Loading...
CCDA Minutes - 05/06/2008 Agenda Item No. j . . C- Meeting of ,tri C/ m City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting - Minutes TIGARD CITY COUNCIL LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD(LCRB) CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY(CCDA) MEETING DATE/TIME: May 6, 2008/6:30 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 1. SPECIAL MEETING 1.1 Mayor Dirksen called the meeting to order at 6:31:58 PM 1.2 Roll Cell: Name Present Absent Mayor Dirksen ✓ Councilor Buchner ✓ Councilor Sherwood ✓ Councilor Wilson ✓ Councilor Woodniff ✓ 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications &Liaison Reports: None 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items: None 6:3__2:51 PM 2. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORKSHOP DISCUSSION - GOAL 2: LAND USE PLANNING Associate Planner Wyss presented the staff report. Highlights include: • A City Council public hearing on this Comprehensive Plan section will be conducted on June 3, 2008. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard E 13125 SWI-Ij Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 24 I-\.1Dtfvi\C-ithy\COvl\2008\080506 final.doc i = • The process to develop the draft language was reviewed. Members of the community were invited and encouraged to participate. • The Planning Commission hosted the meetings during the discussions on how to draft the language since the Coni nission has an important role in developing and implementing the Gty's land use program. • The Planning Commission public hearing was held on April 7, 2008. The proposed language in Attachment 1 to the staff report is recommended to the City Council. • Elements of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment were reviewed. • Staff believes the language recommended by the Plani ng Comnnssion provides a sound legislative foundation upon which to implement, update or expand the City's land use program. • The City's land use program plays an integral role in the communitys quality of He and the health,safety, and welfare of its residents. Assistant Community Development Director Bunch emphasized that the intent of this chapter is to provide a sound legislative foundation for the City's land use program This Comprehensive Plan section is intended to establish the basis by which the City changes and amends important parts of its land use program such as the Comprehensive PIan maps, the text, and the Comprehensive Plan itself. This chapter is important; we don't have a tool like this in the current Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Dirksen reviewed the purpose of the Comprehensive Plan for members of the audience and advised that the Plan is like a blueprint for the City and how we intend the City to look The Plan establishes the basic policies and goals within each chapter. The section under review tonight is land use planning. The City determined that the Comprehensive Plan needed to be reviewed in a general way rather than being modified as needed. For the last two years the chapters of the Plan have been reviewed and now the language is being drafted for the different chapters. As the City Council looks at this draft of the document, this process provides an opportunity to ask questions of staff, make possible suggestions for changes in wording, and also give citizens an opportunity to make comments on the draft plan. Council Questions: Councilor Buehner noted that on Page 2-3, there is a reference to the anticipated growth of a million people in the area. She said she recalled this was anticipated to occur within a 25- ycar period (by 2030) and not 40 years as designated in the proposed language. She asked staff to check on this information. Councilor Wilson remembered that it was very difficult to make a zone change under the old code. He asked if under Policy 15, A G (Page 2-6) if these are replacing the old criteria? Associate Planner Wyss confirmed that the intent was to replace the old locational criteria TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES — MAY 6, 2008 Cit}'of Tigard 1 13125 5W Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 503-639-4171 1 wvRw.tigard-ongov ( Page 2 of 2¢ 1:\t\D-kl\C.nlry\CC2vl\2008\080706 finil.doc contained at the back of the old Comprehensive Plan language. Councilor Wilson said that this was good as it is more flexible. Councilor Woodruff noted it was encouraging that no one spoke against the proposed wording at the Planning Commission hearing and that the Planning Commission approved it unanimously. Mayor Dirksen commended the staff and citizen Policy Interest Teams who looked at this section with a new perspective. He said he was pleased with the collaboration and coordination that went into putting this draft together. Mayor Dirksen, and Councilors Sherwood and Buehner noted they appreciated the huge effort it took to complete the draft as presented. There was no public comment. Mayor Dirksen noted there will be a hearing on June 3, 2008, providing another opportunity for public comment. 6:43:53 PM 3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WORKSHOP DISCUSSION — URBAN FOREST (SUBSECTION OF GOAL 2) Associate Planner Floyd presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in City Recorder's office. Also available during the presentation of this item was Assistant Community Development Director Bunch and Associate Planner/Arborist Prager. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a sound IegisIative basis in the Comprehensive Plan for future tree regulations and programs and is a subsection of the land use chapter. This chapter fulfills Task 1 of Council Resolution No. 07-30 that directs the Tree Board and Planning Commission with the development of a Comprehensive Plan pertaining to tree stewardship and the contribution of trees to Tigard's quality of life. Associate PIanner Floyd reported he received a communication from Councilor Woodruff asking for clarification of a few points. His response was distributed to the City Council in a May 6, 2008, memorandum, a copy of which is on file in the City Recorder's office. Staff has been made aware that several Councilors feel that they are faced with two competing recommendations: one from the Tree Board and one from the Planning Comnussion. Associate Planner Floyd clarified that there are no competing recommendations. There are members of the public who feel that the final product of what emerged from the Planning Commission is not the will or the desire of the Tree Board; however, Associate Planner Floyd emphasized that the Tree Board and the Planning TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 3 of 24 I:\ADM\Cathy\CCM\?Oos\080506(inal.doc i =. Commission have worked closely over the past year and one-half. Associate Planner FIoyd presented history of the work that went into this chapter: • The Tree Board held more than 25 meetings in the last year and a half on this matter, beginning in early 2007. Meetings were consensus based. • Members of the public attended including citizens and the Homebuilders. They were invited to sit at the table. Concepts and language were talked about and deliberated upon. The Tree Board made the extra effort to accommodate a broad diversity of viewpoints. For those members of the public who did not attend, the Tree Board tried to include the results of the 2006 and 2007 public attitude surveys. These surveys indicated that the people of Tigard feel strongly about the protection of trees. • Once the language was becoming more finalized, the Tree Board held two workshops with the Planning Commission. The fust one was in October 2007. The Tree Board and Planning Commission had a conversation; the Planning Commission gave feedback to the Tree Board. The Tree Board worked on the draft for a few months and tried to respond to the Planning Commission's views. In March 2008, the Tree Board and Planning Commission met again. Following that workshop, there were two public hearings on the matter. The latest hearing was April 21, 2008, which was quite lengthy and considerable public comment was taken. Associate Planner Floyd advised there were members from the Tree Board present who could speak as to what occurred at the hearing as well as Planning Commissioner Walsh who will be present. The changes made to the document after the above process, are contained in Attachment 2 in the City Council packet for tonight. The changes are not lengthy and revolve around three primary issues: 1. Regulation of trees both during development activity and outside development activity. 2. Mitigation. 3. Understory vegetation. In terms of regulating tree removal during development vs. non-development activity, the Tree Board recommended language that specified both: regulating tree removal during construction and also regulating tree removal during normal occupancy as people use their land as they see fit. There was a lot of concern as to how far the City really wanted to go at this point in time without a much lengthier process of public inquiry and conversation. The language was changed to be non-specific. It doesn't specify one or the other; it just speaks to minimizing tree removal. This leaves Council with a much broader range of actions in the future. It doesn't prohibit or require the Council to go beyond development-related tree removal. In terms of mitigation, a couple of changes are in the document: The Homebuilders are very concerned about the existing mitigation structure. The Planning Commission tried to accommodate their viewpoints by including language to consider the financial impacts of mitigation. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 Shy/Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 tvww.tigard-or.gov I Page 4 of 24 I:\ADM\G-ithy\CCM\2008\080506 finatdoc i Associate Planner Floyd advised that in tern-is of uunderstory vegetation, the Planning Conunission chose to remove that entirely from the document. This does not prohibit the City from protecting plants adjacent to the trees that are important for their health, but it doesn't specify them because the document should not try to micro-manage. The above changes are documented in Attachment 2. Associate Planner Floyd advised the final language presented to the Council in Attachment 1, establishes Tigard as a strong steward of trees and urban forest, but also leaves considerable room to the Council as to how it might implement in terms of homer far- and how intense. This flexibility is reflected in the following: 1. Minimization of impacts and tree removal; not an outright prohibition. 2. Flexible, incentive-based standards; the City has to "give a little bit" to ask property owners to save trees on their property and to allow them to do so. 3. Define the mitigation broadly. The definition speaks to things beyond fee-based mitigation, Including conservation easements, land banks, replanting of new trees to replace old ones. Allows the City to remove beyond a caliper-inch fee, which is the current structure. 4. Ensuring the speedy removal of hazard trees. This was included because of the desire to assure that if there is a tree out there that threatens persons or property that it is removed quickly and promptly. Councilor Buelnner advised she was very interested in the hazardous tree issue. She raised the issue when she was on the Planning Commission but not in the context of new development, but in the context of existing development. The City now has no way to address hazardous trees. Counncilor Buelnner said she does not see language that would support allowing Code to be developed to address specifically requiring removal of hazardous trees on private property in existing subdivisions. She referred to her own neighborhood where there are six trees that she thinks are hazardous; three other trees have fallen on her house. 6a": ')PAI Associate Planner Floyd referred to Policy 2.3.4,which states: The City shall address public safety concerns by ensuring ways to prevent and resolve verified tree-related hazards in a timely manner. Associate Planner Floyd advised he thinks the language is broad enough to allow us to establish the programs to do that. Mayor Dirl�sen commented that this, as a policy document, Policy 2.3.4 indicates there would be encouragement to include Code language that would allow for hazardous situations to be addressed. Councilor Bueliner said she wanted to make sure that existing development is also addressed. Most of the Comprehensive Plan language is focused on TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY b, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 5 of 24 I:\ADkl\G-ttfn-\CC7v[\2008\080-06 finaldoc new development. She said she understands this is a big concern, but there needs to be methods to deal with problems irn existing areas. There was discussion on whether this could be addressed in the Code language. Councilor Bueluler noted when she looked into the Code language she was told that this should be included in the Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Dirksen added that when the Council first started discussing revisions to this Chapter in the Comprehensive PIan, the point was made that some of our tree protection code is in the Development Code and other parts are in the Municipal Code and there was a need to place these in one place to make sure there are no contradictions. He thinks the proposed language represents the effort to do this and the Code modifications would address Councilor Buehner's concern. Councilor Wilson said he thinks the proposed language expresses the City's values without being too extreme one way or another, it is balanced and well written. Mayor Dirksen referred to Goal 2.2,Policy 10,which reads: The City shall require, as appropriate, the use of trees and other vegetation as buffering and screening between incompatible uses. Mayor Dirksen asked if there was a particular reason why"as appropriate" was inserted into the sentence. He said he thought it would read better if this section read as follows: The City shall require the appropriate use of trees and other vegetation as buffering and screening between incompatible uses. Associate Planner Floyd advised this change could be made as Mayor Dirksen suggested. Mayor Dirksen noted that under Goal 2.3,Policy 2, it reads: In prescribing the mitigation of the impacts of development,the City shall give priority to the protection of existing trees and shall consider the financial impact of mitigation. Mayor Dirksen suggested the language was awkward and recommended the following wording: In prescribing the mitigation of theimpacts of development, the City shall give priority to the protection of existing trees taking into consideration the relative financial impacts of mitigation alternatives. Mayor Dirksen advised that after reading the Planning Commission minutes, he believes the goal of this section is to give a developer an option to mitigate using financial impacts as a justification or an acceptable criteria if mitigation alternatives are relativelyequal. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 E www.tigat-d-or.gov I Page G of 24 I:\ADM\Cltkty\CC1vl\'008\080506 final.doc Associate Planner Floyd agreed that the language proposed by Mayor Dirksen would be consistent with the intent. Mayor Dirksen then referred to Action Measure i, under 2.3,which reads: Develop and implement regulations, standards, and incentives to encourage developers to transfer density, seek variances and adjustments necessary to preserve trees and natural open space in a manner that exceeds the requirements of the Development Code. Mayor Dirksen questioned whether there could be a requirement to exceed the Development Code requirements. Associate Planner Floyd responded that the above language was intended to be linked to incentives; however, he said staff would review to propose wording for clarification. Mayor Dirksen suggested replacing the word "exceeds" with the word"optimizes." As now written, the developer might think the City was asking hirn/her to exceed the law. Associate Planner Floyd said the intent of the language is to enable to exceed the requirements if they want rather than abide by a strict application of development requirements. The intent is to push the Code to be more flexible while still protecting the health, safety, and welfare. Assistant Community Development Director Bunch said that referring to the Development Code in this section is confusing. He suggested the last line read: ... optimizes tree preservation or protection. Mayor Dirksen agreed this would be a better way to phrase. 7:02:26 I'M Councilor Wilson questioned the following wording: Develop and maintain as part of the Citys GIS and permit system a publicly accessible inventory of tree plantings, permitted removals, and the state of the City's urban forest. Councilor Wilson asked if the above language was suggesting that as each development comes forward,we put the landscape plan on the GIS system. Associate Planner Floyd said yes, and this would also be beneficial because people might have trees that were planted at the time of development, which are obligated to remain as mitigation trees. This would enable people to better understand the landscape requirements. Councilor Wilson said he thought tlris was an interesting idea, but wondered if some people might have an issue with this, particularly in residential areas. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-ongov I Page 7 of 24 I:\ADM\Citi.\CCivf\2008\080>06 Fisiaf.dac Councilor Buehner noted this addresses a concern she raised a couple of years ago with the Tree Board regarding invasive species. We are getting more directives from the State regarding invasive species. She said it appears the focus of the language is on new development and not providing vehicles for the City to address the issue iia the contest of existing development where there are problems with invasive species proliferating. She strongly supports the language, but she would like to make sure there is flexibility to add Code language to require property owners to address w=hat the State has asked to be addressed; i.e., invasive species. Councilor Buehner referred to the staff report,Attachment 2, and the discussion of invasive species (Page 5) and said this was very nice language, but she wanted to mare sure this was tied in appropriately so there is flexibility between the Development Code and the Municipal Code. Associate Planner Floyd advised he could bring back a better discussion of the above concerns at next week's hearing. He referred to the following polices: Goal 2.2, Policies 8 &9 Goal 2.3, Policy 7 The above three policies directly or indirectly speaks to the concerns of invasive species. In addition, there are four action measures. Councilor Buehner said she wanted to make sure there was no confusion created between the two types of Codes. Mayor Dirksen referenced a list of approved trees. Councilor Wilson raised a concern that he would not want this to be to "heavy handed." He said he thinks it would be fine to encourage things, but not to mandate them. Councilor Wilson said he was also concerned about the definition of invasive species. He said he downloaded a definition from the National Invasive Species Council; there is grey area. It is not just the fact that a particular plant self-seeds but it also produces harm to the environment, people or econorrucs. Councilor Wilson said that people are sometimes too quick to blacklist certain plants supply because they self-seed. He submitted the definition to staff for their use and to make sure as the City considers this section,that "we don't get too heavy handed." Councilor Buehner said she wanted provide the discretion to address certain weeds that will take over and as we clean up our new open spaces, they are often covered with these and it takes years to get them out. Mayor Dirksen agreed there is a difference between plants that are invasive to the point where they are truly harmful to the environment and others that are considered invasive only because they are not native. Councilor Buehner added there are two different standards according to the State. Mayor Dirksen said that he would support a language to say"discourage" rather than "prohibit" since it gives the City flexibility to challenge any usage but allows that there may be justification. Councilor Wilson referred to Action Measure vii On Page 2-16 and noted he agreed with the justification that infers we don't want to waste water, but said why would the City care if an owner wants a high-maintenance plant? Why should that be a public value? We ought to give people the freedom of choice. Councilor Buehner countered that the City does not TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 WWv.Ligard-or.gov I Page s of 24 1:\ADM\Cat11y\CCM\2008\080506 final.doc currently really have a Code vehicle to address the issue when a neighbor allows invasive plants to encroach on another's property. Councilor Wilson said he works with Development Codes from a variety of communities and gave the example of a Code that mandates native only species and at the same requires an evergreen hedge in a parking lot for screening. There is no "native evergreen hedge." Councilor Buehner clarified that this was not what she's was advocating. Councilor-Wilson reiterated he was saying that this should not be too heavy handed; let's allow the professionals to do their job. Mayor Dirksen asked if Action Measure vi.i on Page 2-16 would apply to development as well as vegetation planted by the City on City-owned properties. Associate Planner Floyd said this was correct. Mayor Dirksen said then for that reason, it would be appropriate to include the wording "low maintenance." He went on to say the language also provides to "encourage and promote" low maintenance, then this would mean that if a developer proposes a high-maintenance plant staff could point this out and thereby encourage a low- maintenance owmaintenance choice. Mayor Dirksen called for public comment. 1 :_ r\1 Planning Commissioner(Vice President)/Tree Board Liaison Walsh advised he has been an active participant in the development of the goals,policies and action measures under the review of the City Council tonight. His comments included the following: • In 2005, the Tree Board brought recommendations to the Planning Commission to make changes to the existing Development Code in the landscaping and tree removal sections. At that time the Planning Commission told the Tree Board the timing wasn't right and asked for the Tree Board to hold these recommendations because of the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update process. This was a difficult time period and some members on the Tree Board resigned because of the Planning Commission's decision to hold off on the Board's recommendation. With the help of staff, the Tree Board took on the task to proceed with development of goals,policies, and action measures. The City Council in May 2007 adopted a resolution which gave the Tree Board anew charge. The Board has "run with it." They met monthly and then more frequently to take on the task of developing the material before the City Council. • A lot of work has been put into the proposed language as they have held meetings as a Board, with Policy Interest Teams,the public, and representatives from the Homebuilders Association (development community). The Board has also received written input, which has been built into the draft language. • The Tree Board came back to the Planning Commission several times to review the product as it was under development. The Planning Commission gave additional feedback and took further input. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES — MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW 1-Edl Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigarci-or.gov I Page 9 of 24 [:\ADtv]\Gnitc\Cal\-'008\080?06 final. uc • A public hearing was conducted on April 7, which was continued to April 21 for a lengthy hearing. This issue has had the most passion, input and discussion of all the Comprehensive Plan sections. • This section has not been treated lightly. The Tree Board and Planning Commission have tried to give the City Council a platform by beeping the pacluge at a high level and leave discretion for further Code development with discretion and direction from the City Council. • The overall goals were: o To enlarge, improve, and sustain a diverse urban forest and maximize the economic, ecological, and social benefits of trees. o To balance the diverse and changing needs of the City through well-designed urban development that minimizes the loss of existing trees to create a living legacy for future generations. • Major points considered by the Planning &nunission/Tree Board as they reviewed the goals included: o Discussion of what was meant by a diverse urban forest, which led into the urban forestry management plan,which is one of the policies. o Attention was paid to citizen surveys, which made it clear that having trees around is important to the citizens of Tigard while achieving a balance. Tigard is mostly built-out. Given density regulations and the difficulty of fitting a home into an infill lot with trees, is a difficult task. The Homebuilders have attested to this difficulty and the balance/compromise bythe Tree Board and Planning Commission was to address this difficulty. He noted the word "flexibility' is throughout in some of the few tools that the Planning Commission has. o It was important to the Planning Commission members to create a living legacy of trees for the future. Yes,we would like to preserve what is here, but also as we plant and plant sensibly,that we want to have ones that we will be proud of in the future. 7 1'):T)PM • Other areas of concern during discussion by the Planning Commission included: o Development of the urban forest master plan— Initially that was "buried into an action measure and rightly so, it was raised tip to a policy." The City Council in its May 2007 resolution was asking for a tree stewardship and urban forest enhancement program. This has now become the urban forest master plan. o Mitigation was a significant issue. The representative from the development community spoke largely of mitigation. The development community was concerned that the packet they received did not address mitigation costs and protocol. Some of their legitimate concerns were really not subjects for the Tree Board; they were subjects for the Planning Commission. When they came to the Planning Commission, some of it was too detailed for this level of discussion for Comprehensive Plan changes. But,what the Planning Commission did build in language in Policy 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 and added Policy 23.2 to address the fauness of mitigation. The comments the Planning Commission heard was that Tigard's TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY b, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-1171 1 wazv.6gard-or.gov I Page 10 of 24 I:\ADM\C1thv\CC2vl\2008\080306 fin[.doc mitigation fee structure is too expensive and unfair. The Planning Commission could not address this issue at this level, but it is certainly a subject for another day and the Planning Coininission feels it should be reviewed. The Planning Commission listened to the Homebuilders and built in several places through the language that we will bind ourselves to address it in the future. o Understory and associated vegetation — referring to the language in the resolution adopted by the City Council last May, the Planning Commission found this was difficult to define. Their focus was on trees. o Regulation of tree removal after development— The Tree Board recommended policylanguage that all tree removal during development and subsequent occupancy minimizes impacts on tree cover. That language was in the draft that came to the Planning Commission. The Plannuag Commission majority was not in favor of this; the majority was not in favor of extending tree removal regulation to non-development, private land. Therefore, the language was changed as presented tonight: "The City shall develop and implement standards and procedures designed to minimize reduction of existing tree cover." It was clear that the Planning Commission did not want to see this in the Development Code, but acknowledged the City Council could address this in the Tigard Municipal Code as the language is very flexible. o Protection of existing trees during development — Several policies were recommended to require action to strengthen the protection of existing trees during development. There was a lot of discussion by the Tree Board to extend this to the tree root system;language to address this was attempted to be worked in. o Flexibility in site design — The policy included encouragement in site design through all aspects of development review to preserve existing trees and assure new trees will thrive. The Planned Development Code is the only tool now available and it is not strong enough to allow flexibility and this would be worthy of future discussion. • In summary, the packet before the City Council is the product of a year and a half of work by the Tree Board. They should be commended for their work. This is a high- level goal and policy document; it specifically does not get into too many details. There were many nights where they got far into the detail and then they tried to raise it back up. It provides a platform for the City Council to act in the future. The details willbe worked out in the Code Development process and that will be a public process and involve a lot of public input. The packet received by the City Council tonight has received a lot of public input. It has been revised many times to incorporate that input. It has had extensive Planning Commission input and modification. The Planning Commission passed the packet unanimously;it meets the charge that the City Council gave to the Tree Board in May 2007. The revisions by the Planning Commission are supported by the Tree Board. Conu-nissioner Walsh recommends that you pass this packet with any modifications the City Council might make although he would prefer the City Cou nca would accept it as presented. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SAX!FL11l Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 Rww.tigard-or.gov I Page 11 of 24 1:\ADtvl\Catliv\CCvl\2008\080506 final.Juc • Councilor Bulehner congratulated the Tree Board,Planning Commission, and staff for their work. She noted she had been involved in the early stages of this project and she believes the proposal represents a compromise that will work to be of benefit to the entire system. -.14 ,.,11.. • Councilor Sherwood commented that one of the things about trees in our community is that people are very passionate about the topic. She noted that several vocal people have come to the City Council at Fifth Tuesday meetings. Her comment was that to get through all of this, we need to compromise. She said she was glad to see the proposal and that it represents a comproinise between the Tree Board and the Planning Commission. u I'M • Councilor Woodruff commented that there has been some public perception that the Planning Conurrission and Tree Board reconunendations are at odds. Commissioner Walsh advised that this perception was brought to his attention just today. He said he has not sensed this, but was hoping that the Tree Board Chair Janet Gillis would speak to this. He said he thought they had worked out a healthy compromise. There were two workshops and two lengthy hearings with a lot of"back and forth" between the two groups. It is his belief that there is some common ground. • Councilor Woodruff referred to the historical photographs on display i Town Hall which illustrates there are many more trees now in Tigard than we used to have. Most people have the perception that we have less trees and this is not the case. 7:20:30 Ptil • Councilor Wilson refereed to the quote,"the devil is in the details and the details are yet to come" and noted that he looked forward to the next phase when we actually write the Development Code and hopes that a good compromise can be worked out then as well. • Tree Board Chair Gillis addressed the City Council. She advised that this was definitely compromise document from the start and spoke of the numerous opinions offered throughout,working with the Planning Commission and direction from the Cary Council. A lot of energy has gone into the document. It is intended to be a"broad document" as it outlines goals,policies and action measures. She agreed with Coutncilor Wilson's observation that the "devil will be in the details." She noted it was good to have had input from the community,Planning Commission,and the members of City Council to know what is important to each representative organization so it is known which details there will be issues for support and development. She noted her appreciation of staff's assistance TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES — MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 i 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1?of 24 I:\ADNI\Gitlit\CC1.,I\2008\080-,06 final.doc throughout the process. She said the Tree Board is aware that mitigation is a"huge issue" and said she feels it should not be addressed as a goal or policy. This will need to be addressed iri the Code. '•3'r0 Pit Chair Gillis noted that preservation of trees was a direction given to the Tree Board by the City Council and it was also listed as important by citizens from survey results. She said she thinl�s this is a sound document incorporating the cominents of many and it is a good document from wluch to work to get to the details. :33:t2P-M Chair- Gillis reported on the process as it was worked through by the Tree Board and Planning Commission. At the April 7 joint rneeting there were changes suggested,the Tree Board reviewed those changes and determined the changes they agreed with and those that they didn't. They returned to the Planning Commission with their recommendations and reached a good compromise on the entire document. The Planning Commission focused on the issues that came up and were able to resolve. 7:37:26 P%4 Mayer Dirksen commented that when you have two groups such as the Planning Commission and the Tree Board that if both groups had agreed on everything, then you'd have to ask whether we needed both of then He said he thinks some of that dichotomy was done on purpose so that we would get different points of view to be discussed and for a compromise to be reached. 7:35:59 I'M Councilor Woodruff said he was relieved to hear that the compromise that was reached was acceptable to both the Tree Board and Planning Commission. Chair Gillis confirmed that this was the case. 7:36:42 I'M Councilor Wilson added that the fact that there were conflicts is a testament to the fact that there are real world conflicts outside of these two groups that need to be resolved. We have development that has to happen and trees that should be preserved — that is a real conflict and by working it out in the groups, then it is hoped that the result will be something that is effective. 7:37:]4 PINI Mayor Dirksen noted that no one had signed up to speak on the sign-in sheet for this agenda item He asked if there was anyone present who did not sign up, but would like to make comment on the proposed language for the Comprehensive Plan regarding the urban forest. 7:37:')5 11%] TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY G, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW 1-tall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 13 of 24 1:\ADM\G,Ehy\CCM\2008\080506 final.doc • Alan DeHarpport, 5740 SW Arrow Wood Lane, Portland, OR 97225 advised he was representing the I-iomebtulders this evening. I Ie said there have been issues they raised duruig the Tree Board meetings, working with Associate Planner Floyd, and with the Planning Continission during the work sessions/public hearings. Mr. Delan-pport distributed a letter dated May 6, 2008 to the City Council; a copy of this letter is on file in the City Recorder's office. He said there were several key issues with regard to the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. These issues can be summed tip in four areas: 1. Property values 2. Tree mitigation costs 3. Builder/developer engagement during the public process 4. Application of the Comprehensive Plan amendment on the upcoming tree code revisions. , 8:13 PSI Property values are currently decreased significantly under the application of the tree code. The high cost of mitigation creates a loss to the property owners that the Homebuilders purchase the property from because they have to offset the cost of the tree mitigation to decrease the value of their property. Mr. DeHarpport said they feel the builder/developer stakeholders have not been properly engaged in the process since the Tree Board was placed in charge of the policy development. He said he and others have had a chance to offer comments to the Planning Commission and Tree Board, but it would have been far better to form an advisory group that included diversity and placed builders and developers on equal footing with the members of the Tree Board as opposed to just being ancillary. 7:39:17 PM HBA believes that passing the current language included in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment increases the potential for the puritive aspects of tree mitigation in the existing Tree Code for City. He said they recognize that this is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and that the details and the mitigation fees will be specifically addressed at a later date. However, they also find that it is imperative that the Comprehensive Plan amendment addresses these concerns in writing. They do not feel that the current document adequately addresses these issues. -:39: 3 PM Mr.Mr.DeHarpport read portions of his letter that was distributed to the City Council. Mr. DeHarpport distributed two examples labeled Parcels A and B to illustrate his points regarding the extra costs to develop parcels with and without trees. To nitigate the property that has trees would cost $700,000 and this amount would come off the top of the property value. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES — MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 14 of 24 I:\ADN,I\Glth�,\CQ�,1\2008\08050b fin-.11JOc i After reading the text of his letter, Mr. Delar-pport said there is a concern by the Homebuilders that there is a vocal minority of people who attend Planning Commission and City Council hearings, who do not represent the overall population of the City, and he said he hoped the City Council would strongly consider the HBA recommendations. Cotuncilor Sherwood asked if Mr. DeHarpport had made these requests of the Planning Corrimission. Mr. DeHarpport said they started with Associate Planner Floyd last year making these recommendations which were transmitted to the Tree Board and these were also brought up to the Planning Commission at the work session and the hearing. In response to a question from Councilor Sherwood, Mr. DeHarpport advised that none of these recommendations were adopted by the Planning Commission, Councilor Buehner said she was interested to hear Mr. DeHupport's comments regarding involvement of his industry. She said she was a real estate attorney who represents developers. She said she personally contacted at least 10 members of the development community in this area attempting to get them involved in this process early on. She said she was tunable to get anyone but one developer to even consider sitting on a committee and being involved in this process. She said it concerns her now upon hearing Mr. DeHarpport say there should have been a special committee when the developers are not willing to be part of the process from the beginning. While she said she did not speak to Mr. DeHarpport personally, she said she thinks he needs to understand that there was outreach to the community. She said she does not like the mitigation system set up the way it is now and would like to see it changed. We need to have the maximum amount of flexibility in the Code. She reiterated she was concerned about "coming in at the 11"' hour and disparaging the process because the development community chose not to be involved." She added that she thought Mr. DeHarpport needed to know that there was outreach. She said she was "sorry they didn't get involved early on and we might have had less upset now." 1 :1-.-I Mr. DeHarpport responded to Councilor Buehner that there has been some level of involvement; however, since he was not a Tigard citizen, he could not serve on the Tree Board. He agreed there is some culpability on behalf of the developer community for not finding an individual(s) to sit on the Tree Board and agreed with Councilor Buehner on that. He said it was also frustrating from their perspective to go through process, send e- mails,provide the langtuage and then be largely ignored. He said that"we are the ones who actually implement the Tree Code. We go to the property owners and explain to them, `I'm sorry Mr. and Mrs.Jones your property is worth... (for example) $700,00 less because the City of Tigard is going mandate that we pay mitigation fees. That's also very frustrating." 7:s:1,PN1 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 Cityof Tigard 13125 SW I-TA Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 w w.tigard-or.gov I Page 15 of 24 I:\ADM\Caihv\CCivl\2008\OSOi06 finaLdoc Councilor-Buehner said she understands Mr•. DeHaipport's frustration but the mitigation is a Code issue, it is not in the Comprehensive Plan. W1hat we have included in the Comprehensive Plan recornmendation is that we need to look at nnitigation. We all know there's a problem that needs to be addressed, but you do not address mitigation in the Comprehensive Plan because die Comprehensive Plan looks at the big picture. She said she is concerned about the overall ability to develop. She said she worked on the PD committee and a tremendous amount of attention was placed on trying to make it available on development. She said, "I really need to push back just a little bit and give you some perspective that you haven't been ignored; there's been a lot of attention paid to that perspective over the last few years." :,;9:;h I'M Mr•. DeI-iarppor•t said that he would appreciate it if the City Council wourld take a chance to at least consider what they have to offer for the final language since that is what will be voted on in the future. 7:5`):55 I'\I Councilor Wilson said he was actually relieved that there is a lot "in it" that you don't like because last Tuesday night we heard from a well-known tree activist that our committees completely caved in to your demands. It appears that neither party is satisfied. 8:0,0:1_'P.%I Mr. DeHarpport acknowledged that they understand this is the whole point of compromise. However, they feel the language certainly doesn't address that properties should be allowed to develop. There is no comment on it whatsoever. 8:00: 1 PkI Mayor Dirksen noted that at one point this process (early on), we had a lot of turnover on the Tree Board and we put out the call for new members. He said he was hoping people would apply so that there could be broad base of representation on the Tree Board. This didn't happen. Toward the end, when making the decisions about who to place on the Tree Board, it was known the Tree Board representatives wouldn't necessarily present a "balanced" view. With regard to maintaining a balanced view, Mayor Di•ksen said, "That's our job and to some extent, the PIanning Commission's job. In fact in this case, I think the Planning Commission really did the heavy lifting in taking that perspective - and that was a perspective that we wanted to hear on this. It didn't necessarily mean it was going to be the last word, but it was the word we wanted to hear. But, then it would be the job of the City as whole to take that perspective and balance it against other things to come up with what we need to come up with. I think at the level specificity that we are tallying about in the document, particularly, your concerns about mitigation, I see that in this document come up again and again - this issue of mitigation. It's enough so I know it's brought it up to a higher level of interest on my own part. Councilor Wilson has said that he believes that for the most part our existing tree codes. And, the proof is that if you look at developments that have been done recently, they look pretty balanced...But I am concerned our tree mitigation process and I don't think TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES — MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 wwv.tigard-or.gov J Page 16 of 24 I:\ADiv1\Githy\CCM\7008\080506 final.dox that it works as well as it should. The proof of that to me is that it is very expensive to developers and we still don't get the outcome that we want, so it doesn't work on either end. As we look at Code coining Out of this document, that's something that we need to address and find a new vay to do that. I thunk the Council members, in general, agree that needs to be addressed and see if we can come up with a better way to deal with the idea of tree mitigation, so that it isn't overly onerous to developers or property owners. But, at the same time achieves the goal that we all want." Mr. DeHarpport referred to the PD Type 3 process. They don't allow those development standards to be implemented in a Type 2 process - this would make a huge difference. He concluded by saying their concerns have been in large part, not necessarily ignored, but dismissed. Councilor Bueliner said that Mr. DeHarpport should encourage business owners and developers to get involved. "We want them on the Planning Commission; we want them on the Tree Board. And, it is really, really hard to get business owners to take the time." Mr. DeHarpport said, "I couldn't agree more. You're right, it's a frustrating0... on our end, too... " 9:04:21 r'-%-1 Mr. Bill McMonagle testified. He said he is a property owner and a Tigard businessman. Iris business address is 8740 SW Scoffins Street,Tigard, OR He spoke to the question of propriety of the existing tree code and what modifications might come about from it. It seemed to him that what is happening is that "we" are creating a class of people who own property with trees and penalizing them. He said he thinks this is illegal, if not unconstitutional. He reviewed how one property owner with treeless property would get full value for his property while the person who has treed property would be penalized because of excessive costs of mitigation. From the way the goals and policies are written,it appears that that trees "would trump density." He added that with regard to the impacts to the property owner with trees, the word "onerous" doesn't quite cover it. He said it seems to him that the City ought to inventory all of the balance of the developable property, which isn't all that much within the urban growth boundary right now, and send out notifications and ask the question, "Would you mind if we penalize your property so that can save some of your trees...during the development process." He said emotions run very high when people start getting concerned about what government is going to do to their land, whether it be a private lot and cutting down a tree in the back yard or whether it be a piece of land that might still have development potential. Mr. McMonagle said he read the study and referred to some of the statements, i.e., " A great percentage of the Tigard residents strongly agree with the preservation of trees." When you read the statistics (Pages 2, 16, 17, 18, and 23) and look at the charts,you will see what is in the statement and what are on those pages,is vastly different. He said it seems to TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES — MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SNV Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 17 of 24 r:\AD[vf\Cth),\CCrvl\2008\080506(inal.dnc i him the study covered rnany subjects but that a study specific to trees ought to be questioned. 5.09:Ii I'M Mr. McMonagle said that it seems to him that with the topography, the density requirements, and the infrastructure requirements that the best way to get trees back on the property is to require, for certani zones, that certain numbers of trees be planted by each builder who builds a home. The street trees are planted by the developer or the builder. That way, "you'd get your tree canopy back, if there was a tree canopy there in the fust place. The City could then come with a It of species of trees that they would encourage people to plant rather than go through this heavy-handed mandated`big brother thing."' Councilor Wilson said he is a landscape architect and he also works in the development community. He at times prepares tree preservation and landscape plans. As an example, he said they built a baseball field at Sherwood High School where there had been an orchard. Fortunately, Sherwood's Code exempts fruit and nut-bearing trees from their mitigation requirements, but had they not done that, it would have been prohibitive. He noted there were other trees on the site. If development is going to happen, it needs to be rational and reasonable and we need to balance these competing objectives of development, which we do intend to go forward and to the degree possible,retain valuable trees. These are difficult things to reconcile and this will be done in the next round. He said he hoped that Mi-. McMonagle would continue to be involved. 8:12: PV Mr. McMonagle said he thinks "it's relatively simple. You cut them down, you plant something. You've got to cut them down to do the things that we have to do today." He again referred to the property owner who has the trees as opposed the one who does not have any and how regulations affect the property values. 8:14"00 PM Mayor Dirksen said he thought of the concerns would be addressed at the "code writing level." Motion by Councilor Woodruff,seconded by Councilor Sherwood,to adjourn the business meeting The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. Mayor Dirksen Yes Councilor Buchner Yes Councilor Wilson Yes Councilor Sherwood Yes Councilor Woodruff Yes TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SAY/1-Tall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 ww-w.tigard-or.gov I Page lS of 24 1:\ADM\Cn1iv\CQv[\2008\080506[inal.doc Mayor Dr-ksen announced the Council would meet in Study Session and the public was welcome to attend. 4. STUDY SESSION DISCUSSION TOPICS: Trach 1 mid 2 • Barrows Road at Summer Creek City Engineer Duenas presented information on Washington County's plans to close Barrows Road at Summer Creek, just south of Scholls Ferry Road this year because of the deteriorating condition of the bridge. A May 1, 2008, memorandum from City Engineer Duenas to the City Council and City Manager Prosser was reviewed; a copy of this memorandum is on file in the City Recorder's office. Discussion by City Council included the following: • The closure will affect access to some properties. • The closure announcement was sudden. ■ Need to review options. ■ New development is occurring or is scheduled to occur in the area, which will greatlyincrease traffic volumes. ■ Developers are trying to sell units in this area. ■ Impact in change in traffic patterns and the need for financial help from the County and Beaverton to address these impacts at the intersection. ■ The new roundabout at the end of Barrows is making it difficult for traffic to exit;it isn't working. A meeting with Beaverton staff on this issue will occur on Thursday. • Ethics Law Changes City Manager Prosser reviewed some of the activity around the state as local elected officials react and have issues to the recently enacted ethics law changes. The new Ethics regulations were discussed by the City Council and the consensus of the Council was to consider a resolution and prepare a letter to the Ethics Commission outlining concerns and offering suggestions for reconsideration or amending the reporting rules. Issues identified during the discussion included the impacts on volunteerism in communities; impacts to family members; this is not just a small town issue, it's an issue for cities of every size; and the requirement to report quarterly. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 563-639-4171 1 wmv.tigard-or.gov I Page i9 of 24 L\ADM\C1t[ty\CC2vl\2008\080506 If nal.doc Council agreed that if others who are required to file the Statement of Economic Interest would life to sign the letter, then they would be welcomed to do so. Track 4 Urbanization Forum City Manager Prosser reviewed the set up of the Washington County urbanization forum, the representation and how the fust meeting was conducted. Of the Each table was given time for discussion to define the issues. Urbanization issues were discussed including the following points: ■ Is there a different solution for existing unincorporated areas than for future expansion of the urban growth boundary. Hillsboro's Mayor Hughes had tinged that no additional urban areas be allowed outside of cities. ■ Giving people a sense of place; this is more of an issue in some areas than in others. ■ A complete community concept. ■ Deal with issues of vehicle miles traveled to get to services; inability in some areas for people to walk— no walking paths or parks and no way to fund. ■ Areas such as Aloha, Metzger, Bull Mountain the West Slope — what happens to these areas when the County's income starts to decline as these areas continue to urbanize and the needs outpace the income to even provide basic services. ■ Timing — There are short-term and Iong-term issues. There is a reluctance of the people in the County to accept annexation or become a part of a city; this would have to be overcome over time. ■ Mayor Dirksen noted representatives are advocating Bull Mountain's updated comprehensive planning in their area, but the question seems to be who should pay for it. Metro declined to pay for it and then the County was asked if it would do this planning as part of the comprehensive planning for Areas 63 and 64. ■ City Manager Prosser said he observed that the forum appears to be set up and functioning as a city vs. unincorporated area discussion. One of the frustrations is that the city residents are county residents and the County Commissioners should also represent these interests. City residents pay County taxes. When the County pays for the tunincorporated areas for services, then money is being taken out of cities and expended in the unincorporated area. ■ City Manager Prosser referred to a tax study done by the County about three years ago, which the City thought was going to review subsidy issues. The County narrowed this to where they only looked at direct County services. They did not look at services cities provide that unincorporated areas rely on. This needs to be revisited with regard to a review of the whole scope. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES -- MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97123 1 503-639-4171 1 www,tlgard-or.gov I Page 20 of 24 1:\ADM\C.ithv\CCVI\2008\080506 final.doc ■ Assistant Community Development Director Burtch reported that Metro Councilor Kathryn Harrington commented that a neutral party needs to look at the issues of cross-subsidization to attempt to get to a common basis of understanding about the numbers. ■ There is a political reality-where there are 187,000 people in the unincorporated area with 300,000 cotulty residents ul cities. ■ Mayor Dirksen submitted a letter to the forum facilitator about his opinions of the issues; this did not get discussed. Mayor Dirksen said he had been under the impression that everyone had seen the letter, apparently, many had not yet seen it when the forum took place. ■ Councilor Buehner referred to an urban reserve meeting that took place on May 5. Washington County Commissioner Strader commented that her constituency preferred to live on larger lots, using the Garden Home area as the example. ■ City Manager Prosser commented that Sherwood Mayor Mays and Tualatin Councilor Barhyte noted their concerns about density. Commissioner Strader's response was that the Garden Home area did not want the density. The impression was that Commissioner Straeder's position is that density is a city issue. ■ This is about all County residents; it's about the future of the entire County, it's not about urban vs. tmincorporated urban, vs. rural. It's about equity, the future of the area in terns of strategies,and implementing 2040 vision. ■ Councilor Wilson said he wondered if we were asking the County to do something that they cannot do. The people inside of cities have governments to represent them. He said we could spend a lot of energy on this. Perhaps we need to go to the State legislature for help. We need to decide what we want to do and whether we have a reasonable chance of accomplishing it or get on with our business. We have other things to do and this is a potential major distraction. ■ Assistant Community Development Director- Bunch advised that this is a problem that the County cannot address by themselves. The best thing that could come out of this is to admit there is a problem and then to seek help. It has taken 50 years to arrive at this problem and it will take a strategic 50-year plan to get out of it. We have to start. ■ Mayor Dirksen said he appreciated Councilor Wilson's comments. He does not want the City or the City Council to get mired down in this and be distracted by it. As issues arise, we need to address them to keep things from getting worse. Mayor Dirksen said he was willing to take on more of this role. "We've got other things to do— that need to be done within our City." ■ In Multnomah County, there are only 17,000 people in unincorporated areas compared to 190,000 in Washington County. Multnomah County decided to quit providing urban services. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Bbd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-1171 f WWW.Ligard-or.gov I Page 21 of 24 I:\ADM\Qthy\CC 1\2008\080506final.doc ■ Councilor Sherwood noted Metro President Bragdon asked when are the citizens of Tigard going "to get up in arms" to say they, have had enough of this. ■ Planning Commissioner Vermilyea said he has been talking to citizens in Tigard recently and he has been struck by people's willingness to listen when presented with issues. He said it seems that there is something that could be done at the grass roots level to start educating and asldng people to act upon that education. This unincorporated urbanization issue is one comprised of money, resources, and the problems that came up during the Bull Mountain annexation proposal. Citizens have the power to change this and they need to know how they can implement the change. He would expect there would be people who would be interested to get involved. • Councilor Sherwood commented about the way this issue is presented in the press portraying Tigard unfavorably. ■ Councilor Buehner referred to library service where City residents are paying more for the same service than those in the unincorporated area. ■ Councilor Woodruff said that he didn't thick there is anything that the City could say that would convince people. He said that "it's got to be the County either-saying they aren't going to provide the services or it's going to be cost- neutral to be in the County or City." ■ Community Development Director Coffee commented that attitudes could change if city people serve on the County Commission. Although during discussion it was pointed out there are former mayors and council people serving on the County Board of Commissioners. There is not a whole lot that the County has been doing to help cities. The City will need to look elsewhere for assistance. It behooves the City to pay attention to try to avoid creating more urbanized areas that are not in cities. ■ Councilor Wilson noted the potential of damaging relationships with County Commissioners and Metro Council. We have had assistance from them. He asked why take a chance on damaging those relationships,when we really ought to be going to other means such as the legislature or our own citizens to get them informed on the issues. It's counterproductive if we aren't specific with these officials and let them know what we want them to do. ■ Planning Commissioner Vermilyea asked if there was a legislative role in this. City Manager Prosser responded that the legislative response has been 90 percent anti-city residents. Over the last two sessions, the legislature has severely limited annexation tools. Salem is not a help right now. He suggested the need to build a coalition: Washington County, Metro, and Multnomah County. ■ Community Development Director Coffee commented on the evolution of what the urbanization summit started out to be. At first, the summit was going to be a one- or two-day session talking about how to deal with expected growth in Washington County. Now it's a forum that will last up to IS months with a TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LC" MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 503-639-4171 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 22 of 24 1:\ADNI\Cithy\CCEvl\2008\080 06 final.doc 1 full-salaried facilitator at $200,000 a year. City Manager Prosser noted the cities are paying 1/3 of tills cost. Community Development Director Coffee said the kickoff meeting is to find out what the purpose of the process is and what the objectives are. ■ Councilor Wilson suggested that Tigard needs to talk to other cities about participation. Mayor Dirksen noted other participants seerned to be hopeful about the forum. ■ City Manager Prosser reported that cities are paying 1/3 of the cost of the forum, special districts 1/3, and the County is paying 1/3. The Cat-s pro rata share is estimated to be $15,000- $20,000. Community Development Director Coffee pointed out that citizens of cities are members of special districts and also the County; therefore, city residents are paying a share of the costs being contributed from all three areas. ■ Assistant Community Development Director Bunch said the County should realize that it needs the help of cities to resolve their service problems. ■ City Manager Prosser observed that there are County services that are crucial to every resident of the County regardless of where you live: jails, health services, social services, and juvenile justice. We all need to pay for this. But, if the County creates these urban unincorporated areas, funding will be taken away from the crucial services identified above. ■ Councilor Wilson noted there are only a li nited number- of alternatives. The legislature can male it easier for cities to annex territory, the County can stop offering urban services, the County could start charging for the services, or we could withdraw from the County. But, what is the likelihood of any of those happening? ■ Mayor Dirksen commented the urbanization fonnz might be a delaying tactic to maintain the status quo. If this is the case and if something substantive doesn't come out of the forum and cities don't walk away from the forum with some kind of satisfaction, then cities might begin to take steps to resolve the subsidization issues on their own. Areas to address might include the use of libraries and parks. ■ Councilor Wilson commented that the issues between Tigard and unincorporated areas are not over because services are still being provided to them. There were comments about water services; what the plans might be for Areas 63 and 64; another incorporation effort on Bull Mountain; and potential annexation proposals. ■ There was discussion on whether or not the City should do what it can to help the Bull Mountain area to incorporate. 5. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Not held. 6. ADJOURNMENT: 9:47 p.m. TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRB MINUTES — MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 503-639-4171 1 «nvcv.tigard-or.gov I Page 23 of 24 1:\.ADlvl\Cath\CCIvI\2008\080906 final.doc Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Attest: 7 Ma§o C ty(of Tigard Date: TIGARD CITY COUNCIL/LCRS MINUTES - MAY 6, 2008 City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97723 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page N of 24 [:\ADN[\C thv\CC[vl\?008\080i06 finl.doc