The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 04/28/2009 TIGARD City of Tigard TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 28 2009 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED I: \Ofs \Donna's \Ccpkt3 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard- or.gov Revised 4/24/09 — Removed Agenda Item No. 8, which will be rescheduled to a future City Council agenda; added Agenda Item No. 11, and added an Executive IIN 41 City of Tigard Session tonic for real property transaction negotiations. ',- -:;-,-,--1,,,,70 Tigard Business Meeting — Agenda l . 'ftk:: , av^„" m „ L § ,L7,” Wd,AP'y 1. ', <r.'a!r', 1 mm -al '.:, r: 3, ,r 5 u . `..':k? .:�� ,. Fw""m>".'"" .c^� 'ai �.W. ». �.�: 7; w - �_..;..hlaw ,s::,a: , • TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 28, 2009 — 6:30 p.m. Study Session, 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., 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 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 Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA CABLE VIEWERS: The regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28 at 7:30 p.m. The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 p.m. Monday 6:00 a.m. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL /LCRB AGENDA - APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503 - 639 - 4171 I www.tigard- or.gov I Page 1 of 7 City of Tigard as Tigard Business Meeting — Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD (LCRB) MEETING DATE /TIME: April 28, 2009 — 6:30 pm Study Session; 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard — Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(d) and (e) to discuss labor negotiations and real property transaction negotiations. 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. • STUDY SESSION ➢ Discuss Proposed Ordinance to Allow Use of Police All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) on City Streets o Police Department ➢ Update on Urban Forestry Master Plan o Community Development Department 7:30 PM 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 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non - Agenda Items 2. PROCLAMATIONS • Mayor Dirksen A PROCLAIM MAY 1, 2009 AS SILVER STAR BANNER DAY TO REMEMBER OUR WOUNDED AND ILL SOLDIERS FROM ALL BRANCHES OF THE ARMED FORCES B. PROCLAIM MAY 3 -9, 2009, AS BE KIND TO ANIMALS WEEK C PROCLAIM MAY 8, 2009, MILITARY FAMILIES APPRECIATION DAY TIGARD CITY COUNCIL /LCRB AGENDA — APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503- 639 -4171 I www.tigard - or.gov I Page 2 of 7 7:35 PM 3. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less, Please) • Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce Update • Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication • Citizen Sign Up Sheet 7:45 PM 4. CONSENT AGENDA (Tigard City Council and Local Contract Review Board) These items are considered 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 City Council Minutes for February 17 and March 10, 2009 4.2 Receive and File: a. Volunteer Program Report b. Joint Meeting Minutes - Tigard - Tualatin School Board and the Tigard and Tualatin City Councils for March 31, 2009 4.3 Appoint Linda Monahan to the Library Board - Resolution No. 09 -22 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING LINDA MONAHAN, CURRENT LIBRARY BOARD ALTERNATE, TO COMPLETE THE UNEXPIRED TERM OF BOARD MEMBER BRIAN KELLY; SAID TERM EXPIRES JUNE 30, 2012 4.4 Appoint Troy Mears as a Member, and Holly Polivka as an Alternate Member, to the Park and Recreation Advisory Board - Resolution No. 09 -23 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING TROY MEARS AS A MEMBER, AND APPOINTING HOLLY POLIVKA AS AN ALTERNATE MEMBER, TO THE PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD 4.5 Approve Grant Application to the State of Oregon for a 2009 Homeland Security Grant for the Police Department 4.6 Approve Grant Application to the Department of Justice for the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Grant for the Police Department 4.7 Approve Grant Application to the Department of Justice for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Competitive Grant Under the Fiscal Year 2009 Recovery Act for Two Funding for a Crime Prevention Specialist for the Police Department 4.8 Approve Grant Application to the Department of Justice for the Fiscal Year 2009 Recovery Act Local Youth Mentoring Initiative for After - School and Summer Camp Programs for the Police Department 4.9 Approve a Grant Application to the Department of Justice for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Competitive Grant for Under the 2009 Recovery Act to Enhance Forensic and Crime Scene Investigations for the Police Department 4.10 Authorize Application for Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (ORPD) Grant to Purchase Summer Creek Property- Resolution No. 09 -24 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO PARTIALLY FUND ACQUISITION OF THE SUMMER CREEK PROPERTY TIGARD CITY COUNCIL /LCRB AGENDA — APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503 - 639 -4171 I www.tigard - or.gov I Page 3 of 7 4.11 Authorize Dedication of $1 Million from the Open Spaces Bond for Purchase of Summer Creek Property- Resolution No. 09 -25 A RESOLUTION DEDICATING $1 MILLION TO ACQUIRE SUMMER CREEK PROPERTY LOCALLY KNOWN AS THE "FOWLER PROPERTY," AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT • Consent Agenda - It Rerrozed for Separate Discussion. Any item. requested to be yenvzai from the Consent Agenda for separate di cuss ion zull be considered immediately after the Co nail /Loral Contract ReriewBaod has zoted on those item zuhich do not nil discussion 7:50 p.m. 5. COUNCIL GOAL UPDATE • Administration Department 8:05 p.m. 6. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 11.04 REGARDING RECYCLING FOR BUSINESSES • Public Works Department • Council Discussion • Council Consideration: Ordinance.No. 09 -05 and Resolution No. 09 -26 Ordinance: . Council Member: . . I move for adoption of Ordinance No. 09 -05 Council Member: I second the motion • Mayor: Will the City :Recorder please read,the number and title of the ordinance? City Recorder: Ordinance No. 09 -05 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 11.04 TO INCLUDE A BUSINESS RECYCLING REQUIREMENT Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): Will the City Recorder please conduct a roll-call vote of Council? City Recorder: Conducts a roll-call to record votes of City Council members. Mayor: Ordinance No. 09 -05 (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Note. Tie zotes = failure to pass. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL /LCRB AGENDA — APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503- 639 -4171 I www.tigard or.gov I Page 4 of 7 Resolution: Council Member: I move for adoption of Resolution No. 09 -26 Council Member: I second the motion Mayor: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the resolution? City Recorder: RESOLUTION NO. 09-26 - A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE TIGARD'S BUSINESS RECYCLING REQUIREMENT Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion) All those in favor of adopting Resolution No. 09 -26 , please say aye. Mayor /Councilors Mayor: All those opposed to adopting Resolution No. 09 -26 , please say "nay." • Mayor /Councilors Mayor: Resolution No. 09 -26 , (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Note. Tie wtes = failure to pass. 8:10 p.m. 7. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO ALLOW POLICE ALL TERRAIN VEHICLES (ATV'S) ON CITY STREETS AND REPEAL TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 10.32.180, TRAINS NOT TO BLOCK STREETS, WHICH HAS BEEN SUPERSEDED BY ORS 824.222 AND 824.223 • Police Department • Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 09 -06 Council Member: I move for adoption of Ordinance No. 09 -06 Council Member: I second the motion TIGARD CITY COUNCIL /LCRB AGENDA — APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503- 639 -4171 I www.tigard- or.gov I Page 5 of 7 Mayor. Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the ordinance? City Recorder: ORDINANCE NO. 09-06 - AN ORDINANCE REVISING TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) 10.32.175 TO ALLOW OPERATION OF CITY OF TIGARD -OWNED ALL - TERRAIN VEHICLES (ATV'S) UPON PUBLIC ROADWAYS, STREETS, HIGHWAYS, PARK PATHWAYS, AND OTHER RELATED AREAS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF TIGARD, AND TO REPEAL TMC 10.32.180 RENDERED OBSOLETE BY ORS 824.222 AND 824.223 (2007) AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Mayor: Is there any discussion? Mayor (after discussion): Will the City Recorder please conduct a roll-call vote of Council? City Recorder: Conducts a roll-call to record votes of City Council members. Mayor: Ordinance No. 09 -06 (is adopted or has failed) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote of the Council members present. Not Tie wtes = failure to pass. Agenda Item No. 8 will be rescheduled to a future City Council agenda. 8:20 p.m. 8. CITY COUNCIL FIN L. e e e Y_I_ _ _ � � � �, d -I_ • L. I_ d_ • ' '!- £ • ►19 e ► I • , 4 . . , i I _ h I . 4I_ .r r . ••f u••1 e► ••f u.. • Community Development Department • Council Discussion • Council Consideration: Ordinance No. 09- 8:20 p.m. 9. UPDA'IE ON DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE DESIGN STANDARDS AND ASSOCIATED LAND USE REGULATIONS AND PLANNING AND ZONING MAP REGULATIONS • Community Development Department 8:35 p.m. 10. URBAN /RURAL RESERVES PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT ASPIRATIONS • Community Development Department TIGARD CITY COUNCIL /LCRB AGENDA - APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503 - 639 -4171 I www.tigard - or.gov I Page 6 of 7 8:50 PM • 11. AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN DEDICATION DEED AND EASEMENT DOCUMENTS FOR BURNHAM STREET BUSINESS AND STORAGE, LLC ACQUISITION, INCLUDING EXPENDITURES FOR THE ACQUISITION • Community Development Department 8:55 PM 12. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 13. NON AGENDA ITEMS 14. 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. 9:00 PM 15. ADJOURNMENT I: \ADM\ CATHY\CCA \2009 \090428.doc TIGARD CITY COUNCIL /LCRB AGENDA — APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503 - 639 -4171 I www.tigard- or.gov I Page 7 of 7 City of Tigard II ' , Stud Session " Y — Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL & LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD (LCRB) MEETING DATE /TIME: April 28, 2009/6:30 p.m. Study Session and 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(d) and (e) to discuss labor negotiations and real property transaction negotiations. 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. > STUDY SESSION > Discuss Proposed Ordinance to Allow Use of Police All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs) on City Streets • Police Department > Update on Urban Forestry Master Plan • Community Development Department > Administrative Items • Agenda Revisions o Add Proclamation: Military Appreciation Day o Removed Agenda Item No. 8 - Fields Final Order o Added Agenda Item No. 11 - Authorize City Manager to Sign Documents - Burnham Street Business and Storage Council Calendar. May 4 Monday Budget Committee Meeting, 6:30 p.m. -- TVF&R Fire Station - 12617 SW Walnut Street 6 Wednesday Mid -Point Review of the Highway 99W Design Vision with the University of Oregon Graduate Students; 5:30 - 7:30 p.m. - TVF&R Fire Station - 12617 SW Walnut Street 11 Monday Budget Committee Meeting, 6:30 p.m. -- TVF&R Fire Station - 12617 SW Walnut Street 12 Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 18 Monday (if needed) Budget Committee Meeting, 6:30 p.m. -- TVF&R Fire Station - 12617 SW Walnut Street 19 Tuesday Council Workshop Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall 26 Tuesday Council Business Meeting - 6:30 pm, Town Hall TIGARD CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA - APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1 503 - 639 -4171 1 www.tigard - or.gov 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 dosed 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 bylaw 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) (j) - Public investments - to carryon 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. L \ADM \Cath \CCA SS - Pink Skeet \ 2009 /090310.doc TIGARD CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA — APRIL 28, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 I 503 - 639 - 4171 I www.tigard - or.gov I Lay Agenda Item #: 5Q-SS i t5'� Meeting Date: April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Status update on Urban Forestry Master Plan (UFMP) Prepared By: Todd Prager Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Receive information on the status of the Urban Forestry Master Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY On June 3, 2008, Tigard City Council adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPA2008- 00002, adding an Urban Forest section to the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Goal 2.2 Policy 11 of the Comprehensive Plan states, "The City shall develop and implement a citywide Urban Forestry Management Master Plan." On October 28, 2008, Tigard City Council adopted Resolution 08 -64 appointing members to the Urban Forestry Master Plan Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC). The CAC is comprised of the Tree Board plus four additional stakeholders including two certified arborists, one Home Builder's Association (HBA) representative, and one community member with expertise in public administration. On November 19, 2008, the Committee for Citizen Involvement approved the Communication Plan for the Urban Forestry Master Plan. The Communication Plan breaks down each of the six phases of the process and speaks to the ways in which citizens and stakeholders may participate, communicate, and receive information about the Urban Forestry Master Plan. Staff and the CAC have completed the first half of the Urban Forestry Master Plan, and are updating Planning Commission (April 6, 2009) and Council prior to embarking on the second half of the process. Items completed to date include: • Analysis of tree canopy changes over time. • Statistically valid community survey specific to tree and urban forestry issues. • Coordination meetings with impacted City Departments to identify those areas where urban forestry program administration could be improved. • Coordination meetings with key community stakeholder groups and jurisdictions that regularly contribute to and /or are affected by the management of Tigard's urban forest. The Urban Forestry Master Plan will be drafted by staff over the next several months using the information collected thus far and input from the CAC during the three remaining meetings. The Urban Forestry Master Plan will be presented for acceptance by Planning Commission and Council in October and November respectively. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A CITY COUNCIL GOALS Goal 1: Implement Comprehensive Plan ATTACHMENT LIST Urban Forestry Master Plan Progress Report FISCAL NOTES N/A • III City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Mayor Dirksen and Honorable Council From: Todd Prager, Associate Planner /Arborist Current Planning Division Re: Urban Forestry Master Plan Progress Report Date: April 10, 2009 INTRODUCTION On June 3, 2008, Tigard City Council adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2008 -00002 adding an Urban Forest section to the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Goal 2.2 Policy 11 of the Comprehensive Plan states, "The City shall develop and implement a citywide Urban Forestry Management Master Plan." On October 28, 2008, Tigard City Council adopted Resolution 08 -64 appointing members to the Urban Forestry Master Plan Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC). The CAC is comprised of the Tree Board plus four additional stakeholders including two certified arborists, one Home Builder's Association (HBA) representative, and one community member with expertise in public administration. The CAC represents a broad range of interests and is currently overseeing the Plan's development. On November 19, 2008, the Committee for Citizen Involvement approved the Communication Plan for the Urban Forestry Master Plan. The Communication Plan breaks down each of the six phases of the process and speaks to the ways in which citizens and stakeholders may participate, communicate, and receive information about the Urban Forestry Master Plan. Staff and the CAC have completed the first half of the Urban Forestry Master Plan, and are updating Planning Commission and Council prior to embarking on the second half of the process. The Urban Forestry Master Plan will be drafted by staff over the next several months using the information collected thus far and input from the CAC during the three remaining meetings. The Urban Forestry Master Plan will be presented for acceptance by Planning Commission and Council in October and November respectively. A website has been developed and is available to the community for more information and to track progress and activities of the Urban Forestry Master Plan at: www.tigard - or.gov /community /trees /master plan.asp Page 1 of 9 BACKGROUND The following excerpt from the International Society of Arboriculture website (Attachement 1) provides an excellent overview of the purpose and importance of an Urban Forestry Master Plan: `Many community tree ordinances have been developed in response to public outcry over specific perceived problems. Unfortunately, a "band -aid" approach to developing tree ordinances often leads to ordinances that are not consistent with sound management practices, and which can actually thwart good management. We believe that communities need to develop or review their overall urban forest management strategy befbre considering a new or revised tree ordinance. Policy makers must recognise that the primarygoal is effective management of local tree resources, not simply regulation. Tree ordinances provide the legal framework for successful urban forest management by enabling and authorising management activities. However, methods for managing the urban forest ecosystem are continually evolving and the input of trained professionals to the management process is critical. Therefore, we believe that ordinances should facilitate rather than prescribe management. Successful tree ordinances follow this guiding principle. If the role of a tree ordinance is to facilitate resource management, the tree ordinance must be part of a larger community forest management strategy. Most of the shortcomings attributed to tree ordinances can usually be traced to the lack of a clearly thought -out management strategy. Poor planning leads to poor ordinances, and even the best - written ordinance is unlikely to succeed in the absence of an overall urban forest management strategy. We have found that few existing tree ordinances have been developed as part of a comprehensive management strategy." (http://www.isa-arbor.com/publications/tree-ord/ordprt1b.aspx) In developing Tigard's Urban Forestry Master Plan, staff and the CAC have been following Miller's (1988) model of urban forest planning. F >1. What do we have? e e d 2. What do we want? b a k 3. How do we get what we want? The remainder of this document describes how the above questions have been and will be answered, and what feedback processes will occur to ensure the Urban Forestry Master Plan is successfully implemented. Page 2 of 9 WHAT DO WE HAVE? The question of 'What do we have ?" is being answered by: • Analysis of tree canopy changes over time. • Historical and current community profile. • • Review of federal, state, and local policy framework. • Review of City department /divisions with urban forest management roles. Metro completed the classification of 1996 and 2007 Tigard air photos using software that can detect the presence of tree canopy cover. This has allowed City staff to do a comparative analysis of tree cover change in the community spanning the past ten years (Attachment 2). It will also allow Tigard to continually track canopy change in the future as Metro runs the software on Tigard air photos every two years. Some highlights of the canopy data collected to date include: • 25% (1996) vs. 24% (2007) Citywide Canopy. • 63 canopy clusters > 5 acres (1996) vs. 48 canopy clusters > 5 acres (2007). • 4,356 canopy clusters < .5 acres (1996) vs. 7,231 canopy clusters < .5 acres (2007). • 1,423 acres of buildable lands (1996) vs. 529 acres of buildable lands (2007). • Canopy coverage on remaining buildable lands is 42 %. • If all canopy was removed from remaining buildable lands, citywide tree canopy would decline from 24% to 21%. • City of Tigard Land Area is 7,556 acres. • 5,448 acres are private and 2,108 acres are public. • City of Tigard property (388 acres) has 46% canopy. • Public Right -of -Way (1,288 acres) has 9% canopy. • Other Public Entities (432 acres) have 24% canopy. • Private Property (5,447) has 27% canopy. • Commercial Zone Canopy is 10% (2007). • Industrial Zone Canopy is 16% (2007). • Mixed Use Zone Canopy is 14% (2007). • Residential Zone Canopy is 30% (2007). Preliminary findings from the canopy study include: • Tigard canopy coverage (24 %) is below the target recommendation of 40% for Pacific Northwest cities. • While Tigard canopy coverage is currently stabilized (1% decrease in 10 years), it is becoming increasingly fragmented (larger groves are replaced by individual trees). • The remaining amount of buildable lands is relatively small (529 acres), so focusing management activities solely on development code revisions will have a limited impact. • Right -of -way canopy is relatively low (9 %). This is an opportunity area where canopy could be increased (e.g. Lake Oswego right -of -way canopy is 34 %). Page 3 of 9 • Citywide residential canopy (30 %) is much higher than commercial, industrial, and mixed use canopy (avg. 13.6 %). Improving parking lot landscape standards may allow for a significant canopy increase in non - residential zones. Ongoing studies that will be completed over the upcoming months include: • An analysis of potential plantable areas in Tigard so that realistic canopy goals can be set and planting sites can be identified. • An estimation of historical canopy coverage in Tigard (pre 1996) so that a comparison can be made between current and historical tree canopy. • An estimation of current parking lot canopy coverage so that the effectiveness of current parking lot standards can be evaluated and parking lot canopy changes can be tracked over time. • Documentation of historical and current community profile. • Documentation of federal, state, and local policy framework. • Description of City department /divisions with urban forest management roles. WHAT DO WE WANT? The question of "What do we want ?" is being answered by: • Review of Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. • Community surveys. • Needs assessments with City departments /divisions. • Interviews of major community stakeholder groups. • Listening posts for community members to express their opinions directly to City staff. An independent, scientific telephone survey of 400 randomly selected citizens about their attitudes towards existing and potential urban forestry policies and programs was completed by Steve Johnson and Associates (Attachment 3). The survey was funded in part by a grant from the Oregon Department of Forestry and USDA Forest Service. Some highlights of the community survey are: • Residents are satisfied with the amount and quality of trees /forests in Tigard (-86% satisfaction). However, ^-74% agreed that more street trees would be good for the City. • Residents feel strongly that trees contribute to quality of life ( -96% agree) and residential property values (-92% agree). • Residents want the City to direct more resources to maintain /protect trees and forests in Tigard (-74% agree), and a majority support increasing funding for tree and forest management (^'55% support). • Residents support tree preservation and replacement during development (-88% support). In addition a majority ( -56 %) support development regulations even when they limit the size and extent of potential buildings or profits. Approximately 32% of residents oppose tree regulations that limit development. • Residents consistently prioritize planting, protection, and maintenance of natural forested areas over other resources such as street trees and ornamental landscape trees. Page 4 of 9 • Approximately 55% of residents would like to see new protection measures focused on larger groves of native trees as opposed to individual trees of significant size. • Residents are supportive of tree regulations for developed private property that would protect large, healthy trees (^'75% support). • A majority of residents support the creation of a program where the City would become involved in disputes between neighbors regarding hazardous trees (-59% support). Preliminary findings from the community survey include: • The community values the urban forest and is satisfied with its quality. • Residents want more funding directed to protecting and maintaining the urban forest. • Residents support development regulations that protect trees even if the result is reduced development. • Residents prioritize grove protection and maintenance. • Residents support the creation of a hazard tree abatement program. A series of meetings were held with representatives from a range of City departments (Community Development, Public Works, and Financial and Information Services) and divisions (Capital Construction & Transportation, Current Planning, Development Review, Information Technology, Public Works Administration, Parks, Streets, Wastewater /Storm, and Water) to discuss urban forestry coordination issues, and identify those areas where coordination could be improved (Attachment 4). The following City needs were identified during the meetings: • Better tracking of street trees and protected private property trees needed via GIS database. • Better tracking and enforcement of required stream corridor enhancements needed. • Prior to City property acquisition, need more detailed evaluation of resource management requirements. • Need to clarify tree protection standards for building additions. • Need to create tree protection standards for City projects. • Need to formalize hazard tree response system. • Need to publicize requirements for trees in sensitive lands. • Need better tracking of tree mitigation fund expenditures. In addition to needs assessment of the City, staff is in the process of coordinating with key community stakeholder groups and jurisdictions that regularly contribute to and /or are affected by the management of Tigard's urban forest (Attachment 5). The stakeholder groups identified the following policies and programs that they think should be revised or created in the future: Pacific Northwest Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture • Do not penalize property owners with trees more than those without trees during development. • Do not continue to incentivize overplanting of trees via mitigation standards. • Prioritize natives and large stature trees. Page 5 of 9 • Make project arborists a more integral member of the development team. • Increase planting strip size and /or require root barriers. • Hire greenspace manager. Oregon Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects • More focus on preservation, less focus on mitigation. • More focus on sustainable landscape standards (not necessarily natives). • Create detailed tree and landscape design manual with planting and preservation standards. • Require warranty period to ensure landscape establishment. • Require landscape architects to be a member of the development project team. Tualatin Riverkeepers • Improve parking lot design standards to incorporate stormwater treatment and more tree canopy. • Increase stormwater incentives /requirements for development such as the "no runoff" provisions. • Establish a sustainable funding source for urban forestry. • Increase efforts to remove invasives. Tigard - Tualatin School District • Partner to plant trees on school grounds. • Focus on low maintenance and sustainable plantings. Portland General Electric • Tree plans should be routed to PGE for comment to avoid tree /utility conflicts on new developments. • PGE can partner with the City to abate existing and potential tree /utility hazards. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce • No comment. Trees and urban forestry has not been an issue for the Chamber members. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board • No comment. Clean Water Services • Exempt stream restoration projects in degraded Sensitive Areas and Vegetated Corridors from tree survey and protection requirements. • Adopt an inclusive invasive species list and exempt invasive tree removal from permit requirements. Page 6 of 9 • Focus on long term maintenance of riparian plantings through Code revisions, Surface Water Management (SWM) funds, and tree mitigation funds. • Secure a stable funding source for long term riparian vegetation management. • Fill the greenspace manager position so that riparian re- vegetation projects continue /expand in the future. • Coordinate City planting standards in stream corridors with Clean Water Services standards. • Implement an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan in cooperation with Clean Water Services. Oregon Department of Transportation • Prohibit the planting of trees that will conflict with powerlines. Route plans to Portland General Electric for review. • Require root barriers and other design feature that will help to minimize conflicts with hard features. • Require development projects to locate utilities on planting plans prior to ODOT and City review. • Clarify jurisdictional requirements in ODOT right of ways. Home Builder's Association (Draft) • There should be no urban forestry program because the benefits of such a program do not outweigh the costs. • Do not regulate trees on private property, and allows owners to manage their land as they see fit. • However, if the City does continue to regulate trees in the future the following should be included /excluded from the program: o Eliminate punitive mitigation standards and only require developers to mitigate for unnecessary tree removal. o Revise fee in lieu of mitigation to reflect the actual cost of tree replacement. o Do not incentivize the preservation of large and potentially hazardous trees. o Revise incentives for tree preservation so that developers are able to utilize the incentives. Tree Board • Increase communication between City departments. • Unify tree related Code provisions. • Focus future Code revisions on areas outside development. • Make sure Code revisions can be translated into something the public can understand. • Expand community education on urban forestry issues. • Continually measure progress on canopy preservation /expansion and community attitudes. • Plan for future annexations of tree resources in areas outside of the City limits. Page 7 of 9 The needs identified by citizens, the City, and community stakeholders will help guide future policy and program goals. The goals set will need to be measurable so that the City can evaluate whether or not goals are being met in the future. For example, a goal of "No net loss of tree canopy between 2007 and 2015" is preferable to a goal of "Maximize tree canopy ". Finally, it will be important to ensure that the goals in the Urban Forestry Master Plan are coordinated with the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. HOW DO WE GET WHAT WE WANT? After goals are identified, the question of "How do we get what we want ?" will be answered through the creation of an implementation matrix. The implementation matrix will be the most important part of the Urban Forestry Master Plan because it will prioritize urban forestry program, policy, and code direction by setting a timetable for implementation. It will also allow for the Tree Board to monitor progress of the Urban Forestry Master Plan as part of their annual work program. A draft example of the implementation matrix is provided below: r — — I o' &" y e c I , c ° Jc co, ON" \e' 462 J5 e ,(` y4 ° � \ `' � re d Q(e 4 � Sa o � 5 � Ss* - Q ' ,4 Implementation Goals �¢ ds y s a Lo � F Q c° 1. Develop Hazard Tree Program. , 11.1 Establish City storm and hazard tree response protocols. a. : Staff Public Works 2.3.8 L $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ODF I____I Prior to land acquisition conduct a tree hazard assessments Fund b. ; Staff ;Hire greenspace coordinater to manage Tigard natural areas Public Works 2.2.5 H $$ Time /General 2015 TRK land develop a proactive hazard abatement program Fund c. Staff I 'Develop and implement formal emergency response Planning 2.3.8, 2.2.3 L $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ODF I _ ___ system for tree hazards on City streets Fund d. Staff 2.2.3, 2.3.8, 2.3.9, i 'Develop and implement formal emergency response Public Works L $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ODF p 2.3.10, 2.3.11 'system for tree hazards in City parks/greenspaces Fund I 1.2 Establish City program to facilitate hazard abatement on private property. a. Staff Revise Tigard Municipal Code to grant authority to the City Planning 2.3.8 H $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ODF to become involved in •rivate •ro•e tree hazards. Fund 2. Revise Street Tree and Landscaping and Screening Ordinances. _, - ',2.1 Revise street tree planting, maintenance, and removal requirements I a. Staff Create design and maintenance manual with drawings and Planning 2.3.8 H $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ASIA, TRK specifications for planting and maintenance. Fund b. ! Staff 'Revise Tigard Municipal Code to establish permit system for Planning 2.2.5 M $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ASLA 'street tree planting, removal, and replacement. Fund Page 8 of 9 FEEDBACK (ARE YOU GETTING WHAT YOU WANT ?) The implementation matrix will allow for the Tree Board to monitor progress of the Urban Forestry Master Plan as part of their annual work program. During the Tree Board's annual joint meetings with Council, progress on the Urban Forestry Master Plan can be communicated. In addition, canopy mapping will be occurring every two years by Metro so that the impact of City programs and policies on Tigard tree canopy can be continually tracked. Finally, the Urban Forestry Master Plan will be updated every five to seven years so that citizen, City, and community stakeholder needs can be reassessed and City programs and policies can be readjusted accordingly. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: "Developing a Community Forest Management Strategy" By the International Society of Arboriculture Attachment 2: Canopy Analysis Results Attachment 3: Urban Forestry Phone Survey Results and Analysis by Steve Johnson and Associates Attachment 4: Internal City Coordination Meeting Results Attachment 5: Stakeholder Interview Results LITERATURE CITED "Developing a community forest management strategy." International Society of Arboriculture. 18 March 2009 < http:// www. isa- arbor. com /publications /tree- ord /ordprtlb.aspx> Miller, R. W. 1988. Urban forestry: planning and managing urban greenspaces. Prentice- Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 404 p. Page 9 of 9 Attachment 1 • " Consumer Conference & Education & Member About ISA Certification Resources Education Trade Show Research Services Championship ISA Home Pace > Education & Research Tree Ordinance Guidelines = r F ?�:i P,:7 , t) Tree Ordinance Guidelines CONSUMER <Previous I Next > INFORMATION Developing a community forest management strategy WEB STORE __ ._..___ _____.�.__ ISA HISPANA Many community tree ordinances have been developed in response to public outcry over specific perceived problems. Unfortunately, a "band -aid" approach to developing tree ordinances often leads to ordinances that are not consistent with sound management practices, and which can actually thwart good management. We believe that communities need to develop or review their overall urban forest management strategy before considering a new or revised tree ordinance. Policy makers must recognize that the primary goal is effective management of local tree resources, not simply regulation. Tree ordinances provide the legal framework for successful urban forest management by enabling and authorizing management activities. However, methods for managing the urban forest ecosystem are continually evolving, and the input of trained professionals to the management process is critical. Therefore, we believe that ordinances should facilitate rather than prescribe management. Successful tree ordinances follow this guiding principle. If the role of a tree ordinance is to facilitate resource management, the tree ordinance must be part of a larger community forest management strategy. Most of the shortcomings attributed to tree ordinances can usually be traced to the lack of a clearly thought -out management strategy. Poor planning leads to poor ordinances, and even the best - written ordinance is unlikely to succeed in the absence of an overall urban forest Attachment 1 management strategy. We have found that few existing tree ordinances have been developed as part of a comprehensive management strateay. How to develop a management strategy We have generally followed Millers (1988) model of the management planning process. More recently, the descriptive term adaptive management has been applied to this process. Miller (1988) presents the management planning process in terms of three basic questions: What do you have? What do you want? How do you get what you want? Developing an appropriate tree ordinance may be a partial answer to the third question, i.e., it is one way of trying to get what you want. However, it should be clear that the first two questions need to be answered before the third can be addressed. Thus, assessment (determining what you have) and goal- setting (determining what you want) should precede any consideration of an ordinance. In practice, answering the first two questions is often an iterative process. Communities may have ideas about what they want before they fully assess what they have. However, an assessment of existing tree resources can help point out needs that might not be obvious, and will help the community to establish appropriate goals. Since the urban forest resource and the external factors that affect it are continually changing, developing a management strategy must be an ongoing process. Asking a fourth question helps to bring the process full circle: Are you getting what you want? Miller (1988) represents this phase as a feedback step which connects the third question back to the first. If the planning process is to be effective, it is necessary to determine whether you actually achieve what you want. If not, methods for getting what you want may need to be changed. Alternatively, it is possible that what you get is no longer what you want, and goals will need to be revised as well. We can define a number of specific steps that address each of these four basic questions. These steps have been defined in similar ways by various authors (Lobel 1983, Miller 1988, Jennings 1978, McPherson and Johnson 1988, World Forestry Center and Morgan 1989). For the purposes of our discussion, we recognize seven distinct steps which are discussed below. Working through these steps need not be overly complicated or arduous. The entire process is driven by the specific resources and goals of the individual community. By following the process outlined below, a small community with very modest tree management goals can develop a simple ordinance that addresses its limited goals. On the other hand, communities seeking to develop a comprehensive tree management program or expand their existing programs can do so following the same process. Ordinances developed through this process will be uniquely suited to the • Attachment 1 needs of each community. I I WHAT DO YOU HAVE? Step A. Assess the tree resource. An assessment of tree resources provides the basic information necessary for making management decisions. It also provides a baseline against which change can be measured. Ideally, this assessment should include all tree resources within the planning area of the municipality. However, • in communities that are just starting to consider municipal tree management, an incremental approach may be more practical. In this case, the assessment may be focused on a certain portion of the urban forest, such as street trees or trees in a particular geographic area. Tree resource assessments are based on various inventory methods, most of which require some type of survey. Complete tree inventories of all public trees are relatively common, and play a central role in many tree management programs. However, for the purposes of setting goals and initiating a management strategy, information from a representative sample of the urban forest will often suffice. Information that may be useful for management planning includes: total number of trees classified by species, condition, age, size, and location; problem situations, such as sidewalk damage, disease and pest problems, or hazardous trees, preferably linked to the basic tree data listed above; amount of canopy cover by location. Inventories vary in complexity depending on the size of the community and the nature of the data collected. They can be made by city staff, consultants, or trained volunteers. In one small community, an inventory of street trees was conducted as an Eagle Scout project. However, it is important to ensure that the data collected is valid and reliable, since this information provides a basis for decisions made in later steps in the process. Several simple sampling and evaluation techniques applicable to urban forestry are described in the Evaluation pages. Step B. Review tree management practices. An important part of understanding the status of the urban forest is knowing how it has been managed. This requires information on both past and current management methods and actions, such as: municipal tree care practices, including planting, maintenance, and removal; existing ordinances, and the level of enforcement practiced (numbers of violations, permits and citations issued, penalties and fines Attachment 1 collected); planning regulations and guidelines that pertain to trees, and numbers of tree - related permits granted, modified, or denied; activities of municipal departments and public utilities that impact trees. The specific types of information involved will vary by jurisdiction, depending on the level of past and current tree management. Municipal records are the most reliable source of this information. However, records on maintenance or ordinance enforcement may not exist in some cases, and the information may have to be obtained by interviewing local government staff involved with these activities. • The point of this step is to identify all of the activities that affect trees in the community, especially those that are under municipal control of one ( form or other. For instance, various ordinances and planning regulations seemingly unrelated to the tree program may impinge on tree resources and their impact must be taken into account. Before trying to change community forest management, we need to consider both current and • historical management practices and identify all of the players involved. WHAT DO YOU WANT? Step C. Identify needs. With information on the status of their tree resources and tree management in hand, a community is in a good position to assess its urban forestry needs. Urban forestry needs can be grouped into three broad categories, although many needs may actually fall into more than one category. Biological needs are those that are related to the tree resource itself. Typical needs in this category include the need to: increase species and age diversity to provide long -term forest stability; provide sufficient tree planting to keep pace with urban growth and offset tree removal; increase the proportion of large - statured trees in the forest for greater canopy effects; ensure proper compatibility between trees and planting sites to reduce sidewalk damage and conflicts with overhead utilities that lead to premature tree removal. Management needs refer to the needs of those involved with the short- and long -term care and maintenance of the urban forest. Some common management needs include: develop adequate long -term planning to ensure the sustainability of the urban forest; optimize the use of limited financial and personnel resources; increase training and education for tree program employees to ensure high quality tree care; coordinate tree - related activities of municipal departments. Community needs are those that relate to how the public perceives and interacts with the urban forest and the local urban forest management Attachment 1 program. Examples of community needs include: increase public awareness of the values and benefits associated with trees; promote better private tree care through better public understanding of the biological needs of trees; foster community support for the urban forest management program; promote conservation of the urban forest by focusing public attention on all tree age classes, not just large heritage trees. : The needs listed above are common to many communities. However, the specific needs of each community will vary, and may include others not noted here. Step D. Establish goals. Now that we know what we have and what we need, we are ready to set goals to address local urban forestry needs and to guide the formation of the management strategy. To establish realistic goals, it's important to consider limitations posed by the level of community support, economic realities, and environmental constraints. Because of limited resources, communities may be unable to immediately address all of the needs identified. If this is the case, it will be necessary to prioritize goals. In setting priorities, it is important not to neglect goals that require a long -term approach in favor of those that can be achieved quickly. At this point in the process, it is absolutely critical to get community involvement and support. Most tree ordinances rely heavily on voluntary compliance by the public. Such compliance is only likely to be achieved if members of the community support the goals which have been set. Management goals reached through public involvement are likely to reflect community values and therefore enjoy public support. Public participation in the goal- setting process also serves an educational function, providing an opportunity for citizens to see how urban forest management affects their community. Goals are the tangible ends that the management strategy seeks to achieve. It is therefore important to set goals which are quantifiable in some way, so that progress toward the goals can be monitored. For example, while it is admirable to seek to "improve the quality of life" or "protect the health and welfare of the community ", such goals are generally too diffuse to be measured in any meaningful way. However a goal such as "establish maximum tree cover' can be made quantifiable by setting canopy cover or tree density standards. Typical tree program goals which are consistent with good urban forest management are discussed in more detail on the Ordinance Goals page. HOW DO YOU GET WHAT YOU WANT? Step E. Select tools and formulate the management strategy. The objective of this step is to develop a management strategy that addresses your specific goals. There are many approaches that can be used to address each goal, and the pros and cons of each approach should be considered. Feasibility, practicality, legality, and economics should be Attachment 2 Canopy Cover (both 1996 and 2007) located within the June 2008 Tigard City Limits City Limits, June 2008 7556 acres 1996 2007 Percent of Percent of June 2008 June 2008 Acres City Limits Acres City Limits Canopy Cover 1952.75 25.84% 1852.69 24.52% 1996 2007 Percent of Percent of Percent of Percent of 1996 1996 2007 2007 Canopy Canopy Canopy Canopy • Size of Canopy Cluster Acres Cover Clusters Cover Acres Cover Clusters Cover Less than 0.5 acres 366.55 18.77% 4356 90.94% 584.30 31.54% 7231 93.86% 0.5 to .99 acres 135.76 6.95% 197 4.11% 167.25 9.03% 242 3.14% 1.0 to 1.99 acres 159.25 8.16% 113 2.36% 177.88 9.60% 131 1.70% 2.0 to 4.99 acres 190.86 9.77% 61 1.27% 157.00 8.47% 52 0.67% 5.0 or more acres 1100.33 56.35% 63 1.32% 766.26 41.36% 48 0.62% Total 1952.75 100% 1 4790 100% 1852.69 100% 7704 100% Attachment 2 Urban Renewal Zone 191 acres - - - -- -- - _ — 1996 2007 Acres Percent Acres Percent Canopy Cover of Urban Renewal Zone 19.67 10.30% 18.41 9.64% Attachment 2 Within June 2008 City Limits Jan 1, 2008 Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) 528.75 acres BLI 1996 1423.32 acres Canopy Cover Year BLI Acres Acres Percent 1996 1423.32 646.52 45.42% 2007 528.75 226.26 42.79% 1996 BLI Canopy Cover Change 1996 Canopy Cover 2007 Canopy Cover within 1996 BLI within 1996 BLI Acres Acres Percent Acres Percent 1996 BLI 1423.32 646.52 45.42% 495.24 34.79% Attachment 2 City Limits, June 2008 7556 acres May 13, 2008 Taxlots 2007 Canopy Cover Percent Ownership Taxlot Ownership Number Acres Acres Cover City of Tigard 235. 388.41 179.18 46.13% Public Right -of -Way n/a 1,288.30 117.45 9.12% Other Public Entity 79 431.65 105.10 24.35% Private 15,880 5,447.64 1,450.96 26.63% Total 16,194 7,556.00 1,852.69 24.52% • Attachment 2 Significant Habitat Areas 2007 Canopy Coverage 1852.69 acres Acres in 2007 Canopy Coverage Percent of 2007 Citywide Habitat Class Tigard Acres Percent Canopy Cover Highest Value 590.51 267.84 45.36% 14.46% Moderate Value 374.88 193.28 51.56% 10.43% Lower Value 447.84 234.96 52.47% 12.68% Total 1413.23 696.08 49.25% 37.57% • • Attachment 2 Sensitive Lands 2007 Canopy Coverage 1852.69 acres 1996 Canopy Coverage 1952.75 acres Acres in 2007 Canopy Coverage 1996 Canopy Coverage Percent Change 1996 Type Tigard Acres Percent Citywide Percent Acres Percent Citywide Percent to 2007 Local Wetland Inventory 290.91 116.01 39.88% 6.26% 145.98 50.18% 7.48% - 10.30% CWS Vegetated Corridor 704.78 302.85 42.97% 16.35% 348.16 49.40% 17.83% - 6.43% FEMA 100 -yr Floodplain 592.6 188.05 31.73% 10.15% 213.17 35.97% 10.92% - 4.24% Slopes > 25% 195.51 129.64 66.31% - 7.00% 130.28 66.64% 6.67% -0.33% Total 1783.8 736.55 41.29% 39.76% 837.59 46.96% 42.89% -5.66% Attachment 2 Subdivisions Approved in 1996/97 Canopy Coverage 1996 2007 Number Total Acres Acres Percent Acres Percent Change 1996 -2007 18 72.76 18.32 25.18% 12.49 17.17% 31.82% Attachment 2 City Limits, June 2008 7556 1996 Canopy Cover 2007 Canopy Cover Percent Change 1996 Zoning 2008 Acres Acres Percent Acres Percent to 2007 Commercial 800 88.13 11.02% 80.52 10.07% - 0.95% Industrial 863 139.81 16.20% 137.58 15.94% -0.26% Mixed Use 701 150.3 21.44% 99.79 14.24% -7.21% Residential 5192 1574.42 30.32% 1534.72 29.56% -0.76% Total 7556 1952.66 25.84% _ 1852.61 24.52% -1.32% Attachment 3 CITY OF TIGARD 2008 URBAN FORESTRY SURVEY STEVE JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES * P. O. BOX 3708 * EUGENE, OREGON 97403 TOPLINE FREQUENCIES * *Topline results include the text of each question, the response categories, and the number and percent of responses in each categwy. All questions include categories for Refused (7 or 97), Don't Know (8 or 98) and No Answer (9 or 99). In the interest of space, responses such as "I don't know," "I can't think of anything," and "no comment" have been removed from the document. The "open answers" are recorded verbatim. They have been corrected for spelling but not grammar. HELLO1 Hello, I'm calling on behalf of the City of Tigard. They have asked us to conduct a survey of residents 18 and older about trees in the city and urban forestry. The survey takes about ten minutes and is voluntary and anonymous. I'd like to start now. [INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF RESPONDENT SELF IDENTIFIES AS UNDER 18 ASK FOR SOMEONE OVER 18. IF NO ONE IS AVAILABLE TRY AND SCHEDULE CALL BACK. IF THIS IS THE LAST DIAL ATTEMPT GO TO NOQUAL] PRESS START TO BEGIN — OR — PRESS DISPO TO SCHEDULE CALLBACK *INTRO FOR PARTIALS: Hi, I'm calling back to finish an interview for the City of Tigard that we began earlier. Is that (you /person available)? SATIS1 I'd like to begin by asking if you are very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of trees in the following locations. First, what about the trees on your street? PROBE: Are you very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of trees on your street? 1 VERY SATISFIED 103 25.75% 2 SATISFIED 246 61.5% 3 DISSATISFIED 32 8% 4 VERY DISSATISFIED 10 2.5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 9 2.25% 400 100% SATIS2 What about the trees in your neighborhood? PROBE: Are you very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of trees in your neighborhood? City of Tigard Urhan Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page I Attachment 3 1 VERY SATISFIED 104 26% 2 SATISFIED 242 60.5% 3 DISSATISFIED 43 10.75% 4 VERY DISSATISFIED 5 1.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 6 1.5% 400 100% SATIS3 What about trees in the city as a whole? PROBE: Are you very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of trees in the city as a whole? 1 VERY SATISFIED 61 15.25% 2 SATISFIED 251 62.75% 3 DISSATISFIED 59 14.75% 4 VERY DISSATISFIED 10 2.5% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 19 4.75% 400 100% HOOD Does your neighborhood need more trees and landscaping to improve its appearance and environmental quality? 1 YES 101 25.25% 2 NO 294 73.5% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 5 1.25% 400 100% IMPORT1 Now I would like to read you some statements people have made about trees. For each one, would you tell me if you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. First, trees are important to a community's character and desirability as a place to live. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 249 62.25% 2 AGREE 138 34.5% 3 DISAGREE 10 2.5% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 1 0.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 2 0.5% 400 100% IMPORT2 It is important to me to have a view of trees from my home. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 218 54.5% City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 2 Attachment 3 2 AGREE 148 37% 3 DISAGREE 28 7% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 4 1% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 2 0.5% 400 100% IMPORT3 Trees contribute to the value of residential property. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 200 50% 2 AGREE 170 42.5% 3 DISAGREE 19 4.75% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 3 0.75% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 8 2% 400 100% IMPORT4 Trees contribute to the value of commercial property. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE - 125 31.25% 2 AGREE 205 51.25% 3 DISAGREE 45 11.25% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 3 0.75% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 22 5.5% 400 100% IMPORTS More street trees would be good for the City. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 97 24.25% 2 AGREE 202 50.5% 3 DISAGREE 62 15.5% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 9 2.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 30 7.5% 400 100% IMPORT6 It would benefit the City if more resources could be directed to better maintain and protect existing trees. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 102 25.5% City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 3 Attachment 3 2 AGREE 203 50.75% 3 DISAGREE 50 12.5% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 10 2.5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 35 8.75% 400 100% IMPORT7 The City should require that some trees be preserved and new ones planted on sites that are being developed. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 160 40% 2 AGREE 193 48.25% 3 DISAGREE 30 7.5% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 9 2.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 8 2% 400 100% FOREST1 All cities have an urban forest. The urban forest in Tigard consists of the trees in parks, along streets, in yards, on empty lots and in forested areas. Do you think the overall quality of Tigard's urban forest has increased, decreased or stayed the same in the last 10 years? 1 INCREASED 73 18.25% . 2 DECREASED 166 41.5% 3 STAYED THE SAME 117 29.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9NA 44 11% 400 100% FOREST2 In the future, do you expect the overall quality of Tigard's urban forest to increase, decrease, or stay the same? 1 INCREASED 113 28.25% 2 DECREASED 126 31.5% 3 STAYED THE SAME 138 34.5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 23 5.75% 400 100% FOREST3 On a scale of 1 -10, where one is poor and 10 is excellent , how would you rate the extent and appearance of trees in Tigard? I ONE 3 0.75% 2 TWO 0 0% 3 THREE 14 3.5% 4 FOUR 11 2.75% City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 4 Attachment 3 5 FIVE 61 15.25% 6 SIX 48 12% 7 SEVEN 96 24% 8 EIGHT (GO TO TAXI) 119 29.75% 9 NINE (GO TO TAX 1) 19 4.75% 10 TEN (GO TO TAXI) 24 6% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 5 1.25% 400 100% FOREST4 What could be done to improve the appearance and quality of trees in Tigard? OPEN ENDED — RECORD EXACT RESPONSE Not cut them all. They are cutting out more than they are putting in. They should require developers to keep some of the existing trees. Better maintenance. More variety. They need to plant more trees when they remove them. Do not just plant commercialized trees. Maintain the trees. Trimming them and things like that. Ask the people to clean up more. During the fall, clean up sidewalk areas like they should. More maintenance, I say plant more, just preserve the ones that are there. Certain areas. Save certain trees. Taken care of the trees. I don't have any good ideas. Don't cut down more big trees. Trimmed when it comes to wires, and in areas with no trees new ones could be planted. When they are doing commercial development they should plant trees when they are done building. In the vast expanses of parking lots there should be shade trees for the cars. It would help with gas so people don't have to use the AC. Shade trees help a lot. Public awareness. Developers not remove existing trees as much. One thing I don't like is the power company coming along and trimming them to look stupid. Better trees that don't tear up streets and utilities. Don't do anything. They'll grow by themselves. No sense in paying tax payers' money on trees that can take care of themselves. High quality maintenance. Let the trees get older. You know you do a good job. Keep up the good work. Add trees along Durham Road and downtown Main Street. More fir trees or pine green trees. Plant more, I guess. I think more of them. And better maintenance of the area around the trees. Plant more trees; take care of them. They don't have a nice setup in Tigard, lack of parks. Cite of Tilzarcd Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page Attachment 3 Maintenance More maintenance from landowners and the city. Better protection of the exciting trees in areas. Keeping them clean, away from street signs and pruning them. Quit cutting them down I think. They could be taken care of. Trimming. Quit cutting them down. They can be trimmed up so they can plant more trees. Plant more trees. Prevent cut down of existing ones, plant more trees. They could put the areas back that used to be there, that are gone. Plant more. I think if they planted the proper trees so that the roots would not appear and break up the sidewalks. I think people either put them down and don't pull out the roots. Ones left are well maintained, pick up leaves off sidewalks and streets for bikers. To trim them. Plant more street trees on Greenburg Road. Not letting people cut them down. Grow more. There are places where there are a lot of trees and places where there are none, trees should be everywhere, especially where there are none. It would also be good to discus the things people don't want to see, especially industrial areas. Trees should be used to shield them from their neighbors. Streets be lined with trees. Leave them alone. Basic maintenance. I think if there is some sort of a plan. When you build new housing areas and existing areas you should have a comprehensive plan about the comprehensive trees. Whether the city is going plant the trees or it is going to be left to individuals. In some areas I think you need to have management people that know what is going on. Placement of trees and people with knowledge of what is going on. It would be more beneficial to have more parks. Percentage of parks in a residential area. Protection of some of the areas, like stream land from development. Maintenance around power lines. More trees. Nothing else. Trees aren't taken care of well, trees in vacant lots should become less neglected. Fertilize. Find a way to keep away all the leaves. Pruning and maintained health, be maintained better. More volunteers to maintain them. Plant more trees! Plant more quality trees. I think that we need to keep the landscaping up. We need to maintain our trees. If we have more trees we will have a better community. City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 6 Attachment 3 Put them in strategic locations like downtown. They should put a ton of trees downtown. They want to improve downtown they should put in good trees. Don't put them there for no reason. Just so much building going on more regulations about what trees need to remain. Probably the amount. There could be more of them on major highways. Highway 99 has none on that road. Plant more trees. More placed in better locations, not be so messy. Add more trees, keep the exciting trees. Better pruning with trees along the streets a lot that have grown big and unruly. Better maintenance. I think that some of the street trees get in the way. Probably just more attention to them. The property owners need to pay more attention to their trees probably. If we are going to have trees, they need to be maintained. Not be willing to cut so many when they are developing. Don't know, maintain them. Get the city counsel in the city forest, they should be running the city not the trees. Maintain damage is done. Leave them standing, pruning assisting their health. Maintain what they have and not let the new buildings do away with the trees. Plant new ones after they have built homes or buildings. Plant more and not chop down forest to put up condos. I wish people would take care of trees better. They could have more trees where there are no trees. More street trees. Don't think anything should be done. Trim them. Highway 99 at the bridge. Just be conscientious. Plant more trees, when you remove trees, plant trees where the space is available. It should be a law to plant trees. Provide good maintenance. Downtown area needs more trees. Old trees be cut down, plant new ones. Preserve during development. Better overall maintenance. Better maintained. Pick up more leaves. I don't have a problem with it, so nothing. Need more trees in old town. Cut them all down, too many large trees, they are blocking the view of everything. They need to at least be trimmed. Developer should put trees of appropriate size for the lot. A little bit better maintained by people that take care of the trees. More of them along the main streets. They could be preserved. Planting the right trees. And more of them. Trimming and landscaping around trees. Like the downtown, they made it look all cutesie. City of Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 7 Attachment 3 Plant more, let more streets be planted next to trees. Less shopping malls, have an area of trees planted, 99 west. They put ugly storage unit, they cut down beautiful trees for that. Improve the city council decisions. Pruning. A little bit of pruning. There could be improvements on highway 99 and on commercial properties. I see a lot of death that needs to be maintained a little bit better. More trees on busier streets. Plant more of them, take care of them, and cut their branches and everything. First of all plant more trees if there is the space. Largely, plant new ones and stop cutting down the old ones. Probably more aggressive street tree planting program. Out reach to property owners that have trees and preserve them. Most of the trees are on private property. As to the ones that are on public domain, they should be maintained professionally with an eye towards long term growth. I like where homes don't go right to the creek and there is green spaces along creeks. Maybe more trimming on trees. Plant more. Expert looking at the issue. Old ones let go. Cleaned up. By preserving existing trees. Better maintenance. Leave them alone. Remove many of them. Public works departments are not funded to protect neighborhoods as a result of leaf fall. There is not enough street sweeping services. Downtown could plant trees. Lining the streets and putting them in parks, but I think they're doing that right now. Where I live there are many trees in the community. More trees, as far as the existing trees, I'm not sure what to say about their quality and appearance. Proper maintenance of the trees and removal of the dead or improper growth. Plant more, rip up cement and plant trees. In certain neighborhoods there could just be more of them. And more yard debris pick -up, so that people are not afraid to have trees. Anything that would make having a tree easier would be good. I would like to see their messes cleaned up quicker. If they had left the old trees to live, it would have been better. They put up some new dinky trees. And they just don't look as good. It's too late. Maybe better maintained and kept trees. Maintain existing trees. Plant more. City to replace trees that are deceased or need to be replaced. Cut down dying trees, take care of trees next to main roads. Stop cutting them down. When a large tree is cut down, requires two of three tree in their place. Adding variety. More of them in public areas. In downtown Tigard. City of Tigard Lh ban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 8 Attachment 3 I think they need to plant more trees along streets and in newly developed areas. Add some along 99. Better trimming and maintenance. Maybe more appropriate trees in the area they're going to be planted. I guess I'm thinking about some trees are planted too close to the street, and that causes problems with leaves in the sewer and sidewalks heaving from the roots. Maintenance Maintenance and replanting with trees that die. Just encourage more people to plant proper trees and take care of the ones they have. And not cut them down unnecessarily. Pruning. In the greenway, we have lots of English ivy that is destroying our trees. Dead trees. Not cutting down massive amounts when they build new areas. Plants more trees along the parks. I don't know what could be done to make them better. I noticed when new development is going in were their is a forestry areas and they take out the tress and I don't like that. I don't like the ripping up of the stuff along Vano Creek. Stop chopping down trees. More maintenance and planting more trees. Plant more decorative trees. Some of the ones that flower in the spring. More evergreens. The big scrub maples, big yellow leaves. Replace stuff with more colors for spring and fall. More red maples. Planting more tress in the downtown Tigard area and taking care of trees that are at the end of their life. Taking down and replacing trees that are dying. They're in pretty good shape. Maintain the one we have, and plant more. Keep them trimmed away from the important stuff. Replace trees as they are taken out. Medians planted with trees. Uniform tree type on various streets so that it isn't so raged looking. Better up keep. Get rid of the old ones that are dying. Just clean up. Plant more. Help maintain the huge fir trees. I think that the city needs to be a little more proactive in trimming them so things can be seen. So that people who are unfamiliar with the area can see the street signs. It's a huge sign. If people are elderly then they can't trim them themselves. Need to be more proactive. I really don't know if I like a tree in front of my house, I wouldn't plant it but I think trees are important. Stop cutting down all the trees on all developments. Keep them trimmed up a little bit nicer and leaves in the fall are a big problem, they make a mess. Nothing I think they are fine. Take down the trees that drop leaves. I'm not sure we need more trees. City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 9 Attachment 3 I don't really know, stop cutting down all the trees, build where they do not have to remove trees. Just prune and thin out the trees. Increase the health of trees. More open green spaces and more trees in commercial areas. Plant more trees. Better maintaining by replanting. More planting. Plant more. I'm thinking of the one on the corner of my lot, it has pruning problems due to the power lines. It really distorts the shape of the tree. Stop building houses. Cutting them back and some pruning them. More planting. Do not cut down anymore than they absolutely have to. I think maybe stronger education on how to take care of trees. More development of downtown, Tigard with lots of trees and landscaping. Better management by the city and government. When developing, keep more trees that are already existing. Or replanting trees that have been taken down to build a new house. Regular maintenance. I think there should be more, plant more. I feel that every time they cut one down they put new ones in. They've stopped doing that. They don't replace anything, it looks like a concrete forest. I think more of the visual stuff and getting the community more involved, too many businesses. I think they are okay. I don't have an opinion on it. Planting to include green space and park settings, Bull Mountain is an example of how not to do it. More trees. Better upkeep. Not cut them down. I would think that they could be better shaped, and trimmed when needed. I fit the location where they fit size wise. Leave the consumer alone. They have their own trees, so let them do what they want. Some of them need to be shaped better. The ones on the road. I don't know, just make sure they're maintained and plant new trees as ones die or become available. They are properly cared for and planted more of them. Better maintenance. Better care and clean up. Variety and maintenance. I would presume plant more. We're going to suggest the city does a better job of maintaining them. To improve our park, we're on Woodard park, it would improve the park if they would thin the trees that are diseased and prune them, or remove them. Quit cutting them down for new developments. Planting more trees. City oCTiaril Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Pa e 10 • Attachment 3 Just constant vigilance. More and just more. Plant trees where there are no trees. Where I live there are lots of trees. Leave them alone. Better maintenance. Plant more. TAXI Currently, property owners are responsible for maintaining street trees in front of their property. Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose a program that transfers the responsibility for maintaining street trees to the City? 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 65 16.25% 2 SUPPORT 128 32% 3 OPPOSE 136 34% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 38 9.5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 33 8.25% 400 100% TAX2 Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose additional funding from increased city fees, charges, or property taxes to fund a City street tree program? 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 25 6.25% 2 SUPPORT 151 37.75% 3 OPPOSE 132 33% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 63 15.75% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 29 7.25% 400 100% TAX3 Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose additional funding from increased city fees, charges, or property taxes to fund a more comprehensive tree planting and maintenance program in Tigard parks and open spaces? PROBE: This would include trees throughout Tigard, not just on streets. 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 32 8% 2 SUPPORT 190 47.5% 3 OPPOSE 104 26% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 53 13.25% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 21 5.25% 400 100% TAX4 Would you prefer volunteering to plant and maintain trees or paying a fee to the City to do this? PROBE: Even if you are not a property owner, which would you prefer? City oFTiga Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page I I Attachment 3 1 PLANT 208 52% 2 PAY 106 26.5% 3 IF VOL — NEITHER 61 15.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 25 6.25% 400 100% CHOICE1 Which of the following would be your first choice of where the city should plant more trees? (PROBE FROM LIST) 1 ALONG STREETS 99 24.75% 2 IN PEOPLE'S YARDS 10 2.5% 3 IN COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL AREAS 51 12.75% 4 IN PARKS 79 19.75% 5 NEAR STREAMS/NATURAL FORESTED AREAS 129 32.25% 7REF /8DK/9NA 32 8% 400 100% CHOICE2 Which of the following statements most closely represents your opinion about trees. 1 PRESERVE AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE 128 32% 2 WHEN TREES ARE REMOVED, REPLACE THEM 129 32.25% 3 PRESERVE LARGE OR UNIQUE TREES 60 15% 4 ALLOW INDIVIDUALS REMOVE TREES IF WISH 71 17.75% 5 IF VOL — NONE OF THESE STATEMENTS 1 0.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 11 2.75% 400 100% HAZARD Currently, if there is a dispute between neighboring property owners regarding a potentially hazardous tree, the City does not get involved, and instead directs the neighbors to work out a solution through civil means. Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose the creation of a program where the City would become involved in disputes between neighbors regarding hazardous trees? 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 54 13.5% 2 SUPPORT 185 46.25% 3 OPPOSE 101 25.25% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 49 12.25% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 11 2.75% 400 100% City of Tiard Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 12 Attachment 3 REG1 Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose tree removal regulations during property development, even when they limit the size and extent of potential buildings or profits? 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 59 14.75% 2 SUPPORT 168 42% 3 OPPOSE 99 24.75% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 32 8% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 42 10.5% 400 100% REG2 If you had the opportunity to develop your property, would you be in favor of city tree regulations that required preservation of existing large trees and landscaping or tree planting afterwards? 1 YES 264 66% 2 NO 97 24.25% 3 IF VOL — IT DEPENDS 14 3.5% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 25 6.25% 400 100% REG3 Should the City allow the decision to preserve trees to be left to the developer? 1 YES 80 20% 2 NO 293 73.25% 3 IF VOL — IT DEPENDS 17 4.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 10 2.5% 400 100% • REG4 If the City were to enact new tree protection measures, would you like to see them focused on natural areas, ornamental landscape trees, both types equally, or on something else. 1 NATURAL AREAS 149 37.25% 2 ORNAMENTAL TREES 11 2.75% 3 BOTH 192 48% 4 SOMETHING ELSE 25 6.25% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 23 5.75% 400 100% REG5 Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose city regulations that would provide some level of protection for large, healthy trees on developed private property? PROBE: This would apply to all current private property. 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 78 19.5% City of TiLtard tit ban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 13 Attachment 3 2 SUPPORT 224 56% 3 OPPOSE 60 15% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 20 5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 18 4.5% 400 100% REG6 If the city were to enact new tree protection measures, where would you prefer to see them focused: on larger groves of native trees or individual trees of significant size. 1 LARGE GROVES 221 55.25% 2 INDIVIDUAL TREES 113 28.25% 3 IF VOL — BOTH 31 7.75% 4 IF VOL — NEITHER 18 4.5% 7REF /8DK/9NA 17 4.25% 400 100% AGE In what year were you born? Coded Categories: AGE 18 -24 3 0.75% AGE 25 -34 23 5.75% AGE 35 -44 59 14.75% AGE 45 -54 106 26.5% AGE 55 -64 91 22.75% AGE 65 AND OLDER 118 29.5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 0 0% 400 100% GENDER Are you male or female? 1 MALE 160 40% 2 FEMALE 240 60% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 0 0% 400 100% RENT Do you own your home, or do you rent? 1 OWN 344 86% 2 RENT 49 12.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 7 1.75% 400 100% City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey — 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 14 Attachment 3 STREET What neighborhood do you live in? PROBE: What is your closest elementary school? PROBE: What is your closest cross street? OPEN ENDED — RECORD EXACT RESPONSE END That's the end of the survey! On behalf of the City of Tigard, we would like to thank you for your time and participation. Have a great day. Good bye. NOQAL I'm sorry, we can only interview residents of who are 18 years of age or older). I'm sorry to have bothered you. Have a nice (day /evening). City of Tigard Urban Forestry Surv..ev — 2008 Top line Frequencies Pace 15 Attachment 3 ;) .‘ STEVE JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES • P. O. BOX 3708 • EUGENE. OREGON 97403 Summary of Results Tigard Urban Forestry Survey By Stephen Johnson, PhD & Christine McCaslin, MCRP December 2008 Introduction The City of Tigard has an active program to regulate, encourage and manage trees inside the city. As part of these efforts Tigard decided to conduct a survey to assess the opinions of residents on the quality of Tigard's trees, the state of the urban forest inside the city, and attitudes toward changes in regulations and funding related to the future management of the urban forest. Working closely with Tigard's City Arborist, Todd Prager, Steve Johnson & Associates planned and implemented a telephone survey of 400 Tigard residents in the Fall of 2008. Survey Results This report summarizes the major survey results. Readers can look at the Topline Frequencies section of the report for the exact question wording and the summarized responses to each question. Readers may refer to the 26 tables in the Banners section of this report for more detail and to find cross - tabulations of each question with a wide range of demographic information. Readers should also look at the open -ended responses inside the Topline section, where respondents give narrative answers to one of the questions. Finally, when looking at the figures in this report readers should note that the horizontal scale is not always the same. The goal of each figure is to give the reader an accurate visual representation of the positions taken by respondents and the scale is adjusted with that goal in mind. The exact numbers used to produce each figure are available both in the Topline and in the Banner Tables. For this survey of 400 Tigard residents the margin of error is + 4.8% at a confidence level of 95 %. This means for any result there is a 95% chance the true answer, if all residents of Tigard had been interviewed, would be within a range no greater than 4.8% above or below the number estimated from the survey and used in this report. Store Johnson & r \;sociatcs PaLc I City of I iyar l I'rhaun i'ar str Sure 2008 S or Rcsults Attachment 3 Satisfaction with City Trees In general, residents of Tigard are satisfied with the quality and quantity of trees in the city. The survey asked respondents to judge their satisfaction with trees on their own street, in their neighborhood, and in the city as a whole. The following figure shows the percentage of respondents who are either "very satisfied," or "satisfied" with the trees in each of these three locations. Figure One: Satisfaction with Quantity and Quality of Trees 100% - 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Trees on Your Street Trees in Your Neighborhood Trees in the City • Very Satisfied • Satisfied As displayed in Figure 1, the levels of satisfaction with the trees in Tigard is high, especially on people's own street and in their own neighborhood, where in both cases 87% of respondents report being either "satisfied," or "very satisfied." For the city as a whole the level of satisfaction is slightly less, but still a very high 78 %. As a follow -up to the questions on satisfaction with trees, respondents were also asked if their neighborhood needed more trees or landscaping. A large majority, 74 %, thought that more trees or landscaping was not needed, further reinforcing the idea that people are well satisfied with the current state of trees in the city. At a later point in the survey respondents were asked if they thought the overall quality of the urban forest had "increased," "decreased," or "stayed the same" over the last 10 years. Forty -eight percent thought the quality of the urban forest had either "increased," or "stayed the same," while 42% thought it had "decreased." Older respondents, over age 65, were much more likely to think the quality of the urban forest had "increased." Such respondents are more likely to have been in the city during the last 10 years than are younger respondents. There was also a significant difference between men and women on this question, with women twice as likely as men to think the quality of the urban forest had "increased." See Banner Table 11 for more detail. Stc'e Johip,on 8,, Associates Page 2 Cit) of I I OI \ Sure) 21108 Suntntar\ of Results Attachment 3 Respondents were also asked if they expected the quality of the urban forest to "increase," "decrease," or "stay the same" in the future. Respondents were very optimistic about the future of the Tigard urban forest, with 63% thinking the quality would either "increase" or "stay the same." Again, respondents over age 65 were the most optimistic about the future of the urban forest, while there was no difference between men and women. See Banner Table 12 for more detail. As a final question about the quality of the urban forest, respondents were asked to rate the extent and appearance of the trees in Tigard on a scale from 1 -10, where one is poor and 10 is excellent. Forty -one percent of respondents gave the trees in Tigard a high score of 8, 9, or 10, while only 4% gave trees a "poor" score of 1, 2, or 3. For those who gave the trees anything other than one of the three highest scores, we asked a follow -up question about what could be done to improve the appearance and quality of the trees. These respondents had many suggestions, but by far the most common ideas were to add more trees, prevent trees from being removed, and to improve the maintenance of existing trees. See the narrative responses to question Forest 4 in the Topline section that follows this report for the complete set of suggestions for tree improvements. The Importance of Trees Respondents were asked to give their level of agreement with seven statements about the importance of trees, or what trees contribute to the city of Tigard. For each question respondents were asked if they "strongly agreed," "agreed," "disagreed," or "strongly disagreed" with the statement that was read to them. Figure 2, below, shows the percentage of respondents who either "strongly agreed," or "agreed" with each statement. Steve Johnson << Associates Page 3 City ofTizard Urban Porestr ■ Survey 2008 Summary of Results Attachment 3 Figure Two: Level of Agreement with Statements About Trees 100% - 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 0% Community View of Trees Residential Commercial More Street More Preserve and Character Value Value Trees Resources Plant ■ Strongly Agree ■ Agree Looking at Figure 2 it is clear that a substantial majority of the people of Tigard agree with every statement about the importance of trees and what they contribute to the city. The "lowest" level of support is a very high 75% for the idea that more street trees would be good for the city, while the "highest" level of support is almost 97% for the idea that trees are important to a community's character and desirability as a place to live. For three of the items: the importance of trees to community character; the importance of being able to view trees from home; and the importance of trees to residential property values, trees are so highly valued that the level of strong agreement with each statement is over 50 %, and total agreement is over 90 %. An analysis of the data shows that women are much more likely than men to hold strong opinions in support of trees, with the level of "strong agreement" ranging from 12% to 25% higher than that of men. However, unlike the position older respondents took on the questions about satisfaction with trees, older respondents were the least likely to "strongly agree" with the statements on the importance of trees, although a majority of older respondents did generally agree with each statement. See Banner Tables 5 to 10 for more information. Steve Johnson & \ssociates Page 4 City ofTigard I rhann Forestry Sure 2(1(18 Summary of Results Attachment 3 Funding Programs for Trees At this point in the survey, respondents were asked about their level of support or opposition for possible new tree programs. In addition, support for increased fees, charges, or property taxes to pay for new tree programs was also investigated. See Figure 3 below for the level of support and the level of opposition for each of these programs. Figure Three: Support Levels for City Tree Taxes 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 % , Street Tree Maintenance Transfer Increase Charges for Street Tree Increase Charges for to City Program Comprehensive Tree Program • Strongly Support • Support ❑ Oppose ❑ Strongly Oppose From Figure 3, we see that there is weak support for the idea of transferring responsibility for the maintenance of street trees from property owners to the City (48% vs. 44 %). However, when asked about the idea of increased taxes or fees for a City street tree program, the weak support turns to opposition with almost 50% of respondents opposed. On the question of fees for a comprehensive tree program inside Tigard parks and open spaces, respondents are much more receptive, with significantly greater support than opposition (56% vs. 39 %). For the funding increase questions, women are more supportive than men, and support levels are highest among respondents from ages 35 to 64 (the ages when people are more likely to be employed). For each of the funding increase questions, approximately 90% of the supporters for one program also support the other program. The main difference is that the program for trees in the parks picks up additional supporters. See Banner Tables 14, 15 and 16 for more detail. In addition to the three questions about programs and funding, respondents were also asked whether they would prefer to volunteer to plant and maintain trees, or to pay a fee for the city to do this type of work. See Figure 4 below. Ste\ c Johnson & ;\ i'tt "c 5 City oI Tigard t r1),1 I orestr■ Sure e) 2 Y(Ig tiummar■ of Results Attachment 3 Figure Four: Volunteer to Plant or Pay a Fee? 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Plant Pay Neither As Figure 4 shows, by a two -to -one majority, people would prefer to volunteer rather than pay. This was true across a wide spectrum of the people of Tigard, with majorities of both women and men, renters and owners, and all ages except those over 65 or younger than 25. However, there was weak support for volunteering among those who strongly supported the idea of increased funding for tree programs. Supporters of increased funding for trees were more supportive of paying the city to carry out tree planting and maintenance. See Banner table 17 for more information. Planting and Preserving Trees Respondents were next asked to pick their first choice for where the City should plant new trees from a list of five possible places. Figure 5 shows, in descending order, what percentage of respondents support each of the five choices. Step e Johnson & Associates Pace 6 Cite of Tigard t rhan I oresin Sure) 2008 Summar) or Results Attachment 3 Figure Five: Where Should the City Plant Trees? 35% - 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% O "/0 Near Along Streets In Parks In Commercial Areas In l ople's Yards Streams /Natural Areas The most common choice for where to plant new trees is clearly near streams and natural areas. In addition, if the support for planting new trees in parks is added to the support for steams and natural areas, the total support level would slightly exceed 50 %. There is nearly twice as much support for new trees along streets, than there is support for new trees within private commercial property or within people's private yards. According to the open -ended responses within the Topline section, many respondents desired street trees and specifically, Highway 99 trees. Respondents were also asked to choose among four different statements about tree preservation that most closely represented their own opinion. Figure 6 shows the level of support for each of these statements. Steve Johnson & Associate., Page 7 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey 2008 Sunirnar■ of Results Attachment 3 Figure Six: Tigard Residents Want To... 35 %- 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Replace Trees When Preserve as Many Trees Allow Individuals to Preserve Large or Unique Removed as Possible Remove Trees Trees As Figure 6 shows, two very related opinions are the most commonly held by residents of Tigard. Thirty -two percent of the public wants trees replaced if they are removed, and 32% want as many trees as possible to be preserved. On the other hand, there is very little support (18 %) for allowing individuals to remove trees if they wish to. Hazardous Trees Respondents were asked if they thought the City should create a new program where they would be directly involved in disputes between neighboring property owners over potentially hazardous trees. Residents of Tigard are in favor of such a program and by a margin of 60% to 38% and want the City to become directly involved. Those residents who want the City to be more involved are also strong supporters of transferring responsibility for street trees to the City and increased funding for tree programs. See Banner Table 20 for more information. New Tree Regulations The survey finished by asking respondents a set of questions about six possible new tree regulations the city might consider. The first regulation concerned the regulation of tree removal during property development. It was made clear in the question that such a regulation might limit the size and extent of possible building or profits from development. However, even with this limit explicitly described a strong majority of residents, 57 %, were in support of the idea, and only 33% were opposed. Respondents who had previously supported increasing fees were much more likely to support this idea than those who opposed increasing fees. See Banner Table 21 for additional information. The second regulation asked about requiring the preservation of existing large trees, as well as subsequent landscaping and tree planting, if the respondent were to develop their Ste\ e Johnson Associates Pace 8 City ot'Tigard l rhun Fore.tr ■ Sun ey 20(18 Summar> or Results Attachment 3 own property. Even though such a regulation might have a direct economic impact on respondents, 66% said they would be in favor of regulation, and only 24% were opposed. The opponents of this measure were much more likely to also oppose increasing tree related fees than were the supporters. See Banner Table 22 for more information. The third regulation asked if the City should leave tree preservation decisions up to developers. Tigard residents were overwhelmingly opposed to this idea, with opposition almost four times as large as support (73% vs. 20 %). Here too, the supporters of this measure were also much more likely to oppose tree taxation measures. See Banner Table 23 for more information. The forth regulation asked if people desired protection measures on trees in natural areas, on ornamental landscape trees, or on both equally. Most people (48 %) wanted the protection focused on both areas equally. However, a large number of people wanted the protection focused on natural areas (37 %), and few respondents wanted the protection focused on ornamental trees (3 %). The fifth regulation asked for their level of support for rules that would give some protection for large healthy trees on developed private property. The total level of support for this idea was a very high 77 %, although strong support was only 20 %. Similarly to the second regulation above, the opponents of this measure were much more likely to also oppose increasing tree related fees than were the supporters. See Banner Table 25 for more information. Finally, respondents were asked if they would prefer to see the City enact tree protection measures aimed at large groves of native trees, or at individual trees of significant size. By almost two -to -one (55% vs. 28 %) residents would prefer to see protection aimed at large groves of native trees. Conclusions The residents of Tigard have substantial interest and concern about trees inside the City, as demonstrated by their agreement with with statements about the importance of trees and their choices regarding tree preservation. In general residents are very satisfied with the trees in Tigard, in particular those on their street or inside their neighborhood. The residents also think the Tigard urban forest is in good shape and is likely to stay that way or improve over time. Tigard residents think trees are important community attributes and that they contribute to and enhance the community in a variety of ways, including both residential and commercial property values. Tigard residents want trees preserved, new trees planted, and increased regulation aimed at the protection of groves of trees as well as individual trees. In particular residents would like to see more trees planted in natural areas and along streets. Steve Johnson & Associates P,12(2 9 City ofTieard 1 than Forestry Survey 2008 Summary o1 Results Attachment 3 In addition, residents of Tigard are in support of regulations that would add limits to what property owners and developers can do with existing trees especially when making changes or additions to their property. Most residents want more resources to be directed to better maintain and protect existing trees. However, there is limited support for funding and an urban forestry program through new fees or taxes. Although most residents felt more street trees would be good for the city, there is higher support for increasing funding for trees inside parks or open spaces compared to street trees. • Steve Johnson & Associates Pace 10 City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey 200S Summary of Results Attachment 4 City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Mayor Dirksen and Honorable Council From: Todd Prager, Associate Planner /Arborist Re: Urban Forestry, City of Tigard Internal Coordination Meeting Results Date: April 10, 2009 On January 21, 2009, a coordination meeting was attended by key City staff members that have a role in coordinating and implementing Tigard's urban forestry programs, policies, and ordinances. Meeting attendees included representatives from a range of City departments (Community Development, Public Works, and Financial and Information Services) and divisions (Capital Construction & Transportation, Current Planning, Development Review, Information Technology, Public Works Administration, Parks, Streets, Wastewater /Storm, and Water). The purpose of the meeting was to discuss urban forestry coordination issues, and identify those areas where coordination could be improved. As a result of the meeting, the following list was generated that identified areas where urban forestry coordination efforts could be improved. 1. Street trees on record drawings don't reflect where they are actually planted (Planning, Engineering, Public Works, IT /GIS); 2. Development engineering inspects vegetated corridors after development, but no long term /sustained maintenance requirements (Engineering, Planning /Arborist and Code Enforcement, IT /GIS); 3. Difficult to track deed restricted trees after development (Planning, IT /GIS); 4. Difficult to track required landscape trees (parking lot trees, buffer trees, etc.) after development (Planning /Arborist and Code Enforcement, IT /GIS); 5. Difficult to track mitigation trees after development (Planning /Arborist, IT /GIS); 6. No inventory of street trees (Planning, Engineering, Public Works, IT /GIS); 7. When City acquires greenspaces, no detailed understanding of maintenance costs (especially regarding hazard trees) (Planning /Arborist, Public Works); 8. No policy for protecting deed restricted trees and significant habitat trees during building additions (Planning, Building); 9. No policy of requiring exempt City projects to follow standards required by private development (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); 10. No review of exempt City projects for trees by planning staff (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); Attachment 4 11. No formal hazard evaluation process for parks /greenspaces (Planning /Arborist, Public Works /Parks, Risk); 12. No formal emergency response system for tree hazards on streets (Planning /Arborist, Public Works /Streets); 13. No formal emergency response system for tree hazards in parks /greenspaces (Planning /Arborist, Public Works /Parks); 14. Tree removal in sensitive lands requires tree removal permits, not sure if there is awareness of this Code provision (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); 15. No formal process for spending /tracking tree mitigation fund expenditures and planting (Planning / Arborist, Public Works, IT /GIS, Finance); and 16. No formal process for determining adjustments to street standards to preserve trees (18.810.030.A.7) (Planning /Arborist, Engineering). 17. No formal street tree maintenance process for limb /root clearance and removal (Planning /Arborist, Public Works /Streets). After the list was generated, a series of meetings was held with representatives from the groups affected by the coordination issues. The purpose of the smaller group meetings was to discuss the coordination issues and formulate possible solutions that could improve coordination efforts. The following list identifies the coordination issues (in black) and possible solutions (in red) that were formulated after the group meetings. 1. Street trees on record drawings don't reflect where they are actually planted • (Planning, Engineering, Public Works, IT /GIS); • Make note on record drawings that actual street tree locations may vary, see street trees in GIS for actual locations. • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS actual locations of street trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on street trees to include location (x /y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date planted, condition, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. • Consider creating program where developers pay a fee to the City to plant and GPS street trees. 2. Development engineering inspects vegetated corridors after development, but no long term /sustained maintenance requirements (Engineering, Planning /Arborist and Code Enforcement, IT /GIS); Attachment 4 • Development engineering inspects vegetated corridors after planting, and after a defined maintenance period (usually two years) to ensure compliance with Clean Water Services (CWS) requirements. • If the vegetated corridor becomes City property, then the Wastewater /Storm Division of Public Works assigns crews to ensure long term maintenance. • If the vegetated corridor is privately owned, the City of Tigard does not currently have a program to inspect /enforce long term vegetation maintenance. The City will clarify with CWS what agency is responsible for ensuring long term maintenance of vegetated corridors. 3. Difficult to track deed restricted trees after development (Planning, IT /GIS); • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS locations of deed restricted trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on deed restricted trees to include location (x /y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date inventoried, condition, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. 4. Difficult to track required landscape trees (parking lot trees, buffer trees, etc.) after development (Planning / Arborist and Code Enforcement, IT /GIS); • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS actual locations of required landscape trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on required landscape trees to include location (x /y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date planted, condition, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. 5. Difficult to track mitigation trees after development (Planning /Arborist, IT /GIS); • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS actual locations of mitigation trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on mitigation trees to include location (x /y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date planted, condition, cash assurance /bond release date, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. 6. No inventory of street trees (Planning, Engineering, Public Works, IT /GIS); Attachment 4 • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS actual locations of street trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Hire AmeriCorps member and /or recruit volunteers to assist in inventory of existing street trees outside development process. • GPS actual locations of street trees planting during annual street tree planting program. • Information on street trees to include location (x /y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date planted, condition, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. • Consider creating program where developers pay a fee to the City to plant and GPS street trees. 7. When City acquires greenspaces, no detailed understanding of maintenance costs (especially regarding hazard trees) (Planning /Arborist, Public Works); • Create budget sheet to track personnel, material, and service costs associated with greenspace acquisition. • Budget sheet should detail first year costs as well as costs for years two through five. • A benefits section should be included on the form to identify mitigation, connectivity, and other potential benefits. • The budget sheet needs to be routed to the appropriate departments and divisions for input before it is finalized. • There is an evaluation form for land acquisition that was used for CIP projects that may be used as a template (contact Carissa). • If hazard trees are an issue during land acquisition associated with development projects, require developer's arborist to conduct a hazard assessment for review and inspection by City Arborist. 8. No policy for protecting deed restricted trees and significant habitat trees during building additions (Planning, Building); • This item should be further addressed during the Tree Code updates. • However, for deed restricted trees, the City can require a protection plan for building additions that complies with the original tree protection plan for the development project. Attachment 4 • For trees in sensitive lands, the City can restrict access /building within the driplines of trees through the use of tree protection fencing. Section 18.790.060 prohibits damage to a protected tree or its root system. 9. No policy of requiring exempt City projects to follow standards required by private development (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); • City Arborist to attend "kickoff meetings" for City projects to identify applicable City rules and regulations. • Project plans will be routed to City Arborist for review and comment prior to completion. • Depending on the size of the project, the City Arborist may provide assistance on tree protection and planting specifications, or recommend that the City hire a project arborist. • Work with the Tree Board and Community Development Director on developing a set of standards for City projects to follow. 10. No review of exempt City projects for trees by planning staff (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); • City Arborist to attend "kickoff meetings" for City projects to identify applicable City rules and regulations. • Project plans will be routed to City Arborist for review and comment prior to completion. • Depending on the size of the project, the City Arborist may provide assistance on tree protection and planting specifications, or recommend the City hire a project arborist. 11. No formal hazard evaluation process for parks /greenspaces (Planning /Arborist, Public Works /Parks, Risk); • Budgeting has eliminated non- emergency management and evaluation of hazards in parks /greenspaces due to the transfer of the greenspace coordinator (urban forester) position from Public Works to the associate planner /arborist (city arborist) position to Community Development. • Proactive evaluation and management of City owned parks /greenspaces would be best accomplished through the hiring of a greenspace coordinator to fill the position vacated in Public Works. Attachment 4 • A greenspace coordinater could develop a program based off of protocols developed by the USDA Forest Service and /or International Society of Arboriculture. • Alternatively, the City could contract with a private arborist to develop a hazard evaluation and management program. 12. No formal emergency response system for tree hazards on streets (Planning /Arborist, Public Works /Streets); • When a member of the public calls the City about a potential hazard tree on a City street, they should be forwarded to the Public Works front desk (503- 639- 4171). • Operators at Public Works will route the call to the Streets Division manager, who will in turn assign a staff member to investigate the complaint. • If the tree clearly is not a hazard, the Streets Division will contact the citizen and close the case. • If the tree is already down or is clearly an immediate hazard, the Streets Division will coordinate traffic control, contact other impacted agencies (such as PGE if power lines are involved), and remove the tree from the street and sidewalk right -of -way using the City's contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available). The debris from the removal will be placed on the owner's property, and debris disposal will occur at the owner's expense. • If the tree hazard is a borderline case, the City Arborist will make a determination whether the tree should be retained, monitored, removed, or further investigated by the contract arborist. • If the City Arborist decides the tree is a hazard and, there is enough time, he will write a letter to the responsible property owner giving them a specific period of time to abate the hazard. If the deadline is not met, the responsible owner will be cited through Code Enforcement. • If the hazard is after hours, citizens will need to call the Public Works after - hours number (503- 639- 1554). Public Works will then investigate the hazard after hours and either contact the contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available) if there is an immediate hazard, or forward the inquiry to the Streets Division for follow up the following business day if the hazard is not immediate. The Streets Division will then follow the same process outlined above. 13. No formal emergency response system for tree hazards in parks /greenspaces (Planning / Arborist, Public Works /Parks); Attachment 4 • When a member of the public calls the City about a potential hazard tree on City property, they should be forwarded the Public Works front desk (503- 639- 4171). • Operators at Public Works will route the call to the appropriate division manager, who will in turn assign a staff member to investigate the complaint. • If the tree clearly is not a hazard, the responsible division will contact the citizen and close the case. • If the tree is determined to be an immediate hazard, the responsible division will contact the City's contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available) to abate the hazard immediately. • If the tree hazard is a borderline case, the City Arborist will make a determination whether the tree should be retained, monitored, removed, or further investigated by the contract arborist. • The City Arborist is estimated to respond to one "borderline" call per week on average. If the time commitment is significantly more, the process may need to be reevaluated. • If the hazard is after hours, citizens will need to call the Public Works after - hours number (503- 639- 1554). Public Works will then investigate the hazard after hours and either contact the contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available) if there is an immediate hazard, or forward the inquiry to the appropriate division if the hazard is not immediate for follow up the following business day. The responsible division will then follow the same process outlined above. 14. Tree removal in sensitive lands requires tree removal permits, not sure if there is awareness of this Code provision (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); • City Arborist to attend "kickoff meetings" for City projects to identify applicable City rules and regulations. • Tree removal permits and fees in Tigard Development Code Section 18.790.050 are applicable for any tree removal over six inches in diameter within sensitive lands (including City projects). • Publicize program through periodic Community Development /Public Works /Capital Construction and Transportation coordination meetings. • Ensure the sensitive lands GIS layer is available through Tigard Maps for all divisions /departments. • Clarify with Community Development Director if invasive /exotic trees are exempt from tree removal permit requirements. Attachment 4 15. No formal process for spending /tracking tree mitigation fund expenditures and planting (Planning /Arborist, Public Works, IT /GIS, Finance); and • GPS actual locations of mitigation trees /areas. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on mitigation trees to include location (x /y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date planted, condition, cash assurance /bond release date, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. • Link mitigation trees (via a GIS point layer) and mitigation areas (via a GIS polygon layer) with IFIS (accounting system) so that expenditures can be directly related to specific projects. 16. No formal process for determining adjustments to street standards to preserve trees (18.810.030.A.7) (Planning /Arborist, Engineering). • The City's policy is to maintain the required curb to curb width standards in the Tigard Development Code in all cases, regardless of existing trees. • However, during the development review process, when a healthy and sustainable tree in the right of way is identified by the project arborist and /or City Arborist, Development Engineering will allow adjustments to planter strip and /or sidewalk standards on a case by case basis. • The City does not currently have the authority to require private developers to preserve trees if they choose not to. 17. No formal street tree maintenance process for limb /root clearance and removal (Planning /Arborist, Public Works /Streets). • If the street tree is the responsibility of the City, the corresponding division will maintain the clearance requirements outlined in the Tigard Municipal Code. • If a citizen complaint is received, the Streets Division will investigate. • If there is an immediate hazard (e.g. blocked stop sign, hanging limb, etc.), the Streets Division will prune the tree immediately. • If there is not an immediate hazard, the Streets Division will contact the responsible party directly and explain the Code requirements, or gather the information and forward to Code Enforcement if the owner is nonresponsive. • If the potential branch clearance hazard is after hours, citizens will need to call the Public Works after -hours number (503- 639- 1554). Public Works will then investigate the hazard after hours and either contact the contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available) if there is an immediate hazard, or forward the inquiry to the Streets Division if Attachment 4 the hazard is not immediate for follow up the following business day. The Streets Division will then follow the same process outlined above. • When tree roots are impacting City streets or utilities, the responsible division will investigate and, if needed, contact the City Arborist for root pruning advice. • If the City Arborist decides the tree can be safely root pruned to make the necessary repairs, the responsible division will absorb the cost of root pruning. • If the tree cannot be safely root pruned and the tree needs to be removed, the City will absorb the cost of removal, but the property owner will be responsible for stump removal and replanting. Prior to removing a street tree, the City Arborist shall be contacted. Attachment 5 III City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Mayor Dirksen and Honorable Council From: Todd Prager, Associate Planner /Arborist Re: Urban Forestry, Stakeholder Interview Results Date: April 10, 2009 In addition to internal coordination of City Departments, is coordinating with key community stakeholder groups and jurisdictions that regularly contribute to and /or are affected by the management of Tigard's urban forest. The following list of groups and organizations were identified as key community stakeholders relative to urban forestry: • American Society of Landscape Architects, Oregon Chapter • Clean Water Services • Home Builder's Association of Metropolitan Portland • Oregon Department of Transportation • Pacific Northwest Chapter of the ISA • Parks and Recreation Advisory Board • Portland General Electric • Tigard Chamber of Commerce • Tigard - Tualatin School District • Tualatin River Keepers • Tree Board The following list of questions have been asked of all stakeholder groups: 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well? 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? The following lists the summarized stakeholder responses (in red) to the above questions: Attachment 5 American Society of Landscape Architects, Oregon Chapter (ASLA) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • High level of familiarity with Tigard's tree and landscape ordinances. • Regularly implements codes during development projects to meet landscape and mitigation requirements. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Tigard actually has a tree and landscape ordinance whereas some cities do not. • Tigard staff is easily accessible to discuss issues with and work out solutions. • The Urban Forestry Master Plan will result in a more comprehensive approach to future tree and landscape ordinance updates. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Replanting on a caliper inch basis does not work because it incentivizes overplanting. • Site planning is focused too heavily on building needs and not on existing site conditions. This causes an excessive amount of clear cutting. • Landscape architects do not have enough flexibility in landscape design because landscape code requirements are overly specific. • Street tree list is outdated, and many of the species are no longer appropriate or relevant. • Street trees and streetscapes are non - uniform. Different development projects choose different types of trees so city blocks become a hodgepodge of street trees. • Many parts of the tree code are overly vague, which creates loopholes and a wide variety of interpretations. For example, there are no spacing, species, or nursery stock quality standards with respect to mitigation trees. • Need more tree and landscape related expertise on the Tree Board. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Focus tree code revisions on preservation and less on mitigation. If preservation requirements are increased, then mitigation could occur on a tree for tree basis rather than inch for inch. • Need to be stricter on grading with respect to trees. This can occur by focusing more on existing conditions and how trees can be incorporated into the building design. Also, landscape architects should be required to Attachment 5 collaborate more with project arborists in order to identify which trees are appropriate for preservation, and how to adjust grading to preserve trees. Perhaps there should be a dual sign off on preservation plans between the landscape architect and project arborist. • Allow for more flexibility in landscape requirements in future updates. Require landscape architects to be part of the design team, and sign off on planting before, during, and after installations. • Update street tree list. • To improve uniformity of streetscapes, the developers should have to survey the street trees in a 4 -5 block radius and choose trees that complement existing plantings. • The tree /mitigation code sections need more specificity. The City of Salem has a detailed development design handbook with detailed drawings and specifications that are referred to in their development code. This allows for more clarity as to what is expected of the development. • When advertising Tree Board vacancies, specify that you are looking for members with tree and landscape expertise. Advertise vacancies with local professional organizations. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • Sends drafts of tree and landscape code revisions to ASLA for review and comment. • Contact ASLA to see if members could get credit hours for developing codes and design handbooks. • Hire ASLA members to help develop code and design guidelines. • Share example codes that require maximum preservation of existing trees. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • More focus on preservation through improved grading plans, less focus on mitigation. The City needs to take a leadership role in this. • More focus on sustainable landscapes. Not necessarily native trees, but trees that are appropriate for site conditions. • Need detailed design /preservation manual with illustrations. • Need to have a warranty period for required landscaping to ensure establishment. • Need to require powerlines to be shown on landscape plans to avoid future overhead utility conflicts. • Landscape architects should be a required member of the design team. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Attachment 5 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • During development, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) reviews street tree planting plans in ODOT right of ways for compliance with ODOT specifications. • ODOT reviews and grants permits for City tree planting projects in ODOT right of ways (99W, Hall Boulevard, Highway 217). 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • No comment. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Street tree planting under powerlines causes conflicts because traffic lanes are closed for ongoing maintenance issues. • Some trees cause damage to infrastructure (sidewalks, curbs, streets). • Trees planted on top of underground utilities cause future conflicts due to root interference. • Some City tree planting and placement requirements are not coordinated with ODOT requirements (root barriers, site distance, clear distance, limb clearance) 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Require overhead utilities to be shown on site plans to avoid inappropriate tree planting that will create future conflicts. Route plans to Portland General Electric for review. • Select street trees that will not conflict with hard features. Require root barriers and other design feature that will help to minimize conflicts. • Require development projects to locate utilities on planting plans prior to ODOT and City review. This help to ensure that trees are not planted on top of existing utilities. • Clarify jurisdictional requirements and coordinate during future Code updates. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • Clarify jurisdictional requirements and coordinate during future Code updates. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? Attachment 5 • Prohibit the planting of trees that will conflict with powerlines. Route plans to Portland General Electric for review. • Require root barriers and other design feature that will help to minimize conflicts with hard features. • Require development projects to locate utilities on planting plans prior to ODOT and City review. • Clarify jurisdictional requirements in ODOT right of ways: o ODOT site distance requirements supersede Tigard requirements. o ODOT clear distance requirements supersede Tigard requirements. o ODOT branch clearance requirements supersede Tigard requirements. o ODOT has final signoff authority on any trees planted or removed in ODOT right of way (ODOT permit required). Pacific Northwest Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture (PNWISA) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • High level of involvement with tree ordinance through development projects. • Assist private property owners with tree management outside the development process. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Tree code helps to incentivize preservation because increasing tree removal requires increasing mitigation and associated costs. • Bi- weekly arborist report condition of approval helps to ensure better project oversight and tree plan implementation. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Tree code penalizes property owners with heavily treed lots more than those with un -treed lots. Mitigation is tied solely to tree removal. This may have the effect of precluding development in heavily treed areas such as the Tigard Triangle that are zoned for dense development. • Mitigation standards encourage overplanting of trees or planting of small stature trees to meet mitigation requirements. Requiring tree replacement on a caliper inch basis may not be appropriate for every tree and contributes to overplanting. • No sustainable funding for urban forestry programs. There needs to be a stable funding source for Tigard's urban forestry program that can be utilized for tree maintenance, not just tree planting. Attachment 5 • Bi- weekly arborist reports can be hard for the City to track, especially during the transition from site development to building phase. • Project arborists are hired to protect their clients. This can result in arborist reports with false or misleading information. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Determine tree stocking levels based on plantable areas as is done in the City of Vancouver, WA. This could be accomplished by matching available soil volumes for lots of various sizes with trees. • Allow required trees such as parking lot and street trees to count for mitigation. This will help alleviate overplanting of mitigation trees. • Provide incentives for planting of natives and large stature mitigation trees. One incentive could be to offer more mitigation credit for planting natives and large stature trees. This will help alleviate overplanting and encourage the planting of trees that offer the most environmental benefits. • Develop spacing standards based on the mature size of trees to improve long term growth and health. • Urban forestry funding can be more sustainable if it tied to stable sources such as stormwater fees, permit fees, transportation fees, etc. This will also allow for the urban forestry funds to be used for long term tree maintenance. • Bi- weekly arborist reports should be required in future code updates. The City should require a copy of the contract for bi- weekly reports and require the project arborist to send a notice to the City if the contract is terminated. If a different arborist is to provide bi- weekly reports, then the original project arborist should have to sign off prior to the new arborist amending the tree preservation plan. • The City should require more personal accountability for project arborists to discourage false or misleading information. Measures could include revoking business licenses and /or fines so that project arborists have more personal accountability when providing false or misleading information. • An alternative method to limit false or misleading reports would be for the City to hire a third party the arborist to do the tree preservation report and bi- weekly inspections. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • ISA can provide input and review on future tree code revisions. • ISA can be a resource for code provisions that have been successful in other jurisdictions and may be appropriate for Tigard. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? Attachment 5 • Require mitigation based on stocking levels, not on a caliper inch basis. • Develop clear and specific mitigation requirements that favor native and large stature trees, and require spacing per industry standards. Allow required landscape trees and street trees to count towards mitigation requirements. • Do not unfairly penalize property owners with heavily treed lots that will have trees that are overcrowded and not in good condition. • Incentivize protection and replanting of natives and large stature trees. • Identify sustainable funding sources for urban forestry programs. Fund long term maintenance of trees, not just tree planting. • Require project arborists to be brought onto the project team as early as possible. • Allow the project arborist to drive the tree preservation plan in future code updates, not the project engineer. • Require metal fencing in future code updates. • Develop a zone of clearance for building footprints, and don't penalize developers for removing trees in clearance zones. This zone could be 5' -10' or 3 to 5 times the diameter of the tree. However, site and species characteristics should be considered when crafting code revisions. • Increase planting strip size and require root barriers to protect streets and sidewalks. • Require utilities to be under the street, not in the planter strip where trees should be. • Hire a greenspace coordinator to manage the City's greenspaces. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) • No comments. Portland General Electric (PGE) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • PGE continually trims trees away from overhead conductors in Tigard to provide for the safe, reliable and continual source of electricity to meet the needs of commercial and residential customers. • PGE considers the City of Tigard an integral participant in this process in terms of establishing approved street tree lists, encouraging appropriate and responsible plantings, approving of ideal specimens for their heritage tree program and having the long term vision to develop and maintain an urban forestry program. Attachment 5 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • As a whole, Tigard's urban forestry program works extremely well. There is very qualified and attentive stewardship of trees in the City of Tigard. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Some inappropriate street tree plantings in the City of Tigard. • Several potentially hazardous tree /utility conflicts in the City of Tigard. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Remove and replace inappropriate street trees. • Aid in the hazardous tree removal by providing the labor and equipment necessary. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • PGE can contribute appropriate trees to new planting sites. • Aid in hazardous tree removal where the threat of an overhead conductor is a factor. • Attend monthly City coordination meetings. • Share in the exchange of information and of past experiences of what works well and what doesn't work quite well in other municipalities. • Assist in any educational capacity such as right tree /right place programs. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Future programs need to recognize the conflict between a static overhead distribution system of electricity and the dynamic nature of vegetation management around PGE facilities. • Invite PGE to monthly City coordination meetings. • Route tree plans to PGE for review. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce • Christopher Zoucha, Chief Executive Officer of the Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce informed me that urban forestry has not been an issue for the Chamber members, and therefore declined providing input as a stakeholder group for the Urban Forestry Master Plan. Attachment 5 Tigard Tualatin School District (TTSD) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • Somewhat limited. • Participation in the Tigard Neighborhood Trails Study. • Manage trees on School District property. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Adequate budget for tree planting and early establishment. • City of Tigard is very cooperative with the School District. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Lack of communication prior to planting trees on School District property. It is important to coordinate with Facilities Division so that long term maintenance issues can be addressed prior to planting. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Bring Facilities Division into the planning process from the beginning of a tree planting project. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • School District properties may offer opportunities to utilize City tree planting funds. • Wetlands on School District properties may offer wetland mitigation opportunities for the City. • Facilities Division would be able to provide guidance as to the types of trees and planting layouts that will facilitate long term maintenance by the District. • School District can contact City Arborist to find out if permits are required for tree removal and /or planting. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Bring Facilities Division into the planning process from the beginning of tree planting projects on School District properties. • Focus on low maintenance plantings with evergreens and other trees with low leaf litter. Attachment 5 Tualatin River Keepers 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • High level of involvement. • Work closely with the City and Metro on restoration projects in Tigard. • Provide comments on municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4) permits. • Provide comments on City of Tigard Parks plans and occasionally on private development applications. • Participated in the development of the Healthy Streams Plan by Clean Water Services. • Member of Oregon Community Trees, a non -profit organization that promotes urban and community forestry in Oregon. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Mitigation fee structure provides an adequate budget for tree planting. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Trees could be better utilized for stormwater management in developed areas such as along street and in parking lots. • Urban forestry funds could be collected and utilized more strategically. An example would be to use stormwater management fees to fund restoration programs. • The City of Tigard could make more of a public commitment to sustainability efforts such as by signing the Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Improve parking lot design standards to incorporate stormwater treatment features and more tree canopy. • Retrofit existing parking lots to improve stormwater treatment and tree canopy using grant money and other funding sources. • Encourage /require the use of more evergreen species in parking lots and streets so that the stormwater benefits of trees can be utiltized during the winter rainy season. • Collect urban forestry funds more strategically through stormwater fees, development fees, etc. so that the funding sources are more sustainable and can be used for more than just tree planting. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? Attachment 5 • Tualatin Riverkeepers can assist with volunteer recruitment for urban forestry projects. • Tualatin Riverkeepers can help educate kids about the importance of environmental stewardship through camp and recreation programming. • Tualatin Riverkeepers can help identify potential restoration sites. • Tualatin Riverkeepers can provide training to Planning Commission, City Council, City staff, and others on low impact development techniques. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Improve parking lot design standards to incorporate stormwater treatment and more tree canopy. • Increase stormwater incentives /requirements for development such as the "no runoff" provisions as in Lacey Washington. • Collect urban forestry funds more strategically through stormwater fees, development fees, etc. so that the funding sources are more sustainable and can be used for more than just tree planting. • More public commitment to sustainability efforts such as signing the Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. • More efforts in invasive species removal. Incentivize and /or require private landowners to remove invasives. Clean Water Services 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • Watershed Management Department manages revegetation projects in Tigard's stream corridors. • Partnered with urban forester (currently unfilled) on many acres of tree planting in Tigard's stream corridors including Englewood Park, Fanno Creek Park, and Cook Park. These projects were funded by Surface Water Management (SWM) fees which come from sewer system ratepayers. • Development Services issues Service Provider Letters (SPL) for development projects with potential impacts on stream corridors. • CWS inspectors monitor Vegetated Corridor work of private developers to ensure compliance with CWS standards. • Some stream restoration projects require City of Tigard tree removal permits and tree protection plans. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? Attachment 5 • Tigard Public Works is effective at using volunteers for planting projects. • In theory, the tree mitigation fund works well (if the money is actually used for tree planting). • Tigard has worked well with Clean Water Services on tree planting projects and meeting "Tree for All" planting goals. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Tree survey requirements can be counterproductive for restoration projects in stream corridors. The money for tree surveys and protection plans in areas dominated by non - native or invasive trees would be better spent on tree planting. • Invasive and non - native trees in Sensitive Areas and Vegetated Corridors should not be protected and /or require a tree removal permit. Protecting invasives and non - natives is a barrier to restoration. • Vegetated Corridor and other natural area plantings require long term maintenance beyond the two -year maintenance period typically required of developers. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • The City should be more diligent about taking a proactive approach to inspecting Vegetated Corridors during the maintenance period if their Urban Forestry Program includes CWS Vegetated Corridor requirements. • Restoration projects in degraded Sensitive Areas and Vegetated Corridors should be exempt from tree survey and protection requirements. • Tigard needs to adopt an inclusive invasive species list and exempt the removal of invasive trees from Sensitive Areas and Vegetated Corridors from permit requirements. • There needs to be more focus on long term maintenance of private and public riparian plantings. This could be addressed through a combination of Code requirements, SWM funds, and tree mitigation funds. The City should secure a stable source of funding for vegetation maintenance. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • Continue stewardship of "Tree for All" sites even after the program ends. • Coordinate public outreach about invasive plants and the responsibilities of streamside property owners. • Ensure City of Tigard and Clean Water Services regulatory requirements are coordinated in future. Allow Clean Water Services to review /comment on Code changes that affect stream corridors prior to adoption. Attachment 5 • Continue partnering to co- implement Stormwater Management Permits. • Coordinate on implementing an integrated pest management plan. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Exempt stream restoration projects in degraded Sensitive Areas and Vegetated Corridors from tree survey and protection requirements. • Exempt invasive and non - native tree removal in stream corridors from permit requirements. • Adopt an inclusive invasive species list and exempt invasive tree removal from permit requirements. • Focus on long term maintenance of riparian plantings through Code revisions, SWM funds, and tree mitigation funds. • Secure a stable funding source for long term riparian vegetation management. • Monitor expenditure of SWM funds to ensure that adequate funding is provided for riparian vegetation management. • Fill the urban forester position so that riparian revegetation projects continue /expand in the future. • Coordinate City planting standards in stream corridors with Clean Water Services standards. • Implement an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan in cooperation with Clean Water Services. Home Builder's Association (Draft) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • The Home Builder's Association (HBA) 1000+ members develop treed residential lands and build homes on treed lots in the City of Tigard. This process often involves clearing trees from properties. • HBA members must develop tree preservation /removal plans prior to development in order to meet Tigard Development Code requirements. • HBA members also mitigate tree removal by planting replacement trees in the City. Some of the mitigation trees are planted on City property such as Cook Park. • HBA members attend Tree Board, Planning Commission, and City Council meetings to provide input on tree related matters such as the Urban Forest section of the Comprehensive Plan. • The HBA has a reprensentative on the Urban Forestry Master Plan Citizen Advisory Committee. Attachment 5 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Tree planting when the right tree is planted in the right place. • The City's overall goal of preserving trees. • Requiring developers to utilize the expertise of independent, certified arborists when evaluating the conditions of trees and their viability of survival with site development. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • The HBA's position is that the City's mitigation requirements are unreasonable and punitive. • The mitigation structure in section 18.790.030.B.2(a -d) is unreasonable because it is not practicable to retain even 25% of the trees on sites zoned for medium to high density residential development (5 units per acre or more). There has likely never been a development in Tigard with 75% or greater retention on property zoned R4.5 or higher. Heavy equipment, grading, roads, and utilities are very disruptive to trees. Significant amounts of grading must take place outside the right of way when driveways are cut in, sidewalks are poured, and building footprints are cleared for structures. This results in tree retention being limited to the perimeter of developed sites. • The City's current program incentivizes the preservation of trees that will cause potential future hazards. For example, trees over 12" in diameter have root systems and canopies that extend at least 10' from the trunk. Larger trees have larger areas around them that need to remain undisturbed. This is not practicable is high density situations. Even if a younger but potentially large tree species such as Doug. -fir is able to be retained, it often makes sense to remove it to avoid potential hazards in the future. • The fee structure associated with fee in lieu of planting for mitigation far exceeds the actual cost to plant trees. For example, a recent mitigation project to plant trees in Cook Park for the Fletcher Woods development cost the developer $20,000 to complete. However, the City required the developer to submit a bond for $106,000 or $110 per caliper inch as assurance and to cover the City's cost of planting should the developer fail to mitigate. • The incentives in section 18.790.040 should be updated. For example, the density bonus incentive allows for a 1% density bonus for 2% canopy cover retained. This bonus does not yield any practical benefit unless the site is very large. For a site that is 10 lots, it would take 20% retention for a 10% density bonus to add just one unit. Moreover, by adding another unit and decreasing the amount of land available for infrastructure and buildings, the result is lots that are significantly smaller than zoning allows. This creates a direct conflict with lot size requirements in section 18.510. Attachment 5 • Finally, it is the consensus of the HBA that tree regulation and tree plan requirements require additional resources adding cost and time to any development project. In addition, Tigard's current program is divisive and creates legal conflicts in the form of appeals to the Land Use Board of Appeals for tree related issues. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Eliminate the punitive standards that cost developers large sums of money for unavoidable tree removal and only serve to drive up the cost of the homes constructed and the price the buyer will ultimately have to pay. • If the City does continue to regulate trees in the future, developers should only be required to mitigate only for unnecessary tree removal. • The City should not incentivize the preservation of potentially hazardous trees. • The mitigation fee in lieu should be revised to reflect the actual cost of planting trees. • Revise incentives for tree preservation so that developers are able to utilize the incentives. • However, the HBA's position is that the City should not regulate trees on private property. Private property owners should be allowed to cut trees as they have done since the establishment of Tigard. This "hands off" approach has successfully been done for decades with virtually no loss (and perhaps even some gain) in tree canopy. Trees are not community property and belong to the owners of the land. • There should be no City forestry program because there is nothing that works well with the current program. The cost of an urban forestry program does not outweigh the benefits. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • The HBA and its members can continue to participate in the public process so that their views are understood by the City's decision makers. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • There should be no urban forestry program because the benefits of such a program do not outweigh the costs. • Do not regulate trees on private property, and allows owners to manage their land as they see fit. • However, if the City does continue to regulate trees in the future the following should be included /excluded from the program: Attachment 5 o Eliminate punitive mitigation standards and only require developers to mitigate for unnecessary tree removal. o Revise fee in lieu of mitigation to reflect the actual cost of tree replacement. o Do not incentivize the preservation of large and potentially hazardous trees. o Revise incentives for tree preservation so that developers are able to utilize the incentives. Tree Board (Draft) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • The Tree Board is an oversight body for Tigard's urban forestry program. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • The City actively works to include the greater community in developing its urban forestry program. • The City collects substantial fees to be used for the planting of trees. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • The City's departments are not well coordinated on urban forestry issues due to lack of communication. • Tree management provisions are scattered throughout the Code and not unified. • The Tree Code is too focused on development. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • More communication between City departments. • Unify tree related provisions in Code. • Focus future Code on areas outside development, and fix the mitigation issue. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest. • The Tree Board can help create a plan for the future management of Tigard's urban forest. Attachment 5 • The Tree Board can help execute the action measures in the plan. Mitigation funds can be used to implement the plan. • The Tree Board can continue to reach out to stakeholders when implementing the plan. 6. What should be included /excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Increase communication between City departments. • Unify tree related Code provisions. • Focus future Code revisions on areas outside development. • Make sure Code revisions can be translated into something the public can understand. • Expand community education on urban forestry issues. Use Eastmoreland outreach materials as a model. • Continually measure progress on canopy preservation /expansion and community attitudes. • Plan for future annexations of tree resources in areas outside of the City limits. - -L>3 - (Xk bik-ki- klui_. Tigard Urban Forestry Master Plan --T756 A- ° c-L c -Ssu- g q . a oc? Implementation Matrix - Draft C • e`' ^ �.�` 5 e Co oc c5 J 0 g- Q\a e `' ° � e o Q e6J L ..9 cc' a ct �` m a c ` AZ 5r ol Implementation Goals ..e C.o 5 L F W F Q 1. Develop Hazard Tree Program 1.1 Establish City storm and hazard tree response protocols. a. Staff Public Works 2.3.8 L $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ODF Prior to land acquisition conduct a tree hazard assessment Fund b. Staff Hire greenspace coordinater to manage Tigard natural areas and Public Works 2.2.5 H $$ Time /General 2015 TRK develop a proactive hazard abatement program Fund c. Staff Develop and implement formal emergency response system for Planning 2.3.8, 2.2.3 L $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ODF tree hazards on City streets Fund d. Staff 2.2.3, 2.3.8, 2.3.9, Develop and implement formal emergency response system for Public Works L $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ODF tree hazards in City parks /greenspaces 2.3.10, 2.3.11 Fund 1.2 Establish City program to facilitate hazard abatement on private property. a. Staff Revise Tigard Municipal Code to grant authority to the City to Planning 2.3.8 H $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ODF become involved in private property tree hazards. Fund 2. Revise Street Tree and Landscaping and Screening Ordinances 2.1 Revise street tree planting, maintenance, and removal requirements a. Staff Create design and maintenance manual with drawings and Planning 2.3.8 H $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ASLA, TRK specifications for planting and maintenance. Fund b. Staff Revise Tigard Municipal Code to establish permit system for street Planning 2.2.5 M $ Time /General 2010 ISA, ASIA tree planting, removal, and replacement. Fund 3 c- 11 reA \v f 17 0 !?/N PROPERTY TAX REFORM PROPO t ALS MEASURE DESCRIPTION TYPE SJR 35 REPEALS MEASURE 50 REVISION DIRECTS LEGISLATURE TO ESTABLISH NEW LOCAL LEVY SYSTEM WITH THE FOLLOWINGfl IA 1. CURRENT PERMANENT TAX RATES 2. ALLOWS FOR LOCAL INCREASE OR DECREASE BASED O _ 0 %LOCAL VOTER APPROVAL 3. ALLOWS TEMPORARY RATES TO CONTINUE UNTIL EXPIRATION 4. STATUTORY MECHANISM FOR LOCAL APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY LEVIES 5. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TAXES OF $3.34 PER $1,000 OF REAL MARKET VALUE FOR SCHOOLS r 6. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TAXES OF $6.66 PER-- C $1,000 OF REAL MARKET VALUE FOR NON- ° \, O SCHOOLS �p 7. NEW SYSTEM APPLIE TAX YEARS BEGINNIN 7 -1 -2012 SJR 36 N • ESTABLISHES MINIMU SSESSED VALUE AMENDMENT V EQUAL TO 50% OREAL ARKET VALUE FOR ALL PROPERTY • REPLACES EXISTING CHANGED PROPERTY ti V RATIO CALCULATION WITH FIXED 75% OF REAL MARKET VALUE STANDARD FOR ALL EXCEPTIONS • APPLIES CHANGED PROPERTY RATIO TO PROPERTIES THAT ARE SOLD OR TRANSFERRED TO NEW OWNER • ESTABLISHES NEW CAP ON ALL PROPERTIES AT 75% OF REAL MARKET VALUE • NEW LIMITS FIRST A PLY TO TAX YEARS BEGINN G 7 -1 -2012 SJR 37 • REPLACES EXISTING PROPERTY AMENDMENT RATIO CALCULATION WITH FIXED 75% OF REAL MARKET VALUE STANDARD FOR ALL EXCEPTIONS • APPLIES CHANGED PROPERTY RATIO TO PROPERTIES THAT ARE SOLD OR TRANSFERRED TO NEW OWNER • NEW LIMITS FIRST APPLY TO TAX YEARS BEGINNING 7 -1 -2012 • N ., Property Tax Structure & Local Government Of "ea, A 1 5105 Intention of Measure 50 • Limit existing structure's property tax growth to 3% per year. • Allow for increases for new growth. — Give same benefit to new properties as existing. • Ideal: 3% growth on existing keeps up with inflation, and new growth pays for itself. — Changed Property Ratio: Formula to "spread" benefits of Measure 5, 47/50 to new growth. How It Works • Rapidly improving • Stagnant • New Construction neighborhood neighborhood House A R0115013 MIAnerash NEW cowl Nom C 1997 0 1997 f, => TAV 5 74.750 TAV !S 74,7k01 MA • S 100.000. CPR ; 74 7M 1 ;7 CPR = 75% ;7 : ' 4;5 isznigers azommas mum 2008 2008 TAV s 103471 RMV 303.250 + PIT% S 100,0036 CPR • 50% -7 = CPR 34.32% CPA 10O.0O% Neighborhoods less able to pay, end up New Construction paying a higher % of home's value does not pay existing services 1 • Changed Property Ratio Taxable Assessed Value Growth Capped at 3% Real Market Value Average Growth 6.98% (Residential — Mu. Co.) • Each year, this ratio grows smaller. • The aggregate county -wide ratio determines the amount of Taxable Assessed Value for new properties. Changed Property Ratios Mutmomah County 0.9 .7 2008 06 0.5 2018 EELS 04 2028 07 0.1 1.1646 1997 2007 2017 2027 2037 2047 2057 2067 +Re963r0el Year —.—Commarcol Gresham Rockwood URD (Residential) CPR Avg. = 58.18% 250 - - - - -- 200 150 '• m 100 _�t 50 - 1 Li ri 0.0 0.1 02 0.3 OA OS 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Changed Property Ratio 2 Portland Pearl District (Residential) CPR Avg. = 43.55% 3,000 .._---- ....._ ._._..__.._......_....__._.._._.._...-------_....- 2,500 2,000 at 1,500 E as 1,000 500 -- 0.05 0.15 025 0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95 Changed Property Ratio City of Gresham Public Safety Costs v. Prop. Tax Revenue 35 — — 30 25 a c 20 g 15 10 5 0 1949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1999 Police and Fire Costs Property Tax Revenues City of Gresham - Public Safety 480 W< - o lce K 3 � .,rl B,Nv 1 c 475 . Y H 'r,G2.xA `° �.' o 7 s c h 3 Pr pert ✓tax Ra enue'` _ fit Pxt'CsriFa lPaai) 240 _ '� a 9w.,�4 7. w l r 40 � �- 160 +.wt. .n. _ -�Sl s4 , � 6. a tr t v a l°' � e ' Fire- 80 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2005 3 General Fund Revenue 19076 r•r3Owtl 0...n.* 2007 G.r•r.) Fund R.. nu.. (125 7 million bbl) (=12.4 mill= 10131) Rwa'IY UW 5% .40.r1Y Olrr '''*%'-' FY D% 5 k?i'9 7 ;-; 1 0; At t 1,,, ' • - '' Star. a.i.r Star. m 3ed , bo..7.. 6% X 11 % % Consequences • Regressive tax system intra- county. • Tax Structure divorce from reality. • Inequality between similar properties. — Same services used, same property value, but property taxes can be up to three times higher. • Urban Renewal Affects. Solution Goals • Fix CPR, so new construction pays for current service levels. • Maintain Predictability for Tax Payers. • TAV is tied to dynamic market realities. • Address existing inequalities that have built up since 1995. 4 0. co v, Ted Wheeler, Multnomah County Chair 1 J`' PRO„ l .' O f4 0 H C 1,A ;' ` "" Y, 501 SE Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 600 7 + j1 ?{ o Portland, Oregon 97214 Phone: 503.988.3308 ie, . 1 8 5 4 • Email: mult Testimony of Mult.,omah County Chair Ted Wheeler Before the Oregon Senate Finance and r' eve. ; ue Com ; i ittee April 22, 2009 Chair Burdick, members of the Committee, my name is Ted Wheeler and I am the Multnomah County Chair. I appreciate this opportunity to testify on behalf of property tax limitation reform. This is an historic occasion, and I want to acknowledge your considerable leadership in bringing this issue to the fore. I had the opportunity to address many of you at a Tigard hearing of the interim version of your committee in September. Unfortunately, we still have the Measure 50 problem. In September I shared a newspaper clip about two home purchasers with similar houses but different tax bills. For this hearing I have brought a comparison between two blocks. Both blocks are in Multnomah County, both are in the City of Portland, both are in the Portland Public School district and thus their tax rates are nearly identical. All the homes have market values between $300,000 and $400,000 but on one block they pay just over $1,000 and on another they pay over $4,000. It's a difference of $3,000 per year ... but no difference in the services provided. The deep discount block has assessed values that are 80 to 85% less than their market value. On the low benefit block, the discount is 35 to 40 %. The taxpayers who got the big tax cuts along with the big service reductions at least were not paying for what they were not getting BUT the people who got modest tax relief saw their own services go away so that somebody in another neighborhood could get a big tax cut and that is just not fair. This year, the folks in the slow growing neighborhoods and those are the low benefit neighborhoods are in for more bad news. Many will see their market value drop by 20% while their taxes go up 3 %. The deep discount neighborhoods are more likely to hold their value. Measure 50 is irrational and unfair. Thank you for exploring ways•to change it. Of course, unfairness is not the'only problem. Because Measure 50 separated revenues from real market values, unable to fund services people want and expect. April22, 2009 Page 2 of 4 So what has this meant to the - people of Multnomah County? LOSS OF BASIC SERVICES that_. - people expect government to be able to provide. • Lost over 600 jail beds, a 40% reduction • Lost 190 positions in the Sheriff's Office • Eliminated the Forest Work Camp where adult and juvenile offenders learned work skills o Eliminated the Work Release program where offenders helped to pay for their room and board. o Eliminated two different alcohol and drug treatment programs and scaled back many others • Eliminated the School Attendance Initiative which tried to intervene to keep kids in school and prevent delinquency and reduced services associated with our nationally recognized SUN School system • Eliminated the Southeast Portland Health Clinic, a big facility that helped thousands of people every year. o Eliminated Juvenile Early Intervention Unit • Eliminated the Special Investigative Unit o Eliminated gang task force participation o Eliminated services for those with mental illness, etc., etc. For almost all of our services, waiting lists for services are longer. Services and hours of service have been cut and cut again. Measure 50 is complicated, so regrettably the fix is too. But there are several levels of reform. I want to applaud your efforts to investigate the various options. Three possible reforms for Measure 50 are before you today. One is to reset the assessed value on sale of the property: ® Won't tax anybody out of their home a Would align Oregon with other states that use "acquisition value" ® Over time, it builds more of a connection between market value and taxes o Reset on sale is relatively easy to understand and may be the politically most viable given that taxpayers must vote in any reform to Measure 50. A second option would create - floor and a ceiling:- - ® Nobody would pay taxes on less than half of their real market value ® Nobody would pay taxes on more than three quarters of their real market value ® The wide differences that we see now would be reduced 2 Apri122, 2009 Page 3 of 4 o This would address the issue of inequity in real estate taxes that I described earlier The One Percent limitation option is the one suggested by Don McIntire. o It has the advantage of greatly simplifying the Oregon Constitution by removing all of the Measure 50 language and replacing it with a stronger Measure 5 type limit. Whatever the option: It needs to be tested statewide and carefully tuned. Measure 50 created huge inequities. It is hard to find a way to equitably reverse these inequities. There needs to be a transition. Measure 50 was created largely to tame large year to year changes. We should find ways to phase -in changes. We need to protect the most vulnerable. Most states provide special tax treatment for fixed - income and elderly homeowners. We used to, we don't anymore, we need to do it again. Finally, I want to specifically address the research that is needed. I know that budgets are tight, I'm announcing mine tomorrow and I know that nothing is free. But I want to say that I will certainly contribute staffing time to help move this forward and I will ask others to help as well. I certainly don't know when the time will be right to ask Oregon voters to do something to fix these problems BUT I know that it must be done. I thank you for having the courage to face this problem. • 3 April 22, 2009 Page 4 of 4 WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPERTY TAX LIMITATIONS FROM MEASURE 50? A TALE OF Two BLOCKS: SW 61 & NE 16TH HOUSES VALUED IN THE $300,000's LISTED IN ORDER OF REAL MARKET VALUE • REAL MAXIMUM ACTUAL • MARKET ASSESSED 2008 VALUE . VALUE . TAXES ADDRESS $307,980 $195,790 $4,147 9910 SW 61 $312,720 $ 66,690 $1,416 5134 NE 16 . $313,530 $ 47,410 $1,007 5117 NE 16 T1 ' $316,630 $216,090 $4,577 • 9931 SW 61ST $326,880 $198,530 $4,205 • • 9930 SW 61 $330,910 $ 47,270 $1,004 5126 NE 16 TH, $365,590 $230,690 $4 9911 SW 61 $392,540 . $ 64,100 $1,361 5133 NE 16 A LOW BENEFIT BLOCK ' ® THE 9900 BLOCK OF SW 61 IS SOUTH OF SW TAYLOR'S FERRY ROAD • THESE FOUR PROPERTIES LISTED PAY TAX ON 60 TO 68% OF THEIR REAL MARKET VALUE ® THUS MEASURE 50 DISCOUNT OF 32 TO 40% OFF OF THE TAX RATE IS APPLIED TO THEIR RMV A DEEP DISCOUNT BLOCK • THE 5100 BLOCK OF NE 16 IS NORTH OF NE ALBERTA STREET ® THE FOUR PROPERTIES LISTED PAY TAX ON 15 TO 21% OF THEIR REAL MARKET VALUE ® THUS MEASURE 50 DISCOUNT OF 79 TO 85% OFF OF THE TAX RATE IS APPLIED TO THEIR RMV SAME COUNTY, SAME CITY, SAME SCHOOL DISTRICT, ALMOST IDENTICAL TAX RATES THE DIFFERENCE • ABOUT $3,000 PER YEAR ABOUT $250 PER MONTH • AGENDA ITEM NO.3 - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: APRIL 28, 2009 (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 of persons who attend or participate 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: ( ,/ / , • or , ( 1 JVonie Also, please spe your name as it sounds, if it will help , 6 4 'A) Si the presiding officer pronounce: e(5 //o . r rs �,� ri i Address 3 s '5 S w f - f St. /)J r / 6 A02 I 0 � City 'r A ({ 9 State c'(L & 0 / Zip q-7 7 Phone No. 3 (0Z 9 y Name: 12100/.1 +16 V' S► I /J 1 it o j u c ( Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help m self GA N the presiding officer pronounce: Address all S- 6 6ti C ' / r tr. A2n 1uti)4 i1-4 U,(1 F1.c State U'L Zip 97j2 (2e scut PiS14 "- Phone No. )- 2 -`4`4- b Name: .11 LorJG' p Also please spell your name as it sounds, if it will help P r°e" the presiding officer pronounce: Q� `- ° `' s WANSkA L t/ Address o) — 2Jc • City E-PflrC 5 - t State '- zip ' Phone No. CSC CITIZEN COMMUNICATION -- Pre3err6d //oq 1f gar April 28, 2009 c G,f, D 6 l To: Tigard Mayor, City Council, Chief of Police, Planning and Public Works Departments ►Yl Over two years ago we testified in front of City Council that nearby STOP SIGNS DO NOT WORK. In the four days following our testimony in 2006, City of Tigard police officers quickly gave citations (with a base fine $250) and warnings to over fifty motorists for violations at the intersection of SW Spruce and 72nd Avenue. Since then, we have seen thousands of motor vehicles drive thru that intersection without stopping or barely even slowing. Oftentimes we see drivers in the middle or on the wrong side of the street. Pedestrians use both sides of the street. Due to these safety issues, we have to pay much more attention to the local traffic as we back out of our driveways. To our surprise, we learned on April 21g that the city opened bids for a pedestrian walkway project. After a conversation with Project Manager Vannie Nguyen, she sent Mr. Zen Dutson to visit with us April 22 to explain the City of Tigard's plans for a pedestrian walkway up 72 Avenue, from in front of our property (approximately 20 feet from the intersection), north to SW Oak Street. Contrary to both Ms. Nguyen and Mr. Dutson's claims, prior notification did not occur. We did not receive via postal delivery the prior notification the City says it mailed, neither did our closest neighbors. The day after his visit, we received city's imprecise notification and map of the walkway project. While we do not oppose the eastside walkway (unless there are legal implications we haven't yet learned); the issue is the principle of our not being properly notified and the apparent lack of concern the city has for pedestrian and vehicle safety in the most dangerous place, the actual intersection of SW 72 Ave and SW Spruce Street. If we had been properly notified earlier, we could have provided input. Specifically, we suggest: 1) an official, designated cross walk (with appropriate signage) angled north from wheelchair ramp across Spruce Street and connecting to the pedestrian walkway, which should extend the entire length of the block on 72nd not just 20 feet up from the intersection; and 2) a line up the middle of street would keep drivers a little more focused on staying in their proper lane of the street and not in the walkway. We feel this is an overdue but poorly designed, low -cost band -aid on the problem of drivers not obeying stop signs at the 72 + SW Spruce intersection at Fred Meyer. We do not suggest at this time, a traffic light, speed bumps, more streetlights, or reflectors for the walkway. i \ Sincerely, 6 01(10/14. :'e; • .)) af 4144 Noreen Crib ZI Norma Hams Jim g Aancy 10730 SW nd Ave 10700 SW 72nd Ave 10 30 S " Ave 10705 SW 72nd Enclosures: 2006 letter to city from us 2006 letter to us from Chief of Police G4="i�d Ouritiy G1,€f7rI J7 c 7 /� G��2ti Lc ��l�d2 L'G c /�/ /2/2DD‘ December 12, 2006 Mayor, City Council, and Chief of Police City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor, City Council, Chief of Police and other readers: With the potential for increasing traffic, we continue to have a big concern regarding the safety of our families, neighbors, community, and ourselves. We live on or near the corner of SW 72n and Spruce Streets in Tigard and Washington County. We have witnessed on many occasions, a blatant disregard of the law. Apparently S -T O -P does not really mean `stop' in Tigard. All four STOP signs do not work at this corner. Dozens of motorists per day do not stop fully on SW Spruce Street, if at all, as they drive out the back of the Fred Meyer parking lot and turn up SW 72n Avenue without even pausing. Sometimes it's impossible to back out of our driveways. Some motorists slowly roll through the intersection, but many others barely slow down at all. Some drivers accelerate through the intersection and speed up the hill. This creates a potential for accidents, a tragedy waiting to happen. We have children, grandchildren, pets, and perhaps more important, there's heavy pedestrian traffic in the area also, due to both stores and Tri-met bus stops nearby. There are two big historic trees that obstruct part of the view for those who should be stopping at the east side of SW 72nd Avenue at Spruce Street. Monitoring this comer could be a possible source of increased revenue for the city. Again this year, we invite city officials to park in our driveways to observe the blatant disregard for the law. Please feel free to contact us. Yours truly, 1A9V2fik 1(4 Noreen M G • ons Norma Harris J Lo � Nancy Naish 10730 SW 72n 10700 SW 72nd 10731e • 72nd 10705 SW 72nd (503) 245 -3999 (503) 244 -6646 cc: Washington County Board of Commissioners Tigard Times, The Oregonian City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 December 19, 2006 11 00 CP rn c (Y-De ; --(rum Chi Mr. Jim Long , n T I G A R D 10730 SW 72 St. C� i c1Sc Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mr. Long, The letter that you and your neighbors presented to the Tigard City Council on Dec. 12, 2006 concerning stop sign violations at SW 72 " and SW Spruce St. was received in the Police Department on the morning of Dec. 14, 2006. I heard about the letter the morning of Dec. 13, 2006 and directed our Traffic Supervisor, Sgt. Karl Kaufman, to initiate enforcement action at this location. Sgt. Kaufman has assured me that the location was assigned to our two motor officers to work as their call load allows. He has also assured me that patrol officers from Day shift and Swing shift have also been working this location as their call load allows. I have been advised that we have written approximately 25 citations and given at least as many verbal citations for stop sign violations since your letter was received. Officers do have the discretion whether to issue the citation based on their observations. Some vehicles show total disregard for the stop sign and are obviously more blatant than others. Warnings are typically verbal in nature but still result in the officers being visible to other drivers as doing something. As you know, this intersection is an odd one because of its configuration. It is possible that an Engineering survey may assist in reconfiguring it but that can not be done until after the Holidays. Sgt. Kaufman will be directed to contact Gus Duenas, our City Engineer to inquire as to any possible changes. What that might involve is unknown at this time but we will make: the effort to inquire. Please be assured our Officers have been made aware of the issue and we will continue our enforcement efforts as diligently and as frequently as possible as our city wide work load allows. Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Do not hesitate to call on me. Sincerely, 4/-141•' William Dickinson, Chief Tigard Police Department (503)718 -2572 Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Annual Volunteer Program Highlights Report Prepared By: Bob Roth Dept Head Approval: ( 4 4 City Mgr Approval: be ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The Annual Volunteer Program Highlights Report informs the City Council and community about recent volunteer contributions, ongoing activities and service trends. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No action required; information only. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Four generations of residents currently volunteer for the City of Tigard at department facilities, outdoor sites and from their homes. Volunteers help children to read at the Library and enhance public safety / preparedness through the Police Reserves and Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT) Programs.Volunteers also conduct department mailings and serve on committees and boards that focus on community concerns. During 2008, 1,595 City of Tigard volunteers contributed 31,775 hours of volunteer time towards City projects, services and special events. This 2008 volunteer hours total equals an additional 15 full -time staff positions and is a 5% increase over the 2007 volunteer hours total. At the 2008 rate of $20.25 per hour, 31,775 hours equals $643,444. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. CITY COUNCIL GOALS The Volunteer Program mission is "Enhancing and maintaining service delivery while strengthening connections to the community." ATTACHMENT LIST None. FISCAL NOTES None. A\NUAL . a REPORT TO TIGARD CITY COUNCIL CITY AD a :b i l ill III LIC I I. . . I A ,„ . , , , .. . _ , _ . _ ,„, , , „ 1 OM'MUI f ^ ' } _ I EL OPMENT lC E c 5 e. 4 a ' T in . . .,,- . _ A . puF t':, Fpi I «sue \ �f �r x ... - _ POLICE DEP .f iii i N T 4 BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD. 1 MAHATMA GANDHI r, City of Tigard staff promote volunteer involvement through recruitment activities, department placements and special event participation. Partnerships with local churches, schools and community organizations expand public awareness and volunteer service. The intent of this report is to describe City of Tigard volunteer involvement during 2008, highlight a range of volunteer activities, and describe trends influencing future volunteer participation. 0 NT • 1 oGRAm missION Enhancing and maintaining service delivery while strengthening connections to the community. 2008 VOLUNTEER ANNUAL REPORT VOLUNTEER INVOLVEMENT BY DEPARTMENT CITY ADMINISTRATION FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES • Assistant Grant Writers • Clerical Assistants • Budget Committee • Community -wide Celebrations • Business License Renewal Assistant • Neighborhood Network Steering • Hard Drive Remover Committee Members • Timesheet Collator • Photographers • Translators POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • DARE Summer Camp Councilors • Explorers • CE2 Students • Interns • City Center Advisory Commission • Reserve Police Officers • Committee for Citizen Involvement • Tigard Youth Advisory Council • Planning Commission • Comprehensive Plan • Policy Interest Teams • Temporary Sign Removal • Traffic and Accident Coordinator • Transportation Financial Strategies A Task Force • Tree Board - -- Ili ber I • 2008 VOLUNTEER ANNUAL REPORT VOLUNTEER INVOLVEMENT BY DEPARTMENT PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC LIBRARY • Adopt -A- Street • Adopt -A -Shelf Readers • Adopt -A -Path • Book Check -in • Adopt -A- Stream • Book Mending • Community Emergency • Computer Class Instructors Response Team (CERT) • Computer Class Teaching Assistants • Rhododendron and Butterfly • Entry Point Greeters Garden Stewards • Friendly Visitors • Park Landscape Maintenance • Holds / Tasket Processing and • Park and Recreation Advisory Board Shelving • Stream Restoration Volunteers • Library Board • Videographers and Scriptwriters • Local History Docents • New Material Processors • PEER Court Coordinators • Requests to Fill • Shelving 1. • Tech Room Hosts k = r • Aci Video Check -in and Shelving t 1 EFT 4,-_,-: I ..,4 'ax,. ' , fi t; - I i ,, 2008 VOLUNTEER ANNUAL REPORT 2008 VOLUNTEER ACTIVITY HIGHLIGHTS C‘ In 2008, over 200 volunteers supported the e City's stream restoration program installing over 4,000 NATIVE PLANTS » • Both the City's Sorg Rhododendron Garden and Tupling Butterfly Garden benefitted from volunteer FAMILY FEST involvement. Following the May 2008 rhododendron bloom, 198 teenagers from the Church of the Latter Day ;, Saints descended on the garden and in a matter of two hours had completed the removal of tens of thousands of The 2008 Family Fest combined spent flower blossoms. This year's bloom will be bigger broad volunteer involvement and brighter because of their efforts. with diversified community partnerships to produce a • In 2008, Tigard Police Department Reserve Officers were busy with special events including 4th of July Millen homegrown celebration of Drive Parade / Fireworks Display, Annual Washington Tigard by residents, volunteers County Air Show, and Tigard High School football and and organizations. basketball games. Reserve Officers also promoted • bicycle safety in partnership with the Cub Scouts and during the Holiday Season Bicycle Giveaway. • famiiy1t 0 12 : • Library Circulation staff trained 42 teen shelvers during "- seven shelving sessions. Staff assessed volunteers' , skills, demonstrated shelving techniques, and scheduled d R follow -up training with them. Volunteer shelvers helped the Library keep pace with record - breaking Circulation " r: levels. • In early 2008, staff completed Board /Committee training needs surveys and forwarded findings to Executive Staff. _y A consultant -led training for members and staff was held y�. g d on May 1 at the Library Community Room. 2008 V(L _ 'MEER ANNUAL P,Er'u i 2008 VOLUNTEER ACTIVITY HIGHLIGHTS Last summer, Library youth volunteered a total of 828 hours — a 22% increase from the p revious summer" CO 0 ii UNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM . C.E.R.T. volunteers expanded their total Tigard membership to 138 with 55 new graduates I in 2008. CERT volunteers increased public ' s preparedness through production of two 4 educational videos and establishment of the _ , 4 „. w i ,i, ww.tigardcert.org website. Southridge High School drama j � _ g g Sc oo d ama students participated in the 2008 CERT Rodeo. • Volunteer Program staff and volunteers • Clerical volunteers continue to provide participated in the Emergency Operations assistance for the Tigard Business License Center Earthquake Exercise on June 4 -5. notification and collection process in 2008. Staff organized simulated volunteer Incoming checks were verified and entered coordination and donations processing utilizing renewal forms. Clerical volunteers activities. Bilingual volunteers provided also organized employee time sheets on a realistic interactions with staff as they bi- monthly basis. role - played concerned citizens requesting information and support during the exercise. • The Ongoing Volunteer Opportunities List featuring local volunteer positions was • Over 200 volunteers supported the City's updated and posted on the Volunteer Program Stream Restoration Program by tying flags webpage with copies distributed to the to mark planting locations, removing ivy and public. Six Tigard area organizations listed 78 other non - native vegetation, and providing separate volunteer positions and additional long -term stream care through our organizations have periodically posted Adopt -A- Stream Program. positions. 2008 VOLUNTEER ANNUAL REPORT 2008 VOLUNTEER ACTIVITY HIGHLIGHTS • Local Eagle Scouts and Order Agorr,..A.sTREET of the Eagle members completed ten major projects across the City The City's Adopt -A- Street . .�. in 2008. These projects included teams removed more a :�'� building and installation of new rDayc$ than ten dumpster Toads ' oTral bridges and pathways; procuring and of trash from our local installing planting, irrigation, and a -, custom picnic table at the skate park; streets and worked closely landscaping the library parking lot; with City crews to provide building and installation of over 50 a cleaner environment for = bat and birdhouses to support our our citizens. Public Works wild neighbors along Derry Dell Creek; technical brochures were installing a rain garden to treat parking translated into Spanish lot runoff from the Summerlake by a telecommuting Park parking lot; and creating rest volunteer for distribution stops and bench areas at Cook and to area residents. Englewood Parks. • Volunteer Program staff successfully utilized • Local City Center Advisory Commission presentations, websites and media contacts members worked with members of the to inform area residents about the WES Planning Commission to review Downtown Commuter Rail Grand Opening and WES Week Design Guidelines. These volunteers also activities. Partnerships with rail enthusiasts provided input into the development of new and service organizations were key to Community Development regulations and recruiting event volunteers. form -based code components. • Technical assistance and support for the • Dog Day Library Shelving events are Volunteer Works software database concluded scheduled to facilitate quick and easy in 2008. Volunteer Program staff reviewed late summer volunteering. Fourteen teens replacement options and selected the web- participated and contributed 84 hours during based Volgistics program for adoption and four sessions. Eight of the teens came to more implementation in January 2009. than one three hour group event. 2008 VOLUNTEER ANNUAL REPORT 2008 CITY OF TIGARD VOLUNTEER STATISTICS 2007 1,505 Volunteers 30,343 hours contributed 2008 1,595 Volunteers 31,77 hours contributed S ats 5% increase in 2008 • 31,775 volunteer hours = 15 fte staff positions • Average value of volunteer hour = $20.25 (2008 — Independent Sector website) • 2008 value of contributed volunteer hours = $643,444 • Total Library volunteer hours for 2008 = 17,040 • 140 community volunteers worked on 2008 Family Fest event • In 2008 Police Department Reserve Officers contributed 2,330 hours of service (17% increase over 2007) • Average monthly Library volunteer hours = 1,420 • Public Works volunteer hours = 6,091 • 95 individuals served on boards, committees and task forces • 75 PEER Court cases conducted by student volunteers • 97 volunteers worked in support of Tigard City staff during the Balloon Festival • 27 teams of volunteers kept Tigard's main arterial streets free of trash • 100 students attended DARE Summer Camp • Eight individuals participated in the Explorer Scouts Program • Eight Eagle Scout projects were completed for the City of Tigard � F a • s r ti 1; (I 1111 • Y_ir is !� 2008 VOLUNTEER ANNUAL REPORT DIRECTIONS AND TRENDS IN VOLUNTEER INVOLVEMENT Local volunteer participation is driven by organizational needs, community conditions and national trends. These factors combine to determine the level of volunteer participation over the short- and long -term. Volunteers, as well as organizations that utilize them, are impacted by Oregon's current economic conditions. Both Library and Public Works staff indicated that well- educated and experienced individuals are contacting them about volunteer opportunities. Many of these contacts are unemployed and are seeking opportunities to sharpen skills, network and reduce isolation. These volunteers' long -term commitment to volunteering is balanced with their employment search and future employment demands. Other individuals who may have volunteered previously are working or seeking employment to maintain household incomes (including retirees). Tigard area volunteer participation has continued to grow at the Library, Neighborhood Network and Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) with staff support and resources. Participation in restoration projects and clerical volunteer opportunities will be marked with available projects and staff resources. Local community organizations' volunteer involvement is being impacted by decreased donations, increased competition for volunteers, staff layoffs and increased demands for human services. While the pool of potential volunteers is expanding, community organizations' capacity to support increased volunteer involvement has not kept pace. At the federal level, both the House of Representatives and Senate have passed legislation this term to expand the AmeriCorps Program from 75,000 to 250,000 positions nationwide. One new corps for low income areas will focus on education, clean energy, and health and services for veterans. A new Summer of Service Program for middle and high school students would provide $500 education awards to be used for college costs for successful participants. 2008 VOLUNTEER ANNUAL REPORT • I TIGARD City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR I 503 - 639 -4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov Agenda Item No. L A Meeting of a4,24.4. ��d 9 March 31, 2009 Board Minutes, Page 1 of 2 M of the Joint. Meeting of the Tigard and Tualatin City Councils and the Tigard- Tualatin School Board Tigard- Tualatin School District, 23J The minutes are official after Board approval, and will be posted at www.ttsd.k12. or. us. Board Members Present: Liz Newton, Tigard Assistant City Manager Mark Chism, Board Chair Bill Dickinson, Tigard Police Chief Jill Zurschmeide, Vice -Chair Kent Barker,Tualatin Police Chief Barry Albertson Don Hudson, Tualatin Finance Manager Toby LaFrance, Tigard Finance Manager Administration Present: Paul Hermon, City of Tualatin Community Services Dir. Rob Saxton, Superintendent Ron Bunch, City of Tualatin Community Development Bonnie Maplethorpe, Chief Financial Officer Larry Braaksma, Tualatin Police Department Dan Goldman, Curriculum & Instruction Associate Director Jim Parsons, Community Member Susan Stark Haydon, Community Relations Director Jan Kittelson, Budget Committee Member Margaret Barnes, Tigard Turns the Tide President Others Present: David Dahlc, Get Spotted Media Patricia Keller, Executive Assistant Connie Jolley, STUD Club Advisor Connie Ramaekers, Prevention Specialist Conor Teichroeb, STUD Student Jay Harris, Tualatin City Council Nichole Jackson, STUD Student Monique Beickman, Tualatin City Council Sarah Pence- Jones, STUD Student Donna Maddux, Tualatin City Council ErikaBoudreau, STUD Student Ed Truax, Tualatin City Council Anna lennartz, STUD Student Chris Barhyte, President Tualatin City Council Rebekah Brems, STUD Student JoeIle Davis, Tualatin City Council Katie Gentry, STUD Student Sherilynn Lombos, Tualatin City Manager Jonathan Languin, STUD Student Gretchen Buchner, Tigard City Council Adam Sanna, STUD Student Marland Henderson, Tigard City Council Adrianna Chisholm, STUD Student Sydney Sherwood, Tigard City Council Christina Cooke, Times Nick Wilson, President Tigard City Council 6:30 PM JOINT MEETING Cal! to Order Chairman Mark Chism called the joint meeting of the Tigard and Tualatin City Councils and the Tigard- Tualatin School District Board of Directors to order at 6:30 PM at the Hibbard Administration Building, 6960 SW Sandburg St., Tigard, OR 97223. Introductions Self introductions were made by all participants and attendees. Discussion Items A. Dan Goldman, 'MD Grant Manager, reported on the Safe Schools /Healthy Students Grant. Mr. Goldman explained that the Federal Grant is jointly funded by three different sources and provides funding at $1.5 million per year. The program brings together the School District, Tigard and Tualatin Police, Oregon Department of Human Services, Washington County Mental Health, Washington County. Juvenile Department, and the Commission on Children & Families; to create safer, drug free, and more supportive community. Mr. Goldman briefly outlined programs that arc funded by the grant. Bill Dickinson, Tigard Chief of Police, and Kent Barker, Tualatin Chief of Police described some of the involvement of the two cities. B. Toby LaFrance, City of Tigard Finance Manager and Don Hudson, City of Tualatin Finance Manager, and Bonnie Maplethorpe, TTSD Chief Financial Officer presented brief Jurisdiction Financial Reports. Toby LaFrance and Don Hudson said the majority of City funds are restricted for dedicated uses such as water, building and capital projects. The 2008 -2009 Tigard - Tualatin School District Board of Directors: Mark Chism, Chair; Jill Zurschmeide, Vice- Chair; Barry Albertson, Caroline Neunzert Art Rutkin, Directors March 31, 2009 Board Minutes, Page 2. of 2 general fund is one -third of City funding with police department receiving the largest amount of funding. Property tax is the largest revenue source for both cities. Bonnie Maplethorpe explained that State School Funding Formula and the Sustainability Fund and described how funding in disbursed, citing personnel as the largest portion of the budget. C. Paul Hennon, City of Tualatin and Ron Bunch, City of Tigard, both spoke about the Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) program. The SRTS program brings together schools, neighborhoods and communities to work with students and families to get them to and from school safely. Paul Hennon said the City of Tualatin wants to hear from interested community members and to apply for Federal funding to implement the program (applications are due by June 15, 2009). Ron Bunch said the City of Tigard has taken steps to increase pedestrian safety. He provided a list of those improvements. The City of Tigard is also interested in applying for funds to help increase pedestrian safety. D. Connie Ramaekers, Prevention Specialist, spoke about `Stop Tigard Underage Drinking' (STUD). Ms Ramaekers explained the purpose of the program and introduced the Tigard Turns the Tide Board members who were present. STUD students were also introduced and spoke about the problem of underage drinking and about how talked about what they are doing as a group to get more students involved in wholesome activities. They also showed a brief video that showed the results of underage drinking and driving and highlighted activities that students can get involved in that are healthy, fun and safe. The group received very positive feedback on both their presentation and their efforts. Public Comment James Parsons. Tigard Community Member, voiced concerns about several sidewalks that are covered with gravel left over from the winter storm season. He requested help in encouraging business owners to clean off the sidewalk in front of their businesses. Adjourn School Board Chairman Chism adjourned the meeting at 8:34 PM. APPROVED BOARD MEETING Date: 2,00 Chairman: se,W ( �r► Clerk: 1 a._4 // req c 2008 -2009 Tigard - Tualatin School District Board of Directors: Mark Chism, Chair; Jill Zurschmeide, Vice - Chair; Barry Albertson, Caroline Neunzert Art Rutkjn, Directors Agenda Item # % 3 Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Appoint Linda Monahan to Fill the Unexpired Portion of a Library Board Vacancy Prepared By Alison Grimes Dept Head Approval: f A ) City Mgr Approval: el ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Approve appointment of Linda Monahan from Alternate to Board Member, assuming the remaining term of Brian Kelly whose term expires June 30, 2012. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve appointment of Linda Monahan. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Appoint Linda Monahan, currently the Alternate on the Library Board, to fill the remaining term of Brian Kelly, who unexpectedly passed away. This term runs through June 30, 2012. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST — Biographical information —Resolution. FISCAL NOTES None. • Linda Monahan 10248 SW Kent Court Tigard, OR 97224 A 26 -year resident of Tigard, Ms. Monahan has her B.S. in Psychology. She is certified in mediation and has been a Human Resources representative for over 11 years. Previous community activity includes the Library Board and the TVFR Civil Service Commission. She also volunteers as a gardener at the Tupling Butterfly Garden. Agenda Item # L/ , Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Consider a Resolution Appointing Troy Mears as Member, and Appointing Holly Polivka as an Alternate Member, to the Park and Recreation AdvisoryBoard Prepared By. Dennis Koellermeier Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ,./3(30 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Council adopt a resolution appointing TroyMears as a member, and HollyPolivka as an alternate member, to the Park and Recreation Advisory Board? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • There are currently three vacancies (one member vacancy and two alternate member vacancies) on the Park and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). • On March 30, 2009 the Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee interviewed the two candidates who had expressed an interest in serving on the PRAB. • Based on the Committee's recommendations, the resolution before the City Council would accomplish the following appointments: - Appoint Troy Mears to fill the unexpired term of Jason Ashley. This term expires on June 30, 2010. Mr. Ashley resigned in November 2008. - Appoint HollyPolivka to her first term as an alternate member. This term will expire on June 30, 2010. • Since only two individuals expressed interest in the positions, one altemate member position remains vacant. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not approve the resolution and provide staff with direction on some other course of action. CITY COUNCIL GOALS 2009 Council Goal 3 Prepare for 2010 Bond Measure for Parks, Open Spaces and Trails a. Complete Parks Master Plan The PRAB advises the Council on matters relating to the goal mentioned above. ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Resolution 2. Appointee Background Information FISCAL NOTES There are no costs associated with this action. PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD (PRAB) RECOMMENDED APPOINTEES BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION Troy Mears is recommended to serve on the PRAB. Troy has a Bachelor of Landscape Architecture and a Bachelor of Environmental Design. He has worked as a landscape architect for over 11 years and has worked with several park and recreation districts and cities on park designs. Troy has extensive knowledge of development and maintenance of parks and facilities. He has lived in Tigard for seven years. Holly Polivka is recommended to serve on the PRAB. Holly is a children's librarian at the Tigard Public Library and was formerly a health therapist at LifeWorks Northwest Adolescent Day Treatment Program located in Tigard. She has a Bachelor of Arts in Social Science and a Master of Library Science. Holly has participated in community theatre in several Oregon cities and has been a resident of Tigard for eight years. Agenda Item # L - J Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Consent Agenda: Approve 2009 Homeland ' 1\(\ Grant Application Prepared By: Chief Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: \/ I � 1 \ City Mgr Approval: [ COD ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council approve the 2009 Homeland Security Grant application being made to the State of Oregon by both the Police and Public Works Departments? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the grant application to the office of Oregon Emergency Management. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The City's grant application procedures require that any grant application above $24,999 be approved by the City Council before submitting to the granting agency. The City in conjunction with the Washington County Office of Consolidated Emergency Management and other local jurisdictions in the area have worked together on developing the application that will be submitted jointly to compete for the State of Oregon allocation to each of the counties. If approved at the state level, the City of Tigard could receive funds up to $52,859 to fund the acquisition of various equipment and materials that can be used in emergency events as well as in situations that arise on a daily operational basis. There is no requirement in the grant that the City must use local funds as a match in order to obtain the funding. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Grant Cover Sheet, City of Tigard Grant Worksheet FISCAL NOTES The City would obtain federal funds in the amount of $52,859 without any match requirement. FY 2009 HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT PROGRAM COVER SHEET The county submitting agency and each agency that requests a direct award must submit a Cover Sheet Program Title: Coordinated Response '09 County Applicant Agency: Office of Consolidated Emergency Mgmt. for Washington County Collaborating Agency: City of Tigard Federal Funds Requested: $ 50,985 (SHSP /LE) $ 1,874 (CCP) — icw, t�.3 31, 20i L Program Start Date: November 1, 2009 Program End Date: Get b 2 609 My jurisdiction has a property /equipment tracking and monitoring system i /lace that complies with the requirements set forth in 44CFR Section 13. YES ONO -/ (initial) (See Page 12 of application) Physical Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Mailing Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Program Contact: Mr. Tom Imdieke Phone number: (503)718 -2554 Fax number: (503)670 -1561 e -mail: tomi @tigard - or.gov Fiscal Contact/Phone Number: Mr. Tom Imdieke Phone number: (503)718 -2554 Fax number: (503)670 -1561 e -mail: tomi @tigard - or.gov Agency Federal Tax Identification Number: 93- 0503941 Authorized Official for the Agency: Cr PrOssgt City Manager Signature of authorized official: . ® I have reviewed the application an concur with the project prioritization c (initial) ❑ !have reviewed the application and do not concur with the project prioritization (initial) Project Number: City of Tigard • Equipment Category Item AEL Reference Number Quantity Unit Cost Total Cost Agency Discipline Other Authorized Equipment Neighborhood Signs 21GN -00 -CCEQ 25 $25 $625 Tigard LE Electronic Communication Other Authorized Equipment Medium 21GN -00 -CCEQ 1 $1,249 $1,249 Tigard LE Interoperable Communications Satellite Phone, Portable 06CC -03 -SATB 2 $1,195 $2,390 Tigard EM Cell Phone Battery LE Equipment Transmitter /Digital Recorder 13LE -00 -SURV 1 $3,295 $3,295 Tigard LE LE Equipment Surveillance Camera 13LE -00 -SURV 1 $4,850 $4,850 Tigard LE Scene Control Lighting - LE Equipment Generator Light Kit 030E -03 -LTPA 1 $3,000 $3,000 Tigard LE LE Equipment Pocketscope for Night Vision 030E -02 -BNOC 1 $4,450 $4,450 Tigard LE Information Technology GPS Units 04AP -02 -DGPS 35 $400 $14,000 Tigard LE Information Technology Tracking System 04AP -07 -INVN 1 $19,000 $19,000 Tigard EM $0 $0 Equipment Subtotal $52,859 Planning /Description of Expense Total Cost Agency Discipline $0 $0 $0 Planning Subtotal $0 Training Course Item/Expense Number Trained Total Cost Agency Discipline $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Training Subtotal $0 Exercise /Description of Activities Total Cost Agency Discipline $0 $0 $0 $0 Exercise Subtotal $0 PROJECT TOTAL $52,859 Agenda Item # Y. 4 Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Approve Grant Application to the Department of Justice for the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Hiring Recovery Program Grant `,, J Prepared By: Chief Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: \1 V City Mgr Approval: C../e ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council approve a grant application to the Department of Justice for the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Grant and receive up to $992,016 over a three year period to fund four police officer positions? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the application. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The COPS Hiring Recovery Program (CHRP) is a competitive grant program that provides funding directly to law enforcement agencies having primary law enforcement authority to create and preserve jobs and to increase their community policing capacity and crime - prevention efforts. This funding became available under the Recovery Act recently approved by Congress. The Tigard Police Department has applied for the funding of four positions and would concentrate their efforts in the areas outlined below. Forensics: With the explosive increase in computer fraud and internet crimes there is a need in the City of Tigard to acquire the skill base to address this growing problem. This would allow the Department to respond to the invitation from the FBI's Northwest Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory (RCFL) to become a partner. By partnering with this lab, the Tigard Police Department would gain the skills and services to deal with this crime problem by committing our resource to the regional effort. Commercial Crimes: Based on an extensive and critical crime analysis, a commercial crimes unit was created last year with the mission and commitment to partner with the business community to reduce crime density in the commercial and business sectors of the City. The shear volume of criminal activity demands expansion of this unit. K -9 and Patrol Units: Our third priority is to enhance our K -9 and Patrol units to meet the growth of our residential base and increased crime. Currently we have one K -9 unit working four days a week and we need to have seven -day coverage. An additional patrol officer will allow us to absorb the increase in calls for service and increased community policing projects. During the three -year period, there are no matching funds required and there is a condition that the jurisdiction must retain all sworn officers awarded under the grant for one additional year. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES The City would receive up to $992,016 to fund the four positions over a three year period. There are no matching funds required during the initial three years and there is only the requirement that the jurisdiction must retain the position(s) for one additional year. �•yG Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Approve Application to the Department of Justice for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Competitive Grant Under the FY 09 Recovery Act — Crime Prevention Specialist Prepared By: Chief Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: -'t'/J City Mgr Approval: C/Q ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council approve a grant application to the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance for the two -year funding of a Crime Prevention Specialist in the Police Department? The City would receive up to $150,000 to fund the position and related supplies. The grant does not require the commitment of any local matching funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the application. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Department of Justice has issued a grant solicitation notice for the Edward Byrne Memorial Competitive Grant Program. One of the grant categories is for the hiring of civilian staff in law enforcement and public safety- related agencies. One of the specific objectives of the grant is to assist "state, local and tribal" jurisdictions in improving the criminal justice system by providing assistance and support for communities in preventing drug abuse and crime. The funds have become available under the Recovery Act approved by Congress. The Police Department for some time has recognized the need to expand and enhance our crime prevention program. By adding a Crime Prevention Specialist to the team, our existing Public Information Officer will be able to greatly expand our current efforts in the crime prevention area by working even more closely with neighborhood groups and businesses. This position would perform a variety of community outreach duties and assist in the planning, coordinating, and implementation of a variety of community education programs, including coordinating these programs with other agencies in the County. The City would receive up to $150,000 over a two -year period to support this enhanced effort. There is no matching requirement of local funds for this grant. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES The City would receive up to $150,000 to fund a Crime Prevention Specialist position with no matching of local funds required. Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Approve Grant Application to the Department of Justice for the FY 09 Recovery Act Local Youth Mentoring Initiative Q Prepared By: Chief Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: PIA/WO City Mgr Approval: l/` ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council approve a grant application to the Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention for funding to enhance and sustain the Police Department's after - school and summer camp programs for youth? The City would receive up to $500,000 over a four —year period to support this program, there is no requirement for matching funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the application. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Awards made under this grant are to support local organizations that develop, implement, or expand local mentoring programs leading to "measurable, positive outcomes for at -risk youth." The primary mission is to enhance the capacity of local mentoring programs to develop and implement mentoring strategies to reduce juvenile delinquency and prevent violence. These funds have become available under the Recovery Act approved by Congress. The City of Tigard's Police Department already has in place, working in partnership with the Tigard Tualatin School District and other organizations, a proven, successful program. The Department's after - school programs (a) prepare, motivate and inspire students by connecting them with caring adults; improving life -skills to reduce crime; (b) improve their social and psychological development; establishing supportive relationships with adults that improve their attitude, • self - esteem, social and communication skills; and (c) improve their academic achievement by providing quality academic support and an array of engaging and enriching learning opportunities. The summer camp programs provide consistent officer presence, regular lessons and activities, safe transportation, nutritional lunches and snacks, along with other forms of stability to help build trust between at -risk youth and the officers responsible for their lessons and care. This grant would assist the Department in sustaining this program at current service levels as well as maintaining the ability to enhance the program as the need arises. The City would receive up to $500,000 over the next four years with no matching funds required by the local jurisdiction. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES The City would receive up to $500,000 to help fund the Department's after - school and summer camp programs over the next four years without a matching fund requirement. • Agenda Item # �• 9 Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Approve a Grant Application to the Department of Justice for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Competitive Grant under the FY 09 Recovery Act - Enhance Forensic and Crime Scene Investigations y 21 Q Prepared By Chief Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: 1///1/ G C City Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council approve a grant application to the Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance for the funding of forensic video clarification and analysis hardware and software? The amount of the grant application is $50,000 and the grant does not require any local matching funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the grant application. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Department of Justice has issued a grant solicitation notice for the Edward Byrne Memorial Competitive Grant Program. One the of the grant categories is to enhance the capabilities of local law enforcement detectives and officers in the field of forensics and be able to acquire and utilize the advancements that have occurred in this field. One area where the Tigard Police Department could greatly benefit is in video, image, and audio evidence clarification technology. By acquiring this advanced type of equipment and software, Department staff will have the tools for processing, analyzing, and presenting digital and analog video; as well as audio evidence clarification. This will allow more efficient use of detective's and officer's time and be able to develop a stronger case that can be presented more effectively in the courts. If awarded, the City would receive up to $50,000 for the acquisition, installation, and training for these advanced forensic tools. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST None FISCAL NOTES The City would receive up to $50,000 to fund the equipment and software without having to use local funds as a match. Agenda Item # 1 /-/ 0 Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Consider a Resolution Authorizing the Submission of a Grant Application to Partially Fund Acquisition of the Summer Creek Property Prepared By: Dennis Koellermeier Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: a. ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the Council adopt a resolution authorizing the submission of a grant application to partially fund acquisition of the Summer Creek property? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • The Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD) recently accepted applications for Local Government Grant Program funding assistance for fiscal year '09 -'10. In order to meet the state's deadline, staff submitted the attached grant application in March 2009. • The City has been working in conjunction with the Trust for Public Land (1PL) to acquire the 44 -acre Summer Creek property, locally known as the "Fowler property." The City would like to acquire the property for the purpose of creating publically -owned park land and open space. • The TPL has obtained an exclusive option to purchase the Summer Creek property and is assembling a combination of public funding sources to acquire the site. • The attached OPRD grant is one of several public funding sources being pursued. • Tigard has requested $500,000 through the grant program, which requires a 100 - percent local match. Financial commitments from the City, Metro, the county and CWS will be used as matching funds. The City Council is considering whether to dedicate $1 million to the property purchase at its April 28, 2009 meeting. • Tigard has successfully obtained other OPRD grants which partially funded projects like the construction of the Jim Griffith Memorial Skate Park, Cook Park expansion, and construction of Fanno Creek Park trails. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Should the Council choose not to approve this resolution, the grant application would be withdrawn. CITY COUNCIL GOALS None ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Resolution 2. Grant application FISCAL NOTES The City has requested $500,000 in OPRD grant funding. If awarded, this grant will become part of the financial package used to purchase the $5.5 million Summer Creek property. As a part of the same funding package, the City is being asked to dedicate $1 million in a separate agenda item. Additional financial commitments from other local governments and grants will provide the balance of the funding. This grant requires a local 100 - percent local match. Financial commitments from the City, Metro, the county and CWS will be used as matching funds. LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION CHECKLIST Name of Project Sponsor: City of Tigard Name of Project: Summer Creek Type of Project: Land Acquisition A complete application for a Local Government Grant includes the application forms and attachments. Please indicate in the space at the left of each item, that it has been enclosed. If item is not enclosed, application is not complete. All items are required unless otherwise indicated. COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKET: X Cover Letter X Completed Application Checklist X Application Forms - required pages have been filled out, including the date and signature of an authorized official. See Section 2 of Grants Manual X Park Vicinity Maps (See Section 2.2 A) X Park Boundary Map /Site Plan (See Section 2.2 B) X Urban Growth Boundary Map (See Section 2.2 C) N/A Construction Drawings /Floor Plans (See Section 2.2 D)(Eligible support facilities only) X State Natural Resource Agency Comments (See Section 2.2 E) N/A Property Deed /Lease Agreement (See Section 2.2 F) X Proof of Willing Seller Documentation (See Section 2.2 G) (Acquisition only) X Preliminary Title Report (See Section 2.2 H) (Acquisition only) X Appraisal (See Section 2.2 I) (Acquisition only) N/A Planning Department Certification (See Section 2.2 J) N/A Final Land Use Approval (See Section 2.2 K) X Resolution to Apply for Grant (See Section 2.2 L) X Maintenance Documentation (See Section 2.2 M) NUMBER OF COPIES TO SUBMIT: Submit two (2) single -sided copies of complete application. Submit 15 copies of maps, color documents and any document over (8 1 /2 x 11) in size. Documents over 8 x 11" must be folded to (8 % x 11) by the applicant. Use the Z -fold format as shown in section 2.3 A of the manual. No documents should be over 11" x 17 ". DO NOT PUT APPLICATION PACKETS IN NOTEBOOKS OR FOLDERS. FASTEN IN UPPER LEFT HAND CORNER. GRANT APPLICATION LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANT PROGRAM 1. PROJECT SPONSOR INFORMATION Federal Tax ID #: 93- 0503940 Project Name: Summer Creek Project Sponsor: City of Tigard Contact Person Name: Dennis Koellermeier, Director of Public Works Address: 8777 SW Burnham Street, Tigard, OR E -Mail Address: dennistigard-or.qov 97223 Telephone No.: 503 - 718 -2596 Fax No.: 503 - 684 -8840 2. PROJECT TYPE AND GRANT REQUEST Type of Project: ® Acquisition ❑ Development ❑ Rehabilitation Type of Applicant: ® City ❑ County ❑ Park & Rec District ❑ Port ❑ METRO Grant Funds Requested $500,000 Percentage of Grant 9% Project Sponsor Match $5,030,000 Percentage of Match 100% Total Project Cost $5,530,000 Payments should be sent to address: Address: City of Tigard Public Works Department 8777 SW Burnham Street, Tigard, OR 97223 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (Concise description of the work elements to be completed) Acquisition of 44 acres of open space in the City of Tigard. The site shall be a city park with wetlands, a mature conifer forest including towering Ponderosa Pine, two streams, and a large ball field. The site is laced with nature trails and the popular and paved Fanno Greenway Trail bisects the site, bringing visitors from throughout the region. 4. PROJECT SITE /LOCATION /OWNERSHIP: Site Name: Summer Creek Size of Property: 44 acres Location Information: USGS Quad _ Beaverton Township 1S Range: 1W Section: 34 Owner: Tigard - Tualatin School District US Congressional District: Oregon Legislative Districts: (H) 35 (S) 18 Site Description: 44 acres in the general vicinity of SW Tigard Street and S.W. Tiedeman Avenue in Tigard, Oregon. The site contains a mosaic of forest, wetlands, oak woodland, and sections of Fanno and Summer Creeks. A nature trail and natural play area covers a portion of the site. The Fanno Greenway Trail runs through the site. In the center of are five acres of open ballfields with two baseball backstops. City /Town: Tigard County: Washington DRIVING INSTRUCTIONS: From Highway 217 northbound, take exit 5, Greenburg Road, toward Metzger. Turn left on Greenburg Road, then right on Tiedeman Street. After crossing rail tracks, the first stop sign will be Tigard Street. The property's NW corner is at this intersection. Turn right onto Tigard street, cross a bridge over Fanno Creek, and park at a small pullout on Tigard Street to enter the property via the Fanno Greenway Trail (trailhead is marked). 5. PROJECT LAND IS CONTROLLED BY: (attach documentation) ® Fee Simple ❑ Lease ❑ Easement ❑ Other 6. PROGRAM NARRATIVE - Describe all elements of the project and the need for assistance, project objectives, facilities to be constructed, existing facilities which are to be renovated, removed or demolished. Describe who will do the work and who will provide supervision, historical site use, community involvement, problems or desires that led to project being selected. Describe how the project relates to current and future public recreation needs, expected results and benefits. Describe any unusual or unique features of the project such as innovative design, conservation, unusual site conditions, etc. Describe the topography of the site and present development on the site and how proposal fits in with future development, and the anticipated start and end dates of the project. See Section 2.1.A in Grants Manual. PROJECT START DATE: August, 2008 PROJECT END DATE: January, 2010 Project Overview The City of Tigard seeks to acquire and protect approximately 44 acres of mature forests, wetlands, and streams in the heart of our city. The property, known as Summer Creek, is adjacent to Fowler Middle School (10865 SW Walnut Street) in a diverse and densely populated community. Situated at the confluence of Summer and Fanno Creeks, the property is a recreational asset of regional significance. The Summer Creek property is currently owned by the Tigard - Tualatin School District. The District has deemed the land surplus and intends to sell it in order to generate funds for much - needed educational investments elsewhere. The District would prefer to see the property remain intact and open to the public rather than be converted into a housing development, as zoning allows. The District has granted The Trust for Public Land (TPL) an exclusive option -to- purchase. Recent appraisal of the property suggests it is worth approximately $5.53 million. Tigard has already committed $1 million to the site and is working with TPL to generate the rest of the needed purchase price through grants from regional and state sources. Site Description The 44 -acre Summer Creek property consists of the natural area north of Fowler Middle School, bounded by SW Tigard Street on the north, SW Tiedeman Avenue on the east, and by SW Gallo Avenue to the west. It contains: • The Fanno Greenway Trail (a major regional non - motorized trail) and associated wetland /floodplain in the northeast of the site • A large ballfield with baseball backstop in the south central portion • A stand of mature conifers— primarily Willamette Valley ponderosa pine, Western redcedar, and Douglasfir —in the middle of the property • A nature trail and nature play area designed by middle school students • A forested wetland in the southwest corner of the property • Upland areas, currently being restored to oak savanna, along the northern boundary of the site Protect Selection The citizens and leaders of Tigard have long sought to protect the property, which has served the public as a natural area, recreation site, and trail corridor for decades. In 2006, the Park and Recreation Advisory Board identified it as the number one priority after an extensive, yearlong evaluation process identifying possible land acquisitions throughout Tigard. The Tigard - Tualatin School District's decision in 2006 to designate the property for surplus added urgency to Tigard's efforts. After consulting Metro, local community members, and natural resource - oriented stakeholders, Tigard concluded that the entire site should be acquired. Its size, regional significance, and multiple benefits prompted Tigard to dedicate all of its available park acquisition funds and to work toward an ambitious funding partnership with regional and local entities including Metro, Washington County, the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, and Oregon Park and Recreation Department. At Tigard's request, The Trust for Public Land initiated negotiation with the School District in late 2007. The School District originally intended to sell a somewhat larger site. However, in order to help maintain a reasonable price and to avoid housing development impacts, TPL was able to negotiate an acquisition of an intact, contiguous tract, excluding several small but costly development areas on the northern periphery of the site. Need Tigard currently lacks a large park in the northern half of the city. Additionally, the immediate neighborhood is park- deficient. Acquisition of Summer Creek will fill this need and secure a key link in Tigard's trail network. The Parks Master Plan, currently being updated through an extensive public involvement process (see Section 21 below), identifies the site as a Tigard's top priority. Previous plans have likewise highlighted the site. Acquisition will meet the needs, identified in the current draft revised plan, for: • A large park in the northern Tigard • Additions to the City's system of natural areas • Additional park space for the local neighborhood • Additional ballfields The neighborhood is a low- to middle - income residential area with below- average access to parks. The students at adjacent Fowler Middle School have the highest rate of free and reduced school lunch program participation of any school in the Tigard - Tualatin School District. Neighborhood density is high for Tigard and there is little remaining open space. Tigard's acquisition of the Summer Creek property will thus meet several key needs not likely to be met anywhere else. Benefits Summer Creek is a regional asset. It is a very large and high - quality natural area well inside the urban growth boundary, accessible by existing bicycle and pedestrian trails to a broad swath of the community. The property thus serves locals and visitors alike. With a diverse and mature forest, intact wetlands, remnant oak savanna habitat, a regional trail, and an expansive ballfield, it offers something for everyone. Bicycle commuters, walkers, and joggers fill the Fanno Creek Greenway Trail, Tigard's busiest regional trail. On any given school day, students from the neighboring Fowler Middle School use the property for physical education and as an outdoor natural science classroom —a living laboratory that, should the property be protected, will soon host a broader range of school children under an expanded environmental education program to be administered by the City of Tigard. On weekends, these same students and their families, along with community volunteers, are frequently on the site planting riparian vegetation, removing invasive plants, and conducting other habitat enhancements. Specific community benefits will include: • Continued access to an educational resource for Fowler Middle School students, who with their families have invested hundreds of hours in restoring the site. • Continued community access to both active and passive recreational assets. • The creation of an expanded "close to home" environmental education resource for other students throughout the west side of the metropolitan area, to be developed in consultation with Fowler Middle School, Tualatin Riverkeepers, Fans of Fanno Creek, and Clean Water Services. • A highly accessible new park connected to the region via the Fanno Greenway Trail and by public transit (Tri -Met route 76 stops a quarter mile from the NE corner of the site and route 45 serves Fowler Middle School at the southern end of the site). • A key connection in a regional network of greenspaces extending from Summer Lake Park in the northwest to Cook Park on the Tualatin River in the south. Community Involvement Tigard's park planning and selection process has entailed substantial community input, as detailed in Section 21 below. Community involvement in this process extends well beyond the parks master planning process, however. Community members have worked for decades to protect, steward, and study this property. This restoration investment comes largely from the students of Fowler Middle School. With assistance from Fowler teachers, parents, and community members, students have: • Constructed a nature trail and nature play area (see Section 19 below). • Cleared invasive plant species, especially Himalayan blackberry, from most of Summer Creek's course through the property. • Installed large woody debris in the stream to improve fish habitat. • Planted over 10,000 native trees and shrubs in the last 12 years —an investment representing, at minimum, $100,000 worth of plants and thousands more in associated volunteer labor (every student in the school has planted at least one plant in the last six years). • Mulched, caged, and maintained the plantings. • Released over 1,200 salmon fry into Summer Creek in the past three years. • Released over 1,000 juvenile steelhead into Summer Creek in the past ten years. • Built a high - quality shed on the Fowler Middle School campus stocked with tools to facilitate large group restoration projects. Local businesses, nonprofits, and individuals donated the labor, materials, and cash. • Improved water quality in Summer Creek by building, in 2007, a bioswale and rain garden in the front parking lot of Fowler Middle School. The approximately $10,000 worth of project materials were funded by Clean Water Services. Augmenting the remarkable investment that Fowler Middle School students have made: • Clean Water Services has done extensive riparian plantings and wetland buffer enhancements. • Mitigation projects along Fanno Creek have improved the riparian Oregon ash forest complex and improved connectivity among habitats on the site. • The nonprofit group Fans of Fanno Creek has worked with Tualatin River Keepers, Friends of Fowler Open Space, the Biodiversity Project of Tigard and the Pacific Northwest Turtle Project to implement an $18,000 Metro Nature in Neighborhoods Grant to restore the oak prairie complex in the northern areas of the property. Currently the Fans of Fanno Creek are undertaking a significant invasive species removal effort in the upland area of remnant oak savanna. This track record of community involvement in a natural area is unparalleled in Tigard. It contributes to making this property Tigard's top acquisition priority. Unique Project Features Tigard is working in partnership with many organizations and individuals to protect this property —this is arguably the most ambitious public - private park partnership in Tigard's history. At the center of this partnership will be the students, teachers, and families of Fowler Middle School, whose interdisciplinary environmental education and service program on the property will form the foundation of a City of Tigard environmental education program. As noted above, this program will be developed in partnership with Fowler Middle School, Tualatin Riverkeepers, The Fans of Fanno, and Clean Water Services, and will reach schools throughout the West side of the Portland metropolitan area. Proiect Timeline Option to purchase signed September 29, 2008 Environmental Assessment completed Survey and parcel creation' expected to be complete by July, 2009 Escrow closing date to be determined; closing can occur as soon as grant funds are released. 7. FIRST TIME AWARD: Have you ever received funding from any of the grant programs administered by Oregon Parks and Recreation Department? PROGRAMS INCLUDE THE LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND, LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANT, COUNTY OPPORTUNITY GRANT, RECREATIONAL TRAILS, OR THE ALL - TERRAIN VEHICLE GRANT PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED BY THE OREGON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT. ® Yes ❑ No If yes, answer questions 8 and /or 9, if no, go to question 10. 8. ACTIVE GRANT PERFORMANCE AND COMPLIANCE: Are you on schedule and in compliance with all active grant projects awarded by OPRD? Have all quarterly progress reports been submitted? Will funds be expended and project complete by the project deadline? ® Yes ❑ No SEE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTIONS 5 AND 7 OF THE LGGP GRANT MANUAL. ENTER ALL GRANTS CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS: Tigard has no grants currently in progress. 9. PAST GRANT PERFORMANCE AND COMPLIANCE: Are you in compliance with applicable guidelines at previously assisted project sites? (No unresolved conversions, overhead utility lines, maintenance issues and open to the public) ® Yes ❑ No SEE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTIONS 5 AND 7 OF THE LGGP GRANT MANUAL. ENTER PAST GRANTS RECEIVED: (Add additional rows if necessary) Name of Grant Program: OPRD LGGP — Jim Griffith Skatepark Agreement #: 0204 Name of Grant Program: LWCF — Woodard Park Agreement #: 41 -1493 Name of Grant Program: RTP — Fanno Creek Trail Segment Agreement #: 03 -03 Name of Grant Program: LWCF — Tualatin River Trail Agreement #: 41 -01539 Name of Grant Program: LWCF — Cook Park Development, Phase 2 (1976) Agreement #: 797 Name of Grant Program: LWCF — Cook Park Expansion (1974) Agreement #: 571 Name of Grant Program: LWCF — Cook Park Expansion (1973) Agreement #: 468 Name of Grant Program: LWCF — Jack Park Agreement #: 472 Name of Grant Program: LWCF — Cook Park (1968) Agreement #: 159 10. ACCESSIBILITY COMPLIANCE — Please answer the following questions about accessibility. Does your agency have a board or city council adopted /approved ADA Transition Plan and /or Self Certification? Yes. The City of Tigard has an ADA Transition Plan and has been implementing its provisions. In 2000, the city retained the services of Environmental Access, specialist in barrier -free parks and recreation facility design, to evaluate its park facilities for complete accessibility by the mobility impaired. The consultant's comments and suggestions are being implemented in all park facilities as funds become available. Most of the identified action items have been accomplished. An ADA Transition Plan and /or Self Certification is mandatory in order to receive a grant award and you must supply a copy upon request. If your agency does not have a current ADA Transition Plan and /or Self Certification you must complete the ADA Checklist. Please contact the OPRD for more information on completing the checklist. What is the topography of the project site (flat, hilly, rough or uneven terrain, etc.)? The site is flat and mostly level. The SW portion of the site contains forest and forested wetlands with a level, soft - surface trail running through it. A paved and universally accessible trail, the Fanno Creenway Trail, runs through the center of the site. What is the surface of existing or proposed parking areas? How many parking spaces are (or will be) allocated for people with disabilities? There is no proposed parking area on the site at this time. Parking will be accommodated along Tigard Street and at the Fowler Middle School, connected to the site by a pedestrian bridge. This school has parking spaces allocated for people with disabilities; these spaces will provide full access to disabled people to the site via paved sidewalks along Tiedeman Avenue and over an accessible crossing Summer Creek. What is the slope and surface of any roads or trails that will be used as accessibility routes to various parts of the park? All trails on the site are flat. The Fanno Greenway Trail, accessing the site from the north and from the southwest, is paved and universally accessible. Do existing areas and facilities within your parks system meet ADA Guidelines for Recreation Facilities? All new park facilities and all repairs and remodels conducted since 2000 meet all ADA guidelines. All existing parking areas include handicapped parking spaces. All restrooms are ADA accessible. How will your proposed development or rehabilitation projects be made accessible? No redevelopment or rehabilitation projects are proposed in this application. How does your agency address special accessibility concerns /needs for people with sight or hearing impaired disabilities? Braille signage has been attached to all directional and facility signage and will soon be ordered and attached to all interpretive and educational signage. No special improvements to aid the hearing impaired have been provided as yet. Does you agency have the latest Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines: Recreation Facilities? Yes For further information contact: DBTAC Northwest ADA Technical Assistance Hotline Toll Free 800 - 9494232 www.d btacnorthwest.org Office of Technical and Information Services, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 2004 -1111. Telephone number (202) 272 -5434 extension 34 (Voice); (202) 272 -5449 (TTY). The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) is in the process of amending the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) by adding a new special application section for newly constructed and altered recreation facilities that are not adequately address by the existing guidelines. 11. READINESS TO PROCEED A. LAND USE /PLANNING STATUS — For Development and Rehabilitation projects only. Have you submitted with this application a planning department certification letter that ❑ Yes confirms the correct zoning for this project? Not applicable ® No Are construction or concept plans completed and a copy submitted with this application? ❑ Yes Not applicable ® No Do you have final land use approval for this project and has a letter or form from your ❑ Yes jurisdiction been submitted with this application? Not applicable ® No List potential permits and status of permit applications that may be required for proposed project that you do not have in hand (i.e. Corps of Engineers, Division of State Land, Building Permits, etc.) Describe any possible delays or challenges that could occur in receiving permits. Not applicable This section not applicable. No redevelopment or rehabilitation projects are proposed. B. ACQUISITION STATUS — For Acquisition projects only. Have you submitted a copy of an appraisal with this application that was ® Yes completed within the past 12 months? ❑ No Do you have proof of willing seller or donor and submitted documentation with ® Yes this application? ❑ No Will development of the property occur within 2 years of acquisition? If no, please explain: ❑ Yes No development is proposed. Trails and recreational facilities (ballfields) already ® No exist on site. 12. FUNDING REQUEST /SOURCE OF FUNDING WORKSHEET A. Local Government Grant Funding Request $500,000 B. Sponsor Match Cash Appropriation, City of Tigard $ 1,000,000 Cash Appropriation, Washington County $ 400,000 Cash Appropriation, Clean Water Services $ 100,000 Cash Appropriation and Grant, Metro $ 2,530,000 State Grant — OWEB $ 1,000,000 B. TOTAL MATCH FOR SPONSOR $5,030,000 C. TOTAL PROJECT COST (A +B MUST EQUAL C) $5,530,000 *Other Grant Funding Name of Grant: Local Share Agency: Washington County Type of Grant: Land Acquisition Status of Grant Request: X Approved _ Pending *Other Grant Funding Name of Grant: Outreach Agency: Clean Water Services Type of Grant: Land Acquisition Status of Grant Request: X Approved _ Pending *Other Grant Funding Name of Grant: Nature in . Agency: Metro Neighborhoods /Open Spaces Bond Type of Grant: Land Acquisition Status of Grant Request: _Approved X Pending *Other Grant Funding Name of Grant: Land Acquisition Agency: Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Type of Grant: Land Acquisition Status of Grant Request: _Approved X Pending 13. SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT /REHABILITATION PROJECT ELEMENTS & COST 1. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES A. Pre - agreement Costs $ 1. 2. B. Construction Plans and Specifications 1. $ 2. $ 2. LAND ACQUISITION A. Value of Land Donation $ B. Value of Land to be Purchased $ 5,530,000 C. Appraisals & Boundary Survey $ D. Other $ 3. CONSTRUCTION A. Site Preparation 1 $ B. Utilities 1. Water $ 2. Electric $ 3. Sanitary Sewer $ C. Roads and Parking $ D. Restroom Building $ E. Recreational Facilities 1. Picnic Tables $ 2. Ballfields $ 3. Hike and Bike Trails $ 4. Picnic Shelter /Pavilion $ 5. Playground Equipment $ 6. Playground Surfacing $ 7. Landscaping $ 8. Irrigation $ 9. Other: $ 10. Other: $ 11. Other: $ 12. Other $ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 5,530,000 GRANT FUNDS REQUESTED $ 500,000 PROJECT SPONSOR MATCH $ 5,030,000 14. PROPERTY ACQUISITION COST ESTIMATES ACREAGE TO BE PURCHASED ACRES Appraisal /Reviewed Value $5,530,000 ACQUISITION TYPE (Check type) Fee Simple Title X Property Easement Donation Partial Sale /Partial Donation Condemnation /Eminent Domain Undefined - purchase type ALLOWABLE LAND COSTS Improvements $ Land $5,530,000 Mineral Rights $ Timber $ Undefined - allowable land costs $ TOTAL ACQUISITION ESTIMATES $5,530,000 15. SOURCE OF FUNDING - Provide information about the sources of funding for local match. When percentages are used they must match the amounts listed in the Source of Funding worksheet. How firm is your local match — have matching funds been committed to this project by your council, board or commission? Tigard's match of $1,000,000 is firm. Mayor, city council members, and staff have all committed to the project; a council resolution authorizing the purchase and obligating funds will be passed on April 28 and supplied to OPRD immediately thereafter. Additional match from Washington County and Clean Water Services is also firm; see attached resolutions. Matching funds from Metro and the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) are pending. Describe whether or not funds have been included in current parks budget and whether or not they are available immediately. Funds are included in current parks budget and are available immediately. What percent of your match is from land or cash donations from other public sector agencies or groups? 63% What percent of your match is from donated labor, equipment and /or materials from other public sector agencies or groups? 0% What percent of your match is from land or cash donations from the private sector? Please provide a copy of the partnership agreement or a letter of commitment for the donation. 0% What percent of your match is from donated labor, equipment and /or materials from the private sector? Please provide a copy of the partnership agreement or a letter of commitment for the donation. 0% What other local commitments, partnerships, use of inmate labor, etc. and support is there? As noted above, there is extensive community investment in restoring and maintaining the site. Fowler Middle School, Fans of Fanno, and Clean Water Services, among others, will continue their ongoing restoration activities. Is all described match available at the time of application? ❑ Yes ® No OWEB and Metro funds are pending. 16. AN INCREASINGLY DIVERSE OREGON POPULATION: Is your project located in an area of the state projected to experience higher levels of increases in population diversity? ® Yes ❑ No PLEASE SEE "DIVERSITY COUNTIES" AND DIVERSITY CITIES" LISTED ON PAGE 35 OF THE MANUAL. If yes, in what city or cities and /or county from the list is your project located? Washington County Please check one or more Diversity Group that is listed for your city /county in the manual: ® Hispanic ® Asian - American ® African - American Project Type: ® Group Day -Use ® Sports Field ❑ Camping ® Trail ® Other: Nature study /environmental education 17. OREGON'S PHYSICAL ACTIVITY CRISIS: IS YOUR PROJECT A "CLOSE -TO- HOME" NON - MOTORIZED TRAIL OPPORTUNITY? ® Yes ❑ No TO QUALIFY AS A "CLOSE -TO -HOME" TRAIL OPPORTUNITY, THE TRAIL MUST HAVE AT LEAST ONE TRAIL ACCESS POINT WITHIN A 5 -MILE RADIUS OF AN URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY (UGB) OR UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY BOUNDARY. A MAP CLEARLY IDENTIFYING THE TRAIL LOCATION AND UGB OR UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY BOUNDARY DRAWN ON IT MUST BE SUBMITTED IN ORDER TO RECEIVE POINTS. 18. NEEDS ASSESSMENT— Answer questions for both Statewide Need and County Level Need. Your project will either be either Close -to -Home or Dispersed -Area, not both. If the project is located within an urban growth boundary (UGB), or unincorporated community boundary use the close- to -home area priorities. Projects outside of these areas will use the dispersed -area priorities. A map clearly identifying the project location and UGB or unincorporated community boundary drawn on it must be submitted in order to receive points. A. Statewide Need — Please check as many that apply to your project from either the Close -to- Home or Dispersed -Area column, not both. CLOSE -TO -HOME PRIORITIES DISPERSED -AREA PRIORITIES ® Non - motorized trails ❑ Non - motorized trails ® Sports and playfields ❑ Group campgrounds and facilities ® Land acquisition projects ❑ Nature study /wildlife watching sites IS] Picnicking /day use facilities ❑ Overnight camping facilities ® Nature study /wildlife ❑ Interpretive displays B. County Level Need — Find your county in the table on page XXX of the manual. Please list the either the "Close -To Home Priorities" or the "Dispersed Area Priorities" listed for your county, not both. CLOSE -TO -HOME PRIORITIES DISPERSED -AREA PRIORITIES 1. Land acquisition 1. 2. Non - motorized trails 2. 3. Picnicking /day -use facilities 3. 19. CONNECTING YOUTH WITH NATURE - Natural play areas are outdoor spaces designed for play that are made of natural components such as plants, logs, water, sand, mud, boulders, hills and trees. Compatible man -made components might also be carefully integrated to support creative play, encourage confident exploration and help children develop a lasting affinity for the natural world. Does your project include a natural play area? ® Yes ❑ No Describe how your project encourages youth to be physically active, supports outdoor youth outdoor program activities, and connects youth with nature. The site already contains a natural play area, designed and built by students at Fowler Middle School. The area, located in the southwest corner of the property, consists of a nature and fitness trail beginning at the pedestrian bridge across Summer Creek, linking the property to the Fowler Middle School campus. The trail, named the Senor Hutsell Trail in memory of a Spanish teacher at Fowler, weaves through a grove of mature cedar trees, along Summer Creek, and through a labyrinth of alder and ash trees before emerging onto the neighboring ballfield. The trail has interpretive markers and a student - created, bilingual guide pointing out native plants (and their uses), invasive ivy, and unique landscape features. It invites visitors to explore features such as the "Goal Post Tree" with unusual branch structures and the "Crawl- Through Tree," where a child can crawl through a fire- exposed hole in the trunk. The functions as a nature play area even without the guide, leading visitors to a variety of play /discovery areas including a large log covered with mosses and ferns, a small hill nestled among cedars, and a gentle slope down to Summer Creek (a shallow waterway teeming with macroinvertebrates and, at certain seasons, native trout). The trail is routed to loop through and around the area, with spurs leading always back to the large, open ballfield. It's an ideal place for kids to get "lost" without actually losing their way. Tigard will maintain this trail and the associated features, ensuring that the area remains safe and appropriate for non - directed exploration. 20. LOCAL NEEDS AND BENEFITS - Do you have an adopted /approved planning document such as a park master plan, city or county comprehensive plan, trails master plan, transportation system master plan, or a bicycle and pedestrian plan? ® Yes ❑ No A. LOCAL NEED- Describe to what extent the project will satisfy the priority needs as identified in your current planning document. As noted above, acquisition of the site will satisfy Tigard's top priority need as identified in the 2006 Park and Recreation Advisory Board evaluation process. The updated Tigard Parks Master Plan, currently being completed, reflects this and addresses the site's citywide importance. Acquisition will also fill a local need, since this area of Tigard is identified in the plan as park deficient. It will additionally secure a key link in Tigard's trail planning. (Tigard's most significant trail, the Fanno Creek Greenway Regional Trail, runs through the site.) B. NEED FOR RECREATIONAL VARIETY— Describe to what extent the project will provide a more balanced mix and wider variety of park and recreation opportunities /facilities within your jurisdiction or intended project service area. There is no other single site in Tigard holds such potential to expand and balance the city's park opportunities. Specifically, the site will add to and balance the city's mix of passive recreation and nature study sites. Cook Park, at the southern boundary of Tigard, is the city's only site with a significant natural area. Summer Creek, at the opposite end of the city, will complement it and create a natural area accessible by trail and public transit to more residents — including the people who live and work near the Washington Square Mall, less than a mile away. Summer Creek will also help to balance the City's active recreation facilities by adding a ballfield suitable for informal and little league sports, relieving some pressure from crowded neighborhood facilities. Finally, the site's environmental education and community stewardship components will provide an entirely new park opportunity to Tigard students. Does the project provide a park and recreation opportunity not currently offered in your jurisdiction or project service area? ® Yes ❑ No 21. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT— Describe any public involvement efforts that led to the selection of the project including citizen involvement through public workshops, public meetings surveys and local citizen advisory committees during the project's planning process. The Summer Creek property's selection as Tigard's top acquisition priority, noted above, was the result of the Park and Recreation Advisory Board's yearlong evaluation of potential acquisition sites, concluded in 2006. This process, and the current citywide park master planning process, have included to date: • Community tour of sites • Planning context memo • Two Park and Recreation Advisory Board meetings • Creation of a recreation service providers matrix • Two Technical Advisory Committee meetings • A recreation provider focus group • Seven stakeholder interviews • Community questionnaire (online and on paper) • A community intercept event at the Tigard Balloon Festival • A Telephone survey retesting 2004 questions about parks, recreation, open space, and funding measures • A public visioning workshop The process will include another Park and Recreation Advisory Board meeting and a City Council meeting before it is complete. 22. OVERALL SITE SUITABILITY A. SITE SUITABILITY - Describe the extent to which the site is suitable for the proposed development. The site is already an ideal large park, with a fantastic diversity of features. Fanno and Summer Creeks, and their associated riparian areas, teem with wildlife and nature study /discovery opportunities. Trails through the property's majestic groves of Western Redcedar, rare Willamette Valley Ponderosa Pine, Douglasfir, Red Alder, and Oregon Ash lead to areas so calm and seemingly isolated that one can hardly believe that neighborhood surround it on all sides. The Fanno Greenway Trail opens the site to all visitors and connects it to a regional non - motorized transportation asset. And a large ballfield makes for a perfect place for sports. Tigard intends to maintain and enhance all of these features, as well as contribute to ongoing restoration of wetlands and oak savanna habitat. There is no place in Tigard more suitable for such a variety of outdoor recreation experiences. B. DESIGN SUITABILITY - Describe the extent to which the site or project design minimizes negative impacts on the environment and surrounding neighborhood? As noted above, there will be no major new developments on the site. Tigard will acquire and maintain the site in its existing condition. Hence there will be negative impacts on the environment or surrounding neighborhood. To the contrary, Tigard's acquisition will ensure the property is not developed into as many as 70 homes, with substantial negative impacts. C. SUSTAINABILITY- Describe how the site or project design will result in a well- designed, managed and sustainable facility. Please use specific examples. Examples include, but are not limited to: recycling, water quality /conservation, plant conservation, wildlife conservation, energy conservation, pollution control, environmental protection, restoration and sustainable trail design. See Section 1.10 in Grants Manual The Summer Creek Project will protect a regionally significant natural area, building on a legacy of restoration, education, and maintenance led by the community. By securing the property (currently slated for sale and development into residences) as a park and natural area, the project advances a wide range of sustainability goals. Specifically, it: • Protects the region's water quality by cooling and filtering runoff, and preventing further degradation to regionally significant waterways (Summer and Fanno Creeks) in a watershed with water quality impacts. • Benefit plant conservation by protecting a locally significant intact forest with rare species and facilitating restoration of native oaks. • Benefits wildlife conservation by protecting an area identified by Metro as regionally significant riparian and wildlife habitat, containing sensitive species such as the red - legged frog, the Western pond turtle, and winter steelhead. • Benefits energy conservation and pollution control by providing a highly accessible, "close to home" natural area — allowing residents and local schools access to nature without needing to get in their cars. • Benefits general environmental protection by enhancing and •rotection an important natural area. • Incorporates already- existing sustainable trails that utilize natural topographical and landscape features, channel runoff appropriately, and maintain a high degree of accessibility. 23. NEED FOR MAJOR REHABILITATION OF EXISTING OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES — Is your project, or any part of your project, defined as a Major Rehabilitation? ❑ Yes ® No If yes, please check below all that apply. ❑ The recreation area or facility is beyond its normal life expectancy. ❑ The recreation area or facility is destroyed by fire, natural disaster or vandalism. ❑ The recreation area or facility does not meet health and safety codes /requirements. ❑ The recreation area or facility requires rehabilitation to ensure critical natural resource protection. ❑ The recreation area or facility does not meet access requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. ❑ Changing recreational needs (e.g. changes in demographics within the service area) dictate a change in the type or recreation area or facility required. 24. LONG TERM COMMITMENT TO MAINTENANCE - Explain how you plan to continue area /facility operation and maintenance after the project is complete by providing the following information: a) How will the project's future maintenance be funded? b) How much do you expect to spend annually or number of hours needed to maintain? c) What degree of commitment do you have? d) Documentation to support partnerships with other agencies or volunteer maintenance will be required to receive points for their work. Where appropriate documentation such as letters of support from volunteer organizations, cooperative agreements, donations, private sponsorship support letters, or signed memoranda of understanding to demonstrate commitment to maintenance should be provided. a) Maintenance will be funded in the Park Maintenance Division budget from General Funds. Additional maintenance funds will be made available from storm water management funds. b) Based on its experience managing similar properties, Tigard expects to spend approximately $35,000 to $50,000 per year on site maintenance. Ongoing volunteer site restoration work will likely accomplish some of the maintenance need, but Tigard will budget for all site maintenance to ensure funds are available. c) Tigard's commitment is firm. The city has an excellent track record of funding park maintenance and renovations. d) See attached letters of support. 25. TIMELINESS a) Is there an immediate need or threat of facility closure because of non - compliance with state and federal laws? b) Describe any actions under consideration that could result in a lost opportunity or facility becoming unavailable for public use. c) Is there a threat to losing the available local match or the ability of local project sponsor not being able to complete the project within 2 years? This project is highly time - sensitive. As noted above, the property has been deemed surplus by its owner, the Tigard - Tualatin School District. The District desires to sell the property to generate much - needed revenue for its mission of educating students. The District prefers to see the property remain a publicly accessible natural area but has state unequivocally and in writing that, should the current efforts to acquire the property not succeed, it will sell the property to a developer. Market conditions will dictate this sale, but it is likely that such a sale would happen relatively soon, since the District recognizes this market downturn as a strong opportunity to acquire a much - needed school site nearby. Were the District to sell the property to a private party, it could be developed into as many as 70 homes, which would completely eliminate the ballfields and upland forest/savanna portions of the property, impair the remaining wetlands and greenway, and render the entire 44 acres unusable as a park. The City of Tigard, the community, the parents and students of Fowler Middle School (who have invested hundreds of hours in the site), and the project partners feel strongly that the time to act is now. 26. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT — Describe the proposed action, a statement regarding the need for it, a description of what the action is designed to accomplish, location of the project, its scope, the level of impact- causing activities, and any adverse or beneficial, environmental impacts resulting from the project. Describe the site, land use of site and surrounding area and the: a) Fish and wildlife b) Vegetation c) Geology and soils d) Mineral resources e) Air and water quality f) Water resources /hydrology g) historic /archaeological resources h) transportation /access I) consumption of energy resources, and overhead utilities j) Are there any overhead utilities? k) Is the project site located in a floodplain or wetland? I) Are there any threatened or endangered species on the site? Attach comments received from State Natural Resource Agencies and a list of other persons consulted. See Section 2.1.0 in Grants Manual. Proposed Action It is proposed to: • Acquire 44 acres of natural area in the City of Tigard, consisting of over 30 acres of wetlands, mature conifer and deciduous forests, two regional streams (Fanno Creek and Summer creek), and a large, grassy area used as a ball field. • Continue ongoing restoration activity: invasive species removal, native riparian plantings, oak savanna restoration on upland areas, and wetland restoration at selected sites. • Maintain existing permeable - surface trails and the paved Fanno Greenway Trail. The site is located at the intersection of SW Tigard Street and SW Tiedeman Avenue in northern Tigard. The site is bordered on three sides by residential neighborhoods and on the south, across Summer Creek, by Fowler Middle School. Alternatives to the Proposed Action The alternative to the proposed action is to not pursue acquisition of the site as a natural area. Under this scenario, it is likely the site would be developed into as many as 70 homes with attendant habitat and storm water degradation. Environmental Impacts of Proposed Action The proposed action will benefit fish and wildlife region by preserving habitat and avoiding potential habitat and storm water impacts from residential development. The site currently hosts sensitive wildlife species including native trout, Western pond turtles, red - legged frogs, and band - tailed pigeons. It is the largest and most important remaining unprotected oak parcel in the city of Tigard and an irreplaceable community natural resource. The proposed action will also benefit the surrounding community by avoiding air and water quality impacts associated with residential development. There are no overhead utilities on the site. Portions of the site are in a floodplain and have benefited from extensive native plantings and other floodplain enhancements. There are no known threatened or endangered species on the site, though as noted above sensitive species are present. Any such species would be expected to benefit from the proposed action. State Agencies Consulted Department of Environmental Quality Department of Fish and Wildlife Division of State Lands Department of Land Conservation and Development 7. APPLICATION SIGNATURE As an authorized representative of The City of Tigard, I certify that the applicant agrees that as a condition of receiving Local Government Grant Program assistance, it will comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws. This application has been prepared with full knowledge of and in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 736, Division 6, for the Distribution of State Funding Assistance to Units of Local Government for Public Parks and Recreation and OPRD's Procedures Manual for the program. I also certify that to my best knowledge, information contained in this Application is true and correct. I will cooperate with OPRD by furnishing any additional information that may be requested in order to execute a State /Local Agreement, should the project receive funding assistance. Dennis Koellermeier Director of Public Works Name Title uthorized Representative Signature Date 503 - 718 -2596 503 - 684 -8840 Telephone Number Fax Number Y� ; Vicinity Map �Y a . — �j,_. _ ' 1 - City of Tigard ' —•„ ,"--7- . c Oregon et --__,./ O _ '- -r —- s. Pmje t Name: =r = _ _ Summer Creek - City of Tigard Project Sponsor: a �_ g ity Ti a .r `6 - ^- - ` , / i -Acquisition Area - ' J; \ , _ ;., °. U Exisitng Park . _ -__. Existing ng T rail - rte -,, Water �- Stream _ J _ * ' ,,\ �. City of Tigard r j # - :off =.>Y —I r�r ' f v + '� " i . _. " t - �• •�= 1 a t.� 4, e 1 6 \i I I� - .,. .Iv' ems.. - � \ ,1 , =t' 1 I � r �u � .:3 • r r ,,,.A m m m.� \ M - 1 - _ h � — �.nl 1.. a AI M1e meA. n ,.. � 9a`'' e 1 WnKn,. ..•s, .Y., IF. on,on �l,k mnp "',p J r 1 7 , . '` r J r I ' �" Y om : " I tI .x,�_u. -. p YIYy O 0 0.7 0.2 0 Miles 0.6 Zi i L _ r i _ ; Fes ° o f " " v..._.. ..... • T . •, i ,• . .a J I, .. a. <t.r i n d 1ntt` rp`�lil�?e 5 ' �� j y ,ir� k r : - 9 � � E y� i 311 I ' 1 . Y ` • 1 l z ., 1 4 i,' , ' ' ''. ,+ l , ' ' mow, L 7,i ; , 1 7. Site Map �, ` i: fi!. �� f . � [ �? '`' I ' City of Tigard _ �� .,µ E * „t . , „r, t , ♦ I, Oregon iii, 4 �' ,� 1 t . ,, 7 � , M►+ • t } 1 r , �' 1 ' ;It „ t �: j r. '1 ir P ro j ect Natne: : 31P di'lt-tai , it i 1 - 7 '" - ..,e. ] ... `';. �k- IA t " + I • v '�. Ij[ — � r , ." di �. . 14 p ,a �t `'R� k .y _. .• ,, ., • . 3 .+ �..... 0 7 7'f '« . `" add), Summer Creek , 1 ; Y '� � �, '� � • _ � ' ' " ° ' / Project Sponsor: . 1 + � - • ,. --a }} • 4r ` • !,t, �'# ,� City of Tigard -i0�r �� Imo_ �' Age y z r .r II _ r' M _ � 'VT (. "� - • 1=3 Acquisition Area , '� �' ' •�. !r i m , . :{ , I i , 44 1 100 yr Floodplain - r i� « ,a° " ' ' {# 2 51 )" 4 -:- � ` 1T".8-1 "44 Existing Trail t r ,„ .. i ,..... ...„.., — ' * .. �," G . � � + / + � Y � . „ Stream r � , " - is ^r f . ,� ' ,4;r �+ a Exisitng Park I ,,; ^ ` k; .,i• ,.. , ` � t EADOW ST err . + , -. � ;OM I g Taxlot Boundary • a ` ". - 1 _ti.. . `4I ' t i* . ', . ,., i , ' ! p art ., V . 1 of . t. 11 ..t ti F� 4 1° l Am ■ :� • . -.- •* } s JO ., 1r ••>k .m..m.a.,aw m.e. „m.,w ° . J 11,r , M E .*. ,. tv ! • fir, Ali r �.- • ,. r1 mT i : F � 41t* 4 (L. 4 - ' rlilli'As' . ' * 1 / ' ;., "it s - """...... 1 ' , 7 ,, PP R . 1 4. 1 .i �� , i F a - � I+/j R < 1f R • �" ''� ° 1 1 ♦ w ' Q t� � o so ioo zoa :_o aoo 7 lit_ ' , V A,. Ya � # + iii." !" L �... . f/ y ' -� Feet � c�,r" 9, � a anrse . ,� : 1a - .- ....,_ ; . .', '.4" . t 4 1 . ilit itlynr- ''': ::: .7777:1 ii ;- .2..77 :"°' 714" r . r!4 aka -stem. DI Y"'•—' ' I • , ,,�Hlllsboro -- ' �� i Urban Growth f ice` r Iv Boundary i 7 Map { City of Tigard _____ 1 P . land Oregon —) Project Name: ,f Summer Creek op tiii � Project Sponsor: \\ City of Tigard ''' _ _ _ _ _,..._ _ _ _ , . . '` Metro UGB • Acquisition Area �— — - - -, , City of Tigard 1i____ i , ' Late Oswego i King City. \-... Duch L r i • Rlverg_i \ � c FN •• m. r„r,m.n. rr �. �, m,. m.� .. �,,.,n ...I . Tim! In 1....,___ 1 // � 0 . i, rir 2 ,/ Sherwood — / t)'''\\ '. W1ls6 / r ills \ , __ sal•■• . Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Consider a Resolution Dedicating $1 Million to Acquire the Summer Creek Property, Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into a Purchase and Sale Agreement, Acknowledging the City as the Intended Future Owner, and Accepting Future Operational and Maintenance Responsibilities Associated with the Property Prepared By: Dennis Koellermeier Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL With regard to the Summer Creek property, shall the Council approve a resolution: • Dedicating $1 million dollars to acquire the property. • Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a purchase and sale agreement. • Acknowledging the City as the intended future owner of the property. • Accepting the future operational and maintenance responsibilities associated with the property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY • In 2004 the City of Tigard recognized the need to acquire additional park land and green spaces. Since that time, the City has actively pursued such purchases. As part of the acquisition process, potential properties were identified, evaluated and prioritized. • The 44 -acre Summer Creek property, locally known as the Fowler property, ranked high on the City's acquisition list. • The property is owned by the Tigard - Tualatin School District (1'l SD) and has been offered for sale. • An appraisal suggests the property is worth approximately $5.5 million; the TTSD has indicated it intends to sell the property at its appraised value. • The City has been working in conjunction with the Trust for Public Land (1'PL) to acquire the property. The TPL is a nationally - recognized, non - profit, land conservation organization that helps local jurisdictions fund and acquire natural open space and park land. • At the request of Metro and the City, the TPL entered into negotiations with the TTSD. TPL has obtained an exclusive option to purchase the Summer Creek property and is assembling a combination of public funding sources to acquire the site. • As one of these funding sources, Tigard is being asked to dedicate $1 million to the property purchase. • In addition to the City, potential funding sources include: - Metro - The Oregon State Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD) - The Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) - Washington County and Clean Water Services (CWS) The county and Clean Water Services recently committed $500,000 towards the property purchase. • The Council will consider submission of a $500,000 OPRD grant application on its consent agenda at the April 28, 2009 meeting. Local commitments from the City, Metro, the county and CWS will be used as matching funds for approximately $1 million in state - requested grants from OPRD and OWEB. • Once the TPL finalizes the funding package and determines whether the purchase will occur as a single- or • multi -phase transaction, the City and the TPL will enter into a purchase and sale agreement. Under the agreement, the City will acquire the property and will take on the associated operational and maintenance responsibilities. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The City could decide to not participate financially or could participate at a different level. The Council could also choose not to authorize the purchase and sale agreement at this time, which would necessitate the issue coming before the Council at a later meeting. CITY COUNCIL GOALS None ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution Site Map FISCAL NOTES In a May 2007 intergovernmental agreement with Metro, the City indicated the majority of its $1.41 million local share proceeds from the Metro Natural Areas Bond Measure would be used to purchase the Summer Creek property. If the resolution is approved, and the City dedicates $1 million, approximately $873,000 is available in local share proceeds. The remaining balance of $127,000 could be taken from the Park System Development Charge Fund. • Agenda Item # S Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title First Quarter Council Goal Update (61-i ' / � Prepared By: Joanne Bengtson _ Dept Head Approval: i .R r ' City Mgr Approval: L/� ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL First quarter informational update on 2009 City Council Goals. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Information only. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached is a first quarter progress report on 2009 City Council goals. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A CITY COUNCIL GOALS N/A - ATTACHMENT LIST 1. First Quarter Goal Report FISCAL NOTES N/A I: \ADM \City Council \Council Agenda Item Summaries \ 2009 \ 1st quarter goal AIS 090416.doc • 2009 1st Quarter Goal Update II I On January 6, 2009, the City Council met to set its goals for the coming year. These goals represent those items 1 that the Council feels deserve special attention in the months ahead. The City will accomplish much more than T I G A R D what is listed here, but we identify these to be of particular importance to our residents. 2009 Council Goals 1. Implement Comprehensive Plan a. Update Tigard zoning maps based on Comprehensive Plan Update b. Update Tree Code to meet Comprehensive Plan c. Continue to lobby for light rail in 99W Corridor d. Develop a 50 -year aspiration goal in support of Urban /Rural Reserves Program 1 Quarter Update: Update Tigard zoning maps based on Comprehensive Plan Update: The City submitted its locally approved Periodic Review Work Program to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). Included in the Work Program are tasks to update the Tigard Transportation System Plan, perform an Economic Opportunities Analysis, and update the Tigard Public Facility Plan. All three tasks are important to serve as findings /rationale for City initiated Comprehensive Plan /Zoning map amendments. Update Tree Code to meet Comprehensive Plan: The first half of the Urban Forestry Master Plan (Goal 2.2 Policy 11) is complete. The Urban Forestry Master Plan is currently providing additional findings to implement Comprehensive Plan policies into Code. Planning Commission completed public hearings on amendments to Development Code Chapter 18.790 (DCA2009- 00001) to ensure the City's preference for tree protection is incorporated into project designs. Community Development has proposed funding consulting services for FY 2009 -10 to conduct analyses required to make upland tree groves eligible for protection in order to implement Goal 2.3 Policy 9. Continue to lobby for light rail in 99W Corridor Planning Processes: Metro (in conjunction with TriMet) is currently writing their High Capacity Transit System Evaluation, through which Metro plans to identify their priorities for the next light rail lines to be designed and constructed. Tigard staff are members of the work group advising Metro on this plan. Staff are cooperating in this effort to provide detailed planning and transportation information, and to help the Metro staff and consultants appropriately recognize the community benefit of light rail along the 99W corridor. Several Tigard staff are actively discussing the virtues of this project through the various committees, work groups, and planning efforts that they attend as part of Tigard's active involvement in regional planning issues. Light Rail roughly paralleling the 99W /Barbur corridor has been selected for detailed evaluation (as a `finalist') as Metro prioritizes future light rail lines. Tigard staff will continue to provide detailed information and closely monitor the evaluation process to ensure that the significant community benefits of light rail in the 99W corridor are accurately considered. Cooperation with potential partners: Tigard staff and elected officials are continuing to work informally with representatives from neighboring cities, Washington County, and other potential partners supporting this project. Tigard personnel are also working to help key regional decision - makers understand the significant community benefit of this project, and keep them apprised of its status. Council Goal Update 1 .Funding: This project is officially designated as a regional priority for federal funding for its next phase, an Alternatives Analysis. The city, county, and region are pursuing federal funding (perhaps through an earmark) for this project as part of federal authorization and appropriations legislation this year. Next Steps: Staff and elected officials will continue to lobby for and provide information in support of this worthy project. The next step for 99W light rail would be a detailed Alternatives Analysis that would narrow down the location of this light rail line and provide the foundation for design work. The cost of this Alternatives Analysis would be in the neighborhood of $10 million. We may be asked: "How much is Tigard willing to contribute towards this analysis process ?" One key item to watch for in the future: Metro is scheduled to release its High Capacity Transit System Detailed Evaluation in early May. This is anticipated to identify the region's next light rail line to enter the detailed planning and design process for future construction. Develop a 50 -year aspiration goal in support of Urban /Rural Reserves Program : The City submitted aspirations to Metro and Washington County for redevelopment potential along 99W, in downtown Tigard, in the Tigard Triangle, and in the Washington Square Regional Center. The City has also submitted aspirations to Washington County for potential urban reserve areas that would likely be governed by the City of Tigard. 2. Implement Downtown Urban Renewal a. Move forward with Burnham Street Project b. Complete land use regulations and design standards for the downtown 1" Quarter Update: Move forward with Burnham Street project: Right -of -Way Associates continues to work with staff to acquire right -of -way and easements from property • owners along Burnham Street and Ash Avenue. There are seventeen acquisitions that are complete or nearly complete, leaving five property owners that are in negotiations with the City. The construction drawings were completed by OTAK Engineering in January 2009. OTAK will provide the City with a proposal for the construction management and construction survey services. W &H Pacific has been hired to review the OTAK plans and specifications for consistency and completeness. The budget for 2009 -2010 includes $5 million for the construction of this project. An additional $3 million is included in the 2010 -2011 budget. Complete land use regulations and design standards for the Downtown: Long Range Planning worked with consultants hired under a Smart Development Code Assistance grant from the State. The consultants reviewed and suggested changes to the draft Downtown Land Use and Design • Standards (produced by staff working with the citizen design subcommittee). Consultants in architecture have produced drawings to illustrate the design standards, making them user friendly. Staff has scheduled updates with the design subcommittee, City Center Advisory Commission, and a work session with the Planning Commission. 3. Prepare for 2010 Bond Measure for Parks, Open Spaces and Trails a. Complete Parks Master Plan b. Pursue Fanno Park and downtown plaza property acquisition 1s` Quarter Update: Complete Parks Master Plan Council Goal Update 2 Information will be provided to the Council through two documents, the Park System Master Plan (PSMP) Update and a new Park System Development Charge (SDC) Study. A draft of the Needs Assessment, the final phase of the PSMP, was completed in April and is being reviewed by staff. Additionally, community input on the PSMP has been obtained through: • Two Park and Recreation Advisory Board meetings • Creation of a recreation service providers matrix • Two Technical Advisory Committee meetings • A recreation provider focus group • Seven stakeholder interviews • Community questionnaire (online and on paper) • A community intercept event at the Tigard Balloon Festival • A telephone survey retesting 2004 questions about parks, recreation, open space, and funding measures • A public visioning workshop MIG, the consultant working with staff on the PSMP, has compiled all the community input to date. The input is posted on the City's web site at www.tigard - or.gov /psmp. Pursue Fanno Park and downtown plaza property acquisition These projects are on hold pending funding determination. 4. Continue supporting the Legislature in addressing the financial needs of Oregon state and local governments 1 Quarter Update: Mayor Dirksen met with County and State Legislators multiple times regarding state and local government issues. In March, he was part of a delegation representing Metro's Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation QPACT), which met with Washington, DC Legislators to discuss transportation funding and stimulus issues. The Mayor, City Manager and Assistant City Manager meet with the city's legislative delegation monthly. The city tracks legislation based on the Council's 2009 Legislative Priorities and other issues of interest. Staff transmits a summary report to legislators of note in support of this goal. In the first quarter, the city went on record on three proposed bills. The city supports SB396, which removes preemption on Real Estate Tax Transfers. The city opposes HB2405 -A which prohibits cities (among others) from regulating Voice Over Internet Protocol Service and Internet Protocol - enabled Service. The City Council also adopted a resolution in support of SJR29, which supports the establishment of a State Rainy Day Fund. Council Goal Update 3 • Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Consider an Ordinance Amending Chapter 11.04 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) to Include a Business Recycling Requirement and Consider a Resolution Establishing the Initial Administrative Rules and Supplemental Regulations Pertaining to a Business Recycling Requirement Prepared By: Dennis Koellermeier Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: (' f ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL There are two separate, but related issues before the Council: • Should the Council adopt an ordinance amending TMC Chapter 11.04 to include a Business Recycling Requirement? • Should the Council adopt a resolution establishing the initial Administrative Rules and Supplemental Regulations Pertaining to a Business Recycling Requirement? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the ordinance and resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Background • Metro's Regional Solid Waste Management Plan ( RSWMP) governs solid waste in the Portland metropolitan area, including Tigard. • Metro recently adopted a `Business Recycling Requirement," in the RSWMP, which requires businesses to separate and recycle any recyclable materials. • The goal of Metro's Business Recycling Requirement is to give business an opportunity to work with local governments to provide recycling and education, to create a consistent standard throughout the Metro region, and to increase recycling. An increase in business recycling will assist the Metro region in achieving the waste reduction goals set forth in the RSWMP. • Currently, Tigard participates in the Washington County Cooperative Recycling Program and businesses are typically referred to this agency for recycling assistance. Tigard's Implementation Philosophy • Tigard's solid waste haulers estimate that at least 80 percent of the City's existing business customers are already in compliance and have a recycling program in place. • Under the new requirement, Tigard plans to bring business recycling assistance in -house using existing staff. The goal is to create a customer - oriented program that conforms to City standards and expectations. • Staff's approach to implementing the Business Recycling Requirement will be to educate and assist our customers, with priority given to those businesses that do not yet have a recycling program. • Along with education and assistance, the City will provide tools, like signage and desk -side recycling containers, to promote positive recycling habits. • Once effective, businesses will be given up to 18 months to comply with the Business Recycling Requirement. Ordinance and Resolution • The attached ordinance amends the Solid Waste Management Chapter of the TMC (Chapter 11.04) and will: - Add a Business Recycling Requirement to the TMC. - Bring Tigard into compliance with the requirements of the RSWMP. - Clean -up unclear language and outdated citations, and update reporting deadlines to correspond with those of other local jurisdictions. • The attached resolution establishes the City's initial Administrative Rules and Supplemental Regulations Pertaining to the Business Recycling Requirement. The rules and regulations: - Provide the details of how Tigard will implement the Business Recycling Requirement. - Can be modified by way of a public process. The process is less cumbersome than doing a Code amendment and may not require Council review. • The Code amendments and the Administrative Rules and Supplemental Regulations have been reviewed by the City Attorney. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The Council could choose not to adopt the ordinance and resolution and could provide direction on Tigard's compliance with Metro's RSWMP. CITY COUNCIL GOALS None ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Ordinance with Exhibit A, TMC 11.04 Redline Version 2. Resolution with Exhibit A, Administrative Rules and Supplemental Regulations Pertaining to the Business Recycling Requirement FISCAL NOTES • There will be no extra cost to businesses, since recycling is already part of their standard garbage service. • At the start of the next fiscal year, Metro is slated to provide the City with approximately $19,000 for complying with the Business Recycling Requirement. Financial assistance beyond FY '09 -'10 is contingent upon Metro's revenue and budgeting process. • The estimated cost to implement and sustain a program of this nature can range from $20,000 - $25,000 annually. The funds Metro provides will be used for education, outreach materials, advertising, and materials for on -site visits. • The proposed FY '09 -'10 budget contains $12,000 to assist businesses to comply with the Business Recycling Requirement. Agenda Item # 7 Meeting Date 4/28/09 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Amend Ordinance Tigard Municipal Code (MC) 10.32.175 to Allow Operation of City of Tigard - Owned All- Terrain Vehicles Upon Public Roadways, Streets, Highways, Parks, Pathways and Other Related Areas Within the City Limits of Tigard and Repeal TMC 10.32.180, Trains not to Blom Stems. /'� Prepared By Bill Dickinson Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: �1 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Amend Ordinance TMC 10.32.175 to allow operation of City of Tigard owned ATV's upon public roadways, streets, highways, parks, pathways and other related areas within the City limits of Tigard. This will also amend Ordinance TMC 10.32.175 allowing the current use of golf carts within the Summerfield neighborhood to be in compliance with ORS statutes. TMC 10.32.180 should be repealed because it has been superseded by ORS 824.222 & 824.223. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend ordinance be amended in order to allow City of Tigard employees to use City of Tigard owned ATVs upon public roadways, streets, highways, parks, pathways and other related areas within the City limits of Tigard for official use only while on duty. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Police Department recognizes the need for rapid response by on -duty Police personnel to situations, including emergency situations, in areas of the City not currently accessible by automobiles. Further, that these areas of the City not currently accessible by automobiles are located in the many green spaces and parks within the City, and that other critical areas not easily accessible by automobile include those areas along the railroad right -of -way and tracks that service freight and commuter trains traveling through the City. The Tigard Festival of Balloons, Community Parades, downtown Halloween and Christmas events are examples of community events that generate a large number of event attendees gathering in areas of the City that because of terrain or density of attendees prohibits the use of existing motorized patrol options. Operation of Police ATVs would provide an excellent opportunity to safely ride among the community event attendees and enable them to interact with our Police personnel but still allow Police personnel to provide improved response times as well as have equipment on hand that would not otherwise be possible while on foot patrol. The Public Works Department has several operational needs to utilize the capabilities of ATVs to inspect, monitor and maintain many of the same areas mentioned by the Police Department above. Public Works has a justification to use these specially designed vehicles to accomplish their required tasks where other modes of transportation would be impracticable, inefficient, and/or cause a greater negative impact to the wildlife, flora and fauna of those areas of the City. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None QTY COUNCIL GOALS N/A ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Draft Ordinance Attachment 2: ORS 824.222 & ORS 824.223 FISCAL NOTES I: \Citywide \Council Packets \Packet '09 \090428 \ATV AIS 042809.doc Chapter 824 — Railroads Attachment 2 824.222 Authority over duration that grade crossing may be blocked; penalty. (1) The power to fix and regulate the length of time a public railroad- highway grade crossing may be blocked by railroad equipment is vested exclusively in the state. (2)(a) Upon petition of the public authority in interest, or of any railroad or upon the Department of Transportation's own motion, the department shall, after due investigation and hearing, unless hearing is not required under ORS 824.214, enter an order fixing and regulating the length of time a public railroad - highway grade crossing may be blocked by railroad equipment. (b) Upon petition of a person, the department shall investigate and may hold a hearing and, following a hearing, may enter an order fixing and regulating the length of time a public railroad - highway grade crossing may be blocked by railroad equipment. (3) The time limits fixed by the department shall be maximum time limits and shall be commensurate with reasonable requirements of train and vehicular traffic operations. (4) Violation of a time limit fixed by the department under this section is punishable by a civil penalty of not less than $100 nor more than $3,000 for each offense. [Formerly 763.120; 2001 c.909 §1] 824.223 Authority to regulate distance from grade crossing at which railroad may stop or park equipment; penalty. (1) The power to regulate the distance from a public railroad - highway grade crossing at which a railroad may stop or park equipment is vested exclusively in the state. (2)(a) Upon petition of the public authority in interest, or of any railroad or upon the Department of Transportation's own motion, the department shall, after due investigation and hearing, unless hearing is not required under ORS 824.214, enter an order establishing a safe distance from a public railroad - highway grade crossing at which a railroad may stop or park equipment. (b) Upon petition of a person, the department shall investigate and may hold a hearing and, following a hearing, may enter an order establishing a safe distance from a public railroad- highway grade crossing at which a railroad may stop or park equipment. (3) In determining what constitutes a safe distance under subsection (2) of this section, the department shall consider issues including, but not limited to, hazards associated with public railroad - highway grade crossings that do not have active protective devices. (4) Violation of an order issued under subsection (2) of this section is punishable by a civil penalty of not less than $100 nor more than $3,000 for each offense. [2001 c.909 §3] http: / /www.leg.state.or.us /ors /824.html 4/1/2009 • Agenda Item # 7 Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title Downtown Land Use Regulations and Design Standards, Council Goal No. 2b Prepared By: Sean Farrelly Dept Head Approval: % City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Update on the status of the Downtown land use regulations and design standards (Council Goal No. 2b Implement Downtown Urban Renewal: Complete land use regulations and design standards for the Downtown.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION Receive update and provide feedback. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY One of the recommendations of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was to revise and update the land use regulations for Downtown. Starting in the summer of 2007, staff, working with a subcommittee made up of members of the Planning Commission and the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC), developed draft code amendments. After substantial completion of the draft code, an Open House was held in July, 2008. Approximately 30 property and business owners and other stakeholders attended. In order to have the draft reviewed by consultants in land use, and to provide graphics to illustrate provisions of the code, in 2007 staff had applied for Transportation Growth Management Code Assistance from the state. Due to delays at the state level, this phase did not get underway until December, 2008. The consultants in land use (Angelo Planning Group) and architecture (SERA Architects) evaluated the proposed code language and recommended changes to improve their clarity and better meet the intent of creating a pedestrian oriented urban village. The architecture consultants completed draft illustrations that will accompany the code. At the direction of staff, the consultants also did an innovative exercise which demonstrated how site plans at three sites would respond to the proposed development standards, height limits, setbacks, etc. This led to an understanding of the feasibility of development under the new code, and some resulting revisions to the draft code language. The consultants have made presentations to the design subcommittee and will make presentations to the CCAC and the Planning Commission. The CCAC will review the draft code at May and June meetings and will be asked to endorse the draft. An Open House is being scheduled for the end of June prior to starting Planning Commission workshops and public hearings on the draft code. Part of this review process has also included early feedback from the Oregon Depaiuuent of Transportation and the issue of maximum density in the zone is undergoing evaluation as a result. It is anticipated that City Council workshops will be scheduled throughout the summer and that public hearings will begin in the fall of 2008. l:ALRPLN \Council Materials \2009 \428 -09 AIS Downtown Codc.docx 1 OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable CITY COUNCIL GOALS Goal No. 2b: Implement Downtown Urban Renewal: Complete land use regulations and design standards for the Downtown 5 -Year Goals: Implement Comprehensive Plan ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Memo to council dated April 13, 2009 Attachment 2: Sample graphics from Code FISCAL NOTES Not applicable I: \LRY1.N \Council Materials \2009 \4-28 -09 AIS Downtown Code.docx 2 '' City of Tigard ATTACHMENT 1 TIGARD Memorandum To: Mayor Dirksen and the Tigard City Council From: Sean Farrelly, Senior Planner Re: Downtown Land Use Regulations and Design Standards Date: April 13, 2009 One of the recommendations of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was to revise and update the land use regulations for Downtown. Work started in earnest on the project in September 2007. A design subcommittee made up of members of the Planning Commission and the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) worked with staff for about a year in developing a draft code. After substantial completion of the draft code, an open house was held in July 2008. Approximately 30 property and business owners and other stakeholders attended and provided feedback. Code Assistance In order to have the draft reviewed by professional consultants in land use, and to provide graphics to illustrate provisions of the code, staff applied for Transportation Growth Management Code Assistance from the state in 2007. Due to delays at the state level, the review phase did not get underway until December, 2008. The consultants in land use (Angelo Planning Group) and architecture (SERA Architects) evaluated the proposed code language and recommended changes to improve their clarity and better meet the intent of creating a pedestrian oriented urban village. The architecture consultants, which included Marcy Mclnelly, a leading expert in form -based codes (land use codes which emphasize the physical form of development), completed draft illustrations that will accompany the code. At the direction of staff, the consultants also did an innovative exercise which demonstrated how site plans at three sites would respond to the proposed development standards, height limits, setbacks, etc. This led to an understanding of the feasibility of development under the new code, and resulted in some revisions to the draft code language. Staff believes the Code Assistance review has resulted in a stronger code that is consistent with the values of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Comprehensive Plan; is relatively simple for applicants, staff, and the public to understand; will result in well designed buildings; and supports the land uses and residential densities necessary to spur economic development in the Downtown. 1 I: \LRPLN \Council Muenals \2009 \4 -28 -09 .Attach 1 Downtown Code docx Summary of New Downtown Land Use and Design Regulations The code amendments are intended to maximize flexibility in the location of land uses while requiring high design standards. Here is a summary of the draft code as it currently stands (revisions may be made as a result of the public hearing process): Land Use: • All of the Downtown Urban Renewal District will be designated with the new zone Mixed Use- Central Business District (MU -CBD). The new zone will also extend outside the Urban Renewal District boundaries to include the Main Street Village Apartments site and the properties associated with the recently purchased "Fanno Creek House" on Hall Blvd. Like the existing CBD zone, a wide range of uses from retail, office, residential, and mixed use will be allowed. The proposed re -zone will also allow mixed use development previously not permitted in the properties zoned General Commercial (C -G) in the Hall and 99W area. Consistent with the current CBD zoning, new industrial uses and auto - oriented uses will not be permitted (those that exist at the time the code is adopted can continue, including those that were zoned C -G.) • The maximum density allowed in the MU- CBD has not been finalized. Early feedback from the Oregon Department of Transportation indicated that to raise it to 80 units per acre (from the 40 units per acre currently permitted in the current CBD zoning) would require the City to perform comprehensive traffic impact studies to address the Transportation Planning Rule. This point will be evaluated. Potential alternatives include a smaller in increase in density (to 50 units per acre), raising the maximum density in selected areas, and /or revisiting density question when the future of high capacity transit in the Highway 99W Corridor is determined. • The MU -CBD zone is further divided into four "sub- areas." While the range of allowed uses are mainly uniform throughout the district, development standards such as building height and setbacks are defined by the sub - areas. Organizing the regulations like this will help create a more consistent public realm within the sub- areas. For example, the properties on Main Street are restricted to three floors and can have zero setbacks, while properties at the Hall and 99W intersection will have a height limit of 8 stories and front setbacks of 15 feet. Non conforming Uses and Development • The non - conforming use provisions are extremely generous, calling out that all existing development may continue (and, if destroyed, be re- established within one year.) If a renovation is planned for an existing building, only the renovated portion must meet the new design requirements. 2 1: \l.RPLN \Council Materials \2009 \d -28 -09 Attach 1 Downtown Codc.docs Design Standards • Requirements for commercial /mixed use developments and residential only standards differ in level of detail, mostly due to the requirements for storefront features for commercial and mixed use buildings. • The amount of required private and shared open space for multi - family development, included as part of a mixed use development will be reduced from what is currently required by the Site Development Review chapter of the Development Code. This would allow a more urban form of development in the Downtown. A fee in lieu of process is being considered as an option for the provision of shared open space. • Discretionary design standards will provide a "safety valve" for well- designed projects that can't meet the clear and objective standards. A review body will have to be established, either a new body made up of design professionals, or a subcommittee of the Planning Commission. • Projects in the Urban Renewal District would not undergo Site Development Review, but would be reviewed under this chapter and other applicable chapters (street standards, etc.). Parking: • Minimum parking standards will be eliminated for development on Main Street and reduced to one space per unit for multi- family residential. Further reductions in minimum parking may be made after monitoring parking in the district. Schedule for Adoption The code assistance consultants will make presentations to the CCAC and the Planning Commission next month. The CCAC will be asked to endorse the draft in June. An Open House will follow at the end of June. Planning Commission workshops and public hearings will take place throughout the summer. It is anticipated that City Council workshops and public hearings will begin in August /September of 2009. 3 I: \I RP1.N \Council Narcrials \2009 \4 -2R -09 Attach 1 Downtown Coda.docx Attachment 2: Sample Code Illustrations Yd v�old�o v�ely v�divzv�d�v v��►8oioiO�oiouO�o�v agov.OLO . - .-- 2v OIa,v� x �k I � ' O. r u ; .z O " w r' �- X" 4: r' Z g".. �O a' £. --T - a 0 ,.7, , .. s 1"` , .. «.� vr,' - ,.------'---,";-,--,'-e w . ? 5 � r.. '� ! , O O - - $' acv « o 'I. ° "- a . " ° .:'rl, o _ Q i s " i ; :f r I A `Ye` m ; - !ro ` »a 7 r Q v ` ;--* " 7 R .='f Yw ."€"' tl„° s' ,�'�, 't ,.. rk'O _ "rte J � _ � c d 40, ,, , ,,,,, ,,,,. ,.. „_,,...ii. „.:,,,,,,,,,,...:::, 1 ':-.. — 741110-111111 - 41110,.., ,:,- - -s.,,i, , .,,,,,. _ ,. -, - ,,,... . •... ' ''. , ' .' ' ° ''-` . n Q Parking on the side or rear of buildings 0 L 1 landscape standard _ Max. 50% of site frontage 0 Landscape not required along shared prop. l m o Min. 10' setback 0 See Ch.18.745 for screening and landscaping requirements z N i B.2 Parking Location PROPERTY LINE DEvtUDPMEM PARCEL PUBLIC REALM „,,,,„, , .„.,. , ,.,,,,, .,,,„:„-s „,,-,,,,,,,,:„.. :: —„ .... ,,„, : .,,,..„:.: ..,, 1 , fi i^�,x b m at _', { L .'” „„,..,, ., -1� 1 ` P ,, ,. , ',� + tea, 3 , - , . s � • s *. „ A•.' y � S a ,� t. p t Y .,� 6 C S Y as s ^4. b • . ,;„:',;,,6):'‘.”‘ T t."Q• v mow' ' d `,„',',4,, P E Y em \! f , 4- , ':,; r...7--. JIB i C.7 4::=777. n :,i 7- g I , g a sl. 1 S� r t F K S +6 raY s i 1 '..I'' a ` b r 4 �� , CO j!, Primary entry door oriented to street or public space 0 Entrance is covered and /or recessed behind facade Q Min 3'; Max 6' projection 0 Max 6' balcony /deck projection Q Min 10' clearance Q Min 6 windows Q Min 30% wi dows © . Upper windows vertically oriented A.2 -4 Commercial /M -Use Bu i l ding PROPERT' LINE DE'ELOPMEM PARCE PUBLIC REALM i. ,, , -4,TNI'l',44 c-fi.th:,',:,.. :::;;' . .. ,. , ' `-,.' .', ;h.,;". " t &:..,.. luN . t ,mo t t = a e j d` - 3 4 �' ... F �� Fir s std i l{ ti �' r # Rk ` r y da.A 1 / a � i .' aft' . 3. I, ggl g _ b 1_ d a ! ` ., ' 4; • • , ..mac -- _:.. a w... ., .,. . Z +, F �' :: r : e : .. i j { .' mo t Ili;' ! 11- e � s ' i I t o �`s � " "� L �jY ' IC E L'. y .i ; `, ' ''' ' S A e � �► � IL � II r' ! r ,,,.'i''..,1 . . • , Q Primary entry doors oriented to street c space 0 Entrance • covered and /or recessed behind or publi facade Q Max 6' balcony /deck projection Q Min 10' clearance Q Min 30 %windows O Upper windows vertically oriented A.2 -4 Res (Only) Building ■,------ — --- ----- -r` :' ,' 't t V ----------- t; i -,, "i- ,--'grogr - • — I I , 1 - - - 1 . 1 , .11, 1 ., I I 1 I 1 L _:4- - . .• : i - a •.,, _i,„ , % ---- -,Ft , ! ' , 1 ' "'' ''"'` J_ , • ' ' P.--=--i 4,:' —1. - - b • , U---- 1; ------- Zi '-. 7 .. - . _ _ - - - , ' • - - - - ' 7.- . 1 I I . „ - -, -, - '' - - ,,,-- , ,, - :----- '- L , 1 , ____ 1 I _ , , .._ . 1 T .. . , ..„,,..,,,,,. :1;:C;'; ::j ' I ? • , ,. .-'‘-' _'''''"- .. ' ,1: - - r , .. — ' :-.' ' -_:- , _.", , `I.:_.... , . 'iori - ' " 2 1. ' 1 , 11 ..:, ..,..,- ., – , . 1 . : ...,.. . _ . _%_'' .. ...... .: 'i r1:11 3 ' At,' • 1 , - " , k-- T _.. _ . T --- i .._ ___,,,,....,,,, , _. , , _ . _ , ,___,,, , 1 , ,. ,, , 1 : .. t I 1 . i 3, . ,.• ' 1 1 ` ' ..' .i . t , 4 1 il ' - - 1 ''• , 1 ■ 1 - ' I rt ' i t'.,.:..t, - I, . j ' t's- , ',., , t 1 i 11 _ ,- - ' , ''t 4 ,*`.. , " ' ' ''' " • , - , t t,:rtt'it:, ';', 1 " , - I I ' rc 1 h , : ' . ' h..-.('142 1 ■ 1 i I t fl■ ' ' k V.e.71 1 . .. •1 -4 ';':'''' i, ' - I ' , ' : - - l':0 -." ::,.. _ _..,- ' -- _ -_,......:. _ ': _ ,. .,...._-.._.: -D'•"' ' - --_- ' 1 1 ' ■ r '.---":;> -----,----- -.-.--- _ , -- - 7 +77---;---..--t: , i -. t [---7,- :,t,-_,4,,,t,„„:4 ---,1.„, ‘•_ i L,,,,a, _:_, _,Ire-:,„ ".„ ''' -_,,:rv,:,...„,„4..; t,t1_-i -' =5"-'' ' - 1.-=„?' """1 - t' r * ' '"'. -' ' '' r. ' '-‘"' ' . , ' '0,.,..4- ..tt'ixti,..t"- - -,1--,,,,,,!..alr___'!„,_,-1,... ,.':t.r,A •1 0 I NI Co 1 e Architectural bay (30' max on center) 0 Building lighting 0 Transom windows 0 Ground floor windowsill (;) Column/pilaster/post Q Blade sign 0 Sign band/storefront frieze B.1 Architectural Bays O .. §a tE , ---±!"":"'I''''' ' � r"` _ ' � .' " �" ` -4:41.-,":1,'-''4'':- I... „ , -A s+ z„, �:; sr` -, 4� ' , m ''�` t q ,E^. . ' t :. _ _ 's�. .�..r ' w s� x-s fi3 ...;� , T . ■ gym "+ r , O" ,, :� .� ,a . . -._ � _ a.._ d. .�. .a .�. r`te , . n ' -. , �, # _ s. x , i .. .,. - a - ' dr ,_k,t v "a -it ; j , d t , ,,( r x. ... u" " ,.. . K=: ,s a a. ' ,. , . t m -, U a '',,.. . - $ �„ a M. r<° e _ .1 I i _ k ..- I - I i - '_'- � i 16 1 , �ILi' O I .xs 1 ' '',1 9 I �,� — —, I ( i 1 I I a �= I a �� >, L INI y �' - ss . , w , S � „ � , . , tk �ti& , a #* �& s 4w ,,,t' i r 7 :.. CF + :.:.- i k,. ,,::' ,� ., ra- y % " � ? 3 _ , 4r ,` f' „a - - ' .f...- g."....,.g.,..i, ''1 "tv ..1j.:1 ' ' ''‘; , : '- ;- , ' ! i dr” a''` it c > 1 ", '' .7; ra6r!--'6'64,-1-1: ". � � , � �. c `� :,. � �S �' ,. � � n ,.. , . , , '� �, � � t fi t I( i`�- 85 y E ? � ' q ".,,: �N $ - ,, .. ' ^_1 . ,` i v k.. a, n �' r f. 1 ,, I Ij a 'lc „<„ �. -' a ' - 1 T '— s ma x A F . – ' 4 � s � ', r , , ,' - r t w r - . t t I :7"1"' ,.4, ';`'''llr r i4 "t" b, ° f �w 23;f4.'11 , ... z < .t ° „' 1 ' i'i , , a ''; ' .�> > + '`P z y . 4 fi i . li t 3 "g' - - _ � 4 �2 } - "\-417-1.—. w } ' r a'°a - r �.,., � rv ' - sue-.. '�'3° ti : ' , _ _ . . . ,. .e .. I j 2 "*t$ _ x z 1 : s .� I a ? .ma _ ._.- , :,�',k,... - - «.. _.._ ' _.�.. _ .1:r;11 _ w' _ _ s..� ... -� - � 7 " _ _ _._ ... t _r i.. .� � t _ >. , z III 1 r 4r ' r { ! F ( ' ��' `mo w`� M • t __. � �- ^°- _ } � cx:..u._.._ "i - J� , . , y3., ^. ^ � . �� , w.. :-----2-7::' .., -.- _ _.v "- " " " �&s $ .RCl. _ .s .. -ed,,. - " -J!'t° _ e , .�F°ika f v .urrrc ,. .e[s- v�..v. ^zY'>0. acdm"z aira.o�sm^°- .rs*.ym" Y�*WS ',. v '. J-dt + +v•.°' " staMta, " twtn . ... =-t �"�w.W'Y"A^..q.+x +k'F � �v _s ,. -- .+w.++2KST'b$^.- s n.. u.. a�, Y <d rtk .s ,c h& Co "Base" 0 Belt course /string course 0 "Middle" 0 Projecting cornice /parapet O "Top" C.1 Integrated Building Facade (Co mmercia l /Mixed -Use Bu � . - � . .�. ,, , � m:. �t *�„{ ` 1 , ° ' -. 7 '+• + "e`k� ^,v� ' s " a s :mot£ r r- x �; , 1 , I , �I 11 ��; 11;- a� �; , x 1 �( 111 f1 1 I .7 [ ,. I 1, i i� lt .. 1 1� . 1 I r ' �i re�t L� av on' ,B r . . rcA ... 1 + [ g ' , . . � Y ! Z .'" i � � "�^ � d+i �, = 44,-,---.4.7'-e---1 .!,=.--1.M'..,-7.17-7,. �q � �� x [. __ 1 + � r C _ ". -." l' :� �� 41f. r.. -a fire V . � 1 t 1 , , - ;'=' u m r�r l�. r�i '��- ( ^. 's rr �1 'i' • i ' t .. --i i u C: , _ , i .cr. r - .1,r L 1;. t t <.�w - t au u, aa.,..,-��a. rr:.. 7! i . ( _`. � ��_ .,?:. . � i. � a� e�y �^a, . r—a m.t" � 11� t: ; � 1,. ; � � � ca : ...� �. „� �, . �.. n "1. �.. > �� 'i � '�:'�' ��' a ,¢ _ ; > ` a _ 3X y ' [ ? '- i, 1' i t ,,--..,,:i ^ : X r 3 ? t? # . .. A .� - 11. � (1 1 ^�E, 1 I a . , -1.44-c, 2 ..e t a a � i � e 3 : z. � F ^ I' _ .��...+ � X14 $ } :�.,. .. g 5 P 44 .. x,-, X I. p il { ( 5 " , . �I .... : ..,.& "�a,........ 1 i ... ., ., Y - X �- va t 4 .___ , pi. n -i t . - ,i - -i — ,,I1. . 17.F 7— 's_ai l 1 111 . _ I . ....„„ ____....... , - � ass t._ r Y . x>_ i:0".! -� a1 ..: - a -, t .l:�t� __a - z - r , rC `' ? � [ i,<":: � .?>:X- -. -a. pt�'- ,� 1=i� a Z— = aIr — ^�, i n �' -. .. . r .� J� ,°.k,;I I ¢ i F .� � i <_f A rr � - , ' . _ ^I "c 4 ; .r ' [,, � k ... .., .' s - R O �- r M.,, -fig 6i:1i - � w4 ... v , , •!•*i '•,' ' -:-,%-•::.;•• • .. -:,..,,t-':,' ,; • • ' ,- i IL__ - _„•:_______A ' ..I 1., -ii • , • ,2,..Li.'- .,_i_i„.;:—.7- ,,•,, '., 4 -,. - f` } a _ ' f X, _ x ? ' . £� ` �_4s -�- �; ,. lam{ ;4 1 ' — r # { , • - i I 1,' II' ,% -f7- ''' ''',„- I ' h . 4 Irt I i ;-- ' ; - ---- 1 ' ' ' — — 1 , , , il 1 .*, f '-, ._._ -.;_ 1 Q',1 1 ' I .`..4" . 11 1 li ''-,-' 1 I l' . I ' ' ' ' 1 ',I 4 _ .. 4-4.:' ' ' - _' 1 r --- - '5 , 1 'sill, I '4 4 i . ‘,',■ - , ., ' Ir'1,, I . '''..I) 6'414 .; —;.- , .,„...___. :_„,......,„, , ,..... ,,, ,, „, 4 at t so . ;a, . ,-... ------ [ ----, 4 „ ;11 1 1.1 ' - ,ic -`4. °_'.• c r- -,,. e , , 4 '`' - ,..0.-,„ , - -‘,1;744 : :'' --'',/.".- .. „,_ .. ,- `-" --"' - = :..r` y in, -. ;. " ». 7 'aZ ° A' , _._- "a:- wZ - y , � 'Z' � 1a ._ y t, aew « dal ":';:::3' - }1 , ...:- � - - ,- ."K - rF< .c e " ,,"''' `:, f . . , ;: x� - e i ,, .. 5, -, ..... -.: X' a . ; . . ?'tr2 4^.. 02;St° n' N�:.Y+n i a3 ' - . ; "S 5.'1 < ; .rt„`Y++Y. 'x C : • t ' ,.r " '^ .,s . .�,+. .- -e s s,_ -t " ^'` y , y z "_ , . , . * ,, • ,x . .. a� s^'c , ,>, :a ?F> $, ° ;- :�`.�4, - �.X r �,x:, r. :t"'J7,�t �' . ,.,'. .Y . J. `0" r . � �", .r L; x � , s . +' 'c` = ^a:" r . v X r x fi? e Street - facing bay window Q Street - facing porch O Street - facing balcony Q Trim required on roof lines, porches, windows, and doors C.2 Integrated Building Facade (Residential Only Building) Agenda Item # l Meeting Date April 28, 2009 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue /Agenda Title: Urban and Rural Reserves Planning Process Update Prepared By: Ron Bunch Dept Head Approval:f� City Mgr Approval: Cam' ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Update on Washington County's and Metro's Urban and Rural Reserve Planning Processes STAFF RECOMMENDATION Receive staff's and Councilor Buehner's update on the Urban and Rural Reserves planning process and provide direction, if determined necessary. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Key decisions are expected on the Urban and Rural Reserve designations in August - September 2009. Staff and Council's representative will update Council on the status of the planning effort and issues that have recently developed. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A CITY COUNCIL GOALS 1. Implement the Comprehensive Plan a) Develop a 50 -year aspirational goal in support of Urban /Rural Reserves Program ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A 1 i . .. ,-- \ - `-,,.. ;:-. ( k 1/.., 4., ' :4 • -,..) _.... , ..\.„..... _ __ . -...., , \ .::: A .. . .. .0 H '‘"-- .. . ,: _, I -- L Rural Reserves 1 es C 1 - , r 1, .., 10114- - I ' 11 %- l 't - 1 ' : j ? , ,, , V 1 .11,, -, • . 4 i 1 - , , ..- . .,,,7 1 • k, ')' e; • -41111111r r * - k. 1.-- 1... ' \ „„.x.-- a s_Q__, d_. a ,j, +___.a, )f .... .. lvi , , r ----... .-. ie ' "7-2 '- , --- ; . „4,.„ .. ,.. ---..- . Lit c„..... 1 . _ 4,,, : 7...-•:„--1. / li... i ; • : O '- ,i1 Pc ---- -- ' ---- - i -‘. - " r •Ii it '..-- . - .. - -1,- ---.1- -.1_ • —.1-- • 1 a ' ,...._• , , , . , ,.,...- ....- ,...... , ,.,. , _.,. -,,, . .. ",.. ' . . : , y ' - -.o r ,,,.._>------ 5 . ; - . , . , ,' - Nt‘ ' e „.,. ._ .. ._ \'''L 1 ' ') .-. 4 En, i 511 li -11111 ': ' VVIO' \,,,„ • • 1 . . ..„. III 7 1 . i 0 'V ;At:, ' 2 - 1 ; 4 , • 0.... • '- 1011 . • . in3 , , " v g•. C-r ., .'. `,.' '4. '''. --.. .':,--".:, -1' • .,:. r f . *, ../...,____ - .-•'' ... gii-E ' • '4 ' ' , ,...' 1 1”r!" '• -T1 , . . . . .... , . • • , & -i,...,, . , . , ' ' - ' --- ML.Y.Y 107. .'''. ' a lgS .4 1.111'4 g :•-• • ,A .,,, • p 4 . --4 . , , % .... 7 7. ...?-z' ,F. .9 .... ,,, I TM- r "1"E.; '' v t", - L'Ll."' "- • ." '. '' r '' - ' , lik 1 :V.... , ;tti ' ' , ' ,..:- --, , 5iiiii:1 ‘246 4.- . - "„.. . • 4.1 Att , 1 %: , 4' 1 1 ,.. fV,./ i ‘, . 1 - '.: . iirt .,,,,1" 4 IMIairAF • .e, :fabirEs. ? - .01 — -, `1 '7%-::- • . "k , ..I... ern Earp S V-.... :. - ( le ,,. i:ir.,:ivai.. \ i ‘,/? - - 7 " - • ,,,i +. ,, . - .4,ar - .N..,r10-ficio-F;14. 4 i sL;Ah: .7 -saT,1; A, - • t,''' ) ' , .. , ":;. ,. Viw ' -- ,._,,q zalp_ti"r„, 4 "- -5- • .- ,„:.' . .- ...,-,, , M . - 1 '7 - rrAilfrX , ,_ , - ttlg.r., Pariqrtualrt-,4* . ,-,......./ , _., - . r ,, A , l ■ ,,,, r., 1 r f ' ,..-"::-------- -- -= % 7 , . C. I . • . F --- • "•-.- ' / . 11,7:4•01 . 0" P r VI 11 110:4411prniklah.. f •P - i 1 • • ,,,., :,7" • _ ' .....--..,e,tfr,,,onAtiams • -,,- •Ii , ' i''. .1 - • ry . - a 4 '"•11, - "igl a ".t. ■,..,c -..1„.., t , , . _ __ It .. L. •)-r _ '\ 4- ..... / , , ; 40 - ...- t .7:7 1 •"....-,;, E.47.51.44#17;lf; .., s ., / - ---e _ ,, - ..11 iL V — ...- 1 ,t.---' . • 211 1: 4 i 1 11 .. .._, .......,--• ._.... _ ..,. . ...7 4,.. _ 1...- • . ) r ',.... fie : . ' : 6 117, 11 , 4/1 , .., "i l La d ' • t • 1 9.1":7 .../ 7.. .. , ,, ,, ,. lik . „.. 1 t,... _ -, -.- . ...... • ,, A , .- „Amu .fr- , • j 614 f • 1:11:tilli . 11° /: '.- t .11 C ilt,...,,,,.....• di 441111 ga ..".**. Or "...... • . P- -:"1. i - I * . :... a. i -:, , - 94r - . r t . • r [AA r1"" 5r1 r ---- .. i Oil . 1 . 4-41,4... i' ' -,. - - ‘ • w. i 1 L. iMila'' ' : t . ---' 1 ',... ',7 -- -r - i f• - I , ! / ) • i f 1 11 2 1 , 4 45 . 1 1: 1 .. i • I ,' , . ...,.. fl `"•,,.-- 1 , . L----.'-- ' - i ,,,,,. #-._ , • ,_ - ,, i 0. ptkorsiiilli . . r•11■111.., r IQ - 32-3113 1 i ...)13-Ele 11111 ‘6.--1 ::; 12477 '..:"... ' - Ufa.. . C 1 ' 0 ' .. ' ---1 -L' ' -- c . ' - ' - ... —1-. • ... -„-,i -1 ir.---,- • ,_, . _.,..... ,.,., . p i7,- B ,i f 4--, t ,_. Rural Reserves ' � ''` Farmti_vt. < C 1 i W it li t 1444: Nf ,r �I " -.1 • - I c2 ''.4' ' t p TH s• --- r/e--/ - V.,€ At4Pi - '' A il kill ........, •■'.., , r - °, ,k l i i +w 1 ` f - -* &* 'N Allitiolval -*.:.i,r ..!.;,.1.0.7.--**; - - Ai . ' 4*(.,..k.g, , ,' . - 0 .,..r. wT ..!, . ".S .r�'!" !. J .Yx " �tNK tw� a J * `t �, .iL y�til ' F � .. �. • _ �- 4R"'.f.t! % 1a�yT N! l e'a �i �7 ■ ^ .fe' /Z'f! ,� n 1_.f { . sif! .'r R� �'1 ' . + '.• � j S� �s�,lid �� -,. ' { � ti . � t f J 4 4.� . ar o 0 ., r cif a n C t " VIP( i s--,..... i :: r \x ,. .., s 1 . i ` a H� -r lky��" _. . k rA •`` ' .... w ` � a .T � y,,, '��rrL (` I J l iv .. ,, t ,,,,,,,,t,,, , ,,,,,:„; ( 6,,,,„_-, C , i f l t 1 / 't�`y . ! • f � A �i - } _ J. 1 y IC �J i /1 = • O * j l�f • r- t ... >t� . J ' - " 5k .ZS�. ~� !' t t� :�' . h ( Al i _„_....../'-'7,,,,,,, 1 OW : " i ; i "a` ; n t. • y' ,\- ic k rti 1 t " .�` ' � � mss' fir ' , znl " I IF ' r# i , L y ," ? .�` ( , . * to \ 1 " ¢¢- g+ k ir t } ' r ' 1 �`�f j ' r '' ' " 1 ' • • V A ° 1 .. ,, , j , ..- f "... xy % ' ,.- it � n . 0 �' + . 4 `1t rs kt . . . gr , a� . 1' / / +li /,... JI: f 1111 7 - ti F,1 3 `. / t a IP �r P. �,r� , 1. R .�.�... 21 "3 I... j G � 8.1 .9 .. -- . / et-- ' " v i I.�I A° .1 � # / I # S 1l� y _ a -- 1 .1--f ■ C 1 '''' VIL , . :., ' , _; Rural Reserves Forest.4 r d I sue: et‘41r1CPIPP NO O +: r . +of -,. - joilitti i fita ti i , hiL • ' Alig 7 r` t ,, - ," `` _ . b 4 ; , r h r\,..,..( ' 4 -4 Z 4 4 1 , ." i _,,, ,7.,,, c , ,, , ‘4,..,..4. ,, 4 , 1 1.: ' ..- ; ,Y�ri . ., = way w r ms!µ �,w�ti ... _ � I I I � .. . _ .1r � ` �134uy;,, ..,,,,,,, ...„,,,, , _ .... C .rte`°' 4 L dp M ,p,,ike ,r .. et " ` 'Awl ur h 9 .. 4"#r; � 'l - f . ° ' ' ri �'. q, sr- `w7 ; ,, X14 a 'pF1 ` t � "• y t r '7 s ..- I # a, r + I „, rimu ' 'w� te � `� W;r P Fllll � i jW� • . .. III '/. ! I w w. .r � - I x -. g_-_,at,wor;,..qviat l imot_-min ........ *iv:4 44 _ 3 f oi - x.- `T ..,...„,..,..,„ WI '... - aVa...:.- wpriftitlittiar,L ._ , , F.1-47,1*-,,,N .:4,2,,,..., ,..4.. ... , , ,.. ,. ,...- „ .. _ _ -, ., _ - i ih ...,,,,..., ....7 , . _ .........,...,, i ..ie_, , , ..r.: flr "y a l I. r : rnrl F�`afi s •� hv , ■ Ill . iliz.ti N ----01 --iow :::IL ii . ,, _ , 'Fb __.„ 4 Ito , „-, J f ✓ ~ 1 drAilizt I f ti�i_ ' ` mop : Jl A „ .. , _, ., ` �, cit., .. _ ,. , - , „...,_. ,. , -,,_.. ..~‘-j-rj ''. ---- m ,,T • - 1-2 1: 1 . Ali April ',2CC. cbvcii(s3:. ••reeer..eaViesvRR.rre•c D f +, -� Iee .,,.ilitor,.,,. - ( � 1 + r a '' Sire ,� ' � ` =, atural Featujfs I . '... 46‘4,,,t;.i: . .. iLllir 4, Nob. • +. y;, acq,,, m ' L. , ma - . ..,... / , . �^ , ,...„... , .. 7011, , . L .... bi. . / . ... _ , ijei li ''' .... ., , _ ... .„. _3 la "'Jill- b „,,,„ 1 . 1 .----.0 . .-,i l _ ....-., --- -. f ! r - i , ate s` ,t e ' A' � `r 1 �1ti e � . i` 1 i S `+1 L Rc hPy,, ' 1 � ; rt,4 �4 - RL , ilk f� . , -..• + � ' * • a "'� 'yMy y ; . 1 � 7�, ; K � ' ; T � lfYti r' � ' T� .0 + ., im L 5' .r l�tr � ^ r . . f , X11 � 1I_; } 'l „,,.. ti f ; l t y xyr i� '" - i � il s� 'il icr i • bti " fir :3 44 43 k r-, i9.,..P.: .1:-. . - .,. - , . iit -stipt g . .i2. ..,......,E, 41 _ V tv .- ,:„..,..... t 4jt iJ4L �� p 1' I \ I 1 _ •••t• r 9 _ : ' r " i_ fi g nii 4 4 Y .•�.•.w�.- " "Y ' = ^• ,..,.,,,'••,_,.,. �.} �� RF :» p. ' A d , ' ' , ' IP it, '"k11 1111111110 ' A ' ' 1 l itil : , V 3 ,.) ;.,....„..,„:„...,_....,,,, _....„,„...,.„,,.„.,...„... ai ,„„....,.. . i 'Z. Pmfnvilista _,J.,71 , ,„,_ . - ._ . - . ,_ L........4A4 , ,-1 - oak ,, fill,.., _4LIE., , Al ;0. . z . , ►ib iJ s'a ` 4 ."" • l 1 /re AGENDA ITEM # j FOR AGENDA OF April 28,2009 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE /AGENDA TITLE Authorize City Manager to sign Dedication Deed and Easement Documents for Burnham Business & Storage, LLC Acquisition, including expenditures for the acquisition. PREPARED BY: Kim McMillan DEPT HEAD OK Km CITY MGR OK CA �) Cu.) ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall City Council authorize the City Manager to sign Dedication Deed, Public Utility Easement and Temporary Construction Easement, thereby approving the acquisition expenditure. STAFF RECOMMENDATION That City Council authorize the City Manager to sign the documents for the Burnham Business & Storage, LLC acquisition, thereby approving the expenditure. INFORMATION SUMMARY As part of the Burnham Street Improvement project additional right -of -way and easements are required. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not applicable. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Acquisition Map FISCAL NOTES This acquisition exceeds City Manager's $75,000 authorization limit, thereby requiring City Council approval. Prior to consideration of this item, City Council will disclose the property purchase price at the City Council meeting after it meets in an Executive Session. Y , ALE NO. TAX LOT 2S- 1 -02AD- 02200 / 4;$ ;\< 4- Vs \* . AP \ vx , \ Ns■ I A tV e k# z e . , ‘t\t#\ /,„ '5 . VA. V% 04 , '‘S , l \ i ii\i , \\S\ - N - 2S- 1 -02AD -02200 :; " A \ BURNHAM BUSINESS & STORAGE LLC 40 I Ask ‘‘\\t# . low 1 SCALE: 1"=40' I l � \,. 4; . PARCEL 1 PARCEL 3 ��4 STREET DEDICATION vim , W C ONSTRUWITE TEMPORARY EAS EMENT / �� AREA = 2,475 S.F. ± 11 CONSTRUCTION p AREA = 1,650 S.F. ± I t — PARCEL 2 g - „t ,'I PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT . AREA = 198 S.F. ± ACQUISITION MAP ......� PARCEL 3 BURNHAM STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT i ■"1"111 PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT ■� EE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON �`�� AREA = 150 S.F. DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 2008 ® a °� Plc • 1 SHEET 1 OF 1 Ems,_ Y ,, , Dedication Deed Page 3 of 3