City Council Packet - 08/21/2007
T GARDCITY COUNCIL
WORKSHOP MEETING
Aug u st 21, 20,07
COUNCIL MEETING L BE
TELEVISE'
I stOfslDonna'slccpkt2
FAUGUST21, ARD CITY COUNCIL -
ORKSHOP MEETING
2007 6:30 p.m. IGARD CITY HALL
125 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97223 -
PUBLIC NOTICE:
Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled
for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171,
ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 ('I'DD - 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 Deaf).
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
COUNCIL AGENDA -AUGUST 21, 2007 'page 1
AGENDA
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
AUGUST 21, 2007
6:30 PM
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
1.1 Call to Order - City Council
1.2 Roll Call
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
2. DISCUSS I-5 TO HIGHWAY 99W CONNECTOR PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
■ Staff Report: Community Development Department
3. DISCUSS STRATEGIES FOR ESTABLISHING A CONTINUING DIALOGUE WITH
THE OREGON TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
■ Staff Report: Community Development Department
4. ANNEXATION ISSUES: REVIEW STATUS OF ANNEXATION PROGRAM
OUTREACH AND REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING APPLYING A
LOWER DENSITY ZONE TO DEVELOPABLE PROPERTY UPON ANNEXATION
■ Staff Report: Community Development Department
5. BRIEFING ON LEGISLATIVE PROCESS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
UPDATE
■ Staff Report: Community Development Department
6. DISCUSS MEMBERSHIP STRUCTURE OF THE COMMITTEE FOR CITIZEN
INVOLVEMENT
■ Staff Report: Community Development Department
7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 21, 2007 page 2
8. NON AGENDA ITEMS
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an
Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced
identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may
disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend
Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(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.
10. ADJOURNMENT
iAadmlcethy1cc812007T070821 cca.doc
COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 21, 2007 page 3
Agenda Item No.
s For Agenda of e -~z ao®
[cur I I
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
WORKSHOP
Meeting Minutes
August 21, 2007
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
1.1 Mayor Dirksen called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m.
1.2 Roll Call:
Name Present Absent
Mayor Dirksen ✓
Councilor Buehner ✓
Councilor Sherwood ✓
Councilor Wilson ✓
Councilor Woodruff ✓
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports: None
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: None
2. DISCUSS 1-5 TO HIGHWAY 99W CONNECTOR PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
City Engineer Duenas introduced this item. I-5 Connector Project Team
representatives, Lawrence Odell, Assistant Director of Land Use for Washington
County; Russ Knoebel, Principal Engineer for Washington County; and Scott Richman
of David Evans Associates were present.
Washington County Principal Engineer Knoebel gave a PowerPoint presentation on
the 1-5 to 99W Connector Project. A copy of his PowerPoint is on file in the City
Recorder's Office. He said future predictions are that there would be 1,000 more
vehicles on 99W per hour and 500 additional vehicles per hour on Durham Road, as
well as 1,500 more vehicles per hour on 99W south of Tigard. He said this would be the
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes - August 21, 2007 page 1
reality if no new facilities are built. He estimated that the demand for vehicles moving
from east to west between I-5 and 99W would increase by 100%.
David Evans Consultant Scott Richman discussed the Regional Transportation Plan
(RIP) Amendment process steps, which include developing a range of alternatives to
meet the challenges. He presented the choices identified to improve transportation
between I-5 and 99W, noting that each step includes obtaining citizen input through
community forums and public hearings -
1. No-Build Alternative
2. Transportation Demand Management/Transportation System
Management (TDM/TSM) Alternative
3. Enhance Existing System Alternative (ESSA)
4. Two Connector Alternatives within the Urban Growth Boundary
(UGB) (4d and 4e)
5. One Connector Alternative partially outside the UGB (5b)
Consultant Richman said the State requires consideration of a no-build alternative
as well as looking at existing system enhancements before recommending a solution
that requires higher capital costs.
Mr. Richman said all connector alternatives connect with I-5 in the same place and
he noted that the blue shaded area on the map extends well beyond the I-5 freeway
because ODOT and the Federal Highway Administration will not allow a new direct
interchange onto Interstate 5. He said it needs to be tied into the adjacent I-205 and
Stafford Road interchanges and connected to those via auxiliary lanes or ramps that
would not disrupt operations on I-5.
Mayor Dirksen asked if traffic would be able to flow directly from I-205 onto a
connector without having to travel onto 1-5. Consultant Richman said that was
correct.
Councilor Buehner noted that on the draft maps a road is shown connecting
Tualatin Sherwood Road with 72"d crossing over both the Tualatin River and the
railroad tracks. She asked if getting another railroad crossing was possible. Mr.
Richman said his understanding was that a railroad crossing or bridge would need to
be grade separated and considering feasibility would be part of the analysis.
Councilor Buehner also said the route goes through Tualatin Park and Durham Park,
which would significantly impact the newly connected park system. She asked if the
Project Team had spoken with the City of Durham yet. Mr. Richman said they had
not.
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes - August 21, 2007 page 2
On Alignment 513, Councilor Buehner remarked that the proposed east-west
connector road in Tualatin needs to take into account the new high school built to
the south of Tualatin High School and adjacent land owned by the school district.
Washington County Principal Engineer Knoebel said he heard concerns from Tigard
Council last time he attended a City Council meeting that the farther south the I-5 to
99W corridor gets, the less assistance it would be for Tigard. He said preliminary data
shows Alternative 4E has the potential to remove 1,000 vehicles per hour off of
99W north of Main Street in Tigard. Alternative 5B has the ability to remove 900
vehicles per hour and both alternatives could remove 250 trucks off of 99W, north
of Main Street.
Washington County Assistant Land Use Director Odell said the five alternatives
are being studied as though each individually would solve the issue at stake. He
said, "Ultimately, the solution is going to be a combination of things."
He also noted that the blue swaths on the maps are 1,000 foot wide and the actual
alignments will be much less. He said these routes made the first cut because
they avoided sensitive areas like the Tualatin National Wildlife Refuge, cemeteries
and schools.
Mayor Dirksen asked Council for their comments. Councilor Sherwood said any one
of the connector alternatives looked like it would remove a lot of cars. She stressed
the importance of reducing truck traffic on 99W. She liked the idea that even if a
connector is chosen, there will be some improvements to enhance the system.
Mayor Dirksen said a combination of a new route plus enhancements to existing
roads was the most logical choice. He said the Council previously expressed
concerns to the project team and steering committee about proposed routes being
too far south, but it appears those routes have been taken off the table.
Councilor Buehner said it would be easier to look at the northern two alternatives
rather than the southern one due to issues relating to being outside the urban growth
boundary. She said the other issue is the viability of getting this land. She said the
development that has occurred could make the right of way very expensive and
asked for an estimate on the right-of-way cost. Washington County Principal
Engineer Knoebel said the corridor location will be known within six months, but the
right-of-way details will need to be worked out later. He said as soon as they know the
route they will be out purchasing land in the corridor to protect the right of way.
Mayor Dirksen asked the City Engineer for his comments on the alternatives. Engineer
Duenas said each has advantages and disadvantages but he noted that Alignment 4D
connects to Roy Rogers Road which he felt makes a natural connection to Scholls Ferry
Road. Engineer Duenas noted the next Steering Committee meeting was scheduled for
August 22, 2007 and they have sought written input from the City of Tigard.
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes - August 21, 2007 page 3
Mayor Dirksen said a letter was being finalized and would be delivered to the Steering
Committee meeting the next day by its 12:30 p.m. meeting.
3. DISCUSS STRATEGIES FOR ESTABLISHING A CONTINUING DIALOGUE
WITH THE OREGON TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
City Engineer Duenas said the Council expressed interest in establishing a dialogue with
the Oregon Transportation Commission members to raise their level of awareness of
the traffic congestion problems on 99W and other state highways in the area. He said
Tigard has a vested interest in talks about:
> Highway 217 Widening Project
> Hall Boulevard improvements and it being turned over to the City or County
> Improvements on 99W Implementation Plan require more funding
> Off-street projects
Inviting the Oregon Transportation Commission members to a Council meeting was
suggested. Including only the OTC members who live in the Portland area was
discussed. Councilor Sherwood said inviting all members might be more appropriate.
Mayor Dirksen agreed that all should be invited soon so Tigard's needs can be made
known. Councilor Buehner remarked that some topics, such as off-street projects, are
issues in many communities.
Engineer Duenas said he would prepare a letter for Mayor Dirksen's signature inviting
all the Oregon Transportation Commissioners to a future Tigard City Council meeting.
4. ANNEXATION ISSUES: REVIEW STATUS OF ANNEXATION PROGRAM
OUTREACH AND REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING
APPLYING A LOWER DENSITY ZONE TO DEVELOPABLE PROPERTY
UPON ANNEXATION
Assistant Community Development Director Bunch introduced this item and said he
would report on the status of Annexation Program outreach efforts and Assistant
Planner Eng would then present an analysis about whether the City could apply lower
density zoning in the Bull Mountain area upon annexation.
Annexation Program Outreach: Assistant Community Development Director Bunch
said the City is in the process of implementing Council's direction to extend annexation
invitations to property owners within 100 feet of the City's boundary. He said staff has
mailed about 240 letters already, and will mail about 500 letters overall, informing
property owners of the benefits of annexation and describing incentives. He indicated
that City staff could be more proactive but there was a lot of other work for them to do
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes - August 21, 2007 page 4
to implement Council's goals. He suggested that staff complete the mailings and if any
property owners are interested in annexation then staff would meet with them. He said
there have been no takers except for an annexation that is being processed for
development purposes.
Councilor Sherwood said, "There was not a goal this year to annex property on Bull
Mountain. I don't feel staff should be going out and trying to get people into the City."
She said, "I don't want to spend any more staff time on this when we've got a Comp
Plan.... and a Downtown to do."
Mayor Dirksen said he agreed with both sides. He suggested that staff follow up on
anyone expressing interest and that there was a duty to encourage what the City thinks
is best. He said, "We set this program in motion and I think we should follow it
through." He said he was not surprised that there was not a lot of response yet. He
said the current level of energy the staff was putting into this is adequate due to their
higher priorities.
Councilor Buehner said people tend to procrastinate and as the ending of the incentive
program nears, there might be more interest.
Mayor Dirksen said the situation might be different if the City sees opportunities in
specific properties because of other needs such as expanding the water storage reservoir
or adding to the Cach Creek park property.
Council direction is for staff to finish their efforts with mailings and to process any
requests that come in.
Applying Lower Density Residential Zones to Property upon Annexation: Assistant
Planner Eng noted that Mayor Dirksen had asked staff to investigate the
possibility of applying a lower density to developable property when it is annexed to the
City. She said that after researching the necessary procedures, staff recommends against
this proposal and that a better and more effective way to achieve lower density on Bull
Mountain would be through the Comprehensive Planning process.
Assistant Planner Eng said the Tigard Municipal Code allows for zoning changes upon
or after annexation through a process which would include either a Zone Map
amendment or a Comprehensive Plan amendment. However, the zone change that has
been proposed is one that would go into effect immediately upon annexation, which is
counter to current policies in effect such as the Development Code, the Comprehensive
Plan, the Metro Regional Functional Plan and the Tigard/Washington County Urban
Planning Area Agreement (UPAA) and the State/Metro Housing Rule. She said it was
also doubtful that the State and Metro would support significant Plan, Code and UPAA
amendments or the incremental approach of initiating Plan and Zoning map
amendments for individual, newly annexed properties. She said it might not be an
Tigard City Council .
Meeting Minutes - August 21, 2007 page 5
effective way to lower residential densities on Bull Mountain. Assistant Planner Eng
said there were potential benefits to the proposal but they were not guaranteed, such as:
> It might provide an incentive to annex because as larger lots become less common,
and developers might want to develop at a lower density to meet a market demand.
> There is a perception that annexing to Tigard automatically results in higher density
than in the County, which is not necessarily true. This addresses those concerns.
> The proposal might provide more low-density residential living opportunities in areas
where lower density is more suitable due to the neighborhood characteristics or
topography.
Assistant Planner Eng said there are many constraints to developing this change,
including obtaining approval from many levels of government, including Washington
County, State of Oregon and Metro.
Mayor Dirksen asked, "Are you saying that before we could implement a change we
would have to go to these agencies and request their approval?"
Assistant Community Development Director Bunch said that in order to change the
procedure Tigard would have to do some major legislative amendments. He said the
City has to prove to Metro that agreed upon housing targets would not be affected. He
also said the City and County have coordinated density plans and this would need to
change.
Assistant Community Development Director Bunch said that for these reasons, the
task would be complex yet the outcome would not be very significant because there is
not that much land up there. Mayor Dirksen asked staff how much land would be
impacted. Mr. Bunch said less than 50 acres.
Mayor Dirksen asked if this could be done as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update,
noting that as the Comprehensive Plan is expected to be hanged for the downtown,
with mixed-use residential being added as well as a residential component in the Tigard
Triangle, it might make up for housing units lost as a result of re-zoning on Bull
Mountain. Assistant Community Development Director Bunch said this could be
considered with the Urbanization segment of the Comprehensive Plan. This work is
expected to be done near the end of the Comprehensive Plan update - twelve to
fourteen months from now.
Mayor Dirksen asked how long it would take if done as a separate project. Mr. Bunch
said it would not be any faster.
Councilor Sherwood expressed concern about a cost/benefit ratio of doing this only
for areas coming into the City.
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes - August 21, 2007 page 6
Councilor Buehner asked if the City would be able to do enough analysis in conjunction
with the final zoning for the downtown area to know how increased density will affect
the citywide density ratio. Assistant Community Development Director Bunch said
staff would look at this and calculate a probable range of numbers to meet requirements
and provide for a lower density opportunity elsewhere. He said these findings would
become part of the Urbanization Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan Update.
Councilor Sherwood asked if this would have to be opened up to other areas of the
City besides Bull Mountain, where people want to build on larger lots. Mr. Bunch said
if we want to re-zone the areas on Bull Mountain, it would be within a specific
geographic area, not necessarily City-wide. Councilor Sherwood said she felt this was
overly generous to the people on Bull Mountain yet in her neighborhood there is one
and one-half acres with 40 units being built on it. She said the City would be generous
to one group but make everyone else keep smaller lots and she did not like this as a
policy.
Mayor Dirksen replied that when he asked staff to look into this, his interest was just
the feasibility and process, not whether or not it should be policy. He said if Council
wanted to consider this as a City policy he thought they would need to look at the City
as a whole and find if there were other areas where it would be logical to apply this.
Councilor Buehner said the property between Greenburg and Commercial is an
important piece of land and she hoped it would be considered in the process.
The Mayor and Council complimented Assistant Planner Eng on her work making
complex process clear and understandable.
5. BRIEFING ON LEGISLATIVE PROCESS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
UPDATE
Associate Planner Wyss briefed Council on the Comprehensive Plan update progress.
He said staff has implemented a citizen involvement program consisting of several
outreach methods but the primary activity for gathering input has been holding
meetings with the Policy Interest Teams. He said the teams formulated draft goals,
policies and recommended action measures which were then reviewed by Department
Review Teams.
He noted that the Planning Commission decided to allow citizens three minutes of
testimony at their workshop sessions and asked Council if they want to do the same.
Councilor Sherwood said, "I think it would be great to allow it. The three-minute limit
is a great idea."
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes -August 21, 2007 page 7
Associate Planner Wyss discussed the suggested Comprehensive Plan document outline
and Council concurred with the choice to have it organized by Statewide Planning
Goals. He said this would make it more clear, easy to use and readable.
Associate Planner Wyss gave Council an update on the first Comprehensive Plan
Amendment. He said the Planning Commission held a workshop on July 16. A public
hearing for Goal 6 - Environmental Quality, Goal 8 - Parks, Recreation and Open
Space, and Goal 13 - Energy Conservation was held last evening. This amendment
would be presented at the September 25, 2007 Council meeting and placed on the
October 23, 2007 Council Business meeting agenda for a public hearing and Council
consideration for adoption.
Councilor Buchner asked, "As we go through each piece, will it immediately be
enforced?"
Assistant Community Development Director Bunch said as each chapter or series of
chapters is adopted by Council and ordinances are passed, they become effective in 30
days. Mayor Dirksen asked if there was a problem having part of the Comprehensive
Plan updated but other parts not updated. Mr. Bunch said the State provides a Post
Acknowledgement Plan Amendment Process that allows updating of individual parts of
the plan, instituted to ensure plans remain usable and current.
Assistant City Manager Newton asked if staffs intention was to have a wrap-up of the
process at the end of the Comprehensive Plan. Associate Planner Wyss said they
would.
At 8.07 p.m. Mayor Dirksen called a five-minute break. The City Council meeting resumed at 8:13 p.m.
6. DISCUSS MEMBERSHIP STRUCTURE OF THE COMMITTEE FOR CITIZEN
INVOLVEMENT (CCI)
Associate Planner Roberts introduced this item for discussion. He noted the
Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI) is the City's officially recognized citizen
involvement group whose members are currently drawn from two groups - a small
pool of former citizen involvement facilitators and the City's other boards and
committees. He said membership from current boards and committees has declined
over time. He said another problem is that should any of the four currently serving
facilitators resign, there would be none left from which to draw. He said staff
recommends changing the membership structure of the CCI and the way members are
appointed.
Associate Planner Roberts said the present CCI's small membership base limits the
pool of potential members and restricts the participation of Tigard citizens. He said that
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes - August 21, 2007 page 8
by creating at-large positions, citizens who have an interest in public involvement, have
experience working in community engagement and who are willing to give their time
would have an opportunity to serve on the CCI. He said another important benefit of
having at-large positions is the opportunity to build partnerships with under-
represented groups in the community. Staff and Committee Recommendations
include:
> Removing the board and committee CCI membership requirement and making
board and committee membership voluntary, rather than mandatory.
> Expanding the CCI's membership to include four at-large members appointed
through the City's established application and interview process
> Emphasizing and encouraging the recruitment and selection of at-large
members who reflect the diversity of the community.
> Including a youth (high school) representative
> Providing an opportunity for any officially recognized Neighborhood
Organization to appoint a representative to the CCI.
Councilor Buehner said she hoped that when the Neighborhood Program is fully
implemented the majority of the slots on the CCI can be filled with neighborhood
representatives. Assistant to the City Manager Newton said a recommendation from
the Neighborhood Program Steering Committee was for each neighborhood to have a
CCI representative.
In response to a question from Councilor Buehner about whether Council should
consider having a representative from the unincorporated area, Mayor Dirksen said he
was not inclined to do that. He said the intent of the CCI is to include members from
Tigard neighborhood groups. He said it was a great recommendation to include a
youth representative. He said at-large member terms would be good in the interim but
there may be a future need to limit the numbers. He suggested that as the group grows
and positions are being filled by neighborhood representative, at-large members could
campaign to be part of a neighborhood group.
Committee for Citizen Involvement Member Rex Caffall said that bringing in members
from outside the committees made sense to him. He encouraged the City to reach out
to Pacific Islanders and Latinos. He said teenagers are busy but any involvement from
youth is good as they will go back and tell their friends that they have a voice.
Mayor Dirksen asked Assistant City Manager Newton to comment on the
recommendations, given her involvement with the CCI. He asked if there should be a
limit to the number of people on the CCI. Ms. Newton said she attends most CCI
meetings and finds them to be a dynamic group. She said she was supportive and also
agreed that over time Tigard should look at drawing more from the neighborhood
groups. She said there are presently 13 neighborhoods.
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes -August 21, 2007 page 9
Citizen Caffall said he attends CCI meetings even though he is no longer required to do
so as a member of the Planning Commission to attend. He said he shares information
with his neighborhood and brings back their input.
7. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
Councilor Buchner reported that the Tigard Water District, at a special meeting,
decided to sue the former board.
8. ADJOURNMENT: 8:32 p.m.
Motion by Councilor Sherwood; seconded by Councilor Buchner, to adjourn meeting.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present.
Mayor Dirksen Yes
Councilor Buchner Yes
Councilor Sherwood Yes
lnu.
Carol A. Krager, Deputy City Re rder
Attest:
Mayo , City of Tigard
Date:
Tigard City Council
Meeting Minutes - August 21, 2007 page 10
Agenda Item #
Meeting Date August 21, 2007
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
City Of Tigard, Oregon
Issue/Agenda Title I-5 to Highway 99W Connector Project Alternatives
Prepared By: A.P. Duenas Dept Head Okay City Mgr Okay
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Project representatives will present the range of alternatives that have been considered for the project, will discuss in
greater detail the alternatives still under consideration, and will be prepared to respond to any questions that Council
may have on the project.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That Council discuss and provide input on the alternatives presented by the project representatives.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
At the June 26, 2007 Council meeting, the I-5 Connector Project Team representatives gave a brief and general
overview of the project with the intent of returning at the August 21, 2007 workshop meeting for more elaborate
discussion with opportunities for questions and answers regarding the alternatives that are being considered for the
project. The range of alternatives developed to meet the purpose and need statements established for the project
were presented and discussed at that first meeting.
At this meeting, the project representatives will again briefly describe the alternatives developed but will present in
greater detail the alternatives that are still under consideration, together with the alternatives recommended by the
team for further examination. The Project Steering Committee (PSC) will select the alternatives to be carried
forwarded for further consideration in the process leading to selection of a preferred corridor. The PSC is expected
to act on the recommendations at its meeting on August 22, 2007.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
None
COUNCIL GOALS
Support for the I-5 to Highway 99W Connector Project is a Council goal for 2007. Its construction has the potential to
reduce traffic congestion on Highway 99W through Tigard and supports the Council goal of alleviating congestion
within the City and on Highway 99W.
ATTACHMENT LIST
None
FISCAL NOTES
At this point, the project does not have any cost implications for the City. The costs to implement the potential
solutions will be developed as part of the evaluation of alternatives to determine a recommended corridor for adoption
into the Regional Transportation Plan.
i:tengtgusNcouncil agenda summaries%8-21-07 1-5 to 99w connector project aftematives.doc
u i of Life Cholces
Range ofA/ternatives
t
Summer 2007 1-5 TO 99
Connector
Project
What Is thq,~prqjec't?
Better
R
transportation
connection
between
-
Interstate D
~w
and OR r
z
- ~ ~ VNt SPry€p a`
Inl f
7. 41 , y
y. 4S~~~f yY'~3
Process, s ps
1. Established Purpose and Need
2. Established Goals and Objectives
20 loswohp IRMH2@ oq &R@PIMMUUw(M23
4. Alternatives Analysis
5. Alternatives Refinement
6. Alternative Selection
7. RTP Amendment
* each step is informed by stakeholder input including
community forums and hearings I-5TO99
Connector
Project
r o i,
_S4 e 1,
sfi #
What are o chop .
k.,
1. No-Build Alternative
2. Transportation Demand
Management/Transportation System Management
(TDM/TSM) Alternative
3. Enhance Existing System Alternative (ESSA)
4. Two Connector Alternatives within the Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB) (4d and 4e)
5. One Connector Alternative partially outside the
I-S To 99
UGB (5b) Connector
Project
s- t
s
Proposed TDM/TSK,.A nA
ner fi
1 Parking Supply Management
2 Transit Pass Subsidies
3 Enhanced Transit Service
4 Park and Ride Facilities
5 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
6 Corridor Traffic Management
Measures
1-S To 99
Connector
Project
Lmend
2- Large Improved Roadway
- Lane New roadway
iwaT L.I$ Improved Roadway
a - Lane New Roadway
-7 Lade Improved Roadway
.n.
a.9AGRIz rxft.
'
i AVERY 37
.,p
b
Lane
o~~ ..w Auxiliary Commuter Rail tension
Regional Trail System
Dote; These Improvements
would be ire ark r`l-i n to those
Included a the 2030 Baseline
SHER,1000 RD ;fi Ti33i,L lTi, pLSRHRiN LRKS
}
a Rtt:EaG!xa.;
RV F Ya e4
-D y RD
( TJALP N S" iFRo" '300
C'GN ST
' SH~'fiW4QG Se' _
e
SUNSET BLVD
R
~BROOK I.., aA?4 RC=aµ._v',,. «a a iu xtai "o Ar,4
t ;
!G N
x }
H<kIESTEADER t
7 Z }
Legentl.
DRAFT
Cif)rridorAlia_/N' ant. 1
KING gym. T,flARD
ILI
s.
i Si-;ERW4:ll~ i~ i~ a • DURHAM
F" Axz
_ I
- - w,~4nuao,~e ;x
RC)
RD
R rUALAPN sVAE~gq n r,
ON ST
t SNERN1flOi3 ~ - TVAIAVN
n m m r s : A >
,
d
x
i
w
V C
i
n
x
i ti W1..5GN4':lt^. x
I .r {
~ I.eg2nd: ._.._e t
DRAFT _ i
nomdor.Alviment tE
~ ~ v a KING CtT?
cy
v
I s
RD LAKE
- f a tot LA 4°'EGO ~
f IEHEAU RD x - ..g...
j 1. 4 m . n tg hr
FUVd GROVE i r
i t+?f✓ v}
'..^)T
r. IB a^ p ~-y r m a a n
R
EDY RD r cx i'Utit..is?IxN ~yH 3*PliJG`1 y
~ ) y
6
-ON ST
gNEPNfOZ}D ~ ~ _
F00~ SUNSET RtMD .r J E
t t:..r. r, ka~A - e ~ ! . sxH 1 ,aaFr ~(sQ{} ~ I
E~...-lG EN tlQT"}
1111 i.J `:hLg4^i`•,iLLE
HOMESTEADER
i "
I a s
; Legend: €3RAFT
, t
h - j 1_55 7o 99 f
r.,vctor, iC onidorAlignment 5B
i
In.
Proposed Connector:, orrido
Corridor Alternative 4 Corridor Alternative 4
Corridor Alternative
Vf f~~1~iu
Mn
n~ r, 10.
t 1
% ! W h ~
It's a Great Place, tai ve
1
^ i
ttil ~1 i^ y F
a
_ r
To stay involved or for the latest project information: r
Visit the web site: www.i5to99w.org"
Call: 503-595-9915
I-5 To 99
Connector
Project
Agenda Item #
Meeting Date August 21, 2007
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
City Of Tigard, Oregon
Issue/Agenda Tide Potential Strategies for Establishing a Continuing Dialogue with the Oregon Transportation
Commission
Prepared By: A.P. Duenas Dept Head Okay City Mgr Okay
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Council wishes to establish a continuing dialogue with the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC). Council's intent
is to raise OTC's level of awareness of the traffic congestion problems on Highway 99W and other state highways in
the area such that key transportation improvement projects to resolve those problems receive appropriate consideration
for funding.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That Council discuss and provide direction on the potential strategies for establishing that continuing dialogue with the
OTC, and on the issues that should be brought to their attention in future meetings.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Oregon Transportation Commission establishes state transportation policy. The commission also guides the
planning, development and management of a statewide integrated transportation network that provides efficient
access, is safe, and enhances Oregon's economy and livability. The commission meets monthly to oversee Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) activities relating to highways, public transportation, rail, transportation
safety, motor carrier transportation, drivers and motor vehicles.
There are five commissioners appointed by the governor. One commissioner has to live east of the Cascades.
Attached are the commission member bios taken from the ODOT website. There are two commissioners that
represent the Portland area: Commissioners Gail Achterman and Janice Wilson. Stuart Foster is the Commission
Chair, and he resides in southern Oregon.
Council wishes to establish a continuing dialogue with the OTC, similar to the current arrangement for periodic
meetings with the ODOT Region 1 Manager. One way to establish that dialogue with the OTC is to invite all the
members to an initial meeting with Council at one of the upcoming Council business meetings. The possibility of
periodic future meetings with one or more of the commission members should be discussed at that meeting. It is
likely that future meetings may be more convenient for the two Portland area commissioners. However, Stuart
Foster is often up in the Portland area on business and may also be able to attend without making a special trip to
do so.
Another strategy is to invite the two Portland-based representatives and the chair to the initial meeting followed by
invitations to the remaining two members for possible attendance at future meetings. This would be a specific
attempt to establish communications with the commissioners representing this area as the initial step followed by a
more general invitation to the rest of the commission members.
Some of the issues that may be discussed during the initial meeting and emphasized in future meetings are:
• A higher level of priority and funding for key Highway 99W projects to help alleviate congestion on the
highway through the City
• Funding for off-system improvements that benefit or enhance the performance of the state system
• Improvements to Hall Boulevard as a prerequisite to jurisdictional transfer
• Support for the Highway 217 widening project, which includes significant improvements to the 72"d
Avenue interchange.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
None
COUNCIL GOALS
Aggressively pursue funding to improve traffic congestion within the City. Seek funding for 99W improvements.
ATTACHMENT LIST
Oregon Transportation Commission member bios - from the ODOT website
FISCAL NOTES
The Highway 99W Corridor Improvement and Management Plan will present a list of priority projects for future
implementation. That list and improvements to Hall Boulevard as a prerequisite to any future transfer of jurisdiction
will need future funding for implementation.
I:teng)gustcouncil agenda summariest8.21.07 strategies for establishing dialogue with the oregon transportation commission.doc
Communications Oregon Transportation Commission Members http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/COMM/otc_members.shtml
Oregon Transportation Commission Members
Stuart Foster, chairman
Stuart Foster is a partner with Foster Denman LLP. His professional
and community activities include terms as president of the Oregon
State Bar, chair of the Oregon State Bar Task Force that wrote
Oregon's Revised Business Corporation Act and president of the
Medford Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Foster holds a bachelor of
science degree from the University of Oregon and a law degree r
from Willamette University. ,4
Commission terms
9/10/1995 to 6/30/1997
7/01/1997 to 6/30/2001
7/01/2001 to 6/30/2005
7/01/2005 to 6/30/2009 4 .r
Stuart Foster
Gail Achterman
Gail Achterman is the director of the Institute for Natural
Resources at Oregon State University. She serves on the boards of
Northwest Environment Watch and the Oregon Garden, and on the
advisory board of the Klamath Basin Rangeland Trust. She spent
20 years in private law practice with Stoel, Rives LLP. She holds a 4
bachelor of arts in economics from Stanford University and a
master of resource policy and management and a law degree from
the University of Michigan.
Commission term
11/17/2000 to 6/30/2004
7/01/2004 to 6/30/2008
Gail Achterman
Randall "Randy" Pap6
Randy Pape is president and CEO of the Pape Group Inc. and
Liberty Financial Group. Mr. Pape is a director for Northwest
Natural Gas and is a director and current chairperson for the
Oregon Business Council. He is also a retired trustee and past
president of the University of Oregon Foundation. He holds a
bachelor of science degree in finance from the University of t LS'
Oregon.
Commission term
1/01/2001 to 6/30/2001
7/01/2001 to 6/30/2005
7/01/2005 to 6/30/2009 +
Randall Pape
1 of 1 8/6/2007 4:17 PM
Communications Oregon Transportation Commission Members http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/COMIvVotc-members.shtmi
Michael Nelson
Mike Nelson is a real estate and mortgage broker and owner of ` -
Nelson Real Estate Inc., Nelson Capital Benefits LLC and Baker City
Laundry. Mr. Nelson served on Gov. Kulongoski's Transition Council
and on numerous local and state boards and commissions. He
represented District 59 for the 1989 and 1991 Legislative
Assemblies. Mr. Nelson was educated through the California state , t
college system. ~j
Commission term:
7/01/2003 to 6/30/2007 «
7/01/2007 to 6/30/2011
Michael Nelson
Janice Wilson
Janice Wilson is a retired Wells Fargo Regional President. She has..
served on the State Board of Higher Education and the Portland
Development Commission in addition to many other local, regional,'
state, and non-profit commissions. She holds a bachelor of arts
degree from Portland State University and is a graduate of the
Pacific Coast Banking School at the University of Washington.
Commission term: - ~y
9/20/2004 to 6/30/2008
Janice Wilson
1 of 1 8/6/2007 4:26 PM
Agenda Item #
Meeting Date 8-21-07
COUNQL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
City Of Tigard, Oregon
Issue/Agenda Title Annexation Issues: 1) Status of Annexation Program Outreach Efforts; and 2) Applyigg Lower
Density Residential Zones to Property Won Annexation
Prepared By. Ron Bunch and Emily Eng Dept Head Approvah City Mgr ApprovaL•
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Council is requested to address the following two annexation matters:
1.) Review the status of efforts to implement the City's 2007 Annexation Policy and, if desired, direct staff to make
adjustments. If Council wishes to change course, staff will do the necessary analysis and bring back specific proposals
for consideration at a regular business meeting.
2.) Review staff's analysis and recommendation regarding applying a lower density zone to developable property upon
annexation to the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
1.) Status of Annexation Program Outreach Efforts
Before considering changes to the City!s approach to encouraging annexation, staff recommends that Council allow
completion of the process to mail invitations to the 500+ property owners that are within 100 feet of the existing City
limits. This would also provide time for staff to formulate possible alternative approaches. During this time, staff would
have the opportunity for informal conversation with property owners who have expressed prior interest in annexation.
2.) Applving Lower Density Residential Zones to Property Won Annexation
At this time staff does not recommend implementing the proposal. However, Council may wish to consider
information in the attached memo and issue paper and determine if it should proceed with a "Comprehensive Plan"
process to find out if lower residential densities are achievable on the City portion of Bull Mountain. If Council wishes
to take this course, staff recommends doing so in 12 - 14 months.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
1.) Status of Annexation Program Outreach Efforts
Council's 2007 annexation policy is based on the principles of 1) extending an invitation to unincorporated property
owners to annex; and 2) offering incentives to do so. Council approved an incentive package that includes waiving the
annexation fee; paying Metro mapping fees; and phasing in City property taxes over three years. In addition, staff
assists applicants with preparing the annexation application.
Staff has updated the City's website and other information describing good reasons to annex to the City. Also, staff is
in the midst of a process to extend written invitations to the 500+ properties within 100 feet of the city limits. Two
mailings have occurred, beginning in June 2007, with about 240 letters sent out. Additional mailings are scheduled. To
date, there have been no applications for annexation. One property owner has met with staff to discuss the possibility.
No neighborhood groups or owners of developable property have requested meetings.
If Council has concerns about the lack of interest in annexation, it may wish to direct staff to try different approaches.
For example, Councilor Buehner recently expressed that mailed invitations may not get people's attention. Direct
contact involving phone calls and/or meetings are needed to encourage annexation. Contact should especially be made
with those that have previously expressed interest and also with owners of developable property capable of being
annexed.
Alternatively, Council may wish to complete the process of mailing invitations to property contiguous to the City before
changing its approach to annexation. Completing this process will take about three - four months.
2.) Applying Lower Density Residential Zones to Property Won Annexation
Planning staff was recently asked to investigate the possibility of applying a lower density residential zone to
developable property upon annexation to the City. The proposal focuses on land zoned Washington CourntyR 6
on Bull Mountain. For example, if a property zoned County R 6 (4,500 sq. ft. avg. lots) annexes, the City would
provide the option to designate it as a City R-4.5 zone (7,500 sq. ft avg. lots) instead of City R-7 (5,000 sq. ft. avg.
lots).
One of the reasons for the request was to address citizen concerns that when unincorporated Bull Mountain
property annexes to Tigard it will be developed to a higher residential density than occurs in the County. However,
review of past development actions shows this is not so. R-6 zoned property within unincorporated Bull Mountain
has developed at the same or higher density as R-7 land in Tigard.
Staff recommends against implementing the proposal. On the surface it is counter to state law, administrative rules
and Metro's Functional Plan. Substantial staff resources would be necessary to achieve a reasonable chance of
approval from the state. Also, the County would have to agree to change the City/ County urban Planning Area
Agreement (UPAA). Another factor is past development practices indicate that it is unlikely for developers to
choose for the low density option. Instead they have chosen to develop at maximum density in the County and then
annex.
If Council remains interested, the best way to assess the possibility of reducing density within the City's portion of
Bull Mountain would be to direct staff to undertake a long range planning study of the area.
Attachment 1: Memo - Annexation Update Regarding Lower Density, explains staff's recommendation in greater
detail. Attachment 2: Issue Paper - Annexation Update Regarding Lower Density, summarizes the reasoning
behind staff's recommendation.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1.) Status of Annexation Program Outreach Efforts
Council may wish to consider the following alternatives:
• Not wait until the mailed invitation process is complete and direct staff to immediately contact property
owners to encourage them to annex to the City,
• Not take a different, more active, approach to annexation and maintain the incentives for the period of time
originally authorized. Revisit the annexation policy at the time the incentives are scheduled to lapse in early
2008.
.2.) Appl*g Lower Density Residential Zones to Property upon Annexation
Council could direct staff to reprioritize its work plan to address this proposal.
CITY COUNCIL GOALS
None.
ATTACHMENT LIST
Attachment 1: Memo - Annexation Update Regarding Lower Density
Attachment 2: Issue Paper - Annexation Update Regarding Lower Density
Attachment 3: Development Code Table 18.320.1- Conversion Table for County and City Plan and Zoning
Designations
FISCAL. NOTES
Not Applicable.
File: Annexation Update Agenda Item Summwith craigs addition.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
1,, MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: EmilyEng, Assistant Planner
RE: Annexation Update Regarding Lower Density
DATE: August 7, 2007
Introduction:
Mayor Dirksen recently asked planning staff to investigate the possibility of applying a lower density
residential zone to developable property when it is annexed to the City. For example, if a property
zoned County R 6 (4,500 sq. ft. avg. lots) annexes, the City would provide the option to designate it
as a CityR 4.5 zone (7,500 sq. ft avg. lots) instead of CityR 7 (5,000 sq. ft. avg. lots). The following
summarizes staff's recommendations, research, and analysis regarding this matter.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends against proceeding with the proposal. In summary, there are significant
downsides and uncertainties with the option of offering a lower density zoning designation upon
annexation. It is uncertain whether the County would participate in amending the
Tigard/Washington County Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA). It is also doubtful that the
State and Metro would support significant Plan, Code, and UPAA legislative amendments or the
incremental approach of initiating-Plan and Zoning map amendments for individual, newly annexed
properties. Staff's experience also indicates the proposal would not be an effective way to lower
residential densities on the City's portion of Bull Mountain.
The amount of staff time this effort would take is significant. In view of the potential obstacles and
limited results, it would be better for city resources to be focused on achieving established Council
objectives.
If Council wishes to further investigate lowering densities on the City's portion of Bull Mountain,
then another approach is recommended. The feasibility and potential implementation of lowering
densities in this area would be best accomplished through the Comprehensive Planning process.
This would involve analysis of community conditions; citizen and property owner engagement; and
coordination and consultation with the County, Metro and the State. This effort could potentially
begin in approximately 12-14 months following completion of current ongoing tasks.
Alternatively, Council could direct staff to reprioritize its work.
ATTACHMENT 1
Copy: Tom Coffee, Community Development Director
Dick Bewersdorff, Development Planning Manager
Ron Bunch, Asst. Community Development Director
File: Annexation Update Memo Attachment 1.doc
ATTACHMENT 2
Issue Paper. August, 2007 Annexation Update Regarding Lower Density
Prepared by: Emily Eng, Assistant Planner
Ron Bunch, Assistant Community Development Director
INTRODUCTION
Mayor Dirksen recently asked Staff to investigate the possibility of applying a lower
density residential zone to developable property when it is annexed to the City. For
example, if a property zoned County R-6 (4,500 sq. ft. avg. lots) annexes, the City would
provide the option to designate it as a City R-4.5 zone (7,500 sq. ft avg. lots) instead of
City R-7 (5,000 sq. ft. avg. lots). The following summarizes staff's recommendations,
research and analysis regarding this matter.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Current Practice: Applying City Zoning Designations to Annexed Properties
How property is zoned upon annexation is determined by the Washington County/Tigard
Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan. Per these
documents, Tigard assigns a City zoning designation to newly annexed property which most
closely conforms to a comparable County zone. This is summarized by "Attachment 3--
Development Code Table 18.320.1- Conversion Table for County and City Plan and
Zoning Designations. For example, Washington County has zoned most properties in the
Urban Growth Area as R-6 (six units per acre/ 4500 sq. ft. avg. lots) When these properties
annex to the City they are assigned a City R-7 single-family residential (SFR) designation. In
a subdivision, the R-7 SFR designation results in average lots of 5,000 sq. ft., with no lot
being less than 4,000 sq. ft. The proposal as above would allow the application of an R-4.5
SFR designation which is a considerably less dense designation. In the R-4.5 zone,
subdivisions result in average lots of 7,500 sq. ft., with no lot being less than 6,000 square
feet.
It should be noted that there are higher density properties (outside and within the City) in
the northern part of the Bull Mountain urban growth area. The County properties are zoned
R 12 and R 15 to be developed at 12 and 15 units per acre respectively and would convert to
Cityx 12 and R-25 upon annexation. However, the Mayor's proposal focuses on single-
family properties zoned County R-6 only.
Page 1 of 4
ATTACHMENT 2
Possible Benefits:
Staff has identified three reasons why the City might wish to consider this matter. They are
as follows:
■ Some Bull Mountain residents may perceive that if residential property annexes to
Tigard, it will be designated to a higher residential density than in the County. This is
not necessarily true. Because of the way Washington County calculates residential
density, its Bull Mountain zoning designation of R-6 at least equals, and in some cases
results in higher densitythan Tigard's R-7. Providing the option to applylower density
zones to annexed property might address this concern. Also, it may encourage
annexation for developers and property owners wanting to partition or subdivide
property into larger single-family residential lots.
■ The proposal might provide more low density residential living opportunities.
Throughout the region there is an obvious shortage of larger (>7,500) square-foot
single-family residential lots. This action might bring more of these lots to the market
and make possible construction of higher value single-family homes.
■ There maybe "neighborhood compatibility" benefits of encouraging annexed property
to be zoned to a lower-density. This is especially important where newly annexed
property would abut existing large lot single-family residential neighborhoods or where
lower density is more compatible with the topography.
Constraints
State and Metro Land Use Planning Issues
There are two major steps to implementing the "lower density annexation option".
The first step would be to initiate amendments to the following:
1. Tigard/Washington County UPAA,
2. Comprehensive Plan annexation policies; and the
3. Tigard Community Development Code to allow annexed property on Bull Mountain
the option of applying a lower density residential zone upon annexation.
The second step would be to initiate a Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Map amendment each
time a property owner consents to annexation and opts for a lower density zoning
designation.
Under current circumstances both of these steps are problematic and would require
significant staff time. There is no guarantee either would hold up under State and/or Metro
review. In addition, during the fast step, the County would have to be a willing participant
to amend the UPAA.
Page 2 of 4
ATTACHMENT 2
The second step, Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Map amendment, would be ongoing and
each application to change the Plan and Zoning Maps would also be under the scrutiny of
Metro and the State. The most obvious problem would be the potential for "spot zoning"
resulting in irregular Plan and Zoning Map designations. In addition, the City would have
the burden of proof to show that each map amendment would be consistent with its
Comprehensive Plan, Statewide Planning Goals and administrative rules, and the Portland
Metropolitan Area Functional Plan. This could be difficult, time consuming and there
would be no guarantee of success for reasons explained below
The following are State and Metro land use planning and State coordination requirements
that pose constraints to implementing the "lower density upon annexation" option.
■ Currently, Tigard and Washington County comply with Statewide Planning Goal 2 to
develop and implement "coordinated comprehensive plans" regarding planning for
the Tigard's Urban Planning Area. The Tigard/Washington County UPAA and
related City and County Comprehensive Plan Policies are how this is accomplished.
Both the City and County have agreed to utilize the above mentioned Conversion
Table for County and City Plan and Zoning Designations - "Attachment 3".
The City s compliance with Statewide Planning Goals and administrative rules would
be affected if it proposes to lower planned residential densities by amending its
Development Code, Comprehensive Plan, and the UPAA.
Most obviously affected by this action is the State's Metro Housing Rule that
requires the "opportunity' for development of 10 dwellings an acre at a 50% -50%0
mix of attached and detached units. In-depth study is needed to determine the
impacts of the proposal on this requirement. Without findings that the Statewide
Housing Rule would not be affected, the Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD) would likely object to the proposal.
Furthermore, Metro's Regional Functional Plan (Title 1) requires Metro area Cities
and Counties to zone urban lands for densities that make it possible to achieve
specific numerical housing targets. Both Metro and DLCD would require that
Tigard and Washington County prove their housing targets would still be achievable
if these changes are made.
Limited Practicality to Achieve Lower Residential Density:
Regarding City R 7 and R 4.5 land, and similarly zoned properties that annex into the City,
staff's experience is that no property owner or developer has requested a lower residential
density designation. Under current market conditions, developers tend to develop to the
maximum density possible. For example, developers have often preferred to divide
residential property in the County to develop under County regulations (which may allow
more density) and then annex to receive City services. It is likely that the lower density
option would have few takers.
Page 3 of 4
ATTACHMENT 2
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends against proceeding with the proposal. In summary, there are significant
downsides and uncertainties with the option of offering a lower density zoning designation
upon annexation. It is uncertain whether the County would participate in amending the
Tigard/Washington County LTAA. It is also doubtful that the State and Metro would
support significant Plan, Code, and UPAA legislative amendments or the incremental
approach of initiating Plan and Zoning map amendments for individual, newly annexed
properties. Staff's experience also indicates the proposal would not be an effective way to
lower residential densities on the City's portion of Bull Mountain.
The amount of staff time this effort would take is significant. In view of the potential
obstacles and limited results it would be better for City resources to be focused on achieving
established Council objectives.
If Council wishes to further investigate lowering densities on the City's portion of Bull
Mountain, then another approach is recommended. A Comprehensive Planning process
would best accomplish this through analysis of community conditions; citizen and property
owner engagement; and coordination and consultation with the County, Metro and the State.
This effortcould potentially begin in approximately 12-14 months following completion of
current ongoing tasks.
Alternatively, Council could direct staff to reprioritize its work.
Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT 3
DEVELOPMENT CODE TABLE 18.320.1- CONVERSION TABLE FOR
COUNTY AND CITY PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS
I' ashington Cousin- Land Use City of Tigard Zoning City- of Tigard
Districts/Plan Designation Plan Designation
R-5 Re. 5 units/acre R-4.5 SFR 7,500 sq. ft. Lots density 1-5 ullits/acre
R-6 Re 6 unitslacre R-i SFR 5,000 sq. ft. Nled. density 6-12 units/acre
R-9 Res. 9 units/acre R-12 lklulti-talmil 12 units/acre I led. density 6-12 units/acre
R-12 Res. 12 milts/acre R-12 Multi-family 13 units/acre 'Med. density 6-12 units/acre
R-15 Res. 15 unity/acre R-25 1\lulti-family 25 units/acre iviedium-High density 13-25
wilts/acre
R-24 Re 11111tSraCrCS R-25 Nlulti-family 25 units/acre \Iediulii-High density 13-25
1111it.s/acre
Office Comillercial C-P Commercial Professional CP Commercial Professional
N K Neighborhood Commercial C\ Nei_I1Lorhood Commercial C\ Nziallborhood Coliunerclal
C BD t_ oninlerclal BusllleS5 CBD Commercial Business CBD Commercial 311s111ess
District District District
Cit-. Cielleral Commercial CG General Commercial C:Ci General Coll mercial
IND Illdustr al I-L Lvalit Industrial Li_llt. Industrial■
Agenda Item # 1
Meeting Date 8-21-07
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
City Of Tigard, Oregon
Issue/Agenda Title Comprehensive Plan Update -Legislative Process
Prepared By. Darren Wyss Dept Head Approval: Qty Mgr Approval
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Council is requested to:
1.) Receive Staff's briefing on the status of the Comprehensive Plan Update and discuss any issues that may arise, and
2.) Give direction on receiving citizen comment at pre-hearing work sessions on Planning Commission
recommendations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
At its upcoming Comprehensive Plan work sessions, staff recommends that Council follow the Planning Commission's
example to allow public comment, after Council has completed its discussion and subject to a three minute time limit
per person.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
Progress Signmary on the Comprehensive Plan's Legislative Phase
Council was last briefed on progress of the Comprehensive Plan Update at its May 15, 2007 work session. Since then
staff has implemented a citizen involvement program and is now engaged with the public and Planning Commission to
develop updated Comprehensive Plan goals, policies and recommended action measures.
Three Plan chapters have been completed and others are in progress. The Planning Commission has scheduled a public
hearing on August 20, 2007 to make a recommendation to Council on Comprehensive Plan chapters pertaining to Air,
Water and Land Resource Quality, Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Space and Energy Conservation. These chapters
correspond to Statewide Planning Goals, 6, 8, and 13 respectively. Planning Commission workshops and hearings on
several more chapters will follow in the upcoming months. Subsequent to each Commission hearing, Council will hold
its own workshop followed by a public hearing.
Citizen Involvement:
Involving citizens is a key part of Council's goal to update the Comprehensive Plan. Beginning in June 2007, staff
began meeting with Policy Interest Teams to formulate draft goals, policies and recommended action measures.
This process will continue until the all the Plan elements are completed and adopted.
Policy Interest Teams are comprised of citizens who share an interest in specific policy areas, such parks, recreation
trails and open space, natural resources, economic development, etc. The teams work with staff to formulate draft
H\8-14AISCompp1an process ron darrenl1doc 1
goals, policies and recommended action measures for Planning Commission review. Community values expressed
through several years of past surveys; the Tigard visioning process and findings from the Tigard 2007 Resource
Report inform the development of goals, policies and action measures. When applicable, the Policy Interest Teams'
proposals are coordinated with Boards and Commissions. In addition, City departments have ongoing
opportunities to provide feedback on the Policy Interest Teams' draft proposals.
In addition to the Policy Interest Teams, Staff has met with several community groups and went to the Balloon
Festival and Farmer's Market to talk about Comprehensive Plan issues.
Public Comment at Council Work Sessions: Some Policy Interest Team members have asked staff if they and
other citizens will be allowed to address Council at its pre-hearing, Comprehensive Plan work sessions. Staff
indicated that it would ask Council how it wishes to handle this matter and pass the information on.
For reference, the Planning Commission allowed Team members and others to provide comment at its work
session, following its discussion and subject to a three minute per person time limit. This worked well. Staff
recommends Council follow the same procedure. Citizens will have further opportunity to testify both by voice and
in writing at public hearings.
Comprehensive Plan Adoption Process: Early on, Staff worked with the Planning Commission to develop the process
for the Plan's legislative phase. In addition, the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CQ) was consulted. At the May
15, 2007 work session, staff briefed Council that the updated Comprehensive Plan will be adopted in increments. The
August 20 Planning Commission hearing on the above three specific Plan Chapters starts this process.
There are several reasons for the incremental approach to Plan adoption. For instance, Tigard faces a number of
existing issues that require policy guidance. It is important to have policy tools now, rather than later. Adopted
Comprehensive Plan policies are needed to assist the City in attaining community quality and livability objectives. For
example, Council recently adopted new Comprehensive Plan goals, policies and action measures pertaining to the
Downtown. The Downtown goals and polices provide the legislative basis for needed design and land-use regulations.
The Tree Board's efforts to enhance Tigard's urban forest require adopted policies and action measures pertaining to
trees both as natural resources and aesthetic elements. The proposed Plan chapter on natural hazards is another
example. The City needs these goals, policies and action measures to reference when preparing its hazard mitigation
and emergency response plans. All the proposed Plan chapters have immediate relevance. If wished, staff can discuss
these matters in detail at Council's convenience.
Completing the Comprehensive Plan and involving the public in the process is one of Council's 2007 goals. Therefore
it is important to keep the Plan and its policy issues in front of citizens, Council, Planning Commission and other
boards and commissions. The best way to do this is to immediately follow up the technical process of updating
individual plan chapters with public hearings. This means citizens, Council and the Planning Commission do not have
to wait several months for action on specific policy areas. Issues are fresh in peoples' minds and the hearing/adoption
process is typically more thoughtful, quicker and less controversial than attempting to adopt a very large policy
document at the end of a many month process.
Organization of the Comprehensive Plan Document: It became clear as staff, Planning Commission and Policy
Interest Teams began to update the Comprehensive Plan Chapters, that it would be best to organize the Plan
document according to the Statewide Planning Goals. Also, formatting the Plan in this way will make it clearer,
easy to use and readable. Also, this format will make Plan much easier to amend and update in the future.
H\8-14AISCompp1anprocess rundarrenl1cloc 2
Using the Statewide Planning Goal format to organize the Plan does not prevent the City from expanding the land
use focus of the Statewide Planning Goals into other areas important to Tigard's citizens.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Council's options pertinent to citizen comment at its workshops are:
1.) Not allow citizens to address Comprehensive Plan issues at pre-hearing workshops.
2.) Allow citizens greater opportunity to address Council than recommended.
CITY COUNCIL GOALS
Goal 1: Comprehensive Plan
A. Updating the blueprint for the City
B. Public Input
Goal 4: Improve Council/Citizen communications
ATTACHMENT LIST
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
He 8-14AISCompplan process ron dan-enlldoc
HA8-14AISCompplan process rondarrenildoc 3
,Agenda Item #
Meeting Date 8-21-07
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
City Of Tigard, Oregon
Issue/Agenda Title Committee for Citizen Involvement Membership Structure
Prepared By: Duane Roberts Dept Head Approval: City N4gr Approval:
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL
Should Council amend Resolution No. 05-04 to change the membership structure of the Committee for Citizen
Involvement, or CCI, and the way its members are appointed? This is a discussion item. No action is required at this
time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council consider the following:
1. Remove the board and committee CCI membership requirement. Make board and committee membership
voluntary, rather than mandatory.
2. Expand the CCI's membership to include four at-large members appointed through the City's established
application and interview process.
3. Emphasize and encourage the recruitment and selection of at-large members who reflect the diversity of the
community.
4. Expand the CCI to include a youth (high school) representative.
5. Explicitly provide the opportunity for any officially-recognized Neighborhood Organizations to appoint a
representative to the CCI.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
CCI members are drawn from two groups: former Citizen Involvement Team (CIT) Facilitators and the City's other
standing boards and committees. A number of problems with this membership structure have become evident in the
two plus years since its implementation. One problem relates to board and committee member interest and
participation. At present, only the Library Board and Planning Commission are represented. None of the other boards
and committees currently have a regularly assigned CCI liaison. Another problem is the small number of former CIT
facilitators. Should any of the CCI's present four CIT facilitators move away or resign for some other reason, there is
no pool of former facilitators from which to recruit a replacement. Although identified as a potential source of future
CCI members, a third problem is that no future neighborhood associations have been created, as yet.
The present CCI's small membership base limits the pool of potential members, and this restricts the ability of Tigard
citizens to participate. Changes are needed for the CCI to function in a better way. An issue paper accompanying this
summary provides additional background detail regarding this topic.
1:\I..RPI.N\Council Materials\211117\8-21-117 AIS CCI Membership Sttucture.doc 1
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Consider changes to the CCI membership structure other than those outlined in the staff recommendation and
memo.
CITY COUNCIL GOALS
Council Goal No. 4: Improve Council/Cititzen Communications.
ATTACHMENT LIST
Attachment 1: Resolution Expanding the Membership of the Committee for Citizen Involvement to include
Representatives from the City's Active Boards and Committees and from Future Neighborhood
Organizations.
Attachment 2: Issue Paper: CCI Membership Structure
FISCAL NOTES
N/A
is\LRPLN\Council Materials\2007\8-21-07 AIS CCI Membership Structure.doc 2
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ATTACHMENT I
-
RESOLUTION NO.05- Cx
A RESOLUTION EXPANDING THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE FOR CITIZEN
INVOLVEMENT TO INCLUDE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE CITY'S ACTIVE BOARDS AND
COMMITTEES AND FROM FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS
WHEREAS, citizen involvement and two-way communication with its citizens is highly important to the
City of Tigard; and
WFIEREAS, State law requires the City to maintain a citizen involvement program that insures the
opportunity for citizens to be actively involved in the land use process; and
WHEREAS, the Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI) is the City's primary public involvement body
for land use issues; and
WHEREAS, the Committee's purview has been broadened to include both land use and the broad array of
non-land use public involvement and communication issues; and
WHEREAS, the Council in 1993 created the Citizen Involvement Teams; and
WHEREAS, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.1.2.c designates the Citizen Involvement Team
Facilitators as the City's Committee for Citizen Involvement; and
WHEREAS, the Citizen Involvement Teams are no long active; and
WHEREAS, the Citizen Involvement Team facilitators are designated as the City's CCI; and
WHEREAS, of the original eleven members, the Committee currently includes only active four members;
and
WHEREAS, the City desires to broaden the Committee's membership to include individuals broadly
representative of the City's geographic areas and diverse interests and perspectives,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION 1: The City of Tigard Committee for Citizen Involvement shall be expanded to include one
representative of each active board and conunittee.
SECTION 2: The City of Tigard Committee for Citizen Involvement can be expanded to include
representatives of future Neighborhood Organizations officially recognized as such by the
City of Tigard.
RESOLUTION NO. 05 -
Page 1
SECTION 3: This resolution is. effective immediately upon passage.
tt NZ
PASSED: This I day of (~-t1~A(A11~_ 2005.
Mayor - ity of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder - City of Tigard
T-m""C n1 %5VA msolutknAm
RESOLUTION NO. 05 Page 2
ATTACHMENT 2
Issue Paper: CCI Membership Structure
As its name implies, the Committee for Citizen Involvement, or CCI, is the City's officially
recognized citizen involvement group. It is advisory to Council on all matters pertaining to
citizen involvement and communications.
The CCI's current membership and purview were defined some two-and-a-half years ago by
Resolution 05-04. Under this resolution, CCI members are drawn from two groups:
• One is the small pool of former Citizen Involvement Team (CFI) Facilitators. These
are citizen volunteers who were trained by staff and a City-hired consultant. They
facilitated the regular monthly meetings of the four neighborhood groups into which
the City was divided between 1992 though 2000, the year the CIT structure became
inactive. When the CCI was reactivated in 2004 with former facilitators only, four
of the original eleven facilitators still resided in the City and wished to serve on the
committee. All four are highly valued and have continued to serve to the present.
• The second source of CCI members is the City's other standing boards and
committees. In addition to former facilitators, Resolution 05-04 defines the CCI as
including one representative from each of the City's other advisory groups. The CD
Director interpreted this at that time to include the Parks, Water, Tree, and Library
Boards, together with the Planning Commission and Budget Committee. CCI
membership was understood to include rotating representation, with the length of
service determined by each individual board or committee.
Problems with CCI Structure
A number of problems with the CCI's present membership structure have become evident
in the two plus years since its creation. One problem relates to board and committee
member interest and participation. Although the current CCI has lost none of its original
group of four facilitators, the number of active CCI members from the other boards and
committees has dwindled over time. At present, only the Library Board and Planning
Commission are represented. None of the other boards and committees currently have a
regularly assigned CCI liaison.
Based on reports, the main reason for this lack of board and committee representation
appears to be that most citizens lead busy lives and have limited volunteer time available. A
citizen serving on one standing board or committee often does not have adequate time to
spend preparing for and attending additional meetings and events. By way of illustration,
Council recently has heard from the Planning Commission regarding the heavy commitment
placed on its members by being asked to serve as liaisons to other committees, including the
CCI.
Although time appears to be the main constraint to liaison participation, lack of interest in
public involvement or civic engagement appears to be another. Most board and committee
members are motivated to serve by an interest in a particular area, such as tree preservation
1:\LRPL\\Council \laterials\2007\8-21-07.ATTACIi 2Issue Paper- CC] membership structure.doc 1
or municipal budget choices, but may not be as passionate about public involvement in and
of itself.
Another issue is that should any of the present four CIT facilitators move away or resign for
some other reason there is no pool of former facilitators from which to recruit a
replacement.
Expanding Participation
Whatever the cause or causes, the reality is that CCI participation on the part of the other
advisory groups has declined markedly, with only two of six original groups currently being
represented.
The Neighborhood Program is a potential source of future additional CCI members:
Resolution 05-04 specifies the CCI "can be expanded to include representatives of future
Neighborhood Organizations officially recognized as such by the City of Tigard."
However, a problem with relying on the Neighborhood Program as a source of new
members is that this program will not be fully established for some months, and there is no
certainty regarding the extent to which the future organizations will have members willing to
serve on the CCL A related concern of the CCI is that if Council were to make
participation in the CCI mandatory for neighborhood recognition, then overall participation
in the Neighborhood Program may decline.
Under these circumstances, staff recommends that board and committee representation on
the CCI be made voluntary, with (revolving) liaisons being available to attend CCI meetings
as needed and as available. Although this may not apply universally, making this role
voluntary on the part of standing committee members could be viewed as taking a step to
avoid burnout on the part of presently serving citizen volunteers.
Although abolishing the role of the boards and committees altogether is another option, the
CCI believes it would be useful to continue having liaisons from the other citizen groups,
even if the liaisons do not attend every meeting. This is because an official liaison provides
the CCI a designated contact for issues relating to that board or committee. In addition,
under a voluntary system, present and future liaisons who wish to continue to actively
participate in the CCI would have the opportunity to do so. The regular and valuable
participation of the Library Board continuing to the present is a case in point.
At-Large Members
Significantly, as presently structured, the CCI is unlike all of the other City boards and
committees. It is the only one made up of members who are not interviewed and directly
appointed by Council. The former facilitators are all self-nominated and their respective
group appoints each of the board and committee representatives. Other members of the
general public who may have a passion to serve, who have experience working in community
involvement, and who are willing to give of their time, have no opportunity to be part of the
CCI.
I:\LRPI.\\Council \lareTials\2007\9-21-07.A'C(ACH 2Issue Paper - CCI membership structure.doc 2
Restructuring the CCI by the creation of at-large slots is necessary to facilitate a fully
functional committee. The CCI cannot operate effectively with only five or six active
members and with no potential replacements for the now serving CIT facilitators. At the
same time, opening up the CCI by creating at-large positions would ensure the opportunity
for all citizens to be involved in the CCL In addition, a program that promotes citizen
involvement should provide opportunities for all citizens to be involved.
A related benefit of adding at-large positions is that this creates an opportunity for increased
diversity and inclusiveness. A priority of the CCI has been to increase outreach to new and
under-represented groups in the community. New member recruitment would advance this
priority by providing opportunities to create a committee that reflects the diversity of the
community. A diverse CCI would set the stage for, and assist in building ties between,
traditionally underrepresented groups and the City. Current members of the CCI are in
support of this concept.
Another recommendation is to create a youth (high school) position on the committee.
Adding a youth slot would bring a fresh, youthful perspective to public involvement and
communication issues of the day. It would also give a voice to the some 30% of community
residents who are under twenty years of age.
Summary of Recommendations
1. Remove the board and committee CCI membership requirement. Make board and
committee membership voluntary, rather than mandatory.
2. Expand the CCI's membership to include four at-large members appointed through
the City's established application and interview process.
3. Emphasize and encourage the recruitment and selection of at-large members who
reflect the diversity of the community.
4. Expand the CCI to include a youth (high school) representative.
5. Explicitly provide the opportunity for any officially recognized Neighborhood
Organizations to appoint a representative to the CCI.
1:\1.R11LN\Council \Iaterials\2007\8-21-07.A'I-r,\CI 12 Issue Paper- CC] membership structure.doc 2