The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 05/20/2003 n 7 , •;#,1t;'-*-AN 4+,;T4ir`"^ .o1C,~$yh" , ,p- ~ -r.v:: ;r4.t V f`. .s .IS'.:,r•;•}: o,•A`.'i.,5 rr': i.r•` P".„ !:fr•:i~ `1:1'~,y yy:,'7`.r'(~•'v :d-'Y 1;'N'.•NT 1 " :et 11", ,,[•'4_ ir';j . lrr':fi >''"y-. ,:rat- T N,., 4,' dFI- , t:Y x' e a'.-5., M: p7~y 6s. r'1~°TCj,5 `~t}'•r-• i'4, I ;1.'a,t,fi z, a; l•(' k ,/1v~.}:S 4 [ t' '49'K d . '!r dj S'7 c:i«~ • ' 4::^:. t. •'G';Y , is , i. ;ti ill j.t'e , ,~',~1;,'1 , t',~fK'. . ;Y,N,.~ f, ; !yy %.A; . a W'r1r7~f`•r,r •.S'd . rr. '''I'•r"~ ,.L 7:t .:Fi„ :•'1 .Y,' l:. . :r.. ',l .r.Iy~"a„ J ;i~t s~tr ~'v e. •c r• fir:,. 'd r,4:i:,,rf' ir,•,s.•. ':'.fit;:-v 'i:,' ,:!,.7;r r. .,t. :r<',' ~'.tt5t etr..''.•,..! •agr,1; Y":.{k ;~t,.~. .ti :ir .tz;r,, n .•d, . ~.3.M. ~ • E'rV}"• zrMg ?te, R•iW`P,,-; .('i .1 Yn u}:L.raF'r, ,r/L..Z r: r v' `J.; ,2{ (;I> r~ r~: r; t , 5,.r,9 it" %tip J a L- , f.r .l..-W:,+~'l,. ~h.vi. .a;' l Fr' .t•,.i Y`t ,.•1 'N7.;i:-,~':". C .~.r;~„.rt',,.r:e 'r':i~. ~y .ir,L'. •.6 1r. .Sff r.'rfrr.1'.S.;t t- rF:i(:':•t- "t :4.' " .L «t?r P!4`+( 1rl:..} :'$'i,•. a7:.n.. >'cv;' .,}f.,":}'^ J: ,.rn• -.Zti'}'~7"r°•::r., :,1 rN. t n/>r.. _Y~ :i`K.. .;;T". .1. •%r.-='( .f.F 'P. ,tv- :ff rt~Ky','~., fr:,•,.c..' f ::f'4! . a -i' f" '.O :l:' C• .4. •!;':L.:. ..'i•, r4 ,n: f..::r .r: :,r.ta~~,n- J '..rf ...e:. 'i.,. ~x X" ..v --Y7', ,1; >1'h'~ l:"t' ~I L "a :'•17',. ;~(t •O i'~'.~,_a >,f¢,;•i,r,.'.:: n.,, i.j;'.,. 3r' r• 5,.. t Y, - J Ti - p F'. .t.^. P r' ,r ' :5' . f All, .M P• [ S~% rt,". :er '`t.. 4 'S t y' it.!' .1 : ^Y f,i ri•' `y ,..:'o .'.ax,.~J~.•,"'r...,,••~~cy-t..}:rt.tt:...r.. •.~i ,,.i', ,.A..'.: -i'+3.~'' ..:i„ ,~ei i':r-. .,i `•r.,:.r. 5C:•~=::( ~V ,-w r 1• y, ~ > 7Y ~ S s r is `d' r t"." '3a• •.r r'i iY' s7 ,i' :d• •"i :H t / 1i r 1i l : ' i{i i q. r. 7 1 `1 .a s .^1 r`. Yr a ` f'il jf ,.y. :7 >f t' ~'s• y - ~ u~ , Xi; :'Y r. y. .,r rr t r 4 .5 d . .N'"t ,A" i' 0 ' 1 't ig ~`w ~ `rtrs'% y^• if 5° 1+ Y. yg~ r..4 i " f "-4 ,,fie. :.r~ - 'f.<. :r:'~;: r: . I ti W'. x• I :,7 >2 C. i t, } r ~`i'', ~,+i ;1 y u'-y'i ,•.L . R, l~li i `fl~l h!: I'1 :Y O~ k "L... - Jr "'y'!'{J~ s,a ; ;ri.: r f.' n - 7 "CR s. v: ^J r ,.Ir ` 4% , ir.; rr: 4~ 4y~ ' r..Y, e4 :~4/. r:' t r~ L h 0.. y fr 1 5 % ti ,y r l wl, f k.. i if Y . et~u:. G... a is y }y i' 4''. C'._ -2} }'u e p J~~ y,„ r , S :c t` ~'JC•r nir~ ~ ; . a 'ii r ~j, 5 - 'S2 : - ra1y . ~y ,r ` - rid S :r u' :~1', f 7 ,r„ "j h .r.yt. +r:'. :Sa t} :Y; rf . )r N"• rS' . ,1. a''. 5 'Ti y~i ti 7 4 1'J d:, rm• . „ w:: r M,% )i /e i. s "I,I ;7„ ~4 iS' d. i%` i^ a, , f a. = I ,k x ' ' r't ms's , ~ t. ~i Y = ';'i 'i:4 ` y, ' ~ , '4 . tla . : rh 3': n "a 'f - i tit %'t 9 .r rA +d Rr .a r y h✓ :r : wx Y , :A .Y 4r _ ,.Nu4 t . rs ~ s r --5'-,~l , ''CO . . : j.-,. .tg 1, t ' ;l „ . ~ - - - - JL : ' I I I I - 4 1 ^.-i+ fs t t.. y a. • _ . . I 1. µ ' - .,tt.i'i - - _ T le ' ,,Y`.. t ~ C L9 ~:1" ~:F d"' t' 7 e ' Y! k' F' t ,rR t~S } ,,wPri: ~,F. - ~i }t 'rt. ~1 , =?`ar. i.c,3L1sYa~`''S '-.'l_.. r-1• _ ,r,.EfVy.. ` "a µ >/a,_',✓,',7.ti.t,_ .41`Ya-,r - :¢.r . , , In. A"' "'W . M. i Y .f,14,- ~~r t _ 4-., . ti u 0+ y' rw rt Si' M 1 CORK HO 1, P, r:.kJ„5rv;~l'.i iY t.{:• - "i _ . , - r hL+r . -av3 ' ~.-ti.f' I:y~l .:e., y ',i:' isc _ . _ ',t..rtr, ~ ,i, ;fir ^r] e ` = . • - ' 141•, _ Lr`tc',?; - - _ - ' - - - ' a;"4'- . : : :I'S+' _ ; 00 r7." 20 2 Nt - y " ~•;3:; 4 - _ - ! - _ . DIY .l-' - _ _ 1. 1, R.. iL ' :l` $ 6. B ' d. „ ;,y..,, ' j_: 'i ,~'I?• ® ' E IIS . , F. TELEI: t-, .v :i'N : - - u .F, - - ..fr; - - 'ter, ''i - - - - C =4 uyd .t - .,i:;r' _ / ,,";i ;t,. S Pry i'= . tf:. . `r t, ys, 'isi" ; .Si' ti,4 i,r'.r .t - `::t : ,V 1, , s e R7r b ~k . 1~ :9. > L Yw ~y. •^tf ^.i .n•;,.r::p'4. i.itr, ':R;"{••^f,' - ,t:, ,:.I r.. ' .j Ni'.,:; ir , ,a} .t' GeV tt • ti^ . t}~ s. ? " r ' h . T r f J . a!' fir,:. ~r_ 1r • . ,:`iy t ' M: '4 ti 4 y= N?•. A v" rr r A !f x - - • . 1' t' ! .G"f' 'r i Il y}. it u ~r rl'• - iq: r. d, 11, t°F :.J ' i I 'N Y i nli ~ 'li ty p`Z q... 7' . n`j a, .rXb' f].lsJ •m .;r-S.' ,.Is : m i5.r ,r.{ ^-'r^, , Z `.L. _ L t '':$fi ' . r. •:P' 1k>r'y`'}1C i'd' S'd.t~~•, •',CS rL r .t4 1,Y,r.L's;, :r.. , ur, 5. '1'::9•: 1::,°,'^,'' ' :y , 'y- ..y'i ;,t,, ic. ' KK'"s p I :d• . t4s1J'' -yu , r i•`. :u• a r•'4i 'a<'e.~ r37 .u Mi. ;;p..y rr ?ti . Nr°•+' `11+,':i'- H Arty„S`,~{a,Cr (S;'''::: x s, ~~rr~~~~'~'i';1;y.i.,j;Ai'A•-Mw'sr H1`1'• - Agenda Item No. Meeting of COUNCIL MINUTES TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING May 20, 2003 1. WORKSHOP MEETING 1.1 Mayor Griffith called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. 1.2 Roll Call: Mayor Griffith and Councilors Dirksen, Moore, Sherwood, and Wilson were present. 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports: None 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non Agenda Items: None 2. JOINT MEETING WITH THE LIBRARY BOARD Library Board Chair Anne Braun and Library Board members Marvin Diamond, Suzan Turley, and Jane Smith presented information to the Council about the following: circulation/cultural passes; reference and adult programming; children's programming/resources and an update on the new library. Mayor commented on the "magnificent groundbreaking ceremony" that took place on Saturday, May 17. Graphs were reviewed showing increases in circulation from 2000 to 2002; visitors per year from 2000 to 2002; cultural pass use in 2001 and 2002; and Internet use 2001 to 2002. Copies of these graphs are on file with the City Recorder. Library Board members thanked the Council and community for the continuing support of the library. 3. ANNUAL REPORT ON THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL COURT Judge Michael O'Brien and Court Manager Nadine Robinson presented the annual y report to the Council. Following the Council's decision to accept certain categories of juvenile offenses, the first misdemeanor cases were referred to the court by the Tigard Police Department in June, 2002. Since relatively few cases were active during the first few months of the program, it is too early to evaluate its impact on juveniles. However, there are some encouraging trends in the preliminary data: . 97% of cited juveniles have appeared for their scheduled arraignments. Rates of compliance with conditions of probation have been very high, with no recidivism to date. . Parental involvement has been very high. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - May 20, 2003 Page I • Juveniles have been ordered to complete 296 hours of community service to date. In addition to the juvenile caseload, the court projects a caseload of approximately 7,400 traffic citations and 350 civil infractions for this fiscal year. Judge O'Brien referred to a "unitary" assessment charged by the State for each ticket. Currently a charge of $35 per ticket is paid to the State; there is discussion at the Legislature to raise this amount to $40 per ticket. Judge O'Brien will update Council in the fall about the juvenile court cases. Councilor Dirksen suggested that the next update be held during a business meeting so the information is cable cast for the public's benefit. 4. STATUS REPORT ON METRO GOAL 5 Associate Planner Duane presented the staff report. Metro is preparing a plan for regional fish and wildlife habitat protection in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 5. The planning process includes three phases: l) determining which resource sites are significant; 2) determining whether to allow, limit, or prohibit the development of resource sites; and 3) developing a protection plan consistent with the step two determinations. So far, Metro has completed the first phase of the planning process, inventorying and identifying significant resources. The target date to complete the second phase, or conflicts analysis, is May 2004. The target date for completion of the protection plan is December 2004. Council received a memo that provided a brief sketch of the regional Goal 5 process to date, along with an overview of the remaining steps and timeline. The memo also overviewed the Washington County "basin approach," which gives County jurisdictions reponsibility, with Metro oversight, for completing the remainings steps in the Goal 5 process for regional resources sites located within Washington County. The "Goal 5 Communication Plan" includes proposed City web page Goal 5 information and inventory map postings. It also includes staff participation with the basin group in two Goal 5 public open house meetings. The first open house is • September 10, 2003. i An adjusted basin work program (due to change by Metro from their original concept) will necessitate an amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement for additional funds for the analysis. This will be placed on a future Council agenda. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - May 20, 2003 Page 2 S. UPDATE ON LOCAL, COUNTY, AND STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES Associate Planner Duane Roberts introduced this agenda item. The purpose of this update was to inform Council of housing issues and provide an opportunity for the Council to ask questions about affordable housing. Michael Soloway, Deputy Director of Community Partners for Affordable Housing provided a general update on CPAH's current and future activities and programs, including a proposed new low-income housing project located adjacent to the Washington Square Regional Center. Susan Wilson, Director of Washington County Housing Services reported on her agency's acquisition of an apartment complex on Bonita, formerly known as Tiffany court. Ms. Wilson reported on present and proposed efforts to upgrade the complex and operate it as safe and decent affordable housing. Craig MacColl, Executive Director of Vision Action Network reported on the efforts to establish a housing trust fund to provide new funding to affordable housing by a collaborative combination of public, private and philanthropic resources. John Blatt, Executive Director for the Association of Oregon Community Development Organizations updated the Council on pending bills in the current legislative session. It is not known yet how affordable housing will fare this session. b. PRESENTATION ON THE CITY OF TIGARD 2003 ALMANAC Community Development Director Hendryx introduced this agenda item. Assistant Planner Beth St. Amand reviewed the Almanac, which was an ongoing long-range planning project to compile various statistics about Tigard. The objective of the 2003 Almanac was to collect valuable statistics in one location, making them easily accessible by citizens, staff, and the business community. Ms. St. Amand reviewed some of the "Tigard Facts" contained in the Almanac: Facts and Figures about Oregon's l l s Largest City. Each department will receive one printed copy of the Almanac and it will be available electronically on the Internet. A press release will be sent to the Tigard rimes announcing the Almanac availability. The report will be available at the Community Development Counter and two reference copies will be installed at the library. Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - May 20, 2003 Page 3 7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None 8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS K ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS o City Manager's Review Process - Council members will turn in their rating sheets to Mayor Griffith next week (May 27) o 1-5/99W Update by Mayor Griffith - Mayor Griffith and City Manager Monahan reported on a meeting held earlier this day about potential funding for a road bypass from Highway 99 to 1-5. This meeting was attended by representatives from several cities in Washington County and by Washington County Board Chair Tom Brian. Ideas are conceptual only; however, there is to be no impact on current transportation programs. There was discussion on acknowledgement by those attending today's meeting, that if this bypass does not assist Tigard's transportation issues, then additional MSTIP dollars would be allocated for Tigard projects. o City Recorder's Review - Council members were reminded to give performance review questionnaires to City Manager Monahan o Meeting with Washington County Board - Tuesday, August 19, 6 p.m. - City Manager Monahan advised Council of this meeting date and time. o Council Vacation Schedule through September - City Manager Monahan requested that Council members advise City Recorder Wheatley of vacation plans. o Update on Balloon Festival Status - Councilor Moore will update the Council on the Balloon Festival at the June 17 meeting. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Not held 10. ADJOURNMENT: 9:27 p.m. erne Attest: eat ey, tty ec er yor o Yrd ate: _-3 I:WDM\CATWCCK030520.D0C Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes - May 20, 2003 Page 4 i Mayor's Agenda rFT CITY OF TIGARD OREGON e PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (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 date by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deat). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 20, 2003 page 1 t AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING MAY 20, 2003 6:30 PM 1. WORKSHOP MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non Agenda Items 6:35 PM 2. JOINT MEETING WITH THE LIBRARY BOARD • Circulation/Cultural Passes • Reference and Adult Programming Children's Programming/Resources i Update on the New Library 7:05 PM 3. ANNUAL REPORT ON THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL COURT a. Staff Report: Finance Staff b. Council Discussion 7:25 PM 4. STATUS REPORT ON METRO GOAL 5 a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Discussion 7:50 PM 5. UPDATE ON LOCAL, COUNTY, AND STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Discussion 8:20 PM 6. PRESENTATION ON THE CITY OF TIGARD 2003 ALMANAC a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Discussion 8.40 PM 7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 20, 2003 page 2 y 8:45 PM 8. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 8:55 PM 9. 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 statute. 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. 9:00 PM 10. ADJOURNMENT 1:WDNACATHMM030520.DOC i I I I V I I COUNCIL AGENDA - MAY 20, 2003 page 3 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS FOR REVIEW MAY 20, 2003 - 6:30 PM • 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 statute. 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. • Administrative Items for Review o City Manager's Review Process - Place on Non Agenda? o 1-5/99W Update by Mayor Griffith - Place on Non Agenda? o City Recorder's Review - Turn in Questionnaires o Meeting with Washington County Board - Tuesday, August 19, 6 p.m. o Council Vacation Schedule through September - Input to Cathy o Update on Balloon Festival Status for Next Year - Schedule on Tentative Agenda for June 17? { j~~ 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 (1) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, If the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660(l) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660(l) (c) - To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660(l) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this instance.) 192.660(l) (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660 (1) (f) - 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 (1) (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing body is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660 (1) (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) (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 (1) Public investments - to carry on negotiations under ORS Chapter 293 with private persons or businesses regarding proposed acquisition, exchange or liquidation of public investments. 192.660 (1) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. I:\ADKCATi M000NCIL\CCLIST\030520.DOC MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder DATE: May 23, 2003 SUBJECT: Supplemental Information - May 27, 2003, Council Meeting Attached are two memos to supplement information Council received in its meeting packet for the May 27, 2003, Council meeting. These memos include information on: 1. Status of Legislative Issues (for Council's information for the discussion with our legislators) 2. Information about the referendum process. Staff has had some discussion about the possibility of a referendum to the voters if a street maintenance fee is adopted. This information is being provided to the Council so members would be knowledgeable of the process and sample timeline for a referendum. 1:1ADWPACKET'03\2003052TSUPPLEMENTAL PACKET MEMO.DOC F MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON , TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager OV DATE: May 23, 2003 SUBJECT: Status of Legislative Issues In preparation for your discussion with Senator Burdick and Representative Williams at the May 27 council meeting, department directors have prepared summaries of legislation they have been tracking. Copies of the summaries are attached along with corresponding letters that have been sent to Senator Burdick and Representative Williams. This memo briefly summarizes the legislation that is still under discussion or undecided, the city's position and the impact the proposed legislation would have on the city if adopted. Labor Issues Three bills to revise SB 750, adopted in 9995: SB 444 - This legislation would revise the definition of comparable communities used in arbitration to eliminate the requirement that comparisons be made only to cities. of similar size. It would also elevate public safety services above all other local service considerations as it relates to interest arbitrations. SB 445 - This legislation would expand the composition of police and fire bargaining units to include any supervisory employee that does not have the authority to exercise economic discipline. Even the Police Chief could potentially be included in a bargaining unit. SB 445 - This legislation would require employers to bargain over staffing levels that have a potential impact on on-the-job safety for police and fire fighter unions. This bill would subject the matter of staffing levels and workload issue to a third party arbitrator to determine in the event binding arbitration is pursued, taking considerable economic and service decision making out of the hands of local government. Attached is a copy of Mayor Griffith's letter to Senator Burdick and Representative Williams opposing all three of these proposed bills. In short, adoption of these bills will tip the scales to the unions and negatively amend SB 750, as well as being detrimental and burdensome to our budget, service objectives, and staff. Engineering Issues SB 585 - Significantly restricts the ability of local jurisdictions to implement street user fees. The city strongly opposes any attempts to cap, limit, or pre-empt street user fees. SB 881 - Prohibits local governments and districts from imposing local gas taxes. It also prohibits any cities and counties that already have a local gas tax from increasing the tax. The city strongly opposes any attempts to limit or pre-empt the ability of local governments to raise revenue through local taxes or fees and opposes this bill. Planning and Building Issues SB 378 - Sets a cap of $250 for land use appeals and requires local governments to refund or reimburse appeal fees and transcript costs incurred by one who successfully appeals a local land use decision. The state statute also limits the appeal fee to $250 for an appeal if there hasn't been a local hearing. The problem with doing it with all appeals is that it could encourage frivolous appeals on many cases, unduly delaying and slowing down the development process for legitimate approvals by NIMBYs. The problem for local government in times of financial problems is that the cost of processing these appeals runs into the thousands of dollars in costs that cannot be recovered. It puts a bigger burden on the taxpayer to pay the bill in the long run. HB 2905 - Requires that the methodology for establishing improvement fees promote the objective of future system users contributing no more than an equitable share to the cost of existing facilities. It would extend the time to file legal action challes aging the methodology for calculating system development charges for 60 to (yet to be determined) days. This bill was sponsored by Max Williams at the request of Oregonians in Action. Attached is a copy of a letter dated April 25 from the city to Representative Williams and Senator Burdick opposing HB 2906 because of uncertainty and undue burden the "re-opening at any time" provision would cause local governments. Also attached is a coy of a letter written by Representative Williams in support of the provisions of HB 2906-A and noting that it is unlikely the bill will come to the floor this session. Library Issues HB 3101 and SB 656 - Both of these bills would require local governments to install filtering software on all public workstations at local libraries. The state library estimates the cost for each individual library to install filters at $3,000 with an additional annual cost of $1,000. In these difficult economic times, requiring mandatory filters places an unreasonable financial burden on local governments. The Tigard library has a policy and procedures in place, which provide for filtering software on two Internet stations. These policies were determined by the Library Board and are reviewed on a regular basis. The city believes these polices should be determined at the local level. Finance Issues HB 2267 - Creates statewide 1 percent hotel/motel tax and pre-empts any additional local hotel/motel taxes unless dedicated to tourism promotion. The city supports the statewide tax, but strongly opposes local pre-emption because it takes away the city's ability to raise local revenues. Public Contracting HB 3303-EN - Interest on bills would become due only 15 days after a bill is submitted for payment. The city opposes this bill because it limits the time available to conduct review of the charges as necessary and the ability to batch bills for payment. Worker's Compensation HB 3334 - Prohibits wage and benefit reductions for public safety officers on worker's compensation time loss. The TPOA contract prohibits this practice, but the city is opposed to it being mandated by a the state. HB 3567 - This bill, if passed, would require affirmative Worker's Comp coverage for police officers whether they were exposed at work or not if they have any disease of the lungs or respiratory tract, hypertension or cardiovascular, or. renal, liver disease or n infections exposure to air or blood-bome agents as long as the employee did not have the j disease prior to starting work. The city opposes this bill because Worker's Compensation coverage is intended for on- the-job exposures. May 20, 2003 TO: William A. Monahan, City Manager FROM: Sandy Zodrow, Human Resources Director RE: Update on Current Legislation The following represents a status summary of those collective bargaining and PERS related bills which we have been tracking: HR 2001: cap on PERS eaminas Governor Kulongoski has signed this House Bill into law. The bill provided an 8 percent annual cap on earnings for a Tier One member's regular account until the deficit account has been eliminated and the reserve account has been fully funded in each of the three immediately preceding calendar years. HR 2003: multiple elements House Bill 2003, which the Governor has signed into law, has several components: a) It will eliminate the 6% member contribution to the member's PERS retirement account. The money will go into a transition account. Employers will be mandated to continue to pick up the 6 percent member contribution for two years if they currently pay the contribution. After two years, the member contribution will continue but employees will bargain with employers regarding who will pay the contribution. b) Halts the 8 percent annual crediting to Tier One member accounts until the deficit account is eliminated. c) Ensures that a lifetime average of the assumed rate (currently 8 percent) will be credited to the member's PERS account at retirement. d) Temporarily removes future cost of living allowance (COLA) increases for members who retired between April 1, 2000 and April 1, 2004 under the Money Match calculation. PERS will recalculate the member retirement benefit based on a lower crediting amount for 1999 (11.33 percent vs 20 percent). Once the frozen benefit adjusts to the lower crediting level, COLA payments would begin again. He 2004: Up-dates PERS mortality tables Governor Kulongoski has signed House Bill 20D4C into law with an effective date of July 1, 2003. This bill updates mortality tables used to calculate monthly pension payments for PERS participants. HB 2005: PERS Board House Bill 2005 was signed into law by the Governor, and contains the following sections: a) It reduces the PERS Board from 12 to 5 members b) Provides that the Governor appoint five Board members to begin terms on September 1, 2003 c) Stipulates that one Board member must be a state employee in a management position (when appointed and throughout the term of appointment) or a person who holds an elective office (by election or appointment) in the governing body of a participating public employer other than the state. One member must be a public employee. Three Board members must be from the private sector with no interest in the benefits provided by PERS. d) Staggers the length of terms for Board members. SB 444: Changes interest arbitration factors SB 444 changes the factors considered in interest arbitration. This proposed legislation favors unions by revising the definition of "comparable communities" used in arbitration to eliminate the requirement that comparisons be made only to cities of similar size. This will roll back some of the achievements employers obtained in the passage of SB 750 back in 1995. This bill also would elevate public safety services above all other local service considerations as it relates to interest arbitrations. It would strengthen the position of public safety bargaining units at the expense of other city services. A hearing was held May 19 before a House Committee, and the matter remains undecided at this time. SB 445: Expands covered positions SB 445 would expand the composition of police and fire bargaining units to include any supervisory employee that does not have the authority to exercise economic discipline (Le suspension, demotion, termination). Even the Police Chief could potentially be included in a bargaining unit! Current law excludes supervisory positions due to their ability to hire, adjust grievances, discipline and other factors. This proposal radically changes the content of public safety bargaining units. A hearing was held May 19 before a House Committee, and the matter remains undecided at this time. ,SB 446: Staffing levels subiect to negotiations 8E3 446 would require employers to bargain over staffing levels that have a "potential" impact on the on-the-job safety for police and firefighter unions. This bill would subject the matter of staffing levels and workload issues to a third party arbitrator to determine in the event binding arbitration is pursued. This would take considerable economic and service decision making out of the hands of local government. Both SB 445 and SB 446 would significantly undo the gains employers made with the passage of SB 750 in 1995. A hearing was held May 19 before a House Committee, and the matter remains undecided at this time. CITY OF TIGARD Engineering Department Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone 503-539-4171 Fax: 503-624-0752 TO: Bill Monahan City Manager FROM: Gus Duenas ):I"- City Engineer DATE: May 21, 2003 SUBJECT: Update on Current Legislation The following are summaries of the legislative bills that we are currently tracking: SB 585 - Significantly limits ability for local jurisdictions to implement Street User Fees This bill significantly restricts the ability of local jurisdictions to implement street user fees. City's Position: The City strongly opposes any attempts to cap, limit, or pre-empt Street User Fees. Bill Status: The bill was sponsored by the Committee on Transportation and Economic Development and is currently still in that committee. A public hearing was conducted on April 3, 2003. Mayor Griffith sent a letter to Senator Rick Metsger, the Committee Chair, strongly opposing the bill. The League of Oregon Cities testified in opposition to 1 the bill using testimony provided by cities and other jurisdictions against the bill. The bill 1 has not been referred out of Committee. 1 SB 881 - Prohibits local governments and districts from imposing or increasing taxes on motor vehicle fuel. This bill prohibits local governments and districts from imposing local gas taxes. It also prohibits any cities and counties that already have a local gas tax from increasing the tax. City's Position: The City strongly opposes any attempts to limit or pre-empt the ability of local governments to raise revenue through local taxes or fees. Hence, the City opposes this bill, which prohibits local governments from imposing taxes on motor vehicle fuel. Bill Status: The bill was sponsored by the Committee on Rules. It has been referred to the Committee on Revenue. No public hearing has yet been scheduled for this bill. c: Liz Newton IAEng\Gus\Memorandums\Current Legislation Update.doc Current Legislation Update Page 2 of 2 May 23, 2003 CITY ®F TIGAR® OREGON The Honorable Ginny Burdick State Senator 900 Court Street, NE, S-317 Salem, OR 97301 Re: Senate Bills 444, 445, and 446 Dear Ginny: am writing to you on behalf of the City of Tigard in expressing our deepest concerns and objections to the proposed Senate Bills 444, 445, and 446. If approved, these bills will have serious long-term impacts on the City's financial health and its ability to determine the personnel and service provisions most appropriate for our jurisdiction. It is important to note that the current collective bargaining regulations, which these bills significantly impact, only date back to 1995 when SB 750 was passed. We believe SB 750 has proven to be an effective piece of legislation for both union and management parties, and there is no compelling reason to change. The provisions are fair, and they do not disproportionately advantage either side. Adoption of these proposed Senate Bills will tip the scales to the unions and negatively amend SB 750. As an example, SB 445 goes much further beyond the current language by potentially including managers into bargaining units who currently have a great deal of responsibility for directing large numbers of staff, establishing policy, and exercising discipline. The current criteria relative to this bill was only established less than 8 years ago. We believe that SB 750 is not broken, and it does not need fixing. am certain that the citizens of Tigard would join me in finding these proposed bills to be detrimental and burdensome to our budget, service objectives and • staff. I urge you to defeat these measures. i i Sincerely, 'r i im Griffith Mayor IAADMWWYOR GRIFFITH\20031SENATOR BURDICK - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING LEGIS.DOC 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 May 23, 2003 CITY OF TIGAR® OREGON The Honorable Max Williams State Representative 900 Court Street, NE, H-276 Salem, OR 97301 Re: Senate Bills 444, 445, and 446 Dear Max: I am writing to you on behalf of the City of Tigard in expressing our deepest concerns and objections to the proposed Senate Bills 444, 445, and 446. If approved, these bills will have serious long-term impacts on the City's financial health and its ability to determine the personnel and service provisions most appropriate for our jurisdiction. It is important to note that the current collective bargaining regulations, which these bills significantly impact, only date back to 1995 when SB 750 was passed. We believe SB 750 has proven to be an effective piece of legislation for both union and management parties, and there is no compelling reason to change. The provisions are fair, and they do not disproportionately advantage either side. Adoption of these proposed Senate Bills will tip the scales to the unions and negatively amend SB 750. As an example, SB 445 goes much further beyond the current language by potentially including managers into bargaining units who currently have a great deal of responsibility for directing large numbers of staff, establishing policy, and exercising discipline. The current criteria relative to this bill was only established less than 8 years ago. We believe that SB 750 is not broken, and it does not need fixing. am certain that the citizens of Tigard would join me in finding these proposed bills to be detrimental and burdensome to our budget, service objectives and staff. I urge you to defeat these measures. Sincerely, I im Griffith Mayor (:IAOMUUAYOR GRIFF(TH%2GMSENAT0R BURDICK - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING LEGIS.DOC 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Bill Monahan FROM: Jim Hendryx DATE: May 23, 2003 SUBJECT: Update on Current Legislation Following are summaries of current legislative bills and CD comments: SB 378 - sets cap on land use appeals This bill sets a statewide cap of $250 for land use appeals and requires local governments to refund or reimburse appeal fees and transcript costs incurred by person who successfully appeals local land use decision. Comments: The state statue also limits the appeal fee to $250 for an appeal if there hasn't been a local hearing. The problem with doing it with all appeals is that it could encourage frivolous appeals on many cases, unduly delaying and slowing the development process for legitimate approvals by NIMBYS. The problem for local government in times of financial problems is that the cost of processing these appeals runs into the $1,000's of dollars in costs that cannot be recovered. It puts a bigger burden on the taxpayer to pay the bill in the long run. The City should oppose this bill through LOC affiliated groups, such as the Oregon City Planning Directors Association (OCPDA). OCPDA will decide whether to take an official position on this bill at its 4125103 meeting and then proceed with testimony, etc. As of 519103: Oregon City Planning Directors Association did not take a position on this specif.-- bill. We continue to oppose this bill. Staff will follow this bill and decide how to proceed. HB 2689 - Urban Growth Boundary Elimination Act of 2003 Authorizes counties to designate rural development zones without adopting exceptions to statewide planning goals relating to urbanization or to public facilities and services. Establishes criteria for rural economic planning in rural development zones. t Comments: This bill would allow urban development outside the UGB. It would allow urban levels of development on over 50,000 acres of rural "exception" lands. This could cost taxpayers money to service that development with new infrastructure and could hurt farmers and foresters. The Governor's office does not support this bill and will most likely veto it. The City should oppose this bill through LOC affiliated groups, such as the Oregon City Planning Directors Association (OCPDA). OCPDA will decide whether to take an official position on this bill at its 4125103 meeting and then proceed with testimony, etc. As of 519103: Oregon City Planning Directors Association did not take a position on this specific bill. Staff will follow this bill and decide how to proceed. The bill appears to have extensive opposition. The City has not taken an official position on this bill. HB 2595 -Affordable Housinq Repeals prohibition on real estate transfer taxes. Would allow local governments to implement a real estate transfer tax to fund affordable housing. Comments: The City should oppose this bill through LOC affiliated groups, such as the Oregon City Planning Directors Association (OCPDA). OCPDA will decide whether to take an official position on this bill at its 4125103 meeting and then proceed with testimony, etc. Referred to Revenue. As of 519103: Oregon City Planning Directors Association did not take a position on this specific bill. Staff will follow this bill and decide how to proceed. HB 2906 Requires that methodology for establishing improvement fees promote objective of future system users contributing no more than equitable share to cost of existing facilities. Extends time to file legal action challenging methodology for calculating system development charge from 60 days to (yet to be determined) days. Comments: This bill is being sponsored by Max Williams at the request of Oregonians in Action. On April 25th, the City sent a letter to Max Williams and Ginny Burdick expressing opposition to this bill (attached). On May 9th, Max Williams sent a letter in response (also attached). The bill was referred back to Committee and Rep. Williams does not expect it to come to the floor again this session.. i ii i i I I 2 MAX WILLIAMS Committees: State Representative Chair: Judiciary DISTRICT 35 _ Member: Revcnuc HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 900 COURT ST NE SALEM, OREGON 97301 q~C 414t- c0 3 May 9, 2003 t~ f~Qn William Monahan Tigard City Manager Copies to: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Mayor/Council ✓ Other: Tigard, OR 97223 City Manager ✓ ~tryl'>N' Council File v7- ,A Subject: HB 2906-A Dear Thank you for your letter regarding House Bill 2906-A, which would modify the statutory provisions relating to the assessment and collection of System Development Charges (SDCs). , As you are likely aware, the bill was referred.back to Committee and I don't expect it will;come to the floor again this session.. While I appreciate your concerns, I believe HB 2906-A levels the playing field between local government and the small business community, while .at the same time allowing local government to collect SDCs that are needed to offset the impacts caused by new development within the community. I believe there are two fundamental flaws in the existing statutory scheme. First, existing provisions allow local governments to impose SDCs that exceed the cost of providing the infrastructure improvements needed to offset the impact of the development. As you indicated in your letter, SDCs are important revenue sources for local governments, as they allow jurisdictions to impose "an equitable share" of the cost of capital facilities upon new development. I agree with that concept. Unfortunately, current law does not limit local L governments to the imposition of an "equitable share," but instead allows local governments to impose SDCs that can exceed an "equitable share." The second flaw in existing law lies in the failure to allow for "as applied" challenges to SDCs. Current law limits challenges to 60 days of the date of adoption of the methodology. But, what happens if an SDC methodology is adopted in 1995, but the actual SDC is not imposed a on a property owner until 2003? Is it fair to expect the property owners in the community to appear before the city-council in, 1995, on the off chance that they may submit a development application in 2003, and desire to challenge an.SDC imposed upon them. at.that time when it. doesn't reflect an "equitable share?" I do not believe that it is. Office: 900 Court St NE H-276, Salcm, OR 97301 - Phone: 503-986-1435 rep.maxwilliants@statc.or.us District: 12103 SW 135th Ave., Tigard, OR 97223 - Phone: 503.52SA275 I appreciate the desire of local governments to maintain some certainty in the adoption of an SDC methodology. But that certainty should not be allowed to insulate the local government from legitimate claims that an SDC, as applied to a particular property owner, imposes inequitable burdens on that property owner, such that the property owner is being forced to pay for infrastructure that exceeds the impact caused by his/her development proposal. As you indicated in your letter, it is true that local revenues are at low levels and that basic services are threatened. But SDCs are not the appropriate tool for raising revenue beyond the amount necessary to ensure that growth pays for itself. House Bill 2906-A ensures that local governments can continue to require growth to pay for itself. But requiring new businesses (as well as existing local businesses that desire to expand) to shoulder more than their fair share of infrastructure costs acts as a disincentive to economic activity and job creation-something we obviously desperately need. I am comforted by your statement regarding the rarity of legal challenges to SDC methodologies. It seems to me that a well-crafted methodology would result in very few legal challenges, simply because a land use applicant would know that his or her SDC assessment was an accurate reflection of the impact of the development on the local government infrastructure. That will not change under HB 2906-A. But in those rare circumstances where the SDC calculation results in a fee that is grossly disproportionate to the actual impact caused by a property owner's proposed development, that owner should have a remedy. Finally, I appreciate your argument regarding the use of averages to calculate individual SDCs, and realize that that is a common practice. But HB 2906-A will not deter local government from using averages when preparing their methodology. In fact, if HB 2906-A is adopted, a local govemment could continue to use its methodology, and require a property owner wishing to challenge an SDC calculation to provide a professionally prepared study to document the actual impacts resulting from the proposed development. That would create a far more equitable system, and, contrary to your letter, I don't believe it would be impractical or burdensome on local government to fairly address these issues. As you know, I am always open to suggestions on how to improve legislation, including HB 2906-A. If you have any suggestions, feel free to contact me. I took. forward to seeing you soon. 9 .Regards, i i R Max Williams i cc: Tigard Mayor Jim Griffith CITY OF TIGARD MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: Bill Monahan 9~ FROM: Margaret Barnes_1_ DATE: May 20, 2003 SUBJECT: Legislative Update Following are summaries of current legislative bills and comments: Although several library-related bills were introduced in this legislative session, the only ones of major significance are FIB 3101 and SB 0656. HB 3101-Internet Filtering "Directs public libraries to install filtering software on library computer terminals that provide Internet access to public." Currently this bill is in the General Government Committee. This bill would require local governments to install filtering software on all public workstations at local public libraries. SB 0656 -Internet Filtering "Directs public libraries to install filtering software on computer terminals that provide access to Internet in children's areas or near children's areas." Currently this bill is in the Judiciary Committee. Each of these bills would require local governments to install filtering software on all public g workstations at local public libraries. Comments: There is a widespread perception on both sides of the political spectrum that both these pieces of legislation are unconstitutional because implementation would block access to constitutionally protected speech. Also, filtering software is often ineffective in adequately i i "protecting" unwitting Internet users from viewing pornographic sites. i i The League of Oregon Cities is currently tracking HR 3101. The last activity on this legislation was on May 1 when a work session was held. Legislative Counsel Greg Chaimov testified then that the bill would violate the constitution. The State Library estimates the cost for each individual library to install filters to be $3,000 with an additional annual cost of $1,000. In these difficult economic times mandating filters places an unreasonable financial burden on local governments. The Oregon Library Association testified that many libraries have filtering software or policies on Internet use, and there has not been a problem regulating access to the Internet. If these bills come out of Committee the City should oppose them through the LOC and OLA. These items should be determined at the local level. It is beyond the purview of the state to mandate the installation of filters. The Tigard Public Library has a policy and procedures in place regarding public access to the Internet. These policies were determined by the Library Board and are reviewed on a regular basis. G a MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan, City Manager Liz Newton, Assistant to the City Manager FROM: Craig Prosse&inance Director RE: Legislative Items DATE: May 23, 2003 Finance is tracking the following legislative items. HB 2906-A Introduced by Representative Williams at the request of Oregonians in Action. Amendments to the bill would allow anyone charged a Systems Development Charge or traffic Impact Fee to challenge the basic methodology setting the fee at any time the fee is levied, rather than at the initial adoption of the fee or fee increase. City of Tigard Position: Strongly oppose. This bill attempts to overturn coup` decisions in the Rogers Machinery case and would preclude ever coming to conclusion on SDC (r TIF) methodology. ■ Passed Committee and went to the floor of the house ■ The House referred this item back to committee, where it is expected to die ■ Rep. Williams still thinks this is a fine idea. HB 2267 Creates statewide 1 % Hotel/Motel Tax and Pre-empts any additional local Hotel/Motel Taxes unless dedicated to tourism promotion. City of Tigard Position: Support 1% statewide tax, but strongly oppose local pre-emption L ■ Still in committee 2 • Governor is supporting 1% statewide tax, but his position on local pre-emption is unclear. State Budget Discussions a In addition to these bills, Finance is watching the state budget discussions for possible impacts i on the City of Tigard. MEMORANDUM To: Liz Newton FROM: Loreen Mills SUBJECT: 2003 LEGISLATION MONITORING DATE: May 23, 2003 There are three areas of legislative concern that Risk is following: municipal liability, public contracting, and workers comp. Following is a list of highlights. Municipal Liability NOTE: 31 bills under this topic have not moved along far enough or are not a concern to require constant monitoring. BB2276-A Injured worker litigation Would permit compensatory and punitive damages in civil action for violation of certain injured worker rights (unlawful employment practices) - retro to 1/1/02. MONITORING. Public Contracting NOTE: There are a total of 25 bills under this topic that are being monitored with 9 that Risk opposes. The two listed below are the ones with the most recent actions occurring in the legislature. RB2341-A Major revision to public contracting requirements & procedures This bill mould clean up Chapter 279 (Public Purchasing Rules) making procedures clearer and the process cleaner. SUPPORTING BB3303-EN Public Improvement Contract billing Interest would become due only 15 days after a contractor submits as bill to the City. OPPOSING Workers, Cculpensat-ion NOTE: 30 bills are being tracked under this topic. HB3334 Prohibits wage & benefit reductions for public safety officers on Workers Compensation time loss. This is consistent with current TPOA contract requirements, however, not mandated at this time by state law. OPPOSING. BB3567 Establishes presumption of compensability for public safety officers in Workers Compensation claims t This bill, if passed, would require affirmative Workers Comp coverage for police officers whether they were exposed at work or not if they have any disease of the lungs or respiratory tract, hypertension or cardiovascular, or renal, liver disease or infections exposure to air or blood-borne agents as long as the employee did not have the disease prior to starting work. j OPPOSING. I I Loreen\c:\My Documents\Legislation Tracking Memo 5-22-03.doc MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder DATE: May 23, 2003 SUBJECT: Referendum Process There has been some discussion about a referendum to the voters of any ordinance the Council may approve to implement a street maintenance fee. Here is the process and an estimated timeframe: • Petitioners could file a petition any time after the ordinance is adopted, but the filing must be completed before the ordinance takes effect, which is no later than the 30`h day after adoption of a non-emergency ordinance. To determine the deadline, for submitting signatures, day one is the first day after the ordinance is passed by Council. For a referendum petition on an ordinance, the number of signatures required to refer the ordinance to the voters is not less than ten percent of the active registered voters in the City (as of today, 10% = 2,203). • After the City Recorder receives a prospective referendum petition, two copies are forwarded to the City Attorney for preparation of the ballot title. The City Attorney has five business days to prepare a ballot title and return it to the City Recorder. The ballot title drafting process and the collection of signatures occur simultaneously. Once the chief petitioners have received written approval to circulate from the City Recorder, the chief petitioners may begin collecting signatures. The chief petitioners do not have to wait for the ballot title before collecting signatures. • The City Recorder publishes a receipt of ballot title in the next available edition of a newspaper of general circulation in the City. Any registered Oregon voter who is dissatisfied with the ballot title may petition the City Council to review the ballot title issued by the City Attorney. The deadline to file a petition to review the ballot title is no later than the seventh day after the ballot title is filed with the City Recorder. • Once at least 100 percent of the required number of signatures are gathered, the petitioner may submit them to the City Recorder (no later than the 30th day after the ordinance was adopted). • After receiving the signature sheets, the City Recorder verifies the signatures to determine if the referendum contains enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot. Signature verification must be completed no later than the 15th calendar day after submitted. • After the signature verification has been completed and there are enough signatures to refer the matter to the ballot, the City Recorder notifies the County Elections Official. The election will be held on the next available election date, which is no sooner than the 90'h day after the referendum petition was filed with the City Recorder. Attached is a sample timeline for referring an ordinance that was adopted on June 24, 2003. I:\NDM\CATIIY\ELECTI ON\PROCEDURES\REFERENDUM.DOC I I Sample Timeline Referendum Council adopts ordinance June 24, 2003 Recorder receives prospective petition and reviews for completion. June 25, 2003 Petitioners can begin circula- ting petition for signatures June 27, 2003 City Attorney writes the Ballot Title within five business days No later than: July 2, 2003 Petition signature sheets are submitted with at least 2,203 signatures (Tigard active registered voters) No later than July 24, 2003 City Recorder verifies signatures No later than August 8, 2003 County is notified of city referendum measure if enough signatures verified August 8, 2003 Referendum appears on ballot !November 4, 2003 I: W D MICATFME LECTION\PROCE DU RESIREFE REND UM.DOC Past Board/Chair Members Library Board Original Appt. Date Date Resigned YVONNE BURGESS 07-23-91 09-12-95 13475 SW Village Glenn Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 639-0903 JERI CUNDIFF 07-23-91 09-12-95 AMO DE BERNARDIS 03-23-87 6-30-93 14930 SW 92nd Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 620-2682 SUSAN GROSSEN 10-23-89 06-30-94 11190 SW Novare Place Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 620-1612 TAMMY GUSTIN 10-10-96 6-30-99 10670 SW Derry Dell Court Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 639-2027 PAT HARPER 05-12-97 06-30-99 10875 SW Summer Lake Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 524-3383 MARILYN HARTZELL 07-23-91 09-12-95 15399 SW Burgundy Street Tigard, OR 97224-1184 Res: 579-1184 i r Bus: 494-7522 i i LONN HOKLIN 07-01-94 01-01-2000 9365 SW Millen Drive Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 598-0454 e-mail: hoklin@teleport.com I:\ADM\Board & Committee Roster.doc 45 Revised: 05/20/03 Past Board/Chair Members Library Board cont'd. Original Appt. Date Date Resigned NANCY IRWIN - Vice Chair 05-27-93 06-30-2001 11135 SW 125th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 503-590-8086 nancy@easystreet.com GARY JOHNSON 07-01-01 12-01-2001 8985 SW Reiling Street Tigard, OR 97224 Res: 503-684-3463 Bus: 503-833-1765 gary_johnson@rsausa.com CARL KOSTOL 06-26-89 10-10-95 13330 SW Genesis Loop Tigard, OR 97223-3900 Res: VINCE MATARRESE 07-27-81 04-23-92 ANGUS McKAY 9-12-95 02-09-98 9720 SW Frewing Street Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 620-7012 LINDA MONA.HAN 03-23-87 06-30-91 JACK SCHWAB 09-12-95 06-21-96 9355 SW Inez Street Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 620-5739 Bus: 245-5220 KEN TOLLIVER 07-13-99 04-10-00 10200 SW Katherine Street Tigard, OR 97223 Res: 503-684-8200 Bus: 503-531-2800, x6398 IMDM1Board & Committee Roster.doc Revised: 05/20/03 46 LEGIBILITY STRIP -On _ :i'hMWrVi11a Apartments Bonita Washington County Department of Housing Services . r > y.1 • Y i+ ~ t s y ~ky ~ S~ ~ i~.~.~~py S~~y• ~ iS ~~7'i5 Ni. Ott Ito, d . z: L. R ~ ~ -ia t?~~' - air .a~~r~v 0 3 kit k LEGIBILITY STRIP r- '"may j ~ • our story be ins... "fDCR " ✓July 1 2002, DHS acquired Bonita Villa. 771 ✓ Why this property? - Bonita Villa has long been a community issue. • Crime/police involvement • Drug activity - • Lack of regular maintenance and management • Fatal fire in December, 2000. LEGIBILITY STRIP .ice t i Our plan et: ud g ✓Original planned b $ 4,200,000.00 Acquisition $ 800,000.00 Repairs and Rehabilitation, including: ® Repair of damaged wallboard, mostly from water t penetration in baths around tubs/toilets ® Casework in kitchens and baths • Re-seeding lawn and clean-up of landscape ® Repairing roof and exterior drainage system of recreation building ® Repair/replace gutters along carports • Repairs to balconies and exterior drainage systems *Prior to acquisition, site was identified in inspection as "typical of buildings of this age [33 years], with deferred maintenance. *Originally, 20 units were identified for immediate rehabilitation. LEGIBILITY STRIP Now : discovered What . snore deferred maintenance Villa had (Bonita iginally knOwn" r iss"es than or and othe s needed Broken sewer pipes water mains, sump pump - ~ of in floors and walls _ Extensive dry_r security and patrol needed - _ Asbestos abatement - " budget cost more than final • _ Many items in ong A anticipated in immediate need of re 64 units were • habilitation ~ - ~ . y planned) ~ p (instead of the 20 originall Now LEGIBILITY STRIP done.** What we've Original Budgeted Amount Spent to ' =Item Amount date Anticipated Costs 48,881.00 $ 57,812.00 - Office and Community Room -Construction and Rehabilitation $ 306,421.00 $ 757,038.00 Residential Buildings -Construction and Rehabilitation (64 units total) $ 15,442.00 $ 64,000.00 Site Improvements (Landscaping, fencing, debris removal) $ 10,000.00 $ 15,000.00 1014, Mailboxes $ 35,000.00 $ 50,000.00 Playground Unanticipated Costs: $ _ $ 10,000.00 74- VDry-rot Walkway $ _ $ 9,000.00 Maintenance $ _ $ 50,000.00 r repair in floors and wal ls $ $ 6,000.00 umps $ $ 144,000.00 seos Abatement $ 49,000.00 Security Patrols of Site 2,000.00 Office Security System $ $ _ $ 50,000.00 Conversion A unit for ADA Accessibility $ _ $ 14,000.00 Tree Removal $ $ 5,000.00 770 300 yards of debris removal $ 4,500.00 Broken sewer lines $ 4,500.00 4 main water valves _ $ 415,744.00 $ 11291,850.00 TOTAL $ 800,000.00 Less Original Budgeted Amount $ (491,850.00) Amount Remaining LEGIBILITY STRIP After . Before and Exterior of buildings and lawn Exter ~y - 'c - ,i+' _ ~F"t` ~ ~ . r 6 wry ✓~p~ qrf` `~..fuf~~Y~i~ e{~-,.,Iyl°c4 .-----mss .-r-~ , ~ ~ ~ r 'b r f r .na~w• tea.... LEGIBILITY STRIP After Before and Trash receptacle area 4 F I, i~ ..J Bef~r= yT~ z Nh rdir~~ t+~t~`~ '-I n ° zg ) ~ ~ Ylpl~ '~f e Co T1 " ttt ~ j ~ ~ 4C After - Before and Community Room ^wXe: 1• i - J ' . - After - Interior ay ~ . ri.. ~ i~ Jr'~ a ~e. S` ytel: r.RO..,.~•r.;{'% r~ ~xn ~i S•}~ a 4 K M~~t ~ ~ y~` 1't `I M1 I LY ~ ~ ~ - T; r,. it' i x c t ,y+e~-- ~ t~ i y~ t •7,r ~ ~ • C Q ~ ~ ~t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ _ ~ LEGIBILITY STRIP fter an Before Exterior Center walkway (still in progress) to II xr1 vF,,~ r NO - Ell - ~ ~,y~s-^ Asti ♦ ~}~*~.~5?~ w :T x. 1 I I c r .i ' k• y`7 t• •~..~~ly'••i ;4 } F Y Y Nt ~ ~ 1 .Sti LEGIBILITY STRIP 1.. Cleaner Safer Bonita Villa A -~f 300 yards (Upon a~,qu~s~tlon, approximately of debris te. were removed from the si 11 A significant reduction in criminal activity has occurred! . s a 66% reduction in - Tigard Police report 14 Apartment Incident Cards (AICs) at Bonita Villa since last year • 31 incidents between 7/1/02 - 12/31/02 • only 11 incidents between 1 / 1 /03 - 5/19/03 J. LEGIBILITY STRIP r Where we are todqv . • • ✓ Work remaining: y Remain an Work Roof rep lace me nt a nd exterior $ 225,000.00 tin ` pain Re habilitation of 32 units, at a cost o $ 275,000.00 l $8 500 each approximate Less remaining funds 0 Amount needed to complete Bonita $ (500,000.00) j Villa Rehabilitation .wcav nor S. 1, hat's our plan? ✓DHS has no additional funds at this time to ALLY- complete the project /DHS does not receive County General ® Funds ./The Department plans to apply for HOME funds In amount of $500,000 the LEGIBILITY STRIP What can the City of Tigard /Provide support for the Bonita villa ! • ° Project -I®ME Application Rehalhtatlon 0 e _ V ' i a tom- m J = 4''7 F- ?+3~.. y R yt~3 L$j f 5 ~f~ .1 7 Y. ~i ~.~~:1 y+S ~.lu~'.i AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF May 20, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Joint Meeting with the Library Board PREPARED BY: Margaret Barnes DEPT HEAD OK /A. CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL This is the regularly scheduled, annual joint meeting between City Council and the Library Board. STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A INFORMATION SUMMARY Annual meeting with the Library Board to provide information to the City Council. The Library Board is prepared to update the Council about the following programs and services. • Circulation/Cultural Passes • Reference and Adult Programming • Children's Programming/Resources • Update on the new Library OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal #2: A wide array of opportunities for life-long learning are available in a variety of formats and used by the community. Goal #3: Adequate facilities are available for efficient delivery of life-long learning programs and services for all ages. ATTACHMENT LIST None. FISCAL NOTES None. LEGIBILITY STRIP checkouts per Year 7®0,000 r t 680,000 rr 6601000 f` 640,000 620, 000 M Checkouts f' - 600,000 560,000-K T: 560,000 - 540,000 - MV 520,000 2000 2001 2002 Year i LCUIDIL11 Y a 1 KIr Visitors per Year 2002 2001 2000 200,000 300,000 ® 100,000 Number of people LEGIBILITY STRIP Cultural Pass use 600 500 400- V, k Checkouts 300 = 200 100 0 2001 2002 Year Public Internet Use Tigard Public Library 61531 ~oooo s 43448 33486. . `Y© LFh/ J j N2000 2001 2002 Q~~ f l AGENDA ITEM # 3 FOR AGENDA OF 5/20/03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Tigard Municipal Court Annual Report PREPARED BY:.. Judge O'Brien & N. Robinson DEPT HEAD OK -12- CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Judge O'Brien and Nadine Robinson, Court Manager, will provide an update on the status of the Municipal Court. The report and presentation will address the court's current programs, including youth court and caseload. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action required. INFORMATION SUMMARY This is the Court's fourth annual report to City Council. The court continues its primary goal of promoting public safety and community values by implementing state and municipal laws in a fair, efficient and professional manner. For most people in Oregon, their direct experience with the legal process typically arises from a traffic citation. The court strives to make that experience a positive one by educating defendants about relevant laws and traffic safety in a context of excellent customer service. Following the Council's decision to accept certain categories of juvenile offenses, the first misdemeanor cases were referred to the court by the Tigard Police Department in June, 2002. Since relatively few cases were active during the first few months of the program, it is too early to evaluate its impact on juveniles. However, there are some encouraging trends in the preliminary data: • 97% of cited juveniles have appeared for their scheduled arraignments. e Rates of compliance with conditions of probation have been very high, with no recidivism to date. m Parental involvement has been very high. e Juveniles have been ordered to complete 296 hours of community service to date. In addition to the juvenile caseload, the court projects a caseload of approximately 7,400 traffic citations and 350 civil infractions for this fiscal year. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A j ATTACHMENT LIST i Annual Report Appendix Graphs I & 2 FISCAL NOTES Funds are budgeted for the current programs. ANNUAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Tigard Municipal Court May 6, 2003 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Michael J. O'Brien, Presiding Judge Nadine Robinson, Court Manager SUBJECT: Annual Report from Tigard Municipal Court We appreciate the opportunity to meet with Council and the City Manager for our fourth annual review of Municipal Court operations and policies. The highlights of the last year are presented below and in the attached graphs and appendix. As always, we are happy to answer any questions you may have. 1. Increases in the Court's Caseload: The current fiscal year has seen a large increase in the court's caseload for all categories of cases. As with most Oregon courts, traffic cases tend to dominate our dockets. Through April 301n, the court has received 6,242 traffic violations. If citations continue to be issued at the current level, the court can expect to receive more than 7,300 traffic violations during the current fiscal year-far more than in any previous year. As in past years, citations for speeding (2,137) and failure to obey traffic control devices (1,163) comprised roughly half of all traffic cases (through April 30"). In view of Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's stated goals of improving traffic safety, including strict enforcement of posted speed limits, we anticipate that our traffic caseload will continue to increase during FY 2003-04. Civil-infraction dockets have continued to increase substantially since the 2001-02 fiscal year, from 288 cases to 321 cases as of April 30`n (an annual rate of about 350 cases). Finally, the court has received 78 misdemeanor cases during the current fiscal year. Of these, 66 were juvenile cases, mostly for Theft II and III (shoplifting) offenses, for an annual rate of about 80 cases. The court also received 12 adult misdemeanors, primarily for consuming alcohol in a public place. Graph 1 illustrates the overall trends in our caseload over the past three years. Please note that the data for the current fiscal year includes only July through April 30`n 2. Juvenile Caseload: The court's juvenile program for first time offenders began operation in June, 2002, in cooperation with the Tigard Peer Court and the Washington County Juvenile Department. As mentioned above, 66 misdemeanor cases were referred to the court under criteria that were developed with the Tigard Peer Court and the Washington County Juvenile Department. The program has functioned as described in previous meetings with Council. In juvenile misdemeanor cases, the court imposes various conditions of probation for a period of six months or more. These conditions typically include community service, a financial sanction, counseling programs and letters of apology. Since relatively few cases were active during the first few months of the program, it is too early to evaluate its impact on juveniles. However, there are some encouraging trends in the preliminary data: • 97% of cited juveniles have appeared for their scheduled arraignments. • Rates of compliance with conditions of probation have been very high, with no recidivism (additional criminal acts) in evidence to date. • Parental involvement has been very high. Only one defendant, an emancipated minor, has appeared without a parent or other family member. • Juveniles have been ordered to complete 296 hours of community service to date. We propose that Council and Washington County Juvenile Department assist us in reviewing the juvenile program in November. By then we expect to have sufficient experience with the program, and a larger database, to better evaluate its effectiveness. 3. Compliance Program: In cases involving insurance, drivers' licenses and equipment violations, defendants may be allowed a reasonable time to come into compliance with Oregon law. In return, a defendant presenting proof of compliance, including a valid license and proof of insurance, may be granted a reduction in the fine initially imposed by the court. This program enhances public safety in Tigard by increasing the number of licensed and insured drivers on our streets. It also provides an incentive to remedy equipment violations. 4. Civil Infractions: As mentioned above, civil infractions (Municipal Code violations) remain a growing portion of our court dockets. Sign-code infractions in particular have nearly doubled from 96 in FY 2001-02 to 179 in the current year (through April 30"). Recent streamlining of the citation and adjudication process has enabled the court to accommodate the increased docket load without additional staffing. 5. Revenues: The court's additional caseload is reflected in increased fines and civil penalties and in revenues. Though April 30', the court imposed fines and penalties totaling $588,826, of which $446,969 has been collected to date. Of the funds received, the following amounts are allocated by law to other agencies: Unitary Assessment (State) $121,651 LEMLA (State) 1,669 County Assessments 18,360 TOTAL: $141,680 We expect that the State Unitary Assessment, now $35 for a traffic violation, will increase to at least $40 as a result of legislative action during the current session. We welcome any questions you have concerning court operations and policies. 2 - ANNUAL REPORT TO COUNCIL APPENDIX ON COURT POLICIES 1. Mission Statement: The court's overriding goal is to promote public safety and community values by implementing state and municipal laws in a fair, efficient and professional manner. Juvenile cases are adjudicated in a manner that deters recidivism, promotes the active involvement of parents, protects the community and secures restitution for victims. For most people in Oregon, their direct experience of the legal process typically arises from a traffic citation. The court strives to make that experience a positive one by educating defendants about relevant laws in a context of excellent customer service. 2. Youth Program: Juveniles who are referred to the court's youth program will be subject to clear and substantial consequences if they have committed a criminal offense. These consequences include a term of probation with one or more of the following conditions: alternative community service, a counseling program, victim restitution, letters of apology to victims, payment of a court diversion fee, and/or participating in peer court as a juror. In appropriate cases, parents may be required to participate in restitution or counseling programs, including parenting classes. The court expects 100% compliance with its orders. Juvenile arraignments take place in our court on Thursday afternoons. All parents are mailed a summons that requires them to appear with their child at arraignment. By agreement with the Juvenile Department and the City Prosecutor's office, misdemeanors are reduced to violations at arraignment for eligible juveniles. Despite this reduction, our policy is to conduct formal misdemeanor arraignments in open court. At the end of each session, a written order is entered and discussed in detail with the parents and juvenile. 3. Court Policies in Imposing Fines: Under Oregon law, judges are given considerable discretion in imposing fines for traffic offenses and many misdemeanors. Maximum fines are established by law for various categories of offenses, from Class A ($600) to Class D ($75). In certain types of cases, such as speeding in school and highway work zones, minimum fines are also fixed by statute. In addition to statutory standards for imposing fines, the Oregon Supreme Court devises minimum "base fine" schedules after each legislative session according to a formula set forth by statute. A base fine (formerly called "bail") is the amount that a defendant can remit to the court if he or she chooses not to contest a citation. It is written on the citation by the issuing officer. In most courts, actual fines tend to be lower than the base fine stated on the citation. Biennial revisions in base fines reflect changes in traffic laws resulting from legislative action. Judges are given the discretion to deviate from the base fine, subject to the statutory maximums and minimums described above. Courts are specifically authorized by statute to adopt higher base fines than the minimums promulgated by the Supreme Court. Within the broad range established by the maximum fines and base-fine schedules, the court considers the following circumstances in assessing fines in traffic, misdemeanor and civil- infraction cases. 1. The nature of the offense, as defined by how it is classified under Oregon law (Class A-D) or the Tigard Municipal Code; 2. The defendant's record of prior offenses, if any; and, 3. Specific mitigating or aggravating circumstances, including: a defendant's explanation of the circumstances; lack of intent; the City's recommendation, if any; demonstrated indigency; and the extent of compliance in cases involving licenses, registration, insurance and equipment violations. The court recognizes that law enforcement and administration, including traffic enforcement, imposes substantial costs. In order to continue to enforce its laws, a community must generate revenue from available sources to sustain these operations. It is the goal of the court to ensure that the overall costs of court administration are recovered through the imposition of fines and other financial sanctions on those who commit violations and crimes. Many defendants, especially in traffic cases, have good records and are cited for less serious violations, most often for exceeding the speed limit within the 11-20 m.p.h. range. While it is appropriate to impose sanctions to deter future misconduct, it is the court's goal to ensure that citizens leave the courtroom convinced that they have been listened to and treated fairly. 4. Traffic Diversion Program: The majority of our traffic citations are resolved through the imposition of a fine. In accordance with longstanding court policies, traffic citations involving juvenile first time offenders and senior citizens (persons over 65) may be referred to one of several driver-education programs. In addition to completing the assigned program, defendants may also be required to receive no new convictions for a designated period of six months or more. Defendants are also required to pay a court diversion fee. Upon meeting these requirements, the citation may be dismissed. Traffic diversion programs are primarily offered to first time offenders. 5. Court Interpreters: Though not required by state law in traffic cases, the court regularly provides interpreters to defendants (typically Spanish-speaking) who are unable to effectively communicate in English. As needed, the court provides interpreters for other non- English-speaking defendants. The court regularly provides letters and other documents in Spanish in traffic, juvenile and civil-infraction cases. 6. Court Publications: The court is committed to providing information about Oregon law and court procedures in understandable form, both online and in its written materials. 7. Court Rules: The court follows the Uniform Trial Court Rules (UTCR) as adopted by the Oregon Supreme Court. Local rules are available to the public online and at the front counter. L r 0 u J Page 2 - 2003 ANNUAL REPORT TO COUNCIL - APPENDIX Traffic Caseload Comparison FY 00101 - 02103 800 700 60o X X. 500 # of Cases 400 300- 200 100- 0- July August September October NovemberDecember January February March April May June Month IC12000-2001 E2001-2002 17 2002-2003 Graph #1 2002-2003 Top Ten Cited Violations Sign Code Violations, 179 Making an Illegal U-tum,189 Registration Plate Violations, 190 No Operator's License, 215 Fail to Renew Vehicle Registration, 212 Fail to Carry Proof of Speeding, 2137 Insurance, 238 Uninsured, 325 Driving Driving While Suspended, 318 Fail to Obey a Traffic Control Device, 1163 Graph #2 k;.- bu. d OREGON UNIFORM CITATION AND COMPLAINT Use for All Violations or Crimes Where Separate Complaint Will Not Be Filed/ORS 153.045 or 133.069 O Q CRIME(S) ❑ VIOLATION(S) ❑ TRAFFIC p OTHER ❑ WILDLIFE (Sea A on Back) (See B on Bads) p BOATING ❑ COMMERCIAL FISHING C D STATE OF OREGON DOCKET NO. cI z CITY/OTHER PUBLIC BODY TIGARD COURT: ❑ MUNICIPAL ❑ JUSTICE I'V • COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ❑JUVENILE 0CIRCUIT •ti-;.~.ts;.,. t_GK ~C T IE$` b. llX~"• > '::'t;::'_.~~,5:;~ti~S ID TYPE. ID NO. STATE TEL NO.>.'ial NAME: LAST FIRST MI I ADDRESS LICENSE CLASS CRY STATE ZIP CODE p EMPLOYED TO DRIVE ✓ sjak~ . ;',i=' ri=m 5 ~ SEX RACE 1DOB HEIGHT WEIGHT HAIR EYES DEF 1S PASSENGER ; ; . J i' -"Hr-fg4vw IN - E:111lq;PLArE TliE~18 E 1l 1~HP COUNTY:'{ OFFENSE DATE MONTH DAY...... YEAR TIME OAM pHIGHWAYO yi~r v+%. _.-.,r`•` ON ABOUT. O PM p PREMISES OPEN TOP K; AT OR NEAR LOCATION ~•i'1xc.~ RUC Z TYPE REGIS / VIN / ID NO STATE ❑ ACCIDENT p INJURY ❑ PROPERTY DAMAGE U ENDANGER VTHERS ,Y VEHICLE YEAR, MARE, MODEL. STYLE, COLOR, OR OTHER, p DRIVER NOT REG. OWNER . DESCRIBE E3 COMMERCIAL VEH. p HAZ MATERIAL OTHER •~i?a, [FTHERE~ ~E_ Lf. ~ .v::t:~`Ai•. ?:e'%' :";..~,~~.-~F~ 1. VIOLATED (CITE ORWORD/RU E) DESCRIBE ALLEGED SPD DESIGNATED SPD L3 RADAR ❑ PACE pLASER # af.~,_r p POSTED LIMIT ❑ VBR Q ❑ INTENTIONAL Q KNOWING Q RECKLESS p PSTD SCH ZN 4 i^• 'Y p CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE ❑ NO CULPABLE E.T. MSTATE ❑ HWY WK ZN 1 • BASE FINE: 2. VIOLATED (CITE ORS/ORDIRULE) DESCRIBE ❑INTENTIONAL ❑KNOWING pRECKLESS~t+.`.= +.:G CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE "a"'.+•`-°~'~1'-`:' •yi. ❑ ONO CULPABLE MENTAL STATE 2. BASE FINE: 3. VIOLATED (CITE ORS/ORD/RULE) DESCRIBE r. .i' INTENTIONAL ❑ p KNOWING ❑ RECKLESS -i0~ = ' i~.t ❑ CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE p NO CULPABLE MENTAL STATE 3. BASE FINE: ~~•('Z ==s" EXPL Sc•; I CERTIFY UNDER ORS 153.045 AND 153.990 AND UNDER OTHER APPLICABLE LAW AND UNDER OFFICER(S) AGENCY ID PENALTIES FOR FALSE SWEARING, DO SWEAR/AFFIRM THAT 1 HAVE SUFFICIENT GROUNDS TO AND 00 BELIEVE THAT THE ABOVE-MENTIONED DEFENDANT/PERSON COMMITTED THE ABOVE OFFENSE(S) AND I HAVE SERVED THE DEFENDANT/PERSON WITH THIS COMPLAINT, 1ST OFFICER ID NO. DATE ISSUED 1ST OFFICER SIGNATURE 2ND OFFICER ID NO. PRINT IST OFFICER NAME I • 2ND OFFICER OR ARRESTING PERSON (IF NOT OFFICER) SIGNATURE PRINT NAME • • MO/DAY/YEAR TIME U AM LOCATION p PM I I 2000 ® 1XIIS001t! Prick ManapemeM 50312565554 I. i CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIOARD TO: Jim Hendryx FiV FROM: Duane Roberts MAr ~~C.o r. DATE: 5/23/03 Aa'~in%stra ton SUBJECT: Goal 5 Presentation During Tuesday's Goal 5 presentation, I indicated that the adopted Metro Goal 5 inventory of "significant" riparian and wildlife sites included 8,000 acres. During the meeting, Councilor Wilson pointed out that this number seemed too low. In fact, according to Metro reports, the actual region-wide number is approximately 95,000 acres. L C i I I I AGENDA ITEM # 4 FOR AGENDA OF 5/20103 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Metro Goal 5 Status Re ort PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK MGR OK / IdOA ISSUE BEFORE THE CO CIL This is an informational update on the development of the regional Goal 5 management plan for fish and wildlife habitat. STAFF RECOMMENDATION This is an "information only" agenda item. No Council action is required. INFORMATION SUMMARY Metro is preparing a plan for regional fish and wildlife habitat protection in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 5. The planning process includes three phases: 1) determining which resource sites are significant; 2) determining whether to allow, limit, or prohibit the development of resource sites; and 3) developing a protection plan consistent with the step two determinations. So far, Metro has completed the first phase of the planning process, inventorying and identifying significant resources. The target date to complete the second phase, or conflicts analysis, is May 2004. The target date for completion of the protection plan is December 2004. The attached memo provides a brief sketch of the regional Goal 5 process to date, along with an overview of the remaining steps and timeline. It also overviews the Washington County "basin approach", which gives County Jurisdictions reponsibility, with Metro oversight, for completing the remainings steps in the Goal 5 process for regional resources sites located within Washington County. The "Goal 5 Communication Plan" includes proposed City web page Goal 5 information and inventory map postings. It also includes staff participation as part of the basin group in two Goal 5 public open house ` meetings. The first of these is set for September 10, 2003. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED i Does not apply. I VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY f Growth Management Goal #1, Accommodate Growth while protecting the character and livability of new and established areas (natural resource protection identified as one of the action strategies under this goal). ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Regional Goal 5 Status Report Exhibit A: Metro's Fish and Wildlife Habitat Protection Plan Exhibit B: Integrated Work Program for Metro and Tualatin Basin Goal 5 Approach FISCAL NOTES This fiscal implications of regional fish and wildlife habitat protection are unknown at this time. i/edadm/jerree/agenda sum/5-20-03 Goal 5 AIS.doc I f Attachment 1 Regional Goal 5 Status Report Executive Summary Goal 5 is the statewide planning rule that requires local jurisdictions to develop protection programs for twelve resources. Metro has chosen to exercise its discretionary authority to develop a regional plan for two of the resources, fish and wildlife habitat. The reason is its determination that local Goal 5 plans within its boundaries have been ineffective in preventing the loss of these two resources. The current regional Goal 5 planning effort began two years ago in early 2001. The effort's intent is to provide higher and more comprehensive protection than is provided in the Metro Title 3 regulations and in local Goal 5 plans. The three-step process being followed is based on the statewide Goal 5 procedures and includes (1.) conducting and inventory of the riparian and upland wildlife resources, (2.) resolving conflicts between protection and development, and (3.) developing a management plan. So far, Metro has completed the inventory step in the three-step process. The riparian and wildlife inventories created are science-based. Some 52 per cent of the combined inventory is subject to Title 3 regulations. The inventory establishes sites for step two in the Goal 5 process, the ESEE (Environmental, Social, Economic, and Energy) analysis. This step generally involves identifying and resolving conflicts between development and preservation. Science is not the only consideration when resolving these conflicts. The environmental, social, economic, and energy aspects are all used in making protection decisions. Step two is where science and policy merge. At this time, Metro is completing methodology studies to provide the framework for conducting a region-wide ESEE that will identify areas for prohibiting, limiting, or allowing development. The target date for completing this step is mid-2004. The final procedural step is the program phase. During this step, Metro will develop a management program in accordance with the decisions from the ESEE. Adoption of the program is scheduled for the end of 2004. The protection program will deal with acquisition, education, incentives, and regulations. A basic assumption is that restoration will be part of the program. The biggest question regarding the program is r how wide the buffer or "no touch" areas will be. Last year, Metro Council decided to allow individual and groups of jurisdictions the w option of completing the two remaining steps in the Goal 5 process for resource sites o located within their hydrologic areas. The Tualatin River basin group, consisting of all the Washington County jurisdictions, was formed to make use of this option. Under an J IGA with Metro, the group is responsible for completing a basin-wide ESEE and developing a management program that will improve the overall environmental condition of the basin and each of eleven sub-basins within it. The basin group recently has developed a work program and timeline that integrates with the new Metro work program and timeline. 1 Regional Goal 5 Status Report 1. Introduction and Background As part of its state-required periodic review update, Metro is in the process of developing a plan for regional fish and wildlife protection in accordance with Statewide Goal 5. This memo provides a brief sketch of the regional Goal 5 process to date along with an overview of the remaining steps and the timeline for their completion. This includes very recent changes in the Goal 5 timeline and work plan. City Coverage City coverage of and participation in the regional Goal 5 process includes the following elected and public officials and committee assignments. • Mayor Griffith & J. Hendryx: Tualatin Basin Natural Resources Coordinating Committee • Jim Hendryx & D. Roberts: Tualatin Basin Natural Resources Steering Committee • B. Shields & B. St Amand: Countywide Goal 5 Communications/Outreach Committee • Joel Groves: Goal 5 GIS Committee Staff-level involvement also includes an ad hoc Goal 5 working group consisting of staff from the CD, Engineering, and Public Works Departments. Goal 5 What and Why Goal 5 is the statewide planning rule that requires local jurisdictions to develop protection programs for twelve resources. The rule gives regional governments discretion to plan for all or some of the resources. Metro has elected to pursue management plans for two of the resources, fish and wildlife habitat. Its rationale is that the quality and quantity of these resources within the region has been declining. Metro's decision also reflects its determination that the various locally adopted Goal 5 management programs for these resources are "inconsistent and inadequate". Metro's general goal is to stop resource loss and improve habitat within the region. The regional government's official vision statement relative to Goal 5 is as follows: The region should conserve, protect and store a continuous ecologically viable streamside corridor system, from the headwaters to their confluence with other stream and rivers, and with their floodplains in a manner that is integrated with the surrounding urban landscape. This system will be achieved through conservation, protection, and appropriate restoration of streamside corridors through time. The policy and programmatic focus of Metro's Goal 5 efforts relate to this overarching goal and vision. At the same time, in its Goal 5, Metro intends to go above and beyond the Goal 5 rule and try to comply with the Clean Water and the Endangered Species Acts. 2 Historical Background and Goal 5 Steps In the mid-1990's, the then-sitting Metro Council developed a three-phase regional vision for resource protection. In proposed implementation order, these phases included Title 3, Goal 5, and stormwater management. Title 3 and Goal 5 are concerned with land use regulation, while stormwater management involves technical standards for low impact designs and practices that allow stormwater runoff to seep into the ground. The latter are considered non-land use decisions, and, therefore, unlike Title 3 and Goal 5 decisions, are not subject to DLCD review and concurrence. The Title 3 program was adopted in 1998 and addresses floodplain management and water quality. Its key provisions include floodplain protection and mandatory setbacks from streams and wetlands. As indicated, Metro adopted Title 3 as the starting point for water quality protection in the region. The Title 3 requirements were regarded as the minimum actions necessary for the interim protection of riparian resources until Goal 5 could be developed. Goal 5 addresses riparian areas and upland wildlife. Metro's first Goal 5 effort started in spring 1999 and was cut short in early 2000. The reason for its abandonment was political and public criticism of the 200 foot regulatory corridor Metro was considering at the time. Another reason was the potential legal challenge related to Metro's Goal 5 planning process, which did not rigorously follow the required state procedure steps. II. Goal 5 Process The current Goal 5 effort began in early 2001. The focus is the same as before: (1.) riparian corridors and wildlife habitat areas within the riparian corridor and with (2.) wildlife habitat in upland areas. What's different this time is that Metro is strictly following every step in the Metro Goal 5 process and allowing public involvement at every stage. Public involvement presently occurs through four Goal 5-related technical and policy advisory review committees. In the future, it will include two public mailings to potentially affected landowners and public hearings. The statewide process presently being followed includes the following steps and decision points. 1. Inventory resources. Determine which resources are significant. 2. Identify potential development conflicts and conduct ESEE analysis. 3. Adopt a protection plan. I The inventory step involves determining location, quantity, and quality and determining which resources are "significant", broadly defined. The conflicting uses step involves identifying land uses (based on zoning) that might conflict with resource protection. The ESEE step involves determining the full range of consequences related to protecting the resource and to allowing its development. The protection plan step involves the adoption of a management program in accordance with the decisions from the ESEE. (Exhibit A) 3 Inventory Step The first step in the three-step Goal 5 process is to complete an inventory and map of the environmental features that support habitat. Metro completed this step last year. At the beginning of this step Metro developed a science technical report. The report describes the attributes of a healthy landscape and provides the approach used to complete the inventory step. From the science report, Metro developed criteria, called the six functions of healthy streams, which were used to inventory the quality of riparian corridors. To account for the width of functions, Metro looked at averages in the literature. The six functions are: 1. Stream flow moderation and water storage 2. Bank stabilization, sediment and pollution control 3. Microclimate and shade 4. Large wood and channel dynamics 5. Organic material sources 6. Riparian wildlife habitat and connectivity Metro mapped upland or isolated wildlife habitat based ony a separate set of inventory criteria. These include six criteria and are based on the Greenspaces Natural Areas model. The basic unit of analysis for the upland wildlife criteria is the "patch", defined as a contiguous area of two or more acres. The six criteria are: 1. Size of area 2. Connectivity and proximity to other areas 3. Sensitive species richness 4. Connectivity and proximity to water resources 5. Interior habitat size 6. Unique and sensitive species habitat Riparian corridor and wildlife sites were rated according to separate scoring systems developed by Metro. The definition of "significance" chosen by Metro Council was a cut off score of one point for the former and two points for the latter resource site types. Completion of the inventory step involved adoption of an integrated inventory map of significant riparian and upland wildlife sites. When the riparian corridor and wildlife maps are overlaid, they show 94 per cent of the same area. Other key statistics are that 24 per cent of all the land inside the Urban Growth Boundary falls within the resource inventory. Approximately 80 per cent of the resource inventory inside the UGB is on private land. Some 52 per cent of the inventory overlaps with floodplains, steep slopes, or water quality protection buffers and is subject to Title 3 regulations. Metro is pledged to consider map corrections all along the goal 5 process, including the ESEE and program steps. A post adoption map correction process also is pledged. The City submitted a list of Tigard-area corrections during the inventory phase, which were reviewed and concurred with by Metro. 4 As a final point regarding the inventory, it is well to note that the identification of a resource may or may not result in its protection. As detailed below, resource protection will depend on analysis and Metro decisions yet to be completed. As shown in the chart, the next step in the Goal 5 process is identifying conflicts and completing an ESEE analysis for the regional resources. ESEE Analysis As mentioned, the inventory step establishes sites for the Environmental, Social, Economic, and Energy (ESEE) or trade off analysis. The ESEE analysis generally involves identifying conflicts between development and preservation and how they should be resolved. The Metro ESEE is intended to describe the positive and negative economic, social, environmental, and energy consequences of protecting regionally significant riparian corridors and wildlife habitat. As part of the ESEE, the Goal 5 rule requires governments to define an impact area for each significant resource site. The impact area is the area in which allowed uses could adversely affect the identified resource. It defines the geographic limits within which to conduct the ESEE analysis for the identified significant resources. The rule provides discretion on how to identify the impact area. In Metro's case, it has defined impact areas around resource sites ranging from 25-to 150 feet. The wider width applies to streams, lakes, and wetlands that have, according to the riparian inventory, adjacent areas with no resource value. To give methological guidance to the preparation of the ESEE analysis, Metro is developing separate technical papers on each of the ESEE components: Economic, Social, Environmental, and Energy. The economic consequences analysis will use the 2040 land use hierarchy and economic data to assign economic values to properties from a future perspective. Metro has hired a team headed by the economic consultant EcoNorthwest to produce the analysis and has created an Economic Technical Advisory committee. The environmental, social, and energy technical papers are being produced by Metro staff and, unlike the economic paper, currently are available in draft form. The environmental analysis focuses on the functions and values of riparian and wildlife areas. The social and energy analyses, respectively, address the social benefits of resources and how energy use relates to the environment. All three currently available analyses are very broad and theoretical at this point. The completed methodology studies will provide the framework for conducting a region- wide ESEE that will identify areas for prohibiting, limiting, or allowing development. How decisions will be made regarding prohibit, limit, and allow will not be know until Metro completes the methodology report and gets into the details of the regional ESEE. Program Phase After the regional ESEE, the next and final step in the Goal 5 process is the program phase. During this step, Metro will develop a management program for the riparian and 5 upland wildlife areas in accordance with the decisions from the ESEE to allow, limit, or protect resource sites. As indicated in the vision statement, the program will deal with acquisition, education, incentives, and regulations. The only certainty about the program at this time is the assumption that the Metro Goal 5 program will provide higher and more comprehensive protection than the Title 3 regulations. The Metro Council will pick from several options, after considerable public discussion and debate, from substantial additional regulation to minimal additional regulation. The updated timetable for the level of protection decisions is discussed below. The biggest question regarding the program is how wide the buffers or "no touch" areas will be. Timeframe The target dates to complete the various goal 5 steps have been revised several times. The latest revised timeframe includes completing the ESEE analysis by spring 2004 and adopting a region-wide protection program decision by December 2004. The target date for local implementation of the management program has not been set but typically would be two years from Metro adoption. However, the implementation timeline applying to Washington County and Tigard will be much shorter than would be the case under normal circumstances, as explained below. III. Basin Approach In early 2002, Metro Council decided to allow individual and groups of jurisdictions the option of completing the remaining steps in the Goal 5 process for their respective basins. This delegation of responsibility was proposed to Metro Council by the Washington County jurisdictions and is referred to as the "basin approach". Under it, Metro was to establish regional parameters for conflicting uses and the ESEE decision process along with a timeline for the completion of any basin plans. The rationale for turning the protection program decisions over to the local jurisdictions, with Metro oversight, was to give local jurisdictions the opportunity to tailor the program to local conditions based on locally available knowledge and information, such as the CWS Healthy Streams inventory. The scope and details of the basin approach are defined in an IGA between Metro and the Tualatin River basin group, the only jurisdiction or group to make use of this option. The IGA gives the basin group responsibility for completing a basin ESEE and developing a management program and stipulates that the ESEE program will be sent to Metro Council for review and concurrence. The review standard for the program is general and includes improvement of riparian area function within the basin area as a whole and within each of eleven subareas within the basin. If approved by Metro as substantially complying with this broad standard, the IGA provides that the management program will be implemented by each jurisdiction within the basin within three months. The Tualatin Basin group is an alliance of all the county jurisdictions, including Tigard, plus Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District and Clean Water Services. Its main features are defined in a formation IGA. These features are that the mayor's and the County Commission Chair are the primary representatives to a coordinating committee, 6 decisions about resource management are made by the committee as a whole, the decision making process includes public hearings, and all the jurisdictions contribute to the cost of planning work and appoint staff to share technical work. From a local perspective, the advantages of participation in the Goal 5 basin option are: • the potential for greater local control and flexibility in the development of the protection plan; • the potential for integrating regional Goal 5, Clean Water Act, and Endangered Species requirements; and • the opportunity to apply the detailed data collected in the countywide CWS inventory of streams and adjacent areas. The significance of the CWS inventory derives from the fact that it is based on detailed on-the-ground evaluations, as opposed to the air photos and computer models used as the basis for the Metro inventory. The main disadvantages are: • The consultant and legal costs (Tigard's overall share is approximately $15,000) associated with completing the basin-wide ESEE and developing the management program; • The staff commitment required to complete the ESEE for local sites and to participate in the development of the basin management program Revised Metro and Basin Flow Charts When first discussed in early 2002, a key assumption underlying the basin approach was that Metro would conduct a "high altitude" ESEE for the entire region, which, when completed, the Tualatin basin would use as a template to conduct a more refined, site specific ESEE. In March of this year, after a re-examination of the Goal 5 work program, Metro Council decided to move away from the two-level analysis to focus on a regional analysis and to add a new element called the pre-program step. The new step is intended to shorten the amount of time needed to develop and adopt the protection program once the ESEE step is completed. With the sub-basin level emphasis gone under Metro's new methodology and the pre- program step added, the basin approach no longer matches up with the Metro approach in terms of process and timing. After an evaluation of the merits and feasibility of modifying the basin approach, a Metro-approved adjusted basin work program has been developed that is believed to reasonably coordinate with the new Metro process. The proposed draft integrated work program and timeline that would maintain the basin approach is attached. (Exhibit B) In its April meeting, the basin policy committee discussed and unanimously agreed in concept to the new work program and timetable. It was to be brought back at the May meeting for adoption. The adjusted approach maintains the same policy goal of 7 improving conditions within the basin as a whole and within each of eleven subareas and of following procedure steps that are reasonably consistent with Metro's. i/citywide/goal5memo.doc L G a i is EXHIBIT "A" METRO Metro's Fish and Wildlife Habitat Protection Plan and State Goal 5 Requirements November, 2001 Step 2. ESEE Analysis Step 3. Program to Achieve stop 1. Inventory (Economic, Social, Environmental and Goal 5 a15 Energy impacts) A. Develop program, including A. Collect information about Go resource sites (This includes identifying the possible incentives, acquisition, public location, quantity, quality of resources)' Consultation A. Identify conflicting uses education and regulatory elements with state and federal agencies. B. Determine the impact area B. Adopt Metro Plan B. Determine the adequacy of information C. Analyze the ESEE consequences C. Local Government C. Determine "significant resource sites ® Implementation D. Determine whether to allow, limit, or D. Adopt a list of significant resource sites prohibit identified conflicting uses (Final action on thts item may be deferred until steps 2 and 3 are also completed.) Other Tasks Other Tasks Other Tasks - Continued public outreach Preparation of scientific literature review and _ peer review of ESEE analysis' - Advisory committee review draft application methods' (used in'A & "C1 -.Continued public outreach - Federal ESA consultation and Early public and land owner involvement - Advisory committee review request for limit on take - Determine "regional resources"" - Restoration opportunity identification _ peer review of scientific literature and - Federal agency ESA coordination' application methods' (part of "A &'C1 - Existing local plan review and analysis" - Consider state safe harbor as altemative' - Advisory committee review - Federal agency ESA coordination' ' not required " Metro only requirement ,wwo+oa~ohcrscoN rvo5 SWM0 CM sawn.1mc rcu+~ - EXHIBIT "B" DRAFT Integrated Work Program for Metro and Tualatin Basin Coal 5 Approach M et r, 6 August 2003 Preliminary Regional ESEE step 9 Staff Draft July 2003 Pre-Program Concepts step 11 Council Decision December 31, 2003 Synthesis Report step 13 Staff Draft May 1, 2004 Regional ESEE Decision - ALP Map step 15 Council Decision December 31, 2004 Program Decision Council Decision Co April Draft Work ProgramlTimeframe & Draft Adjustments to TB IGA °w May Decision on Work Program, TB IGA, Consultant Contract June Existing Environmental Health - HUC level July - August Initial ESEE Approach/Rules - site level, for Jurisdiction Review and Analysis August - Aug 2004 Initial Discussion Pre-Program Concepts September -Additional Discussion Pre-Program Concepts: Allow-Limit-Prohibit December Initial Review HUC/site Level ESEE & ALP Map (Map 1) c January Public Notice #1 & Second Review HUC/site level ESEE Analyses and ALP (Map 2) February Public Hearing #1 April ESEE/ALP Decision May Initial Discussion Program Concepts June Decision Draft Program & Public Notice #2 July Public Hearing #2 August 9 Tentative Program Decision August 16 Final Decision - Adopt ESEE/ALP/Program, Report on Effect of Program on Environmental Health of HUCs 120 days December 16 Metro Council Comply/Substantially Comply Decision i a 180 days r May 31 Local Adoption Due i .l ~ • ,,,a~' ~~~f.~ ~ aY t'~ ~t~~, ~("~r~~~yta,{*~', r , ~~t~Ql, ' S~ ~a: ~ ~ ~''L-~ / , I 'J~~,'/F'. a. r~ij ,~+i+A r~'~~r ~~~,+tT''RL".! 'i ~„•'fY~r 1 ~ t 1 ~Le •~r • ~'i; l~~" f r`~vnL - i, J1~~[ ! ~ ~ ~t ran.- 54 t8}~` 1r ~ 'r ili ~ .{~4. a.~ J Pj••+ 6 4 ~ / y y' W tea ' •r 6 i1 C ' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~r ; ~~'s ' 0~ ~ 'liifj=~~'.!.~~ ,s'.i~'Ci"/t. ~Si O'~t+ •`fja~ Z .,.irJ~' an.~ .'~`ili~~ . ~ 1 ~t' . .~..SSira.,~,~•~i~!, ! tti i~.r., ~~l 7~~1`t, +4 .~J~ ►i~ ' ~ ~!t'i~_~,,t':`:t~`~~'~il '=~1"(F . j r t t 1 ~<'i?!•'. ~ ~ ~~'I~ ~ A~i ~a • 'x l•, /A~.. " ~ +y ~11~ 01$ fNi~~~~ r ► ` r I ) jr i 5'. / ` ,'~lr ~ j '~F~t, 11 " grit q~,^k,ff. T ti ' rt L! a6 ; ~.1~j►'LJ1'~ j~ ~l,\\r. • 1S `w t,: i fiv` i~s `'t MiI : tit ! ~'t(~ 'r`~i 1 i F 11i' Ci< \t i, ~lia:71 µffiS i ~•tt r r, t y I. ~7{^) .~~1► ~ ~y 3 a Ld. : a J '~r~~~r;al~ils Mt,~~l,*1t~•Y ;>~'~~~4.,r•-1~~1~L• t,~~G {t9~~' i f {'fi`r 1'tT,})./,1 ~.;•a kid is 's! r is LA lei •t rt ,rlf 1 Tt~~r'.~a~`-~U.~Q.TV~ ,j"hs, r~~''!!, {1j1~}G:.L/"~! ~''tY`Y• J ,ri a Ue ~~:a' a.. + ff ~,~.'c!.1 + . ! \t F tti ~ ~ t`i. ~i. ~~i' •,T~r~s*„ z-tc. ~1] .~,7 ( s f 1~; ..nri I c. rl t r. ..;7 'r, ` t `v, 'L1:"~'~'. i4 " j' t .r' y,.I) ~•t{ ` ('~L ;,/ry' ~'s. 7:~1r ~ .d . y~ iJ•` t7. 4{U~i .•.'l""'~~• f}t^i,j~:?,~J- i• r)ti' f c`~IIy~ ~1t`i, ~C{,#~[• 'y/`~-j'~ t~.'' ' . l'i '4i!',~iy.j-Ij~Ti1rG~~.. 1.'~: ``.;~i ,mot ~'.f~,ya~•~1:.V,ti`. ~1'~ii ~{`j„ a. ~,,t`,-'~'e 1S~rfr.%tl:: 3',t/~j' ` ^r'1 ;r .:t~rj { . ~ r .i A/ if~it~:... +ft~ l~.b ~~~!+`Lra ~ Itfi(ar a 11~~~:tit~ i r~`'~ ~ r j1rk41 ~ i•~fSv'F ~~,:`i;ti~}~~ x' ~Jff .f iii L',.~.:ly ~a.ti• I►•a'~r1`as..^a;' is J t; f]r !t i y J.r cif ~ .SNa~'~ 41 ti~ f `•'7 EK= 'i.• r''~~( 1'+ 'Y~^ ' ti.~."' ~ 1 t~Y_+ ~ t 'i ~,i-~a«:. ~ r(, ~~''1~ p 4 ~7:~' :~{t~ f r ' y:~~ -1, 0 7 r•. l 4,'t,~• . ~ ~ , '1c•r! . F•' •.''~y'~t1 'i•~/;~'Z~ty 1L•~,~~~>t~ `1.1y~i,~:tj,,`t~•.~?,}',:t'' ~%~n •~~•ik~~: ~.f.(71''''~t.xi`:~,. ,,a 4~,•.~~.'? 1«.,~ r.J.Sr'~~~~` .lq ~ ti,~• tP~r ~1> '111 ~'''t~'~ .1.• ~f •t, ~_Jrla'~~a~+ \ •t ' -C ~~:~.~1 'die ~ ~~i~ r A. iLli ~(i..'~~'.!f t-.tr' ~ t~~' tai/" ? ~ t\ ~x y3 .a, •.s ~ f ~y ~ j, aS.~;t , z'~~ ~ y.'i,;~.'~tvFr ~ ~3'-= j . i'~'UC 'T:~ti'.•.t~~ ~~I~I,~r. }i:''~ -Y.,{,~fJi ~~,,Lr•- ~ ~j Sj, t /~y ti fry. j L•4. Lt ~5•.• * ~ A'( ~ 1 ~ , 4r lt;, ~ t^~I..~' 1 Jy, ~~t~s' ii 1'~ ~ '+1 ~'t'!i q:d; 1.~• r 1ll~'s'br~t; ~.S"''., l,a 7~~~ a.•~ .t t~~t J 11 ~ si1 ~ •i r l/'•~Y M, t 6} 1 i,~,~ ~ +:t,. a.'a;.'t'+ t' 1 { 7a - a%,~ JJJ i :_l~y U►r't!'~~~ 7 -f--,: L•~, i ~i~':,~'!~r+i t, 1J- y `q:~,,~.~r t,~f ,t~'..-. ik=:i"'(?~{~. d~'' ,Gc • ~ ~ ~ d I~~. ~ 1 :7~',',~'7 . ~ 1... J `g ~ r~ • ?t. , /tr` {~.O' I: ' T ~ r ,,~3N 1~ `R tr.. tf 27 ~r •V t~;f~i 1 ,r.~, r. [3 e `Zt r. !~"t~~, •in (.~rt Yy' lZ fit' f. lY,trSl .1 k,~'" ti;~y/'1•i~ .}~~,1 (•••t(~;+•~ + ,It,Y V4 " '°1~~n16,rAg1p si,,T 1j►•'. :b.LkiFt 'j.`/ ii =iw,tr,'•~rA a+p :,,.7 r.;.• ~.f~ :~i` a14i Jf ~t ..'`t P'1VD~~ 4'SSrF.r f=t~ s w... ee , ! ~ , j,~~~ .•1~")e tG!r y r ~v,..,~~-• lh,+, ~~,j t ( ~'r f~yf~?. S. ~.i• a ~ 1 -t!~,jr ~ „ •rt... "au Wit' 1 H ~~'!'i, t~jy ti(~ a4t l Lx 1.1' , 7;, !.'L y-r: f 3~!` ;qf`z• r ~ !j . O.. f,C: . t. ~f 1 ~ ai'!f; v . ~t~.~.i!'i,:,', r ~I;,t1 ~r~k y. •1' 1 ~r,~,~.'L~'.+,~ % ~ t~ 1't~ J ;'h . r,. I••.r• fit F^•.,,. ( ~ t t' a r?" i'Y'-`f .4 / [ / r.~ d , ~ ~ ap~r i{', (Y+ ° ( f , r L !'y, i 2_ ~•r,-~, 1 }f~(~. ~ ~~i~ r}~ l~~P ~~.ijSi ~i~~..:.s•e~ 1i:1 +E : ~ ~'`2 'a~ ~ "1~ .~~If~ r a^"_ 1} 1. r , ~t ,r , t is ` lR..► .P~ , 1.r4?~i-j1 (.'r\• t: , 'r ~::ty'~r' ~'~~,t f-= ttl its ~t r fy~• ~,I.'~rt'" f fC`.+~°,r,'~r'. t ;r?~,~~; tti 1 /t~' t. .x. 1 l;' >k ;.'tf'4~~~}lill{~jf2. i~•►j".,.r' J 2e{tYI»I~ }i ~•?'l ~ti~~f.t t ,~.t, ~,W_. '~1f:ia:}V~~~~/Rv~ r~}.l~•f t.i~~ AOP ]]jj :rf~{ ~ a ~tz:~~,,'1 ~•r, +.~i ,~"'~•-.,...~,(1 ~iN~►y``~~'. tz ;~~-:1`tf`,~# i~ ~ar~;~~ f p,,,~f :4 f 3~f'1 T ~y~, Q 'i f .rrras fp., rr b .r 4 4'r. J•i;>:~ .r~ ~i Ce, If'- / ` ~ !-.l L j ~ ~ i~ ;rK r ~ J ~►r` t 'sGr~t'~~ ~ r ~i~~. ~~~'`C '-1 117-, 7':. t, r? 14 J s~ l{'~1~ r1• q~' f ~~ir i nf,j } /All +~r~r 1/'- T , J\ ~ Y l r=~~' `'~~C~t1+('~f~~`~'~~J-7*~st_ S+tR ~~~;1, r r ~ r', (~/1!~ ,,y3~t' ,r'FF•;y ; 17 y#q~~.; ,,,y~~ylfiw,i►;♦`^ r~`Qyv~~;ih••' r "#!i ? i' ~l ~ ' ' ~`,i' e~t . C';';~~;~, r; 4vir•.~~~!•h~~~ ~~y~ytY~~;•~'~''t ~yy~' ~ ? .t3 •Q"ca+f 1 _ ~ i, ~:y14~- ~ +i 1,~.1`~r t ty .r 1 ' t, `Y vL~lit..t}L~ i. ~•~~`~t(;~[!i1•t~%5{:..e3T•r::9~F1~k+~.'~~itit.~ryJre~~~~~}r:.7i~;~.%.~17.'h I-% T s. .J,u It Goal 5 jails local protedion p!de rule re~ui~►n9 0 StateWMsources lan for all of p for 12 ~ Allows regio~►~~ governments t11e for two X1.1 riparian corr+dors & So ~ Metro ildcihose l'~ e areas lan (2.) loss habitat Rationale ►S resource • to stop loss and improve ~ Goal ~s rocess 3-Step Plan~n 1.1n~entoN & S'gnif'~can~e Step s 2. ESEE Step 3. Program Step LEGIBLLfT7 STRIP Step 1. I ory deterrOining location, quantity, ■ Involves quality fed inventory "Se9nificant" sites in adop include °iSignifiican ❑ No rule standard for point Metro determination based on criteria and system ❑ Identifies sites for stemay not result in protection ❑ Identification may ° ipanan Criteria ■ Strearnflow moderation & water storage ■ Bank stabilization, sediment & pollution control ■ Microclimate & shade ■ Large wood and channel dynamics ■ Organic material sources o Riparian wildlife habitat & connectivity WAcUife Criten"a ■ size of area ■ Connectivity & proximity to other areas v Sensitive species richness s Connectivity & proximity to water resources ■ Interior habitat size ■ Uniqueness & sensitive species habitat Adopted Metro Inventory ■ Combined inventory includes 8,000 acres ■ Half covered by Title 3 ■ Site quality includes 6 categories Local examples • • site p r- v ..d ,a .ems site 1 A~ -r • np .m Q 1 e i. - w 1t LEGIBILITY STRIP ° quLty ° ° e area vam .6~v ~7✓- 4Y7t~~ ~ ~1z.st - - ' tl %i LEGIBILITY 5TRIP • fe site ° M► 1 P Ila 4 . f _..~I \ • 4 NNW LLUMSILI 1 v S I KIP ONE_ upland cif e site w~d Low quahty ~i. 1 i ICu LEOIBILtTY STRIP ago - E SEE AnaYs's F 2e EmAronmental, Social, EconOrOc, ■ Focuses on o sequences of protecton & Energy ~ development conflicting land uses o Identify Based on zoning it conflicts ment consequences of allowing develop ❑ identified ■ Analyz consequences of protecting the resource ■ Analyze ESEE Ex~Ie on nsequenCes of 9roted'On uses'. E~O~omo~ co su pIY 01 hand suitable for con Ions can Cedu~~ ~ Regulateons t deprive development that prohibit all develop+ren o Regulations nofv'ic\jajue resource ~ property ofi eco wences of nme ,'taj conSe Enviro site: resource protection on {unct►ons o ►Nainta~ns Nall an ~euau i a i rtir FESEE Example Social consequences of resource protection quality of life Preserves comma{ional and environmental ❑ Potential for r O~u~~ties education opportunities uence of resource protection is Energy conseq Energy needs for heating and cooling would be reduced ESEE Decision ■ Making choices between protection & development ■ Striking a reasonable balance ❑ Proper balance is a policy decision ❑ Rule standard is providing reasons for ESEE decisions ❑ Show "adequately considered" all consequences LEGIBILITY STRIP F SEE Status E ■ Metro developing technical papers ■ papers will provide framework for ESEE Broad and theoretical No site-level application ■ Next step is apply methodology to region- wide ESEE ■ Completion date is spring 2004 LEGIBILITY STRIP , low Step 3: Program ement plan in accordance ■ Develop manag With ESEE decisions of 2()04 completion date IS Intended ■ of program elements Range end ■ ~ p,~quisition ❑ Education Incentives ~ Regulation . . . . . . low None= Step 3: Program ■ Protection programs is speculative ■ Self-evidently, higher than Title 3 ■ Program parameters defined by ESA & CWA ■ Restoration part of program ■ Buffer width is biggest question LEGBILRY STRIP Basin ApPV4-%roach option Provided by metro Council to complete ■ Allows local government groups SEE and program steps E roving conditions within Review n~ ~a h sub-basin basin a ■ Tigard partner in alliance of county jurisdictions roach and ❑ xibility to create ESEE app provides fle program ~re~urr stwP ecent Ch~ges R ate `h~gh altitude' ~ concept Metro ire ~ ofi ESEE Tate for local SSE hart v provide tempi changed A0`Jqotter program steps April, m SSE and S Includes longer E rogram ance of ° basin work p ESEE ~n adv 0 Pd~us#.~d conductin9 o involves basin Metro AGENDA ITEM # 5 FOR AGENDA OF 5/20/03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Local Counly, and State Affordable Housing tivi 'es of nterest to Tigard PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK it// , GR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE CO CIL This is an informational item designed to keep Council informed of activities and developments in the affordable housing area. No City action is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. INFORMATION SUMMARY The purpose of the meeting is to assist Council in staying abreast of housing issues and activities at the local, county, and state level that affect Tigard. Four guest speakers will be present to discuss and answer questions regarding a range of affordable housing topics of local interest within their respective areas of expertise. Michael Soloway, Deputy Director of Community Partners for Affordable Housing, will provide a general update on the Tigard-based, non-profit organization's current and future activities and programs, including a proposed new low-income housing project located adjacent to the Washington Square Regional Center. Susan Wilson, Director of Washington County Housing Services, will focus on her agency's recent acquisition activities within Tigard. In 2001 and 02 the housing authority acquired 192 new apartment units within the City. Altogether, the agency currently owns and manages 224 housing units in Tigard. The most recent of these is the apartment complex on Bonita formerly known as Tiffany Court. Until its acquisition by the housing authority, Tiffany Court was one of the highest crime areas in the City. Ms. Wilson will highlight the authority's present and proposed efforts to upgrade the complex and operate it as safe and decent affordable housing. Craig MacColl, Executive Director, Vision Action Network, will discuss the Community Housing Fund. A task force of the County-sponsored Vision-West Strategic Planning Group recommended establishing a j housing trust fund to provide new funding for affordable housing development. In recent months, a working 1 group has created a business plan for the fund. The fund's mission is to combine public, private, and philanthropic resources to create a new source of capital that will leverage financing for the construction and rehabilitation of rental and ownership housing. T he 10-year Fund vision is to secure $15 million in capital that will leverage additional resources to create approximately 1,000 affordable housing units in Washington County. Attachment # 1 provides additional information on the fund. John Blatt is the Executive Director for the Association of Oregon Community Development Organizations (AOCDO), a nonprofit association of those engaged in and those who support affordable housing development. Membership includes over 50 non-profit developers of low-income housing throughout the state. On average, the state provides 20% of the funding for units developed by non-profits within Oregon. Mr. Blatt will provide a timely update on pending bills in the current legislative session that relate to affordable housing. The most important of these are: • A plan to use funds from the Housing Trust Fund to fill the state budget shortfall. Interest from the $15 million fund is used to fund affordable housing grants. • A bill to raise the cap on the Affordable Housing Tax Credit. • A bill to renew the local option property tax exemption, scheduled to sunset this year. Tigard has provided a tax abatement program for affordable housing since 1996. • A bill to allow an exception for a real estate transfer tax in metropolitan Portland and Ashland. The "communication plan" relative to affordable housing consists of posting the adopted Tigard Housing Program report on the City web page and the web posting and mailing to potentially interested parties of information on the City's housing fee subsidy program. It also includes a web link to the Housing Connections multiple listing service for metro-area affordable housing. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Growth and Growth Management, Goal #3: Partnerships for advocacy for development of additional units and preservation of affordable housing are encouraged and supported by the City and the community. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: March 2003 Vision Action Network flyer - Community Housing Trust Fund FISCAL NOTES Not applicable. i/ci tywide/sum/affordablehousing.03 Presentation to organizational Capacity City of Tigard I ' r . City Council' ASIA& May 20, 2007 i iM. .p) v!!ac!wxn'?h!4-oi ,µL~.N,rrcnrc ..~q^, N g t'if•w~ ai wnY.lwri'' • 5 staff, 1 VISTA Volunteer •'L4IIDlQ • 200+ volunteers annually What Sets Tigard Apart 11 Member Board in the Housing Arena? • Rebecca Smith, President Policies Adopted: • Michelle Haynes, Vice President • Property Tax Abatement • Doug Plambeck, Treasurer • Property Maintenance Code • Mary Eidson, Secretary D. Enhanced Safety Properties • Roni Angus, Member Fee Waivers • Angel Griffin, Member N Community Partnerships: • Tom Murphy, Member • Library Outreach & Materials • Michael Porcelli, Member tC'' Community Policing • Diana Potts, Member J Coordination with Schools • Marianne Potts, Member m Civic Engagement / Volunteers • Pat Rogers, Member U) W 1 7 Member Advisory Council ~1► Volunteer Support • Mark Barry, Mark D. Barry & Associates: • Pat Biggs, Community Volunteer • Vince Chiotti, OHCSDr f • Anita Fernie, Washington Mutual • Margaret Nelson, Key Bank • Mary Owen, Founding CPAH Board Member fi"1 r' • Max Williams, State Representative 7 Our Development Team And More Volunteer Support • Housing Development Center: Will White, Robin Boyce, Rob Prasch, Eli Spevak y Ike • Seabold Construction: Steve Seabold, L Paul Leverton, Jon DeGroote r • Carleton Hart Architecture: Brian A Carleton, Brad Simmons ~ • Tax Credit Investor: Key Bank 19 ,1 u a 2 CPAH's Housing Village at Wash. Square Portfolio k~ Greenburg Oaks Metzger Park Apts. Village at Wash. Squar 84 units, 1997 32 units, 1996 26 units, 2002 acquisitionlrehab acquisition/rehab new construction 5-P 7-1--. Tangela House 5-bedroom house, 1999 acquisitionlrehab " Who do we serve? Village at Wash. Square, Resident Profile 26 Units Ave. income $18,000; 30% minorities; more May 2002 than 50% are children • 75% female-headed, 15% are elderly-disabled; r r 81% are employed in one or more jobs - 50% in retail I service sector Ml; s t - Others in financial, production, and landscaping y. r.~ Total Households: 143 r Total Individuals: 400+ I rr . 4 I /o ~z 3 Youth What We Do At Our Sites... _ GP1M ~ ~ i 's • ~ ED'1" -n : b`r'a F ~ 1 r", a- # • Youth: Summer and After School Programs • dul : Crime Prevention, Self-Sufficiency Partnerships • Both: : Computer Centers/Librades. Individual Development * •a Accounts Youth Adults Financial Literacy Ater school programs I Computer centers ramnaxromom' Crime Prevention i Y A0 4 What's Next? o'~.. What's Next? Oleson Woods Greenburg Oaks Capital Campaign 32 Units-Family Housing • Total ($584,000) -Phase I: Rear Stairs & Waterproofing ($350,000) -GAP: $25,000 by June 30, 2003 r -Phase II: Decks, Interior r Replacements ($234,000) -GAP: $155,000 by December 31, 2004 What's Next? Your Support Makes a Bertha Triangle Difference (60 Units-Senior Housing) Vicki Parker, CPAH Resident, 5 years T G = Stable housing leads to stable lives M;T.a mn nama s: nM _r a _!z Everyone deserves decent, safe and --n ; affordable housing Housing projects are more than bricks 07...,. ~milil1 n a and mortar '12tf" l'tJ n(., • They are small communities, and they «Gm«,.nrv„~„ are part of larger communities 18 ZO 5 ...Thank You For Your Commitment and Support • It takes a village, to build a village • With support we look forward to building many morel ~r L , C 9 i i 1 1 I I 6 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Pagel of 9 "1•'uture: That period of time in NNhich our affairs prosper, our friends :u•c true and our happiness is assures}." Vision Action Network Vision Action Network Issues Papers Contact Us! r, VAN Facilitates Development of Community Housing 'rust Fund March 2003 In December 2002 and January 2003, the Vision Action Network continued its focus on affordable housing by convening a diverse group of 27 leaders from the housing industry in order to create a business plan for ~t the Community Housing Fund - a public, private partnership that will develop new sources of capital for affordable housing throughout the County. The formation of this working group is an example of the unique resource that VAN provides to the community. Although an affordable housing trust fund concept had been discussed for several years in Washington County, no organization within the affordable housing community was positioned to take a leadership role. The mission of the Fund is to combine public, private and philanthropic resources to create a new source of capital that will leverage financing for the construction and rehabilitation of rental and ownership housing targeted to serve people neglected by the mainstream housing market. The 10-year vision of the Fund is to secure $15 million in capital that will significantly leverage additional resources to create approximately 1,000 affordable housing units in Washington County. During the winter and spring of 2003 the Community Housing Fund will be going through the process of incorporating itself and forming an initial Board of Directors. If you would like to learn more r about the Fund and the affordable housing challenge in Washington County, or to participate in future planning and publicity efforts for the Community Housing Fund, please contact Craig MacColl at 503/846-5792. i 't E Community Housing Fund Business Plan The Need Washington County is experiencing C an affordable housing crisis. During http://www.vision-west.org/isup_hse.htm 5/6/03 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Page 2 of 9 the 1990s Washington County's population grew nearly 43 percent to = Need_ 445,342 people. Our housing costs =One Solution=Community_._Housing Fund are among the highest in the state. If = Key._Design Principles bold steps are not taken, Metro = Capital Sources Eligible _Uses estimates a shortage of nearly 47,000 = Income Targ_eti.ng/Affordability Requirements affordable housing units in the region = Distribution Q Funds by 2017. = Go_v_ernance Operations Based upon the 2000 census, Washington County's median home value was $184,800 - 21 percent above the state average. While the median cost has nearly doubled since 1990, the average household income has only risen by 28 percent. The median gross rent of $720 is the highest in Oregon - 16 percent above the state average. Out of the 169,162 occupied households in the county, 45,289, or 26 percent, pay more than 30 percent of their income for housing. The vast majority of renter households pay more than 35 percent of their income for housing. Further, Washington County's Consolidated Plan estimates that nearly 7,000 households pay more than 50 percent of their income for housing and approximately 6,700 are at risk of homelessness. Clearly something must be done. Washington County has an active housing development community composed of both nonprofit and for-profit developers and the local housing authority. These developers are complemented by a continuum of social service providers that match supportive human services with the needs of those living in affordable housing. Their capacity to develop additional units is limited however, by the amount of available equity capital. Limitations on the production of affordable housing have historically been financial. Following an 18-month study of the region's housing needs, exploring regulatory and funding strategies to meet current and anticipated demand for affordable housing, a 24- member Metro Task Force acknowledged that many of the initiatives identified could not move forward without a new source of funding. Neither the market nor government is able to generate enough equity to reduce the cost of developing and operating housing for those with low, very-low and extremely low incomes. Furthermore, available public funding sources are chronically oversubscribed. a One Solution - The Community Housing Fund i Creating additional capacity in the housing system is dependent on generating new resources. 1 In a recent report on affordable housing, a task force of the Vision-West Strategic Planning t r Group recommended establishing a housing trust fund as a viable option to assist the County s and its partners meet its share of the affordable housing needed in the region. 1 The mission of the Community Housing Fund (The Fund) is to combine public, private and j philanthropic resources to create a new source of capital that will leverage financing for the construction and rehabilitation of rental and ownership housing targeted to serve people i http://www.vision-west.org/isup_hse.htm 5/6/03 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Page 3 of 9 neglected by the mainstream housing market. Our 10 year vision is to secure $15 million in capital that will significantly leverage additional resources to create approximately 1,000 affordable housing units in Washington County. Key Design Principles The Fund is designed to be a catalyst for the understanding of, investment in and production of affordable housing in Washington County. We will enrich existing and develop new strategic partnerships between the public, private and philanthropic sectors to aggregate capital to support the creation of affordable housing in Washington County. We will be innovative in our approach to delivering flexible capital to the affordable housing market that leverages, complements and supports existing affordable housing funding programs. 1 Capital Sources The Fund will be capitalized from grants and donations from five strategic sectors: the public sector, corporate and business partners, private foundations, community of faith based organizations and individual donations. Capitalization of the investment pool will be limited in the early years as individual sector strategies are crafted, relationships are developed and proposals drafted. The attached capital projections assume The Fund will attract an initial capitalization of $1 million in year one which will grow to $15 million in year ten. Public Sector - Public sector giving is anticipated from a mixture of local, regional, state and federal government sources. This sector will play a key role early in The Fund's development. Most housing trust funds have at least one jurisdictional partnership that provides some form of highly reliable operating and investment capital over a start-up period of up to ten years. The Fund will approach local governments to assist in capitalizing the fund via direct contributions or challenge grants. The initial seeding from government partners will likely be an important litmus test for other potential contributors. The State of Oregon, although a champion of affordable housing development, feels that there is no viable State program that can assist in the short run. The closest match may be periodic t competitive investments of capital from the regional pool available through Lottery proceeds. This pool will likely target operating expenses versus the capital pool. i It is possible that our congressional delegation may be able to assist this effort through a targeted request for capital from one or more national programs, but this is of questionable reliability in this early planning. f The model assumes an initial capital investment of $600,000 from the government sector in the first year, increasing to $750,000 in years two and three, and further increasing to $850,000 in years four through ten. http://www.vision-west.org/isup_hse.htm 5/6/03 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Page 4 of 9 r Corporate Giving - Corporate giving is anticipated to be a key factor in long-term sustainability of The Fund. Nationally and in regions similar to Washington County such as the Silicon Valley and Seattle, housing trust funds see significant participation from key industries located in those communities. Every employer has a stake in the quality and quantity of the affordable housing stock in Washington County. It is a key element both in the quality of life of their employees and in the long term retention of a high quality labor pool in the region. We expect that large employers in our community will be willing partners in this venture. Small and medium employers will play a role over time. The role of all employers may include everything from direct grants, gifts s of stocks and donation time to assist in other community outreach efforts. E S Industries aligned to the development of housing may play a role periodically through their internal annual giving programs, employee contribution match programs and direct grants from these corporations. Potential industries to be assessed are financial institutions, real estate brokerages, title insurance companies, mortgage bankers, general contractors, materials suppliers, and trade unions. We project that corporate giving will start small ($75,000) in year one. We project strategic long term growth from the corporate sector as our message is honed, relationships are developed and The Fund's performance can be documented. Increases are projected at the rate of $25,000 in year two through four, $50,000 in year five to seven and $75,000 in years eight through ten. Private Foundations - Foundation support is divided into two categories, those interested in seeding new ideas and t others that participate after the program has seasoned for a few years. Few foundations give on more than a single-year basis, and fewer still like to build community capital resources. Despite this reality, we believe private foundation giving will play a consistent role, but with few participating on an ongoing basis. For this sector to be a consistent source of support it will require staff research, the development of relationships with foundation program officers, well defined strategies and measurable outcomes. ; We are fortunate in our area to have a number of small to large private foundations that will be approached to assess their interest in supporting The Fund. Among the likely local resources are the following private foundations: Meyer Memorial Trust, Collins Foundation, and M.J. Murdoch Charitable Trust. Regional and national foundation resources may include such diverse players as the Paul Allen Foundation, Enterprise Foundation, Spirit Mountain Community Fund, Gates Foundation, Northwest Area Foundation, Kresge Foundation, and Ford Family Foundation. The capital projections assume a consistent $30,000 level of support from foundations in years one through three increasing by $25,000 every three years over the period. http://www.vision-west.org/isup_hse.htm 5/6/03 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Page 5 of 9 Faith-Based Sector - The faith-based sector is emerging both nationally and locally as a strong and willing player in community development. The Vision Action Network today plays a key role in supporting the Washington County faith-based initiative. This sector has deep interest in supporting and housing special needs populations in Washington County. With adequate relationship development and maintenance we project that this sector can generate $150,000 annually over the period. i Individual Giving - i Individual giving is the cornerstone of most community-based philanthropic efforts. The Fund's long-term sustainability likely will hinge on this sector's support. It is unlikely however that individual giving will be a major source of funds in the near term. Marketing will be a key i element in reaching citizens of the County and turning their attention to this new charitable purpose. The board of directors will play a key role in direct giving and in linking The Fund to other individual donors in the community. The capital projections assume $150,000 in individual donations in years one to three, increasing to $225,000 in years four through six and increasing again to $300,000 in year seven to ten. Eligible Uses Investments from The Fund must support one of the following activities: . Rental Housing Production/Preservation with a focus on providing/preserving shelter for extremely low, very low and low income households. . Special Needs Housing with a focus on creating shelter for vulnerable populations who have difficulties accessing the conventional housing markets. . Ownership Housing with a focus on creating ownership and wealth creation opportunities for low and moderate income households. The Fund defines extremely low-income as household earning up to 30 percent median family income (MFI), very low-income as households earning between 31 and 50 percent of MFI, lox, i income as households earning between 51 and 80 percent of MFI and moderate income as households earning between 81 and 120 percent of MFI. i , Income Targeting/Affordability Requirements The Fund is designed to complement and support existing affordable housing funding programs. To the greatest degree possible, income requirements, affordability restrictions and I recapture provisions are deferred to other subsidy providers. y If no other subsidy provider is funding a project, income and affordability requirements will be negotiated on an individual basis. In those instances, The Fund will use other subsidy funders http://www.vision-west.org/isup_hse.htm 5/6/03 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Page 6 of 9 income and affordability requirements as a guide in negotiations. Distribution of Funds The Fund's Board of Directors will establish priorities bi-annually. Priorities will be developed in collaboration with other state and local funding sources to ensure that investments from The Fund complement other funding programs. The allocation of funds will attempt to balance two key goals - to allocate resources for the creation of affordable housing and to create a fund that will become self-sustaining over time. To achieve these goals, 75 percent of the annual capital contributed to The Fund will be awarded to successful applicants. The Fund will maintain this 75 percent allocation ratio until it results in a $1 million annual allocation pool. The allocation ratio will then be reduced to a level that will maintain the $1 million annual allocation pool while enabling the corpus of The Fund to grow more rapidly. Funds not disbursed will be retained in a reserve account and invested to generate revenue to supplement The Fund's general operating budget. The reserve account may also be used from time-to-time to fund special initiatives of the board. Investments from The Fund will be competitively awarded to eligible applicants under two allocation programs - a feasibility fund and a general allocation fund. Fifteen percent of the annual allocation will be set aside in a feasibility pool. Applications for investments from the feasibilitypool will be limited to $50,000. Funding requests under the general allocation pool program are limited to 15 percent of those funds. Funds will be awarded during two funding cycles. The funding cycles and award notifications will be timed to increase an awardee's competitiveness in other funding programs. Innovation is encouraged. Investments will be structured to create the greatest flexibility for the developer while maintaining The Fund's fiduciary responsibility to our funders. Investments z can be structured as grants, loans or in such other form as may be appropriate to the project. Investment funds can be used for, but are not limited to, feasibility studies, land options, predevelopment costs, land development, unit construction and permanent capital. The investment will be secured by documents appropriate to the type of investment. ' Governance Incorporating Board - i The Fund will operate as a private nonprofit 501(c)3 corporation. A volunteer committee of stakeholders will work to move The Fund through the incorporating and start-up phase. This r work group will establish the legal structure, organize the incorporating board, prepare articles and by-laws, establish bank accounts and conduct the necessary initial business of the s organization. It is expected that the work group/incorporating board will conduct organization activities from February through the fall of 2003. http://www.vision-west-org/isup_jise.htm 5/6/03 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Page 7 of 9 r Operating Board - To achieve the mission of The Fund, the Board will expand as The Fund moves into operation. The initial Board will expand up to a maximum of twenty-one members at full strength. Recruitment and expansion of the board, and the nominations process will be the first, and most important, board development activity. The ability of The Fund to successfully carry out its mission depends upon the strength of its governing board. Board members will serve three years terms and members can serve a maximum of three terms. Board membership will be structured to ensure a balance of sector representation and to enable The Fund to effectively compete for various government and foundation funding programs. The board will provide strategic direction for The Fund, choose and nurture strong leaders, and ensure The Fund's financial and legal health. The Board will be a diverse group of individuals that are committed to the mission and possess substantial leadership, fundraising and affordable housing skills and expertise. They will set policy that guides the work, and evaluate management and itself with an eye toward continuous improvement. The Board will have several functions but foremost among them are: • Legal Responsibility: The Board will be composed of volunteers who have no personal financial stake in the organization and therefore can provide effective management and financial oversight. The Board will have fiduciary responsibility for all funds managed, invested and expended by the organization. • Promote the Mission: The directors will support the mission of The Fund and actively seek to promote it. Members will advocate for The Fund by promoting its mission and i goals within the community, local government and within the business community. Members must be well connected, respected, and politically connected within the County and broader community. . Establish Policy: As stewards of The Fund, the Board will take leadership in overall policy development and implementation process. The board will make major financial, operational and policy decisions for The Fund ' • Fund Raising: Fund raising is an expectation of each member of the Board. The ability to raise funds will be a very important measure of the success of The Fund Board. Members are expected to be regular contributing donors themselves. The board members will actively recruit committed business leaders, foundations, and individuals to regularly contribute funds to achieve the goals of The Fund. Technical Advisory Committee - The board will establish a technical advisory committee made up of experts in the affordable i housing field. The advisory committee will provide input to the board on program policy f development and implementation. The advisory committee structure allows the board to gain ! valuable insight from industry practitioners and provides potential applicants with the opportunity to appropriately influence The Fund policies while avoiding a conflict of interest. http://www.vision-west.org/isup_hse.htm 5/6/03 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Page 8 of 9 r Operations The initial operation of The Fund has been separated into three distinct phases. The accompanying financial projections display our operating expense assumptions on a July 1/June 30 fiscal year. Phase one is the start-up phase that consists of incorporation, initial relationship development and fund raising and creation of the basic organizational infrastructure. This phase is projected to run from February 1, 2003 to December 31, 2003. Phase two is when The Fund will hire initial staff. This phase will focus on creation and implementation of a capitalization strategy, continued relationship development and fundraising from the various funding sectors, grant writing and developing the internal administrative and contract management systems. Additionally, work will begin on creating allocation policies, priorities, application and award processes. The phase is projected to run from January 2004 through January 2005. Phase three is program implementation. Fund raising will be a continued priority during this phase and for the life of The Fund. Entering phase three, The Fund will have amassed adequate capital to issue its first Notice of Funds Availability. Work will concentrate on educating the affordable housing community about the availability of and funding priorities for first round funding. Additionally, The Fund's application, award and disbursement processes will be tested and refined. Phase three is projected to run from January 2005 through July 2006. Staffing - The Fund is designed to have a lean staffing pattern. Over time The Fund's staffing structure will ideally mature to 2.5 FTE. With the support of the governing board, staff will have lead responsibility for capitalizing The Fund, developing and implementing program activities and managing the fiscal and general administrative needs of the organization. A variety of skills will be needed to complete these tasks including: strong relationship development, fund raising and leadership skills; general knowledge of affordable housing development and finance; program and policy development; accounting, contract management and general administrative 1 skills. L ' Professional Services - The projections assume that The Fund will hire three primary contract services - Legal, contract underwriting and accounting. 6 i 7 ~ l Legal - Start-up legal expenses are expected to be provided through the County or through pro- bono services from area legal firms. It is only prudent however, to assume that The Fund will incur direct legal costs as fund raising begins and awards are made. The projections assume that beginning in year two that The Fund will use 8 hours of legal services per month at a billing rate of $150.00 per hour. This cost is expected to increase at an annual rate of four percent. http://www.vision-west.org/isup_hse.htm 5/6/03 Housing Issue Update VisionAction Network Page 9 of 9 Contract Underwriting - We assume that The Fund will contract for application underwriting services. These services may be secured on an individual consultant basis or contracted out to a specific firm to complete. The consultant will review all applications, conduct appropriate due I diligence research, write an underwriting report and make a presentation to The Fund approval committee with action recommendations. We project that the consultant(s) will review approximately 10 applications annually. Each application will take approximately 16 hours to review/present and the consultant would be compensated at a billing rate of $75.00 per hour. This cost is also expected to increase at an annual rate of four percent. Accounting/Audit - The Fund will contract for accounting services. We project a need for two and one-half days of accounting services monthly at a billing rate of $75.00 per hour. This cost is also expected to increase at an annual rate of four percent. Operating Expenses - This section of the financial projections outlines basic on-going operating expenses. Occupancy costs are projected at zero for the first three years of operations. We have assumed that office space will be donated by the County or corporate partners during the early years of Fund operations. The remaining expenses are projected based upon assumed current costs or allocated based on direct salaries. Most operating expenses are assumed to increase at the annual rate of four percent. i For more information about the Affordable Housing Trust Fund project: Please contact Craig MacColl, Executive Director, Vision Action Network at 503-846-5792, or via Email at craig_maccoll&o.washington.or.us g i Housing Issue Update i y (19KB, RTF) t j http://www.vision-west.org/isup_hse.htm 5/6/03 AGENDA ITEM # ~o FOR AGENDA OF 5/20/03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Presentation on City of Tigard 2003 Almanac t Book)-- PREPARED BY: Beth St. Amand DEPT HEAD OK MGR OK 1 ISSUE BEFORE THE UNCIL Review and comment on the City of Tigard 2003 Almanac, a compendium of population, business and building statistics for Tigard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action necessary. INFORMATION SUMMARY The almanac is an ongoing long-range planning project to compile various statistics about Tigard. With the proliferation of data today, particularly through the Internet, accessing detailed community information can be time-consuming for staff and confusing or inaccessible for the general public. The objective of the 2003 Almanac release is to collect these valuable statistics in one location, making them easily accessible by citizens, staff, and the business community. The 2003 Almanac contains the most recent data available for population (Census information), building (Building Department statistics), and the local economy (Census and business license information). Portions of the almanac will be updated yearly (City-produced data); however, the Census data will be updated following the next survey and its results released. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED L N/A C D VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY i Community Character and Quality of Life/Communication #1/Strategy 3: Encourage public participation through accessibility and education. The Almanac makes Tigard statistical information accessible to the general public. COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY The communications strategy is two-fold: 1) Internal. Each department will receive one printed copy of the Almanac, and the Almanac will be available electronically on the Internet. An E-mail will be sent to all City staff explaining what the Almanac is and how to access it. 2) External. A press release will be sent to the Tigard Times announcing the Almanac availability. The summary page will be available at the counter. The report will be available on the Internet and at the counter, and two reference copies will be installed at the Library. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: City of Tigard 2003 Almanac FISCAL NOTES N/A 1ALRPLN\beth\Counci1\Counci1 AIS 5 20 03 Almanac.doc i 1 1 i I Attachment 1 C I T Y OF T I G A R D 2003 ALMANAC FACTS AND FIGURES ABOUT OREGON'S 1 1 TH LARGEST CITY CITY OF T10- Ail) C i i is i i - • 'US A The 0 0 2 - 2 0 0 3 P R O F I L E 1~he City of Tigard has been growing steadily since its incorporation in 1961. Over 44,070 residents make their home in this centrally located community 10 miles southwest of Portland, just minutes from I-5, Highway 217, and the ninny services available on Highway 99W. The Fanno Creek Greessway connects neighborhoods to the natural environment and several of Tigard's parks. Tigard is governed by a four-member council and mayor. Council meetings take place on the second, third and fourth Tuesday of each month. POPULATION ECONOMIC From 1990-2000, the city's population grew 39%. Aside from Wholesale trade, retail trade and the service natural increases (births), these new residents came from out industry all play a large role in Tigard's of state, elsewhere in Oregon, and Washington County. The economy. Retail trade has the most median household income is slightly less than the county establishments; and the retail and service median of $52,122. Fifteen percent of Tigard households make industries employ the most people. more than $100,000, and 20,4% make less than $25,000, Econoinicsto Estimated Population 2002) 44,070 Number of Businesses, 2003 ' 7,838 Median Age (2000) 34.5 years old (488 home-based) Number of Households (2000) 16,507 Jobs (1997 Economic Census estimate) 28,233 Average Household Size (2000) 2.48 persons per unit Primary Economic Sector (receipts/sales) Wholesale Trade Median Household Income (1999) $51,581 Tax Rate 1.51310 per $1000 Number of Housing Units (2000 17,369 of assessed value Number of Occupied Units 16,507 Total Assessed Value $4,547,490,295 Owner Occupancy Rate (2000) 583% Diversity, 2000 Census Data Top 10 Private Employers by # Employees, 2003 One race 39,986 97% Company # Emp. White 35,195 85.40% ).Renaissance Credit Services 1167 Black or African American 468 1.10% 2. Meier 8 Frank 502 American Indian/Alaskan Indian 253 0.60% 3. Nordstrom Inc. 476 Asian 2,298 5.60% 4. Servicemaster Building Maintenance of Tigard 250 Native Hawaiian + Other Pacific 220 0.50% 5. Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics 249 Islander 6. Quest Diagnostics 146 Some other race 1,552 3.80% 6. Gerber Legendary Blades 246 Two or more races 1,237 3.0% B. Home Depot 241 'Note: Hispanic or Latino is considered separately by the Census because 9. Torget 239 an individual can be Hispanic or Latino and of an race 10, U.S. Bancorp Equipment Finance Inc. 234 Age of Tigard Residents, 2000 Annual Household income, 1999 8.000 6,730 7,307 m 7000 L 6,,000 SAM 4000 - 0 4,000 K 3.000 35 3000 8 3189 zsss p 3,000 2000- 2.000 1000 1,000 0 0 $o e°C eeP ~h ec°p 9 a°as e'~s a°n $ea cep 0qq ,q °a 0qq gggq 'qqq qqq qqn o app d~ 4 tiq° S`'q• ~\qq• ah~ -N tint eP. P lb~ ~y~ ~yS pyS ~hS ~yW eqP OP,u 0,c pP,* e,u ,e ,u oO~o 0y-~ ti SS y~S by yy0 11y Sp S~yo 51 1 Education of Tigard Residents (Age 25+), 2000 Grad/prof < 12th grade degree 1l% 7ffligh school Bachelor's & grad degree 21% 19% Associate's Some college degree ll% 29% } s - s (CITY LIMITS APRIL 2003 Qq L 'S! N DAKOTA ST > ~F'B PFAFFLE ST y WALNUT S~ 09 < ~y city A Hall P4\ ST C BULL MOUNT RD BONITA RD < r DURHAM RD F~ m 11 Tlgu*r Square Miles 11.5 County washingtor> Residential 5027 69% School District Tigard-Tualatin Commercial 1787 25% Annual Average Rainfall 37.57" Industrial 452 6% Average Daily Temperature - Jan. 38.9 Total 7266 100% -July 65.8 Highest Elevation - Bull Mtn. Summit 713 ft. Numbers are approximate Lowest Elevation - Cook Park Riverfront 104 ft. Source: Tigard MAGIC/GIS Department, March 2003 City Hall, the Library and Police station are all located at Hall Blvd., south of Burnham. 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 Main Phone Line: 503/639-4171 http://www.ci.tigard.or.us ein r Daw eaurrnr f,r this ducummit inchula t1w fdlowiug: 20110 U.S. Census, (:it% of Tigard Finuna: dapnrlcount and CIS departannnt: 1997 U.S. 11.mnomio Ceosus. For mure inf raintion, ruunult tho City af'rignrd 2003. 11twinne This document produced by the City of Tigard Long-Range Planning Department April 2003 For additional copies of this report, contact Almanac Coordinator Beth St. Amand at 503/639-4171. i i 1 I I 1 Cover: Tigard is the state's l lL}1 largest city according to the 2002 Oregon Blue Book. TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword 1. Population: Who Lives in Tigard? 1 a. Households 4 b. Employment 6 c. Census Tract Data 8 II. Building Data: The Built Environment 13 III. Economic Climate: Doing Business in Tigard 18 Appendix A: Guide to Data Sources Appendix B: Census Tract Map Appendix C: Subdivisions Location Map and Index Appendix D: Apartments Location Map i i i r r FOREWORD The Almanac is an ongoing long-range planning project to compile various statistics about Tigard. With the proliferation of data today, particularly through the Internet, accessing detailed community information can be time-consuming for staff and confusing or inaccessible for the general public. The objective of the 2003 Almanac release is to collect these valuable statistics in one location, making them easily accessible by citizens, staff, and the business community. The 2003 Almanac contains the most recent data available for population (Census information), building (Building Department statistics), and the local economy (Census and business license information). Portions of the almanac will be updated yearly (City-produced data); however, the Census data will be updated following the next survey and the release of the results. The 2002 Economic Census data will be released 2004-2005; the next population census will take place in 2010, with results available in 2011-2013. In the meantime, the Population Research Center at Portland State University releases updated population estimates each year for Oregon municipalities and counties. A Note About Data Quality All data are not created equally. When, where, and how data are collected all determine its usefulness, and therefore are clearly noted throughout the document. Some information, such as 100% Count 2000 U.S. Census data which counts everyone (questionnaires went to every household), is quite simply the best it can get. Other data is from a sample, which means that approximately 1-in-6 respondents received additional questions. Their answers were used to represent the behavior of households throughout that Census tract. As a sample, it does contain some error not found in an exact count. Nonetheless, it provides a valuable approximation of households in these different areas. For more information and explanation about these sources, please see Appendix A. In sum, data is only as good as the source it comes from. Numbers are still just numbers p when it comes to reflecting human interactions, and should not be evaluated in a vacuum. Human behavior, market behavior, and government intervention all affect behaviors and should be considered as well. a Population I.WHO LIVES IN TIGARD? The City of Tigard has been growing steadily since its incorporation in 1961. Over 44,070 residents make their home in this centrally located community in Washington County, located just minutes from I-5, Highway 217, and the many services available on Highway 99W. The following data from the 2000 U.S. Census provides information on Tigard beyond statistics of square miles or buildings, for a city derives much of its identity from the people who live and work inside its borders each day. Table 1. Population, July 2002 Table 1 compares Tigard's growth to Apn 1, 0 July), July I 0142.'%,.,2000 -2001 2002' % its neighboring communities and Chainbe Washington County. Tigard Tigard 41,223 43,040 44,070 2.4% o Beaverton 76,129 77,170 77,990 1.1% represents 9.5 /o of the total county Tualatin 22,791 23,270 24,100 3.6% population. The large difference Lake Oswego 35,278 35,580 35,750 0.5% between 2000 and 2001 reflects the King City 1,949 2,060 2,110 2.4% May 2000 annexation of the Washington County 445,342 455,800 463,050 1.6% Portland(PMSA)' 1,918,009 1,950,600 1,979,650 1.5% Walnut Island area. • The Portland Metropolitan Statistical Area consists of Clackamas, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington, Yamhilf and Clark counties. Source: 10010regonpo ulaionRe or1,Po ulationResearchCenter,PortlandStateUniversit Table 2 demonstrates the growth of Table 2. Population Growth for Tigard 1961.2002 Tigard since its incorporation. Tigard grew steadily in the 1990s, but its greatest growth occurred in lcl~hnge rom -,from the city's earliest years. reviouti, 1961 1,084 1982 17,700 14.2 Compared with Washington County, 1962 1,804 66.4 1983 17,850 0.8 the city outpaced Washington 1963 1,844 2.2 1984 18,450 3.4 County in growth during the last six 1964 1,980 7.3 1985 20,250 9.8 years (Table 3). 1965 2,203 11.3 1986 10,765 2.5 1966 2,480 12.6 1987 23,335 12.4 1967 3,700 49.2 1988 25,510 9.3 Washington County's growth is due 1968 4,700 27.0 1989 27,050 6.0 mostly to new migration from other 1969 6,300 34.0 1990 29,650 9.6 counties than from births t.o existing 1970 6,499 3.2 1991 30,910 4.2 1971 6,880 5.9 1992 31,350 1.4 residents (Table 4). 1972 7,300 6.1 1993 32,145 2.5 1973 8,720 19.5 1994 33,730 4.9 Table 3. Population Change, 1990-2000 1974 10,075 15.5 1995 35,021 3.8 year* y 'A 1 year, 1975 10,075 0.0 1996 35,925 2.6 ' 1976 11,000 9.2 1997 36,680 2.1 001 2000 ~-:2000 1977 11,850 7.7 1998 37,200 1.4 0 0 0 1978 13,000 9.7 1999 38,704 1.1 Tigard 39.0 /0 17.7 /0 4.4 /o 1979 14,200 9.2 2000 41,223 6.5 Washington 42.9% 15.6% 2.35% 1980 14,900 4.9 2001 43,040 4.4 Count 1981 15,500 4.0 2002 44,070 2.4 Source: J9P6Date Issourre geport(Tigard), and 10010regon popu/arionleporl, Population Source: City; PRC Revised Intercansal Population Estimates Research Cenler ARC , Portland Stole University PSU I Table 4. Components of Population Change, 1990-2000 111111111111111n a, Washington Count 311,554 445,342 42.9 61,163 23,141 38,022 95,766 State of Oregon 2,842,321 3,421,399 20.4 430,949 113,313 157,626 421,452 Source: -Com onents of Population Change for Oregon's Counties: April I, 1990 to April 1, 2000; PIC•PSU A closer look at. 2000 Census information provides Residence in 1995 insight on where Tigard's new residents are coming front. In Tigard ----------------------Not Tigard S5 % / 45 When asked where they lived five years ago (1995), almost half (43.5%) lived in the same house, and an wash Cty. additional 12% lived in a different. house in Tigard. Of 12% Oregon Out of Out of U.S. the 44.5% who carne from elsewhere, 14.4% came from 14 % State 15% 4% Oregon, 14.7 % carne from out of state, 12% from the county, and 3.6% outside the U.S. Source: US Census 2000, Table P021 (percentages are rounded) CHARACTERISTICS OF THE POPULATION Who lives in Tigard? Census data tells us that the median (half of all Tigard residents are younger, and half are older) age of residents is 34.5, and almost half (48%) are between the ages of 25-54 (see Chart 1). Children under 18 comprise % of the population. Chart 1. Age of Tigard Residents, 2000 Race and Diversity Ninety-seven percent. of residents 8,000 tub 7,307 consider themselves one race, and the d 7.000 C 6.000 Saba majority are White (Table 6). The M 4.0000 J3,1.819 2,765 2955 3574 Census considers Hispanic or Latino p 3,000 2.°00 563 ethnicity separately, as an individual i,oo0 can be of any race and Hispanic or ~0a~y aoa~y ~e~0~y ~e4, -0 4, as5 ~e~y oLatino. Of the total Tigard t population, 8.9% are Hispanic or ti a 6 ey~~ Latino, the majority of whom are Mexican (6.9%) (Table 5). Table S. Race and Hispanic or Latino Origin Table 6. Race One race 39,986 91% Total Tigard Population 41,223 100% White 35,195 85.4% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 3,686 8.9% Black or African American 468 1.1% ■ Mexican 2,849 6.9% American Indian + Alaskan Indian 253 0.6% ■ Puerto Rican 82 0.2% Asian 2,298 5.6% ■ Cuban 57 0.1% Native Hawaiian + Other Pacific 220 0.5 ■ Other Hispanic or 698 1.7% Islander Latino Some other race 1,552 3.8% Not Hispanic or Latino 37,537 91.1% Two or more races 1,237 3.0% ■ White alone 33,317 80.8% Source: Demographic Summary, 2000 U.S. Census Total: 41,223 100% Source: Demographic Summary, 2000 U.S. Census 2 Language Spoken at Education Home More than 90% of Tigard's population 25 years and over have a 5 - 17 years old: high school degree, with 44.3% holding a college degree (associate's, 1. English (83.4%) bachelor's and graduate degrees). 2. Spanish (8.4%) 3. Chinese (1.3%) Table 7. Years of School Completed, 2S Years and older 4. Korean (1.0%) S. Vietnamese (1.0%) Education L eve 18 and Over: Population 25 years and older 27,142 1. English (83.8%) Less than 9fh grade 921 3.4% 2. Spanish (7.7%) 3. Vietnamese (13%) 9e to 121h grade, no diploma 1,564 5.8% 4. Chinese (1.0%) High School Graduate 4,956 18.31/o 4. German (1.0%) (includes equivalency) US census 2000, Table PC710 Some college, no degree 7,683 28.31/o Abbreviated lists of top five percentages only Associate degree 2,114 7.81/o Ability to Speak English Bachelor's degree 7,138 26.30/a (5 years old and over): Graduate or professional degree 2,766 10.2% English Only 83.7% Percent high school graduate or higher 90.8% n/a Another Language 16.31/o Percent bachelor's degree or higher .16.5% n/o -Speak English less than "very well" 7.9% Sourre: U.S. CensusBursou Csntus1000(lod/sDi•1.•ire/i/snlgene~o/demographir~haraderistirs:?o00f. US Census 2000, Demographic Summary 'Percentages add u to more than 100% due to rounding. 3 L14 Households HOUSEHOLDS In the U.S. Census, a household includes all the persons who occupy a housing unit. A housing unit is a house, an apartment, a mobile home, a group of rooms, or a single room that is occupied (or if vacant, is intended for occupancy) as separate living quarters (U.S. Census http://quickfacts.census.gov/gfd/meta/long_71061.htm.). According to the Census, a family consists of a householder ' and one or more other persons living in the same household Total Households: 16,507 who are related to the householder by birth, marriage, or Family: 10,739 (65.1%) adoption. All persons in a household who are related to the Non-Family: 5,768 (34.9%) With children 5,847 (35.4%) householder are regarded as members of his or her family. A under agel8 household can contain only one family for purposes of With individuals 2,944 (17.8%) census tabulations. Not all households contain families since 65 years and older a household may comprise a group of unrelated persons or Average household size = 2.48 one person living alone (http://quickfacts.census.gov/ Median Income = $51,581 U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Oemo ra his Summer qfd/meta/long_58579. htm). Tigard Chart 2. The City of Tigard's 2000 population of Household Size by Number of People, 2000 41,223 lived in 16,507 total households, almost 2/3 of which were family households. Just over a third of these 6,000 a 5,000 households had children under 18. c 4,000- 1-5 3,000 Income 2,000 In 1999, the median income for Tigard 1,000 households was $51,581. This number is 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Tor slightly less than the county median, Number of People more and places Tigard second among its neighbors (Table 10 on page 8). In 10 years, the median increased by almost half. i Households attaining this median generally fall into the ages between 25 to 64, reflecting individuals in the workforce. Householders between 45 and 54 years old bring in the most income. Fifteen percent of households make more than $100,000, and 20.4% make less than $25,000. i i i Poverty In 2000, there were 5.6% households living in poverty. The Census considers a household in poverty when it does not meet a set income threshold, based on the number of individuals in the household (see littp•//www.census.gov/hires/poverty/ povdef.litml). There are approximately 6.6% of Tigard residents living in poverty, an increase from almost 5% 1990 (4.8% and 1,441 more individuals). There were 2.3% households accepting public assistance in 2000. 4 Table 8. Median Household Income in 1999 by Table 9. Income in 1999 for Households Age of Householder ousehold Total Median Household Income 51,581 Number of Households 16,499 100.0 Householder under 25 years 25,451 Less than $10,000 682 4.1 $10,000 to $14,999 772 4.7 Householder 25 to 34 years 50,247 $15,000 to $24,999 1,908 11.6 Householder 35 to 44 years 62,683 $25,000 to $34,999 1,876 11.4 Householder 45 to 54 years 66,049 $35,000 to $49,999 2,684 16.3 $50,000 to $74,999 3,578 21.7 Householder 55 to 64 years 59,904 $75,000 to $99,999 2,397 14.5 Householder 65 to 74 years 40,542 $100,000 to $149,999 1,749 10.6 Householder 75 years and over 29,890 $150,000 to $199,999 551 3.3 $200,000 or more 302 1.8 Median Household Income $51,581 Source: U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000, Table P56 Source: U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000, Demographic Summary Table 10. Median Household Income for Tigard Table 11. Population in Poverty and Adjoining Communities r .Hous~ H' h' Income in 1999 below 2,730 poverty level: 199-9. - Tigard 35,669 51,581 44.6% Under 5 years 355 Beaverton 33,951 47,863 41.0% 5 to 11 years 305 Tualatin 39,500 55,762 41.2% 12 to 17 years 207 King City 23,266 28,617 23.0% 18 to 64 years 1,712 Washington 35,554 52,122 46.6% 65 to 74 years 41 County 75 years and over 110 Source: U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000, Demographic Summaries; 1997 Tigard Data Resource Report Source: U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000, Table P87 5 e Employment EMPLOYMENT Almost 30% of Tigard residents in the workforce are employed in Tigardl (from Census Table P27). Approximately 70% of individuals who do not work in Tigard commute less than 30 minutes, and approximately 1% use public transportation. The busiest time for morning commutes is between 7 and 8 a.m. Although the city does not track unemployment figures, Washington County statistics show that compared to one year ago, unemployment has decreased (Table 14). t I'rrini 2000 G-ii,(i P fnil:rtum Tal,lr P^;. Table 12. Time Leaving Home to Go to Work Table 13. Travel Time by (Workers 16 and over) Means for Workers 16 and Over 9-me, C Time Leavlnq'a Total: 21,619 Total: 20,643 Did not work at home: 20,643 less than 30 minutes: 14,248 12:00 a.m. to 4:59 a.m. 476 2.3% Public transportation 199 5:00 a.m. to 5:29 a.m. 488 2.4% Other means 14,049 5:30 a.m. to 5:59 a.m. 813 3.9% 30 to 44 minutes: 4,449 6:00 a.m. to 6:29 a.m. 1,757 8.50/, Public transportation 401 6:30 a.m. to 6:59 a.m. 2,402 11.61/o Other means 4,048 7:00 a.m. to 7:29 a.m. 3,517 17.0114 7:30 a.m. to 7:59 a.m. 3,424 16.6% 45 to 59 minutes: 1,275 8:00 a.m. to 8:29 a.m. 2,026 9.8% Public transportation 297 8:30 a.m. to 8:59 a.m. 1,164 5.60/, Other means 978 9:00 a.m. to 9:59 a.m. 1,157 5.601o 60 or more minutes: 671 10.00 a.m. to 10:59 a.m. 643 3.1% Public transportation 214 11:00 a.m. to 11:59 a.m. 313 1.5% Other means 457 Worked at home 976 4.71/o Source: 200D Census, P32, Sample Data Source: 2000 Census, P34, Sample Data } Table 14. Unemployment Rates for Washington County, 2001 to 2002 rt rt t rt rt Civilian Labor Force 251,500 255,500 252,800 1,300 -2,700 Unemployment 17,800 16,200 15,900 -1,900 -300 Percent of Labor Force 7.1 6.3 6.3 XX XX Total Employment 233,700 239,300 236,900 3,200 2,400 Note: Components may not add exactly to totals due to rounding. Source: "Resident Labor Force and Unemployment for Regions Within the Porlland•Vancouyer PMSA" Oregon Employment Department • Workforce Analysis I1 Portland Trends • February 2003 6 Occupations Tigard residents work primarily in management, professional, and related occupations; and sales and office occupations (69% total). These positions are field in a variety of industries, including educational, liealth and social services, and manufacturing (Table 16). For more information on Tigard employers, see Section II beginning on page 16. Table 15. Occupation for Employed Civilian Population 16 years and over 0i c" p on # Management; professional; and related occupations 8390 38% Sales and office occupations 6829 31 % Service occupations 2785 13 % Production; transportation; and material moving occupations 2435 11 % (onstruction; extraction; and maintenance occupations 1400 6.4 % Forming; fishing; and forestry occupations 54 .2% Total Employment 21,893 99.6% (due to rounding) Source: 2000 Census, P50, Sample dafa Table 16. Industry for Employed Civilian Population 16 years and over igar &Reildints his Indust4- Educational; health and social services 3359 15.3% Manufacturing 3267 15 % Retail trade 2766 12.7 a/o Professional; scientific; management; administrative; 2622 12 a/o and waste management services Insurance; real estate and rental and leasing 2267 10.4 a/o Entertainment; recreation; accommodation and food 1797 8.2 0/a 10% services construction 1331 63 % Wholesale trade 1250 5.7 %/o Other services (except public administration) 950 4.3 a/o Information 686 3.1 a/o Public administration 582 2.7 % Transportation and warehousing; and utilities 870 4% Agriculture; forestry; fishing and hunting; and mining 146 .7 % Total: 21,893 100.2% (due to rounding) Source: 2000 Census, P49, Sample data 7 CTD (ensus Tract Data CENSUS TRACT DATA The data presented thus far in this report. reflects the entire City of Tigard (boundaries as of 4/1/00). The city is a dynamic place, with diverse neighborhoods and residenLs. By utilizing a smaller level of measurement - Lhe census tract. - the paLterns and trends throughout Tigard can become more evident.. Census tracts are created by the Census Bureau, which divides counLics into these approximately 4,000-person geographical units. Examples of census tracts include 307 and 308.01 (Table 17). However, census tracts don't always match city boundaries. Figure 1. Census: Units of Measure by Size In that case, a smaller unit of measurement can be used to match boundaries. Figure I demonstrates the relationship between the census measurement units. Blocks are the smallest unit for which the Census tabulates data, and they are defined by streets and features. Only 100% count. data is available at Block the block level. Blocks are then collected into block groups, and that data is available for sample data (i.e., BG1, BG2 in Table 17). Census tracts are composed of blocks and block groups. Each assigned number helps pinpoint. the location and level of data (i.e., tract 308.04, BG 3). Please refer to Appendix B for Tigard census tract. boundaries. Tracts with the highest number in each category are highlighted; lowest is underlined. Table 17. General Characteristics Population 1,508 5,713 4,511 9,078 2,758 3,629 1300 2,246 2,307 1,451 Households 683 2,278 2,384 3,413 982 1,490 464 784 893 826 1999 Median fill income' 40.250 48,327 42,826 57,490 66,439 57,500 76,187 63,333 43,194 99,263 Median Year (hsg. unit)Built" 1972 1977 1979 1983 1973 1973 1986 1987 1990 1990 Sources:2000 Census, Summary File I (SF 1) 100-Percent Data, P1 and P15.; 'Sample data, P53 "Sample data, H35 Table 18. Occupied Housing Units and Average Household Size t t:. t: t t t• t, t: t. t: tt , Total: 683 2,278 2,384 3,413 982 1,490 464 784 893 826 Owner occupied 170 1,241 1,388 2,322 814 940 439 536 478 624 - Av. HH Size 2.49 2.59 2.03 2.79 2.8 2.58 2.78 2.74 2.75 3.07 Renter occupied 513 1,037 996 1,091 168 550 25 248 415 201 - Av. HH Size 2.11 2.29 1.7 2.38 2.83 1.14 3.2 3.13 2.39 2.57 Av. HH Size Total 2.21 2.46 1.89 2.66 2.81 2.41 2.8 1.86 2.58 2.95 Source: 2000 Census, 114, H12,100% Count Data 8 Table 19. Total Races by Householder ace, 8 3 319. 1 1; 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1; I I I G1 BOT BIG3 Total races tallied for 714 2,325 2,414 3,497 999 1,516 467 800 916 839 householders: White alone or w/ other races 607 2,102 2,273 3,067 924 1,389 44B 687 762 753 Block or African American alone 8 27 20 48 7 14 4 5 21 8 or w/ other races American Indian and Alaska 16 33 14 47 10 31 1 13 15 8 Native alone or w/ other races Asian alone or w/ other races 41 67 70 224 38 45 10 39 92 37 Native Hawaiian and other 7 11 7 18 5 11 1 2 6 4 Pacific Islander alone or w/ other races Some other race alone or w/ 35 85 30 93 15 26 3 54 20 29 other races Source: 2000 Census, HO, 100% data Table 20. Hispanic or Latino by Total Races by Householder 1 I I 1 ~ ~ 1 I, 1 I I II I Total races tallied for 714 2,325 2,414 3,497 999 1,516 467 800 916 839 householders: Total races tallied for 630 2,173 2,360 3,348 972 1,467 460 707 879 780 Not Hispanic or Latino householders: White alone or w/ other races 553 2,034 2,245 3,001 907 1,363 444 647 738 720 Black or African American alone 7 25 20 44 7 13 4 4 21 8 or w/ other races American Indian and Alaska 16 29 12 43 9 27 1 11 14 8 Native alone or w/ other races Asian alone or w/ other races 40 65 70 224 38 44 10 39 91 37 Native Hawaiian and other 7 11 6 16 . 5 11 1 2 6 4 Pacific Islander alone or w/ other races Some other race alone or w/ 7 9 7 20 6 9 0 4 9 3 other races Total races tallied for 84 152 54 149 27 49 7 93 37 59 Hispanic or Latino householders: White alone or w/ other races 54 68 28 66 17 26 4 40 24 33 Black or African American alone 1 2 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 or w/ other races American Indian and Alaska 0 4 2 4 1 4 0 2 1 0 Native alone or w/ other races Asian alone or w/ other races 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Native Hawaiian and other 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pacific Islander alone or w/ other races Some other race alone or w/ 28 76 23 73 9 17 3 50 1-]26 other races Source: 2000 Census, H9,100% dole 9 0111 Table 21. Sex by Age 307 308.01' 30O.Q 31 3 0 64: "73'66 BG B63 :-1361 .103;- 0to 4 98 391 196 675 189 207 104 234 271 216 5to 9 73 341 154 721 188 243 131 194 238 203 10 to 14 63 356 165 710 120 243 104 151 162 208 15 to 19 88 385 200 572 229 232 63 138 129 185 20 to 24 186 455 293 566 110 229 25 137 185 109 25 to 29 207 500 305 713 122 290 51 211 227 121 30 to 34 144 463 236 707 181 302 119 211 215 175 35 to 44 145 996 531 1730 483 668 263 458 431 461 45 to 54 176 923 464 1357 466 621 261 315 240 413 55 to 59 74 259 172 427 190 192 60 64 58 110 60 to 64 45 191 179 269 113 135 33 44 42 76 65 to 74 69 237 506 332 150 148 40 59 61 92 75 + 40 115 1110 299 117 119 26 30 37 71 Total: 1,508 5,713 4,511 9,078 2,758 3,629 1300 2,246 2,307 2,451 Source: 2000 Census, P12,100% Data Table 22. Educational Attainment for Ages 25 and over Total persons 25+ 993 3,778 3,506 5,905 1,829 2,488 922 1,452 1,368 1,442 Less than 91h grade 64 102 64 170 46 31 5 90 32 30 Some high school ; no diploma 72 186 208 269 53 260 19 60 95 119 High school graduate/equivalency 243 695 746 1002 351 652 121 168 163 112 Some college, no degree 277 1155 957 1756 595 637 255 376 449 339 Associate's Degree 61 291 201 620 117 238 76 112 122 76 Bachelor's Degree 225 899 896 1550 420 459 279 513 431 590 Graduate/Professional Degree 51 450 434 538 247 210 167 133 76 176 Source: 2000 Census, P31, STF3 Sample data Table 23. 1999 Household Income Total: 677 1,287 2,394 3,429 980 1,486 492 788 938 773 Less than $10,000 61 78 88 57 38 56 15 15 48 0 $10,000 to $14,999 39 71 161 119 17 57 13 11 77 32 $15,000 to $19,999 35 171 139 113 27 110 0 17 85 36 $20,000 to $24,999 12 194 175 189 15 54 9 37 97 29 $25,000 to $19,999 89 93 272 117 35 91 0 13 10 20 $30,000 to $34,999 55 160 123 170 59 51 30 7 51 13 $35,000 to $39,999 44 123 187 217 39 49 5 92 41 13 $40,000 to $44,999 47 152 112 246 18 65 15 25 73 5 $45,000 to $49,999 34 149 163 132 47 89 20 43 7 19 $50,000 to $59,999 91 240 180 464 100 144 60 100 104 79 $60,000 to $74,999 58 165 211 445 100 298 70 121 137 18 $75,000 to $99,999 63 385 317 639 225 259 118 143 80 116 $100,000 to $124,999 24 151 112 300 93 78 77 59 23 122 $125,000 to $149,999 12 112 57 98 38 49 13 23 53 88 $150,000 to $199,999 13 30 67 83 24 3 27 52 37 125 $200,000 or more 0 13 30 40 5 33 10 20 15 48 Source: 1000 Census, P52, STF3 Sample Data 10 Table 24. Industry for Employed Population 16 Years and Over 307 U8.61 I I I I, ;108.04,- I: I. I t Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and minin : 0 6 31 38 17 0 0 23 9 8 Construction 47 240 58 297 79 244 62 76 56 69 Manufacturing 142 319 245 993 236 252 115 177 155 117 Wholesale trade 32 185 124 209 101 90 34 66 123 61 Retail trade 134 413 274 593 162 281 48 130 171 154 Transportation and warehousing, and utilities: 40 173 95 150 95 102 28 35 38 87 Information: 16 132 49 186 62 78 15 11 55 b Finance, insurance, real estate/ rental and leasing: 89 306 250 561 152 248 74 167 108 140 Professional, scientific, management, administrative, waste management services: 130 413 268 639 106 193 90 191 114 177 Educational, health, social services: 88 440 390 743 328 341 159 181 168 248 Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services: 134 281 86 319 101 197 90 67 47 49 Other services (except public administration): 18 198 46 286 39 101 19 58 51 46 Public administration: 31 43 71 118 60 62 34 45 53 50 Total: 901 3149 1988 5122 1538 2189 768 1228 1148 1212 Source: 2000 Census, P49, STF3 Sample Data Table 25. Industry for Employed Population 16 Years and Over I I: I I: t I I I, I: i I: I t t Management, professional, and related occupations: 199 1118 765 2120 614 760 378 527 434 499 Service occupations: 240 447 208 472 178 224 85 184 120 112 Sales and office occupations: 304 1052 784 1486 446 728 186 316 382 400 Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations 0 0 26 18 0 3 0 0 0 0 Construction, extraction, and maintenance occupations: 57 172 81 379 109 249 58 92 60 82 Production, transportation, and material moving occupations: 101 360 124 657 191 225 61 109 152 119 Total: 901 3149 1988 5132 1538 2189 768 1228 1148 1212 Source: Census 2000, P50, Sample Data 11 Table 26. Population Living in Occupied Housing Units by Type • t t: t t: t t 319.04 31 t. t: t s: t t t 86 Total population in occupied housingunhs: 1,505 5,596 4,504 9,071 2,756 3,632 1,379 2,229 2,391 2,350 Owner occupied: 379 3,246 2,889 6,684 2,366 2,651 1,312 1,559 1,240 1,992 1, detached 337 2,966 2,297 6,449 2,349 2,637 1,262 1,559 1,158 1,979 1, attached 0 147 363 164 17 0 37 0 51 0 2 0 29 0 8 0 0 13 0 0 0 3 or 4 0 27 143 0 0 0 0 0 31 13 5 to 9 0 24 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 to 19 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 to 49 0 11 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 or more 0 17 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mobile home 42 25 0 31 0 14 0 0 0 0 Boat, RV, van, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Renter occupied: 1,126 2,350 1,615 2,387 390 981 67 670 1,151 358 1, detached 111 403 116 789 165 464 57 136 196 100 1, attached 0 97 80 130 29 26 10 22 41 0 2 48 146 29 69 96 18 0 0 0 0 3 or 4 49 344 187 274 25 93 0 84 258 57 5 to 9 310 447 224 346 51 94 0 27 311 93 10to 19 276 229 459 370 24 153 0 111 200 83 20 to 49 251 398 84 136 0 83 0 241 0 0 50 or more 81 286 436 273 0 50 0 49 145 25 Mobile home 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Boat, RV, van, etc. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Source: 2000 Census, H33, STF3 Sample Coto Note: only highest numbers are noted. 12 6Q Housing Units ILTHE BUILT ENVIRONMENT The City of Tigard accommodates a whole Table 27. Buildable Lands, Jan. 2003 spectrum of activities, from residential to commercial and industrial. Residential uses Parcels, comprise almost 70% of the city's total acreage, with commercial uses consisting of almost s/4 of C-C Community Commercial 0.00 the total acres. Industrial represents the smallest C-G General Commercial 15.90 Parcels < 5 ac 11 land share (approximately 6.3%). Parcels > 5 and < 1 oc 3 1-5 acre parcels 7 Table 28. Land Uses >5 and < 10 0 > 10 acres 0 Residential 5021 Pirce'kaie C-N Neighborhood Commercial 0.00 C-P Professional Commercial 7.10 Commercial 1787 25% Parcels < 5 ac 2 Industrial 452 6% Parcels > 5 and < 1 ac 2 Total 7266 1.5 acre parcels 2 Numbers are approximate >5 and < 10 0 Source: Tigard MAGIC/GIS Department, March 2003 > 10 acres 0 The city has approximately 600 acres of buildable CBD Central Business District 0.80 land available (January 2003). This number reflects 1-H Heavy Industrial 0.00 vacant parcels and parcels that are partially I-L light Industrial 24.90 Parcels < 5 ac 5 developed (with %4 acre or greater that may be Parcels > 5 and < 1 ac 1 available for development). The total acreage 1-5 acre parcels 3 provides only a very general indication of building >5 and < 10 0 potential, as it includes parcels that may have > 10 acres 1 additional constraints, are too small for the I-P Industrial Park 48.00 Parcels < 5 ac 2 indicated zoning, or are fragmented. Parcels> 5 and < 1 ac 2 1-5 acre parcels 3 The most capacity for residential development is >5 and < 10 0 available in the R-4.5 and R-12 zones, the majority > to acres 1 of which is partially developed (one home/large lot). ' MUC Mixed-Use Commercial 3.30 MUC-1 Mixed-Use Commercial 1 6.90 Tigard has few large industrial and commercial MUE Mixed-Use Employment 2710 vacant/underdeveloped parcels. The current MUE-1 Mixed-Use Employment 1 8.70 industrial inventory includes only two buildable MUE-2 Mixed-Use Employment 2 0.80 aggregate parcels larger than 5 acres (38.4 acres is MUR-1 Mixed-Use Residential 1 410 the largest site, made up of multiple tax lots). It MUR-2 Mixed-Use Residential2 1.40 should be noted that the term "parcel" is not R-I 30,000 Sq Ft Min. Lot Size 0.40 R-12 62.00 exclusive with tax lot boundaries; in many cases, it R-2 20,000 Sq Ft Min Lot Size 1.60 consists of vacant land that crosses tax lot lines. All R-25 1,480 Sq Ft Min Lot Size 34.40 industrial inventory is in I-P or I-L zones; there are R-3s 22.80 no parcels available in the I-H zone. R-45 263.40 R-40 40 units per acre 0.00 R-1 15,000 Sq Ft Min Lot Size 73.90 Source: Tigard MAGIC/GIS Department 13 The commercial inventory consists mostly of General Commercial (CG) land; while the majority of parcels are under .5 acre, there are seven parcels between 1 and 3 acres. There are two sites 1 acre or larger in the Professional Commercial zone (C-P); less than one acre total in the CBD, and none in Neighborhood Commercial (C-N). BUILT UNITS Table 29. Total Building Units in Tigard, February 2003 Residential The majority of residential units are Aril 1, 2000 n/a n /a n /a 17,369 (all units) detached, single-family homes. Half April 2000 12 0 0 12 of all housing units today were built May 2000 18 0 0 18 between 1970 and 1990; the median June 2000 19 3 0 22 July 2000- 302 24 3 329 year of construction is 1982. June 2001 July 2001- 185 15 26 226 Appendices C and D Provide maps of June 2002 July 2002- 114 59 0 113 apartments and subdivisions in the Feb. 2003 Tigard area. Total: 650 (7/00-2/03) 101(1100-2/03) 29 (7/00.2/03) 18,149 Sources: 2000 Census (April 1, 2000, figure); Building Dept. Annual Report-Fiscal Years 1999-2000,2000-2001,20D]- 1 2002, Monthly totals 1002.2003 Table 30. Number of Units In Structure Table 31. Year Structure Built IN mber of Units mord Total 17,386' 1939 or earlier 286 1.6 1, detached 9,857 1940 to 1959 1,091 6.3 1, attached 895 2 376 1960 to 1969 2,193 12.6 3 or 4 1,196 5 to 9 1,454 1970 to 1979 4,432 25.5 10 to 19 1,539 1980 to 1989 4,391 25.3 20 to 49 688 50 or more 1,309 1990 to 1994 2,320 13.3 L Mobile home 72 1995 to 1998 2,298 13.2 Boat, RV, van, etc. 0 Source: 2000 Census, 1130, STF3 Sample Data 1999 to March 2000 375 2.2 'Note that this total differs from Table 29. Table 29 should be considered the more accurate count, Source: 2000 Census, Demographic Summary Sheets due to this Table being a sample vs. Table 29's actual count. Q u 14 Table 32. Owner vs. Renter Occupied Housing eavei Ten r ounty Occupied Housing Units 16,507 30,821 1,389 8,651 169,162 Owner-occupied housing units 9,627 14,714 1,005 4,773 102,477 (58.3%) (47.7%) (72.3%) (55.21/o) (60.6%) Renter-occupied housing units 6,880 16,107 384 3,878 66,685 (41.701a) (52.3%) (27.6%) (44.8%) (39.4%) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.66 2.67 1.44 2.81 2.75 Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.24 2.23 1.31 2.38 2.39 Source: 2000 Census, Demographic Summary Shoals Home Ownership Table 33. Monthly Owner Costs as /o of Income At 58.3%, Tigard's home ownership rate pssit ' exceeds t hose of neighbors Beaverton and Tualatin. The median monthly mortgage payment and costs is $1,361 (2000 Census 5.0 percent Demographic Summary Tables). For the 15.0 to 19.9 percent 1,631 18.5 majority of respondents, this represents less 20.0 to 24.9 percent 1,524 17.3 than 25 percent of household income. 25.0 to 29.9 percent 999 11.3 30.0 to 34.9 percent 834 9.5 35.0 percent or more 1,196 13.6 Rental Units Not computed 48 0.5 In 2000, renters paid a median rent of $673 Source: 2000 census, Demographic Summory Tablas (Census 2000, Table H63, Sample Data). However, when computed as a percentage of Table 34. Monthly Rental Costs as % of Income household income, it becomes evident that as income drops, rent constitutes a higher percentage of household income, often 35 Total 6,857 percent or more. "Affordable housing" is Less than $10,000: 550 defined as housing where households pay no 30 to 34 percent 0 0% more than 30 percent of income on rent 35 percent or more 417 76 /o $10,000 to $19,999: 1,203 (Appendix B; Affordable Housing Production 30 to 34 percent 49 4.10/a Goals (Fair Share) of the Regional Affordable 35 percent or more 1,102 91.6% Housing Strategy, Metro, June 2000). Based on $20,000 to 9: 1, 34 these numbers, 2,775 775 housing units in Tigard 301° rc percent 999: 491 25.6% ' ° g 35 percent or more 461 24% were considered unaffordable in 2000, or 40% $35,000 to $49,999: 1,408 of the rental stock. 30 to 34 percent 81 5.6% 35 percent or more 101 7.2% Combined with Table 34, 1,568 housing units $50,000 to $74,999: 1,140 3010 34 percent 51 4.5% had tenants with incomes less than $20,000 and 35 percent or more 14 1.20/c housing considered unaffordable. Currently, $75,000 to $99,999: 418 1,234 housing units are considered assisted by 30 to 34 percent 8 1.9% agencies and non-profits (Table 35). 35 percent or more 0 00/0 $100,000 or more: 219 30 to 34 percent 0 0% 35 percent or more 0 0% 15 Source: 2000 Census, 1173, STr3 Sample Data. Note that percentages less than 30 were edited out. Table 35. Subsidized Affordable Housing Units in Tigard City Limits, Spring 2002 Pro'Vide Washington County Housing Authority/ Single Family and Duplex housing 32 State Housing Division The Colonies 96 Bonita Villa 96 Rent Vouchers to households 180 vouchers State-administered federal tax credits to private 600 providers Community Partners for Affordable Housing (CPAH) Greenburg Oaks 84 Village at Washington Square 26 Single Family House 1 Tualatin Valley Housing Partners (TVHP) Hawthorn Villa 119 Total Agency/NonProfit Provided Units 454 Vouchers 180 Federal Tox re -funded units (private) 600 These numbers are estimates due to an unknown degree of duplication caused by overlap between voucher and tax credit programs. Source: City o/TigardAi/ordad/i Mousing Program, Sep!ember 2002 16 BUILDING ACTIVITY LEVELS During the last 10 years (1993-2002), building activity has remained steady. A total of 4,191 new residential units were built, almost exactly the amount built during the previous 10 years (4,262). For the 1993-2002 period, the most residential activity took place from 1993 through 1997, when almost % of the new units for the entire period were built. The last four years have produced an average of 263 units per year. For single-year activity, the most total units were built in 1996, and the least in 1998. The most single-family homes were built in 1993, but the most multi-family were produced in 1996. The years 2000 and 2001 experienced the highest value for all construction and alterations, including commercial and residential. 2000 also experienced the highest value for all commercial construction and alterations. Table 36. Building Permits by Year 1979 241 292 533 17,347 17,534 34,881 1980 229 71 298 17,230 11,62 28,854 1981 184 5 189 11,391 6,439 17,830 1982 117 0 117 13,344 6,117 19,461 1983 231 10 241 17,937 3,194 20,591 1984 175 34 209 15,889 3,053 18,942 1985 283 338 621 28,473 6,818 35,291 1986 415 126 541 32,863 11,804 44,667 1987 372 286 658 36,533 20,601 57,134 1988 297 229 526 30,333 24,364 54,697 1989 289 386 675 34,885 24,887 59,772 1990 303 287 317 40,013 18,133 58,146 1991 176 0 176 20,942 27,951 48,893 1992 298 0 298 32,130 20,375 52,505 1993 451 298 749 65,906 58,064 123,970 1994 344 108 452 54,042 38,022 92,064 1995 338 154 492 60,414 32,095 92,509 1996 409 479 888 94,223 41,763 135,986 1997 233 150 383 58,304 34,127 92,431 1998 169 8 177 31,728 39,267 70,995 1999 149 144 293 64,893 31,557 96,450 2000 252 0 252 87,697 61,195 148,892 2001 258 26 284 94,619 45,860 140,479 2002 221 0 221 59,131 15,585 74,716 2003(2/03) 44 0 44 11,746 2,110 13,856 Source: 1999 Tigard Database; Building Department Annual Reports and Monthly Tolals 17 Business/ Economy III.DoING BUSINESS INI TICARD Table 37. Business Counts in Tigard, Wholesale trade, retail trade and the service industry all 2001-2002 play a large role in Tigard's economy. Retail trade has the t t t r most establishments; and the retail and service industries RPM F employ the most people. This focus is also reflected in the Building Materials 13 13 specialties of the city's largest employers. Department Stores 14 14 Grocery Stores 13 15 The U.S. Census Bureau collects data on economic sectors Auto Dealers 4 3 every five years. Currently, the 1997 Census data are Gas Service Stations 12 12 available, and are included in this section (the 2002 results Clothing 31 30 are expected in 2004-2005). Furniture 14 13 Restaurants/Pubs 89 92 Data for this section also comes from the City of Tigard (not drive-ins) Business License Renewals and the Tigard Chamber of Drug Stores 5 5 Commerce. Source: Tigard Chamber of Commerce Business Directory, 2001 and 2002 editions Table 38. Tigard's 15 Largest Private Employers, February 2003 tt 1. Renaissance Credit Services Finance/Banking/Real Estate 1167 2. Meier & Frank Department Store 502 3. Nordstrom Inc. Department Store 503 476 4. Servicemoster Building Maintenance of Tigard Janitorial/Carpet/Windows 250 5. Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics Manufacturer 249 6. Quest Diagnostics Service industry 246 6. Gerber Legendary Blades Manufacturer 51 246 S. Home Depot Retail 178 241 9.Target Department Store 105 239 10. US Bancorp Equipment Finance Inc. Finance/Banking/Real Estate 234 11. Hewlett-Packard Company Electronic Equipment/Supplies 96 231 12. Fred Meyer Department Store 260 215 13. The Coe Manufacturing Co. Manufacturer 236 221 14. Landmark Ford Auto Sales/Service/Lease 175 210 1S. Sears Department Store 154 206 I Source: City of Tigard Finance Department/ Business Licenses. All numbers reported by the business. ( 'Number on record appears to be erroneous (70). I I 18 1 997 ECONOMIC SECTOR DATA Lr► the following tallies, the I►ighest nurnher is higillighted in each Category. Each category provides it different perspective on tilt- role, it perfornss ill '11gard's econoilly. Son►e categories n►ay perfi►rrll highly in nun►herof'estahlisiunenis, hilt others h~rvC strong sales. Others have greaser payrolls and jobs. A full analysis of each sector is required to lwovide the most aecuralt- reading of the city's eeouonry. which is beyond the scope oft he 2003 : linanar. For clefinit ions of Iernbs, sec Appendix A (page 25). Table 39. City of Tigard Retail Industry rr. err Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers 23 140,128 14,448 440 Furniture & Home Furnishings stores 37 72,456 9,754 368 Electronics & Appliance stores 23 70,513 5,754 224 Building Materials and garden 27 208,130 23,041 768 equipment and supplies dealers Food & Beverage stores 41 130,110 12,394 748 Health & Personal Care stores 23 26,483 3,622 240 Gasoline stations 19 40,347 2,368 166 Clothing & Clothing Accessories stores 56 162,419 20,747 1,520 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music 21 38,001 2,993 254 stores General Merchandise stores" 13 457,248 35,717 2,014 Miscellaneous store retailers 45 D` 0 500 to 999 employees Monstore retailers 6 D D 20 to 99 employees Total 335 1,429,402 139,695 7,330 ' (withheld to avoid disclosing data of individual companies; included in higher level totals) "Includes department stores, warehouse clubs and superslores Source: 1997 Economic Census: geladTrade, U.S. Census Bureau. Geographic Area Series- Oregon, Table 4: SummorySlolislirslorPlores: 1997. Table 40. City of Tigard Wholesale Industry Wholesale Merchants 110 114 111 439,087 777,088 1,628,309 Other Operating Types 51 55 69' 276,169 1,553,212 1,584,231 Total 161 169 239 715,256 2,330,300 3,212,540 'Other operating types consists of these categories: wholesale trade; manufacturers' sales branches and sales offices; and agents, brokers and commission merchants Source: 1997 Economic Census: Wholesale !rode, U.S. Census Bureau. Geographic Area Series - Oregon, Table 7: SummarySlo/itlirr/orP/ores. 1997 i Table 41. City of Tigard Manufacturing Industry r err err 1992 104 139,600 1.0% 284,400 0.9% 33 1997 110 290,001 1.2% 566,387 1.2% 37 'Considered to be the best value measure available for comparing the economic importance of manufacturing among industries and geographic areas, It avoids the duplication in the value of shipments that results from the use of products of some establishments as materials by others. See Appendix A for more information. Source: 1997 Economic Census: Manufacturing, U.S. Census Bureau: Geographic Area Series - Oregon, Table 4: ladwzySialislirs forPlares: 1997. 19 Table 42. City of Tigard Service Industry .rt 9 1199V Kind'of,B 1987 1992 'J99 1987 19 2 usihess Hotels & Other Lodging 8 6 5 3,986 Foodservices and Places ' 125 ' 84,405 Personal Services 23 49 31 3,824 9,442 7,195 Auto Repair + Maintenance 25 31 38 7,925 12,240 27,122 Misc. Repair Services 13 14 19 1,528 2,599 Arts, Entertainment, Recreation 11 19 12 1,952 5,289 5,885 Health Services 64 103 114 16,013 84,011 107,755 Legal Services 9 18 21 1,401 6,702 8,166 Social Services 9 29 25 1,442 5,463 4,836 Architecture, Engineering, and 57 73 60 42,015 85,435 Related Services Other Professional, Scientific ' 166 135,861 and Technical Services' Administrative/Support Services ' 113 193,969 Waste Management and 4 2,716 Remediation Services Total: 302 460 733 95,173 255,457 n/a due to missing data ' Not recorded in previous Almanac editions "Unavailable due to confidentiality issues associated with small sectors. Includes accounting, tax return prep, bookkeeping and payroll services; computer systems design and related services; management, scientific and technical consulting services; advertising and related services; and "others" categories. Source: 1997 Economic census, various tables for Oregon; 1999 Tigard Database (earlier Almanac editions) I I 20 APPENDIX A. GUIDE TO DATA SOURCES 1. Population Data The Census data presented in this report comes from the 2000 Census. There are two types of Census data: 100% Count and Sample Data. The 100% count data (summary file 1 - SF1) reflect information from every person in Tigard who was counted in the April 1, 2000, Census. This data was obtained through the short-form questionnaire. The sample data (summary file 3 - SF3) do not. include data from every person in Tigard. The Census obtained this information from the long-form questionnaire, which asks detailed questions regarding income, employment and residence, among other topics. Only a randomly selected sample of citizens receive this version, about 1-in-6. The Census then takes their answers and projects their responses to reflect. the larger population. While this sample is statistically valid, it is still a sample, and therefore has some inherent error. This data should be considered as estimates only. The difference between 100% and sample data. For example, if you were placing an order for 100 sandwiches, and asked each person what they wanted, the final order would represent each person's preferences with high accuracy. But if you decided to save time by getting a sample of 50 people's preferences (12 vegetarian, 10 turkey and 28 roast beef), you could place the entire order based on these percentages. You will have a small percentage of individuals who will not get their favorite, since the sample did not capture everyone's preferences, but it should capture the majority. As long as a minimum sample size is used, this small amount of error is considered acceptable due to the large amount of time it would take to count everyone. However, sample data must be considered as estimates. Where to find this information. Census data can be obtained by anyone with an Internet connection. The American Fact Finder portion of the U.S. Census Bureau's website allows access to this same data, characterized as Place data for Tigard, Oregon (http://www.censtis.gov). 'early updates. The Population Research Center at Portland State University provides 9 yearly population estimates. The center's website states its goal as the following: to provide ready access to census and other information on the population of Oregon and to provide timely analyses of the patterns of past, current, and projected future j populations in Oregon and of the implications of such patterns for key issues facing i Oregon (littp•//www.ui2a.pdx.edn/CPRC/about/index.lttml).. 2. Other Data Economic Data. The U.S. Census Bureau collects data on economic sectors every five years. The 1997 Census data were included in this document. The 2002 results are expected in 2004r through 2005. This data is based on forms sent to all mid-sized and large businesses, but only to a sample of the smallest, in every industry and geographic 21 area of the U.S. If a company has more than one location, all forms are sent to the company headquarters. A few industries are not covered by the Economic Census - agriculture, forestry, and fisheries; schools and colleges; and labor, political, and religious organizations. For more definitions of categories or to obtain more data, go to litt_l2:/.v-.vNv.census.gov/epcd/www/econ97.lit.nii Scroll down past the 2002 information to the shaded blue box on the right, and choose the sector you are interested in. You can then continue to scroll down, past the definitions, to the state information and choose Oregon for the actual data. SELECTED DEFINITIONS FROM THE ECONOMIC CENSUS: Retail/General Merchandise Stores: Establishments in this subsector are unique in that they have the equipment and staff capable of retailing a large variety of goods from a single location. This includes a variety of display equipment and staff trained to provide information on many lines of products (includes Department stores). Wholesale Trade. The, wholesale sector includes merchant wholesalers who buy and take title to the goods they sell, manufacturer's sales branches and offices who sell products manufactured domestically by their own company, and agents and brokers who collect. a commission or fee for arranging the sale of merchandise owned by others. The wholesaling process is an intermediate step in the distribution of merchandise. Wholesalers are organized to sell or arrange the purchase or sale of (a) goods for resale (i.e., goods sold to other wholesalers or retailers), (b) capital or durable nonconsumer goods, and (c) raw and intermediate materials and supplies used in production. Manufacturing/Value Added by Manufacture. This measure of manufacturing activity is derived by subtracting the cost of materials, supplies, containers, fuel, purchased electricity, and contract work from the value of shipments (products manufactured plus receipts for services rendered). The result. of this calculation is adjusted by the addition of value added by merchandising operations (i.e., the difference between the sales value and the cost of merchandise sold without further manufacture, processing, or assembly) plus the net change in finished goods and work-in-process between the beginning and end-of-year inventories. For those industries where value of production is collected instead of value of shipments, value added is adjusted only for the change in work-in-process inventories between the beginning and end of year. For those industries where value of work done is collected, the value added does not include an adjustment for the change in finished goods or work-in-process inventories. "Value added" avoids the duplication in the figure for value of shipments that results from the use of products of some establishments as materials by others. Value added is considered to be the best value measure available for comparing the relative economic importance of manufacturing among industries and geographic areas. 22 LG11671UIL1 1 11 a i Mir, - - - - - - Q- 0501 - GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM - 3 0002 i City of Tigard = 4^ Rod i _ Appendix B J, Census 2000 I' - 03 006 " r_ i{ w~ t I F 0306OU~ c Legend `'031809v ~i „ _ I °I 3~NTf i ( ® Census Tracts Tigard City Limits n`a.~mi - I Jj~ (tP °LL d/ T~"'`•-``""--`"'ii~_ I _ _ ' r-,~I plly MOW _ ( - ~ J~ as •~i~ T~ i~ ~ Ir y, ~~-tI~I I Oar , w^~"G`l_t.•I~;k~-1.. GZ a9 ' I °5+dS i'r-h,~tr ' t a ~u n > "~,~r I~ P~ I R Of l 1:' 1111 b 1 I 00 F-4L~- « t, I Lt~?• '~w'4,;~:7 4 ~y Ii _~.`"'i i :I MOUNTAI 6Iwi LL7 t?E3 r ~ lY ~C --Ez I 't I •r Cia~_ _ L.I E. 4 '-:031906 c - N 7 ' I -p II 7 I ~I 04 y 0 10002000 3000 4000 5000 Feel l / _ 1"= - 3500 feet I I Q' City of Tigard {r Information on this map is for general location only and 032001 I 1 I _ , ' should be verified with the Development Services Division. - 13125 SW Hall Blvd IM:: Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 1 httP:IM ig .or.us 032`0 Plot date:Wy1, 20WFAGISUOELVAapFlaker:apr Coriniunity Development x t , Appendix C TY of T1 I o I I IYo Y o I k l to I~f ! a I® N v M c r 5' ,,•Q;4 p~j 3 ro~ 2 r 1 II'y+ GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM 10 9 r 8 I P,rl4, I~~ Subdivisions R 1 , )S t - p~ TAYLOR"5 1 .FRRRY F y I q % hL n Le9end 1 Subdivision Locations I TZ74 2! I {-j I~ ~Ik~t~71 ~~~~~Nl. 3 n_ ~~i 1- t -J L -{~Sfi 1 ST c I 1 I' ( ~ ` ~ K v l 4 } ERR' ®I I ~ ~ ~ Tigard City Limits ° y , Miln 7-3 l.b Z _ l 1 7 I B Urban Services Area 1-1 A r a 7 _ ts~~l~ r Area of Interest 1_t7_~ J ,4 j,4 _ !rI/~J1~,1 k r c q~ ® I ~4`' AKO~ PLO STI, I. t1500 r v I c r n r LLl_L~l._.:__LJ1 !I1 r 4 y °'-f P ''j'C. ' W . I. Ii J~V,/. I I !r >I''i O T . I ~j1 L r~ : zs a v 011 I I u ! ,r t UT " z N ~1 :..,.~r~."I~~l,h I ' i• f C Ste .y i ~T' ! ! ~ ~ YI 12500.ri I ('-ib~.."~ I C c J7 I ty" R 1 1 r "'-'r}~ t to F I ~](~p~cp~ F ~Y IIJI J~~31Cy I L 46L Nox r t Gh ~oIL LI-LL n t-t I.~ w rr`~, ,i~+~a • j.... 1 ~ j,~luD V I- I h +"1~' t~t v l N 1 II . ~7 t~~, ®CJ' • IIY _ 13500 l I r, X11 /°n*, 0~-u• I f~ {}jam 1`IH 41 fir!®i. ' J, - " j E ' L~•'i 1,+n~ l~ * ~1 `~~~/~rt l, Q ~J J~ 1`~e'~i ~s t• • . ~.~R.D ®~ST y QPl7 ® ` q, i-LLjl } 73~ 1.C + ---14500 r'>` u r rl~ ~i i I ffid -Q-J, ti 1 :1 LTq; r-T 61 -V 7 ) F r~ ~Pl 73 o z~ . 1 W, I I Al Q, I IWWR 7 - ;F r ® 15509 -1 iju LCS 4tI^ ihi! `N City of Tigard i '""''-t° { A _ I li .~/l~'~' I,~ ~,,1~ I•~ r R' +•.tl~N~ ,T uu I .i®-'~~ , ® n`~.:: 1 r I I i- F 11 0 1000 ' h) aaoo 5000 Feet 14' 2000 3040-_.. . ; _ 60- 1-. 165 P, 1"=2500feet H r Information on this map is for general location only and WA - t ft DURHA r I should be verified with the Development Services Division. rl ~I ~r i -NMI I~ F; i - { ~ 13125 SW Hall Blvd { 1, { 0 ' Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-0171 1 Ix http://www.ci.tigard.or.us Appendix C . 1 r NUM UMBERMAREA'11341, muffallmilli AFTON COMMONS 722 H2 BRADLEY WOODS NO.2 735 H7 AFTON COMMONS NO.2 723 H2 BRAMBLE BEND 539 F5 AFTON COMMONS NO.3 730 H2 BRELYNN WOODS 469 F3 ALEX ESTATES 163 C5 BRIDGE PARK 426 E3 AMART SUMMER LAKE 58 B7 BRIE WOODS 472 F4 AMART SUMMER LAKE NO.3 55 B7 BRITTANY 103 67 AMES ORCHARD 468 F6 BRITTANY 150 67 AMESBURY HEIGHTS 330 D8 BRITTANY SQUARE 165 C7 ANTON PARK 97 B7 BRITTANY SQUARE NO.2 149 C7 ANTON PARK NO.2 98 B6 BRITTANY SQUARE NOA 126 C7 APPLEWOOD 1 602 G3 BROOKSIDE PARK 251 D4 APPLEWOOD II 601 G3 BROOKSIDE PARK NO.2 248 134 APPLEWOOD 111 600 G3 BROOKWAY 226 C7 ARI GREEN 176 C8 BULL MOUNTAIN ESTATES 427 E9 ARLIES PLANTATION 452 E4 BULL MOUNTAIN MEADOWS 313 D10 ARLINGTON HEIGHTS 531 F7 BULL MOUNTAIN MEADOWS NO.2 334 1310 ARLINGTON RIDGE 438 E7 BULL MOUNTAIN MEADOWS NO.3 311 E9 ASH CREEK CONDOS 114 B4 BULL MOUNTAIN MEADOWS N0.4 356 1310 ASH CREEK MEADOWS 136 C2 BULL MOUNTAIN PARK 493 F8 ASHFORD OAKS 612 G2 BULL MOUNTAIN PARK NO.2 524 F8 ASHFORD OAKS NO.3 609 G2 BULL MOUNTAIN PARK NO.3 563 F8 ASHFORD OAKS NO.2 610 G2 BURLWOOD 151 C6 ASHWOOD DOWNS 46 B7 BURLWOOD NO.2 139 C6 ASPEN RIDGE 527 F6 BURLWOOD NO.3 159 C6 AUM DOWNS 37 81 BURLWOOD N0.4 160 C6 AUTUMN HILL 630 G8 BURNHAM PARK 348 E3 BARBEE COURT 193 C3 BUTLER TERRACE 507 F3 BARNUM PARK 372 E4 CAFFALL'S CORNER 720 1-14 BARRINGTON HEIGHTS 664 G8 CAMERON 419 E10 BARRINGTON HEIGHTS NO.2 661 G8 CANOGA 327 136 BARRINGTON HEIGHTS NO.3 633 G8 CANTERBURY 465 F5 BARRINGTON HEIGHTS NOA 634 G8 CANTERBURY COURT CONDOS. 554 F5 BARTON 119 B6 CAPSTONE 187 C7 BEDFORD GLENN 715 H7 CARMEN PARK 286 136 BEEF BEND CT 658 G8 CARNAHAN'S ADDITION 106 65 BEEF BEND HEIGHTS 629 G8 CASCADIAN PLACE 161 C5 BELLA VISTA 624 G7 CASTLE HILL 220 C8 B_EL_L_WOOD 237 C7 CASTLE HILL NO.2 240 C8 BEL_LW_OOD N62 224 C7 CASTLE HILL NO.3 242 C8 BELL_W_OOD NO.3 221 C7 CASTLES AT BRITTANY 93 67 B_ENCH_VIEW ESTATES 371 E8 CHAPARRAL 28 A7 BEREA 389 E4 CHARDONNAY ESTATES 562 F9 BERKLEY ESTATES 703 1-15 CHARLES ESTATES 8 Al BEVELA_ND_ NO.2 298 D1 CHELSEA HILL 370 E3 BLACKBULL PARK 50 65 CHELSEA HILL NO.2 365 E3 BLUE HERON PARK 297 137 CHERRY TREE 218 C8 BLUE RIDGE 505 F7 CHESSMAN DOWNS 669 G3 BO_ETC_HE_R'S_ADDITION 142 C4 CITADEL ESTATES 36 B1 BOND PARK 672 G2 CLOUD 520 F4 BOND PARK N0.2 665 G2 CLYDESDALE 244 C5 BOND PARK N0.3 643 G2 COLES ACRES 442 E6 804D PARK N0.4 670 G2 COLES ACRES 445 E6 BONITA FIRS VILLAGE 460 E2 COLONIAL VIEW 404 E6 BONITA INDUSTRIAL PARK 448 E2 COLONY CREEK ESTA 462 E3 BOURBON ACRES 679 G7 COLONY CREEK EST.3 467 F2 BRADL_E_Y WOODS NO.3 734 1-17 COLONY CREEK EST.3 479 F2 BRADLEY WOODS 736 H7 COLONY CREEK ESTA 457 E2 Appendix C R. .pry ' . "r NAM umll ei+ - r W.~y, ;i ,LJUMBER't~"iAREAtita$eii COLONY CREEK EST.5 498 F2 EVERGREEN SPRINGS 444 E6 COLONY CREEK EST.6 456 E2 FAIRHAVEN COURT 387 ES CONDOMINIUM 666 G5 FAIRVALE 85 B2 CONTINENTAL HEIGHTS 492 F9 FANNO CREEK TOWNHOMES 654 G2 COPPER CREEK 690 G4 FANTASY HILL 363 E5 COPPER CREEK NO.2 701 H4 FILBERT PARK 421 E3 COPPER CREEK NO.3 707 H4 FINLEY PARK 439 E3 COPPER CREEK NOA 691 G4 FISHER ROAD WOODS 732 H7 COTSWALD MEADOWS NO.2 210 C8 FONNER WOODS 323 D5 COTSWALD MEADOWS NO.3 179 C8 FORAN 475 F7 COTTONWOOD PLACE 255 05 FOUNTAINS AT SUMMERFIELD 611 G5 COTSWALD 180 C8 FOX CREEK 653 G9 CREEKSIDE PARK 397 E6 FOXGLOVE 652 G9 CRESMER HILL_ 373 E4 FOXGLOVE NO.2 681 G9 CREST RIDGE 483 F9 FRENCH PRAIRIE ESTATES 543 F9 CURL ACRES 299 D7 FRENCH PRAIRIE ESTATES NO.2 540 F9 CURL ACRES NO.2 284 D7 FRENCH PRAIRIE ESTATES NO.3 526 F9 DAFFODIL HILL 470 F8 FRIENDLY ACRES 113 B2 DAKOTA GROVE 146 C3 FRUITLAND ACRES 117 131 DAKOTA MEADOWS 140 C4 FRUITLAND ACRES 231 B1 DAKOTA RIDGE 162 C3 FYRESTONE 296 D6 DAKOTA VILLAGE 107 B4 GAARDE PARK 406 E5 DARMEL 546 F4 GALLO'S VINEYARD 186 C5 DARMEL NO.2 569 F4 GEARHART MAYFAIR ACRES 143 C3 DARMEL NO.3 547 F4 GENESIS 360 E6 DAVID'S WINDSOR PARK NO.2 250 D9 GENESIS NO.3 338 D6 DAVIS PLACE 560 F9 GENESIS NO.2 355 E6 DAWN'S INLET 209 C6 GENTLE WOODS 588 G2 DEER POINTE 282 D7 GETTY S EMERALD ACRES 517 F2 DELMONTE SUB. 544 F4 GLENNBROOKE 368 E4 DELMONTE SUB. NO.2 542 F4 GOLF SIDE ESTATES 594 G4 DENWOOD VILLAGE 7 A3 GRAHAM ACRES 81 B3 DERRY DELL 342 D5 GRAYHAWK 575 F9 DERRY DELL PLAT 2 343 D5 GREENBRIER 490 F4 DOGWOOD RIDGE 145 C3 GREENBURG 118 B4 D_OREN COURT 135 C5 GREENBURG HEIGHTS 141 C4 DOUGLASS HEIGHTS 481 F4 GREENBURG PINES 203 C4 DOVER_LANDING 713 H5 GREENSWARD PARK 484 F3 DOVER LANDING N0.2 709 H5 GREENSWARD PARK NO.2 482 F3 DUBLIN PARK 229 C4 GREENSWARD PARK NO.3 506 F3 DUCK CREEK HOMES 358 E3 HAMBACH PARK 532 F2 DURHAM OAKS 675 G2 HAMPTON COURT 591 G2 DURHAM SCHOOL PARK 677 G2 HARTS LANDING 71 B5 EAGLE POINTE .383 E7 HAWK MEADOWS 455 E6 EAGLES VIEW 589 G8 HAWKS BEARD TOWNHOMES 77 137 EAGLES VIEW 590 G8 HEIGHTS AT BULL MOUNTAIN 392 E10 ELK HORN RIDGE ESTATES 435 E7 HELM HEIGHTS 552 F6. I ELMWOOD PARK .18 Al HERB AND PEGGIE'S PLACE 115 62 ELROSE TERRACE 454 E3 HERMOSO PARK 256 D2 EMERALD HEIGHTS 567 F6 HIGH TOR 430 E8 EM_MERY WEST 447 E5 HIGH TOR WEST 428 E8 ENGLEWOOD NO.2 44 B6 HILLSHIRE 329 D8 ENGLEWOOD N03 57 B6 HILLSHIRE CREEK ESTATES #4 337 D9 ENGLEWOOD 40 B6 HILLSHIRE CREST 316 D8 ENO_I.A HEIGHTS 205 Cl HILLSHIRE CREST ESTATES 253 D9 ERICKSON HEIGHTS 571 F5 HILLSHIRE CREST ESTATES 274 D9 ESAU 166 C4 HILLSHIRE CREST ESTATES NO.3 278 D9 Appendix C HILLSHIRE ESTATES 376 E8 KING CITY NO.7 660 G7 HILLSHIR_E ESTATES NO.2 374 E8 KING CITY NO.8 700 H6 H_ILLSHIRE ESTATES NO.2 375 E8 KING CITY NO.9 620 G6 H_I_LLSHIRE HOLLOW_ 303 D8 KING CITY TERRACE CONDOS. 636 G7 H_ILLSHIRE SUMMIT 425 E8 KINGGATE NO.2 733 H2 HI_LLSHIRE SUMMIT NO.2 416 E8 KNEELAND ESTATES 704 H4 HI_LLSHIRE WOODS 265 D8 KNEELAND ESTATES NO.2 693 G3 HLLY O_TREE_ 398 E6 KNOLL ACRES 254 D2 HOOD VI_EW 586 G4 KOVEN HEIGHTS 441 E10 HOODVIEW_N_0.2 585 G4 KRAFT PLACE TOWNHOMES 283 D9 H_U M_B_OLDT_CREEK 287 D5 KREICK MEADOW 676 G3 HUNTERS_GLENN 262 D6 LA MANCHA ESTATES 556 F2 HUNTER'S WO__ODLAND 317 D6 LAKE TERRACE NO.2 .241 C6 IMPERIAL C_T._ 606 G6 LAKE TERRACE 246 D6 IMPERIAL TERRACE 608 G6 LAKESIDE PLACE 596 G4 ING_EBRAND HEIGHTS 478 F4 LANDAU WOODS 24 Al I_NV_ERNESS 497 F8 LANG HILL 511 F5 IRONWOOD ESTATES 474 F9 LANG HILL NO.2 541 F5 ISAACS_ 225 Cl LANGTREE ESTATES 641 G2 JACOB COURT 199 C4 LAUN LINDA PARK 548 F3 JEFFERY 301 08 LAUREL GLEN 508 F6 JEFFREY ESTATES 84 B5 LAUTTS TERRACE 463 E4 JOE SQUARE 418 E5 LEE WAY 82 61 JOHNSON GRANT 268 D4 LEHMANN SQUARE 22 A3 JUBILEE PLACE 491 F3 LERON HEIGHTS 245 C6 KALAMOIIKA ESTATES 204 C4 LERON HEIGHTS 2 222 C6 KAREN_PARK 405 E5 LERON HEIGHTS NO 3 201 C6 i 4R_OL COURT 228 C4 LOCUST TERRACE 33 Al K_ER_RON'S CREST 310 D10 LOMITA TERRACE 169 C3 KERRON'S 6R_E_ST N0.2 328 D10 LONDON SQUARE 213 C4 KE_RRO_N'S_CREST N0.3 354 E10 LONDON SQUARE NO.2 214 C4 K_E_RRO_N'S_C_REST N0.4 366 E10 LUCILLE ESTATES 95 B2 KERWOOD ESTATES 655 G4 LYNX CT. 409 E4 KEVINGTON 657 G4 MAJESTIC WOODS 32 Al KI_MB_ERLYADDITION 230 C3 MALLARD LAKES 549 F3 KING_CITY_HIGH_LANDS 695 G7 MAPLELEAF 48 B1 KING CITY HIGHLANDS N02 699 H7 MAPLERIDGE ESTATES 42 B3 KING CITY HIGHLANDS N_O.3 698 H7 MARA WOODS 518 F2 KING CITY HIGHLANDS 140.5 '678 G7 MARG TERR. 91 B2 KIt_46-6 ITY HIGHLANDS N6.6 674 G7 MARION ESTATES 572 F4 KING CITY NO.1 573 F6 MATTHEW PARK 561 F2 KING CITY N0.16 719_ H7 MAYFAIR 127 C3 KING CITY N0.11 711 H7 MAYVIEW 306 D9 KING_ CITY N0.12 718 H7 MCDONALD ACRES 449 E4 KING CITY NO. 13 717 H7 McMICHAEL HEIGHTS 257 D5 KING CITY N0.14 627 G6 MEADOW VIEW 105 B3 KING CITY_ N0.15 _ 710 H7 MEADOWGLADE 223 C6 KING CI_TY_N0.16 613 G6 MELEY GROVE 69 B2 KING CITY N 0._17 726 H7 MELROSE 391 ES KING CITY NO.18 725 H7 MERESTONE 190 C6 KING CITY N0.19 724 H7 MEYER'S FARM 500 F10 KING CITY _NO 584 66 MILL VIEW 134 C7 KING CITY_N_0.2_0 714 H6 MILLER 164 C3 KING CITY NO.3 63_7 G6 MILMONT PARK 648 G3 KING CITY NO.4 697 H7 MIRA PARK 361 E5 KING CITY NO.5_ _ 626 :G6 MONTEREY LANE 728 H7 KING CITY NO.6 712 H7 MOORES MEADOW 275 D4 Appendix C N_t,IMBErt's`~REA zE.§'°4i .,,?b;°> ,+acs•. MBE r'4 AREA~~r MORNING HILL N0.5 234 C8 RAVEN'S RIDGE 434 E7 MORNING HILL NOA 211 C8 RAZE MEADOWS 537 F2 MORNING HILL NO.2 239 C7 RAZE MEADOWS NO.2 555 F2 MORNING HILL NO.3 235 C7 REBECCA PARK 702 H5 MORNING HILL NOA 219 C7 REDWOOD VISTA 440 E6 MORNING HILL NO.6 247 D7 REEL ACRES 122 63 MORNING HILL NO.7 249 D8 REGAL TERRACE 729 H6 MORNING HILL 40.8 258 D8 RENAISSANCE SUMMIT 614 G5 MORNING HILL NO.9 261 D7 RENAISSANCE WOODS 618 G2 MORNING SIDE_ 315 D9 RENAISSANCE WOODS NO.2 639 G2 MORNINGSTAR 379 E7 RIVERMEADE 686 G8 MO_RNINGSTAR NO.2 394 E7 RIVERVIEW ESTATES 687 G4 MOUNTAIN GATE 495 F8 RIVERVIEW ESTATES NO.2 708 H5 MOUNTAIN GATE NO.2 515 F8 ROLLING HILLS 357 E2 MOUNTAIN GATE NO.3 565 F8 ROLLING HILLS NO.2 377 E2 MOUNTAIN GATE NOA 605 G8 ROSE MEADOWS 270 D8 MOUNTAIN HIGHLANDS 381 E7 ROSE TERRACE 325 D5 MOUNTAIN HIGHLANDS NO.2 407 E7 ROUNDTREE ESTATES 318 D9 MOUNTAIN HIGHLANDS NO.3 382 E7 RUSSELL'S SCROLLS FERRY 227 C8 MURDOCK HILL 545 F4 RUTH 192 C4 MUTTLEY'S ADDITION 185 C5 SAGELAND PARK 731 H6 MYERS ESTATES 90 82 SALEM FREEWAY SUBDIVISION 403 E1 NACIRA PARK 195 C4 SHANNONDOW 89 B2 NODAK 138 C5 SCHECKLA PARK ESTATES 550 F3 NORTHERN 110 B5 SCHOLL FERRY ROAD TOWN HOMI128 C7 OAKEN GATES 17 A3 SCHOLL'S MEADOWS 292 D9 OBRS HEIGHTS 276 D8 SCHOLLS VILLAGE II CONDOS 197 C8 OMEGA 451 E4 SCOTT 189 C4 ON FONNER POND 322 D5 SEVENTY SECOND BUSINESS CEN 369 E1 O'NEEL ACRES 144 C3 SHADOW HILLS 473 F6 ORCAS ESTATES 667 G9 SHADOW HILLS NO.2 471 F6 ORGS HEIGHTS 271 D8 SHADY DELL 2 Al PACIFIC CREST 340 D9 SHANNON MEADOWS 504 F3 PACIFIC RIDGE 380 E2 SLEEPY HOLLOW 86 B2 PANORAMA 116 B6 SOLAR ACRES 466 F4 PANORAMA NO.2 101 86 SONOMA HILLS 488 F9 PATHFINDER_ 295 05 STANHURST 396 E10 PATHFINDER NO.2 319 D5 STARLINGS CROSSING 519 F2 PEBBLE CREEK 175 C8 STEVE & HUGHES PLACE 88 B2 PEBBLE CREEK 40.2 196 C8 STRATFORD 646 G3 PEBBLE CREEK NO.3 .167 C8 STUDIO ESTATES 682 G3 PEMBROOK HEIGHTS 513 F4 SUB 114TH PLACE 184 C6 PENMA_R TERRACE 499 F3 SUMMER HILLS PARK 154 C7 PENN LAWN ESTATES 83 136 SUMMER LAKE 68 B7 PENN LAWN ESTATES NO.2 70 B6 SUMMERFIELD 651 G4 PENROSE TERRACE 480 F3 SUMMERFIELD NO.9 663 G3 PHYLLIS ANN 72 B2 SUNRIDGE HEIGHTS 522 F9 F PICKS LANDING NO.1 688 G4 SWANSON'S GLEN 685 G4 I PICKS LANDING N02 689 G4 SWANSON'S GLEN NO.2 705 H5 PINE 111 B5 TAMI PARK 604 G4 PINEBROOK TERRACE '516 F3 TANGELA 207 C3 I PLEASANT VIEW 501 F10 TANIA PARK 659 G2 PLEASANT VIEW NO.2 503 F9 TERRACE TRAILS 349 E6 QUAIL HOLLOW - EAST 364 E7 THE MEADOW 215 C4 QUAIL HOLLOW - WEST 332 D7 THE RAZBERRY PATCH 16 Al QUAIL HOLLOW SOUTH X346 D7 THE WOODS 420 E10 RANCH VALLEY 124 B2 THOMAS TERRACE 157 C3 ■ Appendix C Wit. ' : - q ~ BE R~ aE ~t YNAME L 'n'wi _ s ' 3. :i NUMBEEMR THORNWOOD 529 F6 THREE MOUNTAINS ESTATES 432 E8 TIGARD PARK 170 C5 TIGARD TERRACE 269 D2 TIGARD WOODS 27 A2 TIPPITT PLACE 285 D6 TONY'S PLACE 412 E5 TORLAND ESTATES 133 C5 TOWN OF METZGER 38 B4 TRAVPORT PARK 345 D6 TRENT TERRACE 80 B2 TURNAGAIN HEIGHTS 574 F6 TUSCANY 390 E10 UNRECORDED PLAT 570 F6 VANTAGE CREST 486 F8 VENTURA COURT 112 B5 VENTURA ESTATES 35 Al VIEWCREST TERRACE 341 D4 VIEWMOUNT 400 E6 VILLA RIDGE NO.2 54 B1 VILLA RIDGE 53 Bl VILLAGE AT SUMMER LAKE NO.1 183 C7 VILLAGE GLENN 359 E4 VIRGINIAACRES 386 E6 VIRGINIA ACRES NO.2 388 E5 VISTA WEST 477 F10 WALMAR ACRES 280 D7 WALNUT GLEN 233 C6 WALNUT GROVE 259 D6 WASHINGTON SQUARE 29 Al WASHINGTON SQUARE ESTATES NO.3 21 Al WASHINGTON SQUARE ESTATES NO.2 23 Al WATKINS PLACE 320 D5 WAVERLY ESTATES 721 H3 WAVERLY MEADOWS 458 E2 WEST COLONY PARK 424 E10 WEST COLONY PARK NO.2 433 E10 WESTCOAST EVERGREEN HEIGHTS 536 F8 WHISTLER'S WALK 385 E7 WILDERNESS 289 D5 WILLAMETTE PLAT 333 D6 WILLAMETTE PLAT NO.2 344 D7 WILMINGTON 431 E7 WINDSOR PLACE 76 B5 WINSOME 331 D4 WINTER LAKE 173 C7 WINTER'S ADDITION 104 B5 WONDER VIEW ESTATES 423 E9 WCODCREST 362 E6 WOODCREST NO.2 339 D6 WOODFORD ESTATES 476 F7 WOODHUE ESTATES 621 G9 WOODHUE ESTATES NO.2 622 G9 WOODSIDE 1- 553 F7 WOODSIDE NO.2 625 G7 YE-OLDE WINDMILL 216 C6 . 11 - I Appendix D N 0,1 0 - O O O O O O O O o t O NATION SYSTEM O GEOGRAPHIC INFOR p r_ 5 I- Ir- Q. V 4 G,, 3 n 2 It 1 t~ J N O N g 7 6 I 10 m,f Y i % i I Apartment Locations t~ ,-,'Z',~~'. , ! . ~ I^ t4 IV TAYr~~~S 1 / TiigardCity Limits i. 0 y MRRY- I V. r- f / "a - - I.04 1 rl~~ / I 1 +1+ Urban 3erviceNea - City of Tigard I I / I Area of Interest c. I I I 3 a II 5Q01 1 Name ID Location + 1 .kY r Apartments 1 1 - . r I A Alderbrock 7 E2 4 1 _ I \ I _ Arbor Heights GS , , - I . . ~ 7 D3 , 1 1y I J -~t - I -,I Ash Court Apartment. 9 J G I ` 'I a`I /1 11 j Avalon Park + c _ t r- ~[I - - I 1 Beef Bend Court 6 Ge 1 r a s. 5 N6 [4 pi e,. \ r , , r BEAVERiO -I I ST' 7 I Biamark Court a e2 ! F~l r ~i - F /.\U `4:P y i R i 1 I Bonita Court p / 1 RI I''F~ y, 1 , .`r 1 I - t I.' I Bonita Villa Apartments 9 P2 I 1 ~ , - I lr l ,y' i tai L'r R~,..-o._'.:!.,Yt._.^'~r : l'+ I I Bri 10 P4 1(,/L,, 1 .~r t /1' '~~~y- ; : ~.,4, i`+ (.L n" U P ~"r . P: G- ~.t I I -l 10500 , eulihton HMountill ain Heights 11 P5 a _""un":. 'R,,:-,^ t~ 't f J_ I IL- -{`I~ m L 1 t~~ r^~ r - Carriage House - V1, I~y 1\ R,,. (`rS j/ C.. - l `l '7 [ t _ .B.'' Chalet Village 13 D9 t. ria~~r ^ C,~ i~ S` . 1 .n f' y _ ~ - I-, Z 1[=~~`i,tin+,r r- 1, rt , tll 1,}t Cr:F l ~ I Ce6 15 G4 ) t C J 'I_1 k - n 1 t i _ ' J _I~` r• ~t I Clubhouse Eats 14 E4 I p"!-{.1 `;6.,r- 1, r II NT l -JI cll f „r~II:~.J1. 2~ r ~"2. _ V° Cha[la[[enhoE _+~-..'r , L, I' I, I7~ I f I / i 1 / 4 ~i n )r 1t 1\ r, Yvq~ , 5""C'" 1 - 9pJ l crown aka 17 c4 r= T?= - r---r LL -•i "`r 1 •*6J, 'I 'fir,. ~r a'. 41 I ( Dakota Knoll ~'';_J Y'-'1 I14~ii'1` "I I / P{'./,-i1r--'N-t~ { JtL 1. V y r ✓ i11®' { ~T ` ._.I Dakota Station 19 C4 III -,i._ O it r P/ t tl , t t ♦ Dove. CouY[ 91 I ` P'~''g'~~ / L I st r r , ,r Uf~KOfflST ' I Dri fewood Terrace 20 e4 II II r > w r = 7 !"1 ~1 [r~Ir I - \+~J 4 r r O^ t'. I . r,:, Lt i/i "C ~i~ u ry y _ _ t, X11 f - - r 21 c2 H Il 1.- t , r --f r 1 I, Y , I A`' I , .i, Durham Estates 22 G4 -11 I _ l!~`- I I F' t. -t~,`•S~ ' /nX'-c _ r-• r ` r . 1. I 115GQ I Durham Paxk (•f 1 ,zM1. I Ir r_-._-, / -1 F l.~l ..t,--Ir .t,.. 14~ 1 1 I ¢dgewood Mano[ 23 P2 .LT-o..~."'iw.11 d'^1„~ 1 / ,y , ! ~1 1 I SS7 ? 7 'tv~, I (V~''f, c 1 I - IUT &n9leuood Terrace 29 BS { ( 4~.. . J'<l m- t I. "i` .yl a _ _ .C I I lr Fanno CcY. Village 25 E2 III !.V `-t Yf,,~ T:E... IV T 7~ 7 1. y ,`Z l (G 1 - Fr[ Grove Village 26 E4 .1 I "'-t { i I(i "ii j~l lj ,01. f Irff.7 y~ j 0 (llr I 27 C2 'li- C I - .I _ I Fit Gale Terrace * ,ii m g Qua - / ra ~ ~ ~l S' i r j ~..5 - I j Four O kideawav 2a ce ~ r ,~~d~~r i~ _..L J'k = I ~1~ T . ,(x L ~I `~1~Y r ; l' f(: I Four Oakes 330 C2 I _2 ~p:C'y la~lti'~I ~~if 1 uv( I.1, k' ,v.' ; 'I t ?T~_ I( A4 i 4 h y}~ L L_I Georgetown A artment. 1 I E~(GC1L..._. 7. ,tC`, ,._t,~;+~',~,j~ . 1i'it~'!:-. ++J I!. Yt~ 1, .1 Z. F \ h Glacier Lllyp 72 C4 1 ' tjll l i 'ce' , ^ `41i.. ,i~ f a a 7 R l~ ~tl:NU l 7 t4~ ~ 1 N , I Grant Manor 33 D4 f' Gip ~1, E1 fj~~, 11:1 J J i~,l i~~~ / , f' ~~`0 i ; r - }yl, t .Ir I r t ~ 7 L. 1 4 1 125GQ 1 Green Gables 75 C3 ff, IV r ~ I7.% , 1 aa"' t I, it 1 I- r,l ~Ct 1' / ~j Geeenbur Oaks 36 C4 11 - I . i,`~j f":I (~,Q~l " S1*~I ~'M 7f t- 1 1 y 'ti {~j ~ , L t U ' (v1/~~ p I G . Creenbu[g Terrace I-t j- ir ~I,,', l t-j 'tl _'I q I ~1 I f'~} ~,{~~',c'l, ;T',--U'm"`I 3+l ! -I. t' P,,~ V ' lf') I C[eenfleld Village 37 Ca t H ~IT`.~~J,!qqj a`~- L~ ~ Fl., r n t,1 1-' -T'-,,~ ,-~~o*: ' a, :r. _ ' ~ _ _ - r .1 Ham ton .ark 7B D1 { I.I;~ ~ : t ?p` 'R ,1 •F,F, h~ p Ti. XM X41; i~~a~ I t ~ ~ , j 1r 1 p y 79 D1 I ~t t ' `f t t : Ham ton Rid e ~u 'a1 r ~jl f L^~+F--y I(`~-t~ q[-'-r 1~'I I i.! nF rl lr c t 1- 'I I I i "-.1 1 H Jolenawthorne Villa 41 C2 -11 ~ -'~~"l~]'~ t ~~vv,mmrr,, ~ ~ I ~rir" JLL:L ~ p L J, I -1 -C-'+m~;T~h7 / J"d t, lC : I xi itcresc 41 Dl ~me41ro®E2p,VE ,9 I ~ t1~ 4 11, ~ FIPI = j'[ki i'"' 7 ( r4Yi, 1 J r ~I. e AparCmente 42 P5 i Wt -1-,~ + ~^7[: n ~J I St-1 \ y5'(] Gr'lir'1`11F, ' . J ~rJ Ii ,,j h ~ Y - ~ 0 I Karen Court Condos 944]6 5 D3 D3 D7 - Lord Chaucer Apaxemente 44 es a, II ' !V' ~ 7 ',h ,C ',-~t• , v' rtJ'i ~ t I / l h .(-1I -fir iu ,t 1' 0f. ii > ~ _ '13500 V n~ / ~ j +;/1 I' r I ' ~l S 1. iT~i i Nam Srxeet village i y f CC-- t / I ~ f1 ~I f~ * I `\t ,r r Manchester Square J Ma[lene yE P2 Ma[ciene i[ 1 .~~I t r o-/ ~✓`11 t I_h- i t (t\ I u L J L - I . '1` ! /F. ~t krl -nF z, it, t7l I a~ 7!• .r .,.1. I Marcue Lee 49 C4 -ft 50 C4 l..C' I I ~l~H ~fj F{ /~C1~, S, a~ E7 r.r. ~i,~G 1)411 ..t!U r I =Q' . _ _ I Mari-Rob Manor N W ~rVt[\~~ 1~- I McKenzie 51 D4 `0 - ti `i Qr~l 1 ~ <<! r 4 •1✓,r L I -I 52 06 , 41i,rILJl ~V i 1~,~1 -'n^ - j.l, 1 V Meadow Creek 1j j ~ T 1 ~u . u k. ; I 57 c7 t - n - --1 . Oakmont Apa r-~ , (i1) 1 I ~ ' ~ ` L - a ,4 Lj1 1 N , i~ 4-I , ' , OrchardB Parktmente 54 E9 ~~~i~7~ t , ~ ~ c` r l c I ~7jru; , -~r r~; ~r:..-.CS;, ~L (v.l"7a i..`✓, 3 s5 6 F5 1- h I I u" 1 4, r I 1 Pacl [ic CYeat Apai 57 09 ~'rt r. L~ IVI~ULV ~jj-~ F T J( F tmen[s _ I 14500 7 eacifit vi lla a 5¢ E5 ~~r Jt~?'-] LLr' .H,.~ "~k 1 r t 1 11 I o i pI _ _-~I~r-'LLLr1C i 1~.,'j~^l `i`f➢{ F-1"I • f „y t r lj t I j O~NjIA R~ . I "I Park P1.ce 59 t , l ` ill r,;-4 4. Pj7,yh t I _ ~ TI ~D 'r-M ~=U i r yF 1L~ !ll~~~ t 'a~ j Pa[kwood Apartments ES F: I , *f k 1- -IL• ~F-, 14 / J' E' 1 1 J'- 4 c { G I Plaza Garden 60 C3 I "p p-^1~FM r ,I1 ~L-...-1 r ~J r , iLf~ LI m ® ` ~ ; I I •1 Il.._ 4 / r~ J Y . I I Sherw Cou:C 6617 C4 I~ R "I lr~ 'E" I5 B'C I14-i-_7~.ral,-,.1 iIj . --7~~ 11, j I G, r5 ';r- _ I < u.l ' I Slver c 62 D3 I T n"/! u- ~.vjr I, i, d,-- ~4 lt-,1~ ';r- --l- ."L-,-.,.`--,-,,~,,__ , -I - - I 1 . - 63 ~ '.1 - ~:j It , ; ~ ~ , I. - "e R~ -fr: Y . H1~' ~ Fi~U r` ~ ,I C2 -1 , 6 " -91Fi,-------r? - - : .-I - :i`;~ "I.- 64 B6 i . F- - 1 ,.--i- ~rr 4 : - .-i r 1 ~,,`,-1 - l.t i' + / ~ Silver Creek ~,'~11. - - - ,L. I 1~- ~,"~-,L,:--",---,~,,~-~~-"-4"~ . - -]Tj I , ; . . r ` p- n*rt (f 1~•'I+,' L I jr~1f"1- i~~~ ~.e~. 1 ! Fl r.t t J .Y 0 _ ~,_/t ' j _ .Q I ¢pzingwood village 65 BI .L,.' ll a~1 f Cf ~ 1 G 7 Z Y` St dames Creek Aparcmen[s 66 07 A' - _ - 1 r 1 1 tj 5 -1 - - 11`r r. > [ ~7 U „ I Summer Ys rl I- 4LTlj; tl I I Ii" I ^r I S~I.1 _ 67 G9 4- 1 I.,,L ,rF ; I I f i'~e Il r i I SumaerEleld 68 Ce { 7I- II Sunflower EI ' C~ H t' i /~f(4 G. f I t I 155Q0 p I SumaWoade A arc ts _ -I--_- , ' I~N I•^TT _.n r<C'G_"" , /'r ! I t. •i i ~ ZI, Sycamore Terrace f l `1 a ~l't w , ' I - _wm w`~ men 69 E9 11IK~, _ u - _pk.. +`.LL i I L~- t` " i ' I 71 C4 4 , ([',`L'y','~,.~. r 1r""'le"a~ J- f' r 3 ~ 1 ti+. .r li t h rr 1 ~O Tamaryn _-_._.j 1 1 'fir ~ a -il , ut 1 V +1 t 3 I The Birches 72 CA t l t ( 'fhe Colonies 77 P5 ~T L I I The Maple Tree 74 FS 5[) 75 D7 J - 1 ii'-t +5.tf.'1\ I ~~v7.4 /r1! ,•,~t,_„'~ s~ x fh Ir / _ 1 Tigard Manor (Ash _ 'nom„TJ¢~` ~V F 4 J _ • I Tigard Terrace 76 D3 m 4 ~a ~ -I " _ - 11 jL.,_ t- l /E~CF ..e..x4"i~--y : I' C~ r' „ r I - Tigard Towne House n D3 1. I (1 9 1 200 In I~ I r y'~ IilF , 7 tl ~f i t it (`G >.,r -..I 1 1 L fl u ! I { 0 IQI - Tigaxdan Court Apartments 7B C7 Apartments 79 PS [1 ; f. NWn, 11 1 f t.. ~''~,r[ ~w -'I Timberline ao 03 ~1 ~I''~~~ L-..I.J a+ 1 i:. 1 IF h' ii 1 Viking Apartments 7 f W / / Village m Wash- Square et C3 I 1, - 11- t l r ! v .j~ L~-. 7' , /ll ( , ~7' Walnut Court Apartments 02 D4 ~t I f - 1 , n 1 L- C y J,.. i „ I Welling[one I . . - , , , . - . L P ~ II r - ~ _ i!l 11 Wa1nuC Place 84 C4 r H "I'll, 4 1 Eetates 85 F6 ! I iLV" ~7~ ywi-l ai - _ 1., Weatwoed Green B86 7 G2 i . ~i / r - - - 1 - William Reed r , I r 1, f~~; ~ ,1 A" III I DUPHAM ' Z I I I i william.b.t ee D7 n° r H kl" i 1 1 I i;Q. Willow Bend y N III ;dll \ g B9 03 \ fr i 1 4 , , Window. 90 D4 f-- i. ~ ~La,al' d tS' It f l t- I ~w I 1r , windmill 91 cs - ! pp l I - Y i 1 I 1 I I Woodard Park 92 D4 r ~ odaprin S, 1 n... _ _ _ _ _ - . ploldalei May 1, 2401 F:ICISWOEL MapMaker;apr" ~ommu velnpment ~b •O,/ _....yaae ua~e:a~e:ae~uow _ ............'o \~C\l w@-"- . -:--e+a O u V7.-ruEQu~"+.ur.,.au, „s :sv:.:..:sa "TZ labialaFJaiblNC CZ= )/a ..m'.-..`..~..-.'.~.:.~. .{.A.1. ~JWh.al.'+.+J ni )w ~ Ja..~.WLAACi%J.:i.:F.t;i.••t _ Y'-•~!"'.~~^u^~~,,~~~r,.:t..7.uit ~l we awa:~ u.:~+. amz n i.i.A:~.:.:,i.i~Yi;i ~6, ci:~l.,ii~{..ii: '-i • rrr^ MMMUZ •~.J a~uw+o:oa+an: A as O s.i C O . iaOGac aacwa rr^`_^ T_ . •.wr~Y txw.+.wwxwea ^ L... r"~ «k•"IIwa ~ .~,uva,_-u'-'+"it.. "•p• , ►'!I aNU~e~aaxou ~~"a,.,~~ ..~~~~~w~+~aui"" ~f ry-(n,~u1v.,,F;>,~, :'}gym - ==~"M., ~•~'C ^__'~i~il': .~re~u:'x'c ~^s ...a.e,yy~a.y .~^TM"V"~......_.~ _'_`------=-""a':ww+auwuV^+w.x. ON cr \ _ •heriiftCrereK~4retPlerea:Nx ~-;..+j,".~: yVm ^ ~ orohV"hCNtCrhMP~~iCR ~••y~•'..• err.-^.• ~ tt ~ ^TM ~ ~ ` Y~~ P mK1M>KKIOKM1YmfVV»Wt ~''r- ~ •••••••»»mm ~ nV..7rPNrL.PKrt,9KtC.hCKK,GK. _ O••»••••.•••••••.• :1.`KtwrfetY:KY-'IMMttoICMKf?Fa.•-..~~ 0i-~~~" Vl _ ye«~v....~.+..w.a....MKK1MMeKY.»Nf••.....~.v`^...~_ KthertCKt: a,.Y __.~~.p•`• >ftf%faKKf:Kt-"Kn'K K!>KY+i•••~••....».». t(" » m:mhatcra.:,:nYtcroK;eth:i-...................... mKfYOf'mKfYm~KKY,VWtiit..:...-.^ ~ :t%f:1mKfMKNKKKKK1.Yt~-..•-•-~..- ~ _ _ rtfi•~"thCreK'rt.GinrherhMrhhM•-.:.:•~_•,-.••~~•,~•• _ _ ~"~~tr,~rwr:f"'""Kr Y tmYmrmsnYmrtn,e=Kr yyL.~~a?yj*M~*1+':. _•_~_~.'~J~"' Kt~rrtKmM.rethhhh Yl~...:1"~ _ ,oKKKKKKKK1mKK,?t?KKt ~~ru~i'lit[Y:,f . _ V•M w...s_w"-' »mKKKKKKt^KKnnettmK :;:.h'...•.}.e~t.• '0'..fY~.. :KMK~KYt~K t OI-'~^ 0. K~KKKpKKKKKKtoKNNicI. ;m~^rri ~ . ~ ro.- meK.MK,hM,"oK•m:n ; mw~r-„-'~-."-'T~..-. .1>T?f~WYif~ :j{}_ ~ :fmKtmYfYmtp-~t'Im.:~~'• VI^••1 ,p ~M~~ ~m ~rt;pjr%Kr-rrt^-~• . 4rf^Y ~YoKf+f~f..:u~ _ ;,_.o~' V °~K.~.KlmtcKKKfkM~ ~ ~.61'~ ~r'"V ,t v,;,4...,r~:.~,,°, =~a.'c•: js • ~ ,.:K.eKKt::h:.h~>~" . cnw~~_ ~~F.»"~3»: ~Cr'T•\..Y.• >f:Mf:%KY,:KY:Kt~K1-Y N 1~•.... .f 3 Wi'n' _ ,~.,,.....,,..6T' M...• ~ ~Y:y~~l>Y.t~Vm itY`rW`~Y Y ~ K~ ~ ~1 t~ANM?KtNGfaKNMKKN_MKI '.:.:.:'C:.......1. .._a KKtn =rt^Krrt,gm^f^rx _____.c+Kr. r~xrcwK • w~'~M.~.A~flf~tM~MKi y~~~~~~ ~~W t'~~. rYr'!r Jsn1 '^'T-.: rr ms rr.n~~r«~r.. ~r...'.."'..'ry. "»fP".. -.mx' `Kf tei f~fV V't t trnV f't~1-t~t,. 1P•`~' t`r3?r. ;m ytyary.y`y'r___ I %r, ~~r!T'.;y~yt~k~t!~Y-~~___^____ 'K}~:KKY.t•`KWKKK1:tmN1-^.-• ^~/1-••---Z'^ Y.:h:'; r.Y. .i^r1Y.YRerY-^~^~r^ .t'lh:lMK1StL'ISINMK~•+..~. .~nRI.». MY~~t?f M~-^__ _ ~YKf:KNfwt%~tNKI%t'fmt?I••-~^•-•~j..V..~..w •~YYY1:fY"•t^flYt Y,^-T V :NKK'KKt~VmYKtmKKKf1K1.•».~.-•-~•.~»..--^V .w..,.. isKK'e:rt.Y.teRnlhixei:Y.4CKY4.-.'~.~-......'~.'7. ~YY~y t-Y~tW+f'~ - _ ~rm:r.K~ nronttt:KriY?t... - mer..ort.o• YYYr'i`YY • YYa •.••••:.••',Y.•.•.••~: • Y.r:r .:rm4'rhh:t7rh:rl:tPiiY-• n:KnKm:rr..Y:awKKKKrf..»»....,............._ N