The URL can be used to link to this page

09/17/2007 - Packet S TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 17, 2007 7:00 p.m. TIGARD TIGARD CIVIC CENTER— TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL 7:02 p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:10 p.m. 4. APPROVE MINUTES 7:15 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2007-00002 Tigard Comprehensive Plan Update of Statewide Planning Goal 7: Natural Hazards REQUEST: Amendments to the current Comprehensive Plan Topic 3: Natural Features and Open Space by updating the goals, policies and recommended action measures to reflect current community conditions and values. The complete text of the proposed Amendment can be viewed on the City's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code_ amendments. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: All City zones. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3 & 7; Metro Functional Plan Tide 3 and 13; and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 7, 9 and 11. 8:15 p.m. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 8:25 p.m. 7. ADJOURNMENT • • CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes September 17, 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, Fishel, Hasman,Muldoon, and Vermilyea Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Walsh Staff Present: Ron Bunch,Long Range Planning Manager;Marissa Daniels,Assistant Planner; Jerree Lewis,Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Caffall reported that the CAC met with ODOT. Their final report is ready and they will go to City Council in October. Ron Bunch advised that the meeting with Council will be November 20th. Council will be asked to direct staff to amend the Transportation System Plan. This will allow the City to be in line for grants and other kinds of assistance to implement the Hwy. 99W Plan. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Muldoon seconded by Commissioner Caffall to approve the August 6, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion was approved as follows: AYES: Anderson, Caffall,Doherty, Fishel, Hasman, Inman,Muldoon,Vermilyea NAYS: None ABSTENTIONS: None EXCUSED: Walsh Motion by Commissioner Muldoon seconded by Commissioner Hasman to approve the August 20, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion was approved as follows: AYES: Anderson, Caffall,Doherty, Fishel,Hasman,Inman,Muldoon,Vermilyea NAYS: None ABSTENTIONS: None PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 17,2007—Page 1 • S EXCUSED: Walsh 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2007-00002 Tigard Comprehensive Plan Update of Statewide Planning Goal 7: Natural Hazards REQUEST: Amendments to the current Comprehensive Plan Topic 3: Natural Features and Open Space by updating the goals, policies and recommended action measures to reflect current community conditions and values. The complete text of the proposed Amendment can be viewed on the City's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code_amendments. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: All City zones. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3 & 7; Metro Functional Plan Tide 3 and 13; and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 7, 9 and 11. STAFF REPORT Assistant Planner Marissa Daniels presented the staff report on behalf of the City. She reported that Hazards (Goal 7) is the second Comprehensive Plan Amendment to update the current Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission held a workshop on August 20th to discuss the draft goals, policies, and recommended action measures that were formulated based on the input from the policy interest and department review teams. At the workshop, the Planning Commission requested subheadings be added to the introductory text. The following subheadings have been added to the text: Earthquake, Wildfire, Landslides, Flooding, and Other Hazards. The Planning Commission also recommended that "native plant species" be replaced with "non-invasive species" throughout the Comprehensive Plan. Goal 7.1 Policy #13 has been updated to reflect this change: 1. The City shall retain and restore existing vegetation with native plant non-invasive species in areas with landslide potential to the greatest extent possible. Planning Commissioners recommended adding an action measure under Goal 7.1 to research and implement standards to prevent inappropriate land uses in high hazard areas. This action measure reads as follows: i. Research and implement standards to ensure only appropriate land uses are allowed in high hazard areas. Daniels advised that suggestions received from DOGAMI and CWS have been incorporated. In addition to changes in the text, Daniels forwarded 2 suggestions to the Policy Interest Team for the Public Safety Section (undergrounding of utilities and emergency notification of severe weather conditions and consequences). PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 17,2007—Page 2 • • Daniels advised that she received comments from resident John Frewing. His comments and staff responses are shown in Exhibit A. Daniels stated that staff finds the proposed changes comply with the applicable criteria and recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to the City Council. Staff was asked if there are any areas that are at risk, but outside of the 100-year floodplain at this time. Are there high-risk areas on another stream bed? Staff answered no. If it were determined later that there were areas that needed to be added, the City could go through the FEMA process for updating. PUBLIC TESTIMONY John Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard 97223 testified that he would like to add substance to the words regarding hazards. His comment is the same comment that CWS provided to the City. He feels there isn't enough guidance for City staff or citizens as to what is meant by these various terms. Frewing said he was told by staff that vague terms are intended to trigger engineering site studies. It's his experience that such studies are either not done or are done with no standards at all. Perhaps we should detail what an engineering site study should be. With regard to his second comment (Exhibit A), he believes the words "promote non- structural approaches when appropriate" are words that say nothing. Tigard should be more clear on what they want to do about non-structural approaches. We could say we "prefer" non-structural approaches to avoiding hazards of floods, etc. With regard to the 100-year floodplain, Frewing testified that 80% of Tigard's perennial streams are not covered by the Corps of Engineers FEMA study that defines the 100-year floodplain level. He gave Ash Creek and Pinebrook Creek as examples. Staff advised that the City has undertaken an analysis of flood hazard areas. The Tigard Resource Report shows Ash Creek, Fanno Creek, Summer Creek, Red Rock Creek, and the Tualatin River Basin in the floodplain. In order to apply FEMA regulations, flood areas have to be on the FEMA maps. Map revisions have to be part of a FEMA-approved process in order to be regulated. The City participates in the National Flood Insurance Program. In order to participate in the program, we have to comply with all FEMA standards. The City has undertaken a drainage master plan that looks at water flows. We've also worked with the Army Corps of Engineers to update the maps. The most recent maps were updated in 2005. The City can ask FEMA to undertake additional studies or to undertake site-specific problems of areas of localized flooding. President Inman noted that it's a very PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 17,2007—Page 3 • • extensive, expensive process to update FEMA maps. Also,if any of the floodplain maps touch your property, you're required to have additional flood insurance or you have to have an engineer certify that you are outside of the floodplain. When it comes to a property that's not FEMA-mapped, but does have a drainageway through it and is in the process of developing, there are many code standards that CWS addresses to look at the impact of the development. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Staff confirmed that FEMA is the bare minimum that the City has to do in terms of regulating floodplain. The 100-year floodplain is the basis for the flood insurance program. The Natural Hazards section in the Comp Plan is where we acknowledge that we will comply with FEMA requirements. Statewide Planning Goal #7 obligates the City to comply with FEMA flood regulations. Commissioner Vermilyea believes it's redundant to put a policy in the Comp Plan when we're already obligated by State law to do it. Ron Bunch said it's important in terms of overall applicability to the Federal Flood Insurance Program. It's an affirmation that we will comply with the law. President Inman disagreed. She believes in goal setting, but she's not sure this is something that needs a higher goal set. Is there a fundamental need to set a higher standard? Commissioner Muldoon noted that, typically, state & federal regulations are looking for demonstration of due diligence and intent to comply. Its absence poses a negative for the City. When we talk about redundancy,we're talking about eliminating evidence of willingness to comply. Ron Bunch advised that there is some leeway as to what extent jurisdictions have to comply with FEMA regulations. Some communities allow much more development in the floodplain than is possible in Tigard or other Metro communities. Tigard has adopted a strict standard in which there is 0' rise allowed in the floodway. Commissioner Muldoon asked about action measures for pre-positioning any kind of floodflow devices (e.g., sandbags or barriers). Staff said that sort of thing would be more appropriate in a hazard mitigation plan. Mitigation plans contain tactics to address this kind of thing. To keep the language from being confusing and vague in both Policy 7.1.1(Natural Hazards) and Policy 3.1.1 (Natural Features and Open Space), the following change was suggested for both policies: "The City shall not allow development in areas having the following development limitations except where • • : •• - - : : - : : : - - - the developer demonstrates that generally accepted engineering techniques related to a specific site plan will make the area suitable for the proposed development:..." PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 17,2007—Page 4 • • Discussion was held about the use of non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation. Staff said this could mean: • don't develop in floodplains, there is a 0' rise • less density on steep slopes;roads could be graded along the contours only in those areas that don't require extensive structural modification • in areas subject to wildfires, defensible space type techniques could be used • earthquakes would require a structural approach Staff advised that with Policy #7.1.2, the onus would be on the City to utilize non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation. Some of the action measures would have to be incorporated into the Development Code. Currently, the Development Code is very structurally oriented. After further discussion,it was decided to change the language for Policy 7.1.2 to read: "The City shall pretete favor the use of non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation when ally Motion by Commissioner Doherty seconded by Commissioner Muldoon for a recommendation of approval by City Council of the staff report for CPA 2007-00002 with the following changes: • • Under Policy #1,it would read, "The City shall not allow development in areas having the following development limitations except where the developer demonstrates that generally accepted engineering techniques related to a specific site plan will make the area suitable for the proposed development." The rest (A, B ,C, D) would be the same. • Policy #2 would read, "The City shall favor the use of non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation." • Policy 3.1.1 would read, "The City shall not allow development in areas having the following development limitations except where the developer demonstrates that generally accepted engineering techniques related to a specific site plan will make the area suitable for the proposed development." • The motion was approved as follows: AYES: Anderson, Doherty,Fishel,Hasman, Inman,Muldoon NAYS: Vermilyea ABSTENTIONS: Caffall EXCUSED: Walsh 6. OTHER BUSINESS None 7. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 17,2007—Page 5 • , The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. and then reopened to allow for clarification of the vote. Commissioner Vermilyea stated that he voted against the motion, not because of the amended language with respect to 7.1,but rather with the fact that we are putting in our Plan statements that we will comply with existing law that we already have obligations to comply with. There are 2 separate incidents in this proposal. He thinks it's bad policy to do that P P P P Y because it clogs up the statute and makes it unclear. He also believes we didn't do enough to address the issue of the 100-year floodplain. It should have been addressed in more detail. Commissioner Caffall advised that he abstained from voting on the motion primarily because of the 100-year floodplain issue and that we did not address the secondary stream issues. He's also a little confused on where the overall language is going to end up. The meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m. Jerree 's,Planning Co 'ssion Secretary ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—September 17,2007—Page 6 Marissa Daniels -Comments for Hazards eon, Tigard Comp.Plan Page 1 From: "John Frewing" <�frew mg @teleport.com> To: "Marissa Daniels" <Marissa @tigard-or.gov> Date: 9/17/2007 3:10:21 PM Subject: Comments for Hazards Section, Tigard Comp Plan Marissa, Below are John Frewing comments on your draft Hazards section of the new Tigard Comp Plan. The gist of these comments is that we in Tigard can do better than proposed in your policies to prevent and manage hazards. Please give to the Planning Commission at the start of this evening's hearing. 1 In at least several instances, the avoidance of definitions or the use of very narrow definitions reduce the effectiveness of policies. For example, reference to 'established and proven engineering techniques' and reference to 'severe soil erosion', 'subject to slumping, earthslides or movement', 'slopes in excess of 25%' and 'severe weak foundation soils' in draft Policy 1 of Goal 1 do not state a clear policy. The record of developing this policy give no guidance to staff or citizens on the degree of protection which the city intends. In other discussion, findings and policies, (ie for other issues), reference is made to codes or texts which define important terms, but not for Policy 1. For example, the measurement of slopes in excess of 25% is a much debated item and exists with great precision in CWS materials. For example, should one measure from one edge of the property to another and see if 25% is exceeded? Should one use 2-foot, 10-foot or 50-foot segments to measure slope? Where should one start to measure slope? I urge the Planning Commission to direct staff to provide definitions of the operative terms in the policies proposed before Planning Commission approval. 2 The wording of Policy 2 of Goal 1 is 'weak kneed' at best. Tigard should do more than 'promote' non- structural approaches to avoiding hazards, whatever'promote' might mean. Tigard should identify, regulate and enforce the use of non-structural approaches. The use of the'when appropriate' term basically says nothing, giving no guidance to staff as to appropriate conditions for use of non-structural measures. This'when appropriate' term also allows dangerous developers to argue that a given situation is not 'appropriate'. I urge the Planning Commission to direct staff to make Policy 2 meaningful. 3 Policies 7, 8 and 9 of Goal 1 refer to a 100-year flood, a very important concept in avoiding hazards in any community. However, as used in these policies, it refers only to the locations defined as being subject to a 100-year flood in documents issued by FEMA. The 100-year flood exists on every stretch of every stream, whereas FEMA only maps the 100-year flood on Fanno Creek and the very lowest portions of tributaries. Tigard should eliminate hazards associated with floods by applying its setbacks, floodproofing and development limits to all portions of all streams and their associated 100-year flood levels and flows. I urge the Planning Commission to direct staff to clarify that reference to 100-year floods and streamflows apply to all portions of all streams. 4 Policy 2 of Goal 2 should be strengthened. Certainly communication among agencies is a mandatory function of city government regarding things like pest infestations and communicable diseases. However, Tigard citizens deserve more than that. Other cities have workable regulations regarding standing water (west nile virus, mosquito breeding) and bird-transmitted diseases. I urge the Planning Commission to direct staff to research and draft policies that will ensure later staff development of regulations to manage such hazards. Marissa Daniels -Comments for Hazareection Ti a—rd Com Plan Page.2 Thank you, John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard, OR 97223 • . . • Staff Response to Comments submitted by John Frewing on September 17, 2007: I. Suggested definitions: The degree of protection a. `established and proven engineering techniques' b. `severe soil erosion' c. `subject to slumping, earthslides, or movement' d. `slopes in excess of 25%' e. `severe weak foundation soils' Staff Response: Staff recommends against writing specific definitions for these terms. Policy 1 reads almost identically to Policy 3.1.1 of the current Comprehensive Plan. Presently, definitions of these terms are not included in the Comprehensive Plan as the degree of protection is determined by an engineer's site-specific analysis. The bottom line is that established and proven engineering techniques can change over time, and the other definitions are best left to an engineering geologist. General definitions may be appropriate for a future code update, but are best left out of the Comprehensive Plan. . 2. Policy 2 of Goal 7.1: Suggested policy language Identify, regulate, and enforce the use of non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation. Staff Response: This policy was amended to reflect the comments of the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). While non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation are appropriate for protection against landslides and flooding, structural approaches to earthquake mitigation are more appropriate. For wildfire, both structural (i.e. roof composition) and non-structural (i.e. the creation and maintenance of defensible space) are important. Thus, this policy has been revised to read, "The City shall promote the use of non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation when appropriate." 3. Policies 7, 8, and 9: The definition of the 100-year floodplain Staff Response: Staff recommends against revising the definition of the 100-year floodplain to include all streams and areas that might be within their respective 100-year floodplains. It is the intent of this suggestion that Tigard should eliminate all hazards associated with floods. This is not possible. This suggestion was also brought up at the first Policy Interest Team meeting(PIT). Other members of the PIT discussed that the City could spend its entire budget on hazards mitigation and still be vulnerable to the unimaginable. FEMA and The Army Corps of Engineers are really the experts in this field. Furthermore, FEMA standards allow for study and designation of additional flood areas if done according to approved criteria and certified by the Corps. This would result in a map change, not a definition change. • • 4. Policy 2 of goal 7.2: Research and draft policies to manage hazards such as pest infestations and communicable diseases. Staff Response: Again, this section of the Comprehensive Plan goes above and beyond Statewide Planning Goal 7. The number of possibilities for inclusion in this section is limitless. This policy is intended to be specifically about communication. The mitigation plan is a more appropriate place to include hazard specific risk assessments and mitigation action items. Staff recommends against revising this policy to include all possible scenarios. • • Tigard Planning Commission - Roll Call Hearing Date: Q" 7--v 7 Starting Time: `7 =OZ) (rvrn COMMISSIONERS: ✓ Jodie Inman (President) t7 Tom Anderson Rex Caffall Margaret Doherty ✓ Karen Fishel Smart Hasman Matthew Muldoon y Jeremy Vermilyea David Walsh STAFF PRESENT: Dick Bewersdorff Tom Coffee Gary Pagenstecher enstecher ✓ Ron Bunch Cheryl Caines John Floyd Emily Eng Duane Roberts Kim McMillan Sean Farrelly Gus Duenas Darren Wyss Phil Nachbar . • , COMMUNITY NEWSPAPERS CITY OF TIGARD 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland,OR 97222•PO OREGON Box 22109• Portland, OR 97269 Phone:503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 TIGARD Email: legals @commnewspapers.com PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission on Monday September 17. 2007 at 7:00 PM at the State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS Tigard Civic Center - Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon. I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on depose and say that I am the Accounting this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure Manager of The Times(serving Tigard, adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060.E. The Planning general circulation, published at Beaverton, in Commission's review is for the purpose of making a recommen- the aforesaid county and state, as defined by dation to the City Council on the request. The Council will then ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that hold a public hearing on the request prior to making a decision. City of Tigard Further information may be obtained from the City of Tigard CPA of Tigard Planning Division (Staff contact: Marissa Daniels) at 13125 SW CPA Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 97223 or by calling 503-639-4171. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT(CPA)2007-00002 a copy of which is hereto annexed, was Tigard Comprehensive Plan Update of Statewide Planning Goal published in the entire issue of said • 7:Natural Hazards newspaper for • REQUEST: Amendments.to the current Comprehensive Plan 1 Topic 3: Natural Features and Open Space by updating the goals, weeks in the following issues policies and recommended action measures to reflect current com- munity conditions and values. The complete text of the proposed Amendment can be viewed on the City's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code amendments. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: All City zones. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development �� // Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390,; Comprehensive Plan Policies L 1, 2, 3 & 7; Metro Functional Plan Title 3'and 13; and Statewide Charlotte Allsop(Accounting Ma ager) Planning Goals 1,2, 7,9 and 11. Publish 8/30/2007 TT11019 August 30, 2007 6,Oa(NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OR OFFICIAL SEAL � i�OBlH A.BURGESS My commission expires NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON � ' COMMISSION NO.390701 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 16,2009 Acct#10093001 Doreen Laughlin City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Size:2 x 5.5 Amount Due$91.85 'Remit to address above • 0 r � r Tigard Planning Commission n Agenda Item #5 1 Page / of Date of Hearing q -/7-v 7 Case Number(s) CP/4i c'7 - 00001 Case Name (/ 3 /ito(Se Al%7uvut / / 'L4,-cs Location - tvF-c)e_ If you would like to speak on this item, please PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (for the proposal): n1 Opponent (against the proposal): Name jQ s 't '> Name: Address:1\ <5' Sri c--10 i_Ews'Tg- Address: City, State, Zip: f hARD? Oa_ 972.7-� City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: _ City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: S • Agenda Item: Hearing Date: September 17,2007 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 's FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES,AND RECOMMENDED ACTION MEASURES PERTAINING TO STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7: NATURAL HAZARDS FILE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA) CPA 2007-00002 PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the current Comprehensive Plan Topic 3: Natural Features and Open Space by updating the Goals, Policies, and Recommended Action Measures to reflect current community conditions and values. APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: N/A 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: Citywide ZONING DESIGNATION: All City zoning districts COMP PLAN: All City comprehensive plan designations APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390;Comprehensive Plan Topics 1, 2,and 3;Metro Functional Plan Title 3 and 13;and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 7,9, and 11. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission finds this request to meet the necessary approval criteria.Therefore,staff recommends APPROVAL to the Tigard City Council to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to revise Section 3.1 and 3.2 of Topic 3 as determined through the public hearing process. STAFF REPORT TO TI-IF PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 1 OF 14 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History The Tigard Comprehensive Plan is the primary document that guides land use decisions within the community. It outlines goals, policies, and recommended action measures that are intended to reflect the community's values and aspirations for a broad range of matters relating to land use planning and growth management. It also aims to organize and coordinate the relationships between people, land, resources, and facilities to meet the current and future needs of Tigard. The Tigard Comprehensive Plan is required by State law and must conform to 12 of the 19 Oregon Statewide Planning Goals. Land development and related activities, including the City's development codes, also must be consistent with adopted Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. It is now seven years beyond the year 2000 planning horizon of the City's 1983 Comprehensive Plan. Tigard has grown dramatically since 1983, from 18,379 residents, to 46,300 today. Jobs and business activity have grown just as fast. Although minor updates have taken place over the years, the 1983 Plan, in many ways, does not reflect current and projected community conditions. For this reason, it is necessary to undertake a thorough update. This is important to ensure the Plan remains a viable tool for decision-makers and citizens to use when seeking policy direction regarding land use and Tigard's future. For this reason, the Tigard City Council has made it a goal to update the Comprehensive Plan. The first step in updating the Tigard Comprehensive Plan involved City staff developing a fact base to inform the update. The result was the Tigard 2007 resource document completed in February 2007. Key findings from Tigard 2007, combined with community issues and values, form the basis for Plan goals, policies, and recommended action measures. Community issues and values were identified through the community's visioning process and a number of surveys completed over the last several years. The second step involved community volunteers and stakeholders coming together to develop draft goals, policies, and recommended action measures. These Policy Interest Teams have been meeting over the past several months to discuss Comprehensive Plan topics in which they share an interest. City Department Review Teams then review and provide comment on the work of the policy interest teams. These final draft goals, policies, and recommended action measures are then forwarded to the Planning Commission to begin the legislative process: Since each of the Policy Interest Teams are moving at their own pace, Staff will be bringing a series of Comprehensive Plan Amendments (CPA) through the legislative process over the next several months. Each CPA will correspond to a Statewide Planning Goal that is applicable to Tigard. The CPA will strike the appropriate language from the existing plan and replace the language with an updated chapter that addresses that particular Statewide Planning Goal. Hazards (Goal 7) is the second Comprehensive Plan Amendment to update the current Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission held a workshop on August 20th to discuss the draft goals, policies, and recommended action measures that were formulated based on the input from the policy interest and department review teams. At the Planning Commission workshop, the following changes were requested (also found in Exhibit A with deleted text as strikeouts and added text bold and underlined): The Planning Commission requested subheadings be added to the introductory text. The following subheadings have been added to the text: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 2 OF 14 • • Earthquake Wildfire Landslides Flooding Other Hazards The Planning Commission recommended that "native plant species" be replaced with "non-invasive species" throughout the Comprehensive Plan. Goal 7.1 policy 13 has been updated to reflect this change: 13. The City shall retain and restore existing vegetation with non-invasive species in areas with landslide potential to the greatest extent possible. Planning Commissioners recommended adding an action measure under Goal 7.1 to research and implement standards to prevent inappropriate land uses in high hazard areas. This action measure reads as follows: xi. Research and implement standards to ensure only appropriate land uses are allowed in high hazard areas. Proposal Description The primary intent of the proposed changes is to ensure the Comprehensive Plan remains a viable tool for decision-makers. By updating the Comprehensive Plan, the City will ensure it is in compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, plans, and programs. As importantly, the update will also ensure the Comprehensive Plan reflects current community conditions and values. This amendment is the second in a series of amendments that will update the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. This amendment will update Statewide Planning Goal 7 with goals, policies, and recommended action measures that will serve as the "legislative foundation" in regards to natural hazards. Land use actions and amendments to the Tigard Development Code will be based on the new language included in this amendment. Below is an explanation of the terms that create the "legislative foundation": Goal Definition -A general statement indicating a desired end or the direction the City will follow to achieve that end. Obligation -The City cannot take action which violates a goal statement unless: 1. Action is being taken which clearly supports another goal. 2. There are findings indicating the goal being supported takes precedence (in the particular case) over another. Policy Definition - A statement identifying Tigard's position and a definitive course of action. Policies are more specific than goals. They often identify the City's position in regard to implementing goals. However, they are not the only actions the City can take to accomplish goals. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 3 OF 14 • Obligation -The City must follow relevant policy statements when amending the Comprehensive Plan, or developing other plans or ordinances which affect land use. To amend the Comprehensive Plan, the City must show consistency with the Statewide Land Use Goals. Such an amendment must take place following prescribed procedures prior to taking an action that would otherwise violate a Plan policy. Recommended Action Measures Definition - A statement which outlines a specific City project or standard, which if executed, would implement goals and policies. Recommended action measures also refer to specific projects, standards, or courses of action the City desires other jurisdictions to take in regard to specific issues. These statements also define the relationship the City desires to have with other jurisdictions and agencies in implementing Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. Obligation - Completion of projects, adoption of standards, or the creation of certain relationships or agreements with other jurisdictions and agencies, will depend on a number of factors such as citizen priorities, finances, staff availability, etc. The City should periodically review and prioritize recommended action measures based on current circumstances, community needs and the City's goal and policy obligations. These statements are suggestions to future City decision- makers as ways to implement the goals and policies. The listing of recommended action measures in the plan does not obligate the City to accomplish them. Neither do recommended action measures impose obligations on applicants who request amendments or changes to the Comprehensive Plan. The list of recommended action measures is not exclusive. It may be added to or amended as conditions warrant. SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF REPORT Applicable criteria,findings and conclusions • Tigard Community Development Code o Chapter 18.380 o Chapter 18.390 • Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies o Topics 1, 2, and 3 • Applicable Metro Standards o Title 3 and 13 • Statewide Planning Goals o Goals 1, 2, 7, 9, and 11 t City department and outside agency comments SECTION V. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (TITLE 18) Chapter 18.380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments Chapter 18.380.020 Legislative Amendments to the Title and Map A. Legislative amendments. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.309.060G STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 4 OF 14 • • Findings: The proposed amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would establish policies to be applied generally throughout the City of Tigard; and therefore, the application is being processed as a Type IV procedure,Legislative Amendment, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures Chapter 18.390.020. Description of Decision-Making Procedures B.4. Type IV Procedure. Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy. 'Type IV matters are considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decisions made by the City Council. Findings: The proposed amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan will be reviewed under the Type IV procedure as detailed in Section 18.390.060.G. In accordance with this section, the amendments will initially be considered by the Planning Commission with City Council making the final decision. Chapter 18.390.060.G. Decision-making considerations. The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3. Any applicable Metro regulations; 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and 5. Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Findings: As indicated pursuant to the findings and conclusions that address applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Regional Functional Plan Titles, the amendment is consistent with this criterion. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendments satisfy the applicable review criteria within the Tigard Community Development Code and recommends the Planning Commission forward these proposed amendments to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption. CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: A review of the comprehensive plan identified the following relevant policies for the proposed amendments: Topic 1: General Policies Policy 1.1.1: The City shall ensure that: a. This comprehensive plan and all future legislative changes are consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission, the Regional Plan adopted by the Metropolitan Service District; Findings: As indicated pursuant to the findings and conclusions that address applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Regional Functional Plan Titles, the amendment is consistent with this criterion. Topic 2: Citizen Involvement Policy 2.1.1: The City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program and shall assure that citizens will be provided an opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Findings: The proposal has complied with all notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 18.390.060 of the Tigard Community Development Code. This staff report was also available seven days in • STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 5 OF 14 • • advance of the hearing pursuant to Chapter 18.390.070.E.b of the Tigard Community Development Code. Additionally, a Public Involvement Program for the Comprehensive Plan Update was developed in March 2006. This Program was reviewed and endorsed by the Committee for Citizen Involvement and the Planning Commission. The Program outlined the information, outreach methods, and involvement opportunities available to the citizens during the process. Information was distributed throughout the process via the project website, an interested parties listserv, Cityscape articles, press releases, articles in the local paper, and two project open houses. Outreach methods also included presentations to a number of civic organizations in the community, personal emails sent to groups and organizations, updates to City boards and commissions, presentations to high school students, and staff attendance at community events to pass out information. Involvement opportunities included two open houses, participation on a policy interest team, submitting written comments via the website, and attending the Planning Commission workshop. Additionally, the interested parties listsery and volunteers who signed up for the policy interest teams were provided notice of all meetings held regarding the Comprehensive Plan Update. As part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, public notice of this Planning Commission public hearing was sent to the interested parties list and published in the August 30, 2007 issue of The Times. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. Policy 2.1.2: The opportunities for citizen involvement provided by the City shall be appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and shall involve a broad cross-section of the community. Findings: As outlined above, the community was given multiple venues to get information and get involved. This included a number of articles in the Cityscape newsletter that is delivered to every household in Tigard. Staff also made a good faith effort to ensure a diversity of citizens and stakeholders were involved in the policy interest team meetings by not only soliciting volunteers, but by inviting organizations that share a common interest in that particular topic. Policy 2.1.3: The City shall ensure that information on land use planning issues is available in an understandable form for all interested citizens. Findings: Information regarding the topics included in this Comprehensive Plan Amendment was available in multiple locations in an understandable format for the duration of the process. This included paper and electronic copies that were available in the permit center and also on the website. Information was regularly sent to the project listsery and to the community volunteers who participated on the policy interest teams. Topic 3: Natural Features and Open Space Policy 3.1.1: The City shall not allow development in areas having the following development limitations except where it can be shown.that established and proven engineering techniques related to a specific site plan will make the area suitable for the proposed development. (Note: This policy dies not apply to lands designated as significant wetlands on the floodplains and wetlands map.): STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 6 OF 14 • • a. Areas meeting the definition of wetlands under chapter 18.26 of the Community Development Code; b. Areas having a severe soil erosion potential; c. Areas subject to slumping, earth slides or movement; d. Areas having slopes in excess of 25%; or e. Areas having severe weak foundation soils. Findings: Policy 3.1.1 sections (b), (c), (d), and (e) will be replaced with Policy 1 under goal 7.1 in the updated Comprehensive Plan. However, Policy 3.1.1 section (a) deals with wetlands and is therefore not applicable to Goal 7. Section (a) of Policy 3.1.1 will remain in the current Comprehensive Plan until they are updated in the Natural Resources section. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Policy 3.2.1: The City shall prohibit any land form alterations or developments in the 100-year floodplain which would result in any rise in elevation of the 100-year floodplain. Policy 3.2.2: The City shall: a. Prohibit land form alterations and development in the floodway*except alterations which preserve or enhance the function and maintenance of the zero-foot rise floodway*, and b. Allow land form alterations or development in the floodplain* outside the zero- foot rise floodway*which preserve or enhance the function of the zero-foot rise floodway*provided: 1. The land form alteration and/or development is in an area designated commercial or industrial on the Comprehensive Plan land use map, and factors set forth in policy 3.2.3 can be satisfied; or 2. The land form alteration and/or development is associated with community recreation uses, utilities, or public support facilities as defined in chapter 18.42 of the Community Development Code and the factors set forth in policy 3.2.3 can be satisfied. Policy 3.2.3: Where land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100-year floodplain* outside the zero-foot rise floodway*, the City shall require: a. The streamflow capacity of the zero-foot rise floodway*be maintained; b. Engineered drawings and/or documentation showing that there will be no detrimental upstream or downstream effects in the floodplain* area, and that the criteria set forth in the Sensitive Lands section of the code have been met (See FIS September 1981); c. A buffer, either existing or planted, on the commercial or industrial land abutting residential land which adequately screens the development from view by the adjoining residential land, and which is of sufficient width to be noise attenuation; and d. The consideration of dedication of open land area for greenway adjoining the floodplain*including portions at a suitable elevation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain* in accordance with the adopted pedestrian bicycle pathway plan. STAFF REPORT TO TFIE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 7 OF 14 • • Policy 3.2.5: The City shall require the consideration of dedication of all undeveloped land within the 100-year floodplain plus sufficient open land for greenway purposes specifically identified for recreation within the plan. *The Floodplain and Floodway, as defined by the Flood Insurance Study for the City of Tigard dated effective February 18,2005. Findings: Current Comprehensive Plan Policies 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, and 3.2.5 will be deleted and replaced in their entirety by proposed amendment Goal 7.1 and the associated policies (See Exhibit A). This update will ensure the City is in compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, plans, and programs. This update will also ensure continued compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 7 as the new goals and policies reflect current community conditions and values. The new goal and polices have been developed through a citizen involvement effort,reviewed by City staff, reviewed by affected agencies, and reviewed by the Planning Commission at an August 20, 2007 workshop. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 3: Water Quality, Flood Management, and Fish/Wildlife Habitat Conservation - protect beneficial uses and functional values of water quality and flood management resources by limiting uses in these areas from development activities and protecting life and property from dangers associated with flooding. Findings: In 2002, the City of Tigard adopted Comprehensive Plan and Code Amendments to comply with Title 3 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, which outlines water quality and flood management requirements for the region. The adopted standards were based on a unified program developed by local governments in the Tualatin Basin and implemented through the Clean Water Services District's (CWS) Design & Construction Standards, which provides for vegetated stream corridor buffers up to 200 feet wide and mandating restoration of corridors in marginal or degraded condition. In addition, Clean Water Services, local cities, Washington County, Metro, and Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District, partnered on a parallel effort to develop the CWS Healthy Streams Plan (HSP), an updated watershed plan designed to enhance the functions of the Tualatin Basin surface water system and address the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act (ESA). The proposed amendment, specifically Goal 7.1 and its associated policies (see Exhibit A), will continue to ensure compliance with Title 3 requirements and standards. The stated purpose of the Flood Management Performance standards is to reduce the risk of flooding, prevent or reduce the risk of loss of life and property, and maintain functions and values of floodplains. Goal 7.1 reflects this purpose, and Policy 11 states explicitly that the City will comply with Metro Title 3 Functional Plan requirements for balanced fill and removal in the floodplain. Also, Policies 7-12 under Goal 7.1 deal specifically with flood hazards. Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 13: Nature in Neighborhoods — conserve, protect, and restore a continuous ecologically viable streamside corridor system, from the streams' headwaters to their confluence with other streams and rivers, and with their STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 8 OF 14 • • flooplains in a manner that is integrated with upland wildlife habitat and with the surrounding urban landscape; and control and prevent water pollution for the protection of the public health and safety, and to maintain and improve water quality throughout the region. Findings: The multi-jurisdictional approach undertaken by Tualatin Basin jurisdictions was used to develop a program to meet Statewide Goal 5 requirements for inventorying riparian areas and wildlife habitat and to comply with Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 13 (the regional Nature in Neighborhoods program). The Tualatin Basin Fish and Wildlife Habitat Program was developed to complement Clean Water Services Design and Constructions Standards to protect the beneficial uses of water (including rivers, streams and creeks) within the Tualatin Basin. The proposed amendment, specifically Goal 7.1 and its associated policies (see Exhibit A), will continue to ensure compliance with Title 13 requirements and standards. Policy 11 provides direction for the City to work with Clean Water Services to protect, restore, and enhance natural drainageways and wetlands. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable Metro regulations. THE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES ADOPTED UNDER OREGON REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 197 Statewide Planning Goal 1—Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. Findings: This goal was met through an extensive public involvement process. A Public Involvement Program for the Comprehensive Plan Update was developed in March 2006. This Program was reviewed and endorsed by the Committee for Citizen Involvement and the Planning Commission. The Program outlined the information, outreach methods, and involvement opportunities available to the citizens during the process. Information was distributed throughout the process via the project website, an interested parties listserv, Cityscape articles, press releases, articles in the local paper, and two project open houses. Outreach methods also included presentations to a number of civic organizations in the community, personal emails sent to groups and organizations, updates to City boards and commissions, presentations to high school students, and staff attendance at community events to pass out information. Involvement opportunities included two open houses, participation on a policy interest team, submitting written comments via the website, and attending the Planning Commission workshop. Additionally, the interested parties listsery and volunteers who signed up for the policy interest teams were provided notice of all meetings held regarding the Comprehensive Plan Update. As part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, public notice of this Planning Commission public hearing was sent to the interested parties list and published in the August 30, 2007 issue of The Times (in accordance with Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390). Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 9 OF 14 • • • number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. Statewide Planning Goal 2—Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. Findings: The proposed amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan is being processed as a Type IV procedure, which requires any applicable statewide planning goals, federal or state statutes or regulations, Metro regulations, comprehensive plan policies, and City's implementing ordinances, be addressed as part of the decision-making process. Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing as required. All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report; therefore, the requirements of Goal 2 have been met. Statewide Planning Goal 7 —Areas Subject to Natural Hazards To protect people and property from natural hazards. Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with this goal as it provides policy direction that intends to protect both people and property from natural hazards. Current Comprehensive Plan Policies relating to Statewide Planning Goal 7 will be deleted and replaced in their entirety by proposed amendment Goal 7.1 and the associated policies and action measures (See Exhibit A). This update will ensure the City is in compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, plans, and programs. This update will also ensure continued compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 7 as the new goals and policies reflect current community conditions and values. The new goal and polices have been developed through a citizen involvement effort, reviewed by City staff, reviewed by affected agencies, and reviewed by the Planning Commission at a August 20, 2007 workshop. Statewide Planning Goal 9—Economic Development To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health,welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with this goal as it provides policy direction that intends to protect Tigard's businesses from natural hazards. Hazards protection contributes to economic vitality by protecting current employers and employees from hazards. Statewide Planning Goal 11—Public Facilities and Services To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with this goal as it provides policy direction that intends to ensure the efficient arrangement of public facilities and services. Updated policies address the provision of public facilities within areas subject to natural hazards. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Public Works Department, Engineering Division, Current Planning Division, and Police Department has had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 10 OF 14 • • The City of Tigard's Building Division had an opportunity to review this proposal and offered the following comments: Under Goal 7.1, Recommended Action Measure x.: Because the numbering of building.code sections changes from time to time, change section R324 to state the name of the section, "Wildfire Hazard Mitigation." Findings: Staff agrees with the comments and has added language "Wildfire Hazard Mitigation section" to replace "section R324" of the Oregon Residential Specialty Code. Staff recommends leaving the action measure with the updated language. Under Goal 7.1, Policy 5 add "the most current" (Building Code standards) to protect the built environment. Findings: Staff agrees with the comments and has added language "the most current" building code standards to Policy 5. Staff recommends leaving the action measure with the updated language. SECTION VII. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS The following agencies/jurisdictions had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond: City of Beaverton City of Durham City of King City City of Lake Oswego City of Portland City of Tualatin Metro Greenspaces Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development Oregon Department of Environmental Quality ODOT Region 1- District 2A Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Oregon Division of State Lands US Army Corps of Engineers Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation Tigard-Tualatin School District# 23J Beaverton School District #48 TriMet FEMA Natural Hazards Program Metro Land Use Planning & Growth Management, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, and WCCA had an opportunity to review this proposal and have no objections. Clean Water Services (see Exhibit B) had an.opportunity to review this proposal and offered the following comments: - STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 11 OF 14 • • We recommend following the provisions of the current Design and Construction Standards for all issues relating to development, vegetated corridors, erosion control, and preservation of wetlands, natural drainageways, and enhancements thereof. Findings: Specific standards are to be included in the development code. Currently the CWS Design and Construction Standards are adopted by reference in the Community Development Code. Staff does not recommend Comprehensive Plan text changes to reference specific standards. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (see Exhibit C) had an opportunity to review this proposal and offered the following comments: Earthquakes Page 1: The reference to Seismic Zone 3 is from the UBC 1997. Oregon now uses the IBC 2006 and 2007 Structural specialty Code (OSSC) which no longer has seismic zones. This needs to be updated. Findings: Staff has revised this statement to read, "To minimize loss of life and property from earthquakes, the City requires all new commercial, industrial, and multifamily structures to conform to Oregon Structural Specialty Code requirements for Zonc 3 (thc second highest—lifez-aad mac), while single-family construction must conform to the Oregon One and Two Dwelling Specialty Code for seismic category Dl. Page 3: Bullet no.1, The reference to Cascadia..."cause an 8+ magnitude earthquake". Most scientists believe this should be M9+. Findings: Staff updated this number to be consistent with the Washington County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan. Bullet no.3, I'm not quite sure what this is referring too. I think it might be the earthquake induced hazards, such as amplification, liquefaction, landsliding, etc.Just needs to be clear on what is being discussed. There is a big difference between the seismic hazard (IE ground motion hazard) and the earthquake induced hazards. Findings: Staff updated this finding to read, "According to DOGAMI's relative earthquake hazard data, fifty-eight percent of the City is subject to the greatest earthquake hazard level, with an additional 21% falling into the next hazard level. These areas include developed residential and commercial areas, as well as the Washington Square Regional Center." Bullet no.5,Again, the UBC 1997 seismic zone 3 needs to be updated to the IBC 2006 and 2007 OSSC. Findings: Staff updated this key finding to read, "the City of Tigard requires all new commercial, industrial, and multifamily structures to conform to Oregon Structural Specialty Code requirements€er Sci3mic Zonc 3,while single-family construction must conform to the Oregon One and Two Family Dwelling Specialty Code for Seismic Category D1." Policies no.2, In the case of seismic retrofitting structures (buildings, bridges, etc.), which is one of the best ways to reduce risk from earthquakes, structural approaches to hazard mitigation should be promoted along with non-structural. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 12 OF 14 • • Findings: Staff agrees with this suggestion and the policy now reads, "The City shall promote the use of non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation when appropriate." Landslides Page 2: Second paragraph, states "By mapping steep slopes...etc" This is not how we figure out where landslide prone areas are located. We need to acquire LIDAR and map the existing landslides then use geologic information combined with the LIDAR slope data to create landslide susceptibility maps. Findings: Staff deleted the following sentence: "I • - • a a . - a - _: - • : • •= - • __ == -• - devclopment in these areas the City can limit the impact of landslides on the community, and replaced it with, "The City uses steep slopes to define sensitive lands in the Community Development Code and has special requirements for development in these areas. When LIDAR information is available the City will evaluate the effectiveness of this approach to identifying landslide hazards and limiting their impact on the community." Page 3: Bullet no. 8, I'm not sure if this is correct? Findings: Bullet number 8 reads, "The most common type of landslide in Washington County is caused by erosion." The Washington County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan reads, "Slides caused by erosion are the most common type of landslide in Washington County (Page 5-2)." Staff recommends leaving this key fording in the Comprehensive Plan. Bullet no. 10,You need to figure out the landslide susceptibility through modern techniques as suggested above before estimates of percentage susceptible should be estimated. Findings: Staff agrees with this suggestion and updated the key finding to read, "It is estimated about 3% of the City's land, or 286 acres, is greater than 25% slope. about 4.3 miles of critical streets could be subject to land3lidc damage. Policies no. 2. Again, non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation should be promoted along with structural. Findings: Staff agrees with this suggestion and the policy now reads, "The City shall promote the use of non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation when appropriate." Page 4: no. 5. Once new LIDAR based landslide maps are created, the building codes and or a landslide ordinance should be updated/created and enforced. Findings: The Building Division suggested the policy be changed to read, "The City shall apply and enforce the most current building code standards to protect the built environment from natural disasters and other hazards." Staff feels this incorporates the changes suggested by DOGAMI. Some items not included,which should be added include: Public education on predisaster mitigation and post disaster recovery. Risk assessment Institutional and/or long term mitigation plans. Findings: Public Education and disaster recovery will be addressed in the Public Safety section of the Public Facilities chapter. Both the Hazards Policy Interest Team and the Department Review Team STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 13 OF 14 • • have made suggestions to be included in this section. Staff added an action measure to address risk assessment and mitigation plans. The action measure reads: xii. Complete the Tigard Natural Hazards Addendum to the Washington County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan and include risk assessments and mitigation action items. SECTION VIII. CONCLUSION The proposed changes comply with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Tigard City Council as determined through the public hearing process. ATTACHMENT: EXHIBIT A: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. EXHIBIT B: CLEAN WATER SEERVICES COMMENTS EXHIBIT C: DOGAMI COMMENTS it w %' AQ September 7, 2007 PREPA'1 BIrePv7r arissa Daniels DATE Associate Planner r • September 7, 2007 APPROVED BY: Ron':unc DATE Planning Manager STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2007-00002 STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 7:NATURAL HAZARDS PAGE 14 OF 14 • S • -DRAFT- Hazards Natural features provide a community with valuable resources but,under certain conditions, these resources may also present a hazard. For example,rivers and creeks are important for storm water conveyance,wildlife habitat, and water quality. However, these resources can quickly threaten property and people unless careful planning has documented flooding risk and adequate precautions are taken. The City's commitment to protect people and property from hazards is based on Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 7. Goal 7 lists six hazard categories to be addressed by comprehensive plans. Four of these apply to the City of Tigard: wildfire, landslides, flooding, and earthquakes. In addition, the City is also vulnerable to harm from severe weather and man-made hazards. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards "To protect people and property from natural hazards." Tigard's citizens value a safe community where natural resources are protected and there is minimal danger from both natural and man-made hazards. Tigard residents value the importance of natural systems in protecting the community from hazards, and additionally recognize that although landslides, earthquakes,wildfires and floods occur naturally, the effects of these events are often made worse by human activities. Hazards can have a significant negative impact on a community's quality of life. It is important for the Comprehensive Plan to provide policy direction on how the City will manage hazardous conditions and events. Land use planning, development regulation and emergency management play key roles in assessing and reducing the risk to people and property from hazards. It is important for local governments to have an understanding of underlying natural conditions and past event history to develop hazard mitigation and prevention programs. Earthquakes Because hazards, such as earthquake faults and floodplains, extend across jurisdictional boundaries, it is essential to coordinate planning and emergency response services regionwide and with the state and federal governments. For example, due to the scale and complexity of earthquakes,Tigard coordinates with the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). In addition to DOGAMI, Tigard coordinates with Metro, Washington County, and other jurisdictions to mitigate the risk associated with an earthquake. To minimize loss of life and property from earthquakes, the City requires all new commercial, industrial, and multifamily structures to conform to Oregon Structural Specialty Code requirements,while single-family construction must conform to the Oregon One and Two Dwelling Specialty Code for seismic category Dl. Wildfire In Tigard, wildfire is characterized by the Urban Interface Zone, or the urban-rural fringe where homes and other structures are built onto a densely forested or natural landscape. The Oregon Department of Forestry implements the Oregon Forestland-Urban Interface Fire Program,which is expected to be fully implemented by 2011,in order to protect interface communities in Oregon from wildfire. The City of Tigard works with Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue (TVF&R) to mitigate the effects of wildfire. TVF&R is responsible for all fire prevention and education,and has the opportunity to comment on all development applications. TVF&R also maps the urban interface 1 • • -DRAFT- zone in Tigard. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) controls both backyard and agricultural burning in Oregon; however,Tigard is within the DEQ permanent burn-ban area in an effort to reduce the risk of wildfire as a result of backyard burning. Landslides People and property are best protected from landslide when building structures and roads are not built within areas prone to mass movement.Although landslides are a natural geologic process, the incidence of landslides and their impacts on people can be exacerbated by human activities. Such human activities include grading for road construction and development, excavation, drainage and groundwater alterations, and changes in vegetation. The City uses steep slopes to define sensitive lands in the Community Development Code and has special requirements for development in these areas. When LIDAR information is available the City will evaluate the effectiveness of this approach to identifying landslide hazards and limiting their impact on the community. Also, by retaining vegetation and natural drainageways in these areas, the City can work to identifying landslide hazards and limiting their impact on the community. The effects of landslides are often more widespread than the physical area they inhabit, as landslides can affect utility services, transportation systems, and critical lifelines. Flooding Floods are influenced by a number of factors,including the amount and intensity of precipitation, geography and geology, and development activity. The City of Tigard cannot control precipitation or the community's soil type but can control development activity which contributes to, and is affected by, flooding. The City coordinates with several agencies to mitigate the risk of flooding. The FEMA designated floodplain is used to administer the national flood insurance program (NFIP). The floodplain serves as the FEMA flood hazard regulatory area. Within this area, development activities are regulated to minimize impacts on floodwater flows and storage areas to reduce impacts from flood events. Oregon state law regulates development within the 100-year floodplain and Tigard complies through adoption of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan,Title 3. The Sensitive Lands chapter of the Tigard Community Development Code implements Title 3 through the Clean Water Services'Design and Construction Standards. Floods can have a devastating impact on almost every aspect of the community, including private property damage, public infrastructure damage, and economic loss from business interruption. The City has been proactive in mitigating flood hazards by purchasing floodplain property. These areas, if left undisturbed, can act to store excess floodwater. The Oregon Division of State Lands (DSL), jointly with the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers;requires a permit for development within the waters of the United States. Any disturbance to a water body and its associated floodplain is covered through this process. Other Hazards Tigard is also at risk of non-natural or man-made hazards. Although statewide planning goal 7 addresses natural hazards, other hazards are included in this chapter as the community is concerned about protection from non-natural hazards as well as natural hazards. Other hazards addressed by this section may include mass casualty transportation accidents, hazardous material releases, severe storms, terrorism, epidemics, and infestation. Tigard coordinates planning for non-natural hazardous occurrences with other jurisdictions and agencies from around the state. 2 • • -DRAFT- Key Findings • The Cascadia Subduction Zone could potentially cause a 9+ magnitude earthquake, affecting Tigard. • Tigard is subject to more frequent shallow earthquakes (crustal fault earthquakes). These events typically do not exceed magnitude 4,but could go up to magnitude 7. • According to DOGAMI's relative earthquake hazard data, fifty-eight percent of the City is subject to the greatest earthquake hazard level,with an additional 21% falling into the next hazard level. These areas include developed residential and commercial areas, as well as the Washington Square Regional Center. • Wood-frame homes tend to withstand earthquakes better than unreinforced brick buildings. • The City of Tigard requires all new commercial,industrial, and multifamily structures to conform to Oregon Structural Specialty Code requirements,while single-family construction must conform to the Oregon One and Two Family Dwelling Specialty Code for Seismic Category Dl. • The increasing number of homes being built in the urban interface zone is increasing the threat of wildfire in Tigard. More than 30% of all land in Tigard is vulnerable to wildfire. • Tigard is within the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's permanent burn ban area, so backyard burning is not allowed anywhere within Tigard. • The most common type of landslide in Washington County is caused by erosion. • Landslides within Tigard have historically not caused major property damage. However in other parts of the Portland metropolitan region they have caused considerable damage. • It is estimated about 3% of the City's land, or 286 acres, is vulnerable to landslides. • Human activities such as deforestation, stream alteration, and urban development within the Tualatin basin have significantly altered the hydrology of the watershed. This has resulted in increased water runoff and greater potential for flooding. • Floods are Oregon's most frequently occurring natural disaster. • The 100-year floodplain includes six streams and 7.9% of all land area in Tigard. • As of June 2006,Tigard owns 34% of the 100-year floodplain. • Tigard residents are concerned about the effects of all other hazards on the community. Goal 7.1 Protect people and property from flood,landslide, earthquake,wildfire,and severe weather hazards. Policies 1. The City shall not allow development in areas having the following development limitations except where it can be shown that established and proven engineering techniques related to a specific site plan will make the area suitable for the proposed development: A. Areas having a severe soil erosion potential; B. Areas subject to slumping, earth slides, or movement; C. Areas having slopes in excess of 25%;or D. Areas having severe weak foundation soils. 2. The City shall promote the use of non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation when appropriate. 3 • • -DRAFT- 3. The City shall coordinate land use and public facility planning with public safety providers (law enforcement, fire safety, and emergency service providers) to ensure their capability to respond to hazard events. 4. The City shall design and construct public facilities to withstand hazardous events with a priority on hazard protection of public services and facilities that are needed to provide emergency response services. 5. The City shall apply and enforce the most current building code standards to protect the built environment from natural disasters and other hazards. 6. The City shall enforce standards requiring the creation and maintenance of defensible space around habitable structures located in wildfire hazard areas. 7. The City shall comply with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood regulations,which include standards for base flood levels, flood proofing, and minimum finished floor elevations. 8. The City shall prohibit any land form alterations or developments in the 100-year floodplain which would result in any rise in elevation of the 100-year floodplain. 9. The City shall not allow land form alterations or development within the 100-year floodplain outside the zero-foot rise floodway unless: A. The streamflow capacity of the zero-foot rise floodway is maintained, and B. Engineered drawings and/or documentation shows there will be no detrimental upstream or downstream effects in the floodplain area. 10. The City shall work with Clean Water Services to protect natural drainageways and wetlands as valuable water retention areas and,where possible, find ways to restore and enhance these areas. 11. The City shall comply with Metro Title 3 Functional Plan requirements for balanced fill and removal in the floodplain. 12. The City shall minimize impervious surfaces to reduce storm water runoff. 13. The City shall retain and restore existing vegetation with native non-invasive species in areas with landslide potential to the greatest extent possible. 14. The City shall work to reduce the risk of loss of life and damage to property from severe weather events. Recommended Action Measures i. Place land acquisition priorities on high hazard areas to be used for recreation or open space purposes. ii. Update and maintain accurate information regarding natural hazard risks and past events. iii. Publicize and maintain maps of high hazard areas. iv. Address planning for the protection of public facilities and services from hazards in the 4 • e -DRAFT- Tigard Public Facilities Plan and Community Investment Plan. v. Retrofit existing public facilities and services to contemporary standards to better withstand natural disasters and hazardous occurrences. vi. Recognize some existing buildings have not been built to contemporary building code standards and seek ways to encourage their retrofit to modern codes. vii. Design and Implement a natural hazards home inspection program. viii.Update and maintain a list of essential and critical facilities to be used in hazards planning. ix. Work with Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Community Safety Program to provide information and education about urban interface wildfire to Tigard citizens. x. Adopt the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue Wildfire Hazard Map and implement the Wildfire Hazard Mitigation section of the Oregon Residential Specialty Code. xi. Provide information and access to resources for property owners who wish to assess the ability of their buildings to withstand natural hazards. xii. Continue to maintain eligibility for the National Flood Insurance Program. xiii.Research and implement standards to ensure only appropriate land uses are allowed in high hazard areas. xiv. Complete the Tigard Natural Hazards Addendum to the Washington County Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan and include risk assessments and mitigation action items. Goal 7.2 Protect people and property from non-natural hazardous occurrences. Policies 1. The City shall design, construct, and coordinate the surface transportation system to reduce the potential for mass casualty accidents and to provide the ability to evacuate when necessary. 2. The City shall encourage communication and coordination among a wide variety of agencies to respond to technological and man-made disasters. Recommended Action Measures i. Keep a current inventory of locations where hazardous materials might pose a danger to the public, including storage and transportation areas. ii. Update and maintain the Tigard Emergency Operations Plan to ensure essential governance and public safety services are available during a disaster. iii. Continue to work with the Washington County Office of Emergency Management to: A. Coordinate emergency preparedness education for Tigard residents, B. Provide ongoing responder training and exercises, 5 • -DRAFT- C. Coordinate regionwide hazards response, and D. Provide hazards information and resources countywide. iv. Continue to implement the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program for community members and City staff. v. Encourage projects that enhance medical treatment capabilities and capacity. 6 • r 3. NATURAL FEATURES AND OPEN SPACE This chapter addresses a broad range of topics all having to do with the natural resources located within the Tigard Urban Planning Area. This chapter reflects the concerns expressed in several of the Statewide Planning Goals including: Goal #3 - Agricultural Lands; Goal #4 - Forest Land; Goal #5 - Open Spaces; Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources; heal #7 - Areas subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards;and Goal#8-Recreational Needs. The natural environments within the planning area offer many opportunities for a unique and healthy urban development. Those environments, when viewed as a series of systems rather than isolated features, will provide Tigard with those elements necessary for a healthy place in which to live, work and play. Floodplain greenways, for example, can provide the community with an excellent system of open space links between neighborhoods and services, in addition to providing a relatively inexpensive system for storm water runoff. It is to the community's benefit that consideration be given to both the opportunities and the limitations of the various environments within the planning area. The natural environments included within the planning area all have their own respective limitations with regard to urbanization. Development pressure upon lands with such limitations can have profound effects on the environment. Erosion of steep slopes caused by inappropriate development,for instance, does not occur as an isolated incident. Soil type, permeability, vegetation and drainage all play major roles in and are effected by development. Likewise,the effects of inappropriate development located within the floodplain areas could have adverse effects on properties both up and down stream from the development site. The social, cultural and economic values of such resource lands could be reduced by the effects of urban development nearby. The limitations of the various environments should be considered in reviewing new development within the planning area. The recognition of the natural environment in the planning area and the development of findings and policies which address the characteristics of the environment are extremely important elements in the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of this chapter is to define the parameters of the various natural environments in the planning area and to identify the limitations and opportunities inherent in those environments. Additional information on this topic is available in the "Comprehensive Plan Report: Natural Features and Open Spaces." 3.1 - - - •, e. -, • - _ • - • _• -.- . . . WETLANDS €indings • and density of development whisk sari be accommodated on that property (carrying capacity). Combinations sash as steep slopes and unstable sells create severe development sens#aints: €xsesswe development in cosh physically limited areas greatly increases the potential severity of • • natural habitation of wildlife- Nonetheless, it is tee often removed and replaced by buildings or•eleVelepfgeRt. -•-• -- -- •-• - -- - : -= e••- - - - - - . - -•=' -- - - - • • Increased nfnet# and sedimentation from poorly developed hillsides sail require increased publis Vol. II, Policy 3-1 • • • POLICY 3.1.1 THE CITY SHALL NOT ALLOW DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS HAVING THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS EXCEPT WHERE IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT ESTABLISHED AND PROVEN ENGINEERING TECHNIQUES RELATED TO A SPECIFIC SITE PLAN WILL MAKE THE AREA SUITABLE FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. (NOTE: THIS POLICY DOES NOT APPLY TO LANDS DESIGNATED AS SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS ON THE FLOODPLAIN AND WETLANDS MAP.): a. AREAS MEETING THE DEFINITION OF WETLANDS UNDER CHAPTER 18.26 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE; • - - - _- - _ - • -, _. • - _ . _ .- „ • ; • - - - - - ° (Rev. Ord.85-13; Ord.84-36) IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES = _. - • -- = - -- - - .. _ • ° -- _--: t •= site specific sell surveys and geologic studies where potential hazard& are identified based upon •- special design considerations and senstwstion measures be taken to offset the soil and geologic . .•• • . • ::••:- .. . .. . . 22••:" . . . .••22•- --. - - - . ... . . •_ •- - -- -- --- -- • = -- =--- t.. (Rev.Ord.85 13) 3.2 FLOODPLAINS Findings • Vol. II, Policy 3-2 • • prep°octiesi-and 7•• • -- - •: : - •: : • : :•:- : - - :- • - -- _ Peed-levels • _.. • - - - , - - --. . - :. - - - -- : : -•• • - 14 flooding-occurs' - r - _ _ --_•: , - ._ _ _ _ - = • _ - - _ _ _ • --.• _ _ _. rate- • _ _ - - •• _-_ _ _... . 2=_ . _ • _ • levels- • .. ... 7__. __ _ __ -: _ - _ . - - . .._ - - 7__. - - -• . 'f'ho feeefel • The City of Tigard surreally has ordinances, pelisies and standards within the Tigard_ Community•: - ..•• _.. ._ .. ... .. _ .. .-• • ••• 7:-- • - - • ... • - - •- • "._ _ - • - - -• - _ - - .i -• _ - _ • , 7:-. are-taken: • •• 7. POLICIES 3-24 - _ • _- • •'e- , _ . . -.., • e• _ e . ••„ _ . - 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN WHICH WOULD RESULT IN ANY RISE IN ELEVATION OF THE 3,24 THE CITY SHALL: EXCEPT ALTERATIONS MAY BE ALLOWED WHICH PRESERVE OR ENHANCE THE •• • • . „ • • • • • _ . - !• •• 2 _ •• . *. • • . I} ALLOW LAND FORM ALTERATIONS ERATIONS OR DEVELOPMENT IN THE FLOODPLAIN-*_ OUTSIDE THE ZERO FOOT RISE FLOODWAY* WHICH PRESERVE OR ENHANCE .. . -. .. _ ••. • •.• . .: Vol. II, Policy 3-3 • • 4- THE ��LAND�FORM ALTERATION AND/OR BEVEI QP ENT IS IN AN AREA DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ON THE COMPREHENSIVE SATISPIEDAR 2 THE LAND FORM ALTERATION ATION AND/OR DEVELOPMENT IS ASSOCIATED WITH COMMLINIP4 USES, UTILITIES, OR PUBLIC SUPPORT FACILITIES AS DEF-WED IN CHARTER 18.42 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE FACTORS SET FORTH IN POLICY 3.2.3 CAN BE SATISFIED. 2,2,3 WHERE LAND FORM ALTERATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN* OUTSIDE THE ZERO FOOT RISE FLOODWAY*, THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE. n� a- THE CAPACITY OF THE ZERO FOOT RISE FLOODWAY* BE MAINTAINED; B€ NO DETRIMENTAL UPSTREAM OR DOWNSTREAM EFFECTS IN THE AREA, AND THAT THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN THE SENSITIVE • . .. . - .. - . . ,i •, LAND ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL IAN WHICH ADEQUATELY SCREENS THE IS OF SUFFICIENT IMDTH TO BE NOISE ATTENUATING;AND d- THE CONSIDERATION OF DEDICATION OF OPEN LAND AREA FAR GREENWAY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE PATHWAY WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN* IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADOPTED PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE 3.2.4 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN AREAS DESIGNATED AS SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS ON THE FLOODPLAIN AND WETLANDS MAP. NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL OCCUR ON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO AREAS DESIGNATED AS SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS ON THE FLOODPLAIN AND WETLANDS MAP WITHIN TWENTY FIVE (25) FEET OF THE DESIGNATED WETLANDS AREA. DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS SHALL BE ALLOWED UNDER THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SECTION OF THE CODE. 3-2-5 THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE THE CONSIDERATION OF DEDICATION OF ALL UNDEVELOPED LAND WITHIN THE 0 10Tw YEAR FLOODPLAIN PLUS SUFFICIENT OPEN LAND FOR GREENWAY PURPOSES SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED FOR RECREATION WITHIN THE PLAN. (Rev. Ord.05-01; Ord. 98-19; Ord.90-22;Ord.85-13; Ord. 84-36) 3.3 NATURAL RESOURCES Findings • Currently, there are extensive rock and gravel extraction areas located to the north and west of Tigard's planning area within Beaverton and Washington County. (Rev. Ord.01-07) • There is one active mineral or aggregate resource within the Tigard Planning Area, known as the Durham Pits,which is operated by Washington County. Vol. II, Policy 3-4 • Clean Water Services RECEIVED PLANNING Our commitment is clear. AUG 3 1 2007 CITY OF TIGARD MEMORANDUM DATE: August 30, 2007 FROM: David Schweitzer, Clean Water Services TO: Marissa Daniels, Assistant Planner City of Tigard Planning Division SUBJECT: Review Comments—Planning Goal 7 Update, 2007-00002 CPA GENERAL COMMENTS • We recommend following the provisions of the current Design and Construction Standards (currently R&O 07-20, available on line at: http://cleanwaterservices.org/PermitCenter/DesignandConstruction/Update/default.aspx) for all issues relating to development,vegetated corridors, erosion control, and preservation of wetlands,natural drainage ways, and enhancements thereof. 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway• Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 Phone:(503)681-3600• Fax:(503)681-3603 •www.CleanWaterServices.org . • September 5, 2007 Marissa Daniels Assistant Planner City of Tigard Tigard, OR Re: City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Update-Hazards Document Review by DOGAMI Ms. Daniels We received a copy of the Hazards section of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Update on August 29, 2007 dated August 17, 2007 and the request for comments. The Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI) has expertise on two of the four hazard categories listed (earthquakes and landslides) and therefore makes comments on these two hazards only. Our review of the document reveals the need for significant updating and revisions. We have outlined these below and would be happy to discuss further in person. Earthquakes Page 1: The reference to Seismic Zone 3 is from the UBC 1997. Oregon now uses the IBC 2006 and 2007 Structural specialty Code (OSSC) which no longer has seismic zones. This needs to be updated. Page 3: Bullet no.1, The reference to Cascadia..."cause an 8+ magnitude earthquake". Most scientists believe this should be M9+. Bullet no.3, I'm not quite sure what this is referring too. I think it might be the earthquake induced hazards, such as amplification, liquefaction, landsliding, etc. Just needs to be clear on what is being discussed. There is a big difference between the seismic hazard (IE ground motion hazard) and the earthquake induced hazards. Bullet no.5, Again, the UBC 1997 seismic zone 3 needs to be updated to the IBC 2006 and 2007 OSSC. Policies no.2, In the case of seismic retrofitting structures (buildings, bridges, etc.), which is one of the best ways to reduce risk from earthquakes, structural approaches to hazard mitigation should be promoted along with non-structural. Landslides Page 2: Second paragraph, states "By mapping steep slopes...etc" This is not how we figure out where landslide prone areas are located. We need to acquire LIDAR and map • • the existing landslides then use geologic information combined with the LIDAR slope data to create landslide susceptibility maps. Page 3: Bullet no. 8, I'm not sure if this is correct? Bullet no. 10, You need to figure out the landslide susceptibility through modern techniques as suggested above before estimates of percentage susceptible should be estimated. Policies no. 2. Again, non-structural approaches to hazard mitigation should be promoted along with structural. Page 4: no. 5. Once new LIDAR based landslide maps are created, the building codes and or a landslide ordinance should be updated/created and enforced. Some items not included, which should be added include: 1) Public education on predisaster mitigation and post disaster recovery. 2) Risk assessment 3) Institutional and/or long term mitigation plans. Again, based on our review of the Hazards section of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan, it appears to need significant updating and revisions. We would be happy to discuss these individual items or perhaps give a general talk to a group of people at the City of Tigard who work on hazards, so that they can have a better understanding of these hazards when creating documents like the Comprehensive Plan. Please call Yumei Wang or myself should you have questions regarding this matter. Our number is (971) 673-1555. Sincerely, • Bill Burns, MS, CEG Engineering Geologist CC Yumei Wang, Vicki McConnell, Don Lewis, Ian Madin