The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 04/24/2007 City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 24, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED I:\Ofs\Donna's\Ccpkt3 Phone: 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.684.7297 9 www.tigard-or.gov TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 ORevlsed 4/20/07 - (Added- Discussion with Dave Nicole' during Study Session; Dort on Intergovernmental Water Board (See Item 1.4); and Consent Agenda Item Nos. 2 and 3 (Budget Amendments)) TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2007 6:30 p.m.* TIGARD CITY HALL - 1 SW HALL BLVD ~J TIGARD, OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Citizen Communication items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 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 by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deao. SEE ATTACHED AGENDA * Volunteer Appreciation Event will commence at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Lobby COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 2007 page 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2007 5:30 I'M • VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION EVENT 6:30 I'M • STUDY SESSION • Dave Nicoli -Tigard .Festival of Balloons - Use of Cook Park • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss labor negotiations under ORS 192.660(2)(d). 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(4), 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. 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports Update on Intergovernmental Water Board (Councilor Buehner) 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. PROCLAMATIONS 2.1 Be Kind to Animals Week Proclamation • Mayor Dirksen 3. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) • Citizen Communication - Sign-In Sheet • Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication • Chamber of Commerce Representative COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 2007 page 2 4. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 4.1 Approve Council Minutes for March 13 and 20, 2007. 4.2 Approve Budget Amendment #14 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Mayor and Council Budget Within the Policy and Administration Program for One-Time Funding for the Vision Action Network's Sustainability Feasibility Study - Resolution No. 07- 4.3 Approve Budget Amendment #15 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations to the Mayor and Council Budget with the in Policy and Administration Program for One-Time Funding to Tigard Safety Town - Resolution No. 07- Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items rrguested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 5. ANNUAL VOLUNTEER PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS PRESENTATION a. Staff Report: Administration 6. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 TO ADD NEW DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges: Does any Council member wish to declare or discuss a conflict of interest or abstention. C. Staff Report: Community Development Department d. Public Testimony Proponents Opponents C. Staff Recommendation f. Council Questions g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration - Ordinance No. 07- T. MEASURE 37 CLAIM HEARING (QUASI JUDICIAL) - E & V DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (M372006-00007) A request for compensation or waiver of Tigard wetland regulations for property located along Greenburg Road. a. Open Public Hearing - Mayor COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 2007 page 3 b. Statement by City Attorney Regarding Procedure C. Declarations or Challenges - Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? - Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? - Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? d. Staff Report: Community Development Staff e. Public Testimony - Proponents Applicant Other Proponents - Opponents - Rebuttal/Final argument by applicant f. Staff Recommendation g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Discussion and Consideration: Ordinance No. 07- 8. MEASURE 37 CLAIM HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) - ROBERT E. RUEDY (M372006-00006) A request for compensation or waiver of development regulations for property located at 14185 SW 100,h Avenue (1.14-acres). a. Open Public Hearing - Mayor b. Statement by City Attorney Regarding Procedure C. Declarations or Challenges - Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? - Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? - Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? d. Staff Report: Community Development Staff e. Public Testimony - Proponents Applicant Other Proponents - Opponents - Rebuttal/Final argument by applicant f. Staff Recommendation g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Discussion and Consideration: Ordinance No. 07- 9. FIRST QUARTER GOAL UPDATE a. Administration Department COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 2007 page 4 10. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 11. NON AGENDA ITEMS 12. 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(4), 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. 13. ADJOURNMENT iAadm\ athy\c \2007t070424p.doc COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 2007 page 5 STUDY SESSION AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING April 24, 2007 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon 6:30 Pbf • STUDY SESSION • Dave Nicoli -Tigard Festival of Balloons -Use of Cook Park • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss labor negotiations under ORS 192.660(2)(d). 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(4), 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 > Tonight's Agenda was revised (see attached agenda). Copies of Consent Agenda Item Nos. 4.2 and 4.3 are attached. > Red Hat Society Proclamation added to tonight's agenda (Item 2.2) > D.A.R.E. Graduation, Thursday, April 26 at Templeton Elementary; determine availability of Council members to attend. > Schedule Council vacancy discussion. > City of Tigard Balloon Festival Booth - June 15, 16 and 17; determnie availability of Council members to take a shift during the event. > Council Calendar: April 30 Monday Budget Committee Meeting - 6:30 pm, Library Community Room May 7 Monday Budget Committee Meeting - 6:30 pm, Library Community Room 8* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 14 Monday Budget Committee Meeting - 6:30 pm, Library Community Room 20* Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 21 Monday Budget Committee Meeting - 6:30 pm, Library Community Room (If needed.) 22* Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 28 Monday Memorial Day Holiday - City Offices Closed 29 Tuesday Fifth Tuesday Council Meeting - 7 pm, Library Community Room *Regular Council meetings. i 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 (2) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, If the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660 (2) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660 (2) (c) - To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660 (2) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this instance.) 192.660(2) (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660 (2) (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 (2) (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing . body is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660 (2) (h) - Legal counsel - for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 192.660 (2) (i) - 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 (2) 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 (2) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. 192.660 (2) (1)- Relates to State Landscape Architect Board. 192.660 (2) (m)- Relates to the review and approval of programs relating to security. i:%admlcathy\c ss - pink sheetQO071070410.dm I i Agenda Item No._3. For Agenda of Qafif, 21017 Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes Date: April 24, 2007 Time: 6:32 pm. Place: Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, Oregon Attending: Mayor Craig Dirksen Presiding Councilor Gretchen Buchner Councilor Sally Harding Councilor Sydney Sherwood Councilor Tom Woodruff Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Executive The Tigard City Council went into Executive Session Session at 6:32 p.m. to discuss labor negotiations under ORS 192.660(2)(d). Executive Session concluded at 6:50 p.m. Study Session - ■ Tonight's agenda was revised as noted on the Administrative first page of the agenda. Copies were distributed Items to the City Council. ■ There was brief discussion on the Red Hat Society proclamation, which the Mayor will issue during the business meeting. ■ D.A.R.E. Graduation, will be on Thursday, April 26, at Templeton Elementary School. Councilor Sherwood will attend. ■ City Council discussed the Council vacancy that City Council decided to will occur due to Councilor Harding's decision to continue this discussion at its resign as City Councilor effective today (after the May 8, 2007, City Council City Council meeting). Councilor Harding and meeting. Councilor Sherwood have had conversations with former Councilor Nick Wilson. Mr. Wilson said he would be willing to consider serving on the City Council again if the City Council chose to appoint him. Councilor Buchner indicated concern about process for making the appointment advising that there may be a perception issue from the community if Mr. Wilson were appointed without soliciting names from others. City Attorney Ramis advised that Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 1 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u the Charter gives wide discretion to the City Council with regard to the appointment process. City Council members discussed their options. Some City Council members had been contacted by individuals who are interested in an appointment as a City Councilor. Councilor Sherwood commented that the advantage of appointing Mr. Wilson would be his familiarity with several large City projects that are underway including the Comprehensive Plan Update, 99W improvements, and the Downtown development. ■ An e-mail communication from Brian Wegener regarding a Measure 37 claim (E&V Development Property) was distributed to the City Council. ■ The Tigard Balloon Festival will be held June 15- 17, 2007. City Manager Prosser requested City Council members consider staffing the City booth for a few hours during the event. Councilor Sherwood advised she would be unable to attend this year. ■ Measure 37 hearing proceedings were discussed. There was a question whether wetland regulations were applicable for Measure 37 claims. City Attorney Ramis said there is some question about whether wetland regulations would apply when considering a Measure 37 claim. Mayor Dirksen said he understood that if an approval if granted, it does not mean the Clean Water Services or other agencies' regulations would automatically be waived. Councilor Buehner noted that this is the type of issue that should be brought to the attention to citizens when Measure 37 claims are presented. Study Session Tigard Festival of Balloons organizer, Dave Nicoli, After discussion, there was (continued) - presented his argument whereby he was proposing agreement among the Mayor Tigard Festival to close Cook Park to the public for the exclusive and City Council members of Balloons and use of the Balloon Festival. He noted his work and to close the park for the the Use of financial support over the years to make this event exclusive use of the Balloon Cook Park "stand on its own." He advised he donates about Festival this year to see how $50,000 a year to the event. Mr. Nicoli reviewed the the community responds. activities being planned and efforts to provide more The closure will be evaluated Festival activities during the day. To reach the goal before allowing closure to of self-sufficiency, more people need to attend. He occur again next year. Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 2 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u noted the number of non-profit organizations in the community that benefit from participation in the festival though fundraising activities. Public Works Director Koellermeier advised staff has reviewed and supports Mr. Nicoli's request. A pass can be purchased for $5, which will be good for the entire weekend. Other services and activities were discussed including availability of handicapped parking, activities for all ages, and future plans for the festival. Study Session concluded at 7:27 p.m. Business 1.1 Mayor Dirksen called the City Council and the Meeting Local Contract Review Board to Order at 7:34 p.m. 1.2 Council Present: Mayor Dirksen, Councilors Buchner, Harding, Sherwood, and Woodruff. 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items Councilor Harding announced her resignation from the City Council, which would be effective at the conclusion of this meeting. She spoke of her service on the City Council and how difficult it was to make this decision. Councilor Harding will be moving out of state. Mayor Dirksen said that Councilor Harding would be missed. Mayor Dirksen presented Councilor Harding with a certificate of appreciation, a gift, and farewell cards signed by the City Council and members of staff. City Attorney Ramis commented on the procedural aspects available to the City Council as they consider how to fill the vacancy created upon Councilor Hardin 's departure. There is a wide array of options Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 3 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u available to the City Council. Mayor Dirksen commented on past methods used by previous City Councils when a vacancy was filled. He advised the City Council would discuss this matter again at its May 8, 2007, City Council meeting. 2. Mayor Dirksen issued the following proclamations: Proclamations ■ Be Kind to Animals Week - May 6-12, 2007. ■ Red Hat Society Day - April 25, 2007. Ms. Jill Davis from a local Red Hat Society organization, the Crimson Crones, spoke about the purpose of this Society, which was founded in 1998. Copies of the proclamations are on file in the City Recorder's office. 3. Citizen Tigard Chamber of Commerce President Ralph Communication Hughes presented information on upcoming Chamber events. 4. Consent 4.1 Approve Council Minutes for March 13 and 20, Motion by Councilor Agenda 2007. Sherwood, seconded by 4.2 Approve Budget Amendment #14 to the FY Councilor Harding, to 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in approve the Consent the Mayor and Council Budget Within the Policy Agenda. and Administration Program for One-Time Funding for the Vision Action Network's The motion was approved Sustainability Feasibility Study - Resolution No. by a unanimous vote of 07-25 Council present. 4.3 Approve Budget Amendment #15 to the -FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations to Mayor Dirksen Yes the Mayor and Council Budget with the in Policy Councilor Buehner Yes and Administration Program for One-Time Councilor Harding Yes Funding to Tigard Safety Town - Resolution Councilor Sherwood Yes No. 07-26 Councilor Woodruff Yes 5. Annual City Administration Volunteer Coordinator Bob Volunteer Roth introduced Library Volunteer Coordinator Program Trish Stormont and Public Works Surface Water Highlights Quality/Volunteer Coordinator Carla Staedter. Staff Presentation presented information to the City Council and community about recent accomplishments, ongoing activities and anticipated volunteer trends. A Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 4 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u summary of the information presented is on file in the City Recorder's office, including copies of the PowerPoint presentation slides: Giving a Face to Tigard's 1200 Volunteers and City of Tigard Volunteer Program By the Numbers. 6. Legislative Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing. Motion by Councilor Public Hearing Harding, seconded by - Comprehen- City Attorney Ramis reviewed the process for Councilor Sherwood, to sive Plan this legislative public hearing. adopt Ordinance No. 07-07. Amendment (CPA) 2006- Associate Planner Farrelly presented the staff The motion was approved 00002 to Add report; a summary is on file in the City by a unanimous vote of New Recorder's office. Council present. Downtown Goals, Policies, The issue before the City Council whether to Mayor Dirksen Yes and Action approve the Planning Commission's Councilor Buehner Yes Measures recommendation to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Councilor Harding Yes Amendment (CPA 2006-00002) to add new Goals, Councilor Sherwood Yes Policies, and Action Measures applicable to the Councilor Woodruff Yes Downtown Urban Renewal District to enable implementation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Key points of the staff report included: ■ The current Comprehensive Plan language is inadequate. ■ Section 11.1 is outdated. The amendment will reflect Downtown's new multiple-functional role for housing, employment and retail. ■ Economy Policy 5.5 recommends that downtown residential development be allowed above the first floor; this Comprehensive Plan amendment will allow stand alone housing in the downtown. ■ The relationship between the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) and this amendment is that the TDIP will be the resource for the Comprehensive Plan amendment and is identical to the TDIP's goal to create a vibrant, active urban village in the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and ensures a combination of resources Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 5 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u that enables people to live, work, play, and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. ■ The policies and action measures are found in three categories. Associate Planner Farrelly summarized the policies and action measures to facilitate an urban village. ■ This CPA will apply to the urban renewal district area, a larger area than the central business district. • Applicable standards and policies of the state (DLCD), Metro, and City of Tigard have been satisfied. ■ A public hearing on this proposed amendment was held before the Planning Commission. After one revision, included in the document before the City Council, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment by a unanimous vote. A copy of the March 19, 2007, meeting minutes of the Planning Commission summarizing their discussion on the proposed amendment was submitted as part of the staff report for this hearing before the City Council. ■ Amendments to the Development Code will be prepared for Council consideration if this comprehensive plan amendment is approved. Mayor Dirksen asked if the City Council if there were questions of staff. There were none at this time. Public testimony. Sue Beilke signed in as an opponent. Ms. Beilke said she supports the proposal overall; however, she did not think some items had been addressed. She referred to Policy 11.2.1 and said she did not see where natural resources values and functions were defined. Associate Planner Farrelly responded that the amendment is a roadmap to guide future changes and to provide a legislative foundation; more details would be developed when the Development Code amendments are prepared relating to the urban renewal district area. City Attorney Ramis noted that the amendment Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 6 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u represents general policy language and that the City Council could develop other regulations using this language as a framework. Councilor Buehner noted this amendment had been discussed during recent City Center Advisory Commission meetings. One of the primary concerns of the CCAC was that guidelines be established as quickly as possible so implementation of the downtown improvement plan could proceed recognizing there is a longer-term project occurring with the update of the City's overall comprehensive plan. Councilor Harding added that part of the reason for addressing this section of the comprehensive plan was to make it possible for development to occur in the downtown. She also noted that the strict City of Tigard Goal 5 regulations now in place would apply. She said the Downtown Improvement Plan should be allowed to move forward but cautioned that development should be monitored closely. Ms. Beilke suggested that it be stated that existing regulations are applicable. Mayor Dirksen reiterated that the purpose of considering the proposed amendment now was to keep downtown projects moving forward while decisions are being made on the Comprehensive Plan amendments overall. The amendment now before the City Council will allow City officials to determine what changes are needed to the Development Code to implement the TDIP. Councilor Sherwood encouraged Ms. Beilke to remain involved as changes are proposed for the Development Code. Additional testimony: Associate Planner Farrelly noted, for the record, an e-mail dated April 19, 2007, was received from Mr. John Frewing. This e- mail was distributed to the City Council and is on file in the City Recorder's office. Mr. Frewing advised of his concerns in that the "...proposal departs grossly from common sense and prior practice of this City Council wherein changes are evaluated against all of the State Land Use Goals and judged to be relevant or not relevant." Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 7 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Mayor Dirksen asked if the City Council had questions or if staff had rebuttal comments to testimony received. Associate Planner Farrelly advised that natural resources regulations would be taken into account for future development. Staff recommended approval of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Council comments: Councilor Buehner referred to the CCAC's position that it is important to get this amendment through as soon as possible. Councilor Woodruff noted this matter has been under review and supported the amendment as the next step to move ahead. Councilor Sherwood agreed that the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is "Just the start." Councilor Harding indicated she also supports moving forward with this amendment; in fact, the process followed up to this point has potential for national recognition. Mayor Dirksen also agreed that this is a step in the process to begin work on the downtown. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. City Council considered Ordinance No. 07-07: AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2006-00002 TO REPLACE THE DOWNTOWN CHAPTER OF VOLUME II OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADD NEW GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES AND AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 5.5 Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 8 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u 7. Measure 37 Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing. Motion by Councilor Claim Hearing Buchner to adopt Ordinance (Quasi-Judicial) City Attorney Ramis reviewed the procedures No. 07-08 to approve the - E & V for this quasi-judicial hearing. waiver. There was no Development second; the motion was not Company City Council Declarations: Councilor Buchner considered by the City (M372006- advised she represents two property owners whose Council 00007) land abuts this property. The Mayor asked if there Associate Planner Caines presented the staff was any support for a report. E&V development Company seeks a waiver continuance of this item. of current land use regulations that restrict development within wetlands on a .41 acre site Councilor Woodruff said he located on Greenburg Road, south of Highway 217. would be interested in The Council Agenda Item Summary for this matter hearing what Clean Water is on file in the City Recorder's office. Services would have to say about this application. He Staff recommended the proposed ordinance be would be open to reviewing adopted, which would grant a Ballot Measure 37 this later with input from waiver of the Tigard Development Code CWS. City Attorney Ramis wetland regulations, to run with the person and said the only way to get more not the land. A copy of the proposed ordinance is information for this process on file in the City Recorder's office. would be to continue the matter, with the concurrence Mayor Dirksen referred to a map and requested of the applicant and get a clarification of what areas are wetlands. Associate waiver from the 180-day Planner Caines identified a area around Ash Creek, time limitation from the which is a significant wetland. Another area is a applicant, and then have the buffer area around the wetland which is regulated by staff work further on the Clean Water Services. Associate Planner Caines process. confirmed that the buffer area could be considered developable property if it was not located adjacent Discussion followed, to a wetland. including advice by City Attorney Ramis that the Public Testimony: Council could make a motion to deny the claim, Applicant Eugene Davis noted he and his wife, then staff would return with Vivian, purchased this land in 1969. He reviewed an ordinance reflecting the the key points of his request: Council's decision for the Council to consider. ■ They would like to develop this property. Motion by Councilor ■ He said that since he has filled out the Measure Harding, seconded by 37 application, he has hired an architect. Councilor Sherwood, to deny the claim. Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 9 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u ■ They would like to build up to a six-plex and have the same privileges they had when they The motion was approved bought the property. by a majority vote of Council present. He advised his architect was available to answer any technical questions. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buchner No Mayor Dirksen asked City Council if there were Councilor Harding Yes any questions. Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes Councilor Buchner asked if Mr. Davis had done an analysis of the FEMA 100-year floodplain. Mr. The staff will return with an Davis said yes. She asked if any of this property was ordinance for the City within the 100 year flood plain. Mr. Davis Council's consideration on confirmed some of the property was within this May 22, 2007 on this matter. flood plain and acknowledged that they would need to deal with that according with the FEMA plans. In 1979 Mr. Davis received a permit from FEMA; he said he has those drawings when the Ash Creek Condominiums were built (60 units). He noted this one lot was not built, which they planned to develop later. The 100-year floodplain was delineated for this lot. Councilor Buchner asked Mr. Davis if he was aware that this floodplain was recently amended. Mr. Davis said, no. But, he said since the property was developed in 1979 and there have been two "more than" 100-year floods and none of the condominiums "got wet." The 100-year floodplain, as FEMA had it delineated originally, said Mr. Davis, is the true 100-year floodplain. In response to a question from Councilor Buchner, Mr. Davis said he had not applied for a permit from Clean Water Services. He said he did what was necessary to file the Measure 37 claim. Mr. Davis said he believed he had filed a claim with the State. In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff, Mr. Davis confirmed he bought a large parcel of land a number of years ago, developed part of it and saved a parcel, which he planned to build on later. The reason he did not do it initially, was because they could not afford it. Councilor Woodruff asked Mr. Davis what his plans had been prior to the arrival of Measure 37. Mr. Davis said he always thought somehow this could Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 10 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u be developed. He noted they tried to develop earlier, but there were too many obstacles because of the wetland issues. He said, "...everyone loves to look at water that belongs to someone else." Additional public testimony: Robert Ruedy testified in favor as a proponent of the Measure 37 claimants to retain all of their land use options available to them at the time of original purchase or moment of initial ownership. The will of the majority of voters have created this property rights law for its most loyal long term citizens and taxpayers and he stated he wished to reflect his full support of its implementation. He suggested that opponents to the Measure 37 claim buy the property at the Measure 37 protected prices and enjoy the property and all it has to offer. Paul Sedoric, of Salem, Oregon testified as the owners' architect. He advised he has only had time to work on the conceptual stage with regard to the best development for this property. He created some drawings and left a copy as an exhibit with the City Recorder. At the time of application, Mr. Davis proposed to do some type of residential development. It looks as if there would be no problem to place six units (condominiums). He described an L-shaped, three-story building. The market would be for "empty nesters" or people who only want a single-level condominium. He noted there would be underground (below grade parking). In reviewing an aerial photograph, there would be little impact to the wetland habitat. There are no plans to place the building right up against the creek. The waiver of requirements, he explained, was really a request for a waiver of the buffer requirements. He noted he had a site plan and a projected floor plan. Because of the location, adjacent to Greenberg Road, they would be looking at a minimum amount of windows on that side of the structure. The building would offer "fantastic views" of the wetlands. City Attorney Ramis asked if there has ever been a wetland delineation done for the property. Mr. Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 11 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Sedoric said "not to my knowledge." Mr. Sedoric said the map used by the City was probably created for the City by a professional who was paid to develop a general wetland map. City Attorney Ramis asked if the applicant would be developing a wetland analysis for the property? Mr. Sedoric answered that "I think we will have to because even though the procedure is being waived by the City ...if approved tonight ...we still have Clean Water Services ...DSL...and Corps of Army Engineers," which all have regulations. There were would be simultaneous action and review by these other agencies. Mr. Sedoric said it would go back to when the authority was gained over the wetlands. He said that he thought "we might beat DSL out on that and I am pretty sure we beat Clean Water Services out on that date, but I doubt if we beat out the Corps of Army Engineers. He said typically, "they watch out for each other." He said he was sure the Corps of Army Engineers would look at it more thoroughly if they were aware of regulations in place through Clean Water Services. He said they expect they will have to deal with the various agencies and comply with standards in effect in 1967. Opponents: Brian Wegener testified representing Tualatin Riverkeepers. Mr. Wegener had submitted written testimony to the City Council and Council members confirmed that they had a copy. Measure 37 and Tigard's rules about Measure 37 say that claims may be denied if the regulation protects public health and safety or if the regulation is required by federal law. Tigard's Development Code (Sensitive Lands) makes the purpose of the sensitive lands regulations clear: Sensitive lands areas are designated to protect public health, safety, and welfare of the community through regulation of these sensitive lands. The public health and safety conditions for which the Council could deny this waiver exists in the City Code. Further, 18.775 states that the regulations of this Chapter are intended to protect the beneficial uses of water in the Tualatin River Basin in accordance with Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards adopted in February 2000. Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 12 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u He said this language comes from the Federal Clean Water Act. Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards are conditions of their municipal storm sewer permit issued by the Department of Environmental Quality. Since the City of Tigard operates part of the municipal storm sewer system, Clean Water Services must have the authority to regulate, which is done through an intergovernmental agreement (IGA). Mr. Wegener said the IGA says the City must uphold the Design and Construction Standards; these cannot be waived or it would be a violation of the Clean Water Act subject to penalties. The IGA states that if these penalties are imposed, the City will hold Clean Water Services harmless. Mr. Wegener noted the $398,150 claim, but it is not supported by a market study or appraisal. Further, there is no wetland delineation, no platting of where the land is. He questioned how the applicant could determine the amount of damage. Mr. Wegener said he thought the Council's time was more valuable than to be spent evaluating incomplete applications. For that reason alone, he said the City's rules say that incomplete applications may be denied. He said the strongest argument against approval of this claims lies with the need to comply with the regulations for a storm water permit. Next, he said the City's Development Code says that the purpose of the Code is to protect the public's health and safety. Mr. Wegener and Councilor Buehner responded, "yes" to a question from Councilor Sherwood regarding regulation language that strictly states denied if public health and safety is affected. Mayor Dirksen called for discussion on this request. He thanked Mr. Wegener for bringing up these issues earlier and noted that the City Attorney has reviewed Mr. Wegener's information. City Attorney Ramis said that another jurisdiction is litigating a very similar case where the city has denied a Measure 37 claim based on the theories Mr. We ever is offering. On the question of whether or Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 13 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u not the claim can be denied on the theory the regulation protects health and safety, the issue is this: Is it sufficient that the ordinance simply says it's a health and safety issue, as many ordinances do. Or, is it necessary to show that because of circumstances for this property there are public health and safety issues. This is ultimately what will be litigated. City Attorney Ramis said that, while this is the correct issue, he could not say that as a matter of law, yet, that the City would be compelled to deny the application. He said he thought it was a matter of judgment by the City Council until there is further guidance from the Court. City Attorney Ramis said that on the question of whether the City Council could deny based upon federal law requirements, at this point it is attenuated insofar as it is a requirement and the City has agreed through an agreement with Clean Water Services to have regulations.. City Attorney Ramis said it was not clear to him that the IGA requires the City to deny Measure 37 claims. The Court may say so, but at this point there is no case law. City Attorney Ramis said he would be comfortable defending a Council decision either way. He said he did not think the staff's recommendation was necessarily the incorrect one. He suspected that if the Council concurred with the staff's recommendation, the forum for resolution of this dispute shifts to the State. The applicant clearly recognizes that they need to go to other jurisdictions to get waivers. City Attorney Ramis said he thought it had become clear tonight that would include Clean Water Services; they have already filed with the state, and without doubt, the Corps of Engineers would have an interest in this property. City of Tigard is not the only jurisdiction that "will have a hand in this." Mr. Wegener said the Corps of Engineers and the Department of State Lands regulate the wetlands. He said the City's storm water permit, which is part of the Design and Construction Standards, includes those buffers; however, they are also in the Community Development Code, 18.775.090. Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 14 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Dan Tanner, noted his concerns about this development with the possibility of six units "crammed on this tiny ...piece of property." He said he and others have concerns that this development would change the appearance of their entryway. Now, they have a "nice, open entry ...when you have this totally different building up front, it will change it dramatically." He asked about impacts to parking lot resources. Mr. Tanner said he did not see anything in the way of a plan. He said he bought his property with a nice, open lot and he realized later on that it was not part of Ash Creek Park, but it was owned by the Davis's. He said he hoped there was some concern for the owners who have bought land "with things being as they are." Sue Beilke submitted written testimony for the record, which is on file in the City Recorder's office. She agreed with Mr. Wegener's comments. She reiterated that the applicant seeks to avoid wetland regulations, "...but we citizens of Tigard rely on City regulations" to help protect our streams, our corridors, buffers, water quality, flooding - the health and safety of all the citizens. She said she does not the City to provide a waiver and pass this onto a higher body, such as the state, to rule on this. She asked the Council to rule on this matter tonight as it is really important. Ms. Beilke said Measure 37 was passed by the majority of voters; however, she said she thought there was a general consensus that this measure would allow property owners to develop in cases where they had been denied that ability. She said this landowner does have the ability to develop. She asked that the waiver be denied so the existing streams and buffers are protected. She said she was referring to 18.775, of the Tigard Development Code, which addresses Ash Creek and the wetlands. The Code language also provides for a 50-foot vegetative corridor. The purpose of the Tigard Development Code is to maintain the integrity of the rivers, streams and creeks in Tigard by minimizing erosion, promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quality. She said she thinks that these would all be things that the owner wants to do so no one would move in and be flooded or have the bank fall apart as has been Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 15 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u experienced on coastal properties and some areas in the state of Washington. There is little of this sensitive land in Tigard and urged the Council consider how development would affect everyone. She noted the property owner would still be able to develop the property, although "it would be a little bit less." Applicant Rebuttal: Mr. Davis said that well over a million voters in Oregon voted for Measure 37. Not even .8 of 1 percent of the land in Oregon is impacted by Measure 37. He said this property is only .41 acres and a good deal of this in the 100-year flood plain that is not available to develop. Mr. Davis said he does have a 100-year flood plain delineation. Everyone, including him, wants open land from someone else's property. The fact is, "this is our lot and we have a right to build on it, I believe." Mr. Sedoric said that they would be regulated as far as water quality and storm water runoff. All of these are important issues and they have an equal amount of concern as do the citizens for the water quality of Ash Creek. The development would be designed to meet standards by Clean Water Services and meets runoff requirements. There are opportunities for a more urban development. Councilor Sherwood asked if it is the applicant's plan to meet all of Clean Water Services regulations, then why is the Council being asked to waive the City's regulations? Mr. Sedoric qualified that he only recently became involved in this project, but it appears that because of regulations, there is no buildable site left in the area. He said most codes allow that at least one unit be allowed on each site and, therefore, there is a substantial amount of financial loss (one unit vs. six). He said staff might be able to answer questions about regulations better than he can. Councilor Sherwood asked how many units are allowed to be built on the site. Planning Manager Bewersdorff said staff does not know at this time; Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 16 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u the project would go through the site development review process. Density calculations must be reviewed and, based on what the Code allows, the applicant will be allowed to build a certain number of units. He said the staff's recommendation for the waiver would avoid potential litigation and associated costs of litigation. CWS, Corps of Engineers, and DSL requirements would "come into play." These are very similar requirements adopted in 1984. All of the City's subdivisions and developments were required to go through those review processes if wetlands were involved. Planning Manager Bewersdorff confirmed Mayor Dirksen's statement that if the City waives its regulations, there is no loss in regulations because of other agencies' regulations that are in place. Councilor Woodruff asked what is buildable or developable on this property without any kind of waiver. Planning Manager Bewersdorff said that until there is a site plan and wetland delineation, staff will not know the answer to this question. Planning Manager Bewersdorff said based on the area there are ways to develop parts of the property. Councilor Buehner said it was her understanding that the City adopted CWS standards with regard to wetlands and buffers. Planning Manager Bewersdorff confirmed this understanding and added that there axe additional regulations that apply through the Safe Harbor Act (state regulations). Councilor Buehner said that if we waive our code, then we are not waiving anything that they would not need to address because of other jurisdictions' regulations. Planning Manager Bewersdorff said that is correct. City Attorney Ramis asked staff if the site is developed, does the applicant need to go to DEQ to get a discharge permit. Planning Manager Bewersdorff said such a permit would be needed depending on the number of units and parking lot requirements. They will also need to deal with storm drainage, and sewer and water system requirements along with evidence that the meet Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 17 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u traffic requirements. Mayor Dirksen said it was his understanding there was an option available to the City to reach an agreement with the applicant to continue this process until they do development review and submit plans. Then, the City Council could evaluate what Measure 37 claim may exist or attempt to mitigate. Perhaps the best thing to do is to continue this hearing until additional information is submitted by the applicant. City Attorney Ramis confirmed that the City Council does have this option if the applicant agrees to continue the proceeding to allow further review of the project. The City could also enter into a settlement agreement if it wished to do so. Mayor Dirksen asked if this was something the applicant would consider. Mr. Davis said he was here to do "whatever you guys tell me." He said he would like for this to be as simple as possible to avoid additional meetings. , Mayor Dirksen said he was fairly certain staff would recommend the course of action to avoid litigation and complications. But, as a Council they need to look at what is the fairest and best. Planning Manager Bewersdorff said staff has some concern as they were reacting to the claim that was submitted. When this goes through the development review process, there could be a potential for another claim. In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff, Mayor Dirksen advised he is suggesting that the Council continue this claim and ask the . applicant to move forward with a development application so there would be information to review and determine what the impacts would be and determine if there is possibility for a settlement agreement, which might include a partial waiver as opposed to a "blanket waiver." Councilor Sherwood said she agrees with the staff recommendation. She would prefer not "dragging this out for months" and then have more claims filed. Councilor Hardin noted her dismay at what this is Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 18 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u costing the City even for this review. She said she was not anti-Measure 37 as it has its merits, but she said there was a need to consider what was the intent of the voters. She said she was disappointed in this claim noting the property has been there for 40 years and the applicant has waited until the very end to make a claim. She referred to the circumstance where regulations imposed by the Army Corps of Engineers made it too costly for the City to make improvements to Greenburg Road. With regard to the applicant's testimony concerning the desirability of property along waterways, she noted that Fanno Creek and Tualatin River have been cleaned up in recent years, which has been better for the community. She noted the property is assessed at $1800 and a yearly tax bill of $25. Councilor Woodruff said he was sympathetic to the Davis's in that in some way he thinks this represents the type of situation, which led to the passage of Measure 37. However, it sounds as if this will not be developable because of CWS regulations and approval of the waiver might appear as if the City was just "passing the buck" to another agency. He said Tigard could decide to "take the heat" and become the first jurisdiction to say no to this request. Councilor Woodruff commented on the Measure 37 claims that have come before the Council, which have been approved if it appears to fit the intent of the Measure 37 law. However, he said he did not think it was the City's intention to "roll over" on every application that comes forward if there are other mitigating circumstances and to consider the benefit of the entire community. Councilor Sherwood commented that the reason why the existing condominiums haven't been flooded is because there are wetlands and a buffer there to protect them. She referred to her recent visit to New Orleans where she saw what has happened because all of the wetlands had been dried up and used for development. She came back with a new outlook and appreciation for the function of wetlands. She said she questions whether this case falls under what the intent was for Measure 37 because of the risk to public health and safe to our Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 19 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u community. Councilor Buehner said she, as a real estate lawyer, works with a lot of clients who own property who deal with wetland and buffer issues and work with CWS and the state. Whatever the City Council does would be irrelevant because of the standing regulations of other agencies. She expressed her personal dislike of what the applicant was planning to do on the property; however, she is elected to do what is in the best interests of the City. She said she did not think the applicant, in the end, will be able to develop very much. She said she was very hesitant to have the City take on potential liability when all they would be doing is implementing regulations that other jurisdictions have asked the City to implement. Mr. Davis responded to the Mayor's question about whether the applicant would consider continuing the application. He said he would like to continue this process, do more work to determine more answers. Staff recommendation: Planning Manager Bewersdorff said the staff recommendation is that the waiver be granted. Councilor Sherwood commented on testimony (Mr. Tanner) about how this affects people living in the condominiums. These issues cannot be addressed by the City Council. The Measure 37 claim has to do with waiving regulations only - not how it would affect the view from another property. Mayor Dirksen also spoke to Mr. Tanner's concerns. He said the only thing being considered tonight was whether to waive the wetland requirements. If the developer wants to develop additional areas of the property, he would still need to meet all other development codes; i.e., parking, setbacks, etc. Mayor Dirksen noted his interest in what was said by Mr. Wegener with regard to public health and safety and also to the City Attorney's insight on this matter. City Attorney Ramis confirmed that Measure 37 gives specific allowance to waive Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 20 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u regulations that have impact on the value of property. In a situation where a City concludes that it might be facing financial risk for not granting the application, it can then waive. Mayor Dirksen commented that it might seem desirable to take the brave course and deny the claim and risk litigation, and risk other people's money. However, the money that would be at risk would be the money of the citizens of the City of Tigard. Therefore, it behooves the City Council to not necessarily make the most courageous choice, but to make the prudent choice. If he were to vote in favor it would be because he would be comforted in knowing there would be other agencies that would have to consider this claim. He said he did not hear anything tonight that would give the Council the allowance to deny the claim based on Measure 37. But, he did not think this was the type of situation for which Measure 37 was intended. Mayor Dirksen said he thinks even the Measure 37 proponents would agree that there have been unforeseen consequences as a result of the passage of Measure 37. Measure 37 was written, and the spirit of the law, was to deal with issues where zoning and comprehensive planning have changed the allowable uses of properties. Because of the way the measure was written, environmental regulations or changes in codes for regulations on items such as streets and sidewalks, also fall under the Measure's effect. Mayor Dirksen noted that Measure 37 claims made after December 4, 2006, will have different requirements in that there must have been a development application and a code requirement must be cited. The decision on this claim will not set a precedent as claims made after December 4 will be dealt with differently. Councilor Buehner said she was sympathetic to the testimony from the Tualatin Riverkeepers and she believes they are correct. The City of Tigard does not have the authority to waive CWS regulations. Councilor Buehner said this should be sent to Clean Water Services to let them review and she said she Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 21 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u was fairly certain that CWS would deny this application. Councilor Woodruff said he hoped the applicants would talk to staff to determine if there was some way for them to get a return on their investment without having to go through this process and create animosity in the community. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. The City Council considered Ordinance No. 07- 08: AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS TO GRANT A BALLOT MEASURE 37 WAIVER OF THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE WETLAND REGULATIONS FOR THE.41 ACRE SITE ON GREENBURG ROAD, SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 217 (WCTM 1S135CA, TAX LOT 02800) SUBJECT TO APPLYING FOR AND RECEIVING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL (1\4372006-00007) 8. Measure 37 Mayor Dirksen opened the public hearing. Motion by Councilor Claim Hearing Buchner, seconded by (Quasi-Judicial) City Attorney Ramis noted the procedures as Councilor Woodruff, to - Robert E. reviewed for the previous hearing apply to this adopt Ordinance No. 07-09. Ruedy hearing. Everyone present in the Council (1\4372006- chambers had been present when Mr. Ramis The motion was approved 00006 reviewed the procedures for the previous hearing. by a unanimous vote of Council present. Associate Planner Pagenstecher presented the staff report. Robert E. Ruedy is seeking Mayor Dirksen Yes compensation and/or waiver of the current land use Councilor Buchner Yes regulations and Comprehensive Plan policies that Councilor Harding Yes are more restrictive than those in place at the time Councilor Sherwood Yes the subject 1.14-acre property was acquired. The Councilor Woodruff Yes property, located south of SW McDonald Street and east of SW 100`h Avenue, was acquired by the claimant on December 7, 1992. In response to a question from Mayor Dirksen about restrictions imposed by the Code, Associate Planner Pagenstecher reviewed the key points of the applicant's request. Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 22 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u Public Testimony: Applicant Robert Ruedy testified noting that the purpose of filing the claim came about when he tried to find out what had changed in the code since he purchase the property and was not able to get a "concrete definition." He said it looks as if he could place 6 or even 8 units on this 1.4 acre property, but could not build 12 units. In response to a question from Councilor Woodruff about the scope of Mr. Ruedy's claim, Mr. Ruedy explained that he wanted to keep his options open and that he is not sure what he wants to do the property. Council Buchner and Mr. Ruedy discussed how access could be provided. Proponents: Eugene Davis spoke in favor for approval of Mr. Ruedy's request. He noted the voters have said what they wanted to have happen. Opponents: Sue Beilke noted her concerns with this and other applications and referred to the protection of the public's health and safety. Her issues with this proposal included how the units would be accessed, addressing fire codes, and if the property would need to be filled to develop. Mayor Ditksen acknowledged that parking would be an issue for this development. However, if the City was to waive the Code requirements now in place and the requirements in 1992 were applied, the plot plan.would have to be reviewed by the Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue (IVF&R) for safety requirements. City Attorney Ramis confirmed that the City does not have the authority to waive TVF&R regulations. Mayor Dirksen added it was questionable whether the parking requirements would be less restrictive in 1992 than the requirements now in place. City Attorney Ramis confirmed that it is permissible to submit information to the City Council at the public Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 23 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u hearing. Rebuttal: Robert Ruedy requested the City Council honor the will of the voters regarding Measure 37. Staff Recommendation: Associate Planner Pagenstecher advised that staff recommends the City Council grant the Ballot Measure 37 waiver. Mayor Dirksen advised he would support the waiver as recommended and said the claimant would still need to meet health and safety requirements. Mayor Dirksen closed the public hearing. Councilor Woodruff noted this represents a different circumstance from the Measure 37 claim heard earlier this evening (E&V Development Company) and noted the regulations were more restrictive in 1992; however, stricter regulations do not necessarily mean there is a reduction in property value. Councilor Sherwood commented she would support the request for a waiver since the 1992 code was stricter. The City Council considered the proposed ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 07-09 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS TO GRANT A BALLOT MEASURE 37 WAIVER OF THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES THAT ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THOSE IN PLACE ON DECEMBER 7, 1992 WHEN THE 1.14 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF MCDONALD STREET AND EAST OF SW 100AVENUE (WCTM2S 11 1BB, TAX LOT 00500) WAS PURCHASED BY ROBERT E. RUEDY, AND TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE IN PLACE AT THAT TIME, SUBJECT TO APPLYING FOR AND RECEIVING SITE Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 24 Agenda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL (M372006-00006) 9. First Quarter Due to the lateness of the hour, City Council City Council decided not to hear the update. City Manager Goal Update Prosser advised the status of the 2007 Council goals are posted on the City's website. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:14 p.m. Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Woodruff, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buehner Yes Councilor Harding Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes LL? - Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Attest: Mayor, ity of Tigard Date: 00 a 007 Tigard City Council Minutes - April 24, 2007 25 r City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting TIGARD In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinance(s) C! STATE Or OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I,e 1T lt_, l.~ jT~ being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) 67-07 C'2 l 4- 6-7_. G which were adopted at the City Council meeting of with a copy(s) of said Ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the _ day of , 200-2. 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Public Library, 13500 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 3. Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon t Z Signature of Perso who Performed Posting Subscribed anid sworn (or affirmed) before me this day of 20 O Si nature of Notary ublic for Oregon OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M BYARS *NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES BJUNE 14, 2008 City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting TIGARD In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinance(s) 0 STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) I, a e , 172 t,q , being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) 67-07 7 Gk J-G7- G which were adopted at the City Council meeting of 7 r( 01 , with a copy(s) of said Ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the day of 4,113 g- , 200. 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Public Library, 13500 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 3. Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 6- N\ - . ) - 'z' Signature of Perso who Performed Posting Subscribed an sworn (or affirmed) before me this day of K~ ,200 . Si nature of Notary ublic for Oregon OFFICIAL SEAL JILL M BYARS NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON MY COMMISSION ON EXPIRES 3JUNE 14, 2008 ,pi=4s v ~ ~1~• ~ ~ ~~'~l a~ .,,°~'a ;~is 1J~ e1~4~ t:,~,~ x~" r r, ~k ^ ~e~ ~ H 1 1 r~,~~t ~i ~ te~~"a D• e- i ~ Aq .~E~~I~ 1i16~~a ~ J .T'y?tn~,* . ~ I~s. ~A1 ~ J' ~ ~~s'H~ F^ ^"a~ea ~e ~'ra.~ ^ R'S~~"/~o 4. PROCLAMATION ?N Be Kind to Anhmak Week WHEREAS, Oregonians benefit tremendously from our animal friends, who give us III' companionship and great pleasure in our daily lives; and v ' WHEREAS, we have a firm responsibility to protect these fellow creatures from need, pain, fear and suffering; and WHEREAS, we recognize that teaching attitudes of kindness, consideration and respect for all living thin through humane education in the schools and the community helps to provide the basic values on which a humane and civilized society is built; and WHEREAS, we are deeply indebted to the Oregon humane societies for over 100 years of invaluable service in caring for homeless animals, instilling humane values in our children through education programs, and promoting a true working spirit of kindness and consideration for animals in the hearts and minds of all people; and WHEREAS, we depend greatly upon our animal control agencies, veterinarians and other y organizations that provide humane care for animals; and iC •_-;4. WHEREAS, May 6-12, 2007 is set aside to observe nationally the philosophy of kindness to animals. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT 1, Mayor Craig Dirksen of the City of Tigard, 11~ Oregon, do hereby proclaim the week of May 6-12, 2007 as Be Kind to Animals Week in Tigard, Oregon and urge our citizens, businesses and organizations to join in this observance. 'f Dated this day of 2007. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Tigard to be affixed. £;:r Craig E. Dirksen, Mayor = m City of Tigard fillf„ Y Attest: ¢ City Recorder a iin:~':v 4 a' "o'iJla'yiltidtY_,a .,~C~Ylc~ w e.£y. 4 wm FsizT3'7 r'~ .us r a .Q t s'. Yrs. f ! : a€:.. ~8 @' ~s . ;Yrd tt ;nuia ilti nAP 1i1Nd,.w}ftd§i~ti ~h {titNq`+yitpG* rty►e~ `y}btird _ /s e SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET ~~I~_ ~Dc FOR AUi a 9 00-7 C - (DATE OF MEETING J~ `-Q_YY` . . 17 PROCLAMATION 4; . Red Hat Society Day WHEREAS, the poem "Warning" by Jenny Joseph, depicts an older woman in purple clothing with a red fiat, inspired the Red Hat Society, what is now a world-wide ~l disorganization of ladies dedicated to proving there is life and fun after 50, and a WHEREAS, the Red Hat Society is dedicated to greeting middle age with verve, humor and :_`•j;'`- elan accepting silliness as the comedy relief of life while sharing a bond of affection forged by common life experiences and a genuine enthusiasm for wherever life takes them, and WHEREAS, on Wednesday, April 25th, the Crimson Crones Chapter will join in the worldwide celebration of the founding of the Red Hat Society in 1998. " WHEREAS our local Red Hat Society chapter, the Crimson Crones has requested official recognition for the Red Hat Society members, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT 1, Craig Dirksen, Mayor of the City of Tigard, 4 Oregon, do hereby proclaim Wednesday, April 25th 2007, as the official Red Hat Sodety Day }~y in the City of Tigard, in recognition of the spirit, joy and enthusiasm - in today's organized world - of this great disorganization. - ? Dated this day of , 2007. ' IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of r' 3 Tigard to be affixed. " Craig Dirksen, Mayor City of Tigard { Attest: ' City Recorder z .3, a wf ^'+-r ~s 'r~,rh~"`•tiro =-a~ t,~s~ e % try_ ~'~1 O o a ate'-•,ay, ~w..?Yff•,•+. +,hii 5r .iii.. }~*tlitlI~q~ K"AtWa '+6iiN ~Ly;siti3+- 7tl'"~ 'yLltila ~ v " _4 .=ate fih b::L•'"' ~0 .~'.Sxj„ ,.+„~=rt r ..~`•~.rr~fr F. "'=i`•y" AGENDA ITEM NO.3 - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: April 24, 2007 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend orparticipate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET SP FOR o0 (DA E OF MEETING) ~I+ Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title A Resolution Approving Budget Amendment #14 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Mayor and Council budget within the Policy and Administration Program for One-Time Funding for the Vision Action Network's Sustainability Feasibility Stud Prepared By: Michelle Wareing Dept Head Approval: 141 City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve Budget Amendment #14 to increase appropriations in the Mayor and Council budget for one-time funding to Vision Action Network? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Budget Amendment #14. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY At the April 17, 2007 Council Workshop meeting, Council discussed Vision Action Network's request for funding of its feasibility study. This study will assess the feasibility of establishing an office of sustainable development or other sustainability organization within Washington County. Council gave direction to staff at this meeting to prepare a budget amendment to provide $1,000 to Vision Action Network for this study. Council noted that tlus contribution was one-time in nature and did not commit the City to future contributions. This budget amendment will transfer $1,000 from the General Fund contingency to the Mayor and Council budget within the Policy and Administration Program. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. CITY COUNCIL GOALS Not Applicable ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution including Attachment A. FISCAL NOTES This resolution transfers $1,000 from the General Fund Contingency to the Mayor and Council budget for one-time funding for the Vision Action Network's Sustainability Feasibility Study. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07- A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #14 TO THE FY 2006-07 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL BUDGET WITHIN THE POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM FOR ONE-TIME FUNDING FOR THE VISION ACTION NETWORK'S SUSTAINABILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY. WHEREAS, Vision Action Network submitted a request for funding for its study, which will assess the feasibility of establishing an office of sustainable development in Washington County; and WHEREAS, the City Council discussed the request at the April 17, 2007 Council workshop; and WHEREAS, Council agreed to provide one-time funding of $1,000 to Vision Action Network; and WHEREAS, it is now necessary to amend the FY 2006-07 Budget to increase appropriations in Mayor and Council budget to pay for this expenditure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The FY 2006-07 Budget is hereby amended as shown in Attachment A to this resolution to transfer $1,000 from the General Fund contingency to the Mayor and Council budget in the Policy and Administration program to pay for the contribution to Vision Action Network for its feasibility study. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2007. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 07 - Page 1 Attachment A FY 2006-07 Budget Amendment #14 FY 2006-07 Budget Revised Revised Amendment Revised Budget # 14 Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $7,801,614 $7,801,614 Property Taxes 10,225,860 10,225,860 Grants 344,355 344,355 Interagency Revenues 2,699,084 2,699,084 Development Fees & Charges 664,000 664,000 Miscellaneous Fees and Charges 307,325 307,325 Fines and Forfeitures 626,000 626,000 Franchise Fees and Business Tax 3,667,000 3,667,000 Interest Earnings 217,400 217,400 Other Revenues 26,000 26,000 Transfers In from Other Funds 2,707,028 2,707,028 Total $29,285,666 $0 $29,285,666 Requirements Community Service Program $12,456,168 $12,456,168 Public Works Program 2,999,637 2,999,637 Community Development Program 3,056,903 3,056,903 Policy & Administration Program 348,365 1,000 349,365 General Government 75,000 75,000 Program Expenditures Total $18,936,073 $1,000 $18,937,073 Debt Service $0 $0 Capital Projects $0 $0 Transfers to Other Funds $4,876,553 $4,876,553 Contingency $930,000 ($1,000) $929,000 Total Budget $24,742,626 $0 $24,742,626 Ending Fund Balance 4,543,040 4,543,040 Total Requirements $29,285,666 $0 $29,285,666 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR (DATE OF MEETING) Agenda Item # `a Meeting Date Apri124, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Resolution Approving Budget Amendment #15 to the FY 2006-07 Budget to Increase Appropriations in the Mayor and Council budget within the Policy and Administration Program for One-Time Funding to Tigard Safety Town. Prepared By: Michelle Wareing Dept Head Approval: /1IJ City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve Budget Amendment #15 to increase appropriations in the Mayor and Council budget for one-time funding to Tigard Safety Town? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Budget Amendment #15. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY At the April 17, 2007 Council Workshop meeting, Council discussed Tigard Safety Town's request for funding of its event insurance coverage and volunteer background checks. The City used to provide insurance coverage for Tigard Safety Town events, but due to insurance market requirements, the City is no longer able to add this event to its Policy. Council gave direction to staff at this meeting to prepare a budget amendment to provide $3,500 to Tigard Safety Town. Council noted that this contribution was one-time in nature and did not commit the City to future contributions. This budget amendment will transfer $3,500 from the General Fund contingency to the Mayor and Council budget within the Policy and Administration Program. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None CITY COUNCIL GOALS Not Applicable ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution including Attachment A. FISCAL NOTES This resolution transfers $3,500 from the General Fund Contingency to the Mayor and Council budget for one-time funding to Tigard Safety Town for their insurance coverage and volunteer background checks. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07- A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #15 TO THE FY 2006-07 BUDGET TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL BUDGET WITHIN THE POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM FOR ONE-TIME FUNDING TO TIGARD SAFETY TOWN. WHEREAS, Tigard Safety Town submitted a request for funding for its event insurance coverage and volunteer background check expenditures; and WHEREAS, the City Council discussed the request at the April 17, 2007 Council workshop; and WHEREAS, Council agreed to provide one-time funding of $3,500 to Tigard Safety Town; and WHEREAS, it is now necessary to amend the FY 2006-07 Budget to increase appropriations in the Mayor and Council budget to pay for this expenditure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The FY 2006-07 Budget is hereby amended as shown in Attachment A to this resolution to transfer $3,500 from the General Fund contingency to the Mayor and Council budget in the Policy and Administration program to pay for the contribution to Tigard Safety Town for its insurance coverage and volunteer background checks. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2007. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 07 - Page 1 Attachment A FY 2006-07 Budget Amendment # 15 FY 2006-07 Budget Revised Revised Amendment Revised Budget # 15 Budget General Fund Resources Beginning Fund Balance $7,801,614 $7,801,614 Property Taxes 10,225,860 10,225,860 Grants 344,355 344,355 Interagency Revenues 2,699,084 2,699,084 Development Fees & Charges 664,000 664,000 Miscellaneous Fees and Charges 307,325 307,325 Fines and Forfeitures 626,000 626,000 Franchise Fees and Business Tax 3,667,000 3,667,000 Interest Earnings 217,400 217,400 Other Revenues 26,000 26,000 Transfers In from Other Funds 2,707,028 2,707,028 Total $29,285,666 $0 $29,285,666 Requirements Community Service Program $12,456,168 $12,456,168 Public Works Program 2,999,637 2,999,637 Community Development Program 3,056,903 3,056,903 Policy & Administration Program 349,365 3,500 352,865 General Government 75,000 75,000 Program Expenditures Total $18,937,073 $3,500 $18,940,573 Debt Service $0 $0 Capital Projects $0 $0 Transfers to Other Funds $4,876,553 $4,876,553 Contingency $929,000 ($3,500) $925,500 Total Budget $24,742,626 $0 $24,742,626 Ending Fund Balance 4,543,040 4,543,040 Total Requirements $29,285,666 $0 $29,285,666 Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Annual Volunteer Program Highlights Presentation Prepared By. Bob Roth Dept Head Approval: City Mgr A.pprovaL- ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The annual Volunteer Program presentation informs the City Council and community about recent accomplishments, ongoing activities and anticipated volunteer trends. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action required; information only. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY City of Tigard volunteers are serving the community in a variety of ways including the Tigard Public Library, Police Department Reserve Officer Program and watershed restoration projects. Volunteers are also serving in other important roles on boards and committees and in the Community Emergency Response Team Program. Individual volunteeers update records, maintain parks, translate information and photograph events. Volunteering provides recent residents with community involvement opportunities and prepares participants for future leadership roles. During 2006, 1,198 volunteers contributed 23,618 hours of their time towards City of Tigard projects, services and events. This volunteer hour total is a 9% increase over 2005. At the current standard rate of $18.77 per hour, the 23,618 volunteer hours would be valued at $443,310. The 2006 volunteer hour total is equal to 11.3 full time staff positions. In addition to coordinating volunteer placements within departments, Volunteer Program staff promote local volunteer involvement in Family and Balloon Festival events and with community organizations including the Tigard Senior Center, Good Neighbor Center and Tigard Historical Society. The surge of Baby Boomers will increase volunteering by older adults by 50% by the year 2020 and double the number of older adult volunteers by 2036. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None.. CITY COUNCIL GOALS The City of Tigard volunteer mission was produced during the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow planning process: "The City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community." ATTACHMENT LIST Powerpoint Presentation. Fiscal. NOTES None \\tig20\inetpub\tig20\w root\forms\form docs\council agenda item summary sheet 07.doc Giving a Face to Tigard's Stream Restoration 1200 Volunteers i i8 J-77-, pAi. e 7 FS ~ 1 + P , 4 777 y'jl z4- W ~p N r1 s~ 2 co Par S Ity ~ '`a 1 .7 7 Sc y E x-, f ~•r ( ~ fr r. ~ '7' ~ ' 4~`tT~ 7 ' Sfi w 1 i ~f •tf ~ i t "z4: ~3 r r i `t= a t,~ 41 i A # y`.. r t, ~r - ~ t 1 ~ ~'~R•.i~v ~i~c"~f : ,T~~"t'p 4 u `f 7 Commission Meetings 4 VAS ~ ~ ~~.d jt# 4 ~ .~.r+~' ~ tab r 7N 1 Butterfly Garden : _n A l~ yy ACV R! i . i F• r j s~~'. 5 atx' 1-77 °d BA . e . - w f Yr- Jr. fh . Library !ism 5 Y iisiA ~ auir7n ~ - IU7 6 low r 2XII11- Ir h - r1, E - ~4 i m J I 4 ~ 7 IJR 1} ~ II1kR' ~lq jy 1 ' zi ~1 t Bl~ :lICI~ eta 1 . r Vl~ t' '4 ~•;,,a e 1 . ~ ~~t, F gas i 4 A ri AVX sy~ ~y, s i f - nrarq, } ' Rhododendron Garden 9 0 > 1`[S Air c, cy_ f 2 4 - - x ' Al & r" x , t ~ } A i*Y r- C p if z ♦ , tea, € r.. f. ~ ~ Jf3 i~.--- I 4 , L' ~ t ~ 1I i Nr s.A< a } +q, t ~ t r~Tll i Police Reserves ~u tl'S' µ E x 12 Sk. M. Cis The Rest of the Story 13 z 71 _ Y P~ Mr. f` h~ r t i t ~ t lit n , .#Illtill tiFiTi4i;1t C#`.ryl M r ve, -M ,fS ~f -t~ M1*~ I ~I 10 cn z 1 rl R+ m4i ~p _ Y~** t 16 . ...,'7-77'f' i t Special Thanks to Louis Babcock and Doug Volwaller Tigard's Talented Volunteer Photographers Thanks Volunteers for a Fun and Productive r 2006!!!!! c For more information on Volunteer Opportunities in the City of Tigard www.tiaard.or.aov (503) 718-2402 A r i'v 14 17 L City of Tigard 1,198 Volunteer Program The total number of individuals By the Numbers that volunteered with the City of Tigard in 2006. 23,618 $18,77 The total number of City of Tigard The current value of a volunteer volunteer hours contributed in hour of service in the USA. 2006 (equals an additional 11.3 full-time staff positions). 9% $443,310 The total dollar value of services The increase in hours contributed by City of Tigard contributed by 2006 Tigard volunteers in 2006. volunteers in compared to 2005. 1 1,200 3,200 The average monthly total of The number of native trees and hours served by 175 library shrubs installed by volunteers in 2006 volunteers, the equivalent of 7 . full-time staff members! 1,263 300 The total hours served by 318 volunteers restoring 6,863 The number of hours served linear feet of local streams. by teenage volunteers in the (That's the length of 23 library during August 2006. football fields!) 139 259 The number of volunteer positions The total number of volunteers on 15 separate boards and that attended stream committees that research issues restoration events in 2006. and develop recommendations for City Council consideration. 2 38% 37 Increase in the number of hours contributed by groups Number of teenagers that volunteering at the library, completed their court-ordered including Tigard and Southridge community service hours High School groups, 3 churches, mandated b Tigard Peer 3 Boy Scout troops, and by AmeriCorps volunteers Court. 29 21 The number of groups that The number of teens that have adopted local streets completed their required 16 and keep them clear of trash hours of summer service with every month. several working up to 40 hours each! 10 6 Honors students that completed their International Volunteers participated in job Baccalaureate and National training programs. Honors Society hours at the library. 3 3 4 # of volunteers that were hired..... The number of dogs that officially volunteer for the City, # of new volunteers who walked over including 3 service dogs that from the condominiums and serve in the children's reading apartments next door to the library. program at the library and 1 # of volunteers that resigned due to dog that retrieves trash. new babies. 2 1 Volunteers who resigned because of new grandbabies Au pairs from Europe that volunteered Each Volunteer is one-of-a- to fulfill visa requirements kind and contributes unique Chess competitors were discovered in gifts. the ranks of our volunteers 4 Agenda Item # 6 Meeting Date April 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2006-00002 to Add New Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures y Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: Prepared By: Sean Farrell ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall Council approve the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA 2006-00002) to add new Goals, Policies, and Action Measures applicable to the Downtown Urban Renewal District to enable implementation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Council is requested to approve the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to add new Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The findings and recommendations of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) were accepted. by Council on September 27, 2005. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan process was notable for its broad- based public involvement, incorporating high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. In May 2006, Tigard voters approved an Urban Renewal District for the area to finance the implementation of the plan. The proposed amendment would replace the Downtown chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and add new Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. It would provide the legislative foundation to make future changes in the Downtown Land Use program, such as new zoning and design regulations. Separate and joint work sessions were held with the Planning Commission and the City Center Advisory Commission to review the proposed language. On March 19, 2007, a public hearing on the proposed code amendment was held before the Planning Commission. Public testimony was given. (Staff has responded to this testimony in the attached memo dated March 29, 2007.) The Planning Commission recommended making a minor change in the wording of one Action Measure and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. I:\LRPLN\Council Matedals\2007\4-24-07 AIS Public (fearing- CPA 2006-00002.doc 1 CITY COUNCIL GOALS Goal 2: "Continue to Support Implementation of the Downtown Plan." ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: An Ordinance approving Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2006-00002 to update Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Attachment 2: Memo to Council dated March 26, 2007, summarizing proposed Comprehensive Plan changes. Attachment 3: Map of Urban Renewal District Exhibit A: Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) Amendments Exhibit B: Staff Report to the Planning Commission Exhibit C: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - March 19, 2007 Exhibit D: Council Memo dated March 29, 2007 (Response to March 19th Public Hearing Issues and Comments) FISCAL NOTES Not Applicable I:\LRPLN\Council Materials\2007\4-24-07 AIS Public Flearing- CPA 2006-00002.doc 2 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 07- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2006-00002 TO REPLACE THE DOWNTOWN CHAPTER OF VOLUME II OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADD NEW GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES AND AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 5.5 WHEREAS, the findings and recommendations of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan were accepted by City Council Resolution 05-62; and WHEREAS, a recommendation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan Implementation Action Plan is to make code and regulatory adjustments to be consistent with the vision of the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has proposed an amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Chapter 11 adding new Goals, Policies, and Action Measures for the Downtown Urban Renewal District and updating Policy 5.5; and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public meeting on March 19, 2007, and recommended approval of the proposed CPA 2006-00002 (with a minor revision) by motion and with unanimous vote; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2007, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing to consider the Commission's recommendation on CPA 2006-00002, hear public testimony, and apply applicable decision-making criteria. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY,OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) is amended to include the text in "EXHIBIT A." SECTION 2: The findings and conclusions contained in the Staff Report dated March 7, 2007, the Planning Commission meeting minutes for March 19, 2007, and memorandum to Council dated March 29, 2007, are adopted by reference ("EXHIBIT B", "EXHIBIT C", and "EXHIBIT D" respectively). ORDINANCE No. 07- , Page 1 SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of , 2007. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of , 2007. Craig Dirksen, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 07- Page 2 ATTACHMENT 2 U MEMORANDUM TIGARD' TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner RE: Proposed Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) DATE: March 26, 2007 The purpose of this memo is to inform the City Council of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) which updates the Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures prior to the Council's April 17,h work session and April 24,h public hearing. At the public hearing on March 19,11, 2007, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed amendment (with one minor modification.) Background: Relationship to Comprehensive Plan Update City staff is currently engaged in updating Tigard's Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Update Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures is a precursor to the format of the rest of the Comprehensive Plan update. Although it will be amending the current code, this amendment will reflect the format of the updated code, which will be made up of Findings, Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was the result of an extensive citizen involvement process. It was accepted by the Council in September, 2005. Its goal is to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." What Does the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Propose? The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures will be the legislative foundation for future changes in the Downtown Land Use program, such as new zoning and design regulations. Most of the content of the Amendment was taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Public Hearing Comments and Responses At the public hearing, a number of individuals testified. Please refer to the attached response to the issues of Mike Stevenson and John Frewing. Planning Commission's Recommended Change The Planning Commission recommended modifying the wording of Action Measure 1 LA.2. Its recommendation was to say "consider utilizing form based code principles," rather than "utilize form based code principles." Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. The proposal is consistent with all applicable State Goals, Metro Functional Plan, and Comprehensive Plan policies. Next Steps If the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved, staff will continue the process of developing specific language to amend the Development Code and craft design regulations for the Downtown. Stakeholder involvement and review will be necessary prior to proposing Development Code Amendments. VRG i4l %.v IF x S` r a 12 a LE IS N -12 = Q PIMgS 1A r LN tl ST ( 9P T GELA CT ~ ~'f' < L R-7 Li x o HD) O sic n I O Nl O C 0 pie o ~ 4 d ~o ❑ sO~l OOp00 O t a { hN~ , S F~ tiF c O (V~ qti °~2F? o/p oo sT ~ o sr o O p oo ~ Q o0 h s~ O p0 D 0 ~ r ~r o~ O ~q s MQ4FH tiy~~ ~ ~~ti ~ sr ?F ~ O l CBD . n P~ I-L (PD)~a R-25 b R- 2 2 (P c Lo OD B 3 ° N , .5 w N W S S I-L Zoning Classifications Urban Renewal Boundary Urban Renewal District zoning districts ATTACHMENT 3 City of Tigard Oregon 0 250 500 1,000 Canogtapln': Commwin" D-Iopmcm Dcpt Rb 2007 Feet Somas: City of Tigard, Washington Comp' EX H I B IT A 5. E C O N O M Y Commentary: The proposed amendment would amend Policy 5.5 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan states that more housing and a variety of housing n,pes will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core. Although much of the new residential development would be focused in mixed use development above the first floor, the TDIP does call for medium-density, stand alone housing types, such as townhouses, in the area bordering Fanno Creek Park. • Language to be added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined. • Language to be deleted from the Comprehensive Plan is shown instrike th . POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DIS'_FRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED ABOVE THE FIRST-I='_ OR 1N T14E G T-P:;_- BUSI ESS DISTRICT, AND ABOVE 'r14Ft SEC()) D '-T 00R 1N RESIDENTIAL DLVE lITPA. ENT SHAT T BE DETERAIINTu T\ TAT IN ALL "ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT AT APPROPRIATE DENSITIES. IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR. (THE DENSITY IN THE COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WIT) I T HE R-40 DISTRICTS.) AND; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERI\TITIT.D USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES.; WITHIN THE 1\,IUC, MUR I AND 2 AND MUE 1 AND 2 ZONES WITHIN THE WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERIVI]TI-ED AND ENCOURAGED AT HIGH DENSITIES RANGING FROM R-25 (MUE 2 AND IVIUR 2) 'TO R-50 (MUC, MUE 1 AND MUR 1): AND WITHIN THE MUC-1 DISTRICT, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMFIED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON- RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPI\1ENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. 1 1. S P E C I A L A R E A S OF C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BACKGROUND Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live, work, and play, and to serve as a communit , gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center, dating back to around 1907.Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years. The most recent effort dates back to 2002, with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line X-6th a planned station in downtown Tigard. This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. A state Transportation and Growth Management (TGU grant facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including comcom unin, dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public surve),: Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (1DIPl The TGAI grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that'enable people to live, work play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Ti Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided b, urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. FINDINGS Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the CW,'s 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street, the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function, but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. Spec7alAreas of Corcem 1 Downtown In general, downtown properties have low improvement to land (1:L) ratios. Healthy I:1 ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tig_ard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (ReportAccompanyinn the City, Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions,, Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial, office, residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation S .ry tens The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.) with heave traffic levels. Mane of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general, there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown. A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature. The creek, part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre cit}, park with a multi-use path. • Curient Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD). While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown, the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form. As a result, the area has developed without many of the pedestrian- oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots, which are zoned R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25, C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial;) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W. These additional zones do not permit mixed use development, which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary, Downtown is important to Tigard residents; mane use it on a weekly basis. Mane would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Communijy Character & Quality of Life section, includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a `focal point' for the community," and "a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friend- downtown and is being implemented." Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown 'The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community.- that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by mane modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning, design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard, while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary- land uses such as: Retail restaurants entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing: c.) Civic functions (government offices, community- services, public plazas, public transit centers, et-c d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City= shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing, auto-dependant uses; industrial manufacturing; and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.=4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design, development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety, accessibility, and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality- living environment. Special-Ilreac of Concent 3 Downtown 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a "traditional Nlain Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11 2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 1122 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 112.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent xvith the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park. 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served be a complete array of multi-modal transportation sen=ices including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City, in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by "park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and interstate 5, the Cite shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscal2e and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses. -joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant, compact, mixed-use area with housing, retail and employment opportunities. Special.-Ireas of Concern 4 Downlown 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and invitiLig downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials, particularly in the building fronts and streetscape. Also develop appropriate density, height, mass, scale, architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A 2 Consider utilizing form based code principles in ways that are consistent Nvith state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 1 LA.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibihi), issues when new downtown development occurs in close prosimit), to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.x1.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where communi!y events, farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.x\.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information, urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas, such as park blocks, plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses, public spaces and transit. 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.C Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit SperialAreas of Concern 5' Downtown 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity, to, from, and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system, including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown, such as connections across Highway 99W. 1 I.C.2 address public safety, and land use compatibility, issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation s),stem. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT's Special Transportation Area (STA.) and Urban Business Area (UBAL. 1I .C.=1 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 acquire property, and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets, pathways, entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot, and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by, utilizing the "unifying elements" palette from the Strcetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment / facility, needs into the City''s Public Facility, Plan and implementing Community] Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy, in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 1 LD.2 Provide public, including members of the development community, with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by, the City, Center Development Agency. SpecialAreas of Concern 6 Downlown Exhibit B Agenda Item: Hearing Date: March 19, 2007 Time: 7:00 PM F _ STAFF REPORT TO THE PI:ANNING COMMISSION FOR;T__ CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON . „ 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES FILE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) CPA2006-00002 PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend Section 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to incorporate Goals, Policies, and Action Measures as a basis to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian-oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. The amendment would also update Section 5 to allow complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal District. APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: N/A 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District ZONING DESIGNATION: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25 COMP PLAN: Commercial, Residential APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3 5, 6, 8, 9 and 11; Metro Functional Plan Tide 6, and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 8, 9,10 and 12. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning;Comnusslon recommend approval to the TigatdlCaty Colnctl`to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to replace;Secuori! 11.1 and amend Policy 5 5 as,deterrrimed, through the public hearing process STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 1 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live, work, and play, and to serve as a community gathering place, in Downtown Tigard. The current planning effort to create a "heart" in Downtown Tigard dates back to 2002. A group of citizens and business owners were inspired to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on the planned Commuter Rail station in Downtown. A more extensive planning process was made possible with a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. Because of the Downtown Improvement Plan citizen involvement process, the City of Tigard was awarded the 2005 Good Governance Award from the League of Oregon Cities. The award recognizes exceptional city programs that unite citizens within a community. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TRIP) The planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TRIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TRIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for the Urban Renewal District in the May 2006 election. Proposal Description In order to implement the TDIP, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are necessary. These will establish the "legislative foundation" on which other land use actions and amendments to the Tigard Development Code can be based, including specific zoning map, land use and design standards. The first step is to completely replace Section 11.1 of the Comprehensive Plan, which covers the Downtown Central Business District of Neighborhood Planning Organization #1. The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures would be applicable to the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District (which encompasses a slightly larger area than the Central Business District zone referred to in Section 11.) The City is currently updating the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. Each section of the updated Plan will include Findings, Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. Here is an explanation of these terms: Findings are the written statements of relevant facts that are the basis for the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 2 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Goals are the broad-based statement of the community's desires. In this case the proposed Goal is taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Policies are general statements intended to guide the City now and in the future. They provide general legislative direction and are the foundation for the City's land use, codes, and standards. Action Measures are more specific short and medium term actions that will implement the Goals and Policies. This term will replace "Implementation Strategies" found in the existing Comprehensive Plan. They can be evaluated on a regular basis- every two years, to check on their progress. Action Measures are not required to be referenced when new land use codes and standards are proposed for adoption. In addition, Policy 5.5 of the Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated to allow for the opportunity for a variety of housing types called for in the TDIP, throughout: the Downtown Urban Renewal District. SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF REPORT Applicable criteria, findings and conclusions • Tigard Community Development Code o Chapter 18.380 o Chapter 18.390 • Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies o Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 • Applicable Metro Standards o Title 6 • Statewide Planning Goals o Goals 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 12 City Department and outside agency comments SECTION V. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments This chapter sets forth the standards and process governing legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this tide and zoning district map. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060.G. Therefore, the proposed text amendments to the Tigard Development Code will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures This chapter establishes standard decision-malting procedures for reviewing applications. The amendment under consideration will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as detailed in the chapter. Section 18.390.060.G states that the recommendation by the Commission, and the decision by the Council, shall be based on consideration of the following STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 3 OF I O COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT factors (reviewed above), including: 1) Statewide Planning Goals, 2) applicable federal or state statues or regulations, 3) applicable Metro regulations, 4) applicable comprehensive plan policies, and 5) applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable review criteria within the Tigard Community Development Code and recommends the Planning Commission forward this proposed amendment to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption. APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: A review of the comprehensive plan identified the following relevant policies for the proposed amendments: Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.1.1: General Policies This policy states that all future legislative changes shall be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Regional Plan adopted by Metro. As indicated under the individual Statewide and Regional Plan goals applicable to this proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with the Statewide Goals and the Regional Plan. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.3.: Citizen Involvement These policies state that the City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program, provide opportunities for citizen involvement appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and that information on land use planning issues shall be available in understandable form for all interested citizens. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan process was notable for its broad-based public involvement. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. The May 2006 Tigard voters approved an Urban Renewal District for the area to finance the implementation of the plan. In addition, the City Center Advisory Commission, a citizen committee, has reviewed and suggested changes that were incorporated into the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This policy has also been met by publishing notice of the Planning Commission public hearing that was in the March 1, 2007 edition of the Tigard Times. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. Letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Comprehensive Plan Policy 3: Natural Features and Open Space 3.4 Natural Areas These policies protect natural resources, including wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat. The proposed amendment satisfies Policies 3.4.1-3.4.2 because it strengthens protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWN'T'OWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 4 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 3.5. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Policies 3.5.1 The City shall encourage private enterprise and intergovernmental agreements which will provide for open space, recreation lands, facilities, and preserve natural, scenic and historic areas in a manner consistent with the availability of resources. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2 which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to be a central gathering place for the community and to provide a recreation area for such activities as a farmers market and performances. 3.5.3 The City has designated the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek, its tributaries, and the Tualatin River as greenway, which will be the backbone of the open space system. Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.3 which states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Additionally, the TDIP calls for the expansion of the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park, by purchasing additional property in the floodplain. 3.5.4 The City shall provide an interconnected pedestrian/bike path throughout the City. This policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.3.1, which states that the Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. In addition, the TDIP calls for a "rail-to-trail" path to be created in present railroad right-of-way. Comprehensive Plan Policy S: Economy 5.3 The City shall improve and enhance the portions of the Central Business District as the focal point for commercial, high density residential, business, civic, and professional activity creating a diversified and economically viable core area The TDIP seeks to improve and diversify Downtown Tigard's economic and employment mix. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas, public transit centers, etc); d) Professional employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks." This proposed policy is aimed at facilitating the development of an urban village, promoting the retention of existing businesses, and creating opportunities for new investment. The proposal would also amend Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5 to make it possible to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. More housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core. STAFF REPORT TO T'HE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 5 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Comprehensive Plan Policy 6: Housing 6.1.1 The City shall provide an opportunity for a diversity of housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent levels. This policy is satisfied because the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6, which states that "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." This policy is also satisfied by proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5. which would create the opportunity for complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The change will likely result in increased housing choices at a variety of rent and price levels. Comprehensive Plan Policy 8: Transportation 8.1.2 Provide a balanced transportation system, incorporating all modes of transportation. This policy is satisfied by the inclusion of these proposed Policies: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City, in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by "park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses. Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. Collectively these policies aim to develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles and transit. Projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail station, and expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes will further increase transportation options. Comprehensive Plan Policy 9: Energy 9.1.3 The City shall encourage land use development which emphasizes sound energy conservation, design, and construction. The main goal of the TRIP is to create an urban village, which would result in an opportunity to live, shop, recreate, and work in a pedestrian-friendly environment. The envisioned place would allow residents to conserve energy by reducing their dependence on automobiles, as the area is presently well-served by transit. Future projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 6 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAIN AMENDMENT station, expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes could further decrease reliance on the automobile. Additionally the TDIP expresses a preference for sustainable practices in construction of new Downtown buildings and infrastructure. These proposed Action Measures would encourage this type of design: 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: Metro Functional Plan Title 6: Central City, Regional Centers, Town Centers and Station Communities Requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent witfi Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center. Centers are defined as "compact, mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation. and roads." The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan fulfilled the requirement to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would institute the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's goal of "creating a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian-oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to "live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Policies and Actions Measures would enable the future adoption of code and policies to implement the goal. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable Metro regulations. THE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES ADOPTED UNDER OREGON REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 197 Statewide Planning Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal was met through the extensive public involvement in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, which included a Task Force of 24 citizens, community dialogues, workshops, an open house, and a public survey. The City Center Advisory Commission, a citizen group, has reviewed and provided input to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2000-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 7 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT This goal has also been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Chapter 18.390. Notice has been published in the Tigard Times newspaper prior to the public hearing. Two Public Hearings are being held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) in which public input is welcome. In addition, letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Statewide Planning Goal 2 - Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The proposed amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan is being processed as a Type IV procedure, which requires any applicable statewide planning goals, federal or state statutes or regulations, Metro regulations, comprehensive plan policies, and City's implementing ordinances, be addressed as part of the decision-making process. Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing as required. All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report; therefore, the requirements of Goal 2 have been met. Statewide Planning Goal S - Natural Resources This goal requires the inventory and protection of natural resources, open spaces, historic areas and sites. The proposed amendment is consistent with this goal because the proposed changes strengthen protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Existing Goal 5 protections for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District will remain in place. Statewide Planning Goal 8- Recreational Needs This goal aims to provide for the siting of facilities for the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors. This goal is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2, which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to provide a range of recreation activities such as farmers markets and performances. This will become a. central gathering place for the community and increase recreational opportunities for residents. Statewide Planning Goal 9- Economic Development This goal aims to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas, public transit centers, etc); d) Professional STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 8 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks." This policy is consistent with Goal 9 as it is aimed at facilitating the development of a vibrant and economically sound city core. The TDIP calls for opportunities for new housing, commercial, and employment which would create a thriving urban village. Statewide Planning Goal 10- Housing This goal aims to provide adequate housing for the needs of the community, region and state. One of the recommended catalyst projects in the TDIP is to increase the number of housing units in the Downtown. This could increase the number of potential patrons for Downtown businesses and potential riders of the new Commuter Rail line. The proposed Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6 which states: "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." The proposed amendment is consistent with Goal 10. Statewide Planning Goal 12-Transportation The goal aims to provide "a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." The proposed Amendment satisfies this goal with the inclusion of several Policies to Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit including. 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with TriMet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by "park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses. Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. These proposed Policies would improve the safety, efficiency and economy of the transportation system in the Downtown Urban Renewal District and expand access to transportation options. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 9 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Building Division and Police Department, have had an opportunity to review this proposal and have no objections. The City of Tigard's Public Works had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond. SECTION VII. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and Metro, were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, Tualatin Valley Water District, and Cleanwater Services were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. SECTION VIII. CONCLUSION The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was the result of extensive public involvement. In order to implement the Plan, changes are needed to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the Development Code including new zoning and design standards. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would provide the "legislative foundation" to accomplish this. The proposed changes comply with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Tigard City Council as determined through the public hearing process. ATTACHMENT: EXHIBIT A. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. March 7 2007 PREPARED BY: Sean Farrelly DATE Associate Planner March 7 , 2007 APPROVED BY: Ron Bunch DATE Planning Manager STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 10 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes March 19, 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, and Walsh Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Vermilyea Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Long Range Planning Manager; Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner; ]erree Lewis, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Planning Manager Ron Bunch reported that the Tree Board met on March 7t11 to discuss its proposed charge statement to develop a tree protection program. The program is intended to look at trees in a larger context rather than as street trees or trees in development property. The Tree Board also reviewed the Costco tree planting plan. Costco had been conditioned to have 35% tree coverage in their parking lot. They came back with a tree planting plan that they would like to try to meet the standards. The secretary reported that the new Commissioners will be appointed by Council on March 27Lh. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES It was moved and seconded to approve the February 26, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 3-0. Commissioners Caffall and Walsh abstained. It was moved and seconded to approve the March 5, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. President Inman abstained. 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES PLANNTNG COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March 19, 2007 - Page 1 REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed at htW://www.tigard-or.gov/code amendments. LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11, Metro Functional Plan Title 6, and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 10, and 12. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Sean Farrelly gave a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit A) for the proposed amendment for an update of Downtown goals, policies, and action measures to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). He advised that the amendment would not change the Development Code. It lays the groundwork for future changes; any specific development code changes will be subject to further public hearings. Farrelly noted that with the new format, action measures will replace the current implementation strategies in the Comprehensive Plan. This particular amendment is needed to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. The current land use in the Comp Plan that deals with the Downtown is inadequate. Section 11, Special Areas of Concern that deals with the Downtown, treats it primarily as a shopping area. This amendment will reflect the multi-functional role of the Downtown. Another part of the Comp Plan that needs to be changed is Economy Policy 5.5 which restricts residential development above the first floor. Farrelly reviewed the goals of the TDIP. He advised that most of the language for this proposed amendment was taken from the TDIP. The policies and action measures are organized into 3 categories: Facilitate the development of an urban village; Develop and improve the open space system and integrate natural features; and Develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles, and transit. This amendment would apply only to the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. Staff reviewed the proposed amendment against the applicable criteria and found it to be consistent with present Comp Plan policies and Development Code policies. The amendment is also consistent with applicable Metro requirements and all applicable Statewide Goals. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to City Council. President Inman asked about the new action measure 11.A.2. She asked if Tigard was actually pursuing form based code (FBC). Farrelly advised that this action measure would only pursue FBC in ways that are consistent with Oregon Land Use Law. We might not PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March I9, 2007 - Page 2 adopt FBC, but we may use some of the principles in the eventual new development code. This action measure allows us the opportunity, but does not require that we use FBC. Vice-President Walsh asked for clarification that the Commission was being asked to approve only a change to the Comprehensive Plan adopting the format and structure of the proposed Comp Plan that the Commission will see later. This one section is being approved ahead of time; it will be put in place of the existing section of the Comp Plan and nothing more. Farrelly concurred, saying that this starts the process to allow for further changes and gets the process moving along. It does not change existing Development Code regulations or land use laws. Before changes to the Development Code happen, there will be more outreach to property owners and stakeholders. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN FAVOR John Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard 97223 commended staff and the Downtown Task Force for developing this portion of the Comprehensive Plan. He is concerned about the explanation for form based code, saying that the language states, "The City will utilize form based design where consistent with the State regulations." It doesn't say ma~ use it. He would like to endorse the language as written. He disagrees that this section is outside the Comp Plan. It is Section 11 of the Comp Plan; it is the Comp Plan. This is the first piece of the Comp Plan to come before the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption. He wants to get it right the first time. In that effort, he has a list of issues that he brought up (Exhibit B). He asked that the Commission to continue the hearing so that these matters can be addressed. Mike Swanda, 13285 SW Village Glenn Drive, Tigard 97223, testified that he owns and operates My Time Beads at 12200 SW Main Street. He thinks the TDIP is a wonderful goal. He had one comment about Section 11.1.3 which states, "The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing; auto-dependent uses; industrial manufacturing; and industrial services uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village." He would like to see more clarification for the term "auto-dependent" uses. He asked what the term meant. Jonae Armstrong, 16333 SW Stahl Dr., Tigard 97223, Tigard testified that she works at Washington Square. She has been watching this process and urged the Commission to continue the approval process to go on to City Council. She believes it is important to focus on the Downtown and offered her encouragement. Lisa Olson, 14720 SW Cabernet Ct., Tigard 97224, advised that she was a member of the Downtown Tigard Task Force, was the chair for the Streetscape work group, and will be on the steering committee for the Fanno Creek Master Plan. She encouraged the Commission to continue to look at keeping the community involved in this process and to encourage City staff to involve community members. There is a large number of people who have been working on this and understand what's going on. She would like the City to utilize the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March 19, 2007 - Page 3 resources available in community members to continue to have the community involved in the process every step of the way. Phil Yount, 11222 SW Cottonwood Lane, Tigard 97223, stated that he was undecided about the amendment. He has been an interested observer and an occasional participant in some of the surveys and task force hearings, so he is aware of what's going on. He supports the TDIP proposal in general. He was impressed with John Frewing's testimony. While he encourages the Commission to proceed with the process, he urged them to look carefully at Mr. Frewing's critique. What we do needs to be done right. Mike Stevenson testified that he owns a business at 9040 SW Burnham Street, Tigard 97223. He has been involved with the Downtown Task Force since the beginning and is happy with the progression. The TDIP affects him personally because he owns a large piece of property in the Downtown. He has concerns about Section 11.1.3 to not permit any new land uses, such as warehousing, auto-dependent uses, etc. If this process is going to take 20-25 years, he will be put in a "no-man's position" as far as expanding his business is concerned. Section 11.1.4 states that existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. He wonders what this means and he is concerned about what we will do with existing businesses. Mr. Stevenson has another thought about the staff report, under 3.5.3 - "The City has designated the 100-year floodplain Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain." Does that mean he will be required to give open land to the City? He asked for clarification on this. Staff answered that this code section is an existing policy. If he wanted to do some development, would he be required to donate some land? Staff advised that currently in the Tigard Development Code, there are specific standards that require protection and preservation of the floodplain. This was quoted in the staff report to show how the proposal is consistent with the existing Plan. The City cannot essentially exact property for dedication. Since this existing this policy is probably 23 years old, it may be out of date. However, it is the criteria we have to use now to judge the current proposal to make sure it's consistent with existing policy. The entire Comprehensive Plan will be updated, including the Natural Resources section. We have to work with the Comp Plan we have now. Mr. Stevenson will be subject to the policy as it exists currently. It may very well be amended in the future, but the existing policies had to be used as a tool to judge whether the new proposal meet the requirements of the existing Plan. President Inman noted that this is in a different chapter which will be reviewed at a later time. PUBLIC TESTIMONY - IN OPPOSITION None PLANNING. COMM I SSION MEETING MINUTES - March 19, 2007 - Page 4 REBUTTAL Planning Manager Ron Bunch responded to Mr. Frewing's concerns. He noted that what Mr. Frewing spoke to, to a great deal, was the entire Comprehensive Plan, e.g., Goal 9 Economic Development; Goal 10 Housing; Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services; Goal 6 Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. This proposal is just one small part of the Comprehensive Plan. For example, in the Goal 9 Economic Development Rule that was quoted, in the Comprehensive Plan, there's a separate chapter that addresses Goal 9. The Industrial Lands Inventory, Analysis of Available Lands, Buildable Lands Inventory, etc., take place in the context of that particular section of the Comp Plan. This proposal is looking at a specific district - the Downtown. These tools (goals, policies, action measures) are needed to start having the broad community dialog to begin to implement the Urban Renewal District. The sections of ORS 197 that Mr. Frewing spoke to are out of context for this particular hearing. Regarding the process, the TDIP is a study that was accepted, but not adopted. Mr. Frewing referenced the need to have facts that are relevant and recent. This application was coordinated with the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). DLCD found the proposal to be in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Administrative Rules. Regarding the facts, Bunch advised that this is a legislative hearing; we are obligated to look at the facts according to specific criteria in the Comp Plan and other criteria. Staff reviewed the criteria and found that the proposal complies with all the applicable criteria. As a legislative amendment, essentially the City Council can determine what facts it wishes to rely upon. The facts that we consider relevant are the ones we have on hand - we can't constantly go back and get new facts and refer to them. We have to begin the process and stop it at some time. Regarding zoning classifications and mapping, this hearing is about creating the tools - goals, policies, and action measures. In referencing the maps, there are discrepancies in the TDIP and in the Community Development Code and in the Urban Renewal District. This proposal is just to establish the goals, policies, and action measures. This proposal only applies to the Urban Renewal District. Regarding the moving target of the floodplain, where the landuse designation should be, etc., those are refinements that will be built from the goals, policies, and action measures. The public amenities associated with the Plan are part of the development regulations that will come later. We need to have the tools first before we can build development regulations. When we amend the Development Code, we will use the tools to judge the Development Code Amendment - does it or does it not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Regarding comments about the interrelated use of land, ORS 197, these comments apply to the whole Comprehensive Plan. Each element does not have to be judged against that, but when we have the whole Comp Plan put together in one document, we'll have the whole range of issues within which to judge. We have to look at whole plan, not just one part. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March 19, 2007 - Page 5 These goals, policies, and action measures will provide the legislative basis by which we can develop a Transportation System Plan refinement that can be adopted as part of the TSP. We will get there using these tools. A pre-application was done. The papers are in the file. A key item for staff was coordinating this with DLCD, Metro, ODOT, Trimet, and LCDC. We have not received any comments against the proposal. The Planning Commissioners asked the following questions: • Section 11.1.3 says it shall not permit new land uses, such as warehousing, etc. What is an example of an auto-dependent use business? Staff responded that new drive-thru businesses would be an example. The proposal does not prohibit people from driving Downtown. Will this affect current businesses? Existing drive thru businesses would be,gran fathered as non-conforming uses. It would protect the current business, but would not allow for expansion of the non-conforming business. The current non-conforming use standards that apply to the whole City allow 20% expansion. Specific code language for Downtown non-conforming businesses will need to be discussed. • Staff explained that the current non-conforming use standard allows existing non- conforming businesses to be grandfathered in and allowed to continue, subject to certain restrictions. If the non-conforming use is discontinued for more than 6 months, it would not be permitted to come back. The new business would have to conform to current applicable zoning standards. Staff believes that in the CBD zone, there are several properties that have been exempted from that requirement. Business owners were encouraged to work with staff on these issues. Staff noted that the current CBD zoning does not allow industrial uses. All existing industrial businesses in the Downtown are considered non-conforming and allowed to continue, subject to certain restrictions. When we begin to develop the Code, we will determine the specifics on how to deal with non-conforming uses in the Downtown. • The Commission suggested doing an outreach to business owners that own non- conforming businesses in the Downtown. Staff answered that the Code development phase will include that type of outreach. • Under 11.1.3, would the Fanno Creek Microbrewery be allowed or not allowed? Staff answered that this is considered an eating establishment and would be an allowed use. Producing the microbrew would be considered auxiliary to the eating and drinking function. • Staff advised that industrial services provide services to manufacturing, warehousing, construction, etc., that are necessary to keep those services going. Some examples are janitorial services; machinery repair and refurbishing, and repair of lumber equipment. In some codes, it includes fleet operations to maintain trucking fleets and equipment. It varies by region. • Has staff talked to people involved in a performing arts center or a farmers' market? Broadway Rose Theatre is now beginning a capital improvement project to have their own performing arts center. Staff noted that farmers' market people are aware of the plans. The performing arts center is a catalyst project that is more long range projects, maybe 10-15 years PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March 19, 2007 - Page 6 out. Commissioner Dougherty suggested involving more than just the Downtown boundaries in the discussion. Ron Bunch noted that these specific activilies are considered action measures, which fall into placeholder categories for implementation. The statements which have real legislative intent are the goals and policies; action measures are things that we would like to implement and that we could use as agauge or measurement to see how we're doing. For e.Xample, if Broadway Rose finds anotherplace, perhaps we should consider another kind of performing arts in the Downtown. • The Commission suggested adding a definitions section. Staff answered that the Plan will have a definitions section that will also include a list of acronyms. • President Inman said she thinks the language on the form based code principles reads fairly strong. She would like the language to state that it gives us the opportunity to utilize form based code, but not state that we will utilize it. The Commission likes the wording, "Consider utilizing form based codes." PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED President Inman feels good with the modification of 11.A.2 to say "consider" rather than "utilize" form based code. She hopes that the Commission gets the same participation when these issues come back so nothing will be dropped when we get to the implementation phase. Commissioner Walsh thinks it's a great start, the structure works, the language is supported. Commissioner Anderson noted that these tools can help with other committees and community- involvement. He likes the language and the definition sheets. He supports the proposal. Commissioner Dougherty would like staff to seriously consider the comments that Mr. Frewing made. She thinks there should be definitions to prevent confusion and misunderstandings down the road. She agrees with President Inman on the dealing with the verbiage of form based code. Commissioner Walsh moved to recommend approval to City Council of Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2006-00002, Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to update Downtown Goals, Policies and Action Measures, with the change to 11.A.2 to change the language to add "consider utilizing form based codes" in place of what is there, based on the staff report as presented and testimony given. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. OTHER BUSINESS Staff advised that the there will be a meeting with Council on April 17th to discuss Planning Commission liaison duties. It was suggested that maybe Planning Commissioners and members of other committees could alternate attending each other's meetings. It was also suggested that staff might take a bigger role in information sharing. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March 19, 2007 - Page 7 The Commissioners discussed the Form Based Code subcommittee. It was noted that form based code may be beneficial to the City and that having a subcommittee to review examples from other cities and make a recommendation is a good idea, however the committee needs parameters and a set timeline. Members of the CCAC and the Planning Commission feel they need more information before they can make a decision about form based code. Ron Bunch stated that the important thing for staff is that we're burning time; we need to move this along. Council would like to have a worksession in May about urban design in the Downtown. There will be a yes-no decision by Council soon. Bunch advised that staff has been directed to get a clear representation of what the future Downtown will look like in architectural form, block size, transportation, etc. Once we have that, we can then work backward to determine the kind of code we need to achieve that model. There are some codes and standards that can be done no matter what method we use. Staff can begin now to get an idea of what the Downtown will look like. Staff will take the leadership to put together information and work with the City Manager and Council to educate them so they can help make a decision. The subcommittee can provide an endorsement. It was decided that the subcommittee could meet before regularly scheduled Planning Commission meetings beginning on April 2❑d. Commissioners Inman and Anderson agreed to serve on the committee. Commissioner Walsh suggested having a short meeting prior to the public hearing on April 2nd to meet the new Commissioners. and talk about the meeting process. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m. Jerree fewis, Planning Commission Secretary ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - March 19, 2007 - Page 8 "t-:.r js,~~.~"""T2 ti ' s~•F~~c C r o~ r 31' c y ii _ ~~'~'S'~''7 r~ Avel, an 'If Ix It-,( sk. -f '?eiH''`3 ~ y~'a ~`3.{ f~~ s ~ 77 i~Fli~ ~~L4~"' ~ .n + 1 ~i ~7 Fa. -S • 1 1 ,.Y ~~'~+y ~ ~(`g~7~'Q` ~,-tf sy~~nx yY~..r 6~''kL^`1"' i kiti~+ ~ • • • ~ s d~ Jt r~ r ~'~Prop~~e aFJp t ~a pr t ~4 { z Y~~ ~5 ®ril ` syC r avg. af°i~ J!t ty ,7 ~1 L11~^ ~~~!~y¢$}R~y(T, • • Sbnfli!S? .~='~'~n'yfa # ~ ~x f k °!.S'ity o£Ti s ~ q y u i r "Xi 11 1 • i • i ~ ~ ~ • ~ ® ~ . ~ ~ # ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • T4'~~v~p ~ ~ .a~~'`~" xvA."r ~ ~ i ~ ~ t ~ 1 ~ ~ • ` ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • s r 0 0 r • • i r, r r ~~;40 1 1 1 1 0 1 i / / of o •1 #~~,~r.,3~,~y A,` ~ 11 1 / / PI i 1 or1 _ I y7~1~' - 77- v ~ `•--1rNn .A D..19 ^~II~rnNlw --I~~ 4 ~ , ` e • • t . ~ • M, a II • ,.l • . ~ ~ • • • . ~ II ~ • CJ o ~ ~ ~ D _ • • ~ e e ° ~ r~ e • - aA;~~;~ ~ ~ f# ~ 9 :K="'" 6 ® ~ o00 o, o ~ N ~ oe~ o, e • 0 0 1 e e e fie. ~ e 1• ee e e • ~ e~ a • e e e ~ 1e a ee C • e 1 • 2r~Ky 7 io o e i io a •r ~ • 3 7 ' coo ~ u 1 CtnaiLuDOm ,7cvmbCWaUaaaons _ o o ...e i w~.....~ o 8 • ~ ~ ' _ • ~ • o . . - ~ , . ~ ~ • e ~ 9 I~V f i • f f f • • • t • • >s •o • r 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The `Background' and `Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard, but the `Policies' of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus, there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least. some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan, but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan, such facts are provided as Volume 1, Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report, Figure I purports to show the plan area, but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP, a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure l shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP, Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map - in the TDIP Figure 1, the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings, but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map, the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP, page 30) is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include; the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities (eg a circumferential trail, street improvements) have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review (including view clearances, setback distances, pedestrian amenities, etc) in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment, including its purported factual base (TDIP, 9/27/05), seems to fall far short of the state requirements (ORS 197.015, ORS 227.170) that it "interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems, transportation systems, educational facilities, recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems" and be "based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements, transportation systems have been discussed the most, but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments, none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example, the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River, with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts, invasive species, water pollution, air.pollution, noise impacts of development, etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek (ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it, an important part of any `green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject (eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code, TSP, they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action, by any city body. For example, Figure I of Appendix C (Kittleson, 10/24/04) shows a `planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension, east of the current Tigard library - not only is this outside of any definition of downtown, but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly, the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONONHC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference, OAR 660-009-0015 (6). For example, 0015(1) requires the plan to "identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area In the present comp plan proposal, only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment, eg by SIC code. 9 OAR -0020 (1)(b) requires the city to adopt a policy "stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis (full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District' that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05, Technical Memorandum, pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency #I: In this same comp plan change, MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities, while in the TDIP noted above, MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency #2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUCH district, a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUCH calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre, but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP, multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. I I A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045 (1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air, water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas (eg flooding), Goal 11, regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? Exhibit D F711 MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) March 19, 2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing Comments DATE: March 29, 2007 At the March 19, 2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing a number of citizens gave public testimony in favor of the Amendment. Two of the speakers, Mike Stevenson and John Frewing, raised issues that will be addressed in this memo. Nonconforming Uses Mike Stevenson. a downtown property owner, raised a concern about the future of nonconforming uses under the new zoning that will be adopted. Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment contains Policy 11.1.4 which states "Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion." How to specifically treat nonconforming uses will be a major issue in the Development Code amendment process. Staff will work with stakeholders to develop acceptable regulations. An important point to consider is that many of the existing industrial and automotive repair uses in the Downtown are presently nonconforming uses. They became nonconforming when the zoning was last changed (to CBD) in 1983. Process and Procedural Issues John Frewing raised thirteen points (included as Exhibit B) regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Staff rebutted many of these points at the public hearing. Most of the points refer to processes set up to update entire Comprehensive Plans, rather than a "Post-Acknowledgement Plan Amendment" which amends a portion of an existing plan (as this one does). The City provided the required 45-day notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development, and received no 1 comment from them. If the agency had concerns with the proposed amendment, they would have provided comment to the City. Here is a rebuttal of each of Mr. Frewing's points. Mr. Frewing's comments are numbered and staff response follows: I Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. Response: All of the reports in the appendices of Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan are dated 2004 and 2005 and relied on contemporaneous data. It is unlikely that conditions in Downtown Tigard have changed to any significant degree in the past two to three years. The only data that appears to be six years old is the Census data (the latest data is from 2000) and Metro's Regional Transportation Plan completed in 2000 (currently being updated). 2 The `Background' and `Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard, but tho `Policies' of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus, there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. Response: The intention of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is to change the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to implement the TRIP It will provide the legislative foundation to adopt the specific zoning and other land use regulations that are called for in the TDIP. After this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is adopted, the next stage will be to amend the Development Code to define and map specific new zoning districts. Comprehensive Plan Amendments do not, in and of themselves, change the zoning of properties. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan, but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan, such facts are provided as Volume 1, Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. Response: The TRIP, in its entirety, contains extensive factual information that is the result of extensive research and technical analysis. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment takes its language directly from the TDIP. The TRIP will serve as the Volume 1 Resource document. In addition, as a legislative amendment, the City Council can determine what the relevant facts are to base its decision on. The Planning Commission has recommended adoption based on the findings (facts) and the conclusions in the staff report. 2 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report, Figure 1 purports to show the plan area, but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP, a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TRIP, Figure I and the Paramatrix. Technical Memorandum map - in the TDIP Figure 1, the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings, but in the Pammatrix Technical Memorandum map, the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP, page 30) is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain Response: The cover page of the staff report and elsewhere in the application identifies the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District as the location of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Included in this application is the map of the Urban Renewal District, which has been legally and specifically defined in the Urban Renewal Plan. As for the floodplan i issue, Tigard relies on the most current FEMA floodplains to administer its code. Any previous maps referred to in the TDIP are not pertinent. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment, including its purported factual base (TDIP, 9/27105), seems to fall far short of the state requirements (ORS 197.015, ORS 227.170) that it "interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems, transportation systems, educational facilities, recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems" and be "based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements, transportation systems have been discussed the most, but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments, none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example, the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Farmo Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River, with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts, invasive species, water pollution, air pollution, noise impacts of development, etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements ofa central gathering place near Fanno Creek (ie it must be moved away from the stream fiuther than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it, an important part of any 'green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject (eg Costco parking acreage). Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment is being adopted under the "post- acknowledgement plan amendment process" outlined in ORS 197.610. DLCD was sent a copy of the proposed amendment 45 days in advance of the hearing and has not indicated any problems. Under 197.610, it is not necessary to "interrelate all functional and natural systems and activities." The update of the entire Comprehensive Plan will follow this requirement. The Green/Corridor Urban Creek as described in TDIP would be a man-made feature. The feasibility and scope of this proposed project will be determined as part 3 of the Downtown Urban Design Plan. A comprehensive plan would not be the appropriate forum to describe the details of this potential project. 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for f dwe modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code, TSP, they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action, by any city body. For example, Figure 1 of Appendix C (Kittlesm, 10124/04) shows a `planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension, east of the current Tigard library - not only is this outside of any definition of downtown, but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly, the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. Response: City Council resolution 05-62 accepted the findings and recommendations of the TDIP, as well as the associated TDIP documents. Council directed staff to use the Plan's goals, objectives, and recommended actions as a guide for future programming of Downtown improvements. However if an appendix document within the TDIP is contradicted by another adopted Plan, the adopted Plan would take precedence. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference. OAR 660-009-0015 (6). For example, 0015(1) requires the plan to "identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area In the present comp plan proposal, only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment, eg by SIC code. 9 OAR -0020 (1)(b) requires the city to adopt a policy "stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis...." (full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. Response: The regulations regarding economic development refer to Comprehensive Plans covering an entire jurisdiction, not a post-acknowledgement plan amendment such as this. The Comprehensive Plan, currently being updated, will address the entire City- wide Economic Development issues. The Economy chapter will include supply and demand of industrial and employment land, and related issues. 4 HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a 'Commercial Professional District' that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05, Technical Memorandum, pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency #1: In this same camp plan change, MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities, while in the TDIP noted above, MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency #2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district, a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TD1P. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre, but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP, multifamily housing in the MLJC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. Response: Policy 5.5 provides policy specifying where complementary residential development shall be allowed in some commercial zones all around the city. It does not only apply to the Downtown. Policy 5.5 needed to be amended to allow complementary housing in all zones of the Urban Renewal District, (not only above the second floor as the Policy currently states). The zoning matters referred to by Mr. Frewing as "inconsistencies" actually are not related to the Downtown. The zones referred to are existing mixed used zones throughout the City. At any rate, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not instituting new zoning designations, but setting the legislative ground work to make future changes. I I A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045 (1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. Response: A Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) is available on the City's website and up to date as of January 1, 2007. It is not necessary to include the BLI with this post- acknowledgement Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 13 Note to roviow: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18380 and 18.390?? Response: All applicable procedures for City-initiated Type IV Amendments have been followed and meet the requirements of 18.380 and 18.390. 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The `Background' and `Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TRIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard, but the `Policies' of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus, there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan, but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan, such facts are provided as Volume 1, Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report, Figure I purports to show the plan area, but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP, a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP, Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map - in the TDIP Figure 1, the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings, but in the Paramatrix, Technical Memorandum map, the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP, page 30) is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include; the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities (eg a circumferential trail, street improvements) have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review (including view clearances, setback distances, pedestrian amenities, etc) in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment, including its purported factual base (TDIP, 9/27/05), seems to fall far short of the state requirements (ORS 197.015, 'ORS 227.170) that it "interrelates all functional and . natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems, transportation systems, educational facilities, recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems" and be "based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans" Of these minimum scope requirements, transportation systems have been discussed the most, but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments, none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example, the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River, with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts, invasive species, water pollution, air pollution, noise impacts of development, etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek (ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it, an important part of any `green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject (eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code, TSP, they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action, by. any city body. For example, Figure 1 of Appendix C (Kittleson, 10/24/04) shows a `planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension, east of the current Tigard library - not only is this outside of any definition of downtown, but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly, the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOWC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference, OAR 660-009-0015 (6). For example, 0015(1) requires the plan to "identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area In the present comp plan proposal, only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment, eg by SIC code. 9 OAR -0020 (1)(b) requires the city to adopt a policy "stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis (full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District' that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05, Technical Memorandum, pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency #1: In this same comp plan change, MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities, while in the TDIP noted above, MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be . resolved. Inconsistency #2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district, a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the 1'DIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre, but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP, multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045 (1). This should be provided to comply with state rules.. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air, water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas (eg flooding), Goal 11, regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: April 24, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 TO ADD NEW DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Proponent (Speaking in Favor) Opponent (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print Name: Name: 5V-Q- 761~ Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if will help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer -51 'el- I ) CZ pronounce: Address Address q x_ Address City City State Zip State 67):7- Zip q:Ja.L 7---? City Phone No. Phone No. 3 g' '3 State Zip Phone No. Name: Name: Name: Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if will help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address Address City City Address State Zip State Zip City Phone No. Phone No. State Zip Phone No. Sean Farrelly - Re Downtown Tigard Com Plan Amendments m _ age 1 -s -F 'Su bm From: Ron Bunch To: Farrelly, Sean; Frewing, John Date: 4/19/2007 1:26:59 PM Subject: Re: Downtown n Tigard rd Com Plan Amendments ~C!GZ T CX Hello John: We will include the Email in the written testimony and will bring Council attention to it at the 24th hearing. Best wishes and have a wonderful tilme in Hawaii. SUPPLE ENTAL PACKET Ron FOR ? a of Ron Bunch (DA E OF MEETING) Long Range Planning Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 503-718-2427 ron@tigard-or.gov "John Frewing" <jfrewing@teleport.com> 04/19 6:13 AM Ron, Please include this testimony in the record for the April 24 City Council consideration of Comp Plan amendments relating to Downtown Tigard: I repeat my earlier testimony provided to City staff regarding the Comp Plan amendments proposed to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Program. The proposal departs grossly from common sense and prior practice of this City Council wherein changes are evaluated against all of the state Land Use Goals and judged to be relevant or not relevant. Thank you, John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CC: Farrelly, Sean Agenda Item # 7 Meeting Date April 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title E & V~D~evvelopment Company, Ballot Measure 37 Claim (M372006-00007) Prepared By: Cheryl Cain es Dept Head Approval: City AIgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL To consider a Ballot Measure 37 claim for compensation or waiver of Tigard wetland regulations for property located along Greenburg Road in Tigard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached ordinance granting Ballot Measure 37 waiver of the Tigard Development Code wedand regulations. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY E & V Development Company is seeking a waiver of the current land use regulations that restrict development within wetlands on a .41 acre site located on Greenburg Road, south of Highway 217. Ballot Measure 37 established a process whereby a property owner or family member who acquired property prior to the adoption of land use regulations can make a claim if the land use regulation has restricted the use of property and reduced the market value of the property. The unit of government responsible for the regulation must either pay compensation for the reduced property value or waive the regulation. The application form shows June 1967 as the date the Claimant (E & V Development Co.) acquired the property. The deed provided by the Claimant shows that Eugene and Vivian Davis conveyed the property to E & V Development Company in 1979. Both of these dates precede the adoption of City wetland regulations in 1983. The property is part of the Ash Creek Park Condominium development. The site provides access and some parking for the condominium development. The current zoning is R-12 (Medium Density Residential), and the site is within the Washington Square Regional Center. The Claimant states that waiver is requested in order to construct a four-plex on the site. The Claimant also states the reduction in property value is approximately $398,150.00. Neither a specific site plan nor documentation supporting this amount was submitted with the application. Should the City Council choose to grant the waiver, it is suggested that the waiver be granted to the owner, E & V Development Co., and not the land and be specific to allow waiver of the City's wetland regulations as requested by the Claimant. Once a site development review application is filed, the application is to be processed under the current standards except for regulations specific to wetlands. Development then may occur consistent with a site development review approval. After development, changes of ownership will not affect the continued use of what was approved. However, expansion or modification will be subject to the regulations in effect at the time of such future application. Location of the wetland is not definitive because no wetland delineation was provided. Generalized City wetland maps indicate that a portion of the property is likely in a wetland (Attachment 3). Waiver of the City's wetland regulations does not provide the claimant waiver of other jurisdictional wetland regulations. These jurisdictions include the Oregon Division of State Lands, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Washington County Clean Water Services. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Deny the waiver. 2. Pay compensation to the land owner in which case the City may want to obtain its own market assessment of the amount of compensation. CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Ordinance waiving City wetland regulations. Attachment 2: Staff Report Exhibit A: Vicinity Map Attachment 3: Tigard Significant Wetlands Map (generalized) Attachment 4: Applicant's Materials FISCAL NOTES The applicant provided a $1,000 deposit to cover application review costs. This deposit will be refunded to the applicant if the claim or waiver is granted. There are no budgeted funds to pay compensation. QTY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL L y1.) S e l0 r1 C, ORDINANCE NO. 07- rn /I or- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS TO GRANT A BALLOT MEASURE 37 WAIVER OF THE J TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE WETLAND REGULATIONS FOR THE .41 ACRE SITE ON GREENBURG ROAD, SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 217 (WCIM 1S135(aA, TAX LOT 02800) SUBJECT TO APPLYING FOR AND RECEIVING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL (M372006-00007). WHEREAS, the voters of the State of Oregon passed Ballot Measure 37 in 2004; and WHEREAS, Ballot Measure 37 provides the responsible governing body to either pay compensation for reduced property value or waive the regulations where property is owned prior to the adoption of land use regulations; and WHEREAS, a claim was made byE & V Development Co. in the amount of $398,150.00 as the net difference in the value of the property under the Tigard Development code in place in September 1979; and WHEREAS, E & V Development Co. has owned the property since September 1979 preceding the adoption of regulations limiting development within wetlands. NOW, TI EREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The attached staff report (Attachment 2) and applicant's materials (Attachment 4) are hereby adopted as findings. SECIION2: A waiver from the City of Tigard wetland regulations is hereby granted to E & V Development Co. to allow construction of a four-plex. E & V Development Co. may apply for Site Development Review under all non-wetland regulations in place on the date of application. Once the property is developed, it may continue to be used as developed, even if there are changes in ownership or tenants. Once E & V Development Co. ceases to be the owner, expansions or major modification beyond development applied for during this ownership shall be subject to the land use regulations in effect at the time of application. SECTION 3: This waiver applies to 11040 SW Greenburg Road; WCFM 1S135CA, Tax Lot 02800. SECTION 4: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the Clty Recorder. ORDINANCE No. 07- Page 1 PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of , 2007. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of )2007. Craig Dirksen, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 07- Page 2 ATTACHMENT 2 Agenda Item: Hearin Date: April 24, 200 Time: :30 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD,. OREGON 180-DAY CLAIM PROCESSING PERIOD = 6-2-2007 SECTION I. CLAIM SUMMARY FILE NAME: E&V DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM CITY CASE NO. MEASURE 37 CLAIM (M37) M372006-00007 CLAIMANT/ E&V Development (E. & V. Davis) OWNER 10875 SW 89 Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 CLAIMANT'S Not Applicable. REPRESENTATIVE CLAIM: The claimant seeks to build a four plex (rowhouses). The applicant alleges that wetland regulations restrict the use of the property. The amount claimed as compensation without waiver of regulations is $398,156. AFFECTED REGULATION: Applicable wetland regulations under TDC 18.775. ZONING DESIGNATION: R 12: Medium-Density. LOCATION: 11040 SW Greenburg Road; WCIM 1S135CA, Tax lot 02800. APPLICABLE CODE CRITERIA Municipal Code Chapter 1.20. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council review the following report and determine whether the claim is valid. Staff further recommends that City Council opt for a waiver of the City's wetland regulations. E &V DEVELOPMENT CONTENSAMON CLAIM STAFF REPORT (IvLi7200600007 PAGE 1 OF S CITY COUNCIL HEARING 4/24/2007 SECTION III. BACKGROUND The subject parcel is .41 acres and contains lawn area and driveway to the Ash Creek Park Condominiums. Other than the adjacent condominiums on a separate parcel, no development applications have been made for this particular parcel. SECTION III. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Section 1.20.030 states a property owner wishing to make a claim against the City under Measure 37 shall first submit a claim to the City. A claim under Measure 37 must be in writing and include: A. Identification of the affected property. Identification may be by street address, subdivision lot number, tax lot number, or any other information that identifies the property. The claimant identifies the property as indicated previously and also designated, as Tax lot 02800, WCTM 1S135CA, 11040 SW Greenburg Road. B. The name and contact information of the person making the claim, the date the Claimant acquired the property, and, if applicable, the date that a family member of Claimant acquired the property and the names and relationships of family members that are previous owners. The name and contact information of the persons makin the claim is Eugene and Vivian Davis as E&V Development, 10875 SW 89a' Avenue, Tigard, OR, 97223 503-246-5862). The property was acquired by the claimants in June, 1967. They submitted a copy of a warranty deed that shows the property was conveyed to E&V Development on December 24, 1979. C. A list of all persons with an ownership interest in or a lien on the property. No Title Report was submitted. See B. above. Identification of the regulation that is alleged to restrict the use of the affected property and a statement describing how the restriction affects the value of the property. The claimant only lists wetlands regulations and that they wish to build a four plex t whouses) next to the condominiums. Since the claim is not specific to individual wetlands regulations, . assumed that all qty wetland regulations are claimed. It is important to note that there is no specific wetlands delineation to determine the extent of limitation. Normally, wetlands are delineated as part of a land use application. Generalized City wetland maps indicate that a portion of the property is likely in wetland. Without a specific delineation, however, the boundary cannot be determined nor can the impact of the wetlands regulations. It must also be pointed out that waiver of City wetland regulations does not provide the claimant waiver of other jurisdiction wetland regulations. This could include the Oregon Division of State Lands, the US Anny Corps of Engineers and Washington County Clean Water Services. Attachment # 3 is a copy of the generalized location of wetlands as shown on City maps. E. A statement whether the Claimant prefers compensation or a waiver, suspension or modification of the regulation, and a statement describing the extent to which the re&uation would need to be waived, suspended or modified to avoid the need for compensation. A description of the proposed use must be provided. Under claim preference, the claimant lists only "We want to build a four plex (rowhouses next to our condos that we built)". This implies they would prefer a waiver. F. The amount claimed as compensation and documentation supporting the amount. The documentation shall include a market analysis, an appraisal, or other documentation at least equivalent to a market analysis. The claimant claimed $398,150 as compensation but did not provide documentation supporting the amount. E & V DEVELOPMENT COMPENSATION CIAIM STAFF REPORT (M372006-00007) PAGE 2 OF 5 QTY COUNCIL HEARING 4/24/2007 G. The name and contact information of the Claimant's authorized representative or representatives, if applicable. No representative is listed. Only E&V Development (Gene Davis) 10875 SW 89`' Avenue, Tigard, OR 97223, 503- 246-5862 is listed. Section 1.20.080 outlines the criteria for making a decision on the compensation claim. In deciding the claim, the Decision Maker may take any of the following actions: Deny the claim based on any one or more of the following findings: a. The regulation does not restrict the use of the private real property. Without a wetland delineation, it is impossible to determine how wetland regulations limit the property. The Cis wetland regulations, however, are restrictive in some circumstances. City wetland mapping indicates that e property is impacted by a designated significant wetland. Landform alterations or development is not allowed within significant wetlands. As a result, the regulations will likely impact the ability to develop a four plex to some extent. b. The fair market value of the property is not reduced by the passage or enforcement of the regulation. The claimant has only indicated a claim of $398,150. It is unclear whether this is a claim for the prohibition of all development or a limitation on the development. If the wetland regulations actually impact the development potential, it can then be deduced that the fair market value was reduced. How much or to what extent cannot be determined without a plan and application of the wetland regulations and how they interface with other land use regulations. c. The claim was not timely filed. The claim was filed on December 4, 2006 which was the last day to file a claim two years after the passage of Measure 37. d. The Claimant is not the current property owner. While no title report was provided, the claimant indicated purchase of the property in June, 1967 and the transfer of the property to E&V Development in 1979. Both of these dates precede the current wetland regulations. e. The Claimant or family member of Claimant was not the property owner at the time the regulation was adopted. The City was incorporated in 1961. Wetland regulations did not exist in the development code in 1967. Wetland regulations were not adopted until 1983 and have been amended numerous times since then. f. The regulation is a historically and commonly recognized nuisance law or a law regulating pornography or nude dancing. While there may be some argument that regulations protecting wetlands and natural areas are nuisance related, they have not been litigated with respect to Measure 37. g. The regulation is required by federal law. Other jurisdictions such as the US Army Corps of Engsneers and the Oregon Division of State Lands have established wetland regulations that are different yet complimentary to the City of Tigard wetland regulations. The Claimant must either comply with other regulations or file claims where appropriate. We have no information whether claims were filed at the State or County level. Measure 37, however, does not apply to federal regulations. E &V DEVELOPMENT COMPENSATION CLAIM STAFF REPORT (M37200600007) PAGE 3 OF 5 QTY ODUNOIL IMARING 4/24/2007 h. The regulation protects public health and safety. Wetland regulations help to maintain the integrity of rivers, stream and creek systems by nuinir ai mi g pollution, promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quali ty and fish and wildlife habitats. These may be partially related to public health and safety but once again have not been litigated with respect to Measure 37. i. The City is not the entity responsible for payment. The City is not responsible if the challenged law, rule, ordinance, resolution, goal or other enactment was not enacted or enforced by the City. The City has enacted wetland regulations which may impact the property in question. j. The City has not taken final action to enforce or apply the regulation to the property for which compensation is claimed. No detailed development plan or land use proposal has been reviewed or final action taken on to apply the challenged regulations. The City could force the clanmant to apply by denying the claim. The claimant then has the option of making application which then provides two years from the date of the decision to file a claim or to go directly to circuit court for a determination. k. The City has not established a fund for payment of claims under Measure 37. No such fund has been established at this time. 1. The Claimant is not legally entitled to compensation for a reason other than those listed in subsections a through k.. The basis for this finding must be clearly explained. Staff finds no other reasons, aside from those already listed, to deny the claim. 2. Pay compensation, either in the amount requested or in some other amount supported by the evidence. If the City pays compensation, the City shall continue to apply and enforce the regulation. Any compensation shall be paid from funds ap ropriated for that purpose. The City may require any person receiving compensation to sign a waiver of tuture claims for compensation under Measure 37 and the City may record that waiver with the County Recorder. The City Council will need to make a determination of whether funds may be appropriated to pay any valid claim. To pay an alternative monetary claim would require an appraisal of the impact of the regulations and there is no way to determine how that alternative would relate to this claim. 3. Waive or not apply the regulation to allow the owner to use the property for a use permitted at the time the Claimant acquired the property. The City Council shall decide whether to pay the claim or waive the regulation. Staff recommends that should a waiver be granted, it shall run with the person, not the land, and shall be a specific exemption to the City wetland regulations. 4. Modify the regulation so that it does not give rise to a claim for compensation. Any such modification shall be for the specific property only unless the City follows the procedure for a legislative land use decision. Waiving wetlands re ations will still require the claimant to meet other jurisdiction requirements and, the remainder of the City and use regulations. E & V DEVELOPMENT COMPENSATION CLAIM STAFF REPORT "7200&00007) PAGE 4 OF 5 CITY COUNCa. HEARING 4/24/2007 5. Conditionally waive or suspend the regulation subject to receipt of a defined amount of contributions toward compensation by a specified date from persons oppposed to the waiver or suspension, such as affected ?Posed persons who believe they would be negatively y or suspension, with the waiver or suspension being granted if the defined amount of contributions is not received by the specified date. If the contributions are received, compensation shall be paid within 180 days of the date the claim was filed. The specified date shall allow the City time to process the contributions and pay compensation. No contributions for compensation have been identified at this time. The Decision Maker may take other actions it deems appropriate in individual circumstances, may modify the listed actions, and/or may combine the listed actions, consistent with Measure 37. The Decision Maker may negotiate an acceptable solution with the Claimant or may direct staff to negotiate with the Claimant. In the event that the Decision Maker directs staff to negotiate, the matter shall be set for further action by the Decision Maker no less than 175 days from the date of the notice of claim became complete. The Council shall take final action within 180 days of the claim. The Decision Maker shall take actions 2 through 5 only if it determines the claim is valid. Given the date of this analysis, it is impossible to enter a process of resolution and resolve the claim within 180 days. The staff recommendation suggests waiver of the City s wetland regulations. The claimant should file a development application and apply according to all regulations except those relating to City wetland regulation. Requirements of other jurisdictions must be completed by the claimant. A decision by a Decision Maker other than Council shall not be a final decision, but shall be a recommendation to Council. This report represents only a recommendation to the City Council and is not a final decision of the Caty. SECTION IV. CONCLUSION Staff finds that it is possible that wetland regulations could restrict the development of the parcel in question. With respect to that, it is suggested that the City wetland regulations be waived. An ordinance adopting the staff report and establishing a waiver of the wetland regulations of 18.775 of the Tigard Development code has been prepared for Council Consideration. h Q. 0 March 26, 2007 PREPARED BY Cheryl Caines DATE Assistant Planner March 26, 2007 APPRO B Dick Bew rsd rff DATE Planning Man er E &V DE VELOPMENI' C OMPENSATI ON CLAIM STAFF REPORT (M372006-00007) PAGE 5 OF 5 CITY COUNCIL HEARING 4/24/2007 I , GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM a VICINITY MAP FE - - M372006-00007 x W i I E& V DEVELOPMENT - MI?ASURF, 37 CLAIM AVE--L.._- SHADY LN T J LEGEND: PL Subject Site ~'A ~ 1R5 rFnrt c o o°o° i. cc= A_ w I h- Iff I ..i i 1 t 1 - ~O n:.~vJr,nn ROJ'' .__nugr/A•:,._LI RO i:Y CJ Il ~ / I • ° Ili1~n1_JJJ %Iird Are. Map NORTH DAKOTA TH_ _ c- N 0 80 160 240 320 400 Feet W r-.. 1"= 311 feet EE Q Information on this map is for general location only and snould be verified Will, the Development Services Division. W 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 ' - I http:/Av- ci.Ggard.or.us t f- Q ~i ~ • 4i ~ - ~ , t r~,ny~ as Its' art, a ~5~-. t. . B~ ~ /A All ~ 'G a 10i _ e°aN. n.i" t •t .Gt Tjc3 Y•"„'' i""ttarrs `t.c g~! r rans'~s „s, ! - e+f~'~~ ~;~Rry •rfk u;~~zt~r,~C`'y,'~6a'~` 1:.~ ~'~.'P 't7~i~a'#,.., 3~ t .nS S v"' - ®~t rotS ors, I~ q r , j-~7at 7T qR r ii'>ts't.'~Ir` M~ r .,.7,i4rra s~wa~ o m a s ao, es,.0! ms t? g f .'~,.Y't~"yxrw.#'Y<t 1, t7' ♦ r 4~7A+ a ,..rl"rS .art y?.: f' KC to dir..; r, ..r j a. ~c, 1 k~~"r NORTH a a Geograpilic Infonii r wetlands . ~onS Rnnge Plunnir anon NON-SIG mmw icy Bevelo'6 ,ion. III ` W . Pm¢ntpepanmem yst'-e- SIGNIF(CAt IFICANT Tigard RiNT USA Water Setback Y Buffer ATTACHMENT 4 PROCEDURE FOR BALLOT ME §e i ED ax zd, " COMPENSATION CLAIM DEC o 4 zoos City of Tigard Pawn Caster 13125 SWHaU B1 7i OR 97223 Phony 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 CITY OF T{Cp,Rp PLANNINGIENGG iNEERINC The claim must be in writing and include the information listed below. The claim shall not be considered filed until all of the requirements of the procedure are met: FOR STAFF USE ONLY Case No.: 37 ,1" 1 0-01" Application Accepted By. Date: 1 0 Date Determined Complete: Deposit $1,000 (Deposit to be refunded if claim is determined to be valid If claim is denied and ultimately determined invalid, the claimant shall reimburse the sty for the costs the City incurs in processing the claim. If reimbursement exceeds the deposit, the claimant sball pay any additional amount within 30 days of a demand by the City for full pant. If costs are less than the de sit, the difference wrll be refunded to the claimant) IDENTIFICATION OF AFFECTED PROPERTY Property Street Address/Location(s): Tax Map & Tax Lot # (s): I ..S 1_14' ~ 4 Subdivision Lot # (s):_~ ~`T> CLAIMANT INFORMATION C j2ee-17ri Property Owners/Claimants/Deed Holders*: 9, Address: Phone: Caty/State: Zip: (Attach list if mo than one) Date Claimant Acquired Property-4 Z71, Date Family Member of Claimant Acquired Property (if applicable): Names and Relationships of Family Members that. are Previous Owners (if applicable): (Attach list if additional space is needed) Lien/Security Interest Holders of the.affected property Address: Phone: City/State: Zip (Attach list if more than one) When the owner and the applicant.are different people, all owners of the affected property must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form. If the affected property is owned by two or more persons and not all owners seek compensation, all owners who do not seek compensation shall sign a waiver of the right to compensation. REGULATION RESTRICI'INGUSE Identify the regulation that is alleged to restrict use of affected property. Provide a statement describing how the restriction affects the value of the property. (Attach additional materials as necessary) LtWa CLAIM PREFERENCE Provide a statement of whether claimant prefers compensation or a waiver, suspension, or modification of the regulation. Z Include a statement describing the extent to which the regulation would need to be waived, suspended, or modified to avoid the need for compensation. A description of the proposed use must be'provided. (Attach additional materials as necessary) AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION The amount claimed as compensation: 4td ~M f 4 ~1 Provide documentation supporting. the amount Said documentation shall include a market analysis, appraisal, or other documentation at least equivalent to a market analysis. Claimants' Authorized Representative(s) if applicable. SIGNATURES.of each owner of the subject property. DATED this 4W day of 2044~ is 49 4 e i e Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Re.vz 7isiat i\aupta\mastas\Iwd use applications\bAot mentue 37 claim form.doc CITY OF TIGA" 12/5/2006 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 8:15:25AM Tigard, OR 97223 503.639.4171 Receipt 27200600000000005706 Date: 12/05/2006 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid M372006-00007 [M37-CD] Measure 37 Deposit 100-0000-229080 1,000.00 Line Item Total: $1,000.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID Acct./Check No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check GENE DAVISNIVIAN M DAVIS ST 1198 In Person 1,000.00 Payment Total: $1,000.00 cReceiptxpt Page 1 of I Attachment 2 (b) CITY OF TIGARD . ORDINANCE NO, 04-)--'5 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 04-12 PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION UNDER 2004 BALLOT MEASURE 37, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 1.20 TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, on November 23, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 04-02 without incorporating the written Exhibit A that had been distributed and directed that a revised Exhibit A be prepared to include specific changes; and WHEREAS, a revised Exhibit A has been prepared that includes the changes requested by the Council; now, therefore; THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Ordinance 04-12 is hereby amended by adding an Exhibit A to that ordinance in the form of the attached Exhibit A. The Tigard Municipal Code is consequently amended as provided in Ordinance 04-12 and Exhibit A. SECTION 2: Because this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of the health, safety and welfare of the City, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall be in fall force and effect immediately on passage. PASSED: By m CI N-) vote of all Council members present after. being read by number and itle only, this Ig0day of eCem~r 2004. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of 2004. r Craig D ksen, Mayor Approved as to fo ' V ~ 'ty Attorney V ORDINANCENo.04 Page 1 • r 1 ~ EXIIIBIT A TO CITY OF TIGARD ORDINANCE NO. • I~ PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION UNDER 2004 BALLOT. MEASURE 37, INCLUDING A PROVISION FOR ACTION BY NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 1.20 TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE. Chapter 1.20 Compensation for Reduction in Property Value 1.20.010 Purpose The purpose of this Chapter is to provide procedures and standards.for claims for compensation made pursuant to 2004 Measure 37. 1.20.020 Definitions As used in this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise: "Affected property" means the private real property that is alleged to have suffered a reduction in fair market value as result of the City's regulation restricting the use of that property and for which a properly owner seeks compensation for the reduction in value. "Claimant" means the property owner who submits a claim for compensation. under Measure 37 in accordance with Section 120.030. "Decision Maker" means the- City Council or any person, board, commission, or other entity to whom the Council has delegated authority to make decisions on Measure 37 claims. "Regulation" shall mean a provision of the City's comprehensive plan, Community Development Code and transportation ordinances. "Restricts the use of property" means prohibiting -a particular use of the property or making that use only permissible under certain conditions. Regulations requiring or setting fees to be charged are not restrictions on the use of property. "Manager" means City Manager or designee. 1.20.030 Claims A. A property owner wishing to make a claim against the City under Measure 37 shall first submit a written claim to the City. A claim under Measure must be in writing and include: ORDINANCE No. 04- Page 2 1. Identification of the affected property. Identification may be by street address, subdivision lot number, tax lot number, or any other information that identifies the property. 2. The name and contact information of the person making the claim, the date the Claimant acquired the property, and, if applicable, the date that a family member of Claimant acquired the property and the names and relationships of family members that are previous owners. 3. A list of all persons with an ownership interest in or a lien on the property. 4. Identification of the regulation that is alleged to restrict the use of the affected property and a statement describing how the restriction affects the value of the property. 5. A statement whether the Claimant prefers compensation or a waiver, suspension or modification of the regulation, and a statement describing the extent to which the regulation would need to be waived, suspended or modified to avoid the need for compensation. A description of the proposed use must be provided 6. The. amount claimed as compensation and documentation supporting the amount The documentation shall include a market analysis, an appraisal, or other documentation at least equivalent to a market analysis. 7. The name and contact information of the Claimant's authorized representative or representatives, if applicable. 1.20.040 Notice The City shall provide notice of the hearing required by Section 1.20.070 to all owners of the property, lien holders and security interest holders, record owners of property within 500 feet of the property, recognized community participation organizations for the area the property is located, and anyone who has requested notice at least 7 days before the hearing. The notice shall identify the property, state the date; time and place of the hearing, state the amount of the claim or statement describing the extent to which the regulations would need to be waived or suspended, the City contact person and phone number, advise of the availability of the staff report and summarize the hearing procedures and nature of the claim. Failure of any person to receive notice or any defect in the notice shall not invalidate any action taken or decision made at the hearing. 1.20.050 Staff Report City staff shall prepare a report analyzing the claim. The staff report may be reviewed by the Community Development Director, Finance Director, and Manager before being submitted to the Decision Maker. ORDINANCE No. 04- ~j Page 3 The staff report shall be submitted to the Decision Maker, mailed to the Claimant, and made available to the public at least 7 days before the public hearing required by Section 1.20.070. 1.20.060 Decision Maker Proceedings The Decision Maker shall hold a public hearing on the claim. The public hearing should normally be set within 150 days of submission of the claim but may be set at any time. The Decision Maker may bold an executive session on the claim at any time. 1.20.070 Public Hearing The Claimant and any other person shall be provided a reasonable opportunity to present evidence and argument at the public hearing. The Decision Maker may limit the duration of testimony. 1.20.080 Decision Maker Decision In deciding the claim, the Decision Maker may take any of the following actions: 1. Deny the claim based on any one or more of the following findings: a. The regulation does not restrict the use of the private real property, b. The fair market value of the property is not reduced by the passage or enforcement of the regulation., C. The claim was not timely filed. d. The Claimant is not the current property owner. e. The Claimant or family member of Claimant was not the property owner at the time the regulation was adopted. f: The regulation is a historically and commonly recognized nuisance law or a law regulating pornography or nude dancing. g. The regulation is required by federal law. h. The.regulation protects public health and safety. i. The City is not the entity responsible for payment. The City is not responsible if the challenged law, rule, ordinance, resolution, goal.or other enactment was not enacted or enforced by the City. ORDINANCE No. 04- ?j Page 4 j. The City has not taken final action to enforce or apply the regulation to the property for which compensation is claimed. k. The Claimant is not legally entitled to compensation for a reason other than those listed in subsections a through g. The basis for this finding must be clearly explained. 1. The City has not established a fund for payment of claims under Measure 37. 2. Pay compensation, either in the amount requested or in some other amount supported by the evidence. If the City pays compensation, the City shall continue to apply and enforce the regulation. Any compensation shall be paid from funds appropriated for that purpose. The City may require any person receiving compensation to sign a waiver of future . claims for compensation under Measure 37 and the City may record that waiver with the County Recorder. .3. Waive or not apply the regulation to allow the owner to use the proper ty for a use permitted at the time the Claimant acquired the property. 4. Modify the regulation so that it does not give rise to a claim for compensation. Any such modification shall be for the specific property only unless the City follows the procedure for a legislative land use decision. 5. Conditionally waive or suspend the regulation subject to receipt of a defined amount of contributions toward compensation by a specified date from persons opposed to the waiver or suspension, such as persons who believe they would be negatively affected by waiver or suspension, with the waiver or suspension being granted if the defined amount of contributions is not received by the specified date. If the contributions are received, compensation shall be paid within 180 days of the date the claim was filed. The specified date shall allow the City time to process the contributions and pay compensation. The Decision Maker may take other actions it deems appropriate in individual circumstances, may modify the listed actions, and/or may combine the listed actions, consistent with Measure 37. The Decision Maker may negotiate an acceptable solution with the Claimant or may direct staff to negotiate with the Claimant In the event that the Decision Maker directs staff to negotiate, the matter shall be set for finther action by the Decision Maker no less than 175 days ftom*the date of the notice of claim became complete. The Council shall take final action within 180 days of the claim. The Decision Maker shall take actions .2 through 5 only if it determines the claim is valid. A decision by a Decision Maker other than Council shall not be a final decision, but shall be a recommendation to Council. ORDINANCE No. 04- / Page 5 . s ' 1 1.20.090 Delegation of Authority and City Council Review The. Council may delegate authority to act as a Decision Maker to any person, board, commission or other entity by motion, resolution or ordinance. The Council shall review all recommendations of the Decision Maker and make the final decision. If a Decision Maker other than Council has made a recommendation to Council, Council may act on the recommendation by motion, or order without a Council hearing. The Council may approve recommendations on its consent agenda. 1.20.100 Action by Neighboring Property Owners If a Claim results in a waiver of enforcement of a regulation and the development allowed by the waiver causes a reduction in value of other property located in the vicinity of the Claimant, those property owners shall have the right to maintain an action against the Claimant in state circuit court to recover the amount of the reduction. The nearby properly owners, if successful, shall be entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees. This section does not create a right of action against the City. 1.20.110 Authority The City Council shall have the authority to take the actions listed in Section 1.20.080, including the authority. to waive or suspend any provision of any City code, ordinance or resolution, notwithstanding any inconsistent provision in this code or the Community Development Code: The City may retain an appraiser to assist the Decision Maker or Council determination. . 1..20.120 Deposit and Responsibility for Costs The Claimant shall provide a deposit of $1,000 at the time the claim is filed with the City. -If the claim is determined to be valid, the City shall refund the entire deposit. If a claim is denied and ultimately determined to be invalid, the Claimant shall reimburse the City for the costs the City incurred in processing the claim If the amount of reimbursement exceeds the cost of deposit, the Claimant shall pay any additional amounts within 30 days of a demand by the City for full reimbursement. If the amount of reimbursement is less than the deposit; the City shall refund the difference to the Claimant. The City.shall provide an invoice detailing its costs when demanding additional reimbursement or providing a partial refund. 110.130 Severability If any section, phrase, clause, or part of this Chapter is found to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining phrases, clauses, and parts shall remain in full force and effect. ORDINANCE No. 04- ) ?j Page 6 7~' u t•. r. . rt aeta_a....7a.. y.. w+ry 4...+.rt e.. ~ _ _ t AIRFAA,r ss+s-arATUMV tnw 79039753 i' EMEtK L. DAVIS and wvw iAVIS one. y r;~ mwyr AVO rartrMr to .E.t..V.OEIKlOrnENi .CQ.. an OroW..tor"ret loa Ororw, w ta/lnety doatbN ral /Ma4 fwe of aaWit m grogleafh ow hrvA AwM dared in wash logton tea: t7rep4 is rift P Fi? o f» K Albit A attach! herato aad by this roforanto made a part bar f. 1 M ON* oftw"Ima. mean woorar am ertm rro Iti: a. P 'ys 1$a MW PGVM V h hw 6aar 4W WAUM aaw .moat 4 Lp!tO~tIR _ - - _ : ?Wry! - - uf• - R. rho anowwa*n for lien 479wgawa L lHo-DA0M0_ (qma a w%* muk tie apuirunola of am IsM ` laeau .4 •ti dTAfJT t7/ tfJt/QDA Covri d..lmltnorah___)aa . ~S~ta~sr_._.._.._.wf!_~_ ro maw 00 &A abare aaaraf ~ 9_Ita_.QfaT~ta Y1Y~d4.la11f1!_ _ . atlsm.fnyd !b. to b _ ~gfantars ad err/ died. Is. rt~7flf ttti~ T irdlt QI aRAQW On WMdft s0w IN --a.ea.rrrA.i atlrr . t::. I~SQ'.S tV:: -laradalrait Moir. rs mar : r,.•:'_ ~re:..~.v( •r,' s _ off' r ~Y~r~ ~H i f ~~(.i it i.~; :.ti, :1:'i•~• ' vS 'if• ~~S •y iy `,z ~!yl'%• ~t'j:-47 Vic: 't:'-'- - • .n-:•i..: ~:i ray, J =SUIT A t'r,ge 1 Real Property. stlented to live County of wuhilwton. Stole of eioa. m folloem ,x • Paa00li t ~ Y ~ t.; _i.Y•. t woplog at live Boulhwad corner of the D. C. OraMm omit" Land Ciptm No. st In To+lddp 1 Sevilt. "o t ttat of the ~ ~ Ml is M erldaN NarMr plan Cowdy. Oregon, and "Inning thence Eat oloall the South lira of raid donation lad delea. INT.9 fed to 21 r . •r i eorrtnr a[ Imi earlale vat of IWO enmity to w • d by dad ar recorded an pop s of Volume tat of stnsatnet, on County, Oregon, Dow Reeoda. wiefaa petal is the !roe petal oinollK rd the heroin doenxibed tract of tard, end "web poof the ,r Morthft hatoeisry tine of I%& ltegof Meattle Rahway right of wayl theme from the !,sore deso<ihad pmt of boombill. south sror vat darg thf Mortlierly boundary Ilff of mid Oregon MocirlO A& ' of way 02.4 feel to the !mod souttrerly over of said Nuremberg sYx treau tbwm worth l9'sr West 541 feel to a re•oatraol eorear in " . Ned 1111gt0ibotS irecli boiwlt the MorlheM career of (reel caweyod to llarg ova by decd recorded an pays U, (look 04, Deed Records of - wasmastou Cwdy. Orecost AAeaco do%-go North Ova of said I fargrove trot Booth 700=1 wed ass teat to the Souttmat comer of lit. eartels tIA1211 sure trout *Mob was eonveyod to Henrietta flan thence f MW the Eat line of said RM treat ltarth 3'3V Melt q<r.; Y MA foal to on Iran, at the lMortbeset corner of add Rue irsell thence ' '`..{i.."~• aiay tine North in at said Mae eruct, Booth It a W !lest 913 (Oct ofd thence worth sioas the wed One of aid WIN Aborg treet and to S said Cooney !toad 1403 feet to e pdalt theme Nora, iis• w Real 4211.9 teat to an !roe pipe oa on Rest One of Mki wonw*orig t►foll thaaae 0mak eto west lei.s tent to ttw true polet of beghnsiso of "dl it UUM fared tar BeQlanhy at too Boaitewod 001M of the U. C. Orshaeo Donation Land Claim No. s= In Township t south, Raolte t era of she willaseetle Mortaraft w"Mrwton awe! , Oraae, and r arming throe beet the Booth uae of UM drnstio fawn de lass 11109.0 toot to ` BoWlnaest sa Iron lhsaao North Op IS, fad 451.1 feet to the' Dana. "tub tract of bwd eotreyed to Amew wonosborg. . by dad a recorded an page M of VdMo 201 of waMlntoa Celsnty, Qrop,% Dead Resotdt, w' wals polar It an tM PwtM y boundery Ora k~}.' .4Vtf r yt: wi L'ro~ . r • ';,',.::t f ' -i . 1Y1.'.i n.r s s - 1 F? 1~ 4 ~l~til f, 11 {':'J' 3 4i., y)~1 f~ •I ` { :•r_.. a. _4 •1 jig ,,~~r.:~:._r~• ,.Sa _i ~'•Itagc,v~h.i.'"=:':.'.~ • ;~y'J~ t• ~.i •~T~:q'F.•.. .rt. a-:.. ~%T~t l I ♦ • . .r _ at the Orgoa P.laetrle ReHwej rilltt of s.syi llwetes Routh 53'04' t Narltetly b0otdwy IkA d sold OreRan FlcetNe NRn! i Mat rdat of weld Wottefbarg of tray: 112r! feet to the theft sorthe~ b aaecr► of the treat * treet wed tlw true palm dbc~rt~>M t 90'55' Wad ycot to • re-enlnnl career in rAid them Ita the Maethaat owner of tree! otanayod to lrastt baie6 s-.;~ "<`c•'L:`' 7<oratt dead raoorded as Tr;s lT. Gook 94• Aced Records of y;: ,:yr; `•'tiri•' nawoo~vr~a the worth "no of said= ttasLl*; County. Orel sW lb«roo slot I[ f treat tioetb 784 tot blast "All feet to oho Neflheast career or Ibat curiae treat dmcf%W is dead to PA. C. Itsxrote reeardM In :•a+x t~ ` ,a~ Yea z t stt10 its love tract n'dT Ew 1Ra Ieei oe d loop ptheno the North time of said Orgfsu Electric sRewy ifa Naeth se 574 geat.a.57 f"t to (be true poll of btineleg: Tttteal m gent ydt et an IN" 14pa is ltd Camly Rood ,hid, b fooled 455.44 loaf Qstd OW 17{.04 feet Nortb of the Sootbsat corner Of the I/. rr . Oeaha~ floeatioe Iced Coates Mo. sit, in Smilm 35. Tov dip IS 11 f Heat of the WNIasaUo Marldlrt. Wedit il, lttatlt:a North or Sit But 271;44 fast to Ir IAF b tiw ° ' "Mote &-Ur West 14.40 fed to m Iron pipattllt 437* 031 e v low Taal 40.ZS le to an Ina tape pips a ds t N Q~r ~ n of the ~soia~ ~IOe last . to h s" 5 51411211,111, RaYwsyl theme Nara t. 57. Ea:-ston{ sad Nartbwly r%M d nay Me to a poled an the lint 1111110 f that kaet dsecrlbed In dead . Item 1!mdsHolc 0 Imb°rd• et cep. to The Oversee llaattio itailnay .Co.. r"t d laaesty Nt l tine to book b tM 7eautw Mw of I4abrAcasd thaw* OselL ttpeth don[ "M ay. weld polni heh+s the etas! NoAheriy aereer oI =910r=(Z is deed Irma Mabei L Simppoe: &vA Iasbead W tlertelatla N. itwe. -ccordod weeasrbor to, is", to tloal1•454. ?Vn 33s. Dead Recaedq thence awth Ss' ST Wad: atmg the enter um of said . abrAdoeed 000 at wap to /ho uod Westerly t:orertr of weld Rotes! If -daaar4•d.1e weld M•d to Iloerlalta W. Ruq thl"wo itaelis 37007' lbsd x a1stR the Waidotly-lim of seeld PreN N. 2 (ad t ~i tNpr«ty w of aid abeedotwd right of *W. saw Pb °f earaar of T.at t dcau Ib)s u>! Nnso of d t nir"sd°"cd 11WAM Roue sea, Heat +doaN the a 24 Path- SO, West to on center. IIrA of the cellar these at the yy CoueRe ly the Road$ to Na 40'Hest stag the ce d wWo ' 111114 polet bang the Naetb.Ay use of weld abandtw>cd NIdR dap.I from -in- .0 - 11104111311 aa9 emear of that trivet loser A l as, Nab alabdrom ad y gook bode Mate new Remoord"Ib a amumft alww.uw {1 AON ~ii,-i ~:-Fi•.¢~c , rq's:~ F q~ t~i ~...Y~.•x. ,t 1,,:.: hi. • F~~iiflflJf6ri~Ri0.17:Shr,~~wis+4:,;rsiAli7kG:J..._ vr.~. r...... A - 'r • Morib W- 37' *at 0.30 scat to the poled coi►ter of We Conaly R04 of b~1 Bxc:BMINO •TIIBRWAOU' imt portion emveyce •ta lrea a~R~ at ux• to waMryltON COU013Fr•tar decd:, r~ooe0ed . Nowaibep "'r, 104. to hook. N. INV Ms DWW ice:":: m - - • • ~,•~~'flt•~ tt; :K F-`~f~ -:'i•'`t c,- - - ~i ► 'ter' `c : _ _ •'~t Vic- •l}•~,- _ ,•3'x.4. ~l •C wt. q*fp~~ 1J,r.~cR 7, T 'I~iOi''~ , „y`1 a'., `.r'^'i.' " •.C'• `rte ~~,:.tr' ems ' 31r *WWI gig %iR . ♦ - t 2600 RRR ~f~n''~~ / , y` y. , • ` At Ac 422 ® J 1S136G 40000 I 2600 ~'~~^,t ,,rte ~z~ ~ 4 , 600 .1 Ile 2.49 AC 10 4b- 1cf4lcA(;O TITLE acals. o httenCe tltereon t< ur WA WO refere to Weets, loss ~n by reason of t is for your aid in bcs n9 Yo no tiebiiKY y assume8135C 600 Whife this pint is beflevedt° be M P~N° N P; ~ 10/35 a.E` SUN gt015 CWCKJMA& Of WC'OK t 7/1/06 TO 6/3u 07 REAL PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON ' 155 N FIRST AVE., RM 130 HILLSBORO, OREGON 97124 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION MAP: 1S135CA-02.800.. ACCOUNT NO: 8272957 SITUS: 11040 SW GREENBURG RD, CODE AREA: 023.81 ACRES .41 2006-2007 CURRENT TAX BY DISTRICT: COLL-PORTLAND 0.48 ESD-NW REGIONAL 0.26 Pa`d' ~~~-]__/\r SCHOOL - TIGARD 8.51 lJJ[) SCH-TIGARb/TUAL/AFTER LOL 0.00 EDUCATION TAKES: $9.25 E 8L V DEVELOPMENT CO VlV 10875 SW 89TH AVE WASHINGTON COUNTY 4.16 TIGARD, OR 97224 REG-MEtRO SERVICE . 0.18 PORT-PORTLAND 0.13 VALUES: LAST YEAR THIS YEAR FIRS-TV FIRS & RESCUE 2.82 MARKET VALUES: CITY=TIGARD 4.65 LAND 1,850 1,850 TV FIRE & RESCUE LOL 0.46 STRUCTURE 0 0 GENERAL GOVERNMENT TAKES: $12.40 TOTAL RMV VALUE 1,850 1,850 TAXABLE VALUES : BOND WASHINGTON -COUNTY 0.37 ASSESSED VALUE 1,850 1,850 BOND-METRO SERVICE DIST 0.34 BOND-PCC 0.38 BOND-SD #23=TIGARD 1.65 PROPERTY TAXES: $27.60 $26.51 BOND- TV FIRE & RESCUE 0.08 BOND=CITY.OF TIGARD 0.40 APPEAL DEADLINE January 2nd, 2007 BOND=TRI=PffiT ; 0.18 Value Questions Call 503-846-8826 SCH-TIGARD/TUALATIN-AFTER 1.46 Tax Questions Call 503-846-8801 BOND AND MISC TAX: $4.86 Personal Property Questions Call 503-846-8741 Other Questions pall 503-w846-8741 2006-07 TAX (Before Discount) $26.51 PROPERTY TAX PAYMENT OPTIONS (See back of Statement for payment instructions.) Pay Due Discount Net Amount Due In Full 11/15/06 0.80 $25.71 213 11/15/06 0.35 $17.33 V3 11/15/06 NONE $8.84 ~f-C1r 26.77 PLEASE MAKE PAYMENT TO: Washington County Tax DELINQUENT TAXES: NO DELINQUENT TAXES DUE Make Online Payments at (See back for explanation of taxes marked with an asterisk Delinquent Tax Total is included in payment options to the left.) https://ecomm.co.washington.or.us/propertyta*x TOTAL' (After Discount): $25,71 Pay by Phone at: (888) 510-9274 All Payments Processed Upon Receipt AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: April 24, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-] UDICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDER A BALLOT MEASURE 37 CLAIM E &.V DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (M372006-00007) A request for compensation or waiver of Tigard wetland regulations for property located along Greenburg Road This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony • AGENDA ITEM No. 7 Date: April 24, 2007 This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. PLEASE PRINT Proponent - (Speaking In Favor Opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. I6AiRz) " c07 -124- w ►-~o , St - luo (020-599 i ZZ (J503 cf 7 50 5 6 20 7 507 Name, Address & Phone No. Na'mJe, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. YC~, ~f%N N 1(~'err 1 l 01-I ~t SU eµ,, 6- vr~ ~ LZv -q-17 2 3 a, t-ZZ Z -Z517 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. I~ ~ ~I~~PU Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. CL V rga.d~l ~©ve• Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Pkvr_ 20o)-L) K- °I~3~1 Message Page 1 of 2 Craig Prosser - Fwd: M372006-00007 E&V DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM (Forwarded from Sydney@CityHall) (Frowarded from CouncilMail) From: council mail councilmail To: Craig Prosser; Liz Newton J-80410 S: OD Prn Date: 4/24/2007 3:47 PM Subject: Fwd: M372006-00007 E&V DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM (Forwarded from Sydney(&CityHall) (Frowarded from CouncilMail) Jam- ~(~ci ey,,t `7 SUPPLEMENT L PACKET FOR a (DA E OF MEETING) - 'TUALATI N RNE_RKFEPERS® r„ www.tualatinriverkeepers.org April 24, 2007 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 RE: M372006-00007 E&V DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM Dear Mayor Dirksen and City Council, Tualatin Riverkeepers requests that you deny all claims for compensation waiver of regulations under Measure 37. The purpose of Tigard Development Code 18.775, the sensitive lands regulations from which the applicant seeks relief, is clearly stated - to protect public health and safety and to comply with the federal Clean Water Act. Measure 37 and Tigard Municipal Code Section 1.20.080 state that Measure 37 claims may be denied if "The regulation protects public health and safety" or if "The regulation is required by federal law. Tigard Development Code 18.775.010 F. makes the purpose of this regulation plain and clear: Sensitive land areas are designated as such to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the community through the regulation of these sensitive land areas. Thus, this claim, and any other claim for relief from Tigard's sensitive lands code 18.775 should be denied in order to protect public health and safety. Allowing this claim will set a precedent that could open up the City to future M37 claims based upon sensitive lands. Further, 18.775.010 states that" The regulations of this chapter are intended to protect the beneficial uses of water within the Tualatin River Basin in accordance with CWS "Design and Construction Standards as adopted file://C:\Documents and Settings\Craig.000\Local Settings\Temp\GW}0000l.HTM 4/24/2007 Message Page 2 of 2 February 7, 2000. Compliance with the Design and Construction Standards is required by the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between Clean Water Services and the City of Tigard. Such compliance is a condition of the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Permit issued by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality under the Federal Clean Water Act. Failure to comply with this permit is a violation of federal law, thus this claim should be denied. By violating this permit, CWS is liable for both civil and criminal penalties. The IGA with CWS holds the City liable for any fines caused by the City's violations. According to TMC Section 1.20.080 a claim or waiver of regulation may be denied if the application is incomplete. The applicant failed to supply the required supporting documentation (market analysis and appraisal) for the claim of $398,150. The City should not subject this Council to hearings for incomplete applications. This claim and waiver should thus be denied for being incomplete. The City would be setting an undesirable precedent in waving regulations that protect public health and safety. Accepting incomplete Measure 37 claims such as this also subjects this council and City staff to unnecessary burden. Waiving regulations that ensure the City's compliance with the federal Clean Water Act harms our natural resources and puts the City at risk for criminal and civil penalties. For these reasons this claim for compensation and waiver of regulations under Measure 37 should be denied. Sincerely, Brian Wegener Watershed Watch Coordinator Tualatin Riverkeepers 12360 SW Main St -Suite 100 Tigard, OR 97223 office: (503)620-7507 cell: (503)936-7612 Website: www.tualatinriverkeepers.org file://C:\Documents and Settings\Craig.000\Local Settings\Temp\GW)0000l.HTM 4/24/2007 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET-)i-'~~-? April 24, 2007 FOR a Sld `Q (DAT OF MEETING) City of Tigard Planning Department Comments on Measure 37 Claim 2006-00007/E&V Development Property We are writing to submit comments on the above claim. We are a citizen based all volunteer group that works to protect and improve Tigard's natural resources. • This claim seeks to avoid wetland regulations by asking the City of Tigard for a waiver of these regulations. 18.775 of the Tigard Code is intended to "maintain the integrity of the rivers, streams, and creeks in Tigard by minimizing erosion, promoting bank stability, maintaining and enhancing water quality...." (18.775.010). Under 18.775.090, Ash creek and the wetlands associated with it are protected with a 50' vegetated corridor. These regulations are important to protect remaining creeks, wetlands, etc. They help to promote and ensure the HEALTH AND SAFETY OF CITIZENS, by helping to protect water quality and minimize flooding, etc.. Measure 37 clearly states that regulations should not be waived where the health and safety of the citizens is concerned as it most surely is in this claim. In addition, the owner is clearly aware they can already develop their land under existing regulations. They have failed in their claim to submit a wetland delineation which prohibits the city or citizens from knowing exactly what they want to do and where. This is absurd and appears to be done intentionally to thwart public comment and denying the city and citizens the right to know what their true intentions are. We therefore request the City of Tigard DENY this claim based on all of the above information Sincerely, Susan Beilke Director, The Biodiversity Project of Tigard c u,f Se dO(LA o. ti ClmdA'9 7 o° la)-4 10 o~ . SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET ®04 r oo P ai FOR ° (DA E OF MEETING) 04.po v `off a~oo 5 6A 1 y b Prepared and copyrighted by oe Paul Sedoruk A,IA, far Dr. Gene Davison entrance Apd120, 2001 i 1 I I; J,.....Y• . _'ie:~N~~'' ( ~ l i l i~~~e rZti-_~= i ~i~i i I I I I I ~ i ~ I ~ ` ~ i i I I ~ I ~ I ~ 11 6P O~ a ~O ; . . FA y J . O _ I V. A 1 Paul AIA PRIVATE DRIVE [ . It Z a 1007 W W ~ J CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Robert E. Ruedy Ballot Measure 37 Claim ()4372006-00006) Prepared By: Gary Pagenstecher Dept Head Approval: City 2\4gr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL To consider a Ballot Measure 37 claim for compensation or waiver of development regulations for property located at 14185 SW 100`'' Avenue in the City of Tigard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached ordinance granting Ballot Measure 37 waiver of all development code and Comprehensive Plan policies which are more restrictive than those in effect on December 7, 1992, the date the Claimant acquired interest in the property through Warranty Deed, subject to applying for and receiving site development review approval. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Robert E. Ruedy is seeking compensation and/or waiver of the current land use regulations and Comprehensive Plan policies that are more restrictive than those in place at the time the subject 1.14-acre property was acquired. The property, located south of SW McDonald Street and east of SW 100`' Avenue, was acquired by the claimant on December 7, 1992. Ballot Measure 37 established a process whereby a property owner or family member who acquired property prior to the adoption of land use regulations can make a claim if the land use regulation has restricted the use of the property and reduced the market value of the property. The unit of government responsible for the regulation must either pay compensation for the reduced property value or waive the regulation. The property is improved with a 1,071 square foot residence built in 1954. Proposed changes to the site are indicated by the various site plans included in the applicant's materials (Exhibit B). The Claimant states the reduction in property value is estimated to be $600,000.00. Documentation supporting this amount was not submitted with the application, but the Claimant reserves the right to supplement the claim with additional materials. Should the City Council choose to grant the waiver, it is suggested that the waiver be granted to Robert E. Ruedy, and not the land. Once a site development review application is filed, the application will be processed under the C-3 or C-G standards in place at the time the property was acquired. Development may occur consistent with any approved site development review. Once Robert E. Ruedy ceases to be the owner, however, any expansion or major modification beyond development applied for shall be subject to the rules in effect at the time of application. The code in effect at the time the claimant purchased the property was the City's 1989 Development Code with several amendments for Clear Vision Areas (Ord 92-04) and Buffering and Screening Chapters (Ord 91-04). The proposed single-family residential use, the density of 3,050 square feet per unit, and setbacks for buildings are the same now as prior to the claimant's ownership. However, in his submittal materials, the claimant lists items such as street improvement requirements (widths, cul-de-sac radii, hammer-head dimensions) which could marginally limit the available property for the proposed single-family development scenario. Development of single-family detached dwellings in the R-12 zone at the time of acquisition would be substantially similar to development under the current code. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Pay compensation to the land owner, in which case the City may want to obtain its own market assessment of the amount of compensation. CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Ordinance Exhibit A: Staff Report and Vicinity Map Exhibit B: Applicant's Materials FISCAL NOTES The applicant provided a $1,000 deposit to cover application review costs. This deposit will be refunded to the applicant if the claim or waiver is granted. There are no budgeted funds to pay compensation. QTY OF TIGARD, OREGON. TIGARD QTY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 07- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FINDINGS TO GRANT A BALLOT MEASURE 37 WAIVER OF THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE .AND 'COMPREHENSIVE:PLAN POLICIES THAT ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THOSE IN PLACE ON DECEMBER 7, 1992 WHEN THE 1.14 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF MCDONAI.D STREET AND EAST OF SW 100THAVENUE (WCTM 2S111BB, TAX LOT 00500) WAS PURCHASED BY ROBERT E. RUEDY, AND TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE IN PLACE AT THAT TIME, SUBJECT TO APPLYING FOR AND RECEIVING SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL (M372006-00006). WHEREAS, the voters of the State of Oregon passed Ballot Measure 37 in 2004; and WHEREAS, Ballot Measure 37 provides the responsible governing body to either pay compensation for reduced property value.or waive the regulations where property is owned prior to the adoption of land use regulations; and WHEREAS, a claim was made by Robert E. Ruedyin the amount of $600,000.00 as the reduction in the value of the property under the current Tigard Development code; and WHEREAS Robert E. Ruedy has owned the property since December 7, 1992 preceding the current Tigard Development Code and other applicable standards; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The attached staff report and vicinity map (Exhibit A) and applicant's materials (Exhibit B) are hereby adopted as findings. SECTION 2: A waiver from the Tigard Development Code Standards is hereby granted to Robert E. Ruedy to apply for Site Development Review under the code and zoning that was in place on December 7, 1992. Once Robert E. Ruedy ceases to be the owner, however, any expansion or major modification beyond development applied for during this ownership . shall be subject to the land use regulations in effect at the time of application. SECTION 3: This waiver applies to the property south of McDonald Street and east of SW 100th Avenue in Tigard addressed as 14185 SW 100" Avenue, and legally described as WCIM 2S111BB, Tax Lot 00500. SECIION 4: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of , 2007. ORDINANCE No. 07- Page 1 Catherine Wheatley, Gfy Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard Qty Council this day of 32007. Craig Dirksen, Mayor Approved as to form: CatyAttorney Date ORDINANCE No. 07- Page 2 EXHIBIT A Agenda Item: Hearin Date: April 24 200 Time: 730 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 180 DAY CLAIM-PROCESSING PERhOD_:=>5/30/,'2007 SE SECTION I. CLAIM SUMMARY FILE NAME: RUEDY PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM CITY CASE NO. Measure 37 Claim (M37) M372006-00006 CLAIMANT: Robert E. Ruedy OWNERS:- Same 14185 SW 100' Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 CLAIM: The amount claimed as compensation is $600,000.00 for the loss of six lots at $100,000 each. AFFECTED REGULATION: The. Claimant seeks a waiver Of unspecified "City of Tigard comprehensive: plan change; and other changes that may have impacted the comprehensive use of the property within its current zoning at the time of original purchase in 1992 until the present." The applicant's supporting materials refer generally to Chapter 18.510, Residential Zoning Districts. No specific code provisions are cited. Furthermore, the claimant provides no specific development plan, but instead offers a list of development options. Because the compensation claimed is for loss of six single-family lots, staff has limited its review to that development scenario. ZONING DESIGNATION: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also pennitted conditionally. . LOCATION: 14185 SW 100`h Avenue; WCIM 2S111BB, Tax Lot 00500. APPLICABLE CODE CRITERIA: Municipal Code Chapter 1.20. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council review the following report and determine whether the claim is valid. Staff further recommends that Council deny the monetary claim and waive the regulations as described in the conclusion section of this report. RUEDY PROPERTY 00NIPENSATION CLAIM STAFF REPORT (M372006-00006) PAGE I OF 6 QTY 00UNCIL HEARING 4/24/2007 SECTION III. BACKGROUND The subject 1.14-acre parcel is located south of McDonald Street and east of SW 100'' Avenue and is developed with a single-family residence built in 1954. The parcel is part of the November 1, 1906 Tigardville Heights subdivision. The parcel is currently zoned R 12, which was also the zoning designation at the time the claimant acquired the subject parcel (September 1991 Comprehensive Plan Zoning Districts map). SECTION III. APPLICABLE CRITERIAAND FINDINGS Section 1.20.030 states a property owner wishing to make a claim against the City under Measure 37 shall first submit a claim to the City. A claim under Measure 37 must be in writing and include: A. Identification of the affected property. Identification may be by street address, subdivision lot number, tax lot number, or any other information that identifies the property. The claimant identifies the property as "14185 SW 100'' Avenue, Tigard, OR, 97224; WCTM 2S111BB, Tax Lot 00500. B. The name and contact information of the person making the claim, the date the Claimant acquired the property, and, if applicable, the date that a family member of Claimant acquired the property and the names and relationships of family members that are previous owners. The name and contact information of the person making the claim is Robert E. Ruedy, 14185 SW 100`' Avenue, Tigard, OR 97224; Phone: (503) 620-5997. The propertywas acquired bythe claimant and his wife, Donna Ruedy, on December 7, 1992 as shown in the Warranty Deed for the property. A Bargain and Sale Deed, dated June 17, 2005 conveyed Dona Ruedy's interest to Robert Ruedy, who is presently the sole owner. C. A list of all persons with an ownership interest in or a lien on the property. The claimant is the sole owner of the subject property. D. Identification of the regulation that is alleged to restrict the use of the affected property and a statement describing how the restriction affects the value of the property. The claimant states that the "City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan change, and other changes may have impacted the comprehensive use of said property within its current zoning at the time of original purchase in 1992, until the present." The claimant generally refers to'IDC Chapter 18.510, Residential Zoning District regulations and to potential restrictions associated with streets, stormwater mitigation,'inigation wells, trees, variances and conditional uses. The claimant asserts that the number of lots allowed under the current code is reduced by six and that. the restrictions reduce the value by $600,000 (6 lots at $100,000 each). Because the claimant does not identify specific standards and does not provide information to substantiate the compensation claim, there is some question as to whether the claimant has provided sufficient detail to asses the claim. Furthermore, the proposed single-family residential use and the proposed density are the same now as prior to the claimant's ownership. However, in his submittal materials, the claimant lists items such as street improvement requirements (widths, cul-de-sac radii, hammer-head dimensions) which could marginally limit the available property for development. RUEDY PROPERTY COMPENSATION a-AIM STAFF REPORT (M372006-00006) PAGE 2 OF 6 QTY COUNCIL HEARING 4/24/2007 E. A statement whether the Claimant prefers compensation or a waiver, suspension or modification of the regulation, and a statement describing the extent to which the regulation would need to be waived, suspended or modified to avoid the need for compensation. A description of the proposed use must be provided. The claimant states a preference for "either or both, compensation for, or waiver of, the regulation." The claimant did not submit a statement describing the extent to which the regulation would need to be waived, suspended or modified to avoid the need for compensation. The claimant proposes several development scenarios including: • Dividing the property into two lots, one for the existing single-family dwelling, and the other for multi- family housing, group care residential, family day care, group residential treatment, or hospital; or • Dividing the property into 12 lots (in addition to the existing single-family residence) for mobile homes, manufactured homes, townhouses; or • Dividing the property into 6 lots (in addition to the existing single-family residence) as multi family units, duplex residential units, or single-family attached. F. The amount claimed as compensation and documentation supporting the amount.,The documentation shall include a market analysis, an appraisal, or other documentation at least equivalent to a market analysis. The claimant states the amount of just compensation is the "loss of six units at $100,000.00 each," or $600,000.00. The claimant has not provided an appraisal or market analysis of the subject property to support the claim. The claim is based on the unsubstantiated assertion that at the time of purchase, 12 lots could have been developed, and that under current regulations only 6 lots would be allowed. G. The name and contact information of the Claimant's authorized representative or representatives, if applicable. NA Section 1.20.080 outlines the criteria for making a decision on the compensation claim. In deciding the claim, the Decision Maker may take any of the following actions: 1. Deny the claim based on any one or more of the following findings: a. The regulation does not restrict the use of the private real property. The regulation cited by the claimant, TDC 18.510, includes allowable uses and residential zoning district development standards, Tables 18.510.1 and 18.510.2, respectively. The claim is based on the loss of six lots for allowed uses. Yet, a brief staff analysis shows that 12 to 13 lots for single-family use may be allowed under current standards. Staff finds that current regulation does not restrict the type of uses the claimant has proposed or the density of use proposed. It appears that the claimant believes that development standards for such items as water quality and street standards would restrict development even though he has not explored variances or adjustment allowed by the present code. Therefore, the claim could be denied. Note: As there has been no litigation on this issue, the claimant could go to court for a determination of the basis of a denial. RUEDY PROPERTY OOIPENSATION aAM STAFF REPORT (1372006-00006) PAGE 3 OF 6 QTY OOUNCIL HEARING 4/24/2007 b. The fair market value of the property is not reduced by the passage or enforcement of the regulation. The claimant has not submitted information to support the proposed compensation. The claimant has not provided information on which to base areduction in fair market value as determined by the difference between the market value of the property as is with current regulations and the market value of the same property without the regulations adopted since the property was acquired that reduce the value of the property. Therefore, the claim could be denied. Note: As there has been no litigation on this issue, the claimant can go to court for a determination of the basis of a denial. c. The claim was not timely filed. The claim was filed within two years of passage of Measure 37. It was timely filed on December 1, 2006. d. The Claimant is not the current property. owner. According to the title information, the claimant is the current property owner. e. The Claimant or family member of Claimant was not the property owner at the time the regulation was adopted. The claimant has owned the property since December 7, 1992. The Claimant owned the property at the time the cited regulation was adopted. f. The regulation is a historically and commonly recognized nuisance law or a law regulating pornography or nude dancing. TDC 18.510 includes regulations with respect to residential uses and development standards neither of which are considered nuisance. laws. g. The regulation is required by federal law. TDC 18.510 consists of land use regulations, which are typically in the domain of local governments and not required by federal law, as is the case with these regulations. h. The regulation protects public health and safety. The regulations in 18.510 have the purposes to preserve neighborhood livability and encourage construction of affordable housing. Zoning districts are described, uses are listed, minimum and maximum density is established and development standards are provided for lot size, width, setbacks, building height, lot coverage and landscaping. In addition, 18.510.050.A.2 requires all development to comply with all other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title (Title 18, Development Code). Arguably, setback requirements are designed for the benefit of public health and safety, as they ensure a minimum outdoor open space and adequate emergency access between buildings, specifically, and protect the livability of existing and future neighborhoods, generally. RUEDY PROPERTY COMPENSATION OLMM STAFF REPORT ( U72006-00006) PAGE 4 OF 6 QTY COUNT HEARING 4/24/2007 i. The City is not the entity responsible for payment. The City is not responsible if the challenged law, rule, ordinance, resolution, goal or other enactment was not enacted or enforced by the City. The City enacted the present zoning designation and development. standards, and is therefore, the jurisdiction responsible for payment, if payment is required. J. The City has not taken final action to enforce or apply the regulation to the property for which compensation is claimed. Although pre-application conferences were held in March, August, and October of 1992 for several proposed development scenarios, no detailed development plan or land use proposal has been reviewed or final action taken to apply the challenged regulations to the subject property. k. The City has not established a fund for payment of claims under Measure 37. No such fund has been established at this time. If the City finds the claim to be a valid claim, the City should waive the regulation and deny the claim for compensation. 1. The Claimant is not legally entitled to compensation for a reason other than those listed in subsections a through k. The basis for this finding must be clearly explained. Staff finds no other reasons, aside from those already listed, to deny the claim. 2. Pay compensation, either in the amount requested or in some other amount supported by the evidence. If the City pays compensation, the City shall continue to apply and enforce the regulation. Any compensation shall be paid from funds appropriated for that purpose. The City may require any person receiving compensation to sign a waiver of future claims for compensation under Measure 37 and the City may record that waiver with the County Recorder. The City Council will need to make a determination of whether funds may be appropriated to pay any valid claim. Staff finds that the evidence does not support the compensation request, and suggests that any claim paid be subject to development review and an appraisal to determine the appropriate value of the claim. But clearly, the City has not appropriated any funds for compensation and staff recommends instead that the Council opt for waiver of any affected regulations. 3. Waive or not apply the regulation to allow the owner to use the property for a use permitted at the time the Claimant acquired the property. Staff notes that it appears that the claimant's proposed 13-lot development under the present zoning could be approved and suggests that a development plan be filed to determine to what extent the regulations, in fact, affect the property. Without this review, Staff recommends that a general waiver of applicable rules may be granted, and that any waiver shall run with the person, and not the land. The waiver would require the claimant to apply for land use under the substantive standards in effect as of December 7, 1992, and use the current development review process for the type of application made. 4. Modify the regulation so that it does not give rise to a claim for compensation. Any such modification shall be for the specific property only unless the City follows the procedure for a legislative land use decision. RUEDY PROPERTY ODMPENSATION CLAIM STAFF REPORT "72006-00006) PAGE 5 OF 6 CITY ODiJNCIL HEARING 4/24/2007 No specific regulation has been cited by the claimant. Staff notes that it appears that the claimant's proposed 13-lot development under the present zoning could be approved, and suggests that a development plan be filed to determine to what extent the regulations, in fact, affect the property. Staff recommends that any modification of applicable rules to avoid compensation be considered subject to development review, and that any waiver shall run with the person, and not the land. 5. Conditionally waive or suspend the regulation subject to receipt of a defined amount of contributions toward compensation by a specified date from persons opposed to the waiver or suspension, such as persons who believe they would be negatively affected by waiver or suspension, with the waiver or suspension being granted if the defined amount of contributions is not received by the specified date. If the contributions are received, compensation shall be paid within 180 days of the date the claim was filed. The specified date shall allow the City time to process the contributions and. pay compensation. No contributions for compensation have been identified at this time. The Decision Maker may take other actions it deems appropriate in individual circumstances, may modify the listed actions, and/or may combine the listed actions, consistent with Measure 37. The Decision Maker may negotiate an acceptable solution with the Claimant or may direct staff to negotiate with the Claimant. In the event that the Decision Maker directs staff to negotiate, the matter shall be set for further action by the Decision Maker no less than 175 days from the date of the notice of claim became complete. The Council shall take final action within 180 days of the claim. The Decision Maker shall take actions 2 through 5 only if it determines the claim is valid. If Council finds the claim is valid and wishes to negotiate an acceptable solution with the Claimant, the matter shall be set for further action by Council by May 22, 2005 and for final action by May 30, 2007. A decision by a Decision Maker other than Council shall not be a final decision, but shall be a recommendation to Council. This report represents only a recommendation to the City Council and is not a final decision of the city. SECTION IV. CONCLUSION Staff finds that there is no basis for a compensation claim and suggests the Qty Council could deny the claim. However, because of the ambiguity of the claim with respect to the intended use and the affected regulations, staff recommends Council waive any regulations that may be affected, subject to development review for a specific development proposal. The particular terms of the waiver are described in the attached ordinance. `t April 10, 2007 PREPARED BY: Gary Pagenstecher DATE Associate Planner RUEDY PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM STAFF REPORT "72006-00006) PAGE 6 OF 6 CITY COUNCIL HEARING 4/24/2007 \~'✓y CITY of 1 _ GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM 0 VICINITY MAP HILL VIEW ST I / N ~VIEw C M372006-00006 ROBERT E. RUEDY 1 I MEASURE 37 CLAIM ST LEGEND: 8 > SUBJECT ,~o Q ¢ SITE JANZEN ELROSE ST T 5 F'I U 0 I; \ i ~AYRS rER CID _ -4 L 1 _ 00 I REF 3END I.>U~,.AM_ 0.D 1 >J: I 1J C fl1 Tigard Area Map/ . tLI > TE VIEW TERR N 0 100 200 300 400 500 F at 1 ~ 487 feel I T .p CANTERBURY Information on Iha map is for general location only and shotdd be verified with the DevetopmeM Services Division. 13 6 Hall Blvd Tigard. DR 97223 639.4171 (503) PEMBROOK ST htlpJt+ ,ci.tigard,or.uS Community Development Plot date: Feb 2, 2007; C:\magic\MAGIC03.APR EXHIBIT B PROCEDURE FOR BALLOT MEASURE 37 COMPENSATION CLAIM V rr City of Tigvd Penh Center 13125 SWHall Bl&, 7"rgotj OR 97223 Phony 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 The claim must be in writing and include the information listed below. The claim shall not be considered filed until all of the requirements of the procedure are met. ONLY 1 P') 30 FOR STAFF USE Case No.: 1V37a2oo-to -odor Application Accepted By. K,240 Date: Z'l.~o b G v im : 5 68y Date Determined Complete: Deposit: $1.000 Peposir to be refunded if claim is determinedto be valid' If claim is denied and ultimatelydetetmined invalid, the claimant shall. reimburse the City for the costs the City incars in processing the daim. If reimbursement e=eeds the deposit, the claimant shall pay anyadditional amount within 30 days of a demand by the City for full If costs are lesi than the de osk, the difference will be refunded to the claimant IDENTIFICATION OF AFFEMDPROPERTY A PropertyStreet Address/Location(s): 4d a S S9 I t>O~ ku~aQ C _ 1 l~ . &K) ` -7 Z~T Tax Map & Tag Lot # (s): S a.. -4-- e> f Cab -6-o Subdivision Lot # (s): M4`~P 3 CLAIMANT INFORMATION U Property Owners/Claimants/Deed Holders*:3-T~-1 l C Address-. ) AASS l t 6 01 U~ Phone: (563) ( ° 2.0 9 City/State:' CC~t 1PcR~ ~Y~ Zip: `q 5 j (Attach list if more than one) Date Claimant Acquired Property: becf~-rw Date Family Member of Claimant Acquired Property (if applicable): Names and Relationships of Family Members that are Previous Owners (if applicable): r Nil& (Attach list if additional space is needed) Lien/SecurityInterestHolders of the affected property w 4 ~ t-~ FN*f4o Address: Phone: City/State: .Zip: (Attach list if inore than one) When the owner and the applicant are different people, all owners of the affected property.must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form. If the affected property is owned by two or more persons and not all owners seek compensation, all owners who do not seek compensation shall sign a waiver of the right to compensation. USE RE GULATION RESTRICTING Identify the regulation that is alleged to restrict use of affected property. Provide a statement describing how the restriction affects.the value of the property. (Attach additional materials as necessary) G ~TL( b Tl cj Prw._t~:. Cp„~- Ns y r ~11~ b77k>G6(~ wr 070~ O~ S~ t c~o- ~r L"S -rn~2 ►t"'~i ~s-~~ 0'1¢ -r~ n~ a m~ r r nf.4 L P cn2ct4s~ ir1 1 a z UW CLAIM PREFERENCE Provide is , to nt of whether claimant prefer's compensation or a waiver, suspension, or modification of the regulation. t >Et'MW?---~M LM (~Jti/~125 C CYL, C ~',9ra 400-M.57A-T1 Z) A-11 O'R edlq l (/~,17 , M~E 7W &4! Z~, Include a statement describing the extent to which the regulation would need to-be waived, suspended, or modified to avoid the need for . compensation. Adescription of the proposed use must be'provided. (Attach additional materials as necessary) -ru-je kP1 © 19\61 I M fArlk_ tts: C-1- L MEr-c Pc VM-111" le7p 1 9 2. AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION The amount claimed as compensation Lb SS o F 6 Cn kT $-1ors low. CO tcp4m Provide documentation supporting the amount - Said documentation shall include a market analysis, appraisal, or other documentation at least equivalent to a market analysis. Claimants' Authorized Representative(s) if applicable. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. DATED this dayof • 20 Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Rev.: 7/5/06 c\curpla\masten\land use appBcaoons\banot measure 37 claim formdoc CITY OF TIGARD EU1/20U6 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 4:50:28PM Tigard, OR 97223 503.639.4171 Receipt 27200600000000005684 Date: 12/01/2006 Line Items: Case No Tran Code Description Revenue Account No Amount Paid M372006-00006 [M37-CD] Measure 37 Deposit 100-0000-229080 1,000.00 Line Item Total: $1,000.00 Payments: Method Payer User ID AcctJCheck No. Approval No. How Received Amount Paid Check ROBERT E. RUEDY kjp 8586 In Person 1,000.00 Payment Total: .$1,000.00 cReceiptrpt Page 1 of 1 Robert E Ruedy LEI j: O T"NS =AL 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Date: 1215106 Job No. Ruedy Property (503) 620-5997 ATTN: K. J. Peerman RE: Measure 37 Claim F' To: Permit Center & Planning Department City of Tigard, Oregon V 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Subject: Supplemental Itg"Qor9006 Tigard, Oregon 97223 PLAIViVi CITyGF T/GIRD ~G Transmitted are the following. ® Attached ❑ Under Separate Cover via the following items: ❑ Permit Drawings ❑ General Specifications/Scope of Work ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Submittals ❑ Samples ❑ Change Order ❑ AutoCAD file(s) ❑ As-Built Drawings ❑ O & M Manual(s) ❑ Copy of letter ® Other: Supplemental Information as listed below. Item Copies. Dated. Doc. Page Rev Description: No. No.: No.: No. 1 1 set 12/4/06 M37.10 Pgs 1-14 of 14 1 State of Oregon Measure 37 (M37) Claim Form with reference to Exhibits A thru W. 2 P g. of 3 P g. of 4 P g. of 5 p g. of ❑ For Approval ❑ Approved as Submitted ❑ Resubmit sets of copies for Approval ® For Review and Comment ❑ Approved as Noted ❑ Submit sets of copies for Distribution ❑ For Your Use ❑ Returned for Corrections ❑ Returned sets of Corrected Prints ❑ As Requested ❑ For Bids Due AM/PM ❑ Price Prior to Proceeding ❑ Other: Routed By: ❑ Fax Immediately ❑ Courier/Ta)d ❑ Fed Ex - Priority Overnight ❑ UPS - Overnight ❑ U: S. Mail - Overnight delivery ❑ Fed Ex - Standard Overnight ❑ UPS - 2nd Day Air ❑ US- Mail - Standard delivery ® Hand Deliver ❑ E-Mail/Modem ❑ US. Mail - Standard ❑ Other Comments: Please attach these documents to the City of Tigard, Measure 37 Claim Form submitted December 1, 2006 awaiting city staff review. Copy to: File RECEIVED Signed: DEC 0 5 2006 CITYC)FTIGARD PLAN NING/ENu;NEERING LETIER OF TRANSMrrrAL - 12/512006 Page 1 of 1 Decmnber2006, Rev.I 0 0, i^ t r 77. t "'r I rrrr , C • f f • Risk Management - State Services Division 1225 Ferry St. SE, Suite 1.11160, Salem, Oregon 97301-4292 Web Site: hftp://www.orecLon.gov/DAS/Risk/M37.shtmi Phone: 503-378-5513 INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING A CLAIM This form identifies the information that is required for the State of Oregon to act on a claim made under ORS 197.352 (2004 Oregon Ballot Measure 37). Please complete each box of the claim form, and attach any additional information or evidence that you want to support the claim. Attached documents may not be used to complete sections 1 or 2, or any section that requires a signature. ■Claims may only be submitted by an Owner or an Authorized Agent of the Owner. ■Claims may only be submitted: in person, by private carrier, by U.S. Postal Service Certified, or by Registered Mail to: Risk Management-State Services Division, 1225 Ferry St. SE, U160, Salem OR 97301 - 4292 -Only Original Signed Claims will be accepted, claims submitted electronically or by facsimile, will not be accepted. ■If you need more space, attach separate sheets of paper as needed, with reference to the appropriate Section number on this form. -Claim criteria/re uirements may be found in Oregon Administrative Rules 125-145-0010 to 0120 @Ction 1 NAME AND CONTACT INFORMATION OF ALL CLAIMANTS/PROPERTY OWNERS Enter the name and contact information of each person that this claim is submitted for. Please note, the claimant(s) must own an interest in the property. If the present owner of the property is a business entity (such as a corporation), the claim should be made by an appropriate authorized person on behalf of that entity. It the property has been placed in a trust, the claim should be made by a trustee of the trust. Name of Claimant #1: Robert E. Ruedy Day Time Phone (503) 819-7898 or 503 620-5997 Address: 14185 SW 100th Avenue City: Tigard State: OR Zip: 97224-4951 To file a claim for a particular property, you must own an interest in that property. Please describe what your ownership interest in the property is (e.g., fee title, contract purchaser, lessee, life estate holder, etc.). Sole Owner via home mortgage of the property described herein. ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS FOR ADDITIONAL CLAIMANTS IF NEEDED Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 1 of 14 ection 2 NAME AND CON'. ~'T INFORMATION OF PERSON SUBMIT'. ..40 CLAIM (AGENT, IF ANY) If you have an attorney, relative, or some other person who is filing this claim for you, enter the name and contact information of that person. Name of Agent: Robert E. Ruedy [Day Time Phone (503) 819-7898 Address: 14185 SW 100th Avenue City: Tigard State: OR Tip. 97224-4951 You must attach a written notarized statement signed by the claimant(s), or a Power of Attorney, properly authorizing this person to submit this claim on the claimants behalf. Attachment: Yes❑ No P/ Since I am the Claimant. [Section 3 THE PROPERTY THE CLAIM IS FOR Identify the property(ies) the claim is for. You should attach a county tax lot map, with each tax lot the claim is for marked clearly on the map. To assist in the review of your claim, you also are encouraged to obtain and include a copy of the county tax assessor's "plat' or "deed" card for each tax lot your claim is for. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Street Address or nearest intersection: 14185 SW 100 Avenue -City only if within a city): Tigard County: Washington State: OR Zip: 97224-4951 Tax Lot #(s): 00500 "TIGARDVILLE County Tax Assessor's Map Reference #(s): HEIGHTS", Parcels 13 $ 14 2S111 BB-00500 (Tax Lot 500) Map 23-74 Township: 2S Parcel #R0501905 Range: 1W Section: 11 BB On what date did the claimant(s) acquire an interest in each tax lot this claim is for? December 7, 1992 Current Zoning (of each tax lot): R-12, Property Size (acreage of each tax lot): 12 units/acre, - 1.14 Acre Minimum lot size: 3050 square feet. What was the zoning of each tax lot when the If the claimant(s) acquired the property from claimant(s) acquired the property? R-12, a "family member" (as defined in ORS 12 units/acre, 197.352); what was the zoning of each tax lot Minimum lot size: 3050 square feet. when the family member of the claimant acquired the tax lot? Property was not acquired from a family member, and was purchased at above market price for its future development potential noted herein. Other Information. If your property is located within a subdivision or partition, please provide a copy of any recorded conditions relating to that subdivision or partition). Attachment: Yes 0✓ No ❑ The "TIGARDVILLE HEIGHTS" Subdivision of November 1st,1906. Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 2 of 14 ection 4 EVIDENCE OF.O1.._.ERSHIP Include evidence or information documenting that the claimant(s) owns an interest in each lot or parcel the claim is for, when the claimant(s) acquired that interest, and that the claimant(s) have continued to own an interest since that date. The information required by this section may be provided in the form of a preliminary title report, if you also include a copy of the deed or other document conveying an interest in the lot or parcel to the claimant(s), along with copies of the exceptions listed in the title report, and a statement that the claimant has owned the property continuously. The following is attached List any attached documents: as proof that the claimant Exhibit A: Deed of Trust (showing date of purchase) and owns an interest in each original purchaser(s). Washington Co. #92088048. lot or parcel: Recorded 12110/1992. (provide for each claimant, and each lot or parcel, and list all Exhibit B: Deed of Reconveyance on September 1, 1998 (showing attachments) satisfaction of original "Home Savings Bank" primary At a minimum, you must mortgage loan #1504113. Washington Co. #98125411. include a copy of the Recorded 1110611998. document conveying an Exhibit C: Deed of Trust on January 8, 2002 (showing refinance interest in the lot or primary mortgage with "Wells Fargo Home Mortgage" parcel to the present loan #23085681. Washington Co. #2002-004944. owner(s) of each Recorded on 01/14/2002. property. Normally, this Exhibit D: Short Form Line of Credit Deed of Trust on February will be a deed. 16, 2005 (showing satisfaction of security interest in property). Washington Co. #2005-027433. Recorded 03115/2005 Exhibit E: Deed of Reconveyance on March 14, 2005 (showing satisfaction of secondary mortgage with "Wells Fargo Financial National Bank" loan #6546 5447 9991 70001. Washington Co. #2005-029520 Recorded on 03/21/2005. Exhibit F: Bargain and Sale Deed on June 17, 2005 conveying property to Robert E, Ruedy only as sole owner. Washington Co. #2005-069310 Recorded 06/17/2005 Exhibit G: Oregon Measure 37 Property Use Concerns and Impacts listing Exhibit U: Tax Map indicating the claim property (3 each) Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 3 of 14 Is the property in a Trust? ❑ Yes No If yes, please provide the date of the trust. Date Property Placed in Trust: Not applicable at this time If yes, is the trust Revocable or Irrevocable? ❑ Revocable ❑ Irrevocable Not applicable at this time If yes, are you filing on behalf of the Trust, as an Individual, or both? ❑ Trust ❑ Individual ❑ Both Not applicable at this time If yes, please attach a certificate of trust indicating who the current trustees of the trust are. Not applicable at this time. Is the.Property owned by ❑ Yes © No a Corporation, by a Partnership, by a Limited Liability Company, or by a Limited Liability Partnership? If yes, please provide the name of the business Name of business entity: Not applicable. entity that owns the property and the date on which the business entity acquired the property. Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 4 of 14 ection 6 State Lawt hat Restrict Your Desire.. Use of the Property Identify the state Land Use Regulations that the Claim is based on, and describe how each restricts the desired use of the Property you described in Section 5. If you believe that state land use regulations, other than those enforced by the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD or LCDC) restrict your desired use, then you must specifically identify those land use regulations and describe how they restrict your desired use. Attach additional narrative if you need more space. Law or Rule: City of Tigard (COT) Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your Land Use Chapter 18.510 updated desired use of the Property: See below references needed code dated June, 2002, and for evaluating M37 cost impacts: These reflected code and code other related COT other related restrictions will reduce the remaining preceding developable portion of the property to a maximum density and Non-COT related restrictions, of only 6 lots and/or units, or other losses of use and/or and/or Local Fire, Life, Safety reduced maximum density described in section 5 above. regulation/ordinance # The loss would be the remaining 6 lots and associated restrictions. units originally planned for when purchased in 1992. These are viewed by the Property Owner as Measure 37 Claim Impacts. Attachment if Applicable: Yes See Exhibits G thru R Law or Rule: City of Tigard Land Use Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your Chapter 18.510 within the 0612002 desired use of the Property: See below references needed Code Update, other related COT and for evaluating M37 cost impacts: With an increase in required road widths, cuWe-sac radii, hammer-head Non-COT related restrictions, and/or lengths and hammer-head intersection radii, this Local Fire, Life, Safety ordinance will significantly reduce the available property regulation/ordinance # capable of being developed. The impact of this is severe restrictions. as the maximum density that was in effect on 12/10M 992 when the property was originally purchased is unachievable under current COT 1111-12 Zoning Use" code, and benefits minimally by improvements to the zoning density from that 1992 timeframe. Because of this the maximum density will not be achieved for the property and will be significantly less than 80% of the developable land, thereby minimizing it by 6 lots, and also almost certainly require the deeding of parks and wider "public" streets to the City. An attempt to comply with current use codes and other restrictions and/or use requirements will therefore add additional fees, development costs, and reviews, variances and appeals, plus other ancillary aspects of cost due to the negative impacting changes since the original 1992 code. These are viewed by the Property Owner as Measure 37 Claim Impacts. Attachment if Applicable: Yes See Exhibits G thru R Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 6 of 14 Law or Rule: City of Tigard Land Use Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your Chapter 18.510 within the 0612002 desired use of the Property: See below references needed Code Update, other related COT and for evaluating M37 cost impacts: This COT ordinance, and appurtenant COT and Non-COT regulations on use, Non-COT related restrictions, and/or reflects a significant increase the collective storm water Local Fire, Life, Safety run-off collecting, transmission, storage, controlled regulation/ordinance # release, overflow control and down-stream regulation and restrictions. associated costs and fees for property capable of being developed. The impact of this is severe as there was no storm water retention that was in effect on 12110/1992 when the property was originally purchased, and virtually no transmission or other aspects of its migration characteristics. When compared to current COT 1111-12 Zoning Use" code, the improvements are significant as are the cost impacts. Because of this impact on the property, there appears to be a need for Measure 37 impact analysis and resolution. Any similar restrictions on use due to changes in the impervious surface quantities, surface water drainage, collection, etc. will also need to be considered a Measure 37 Impact. An attempt to comply with current use codes, and other restrictions and/or use requirements will therefore add additional fees, development costs, and reviews, variances and appeals, plus other ancillary aspects of cost due to the negative impacting changes since the original 1992 code. These are viewed by the Property Owner as Measure 37 Claim Impacts. Attachment if Applicable: Yes Q✓ See Exhibits G thru R Law or Rule: City of Tigard Land Use Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your Chapter 18.510 within the 0612002 desired use of the Property: See below references needed Code Update, other related COT and for evaluating M37 cost impacts: This COT ordinance, and appurtenant COT and Non-COT regulations on use, Non-COT related restrictions, and/or reflects an inability to install one or more irrigation water Local Fire, Life, Safety wells that were possible for the existing property and the regulation/ordinance # additional portion of the property that is capable of being restrictions. developed. The impact of this is severe as the only water available for irrigation is the potable City Water system, which not only is a waste of quality potable city water for irrigation needs, but also a financial hardship imposed on the negative impact relating to the allowed use that was in effect on 1211011992 when the property was originally purchased. Because of this impact on the property, there appears to be a need for Measure 37 impact analysis and resolution. Any similar restrictions on use due to changes in the water rights for this property will also need to be considered a Measure 37 Impact. An attempt to comply with current use codes, and other restrictions and/or use requirements will therefore add additional fees, development costs, and reviews, variances and appeals, plus other ancillary aspects of cost due to the negative impacting changes since the original 1992 code. These will be viewed as Measure 37 Impacts. These are viewed by the Property Owner as Measure 37 Claim Impacts. Attachment if Applicable: Yes [a See Exhibits G thru R Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 7 of 14 Law or Rule: City of Tigard ad Use Describe how this State land -a regulation restricts your Chapter 18.510 within the 0612002 desired use of the Property: See below references needed Code Update, other related COT and for evaluating M37 cost impacts: This ordinance will significantly increase the landscaping requirements, Non-COT related restrictions, and/or including but not limited to the tree aspects, for the entire Local Fire, Life, Safety property and'its future R42 Use area capable of being regulation/ordinance # developed. The impact of this is severe as the restrictions. landscaping requirements that were in effect on 1211011992 when the property was originally purchase was minimal when compared to the current COT 11R-12 Zoning Use" code. Because of this the landscaping percentage of area would be significantly impacted, and therefore be not only a Use impact but also a financial hardship imposed on the negative impact relating to the allowed use that was in effect on 12110/1992 when the property was originally purchased. An attempt to comply with current use codes and other restrictions and/or use requirements will therefore add additional fees, development costs, and reviews, variances and appeals, plus other ancillary aspects of cost due to the negative impacting changes since the original 1992 code. These are viewed by the Property Owner as Measure 37 Claim Impacts. Attachment if Applicable: Yes 0✓ See Exhibits G thru R Law or Rule: City of Tigard (COT) Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your Land Use Chapter 18.510 updated desired use of the Property: See below references needed code dated .tune, 2002, and for evaluating M37 cost impacts: It is unknown how the referenced code has changed since December 1992 preceding code, other related COT regarding the granting of "Variance" and "Conditional Use and Non-COT related restrictions, Permitting" requests, therefore its Measure 37 Claim and/or Local Fire, Life, Safety Impact is also unknown. A change in the methodology regulation/ordinance # used and/or decision results for the entire process could restrictions. provide Measure 37 Claim Impacts when compared to the methodology and decision process that was in effect on 1211011992 when the property was originally purchased. In the event there is an impact, the Property Owner will view it as a Measure 37 Claim Impact. This would be a multiple aspect impact that involves the earlier 1992 request and approval process when compared to the current 2006 process, but also a financial hardship imposed on the negative impact relating to the allowed use from any negative result from the process when compared with the process that was in effect on 12110/1992 when the property was originally purchased. An attempt to comply with current "variance, "Conditional Use", and/or other submission and approval processes, code and/or other restriction(s) compliance, and/or use requirements will therefore add additional fees, development costs, and reviews, variances, waivers, conditions and appeals, plus other ancillary aspects of cost due to the negative impacting changes since the original 1992 code. In the event there are impacts, These too the Property Owner will view it as a Measure 37 Claim Impacts. Attachment if Applicable: Yes Q✓ See Exhibits G thru R Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 8 of 14 Law or Rule: Local Fire, Life, Safety Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your regulation/ordinance #(Pending). desired use of the Property: Unknown at this time. Research will follow to access the impact(s0, if any, and their significance. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Law or Rule: Local Fire, Life, Safety Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your regulation/ordinance #(Pending). desired use of the Property: Unknown at this time. Research will follow to access the impact(s0, if any, and their significance. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Law or Rule: State LCDC Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your regulation/ordinance #(Pending) desired use of the Property: Unknown at this time. Research will follow to access the impact(s0, if any, and their significance. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Law or Rule: State LCDC Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your regulation/ordinance #(Pending) desired use of the Property: Unknown at this time. Research will follow to access the impact(s0, if any, and their significance. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Law or Rule: State Fire Marshal Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your regulation/ordinance #(Pending) desired use of the Property: Unknown at this time. Research will follow to access the impact(s0, if any, and their significance. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Law or Rule: State Fire Marshal Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your regulation/ordinance #(Pending) desired use of the Property: Unknown at this time. Research will follow to access the impact(s0, if any, and their significance. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Law or Rule: Tualatin Valley Fire & Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your Rescue F/L/S regulation/ordinance desired use of the Property: #(Pending) Unknown at this time. Research will follow to access the impact(s0, if any, and their significance. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Law or Rule: Tualatin Valley Fire & Describe how this State land use regulation restricts your Rescue F/L/S regulation/ordinance desired use of the Property: #(Pending) Unknown at this time. Research will follow to access the impact(s0, if any, and their significance. Attachment if Applicable ❑ Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 9 of 14 ection 7 Effect on Fair Market Value of the Property By what amount has the enactment or enforcement of each state land use regulation identified in section 6, above, reduced the fair market value of the property? Describe what the basis of your statement is, and attach evidence or provide information to support your statement. Law or Rule: City of Amount of Reduction Basis of Statement: Tigard (COT) Land in Fair Market Value: This ordinance will reduce the property to a maximum density of Use Chapter 18.510 $900,000.00 only 6 units. The loss would be the remaining 6 lots at updated code $150,000.00 per lot, equaling $900,000.00 dated June, 2002, and preceding code and other See Real Estate Comp's within "Exhibits V" related restrictions, and/or Local Fire, Life, Safety regulation/ ordinance 4 M) E rt \ tt ~ ( l i1 ~ l 1 x .s. Law or Rule: City of Amount of Reduction Basis of Statement: Tigard Land Use in Fair Market Value: This ordinance will reduce the property to a maximum density of Ordinance $300,000.00 50% of available land, thereby minimizing it by 6 lots at # $150,000.00 per lot, equaling $900,000.00 and also require the and/or Local Fire, deeding of parks and streets to the City. It would therefore add an Life, Safety additional $300,000.00 of fees, development costs, and reviews regulation/ and appeals, plus other ancillary aspects of cost. Total financial ordinance impact $1,200,000.00 Which would require the land owner to Deed. streets and pant,, plus , to the City of Tigard. ,fit ~i 4 Y 1 T 4`~'! '1 t f - 4F d Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 10 of 14 action 8 NAMES AND CON, -.,;T INFORMATION OF OTHERS WITH IN1 REST IN THIS PROPERTY Enter the name and contact information of other persons or entities that own an interest in the Property, or attach a preliminary title report. Other ownership interests that should be listed include but are not limited to: (a) Every lessee and lessor of the Property; (b) Every person or entity holding a lien against, or a security interest in, the Property; (c) Every person or entity holding a future, contingent, or other interest of any kind in the Property. This could be other owners, persons holding an easement over your property, banks, mortgage companies, state or federal agencies or entities, programs specific to the use of the property and any and all others with any interest in the property. Some examples could be; a USDA program providing funds for an owner not to grow a particular crop on the land, banks with second, third or other mortgage interest. If using an attachment, the attachment must be submitted in such a format as to easily distinguish the various owners and interest in the property. Name: Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Doc. Mgmt. Day Time Phone (503) 684-6222 Address: PO Box 5137 City: Des Moines State: IA Zip: 50306 Describe Interest in Property: Mortgage Lender security interest Name: Wells Fargo Home Equity Day Time Phone (503) 684-6222 Address: PO Box 31557 City: Billings State: MT Zip: 59107 Describe Interest in Property: Mortgage Lender security interest action 9 AUTHORITY TO ENTER PROPERTY This section of the form authorizes the Department, the Regulating Entity and their officers, employees, agents, and contractors to enter the Property as necessary to verify information, appraise the property, or conduct other business related to this claim. Each person that can restrict access to the property must sign in the appropriate box in this section. IMe Affix Our Signature(s) to this Form Granting Access to the Subject Property in ANY Manner or Form Deemed Appropriate by State Agency or Agencies for the Review of the Property in Furtherance of the Processing or Handling of this Claim: SIGNATURES OF ALL OWNERS WITH AUTHO O RESTRICT ACCESS, Printed Name: Robert E. Ruedy Signature: 7 171., 77 -Y- 7 Interest in Property. Sole Owner of said property. Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 11 of 14 Section 10 ATTACHMENT Check the appropriate box for all documents, evidence and supporting information that is attached and included as a part of this claim. Title. Report: Deed: Appraisal(s): County Assessor's Plat Card: Yes O No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes ❑ No Yes ❑ No ❑ See; "Exhibit T" Comp's: Yes See "Exhibit W Affidavits: Tax Lot Map(s) Subdivision or Tax Reductions: Yes ❑ No 0✓ Yes © No ❑ Partition Yes ❑ No See "Exhibit U" Conditions: 3 each)- Yes . No ❑ Property Tax Statement (proof of ownership): Yes Q No ❑ See attached "Exhibit S" Participating Federal Programs: Yes ❑ No Other Information: (Explain) Exhibit H: City of Tigard "Chapter 18.54 for R-12 Multiple-Family Residential (12 Units Per Acre)" code update revised and effective January 17, 1991 (Pages 111 thru 113). Exhibit J: City of Tigard "Uses by Zones Matrix" revised and effective June 1986 (7 pages). Exhibit K: City of Tigard "Zoning Regulations Summary: Dimensional Standards" revised and effective March 1997 (2 pages). Exhibit L: City of Tigard "Pre-Application Conference Notes" for Robert Ruedy dated 1010111992. Exhibit M: City of Tigard Submission Plat related to the above noted City of Tigard "Pre- Application Conference Notes" for Robert Ruedy dated 1010111992. Exhibit N: City of Tigard "Chapter 18.510 Residential Zoning Districts" updated and effective June 2002 to date. Exhibit P: City of Tigard "Pre-Application Conference Notes" dated August 11, 1992 and provided to Robert Ruedy as example submissions with City comments for said R-12 Zoning Use property. Exhibit Q: City of Tigard "Pre-Application Conference Notes" dated March 12, 1992 and provided to Robert Ruedy as example submissions with City comments for said R-12-Zoning Use property. Exhibit R: City of Tigard and Vicinity "Comprehensive Plan Map Ordinance 83-24, Zoning District" dated September 1991. Subject property is highlighted along with the "R-12 Zoning Use" identification. Exhibit S:- Washington County "Real Property Tax Statement" for 711106 to 6130107 indicating Robert E. Ruedy as the sole owner of said property. Exhibit T: Preliminary Title Report indicating Robert E. Ruedy as the sole owner of said property. Continued on next page 4 4 Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 12 of 14 Exhibit U: 1) Close-up site lot an Tax map from Transnation Title'. Acating the claim property highlighted. 2) Washington County Tax Map (letter size - 8-1/2" x 11") indicating the claim property highlighted. 3) Washington County Tax Map (full size - 20" x 24") indicating the claim property highlighted. Exhibit V: Comparable "Residential Use" Properties, from RMLS at a 10 mile radius of claim property. Exhibit W: City of Tigard "Procedure for Ballot Measure 37 Compensation Claim" filing submitted on December 1, 2006 (their "deadline" date). Package includes a copy of their $1,000.00 processing fee paid via personal check #8586. (8 pages) ection 11 OTHER CLAIMS FILED List all other govemmental entities you or someone on your behalf has submitted claims to regarding the Property involved in this claim. List all claims submitted to the state or other entities relating to this property or any portion thereof on anyone's behalf. You must list all entities even if you only submitted a claim to them for a portion of the Property that is the subject of this claim. Have you submitted a claim to another governmental entity regarding the property listed in this claim? No ❑ Yes Date: December 1, 2006 (Their M37 Deadline Date) To Whom: The City of Tigard Claim number: Not provided- See attached "Exhibit W" 8 pages) Yes ❑ Date: To Whom: Claim number: Yes ❑ Date: To Whom: Claim number: Yes ❑ Date: To Whom: Claim number: Yes ❑ Date: To Whom: Claim number: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT MAY BE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS CLAIM 1. A report by a certified appraiser that addresses the Reduction in Fair Market Value of the Property resulting from the enactment or enforcement of the cited Land Use Regulation(s) as of the date the Claim was filed; 2. A statement of the effect of the cited Land Use Regulation(s) on any Owner's tax status, including without limitation any tax deferrals or tax reductions related to the cited Land Use Regulation(s); 3. Citation to,each Land"Use~Regulation(s) in effect"at.the time the ownecacquired the property,explaining how the use that is now not permitted by the Land Use Regulation(s) set forth in Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 125-145-0040(9) was permitted at the time the owner acquired the property; 4. Names:and.addresses 4.. :Owners:of:ill'real property. located within 100 feet of the Property if the Property is located in whole orlh.part in an urbamgrowth- boundary; 250 feet of the Property if the Property is located outside and urban growth boundary and not within a farm or forest zone and 750 feet of the Property if the Property is located in a farm or forest zone. Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 13 of 14 I ATTEST THAT I HAVE THE =ORMATION CONTAINED IN THI CLAIM IS TRUE AND CORRECT. (Signatures of the claimant(s) and (if the claim is prepared by an agent) any agent of the claimant(s).) Z, 111, C imant #1 Signature Date Agent #1 Signature r Date State of Oregon County of Washington Signed and sworn to before me on December 4, 2006 by Robert E. Ruedy (month - day - year) v v v Notary Seal v v v (Notary Public - S ate of Oregon) 01TIC"Sm !'a11<ltERIW NN~L~ p0ilaMimi My CO My commission expires: Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 14 of 14 r ffl) 92088048 T.:OR TITLE INSUR_JCE Waahington County STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED u L W H (8 rT A" EVELYN C. BACON Grantor, conveys and warrants to ROBERT E. RUEDY AND DONNA L. RUEDY, HUSBAND AND WIFE Grantee, the following described real property free of encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein situated in WASHINGTON County, Oregon, to wit: THE EAST HALF OF LOTS 13 AND 14, TIGARDVILLE HEIGHTS, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD,.COUNTY OF WASHINGTON AND STATE OF-OREGON, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST HALF OF SAID LOT 13. - THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLI- CABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING ORACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIR- ING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES. The said property is free from encumbrances except POWER OF ASSESSMENT OF THE UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY; RIGHTS OF PUBLIC IN AND TO THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN STREETS, ROADS AND HIGHWAYS. The true consideration for this conveyance is $121,250.00 (Here comply with the requirements of ORS 93.030) Dated this 7th day of December 1992 OFFICIAL SEAL EVELYN C : BACON _ Snz'•"fl~ LAV'ff NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION W0. 008b57 F'Y COMMISS'010 EXPIRES SEPt.10,1 State of Oregon, County of r1 ar•kamaa State of Oregon, County of The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me thin The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this:. 7th_day. of DPnPMbPr , 19_92by day of , 19 by Eve 5M C -Bacon President and Secretary of a corporation, f~ :l on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public fort; Qregon my commission. expires: Notary Public for Oregon 9/10/95 My commission expires: WARRANTY DEED This Space Reserved for Recorder's Use EVELYN C. BACON GRANTOR GRANTEE ROBERT E. RUEDY DONNA L. RUEDY Until a change is requested, all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: 4i v YiASHIt~GT0"J COUNTY REAL PTiOPa:RTY TRANSFER IAX ROBERT E. RUEDY CD 2 - d 14185 SW 100TH AVENUE DATE FEE PAID T;9WNe OR 97224 Title No.. 596301BL 596301 After recording return to: ROBERT E. RUEDY 14185 SW 100TH AVENUE TIGARD , OR 97224 Ticor Form No. 137 Statutory Warranty Deed 8/85 Section 5 INTENDED USE Q )ROPERTY What is your desired use of the property that is restricted by one or more state land use regulations? Please provide as much detail as possible concerning the desired use, as your claim will be evaluated based on this information. You must identify your desired use so that we are able to: (1) determine whether that use has been restricted by one or more state land use regulations and if so, which ones; (2) determine whether state land use regulations have had the effect of reducing the value of the property; (3) state clearly what state land use regulations will "not apply" to your use of your property (if the state elects not to pay compensation); and (4) provide adequate notice to those entitled to notice. At the very least you need to identify the type of use and give us some idea of the intensity of the use. Some typical examples of the of what other claimants have said are: (a) to divide the property into five lots, and to establish a residence on each lot; (b) to build a single-family home on the property; (c) to develop a golf course on ten acres of the property along with a clubhouse. The more general you are in your description, the less likely it is that we are to determine that particular state land use regulations restrict your use. The more specific you are, the less likely it is that you will have to file additional claims. If you have already filed a claim with a city or a county, and the use you want the state to consider is the same as for your local claim, then please tell us that. If you do not tell us what your desired use is, we will assume that you wish to establish one additional dwelling on your property, and we will process your claim on that basis. Attach narrative statement proposed plan; or other documentation of desired use, as you think necessary ❑ To divide the property into 2 lots for the existing single-family residence and one large Multi family, Group Care Residential, Family Day Care Facility, Group Residential Treatment Home(s), Hospital, or other multi- family dwelling residential units or series of units; or 12 lots or parcels (in addition to the existing single family residential lot) and establish a residence on each lot or parcel to create a subdivision for mobile homes, manufactured homes, townhouses, or 6 lots (in addition to the existing single family residential lot) as multi family residential units, duplex residential units, single family attached residential units; providing they meet the state and local land use ordinances at the time of original purchase in 1992 as enclosed herein, or benefit from reduced land use and zoning regulations since that date. In some of the instances above the original single-family residence and unattached yard shed may be either demolished or relocated to allow for the homes' lot to be additionally subdivided for final achievement of maximum density of the R-12 Zoning Use. Form: M37.10-9-06 Page 5 of 14 f .I a T S4 S-, . OF OREGON County of Washington SS I, Jerry ' nson~Airectti;r of Assess- ment and _~R.~.' y T" lion ancL Clerk Eifjfficlo County fortea~ sp}yy-, o ea h #j that the wit~ra ins1r ent 4lavriitn sTreceived and reeorft gook: of%" a county;: re .6*i1 4of said el,•~• r a 1'rry'R: Ha9 n, oil Director of Assessment''ancTaxation, Ec- I Offii fo Couiily Clerk Doc ; 98125411 Rect: 220202 ~ 11/06/1998 , 02: 41:02p 11:00 Loan No. 1504113 DEED OF RECONVEYANCE Mark Peterman is the trustee ("Trustee") under the Deed of Trust dated December 3, 1992 executed by Donna L. Ruedy and Robert E. Ruedy in which Home Savings of America, FSB is the beneficiary. The Trust Deed was recorded on December 10, 1992 a8 Fee No. 92088049 in the Records of Washington County, Oregon. The Trustee has received from the beneficiary a written request to reconvey, stating that all obligations secured by the Trust Deed have been fully paid and performed. THEREFORE, the Trustee hereby conveys without covenant or warranty, express or implied, to the person legally entitled thereto, all of the estate now held by the Trustee in and to the property described in the Trust Deed. DATED: September 1, 1998. Mark Peterman, Trustee STATE OF OREGON ) ss. County of Multnomah ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on September 1, 1998, by Mark Peterman, as Trustee under the above-referenced Trust Deed. _ OFFICIAL SEAL DARREN L. DORRELL t /Z J , l , NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 301462 Notary Public for Oregon !~Y COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 26, 2001 After recording return to: Robert E.:.& :Donna L•. Ruedy '14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 PDX I A-1.40725.1 27163-0 W 1 `~,>h (g t i C tr - Washington County. Oregon 2002-004944 0111412002 02:50:10 PM D•M Cnt■l 61n■t K GRUNEWALO Until a change is requested all tax statements shall be sent $78.00$11,001111.00 • Tehh$112.00 73t20rfollowing address. SW MMZIIKER,MSUITEg310 Inc 1PORTLAND, OR 97223 00034837200200048440160164 503-684-9222 1, Jeny Hanson, Director o1 Assessment and Taxation and Ex4nklo County Clerk forWashington Courtly doherebyoertlylhdlhov*lhlnlnsWmmtofwntlnp •i WIHN RECORDED MAIL TO was ncdwd and naordetl N the bo k of records of nld County. WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, INC. Jerry It.Henson, DlnetorbHlneiamentandTaxatlon, Ex-0Rlelo Couragr Clerk P.O. BOX 5137 DES MOINES, IA. 50306 503-684-6222 ACCOUNT NUMBER Loan ID: 0023085681 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER ROS0190S [Space Above This Line For Recording Data] DEED OF TRUST 0 M 0 DEFINITIONS Words used in multiple sections of this document are defined below and other words are defined in Sections 3, 11, 13, 18, 20 and 21. Certain rules regarding the usage of words used in this document are .P. also provided in Section 16. ...t (A) "Security Instrument" means this document, which is dated January 8th, 2002 , C= together with all Riders to this document. ,cc ' (B) "Borrower" is ROBERT E. RUEDY and DONNA L RUEDY C W r.. (.i_ Borrower is the truster under this Security Instrument. (C) "Lender" is WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, INC. Lender is a CORPORATION organized and existing under the laws of "The State of California" OREGON-Single Family-Fannie Mae/Freddie Mae UNIFORM INSTRUMENT Form 3038 1101 Pape.! of tE Inldda:"a~- VMP MORTGAGE FORMS-18001521-7291 I IIlIIIII IIII IIII IIIIII I~I! IIII IIII Washington Cowry, Oregon +2005-029520 031211200512:26:54 PM 0-M Cnial sa,■Y C T IVPKIN8 $3.oo ".00 $11.00 - Total ■ $2100 This document was prepared by `II I I I III I II I u l l l) I I I III I~I I (I) II I I II ((I I~ Wells Fargo Bank 00742735200500I85200010018 2324 Overland Ave I, Jerry Hannon, Director of Assessment and Taxation PO Box 31557 and Ex,(Mclo County Clark for Washington County, Billings MT 59102, 866-255-9] 02 Oregon, do hereby certify that the within Inetrumanl of writing was received and [acorded I the book of records of said Dourly. , y~ WHEN RECORDED MAIL. TO: Jerry Ft Hanson, Director(br. saossmont and Taxation, Ex-0=clo County Clerk ROBERT E RUBDY 14185 SW 100TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97224-4951 DEED OF RECONVEYANCE Account Number: 65465447999170001 The undersigned as Trustee under that certain Deed of Trust described as follows: Dated: NOVEMBER 5, 2002 Recorded: DECEMBER 9, County of. Washington 2002' Fee / Doc No.: 2002-149174 Book: N/A Page: N/A Reel: N/A Parcelk R501905 Micro Film / Code Film: N/A State of Oregon- Trustor: ROBERT E RUEDY AND DONNA L RUEDY, HUSBAND AND WIFE Trustee: Wells Fargo Financial National Bank Beneficiary: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Having received from the present Beneficiary under said Deed of Trust, a written request to reconvey, reciting that the obligations secured by the Deed of Trust have been fully satisfied, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and reconvey, unto the parties entitled thereto all right, title and interest which was heretofore acquired by said Trustee under said Deed of Trust. Dated: 03/1412005 Wells Fargo Financial National Bank Julie Bloom Collateral Officer STATE OF MONTANA } COUNTY OF YELLOWSTONE }ss. This foregoing instrument was acimowledged before me, the undersigned Notary Public, on this 03/14/2005, by Julie M Bloom, Collateral Officer of Wells Fargo Fi anti,! National Ppnk. YN P~ • ' Marilyn Packar OIAIQ Notary Public fo4ftte State of Montana (seal Residing at Billings, Montana * My commission expires: 07/01/2007 SEAL ' t- 9 of 2002-4944 Lender's address is P.O. BOX 5137 DES MOINES, IA. 50306 Lender is the beneficiary under this Security Instrument. (D) "Trustee" is Forest N.A. Bacci, Esq. (E) "Note" means the promissory note signed by Borrower and dated January 8th, 2002 The Note states that Borrower owes Lender Two Hundred Twelve Thousand and no/100 and no/100 Dollars (U.S. $ 212, 000.00 ) plus interest. Borrower has promised to pay this debt in regular Periodic Payments and to pay the debt in full not later than February 1st, 2032 (F) "Property" means the property that is described below under the heading "Transfer of Rights in the Property." (G) "Loan" means the debt evidenced by the Note, plus interest, any prepayment charges and late charges due under the Note, and all sums due under this Security Instrument,. plus interest. (H) "Riders" means all Riders to this Security Instrument that are executed by Borrower. The following Riders are to be executed by Borrower [check box as applicable]: Adjustable Rate Rider 0 Condominium Rider El Second Home Rider O Balloon Rider F-1 Planned Unit Development Rider El 1-4 Family Rider Q VA Rider ED Biweekly Payment Rider 0 Other(s) [specify] (1) "Applicable Law" means all controlling applicable federal, state and local statutes, regulations, ordinances and administrative rules and orders (that have the effect of law) as well as all applicable final, non-appealable judicial opinions. (J) "Community Association Dues, Fees, and Assessments" means all dues, fees, assessments and other charges that are imposed on Borrower or the Property by a condominium association, homeowners association or similar organization. (K) "Electronic Funds Transfer" means any transfer of funds, other than a transaction originated by check, draft, or similar paper instrument, which is initiated through an electronic terminal, telephonic instrument, computer, or magnetic tape so as to order, instruct, or authorize a financial institution to debit or credit an account. Such term includes, but is not limited to, pofut-of-sale transfers, automated teller machine transactions, transfers initiated by telephone, wire transfers, and automated clearinghouse transfers. (L) "Escrow Items" means those items that are described in Section 3. (M) "Miscellaneous Proceeds" means any compensation, settlement, award of damages, or proceeds paid by any third party.(other than insurance proceeds paid under the coverages described in Section 5) for: (i) damage to, or destruction of, the Property; (u) condemnation or other taking of all or any part of the Property; (ill) conveyance in lieu of condemnation; or (iv) misrepresentations of, or omissions as to, the value and/or condition of the Property. (N) "Mortgage Insurance" means insurance protecting Lender against the nonpayment of, or default on, the Loan. (O) "Periodic Payment" means the regularly scheduled amount due for (i) principal and interest under the Note, plus (ii) any amounts under Section 3 of this Security Instrument. (P) "RESPA" means the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (12 U.S.C. Section 2601 et seq.) and its implementing regulation, Regulation X (24 C.F.R. Part 3500), as they might be amended from time to time, or any additional or successor legislation or regulation that governs the same subject matter. As used in this Security instrument, "RESPA" refers to all requirements and restrictions that are imposed in regard Enid -6(OR) 100061 Pape 2 "116 Form 3038 - 1101 ' 2002-4944 to a "federally related mortgage loan" even if the Loan does not qualify as a "federally related mortgage loan" under RESPA. (Q) "Successor in Interest of Borrower" means any party that has taken title to the Property, whether or not that party has assumed Borrower's obligations under the Note and/or this Security Instrument. TRANSFER OF RIGHTS IN THE PROPERTY This Security Instrument secures to Lender. (i) the repayment of the Loan, and all renewals, extensions and modifications of the Note; and (ii) the performance of Borrower's covenants and agreements under this Security Instrument and the Note. For this purpose, Borrower irrevocably grants and conveys to Trustee, in trust, with power of sate, the following described property located in the COUNTY of WASHINGTON ['type of Recording Jurisdiction] (Name of Recording Jurisdicdon] THE EAST HALF OF LOTS 13 AND 14, TIGARDVILLE HEIGHTS, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON-AND STATE OF-OREGON. EXCEPTING THEREFROM, The North 100 feet of the East half of said Lot 13. Item R0501905 which currently has the address of 14185 SW 100TH AVENUE [Suret] TIGARD (City], Oregon 97224 [Zip Code] ("Property Address'): TOGETHER WITH all the improvements now or hereafter erected on the property, and all ettsements, appurtenances, and fixtures now or hereafter a part of the property. All replacements and additions shall also be covered by this Security Instrument. All of the foregoing is referred to in this Security Instrument as the "Property." BORROWER COVENANTS that Borrower is lawfully seised of the estate hereby conveyed and has the right to grant and convey the Property and that the Property is unencumbered. except for encumbrances of record. Borrower warrants and will defend generally the title to the Property against all claims and demands, subject-to any encumbrances of record. THIS SECURITY INSTRUMENT combines uniform covenants for national use and non-uniform covenants with limited variations by jurisdiction to constitute a uniform security instrument covering real property. UNIFORM COVENANTS. Borrower and Lender covenant and agree as follows: 1. Payment of Principal, Interest, Escrow Items, Prepayment, Charges, and Late Charges. Borrower shall pay when due the principal of, and interest on, the debt evidenced by the Note and any prepayment charges and late charges due under the Note. Borrower shall also pay funds for Escrow Items pursuant to Section -3. Payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument shall be made in U.S. IMWI~:_~/t (IL"~ -610R1 tooost aeea 3 of 16 - Form 3038 1101 ' % i . tilt 2002-4944 currency. However, if any check or other instrument received by Lender as payment under the Note or this Security Instrument is returned to Lender unpaid, Lender may require that any or all subsequent payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument be made in one or more of the following forms, as selected by Lender: (a) cash; (b) money order; (c) certified check, bank check, treasurer's check or cashier's check, provided any such check is drawn upon an institution whose deposits are insured by a federal agency, instrumentality, or entity; or (d) Electronic Funds Transfer. Payments are deemed received by Lender when received at the location designated in the Note or at such other location as may be designated by Lender in accordance with the notice provisions in Section 15. Lender may return any payment or partial payment if the payment or partial payments are insufficient to bring the Loan current. Lender may accept any payment or partial payment insufficient to bring the Loan current, without waiver of any rights hereunder or prejudice to its rights to refuse such payment or partial payments in the future, but Lender is not obligated to apply such payments at the time such payments are accepted. If each Periodic Payment is applied as of its scheduled due date, then Lender need not pay interest on unapplied funds. Lender may hold such unapplied funds until Borrower makes payment to bring the Loan current. If Borrower does not do so within a reasonable period of time, Lender shall either apply such funds or return them to Borrower. If not applied earlier, such funds will be applied to the outstanding principal balance under the Note immediately prior to foreclosure. No offset or claim which Borrower might have now or in the future against Lender shall relieve Borrower from making payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument or performing the covenants and agreements secured by this Security Instrument. 2. Application of Payments or Proceeds. Except as otherwise described in this Section 2, all payments accepted and applied by Lender shall be applied in the following order of priority: (a) interest due under the Note; (b) principal due under the Note; (c) amounts due under Section 3. Such payments shall be applied to each Periodic Payment in the order in which it became due. Any remaining amounts shall be applied first to late charges, second to any other amounts due under this Security Instrument, and then to reduce the principal balance of the Note. If Lender receives a payment from Borrower for a delinquent Periodic Payment which includes a sufficient amount to pay any late charge due, the payment may be applied to the delinquent payment and the late charge. If more than one Periodic Payment is outstanding, Lender may apply any payment received from Borrower to the repayment of the Periodic Payments if, and to the extent that, each payment can be paid in full. To the extent that any excess exists after the payment is applied to the full payment of one or more Periodic Payments, such excess may be applied to any late charges due. Voluntary prepayments shall be applied first to any prepayment charges and then as described in the Note. Any application of payments, insurance proceeds, or Miscellaneous Proceeds to principal due under the Note shall not extend or postpone the due date, or change the amount, of the Periodic Payments. 3. Funds for Escrow Items. Borrower shall pay to Lender on the day Periodic Payments are due under the Note, until the Note is paid in full, a sum (the "Funds") to provide for payment of amounts due for: (a) taxes and assessments and other items which can attain priority over this Security Instrument as a lien or encumbrance on the Property; (b) leasehold payments or ground rents on the Property, if any; (c) premiums for any and all insurance required by Lender under Section 5; and (d) Mortgage Insurance premiums, if any, or any sums payable by Borrower to Lender in lieu of the payment of Mortgage Insurance premiums in accordance with the provisions of Section 10. These items are called "Escrow Items." At origination or at any time during the term of the Loan, Lender may require that Community Association Dues, Fees, and Assessments, if any, be escrowed by Borrower, and such dues, fees and assessments shall be an Escrow Item. Borrower shall promptly furnish to Lender all notices of amounts to be paid under this Section. Borrower shall pay Lender the Funds for Escrow Items unless Lender waives Borrower's obligation to pay the Funds for any or all Escrow Items. Lender may waive Borrower's obligation to pay to Lender Funds for any or all Escrow Items at any time. Any such waiver may only be INBelf;t(,EGt y/Li CkWR) (ooos) Page 4of 15 Form 3038 1/01 2002-4944 in writing. In the event of such waiver, Borrower shall pay directly, when and where payable, the amounts due for any Escrow Items for which payment of Funds has been waived by Lender and, if Lender requires, shall furnish to Lender receipts evidencing such payment within such time period as 'Lender may require. Borrower's obligation to make such payments and to provide receipts shall for all purposes be deemed to be a covenant and agreement contained in this Security Instrument, as the phrase "covenant and agreement" is used in Section 9. If Borrower is obligated to pay Escrow Items directly, pursuant to a waiver, and Borrower fails to pay the amount due for an Escrow Item, Lender may exercise its rights under Section 9 and pay such amount and Borrower shall then be obligated under Section 9 to repay to Lender any such amount. Lender may revoke the waiver as to any or all Escrow Items at any time by a notice given in accordance with Section 15 and, upon such revocation, Borrower shall pay to Lender all Funds, and in such amounts, that are then required under this Section 3. Lender may, at any time, collect and hold Funds in an amount (a) sufficient to permit Lender to apply the Funds at the time specified under RESPA, and (b) not to exceed the maximum amount a lender can require under RESPA. Lender shall estimate the amount of Funds due on the basis of current data and reasonable estimates of expenditures of future Escrow Items or otherwise in accordance with Applicable Law. The Funds shall be held in an institution whose deposits are insured by a federal agency, instrumentality, or entity (including Lender, if Lender is an institution whose deposits are so insured) or in any Federal Home Loan Bank. Lender shall apply the Funds to pay the Escrow Items no later than the time specified under RESPA. Lender shall not charge Borrower for holding and applying the Funds, annually analyzing the escrow account, or verifying the Escrow Items, unless Lender pays Borrower interest on the Funds and Applicable Law permits Lender to make such a charge. Unless an agreement is made in writing or Applicable Law requires interest to be paid on the Funds, Lender shall not be required to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on the Funds. Borrower and Lender can agree Mi writing, however, that interest shall be paid on the Funds. Lender shall give to Borrower, without charge, an annual accounting of the Funds as required by RESPA. If there is a surplus of Funds held in escrow, as defined under RESPA, Lender shall account to Borrower for the excess funds in accordance with RESPA. If there is a shortage of Funds held in escrow, as defined under RESPA, Lender shall notify Borrower as required by RESPA, and Borrower shall pay to Lender the amount necessary to make up the shortage in accordance with RESPA, but in no more than 12 monthly payments. If there is a deficiency of Funds held in escrow, as defined under RESPA, Lender shall notify Borrower as required by RESPA, and Borrower shall pay to Lender the amount necessary to make up the deficiency in accordance with RESPA, but in no more than 12 monthly payments. Upon payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument, Lender shall promptly refund to Borrower any Funds held by Lender. 4. Charges; Liens. Borrower . shall pay all taxes, assessments, charges, fines, and impositions attributable to the Property which can attain priority over this Security Instrument, leasehold payments or ground rents on the Property, if any, and Community Association Dues, Fees, and Assessments, if any. To the extent that time items are Escrow Items, Borrower shall pay them in the manner provided in Section 3. Borrower shall promptly discharge any lien which has priority over this Security Instrument unless Borrower: (a) agrees in writing to the payment of the obligation secured by the lien in a manner acceptable to Lender, but only so long as Borrower is performing such agreement; (b) contests the lien in good faith by, or defends against enforcement of the lien in, legal proceedings which in Lender's opinion operate to prevent the enforcement of the lien while those proceedings are pending, but only until such proceedings are concluded; or (c) secures from the holder of the lien an agreement satisfactory to Lender subordinating the lien to this Security Instrument. If Lender determines that any part of the Property is subject to a lien which can attain priority over this Security Instrument, Lender may give Borrower a notice identifying the weat~v -BtOR) foooal Pape 6 of 16 Form 3038 1101 i 2002-4944 lien. Within 10 days of the date on which that notice is given, Borrower shall satisfy the lien or take one or more of the actions set forth above in this Section 4. Lender may require Borrower to pay a one-time charge for a real estate tax verification and/or reporting service used by Lender in connection with this Loan. 5. Property Insumce. Borrower shall keep the improvements now existing or hereafter erected on the Property insured against loss by fire, hazards included within the term "extended coverage," and any other hazards including, but not limited to, earthquakes and floods, for which Lender requires insurance. This insurance shall be maintained in the amounts (including deductible levels) and for the periods that Lender requires. What Lender requires pursuant to the preceding sentences can change during the term of the Loan. The insurance carrier providing the insurance shall be chosen by Borrower subject to Lender's right to disapprove Borrower's choice, which right shall not be exercised unreasonably. Lender may require Borrower to pay, in connection with this Loan, either: (a) a one-time charge for flood zone determination, certification and tracking services; or (b) a one-time charge for flood zone determination and certification services and subsequent charges each time remappings or similar changes occur which reasonably might affect such determination or certification. Borrower shall also be responsible for the payment of any fees imposed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in connection with the review of any flood zone determination resulting from an objection by Borrower. If Borrower fails to maintain any of the coverages described above, Lender may obtain insurance coverage, at Lender's option and Borrower's expense. Lender is under no obligation to purchase any particular type or amount of coverage. Therefore, such coverage shall cover Lender, but might or might not protect Borrower, Borrower's equity in the Property, or the contents of the Property, against any-risk, hazard or liability and might provide greater or lesser coverage than was previously in effect. Borrower acknowledges that the cost of the insurance coverage so obtained might significantly exceed the cost of insurance that Borrower could have obtained. Any amounts disbursed by Lender under this Section 5 shall become additional debt of Borrower secured by this Security Instrument. These amounts shall bear interest at the Note rate from the date of disbursement and shall be payable, with such interest, upon notice from Lender to Borrower requesting payment. All insurance policies required by Lender and renewals of such policies shall be subject to Lender's right to disapprove such policies, shall include a standard mortgage clause, and shall name Lender as mortgagee and/or as an additional loss payee. Lender shall have the right to hold the policies and renewal certificates. If Lender requires, Borrower shall promptly give to Lender all receipts of paid premiums and renewal notices. If Borrower obtains any form of insurance coverage, not otherwise required by Lender, for damage to, or destruction of, the Property, such policy shall include a standard mortgage clause and shall name Lender as mortgagee and/or as an additional loss payee. In the event of loss, Borrower shall give prompt notice to the insurance carrier and Lender. Lender may make proof of loss if not made promptly by Borrower. Unless Lender and Borrower otherwise agree in writing, any insurance proceeds, whether or not the underlying insurance was required by Lender, shall be applied to restoration or repair of the Property, if the restoration or repair is economically feasible and Lender's security is not lessened. During such repair and restoration period, Lender shall have the right to hold such insurance proceeds until Lender has had an opportunity to inspect such Property to ensure the work has been completed to Lender's satisfaction, provided that such inspection shall be undertaken promptly. Lender may disburse proceeds for the repairs and restoration in a single payment or in a series of progress payments as the work is completed. Unless an agreement is made in writing or Applicable Law requires interest to be paid on such insurance proceeds, Lender shall not be required to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on such proceeds. Fees for public adjusters, or other third parties, retained by Borrower shall not be paid out of the insurance proceeds and shall be the sole obligation of Borrower. If the restoration or repair is not economically feasible or Lender's security would be lessened, the insurance proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument, whether or not then due, with I"n(~ -6(OR) (0006) P&GO a of 16 Form 3038 1101 the excess, if any, paid to Borrower. Such insurance proceeds shall be applied in the order provided for in Section 2. If Borrower abandons the Property, Lender may file, negotiate and settle any available insurance claim and related matters. If Borrower does not respond within 30 days to a notice from Lender that the insurance carrier has offered to settle a claim, then Lender may negotiate and settle the claim. The 30-day period will begin when the notice is given. In either event, or if Lender acquires the Property under Section 22 or otherwise, Borrower hereby assigns to Lender (a) Borrower's rights to any insurance proceeds in an amount not to exceed the amounts unpaid under the Note or this Security Instrument, and (b) any other of Borrower's rights (other than the right to any refund of unearned premiums paid by Borrower) under all insurance policies covering the Property, insofar as such rights are applicable to the coverage of the Property. Lender may use the insurance proceeds either to repair or restore the Property or to pay amounts unpaid under the Note or this Security Instrument, whether or not then due. 6. Occupancy. Borrower shall occupy, establish, and use the Property as Borrower's principal residence within 60 days after the execution of this Security Instrument and shall continue to occupy the Property as Borrower's principal residence for at least one year after the date of occupancy, unless Lender otherwise agrees in writing, which consent sball not be unreasonably withheld, or unless extenuating ' circumstances exist which are beyond Borrower's control. 7. Preservation, Maintenance and Protection of the Property; Inspections. Borrower shall not destroy, damage or impair the Property, allow the Property to deteriorate or commit waste on the Property. Whether or not Borrower is residing in the Property, Borrower shall maintain the Property in order to prevent the Property from deteriorating or decreasing in value due to its condition. Unless it is determined pursuant to Section 5 that repair or restoration is not economically feasible, Borrower shall promptly repair the Property if damaged to avoid further deterioration or damage. If insurance or condemnation proceeds are paid in connection with damage to, or the taking of, the Property, Borrower shall be responsible for repairing or restoring the Property only if Lender has released proceeds for such purposes. Lender may disburse proceeds for the repairs and restoration in a, single payment or in a series of progress payments as the work is completed. If the insurance or condemnation proceeds are not sufficient to repair or restore the Property, Borrower is not relieved of Borrower's obligation for the completion of such repair or restoration. Lender or its agent may make reasonable entries upon and inspections of the Property. If it has reasonable cause, Lender may inspect the interior of the improvements on the Property. Lender shall give Borrower notice at the time of or prior to such an interior inspection specifying such reasonable cause. 8. Borrower's Loan Application. Borrower shall be in default if, during the Loan application process, Borrower or any persons or entities acting at the direction of Borrower or with Borrower's knowledge or consent gave materially false, misleading, or inaccurate information or statements to Lender (or failed to provide Lender with material information) in connection with the Loan. Material representations include, but are not limited to, representations concerning Borrower's occupancy of the Property as Borrower's principal residence. 9. Protection of Lender's Interest in the Property and Rights Under this Security Instrument. If (a) Borrower fails to perform the covenants and agreements contained in this Security Instrument, (b) there is a legal proceeding that might significantly affect Lender's interest in the Property and/or rights under this Security Instrument (such as a proceeding in bankruptcy, probate. for condemnation or forfeiture, for enforcement of a lien which may attain priority over this Security Instrument or to enforce laws or regulations), or (c) Borrower has abandoned the Property, then Lender may do and pay for whatever is reasonable or appropriate to protect Lender's interest in the Property and rights under this Security Instrument, including protecting and/or assessing the value of the Property, and securing and/or repairing the Property. Lender's actions can include, but are not limited to: (a) paying any sums secured by a lien which has priority over this Security Instrument; (b) appearing in court; and (c) paying reasonable InRieLa~~cY'~•- . ( - (OR) (00051 Pnpn 7 of 16 Form 3038 1/01 III I II 2002-4944 attorneys' fees to protect its interest in the Property and/or rights under this Security Instrument, including its secured position in a bankruptcy proceeding. Securing the Property includes, but is not limited to, entering the Property to make repairs, change locks, replace or board up doors and windows, drain water from pipes, eliminate building or other code violations or dangerous conditions, and have utilities tamed on or off. Although Lender may take action under this Section 9, Lender does not have to do so and is not under any duty or obligation to do so. It is agreed that Lender incurs no liability for not taking any or all actions authorized under this Section 9. Any amounts disbursed by Lender under this Section 9 shall become additional debt of Borrower secured by this Security Instrument. These amounts shall bear interest at the Note rate from the date of disbursement and shall be payable, with such interest, upon notice from Lender to Borrower requesting payment. If this Security Instrument is on a leasehold, Borrower shall comply with all the provisions of the lease. If Borrower acquires fee title to the Pioperty, the leasehold and the fee title shall not merge unless Lender agrees to the merger in writing. 10. Mortgage Insurance. If lender required Mortgage Insurance as a condition of making the Loan, Borrower shall pay the premiums required to maintain the Mortgage Insurance in effect. If, for any reason, the Mortgage Insurance coverage required by Lender ceases to be available from the mortgage insurer that previously provided such insurance and Borrower was required to make separately designated payments toward the premiums for Mortgage Insurance, Borrower shall pay the premiums required to obtain coverage substantially equivalent to the Mortgage Insurance previously in effect, at a cost substantially equivalent to the cost to Borrower of the Mortgage Insurance previously in effect, from an alternate mortgage insurer selected by Lender. If substantially equivalent Mortgage Insurance coverage is not available, Borrower shall continue to pay to Lender the amount of the separately designated payments that were due when the insurance coverage ceased to be in effect. Lender will accept, use and retain these payments as a non-refundable loss reserve in lieu of Mortgage Insurance. Such loss reserve shall be non-refundable, notwithstanding the fact that the Loan is ultimately paid in full, and Lender shall not be required'to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on such loss reserve. Lender can no longer require loss reserve payments if Mortgage Insurance coverage (in the amount and for the period that Lender requires) provided by an insurer selected by Lender again becomes available, is obtained, and Lender requires separately designated payments toward the premiums for Mortgage Insurance. If Lender required Mortgage Insurance as a condition of making the Loan and Borrower was required to make separately designated payments toward the premiums for Mortgage Insurance, Borrower shall pay the premiums required to maintain Mortgage Insurance in effect, or to provide a non-refundable loss reserve, until Lender's requirement for Mortgage Insurance ends in accordance with any written agreement between Borrower and Lender providing for such termination or until termination is required by Applicable Law. Nothing in this Section 10 affects Borrower's obligation to pay interest at the rate provided in the Note. Mortgage Insurance reimburses Lender (or any entity that purchases the Note) for certain losses it may incur if Borrower does not repay the Loan as agreed. Borrower is' not a party to the Mortgage Insurance. Mortgage insurers evaluate their total risk on all such insurance in force from time to time, and may enter into agreements with other parties that share or modify their risk, or reduce losses. These agreements' are on terms and conditions that are satisfactory to the mortgage insurer and the other party (or parties) to these agreements. These agreements may require the mortgage insurer to matte payments using any source of funds that the mortgage insurer may have available (which. may include funds obtained from Mortgage Insurance premiums). As a result of these agreements, Lender, any purchaser of the Note, another insurer, any reinsurer, any other entity, or any affiliate of any of the foregoing, may receive (directly or indirectly) amounts that derive from (or might be characterized as) a portion of Borrower's payments for Mortgage Insurance, in exchange for sharing. or modifying the mortgage insurer's risk, or reducing losses. If such agreement provides that an affiliate of Lender takes a share of the insurer's risk in exchange for a share of the premiums paid to the insurer, the arrangement is often termed "captive reinsurance." Further: (a) Any such agreements will not affect the amounts that Borrower has agreed to pay for Mortgage Insurance, or any other terms of the Loan. Such agreements will not increase the amount Borrower will owe for Mortgage Insurance, and they will not entitle Borrower to any refund. -6(0R) (0005) Page aof 15 Form 3038 1101 2002-4844 (b) Any such agreements will not affect the rights Borrower has - if any - with respect to the Mortgage Insurance under the Homeowners Protection AM of 1998 or any other law. These rights may include the right to receive certain disclosures, to request and obtain cancellation of the Mortgage Insurance, to have the Mortgage Insurance terminated automatically, and/or to receive a refund of any Mortgage Insurance premiums that were unearned at the time of such cancellation or termination. 11. Assignment of Miscellaneous Proceeds; Forfeiture. All Miscellaneous Proceeds are hereby assigned to and shall be paid to Lender. If the Property is damaged, such Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied to restoration or repair of the Property, if the restoration or repair Is economically feasible and Lender's security is not lessened. During such repair and restoration period, Lender shall have the right to hold such Miscellaneous Proceeds until Lender.has had an opportunity to inspect such Property to ensure the work has been completed to Lender's satisfaction, provided that such inspection shall be undertaken promptly. Lender may pay for the repairs and restoration in a single disbursement or in a series of progress payments as the work is completed. Unless an agreement is made in writing or Applicable Law requires interest to be paid on such Miscellaneous Proceeds, Lender shall not.be required to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on such Miscellaneous Proceeds. If the restoration or repair is not economically feasible or Leader's security would be lessened, the Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument, whether or not then due, with the excess, if any, paid to Borrower. Such Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied in the order provided for in Section 2. In the event of a total. taking, destruction, or loss in value of the Property, the Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied to the sutras secured by this Security Instrument, whether or not then due, with the excess,-if any, paid to Borrower. In the event of a partial taking, destruction, or loss in value of the Property in which the fair market value of the Property immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value is equal to or greater than the amount of the sums secured by this Security Instrument immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value, unless Borrower and Lender otherwise agree in writing, the sums secured by this Security Instrument shall be reduced by the amount of the Miscellaneous Proceeds multiplied by the following fraction: (a) the total amount of the sums secured immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value divided by (b) the fair. market value of the Property immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value. An balance shall be paid to Borrower. In the event of a partial taking, destruction, or loss in value of the Property in which the fair market value of the Property immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value is less than the amount of the sums secured immediately before the partial taking, destruction, or loss in value, • unless Borrower and Lender otherwise agree in writing, the Miscellaneous Proceeds shall be applied to the sums secured by this Security Instrument whetherr not the sums are then due' If flue Property is abandoned by Borrower, or if, after notice by Lender to Borrower that the Opposing Party (as defined in the next sentence) offers to snake an award to settle a claim for damages, Borrower fails to respond to Lender within 30 days after the date the notice is given, Lender is authorized to collect and apply the Miscellaneous Proceeds either to restoration or repair of the Property or to the sums secured by this Security Instrument, whether or not then due. "Opposing Party" means the third party that owes Borrower Miscellaneous Proceeds or the party against whom Borrower has a right of action in regard to Miscellaneous Proceeds. Borrower shall be in default if any action or proceeding, whether civil or criminal, is begun that, in Lender's judgment, could result in forfeiture of the Property or other material impairment of Lender's interest in the Property or rights under this Security Instrument. Borrower can cure such a default and, if acceleration has occurred, reinstate as provided in Section 19, by causing the action or proceeding to be dismissed with a ruling that, in Lender's judgment, precludes forfeiture of the Property or other material impairment of Lender's interest in the Property or rights under this Security Instrument. The proceeds of any award or claim for damages that are attributable to the impairment of Lender's interest in the Property are hereby assigned and shall be paid to Lender. All Miscellaneous Proceeds that are not applied to restoration or repair of the Property shall be applied in the order provided for in Section 2. 12. Borrower Not Released; Forbearance By Lender Not a Waiver. Extension of the time for payment or modification of amortization of the sums secured by this Security Instrument granted by Lender Im1. MR) (0006) Pape9ott6 Form 3038 1101 ' 2002-4944 to Borrower or any Successor In Interest of Borrower shall not operate to release the liability of Borrower or any Successors in Interest of Borrower. Lender shall not be required to commence proceedings against any Successor in Interest of Borrower or to refuse to extend time for payment or otherwise modify amortization of the sums secured by this Security Instrument by reason of any demand made by the original Borrower or any Successors in Interest of Borrower. Any forbearance by Lender in exercising any right or remedy including, without limitation, Lender's acceptance of payments from third persons, entities or Successors in Interest of Borrower or in amounts less than the amount then due, shall not be a waiver of or preclude the exercise of any right or remedy. 13. Joint and Several Liability; Co-signers; Successors and Assigns Bound. Borrower 'covenants and agrees that Borrower's obligations and liability shall be joint and several. However, any Borrower who co-sins this Security Instrument but does not execute the Note (a. "co-signer"): (a) is co-signing this Security Instrument only - to mortgage, grant and convey the co-signer's interest in the Property under the terms of this Security Instrument; (b) is not personally obligated to pay the sums secured by this Security Instrument; and (c) agrees that Lender and any other Borrower can agree to extend, modify, forbear or make any accommodations with regard to the terms of this Security Instrument or the Note without the co-signer's consent. Subject to the provisions of Section 18, any Successor in Interest of Borrower who assumes Borrower's obligations under this Security Instrument in writing, and is approved by Lender, shall obtain all of Borrower's rights and benefits under this Security Instrument. Borrower shall not be released from Borrower's obligations and liability under this Security Instrument unless Lender agrees to such release in writing. The covenants and agreements of this Security Instrument shall bind (except as provided in Section 20) and benefit the successors and assigns of Lender. 14. Loan Charges. Lender may charge Borrower fees for services performed in connection with Borrower's default, for the purpose of protecting Lender's interest in the Property and rights under this Security Instrument, including, but not limited to, attorneys' fees, property inspection and valuation fees. In regard to any other fees, the absence of express authority in this Security Instrument to charge a specific fee to Borrower shall not be construed as a prohibition on the charging of such fee. Lender may not charge fees that are expressly prohibited by this Security Instrument or by Applicable Law. If the Loan is subject to a law which sets maximum loan charges, and that law is finally interpreted so that the interest or other loan charges collected or to be collected in connection with the Loan exceed the permitted limits, then: (a) any such loan charge shall be reduced by the amount necessary to reduce the charge to the permitted limit; and (b) any sums already collected from Borrower which exceeded permitted limits will be refunded to Borrower. Lender may choose to make this refund by reducing the principal owed under the Note or by making a direct payment to Borrower. If a refund reduces principal, the reduction will be treated as a partial prepayment without any prepayment charge (whether or not a prepayment charge is provided for under the Note). Borrower's acceptance of any such refund made by direct payment to Borrower will constitute a waiver of any right of action Borrower might have arising out of such overcharge. 15. Notices. All notices given by Borrower or Lender in connection with this Security Instrument. must be in writing. Any notice to Borrower in connection with this Security Instrument shall be deemed to have been given to Borrower when mailed by first class mail or when actually delivered to Borrower's notice address if sent by other means. Notice to any one Borrower shall constitute notice to all Borrowers unless Applicable Law expressly requires otherwise. The notice address shall be the Property Address unless Borrower has-designated a substitute notice address by notice to Lender. Borrower shall promptly notify Lender of Borrower's change of address. If Lender specifies a procedure for reporting Borrower's change of address, then Borrower shall only report a change of address through that specified procedure. There may be only one designated notice address under this Security Instrument at any one time. Any notice to Lender shall be given by delivering it or by mailing it by first class mail to Lender's address stated herein unless Lender has designated another address by notice to Borrower. Any notice in connection with this Security Instrument shall not be deemed to have been given to Lender until actually received by Lender. If any notice required by this Security instrument is also required under Applicable Law, the Applicable Law requirement will satisfy the corresponding requirement under this Security Instrument. wuon:~/d/~ -6(OR) (ooos( Page 10 of 15 Form 3038 1101 i • 2002-4944 16. Governing Law, Severability; Rules of Construction. This Security Instrument shall be governed by federal law and the law of the jurisdiction in which the Property is located. All rights and obligations contained in this Security Instrument are subject to any requirements and limitations of Applicable Law. Applicable Law might explicitly or implicitly allow the parties to agree by contract or it might be silent, but such silence shall not be construed as a prohibition against agreement by contract. In the event that any provision or clause of this Security Instrument or the Note conflicts with Applicable Law, such conflict shall not affect other provisions of this Security Instrument or the Note which can be given effect without the conflicting provision. As used in this Security Instrument: (a) words of the masculine gender shall mean and include corresponding neuter words or words of the feminine gender; (b) words in the singular shall mean and include the plural and vice versa; and (c) the word "may" gives sole discretion without any obligation to take any action. 17. Borrower's Copy. Borrower shall be given one copy of the Note and of this Security Instrument. 18. Transfer of the Property or a Beneficial Interest in Borrower. As used in this Section 18, "Interest in the Property" means any legal or beneficial interest in the Property, including, but not limited to, those beneficial interests transferred in a bond for deed, contract for deed, installment sales contract or escrow agreement, the intent of which is the transfer of title by Borrower at a future date to a purchaser. If all or any part of the Property or any Interest in the Property is sold or transferred (or if Borrower is not a natural person and a beneficial interest in Borrower is sold or transferred) without Lender's prior written consent, Lender may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument. However, this option shall not be exercised by Lender if such exercise is prohibited by Applicable Law. If Lender exercises this option, Lender shall give Borrower notice of acceleration. The notice shall provide a period of not less than 30 days from the date the notice is given in accordance with Section 15 within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Security Instrument. If Borrower fails to pay these sums prior to the expiration of this period, Lender may invoke any remedies permitted by this Security Instrument without further notice or demand on Borrower. 19. Borrower's Right to Reinstate After Acceleration. If Borrower meets certain conditions, Borrower shall have the right to have enforcement of this Security instrument discontinued at any time prior to the earliest of: (a) five days before sale of the Property pursuant to any power of sale contained in this Security Instrument; (b) such other period as Applicable Law might specify for the termination of Borrower's right to reinstate; or (c) entry of a judgment enforcing this Security Instrument. Those conditions are that Borrower: (a) pays Lender all sums which then would be due under this Security Instrument and the Note as if no acceleration had occurred; (b) cures any default of any other covenants or agreements; (c) pays all expenses incurred in enforcing this Security Instrument, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees, property •inspection and valuation fees, and other fees incurred for the purpose of protecting Lender's interest in the Property and rights under this Security Instrument; and (d) takes such action as Lender may reasonably require to assure that Leader's interest in the Property and rights under this Security Instrument, and Borrower's obligation to pay the sums secured by this Security Instrument, shall continue unchanged. Lender may require that Borrower pay such reinstatement sums and expenses in one or more of the following forms, as selected by Lender: (a) cash; (b) money order; (c) certified check, bank check, treasurer's check or cashier's check, provided any such check is drawn upon an institution whose deposits are insured by a federal agency, instrumentality or entity; or (d) Electronic Funds Transfer. Upon reinstatement by Borrower, this Security Instrument and obligations secured hereby shall remain fully effective as if no acceleration had occurred. However, this right to reinstate shall not apply in the case of acceleration under Section 18. 20. Sale of Note; Change of Loan Servicer; Notice of Grievance. The Note or a partial interest in the Note (together with this Security Instrument) can be sold one or. more times without prior notice to Borrower. A sale might result in a change in the entity (known as the "Loan Servicer") that collects Periodic Payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument and performs other mortgage loan servicing obligations under the Note, this Security Instrument, and Applicable Law. There also might be one or more changes of the Loan Servicer unrelated to a sale of the Note. If there is a change of the Loan. Servicer, Borrower will be given written notice of the change which will state the name and address of the new Loan Servicer, the address to which payments should be made and any other information RESPA ~owefrC -eIOR) ttwos) vim" 11 d15 Form 3030 1101 III ' 2002-4844 requires in connection with a notice of transfer of servicing. If the Note is sold and thereafter the Loan is serviced by a Loan Servicer other than the purchaser of the Note, the mortgage loan servicing obligations to Borrower will remain with the Loan Servicer or be transferred to a successor Loan Servicer and are not assumed by the Note purchaser unless otherwise provided by the Note purchaser. Neither Borrower nor Lender may commence, join, or be joined to any judicial action (as either an individual litigant or the member of a class) that arises from the o*er party's actions pursuant to this Security Instrument or that alleges that the other party has breached any provision of, or any duty owed by reason of, this Security Instrument, until such Borrower or Lender has notified the other party (with such notice given in compliance with the requirements of Section 15) of such alleged breach and afforded the other party hereto a reasonable period after the giving of such notice to take corrective action. If Applicable Law provides a time period which must elapse before certain action can be taken, that time period will be deemed to be reasonable for purposes of this paragraph. The notice of acceleration and opportunity to cure given to Borrower pursuant to Section 22 and the notice of acceleration given to Borrower pursuant to Section 18 shall be deemed to satisfy the notice and opportunity to take corrective action provisions of this Section 20. 21. Hazardous Substances. As used in this Section 21: (a) "Hazardous Substances" are those substances defined as toxic or hazardous substances, pollutants, or wastes by Environmental Law and the following substances: gasoline, kerosene, other flammable or toxic petroleum products, toxic pesticides and herbicides, volatile solvents, materials containing asbestos or formaldehyde, and radioactive materials; (b) "Environmental Law" means federal laws and laws of the jurisdiction where the Property is located that relate to health, safety or environmental protection; (c) "Environmental Cleanup" includes any response action, remedial action, or removal action, as defined in Environmental Law; and (d) an "Environmental Condition" means a condition that can cause, contribute to, or otherwise trigger an Environmental Cleanup. Borrower shall not cause or permit the presence, use, disposal, storage, or release of any Hazardous Substances, or threaten to release any Hazardous Substances, on or in the Property. Borrower shall not do, nor allow anyone else to do, anything affecting the Property (a) that is in violation of any Environmental Law, (b) which creates an Environmental Condition, or (c) which, due to the presence, use, or release of a Hazardous Substance, creates a condition that adversely affects the value of the Property. The preceding two sentences shall not apply to the presence, use, or storage on the Property of small quantities of Hazardous Substances that are generally recognized to be appropriate to normal residential uses and to maintenance of the Property (including, but not limited to, hazardous substances in consumer products). Borrower shall promptly give Lender written notice of (a) any investigation, claim, demand, lawsuit or other action by any governmental or regulatory agency or private party involving the Property and any Hazardous Substance or Environmental Law of which Borrower has actual knowledge, (b) any Environmental Condition, including but not limited to, any spilling, leaking, discharge, release or threat of release of any Hazardous Substance, and (c) any condition caused by the presence, use or release of a Hazardous Substance which adversely affects the value of the Property. If Borrower learns, or is notified by any governmental or regulatory authority, or any private party, that any removal or other remediation of any Hazardous Substance affecting the Property is necessary, Borrower shall promptly take all necessary remedial actions in accordance with Environmental Law. Nothing herein shall create any obligation on Lender for an Environmental Cleanup. INUaIa~ 6(OR( tooom Pop. 12 at 16 Form 3038 1/01 .II II III IIIII II II IIIII 2002-4944 NON-UNIFORM COVENANTS. Borrower and Lender further covenant and agree as follows: 22. Acceleration; Remedies. Lender shall give notice to Borrower prior to acceleration following Borrower's breach of any covenant or agreement in this Security Instrument (but not prior to acceleration under Section 18 unless Applicable Law provides otherwise). The notice shall specify: (a) the default; (b) the action required to cure the default; (c) a date, not less than 30 days from the date the notice is given to Borrower, by which the default must be cured; and (d) that failure to cure the default on or before the date specified in the notice may result in acceleration of the sums secured by this Security Instrument and sale of the Property. The notice shall further inform Borrower of the right to reinstate after acceleration and the right to bring a court action to assert the non-exWwce of a default or any other defense of Borrower to acceleration and sale. If the default is not cured on or before the date specified in the notice, Lender at its option may require immediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument without further demand and may invoke the power of sale and any other remedies permitted by Applicable Law. Lender shall be entitled to collect all expenses incurred in pursuing the remedies provided in this Section 22, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of title evidence. U Lender invokes the power of sale, Lender shall execute or cause Trustee to execute a written notice of the occurrence of an event of default and of Lender's election to cause the Property to be sold and shall cause such notice to be recorded in each county in which any part of the Property is. located. Lender or Trustee shall give notice of sale in the manner prescribed by Applicable Law to Borrower and to other persons prescribed by Applicable Law. After the time required by Applicable Law, Trustee, without demand on Borrower, shall sell the Property at public auction to the highest bidder at the time and place and under the terms designated in the notice of sale in one or more parcels and in any order Trustee determines: Trustee may postpone sale of all or any parcel of the Property by public announcement at the time and place of any previously scheduled sale. Lender or its designee may purchase the Property at any sale. Trustee shall deliver to the purchaser Trustee's deed conveying the Property without any covenant or warranty, expressed or implied. The recitals in the Trustee's deed shall be prima facie evidence of the truth of the statements made therein. Trustee shall apply the proceeds of the sale in the following order: (a) to all expenses of the sale, including, but nqt limited to, reasonable Trustee's and attorneys' fees; (b) to all sums secured by this Security Instrument; and (c) any excess to the person or persons legally entitled to it. 23. Reconveyance. Upon payment of all sums secured by this Security Instrument, Lender shall request Trustee to reconvey the Property and shall surrender this Security Instrument and all notes evidencing debt secured by this Security Instrument to Trustee. Trustee shall reconvey the Property without warranty to the person or persons legally entitled to it. Such person or persons shall pay any recordation costs. Lender may charge such person or persons a fee for reconveying the Property, but only if the fee is paid to a third party (such as the Trustee) for services rendered and the charging of the fee is permitted under Applicable Law. 24. Substitute Trustee. Lender may from time to time remove Trustee and appoint a successor trustee to any Trustee appointed hereunder. Without conveyance of the Property, the successor trustee shall succeed to all the title, power and duties conferred upon Trustee herein and by Applicable Law. . 25. Attorneys' Fees. As used in this Security Instrument and in the Note, attorneys' fees shall include those awarded by an appellate court. 26. Protective Advances. This Security Instrument secures any advances Lender, at its discretion, may make under Section 9 of this Security Instrument to protect Lender's interest in the Property and rights under this Security Instrument. 27. Required Evidence of Property Insurance. WARNING Unless you provide us with evidence of the insurance coverage as required by our contract or loan agreement, we may purchase insurance at your expense to' protect our interest. This insurance may, but need not, also protect your interest. If the collateral becomes damaged, the coverage we purchase may not pay any claim you make or any claim made against you. You may later cancel this coverage by providing evidence that you have obtained property coverage elsewhere. INtlale: -6108) (0005) Pape 13 of 15 Form =8' 1101 Iillll IIIII 111111 111111 IIII • 2002-4944 You are responsible for the cost of any insurance purchased by us. The cost of this insurance may be added to your contract or loan balance. If the cost is added to your contract or loan balance, the interest rate on the underlying contract or loan will apply to this added amount. The effective date of coverage may be the date your prior coverage lapsed or the date you failed to provide proof of coverage. The coverage we purchase may be considerably more expensive than insurance you can obtain on your own and may not satisfy any need for property damage coverage or any mandatory liability insurance requirements imposed by Applicable Law. BY SIGNING BELOW, Borrower accepts and agrees to the terms and covenants contained in this Security.Instrument and in any Rider executed by Borrower and recorded with it. Witnesses: (Seal) RO ERT E. RUEDY -Borrower (Seal) DONNA L RUEDY Borrower (Seal) (Seal) -Borrower -Borrower (Seal) (Seal) -Borrower Borrower (Seal) (Seal) -Borrower -Borrower MOR) iopob) paps 14 of 16 Form 3038 1/01 ' 2002-4944 STATE OF OREGOI~~ Washington County ss: On this h day of January 2002 , personally appeared the above named ROBERT E. RUEDY and DONNA L RUEDY and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his/her/their voluntary act and deed. me: My Commission Expires: ~O Be.. (Official Seal) Notary Public for Ore n C•~ J~ OFFICIAL SEAL %!R CINDY BLAKE NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.309408 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEB 9, 2002 CSIORI (Doo5i Pepe 15 of 15 Form 3038 1101 C . . ~`E- off J~'(J D" WashirMton County, Oregon '20OM2 / 433 ' 03H 5/2005 03:32:36 PM D-M Cut-1 81111-0 C TOMPIONO $15.00 $6.00 $11.00 - Total - $3100 VIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIuIIIIIIIIII I VIII 80200500274 00 034 Hamon, Dlntetor of Aaunmatd Taxation Return Address: and d EX Ex•ORl and clo Count' Clnrk for WYahinpton Counb, We I Is F a' g O Bank, N.A. Drnpon, do Mnby eartiry that tha wlthtn Inntn+mmt of DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT ~`*Itl"yy •+unealvndand ooid. dlnt~•bookof I , ordi of add cou ft nc t 1 _ _ , P. 0. BOX 31557 BILLINGS, MT 59101 .Inny R Hannon, Dlrnctor aaammont and Toxaeen, Exdlfldo county clack State of Oregon Space Above This line For Reoordine Dat RF,FERENCM 20050111200947ACCOUNT/{:0651-651-7716314-0001: ' " • SHORT FORM LINE OF CREDIT DEED OF TRUST (With Future Advance Clause) 1. DATE AND PARTIES. T is date of this Short Form Line of Credit Deed of Trust ("Security Instrument") is 0211812005 and the parties are as follows: TRUSTOR ('Grantor ROBERT E. RUEDY AND DONNA L. RUEOY, HUSBAND AND WIFE whose address is:14185 SW 100TH AVE TIGARD, OR, 97224 TRUSTEE: Wells Fargo Financial National Bank c/o Specialize Service 401 West 24th Street, National City, CA 91950 BENEFICIARY("Lender"):Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. P. 0. BOX 31551 BILLINGS, MT 69107 2. CONVEYANCE. For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, and to secure the Secured Debt (defined below) and Grantor's performance under this Security Instrument, Grantor irrevocably grants, conveys and sells to Trustee, in trust for the benefit of Lender, with power of sale, all of that certain real property located in the County of WA SH I NG TO N State of . Oregon; described as follows: THE EAST HALF OF LOTS 13 AND 14, TIGARDVILLE HEIGHTS, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON AND STATE OF OREGON, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST HALF OF SAID LOT 13. with the address of 14185 SW 100TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97224 and parcel number of R0601905• together with all rights, easements, appurtenances, royalties, mineral rights, oil and gas rights, all water and riparian rights, ditches, and water stock ' and all existing. and future improvements, structures, fixtures, and replacements that may now, or at any time in ' the future, be part of the real estate described above. 3. MAXUdUM OBLIGATION AND SECURED DEBT. The total amount which this Security Instrument will secure shall not exceed $,7 1 , 000.00 together with all interest thereby accruing, as set forth in the promissory note, revolving line of credit agreement, contract, guaranty or other evidence of debt ("Secured EQ239A (1212004) OREGON - DEED OF TRUST r . 1DebY") of even date herewith, and all amendments, extensions, modifications, renewals or other documents , . which are incorporated by reference into this Security Instrument, now or in the future. The maturity date of the Secured Debt is 03/0512020 4. MASTER FORM LINE OF CREDIT DEED OF TRUST. By the delivery and execution of this Security Instnunent, Grantor agrees that all provisions and sections of the Master Form Line of Credit Deed• of Trust ("Master Form, inclusive, dated February 1, 1997 and recorded on February 6, 1997 as Instrument Number 91010994 in Book NIA at Page N I A of the Official Records in the Office of the Recorder of WASH I NGTON County, State- 6f..* Oregon, are hereby incorporated into, and shall govern, this Security Instrument . . 5. RIDERS. If checked, the following are applicable to this Security Instrument The covenants and agreements . of each of the riders checked below are incorporated into and supplement and amend the terms of this Security Instrument ® Third Party Rider ® Leasehold Rider ® Other N i A SIGNATURES: By signing below, Grantor agrees to perforin.all covenants and duties as set forth in this Security Instrument Grantor also acknowledges receipt of a copy of this document and a copy of the provisions contained in the previously recorded Master Form (the Deed of Tout BanVCustorner Copy). RO E T E. RUEDY Grantor Date • !,~v~v~. ~ ~ cam' : . DONNA L. RUEDY Grantor Date " Grantor Date Grantor Date . Grantor Date Grantor Date 2005-27433 II'I ~ II III I I~I III OREGON - DEED OF TRUST EQ239B (12/2004) lllllil llllllilll ll~ llll Iil - - : . 2005-27493 ACKNOWLEDGMENT: (Individual) (~d2 may, , COUNTY OF LU %~+Q O } ss STATE OF This instrument was acknowledged before me on a LO S by y- Dcn, (Sigllat:ue of notarial officer) , OFFICIAL SEAL Title (and ) KAREN' ROBER71 NOTARY PUBUC OREGON], COMMISSION DENO. CE BERM MYCOhtMISStOND~IRESDEOEMBER27.2008 Commission expires: My OREGON - DEED OF TRUST EQ239C (1212004) PUBLIC MEETING GUIDE FOR CITY OF TIGARD COMMISSIONS, COMMITTEES AND BOARDS General Rules The Public Meetings Law establishes a presumption in favor of open meetings. The courts construe the Public Meetings Laws broadly in favor of the requirement for public meetings. A. Open to the Public - All meetings of the city's committees are required to be open to the public and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting except as provided in the state's public meetings law. B. No private meetings - No quorum of a committee may meet in private for the purpose of deciding on or deliberating towards a decision on any matter except as provided in the State's public meetings law. Definition of "Meeting" The law covers meetings at which decisions are made and meetings where the body is deliberating toward a decision. This has been construed to include virtually any discussion of any public business by a quorum. A. Definition of "Meeting" - A "meeting" is any quorum of a committee, which makes a decision towards a decision on any matter. This term is broadly construed and could include a social gathering at which a quorum is present and official business is discussed. B. Exceptions - A "meeting" specifically does not include any on-site inspection of any project or program, or the attendance of the members of the committee at any national, regional or state association to which the public body or the members belong. C. Definition of "decision" - A decision means any determination on which a vote of the committee is required, at any meeting at which a quorum is present. Meeting Requirements The fundamental premise underlying the public meetings law is to provide the public with information. The authority to hold private meetings, executive and emergency sessions are exceptions to the general rule of openness and are narrowly interpreted. Even when committees have the ability to operate in secret, they generally are not required to do so. A. Location - All committee meetings must be held within the city limits of Tigard. The only exceptions are training sessions at which no deliberations are held, joint meetings with other government, committees from outside the city, and emergency meetings. Meetings cannot be held at any place, which discriminates on the basis of race, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age or national origin. B. Conference Calls - Public meetings can be held by conference call. Unless the meeting is an executive session, however, the committee must make at least one place available for the public to listen to the call. C. Smoking Prohibited. Smoking is prohibited in a room "rented, leased, or owned" by a public body where a public meeting is being held. D. Right to Request Interpreter - If special assistance is required to participate in a meeting, such request should be made to the staff at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. E. No Public Right to Participate - The right of the public to attend meetings does not include the right to participate. Unless a public hearing is required by ordinance or statute or unless otherwise permitted by the committee, the public may not participate in discussion at a public meeting. F. Types of Meetings - Three types of meetings are designated in the Public Meetings Law: regular meetings, special meetings, emergency meetings, and executive sessions. Regular meetings are established by a committee by adopting a meeting schedule or designating a certain time and day of the week or month as a regular meeting. Special meetings are those meetings held by the committee not at its regular time. Special meetings may be held upon 24 hours notice to the press, the members of the committee and the general public. Emergency meetings are those meetings held by a committee not at its regular time and when there is insufficient time to give the notice required for special meetings. 1. Agenda - There is no specific legal requirement for agendas except that the public meetings law requires that the notice for the meeting must include "a list of the principal subjects anticipated to be considered at the public meetings." This requirement does not prevent the committee from considering additional subjects not on the agenda. Agendas are not required for executive sessions, but the precise statutory authorization for holding the session must be cited. 2. Notice - The committee must provide for notice of public meetings which is "reasonably calculated to give actual notice to interested persons including interested news media which have requested notice." The easiest manner in which to comply is to adopt regular meeting dates and send out agendas to the media and all those persons who have requested notice. (NOTE: Notice is not required to be published in the newspaper. In other words, the committee does not have to purchase space in the newspaper for the publication of its notices.) Emergency meetings may be held "upon such notice as is appropriate to the circumstances," but the minutes must describe the emergency. 3. Minutes - Written minutes must be taken of all public meetings. Minutes do not have to be a verbatim transcript, but must include the following information: a. A list of the members of the governing body present. b. The nature and disposition of all motions, proposals, resolutions, orders, ordinances, and measures proposed. c. The results of all votes by name. d. The substance of any discussion. e. A reference to any public document discussed. G. Americans with Disabilities Act. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if special assistance is needed to participate in this meeting, please contact the support staff (503) 718-2410 (TDD phone number 503-684-2772). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28CFR.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). i:ledmXcathy\projegs\public meeting guide.doc t ilEX. Washington county, Oregon. 20055-069.3 0 0611712005 03:29:34 PM D-D88 Cnt■1 alln■ll RECORD61 BARGAIN AND SALE DEED S&00 $6.W $11.00 • Total a $2200 GRANTOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: FOR RECORDER'S USE ~'I I, I) II II I II I I II I II I u III (II tI (I lI ll~l 111 ROBERT E. RUEDY & DONNA L. RUEDY 00785520200500693100010013 14185 S.W. 100"'Avenue 1, Jerry Hanson, Dire etorofAsseaamentand" axatIon and Ex-oRlclo County clerk ror Washinplon County, Tigard, Oregon 97224 orsaon, do hereby certly that tM wlthln Instrument of svtdna wax mcelved and corded lh book or retOrda or Wd county. GRANTEE'S NAME AND ADDRESS: Jerry R Hanson, Dlreetor sxdaiel a area uatlon, ROBERT E. RUEDY Ex.Otllclo County Clem 14185 S.W. 100"'Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97224 AFTER RECORDING, RETURN TO: ROBERT E. RUEDY 14185 S.W. 100"' Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97224 UNTIE. REQUESTED OTHERWISE, SEND ALL TAX STATEMENTS TO: ROBERT E. RUEDY 14185 S.W. I 00o' Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97224 ROBERT E. RUEDY and DONNA L. RUEDY , Grantors, convey to ROBERT E. RUEDY, Grantee, the following real property situated in Washington County, Oregon, to wit: The East half of Lots 13 and 14, TIGARDVH.LE HEIGHTS, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon; excepting therefrom, the North 110 feet of the East half of said Lot 13. The true consideration for this conveyance is dissolution of marriage, a proceeding for which will be filed in Washington County, Oregon Circuit Court. Dated: June 17, 2005 ~?'f R E. RUEDY DONNA L. RUEDY STATE OF OREGON, County of Multnomah ) ss. STATE OF OREGON, County of Multnomah ) ss. The above-named ROBERT E. RUEDY appeared before me The above-named DONNA L. RUEDY appeared before me and acknowledged the foregoing instrument on the 17 ih day of and acknowledged the foregoing instrument on the 17'h day of June 2005. June 2005. &~7 - '4 04'~ tary Public for Oregon Not&ry Public for Oregon OFFICIAL SEAL OFFICIAL SEAL LEE ANN MULFORD LEE ANN MULFORD NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 354WS COMMISSION NO. 354865 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MARCH 22, 2005 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MARCH 22, 2006 , This vestnuncntwiU not allow use of the property described in this h n m=tin violation of :,applicable land use laws and regulation. Before signing or accepting this instru mad, the person acquiringlee. title to the property should check with the appropriate city or county: plsmingdeparnnent to verify approved nses and to determine any limits on lawsttits agaiasti :f'?IIPPt; f4restpractices,as defined in ORS 30.930. _.................e Pagel of 1 - BARGAIN & SALE DEED (14185 sw so0'Aveam Tigard, Oregon 97224) Owner: Robert E. Ruedy Oregon Measure 37 "Exhibit G" Property: 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Property Use Description: 2S1 11 BB- Tax Lot 0500 Concerns and Impacts Issue Ordinance Ref. No. Description FLS COT Financial Ref. # Issue Issue Impact "Unlisted Use" for R-12 zoned properties is indicated within the COT Chapter 18.54.020, page 111 entitled "Procedures and Approval Process" (Effective 12/10/1992), reflects a cross referencing to COT Chapter 18.43 provisions for COT Chapter "Unlisted Use" of R-12 property. And it is not known at this time if this chapter has 18.54.020 been modified since 12/10/1992 (or superceded) to negatively impact the "permitted or 1. "Procedures and conditional use" as defined within those quoted Chapters from the 1/17/91 revised Maybe Yes Unknown Approval Process" code. Based on the code in effect at the time of original purchase on 12/10/1992, any (Effective 12/10/1992) modification or superseding of the "Unlisted Use" would be viewed as encumbrances on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. Note: The current (06/2002) Code Update reflects a cross reference to COT Chapter 18.230, but it is unknown as to what impacts this may present to the 1992 allowed use. . Permitted Use for Item #8 "Residential Treatment Home" is indicated within the COT Chapter 18.54.30.8, page 112, entitled "Permitted Use" (Effective 12/10/1992), but is COT Chapter not shown as a "permitted use" within COT Chapter 18.510 Code Update dated 18.54.030 06/2002. Based on the code in effect at the time of original purchase on 12/10/1992, 2. "Permitted Use" Its elimination from current code Is viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the Maybe Yes Unknown (Effective 12/10/1992) property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. Additionally, the definition of "Family" Day Care should include "Children" Day Care to maintain consistency with the 12/10/1992 code. (T2S, R1 W, Section 11 B) Page 1 of 7 December 1, 2006 Owner: Robert E. Ruedy Oregon Measure 37 "Exhibit G" Property: 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Property Use Description: 2S1 11 BB- Tax Lot 0500 Concerns and Impacts Unrestricted "Family" Day Care use is indicated as a "Permitted Use" within the COT Chapter 18.54.30.10, page 112 entitled "Permitted Use" (Effective 12/10/1992), but is not shown within COT Chapter 18.510 Code Update dated 06/2002. What is shown COT Chapter within the COT Chapter 18.510 Code Update (dated 06/2002) is "Daycare", but is 3 18.54.030 additionally "conditionally" restricted to not allow "free-standing" Day Care Centers Maybe Yes Unknown "Permitted Use" without a "Conditional Use" application and discretionary/subjective review process, (Effective 12/10/1992) including all associated costs and fees and with no commitment as to outcome once the process is completed. Its elimination from current code Is viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. Unrestricted "Home Occupation" use Is indicated within COT Chapter 18.54.30.11, COT Chapter page 112 entitled "Permitted Use" (Effective 12/10/1992), but is shown as a Restricted 18.54.030 use per COT Code "Table 18.510.1" within COT Chapter 18.510-4 Code Update dated 4. " 06/2002. The restriction are specifically referenced to COT Chapter 18.742 and are all Maybe Yes Unknown Permitted Use" viewed as encumbrances on the use of the property since its time of original purchase (Effective 12/10/1992) on 12/10/1992, and therefore a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. Unrestricted "Temporary Use" Is Indicated as a "Permitted Use" within the COT COT Chapter Chapter 18.54.30.12, page 112 entitled "Permitted Use" (Effective 12/10/1992), but is 5 18.54.030 not shown within COT Chapter 18.510 Code Update dated 0612002. Its elimination Maybe Yes Unknown "Permitted Use" from current code is viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the propertyand a State (Effective 12/10/1992) of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. Unrestricted "Fuel Tank" use is indicated as a "Permitted Use"within the COT Chapter COT Chapter 18.54.30.13, page 112 entitled "Permitted Use" (Effective 12/10/1992), but is not 6 18.54.030 shown within COT Chapter 18.510 Code Update dated 06/2002. Its elimination from Maybe Yes Unknown "Permitted Use" current code is viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of (Effective 12/10/1992) Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. (T2S, R1 W, Section 11 B) Page 2 of 7 December 1, 2006 Owner: Robert E. Ruedy Oregon Measure 37 "Exhibit G" Property: 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Property Use Description: 2S1 11 BB- Tax Lot 0500 Concerns and Impacts Unrestricted "Utilities" use Is indicated as a "Conditional Use Type" within the COT Chapter 18.54.40.04, page 112 entitled "Conditional Uses" and within the "Uses By Zone Matrix, Item #8" (Effective 12/10/1992), but is shown as "further restricted" within COT Chapter 18.510 Code Update dated 06/2002. What is shown within the COT Chapter 18.510 Code Update (dated 06/2002) is "Basic Utilities", but is additionally COT Chapter "conditionally" restricted for all other uses except water, storm and sanitary sewer 18.54.040 systems (which are allow by right) and must undergo a Conditional Use application 7. and discretionary/subjective review process, including all associated costs and fees, Maybe Yes Unknown "Conditional Use" and with no committment as to outcome once the process is completed. Because the (Effective 12/10/1992) 06/2002 updated code only reflects "Basic Utilities", there is a disconnect as to whether a conditional use review would even allow the unrestricted definition of "Utilities" that existed at the time of the original purchase date 12/1992 code section 18.54.40. This modification of the current code is viewed as an encumberance on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. Unrestricted "Parking Facilities" use Is indicated as a "Conditional Use Type" within the COT Chapter COT Chapter 18.54.40.06, page 112 entitled "Conditional Uses" and within the "Uses 8 18.54.040 By Zone Matrix, Item #9" (Effective 12/10/1992), but is not shown within COT Chapter Maybe Yes Unknown "Conditional Use" 18.510 Code Update dated 06/2002. Its elimination from current code is viewed as (Effective 12/10/1992) an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. COT Chapter Unrestricted "Minimum Lot Width" is indicated as a "allowed" within the COT Chapter 18.54.050 18.54.50.02, page 112 entitled Permitted Use (Effective 12/10/1992), but is not 9. "Dimensional shown within COT Chapter 18.510 Code Update dated 06/2002. Its elimination from Maybe Yes Unknown Requirements" current code is viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of (Effective 12/10/1992) Oregon Measure 37 claim'compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. (T2S, R1 W, Section 11 B) Page 3 of 7 December 1, 2006 Owner: Robert E. Ruedy Oregon Measure 37 "Exhibit G" Property: 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Property Use Description: 2S1 11 BB- Tax Lot 0500 Concerns and Impacts Within the COT "Uses By Zone Matrix" in effect on 12/10/1992, the "Residential Use Types", Item #6 reflects a "Group Care Residential" use as "Permitted Use", and COT Chapter 18.54 without restriction, but is not shown within COT Table 18.510.1 within the Chapter 10. Uses By Zone Matrix" 18.510 Code Update dated 06/2002. Its elimination from current code is viewed as an y encumbrance on the use of the property unless it can be shown to exist elsewhere In Maybe Yes Unknown (Effective 12/10/1992) the code and unrestricted from the.version in effect on 12/10/1992, otherwise it will be considered an State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. It is unknown if the 12/10/1992 Code definition of "Residential Homes" indicated in the COT Zone Matrix "Residential Use Types, Item #7" is exactly the same as the Table 18.510.1 "Residential" description entitled "Household Living" within the COT 06/2002 COT Chapter 18.54 updated code. Clarification and confirmation is needed as to the definition, unison and 11. Uses By Zone Matrix" any restrictions on the use of the property from the earlier version of the code to the Maybe Yes Unknown (Effective 12/10/1992) current version that would negatively impact the maximum density beneficial use of the property(ies). Any negative variation from the earlier code to the current code would be viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. It is unknown if the 12/10/1992 Code definition of "Hospitals", indicated in the COT Zone Matrix "Civic Use Types, Item #5" is exactly the same as the COT Table 18.510.1 "Civic Use" description entitled "Medical Centers" within the COT 18.510 COT Chapter 18.54 Code Update dated 06/2002. Clarification and confirmation is needed as to the 12. Uses By Zone Matrix" definition, unison and any restrictions on the use of the property from the earlier y version of the code to the current version that would negatively impact the maximum Maybe Yes Unknown (Effective 12/10/1992) density beneficial use of the property(ies). Any negative variation from the earlier code to the current code would be viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. (T2S, R1 W, Section 11 B) Page 4 of 7 December 1, 2006 Owner: Robert E. Ruedy Oregon Measure 37 "Exhibit G" Property: 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Property. Use Description: 2S1 11 BB- Tax Lot 0500 Concerns and Impacts Per COT "Pre-Application Conference Notes" dated 10/1/1992 and attached herein, for the said owner applicant while investigating the property under escrow for allowed COT zoning use, certain variances were allowed for 9 residences on one access, a setback variance for the existing house to accommodate the anticiapted lot line T Chapter 18.54 minimums for the existing house as shown on the enclosed plat dated 2/7/1993, plus a CO 13. T Ch Uses"" variance to allow more than six dwelling lots on a private street. It also states the minimum lot width as "zero" ft. and "corner yard set-back less than 10 ft. It is unknown Maybe Yes Unknown (Effective 12/10/1992) if these variances would currently be allowed under COT and other. state and local codes, but any deviation from the notes and subsequent plats so stated, unless beneficial to achieving the maximum density use, would be viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. Any and all information specifically noted within COT Chapter 18.54 (in effect 12/10/1992) that is not applicable to. R-12 Zoned Property, or would negatively impact COT Chapter 18.54 Its maximum density beneficial use, is not required to be adhered to subsequent to the 14. "R-12 Uses" effective date of ownership on 12/10/1992. Any deviation or attempt to impose Maybe Yes Unknown (Effective 12/10/1992) additional use restrictions would be viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation' and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity or activities. Land Use, subdivision, partitioning, and all application, review, variance and other use related fees, costs and appurtenant requirements must only be allowed escalation at the national average of the annual cost of living increase (COLA) from the effective 15. COT Chapter 18.54 date of 12/10/1992. All increases of any fees, costs or other elements of maximizing a Maybe Yes Unknown (Effective 12/10/1992) City of Tigard "R-12 Zoning Use" will be viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and the reasonable cost to achieve that maximum zoning density thereby supporting an State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity or activities. (T2S, R1 W, Section 11B) Page 5 of 7 December 1, 2006 Owner: Robert E. Ruedy Oregon Measure 37 "Exhibit G" Property: 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Property Use Description: 2S1 11 BB- Tax Lot 0500 Concerns and Impacts In 1992, at the time of the enclosed "Pre-application Conference Notes", the "Private Access Road" Hammer-head lengths and intersection radii were established as 20' road width, plus a 5' sidewalk, with no set-back from property lines, and 20' radii cul-de- sacs, was preliminarily approved based on the enclosed plat for COT compliance access/egress. Additional examples were provided this owner at that time reflecting COT Chapter 18.54 additional support of a 6 and 7 lot subdivision, and these are also enclosed. The 16. (Effective 12/10/1992) Owner, as stated herein, reserves the right under the State of Oregon Measure 37 Maybe Yes Unknown guidelines to achieve maximum density under the City of Tigard codes that existed in 1992, and also any changes since then that may benefit the maximum density use of said property(ies). Additionally, and any manner used to reduce that capacity will be viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity or activities will be necessary to remedy said owner. It is unknown if the 06/2002 Code Chapter 18.510.050 will negatively impact said property(ies), and close comparison will differentiate any negative impact COT Chapter 18.510 irregularities. Clarification and confirmation is needed as to the definitions, unison and 17, "Development any negative restrictions on the use of the property from the earlier version of the code Maybe Maybe Unknown Standards" to the current version. Additionally, any negatively impacting variation of the earlier (Effective 06/2002) code to the current code would be viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property(ies) and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. It appears that the 06/2002 Code Chapter 18.510.060 will negatively impact said property(ies), and close comparison will differentiate the negative impact irregularities. COT Chapter 18.510 Clarification and confirmation is needed as to the definitions, unison and all negative 18. "Accessory Structures" restrictions on the use of the property from the earlier version of the code to the Maybe Maybe Unknown (Effective 06/2002) current version. Additionally, all negatively impacting variation of the earlier code to the current code will be viewed as an encumbrance on the use of the property(ies) and a State of Oregon Measure 37 claim compensation and/or waiver, suspension, or modification of the activity. 19 COT Chapter 18.54 (Effective 12/10/1992) (T2S, R1 W, Section 11 B) Page 6 of 7 December 1, 2006 Owner: Robert E. Ruedy Oregon Measure 37 "Exhibit G" Property: 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Property Use Description: 2S1 11 BB- Tax Lot 0500 Concerns and Impacts 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. (T2S, R1 W, Section 11 B) Page 7 of 7 December 1, 2006 i-- Cli Lter 18.54 14 - 1~ l H' R-12: MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (12 UNITS PER ACRE) Sections; 18.54.010 Purpose 18.54.020 Procedures and Approval Process 18.54.030 Permitted Uses 18.54.040 Conditional uses (See Chapter 18.130) 18.54.050 Dimensional Requirements 18.54.060 Additional Requirements 18.54.010 Purpose A. The purpose of the R-12 zoning district is to provide for single-family attached and multiple-family residential units for medium density residential developments. (Ord. 89-06; Ord. 83-52) 18.54.020 Procedures and Approval Process / A. A permitted use, Section 18.54.030, is a use which is allowed outright, but is subject to all applicable provisions of this title-,/ It a use is not-" rlJliste as a permute use, it may e held to 'b ea similar unlisted use under the _provisions of `Chapter 18. 431Unlisted Use. t !9t i C_ D3 .'.l Cc, 1 _ B_ A conditional use, Section 18.54.040, is a use the approval of which is discretionary with the Hearings Officer. The approval process and criteria for approval are set forth in Chapter 18.13 Conditional Use. If a use is not listed as a conditional use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted use under the provisions of Chapter 18.43, Unlisted Use. (Ord. 90-41; Ord. 89- 06; Ord. 83-52) 18.54.030 Permitted Uses A. Permitted uses in the R-12 district are as follows: 1. Single-family detached residential units; 2. Duplex residential units,- 3. Single-family attached residential units; 4. Multiple-family dwellings residential units; 5. -Residential care facility; 6. Mobile home parks and subdivisions; u ' 1: ~ [~(S I~N C-~ Cc7NT~/~V~ GN 1~1Gn1 ` 1 Revised 1/17/91 Page 111 i. Public su' art services; 5 Res;denti<_2 treatment home; 9. manufactured homes; 1 CIO-- Family day care; -S i 11 Home occupat le., 'S i~.lit ! _ i~.C ~~'i LC e (c°L r'-':' ;•2 C !fit2 f~~}i 1 [C';7Cr~ -7711 - f'\l.. ~i: V\.~i"E 1=''i. ~~•5 ~w V'c' .S iti. .!r-• p1 EcE f vrC:•..! f 1~'2. Temporar~ tise~ t e`tr~i.. r_'c! ct'r CYJ ~c_ A" i~i,r ctT, c:.1:'sue ~i> Si{ti S~AE11 ` `c `_l -s>; \,t~1:S N~ t~ci`-i;) ( n,1i)! Y e~'r\i f s' 13. F::el Tank. Cr 14. Accessory structures. (Ord: 90-41; Ord. 89-06; Ord. 85-15; ord. 83-52) 18.54.040 Conditional Uses (See Chapter 18.130) A. Conditional uses in the R-12 district are as follows: 1. Community recreation, including structures; 2. Religious assembly; 3. Schools and related facilities; Ut i 1 i t i?s ; y `~s'~iY'i=:hi?~l- i.''.iC%Tu,~`i i .?ts: e.. t= ~,`.s fV , 5. Residential care facility; r6_-. Parking facilities ~(c Sh, p.u ~ ~ V, S't~7+r:, 7. Hospitals; 8. Lodge, fraternal, and civic assembly; and 9. Children's day care. (Ord. 90-41; Ord. 89-06; Ord. 87-03; Ord. 83-52) 18.54.050 Dimensional Requirements A. Dimensional requirements in the R-12 district are as follows: 1. The minimum lot size shall not be less than 3,050 quare feet per unit; ~2. There is no minimum lot width requirement; an 3. Except as otherwise provided in Chapter 18.96 and Section 18.100.130, the minimum setback requirements are as follows: a. For multiple-family dwellings the front yard setback shall be a minimum of 20Vfeet. For single-family dwellings the front yard shall be a minimum of 15 feet; b. For multiple-family dwelling units on corner and through lots, the minimum setback for each side facing a street shall be 20 feet; however, the provisions of Chapter 18.102 must be satisfied. For single-family dwelling units the minimum setback for each side facing a street shall be 10`1feet; however, the provisions of Chapter 18.102 must be satisfied; l Revised 1/17/91 Page 112 c. For iultiple-family d+al1!nQs thv s yard setback. shall be a mil um of !0"feet. For 3:n71e-fa.'nt., •;wallings the side yard setback shall be five "'feet except this shall not apply to attached units on the lot line on which the units are attached; 1 .d. For multiple-family dwellings the rear yard setback shall be a minimum of 20"feet. For single-family dwellings the rear yard shall be a minimum of 15°/ feet; e_ Where the side yard or rear yard of attached, multiple- family or single-family dwellings abut a more restrictive zoning district, such setbacks shall not be less than 30~feet; and f. The distance between the property line and the front of the garage shall be a minimum of 20 f eet; 4. Except as otherwise provided in Chapter 18.98, no building in an R-12 zoning district shall exceed 35'feet in height; S. The maximum lot coverage shall be 80Vpercent including all buildings and impervious surfaces; and 6. The minimum landscape requirement shall be 20 percent. (Ord. 89-06; Ord. 85-32; Ord. 84-29; Ord. 83-52) 18.54.060 Additional Requirements A. Additional requirements in the R-7 district are as follows: 1. Residential density transition, Section 18.40.040; 2. Overlay Districts, Chapters 18.80 Planned Development, 18.82 Historic Overlay District, 18.84 Sensitive Lands, 18.86 Action Areas, and 18.88 i' Solar Access Requirements; 3. Supplemental Provisions, Chapters 18.90 Environmental Performance Standards, 18.92 Density Computations, 18.94 Manufactured/Mobile Home Regulations, 18.96 Additional Yard Setback Requirements and Exceptions, 18.98 Building Height Limitations: Exceptions, 18.100 Landscaping and Screening, 18.102 Visual Clearance Areas, 18.104 Fuel Tank Installations, 18.106 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements, 18.108 Access, Egress, and Circulation, and 18.114 Signs; 4. Site Development Review, Chapter 18.120; 5. Development and Administration, Chapters 18.130 Conditional Use, 18.132 Nonconforming Situations, 18.134 Variance, 18.140 Temporary Uses, 18.142 Home Occupations, 18.144 Accessory Structures, 18.146 Flexible Setback Standards, and 18.150 Tree Removal; and 6. Land Division and Development Standards, Chapters 18.160 Land Division: Subdivision, 18.162 Land Division: Land Partitioning - Lot Line Adjustment, and 18.164 Street and Utility Improvement Standards. (Ord. 91-02; Ord. 90-41; Ord. 89-06; Ord. 84-29; Ord. 83-52) ~v..._CP.. J Page 113 U-S CITY OF TIGARD u ~ x~ L~ 1 J H USES BY ZONES MATRIX Permitted Uses F7 "C" = Conditional Uses which may be permitted subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit application. "X" = Use is specifically prohibited ZONES R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 C-N C-G C•-P CBD I-H I=L I- RESIDENTIAL USE TYPES (1) Single Family Detached P P P P P P b/ P P X X X X X• X X (2) Duplexes X X i C C P P P P X X X X X X X (3) Single Family Attached X X X C P W, P P X X X P X X X (4) Multiple Family X X X X X P P P X X P(R-40+•) P X X X `r Now Ca) a> (5) Group Residential CL ,N1~3X X X X X. C, C P X X X X X X X (6) Group Care.Residential C C C C C CP) P P X X X C X X X (7) Residential Homes P P P P P P' P P X X X X X X X (8) Children's Day Care C C C C C ® X X P P P C X X P ~~~t=rNl?p A"1 LJ'NAT IN h1 (9) Manufactured •.._P. P P P P P P P X X X X X X X (10) Mobile Homes X X C C P P v P P X X X X X X X . 1 ~r C ZONES R-1 R-2 R-3, 9• R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 C-N C-G C-P CBD I-H I-L I-P -CIVIC USE TYPES (1) Public Administrative Agency X X X X X X, X X P P P P X X X (2) Conmiunity Recreation C C C 'C C C./ C C X X X P X X X (3) Cultural Exh. 6 Library Serv. X X C C C X X X P P P P.. X X X ~.C UL:10Pi, 'J ~i'{1 7'lvtJ `r .`ice-E Gc•cZ VCrmi4...fs C:. (4) Public Support Facilities P P P P P P P P X P P P P P•• P (5) Hospitals/v) -C,-,.'-C ,,USX X C C C C✓~ C C C C C C X X X (6) Civic Services. A X X X X X✓ X X X X X P X X X (7) Lodge,Fratern.F, Civic Assem, X X X x X C✓ C C C P P P X X X (8) Utilities. C C C C C C C C C C C C C C (9) Parking Facilities X X X X X C C C P P P P P P (10) Postal Services X X X X X X r,/ X X P P P P P P P (11) Public Safety Facilities C C C C C X X X P P P P P P P (12) Religious Assembly. C C C C C Ck•, C C C P X X X X X i (13) Schools C C ' 'C C C C✓ C C X X X X X X X (14) Accessory Dwelling Unit C C. C C C x X X X :X X X X X X ZONE MATRIX - PAGE 2 R 6-86 ZONES R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 C-N C-G C-P CBD I-H I-L I-P COMERCIAL USE TYPES, (1) Adult Entertainment x X X X X X X X X C X C X X X (2) Agricultural Sales & Serv, x X X X X X X X X P A X X P P X (3) Agricult. Horticulture Serv.•••X X X X X X X X X X X X X P X (4) Amusement Enterprise x X X X X X X X X P X P X. X X (5) Animal Sales F Services a. Auctioning x X X X X X X X X X X X P P X b. Grooming x X X X X X X X X P P P X X X c, Kennels x X X X X X X X X X. X X P P X d. Veterinary-Large x X X X X X X X X X X X P P P e. 'Veterinary-Small x X X X X X X X X P P P. P P P ZONES R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 C-N C•-G C-P CBD I-H I-L I-P :0141ERCIAL USE TYPES (cont.) ;6) Automotive G Equipment a. Cleaning X X X X X X X X X P X P P P X b. Fleet Storage X X X X X X X X X C X X P P X c. Repairs, Heavy Equip. X X X X X X X X X X X X P P X d. Repairs, Light Equip. X X X X X X X X X P X P P P P e. Repairs, Body, light X X X X X X X X X X X X P P C f. Sales/Rentals, Farm Equip. X X X X X X X X X C X P P X g. Sales/Rentals, Hvy.Equip. X X X X X X X X X C X X P P. X h. Sales/Rentals, Lgt. Equip. X X X X X X X X X P X X P P P i. Storage, Nonoperating Veh. X X X X X X X X X X X X P X X j. Storage,Recrea,Veh.F Boats X X X X X X X X X C X X X X X (7) Building Mint.' Services X X X X X X X X X X P P X P P (0) Business Equip: Sales F, Serv. X X IX X X X X X X X P P X X P (9) Business Support Services X X X X X X X X X P P P X X P (10) Communications Services X X X X X X X X X X P P X X P (11) Construction Sales E, Serv. X X X X X X X X X X X X P P P (12) Consumer Repair Services X X X X X X X X P P X P X X X ZONE MATRIX - PAGE 4 R 6-f16 ZONES R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 C-N C-G C•-P CDD I-H I-L I-P COMMERCIAL USE TYPES (cont.) (13) Conven. Sales 6 Pers.Serv. X X X X X X X X P P P P X X P (14) Eating $ Drink. Establish. X X X X X X X X C P, P P X X P (15) Explosive Storage X X X X X X X X X X X X P X X (16) Fin.,Insur.,6 Real Estate Srv X X X X X X X_ X P P P P X P (17) Food 6 Beverage Retail Sales X X X X X X X X P P X P X X. X (16) Funeral & Interment Services a. Cremating X X X X X X X X X P X X X X X b. Interring X X C C C X X X X X X X X X X c. Undertaking X X X X X X X X X P X X X X X d, Cemetaries X X C C C X X X X X X X X X X (19) General Retail Sales X X X X X X X X X P X P X X P (20) Laundry Services X X i X X X X X X X X X X. P P P (21) Medical 4 Dental Services X X X X X X X X P P P P X X P 7(W;! MATQTX - PAGE OYWta it ZS" ZONES R-1 R-2 R-3.5.,. R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 C-N C-4G C-P - CBD I-H I-l I-P COMMERCIAL USE TYPES (cont.) (22) Participant Sports & Recrea. a, Indoor x X X X X X X X P P P P X X P b. Outdoor x X X X X X X X X P P P X X P (23) Personal Service Facilities X X X X X X X X X P P P x x P (24) Profess. & Adm, Services x X X X X X X X P P P P x x P (25) Research Services X X X X X_ X X X X X P X P P P (26) Scrap Operations x X X X X X X a x X x x P a x (27) Spectator Spts,& Enter. Fac, X X X X X X X X X P X C, X X X (28) Transient.Lodging x.. X X X X X X X X P P P X X X (29) Vehicle Fuel Sales. X X X X X X X X C P X C P P/C P ZONE MATRIX - PAGE 6 R 6-86 .&16M -J' Ell, '7 ZONES R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R•-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 C-•fil C-G C•-P CBD I-H I-L I-P INDUSTRIAL USE TYPES (1) Light Industrial a. Mfy. of Finished Prod. X X X X X X X X X X X X P P P b. Packaging & Processing X X X X X X X X X X X X P P P C. Wholesale, Stg. & Dietri. X X X X X X X X X C X C P P. P 1. Mini-Warehouses x X X X X X a x X C X X P P P 2. Light X X X X X X X X X X X X P P P (2) Heavy Industrial a. Mft. of Finished Prod. X X X X X X X X X X X X P P P b. Wholesale,Storage & Distribution -'Heavy x X X X X X X X X X X x P x P Farming P P ' P P P X X X X X X X P P X Home Occupations P P P P P P P P P P P P X X X Heliports x X X X X X X X X C C C C C DAS:bs1l0 CITY, OF TIGARD7 _ ~ ~ - iiNG1REGULATIQNS SUM~iARI DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS / 7anuar 1986%Revi~ed Mardi 1987 \ NOTE: This is intended to be a brief guide only. U"C=-~ Z Additional, information is available. - CaTT'Pianning-at, 639: 4171:.-` MINIMUM AVERAGE MINIMUM MINIMUM LOT MINIMUM MINIMUM MINIMUM FOR FRONT SETBACK MAXIMUM MAXIMUM SIZE(d) LOT FRONT SIDE, REAR. CORNER + FOR SITE BUILDING MAXIMUM NO. ZONE SQ,FT, WIDTH 1'ARD(a,b) 1'ARD'(a~ YARD(a1 THRU LOTS(a) GARAGES COVERAGE HEIGHT OF UNITS/ACR R-1 30,000 100 ft 30 ft. 5~ ft 25 ft 20 ft 30 ft N/A 30 ft 1 R-2 20,000 100 ft 30 ft 5 ft 25 ft 20 ft 30 ft N/A 30 ft 2 R-3.5 10,000 65 ft 20 ft 5 ft 15 ft 20 ft 20 ft' N/A 30 ft 3.5 R-4.5 7,500 = 50 ft = 20 ft 5 ft 15 ft 15 ft. 20 ft N/A 30 ft 4.5 detached detached 10,000 = 90 f# _ duplexes duplexes Z R 7 S 000 50, f# 15„ft 5 ft 15 ft'. 10 'ft 20.ft . 80%.,.... 35 f# 7 - detaehedt±: detached (p) dipleiiesy,$` 40 ft. attacFie`d attached R 12 3,050 NONE Z MF=20 ft 4+MF `10fMF~20ft MF=20 ft 20'.f t.~ ;'$0% :3S ft ii:,,... . SF=15 ft SF= 5 ft SF=15 ft SF=10 ft (c) R-25 SFD-3,050 I4ONE 20 ft 10-ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 80% 45 ft 25 SFD-3,050 (c) DUP-3,050/unit MF -1,480/unit R-40 NONE NONE 20 ft 10 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 80% 60 ft 40 C-N 5,000 50 ft 20 ft RES,= REST= .20 ft N/A 85% 35 ft 40 20 ft 20 ft N/A vl C C71 . Z OF Z MINIMUM AVERAGE _ MINIMUM MINIMUM LOT MINIMUM MINIMUM MINIMUM FOR FRONT SETBACK MAXIMUM MAXIMUM SIZE(d) LOT FRONT SIDE REAR CORNER + FOR SITE BUILDING MAXIMUM NO.. ZONE SQ.FT. WIDTH YARD(a,b) YARD(a) YARD(a) THRU LOTS(a) GARAGES COVERAGE HEIGHT OF UNITS/ACRE C-G NONE 50 ft NONE@ NONE NONE' NONEM N/A -85% 45 ft N/A AR=20ft AR=20ft C-P 6,000 50 ft NONE@ NONE NONE NONE@ N/A 85% 45 ft N/A AR:20ft AR:20ft CBD NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE N/A N/A 85% 80 ft@ N/A NON-RES 30 ft AR:30ft AR:20ft CBD-RES NONE NONE 20,ft 10 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 80% 60ft N/A (R-40 6 AMR;35ft AMR:35ft R-12) I-P NONE 50 ft 35 ft NONE NONE 20 ft N/A 75% 45 ft N/A AR:50ft AR:50ft I-L NONE 50 ft 30 ft NONE NONE 20 ft N/A 85% 45 ft N/A -AR;50ft AR:50 ft I-H NONE 50 ft 30 ft NONE NONE 20 ft N/A 85% 45 ft N/A AR:50ft AR:50ft (a) Visual clearance areas must be maintained. (18.102) (b) MF = Multi-family; SF = Single family dwelling units (c) Where the side or rear yard of attached single family or multi-family residential dwellings abut a more restrictive zoning district, such setbacks shall not be less than 30 feet. (d) Additional information is available pertaining to "Grandfather Clause" on lot sizes and dimensions. @ If within 100 ft. of residential area, then 40 ft. @@ See Visual Clearance Areas, Landscaping and Screening Chapters of Code AR When a property line abuts a•residential zone AMR When a property line abuts a more restrictive residential zone 0094W/0004W CITY OF TIGARD ` PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES DATE: q-Z- APPLICANT: AGENT: Phone; --S771 1f1 Phone: PROPERTY LOCATION ADDRESS: I ! ~S Sw I00 TAX MAP & TAX LOT: 2S 1 1 f L? ? OO NECESSARY PLIAATION(S : Sv6.4JS l -f-_T2 tj 12 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: 14, S ti u~ - ALL.ow 51x DWELL/AJG _L_4~ cots OAN A PR1VA115 5MEe-l_ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: m ed - Q.. c ~ rc ft a I ZONING DESIGNATION: ~~t Z NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION. CHAIRPERSON: S CCa~.UG~t PHONE: 6 3 r► - 8Sa 7 ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size:'3aoso sq. ft. Minimum lot width:: - O ft_ . Setbacks:.. front- .151 ft. side- .rft., rear-16- ft_ . . garage-__2,4> ft'. corner-_ ft. from both streets. Maximum site coverage: So$ Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: ..?o g Maximum building height: •35- ft. ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land T--Q partition process. - Lots created as.part of a partition must have. a.: minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a. minimum 15 foot wide access easement. Maximum lot depth to width ratio o£ 2.5 to 1.; SPECIAL SETBACKS Streets: ft. from centerline of Established areas: ft. from.. Lower intensity zones: ft., along the site's boundary Flag lot: 10 ft. side yard setback Accesso structures:. u to 528 a ft. in'size=5, ft. setback from eide a rear lot lines ; :.::t-.•: ,ray:. . ft. where.: 'allowed :c;,;;,,J,~;..,.,::;:•=-~.•.:Accessory.;structures: up' to 1000 eq. ;t=( ).;::,:.:1:';,,,,,.::.::+.•.;>::;"i:: applicable zoning districtr.eetbacks Zero: lot line :lots: minimum.10 foot separation between buildings t x~s~ cr% Multi-family.. residential building separation:' See Code Sectionrl8y`96 030 f Page 1 < - :~f.. ' 'f Yr y ter,.... ion . ~ CD 4-0.0 C)b C l- Y - 33`~4Do JF SEp 1 PAS c-~t'~c oa -b~ s~oh1 I 2_►0 GN. ~i38.1o zr~ ooo =f ~^c r - 'P fO Zo . Ohl / ~ • M l7 yn. n 40 e tAV C n' -)Z.OP p.2O g4.50 r (aA~AGE 2O . 5~ ~ x r5'r"r uG " 3p ,I,t- ~ _ J- ,"i . r iv IN -7. Cq 00° c>-7'r ~ u GICHICi~T M"(2) I 290 . na)p uss, N +30443 a RETAINING WAu < i r 307.90 J 5.89'41'27' W , 300.ee 295.43' 00.37 1 a . 4 37.00 9).89 290. 297.91 •N R=15.o~ +30297 ~(,~1~ 00 in 7'81'800.77, 29 Al N t b9.29 a^i 1AAYY U 61 IQO''~ + 307.24 1 R?tsor t 304.08 tV ^ 0198 304.88 ~'17t 2.130&37 GARAGE ' ~~qq EXISi1NG 300. 300 N 1 .93 01 + 303.10 m 309.99 ♦ 3090 DRIVEWA I . ~n.m .ee BF2e+s .9e +303.54 220.81 304.37 d, 8 5' ~t2a I . $ 701.78 M 1199 t+ `~I 4 . I NOUX 1x52 N ..99 E M Nl U3E 304.71 0 ' .3.20 57't ♦ 310. Q~~"'AA04.72 1B 1z11 309.43 305.05 04.1 8 ~0 ~O 0 303.26 303.0 30],91 30 309.52 .305. . 305. 5.07 t 11.18 308.37 3 97 to M + l 07 N X09.,4 + 307.44 b pO ,0..3 0 - - r. 30 99 r + 313.95 $ < 4~ N V! m 9 m to M w O m .312.11 M +a9a17 a ' ~i2.o0' .43' 104,06, .307.45 N 89-41:27- E 295.47' 300 308. R doS! R SI TE PLA N aq 1308.4 1,1128 -SCALEL I UN6 le / IMENle ' Robert E. & Donna L. Rued Y 418.5. RU E DY G-1 5IIE' PEA IV OA4VMONe~ 9aa9N['0` ' ' i . 14185SW, 100th Avenue. Ti{[rd, OR 97224 (503)920.]997 eN[e[m iz. R7~EaY CR A[Y 9[e0A,a19N „ e,r[.,. PARTITION.-. PROJECT IDARTI T•ION LAYOUT" Cgc[[o AfiVIeIONB eM[FT Mwe[A U h N Chapter 18.510 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Sections: 18.510.010 Purpose 18.510.020 List of Zoning Districts 18.510:030 Uses 18.510.040 Minimum an4 Maximum Densities 18.510.050 Development Standards 18.510.060 Accessory Structures 18.510.010 Purpose A. P_cesecve neighborhood livability. One of the major purposes of the regulations governing development in residential zoning districts is to protect the livability of existing and future residential neighborhoods, by encouraging primarily residential. development with compatible non-residential development schools, churches,. parks and recreation facilities, day care centers, -neighborhood commercial uses and other services at appropriate locations and at an appropriate scale. B. Encourage construction of affordable housing. Another purpose of these regulations is to create the environment in which construction of a full range of owner-occupied and rental housing at affordable prices is encouraged. This can be accomplished by providing residential zoning districts of varying densities and developing flexible design and development standards to encourage innovation and. ~.t'•,X~`"-_t'' reduce housing costs. 18.510.020 List of Zoning Districts A. R-1: Low-Density Residential District. The R-1 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 30,000 square'feet. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. B. R-2: Low-Density Residential District. The R-2 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. C. R-3.5: Low-Density Residential District. The R-3.5 zoning district is designed irto . accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Duplexes are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. D. R-4.5• Low-Density Residential District. The R=4.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet. Duplexes and attached single-family units are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. E. R-7: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-7 zoning district is designed to accommodate attached single-family homes, detached single-fainily homes with or without accessory residential . units, at a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet, and duplexes,.at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet- Mobile home :parks. and subdivisions are also perm."ttted outright. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. Residential Zoning-Districts .18.510-1 Code Update: 06102 F. R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. -G. R-25:. Medium High-Density Residential District. The R-25 zoning district is designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new attached single-family and multi-family housing units at a minimum lot size of 1,480 square feet.. A limited amount of neighborhood commercial uses is permitted outright and a wide range of civic and institutional uses are permitted conditionally. H. R-40: Medium High-Density Residential District. The R-40 zoning district. is designed to accommodate existing housing of all types and new attached single-family and multi-family housing. units with no minimum lot size or maximum density. A limited amount of neighborhood commercial uses is permitted outright and a wide range of civic and institutional uses are permitted conditionally. 18.510.030 Uses A. Types of uses. For the purposes of this chapter, there are four kinds of use: 1. A permitted (P) use is a use which is permitted outright, but subject to all of the applicable provisions of this title. If a use is not listed as a permitted use, it may be held to be a similar unlisted used under the provisions of Chapter 18.230 - - -`V NDr ~o I EN D 2.. A restricted (R) use is permitted outright providing t B in compliance with special requirements, i "j Q a 2 exceptions or restrictions; 3. A conditional use (C) is a use the approval of which is discretionary with the Hearings Officer. 18.310 and 18.320. If a use is not The approval process and criteria are set forth Psile listed as a conditional use, it may be held to unlisted used der he proisions of h~TeT C ~ ' S tg92 cE 'b lY~.l3b 8230; .'S,C --_J?? E~ i09 _ - - 4. A ed use >s one whi ch is not permitted in a zoning district under any circumstances. B. Use table. .A list of permitted, limited, conditional and prohibited uses in residential zones - is presented in Table 18.510.1. Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-2 Code Update: 06102 TABLE 18.510.1 USE TABLE _ USE CATEGORY R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R-40 RESIDENTIAL %cE i ;:i? vcT.s c: Household Living P P P P P P P P Group Livi.ngIt 4= 1' R'/C R'/C R(/C R'/C R'/C RR'/C R'/C Transitional Housing" " N N N N N (C ] C C Home Occupation RZ RZ R2 RZ RZ R , RZ R' I w_5 HOUSING TYPES ' t-4{,NT L'r1iFS:r=:~ tr•: r~~`12 ix<s Vil5 Single Units, Attached N N N R' R'1C P iP P Single Units, Detached P P p p p p p J?~l ti i~ Accessory Units R' R3 R' R3 R3 R3 r R3 R3 Duplexes N N C C P ` P P Multi-Family Units N N N N N ( PV P P Manufactured Units P P P P p p c,/ p p Mobile Home Parks/Subdivisions N N C C P P V P P 5 = CIVIC (INSTITUTIONAL) t .•K~-; 04 !q(:-7. "PIES F!rs r~u Basic Utilities TN4'7,-3 is--6 C" C< Ca Ca C C"4 Ca Ca Colleges C C C C C C C Community Recreation C C C C C C C C Cultural Institutions N N C C C 'C N N Day Care P/C' P/CS P/C-1 P/CS P/CS Vp/0"..) P/CS P/CS Emergency Services C C C C C N N Medical Centers N N C C C CC C Postal Service N N N N N N-1 N N Public Support Facilities P P P p p P.V p p Religious Institutions C C C C C C•V" C C Schools C C C C C C V C C Social/Fraternal Clubs/Lodges. N N N N N C v, C C -t\L.(LI' E5 (5 /71i5~1r L! F YZ~M riil~ l(ST4\iCC1 f3 Li tS CrV IC(c1Z `r COMMERCIAL t. Commercial Lodging N N N N N N N N Eating and Drinking Establishments N N N N N N N N Entertainment-Oriented Major Event Entertainment N N N N N N N N Outdoor Entertainment N N N N N N N N - Indoor Entertainment N N N N N N N. N Adult Entertainment N N N N N N N N General Retail Sales-Oriented N. N N N N N R" R" = Personal Services N N N N N N R" R11 Repair-Oriented N N N N N N R" R' Bulk Sales N N N N N N N N Outdoor Sales N N N N N N N N Animal-Related N N N N 'N N N N Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-3 Code Update: 06102 TABLE 18.510.1 (CON'T) USE CATEGORY R-1 R-2 R-3.5 R-4.5 R-7 R-12 R-25 R40 Motor Vehicle Related Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental N N N N N N N N Motor Vehicle Servicing/Repair N N N N N N N N Vehicle Fuel Sales N N N N N N' N N Office N N N N N N N N Self-Service Storage N N N N N N :-XI N Non-Accessory Parking N N N N N ( 10) C10 C10 INDUSTRIAL V-° Industrial Services N N N N N N N N Manufacturing and Production - Light Industrial N N N N N N• N N - General Industrial N N N N N N N N - Heavy Industrial N N N N N N N N Railroad Yards N N N N N N N N Research and Development N N N N N N N N Warehouse/Freight Movement N N N N N N N N Waste-Related N N N N N N N N Wholesale Sales N N N N N N N N' OTHER Agriculture/Horticulture P6 P6 P6 P6 P6 N. N N Cemeteries N. N C C C N N N Detention Facilities N N N N N N N N Heliports N N N N N N N N Mining N N N N N N N N Wireless Communication Facilities P/R7 P/R7 P/R7 P/R7 P/R7 P/R7 P/R7 P/R7 Rail Lines/Utility Corridors C C C C C C C C P=Permitted R=Restricted Conditional Use N=Not Permitted Group living with five or fewer residents permitted by right; group living with six or more residents permitted as conditional use. 0 C .2 emzitted subject to requirements Chapter 18.742. ~~cc~~iucCeS- 3Permitted subject to compliance with requirements in 18.710. ~Cr~~Scr:.V 41+VrT~" rvlC(yi,s;Ltr:+o;;;, aExcept water and storm and sanitary sewers, which are allowed by right. iv 1L/ls•;irvYr.u,»-5In-home day care which meets all state requirements permitted by right; freestanding day care centers which meet all state requirements permitted conditionally. t ~t---r 6When an agricultural use is adjacent to a residential use, no poultry or livestock, other than normal i. tC~t(; LE housebold pets, may be housed or provided use of a fenced run within 100 feet of any nearby residence except a dwelling on the same lot. Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-4 Code Update: 06102 7See Chapter 18.798, Wireless Communication Facilities, for requirements for permitted and restricted A= L O- V facilities. BAttached single-family units permitted only as part of an approved planned development. 9Permitted by right if no more than five units in a grouping; permitted conditionally if six or more units r..-1.: C. per P grouping.- 6 t tt. -,Vi: t=`i 10Only park-and-ride and other transit-related facilities permitted conditionally. "Limited to ground-floor level of multi-family projects, not.to exceed 10% of total gross square feet of the building. 18.510.040 Minimum and Maximum Densities A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish minimum and maximum densities in each residential zoning district. To ensure the quality and density of development envisioned, the maximum density establishes the ceiling for development in each zoning district based on minimum lot size: To ensure that property' develops at or near the density envisioned for the zone, the minimum density for each zoning district has been established-at 80% of maximum density. B. Calculatine minimum and maximum densities. The calculation of minimum and maximums deasities is governed by the formulas in Chapter 18.715, Density. Cor! u tio_ ns. Oq F-1 t i z~ j w• i'E ~'~►zr ~ 4~ y Cul'eP ENS o Dr W7 t t tVFGR Titr6 t `t 1 FACT 7ft9 ~ /t? f 2 D(A t'Z t Ftt f'CT~i i '~M~ d a TXtg VC S u-I St+ cHAPTEyL /g, 9z 4aO 0-FH S C. Adjustments. Applicants may request an- adjustment when, because of the size of the site or. other constraint, it is not possible to accommodate the proportional minimum density as required by Section 18.715020C and still comply with all of the development standards in the underlying zoning district, as contained in Table 18.510.2 below. Such an adjustment may be granted by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Chapter 18.390, using approval criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.2. ' ~t• - ' ti C ~ S ~4S:h~ r 18.510.050 Development Standards A. Compliance required. All development must comply with: con t ist'9 7' 1. All of the applicable development standards contained in the underlying zoning district, except .TON-;.i5 N where the applicant has obtained variances or adjustments in accordance with Chapters 18.370; lctcitL v`t,2_ ''`f-~ 2. All other applicable standards and requirements contained in this title. B. Development Standards. Development standards in residential zoning districts are contained in Table 18.510.2. Residential Zoning Districts '18.510-5 Code Update: 06102 Lt L er T1. 11,11-1 ,f 18.510.060 Accessory Structures A. Permitted uses: Accessory structures are permitted by right in all residential zones subject to the following_-- 1- Dimensional requirements: r- a. On sites containing less than 2.5 acres, an accessory structure may not exceed 528 square feet. On sites 2.5 acres or larger, an accessory structure may not exceed 1,000 square feet; b. An accessory structure may not exceed 15 feet in height; c, In no case shall the primary structure and accessory structure(s) exceed the maximum lot coverage allowed in the base.zone; L d. An accessory structure may not be located within the front yard setback; ` e. An accessory structure must maintain a minimum side and rear yard setback of five feet; 2. Non-dimensional requirements: a. No accessory structure shall encroach upon or interfere with the use of any adjoining property or public right-of-way including but not limited to streets, alleys and public and private cf easements; Acc6Z- rarke-,,J/-s_:kc s F1:5p,Citi- tt'.rr.U Ti 1 ~Oi2~? ! Nei i11 r r~P~ ~«7,~. b. An accessory structure shall comply with all of the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. All accessory structures except those less than 120 square feet in size require a j building permit; S - c. 'An accessory structure which is non-conforming is subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.760, Non-Conforming Situations, when an alternation, expansion or reconstruction is requested; d. The erection of television receiving dishes on the roof of a structure is not pernutted in any residential zone. 3. All freestanding and detached towers, antennas, wind-generating devices and TV receiving t dishes, except as otherwise regulated by Wireless Communication Facilities (Chapter 18.798), shall have' setbacks equal to or greater than the height of the proposed structure. Suitable protective anti-climb fencing and a landscaped planting screen, in accordance with Chapter 18.745, Landscaping and Screening, shall be provided and maintained around these structures and accessory attachments:■ Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-7 Code Update: 06102 TABLE 18.510.2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES STANDARD R-1 R-2 R-3.5. R4.5 R-7 Minimum Lot Size - Detached unit 30,000 sq.ft 20,000 sq.fL 10,000 sq.ft. 7,500 sq.ft 5,000 sq. fL - Duplexes 10,000 sq.fL 10,000 sq.ft. - Attached unit 1 5,000 s .1 Average Minimum Lot Width - Detached unit lots 100 R 100 fL 65 IL 50 R 50 ft. - Duplex lots 90 ft 90 ft 50 R -Attached unit lots 40 fL Minimum Setbacks Maximum Lot Coverage 715fL - Front yard 301 30 ft. 201 20 ft. - Side facing street on comer & through lots 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 fL 15 fL - Side yard 5 fL 51 5 ft. 5 ft - Rear yard 25 fL 25 ft 15 ft. 15 ft. - Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 30 ft. - Distance between property line and front of garage 20 ft. 20 R 201 20 ft. 20 R Maximum eight 30 fL 301 30 ft. 30 ft. 35 R. Minimum Landscape geqfilrernent 20% [1] Single-family attached residential units permitted at one dwelling pet lot with no more that five attached units in one grouping. [2] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. TABLE 18.510.2 - (Cont'd.) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES R-12 R-25 R-40 STANDARD MY DU* SF DU** MF DU* SF DU•.* MF DU• ' SF DU** Minimum Lot Size - Detached unit 3,050 sq.fiper unit 3,050 sq.fL per unit 1.480 sq.fL 3,050 sq.1 per unit None None -Attached unit 1,480 sq.fL None - Duplexes 6,100 sq.fL'oc 3,050 sq.fL per unit None -Boarding, lodging, rooming house 6,100 s .fL Average Lot Width None None None None None None l~Fl~:r. i Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 20 CL V 151'/ 20 ft. 15 R 29 ft. 15 R - Side facing sheet on corner & through lots 20 fL•/ 10 ft. 20 ft 10 fL 20 ft. 10 R - Side yard 101✓ 51 [I] V to ft. 5 tE [1] 10 8.. 5 fL [1] - Rear yard 20 fL r/ 151 V 20 ft 15 ft 20 ft. 15 fL -Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 301 f 30 R V 30 R 301 35 fL 35 ft. - Distance between property line ! and garage entrance 20 fL" 20 fL,'f 201 20' t 20 ft 20 ft. Maximum Height 35 R ' 351. 45 ft 451 60 R 601 Maximum Lot Covers e 2 80% 80%' 80% 80% go% g0% Minimum Landscape rement 20% ✓ 20% 20% 20% 20% 20% [1] Except this shall not apply to attached units on the lot line on which the units are attached. [2] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. Multiple-family dwelling unit " Single-family dwelling unit Residential Zoning Districts 18.510-6 Code Update: 06102 •:~ih CITY OF TIGARD PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES 61ATE A6 Uf; r ; :y ;Cr`'t`fi n/I~c F~•l AGENT: rtix :,t APPicAaT:; = r ' c i c s a ~s - Nit vc Phon4 r' Phones b..' PR0PERTY.:LOCATION ' r 8 - S, ADDRESS- TAX MAP & TAX LOT: ~S I Il BB 7L 5 IMCESSARY APPLICATION (S) : S NQ D I I S N <Ngr~,.).~}nn) I~ae?IA-Nc a FOR c0RNE7tAf~D S TT`~ALK ~-~SS THAhJ IO~J. SYftti►AARD pgpppSAL DESCRIPTION: SEy~]J LOT T" &D fV (5 0 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: v? U4 Al E-N S. ( > !I L ZONING DESIGNATION: NEIGHBORHOOD -PLANNING ORGANIZATION . CHAIRPERSON: J u E C'RR V~~L PHONE: ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size:-. 42Dsq. ft. Minimum lot width:: _0 ft... Setbacks:: front-..,. ft.* side-5 ft., rear-_ ft... garage= AQ.ft'. corner-_ ft. from both streets. Maximum site coverage: Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: $ Maximum building height: -3- -ft. ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL-REQUIREMENTS._ Minimum lot frontage:. 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. :-Lots created as part of f-a partition must have, a...:: 'miniu 471m of 15 feet;'of -frontage..'or have a. minimum 15 foot wide easement. Maximum lot dePth':to~width ratio'of'f2.5 to 1• .r_ SPECIAL SETBACKS t:•~from"centerline 'of, - • E....~rruucu ~..ft: • from - - Lower.•intensity''zories:' " ft., along the site's boundary: --1t--~ O: t_ .:sic2 d tback .Fla ot: ~1 f ~l '+:a ".Accesso 'structures: ~tx~"u P 'to: 528 . s _rft: in 'size-S ft. setback from:`sidea Ali- ;,}fi Y-r^i #c.• x,. I. - q•::, . - e , .ff.'s s~ aric3 rear lot a-;-. t L"kc I 1 f• r{ - g~:,., .,Accessb :'structures.:,,,. __,s?~~ft:' where allocred 'see`. ~ 15. ~.*a.;tt;:i,' L :,.x• >z : )a.. r•y a licable:;zonin diatrict'='setbacks . `Vi'i+,:. `Zerorlot':'hne<:Tots=t">r...:,;a,minimum=`10 foot sePteation-'betwi3ea`bu g ildin s•.y: . r, yzs din _z.sePte r';' sy` Multi=famil residential it atonz;, ..Sire' Code Soct 9-._ Lori<18.96.030 r •,z . ~ . •!0 ' ' Page 1 _ GL `:A 1 f r L. }r t~vv`r"F- Z~n,..jhE• to l:C yb-., 1 < rr 1 aY%r~•r L•r:^^»+{ :SP.':.~.:r~:~>C~• La. i'Y;; :•7t V b s. w S5 : t tI CAC' I+p`iJ, , p> \ V ':r Y` t:. in W •jo~ -.Y 4 t .4y ~ ''.cat .."fit-.^ .~~'~t'~"~+,..~~ti 310 57 toy o 01 ° ' 92 ,l 25 rn g4 t J t N J O 5, DED• \ 8p U 4'. ~ 92 ~ ~ g4 C)D C 61 o,, _pRwE , LOA-, PRA 300 20. 20, 05 OF CITY OF TIGARD PREP-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES DATE: r G t 1 e ,11 :A APPLI GBNT: PIN L5 r CANT : Phone Phone: o'L5'1o-111 Zr ,r.z : _ •-?1•,, PROPERTY LOCATION: 1 ~E[8~ _Y~ io ADDRESS : ' { S : . TAX MAP TAX LOT: T. L OCa NECESSARY. APPLICATION(S): S1A$J>►1/~Sl~~ Y PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION w1 11~ 1 ( f In COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: , ' 1ED1 CJI k Z' a V 2ES -epi iA c ZONING .DESIGNATION: 1,(K` r~ NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION CHAIRPERSON: (d `CrkV v1,kq0-~ PHONE c .ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS 4- Minimum lot size: 3~~ sq. ft. ifle✓ W%; T Minimum lot width: - ft. Setbacks: front- IS ft. side- S ft-, rear-_Lr ft- garage- ft. corner-ja ft. from both streets. Maximum site coverage: ?A2% Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: Maximum building height: -ft. ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot frontage: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15 foot wide access easement. Maximum lot depth to width ratio of 2.5 to 1. SPECIAL SETBACKS Str~tes from centerline of ft. from Lower intensity zones: ft., along the site's boundary Flag lot: 10 ft. Bide yard setback Accessory structures: up to 528 sq. ft. in size=5 ft. setback from side and rear lot lines Accessory structures: up to, 1000 sq. ft.' (where allowed) - See applicable zoning district setbacks Zero lot line lots: minimum 10 foot separation between buildings Multi-family residential building separation: See Code Section 18.96.030 Page 1 03/0 :!92 12:36 T7503 256 2342 GEORGETOWN CITY OF TIGARD 171003/003 00, OF 2 r> ,err h ~ r ~ SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX CHECK LIST FOR SUBMITTING BUILDING PLANS NEW ONE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE: 3 sets of plans 3 site plans to include property lines, setbacks, and erosion control placement Application form including site address, subdivision & lot number, names of contractors (general, heating, plumbing) $250 plan check deposit ADDITIONS OR ALTERATIONS: 2 sets of plans (3 sets if adding square footage) 2 site plans (3 if adding square footage) to include property lines, setbacks, and erosion control placement Application form to include names of contractors (general, heating, plumbing) Plan check deposit (based on valuation of construction) PERMIT FEES AND DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Building Permit Fees: Based on valuation of construction as per 1990 State of Oregon Structural Specialty and Fire Life Safety Code Fee Schedule Table 3-A. Plan Check Fees: 65% of building permit fee 25% of mechanical permit fee State Tax: 5% of permit fees (building, mechanical, and plumbing) Plumbing & Mechanical Permit Fees: Based on the 1990 State of Oregon Fee Schedule Development Charges (new one & two-family): Traffic Impact Fee $1,460 per unit .~Zfv`f~ s~ "SSDC (storm drainage) $ 280 per unlit PDC (parks development) $ 500 per unit * Sewer Connection $2,100 per unit Sewer Inspection $ 35 per bldg.... * May be subject to additional assessment for construction of public sewer. MISCELLANEOUS Electrical Permits: Contact Washington County 684-4632 Water Meters: Tigard Water District 639-3516 Tualatin Valley Water District 245-3331 jlh/sfd Y• { I CHOOI s.. r071n / L/ T~(sn r j , POEM Ci / ? DERRY • ll CT. P, c, cif, .\4 S DARK SL a•y- .1►-.:i •.•DF1~ n # - p ~ ~r~ d u G v~p COO)l LK yG S~ i p w r. 7 5 ~IM Ct E ~ 3 ~NO` p5f OP, 5# Lp ~ O Y f ~ I SYL FAIREyVEK PT. P O t~,t. S" ro S OYARA ~ f FAIANavE WAY OOEWO WNT CT. 9.'L WT•E, w• EN R 4 2 09 / MC DONALD R u • w sw ,R 00° S C1A .E ELROSE CT U DRIFT'S AMZE ,r NCPNT ER Y r w 5•, w. u0 NTa1N VIEW v4 ; S Jf. I VIET/ TERR. W S W. W a Ew E t e O O V,T, O 1 w' TER p • IVI r, TM TERR NI, 5 YI. f.YEZ cT SW. INEZ w F ST. ; a LANE f- J HNEEROVK s.w. REMSROOK S' TWALIT" ~ 4*• < JUNIOR = O o i a q HIC,H w •=c RrnEBR00N m • ' OCI E w. ST. J M SCHOOL - URO~C ; °o_ J ~ . r. TcNPLETON s.w. ~ R-12 PD O w S 1 ELEMENTARY p~' r' O J p J CT. f D SCHOOL O w• h, O O Si/ L NONTC OR MaRI~YN• Ci _E.7JE p, Jh, J^ i M. (PD D) m _ p 1w SATTL=S - $.w. N OD v~M OP , Ty s ` g J i SMRFLO OAKS LM s a i~ LJJ r. Sw. NA9lE 4T. r LyC, S CIE 3 L Jr, ..y: R 2C • 'N1' • ' 1 po wO SaR Cax ' LD `ap Tt0.R A: C,, fi(rC O w - r 1 L ] w 4FE£M.EPf f~• fe SV~' , q ` .:Y S.1 . DR )O. sY~ :]RN Op4 it f0 ~ J. } r S. p- T Z• QN f Sr ' cl pJ W w . Y D O~OOFq L? ,lrE' 1"= ,Vn ~o ~ S.V. Can l~L, L+S S.w• CAi ~ • Y A'l. S' i0< t - '4 F R1RMdM 10 ~ rCE v \ ~ ~ RD. rSW XER 11 CT, cERENA 1 1 1_ r l __l 1' 71. 1-1 7/1/06 TO 6/30107 REAL PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON ` 155 N FIRST AVE., RM 130 ` HILLSBORO, OREGON 97124 rPROPERTY DESCRIPTION MAP: 2S111BB-00500 ACCOUNT NO: R501905 SITUS: 14185 SW 100TH AVE, CODE AREA: '023.74 TIGARDVILLE HEIGHTS, LOT PTS 13.14, ACRES 1.14 2006-2007 CURRENT TAX BY DISTRICT: COLL-PORTLAND 40.87 ESD-NW REGIONAL 22,23 SCHOOL - TIGARD 720.99 SCH-TIGARD/TUAL/AFTER LOL 144.51 EDUCATION TAXES: $928.60 RUEDY, ROBERT E WASHINGTON COUNTY 324.90 • 14185 SW 100TH AVE TIGARD, OR 97224 REG-METRO SERVICE 13.96 PORT-PORTLAND 10.13 VALUES: LAST YEAR THIS YEAR FIRE-TV FIRE & RESCUE 220.41 MARKET VALUES: CITY-TIGARD 363.17 LAND 216,840 293,190 TV FIRE & RESCUE LOL 36.13 STRUCTURE .72,490 81,330 GENERAL GOVERNMENT TAXES: $968.70 TOTAL RMV VALUE 289,330 374,520 TAXABLE VALUES: BOND-WASHINGTONN COUNTY 29.05 ASSESSED VALUE 140,310 144,510 BOND-METRO SERVICE DIST 26.24 BOND-PCC 29.78 BOND-SD #23-TIGARD 128.63 PROPERTY TAXES: $2,293.33 $2,276.19 BOND- TV FIRE & RESCUE 6.39 BOND-CITY OF TIGARD 30.85 APPEAL DEADLINE January 2nd, 2007 BOND-TRI-MET 14.06 Value Questions Call 503-846-8826 SCH-TIGARD/TUALATIN-AFTER 113.89 Tax Questions Call 503-846-8801 BOND AND MISC TAX: $378.89 Personal Property Questions Call 503-846-8741 Other Questions Call 503.846-8741 2006-07 TAX (Before Discount) $2,276.19 PROPERTY TAX PAYMENT OPTIONS (See back of Statement for payment instructions.) f 15%Y[ , l Pay Due Discount Net Amount Due / C ~JK. 4~J In Full 11/15/06 68.29 $2,207.90 213 11/15/06 30.35 $1,487.11 1/3 11/15/06 NONE $758.73 PLEASE MAKE PAYMENT TO. Washington County Tax DELINQUENT TAXES: NO DELINQUENT TAXES DUE Make Online Payments at (See back for explanation of taxes marked with an asterisk Delinquent Tax Total is included in payment options to the left.) t https://ecomm.co.washington.or.us/propertytax TOTAL (After Discount): $2,207.90 Pay by Phone at: (888) 510-9274 All Payments Processed Upon Receipt Robert E Ruedy LL iTER Of TMNSMMAL 14185 SW 100th Avenue DEC 2 ~ 2006 Tigard, OR 97224-4951 Date: 12/21106 Job No. Ruedy Property TTN: K. J. Peerman % Q A (503) 620-5997 A. to P;I RE: Measure 37 Claim Filing, To: Permit Center & Planning Department K . City of Tigard, Oregon 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Subject: Supplemental Information Tigard, Oregon 97223 Transmitted are the following: ® Attached ❑ Under Separate Cover via the following items: ❑ Permit Drawings ❑ General Specifications/Scope of Work ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Submittals ❑ Samples ❑ Change Order ❑ AutoCAD file(s) ❑ As-Built Drawings ❑ O & M Manual(s) ❑ Copy of letter ® Other: Supplemental Information as listed below. Item Copies: Dated. Doc. Page Rev. Description: No. No.: No.: No. 1 1 set 12/14/06 M37.20 Pgs 1-14 of 14 1 State of Oregon Measure 37 (M37) Exhibit T, Preliminary Title Report & Insurance confirmation 2 P g. of of 3 P g. 4 P g. of ❑ For Approval ❑ Approved as Submitted ❑ Resubmit sets of copies for Approval ® For Review and Comment ❑ Approved as Noted ❑ Submit sets of copies for Distribution ❑ For Your Use ❑ Returned for Corrections ❑ Returned sets of Corrected Prints ❑ As Requested ❑ For Bids Due AM/PM ❑ Price Prior to Proceeding ❑ Other: Routed By: ❑ Fax Immediately ❑ Courier/Taxi ❑ Fed Ex - Priority Overnight ❑ UPS - Overnight ❑ U.S. Mail - Overnight delivery ❑ Fed Ex - Standard Overnight ❑ UPS - 2nd Day Air ❑ U.S. Mail - Standard delivery ® Hand Deliver ❑ E-Mail/Modem ❑ U.S. Mail - Standard ❑ Other Comments: Please attach these documents to the City of Tigard, Measure 37 Claim Form submitted December 1, 2006 and is awaiting city staff review. Copy to: File Signed: C z2- ag LETIEROFMANSMMAL - 11/22/2006 Page I of 1 Dec mber20D6, Rev.1 1,:/l~l/l10 14. 11~ jllh D1.: 71D IIGLLJ JlU\VV LI11.1\-VVJF v ~XNIBiT Tu SCHEDULE A Order No.: 12-1213701-28 Policy No.: 27-041-92 623842 Amount of Insurance: s 212,000.00 Premium Amount: 5 956.00 Date of Policy: January 14, 2002 at 02'30 p.m. 1. Name of Insured: Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. Inc.. its successors and/or assigns 2. The estate or interest in the land which is encumbered by the insured deed of trust is: A Fee 3, Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: Robert E. Ruedy and Donna L. Ruedy, as tenants by the entirety n. The ir_sured deed of trust and assignments thereof, if any, are described as follows: A deed of trust to secure an indebtedness in the amount shown below, and any other obligations secured thereby Amount: $212,000,00 Dated: January 8. 2002 Grantor: Robert E. Ruedy and Donna L. Ruedy Trustee: Forest N.A. Baeci. Esq. Beneficiary: Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. Loan No.. 0023085681 Recorded: Januarv 14, 2002, Recorder's No. 2002004944 he 'and ieierred Lo in this pc!icy is si-uate6 in the County of Washington, azata of Oregon, and is desrribed as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "ONE" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF T. iS F'OiiCY -VAL:.u ONLY :F SCMEDUL£ 8 IS ATTACHED Page 1 Pct' rl 960S I 6 01 0SZ9 S I B 109NW 3WOH 09dU=1 S-113M N3 e2:80 9002 S l 73(T Loan Polley of Tide Insurance Fidelity National Title Insurance Company Policy Number A Stock Company 7-1-041-92 E. 2 ;83 11 2 LOAN POLICY OF THE INSURANCE SMIECT7oTHEEXCLWONSFROMCOVIERIIGL, MEXCEPlOMFROMCO✓EAACH CONTABIJED INSC.M DM .B AND THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS, FIDELITY NATIONAL TIME INSUPANCE`COMPANY, rt corporation, herein called the Company, insuras, as of Dare of Policy shown in Schedule A, against lost or damage, not gyrfMing the Amount Of ASU!'arlCe slated in Schedule A, =coined or incurred by true insured by reason of: 1. Title to the estate or intarest described in Schedule A being vested other than ar stared therein; 2_ Any defect In or lien or encumbrance on the title; 3 Unmarke'ability of die title; 4. Zack of a right of access to and farm the land; 5. The invalidity or unerlforceabiliry of the lien of the insured mortgage upon the title; The priority of arty lien or encwnbmnce over due lien of =he insured mortgage; 7 Lack of pr.'ori:y of the lien of :he insured mortgage offer any starltory lien for services, labor or marerial: (a) arising from an impravemenr or fork related to the land which is contracted far or commenced prior to Dare of ,policy: or (b) arising from an fmprovemenr or lvork related to the land.which is conmmied for or commenced subsequent to Dore of Policy and which is financed in whole or in pan by proceeds of the indebtedness secured by the inhered mortgage which at Date of Policy the insured has advanced or is obligated to advance; $ Ae ;rn Las;,: or unenforceat:rl:y q,' any assigrn-.er_- of the insured mort s,e, prmlded The LIMgnment is shown it Schedule A, or the failure of the assigvnent shown in Schedule A to vest ride to the insured mortgage in the r--led ed ossi;hee j~Dt and 6zar of a/. Lens. n_P Company .Off also pay the -ftorn4ys' fees and enenses irctrred in defense of the title or the hen of the insured n-ongage: as Injured, but only to the ezterr prcvided in the Condid=- and SYipuladons. IN W, TN£SS WJfCRF,0P F.'DE'LITY t1ATl0r1AL T171 INSURA.Vr-E COfwrANY has causce this aoiicy to be signet' end Sealed by its daly authorized oSllc7-s .cs of Dare of Poky shown in Schedule A. .K&,elfry Nof:oncl Mite Insurance .Corroany • yam' P~Oq,Q~°y~s tl'r /l/ r A, no 1 Ti: L4 j.~ 7/•-I.. L.v ail)-e Soli' J Q77R CS'gPraC T C n 1 Mr) 0 r'. t O T ra[.1Iu1.1 71.1nu eNn,~iw_j C1-17m v.., n-r . nn nnn~ n r -ti r. COMIITIMN9 AND nPULAnOttS - (Conuouea i-- Roma Stet Of Polder P'") 4. DEMISE AND PROSECUTION Or ACTION5; DITI-Y OF rNSUR D or the indclimdnns shall Oratisfer, assign, and convey the indebtedness and the in• CLADO,M TO COOPERATE sused acots$Sge, together with any collatenl security, to the Company upon pay- (s) Upon wince requtst by the insured and subject co the option wntained in ntent therefor. Section 6 of these Conditions and Stipulations, the Company, at its own cost and Upon the ecerdse by the Company of eithv of dye options provided for in paragraphs without ururmanablc delay. shat) provide for the defense of an insured in 5694 ion S (i) or (ii), ell liability and obligations to the insured under this policy, other than in which any third party asserts a claim adverse to the title or interest as insured. to make the payment r~yurred in those paragrapht, sh:d! Itcntinate, including any but only as to those :cued causes of action alleging a defect, lien or encumbrance liability of obGguion t defend, prosccutc, or continue any litigation, and the policy or atlltz msrcr lasured sEaltin by this policy. Tht Company shadi bave the riglu shall be wrteadued co the Company for carteellarion. to sclcGt'.z .sd o: b choice (subject to this nghtof the insured to ocjw for reasonable (h) To Puy or Otherulse Settle With Forties Other than the ensured cause) to rcprescm the insured as to chose stated causes of action and shall not be or With the Instred Clairrlarlt. Lable for and will not pay the fccx of sny ether counsel. The Company will tat (i) to pay or otherwise scale with other parties For or in the tL'itric of an insured pay any fees, costs or expenses i;=M4 by the inmrod in the defense of thole faucet claimant any claim insured against under this policy, togc9+u with any costs, at- of action which allege matters not insured against by thin policy. torntys' fees and expenses incurred by the insured claimant which were authorized (h) The Company shall have the right, at its own cost, to insrinite and prosecute by the Company up to the time of payment and which the Company is obliffaad any action or proccodint or to do any other act which jh its opinion nny be accessary to pay; or or desirable to eclabhsh the title to the P au or interest at the lien of the insurer ((u) to pay err Ddierwdse scale witls die irdurcd cisitnsnt the loss or damage pm- mortgage, as insured, of to prevant or rttduce loss or damage to the insured. The vidcd for under this policy togtd= with any costs. anorneys' fees and expenses Company may take my appropriate action tinder die terms of this policy, whether incurred by the meurrd claimant which were authorized by the Company up to the or not it shall be liable hereunder. and shall not thereby concede l"ublhry or waive time of paymcat and which the Company iS obliCacd to pay. any provision of this policy. If the Company, shall axercise its rights under this Upon the exercise by the Company of either of the options prev,ded for to paragraphs pata5raph, it shall do so dilioatly. NO) Or (ii). the Comp.ny's obhgetions to the insured under this policy fer the claim- (c) whenever the Company shall have brought an action or interposed a defcme ed Ions or dsmaSc, other than the paymuiu required to tw made- Shull terminate, as required or permitted by the provisions of this policy. the Cornp2ny may pursue including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute eir continue any litigation, any litigation to final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction and ex- DETI:.RIrf3NATION AND EXTENT OF I IAB=Y pressly reserves the right, in its sole diacrction. to appeal from any adverse judlt- This policy is a contract of indemnity agaimt actual monetary loss of damage mast or order. tuztained COT incurred by the insured claimant who has Vuffmd loin or damage by (d) in all casts where this policy permits or requires the Company to pros. "le fcason of matters insured agairaL by this policy and only to the extern hcnin tincribt d. Or provide for the dz~-Sc of trey anion or T.oeeed:ng. the insured alias: samr. (a) The liability of litr Comp.my under this policy shall not cxeeed the ieast of: to the Company ihe: tight to so prosecute or provide dafer{se to the action of pro- (ij the Amaum of Insurance tptrd in Schedule n, or, if applicable, die amoun Appea reeding and all re-d f s tthig , and pc he r by Company to y use, the at its Comoptipanyon. the of insurance Ss defined in Seetton 2 (e) of these Conditions and Sdpal:uinru; oatuir of the insured for hi.t peu-5z, . pier give the Company al dl the the (h) the amouaz of the an ~d principal indeb•-dness seeurcd by the inshimi mort- iinsany at the me or proceeding, scarring ev expense, g c-idacn witnesses, prOProsecu aid (t)ting gage as limited or rovidu under Section 6 of these Conditions and Stipulations n nay or action or prmic edit or mec, nEsobt.tddn1eL and (b) p N any other or as red)tcetl undertSection 9 of thnc Cocidi6oas and Stipulations, at the dime me crher with iniereu thttron; or or defending the action or ga the Company may be y be necessary (ii) or desirable co loss or dam8' ! a insured a6aiMt by this Po.It occurs, tog' lawfi:l vet which n the opinion of the c„O establish the title co the cstutc or interest or the hen of the insured mortgage, u (to) nca difference bctdtocn the ..due of the. insured estate or interest u insvrcd ~.su-zd. !f the Cor„r3-y f' udircd by tic failure of :he insured to S::tith the and the v-!t:e of _he !.send essay or tnt_=est subject to the de. ;ern or cneum- required coopemdon. The Company's obligations to OAe insured under mtc policy bnrce insured against try this policy. shail ta-citrate. including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute. or con- lb) In the event the insured tier nequuea the estate or interest )n me manner described timer an lit APA, With re and to the nutter or matters rcquinrg such coepcrztiun, to Section 2(a) of these Conditions anti Stipulations or its conveyed the tide, then any C g the liability o the Compan) :hall eontinne at set forth in St Lion 7(a) of these Can- 5. PROOF OF LOSS OR AA.'idAGE diuons and Stipulations. In addition to and after the notices required under S=don 3 of these Conditions (c) The Company will pay artery those costs, atwmcys' fcct and expenses Incurred avid Stipaladow have beta provided the Company, it proof of lost or damoge iigned in accordance with Secdop 4 of dheSC Conditians snit Stipulations. sad ,worn to by the insured claimant stroll be furnished to the Company within 9. LJ 1=A.TION OF LugII IlY 90 days after the insured claimant SM)) asccrrain the fans giving rise to the Loss (o) IF the Company establishes the title. or rcrnoves the alleged dcltct lien or cr elamran The proof .of or loss a matt,eo shall describe the defect in, or lien of encumbrance, or cure. the lack of a right of 3eccys to or f}om the land, or cures encumbrance oo the ndr at loss matter inserted against cx this policy which can- the claim of unrnark:tabiltry of title. or othomise establishes the lien of the intured ssitutes the bas's of Ines or damage led shall rate, to Me octane possibit. the bath ncrrgase, all as insured, In a seasonably diligent manner by any method, including of calcul;= ;Be Amount of the loss or dsmage. If the Company 6 prriudita:d by fdttgetle_ . a _1e wimplecian a6 er.; appeals therefrom. it c:. i have fully pert'ormed the Lslutc qf':x itUur[d Ciatdlant so previoc xc -wired pptoof af ire or tiama~e, its obligations with respect to that [natter and shalt not lac liable for any losq or the Cor4nAy's obligations to the insured under the policy "I termioat-- including damage eauacd thereby arty liibiliry to obligation to ttefend, ptosectrte, or continue my !itigstba, with regard it) :n thr event of any litigation, incloding iltigation by the Company or with to the rttaw or matters. r uinng such proof of loss or damage. the Company's conscnc, the CompsAy shill b+ve no liability for los; or damage In 9ddition'. the intuted claimant min reasonably be required m submit to cx- u,+ol there has been a final detertninauon by a e:ur. of egmpeunt jurisdict oa, and ducO fi undo oath by any ou[hariie4 y'J4tanve ref the ble tinny and Held in, position of sit appeals thertfrohh. adverse to she title or to the lien of the insured andriation prooduce Cur ci®-nirmtioa iaspocsion and copying. , a at such reasonable time and places morgage. >t insures. ss may be dceigA°tt~1 by cay as horized reore-sentanve pf the. Company, e : ittirords. (rl The Company S itisw shall nnc be liable for loss u da tvtr to any in;e rd for liability ~t ;a, {epgvs, checks, ca act ind aualoratlc, w)hedier bearings date voiunratiiy in settling any elatnct or suH without the prior ty. before or aE_ n.. of p_I;c...which ceeaer"y - :n:a to the Ter: ar :Masc. Voiminsured S:'=gt xcd by any auft i:?d =epr^sentativa of the Company, the insured ttis y assu It of the by the the insured The Company seal) not be lichee for tier snr indebtedness c:atd subsequent of dw. t shall pa y g to ram its ;W. inspe ain wriduc. nd copy all recor recor't ds. books, rgmrs. check . to Date of Policy except for advances made to pioice; the lien of the ituurtsl ,nor- co e ood6cit snerhnoe. de illn the custody a ar control of of s a t rd part checks. Otago and saatrttd thereby and reasonable amounts enpendtd to prevent deirric ra- rrespuly pee Wild merns or Leda party. m ica hot of improvements: or (di) eortsaucaon loan adv=C= made subsequent to Date by the irou to the loss ed to th dto The. All !nny mitioa designated Sss confidential not of Poht:y, accept constriction loan bdvaoecs trade subsequent to Due of Policy by the ruutut claimant provided Company pursuant to this Section c hap not for the purpose of fitnlido in whale or in part the cotuvuaion of an improvement tit ditc!"ad to others unless, in the reasonable judgment of the Company, it is to the land which at Date is Policy were secured by the insured mortCagcand which . mit it for a to that indes Oath, the claim. bcr rag Failure of ab rLite insured ed claimant to subthe insured wit ohd eentinura to be obligated to advance at and after Dare of Policy. grforoat pcrmissxaiiasiiitm on to u undo secure , pen rtasotubly ly nocecesrares ry in[orrilormatirequested ri nucsolem third n te• 9. REDUCTION OK' INSURANCE; REDUCTION *OR TE-RMIlKATION OF or m ai rtquaed in the above part.Viipb. unlna prohibited by law or governmental rcgula• LWIUTY nor,. shell terminate arty )tebduy of the Company under this Policy 39 to ,bat claim. fa) All payrrebts under this policy. except yments made f'or costs, aoorneyt' . 6. OPTIONS TO NAY OR O'rI3 AWISE SUL i LE CLAnW TEFUMNA'1ION fees and cipenscs, shall reduce the amovat o~Qtc tnfuraece pm canto. However. OF I,IP.,lir)7.[I.1' any payrecna made pndr to the xgutsstioa of rtde to the esuic or iatcreat os preivid. oil to Section 2(n) of these Conditions and Stipubulens shell trot rcauee pro Omni* In coca of= <[afrri under chic policy, the Company shall have the foltoa in$ adder. I'm anoctnt of ;,`.e msu i:4 a:for,04 under this h policy except to the extent that the tioAd options Pa: payments reduce the amotiln of the indebtedness secured by the insarod mortgage. (aJ To o Pa, or Tender Payment of the Amount of Iaitiraatc vt to fb) payment in oast by any Demn of the principal of the indebtedness, or airy Purchase- the Indebted em. nester obligation secnfed by the insured morioage, or any voluntary panial satisfac- iij rte rnoy nr rrrv is sw ntieM of die ,7:•stAr of inn ranee ur.&r tw.° rsc'y m Ra:1ie: 1;00 nr -tiettae of the Inettrea mortgage. to the -)-tent of the payment, satisfaction wiz any costs, attorneys' fa.Y and eapcttsm inn urnv by the insured claimant. Which OF rsKe`r. -hsit .-:^uce the _m_-_= of Imotsnee p; o arc. The amount of induranee were zuthotiaxd dry sec Company. un to the time of payment or tender of payment Tay thereafter be ineteasod by accruing intctoa and advances made to omma the acid wbscl Oho Cartwoany is eb4atcd io uav; or ;;ca of the insured -torraFr and tmcared dherebv, with interest thereon. ?rovitled • i) .4 putnltae tale iDdCVfninela icturcd by (flc ;naurtxi riongea a :tic Jt :WK idol ;t no evert shalt the amount of iMutaace De $rester :hen the Amount of luStiraocc owing mertva togahor with any zimu, attorneys' has nnCn -_7pctta^.i incurred Cy ; amt to S.hcdule ,k. tL cts• •-1i'H !:ith r~ y, _ y • - ?_y-e,t (3 -,jn Dy UW ptP.e1 or 0'e volwitnty •~ti J:r_t r or -ri=m r.' -::a c!-~ Crtpary a ica - pay. insured monrace ASii umitute an ;iaodity of nnc f2 a many except u nrovtcw if die r4nipariv offers to purchase die indebtedness as herein provided. the owner iz ?z::ia .^.f -hear Cabcbse s _~d Scvulauora. ti0' d 82266C9C0516 01 051.9 9 18 1 AnNW 7=11,10H OL)NH-1 S11:11n N-1 AP : act 4MOP C r 'iarl _ Order No.: 12-1213701-28 Lender's Extended Policy No.: 27-041-92 623842 EXH1131T "ONE" The East half of Lots 13 and 14, TIGARDVILLE HEIGHTS, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon. EXCEPTING THEREFROM; The North 100 feet of the East half of said Lot 13. Page 2 Lender's Extended Order No.: 12-1212701-28 Policy No.: 27-041-92 623342 SCHEDULE B PART I This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses? which arise by reason of: 1. Covenants. conditions and restrictions. as shown on the plat. Recorded: December 30,1907 in Plat Book 2 Page 38 Reference is made to said document for full particulars. Page .i • n n - n nnlr .n .ern n-,---a n n n n VV AY, AJ L'KA V1iJA V IILl.LJ L'LIL~VV LN-Il•~.VJL- `!':I ..VV Lender's Extended Order No,: 12-1213701-28 Policy No.; 27-041-92 623342 SCHEDULE B PART 11 In addition to the matters set forth in Part I of this Schedule, the title to the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A is subject To the following matters, if any be shown, but The Company insures that these matters are subordinate to the lien or charge of the insured deed of trust upon the estate or interest: NONE l=oge 4 i M • - j 07'7cenno lr l c n 1 rar Jo r T o T ran11L1 =11.inu nnMt4J c-I-I7m ]1J 0-7• orA OMM-2 r T -1Mn x.'11. ..v A'I1V FA/\ VAAV JVY IULL.I 1'[11\\1V L/1111t. VIJl . Order No.: 12-1213701-28 EXTENDED COVERAGE ENDORSEMENT Attached to Poliry No. 27.041.22 52aB42 Insucd by FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY bate: January 14, 2062 Premium: 950.00 The Carttpany hereby inAures against la,-, which aAid insurod shalt sustain by reason of any of the following matters: 1. Any incorrectness in the assurance of the Company hereby gives: (a) Th9r there are no covcnarts. coreitionc, orrestrictions under which the lien of -.tie mortgage or deed of truer referred to in Schedule A can be cur off, subordinated, OF otharWico irppyirad: lb) Thot there are no proscnt violations on said laro of any enforce9ble covenants,conditions, or re:trietjons. (c) Thar„ oxeant ac shown in oehedula B. there are no ancroaehmcnt-t of buildings, structures. or improvements located on ;aid land onto adjoining ]ands, nor any .tneroachrnants nnro said land of buildings, structures, or irnprot,cmehts located on adjoining lands. Any future violations On suid land of any covenants, conditions, or re!:triclions occurring prior to aequisitionS of title to oafd Lind by the Insured, provided such violations, result in lose or impairment of the lien of the mortgage or deed of truss referrtd to in S chsdulc A, or resulT in loss or impeirrpent of rho title to said li)nd rf the Insured shall enquire title in cati;faction of the, indebtedness aetured by such mortgage or decd of trust; 3. pamagc to exivVng improvamerat (a) Which are located or cn.tc,4ch upon that portion of the land subjort to dny ~aocment o(town in Schedule 5. which damage resulte from the excre(se of trio right to use or maintain such easerncrtr far the purpoua for which the torhr was grunted or reserved; (b) resulting from the cxereiso of MY right to use the surface of said land for the extracticn qr developm ant of rJta minc:.(S 9x=,,)Tad train we d-%6latlon of said land or shown as n -torvacon in SChedul, S. 4. Any final tour, order or jud Jrnont requiring removal from any lend adjoining said I,gnd of 6ny ancroArhmont shown in Schcdute B. No coverage is provided under the endomorttont as to any covon;w, condlrion, rcariction, V ether provision relating to anvironfrlental protection. Al~ used in thie endorwncnT, the words'covinants, conditions, and resrrictiona' do not refor to and do not include the tem%e, coverlanrs, c0ndtions, rocuictions and lirnirtions contained in any instiurnem ereatlrto a jcase. The tot-,41 liab(lity of the Company under said policy and any andomtrnent therein shall not exceed. in the Aggregate, the rarut amount of said policy end cost; which the Company is obligated under the stipulations rliereof to pay. This andorserrem is made a part of Said polity an ie 9ubjeeT to Tha :cltcclulrs, conditions. and stipulations tharo]n, except 69 ~Ca Of,' v'r ,he pr.7vl9]CS ~arevf. Fidelity National Title lNaUftnNU1: r;0`dla,NY FNTCO 10.7 kA_ OLTA 52 Countersigned CLTA 100 nn , n--r-rrrnnnnr rn n, rar,n r•.n inn.,.. r...,, , , - - 1h•lYr VV 1`I.1V IAA V1hJ1 Vr,li1.,LJ 1'Al\VV VAIrl1VVrJ1- K•-J V1U Order No-: 12-1213701-20 LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENTS ENDORSEMENT AttaChed To Polley No. 27-041.92 623242 Issued by FIOELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Date: January 14, 2002 Premium: 60.00 The"Companv assures the Insured th5t at the date of this policy there is located on the land described therein, improvements having a street address or route anVor box numoer as follows: 141553W 100th Avenue, Tirlard, Oregon 97224 The Company hereby insures t112 Insr.red agalnst loss whirl) said insured shall sustain in the evenr That tie assurance herein shalt prove to be incorrect. The total liability of the Company under said policy, and any endorsement mereln shell not exceed, in The aggregate. the Face amount of said policy and costs which the Ccnlpany is obllaated ender the conditions and stipulations thereof to pay. This endorsement is made a part of said policy and is subject to the schedules, conditions and stipulations Therein, "cept as modified by the p(ovlsions hCreof_ Nothing herein contained shall be conshued as o_xtFnding or changlno the effective date of said policy, unless otherwise expressly stated. = Fidelity National Title INSUILikNCF COhIPANY FNTCO 10.13 e ~ FN-1 IC 465 countersigned OLTA 59 GLTA 118 ~fil • ..J R77CF,S'QPMC T P n I MC) Q C T R T LAt)AIJ =I[An i Or)NH 4 ?14 f.7 ~ ROI CIMM2 t: T 1RrT . lei Orrier No.: 12-1213701-2$ ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LIEN ENDORSEMENT Attached to Policy No. 27.041.92 623842 Issued by FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Date: January 14, 2002 Premium: $0.00 Th9 insurance afforaed by this endorsement is only effective if th= land is used or i.t co' be used primarily for residential purposes. The Company insures the insured against loss or damage sustained by reason of tack at priority of the lien of the m5ured trust deed or mortgage over: 1. Any environmental pr-geetion lien whicn. at date of policy, is recorded in those records esthblished under state statutes at date of policy for the purpose of tmparting constructive notice of matters reiating to real property to purchasers for value and without knowledge, or filed in the records of the clerk of the United States district court for the district in which the lend is located, except as set forth in Schedule 13: or 2. Any environmental protection lien provided tar by any state statute in effect at date of policy, excep! environmental protection liens pruvided for by the following state staiutes: NONE This endorsement is made a part at the policy and is subject TO all of the terms and aravisions thereof and of any prior endorsements thereto. Except to the extent expressly statecl, it neither modifies any of trio terms and provisions of the policy and any prior endorsements. nor cues it extend the effective date of the policy and any prior endorsements, nor does it increase the face amount tnereoi. Fidelity National Title IUJJ~L~f~t'l' t:ttwil',=1~IY Fr:TC010.34 FNTIC 483.1 Counir rsigned A4TA 9.1 OLTA 83_1 CLTA 110.9 R f ' rl R~?.RRE QF ' R~ I of q~l 9 S t f3 1098W :3WOH 0~21d~ S113M NA 62 8 0 9002 SI 08Q nn Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon Map # 2SIlIB13 00500 The drawing below a copied (mm the publit scolds and a pro,, ided Sulcly for tha purpose oresersnn~ in locating the premises, Fidelity National '1'idc ustumce no fiability rorveriatiohs, if any, In dimensions, area or location of the premises or tha location of impmVements aseertailted by =1w-'1 Cun'ey. I s^ 1 I j I -PF-& ,aaw ti It6 ' 1301 I Ll ( a 9*;72 l I I •`'H't4t~^ • . J0.00 , Ir U 3.172 A[ i t jSp 981ig9a l I (a 300 r i.U 72 AG I l I .31 A[ s' ~I f ~ 40U I ~ \r'~' ~h I 10 a' Z I 13 I- 75 ac - 73 Acs e f Lu I , I 3tc a I_ 1 i < 711-t r . 9.6H MC1NS I ' I ' m I .73 AC y1 5 1300 I I 500 C 14 1.16 AC ( ,+n Batty 1 1 .1 t . 1. .6 ZS1 11a4 57 Ad 00; I 1200 S a I 57n~ g Q Zr 600 / a (L l U 33 AC ) - tb ~e toonc /I I I- CC I luau YJ\oF~ NBM3.cew ~B+.TC ,,I 17,.00 r 11 Ca ! I Alan sync Boo 700 - at'c 1000 I 900 f 25 PC 1 z4 PC r ,U .12AC AC iR l 1 „l l , " I I ~ ~ IC8IDYOOW I I I 7±0,[0 ~ u0.00 I ' ~ HOYISar, It SB9a-e:~00w I 21 r ;ivo i? At ?I ~ ~F 0 2S I ' .T r~ Yvm F,- I r S -W V SW of TERRACE i ,7 i1 '~a ,a '976.7 _ _ tanoo~ , ._V'2 .117'J yc Q r.117ur 1- s` I s04, y°~•~ nnpa ^I: 31NIM' -s„ydC =wc c r5~ {ta ~z ~w r _ seoo ='q a IoDP' .,60 i~ :'S:':eC ~'>;f~ dlM~ w 27P J17 29 Ac _ I t:DU al . 1 F. 00 •oc.w :coe ~ • I I 1p.W 111.00 pop ] .r, 00 T T• J o»ccroc+r~r 7 c n 1 0 r 1 o r T 0 7 nn'U 1.1 71.InlJ nr%\j J r.`1-1-,M \1 1 r- nn --"Order No. 12-1213701-28 A deed of trust to secure an indebtedness in the amount shown below, and any other obligations secured thereby Amount: $138,700.00 Dated: July 28, 1998 Grantor: Robert E. Ruedy and Donna L. Ruedy, husband and wife Trustee: Mark Peterman Beneficiary: Home Savings of America, FSB Loan No.: 019758648 Recorded: August 3, 1998, Recorder's No. 96-084665 1 Line of credit Deed of Trust, to secure an indebtedness as shown below and any other obligation secured thereby: Amount: $46,000.00 Dated: August 19, 1998 Grantor: Robert E. Ruedy aka Robert Ernest Ruedy and Donna L. Ruedy Trustee: U.S. Bank Trust Company, National Association Beneficiary: U.S. Bank National Association ND Loan No.: 66400100337120001 Recorded: September 28, 1998, Recorder's No. 98-107201 The following matters pertain to Extended coverage only: 1Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of persons in possession. To remove this item, we will require an affidavit and indemnity on a form supplied by the company. 1 Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments or any other foots which a correct survey would disclose. The company will make an inspection of the premises and this exception may be eliminated or limited as a result thereof. Any statutory liens for labor or material, including liens for contributions due to the State of Oregon for unemployment compensation and for worker's compensation, which have now gained or may gain priority over the lien of the insured deed of trust, which liens do not now appear of record. To remove this item, we will require an affidavit and indemnity on a form supplied by the company. END OF ITEMS AND EXCEPTIONS NOTES; Note A. The address of said land is known as 14185 SW 100th Ave., Portland, OR 97224. 4 C • .-r S?77CCr`Qr'fi1C T C n raC J C C t R t rAn N1.l 71,1()W nt)?JH A CZ1-1--:1m M-1 r;7 : ara QLlrA7; C7 -17rt --"Order No. 12.1213701-28 Note B. There are no judgments of record against Robert E. Ruedy or Donna L. Ruedy. 5 OT J o~~ccc~oc~rAr t c n] MC7l 0 r 7 0 T fA[1]11.1 MlAnu nnvuJ c -I -inm ',J -J c- • ore OrarT7 r T -17M L l ' 39UJ -1H101 Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon N Map # 2S111BB 00500 w S The drawing below is copied from the public records and is provided solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises. Fidelity National Titlc assumes no liability for variations, if any, in dimensions, area or location of the premises or the location of improvements ascerwined by actual survey. 111301 I ems'' ao.aol W L) 3.92 AC i ; I I L'300 LIJ Sl'5 31 AC 07.7.-;- $ 400';,' . aas ac~~ • w, 13 .76 AC .i 12374 I:r1•' a6e~C1N8 r- _ -4, i I. I ..to0.00 I I$, % z6tit9a' 11 ! fs , 'ra'tio' ,dC ^i la' 1300 500 < ~Nri2oe4 I a2AC I e~ 1a t.uac W o ~ ri 139.98 - 4- - 5 room ~ ~riu L'~IY ~i. 0090-U-96.-00E C, (Y) 7 ¢C I ~ r' g•~ :a'", .ate 0 s~s 1200 s00 e e- D .33 AC 15 n 1.30 AC e ;J S17.II ♦0 NOa•OB•OOW \ N09 a6Dour uy~-o 76• Oj^g04~.. N T.7- Oe0.70 187.80 171,00 / I L 1371•t0A . zas.7o 1100 1111 • •ovo ' I DfiAC 800 700 1 I fit ac 1 ~i td~ 900 .36 0 1 .36 AC 72 AC i I AC 16 11 I 6 ; NOY33.OOW taa:0o ' • I I , IL~ 2y0.00 lw.,I,,~ B 1t3.00 07.20. • +fasa>xoog•''•r.' r• so9~aooyt I ,sru9a g,~ ,33 AC T. ~p .'tB111Be,' ' 2S1fie? Zg• t)oo,r a000~, iertrec 'zstfieo• II IQ io ab'' ^ 4' 9'' A I d.. oo i.... %J e Y w SW VIE, TERRACE SW ~~&opw ,1.'•zstitac1BV'~I Ig, isttiA.$ to t tt o m zsrtiaC S soo 37 AC 13 • 'nC pq t C 'n? zaLil&C.' . 1. yr. ATAC s; I I~ 3D r 00 30 13200 ,o t' t sa77~cs`q~ele t C n I PC) Q e t S2 t ranvl., ~i.lnlf -nel?IH~ c~~~m >t~ c -~rota onn~ e t \eel "eX 14101 C a Z n 300 $ r0`E .31AC m 197.74 li2 400 "";7W C y` 1~ J , v 13 .75 AC 74 ,3 500 (A! D0 O r~ 14 t.W AC J 8 95935-0OE ® ` r ' ~tBA 77 c is , ~ l . t07 Af, 16 1.30 AC t~s-sfi-oow + su.7: td~6a.0a~4 688.70 ° ,1911AQ- ` I71A0 , = tea.7o 1100 25 AC a00 700 DOO .35 AC .35 AC I AOAC `y 2 AC 16 220.00 7 119A0 0730'>'" ',53 Ad . . 2Mq `yam` SS TERRACE ' +'r' I' .7 ' 32+{70 v ° n 74 ,Y, ~a ,S ~`t•~ ~.i-w y' `<`.,-~',t' ,')'d `}'2i~i?1iC a': ;Y', Map No. 2S111 BB 00500 TRANSNATION TITLE AGENCY OF OREGON 12360 East Burnside Portland, OR 97233 Phone (503) 256-1163 Fax (503) 254-6992 This plat map is for your aid in locating your parcel with reference to streets and other properties- VNtile this plat map is be6eoed to be correct, the comyanyassumes ro bali tytor arty loss o<xxWng by reason of reliance thereon. 2S 1 1 1 BB 2S 1 1 1 BB WASHINGTON COUNTY ASSESSW TTAX TION 6 DEC 0 1 2006 FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY - DO NOT RELY ON FOR OTHER USE >rw ALD a•. z ROAD (CR 43 - dQD.QNAL(1L_._._ . WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON i. T2 NW /4 SECTION 11 5 II nur Y,r ,.n ouwr >„awe ue a•wr 1/4 NW1 - R1W W.M. SCALE 1 100' 1607 5 I ' E~. r.w• - _ E ,r p m;is..::' d,:_ ' n.°:'~- 36:':81+• ^"32:. ~ Se ~'9~:~ :35' '3 f 7 I I i too 2 y Ji~r1r .:P l>;'°' ':i:: a,.c.. i~ ~'.Ji?'/^ than gq 2100 6 e.~ 1 I 3 Aa♦C 'Ae'K. '.I,ae„O as 4C• " ' .nK '-q 4eK r I 1 200 . { 150, 6 9 zt .,eK ~ I I ;,~pd,. : ii rh 'e>::i;a5• - i` . 2101 I1301 1.y~' i C1:. U S• .B:•St,'/<:i.Bi:,~IGi v`'~lur: .euc W I Z a •R•: 1. 300 g : k•' ~~4 1602 i W 1 ~ 32K 1 I -tt 4< 1 •"P ':nme: > > ' ::z5i ~'s'o";i~%se~,'rza5?er,. %~4> Jzs iao-': 'y: A W <8a: 32: :~3'1':`~~•l g,:-'9~:. ::3j:< . . 17r1e,•'• •.41"-''•. ..5'..: tj;':~$~'; ~..3> i'~r. `3 ; ::'2% '.7:` 11100 t 8 Z 13 - 71. 1 q 700 FOR ADDRIONAL MAPS VISIT OUR WEBST7E AT • S n. s Q 23 74- 2000 9 1300 ,5w40zr'~.. :•'f '•ae+~n eye Del. :-Yi,t!~'•.,,• a x100 \ v C~ •5'.'::.:s,K•'•:': 1.; R._ _ .,:G.,.;...; ,..:D... A' Cl) 1100 1)~.K~~:~ 9 B ' 2600 ntK Is14 Goo 8 ''1•, 1!-'•,'' ! Saco c• i- ~ tl r i 02400 R 23001 0 600 •~nno-- r x 1 4 • 2 k• ,n,e r "}:4. Canoelletl Twdots Far. 2811ISS e• w 1100 y l 110.1 N1,170$,1100. mim 600 700 _ _ .ic seK aeK atK ~IS'.-• . .,,e I. 4 ~ ,060101 >J *wje°t8 a I fnrismi•. JCrr .'1r„Ib M1O •'I~ i .'3 ."3 SO4C.'. '4• v r SW VIEW T r6ti ER "A.~.` Y•. RACE = SW VIEW CARTOGRAPF{Y IS SW VI TERRACE ~6 r,,.,' T t % 9 1 6'0 ,~mn -~-7~ ~ PLOT DATE; October 17, 2001 :•A R : e . a4:'''• r.;:ya.•. y,`\ nao g'•.•;y., . FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ~7•%4 lA DO NOT ••-d • ONLY- O RELY ON ''d• 1 6.1 m6.••' "'F J• FOR OTHER S USE - n'aq,' : ! l:. .hr r'• . ''r r'~:~ r CO ' :.'J::~,,1 J':~ Y,nuert ee,r»maq••Mrrpvr Yi9,0Ye ao.rarttl.n . . - wmra4m YrM,nm ,arm ,n,am,Rr m, men 'r i a.,r.m a ao.r. mnm ne.mro+•n m.a •~a~ ..uqt.. ••~pm. .w.v-.. (1 oaarmer.na.-w. wRY u,a.,.K:+em,.ma. X Y. r, .q •R - 4S•..g `f• r.. TIGARD t8p2A1)r1, 2S 1 1 1 BB 2S 1 1 1 BB 2S 1 1 1 BB 2S 1 1 1BB 17 75 'LJ 1,anno: . 273 X: kxW `tl }s^`" raaw w» iow 'rnwairw s' 2 s# _ SW.. MC DONALD ALD ROAD (CR 43..x' °w u„i em„oe luclaan r „c WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON ET_ it 114 NW11 R1WW.M. NW 11 T23 i uee- R. r. N~,c E . to n k aw. •,asea a»xxo.wa xAaow•a a»aawa n. - m - SCALE tON - 10D 1503 ar ~ 9a 8 ~ I m nu .'36. 31. .32 . 33. .31:..36 ~ '38 :31: ° »w I I too 1 mno ru mnu ~ (aZl ne;'. ~ ai AC " , 1500 lit 2100 I xaC d ,a6At' I .ao AC. . k I I 200 e.A< 4•I. i g 1r: a: .c...d 3,%•2 ..y.>:.`., d 6 ,A0 1501 a m .2 ~ 72, 9 8, 10 71 12 7 i,ot 1,~1 I'a~+ w ~"''•t'i1. 73; 1B 17 78 f6 10 13 19 < u \~l!~...,. .an x~ 1.2 200 _s W g• fAC ay'A 8C wa'e' 4'. f 20 1D - 20~ 2t•_ -42. i28, 249: Ac . 1 ! W I Q sY 25 30 20 28 27 26 28 3a' r» W g ~p/76 . yd 96 91,321-.99 90 36.39 31 . <S y 1600 4 1 A Z 3 10 .aaw d 8 .'oa¢. I g.^'®~5° 7-~ 8. .8• d .'3'•2' x 6 f x 2 k,2- 7 _ FOR AD07ffONAL MAPS 27 OUR WEB3l1'E AT `-r. 1 _ :_.!?~y _ www. .w nAln n.w.us co a - as 'AA j $00 24 1000 ; ~ 2AC C s T.c i) ai uac ~ a"';`637 IV {B l• t.A ;H: .wrax« ..••aA arm BD Ad I AD -:700 w"'•,~nnn._... p - I / o :7 9EC.T ONI aa 2200 IL C I I o!#~ '.e7¢ I g io \ a C8 1 'CA. .UB J DA w2d 1~ ~2. '~°'L• 1200 3 600 .I A7 arc 1 6' ' ~ • 2600 p ~ 6 K 1600 ` ! I I ~ CD' ~ ~DC ~ DD tl~` S g L •F+!. sAA AC a1V6+A~ e ~>aowl n n t I _ 02soo .a..» - : ~ 1 II L 262a0s 3 2600 Cancelled Taxlots Fm: 2311188 j . . 1 y 2 nrm mm „y p . » aa» .osM ;00' 700 s ; INO.IA1,170T, GW, ~.....o«.....r....... _ 1000 .12 to ! T. ' t= AoAC' 6 ~ 7 om Ir - n,rraa °Y .a x» 2 3' a.,e e,._ t_Ae°.: ,,,a •a,. R p e b. ,,,.Aew ...:1!i:n..:..:::_. , z 4: VIEW RR ACE VIEW ~CAl7TOGRAPHV SW § E,kV MT~E r ~,,~RACE $ s SW VI } ' y »r„b S PLOT OATE 0ctober 17, 2001 FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES fj, ~ .'J 'f1 1" oW 7B m>p •a .g °_g .a.c. ¢ In ~o,c e' ONLY- 00 NOTRELYON f - - a b FOR OTHER USE A r nr6 1 ¢ r - •nu mmww.a .rn« o.oaa.n,rnw . r z I IN i .xa»m f .1 1 or v mm°ex aryrw»ymmmvu• 1 1 ~._:a.v~.•..•_•a ,..,.'..~.i4~w .:.t:.'i ~ o.,•a~m.m~a.. nunx»mmIM MF'Ra4»m°p _ ~ _ rWm.•wlxaa».wxn».ee,. ~ 3 {0. ,,,m jann.° .x , ,~nuo a m•,c: R~3se ~c ae'ac. ~ ~ Aonc' ~ +'io ~ . .s:. " mrrb /a> t.l f . . Ja ac G - r'l fS eK r,~ ' u~eK I f~ TIGARD 2S 1 1 1 BB 2S 1 11 BB OIp0i1w11 Yahoo! Mail - robruedy(& ,yahoo.com Page 1 of 4 ■ ~XN (a tT v YAH M L t ° 1 I-) Print - Close Window Subject: #6084057 Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 09:09:47 -0800 From: "Peter Balzola" <pbalzola@pru-nw.com> To: "Rob Ruedy" <robi-uedy@yahoo.com> http-1/transactionnw.com/ASPEngine/attachments/2803OF941A38495CAAEA6FF7506EO9C6 email.htm HTML Attachment Peter and Cynthia Balzola r 503-684-2182 • pbalzola@pru-nw.com www.balzolaproperties.co Mls Number: 6084057 LOTS AND LAND List Price: $158,000 Status: Pending Sale r ' s Address: 17332 SW Minnie City/ZipCode:Aloha, 97007 PubRmks: Direct: Hart to Bany. Lefton 173rd Right on Minnie Ct w VTour: Legal: LOT 2 NOEL'S OVERLOOK OF ALDRICH ACREAGE Mapguest Expedia ~r*~ Image 1 GENERAL INFORMATION Area: 150 Beaverton, Aloha Status: Pending Sale List Price: $158,000 TGuid: 6241F/6 Sold Price: $ Mis Number: 6084057 SellerDisc: EXEMPT Zoning: DOM/CDOM: 17/17 County: WASHINGTON TaxIDNo.: R0160587 Listing Date: 09119/2006 Ele.Sch: ERROL HASSELL Taxes: $0.00 OList Price: $158,000 MidSch: MOUNTAIN VIEW LandPropTp: RESID Expired Date: 11 SrHiSch: ALOHA Pend Date: 11 LAND INFORMATION Lot Desc: Present Use RESIDNC Waterfront: OTHER Lot Dim: 4967 SF Topography: Rd frontage: LotRange: 3K-4,999 Soil Type: Rd Surface: PAVED Acres: Perctest: Landlease: N AddParcels: AddParcelsDesc: View: TERRITR LimRep: N River/Lake: ManufHseOk: CC&R: y Avail: SALE OtherDisc: SoilTypeClass: Escrow: Fidelity Nat Title http://us.f302.maii.yahoo.com/ym/ShowLetter?box=Inbox&MsgId=2674 71755534 2112... 12/5/2006 Yahoo! Mail - robruedy@yahoo.com ti Page I of 2 ey--k131T V ~Q1 M A I L Print - Close Window Subject: Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 09:13:33 -0800 From: "Peter Balzola <pbalzola@pru-nw.com> To: "Rob Ruedy" <robruedy@yahoo.com> http'//transactionnw com/ASPEngine/attachments/3B9A68D44BE64B8099B3315E23A25D48 email.htm HTML Attachment Peter and Cynthia Balzola 603-684-2182 pbalzola@pru-nw.com www.balzolaproperties.co Mls Number: 6084063 LOTS AND LAND List Price: $158,000 Status: Pending Sale Address: 17380 SW Minnie S Cit /Zi Code:Aloha, 97007 ` PubRmks: Direct: Hart to Bany. Left on 173rd Right on SW Minnie Ct VTour: Legal: LOT 4 NOEL'S OVERLOOK OF ALDRICH ACREAGE Mapquest Expedla Image 1 GENERAL INFORMATION Area: 150 Beaverton, Aloha Status: Pending Sale List Price: $158,000 TGuid: 6241F/6 Sold Price: $ Mls Number: 6084063 SellerDisc: EXEMPT Zoning: DOM/CDOM: 17117 County: WASHINGTON TaxIONo.: R0160587 Listing Date: 09/19/2006 Ele.Sch: ERROL HASSELL Taxes: $0.00 OList Price: $158,000 MidSch: MOUNTAIN VIEW LandPropTp: RESID Expired Date: SrHiSch: ALOHA Pend Date: LAND INFORMATION Lot Desc: Present Use RESIDNC Waterfront: Lot Dim: 4142 SF Topography: Rd frontage: LotRange: 3KA,999 Soil Type: Rd Surface: PAVED Acres: Perctest: Landlease: N AddParcels: AddParcelsDesc: View: TERRITR LimRep: N River/Lake: ManufHseOk: CC&R: y Avail: SALE OtherDisc: SoilTypeClass: Escrow: http://us.f302.mail.yahoo.com/ym/ShowLetter?box=Inbox&MsgId=2902 71808104 2113... 12/5/2006 Yahoo! Mail - robruedy@yaboo.com Page •1 of 2 u ~y r✓X W(6 /T A,~30 f M A 1 L Print - Close Window C3 ° 4) Subject: Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 09:IS:35 -0800 From: "Peter Balzola" <pbalzola@pru-nw.com> To: "Rob Ruedy" <robruedy@yahoo.com> http://transactionnw.com/ASPEn.gine/attachments/47282DAF12B7483DB656175740EBD432 email.htm - HTML Attachment Peter and Cynthia Balzola I FAF 503-684-2182 pbalzola@pru-nw.com , i www.balzolaproperties.co Mls Number: 6093635 LOTS AND LAND List Price: $165,000 Status: Pending Sale Address: 0 NW Albemarle t ` r yam' C ity/ZipC ode: Portland, 97210 , PubRmks: Tucked into a comer between #419 and #485 NW Albemarle this 'C Rare NW lot is perfect for a contemporary'dwell-style' home. some view towards the North - go see what they're doing toward the end of NW Marlborough - similar conditions and lot size. Direct: Up Albemarle past NW Ariel VTour: Legal: KINGS HTS a RPLT; LOT 6 BLOCK 28 Mapquest Expedia Image 1 GENERAL INFORMATION Area: 148 Portland West, Status: Pending Sale List Price: $165,000 Raleigh Hills TGuid: 5961C/5 Sold Price: $ Mls Number: 6093635 SellerDisc: Zoning: R7 DOM/CDOM: 19119 County: MULTNOMAH TaxlDNo.: R198341 Listing Date: 10/19/2006 Ele.Sch: CHAPMAN Taxes: $1,249.82 OList Price: $165,000 MidSch: WEST SYLVAN LandPropTp: RESID Expired Date: SrHiSch: LINCOLN Pend Date: LAND INFORMATION Lot Desc: TREES Present Use RAWLAND Waterfront: Lot Dim: 4,450 sq It Topography: Rd frontage: LotRange: 3K4,999 Soil Type: Rd Surface: PAVED Acres: 0.10 Perctest: Landlease: AddParcels: AddParcelsOesc: View: SEASONL LimRep: N River/Lake: ManufHseOk: CCBR: N Avail: SALE OtherDisc: SoilTypeClass: Escrow: Chicago - K.Hays http://us.f3O2.mail.yahoo.com/ym/ShowLetter?box=Inbox&Msgld=3026 71851438 2114... 12/5/2006 Yahoo! Mail - robruedy~ayahoo.com Page 1 of 3 .&14C K:> MAIL Print -Close Window Subject: #6071634 Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 09:08:47 -0800 From: "Peter Balzola" <pbalzola@pru-nw.com> To: "Rob Ruedy" <robruedy@yahoo.com> HTML Attachment Peter and Cynthia Balzola r 503-684-2182 pbalzola@pru-nw.com ` www.balzolaproperties.co . Mls Number: 6069408 LOTS AND LAND List Price: $175,000 Status: Pending Sale Address: 2800 NW ARIEL City/ZipCode: Portland, 97210 z' PubRmks: Steep uphill lot on south side of NW Ariel Terrace at NW Albemarle. Direct: up WESTOVER left on MARLBOROUGH right to ALBEMARLE left to ARIEL TERRA VTour. " Legal: KINGS HTS & RPLT; LOT 10 BLOCK 27 tr ' Mapauest Exoedia " _..c. _ ..a Image 1*... GENERAL INFORMATION Area: 148 portland West, Status: Pending Sale List Price: $175,000 Raleigh Hills TGuid: 596/C/5 Sold Price: $ Mls Number: 6069408 SellerDisc: DSCLOSUR Zoning: R-7 QOM/CDOM: 70170 County: MULTNOMAH TaxIDNo.: R198328 Listing Date: 07109/2006 Ele.Sch: CHAPMAN Taxes: $604.13 OList Price: $175,000 MidSch: LandPropTp: RESID Expired Date: SrHiSch: TIGARD Pend Date: LAND INFORMATION Lot Desc: WOODED Present Use RAWLAND Waterfront: Lot Dim: 55 X 81 Topography: Rd frontage: LotRange: 3K-4,999 Soil Type: Rd Surface: PAVED Acres: 0.10 Perctest: Landlease: AddParcels: N AddParcelsDesc: View: MNTAIN, SEASONL LimRep: N River/Lake: ManufHseOk: CC&R: N Avail: SALE OtherDisc: SELLER LIC. RE BKR. SoilTypeClass: SILT OVER BEDROCK Escrow: Fidelity National http://us.f302.mail.yahoo.com/ym/ShowLetter?box=Inbox&MsgId=2613 71728999 2112... 12/512006 PROCEDURE FOR BALLOT MEASURE 37 oCOMPENSATION CLAIM City of Tigard Permit Center 13125 SW Hall Mud, 7t~zn~ OR 97223 Phones 503.639.4171 Fax: 503.598.1960 The claim must be in writing and include the information listed below. The claim shall not be considered filed until all of the requirements of the procedure are met. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Case No.: Application Accepted By: Date: Date Determined Complete: Deposit: 1000 (Deposit to be refunded if claim is determined to be valid. If claim is denied and ultimatelydeterrnined invalid, the claimant shall reimburse the City for the costs the arty incurs in processing the claim. If reimbursement exceeds the deposit, the claimant shall pay any additional amount within 30 days of a demand by the City for frill payment If costs are less than the de sit, the difference will be refunded to the claimant IDENTIFICATION OF AFFECTED PROPERTY ~7 Property Street Address/Location(s): U AU'~ig 1 CCy{~ , L~~ !Z4~ Tax Map & Tax Lot N (s): 2- ~f7 GCd ~ Subdivision Lot # (s): CLAIMANT INFORMATION Property Owners/Claimants/Deed Holders*: Address: 1 ()U72~ '(AN!aju)5- Phone: ~3J ~LU~rr y97 Gty/State:--- ~ A-Z zip (Attach list if more than one) ; Date Claimant Acquired Property. b?w'cx-~Tw b3 tc 1,C) Date Family Member of Claimant Acquired Property (if applicable):- Names and Relationships of Family Members that are Previous Owners Cif applicable): (Attach list if additional space is needed) Lien/SecurityInterest Holders of the affedted property CZ-~-~U~ Tesv4.~ YYto'~ Y ~h~Cr; Address: Phone: City/State: Zip: (Attach list if more than one) When the owner and the applicant are different people, all owners of the affected property must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form. If the affected property is owned by two or more persons and not all owners seek compensation, all owners who do not seek compensation shall sign a waiver of the right to compensation. Fc.. 586• 8 ROB E , . , EDY 14185 SW 1Q0TWNVE X37224 495T 24 680/1230 3272. TIGARD, OF,, 503-820 5997 > ~ ~Z ~ b oi769o1726'!; ~ •r,.,•r ~ E' _ .Date. lfrder of DoGan ~s na. t O~~mi a a _ f fir RECEIVED DEC 0 1 2006 CITY OF TIGARD BUILDING DIVISION Attachment 2 (b) CITY OF TIGARD ORDINANCE NO.04-1~5 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 04-12 PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS FOR ' COMPENSATION UNDER 2004 BALLOT MEASURE 37, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 1.20 TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, on November 23, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 04-02 without incorporating the written Exhibit A that had been distributed and directed that a revised Exhibit A be prepared to include specific changes; and WHEREAS;' a revised Exhibit A has been prepared that includes the changes requested by the Council; now, therefore; THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Ordinance 04-12 is hereby amended by adding an Exhibit A to that ordinance in the form of the attached Exhibit A. The Tigard Municipal Code is consequently amended as provided in Ordinance 04-12 and Exhibit A. SECTION 2: Because this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of the health, safety and welfare of the City, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately on passage. PASSED: By 0-.')Dr) vote of all Council members present after being read by number and rtle only, this /q LAday of 'J-,)9C'Qrn.2r, 2004. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of , 2004. 4CraigUsen, Mayor Approved as to fo V ty Attorney ORDINANCE No. 04- Page 1 EXHIBIT A TO CITY OF TIGARD ORDINANCE NO. t" 2q, PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION UNDER 2004 BALLOT MEASURE 37, INCLUDING A PROVISION FOR ACTION BY NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 1.20 TO THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE. Chapter 1.20 Compensation for Reduction in Property Value 1.20.010 Purpose The purpose bf this Chapter is to provide procedures and standards for claims for compensation Y. made pursuant to 2004 Measure 37. 1.20.020 Definitions As used in this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise:. ",Affected property" means the private real property that is alleged to have suffered a reduction in fair market value as result of the City's regulation restricting the use of that property and for which a property owner. seeks compensation for the reduction in value. "Claimant" means the property owner who submits a claim for compensation. under Measure 37 in accordance with Section 1.20.030. "Decision Maker" means the City Council or any person, board, commission, or other entity to whom the Council has delegated authority to make decisions on Measure 37 claims. "Regulation" shall mean a provision of the City's comprehensive plan, Community Development Code and transportation ordinances. "Restricts the use of property" means prohibiting -a particular use of the property or making that use only permissible under certain conditions. Regulations requiring or setting fees to be charged are not restrictions on the use of property. "Manager" means City Manager or designee. 1.20.030 Claims A. A property owner wishing to make a claim against the City under Measure 37 shall first submit a written claim to the City. A claim under Measure must be in writing and include: ORDINANCE No. 04- Page 2 EXI-11BIT A TO CITY OF TIGARD ORDINANCE N0. 0q, _3 PROVIDING A PROCESS FOR CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION UNDER 2004 BALLOT MEASURE 37, INCLUDING A PROVISION FOR ACTION BY NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 1.20 TO TI-IF- TIGARD MUNici?AL CODE. Chapter 1.20 Compensation for Reduction in Property Value 1.20.010 Purpose The purpose of this Chapter is to provide procedures and standards for claims for compensation made pursuant to 2004 Measure 37. 1.20.020 Definitions As used in this chapter, unless the context requires otherwise: "Affected property" means the private real property that is alleged to have suffered a reduction in fair market value as result of the City's regulation restricting the use of that property and for which a property owner seeps compensation for the reduction in value. "Claimant" means the property owner who submits a claim for compensation. under Measure 37 in accordance with Section 1.20.030. "Decision Maker" means the City Council or any person, board, commission, or other entity to whom the Council has delegated authority to mare decisions on Measure 37 claims. "Regulation" shall mean a provision of the City's comprehensive plan, Community Development Code and transportation ordinances. "Restricts the use of property" means prohibiting - a particular use of the property or making that use only permissible under certain conditions. Regulations requiring or setting fees to be charged are not restrictions on the use of property. "Manager' 'means City Manager or designee. 1.20.030 Claims A. A property owner wishing to make a claim against the City.-under Measure 37 shall first submit a written claim to the City. A claim under Measure must be in writing and include: ORDINANCE No. 04- Page 2 1. Identification of the affected property. Identification may be by street address, subdivision lot number, tax lot number, or any other information that identifies the property. 2. The name and contact information of the person making the claim, the date the Claimant acquired the property, and, if applicable, the date that a family member of Claimant acquired the property and the names and relationships of family members that are previous owners. 3. A list of all persons with an ownership interest in or a lien on the property. 4. Identification of the regulation that is alleged to restrict the use of the affected property and a statement describing how the restriction affects the value of the property. 5. A statement whether the Claimant prefers compensation or a waiver, suspension or modification of the regulation, and a statement describing the extent to which the regulation would need to be waived, suspended or modified to avoid the need for compensation. A description of the proposed use must be provided. 6. The amount claimed as compensation and documentation supporting the amount. The documentation shall include a market analysis, an appraisal, or other documentation at least equivalent to a market analysis. 7. The name and contact information of the Claimant's authorized representative or representatives, if applicable. 1.20.040 Notice The City shall provide notice of the hearing required by Section 1.20.070 to all owners of the property, lien holders and security interest holders, record owners 'of property within 500 feet of the property, recognized community participation organizations for the area the property is located, and anyone who has requested notice at least 7 days before the hearing. The notice shall identify the property, state the date; time and place of the hearing, state the amount of the clahn or statement describing the extent to which the regulations would need to be waived or suspended, the City contact person and phone number, advise of the availability of the staff report and summarize the hearing procedures and nature of the claim. Failure of any person to receive notice or any defect in the notice shall not invalidate any action taken or decision made at the hearing. 1.20.050 Staff Report City staff shall prepare a report analyzing the claim. The staff report may be reviewed by the Community Development Director, Finance Director, and Manager before being submitted to the Decision Maker. ORDINANCE No. 04- Page 3 - Tht staff report shall be submitted to the Decision Maker, mailed to the Claimant, and made available to the_public at least 7 days before the public.hearing required by Section 1.20.070. 1.20.060. Decision Maker Proceedings The Decision Maker shall hold a public hearing on the claim. The public hearing. should nonnally be set within 150 days of submission of the claim but may be set at any time. The Decision Maker may hold an executive session on the claim. at any time. 1.20.070 Pimblie Hearing The Claimant and any other person shall be provided a reasonable opportunity to present evidence and argument at the public hearing. The Decision Maher may limit the duration of testimony. - 1.20.080 Decision Maker Decision In deciding the claim, the Decision Maker may take any ofthe following actions: 1. Deny the claim. based on any one or more of the following findings: a. The regulation does not restrict the use of the private real property, b. - The fair market value of the property is not reduced by the passage or enforcement of the regulation. C. The claim was not timely filed. d. The Claimant is not the current property owner. ' C. The Claimant or family member of Claimant was not the property owner at the time the regulation was adopted. f.. The regulation is a historically and commonly recognized nuisance law or a law regulating pornography or nude dancing. .9. The regulation is required by federal law. ' h. The regulation protects public health and safety. i. The City is not the entity responsible for payment. The City is not responsible if the challenged law, rule, ordinance, resolution, .goal .or other enactment was not enacted or enforced by the City. ORDINANCE No. 04- , Page 4 AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: April 24, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-] U DICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDER A BALLOT MEASURE 37 CLAIM ROBERT E. RUEDY (M372006-00006) A request for compensation or waiver of development regulations for property located at 14185 SW 100`' Avenue (1.14 acres) This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM No. 8 Date: April 24, 2007 This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record and is openly available to all members of the public. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. PLEASE PRINT Proponent - (Speaking In Favor Opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. tcT-V Alit. 11 7,5"~.J I I.eiZ (6&9-0) q I CA-1 620 5957 9 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. &e►~ bavrs / r 'o >g Sto 13 Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Message rage i or z Craig Prosser - Fwd: M372006-00007 E&V DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM (Forwarded from Sydney@CityHall) (Foowarded from CouncilMail) SUPPL ENTAL PACKET From: council mail councilmail FOR ' To: Craig Prosser; Liz Newton DATE OF Ni~E1'IN Date: 4/24/2007 3:47 PM Subject: Fwd: M372006-00007 E&V DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM (Forwarded from Sydney@CityHall) (Frowarded from CouncilMail) ID 7 TUALATIN PERT www.tualatinriverkeepers.org April 24, 2007 Tigard City Council 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 RE: M372006-00007 E&V DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY COMPENSATION CLAIM Dear Mayor Dirksen and City Council, Tualatin Riverkeepers requests that you deny all claims for compensation waiver of regulations under Measure 37. The purpose of Tigard Development Code 18.775, the sensitive lands regulations from which the applicant seeks relief, is clearly stated - to protect public health and safety and to comply with the federal Clean Water Act. Measure 37 and Tigard Municipal Code Section 1.20.080 state that Measure 37 claims may be denied if "The regulation protects public health and safety" or if "The regulation is required by federal law. Tigard Development Code 18.775.010 F. makes the purpose of this regulation plain and clear: Sensitive land areas are designated as such to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the community through the regulation of these sensitive land areas. Thus, this claim, and any other claim for relief from Tigard's sensitive lands code 18.775 should be denied in order to protect public health and safety. Allowing this claim will set a precedent that could open up the City to future M37 claims based upon sensitive lands. Further, 18.775.010 states that" The regulations of this chapter are intended to protect the beneficial uses of water within the Tualatin River Basin in accordance with CWS "Design and Construction Standards as adopted file://C:\Documents and Settings\Craig.000\Local Settings\Temp\GW) 0000 LHTM 4/24/2007 Message rage L or February 7, 2000. Compliance with the Design and Construction Standards is required by the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between Clean Water Services and the City of Tigard. Such compliance is a condition of the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Permit issued by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality under the Federal Clean Water Act. Failure to comply with this permit is a violation of federal law, thus this claim should be denied. By violating this permit, CWS is liable for both civil and criminal penalties. The IGA with CWS holds the City liable for any fines caused by the City's violations. According to TMC Section 1.20.080 a claim or waiver of regulation may be denied if the application is incomplete. The applicant failed to supply the required supporting documentation (market analysis and appraisal) for the claim of $398,150. The City should not subject this Council to hearings for incomplete applications. This claim and waiver should thus be denied for being incomplete. The City would be setting an undesirable precedent in waving regulations that protect public health and safety. Accepting incomplete Measure 37 claims such as this also subjects this council and City staff to unnecessary burden. Waiving regulations that ensure the City's compliance with the federal Clean Water Act harms our natural resources and puts the City at risk for criminal and civil penalties. For these reasons this claim for compensation and waiver of regulations under Measure 37 should be denied. Sincerely, Brian Wegener Watershed Watch Coordinator Tualatin Riverkeepers 12360 SW Main St -Suite 100 Tigard, OR 97223 office: (503)620-7507 cell: (503)936-7612 Website: www.tualatinriverkeepers.org file://C:\Documents and Settings\Craig.000\Local Settings\Temp\GW)OOOO1.HTM 4/24/2007 City of Tigard, Measure 37 Land Use Hearing SUPPL M N AL P timony from Robert E. Ruedy FOR :;1 00 April 24 , 2007 jvln 0,_ (DATE OF MEETING) RE: Measure 37 Claim #2006-00006 by Robert E. Ruedy Dear Mayor Dirkson, Tigard City Council members, our Tigard City Attorney, and planning department staff, I wish to testify in favor as a proponent of my subject Measure 37 claim to retain all land use options available to me at the time my original purchase or moment of initial ownership. When this subject property was originally obtained, it was accompanied by certain land use expectations. Any negating restriction and/or regulation pertaining to the subsequent use of that property by this owner, shall be either compensated at fair market price for my loss of that use, or those negating land use restrictions and/or regulations should be waived and released from their encumbrances upon the said property and its inevitable use or uses. The will of the majority of voters have created this Private Property Rights law for its most loyal "long term" citizens and taxpayers through Measure 37, and I hereby wish to reflect my full support of its implementation. With regard to this specific referenced claim noted above, as is stated in the "Public Hearing Notice" provided to the claimant 7 days prior to the hearing (see Exhibit A): Under the "Zoning Designation:" section is stated that "The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types"... and "A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally." Yet in the "Affected Regulations" section previous in this "Public Hearing Notice" is stated "Furthermore, the claimant provides no specific development plan, but instead offers a list of development options." It appears to me that for this private property owner to retain all available land use options applicable at the time of their original purchase, that objective requires latitude in application of the land use alternatives available at that point in time of the original purchase. Also, with regard to the "Affected Regulation:" section stating "No specific code provisions are cited", this statement is grossly in error as the supplemental information provided with the Measure 37 Claim was approximately 1 inch in thickness and had significant specifics as to the land use and other regulatory changes and issues that were both highlighted and red-lined marked-up. Within that supplemental information and support documentation is a comprehensive State of Oregon Measure 37 Claim application, there is also an 18-point table of information specifically stating the exact land use regulation chapters, sections and sub-sections specific to this property and its Measure 37 Claim issues. If any clarification is needed, it would be to state that "this claimant has requested waiver of ALL land use regulation and/or restriction that would negatively affect the subject property, or its land use relationship to the city and/or region, since the owner's original purchase date in December 1992." With regard to the "City Council Item Summary" for April 24, 2007, a few minor corrections are necessary: 1. In the first paragraph, the last sentence should be corrected to read "The property, located south of SW McDonald Street and west of SW 100th Avenue, was acquired by the claimant on December 7, 1992." 14185/Measure 37 Claim/ Page 1 of 5 Rev. 0 City of Tigard, Measure 37 Land Use Hearing Testimony from Robert E. Ruedy April 24th, 2007 2. In the second paragraph, for clarification, the last sentence should read "Proposed changes to the site are indicated by various site plans included in the applicant's materials (Exhibit B), and the claimant has reflected that he may also pursue other land development plans or configurations, and/or uses as allowed by the City of Tigard and other agency land use regulations in place in December 1992." Additionally, "Exhibit B" was not provided to this claimant for review and verification as to its comprehensive contents. Request is made for its review, comment and inclusive changes by this claimant prior to it being included in formal public record. 3. In the fifth paragraph, towards the clarification of the claim, the last two sentences "However, in his submittal materials, the claimant lists items such as street improvement requirements (widths, cul-de-sac radii, hammer-head dimensions) which could marginally limit the available property for the proposed single-family scenario. Development of single-family detached dwellings in the R-12 zone at the time of acquisition would be substantially similar to development under the current code." would benefit from a final two sentences that would read; "Hence, the claimant has proposed a claim with adequate latitude to allow consideration of all R-12 zoning land uses at the time of his original purchase which include, but are not limited to, single-family attached, single-family detached, multi- family, and all other uses allowed both with and/or without condition. These uses may vary from current code, but will be fully explored at the time of Development Review Application by the claimant, whenever that may occur in the future." With regard to the "Staff Report to the City Council for the City of Tigard, Oregon" a number of clarifications are needed: 1. Under the "Affected Regulation:" section, the last three sentences reading "No specific code provisions are cited. Furthermore, the claimant provides no specific development plan, but instead offers a list of development options. Because the compensation claimed is for loss of six single family lots, staff has limited its review to that scenario" should be followed by but the city agrees to review this claimants 1992 land use options at the time of Development Review Application, whenever that may occur in the future." 2. Section III - Background needs a couple minor corrections in the first sentence which should read "The subject 1.14-acre parcel is located south of SW McDonald Street and west of SW 100th Avenue and is developed with a single-family residence built in 1954." 3. Section III - Applicable Criteria and Findings should be changed to reflect "Section IV - Applicable Criteria and Findings" since Section III is already established as "Background" 4. Corrected "Section IV - Applicable Criteria and Findings" sub-section D, paragraph 3, sentence 1 should read "Because the claimant does not identify specific standards and does not provide information to substantiate the compensation (which I strongly disagree with), there is some question as to whether the claimant has provided sufficient detail to assess the claim." 5. Corrected "Section IV - Applicable Criteria and Findings" sub-section E, paragraph 2, sentence 1, stating "The claimant did not submit a statement describing the extent to which the regulations would need to be waived, suspended or modified to avoid the need for compensation", needs to be qualified to present the perspective that the land use regulations and/or restrictions need to be comprehensively waived to mitigate the compensation requested in the specifically referenced City of Tigard claim filing. However, latitude has been provided within the claim for partial compensation in lieu of partial comprehensive waiver. 14185/Measure 37 Claim/ Page 2 of 5 Rev. 0 City of Tigard, Measure 37 Land Use Hearing Testimony from Robert E. Ruedy April 24th, 2007 6. Corrected "Section IV - Applicable Criteria and Findings" sub-section E, paragraph 2, sentence 1, should additionally state that the waiver is to be all inclusive. The subject claimant further clarifies that the "Development Review Application" and other land use and development processes in place at the time of the original 1992 purchase will be allowed to be used for the cradle-to-grave process of any land use and development processes related to this Measure 37 Claim property, unless they are more restrictive (or less simplified) than is currently in place at the time of final "Development Review Application" submission. 7. Corrected "Section IV - Applicable Criteria and Findings" sub-section E, paragraph 3, title sentence and bullet points reflect only a portion of the development options available to the subject property. The claimant disagrees with the City Staffs choice of limited use options described for the private property claim, and wishes instead to maintain all development options and scenarios available in 1992. Upon "Development Review Application" submission by the claimant, the city will then be able to reflect on the land use applicability to the proposed land development based on 1992 land use regulations and restrictions in place at that time. 8. Corrected "Section IV - Applicable Criteria and Findings" sub-section F, paragraph 1, sentence 2, states that "The claimant has not provided an appraisal or market analysis of the subject property to support the claim." But the claimant disagrees with this statement reflecting that there were property compensation examples provided in the supplemental documentation submitted to the City regarding the claim. Furthermore, City Staff confirmed their receipt of this specific information, but that is unfortunately not reflected in this Staff Report for the resolution of this Measure 37 claim. 9. There is no "Section reference for what should be "Section V - Decision Options" on page 3 of 6. This should be corrected to accurately reflect the section. 10. Corrected "Section V - Decision Options", sub-section 1, item a, paragraph 1, sentences 2 and 3 state that "The claim is based on the loss of six lots for allowed uses. Yet a brief staff analysis shows that 12 to 13 lots for single family use may be allowed under current standards." The subject claimant was reflected by City staff at the time of his original purchase in 1992 that 13 units (including the existing single-family residence) would be allowed to be placed on the property, and pre-application conferences of his and others substantiated that use, if that was the development choice of the private property owner when they eventually chose to file their "Development Review Application". When the claimant, prior to this Measure 37 claim filing, contacted City staff in person, the only confirmation that City staff was able to provide was that six units (in addition to the existing one) would be allowed to be constructed under current (2006) land use codes, regulations, and restrictions. This is what prompted the Measure 37 claim filing for the land use impacts subsequent to the original 1992 purchase of this subject property. 11. Corrected "Section V - Decision Options", sub-section 1, item b, paragraph 1, sentence1, states that "The claimant has not submitted information to support the proposed compensation." But again, as noted previously in item 8 above, the claimant disagrees with this statement reflecting that there was property compensation examples provided in the supplemental documentation submitted to the City regarding the claim. Furthermore, City Staff confirmed their receipt of this specific information, but that is unfortunately not reflected in this Staff Report for the resolution of this Measure 37 claim. 14185/Measure 37 Claim/ Page 3 of 5 Rev. 0 i City of Tigard, Measure 37 Land Use Hearing Testimony from Robert E. Ruedy April 24th, 2007 12. Corrected "Section V - Decision Options", sub-section 1, item b, paragraph 1, sentences 2 and 3, states that "The claimant has not provided information on which to base a reduction in fair market value as determined by the difference between the market value of the property as is with current regulations and the market value of the same property without the regulations adopted since the property was acquired that reduce the value of the property. Therefore, the claim could be denied." Unfortunately, this scenario is only possible through first a denial of a submitted "Development Review Application" under 1992 based land use regulations, and then a subsequent 2007 based "Development Review Application" under 2007 based land use regulations. It is my understanding that this is the post- December 2006 method of filing a Measure 37 Claim and therefore it does not apply to this Measure 37 Claim or its decision options. 13. Corrected "Section V- Decision Options", sub-section 1, item h, paragraph 1, sentence 1, states that "The regulations in 18.510 have the purpose to preserve neighborhood livability and encourage construction of affordable housing." In the event this claimant decides to develop the property under his Measure 37 Claim waivers, or otherwise, he would hope to maintain a similar affordable housing position that is being currently incorporated within the development to the south adjacent to his property. 14. Corrected "Section V - Decision Options", sub-section 1, item 1.3, paragraph 1, sentence 1, should be corrected to read; "Staff notes that it appears that the claimant's proposed 13-lot and/or unit development under the present zoning could be approved and suggests that a development plan be filed to determine to what extent the regulations, in fact, affect the property." 15. Corrected "Section V - Decision Options", sub-section 1, item 1.3, paragraph 1, last sentence, reflects that "The waiver would require the claimant to apply for land use under the substantive standards in effect as of December 7, 1992, and use the current development review process for the type of application made." The Measure 37 claimant vehemently disagrees with this City staff statement and requests that the statement should be modified to state that the Measure 37 Claim land use waiver is to be all inclusive, and that the "Development Review Application" and other land use and development processes in place at the time of the original 1992 purchase will be allowed to be used for the cradle- to-grave process of any land use and development processes related to this Measure 37 Claim property, unless they are more restrictive (or less simplified) than is currently in place at the time of final "Development Review Application" submission. This was requested in the original Measure 37 Claim and supporting documents, and must remain a part of this claim. 16. Corrected "Section V - Decision Options", sub-section 1, item 1.4, paragraph 1, first sentence, again states that "No specific regulation has been cited by the claimant", this statement is similar to that in the previous "Affected Regulation" section, and remains grossly in error as the supplemental information provided with the Measure 37 Claim was approximately 1 inch in thickness and had significant specifics as to the land use and other regulatory changes and issues that were both highlighted and red-lined marked- up. Within that supplemental information and support documentation is a comprehensive State of Oregon Measure 37 Claim application specifically referring to these regulations. There is also an 18-point table of information specifically stating the exact land use regulation chapters, sections and sub-sections specific to this property and its Measure 37 Claim issues. If any clarification is needed, it would be to state that "this claimant has requested waiver of ALL land use regulation and/or restriction that 14185/Measure 37 Claim/ Page 4 of 5 Rev. 0 City of Tigard, Measure 37 Land Use Hearing Testimony from Robert E. Ruedy April 24th, 2007 would negatively affect the subject property, or its land use relationship to the city and/or region, since the owner's original purchase date in December 1992." 17. Corrected "Section V - Decision Options", sub-section 1, item 1.4, paragraph 1, second sentence, should be corrected to read; "Staff notes that it appears that the claimant's proposed 13-lot and/or unit development under the present zoning could be approved and suggests that a development plan be filed to determine to what extent the regulations, in fact, affect the property." 18. "Section IV - Conclusion" should be changed to reflect "Section VI - Conclusion" since Section IV and V have previously been recognized as other section titles. 19. Corrected "Section VI - Conclusion", paragraph 1, last sentence, refers to "The particular terms of the waiver are described in the attached ordinance." But this claimant is unable to find said "particular terms" and requests that they be made available for review, comment and implementation within the ordinance prior to it being executed into formal public record. With regard to the "City of Tigard, Oregon, Tigard City Council Ordinance No. 07- " draft, a number of clarifications are needed: 1. In the Ordinance Description at the top of Page 1, EAST needs to be changed to WEST of SW 100th Avenue 2. "Section 1:" references "Exhibit B", but this exhibit has not been provided to, nor reviewed by this claimant for its contents as being comprehensively provided to the council. Request is made for its review, comment and inclusive changes by this claimant prior to it being included in formal public record. 3. "Section 3:" EAST needs to be changed to WEST of SW 100th Avenue It is requested that city staff comprehensively review and refer to all information provided within this and other Measure 37 Claim filings, and their subsequent land use applications when submitted, prior to forming final staff reports, land use opinions, land use approvals, and/or submissions to other City governed bodies. Thank you for your time and consideration of this testimony. Respectfully submitted, Robert E. Ruedy 14185 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, OR 97224-4951 (503) 620-5997 Attachment(s): "Exhibit A" 14185/Measure 37 Claim/ Page 5 of 5 Rev. 0 Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 24, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Fast Quarter Council Goal Update Prepared By. oanne Ben on Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: 11 - ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Progress report on the Council goals for the first quarter of 2007. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review the update. ' KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached are brief summaries of the progress made on the goals adopted by Council in January 2007. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A. CITY COUNCIL GOALS Goals are identified throughout the document. ATTACHMENT LIST - First Quarter Goal Update Report FISCAL NOTES N/A. iAadm\cirycouncil\council agenda item summaries\2007\ais for 1st quarter goal update 070424.doc4/ 16/07 2007 Quarterly Goal Update P-41 a The City Council meets annually to set out its goals for the coming year. For 2007, we have focused tasks that should be done in 2007 to lay the foundation for progress, „a in the future. We would also like to acknowledge on-going tasks, programs, and projects that serve and protect Tigard citizens. These work items are in process and do not require specific Council action. Examples include obtaining a permanent and secure water source for the City, greenspace acquisition, fiscal viability, public safety, and library services. 1. Comprehensive Plan a. Updating the blueprint for the City b. Public Input 1St Quarter Update: a. Updating the blueprint for the City • Completed and published Tigard 2007.• A Comprehensive Plan resource report. • Transitioned Tigard Beyond Tomorrow vision process to the Comprehensive Plan Update. • Reviewed Comprehensive Plan goal and policy "concepts" for "Trees and Other Vegetation" with the Tigard Tree Board. • Made Transportation Growth Management (TGM) Grant Application to update the City's Transportation System Plan (TSP). b. Public Input • Scheduled and held joint CCAC and Planning Commission work sessions on Comprehensive Plan Goals, Policies and Action Measures for Tigard Downtown; Planning Commission subsequently held a public hearing and has recommended adoption to Council. • Established Citizen Involvement Program, which includes the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI). • "Kicked-off' policy phase of Comprehensive Plan Update, which involves developing goals, policies and action measures; public Open Houses to be held on April 18 and 21. 2. Continue to Support Implementation of the Downtown Plan a. Pursue funding for projects b. Prepare for business /developer recruitment c. Promote Tigard identity d. Promote community fabric in the downtown i. Business Development ii. Public Square iii. Farmers Market iv. Arts & Culture 1St Quarter Update: 2a. Pursue funding for projects: Staff received notification from Metro in March that the City was awarded a grant in the amount $2.5 million for redesign and construction of Main Street in Downtown. Approximately 1/2 of Main Street (railroad to the SW entrance) will be fully reconstructed with grant funds. Improvements will include the street and sidewalks, lighting, landscaping, a revised Council Goal Update 1 parking and sidewalk layout, and be constructed to sustainable design standards. 2b. Prepare for business /developer recruitment: Staff has started contacting developers to familiarize them with the status of the Downtown, upcoming improvements, and potential opportunities. A newsletter is being updated on-line, and will be provided with other relevant materials for distribution. Business and key land owners in Downtown have committed to being part of the Fanno Creek Park and Downtown Plaza master planning effort. Being closely connected to this process will inform them of potential opportunities for public / private partnerships. The CCAC is looking at ways in which the City can market its message more effectively. One of the key elements is to provide relevant information to the news media for local coverage. An effort will be made to place graphics and stories about the evolving design of Downtown such as Main Street, Park or Public Plaza in the newspapers. 2c. Promote Tigardard i Most of staff's effort to create an "identity" in Downtown has been linked to projects as identified in the Downtown Plan and Urban Renewal Plan. These include the creation of a pervasive open space system in Downtown including Fanno Creek Park and Plaza, the promotion and construction of "sustainable design" projects such as Burnham Street design and Main Street, and the formation of design guidelines which will create the type and character of place envisioned. Refining the marketing message about Downtown will be made in Cityscape, on-line, and in the news media. 2di. Business Development: Because attention has been focused on project implementation, there has been little effort to promote new business in the Downtown. Staff is instituting regular monthly meetings in Downtown to establish better communications with Downtown businesses. It is anticipated that these meetings will provide an opportunity for local businesses to raise concerns. It is also expected that new liaison with the Chamber of Commerce and the upcoming reconstruction of Main Street will stimulate thinking about how to promote new businesses in Downtown. 2dii. Public Square: Walker Macy, landscape architects, was awarded the contract to provide a master plan for Fanno Creek Park and Plaza in Downtown. The siting, programming and design of the Plaza will bring community-wide attention to this project over the next 6 to 9 months. 2diii. Farmer's Market: Currently the Farmer's Market is located in the Washington Square area with some interest in locating a mid-week market in Downtown. No decisions have been made. The idea of a public market as a programmed use in the Downtown Plaza will be evaluated as part of the Fanno Creek Park Master Plan project. 2div. Arts & Culture: There has been some consideration within the Downtown Streetscape Plan of the placement of public art. This topic will be raised again during the discussion about the public plaza and its environment. The topic will also resurface when discussion about a future Performing Arts Center is raised. The siting of a future Performing Arts Center will be considered as the development plan for Downtown evolves and becomes more specific. This is likely to occur over the next 1 to 2 years. Council Goal Update 2 3. Aggressively pursue funding to correct traffic congestion within the City a. Seek funding for 99W improvements b. Support the I-5 Connector c. Support Hwy 217 funding 1st Quarter Update: 3a: Seek funding for 99W improvements: Highway 99W carries over 50,000 vehicles per day, half of which is regional through traffic. This highway is currently overwhelmed by the existing traffic volumes. There are no significant parallel routes to this highway, and the traffic congestion will continue to worsen as traffic increases during the next few years. The intersections of Highway 99W with Hall Boulevard and Greenburg Road are bottlenecks that seriously hamper the smooth flow of traffic. At peak travel hours, cut-through traffic uses the City of Tigard's collector and arterial system to avoid the Highway 99W traffic congestion. This traffic adversely impacts the arterial and collector street system in the City. There are three significant projects that have been funded for improvements to Highway 99W. The projects are: • The TGM (Transportation and Growth Management) grant to prepare a Highway 99W corridor improvement and management plan • The Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street intersection project funded through the 3- cent local fuel tax • The Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W intersection improvements funded through Washington County's MSTIP program Highway 9911 Corridor Improvement and Management Plan The plan will identify projects and potential land use changes both aimed at alleviating traffic congestion and improving traffic circulation within the highway corridor through Tigard. Projects identified in the final plan will be prioritized for implementation through the City's Community Investment Program. Those projects that require joint effort from the City, county and state will be identified and partnerships will be sought for funding and implementation. The preparation of the plan began in mid-August 2006 and will be completed by the end of June 2007. The plan development process includes six tasks: Task 1: Project Management, Interagency Coordination and Public Involvement (ongoing for duration of the project - estimated as 11 months) Task 2: Existing Conditions, Plans and Policies (complete 2 months after Notice to Proceed) Task 3: Identify Needs, Opportunities and Constraints (complete 5 months after Notice to Proceed) Task 4: Alternatives Development (complete 7 months after Notice to Proceed) Task 5: Alternatives Evaluation (complete 9 months after Notice to Proceed) Task 6: Refinement/ Implementation (complete 11 months after Notice to Proceed) CumntStatur. The project has progressed through the existing conditions and needs, opportunities and constraints tasks. An open house meeting to present the findings for public comment was conducted on February 7, 2007. The development of alternatives is underway and will be reviewed by the Technical Advisory (TAC) and Citizen Advisory (CAC) Committees during the first two weeks in April. A second open house meeting to present the alternatives for public input and comment is scheduled for April 19, 2007 in Town Hall. The evaluation of alternatives will follow with review by the TAC and CAC and a third and final open house meeting on June 7, 2007, also in Town Hall. The Council Goal Update 3 plan is expected to be completed by the end of June 2007, and will be presented to Council for acceptance or adoption sometime during the summer months. Greenburg Goad/Hi,ghway 99W/Main Street Intersection Improvements The current level of service on Greenburg Road at Highway 99W is extremely poor, especially in the afternoon peak travel hours with vehicles waiting through multiple traffic cycles to clear the intersection. In addition, forecasts for Highway 99W along this area show it is well over capacity in future demand. A 3-cent local fuel tax was established by City Council on December 19, 2006. The revenue from this tax is dedicated solely to improvements at the Greenburg Road/Highway 99W/Main Street intersection to complement Washington County's MSTIP 3 (Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program) project to construct improvements at the Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W intersection. The improvements to the Hall/99W intersection will not be fully effective in improving circulation and relieving traffic congestion as long as the bottleneck at the Greenburg Road intersection remains. A corresponding improvement to the Greenburg Road intersection is needed to improve traffic circulation across and along Highway 99W north of the viaduct to the Highway 217 interchange. The local gas tax will provide the revenue to design the project and construct it together with the County project at Hall and 99W. The tax has a 5-year sunset clause, and will be reduced if the state and county increase their gas taxes during the 5-year period. Current status. An Intergovernmental Agreement has been executed with Oregon Department of Transportation Fuel Tax Group for collection of the local tax. The tax takes effect April 1, 2007 and will continue until December 31, 2011. A prospective petition has been filed by the Oregon Petroleum Association for an initiative to repeal the ordinance. If they obtain sufficient signatures, the local fuel tax will be placed before the voters at a future election. In the meantime, the City will move ahead with the design of the project for construction in conjunction with the Hall/99W intersection project. Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W Intersection Project This project adds capacity to the Hall Boulevard/Highway 99W intersection. It is funded through Washington County's MSTIP 3 (Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program) with contribution of up to $750,000 from ODOT. Current Statur. The project is on track for construction to begin in the spring of 2008. The project design is underway and the right-of-way necessary for the widening is being identified for acquisition to begin in the next few months. A draft intergovernmental agreement has been prepared for review with County, City and ODOT obligations clearly identified. The City is interested in constructing gateway treatments at the corners of the intersection. The intent at this point is to integrate the gateway treatments into the design and construction of the project. Funding is proposed in the FY 2007-08 Community Investment Program for these gateway treatments. 3b. Support the I-5 Connector Regional and local transportation plans have recognized the need for a major connection between I-5 and Highway 99W for more than a decade. The increase in freight movement and traffic with destinations along the Highway 99W and I-5 corridors have resulted in heavy traffic congestion in the street systems along both major routes. Washington County, Metro and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) are jointly leading the I-5 to 99W Connector Project to address this regional problem. The Oregon Transportation Commission has recently designated this as a project of Council Goal Update 4 statewide significance. A thorough and detailed study with rigorous analysis and ample opportunities for public involvement and jurisdictional coordination is underway to establish the alignment for this connector. Current Status. Two community forums have been conducted since the project began in 2005. A range of corridor alternatives are now being developed and will be presented for public comment in a community forum scheduled for summer 2007. The next steps include evaluation of alternatives, a public hearing in winter 2007 to obtain formal public testimony, followed by selection of a preferred corridor for Regional Transportation Plan adoption and local plan amendments. The importance of the connector to Tigard is dependent upon the location of the connection point with Highway 99W. The further south along Highway 99W, the less important it is as a means of reducing traffic congestion on Highway 99W. Although Tigard is not actively involved in the project, the City remains an interested party and is kept informed of its progress. 3c. SuWport Hwv 217 Funding After two years of study and review, the Highway 217 Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) recommended improvement options to move forward for further study. All of the options studied included improvements to interchanges, arterials, transit, and bike and pedestrian routes in the corridor. The options considered were: • Option A - a new general-purpose (free, unrestricted) lane in each direction on Highway 217 • Option B - a new express toll lane in each direction on Highway 217 in addition to existing general-purpose lanes • Option C - a new lane in each direction on Highway 217 and a new tolled ramp meter bypass lane on highway entrances The Highway 217 PAC selected Options A and B in their final recommendation to move forward to an environmental impact study. Current Status. A request for funding from Washington County to perform preliminary environmental studies for the Highway 217 widening project was submitted for consideration in the Metro Priorities 2008-11 project selection process. The request was approved by the Washington County Coordinating Committee, which consists of elected officials from the County and its cities. Mayor Dirksen is the primary City representative with Councilor Harding as the alternate. The initial request of $500,000 was eventually reduced to $373,000 in the final JPACT recommended list. The overall project cost is estimated to range from $350 to $550 million, depending upon the alternatives selected. 4. Improve Council/Citizen communications a. Complete the City Active Neighborhood (CAN) Program b. Citizen comment card at City Hall/Council meetings c. Boards & Commissions i. Develop a regular training program for new members ii. Develop a tracking system for Board & Commission recommendations iii. Appoint Council liaisons to each Board and Commission - Periodically sit in on meetings iv. Recognize & develop Boards & Commissions as sources for future Council candidates v. Staff 1. Periodically attend staff meetings 1s, Quarter Update: Council Goal Update 5 4a. Complete the City Active Neighborhood (CAN.) Program Staff continues to work on development of the Enhanced Neighborhood Program, involving residents of the pilot areas who have expressed an interest in participating as well as the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI). The purpose of the Enhanced Neighborhood Program is to involve citizens as partners in addressing their neighborhood issues as early as possible, and to facilitate neighborhood- level input on broader community issues. Communication resources are being developed to assist citizens in gaining information and education through individual neighborhood web pages, cityscape and training opportunities. A presentation on Neighborhood Program Webpage Design was given to the Committee for Citizen Involvement on February 21, 2007 to collect comments on content of each webpage. Another visit to this committee took place on March 21, 2007 to report progress and solicit advice on developing neighborhood steering committees. Members of the CCI recommended steering committees govern each neighborhood, engaging residents who already volunteer in some capacity for the City - i.e. Neighborhood Watch members, Community Connectors, or CERT trained volunteers. Staff will attend two PSO meetings (Templeton and Metzger) to discuss the Neighborhood Program as well as Comprehensive Plan Open Houses on April 18 and 21 to provide information about the program. The pilot neighborhood webpage is set for roll-out in April. CRIME Spotter, a map-based tool for general information about criminal activity within the City was launched successfully to the public on April 1, 2007. 4b. Citizen comment card at City Hall/Council meetings GOAL COMPLETED At the October 17, 2006 work session, staff reported on development of a Citizens Comment Card suggested by Councilor Harding at the September 26, 2006 Council meeting. Staff took Council feedback from that meeting and integrated comments into a format approved by Council members. A copy of the comment card is attached and is currently at the printer. It will be available for distribution as soon as mid-April. 4c. Boards & Commissions Council met on January 23, 2007 to discuss liaison appointments to each Board and Commission. Resolution No. 07-05 was passed which assigned each member of Council to a Board or Committee. Council will periodically sit in on meetings, but not have a voting role. 4c.v. Staff Council members attended the March 14 and March 16 All Employee meetings as part of their efforts to get involved with staff. 5. Increase Tigard's involvement with Washington County, Metro, State, ODOT, Tri-Met, and Federal government 1St Quarter Update: The following has occurred: ■ Monthly meetings between City Manager staff and Dennis Mulvihill, County Lobbyist. ■ January and February briefings to Council by State Senator Ginny Burdick and State Representative Larry Galizio. ■ City Manager & Asst. City Manager met with State Senator Ginny Burdick and State Council Goal Update 6 I Representative Larry Gahzio in January, February and March to discuss city priorities. ■ Quarterly update provided to Council by ODOT Region 1 Representative in March. ■ City Managers in the County meeting on a monthly basis with County representatives. ■ Contract with Tri-Met for Officers to staff Transit Police Unit ■ Metro: Councilor Carl Hosticka attended the City Council meeting in February to update Council on Metro proceedings. Council Goal Update 7