The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 06/20/2000 6061Al l L TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING JANE 2, 2000 COUNCIL MEETING WILL NOT E TELEVISE i:ladmljolccpkt2.doc Revised 6/16/00 TIGAKD CITY. :COUNCiL CITY OF TIGAR® WORKSHOP M-EETIM3 JUNE 20,2060* ~ 6:33 TIGARD CITY HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD, OREGON 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • 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 - JUNE 20, 2000 -PAGE 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING JUNE 20, 2000 6:30 PM 1. WORKSHOP MEETING • Call to Order: Mayor Nicoli • Pledge of Allegiance • Council Communications 8z Liaison Reports • Call to Staff and Council for Non Agenda Items 6:35 PM 2. ANNUAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND LIBRARY BOARD a. Staff Report: Library Staff b. City Council Questions/Comments 7:20 PM 3. REVIEW OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE (HOUSING CODE) a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. City Council Questions/Comments 7:50 PM 4. DISCUSSION OF ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ZOA 1999-00003) TO ALLOW DAY CARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. City Council Questions/Comments 8:20 PM 5. UPDATE ON THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. City Council Questions/Comments 8:35 PM 6. DISCUSS CITY MANAGER'S REVIEW COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 2 8:50 PM 7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:00 PM 8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 9:10 PM 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), (f) a (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. 9:30 PM 10. ADJOURNMENT I:\ADM\CATHY\CCA\000620. DOC COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 3 Agenda Item No. _3. I Meeting of 6-22-00 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 20, 2000 1. WORKSHOP MEETING ® Call to Order Council President Brian Moore called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. o Roll Call Council Present: Councilors Paul Hunt, Council President Brian Moore, Joyce Patton, and Ken Scheckla Council Absent: Mayor Jim Nicoli Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley; Library Director Margaret Barnes; City Engineer Gus Duenas; Current Planner Julia Hajduk; Associate Planner Laurie Nicholson; Planning Manager Dick Bewersdorff; Others Present: Library Board members - Larry Beck, Ann Braun, David Chapman, Nancy Irwin, Sue Kasson and Jane Smith; George Burgess, past Board member and member of the Friends of the Library and the Library Expansion Committee e Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items Bill Monahan, City Manager, mentioned more information on the Atfalati Recreation District ballot measure, and a petition received from the Hill Street neighbors. Council President Moore mentioned requesting recognition of Brice Ellison. 2. ANNUAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND LIBRARY BOARD Margaret Barnes, Library Director, introduced the Library Board members. David Chapman expressed the Board's appreciation of the Council's positive steps towards obtaining expanded library facilities for the citizens, mentioning the $400,000 set aside in the budget for the new facility. Mr. Chapman reviewed the five main service response areas for the library, identified in the five- year plan (expected completion date Fall 2000): general information, information literacy, current topics, lifelong learning, and business and career information. He described the work done to establish a non-profit Library Foundation for Tigard for the purposes of fundraising for the new facility and strengthening the public awareness of the library. He recommended personally that the Foundation not become part of the Tigard Area Community Foundation in order to retain control over its expenditures. Jane Smith reviewed the adult programs provided at the Library, discussing literary programs, practical workshops, Library electronic resources classes, an adult reading program, a monthly book discussion group, and Book Nights (library staff thumbnail book talks). She mentioned the need for more space at the library for the adult programs, noting the use of the Water Building for the large events. Sue Kasson reviewed the elements in the Electronic Resource Center, noting the 15 stations and the statistics indicating a marked increase in their use since last year. She observed that the staff did not have the time to enforce the time sign up sheets, although software existed to help with that situation. She mentioned the Cyber Patrol software on the children's computer, the ADA machine for the visually impaired, the self-checkout machine, and the color copier. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 1 Nancy Irwin reviewed the children's programs, mentioning the variety of programs the Library sponsored for the entertainment and education of children (infants to post- high school teens) from performing artists for all ages to pre-school craft and story times to teen book clubs, movie nights, and campouts at the library. She spoke of baby kits for new mothers, new sibling kits, and early childhood theme bags promoting a love of reading (funded by a Ready to Read grant). She described the Library's outreach to the children who could not get to the library, citing the onsite resources at Villa La Paz. She mentioned the wealth of information on colleges and careers available for the post-high school teens. Ann Braun reviewed the County-wide Summer Reading Program, "Tickets to Tomorrow." She referenced the County's flyer listing the schedule of activities and the Tigard Library flyer. She described the different activities and rewards for the up-to-fifth-grade section and the sixth-grade- and-up section. George Burgess gave the Council an update on the Library Expansion Committee. He mentioned that the Friends provided the funding for many library programs, such as the adult reading program and the baby kits. He presented a request from the Committee that the Council consider changing its name from the Library Expansion Committee to the Library Construction Committee to more accurately reflect its purpose. He asked the Council to consider increasing the size of the committee to involve more citizens. He described the work of the committee in meeting with the consultants and architect. He mentioned the consultants' recommendation of a 20-year building size of 44,000 square feet. Larry Beck discussed the importance of a vital, working library to the Tigard community, citing the high usage of the library by Tigard citizens. He described libraries as the heart of a community. He thanked the Council for its support and partnering in building a new library for the City of Tigard. Councilor Hunt asked if the Foundation would use the principal, the interest or both. Mr. Chapman said that, while an endowment fund using only the interest off the principal would be valuable, their current focus was on raising funds for the new facility. Councilor Hunt asked if there was an advantage to holding programs at the Water Building or would it be better to hold them at a larger facility (given the overflow crowds). Mr. Chapman commented that ideally they would like to hold the programs at the library in order to encourage families to check out books, thus increasing the circulation on which the library's funding was based. Mr. Monahan indicated to Councilor Scheckla that they could draw committee members from outside the Tigard city limits, as the library service area went beyond the city limits. The Council agreed by consensus to direct staff to prepare a resolution that would allow the committee to suggest a name and to recommend adding a certain number of people. Mr. Monahan mentioned using the Cityscape and Library resources to advertise for interested people. Council President Moore asked for a description of the kind of people the Committee was looking for. Mr. Chapman indicated to Councilor Hunt that the Committee has not thrown out any options at this time; they would look at the option to build a shell and complete the building in phases. Councilor Hunt suggested that the Library Board produce a video describing the library programs, as it did tonight, for cablecast after the election. Councilor Scheckla suggested getting the Tigard Times and the Oregonian: to do articles on the Library programs. Councilor Patton noted that, although she was the Council's representative on the Committee, she has been unable to attend the daytime meetings. She indicated her continued interest in the Committee's work and asked if an evening meeting was possible. Mr. Monahan said that he and Ms. Barnes would discuss moving the meeting time at their next meeting. Ms. Barnes indicated to Councilor Scheckla that the pattern of attendance at library programs showed a combination of returning and new people. She said that the adult reading program age was 18 years old and up. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 2 Council President Moore commended the Library Board on their excellent presentation. The Library Board left the meeting. Council President Moore recessed the meeting for a break at 7:20 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 7:22 p.m. 3. REVIEW OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE (HOUSING CODE) Albert Shields, Housing Inspector, gave the PowerPoint staff presentation of the one-year review of the implementation of the Housing Code. He reported that the feedback staff has received from landlords and tenants-rights organizations indicated that the Code achieved a good balance of addressing concerns without taking either a hostile or a passive stance. He characterized the Council direction of "enforcement friendly implementation" as one of the strongest assets of the program. He mentioned his location within the Building Division as another asset, given the many cases of overlapping responsibilities between the Housing Code and the Building Code. Mr. Shields stated that the program was working to resolve complaints and to arrest building deterioration through improved maintenance. He emphasized that, so far, staff has managed to achieve compliance without creating hostility or going to court. He mentioned the interest of other communities in how the Tigard Code was working. He observed that the professional managers willingly cooperated with the Code; any enforcement problems tended to occur with non- professional managers. Mr. Shields reviewed the statistical breakdown of the 146 complaints received in the first year, noting that only 122 fell within Tigard's jurisdiction. He indicated that staff declined 14 complaints upon investigation, leaving 94 complaints for staff action; only 15 remained unresolved at this time. He noted that complaints were filed for both multi-family rentals (74) and single-family structures (27). He mentioned the effectiveness of the Code in appropriately addressing the wide variety of complaints received. He presented pictures of specific cases that required enforcement of the Code. Mr. Shields reviewed the implementation measures staff has taken to develop specific forms and procedures for investigation, record keeping and enforcement. He discussed the issue of confidentiality. He expressed his appreciation for the cooperation he has received from other City departments. He commented that photo documentation has proved invaluable and cost effective. Mr. Shields discussed Tigard's leadership role in the region in addressing these problems common to any city with an aging housing stock. He mentioned that staff gave presentations to Gresham and Astoria; Gresham decided against a Housing Code but Astoria was still looking at one. He noted the importance of using a task force with stakeholder representatives in achieving a workable Housing Code. Mr. Shields referenced the capability staff had in the Code to address issues of eviction, repair and remediation by the City, even though staff has not had to use them yet. He discussed the importance of advertising the program in maintaining the enforcement friendly mode. He emphasized the staff's low-key approach, per Council direction. He reported that they have had translation services available when they needed them, although in the future they might need to set up more formal procedures. Mr. Shields reviewed the elements staff identified during implementation as needing fine-tuning. He suggested eliminating the Code requirement that a respondent to a civil infraction summons to provide a $50 security deposit, as staff autornatically waived it. Mr. Shields reported that, at its May meeting, the Task Force expressed strong satisfaction with the City's implementation of the Housing Code and its enforcement friendly stance. He suggested that the City thank the Housing Task Force for the significant investment of time and effort the members put into developing the Code. Council President Moore concurred that it was appropriate to formally recognize the Task Force members for their work over two years. Mr. Monahan suggested that he and Mr. Shields poll the Task Force members to see which televised Council meeting date most of them could attend for a CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 3 formal recognition ceremony. He suggested asking the Tigard Times and the Oregonian to acknowledge the efforts of the Task Force and Mr. Shields, and the community's response to the program. Sheila Greenlaw-Fink, Housing Task Force member, mentioned the Task Force's pleasure at the Council listening to the Task Force as it dealt with the remaining contentious issues. She concurred that Tigard proved itself a leader in the region with the housing code issue. She mentioned a concern the Task Force had that enforcement might lead to exorbitant costs, noting that that has not proved to be the case. She said that the Task Force was very happy with how the City implemented the Code. Councilor Scheckla, who also sat on the Task Force, noted the time and effort it took to achieve a Code that considered all the viewpoints. He mentioned the City's good fortune in having Mr. Shields to implement the Code, as Mr. Shields worked as a negotiator to get compliance without taking a hard line. He thanked him for his work. Councilors Patton and Hunt concurred. 4. DISCUSSION OF ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ZOA 1999-00003) TO ALLOW DAY CARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES Julia Hajduk, Current Planner, referred to the information summary in the Council packet and her memo outlining the steps she took to address the Council's concerns. She reported that she found few regulations in the state dealing with daycare uses not affecting the existing uses. She recommended requiring the daycare applicants to look at the noise and environmental impacts of adjacent uses and to take steps to protect themselves so that the existing uses did not exceed the City Code requirements. She also recommended requiring daycare applicants to start the permitting process for a daycare before applying to build a daycare, so that the City knew that what it was approving would ultimately be permitted. Ms. Hajduk recommended changing the language in Exhibit C to make daycare a permitted use with restrictions within the zone, as opposed to a conditional use. She noted that she included the option of a conditional use, if Council wanted it, although staff did not recommend it. Council President Moore opened the meeting to public testimony. John Brosy described his work with Ms. Hajduk on this matter. He said that their first choice was the staff recommendation for a permitted use with restrictions. He discussed their concern with the requirement for an environmental impact assessment, as they were uncertain what that involved. Ms. Hajduk explained that the only issue she foresaw at this time was noise; it was the only measurable item in the State,Code. She commented that the applicants' doing an environmental assessment looking at noise, visual concerns, emissions, etc., would provide protection for both themselves and the existing users. Councilor Patton suggested defining "environmental impact assessment." Ms. Hajduk referenced the definition in Exhibit C. Councilor Patton spoke to including a reference to that definition in Footnote 9, as it was not clear where the full definition was located. Ms. Hajduk said that she would reword Footnote 9 to state, "daycare uses with over five children are permitted subject to an environmental impact assessment in accordance with TDC 18.530.050(c)(1)." Mr. Monahan indicated that staff would provide Council with the revisions for the reopening of the public hearing at the June 27 meeting. o Non-agenda item: Hill Street Neighbors Petition Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Director, referenced the June 20, 2000, memo from Barbara Gomez discussing the complaints received about two duplexes (beginning in September 1999). He explained that the neighbor complaints dealt with cosmetic issues not addressed by the Housing Code. He indicated that the problem was a combination landlord-tenant problem but staff had no authority to go into the buildings, since the tenants have not complained. He mentioned dealing CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 4 with the visible code violations outside, commenting that any more complaints of code violations would result in going to court. Mr. Shields mentioned their hope that the owner would allow them to tour one unit, once vacated, in order to assess the probable Housing Code violations inside the building. 5. UPDATE ON THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Gus Duenas, City Engineer, reported staff's concern with Metro's intent to downgrade Hwy 99W to a major arterial, following construction of the I-5 connector, and to leave it to Tigard to solve the problem of Hwy 99W. He indicated that their findings showed a 50150 split between local and regional traffic on Hwy 99W; Metro's initial findings showed primarily local traffic on Hwy 99W. He described the staff work with Metro to change the language to recognize that Hwy 99W was a regional problem, requiring a coalition of regional resources to solve it. Mr. Duenas indicated that the Washington Square Regional Center Plan recommendations were included in the Regional Transportation Plan, although they would most likely be placed in the 2011-2020 time frame. He mentioned the advantage Tigard had with its Transportation System Plan progressing on an almost parallel path with the Regional Transportation Plan, thus providing Tigard with information to counter Metro's information when necessary. He commented that the Tigard Plan was in good shape, slated for adoption before the end of the calendar year. Laurie Nicholson, Associate Planner, indicated that staff was waiting on comments from ODOT on its local Transportation System Plan before proceeding with the public process to gather citizen comment. She commented that an adopted Transportation System Plan would help in asking for money for projects. e Councilor Hunt asked what happened to the original Agenda Item 6, USA. agreement. Mr. Monahan explained that Mr. Wegner found out that other jurisdictions were not satisfied with the agreement; staff wanted Council to have the benefit of comments from other jurisdictions. Mr. Monahan announced that ODOT intended to close the top ramp of the I-5 entrance off Hwy 99W in order to do the grinding and scraping of that section. He commented that he hoped ODOT provided good signage because they did not inform the City of this until this morning. s Council President Moore mentioned his observation that the ODOT project has disrupted the signal light timing. Mr. Monahan said that Mr. Duenas would check with ODOT to see what was going on. a Councilor Hunt spoke to the Council not postponing issues for discussion at a later meeting simply because a Councilor was not present at the meeting. He suggested that any Councilor who knew that he or she would be absent for a particular discussion forward his/her comments to the City Manager. 6. DISCUSS CITY MANAGER'S REVIEW The Council discussed whether to discuss the City Manager's Review after the regular agenda. Council President Moore indicated that Mayor Nicoli had comments about the review; however he does not have a copy of these comments yet. Mr. Monahan pointed out that if the Council wanted to hold his review in Executive Session, it needed to first allow public comment on the review criteria. He suggested holding the discussion on the review criteria tonight in an open session study session. If the Council decided to hold his review in Executive Session, staff would schedule an opportunity for the public to respond to the criteria. The Council agreed by consensus with the City Manager's recommendation. 7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 5 8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS • Atfalati Recreation District Bond Mr. Monahan referenced his memo discussing the most recent happenings in the Atfalati Recreation District formation efforts. He recalled that the memo of understanding, which the Council authorized him to sign, estimated a tax rate not to exceed 48 cents per $1,000 for the permanent tax rate (operating) and not to exceed 35 cents per $1,000 for the 20-year capital tax rate. He explained that Harvey Rogers, the Bond Counsel for the County, expressed concern at putting the formation of the district with its permanent tax rate and the capital tax rate on the same ballot, since this effectively authorized a capital tax for an entity that did not yet exist. Mr. Monahan said that Mr. Rogers recommended rolling the two tax rates together into one permanent rate of 83 cents per $1,000, similar to what happened with the WCCLS and MSTIP levies under Measure 50. He pointed out that this meant that the capital tax did not necessarily go away after 20 years. He indicated that Mr. Rogers' concern primarily lay with the bond buyers and a potentially higher rate, as opposed to the legalities. Mr. Monahan reported that County Counsel Dan Olson held that the resolutions already passed by the jurisdictions would hold up; the jurisdictions did not have to pass new resolutions reflecting the change in the permanent tax rate because the resolutions authorized a total of 83 cents per $1,000 as a tax rate. He mentioned the public hearing set for the first reading of the County ordinance at the County Commission meeting next Tuesday and the second reading scheduled for August 15. Mr. Monahan confirmed to Councilor Seheckla that the capital rate would not go away in the Bond Counsel's proposal but clarified that the tax rate would remain at 83 cents permanently. He concurred with Council President Moore that the recreation district could choose not to levy the capital tax after 20 years. He clarified for Councilor Scheckla that the Recreation District included Tigard, Tualatin and the Tigard-Tualatin School District. He mentioned that Atfalati had to ask Clackamas County to put this issue on its ballot to cover the small portion of Tualatin within Clackamas County. Councilor Patton commented that she had a hard time understanding the County Counsel's opinion because the permanent tax rate became 83 cents with no distinction for the capital. She concurred that Mr. Olson was depending on the word "anticipated." She described the problem as Mr. Olson forgetting that the resolutions itemized the distinction between the pennanent tax rate and the capital tax rate. She asked how the County intended to present its case to the voters for a capital tax rate that would not necessarily go away after 20 years. Mr. Monahan said that he did not know. Council President Moore commented that ultimately the voters reading the ballot measure would determine the permanent bond rate versus a 20-year rate. Councilor Hunt pointed out that the Council authorized a 20-year tax rate; it did not authorize this change, and therefore, it should consider another resolution authorizing the change. Mr. Monahan concurred with Councilor Patton that the Council specifically designated one portion as a permanent tax rate and one portion as a i capital improvement rate (defined as a certain number of projects for a period of time), and with Council President Moore that the resolution did not specify a time period for the capital rate. He noted that the Council did not discuss the capital rate exceeding 20 years. Mr. Monahan suggested that staff obtain a copy of the County staff report, send a letter to the County Commissioners at the first public hearing (indicating the Council desire to revisit the matter), discuss what it wanted to do at the July 11 meeting, and then testify at the second public 3 hearing in August. He listed the Council's options: passing a second resolution, qualifying the first a resolution with a recommendation to review the capital tax after 20 years according to specified criteria, recommending that the County not take the Bond Counsel's advice and proceed with a separate taxing measure predicated on the formation measure passing, or recommending sending the formation measure to the voters first followed by the taxing measure at a later election. The Council agreed by consensus that staff should get more information from the County. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 6 o Recognition of Bruce Ellis Council President Moore suggested that the City offi ;ially recognize the work of Bruce Ellis in running the Balloon Festival for more than a decade. He mentioned the pride and public recognition the Balloon Festival brought to the City of Tigard. Councilors Hunt and Scheckla spoke to obtaining detailed financial reports from the Balloon Festival Committee before recognizing Mr. Ellis' work. Council President Moore said he did not see how the financial reports related to recognizing Mr. Ellis for his work on behalf of the City related to obtaining detailed financial reports; however, he said he would table his suggestion. 9. STUDY SESSION Council President Moore adjourned the meeting to study session at 9:00 p.m. City Council Discussion: City :Manager's Review Councilor Moore asked for comments regarding information provided by City Manager Monahan on his past performance reviews. Also reviewed was City Manager Compensation Review/ Retirement and Deferred Compensation of City Managers from other jurisdictions Council discussed process and decided it would iiLu,iss and reach preliminary agreement on the City Manager's compensation tonight. Opportunity for public comment would be provided at an upcoming City Council meeting. A final City Cov_lcil study session would be held to discuss the final review and recommendation for compensation and how it would be presented to the City Manager. After lengthy discussion regarding compensation, it was decided that a COLA of 2.6% as granted to management staff, and consistent with the City Manager's contract, would be provided. After review of comparable wages/benefits from other cities, City Council decided that an increase in wages would not be granted to the City Manager this year. The subject of a Deferred Compensation Plan was discussed. City Council felt it was worth reviewing, but wanted more time and information before making a decision. City Council review the City MLilager's vacaticn rate and determined the present accrual rate was fair; no increase would be considered this year. Council decided that Council President Moore would update Mayor Nicoli with the City Council's discussion regarding the City Manager's review. The next step will be to provide an opportunity for public input, final City Council discussion and then to conduct the review. 10. ADJOURNMENT: 9:45 p.m. at kv2 Q Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorde i~~ L~V~ Brian J. Moore, Council President Date: 4a jst a a~ awo CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JUNE 20, 2000 - PAGE 7 ' e AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 20, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Annual joint meeting of City Council and LibrM Board PREPARED BY: Margaret Barnes DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK Vlrsc~/ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Annual Meeting of the Library Board with the City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action necessary. INFORMATION SUMMARY • Opening Comments • Five Year Long Range Plan • Foundation Update • Adult Reading Programs • Electronic Resource Center • Children's and Young Adult Programs • Annual Summer Reading Program • Library Construction Committee Update • Closing Comments OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A 1 ' VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A I ~ FISCAL NOTES None iAcitywide\sum.dot Joint Meeting - City Council and Library Board - June 20, 2000 Please sign in.... SUL f4Q) &-zo e LIBRARY BOARD CURRENT TERM EMPIRES/ ORIGINAL APPT. DATE TARRY BECK 06-30-2001 / 09-12-95 10820 SW Pathfinder Way Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 620-1602 Bus: 626-2800, Ext. 2390 e-mail: beckhome@easystreet. com BRAUN 06-30-2003 / 07-13-99 `0920S W North Dakota Street Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 670-1543 e-mail: anneb40540(paol.com ~VID CHAPMAN - Chair 06-30-00 / 06-09-98 9840 SW Landau Place Tigard, OR 97223-1016 Res: 246-3118 /e-mail: chapmans(&teleport.com NANCY IRWIN 06-30-01 / 05-27-93 11135 SW 125th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 590-8086 e-mail: nancyQeasystreet.com V//SUE KASSON 06-30-01 / 05-27-97 16570 SW 93rd Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 620-9771 Bus: 670-0440 e-mail: Skasson@hotmail.com Revised 2/2000 is\adm\jo\Cd&comrs.doc 9 LIBRARY BOARD CURRENT TERM EXPIRES/ ORIGINAL APPT. DATE ti,'ItfN'E SMITH 9200 SW Elrose Court Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 639-4622 06-30-02 / 04-11-00 \,_KEN TOLLIVER 06-30-2003 / 07-13-99 10200 SW Katherine Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 684-8200 Bus: 531-2800, Ext. 6398 e-mail: Krt@orix-cac.cin BOARD MEETS: 2nd Thursday, 7:00 PM, Library Puett Room STAFF LIAISON: Paula Walker, Staff' Liaison I Revised 2/2000 iAadm\jo\bd&comrs.doc AGENDA ITEM # .3 FOR AGENDA OF June 20, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Residential Property Maintenance Code (Housing Code) PREPARED BY: Albert Shields DEPT HEAD OK VJ P 4J,-_ CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Report to Council: Review of first year experience; report on 5111 review with Community Housing Task Force. STAFF RECOMMENDATION This is an informational item - no staff recommendation. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Housing Code and the City's implementation of it have met the expectations of the Task Force and the City Council in terms of resolving complaints and achieving results while maintaining an "enforcement-friendly" approach. Staff will continue to evaluate on-going and potential future issues including publicity and potential eviction/remediation by the City, but on-going involvement of the Task Force is not required for this. It is appropriate to conclude the Task Force's charge and thank them for their involvement and investment of time and energy. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A iACD\B1dg\A1bert\Repocts to CouncilWgenda Summary 062000 MEN AGENDA CITY OF TIGARD eExecutive Summary PROPERTY a Numbers MAINTENANCE a Pictures CODE a lmplementation eOther Cities YEAR ONE REVIEW *Next Steps/Future Issues JUNE 20, 2000 eTask Force e Conclusions eQuestions & Suggestions EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUMMARY YEAR ONE RESULTS: . Complaints are being received and resolved - Very favorable, on-track maintenance is being with the direction given by improved and deterioration the Council and Task Force is being arrested; • The Housing Code itself, • Compliance has been achieved without (so far) •'Enforcement-friendly" having to bring anyone to implementation, Court - we have gained • Integration into the Building compliance without Division. creating hostility; EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUMMARY • We have provided citizens *'The word is out" - tenants and neighbors - • among tenants, that they can complainants, with get he:a with maintenance someone they can call on problems, and for help; . among landlords & managers, that Tigard is enforcing its maintenance code and ihal they might as well go along t voluntarily. 1 COMPLAINTS: NUMBER & DISPOSITION NUMBERS Total Complaints 146 100% Referred Out 24 16% Total in Jurisdiction 122 84% Declined (Afterlnvesugatlon) 14 12% Accepted Cases 108 72% Closed 89 Open 19 100% Voluntary Compliance No citation or summons. COMPLAINTS TYPES OF COMPLAINTS BY TYPE OF PROPERTY Total in Jurisdiction 122 100% No Permit 22 Drainage 7 Electrical 15 Heat 6 Multi-Unit Rental 74 61% Mold/Mildew 18 Refrigerator 5 Single-Family Rental 27 22% Roof Leak/Tarp 12 Ventilation 5 Total Rental 101 83% Garbage/Trash 12 Rails/Steps 5 Retaining Wall 10 Sidewalk 4 Single-Family Illegal Structure 9 Fire Hazard 4 Owner-Occupied 21 17% Ant/Roaches 8 Foundation 3 Housing Code 7 No Hot Water 8 Swimming Pool 3 CamrTrucks 7 Egress 3 Building Code 14 Plumbing Leaks 7 Water Quality 3 (cases can appear in muluple categories.) COMPLAINTS NOT ACCEPTED Declined after Investigation 14 Multi-unit Rental 11 PICTURES OF SFR Rental 1 PROGRESS SFR Owner-Occupied 2 Referred to other Jurisdictions 24 "What you see Code Enforcement 11 is what you get." Engineering 5 { WACO 5 Beaverton/Portland 3 Ul l i 3° y'@ 4 A s - 1 Y Sar ~M P yw l` IMPLEMENTATION • Specific forms & procedures ` for investigation, record keeping, and enforcement have been developed, reviewed, and put in place. i I c . Complaint Records • Confidentiality . Enforcement Documents I -Notice of Violation f I I -Summons and Complaint I OEM 3 IMPLEMENTATION OTHER CITIES • Coordination • Other cities have asked about • Zoning & Planning CEO Tigard's experience, apparently • Building Division considering following Ttgard's • Other city departments lead. This confirms the • Documentation - digital conviction that Tigard has photography has proven to be stepped ahead of the pack In invaluable, powerfully convincing, addressing a problem and a and cost-effective. Photos are process of deterioration that hard to argue with and instantly affects every community, and viewable. Just the presence of the camera during an inspection that every community will appears to have a salutary effect eventually need to address in in producing a cooperative spirit. some manner. OTHER CITIES NEXT STEPS/FUTURE ISSUES • Gresham - Tigard and Portland -Eviction/Repair/Remediation gave a joint presentation to the by the City - we've been able Gresham City Council in to avoid, so far, ordering an September 1999 about our eviction or expending City Housing Codes and their funds on emergency repair - implementation. landlords have agreed to -Astoria - apparently considering provide immediate repair or to ways to address the put tenants up in a motel. A deterioration problem; the couple of dwellings have come Astoria Times has requested close to being deemed unsafe background on our experience. or uninhabitable and we will likely run into one eventually. NEXT STEPS/FUTURE NEXT STEPS/FUTURE ISSUES ISSUES I . Publicity & Promotion - to I maintain the 'enforrement- Publicity & Promotion (cont.) I friendly" mode of the program However, a standing question I and to avoid 'creating" is - how to let both tenants I complaints or on adversarial and landlords/owners know atmosphere we have refrained that we're available without from aggressive "advertising." encouraging people to seek enforcement instead of first After introductory Landlord/ seeking cooperative, voluntary Public Forums and associated compliance. We will continue newspaper ads and articles, to consider possible avenues additional publicity has been of communication. limited to CityScape articles. NEXT STEPS/FUTURE NEXT STEPS/FUTURE ISSUES ISSUES • Translation Services - so far, • Updates to Enforcement we have had only a few Process - a few items in the situations where Immediate Civil Infractions Enforcement translation was required. In Process set forth in the these cases we have been Municipal Code call for able to turn to other City updating. We are reviewing personnel or representatives these with the City Attorney's from the Community Action office and will bring Center. Should a regular need recommendations to Council. become apparent we will establish more formal channels of support. COMMUNITY HOUSING TASK FORCE CONCLUSIONS e Reviewed experience 5111. • Tigard's Housing Code is off o Task Force expressed strong to a good start and our satisfaction, particularly with "Enforcement Friendly' the City's achieving results approach is working well. while remaining 'enforcement-friendly.' o The City can be proud of its • Staff recommends Council program and of leading the conclude the Task Force's way for other cities in dealing charge and thank members with the problem of property for their investment of time maintenance. and energy -for their investment in Tigard's future. QUESTIONS? 5 AGENDA ITEM 4 FOR AGENDA OF June 20, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Zone Ordinance Amendment (ZOA1999-00003) to Allow Dam Care Uses in Industrial Zones. PREPARED BY:Julia Haiduk DEPT HEAD OK 1^J 19+V CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Discuss recommended code language and Ordinance for the Zone Ordinance Amendment to allow day care uses in Industrial zones. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review the recommended code language and Ordinance and direct staff to make changes as needed prior to the June 27, 2000 Public Hearing on this matter. INFORMATION SUMMARY 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. Staff forwarded this recommendation to the City Council. The applicant originally requested the amendment to allow day care uses either conditionally or outright in all Industrial Zones. The applicant clarified the request before the City Council, indicating that day cares should be permitted outright in the Light Industrial zones and conditionally in the Heavy Industrial zones. At the April 25, 2000 public hearing, the City Council indicated they were in favor of approving the request in concept. Staff was directed to prepare language that would allow day care uses with restrictions. Staff indicated at that meeting that a Conditional Use was not necessary and that the amendment could be worded in a way that placed restrictions on the use but that if the standards were met, the use could be an outright permitted use. This will avoid a public hearing that is not really needed. This is the direction staff has taken in preparing the recommendations. As an option, in the event that Council does in fact want the day care uses to e reviewed as a Conditional Use, staff has prepared draft changes to the Conditional Use Section of the code that would reflect the same restrictions staff is recommending be a part of Industrial zoning regulations section. The City Council directed staff at the April 25, 2000 public hearing to draft language for a code change that would allow day care uses in Industrial Zones with restrictions that would both insure the safety and efficiency of the day care use, as well as insure that adjacent uses could continue without the need to make site upgrades in response to the day care use adjacent to it. Staff contacted the Childcare Division- Day Care Unit, DEQ, the Oregon Health Division and several cities that allow day care uses in Industrial zones for input on proposed language. Attached is a detailed summary of staff's findings, the language proposed with restrictions, and a draft Ordinance for Council's consideration. If Council feels that the language proposed adequately addresses their concerns, staff will make no changes and the Council can adopt the proposed Ordinance at the June 27, 2000 public hearing. If changes are requested, staff will make these changes and prepare a revised Ordinance for the June 27, 2000 public hearing. Exhibits: A - Summary of Staff's Recommendation and Background Information B - Proposed Ordinance + C - Proposed Industrial Zone Section Code Language D - Proposed Conditional Use Section Code Language If Council Chooses To Make Day Care Uses A Conditional Use OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Direct staff to make additional changes to the proposed language prior to the City Council meeting. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A iscurpln\julia\zoal999-03ais4.doc 6-Jun-00/12:15 PM Elm "EXHIBIT A" City of Tigard Community Development Shaping A Better MEMORANDUM Community OIYY F YIGARD, OREGON 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 Fax 684-7297 TO: City Council FROM: Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner DATE: June 2, 2000 SUBJECT: Zone Ordinance Amendment to Allow Day Care Uses in Industrial Zones Recommendation and Background Information. The City Council indicated they had concerns that a new day care next to existing industrial uses would require the existing industrial uses to change their operating procedures to comply with regulatory requirements. Staff has contacted the Children's Services Division (CSD) Day Care Unit, DEQ, and the Oregon Health Division to research whether there would be any potential problems. Staff has a,so reviewed the Tigard Municipal Code and several other cities' development codes for guidance in preparing recommended language. The following summarizes what staff found: CSD Tmere are no locational criteria for a day care that would prohibit location near an industrial use. The standards do, however, require a certain amount of outdoor space based on the number of children using the facility at one time. DEQ DED standards do not require different compliance standards based on the use of adjacent properties, therefore, a day care would not require any more regulatory compliance than that of another industrial use. When asked if the federal EPA may have rules or regulations that would impact existing uses next to new day cares, staff was informed that DEQ regulates the EPA rules. Since EQ rules are not dependent on the use or adjacent uses, neither would the EPA rules. Of course, if an existing industrial use was not in compliance or wished to increase the amount of discharge into the air or water, DEQ would have to review permits which may or may not be approved based on the regulatory standards. This approval will not, however, be based on adjacent users. Health Division/OSSHA There are no stricter regulations for contaminants next to a day care than for any other use. Any facility is required to meet health and safety standards for their employees but they are not mandated to insure their operation meets this for employees in adjacent businesses. Cit of Ti and Munici al Code The igar unicipa Go de lists day cares as a "noise-sensitive land use". The maximum noise level at the property line of a noise sensitive land use is 50dB during the day and 40dB during the nigght. There is a potential that existing industrial uses may exceed this at the property line of tential day care sites. Staff has recommended that a restriction of the permitted day care use gothe measuring of noise levels (as well as other environmental elements) and requiring that the proposed day care site be designed so as to meet this standard. This will put the burden on the day care, instead of on existing uses. Neighboring City Standards for-Comparison to reviewed the o owing cities development codes to determine if they had restrictions or regulations that the City of Tigard could incorporate into this amendment: Portland Beaverton Oregon City o Tualatin Salem Gresham Among these cities, the regulations and restrictions vary from not permitted, permitted outright and permitted conditionally. Staff looked at the conditional use regulations and restrictions for cities that did allow them to determine if any of these restrictions should be applied in the City of Tigard. Several cities had requirements on the amount of outdoor open space for the day care use. Staff does not feel this is necessary, since the amount of outdoor open space is regulated by the Children's Services Division permit requirements. Staff does, however, believe that a condition that the applicant work with CSD prior to submitting the application to the City is necessary. A condition of final inspection and occupancy should be to obtain a permit from ND to operate the day care center is also appropriate. The City of Tualatin allows day care uses outright in industrial zones provided they are more than 400 feet away from exterior walls and pump islands of any automobile service station. Staff has found no specific reason for this standard from DEQ or CSD. While the City of Portland's Conditional Use criteria appear to most closely address the concerns the City Council raised at the last hearin , staff finds that the majority are too vague to adequately analyze as discretionary criteria. By complying with the Site Development Review standards and special restrictions staff has recommended, the site will be suitable for the proposed day care use. Staff has not recommended site size limitations (nor have they been found in other cities researched), however, the City Council may chose to set minimum or maximum lot sizes. If this is requested, it may eliminate smaller infill sites or require a developer to partition a larger site that may be more appropriate to be developed as part of a development complex. Recommendation: Staff as etermined that there are some specific restrictions that are clear and objective that can and should be placed on day care uses in industrial zones. Included in the Council packet is the recommended language to be placed in the Industrial zone section of the development code. Staff does not recommend requiring applicants to go through the Conditional Use process because the recommended restrictions are clear and objective and can be adequately addressed by staff. If, however, the Council wishes to have an added level of review, staff has prepared draft changes to the Conditional Use section of the Tigard Community Development Code for Council to consider at the work session. It should be noted that the recommended restrictions remain the same. The only change would be the process in which they are reviewed. 1: c u rp I n /j u 1 i a/ZOA/ZOA 19 99-03 re p o rt. d o c Page 2 of 2 "EXHIBIT B" CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 00- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LANGUAGE OF THE TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW DAY CARE USES IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES WHEREAS, the applicant requested a Zone Ordinance Amendment to allow day care uses either conditionally or outright in all industrial zones; and WHEREAS, the City Council opened a Public Hearing on the request on April 11, 2000 and heard testimony on April 25, 2000 and indicated they were supportive of the pro posed zone change and directed staff to prepare langauge and an Ordinance for Council review and approval and WHEREAS, Staff prepared recommended language and an Ordinance which was discussed at the June 20, 2000 City Council work sesssion; and WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the proposed language adequately addressed concerns regarding protecting both the proposed daycare uses, as well as, existing adjacent industrial uses; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; any applicable Metro regulations; any applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies; and any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Council has found the following to be the only 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; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed zone ordinance amendment is consistent with the applicable review criteria and that approving the request would be in the best interest of the City of Tigard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The specific text amendements attached to this Ordinance are hereby adopted and approved by the City Council. PASSED: This day of 2000. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard ORDINANCE NO. 00- i:\curp1n\ju1ia\zoa1999-03ORDdoc Page 1 of 1 6-Jur.-00!1:03 PM **DRAFT** "EXHIBIT C" PROPOSED CHANGES FOR OUTRIGHT PERMITTED USE, WITH RESTRICTIONS TABLE 18.530.1 USE TABLE: INDUS'T'RIAL ZONES USE CATEGORY I-P I-L I-H RESIDENTIAL Household Living R1 R1 R' Group Living N N N Transitional Housing N N N Home Occupation N N N CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) Basic Utilities C C P Colleges N N N Community Recreation N N N Cultural Institutions N N N Day Care R~ ' 2 R'=`' R' 9 Emergency Services P P P Medical Centers N N N Postal Service P P P Public Support Facilities P P P Religious Institutions N N N Schools N N N Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges N N N COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging P N N Eating and Drinking Establishments R2 N N Entertainment-Oriented - Major Event Entertainment N N N - Outdoor Entertainment P N N - Indoor Entertainment P N N - Adult Entertainment N N N General Retail - Sales-Oriented R2 N N - Personal Services R2 N N - Repair-Oriented P N N - Bulk Sales N N N - Outdoor Sales N P P - Animal-Related P P P Motor Vehicle Related - Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N P P - Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair C P P - Vehicle Fuel Sales P P/C' P Office P N N Self-Service Storage P P P Non-Accessory Parking P P P gill T A Ua, 1 °0.530.1 (CON' 1 ) USE CATEGORY I-P I-I I-H INDUSTRIAL Industrial Services N P P Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial P P P - General Industrial N P P - Heavy Industrial N N P Railroad Yards N N P Research and Development P P P Warehouse/Freight Movement N P P Waste-Related N N P Wholesale Sales R4 P P OTHER Agriculture/Horticulture Ps Ps P5 Cemeteries N C N Detention Facilities C N C Heliports C C C Mining N N P Wireless Communication Facilities P/R6 P P Rail Lines/Utility Corridors P P P Other NA NA P' P=Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted 'A single-family detached dwelling or single-family mobile or manufactured home allowed for caretaker or kennel owner/operator when located on the same lot as the permitted use and is exclusively occupied by the caretaker or kennel owner/operator and family. 'These limited uses, separately or in combination, may not exceed 20% of the entire square footage within a development complex. No retail uses shall exceed 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area per building or business. 3In-home day care which meets all state requirements permitted by right. 'Permitted if all activities, except employee and customer parking, are wholly contained with a building(s). 'When an agricultural use is adjacent to a residential use, no poultry or livestock, other than normal household pets, may be housed or provided use of a fenced run within 100 feet of any nearby residence except a dwelling on the same lot. "See Chapter 18.798, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition of permitted and restricted facilities in the I-P zone. Vehicle fuel sales permitted outright unless in combination with convenience sales, in which case it is permitted conditionally. gExplosive storage permitted outright subject to regulations of Uniform Fire Code. Day care uses with over 5 children are permitted subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment The design of the day care must frilly comply with State of Oregon requirements for ourd~or o n~zre to b:ck~, min loin, 111111111 1.530.040 Development Standards A. Compliance required All development must comply with: 1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapters 18.370. 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. B. Development Standards Development standards in industrial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.530.2 below: TABLE 18.530.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES STANDARD I-P I-L I-II Minimum Lot Size None None None Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. - Side facing street on comer & through lots [1] 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. - Side yard 0150 ft. [3] 0150 ft. [3] 0150 ft. [3] - Rear yard 0/50 ft. [3][4] 0150 ft. [3] 0150 ft. [3] - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a public or private street Maximum height 45 ft. 45 ft. 45 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75 % [5] 85% 85% Maximum Landscape Requirement 25 % [6] 15% 15% [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795 (Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Policy 11.5.1. [5] Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80% if the provisions of Section 18.530.05013 are satisfied. [6] Except that a reduction to 20% of the site may be approved through the site development review process. I-P - Industrial Park District I-L - Light Industrial I-H - Heavy Industrial 18.530.050 Additional Development Standards A. Commercial lodging in the I-P zone. The following development standards shall apply for a commercial lodging facility located in the I-P zone: 1. Site size shall be a minimum of two acres and a maximum of five acres. 2. The site shall have access to be approved by the City Engineer to an arterial or major collector street with capacity sufficient to ensure that adequate access to local businesses is maintained. 3. Ancillary uses, also permitted in the I-P zone as contained in Chapter 18.530 shall be allowed as integral elements of the commercial lodging development, provided they comprise no more than 20% of total floor area. 4. Signage shall conform to Chapter 18.780. B. Reduction of lot coverage requirements, Lot coverage may be increased from 75% to 80% as part of the site development review process, providing the following requirements are satisfied: 1. The minimum landscaping requirement shall be 20% of the site. 2. The applicant shall meet the following performance standards with regard to the landscaping plan approved as part of the site development review process: a. Street trees, as required by Section 18.745.040 Cl are to be installed with a minimum caliper of three inches rather than the two inches as measured at four feet in height; b. The landscaping between a parking lot and street property line shall have a minimum width of 10 feet; c. All applicable buffering, screening and setback requirements contained in Section 18.745.050 shall be satisfied. d. The applicant shall provide documentation of an adequate on-going maintenance program to ensure appropriate irrigation and maintenance of the landscape area. C. Day care uses. The following= standards shall apply for commercial day care uses in industrial zones: 1. The Environmental Impact Assessment must document noise, visible emissions, vibration, odor. glare and heat from uses within one quarter mile. A plan and program for day care facilities to provide mitigation on-site for any of the above off-site impacts mu be rovided. Sound attenuation walls, screening, window covering, shades. and other such means are appropriate means of mitigation and may be attached as conditions of approval. 2 The State of Oregon Child Care Division Certification Section shall be notified of the proposed site plans prior to submitting an application to insure that the plans submitted generally address the permitting requirements. 3. Prior to occupancy of a proposed day care, evidence of certification through the State of Oregon Child Care Division shall be provided. I:\curpln\julia\zoa\zoa1999-02 proposed clranges.doc "EXHIBIT D" **DRAFT** PROPOSED CHANCES FOR CONDITIONAL USE TABLE 18.530.1 USE TABLE: INDUSTRIAL ZONES USE CAT'E'GORY I-P I-L I-II RESIDENTIAL Household Living R1 R' R' Group Living N N N Transitional Housing N N N Home Occupation N N N CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) Basic Utilities C C P Colleges N N N Community Recreation N N N Cultural Institutions N N N Day Care R_Ca 3 RC3_ RC3 Emergency Services P P P Medical Centers N N N Postal Service P P P Public Support Facilities P P P Religious Institutions N N N Schools N N N Social/Fratemal Clubs/Lodges N N N COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging P N N Eating and Drinking Establishments RN N Entertainment-Oriented - Major Event Entertainment N N N - Outdoor Entertainment P N N - Indoor Entertainment P N N - Adult Entertainment N N N General Retail - Sales-Oriented R2 N N - Personal Services Rz N N - Repair-Oriented P N N - Bulk Sales N N N - Outdoor Sales N P P - Animal-Related P P P Motor Vehicle Related - Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N P P - Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair C P P - Vehicle Fuel Sales P P/C' P I Office P N N Self-Service Storage P P P Non-Accessory Parking P P P TABLE 18.530.1 (CON'T) IJSE CATEGORY I -P I 1-H INDUSTRIAL. Industrial Services N P P Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial P P P - General Industrial N P P - Heavy Industrial N N P Railroad Yards N N P Research and Development P P P Warehouse/Freight Movement N P P Waste-Related N N P Wholesale Sales R4 p P OTHER Agriculture/I3orticulture Ps Ps Ps Cemeteries N C N Detention Facilities C N C Heliports C C C Mining N N P Wireless Communication Facilities P/R6 P P Rail Lines/Utility Corridors P p P Other NA NA P' P=Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted 'A single-family detached dwelling or single-family mobile or manufactured home allowed for caretaker or kennel owner/operator when located on the same lot as the permitted use and is exclusively occupied by the caretaker or kennel owner/operator. and family. 2These limited uses, separately or in combination, may not exceed 20% of the entire square footage within a development complex. No retail uses shall exceed 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area per building or business. 31n-home day care which meets all state requirements permitted by right. 4Permitted if all activities, except employee and customer parking, are wholly contained with a building(s). 'When an agricultural use is adjacent to a residential use, no poultry or livestock, other than normal household pets, may be housed or provided use of a fenced run within 100 feet of any nearby residence except a dwelling on the same lot. 6See Chapter 18.798, Wireless Communication Facilities, for definition of permitted and restricted facilities in the I-P zone. 'Vehicle fuel sales permitted outright unless in combination with convenience sales, in which case it is permitted conditionally. 'Explosive storage permitted outright subject to regulations of Uniform Fire Code. 18.530.040 Development Standards A. Compliance required. All development must comply with: 1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapters 18.370. 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. B. Development Standards Development standards in industrial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.530.2 below: TABLE 18.530.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN INDUSTRIAL ZONES STANDARD I-P I-L I-H Minimum Lot Size None None None Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft. Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. - Side facing street on corner & through lots [1] 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. - Side yard 0150 ft. [3] 0/50 ft. [3] 0/50 ft. [3] - Rear yard 0150 ft. [3][4] 0150 ft. [3] 0/50 ft. [3] - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a public or private street Maximum height 45 ft. 45 ft. 45 ft. Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75 % [5] 85 % 85% Maximum Landscape Requirement 25 % [6] 15% 15% [1] The provisions of Chapter 18.795 (Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. [3] No setback shall be required except 50 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] Development in industrial zones abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood shall comply with Policy 11.5.1. [5] Maximum site coverage may be increased to 80% if the provisions of Section 18.530.05013 are satisfied. [6] Except that a reduction to 20% of the site may be approved through the site development review process. I-P - Industrial Park District I-L - Light Industrial I-H - Heavy Industrial 18.530.050 Additional Development Standards A. Commercial lodging in the I-P zone The following development standards shall apply for a commercial lodging facility located in the I-P zone: 1. Site size shall be a minimum of two acres and a maximum of five acres. 2. The site shall have access to be approved by the City Engineer to an arterial or major collector street with capacity sufficient to ensure that adequate access to local businesses is maintained. 3. Ancillary uses, also permitted in the I-P zone as contained in Chapter 18.530 shall be allowed as integral elements of the commercial lodging development, provided they comprise no more than 20% of total floor area. 4. Signage shall conform to Chapter 18.780. B. Reduction of lot coverage requirements. Lot coverage may be increased from 75% to 80% as part of the site development review process, providing the following requirements are satisfied: 1. The minimum landscaping requirement shall be 20% of the site. 2. The applicant shall meet the following performance standards with regard to the landscaping plan approved as part of the site development review process: a. Street trees, as required by Section 18.745.040 Cl are to be installed with a minimum caliper of three inches rather than the two inches as measured at four feet in height; b. The landscaping between a parking lot and street property line shall have a minimum width of 10 feet; c. All applicable buffering, screening and setback requirements contained in Section 18.745.050 shall be satisfied. d. The applicant shall provide documentation of an adequate on-going maintenance program to ensure appropriate irrigation and maintenance of the landscape area. Chapter 18.330 CONDITIONAL USE Sections: 18.330.010 Purpose 18.330.020 Approval Process 18.330.030 Approval Standards and Conditions of Approval 18.330.040 Additional Submission Requirements 18.330.050 Additional Development Standards for Conditional Use Types 18.330.010 Purpose A. Purpose, The purpose of this chapter is to provide standards and procedures under which a conditional use may be permitted, enlarged or altered if the site is appropriate and if other appropriate conditions of approval can be met.. There are certain uses which due to the nature of the impacts on surrounding land uses and public facilities require a case-by-case review and analysis. 18.330.020 Approval Process A. Initial applications. A request for approval for a new conditional use shall be processed as a Type III-HO procedure, as regulated by Chapter 18.390.050, using approval criteria contained in Section 18.330.030A and subject to other requirements in this chapter. B. Major modification of approved or existing conditional use. 1. An applicant may request approval of modification to an approved plan by: a. Providing the Director with five copies of the proposed modified conditional use site plan; and b. A narrative addressing the proposed changes as listed in subsection B below. 2. The Director shall determine that a major modification(s) has resulted if one or more of the changes listed below have been proposed: a. A change in land use; b. An 10% increase in dwelling unit density; c. A change in the type and/or location of access ways and parking areas where off-site traffic would be affected; d. An increase in the floor area proposed for non-residential use by more than 10% where previously specified; e. A reduction of more than 10% of the area reserved for common open space and/or usable open space; f. A reduction of specified setback requirements by more than 20%, g. An elimination of project amenities by more than 10% where previously specified provided such as: (1) Recreational facilities; MINE IN (2) Screening; or (3) Landscaping provisions; and h. A 10% increase in the approved density; 3. Upon the Director determining that the proposed modification to the conditional use plan is a major modification, the applicant shall submit a new application in accordance with Section 18.320.020A. C. Minor modification of approved or existing conditional use 1. Any modification which is not within the description of a major modification as provided in Subsection B above shall be considered a minor modification. 2. An applicant may request approval of a minor modification by means of a "Type I procedure, as regulated by Section 18.390.040, using approval criteria in Subsection C3 below. 3. A minor modification shall be approved, approved with conditions, or denied following the Director's review based on the findings that: a. The proposed development is in compliance with all applicable requirements of this title; and b. The modification is not a major modification as defined in Subsection A above. D. Phased development approval, As part of the approval process, the Hearings Officer shall approve a time schedule for developing a site in phases over a period of time of one year, but in no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than three years without reapplying for conditional use review. The criteria for approving a phased conditional use review proposal is that all of the following are satisfied: 1. The public facilities shall be constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase. 2. The development and occupancy of any phase shall not be dependent on the use of temporary public facilities. A temporary public facility is any facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard. 3. The phased development shall not result in requiring the City or other property owners to construct public facilities that were required as part of the approved development proposal. 18.330.030 Approval Standards and Conditions of Approval A. Approval standards. The Hearings Officer shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a conditional use or to enlarge or alter a conditional use based on findings of fact with respect to each of the following criteria: 1. The site size and dimensions provide adequate area for the needs of the proposed use; 2. The impacts of the proposed use of the site can be accommodated considering size, shape, location, topography, and natural features; 3. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal; 4. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except as modified by this chapter; 5. The applicable requirements of 18.330.050; and 6. The supplementary requirements set forth in other chapters of this code including but not limited to Chapter 18.780, Signs, and Chapter 18.360, Site Development Review, if applicable, are met. B. Conditions of approval The Hearings Officer may impose conditions on the approval of a conditional use, which are found necessary to ensure the use is compatible with other use in the vicinity, and that the impact of the proposed use on the surrounding uses and public facilities is minimized. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: I . Limiting the hours, days, place and/or manner of operation; 2. Requiring design features which minimize environmental impacts such as noise, vibration, air pollution, glare, odor and/or dust; 3. Requiring additional setback areas, lot area, and/or lot depth or width; 4. Limiting the building height, size or lot coverage, and/or location on the site; 5. Designating the size, number, location and/or design of vehicle access points; 6. Requiring street right-of-way to be dedicated and street(s) to be improved; 7. Requiring landscaping, screening, drainage and/or surfacing of parking and loading areas; 8. Limiting the number, size, location, height and/or lighting of signs; 9. Limiting or setting standards for the location and/or intensity of outdoor lighting; 10. Requiring berms, screening or landscaping and the establishment of standards for their installation and maintenance; 11. Requiring and designating the size, height, location and/or materials for fences; 12. Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees, soils, vegetation, watercourses, habitat areas and/or drainage areas; 13. Requiring the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenway adjoining and within the floodplain when land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100- year floodplain; and 14. Requiring the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrianibicycle pathway plan. C. Exemptions. Manufactured home parks and manufactured home subdivisions are exempt from the provisions of Subsection B above. Manufactured home subdivisions are subject to approval under the provisions of Chapter 18.430, Subdivisions. Manufactured home parks are subject to approval under the provisions of Chapter 18.340, Site Development Review. 18.330.040 Additional Submission Requirements A. Additional submission requirements. In addition to the submission requirements required in Chapter 18.390, Decision-Making Procedures, an application for conditional use approval must include the following additional information in graphic, tabular and/or narrative form. The Director shall provide a list of the specific information to be included in each of the following: 1. Existing site conditions; 2. A site plan; 3. A grading plan; 4. A landscape plan; 5. Architectural elevations of all structures; and 6. A copy of all existing and proposed restrictions or covenants. 18.330.050 Additional Development Standards for Conditional Use Types A. Concurrent variance application(s). A conditional use permit shall not grant variances to the regulations otherwise prescribed by this title. A variance application(s) may be filed in conjunction with the conditional use application and both applications may be heard at the same hearing. B. Additional development standards. The additional dimensional requirements and approval standards for conditional use are as follows: 1. Adult Entertainment: a. No adult entertainment establishment shall be permitted to locate within 500 feet of any: (1) Residential zone; (2) Public or private nursery, preschool, elementary, junior, middle, or high school; (3) Day care center, nursery school, resident care facility or hospital; (4) Public library; (5) Public park; or (6) Religious institution. b. Distance shall be measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures, objects or roads, from the closest point of the structure or portion of structure containing the use, to the closest portion of the residential zone or property line upon which a use specified in paragraph (a) above is listed; c. Any sign shall comply with the sign requirements, Chapter 18.780; d. Hours of operation shall be limited to 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m.; e. All windows less than seven feet from the ground shall be covered or screened in such a manner that the sales area and inventory are not visible from the sidewalk adjacent to the use; f. Doors and windows shall at all times be closed except for normal ingress and egress; g. No amplified or mechanically reproduced sounds shall emanate from the confines of the structure or portion of the structure in which the adult business is operated; and h. All adult entertainment establishments shall comply with all applicable state laws. 2. Motor Vehicle Servicing and Repair: a. Setbacks: (1) A five-foot perimeter setback shall surround all outdoor parking and storage areas; (2) Buffer screening shall be provided along the perimeter of all outdoor parking and storage areas as required in Section 18.745.040; and (3) All repair work shall be performed indoors. 3. Fleet Storage: a. No buildings or structures are allowed; and b. Setbacks shall comply to those of the underlying zone. 4. Motor Vehicle Sales and Rental: a. Five feet of the perimeter setback shall be used for landscaping and screening purposes; 5. Community Recreation and Parks: a. All building setbacks shall be a minimum of 30 feet from any property line; b. There are no off-street parking requirements. 6. Heliports: a. In all commercial and industrial zones, heliports shall be sited in accordance with the ODOT Aeronautics Division requirements and the FAA recommended design guidelines. 7. Vehicle Fuel Sales: a. Minimum lot size shall be 10,000 square feet; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be 40 feet; (2) On corner and through lots, the setback shall be 40 feet on any side facing a street; and (3) No side or rear yard setback shall be required, except 20 feet where abutting a residential zoning district; c. Fuel tank installation shall be in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code; and d. Building height shall be the same as applicable zone. 8. Schools: a. There shall be no minimum. lot size requirements for schools other than what is required for the applicable zoning district; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet; (2) On corner lots and through lots, the setback shalt be a minimum of 20 feet on any side facing a street, plus meet visual clearance areas, Chapter 18.795; (3) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet; and (4) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet. 9. Religious Institutions: a. Minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (2) On corner lots and through lots, the setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet, plus meet visual clearance areas, Chapter 18.795; (3) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet; (4) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet; and (5) Each setback shall be increased five feet for every 10 feet of building height over 45 feet. 10. Medical Centers: a. Minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet plus 1,000 square feet for each bed over 15 beds; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (2) On corner lots and through lots, the setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet, plus meet visual clearance areas requirements, Chapter 18.795; (3) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (4) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; and (5) Each setback shall be increased five feet for every 10 feet of building height over 45 feet. 11. Cemeteries: a. The minimum lot size shall be five acres; b. Setbacks: (1) For graves only: (a) The front yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 15 feet; (b) The side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 15 feet; and (c) The rear yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 15 feet. (2) For Structures Only: (a) The front yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (b) On corner lots and through lots, the setbacks shall be a minimum of 25 feet on any side facing a street, plus meet visual clearance areas, Chapter 18.795; (c) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; and (d) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; c. Adequate fencing shall be provided. A fence of at Least four feet in height located at least 2-1/2 feet from any right-of-way shall completely surround the area and shall meet visual clearance areas; and d. There are no off-street parking requirements. 12. Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges: a. Minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet. 13. Major Event Entertainment: a. The minimum lot size shall be two acres; b. Setbacks: (1) The front yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet; (2) On corner lots and through lots, the setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet on any side facing a street, plus meets visual clearance areas, Chapter 18.795; (3) The side yard setback shall be a minimum of 25 feet; (4) The rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet; and (5) Each setback shall be increased five feet for every 10 feet of building height over 45 feet. c. With regard to off-street parking: Exempt, if constructed with a school use. Otherwise, requirements shall comply with Section 18.765; 14. Duplexes: a. The minimum lot size shall be 10,000 square feet; and b. The remaining dimensional requirements of the underlying zoning district shall apply. 15. Group Living: a. Minimum lot size shall be 5,000 square feet; b. Minimum setbacks shall be those in the applicable zone; c. Height limitation shall be that in the applicable zone; d. Compliance with all state requirements shall be required; and e. Off-street parking shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765. 16. Emergency Services and Basic Utilities: a i a. Minimum lot size shall be 5,000 square feet; b. Minimum setbacks shall be those in the applicable zone; 3 c. Height limitation shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.730; d. Off-street parking and loading requirement shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765; and e. Screening shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.745. 17. Non-Accessory Parking: a. Minimum lot size shall be 5,000 square feet; b. Minimum setbacks: for structures: shall be those of the applicable zone; for parking area: five feet around perimeter of paved area for landscaping and screening purposes; c. Height limitation shall be that of the applicable zone; d. Off-street parking requirements shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765; and e. Screening shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.745. 18. Manufactured/Mobile Home Parks (Also see Chapter 18.750): a. Minimum lot size shall be one acre; b. Minimum lot dimension: (1) Frontage: 100 feet; (2) Depth: 150 feet; c. Minimum setbacks: (1) Front yard: 25 feet; (2) Rear yard: 25 feet; (3) Side yard: 10 feet; (4) Comer yard: 25 feet. d. Height limitation shall be that of the applicable zone; e. Off-street parking shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765; f. Landscaping shall be equal to 20% of the project area; g. Screening shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.745; h. Outdoor recreation shall equal a minimum of 60 square feet area, suitably improved for recreational use, for each unit exclusive of required yards. Each recreation area shall have minimum size of 2,500 square feet. 19. Children's Day Care: a. Minimum lot size shall be 5,000 square feet; b. Minimum Setbacks shall be those of the applicable zone; c. Height limitation shall be that of the applicable zone; d. State certification shall be obtained in accordance with ORS Chapter 4 i 8; and e. Off-street parking shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.765. f.,._. Ij]-industrial zones an Environmental Impact Assessment must be submitted that documents notse vtst a emissions vibration. o or glare an eat from uses within one quarter mile, A DIan and program tbr day r fhcilities to provide mt t i n on-site o 912y 91 lb?. v t s mt r v n t n walls. screening window covering. t ~ion and v 20. Drive-Up Windows: a. Minimum lot size shall be as required in the underlying zone. b. Minimum setbacks: Where access to the drive-up windows is not separated from abutting properties or a public right-of-way by parking, structures or landscaping, visual screening shall be provided to screen headlights from abutting property and the right-of-way. c. Height limitation shall be in accordance with the underlying zone. d. Drive-up window reservoir requirement: All uses providing drive-up service as defined by this title shall provide on the same site a reservoir for inbound vehicles as follows in Table 18.765.1 contained in Chapter 18.765, Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements. e. Reservoir Parking: Restaurants providing drive-up window service shall provide at least two designated parking spaces immediately beyond the service window, or provide other satisfactory methods, to allow customers requiring excessive waiting time to receive their food while parked. f. Hours of operation: Hours of operation shall be limited for the drive-up window when the property with the drive-up window facility abuts a residential use. In this case, hours of the drive-up window shall be limited to 7 AM to 9 PM. g. Walk-up service: Financial and other commercial establishments providing drive-up window facilities which do not provide for walk-in customer service (i.e., not allowing transactions within the structure) shall provide for safe, convenient and readily-accessible exterior walk-up window service, such as an automatic teller machine, at any time during regular business hours. Additionally, at a minimum, two parking spaces shall be provided allowing convenient access to the walk-up service window. h. Emergency exit: The design of the vehicle stacking area serving the drive-up window shall allow customers to leave the stacking line in their vehicle in the event of an emergency. i. Pedestrian access: On-site parking for walk-in customers shall be designed so that pedestrians do not have to cross drive-up window stacking lines to any public entrances into the building. j. Obstruction of rights-of-way: Establishments having drive-up window facilities shall have sufficient stacking area to insure that public rights-of-way are not obstructed. k. Sound systems: Communications sound systems shall not exceed a measurement of 55 decibels at the adjoining property line(s) at any time. I:\curpln\julia\zoa\zoa1999-03cup changes.doc ~Jis ~uss.~~ MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan, Jim Hendryx and Dick Bewersdorff, - FROM: Barbara Gomez, Code Compliance DATE: June 20, 2000 SUBJECT: Hill Street Duplexes Addressed as 9283, 9285, 9287 and 9289 SW Hill St. I have been asked to address the problems surrounding the two sets of duplexes located on Hill Street. I became involved with the duplexes soon after I started to work for the City of Tigard in September of 1999; however, complaints had been received before that time. Problems develop and expand due to lack of interest in the properties shown by the property owner, Bruce Richie. The current tenants of the duplexes have a total disregard for maintenance of the property both inside and out that have led to several notices of violations and citations being issued on two separate occasions. The first citation issued included noxious vegetation, offensive littering and obstruction of street violations. A court date was set for March 29, 2000. This citation was issued after several violation notices had been sent to the property owner. On March 21, 2000, a request for dismissal of charges was submitted to the court after the property had been cleaned to a point of compliance. The neighbors were not satisfied because they felt more should be done. The code, however, does not have provisions for cosmetic complaints. Citations cannot be issued on lack of grass in the yards, structural painting or unsightly fencing. The fence in question was less than 4 feet high and did not require a permit. After a period of time, the properties began to deteriorate and again a citation was issued on the morning of April 11, 2000, in which the charges were scattering of rubbish and obstruction of streets. A court date of April 25, 2000, was set. On the afternoon of April 11, 2000, a meeting was held at the Police Department to discuss the Hill St. duplexes. At this meeting was Melanie Fletcher of Washington County Department of Housing. She indicated that her office would be removing the children who lived at 9283 Hill St. due to living conditions that existed inside the residence. Within days, the children were removed. The police issues of possible trafficing of drugs at 9283 SW Hill St. were never proven. A request for dismissal of the violation was made only after the property owner had cleaned the property to a point of compliance. He was advised that if a third citation were I to be issued, there would be no dismissal. The Municipal Court will be provided a full accounting of the past problems. The judge has the authority to assess the fines. On the morning of June 13, 2000, I drove by the duplexes to verify the status. Although the grass on both properties need to be mowed again, there was no debris in the street, sidewalk, or in the front or back yards that I could see. I believe that the neighbors want the City to hold the property owner, Bruce Richie, more responsible for his properties. This was my goal also. Since the dismissal of the last citation, I have stayed in contact with the property manager. She has updated me on the course of action that they had to take. Eviction notice was given to the residents of 9283 SW Hill Street. They were to be out on May 22; however, the property manager had to file papers in court because they failed to move. Based on the property owner's attorney, this comrlaint was withdrawn due to the health condition of one of the renters. This was done with the condition that the renters would leave within thirty days. At the time of departure, it is hoped that the Housing Inspector will then have a chance to view the interior of the structure. All concerned, property manager, Housing Inspector, and I expect that major damage has been done to the interior of the structure. Maybe at this point, repairs can be required that will give a degree of improvement. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 20, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Re ional Transportation Plan PREPARED BY: Laurie Nicholson DEPT HEAD OK 0-P~ rlT- V MOR ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Update on the Regional Transportation Planning process STAFF RECOMMENDATION Informational Briefing. City Council discussion and input would be appreciated-. INFORMATION SUMMARY The 2000 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is the latest in a series of updates of Metro's transportation plan to comply with state and federal planning requirements in a manner that implements the Portland region's land use and transportation goals and objectives. This transportation plan establishes the priority projects for roads and freight movement as well as alternative transportation options such as bicycling, transit, and walking. Metro is currently processing public comments on the plan from local jurisdictions. Attached is Metro's schedule for adoption of the RTP. There is further opportunity to submit additional comments prior to the deadline of June 29, 2000. City staff has worked with Metro staff throughout the process. The primary issue for Tigard with the RTP is Highway 99W. Not surprisingly, the RTP shows that Highway 99W through Tigard cannot be solved through conventional widening because of all the latent travel demand in this area. Tigard staff agree with Metro that Highway 99W will remain congested and that no simple solution is immediately available. Through our Transportation System Plan (TSP), we plan to address long-tern transportation planning issues for Highway 99W, and through continuing to work with the Oregon Department of Transportation, Washington County, and Metro. The RTP does include proposed improvements to major streets in and around Tigard. In addition, the Washington Square Regional Center study project recommendations are considered in this RTP. Major projects from the Washington Square Plan are included in the project lists. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY The projects in the RTP relevant to Tigard would meet the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goals of Improve Traffic Flow and Improve Traffic Safety. FISCAL NOTES Not applicable iAcitywide\sum\6-20-00 Regional Transportation Plan.doc Metro Regional Services f, Creating livable communities 600 NE Grand Ave., Portland, OR 97232 RTP cornment period May 15-June 29 2000 Regional Transportation Plan final adoption timeline May 15 45-day public comment period begins June 6 Metre Council Transportation Planning Committee financial discussion June 8 Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation concludes financial discussion June 29 Council public hearing and end of 45-day comment period July 12 Proposed Metro Policy Advisory Committee action on RTP July 13 Proposed JPACT action on'RTP July 27 Proposed Metro Council action on RTP August Begin air quality conformity process Begin review and update of Metro Transportation Planning Public Involvement Policy September RTP implementation program begins September/October Public review, comment period and adoption of final air quality conformity resolution and of public involvement policy October 2000 RTP published Metro - planning that protects the nature of our region It's better to plan for growth than ignore it. Metro serves 1.3 million people who live in Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington counties and the 24 cities in the Portland metropolitan area. Metro provides transportation and land-use planning services and oversees regional garbage disposal and recycling and waste reduction programs. Metro manages regional parks and greenspaces and the Oregon Zoo, and oversees the trade, spectator and arts centers managed by the metropolitan Exposition-Recreation Commission. Metro is governed by an executive officer, elected regionwide, and a seven-member council elected by districts. An auditor, also elected regionwide, reviews Metro's operations. Executive Officer- Mike Burton; Auditor- Alexis Dow, CPA; Council: Presiding Officer - David Bragdon, District 7; Deputy Presiding Officer - Ed Washington, District 5; Rod Park, District 1; Bill Atherton, District 2; Jon Kvistad, District 3; Susan McLain, District 4; Rod Monroe, District 6. Metro's web site: www.metro-region.org i s i t ern wz talled. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 20.2000 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE USA-Citv Agreements PREPARED BY: Bill Monahan DEPT HEAD OK ZX V- LTTY MGR OK - ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Discussion of the draft USA-City Agreement which would revise th? original USA contract adopted in 1970 as modified through 1990. USA has determined that the existing agreements with Washington County cities are incomplete and do not reflect current operating conditions within the urban area of Washington County. A draft revised contract has been discussed with City staff for the past several months. The latest draft is ready for discussion with the City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council review the draft City Agreement and engage in discussion with City staff as well as representatives of USA. INFORMATION SUMMARY Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County has prepared a draft City Agreement for review by member jurisdictions. City staff has participated in discussions with USA personnel and other cities for the past several months. The Agreement is out-of-date as modifications have not been made since 1990. Surface water management responsibilities were added to the agency in 1990 resulting in changes to the Agreement to reflect the added responsibility. Current/pending regulatory requirements such as the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and Metro Title 3 as well as the Conveyance System Management Study necessitate a review at this time. The proposed agreement would better identify the responsibilities of USA as well as member cities. Attached for review is a redline version of the USA-City Agreement which illustrates changes proposed by various jurisdictions, including Tigard. Our City Attorney has contributed to the City's proposed amendments. A clean copy of the agreement proposed by USA is also attached. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Keep the 1990 USA Agreement without making modification. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A I:\ADMIGREER',AGENDA ITEMS\USA-CITY AGREEMNT SUMM.DOC ,Vrr4 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY RECEIVED C.0-T. May 19, 2000 MAY 2 2 2000 Administration Bill Monahan City Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Bill: SUBJECT: CITY AGREEMENTS I have enclosed two copies of the USA-City Agreement (Agreement) in advance of our meeting within the next few weeks. My office will call to schedule a convenient time. The first enclosure highlights the comments received from the cities during the review process. These proposed revisions have been discussed during earlier meetings with you, at our County Manager's meetings and at a joint council meeting of the Agency and cities. The second enclosure is an executable copy of the Agreement containing the revised language reflecting many of the changes proposed by the cities. In considering Tigard City Council action on this issue, it is useful to summarize why the Agency feels that adoption of this revised Agreement is essential at this time. Out of Date The current USA-City agreements were originally adopted in 1970 with only minor modifications through 1990. In that year, surface water management responsibilities were added to the Agency, and changes were made to the Agreement reflecting this added responsibility. In reviewing the existing Agreement within the context of current/pending regulatory requirements (Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, Metro Title 3), new service delivery initiatives (Conveyance System Management Study), and the Agency's legal responsibilities for managing revenues and expenditures under ORS 451, it is clear that the existing Agreements are incomplete and do not refleci current operating conditions within the urban area of Washington County. The revised agreement better reflects these current conditions. Regulatory Compliance Under ORS 451 and as the lead Agency in terms of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and overall Clean Water Act (CWA) compliance, USA is the permittee for both sanitary sewer and storm water regulations. While USA is the responsible party, federal and 077 n 155 North First Avenue, uite 270, MS 10 Phone: 503/648-8621 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124-3072 FAX: 503/640-3525 City Agreements May 19, 2000 Page 2 of 3 state regulatory agencies have determined that the existing language in the USA-City Agreements does not clearly delineate USA's authority to mandate specific compliance actions within the cities. In light of this criticism, we engaged outside counsel to assess the legitimacy of the regulatory agency concerns and evaluate possible remedies. It is true that the existing agreements do not contain very credible provisions assuring compliance. We are advised that this weakness can be corrected through revision of the Agreement or by Agency rulemaking. It seems most consistent with our history of collaboration that we work together to address this need by amendment of the agreement. Accordingly, the revised Agreement restates this authority (already established under ORS 451) by clearly designating USA as the lead Agency in responding to permit issues throughout the service area. Service Delivery Efficiencies The urban area of Washington County covers 123 square miles. Within that area are over 1,400 miles of sanitary sewer pipe, 26,500 catch basins and 890 miles of storm lines. USA and the cities share field maintenance responsibilities for these collection systems. The current Agreement has provided the basis for assigning general system responsibilities and establishing very basic criteria for performing field maintenance activities. The unprecedented rate of development within the urban growth boundary and the corresponding expansion of sanitary sewer and storm water system inventory have highlighted the need to better define and coordinate the field maintenance operations of the Agency and cities. The work planning program and service area maps developed with the cities over the last two years and included in the proposed City Agreements are key steps toward implementing a more cost-effective approach toward sanitary and storm water system maintenance. This efficiency will translate into better service and long term savings for all ratepayers in the urban area of Washington County. Coordinated Financial Management Under the current Agreement, the Agency and cities jointly provide field services under a framework, which generally assigns to the individual jurisdictions the physical areas of responsibility and the system inventory to be maintained. Under the Agency's rules, uniform percentage allocations of service charge revenue are made between the cities and USA; 75 percent of storm water rate revenue is retained by the City and 30 percent of the sanitary sewer rate revenue is retained. These percentage allocations have been in place since 1990 and 1970 respectively. Neither is supported by actual cost or system inventory data. In order to insure that cities receive revenues needed to do the revised work programs resulting from the Conveyance Study, we need to develop a consistent cost based means of paying the City for that work. The I basis for allocations has been developed with the cities through the Conveyance System Management Study. In addition, these allocations can be adjusted annually to reflect any changes impacting maintenance activities/costs. In terms of funding, rate setting and financial management, the existing and new Agreements provide the Agency with comprehensive Unified Setts-crage Agency/City Agreements Revised dlay 2000 MINIM ~~01111111111111111 City Agreements May 19, 2000 Page 3 of 3 authority to manage revenues and expenditures throughout the service area. Our revised approach establishes a procedure to better manage the allocation of service charge revenues for field maintenance activities. In addition, the Agency will continue to work with the cities toward better allocation of system development charge revenues and establishing improved financial reporting systems. These areas highlight the major changes to the Agreement, which the Agency believes necessary to meet regulatory requirements and better manage how USA and the cities do business. As in the past, the Agency commits itself to working with the partner cities in providing the highest quality and lowest cost sanitary and storm services. This revised Agreement is an important step toward ensuring this level of service into the future. Agency staff is available to assist with presentations to Council and hope that the Agreements can be brought up for adoption by mid- June. I look forward to our meeting in the next few weeks. Sincerely, Bill Gaff General Manager Unified Seiverage Agency/City Agreements Revised May 2000 Version 3-23-00 USA-CITY AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the ^ day of , 2000, between the City of a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, hereinafter referred to as "City," and the Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, a municipal corporation and county service district, hereinafter referred to as the "Agency." WHEREAS, the Agency was duly formed and organized under ORS Chapter 451, has the authority to provide sanitary sewerage treatment facilities, and to provide for Aorm and surface water management within its boundaries; and City is within the Agency by action of its Council pursuant to an election duly conducted within the boundaries of the Agency; and WHEREAS, City and Agency have the authority to enter into contracts for the cooperative operation of service facilities under ORS 451.560 and ORS Chapter 190; and WHEREAS, the Agency and Cities have established and will continue to maintain an effective partnership for sanitary sewerage and surface water management services which this agreement is designed to support, enhance, and clarify; and WHEREAS, City and Agency previously entered into an Agreement for the cooperative operation of sanitary sewer and surface water facilities, and said Agreement is in need of amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and agreements to be kept and performed by the parties hereto, it is agreed as follows: Section 1. Definition of Terms Wherever the following terms are used in this agreement they shall have the following meaning unless otherwise specifically indicated by the context in which they appear: A. Area of Geographic Responsibility means the area set forth in the map attached as Exhibit A as may be amended. B. Board means the Board of Directors of the Agency, its governing body. C. Chief Executive Officer means the City official responsible for managing the day-to-day business affairs of City. D. Council means the City Council, governing body of City. Page t of 20 - Agreemcnt with City or E. Industrial Waste means any liquid, gaseous, radioactive or solid waste substance or a combination thereof resulting from any process of industrial or manufacturing business, or from the development or recovery of natural resources. For the purposes of this agreement, Industrial Waste shall also include any substance regulated under 33 USC Sec 1317, together with regulations adopted thereunder. F. Operation and Maintenance means the regular performance of work required to assure continued functioning of the storm and surface water system and the sanitary sewerage system and corrective measures taken to repair facilities to keep them in operating condition, and in full compliance with the requirements of all applicable laws, regulations, and permits. Tualatin City is concerned about the reference to "fi,ll" compliance and "all" applicable laws because of the potential legal implications. These terms may be read to impose a duty of absolute perfection in operation and maintenance, with any infraction of that duty opening the door to civil liability for negligence and whatever the Federal government might impose. While we strive for excellence and understand the consequences for failing to comply with applicable laws, regulations, and permits, we believe that simply deleting those two words and leaving the rest of the language accomplishes your needs without imposing impossible standards on us. Comment USA agrees with the City of Tualatin's comment to delete the word "full" and the word "all" from section I.F. G. Order means Resolutions, Orders and Directives of the Agency prescribing general standards and conditions for construction or use of the storm and surface water facilities and the sanitary sewerage facilities, and Rates and Charges. H Person means the state of Oregon, any individual, public or private corporation, political subdivision, governmental agency, municipality, industry, co-partnership, association, firm, trust, estate or any other legal entity whatsoever. 1. Program Funding means the revenues made available to City through Section 4.A.3. of this agreement to follow the adopted work programs and performance standards. J. Rates and Charges are defined in the Agency's "Rates and Charges" Resolution and Order (R&O) No. 98-22, or as may be amended. The following terms when used in this agreement shall be as defined in that R&O: 1. Dwelling Unit Equivalent (DUE) 2. Equivalent Service Unit (ESU) Page 2 of 20 - Agreement with City of _ 3. Impervious Surface Area 4. Permit Application and Inspection 5. Sanitary Sewer Service Charge 6. Sanitary System Development Charge (SDC; Connection Charge) 7. Storm and Surface Water Service Charge 8. Storm and Surface Water System Development Charge K. uu.auU. . Jy:...a.: 1-.,~.uaas anyy .7 vi..c.c.vii CICaCmellt plant, pumping or lift facilities, sewer pipe, force mains, laterals, manholes, side sewers, laboratory facilities and equipment, and any other facilities for the collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal of sanitary sewage comprising the total publicly-owned Sanitary Sewerage System within Agency jurisdiction, to which storm, surface and ground waters are not intentionally admitted. L. Standards means the standards and conditions of use of the storm and surface water system and the sanitary sewer system as specified and adopted by the Agency. Standards also shall mean applicable statutes and rules of the United States and the State of Oregon. M. Storm and Surface Water System means any combination of publicly owned storm and surface water quality treatment facilities, pumping or lift facilities, storm drain pipes and culverts, open channels, creeks and rivers, force mains, laterals, manholes, catch basins and inlets, grates and covers, detention and retention facilities, laboratory facilities and equipment, and any other publicly owned facilities for the collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal of storm and surface water comprising the total publicly owned Storm and Surface Water System within Agency's jurisdiction, to which sanitary sewage flows are not intentionally admitted. N. Work Program and Performance Standards are adopted by the Agency to define the activities required to operate and maintain the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems. Tigard The Work Program and Performance Standards should be a joint effort of USA and the Cities. Section L N should read: "Work Program and Performance Standards are adopted by the Agency and City to define..." Comment There were similar comments from the cities throughout this agreement on the fimdarnental issues of the Agency's authority to ultimately set the work programs, division of responsibility, rates and charges, the division of revenue, and to assess enforcement actions and penalties. In general, the cities commented that these actions should be by mutual approval. This issue is fundamental to the Agency being able to carry out its responsibility as the regional service provider for the storm and sanitary sewer programs. The new agreement does not give the Agency any additional authority than it had in the existing agreement, rather it is just defined more openly. The exception being the ability for the Agency to assess tines and penalties. USA was formed in 1970, Pagc 3 of 20 - Agrccmcnt with City of MINE and the SWM authority was added in 1990, in order to create an agency with the power and ability to operate a unified program. The regulatory agencies view USA as the responsible entity, and USA would receive the fines and penalties for non-performance throughout its service area. The Agency believes that in order for the regional storm and sanitary sewer systems to function properly and meet regulatory requirements, the Agency must have the authority to develop and enforce the programs necessary to meet the permit obligations. As such, the rules, policies, and work programs are not a "group decision", but instead are ultimately a decision of our governing board. It also follow-. that the implementation of the policies and programs can not be "discretionary" within each member cities. The alternative of each city having "veto power" over rules, policies, and programs would neutralize this central authority and make it virtually impossible to achieve the goals required by our permits. Recommended revising to read: " Work Program and Performance Standards are adopted by the Agency after considering input from the cities to define the activities required to operate and maintain the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems." Beavertoll (general C oT1111lcnt Otv believes this is a coo peratiNe aLYrVenrent shanfl, rnir mutual auth0ritY. and 1101 011 that dMCUl"11es authority 10 ('itV Comment Please see the response to Tigard's comment above. No change recommended. Section 2. Determination of Programs, Rules, Policies and Standards A. The Agency is responsible for the management and operation of the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems within its boundary, and is the designated permittee who shall obtain and enforce timely compliance with relevant Federal and delegated State Clean Water Act permits for treatment plants and stormwater. The Agency, in cooperation with the Cities, shall adopt orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria for the proper and effective operation of the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water Systems and to comply with State and Federal permits, laws and regulations. In addition, the Agency, in cooperation with the Cities, shall have the authority to make changes to its orders, work programs and performance Standards. Any such changes duly adopted by the Agency that impact City will become effective 30 days from the date of notice to City by Agency or as mutually agreed to. Tigard Amend the last sentence to read: Any such changes duly adopted by the ^geney that impact Eity to work programs and performance standards required by state and/or federal permits or regulations will become effective 38 90 days from the date of notice to City by Agency or as mutually agreed to. Any changes to work programs and performance standards, not required b state and/or federal permits and regulations, shall be mutually agreed to by the Auencv and City before they become effective Proposed changes should be communicated Page 4 of 20 - Agreemcnt with City of MMM oil between the Agency and the City in or before December of the year before they are to be implemented to allow Agency and City to budget appropriately for the following year. Comments Regarding the 30 or 90 days, USA agrees with the City of Tigard's comment to amend the effective date of changes to orders, work programs and performance standards. USA proposes that the phrase "become effective 30 days from the date of notice to City by Agency or as mutually agreed to" be amended to read "become effective 60 days from the date of notice to City by Agency or as mutually agreed to. However, in the event such orders, work programs or performance Standards are required by a regulatory agency to be implemented immediately, the orders, work programs or performance Standards shall be immediately implemented." This change gives the cities more time to inform work groups of the changes and allows time for supplemental budgeting if necessary. Regarding the Agency's authority to make the changes, please see the response to Tigard's comment in Section 1.N, with no change to the authority being recommended. Beaverton --City does not a,ree with !\uenc•r- <rut1lorit\• to change division of\\ork and revenue Oil a .10 day notice Comment Same as above. Tualatin In the existing language, it says, "The Agency, in cooperation with the cities...,, The term, "cooperation" is unclear as to what the Agency and the cities are to do. We would like this clarified. Comment USA proposes to change "in cooperation with" to "after considering input from the cities". B. City agrees to follow and enforce the Orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria promulgated by the Agency, subject, however, to program funding and to the extent that City may be lawfully authorized to act. City further agrees to notify Agency of apparent violations thereof which may require Agency legal action. Tualatin --The first sentence of Section 2.13 requires the city to follow and enforce the Agency's orders, specs. etc. With USA becoming the issuing agency for storniwater and the cities merely referring- developers to USA, I don't know what we're expected to enforce nor inhere we get the authority to do so, especially where we have existing SW\i 1 ordinances on our books that do not mirror what USA has just adopted. Comment Tile City only has to enforce the provisions where the City has taken the i responsibility for the activity in the agreement. No change is recommended. Tualatin Section 2.13, last sentence, change to read: "City further agrees to notify Agency of apparent violations thereofofwhich it has a kilo lcdae which may regrrll'e AgenCl' ie`~al action." City believes this is necessary to keep from imposing a dutV on the city to actively seek out violations. Comment The change as proposed is accepted. Page 5 of 20 - Agreement with City of Section 3. Division of Responsibilities A. Division of Responsibilities 1. The purpose of this agreement is to delegate to and contract with the City to do specific functions. The responsibilities of the Agency and City are defined in this Section and Appendix A. Exhibit A is a map showing boundaries of responsibility between the Agency and City and is hereby made a part of Appendix A and incorporated into this agreement. 2. All functions relating to the subject matter of this Agreement not specifically listed in this Section or Appendix A as being the responsibility of City shall remain the responsibility of the Agency. B. Procedure for Modifying the Division of Responsibilities 1. Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be modified from time to time with approval in writing by the Chief Executive Officer of City or designee and the Agency General Manager or designee. Tualatin City does not believe that the City Manager (Tualatin's chief executive officer) can modify this agreement without City Council action. The agreement itself has to go to Council for approval, so any modifications, unless there are very specific, narrow parameters upon the delegation, would also have to go to Council. Therefore, "chief executive officer or designee" should be deleted and "City" inserted. Comment USA agrees with the City of Tualatin's comment to delete the words "Chief Executive Officer of City or designee" and replace with "City", although the assumption of the original language assumes that the City official would obtain the necessary authority to sign, including City Council authorization when necessary. 2. Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be modified by the Agency Board after receiving input from the City and determining this modification will be in the best interest of the public. Any changes in responsibility imposed by the Board shall only be done when the Board determines such a change is necessary to comply with State or Federal permits, laws or regulations. Tigard Amend the last sentence to read: Any changes in responsibility imposed by the Board shall only be done when the Board 7 and Chief Executive Officer of the City or designee determines such a change is a necessary to comply with State or Federal permits, laws or regulations. Comment Regarding the joint approval, please see the response to Tigard's comment in Section 1.N• with no change to the authority being recommended.. Recommended clarifying the paragraph to read: "Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix of 20 - Agreement with City of Page 6 ~ 111010111 A may be modified by the Agency Board after receiving input from the City and determining •thisedifleatien will be in the inter-est-a€the-publi . Any ehanges r-espensibility imposed by the Bear-d shall enly be dene when the BeaFd deter-mines sueh a the change is necessary to comply with State or Federal permits, laws or regulations." Beaverton City does not a~,ree with A-ency auth01-ity to chanoe division of work and revenue on a 30 day notice. Comment Same as above. Tualatin Section 3.13.2 allows modification by the Board "after receiving input" from the city and "determining" the modification is in the best interest of the public. It is unclear whether the Board can unilaterally modify the responsibilities, even if the City's input is "No" and it is also unclear whether the City has to determine that the modification is in the best interest of the public or whether only USA makes that determination. We do not favor USA being able to modify the responsibilities unilaterally. Comment The intent of this language is that the Board makes the decision after receiving input from the city, and the City does not have to agree with the final decision. Please see the response to Tigard's comment in Section L N, with no change to the authority being recommended. 3. City may request that the Agency assume responsibility for any portion of the program defined in this Section and Appendix A upon reasonable notice, such notice in no event to be less than 6 months. Corresponding adjustments to the revenue allocation shall be made to reflect the change in responsibility upon implementation of such changes. City shall be responsible for correcting or paying to have corrected any deficiencies in the system resulting from non-performance of the programs under its responsibility. Tigard Amend the second sentence to read: "As long as funding; levels stay the same, corresponding adjustments to the revenue......" Comment The intent of the original language is that the funding levels will not stay the same, but this would only occur when there is a significant change in the program required to meet regulatory requirements. No change is recommended. Amend the last sentence to read: to ....resulting from non-performance of the programs under its responsibility subject to funding availability." Comment The proposed change is acceptable. 4. City boundaries may change through annexation. For City annexation of territory currently in the Agency's boundary, the responsibilities defined in Appendix A shall apply to the new City boundary. The responsibility Page 7 of 20 - Agreement with City of ~iM boundaries defined in Exhibit A are not changed due to City annexations of territory currently inside the Agency's boundary. For annexations of territory not currently within the Agency's boundary, the Agency will amend Appendix A and Exhibit A to define the responsibilities for the new area in cooperation with adjacent cities. C. Additional City Responsibilities Tigard Section 3.C General comments and concerns The City is concerned that the additional City responsibilities listed in the draft IGA do in fact add to the City Responsibility and may impose additional costs on the City. The City should not have to bear extra financial burdens just so that USA can restructure its process. Comment The intention is that the Agency will fund everything we ask the City to do. The procedure requires coordination of the USA and City processes. The City is concerned that USA will not be able to respond in an adequate time to allow the City processes to meet their deadlines. Subsection 2 requires the City to refrain from issuing a stormwater connection permit without verification from USA. Does USA have adequate resources to provide a response without delaying projects, including City project? Under subsection 3, the City must obtain approval from USA before approving grading permits, land clearing permits, plat approvals and land use approvals. The City must reach a final decision on most of these applications within 120 days, or in some cases a shorter time. Any delay will result in a mandamus action, with the Courts not the City and not USA making the decision. Does USA have the resources to do this? This section should be substantially modified. USA previously informed us that the two processes would be independent and that the City could issue approvals and that USA would have independent authority to deny the sewer connection. That system could work, but a system that requires prior approval from USA cannot work unless USA devotes substantial resources to the process and commits in the agreement to a decision within a short amount of time. Comment The intent of this language is to meet the requirements of Agency R&O 900- 7, Section 1.02.15, which defines Development and is in part intended to ensure that proposed development can meet water quality requirements before it is approved through the land use process. It is also intended to ensure that other activities, like land clearing and tree removal, which call have a negative impact on water quality, are reviewed and provide mitigation for negative water quality impacts. Thus, the IGA language in Section 3.C.3 which reads "for any grading permit, land clearing permit, plat approval, or land use approval prior to undertaking work" should be revised to mirror more closely the language in RKO 400-7 to, for all development, as defined by the Agency (such as land division, grading, paving, clearing, etc.), prior to undertaking work. Page 8 of 20 - Agrccment with City of t The first part of Section 3.C.2 refers primarily to construction and the second portion, primarily to pre-development activities. It is correct that the pre-development reviews by the City and Agency are two separate processes. They can, however, be handled concurrently and should be coordinated. R&O #00-7, Section 2.04.3, outlines the Agency's approval timelines. Upon initial submittal, the Agency shall endeavor to approve, return for revision, or reject it within 15 working days. The Agency shall endeavor to approve, return for revision, or reject subsequent submittals within 10 working days. We question why a separate USA approval is necessary if the standards are clearly stated. Comment Please see response above. Section 3 is headed "Division of Responsibilities". Subsection C of Section 3 lists "Additional City Responsibilities". There is no section listing USA responsibilities. (Again we note we have not seen Appendix A.) Section 3.C.7 requires the City to allow USA to obtain certain permits from the City without having to pay fees? This provision should be reciprocal. Comment The organization of the agreement appears to cover all the topic areas. Regarding permit fees, the Agency does not have roads where we could reciprocate. No changes are recommended. 1. Refer Persons who may desire to connect a non-residential use to the sanitary sewerage system to the Agency. City shall not issue any sanitary sewer permit to non-residential customers without verification that the Agency has issued an Industrial Waste discharge permit, or the Agency has determined that none is required. 2. Refer persons who are proposing 'development', as defined in the Agency's current version of its Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order, to the Agency to obtain a Service Provider Letter. City shall not issue a stormwater connection permit without verification from the Agency that the development conforms to adopted Agency standards, orders, and master plans. Tualatin Section 3.C.2 reference to Auency's "current" version of its Design and Construction Standards is too vague. The reference should be to a particular dated version or at least refer to the document that is in effect at the time the developer is seeking a Service Provider Letter. Most important: This says that the "City shall not issue a stormwater connection permit..." It was the City's understanding from David Noran that USA would be issuing the permits and that the City was merely to refer developers to USA. If that is not true, we need to be so advised because that changes the City's position on this process. If it is true, then perhaps we need a definition to know what a "stormwater connection permit" is and how that is different from what USA will he issuing,. Page 9 of 20 -Agreement wiUa City of Comment Regarding the first comment, the Agency must be able to refer to whatever is the current version of the D&C Standards, plus the current version of all other rules, without having to go back to the City for approval of a change to the agreement. Please see the response to Tigard's comment in Section 1.N for further discussion. Regarding the second issue of issuing stormwater connection permits, the intent of this language is to meet the requirements of Agency Ordinance #27 and R&O #00-7, Section 3.01, which states in part, "All development within USA's jurisdiction must obtain a stormwater connection permit from the Agency or its designee.... " So the proposed IGA language is correct. Agency staff is working to clarify the difference between a "connection permit" and systems development charge, which have been used interchangeably in the past. Historically, the Agency has delegated to large City staffs the routine authority to sell, charge, and collect systems development charges. The term connection permit, however, should be limited to the approval to physically connect to the public system. 3. Provide notice to and obtain Agency review and approval as the Agency may require for any addition, modification, construction, or reconstruction (other than repairs) of the publicly-owned sanitary sewerage system and storm and surface water system, or for any grading permit, land clearing permit, plat approval, or land use approval prior to undertaking work or approving such action to ensure conformance to adopted Agency Standards, Orders, and master plans. 4. Obtain Agency review and approval prior to entering into any agreement for the use of the Storm and Surface Water System or the Sanitary Sewerage System. 5. Inform the Agency in writing not less than 30 days prior to initiating or entering into any agreement for the financing or incurring of indebtedness relating to the storm and surface water system or the sanitary sewerage system. City shall not obligate any Agency revenues of the sewer fund or storm and surface water fund, nor shall facilities of the sanitary or storm and surface water system be obligated for any debt. Tualatin Does Section 3.C.5 mean that the City may not use its share of revenues for debt and if so, why not? Wily does USA care what the City does with its share of the revenues? If this is meant to refer only to USA's share of revenues, i don't understand how the City could obligate revenues that does not belong, to it. Comment The Agency recommends subsection 5 be amended as follows: "Inform the Agency in writing not less than 30 days prior to initiating or entering into any agreement for the financing or incurring of indebtedness relating to the storm and surface water svstem or the sanitary sewerage system. Revenues allocated by the Agency to the City for the performance of functions identified in Appendix A are considered restricted, and may only be used to perform those functions (including reasonable administration) delegated to the City for such things as operation and maintenance of the sanitary or storm and surface water system. System Development Charge (SDC) revenues allocated Page 10 of 20 - Agreement with City of by the Agency to the City may only be expended for the uses identified in the Agency's SDC mcThodology, and may not be obligated by the City for payment of non-Agency bonded debt. City shall not obligate any and suFf ee watef ffina neF shat assets or facilities of the Agency's sanitary or storm and surface water system be-e>3ligated for any debt." 6. Allow the Agency access at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice to inspect and test storm and surface water facilities and sewerage facilities within City. 7. Grant the Agency permits from time to time as may be necessary for the installation of storm and surface water facilities and sewerage facilities in the public streets and ways of City without imposing permit issuance fees, provided that the Agency shall adhere to any conditions required pursuant to ORS 451.550(6). 8. To issue no new permit for the construction within, or modification to, a wetland, floodway, or floodplain without first receiving the written approval by the Agency to do so. This paragraph shall not apply to permits issued by City pursuant to a current permit under 33 USC Section 1344(e) (a section 404 general permit), and within the scope of such permit. Tualatin In Section 3.C.8, under FEMA rules, the City administers floodway and floodplain matters. Flow does this paragraph reconcile with FERIA regs? Do we need to work on this Section? Comment Regarding the comment that section 3.C.8. may overlap with FEMA regulations, USA would be happy to review any specific changes that City of Tualatin might have or to discuss any specific concerns. 9. To pursue, when City deems feasible and appropriate, the conversion of storm and surface water facilities from private to public ownership, through the acquisition of easements and other property rights as necessary, for those privately owned storm and surface water facilities which are identified as being necessary or appropriately a part of the public system. D. City Responsibilities Outside of its City Limits { 1. City is not obligated by this agreement to accept responsibility for any programs or work activities outside of its City limits. I 2. To the extent City has agreed to responsibilities both inside and outside of its City limits, for activities which are the responsibility of City, City shall perform the work to meet tite minimum requirements specified in Pagc I I of 20 - Agrccmcnt with City of the Agency's adopted Work Programs and Performance Standards. When the same type of service is being performed by City both inside and outside City, the service shall be prioritized and performed in a like manner in each area, including the response to storms and other emergencies. The exception shall be if City provides a higher degree of service inside City due to its own supplemental funding. Tigard Section D.2 refers to the Agency's Work Programs and Performance Standards. As discussed above, these should be jointly adopted by USA and the City. Comment Please see the response to Tigard's comment in Section L N, with no change to the authority being recommended. Section 4 Determination and Division of Revenue Operating Procedures and Rules Relating to Revenue A. The Agency Board shall determine and certify annually for both the sanitary sewerage system and for the storm and surface water system the monthly service charge and system development charge. The City agrees to impose those charges as a minimum. The City may impose additional charges as allowed in Section 4.D.4. B. The Agency Board shall determine and certify annually for both the sanitary sewerage system and for the storm and surface water system the portion of the monthly service charge and system development charge to be retained by the City for performance of the functions defined in this Agreement. Tigard Section 4.13 should be modified to provide a standard for funding. We recommend as an additional sentence: "The portion to be retained by the City shall be sufficient to perform the functions described in this Agreement". Comment It is recommended to add the following sentence to the end of subsection B: "Certification of revenues to be retained by the City will be dependent upon the standard costs for functions performed by the City and the overall level of revenue available for allocation." C. The division of revenue may be adjusted annually by the Agency to recognize changes in responsibilities after coordination and communication with the Cities. If there is a change in responsibilities, which the Agency determines to be significant, the Agency Board may, upon 30 days notice to City, adjust the division of revenue at any time. Any mid-year changes in the division of revenue initiated by the Agency Board shall only be done when the Board determines such a change is necessary to comply with State or Federal permits, laws or regulations. Page 12 of 20 - Agrecment with City of ,t Tigard The provision should be revised to provide 90 days' notice rather than 30 days notice. Mid-year adjustments should not be permitted because of the effect on adopted budgets. Comment Agency agrees to give 60 days notice. City of Tigard commented that mid- year adjustments should not be allowed. However, the agreement allows mid-year changes only "when such a change is necessary to comply with State or Federal permits, laws or regulations." Recommend clarifying the paragraph as follows: "The division of revenue may be adjusted annually by the Agency to recognize changes in responsibilities after coordination and communication with the Cities. Changes in the division of revenue will be done as a part of the normal budget process, except as defined below. If there is a mid-year change in responsibilities, which the Agency determines to be significant, the Agency Board may, upon 60 days notice to City, adjust the division of revenue at any time. Any such mid-year changes in the division of revenue initiated by the Agency Board shall only be done when the Board determines such a change is necessary to comply with State or r„deral permits, laws or regulations." 13ea\crtoll ('its. does not aurce \\ith uencv authorliv to chanue division of ~wrk and l'C\Cnue un a .;ft dlV llOtICC Comment Same as above. Tualatin Section 4.C, when does the "year" begin? Is it calendar or fiscal? Comment Fiscal D. Operating Procedures Relating to Revenue Tigard The City has not had adequate time to consider all the financial consequences of the proposed operating procedures relating to revenue and expects to provide additional comments after further review. Comment With the recent change in adoption schedule delaying the implementation of the phase 1 program to July 1, 2001, there should now be adequate time to review the financial impacts. 1. City shall remit to the Agency the portion of sanitary sewer service charges and systems development charges collected, and storm and surface water service charges and systems development charges collected, as identified in Section 4.13. ~I 2. Payments shall be remitted on a monthly basis, with a report on Agency designated forms. 3. Payments shall be due upon 30 days of receipt of the revenue by the billing party, unless the payment has been appealed by the billing party. If the payment has been appealed by the billing party under the Page 13 of 20 - Agreement with City of dispute resolution process of Section 6, the amount in dispute may be withheld or paid without prejudice to either party. Tualatin The due date in Section 4.13.3 appears to be a moving target because revenues would come in at various times through a month. We would prefer a date certain each month that would give us time to get the paperwork done. Comment The Agency agrees with the comment and recommends the first sentence be revised as follows: "Payments to the Agency shall! b of the revenue collected by the billing party shall be due within 20 days following the end of each month, unless the payment has been appealed by the billing party." 4. City may charge and collect a service charge or system development charge at a higher rate per DUE and ESU than that set by the Agency when the City determines it is needed for the local City system. The City shall retain 100% of these additional revenues collected. Such additional charge shall be consistent with the services provided by City and with applicable federal rules in order to preserve eligibility for grants and other funding programs. 5. For permit and inspection fees for private development construction of public storm and surface water facilities and sanitary sewer facilities, and for erosion control permit fees, City shall remit to the Agency the fee set forth in Agency's Rates and Charges to compensate the Agency for its costs for services performed relative to these fees, as prescribed by Agency Order or agreement with City. 6. For Industrial Waste fees, Agency shall remit to City a percentage of system development charges, volume, and monthly service charges collected equal to the percentages of non-industrial fees defined in Section 4.13. Agency shall retain one-hundred percent (100%) of the annual permit fee, and any penalty fees, COD, SS (as those terms are defined in the Rates and Charges) and other fees that may be assessed. 7. City will institute administrative procedures to diligently maintain regular billings and collection of fees, adjust complaints thereto, and pursue delinquency follow-ups and take reasonable steps for collection thereof. 8. City and Agency shall each establish separate accounts for the storm and surface water program and sanitary sewerage program for the purpose of accounting for service charges and systems development charges collected and received pursuant to this agreement. 9. Agency or City may at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice inspect and audit the books and records of the other with respect to matters within the purview of this Agreement. Page 14 of 20 - Agreement with City of mood 10. City and Agency shall each prepare and submit to each other a performance report of the storm and surface water functions, and the sanitary sewer fi:nctions for which each is responsible. Agency will specify the requirements, frequency, and content of the performance report. Tigard Section 4.D.10 must specify the frequency. It cannot be left to the agency to dictate but must be agreed to by the parties. Comment The Agency believes we do need to be able to specify everything about the report. Different types of reports will require different frequencies, and it appears there will be new reporting requirements mandated by Federal Rules. In addition, the Agency will pay the costs for the city to prepare the reports, and so the Agency will be prudent in not requiring overly frequent or time intensive reports. No change is recommended. 11. The City and Agency may, each at its own cost, install permanent and temporary volume and quality monitoring stations to determine the effectiveness of City and Agency programs. 12. Interest shall accrue on late payments at a rate of 1.25 times the monthly Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP) earnings rate as posted for the previous month, and will be applied each month to the unpaid balance. Section 5. Administrative and Operating Provisions A. The Agency will not extend sewer service to areas outside the City except with prior approval of the City where such areas are included in the Urban Planning Area Agreement between the City and the appropriate county or counties and any of the following exists: a. A new or existing single family property desires sewer service and needs to directly connect to a sewer line within the city. b. A new development desires sewer service and needs to directly connect a lateral or mainline public sewer directly to a sewer line within the city. B. City and the Agency will each obtain such insurance contracts as necessary to cover the liabilities of City and the Agency respectively for the risks and liabilities arising from activities and operations under this agreement. Each party hereto shall cause the other to be named as an additional insured on its policy or policies as to the obligations under the terms of this agreement. In the event that either party chooses to be self insured, that party shall maintain and furnish proof of separately identified Page 15 of 20 - Agreement with City of and unencumbered reserves for the maximum liability allowed under state law. C. Agency will not establish local assessment districts within City, without first obtaining City approval. D. Agency will process applications from City pursuant to Section 3.C.7 for Wetland, Floodplain, and Floodway modifications. Timely review of the application shall be provided by the Agency. Upon review and approval by USA, and upon request by City, the Agency shall act as a facilitator and liaison for State and Federal review and permit processes. E. Under applicable State law, the obligations for monitoring and reporting of sanitary sewer overflows to the State rest with the relevant permit holder, here the Agency; on the other hand, only City can timely obtain and report the relevant information within its area of responsibility. Agency therefore agrees not to have City brought under a permit reporting requirement, and for Agency to maintain that obligation, so long as City timely reports to Agency the information necessary and appropriate for Agency to fulfill that reporting obligation. City agrees to reimburse Agency for any expense, costs, damages, claims, fines, or penalties incurred by Agency that result from or are related to City's failure to so timely and adequately report. Tigard The City has a concern that Section 5.E imposes liability on the City in some situations in which the City itself lacked information. The section should simply read: "The City shall report all sanitary sewer overflows that it becomes aware of to the Agency within 24 hours of learning of the overflow. The City shall require all permittee of the City to report sanitary sewer overflows to the City." Comment The change is acceptable. Tualatin What do "timely" and "adequate" mean in Section 5.E? Need to clarify City's duty under this section. Comment It is recommended to use Tigard's proposed language above. F. City and Agency shall each be responsible for the negligent or wrongful acts of its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers, while performing work related to this agreement. Each party shall be solely responsible for defense, costs or payments arising from legal challenge alleging improper use by that party of funds derived from this agreement, or otherwise held by that party. Each party shall be responsible for any liability arising out of its ownership of real property and interests therein, for acting or failing to act within its Area Of Responsibility, activities governed by an NPDES permit or other air or water discharge permit issued by competent authority to that party, and any conduct of that party subject to direct Page 16 of 20 - Agreement with City of regulation by state or federal authority. Each party shall fully defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other from any expense, costs, damages, claims, fines, penalties, or liability incurred by or threatened against the other due to or resulting in whole or in part from the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party (including its officers, agents, or employees) under or in connection with or arising from any work, authority, jurisdiction, or responsibilities delegated to that party by this Agreement. G. The City agrees that the Agency has the authority to impose fines and penalties against the City for non-performance of adopted programs or non-compliance with Agency, State, or Federal rules and policies. The procedures by which the Agency considers non-performance or non- compliance, imposes such fines or penalties, and processes appeals, shall be set forth in an Agency rule. In this regard, any fines or penalties assessed by the Agency against a City shall be of the same magnitude as those set forth in the relevant Oregon Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules for fines and penalties imposed by Oregon's Department of Environmental Quality. The City shall have the right to appeal any such fines or penalties imposed by the Agency to the Agency's Board of Directors. Any monetary fines or penalties imposed can not be paid from the regular Stormwater or Sanitary Sewer Funds retained by the City, but rather would have to be funded from the City's General Fund or through additional Stormwater or Sanitary Sewer revenue generated locally as provided in Section 4.13.4. Tigard The City does not agree with Section S.G. The last sentence should be deleted. Comment Penalties can not come from the City's regular storm or sewer fund allocation, because that would reduce their ability to do a required program element. Fines and penalties must come from another source. The following is an alternative to replace the last sentence: "Payment of fines and penalties does not relieve the City from the responsibility to accomplish the work program." Tualatin In Section 5.G, how does USA have the authority to impose fines for federal or state violations? Aren't those the purview of the agency whose rules have been violated? Further, why should this agreement say that the City may not pay fines or penalties out of Stormwater or Sanitary Sewer Funds but must be taken from the General Fund? The Cite council has the sole discretion to determine how City funds should be spent. We oppose this section in concept. Comments The Agency is not imposing Federal or State penalties. Regarding where tines are paid from, see the response to Tigard's comment above. Ih i~ ,I, :!!:i llow% !t` Comment As discussed with the Cities, the Agency believes it needs some type of enibrcement tool short of taking over the entire program. Page 17 of 20 - Agreement with City of H. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation upon or delegation of the statutory and home rule powers of City, nor as a delegation or limitation of the statutory powers of Agency. This Agreement shall not limit any right or remedy available to City or Agency against third parties arising from illegal acts of such third parties. 1. Where this Agreement calls for review or approval of a fee or charge, Agency shall perform such review in a timely manner, shall not unreasonably withhold approval, and shall provide its decision to City in writing. If, within 30 days of written request by City for approval by Agency, the Agency has failed to provide a written response, the request shall be deemed approved. J. To iche extent that it is so required by law or regulation, City shall comply with Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) Chapter 340, Division 49, "Regulations Pertaining to Certification of Wastewater System Operator Personnel," including the obligation that City shall have its wastewater collection system supervised by one or more operators certified at a grade level equal to or higher than the system classification shown on page 1 of Agency's NPDES permit, issued by the State. The designated supervisor(s) shall be available to the system owner and any other operation of the facility. Tigard The last sentence of Section 5.J is confusing and unclear. Comment Agency agrees with the comment and recommends deleting the last sentence as the topic is already covered in the general statement in the first sentence. Tigard General comment concerning responsibilities and liabilities. USA appears to be asking the City to assume substantial additional liability, even though USA is taking over more of the administration of the system. USA has not provided any good reason why the City should increase its liabilities without receiving any benefits. Comment As discussed with the Cities, the Agency recommends that these changes are needed to insure the continued performance of the storm and sanitary systems and to meet the current demands and requirement of regulators. These changes are in response to recommendations from outside Counsel. Section 6 Dispute Resolution" Remedies A. In the event of a dispute between the parties regarding their respective rights and obligations pursuant to this Agreement, the parties shall first attempt to resolve the dispute by negotiation. If a dispute is not resolved by negotiation, the exclusive dispute resolution process to be utilized by the parties shall be as follows: 1. Step 1. Upon failure of those individuals designated by each party to negotiate on its behalf to reach an agreement or resolve a Page 18 of 20 - Agreement with City of dispute, the nature of the dispute shall be put in writing and submitted to City's Chief Executive Officer and Agency's General Manager, who shall meet and attempt to resolve the issue. If the issue in dispute is resolved at this step, there shall be a written determination of such resolution, signed by City's Chief Executive Officer and Agency's General Manager, which determination shall be binding on the parties. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence of both parties' representatives. 2. Step 2. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved at Step 1, the matters remaining in dispute after Step 1 shall be reduced to writing and forwarded to the Mayor and the Chairman of the Board of Directors. Upon receipt of the written issue statement, the Mayor and Chairman shall meet and attempt to resolve the issue. If the issue is resolved at this step, a written determination of such resolution shall be signed by the Mayor and Chairman. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence of both the Mayor and the Chairman. 3. Step 3. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved at Step 2, the parties shall submit the matter to mediation. The parties shall attempt to agree on a mediator. In the event they cannot agree, the parties shall request a list of five (5) mediators from the American Arbitration Association, or such other entity or firm providing mediation services to which the parties may further agree. Unless the parties can mutually agree to a mediator from the list provided, each party shall strike a name in turn, until only one name remains. The order of striking names shall be determined by lot. Any common costs of mediation shall be borne equally by the parties, who shall each bear their own costs and fees therefor. If the issue r is resolved at this step, a written determination of such resolution shall be signed by both parties. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence by both parties. In the event a dispute is not resolved by mediation, the aggrieved party may pursue any remedy available to it under applicable law. B. Neither party may bring a legal action against the other party to interpret a or enforce any term of this Agreement in any court unless the party has „ first attempted to resolve the matter by means of the dispute resolution of subsection A above. This shall not apply to disputes arising from a cause other than interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. Section 7 Effect of this Agreement a This Agreement shall supersede all prior agreements and amendments including the "City Committee Agreement" between the parties with respect to sanitary sewerage Page 19 of 20 - Agrcemcnt with City of and service, storm and surface water management; provided that, except as expressly modified herein, all rights, liabilities, and obligations of such prior agreements shall continue. This agreement shall be effective upon its execution by both parties hereto, and shall continue in effect for four renewable terms of five years each. This Agreement shall be deemed automatically renewed for a succeeding five year term up to a limit of 20 years, unless either party gives the other written notice not less than one year prior to the nominal expiration of term of its intent not to renew this agreement. This Agreement may be modified only by written amendment or as otherwise specified in this Agreement. Section 8. Severability In the event a court of competent jurisdiction shall deem any portion or part of this agreement to be unlawful or invalid, only that portion or part of the agreement shall be considered unenforceable. The remainder of this agreement shall continue to be valid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed in duplicate by authority of lawful actions by the Council and Agency Board of Directors. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY CITY OF , OREGON OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON By By Chairman, Board of Directors Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: City Recorder Attorney for Agency City Attorney Page 20 of 20 - Agrccmcnt with City of USA-CITY AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the _ day of , 2000, between the City of a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, hereinafter referred to as "City," and the Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, a municipal corporation and county service district, hereinafter referred to as the "Agency.11 WHEREAS, the Agency was duly formed and organized under ORS Chapter 451, has the authority to provide sanitary sewerage treatment facilities, and to provide for storm and surface water management within its boundaries; and City is within the Agency by action of its Council pursuant to an election duly conducted within the boundaries of the Agency; and WHEREAS, City and Agency have the authority to enter into contracts for the cooperative operation of service facilities under ORS 451.560 and ORS Chapter 190; and WHEREAS, the Agency and Cities have established and will continue to maintain an effective partnership for sanitary sewerage and surface water management services which this agreement is designed to support, enhance, and clarify; and WHEREAS, City and Agency previously entered into an Agreement for the cooperative operation of sanitary sewer and surface water facilities, and said Agreement is in need of amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and agreements to be kept and performed by the parties hereto, it is agreed as follows: Section 1. Definition of Terms Wherever the following terms are used in this agreement they shall have the following meaning unless otherwise specifically indicated by the context in which they appear: A. Area of Geographic Responsibility means the area set forth in the map attached as Exhibit A as may be amended. B. Board means the Board of Directors of the Agency, its governing body. C. Chief Executive Officer means the City official responsible for map_aging the day-to-day business affairs of City. D. Council means the City Council, governing body of City. Page I of 12 Agreement with City of E. Industrial Waste means any liquid, gaseous, radioactive or solid waste substance or a combination thereof resulting from any process of industrial or manufacturing business, or from the development or recovery of natural resources. For the purposes of this agreement, Industrial Waste shall also include any substance regulated under 33 USC Sec 1317, together with regulations adopted thereunder. F. Operation and Maintenance means the regular performance of work required to assure continued functioning of the storm and surface :eater system and the sanitary sewerage system and corrective measures taken to repair facilities to keep them in operating condition, and in compliance with the requirements of applicable laws, regulations, and permits. G. Order means Resolutions, Orders and Directives of the Agency prescribing general standards and conditions for construction or use of the storm and surface water facilities and the sanitary sewerage facilities, and Rates and Charges. H Person means the state of Oregon, any individual, public or private corporation, political subdivision, governmental agency, municipality, industry, co-partnership, association, firm, trust, estate or any other legal entity whatsoever. 1. Program Funding means the revenues made available to City through Section 4.A.3. of this agreement to follow the adopted work programs and performance standards. J. Rates and Charges are defined in the Agency's "Rates and Charges" Resolution and Order (R&O) No. 98-22, or as may be amended. The following terms when used in this agreement shall be as defined in that R&O: 1. Dwelling Unit Equivalent (DUE) 2. Equivalent Service Unit (ESU) 3. Impervious Surface Area 4. Permit Application and Inspection 5. Sanitary Sewer Service Charge 6. Sanitary System Development Charge (SDC; Connection Charge) 7. Storm and Surface Water Service Charge 8. Storm and Surface Water System Development Charge K. Sanitary Sewerage System means any combination of sewer treatment plant, pumping or lift facilities, sewer pipe, force mains, laterals, manholes, side sewers, laboratory facilities and equipment, and any other facilities for the collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal of sanitary sewage comprising the total publicly-owned Sanitary Sewerage System Page 2 of 12 - Agreement with City of within Agency jurisdiction, to which storm, surface and ground waters are not intentionally admitted. L. Standards means the standards and conditions of use of the storm and surface water system and the sanitary sewer system as specified and adopted by the Agency. Standards also shall mean applicable statutes and rules of the United States and the State of Oregon. M. Storm aid Surface Water System means any combination of publicly owned storm and surface water quality treatment facilities, pumping or lift facilities, storm drain pipes and culverts, open channels, creeks and rivers, force mains, laterals, manholes, catch basins and inlets, grates and covers, detention and retention facilities, laboratory facilities and equipment, and any other publicly owned facilities for the collection, conveyance, treatment and disposal of storm and surface water comprising the total publicly owned Storm and Surface Water System within Agency's jurisdiction, to which sanitary sewage flows are not intentionally admitted. N. Work Program and Performance Standards are adopted by the Agency after considering input from the cities to define the activities required to operate and maintain the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water svstems. Section 2. Determination of Programs, Rules, Policies and Standards The Agency is responsible for the management and operation of the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems within its boundary, and is the designated permittee who shall obtain and enforce timely compliance with relevant Federal and delegated State Clean Water Act permits for treatment plants and stormwater. The Agency, after considering input from the cities, shall adopt orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria for the proper and effective operation of the sanitary sewer and storm and surface water systems and to comply with State and Federal permits, laws and regulations. In addition, the Agency, after considering input from the cities, shall have the authority to make changes to its orders, work programs and performance Standards. Any such changes to work programs and performance standards that the Board determines are required by state and/or federal permits or regulations will become effective 90 days from the date of notice to City by Agency or as mutually agreed to. Any changes to work programs and performance standards, not required by state and/or federai permits and regulations, shall be mutually agreed to by the Agency and City before they become effective. Proposed changes not required by state and/or federal permits and regulations should be communicated between the Agency and the City in or before December of the year before they are to be implemented to allow Agency and City to budget appropriately for the following year. A. City agrees to follow and enforce the Orders, Standards, specifications, work programs, and performance criteria promulgated by the Agency, subject, Pagc 3 of 12 - Agreement with City of however, to program funding and to the extent that City may be lawfully authorized to act. City further agrees to notify Agency of apparent violations thereof, of which it has knowledge, which may require Agency legal action. Section 3. Division of Responsibilities A. Division of Responsibilities 1. The purpose of this agreement is to delegate to and contract with the City to do specific functions. The responsibilities of the Agency and City are defined in this Section and Appendix A. Exhibit A is a map showing boundaries of responsibility between the Agency and City and is hereby made a part of Appendix A and incorporated into this agreement. 2. All functions relating to the subject matter of this Agreement not specifically listed in this Section or Appendix A as being the responsibility of City shall remain the responsibility of the Agency. B. Procedure for Modifying the Division of Responsibilities I . Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be modified from time to time with approval in writing by the City and the Agency General Manager or designee. 2. Responsibilities defined in this Section and Appendix A may be modified by the Agency Board after receiving input from the City and determining the change is necessary to comply with State or Federal permits, laws or regulations. 3. City may request that the Agency assume responsibility for any portion of the program defined in this Section and Appendix A upon reasonable notice, such notice in no event to be less than 6 months. Corresponding adjustments to the revenue allocation shall be made to reflect the change in responsibility upon implementation of such changes. City shall be. responsible for correcting or paying to have corrected any deficiencies in the system resulting from non-performance of the programs under its responsibility, subject however to funding availability. 4. City boundaries may change through annexation. For City annexation of territory currently in the Agency's boundary, the responsibilities defined in Appendix A shall apply to the new City boundary. The responsibility boundaries defined in Exhibit A are not changed due to City annexations of territory currently inside the Agency's boundary. For annexations of territory not currently within the Agency's boundary, the Agency will amend Appendix A and Exhibit A to define the responsibilities for the new area in cooperation with adjacent cities. Page 4 of 12 Agreement with City of C. Additional City Responsibilities 1. Refer Persons who may desire to connect a non-residential use to the sanitary sewerage system to the Agency. City shall not issue any sanitary sewer permit to non-residential customers without verification that the Agency has issued an Industrial Waste discharge permit, or the Agency has determined that none is required. 2. Refer persons who are proposing 'developmeni , as defined in the Agency's current version of its Design and Construction Standards Resolution and Order, to the Agency to obtain a Service Provider Letter. City shall not issue a stormwater connection permit without verification from the Agency that the development conforms to adopted Agency standards, orders, and master plans. 3.. Provide notice to and obtain Agency review and approval as the Agency may require for any addition, modification, construction, or reconstruction (other than repairs) of the publicly-owned sanitary sewerage system and storm and surface water system, or for all development, as defined by the Agency (such as land division, grading, paving, clearing, etc.), prior to undertaking work or approving such action to ensure conformance to adopted Agency Standards, Orders, and master plans. 4. Obtain Agency review and approval prior to entering into any agreement for the use of the Storm and Surface Water System or the Sanitary Sewerage System. 5. Inform the Agency in writing not less than 30 days prior to initiating or entering into any agreement for the financing or incurring of indebtedness relating to the storm and surface water system or the sanitary sewerage system. Revenues allocated by the Agency to the City for the performance of functions identified in Appendix A are considered restricted, and may only be used to perform those functions (including reasonable administration) delegated to the City for such things as operation and maintenance of the sanitary or storm and surface water system. System Development Charge (SDC) revenues allocated by the Agency to the City may only be expended for the uses identified in the Agency's SDC methodology, and may not be obligated by the City for payment of non-Agency bonded debt. City shall not obligate any assets or facilities of the Agency's sanitary or storm and surface water system for any debt. 6. Allow the Agency access at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice to inspect and test storm and surface water facilities and sewerage facilities within City. Page 5 of 12 -Agreement with City of 7. Grant the Agency permits from time to time as may be necessary for the installation of storm and surface water facilities and sewerage facilities in the public streets and ways of City without imposing permit issuance fees, provided that the Agency shall adhere to any conditions required pursuant to ORS 451.550(6). 8. To issue no new permit for the construction within, or modification to, a wetland, floodway, or floodplain without first receiving the written approval by the Agency to do so. This paragraph shall not apply to permits issued by City pursuant to a current permit under 33 USC Section 1344(e) (a section 404 general permit), and within the scope of such permit. 9. To pursue, when City deems feasible and appropriate, the conversion of storm and surface water facilities from private to public ownership, through the acquisition of easements and other property rights as necessary, for those privately owned storm and surface water facilities which are identified as being necessary or appropriately a part of the public system. D. City Responsibilities Outside of its City Limits 1. City is not obligated by this agreement to accept responsibility for any programs or work activities outside of its City limits. 2. To the extent City has agreed to responsibilities both inside and outside of its City limits, for activities which are the responsibility of City, City shall perform the work to meet the minimum requirements specified in the Agency's adopted Work Programs and Performance Standards. When the same type of service is being performed by City both inside and outside City, the service shall be prioritized and performed in a like manner in each area, including the response to storms and other emergencies. The exception shall be if City provides a higher degree.of service inside City due to its own supplemental funding. Section 4. Determination and Division of Revenue, Operating Procedures and Rules Relating to Revenue a A. The Agency Board shall determine and certify annually for both the sanitary sewerage system and for the storm and surface water system the monthly service charge and system development charge. The City agrees to impose these charges as a minimum. The City may impose additional charges as allowed in Section 4.13.4. Page G of 12 - Agreement with City of B. The Agency Board shall determine and'certify annually for both the sanitary sewerage system and for the storm and surface water system the portion of the monthly service charge and system development charge to be retained by the City for performance of the functions defined in this Agreement. Certification of revenues to be retained by the City will be dependent upon the standard costs for functions performed by the City and the overall level of revenue available for allocation. C. The division of revenue may be adjusted annually by the Agency to recognize changes in responsibilities after coordination and communication with the Cities. Changes in the division of revenue will be done as a part of the normal Fiscal Year budget process, except as defined below. If there is a mid-year change in responsibilities, which the Agency determines to be significant, the Agency Board may, upon 60 days notice to City, adjust the division of revenue at any time. Any such mid-year changes in the division of revenue initiated by the Agency Board shall only be done when the Board determines such a change is necessary to comply with State or Federal permits, laws or regulations. D. Operating Procedures Relating to Revenue 1. City shall remit to the Agency the portion of sanitary sewer service charges and systems development charges collected, and storm and surface water service charges and systems development charges collected, as identified in Section 4.13. 2. Payments shall be remitted on a monthly basis, with a report on Agency designated forms. 3. Payments to the Agency of revenue collected by the billing party shall be due within 20 days following the end of each month, unless the payment has been appealed by the billing party. 4. City may charge and collect a service charge or system development charge at a higher rate per DUE and ESU than that set by the Agency when the City determines it is needed for the local City system. The City shall retain 100% of these additional revenues collected. Such additional charge shall be consistent with the services provided by City and with applicable federal rules in order to preserve eligibility for grants and other funding programs. 5. For permit and inspection fees for private development construction of public storm and surface water facilities and sanitary sewer facilities, and for erosion control permit fees, City shall remit to the Agency the fee set forth in Agency's Rates and Charges to compensate the Agency Page 7 of 12 - Agreement with City of _ for its costs for services performed relative to these fees, as prescribed by Agency Order or agreement with City. 6. For Industrial Waste fees, Agency shall remit to City a percentage of system development charges, volume, and monthly service charges collected equal to the percentages of non-industrial fees defined in Section 4.13. Agency shall retain one-hundred percent (100%) of the annual permit fee, and any penalty fees, COD, SS (as those terms are defined in the Rates and Charges) and other fees that may be assessed. 7. City will institute administrative procedures to diligently maintain regular billings and collection of fees, adjust complaints thereto, and pursue delinquency follow-ups and take reasonable steps for collection thereof. 8. City and Agency shall each establish separate accounts for the storm and surface water program and sanitary sewerage program for the purpose of accounting for service charges and systems development charges collected and received pursuant to this agreement. 9. Agency or City may at any reasonable time upon reasonable notice inspect and audit the books and records of the other with respect to matters within the purview of this Agreement. 10. City and Agency shall each prepare and submit to each other a performance report of the storm and surface water functions, and the sanitary sewer functions for which each is responsible. Agency will specify the requirements, frequency, and content of the performance report. 11. The City and Agency may, each at its own cost, install permanent and temporary volume and quality monitoring stations to determine the effectiveness of City and Agency programs. 12. Interest shall accrue on late payments at a rate of 1.25 times the monthly Local Government Investment Pool (LGIP) earnings rate as + posted for the previous month, and will be applied each month to the i unpaid balance. a Section 5 Administrative and Operating Provisions 3 A. The Agency will not extend sewer service to areas outside the City except with prior approval of the City where such areas are included in the Urban a Planning Area Agreement between the City and the appropriate county or counties and any of the following exists: Page 8 of 12 - Agreement with City of MIN a. A new or existing single family property desires sewer service and needs to directly connect to a sewer line within the city. b. A new development desires sewer service and needs to directly connect a lateral or mainline public sewer directly to a sewer line within the city. B. City and the Agency will each obtain such insurance contracts as necessary to cover the liabilities of City and the Agency respectively for the risks and liabilities arising from activities and operations under this agreement. Each party hereto shall cause the other to be named as an additional insured on its policy or policies as to the obligations under the terms of this agreement. In the event that either party chooses to be self insured, that party shall maintain and furnish proof of separately identified and unencumbered reserves for the maximum liability allowed under state law. C. Agency will not establish local assessment districts within City, without first obtaining City approval. D. Agency will process applications from City pursuant to Section 3.C.7 for Wetland, Floodplain, and Floodway modifications. Timely review of the application shall be provided by the Agency. Upon review and approval by USA, and upon request by City, the Agency shall act as a facilitator and liaison for State and Federal review and permit processes. E. The City shall report all sanitary sewer overflows that it becomes aware of to the Agency within 24 hours of learning of the overflow. The City shall require all permittee of the City to report sanitary sewer overflows to the City. City agrees to reimburse Agency for any expense, costs, damages, claims, fines, or penalties incurred by Agency that result from or are related to City's failure to so timely and adequately report. R City and Agency shall each be responsible for the negligent or wrongful acts of its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers, while performing work related to this agreement. Each party shall be solely responsible for defense, costs or payments arising from legal challenge alleging improper use by that party of funds derived from this agreement, or otherwise held by that party. Each party shall be responsible for any liability arising out of its ownership of real property and interests therein, for acting or failing to act within its Area Of Responsibility, activities governed by an NPDES permit or other air or water discharge permit issued by competent authority to that party, and any conduct of that party subject to direct' regulation by state or federal authority. Each party shall fully defend, indemnify, and hold hanmless the other from any expense, costs, damages, claims, fines, penalties, or liability incurred by or threatened against the Page 9 of 12 - Agreement with City of other due to or resulting in whole or in part from the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party (including its officers, agents, or employees) under or in connection with or arising from any work, authority, jurisdiction, or responsibilities delegated to that party by this Agreement. G. The City agrees that the Agency has the authority to impose fines and penalties against the City for non-performance of adopted programs or non-compliance with Agency, State, or Federal rules and policies. The procedures by which the Agency considers non-performance or non- compliance, imposes such fines or penalties, and processes appeals, shall be set forth in an Agency rule. In this regard, any fines or penalties assessed by the Agency against a City shall be of the same magnitude as those set forth in the relevant Oregon Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules for fines and penalties imposed by Oregon's Department of Environmental Quality. The City shall have the right to appeal any such fines or penalties imposed by the Agency to the Agency's Board of Directors. Payment of fines and penalties does not relieve the City from the responsibility to accomplish the work program. H. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as a limitation upon or delegation of the statutory and home rule powers of City, nor as a delegation or limitation of the statutory powers of Agency. This Agreement shall not limit any right or remedy available to City or Agency against third parties arising from illegal acts of such third parties. 1. Where this Agreement calls for review or approval of a fee or charge, Agency shall perform such review in a timely manner, shall not unreasonably withhold approval, and shall provide its decision to City in writing. If, within 30 days of written request by City for approval by Agency, the Agency has failed to provide a written response, the request shall be deemed approved. J. To the extent that it is so required by law or regulation, City shall comply with Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) Chapter 340, Division 49, "Regulations Pertaining to Certification of Wastewater System Operator Personnel," including the obligation that City shall have its wastewater collection system supervised by one or more operators certified at a grade level equal to or higher than the system classification shown on page 1 of Agency's NPDES permit, issued by the State. Section 6. Dispute Resolution, Remedies A. In the event of a dispute between the parties regarding their respective rights and obligations pursuant to this Agreement, the parties shall first attempt to resolve the dispute by negotiation. If a dispute is not resolved Page 10 of 12 - Agreement with City of _ OHIO IMM110 by negotiation, the exclusive dispute resolution process to be utilized by the parties shall be as follows: 1. Step 1. Upon failure of those individuals designated by each party to negotiate on its behalf to reach an agreement or resolve a dispute, the nature of the dispute shall be put in writing and submitted to City's Chief Executive Officer and Agency's General Manager, who shall meet and attempt to resolve the issue. If the issue in dispute is resolved at this step, there shall be a written determination of such resolution, signed by City's Chief Executive Officer and Agency's General Manager, which determination shall be binding on the parties. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence of both parties' representatives. 2. Step 2. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved at Step 1, the matters remaining in dispute after Step 1 shall be reduced to writing and forwarded to the Mayor and the Chairman of the Board of Directors. Upon receipt of the written issue statement, the Mayor and Chairman shall meet and attempt to resolve the issue. If the issue is resolved at this step, a written determination of such resolution shall be signed by the Mayor and Chairman. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence of both the Mayor and the Chairman. 3. Step 3. In the event a dispute cannot be resolved at Step 2, the parties shall submit the matter to mediation. The parties shall attempt to agree on a mediator. In the event they cannot agree, the parties shall request a list of five (5) mediators from the American Arbitration Association, or such other entity or firm providing mediation services to which the parties may further agree. Unless the parties can mutually agree to a mediator from the list provided, each party shall strike a name in turn, until only one name remains. The order of striking names shall be determined by lot. Any common costs of mediation shall be borne equally by the parties, who shall each bear their own costs and fees therefor. If the issue is resolved at this step, a written determination of such resolution shall be signed by both parties. Resolution of an issue at this step requires concurrence by both parties. In the event a dispute is not resolved by mediation, the aggrieved party may pursue any remedy available to it under applicable law. 13. Neither party may bring a legal action against the other party to interpret or enforce any term of this Agreement in any court unless the party has first attempted to resolve the matter by means of the dispute resolution of subsection A above. This shall not apply to disputes arising from a cause other than interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. Page I I of 12 - Agreement with City of _ .W Section 7. Effect of this Agreement This Agreement shall supersede all prior agreements and amendments including the "City Committee Agreement" between the parties with respect to sanitary sewerage and service, storm and surface water management; provided that, except as expressly modified herein, all rights, liabilities, and obligations of such prior agreements shall continue. This agreement shall be effective upon its execution by both parties hereto, and shall continue in effect for four renewable terms of five years each. This Agreement shall be deemed automatically renewed for a succeeding five year term up to a limit of 20 years, unless either party gives the other written notice not less than one year prior to the nominal expiration of term of its intent not to renew this agreement. This Agreement may be modified only by written amendment or as otherwise specified in this Agreement. Section 8. Severability in the event a court of competent jurisdiction shall deem any portion or part of this agreement to be unlawful or invalid, only that portion or part of the agreement shall be considered unenforceable. The remainder of this agreement shall continue to be valid. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed in duplicate by authority of lawful actions by the Council and Agency Board of Directors. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY CITY OF , OREGON OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON By By Chairman, Board of Directors Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form: City Recorder Attorney for Agency City Attorney Page 12 of 12 - Agreement with City of APPENDIX A DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES EFFECTIVE THROUGH JUNE 30, 2001 TIGARD Basic Work Ian Inside City Limits Outside City Limits Sanitary Maintenance Lines under 24" Lima 13''aanIing, city Agency Root Cuffing city Agency Emergency response city Agency Overflow and Complaint response and investigation city Agency Cross connection investigation and response city Agency Manhole adjustment City Agency Non-structure line sealing and point repair City Agency Manhole rehabilitation (sealing) city Agency TV inspection city Agency Compilation of TV reports and system evaluation city Agency W abatement and system rehabilitation projects Agency and City Agency Root Foaming city Agency Structural line repairs city Agency Line replacements City Agency Pump station maintenance Agency Agency Lines 24" and Larger All maintenance, inspection, repair, and replacement Agency Agency SWM Maintenance Line Cleaning City Agency Root Cutting city Agency Catch Basin cleaning city Agency Water quality manhole maintenance city Agency Storm and emergency response city Agency _ Complaint response and investigation city Agency Street Sweeping city Agency City for local Agency Water Quality facility maintenance for Regional Agency City for local Agency Water Quantity facility maintenance for Regional Agency Maintenance of public Streams/creeks/open _ channels City Agency Processing and disposal of sweeper, catch basin and storm line material -City ______Agency Structural line repairs city A ency _ Line replacements _ _Ci Agency Pump station maintenance and operation, Agency Agency Roadside ditches and piping system in County Roads Agency Agency N inspection Ci Agency Compilation of TV reports and system evaluation city Agency Proactive Leaf management program city Agency ENGINEERING, INSPECTION, AND SUPPORT ELEMENTS Development Process (development review, plan review) city Agency Sanitary Sewer connection permit issuance city Agency SWM connection permit issuance city Aqency Billing and collection of monthly service charges city Agency Inspection of developer projects city Agency Installation of Sanitary Sewer Masterplar. City 21' and less, Projects Agency 24" & up A enc installation of Masterplan Pump Station Projects Agency Agency Installation of SWM Masterplan Projects city Agency Erosion control permit issuance city Agency Erosion control inspection Ci Agency Accounting city Agency Industrial Waste Program Agency Agency Maintaining GIS information City and Agency Agency Maintaining system mapping City and A enc Agency Maintaining Engineering records of systems City and Agency Agency Preparing and revising sanitary sewer masterplans Agency Agency Preparing and revising SWM masterplans Agency Agency Response to customer billing inquiries city Agency Public information, newsletters, etc., for SWM and Sanitary programs, City and Agency Agency APPENDIX A DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2001 Inside City, and Inside City, and Outside City, and Outside Inside Responsibility Inside Responsibility Responsibility Tigard Boundary Boundary Boundary Sanitary Maintenance Ines under 24 Line Cleaning city city Root Cutting city city Emergency response city city Overflow and Complaint response city city Cross connection investigation and response city city Manhole adjustment city City _ Non-structure line sealing and point repair Agency Agency City 10/year, Agency City 10/year, Agency Manhole rehabilitation (sealing) remainder remainder N inspection city city Compilation of N reports and system evaluation Agency Agency I&I abatement and system rehabilitation projects A enc Agency Root Foaming Agency Agency City 10/year, Agency City 10/year, Agency Structural line repairs remainder remainder Lateral Repairs in Public Right of Way Agency A enc Line replacements Agency Agency Pump station maintenance Agency Agency Vector Control city city Off road inspection and locator post maintenance City city Easement and Access Road Maintenance city city Lines 24" and Larger All maintenance, inspection, repair, and replacement Agency Agency SWM Maintenance Line Cleaning City city _ Root Cutting City _ city _ Catch Basin cleaning _ city city Water quality manhole maintenance city city Storm and emergency response city city Complaint response investigation and reporting city city _ Street Sweeping city City Water Quality facility maintenance _ Agency --Agency _ Water Quantity facility maintenance _ Agency Agency___ Maintenance of public Streams/creeks/open channels city City Processing and disposal of sweeper, catch basin and storm line material (excluding leaves city city Structural line repairs Agency Agency Line replacements Agency Agency Pump station maintenance and operation Agency Agency Roadside ditches and piping system in Coun Agency Agency N inspection city city Compilation of iii reports and system evaluation Agency Agency Proactive Leaf management program c1q, City ENGINEERING, INSPECTION, AND SUPPORT ELEMENTS Development Process (development review, plan review) city Agency Sanitary Sewer connection permit issuance city Agency SWM connection permit issuance City Agency Billing and collection of monthly service charges city Agency Inspection of developer projects city Agency Installation of Sanitary Sewer Masterplan City 21" and under, Projects Agency 24" & up Agency Installation of Masterplan Pump Station Agency Agency Installation of SWM Masterplan Projects city Agency Erosion control permit issuance City Agency Erosion control inspection Agency Agency Accounting City Agency_ _ Industrial Waste Program Agency Agency Maintaining GIS information City and Agency City and Agency Maintaining system mapping City and Agency City and Agency Maintaining Engineering records of systems City and Agency City and Agency Preparing and revising sanitary sewer masterplans Agency Agency Preparing and revising SWM masterplans Menc~r A ency _ Response to customer billing inquiries City Agency Public information, newsletters, etc., for SWM and Sanitary programs City and Agency City and Agency Flow Monitoring Agency Agency _ Formation and Administration of LID's City and Agency Agency Inspection of Private Facilities City Agency Marking Utilities City Agency Fixture Counting Agency_ Agency Field Yard General Maintenance City Agency t _ Exhibit A f - 11 'til _ 9 - NHNHNHp ! LL ~ Iva. ,s Responsibility rl~ I ro. ~Olu; Boundary RIP, T LEGEND II ~~p Beaverton J b f " ? ® Cornelius ,II ~I f 4 i ,11 _ ~ t Forest Gmve r 1 HilMoro I - a r Tigard Tualatin ~ ~ ul Sherwood ra k 1 r kk F=. Unified Sewerage Agency L}-- Taxbts ~ P~ n f ~t °I" t o t a CITY UNTS Bar*s Beaverton I ~ f II , ~ ~ ~ r7r I I ; I I I ~ ».W Durham Forest Grove IY t _e Gaston I q - l' Hillsboro dy 1, ! li 1 _y, r + 1 i~ C4 .J I I I ~I Lake Cswego i North Plains b _I _ M MA r t ~ I r M Portland 1 RNergrove j \ ) 1 9 h u t + Sherwood fit( J ~ LGk r-. J ,I,: Tigar•1 J, a Tualatin 15C LL5~5NERWGOD 01 41 1 1 ii JIM Twig"rd