2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Resolution of Necessi to o Acquire Property for the Gaarde Street Improvement Project (Phase 1) PREPARED BY: A.P. Duenas DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK Ll/.i~9_ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall City Council approve the attached resolution declaring the need to acquire property for the construction of the Gaarde Street Improvements (Phase 1) project? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve, by motion, the attached resolution declaring the need to acquire property for the construction of the project. INFORMATION SUMMARY The extension of Gaarde Street from Quail Hollow-West to Walnut Street is an approved capital improvement project currently being designed for construction during the summer months in calendar year 2000. The project is identified as Gaarde Street Improvements (Phase 1). This project extends Gaarde Street from the north boundary of Quail Hollow-West to Walnut Street. It includes construction of a new segment of Gaarde Street, as well as the widening and signalization of the Gaarde Street/Walnut Street Intersection. The project also includes improvements to the Walnut Street approaches to the intersection. The project design is nearing completion and will be advertised for bids sometime in the next two months to permit construction of the project during the summer months. To ensure timely construction of the project, all properties needed for the improvements must be acquired as soon as possible. The resolution of necessity for this project directs the City Manager and City's attorneys to attempt to negotiate a satisfactory agreement for purchase of each of the properties. In the event that satisfactory agreements cannot be reached, the resolution authorizes legal action in accordance with the provisions of ORS 281.510 to acquire the properties for timely implementation of the construction project. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Delay implementation of the Gaarde Street project and continue to negotiate until all properties are acquired. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATE Y The improvements proposed for the extension of Gaarde Street meet the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goals of Improve Traffic Safety and Improve Traffic Flow. FISCAL NOTES The design and land acquisition necessary for the project are funded from Traffic Impact Fee funds in the FY 1999-2000 Capital Improvement Program. I:\Citywide\Sum\Resolution of Necessity for Gaarde Street Extension MEN AGENDA ITEM # 0- FOR AGENDA OF April 25, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Award of Fire Hydrant Replacement Bid S►+~ PREPARED BY: Sam Morrison DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board award the bid to replace 18 two-port fire hydrants. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That the Local Contract Review Board award the bid to All-Ways Excavating on a time and material bases not to exceed 6'),000.00. INFORMATION SUMMARY During the FY 1999/2000 Budget process, Public Works identified 18 two-port fire hydrants in the King City area that needed to be replaced with an updated three-port fire hydrant. Although the existing two-port hydrant's can provide the minimum fire flow for this area, through their 2-'/z -inch ports, they cannot be directly connected to the 4'h-inch pumper port on the fire truck. The ability to connect to the 4'/z-inch pumper port will substantially increase the efficiency of the fire hydrants and the ability to delivery fire flows beyond the minim-im allowable. The City of Tigard issued an Invitation to Bid for the replacement of 18 two-port fire hydrants. A total of fifteen bids were sent out and seven responses received. After reviewing the bids and calling references five bidders were disqualified because specified information was not included with the bid at time of opening. Only two bidders completed all of the required information in the bid packet. They are: All-Ways Excavating and RC Northwest Inc. The bids were evaluated based on a time and material bases on the enclosed spreadsheet. Based on this analysis Ail-Ways Excavating has the lowest and best bid. We specifically check references for this type of work, fire hydrant installation/repl,,.cement, and the responses were positive. We also checked the references of the foreman and lead workers; all have experience in this line of work. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not award bid. Do not award bid and carry over funds to FY 2000-2001. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY None FISCAL NOTES Through the 1999-2000 budget process $60,000.00 was budgeted for this project. i \pw\hydrant summary shcet.do i y i i 3 Ate Ways Bid tabulat-'on ent DaNeal dram Replacem Crestview t Yes Fire tiY Sun quest Yes RC Northwest csa"M Yes Yes Yes Yes Ed W~ Yes Yes Yes Yes NW General e Yes Yes Did not incl. Yes 4 Yes Yes Didnotincl. Did not Inc,,. BID CONmACTOR Yes Yes Yes Did notInc%. 2 NO Did not incl. Did not incl. Yes not Inc" Did not incl. 1 Did an crew Bid Bond Did not Incl. 213 First 4er Subcontractor Form 1 AO 00 3 60.00 32.E pre qualification p ppl A dendum A6.00 42.00 35A Acknowledgment of 00 1O"f AL iABORERS 46.50 86A0 41.00 20. 45,72 44,60 40.00 35.00 30.00 32,00 pi0 Bit) 37.00 40.65 41.90 33.00 3150 42.65 %0131D 43.00 LP,BOR 27.00 37.00 27.88 NO BID 30.00 34.50 75.OO1per dal Foreman or crew leader 27 00 33.501ea tmobilialionftravell 35 00169 Norse t Per hour N0 BID daggers ii needed 28,00 40.00 t 1700 LBS Laborers cos operator per hour E4uIpment op hour $32 1416 Cat WiP 25.00 30,00110-12 YD 10.00 Snick Driver Per FIa99ers) 4001bs 35.00 ete 15.50 1100 tIP $701 cat 3153Q concr saw not listed l %0 BID 53,00112 cY 8.00 $100tdaY Other tabor 42.00 .OOltrailar $401hr roller HP W00 12 g018 YD 10.00 $6 actor actor comp A5.00 190 YO 6.75 S26 Loader $ I,oofcomP s501dVi pump $ t Cat dump water 30.00 19.00 16 50.00 1162 LB OOibs j12YD 19.00 3,15mc $24.0016cY $50idaY 30.00116,O 25.00 8000 jumping jack 'wipmENS horsepower 20,00110-12YD 12.001 1 TON 62.OOIFord er hour and ht of machine. lbs 0.00 125 00 IDPS Vaccuum 3 001 hr h Backhoe P per our & weigh Ow 32.00 lates Track hoe P size of box NO BID 2enworth Dump 4.st S x10 truck per hour and ~A~KHAM 185CFM 90 LB• Truck JO YD 0411112 Dump ck Per hour per daY or hour and size Worker notlisledP $40idaYi85lb Other equip actor comp 1 ,11firehydrant CONTRACTOR Bid Tabulation MW General Fire Hydrant Replacement hm Ed9 RC Northwest MATERIAL hm Sun Quest Crestview Asphalts ~L DaNeal All-Ways Per ft q^ deep installed Vt. 3/4" Concrete per s q ft 4" deep installed 2.25 Excavating minus rock per eyd dely to job site 4.00 1,10 1.5' drain rock Per Yd 3.50 3.75 4.00 810 valve box p dely to job site 13.00 4.29 6.00 6" pvc 3034 Complete 13.00 17'50 4.00 36.00 per ft for valve box bottom 17'50 14.80 19.85 8'00 2.50 6" flange x MJ adapter complete 1.00 00 26.70 23.85 19.85 18.00 4.00 1. 3.00 6" ductile iron pipe mass 52 1.90 25.84 27.7o 26.04 17,00 10.25 6" Mega-lug follower per ft. 26.32 1.85 28.00 17.00 6" complete 7.74 59.50 62-20 2,15 26.00 16,50 flarge x MJ gate valve 9.55 .20 71.55 2'50 24.47 6" MJ X Flange tee co e c 248.00 19.35 11.50 1.85 6" tong pattern solid sleeve c 268.00 20'23 23.25 9'00 62.20 59.09 5.25 HYdr.:nt to be used Mueller C omplete 423 g^ MJ 130.47 67.00 280,19 26.0o 10.00 86.47 122.44 320.00 20.23 9.50 MVO 3-Port (2-2,5' NST hose enturion qconnection, 117.00 140.00 290.00 19.34 1-4.5"NST 1,016.00 70.00 110.00 280.00 nuts Pumper) 1.5" pentagon o NO BID 80.50 122.44 260.04 , open left. lor Perating 947.06 11090.00 50.00 116.47 70 Hydrant block specified in yellow Cit 1,200.00 .00 City Design #542 94 47.00 66.87 45,00 2.90 863.53 3.13 3.60 7.00 3.50 3.47 H:/doss/dWcontract1f'rehydrant gonna 2 04/11/2000 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF April 25, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Embedded Crosswalk Lighting System on 121st Ave. at Katherine /Lynn Street PREPARED BY: V ante graven, Tom Roberts DEPT HEAD OK Gus Duenas CITY MGR OK Bill onahan ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve the contract award for the construction of the Embedded Crosswalk Lighting System on 1215` Avenue at Katherine Street/Lynn Street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve the contract award to EC (Electric Construction) Company, Inc. in the amount of $33,380.00. INFORMATION SUMMARY The proposed project is a pilot program by the City to determine the effectiveness of utilizing an embedded crosswalk lighting system in protecting pedestrians from oncoming two-way traffic while they are crossing at a mid-block crosswalk or at an intersection. The system has been installed in over 50 sites in two dozen cities nationwide, including two by the City of Portland at the intersections of SE Stark & 108`h Avenue and SE Washington & 108`h Avenue. The system emulates the same kind of powerful, inground lighting systems used on airport runways. Prior to a pedestrian stepping into the street he/she will activate the system by pushing a button causing the embedded flashing lights to illuminate the walkway. These lights are visible to drivers more then 300 yards away. The system stands on its own and is not augmented by a traffic walk signal. One embedded crosswalk in the intersection is approximately 25 to 30% the cost of a traffic walk signal which is approximately $100,000 to $130,000 to install. These improvements are proposed at three locations in FY 2000-01 The bid opening was conducted on April 4, 2000. The bid results are: EC (Electric Construction) Company Albany, Oregon $33,380.00 Highlite Construction Co. Brush Prairie, Washington $33,924.71 Elk Mountain Construction Co. Tigard, Oregon $40,981.36 Engineer's Estimate $28,700.00 OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE G DAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES This project was funded in the amount of $30,000 in the FY 1999-2000 CIP State Gas tax revenue for the Embedded Crosswalk Lights project. The difference of $3,380 will be funded from the same revenue utilizing funds that were not used for the PMMP projects. I:%dtywideIsum%emb aosmalk 121 kathertne.doc 1 i i i I ST ri r TiGARD r---- ~.,1-.._! SUMMERCRESY _ f ~p FSA CA `t a M~`ER'CR ~ 5V ~ a U MERESTONE CT CT- ' I ~e KATHEk1NE ST a _ - - - t i N ppOJECT LOCAl10N - - j 1 4 I 7 4 v 4 r O S KATtCR- LYNN - ST - - t E4 / N ANN CT.~ ~ ANN ST ANN PE._..l c~4REE~ -~,5. Q`t t41 CN t' i AGENDA ITEM # LI 3 0- FOR AGENDA OF 25, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Award of Contract for the Construction of 118' Cort Storm Drainap-ee Improvements en PREPARED BY: Vannie DEPT HEAD OK: Gus Due CITY MGR OK: Bill Monahan ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board approve the contract award for the construction of 118`h Court Storm Drainage Improvements? STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, approve the contract award to Kasey Cooper Excavation, Inc. in the amount of $30,580.00. INFORMATION SUMMARY The existing 12-inch culvert crossing Gaarde Street just east of 118`' Court has its outfall buried in the backyard of a property north of the street. Storm water in this culvert eventually surfaces and enters into the backyards of two adjacent properties during periods of heavy rain. Water flowing across these properties has saturated the soil and threatened to create bank erosion to the greenbelt next to these properties. The scope of this project is to re-route the existing storm drain pipes to the public rights-of-way. The new drainage system includes 3 manholes, 1 catch basin and approximately 450 feet of 15-inch PVC installed in Gaarde Street and 118`'' Court. The bid opening was conducted on April 4, 2000. The bid results are: Kasey Cooper Excavation Boring, OR $30,580.00 M. J. Hughes Hillsboro, OR $36,427.00 Oregon Excavations Clackamas, OR $46,424.00 Three Dimensional Portland, OR $49,150.00 Miller & Sons Sherwood, OR $54,751.25 Crestview Construction Hillsboro, OR $55,301.00 Sun Quest Construction West Linn, OR $57,709.00 Excel Excavation Tualatin, OR $57,889.00 J. Mac Tigard, OR $64,644.00 Elk Mountain Construction Tigard, OR $77,452.20 All Concrete Specialties Vancouver, WA $86,770.50 Engineer's Estimate $50,800 OTHER ALTERNATIVES C-QNSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES This project was funded in the amount of $60,000 in the FY 1999-2000 CIP Storm Drainage Major Maintenance Program. This amount is sufficient to award the contract of $30,580.00 to Kasey Cooper Excavation, Inc. I:%dlywide\sumlagenda summary rori I Sth siorm drainage project.doc II I I 1I 1 { PROJECT L0CATl0N N ~ LFAIRHAVEN _ TALON LANE ?S~~ 4 w Wv w 3 - Q 0 ROSE VISTA OR ~ e Q N \ ~ N ~ N ---1 VIEWMOUNT J CAARDE ST _AMES LANE SABLE LANE CCHANDLER DR cr JAKI LN m ~ a DUCHILLY CT I a MCFARLAND BLVD CLOUD C 3 J N 5 'Pub h p HRo r t n _ ~J w y C a,12 2 U.5~5 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 - VISITOR'S AGENDA g Cn 61 YA, .o CILL DATE : April 25, 2000 ~vn2S (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. ~l,p- a.52 chc)ck OY1e. . e-p+'uponQrv, - Opp D Y-)4A NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TopfE- STAFF- 3914TA&TED ©hn l3rosji /6/ SE SU~ ~y ,S'aWeml OR 9,2 3 aJ ,N1,'ll~ ~ f own 'j o / N W /~'fvrrgY ~/v d , pa r~'ja,.d OYZ nc lee,- 299` 5 5v Rose L W ~SanV~ 12 `I7o7a ~ / G~ ~S I P, C-4 V ~i O 3 `6 W 1 .-r V a~ - lam. ~ ~ CT'r~ ~ v z ► y N -i VISITOR'S AGENDA Page 1 milli AGENDA ITEM # 5 FOR AGENDA OF Mril 25, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Zone Ordinance Amendment (ZOA1999-00003) to allow daycare uses in Industrial Zones PREPARED BY: Julia Haiduk DEPT HEAD OK ~ITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council take the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the requested Zone Ordinance Amendment to allow daycare uses in Industrial Zones? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Deny the requested Zone Ordinance Amendment. INFORMATION SUMMARY This meeting is a continuation of the Public Hearing opened April 11, 2000. The Council voted to continue the public hearing to receive testimony until they had the opportunity to review the applicant's submittal items which were inadvertently left out of the Council packet. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the request on March 6, 2000. At that meeting, the Commission voted 5-2 to deny the requested amendment. The applicant has requested the amendment to allow daycare uses either conditionally or outright in all Industrial Zones. At the April 11, 2000, meeting the applicant testified that day cares should be permitted outright in the Light Industrial zones and conditionally in the Heavy Industrial zones. Staff reviewed the request along with the applicable City and State requirements and recommended denial. Several factors led staff to recommend denial, most importantly was that fact that there is a very limited amount of vacant Industrial land remaining in the City and it should be preserved for uses that are Industrial and can not locate in other zones within the City. The attached Planning Commission recommendation outlines the applicable criteria and issues. The two Planning Commissioners that voted against denial did so because they felt that the use was compatible with Industrial uses and should be permitted. The five Commissioners voting to deny the request felt that Industrial land was too limited to allow additional daycare uses. They also felt that the proposed request was more site specific than legislative and did not feel it was appropriate to change all industrial zones for a specific site. Minutes of the March 6, 2000, Planning Commission Public Hearing are included in this packet. At the April 11, 2000, meeting the applicant clarified that he was asking for a change to allow day care uses outright in the I-L zone and conditionally in the I-H zone. Staff's analysis considered both outright and conditional uses, therefore the recommendation and analysis would not change as a result of this clarification. As noted on page 6 of the Planning Commission recommendation, a conditional use process would not provide for disapproving a daycare facility, it would just set standards that would have to be met in order to be approved. There is no real benefit in making a use conditional because if the standards are met, the use must be approved. No conditional use standards were proposed by the applicant. If the Council chose to permit daycare, the existing ordinance standards for outright permitted uses are sufficient to process applications. It is still stafs opinion that because of the limited amount of industrial land in the City, the request should be denied. The applicant raised an issue related to the amount of time elapsed since the initial application was filed. The application was filed July 12, 1999. A letter explaining deficiencies in the application and deeming it incomplete was sent on August 11,1999, within the 30 day review period. The applicant resubmitted materials after a long delay and the application was deemed complete and processing began on January 19, 2000. The service standards for a code amendment is 3-4 months. Exhibits: A - Planning Commission Recommendation and Planning Commission Minutes B - Applicant's submittal materials C - Letters received before and during the hearing on April 11, 2000 D - Map of vacant Industrial Land in the City of Tigard „ OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Approve the requested Zone Ordinance Amendment and direct that the appropriate ordinance language be drafted for Council review. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A I:curpln\juHa\Z0A1999-03AIS3.doc 17-April-00/9:30 AM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 00- A RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUESTED ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ZOA19994)0003) TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on March 6, 2000 on the request and voted to recommend denial to the City Council in accordance with the signed Planning Commission recommendation, as attached (Exhibit A); and WHEREAS, the City Council opened a Public Hearing on the request on April 11, 2000 and heard testimony on April 25, 2000; and WHEREAS, there is limited amount of industrial land available for industrial uses within the City of Tigard; and WHEREAS, the requested Zone Ordinance change has been reviewed for consistency with applicable City and State criteria; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that approving this request would not be in the best interest of the City of Tigard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The requested Zone Ordinance Amendement to allow daycare uses in Industrial Zones is denied. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby adopts "Exhibit A" as its findings. PASSED: This day of 12000. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard i:\curpin\Julin\zoa 1999-03RES2.doc 12-ApriW/9:00 AM RESOLUTION NO. 00- Page 1 of 1 ' "EXHIBIT A" Agenda Item: Hearing Date: ARM 1'1.2000 Time: 7:30 PM i'Y" Q U QN6 G 0 M~SSIO r _t r ty 9 a 11 6F TIOARD ~"r a r. { 1 SF41~lFT"TZt1^i~'~+Fi . F ECO ENDAT~QN 0 E sl UUH1151 SECTION I APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE NAME: INDUSTRIAL ZONES AMENDMENT CASE NO.: Zone Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) ZOA1999-00003 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of a zone ordinance amendment to allow daycare uses outright or conditionally in all industrial zoned properties. APPLICANT: John L. Brosy OWNER: N/A 161 High Street SE, Suite 204 Salem, OR 97301 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial. LOCATION: All industrial zones citywide (I-L, I-P and 1-H). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 5 and 12.3; The Metro 2040 Plan; and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9,12 and 14. SECTION II PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The City of Tigard Planning Commission recommends DENIAL of the requested Zone Ordinance Amendment by the Tigard City Council. PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL 4/11/2000 PUBLIC HEARING ZOA19994)0003 CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES PAGE 1 OF 6 Ills I SECTION 1111, BACKGROUND INFORMATION The applicant has proposed this zone change so his client can develop a daycare center on a parcel of land zoned Light Industrial. The parcel 'is located in the vicinity of SW Bonita Road and SW 72nd Avenue. This Industrial area is referred to in this report and the applicant's statement as the southeastern industrial area. The Industrial area near the Washington Square Mall area is referred to as the northern Industrial area. SECTION IV SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE CRITERIA Chapter 18.380 states that legislative text amendments shall be undertaken •by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. Chapter 18.390.060E states that the recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: • The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; e Any applicable Metro regulations; e Any applicable Comprehensive Plan policies; and 0 Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Summary and Applicability of Statewide Planning Goals Statewide Planning Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal has been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Section 18.390. Notice was mailed to all property owners of Industrial Land and notice was published in the Tigard Times prior to the hearing. In addition, after the hearing before the Planning Commission, additional notice will be mailed and published prior to the City Council Hearing. Two Public Hearings are held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) in which public input is welcome. Statewide Planning Goal 2 - Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The Development Code implements the Comprehensive Plan. The Development Code establishes a process and policies to review changes to the Development Code consistent with Goal 2. The City's plan provides analysis and policies with which to evaluate a request for amending the Code consistent with Goal 2. PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL 411112000 PUBLIC HEARING 7.OA1999*0001 CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL. ZONES PAGE 2 OF 6 Statewide Planning Goal 9 - Economic Development. The purpose of goal 9 is to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. This is accomplished in part by requiring Comprehensive Plans to provide an adequate supply of sites of suitable size, location, etc for Industrial and Commercial uses and to limit uses on or near sites zoned for specific industrial and commercial uses to those which are compatible with proposed uses. Statewide Planning Goal .12 - Transportation: This goal is intended to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. This goal outlines how the transportation plans should be prepared and implemented. The applicant has cited this as a relevant goal because he believes that the permitting of daycare uses in Industrial zones will reduce vehicle miles traveled by allowing parents closer access to their children. Statewide Planning Goal 94 - Urbanization: This goal outlines the process in which lands suitable for development are included. in the Urban Growth Boundary. This goal requires consideration of, among other things, the maximum efficiency of land uses within and on the fringe of the existing urban area, orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services and the compatibility of the proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural activities. This goal has been addressed with the adoption of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan includes locational criteria for the various land uses. The locational criteria are discussed further in this report. Summary and Applicability of Comprehensive Plan Standards Comprehensive Plan Policy 5 (Economy): This section of the Comprehensive Plan addresses Goal 9 of the Statewide Planning Goals. After thorough analysis of the economic conditions, the findings in the Comprehensive Plan conclude that "...The City continues to experience thriving commercial and industrial growth; A core problem facing the City is lack of buildable land designated for industrial use; and The City's large industrial parks provide an ample supply of leasable space for smaller and younger industries." Comprehensive Plan Policy 92.3 (Locational Criteria): This section of the Comprehensive Plan identifies the locational criteria for industrial uses. The intent of the Industrial land use designation is to provide for the designation of suitable lands for industrial use, provide for economic growth and development, protect existing and potential lands suitable for industrial development from encroachment by non-industrial or incompatible uses; provide land for industrial use by type to minimize the impact on surrounding development; and take advantage of existing transportation facilities. PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL 4/11/2000 PUBLIC f iEARING ZOA1999 00003 CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL TONGS PAGE 3 OF 6 The Comprehensive Plan states: 'Heavy Industrial Lands are areas intended to provide for manufacturing, processing and assembling activities. Uses within this. classification are characterized by large buildings and large storage areas and having associated external effects such as smoke, noise, odor or visual pollution. Light Industrial Lands are areas intended to provide for manufacturing, processing, assembling and related office activities. Uses within this classification are of a size and scale which makes them . generally compatible with other non-industrial uses and which have no off-site effects." SECTION V. SUMMARY OF FACTS There are no applicable federal or state regulations that need to be considered in this request. There are no Metro regulations that need to be considered in this request. The Tigard Development Code Section 18.390 outlines the process for reviewing a Development Code Text Amendments and 18.530 identifies the uses allowed in the Industrial zones. Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing as required. In addition, the Tigard Development Code and Comprehensive Plan have been acknowledged by DLCD. The uses permitted in the industrial zones are in compliance with the locational criteria of the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant contends that daycare uses are compatible with Industrial uses because the employees would have a daycare location close to work, thus limiting excessive traffic and making these areas more attractive to employees with young children. The applicant has provided an analysis showing that several neighboring Cities have provisions that allow daycare in Industrial zones outright or with restrictions. In Tigard, daycare is permitted in every commercial zone, with limitations in residential zones, and permitted in up to 20% of the development area of a specific development in all Industrial Park zones. Industrial Park zones are the largest industrial zone in the City and currently has approximately 64 acres of vacant land. The Light Industrial zone has approximately 84 acres of vacant land, and there is no vacant Heavy Industrial land available. The vacant land takes into account development restrictions due to increasing regulation to protect streams, wetlands and fish and many of the Industrially zoned lots adjacent to the floodplain and wetlands. Assuming the 64 vacant acres zoned I-P are able to be developed, this leaves 12.8 acres that could potentially be used for daycare uses if associated with an industrial development (as permitted in the I-P zone.). There appears to be a significant demand for industrial land in the City, as evidenced in 8 applications for new construction or expansion in industrial zones in 1999, equating to approximately 35 acres of land. In addition, There are 3 applications for development in industrial zones under review so far in 2000. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 2123/2000 PUBLIC HEARING ZOA1999-00003 CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES PAGE 4 OF 6 The applicant has requested that the use be allowed either outright or conditionally, however they have not proposed what parameters a conditional use for -a daycare in an industrial zona should be reviewed under. The City could not process a conditional use application for a daycare in an industrial zone without ordinance language establishing review criteria. The applicant states that, by allowing daycare in industrial areas, auto vehicle miles traveled will be reduced. The applicant has provided information on daycare as follows: They tend to occupy less than one acre. Because of the desire to be near places of employment, the use is complimentary. They state that based on the distribution of ' daycare centers in other cities, only 2 or 3 new businesses would be expected to locate in the southeast industrial area if the Code were amended. Typical sizes are 7,000-10,000 square feet with 2,000-3,000 square foot playgrounds and 15-25 parking spaces. SECTION VI. STAFF ANALYSIS The staff recommendation is . based on several factors. First and foremost, staff is assuming that the Planners, citizens and City Council members that worked on the original Comprehensive Plan and Tigard Development Code, as well as subsequent updates, had a purpose for allowing and disallowing the uses they did in each zone. Notwithstanding that, it is also accepted that omissions are made in use classifications and amendments may be needed to allow uses that should have been included in a particular zone. In this case, however, the daycare use is permitted in the Industrial Park zone as long as it does not exceed 20% of the development site. Staff agrees, and the fact that daycare and other compatible uses are allowed with some size limitations acknowledges, that this use can be compatible with industrial uses. Just because there is not currently a large amount of daycare centers in the vicinity does not mean the City should change all Industrial zones to allow daycare outright, especially since, as inventoried, industrial land is in short supply in the City. The 1-P zone has the largest supply of vacant land. In addition, while staff agrees that daycare centers close to the job site may be in the best interest of the parent, child, employer, and environment, it is not agreed that it is compatible with all industrial uses nor should it be permitted outright in all industrial zones. The summary of other neighbor cities restrictions (conditional uses, location restrictions, and zones in which daycares are not allowed) confirms that they too, do not feel that all industrial areas are suitable for daycare uses. The I-P zone is a light industrial/office zone that is really most suitable for this type of complimentary use. The applicant has not proposed conditional use language for staff to consider supporting allowing this use conditionally in all zones. PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO TI iE CITY COUNCIL 4/11/2000 PUBLIC HEARING ZOA1999-O0003 CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES PAGE 5 OF 6 mill Staff Recommendation: Because of the limited amount of available vacant industrial land and because the use is already allowed within limitation in the I-P zone, staff is recommending that the requested Code change not be approved and the Code remain as is. Other possible considerati.Qns Amend the Code the allow the daycare use outright in I-P zones instead of being limited to 20%. A problem with this is that it would still use limited Industrial land for a use that is not industrial. A Conditional Use process would not provide for disapproving a daycare facility in an industrial zone, it would just set standards that would have to be met in order to be approved. SECTION VII ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF AND OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS City of Tigard Long Range Planning Division has reviewed this proposal and* that there is very little vacant industrial-land left in the City. Why is daycare anymore a necessary service than say, a 7-11, a dry cleaners or any other use for the convenience of employees? DLCD, The Oregon Department of Transportation, and Metro Land use and Planning Growth Management have all had an opportunity to review this proposal and have offered no comments or objections to the proposed zone change. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL PASSED: This 6th day of March. 2000 by the Planning Commission of the City of Tigard, Oregon. (Signature Box Below) a jNick Wilson, President City of Tigard Planning Commission hcurpln~ ulia\zoa 1999-00003rec.doc PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL 411112000 PUBLIC HEARING ZOA1999 W003 CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES PAGE 6 Of 6 ONE= CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting Minutes March 6, 2000 1. CALL TO ORDER President Wilson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Wilson; Commissioners Anderson, Griffith, Olsen, Padgett, Scolar, and Topp Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Incalcaterra and Mores Staff Present: Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner; Jerree Gaynor, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS The commissioners were reminded of their next TSP task force meeting on March 20th and were given copies of the TSP preliminary draft. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES Commissioner Padgett moved and Commissioner Olsen seconded the motion to approve the February 7, 2000, meeting minutes as submitted. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed by a vote of 5-0. Commissioners Griffith and Scolar abstained. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ZOA) 1999-00003 CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAYCARE CENTERS IN ALL INDUSTRIAL ZONES The applicant is proposing a Zone Ordinance Amendment to change the City of Tigard Community Development Code to allow daycare uses outright or conditionally in all Industrial zoned properties. LOCATION: All Industrial Zones Citywide. ZONES: Light Industrial, I-L; Industrial Park, I-P; and Heavy Industrial, I-H. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development i Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Polices 5 and 12.3; The Metro 2040 Plan; and Statewide Planning Goals 2 and 9. STAFF REPORT a Julia Hajduk presented the staff report on behalf of the City. To clarify the acreage figures reported in the Summary of Facts, she submitted a map which takes into account development restrictions due to flood plain and wetland areas that were not shown in the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March G, 2000 - Page I report. Total vacant industrial land is 147.97 acres and vacant industrial park land is 63.87 acres. Staffs recommendation is for denial of the request based on the limited amount of vacant industrial land available for development. Numerous recent applications for development of industrial land show that it is needed and is being used. Additionally, daycare uses are already allowed for up to 20% of development in vacant industrial parks, as well as in existing industrial parks so long as the addition of a daycare facility does not exceed 20% when combined with other existing non-industrial uses. The Planning Commission should recommend to the City Council that the application be denied. Commissioner Tapp asked how the 20% non-industrial usage is monitored. Ms. Hajduk said that they monitor it at the application stage for development revisions or new tenant improvements, but ultimately it is the owner/developer's responsibility to maintain that quota. If it came to staffs attention that 20% is being exceeded, then it becomes a Code enforcement issue. A list of uses showing calculations of the square footage of the various uses is requested with the development application. In the Code thera is a list of uses that are allowed in the industrial park zone. In combination, non-industrial uses cannot exceed 20% of the industrial development. The uses include eating and drinking establishments, daycare, general retail, personal services, and other non-industrial uses. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION John Brosy, 161 High St. SE, Suite 204, Salem, OR 97301, is a planning consultant. He said this has to do with fine-tuning the existing City Code. Unlike surrounding jurisdictions, Tigard does not allow commercial daycare use in light or heavy industrial zones unless it is included in the 20% total non-industrial uses. Parents want daycare close to their place of employment. In Tigard the industrial zones are mainly. concentrated in the southeast quadrant where there is little or no commercial, residential, or mixed use zones that do allow daycare use. The concentration of industrial zoning limits complimentary commercial uses such as daycare in close proximity to employment in the industrial zone and results in a large area with a lot of employees who cannot be close to a daycare facility. This makes the area less competitive for businesses recruiting family-age employees because it requires employees to travel additional miles in order to take their children to a daycare. Mr. Brosy used an overhead projector to point out the different zoning areas and to compare Tigard's zoning uses with other cities. Portland, Beaverton, Tualatin, Salem, and Gresham allow daycare uses either outright or as a conditional use in industrial areas. He said that daycare facilities are serving other areas of Tigard pretty well, but there is currently only one facility (Rocking Horse Daycare on Boones Ferry Road) in an industrial-zoned area. This facility's long waiting list points to a need for additional daycare in the area. Mr. Brosy believes staff is justified in its concern about protecting the supply of industrial land. However, daycare uses are an efficient land use because they typically are located on significantly less than an acre and are generally of higher value than industrial improvements. The pre-school age group in a daycare requires more indoor play space for security reasons, and a relatively small outdoor play area, which results in a good-sized building with adequate parking existing on a parcel of land that is only 30,000 to 40,000 square feet in size. When a daycare is established, others tend to not locate in the same PLANNING COMMISSION 10LETING MINUTES - March 6, 2000 - Page 2 area; therefore, if they were allowed, only a small number of daycare facilities would be added. This is a small, efficient, and complimentary use for an industrial area. Mr. Brosy elaborated on the positive effects of allowing daycares, using the Fred Meyer Corporate Center in Portland as an example. He said the applicant would like to see this use allowed outright in the IP and IL zones and as a conditional use in the IH zone. Commissioner Olsen asked how many children are in a daycare facility on average. Mr. Brosy said that Mir. Blackwell could answer that question. Mr. Brosy's information is only about the average size of 35,000 to 40,000 square feet for a typical daycare facility. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN FAVOR Jim Blackwell, 2838 SW Orchard Hill, Lake Oswego, OR 97035, is the owner of the Wilsonville and Durham Learning Tree daycare facilities. This application results from his approach to an industrial landowner about building a daycare facility, due to the waiting list and demand in his current facilities. His and other facilities in the area are in very high demand. Their experience is that people want daycare close to where they work. He has been looking for a new location for three years and this is the first site he has found that combines proximity to both employers and residential areas, ease of access, and a school appearance with a good presentation to parents. Facilities that are built inside industrial improvements have not been successful because they were not intended to be used by both the employees of the area as well as local residents; a freestanding building that is not part of an industrial improvement is best. The site he is interested in meets these criteria and there are no other daycare facilities in the area. Daycare nearby is also an advantage to employers and has become a consideration as an employee benefit and a way to recruit new employees because it has become a high priority to employees. A daycare facility adds value to the development of surrounding businesses and their employees. In response to Commissioner Olsen's earlier question, the number of children enrolled in a daycare is determined by the square footage and set forth by the State of Oregon. The facility he is looking at would have 100 children, which is average for the area. Commissioner Olsen inquired about the hours of operation and parking requirements. Mr. Blackwell responded that it changes by location. Typically it is 6:30 a.m. to 6:15 p.m. His Durham facility, with 100 children, has 20 parking spots and in four years the parking lot has never been full. Commissioner Topp asked what the typical distance is between facilities. He pointed out that if the Durham facility has a waiting list, another facility could simply be built nearby. Mr. Blackwell said it is about five miles or less. An operation cannot become too large because of the level of operational efficiency and because parents prefer a small school to a larger one. Commissioner Topp posed a question to staff about internal daycare (within an individual company) being considered the same as commercial daycare and included in the 20% allowed for non-industrial uses. Ms. Hajduk said that is correct. The Code does not PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March 6, 2000 - Page 3 1110 1111111 111111N I provide for daycare as an accessory to any company and therefore an in-house daycare, whether in the company's building or as a separate building, cannot exceed 20% of non- industrial use in that company's development complex. This is something that can be addressed in this application review process. Commissioner Olsen asked for an explanation of how this system evolved and how much of Tigard's industrial land is currently developed. In response, it was noted that the purpose is the protection of industrial land for future development and that approximately two-thirds of available industrial land is already developed. Ms. Hajduk pointed out areas on the map showing land that is considered vacant or underdeveloped. All other industrial zoned land is either developed or has approval for development. In response to a question from Commissioner Topp, Ms. Hajduk said the distance from top to bottom is about 10,000 feet, or 2 miles. President Wilson pointed out that Tigard has very little industrial land to begin with relative to other cities. Ms. Hajduk said this is acknowledged in the Comprehensive Plan, which was developed in the early 1980s. Commissioner Griffith asked if daycares are allowed outright in commercial and residential zones. Ms. Hajduk replied that the State mandates that cities cannot prohibit daycares of less than six children in any residential zone. Therefore, daycares of up to six children are permitted outright, and more students are permitted as a conditional use, in all residential zones. It is a permitted use outright in all commercial zones. The only areas it is not permitted outright is in the industrial zones, but are permitted up to 20% in industrial park zones. After a brief discussion it was determined that there are approximately 14 daycare facilities in Tigard, the majority of which are located by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99). Commissioner Topp noted that a residence located in an industrial zone is allowed to operate a daycare of up to six children pursuant to allowance by the State. Commissioner Anderson asked what the philosophy is behind preserving industrial land. Ms. Hajduk said it is to ensure that land is available for industrial uses that cannot be located in other areas. The City is required to provide a certain amount of commercial, industrial, and residential land, and to keep a balance of among the areas. This is part of the statewide planning goals. Commissioner Topp commented that those standards for particular land use are now Metro's standards for job creation. Most cities try to balance it based on economic factors. President Wilson asked if industrial land provides more in taxes than they consume in services. After a brief discussion, it was noted that industrial land does provide more in taxes than residential, but not necessarily more than commercial land. Commissioner Padgett said that from a tax standpoint in general, industrial zoning is considered to be the "best bang for the buck" for the City. Despite the lower industrial tax PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March G, 2000 - Pagc 4 NW.J ligillilloill 111011=11MEN - A rate, the amount of services used (for instance, police and street maintenance) is generally much lower in ratio than for residential areas. Commissioner Anderson asked if a conditional use request could be made by this applicant. Ms. Hajduk responded that sufficient conditional use language has not been proposed and therefore staff was not in a position to make that recommendation. Dick Bewersdorff commented that the applicant could make that proposal, but he feels there is no longer value in the conditional use process in Tigard, and that such a proposal would not do any good, it would only be an exercise in bureaucracy. Mr. Brosy said this proposal would not be made if there were commercial alternatives for a location in the large southeast industrial area. He briefly discussed his understanding of the need to protect industrial land, the lack-of commercial alternatives in the area, and the value of this proposal to the area. PUBLIC TESTIMONY None PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Topp said he was concerned that existing industry cannot have in-house daycare considered exclusive of the 20% limit. He believes a business should be able to have internal daycare because it is not a commercial use, and he would like to see if that can be remedied. However, he is only in favor of allowing commercial daycare if there is a restriction on the proximity of facilities to each other and on a facility's site being no more than one acre, thereby limiting the number that can be developed in the area. Commissioner Scolar feels that daycare would be a complimentary use and would make the area more attractive to businesses that may want to locate there. Commissioner Padgett said he agrees with the staff recommendation because this is a legislative hearing and is not meant to be project specific. There has been no request for this use from citizens or industrial area business owners. While he agrees that a business should be able to have internal daycare, he does not believe commercial daycare facilities should be allowed on the limited amount of land available for industrial development. There has been no evidence that companies are not building in the area or that people will not work in the area because there is no daycare. However, he would support some sort of measure allowing companies in all industrial zones to operate an in-house daycare for employees. Commissioner Olsen thinks daycare is a complimentary use and would benefit parents and families. Building a facility is a major investment and a prudent businessperson would not build a new facility in close proximity to an existing one, so the density would be self- regulating. He is in favor of this request. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March G, 2000 - Page 5 President Wilson said he is a consumer of daycare services. From where he lives, he must drive past all the industrial areas and go a fair extra distance to get to the daycare, so he recognizes the strong convenience factor to having daycare close to work and home. However, it cannot be said what people will do for convenience, because different people do different things. He said he agrees with Commissioner Padgett that this is a legislative matter and not a quasi-judicial one. The Comprehensive Plan states that there is a very serious concern about the amount of industrial land available. For this reason, he does not recommend this change to the Code. Even though he does feel it is a compatible use and that there is a shortage of this service in that area, if it were not for the shortage of industrial land he would support the change. Commissioner Anderson said she agrees with President Wilson, and also agrees with Commissioner Padgett that something should be worked out so that existing businesses in the area are able to have an on-site facility that does not apply to the 20% limit for non- industrial uses. President Wilson stated that while the Commissioners cannot change the Code at this meeting, they must rule one way or the other for recommendation to the City Council. However, the Planning Commission can encourage the applicant to approach staff to further discuss this matter. Commissioner Topp commented that any resident can bring legislative action to the Planning Commission. This is not a site-specific request, but one with respect to a particular use, so he believes it is an appropriate legislative matter and not a quasi-judicial action. This is an opportunity to add this change to the Code and to direct staff to develop appropriate language for this and to hold another hearing. Commissioner Padgett responded that he is not sure he wants to ask staff to draft new language on allowing businesses that own their own building to be able to, provide in- house daycare. He believes this should go through the City Attorney because there are some legal issues that need to be addressed. After further brief discussion, Commissioner Padgett moved that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of denial to the City Council of ZOA 1999-00003. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. Commissioner Griffith asked for comments and clarification regarding distances people travel to daycare and what daycare users consider a convenient distance. Upon further discussion, a voice vote was taken and the motion passed by a vote of 5-2. Commissioners Anderson, Griffith, Padgett, Topp, and Wilson voted yes; Coy gmissioners Olsen and Scolar voted no. 6. OTHER BUSINESS None PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March G, 2000 - Page 6 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:35. erree aynor, Plan ng o fission Secretary ATTEST: reside Nick Wls PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March 6, 2000 - Page 7 wme®enarnR3Gnc7G1~l~AlIA1RII®f~RIdIAflRRA .Ca "•i• 'till,\•r:~C•. '('!I• ,'{''~=Li• S:~Y~ '"1'~ VY +h1• ~ .~,y♦ .1. ,iz• •J art;<°%. _ r x;''ih' ;.y,:jr".~': Y.+'.t 4,.Y~b.. .4i•~•i !7.3.~~~~6.~.. ~1G•w..Y_wa~!. "jij :rl, iW. ,i ~y ':e I'- .lrar. `ja Yp,iyi 'sl. . •,:..:7': '•'r...nl: !t . 1'd t f ~i:.L: A': ' ' ~ vid', :,i•~'N" a ti , S .t`r t ' •"t• .`S° "iL,Y: •r~, ••:,,T';.:'~t,•,~ =Ci'i ,k.y7:;;%;l;y:tr• ,a ,7J. . tI K/ `At's•~~. ...~~r~• •"r• ~~:.+.T ~ ~ Y!c.`!.~,°M1+ 11~ •s ~ ':~~1~'•~;~''C:~~!1:1~7G~i?'-)f :a. ; ',,a + ~rz a Ws 1 is+~ ~.i1~1Y ` P~JL`'-: . I• - Saleai; CiR'97g61:' Laxid''latiaiiai an DeveloP 'iiie t Services i' $ Supplemental Information .ZOA 1999-0003 City of Tigard File Legislative Code Ameitdment Request Re: Day Care Centers:in'IIndustrial Zones.'. The legislative c6de:ehange proposal to'aliow daycare centers`as outright br conditional ; . ' uses in industrial zones in•the, City'of Tigard c6nforms tQ periineni.City, of Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and Statewide. Planning Goals .jn the following' ways: Tigard Comprehensive Plan Volume II, of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan entitled "Findings, Policies & Implementation Strategies, is a decision-making consideration under TMC 18.390.060(G). That document includes Section 12.3, Locational Criteria/Industrial. Please note that Section 11, Special Areas of Concern does not include any policies or strategies that would be affected by the proposed code change. Implementation item 3 under 12.3, Industrial, states: "Protect existing acrd potential lands writable for itidrtstrial deielopnreiti from encroachment .by troll-irrdttstr-ial or incompatible rises. " Our application explains that the average commercial day care center only occupies less than one acre, and because of the desire to have day care facilities near places of employment, such land uses are complimentary to industrial areas and should be seen as supporting the viability of the large, existing industrial areas in Tigard by making those industrial areas more attractive to employees with young children. Many parents of very young children visit those children during the work day, so proximity of day care to employment centers reduces vehicle trip miles, The application material already submitted indicated that the average day care center business occupies less than one acre. They do not pose a significant threat to the supply of industrial land. Please refer to the City of Tigard zoning map. Other than the large amount of I-P, I-H and I-L zoned lands as shown on the City zoning map (portion) included in the application, there is only one other area of industrial zoning in the entire city limits of Tigard. This is the smaller area running along the SPRR tracks and Tigard Avenue northwest of Hwy. 99, and including the Koll Business Center on the Tigard side of Scholls Ferry Road and the area extending to south of Hwy. 217 and west of Greenburg Road. Distribution of day care centers in other cities suggest that if the code is amended, the City of Tigard may ultimately expect, at the most, only two or three new day care businesses in the southeast industrial area as shown on the map included in the code amendment request. ' r;,i: ;1•.• .Y l.•C-:' 1'-y... :1• .t't,.~: ,ti •'E•': •'tl'• . t,.k Y•• • ..•i + :J J.:: h `L'. : Lr•,• 4i .4 , '•J-'•'nl..,_:'~ 1 ''j '->'`lji•t;:;-''.•~+~ ~i~~%" r' .ij~. 1; ysr Y~.ot yy~~i rlii•1' +:Vi'i ..y,.~'~et•>"., n t. ,:'~t!•. y.i,y 'F,~Crv `1`.. 4:••• .:.~;,..p'!., ?;'y.. w r. '•.S. f, lF:CI.. kS1L_~ rM _ _ ` ,'r,.~.4.:;{l- 7d%,'tf 'f: fi-.. ~'s'i )'~1".'• va'l ~:Y.rX:n ~L^~./': i. ff~,. - sy. C'•i, .;t"^t"nos:, _:C;`:1• 1 •y ':•f" V•{T.. ti`!`..,i:~,:;- •.7.xj y'i y'.t' !y • t it :2 , .rr.. ' . :.Irl• • 1. -S r.=ti"?r.E;,. ••rw ....i.r iG:. .~rr,•,:....},. ;~r+:5" 't~':r~X. n. a::y,- .,t .f..• "t~, .r`T. :bra s?. { '~i+'•.. :f,,'°;a:i+,y~•' ,t, ~4 ,C; p:•y~.. .r.. Lr. 1 ,R :ii.. .r:+:.i-niti:.t• ,.r:. !y.~,y/.'~..y',~:;i;,f~f.:; f ''1~,1.Y•! •.fI.2~. .1"i.: ; •`'.l,Rti`,.,?~'.,~•:" ~M.'r,r'.. t ~.'s: S :'r: fj ,rS, Yt:•Gr:,;::,`' f~ t e:'r .J : !'7~ j..,. ~•rt.~' tw.-1 ' Y ~i• S ; r: ~~%...l~a}':.S `,i~~:F; 1 +M',,;d,¢+:i:.1. ,.7.i7~ii ',;.'r. .!i~, f,.s ..~J.. :r; •ri ar..,.. rti ~f.~"y+ ~r'~: i:7'tr• +r•?t,,'.til ~v.•y .~$'}.r, ry,. ' j: •%.ti': +~'.:r , . ^ V :il, ~i 4 ~a~'Ji`';i~i'4„ 4.r , ' "..a' • ~'i'. • .r- .~;.v,~f., i • A! .S" ` 1 •y.• •'qY. j?t.~;•{'~• i+" ~';";;%3•a •.2,~ .t 3,; y:;:.: , R~•....:t~•',:~'A-'`<~'~ ;}.-i+~t, - ' j, r: :,~"'."~'`l„''l.• d.-~i'.a' : ef:~~~n't':I~:y` ra, S.;i .•i `f?:.`r.: :.i ":u.; ) ~.7,'',~}.,,;~.. '•~::•~t''• ,r,. ~I:'~":...'i„yf!6;Sb~,N ..a.. .t:t `r;. l.t~ys;:?H +;i.tf ~~:~•1t:~.. ~ff.+}ii13 r,t., r•.1.:~q.•. '!ii•:. i'{ r.;r..; ,r:• 't ..Y.. n,., v j' ~ : t t '2r ~rZ~Y'', fit. r'{ 1'Y.h ~~l+~ '•`At^•"ir,". •l. 2' A S '1 jr f s i-•.t. ` h,, :,t l rP, i F ~i 4' ~SuPl?.lemenfto',ZOA 1999-0003 ;;Pale 2 :',Because that other industrial area described above is smaller and narrower, and there are ' other sites.nearby that would also allow-day cars as outright:or :conditional uses; it is'not : ' . f :likely that any more day c"ares:will be 1"orated in'that area in the, foreseeablefuture if the code'weze -changed as proposed: -Much D, that other indu'sfrial area.has the added , . ` constraint of the Fanno Creek flood plain. . ..-Although 'not speeifically noted in the Plan's,. olicies for'iridusfrial.lands in Tigard, it 'seems prudent to encourage complimentary , supportive land uses such- as day race. centers that - reduce vehicle trip riles on the transportation network, and that are desired by employees, .of industrial areas (see Statewide Goals, below). Metro Metro's Region 2040 Plan does not have specificpolicies or code issues that relate to the :kind of complimentary land uses that should be permitted or otherwise encouraged by Tigard in its industrial districts. This was confirmed by senior planners of the City of Tigard and Metro. Statewide Planning Goals Statewide Goal 9, Economic Development requires Comprehensive plans.for urban areas to: "(3.) Provide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, locations, and seri~ice level:' for: a variety of industrial and commercial uses consistent with plan policies." While the City of Tigard has a very successful and large, competitive southeastern area devoted to industrial uses, employees with day care-age children must. travel outside this large area for day care services. This is because of the large concentration of industrial zoning that now do not allow day cares as either outright or conditional uses. Day care should be.considered a valuable, complimentary land use for high quality industrial areas of Tigard. Their locations are now unnecessarily restricted by the City of Tigard Zoning Code. Another requirement for Comprehensive plans in Statewide Goal 9 is "(l.) Limit uses on or 'near: sites zones, for specific industrial and commercial rises to those li'lnich are compatible i4th proposed uses. " Similar language exists in the Tigard Plan. The highest level of compatible use is one that is actually also complimentary to the primary mission of the area, which is industrial. Day care businesses located suitably close to large employment centers are desired features for the employees of an industrial area, and thus, the competitive health of Tigard's industrial areas. - r 1.• .M ,.Fyn,,; :.1; :,,,i~ fir,;.!:. tilr• '^N•.;++r7• `.Y'ti. a~'L( 1 r~t Dili' i'. j• - "yam:. •4i~: 7~. "N' v: • ~ 'r~Y :.'•.`liA r w; f . t~li°' J "i' 1~':'~,.''~Y:~ p v yrY ti:. 'Ri'"' .r •q: Yr IC.....~.:~.°~~ rv~ r_ti' i ^;L,• .~.5 .+.irr .:f rk,..•?,,.. `g{ '.j r:~• T... .~•t. .k . 'Y~(.~ft.. ,4}1.1 :~l".'y. ~ . t .q..~ 4,.. . t ~ ;:'.d xiY.'q•' •ti,' ~Y`;F,~r ..,ta'llr!. :~M.~:"io+.•1a'••`'+: ;~lrio4'~;yir~;Z.r;y. :r r~- k• r ::ate'. ~a't;~:~•~~ ".%,4`0i:;f ,4;~,''..~}~+r r,}, V,G:.'~ M -J. . t+:f,'i: ,,v,.. 1: , : ' I' I F L. ,vT . •.}N t• 5~ nip, }a N. 'f..t• `!M`}.f'Y~'•..a" ;i!'t~' r`..1'! >r Jar :ti. i e.i ~:.l:.1 .14 1 ..Y :•J: C.:' . pa r • ,+.,5,:.,..!, .y . ,.H;• ,1•.~ ~•"C'.. ~?.....r. .'tl%A.Y., y ':t v rim ;f.,~,'•?~;- aid: ~•':1 •tsr. r`cCr('o yr r1. 'f ,r; .a. „~Y•: ~ . t f .r. .i .•f.;17 ~ri•"'q, :°o:: Y:•r,tK' e}r. 1.,~:'t !S.J'~,,~; .~`r M i:~a ~ .i ~..ti. ] v' t • ' ~a~ 'S'i~• '•"'kl;': `'F a':F .r: y 'Qj' y``•• r ,t 4• 'tv ,1. 4,t 7i4.• . ",ti:''\rf) t t v:,,:.iie~1~.. F.r~' ! r ~9,'„~.r' Y, .4!, r.;,r(.• :1-.'.'~,'`rs t r' 1 _•'',t•. ..,.5. ,~YSrv <!,i •J, .r ~ l•..'l:.!' :`.r i'. ~f:?,,"a.~i'4: ,.t7~"'~\. . 6:~ r Cll, ~.~.I:F.:• sa~j::s~rr. `.Sia plement to ZOA 1999-0093. - Page 3: Statewide Goal' 12 is -Transportation...Oregon Administrative Rules (CAR) include Divis10i n'012, Trarisportaiion Planning, Arid. the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR PL. lements'Statewide Plarinin$'Goal:12. ;The first serifenee of.the purpose section which im- of the TPR (OAR 660-012-0000) is: - "The purpose of ibis dwision is to inrPlemetlI Statewide Plah ling Goal 12 (TiraMportation) dnd promote the development of safe, Colivenient and economie ; 'hransportation systems that are designed to reduce-reliance on the autolilobile:so that the air pollution, traffic and other livability problems faced by urban areas-in other parts of the country might, be avoided..:'.' Later in the same paragraph, the Purpose statement continues: "This portion of the rule aims to improve the livability of urban areas by promoting changes in land use patterns and the transportatio'r system that make it more convenient for people to ii'alk, bicycle and use transit, and drive less to meet their daily needs. Changing land use and travel patterns will also complement state and local efforts to meet other objectives, including containing urban development, reducing the cost of public services, protecting farm and forest land, reducing air, water and noise pollution, consern~ing energy and reducing emissions of greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change....". (emphasis added) One important decision-making factor for parents choosing day cares is proximity to place of work. Allowing day cares as outright or conditional uses in Tigard industrial zones that are significantly large concentrations of employment will compliment the purposes of the industrial zones in the City and will enable people to drive less vehicle miles and therefore reduce air pollution, conserve energy and reduce emissions.. This effect is particularly evident for parents of very young children in day cares, as previously stated in this application. The TPR requires Metro and the City of Tigard to adopt Transportation System Plans (TSP's). One measurable objective of the TSP for Metro (of which Tigard is a part) is a 10% reduction in automobile vehicle miles traveled (VISIT) per capita for the Metro area within 20 years of adoption of a (TSP) plan. In addition that significant objective, a an additional 5% reduction of VMT within 30 years of adoption of the TSP is required through "subsequent planning efforts" [OAR 660-012-0035 (4)(b) and (c)]. oil 2 ..i ; I' ti ,f~~" 1,6 f YA -0`' Y r i•i .`~•';'iJ L~ t •r•.; jh; ;s f> v': t ikr h ...r`~} 'v,~, ~t~ ~r11•'~x:. ♦ tv.?.'. i'.. _ '!:s'•. Y7 }`6Y...~~t1C-;'•r tiar~'';,~ 4 .1 1 h-. ;r ,f.*i'~\i.•f: ~t:i.~:!dr~'r'~.'; i?~~!ry' T:..q ti; . J :ii ;•Y'~ :~i~ ii;%t.. '~~$'F. {.1-•..~. .t.•'Y. F{. ~ i. ~.t ~t• 1 -R}, n t•' ~Fi tn. ~~j. r•v:.: .7-(% ..ice r. 'Sa: .y,.t' 'y-^ji;• s r n7~ o f t». i.. L.Y.•'trf`~,rJ ~f~iijr: : ir'.: ,r~ ' t . t '7 T i !:7; ;v^1: T:'~ fit. ` • 'r'':•5','{ti•t;i~ •t7`~1SL •~;?rA. a. Vf• ✓4. .{ry', 'j:. •ti'~;^~;i,Yf^Q'.. . ♦ Y. ♦ ;i a •S:~•!~ o- ~av:' :4.ii '•.(..~Je•~~:~!°-."•,': ~t .t~6.; r:.,►:q .,r . .i :rt> rt•..tt rK,~ •~'•~.{,,,r.. ..y.t~'~-• •!T• ; .,r •4'' :~,5.±t~ •,r .:1',:"', y.' ..Y•.•,':r. ,A.,y ~3~ e. ,..c^t'.~1r.~f .};i;~t'• y!; y.vCY4 ti':h'~w•" .x •r. .~)''•'S✓i 'S- t .,7i~t~~: )%i, ~yf: .i.:iA7~`- ir,t• •'r`• i7 k%i. t•Y~ •f:ran.,.tr.. ,y'.1•-Xt•RYr+yl~y +tCrK,. •~Yr , 3 +:r :;'N•^ ~ o:, :~~f{.IH ~ i.. : Pi. t']. ^~1l ..7 ~ • 1 O ~ i ~ .tiy,~l.n,i ~•r„ .`.,•l:.i'~ .C.: r' n':7• L. a.~~',r .rs 1•it~.:+ye'• ,.7t..: r.'~Y~ •7.:~\'.,11.6~.~`♦~.o.L~'~t :~u•, ;f'<h ~'`1. ,'~•p.'1..~^^ .,f•. )S is •{4' ,Y.✓ ':u~,•: • f; ?:P,i 6 • .9 i; n.:<• { , 3r:.. ,5.1 ;~i: t' r ~'4a,:..-1, , r~F. ~Z~:: , . ~ ~ .k'j~' . Z'tlit ~F~ f w'~%~ °:1:;: t . ~1.~' a. 1.u ~d . r~.,r;~• • r ..2:.5: ~.k':y. fig' s•'. • A ';g, y. l..• rr~,'.J..`:,•. .ai- ,'r'-'; ~~^c'u P.;,, ,.r. rS:; 'fS.. +:.1, - 6. R Y, .:,•y,, .A.•r ^.14~. J~fN n1~}..aii•v~. r a. •'~••:~.;i~+r rJ 1 g + a ;?y-•'C; _ .J:..,;o-. S. •t:, r .yr ^V. .h ✓t .ysY~...f.:':!': ~yii')~!.'~3f: ~ 1 7 n;. ri,, ,i,y,i •t.,~ •t; `•S y. i t t -a„ ✓f';r-: ~:',~t. cj~,~3{:{:,lit'•,.t;Y,6' :~t• y'• t.i't'" •nr ~T>. ~ «:'K:, -'i. x. -0003: : . Suppl1eht fo'ZOA X999 Pa$e Q, educe,VMT; forahe ne will help r 1tY ° ; ; proposed amendment to: the c of Tigard Co reasons already stated. . JLB ON= • City Of 7 ,ard : Total Industrial Are: 'n Acres. 5/4/99 ZONING TYPE OVERLAY ACRES I-P COM 184.51 I-P IND 5.77 I-P IND 53.17 I-P IND 12.54 I-P IND 215.29 I-P IND 79.82 551.10 I-L IND 14.32 I-L COM 363.71 \ 378.03 I-H IND 58.04 58.04 Total Industrial 987.17 There are approximately 160 parcels in Zones I-P, I-L, and I-H. 1 •s ~ . RAPNIC INFORYA71ON yYdtEM O£OO rndust"al Zon°T . 1-P 1-L 1- tP N 300D ~ I o ,mo 20° P 1 PC~, of TiB~ ~p}Storq~~`x` dtau+ ~=J ' , ^ ' ' Y .161 High St:.SE T .0.5 ' Land. Planning and. Development Services . Salem, OR 97301 • ; •',(503) 316-1842 July 12, 1999 Mark Roberts Associate Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Legislative-Code Amendment Request Regarding Day Care Centers in Industrial Zones Dear Mr. Roberts: The following information supports a request to amend the City of Tigard Zoning Code, to allow child day care centers as outright or conditional uses in the City's three industrial zones (I-P, I-L and I-H). These commercial day centers, known by such business names in the southwest metropolitan area as Kindercare, Leaming Tree and Tutor Time, are allowed in industrial zones in surrounding jurisdictions, which recognize that child care centers have an important reason to be located near places of industrial employment. Despite the common practice of other, bordering cities, Tigard remains the only City that does not allow such uses in their three I-zones. Description of Use Type In the Tigard Code, these uses are defined as "Institutional Day Care," which is a day care facility operated for 13 or more children [Chapter 18.130, Use Classifications, Section 18.130.020(A)(5)(c). Other neighboring cities call them Child Care Facilities (Beaverton), Child Day Care Center (Tualatin), Day Care Facility (Washington County) or Daycare (Portland). These kind of day care centers typically occupy a building of approximately 7,000-10,000 square feet with a 2,000-3,000 sq. ft. playground, approximately 15-25 parking spaces, on a total parcel size of 32,000 sq. ft. to 38,000 sq. ft. In other cities, these uses are very often located on collector or arterial streets in both industrial and commercial zones. One important locational factor is that many parents spend part of their lunch hour or other part of the work day visiting their child, so proximity to place of work is important to parents. Overall trip miles are reduced when the center is located near the place of work. Close proximity to parents' work place is an important locational factor in the child care center business. Mark Roberts July 12, 1999 Page 2 Day Care Centers in Industrial Zones of Neighboring Cities The zoning codes of the four major cities (not including Durham or King City) which abut the City of Tigard were compared, as they relate to day care centers in industrial zones. Those four cities are Portland, Beaverton, Tualatin and Lake Oswego. Portland In the City of Portland, these uses are called "Daycare." As such, they are allowed as outright uses in Portland's EG1 (General Employment 1), EG2 (General Employment 2), and EX (Central Employment) zones. They are permitted as conditional uses in that city's IG1 (General Industrial 1), IG2 (General Industrial 2), and IH (Heavy Industrial) zones. Daycare uses which are 3,000 sq. ft. or less in floor area do not require conditional uses in the IG1, IG2 or IH zones. The conditional use approval criteria in the City of Portland's industrial zones for Daycare uses are intended to promote preservation of land for industry while allowing other (daycare) uses when they are supportive of the industrial area or not detrimental to the character of the industrial area. The approval criteria are (33.815.125): A. The proposed use will not have significant adverse effects on nearby industrial firms; B. The transportation system is capable of safely supporting the proposed use in addition to the existing uses in the area. Evaluation factors include street capacity and level of service, access to arterials, transit availability, on-street parking impacts, lot access requirements neighborhood impacts, and pedestrian safety; C. The proposed use will not significantly alter the overall industrial character of the area, based on the existing proportion of industrial and non-industrial uses and the effects of incremental changes; D. The proposed use needs to be located in the industrial area or building because industrial firms or their employees constitute the primary market of the proposed use; and E. City-cdesignlted sceiric resoru•ces are preserved. Mark Roberts July 12, 1999 Page 3 Beaverton The City of Beaverton defines nursery, day or child care facility as providing care for compensation for seven or more children on Matrix) during a 24-hour period. As such, they are permitted as outright uses in Beaverton's IP, Industrial Park and LI, Light Industrial zones. [20.15.10(A)(17) and 20.15.15(A)(19)]. In the CI, Campus Industrial zone, they are permitted so long as they are use no greater than 60% of the land area in a "development control area." These are the only three industrial zones in the City of Beaverton on Matrix). In Beaverton's code section 60.40.25, there are special requirements for these facilities, wherever they are located. The outdoor play area must have a minimum of 100 sq. ft. of play area for every 1 /3 of the total licensed capacity of children. The play area has fencing requirements. Facilities licenses for 40 or more children may be required to have a driveway designed for continuous forward flow of passenger vehicles for the purpose of loading and unloading children. Tualatin The City of Tualatin describes this same use as a Child Day Care Center (zoning code page 31-6, definitions). These uses are allowed outright in all three of that city's industrial zones. Those zones are ML, Light Manufacturing, MG, General Manufacturing and MP, Manufacturing Park. The only stipulation is that in the MP and ML zones, exterior walls and outdoor play areas shall be a minimum of 400 feet from the exterior wall and pump islands of any automobile service station, irrespective of any structures in between on Matrix). i Lake Oswego i The City of Lake Oswego does not define the size and kind of day care centers that are part of this city code comparison. Lake Oswego only defines facilities that regularly accommodate 12 or fewer children. All other day care facilities are considered in the broad category of "institutional uses." Lake Oswego has very little industrial zoning as a percentage of total city area. They have two industrial zones. These are called Industrial (I) and Industrial Park (IP). Institutional uses are not permitted as outright or conditional uses in these two zones. Mark Roberts July 9, 1999 Page 4 Other Cities Two other cities are added to the comparison. Because of the large size (by Oregon standards), these cities have several similar facilities. Salem The City of Salem defines Child Day Care Center as a facility which provides child care or kindergarten for 13 or more children. Salem has four industrial zone classifications. They are called Industrial Business Campus (IBC), Industrial Park (IP), General Industrial (IG), and Intensive Industrial (II). That City allows Child Day Care Centers as outright (permitted) uses in all four industrial zones. Salem also has a "hybrid" zone called Industrial Commercial, which allows a mixture of different uses. Child Day Care Centers are not allowed as outright or conditional uses in that particular zone. Gresham Child Care Facilities are regulated by the City of Gresham as "Community Services" in Article VIII, "Special Uses" (8.0100) of their Land Development Code. Gresham has three industrial zones. They are called Business Park (BP), Light Industrial (LI) and Heavy Industrial (HI). Child care facilities for 13 or more children are allowed in all three industrial zones through that city's Type III, Community Services approval process. This Type III process is essentially a conditional use, but is heard by Gresham's Planning Commission rather than their Land Use Hearings Officer. Day Care Centers as Land Users It is recognized that the City of Tigard no longer has a large supply of vacant or under- utilized land zoned for industrial uses. This is locally important from a tax base standpoint. The general understanding is that residentially zoned land demands more services than it generates in property taxes, and commercial and industrial land demands U~ 111111M 1=1 Mark Roberts July 12, 1999 Page 5 less services than are generated in property taxes for those businesses. However, the familiar child day care centers such as Kindercare, Learning Tree, and Tutor Time typically occupy sites of less than one acre in size. As private businesses, they pay property taxes just like industrial businesses. The improvement component of a property's assessed valuation is dependent upon building cost and value. Since the typical day cane center building is commercial grade construction and details, these businesses often pay more in property taxes on their real property improvements than many industrial uses now allowed in Tigard's three industrial zones. Children day care center uses are seen by almost all cities in the metropolitan region as supportive of industrial areas. Typically the sites used by children day care centers are efficiently used, because of high land values and the competitive nature of the child care business. Compatibility Issues Compatibility between children day care centers and other industrial uses, when the centers are allowed to locate in industrial zones, is handled extremely well by the competition of the private business sector. A center that is located near another use, whether it is incompatible or only perceived as incompatible, will not succeed in the marketplace which has other child care location options for parents. This situation is so obvious to those business owners that there are no examples of these kind of incompatible land uses in the southwest Portland metropolitan area. This is not because of zoning codes, because as the survey of other city code shows, day care centers are usually allowed in industrial zones. There are no incompatibility issues because of practical business decisions of day care center owners. In industrial parks where there may be many business leases with one land owner, there is an additional protection against incompatible uses, exercised by the property owner to protect his/her existing tenants. r Mark Roberts April July 9, 1999 Page 6 Effect of Excluding Day Care Facilities in Tigard's Industrial Zones Southeastern Tigard is where the majority of industrial land is located in the City of Tigard. In particular, the land bounded by I-5, Highway 217, Fanno Creek and the southern City limits of Tigard is dominated by I-L, I-P and I-H zones. Very little vacant land of any kind in this area has any other zone. The City of Tigard now does not allow children day care centers as outright or conditional uses in any of these three zones. This is despite the fact that a very large population of persons employed in that area use day care facilities for their children. The most significant industrial area of the City of Tigard is not and cannot be supported by even one day care use, because of the restrictions now found in the City Code. Because of the limited vacant land in Tigard, the practical effect of changing the zoning code text will probably be the location of one or possibly two new day care businesses in the large industrial area previously described. It should be noted that The City of Tigard recently completed a rezoning of the "Tigard Triangle" area which is on the north edge of the enclosed zoning map. The "Mixed Use Employment" (MUE) zone used in the Triangle does allow commercial day care centers. However, this does not solve the problem in the southeast industrial area because in fact the Triangle area is across the freeway and fairly distant from a travel-time standpoint, from much of the industrial lands in this part of the City. The MUE designation helps, but it does not solve the siting problem for the large majority of the southeast industrial area. One effect of the peculiarity of the Tigard code as it relates to commercial day cares is that the closest day care to this area, which is located near the City limits of Tigard in the City of Durham, has a very high demand. Because of facility capacity and government requirements concerning staffing ratios and classroom space, that business cannot keep up with demand and a long waiting list must be used. That business is the Leaming Tree Day School at 18115 SW Lower Boones Ferry Road, just outside the City of Tigard and south of the zoning map enclosed. According to that school's records, as of June 11, 1999, their waiting list numbered 52. The waiting list is updated regularly. Demand generally is greatest at the beginning of the school year. That school's good reputation has helped create the large waiting list, but the lack of other commercial day cares to the north in the industrial part of the Tigard also is believed to create this situation. Mark Roberts July 12, 1999 Page 7 At the City's suggestion, the issue of scarcity of industrial land in Tigard was further researched. The technical memo from Metro titled Nonresidential Refill (Redevelopment and Infcll) of April 12, 1999 was reviewed. Among other topics, this report describes the likely results of scarcity of industrial land supply. The memo had limited usefulness to individual jurisdictions. Industrial inventories are inherently subjective because when a property is underutilized from the standpoint of the current allowed zoning, it is sometimes counted as occupied and sometimes not. For example, a rental house that is located in an industrial zone may be counted as occupied land, but it clearly is land available for redevelopment by a higher value industrial use. The fact that Tigard has a small amount of vacant industrial land does not in itself reduce the importance of allowing commercial day cares as allowable uses in industrial zones. Their overall use "footprint" is relatively very small compared to other industrial uses (as described earlier in this letter), and their function actually supports the industrial districts by providing day care opportunities close to parent's employment. Conclusion The City of Tigard, recognizing that children day care centers are supportive of industrial areas, should amend its zoning code to allow such uses as outright uses it? Tigard's I-L, I-N and I-P zones. Sincerely, Jo L.. Brosy, AICP c: Jack Steiger Jim Blackwell encl: Comparison Matrix City of Tigard Zoning Map (portion) Comparison: Day Care Centers* In Industrial Zones See text for *'s Zone City and Zone Abbrei~iation Allowed Outright Conditional Uses PORTLAND: General Employment EG I X General Employment EG2 X Central Employment EX X General Industrial IGI X General Industrial IG2 X Heavy Industrial IH X BEAVERTON: Industrial Park IP X Light Industrial LI X Campus Industrial CI X** TUALATIN: Light Manufacturing ML X General Manufacturing MG X Manufacturing Park MP X*** LAKE OSWEGO: Industrial I (Not specifically defined. General category of Industrial Park IP "Institutional Uses" not allowed in I or IP zones SALEM: Industrial Business Campus IBC X Industrial Park IP X General Industrial IG X Intensive Industrial 11 X GRESHAM: Business Park BP X Light Industrial LI X Heavy Industrial HI X TIGARD: Industrial Park I-P (Day Care Centers are not allowed Light Industrial I-L in any of the three industrial zones as Mealy Industrial I-H outright or conditional uses in Tigard) r CI - T F TIGA ZONING Southeast Industrial Area Scale: 1" _ 800' , -1. Source: City of Tigard 2/10/99 LLLLJ :Y ; 1-p Rw25 'i SENIOR ,...rl• v ! _ L.J~ l ~ CENTER I I_Q i Fp ( , A 7 ~-r- - ~ I r: ~t l ~ t ~I!j~;l _ 1 ml i ' 7 ( i R-1 ( ` 1 p NAM -°,~,y-''✓' > ~-.-j T VSCHOOL t / " l• j I USA ,,.r_-__•y, /i~ / _ TREATMENT 1 PLANT j 1 y/ S~ ` 7 t 1-® 1 r~ • ~ ~ I 15;,:~.,v,~, - may'-`---- I / '4,11 ~i - 1-P lj ®UR1 mill' EXHIBIT C Issue Paper: Why Tigard needs to allow some Day Care in Industrial zoning Council Agenda Item: Tuesday April 12, 2000 We respectfully request that the Tigard City Council reverse a Planning Committee decision to deny the location of adequate commercial Day Care services to meet the needs of the industrial workforce. We ask you to make this modification to the Tigard Zoning Code text to allow commercial Day Care as permitted uses in 'the 1-L zone, and as conditional uses in the 1-Ii zone. • This is a quality of life issue, if childbearing age parents cannot get convenient day care; it diminishes the quality of life for these citizens. • Other local cities allow adequate Day Care in industrial areas, if we do not make these changes to the code, we will put our industries at a competitive disadvantage. (See Brosy letter to Mark Roberts, July 12, 1999) • These facilities, necessary to efficient industrial operation, take up less that one acre and can be located on smaller parcels, that are not suitable for large scale industrial developments sought after by major employers. Day care centers for industrial employees support the industrial base. • If no local Day Care is available, working parents must travel longer distances to these facilities causing: 1) Extra avoidable local trip miles; 2) Increased congestion at key traffic "choke points" causing more backups; 3) Extra stress on working parents who have a tough time in life anyway; 4) Loss of productive work time while working parents must fight traffic to oversee the needs of their children. • We believe this change in policy would optimize and make more efficient the use of industrial lands. We've thought hard about this issue. We'd like to discuss several alternatives that are practical, humane and in the best interests of the City of Tigard, workers and industry alike. We will be pleased to present these at the hearing on Tuesday. Thank You! John L. Brosy (503) 316-1842 Jim & Maise Blackwell (503) 620-9815 learning Free Day School Durham, 18115 Lower 13oones Ferry Road, Durham, OR 97224 620-9815 Wilsonville, 29880 SW Town Center Loop West, Wilsonville, OR 97070 682-3647 F1D#93-1130765 Business' that have signed letters supporting the building of a Day Care/Preschool in the industrial area of Tigard- Logic General 6713 SW Bonita Road Tigard, OR Verifone Finance 16100 SW 72nd Tigard, OR American Telephone Technology Precision Interconnect 16640 SW 72nd Tigard, OR The Stash Tea Company 9040 SW Burnham Tigard, OR Qualcomm Renovate-it Construction 7445 SW Findlay Dr Tigard, OR Home Depot 14800 SW Sequoia Parkway Tigard, OR Office Depot 15060 SW Sequoia Parkway Tigard, OR Copelco Capital 13500 Fir Loop Tigard, OR -ggg-01 Ng We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. Signed Title Company Date i i i We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. Signed Title 1J1~,,~!!~~a~cc Company Date 17& ~ -2 e X We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition. of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. Signed Title J Company Y 1 Date 3l~y~a. We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. Signed Co ,'se Title y e Company Date 3~ , VC . We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. Signed Title Company c. y Date We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. r~ Signed Title Company 4 Date We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to wor . Signed v Title Company Date , ~f~ We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. Signed J_I'amw Title Company _ Date rmmm7 We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool ' ZO ,I11S - aa-----W01 beliei7P al l of the people working in . ca. W01 this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. Signed Title Company r4 Date ~Z17 0 M -i 1 We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located neap our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place to work. Signed Title Company Date 1/~ We support the addition of a Day Care/Preschool to this area. We believe all of the people working in this area would benefit from the option of using a daycare/preschool conveniently located near .our place of employment. We also believe that there would be no negative impact to the area or to Tigard in general and in fact the addition of a daycare/preschool to this area would greatly enhance its desirability as a place work. Signed Title Company C f=~ Date \TTTT T1 rIn /V ♦ T~ Y~ ~~g1 TTT'~`a1 I/Y 1T1 T rb1YYlI1 IW AEI a YZ Y\ ~.•ril~l~ AR CEN 1 E+ RS 1N 1 rir-d 11%-Y C MARKET Learning Tree, 18115 SW Lower Boones Ferry Rd, Durham aea~'YYllig 1 _C, 1 0236Y V 53 ~s 7 I 00 017 t th , rp;,, r/] a T I C & AE a L+ Learning Tree, 13855 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard La Petite, 16200 SW Pacific Hwy, Tigard I1TW Montessori, 11511 SW Bull Mtn Rd, Tigard Children's Village, 10400 SW Park St, Tigard Heidi's Montessori, 8960 SW Pinebrook, Tigard Kids Space, 12325 SW Katherine, Tigard Kids Campus, 12975 SW Grant Ave, Tigard Kids Klubhouse, 9225 SW Hall, Tigard Kindercare,11533 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard Kindercare, 12658 SW North Dakota, Tigard ! Rocking Horse, 15750 SW Boones Ferry Rd, Tigard TLT/Hall, 8485 SW Hunziker, Tigard Morning Hill, 13105 SW Falcon Rise Dr, Tigard APR 10 2000 3:13 PM FR T-J-S 5035987373 TO 250#12345#684729 P.02 VIA FACSIMILE: 684-7297 AND FIRST CLASS MAIL April 7, 2000 • ° Tigard City Council 13125 SW. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Attention: Julia Hajduk Re: Zone Ordinance Amendment [ZOA] 1999-0003 Our client: Snyder Roofing Our File No. 45842/29934 Dear Ms. Hajduk: We represent Snyder Roofing with regard to the above-referenced matter. It is our understanding that there will be a City Council meeting on Tuesday, April 11, 2000, at 7:30 p.m. regarding this proposed Zone Ordinance Amendment to allow daycare centers in industrial zones. Our client, Snyder Roofing, has its business on the industrial property that would be affected by this amendment. Snyder believes that the presence of daycare facilities in the City's industrial zone presents use and safety conflicts which may compromise efficient industrial use of the property. The City Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 6, 2000, and voted to recommend denial to the City Council. It is also our understanding that the staff recommendation was that the Zone Ordinance Amendment be denied. Snyder Roofing does not intend to have a representative attend the Council meeting on Tuesday. However, for the reasons stated in the April 11, 2000, staff report and for the reasons stated by the Planning Commission in support of its March 6, 2000, denial, Snyder Roofing also opposes the proposed amendment and would like that to be reflected in the City's file. If you have any questions, please call me. Very truly yours, r' T ARLOW JORDAN & SCHRADER /-q/ Jeff Bennett cc - Snyder Roofing ,d Tara! ~,Noli:y Management Orgunizatior. v9t4 nn; :A c ;r. S ~ y t ~rscEY , INf ORY~,ZION 6EOOR/.PNtC, Zoned v8C,2ntLand Mdustna a ® so's D~ Ike i ~ ® i® IRS m ® aawov~~ s d~ d t~and Vasan industnel on, Fcd 3DW p,}c~ea9e go r= {done 1-H BOO I-L nt and ooo; L'\GISyo~Pco} dotal ~ndus~al Vacs Plot date: Feb 25 2 A47.97 h ~av ON oP 't • JOHN L. BROSY 161 High St. SE s„ Suite 204 Salem, OR 97301 Land Planning and Development Services (503) 316-1842 April 25, 2000 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Request to Amend Zone Ordinance (Legislative) Commercial Day Care Uses in Industrial Zones Members of City Council: We look forward to completing our presentation regarding an improvement to the Tigard Zoning Code. We believe that not allowing commercial day cares as either outright or conditional uses in the I-L or I-H zones was probably originally an oversight in the Tigard Code. In order to properly support the important industrial uses in the City and in order to provide a needed, convenient service to workers in those industrial areas that have young children, we propose that commercial (lay cares be added as conditional uses in the d-L and I-H zones. Statewide Goal 9, Economic Development requires all cities in the state to provide adequate opportunities for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare and prosperity of its citizens. Nearly every other city in the region recognizes the need to locate day cares near places of industrial employment, as you have seen in our comparison matrix. The cities of Portland, Beaverton, Tualatin, Salem and Gresham all respond to the Statewide Goal by allowing commercial day cares as outright of conditional uses in their various industrial zone areas. By not allowing commercial day cares in any manner in the I-L or I-H zones, the code places Tigard's important industrial areas at a competitive disadvantage in the metro region. We have shown that these uses typically use only less than an acre for each site, so are not significant threats to the supply of industrial zoned land in Tigard. The concentration of industrial zoning in the Southeast section of the City of Tigard makes siting of commercial day cares extremely difficult. Tigard City Council April 25, 2000 Page 2 We suggest the following conditional use approval criteria be added to the code when listing commercial day cares as conditional uses in the I-L and I-H zones. A. The proposed use will rrot have signifrcatrt adverse effects oil nearby industrial firms. B. The transportation system is capable of safely supporting the proposed rise in addition to the existing uses in the area. C. The proposed use will not significantly alter the overall industrial character of the area, based on the existing proportion of industrial and iron-industrial uses. D. there is a demonstrated creed for this use, based oil the proximity of other similar uses, waiting lists for existing businesses, and'or other relevatrt information relating to public need. Commercial day care uses should also be controlled so that no individual day care business may occupy more than one acre in the industrial zones. Also, a minimum of 2,500 sq. ft. of outdoor play area should also be required. We believe this proposal enhances the industrial area of Tigard and will be an improvement to the City Code. Thank you for you consideration of this important matter. Sincerely, J n L. Brosy, AICP representing the code change request. 0 . _ . > i:~ - - s ~ x. e. ~4 ...tom-..-.~'~ _ ~V - ,?:gr xxr-a 10 -9 8 7 ~ a 4 6'.: , 3 • " ti - Ci of Ti and ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tY - ~ ~ ~ Q-., ~ , n~:f;~ aL/ 1 Z®NING DIS~'R~CTS ~ ~euciesumoey.nm Blaawon ' 1; ~'~yp I , ~j ~ er,Maoeeeoranvao _ ~j ' Ayoaea uem NO.s - ~ 4-.I r/ ~ I ..„,,,m - - ~ °ry ® i r~ _ ~ I -I _ _ ~ ,'C~ 1 - ~c.,.-.._ Via' , 1 7 ~ ~i r , - ~ - ~ =I 5r ..f `1, rr .D Rd5 ~ r.:l":...... , ,BEAVERTON' ~ ; p cc \ \i~ y , - r J 5^, t JI f-43.431-f' / , , : , p - , GC , - l~ - _ ~ `1 _ - R.25 ~ R-4.~5 t._. u`r . ~ R-12 R-0.5 R42 I _ Y. i . . ...w . , I ~ __t . I R-7 ~ ~ , c ~ Rs ~.w - Rz}~ p I,I; _ - R-4.5~ - Ja 1 i~ I r' MUE - ~ _i, , R,~ _ ter. r ,r~; l' ~ © '4~,:v= . ` a, r`,. r _tiJ O , r 1' , , / ( ~ Mk ~ R 7 +'7' 1 _ i `4 _ , R-0 5 - _ ftrvol a ce~ 9- 5, - ~ sa ~'R-0S ' - R-35 .-r C.G I ~ R•3.5. t - J y - - - - ~ : ~ ~ :,w wM , " R-7 ' R_ , . - _ _ i - - ~ .aaa .i _r--~- • ~ LL ~ _ , i . _ i-- ..~.w.. - _ m R@.. tom. - ~ ._o.~.--. . ~ _ ~ I~_. j , ww - - ~ - - j ' ~ ~ - - _ - - : - R42 I L _i - - _ 1 on - ~s _ ~ I I , ~ t - e ~ Ri.S;,,{ Rao - , I~~ - ~ _ - T`~ - I _ ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS F- ~ - ~ ~ y., , I R-3.5 ~ - - (HD) Nistonc Dismd . - - R-7~ I - I~ -f LL .,w, ~ e R 25 (PD) Plannatl Development I -'R-0,rr- < ~ - ,f. R~ I - - _ ~ 7 _ I ~ ~1` ' ' (Uq)2one ApplieC Upon Apphoahon ~ "0 - - ~ ~ - ( .s R GC Communty COmmerciol q,7 ' ~ ~ - _ _ _ . C-G General Commemaal , ~,y n4 -f- J~ _ i _ _ - - _ ~ R 7 -l>. _ - C~N NeiOAhomootl Cammardal -l'. ~ _ .f _ _ _ - ~n~.i _ 'a'. . 9 - R _ _ ~ - ~ ~7j. : i R-72 ~tPOy,,, C-P PmfesonalCammemiel . e. GG _ - ' CBO _ o ~ ' Central Bus ness District _ ~ ~ _ - .ti,' - rt. _ _ i ~ i'N Mea Industnal - - 0_. - ~ . ~l ~ ~ l - - } , ii } Id llphtlndusuial -7I I ri- ~,v t i'~ ~ f~ - ate; _ , ~L~`, r/ ~ov`R7 ~~~1 i e'-1`~ ~ 1~',, f+A A - 1. ;'r I I I-P IntlmMel Pane . r. - li ~ I 1 I ' / 'R-2 apw ~ ~ R-12 ~ f; ! R 7 - 'R- ' t^.,... - tl ~ -R.-.. _ r - ~y, - I ~I RUE MixaC-Use EmWa/ment L.',^ R25_~, - ~'C°~~~.,~~sr Sc I 'v'At~~ "7 udf~~.. ~ ~ J ~ f i _ - - - i GG )}.7 „ v, ~ I ~+~.~._niil~d-~•SJ _r'1'\_' il i _ 7- `r~n~p I 00,000 Sq. FL Minimum Lot Bk ' _ ~ - 2 3,050 Sq FL M nimum Lol Site ~ ~ i ~ ' ~ ~i ; ~I,~ i ~ 4 ~~a ! I _ r. I ~z ~S, _'It'e1~:trJ1 li t (j~µr I ff 6 ~~I 1 I ~I_ _.J c' / ~ ~ r 7 1 I Lf_ II - 7 r ~ s I G i ~v I ! R-2 20,000 Sq. Ft Minimum Lal Slxa~ ~ =721 r - F / ~ - - i ~ ~ I ~ it ~ ~ - .-tr- ^ C I '":a.._ ~ _ . ,400 . Ft Minimv i % T - ~ J R-f2 a"Q mat 51 r- L m J ~ I, ~ ~ - r r It--r fir' 'Rt45 t 1 A' L~.~J _ -i 1 jj{{ R-0.5 70,000 Sq. Ft MinimumLatS s~ I ~~~n '"'~i ~`~;"`y ( 4 ~ :'„j ~ I ~ ~ ~T 6C' , '~.~i "~ri--. R•4.5 7 - _ I . -F .A lri i 'E ,-M. i cC;,.._.U. ,500 Sq. FL Minimum Lot Stra ~ I_~ - ; I I m Ur-' - ~ n ~ L1,y hs w _ I ti ~~rta ~ ~ ~ ~ n 1.LL ~ _ _ _7 ~ ~ - Rio 40 Units perApe C`~'L'i 7 ~ `~L-=1 L--L I C .fir dR-05 n 1 t RT 5,000 Sq. Ft MlniMum LOtSiza I ~ ~ ~ I ~ r lr'R~41 ~I''n 15 J~ c`~',JJI - We0e ~ 1 r~. ~ i ~ _ III, X71{i ~ rl 1. I i J. ..t ~ ~ a i _ / FlootlP sins i ~-'r- rc : 1 i', ' t - J i ~ i i ~ u, . 71S•=roar i , I I ( 1 ~I. ~ - t"-~~t~i`"'~` i ~ J t ~ ~ - cl or r , - _ I~ bOCThaN ~ ~ ~ ~i I _ {~f I I~i I~~ r ~,v~~ I - - - 1_', _ - I N i~ ~ ~ti}LLB ~ _I _j I - I t - ~11~.i~`lK ~ If1 r I - % h ~ - - - - - ,row ~rv.ow~au,. ~tw. L~~-J IIj~-U ~Z I I ..1 ~ ~.L 1LL i III li ; ~ -,d 1 , ~ : -72 ~ - ~ ! t- ~ - ~ _ . ~m.~ ,~~..v.K~. m„r,,..a,~waw~.muo~ I ~ I I_ - I~~rl~ I r~~. - ' i I I i Ii ~ t ' - _ r-_ - ~ DUR~~ ~ . B.G , , ~u ~ ~ I_ ~ ~ > T ~~m~ _L ~ I ate ' ~ _ ._,w.__. I M"c ~ ' ~ F--I ! I~ ._i. I L~~4 F-~ I I' ,1l °w 7 ' ARmaero 5 R-0.5 i a L - ~ I~I ~ ( ~ - ~ I tPOianmemm cmd~.~l, I ~ -L.I ~n~~l I ' i 1~ I I'1 I IiII I`j ii I I I I a~ ,q I ~pu ~~ul _ .i... .o.......... ~ l e e > I is ~ I L~ i 'I w I a d e i, I to l zlo l c~ i~zle l I v~~~~ - la i. ie i~ io x~o n r v - - I g ~ - a_. ~ . 3 4-_ _ ~ ` q ~I~t ~ ~dJ n I!. t1Lr; tild1,~UlI,IU 11A.h I ~ I, I _ 4,~ - rr - - ~ ~ ~idrt!1.~~ ~k~uWr ! LIIIJ~u)d,1,.f-,t~.tt,,..luU14.11W!tld, u~Y ~ ,1 ~dn d ~I 1 :1~ Y.~r 1u w,u,~, ~LILUL<, L.~WiUU~ ~a-1.1,t,.liJ.Oe ~ { 'r , s n;~ H _ , --e~. - - - - . . ~ 1L.. 3tA•' ~,'"~.Y ~i"'?s .5.. 'a5"s~°°'"""" ...('-~?;~*~m^'^.r,. :.~n~rns'^;~msnnR~MB,szn~.,,.tw.r~~.;Y.,~-,.5...~. ~ may. rte, - - - ` - - _ - - _ .,,.u... _ _ - - - - . r _ , ~x,r;,u.v - 4$P".r~t~ .r~rza„=:n.- ..,..s .....,;:~.y-.._... -~.--•.-_,~:s~e-~~:-s~^ _ .m.~ ..ic'+reca-._. . ~c~',. -v . - . n . _ _ jam„ -✓tc q,:. :yp,,~(fik ~..,.4. ~.3 ,r. r.,..: ......nr;. _ ,....:,i at.-.,,:. ",r. ~,.m~ , .-.:.,.~<,< ~.;yr.-.± 3..- e,.W.=-',>~.~a. ~i _,ror r+:.t.- u "~!e ~eD~ ~r;~, r, . ^s ~.W .t? ~r..E. _ .s t~v..1+~_.,... ~x. .'s.4..,w. e_~*! ~r,. F... ~ - - 2` r rj ~ FT,~~ s . ~ t !i2R~i ^as~3~~..g8"~ n.,-. `M - ~ _ - _ . - ~y.ti-., v~s:.,.-~., ~.,sm,`:, ~satr,.~s:~nr<s-x-. - - - , - . AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF April 25, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: An ordinance granting to NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc., a Washington corporation, a franchise to conduct a telecommunications business in the City of Tigard, Oregon, including the right to place poles, wires, and other appliances for telecommunication purposes in the public rights-of-way; authorizing the Mayor to sign this agreement; and declaring an emergency. PREPARED BY: C. Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK It ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Council approve an ordinance to establish a new franchise agreement for local telephone services provided by NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc.? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the franchise agreement. INFORMATION SUMMARY NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc. has requested a franchise from the City of Tigard to offer long distance and local access telephone service within the City limits. The attached ordinance establishes that franchise, including the rights and responsibilities of the City and of NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc. The agreement requires that NEXTLINK Oregon, Inc. pay a franchise fee each year equal to 5% of its net revenues generated within the City of Tigard. This ordinance was initially heard by the City Council on March 28, 2000, at which time the Council requested a change in the agreement language regarding NEXTLINK'S ability to sell this franchise without prior City approval. The agreement has been modified to remove language which would have granted NEXTLINK this ability (section 11). The City attorney has reviewed this change and a memo from the City Attorney is attached to this summary. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not approve the local telephone access franchise agreement. moo= VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES Telephone franchise agreements generate General Fund revenue based on 5% of the franchisee's revenues generated within the City of Tigard. -Moll= We - RAMIE CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH LLP ATPORNEYS AT LAW N.W. 1727 Hoyt Stmet MEMORANDUM Portland, Oregon 9720 97209 (503) 222.4402 Fax: (503) 243-2944 TO: Craig Prosser, Finance Director City of Tigard FROM: Gary Firestone, City Attorney's Office DATE: April 4, 2000 RE: Tigard/Finance Nextlink Franchise Agreement In the course of negotiations between the City and Nextlink over a non-exclusive franchise agreement to be granted to Nextlink, Nextlink suggested a provision that would read: Grantee shall not assign or transfer this franchise without the written consent of the City, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld; except that upon written notice to the City, Grantee may assign this franchise without City's consent to any entity that Grantee controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, or to any entity which acquires or succeeds to all or substantially all of the business assets of Grantee whether by consolidation, merger, sale or otherwise. A council member questioned whether it was advisable for the City to relinquish its right to control a transfer of a fl-anehise agreement when the franchisee is sold, merged or consolidated. Although the Federal Telecommunications Act limits the City's ability to deny access to telecommunication service providers, it does allow the City to control the right-of-way and the City has a legitimate basis for refusing to grant franchises to entities that have failed to or lack the ability to comply with regulations protecting the right-of- way, Deletion of all leinguage from "or to any entity which acquires or succeeds to to the end of the sentence will achieve the City's purpose in keeping control of the right-of-way. This provision allows the franchisee to transfer the franchise to a related entity. This is appropriate because any such transfer will likely be the result of an internal corporate restructuring that the City has no real interest in, The provision still retains the City's right to approve transfers and assignments except assignments to related entities. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 4-25-00 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Annexation of Bull Mountain and other non-island areas PREPARED BY: Laurie Nicholson DEPT HEAD OK Y MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Staff is requesting overall direction from Council on how to approach annexation of Bull Mountain and other non-island areas. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff has no recommendation. This agenda. item is informational. INFORMATION SUMMARY A "non-island" annexation is one in which the area to be annexed is not surrounded by City boundaries. The purpose of annexing the Bull Mountain area and other non-island areas would be to simplify the City boundary and allow efficient delivery of services to these areas. State law is different for non-island annexations than island annexations. For non-island annexations to occur without an election, double majority consent must be obtained. Double majority means that a majority of the property owners and voters in the area to be annexed must sign a petition consenting to be annexed. If double majority consent cannot be obtained, then an election must be held in the area to be annexed. Any successful annexation approach would involve extensive public outreach, similar to the public outreach effort that was used for the Walnut Island area. Staff could explore the possibility of partnering with Washington County, as was done for the Walnut Island annexation effort. During this time, staff would develop a report outlining the costs of annexation for both the City and Bull Mountain residents. Staff will be presenting annexation options to Council. The annexation options are as follows: 1.) Initiate annexation of the non-island areas and send to electors. 2.) Obtain consent to annex from area property owners. 3.) Annex property and right of way whenever possible to create island areas. The attached memo details the positive and negative aspects of each option, and some of the costs. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED This item is informational. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY IME MEN 11111011 1111111, 11111111 .01,11 11il Growth & Growth Management: Goal #2. Urban services provided to all citizens within Tigard's urban growth boundary and recipients pay for their share. Strategy 2.) Adopt criteria that outlines when and under what circumstances areas on Bull Mountain will annex. FISCAL NOTES Not Applicable iAcitywide\4-25-00;BuII man..sum.rtf MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Laurie Nicholson, Planning Division DATE: April 14, 2000 RE: Bull Mountain Annexations As part of the Walnut Island annexation process, staff requested a separate discussion with Council to discuss annexation options for Bull Mountain and "non-island" areas. Since the Walnut Island annexation process is now basically complete, staff decided to return to Council to discuss the issue of Bull Mountain and "non-island" area annexation. There has been no recent discussion of a major effort to annex the Bull Mountain urban service area. Historically, staff has processed annexation applications for those who voluntarily annexed to Tigard. If Council chooses none of the options outlined below, then staff will continue to process annexation applications of those who want to annex to Tigard. Since the Portland Metro Boundary Commission no longer exists, State annexation law is directly applied and, in addition, State law also requires application of Metro adopted standards regarding how annexations will be processed in the Portland Metro area. Metro requirements involve longer notice periods, which requires more careful planning to insure that annexations occur at the desired time. As with any action by Council, the public has the right to refer the ordinance to Tigard voters. The following steps outline the process followed by the City for non-island annexations as required by State, Metro, and City rules: • The City of Tigard must adopt resolutions to initiate the annexation process. Schedule an election of Bull Mountain area voters, or collect signatures of Bull Mountain residents and property owners for a double majority annexation. Mail and post notice to necessary parties 45 days prior to hearing date (necessary parties are any county, city, or district whose jurisdictional boundary or adopted urban service area includes any part of the affected territory or who provides any urban service to any portion of the affected territory, Metro, and any other unit of local government, as defined in ORS 150.003, that is a party to any agreement for provision of an urban service to the affected territory). Staff must complete staff report 30 days prior to the City Council hearing. mom • Send notice of the public hearing to property owners within 500 feet, 20 days prior to the hearing. • Publish an ad in the newspaper once each week for two consecutive weeks prior to the public hearing. • Have the staff report packet and resolutions prepared 12 days prior to the hearing and given to City Administration. • Hold a public hearing before Council at which a decision is made whether to annex or not. • Completed annexation is sent to Metro. • Annexation must be completed by March 31St for the annexed property to be included on nexi fiscal year's tax rolls. Bull Mountain and Non-Island annexations A "non-island" annexation is one in which the area to be annexed is not surrounded by City boundaries. The purpose of annexing this area would be to simplify the City boundary and allow efficient delivery of services to these areas. The City's and County's long-term plan for the Bull Mountain area and the non-island areas is that they will eventually be annexed. State law is different for non-island annexations than island annexations. For non-island annexations to occur without an election, double majority consent must be obtained. Double majority means that a majority of the property owners and voters in the area to be annexed must sign a petition consenting to be annexed. If double majority consent cannot be obtained, then an election must be held in the area to be annexed. Staff is requesting that Council direct staff on how to proceed with the non-island areas. Staff has identified the following options: Option #1 Initiate annexation of the non-island areas and send to electors. This will require a majority of the votes cast in the area to vote in favor of the annexation in a general election. The tax rolls are not changed until the following year for any property annexed after March 31St. Depending on when the annexation occurs, there may be a period (13 months) where service is being provided, but taxes are not being collected. Since an election is involved, the process may not be complete within a year. To ensure that the annexed properties are on the tax rolls for the next fiscal year, the City should attempt to place the annexation on the November 7, 2000 election and will need to start the annexation process no later than mid-June to complete the process in time to make the November election. Option #2 Direct staff to contact property owners to obtain consents. This option will require staff to contact the property owners in the Bull Mountain area being considered and request that they sign consent forms. No election is required in the territory if the City has the written consent of the owners of at least half the land and the majority of the electors in the territory to be annexed. No Council initiation is necessary. If staff can obtain a majority of the registereCA1 voter's approval, the annexations can be processed without an election. This will be quite time intensive for staff. The consent forms may be submitted at any time up to the date of the hearing. If the necessary number of consents are not obtained, the hearing will be canceled for that particular area. This annexation option would require additional staff to assist in the labor intensive effort of contacting property owners. Staff estimates the budget for this option would cost approximately $50,000 to pay for interns to collect petition signatures and mailing costs. If Washington County assisted in this effort, the cost may be less than the estimated $50,000 budget. If staff could begin right away, then petitions could be signed this summer, open houses held in the fall, and the annexation process in the winter so the annexation could be completed by March 31St of 2001. Under this option, it is possible that some areas will sign the petition to annex and others will not. The result in this case will be that portions of Bull Mountain and/or other non-island areas may not be annexed. Option #3 Annex right of way wherever possible to create areas in the County that are surrounded by the City, or create islands A final option is to have a City policy to annex right of ways and property wherever possible to create islands, so that unincorporated areas could be annexed without voter the approval. The problem with this option is that this approach could be challenged legally by the property owners in the areas made into islands, and their legal challenge would be that the City is depriving them of their right to vote through purposefully creating island territory. The process for annexing right of ways and properties could begin next month to create island areas to be annexed. Over the next year workshops and other forms of public outreach could be held, similar to the Walnut Island annexation process. Council could adopt a resolution in December declaring an annexation of island areas, and hearings could be held next January and February so that the annexation process could be completed by March 31St of 2001. Any successful annexation approach would involve extensive public outreach, similar to the public outreach effort that was used for the Walnut Island area. Although the issue of annexation of the Bull Mountain area has been discussed at Citizen Involvement Team meetings, the discussion was limited because staff could not provide the tax and service information that residents had requested without first developing a detailed report, similar to the one done for Walnut Island. A public outreach effort is necessary because we are not clear on residents expectations of Tigard, and Washington County has not been involved in discussions with the residents regarding its long-term service expectations for the Bull Mountain area and "non-island" areas. Staff could explore the possibility of partnering with Washington County, as was done for the Walnut Island annexation effort. During this time, staff would develop a report outlining the costs of annexation for both the City and Bull Mountain residents. AGENDA ITEM # _ S FOR AGENDA OF !~D CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Consideration of Event Sponsorship for Fiscal Year 2000/01 PREPARED BY: Cathy Wheatley DEPT HEAD OK ITY MGR OK l t4L ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Consider sponsorship of community events for Fiscal Year 2000/01. STAFF RECOMMENDATION After reviewing information submitted and hearing more information from the representatives of the events listed below, staff requests that the City Council deliberate and determine which events the City of Tigard will sponsor for FY 2000/01. Staff also recommends that the City Council ask the representatives to speak to the factors that City Council identified in Resolution No. 00-01, which are also listed below. INFORMATION SUMMARY On January 25, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 00-01 establishing a procedure to grant City sponsorship to community events. A copy of the resolution is attached (Exhibit 1). Exhibit 2 (attached) is a summary of the requests received for sponsored events for Fiscal Year 2000/01, which includes a breakdown of the cash and in-kind contributions. The in-kind contributions are the estimates made by staff based on prior years' experience. The events presented for Council consideration for City of Tigard sponsorship are as follows: ➢ Broadway Rose ➢ Tigard Festival of Balloons Tigard 4"' of July Celebration > Train Days ➢ Holiday Tree Lighting The last section of this report (Exhibit 3) contains the responses to a January letter sent by Finance Director Craig Prosser asking the event representatives to provide the City with information, explaining how they meet the criteria: ➢ The number of City residents participating in the event. ➢ The number of City residents volunteering for the event. A The role of the event in creating a greater sense of community and Tigard identity. Y Economic, artistic, and cultural benefits of the event to Tigard residents and businesses. > The level of support for event raised from other sources. Representatives for each of the events listed above have been requested to attend the April 25, 2000, City Council meeting to respond to the criteria and questions the City Council may have. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Fund all events as requested. 2. Decide to provide additional funding in 2. Fund some events partially or some not at all. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Target Area: Community Character and Quality of Life. Goal: Develop overall approach for sponsoring community events that establishes balance among popular or traditional standing events, requests for support of new events, and limited City resources. Strategy: Develop a philosophy on City event sponsorship. FISCAL NOTES Cash requested totals $45,100; in-kind contributions total $39,772 for a grand total of City contribution adding up to $84,872. The cash and in-kind amounts have been placed in the proposed budget that will be forwarded to the Budget Committee; however, the amounts will be adjusted should the City Council decide to increase or decrease the funding requests. 1AA M\CATHY\COUNCIUEVENT SPONSORSHIP SUM.DOC w Agenda Item No. Meeting of MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Ed Wegner, Public Works Director RE: Cook Park Water Line DATE: April 20, 2000 The Tigard Festival of Balloons has requested the feasibility and possible installation of a water line along the north side of the soccer fields. This would allow for potable water service to those vendors on the northside of the field. The service would not interfere with soccer field use or the current irrigation system. The cost of material for this project would be approximately $775.00 which includes a four person crew for twelve hours. Since the Balloon Festival is for a very short period of time, we could install a temporary meter form time to time, so this would not be setting a precedent by offer this option. The Balloon Festival currently does not pay for any other water use since the park is on one master meter, although we would have the capability to charge them for the northside usage. It would be the recommendation of Public Works to install the water line at no charge to the Balloon Festival. City Manager, Bill Monahan requested that I submitting this to you for approval. Thank you for your consideration and if you have further questions, do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks! Kathy\balloon festival waterline City of Tigard FY 2000-01 Community Event Grant Requests 2/9/00 Target (based on proprtional share of policy set-aside) = $34,000 FY 1996-97 FY 1997-98 FY 1998-99 FY 1999-00 FY 2000-01 Agency Actual Actual Actual Adopted Requested Recommended Affairs of the Arts Direct 500 0 0 0 0 In-Kind Broadway Rose Direct 7,500 7,000 8,244 10,000 15,000 In-Kind Festival of the Balloons Direct 5,000 5,000 5,778 10,000 10,000 In-Kind Tigard Country Daze Direct 5,000 2,500 3,444 0 0 In-Kind Tigard 4th of July Direct 4,000 4,000 4,500 7,500 7,500 In-Kind 1,600 Tigard High Graduation Ceremony Direct 500 500 500 500 500 In-Kind Train Days Direct 0 0 2,500 0 4,000 In-Kind Tualatin Riverkeepers Direct 0 0 0 1,000 2,710 In-Kind 1,000 Tualatin Valley Community Band Direct 900 900 1,122 1,200 1,250 In-Kind Total Direct 23,400 19,900 26,088 30,200 40,960 - In-Kind - - - - 2,600 - Tree Lighting h:Docs\Craigs WorldTudget%Budgel0l\Social Service - Community Event Summary.xls Community Events 4/25/00 5:34 PM A, f CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Exhibit 1 RESOLUTION NO. 00- O f A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE TO GRANT CITY SPONSORSHIP TO COMMUNITY EVENTS. WHEREAS, various groups organize and put on community and cultural events for the benefit of the citizens of Tigard, and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard from time to time offers support for some events in the form of direct cash grants, in-kind services, and/or access to City facilities or insurance, and WHEREAS, it would be appropriate for the City to join certain events as an official sponsor due to the number of Tigard citizens participating or volunteering for the event; the role of the event in creating a greater sense of community in Tigard; and the economic, artistic, and cultural benefits of the event to Tigard residents and businesses, and WHEREAS, official City sponsorship, with a commitment for long term participation, improves the ability of event organizers to plan for the long term and to obtain other sponsors and financial support, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that the procedure for City Sponsorship of Cultural Events, included in this Resolution and Attachment A, is hereby adopted. PASSED: This O- day of 2000. -M-ayer--amity-e -T4gard Council President, City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 00- U1 Pagel Attachment A City Sponsorship of Cultural Events 1. The City of Tigard will formally recognize by Council resolution those community and cultural events that it wishes to sponsor. Sponsorship will continue until terminated by Council resolution, which will provide one year notice of termination. 2. City sponsorship will include City support (direct cash grants, in-kind services, access to facilities or insurance coverage, or a combination of the above) as identified in the sponsoring resolution. If City sponsorship includes direct cash grants, the sponsoring resolution will identify a target funding amount. A target amount may be adjusted, however, during the City's annual budget process. 3. In identifying events for City sponsorship, the City will consider the following factors: a. The number of City residents participating in the event b. The number of City residents volunteering for the event c. The role of the event in creating a greater sense of community and Tigard identity d. Economic, artistic, and cultural benefits of the event to Tigard residents and businesses e. The level of support for the event raised from other sources 4. Events sponsored by the City will be required to list the City as an official sponsor in all publicity and promotional materials. 5. Non-sponsored events may be considered for funding during the City's annual budget process on a year-to-year basis. RESOLUTION NO. 00--G1 Page 2 MMS 11,1111 M1103MI11111111 ~J h Exhibit 2 Sponsored Events Proposed for Budget Year 2000/01 Event Cash Requested in-Kind Estimate Total Broadway Rose $15,000 -0- $15,000 Tigard Festival 10,000 25,592 35,592 of Balloons Tigard 4t" of 7,500 950 8,450 July Train Days 4,000 4,150 8,150 Goods/Services Staff Wages *Holiday Tree 8,600 9,080 17,680 Lighting and Decorating of Civic Center Total 45,100 39,772 84,872 *For more information on Tree Lighting/Civic Center decorating costs, attached is the breakdown of the actual expenditures in 1999. IADM\CATHY\EVENTS\SPONSORED EVENTS.DOC Holiday Tree Lighting - December 3, 1999 Expenditures Tansacres Nurser $230.00 Ha 's Tree Farm 189.50 Expenditures for Props - Santa's Area _ 46.13 Reimburse to C. Wheatley - Supplies 125.90 (candy canes, vinyl tablecloths, decorations for lobby, platters for cookies) Costco supplies 68.71 Food for staff decorating lobby 40.08 Gourmet Coffee Catering 387.00 Peter Corvallis - tents, sound system, 1,828.75 outdoor lighting, heating Dickens Carolers 175.00 Reimburse to C. Wheatley - Santa Hats, 63.51 Soda Pop/Ice for volunteers; stationery for thank ou's to volunteers/workers Round Table Pizza - (for 194.10 volunteers/workers) Photo Processing (Costco) 8.50 Photo Processing (One Hour Photo) 12.15 Cambridge Cleaners (clean Santa Suit - 11.50 before tree lighting) (suit needed to be cleaned from last ear) Main Street Cleaners (clean Santa Suit - 20.00 after tree lighting - ) Administration Total 3,400.83 (budgeted amount was $4,400) Public Works Total (see attached) 12,879.36 Grand Total - 1999 Expenses $16,280.19 I:\NDM\CATHY\EVENTS\9EJ HOLIDAY TREE LIGHTING EXPENSES.DOC ' ~ca.b L t~ k.tcxks 1999 HOLIDAY REPORT FOURS WORKED SUPERVISOR 40 hrs. $1,252.00 SR. UTILITY 143hrs. $3,760.90 UTILITY II 138hrs. $3,312.00 TOTAL 321hrs. $8,324.90 MATERIALSLRENTALS/SERYICES TREES AND WREATHS $ 189.50 LIFT RENTAL $1,280.00 POINSETTIAS $ 230.00 MISC./ TAPE,TIES,TIMERS ETC. $ 189.31 PHOENIX ELECTRIC $ 486.00 NEW LIGHT STRINGS $2,599.15 TOTAL $4,973.96 GRAND TOTAL $ 13,298.86 Pa:, d by 1999 COST: $13,298.86 -Admin. au~y' 1998 COST: $119814.61 1997 COST: $ 8,828.00 pw ca 1996 COST: $10,927.60 ~O TOTAL: $449869.07 c~ NOTES: 1999 cost were up due to the purchase of new light strings for the building and tree. Electrical cost, however were down as a result of the new lights. 1998 cost represent an increase in hours spent hanging, maintaining and removing lights and decorations. An increase of 50 labor hours at a cost of $2,098.41 plus $ 1,063.36 spent on electrical repairs accounted for these years increases. 1997 cost were lower due to lower labor hours and less electrical problems. 1996 cost included the initial purchase of the lights, which cost $ 2,400.00. Electrical services cost us $ 1,700.00 that year. Exhibit 3 Requests/Letters for Event Sponsorship r THE OAD THEATR January 27, 2000 Craig Prosser - Finance Director City of Tigard Y~ 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Prosser, Enclosed please find the Broadway Rose Theatre Company's grant request for $15,000. The money will be used toward operating expenses for our 2000 summer season. Thank you for your consideration of our request. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact me at 503-620-5262. I look forward to meeting you in person. Sincerely, Sharon 1vlaroney Artistic Director P.O. Box 231004, Tigard, OR 97281 (503) 620-5262 1 t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125.SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: The Broadway Rose Theatre Address PO Box 231004 City, State, Zip Tigard. OR 97281 Contact Name: Sharon Maroney Telephone Number: 620-5262 .~i 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $ 15,000.00 In-Kind Services (use of city property, city staff support, etc. $ 0 Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) Total Request $ 15,000.00 2. Purpose of Funding Request Operating Support for our ninth summer stock season in Tigard. 3. Please submit the following Information with this request: a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY 1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Budget should identify beginning and ending balances, major revenue sources, major expenditure categories, and number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fiscal year. c. Articles of Incorporation* d. 501(c)(3) status* e. Organization Bylaws* Information not required if it has been submitted at least once in the last five years. Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial of request THE OAD THEATRE QQMPANV The Broadway Rose Theatre Company P.O. Box 231004, Tigard, OR 97281 Contact: Sharon Maroney, Artistic Director, (503) 620-5262 The Broadway Rose Theatre Company has been producing live, fun,,professionaLsummer stock theater in Tigard since 1992. As the only professional theater company in Washington County, we fill an essential niche. We are committed to continuing our contribution to the arts and culture of our community. MISSION: To bring affordable, professional theater to Washington Cqunty audiences. PREWARY GOAL: To create relationships between professionals and students and to train, encourage and nurture those seeking careers or desiring to expand their expertise in theater. We are celebrating our ninth summer season at the eb Fennell Auditorium where we will produce five top-notch shows in seven performing weeks, June 29-Augusts, 2000. Our threeAdly produced musicals will be Grease, Baby, and The World Goes 'Round ('The Songs of Kander and Ebb), We also produce two original children's musicals. We offer a unique drania camp for children where the campers perform in one of our children's shows. We plan to accomplish the following: + Employ more than 20 student intems to work alongside our professional performers and crew members. ~ Increase our average attendance from 213 to 225 paid admissions per show. ~ Secure new corporate sponsors who can join our mission to ensure that arts live in our community. 4 Utilize the skills and talents of our dedicated volunteer base. The foundation of Washington County's performing arts is the seven weeks of exciting live theater produced by the Broadway Rose. Our intent is to eventually secure our own performance facilities where we can provide year-round access to theater arts. In addition to mounting productions outside the summer months, we will also offer classes and workshops, provide rehearsal space for other arts organizations, and have a permanent environment in which we can foster arts awareness for young and old alike. The producers have successfully demonstrated their ability to reach the company's goals. For eight years we have succeeded in bringing affordable, high quality theatre to area audiences. We have demonstrated fiscal responsibility by working within our annual budgets. Successful public outreach is demonstrated by the fact that each year attendance has grown and the volunteer pool has expanded. Each year the company has consistently attracted new corporate and private funds. Project Description Our mission is to keep high-quality, professional theater affordable and accessible to all people. Frequently, arts organizations are able to cover approximately 75% of their budget from ticket sales. Because we choose to stay true to our mission, Broadway Rose ticket sales cover less than half of our budget. We keep our ticket prices low and still pay all our bills by being proactive in our fundraising and marketing. For the first time in four years we have raised our ticket prices one dollar, and we hope this will be the last increase for another four years. Our challenge and mission is to keep quality theater affordable as a family experience. Ticket prices at The Broadway Rose range from $6.00 to $15.00. Our season subscription package brings the general admission ticket price for an adult to $13.33 per show, a senior & student to $11.67, and the children's ticket to $7.33. We are requesting $15,000 from the City of Tigard to ensure the arts remain viable and available to our community. P.G. Box 231004, Tigard, OR 97281 (503) 620-5262 Groups Being Served The theater primarily serves Southeast Washington County, encompassing the communities of Tigard, Beaverton, Tualatin, Sherwood, King City, Summerfield, and Durham. Approximately 601/o of our audience are senior citizens. Tigard residents comprise over 1/3 of our audience. Impact on the Community The Broadway Rose sets new precedents. On October 11, 1994, the City of Tigard adopted its first Arts Policy as a result of this growing theater. The Broadway Rose was the first arts organization ever to receive funding from the City of Tigard. The Broadway Rose enjoys flourishing partnerships with many local organizations. Each year we attract new corporate dollars from businesses who are excited about the Broadway Rose's mission. In addition to monetary sponsorships, we also benefit from in-kind contributions. Paper Plus donates the paper for our programs and newsletters and the Tigard/ Tualatin School District donates the printing. Last season, Community Newspapers bumped up our advertising and publicity and Barton Productions Catering provided a beautiful reception for our corporate sponsors. All of these contributions, and many others, prove that we live in a community where the arts are considered valuable and worthy of our devotion and financial commitment. The Broadway Rose offers unlimited volunteer opportunities. More than 100 people of all ages contribute their time and energy to our theater. In addition to volunteer fishers, event workers,aud office help, we have dedicated committee members who oversee our marketing, fundraising, sales and much more. We have a few key volunteers who contribute to the organization at the level of staff members. The Broadway Rose gives back to the community. Last year, nearly 1500 people saw one of our shows for free. We are committed to ensuring that live theater is available to people of all circumstances. Through cooperation with Community Partners for Affordable Housing, the Twah Sunchako Head Start Program, and other community organizations, numerous low-income and minority youth and their families were exposed to live theater last summer. Sources of Potential Support and Current Status We are anticipating continued support from the City of Tualatin, the Regional Arts and Culture Council, the Oregon Arts Commission, the Collins Foundation, the Tucker Foundation, the Templeton Foundation, the Jackson Foundation, the Swigert Foundation, and the Tigard Rotary Foundation, to name a few. Funding Status So far this year we have solidified the following: Our fifth year with Platt Electric Supply, title corporate sponsor $10,000 and an additional in-kind $15,000 4,- Pearson Financial Group, show sponsor of Grease $ 9,000 ~ The Portland Spirit, show sponsor of Baby $ 3,500 4 Bullivant, Houser & Bailey Law Firm (a first-time sponsor), show sponsor of The World Goes 'Round $ 4,000 In addition, Pearson Financial Group has committed for a sixth year to buy out a performance at an additional $6,000. They will offer an evening of Grease as a way to thank their clients and support the theater. Future Financing Selling tickets is the key to strengthening the financial foundation of the organization. We have the capacity to seat 600 per performance in the Deb Fennell Auditorium. Our current average is 213 paying patrons per performance. This is a significant increase since our first year (1992) with 30 per performance; each year our ticket sales have steadily risen. We are now taking action to increase next season's average to 225 per performance. This fall we enticed our individual ticket holders to become season subscribers by offering a bonus ticket for orders placed before December 25a`. This special offer worked. We sold 236 season tickets (a total of over $8,000) and 106 of these were Elm El 1111 1111§=~i first-time buyers. This spring we will produce a free concert previewing our shows. We will invite potential ticket buyers to attend with the understanding that they should bring their checkbooks to take advantage of purchasing season tickets at 20% off for that night only. In addition to these special promotional offers, our marketing committee is upgrading the look of our publicity materials to more accurately reflect who we really are and, for the first time, we have hired a saleswoman to head our group sales department. These are just a few of the ways that we are working toward continued audience growth. For documentation of the organization's 1999 financial condition, please see the statement titled "Actual Expenses & Revenue 1999," attached. For information about 2000, please see "Projected Revenue and Expenses 2000," attached. i Z 3 The Broadway Rose Theater Projected Revenue and Expenses 2000 Expenses Loans $ 2,300.00 In-Kind Housing $ 600.00 3 Administrative Positions $ 31,200.00 $ 5,500.00 Travel $ 702.30 Federal Taxes $ 13,600.00 State Taxes $ 4,400.00 W.Comp/Insuran. $ 6,981.00 Advertising $ 8,816.82 $ 10,000.00 Office $ 1,295.22 $ 2,500.00 Auditions $ 287.00 Telephone $ 2,074.50 $ 100.00 Rent/Storage $ 8,265.00 $ 1,944.00 Postage $ 4,162.96 Organis. Dues $ 525.50 Bank.Fees $ 1,351.38- Printing $ 3,863.65 $ 3,000.00 Concessions $ 1,100'84 $ 300.00 Fundraising $ 587:27 Staff Development $ 800.75 Classes $ 9.58 Entertain/Strike ..~t $ .550.94 Raffle $ 300.00 Business Expenses 93,774.71 Cost of Producing 5 Shows $ 98,709.44 Total Expenses $ 192,484.15 $ 3,344.00 Projected Revenue Tickets $ 88,800.00 Indiv. Contr. $ 11,000.00 Cone / Souv/ Raffle $ 4,263.04 City of Tualatin $ 200.00 Tigard Rotary $ 500.00 Grants Regional Arts & Culture $ 10,000.00 Oregon Arts Commission $ 2,000.00 Collins Foundation $ 6,000.00 Jackson Foundation $ 2,200.00 Tucker Foundation $ 2,500.00 Templeton Foundation $ 3,000.00 US Bank $ 7,000.00 Corporate Platt Electric Supply $ 10,000.00 Pearson Financial Group $ 9,000.00 i Portland Spirit $ 3,500.00 Bullivant, Houser & Bailey $ 4,000.00 * Bold are Committed Perkanance Sponsors 29 performance sponsors $25 $ 7,250.00 Fundraisers $ 2,000.00 Misc. Classes $ 2,000.00 Interest $ 233.77 Deposit refunds $ 1,000.00 program advertising $ 1,037.34 a Total Projected Revenue $ 177,48 15 Amount requested The City of Tigard $15,000 The Broadway Rose Theater Company ACTUALS Actual Revenue & Expenses 1999,1999 1998 Actual 1999 Actual Expenses Loans $13,600.00 $2,400.00 Costumes $3,464.41 $2,746.38 Sets $15,669.73 $22,372.51 Royalties $3,378.75 $8,624.40 Props $808.91 $819.47 Lights $1,824.21 $2,878.92 Sound $3,972.32 $1,964.60 Housing $103.48 $0.00 3 Administrative Staff $23,874.36 $31,410.33 Travel . $202.30 $479.44 Net Wages $55,406.78 $51,760.41 Orchestra $6,705.00 $5,670.00 Federal Taxes $11,707.33 $13,142.70 State Taxes $3,644.85 $4,070.95 W.Comp/Insuran. $5,880.00 $7,408.00 Advertising ,x,$9,047.82 $10,747.51 Office $2,923.58 $x,757.73 Auditions $132.00 $200.00 Telephone $1,868.74 $2,000.26 Rent/Storage $5,117.26 $7,809.97 Postage $3,749.65 $4,139.48 Organis. Dues $295.00 $1,118.50 Bank Fees $1,673.75 $1,684.13 Printing $3,427.64 $3,922.49 Concessions $1,100.84 $881.08 Souvenirs $0.00 $0.00 Fundralsing $514.75 $0.00 Staff Develope $314.75 $858.75 Classes $9.58 $0.00 Entertain/Strike $677.97 $476.33 Raffle $300.00 $160.00 Total Expenses ' $181,395.76 $191,508.34 Revenue DONATION $10,092.00 $12,692.34 TICKETS $77,287.40 $82,139.86 INTEREST $341.34 $83.52 PERFORMACE CONTRACT (Sherwood) $9,022.62 POMO/RENTAL $0.00 $975.00 FUNDRAISING $1,380.00 $1,340.00 ii GRANTS $44,756.00 $48,718.00 CORPORATE $25,050.00 $28,450.00 REFUNDS $2,181.71 $1,197.11 3 CLASSrCAMP $4,475.00 $3,400.00 RAFFLE $2,545.00 $2,503.00 SOUVINERS $36.00 $156.00 CONSESSION $2,227.04 $2,351.15 ADVERTISING $1,150.00 $1,500.00 LOANS $0.00 $0.00 Total Revenue $171,521.49 $194,528.60 helping people make educated financial decisions" November 23, 1999 h Y To Whom It May Concern: 4 Conrad and Barbara Pearson, and Pea4on Financial Group (PFG), have enjoyed a long- standing association with the Broadway Rose Theatre, and it is a pleasure to share our thoughts regarding the contribution this organization niakes to the community and its association with Pearson Financial Group. As a client-oriented business, Pearson Financial Group strives to show its appreciation to our clients for their business. In cooperation with the Broadway Rose Theatre, PFG annually extends an invitation to all clients to experience a night at the theater. Clients express great enthusiasm for this event, calling in advance of the invitation to make sure the date is on their calendar. We receive more favorable comments regarding this event than any one thing we do over the course of the year. The Broadway Rose Theatre is a tremendous asset to the community. Its productions are affordable to a wide range audience and allow numerous persons a live theater experience that they might not otherwise.enjoy. Students are also afforded the opportunity to participate in professional productions at a community level. While, certainly, Pearson Financial Group continues to enjoy a mutually beneficial relationship with the Broadway Rose Theatre, the greatest benefit is for the community at large. Sincerely, H i y Conrad Pearson 5665 SW Meadows Road. Suite 120 • Lake Osvena, OR 97035 503.670.0500 669.236.0500 FAX 503.670.0501 S^runles nl!e•ca ihrcuc~h Fo•; aI q;iiance .4~snca'rs. _ • t'An_ ''.4SD 8 SIPC IN'TERhAt. RRVENUC SERVICE DEPARTM1311'P OF T1113 '1HHASURY DISTRICT DIRECTOR •2 CUPANIA C ERCLr MONTEREY PARK, CA 91755-7431 Employer Identification ihimbers Datet MAY 1 2 1997, 93-1069099 Cnse tlumbnri 95705.1029 DROAUWAY tto!:E THRATHE COMPANY Contact Pornom C/O MAT111EW G. RYAN EO CU11'i'0141;It t KIWIC1s P.O. BOX 231004 Contact Toleplimle tiumbert TIGARI), Olt 97201-1004 (213) 094-2209 Our Latter Dateds Mny 1992 Addendum AppliesI 110 Dear ApEzl icnt,t s This modif ion our letter of the above date in wlAch wo ntnted that you would be treated as an organization that in not n priv4,te foundaLion until the expiration of your advance ruling period. Your exempt status under section 501 (n) of Lite Internal Itevetttte Code an nn organization described in section S& (c) (3) in tit•iAa i,t effect. Irnnect o„ tl,e information you nubmitted, we have determined that you are not a private foundation within the meaning of section 509 (a)l of the Code becattne yon area all organi.zati0u of Lite type described in section 509 (a) (1) and 170 (b) (1) (A) (vi) . Grant•c»:s rood cor►tributors may rely on thin dntet:ml.nntlota uulens Lila Internal Rc!verrue Service publichen notice to Lion conLrnry. However, if you lose your 1-ct-ion 509(x)(1) status, a grantor or contributor may not rely on this cleterualuation if Ise or site wan in part responnible for, or wan aware of, the act or failure to act, or the substantial or inntorinl chnnge oil tire pnr•t of the organization that resulted in your Ions of rrttch ntatun, or if lw or "lie acquired knowledge that the Internal Revenue Sea-vice land g ivett uoL-ice that you would no lutiger be classified an a section 5091n) (1) organization. An of January 1, 1904, you are liable for Lnxon ttntlor tile Federal Insurance Contributions Act (social security taxon) au remmterstrion of $100 or more you pay to each Of your employees durincl a cn.lcesdar• year. You are not liable for the tax imposed under the Federal Unemployment 'l'ax Act- (FU'CA). You are required to file Form 990 only if your clrorrn rece.ipto each year are normally more than $25,000. For guidance ila dotormining whether your gross receipts are "normally" more that, $25,000, nee the it,struct•iottn for For%%% 990. if a returs, is required, it must be filed by thn 15th clay of the fifth tnot,th after the end of your annual accounting period. A ponnlty of $10 a clay iu charged when a return is filed late, unless there in reasonable caune for the delay. however, the maximum penalty charged cartnot• exceed $5,000 or 5 percent of your groan receipts for the year, whichever in lean. This penalty may also be charged if a return is riot complete, no !leans be sure your return in complete before you file it. If we have indicated in the heading of thin letter that nn addeuduno applies, r:he addendum encloned is all integral part oC title letter. Letter 1050 (DO/CU) Broadway Rose Theatre Company 1999 Board of Directors Shari Scales (President) Michael Staeheli Ph: 221-2307 Fax: 228-6741 Ph: 590-5752 8627 SW Dakota Drive 14795 SW Osprey Dr. #918 Tualatin, OR 97062 Beaverton, OR 97007 Shari lyn(&teleport.coin Staeheli(atelep6rt.com Y Harvey Platt Dan Yates . Ph: 641-6121 Fax: 350-5579 Ph: 224-3900 Fax: 231-9089 Platt Electric Supply The Portland Spirit 10605 SW Allen Blvd. l 10 SE CZruthers Beaverton, OR 97005 Portland, OR 97214 HJPLATT~a' )aol.com Bill Monahan Barbara Pearson Ph: 639-4171, x. 306 Ph: 670-0500 Fax: 670-0501 City of Tigard Pearson Financial Group 13125 SR' Hall Blvd. 5665 SW Meadows Rd. Suite 120 Tigard, OR 97223 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Bill o,ci.tieard.or.us George Mead Sharon Maroney (Artistic Director) Ph: 228-6351 Fax: 295-0915 Ph: 620-5262 Fax: 670-8512 Bullivant, Houser, Bailey, Pendergrass & The Broadway Rose Theatre Co. Hoffman PO Box 231004 888 SW 5t' Ave. Suite 300 Tigard, OR 97281 Portland, OR 97204 BRTCSM c~.aol.com Georae.MeadrBul l ivant. com i i 1 i i 3 MENOMONIE In June 1971 writers Jim Jacobs 1972. In 1978, the film version, and Warren Casey presented their starring John Travolta and Olivia 50's musical comedy as a Newton-John, became the top money- five-hour-long amateur making musical film ever, surpassing show in a Chicago even The Sound of Music. trolley bam. After Join Rydell High's class of 1959 cutting the show as they pay musical tribute to Elvis down to normal and Fabian, big hair, sock hops and length, it opened at guys who name their cars "Greased the Eden Theater in New Lightning!" York on February. 14, thirty-somethings, having trouble r Is there anything more exciting, conceiving but determined to try; and C 0 frightening and utterlyuu transfonna- the middle-aged parents, looking tional than impending parenthood? forward to seeing their last child ~r Baby tells the story of three graduate from college when a night couples on a university campus as of unexpected passion lands them they deal with the painful, rewarding back where they started. and agonizingly funny consequences Baby was the first book _ of impending parenthood. There musical by Richard Maltby, are the college students, barely at Jr. and David Shire to open the beginning oftheir adult lives; the on Broadway. It debuted at the Ethel It's a perfect show for anyone Barrymore Theatre in December 1983. who's ever had a baby ...or anyone who's ever been one! the e "Sometimes you're happy and sometimes you're sad - but the collaboration in theatre, film and world goes `round." Life - with its television. It spotlights songs from glories, indignities, hopes and quiet Cabaret, Chicago, New York, New O dreams - is the subject of this stun- York, Funny Lad}~, Kiss of the O ning revue of the beloved songs of SPiderwoman and more. ® John Kander and Fred Ebb. From offbeat comedy to reflec- This glittering revue, which tive ballads, you're sure to leave the -y debuted in New York in 1992, theater humming one ofyour favorite r~,, Sager a~ features unforgettable gems from melodies from this evening of ~aaa'mr aTd E66 throughout their twenty-plus years of contemporary classic tunes. ti w a ,ce "Bouyant, brash and glowing with charisma.. The Oregonian 71Q t K _ 6'I A III ~ Z~ I r ® ~ thr rjJr~•h ur►• ~lu►►►►i►►,ir. t I Ill'l h~:r,nn.ut 1 fla1 11111 s'Wil 1' USlll M10 S. v J tt° !il,r a nvulk in the N►u►%hi►rr with Inloic. " I he ()I-CL ►nian • u • : ..s:_' _ 3.;.....`~._.r•r• ! car .r.?: ~ 'rik' ` ! : r ` - I rate: <t. Min n®~ THE OAD jt~Ay #;~~dcRco.T ~ FAD THEATRE COMPANY February 15, 2000 Bill Monahan City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Bill, The Broadway Rose Theatre Company has been producing live, fun, professional summer stock theater in Tigard since 1992. As the only professional theater company in Washington County, we fill an essential niche. We are committed to continuing our contribution to the arts and culture of our community. The Broadway Rose Theatre would like The City of Tigard to consider our summer season as an annual sponsored event. We have enjoyed a long term relationship with Tigard and look forward to the relationship growing. If you need additional information or have any questions please call me at 620-5262. Sincerely, _ Sharon Maroney Founding Artistic Director P.O. Box 231004 • Tigard, OR 97281 • (503) 620-5262 Fax (503) 670-8512 11 NIM NINE 1111111 11M111111"111111 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: 7-1G~`i20 L-S7-1111;-L OF A44Z-00AIS Address 11.5-75 0a). Ail-G/F/O kxiY 131 City, State, Zip /6s1'9,6D, 972 7- 3 Contact Name: ,~%UC~ ~l11S -51 /1? V ff/fV/y/7,:1ACR Telephone -4P3 - S`'~o - /dt Z 8 Number: x'03 - Zoq_ iD 972 -.0 O 3 -7©9- AZ Z 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $ /0' Oo p, In-Kind Services (use of city property, City staff support, etc. $ VvZ4 g"/Z ~1T IIAMWOWAI Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) T / S /UAL, UT S,tm,!F /~ft2/~S ~EF'T IDOL/C E O4"S Total Request $ PP-EVioUS 7-Wc> VE/4YLS, 2. Purpose of Funding Request */O, ©OD. 7o L-S7X13L1sF0 67V,9-1V7' 4S A /1JOAI- P,Qcst,::frJ /CR~E" /~-.aMi,4i's ~oN ~'-V~n/ 7" ~a~2 ~Lc. GSM Lt CS O ~ T/G~t2,a /AND Sv/120onlOriv~ (?D~I/j?~iViTiES. To 4U11/7-.11VUE A1_60W11V6- SEW-R'14 A49,V- x/10/=1T ORG,+Wi7_47.1 VS FUND "emsll!~ 19G7r/t//Ty I02 y7VE-1Ae 3. Please submit the following information with this request: /1Lo6rW,41gS, a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY 1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The and ending balances, major revenue sources, mai,1 y number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fis c. Articles of Incorporation* d. 501(c)(3) status* ' e. Organization Bylaws* * Information not required if it has been submitted at least once Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial l~1 A/Xfry~M`~'1 -~1 tom'' "'1~`Y•X- rK y WIN Tigard 4th of July, Inc. A Not for Profit Corporation FIN 93-1031978 (503) 624-2975 First Bank of Tigard Building 12420 S. W. Main Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 February 4, 2000 Mr. Craig Prosser Finance Director ' City of Tigard ;a 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Craig, The Board of Directors of Tigard 4th of July, Inc., a Non Profit Corporation, submit this letter with enclosures as our Funding Request for the Fiscal Year 2000 - 2001. To the criteria for funding, we submit the following comments: (1) The Tigard Old Fashioned 4th of July Celebration is primarily for Tigard area residents; we do not advertise outside of the area. (2) This event is open to all citizens, with the only restrictions being no alcoholic beverages, no smoking, and no personal fireworks. (3) We stress a family oriented type of celebration on this annual event, with effort to provide quality entertainment, a family/community style picnic atmosphere, and public opportunity to participate at no cost (unless they should desire to purchase snacks at very reasonable prices, the proceeds going toward the subsequent year's event). (4) With thirteen annual events successfully accomplished (our first was in 1987), we feel that the event has proven to be valuable to the community, and very affordable for the city and the citizens attending. i i (5) As with item (4), the Board of Directors feel that our success for thirteen years and the records we have kept demonstrate an ability to reach our goals and keep within reasonable budget commitments. (6) Financial Statements are annually prepared and submitted. Craig Prosser City of Tigard February 4, 2000 Page 2 (7) The Funding Request per our previous agreements with the City of Tigard are based upon the encouragement of other sources of revenue. We hope you find the information contained herein to be adequate for the City's budgeting purposes. We also hope you look forward to enjoying each year's event as much as we look forward to putting it on. Last year, the City of Tigard approved an award of $ 7,500.0p for the 1999/00 fiscal year. We accepted $ 1,000.00 of that money in July of 1999, leaving $ 6,500.00 to be received this year (prior to June 30, 2000). For the fiscal year 2000/01, the Board of Directors of Tigard 4 h of July, Inc. requests $ 7,500.00 in contribution from the City of Tigard. This is the same as was approved last yeaAand we find it to beX adequate amount to ensure the success and continuation of the 4'' of July Celebration. With regards to City in-kind contributions, we have identified the following impacted areas: Public Works - If the City Public Works personnel prepare the fireworks firing trench, I have been previously advised that the estimated cost is $ 400 (1999 $ subject to indexed adjustment). Police Department - The Police Department is advised of the event and incurs an estimated $ 1,200 (1999 $ subject to indexed adjustment) of cost for what primarily is traffic control after the event. Officers are present during the event more for public relations than for any policing requirements. We support the Officers presence, making some very important contacts with the citizens and youth in particular. Administration - Insurance for the event is accomplished by a rider to the City's existing policy. Loreen Mills advises that there is no additional charge for this rider. a Should have questions about any of the above, please contact me for assistance. Sincerely, R. Michael Man Treasurer R.NfvVdbm Enclosures CC: Board Members N~~ 111111N mill 0 T r CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: De ,Tae-s-, Address /~s~zc~ a~G~ /~i.~~-✓ f City, State, Zip 97zz~ Contact Name: /yli~ct /1J-i~~ A Telephone Number: 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) ` Cash $ -7 ,x-00 In-Kind Services (use of City property, City staff support, etc. $ !o DO Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) Total Request $ 9~ / o 40 2. Purpose of Funding Request 3. Please submit the following information with this request: a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY 1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Budget should identify beginning and ending balances, major revenue sources, major expenditure categories, and { number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fiscal year. c. Articles of Incorporation* 1 d. 501(c)(3) status* e. Organization Bylaws* * Information not required if it has been submitted at least once in the last five years. Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial of request TIGARD 4TH OF JULY, INC. Balance Sheet (Unaudited) as of December 31, 1999 Current Year 12 Mo. Per To Date 1000 ASSETS 1450 Cash - Non Interest Bearing 1451 Petty Cash 125.00 125.00 1452 General Checking Account 2,608.18 5,766.06 1460 Savings & Temp. Investments 1461 Savings 0.00 0.00 1470 Accounts Receivable 1471 Accounts Receivable 0.00 0.00 1476 (Uncollectable Allowance) 0.00 0.00 1480 Pledges Receivable 1481 Pledges Receivable 0.00 0.00 1486 (Uncollectable Allowance) 0.00 0.00 1490 Grants Receivable 1491 Grants Receivable 't. 0.00 0.00 1500 Recievables from Related Parties 1501 Receivables from Directors 0.00 0.00 1510 Other Receivables 1511 Notes Receivable 0.00 0.00 1516 (Uncollectab!e Allowance) 0.00 0.00 1520 !nventories For Sale or Use 1521 Inventories For Sale or Use 80.22 80.22 1530 Prepaid Expenses / Deferred Charges 1531 Prepaid Expenses 0.00 0.00 1540 Investments - Securities 1550 Investments - Assets 1560 Investments - Other 1570 Equipment 1571 Equipment 0.00 0.00 1576 (Accumulated Depreciation) 0.00 0.00 1580 Other Assets TOTAL ASSETS 2,813.40 5,971.28 2000 LIABILITIES 2600 Accounts Payable & Accrued Exp 2601 Accounts Payable 0.00 0.00 2610 Grants Payable 2611 Grants Payable 0.00 0.00 i 2620 Revenue Designated (Future Per.) a 2621 Revenue Designated 0.00 0.00 a 2630 Loans from Related Parties 2631 Loans from Directors 0.00 0.00 2640 Mortgages/Notes Payable 2641 Notes Payable 0.00 0.00 3 2650 Other Liabilities 2651 Other Liabilities 0.00 0.00 a Total Liabilities 0.00 0.00 1 , r TIGARD 4TH OF JULY, INC. _ Page 2 Balance Sheet (Unaudited) as of December 31, '1999 Current Year 12 Mo. Per To Date 3000 FUND BALANCES 3670 Current Funds 3671 Unrestricted Funds 0.00 0.00 3676 Restricted Funds 0.00 0.00 3680 Equipment Fund 3690 Endowment Fund 3700 Other Fund 3710 Capital Stock or Trust Principal 3711 Capital Stock 0.00 0.00 3720 Paid In or Capital Surplus ;s 3730 Retained Earnings / Accumulated Income 3731 Retained Earnings > 01/01/99 0.00 (3,157.88) 3732 Current Earnings > 12/31/99 (2,813.40) (2,813.40) Total Fund Balance (2,813.40) c (5,971.28) TOTAL LIABILITIES & FUND BALANCE (2,813.40) (5,971.28) 0.00 0.00 Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: i i 3 2 r TIGARD 4TH OF JULY, INC. Income & Expense Statement as of December 31,1999 (Unaudited) Current Year 12 Mo. Per. To Date 4000 INCOME 4010 Contributions, Gifts, Grants 4011 Direct Public Support (7,109.90) (7,109.90) 4012 Indirect Public Support 0.00 0.00 4013 Government Grants (7,100.00) (7,100.00) 4020 Program Service Revenue 4030 Meml 4040 Interest Earnings 4050 Dividends / Interest on Securities 4060 Net Rental Income 4061 Gross Rents 0.00 ' 0.00 4066 Rental Expense` 0.00 6.i6 0.00 4070 Other Investment Income 4080 Gain / Loss from Sale of Assets 4081 Gross Sale Amount .~L 0.00 0.00 4086 Cost / Expense 0.00 f` 0.00 4090 Fundraising Events c 4091 Gross Revenues 0.00 0.00 4096 Direct Expenses 0.00 0.00 4100 Gross Profit from Sales 4101 Gross Sales Less Returns (1,361.60) (1,361.60) 4106 Cost of Goods Sold 643.60 643.60 4107 Cost of Goods Sold 17.04 17.04 4108 Cost of Goods Sold 80.00 80.00 4110 Other Revenue Total Revenue (14,830.86) (14,830.86) 6000 EXPENSES 6130 Program Service Expenses 6131 Tigard 4th Celebration 12,007.46 12,007.46 6140 Management & General Expenses 6141 Bank Service Charges 0.00 0.00 6142 Miscellaneous 0.00 0.00 6150 Fundraising Expenses 6151 Miscellaneous 10.00 10.00 6160 Payments to Affiliates J i Total Expense 12,017.46 12,017.46 t (Excess) or Deficit (2,813.40) (2,813.40) i 3 3 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 503-639-4171 FY 2000-01 COMMUNITY EVENT FUNDING REQUEST Event Name: Train Days - September 2000 Address 13125 SW Hail Blvd. City, State, Zip Tigard, OR 97223 . Contact Name: Bill Monahan Telephone Number: 639-4171 Ext. 309 1. Request (express in whole dollar amounts only) Cash $ 4,000 In-Kind Services (use of city property, City staff support, etc. $ see attached Please explain the services requested on a separate sheet) Total Request $ see attached 2. Purpose of Funding Request Event would be patterned after the event held in September 1998. Planning would include approaching the City of Tualatin, Tigard/Tualatin School District, Metro, Tri-Met, and Washington County for assistance in contributing additional funding. 3. Please submit the following information with this request: a. Detailed budget, including FY 1998-99 actual expenditures, FY 1999-00 Adopted Budget, and FY 2000-01 Proposed Budget. The Budget should identify beginning and ending balances, major revenue sources, major expenditure categories, and number of authorized positions. b. Audit report or financial statements for the last fiscal year. c. Articles of Incorporation* d. 501(c)(3) status* e. Organization Bylaws* a a * Information not required if it has been submitted at least once in the last five years. Lack of adequate financial information could result in denial of request Cash Request: The cash request would be for the following items: 2,500 Costs associated vith running the train 1,000 Scaffolding 200 Port-a-potties 100 Refreshments for volunteers 20 Film and developing 180 Souvenirs for volunteers In-Kind Request 2 Public Works FTE for 2 days for site logistics (set up, clean up.dpring the activity, tear down) 2 School Resource Officers for the time period that the children are visiting the trains. A Police coverage as needed for event (traffic control). In Kind assistance was received in the 1998 event from Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue who supplied the water needed for the steam engine. 1AADM\CATHY\EVENTS\TRAIN DAYS 2000.DOC a a AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 25 April 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update on the Status of Cook Park Master Plan Expansion Project PREPARED BY: John Roy DEPT HEAD OK~ CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL No issue to be deeded. STAFF RECOMMENDATION INFORMATION SUMMARY A presentation outlining the 3 phases remaining to be completed, projected target dates for design, construction start dates and construction completion dates will be provided. See attached presentation information. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY FISCAL NOTES iAcitywide\sUndot COOK PARK IN THE NEW MTLENNIU M what have we ac~ornplished to date? Of the park ®raphic survey 9~nd Ave = . Complete F t design if or wal of®nGeF ,council apFr to rWerfr®nt mFr®vements line and Power _ tion Of ater iVerfr®nt 11nstalla e c; shelter at r • ° on ction of peen` . _ pavM :o~enste~u ekla ~ulteuse 0, ® Of f bishop/_ .Constructs se errnat for ion .®f Land F Is~at . bases remcsnsn9 -F Now orking one Consulting currer~tlY WnderwaY ~y ~~ut urea t design 's • ~teon pro,ec itag etlcLnd er~ices o®® ~~isia~► ~eerIng s• une 2 _ end use d eng' ruction ril ® . Ind s f®con~t • n held ~p m5id proce$ it uppl,out,o ring on perms Consultant use 00o design Cony l 30.2 ineering by May is for eng s ~,Fp prop~~a 3 hales e, try ucces e~i~~eng e~~,neng p . nin9 e~ner9 d crossang .~or .r deslg Wet1o' services CurrentlY including ° n by • urgent Cook park onstructe® under c ineer ng De? ~ to area o~ng _ om-$~ Avenue ~r®nt o'r VGA fr for river o®~.,fucilitY tr res dor outside ve y ~ - i 4 _ .1,~ ski i~r LyxY ~ e r ~ { i , %4, S a qa ~.;y,~ r~~rr,`~_ .,.,sZ.:. l1~ 4, r ~t t ty gl ~s 7. -~,j v ~e •i 'J, ~~`rq 2 rc wb f t rt $ i•' t Y_ i# ^ r„- ! J 1 r5d~?..t S' Jf'~ t it's .+`'Fo +t '°ocT.. t s ,~#2.Ar = e• 7 . :.l . 1 FY Ir7~. `y~+,•c `s S'. y s ' k , lt' x t6;1 a ,{at eta.Attyr `4ai' ! i ` °n ~r~, 7:+. ear, ( s ;~~r "►r $ P t,1~~; ofi,{ iy r; h3L~ .7w iY?r:N'fir r,.,~', t•~~..Y Z5y" J,A. .°ti-._: - y f f,+ ~rqY < R sir . r74tsjy G'P"~ 3rd ti ~~yy ~~i, {•1 ' _zF - ; Y~"Y'" ar~ o : ~{:Ir ~jJ l Yi } a i" tr 0 i. `r`~,~r.,'r~•"~.. if - 4 Y4 r, } .7d~~ ~Q*t `y tt -ly Aw~.~~• rr't' t ~';J' ~x .ii ( ~ 1' f%yl'1>.. x ; r 14 _ _ ~ e a F r. Ki'~10- ^•f'7, 't°.4 r j t`"~•'j q••~ ° ^ •''''ii+" ~ t,4~,a~^, - : f' ~ r ,P ~7 ~ , . 'y ' ° :h ~ - ~ . '.r•, Wit. - 'What,r,areU•;our --future plans. ~t. hree•{.remainondesic~nphases as follows; r l"here /y6 e:: # F't,~-tt~,~gr;q,y..l;~: iru;w: (e, •.n . _t ,®li" _j,,:,., •;,.s:^ ~"..:r- - - Phase I ,r. _ t 11 a►d._ r-f't x.t~ ' "`'h,ccn4 Field Sports, a'.. . "r - _ . =C r•,~ SQ 1 ,A ~ n.w • "lot ~T .r.,920 Ave . . =`Park~ngon - -east 'side ,-of . b.~ ;~r~c• Rest~®om~_:faceast end of sports f sells. i ° s °,"pY ~`t d ~r a Y , w5• r~~ ~"T" ttnj~ N,,,•.._ .i.. le er er t do t t r.Y. ~1•. 2`I';..~ -x :'..i. 'tr , ~ '~."tr,.'+..~C~i3,`ra'rt3'y'.'•a• i _ Infrastructure i• - ` " r T P ! Sir-.•• - .r i _ • • - . _ + p.+rr• :i. J : i z` r o + j - x edb. ust .y'Fly!'•an.aA *Ra ;3j ¢ her f *~trsslgn V®..•pBit.er• t - Y'- J i? 5.i'y `~_r~ n- tirM t- f4wF 4T 'I4 .+-•dri -ir•J • - e 1 y 'r , , .t o r Tt<t r-' -11®ns ruc•1i0 b ~tw'Aprl~" d,'~aA+v~®®1 1 _ r• Y ~ 1'w r4~ ra { b_` U ®®~Sr~~el,e rn15 //yp .F ~~}c a rF,. `~?+f. dye r a -r , ¢ ? r'F: ~ • l4 ~ _ - -i .i. s Pd~9~ •I^~& `~~4..m ~rZ'r!{~SR~ y ..~,'~•~„'~l L ` i1-.'r~ Y;•~.....w~ i - - • ter +i"7' ~x~y~'-~. t ~'~1 y T$ s,", r 3 ~ •..i::rs"•;P:= r~ fi`;'= ,1... ~rA y r s,r/ ' ♦f~y'~~`" ~~'a} ,~rP+si,S'"~lrr' Iq,". „n s } t s i _ r ~f~' .,5~ °"Dt~-~• .,kph ,~rq~ ~ ,t, t~. ry.. a:- .1, + •4~1'... i'',,i`F a ~.'"#ru t1~.i~R lr r a ry .a+~kf'1J -•!•~':t~ L'' -stn ,n~tS.E.A1:,C_~. r i Phase I ` r`, • estroo~n and Concession Facility •t S nstruction .-rail Co R •onal Trail Connection _ , ego rat east side of Shelter .picnic ~ y. ~ . area ~ f 1 project Lot playground _ , • T-~. . Tot "f ",..~„e,T ~,S^3 ~ ~Y r.. :~rf~, ~;~;.s'11t._~='-'r t' ~ ~i~~}~u completed by ~ , ~esign 2 2000 `1 4~-e~. Ste' october Construction begins by August 2002 on by June !a~ . Completi ~j 4 1y i f ` ~y p• ft . n, A ~ ~A ~r~ r~,i~ I ~ + y ~ ~i ~ ' 'y~ , a jill~jl Z N Q i i z D a - ~e w o w y CL T-- U i ,V ! 1- • 1 r~rS~ i s: • o • I I I it 4 w m ~qgq QJ?.S7A:~y:iii wmRSIM jj 4 ih Z gT r ~yeb v4t1 ^S`- L`"„ ' ,7 fN$ r~j•'1~1;~>, ,9`.19-'YkiJ nv~,yF +Mr, tit>~~> • I m II I ~Nf i t t i _0 gfiTt~ND AREA 5 G SOCCER I y I CdORT t PARt(Did yD7t$t-U~ ~ ~µl V 0 ~~o ygadP~ o o o QIIaARD 0 Rsst Rpp P O u o d© ° GR C o 1a a~ ~taER oG o~B8C~O SOF[ f P $ a g a ~ 9.y, F~ t~1 o RO~g ~-a C RpOtt 4tT ° CO( PIClac ~ 9gEt, C} t, cc fie{. eogr u ppCK ,9 COOK PARK EXPANSION MASTER PLAN BUDGET FY2000/2001 Park Levy Improvement Fund (carry over) $ 215,000.00 Park SDC Funds $ 785,000.00 Tupling Donation (Butterfly Meadow) $ 100,000.00 Total $1,100,000.00 PROJECTED EXPENDITURES FOR FY2000/2001 Wetland construction $ 250,000.00 Infrastructure $ 90,000.00 Parking Lot (east) $ 450,000.00 Restrooms (east) $ 75,000.00 Butterfly Meadow $ 100,000.00 Engineering Design Services* $ 135,000.00 Total $1,100,000.00 *Contract not yet awarded s AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 4/25/00 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Local Government Grant Program PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK l" ITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City submit applications for Local Government Grant Program funding? Which projects should be submitted? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Authorize submittal of Cook and Woodard Park grant applications by adopting the attached resolution. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Oregon State Parks and Recreation Department is accepting applications for park projects that will be funded from the Local Government Grant Program this summer. A one-page information sheet describing the newly established program is attached. Two project proposals per sponsor may be submitted. For the current funding cycle, staff recommends the City seek funds for improvements identified in the Cook and Woodard Park Expansion Plans. At its 4/18/00 meeting Council expressed interest in considering ideas for grant proposals. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Partner with the Trust for Public Lands on one or two land acquisition grant proposals. Not to submit one or more grant applications. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal # 1: Community Aesthetics: Balance development and aesthetic needs. FISCAL NOTES The project selection process calls for grants to be awarded by July 1, 2000. The matching requirement is 50%, which may include the value of land acquired within the past six years. The amounts requested are $250,000 for the Cook Park Project and a lesser amount for the Woordard Park project. The City's proposed match is the value of the land acquired for the expansion of Cook and Woodard Parks. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 00- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL TO THE OREGON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANT PROPOSALS FOR COOK AND WOODARD PARK FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS. WHEREAS, the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department is accepting applications for the Local Government Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard desires to participate in this grant program to the greatest extent possible as a means of providing needed park and recreation improvements and enhancements; and WHEREAS, the City Council has identified facility improvements at Cook and Woodard Parks as high priority needs in the City of Tigard; and WHEREAS, the proposed improvements to Cook Park include sports fields, parking areas, restroom facilities, and irrigation improvements; and the proposed improvements to Woodard Park include a picnic shelter, play structure, and open play area; and WHEREAS, the City hereby certifies that the matching shares for these applications are readily available at this time; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The City Manager is authorized to submit applications for Local Government Grants from the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department for facility improvements at Cook and Woodard Parks as specified above. PASSED: This day of2000. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard Ulrpn/dr/res/iocalgrant.applications RESOLUTION NO.00-_ Page 1 Local Government Grant Program The Local Government Grant Program is a State program created by the Oregon Park and Recreation Department as a result of voter approval in November 1998 of Ballo: Measure 66. The newly established program provides up to 50% funding assistance to local park providers for land acquisition and outdoor park facilities. A total of $4.5 million dollars is available. Funding Limits/Cycles The State program includes two types of grant requests: Small Grants and Large Grants. Small Grants are for projects that do not exceed $50,000 total cost and $25,000 in grant funding. The funding cycle for Small Grants is on an annual basis. Large Grants are for projects that include grant requests in the $25,000 to $250,000 range. Large Grant requests will be accepted on a biennial basis. The next opportunity to submit a Large Grant request will be April 2002. Project sponsors are eligible to submit two applications per cycle. The two may include any combination of Small or Large Grant requests. Eligible projects include land acquisition, development, and rehabilitation. In the future, if a park provider has an active local grant-funded project, the sponsor may submit only one project. Should a park provider have two active projects, the sponsor will be ineligible to submit any new applications. Land Acquisition Funding assistance is available to acquire property for which improvements are planned at a future date. In the interim, according to the grant guidelines, "the property should be open for those public recreation purposes which the land is capable of supporting or which can be achieved with a minimum public investment." If development will be delayed for more than two years from the date of acquisition, the project sponsor must include in the project application information on when such development will occur. The grant guidelines do not set a time limit by which sponsors must carry out planned improvement to grant- funded land acquisitions. However, land banking is not encouraged and some level of improvements are recommended to accommodate public access. Assuming the City were to acquire park or natural area property using grant funds, potential associated costs would include such items as insurance premiums, soft path construction, on-going maintenance costs, and signage. At this time, costs are not known. Local Match The matching requirement is 50%. The match may include local budget funds, other eligible grants, or the value of land acquired within the past six years for which development funding is requested. However, funding must be certified with the grant application. Timeline The deadline for submitting grant requests is April 28'. A statewide advisory committee will rate projects according to objective scoring criteria and make recommendations to the agency director for funding. Grants are scheduled to be awarded and agreements signed by July 1. 1/Irpn/dr/parks.localgrant I i I~ { wins _ 6 Item No. For Council Newsletter dated ' MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Bill Monahan, City Manager p DATE: April 21, 2000 SUBJECT: Council Meeting of April 25, 2000 - Agenda Items The agenda for the April 25 meeting has been revised to add the discussion of Cook Park improvement status (City Council packet material is attached) as well as potential grant applications for park land acquisition or development. A letter and memo describing the Oregon Parks and Recreation Local Government Grant Program is attached along with a chronology of the City involvement with the Stanley, Gage, and Senn property. Explanation of the City obligation that would result from land acquisition is included in the discussion. A second agenda item is the discussion of the issuance of bond anticipation notes for the Dartmouth LID. A revised package of materia! prepared by Finance Director Craig Prosser regarding issuance of bond anticipation notes for the Dartmouth LID is attached. A letter from Phil Smith of Murray, Smith & Associates Engineers is attached. This letter addressed to Dan Bradley of South Fork Water District describes the scope of work required to evaluate the options for the City of Tigard to participate in South Fork. Also attached is information obtained from McKeever Morris, consultants to the Growth Management Caucus. This information is related to the City's discussion of whether or not to participate in the Growth Management Caucus in the coming year. It is proposed, that if time permits, we can discuss this matter in Study Session. The package contains information describing the present membership of the Growth Management Caucus as well as the cost of participation. The Sponsorship of Community Events will be discussed on April 25 (Agenda Item No. 8). Attached for discussion by the City Council is a memo from Ed Wegner, dated April 20, 2000, noting a request by the Tigard Festival of Balloons for feasibility of installation of a water line along the north side of the field. 1:1ADM\BI LB000421.DOC Agenda Item No. Msetinp ol 4 35. rlD Chronology of City Involvement in Stanley, Gage, and Senn Properties Stanley 1997 City contacts family representative regarding interest in land donation. Transaction turned over to property negotiation consultant after owner expresses initial interest. Land is of interest to City because it is located immediately adjacent to Cache Creek Greenspaces property. 1998 Property donated to Trust for Public Lands. According to Dom Collette, City property attorney, main reason is that family accountant is a Trust member and advocate of giving land to Trust. Council decides against the purchase of the one-acre Hanson property, located along the southern edge of Cache Creek Park. Stanley property connects to the park's eastern edge. Trust for Public Lands approaches City regarding working together to put the Stanley and two other properties into community ownership. Funding assistance is proposed to come from a local grant program the Trust is working to establish, following voter approval of Ballot Measure 66 in late 1998. Staff makes clear to TPL the history of three failed efforts to acquire the Gage property and of Council's position. 1999 Identified in Park System Master Plan as proposed addition to Cache Creek Park and as an active park site. Council discusses TPL properties in study session and supports the addition of the Stanley property to the City park inventory, but does not support the addition of the Gage property. (see attached letter to TPL . Please note that the letter refers to the Stanley property by the name of the owner's daughter, Saunders, who had been representing her mother's interests with regard to the property.) TPL requests City letter supporting the establishment of a local grant component under a Measure 66 program. Mayor sends requested letter, which at TPL's reouest uses Stanley property as an example of an opportunity for the City to meet park needs. The City's financial committment in the property is not discussed. 2000 State finalizes new Local Government Grant Program. Requests for applications letter received March 1". Grant applications due April 28`x'. Staff attends first technical assistance workshop held on (March 28'". TPL discusses outline of funding proposal for the acquisition of the property. Includes a $250,000 State grant, a value donation from the Trust which holds title to the land, and a $150,000 City cash contribution. Staff identifies funding issues related to City contribution. Community Development and Public Works staff meet to evaluate funding options and support reprogramming Tigard/Tiedeman Greenspaces trail funds for proposed land acquisitions. Staff asks TPL to provide details on the funding proposal before forwarding to Council. Proposal included in April 7, 2000 Council mail packet. Staff provides an overall update on the park and Greenspaces programs. As part of this presentation, staff proposes to submit grant applications to purchase the Stanley and Gage properties. This request is consistent with the TPL funding proposal. Council considers and decides against the proposal. The reasons discussed include a concern that the proposed City contribution would come from funds committed to the development of a segment of the Fanno Creek Trail; the need to improve existing parkland located inside the City; and the fact that the Stanley property is located in the Urban Services Area and, as such, the residents do not pay City taxes and development within the area is not subject to a park SDC. Gaae 1990 City receives LID Interest Petition requesting the City to investigate the feasibility of forming a local improvement district to acquire the four-acre Gage parcel. No action taken, because most of the land between the site and Hail Boulevard is undeveloped. 1993 City receives park LID Interest Petition signed by the owners of 103 properties. No action taken because property owners interested in proceeding hold less than 50% of the property estimated to be benefited. No formal appraisal conducted; property value estimated at $120,000. 1996 City identifies property as Local Share Greenspaces candidate site and commits $118,000 in local dollars to be matched by a $32,000 neighborhood contribution towards asking price of $150,000. r Match requirement amended by Council to $29,000, after the organization holding the matching funds finds itself $3,000 short of its pledge of $32,000. 1997 Appraiser hired by City estimates value of 3.97-acre parcel at $490,000. This includes an adjustment for 0.25 acres of wetlands located on southeast corner of property. Owners revise asking price to $300,000 from $150,000. Council amends Greenspaces local projects list to remove parcel. Council decision based on property owner's new asking price. 1999 Trust for Public Lands (TPL) approaches City regarding working together to put this and two other properties into community ownership. Concept involves funding from a new State grant program. Council discusses TPL properties in study session and does not support inclusion of the Gage property. (see attached letter to TPL) 2000 TPL appraisal by Palmer, Growth puts value at $550,000. TPL identifies a funding proposal for the acquisition of the property. Includes a State grant for $250,000 and a value donation, with no City contribution. The proposal is linked to a proposal to also purchase the Stanley property. Council considers the proposal at its 4/11 meeting and decides against proceeding with the land acquisition proposal. Senn 1984 Designated by County as Goal 5 natural resource site as a forest site. 1995 Property listed in City 95/96 Capital Improvement Plan for acquisition as a natural area. Budget is $491,000 for land and access improvements. 1996 Project abandoned after City and owner are unable to agree on purchase price. Asking price is one million dollars. Property not considered as G: ;enspaces Local Share candidate, because asking price is more than total Greenspaces budget. NIMMI, WENENOMMENA W 1999 Identified in Park System Master Plan as proposed natural area site. 2000 During visitor's agenda, citizen asks Council to consider acquiring property. Information on property included in 4/11 Council packet. At Council meeting, citizen provides information from County's Metzger Community Plan describing area park needs. No formal Council action on property taken. Concerns included issue of willing seller and timing of formal Metro Council designation as candidate site. On April 14, 2000, identified by Metro Council as Fanno Creek headwaters area Greenspaces target site. Metro can now provide 75% of acquisition cost. I/Irpn/dr/chronology February 12, 1999 Geoff Roach W F 71GARD Trust for Public Land 1211 SW Sixth Avenue OREGON Portland, OR 97204 Dear Geoff Thanks for the timely memo concerning the Saunders and Gage properties. The memo arrived just before Council consideration of TPL's offer to work with the city to protect these two properties. Copies were distributed to Council members and the contents provided the basis of their discussion. This letter summarizes the outcome of that discussion. Council's initial reaction is that the Saunders property would be a valuable addition to the city's parks and open space inventory. Combining the Saunder's and abutting Cache Creek pieces would create a large-acre nature park in a park deficient area undergoing steady development. Council is supportive of this concept. At the same time, Council's reaction to the Gage property was strongly negative. Council made clear it has no interest in pursuing the Gage property and is opposed to any linkage of the two properties as a package. As we have discussed previously, the reason for this attitude is that the city in recent years has been involved in two unsuccessful and highly controversial efforts to form a park LID to protect the Gage property. A third and more recent effort to acquire the property using local share Greenspace dollars suffered a similar fate. Council's view of the latter transaction is that the Gage sisters at the end of an intensive, one-year Greenspaces project selection process, backed out of a deal they earlier had agreed to. For these historical reasons, Council is unwilling to entertain further consideration of the Gage property. Before making any decision regarding the Saunders property, and assuming it can be untied from the Gage property, Council wishes to have more certainty regarding the potential cost to the city than appears to be obtainable at present. They understand TPL wishes to build a broad coalition that would advocate for the creation of a local grant program under Measure 66. Council's attitude about this is that it supports, but is leery of taking an active role in this effort. The reason for this reluctance is a concern about raising the public's expectations should the proposed grant funding not become available. The city has a long list of unfunded park needs, and Council is concerned about appearing to assume a potential funding obligation without knowing how much in city a dollars this obligation might be. To summarize: assuming it can be split off from the Gage property, the Tigard City Council indicates] an interest in putting the Saunders property into city ownership. Council has expressed a desire to wait and see what happens regarding the outcome of 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 4 the Measure 66 local option drive and the availability of any local option dollars for the Saunders property before making any specific commitment of city funds toward its purchase. Council is willing to adopt a resolution or provide some other expression of support for this effort, but does not wish to participate in a broad public support campaign at this time. Thank you for your organization's efforts to preserve open space in Tigard. Please continue to keep in touch with Duane Roberts regarding the Saunders property. Sincerely, William A. Monahan City Manager i/Irpn/dr/trust.letter L N April 25, 2000 Tigard City Council Tigard, Oregon .Res Trust for Public Lands Proposal I would encourage you with all of my heart to reconsider seriously your deliberations regarding the Trust for Public Lands proposal that will be before you tonight, for the following reasons. The "Tigard Beyond Tomorrow" vision statement adopted by the City of Tigard City Council encourages "partnering", and this is being done now with the Tigard-Tualatin School District; The Tualatin Fire Dist.; The Tigard Water Dist. (unincorporated), King City and Durham; Washington County and others. This is an important concept and one that fits this situation and proposal. The strategy under the Urban & Public Services section of this Vision Statement says, " DEVELOP COMMUNITY WIDE PARTNERSHIP TO EDUCATE CITIZENS ABOUT THE NEED TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE WETLANDS AND OPEN SPACES AND PREP RE A LIST OF POSSIBLE LAND ACQUISITIONS SITES AVAILABLE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE CITY." These are important words and ones that fit this s tuation and proposal perfectly. These pieces of property being proposed for acquisition through this proposal are once-in-a-lifetime properties, as land is so scarce now, and would serve large populations of people within the future growth boundary of Tigard, and within the City itself. One of these pieces is adjacent to a school site to be developed in the near future, where there will also be a water reservoir on the school site - so this would be partnering at its best and highestvalue, for the community. These vision statements must be more than words on a page if they are meaningful, and sometimes need action sooner than later. Thank you, Beverly Froude cc to ALL CITY COUCIL MEMBERS MIMI Iil %,opies co: Mayor/Council Other: City Manager p~~ a RECEIVED C.O.T. Council File 1 April 24, 2000 APR 2 4 2000 Administration Mayor Jim Nicoli 11734 SW Fairview Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Nicoli: I have been a resident of Bull Mountain for over 25 years. In that time, I have seen the mountain change from a rural, low density area to one of significant population growth. One of the reasons our family moved here was to enjoy the quality of life that open space provided. That has now changed and there are few areas available which could and should be reserved for open spaces or parks for the residents. I am pleased to note that the Tigard City Council is trying to address park deficiencies. I am aware of the city's present opportunity to apply for $500,000 available through Oregon State Parks to assist with the acquisition of property in the city of Tigard and the Tigard service area. I am very much in favor of acquiring properties when we have the chance and when the land is available, and therefore urge you to apply for this grant before the deadline on April 28. The properties I refer to are the Cache Creek Addition Property North of SW 185th Terrace, and the Bond Steet Property at the North side of SW Bond Street, North of SW 81st Court in Tigard. In addition, I believe the Bull Mountain East/Conklin Property should be secured for open space or park use, as it would be located next to the proposed elementary school on Bull Mountain. This could provide many outdoor educational opportunities for study for the children at the school: I believe it is in the best interest of the community to preserve these spaces. Our community is desperately in need of parks and recreation land. I believe acquiring these properties would be of great benefit to the citizens of Tigard and Bull Mountain. Please vote in favor of submitting application for state funds. Sincerely, Janet Moore 14505 SW Hawk Ridge Road Tigard, OR 97224 RECEIVED C.O.Y. George I. Rhine APR 42000 President Administration 15361 SW Ashley Dr. ® ~ ~ ~ (Tigard, OR 97224 Copies 30 Voice 503 6244 4-4830 Voice to: 639-3276 FAX Mayor/Council ✓ Other: (503) City Manager & NETWORK (503) 860-3998 Mobile Council File SOLUTIONS ~ April 24, 2000 Brian ore CG h_ Tigar City Council Y Dear Council Member Moore: I understand that a topic of the Council meeting tonight is the opportunity for the city to apply for $500,000 which is available through Oregon State Parks to assist with the acquisition of property in Tigard and the Tigard service area to be used for Parks and greenspace. My understanding is that three such parcels are currently under consideration; Bull Mountain East/Conklin Property, Cache Creek Addition Property, and Bond Street Property. I strongly support your application for these funds. Please vote in favor of submitting for the state funds and work toward the City's ownership of these important park and recreation properties. Sincerely, Ae o r en i i } i i i 3} i r MAX WILLIAMS State Representative' Committees: DISTRICT 9 via-Chair: Judiciary-Civil Law REPLY TO ADDRESS INDICATED: j~ Member: Revenue ❑ Oregon House of Representatives Salem, OR 97310 Rules. Elections, & Public 19112103SW 135th Ave. Affairs Tigard, OR 97223 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SALEM,OREGON 97310 RECEIVED C.O.T. APR 18 2000 April 17, 2000 Administration Jim Nicoli, Mayor City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Government Grants Under Measure 66 Program Dear Mayor Nicoli: I am writing to urge the City of Tigard to apply for two local government grants under a Measure 66 program established by the 1999 Oregon Legislature. These grants would assist Tigard in acquiring the Stanley Trust (Cache Creel:) and Bond St./Gage properties in our community. At your request last spring, both Senator Qutub and I urged the State Parks and Recreation Director to establish and fund this program, in part to help our community protect additional land at Cache Creek Park (see attached). I was pleased that, in fact, the program was funded. I understand that the deadline for making application is April 28, 2000; and I realize decisions involving this grant are somewhat last minute. Nevertheless, I believe this is a wonderful opportunity to take advantage of a new state funding program designed to bring money to local-governments. Moreover, the two projects for which you could apply will provide much need enhancements to our growing community. I have been told that in order to compete for these two grants, the City will need to identify matching funds and that your staff has proposed utilizing a major landowner gift, plus a cash gift from the Trust for Public land and $150,000 of reprogrammed Metro money to account for the 50 percent local match requirement. Let me point out that your decision to allow staff to apply for the grant funds is not making the decision to reprogram those metro dollars permanently. That decision can be made if we are lucky enough to obtain the grant funds. I understand the Council has concerns about reprogramming the Metro money and deferring trail construction along Fanno Creek. I share your concerns. However, the opportunity to protect land while it is still available and the timing of this sizable state funding source, merit your application now. Moreover, I am pleased that City staff does not have to consider drawing from either general fund or SDC revenues for the local match. With respect to the trail construction project, I would be happy to assist in any way I can to identify other funding sources. Office: 11-475 State Capilol. Salem. OR 97310 - Phone: (503) 996-1409 District: 12103 SW 1351h Ave.. Tigard. OR 97223 - Phone: (501) 524.475 - Email: ulilli:unx.rel)C2stale.oeus r Jim Nicoli, Mayor -2- April 17, 2000 I also am aware of your concern that the Stanley Trust property is not within City limits. I think we can all agree that this acquisition makes sense for the future. I am also talking with Washington County about agreeing to accept maintenance costs for the Stanley Trust parcel. Again, I fully appreciate the awkward nature of last minute requests, and I wish the State Parks and Recreation Department had forwarded grant criteria sooner. Nevertheless, I hope you and the Council can work with your staff and craft an application that takes advantage of significant private philanthropic action and moves these two open space projects forward so they can be competitive. Thank you for your efforts. Please call me if you have any questions. S' cerely, illi s State resentative District 9 cc w/enc: Councilor Paul Hunt Councilor Brian Moore Councilor Joyce Patton Councilor Ken Scheckla Bill Monahan, City Manager i i 3 a ~ 11011I li Ell June 4, m WYOF Rep fte Max, Williams Stab Copitol darn, 014 97310 Dior Representative 10ffiarns: . Theo Clty of Tigard requests your support for a State Paris project in the park-d nt neighborhood of Bull Mountain. - The Stanley Trust property, approximately 8 mss, near a small park already in City ownership, provides it unique opportunity to protect a Valuable community resource. It Is [brolly the largest remaining forested tract left In an athewoke newly developed community- It represents a wonderful opportunity for the 'City to meet Its mar growing demand for park land. My kftW In Measure 88 and spec iftaily the provision for local grants, stems from the City of Tigaid`s long term commitment to providing adequate community park land for our growing neighb ds In the Tigard area. As you may know, the Clty, in p®rtrillership with kxNd cUens, has been working to protect this property for nearly two yam. The details of the projects are explaktad in the attached boot iet. 1 arm venting with ai s$paoft request. A letter from you to Robert Meinen, the Dkector of blab Parks. requesting that the Parks Department carefully consider a local grant for the Starday Trust project, dating your fami7iarfty with atnd'support for the project, would be very helpful. W6 would afso Iike a copy of your latter to put In our find[ grant appIcation pacicet. We are enclosing a sample latter for your use. j h~ in this matter would very much appreciated. . Iclicoli. . y r 13126 SON Wad Slvd., T1garcL OR 97223 (.503) 639AI71 TDO (SM) 684-2772 0=5 MIMI am an Jun& 4, 1999 WY OF OREGON r EUeen Qutub State Capitol Satwn, OR 97310 Oew Senatmr Cutub: . the City of Tigard requests your support for a State Parks project in the park-def font nelghborhood of Sup Mountain. The Stanley Trust property. approximately S acres, m mr a small park already in City ownership, provides a unique opportunity to proms a valuable community resource. It is morally the largest remaining forested tract left In an otherwise newly developed community. it represents a wonderful opportunity for the City to mcwt ils ever growing demand for park land. My k4bered In Measure 66 and spedlically the provision for local grants, stems from the City of Tigard% long terra commitment to providing adequate community parts land 1br our growing neighbcwhoods in the Tigard area. As you may know, the City, in partnership•with kx:ai citizens, has been working to protect this property for nearly two yeare. The deftft of the projects are explained in the attached booklet: i am writing with a sped' rc request. A letter from you to Robert Mainen, the Director of State Perim, requesting that the Parks Department c arefuily consider alocal grant for the Stanley Trust project, stating your familiarity with and support far the project. would be very helpful. We would also like a copy of your letter to put in our final grant application packet We are enclosing a sample l r for your use. Your help in this matter would be very much appreciated. Si , ,i NOW f ~ li6i79r' ' enckwume 13125 SIN Hcd 8W., Tigard OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 MD {6133) 684.2772 i. ~ ~ • l~•(JeC.G17G c Nam :ad" 9 BYO bra Law it~aeoa: ® Rules. ss ns.k 06 E3 at6mizaAh, HOUSE OF REl'MENTA SALEK OREGON RECEIVED C.O.T. JUN 15 1999 June 11, Im Robert L. Mzinen e V I44 ¢ OmSen 1 & Recrenuon I)epartment " eta 1$15 Com meiuial Sti-a-et NE ' • Smart, 01t sin to-1®01 SWact: Staley Trust Application Direct" Mcine . YOU tatd. the SWC Parks Conunission will soon be mciving a request famm the City of 11gatei fora local grant to acquire the Stanley 1~ust property, 8 acres within the park- deficient neighborhood of Bull Mountain in Washington County. I on t ier with this ptgcct and I hope you will carefully consider the application. Tire residents of 1 ord and the city government have been woddag diligently over the past theme y to assemble the land for this park. 7M9 critical property will add one of the last rammiomg undeveloped I F of forested ground is the am to a. small local pad L It rests a umqure opportunity for the state to participate in the protection of land for Ore$=°a suet geara•ation_ I will :rtsougly support your effor W in helping the .community off Tigard on-this matter. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me. 70 Y~ am$ i Office N-473 Sate Capiaol. Setcm, OR 97310-Ph-* (507) 986-1109 Mark= 12103 SW 13ft Ave- -nga v9.OK 97223 - Pbovwe: (303) 3244275 - Email: wllliannt mV*a jA a onus Votault =ZW QVM V ftf `/f \ Y' • • a as ~ ~f ems MAJORMWHW ~w A~a~adteseaDMTftICr4 err ` fit. ~Oyca~ wA9IttN o rrtY & EMD C- eaa~rxroAaa~ ~ ,~.w~af~. 0--r-JUN 161999 OREGON STATE SEMTE: C1 11133 Prpllbf tdy StlY., OREGON a..e tsorJ sta~t~s 577310 Juan 15,19" Robert r.. Meiners, DKector ' Oregon Pub & R=cation Department 1115 Commercial Suva NE Saida, bR 97310-1001 Dew Mr. Meinen: You and the States Park Commission will soon be receiving a request from the City of Tigard for a local great to acquire the Stmt y Trust property which is eight acres within the park deficient neighbor ood of Bull Mountain in Washington County. I am familiar with this projed and I hope you will carefully consider the application. The residents of Tigard and the City goverment have been working diligently over the past three yeses to aanemble the land for this park. This critical property will add one of the but remaining anrde dapod-tracts of forested ground in the area to a small local park. It reprosents a unique opportunity for the State to participate in the protection of lend for Oregon's next generation. I will sueng y support your efforts in helping the community of Tigard on this mutter. If you have any questions or comments, please call me. Thank you for your consideration. FMMLa hab ator bistrict 4 { EQ/aa1 i , i i 3 April 25, 2000 Tigaiid City Council Tigard, Oregon Re: Trust for Public Lands Proposal I would encourage you with all of my heart to reconsider seriously your deliberations regarding the Trust for Public Lands proposal that will be before you tonight, for the following reasons. The "Tigard Beyond Tomorrow" vision statement adopted by the City of Tigard City Council encourages "partnering", and this is being done now with the Tigard-Tualatin School District; The Tualatin Fire Dist.; The Tigard Water Dist. (unincorporated), King City and Durham; Washington County and others. This is an important concept and one that fits this situation and proposal. The strategy under the Urban & Public Services section of this Vision Statement says, " DEVELOP COMMUNITY WIDE PARTNERSHIP TO EDUCATE CITIZENS ABOUT THE NEED TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE WETLANDS AND OPEN SPACES AND PREPARE A LIST OF POSSIBLE LAND ACQUISITIONS SITES AVAILABLE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THE CITY." These are important words and ones that fit this situation and proposal perfectly. These pieces of property being proposed for acquisition through this proposal are once-in-a-lifetime properties, as land is so scarce now, and would serve large populations of people within the future growth boundary of Tigard, and within the City itself. One of these pieces is adjacent to a school site to be developed in the near future, where there will also be a water reservoir on the school site - so this would be partnering at its best and highestvalue, for the community. These vision statements must be more than words on a page if they are meaningful, and sometimes need action sooner than later. Thank you, Beverly Froude cc to ALL CITY COUCIL MEMBERS %,oples to: -DCM Mayor/Council v/ Other: City Manager M_ RECEIVED CAT. Council File _vl' APR 2 4 2000 April 24, 2000 AdministratIon Mayor Jim Nicoli 11734 SW Fairview Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Nicoli: I have been a resident of Bull Mountain for over 25 years. In that time, I have seen the mountain change from a rural, low density area to one of significant population growth. One of the reasons our family moved here was to enjoy the quality of life that open space provided. That has now changed and there are few areas available which could and should be reserved for open spaces or parks for the residents. I am pleased to note that the Tigard City Council is trying to address park deficiencies. I am aware of the city's present opportunity to apply for $500,000 available through Oregon State Parks to assist with the acquisition of property in the city of Tigard and the Tigard service area. I am very much in favor of acquiring properties when we have the chance and when the land is available, and therefore urge you to apply for this grant before the deadli ie can April 28. The properties I refer to are the Cache Creek Addition Property North of SW 185th Terrace, and the Bond Steet Property at the North side of SW Bond Street, North of SW 81st Court in Tigard. In addition, I believe the Bull Mountain East/Conklin Property should be secured for open space or park use, as it would be located next to the proposed elementary school on Bull Mountain. This could provide many outdoor educational opportunities for study for the children at the school. I believe it is in the best interest of the community to preserve these spaces. Our community is desperately in need of parks and recreation land. I believe acquiring these properties would be of great benefit to the citizens of Tigard and Bull Mountain. Please vote in favor of submitting application for state funds. Sincerely, Janet Moore 14505 SW Hawk Ridge Road Tigard, OR 97224 A$ ey)dQ -T-Lm *in RECEIVED C.O.T. George 1. Rhine APR 2.f2000 President Aim Administration 15361 SW Ashley Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 COMPUTER. (503) 6244830 Voice Copies to: (503) 639-3276 FAX Mayor/Council City ayor Manager /Council ✓ Other: T _ 1 11'~ O (503) 860-3998 Mobile Council File _L SOLUTIONS April 24, 2000 Brian re Tigar City Council 'eZ NW6 Dear Council Member Moore: I understand that a topic of the Council meeting tonight is the opportunity for the city to apply for $500,000 which is available through Oregon State Parks to assist with the acquisition of property in Tigard and the Tigard service area to be used for Parks and greenspace. My understanding is that three such parcels are currently under consideration; Bull Mountain East/Conklin Property, Cache Creek Addition Property, and Bond Street Property. I strongly support your application for these funds. Please vote in favor of submitting for the state funds and work toward the City's ownership of these important park and recreation properties. Sincerely, Geo e 4ine