The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 06/26/2001 ORIComAL L CITY F TIGARD ®REGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 26,2001 COUNCIL MEETING ILL BE TELEVISED H.l eannie\docskcpkt3 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 Revised June 22, 2001 6941cet#reagh = Agenda items deleted or moved to another section of the agenda. Underline = Agenda items added or relocated to-that section of the agenda. IV j, ov, 1'W Ali f ~1T2 fWVOE iE i'_Q~NVI L~ s at¢uv, 6 {a' fiE&TIN wncMyMakx=r`tltrk ve CITY OF TIGAR® 3 sir , . x Watap v N`n~' '''~r~ r,JUzi I & O 2001 =rte ~ ~°:3®ip.m. , ~a , w r,e y ~~''r': !t.'~~ ftR~t'fn~rx~~ ~ ^cx~~ f „}r~I~7F~ { ~~F✓Y ~."~r.a 5.~~"`~ P rN a4d. Y+tr x4;7 mr~,w y 4~A L36xt~#A<¢~t f~ a 1 'A RD~OR~~s9722y3tY~~~t '{"r a vcu~ex' ~ rau ~ aka i r N .ea" ~-:a PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated: it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 mm. 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 503-639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (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 by calling: 503-639-4171, x309 (voice) or 503-684- 2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - June 26, 2001 page 1 Milli' AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 26, 2001 6:30 PM • STUDY MEETING > PAPERLESS PACKET TRAINING > CONSOLIDATION ISSUES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statue. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Cali to Order - City Council 8z Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 8i Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:40 PM 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted i in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: i 3.1 Approve the Transfer of Funds from the Public Works Operating Appropriation to the General Fund Capital Improvement Program Appropriation for the Police HVAC Replacement Project (Budget Amendment ##9) - Resolution No. 01 - COUNCIL AGENDA - June 26, 2001 page 2 Mimi 3.2 Approve a Four Year Extension of an Intergovernmental Agreement with Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue for Preventative Health and Disease Services 3.3 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Contract with the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department Accepting $50,000 In Grant Funds for the Construction of the Tledeman/Woodard Park Segment of the Fanno Creek Trail 3.4 Adopt a Resolution Acknowledging 20 Years of Excellent Legal Services Rendered by the is, Crew, Corrigan and Bachrach Law Office - Resolution No. 01- 01(9 3.5 Approve a i5WAnnual Cost of Living Salary Adjustment for Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group Employees to Be Effective July 1, 2001 - Resolution No. 01 - S~ 3.6 Adopt a Resolution Reappointing George Burgess and Sydney Sherwood to the Budget Committee, Reappointing Susan Kasson to the Library Board, Appointing Gary Johnson and Jan Thenell to the Library Board, and Appointing Jeffrey Lawton as an Alternate to the Library Board - Resolution No. 01 - 11 3.7 Local Contract Review Board a. Award Construction of Cook Park Phase 1, including Construction of the Wetland Gazebo Area, to Northwest Earthmovers, Inc. 3.8 Approve Budget Amendment #10 to the FY 2000-01 Budget to Transfer $20.000 from the General Fund Contingency to the Policy and Administration Program for Grant Writing Services Provided b Randall Development, Inc. - Resolution No. 01- 3.9 Approve Budget Amendment #1 to the FY 2001-02 Budget to Transfer $48.000 from the Central Services Fund Contingencv to the Policy and Administration Program for Grant Writing Services Provided by Randall Development Inc. - Resolution No. 01-~ g 3.10 Consider A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Submit an Application for The Oregon Economic and Community Development De artment for a Loan to Finance Implementation of the Cook Park Master Plan -Resolution No. O1- (This item was moved. It was formerly listed in the business meeting as Ag da Item No. 7.) • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. COUNCIL AGENDA - June 26, 2001 page 3 7:45 PM 4. INTRODUCTION OF BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS GEORGE BURGESS AND SYDNEY SHERWOOD, LIBRARY BOARD MEMBERS SUSAN KASSON, GARY JOHNSON AND ]AN THENELL, AND LIBRARY BOARD ALTERNATE JEFFREY LAWTON S Mayor Griffith 7:50 PM 5. UPDATE ON WATER SUPPLY a. Staff Report: Public Works Department b. Council Discussion and Direction to Staff (Agenda Order for 6, 7 and B changed to accommodate scheduling for Senator Deckert and Representative Williams). 8:20 PM 6-.8. DISCUSSION WITH STATE SENATOR RYAN DECKERT AND STATE REPRESENTATIVE MAX WILLIAMS &a9 PH 7 CONSIDER A 7Z RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TITtJCr CITY M A AI A GE T`ll'RrP'[CTCiI TO CR--7fT~ SUBMIT AN APPUGATIGN FOR THE OREGON ECONOMIC AND GOMM► IAIITV DEV[1 OPMENT'DE A DT 4ENT CI1D A LOAN TO FIN A AI !MDI EMCAIT A TION GF THE COOK DARK MASTER DI A 1.1 This item relocated to Consent Agenda, Item 3.10. 8:10 PM 8-.7. UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE KOREAN WAR 50T" ANNIVERSARY COMMEMORATIVE COMMUNITY PROJECT a. Staff Report: Finance Staff b. Council Discussion 8:00 PM 6. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) - CONSIDER THE VACATION OF APPROXIMATELY 9,544 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF- WAY KNOWN AS SW 67` AVENUE (VAC2001 -0000 1) The applicant requested that the City Council vacate a portion of the public right-of- way on SW 67th Avenue. The right-of-way lies to the south of SW Clinton Street and to the north of the SW Haines Road southbound off-ramp. This portion of the right-of-way has never been improved and "leads to no where", as it dead-ends into the off-ramp. The applicant intends to construct a two-story office building of COUNCIL AGENDA - June 26, 2001 page 4 24,000 square feet adjacent to SW 67th Avenue and needs the extra square footage for an entrance into the property. Appropriate agencies have been contacted for comments and no objections were received. These include utility companies and emergency service providers. a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges C. Staff Report: Community Development Department d. Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Rebuttal e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Discussion, Questions, Comments g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 01 - C)(P 9:15 PM 10. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-] UDICIAL) - CONSIDER ADOPTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES FOR THE DURHAM QUARRY SITE (CPA2001-00001 /ZOA2001-00001 /ZON2001- 00001) Washington County has requested a comprehensive plan amendment, a zone change and zone ordinance amendment on this property to change it from Industrial Park (I-P) to a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). The purpose is to be consistent with zoning recently adopted on adjacent property in the City of Tualatin in order to facilitate a mixed use development on the existing Durham Quarry site. The Durham Quart' is a 29-acre parcel owned by Washington County. Approximately 21 acres is located within the City of Tualatin and approximately 8 acres in within the City of Tigard. The Quarry has been declared surplus and, therefore, the County wishes to sell it or lease it on a long term lease to a developer. After many months of multi-jurisdictional meetings, it was determined that a mixed use commercial development was a better use of the surplus land than the existing Industrial Park zone would allow. No development applications have been proposed. LOCATION: Corner of 72"d Avenue and Bridgeport; WCTM 2S1 13AC, Tax Lot 01200. ZONE: Existing - Industrial Park (1-P), Proposed - Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.380.030, 18.390.050 and 18.390.060; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 3.3.1, 5.1, 6.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.1.1, 12.1.1 and 12.2.1; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 10, 12 and 13; and Metro Functional Plan Titles 1, 3, 4, 7, and the Regional Transportation Plan. a. Open Public Hearing COUNCIL AGENDA - June 26, 2001 page 5 b. Declarations or Challenges C. Staff Report: Community Development Department d. Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Rebuttal e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Discussion, Questions, Comments g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 01 - 9:45 PM 11. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE DELETING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.58 RELATING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF THE FINANCE DIRECTOR a. Staff Report: Finance Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 01- 9:50 PM 12. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.44.010 RELATING TO THE SALE SUBSTANDARD SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY a. Staff Report: Finance Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 01- Qj 9:55 PM 13. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 10:00 PM 14. NON AGENDA ITEMS 10:05 PM 15. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statue. All discussions are confidential and G those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3), y but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 3 10:10 PM 16. ADJOURNMENT I:\AD M\CATHY\CCA\010626. DCC COUNCIL AGENDA - June 26, 2001 page 6 e Agenda Item No. Meeting of ~1~ • O 1 MINUTES TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 26, 2001 Mayor Griffith called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. Council Present: Mayor Griffith, Councilors Dirksen, Moore, Patton, and Scheckla. STUDY SESSION ➢ PAPERLESS PACKET TRAINING The Council received training on how to navigate through their electronic paperless packets until 7 p.m. ➢ CONSOLIDATION ISSUES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT Police Chief Ron Goodpaster updated Council with regard to talks about consolidating law enforcement in Washington County. He noted that this has been a subject discussed for about the last 20 to 25 years. Mr. Ron Massey has advised Mr. Goodpaster that this is a community issue on which he would like to base his campaign for a congressional seat. Mr. Goodpaster reviewed the Council packet materials including several newspaper articles that are on file with the City Recorder. Mr. Goodpaster noted that the unions support consolidation. Mr. Goodpaster noted that he has three concerns about consolidation :ind whether these items have been addressed: 1. service levels 2. cost 3. local control (cost, equipment) He advised he did not believe that the supporter of this idea had thought out all ramifications. In response to a question from Councilor Patton who said that she did not understand why there was support from the police unions, Mr. Goodpaster said he understands that the unions believe that there is currently duplication and overlapping services that could be addressed, and consolidation would offer an opportunity to lower costs. Mr. Goodpaster noted areas where certain functions have been consolidated and have worked well including police dispatching services and inter-agency teams such as the swat team. He also noted that there are mutual-aid boundzries that were COUNCIL MINUTES June 26, 2001 page 1 working out well and that a consolidated record system is being considered. Discussion followed with regard to the consolidated fire protection district, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF8zR). Mr. Goodpaster noted that it is not known how the structure would be proposed. He cited the differences in activity levels from community to community. If patterned after the TVF81R structure, the wages would be similar throughout the region. City Manager Monahan noted the purpose of bringing this discussion to the Council at this time is to raise the subject for further thought and to start considering what details need to be worked out. Mr. Goodpaster advised he has researched instances where consolidation has occurred. He noted that Oregon funds police services differently than any other location in the United States. He advised that this Is an issue that may be referred to the voters. ➢ ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS - Council agreed to meet with Metro representatives regarding the 2040 Metro Plan on July 30, 2001. - A memo on Council groundrules will be discussed at the July 10, 2001, Study Session. - Kows for Kids on Parade is a fundraising effort for youth. The City has been asked to contribute to this fundraiser. After brief discussion, Council agreed that these types of requests should be submitted and addressed during the budget process. - BAPS Temple - City Manager Monahan noted there was a hearing last night on this land use Issue. He advised that the record had been left open for three weeks for the applicant to respond to issues raised during the hearing. Mr. Monahan cautioned that this item could come to the Council on appeal and, therefore, Council members should be mindful of exparte contacts. Councilor Scheckla advised that he attended the hearing last night. 1. BUSINESS MEETING ' 1.1 The meeting of the Tigard City Council 8z Local Contract Review Board wz.. called to order by Mayor Griffith at 7:39 p.m. 1.2 Council Present: Mayor Griffith, Councilors Dirksen, Moore, Patton, and Scheckla 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 8z Liaison Reports - None. 1.5 Cali to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items - None. I COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 2 Jim 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA Mr. Jack Polaris, 16000 SW Queen Victoria Place, King City, Oregon, advised of his concerns with- an earlier discussion in the Study Session with regard to the consolidation of the police functions. He expressed concern about the "power" held by police agencies. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilor Scheckla requested that items 3.8 and 3.9 be pulled from the Consent Agenda, as he would like to vote "No" on these items. Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Patton, to approve the Consent Agenda minus items 3.8 and 3.9 as follows: 3.1 Approve the Transfer of Funds from the Public Works Operating Appropriation to the General Fund Capital Improvement Program Appropriation for the Police HVAC Replacement Project (Budget Amendment ##9) - Resolution No. 01 - 34 3.2 Approve a Four-Year Extension of an Intergovernmental Agreement with Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue for Preventative Health and Disease Services 3.3 Authorize the City Manager to Sign a Contract with the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department Accepting $50,000 in Grant Funds for the Construction of the Tiedeman/Woodard Park Segment of the Fanno Creek Trail 3.4 Adopt a Resolution Acknowledging 20 Years of Excellent Legal Services Rendered by the Ramis, Crew, Corrigan and Bachrach Law Office - Resolution No. 01- 35 3.5 Approve a 3.5% Annual Cost of Living Salary Adjustment for Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group Employees to Be Effective July 1, 2001 - Resolution No. 01 - 36 3.6 Adopt a Resolution Reappointing George Burgess and Sydney Sherwood to the Budget Committee, Reappointing Susan Kasson to the Library Board, Appointing Gary Johnson and ]an Thenell to the Library Board, and Appointing Jeffrey Lawton as an Alternate to the Library Board - Resolution No. 01 - 37 3.7 Local Contract Review Board a. Award Construction of Cook Park Phase 1, including Construction of the Wetland Gazebo Area, to Northwest Earthmovers, Inc. COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 3 3.10 Consider A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Submit an Application for The Oregon Economic and Community Development Department for a Loan to Finance Implementation of the Cook Park Master Plan - Resolution No. 01- 40 (This item was moved. It was formerly listed in the business meeting as Agenda Item No. 7.) The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present: Mayor Griffith - Yes Councilor Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Patton - Yes Councilor Scheckla - Yes Discussion followed. There was some concern on item 3.7; therefore the Council would also discuss this item further. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to approve items 3.8 and 3.9. The motion was approved by majority vote of Council present: Mayor Griffith - Yes Councilor Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Patton - Yes Councilor Scheckla - No Discussion followed on agenda item 3.7, which was the bid award for Cook Park Expansion Phase 1. Property Manager John Roy from the Public Works department reviewed the staff report and the items considered with the bid documents. The successful bidder, Northwest Earthmovers, Inc., submitted a bid with a base bid being $575,553.30 and an additive bid (to construct a wetland gazebo area) of $60,000.00. Representatives from Crestview Construction, Inc. contested the award of bid citing the fact that they had a lower base bid. Mr. Roy advised that under the purchasing rules for the City of Tigard, the City is allowed to award a bid based on the total bid amount. City Attorney Ramis confirmed that there was no violation of the bid process. Representatives from Crestview suggested that the City could award two bids with one contractor to do the base bid and one contractor to perform the additive work. City Attorney Ramis noted that the City reserves the right to make the choice COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 4 solely on the base bid or the base bid plus the additive bid. The controlling authority for this bid award Is the City of Tigard ordinances and Mr. Ramis said he supports the conclusions of staff with regard to the recommendation that the bid be awarded to Northwest Earthmovers, Inc. Councilors Moore and Patton advised that they believed the rules are clear with regard to the bid award and that the lowest total bid was received from Northwest Earthmovers, Inc. Councilor Scheckla advised that he thought this language should be clarified for future interpretation. City Attorney Ramis advised that he thought that the rules governing this action were clear. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to award the bid for Cook Park Expansion Phase 1 to Northwest Earthmovers, Inc. The motion was approved by majority vote of Council present: Mayor Griffith - Yes Councilor Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Patton - Yes Councilor Scheckla - Abstained 4. INTRODUCTION OF BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS GEORGE BURGESS AND SYDNEY SHERWOOD, LIBRARY BOARD MEMBERS SUSAN KASSON, GARY JOHNSON AND JAN THENELL, AND LIBRARY BOARD ALTERNATE JEFFREY LAWTON Mayor Griffith introduced Sydney Sherwood, Susan Kasson, and Jeffrey Lawton who were recently appointed to Board positions. The Mayor distributed City of Tigard pins to the newly appointed Board and Committee members. 5. UPDATE ON WATER SUPPLY Public Works Director Ed Wegner introduced Dennis Koellermeier, newly hired Utility 1 Manager for the City of Tigard. i i Mr. Wegner advised that the City of Tigard Is working to assure an adequate water supply. He noted that Portland and the metro water suppliers are working together. i Mr. Koellermeier reviewed the status of the current activities and projects relating to short-term water supply issues including conservation efforts, improvements to the COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 5 distribution system and discussions of new sources with Tigard's suppliers. This information is summarized in the staff report, which is on file with the City Recorder. The City of Tigard should be able to meet this summer's demands; however, the City needs to be resourceful with regard to conservation. It was noted that Tigard citizens have been conserving. Even though the population has increased, water usage has been kept under control. In response to a question from Mayor Griffith, Public Works Director Wegner noted that water Is obtained from the City of Portland and supplemented by existing wells, a supply from Tualatin Valley Water District, and storage. Mayor Griffith urged that the staff' continue to remind people to conserve water. Articles have appeared in the Cityscape and a weekly column has been planned for the Tigard Times. In response to a question from Mayor Griffith, Mr. Wegner advised that there has been no evidence of lead In Tigard's water system. He referred to the Portland experience and noted that some of the older homes in Portland have lead solder in water pipes, which places lead into the water. In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Wegner advised that the Portland water rates are based on a formula that charges the City a penalty with what Is termed a "peaking" factor. 6. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-] UDICIAL) - CONSIDER THE VACATION OF APPROXIMATELY 9,544 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY KNOWN AS SW 67T" AVENUE (VAC2001 -0000 1) The applicant requested that the City Council vacate a portion of the public right of way on SW 671 Avenue. The right of way lies to the south of SW Clinton Street and to the north of the SW Haines Road southbound off-ramp. This portion of the right- of-way has never been improved and "leads to no where", as it dead-ends into the off- ramp. The applicant intends to construct a two-story office building of 24,000 square feet adjacent to SW 67th Avenue and needs the extra squai-a footage for an entrance Into the property. I Appropriate agencies have been contacted for comments and no objections were received. These include utility companies and emergency service providers. a. Public Hearing was opened by Mayor Griffith. b. Declarations or Challenges - Mayor Griffith asked the following questions: ` Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 6 Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? Councilor Scheckla noted that he is familiar with the location. All Council members indicated that they familiarized themselves with the application. There were no challenges. C. Community Development Director Hendryx reviewed the staff report, which is on file with the City Recorder. d. Public Testimony Mayor Griffith read the following statement: - for all those wishing to testify, please be aware that failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the Council and parties an opportunity to respond to the issue will preclude an appeal to the land Use Board of Appeals on this issue. Testimony and evidence must be directed toward the criteria described by staff or other criteria in the plan or land use regulation, which you believe, apply to the decision. Proponents • Gordon Root, 19935 SW Opole Road, Sherwood, Oregon, noted that he is the applicant for this vacation proposal. Mr. Root described the configuration for a proposed development should this vacation of right of way be granted. He noted that adjoining property owners had supplied him with statements of consent in support of his vacation request. In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Root advised that six people attended a recent neighborhood meeting where he described what he was proposing to do at this property. e. Staff Recommendation: Community Development Director recommended approval of the proposed vacation. f. Mayor Griffith closed the Public Hearing. g. Council Consideration: Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Patton, to adopt Ordinance No. 01-06. COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 7 ORDINANCE NO. 01-06 - AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE VACATION OF APPROXIMATELY 9,544 SQUARE FEET OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ON SW 67TH AVENUE IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON (VAC2001 -0000 1). The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present: Mayor Griffith - Yes Councilor Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Patton - Yes Councilor Scheckla - Yes (Agenda Item No. 8 was considered at this time.) 7. UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE KOREAN WAR 50TH ANNIVERSARY COMMEMORATIVE COMMUNITY PROJECT City Manager Monahan reviewed the activities of the City of Tigard, which is a Korean War 501 Anniversary Commemorative Community. A list of the activities for the first year is contained in the staff report, which is on file with the City Recorder. 8. DISCUSSION WITH STATE SENATOR RYAN DECKERT AND STATE REPRESENTATIVE MAX WILLIAMS (Note: State Representative Max Williams was not able to attend this meeting.) Senator Deckert was present and advised the City Council that the Senate has almost completed their work this session. He said it was a good session for the most part. He noted recent transportation funding approval where this district will receive a higher percentage of the funds when compared statewide. Senator Deckert announced that the commuter rail project has been funded with $23 million allocated this biennium and $15 million scheduled to be funded next biennium. Senator Deckert reported on education. Tigard and Beaverton school districts will need to make financial cuts of approximately $1.5 million. Senator Deckers noted that it was important to provide incentive for local voters to invest In new schools. In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla regarding Senate Bill 479 concerning limiting utility fees, Senator Deckert advised that he now opposes this Bill noting that all Jurisdictions should be subject to the same rules. He said that the COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 8 ,f City of Ashland has been providing cable and television services. Senator Deckert commented on the local franchise fees charged by communities and advised he supported local control of communities. There was discussion on proposals that have surfaced this legislative session that preempts cities from legislating activities In certain instances. Councilors Patton and Dirksen noted that it is problematic when the legislature usurps local control, which then makes it difficult to respond to local citizens' concerns. Councilor Patton thanked Senator Deckert for being responsive to the City Council and for his availability to the Council to hear concerns. 9. (City Recorder's Note: Due to amendments to the Agenda, there was no Item No. 9 assigned.) 10. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-)UDICIAL) - CONSIDER ADOPTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES FOR THE DURHAM QUARRY SITE (CPA2001-00001 /ZOA2001-00001 /ZON2001- 00001) Washington County has requested a comprehensive plan amendment, a zone change and zone ordinance amendment on this property to change it from Industrial Park (I-P) to a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). The purpose is to be consistent with zoning recently adopted on adjacent property in the City of Tualatin in order to facilitate a mixed-use development on the existing Durham Quarry site. The Durham Quarry is a 29-acre parcel owned by Washington County. Approximately 21 acres Is located within the City of Tualatin and approximately 8 acres is within the City of Tigard. The Quarry has been declared surplus and, therefore, the County wishes to sell it or lease it on a long- tenm lease to a developer. After many months of multi-jurisdictional meetings, it was determined that a mixed-use commercial development was a better use of the surplus land than the existing Industrial Park zone would allow. No development applications have been proposed. LOCATION: Corner of 72,d Avenue and Bridgeport; WCTM 2S113AC, Tax Lot 01200. ZONE: Existing - Industrial Park (I-P), Proposed - Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.380.030, 18.390.050 and 18.390.060; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 3.3.1, 5.1, 6.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.1.1, 12. 1.1 and 12.2.1; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 10, 12 and ` 13; and Metro Functional Plan Titles 1, 3, 4, 7, and the Regional Transportation Plan. COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 9 1111M 1111111 111NE momi a. Mayor Griffith opened the Public Hearing. b. Declarations or Challenges - Mayor Griffith asked the following questions: Do any members of Council wish to report any ex pane contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? Councilor Scheckla noted that he drives through this area regularly. Councilor Moore noted that this item has been discussed previously by the City Council; however, there were no development proposals discussed. All City Council members indicated they were familiar with this agenda Item. There were no challenges expressed. Legal Counsel Ramis noted that if, during the course of the hearing, infonnation that had been heard previously by the City Council will affect a member's vote, then they should so advise. Councilor Moore said that the information presented to the City Council to date has not swayed his opinion. C. Community Development Director reviewed the Staff Report, whlch Is on file with the City Recorder. The City Council is considering amending the Comprehensive Plan Text and Map and Development Code Text and Zoning Map to allow an MUC-1 designation on a portion of the Durham Quarry located in the City of Tigard. In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Community Development Director Hendryx advised that the City Manager from Durham has been Involved with the project throughout the process. d. Public Testimony - Mayor Griffith read the following statement: For all those wishing to testify, please be aware that failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the Council and parties an opportunity to respond to the Issue will preclude an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals on this issue. Testimony and evidence must be directed toward the criteria described by staff or COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 10 other criteria in the plan or land use regulation, which you believe, apply to the decision. Proponents • Frank Angelo, 620 SW Main, Suite 201, Portland, Oregon 97205 and Larry Eisenberg of Washington County presented Introductory remarks to the City Council. Mr. Eisenberg noted that two years have been spent in developing a viable concept for a mixed-use development. Also he noted that traffic Issues need to be addressed for this area. The purpose of the hearing tonight Is to create a uniform zoning for a master plan for the parcels that are located within both the Cities of Tigard and Tualatin. Mr. Angelo reviewed the details of the request, which Include the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for a mixed-use development and the Development Code amendments. The Cities of Tigard, Tualatin, and Durham have worked together in developing a proposal. The Washington Square Plan was used as a model; however, it Is not an exact replication. An intergovernmental agreement will be needed between Tigard and Tualatin with regard to review authority and process. Traffic is a major Issue, which can be more specifically addressed once a development proposal is submitted. The City of Tualatin has adopted a mixed-use commercial designation. In response to a question from Mayor Griffith, Mr. Angelo advised that the proposed rebuild of the intersection near this location is under review by the Oregon Department of Transportation. An area traffic study is needed. In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Eisenberg advised that the Tri Met transfer station has been considered. There will be a need to reconfigure the site. It is anticipated that there will be an opportunity to expand the number of vehicles that could utilize the transfer site. Community Development Director Hendryx noted that staff recommends approval of the proposed ordinance. COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 11 Councilor Patton commented on the Planning Commission's recommendations. She said that she did not think that the City Council should attempt to designate a certain amount of residential units and was In favor of retaining flexibility on the number of residential units. She advised there was no need for additional units in this instance for density requirements. e. Mayor Griffith closed the Public Hearing. f Council Consideration: ORDINANCE NO. 01-07 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES FOR THE DURHAM QUARRY SITE (CPA2001-0001 /ZOA2001 - 00001/ZON2001.00001) Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Dirksen, to adopt Ordinance No. 01-07. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present: Mayor Griffith - Yes Councilor Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Patton - Yes Councilor Scheckla - Yes 11. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE DELETING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.58 RELATING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF THE FINANCE DIRECTOR Finance Director Prosser reviewed the Staff Report, which is on file with the City Recorder. Section 2.58 of the Tigard Municipal Code contains outdated procedures governing the appointment of the Finance Director. City Manager Monahan noted that under the Council/Manager form of government, the City ' Manager appoints department heads. In response to a question from Councilor i Scheckla, City Attorney Ramis advised that the Code was originally written with the current language for the Finance Director when Tigard was a small community. j Initially, the City Council had direct control over the Finance Director; however, the ' City has now developed a more sophisticated method for management. COUNCIL MINUTES - ]une 26, 2001 page 12 ORDINANCE NO. 01-08 - AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.58 RELATING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF THE FINANCE DIRECTOR. Motion by Councilor Patton, seconded by Councilor Dirksen, to adopt Ordinance No. 01-08. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present: Mayor Griffith - Yes Councilor Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Patton - Yes Councilor Scheckla - Yes 12. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.44.010 RELATING TO THE SALE SUBSTANDARD SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY Finance Director Prosser presented the staff report, which is on file with the City Recorder. The proposed amendments would allow greater flexibility in the method of issuing notification of sale and allowing City Council to establish terms and conditions. ORDINANCE NO. 01-09 - AND ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3.44.010 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE SALE OF SUBSTANDARD SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY. Motion by Councilor Patton, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, to adopt Ordinance No. 01-09. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present: Mayor Griffith - Yes Councilor Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Patton - Yes Councilor Scheckla - Yes 13. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS - None. > Study Meeting items were continued at 9:25 p.m. COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 13 • The 1-5/217 Project Grand Opening will occur on July 10. City Manager Monahan advised Council that the City of Tigard participated in the commemorative edition of the Tigard Times for this project by submitting a one- quarter page advertisement at a cost of $385. Mr. Monahan advised that this money was not budgeted; however, he was not attending a conference that had been budgeted and therefore funds are available to pay for this expenditure. Council consensus was for support of this advertisement. • Council discussed the National League of Cities conference to be held in December In Atlanta, Georgia. All City Council members are planning to attend. 14. NON AGENDA ITEMS: None. 15. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Canceled 16. AD30URNMENT: 9:38 p.m. Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder M or, i r Da e1 o 1A4DMICATWCCM1010626.D0C COUNCIL MINUTES - June 26, 2001 page 14 N11111 11111 111111 111111011 ills COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)684-0360 N otice 'l1 9 r, . BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Notic a 8 Legal Notice Advertising ' City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheat Notice 13125 SW Ball. Blvd. * Tigard, Oregon 97223 ' ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Accounts Payable AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) I, Kathy Snyder being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director, or his principal clerk, of the m; cgs rd-'mil ] at in Tj rues a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at T; ga rr3 in the aforesaid county and state; that the Public Ilea ringZ('PA2001 -00001 a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for OIdE -successive and consecutive in the following issues: June 7,2001 Subscribed and sworn to ore me this 7th day ant J u ne , 2 0 01 OFFICIAL SEAL ROBIN A BURGESS Not Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBUC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 3445M My Commission Expires: MY c IMM + s WY 1B, 2005 AFFIDAVIT 111"111 1 Iwo The Tigard City Council mee ing to consider the foll"Ing application, originally scheduled' for June 12,_ 2001, has. been " rescheduled and will be heard on JUNE 26, 2001, AT 7:30 P.M. The .meeting will beheld in the Town Hall of the Tigard Civic Center at 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Both public oral and written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be conducted in accordance with ORS 197.763, ORS 227.175, the rules of Chapter 18.390 of the Tigard Municipal Code and any rules and procedures adopted by the•Tigard City Council. Failure to raise an issue in person or by letter at some point prior to the close of the hearing on the request accompanied by statements or . evidence sufficient to allow the Hearings Authority and all parties to respond on the request, precludes an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals based on that issue, and failure to specify the criterion from the Community Development Code or Comprehensive Plan at which a comment is directed precludes an appeal based on that criterion. Further information is available at City Hall and may be obtained from the Community Development Director or City Recorder at the : same location, or by calling 503-639-4171. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2001-00001 ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT (ZOA) 2001-00001/ ZONE CHANGE (ZON) 2001-00001 > DURHAM QUARRY < REQUESTs Washington County has requested a comprehensive plan amendment, a zone change and zone ordinance amendment on this property to change it from Industrial Park (I-P) to a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). The purpose is to be consistent with zoning recently adopted on adjacent property in the City of Tualatin in order to facilitate a mixed use development on the existing Durham Quart' site. The Durham Quarry is a 29-acre parcel owned by Washington County. Approximately 21 acres is located within the City of Tualatin and approximately 8 acres is within the City of Tigard. The Quarry has been declared surplus and, therefore, the County wishes to sell it or lease it on a long term lease to a developer. After many months of multi jurisdictional meetings, it was determined that a mixed use commercial development was a better use of the surplus land than the existing Industrial Park zone would allow. No development applications have been proposed. LOCATION: Corner of 72nd Avenue and Bridgeport; WCTM 2S 113AC tax lot 01200. ZONE: Existing - Industrial Park (I-P). Proposed - Mixed i Use Commercial (MUC-1) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.380.030, 18.390.050 and 18.390.060; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 3.3.1, 5.1, 6.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.1.1, 12. 1.1 and 12.2.1; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 10, 12 and 13; and Metro Functional Plan Titles l,' 3, 4, 7, and the Regional Transportation Plan. . ve~saovr~nr tPA3~100091 1DA1R01-0t!i01 IOiR001~0401 DURHAM l1UNAY A i T19898 - Publish June 7, 2001. CI'T'Y OF TIGARD, OREGON AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING In the Matter of the Proposed STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, Zi gE t_ k A. L7A S i Q tiJ begin first duly sworn, on oath, depose and say: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number (s) D/ - 06 D/ _h D% -D9 which were adopted at the Council Meeting dated Z ~o 2,0101 copy(s) of said ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the _ 0799- day of _ z Lr'2 o_ , 2001 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Library, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 3. Tigard Water Department, 5777 SW Burnham, Tigard, Oregon Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of L, A , 200 L_. + Notary Public for Oregon OFFIc4ALoZAL OLVfiW a~~3 hors My Commission Expires: PUBUC-OREGCW PAY coa~A ~s&o SON NO. 32OW EXPWMS FEB. 11, 2M CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 01- 06' AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE VACATION OF APPROXIMATELY 9,544 SQUARE FEET OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ON SW 67T" AVENUE, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON (VAC2001-00001). WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council initiated this vacation request pursuant to Section 15.08.040 of the Tigard Municipal Code on May 8, 2001, and WHEREAS, the approximately 9,544 square foot portion of the road had previously been dedicated to the public; and WHEREAS, SW 67 h Avenue is unimproved and dead-ends into the SW Haines Road southbound off-ramp of Interstate-5; and WHEREAS, the said portion of public right-of-way is no longer necessary; and WHEREAS, the vacated portion will be used as a second access to the property to the north; and WHEREAS, the City will no longer have maintenance responsibility of this area; and WHEREAS, all affected service providers, including utility companies and emergency service providers, have reviewed the vacation proposal and have provided no objections; and WHEREAS, notice has been mailed to all property owners abutting said vacation area and all owners in the affected area, as described by ORS 271.080; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Tigard Municipal Code 15.08.120, notice of the public hearing was posted in the area to be vacated and published in the newspaper; and WHEREAS, the property owners of the majority of the area affected have not objected in writing; and WHEREAS, the City Council having considered the request at a public hearing on June 26, 2001, finds that it is in the public interest to approve the request to vacate said public right-of-way as the public interest will not be prejudiced by this vacation, as provided by ORS 271.120 and TMC Section 15.08.130. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby orders the vacation of said 9,544 square foot portion of public right-of-way as shown and described on the attached Exhibits B and C (legal description and map of the area to be vacated), and by this reference, made part thereof. ORDINANCE No. Ol-UI.O 0citywide\ord\VAC67diORD.doc Page I of 2 M1 IN 110111 SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, approval by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By l l 60) 1 M014 S vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this L-l Lt' day of .4 k i► , 2001. 'Gatherine Wheatley, City Reco er tvi APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this -day of , 2001. J' G tth, M r Approved as to form: Attorney Date ORDINANCE f4o. 01- is\citywide\ord\VAC67thORD.doc Page 2 of 2 O(OGaAIM1C 1MIoa Y A~T10M SYST(Y VICIMITY MAP lK A„LLrCr ~r Avg i11p- ~ - - - 4 y VAC2001-00001 x A ST M 67th Avenue Clinton Street Public Right-of-Way El~] Q AYLOR ST Street Vacation a d n S.W. SOUTwIEW ST. T N ti } z tD = r `D 3 ; N LINT N ST Approximate Area Being Vacated z ~ y N rn v, a N S.W. DOUGLAS ST. DARTMOUTH ST Ell= 0 100 2030-2°° ,u0 Fvet SW OWGUS OR ~1". 2061ee1 i City of Tigard LU Inlonruuon on this map n for 9°nont toot o" and should ba Yanf sd vnth the DovatoPrnsnt Sir,"' Omslon. Q 13125 SW Hsu Btvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-x171 ELMHURST ST hhgllw r5bgard or of Plot date: Apr 19, 2001; GAmagiCmAGIC03.APR Community Development rnTTa I TTrTTQTnrwT RECENED P KING Exhibit B MAY 0 2 2001 Surveying, Lu• CITY OF TIGARD A Street Vacation Description in the Southeast of Section 36, T. 1 S., R. I W., W.M. S W 67"' , Between Block 13 and Block 14 "West Portland Heights" and North of the 1-5 Freeway soutli`bound off ramp at Haines Rd. as it exists on April 4, 2001. Beginning at the northwest corner of Block 14 "West Portland Heights", said point also being on the east line of SW 67"', Thence south along the west line of black 14 a distance of 142.60 feet, Thence S 61 °37'46"W to the cast line of Block 13 and the southeast corner of Lot 34 "West Portland Heights", a distance of 68.19 feet 'Thence north along the cast line of Block 13 a distance of 175.00 fret, said point also bcinb the Northeast corner of Black 13, Thence east 60.00 feet to the place of beginning. 'This Descripton prepared by Joe H Ferguson, PLS i i J] JOE IA. FERGUSoN. PLS PAUL J MORN. PLS LAWRENCE p BART. PLS 1 18438 SL Ptnc St_ PotTland, )rA:Vn 97233 Ph. (50.3) 618-056-I Fa. (50.;) 665-1503 email: «OI1 !I «Oll urn c) in~.COn1 wCl.itc. wv~,~~p11St1[ c in~.CUnI r w VACATED SW CLINTON ORD 86-16 60.00 BLOCK i BLOCK 14 z O O ro O , O 00 BLOCK 13 o AREA OF I O _ VACATION Ln I 0 N i SCALE; 1" = 50' 00 APRIL 20, 2001 9 I I ' 60 \9p6'~F' 0o0T FENCE i i STREET VACATION SVV 67TH SOUTH OF SW CLINTON 18438 S.E. PINE STREET SE 114 SEC 36 T. 1 S., R. 1 W., WY PORTLAND, OREGON 97233 618-0564 CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON SUNCying, Inc. JOE H. FERGUSON, PLS PAUL J. VORIN, PLS LAWRENCE 0. HART, PLS I will 1111 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 01- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGES FOR THE DURHAM QUARRY SITE (CPA2001-00001/ ZOA2001-00001/ZON2001-00001). WHEREAS, The Durham Quarry consists of approximately 29 acres of land, 8 of which are located in the City of Tigard and 21 of which are location in the City of Tualatin; and WHEREAS, Tigard, Tualatin and Washington County have worked together to develop a plan for this surplus site which includes the proposed amendments and an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) giving Tualatin review authority for the portion of the site in Tigard; and WHEREAS, the portion of the Durham Quarry site located in the City of Tigard is identified on WCTM 2S 113AC, tax lot 01200; and WHEREAS, the IGA is being developed but has not yet been signed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, which was noticed in accordance with the City standards, on 5-7-01 and voted to recommend approval of the requested amendments with concerns to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission concerns have been adequately addressed by the applicant based on information and testimony provided at a 6-26-01 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing, which was noticed in accordance with City standards, on 6-26-01 and voted to approve the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, the decision to adopt was based on compliance with Oregon Statewide Planning Goals #1, #2, #9, #10, #12 and #13; Metro functional Plan Titles 1, 3, 4, 7, and the Regional Transportation Plan; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 3.3.1, 5.1, 6.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.1.1, 12. 1.1 and 12.2.1; and Community Development Code Chapters 18.380.030, 18.390.050 and 18.390.060 as detailed in the staff report (Exhibit 1). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The requested amendments are approved based on the analysis and findings in the staff report (Exhibit 1). SECTION 2: The adopted comprehensive plan text amendment and development code text amendments, are shown in Exhibits 2 and 3. SECTION 3: The zoning on the property identified as WCTM 2S113AC, tax lot 01200 is changed from I-P to MUC-1. ORDINANCE NO. 01- is 1rplnyuliaicpa\durham quarry adoption ord.doc Page 1 of 2 05/31/01/1:33 PM SECTION 4: The approved amendments and zone change shall not be effective until the IGA has been signed by the City of Tigard and the City of Tualatin.. PASSED: By C1MA-010 is vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this c- U" day of 2001. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorded, APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this, ' day of , 2001. TJes'E-L(Gridth, ay Approved as to form-11 (0 . ity Attorn y - b l --2- Date ORDINANCE NO.01- U i:Urpln\julia\cpa\durham quarry adoption ord.doc Page 2 of 2 05/23/01/4:08 PM Exhibit 1 Agenda Item: 5.1 Hearing Date: May 7.2001 Time: 7:30 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF TIGARD FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON Development Shapi g,A Better collluyuul.%ty SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE NAME: DURHAM QUARRY CASE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) CPA2001-00001 Zone Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) ZOA2001-00001 Zone Change (ZON) ZON 2001-00001 PROPOSAL: Washington County has requested a comprehensive plan amendment, a zone change and zone ordinance amendment on this property to change it from Industrial Park (I-P) to a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). The purpose is to be consistent with zoning recently adopted on adjacent property in the City of Tualatin in order to facilitate a mixed use development on the existing Durham Quarry site. The Durham Quarry is a 29 acre parcel owned by Washington County. Approximately 21 acres is located within the City of Tualatin and approximately 8 acres is within the City of Tigard. The Quarry has been declared surplus and, therefore, the County wishes to sell it or lease it on a long term lease to. a developer. After many months of multi jurisdictional meetings, it was determined that a mixed use commercial development was a better use of the surplus land than the existing Industrial Park zone would allow. No development applications have been proposed. APPLICANT/ Washington County CONSULTANT: Frank Angelo OWNER: Larry Eisenberg Angelo Eaton and Associates 111 SE Washington 620 SW Main, suite 201 Hillsboro, OR 97123 Portland, OR 97205 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Existing - Industrial Park (I-P), Proposed - Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1) LOCATION: Corner of 72nd Avenue and Bridgeport; WCTM 2S113AC tax lot 01200 APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.380.030, 18.390.050 and 18.390.060; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 3.3.1, 5.1, 6.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.1.1, 12.1.1 and 12.2.1; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 10, 12 and 13; and Metro Functional Plan Titles 1, 3, 4, and 7. SECTION I1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of APPROVAL of the requested comprehensive plan amendment, zone ordinance amendment, and zone change to the City Council. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001.00001/ZOA2001-0000117.ON2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 1 OF 12 Ron Exhibit 1 SECTION Ill. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Site History The entire 29 acre property, known as the Durham Quarry, has been operating as a gravel quarry for many years. The property was owned and operated by Washington County. The gravel has been extracted and Washington County has declared the property surplus and wishes to sell it or lease it on a long term lease. Vicinity Information The property to the south of the subject site is the portion of the quarry site in the City of Tualatin. The property to the north is zoned Industrial Park (inside the City of Tigard) and developed with an industrial office complex. The property to the west is in the City of Durham and is zoned and developed residential. To the east is SW 72"1 Avenue and property zoned and developed General Commercial. Site information and proposal description Washington County has requested a comprehensive plan amendment, a zone change and zone ordinance amendment on this property to change it from Industrial Park (I-P) to a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). The purpose is to be consistent with zoning recently adopted on adjacent property in the City of Tualatin in order to facilitate a mixed use development on the existing Durham Quarry site. The Durham Quarry is a 29 acre parcel owned by Washington County. Approximately 21 acres is located within the City of Tualatin and approximately 8 acres is within the City of Tigard. The Quarry has been declared surplus and, therefore, the County wishes to sell it or lease it on a long term lease to a developer. After many months of multi-jurisdictional meetings, it was determined that a mixed use commercial development was a better use of the surplus land than the existing Industrial Park zone would allow. No development applications have been proposed. The City of Tualatin has already adopted essentially the same language that is being proposed with this application with the understanding that both jurisdictions will have the same standards and Tualatin will administer all land use and building permits for the entire quarry site. SECTION IV SUMMARY OF REPORT Applicable criteria, findings and conclusions • Tigard Development Code 18.380 • Tigard Development Code 18.390 • Statewide Planning Goals • Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies • Applicable Metro Standards Additional City staff and outside agency comments Staff analysis, issues and concerns Attachments: 1. Applicant's narrative/proposal (includes proposed text changes as exhibits) 2. Staff revised Comprehensive Plan changes 3. Staff revised Development Code Changes SECTION V. APPLICABLE CRITERIA. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Tigard Development Code 18.380 Chapter 18.380 states that a recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5.7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001-0000120A2001-00001/ZON2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 2 OF 12 min= Exhibit 1 As described within this report, the proposed change is consistent with all applicable comprehensive plan policies, Development Code standards, applicable Metro standards and applicable Statewide Planning Goals. The proposed amendment to the zoning district map will occur concurrently with the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan map from Light Industrial to Mixed Use Commercial, thus the proposed zoning amendments will be compliant with the Comprehensive Plan Map amendment. Compliance with the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies is addressed further in this report. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and As discussed above and within this report, The proposed amendments are consistent with all applicable plan policies, development code standards, applicable Metro standards and applicable statewide land use goals. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. When the Industrial Park (Light Industrial) designation was placed on this property in the Comprehensive Plan, zoning •map and Metro maps, the site was actively operated as a quarry. The land is owned by Washington County. Since that time, the quarry operation has ceased and Washington County has declared the property surplus, thereby resulting in a change in circumstances affecting the property. The cities of Tigard and Tualatin have been working with Washington County to identify an appropriate mix of uses for the site and have agreed to work together to help encourage a high quality, mixed use development on the site. Due to its proximity to 1-5 and arterial roads, it was determined that an industrial use would not be the most economic and efficient use of the land. In addition, because of the existing commercial zone to the south in Tualatin, an industrial zone would not provide an opportunity for a cohesive development over the entire quarry site. FINDING: Based on the analysis above and further in this report, the standards outlined in Section 18.380 have been addressed and satisfied. Tigard Development Code 18.390 Chapter 18.390.060G states that for legislative map and text amendments (comprehensive plan and development code) the recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; e Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; e Any applicable Metro regulations; e Any applicable Comprehensive Plan policies; and e Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. This report addresses the applicable standards listed above and demonstrates that the proposed amendment complies with all applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Metro regulations, Comprehensive Plan policies and provisions of the Development Code. There are no applicable federal or state f regulations other than those previously listed. FINDING: As discussed in detail throughout this report, the proposed amendments comply, or can be conditioned to comply, with the standards outlines in 18.390.060.G. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA20014)0001/ZOA2001-00001IZON2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 3 OF 12 Exhibit 1 Statewide Planning Goals Statewide Planning Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal has been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Section 18.390. Notice was mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject site and notice was published in the Tigard Times prior to the hearing. In addition, after the hearing before the Planning Commission, additional notice will be published prior to the City Council hearing. Two public hearings are held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) in which an opportunity for public input is provided. Statewide Planning Goal 2 - Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The Development Code implements the Comprehensive Plan. The Development Code establishes a process and policies to review changes to the Development Code consistent with Goal 2. The City's plan provides analysis and policies with which to evaluate a request for amending the Code consistent with Goal 2. As discussed within this report, the proposed amendments comply with the Development code and Comprehensive Plan criteria. Statewide Planning Goal 5 - Natural Resources Requires the inventory and protection of natural resources, open spaces, historic areas and sites suitable for removal and processing of mineral and aggregate resources. The Durham Quarry was utilized as a quarry for many years. Tigard assisted in protecting this resource by zoning the property industrial, recognizing the quarry usage needs of the site. Now, however, the quarry has been fully extracted and no longer needs protection as a resource. The County has deemed the land surplus and has proposed a zone change which will allow a more economic and efficient use of the land than if the zone were to remain industrial. Since the quarry use no longer exists, the change would not violate Goal 5. There is also a wetland area identified on Metro maps along the southern portion of the property. The applicant has stated this resource was created as a result of the mining operation. They believe that this can be adequately addressed during development review under the existing USA, Metro and City Sensitive Land standards. Because there are numerous review processes in place and the applicant is well aware of the issue, staff feels comfortable that allowing the property to be zoned as proposed will not, in itself, violate Goal 5 issues. Staff has explained to the applicant that there is a risk that this resource will have to be protected and may affect the development proposal on this property. i Statewide Planning Goal 9 - Economic Development: i The purpose of goal 9 is to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. a This is accomplished in part by requiring Comprehensive Plans to provide an adequate suPPIY of sites s of suitable size, location, etc., for Industrial and Commercial uses and to limit uses on or near sites zoned for specific industrial and commercial uses to those which are compatible with proposed uses. While the proposed amendment will result in less industrially zoned land, the accommodation of a mixture of uses will promote opportunities for a variety of economic activities and will encourage diversity of development. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001.00001/ZOA2001-00001/ZON2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE4 OF 12 III IN= 1111111 111111E 11110 1 Exhibit 1 Statewide Planning Goal 10 - Housing: This goal requires that plans encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at various price ranges and rent levels and allow for flexibility of housing location, type and density. The proposed amendment will allow multi-family residential development at a density of 25-50 units per acre. The City currently complies with this goal by having a variety of density levels in residential zones, however, allowing some residential density within a mixed use development provides another avenue for housing opportunities. Statewide Planning Goal 12 -Transportation: This goal is intended to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. This Goal is implemented by Oregon Administrative Rule 660-12, which is also known as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). Section 660-12-060 states that plan amendments which significantly affect a transportation facility shall assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and level of service of the facility. The applicant has provided a traffic report, prepared by DKS Associates, which states that the change from I-P to MUC-1 on this property will not significantly impact the surrounding transportation system. It is recognized that there are traffic issues in this area, however, these will be addressed once a specific development plan and related traffic study have been submitted. Statewide Planning Goal 13 - Energy Conservation. This goal is intended to encourage uses developed on land to be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles. Priority consideration in land use planning should be given to methods of analysis and implementation measures that will assure achievement of maximum efficiency in energy utilization. The allocation of land and uses permitted on the land should seek to minimize the depletion of non-renewable sources of energy. By providing for mixed uses on this site, it is anticipated that the energy demand will be minimized because fewer and shorter trips will be needed to obtain necessary services. In addition, the applicant has indicated that building design techniques that can promote energy conservation will be considered during future design review stages of the project. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed zoning does not violate applicable statewide land use goals. Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies Policy 1.1.11(a) requires that legislative changes are consistent with statewide planning goals and the regional plan adopted by Metro. The proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goals as addressed above under 'Statewide Planning Goals'. The proposal conforms with the applicable portions of the Metro "Urban Growth Management Functional Plan" that was approved for adoption on October 24, 1996, by Metro as discussed within this report. Citizen Involvement: Policy 2.1.1 states that the City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program and shall assure that citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001-0000120A2001-0000120N2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 5 OF 12 1101111 Millillillill Mill Exhibit 1 The Planning Commission and City Council hearings have been legally advertised. Notice has been sent to property owners within 500' of the subject property to ensure that they will have the opportunity to (earn about the hearing and to participate in it. In addition, a neighborhood meeting was held on June 29, 2000 at the Tigard Fire Department, Station 51, 8935 SW Burnham Street, to present an overview of the proposed amendments to the community in accordance with the City's neighborhood meeting requirements. Policy 3.3.1 states that the City shall support the efforts of Washington County, Beaverton and Metro to ensure the availability of rock mineral resources. The City complied with this Comprehensive Plan criterion by designating the subject site industrial. As mentioned previously in this report, the quarry land is no longer in operation and has been deemed surplus by the County. The applicant has proposed changes to the comprehensive plan, which will delete the last finding discussing the Durham Quarry site. Staff supports this proposed change. Policy 5.1 stated that the City shall promote activities aimed at the diversification of the economic opportunities available to Tigard residents with particular emphasis placed on the growth of the local job market. Policy 5.5 states that the City shall prohibit residential development in commercial and industrial zoning districts except existing single family in mixed use employment shall be considered permitted uses and new multi-family density development shall be permitted and encouraged to develop at R-40 densities. Policy 5.1 is addressed because the proposed zoning will provide for a diverse mix of uses by providing a mix of commercial and residential opportunities on the same site. Policy 5.5 is addressed because the proposed mixed use zoning allows for residential development at a minimum density of 25 units per acre and a maximum of 50 units per acre. Housing: Policy 6.1.1 requires the City shall provide an opportunity for a diversity of housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent levels. This policy is primarily implemented through OAR 660-07, the Metropolitan Housing Rule. The rule requires that the City maintain sufficient residential buildable land to provide the opportunity for at least 50% of new units to be attached single family or multi-family housing and to provide for an overall density of ten units per acre. The City is currently in compliance with this rule. The proposed Durham Quarry Mixed Use Commercial zoning will allow new multi-family developments and will therefore increase the supply of land available for multi-family housing. The current Industrial Park zoning only allows individual caretaker dwellings. Transportation: Policy 8.2.2: The city shall encourage the expansion and use of public transit by locating land intensive uses in close proximity to transitways; Incorporating provisions into the community development code which require development proposals to provide transit facilities; and Supporting efforts by TRI-MET and other groups to provide for the needs of the transit disadvantaged. The Durham Quarry mixed use development will allow the development of more intense land uses in close proximity to existing bus lines on 72nd Avenue and on Lower Scones Ferry Road. In addition, the site is within one-half mile of the Tualatin Park-and-Ride lot. The existing Development Code addresses the provision of transit facilities, therefore, required facilities will be provided when development is proposed on the site. The City of Tigard, together with the City of Tualatin and Washington County, will continue to work with Tri-Met on issues associated with the transit disadvantaged. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001-0000120A2001-00001IZON20014)0001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 6 OF 12 111011ERN 103111 11,1121 101111 - ~NIMJ Exhibit 1 Energy: Policy 9.1.1: The city shall encourage a reduction in energy consumption by increased opportunities for energy conservation and the production of energy from alternative sources. Policy 9.1.3 states that the City shall encourage land use development which emphasizes sound energy conservation design and construction. Allowing mixed use development on the Durham Quarry site will encourage reduction in energy consumption by allowing the opportunity for housing to be located in close proximity to jobs and transit. Locational Criteria: Housing Policy 12.1.1: The city shall provide for housing densities in accordance with applicable Plan Policies; applicable Locational Criteria; and applicable Community Development Code provisions. Medium-High Density and High Density Residential policy 12.1.3.A The following factors will be the determinants of the areas designated for high density on the plan map: (1) Areas which are not committed to low density development; (2) Areas which can be buffered from low density residential areas in order to maximize the privacy of established low density residential areas; (3) Areas which have direct access from a major collector or arterial street; (4) Areas which are not subject to development limitations; (5) Areas where the existing facilities have the capacity for additional development; (6) Areas within one-quarter mile of public transit; (7) Areas within one-quarter mile from neighborhood and general commercial shopping centers or business and office centers; and (8) Areas adjacent to either private or public permanent open space. The Durham Quarry site is not currently committed to low density development. Neighboring uses include a mix of office and residential in the City of Durham to the west, commercial to the east, light industrial to the north, and the remainder of the Durham Quarry site in Tualatin to the south. The existing development code has buffering and screening standards which will protect the existing residential neighborhood in the City of Durham. The Durham Quarry site will have direct access via Bridgeport Road and/or 72nd Avenue, both of which are designated as major collector streets. While there is a potential water resource area on the site (as discussed previously in this report) it is riot believed to be a significant limitation to development in that development could be planned around it and the resource could be incorporated into a development proposal if protected. As described in the applicant's submittal - Exhibit F (traffic impact assessment from DKS), the proposed rezoning from IP to MUC-1 will not significantly impact the City of Tigard's street system. In general, mixed-use development can benefit the transportation system by reducing the overall number of trips by providing more opportunities for employment and retail activities on the site. Any proposed development on the site would necessarily provide transportation improvements sufficient to support proposed new development and land use densities. Water, sewer and stormwater facilities are or will be available to the site when development is proposed. Existing bus lines serve this area via 72nd Avenue and Lower Boones Ferry Road. The applicant has indicated that neighborhood and general commercial shopping, business and office centers will likely be located on the Durham Quarry site, together with any proposed multi-family residential. The Durham City Park is the closest park to the site. It is located approximately one-half mile away. The applicant will be required to provide a minimum of 10 percent landscaping. During the design review process through the City of Tualatin it is anticipated and encouraged that there would be some common areas within the development dedicated and designed for public gatherings. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001.0000120A2001.00001/ZON2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 7 OF 12 Exhibit 1 Policy 12.1.3.6 states that the following factors will be determinants of the density ranges allowed in the medium-high and high density planned areas should the City adopt more than one, high density zone: 1) The topography and natural features of the area and the degree of possible buffering from established low density residential areas; 2) The capacity of the services; 3) The distance from public transit; and 4) The relationship of the site to existing neighborhood and general commercial centers and office and business centers. Given the topography, natural features and degree of possible buffering from the established low- density residential area to the east, the Durham Quarry site is well suited to the proposed density of 25 to 50 units per acre. Existing bus lines serve this area via 72"d Avenue and Lower Boones Ferry Road. Given the relationship of the site to existing neighborhoods and the potential for the on-site development of commercial centers and office and business centers, the Durham Quarry site is well suited for the proposed density of 25 to 50 units per acre as part of the overall mixed-use development. Much discussion occurred with the City and service providers in determining the best use of this land and staff has received no capacity related concerns for this site as a mixed use development. Commercial Policy 12.2.1 A. Provide for commercial development based on the type of use, its size and required trade area B. Apply all applicable plan policies C. Apply the appropriate locational criteria applicable to the scale of the project. The Washington Square Regional Center Plan included amendments to the Comprehensive Plan locational criteria related to Mixed Use developments. The City Council adopted these amendments but delayed implementation until further study was done. In the interim, there are adopted standards that are not formally incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant's proposal calls for some amendments to the Mixed Use Development language already adopted as part of the Washington Square Regional Center. Because the original language has not been incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, the Council will need to adopt a portion of the Mixed Use section which relates to this development. The applicant's submittal (Exhibit A-3) shows the proposed amendments, however, staff has also included an attachment showing the entire language that must be adopted and included in the Comprehensive Plan in order to state that this proposal meets the Comprehensive Plan criteria and standards. The text staff is asking to be adopted is labeled ATTACHMENT 2 FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the proposed amendment complies, or will comply after suggested changes are made, with the applicable Comprehensive Plan standards and criteria. Applicable Metro standards Metro Functional Plan Title 1 - Requirements for Housing and Employment Accommodations Functional Plan policies in Title 1 seek ways to increase the capacity within the urban growth boundary, such as changing local zoning to accommodate development at higher densities in locations supportive of the transportation system. While the City currently complies with density requirements, the proposed amendments allowing mixed use development, including multi-family residential at densities of 25 to 50 dwelling units per acre, are supportive of the intent of Title 1. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001.00001/ZOA2001-000012ON2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 8 OF 12 , oil III - J Exhibit 1 Metro Functional Plan Title 3 - Water Quality, Flood Management, and Fish/Wildlife Habitat Conservation Protect beneficial uses and functional values of water quality and flood management resources by limiting uses in these areas. Establish buffer zones around resource areas to protect from new development. As stated previously in this report, a small portion of the southwest corner of the site appears on Metro's Title 3 map as a wetland area. This portion of the site included quarry operations and has been disturbed. Since this resource is mapped, issues related to Title 3, if any, will be addressed during future development review actions utilizing USA standards as well as the City of Tigard's Sensitive Lands Review standards. Metro Functional Plan Title 4 - Retail in Employment and Industrial Areas This title restricts some types of commercial development in designated Employment and Industrial Areas. The Title 4 "Employment and Industrial Areas Map" designates the Durham Quarry site as an "Employment Area". Metro Code 3.07.420.C states that areas that do not allow retail uses larger than 60,000 square feet in Employment Areas shall continue to prohibit them unless they meet one of the exception criteria. The Durham Quarry site is zoned industrial and designated as an Employment Area on Metro's 2040 Growth Concept map. The. applicant's proposal shows limiting "bulk sales" and "repair-oriented" commercial uses to no larger than 60,000 square feet of gross floor area per building or business, however they have not proposed to limit sales-oriented uses. Metro provided comments to this extent stating that the applicant can either ask for a Title 4 map amendment removing this area as an Employment Area, or restrict the amount of retail to no larger than 60,000 square feet per building or business. Staff asked the applicant to respond. The applicant has stated that they would prefer to amend the zoning regulations to restrict sales-oriented retail and personal services to no more than 60,000 square feet per building or business. Staff has provided an attachment (ATTACHMENT 3, pg. 4) which reflects the changes proposed by the applicant with this additional restriction added. Metro Functional Plan title 7 - The intent of this section is to provide a choice of housing types, that regulation barriers to sufficient and affordable housing are reduced for households of all income levels that live in the region, that.housing opportunities commensurate with the wage rates of jobs are available within each subregion, a process for addressing current and future need for and supply of affordable housing is initiated, and concentrations of poverty are reduced. By providing for a residential* component, the applicant will be providing additional housing opportunities for people within this region. FINDING: Based on the analysis above, the proposed amendments will comply with the applicable Metro standards provided the retail uses are limited to 60,000 square feet per business or use as shown in Attachment 3, pg. 4. SECTION VII. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF AND OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS City of Tigard Police Department, City of Tigard Operations Department have reviewed this proposal and offered no comments or objections City of Tigard Engineering Department has had an opportunity to review this proposal and offered no comments or objections. City of Durham has had an opportunity to review this proposal and pointed out that the subject site map provided in the applicant's submittal (page 3) is incorrect. They indicated that they would likely provide additional comments but none have been received to date. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001-00001/ZOA200140000120N2001.00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 9 OF 12 Exhibit 1 City of Tualatin has had an opportunity to review this proposal and provided comments which are summarized below: The applicant's materials, p. 5, Table 1 states Repair oriented and bulk sales uses are restricted to 60,000 square feet but it does not explain exactly what the restriction is. Further in the materials (Exhibit B, p.7) there is a footnote that states "per building or business". Tualatin recommends that this language be deleted since their code does not have this same limitation. Tualatin's code refers to the 60,000 square feet in terms of building footprint. Staff response: Metro has provided comments indicating that because the property in Tigard is a designated Employment Area, retail uses (including the addition of sales oriented and personal services) must be limited to 60,000 square feet per building or use. Because of this, the restriction must remain on these uses even though this will result in a slight disparity between Tigard and Tualatin standards. Tualatin also pointed out that Exhibit B, p. 2 states that the maximum density of 25 units/acres. Staff has contacted the consultant and determined that this was a typo. Staffs proposed text changes (ATTACHMENT 3, pg. 3) reflects the correct language. Tualatin has concerns that the proposed language (Exhibit C, p. 3, 18.640.200, A.3) refers to the proposed IGA for resolving conflicting standards. Tualatin's language refers to an Architectural Review board which shall resolve conflicting standards based on criteria which a.) give deference to using 18.640 and b.) use the standard that will yield the highest quality development. Tualatin recommends that Tigard incorporate the same criteria into this section (without reference to the Architectural Review Board) because of the potential problems with having criteria and standards in the IGA, which is not a land use document. Staff response: It is staff's understanding that this was proposed the way it was because originally, it was proposed to use the same language as Tualatin, however the City of Tigard does not have an Architectural Review Board. The intent is to allow Tualatin's process to review the entire site, which includes review by the Architectural Review Board. Further, it is staff's understanding that the 'terms" of the IGA would be that Tualatin's process is what is used to review land use proposals on the Tigard property, therefore, it is not a land use decision and will not result in conflicts. In any event, staff found that the applicant had proposed two separate sections to address conflicting standards. - The section referred to by Tualatin has been deleted and there are no references to the IGA in Section 18.640.0408. The final comment from Tualatin is pointing out a typo in Exhibit C, p.5, 18.640.300, G, Parking. The typo currently reads "It there is no alley..." and should read "If there is no alley..." This typo has been corrected in staff's proposed text changes (ATTACHMENT 3, pg. 15). Washington County has had an opportunity to review this proposal and offered no comments or objections. DLCD has had an opportunity to review this proposal and indicated concerns that the proposed code language does not include certainty and direction to ensure that there will be a residential component in future development on the site. DLCD recommends additional code language that provides regulatory measures and incentives to increase the likelihood of mired-use development on the site. One of the measures recommended is to limit the square footage of retail development and of single-use retail structures. It is also suggested that the City consider code language that encourages or requires "vertical" mixed use. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001.00001/ZOA2001.0000120N2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 10 OF 12 Exhibit 1 DLCD also points out that, while the applicant states the designation will not significantly affect the transportation facility, Section 660-12-060 of the Transportation Planning Rule still should be addressed. It is noted that to successfully implement statewide Planning Goal 12, land uses and the transportation system for this area must be integrated and designed to maximize efficiency and reduce reliance on the automobile. Staff response: In response to Metro's comments, as discussed previously in this report, the standards for retail uses will be changed to limit the size of buildings and uses for retail to 60,000 square feet (in accordance with Metro standards). There are no state or regional standards which require a residential component for development proposed on this site. Mixed-use development is encouraged, however, Tigard complies with the housing density requirements throughout the City without this property being included. There is no need, therefore, to place additional requirements on this property to ensure housing is developed. In response to the transportation comments, the applicant does not have a specific developer lined up, nor a proposed transportation system plan for the development. When a specific plan is proposed, it will be reviewed in accordance with the standards of the Development Code with consideration to maximizing efficiency and reducing reliance upon the automobile. This standard will be thoroughly addressed at time of development review. Metro Land use and Planning Growth Management has had an opportunity to review this proposal and have offered comments regarding Title 4 compliance which have been incorporated and addressed within this report. Their comments state that the quarry site is an employment area, designated on the Title 4 maps and as such, cannot allow retail uses larger than 60,000 square feet per building or use without a Title 4 map amendment. Oregon Department of Transportation has reviewed the proposal and has provided the following comments: "as noted ODOT has no objections and has been involved in the process. Our issues pertaining to mitigating traffic impacts on the interchange will be addressed at the development stage." City of Tigard Water Department has reviewed the proposal and has offered the following comments: "It is the intent that Tualatin will also be the provider of water to this site?" Staff response: It is Staff's understanding that Tualatin will be the service provider for the entire development site. The details will be worked out in an Intergovernmental Agreement. SECTION VI STAFF ANALYSIS. ISUES AND CONCERNS Based on the information above, the proposal complies with the applicable Development Code, Comprehensive Plan, Metro and Statewide Planning goal standards with the following exceptions: o Proposal must include the full version of the Washington Square Regional Center language regarding Mixed Use Commercial development adopted into the Comprehensive Plan, and a • Proposal must show that sales-oriented and personal service retail uses will be limited to no more than 60,000 square feet as proposed by the applicant. Provided these changes are made, staff finds that the proposed Comprehensive Plan text and map changes and the Development Code changes meet the applicable standards and can be approved. In addition to these technical issues, staff has concerns about the logistics of the zone change given STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5-7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA20014)0001/ZOA2001-0000120N2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 11 OF 12 Exhibit 1 that the anticipated IGA has not been developed or signed. One of the main reasons for the zone change and staffs support of it is that it will allow an efficient development of the entire quarry site. Staff does not want to allow this zone change to move forward and then have something fall through and be faced with a developer wanting to develop a non-cohesive development on Tigard's portion alone. With that in mind, staff is recommending that the zone change and text amendments be effective upon the signing of the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and the City of Tualatin. April 26. 2001 PREPARED BY: Julia Hajduk DATE Associate Planner April 26. 2001 APPROVED BY: Nadine Smith DATE Long Range Planning Manager i:\Irpln\julia\Durham Quarry staff report.doc STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 5.7-2001 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2001-0000120A2001-0000120N2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY CODE AMENDMENT PAGE 12 OF 12 Exhibit 2 Proposed Tigard Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments For the Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development The following changes are the applicant's proposed changes with modifications by staff as discussed in the staff report. Because portions of the text being amended were adopted as part of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan which has not been implemented and incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan, the italicized text (which represents the text adopted as part of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan) must be adopted and incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan at this time as well. The underline text represents proposed additions and the text with StFike thFoughs, represents proposed deletions. Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Findings Policies & Implementation Strategies, Volume II 1. GENERAL POLICIES IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and the Official Zoning District map will reflect the plan policies and apply the land use categories in the following manner: Strategies a. through j. no change n. Mixed Use Commercial District - Principle development in these areas will be high density office buildings, retail and service uses. MUC districts will encourage larger buildings with parking under, behind or alongside the structures. There are two applicable mixed use commercial zoning districts: MUC and MUC-1. A zoning designation of MUC will also allow mixed-use development and housing at densities of 50 units an acres. paFking under-, behind eF alongside the str-ueturzes- The Regional Center Plan recommends that land around the Washington Square Mall and land immediately west of Highway 297 be designated distrietMUC. A zoning designation of MUC-1 will allow mixed-use development and housing at densities of 25 to 50 units an acre. The MUCH district is applied to the Durham Quarry site. 2. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT - no change. 3. NATURAL FEATURES AND OPEN SPACE - no change. 3.3 NATURAL RESOURCES Findings: CPA 2001-0001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 2, PAGE I OF 4 Finding 1 - no change Finding 2 - [delete] Planning Afea, known as the Dur-ham Pits, whieh is epefated by Washington Getifity. 4. AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCES QUALITY - no change. 5. ECONOMY POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS. (THE DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R-40 DISTRICTS.) Al-M; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERMITTED USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES ; AND WITHIN THE MUC-1 DISTRICT. WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON-RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. 6. HOUSING - no charge. 7. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES - no change. 8. TRANSPORTATION - no change. 9. ENERGY - no change. 10. URBANIZATION - no change. 11. SPECIAL AREAS OF CONCERN - no change. 11.9 [RESERVED FOR WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER] 11.10 DURHAM QUARRY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AREA In 1999, the City of Tigard the City of Tualatin and the property owner Washington County, agreed to work together to encourage a high quality, pedestrian-friendly transit CPA 2001-0001 DURHAM QUARRY ATTACHMENT 2, PAGE 2 OF 4 oriented mixed use development on the site of the Durham Quarry site. Only 7.2 acres of the 28-acre site are within the City of Tigard, the remainder is within the City of Tualatin. The jurisdictions have been working together to develop an intergovernmental agreement wherein the City of Tigard would authorize the City of Tualatin to make land use and building permit decisions for the portion of the quarry site within Tigard. POLICIES 11. THE CITY OF TIGARD WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY AND THE CITY OF TUALATIN TO HELP ASSURE THAT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE DURHAM QUARRY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AREA PROVIDES A HIGH QUALITY URBAN ENVIRONMENT THAT EMPHASIZES PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY. 11.10.2 THE DURHAM QUARRY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AREA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF TUALATIN WHICH WOULD AUTHORIZE THE CITY OF TUALATIN TO MAKE LAND USE AND BUILDING PERMIT DECISIONS FOR THE PORTION OF THE QUARRY SITE WITHIN TIGARD. 11.10.3 A UNIQUE MIXED USE DISTRICT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR THE DURHAM QUARRY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AREA KNOWN AS MUC-1. 11.10.4 THE MUC-1 DISTRICT IS INTENDED TO PROMOTE DEVELOPMENT WHICH ALLOWS A MIX OF USES, INCLUDING RETAIL, SERVICES. OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL. THE MIXED USE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION SHOULD ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO WORK, SHOP AND LIVE IN A COMPACT, PEDESTRIAN- ORIENTED COMMUNITY. 11.10.5 NECESSAR)( PUBLIC FACILITIES INCLUDING SEWER WATER AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES, SHOULD BE IN PLACE, OR PLANNED TO BE CONSTRUCTED, IN TIME TO SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENT. 11.10.6 NECESSARY TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AS DETERMINED BY A TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT, SHOULD BE IN PLACE, OR PLANNED TO BE CONSTRUCTED, IN TIME TO SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENT. 12. LOCATIONAL CRITERIA [NOTE: Section 12.5 added by Washington Square amendments which have not been implemented and incorporated into the comprehensive plan. Portions of the text must be adopted and incorporated as part of this proposal. While the applicant's proposal includes the entirety of the Washington Square adopted text, the text below includes only the pertinent information which must be adopted as part of this proposal. j 12.5.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS INACCORDANCE WITH: a. APPLICABLE PLAN POLICIES; CPA 2001-0001 DURHAM QUARRY ATTACHMENT 2, PAGE 3 OF 4 b. APPLICABLE PURPOSE STATEMENTS; AND C. APPLICABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVISIONS 1. Mixed Use Commercial A. The purpose of the Mixed Use Commercial (MUC) land use designation is: 1. To create a dense mixed-use commercial district that forms the commercial core of the Washington Square Regional Center; 2 To create a high quality, mixed-use commercial district, in conjunction with the City of Tualatin, on the site of the former Durham Quarry 3. To provide opportunities for major retail goods and services, office employment, and housing in close proximity, and with good access to transportation services; 4. To implement the Afetro 2040 Growth Concept and Urban Growth Management Functional Plan for areas designated Regional Center within the City of Tigard. Policies 12.5.2. THE CITY SHALL APPLY A MIXED USE COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR AREAS SHOWNAS REGIONAL CENTER IN THE METRO 2040 GROWTH CONCEPT OR TO OTHER AREAS IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY AS APPROPRIATE FOR MIXED USE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The Community Development Code shall: a. Include a two Mixed Use Commercial District; MUC and MUC-1; CPA 2001-0001' DURHAM QUARRY ATTACHMENT 2, PAGE 4 OF 4 Exhibit 3 Proposed Text Amendments to the Tigard Development Code _ The following changes are the applicant's proposed changes with modifications by staff as discussed in the staff report. The underlined/shaded text represents proposed additions and the text with StRke thiFeUghs, represents proposed deletions. Chapter 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Sections: 18.520.010 Purpose 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts 18.520.030 Uses 18.520.040 Development Standards 18.520.050 Special Limitations on Uses 18.520.060 Additional Development and Design Guidelines 18.520.010 Purpose A. Provide range of commercial services for City residents. One of the major purposes of the regulations governing development in commercial zoning districts is to ensure that a full range of retail and office uses are available throughout the City so that residents can fulfill all or most of their needs within easy driving and, ideally within easy walking and/or biking distance of their homes. The location of land within each commercial district must be carefully selected and design and development standards created to minimize the potential adverse impacts of commercial activity on established residential areas. At the same time, it is important to create more opportunities for mixed use, including residential, commercial and institutional activities, in new and re-developing commercial areas. B. Facilitate economic goals. Another purpose of these regulations is to ensure that there is a full range of economic activities and job opportunities within the City limits, in compliance with the economic goals of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts A. C-N: Neighborhood Commercial District. The C-N zoning district is designed to provide convenience goods and services within a small cluster of stores adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Convenience goods and services are those which are purchased frequently, i.e., at least weekly; for which comparison buying is not required; and which can be sustained in a limited trade area. Such uses include convenience markets, personal services and repair shops. A limited number of other uses, including but not limited to restaurants, gas stations, medical centers, religious institutions, transit-related park-and-ride lots and facilities with drive-up windows, are permitted conditionally. B. C-C: Community Commercial District. The C-C zoning district is designed to provide convenience shopping facilities which meet the regular needs of nearby residential neighborhoods. With a service area of about 1.5 miles, such commercial centers typically range in size from 30,000 - 100,000 gross square feet on sites ranging from 2 - 8 acres. Separated from other commercially-zoned areas by at least one-half mile, community commercial centers are intended to serve several residential neighborhoods, ideally at the intersection of two or more major collector streets or at the intersection of an arterial and collector street. Housing is permitted on or above the second floor of commercial structures CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 1 OF 15 at a density not to exceed 12 units/net acre, e.g., the maximum density permitted in the R- 12 zone. A limited number of other uses, including but not limited to car washes, gas stations, religious institutions, and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the C-C zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well- integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. C. C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non-conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. D. C-P: Professional/Administrative Commercial District The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g., convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R- 40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. E. CBD: Central Business District. The CBD zoning district is designed to provide a concentrated central business district, centered on the City's historic downtown, including a mix of civic, retail and office uses. Single-family attached housing, at a maximum density of 12 units/net acre, equivalent of the R-12 zoning district, and multi-family housing at a minimum density of 32 units/acre, equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted outright. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, utilities, facilities with drive-up windows, medical centers, major event entertainment and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. F. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and 1-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the City through the legislative process. G. '.MUC-9: -`Mixed Use Commercial =:1: The. MUC=1 ,zoning district' iivhich is designs"d to apply to that aortwn:bf.the:Durham Qua'rrv sitewithin theCrty of=Tigard isa'rraixed use':'commercial district`bbunded:bk,72"d venue : Fmdlay~St~eet anel'tha Tigard Tualatin and.:Durham cityJ1nJ1ts -.This'site is':the subjectAof an'intergjovernriiental agreement between~the'cities bf Tiaard and Tualatin ~ Pursuar'rt~to ~tFiat~agreement"the City-of Tualattn'.shall 'furnish all :planning iiuildmg and a's'sociated ^"deveiloggmeidt reuiew/aermit-service's for<;the proper#y:::rThis:ioriirig'`:'dist-(6t461infended 465ffi7Maethe City`-of Tualatin's Mixed Use Cortimercial Merl6t District `=`'Charter"115Z} _-it CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 2 OF •13 "'ee"° it `a vliie'ran :~f u°~ses ln`ctui9in"'comaiierc~al: a n e e of M ea 1 ce n o stn°"°~f e: a HE ni s c ~n~d xa a m m,o NO n is ac e..' edit nna, ses nc ud n to~;ena o~~"'given'~:~en~e`""'rt'alnment'~ancl~tir+o~o~x~ coiic9itionally:Inl,adition`yto:.thy':stand'ai'cls:cif tiFiisciap$er.clevelonmeng+nith(ie his zone is'Su66 cf1to'the tariidard9W18:640: 18.530.030 Uses A. Types of uses. For the purposes of this chapter, there are four kinds of use: 1. A permitted (P) use is a use which is permitted outright, but subject to all of the applicable provisions of this title. If a use is not listed as a permitted use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted use under the provisions of Chapter 18.230; 2. A restricted (R) use is permitted outright providing it is in compliance with special requirements, exceptions or restrictions; 3. A conditional use (C) is a use the approval of which is at the discretion of the Hearings Officer. The approval process and criteria are set forth in Chapters 18.310 and 18.320. If a use is not listed as a conditional use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted use under the provisions of Chapter 18.230; 4. A prohibited (N) use is one which is not permitted in a zoning district under any circumstances. B. Use table. A list of permitted, limited, conditional and prohibited uses in residential zones is presented in Table 18.520.1. C. Accessory structures. 1. Accessory structures are permitted in all commercial zones providing the site is still in compliance with all development standards, including but not limited to setbacks, height, lot coverage and landscaping requirements, of the base zone. All accessory structures shall comply with all requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All accessory structures except those less than 120 square feet in size require a building permit. 2. All freestanding and detached towers, antennas, wind-generating devices and TV receiving dishes, except as otherwise regulated by Wireless Communication Facilities (Chapter 18.798), shall have setbacks equal to or greater than the height of the proposed structure. Suitable protective anti-climb fencing and a landscaped planting screen, in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall be provided and maintained around these structures and accessory attachments. TABLE 18.520.1 USE TABLE: COMMERCIAL ZONES f USE CATEGORY C-N' C-C5 C-G C-P CBD MUE20 MUC-1 I RESIDENTIAL Household Living N RO R" R13 R" R21 Pze Group Living N N C N P N C Transitional Housing N N C N C N C Home Occupation R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 R2 P CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 3 OF 13 TABLE 18.520.1 (Continued) USE TABLE: COMMERCIAL ZONES USE CATEGORY C-N' C-C5 C-G C-P CBD MUE20 MUC=1 CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) Basic Utilities C N N C C C C Colleges N N N N N C C Community Recreation N P N N P C N Cultural Institutions P P P P P P P Day Care P P P P P P P Emergency Services P P P P P P P Medical Centers C N C C C C C Postal Service P P P P P P P Public Support Facilities P P P P P P P Religious Institutions C C P C P P G Schools N N N N N C Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges C C P P P P P COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging N N P R14 P P P Eating and Drinking Establishments C P P R15 P P P Entertainment-Oriented - Major Event Entertainment N N C N C N C - Outdoor Entertainment N N P R15 P N N - Indoor Entertainment P P P P P P P - Adult Entertainment N N C N C N N General Retail - Sales-Oriented P P7 P R18 P R22 R25 - Personal Services P P P P P R22 R25 - Repair-Oriented P P P N P R22 R25 - Bulk Sales N N P N N R22 R25 - Outdoor Sales N N P N N N N - Animal-Related N N N N N P P Motor Vehicle Related - Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N N P/C1Z N C N N - Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair N C8 P/C1Z N R18 R22 R25 - Vehicle Fuel Sales C C C N C N C Office P R9 P P P P P Self-Service Storage N N C N N N N Non-Accessory Parking C C P P P P P INDUSTRIAL Industrial Services N N N N N N N Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial N N N N N R23 N - General Industrial N N N N N N N - Heavy Industrial N N N N N N N Railroad Yards N N N N N N N Research and Development N N N N N R24 K24 Warehouse/Freight Movement N N N N N R24 N Waste-Related N N N N N N N Wholesale Sales N N N N C N N CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 4 OF 13 TABLE 18.520.1 (Continued) USE TABLE: COMMERCIAL ZONES USE CATEGORY C-N' C-C5 C-G C-P CBD MUE2Q MUC-1 OTHER, Agriculture/Horticulture N N N N N N N Cemeteries N N N N N N N Detention Facilities N N C N C N N Heliports N N C C C N N Mining N N N N N N N Wireless Communication Facilities P/R3 P/R3 P/R3 P/R3 P/R3 P/R3 P/R27 Rail Lines/Utility Corridors P P P P P P P Other C4 CIO NA NA C99 NA NA P=Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted 'All permitted and conditional uses subject to special development standards contained in 18.520.050A. 2Permitted subject to requirements Chapter 18.742. 3See Chapter 18.798 Wireless Communication Facilities, requirements for permitted and restricted facilities. 4Uses operating before 7:00 AM and/or after 10:00 PM are conditional uses. 5AII permitted, limited and conditional uses must meet special development standards in 18.520.050B. 6Residential units permitted by right, as a mixed use in conjunction with a commercial development, on or above the second floor of the structure, at densities not to exceed 12 units/net acre. 7Limited to 10,000 gross square feet in size, except retail food and beverage outlets, which are limited to 40,000 gross square feet or less. 81-imited to motor vehicle cleaning only. 9When combined in single structure, each separate establishment shall not exceed 5,000 gross square feet. 1OUses operating before 6:00 AM and/or after 11:00 PM; or drive-up windows are conditional uses. "A single-family unit providing that it is located on the same site with a permitted or conditional use in and is occupied exclusively by a caretaker or superintendent of the permitted or conditional use. Multi-family housing is permitted as part of a PD, subject to Chapter 18.350. 3 12 Cleaning, sales and repair of motor vehicles and light equipment is permitted outright; sales and rental of heavy vehicles and farm equipment and/or storage of recreational vehicles and boats permitted conditionally. 73MUlti-family residential units, developed at R-40 standards, as a mixed-use in conjunction with commercial development on or above the second floor of the structure, only in the C-P District within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road district. CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT- 3, PAGE 5 OF 13 14 Restaurant permitted with restriction in size in conjunction with and on the same parcel as a commercial lodging use. "As accessory to offices or other permitted uses, the total space devoted to a combination of retail sales and eating/drinking establishments may not exceed more than 20% of the entire square footage within the development complex. 16 May not exceed 10% of the total square footage within an office complex. 17Single-family attached and multi-family residential units, developed at R-40 standards, except the area bounded by Fanno Creek, Hall Boulevard, O'Mara, Ash Avenue and Hill Street, within which property zoned for CBD development which shall be designated R-12 PD and shall be developed as planned developments in conformance with the R-12 District standards. 18 Motor vehicle cleaning only. 19Drive-up windows permitted conditionally. 20AII permitted and conditional uses subject to special development standards contained in 18.520.050C. 21 Multi-family residential, at 25 units/gross acre, allowed outright. Pre-existing detached single- family dwellings are permitted outright. 22Retail and sales uses may not exceed 60,000 gross leasable area per building within the Tigard Triangle except for those areas zoned C-G at the time the MUE zoning district was adopted. 23AII activities associated with this use, except employee and customer parking, shall be contained within buildings. 24 Permitted as accessory to a permitted use as long as this use is contained within the same building as the permitted use, and does not exceed the floor area of the Dermitted use. ?SPermitted 6r6vid6atheti se ~is'no lar`a&~•than WOO-" sadare -,feet-of aairOS~=flo®rt rea tier builrfirig-o~'6usiness 26146r ' ..c*.usehc ti i,,.. r r. z..•'-.at a :%-sr':r" .:qs old ilivina~ limited sfo single unitskatYachedanulmulti familt~nclutlon-gt=~buttinot (r f R f l N.F. limited Ito aapartrroents: ~~attached wcontlomiriiums ,fowr~houses wand rowhousesatla tf t '.;:t «ap.r.c~~,.....:•rµ~ .yey,,, rCi1..+x:x:.h.. - . cz, ay Y w43+' :(J-`7 rain riitlm~den'slty"of:25~'~luyelling units~~per~acre and~a=maximuni iiensifv°oft~50 diar'ehing units neracre. 27W1reies6?6n1vas attached to s$ructure:eniithin heiglitlimit =see Chapter 18 798 18.520.040 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 18.310 and 18.320; 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 6 OF 13 B. Development standards. Development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.520.2 below: TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES MUE CBD Residential R-25 STANDARD C-N C-C[4] C-G C-P CBD R-40 R-12 C-G MF DU* AUC-1 Minimum Lot Size 5,000 sq 5,000 sq ft None 6,000 sq None None None None - one - Detached unit ft - - ft - - - 1,480 sq - Boarding, lodging, rooming - - - - It house - - 6,100 sq ft Minimum Lot Width 50 ft 50 It 50 ft 50 ft None None None 50 It None None Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 20 ft 0/20 It [5] 0 ft [6] 0 ft (6] 0/30 ft [7] 20 ft 20 ft 0 ft [6) 20 ft See - Side facing street on comer & 20 ft - - - 0/30 ft [7] 20 It 20 ft - 20 ft 48.640, through lots [1] B - Side yard 0/20 ft [3) 0/20 ft (3] 0/20 ft (3] 0/20 ft [3] 0130 ft [7] 10 ft [9) 10 ft [9] 0/20 ft [3] loft - Side or rear yard abutting more - - - - - - - - 30 ft restrictive zoning district - Rear yard 0/20 ft [3] 0120 ft [3) 0/20 ft [3] 0/20 ft [3] 0/30 ft [7] 20 it [9] 20 ft (9] 0/20 ft [3] 20 ft - Distance between front of - - - - - 20 ft 20 ft - 20 ft garage & _ property line abutting a public or _ private street. Maximum height 35 ft 35 ft 45 ft 45 ft 80 It [8] 60 It 60 ft 45 ft 45 ft 70 ft Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85% 80% 85% 85% 85% 80% 80% 85% 80%1111 90% Minimum Landscape 15% 20% 15% 15% 15% 20% 20 %110] 15% 20% 11°Q Requirement [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 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] See Section 18.520.0508 for site and building design standards. [5] No front yard setback shall be required, except a 20 foot front yard setback shall apply within 50 feet of a residential district. [6] There shall be no minimum front yard setback requirement; however, conditions in Chapters 18.745 and 18.795 must be met. [7] There are no setback requirements, except 30 feet where a commercial use within a district abuts a residential zoning district. [8] The maximum height of any building in the CBD zone within 100 feet of any residential zoning district shall not exceed 40 feet. [9] Where the side or rear yard of attached or multiple-family dwellings abut a more restrictive zoning district, such setbacks shall not be less than 35 feet. [10] Landscaped areas on existing developed property in the CBD shall be retained. Buffering and screening requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745 shall be met for existing and new development. [11] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. "`Multiple-family dwelling unit C-N - Neighborhood Commercial District C-C - Community Commercial District C-G - General Commercial District C-P - Professional/Administrative Office Commercial CBD - Central Business District I MUC1 ~-Mixed Use Cbmmercial CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 7 OF 13 18.520.050 Special Limitations on Uses A. In the C-N zone. Special limitations in the C-N zoning district are as follows: 1. The use shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed structure, except as allowed in Section 3 below; 2. No use shall have a gross floor area greater than 4,000 square feet; 3. Accessory open-air sales, display and/or storage shall be permitted for horticultural and food merchandise only and shall constitute no more than 5% of the gross building floor area of any individual establishment; and 4. Uses operating before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM shall be subject to the conditional use provisions, as governed in Chapter 18.330. B. In the C-C zone. Special limitations in the C-C zoning district are as follows: 1. Such centers shall be developed preferably as a single unit and occupy only one quadrant of the intersection at which it is located; 2. The use shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed structure, except for outside play areas for children's day care facilities, and as allowed in Sections 3 and 4 below; 3. No use shall have a gross floor area greater than 5,000 square feet except for the retail sales of food and beverages, when the maximum floor area shall not exceed 40,000 gross square feet, and all other sales-oriented retail, where the maximum floor area shall not exceed 10,000 gross square feet; 4. Accessory open-air sales, display and/or storage shall be permitted for horticultural and food merchandising uses only shall constitute no more than 5% of the gross building floor area of any individual establishment; 5. Accessory open-air dining or drinking areas shall be permitted for approved eating and drinking establishments or retail food stores only. Outside dining areas are not permitted within 200 feet of any developed residential area. Public or private sidewalk areas around dining areas may not be reduced to less than five feet of clear walkway; and 6. Uses operating before 6:00 AM and/or after 11:00 PM and drive-up windows are subject to conditional use provisions, as governed by Section 18.330. - C. In the MUE zone. Special limitations in the MUE zoning district are as follows: 1. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for all commercial and industrial use types and mixed-use developments shall not exceed 0.40. Residential use types, including transient lodging, shall not be subject to this requirement; { 2. On lots greater than three acres, general retail sales uses are limited to 30,000 square feet of gross leasable area plus one additional square foot of gross leasable area of general retail sales use for each additional four square feet of non-general retail sales use. 17 In tli6 MUC-1 -zone.' In'~addition`=to the standards" of this Chapter: develoomerit :in': the RIIUCA1 ---one is -subject to : Chapter 18.640 s and ' an" Interaovernmental -.'Aciree'rrient betweeri'the cities of Tigard and Tualatin. 18.520.060 Additional Development and Design Guidelines - [No changes.] CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 8 OF 13 ii IN CHAPTER 18.640 DURHAM QUARRY DESIGN STANDARDS Sections: 18.640.010 Purpose 18.640.020 Permitted Uses 18.640.030 Conditional Uses 18.640.040 APplicability 18.640.050 .:.Development Standards 18.640.060 Determining Net Acres 18.640.070 :Not Used 18:640:080 "Not Used 18;640:090 'Mot Used 18:640.100 .iAccess It"6.~2061"MMO, i ' "Standards 4$:84b:30t9 esign`C6mpatibllity:!§6nd6Ms i18?64040'Us 43Lancl's'eap3ngjan'Screening 'L8c640:~500 ' Off=Street Parkin an i=Loadi6g 18:640:600" Environii ental'Staridards 18.640:700 .~'~'1=1oo~iiain`Distric~ 18:640:010 Purpose. The4ourriose of tHis district%'is to recognize and accommodate the'changina commercial/residential'rrearketplace by416WMn '6orrirriercial and°f6sidii ialln ixed usesjri':the -gyn..,,..,:.,-.. 666 imately 7 acre portion'of the Durfiani Quarry.site that are within th i,City of Tigard.in`the Mixes Use Commercial UC=1) Planning District. '.Retail; office :business-services and p'e"rsonall e6Ni6es are emgliasii6d buf residential uses:are also alloinred fA second purpose. is to"recognize that'when developed under .certainregulations'commercial and:6dsid66ua- uses maybe compatible in the'Mixed Use:C6mmerci6i'Di§tri6t: 18.640.020 - Permitted Uses A Permitted uses are those uses permitted outright orwith restrictions Within the-MUC-T.base 0666-bursuant to Section .18.520:030. 18:040.030 Conditional Uses A Conditional uses are those uses allowed conditionally within the MUC-1 base zone pursuant toSection 18.520.030. 18.640.040 Applicability A >These design standards are applied in the City of Tigard to the Durham Quarry-SM. The boundaries of this site are described by the Intergovernmental Adr66hient dated- B. Conflicting standards In addition to the standards 'of 18.520'(Commerci4l:Z6ni6g District) and other applicabI&standards`of the development code;-the following design "standards apply to all development located within the, Durham Quarry AMthin the MUC-1 zone., if a standard found in this section conflicts with another section 'in the Development Code; standards to this section shall govern. CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 9 OF 13 '18:640:050": ~°®evelogment'Standards K DMlopmenM het''&m-6lyRwif6rgi`fi'ii°i able°d elop''menf st`anda?ds 9xcegt yi►fig' r`e' va iarices ' rs-iY IKL ."'•.'+is•:+•(r.f~'LY.-' jtri:•3'N'.YrorfY4ir'. "j.'r.+Flr„„+nY'..'f' .wyc+r.l~!+A(y. ~.••y~ r`4wf+ayY•t>• i5g1, *wwclCeiYJ:Wi•rY+C/pL' and:minorvanances~are-ctranted•in'accordance:wltfirthe terms'of;the~tntergovemmen aAg~eeinent-"between Tigarcf'and'Tuala"tid. B:~: ~Developmenf`standard 1. :Minimum'lo't:area: -None. 2.Mihimum building setbacks: None. 3:-<Excelt~as~determined~in'the•Arcliitectural Review process, maxiriium`bailding setbacks aye: a. ~ Commer'cial. 10`feet frontad!§th§etside. `O interior side and rear: except when the side '~'and fearia50 0e91 dential.'district`it-s~20'feef b:"`•Residen`tia1. ~20~feetfront. 0:"rearand'intenor side:+:except'when the•sid'e and4rear 666f `a 'r'es'idential `disf~ if 0-20'166f.; 20 fis666W&.' 4Minirnurri b~uilcJina tieighf Ezcei3t'f&.theaters,an 1 "cinemas'-which'`can.be onesforv 20 'i -q- K•r: dun- oar~r•s:yv. 'F" ~:}'•:'f'@KY'`'K'N„y....,-,^.~t! 5'~;~axlrriilmbulldin .-hei hts~7:0~tee£y uu:•. i,.+a YYyY wu•smrrres`M' rrxaEM"« ~-"'tiy~r~,tryY- o+bti:7"gh"41 bensity"eguirem ii fS°'ordetermini`nggloor re `aaio. FAR)and~resMdehial" ens ties; 8s~40?U60sh"a11 be ise Wes fa ii'sMfheffo'fZr W i3: The rrzinimum" F1ARif rSonr sidential e e ao it antl mixed- `see eve o W VHi~licfi _nc dd`es%'lfesl8e ltia ~ open 1s 0 HIRi edLu`se18eV O amen S s E70enmal'floor' rya is ncll"~`tle Jrin~the'' alcuiations `of FAf3? 9`yThe minimumtdensltfor4 esidentiaY'oniyn"rolectsts~25=iiintellin~irilts ne~ieacre., 'fiere`is"e~i±ARfor residenfiaf~inly oleos? c~Tliexmaximum~d`ensity~oe lsls iiential `onlv~tir`oiects`is~50`dwelling urn s'f fip .~n`et acre: 18:6 0:060sT' De#er'mining Net Acres Netracresaha1l be determined tiy-subtracfiriglhe:following_land areas froiMh6~6ros acres'(ali of the'aand''includ`ed`in'fHe"`legalidescrlption of tlie`p~o'a_rtylto be rJeve16601:~ A'' ~Tf e'folloiniinq sees tiv eland areas' 5~k~`Land'witfiinafe--:100 year•floodplain: 2 .Land=exceeding %25%slope: 3=~`~D~ainage~ways.antl 4' yy~llVetlands C~ uLaniiedicatedto the libbflc.fde park~purooses D ~L~andt`c]edicated'to the`ciublic fog ngfits=of-viiay :VVfien°actual.inf& afiorrlsrnofayailable':tfie followma formulas may be used _ 1:;:%Smgle=family deVe1opment a'~lo"cafe 20%0 of 4ro"ss.acres 2 Multi-family development induding but not limited to.apartments. condominiuiiis and townFi"ouses''. allocate':15%of'g~ossaci-es:-and E: Land'i roposed fo~'p~ivate'sti'eets: 18.640.'070 Not used 18.640.6-30.. "..`Not used 18640:090. -Not used 18.640:100 :Access ExcegtaS "arovided beloGW no lot shall be"created witliout•lirovision"''for access to"th6-'6dtili6:"right- of way in accords"rice with"`18 705: Such access"`may`be'proVided by lot#rontagebn a" street`orLtiy`creating uninterruiited vehicle anij,tiedestriari4acces's=between'the subiect'1ot•and ~Fie':6u61'ic-street: CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 10 OF 13 18:64®;x®0 of~'~ ®eslgri ~Staoidards. _ A'~ Purpose"anii'Applicability. 1. Design Principles Design standards f&public street improvernents-for.: the...-' Durham Quarry site address several important guiding principlesincluding creating-a'Fiigh=quality mixed use area..,providing_a convenient gedestrian`and bikeway system and utilizing_streetscaiie to create4fil-gh quality image:for:th6 area:, 2 Development Conformance' New deVelopment. includingrerriodelind snd'renovation projects'resulting in non=singlblamily residential uses, are expected to contribute to the cha"r'acter and duaGtybf the'area;<in addition-to meeting'the design'standards described Below-and other.'tleveloprnent`star dards'requieed'by the Development and Building Codes, de`velojiment's wWf be required fo dedicate'and knp"r'ove public streets : connecf to public ac~titees such.s sariifay aewer :wafer>andstorin-`dtaina' a ~and:' arHci Fate>in fundiri" ';future tieY"' .e•'Mrn., '.Se7: oNr4~A F..-->+:rw.''N'--. YY "Prt4i' V u°C"r'sny"~+ Y+y "1n3M •^t,Wv<n." a rta#io"mrw- ubii'Mi royemen' ro eets%withlnr•and urio `ndina the Durf~am. uarr r site B: ~ Si e~"` De""'sign Standarcls `YD'eveloiimenf'sh~all rrieet`thegfoflowingrsi des iinr fanards < onlWiorrand 11Ainor Artenals4 Buildings shal!'occupy a riiiiimumrof Building^~ila'cemenf~ v r,".- •r,.«rn , T.e, 5µu"7 ae.r , 50%'of~lVlaio~~anc#Minor'.~Ai~erial~streeffrontaq~ies..buildings-sFiali be~locatea•at;public street:iritersecfons`on'IVlajor and `Minor Arterials Buildin&etbacks 'See11 8 640 050(8): 5 F~on# iar"d setijack`des gn:~'For se£backs eate"if han OffesfiAan'dY&6ing 'an arcatle `or afliard sui 698 expansion`ofahe'sidewalksfiallsbe4pr"ovia6d' ietw'een a stF'60 re-an'&a "ublic street or accesswa"` ~tf abuddina abutsmore filian one)streetfhe~ eaui~ed mbF&" meritsshall'lie`pra ided=on'all s#reets L~ahdscapmci`'sl allrbe!"de"velopetl'to an"L=1 .r., r. r xyp...:r' -..i r+;4}' :".-r•. m•ir -v.ue c-a.n.-nr-n.., standaid"on aublic streets%and an L=2 s#andard "on accesswaysMlard.surfaced•-areas or modular pavingtma£enals Ben ties and "shall be constructed•withxscored cone e' 6W,* other sfreetYfumishings are'`r`eciui~edrThe`se areasTSfiallscontnbute o3thanini"mum iandscariing'requirements 4WalKway"connection to' buldingrentrances A'"walkway connection ~s requi ed between a Eiwldind s;entrance and"•a,publicsfreet:or°ac'cessway Thewalkways"halletie a aeasf6 feet7wide and paved with scored concrete"or modular p°avan'g`mate"r'ials'~.~Bl'i"il iincs ('.cr ?.tN' , f • :a.r4 .::f+C t:F.arr, J.crr u:_".«: rr-i.' rTY4.Ba.«.^p.;~n?sl;': _ . entrances at a"corner near a public street-intersection "are"reguired:rTheseareasshall contribute to the minimum~landscaping reawrements" 0-*';',r{Parking•location and'Jandscape`desig_n Parkmu`forbuila'ings or y ases4a iacent'to "ut5lic'`street ri' hts=of wa" `shall be'lo'cafed to :the'side orYrear 'new V, ons 'uildiiigs"When bbildin"a s 'or phas_es,are"adiacentto more than 15116' 1 primary street(s) shall be'identifed where'this'reauirement aiiolie°s.' iftlocatedori`.the sitle parking i'slimited to`50% of the street frontage and must be behind a.tandscaped area constructed to ari•L'=1 Landscape•Standard. Tfie minimum.depth ofahe'L-1~Isndscaped area is'five feet or ~s°egual to the`tuilding setback whichever<os greater Intenorside and , ,haw r. f,. -r M rearyards sFiall be landscaped o'a L 2 Landsca~ie Standardf'exceptwher"e~a'side yard abuts°a"tiublic~street =where"it shall"be`landsca~ed~.to~an L-1 :Landscape`Standard.~See 18.'640.'200'(D). C. Building Design Standards • 1- `Non resederitial buildings shall comply with the `following, a ~ 'Ground'floor"windows:' Street-facing'elevationswith~n.the'Bwlding'Setback (0=10 feet 61o66'606 is gfe6e, is shail•include a minimum of 50% of the around fio'b wall area "yiiitti virintlows 'display areas`or'doonniay openings n'I fie grou6tlyf166 wall area sFiall'b`e measured from tFree feet'above'g~ade to nine feet7above'iarade°`the entire width of the`streef facinq•elevation"jThe around flaor.window requirement sti"all be jbet"viiifiiin'tfie'ground flooi :wall area and for"giass`doorwa obernngs o dro" T6*d 16i6l. CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 11 OF 13 [jb%6 50% of the g v~mdow°requi'remen maybe meton ai adiofli elev" anon` as`long` as-all'`ofxhe`tagwrement3siicated 6r, 3:~ 'w:(y • "4^'_ «t' ra~.u . fw .tca;._N....~. 4 tiBuildti`g=facades:Facades,tfiat'face a putilicstieefs"fiah:exfend:nii2maeefhan;50:feet G6i}lioi,t'pioviding at` ei--;i°s`t.one,afthe'foilowing(f eafuees5 'a''`va~iationAiribuif`ding~mafe~ials (ii buiIding-off-sddfbf at 1e66t•_1'foot; (iii) a wall area:that-is'e' ntirel' y separated from other`wail areas by a projection: such as an arcade, or Div) by other desidn:featune hat.retlect the,buildinq's structural~.sVstem: (v) No building'fagadeshalfeixtend for rmore.tlian'300.:feet WI ithout abedestrian 6666'66tion'betwee6 or through the building: c:', Weatherprote'ction:Weafherprotection for?pedestriaris.}such as awnings canopies and arcades shall be provided at buildmcLentrances Weather protection is encou`' 66'66166 '.buOdifi- frontages"abutting?a'put lic,sidewalk or a hard surfaced expansion ofa"''sidewalkand along-building `froii`taQes betitieen a building'ent'r"aice t'..7.w~A'F 'K4J ' 4l~ obl in f M,4=Yve'~Nl~ a 9Haga~ufic-mreg,o ccessw y. R y~..v'•M'•%en. ~ V. S¢: »~,l,YFO'aky+.w:I. G.~'^T iiZ3!'+.5'RY7' Xir i{~sSi..a~.^,~. amt 7R .'~^.s,,•, cl'Bii ild i n` Mlatenals`Plain concrete blocky lain oncree'PP<corru a{edame~'" ood ~Siieef~ress '`oard~or:~inyl sidinci~sliatlt'~besed:s.e eno~~tin"is'h m`ai'~e`"rials ".F7+'na ro. 56% +eYauc,sf ,s:-~ .xim:• .+7oc fc~ -b ounda"tp enaul•~nay lie lain~concre ain~eoncre e~'b"t ere e oundationmatenal+ts~not revealed for~more an 2feet e 4t 6'6fs`antl Roof Qh9'cEXCept'in'°the case"'of olding en`tratice fieatu a oofs shall pe desighed as an extension of the pvrimary rviaterials used for the building--and ~houltl rr"expect+tfie~building's~structur'al system ~ancJ architectural sty7e~Fa"Ise~;fronts a`n'dzfalse'•~oofs~are notrp~rmittedl f..•-Roof-mountedaEQUipment ~Roof'mountedequigment~sliall Ue~creenedtfrom> iv ew N, 1 _ s•"p""•i~.'.e,.: s., „w K y,.~;>~~,.. a^'~us+n3"rs+rw.-env:u-w r..rnu- ,..r,,i;esree+., ++.v w.,. i'rom adjacent.public-s~reets~~~Satellite!:dishes.and~other~commurncationeg~3ipment shall be set back or.~positionei on a~"roofso^that`~ezposure~f~omY`°ad'iacent:aublc sheets is minimized 3 . Residenfial-only and Mixed=Use'Buildings Where"at`Ieast:50:1 /o.ofahe.gross floor=area of the`tiuildin- is'residential shall'comi ly `vi iffi'18:640:,300 D..Landscapih6- h&8& eeriing: 1 Appi'icable Levels: Two levels of landscaping and screenincLstandards are'aoplicatle: The'location"s`where`the landscapmg:ortkreernng ii ~uwred'andahe<depttir he landscaping p-e," de`ening" are defined'in' 18-.6404400 These'standards°pre iiinim m requirements?Higher-standards may'fiesubstituted:as~fond as'all~he~htrtlimifationsare met: a L-1`Low Screen. For general landsi;apmg of,landscaped-and screenedsareas`within parkin9Yot6and along,:166a1 collectohs and local streetialanbng stancJardsa'18 745: Landscaping and•Screeiiinia~'stiall apply In addition~'the.L: 1:`standartl"applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials:`~UVhere~ffe settiack`is`a Minimum ofi"5 feet between the parking lot and a'mai6e,- riicln-76 attenal, tre"es'shall ulanted at 3:'/2 inch calider at a maximum of•28 feet'on center'Shrubs sti'all`b'e' of a yanety'that will pr6yldb'6'3 foot.high screen'and`a'90 /o opacity uiiithinfone'vear.'Groundcover iilants must fully cover the'remainder of laridscape°area `vii'ithin`two years: b. , L-2 General Landscaping. For' general landscabing`ofaandscaped aid sc'ree'ned areas within'riarkinglots and along iocal collectors~and local streets planting standards 18.745 ~ L•andscaping and Screening shall apply.Kln addition:xtrees'shall be '`of28 feet BFirubs bfWded ata minimum 2'/z inch caliper;`at a'!iiaximi]m spacin9 shall le'`of`a size`and'guality'to achieve tte repiii~ei'landscaping"oi-'screenincjteffect within"•two` years. CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 12 OF 13 8:640 300 ~bi3sig ~atlb'~li~tanclat'~s A ? jFronn° acadds 1lKM n?ground- aor common.entn es r a d~i~icixi a n eh'° r f r" eet f'ronfrt§igiall~67!orien't'e- fo`ffe%freel< o o a me o o n o giant elevati©n iv "id v ".ecl.=.$.nt structu"res~musfslie-tloxsriiallecareas:orplanes'"of~5(l0~sauare~feet or.less:hPro' iectiny"`:featur`es'sucli'»as ~po~eFies~~alconles:zbays'aricid`orme~~vvlndowstani:i-oof petlime`nts aye encourages for'str'ucfures:"facing`a"steef`to=crea&isualmterest B. Main entrance:'-'Prima structures'must;u oriented with`thei main,en rancei tiding"tfie ~."rt*nr...;,., ..,,.:n'fn►hi6h.*..th fe;jir`o ~ .ierc...t f.ro, :nt y+s:~+~ .if~tfie,,,.~1s~.~ite 't stre et opo.i ' comer. nay fig e'~ts airt`ehtrance one ed fo`either sfeeet''or of tfie corner. C. Unit`detinition.,"Each`dweliinri unI shall be'em~ohasized by_inclucJi'ng a`~oof alormeror. ay viiindows'"on'the`street='.facing'eleva 'ion'or"by irig a'roof ga(ile ar poich tliatf~faces-flie str"e'et.„Ground-leveVb 61imq'un"ifs sfiall include porches fFiatshall lje'at1east 48 sauare'fieet in area with'"`no dimension`I'e"ss'=tNan sizfeet D. ~Ro~o"fairies:~f2oof~line~offsets~sHalfftie ` ~oviiie$:at'~nfervalsfafK40~eefxortl"e`ssr$o~c eate~tiarie" n ss n ofZtr7iidure"g a- c7' eV'` f eh~" ect in e n oof o f it a offsets e. rnii um146oWern5l onte' i he ~'er$ica I iom er ine. rho on$all'~ E f?cim~ efail? Bird S all e` 3se o marl all uilii nc °roof'I'in` a Apo cfies. In oz's a " 1 sr ft a#-are on=a Rfa stn'Pcrur-es -ee` -facin 7cTl ..Yr_.r. .tYx '-~p.wc'risnran'r +ay ►sAS~ wan vp.e+r. ' ,va~+.R+_ fit-gp:s+t{fAwca-<+ F.-.TWecharncaMUM- ion sii en$`~~"Roof=:mo'i~n-f d-mech"a'T'iical;ea~pmen"t~s~"tfierthan~en~s'~r ventilators:fiall`tielo steden?"constr"cted"so as"$ob`"eFscreenec~from ground= evel'yevi Screening shall be mtegPated wittiextenor=buildmg"design: iS, 'a ..a, ~ Y aw :.arv C ar,Nt M^YY rd Rf' +sax. 1~ y+r rf4*e' J+6s ~ tx.Y'ff'7T"'i•i.~+KS•7'•A-9"St"4bx"~R7'r"`r ,r ~G~Parkina~~Farking~andiloading"areasfmay no`~=-0be~locafeciibetween;the~pnmary"structure(s) y.,. a9„~ro..t~.r.,aar Y-t;:t:^r'ai"b'3+, r-r .+.+n+~ v»:r -e.ewrik=•~{4taaa^ +r . xa....rr 'h•_ w.•.v.' v. ws•y,r-: s~~ihestreett~"onwhicl~rthes$cicture<fronts'.~Alf:~there:.es.no'~al y~ancJ~notofirtivehiclaccess s~from`th'~e'~'st'reef'~ia~kiig°~'mustgbe provided+ x.u r~+w*.su.+:.wscna-. s < F 2.,s•^.r s. .~v ~ aa3,•r.. ' ra,-,rree~~r:rv.r•4'aes ~I ~~'in a garage that isattacheii~$o~he~pnmarvstnicture: '~~~In~a-detache""~'accessoiy3sti~c~uFe lo`cafeciiat~least50~feetrfrom-the~fron ropertv~line or 3 # ln,parlcing Ha"" rff!ie s 8iiI rear<of~fKdsite' H.' Pedestnar circula$ioi% ,z«,..a {y.eery '*c~:-+m+^er. Nx+L'!•-err.'r'.N;. :s. ar._*rr r+ ; .....y ~.o.:~us=andf~~«:xsz^~r; c onn~x.,:ceeect~~•-."^*e~:a:a~crou~~-n.~..;._.. 1~The.on-si$e=pede"stnan`circulat~on system shall b"e'continu.thnd= level`entrarices of:pnmary st~uctu~e(sl°toahe following a`Streetsfiabutting`fhe sites 6'``j..+Commonbuiidinas such aslaundry:'and':rec~ea ion<facilities: c~:at?arking`areas dr~'Sha~eii ~open'siiace'andplay=areas: e~~Ab'utting transit`s'"tops and fAny`oedes'tnan amernty such as iilazas restina'areasand viewpoints! 2 - Tliere1shailAbe'afileas$.one~b6ff than connection to.an:abu ting'street;fionfage foi`•each 200~~lineaf;feet'of,`streef frontage: 18:640:400'x;'-Landscaping and`Screen~ng, See 18:745 18:640:500 `=©ff=Street Pa~kina'andi Loading: See 18:765 18.640x600'` -Environmental Standards:+See'=18:725 18.640.700 Floodplainbis&ict, See 18.775 ®i- Arid. See°18:775 18.640.800 Wetlands Pi"otect; 0-i - CPA2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY EXHIBIT 3, PAGE 13 OF 13 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO.01- CAS AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.58 RELATING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF THE FINANCE DIRECTOR WHEREAS, Tigard Municipal Code section 2.58 contains certain provisions governing the appointment of the Finance Director, and WHEREAS, this code provision is out of date and does not reflect current practice in the City, and WHEREAS, Citywide Personnel Policies, section 2.0, grants the City Manager appointive and removal power over all department directors, including the Finance Director. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Tigard Municipal Code section 2.58 is hereby repealed. SECTION 2: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: ByurlCtnimou,3 vote of all ouncil members present after being read by number and title only, this day of -22001. ~ Li.nt~ L~J • Ll_ Catherine Wheatley, City R rder bpi - APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this PeU day of , 2001. )ames ayor T ved as to form: V* Attorney (-2C.- v~ Date ORDINANCE No. 01 Page 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO.01- Cx? AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3.44.010 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE SALE OF SUBSTANDARD SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY WHEREAS, the City's process for disposal of substandard undeveloped property currently requires a City Council decision and a notice, and WHEREAS, the City's ability to use substandard undeveloped property is limited, and WHEREAS, the pool of potential purchasers of substandard undeveloped property is limited, and WHEREAS, the public interest served by requiring a notice can be satisfied by a public request for proposal process, and WHEREAS, the process can be made more efficient if the City Council can pre-authorize terms and agreement form at its initial meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Section 3.44.010 of the Tigard Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: A. Whenever a particular parcel or parcels is proposed for sale by the city, or a purchase inquiry is made, and the property is classified as substandard undeveloped property, the matter shall be set on the regular council agenda, but no public hearing is required. Except as otherwise provided in this section, notice of the agenda item shall be given to all property owners within 250 feet of the parcel and to any parties who have inquired about the purchase. If the City has issued a request for proposal seeking purchasers of the property and provided the request for proposal to property owners within 250 feet and to those who have inquired about purchasing the property, notice need only be provided to those who have submitted a proposal. After discussion of the agenda item, the Council shall determine whether it will offer the property for sale. B. If the City Council decides to sell the property, it will direct the City Manager or designee to take further action to sell the property. The City Council may authorize the City Manager or designee to publicize as appropriate, determine the existence of interested prospective purchasers, and negotiate for the sale of the property. Nothing in this section shall preclude the City Manager or designee from taking preliminary actions, including publicizing a possible sale, determining the existence of interested prospective purchasers. and issuing a request for proposals prior to the City Council's decision, so long as the City does not enter into a binding agreement without City Council authorization. ORDINANCE No. 01-J ~ Page 1 C. The City Council shall have the final authority to approve or disapprove the final terms of the sale. The City Council may pre-approve terms and the agreement form at the meeting at which it determines to sell the property. If the City Council,4oes not pre- approve terms and the agreement form at its initial meeting or if alternate terms or agreement form are proposed, the City Council shall at a later regularly scheduled council meeting consider approval of the terms and agreement form. SECTION 2: This ordinance sliall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By U f)Un l MOUS vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this; 2y ' day of , 2001. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorde APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this 04 day of , 2001. am es E. G ' th, r Ap roved as to form: Attorney CQ - 2-(,. o 1 Date ORDINANCE No. 01- 0§ Page 2 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) City of Tigard ) I, A. hereby certify: Please Print That I am a JDEPu7-' elTY WFcDeI)EIZ for the City of Tigard, Oregon. That I served notice of the Tigard City Council Fi NA L np--Diaa- LYn~T o1o01 -,06n,-)l . ZoA- Jool - ODanl . ZOI&I a/)/ -,6 0,06 of which the attached is a copy (Marked Exhibit A) upon each of the following named persons on the c?~ day of t.-JGltiz- , 40- ~RDn) , by mailing to each of them at the address shown on the attached list (Marked Exhibit B), said notice is hereto attached, and deposited in the United States Mail on the dS day of %-T~L.n1 , 1:9'J00/ , postage prepaid. Prepared Notice Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 'Ig '~Q~ I. OFFICIAL SEAL D L WIC NOTARY COMMISSION No. 3mm Notary Public of Oregon M MISSION ~ PIRIBS FEB. 11' My Commission Expires: a iJ03 h:\Iogln\oathy\afofmaII r EXHIBIT.A 120 DAYS ° N/A CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL Case Number(s): Comprehensive Plan Amendment [CPA) 2001-00001 / Zone Ordinance Amendment I:ZOM 2001-00001 / Zone Change 130N] 2001-00001 Case Name(s): Durham Quarry Name of Owner(s): Washington Count Name of Applicant: Washington County, Attn: Larry Eisenberg Address of Applicant: 111 SE Washington Hillsboro, OR 97123 Location: Corner of 72nd Ave. and Bridgeport; WCTM 2S113AC, tax lot 01200 Request: ➢ THE CITY COUNCIL HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS APPLICATION ON JUNE 26, 2001: Washington County has requested a comprehensive plan amendment, a zone change and zone ordinance amendment on this property to change it from Industrial Park (I-P) to a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). The purpose is to be consistent with zoning recently adopted on adjacent property in the City of Tualatin in order to facilitate a mixed use development on the existing Durham Quarry site. The Durham Quarry is a 29 acre parcel owned by Washington County. Approximately 21 acres is located within the City of Tualatin and approximately 8 acres in within the City of Tigard. The Quarry has been declared surplus and, therefore, the County wishes to sell it or lease it on a long term lease to a developer. After many months of multi-jurisdictional meetings, it was determined that a mixed use commercial development was a better use of the surplus land than the existing Industrial Park zone would allow. No development applications have been proposed. Action: ➢ ❑ Approval as Requested ❑ Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice of the hearing was published in the newspaper and mailed to: ® Owners of Record within the Required Distance ® Affected Governmental Agencies ❑ The Affected Citizen Involvement Team Facilitator® The Applicant and Owner(s) Final Decision:% FTHE DECISION WAS SIGNED ON AND BECOMES EFFECTIVE ON The adopted findings of fa , decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. Appeal: A review of this decision may be obtained by filing a notice of intent with the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) according to their procedures. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Division or the City Recorder at (503) 639-4171. CPA 2009-0009 DURHAM QUARRY "Smooth Feed 5heets'*m Use template for 516919 EXHIBIT-0- Frank Angelo Washington County Angelo Eaton and Associates Attn: Lamy Eisenberg 620 SW Main, suite 201 111 SE Washington Portland, OR 97205 Hillsboro, OR 97123 n~ AVERye Address Labels Laser 5961 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL STUDY MEETING June 26, 2001 - 6:30 p.m. The Study Meeting Is held in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room. Enter at the back of Town Hall. The Council encourages Interested citizens to attend all or part of the meeting. If the number of attendees exceeds the capadty of the Conference Room, the Council may move the Study Meeting to the Town Hall. > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go Into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statue. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any flnal action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: 0 Tonight's Meeting: Article distributed (for discussion on Consolidation Issues In Law Enforcement) "Regional Policing is not the Ultimate Solution" - 0 Discuss Special Council Meeting(s) - Monday 7/30 - Meeting with Metro Representatives concerning 2040 Growth Concept. Tuesday 7131 - Meeting on Right-of-Way Maintenance - or - combine both topics and meet on 7/30? (Metro reps may not be available on 7/31) 0 Review Memo from City Manager Monahan - Council Groundrules Discussion on 7/10? 0 Kows for Kids on Parade - Request for Donation - $1,000 0 Community Newspapers - Request for Purchase of ad In commemorative edition for the completion of the 1-5, 217 Interchange. (1/4 page m $385) -)~-LyAke Qz4~t - a4,4. n./pct;" , a , a , s ~i ;-l 3M SW.T )AY JUNE 21 2001 OPINION Wtim • • not tile ate s. Utio nal IJOIJCmg 1.. largest police unions firmly Regio county's four of the proposal. am 1 support further study there are several reasons not to have a t fr fi f sure police unions are coneemed for the But steal a 1egionaiforce. " e ou eet'strongiY~ Y~ uns and will support t is true that crime knows no borders Someone may safety of the comet ty qty or county. Some of them are political, and I willleave Do you have an ins v they thinkt improve that safety. it in What ion of these to eyed °ffi~ als. about? Rn experienceYou wagtGashare? t have another mo= card in Beaverton and another d iscuss cial Turn' IsanopPor!►niklr toeXg c~s However, tmionsnalpolicing credit ; for supporting Portland, in another city mere also is a sound finan flli gnot yo ursetf Subitil du ? pub comity to have regional p on county's cities Ryan Frank's May 31 article Each city makes a>?udg- „~or004-►t~ati'stlaea' Combining all Washingt licing, n subl P, into one police force would create a union of or a dozen etary decision in June as to pages My yr e ~ pA rb 50p members, a size that rivals spend on exfustrtely fog= { •u more than group would E R~° p assumed that a how much it will agencies. 7 police protecuon.That dots- jgct ~a editing; l2nsvic~~ > e Pot~land's Police union Such a fraud committed in Washing- fh~.prop [ty" based upon the level ted for pubficattor becpr0 etkited to[t i otiate higher salaries and ben- ton county would be ice invests- that of Sion is service needed and the of.The Oregonian aid trio te~tral;dis4~Y efiT~ fko its membe hb ed upon c°mpara- by a regional force 4 ' available. pubiication pu ed is biished!Y►a fi* ble salary andbenefits of the Portland union gated o{her 110Y t: taa would cut down on duplication money for exam. b cedistrlbut of effort While that argument North plains, Southwest 9ureau; Tti Oreganiap,15495 ^ a substantial benefit to union members at has some merit when the con- s1Y l U ll ll pie, has determined that its S.W sequoia Parkway, Patttagd~ Ura 972? a substantial cost to the smaller sties. userv ed are committed necessary level of service is p kr1 { I agree that when consolidation of to 503-968.606 a a x sense, it should be pursued. netted crimes it falls f and two patrol of ,send 1a tax in the same county, Donald H. ottoman a police CM( dude a telephone numberk fi?e can ices makes to the ilisued apart soon as the criminal officers. To fund that level of reach you during the day ' w'Wr However, it should not be p crosses county lines, which service, the city has adopted a salary range detriment of smaller sties that barely are happensoften. lice officers that starts at $2,150 per able to provide what they deem necessary for limite re- r f these servmonth. not be able service and would see local services dsmin- There are sound re soon o are provided sarttelevel of service ishbecausethecostsincreased gional police services. The Washingt Sheriffs office enforcement, abefca s e r ices, such as dispatch, on a °n C th County level of er cost, it should be left to local countywide basis. Regional storage of evi- also has determined e evel officers a the I»gh pay good use of the re" essarY and can Pay its entry government to determine the level of service Donald 11otterPnan is the North Plains city dente would be another encies $2,653 per month. necessary and budget accordingly. gional concept law enforcement agencies $2,65 already work cooperatively in investigating if the sheriffs office provided regional 130- a oregoniati s article stated that the manager. Th, crime without being a part of the same licing North plains would lose its level of law agency. . . . ..CHOP ONSENCE play big , t. ~ ors i .c n' '~'ljy~`~C"~~ -Y¢iO~ • j EMU . parents z - 1j ~ Z fit:' ~p1~'a„r rr}'~~:ly!"q/1~s~{~~F~,z',~ ,71~ ''~~.c. ~ • II i yes Orid to ruccis n i a in rks:'~►the►tplaYU#4~l nrQhi, 7 ti'cCa ■6 a s e C Haw should o commutAi4y 4 D, av r; <Mosm4k1.g4lA a~ lflnhgClkaffyourdo4` 1 t ' 4 • r n9 complarrltx 7 At their first four or five years. And, e hit recer~fJy with a spate of ofswas- ` u conVlcted thefI y~N1►it1 city', t trying the past eig influen- Tigard(t a z ourdgg r fnanCe. ' r a s bee ry . •4 T"I . the most weeks, I have had the dal years are ch to prepay our tlappea #iksandotherK- -a&dt cntgYfa OR nds-scdt~oo ringlnthe:crh' 1` pleasure of speaking rest oftheir hves. S , - isanda,.,_ .*.=fe[i'"~l'sttlkp~'aotfntQ 9 . for the M T~ with teachers and ad- children wastikas CORRECTION THE PRECEEDING RECORD OR DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN RE-PHOTOGRAPHED TO ASSURE LEGIBILITY OR SEQUENCE AND THEIR IMAGE OR IMAGES APPEAR IMMEDIATLEY HEREAFTER. ➢ Executive Session - The Public Meetings Law authorizes governing bodies to meet In executive session in certain limited situations (ORS 192.660). An "executive session" is defined as "any meeting or part of a meeting of a governing body, which is closed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters." Permissible Purposes for Executive Sessions: 192.660 (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, if the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660 (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660 (c) - To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660 (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this instance.) 192.660 (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660(0- Exempt public records - to consider records that are "exempt by law from public inspection." These records are specifically identified in the Oregon Revised Statutes. 192-660 (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce In which the governing body Is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660 (h) - Legal counsel - Executive session are appropriate for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 192.660 (1) - To review and evaluate, pursuant to standards, criteria, and policy directives adopted by the governing body, the employment-related performance of the chief executive officer, a public officer, employee or staff member unless the affected person requests an open hearing. The standards, criteria and policy directives to be used in evaluating chief executive officers shall be adopted by the governing body in meetings open to the public in which there has been an opportunity for public comment. 192.660 Public investments - to cant' on negotiations under ORS Chapter 293 with private persons or businesses regarding proposed acquisition, exchange or liquidation of public Investments. 192.660 (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. 3M SW-T ® ® )AY JUNE 21 2001 UPI JJ~ ® 0 lL1.t1®11 . ® not the ultimate s® Kegion?i ncing is n® . FO county's four largest police unions firmly t is true that crime knows no borders, But there are several reasons not to have a , copport further gdy of the proposal, I firmly city or county. Someone may steal a regional force. r 4 r= Do ou have an fssueyou f"e sttPg9hl " sure police unions are concerned for the , 14 1#' safe of the community and will support credit card in Beaverton and use it in Some of them are political, and I will leave ji Portland, in another city or in another discussion of these to elected officials. about? M experi$nce you wagt$c~siare? whatyth think nu>t improve that safety. There also is a sound financial reason not Vy Turn is an oppgi~unitX to exp{ SS ' However, unions might have another mo= county. Frank's May 31 article to have regional policing. ;yourself. SubgiIssians sho.qld ba Utz zl ~ for supporting regional Pohan& or a dozen Each city makes a budg- M, sp rpmo ih4ee t~ltev ~ , . agencies? r Regional po hcing, assumed that a pages: MyTur mafer3a:ln combining all Washington County's sties etary decision in lone as to fraud committed in Washing- how much it will spend on ' , exclu5litely jW Qf4 411tatl,sb Y{~ into one police force would create a union of ton County would be investi- police protection. That des ; Jectxp edlttn unsp~tcltetalt►li, more than 500 members, a size that rivals gated by a regional force that Sion is based upon the level ted for,puhlecdttan bem,W .ills Kopetil~ L. Portland's police union Such a group would would cut down on duplication of senzce needed and the i7 . of The 0 fegonlariad mayedi;fo f be able to negotiate higher salaries an d ben- of effort While that argument i money available. publication Publ~sded mater"1ai18~S9 Y = efits for its members based upon compara- has some merit when the con- North Plains, for exam- be, cedlsi nbuted t~ ocher m' oia. Writs ble salary and benefits of the Portland union netted crimes are committed MY TURN ple, has.detemrined that its Southweskl3urau; fhl:Qteti Nap w. a substantial benefit tounionmembeisat ~r 472~4~' asubstantial cost to the smaller sties in the same county, it falls necessary level of service is S W Sequoia Earkway, Pt~tthrld, irt• Donald H. Otterman a police chief and two patrol orsenda fax l at13~96s611'lelt». apart as soon as the criminal officers. To fund that level of clods a; telgphong numaec We- I agree that when consolidation of serv- crosses county beas' winch service, the city has adopted a salary range reach you during the day,=t" K 1.; ices makes sense, it should be pursued However, it should not be pursued to the Ur s .23 1L ~ '+LY NJ Ji 4 detriment of smaller cities that barely are There are sound reasons for limited re- for police officers that starts at $2,150 per gional police services. Some of these sere- month able to provide what they deem necessary ices, such as dispatch, are provided on a The Washington County Sheriffs Office enforcement, because it would not be able service and would see local services dimin- countywide basis. Regional storage of evi- also has determined the level of service nec- to afford to pay for the same level of service ish because the costs increased. dgnce would be another good use of the re- and can pay its entry level officers at the higher cost It should be left to local ~ work assary per month. government to determine the level of service gional concept law enforcement agencies crime dy without t being eing a cooperatively part in of investigating the same $2, If 653 the sheriffs office provided regional po- necessary and budget accordingly. Donald H. Otterman is the North Plains city ' agency. licing, North Plains would lose its level of law The Oregonian's article stated that the manager. ~ -.mow _ . Parents Vlay big r®le CORRESPONSENCE / a .r.; , i..• I i !;=eT`,~ S„f~ t*.'!`~''3, 'Y'.a4~'V~Aj.3~'~tP;''•k. in a -c ° d s education X:~ Y How 'should alcomnwnity resod wring the past eight their first four or five years. And, weeks, I have had the to me, these are the most influen- D ensure of speaking dal ears in which to prepare our ~ n9a~hasbeeph/treter~lywlthasFatg'oa`afswa~~,r`& o with teachers and ad- children for the rest of their lives. flkas andQtlrelxac/st g/atl apring lrr fhe_t( ~'~'z~ou!1. L ..,:..:,...,.,.k ~~h~„t~ _ _ 'swastlkas•appeared'atFlaygr"~tmds- MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Bill Monaha t DATE: June 26, 2001 SUBJECT: Council Groundrules Discussion Annually, the City Council reviews the Council Groundrules in either July or August. I have tentatively set the time for discussion of the groundrules for the study session portion of the council meeting on Tuesday, July 10, 2001. Please note that the last section of the existing groundrules states that the groundrules will be submitted for review by council each year in either the July or August workshop meeting. Since Councilor Brian Moore will not be able to attend the workshop meeting on July 17, 2001,1 am suggesting that the council hold the discussion during the July 10 meeting rather than wait until the August 21 workshop meeting. A copy of the groundrules was submitted to council on June 22, 2001, within the Council Newsletter envelope. If council requires any additional information, please let me know. I:UDM0LLVAU40 000NGL GROUNDRULES 2.DOC J 1 i i i i $fu ~s.i AGENDA ITEM # ft) ee FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Consolidation Issues in Law Enforcement PREPARED BY: Ron Goodpaster DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The purpose of this presentation is to provide the Council with information regarding the recent articles on the consolidation of Law Enforcement in Washington County. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action necessary at this time. INFORMATION SUMMARY For approximately the last two years, there has been growing talk and interest in the County regarding the consolidation of all Law Enforcement. The first editorial appeared in the Oregonian on December 11, 1999. Since that time, there have been several additional articles and editorials. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None at this time. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY This topic is related to our Visioning Goals: Public Safety, Community Character & Quality of Life, and Urban and Public Services. ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Big Department Problem Source. 2. The Next Question: Should Washington County have a Single, Consolidated Police Department? 3. Regional Policing, or a Dozen Agencies? 4. TPOA Membership Survey. 5. Sheriff's Office Well-Suited to Serve Smaller Cities (this article is about Multnomah County agencies) 6. County Studies Shared Law Units 7. It's Time to Consolidate Washington County Police FISCAL NOTES None. 1AADM\CITY COUNCIL\COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES\CONSOLIDATION ISSUES - LAW ENFORCEMENT.DOC -The Oregonian Archives Page 1 of 6-111-01 INSIDE • ' q is Search » News » Weather BIG DEPARTMENT PROBLEM SOURCE » Traffic Big department problem source That's a definite no. I » HomeTown agree 100 percent with the police chief that it is a great » Obituaries idea to have people know their police on a one-to-one » The Oregonian basis. MUST CLICKS You get a great deal of problems with a large m Community Forums Washington County police department, as has been „ Email yQSu publicized in the paper. It's a very bad idea, and I would representative like to leave it as it is. TOM FINLEY North Plains » Lottery Results Taxpayers need to see facts The subject isn't new, » An Oregon Century having been around the state and county off and on in CLASSIFIEDS the past few years. Whether it's good or bad, I do not know. » Find ,lobs! NEWSLETTERS However, I do think that the taxpayers should be given an » Find Autos! P Free small » Find Homes updates from opportunity to look at the facts. There are pros and cons » Find Merchandisel Egon Livet on the issue in West Metro. Perhaps a professional poll could give the people a chance to see if there is enough MARKETPLACE Our Advertisers interest to put it on the ballot. s Oregon Bid - Free How to Advertise Listinas! About Us It appears that law enforcement is in favor for the most " yellow Paces! Job Opportunities art, and those known to object so far are among a few » Marketplace! User Guide Guide p Contact Us city and county administrators, chiefs, etc. I suppose NEWSLETTER User Agreement they have their reasons. Privacy Policy » Get free daily email 02000 updates from Oregon Oregon Live Consolidation is going on everywhere in the business Livel All rights world these days to compete in a world market. I certainly » sign up owi reserved can see, at least on the surface, potential savings in records and information shared, communications, vehicles, jurisdiction overlaps, physical facilities, just to name some. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue is looking good, and there was skepticism about it a while back. The people have a right to have a look at the numbers, I think. CHARLES P. PITTS SR. West Slope Plan sounds like a police state I do not think that Washington County should have one large police force. That sounds like a police state. Each community should have its own policing, independently. RUTH MARIE DOBRATZ Beaverton Merging logical, responsible act Merging Washington County's 12 police agencies makes both fiscal and organizational sense. The success of Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue has proven that emergency service consolidation is logical and responsible and assures that local concerns are always addressed promptly. Hopefully, Washington County's political leaders have the good sense to listen to their sworn police officers and to the taxpayers as well. I know that both groups will take a keen interest in what those leaders say and do regarding this issue in the coming weeks and months. RON MASSEY Cedar Mill http://nllI.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=OECA809FAB254FC6&p_docnum=i 6/18/ rnv~ The (Oregonian Archives Page 1 of Ila iras~ea~ch » News Weather THE NEXT QUESTION SHOULD WASHINGTON » Traffic COUNTY HAVE A SINGLE, CONSOLIDATED POLICE » HomeTown DEPARTMENT? » Obituaries Ron Massey, an advertising salesman who lives in Cedar » The Oregonian Mill, is on a campaign to merge the county's 12 police agencies into one Portland-sized department. He MUST CLICKS contends that consolidation would rid taxpayers of an s Community FottLms inefficient, ineffective and costly police service. Now, , E-mail your when crimes cross city and county borders, officers from representative each jurisdiction must investigate them, often duplicating . Lottery Results efforts. is An Oregon Canturv Washington County Sheriff Jim Spinden and the county's four largest police unions firmly support looking CLASSIFIEDS more closely at the proposal. s Find Jobs! NEWSLETTERS s ElodAutost s Free mail s Find Homes! mates from But at least one police chief and most of the county's s F.lad. Merchandise) OrRgnn Live) elected officials don't like it. They don't want to lose MARKETPLACE autonomous control of how and where officers enforce Our Advertisers the laws. s Oxon Bid - Fred How to Advertise jjstingsl About Us They say a community's approach to policing - for s Ygllow Pawa Job Opportunities instance, whether officers take reports of graffiti or • Marko iacel User Guide Contact Us concentrate on trying to catch stores that sell beer to NEWSLETTER User Agreement teen-agers - reflects local values. Privacy Policy s Get free daily email updates from Oregon ® oo What do you think? Would one large police agency be a Uvel Oregon Live All rights good idea? Would it be more efficient? Or do you like the , Sion up nowt reserved personal touch of having each community's policing be independent? Tell us what you think. We'd like to publish your response. To use The Oregonian's Inside Line, a free service inside the local calling area, dial 503-225-5555 from a touch-tone telephone, then enter category number 6689. Responses will be published in next Thursday's Washington County Weekly. SEARCH AGAIN Y http://nl l l .newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=@EC832I DA7DA658E&p_docnum=... 6/18/ 1 1111111 11 11111,100111 The Oregonian Archives Page 1 of INSIDE • i d is Search » News » Weather REGIONAL POLICING, OR A DOZEN AGENCIES? » Traffic Summary: Supporters say a regional force would » HOmeTown eliminate duplicated services and provide centralized » Obituaries crime records » The Oregonian Fraud knows no borders. MUST CLICKS A thief may steal credit cards in Beaverton, then use v Community Forums them to buy computers in Hillsboro, water scooters in » E-mail your Forest Grove and groceries in Scholls. representative To track the bad guy, frustrated detectives from four u Lottery Results police agencies repeat each other's work, tracing the An Oregon Century same purchases at the same stores. "Right now, I think CLASSIFIEDS the bad guys are winning," said Detective Shawn Fischer of the Washington County Sheriffs Office. P Find Jobs! r Find Autos! NEWSLETTERS • Find Homes! update email A Cedar Mill man wants to halt that duplication. " Find Merchandisel s fro _Qmgon Livel MARKETPLACE Our Advertisers Ron Massey, 41, whose day job is selling radio ads, is on , Oregon Bid - Free How to Advertise a vigorous campaign to merge the county's 12 police Listinas! About Us agencies into one Portland-sized department. He v Yellow Pages! Job Opportunities contends that consolidation would rid taxpayers of an Marketplace! User Guide inefficient, ineffective and costly police service. Contact Us NEWSLETTER User Agreement Privacy Policy Washington County Sheriff Jim Spinden and the » Get free daily email 02000 county's four largest police unions firmly support further updates from Oregon Oregon Live study of the proposal. Uve! All rights » Sion up now! reserved But at least one police chief and most of the county's elected officials don't like it. They don't want to lose autonomous control of how and where officers enforce the laws. They say a community's approach to policing - for instance, whether officers take reports of graffiti or try to catch stores that sell beer to teen-agers - reflects local values. The plan to merge the county's police departments isn't new. Spinden said it has been around at least 20 years, but he credits Massey with forcing the issue. "It's more intense now because you have Ron Massey saying, 'Hey, I'm a taxpayer.... This is stupid. You're duplicating services,'" Spinden said. Massey belongs to committees that advise Spinden and Beaverton Police Chief David G. Bishop. He has pushed his proposal in private meetings with police chiefs, union presidents and elected officials, and in public sessions with civic groups. Police unions in Hillsboro, Beaverton and Tigard and with http://n113.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=OEC5EDOF6AB851 EB&p_docnum=... 6/18/ 'The Ofegonian Archives Page 2 of the Washington County Sheriffs Office voted to support a study exploring the plan. Senior Deputy Todd Duncan said the Washington County Police Officers' Association, among others, soon will pay a Portland firm to poll county residents to gauge their interest in a merged police force. Massey's proposal is not specific enough yet to predict how much money might be saved or how many officers would be needed or even how the consolidation would take place. County residents depend on regionalized agencies for several services: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue for fire protection, Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District for recreation services and Tri-Met for mass transportation, among others. And the county's 11 police departments and sheriffs office, comprising a total of about 550 officers, already consolidate certain functions, such as the 9-1-1 dispatch center, the jail, and gang and drug teams. Three other teams can be activated to deal with major crimes, serious car crashes and hostage situations. Although the Portland area does not have a regionalized police department, a few metropolitan areas do, including Las Vegas. That department protects 1 million people and 7,500 square miles in the city and its suburbs. Spinden said one consolidated department would be more efficient and economical. A large department would benefit by paying once for equipment, training and recruiting - something 12 police agencies are doing individually. Other efficiencies would be a single criminal records system, evidence storage space, traffic enforcement department and detective unit. Critics agree additional services can and should be consolidated, especially the records and evidence systems. In fact, county administrators spent $50,000 on a study last year that called for more cooperation among departments. Fire service worked Proponents of merged police forces say they could replicate the successful 1988 merger of Washington County Fire District 1 and Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District, which created Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue. It now serves nearly 400,000 people in eastern Washington County and pails of Clackamas and Multnomah counties. But Tualatin Valley Chief Jeff Johnson, who literally co- wrote the book on consolidating public agencies, said potential mergers must make sense in three ways: operationally, financially and politically. http://n113.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=OEC5EDOF6AB851 EB&p_docnum=... 6/18/ 'The Oregonian Archives Page 3 of "I applaud him challenging the system and bringing his private-sector approach to government," Johnson said of Massey. "But that doesn't mean it will work." On its face, the argument for improved efficiency makes sense. Portland has 529,121 people and one police bureau. Washington County has 445,342 people and 12 police agencies. But critics say it's not that simple. "I have three main concerns," said Tigard Police Chief Ron Goodpaster: "cost, service, control." Mayors list concerns Mayors in Hillsboro and Beaverton echoed Goodpaster. City residents would oppose a merged police force if it meant their taxpayers would pay more, they say. Yet, residents should get the same service, and mayors and city councilors should be able to enforce the taws they think are important. "People are used to their own police department, especially small cities," said North Plains Police Chief Gary McKenzie. "They are used to having an open door to their chief." Beaverton Mayor Rob Drake also pointed to the difference in service levels. The sheriffs office has 0.39 officer for every 1,000 residents, while Beaverton and Hillsboro have about 1.5 officers for every 1,000 residents. Massey said the numbers aren't a fair comparison because they include officers who don't patrol the streets. Hillsboro Police Chief Ron Louie and Mayor Tom Hughes were less diplomatic. Hillsboro is Washington County's largest full-service city. The city has its own police, fire, water and parks departments. Louie and Hughes want to keep it that way. "The more regional you are, the more you lose your community identity," Louie said. That's why people choose to live in different locations." Massey countered, "You have a handful of elected leaders and politicians who sugar-coated the fact that they don't want to lose control.... Its an ego issue for these guys. "I don't think the public is too interested in ego gratification. They're worried about having the best bang for their buck and the best-trained officers." Despite the opposition from elected leaders, Massey is convinced the planned poll of Washington County residents, which the unions will finance, will show that the public supports his idea. http://n113.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=OEC5EDOF6AB851 EB&p_docnuin=... 6/18/ Ell I The OPegonian Archives Page 4 of "I would turn my attention to the elected powers that be, I would say, 'Look at the handwriting on the wall,'" he said. "'You can be on the train or under the train.' " You can reach Ryan Frank at 503-294-5955 or by e-mail at ryanfrank@news.oregonian.com. SEARCH AGAIN ht pp://n113.newsbank.con/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=OEC5EDOF6AB851EB&p_docnum=... 6/18/ TPOA Membership Survey As you are undoubtedly aware, there has been talk in recent months about consolidating law enforcement services in Washington County. The basic concept deals with merging the various municipal police departments and Sheriffs office into a new yet-to-be-named police agency that would serve all of Washington County. Although police consolidation is a complex issue, there are many potential benefits for the law enforcement community and the taxpaying public. As your representatives, we believe that police consolidation deserves further study. - With that in mind, we want to "take the temperature" of our members to determine how you feel about this issue. Please fill out this form and return in the postage paid envelope no later than August X 1 th 2000. CHECK ONE Yes, I am in favor of Washington County police consolidation, and I support further study of this issue. No, I am opposed to police consolidation ADDITIONAL COMMENTS i i 1 I I1 tL COON 1 ATV 3/15101 `s' G f~~f/ oKr,9TJ 3(/~jG1 5 Sheriffs office weU-suited to serve smaller cities his is in response to daily in carrying out orders of the Troutdale Police Chief court related to child custody, the OME 015ADYAUTA66 ro (et{B!uINS David Nelson's commen- =ant of property and nu- tary (MeuoFast, Feb. 2; memos other processes for resi• MDLth1DMA~f CpOMY-T90MALE, barding combining the police dents inTroutdaleandFairview' fAIRYIEW*0 WOOD.YlllAbE .rtes of Fairview, Wood. Vghge We have deputies assigned to QD:ICE SERVICES idTroutdala patrol the waterways that flow Nelson is correct when he asks. through and past those communi• b% it make Sense to have one ties We have deputies who have lency out here?" It certainly does, volunteered to be members of a ld %vhat makes the most sense is dive team to take on the.dangerous wing the Multnomah County task of search, rescue and recovery ietifPs 00ce pro- in those waterways ce ail police service We provide search those cornst uni- and rescue through s The sh -v ~ the use of out depu- an$s ot- ties and many vol- e r NNTR[x11DAL~FAIQVIE1rlWp{jD ° 1 god Village pdic- f✓' unteers, inducing & some really out- The sheriffs office standing young pro- ^ SffEP/i/F a full-senvi x a le 5rom those tom- ti provid¢ng'an: MY TURN pie who make icts of law enforce- David Had up our Explorer tint. 4 r. . ent, including pa- Small agencies ' sits^"sE~~.Vw,• nl, special naicotks sorb at Fairview and <~c .x r ~s1 vestigation unit hazardous ma- Troutdale simply cannot afford to vials unit, tralbc satetyunit de- provide these types ofservlca .tK= L crimes f team and t Co ~ Each time the issue of what Services beyond patrols der the umbrella of one of the most Sgt David Hadley is president of ity providingipatrolservia agm gamenforcement Y p 4' Tries team to investigate fatal adsatythe>iln Qacommut E4 nheMulmornohCount De p tY Sheriffs Astor silo t He lines in d serious-injury collisions in- council members and police ritiefs without providing these a ecom ♦ ~k~s services is a dLsservire G~ the corn hir:g alcohol and drugs dig In their heels in an attempt no The major crimes and vehicular protect their turf in the bame of munity: mes teams are crteragencyuntts some outrnoded idea about losing Professional officers with an in - mbkdDg of5an from Mtilmo- control of their ability to provide novative appraarh to law enforce- ,h County, tbe Oregon State Po- 'police service to their mmmutnity. meat staff the Multnomah County a and the Gresham, Troutdale the Fars are that any comma- Sheriff's Office We didn't invent tiont~ng but we•lem- d Fairview police departments. nity contracting for police service co~ unity is approach provides the assets, would be able to maintain the con- ~ d polic fo of et than 2 ff and exp- In ensure that oriented policing n ng for more than 20 trol : public gets the best possible think and direction sevitt they yeam Auct for the public safety t would bust suit t the residents We have plovers successes and in their community. The o&ea in hneyspent byresidents ar7taut- Fairview and Troutdale ato - rover, nationally recognizedprogranuin e and Fairview. many communities in the Portlaud Multnomah County and the professionals who would fit well arm including Columbia Yhpa sham Police also into the ltnh'Cpol ring style Brentwood'Da lin on and Wood wide detectives for the Portland of the Office. Multnomah Counmoty 3heri9 s. village ice Bureau child abuse team Police service to a community is The residents of Fairview and i domestic violence unit, which Troutdale spoke loudly when they estigates crimes of sexual, phys• so much more than just an oE5Cer rejected last year's levy. They un- and emotional abuse against in a patrol tar responding to radio derstand that simply adding more tdrtn and domestic violence in calls. Accent events require that officers in more cars to respond to •utdaleandFai view. law enfb=ment agencies be pro- more calk for service by on in- Ve have detectives assigned to active in our schools by providing creasing population is not the way, tro to assist in the investigation full-time school resource office sr' as Chief Nelson stated -to get the illegal dumping of waste and Rising cvmmuutity awareness of best bang forthebuck' . ardous materials in Troutdale domestic violence and its after. With all due respect to Nelson, I Fairview, math require that law enforcement the best w~ to do than Is for Fair- Deptrties assigned actively involved in early inter- vlCvv and Troutdale to stop pre- vention to ensure that victims un• ~ding to be full-service law en- ;e have deputies assigned to a eluding the too. ofrer neglected fort:ementagencies and join us un- unit to ensure the orderly pro- children aze provided pmt xtioo, of serving the many doat• counseling and continued follow r its produced by our legal sys- up to prevent the violence from es- These deputies are invoked talatinginto tragedy. {I 90/Z9 30vd 302-10d 3"1tfG117081 S0/E0 30Cd 3DI-10d 3-Ti01110211 03/15 101 15:37 N0.571 02/05 NewsLibrary Document Delivery http-J/library.oregoniaa.corn/cgi.-b...665:',3:26041:14:52046:13:57161:13 THE OREGONIAN COUNTY STUDIES SHARED LAW UNITS Date: Monday, June 5, 2000 Section.: LOCAL STORIES WEST ZONER Edition: SUNRISE Page: E01 RYAN FRANK of the Oregonian Staff Dateline: HILLSBORO Summary: Police could consolidate jail shuttles and crime records for efficiency, but questions rem.ai.n about a juvenile ;facility A recently completed study of police agencies in Washington County reveals three basic services that could be consolidated under the sheriffs office. Two of the services, a prisoner shuttle to the jail and a central records department, could replace services now handled by individual departments. The third, a juvenile facility, does not exist in the county. Consolida.0ion of primary police services, such as traffic patrol, was not recommended in the $50,000 study, paid for by the county. But it could come under discussion: in the coming years, officials said. The study was commissioned in January 1999 to clarify the role the sheriff s office and the city police departments should have in Washington County law enforcement. Most Washington County residents would not notice a "stunning change" if the consolidations take place, said County Administrator Charles D. Cameron. But officials say they would be able to do business more efficiently. "I cannot stress enough how much waste and inefficiency we have in our, system, Cornelius Police Chief Paul Rubenstein said. Some of the county's smaller towns, Cornelius and Sherwood, for example, have considered contracting with. the county for police coverage. The jai] shuttle could be the fxst consolidated service. If votexs approve the county's proposed $65.5 milli n' five-year levy in November, th.e sheriffs office will add two deputies and a patrol car to transport prisoziers to the Washington County Jail in Millsboro, Sheriff Tim Spinden said. Under the current system., city and county police officers transport arrested suspects to the jail from all corners of the county. That can take some officers out of their jurisdiction for as long as three hours, which leaves some agencies shorthanded. Sherwood police, for example, have three officers on duty during a typical shift. Spinden said a consolidated records system is long overdue. But completing one could take two or three years. Spinden said he expects to start pushing for the eonselidadan later this month. He hopes the county will pay start-up costs, but the cities will contribute a user fee. 1 oft 03/15/2001 2:32 PM 03/15 '01 15:38 NO-571 03/05 NMLibmry Document Delivery httpJ/Iibrary.oregorfen.com/cgi-b...665:13:26041:14:52046:13:57161:13. One reason for the consolidation is the mobile nature of criminals, who do not stay within city boundaries, Rubenstein said. And with a handful. of records systems in the county, officers sometimes have to make half a dozen phone calls just to conduct a ba ftmu nd search, said Tualatin Police Chief Steve Winegar. Reaching agreement about a juvenile facility could be the most difficult. Some chiefs want Washington County to have a juvenile center similar to Multnomah County`s Donald E. Long Juvenile Detention Center in Portland, which has nearly 200 beds and houses those suspected of serious offenses until their first court appearance. However, a juvenile official said the more likely option is to build a reception facility where youths accused of minor offenses, such as possession of alcohol, could stay for no more than five hours and receive counseling before being released to a parent or guardian. Without a reception facility, Washington County police typically immediately return juveniles accused of minoffenses to a parent or guardian. nose accused of serious offenses are taken to Donald E. Long, where Washington County leases 14 beds. Either way, officials agree something needs to be done. "We're just fall' down on our faces in our ability to deal with serious juvenile crime," Rubenstein said. "There are no consequences. We have to be able to deal with crime at the juvenile level.. If we don't, we will at the adult level." The Washington County Juvenile Department plans to examine the possibility of a reception facility, but a detention center is not yet a serious thought, said Joe Christy, the department director. A new facility, no matter what the size, is at least three years off, and the financing source is unkn.ovm, Spinden said. Clackamas County has a reception facility, but Sheriff Ris Bradshaw said he is exploring financing options for a detention center. All conteAt ® TIE OREGONIAN and may not be republished without permission.. 1 i .411,chi0es are stored on a SAVE 0m) rr wpaper library system from Ale&d5&eam Inc., a ."ight-Rldder Inc. company. i i f 2 of 2 03/13/20012:32 FM THE OREGONIAN o SATURDAY. DECEMBER 11, 1999 ® ton County consolidate 4 s time tv district agency- It was the tion result of the District, , Forest Grove, fire those 12 are Beaverton, Tigard, HillsboroCity, Gaston, Come- of the Tualatin Rural Fire I and Protec the , Washington Sherwood, Banks, North Plains, ng an County County Fire District No. Beaverton Fire Depart uus e She and Tualatin police, and the Washings menu Twelve separate agencies are too many for a Sh needs Sheriff's office. When originally proposed, the idea was met with a fast-growing county with overlapping firestorm rl criticism. Old-timers complained that small boards of the During the past four months, I've metwith virtually eve and that service would and listened to a multitude towns would lose their identity ublic and the p s a member of the dtizenadvisory Washington ery Police chief in the county Politics, annexation suffer. It took nearly 10 years to convince ppoolice agencies of horror stories about turf battles, p Toda ,the Count); consolidation has two mya?~ shertfPs office and Beaverton po- communication breakdowns and an astronomical get all the agencies merged. y communities such Alice, I've gotten abehind-the scenes look at the waste of taxpayer dollars. Interestingly, , roved so successful that surrounding folded their law enforcement community in Oregon's fastest-growing not with the people but is in the outdated as West Linn and Oregon City have recently -populous county. system itself. fire departments-into Tualatin Valley. and second-mostwhile these thoughts are my own and do not necmar~ caw enforcementages. First, I've found that Washington Coun- Bottom line? The time has come Washington reflect the views of any s a dedicated on county lido ty is blessed to be served by consolidate r and loyal enforcement agencies. cy, I believe it is time to put aside petty ot provincial group of bright, hard-working on aunty and focus , n just the few. law enforcement officers. The pride and once uponatime, Washingt onwhatsbestforthemarry boundaries- professionalism of the people who work in was composed of small communities sep-mirials do not recognize arbitrary .aty z all branches of Washington County law crated by vast expanses of farm and time why should our law enforcement officers have to. Com- . enforcementisevidentevMmhere. IN MY OPINION berland. Over the years those separations mmunity policing and public safety are important issues disappeared to the point where most peo- ether you live in Cedar Mill, Aloha or Sherwood. The second observation is far less come p'.imentary. Despite the efforts of these ple couldn't today tell you where Beaver- Ronald Massey ~ begins. Much We must put aside our outdated memories of "the way hartil. ig peopleff, Washington County ton ends and where Tigtech brings "used to be" and focus on the way to the re. of the once-sleepy agricultural county is now a high- be" We owe it to our communities, and especially ent suers from an unbeliev lawenforcem efficiency, „~i able amount of institutional but always-done-it" urban area that has grown that nearly the 30 30 ptsideezcent will in con less - dedicated officers soon to 0 protect us. dundancy and a "this-is-the-way- than 10 years. Analysts P the early part r attitude different police tinue to see explosive growth throughout resident and boards of the Washington s Specifically, there are simply too many of the next century. emer en service consolidations Ronald serves on the Massey is a citizen advisory Washington County agencies in the county itself Consider Us: The city Across the country, g cY affordable. The o ulation of roughly 510,000 and opet- County sheriffs office and the Beaverton Police Depart - Portland has a p p Washington have proven e o b sis itive, n our own back yard, the wildly ates with a single police force- By contr12 s ast, ate police best examp s largest ment. County has 400,000 resideS ac Police. For the record, successful Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, Oregon! agencies, plus the Oregon AGENDA ITEM NO.2 - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : June 26, 2001 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City Manager prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED PC 4ff'y 6,- 2- VISITOR'S AGENDA Page 1 7ISSUE11AGENDA AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 26.2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY TITLE A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #9 TO THE FY 2000-0ADOPTED BUDGET TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS OPERATING APPROPRIATION TO THE GENERAL FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM APPROPRIATION FOR THE POLICE HVAC REPLACEMENT PROJECT. PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL A budget amendment is required to transfer appropriations from the Public Works operating budget to the General Fund Capital Improvement Program budget to cover additional identified costs of the Police Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Replacement Project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution so that sufficient appropriations exist within the Capital Improvement budget to cover the costs of the Police Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning replacement project. INFORMATION SUMMARY The FY 2000-01 Budget and Capital Improvement Program includes a project to replace the Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning units in the old portion of the Police building. At the time the budget and the Capital Improvement Program were built, staff estimated this project would cost $125,000. Further project definition and engineering design revealed that the project would cost $215,000, or $90,000 more than was budgeted. Council approved Budget Amendment #6 on February 13, 2001 to provide additional funding. The project is now nearing completion. The latest cost estimates, however, show that the project will require an additional $15,000. The project has experienced a few additional costs, but the major reason for this adjustment is that the February 2001 estimates were too conservative. The additional $15,000 will be covered by transferring $15,000 of appropriation from the Public Works operating budget (capital outlay). Due to an oversight in the development of the FY 2000-01 budget, the Police Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning project was included both in the capital budget and in the operating budget. Since this project is properly a capital project, the operating budget appropriation for this project will not be spent. It is therefore possible to transfer appropriation from the operating budget to the capital budget without drawing down the General Fund contingency. ~II- i gill P OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not amend the budget. Attempt to identify savings in the project to cover the additional costs. This would be very difficult, however, as the project is near completion. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY NA ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution FISCAL NOTES This amendment transfers appropriations within the Adopted City budget, avoiding a draw down of the General Fund Contingency. 0110111 AGENDA ITEM # 3- FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 2001 e CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE IGA - Tualatin Valle Fire and Rescue PREPARED BY: Loreen Mills DEPT HEAD OK V%A r'--EITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Request before Council is to approve a 4 year extension of an intergovermental agreement between the City of Tigard and Tualation Valley Fire & Rescue (TVFR) for preventive health and disease services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve IGA through 6/30/04 and authorize City Manager to sign. INFORMATION SUMMARY Most employees of the Police and Public Works departments have an increased risk for exposure to bloodborne and airborne pathogens, such as hepatitis, tuberculosis and HIV. The City entered into a contract with TVFR for the first time FY 2000-2001 to provide on-site services to train employees how to avoid exposure, as well as vaccinations to prevent certain diseases, documentation & recordkeeping services. They also provide emergency hotline services 24 hours a day to deal with exposures when they occur. Oregon law requires the City provide occupational infectious disease services and TVFR has the expertise and nursing staff to best meet the requirements. . Since TVFR has provided these services in exemplary fashion over this first year, staff recommends extending the IGA for four more years. This length of time is in keeping with the recent revision to the City's purchasing rules which allow for a total of five years service before a new bid process is required. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Look for another provider of occupational disease services. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Updated IGA is attached. FISCAL NOTES Funds are budgeted for these services annually in the Police and Public Works budgets. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Preventive Health & Disease Program and City of Tigard This agreement is made and entered into this itday of June 2001, by and between TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE (hereafter "TVFR") and CITY OF TIGARD ("COT"). The services provided by TVFR will be provided by its PREVENTIVE HEALTH & DISEASE PROGRAM (hereafter "PHDP"). WHEREAS, the COT has a need to obtain occupational infectious disease services as required by OAR 437, Division 2, Subdivision Z, services relating to Toxic & Hazardous Substances; bloodborne pathogens (1910.1030); and WHEREAS, the COT has a need to obtain advice and expertise from the PHDP regarding the provision of bloodborne and airborne pathogen services; and WHEREAS, PHDP desires to provide the COT with bloodborne and airborne pathogen training exposure management and vaccination services under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the parties: 1. PHDP Obligations - Required Services A. Bloodborne and Airborne Pathogens Training and Services PHDP will provide the following services to COT: 1. Assist in the development and revision of the CO Cs exposure control plan; 2. Provide annual bloodborne and airborne pathogen training to COT Public Works personnel and Police Department personnel by a licensed nurse, with knowledge in bloodborne and airborne pathogens, subject to the approval of the COT's Risk Manager or designee, experienced and knowledgeable in pre- hospital emergency and non-emergency services, and meeting the standards set forth in OAR 437 and the rules promulgated thereunder; 3. Provide 24 hour on-call services for exposure incidents, 4. Provide post-exposure management and follow-up; and 5. Provide on-site accessible vaccination clinics to include hepatitis A vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, hepatitis B titers and tuberculosis testing. B. Bloodborne and Airborne Pathogen Service Delivery PHDP shall provide COT with 4 on-site training and vaccination clinics as well as quarterly vaccination and testing clinics. In the fall, PHDP will provide 3 influenza clinics. PHDP shall use reasonable efforts to cover the needs of three shifts, evening and volunteer needs. Additional follow-up vaccination clinics may be determined and agreed upon by the parties at a later date, and billed accordingly. PHDP will provide COT with the records and documentation necessary for OSHA compliance. Each participant will have a vaccination record established with PHDP. Records will be maintained by PHDP. C. Billing will be separate for laboratory and pharmacy services. Lm/HADOMCONTRACT IGA BBP-TVFR-2001-04.doc Page 1 of 5 1111101 loll, -111111mi D. PHDP will comply with OAR 437, Division 2, Subdivision Z, services relating to Toxic & Hazardous Substances; bloodborne pathogens (1910.1030). II. Compensation A. Amounts and Terms Estimates are based on providing services to COT Police and Public Works employees. Rates are $25.00 per Police employee and $20.00 per Public Works employee for the term of this agreement. Payments will be made quarterly in advance upon receipt of an invoice from TVFR. Nursing hours are included in the base rate, except the rate of $37.50 per hour may be applied to complicated exposure management, disease acquisition, or extended counseling services, upon authorization from Risk Manager or designee. The following charges shall apply in addition to the base rate: Hepatitis A Vaccine $30.00 per dose (Series of 2) Hepatitis B Vaccine $30.00 per dose (Series of 3) Tetanus/diphtheria Market price Hepatitis B testing $20.00 Post-exposure Hepatitis C testing $25.00 Post-exposure HIV antibody test $20.00 Tuberculosis test $6.00 Influenza vaccination Market price Bloodborne pathogens training/session $150.00 RN service per hour (If applicable) $37.50 Mileage at government rate (if applicable) B. Pro-Rating of Compensation If either party terminates this agreement at a time when COT has paid for services not yet provided, PHDP shall reimburse COT for that portion of the compensation paid for which it has not provided services. If this agreement is terminated at a time when PHDP has provided services for which payment has not yet been made, COT will pay PHDP for those services received. Any payments or reimbursements will be calculated to the nearest day that services are provided. III. General Provisions A. Term of Agreement: Extension The term of this agreement shall cornmence July 1, 2001, and expire on June 30, 2004, unless earlier terminated or extended as provided herein. In the event either party desires to extend the term of this agreement beyond 2004; it shall provide written notice to the other party of its desire to renew the agreement at least 15 days prior to the expiration of the original term. B. Amendment This agreement may be amended by the mutual written agreement of the parties. C. Renewal This agreement may be renewed upon mutual written consent of the parties. Lm/1-1:00MCONTRAC RIGA BBP-TVFR-2001-04.doc Page 2 of 5 D. Termination This agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of both parties, or by either party upon 30 days prior notice in writing and delivered by certified mail or in person to the other party. E. Applicable Law This agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon, and the parties agree to submit to the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of Oregon. F. Waiver The failure of any party to enforce any provision of this agreement shall not constitute a waiver of it or any other provision. G. Indemnities To the extent permitted by Oregon law (ORS 30.260 through 30.300), each party agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold and save harmless the other, including its officers, agents, and employees from damages arising out of its tortuous acts, or those of its officers, agents, and employees acting within the scope of their employment and duties in the performance of this agreement. H. Entire agreement • This instrument contains the entire agreement of the parties. No amendment or variation of the terms and conditions of this agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and signed by both parties. i. Notices All notices or other communications required or permitted under this agreement shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered (including by means of professional messenger service) or sent by fax and regular mail to the parties at the following addresses: For TVF&R: For City of Tigard: Chief Financial Officer Risk Manager Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue City of Tigard 20665 SW Blanton St. 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Aloha, OR 97007 Tigard, OR 97223 Fax 503-649-5347 Fax 503-639-6795 J. Merger This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. There are no understandings, agreements, representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this agreement. No amendment, consent or waiver of terms of the agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by both parties. Any such amendment, waiver, or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose. The parties, by their signature below, acknowledge having read and understood the agreement and agree to be bound by its terms and conditions. LWHADOMCON RAC-RIGA BBP-TVFR-2001-04.doc Page 3 of 5 K. Assignment Except as otherwise provided herein, this agreement is personal to the parties and may not be assigned by either party without the prior written consent of the other. L. Attorney Fees In the event either party breaches its obligations under this agreement; the non- breaching party shall be entitled to all costs and expenses incurred, including reasonable attorney fees, as a result of the breach. In addition, in the event suit or action is instituted to enforce any of the terms of the agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party such sum as the court or arbitrator may adjudge reasonable as attorney fees in arbitration, at trial, and on appeal of such suit or action, in addition to all other sums provided by law. M. Status of Parties Nothing contained herein shall be construed to imply a partnership, sublicense, joint venture, or principal and agent relationship between PHDP and COT, and neither party shall have any-right, power or authority to create any obligation, express or implied, on behalf of the other unless expressly provided for in writing. N. Insurance PHDP shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, policy or policies of insurance providing at least the following limits and coverages: 1. Commercial General Liability Insurance PHDP shall obtain, at PHDP's expense, and keep in effect during the term of this agreement, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance covering Bodily Injury and Property Damage on an "occurrence" form (1996 ISO or equivalent). This coverage shall include Contractual Liability Insurance for the indemnity provided under this agreement. The following insurance will be carried: Coverage Limit General Aggregate $1,000,000 Each Occurrence 500,000 WIN Fire Damage (Any one fire) 50,000 Medical Expense (Any one person) 5,000 2. Commercial Automobile Insurance PHDP shall also obtain, at PHDP's expense, and keep in effect during the term of the agreement, Commercial Automobile Liability coverage including coverage for all a owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. The Combined Single Limit per occurrence shall not be less than $1,000,000. 3. Workers' Compensation Insurance The PHDP is a subject employer under the Oregon Workers' Compensation Law and shall comply with ORS 656.017, which requires them to provide workers' compensation coverage that satisfies Oregon law for all their subject workers. This shall include Employer's Liability Insurance with coverage limits of not less than $100,000 each accident. Lm/HADOCSICONTRACTIIGA BBP-TVFR-2001-04.doc Page 4 of 5 COT shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, policy or policies of insurance providing at least the following limits and coverages: 4. Commercial General Liability Insurance COT shall obtain, at COT's expense, and keep in effect during the term of this agreement, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance covering Bodily Injury and Property Damage on an "occurrence" form (1996 ISO or equivalent). This coverage shall include Contractual Liability Insurance for the indemnity provided under this agreement. The following insurance will be carried: Coveran Limit General Aggregate $1,000,000 Each Occurrence 500,000 Fire Damage (Any one fire) 50,000 Medical Expense (Any one person) 5,000 5. Commercial Automobile Insurance COT shall also obtain, at COT's expense, and keep iri effect during the term of the agreement, Commercial Automobile Liability coverage including coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. The Combined Single Limit per occurrence shall not be less than $1,000,000. 6. Workers' Compensation Insurance The COT is a subject employer under the Oregon Workers' Compensation Law and shall comply with ORS 656.017, which requires them to provide workers' compensation coverage that satisfies Oregon law for all their subject workers. This shall include Employer's Liability Insurance with coverage limits of not less than $100,000 each accident. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement on the dates noted below. City of Tigard Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Preventive Health & Disease Program B By: William A. Monahan, City Manager Debra L. Guzman, Contract Administrator Date Date LMHADOCS\CONTR MGA BBP-TVFR-2001-04.doc Page 5 of 5 III_ 1111111 INI 1111111 1 loll 11011ME AGENDA ITEM # 3. FOR AGENDA OF 6/26/01 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Recreational Trail Program Grant Agreement PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK/A~' Y MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should Council authorize the City Manager to sign a contract with the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department accepting $50,000 in grant funds for the construction of the 'Tiedeman/Woodard Park segment of the Fanno Creek Trail? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the agreement. INFORMATION SUMMARY Some months ago, Council approved the submission of an application for a federal grant to partially fund the construction of the Tiedeman/Woodard Park Fanno Creek Trail segment (identified as segment three in the attached map). Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, which is adminstering the grant program in Oregon, has notified the City that its proposal has been selected for funding. The agreement between the State and the City accepting the grant funds is attached. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the agreement as to form. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not accept the grant funds. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Fanno Creek Trail Corridor map "Recreational Trail Program Grant Agreement" EIIIIIIII - 111111101 110111 FISCAL 'VOTES The estimated cost of the 1,600 lineal feet of trail construction is $88,000. The grant amount is $50,000. The remaining $38,000 has been budgeted and will come from local Greenspaces funds. The City also is providing in-kind design and construction management. For grant proposal purposes, the cost of the upstream Fowler School trail segment, completed last year, was counted as part of the City contribution to a larger project. This explains why the project agreement refers to a total project cost of $275,690. i/citywide/dr/rtpagreement 1Rf ORMATION SYSSEM GEOGRPPHIO TFwno el CorrIdOr NORTH DAKOTA ~ i GR~F~$~Rc r - 10 i T S EDOSTING i 9°~~ Q VVoocj3rd Park Ile I ; J1i creek 1 ~ CO ~ , MM~Rciq~ city 1 ~~0; ~oet~d -Parks a-„1 ♦a ~a- wgcNVr A2M r 4w City °f Tigard ~#,~.jacd e~~ ` yyeevefi ~T ORSTW t osAm e U ate Jun Q RECREATION TRAIL PROGRAM GRANT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on the date of final signature of this agreement by and between the State of Oregon, acting by and through Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, hereinafter referred to as the "State", and the City of Tigard or designated representative, hereinafter referred to as the "Sponsor". WHEREAS, the Recreational Trails Program (RTP), authorized by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21), is a Federal-aid assistance program to help States provide and maintain recreational trails for both motorized and nonmotorized recreational use. Oregon Parks and Recreation Department has been designated by the Governor of the State of Oregon to administer the Recreational Trails Program for the State and will do so in accordance with the federal statutes [United States Code (23 U.S.C. 206)] and federal program guidelines. WHEREAS, under ORS 390.980 Oregon Parks and Recreation Department may use any funds made available by any federal agency for such purposes as the department determines are necessary or desirable to carry out the purposes of the Oregon Recreation Trails System Act. WHEREAS the Department has reviewed the proposed Project, and based on the Sponsor's representations found it to be feasible and appropriate for funding. Project Title: Fanno Creek Trail Type: Recreation Trail Program 2001 Project Number: RTP 01-1068 A. Funding of Proiect (1) The total cost of the project covered by this Agreement is $275,690 (2) The value of the Sponsor contributions for this project is $225,690 [difference of (1) less (3)j (3) The State agrees to pay $50,000 or 80 percent of the total project costs, whichever amount is less, from monies available through the Recreation Trails Program. Page 1 of 6 1110011111111 B. Proiect Information Description/Scope of Work: Construction of two segments of the Fanno Creek Trail from Tigard Street to Tiedeman Avenue and from Tiedeman Avenue to Woodard Park. The Sponsor's Project Information is more particularly described in the project grant application and by this reference made a part of this agreement. C. Proiect Funding Reports and Progress Payments Sponsor may begin work upon receipt of signed agreement from the State. Any expenses incurred prior to the agreement date will not be eligible for reimbursement. Once work has begun, sponsor shall report to the State on a quarterly basis, for work completed or for request for partial payment during the quarters as follows: By April 30 for the quarter beginning January 1 and ending March 31; By July 31 for the quarter beginning April 1 and ending June 30; By October 31 for the quarter beginning July 1 and ending September 30; By January 31 for the quarter beginning October 1 and ending December 31. A copy of the quarterly reporting form is attached. Please use this form for all progress reporting. In all partial payments, State will retain 25% of total grant allocation amount (Section A. (3)), until final approval and acceptance by the State. The final 25% will be reimbursed only after project completion, full documentation is received and there is final approval and acceptance by State. Partial payments and quarterly reports shall contain a reasonable and accountable request. A status report giving an accounting of the total expenditures and work accomplished during the period is required as a prerequisite to any progress payment. Costs are allowable, as specified in OMB Circulars A-87, A-122, and A-21, if the costs are necessary and reasonable in accomplishing the scope of work described in this contract. At no time will the State reimburse Sponsor for more than the { maximum percentage allowed under this agreement. z j i i Page 2 of 6 Billings: Please complete Agency Billing Form and send to: Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, ATTN: Sean Loughran, Recreation Trails Coordinator, 1115 Commercial St. NE Suite 1, Salem, Oregon 97301-1002. The Agency Billing Form is attached with this agreement. Please use this form for all requests for reimbursement. Projects may be inspected by the State prior to final acceptance. The State reserves the right to cancel the agreement if no progress on this project has been made within 6 months of the signing of this agreement. In such case, all funds shall immediately be returned to the State. The State also reserves the right to cancel this agreement if delays in progress are such that the State reasonably concludes the Project is no longer feasible or no longer meets the conditions under which the initial decision to enter into this agreement was made. D. Proiect Period This Agreement shall become effective on the date at which both parties have signed this Agreement. Unless otherwise terminated or extended this Agreement shall expire on June 30, 2003. Upon termination the State is not obliged to make any further payments. Sponsor must submit a final report within 90 days of the project completion date or the expiration date of the agreement. The final report shall include full and final accounting of all expenditures and description of the work accomplished. If the project is not completed, the report shall contain an estimate of the percentage of completion and shall indicate the degree of usefulness of the abbreviated project. Extensions to the project agreement may be granted only in writing. Request for an extension must be submitted to the State at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of this agreement allowing enough time to prevent a lapse in the agreement. The request for extension must show a compelling need for the extension. E. Useful Life The useful life of the approved project is at least ten (10) years beyond the completion of the project. If temporary closures are necessary the Sponsor will notify the State of the closures of any fund-assisted improvements. If there is an anticipated permanent closure or conversion the State will be afforded the opportunity to comment on such a termination or conversion. If a facility or land is closed Page 3 of 6 a percentage of the allocated funds will be returned to the State equal to the percentage of useful life remaining in the funded facility or land or equipment. Sponsor shall maintain a log showing usage of equipment purchased under this agreement. A copy of the log is to be submitted annually to the State throughout the useful life of the equipment. F. Amendments This RTP Agreement may only be amended or extended in writing when signed by the parties. G. Inspections and Audits The Sponsor shall permit all fund-assisted sites to be inspected by the State and/or its authorized representative(s) at reasonable times. The Sponsor shall retain a project file including accounting records for three (3) fiscal years after the completion of the project and allow the State, or its authorized representative, to inspect and review all fund related records, to the level of detail prescribed by the reviewing entity, whenever so requested by the State or its authorized representative. H. Liability Subject to the limitations of the Oregon Tort Claims Act for governmental entities, Articles XI, Section 10 of the Oregon Constitution, or the Federal Tort Claims Act if sponsor is the United States Government, sponsor shall defend, save, hold harmless, and indemnify the State of Oregon and Department and their agencies, subdivisions, officers, directors, agents, employees and members, from any and all claims, suits, actions, losses, liabilities, costs, expenses, and damages of whatsoever nature resulting from, arising out of or relating to the activities of Grantee or its officers, employees, contractors, or agents under this Agreement. Page 4 of 6 I. Notices (1) All written communications which are to be given to the State under this Agreement will be mailed and addressed as follows: Oregon Parks and Recreation Department Sean Loughran, Recreation Trails Coordinator 1115 Commercial St NE Suite 1 Salem, Oregon 97301-1002 J. No Waiver THIS AGREEMENT CONSTITUTES THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES. NO WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE OF TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BIND EITHER PARTY UNLESS IN WRITING AND SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES. SUCH WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE, IF MADE, SHALL BE EFFECTIVE ONLY IN THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE GIVEN. THERE ARE NO UNDERSTANDINGS, AGREEMENTS, OR REPRESENTATIONS, ORAL OR WRITTEN, NOT SPECIFIED HEREIN REGARDING THIS AGREEMENT. SPONSOR, BY THE SIGNATURE BELOW OF IT'S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT SPONSOR HAS READ THIS AGREEMENT, UNDERSTANDS IT AND AGREES TO BE BOUND BY ITOS TERMS AND CONDITIONS. K. Availability of Funds: State certifies at the time this agreement is written that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to finance costs of this agreement within the StateOs current appropriation or limitation. Funding beyond June 30, 2003 is contingent upon approval of next biennium OPRD budget. i 1y~ i a Page 5 of 6 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be properly executed by their authorized representatives as of the day and year hereinafter written. -T{~ Spon or Title pon or Signature Date - Recommended by Trails Coordinator or Representative Oregon Parks and Recreation Department Date I STATE OF OREGON, by and through Oregon Parks and Recreation Department Authorized Representative of Oregon Parks and Recreation Department Date Page 6 of 6 AGENDA ITEM # 31 FOR AGENDA OF -June 26.2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Acknowledge 20 Years of Excellent Lepal Services Rendered by the Ramis Crew. Corrigan and Bachrach Law Office PREPARED BY: C. Wheatley DEPT HEAD OK t~ CITY MGR OK _ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL This item, acknowledging 20 years of excellent legal services rendered by the Ramis, Crew, Corrigan and Bachrach law office, was recognized by the City Council on June 12, 2001 and now needs to be formally adopted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Formally adopt the proposed resolution. INFORMATION SUMIVIARY City of Tigard records confirm that the Ramis, Crew, Corrigan & Bachrach law offices began services to the City of Tigard 20 years ago in June 1981. City of Tigard employees are recognized at milestone anniversaries of years of service and this is an opportunity for the Tigard City Council to express its appreciation to the law firm. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Proposed resolution for Council consideration. FISCAL NOTES N/A I:WDM\CITY COUNCIUCOUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES\RAMIS ACIWOW V2 SUM.DOC AGENDA ITEM FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Approval of a Cost of Living Adjustment for Management/Supervisory/Confidential Grout) Em o ees effective Jul 1 2001 PREPARED BY: Sand Zodrow DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK kA4- - SUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council approve an annual cost of living salary adjustment for Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group Employees to be effective July 1, 2001 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve a 3.5% cost of living adjustment for this group effective July 1, 2001 INFORMATION SUMMARY Approximately 75 employees belong to the Management/Supervisory/Confidential Employees Group and are not represented by a collective bargaining agreement. Each fiscal year the City Council considers and makes a determination on a cost of living increase (COLA) for this group of employees to be effective July 1. The last COLA adjustment made for this group was July 1, 2000. The City is currently negotiating with the Tigard Police Officer's Association (TPOA), and the Oregon Public Employees Association (OPEU) bargaining group. A cost of living adjustment assists the City in maintaining a competitive market position with regard to its salary plan. A survey of comparable Cities in the metro area indicates that 7-1-01 COLA's for non-represented groups are running on average between 3% - 3.8%. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY i i Offering a competitive salary assists in recruiting and retaining qualified employees, which in turn provides a competent workforce who are charged with developing and implementing many of the Vision Goals and Objectives. ATTACHMENT LIST None ( FY 2001-2002 Management/Supervisory/Confidential Group Employees Salary Schedule to be adjusted per Council direction) 1111M Neil FISCAL. NOTES Cost will be dependent on the amount of the adjustment; funds are available in the FY0I-02 Budget i 7 1 q~ AGENDA ITEM # 3.6 FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Appointments to the Budget Committee and Library Board PREPARED BY: Susan Koepping DEPT HEAD OK kl*YV-*'- CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Appointments to the Budget Committee and Library'Board STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution reappointing George Burgess and Sydney Sherwood to the Budget Committee, reappointing Susan Kasson to the Library Board, appointing Gary Johnson and Jan Thenell to the Library Board, and appointing Jeffrey Lawton as an alternate to the Library Board. INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached is a resolution which, if adopted, would approve the reappointments of George Burgess and Sydney Sherwood to the Budget Committee. Both reappointments are for 3-year terms. This resolution would also reappoint Susan Kasson to the Library Board for a 4-year term, and appoint Gary Johnson and Jan Thenell to initial 4-year terms to the Library Board. Jeffrey Lawton's appointment as alternate to the Library Board would be for 2 years, expiring June 30, 2003, or earlier if he is appointed to complete the remaining portion of a term vacated by the resignation of one of the current Library Board members. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Delay action on the appointment. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY I Goal: City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community. i FISCAL NOTES none f + I:WDM\.SUSANK\TASKFORC\BC&LBSUMM6VI.DOC MEMORANDUM T0: City Council, Mayor Griffith, Bill Monahan FROM: Susan Koepping RE: Appointment of non-resident Library Board member DATE: June 12, 2001 Jan Thenell's appointment as a new member to the Library Board will be brought to the Council by resolution on June 26. Althougti Jan has a Tigard mailing address, she lives in King City. Tigard Municipal Code 2.36.030 (a) states: "There is established Library Board of seven members, six of whom shad be residents of the city and one of whom may reside within or outside the Tigard corporate limits." Currently, no other Library Board members reside outside the Tigard city limits. A Library Board member 1991 -1995 resided outside the city limits. i i i i 3 MEN HINEMMM C AGENDA ITEM # 3,96L, FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE _ Bid Award for Cook Park Expansion Phase I PREPARED BY: John Roy DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Local Contract Review Board authorize the award of bid to the lowest responsible and qualified bidder for the constriction of Cook Park Expansion Phase I which includes the construction of the wetland gazebo area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Local Contract Review Board award the bid for the Cook Park Expansion Phase I construction project to the lowest responsible and qualified bidder, Northwest Earthmovers, Inc., for the amount of $635,553.30. INFORMATION SUMMARY Staff advertised for bid on May 8th in the Daily Journal of Commerce and on May 10th in the Tigard Times for the construction of Cook Park Expansion Phase I. Bids were opened and read on June 5th at 2:00 PM. Bids were received from the following bidders: Contractor Base Bid Additive Bid Total Bid Northwest Earthmovers, Inc. $575,553.30 $60,000.00 $635,553.30 Anderson Pacific Contr, Inc. $598,774.50 $50,000.00 $648,774.50 DaNeal Construction, Inc. $619,161.05 $48,955.00 $668,116.05 Crestview Construction, Inc. $570,980.00 $103,300.00 $674,280.00 Eagle Elsner, Inc. $610,096.64 $ 75,000.00 $685,096.64 Rutan Construction, Inc. $633,337.40 $100,000.00 $733,337.40 Guodl'cllo%~ Bros., Inc. $699,710.00 $35,000.00 $734,710.00 Engineer's Estimate $771,764.00 $100,980.00 $872,744.00 Bids were reviewed to verify that they met the contract requirements for all of the required submittal items. In addition to the signed bid proposal each bidder was required to submit: A bid Bond in the amount of 10% of the bid amount. A copy of their completed State Prequalification Application form. A copy of their letter from the State stating that they are prequalified. ■ A signed acknowledgement of the Addendum. Submission of the First-tier Subcontractor Disclosure Form. Since the total value of the bids are within the City's budget, it is recommended that the City award both the base bid and the additive alternative to the lowest responsible bidder. The additive alternative in the bid specifications includes the construction of the wetland viewing gazebo. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Reject all bids. 2. Award the bid to the next lowest responsible and qualified bidder. 3. Give staff further direction. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY This bid award will help to achieve Goal 4, Task 5 (Continue to implement the Cook Park Master Plan), set by Council for the year 2001. ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES The bid award amount is $635,553.30, which is within the requested budget amount in the FY 2001/2002 budget of $771,764.00. AGENDA ITEM # 3 FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #10 TO THE FY 2000-01 BUDGET TO TRANSFER $20,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY TO THE POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM FOR GRANT WRITING SERVICES PROVIDED BY RANDALL DEVELOPMENT, INC. p PREPARED BY: Crain Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR. OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL A budget amendment is required to transfer appropriations from the General Fund contingency to the Policy and Administration program to make the initial payment required to Randall Development, Inc. for grant writing services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution so that sufficient appropriations exist within the Policy and Administration Program to make the required payment to Randall Development, Inc INFORMATION SUMMARY At the June 12, 2001 meeting, the City Council approved a contract with Randall Development, Inc. to assist the City of Tigard in identifying and obtaining grants to pay the costs of certain city services. The contract requires an initial payment of $20,000 to begin services and $4,000 per month thereafter. This contract was developed late in the fiscal year, and therefore was not included in the Adopted City Budget. This amendment transfers the funds from contingency to make the initial payment, due in June 2001. There is a companion resolution amending the FY 2001-02 Budget, to provide funds for the payments due in FY 2001-02. i OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. The City is required by terms of the contract with Randall Development, Inc. to make these payments. The budget must be amended to allow this contract provision to be fulfilled. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY i NA ,y ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution FISCAL NOTES This amendment transfers $20,000 from General Fund contingency. b AGENDA ITEM # 3 FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #1 TO THE FY 2001-02 BUDGET TO TRANSFER $48,000 FROM THE CENTRAL SERVICES FUND CONTINGENCY TO THE POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM FOR GRANT WRITING SERVICES PROVIDED BY RANDALL DEVELOPMENT, INC. PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR. OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL A budget amendment is required to transfer appropriations from the Central Services Fund contingency to the Policy and Administration program to make the initial payment required to Randall Development, Inc. for grant writing services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the resolution so that sufficient appropriations exist within the Policy and Administration Program to make the required payment to Randall Development, Inc. INFORMATION SUMMARY At the June 12, 2001 meeting, the City Council approved a contract with Randall Development, Inc. to assist the City of Tigard in identifying and obtaining grants to pay the costs of certain city services. The contract requires an initial payment of $20,000 to begin services and $4,000 per month thereafter. This contract was developed late in the fiscal year, and therefore was not included in the Adopted City Budget. This amendment transfers the funds from contingency to make the payments due in FY 2001-02. There is a companion resolution amending the FY 2000-01 Budget, to provide funds for the payment due in FY 2000-01. i OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED a i None. The City is required by terms of the contract with Randall Development, Inc. to make these payments. The budget must be amended to allow this contract provision to be fulfilled. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY NA ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution FISCAL NOTES This amendment transfers $48,000 from the Central Services Fund contingency. d 1 5 • 31D AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 26 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION TO THE OREGON ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR A LOAN TO FINANCE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COOK PARK MASTER PLAN. _ PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR. OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City of Tigard submit an application to the Oregon Economic and Community Development Department (OECDD) to finance the costs of the Cook Park Master Plan improvements over a five to ten year period? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve submittal of the application. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard developed a master plan of improvements to Cook Park following a public involvement process. These improvements are designed to expand recreational and natural amenities available to the citizens of Tigard. The City has been working to implement these improvements, but work has been limited due to limited funding available through Parks Systems Development Charge (SDC) revenues. The master plan has four phases remaining to be completed at a total cost slightly over $2.5 million. The Oregon Economic and Community Development Department (OECDD) has offered loan programs to local communities for the past several years to foster economic improvement. This loan program was recently expanded UFM to include community facilities. Staff has been discussing the Cook Park project with OECDD over the past several months, and OECDD has recently expressed an interest in loaning the City funds to complete this project. Under the loan program, OECDD combines applications from several local governments into a bond sale (to occur in late summer or early fall). The department using lottery funds to pay bond issuance costs and to provide a debt service reserve, thereby lowering costs to participating governments. The interest rate on the loan will be based on the interest rate OECDD obtains on the bonds. The interest rate should be in the range of 5% to 6%, though this is totally dependent upon bond market conditions at the time of the bond sale. The City will repay the OECDD loan using Parks SDC revenues. OECDD will require, however, a back-up pledge of the City's General Fund. This back-up pledge provides bondholders greater security against default and therefore obtains a better interest rate for the City. The City will attempt to structure the loan, however, to minimize any possibility that it would actually have to use General Fund resources to pay debt service on this loan. Participating in this program holds several advantages for the City of Tigard: 1. The master plan can be implemented immediately, rather than taking three to four years as cash becomes available. 2. Disruption to the park and park users is minimized due to the shorter construction schedule. 3. Construction can be completed within timelines established by existing permits and prior to any future regulations which may be developed as a result of concerns about endangered fish runs. 4. The City avoids future construction cost inflation. 5. Debt service payments can be sized to retain some Parks SDC revenues for improvements in other parks. (Currently, the Cook Park project uses almost all Parks SDC revenues, severely limiting improvements that can be made in other City parks.) The major disadvantage to this program is the interest cost that the City will incur. These additional costs will be partially offset by avoided construction cost increases (see #4 above). The resolution also declares Tigard's intent to reimburse itself for expenses incurred on the project prior to loan award. The State obtains funds to make this loan from the proceeds of a bond sale to be conducted around September 2001. Construction on the Master Plan improvements is scheduled to begin in July 2001. Making this declaration preserves Tigard's options under federal law to obtain reimbursement for expenses made in July from funds that will not be received until September. Any reimbursement received would also have to be consistent with State regulation under the OECDD program. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not apply for the loan. The Cook Park Master plan improvements will continue to be made on a cash- available process, and will take from three to four years. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY The Cook Park project supports several of the Vision Task Force Goals, including: 1. Community Character and Quality of Life - Community Events - Goal #1 Community Aesthetics - Goal #1 2. Growth and Growth management - Goal #1 3. Urban and Public Services - Parks & Recreation Goals This project also supports the Council Goals of implementing the City Park Master Plan and providing recreational opportunities to Tigard citizens. ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution (including Attachment A to the resolution) r FISCAL NOTES The OECDD loan will be repaid from Parks SDC revenues, though OECDD will require the City to pledge to make loan repayments from the General Fund should Parks SDC revenues be insufficient. The loan interest rate will depend on the interest rates OECDD obtains for the bonds used to fund the loan and upon the term of the loan. The term of the loan will be negotiated with OECDD, but will not exceed ten years. AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Introduction of Budget Committee members George Burgess and Sydney Sherwood and Library Board members Susan Kasson Gary Johnson and Jan Thenell and Library Board alternate, Jeffrey Lawton. PREPARED BY: Susan Koepping UV DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Appointments to the Budget Committee and Library Board were made as part of the Consent Agenda of this meeting. Those reappointed members of the Budget Committee and new members of the Library Board will be acknowledged by the Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Introduce George Burgess, Sydney Sherwood who were reappointed to the Budget Committee, and Susan Kasson who was reappointed to the Library Board. Also introduce Gary Johnson and Jan Thenell who were appointed for the first time to the Library Board, as well as Jeffrey Lawton's appointment as the alternate to the Library Board. INFORMATION SUMMARY Reappointments of George Burgess and Sydr ey Sherwood are for 3-year terms. Susan Kasson's reappointment to the Library Board is for a 4-year term. G i y Johnson's and Jan Thenell's initial appointments are for 4-year terms to the Library Board. Jeffrey Lawton's appointment as alternate to the Library Board would be for 2 years, expiring June 30, 2003, or earlier if he is appointed to complete the remaining portion of a term vacated by the resignation of one of the current Library Board members. All of these Board and Committee members serve as volunteers using their experience, enthusiasm and community insight for the benefit of the Tigard community. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED i i i Delay action on the appointment. i i VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal: City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community. FISCAL NOTES . m y AGENDA ITEM # J FOR AGENDA OF June 26.2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Water Supply Update 64 PREPARED BY: Dennis Koellermeier DEPT HEAD OK Ei' CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL, Public Works staff will update the City Council on current activities and projects relating to short term (summer) water supply issues, including conservation efforts, improvements to the distribution system, and discussions of new sources with our suppliers. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends continuing on the current plan this summer, while continuing to explore all options such as the potential of the Washington County supply line, the Beaverton intertie, and phase 2 of our aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) project. INFORMATION SUMMARY In light of the regional concerns regarding water availability this summer the Public Works staff has been working on several fronts to assure adequate water supplies. These efforts include: City of Portland Work on the Bradley Comer meter vault is complete and flows have been tested up to 9.8 MGD. We are also discussing a potential connection to the City of Tualatin's leg of the Washington Co. Supply Line. Other City of Portland news includes rates being set at $0.907 per 100 CCF and the Bull Run System is expected to go into drawdown approximately June 1 this year. City of Portland Water Bureau staff continues to tell us that they are predicting adequate supplies this summer. ■ Joint Water Commission (JWQ Tigard was shut off from JWC supply on May 11th due to low stream flows. We do not expect any JWC water until fall or winter. ■ City of Tigard. We have begun our summer effort of actively encouraging water conservation. Currently the cover story in "Cityscape" is titled "Use Water Wisely". We recently distributed conservation handouts at our booth at Washington Square during our Public Works Week celebration, and will be present with this message at the Balloon Festival. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED No viable alternatives for summer, 2001 water supply exist that are not being explored. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Actively participate in regional development of water sources and adequate, innovative funding mechanisms to develop those sources for Tigard users while exploring local options for water reuse and groundwater sources. ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES Each water source has it's own cost, and total summer supply costs will not be known until after the purchases are made and the final blend of sources and costs is made. The increased cost from the City of Portland was anticipated and allowed for in the water rate increase approved by City Council on February 27, 2001. AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: June 26, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: CONSIDER THE VACATION OF APPROXIMATELY 9,544 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN A S 67TH AVENUE (VAC2001-00001) Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony I:=M\GREER\CCSIGNUP\PH TESTIMONY QJ.000 i r AGENDA ITEM No. 6 PLEASE PRINT Proponent - S eakin In Favor Opponent - S eakin Against) Neutral 1- 1 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Cho Q)t' 64 `~-'Uc' 7 G3) 5W GPI R-,b 5 ` wc~ C)A q-1Irq0 $03 ~ 2-~1- ~ 1 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone N. o Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. 11 11 11 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Y AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 6.26.01 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: 67th Avenue Clinton Street -public right-of-wa v ction AC2001-00001 . PREPARED BY: Mathew Scheidegaer DEPT HEAD OK / ITY MGR OK _ 4-11-1 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council vacate an approximately 9,544 square foot portion of public right-of-way commonly known as SW 67th Avenue? STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council approve the Vacation as requested by adopting the attached Ordinance (Attachment 2). INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Council initiated this Vacation on May 8, 2001 (Attachment 1, Resolution No. 01-23.) to consider the above vacation request. The next step in the process is for the City Council to hold a public hearing . The applicant (Root Holdings, LLC) requested that the City Council vacate a portion of the public right-of-way on SW 67 Avenue. The right-of-way lies to the south of SW Clinton Street. It is also north of the SW Haines Road southbound off-ramp. This portion of the right-of-way has never been improved and "leads to no where", as it dead-ends into the off-ramp. Root Holdings intends to construct a two-story office building of 24,000 square feet adjacent to SW 67ffi Avenue and needs the extra square footage for an entrance into the property. Appropriate agencies have been contact6d for comments and no objections were received. These include utility companies and emergency service providers. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Take no action at this time. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not applicable. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachments: Attachment 1- Resolution No. 01-23 Initiating The Vacation Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance Attachment 3 - Exhibit "A" - (Vicinity Map) Attachment 4 - Exhibit "B" - (Legal Description) Attachment 5 - Exhibit "C" - (Site Plan) FISCAL NOTES There are no direct fiscal impacts as a result of this request as all fees have been paid by the applicant. Attachment 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 01- .2'j A RESOLUTION INITIATING VACATION PROCEEDINGS TO VACATE AN APPROXIMATELY 9,544 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ON SW 67TH AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION OF SW CLINTON STREET. WHEREAS, the approximately 9,544 square foot portion of the road had previously been dedicated to the public; and WHEREAS, 67th Avenue is unimproved and dead-ends into the SW Haines Road southbound off-ramp of Interstate-5; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested that the City of Tigard initiate Vacation proceedings to vacate an approximately 9,544 square foot portion of public right-of-way, better known as SW 67th Avenue; and WHEREAS, the said portion of public right-of-way may no longer be necessary; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council finds it appropriate to initiate Vacation proceedings for the requested public right-of-way vacation, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby initiates a request for the vacation of an approximately 9,544 square foot portion of public right-of-way commonly know as SW 67th Avenue, as more particularly described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" and by reference, made a part hereof. SECTION 2: A public hearing is hereby called to be held by the City Council on June 26, 2001, at 7:30 PM in the Town Hall at Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, within the City of Tigard, at which time and place the Council will hear any objections thereto and any interested person may appear and be heard for or against the proposed vacating of said public right-of-way. t~Z PASSED: This day of 2001. AAA - ity J§ard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO.01- Page 1 f L ~r"°-'a KI]' 7 7r77 ~ .tt ~ t k ~ ~ t •k r 9 7 J f r~ d ~ ir" ~`+f i a 'i , G-+ i ~ ,rid r ;1 OL Li1~~9/ S tt ~t~~~ ' f~ ,k s~ * ~ „w»-.*.'. ! ~ ~ „~.+.a` y°•+ i. ~ 1 ~ ' k't:i wY•'•• 1. M f t~. q s-'~ ~ <u 7'r i-}vr~Y}•}~,.~~, c t.7r rit ~ ~h u ~ ~ - ~ ~ '~f~~ a s a ^.j~ fy7Y.c k .n: i ~3 r,.~e.~'" a1.~lt~*~ i 6~`~.'t,,...c~ .}:3wvs~.r:[asry~te.~f"»..ta+uM• .s +`h~-~~'s 'k' : `~4~.ctt+t.a ;3' ref: - ~r3. iF: v ~ - ( I ~ ~ y }'mac t 1~~i✓~~ ~.,-F" C`.~X~ :~Y ri~r.,eY-J+• 1-4 t'Y*'If`. • I~Je•. . •:e~..v~.'~ ~ Y ~ 1 77- ~f n Vii' ~ ,r ' t p~'•;~'(, t Z _ _ ~ jJA.4 t: ~ ~ `r-.. Y'~°' •r•~r'"~r,.+,"'_'"`. ! j ~ ter.,,.,,., t } ` ~i 4' t r ~ ry~ ~.`S ~,i~"+"K~ ~:it + g. ~ tom, ` s.. ~ z,+' s~`~, a'.f~{t kac= 7 r f '+j • ~ y VQ~ . i t3 ~~f j(/wsc _ n YF ~ a ~ . H- i y y . _ ,s ! } • ~~,~^}~~tyt~~ K:. ~ ri ...:f +~~a~v~if~ 'f~ ~ci t r ~ ~ ~rrr.s.s_+6rer~•• .a.tl~u~ 1 - ` t g a, fi ' • ~ 'p -ten ~yq~ A `7 ~t rd Y'S . 11►► ~ 4 f ~i Ln, * t~ _ ~ , 1 df.,ry ~ - r `i f •7~ t ri .Fig,,,~~~ t ~,~p~~_- ~ ~ F ~6 ry .sc . i.-~~'.~'n°•4,x43. ~(+1 ~r+4Ci x~t;F-'~n u ~f f! y F, ,Fy yi }M ~ ~.}n+d.r ,lf Nl~ r k -hv •Yl., _v,r n~ k~J%y~ w_:x nom. v~~ ' 1 ~ 'i},i.~ Pw"~'~;..,-1~• rGM ~ •^:c,...w,;we""4^-?'r„" °.M.GL+«+Yer- ~ R yea a s f k ~3' 'N .r.. .t• w PF~~ 'R x • b . ry . ~ r ~ S w~ ' i r k r"P'r "~fr`'tl 15 resa ~j w r . "56~ isRk'_ r. v-' ~i i. f a 'rte -3!4y. gt ' W-I fit= `y. ~Wr4 Ef~xa y. 'y.+ •r ~~',.Z ''l:f1T ~ 1-~' te'L r.t• r a S x.L~ of i r " ~~•fi~ ~ - Y`u~5+~ Q~ 't' t T _ ~ - _ Ott _ ' ~ 3klA i .r',q {rf'~ ~t'i+ftlr'OVvaxawreF~~ewry~~4` yN,.~.N+~~A 'l'a ~ 44 tll. 1N - • r4 J*s ; - ~ . " ' 1"`, t ~~iyipt~ •°"t rs w 'a~c"'r i v 'X" . r.: 1 > ~ Y<i } h ~t - t ~i S , - t £ a ::r r t La 3> 7 i~+~ ~"f is t ~ ~ t~'~' j ~ s ~ Y ~ - -if r ~R ._:i ~ .atc `"'J°'~ " .,ice '~5 t ch 3 ~£a Sg~y r ~ `''rx{';:` K R t • s• s> wn ti r ~.,,7i~' 4 " r 1 t t ° +i- ' r"~2` it r r - - Sf S ,.t,~t hS i r; j~~' rites !T Y j -Y>• T 5, 316 t. - {P : ras r ~ r ~t*`~'~{s' ,:.~r+•s.~~. ~vo.•~wpt~ t..ar...-~, ~r" r - ~ ~ js- R n : +RI►•~ns..i~i4';.:..m'..yc'.~ ~ ..~j 5~ l..` ~ - ~ .~•A~c..n...w-..o>♦r-a- v .d n.. ArWSi ~ ;sw xs~r n u~,. ~ ~ ~ _t - ~ ~ ~ s ~,,Q,.~„.,,,j S.e ~ •r+. r. art, ~rF°"^~~"~'*° y ~l° S.:5 ~ ~ A c l..cecitS+p... +•..•n.«..,.n-M.«ai~. ~~x.,av~ ~ ~~?ti~ ' ..3.' ~ .zr-. c+tr.,'.r:- . _ ..w: : aw~ ~ ':~t~, r•_y: 'zr•.-., s ,a, . { ~ ~ - ,wux , ~ "'r~F~ Cf j ~z ;,`=,-7 ~ ..~,..t+i y-m.c.~~i _ `w ~...v...... v.~s ~u~.ti . -...Y•..rirr'+.: r,,.. ry.• -.,fir. ~~.r . ~ t,-,rr. ogge, • ;~:;i `;f•~h~.ti to 'm T ' ~ ~ ~ - - . ; _ - _:?dt: ~5:+'r,~.~~;f!s"`~r t b'ysa., Z .y'wrv ' s-.- yrYS~i. 'Sid ++r`~'•,~'7~ro r + , AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 26.2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Status of Korean War 50th Anniversary Commemorative Community Project PREPARED BY: Susan Koepping~GVA 1 DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Korean War 50th Anniversary Commemorative Community STAFF RECOMMENDATION No Council action required INFORMATION SUMMARY In 2000 the City of Tigard and the Tigard American Legion Post #158 were identified by the Department of Defense as Korean War 50th Anniversary Commemorative Community project participants. The first year of that project is finished. Attached is a list of the activities that occurred during the first year and anticipated activities of the second year of the project. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY None applicable ATTACHMENT LIST A summary of the events that occurred daring the first year of this project and a list of anticipated activities for the second year is attached. FISCAL NOTES This report requires no funding. Korean War 50th Anniversary Commemorative Community Tigard American Legion Post #158 and City of Tigard Partnership Recap of first year activities: Year 1: Councilor Ken Scheckla, Chairperson Year - Korean War Commemorative flag is flown with the American Flag round POW/ MIA flag at the Tigard American Legion Post #158 October 24, City Council presentation announcing the Korean War 50th Anniversary 2000 Commemorative Community Project and personal recollections told by local Korean War Veterans, Patsy Nestor, Dorcie Olds, Chuck Woodard, and Bernie Healy who is A.L. Post Commander. Ms. Nestor presented a book, The Medal of Honor. Korea 1950-1953 for the Tigard Library November, City Hall lobby display acknowledging local Korean War veterans, 2000 photos of the Wilsonville Korean War Memorial, and informational display panels rovided b y the Department of Defense November, Regal Courier article about the City Hall lobby display 2000 November Veteran's Day 11, 2000 Korean War Commemorative flag was flown on City Hall flagpole January 9, Tigard High School presentations by Patsy Nestor and Fred Liddell to 2001 four sophomore history classes May, 2001 City Hall lobby display commemorating Veterans including photos of 3 local veterans of the Korean War and a short statement by each as well as 4 educational panels provided by the Department of Defense Korean War Commemorative Project May 26 - 28, Memorial Day 2001 American, Korean War Commemorative, POW/MIA, and Oregon flags flown at City Hall May 26, Memorial Day n 2001 American Legion Post #158 presented their annual Memorial Day N ceremony at Crescent View Cemetery June 14, National Flag Day and Pause for the Pledge of Allegiance 2001 Tigard citizens and representatives of the American Legion Post participated in a short ceremony at the City Hall flagpole. Mayor Griffith rq resided over the ceremony a June 26, Report to City Council regarding activities for Year 1 of the Korean War 2001 50th Anniversary Commemorative Community Project 5110 loll in loll I Anticpated second year activities: Year 2: Patsy Nestor, Chairperson The City of Tigard and the Tigard American Legion Post will continue to work as partners. July, 2001 Purchase from the Department of Defense a set of three booklets outlining the first year of the Korean War for the Tigard Library. A similar set will be added to the collection at the Tigard American Legion Post July, 2001 Add a Korean War Commemorative Community page to the City of Tigard website August 4, Tigard Blast parade: Color guard including Korean Flag by American 2001 Legion color and November, Presentations to 5 local service clubs to raise awareness of the 2001 Korean War and those who served. Some service club members may have served in the war and others may have had family members who served January, Presentations by local Korean Way veterans to four sophomore history 2002 classes at Tigard High School Investigate the possibility of working with TVCA to present a cablecast program related to the Commemorative Project Fly the Korean War Commemorative Flag at City Hall on Memorial Day, Veterans Day and at other appropriate opportunities. The American Legion post will continue to fl that flag throughout the year Opportunities for other activities may arise. Whenever possible we will present information to the community to raise the awareness of this war and the effect it had on those who served, their families and their communities. i i IM M4SUSANKWOREAN WAMIST YR RECAP REFORMATTED.DOC i i i 3 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 26.2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Discussion with State Senator Ryan Deckert and State Representative Max Williams PREPARED BY: Cathy Wheatley DEPT HEAD OK W4_%-_CITY MGR OK 4,0" ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL On June 26, 2001, the City Council will have an opportunity to discuss issues of interest to the City of Tigard with State Senator Ryan Deckert and State Representative Max Williams. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Identify issues of interest or concern to Senator Deckert and State Representative Williams INFORMATION SUMMARY Senator Deckert and Representative Williams have agreed to meet with the with the City Council on a regular basis during the 2001 Legislative Session. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Community Character and Quality of Life - Communication Goal - Citizen involvement opportunities will be maximized by providing educational programs on process, assuring accessibility to information in a variety of formats, providing opportunities for input on community issues and establishing and maintaining two-way communication. ATTACHMENT LIST No attachments. FISCAL NOTES None I:%ADMICITY COUNCIUCOUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARIES\DECKERT - WILLIAMS - 6-26-01.DOC -01 AGENDA STEM No. 10 Date: June 216, 2001 PU LIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following gage(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: CONSIDER ADOPTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANCES FOR THE DURHAM QUARRY SITE (CPA2001 -00001 /Z®A2001- 00001 /ZGN2001-00001) Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony I:WDM\GREEMCSIGNUMPH TESTIMONY QJ.DOC AGENDA ITEM No. 10 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent - S eakin In Favor O onent - S eakin A ainst Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. ~v A-Is Q- G~ , (Fc.o ey*-QjO (0 b 7 W W MN ,5-A ;r" Zo" ~o At(n-. t OAA . Cj'11,6 SU / 21') -3w~I Name, Address & Ph a No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. j~.l vr~, .~i52yt in'7~a~ J~~%/s~~~-o, dry Eo3-g La -alt Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. AGENDA ITEM C) FOR AGENDA OF: 6.26.01 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Durham Ouarry Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Zone Ordinance Amendment/Zone Change CPA2001-00001 /ZOA2001 -0000 1 /ZON2001-00001 . PREPARED BY: Julia Hajduk DEPT HEAD OK Y MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council amend the Comprehensive Plan text and map and Development Code text and zoning map to allow for a MUC-1 designation on the portion of the Durham Quarry located in the City of Tigard? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment, zone ordinance amendment and zone change by adopting the attached Ordinance. INFORMATION SUMMARY Washington County has requested a comprehensive plan amendment, a zone change and zone ordinance amendment on this property to change it from Industrial Park (I-P) to a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). The purpose is to be consistent with zoning recently adopted on adjacent property in the City of Tualatin in order to facilitate a mixed use development on the existing Durham Quarry site. The Durham Quarry is a 29 acre parcel owned by Washington County. Approximately 21 acres are located within the City of Tualatin and approximately 8 acres are within the City of Tigard. The Quarry has been declared surplus and, therefore, the County wishes to sell it or lease it on a long term lease to a developer. After many months of multi- jurisdictional meetings, it was determined that a mixed use commercial development was a better use of the surplus land than the existing Industrial Park zone would allow. No development applications have been proposed. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 7, 2001 and voted to recommend approval of the request with concerns. The specific concerns the Planning Commission wished the Council to be aware of are: 1.) The mixed use designation allows for residential development but does not require it, therefore, there is the possibility that this site will be developed as commercial only or residential only; 2.) If Tualatin has the review authority for this site, the project would go through an architectural review board process; and 3.) There were concerns that the traffic report provided did not adequately address potential traffic impacts. The applicant has responded to the Commission's traffic concerns (attachment 6). The City of Tualatin has adopted the same language and standards as are being proposed for the portion of the property in Tigard. While they are open to changes, it should be noted that their standards do not require a specific amount of residential density to be developed. In addition, unlike the Washington Square area, there is no requirement to provide for a certain amount of residential density on this property. None-the-less, that is still an option that the Council can consider if it so chooses. In regard to the concern about review authority and process, the details will be worked out in the IGA, however, the situation would not be unlike that of the urban services area. In the urban services area, Tigard provides planning services using our standards and process. It would be very complex and burdensome to have a unique set of standards and process for one piece of property. Finally, in response to the 3rd concern raised by the Planning Commission, staff has asked that the applicant be prepared to provide more information on anticipated traffic impacts and proposed solutions at the City Council meeting. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Propose modifications to the text. 2. Deny the request. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE, STRATEGY Growth and Growth Management Goal #1- Accommodate growth while protecting the character and livability of new and established areas. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment: 1 - Draft Ordinance adopting the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, zone ordinance amendment and zone change. Exhibits: 1 - Staff Report 2 - Proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendments 3 - Proposed Development Code text amendments 4 - Planning Commission 5-7-01 meeting minutes 5 - Applicant's Narrative dated February 26, 2001 6 - Updated Transportation Assessment FISCAL NOTES The intergovernmental agreement which will be forthcoming will provide for a sharing of fees on a prorated basis for this portion of the site so that the City of Tigard does not forfeit potential revenues by providing a uniform review process. The details will be outlined and can be discussed when the IGA is brought to Council for approval. 1AIrplan\Julia\cpa\durham quarry ais.doc EXHIBIT 4 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes May 7, 2001 1. CALL TO ORDER President Wilson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Wilson; Commissioners Anderson, Olsen, Padgett, Scolar, Sutton, and Topp Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Mores and Munro Staff Present: Jim Hendryx, Director of Community Development; Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner; Jerree Gaynor, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS Next meeting is May 21st. June meeting is set for June 19tH 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES Commissioner Padgett moved and Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion to approve the April 16, 2001, meeting minutes as submitted. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed by a vote of 5-0. Commissioners Olsen and Wilson abstained. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2001-00001 / ZON 2001-00001 / ZOA 2001-00001 DURHAM QUARRY REQUEST: Washington County has requested a comprehensive plan amendment, a zone change and zone ordinance amendment on this property to change it from Industrial Park (I-P) to a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1). The purpose is to be consistent with zoning recently adopted on adjacent property in the City of Tualatin in order to facilitate a mixed use development on the existing Durham Quarry site. The Durham Quarry is a 29-acre parcel owned by Washington County. Approximately 21 acres are located within the City of Tualatin and approximately 8 acres is within the City of Tigard. The Quarry has been declared surplus and, therefore, the County wishes to sell it or lease it on a long-term lease to a developer. After many months of PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 7, 2001 - Page I 11=11110FAMNOW 11 = ME multi jurisdictional meetings, it was determined that a mixed use commercial development was a better use of the surplus land than the existing Industrial Park zone would allow. No development applications have been proposed. LOCATION: Corner of 72nd Avenue and Bridgeport; WCTM 2S113AC tax lot 01200. ZONE: I-P (existing); MUC-1 (proposed). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Sections 18.380.030, 18.390.050 and 18.390.060; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 3.3.1, 5.1, 6.1.1, 8.2.2, 9.1.1, 12.1.1 and 12.2.1; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 10, 12 and 13; and Metro Functional Plan Titles 1, 3, 4, 7, and the Regional Transportation Plan. President Wilson stated that Washington County is a significant client of his office, but he has no financial interest in this application. Commissioner Topp stated that he has occasionally done work in the past for Gramor Development, which is currently bidding for development of the site, but that he does not have anything to do with this particular site. No challenges were made for conflict for bias or conflict of interest. STAFF REPORT Julia Hajduk presented the staff report on behalf of the City. She presented a vicinity map showing that the subject Durham Quarry site is currently zoned Industrial Park. The site consists of 29 acres, 8 acres of which are located in Tigard. The quarry is owned and operated by Washington County, which has deemed the site surplus land. It has been determined that because the property to the south in Tualatin is zoned as commercial, it would be appropriate to rezone the portion of the site located in Tigard for similar commercial use. The request is to rezone the site for mixed use commercial similar to the Washington Square area, which allows for a mixture of residential and various commercial types of uses. The request meets all of the standards except for the revisions set forth on attachments 2 and 3. Upon inquiries by the Commissioners, Ms. Hajduk offered the following clarifications: ■ MUC zoning differs slightly from MUE zoning in the types of permitted commercial uses, design standards, and the density that would be allowed. In accordance with the Metro requirements, general retail use in buildings will be limited to 60,000 square feet. ■ In regard to the City of Tualatin having site design authority over property located in Tigard, the proposal is for Tualatin to have jurisdiction over review authority for development on the site. Tigard would receive fees for building and planning permits, so there would be no loss of revenue to Tigard on this issue, but design review would be processed in Tualatin. Tualatin has PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 7, 2001 - Page 2 adopted the same development standards as the Tigard standards. The Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) will address issues regarding design review and aesthetic standards. There are still a lot of details in the IGA that need to be fine tuned. Commissioner Padgett suggested that the Commission's recommendation to City Council include language to make Council aware that design review by Tualatin may be included in the IGA. • The final zoning designation will be MUC-1. The Washington Square Regional Center zoning, which has been adopted but is not yet implemented, has a MUC zone designation. The standards for MUC-1 are the same as MUC with a few modifications. ■ This is a site-specific zone change and will not affect the rest of the I-P district. The zone change for this site is appropriate because one owner owns the entire site and the majority of the property is currently zoned commercial. • The consultant will address the reasons for the current regulations requiring that wireless cell towers may only be attached to existing buildings within the height limits. Staff can look into making a recommendation if that language needs to be changed. • When the site is developed, a traffic study will be done to look at traffic impacts. An application cannot be denied if it contains proposals for remedying traffic impacts caused by the development, but conditions can be imposed requiring mitigation of any impact. The applicant and consultant will address this in more detail. President Wilson stated that he does not believe the two zones are similar, as represented in the DKS Associates study. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION Frank Angelo, consultant for Washington County (620 SW Main, Suite 201, Portland, OR 97205) and Larry Eisenberg, Facilities Manager for Washington County (111 SE Washington, Hillsboro, OR 97123) presented the application on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Angelo gave a brief history of the subject request. The cities of Tualatin and Tigard have been working with Washington County on the IGA for about 18 months. The usefulness of the Durham Quarry has expired and the County declared it surplus land a couple of years ago. The County put out an RFP to develop a quality, mixed use type of development. Approximately 21 acres located in Tualatin are zoned general commercial and approximately 7- 8 acres located in Tigard are zoned industrial. The County's intent is to create a quality mixed use development for the community using high quality design standards. With two zoning designations on the property, it would be difficult to realize this intent. The IGA will be signed by the County and both cities and will dictate and direct how future development will be reviewed on the site. The intent is to go through the City of Tualatin with the development application. The objective in creating the mixed use commercial district is to have a common set PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 7, 2001 - Page 3 of standards for the entire site. The Washington Square MUC district was used as a model for the new MUC-1 zone proposed. The MUCH zone has been adopted in the City of Tualatin zoning code. Currently the IGA is being reviewed by legal counsel for both cities and the County. It is expected to be completed within the next two months. The MUCH zone on that site will not become effective until the IGA is signed by all agencies. The IGA will set forth the coordination aspects and the City of Tigard will be involved with any application process. Fees will be prorated between the jurisdictions. The architectural design review process will go through the City of Tualatin, but the City of Tigard will have an opportunity to participate in that. As the site is in the Metro Title 4 mapping area, big box uses will be prohibited; retail uses are limited to 60,000 square feet in the MUCH zone in accordance with Metro requirements. The City of Tualatin requested that the clause regarding wireless communication towers be included in the IGA. Towers will be permitted, but are required to be attached to buildings. In terms of the traffic generation assumptions contained in the DKS Associates letter, the most intensive types of uses are considered. in both the existing and the proposed zone. It is recognized that traffic impact is a big issue at that location and it will be addressed when a development proposal is submitted. The County is currently in the process of selecting and making a recommendation on a developer for the site. The recommendation will be submitted to the Board of Commissioners later this month. Larry Eisenberg, Facilities Manager for Washington County, is coordinating the development of this project. He stated that because the property is owned by a public entity, this is an opportunity to influence development of the site in a manner that is mutually beneficial to all the affected jurisdictions. The County recognizes the significant traffic concerns in this vicinity. It will address these issues and work with a development team to improve traffic in the area. The County's intent is to maintain active participation to ensure a high quality development. The property is owned by the County Roads Department and will not be sold; they are considering a long-term lease-purchase arrangement for the site. Any proceeds from this project will go into the County road fund to improve + the transportation system. The County advocates the mixed use, high density concept and this development provides an opportunity to meet the needs of local and Metro area residents. The goal is to create additional park & ride opportunities and underground parking. The creation of a major theater on this site is being considered. This use is highly compatible with the necessity to address the parking needs of the area as well as meet the goal of developing a high quality mixed use development, create a long-term revenue stream for road and transportation improvements, and enhance the area. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 7, 2001 - Pagc 4 M1 11111110 IMMMEJ Mr. Angelo stated that one of the objectives of the IGA is to lay out the procedural review process, but more importantly it will solidify the partnership between the participating jurisdictions in terms of how future development occurs in the area. The IGA will ensure that coordination occurs among the jurisdictions and the objectives of both communities are reached. Mr. Angelo, Mr. Eisenberg, and staff responded to inquiries by the Commissioners as follows: ■ Regarding the current level of service at the subject intersection, no specific information is available, but it is estimated to be D or E. ODOT is interested in future development at this location and has considered moving 72nd Avenue further west from the interchange. There is also a concept discussed to connect 72"d Avenue to Hazel Fern, to divert traffic around the interchange through the subject site. A currently scheduled project on Lower Boones Ferry Road creates an opportunity for this development to improve the interchange. 72"d Avenue and Lower Boones Ferry Road are County roads. Funding for this interchange improvement is not currently available. The development team will be considering all available avenues for funding. One possible source of funding is traffic impact fees. The developer could be required to provide some improvements as a condition of approval. In regard to permitted uses, a variance cannot be given for use restrictions, such as for a use that is not allowed, but can be given for such things as setbacks. Generally, variances are for development standards, for example to quantify dimensions, and not to extend uses. Uses are well defined in the code; however, classification of a specific use may be subject to the planning director's interpretation. Most specific uses can be accommodated within the current use classifications. If there were any question as to the classification within a general category of a specific use as proposed, the planning director would determine the classification. ■ The development standards of the Tigard and Tualatin codes are intended to be identical for this MUC-1 zone, with minor variations due to the structure of the two codes. The MUC-1 zone is modeled after the Washington Square MUC zone. Tualatin adopted the new zone last year and has indicated a willingness to modify the standards based on input from Tigard or from the developer. To provide the opportunity for mixed uses in this development, residential use is permitted in this new zone. A mixed use zone implies a higher design standard. Commissioner Padgett commented that perhaps a minimum residential percentage requirement for mixed use zoning should be considered for addition in the code. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 7, 2001 - Page 5 ■ General retail outdoor sales, such as outdoor eating patios, would be allowed, but outdoor car lots, for example, would be prohibited. ■ Tualatin has an architectural review board with decision-making authority, which reviews applications as they come in. Tigard staff would have an opportunity to comment at those review meetings, but would not have a member on the board itself. However, in establishing a negotiating team with the chosen developers, there will be participation from both the City of Tigard and the City of Tualatin, as well as the County, on the negotiating team. The negotiating team will establish with the developer the exact details of the project in all aspects. This provides all of the jurisdictions an opportunity to shape the development before it reaches the review board process. PUBLIC TESTIMONY None PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED The Commissioners discussed the following issues: 1) a minimum percentage requirement for residential use in a mixed use zone; 2) office and retail use in a mixed use zone; 3) the Tualatin architectural review committee, Tigard's history of not using such a process, and formal representation of Tigard on that committee; and, 4) traffic concerns and improvement of the interchange. President Wilson stated that he wants a real traffic study done for this area. He presented a comparison, attached as Exhibit A, of the permitted uses and development standards for the current I-P zone and the new MUCH zone. He believes the DKS Associates study is inaccurate and that this area will be developed more intensely. Commissioner Topp summarized the concerns of the Commission: 1) that development will be subject to architectural and planning review by the City of Tualatin; 2) that the traffic study is insufficient to adequately determine the impacts of the potential development; 3) emphasize that mixed use as proposed does not require a minimum mixture of residential and commercial - it could develop as all commercial or all residential. Commissioner Topp moved to recommend approval of the Durham Quarry Project, CPA 2001-00001, ZOA 2001-00001, ZON 2001-00001, with emphasis that the items of concern as listed above are brought to Council's attention. Commissioner Padgett seconded the motion. A voice vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. 6. OTHER BUSINESS None PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 7, 2001 - Page 6 1111111111M___ - 111101 =J 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Serree aynor, P nning ommission Secretary ATTE President dick Wilson PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - May 7, 2001 - Pagc 7 INA EXHIBIT 5 R Washington County • • " • DURHAM QUARRY MIXED E DEVELOPMENT Application for Text and Map Amendments to The City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan And Tigard Development Code SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF TIGARD Prepared by: F~croty Angelo Eaten & Associates 620 SW Main, Suite 201 Portland, Oregon 97205 February 26, 2001 Durham (quarry Mixed Use Development Application for Text and Map Amendments to The City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan and Tigard Development Code TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Application Summary ...............................................................................................1 II. Background Information ...............................................................................................4 III. Conformance with Applicable City of Tigard Criteria for Legislative Amendments ..............................................................................................8 IV. Conformance with Applicable City of Tigard Criteria for Quasi-Judicial Amendments .........................................................................................10 V. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan Policies ...........................................................12 VI. Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Compliance ...............................16 VII. LCDC Statewide Planning Goals and Findings ...........................................................19 Exhibit A: Proposed Tigard Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Exhibit B: Proposed Text Amendments to the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.520, Commercial Zoning Districts Exhibit C: Proposed Text Amendments to the Tigard Development Code, proposed new Chapter 18.640, Durham Quarry Design Standards Exhibit D: Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments Exhibit E: City of Tigard Zoning Map Amendments Exhibit F: Traffic Impact Assessment from DKS Exhibit G: Neighborhood Meeting Materials -=Mai I. APPLICATION SUMMARY PROPOSAL: A request for approval of the following Comprehensive Plan and Development Code amendments within the area known as the Durham Quarry. Type IV Legislative Amendments ♦ Amend the text of the Comprehensive Plan to reflect the new Mixed Use Comprehensive Plan District on the Durham Quarry site, including amending the Mixed Use Comprehensive Plan District created as part of the Washington Square amendments. ♦ Amend the text of the Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.520, Commercial Zoning District, to include a new base zone (MUC-1) specifically limited to the Durham Quarry Site and tied to the Durham Quarry Design Standards (18.640). ♦ Amend the text of the Tigard Development Code to include a new chapter entitled Durham Quarry Design Standards (Chapter 18.640), which is based on Tualatin's Mixed Use Overlay. ♦ Amend the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan map to change the area of the Durham Quarry site from Light Industrial to Mixed Use Commercial. bpe III-PC Quasi-Judicial Map Amendment ♦ Amend the Tigard Zoning District Map to change the Durham Quarry site from Industrial Park (I-P) to Mixed Use Commercial - I (MUC- 1). Attached are the proposed amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and Development Code necessary to implement the Durham Quarry development plans. Proposed amendments to the following documents are attached as follows: ♦ Exhibit A: Tigard Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments e Exhibit B: Tigard Development Code, Chapter 18.520, Commercial Zoning District Amendments ♦ Exhibit C: Tigard Development Code Amendments, proposed new Chapter 18.640, Durham Quarry Design Standards ♦ Exhibit D: Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments ♦ Exhibit E: City of Tigard Zoning District Map Amendments ♦ Exhibit F: Traffic Impact Assessment (DKS) ♦ Exhibit G: Neighborhood Meeting Materials Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 1 February 26, 2001 OWNER/ Washington County APPLICANT: Larry Eisenberg, Facilities Manager 111 SE Washington MS 42 Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 Phone: 503-846-4474 FAX: 503-846-4851 Email: larr-eisenbern,(aico washington.or.us APPLICANT'S Frank Angelo REPRESENTATIVE: Angelo Eaton & Associates 620 SW Main Street, Suite 201 Portland, OR 97223 Phone: 503-227-3664 FAX: 503-227-3679 Email: faneelo(cangeloeaton.ocm COMPREHENSIVE Light Industrial PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING Industrial Park DESIGNATION: LOCATION: The area is bounded generally by 72"d Avenue on the east, Findlay Street on the north, the Tigard/Tualatin city limits on the south, and the Tigard/Durham city limits on the west. (See Figure 1, Vicinity Map) APPLICABLE a Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 6.1.1, 8.1.1., 8.2.2, 9.1.1, 12.1.1, REVIEW CRITERIA: and 12.2.1; ♦ Community Development Code Chapter 18.380.030, 18.390.050, 18.390.060, and 18.390.060(G); Statewide Goals 1-19 and Oregon Administrative Rule 660-12-060. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 2 February 26, 2001 Figure 1: Vicinity Map z Iwo W~ FQSBER Tigard w D ST WDONALO ST KRUSE o DR m ~ME~1 C) GP Subject Site ^ Z DURHAM RD ~ p4 ~ ` e A ~Oi u r h UALATIN ' RD Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 3 February 26, 2001 Gill, Ii. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Washington County owns the Durham Quart' site at the northwest corner of SW Bridgeport Road and SW Lower Boones Ferry Road (See Figure 1, Vicinity Map). The site is approximately twenty-nine acres and the County has declared it surplus and will sell it, or lease it on a long term lease, to a developer. The County desires to obtain good market value and desires quality development on the site. The cities of Tualatin and Tigard desire quality development on the site and a clear and consistent development review process. Of the approximately twenty-nine acres, approximately twenty-one acres are in the City of Tualatin and approximately eight are in the City of Tigard. Two general issues exist because the property is in two cities. First, Washington County and the two cities anticipate prospective developers will prefer to not deal with two cities and two different sets of development standards. Second, the County and the cities desire a mixed-use type of commercial development (retail, office, residential, personal services, business services). To address these issues the County and the two cities are working together to provide one reviewing agency and one set of standards that can achieve a mixed use development approach for the twenty-nine acre area. The first issue (multiple jurisdictions) will be addressed by an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between Tualatin and Tigard to allow Tualatin to review and decide all land use applications and building permit applications for the entire site. The second issue (mixed uses) will be addressed by placing compatible mixed-use commercial planning districts on the twenty-one and eight acre areas. The City of Tualatin recently adopted a new Chapter in the Tualatin Development Code (TDC) to allow mixed use commercial development on the twenty-one acres within its city limits. Other issues exist, but they will be addressed separately. For example, transportation improvements and issues in the area will be addressed more specifically when a development proposal is prepared. The County, Tualatin and Tigard have been 40 working with ODOT, Tri-Met and the City of Durham on these issues. Currently, the eight acres in Tigard are zoned Industrial Park which does not allow mixed use commercial development with a Comprehensive Plan designation of Light Industrial. The City of Tigard has asked Washington County (the property owner) to apply to change Comprehensive Plan designation from Light Industrial to Mixed Use Commercial and the zone from Industrial Park to a Mixed Use Commercial Zone. The City of Tigard's action on this application will provide for a compatible set of regulations (Mixed Use Commercial) on the remaining eight acres. Comparison of Existing Zoning with Proposed Zoning - Uses As shown in Table 1, on the following page, the current Industrial Parking (IP) zoning on the site allows many of the same uses that would be allowed by the proposed Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1) zoning, including offices, commercial lodging, indoor entertainment and some retail. The MUC-I zoning primarily differs from the IP zoning by allowing multi-family residential and a wider range of retail and community- support facilities and by prohibiting light industrial uses. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 4 February 26, 2001 Table 1 Summary Comparison of IP and MUC-1 Uses USE CATEGORY I-P MUC-1 RESIDENTIAL Household Living R- allows for caretaker or kennel P - 25 to 50 dwelling units per owner/operator residence acre Group Living N C Transitional Housing N C Home Occupation N P CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) C Basic Utilities C Colleges N C Community Recreation N N Cultural Institutions N P Day Care R- may not exceed 20%of the entire P square footage and uses must not exceed 60,000 square feet. Emer enc Services P P Medical Centers N C Postal Service P P Public Support Facilities p P Religious Institutions N C Schools N C Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges N P COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging P P Eating and Drinking R- may not exceed 20%of the entire P Establishments square footage and uses must not exceed 60,000 square feet Entertainment-Oriented o Major Event Entertainment N C e Outdoor Entertainment P N o Indoor Entertainment p P s Adult Entertainment N N General Retail e Sales-Oriented R- may not exceed 20%of the entire P square footage and uses must not exceed 60,000 square feet o Personal Services R- may not exceed 20%of the entire P square footage and uses must not exceed 60,000 square feet o Repair-Oriented P R -60,000 square feet or less o Bulk Sales N R -60,000 square feet or less o Outdoor Sales N N o Animal-Related P P Motor Vehicle Related o Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N N o Motor Vehicle C R Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 5 February 26, 2001 USE CATEGORY I-P MUC-1 Servicing/Repair s Vehicle Fuel Sales P C Office P P Self-Service Storage P N Non-Accessory Parking P P INDUSTRIAL Industrial Services N N Manufacturing and Production N ♦ Light Industrial P N a General Industrial N N ♦ Heavy Industrial N N Railroad Yards N N Research and Development P R Warehouse/Freight Movement N N Waste-Related N N Wholesale Sales R N OTHER Agriculture/Horticulture P N Cemeteries N N Detention Facilities C N Heliports C N Mining N N Wireless Communication P/R P/R Facilities Rail Lines/Utility Corridors P P Other NA NA P=Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted Comparison of Existing Zoning with Proposed Zoning - Development Standards The proposed standards for MUC-1 are comparable to those proposed for that portion of the site that is within the City of Tualatin, and thus will allow the site to develop as a single, consistent project. The standards for MUC-1 will allow for a more compact, urban environment than would be allowed under the existing IP zoning. Table 2, on the following page, provides a summary comparison of the proposed MUC- 1 standards and the existing IP standards. It should be noted that development under the IP standards could be intensified using existing exception language and/or Planned Development rules. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 6 February 26, 2001 10 ~Ml NON!! 111111 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN IP AND MUC-1 STANDARD I-P MUC-1 Minimum Lot Size None None Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. None Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 35 ft. None - Side facing street on corner & through lots [1] 20 ft. None - Side yard 0/50 ft. None - Rear yard 0/50 ft. j None - Distance between front of garage & property line abutting a public or private street - None Maximum setbacks None Except as determined in the Architectural Review process, maximum building setbacks are: Commercial: 10 feet front and streetside; 0 interior side and rear, except when the side and rear abut a residential district it is 20 feet. Residential: 20 feet front; 0 rear and interior side, except when the side and rear abut a residential district it is 20 feet; 20 feet streetside. Maximum height 45 ft. 70 ft. Minimum building height None Except for theaters and cinemas which can be one story, 20 feet Maximum Site Coverage [2] 75% None for non-residential. The maximum density for residential-only projects is 50 dwelling units per net acre. Minimum FAR/Density None For non-residential development and mixed use development which includes a residential component is 0.50. The minimum density for residential-only ' projects is 25 du i per net acre. There is no minimum FAR for residential-only projects. Maximum Landscape Requirement 25% [Detailed standards] J I Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 7 February 26, 2001 III. CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD CRITERIA FOR LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS The applicant requests that the proposed text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code and the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan map be processed as a Type IV procedure. Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy. Type IV matters are considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decisions made by the City Council. Chapter 18.390.060 establishes procedures for consideration of legislative and quasi-judicial changes to the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, implementing ordinances and maps. Section 18.390.060(G) lists the factors upon which the Planning Commission and City Council shall base their decisions. These are addressed below. 18.390.060 Type IV Procedure A. Pre-Application conference. ® Response: As required by this section a Pre-Application conference was with City staff in accordance with the requirements and procedures of Section 18.390.080C. C. Application requirements. Response: A completed Type IV application form is included with this submittal package. The application includes the required information including 18 copies of the narrative addressing the appropriate criteria. The required fee has been submitted. In addition, a neighborhood meeting was held on June 29, 2000 at the Tigard Fire Department, Station 51, 8935 SW Burnham Road, to present an overview of the proposed amendments to the community in accordance with the City's neighborhood meeting requirements. A summary of the meeting and affidavits of mailing and posting are included in Exhibit G. D. Notice of hearin&. Response: This land use action involves legislative and quasi-judicial amendments therefore, as per Type IV procedures two hearings one before the Planning Commission and one before the City Council shall be held. Notice of the hearing will be provided in accordance with Tigard's notification requirements. G. Decision-Making,, Considerations: The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on the following factors: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under the Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197, Response: The proposed amendments comply with all applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Compliance with the Goals is addressed in Section VII of this application. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 8 February 26, 2001 -in long go] 11 a 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; Response: Compliance with the State's Transportation Planning Rule is addressed in Section VII of this application. 3. Any applicable METRO regulations; Response: The proposed amendments comply with all applicable METRO regulations. Compliance with the Metro Functional Plan is addressed in Section VI of this application 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and Response: The proposed change is consistent with all applicable plan policies (See Sections V). Additionally, since the existing Light Industrial Comprehensive Plan designation was applied to the site, the quarry operation has ceased, thereby resulting in a change in circumstances affecting the property. The cities of Tigard and Tualatin have been working with Washington County to identify an appropriate mix of uses for the site and have agreed to work together to help encourage a high quality, mixed use development on the site. 5. Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances Response: The applicable implementing ordinances contained in the Tigard Community Development Code are addressed in this section of the application. i i i i i S Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 9 February 26, 2001 1111MIMIEN IIIIIIE110111mmmi r IV. CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD CRITERIA FOR QUASI-JUDICIAL AMENDMENTS The applicant requests that the proposed amendment to the Zoning District Map be processed as a Type III PC procedure. Type III-PC procedures apply to quasi-judicial permits and actions that predominantly contain discretionary approval criteria. Type III-PC actions are decided by the Planning Commission, with appeals to or review by the City Council. 18380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map In accordance with 18.380.030, Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map, a quasi- judicial zoning map amendment shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in Subsection D below. The Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. B. Standards for making quasi judicial decisions. Ai recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 1 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; Response: As described above the proposed change is consistent with all applicable plan policies. The proposed amendment to the Zoning District Map (Exhibit 13) will occur concurrently with the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan map from Light Industrial to Mixed Use Commercial, thus the proposed zoning amendments will be compliant with the Comprehensive Plan Map amendment. Compliance with the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies is addressed in Section V of this application. 2. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and Response: The proposed amendments are compliant with the applicable standards of this code and other applicable implementing ordinances. The applicable standards of this code are addressed in this section of the application. Section VI of this application addresses compliance with the titles of the Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan. Section VII of this application address compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Transportation Planning Rule. " 3. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the " comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. Response: Since the existing Industrial Park zoning was applied to the site, the quarry operation has ceased a and Washington County has declared the property surplus, thereby resulting in a change in circumstances a affecting the property. The cities of Tigard and Tualatin have been working with Washington County to identify an appropriate mix of uses for the site and have agreed to work together to help encourage a high quality, mixed use development on the site. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 10 February 26, 2001 18.390.050 Type III Procedure A. Pre-Application conference. A Pre-Application conference is required for all Type III actions. The requirements and procedures for a Pre-Application conference are described in Section 18.390.080C. Response: As required by this section a Pre-Application conference was held with City staff in accordance with the requirements and procedures of Section 18.390.080C. B. Application requirements. 1. Application forms. 't'ype III applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director as provided by Section 18.390.080 E1; Response: A completed application form is included as part of this application. 2. Content. Response: A completed application form is included as part of this application. The relevant criteria have been addressed in sufficient detail for review and action. The required fee has been paid. Two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes have been provided for all persons who are property owners of record as specified in Section 18.390.050C. An impact study is not included with this application because no specific development is proposed at this time. However, the transportation impacts of the proposed amendment have been addressed pursuant to the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule. In addition, a neighborhood meeting was held on June 29, 2000 at the Tigard Fire Department, Station 51, 8935 SW Burnham Road, to present an overview of the proposed amendments to the community in accordance with the City's neighborhood meeting requirements. A summary of the meeting and affidavits of mailing and posting are included in Exhibit G. C. Notice of hearine. 1. Mailed notice. Response: Notice of the Type III hearing will be provided in accordance with Tigard's notification requirements. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton 8 Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 11 February 28, 2001 V. COMPLIANCE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES General Policies: Policy 1.1.11 (a) requires that legislative changes are consistent with statewide planning goals and the regional development plan. Response: The proposal is consistent with statewide planning goals as addressed above under 'Statewide Goals'. The proposal conforms with the applicable portions of the Metro "Urban Growth Management Functional Plan" that was approved for adoption on October 24, 1996, by the Metro Council (See Section VI of this application which addresses Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Compliance). Citizen Involvement: Policy 2.1.1 states that the City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program and shall assure that citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Response: The Planning Commission and City Council hearings will be legally advertised. Notice will be sent to property owners within 500' of the subject property to ensure that they will have the opportunity to learn about the hearing and to participate in it. In addition, a neighborhood meeting was held on June 29, 2000 at the Tigard Fire Department, Station 51, 8935 SW Burnham Road, to present an overview of the proposed amendments to the community in accordance with the City's neighborhood meeting requirements. A summary of the meeting and affidavits of mailing and posting are included in Exhibit G. Housing: Policy 6.1.1 requires the City shall provide an opportunityfor a diversity of housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent level& Response: This policy is primarily implemented through OAR 660-07, the Metropolitan Housing Rule. The rule requires that the City maintain sufficient residential buildable land to provide the opportunity for at least 50% of new units to be attached single family or multi-family housing and to provide for an overall density of ten units per acre. The City is currently in compliance with this rule. The proposed Durham Quarry Mixed Use Commercial zoning will allow new multi-family developments and will therefore increase the supply of land available for multi-family housing. The current Industrial Park zoning only allows individual caretaker dwellings. Transportation: Policy 8. 1.1 requires the City to plan for a safe and efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated future growth and development. Response: As noted in Exhibit F, the change from Industrial Park to Mixed Use Commercial-1 will not significantly impact the City of Tigard's street system. Transit: Policy 8.2.2: The city shall encourage the expansion and use of public transit by. A. Locating land intensive uses in close proximity to transitways, Response: The Durham Quarry mixed use development will allow the development of more intense land uses in close proximity to existing bus lines on 72nd Avenue and on Lower Boones Ferry Road. As well, the site is within one-half mile of the Tualatin Park-and-Ride lot. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 12 February 26, 2001 110111111011111 B. Incorporating provisions into the community development code which require development proposals to provide transit facilities; and Response: The existing development code addresses the provision of transit facilities, thus required facilities will be provided when development is proposed on the site. C. Supporting efforts by TRI-MET and other groups to provide for the needs of the transit disadvantaged Response: The City of Tigard, together with the City of Tualatin and Washington County, will continue to work with Tri-Met on issues of the transit disadvantaged. Ener Policy 9.1.1: The city shall encourage a reduction in energy consumption by increased opportunities for energy conservation and the production of energy from alternative sources. Response: Allowing mixed use development on the Durham Quarry site will encourage reduction in energy consumption by allowing the opportunity for housing to be located in close proximity to jobs and transit. Locational Criteria: Policy 12.1.1: The city shall provide for housing densities in accordance with: a Applicable Plan Policies; Response: The proposed Durham Quarry mixed-use zone (MUC-1) will allow high-density residential. b. Applicable Locational Criteria; 4. Medium-High Density and High Density Residential A. The following factors will be the determinants of the areas designated for high density on the plan map: (1) Areas which are not committed to low density development, Response: The Durham Quarry site is not committed to low density development. (2) Areas which can be buffered from low density residential areas in order to maximize the privacy of established low density residential areas, Response: Neighboring uses include a mix of office and residential in the City of Durham to the west, commercial to the east, light industrial to the north, and the remainder of the Durham Quarry site in Tualatin to the south. The existing development code has buffering standards. (3) Areas which have direct access from a major collector or arterial street, Response: The Durham Quarry site will have direct access via Bridgeport Road and/or 72"d Avenue. Specific access points will be determined at the time of development review and will be determined based on a traffic analysis. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 13 February 26, 2001 (4) Areas which are not subject to development limitations; Response: There are no known streams, wetlands, steep slopes, areas of high ground water or other areas which might be subject to development limitations on this site. However, should such areas be identified through the development process, the existing Tigard Development Code addresses issues of site development limitations. (S) Areas where the existing facilities have the capacity for additional development, Response: As described Exhibit F, the proposed rezoning from IP to MUC-1 will not significantly impact the City of Tigard's street system. In general, mixed-use development can benefit the transportation system by reducing the overall number of trips by providing more opportunities for employment and retail activities on the site. Any proposed development on the site would necessarily provide transportation improvements sufficient to support proposed new development and land use densities. Water, sewer and stormwater facilities are or will be available to the site when development is proposed. (6) Areas within one-quarter mile ofpublic transit; Response: Existing bus lines serve this area via 72nd Avenue and Lower Boones Ferry Road. (7) Areas within one-quarter mile from neighborhood and general commercial shopping centers or business and office centers; and Response: Neighborhood and general commercial shopping, business and office centers will likely be located on the Durham Quarry site, together with any proposed multi-family residential. (8) Areas adjacent to either private or public permanent open space. Response: The Durham City Park is the closest park to the site. B. The fallowing factors will be determinants of the density ranges allowed in the medium-high and high densityplanned areas should the City adopt more than one, high density zone: (1) The topography and natural features of the area and the degree of possible buffering from established low density residential areas; Response: Given the topography, natural features and degree of possible buffering from established low- density residential areas, the Durham Quarry site is well suited to the proposed density of 25 to 50 units per acre. (2) The capacity of the services, Response: Given the capacity of available services, the Durham Quarry site is well suited to the proposed density of 25 to 50 units per acre. (3) The distance from public transit, and I Response: Existing bus lines serve this area via 72"d Avenue and Lower Boones Ferry Road. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton 8 Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 14 February 26, 2001 (4) The relationship of the site to existing neighborhood and general commercial centers and of ce and business centers Response: Given the relationship of the site to existing neighborhoods and the potential for the on-site development of commercial centers and office and business centers, the Durham Quarry site is well suited to the proposed density of 25 to 50 units per acre as part of the overall mixed-use development. Policy 12.2.1 New commercial zones A. Provide for commercial development based on the type of use, its size and required trade area Response: The new mixed use commercial zone (MUC-1) will not differ significantly from existing commercial uses in the City plan and code, except that it will allow a mix of commercial and residential development. In addition, the proposed design standards for MUC-I will provide for a higher intensity, pedestrian- and transit-oriented development. B. Apple all applicable plan policies Response: Exhibit A is the attached plan policies that will be added to the City's plan regarding the new Mixed-Use Commercial area. ® C. Apply the appropriate locationl criteria applicable to the scale of the project. ~i Response: Exhibit A is the attached plan policies that will be added to the City's plan regarding the new Mixed-Use Commercial areas. PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL OR REVISED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LANGUAGE Certain Comprehensive Plan language will require amendment or additional language to address the proposed Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development. Exhibit A includes the specific language from the Comprehensive Plan that requires amendment. N Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 15 February 26, 2001 11010 111001 Iiiiiii'loillis I VI. METRO URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONAL PLAN COMPLIANCE Title 8, Section 3.A. of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (Functional Plan) requires all plan amendment and zone change proposals to be consistent with the Functional Plan. This section addresses the proposal in light of Functional Plan requirements. The following analysis reviews the applicable portions of the Functional Plan and demonstrates how this proposal is consistent with the purpose and requirements of the Functional Plan. Title 1- Requirements for Housing and Employment Accommodations Functional Plan policies in Title 1 seek ways to increase the capacity within the urban growth boundary, such as changing local zoning to accommodate development at higher densities in locations supportive of the transportation system. Response: The proposed amendments, by allowing mixed use development, including multi- family residential at densities of 25 to 50 dwelling units per acre, are supportive of the intent of Title 1. Title 2 - Regional Parking Policy To meet state TPR requirements to reduce new parking spaces and vehicle miles traveled in the region. Excessive parking requirements can result in less efficient land use; therefore, Metro's Table 2 requires limits on the minimum and maximum number of parking spaces. Response: The site includes both Parking Zone A and Zone B. The City's existing standards for off~street parking (Chapter 18.765) will continue to apply to this site. These standards address the minimum and maximum number of parking spaces allowed in Zone A and Zone B. Title 3 - Water Quality, Flood Management, and Fish/Wildlife Habitat Conservation Protect beneficial uses and functional values of water quality and flood management resources by limiting uses in these areas. Establish buffer zones around resource areas to protect from new development. Response: A small portion of the southwest corner of the site appears on Metro's Title 3 map as a wetland area. This portion of the site included quarry operations and has been disturbed. Tigard's Wetland s and Riparian Setback Map, however, does not indicate the presence of any wetlands or resources on the site. Issues related to Title 3, if any, will be addressed during future development review actions. -a 1 a Title 4 - Retail in Employment and Industrial Areas This title restricts some types of commercial development in designated Employment and Industrial Areas. The Title 4 "Employment and Industrial Areas Map" designates the Durham Quarry site as an "Employment Area". This designation requires that the City amend its comprehensive plans and implementing regulations, if necessary, to require a process resulting in a land use decision for any Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 16 February 26, 2001 retail uses larger than 60,000 square feet of gross leasable area per building or business on those lands where such uses are currently allowed by any process. The standards for the land use decision to allow any such retail uses shall require: (l) a demonstration in the record that transportation facilities adequate to serve the retail use, consistent with Metro's functional plans for transportation, will be in place at the time the retail use begins operation; and (2) a demonstration that transportation facilities adequate to meet the transportation need for the other planned uses in the Employment Areas are included in the applicable comprehensive plan provisions. ® Response: The proposed MUC-1 zoning district would permit "bulk sales" and "repair-oriented" commercial uses provided the use is no larger than 60,000 square feet of gross floor area per building or business. The adequacy of transportation facilities to meet the transportation needs of the proposed development, as well as other planned uses in the Employment Area, will be addressed at the time of development review for those retail uses that may be greater than 60,000 square feet. Title S - Neighbor Cities and Rural Reserves The intent of this title is to clearly define Metro policy with regard to areas outside the Metro Urban Growth boundary. Response: This proposal does not involve any areas outside the Metro urban growth boundary and therefore this title of the Functional Plan is not applicable. Title 6 - Superceded by the Regional Transportation Plan The street designs generally form a continuum; a network of throughways (freeway and highway designs) emphasize auto and freight mobility and connect major activity centers. Slower speed boulevard designs within concentrated activity centers balance the multi-modal demands for each mode of transportation within these areas. Street and road designs complete the continuum, with multi-modal designs that reflect the land uses they serve, but also serving as moderate-speed vehicle connections among activity centers that complement the throughway system. Response: As described Exhibit F, the proposed rezoning from IP to MUC-1 will not significantly impact the City of Tigard's street system. In general, mixed-use development can provide a i synergistic benefit to the transportation system by reducing the overall number of trips. Any proposed development on the site would necessarily provide transportation improvements sufficient i to support proposed new development and land use densities. i i Title 7 -Affordable Housing This Title identifies tools to improve the availability of affordable housing and to encourage manufactured housing in order to address the need for each jurisdiction to accommodate its "fair share" of affordable housing. Response: This requirement is addressed by the City of Tigard through its policies on affordable housing. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 17 February 26, 2001 Title 8 - Compliance Procedures This title requires that amendments made to the City's Comprehensive Plan must be consistent with the requirements of the Functional Plan. Response: This section of the application addresses this requirement by demonstrating how the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Functional Plan. Title 9 - Performance Measures This title establishes performance measures for the implementation of the Functional Plan. Response: This title does not apply directly to local jurisdictions. Title 10 - Functional Plan Definitions This title provides definitions for use in the Functional Plan. Response: This title does not apply directly to the application. Title 11- Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Urban Reserve Plan Requirements Response: This proposal does not involve any areas outside the Metro urban growth boundary and therefore this title of the Functional Plan is not applicable. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 18 February 26, 2001 VII. LCDC STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND FINDINGS A comprehensive plan amendment application must address LCDC's Statewide Planning Goals to ensure consistency with those goals. The following provides findings that demonstrate that this plan amendment request is consistent with LCDC's Goals. Goal I: Citizen Involvement Response: Public notice for the hearing on this application will be provided through the City of Tigard's notification procedures. The public will have an opportunity to review the application and staff report in advance of the public hearing and provide testimony at the hearing. Goal 2: Land Use Planning Response: This goal requires, in part, that adopted comprehensive plans be revised to take into account changing public policies and circumstances. This goal is met because the City has applied all relevant Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan policies and Community Development Code requirements in the review of this proposal. Goal 3: Agricultural Lands Response: This goal is not applicable to this application. Goal 4: Forest Lands Response: This goal is not applicable to this application. Goal S: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources Response: There are no adopted significant natural areas or scenic or historic areas identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan on the subject property. Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Response: There are no significant air, water or land resource quality issues associated with this proposal. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Response: There are no adopted significant natural hazard areas identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan on the subject property. Goal 8: Recreational Needs Response: The site is not identified by the City of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan as a recreational resource. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 19 February 26, 2001 Goal 9: Economic Development Response: This goal requires the provision of adequate opportunities for a variety of economic activities. This goal has been met because the proposed amendments will promote opportunities of a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare and prosperity of Tigard citizens. The mix of uses allowed by the proposed amendments is intended to encourage a diversity of development. Goal 10: Housing Response: This goal requires that plans encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at various price ranges and rent levels and allow for flexibility of housing location, type and density. This goal has been met because the proposed MUC-1 zone will allow multi- family residential development at a minimum of 25 units per acre and a maximum of 50 units per acre. The existing IP zone does not allow opportunities for residential development in conjunction with commercial and office development. Goal]]: Public Facilities and Services Response: Public facilities to the subject property are available and adequate. There would be no substantial difference on the anticipated level of demand for public services if the site developed as mixed-use commercial or under the current Industrial Park designation. Any public facilities improvements will be addressed during the development review phase for this site. Goal 12: Transportation and the Transportation Planning Rule Response: This Goal is implemented by Oregon Administrative Rule 660-12, which is also known as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). Section 660-12-060 states that plan amendments which significantly affect a transportation facility shall assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and level of service of the facility. As described Exhibit F, the proposed rezoning from IP to MUC-1 will not significantly impact the City of Tigard's street system. In general, mixed-use development can provide a synergistic benefit to the transportation system by reducing the overall number of trips. Any proposed development on the site would necessarily provide transportation improvements sufficient to support proposed new development and land use densities. Goal 13: Energy Conservation Response: Development of the site as a mixed use commercial center will provide shopping opportunities in close proximity to residential areas and assist in minimizing the distance people will need to travel to shop. The site is located on a major transit route and future retail activity will be readily accessible by transit. Building design techniques that can promote energy conservation will be considered during future design review stages of the project. Goal 14. Urbanization Response: This goal addresses the need to establish urban growth boundaries, and thus is not applicable to this application. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 20 February 26, 2001 Goal 15: Willamette River Greenway Response: This goal is not applicable because Willamette River Greenway issues are not involved. Goal 16: Estuarine Resources Response: This goal is not applicable. Goal 17: Coastal Shorelands Response: This goal is not applicable. Goal 18: Beaches and Dunes Response: This goal is not applicable. Goal 19: Ocean Resources Response: This goal is not applicable. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton 8 Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments 21 February 26, 2001 t r e 0 0 e Exhibit A Proposed Tigard Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments For the Durham (quarry Mixed Use Development Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Findings Policies & Implementation Strategies, Volume II 1. GENERAL POLICIES IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and the Official Zoning District map will reflect the plan policies and apply the land use categories in the following manner: Strategies a. through i. - j. no change n. Mixed Use Commercial District - Principle development in these areas will be high density office buildings, retail and service uses. MUC districts will encourage larger buildings with parking under, behind or alongside the structures. There are two applicable mixed use commercial zoning districts: MUC and MUC-1. A zoning designation of MUC will also allow mixed-use development and housing at densities of 50 units an acres. The Regional Center Plan recommends that land around the Washington Square Mall and land immediately west ofHighwav 217 be designated a mitred use M JC. A zoning designation of MUC-1 will allow mixed-use development and housing at densities of 25 to 50 units an acre. The MUC-1 district is applied to the Durham Ouarry site. 2. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT - no change. 3. NATURAL FEATURES AND OPEN SPACE - no change. 3.3 NATURAL RESOURCES Findings: Finding 1 - no change Finding 2 - [delete] 4. AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCES QUALITY - no change. 5. ECONOMY Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit A -1 February 26, 2001 POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS. (THE DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R-40 DISTRICTS.) AN I3; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERMITTED USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES:; AND WITHIN THE MUC-I DISTRICT, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON-RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. 6. HOUSING - no change. 7. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES - no change. 8. TRANSPORTATION - no change. 9. ENERGY - no change. 10. URBANIZATION - no change. 11. SPECIAL AREAS OF CONCERN - no change. 11.9 [RESERVED FOR WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER] 11.10 DURHAM QUARRY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AREA In 1999, the Ci1y of Tigard, the City of Tualatin and the property owner, Washington County, agreed to work together to encourage a high quality, pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented mixed use development on the site of the Durham Quarry site. Only 7.2 acres of the 28-acre site are within the City of Tigard, the remainder is within the City of Tualatin. The jurisdictions have been working together to develop an intergovernmental agreement wherein the City of Tigard would authorize the City of Tualatin to make land use and building permit decisions for the portion of the quarry site within Tigard. POLICIES Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit A - 2 February 26, 2001 11.10.1 THE CITY OF TIGARD WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY AND THE CITY OF TUALATIN TO HELP ASSURE THAT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE DURHAM QUARRY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AREA PROVIDES A HIGH QUALITY URBAN ENVIRONMENT THAT EMPHASIZES PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY. 11.10.2 THE DURHAM QUARRY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AREA SHALL BE SUBJECT TO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF TUALATIN WHICH WOULD AUTHORIZE THE CITY OF TUALATIN TO MAKE LAND USE AND BUILDING PERMIT DECISIONS FOR THE PORTION OF THE QUARRY SITE WITHIN TIGARD. 11.103 A UNIQUE MIXED USE DISTRICT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR THE DURHAM QUARRY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AREA KNOWN AS MUC-1. 11.10.4 THE MUC-1 DISTRICT IS INTENDED TO PROMOTE DEVELOPMENT WHICH ALLOWS A MIX OF USES, INCLUDING RETAIL. SERVICES, OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL. THE MIXED USE COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION SHOULD ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENTS TIIAT ALLOWS PEOPLE TO WORK SHOP AND LIVE IN A COMPACT. PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED COMMUNITY. 11.10.5 NECESSARY PUBLIC FACILITIES INCLUDING SEWER WATER AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES. SHOULD BE IN PLACE, OR PLANNED TO BE CONSTRUCTED, IN TIME TO SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENT 11.10.6 NECESSARY TRANSPORTATION FACELITIES, AS DETERMINED BY A TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT, SHOULD BE IN PLACE OR PLANNED TO BE CONSTRUCTED. IN TIME TO SUPPORT NEW DEVELOPMENT 12. LOCATIONAL CRITERIA [NOTE: Section 12.5 added by Washington Square amendments] 12.5.1 THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE FOR MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH.- a. APPLICABLE PLAN POLICIES; b. APPLICABLE PURPOSE STATEMENTS AND C. APPLICABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVISIONS 1. Mixed Use Commercial A. The purpose of the Mixed Use Commercial (MUC) land use designation within the Washington Square Regional Center is: Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit A - 3 February 26, 2001 INIMIN 1. To create a dense mired-use commercial district that forms the commercial core of the Washington Square Regional Center; 2. To create a high quality, mixed-use commercial district, n conjunction with the City of Tualatin, on the site of the former Durham Quarry; 3. To provide opportunities for major retail goods and services, office employment, and housing in close proximity, and with good access to transportation services; 4. To implement the Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Urban Growth Management Functional Plan for areas designated Regional Center within the City of Tigard. 2. Mixed Use Employment - No change 3. Mixed Use Residential No change Policies 12.5.2. THE CITY SHALL APPLYA MIXED USE COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR AREA SHOWN AS REGIONAL CENTER IN THE METRO 2040 GROWTH CONCEPT OR TO OTHER AREAS IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY AS APPROPRIATE FOR MIXED USE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. 12.5.3 No change. 12.5.3 No change IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The Community Development Code shall: a. Include a two Mixed Use Commercial District; MUC and MUC-1; b. through e. - no change. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit A - 4 February 26, 2001 LM Exhibit B Proposed Text Amendments to the Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.520 COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Sections: 18.520.010 Purpose 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts 18.520.030 Uses 18.520.040 Development Standards 18.520.050 Special Limitations on Uses 18.520.060 Additional Development and Design Guidelines 18.520.010 Purpose A. Provide range of commercial services for City residents. One of the major purposes of the regulations governing development in commercial zoning districts is to ensure that a full range of retail and office uses are available throughout the City so that residents can fulfill all or most of their needs within easy driving and, ideally within easy walking and/or biking distance of their homes. The location of land within each commercial district must be carefully selected and design and development standards created to minimize the potential adverse impacts of commercial activity on established residential areas. At the same time, it is important to create more opportunities for mixed use, including residential, commercial and institutional activities, in new and re-developing commercial areas. B. Facilitate economic goals. Another purpose of these regulations is to ensure that there is a full range of economic activities and job opportunities within the City limits, in compliance with the economic goals of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 18.520.020 List of Zoning Districts A. C-N: Neighborhood Commercial District. The C-N zoning district is designed to provide convenience goods and services within a small cluster of stores adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Convenience goods and services are those which are purchased frequently, i.e., at least weekly; for which comparison buying is not required; and which can be sustained in a limited trade area. Such uses include convenience markets, personal services and repair shops. A limited number of other uses, including but not limited to restaurants, gas stations, medical centers, religious institutions, transit-related park-and- ride lots and facilities with drive-up windows, are permitted conditionally. B. C-C: Community Commercial District. The C-C zoning district is designed to provide convenience shopping facilities which meet the regular needs of nearby residential neighborhoods. With a service area of about 1.5 miles, such commercial centers typically range in size from 30,000 - 100,000 gross square feet on sites ranging from 2 - 8 acres. Separated from other commercially-zoned areas by at least one-half mile, community commercial centers are intended to serve several residential neighborhoods, ideally at the intersection of two or more major collector streets or at the intersection of an arterial and collector street. Housing is permitted on or above the second floor of commercial structures at a density not to exceed 12 units/net acre, e.g., the maximum density permitted in the R-12 zone. A limited number of other uses, including but not limited to car washes, gas stations, religious institutions, and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. In addition to mandatory Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit B -1 February 26, 2001 site development review, design and development standards in the C-C zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated, attractively landscaped, and pedestrian-friendly. C. C-G: General Commercial District. The C-G zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of retail, office and civic uses with a City-wide and even regional trade area. Except where non- conforming, residential uses are limited to single-family residences which are located on the same site as a permitted use. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, automotive equipment repair and storage, mini-warehouses, utilities, heliports, medical centers, major event entertainment, and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. D. C-P: Professional/Administrative Commercial District. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g., convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more-intensive commercial and industrial areas. E. CBD: Central Business District. The CBD zoning district is designed to provide a concentrated central business district, centered on the City's historic downtown, including a mix of civic, retail and office uses. Single-family attached housing, at a maximum density of 12 units/net acre, equivalent of the R- 12 zoning district, and multi-family housing at a minimum density of 32 units/acre, equivalent to the R- 40 zoning district, are permitted outright. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to adult entertainment, utilities, facilities with drive-up windows, medical centers, major event entertainment and gasoline stations, are permitted conditionally. F. MUE: Mixed-Use Employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, religious institutions, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and-ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to 1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and 2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the City through the legislative process. G. MUC-1: Mixed Use Commercial - 1. The MUC-1 zoning district, which is designed to apply to that portion of the Durham Quarry site within the City of Tigard, is a mixed-use commercial district bounded by 72nd Avenue, Findlay Street and the Tigard, Tualatin and Durham city limits. This site is the subject of an intergovernmental agreement between the cities of Tigard and Tualatin. Pursuant to that agreement the City of Tualatin shall furnish all planning, building; and associated development review/permit services for the property. This zoning district is intended to mirror the City of Tualatin's Mixed Use Commercial Overlay District (TDC, Chapter 57). It permits a wide range of uses including commercial lodging, general retail, offices and housing; the latter includes multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. Additional uses, including but not limited to major event entertainment and Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit B - 2 February 26, 2001 motor vehicle retail fuel sales, are permitted conditionally. In addition to the standards of this chapter, development within this zone is subject to the standards of 18.640. 18.530.030 Uses A. Types of uses. For the purposes of this chapter, there are four kinds of use: 1. A permitted (P) use is a use which is permitted outright, but subject to all of the applicable provisions of this title. If a use is not listed as a permitted use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted use under the provisions of Chapter 18.230; 2. A restricted (R) use is permitted outright providing it is in compliance with special requirements, exceptions or restrictions; 3. A conditional use (C) is a use the approval of which is at the discretion of the Hearings Officer. The approval process and criteria are set forth in Chapters 18.310 and 18.320. If a use is not listed as a conditional use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted use under the provisions of Chapter 18.230; 4. A prohibited (N) use is one which is not permitted in a zoning district under any circumstances. B. Use table. A list of permitted, limited, conditional and prohibited uses in residential zones is presented in Table 18.520.1. C. Accessory structures. 1. Accessory structures are permitted in all commercial zones providing the site is still in compliance with all development standards, including but not limited to setbacks, heigh4 lot coverage and landscaping requirements, of the base zone. All accessory structures shall comply with all requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All accessory structures except those less than 120 square feet in size require a building permit. 2. All freestanding and detached towers, antennas, wind-generating devices and TV receiving dishes, except as otherwise regulated by Wireless Communication Facilities (Chapter 18.798), shall have setbacks equal to or greater than the height of the proposed structure. Suitable protective anti-climb fencing and a landscaped planting screen, in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall be provided and maintained around these structures and accessory attachments. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit E - 3 February 26, 2001 TABLE 15.520.1 USE TABLE: COMMERCIAL ZONES USE CATEGORY C-N' C-Cs C-G C-P CBD MUE20 MUC-1 RESIDENTIAL Household Living N R6 R" R" R" R21 P26 Group Living N N C N P N C Transitional Housing N N C N C N C Home Occupation R2 R2 R2 RZ R2 R2 P CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) Basic Utilities C N N C C C C Colleges N N N N N C C Community Recreation N P N N P C N Cultural Institutions P P P P P P P Day Care P P P P P P P Emergency Services P P P P P P P Medical Centers C N C C C C C Postal Service P P P P P P P Public Support Facilities P P P P P P P Religious Institutions C C P C P P C Schools N N N N N C C Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges C C P P P P P COMMERCIAL Commercial Lodging N N P R14 P P P Eating and Drinking Establishments C P P R15 P P P Entertainment-Oriented - Major Event Entertainment N N C N C N C - Outdoor Entertainment N N P R15 P N N Indoor Entertainment P P P P P P P - Adult Entertainment N N C N C N N General Retail - Sales-Oriented P P' P Rlb P R22 P - Personal Services P P P P P R22 P - Repair-Oriented P P P N P R22 Res - Bulk Sales N N P N N R22 Res - Outdoor Sales N N P N N N N - Animal-Related N N N N N P P Motor Vehicle Related - Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N N P/C12 N C N N Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair N Ca P/C12 N R's R22 R25 - Vehicle Fuel Sales C C C N C N C Office P R9 P P P P P Self-Service Storage N N C N N N N Non-Accessory Parking C C P P P P P Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit B - 4 February 26, 2001 TABLE 15.520.1 (CO1N'T) USE CATEGORY C-1N C-C C-G C-P CBD MUE MUC-1 INDUSTRIAL Industrial Services N N N N N N N Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial N N N N N R23 N - General Industrial N N N N N N N Heavy Industrial N N N N N N N Railroad Yards N N N N N N N Research and Development N N N N N R24 R24 Warehouse/Freight Movement N N N N N R24 N Waste-Related N N N N N N N Wholesale Sales N N N N C N N OTHER Agriculture/Horticulture N N N N N N N Cemeteries N N N N N N N Detention Facilities N N C N C N N Heliports N N C C C N N Mining N N N N N N N Wireless Communication Facilities P/R3 P/R3 P/R3 P/R3 P/R3 P/R3 P/R27 Rail Lines/Utility Corridors P P P P P P P Other C4 CIO NA NA C19 NA NA P--Permitted R=Restricted C=Conditional Use N=Not Permitted 'All permitted and conditional uses subject to special development standards contained in 18.520.050A. 'Permitted subject to requirements Chapter 18.742. 3See Chapter 18.798 Wireless Communication Facilities, requirements for permitted and restricted facilities. 4Uses operating before 7:00 AM and/or after 10:00 PM are conditional uses. SAIL permitted, limited and conditional uses must meet special development standards in 18.520.0508. 'Residential units permitted by right, as a mixed use in conjunction with a commercial development, on or above the second floor of the structure, at densities not to exceed 12 units/net acre. 'Limited to 10,000 gross square feet in size, except retail food and beverage outlets, which are limited to A 40,000 gross square feet or less. 'Limited to motor vehicle cleaning only. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit B - 5 February 26, 2001 'When combined in single structure, each separate establishment shall not exceed 5,000 gross square feet. 10Uses operating before 6:00 AM and/or after 11:00 PM; or drive-up windows are conditional uses. "A single-family unit providing that it is located on the same site with a permitted or conditional use in and is occupied exclusively by a caretaker or superintendent of the permitted or conditional use. Multi-family housing is permitted as part of a PD, subject to Chapter 18.350. 12Cleaning, sales and repair of motor vehicles and light equipment is permitted outright; sales and rental of heavy vehicles and farm equipment and/or storage of recreational vehicles and boats permitted conditionally. 13 Multi-family residential units, developed at R-40 standards, as a mixed-use in conjunction with commercial development on or above the second floor of the structure, only in the C-P District within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road district. 14 Restaurant permitted with restriction in size in conjunction with and on the same parcel as a commercial lodging use. "As accessory to offices or other permitted uses, the total space devoted to a combination of retail sales and eating/drinking establishments may not exceed more than 20% of the entire square footage within the development complex. "May not exceed 10% of the total square footage within an office complex. "Single-family attached and multi-family residential units, developed at R-40 standards, except the area bounded by Fanno Creek, Hall Boulevard, O'Mara, Ash Avenue and Hill Street, within which property zoned for CBD development which shall be designated R-12 PD and shall be developed as planned developments in conformance with the R-12 District standards. "Motor vehicle cleaning only. "Drive-up windows permitted conditionally. 20All permitted and conditional uses subject to special development standards contained in 18.520.050C. "Multi-family residential, at 25 units/gross acre, allowed outright. Pre-existing detached single-family dwellings are permitted outright. i 22 Retail and sales uses may not exceed 60,000 gross leasable area per building within the Tigard Triangle { except for those areas zoned C-G at the time the MUE zoning district was adopted. a "All activities associated with this use, except employee and customer parking, shall be contained within j buildings. 24Permitted as accessory to a permitted use as long as this use is contained within the same building as the permitted use, and does not exceed the floor area of the permitted use. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit B - 6 February 26, 2001 ZgPermitted provided the use is no larger than 60,000 square feet of gross floor area per building or business. 26 Household living limited to single units, attached, and multi-family including but not limited to apartments, attached condominiums townhouses and rowhouses at a minimum density of 25 dwelling units per acre and a maximum density of 50 dwelling units per acre 27 Wireless only as attached to structure within height limit - see Chapter 18.798 18.520.040 Development Standards A. Compliance required. All development must comply with: L 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 18.310 and 18.320, 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. B. Development standards. Development standards in commercial zoning districts are contained in Table 18.520.2 below: TABLE 18.520.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES MUE CBD Residential R-25 STANDARD C-N C-Cl4l C-G C-P CBD R40 R-12 C-G MF DU* MUC-1 p-Detachedunit Size 5,000 sq ft 5,000 sq ft None 6,000 sq ft None None None None - None - - - - 1,480 sq R ging, rooming house - - - - 6,100 sq ft Minimum Lot Width 50 R 50 ft 50 ft 50 ft None None None 50 ft None None Minimum Setbacks Front yard 20 ft 0/20 ft [5] 0 ft [6] 0 ft [6] 0/30 ft [7] 20 ft 20 ft 0 ft [6] 20 ft See Side facing street on comer & 20 ft 0/30 ft (7] 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 18.640• through lots [1] 050 (B) Side yard 0/20 ft [3] 0/20 ft [3] 0/20 ft [3] 0/20 ft [3] 0/30 ft [7] 10 ft [9] 10 ft [9] 0/20 ft [3] 1011 - Side or rear yard abutting more 30 ft restrictive zoning district Rear yard 0%20 ft [3] 0/20 ft [3] 0/20 R [3] 0/20 ft [3] 0/30 ft [7] 20 ft [9] 20 ft [9] 0/20 ft [3] 20 ft Distance between front of garage & - - 20 ft 20 ft - 20 ft property line abutting a public or private street. Maximum height 35 ft 35 ft 45 R 45 ft 80 ft [8] 60 ft 60 ft 45 ft 45 ft 70 ft Maximum Site Coverage [2] 85% 80% 85% 85% 85% 80% 80 % 85% 80 % [111 90% Minimum Landscape Requirement 15% 20% 15% 15% 15% 20% 20 % [10] 15% 20% 10% [l] The provisions of Chapter 18.795 (Vision Clearance) must be satisfied. [2] Includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit B - 7 February 26, 2001 sill I [3] No setback shall be required except 20 feet shall be required where the zone abuts a residential zoning district. [4] See Section 18.520.050B for site and building design standards. [5] No front yard setback shall be required, except a 20 foot front yard setback shall apply within 50 feet of a residential district. [6] There shall be no minimum front yard setback requirement; however, conditions in Chapters 18.745 and 18.795 must be met. [7] There are no setback requirements, except 30 feet where a commercial use within a district abuts a residential zoning district. [8] The maximum height of any building in the CBD zone within 100 feet of any residential zoning district shall not exceed 40 feet. [9] Where the side or rear yard of attached or multiple-family dwellings abut a more restrictive zoning district, such setbacks shall not be less than 35 feet. [10] Landscaped areas on existing developed property in the CBD shall be retained. Buffering and screening requirements set forth in Chapter 18.745 shall be met for existing and new development. [11] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. *Multiple-family dwelling unit C-N - Neighborhood Commercial District C-C - Community Commercial District C-G - General Commercial District C-P - Professional/Administrative Office Commercial CBD - Central Business District 18.520.050 Special Limitations on Uses A. In the C-N zone. Special limitations in the C-N zoning district are as follows: 1. The use shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed structure, except as allowed in Section 3 below; 2. No use shall have a gross floor area greater than 4,000 square feet; 3. Accessory open-air sales, display and/or storage shall be permitted for horticultural and food merchandise only and shall constitute no more than 5% of the gross building floor area of any individual establishment; and a 4. Uses operating before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM shall be subject to the conditional use 1 provisions, as governed in Chapter 18.330. i i B. In the C-C zone- Special limitations in the C-C zoning district are as follows: 1. Such centers shall be developed preferably as a single unit and occupy only one quadrant of the intersection at which it is located; 2. The use shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed structure, except for outside play areas for children's day care facilities, and as allowed in Sections 3 and 4 below; Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit B - 8 February 26, 2001 3. No use shall have a gross floor area greater than 5,000 square feet except for the retail sales of food and beverages, when the maximum floor area shall not exceed 40,000 gross square feet, and all other sales-oriented retail, where the maximum floor area shall not exceed 10,000 gross square feet; 4. Accessory open-air sales, display and/or storage shall be permitted for horticultural and food merchandising uses only shall constitute no more than 5% of the gross building floor area of any individual establishment; 5. Accessory open-air dining or drinking areas shall be permitted for approved eating and drinking establishments or retail food stores only. Outside dining areas are not permitted within 200 feet of any developed residential area. Public or private sidewalk areas around dining areas may not be reduced to less than five feet of clear walkway; and 6. Uses operating before 6:00 AM and/or after 11:00 PM and drive-up windows are subject to conditional use provisions, as governed by Section 18.330. C. In the MUE zone. Special limitations in the MUE zoning district are as follows: I. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for all commercial and industrial use types and mixed-use developments shall not exceed 0.40. Residential use types, including transient lodging, shall not be subject to this requirement; 2. On lots greater than three acres, general retail sales uses are limited to 30,000 square feet of gross leasable area plus one additional square foot of gross leasable area of general retail sales use for each additional four square feet of non-general retail sales use. D. In the MUC-I zone. In addition to the standards of this Chapter, development in the MUC-1 zone is subject to Chapter 18.640 and an Intergovernmental Agreement between the cities of Tigard and Tualatin dated 18.520.060 Additional Development and Design Guidelines - [No changes.] Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit B - 9 February 26, 2001 Exhibit C Proposed Text Amendments to the Tigard Development Code CHAPTER 18.640 DURHAM QUARRY DESIGN STANDARDS Sections: 18.640.010 Purpose 18.640.020 Permitted Uses 18.640.030 Conditional Uses 18.640.040 Applicability 18.640.050 Development Standards 18.640.060 Determining Net Acres 18.640.070 Not Used 18.640.080 Not Used 18.640.090 Not Used 18.640.100 Access 18.640.200 Design Standards 18.640300 Design Compatibility Standards 18.640.400 Landscaping and Screening 18.640.500 Off-Street Parking and Loading 18.640.600 Environmental Standards 18.640.700 Floodplain District 18.640.010 Purpose. The purpose of this district is to recognize and accommodate the changing commercial/residential marketplace by allowing commercial and residential mixed uses in the approximately 7 acre portion of the Durham Quarry site that are within the City of Tigard in the Mixed Use Commercial (MUC-1) Planning District. Retail, office, business services and personal services are emphasized, but residential uses are also allowed. A second purpose is to recognize that when developed under certain regulations commercial and residential uses may be compatible in the Mixed Use Commercial District. 18.640.020 Permitted Uses A. Permitted uses are those uses permitted outright or with restrictions within the MUC-1 base zone pursuant to Section 18.520.030. 18.640.030 Conditional Uses A. Conditional uses are those uses allowed conditionally within the MUC-1 base zone pursuant to Section 18.520.030. 18.640.040 Applicability A. These design standards are applied in the City of Tigard to the Durham Quarry Site. The boundaries of this site are described by the Intergovernmental Agreement dated Durham Quart' Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit C-1 February 26, 2001 B. Conflicting standards. The following design standards apply to all development located within the Durham Quarry within the MUC-1 zone. If a standard found in this section conflicts with another section in the Development Code, standards in this section shall govern. 18.640.050 Development Standards A. Development shall comply with applicable development standards, except where variances and minor variances are granted in accordance with the terms of the Intergovernmental Agreement between Tigard and Tualatin dated B. Development standards: 1. Minimum lot area: None. 2. Minimum building setbacks: None. 3. Except as determined in the Architectural Review process, maximum building setbacks are: a. Commercial: 10 feet front and streetside; 0 interior side and rear, except when the side and rear abut a residential district it is 20 feet. b. Residential: 20 feet front; 0 rear and interior side, except when the side and rear abut a residential district it is 20 feet; 20 feet streetside. 4. Minimum building height: Except for theaters and cinemas which can be one story, 20 feet. 5. Maximum building height: 70 feet. 6. Density requirements. For determining floor area ratio (FAR) and residential densities, 18.640.060 shall be used to establish the lot area. a. The minimum FAR for non-residential development and mixed-use development which includes a residential component is 0.50. In mixed-use developments, residential floor area is included in the calculations of FAR. b. The minimum density for residential-only projects is 25 dwelling units per net acre. There is no FAR for residential-only projects. c. The maximum density for residential-only projects is 50 dwelling units per net acre. 18.640.060 Determining Net Acres Net acres shall be determined by subtracting the following land areas from the gross acres (all of the land included in the legal description of the property to be developed): A. The following sensitive land areas: 1. Land within the 100-year floodplain; 2. Land exceeding 25% slope; 3. Drainage ways; and 4. Wetlands. C. Land dedicated to the public for park purposes; D. Land dedicated to the public for rights-of-way. When actual information is not available, the following formulas may be used: 1. Single-family development: allocate 20% of gross acres; 2. Multi-family development including but not limited to apartments, condominiums and townhouses : allocate 15% of gross acres; and E. Land proposed for private streets. 18.640.070 Not used 18.640.080 Not used Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit C - 2 February 26, 2001 18.640.090 Not used 18.640.100 Access Except as provided below, no lot shall be created without provision for access to the public right-of-way in accordance with 18.705. Such access may be provided by lot frontage on a public street or by creating uninterrupted vehicle and pedestrian access between the subject lot and the public street. 18.640.200 Design Standards. A. Purpose and Applicability. 1. Design Principles. Design standards for public street improvements for the Durham Quarry site address several important guiding principles, including creating a high-quality mixed use area, providing a convenient pedestrian and bikeway system and utilizing streetscape to create a high quality image for the area. 2. Development Conformance. New development, including remodeling and renovation projects resulting in non-single family residential uses, are expected to contribute to the character and quality of the area. In addition to meeting the design standards described below and other development standards required by the Development and Building Codes, developments will be required to dedicate and improve public streets, connect to public facilities such as sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage, and participate in funding future transportation and public improvement projects within and surrounding the Durham Quarry site. 3. Conflicting Standards. In addition to the design standards of 18.640, the requirements in 18.520 (Commercial Zoning Districts) other applicable Chapters apply. If the provisions of 18.640 and other applicable Chapters conflict or are different, they shall be resolved in accordance with the terms of the Intergovernmental Agreement between Tigard and Tualatin dated . The resolution process shall consider giving deference to the requirements of 18.640 because: a. the Durham Quarry Site is in both the Cities of Tualatin and Tigard and the cities agree the same, or nearly the same, requirements should apply, b. Pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement between the cities of Tualatin and Tigard and Washington County, the City of Tualatin shall furnish all planning, building and associated development review/permit services for this site. B. Site Design Standards. Development shall meet the following site design standards. 1. Building placement on Major and Minor Arterials. Buildings shall occupy a minimum of 50% of Major and Minor Arterial street frontages. Buildings shall be located at public street intersections on Major and Minor Arterials. 2. Building setbacks. See 18.640.050(B). 3. Front yard setback design. For setbacks greater than 0 feet, landscaping, an arcade, or a hard- surfaced expansion of the sidewalk shall be provided between a structure and a public street or accessway. If a building abuts more than one street, the required improvements shall be provided on all streets. Landscaping shall be developed to an L-1 standard on public streets and an L-2 standard on accessways. Hard-surfaced areas shall be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Benches and other street furnishings are required. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirements. 4. Walkway connection to building entrances. A walkway connection is required between a building's entrance and a public street or accessway. The walkway shall be at least 6 feet wide and Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit C - 3 February 26, 2001 mini paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at a corner near a public street intersection are required. These areas shall contribute to the minimum landscaping requirements. 5. Parking location and landscape design. Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public street rights-of-way shall be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings. When buildings or phases are adjacent to more than one public street, primary street(s) shall be identified where this requirement applies. If located on the side, parking is limited to 50% of the street frontage and must be behind a landscaped area constructed to an L- I Landscape Standard. The minimum depth of the L-I landscaped area is five feet or is equal to the building setback, whichever is greater. Interior side and rear yards shall be landscaped to a L-2 Landscape Standard, except where a side yard abuts a public street, where it shall be landscaped to an L-I Landscape Standard. See 18.640.200 (D). C. Building Design Standards. 1. Non-residential buildings shall comply with the following: a. Ground floor windows. Street-facing elevations within the Building Setback (0-10 feet) along public streets shall include a minimum of 50% of the ground floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement shall be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to ground level. Up to 50% of the ground floor window requirement may be met on an adjoining elevation as long as all of the requirement is located at a building comer. b. Building facades. Facades that face a public street shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one of the following features: (i) a variation in building materials, (ii) a building off-set of at least 1 foot, (iii) a wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such as an arcade, or (iv) by other design features that reflect the building's structural system. (v) No building fagade shall extend for more than 300 feet without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. c. Weather protection. Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies and arcades, shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection is encourage along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or a hard-surfaced expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance and a public street or accessway. d. Building Materials. Plain concrete block, plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding shall not be used as exterior finish materials. Foundation material may be plain concrete or plain concrete block where the foundation material is not revealed for more than 2 feet. e. Roofs and Roof Lines. Except in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style. False fronts and false roofs are not permitted. f. Roof-mounted Equipment. Roof-mounted equipment shall be screened from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication equipment shall be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from adjacent public streets is minimized. 3. Residential-only and Mixed-Use Buildings whereat least 50.1% of the gross floor area of the building is residential shall comply with 18.640.300. D. Landscaping and Screening. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit C - 4 February 26, 2001 I. Applicable Levels. Two levels of landscaping and screening standards are applicable. The locations where the landscaping or screening is required and the depth of the landscaping or screening are defined in 18.640.400. These standards are minimum requirements. Higher standards may be substituted as long as all height limitations are met. a. L-1 Low Screen. For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots and along local collectors and local streets, planting standards 18.745, Landscaping and Screening shall apply. In addition the L-1 standard applies to setbacks on major and minor arterials. Where the setback is a minimum of 5 feet between the parking lot and a major or minor arterial, trees shall be planted at 3 '/2 inch caliper, at a maximum of 28 feet on center. Shrubs shall be of a variety that will provide a 3 foot high screen and a 90% opacity within one year. Groundcover plants must fully cover the remainder of landscape area within two years. b. L-2 General Landscaping. For general landscaping of landscaped and screened areas within parking lots, and along local collectors and local streets, planting standards 18.745, Landscaping and Screening shall apply. In addition, trees shall be provided at a minimum 2 '/2 inch caliper, at a maximum spacing of 28 feet. Shrubs shall be of a size and quality to achieve the required landscaping or screening effect within two years. 18.640.300 Design Compatibility Standards A. Front facades. All primary ground-floor common entries or individual unit entries of street frontage units shall be oriented to the street, not to the interior or to a parking lot. The front elevation of large structures must be divided into smaller areas or planes of 500 square feet or less. Projecting features such as porches, balconies, bays and dormer windows and roof pediments are encourages for structures facing a street to create visual interest. B. Main entrance. Primary structures must be oriented with their main entrance facing the street upon which the project fronts. If the site is on a corner, it may have its main entrance oriented to either street or at the corner. C. Unit definition. Each dwelling unit shall be emphasized by including a roof dormer or bay windows on the street-facing elevation, or by providing a roof gable or porch that faces the street. Ground-level dwelling units shall include porches that shall be at least 48 square feet in area with no dimension less than six feet. D. Roof lines. Roof-line offsets shall be provided at intervals of 40 feet or less to create variety in the massing of structures and to relieve the effect of a single, long roof. Roof line offsets shall be a minimum 4-foot variation either vertically from the gutter line or horizontally. E. Trim detail. Trim shall be used to mark all building roof lines, porches, windows and doors that are on a primary structure's street-facing elevation(s). F. Mechanical equipment. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment, other than vents or ventilators, shall be located and constructed so as to be screened from ground-level view. Screening shall be integrated with exterior building design. G. Parking. Parking and loading areas may not be located between the primary structure(s) and the street upon which the structure fronts. It there is no alley and motor vehicle access is from the street, parking must be provided: 1. In a garage that is attached to the primary structure; 2. In a detached accessory structure located at least 50 feet from the front property line; or 3. In a parking area at the side or rear of the site. H. Pedestrian circulation. Durham Quart' Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit C - 5 February 26, 2001 1,11111,11, 11111: 111111 1. The on-site pedestrian circulation system shall be continuous and connect the ground-level entrances of primary structure(s) to the following: a. Streets abutting the site; b. Common buildings such as laundry and recreation facilities; c. Parking areas; d. Shared open space and play areas; e. Abutting transit stops; and f. Any pedestrian amenity such as plazas, resting areas and viewpoints. 2. There shall be at least one pedestrian connection to an abutting street frontage for each 200 linear feet of street frontage. 18.640.400 Landscaping and Screening, See 18.745 18.640.500 Off-Street Parking and Loading, See 18.765 18.640.600 Environmental Standards. See 18.725 18.640.700 Floodplain District, See 18.775 18.640.800 Wetlands Protection District, See 18.775 i i i Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit C - 6 February 26, 2001 wilialligi~l 11141111111 1111111 Exhibit D Tigard Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments LiJ I-L -P y s. ' I-P 9 DURHAM Change existing Light Industrial Comprehensive Plan Designation to Mixed Use Commercial H i 5 Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit D -1 February 26, 2001 Exhibit E City of Tigard Zoning Map Amendments . R-12 ® I-P t f- DURHAM Change existing Industrial Park (IP) Zoning Designation to Mixed Use Commercial-1 (MUC-1) Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton s Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit E -1 February 26, 2001 Exhibit F Traffic Impact /Assessment from DKS Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit F-1 February 26, 2001 DKSAssociates 1400 SW6" Avenue, Suite 500 Foittand, OR 9 720 1-5502 Phone: (503) 243-3500 Fax. (503) 243-1934 February 21, 2001 Larry Eisenberg Washington County Real Estate Management 111 SE Washington Street MS 42 Hillsboro, OR 97123-4029 Subject: Proposed Durham Quarry Site Land Use Re-Zone in the City of Tigard Dear Mr. Eisenberg, At your request, we have reviewed the preliminary transportation impacts associated with the change in zoning and comprehensive plan designation for the lands within the Durham Quarry site that also lie inside the City of Tigard boundary-. The purpose of this evaluation is to identify possible transportation issues within the context of the Transportation Planning Rule requirements (OAR 660-12-060) requirements for plan amendments/zone changes. Background The Tigard portion of the quarry site consists of 7.2 acres that are immediately contiguous to the remainder of the dormant quarry site (21.4 acres) that are within the City of Tualatin jurisdiction. The Tigard piece is currently designated for industrial uses. It relies on vehicular access from SW 72nd Avenue or a possible future shared roadway or easement through the southerly property to SW Bridgeport Road. No direct vehicle access is expected onto SW Upper Boones Ferry Road. The Tualatin portion of the site has a comprehensive plan designation that allows mixed-use development. The current preference by Washington County is that the two portions of the site be developed as one site, and that Tualatin would hold the land use authority for both areas pending an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Tigard. The combined development approach would allow for a broader scope of development and transportation solutions. Accordingly, Washington County is requesting a plan amendment / zone change for the 7.2 acre portion of the Durham Quarry inside Tigard to apply a mixed use commercial designation to the property. This designation will bring the Tigard portion of the Durham Quarry into the same comprehensive plan and zoning designation that Tualatin has applied to the site. For the purposes of this review, it has been assumed that the City of Tigard will consent to this agreement. Transportation Issues We have the following comments on the possible transportation implications of the proposed land use action to change the land use designation and develop the entire quarry site as one unified project: 1. Traffic Generation - The proposed change of land use from industrial to mixed-use designation on the 7.2-acres with the City of Tualatin will not have significantly higher traffic generation. The current Industrial Park designation on the property allows office uses as a permitted use, in addition to the traditional industrial park uses. While it is not known specifically what the ultimate development on X-Drive:PROJECTS:2001:P01067 (Wash Co Durham Quarry):Tigard Re-Zone 1tr rev2.doc Larry Eisenberg February 21, 2001 Page 2 of 2 the Tigard portion of the Durham Quarry will be, for purposes of the traffic comparison it is assumed that office or high density residential uses may occur on the 7.2 acres. Given this assumption, the resulting net gains in traffic generation compared to a traditional light industrial uses are about 100 peak hour vehicle trips. If the site were to develop with office uses (allowed under either the e> fisting or proposed plan and zoning designation) the traffic impacts would be identical. Under either development scenario, we do not anticipate any significant impact to the transportation system as defined by the TPR (660-12-060). 2. Vehicle Access - Looking to the future development of the site, under either the existing or proposed plan and zoning designation a full access connection onto SW 72nd Avenue intersection may be difficult to achieve given the County's access spacing standards, its proximity of the SW Bridgeport Road intersection and the peak period vehicle queuing under current conditions. SW 72nd Avenue is designated as a Minor Arterial with a minimum spacing between adjoining driveways orvublic roads of 600 feet. Existing driveways into the park & ride lot and the retail area east of SW 72 Avenue lie within the 600-foot minimum distance, and any new direct access onto SW 72nd Avenue would require a modification to county road standards to be approved by the county engineer. Future access to the site will need to be addressed within the context of the overall site plan for the development of the Durham Quarry. 3. Alternative Vehicle Access -The limited vehicle access to this site could be significantly improved by a shared roadway system with the adjoining Tualatin site. A better access solution would shift the major site access point onto SW Bridgeport Road via a new connecting roadway. The new intersection would be location westerly of Interstate 5 ramps. Past correspondence from ODOT requests at least 1,000 feet separation between the ramp junction and the new intersection. 4. System Impacts - Because of the above points, the land use change on the Tigard portion will not have significant system impacts to the regional street system. The relatively small change in traffic generation will not change the current functional classification of the adjoining road system, or degrade the current horizon year performance levels on roadways and intersections beyond levels already expected. Further study of these issues will be required at the time of development application to fully consider possible local impacts and issues such as access. RecosmreeWations Our preliminary findings are that the proposed land use change of 7.2 acres in the Tigard portion of the Durham Quarry site will not significantly impact the surrounding transportation system and, therefore, there is no impact to the transportation system as defined by the TPR (660-12-060). Further study will be required at the time of development application to resolve the issues noted above. If you have any further questions, please call me to discuss. 1 y Sincerely, DKSAssociat s, inc. 5 C ILI" Carl D. Sp nger, P. Project Manager Frank Angelo, Angelo Eaton & Associates X-Drive:PROJECTS:2001:P01067 (Wash Co Durham Quarry):Tigard Re-Zone ltr rev2.doc 111111E 111311 MINOR 01101 Exhibit G Neighborhood Meeting Materials TO: File FROM: Frank Angelo DATE: June 30, 2000 CC: FILE 010-003 ! RE: Durham Quarry Neighborhood Meeting Durham Quarry Neighborhood Meeting Summary Date: Thursday June 29, 2000 Time: 7:00pm Location: Tigard Fire Department, Station 51 8935 SW Burnham Road The meeting was conducted in accordance with Tigard's Neighborhood Meeting requirements. Twelve people were in attendance at the meeting. The sign-in sheet is attached to this summary. Presentation Frank Angelo and Larry Eisenberg provided an overview of the proposed plan amendment and zoning code text and map amendments being proposed for the 7.2 acres of the Durham Quarry site within Tigard city limits. The presentation noted that no specific development plan is being proposed for the site at the present time. The Durham Quarry site is owned by Washington County. The site is no longer used for quarry operations and the County has declared the property as surplus. The site totals 28.6 acres in size - 21.4 acres are located within Tualatin city limits and 7.2 acres are located within Tigard city limits. Because the property is currently within two jurisdictions, the County has requested that both Tigard and Tualatin develop a consistent set of development standards and procedures in order to achieve a consistent development over the entire site. The County has been working, with both Tigard and Tualatin to develop a Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District that would be applied to the entire 28.6 acres. The Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District is designed to allow a variety of land use types, including commercial, office and residential. Tualatin has already taken steps to establish the Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District within their Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. This new land use district will be applied to the 21.4 acres of the site within Tualatin. Washington County will be submitting an application to Tigard to apply the same Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District to the 7.2 acres of the site within Tigard. Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit G -1 February 26, 2001 Proposed Action Washington County (the applicant) will be submitting the following land use requests to Tigard to create the Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District within the city's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code: • Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to create the Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District; ■ Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to apply the Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District on the 7.2 acres of the site within Tigard; ■ Zoning Code Text Amendment to create the Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District and establish development and review standards for future development; and ■ Zoning Map Amendment to apply the Mixed-Use Commercial Land Use District on the 7.2 acres of the site within Tigard. Neighborhood Issues /Questions ■ Has ODOT done any study on the interchange and 72nd Avenue? ■ Does ODOT have any improvement plans identified in the area? ■ Are height limitations included in the code changes? ■ What are the County's plans in terms of selling the property? ■ How long does it take for fill material to settle in order to build on it? ■ Does the County anticipate that Tigard and Tualatin will agree on the zoning changes? ■ How does Durham feel about the zoning changes? Frank Angelo and Larry Eisenberg addressed each question at the meeting. Attachments 1. Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In Sheet 2. Neighborhood Meeting Letter 3. Notification Area 4. Notification Mailing List 5. Affidavit of Mailing 6. Affidavit of Posting 7. Neighborhood Meeting Handouts i Durham Quarry Mixed Use Development Angelo Eaton & Associates Application for Text and Map Amendments Exhibit G- 2 February 26, 2001 EXHIBIT 6 DKS Associates _ 1400 SW a Avenue, Suite 500 Portland, OR 97201-5502 Phone: (503) 243-3500 Fax: (503) 243-1934 June 5, 2001 Larry Eisenberg Washington County Real Estate Management 111 SE Washington Street MS 42 Hillsboro, OR 97123-1029 Subject: Updated Transportation Assessment of the Proposed Durham Quarry Site Land Use Re-Zone in the City of Tigard Dear Mr. Eisenberg, At your request, we have elaborated on our previous assessment of the preliminary transportation impacts associated with the change in zoning and comprehensive plan designation for the lands within the Durham Quarry site that also lie inside the City of Tigard boundary. Our original findings were submitted in a letter dated February 21, 2001. This memo responds to comments made at the Tigard Planning Commission hearing that suggested a broader review of potential land uses associated with the re-zone. Background The Tigard portion of the quarry site consists of 7.2 acres that are immediately contiguous to the remainder of the surplus quarry site (21.4 acres) that are within the City of Tualatin jurisdiction. The Tigard piece is currently designated for light industrial uses. It relies on vehicular access from SW 72nd Avenue or a possible future shared roadway or easement through the southerly property to SW Bridgeport Road. No direct vehicle access is expected onto SW Upper Boones Ferry Road. The Tualatin portion of the site has a zoning designation that allows mixed-use development. Washington County and the cities of Tigard and Tualatin have agreed that the site should be developed as one site. Tualatin would hold the land use review authority for the Durham Quarry site after an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Tigard was signed. The combined development approach would allow for a broader scope of development and transportation solutions. Accordingly, Washington County is requesting a plan amendment / zone change for the 7.2 acre portion of the Durham Quarry inside Tigard to apply a mixed use commercial designation to the property. This designation will bring the Tigard portion of the Durham Quarry into a comprehensive plan and zoning designation similar to that which Tualatin has applied to its portion of the site. For the purposes of this review, it has been assumed that the City of Tigard f will consent to this agreement. 1 Transportation Issues We have the following comments on the possible transportation implications of the proposed land use action to change the land use designation and develop the entire quarry site as one unified project: 1. Vehicle Access - Looking to the future development of the site, under either the existing or proposed plan and zoning designation a full access connection onto SW 72"d Avenue intersection X-Drive:PROJECTS:2001:PO1067 (Wash Co Durham Quarrv):Tigard Re-Zone rev4.doc Larry Eisenberg June 5, 2001 Page 2 of 4 may be difficult to achieve given the County's access spacing standards, its proximity of the SW Bridgeport Road intersection and the peak period vehicle queuing under current conditions. SW 72nd Avenue is designated as a Minor Arterial with a minimum spacing between adjoining driveways or public roads of 600 feet. Existing driveways into the park & ride lot and the retail area east of SW 72"d Avenue lie within the 600-foot minimum distance, and any new direct access onto SW 72nd Avenue would require a modification to county road standards to be approved by the county engineer. Future access to the site will need to be addressed within the context of the overall site plan for the development of the Durham Quarry. 2. Alternative Vehicle Access - The limited vehicle access to this site could be significantly improved by a shared roadway system with the adjoining Tualatin site. A better access solution would shift the major site access point onto SW Bridgeport Road via a new connecting roadway. The new intersection would be location westerly of Interstate 5 ramps. Past correspondence from ODOT requests at least 1,000 feet separation between the ramp junction and the new intersection. 3. Trip Generation - The previous analysis submitted on February 21 compared a "worst case" scenario using office and high-density residential trip generation as the basis for the analysis. Under this assumption, we found that the impact was around 100 additional peak hour vehicle trips and concluded that there is no significant impact to the transportation system per the Transportation Planning Rule requirement. No agency has disputed that conclusion. However, the Planning Commission requested that additional information on traffic be provided to the City Council at its June 12`i' public hearing on this Plan Amendment. Frank Angelo of Angelo-Eaton & Associates provided a comparison of the uses allowed in the existing Industrial Park (IP) district and the proposed Mixed Use Commercial (MUC) district that found few differences in terms of allowed land uses that would adversely impact the transportation system. Based on the information he provided to me, the following are the major differences from a potential traffic generation perspective: ■ Residential Uses: the MUC district allows multi-family at a minimum density of 25 units per acre and a maximum of 50 units per acre. The IP district does not allow multi-family. ■ Medical Center: the MUC district allows Medical Centers as a Conditional Use, the IP district does not allow this use. ■ Religious Institutions: the MUC district allows religious institutions as a Conditional Use. the IF district does not allow this use. ■ Schools: the MUC district allows schools as a Conditional Use, the IP district does not allow this use. ■ Major Event Entertainment: the MUC district allows major event entertainment as a Conditional Use, the IP district does not allow this use. ■ Personal Services: the MUC district allows personal services as a Permitted Use. This use is restricted to 20% of the entire square footage within a development in the IP district. e Bulk Sales: this use is restricted in the MUC district to 60,000 square feet. This use is not allowed in the IP district. There are a number of major uses that are permitted in both the IP and MUC districts that would have identical traffic impacts. Those uses that are permitted outright in both the IP and MUC districts are: Commercial Lodging. ■ Indoor Entertainment: including movie theaters which is a likely use on the Tigard portion of the Durham Quarry site. 1101N INNIMIM I Larry Eisenberg June 5, 2001 Page 3 of 4 ■ Retail Sales-Oriented: this use is restricted in both the IP and MUC district to 60,000 square feet. It is further restricted in the IP district to no more than 20% of a development complex. • Office. Of course, the IP district permits some uses that would not be permitted in the MUC district, including: ■ Light Industrial: allowed in the IP and not allowed in the MUC district. ■ Research and Development: this is a restricted use in the MUC district - permitted only as accessory to an industrial use. Wholesale Sales: this is a restricted use in the IP district - permitted if all activities are wholly contained within a building. This use is not allowed in the MUC district. ■ Outdoor Entertainment: allowed in the IP and not allowed in the MUC district. Based on the above findings, we evaluated an expanded range of potentiol uses that include the following for the 7.2 acres: ■ Multi-family apartments at 30 units per acre (allowed only in MUC); • Office at a .5 FAR -157,000 square feet of office (allowed in both IP and MUC); ■ Indoor entertainment, a 20 screen movie theater - 4,500 seats/90,000 square foot building (allowed in both IP and MUC). ■ Mixed-Use Center- limited to 60,000 square feet per building. On the 7.2 acre site at 25% coverage a total of 78,500 square feet of retail could be accommodated - single story - in the WC district. Because of the 20% restriction in IP, assume 32,000 square feet in the IP - 20% of 157,000 square foot office development. The trip generation estimates for each of these cases is summarized in Table 1 for the daily total trips and for the p.m. peak hour trips. All but the first case (multi-family) has land uses that could be developed under either zoning designation. Table 1: Trip Generation Estimate for Four Alternative Uses on 7.2 Acres Allowable Use PM Peak Hour Trips Case Description Size MUC IP Daily In Out Total Trips 1 Multi-family 220 unit ® 1,432 90 44 134 2 Office 157,000 s.f ® 0 2,164 57 279 336 Indoor Entertainment 3 (Multiplex Theater -20 4,500 sea a ® 4,400 198 284 482 screens 4 Mixed Use Center 157,000 s.f 9 0 5,075 191 379 570 General Ojftc 125,000s.. a ® 1,723 46 222 268 Shopping Cente 32,000 s f ® ® 3,353 145 157 302 The total daily trips range from a low of 1,400 for apartment uses to a high of 5,100 for the mixed- use center concept. Second highest is the multiplex theater with 4,400 daily trips. The range during the afternoon commute hour is similar for all cases. This comparison shows that a more intense use Lary Eisenberg June 5, 2001 Page 4 of 4 is possible on the 7.2 acre tinder either zoning. The more intense mixed-use center or theater complex would have a greater impact on the transportation system than the apartment uses, but this could be mitigated through more connections to the adjoining roadways and higher capacity intersections. The relative impact of the re-zoning action appears to be the same as under the existing zoning. 4. System Impacts - Because of the above points, the land use change on the Tigard portion will not have significant system impacts to the regional street system - the same conclusion as we have in our previous analysis. The relatively small change in traffic generation will not change the current functional classification of the adjoining road system, or degrade the current horizon year performance levels on roadways and intersections beyond levels already expected. Further study of these issues will be required at the time of development application to fully consider possible local impacts and issues such as access. Recommeaxiations Our findings are continue to indicate that the proposed land use change of 7.2 acres in the Tigard portion of the Durham Quarry site will not significantly impact the surrounding transportation system and, therefore, there is no impact to the transportation system as defined by the TPR (660-12-060). Further study will be required at the time of development application to resolve the issues noted above. If you have any further questions, please call me to discuss. Sincerely, DKS As o?er, Inc. Carl . Spri E. Proje ct Manager Frank Angelo, Angelo-Eaton & Associates s AGENDA ITEM # II FOR AGENDA OF June 26.2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2.58 RELATING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF THE FINANCE DIRECTOR PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK C CITY MGR OK Wb4" / ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council repeal Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) section 2.58, which contains out-dated procedures governing the appointment of the Finance Director? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Delete TMC 2.58 INFORMATION SUMMARY TMC 2.58 contains provisions governing the appointment of the Finance Director. This procedure is apparently a holdover from the time that the City of Tigard had a City Administrator rather than a City Manager. As written, TMC 2.58 requires the appointment of the Finance Director by the Mayor with the approval of the City Council. Citywide personnel policies grant the City Manager authority to appoint all department directors, including the Finance Director. The City Manager appointed the-current Finance Director under the authority of these policies. There is no other code provision relating to the appointment of any other department director. TMC 2.58 is an outdated procedure which conflicts with current practice. It should be removed from the Municipal Code to avoid future misunderstandings. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Retain TMC 2.58 as written, or modify it to institute new procedures. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Ordinance deleting TMC 2.58 2. TMC 2.58 FISCAL NOTES There is no cost to this action. Attachment 2 Chapter 2.58 FINANCE OFFICER. Sections: 2.58.010 Appointment and removal. 2.58.010 Appointment and removal. The office of finance officer of the city of Tigard, as provided by Section 10 of Chapter III of the Charter, shall be filled by appointment by the mayor with the consent of the council upon the advice of the city administrator. The finance officer shall be appointed solely on the basis of qualifications and experience and without regard to political considerations. Appointment and removal of the finance officer by the mayor shall be upon the advice of the city administrator and require the prior consent of the majority of the full council recorded at a public meeting. Cause shall not be required for removal of the finance officer. (Ord. 86-11 §8, 1986). AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF June 26, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 3 44 010 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE SALE OF SUBSTANDARD SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY PREPARED BY: Craig Prosser DEPT HEAD OK ~W" CITY MGR. OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council amend Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) section 3.44.010 to allow greater flexibility in the method of issuing notification of sale and allowing Council to establish sale terms and conditions up front? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Amend TMC 3.44.010 INFORMATION SUMMARY TMC 3.44.010 contains procedures to be followed by the City when it wishes to sell substandard real property. As currently written, this section requires notice to be mailed to all property owners within 250 feet of the subject property regardless of any other actions the City has taken to notify them of its desire to sell the property. In addition, the City Council is required to approve all terms and conditions just prior to sale of the property. The City recently attempted to sell a piece of substandard property within the Tigard Triangle. The City initially solicited bids from all property owners within 250 feet of the subject property, and when no satisfactory bids were received, started following the procedures contained in section 3.44.010. The solicitation for bids did not meet the requirements of 3.44.010, and so the City was required to send a second notice to all property- owners, which delayed the process, added additional expense, and confused people receiving the second notice. The proposed amendment provides that when a solicitation for bids has been mailed to all property owners within 250 feet of the subject property that this solicitation meets the notice requirements of 3.44.010. In addition, the proposed amendments allow the City Council to set minimum sale requirements for the substandard property. If staff is able to negotiate a sale within these minimum requirements, the City can immediately proceed to close the sale without returning to Council. If the negotiated sale exceeds the minimum requirements set by Council at the start of the process, staff would have to return to Council for their approval prior to completing the sale. This second change allows sale of substandard property within the minimum terms set by Council to be concluded in a timely manner. Timely sale is often an asset in property negotiations. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Retain TMC 3.44.010 as written, or modify it to institute new procedures. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Ordinance deleting TMC 3.44.010 2. Current Form of 3.44. 010 FISCAL NOTES There is no cost to this action. Attachment 2 CURRENT FORM OF 3.44.010 Chapter 3.44 SALE OF SURPLUS REAL PROPERTY Sections: 3.44.005 Qualification--Classification. 3.44.010 Disposal of substandard undeveloped property. 3.44.015 Disposal of standard undeveloped property and developed property. 3.44.025 Broker selection. 3.44.010 Disposal of substandard undeveloped property. A. Whenever a particular parcel or parcels is proposed for sale by the city, or a purchase inquiry is made, and the property is classified as substandard undeveloped property, the matter shall be set on the regular council agenda, but no public hearing is required. Notice shall be given, however, of the agenda item to all property owners within two hundred fifty feet of the parcel and to any parties who have inquired about purchase. After discussion of the agenda item, the council shall determine whether it will offer the property for sale. B. The City Council shall direct the City Administrator or designee to proceed with the sale, publicize as deemed appropriate, determine the existence of interested prospective purchasers and negotiate for the sale of the property. C. After the details of the sale have been negotiated, the terms and negotiated agreement for the sale of the property shall be submitted to the City Council for approval at a regularly scheduled council meeting. (Ord. 94-06; Ord. 87-48 §2, 1987). H H H TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 3.44 SALE OF SURPLUS REAL substandard undeveloped property, the matter PROPER'T'Y shall be set on the regular council agenda, but no public hearing is required. Notice shall be given, Sections: however, of the agenda item to all property owners within two hundred fifty feet of the parcel 3.44.005 Qualification-Classification. and to any parties who have inquired about 3.44.010 Disposal of substandard purchase. After discussion of the agenda item, the undeveloped property. council shall determine whether it will offer the 3.44.015 Disposal of standard property for sale. undeveloped property and developed property. B. The City Council shall direct the City 3.44.025 Broker selection. Administrator or designee to proceed with the sale, publicize as deemed appropriate, determine 3.44.005 Qualification-Classification. the existence of interested prospective purchasers and negotiate for the sale of the property. Real property qualifying for the procedure established in this chapter is classified as follows: C. After the details of the sale have been negotiated, the terms and negotiated agreement A. Substandard Undeveloped Property. for the sale of the property shall be submitted to Parcels with no structures thereon which are not the City Council for approval at a regularly of minimum buildable size for the zone in which scheduled council meeting. (Ord. 94-06; Ord. 87- located; 48 §2, 1987). B. Standard Undeveloped Property. 3.44.015 Disposal of standard Parcels with no structures thereon which are of undeveloped property and minimum or greater buildable size for the zone in developed property. which located; A. Whenever a particular parcel or parcels C. Developed Property. Parcels of any size is proposed for sale by the city or a purchase with structures thereon; inquiry is made and the property is classified as standard undeveloped property or developed D. Special-case Property. Parcels that, property, the matter shall be set for a hearing notwithstanding subsections A, B and C of this before the council. section, were acquired by the city for capital improvement as defined by this code and were B. Notice of said hearing shall be published purchased subject to an agreement for the manner once in a newspaper of general circulation in the in which any surplus would be disposed. (Ord. 87- city at least five (5) days prior to the hearing and 48 §1, 1987). shall describe the property proposed for sale. 3.44.010 Disposal of substandard C. Prior to the sale of a parcel under this undeveloped property. section, an appraisal of the property shall be conducted. At the discretion of the council, such A. Whenever a particular parcel or parcels an appraisal may be ordered prior to or after the is proposed for sale by the city, or a purchase hearing. The appraisal may be made available to inquiry is made, and the property is classified as the public at the hearing at the discretion of the 3-44-1 Reforniatted 1994 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE council. set forth in this chapter be repeated. The Council may, however, decide whether or not an D. Public testimony shall be solicited at the additional appraisal is necessary. (Ord. 94-06; hearing to determine if a sale of any parcel is in Ord. 8748 §3,1987). the public interest. 3.44.025 Broker selection. E. After the hearing, the council shall determine whether it will offer the property for Notwithstanding any administrative rule to sale and what the minimum acceptable terms shall the contrary, the selection of a real estate broker be. shall be in accordance with the following procedures: F. If an offer to sell is authorized by the council, a notice soliciting sealed bids shall be (1) The city shall publish notice in a published at least once in a newspaper of general newspaper of general circulation in Tigard circulation in the city be made a least two weeks inviting proposals for the sale of the real property. prior to the bid deadline date. The notice shall The notice shall be published at least one week describe the property to be sold, the minimum prior to the date on which proposals are due. acceptable terms of sale, the person designated to receive bids, the last date bids will be received, (2) The broker's proposal shall be in writing and the date, time and place that bids will be and it shall address the selection criteria set forth opened. in subsection (3) of this section. G. If one or more bids are received at or (3) The City Administrator or designee shall above the minimum acceptable terms, the highest consider the following factors in the selection of a bid shall be accepted and the city administrator or broker: designee shall complete the sale. (A) The broker's record in selling the H. If no acceptable bids are received on a type of real property being offered by the city for particular parcel: (1) the council may alter or keep sale and the broker's familiarity with Tigard-area the same minimum terns as established under market values; subsection E of this section and direct staff to hold another sale, or (2) the council may alter or keep (B) The broker's proposed marketing the same minimum terms established under plan and timelines: signs, advertising, direct mail subsection E of this section and list the property. and/or other methods; for six months with a local real estate broker on a multiple listing basis. Brokers shall be selected in (C) The amount of the broker's accordance with the criteria found at Section commission; and 3.44.030 of this chapter. A listing may be renewed for an additional one six-month period. (D) Other factors which were stated in the notice of the invitation to submit a proposal. I. After expiration of the period set out in (Ord. 94-06; Ord. 85-09 §3,1985).M subsection H of this section, the property shall be removed from the market. Any decision to sell a piece of property once it has been removed from the market shall require that the entire procedure 3-44-2 Reformatted 1994 0=01 1=110 111111111111