The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 10/27/2015 City of Tigard UPI TIGARD Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE AND TIME: October 27,2015 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session; 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard-Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Citizen Communication items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated;it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:•30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (1DD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers,it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: http://live.tigard-or.gov CABLE VIEWERS: The regular City Council meeting is shown live on Channel 28 at 7:30 p.m.The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 p.m. Monday 6:00 a.m. 14 I City of Tigard TIGARD Tigard Business Meeting—Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE AND TIME: October 27,2015 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session; 7:30 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard-Town Hall- 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM •STUDY SESSION A. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. DISCUSSION ON UPCOMING CONTRACTS 6:45 p.m. estimated time C. CHRONIC NUISANCE PROPERTY TMC 7.42 UPDATE 6:50 p.m. estimated time •EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less,Please) A. Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication B. Citizen Communication—Sign Up Sheet 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Tigard City Council) These items are considered routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion.Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: A. PROCLAIM OCTOBER 27,2015 AS MANUFACTURING DAY IN TIGARD B. APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: This item has been moved to November 10,2015 • October 13,2015 C. RECEIVE AND FILE: Councilor Woodard's National Parks and Recreation Association Conference Notes •Consent Agenda-Items Removed for Separate Discussion:Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council/City Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. PRESENTATION OF THE TREE FOR ALL CHALLENGE AWARD BY CLEAN WATER SERVICES 7:35 p.m. estimated time 5. CONSIDER RESOLUTION EXPANDING TIGARD ENTERPRISE ZONE TO INCLUDE THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 7:45 p.m. estimated time 6. CONTINUED QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR FIELDS TRUST PROPERTY 7:55 p.m. estimated time 7. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY FINDINGS REGARDING RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION OF AN UNNAMED STREET 8:20 p.m. estimated time 8. BRIEFING ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) PROJECTS 8:30 p.m. estimated time 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION:The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss real property negotiations, under ORS 192.660(2) (e). All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. 9:00 p.m. estimated time 10. NON AGENDA ITEMS 11. ADJOURNMENT 9:15 p.m. estimated time AIS-2074 A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Council Liaison Reports Submitted By: Norma Alley, Central Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Council will present liaison reports. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments No file(s)attached _5:10 div _fe-C:s' I A " o lonie /- "Yen e,/,e r,Sc Couhc/1 /i/is',. /Leper t 1.1 _ t,1 1111,17114111 !IT .mow 10- Year Plan to End Homelessness 2015 Homeless Assessment Report to the Board of County Commissioners Year 7: A Summary of Outcomes and Challenges October 2015 fivoN WASHINGTON COUNTY (mu CON r October 2015 This publication was produced by the Washington County Department of Housing Services, in collaboration with the Homeless Plan Advisory Committee (HPAC) and the Housing and Supportive Services Network(HSSN). This publication is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole is granted. To learn more about the homeless programs in Washington County, visit the county's website at http://www.co.washington.or.us/homeless or contact Annette M. Evans, Homeless Program Coordinator at 503-846-4760 or email Annette Evans nco.washington.or.us Annette M. Evans Homeless Program Coordinator At% WASHINGTON COUNTY OREGON Department of Housing Services 111 NE Lincoln,Suite 200-L,MS 63,Hillsboro,OR 97124-3082 503-846-4760•cell: 503-449-3684 fax: 503-846-4795 •TTY: 503-846-4793 email:annette_evans@co.washington.or.us A Road 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness in Washington County, Oregon YEAR 7: July 2014—June 2015 Goal 1. Prevent People from Becoming Homeless Action Steps (Strategy#) Status Lead Sustain Universal Point of Referral for at-risk Community Connect implemented 1/13/14. Community Action H tenancies—"Community Connect"(1.1) operates and funds the system Emergency 1-month Rent Assistance(1.1.c) A gap in prevention assistance funds-Rent provided by H Community Action,St.Vincent DePaul(Hillsboro and Tigard) Staff a Diversion Specialist to counsel tenants facing Rent Assistance Orientation sessions are being held with H l I eviction, 1 FTE Housing Specialist(1.2) homeless household to overcome housing barrier Reduce recidivism of homeless,develop system in Working Legal Clinic and Standardization of Community Service IS S Jail and Hospital to target homeless cycling through Work as ways to reduce barriers to housing—this leads to garnishments of income and for some,a return to criminal institutions(1.3.c) activity. Expand rental education"Rent Well"program(1.4) 3 FTE Community Resource Advocate(CRA)positions trained; H p funding is needed to expand program to meet community need. Participation at the Oregon Ending Homelessness The Oregon EHAC is dissolved. OHCS is developing a Homeless HS Advisory Council (1.5) Task Force Coordination(HTFC) Solicit homeless consumer representation in CoC Homeless/formerly homeless reside on agency boards(CoC- All gi program planning and committees(1.6) funded),to include HSSN and HPAC Provide Family Mediation and Reunification for SafePlace Youth Shelter and HomePlate Youth programs include YTH/ p Youth(1.7) mediation and reunification services HEN Expand HomePlate Program and develop drop-in New youth employment position,added 3'0 location(2 in Hillsboro, YTH IZi Center for Youth(1.7.C) 1 in Beaverton)as daytime drop-in center Develop sustainable funding for Safe Place Youth Private funds,Public Safety Levy,EFSP,and Oregon Alliance of YTH m Shelter (1.8.a) Children Program funding Prevent home foreclosure with Mortgage Assistance Households receive Mortgage Assistance Counseling services H p Counseling.(1.9) Goal 2. Move People into Housing Action Steps (Strategy#) Status Lead Increase rental assistance to serve: 3 units(1-bedroom)permanent supportive New units: MHSN/HS E housing for chronic homeless people(2.1.a) 1 1-bed unit FY2013 McKinney-Vento Award,providing a total 28 units tenant-based rent assistance against Plan goal of 30. 10 units for chronic/high-need homeless families No new units;sustained existing units: B2H/PH (2.1.c) 7 units—Bridges To Housing Families *Program ended 6/30/15—Lack of Section 8 and General Funds 30 units singles/families transitional and rapid re- 19 new CoC RRH units,for total of 41 units: H 7 m housing 12 to 24 months(2.1.d) 13 beds,Homeless To Work(single adult) 6 beds—Jubilee Transition Homes(single adult) 3 units—Washington County Transitional Housing(families) • 19 units—Community Action C oC Rapid Re-Housing Families 6 units Transitional Living Program for Youth less Sustained current inventory: 1 YTH than 24 years of age(2.1.e) 5 beds—The Boys&Girls Aid TLP(Beaverton 4-plex) 9 beds/6 units—The Boys&Girls Aid TLP Increase HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive New units: HS Housing vouchers(2.1.f) 13 units—HUD-VASH(Veteran Affairs Supportive Housing) funding award,providing total of 87 HUD-VASH units. 140 units singles/families diversion and rapid re- Sustained current inventory of 93 units: IS/HS/ housing 1 to 12 months,with services and 14 units-Emergency Solution Grant MHSNCC 10 units—HopeSpring Housing Program employment(2.2, 3.4,4.2, 5.2) 49 units—Supportive Services for Veteran Family Program 8 units—EHA(Document Recording Fee)Veterans 12 units—Housing Stabilization by Good Neighbor Increase supply of housing units: Section 811 funding for 15 units permanent Oregon Health Authority(OHA)received grant award February PH/ 0 affordable housing for extremely low-income 2015. On May 29,the OHCS published a$2.3 million Section MHSNCC 811 PRA request for proposals—no award announcement as persons with disabilities in Year 7. (2.3) of 6/30/2015. 5 units permanent affordable housing for PH extremely low-income persons, 30%AMI (2.4) Create Risk Mitigation Pool(2.5) PH Preserve inventory of Affordable Housing(2.6) PH Increase private market housing units(2.7) HSSN Workgroup formed subcommittee to develop Landlord PH/HWG S Forum to create opportunities for h and-to-house people. _ Create policy and/or funding to mitigate landlord PH/H debt owed by homeless(2.8) Appendix B:Year 7 Work Plan Outcomes 20 Washington County, Oregon , Goal 3. Link People to Appropriate Services and Remove Barriers Action Steps (Strategy#) Status Lead Operate"Community Connect", a Centralized Community Action Organization employs 3 FTE Community HWG/H 0 Assessment System(CAS)that refers people to Resource Advocates(CRA)supporting Community Connect. appropriate housing and service programs based on need(3.1) Expand Homeless Outreach(3.2) Community Connect wallet referral cards developed and distributed MHSNCC/ 0 March 2015. Include PATH&HomePlate stall,Open Door drop- H in center,and community partners;e.g.faith community,law enforcement,fire/EMS,public and private agencies. Develop One-Stop Resource Center;Year 5 was Initiatives seeking to develop day center or one-stop centers MHSNCC $ original 10-Year Plan timeline(3.3) include:a)Just Compassion(Tigard;b)Family Justice Center Hold Project Homeless Connect event to engage Sonrise Church hosted 2 events: VAN/ 0 under-served homeless persons and develop new • 7/11/2014 with 304 people served Sonrise community resources(3.3.e) ▪ 1/30/2015 with 400+people served Church .....__. Increase access to case management and Mental Health&Special Needs Community Consortium(MHSNCC) HI supportive services for clients receiving rental created integrated system of care linked to housing in the Housing MHSNCC 0 TEAM Program. OR-DHS Child Welfare Differential Response assistance(3.4) Program implemented May 2015 Increase services for Veterans(3.6) 85 people(49 households)received services in the Supportive g VA/DAVS ' Services for Veteran Families(SSVF)program. 0 --- Increase Child Care Resources(3.7) H Expand links between Housing and Food/Nutrition 15 of 70 food service sites are located at low-income apartment PH/H 0 Programs(3.9) complex(July to August 2014). Develop Unified Housing Screening Policy linked to PH/ 2.5 Risk Mitigation Pool(3.10) MHSNCC Goal 4. Increase Income Support and Economic Opportunities Action Steps (Strategy#) Status Lead Sustain and expand Supported Employment or other Reboot NW grant will provide job skills and linkage to employment I MHSNCC/ job coach/mentorship programs(4.2.b) -full implementation scheduled by end of June 2015. IS 0 Expansion of Supported Employment Program to include Life Works NW and Sequoia Mental Health Service Inc. ' HomePlate"Home Perk"program with Bethel UCC Reduce barriers to accessing SSI/SSDI and 5/13/15 training at Beaverton Library. SSA hosted event to IS/ mainstream benefits(4.3) include:Overview of program eligibility rules,DDS process, MHSNCC 0 authorized representative,and filing an appeal. Expand WSI Aligned Partner Program to increase No new agencies.Current CoC agencies Community Action, IS income self-sufficiency(4.5) Luke-Dorf,Cascade AIDS,Coda Inc.,OR-DHS,Washington County Jail&Community Corrections,and Easter Seals. Increase access to employment for persons with PREP(Prison Reentry Employment Program)with SE Works, H 0 past criminal history(4.6) Goal 5. Expand Data Collection Action Steps (Strategy#) Status Lead Expand number of HMIS users(5.1) 67 user licenses within 15 agencies(9/1/2014 to 8/31/2015),as All 0 compared to 53 user licenses in Year 6. Expand HMIS data collection and reporting variables HUD HMIS Standards released October 2014;Bowman-Systems All RI in support of HEARTH Act,e.g. length of software updates. HUD released System Performance Standards 5/8/15;Bowman- homelessness, recidivism rates(5.2) Systems will update software by_six months"November 2015). Annual analysis on intervention impact of systems Monthly review of homeless demographic and system HSSN/ 0 and programs, criteria evaluation process(5.3) assessment/referral to available beds by Community Connect HPAC/HS Oversight Committee. OR-506 CoC participation in national Annual HSSN received AHAR and approved data on 12/3/14. The AHAR HS 0 Homeless Assessment Report(AHAR)(5.4) was submitted to HUD on 12/22/14. Perform comprehensive Point-In-Time Homeless 1/28/2015 Point In Time Homeless Count. Homelessness of H/HS 0 Count, use data to develop annual 10-Year Plan shelter and unsheltered included 591 people in 424 households;an increase of 27%since 2013 when the lowest Action Steps(5.5) number of homeless rported. Goal 6. Implement Public Education on Homelessness Action Steps (Strategy#) Status Lead Website, Presentation, Media(6.1) www.co.washinaton.or.uslhomeless provides recent media g HSSN/HS/ 0 updates,homeless data,CoC Program funding IFCH announcements and project awards,and CoC events. Annual 10-Year Plan Homeless Assessment Report Year 7 Homeless Assessment Report:Outcomes and Challenges HS 0 (6.2) will be released by October 2015. Public Education Campaign, Town Hall, Forum, Outreach and Education provided to Southminster Presbyterian IFCH/HS 0 Roundtable discussions(6.3) Church(11/2/14), Tigard CPO(1/8/15),St.Alexander Catholic Church(1/14/15),Sunset High School Homeless Forum(1/21/15). 21 Appendix B: Year 7 Work Plan Outcomes Washington County, Oregon TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary i Year 7: Homeless Demographics and Trends 1 2015 Point-In-Time Homeless Population Count (Census) 1 Homeless Population Trends 2 Homeless Population Characteristics and Special Populations 3 Ethnicity and Race of Washington County Populations 4 Homeless Student Population 4 Year 7: Accomplishments and Outcomes 5 Transforming Our Homeless System: Community Connect 5 Shelter And Housing Inventory 5 Goal 1: Prevent People from Becoming Homeless 6 Emergency Shelter 7 Goal 2: Move People into Housing 8 Transitional Housing 9 Rapid Re-Housing (Diversion from the Homeless System) 9 Permanent Supportive Housing and Serving the Chronically Homeless 9 Goal 3: Link People to Appropriate Services and Remove Barriers 10 Goal 4: Increase Income Support and Economic Opportunities 11 Goal 5: Expand Data Collection 11 Goal 6: Implement Public Education on Homelessness 12 Year 7: Alignment with State and National Planning Efforts 13 Acknowledgements to the 2015 Homeless Assessment Report 14 Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness Appendix B: Year 7 Work Plan Outcomes (This Page Intentionally Left Blank) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The 2015 Homeless Assessment Report provides the latest demographics of homelessness in Washington County, the HUD Recaptures effect of housing instability on seniors and families living in $221,7421n poverty as a result of the affordable housing crisis, and the demonstrated outcomes of public and private partnerships Unspent working collectively through the Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN) to prevent first-time and a recurrence Homeless Rent of homelessness, and the results of implementing Community Assistance due Connect, an integrated system of care providing client-centered housing and services for people experiencing homelessness. to lack of Housing Units Major Findings HOMELESS DEMOGRAPHICS AND TRENDS Using the unduplicated homeless data (point-in-time census) collected in January 2015, this report chronicles changes in overall homelessness as compared to previous point-in-time homeless census activities. While the census methodologies vary and are imperfect, this data provides the tools necessary to assess the changes in homeless populations. • 37% increase in homelessness with adult only households representing 61% of the homeless population. Historically, families with children comprised the higher homeless population. A new face of homelessness includes seniors over age 62 years and people with disabilities living on fixed income. • Chronic homeless populations increased for a second year with 128 people chronically homeless, as compared to 77 people in 2013. The chronic homeless population has barriers to housing given the low vacancy rate in housing. Research shows that permanent supportive housing ends homelessness for people with severe challenges and reduces the use of emergency services. • Veteran homelessness continues to decrease with 77 veterans reported in 2015, as compared to 103 veterans in 2012. Community Connect is a single-point entry system providing referral to homeless housing and services using standard assessment criteria. In Year 7, Community Connect screened 1,911 households (calls for assistance), and assessed 1,043 households as follows: o 49% (513 households) have a criminal history. o 27% (281 households) owe landlord debt (average $3,000 per household). o 35% (360 households) are survivors of domestic violence. o 5% (78 people in 52 households) are seniors older than age 62 years. o 61% (641 households) report previous episodes of homelessness. A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon ECONOMIC AND HOUSING FACTORS Housing has become the pivotal factor contributing to an increase in homelessness, and has impacted the 10-Year Plan $13 Million outcomes as the "housing first" model only works if there are units with low-barrier access for re-housing homeless people. funding shortfall Goal 2: Move People Into Housing has been under-funded by more than $1 million. The plan outlined Strategy 2.4, Increase impacts Permanent Affordable Housing Units for Persons below 30% 10-Year Plan area median income (AMI) that identified $1.3 million to acquire/rehabilitate/construct new housing units for extremely Affordable low-income households. Housing Goal This report considers many of the economic and housing indicators that affect people at risk and those experiencing homelessness. • In Year 7 an increase in foreclosures is reported with 755 Trustee's Deed and General Judgment foreclosures' recorded and 897 Notices of Default and Judicial Election to Sell filed. • The 4.6% unemployment2 rate reported in June 2015 is favorable to the 9.8% unemployment rate reported in June 2009, with unfavorable employment conditions including more than 35 percent of the jobs considered part-time and/or low-wage positions. • 34,557 households3 make less than $35,000 per year, with 89% paying more than 30% of their income toward their housing costs. • 2% average housing vacancy rate with increasing rental costs are displacing people. This countywide crisis is replicated across the state of Oregon and nationally. o Washington County returned more than $221,742 in HUD CoC Program rent assistance funds, as compared to $181 in 2012. This de-obligation of funds is a result of the low vacancy rate that limits the ability of households to access housing. Beaverton/Aloha Hillsboro Tigard/Tualatin 1-Bedroom Unit Rent(Average) 1-Bedracxn drat Rent(Average) 1-Bedroom Unit Rent(Average) &Vacancy Rate &Vacancy Rate &Vacancy Rate $1,200 4.5 $1,200 - r 4.5 $1,200 4.5 $$ 06 2.8zt 3 5$ 1,000 3 5 $1,000 3:44---- — - 4 3.5 2 5 $600 ` 2-5 $800 .t. 3 I$600 4400 - — 51,055 1-5 Ii, Z $600 2"5 $400 L5 6400 , II ! � 1-5 $200 3 51s9Q o-s 5200 $ o.s $zoo os S o $_ ! Sail o 2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015 2012 2013 2014 2015 aaa�1-Bed/1-Bath Unit Rent - —Vacancy Rate V. 1-0ed/1-Bath Unit Rent 1-Bed/1-Bath Unit Rent . . Vacancy Rate t. ....-Vacancy Rate% Washington County Assessment and Taxation and Washington County Circuit Court; July 2014 to June 2015 2 Oregon Department of Labor,https://www.qualityinfo.org/home s U.S. Census Bureau,2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates 4 Norris,Beggs&Simpson Portland Metro Area MultiFamily Report Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness Washington County, Oregon Moving Forward CHANGING HOW WE DO BUSINESS • Create greater access to housing for chronically homeless persons through a Housing Navigator position staffed at Luke-Dorf, Inc. The position was developed under a SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) Housing TEAM project, and has demonstrated outcomes in ending chronic homelessness through building landlord relationships and advocacy on behalf of chronically homeless people. • Develop a plan to increase affordable housing units for extremely low-income households. Identify policy and funding $1,055 opportunities that will create affordable housing as a platform for 1-bedroom rent people working low-wage employment or living on fixed incomes. The Fair Market Rent (FMR) for a 1-bedroom apartment is $1,055 per month, as compared to $683 in 20125. • Create policy to standardize the rate of Community Service Work from $10 per hour to a rate comparable to the Oregon BOLT Landscape Technician Position. • Integrate legal services at Community Connect, a central access point for homeless persons to determine client-centered housing and service needs. o This system will link households to the most appropriate intervention to resolve their housing crisis — with a focus on housing first and diversion from the shelter system. The alignment of housing, client-centered services and health care will provide an integrated and comprehensive system that promotes cost savings and a focus on wellness and self-sufficiency. • Create efficiencies with scarce funding, to include prioritizing resources in support of housing first programs that leverage mainstream and community resources that increase capacity in the homeless continuum. o Assist homeless individuals and families access health insurance under the provisions established in the Affordable Care Act, to include commercial qualified health plan coverage available through Medicaid expansion programs delivered by Coordinated Care Organizations (CCO). o Prioritize resources to end veteran homelessness by 2015, chronic homelessness by 2017 and homelessness amongst youth and families by 2020 in alignment with the Federal Strategic Plan: Open Doors. Research in the county's Homeless Cost Study point to areas of potential cost-savings in reducing the number of high-user chronic homeless populations through housing first programs and client-centered services. • Researching the continuum of risk factors leading to housing instability. Use data to inform policy and funding to effectively prevent homelessness. Risk factors include the socioeconomic elements of poverty, to include insufficient education (less than GED or high school degree), underemployment and lack of job skills. 5 Norris,Beggs& Simpson,MultiFamily Report:Market Overview for Beaverton/Aloha(2012, 2013, 2014, 201 5) A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon YEAR 7: HOMELESS DEMOGRAPHICS AND TRENDS 2015 POINT-IN-TIME HOMELESS COUNT (CENSUS) Data Collection Performed: January 22 to January 31, 2015 The annual homeless count (census) data provides a basis for planning purposes, and is used in weighted formulas for distribution of state and federal funds to jurisdictions. Implemented in January 2009, Washington County continues to enumerate, de-duplicate and ensure quality of the county's annual homeless census using the Service Point Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). In Year 7 of the 10-Year Plan, the number of people living in places not meant for human habitation has increased, while the doubled-up homeless population shows a decrease as these households were not a focus during the street outreach activity. [Family] [Adult Only] [Youth Only] Total At Least One Adult Single Adult and Only Children Homeless and Couples without <18 Years Persons One Child<17 Years Children #of Homeless Households 568 76 442 50 #of Homeless Persons 776 248 477 51 (8 chronic6) (120 chronic) Literally Homeless:Sheltered' 196 99 96 1 Literally Homeless:Unsheltered 395 93 290 12 Doubled-up Homeless8 185 56 91 38 Source:Washington County Point-In-Time Homeless Count,January20I5 Federal Definition Federal and State Literally Homeless (Literally Homeless) (Literally and Doubled-up) (%of Total Homeless) 2015 591 776 76% 2014 537 1,011 54% 2013 432 1,153 38% 2012 751 1,331 56% 2011 752 1,356 55% 2010 950 1,383 69% 2009 748 1,243 60% Source: Washington County Point-In-Time Homeless Count.January20I5 6 Chronic homeless definition includes literally homeless people living in a place not meant for human habitation,a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter,and has been homeless and living or residing in a place not meant for human habitation,a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter continuously for at least one year or on at least four separate occasions in the last 3 years,and can be diagnosed with one or more disabling conditions. [March 2013,24 CFR 579.3] Federal homeless definition includes literally homeless people living in shelter and housing designated to provide temporary living arrangement,and people with a primary nighttime residence that is a place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation(place not meant for human habitation). [December 2011,24 CFR 585.5] 8 State of Oregon homeless definition expands the Federal definition to include people sharing the housing of other persons (living "doubled-up") due to loss of housing, economic hardship, personal safety, or facing impending eviction from a private dwelling unit and has not found a subsequent residence and resources needed to obtain housing. [June 2008,A Home For Hope] 1 A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon Homeless Population Trends Conducted on January 28, 2015, the census reports an increase of homelessness experienced by all household types with gaps in affordable housing identified as the primary contributing factor of homelessness. • 50% average increase in 1-bedroom rents (Beaverton/Aloha, Hillsboro, Tigard/Tualatin) • 2.54% vacancy rate in rental housing (Beaverton/Aloha, Hillsboro, Tigard/Tualatin) • 35% of employment positions are low-wage jobs • Seniors and persons with disabilities live on fixed-incomes that are not keeping pace with inflation and rising housing costs Federal Homeless Definition Sheltered and Unsheltered People by Household Type 500 446 At Least One Adult and 400 380 One chive 386 300 3276 253 185 160 -a-Adult without Children 200 100 132 186 192 44 0 —3 , 2 - 6 --3--, 1 13 Children Only(<18 65 Nc) �� ti �O^,5 p y^ ^ years) '1\r6 Source: Washington County Point-In-Time Homeless Count,January2015 The "housing first" model outlined in A Road Home is reliant on rent subsidy provided in market rate housing. This model demonstrated cost effective results in ending homelessness when vacancy rates were over 4%, and rents were more affordable for people working low-wage employment and fixed incomes. Currently, the model is not working as people cannot access housing or retain housing once the subsidy is removed given the high cost rents. Federal Homeless Definition Sheltered and Unsheltered People (Literally Homeless) 800 700 600 --t-al 500 536 Unsheltered People 400 300 ` ' �tf — All Sheltered 200 People 100 I 19: 19, 0 1 Source: Washington County Point-In-Time Homeless Count,January2015 Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 2 Washington County, Oregon Homeless Population Characteristics and Special Populations The following graphs represent demographics of homeless people as defined by the Federal and State homeless definitions that were reported during the annual point-in-time census. Changes in Age Distribution of the Homeless Population (Years of Age) Age 0- 5 6- 11 12- 17 18- 23 24-44 45 -54 55-69 70+ Unknown 2015 51 47 90 96 236 111 81 7 57 2014 69 158 153 95 311 97 59 8 61 2013 68 163 130 129 386 166 84 3 24 2012 107 164 180 147 483 145 78 1 26 2011 98 177 148 123 463 194 77 5 71 2010 124 170 155 127 493 180 95 5 34 2009 114 183 142 106 382 167 47 4 98 Source:Washington County Point-In-Time Homeless Count,January2015 2015 Homeless Population People experiencing homelessness tend to have Characteristics special needs for housing and services to address Drug and Alcohol physical, psychological and physiological Abuse Veterans 13% disabilities. 14% Additionally, a range of housing barriers delay or prevent people from transitioning out of Mental Domestic homelessness to housing due to barriers that Illness vi22 oce 21% u include poor credit and/or eviction history, criminal background, lack of education and job skills to obtain or retain living wage employment, fleeing Developmen domestic violence, and other socioeconomic tal Disability Incarcerated Or factors. 1% Physical Foster Care Correction Disability nu (Current a dRelease <90 11% ) 11 days 4% 14% Homelessness by Subpopluation Sheltered and Unsheltered 200 180 182 189 160 145 160 Chronically 140 128 a 120 - - 111 lomeless 100 77 Veterans a 80 - 94- 103 91 76 77 60 - 62 40 • - Youth<18 Years 20 1re' 13• 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: Washington County Point-In-Time Homeless Count,January2015 3 A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon Ethnicity and Race of Washington County Populations The diversity of the homeless population reflects the overall diversity of Washington County's population, as reported in the January 2015 Point-In-Time Homeless Count (776 people) and the data for newly homeless individuals (1,219 people) who entered shelter and housing programs during Year 7 of the 10-Year Plan. Percentage of Percentage of Percentage of the Point In Time Newly Homeless Persons living Percentage of Characteristics of Washington Street/Shelter Persons in below Federal the County County Populations Homeless Count Shelter/Housing Poverty Level Population 1/28/2015 Programs 2014-15 2014 ACS 2014 ACS Census 776 people 1,219 people 71.398 people 556.618 people Ethnicity Hispanic/Latino 15% 16% 36% 32% Non-Hispanic/non-Latino 85% 84% 64% 68% Race American Indian/Alaskan Native 2% 2% 2% 1% Asian 2% 1% 11% 10% Black or African American 7% 12% 4% 2% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 1% 2% N N White 75% 72% 57% 77% Other Multi-Racial/Unknown 13% 10% 26% 10% Special Populations Veteran (Adults Only) 10% 11% 2% 6% Disabled(Children and Adults) 54% 55% 13% 10% Elderly 65+ years 6% 3% 6% 12% An"N"entry indicates that data cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small. Source: Washington County Point-In-Time Homeless Count,January 2015 Washington County Homeless Programs,July 2014 through June 2015 U.S.Census Bureau,20/4 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimate U.S.Census Bureau,2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimate Homeless Student Count HOMELESS STUDENT POPULATION (GRADE K-12): SCHOOL YEAR 2014-2015 Total = 2,148 students in Washington County The Education for Homeless Children and Youth (EHCY) program is part of the No Child Left Behind Act and is more commonly called "the McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Program". The definition of homelessness includes residing in shelter, motel, doubled up housing due to economic hardship, or living in an unsheltered situation such as vehicle, tent, or other substandard housing. In Year 7 an increased number of homeless students lived in motels or unsheltered situations, with the vast majority of homeless students living in doubled-up housing with family and friends. See Appendix A for a summary of homeless students by school district and data on Oregon's homeless student populations. Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 4 Washington County, Oregon YEAR 7: ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND OUTCOMES In Year 7, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) enacted into law the new federal Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act that codifies in law the CoC planning process to provide greater coordination in responding to the needs of homeless people under a new CoC Program. The work develop and implement strategic plans and resource priorities for current homeless demographics is carried out by the Washington County Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN), a consortium of cross- sector public and private representation. Washington County received $2.7 million in FY2014 HEARTH Act funds to provide housing and services programs, and leveraged an additional $1.3 million in public and private funds. A reference document containing the 10-Year Plan goals and strategies scheduled form implementation is attached in Appendix B. TRANSFORMING OUR HOMELESS RESPONSE SYSTEM: COMMUNITY CONNECT Implemented in 2014, Community Connect provides a single-point entry to homeless shelter and housing resources, as compared to homeless contacting more than 20 agencies in the community providing homeless housing programs. This integrated system of care works to provide an effective intervention that minimizes the trauma people experience and aligns with goals to reduce the length of homelessness and recidivism rates, and promote self-sufficiency through greater access to health care, mainstream resources, education and employment programs. • Over 900 beds are aligned with Community Connect in a coordinated assessment and referral system providing all homeless persons equal access to publicly funded assistance. A reduction in beds is reported due to under-utilization of federally funded rent subsidy and loss of philanthropy funding. COMMUNITY CONNECT Shelter and Housing Inventory Facility and Scattered-Site Rental Housing Resources 1000 900 05 +Total Bed Inventory 800 73' —o—Permanent Supportive 700 .05 6� Housing ralll 500 --� Transitional Housing CO 400 _ s�_ 427 300 -- illil._— —a—Rapid Re-husing 200 � 243 (Permanent) 100 MI "- 129 Emergency Shelter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Safe Haven Source: OR-506 CoC Housing Inventory Chart(MC),January 2015 A Road Home: 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness includes six goals with integrated strategies, many which are considered national best practices with proven effectiveness in reducing homelessness in other cities and counties nationwide. This section of the report will highlight the goals and performance outcomes in outreach, prevention, diversion (rapid re- housing) and intervention through a continuum of care (CoC) planning model. 5 A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon Goal 1: Prevent People from Becoming Homeless A major contributing factor for the increase in homelessness Eviction Court Number of in Year 7 is the rise in poverty as a result of increased Cases Filed Eviction housing costs, under-employment and landlords being (By Calendar Year) Cases Filed selective in tenants, e.g. excluding people with poor credit, CY 2008 4,348 criminal history, evictions. CY 2009 4,194 CY 2010 3,819 An increase in 60-day no cause eviction notices was CY 2011 3,422 reported in Year 7. Beginning in 2008, Rent Well Tenant CY 2012 3,235 Education training has proven to be an effective strategy on CY 2013 2739 working with Landlords and the need to avoid eviction court. CY 2014 2,687 Source:Washington County Circuit Court PREVENTION OF EVICTION AND FORECLOSURE Keeping people in their current housing reduces trauma to the household and reduces cost to institutional systems of care. As the cost of housing increases, fewer households can be served with prevention and foreclosure funds. Funds are needed to implement more robust prevention programs that address situational poverty9 and encourage cross-sector results. ✓ Emergency one-month rent assistance served 1,727 persons (488 households)facing eviction. Community Action is a lead nonprofit agency providing emergency rent assistance through public and private funds ($219,886 administered July 2014 to June 2015). ✓ 4,362 people (1,161 households) received emergency rental assistance provided by St. Vincent DePaul (Hillsboro) and St. Anthony's (Tigard). $135,592 funding included $100,000 in private funds. Baseline Year 2009-10: 1,117 households assisted with $105,000. ✓ Housing counseling on mortgage Foreclosures of Property delinquency issues provided by Washington County,Oregon Open Door Counseling Center. 4500 — 4112 ✓ Bulk food donations and nearly 4000 3857 200 HOPE "Help The Homeless" 3500 hygiene bags were provided by 3000 31 Oracle employees. 2500 ,87 SB 1552 Oregon Foreclosure 2000 • ' &' Reform: Senate Bill 1552(2012)directed the • 1500 Attorney General of Oregon to establish a residential 1591 Foreclosure Avoidance Mediation Program.The 1274 126 Foreclosure Avoidance Mediation program lends a 1000 structured process for communicating with the lender, 860 795 submitting financial documentation to the lender,working 500 with a financial counselor,and meeting with the lender face-to-face with a mediator at a neutral location. This• 0 program was implemented July 11.2012,and is available 2007- 2008- 2009- 2010- 2011- 2012- 2013- 2014- to homeowners who have received a"Notice of 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 Mediation"from their lender;and,homeowners who are Fiscal Year(July to June) at-risk of default and who wish to mediate with their •Notices of Default&Election To Sell lender. ■Trustee Deeds&General Judgments/Writ of Execution Source: Washington County Assessment and Taxation`Notice of Default'and`Trustee Deeds' Washington County Circuit Court `Election to Sell'and'General Judgments/Writ of Execution' 9 Situational Poverty happens when a household suffers negative financial changes due to illness,job loss,and other temporary events. Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 6 Washington County, Oregon EMERGENCY SHELTER 44 Days Average Length of Stay, as compared to 32 Days in Year 5 of the Plan The Family Shelter Network, comprised of beds operated by Community Action, the Good Neighbor Center, and Family Bridge, operates through a unified shelter wait list that averages 30 families per month. The family shelter capacity will serve up to 17 homeless families (adults with children) at any point in time. An increase in the length of stay is a result of the added time it takes for households to find housing in the community upon exit from the shelter. A gap exists in the homeless response system exists with zero emergency beds available for homeless adults without children. • The Severe Weather Shelter Response Plan was activated for 125 days during the winter months of 2014-2015, with faith-based shelters enlisting 13,581 volunteer hours that provided 5,409 overnight shelter bed stays. The shelter sites in five major cities include: Forest Grove United Church of Christ (Forest Grove), SOS-Shelter at Sonrise Church (Hillsboro), St. Francis Catholic (Sherwood), Calvin Presbyterian and St. Anthony's Catholic (Tigard), and Rolling Hills Community (Tualatin). ✓ The nonprofit shelter capacity was reduced by 32 days during Year 7 as shelters closed for facility repairs and maintenance of our aging shelter infrastructure. Nonprofit Shelter Provider Agency Population # Units # Beds Served Communit Action Famil Shelter 5 20 Famil Brid•ellnterfaith Hos.italit Network MIMTM 3 12 Good Nei•hbor Center Shelter =MEM 9 36 Subtotal Beds 17 Units 68 Beds SafePlace Youth Shelter(<19 years of age) Youth - 4 Domestic Violence Resource Center(DVRC) Family 6 21 Domestic Violence Resource Center(DVRC) Singles - 3 Total Bed(Adult with child, youth and DV) 23 Units 96 Beds YEAR 7 OUTCOMES (Family Shelter Network and DVRC) 645 adults and children (179 households) received emergency shelter services Of the 250 adults that exited: 106 adults (42%) exited to permanent housing 189 adults (76%) adults exited shelter with economic support10 57 adults (23%) adults employed at program exit YEAR 7 OUTCOMES (SafePlace Youth Shelter) 71 unaccompanied homeless youth (age 12 to 19 years) received shelter services 26 youth (37%) exited shelter to permanent housing, 14 youth (20%) exited to transitional housing, and the remaining to other or unknown locations 1°Economic Support is defined as income from one or more of the following: Social Security,TANF,Food Stamps, Veterans Benefits,Employment,Unemployment,Medicaid,and other income. 7 A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon Goal 2: Move People Into Housing With the implementation of Community Connect, Washington County's new integrated system of care has prioritized homeless housing and services based on severity of need and vulnerabilities. This "higher-need" population is reflected in the population served in Year 7. Homeless Population: Prior Living Arrangement the Night # Adults before Program Entry Entering Year 7 Year 5 Pro.rams 771 Total from Street and Shelter Place not meant for human habitation 223 29% 20% Emergency Shelter or Transitional Housing 224 29% 19% Total from "Housing" Rented or owned housing unit(Voluntary/Eviction/Foreclosure) 41 5% 13% Staying with Family/Friends 190 25% 31% Total from Institutional Settings Psychiatric Hospital 0 0% 0% Hospital 2 0% 0% Inpatient Alcohol and Drug Treatment Facility 9 1% 1% Jail, Prison or Juvenile Detention Center 23 3% 2% Other Other, Unknown, or not reported by homeless 59 8% 14% Source: Washington County Homeless Program, Year 7(20/4-15)as compared to Year 5(2012-13) PROJECT-BASED SECTION 8 AFFORDABLE HOUSING (30% AMI) The Housing Authority of Washington County has implemented a strategy to create new affordable housing serving extremely low-income households making 30% or less Area Median Income (AMI) through project-basing Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers. REACH CDC opened Orchards At Orenco in June 2015, with 8 units at 30% AMI subsidized with project- based subsidy. TRANSITIONAL HOUSING 251 Days Average Length of Stay, as compared to 227 Days in Year 5 Transitional homeless programs limit participants in housing up to 24 months, and operates under the administration of public, nonprofit and faith-based organizations that provide an array of supportive services to homeless households with moderate barriers to housing. Transitional housing is costly as compared to rapid re-housing, and is prioritized for transitioning homeless youth (ages 18 to 24 years), and persons in need of short-term housing while attending addiction treatment and reentry into the community upon exit from the criminal justice system. YEAR 7 OUTCOMES 118 adults and children (96 households) served by transitional housing Of the 118 adults that exited: 67 adults (57%) exited to permanent housing 63 adults (94%) exited transitional housing with economic support 44 adults (66%) employed at program exit Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 8 Washington County, Oregon RAPID RE-HOUSING (DIVERSION FROM THE HOMELESS SYSTEM) Consistent with the "housing first" model where the rental lease is in the homeless household's name, rapid re-housing helps homeless households locate affordable housing in the community, provides funds to pay for rental deposit and short-term rent subsidy to provide a diversion from accessing more costly homeless resources; e.g. shelter, transitional and permanent supportive housing programs. Households remain in the program from 1 to 24 months, and retain their housing when services and rent subsidy is removed upon exit from the program. YEAR 7 OUTCOMES 536 adults and children (218 households) received rapid re-housing assistance Of the 147 adults that exited: 131 adults (89%) exited to permanent housing 118 adults (80%) exited with economic support 53 adults (36%) employed at program exit PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING The national focus continues to prioritize the need to develop housing with supportive service programs for veterans and chronically homeless populations. Washington County provides permanent supportive housing using a "housing first" model linked with intense client-centered supportive services that assist homeless persons with disabling conditions move toward self- sufficiency. The housing lease is in the name of the homeless household with no time limit on how long the household can stay in the program. Washington County's 10-Year Plan aligns with federal priorities to end veteran homelessness by 2015 and chronic homelessness by 2017. New programs and resources in Year 7 include: ✓ 27 units—HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) program vouchers awarded October 2014 and April 2015 valued at$162,070 to serve homeless veterans and their families. The Housing Authority of Washington County administers a total of 87 HUD-VASH units. ✓ 55 households (158 people)—The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs renewed funding for the Supportive Services for Veterans Families (SSVF)program serving low-income and homeless veteran households in Washington County. Community Action is the local lead agency providing services and housing assistance under the SSVF program. ✓ 71 chronically homeless adults received permanent housing and specialized services in the Housing TEAM program managed by Luke-Dorf, Inc. The program was a 3-year initiative to end chronic homelessness funded by Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Cooperative Agreements for Benefits Homeless Individuals (CABHI). The program developed a Housing Navigator position that worked to develop landlord/property management partnerships in support of housing people with disabilities. This position is continuing during Year 8 with funding provided by a CDBG grant. ✓ Homeless Cost Study—In December 2014 the Northwest Economic Research Center released A Comparison of Emergency Service Provider Costs for Formerly Homeless Persons Living in Permanent Supportive Housing. The research provides local leaders and stakeholders with compelling evidence on the need to redirect funds to create cost savings in health care, criminal justice, education, and other institutions of care, and create new capacity to develop affordable housing and research housing models as the county's population increases and becomes more urban and diverse. www.pdx.edu/nerc/siteslwww.pdx.edu.nerc/files/P2 Report Final.pdf 9 A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon YEAR 7 OUTCOMES 586 adults and children (463 households) received permanent supportive housing assistance Of the 138 adults entering permanent supportive housing in Year 7, 62% (86 individuals) were chronically homeless adults with disabilities entered housing Of the 95 adults that exited: 49 adults (52%) exited permanent "supportive" housing to independent housing 89 adults (94%) exited with economic support 7 adults (7%) employed at program exit Goal 3: Link People to Appropriate Services and Remove Barriers YEAR 7 OUTCOMES 620 adults received specialized services. Client-centered Services Provided for Special Needs Populations 35% 32%-- 30% 28% 25% 2i 20% 15% 9% 10% 8% 5% 0% 0% e, J`' \Q �a •( C • Q O QC) Source: Washington County Homeless Programs.July 2014 through June 2015 ✓ Provider agencies developed partnerships with the Oregon Health Authority to receive information on the Affordable Care Act. They will receive training on how to assist people access insurance delivered by Cover Oregon and the Medicaid expansion programs administered by the Coordinated Care Organizations (CCO), to include Health Share of Oregon and Family Share Inc. ✓ Nearly 500 people received housing information and accessed on-site services at the 9th Annual Project Homeless Connect held January 30, 2015. A summer Project Homeless Connect event drew nearly 300 homeless persons seeking assistance on July 22, 2014. ✓ 280,299 meals were provided in the 2014 Summer Lunch Program serving low-income and homeless youth below the age of 18 years. The program has expanded to affordable housing sites where extremely low-income and low-income households reside. Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 10 Washington County, Oregon Goal 4: Increase Income Support and Economic Opportunities YEAR 7 OUTCOMES 82% of participants exited homeless programs with financial resources, as compared to 70% in 2008-09 (Year 1 of the 10-Year Plan). SELF-SUFFICIENCY AT PROGRAM EXIT: ADULTS WITH EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC SUPPORT Year 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year 7 EMERGENCY SHELTER 2008-09 2010-11 2012-13 2014-15 Number of Adults(18+ Years) 279 358 344 319 Number of Adults with Employment Income 39 55 72 57 18% Number of Adults with Economic Support* 243 286 313 258 81% TRANSITIONAL HOUSING 2008-09 2010-11 2012-13 2014-15 Number of Adults(18+ Years) 69 221 389 67 Number of Adults with Employment Income 36 72 103 44 66% Number of Adults with Economic Support* 44 164 289 63 94% RAPID RE-HOUSING**(PERMANENT HOUSING) 2008-09 2010-11 2012-13 2014-15 Number of Adults(18+ Years) 51 147 Number of Adults with Employment Income 20 53 36% Number of Adults with Economic Support* 40 118 80% PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING 2008-09 2010-11 2012-13 2014-15 Number of Adults(18+ Years) 27 73 100 95 Number of Adults with Employment Income 17 10 20 7 7% Number of Adults with Economic Support* 21 64 100 89 94% *Economic Support includes TANF,SSI/SSD,Food Stamp, Veteran Benefits,Medicaid,SCHIP (State Children Health Insurance),Employment Income **Note: Rapid Re-Housing implemented in 2012-13. Source: Washington County Homeless Programs,July 2014 through June 2015 Goal 5: Expand Data Collection The 10-Year Plan embraces the concept that a Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) will improve services by establishing and maintaining an information sharing system that supports quality programs, fosters cooperation, ensures privacy, and creates accurate information about homelessness and housing. Bowman Systems ServicePoint HMIS is used statewide, and provides local data to support analysis on effectiveness in system changes and program performance. Benchmark data has been collected on the "length of stay in homelessness" for all homeless participants in shelter and transitional housing programs, and agency "bed utilization rates". The HSSN will use this data to promote a high performing CoC that quickly re-houses homeless people while minimizing trauma and dislocation, promotes greater access to and effective utilization of mainstream programs, and optimizes self-sufficiency among people experiencing homelessness. In Year 8, HMIS data will gauge system and program performance as indicated by: ❖ The length homelessness being less than 30 days, or decreasing by 10% annually. ❖ Less than 5% of people leaving homelessness become homeless again within the next 2 years, or the percentage of people doing so decreases at least 20% annually. ❖ The HMIS having both a bed coverage rate and service coverage rate of at least 80%. 11 A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon YEAR 7 OUTCOMES 2014 Annual Homeless Assessment Report(AHAR) submitted in December 2014 to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for inclusion in the national 2014 Annual Homeless Assessment Report. The AHAR responds to a series of Congressional directives calling for the collection and analysis of data on homelessness at a local and national level, and informs Congress on future policy and funding decisions. 2015 Point-In-Time Homeless Count data entered into HMIS for de-duplication and submitted to Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) for inclusion in the Oregon Homeless Count Report. 17 Annual Performance Reports (APR) prepared using HMIS and submitted to HUD on homeless demographics for clients receiving assistance in federally-funded McKinney- Vento Homeless Assistance projects. 14 HMIS user licensed agencies (68 user licenses) provide data on clients accessing shelter, housing and service programs in Washington County, as compared to 11 user licensed agencies in Year 1 of the 10-Year Plan. Goal 6: Implement Public Education on Homelessness Through the collaborative efforts of the Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN) provider agencies, the Interfaith Committee on Homelessness (IFCH), and community advocates, a sustained community initiative to address the issues around homelessness has resulted in actions that not only educate the public on the social impact of homelessness, but also serve vulnerable populations in our community who seek basic needs to address hunger, housing and health care. YEAR 7 OUTCOMES: ✓ City of Beaverton Human Rights Advisory Commission: A panel discussion on homelessness and homeless youth was hosted on October 1, 2014 to include Bridget Calfee, HomePlate Youth Services, Beverly Woolf, Second Home, Sara Palestino, Beaverton School District, and Annette Evans, Washington County Department of Housing Services. An overview of the homeless demographics, gaps in housing and services to serve this population, and information on how the community can become involved in serving the homeless was provided to nearly 50 attendees. ✓ Tualatin Valley Vicariate: On January 14, 2015 the Vicariate representing Catholic parishes from Aloha, Cornelius, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, North Plains, Roy, and Verboort hosted a meeting to discuss the church's response to homelessness in western Washington County. Annette Evans, the County's Homeless Program Coordinator, provided information on homeless demographics, the countywide homeless response system, and the role faith community's provide through food pantries, clothing closets, and hosting Severe Weather Shelters. Catholic Charities opened an office in Forest Grove to partner with local faith communities in serving Oregon's poor and vulnerable populations. Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 12 Washington County, Oregon ALIGNMENT WITH STATE AND NATIONAL PLANNING EFFORTS State of Oregon: A Home For Hope The State of Oregon believes all people in Oregon should have the opportunity to be at home in their communities and to be physically, emotionally and economically healthy. A Home For Hope: A 10-year plan to end homelessness in Oregon was adopted in June 2008. To view a copy of A Home For Hope, visit the state website. https://www.oregon.gov/ohcs/pdfs/report-ehac-10-year-action-plan.pdf Federal Strategic Plan: Opening Doors On May 20, 2009, President Obama signed into law the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH)Act, which amends the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act to change HUD's definition of homelessness, increase prevention resources, and emphasize outcomes. HEARTH Act regulations were released in 2012. Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness 2010 was released on June 22, 2010, and reflects interagency agreements on a set of priorities and strategies. To view a copy of the Federal Strategic Plan, visit the US Interagency Council on Homelessness is online at http://usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset library/USICH OpeningDoors Amendment201 5 FINAL.pdf A summary of the amendment to the Federal Strategic Plan was released in 2015, and is online at http://usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset library/Summary Changes 2015 OD Amendment.pdf 13 A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon Acknowledgements to the 2015 Homeless Assessment Report The 2015 Homeless Assessment Report is prepared by the Washington County Department of Housing Services in partnership with members of the Housing and Supportive Services Network (HSSN) and oversight provided by the Homeless Plan Advisory Committee (HPAC). Washington County gratefully acknowledges the generous contribution of time and expertise from many individuals and agencies that provide housing and services to the homeless men, women, and children living in our community. A Road Home recognizes the involvement of elected officials, community leaders and partner agencies who share the same vision to one day end homelessness for those persons seeking safe and stable housing. HOMELESS PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE(HPAC) • Commissioner Dick Schouten,Washington County • Kristin Griffey, Homeless Advocate • Councilor Marland H. Henderson,City of Tigard • Ramsay Weit, Citizen At-Large • Sheriff Pat Garrett,Washington County • Robin Shultz, Oregon Dept.of Human Services • Adolph 'Val' Valfre,Jr., Housing Authority of • Lai-Lani Ovalles, United Way of the Columbia Washington County Willamette • Carol Herron, St.Anthony's Severe Weather Shelter • Russ Dondero, Citizen At-Large • David Ruelas, Bienestar • Samira Godil, SW Community Health Center • Janice Burger, Providence Health System • Steven Berger, Community Corrections, • Jerralynn Ness, Community Action Washington County • Jerry Jones,Jr., Lanphere Construction • Vera Stoulil, Boys And Girls Aid HOUSING AND SUPPORTIVE SERVICES NETWORK(HSSN) • 211 info • Lutheran Community Services NW • Barbara Nelson, Citizen Advocate • NARA Northwest Department of Mental Health, • Beaverton Round Executive Suites Washington County • Beaverton School District • Office of Community Development,Washington • Bienestar County • Boys And Girls Aid • Open Door Counseling Center • Bridges To Change • Oregon Department of Human Services • Calvin Presbyterian • Oregon Department of Education • Care Oregon • Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles • Cascade AIDS Project • Oregon Food Bank • Catholic Charities • Oregon Housing and Community Services • City of Beaverton • Pacific University • City of Hillsboro • Portland Community College • CODA, Inc. • Portland Housing Center • Columbia Care Services • REACH Community Development, Inc. • Community Action Organization • Ride Connection • Community Partners for Affordable Housing • Rolling Hills Community Church • Community Warehouse • Sequoia Mental Health Services Inc. • Department of Community Corrections,Wash. Co. • Sheriffs Office,Washington County • Department of Housing Services,Wash. Co. • Social Security Agency • Disability,Aging and Veteran Services,Wash. Co. • Sonrise Church • Domestic Violence Resource Center • St.Anthony's Catholic Church(Tigard) • Easter Seals of Oregon • St. Francis Catholic Church(Sherwood) • Families for Independent Living(FIL) • SW Community Health Clinic • Family Promise/Interfaith Hospitality Network • The Salvation Army • Forest Grove School District • Transition Youth • Forest Grove United Church of Christ • U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development • Good Neighbor Center Shelter • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs • Goodwill Industries • Virginia Garcia Memorial Health Center • HomePlate • Washington County Cooperative Library Services • Housing Authority of Washington County • Washington County Reentry Council • Housing Independence • Welcome Home Coalition • Job Corps • Willamette West Habitat for Humanity, Inc. • Jubilee Transition Homes • Worksource Oregon • LifeWorks Northwest • Write Around Portland • Luke-Dort, Inc. • Youth Contact Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 14 Washington County, Oregon (This Page Intentionally Left Blank) 15 A Road Home: 2015 Homeless Assessment Report Washington County, Oregon Oregon Department of Education Students Experiencing Homelessness Definitions of Homeless Children and Youth 17 k Homeless Students by School District(Washington County) 18 Homeless Students in Oregon 19 • r W al a Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 16 Washington County, Oregon HOMELESS STUDENTS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY SCHOOLS Definitions of Homeless Children and Youth The Education for Homeless Children and Youth (EHCY) program is part of the No Child Left Behind Act and is more commonly called "the McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Program". Each school district is required to have a McKinney-Vento Homeless Liaison to assist children and youth experiencing homelessness to enroll in, attend, and succeed in school. Liaisons ensure students are enrolled in school, have the supplies they need and provide referrals to the community services for shelter, health care and counseling. This effort includes data reporting to state and federal officials. As provided by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Student Liaison, the data below reflects those homeless children and youth (Kindergarten through 12 grade) who lack a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence, and includes children and youth who: • are sharing the housing of other persons ("doubled-up") due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or a similar reason; • are living in motels, hotels, trailer parks, or camping grounds due to the lack of adequate alternative accommodations; • are living in emergency or transitional shelters; • are awaiting foster care placement; • have a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings; • are living in vehicles, parks, public spaces, abandoned buildings, substandard housing, bus or train stations, or similar settings; and • are migrant children and youth (as defined under NCLB Title IC — Migrant Education) who qualify as homeless for the purposes of this subtitle because the children are living in circumstances described above. The Oregon Department of Education reports the following homeless students in Washington County: Total Homeless Children in Washington County Schools 3000 — 2298 2383 26O2 2500 2000 /1140 v 1500 ♦"�� 1000 ° 500 - m m 0 School School School School School School School School School = Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Source: Oregon Department of Education,October 2015 17 Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness Washington County, Oregon HOMELESS STUDENT COUNT (K-12): SCHOOL YEAR 2014-2015 Total = 2,148 students in Washington County Homelessness as a percent (%) of School District total Student Enrollment District #Homeless %of District Sheltered: Sheltered: Unsheltered: Unsheltered: Unaccompanied Students Enrollment Emergency Doubled-up Vehicle/Tent/ Hotel/Motel Youth Housing Other 2,148 115 1,762 125 138 419 Banks 7 0.63% 0 7 0 0 0 Beaverton 1,380 3.47% 61 1,169 78 72 335 Forest Grove 100 1.64% 9 75 11 0 18 Gaston 48 8.57% 0 44 0 0 8 Hillsboro 386 1.85% 29 300 26 33 39 Sherwood 39 0.75% 0 38 0 0 0 Tigard-Tualatin 188 1.48% 16 129 10 33 19 Source:Oregon Department of Education,October 2015 Tri-County Comparison 2008-09 2014-15 % County School School + / - Year Year Clackamas 1,072 1,288 20% Washington 1,844 2,148 16% Multnomah 3,137 4,059 29% Source:Oregon Department of Education.October 2015 Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness 18 Washington County, Oregon I Homeless Students in Oregon HOMELESS STUDENT COUNT (K-12): SCHOOL YEAR 2014-2015 Total = 20,524 students in Oregon The following is a summary of school districts in Oregon reporting greater than 500 students homeless within the school district. School District 2014-15 Highest Homeless Homeless Student Counts Student Count: Hi to Low Beaverton SD 48J 1,380 Reynolds SD 7 1,350 Portland SD 1J 1,325 Medford SD 549C 1206 Salem-Keizer SD 24J 971 Eugene SD 4J 722 Bend-LaPine SD 1 680 Reynolds SD 7 754 Lincoln County SD 571 Redmond SD 2J 543 Source:Oregon Department of Education,October 2015 Number of Homeless Students in Oregon by School Year 2007-08 15,859 2008-09 18,051 2009-10 19,040 2010-11 20,545 2011-12 20,370 2012-13 18,165 2013-14 18,902 2014-15 20,524 Source:Oregon Department of Education,October 2015 19 Appendix A: Students Experiencing Homelessness Washington County, Oregon AIS-2359 B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Discussion on Upcoming Contracts Prepared For: Joseph Barrett Submitted By: Joseph Barrett,Finance and Information Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Local Contract Review Board Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE A discussion of an upcoming contract for the city's Dirksen Nature Park-Education Center&Pathway Improvements project that will be presented to the Local Contract Review Board for an award decision at a future business meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff is asking Council to provide direction and inform staff of any additional information they would like to have presented during the award presentation for this contract. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY As part of the overall development of Dirksen Nature Park, the city plans improvements to the Environmental Education Center on the site.A general description of the work includes the following: 1. Mobilization,Traffic Control,Erosion Control,Clearing and Grubbing. 2. Renovations to the Education Center Building(Roofing,Cladding,Doors,Decking,etc.) 3. Parking lot improvements. 4. Installation of a LIDA water quality facility at the Environmental Education Center Building. 5. Installation of landscaping. 6. Installation of an 8'wide concrete path from Summer Creek Bridge to the Fanno Creek Trail. 7. Performance of additional and incidental work as called for by the specifications and plans. The city issued an Invitation to Bid for this work on September 9,2015 with bids due back to the city on September 24th. The city received the following three bids: 1.Lee Contractors -$180,686 2.Brown Contracting- $252,248 3.Pac Green Nursery&Landscape - Incomplete Bid Engineer's Estimate- $122,610 Staff reviewed the bids and has found that Lee Contractors (the contractor that completed the entryway monuments downtown) is a responsible bidder and submitted the lowest bid. However, the bid is nearly $60,000 higher than the city's estimate. This is in large part due to higher than expected concrete work- nearly$30,000 higher than the city's projections -and higher than expected clearing and grubbing costs. In an effort to keep future phases of the park's development at their current projected budget levels, the city is forced to look at scaling back on the work on the Environmental Education Center due to these overages. Staff is proposing to eliminate the proposed concrete path along with other minor modifications to bring the project back in alignment with available resources. Staff has discussed this with Lee Contractors and the scaled back project cost would be$115,886. Staff is looking for Council to provide their thoughts on this project alteration and guidance on any additional information Council would like to see. The plan,if a new Invitation to Bid is not issued,is to bring an award presentation before the Local Contract Review Board on November 10th. OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION This is the first time the Council has discussed this contract. Fiscal Impact Cost: Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where budgeted?: Parks Capital Fund Additional Fiscal Notes: With changes included in a 1st Quarter Supplemental,the FY 2015-2016 construction budget for the Dirksen Park Improvements is $194,429 with an additional$60,000 in contingency for a total of$254,429 available. Of this,a minimum of$116,000, funded from the Urban Forestry Fund and a contribution from Agilyx Corporation,is for the Oak Savanna project. Additionally,approximately$8,000 in funds must be set aside for construction administration and permitting costs. This would leave no more than$130,429 available for this work. Attachments No file(s)attached ;� 1 S��s,o� / --2 2- c i s— ,4 yen��A-/ledi B y Proposed- Environmental Education S U M III E R CREEK PROPERTY Center Improvements Master Plan A.K.A. D/RKSEN NATURE PARK June 2012 Entrance Community Trail/Sidewalk ` +# ti,-,4,r,l_6 ,.....:4--. ----v-f —-DOP-rt�-/-1._....._..____s_oLhipi s.1,.--- Parking(10 to 15 cars) Entrance Picnic/ -� o Interpretive ti;= Nature Play.__ -— __ __-- Environmental Education ✓`. savanna Building & Parking Lot& Area L- — overlook (tots) /.,, Drainage Improvements Wetland Overlook Restroom/Shelter - , ,,x q,,,, '' S - -- -- Nature Play(5-12) / too 3 /r // ,., „ , i .74 ,Replan ."' t cL �c�. • ,e Forested Wetland overlook ;' (\ i h$ , / , 4 l/ ( i Coniferous ,• ((/ /. Iii i Fanno Creek Trail Entrance Big Cedar `w Forest Y i 1 ' i l 8-foot Paved Trail Soft Surface Trail _ _ } . ' - Sidewalk Network ,.- '� 5-foot Chip Trail / . �•:�-; 3-foot Chip Trail I. I Boardwalk et C' X. `'� .,,-.�,. -Summer Creekoverlooki,r' Entrance 51 Water Quality Station • • Nature Play Entrance ED Structure , ,er ,... -_----.• „*.', it * Education Node Fowler Middle School AIS-2396 C. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: Chronic Nuisance Property update TMC 7.42 Prepared For: Alan Orr,Police Submitted By: Lisa Shaw,Police Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Staff recommends revisions to the Chronic Nuisance Property Ordinance (TMC 7.42) to revise and add language which will allow a broader range of enforcement in order to protect neighborhoods from nuisance properties. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends revising chronic nuisance Property Ordinance (TMC 7.42) with the following updated language and definitions as listed below. Summary 1.7.42.020 Item C:Revise number of nuisance occurrences from four(4) to three (3),and time period from sixty (60) to one hundred twenty (120) days. Revised language includes a violation for three nuisance complaints received within one hundred twenty(120) days. 2.7.42.020 Item D: Language defining nuisance property for which a court has issued a search warrant based on probable cause that possession,manufacture, or delivery of a controlled substance occurred at the location. 3.7.42.020 Item(s) 9-16: Definitions added including prostitution, theft,arson, sexual abuse, contributing to the sexual delinquency of a minor,sexual misconduct,alcoholic liquor violations, offensive littering, illegal gambling,animal abuse,animal neglect,and animal abandonment. 4.7.42.040 Items B &C:Revise language from three (3) nuisance occurrences in sixty (60) to two (2) in one hundred twenty (120) days. After receiving two (2) nuisance occurrence complaints in one hundred twenty(120) days the homeowner or registered agent of the residence will receive a warning letter identifying the problem to be remedied or fines may be imposed after the third occurrence. 5.7.42.050 Item 2: Revise civil penalty from$500.00 to up to $1,000.00 per day for each day a nuisance activity occurred on the property after three (3) occurrences within a one hundred twenty(120) day period. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Chronic nuisance properties negatively effect the livability and safety of impacted neighborhoods and place a strain on City resources. The existing Chronic Nuisance Property code does not address several crimes commonly associated with chronic nuisance properties. Staff proposes to add these crimes to the code definitions: prostitution,theft, arson,sexual abuse, sexual misconduct,alcoholic liquor violations,offensive littering,illegal gambling and animal abuse. Additionally,the current'occurrence'and 'timing' thresholds that must be met before any consequences are triggered do not provide strong enough tools to hold property owners accountable in a timely manner. The proposed revisions would reduce the number of nuisance occurrences from four(4) to three (3) and increase the time period assessed from sixty(60) days to one hundred twenty (120) days. Staff reviewed data related to a particularly egregious chronic nuisance property in order to estimate related costs. Over the most recent five year period,Tigard Police responded 233 separate times to one particular house.This equates to an average of 46 calls for service per year. Over the most recent three year period, Tigard Police spent at least 140 hours responding to this property.The cost to the department related to these most recent calls is estimated to have been between $9,000 and$18,000. Every hour spent responding to a nuisance call is an hour that is unavailable for more pro-active community policing and places a strain the department's ability to respond to other issues. The current language associated with chronic nuisance property fines is ambiguous and not enough of a deterrent to be effective. Proposed revisions include updating the penalty from$500 to $1,000 and clarifying that the fine may be levied every day that a nuisance activity occurs on the property after the 120 day 3 occurrence threshold is met. OTHER ALTERNATIVES If the Chronic Nuisance Property Code (TMC 7.42) is not updated with the proposed revisions,the current code with less effective language and more lenient thresholds will remain in effect. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS This change supports Tigard Police Department goals to "reduce crime and the fear of crime" and to "enhance the safety and security of Tigard's residents,visitors and businesses. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION TMC 7.42 was previously updated in March 2012. The current changes will come before Council during the November 10th Business Meeting. Attachments TMC markups 7.42 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 7.42 CHRONIC NUISANCE Tigard Police Department or his/her designee. PROPERTY B. "City manager" means the city manager Sections: or his/her designee. 7.42.010 Short Title C. "Chronic nuisance property" means 7.42.015 Incorporation of State Statute property upon which four three (3) or more 7.42.020 Definitions distinct occurrences of any of the following acts 7.42.030 Chronic Nuisance Property or behaviors take place during any 60-day one 7.42.040 Prefiling Notification Procedure hundred twenty day(120)period. 7.42.045 Commencement of Actions— Summons and Complaint 1. Property for which a court has issued 7.42.050 Remedies a search warrant based on probable cause that 7.42.060 Defenses—Mitigation of Civil possession, manufacture or delivery of a Penalty controlled substance or related offenses as defined 7.42.070 Closure During Pendency of in ORS 167.203, ORS 475.005 through ORS Action—Emergency Closures 475.285 and/or ORS 475.940 through ORS 7.42.080 Enforcement of Closure 475.995 has occurred within the previous 120 Order—Costs—Civil Penalty days and the Chief of Police has determined that 7.42.085 Tenant Relocation Costs the search warrant was based on evidence of 7.42.090 Attorney Fees continuous or repeated chronic nuisance activities 7.42.100 Severability at the property. 7.42.110 Nonexclusive Remedy 2. "Harassment," as described in ORS 7.42.010 Short Title 166.065; The ordinance codified in this chapter shall 3. "Fire or discharge of a gun or be known as the "Chronic Nuisance Ordinance," weapon," as described in Section 7.32.120 of this and may also be referred to herein as "this code; chapter."(Ord. 94-11) 4. "Disorderly conduct," as described 7.42.015 Incorporation of State Statute in ORS 166.025; Any reference to state statute incorporated 5. "Public indecency," as described in into this chapter refers to the statute in effect on Section 7.32.110 of this code; the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter. (Ord.94-11) 6. "Unlawful use or possession of weapons or firearms," as described in ORS 7.42.020 Definitions 166.210 through 166.275; As used in this chapter,or any code provision 7. "Violation of the Uniform referenced by this chapter, the following Controlled Substances Act," as described in ORS definitions apply. Chapter 475; A. "Chief of police" means the chief of the 8. "Assault," as described in ORS 7-42-I Code Update:3/12 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 163.160, 163.165, 163.175,or 163.185; F. "Owner" means the person or persons having legal or equitable title to the property. 9. "Menacing," as described in ORS 163.190. G. "Property" means any real property including land and that which is affixed, 10. "Prostitution"or related offenses as incidental or appurtenant to land, including but described in ORS 167.007 through ORS 167.017. not limited to any premises, room, apartment, house, building or structure or any separate part or 11. "Theft" as described in ORS portion thereof,whether permanent or not. 164.015 through ORS 164.140. H. "Responsible party" includes each of the 12. "Arson" or related offenses as following: described in ORS 164.315 through ORS 164.335. 1. The owner of the property, or the 13. "Sexual Abuse, Contributing to the owner's manager or agent or other person in Delinquency of a Minor, or Sexual Misconduct" control of the property on behalf of the owner; or as described in ORS 163.415 through ORS 163.445. 2. The person occupying the property, including bailee, lessee, tenant or other person 14. Alcoholic liquor violations as having possession.(Ord. 03-08;Ord. 94-11) described in ORS 471.105 thorough ORS 471.482. 7.42.030 Chronic Nuisance Property 15. "Offensive Littering" as described A. The acts or omissions described herein in ORS 164.805. are hereby declared to be public nuisances of the sort that commonly recur in relation to a given 16. "Illegal Gambling" as described in property,thereby requiring the remedies set out in ORS 167.117, and/or ORS 167.122 through ORS this chapter. 1 67.127. B. Any property within the City of Tigard 17. "Animal Abuse or Neglect", ORS which becomes chronic nuisance property is in 167.315 through ORS 167.330; "Animal violation of this chapter and subject to its Abandonment", ORS 167.340; "Animal remedies. Fighting", ORS 167.355; or"Dog Fighting", ORS 167.365. C. Any person who is a responsible party for property which becomes a chronic nuisance property shall be in violation of this chapter and D. "Code enforcement officer" means the subject to its remedies. (Ord.94-11) chief of police or the city attorney, as designated by the city manager. 7.42.040 Prefiling Notification Procedure E. "Hearings officer" or "civil infractions A. Except as otherwise noted herein, hearings officer" means the municipal judge of notwithstanding Section 1.16.060.B of this code, the City of Tigard. this section sets out procedures to be used in processing an infraction of this chapter. 7-42-2 Code Update:3/12 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE B. After three two (2) occurrences of any of the acts or behaviors listed in Section 2. The name and address of each 7.42.020.0 of this chapter within a sib-(60) 120- respondent; day period, the chief of police shall provide notification via certified mail, stating the times 3. The infraction with which the and places of the alleged occurrences and the respondent is charged; potential liability for violation of this chapter, to all responsible parties for the property. 4. The date, time, and place at which Responsible parties for a given property shall be the hearing on the infraction is to take place; presumed from the following: 5. An explanation of the respondent's 1. The owner and the owner's agent, obligation to appear at this hearing, and that as shown on the tax rolls of Washington County; failure to appear may result in a default judgment being taken against the respondent; 2. The resident of the property, as shown on the records of the water department. 6. An explanation of the respondent's right to a hearing, right to representation by C. After three two occurrences of any of counsel at personal expense, right to cross the acts or behaviors listed in Section 7.42.020.0 examine adverse witnesses, and right to of this chapter within a 60-day 120 day period, compulsory process for the production of notification shall be provided as described in witnesses; subsection B of this section. (Ord. 12-01 §2; Ord. 94-11) 7. Notice that the cost of the hearing, including witness fees, may be charged to the 7.42.045 Commencement of Actions— respondent if the final order of the court finds that Summons and Complaint the property is a chronic nuisance property. A. A uniform infraction summons and C. The uniform infraction complaint shall complaint, containing the following parts, may be contain the following information: served upon any responsible party for chronic nuisance property, citing that party into municipal 1. The date, time, and place the court. alleged infractions occurred; 1. The summons; 2. The date on which the complaint was issued; 2. The complaint;and 3. A notice to the respondent that a 3. A description of the alleged civil complaint has been filed with the Municipal occurrences leading to violation of this chapter, Court. stating the times and places of those occurrences. D. Service of the summons and complaint B. The uniform infraction summons shall shall be accomplished as described in Section contain the following information: 1.16.230 of this code. In addition to the affidavit described in subsection G of that section, a return 1. The file number; receipt of certified mailing which indicates 7-42-3 Code Update:3/12 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE delivery of the summons and complaint to the pursuant to subsection A of this section, the respondent's last known address, or a certified respondent may file a bond acceptable to the mailing which has been returned by the post office court. Such bond shall be in an amount set by the "unclaimed," shall also create a rebuttable court not to exceed the value of the property presumption that the respondent had the required closed as determined by the court, and shall be notice. conditioned upon the non-recurrence of any of the acts or behaviors listed at Section 7.42.020.0 of E. The hearing for determination as to this chapter for a period of one year after the whether an infraction has been committed shall judgment. Acceptance of the bond described take place in the manner described in Sections herein is further subject to the court's satisfaction 1.16.250 through 1.16.300 and 1.16.320 of this of the respondent's good faith commitment to code. abatement of the nuisance.(Ord. 94-11) F. Subject to the limitations of Section 7.42.060 Defenses—Mitigation of Civil 1.16.230.G of this code, a default judgment may Penalty be entered against a respondent who fails to appear at the scheduled hearing. Upon such A. It is a defense to an action brought judgment, the court may prescribe the remedies pursuant to this chapter that the responsible party described in this chapter. (Ord. 12-01 §2; Ord. 94- at the time in question could not, in the exercise of 11) reasonable care or diligence, determine that the property had become chronic nuisance property, 7.42.050 Remedies or could not, in spite of the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, control the conduct leading to A. Upon finding that the respondent has the finding that the property is chronic nuisance violated this chapter,the court may: property. However, it is no defense under this subsection that the party was not at the property at 1. Require that the chronic nuisance the time of the incidents leading to the chronic property be closed and secured against all use and nuisance situation. occupancy for a period of not less than 30,but not more than 180,days;and/or B. In implementing the remedies described in this chapter, the court may consider any of the 2. - • - ' •-•• • . . - • following factors, as they may be appropriate, and $-5-00t-and/or If the court determines a property to shall cite those found applicable: be a Chronic Nuisance Property, the court mad impose a civil penalty of up to $1,000.00 per day 1. The actions taken by the owner(s) for each day a nuisance activity occurred on the to mitigate or correct the problem at the property; property after three (3) nuisance activities have occurred on the property within a 120 day time 2. The financial condition of the period. owner; 3. Employ any other remedy deemed 3. Whether the problem at the by the court to be appropriate to abate the property was repeated or continuous; nuisance. 4. The magnitude or gravity of the B. In lieu of closure of the property problem; 7-42-4 Code Update:3/12 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE C. The city manager may, within 14 days 5. The cooperativeness of the of written decision by the court, submit a signed owner(s)with the city in remedying the problem; and detailed statement of costs to the court for its review. If no objection to the statement is made 6. The cost to the city of investigating within the period prescribed by Oregon Rule of and correcting or attempting to correct the Civil Procedure 68, a copy of the statement, condition; including a legal description of the property, shall be forwarded to the office of the city fmance 7. Any other factor deemed by the director who thereafter shall enter the same in the court to be relevant. (Ord. 94-11) city's lien docket in the same manner prescribed by Section 1.16.710 of this code. 7.42.070 Closure During Pendency of Action—Emergency Closures D. Persons assessed the costs of closure and/or civil penalty pursuant to this chapter shall In addition to any other remedy available to be jointly and severally liable for the payment the city under this chapter, in the event that the thereof to the city. (Ord. 12-01 §2; Ord. 03-08; chief of police finds that a property constitutes an Ord. 94-11) immediate threat to the public safety and welfare, the city may apply to any court of competent 7.42.085 Tenant Relocation Costs jurisdiction for such interim relief as is deemed by the city manager to be appropriate. In such event, A "tenant" (as defined by ORS 90.100(16)) the notification and commencement of action of chronic nuisance property may be entitled to procedures set forth in Sections 7.42.040 and reasonable relocation costs, if without actual 7.42.045 need not be complied with. (Ord. 03-08; notice the tenant moved into the property after the Ord. 94-11) property owner or his/her agent received notice of an action brought pursuant to this chapter. Any 7.42.080 Enforcement of Closure allowable costs will be determined by the city, Order—Costs—Civil Penalty and shall be a liability upon the owner of the chronic nuisance property. (Ord.94-11) A. The court may authorize the city to physically secure the property against use or 7.42.090 Attorney Fees occupancy in the event that the owner(s)fail to do so within the time specified by the court. In any action brought pursuant to this chapter, the court may, in its discretion, award B. The court may assess on the property reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party. owner the following costs incurred by the city in (Ord. 94-11) effecting a closure of property: 7.42.100 Severability 1. Costs incurred in actually physically securing the property against use; If any provision of this chapter, or its application to any person or circumstance, is held 2. Administrative costs and attorney's to be invalid for any reason, the remainder of the fees in bringing the action for violation of this chapter, or the application of its provisions to chapter. other persons or circumstances, shall not in any way be affected. (Ord. 94-11) 7-42-5 Code Update:3/12 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE 7.42.110 Nonexclusive Remedy The remedy described in this chapter shall not be the exclusive remedy of the city for the acts and behaviors described in Section 7.42.020.C. (Ord.94-11) • 7-42-6 Code Update:3/12 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.B - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: October 27, 2015 (Limited to 2 minutes or less,please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda and items on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a at of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. Al written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in Cite of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: 11/e VoTe. Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address /325 3 5,ti, DA'eC'G'ral City en`yd State V X. Zip 77223 Phone No. 503 - 5 2 / l Name: 1C' c,Yl `Ie, 1 l _ I "! ( Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address -3°S dv J City Ti 6 A- State Zip Phone No. 5'03 - '8 3 c8/ Name: a thel S (7;44-R STE C-k Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: 1411,0L()t1J Address I 1 7 7( 51A-) 1 5-711 e'r Co 5-- f�C City 11 64-4-b (1o,tJ l S.r n State O 1` Zip ! 7 a)-3 Phone No. 5-0 --3 L 7—4 /i1/ CITIZEN COMMUNICATION I:\ADM\CATHY\000 City Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\citizen communication 150922.doc AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.B - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: October 27, 2015 (Limited to 2 minutes or less,please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda and items on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. Al written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: \ c ,' Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will 1 '._- P tN tx\ help the presiding officer pronounce: Address s\-\) .s � W 1 b City 1 \i\k \ State - Zip�n��5 Phone No.h� ` C,�LV' J� Name: G f" Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address 75SQ ��1J li 4A/' n S S� f Vbt --, �5o 1" State ON< Zip (?22 Phone No. 510. ' Name: PQCtA eA- Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address 64?-11— ) k) 7 (7.k I v City State 0 Zip Phone No. Co` — � � "-q CITIZEN COMMUNICATION I\ADM\CATHY\000 City Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\citizen communication 150922.doc PIP AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.B - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION DATE: October 27, 2015 (Limited to 2 minutes or less,please) The Council wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda and items on the agenda, but asks that you first try to resolve your concerns through staff. This is a Cite of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. Al written and oral testimony becomes part of the public record. The names and addresses of.persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF Please Print CONTACTED Name: L� Cr—e(t' f — ` /' ee( (rimed Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: G .� Address `1if° Vie/1Y City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address City State Zip Phone No. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION I:\ADM\CATHY\000 City Recorder-Records Resources and Policies\CCSignup\citizen communication 150922.doc SUPPLEIVIENTAL PAS KET , City of Tigard FOR & Measure No. 34-241 (DATE OF MEETING) Ballot Title Kee 7 �rr� n -- 0/ 4 Z« (' 41 tin/�6t�!`-r - Authorizes General Obligation Bonds For Tigard Community and Recreation Center Question:Shall Tigard Be Authorized To Issue Up To $34,500,000 Of General Obligation Bonds For A Community and Recreation Center?If the bonds are approved,they will be payable from taxes on property or property ownership that are not subject to the limits of sections 11 and 11 b. ,!, tfsti3- ,. Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. • Summary:This Measure would authorize the City to issue up to$34,500,000 of general obligation bonds to pay for capital costs to provide a community and recreation center, including to acquire property and construct a community " � and recreation center,parking lot and related amenities, and finance issuance costs. The primary purpose of the community and recreation center is to provide community " x event space,athletic,fitness and recreational facilities. ■ • The City expects the community and recreation center to be operated by a non-profit organization,such as the YMCA. This measure is estimated to result in a tax of$0.51 per $1,000 of assessed value per year,or approximately$122 per year on a home assessed at$240,000. The Alternate Format The bonds may be issued in multiple series and each series Ballot (AFB) may mature over no more than 21 years. Property taxes are assessed after bonds are issued. AFB is a voting tool which allows a voter with disabilities Explanatory Statement to vote privately and This Measure,if approved,would authorize the City to issue up to$34,500,000 of general obligation bonds to pay for capi- independently. tal costs to provide a community and recreation center, includ- ing costs to acquire property and to construct a community and recreation center,parking lot and related amenities,and If you wish to have more finance issuance costs.The primary purpose of the communi- ty and recreation center is to provide community event space, athletic,fitness and recreational facilities. sign up to receive the AFB The City expects the community center to be operated by a contact the Voter Assistance non-profit organization,such as the YMCA. Team at 503-846-5820. This measure is estimated to result in a tax of$0.51 per $1,000 of assessed value per year,or approximately$122 per Email your request to: year on a home assessed at$240,000. vap @co.washington.or,us The bonds may be issued in multiple series and each series may mature over no more than 21 years. Property taxes are Or assessed after bonds are issued. Submitted by: Visit the Elections website at: Marty Wine ' www.co.washington.orusielections City of Tigard WC-16 CONTINUED 0 City of Tigard Measure No 34-241 Arguments Tigard YMCA.We will be guided by a Board of Managers Argument in Favor composed of Tigard citizens. We should have built a Community-Recreation Center 20 years The YMCA is not a for-profit business.Our mission is to serve ago. all who need us.We are a 501C3 charity.We are not a church.classes and Vote YES on 34-241 and let's get to work.This is good for Tigard! services s of interest anndrvva value ole everyone 9your city. This information furnished by: We are sensitive to the needs of seniors living on fixed Marland Henderson,Tigard City Councilor incomes.We provide specialized exercise programs and positive,uplifting classes and social activities for seniors.We have sliding fee scales and scholarships for anyone in need. Under Plan B,Silver Sneakers and Silver Fit members receive Argument in Favor discounted or free YMCA membership. • Throughout my tenure on the Tigard City Council,I have championed the cause of recreation,trails,and parks. I'm Our teen teenager living in Tigard,mb hiP are free or very low w cost for proud working the accomplishments s,bu one s progress we've made in school, a tra nd retain homeowners and businness,/and encourage develop pa healthy lifestyle and stay away from drugs. attract quality development that enhances our community and maintains the livability which is so important to us all,we must This is our other important benefit will provide do Tigard.lt more in investment will with surrounding cities. This$34.5 million than just provide programs and recreational opportunities.We beeefinent wul serve as an economic facility will l s yielding look for people who are hurting and struggling-for whatever benefits far outweighing cost. This facility will serve as a p p catalyst creating jobs,and attracting business and residential reason-and we are there to help. use to the area. There will be a significant net positive return on Thank you for considering bringing the YMCA to Tigard. investment for taxpayers. Bob Hall President and Chief Executive Officer City recreation priorities are especially important if we hope to YMCA of Columbia-Willamette create community gathering and walkable destination places, where memories are made,moral leadership is garnered and This information furnished by: families want to bring their children. As a,fitness,recreation Bob Hall,President and CEO,YMCA of Columbia-Willamette and healthy lifestyle consultant(Bio at Linkedln)I know the YMCA is the best operator for our city's community by recreation city, center. The YMCA Daxko Feasibility Study,paid for ti Argument in Favor YMCA and Wash County commission showed overwhelming support for the YMCA,with a majority wanting it Downtown. It a is important to remember the citizens of Tigard will make the Poputime.Tigard over ready for Tigard is now n center.ter. iithta offer a community final decision on the location and operator. amenities that will benefit a wide range of citizens.The building itself will be a source of pride for Tigard for the next 50 years plus. While providing quality services,having the YMCA as our The benefits of timing are that real estate prices are on the operator of the Tigard taxpayers ll r financial an not o mbmeizing g year that we wait will operation of the facility. All our financial commitments are upswing and interest rates are historically low,both positive covered by this bond,and we will own the land and building factors when securing real estate.Every y free and clear in 20 years. The YMCA will pay all employee only add on to the final price tag. wages and benefits,pay for building maintenance,and provide the fitness equipment. Family valued offerings: teen jobs, I a Tigard will that concerned the d about and have a operates to which city y reputable internships,qualified senior teen center,toddler and up 9 pool(s),care,aerobics programs and community low events center and firs at Then we will have a vibrant community center building hat can built public), P accessed by everyone from youth to seniors.It is time. public meeting space etc. . I encourage a YES vote on Measure 34-241. Tom Anderson This information furnished by: Owner Tigard Real Estate Marc Woodard,Tigard City Councilor Former Tigard Planning Commissioner President This information furnished by: Argument in Favor Tom Anderson The YMCA will provide Tigard with many benefits.Housed in the 90,000 SF indoor Community Recreation Center will be Argument in Favor swimming pools and gymnasiums,child watch and a coffee shop,classrooms,exercise equipment,teen center,large We could have followed the lead of Sherwood and built a catered meeting hall and much more. YMCA Community Recreation Center in Tigard decades ago. We will bring 175 paying jobs and 200 volunteer opportunities They have a 20 year head start on us,but the good news is the to Tigard.The YMCA has been building families and successful Sherwood YMCA shows us what we can do. communities for 171 years,and we are experienced at running large recreation centers-but you will be in control of your I am impressed by this grassroots movement by the people of The printing of these arguments-does not constitute an endorsementhy Washington County,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made In the arguments. WC-17 City of Tigard Measure No. 34-241 Arguments Tigard.This is virtually a turnkey project created by a team of This information furnished by: Tigard citizens,and the City Council have referred it to us,the Frank Chinn citizens of Tigard,for the final decision. This will be a wonderful addition to our city,and the YMCA will serve every age and demographic found among our 50,000 Argument in Favor residents. Tigard needs a Community Recreation Center,and we need it As a new grandmother I enjoy taking my grandchildren to the new downtown.The YMCA is the obvious choice to operate it for us. Elisabeth Price Park,but I am acutely aware Tigard does not offer much in the way of multigenerational family activities.I agree with This is what the citizens and businesses of Tigard have told us the vast majority of Tigard citizens,who in a recent poll,said they they want.I'm impressed by the fact more than 40 Downtown want the YMCA built Downtown,in the heart of Tigard. businesses signed a petition saying they want the YMCA built in Downtown Tigard.No one knows the area and its needs I live on Bull Mountain and can easily drive an extra mile to better than these business people.Their survival depertds on reach the Y,but for those seniors and others who do not drive, it.Such broad support for building the YMCA in our City Center being downtown and just a quick walk from the Tri-Met Transit gives me good direction that I should support them. Center is a necessity. A recent professional poll of Tigard voters showed 80% Safety is also important.The Tigard Police are located favorable feelings toward building a Community Recreation Downtown,the speed limit is 25 miles an hour and Tigard spent Center,with the majority wanting it Downtown.Even before nearly$8 million on Street improvements,building the best this study,community activists and students from Tigard High sidewalk system in our city. School visited homes throughout the city and collected more than 1000 signatures supporting this project. Let's continue the Downtown development momentum and build our very own YMCA.Twenty years late is still better than never. Much money and hard work has been expended fixing up Let's vote YES and bring the YMCA to Tigard! downtown Tigard. The infrastructure is in place and it is impressive.But for Downtown to succeed it needs people... Kathy Fastenau We need feet on the street! This information furnished by: Using the successful Sherwood YMCA is an example,we Kathy Fastenau expect 800 additional people per day to come downtown to visit the YMCA,and you know they will be spending their dollars at Downtown businesses.Bringing Tigard people Downtown is key to the success of our City Center. Argument in Favor I am an architect and planner,and since moving to Tigard a The livability of our community can make such a difference in decade ago have served on the Tigard Planning Commission our day-to-day lives.This is why it's important for us to vote and the City Center Advisory Committee,which oversees YES for the Tigard YMCA. downtown Tigard.I also was a founder of the Tigard Development Association,also focused on Downtown.I want As a former teacher in the Tigard Public Schools,I've seen first- to support Downtown Tigard and see it become the vibrant, hand how important it is for kids and their families to have access thriving heart of the City of Tigard. to wholesome,engaging activities.A project like the YMCA provides exactly this opportunity at a moderate,affordable cost. I recommend you vote yes for the Community Recreation Center. it The Y would not only enliven our downtown area,but would Richard Shavey also provide a wonderful place for our young people to go. This information furnished by: For our teens in particular,the teen center will become a safe, Richard J.Shavey positive,supervised experience.And incredibly,every Tigard teen between the ages of 12 and 18 will be provided with free membership!No one will be turned away. What makes the YMCA perfect for Tigard is that it is a nonprofit Argument in Favor organization-not a for-profit business.The YMCA mission is not Voters can be confident the figures used to prepare this to see how much cash it can pull out of our community,but to bond measure are based on careful research and reflect due see how many benefits it can share with all who call Tigard home. diligence in preparation. And even though the Y will be important in filling the gap in I am treasurer of Friends of the Downtown Tigard YMCA,and school activities due to budget cuts,remember the Y is not just have participated throughout the process of preparing this for kids-it's for everyone.The YMCA facilities will be available proposal and developing the cost projections.A large team to all Tigard residents as it encourages a healthy lifestyle for of Tigard citizens have participated in this process.Many are people of all ages and from all walks of life. professionals in the fields required to develop and build our Community Center:Engineers,designers,builders and more. Rain or shine,the Tigard YMCA will provide a truly valuable center of indoor activity in the heart of downtown Tigard,within To determine the cost of the building we performed a triple walking distance of our other treasured cultural and community blind test,seeking construction estimates from three different - center-the Tigard Public Library. builders known to us,to the YMCA,to the City of Tigard.We • then cross-referenced the bids and vetted the estimate process This is in the best interest of our community.Please vote YES to ensure the figures are reliable. for the Tigard YMCA.Make Tigard an even better place to live. The builder with the lowest cost estimate is well-known to the Frank Chinn . people of Tigard.He's been in the business for 50 years and The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by Washington County,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made In the arguments. WC-18 f� CONTINUED City of Tigard I Measure No. 34-241 Arguments built Tigard's football stadium.He is currently building a similar am writing this endorsement in support of the proposed Tigard recreation center in Tigard for a private school.This building is YMCA.Through the years my wife,my four kids,and I have comparable to ours and came in at a lower cost per square foot. been heavily involved in our community schools,youth sports, and activities. Contracting with the YMCA to operate our Community Center gives us an experienced operator and avoids the staggering Living in Tigard and being involved in the community has been It expense of expanding city government.The YMCA accepts a great experience for us and we have benefited tremendously. all liability and pays all bills.This includes labor,benefits, We have played soccer,baseball,basketball and football at retirement,equipment,supplies,utilities,maintenance,and many Tigard venues,parks,and schools.At youth ages that more. If revenues drop below delivery costs the YMCA has are"younger"than Little League,Southside Soccer,and Tigard agreed to pay the difference. Youth Basketball we found that our children hadfew or no cost effective choices in Tigard.We chose to join groups based at This building will be a permanent public asset for the people of the YMCA in Sherwood,the HOOP in Beaverton and other Tigard.In 20 years the bond will be paid in full and we own the locations outside of Tigard. building and land free and clear. Besides the organized leagues and schools there are not Please vote yes for the Tigard Community and Recreation Center. enough affordable indoor venues in our community today. If adults want to workout indoors or participate in a casual Marsden Smith activity,there are few inexpensive choices in Tigard.Club Sport Treasurer,Friends of the Downtown Tigard YMCA and LA Fitness are excellent businesses and facilities but these businesses do not fit everyone. This information furnished by: Marsden Smith I believe adding a YMCA in or near our Tigard downtown area would be a great plus for our community.It would be another reason for people to stay in Tigard to workout,start additional athletic leagues,and connect with others from Tigard.We love Argument in Favor our community and hope this YMCA is another step in building it for our families. Our two sons grew up in the YMCA.Our whole family has been involved.The Y instills great values in our children,and all of us, Sincerely, and can and should be part of our City. Bob Carter Tigard is way overdue to have our own YMCA.It serves all ages and creates a sense of community identity and belonging. This information furnished by: Joe was born and raised in Tigard,and we raised our children Bob Carter here.There has never been a place for young people to go,a place to meet friends and hang out.Having a YMCA means our kids will finally have a safe place to go,where they will be supervised, receive guidance,and develop strong values. Argument in Favor Even with our children becoming young adults,we still have Building a Community Recreation Center is long overdue.The responsibilities as caregivers.Joe's mother is elderly,and the City must be held to its promise to create a Downtown which YMCA will provide us with,a safe place to take her where she will serve all Tigard citizens.This grassroots citizen campaign can participate in senior-friendly activities.But even more does just that,and FIXES major problems plaguing Downtown. important,as Tigard's Community Center the YMCA will provide seniors with opportunities to socialize. Citizens,business,and government are cooperating to create something our City has needed for 20 years.The Downtown This is the true meaning of a Community Center.More than Tigard YMCA will realize the City vision of a thriving Downtown anything else,it is a place for people to gather and socialize. for all. We can't stress enough how important it is Tigard people have a safe place to go. The YMCA will activate our Downtown from 5 AM to 10 PM seven days a week.See for yourself our strong support for Our Tigard YMCA will operate as a partnership with Tigard the YMCA.Drive down Main Street and look at all the big blue citizens.We will capitalize upon the 171 years of experience of YMCA posters in store windows. the YMCA,while maintaining local control.What a wonderful way to better our community and unite us as residents of this The YMCA is the best operator for our Community Center, great City. and Burnham Street in Downtown Tigard is the best location. • Burnham was completely rebuilt at a cost of$5 Million.It is We are glad to have this opportunity to help bring the YMCA to the best street in Tigard,but lacks an anchor or any reason for Tigard.We will use the YMCA after it is built,and whether you most Tigard people to use it. realize it now or not,we suspect most of you will,also. Downtown is the safest area in our City.Would you rather your Please join us in voting YES for the Tigard YMCA. children walk down Burnham Street or 99W?There is great police protection,and the influx of so many Y members will Heather and Joe Jackson only add to public visibility and safety. This information furnished by: Consider these benefits. Heather and Joe Jackson Trail Head for Tigard's Fanno Creek Trail System -Hiking,Biking,Jogging Prime Site for Walkability Argument in Favor Best Mass Transit Access in Tigard 350 Seat Catered Meeting Hall My name is Bob Carter and I am a 12 year resident of Tigard.I Anchor Business for Downtown The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by Washington County,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the arguments. WC-19 City of Tigard Measure No. 34-241 Arguments 90,000 SF Building Argument in Favor 175 Paying Jobs 200 Volunteer Positions My support for this bond measure is based on the following: 25,000 trips per month=More Business 500 off-street Parking Spaces Need for a Community Center Makes Downtown a Destination Creates a Thriving,Vibrant Downtown A community is a collection of households connected by a rich network of personal relationships.These relationships need Please join us and vote YES for the Downtown Tigard YMCA. places to develop and thrive.For the most part,Tigard lacks these places.Shopping centers are poor substitutes.This bond Downtown Tigard Business Owners: measure is an attempt to create a community center,a place that promotes these relationships.It is long overdue,especially This information furnished by: for a town the size of Tigard. Brian Bishop,Thomas In,Haibin Wang,Warren Reeser and Friends of the Downtown YMCA Support for a Downtown Location • The Mayor's Blue Ribbon Task Force has recommended that"a vibrant downtown with a community gathering place Argument in Favor is important for connecting citizens to their community." The YMCA operated,City of Tigard owned Community • The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board unanimously Recreation Center offers many benefits only available if built in recommended that City Council put this bond measure on the heart of Tigard,our Downtown City Center. the November ballot. Much Needed Downtown Parking • A recent study funded jointly by the City of Tigard,the YMCA,and Washington County shows strong voter This proposal adds 500 off-street parking spaces downtown. support for a community center located in downtown This ensures more than adequate parking for the YMCA,even Tigard and managed by the YMCA. when multiple events are occurring at the same time. The YMCA-an Excellent Partner This space can also be used for activities like the Sunday Farmers Market,parades,community fairs,and other special YMCA has been one of the largest charitable non profits in the events.They will make Downtown accessible to city residents. United States in terms of donations received from the general 350 Seat Catered Meeting Hall public(Forbes magazine).It exists as a national resource Our Tigard Rotary Club currently meets in another city because there is no place in Tigard large enough to host them.Besides including about 2,700 separate local YMCA entities.The service groups like Rotary,this room will be available to individuals,families,corporations,Scouts,and any others YMCA has a stellar record of partnering with thousands of needing a large indoor space. communities across the country to provide opportunities for It will be Perfect for weddings and receptions,and family reunions.Combined with the YMCA's recreational facilities socializing,studying,family activities,and recreation. it will be the perfect location for our high school all-night graduation parties.And our large parking lots guarantee there Need for a Downtown Location won't be problems when special events overlap with regular YMCA activities. "The overarching objective of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan is to ensure that downtown Tigard will Coffee Shop,Foyer and Walled Outdoor Patio serve the community's needs for an active,mixed use'urban village".Siting a YMCA downtown will draw people from Our Downtown Tigard YMCA will house the largest coffee shop throughout Tigard.It will ensure that this"urban village"is not in the City,with the big indoor foyer and in adjacent outdoor the privileged enclave of the immediate residents but rather a patio accessible only from within the building.This is a key community center for all of us. part of our Community Center.What a wonderful place for our community to gather and socialize.This truly will be Tigard's For more information,visit TigardYMCA.com. Community Center. • Thomas C.Kerrigan Tigard Celebrations This information furnished by: We will have a place for Tigard celebrations.This can be the Thomas C Kerrigan new location for the Christmas Lighting Ceremony-moving from crowded and noisy 99W to our large Sequoia tree.You can even watch the lighting from inside the Foyer! Please join us and vote YES for the Downtown Tigard YMCA. Argument in Favor For many of you the YMCA Downtown Tigard Community Downtown Tigard Business Owners: Recreation Center on your ballot may appear to come out of the blue.Actually,this has been in development for decades. This information furnished by: Janice Paris,Musi Hill,Darbie Mayberry The first steps of this grassroots effort to bring the YMCA to downtown Tigard began in 1998.In the following years support and participation have grown steadily. Volunteers walked door- The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by Washington County,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the arguments. WC-20 • CONTINUED City of Tigard Measure No. 34-241 Arguments to-door and attended hundreds of local meetings,speaking I went door to door and spoke with many of you,and was with thousands of people. inspired by your positive attitude and strong support for the Tigard YMCA. Then,using this citizen input as a baseline and working side- by-side with the YMCA,a group of Tigard professionals in Please join me in voting YES for the downtown Tigard YMCA. development and construction-from engineers and builders to designers and financial experts-created the plans and budget Carter Kruze,THS Graduate upon which this ballot measure is based. 2015 Tigard High School Student Body President 2015 Tigard Youth Advisory Council President Remember:This was developed by the people of Tigard,not special interest groups and not the government. This information furnished.by: Carter Kruse Earlier this year a$24,000 poll of Tigard property owners was conducted to determine the level of support for this YMCA bond measure.The poll was paid for by the City,the YMCA, and the Washington County Board of Commissioners.500 Argument in Favor S Tigard taxpayers were interviewed.This is a big sampling which yielded very accurate results. Tigard can't survive without a downtown.No city can.Drive to the coast and you'll pass multiple little towns built right along Not surprisingly,considering the decades of community 99W without a separate downtown.Today they're just parking involvement in developing all aspects of this proposal,poll lots,with traffic backed up for miles.We are fortunate to have a results showed overwhelming support for the Tigard YMCA and downtown not dissected by Hwy 99. a willingness by voters to pay for it.It also showed the strongest support was for placing the YMCA in Downtown Tigard. If we want to turn Downtown Tigard into a family-friendly destination spot,building the YMCA Community Recreation After our Tigard City Council saw this level of support the Center is the first step,probably the most important one. majority chose to listen to the voice of the people and referred this back to us for a vote. The YMCA is the perfect choice to operate our Community Center.I speak from personal experience.My association with We have worked long and hard to get to this point.On the Y dates back more than half a century. I became a certified - November 3,let's take the final step and vote YES for the lifeguard through the YMCA when I was 13 years old.Since downtown Tigard YMCA. then my children and their children continue to utilize the Y. It will be great to take my grandchildren to the Y in Tigard, Art Crino instead of driving to Sherwood as we do now. This information furnished by: I like their emphasis on aquatic programs.Studies show Art Crino fewer Americans can swim than ever before.Swimming is a skill which just might save your life someday.With its three swimming pools,the Tigard YMCA will provide aquatic training for all ages,from toddlers to seniors. Argument in Favor This 90,000 ft.2 building offers many physical activities under All too often the youth in Tigard go unheard.I have seen,heard, one roof.Rain or shine,it will provide social and exercise and clearly understood the wants and needs of teenagers opportunities year-round.Basketball,volleyball,exercise in Tigard.We need a safe place to gather after school,for equipment,swimming and an indoor track guarantee recreation and to socialize.We need a central place in Tigard to something for everyone. build community and meet new people. The YMCA is an inexpensive way to stay in shape.There's a We need a YMCA In Downtown Tigard. lot to like about the Y.They are very safety conscious,there is ease-of-use,and the Y is not dedicated to the me-only A YMCA operated Recreation and Community Center will serve generation.It's for everyone! our youth and demonstrate that our city cares about them.The YMCA is affordable for all,and offers discounts or even free I'll be voting YES for the Downtown Tigard YMCA.It will be a membership to those with financial needs. refreshing change to cast a vote I can feel good about. The envisioned YMCA would have an actual teen center, Marvin S.Gerr,Summerfield where teens from 12 to 18 can come to hang out or study,and socialize...with adult supervision.Best of all,membership In This information furnished by: the teen center is free for every Tigard teenager. Marvin S.Gerr Young people often get into trouble when they lack supervision or a safe place to go.Young people do not get into trouble at the YMCA.Everyone benefits,not just youth. Argument in Favor I am proud of the volunteer work I have done on this grassroots My name is Bob Gray and I'd like to answer your questions project to bring the YMCA to downtown Tigard.But I certainly about the YMCA Community Recreation Center proposed to be was not alone.Literally thousands of people have been built in the Downtown Tigard. involved in some way. What are my qualifications?My company TS Gray Construction This is a citizen inspired,citizen led effort.More than 1000 people has built more than 50 tilt-up buildings in and around Tigard signed petitions in support,and I have worked closely with and Tualatin.We built the Tigard High School Football Stadium, many Tigard adults who donated their time,from builders and using zero tax dollars. engineers to our own Tigard City Council. I have been involved throughout the YMCA development The printing.of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by Washington County,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the arguments. WC-21 City of Tigard Measure No. 34-241 Arguments process.Contrary to what you may have heard,this is not The YMCA is the best possible operator,and Downtown Tigard being rushed and there are not a lot of unanswered questions. is the best possible location.Please vote YES. This proposal has involved extensive input from engineers, architects,and other professionals.It is an impressive, Neal and Charlotte Brown comprehensive development strategy. This information furnished by: We are currently building a similar facility in Tigard for a private Neal Brown and Charlotte Brown school. It is more complex than the proposed YMCA and we are coming in below the budget on which you are voting.Two other builders besides myself have submitted preliminary estimates for constructing the YMCA.These are typically within Argument in Opposition 10%of the final cost. Dear Fellow Tigard Voters: Building this 90,000 ft.2 facility at the proposed location of the corner of Burnham and Ash streets in downtown Tigard is absolutely practical and doable. I ask that you loin me in VOTING NO against this Tigard Community and Recreation Center(TCRC)scheme. Downtown is obviously the best location to serve the people of Tigard.The whole community can get to it easily.It's good for The mice tag is$34.5 million tax dollars.That's right-more Tigard,it's good for downtown,and it will serve as a magnet to than twice the cost of our new Library, bring our community to the downtown area. The entire project was privately developed by vested Downtown Tigard is the center of our community,but it is not interests and volunteers.City staff has not verified cost a community center.Lack of parking and limited opportunities estimates or checked existing plans.The City Council was actually serve to keep people away.The Tigard YMCA unfortunately badgered into a ballot measure resulting in a split Community Recreation Center changes this. 3-1-1 vote.This huge taxpayer burden has been placed on the ballot by the city without studied analysis. We should get going and do it now.Everything is continually going up in price. Now is the best time to build. Proponents demanded a November vote.The rush was purportedly necessary because"voter interest would fade Bob Gray,TS Gray Construction before the next election".The real reason for haste is the 500 parking spaces.A large number of that total represent a This information furnished by: separate,special project for downtown parking relief.It is not, Bob Gray,TS Gray Construction in any way,related to the TCRC.This means all Tigard property owners will have to build,light and maintain the parking for downtown merchants.All other businesses must build and pay • for their own parking.Residential property owners would also Argument in Favor share in this unfair and discriminatory burden.If the downtown needs more spaces it can form a local improvement district. The YMCA has been building families and communities for This is a grass roots effort gone awry.Please vote NO! 171 years,sometimes quite literally.36 years ago we met at a YMCA;fell in love,married,and raised our family. The site was even selected by proponents without city participation.The city does not own or have options on We hope you will study carefully this proposal and see just how the selected site.Should this measure be approved a large many benefits we receive from building the Downtown Tigard value increase can be expected.This will likely incur another YMCA Community and Recreation Center. unnecessary taxpayer burden!Why? The Genesis of this plan was simple:Tigard didn't have a The City Manager advised the Tigard City Council to not Community Recreation Center.We realized the best thing place this measure on this ballot. we could do for Tigard is to have a Community Center in the middle of our city,to serve all our people. I have lived in Tigard for more than 22 years. My professional experience includes more than 25 years of The YMCA has a great reputation,and 171 years of experience. managerial and administrative positions in city and county They have a fantastic management team highly experienced in government. operating this sort of Center.A partnership between the City Please vote NO! of Tigard and the YMCA is the best way to go.The city puts • up the money for the land of the building,and the YMCA takes G.E.McAdams,MPA • care of everything else.This means we don't have to hire more public employees and the YMCA accepts all liability. This information furnished by: G.E.McAdams Throughout this long process we have been truly inspired by the Tigard Parks and Recreation Advisory Board—PRAB. This group of dedicated citizens are committed to having a Community Recreation Center.They voted unanimously to ask Argument in Opposition the Tigard City Council to place this on the November ballot. Dear Tigard Voters; A large team of professionals worked on every step of this proposal.You can have absolute confidence in the figures we Please vote NO! are providing you.We also worked closely with the YMCA and Tigard citizens to design a Community Center which meets This$34.5 million General Obligation Bond Measure for our needs. the Tigard Community and Recreation Center(TCRC)needs to be stopped! We really tightened the budget to hold down costs while still delivering a great facility. - The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by Washington County,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the arguments. WC-22 t i City of Tigard • • Measure No. 34-241 Arguments Tigard Times readers plead for more than propaganda a Review of the Operation Agreement to investigate the scope from proponents--who insist on immediate,unsubstantiated of the YMCA operation in relation to the original contract. approval for the project. Sherwood could assume control of their city-owned building Proponents are ignoring all requests for factual elaboration. presently operated by the YMCA. Sherwood would retain all operating revenue. No hard facts! Just approval! They continue to identify This would mean a dramatic drop in revenue for the YMCA. the project as the"Y"or"YMCA". (The official name is Tigard Community and Recreational Center-TCRC.) Is this one of the reasons the YMCA supporters are pushing this bond levy in Tigard now? Other reasons to vote NO! What do you think? •The cost is more than twice that of the new library. The MIG, Inc.recommendations can be implemented NOW. •Only three of the four Councilors voted yes. The other No Tigard Community Center is needed. voted no.The Mayor abstained. A 3-1-1 split vote for a Tigard Parks Dept.can use existing resources for recreational $34.5 million project? programming. •The Tigard City Manager recommended against placing this on the ballot. DO NOT invest$34.5 million tax dollars in a building •None of the cost estimates have been verified by the , our community is not allowed to operate. city! Imagine,a$34.5 million project wherein the city has Tigard should not enter into a long term contract that relinquishes not verified estimated costs? control of future recreational revenue. It is not good business. •All the volunteer professionals(architects,engineers, contractors etc.)were selected by the proponents. Vince Arditi •500 parking spaces? A large number of these spots Director-Recreation at Your Service are set aside to fund more public parking on main street. These spaces have nothing to do with TCRC and are This information furnished by: barely mentioned by advocates. (Main Street should Vince Arditi build and maintain its own parking lot/lots-as does every other city merchant.) •The lead proponent-a private,vested,realtor-chose the proposed site which is privately owned at this writing. •The city does not own or have options on a suitable site! •There is serious doubt as to the city's ability to procure a building permit for the parcel due to flood control regulations. I urge you to loin me in voting NO! Cleo A.McLeod This information furnished by: Cleo A.McLeod Argument in Opposition Vote NO • Who are the real driving forces for this bond levy? • Why are YMCA supporters so adamant about a DOWNTOWN location? • Why the necessity to pass this bond levy now? "A community center was not deemed a priority at this time" -MIG,Inc.,Recreation Program Study-March 2015 In 2015 MIG,Inc.the nationally known consulting company who developed the 2009 City of Tigard Parks Master Plan completed a comprehensive Recreation Program Study to determine how to facilitate&fund recreational programming in the city of Tigard. The recommendation was that the city move forward using existing resources. The city chose to ignore this study.Instead,partnering with the YMCA(by using YMCA consulting company-Daxko T2). Why was the MIG,Inc.Study BYPASSED? Daxko T2 suggested the YMCA control a community center to be built in Tigard using an operating agreement similar to the Sherwood-YMCA model. Sherwood and the YMCA are nearing the end of a 20 year contract(1998-2018). In 2014 the city of Sherwood generated The printing of these arguments does not constitute an endorsement by Washington County,nor does the county warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made in the arguments. WC-23 ./t few( sre4v r,. PACKET Cifi��&vieuh,Ck,Z7�.„ SUPPLEMENTAL P `' _ Artist Concept FOR , (97t �?/ ,6,1,i- (DATE OF MEETIN = .. ■ F. a R y 1 1 4 7 Tigard Community i Vote YES. 34-2 Recreation Center . PLEASE VOTE! This election is close and every vote is critical TigardYMCA.COm Please join 1 ,000 of your neighbors and share our vision for Tigard Our Community Center will provide Tigard �g, R� , with cultural identity and emotional focus A ttGARp F REStDEtRS SltVPORT BbNDIN r DOWNTOWN AINIY YMCA t„ ATiGARD FAMILY YMCA y . TIGARD DOWNTOWN TIG TIGARD ill By NEAL BROWN cherish it forever. Some of you want I Project Leader to recreate what you had in another _ ,__ IF :„, community, and we know many of i:.. A Friends of the Downtown Tigard >:.. 111 i you want to share these experiences YMCA have put forward our vision — �_ with your children. `, for a community center to unite the ' RESIDENTS SUPPORT BUILDING .,JALDING j A TIGARD FAMILY YMCA IN people of Tigard and bring us togeth- " •'`Our Downtown truly is the DOWNTOWN TIGARD er. We have never wavered in our heart of Tigard, and our YMCA message. It is today exactly what it Community Center will be the was when we began. heart of Downtown." III We believe our community needs a — Neal Brown I -`_A cultural and emotional center. Tigard possesses neither a community iden- This will be so much more than just tity nor an emotional core. a place to exercise, or swim, or take classes, or just have a cup of coffee Emotions lead to memories created with friends. by shared family experiences. They strengthen the multigenerational ties Special memories are created when that bind a family. Children, parents a small child learns to swim, or to Neal Brown stands amidst the signatures of 1,000 Tigard residents and grandparents may have very play basketball, or becomes part of demonstrating their support for the Downtown Tigard YMCA. ' different interests and skills, but our a team for the first time. These are Our community center will provide was done by the people, guided by community center will provide the experiences only parents and caring so much now missing from our years of citizen input and city stud- shared experiences needed to support individuals can provide. hometown. We can hold our high ies, planning and goal setting. and nurture families. Families, teens, seniors, and other school grad parties there, instead of It also will foster the memories we diverse groups of people can come sending our children out of town. I see this election as a turning point need to carry us through our lives. together and benefit, as a community, The large community room can be for Tigard and for our downtown. We know the strong support we have from the bonds they develop at the used for weddings, and family re- The real issue is, will Tigard people ', received from Tigard citizens is due YMCA. I speak from experience. unions, and whatever other uses you be invited to use our downtown? Or in large part to their prior experi- Many years ago I met, for the first can find for it. will outside consultants and special ences with the YMCA. Once people time, my wonderful wife Charlotte at interest groups continue to run Ti- have had this in their lives, they the YMCA. This is grassroots leadership. This gard? The answer is in your hands. NNW*tell id ifitt 111 i --3-1� �4ta Tian s 11 titR E l N bi 1991 - t _ um lir -A I 1 E 1 { ( - • ( G ff „ Awlm . Y . ` i Amazing Tigard Swim Center! The 90,000 Sq. Ft. YMCA will include a full I,g,l is t'aqua center, with all this and more 1 U.S. POSTAGE Lap Pool - Family Fun Pool - Splash Poo l PAID for Tots - Giant Curved Tube Slide PERMIT NO. 700 PORTLAND, OR - There is nothing like this in Tigard. Year ECRWSS _ round indoor swim fun for your family! Residential CUSTOMER Before you vote... Know the Facts about Ballot Measure 34-241 Twenty years ago Sherwood built employees to run this facility. a Community Recreation Center and contracted with the YMCA to operate it. The YMCA is a charity. It is not hying We are simply copying what Sherwood ,- - � to make a profit. Quite the contrary,its --_ •. goal is to deliver services. The YMCA did. It has worked well for Sherwood for - �-, .,*. r b,,r t g 20 years, and it will work for us. guarantees they will cover all operating The Timeline N costs of the facility. Beyond this bond I 1 - measure Tigard property owners have no Sherwood passed their bond in No- �1 financial liability. vember. Within two months they had -k .1 1 Tigard citizens keep ownership - a signed contract with the YMCA,and `? ' . i & local control within five months they had purchased 1 the land. ' - '= The YMCA has submitted to Tigard a i AI O V MCA draft contract for operating the facility. Then they hired an architect and a build- I This can be viewed on our website. er, and within two years the Sherwood . 4.. +t `"' , 111;: n �. YMCA opened! Tigard can do this, too. _ it` ! TigardYMCA.com Interest rates are historically low,but t, costs are going up. The faster we move }_ s i It spells out in great detail how the the more we save, and that translates 'F partnership will work and establishes a P P into a bigger,better Community Center. Artist Concept v Board of Managers composed of Tigard The Proposal citizens. We are not giving up control. urns,a 350-seat community meeting many benefits Tigard receives ONLY if This Ballot Measure raises $34.5 million hall,teen center,exercise rooms, indoor the YMCA is located downtown. How much does it cost? to buy land and build a Community track, coffee shop, and much more. The ONLY cost to Tigard taxpayers is The YMCA as Operator Recreation Center. Where in Tigard will it be built? the bond measure. This will be paid off A public-private partnership between in 20 years, then we own the land and Construction estimates show we can We recommend Downtown Tigard as Tigard citizens and the YMCA is the building forever.According to the City build a 90,000 Sq. Ft.building with the best location. Elsewhere in this only way this project is feasible.Tigard of Tigard,the cost will be$122 per year three swimming pools,two gymnasi- newspaper we explain in great detail the cannot afford to hire 175 new public on a$240,000 home. IIIII Tigard City Counselor Marland Henderson : ____ _....-_ ..� This open, public process complies with every City goal, plan and vision Tigard has put forth in the last 20 years \4. By Marland Henderson Don't be swayed by disingenuous argu- 1":",, -- " Ems. _- Tigard City Council ments intended only to confuse. This is a Sa fA y.1. „ , grassroots effort led entirely by Tigard cit- `� ` ,„ ci „ The proposal to build a Community Recreation ' ,G k __ I Center in Downtown Tigard is in full compliance Y to act on its decade-old promises. :. -., = -- with Tigard vision, goal setting and planning for the last decade. Nothing has been "rushed.” Quite the contrary, it is a decade overdue. I am proud to see the citizens of my City grasp the reins of leadership and take such decisive action to bring about this much-needed public project. It Lq You don't have to take my word for it. It's all spelled out in black and white. In September, 2005 the final Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan c was an honor to listen to you and to be in a posi- tion to take action to give you the final voice on this issue. f 4 (TDIP), prepared by 60 Tigard citizens, elected �'/ „ ,- : officials, City staff and professionals, was issued From its preface to the final page, the TDIP ,,��, detailing the City's 1-10 year goals for the identifies the need for a Downtown Corn- ,' i munity Recreation Center and spells out a Downtown area, including a Community Recreation Center, suggesting a public ballot measure as the source of funding. the process by which it should be devel- oped, culminating in the ballot measure City Council - stands before a Main Street before you now. lot from which he cleared an old derelict Well, it's been 10 years and now that ballot mea- structure last week. sure is in your hands awaiting your vote. This is Not only did the citizens behind this project why I was part of the majority of your elected City follow the TDIP to the letter, but their proposal complies with every goal and vision of eve City COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER com officials who voted to give you the opportunity to P ry g every vote on this. report and plan developed in the last 20 years. Development of a... Community Recreation r---- -- Center is seen as an opportunity to create PAYING IT FORWARD... a community gathering place for the arts and activities in the `heart'of Downtown that What the YMCA did for me when I was a child links visually and physically with the Fanno I was raised by a divorced, single mother of three boys.We Creek public area across Burnham Street. had little money. The Y was a bright spot in my childhood. p The purpose would be to bring day-round Q170 They gave me swim lessons, and the volunteers stood out activity to the Downtown `heart' through the .J as some of the kindest people I've ever met. I couldn't get Recreation Center... and provide a commu- there often because we didn't live close by, but when I was nity gathering space while stimulating pa- there, it always felt like home. My early experiences led me tronage of complementary uses (e.g. restau- y tii 1 back to the Y as an adult volunteer to "pay it forward." rants, coffee shops, etc.). YMCA team members today share those same qualities of Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan the Y staff I knew growing up.They simply enjoy giving and Prepared for the City of Tigard 9/27/2005 ; serving others. '" � We should have done this 20 years ago. afi ;, Connecting people and communities is what we do at the ' Y. Everyone connects electronically these days, but human We SAID we'd do it 10 years ago. I contact has decreased, leading to disconnected communi- It is time to do it NOW. ties. We're excited so many people in Tigard want to build Mark Burris, Board Chair, nonpaid abetter community, and our YMCA is here to support you. - Marland Henderson YMCA Columbia-Willamette -Mark Tigard City Council Tigard City Counselor Marc Woodard : , g Y Ballot Measure 34 — 241 was NOT rushed, but developed in `a fully transparent public process spanning many years' By Marc Woodard Ballot Measure 34-241. Tigard City Council In spring of this year, the DAXCO T-2 Con- It is important to know the history behind Ballot suiting Feasibility Study, paid for by the Wp0DARD Measure 34-241, the Community Recreation City, County and YMCA, found 41.9% of Il Center. There have been years of public input and homeowners support a $10 month proper- alk PARK Council deliberation, beginning in the 1990s. ty tax increase for the new Y facility; with the remaining 39% unsure but wanting ' 5- ' 2001 Tigard City Council Goal No 2: Pro- more information. Opposition was low at k . .,„tip vide recreational opportunities, including just 19.1%. The statistics are significantly `-; r +- .k programs, facilities and activities. positive, with voters telling the city what s 1 ; " • they want. In 2009, the Tigard Parks and Recreation Advisory `s ,�� _ ,,,e. Board(PRAB) chose to concentrate on land ac- From May 19 through July 28 your City Council -3. ; . . •. - ' ` .44,,..",,,` - quisition for a possible bond measure. When I was has had robust conversation on: The DAXCO and Councilor Marc Woodard visits Woodard Park, elected as your City Councilor in 2011, I became MIG studies- results of the City's previous pub- named after his grandfather Mayor Edward Wood- the Council liaison to PRAB, and we set a recre- lie process - and the grassroots YMCA initiative, ard, Tigard s 2nd mayor, serving in the 1960s. ational goal approved by the Council for 2012. backed by more than 1000 signatures collected in We decided, given the 17 year public process and Tigard neighborhoods, all in favor of a YMCA time involved, it was time to let citizens vote. In 2014 the city initiated a recreation program operator to run the Community Center without As you will note reading the history, there study with MIG, Inc. Their 1-5 year plan in- taxpayer subsidies.As citizens, our only obliga- has been a lot of research, public process, chides a Community Recreation Center to tion is the bond measure, and after 20 years we staff and Council time spent on this. In no be developed in partnership with a nonprofit own the building and land free and clear. way was Ballot Measure 34 - 241 devel- operator such as the YMCA. Within the MIG oped in a rushed manner without public implementation plan time line it is stated: "It is On July 28 the majority of your City Coun- input. It was a fully transparent public anticipated and if support for a Community Center cil approved putting ballot measure 34 process spanning many years. increases, the City may investigate partner support - 241 Community Center Recreation Facil- to develop a multipurpose recreation center." ity before the voters, recommending the The only thing left to do is for voters to decide if facility be publicly owned but operated by they are ready to approve a Community Recre- This is the terminology and process reflected in a non-profit such as the YMCA. ation Center which could be run by the YMCA. r We support ort the Downtown Tigard YMCA! /,� , ;'f 1 ,i , i 4 Pp 9 Rai-- I ; J F r 1P "' '' >„ 1 ..i� _ a 0it;i00 gyp : /, "More people will know about . Mr. Get Out the Vote" Neal Brown S Downtown Tigard with this prof- AO .+ ect." - Haibin Wang, owner of :,,,,.T,'14'-..' .,x rot ,E"'' 4 ,.,el,:J .' - Fish-Field INC on Main Street. , x , 1' 3 ^ i - , Matthew and Lisa Brown with i4. A - . daughter Zoey (below). Brian and Angela Leet with chil- "The Y is a great place for socia- t� g bility and friendships." - Mrs. Es- dren Miles, 5, and Alex, 7. N Scott and Laurie White (below). telle May, tending the lovely rose y N - - garden at her Tigard home. ` ` ' m " - Linda and Tom Cook, students at r • - � Dr. Kirsten Crowley and Reese. Tigard Kung Fu (below). Brother and sister Andan Rempel and Leah Stratford (below). 1.4 CI - PV ,rYe�. • -or -7-,00. I. •1 — ( . ,,ra, 1-4:4\4:,./0',' A -�- Nimesh and Jai ENDORSED by Tigard Now! Newspaper `This grassroots campaign by Tigard citizens is _�' ' .ti----4 -. _ function. A resounding YES vote will force reticent 4 ii Dayal, owners of PostNet on Pacific Tigard politicians and bureaucrats to finally listen �/7 • t ' Hwy. with children to the people, not consultants. We encourage a (L-R) Samiyah, Sejal YES vote in November.'10-6-15 TigardNow.com 1K MINA aand Ishan. _...1 Downtown • YMCA __,_ ,,,,,,,__05 _rx„ _, , ,_, __,k iii _ , , 1 —Artist Concept k -F << b,--- t .ate - -, i �` R' i k c T �A �t { f a i. ;t 4 �; 4 �'!"_ !�°�"""`"'+fir-e.�.r- it .-...�.�,,. ,- _I 4 • _tea - ! I 1r illi An Anchor Business for Downtown 90,000 Square Foot Building 25,000 trips per month = More Business 175 Paying Jobs Downtown Makes Downtown Tigard a Destination 200 Volunteer Positions Creates a Thriving, Vibrant Downtown 500 off-street Parking Spaces All Roads lead to Downtown Tigard - & so do the Buses, WES Train and Tigard Trails! COMMUNITY CENTER Trail Head for Tigard's Fanno Creek Trail System 350-Seat Catered Public Meeting Hall - Hiking, Biking, Walking and Jogging - For Weddings, Auctions, Parties & Events Perfect for Tigard's `Walkability Vision' Teen Center Free for Tigard Teens Best Mass Transit Access in Tigard Meeting Rooms and Classrooms Safe Neighborhood for Families & Children Coffee Shop and Outdoor Patio Much safer than along busy Highway 99W On-Site Child Watch RECREATION CENTER Gets Downtown Tigard Working Three Swimming Pools Activates Restaurants, Retail and Residential - Lap, Family and Splash Pools Two Gymnasiums - Team Sports Utilizes the City's $8 Million investment in Burnham Basketball and Volleyball and Main Streets Indoor Track, Cardio Training Exercise Equipment and Weights 500 Parking Spaces - Sufficient to operate the All Ages Health and Fitness Activities YMCA and hold events in the 350-seat Community Specialized Senior Programs Room at the same time - Always plenty of Parking! Good for Downtown Great for Tigard "This is a grassroots project led by Tigard Citizens, NOT the City. If this passes, citizens will decide the - It's not the building, it's the community coming together as neighbors, location and facility operator. and for this to work we must select the right location. "Friends of the Downtown Tigard Downtown Tigard is the heart of Tigard, but there is something missing: YMCA recommend building An anchor, a reason for the entire community to want to be Downtown. Downtown, using the YMCA as our Community Center manager. For a city to succeed and build identity, it must offer three things: "If anyone can suggest a better location and operator, please do so. 1 . A place to work. 2. A place to live. 3. A community gathering place. We welcome that discussion." Tigard offers no place for us to socialize and unite as a community. The Neal Brown Downtown YMCA solves this problem. It will be 'The Heart of Tigard.' Project Director See the Support for Yourself! Two Acres of Indoor Family Fun Right in the Heart of Tigard YMCA - Building Families and Communities for 171 Years Drive down Main Street and you Owned by the Citizens of Tigard - Operated by the YMCA will see 40 BIG posters like this in store windows, and find even more •TIgardYMCA . com inside other businesses. We NEED the Downtown YMCA! Authorized and Paid for by Friends of the Downtown Tigard YMCA SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET 647'2>/►■--001 11114 h l'C4�j,6 r\ • zeitziniMP!.r - Vo te YES! 34-241 (DATE OF MEETING) Tigard Community Recreation Center \' 'L , r 7 .. r f ,. IMAROW4CA kg � !! f t y �� , w s s3 ..' Tigar dYM C A. com Artist Concept -- The YMCA will build „ ... community i n Tigard .� a 7 ys �' By RENEE BROUSE and ownership of what's happening. Now Sherwood YMCA Executive Director ; `" " This is important to us at the YMCA, '` _ •_ The YMCA in Sherwood has become because we need to make sure we take the hub of activity for our city,a place care of our seniors. all ages can come and feel comfortable. —...;::_„7.__ ..._ /Ns The Y has no desire to be a standalone Children are happy to be here,and their entity in Tigard.We are all about col- _ �� parents know it is a safe place.As chil- laboration and partnerships between cit- dren play and learn,parents can partici- izens, local government, local schools, __- pate in their own activities or just relax businesses, community groups and the with friends and enjoy a cup of coffee. Y. This is fundamental to the success of the YMCA and your community. City Councilor and Sherwood YMCA Executive Director Renee Brouse and We have a large number of seniors who her local YMCA Board of Managers created a vision 9 years ago of the YMCA use the Sherwood Y not only for recre- In Sherwood,we are the largest nonprof- becoming the hub of the City. Today that vision is reality.We share her vision, ation and exercise but for their social it organization in the city and the largest and want this for Tigard. Photo of Renee taken at the Sherwood YMCA. needs. I know some Tigard seniors employer of youth.Talk to many adults have said they will support the Y for anywhere in America and they will fantastic way to accomplish this. In our community is an important value the the young people but won't be using it tell you they held their first job at the Sherwood people want to move and live YMCA instills not only in youth,but in themselves. I think they'll be in for a YMCA,where they learned work ethic, near the YMCA. This is exactly what all our employees. pleasant surprise when the Y opens. courtesy and values which help them in Downtown Tigard needs. their careers to this day. The next step is up to you,the citizens In Sherwood,our seniors arrive early The YMCA is all about building corn- of Tigard. I am very impressed with the just to socialize with their friends.Their I know Tigard citizens are looking for munity,and if given the opportunity hard work and effort you have expended social time is very important to them, a way to build up their downtown area I am convinced we can do a great job over the years to bring this to a vote. and they take ownership of the space and encourage businesses and residents serving the people of Tigard. I am to move there.The YMCA will be a not only the executive director of the I speak for all of us in the YMCA corn- Sherwood YMCA,but I was recently munity when I say how grateful we are - ��: elected to our City Council. Service to to you for considering us. 111111111111- - .. >•e �, Our youth NEED the Tigard YMCA I • 3 `The YMCA is the fortress we can build in our community to shield our children.' — •k,` By MARKEE BROWN draws youth away from the bad influences that exist `.. _ Juvenile Counselor in every community. Building it Downtown puts the Y County Juvenile Department close to the Tigard Police Station, another big benefit. I would love to see our fine police officers serve as ESon 34-241 , When I see kids in my professional role as a juvenile mentors to teens at the YMCA. counselor,they often are nearing the end of the line. We work hard to get them turned around and mentor I want to correct a serious misconception. Children 1°°(°." them so they can lead a productive life and stay out of who end up in the juvenile justice system do not all the adult penal system. But sadly,by that stage in their come from single-parent families and low income iik iiiii young lives, it is already too late for some. households. Living in a nice neighborhood is great,but no guarantee of protection. It is a dangerous world. 1 • ardYMCA,COm The best time to ensure young people develop the so- "' cietal values and skills needed in life is before they get Y g All it takes is one bad influence, one school friend us- into trouble.This is why I support the Tigard YMCA. ing drugs, or hanging out at the wrong house, and even PRSRT STD Tigard resident Markee Brown An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. the best young person can start down the wrong path. U.S. POSTAGE with twin sons Kalim and Ma- i PAID lik, 11. Not every child has a The YMCA provides a safe environment where young great dad like Markee. He says p Y g The YMCA is the fortress we can build in our commu- PERMIT NO. 700 people are around positive role models,both their nity to shield our children. I have seen firsthand how PORTLAND, OR the YMCA will fill the gap, pro- h viding Tigard youth with role teenage peers and adults.The YMCA offers structured participation in the Y benefits young people. Please ECRWSS models and a safe place for activities,ranging from team sports and classes to join me in voting yes for the downtown Tigard YMCA! POSTAL CUSTOMER recreation or just hanging out. computers. The free teen center will be a magnet which This is the best choice for Tigard and our children. Justthefacts . . . r _ . . ,r + :7-- . ii. 1 v. , 1 . : , _ . 1 1 1 , ., . .-11,;.--4, 1, c'i ,- Twe nty years ago Sherwood built YMCA opened! Tigard can do this,too. ' .,,- a Community Recreation Center and Interest rates are historically low,but contracted with the YMCA to operate it. costs are going up. The faster we move We are simply copying what Sherwood the more we save,and that translates _ _ did. It has worked well for Sherwood for into a bigger,better Community Center. 4 , - , - u__. 20 years, and it will work for us. _The Proposal .y, The Timeline s This Ballot Measure raises $34.5 million r i; Sherwood passed their bond in No- to buy land and build a Community vember. Within two months they had Recreation Center. - a signed contract with the YMCA, and track,coffee shop, and much more. many benefits Tigard receives ONLY if within five months they had purchased Construction estimates show we can the YMCA is located downtown. the land. build a 90,000 Sq. Ft. building with Where in Tigard will it be built? three swimming pools,two gymnasi- We recommend Downtown Tigard as The YMCA as Operator Then they hired an architect and a build- urns,a 350-seat community meeting the best location. Elsewhere in this A public-private partnership between er, and within two years the Sherwood hall,teen center,exercise rooms, indoor newspaper we explain in great detail the Tigard citizens and the YMCA is the only way this project is feasible. Tigard Tigard City Councilor Marland Henderson cannot afford to hire 175 new public Now is the time to build, here are the reasons why employees to run this facility. The YMCA is a charity. It is not trying By Marland Henderson development occurs.The current to make a profit. Quite the contrary,its Tigard City Council proposed facility is a"slab on ground" goal is to deliver services. The YMCA MH Construction, owner with concrete walls inside and out. This guarantees they will cover all operating construction made of concrete and steel costs of the facility. Beyond this bond We should have done this 20 is an area where costs are known and measure Tigard property owners have no years ago. It is time to do it now. _ a . current estimates can be relied upon for financial liability. the near future. Given the high moisture Right now Tigard's population stands atmosphere inside and out this is the Tigard citizens keep ownership above 50,000,but I don't believe it will right kind of structure. It will endure, & local control be long before we could see it increase ..,.,'` serving Tigard for a very long time. The YMCA has submitted to Tigard a by 50%or more.Already extensive ex- .'` ' ` fi draft contract for operating the facility. x. _ pansion is taking place in our city. -4 '4 I was one of the majority of your City This can be viewed on our website. Councilors who referred this for our Y TigardYMCA.com With the Community Recreation Center, vote. This proposal was brought to us It spells out in great detail how the as with all City projects,we must plan by many citizens of Tigard, citizens who partnership will work and establishes a for the future and build accordingly. endorsed it through petition and corn- Board of Managers composed of Tigard mittee, and I believe you should have citizens. We are not giving up control. As a local general contractor who has the final say. built several commercial buildings in Councilor Marland Henderson How much does it cost? downtown Tigard, including the Tigard Tigard City Council This is about working for the communi- Area Chamber of Commerce building, The ONLY cost to Tigard taxpayers is g bond rates will make this project even ty and determining what we want for our the bond measure. This will be paid off know the market and I know the factors more affordable. City as a core value for the future. This in 20 years,then we own the land and which influence costs. Understanding discussion has been around for a long costs along with acting quickly to take building forever.According to the City g g q Y We all know the cost for land and time, and we need to decide if this is of Tigard,the cost will be$122 per year advantage of the land market and low materials is going to increase as more what we want for Tigard. on a$240,000 home. Dr. Jack Clinton 's rescri tion for Tigard p p "The YMCA, from my standpoint, is one of those accessible to all Tigard citizens and proposed to special entities that if a community has access to be built Downtown, will fill an important need for one they are better off than the community which _ Tigard. does not." . . = ._ t "These public facilities, along with the three These are the words of Dr. Jack Clinton, a 45 I _ i ' ` aquatic pools, two gymnasiums, fitness rooms year Tigard resident who serves on the faculty `- _ I.. _ and health training, would be a great addition to of OHSU. He was dean of the OHSU School of our city. When you visit the YMCA people have a Dentistry until 2012, and now he serves as Dean _ good feeling. Emeritus. He is also the former chair of the Tigard Tualatin School Board. t1 •_ "We in good faith continue to trust our City to make good decisions," says Dr. Clinton. "They "The YMCA focuses on family, health, values and } . have set a goal of making Tigard the most walk- communication. It engenders a sense of communi- able city in Oregon. But I believe we should ty that has been largely lost. The YMCA is a great broaden our horizons and set higher standards for catalyst to restore and build community. "The YMCA is the beginning of ourselves. an identity change for Tigard "Tigard has not had the stimulus or access to life if "I would like to see Tigard become the healthi- enriching experiences. The only community ex- and our dOWntOWn. est community in Oregon, and the YMCA is the perience is the public school system. The YMCA "' Dr. Jack Clinton trigger that can make this happen. The YMCA represents a higher level than what we have now. provides a comprehensive way to build a lifelong Building a YMCA operated community center in ization in an uplifting environment. There is an good health commitment. This is something great Tigard will provide the life enriching experiences emphasis on creating a gathering place, a commu- to bring into Tigard." we now lack. nity meeting place. This will provide Tigard the identity and sense of community now lacking." "The YMCA is the beginning of an identity "It increases our opportunities to empower our change for Tigard and our downtown," says Dr. own lifestyle, with a focus not only on health and Dr. Clinton says the large coffee shop, 350 seat Clinton. "We need to take advantage of this oppor- fitness, but the equally important needs of social- catered meeting room and smaller meeting rooms, tunity to begin the steps to make this happen." This is the right proposal . . . Proto, )0060- �- The right time to take action ._. .,, 1 By Neal Brown attract people to Downtown Tigard. ,fix Tigard YMCA Project Leader £ . - 6.A prominent location for an ex- t _ .. -- We've worked hard to bring you the ceptional facility which will inspire ` best operator, the best building, the community pride. k 1 best parking and the best location. °y r 1 7. Great parking- we can use our s, pry. � � - .. I More than 2,000 Tigard citizens had 350-seat Community Center catered the opportunity to provide input on hall and YMCA simultaneously. :,;.„,: r; --:.g a this project. In selecting a location for our Tigard Downtown YMCA, 8.A large parking lot for multiple these are the factors we considered: uses parades, celebrations and more, 1. Walkability- Our City vision. landscape like a garden to blend in with the surrounding een spaces. 2. Fanno Creek Trail is the best trail .,. «9. Enhancing and improving the .,. Y4 ` system in Tigard. Burn- existing neighborhood. Tigard YMCA volunteer project leader Neal Brown stands in the center of Burn- ham Street. Tigard Government has spent $8 million and many years building 3. Southwest Main and Burnham 10. Great views of a natural setting. gigantic sidewalks and flower planters along Burnham and Main streets.What - 4: loi streets are the best streets in Tigard, they have not done is give Tigard people a reason to use the streets and side- with more than $8 million invested. walks. Built Downtown,the proposed YMCA Community Recreation Center will 11. Easy walking distance to Tri-Met activate the area and turn it into the bustling, vibrant heart of Tigard! 4. Centrally located for the conve- Transit Center and WES Station. nience and benefit of Tigard resi- Tigard who have contributed to this had we not come together as a corn- 12. Public Safety-Near Tigard project. Thank you for your help, munity and done this is a team. dents, not surrounding cities. Police Station and Fire Department. advice, encouragement and support. I hope you will join us and help 5. Synergy with existing retail and I want to thank the many people in This would not have been possible bring to life our vision for Tigard. residential development, an anchor to W 60/40 .. i i iii:00' ‘ 7 et • IL,_ a w.,, .�.:'` vy A . ,, _ A ,- a , a ,,.. . ._... e OP . We support Downtown Tigard Community ENDORSED by Tigard Now! Newspaper RARecreation Center! `This grassroots campaign by Tigard citizens is ` ,...r . ' To Row L to R Heather and a shining example of how our democracy should `� 1395: F a; .. ° LI Joe Jackson, sons Justin function. A resounding YES vote will force reticent ` l; I': and Andrew; Frank Chinn; Tigard politicians and bureaucrats to finally listen `r% p. : Coach Bob Carter;Art Crino; to the people, not consultants. We encourage a n .11 f=, Tom and Kelcie Anderson, , # - ` - YES vote in November. 10-6-15 Ilrf ,i,,,h ' I' Autumn and Aaron. TigardNow.com Ada Left: Tom Kerrigan. .. ,�. "I know the YMCA is the best operator for "The vision for Tigard is broad our city's Community Recreation Center. and leaves a lot for interpretation, ,, The YMgi1l0;A DAXCO paid for .County f4. , but it does not say the vision is Commission,showed overwhelming support x " to encourage our citizens to seek for the YMCA, with the majority wanting it . .. services from other cities." built downtown. _, - +_" - ,, Marsden Smith 7 .- i 1 "It is important to remember the citizens of Treasurer Tigard will make the final decision on the to- .,_ cation and operator." Friends of the Downtown Tigard YMCA i or 1 Marc Woodard Elsa and Marsden Smith Tigard City Council t at their Tigard home. :7'7' 7''' The Miller Family says YES ,, to the Downtown Tigard YMCA! �h : " 't ' 1\1C:.-r'7M 1. "It's good for families to be able to go C � �Lj to a workout place that has something 32195 for everyone. There is really no place to _ work out in Tigard. It would be nice to ..,, .. . _ i >:; ,' have something local," says Angelita, a ._ . , , public school administrator. t "I was a Y member growing up in Med- - ford," adds Brian, a police officer. "I'd - , - like my children to have this opportuni- w T }� `' " " ty." Pictured at left:Angelita and Brian b 00) . Miller with their children Sofia, 13, Macy, Ly 8 and Molly, 11. Chef Aldo Ruiz-Jeronimo, part . IF" # I "Family and friends,that's what it's all owner of La Fuente Taqueria about," says Chef Aldo Ruiz-Jeronimo, 3 and Restaurant in downtown part owner of La Fuente Taqueria and they are part of the family.The Y will Tigard (left).Above: Al Fuente Restaurant in downtown Tigard. "We be a great benefit.We want people to workers Chris Jeronimo, Ivette '- want everyone to come and feel like come and stay downtown." Pena and Elizabeth Jeronimo. i 1 Downtown T . YMCA Artist Concept _sue ._ _ F , _ _ _ A_ _ ___ . _r__ p.E Few, _ _,, , _ , , E _,,. u._„,.. r _ 1 ,;-. i4 - ; i --:- , s xw An Anchor Business for Downtown 90,000 Square Foot Building 25,000 trips per month = More Business 175 Paying Jobs Downtown Makes Downtown Tigard a Destination 200 Volunteer Positions Creates a Thriving, Vibrant Downtown 500 off-street Parking Spaces COMMUNITY CENTER Trail Head for Tigard's Fanno Creek Trail System . 350-Seat Catered Public Meeting Hall - Hiking, Biking, Walking and Jogging - For Weddings, Auctions, Parties & Events Perfect for Tigard's `Walkability Vision' Teen Center Free for Tigard Teens Meeting Rooms and Classrooms Best Mass Transit Access in Tigard Coffee Shop and Outdoor Patio Safe Neighborhood for Families & Children On-Site Child Watch Much safer than along busy Highway 99W RECREATION CENTER Gets Downtown Tigard Working Three Swimming Pools Activates Restaurants, Retail and Residential - Lap, Family and Splash Pools Two Gymnasiums - Team Sports Utilizes the City's $8 Million investment in Burnham Basketball and Volleyball and Main Streets Indoor Track, Cardio Training Exercise Equipment and Weights 500 Parking Spaces - Sufficient to operate the All Ages Health and Fitness Activities YMCA and hold events in the 350-seat Community Specialized Senior Programs Room at the same time Tigard Citizens must take control I'll use the YMCA, so will many others By Darby Mayberry, Tigard Cleaners By Chef Warren Reeser, Cafe Allegro Restaurant liit s. s A great amount of money has been spent on I live and work Downtown,and I'll be joining the Y - Main and Burnham streets, but not a lot has the day it opens. This will bring the people of Tigard been accomplished.We have big sidewalks Downtown, and that will be good for everyone. and massive planters... but we don't have what businesses need to survive: Parking and cus- Far past time for a Community Center tomers. The YMCA Community Center chang- By Shaun Stuhldvyer, SL Green Construction — es this. It will provide its own parking,which means no negative impact, and it will generate The YMCA will be a great anchor for Downtown Ti- � at least 25,000 trips per month. Increased traffic gard. It's far past time to build a Community Center means increased business, and we all win. Downtown. This will attract new businesses and residents to move Downtown. Right now there is no .� This has been needed for a long time real reason for either to come here. A. By Thomas In,Allstate Insurance - at,E t The Community Recreation Center will be a gather- '3.5r.0. This is good for Downtown, and good for ing place for the entire City. Tigard is growing, but _ Tigard.We have needed a Community Center there are not a lot of outlets for people to do things for a long time. The YMCA will provide a family together.Tigard's population growth has far sur- Top: Darby Mayberry, friendly environment and will draw families to passed its infrastructure. s N the Downtown area. Tigard Cleaners; Marvin _ 11 You have an Old Town Tigard,and many new neigh- Bowen, Maxs Fanno � ;5 � borhoods, but there exists a disconnect.This will Creek Brew Pub; Middle: Good for the whole City Chef Warren Reeser, By Marvin Bowen, Maxs Fanno Creek Brew Pub bring us together and unite the City. :° _ Y Cafe Allegro; Thomas In, + Building the Community Center here will be Allstate Insurance; Right: , good for Main Street, good for Tigard and good Nearly 50 Downtown Tigard Businesses Shaun Stuhldvyer, l -A for all citizens. encourage you to VOTE YES Nov. 3. SL Green Construction Authorized and Paid for by Friends of the Downtown Tigard YMCA SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET J&t 7 „Erac,ir`_ FOR Z7 C-f"- ,3.7 t S 0, 62,3._ C'omhi,k1 c4.-6-ia)-N Artist Concept (DATE MEETING) U S PRSRT STD POSTAGE PAID a, . 'x PERMIT NO. 700 . .„ `k. PORTLAND, OR „ l.:� ECRWSS„.___,4 A . _, _ ao-r. POSTAL CUSTOMER....,. .,..,.. „ �. 3 v f 444' ,144 1 1_, 4 € `� , 7 „,41, ,ir 4� w T - Vote YES o n 34-241 1 , , „: . ...... . The Tigard Community Recreation Center 7 This is our vision. We have never The YMCA as Operator wavered or changed since the project A public-private partnership between Tigard citizens began years ago. We would like you to and the YMCA is the only way this project is feasible. join us in making this vision a reality. Tigard cannot afford to hire 175 new public employees to run it.The YMCA is a charity. It is not trying to make This was conceived and developed by a profit. Quite the contrary, its goal is to deliver ser- vices. The YMCA guarantees they will cover all oper- your neighbors. All the professionals ating costs of the facility. Other than this bond measure I and all the volunteers work or live in Tigard property owners have no financial liability. and around the City of Tigard. Tigard citizens keep ownership & control This comes from the people. The YMCA has submitted to Tigard a draft contract for Not from consultants. operating the facility. This can be viewed on our web- . site. It spells out in great detail how the partnership will Not from city government. work and establishes a Board of Managers composed of TigardYM .com � g g P Not from politicians. Tigard citizens. It comes from the people of Tigard. How much does it cost? The ONLY cost to Tigard taxpayers is the bond measure. ` The Proposal This will be paid off in 20 years, then we own the land "We should and building forever. According to the City of Tigard, `' have done this This Ballot Measure raises $34.5 million to buy land the cost will be$122 per year on a$240,000 home. and build a Community Recreation Center. Construc- 20 years ago. tion estimates show we can build a 90,000 Sq. Ft.build- We are copying what Sherwood did ing with three swimming pools, two gymnasiums, a « 350-seat community meeting hall, teen center, exercise Twenty years ago Sherwood built a Community Recre- „_ It is time to rooms,indoor track,coffee shop, and much more. ation Center and contracted with the YMCA to operate do it now.” it. We have used this successful project as our model • Where in Tigard will it be built? and guide. We are simply doing what Sherwood did. It has worked well for Sherwood for 20 years, and it will We recommend Downtown Tigard as the best location. work for us. Marland Henderson Elsewhere in this newspaper we explain in great detail the many benefits Tigard receives ONLY if the YMCA Authorized and Paid for by Tigard City Council is located downtown. Friends of the Downtown Tigard YMCA it is time... Tigard is ready for a Community Center. With a population of over s... 50,000, Tigard is now in a position to offer amenities that will benefit a wide range of citizens. The building itself will be a source of pride for ._ Tigard for the next 50 years plus. 40 i --.v The benefits of timing are that real estate prices are on the upswing and "', interest rates are historically low, both positive factors when securing real x _ estate. Every year we wait will only add to the final price tag. I am not that concerned about who operates it. The people of Tigard will control the building and choose a reputable nonprofit organization to staff the Center. But the building has to be built first. Then we will have a vi- '""' brant Community Center accessible to everyone from youth to seniors. • It is time. - Tom Anderson Owner-Tigard Real Estate - Tom and Kelcie Anderson,Autumn and Aaron Former Tigard Planning Commission President Bring the YMCA to Tigard ! .... , _ _ ,.., -„ _ .. , i , joioN .., By Kathy Fastenau I live on Bull Mountain, and I appreciate the fact We should have followed the lead of Sherwood that some city employees advocate placing the and built a YMCA Community Recreation Center YMCA here. This would be very convenient for � - in Tigard decades ago. They have a 20 year head me, but I do not support this. I agree with the vast " , .—• start on us, but the good news is the successful majority of Tigard citizens who in a recent poll 7 i -s v .,J , ' I '"4. Sherwood YMCA shows us what we can do. said they want the YMCA built Downtown, in the -- l '5.0 heart of Tigard. +/! 1 `11 '4" 4 I am impressed by this grassroots movement by `,,� `* the people of Tigard. This is virtually a turnkey Twenty years late is still better than created by a team of Tigard citizens. It was ,i' ,0 4# lep � �• ,- project y g never. Let's vote YES and bring the S. handed to the City Council on a silver platter, and YMCA to Tigard! ■ 40 - they referred it to us for the final decision. • ''' Recently I became a grandmother, and I am acute- This is the best choice. I can drive an extra mile to ly aware Tigard does not offer much in the way of reach the Y. But for those seniors and others who \.k' { do not drive, being downtown -just a quick walk i multi-generational family activities. Why must we from the Tri-Met Transit Center- is a necessity. —*or'l `. ' 4 drive to Portland to spend time with our children? , ?' Safety is also important. The Tigard Police are This will be a wonderful addition to our city, and C located Downtown, the speed limit is 25 miles an ,_ 0 the YMCA will serve every age and demographic hour, and Tigard spent nearly $8 million on street { found among our 50,000 residents. y improvements, building the best sidewalk system �` Kathy Fastenau with her granddaughters. in our city. Please vote YES! Great for • An Anchor Business for Downtown 90,000 Square Foot Building 25,000 trips per month = More Business 175 Paying Jobs Downtown Makes Downtown Tigard a Destination 200 Volunteer Positions Creates a Thriving, Vibrant Downtown 500 off-street Parking Spaces COMMUNITY CENTER Trail Head for Tigard's Fanno Creek Trail System 350-Seat Catered Public Meeting Hall - Hiking, Biking, Walking and Jogging - For Weddings, Auctions, Parties & Events Perfect for Tigard's `Walkability Vision' Teen Center Free for Tigard Teens Best Mass Transit Access in Tigard Meeting Rooms and Classrooms Coffee Shop and Outdoor Patio Safe Neighborhood for Families & Children On-Site Child Watch Much safer than along busy Highway 99W RECREATION CENTER Gets Downtown Tigard Working Three Swimming Pools Activates Restaurants, Retail and Residential - Lap, Family and Splash Pools Two Gymnasiums - Team Sports Utilizes the City's $8 Million investment in Burnham Basketball and Volleyball and Main Streets Indoor Track, Cardio Training Exercise Equipment and Weights 500 Parking Spaces - Sufficient to operate the All Ages Health and Fitness Activities YMCA and hold events in the 350-seat Community Specialized Senior Programs Room at the same time Developed & Presented by the People of Tigard °' - - Good for kids... Good for teens... 4 This is a grassroots project led by Tigard . « A Good for families Citizens, NOT the City. families... e.° - r� Good for seniors... ' Citizens will decide the location and operator. Good for Tigard. Vote YES ._. .., ... Friends of the Downtown Tigard YMCA — Davy Jones recommend building Downtown, using Tigard Citizen . the YMCA as our Community Center manager. Husband and Father Youth Football Coach �. Tigard City Councilor Marc Woodard . . .g Why we need to make this happen By Marc Woodard whelming support for the YMCA, with the , Throughout my tenure on the Tigard City majority wanting it in Downtown Tigard. Council, I have championed the cause of - recreation, trails, and parks. I'm proud of The YMCA is the best operator for the accomplishments and progress we've our Community Recreation Center. made working together - citizens, business and government. While providing quality services, having the YMCA as our operator means Tigard 0- City recreation priorities are especially taxpayers will not be subsidizing operation important if we hope to create community of the facility. All our financial commit- gathering and walkable destination places, ments are covered by this bond, and we , where memories are made and families will own the land and building free and .. want to bring their children. clear in 20 years. 4 The YMCA DAXCO Feasibility Study, The YMCA will pay all employee wages paid for by the City, YMCA and Washing- and benefits, pay for building maintenance, 1 , ton County Commission, showed over- and provide the fitness equipment. Councilor Marc Woodard `An impressive, comprehensive development strategy' By Bob Gray builders besides myself have submitted prelimi- TS Gray Construction nary estimates for constructing the YMCA. These My name is Bob Gray and I'd like to answer your are typically within 10% of the final cost. 'PrelOi questions about the YMCA Community Recre- t ation Center proposed to be built in a Downtown Building this 90,000 Sq. Ft. facility at the pro- -ter r ` 1 , t Tigard location. posed location at the corner of Burnham and Ash vac streets in downtown Tigard is absolutely practical " - ife What are my qualifications?My company TS and doable. Gray Construction has built more than 50 tilt-up ,. buildings in and around Tigard and Tualatin. We „h '._.y g g Downtown is obviously the best built the Tigard High School Football Stadium, location to serve the people of F ,`tea u 0 sing zero tax dollars. Tigard. The whole community can I have been involved throughout the YMCA get to it easily. 4 � development process. Contrary to what you may have heard, this is not being rushed and there It's good for Tigard, it's good for are not a lot of unanswered questions.This pro- Meet our engineers. Tigard engineering firm Q P downtown, and it will serve as a Hayden Consulting Engineers has donated posal has involved extensive input from engineers, magnet to bring our community to their services to the project, working close- architects, and other professionals. It is an impres- the downtown area. ly with builder Bob Gray. Pictured are Gabi sive, comprehensive development strategy. Miller, S.E., Ryder Miller, and owner Darron Downtown Tigard is the center of our community, Hayden, P.E., S.E. We are currently building a similar facility in Ti- but it is not a community center. Lack of adequate Recreation Center changes this. We should get go- gard for a private school. It is more complex than parking and limited opportunities actually serve to in and do it now. Everything is continually going proposed YMCA and we are coming in below p g pp y g g y g g the budget on which you are voting. Two other keep people away. The Tigard YMCA Community up in price. Now is the best time to build. Build our Center Downtown and have the YMCA run it... iii That's the best location and the perfect operator lie By Marvin S. Gerr association with the Y dates back . Summerfield more than half a century. I became . ice; Tigard can't survive without a down- a certified lifeguard through the I town. No city can. Drive to the coast YMCA when I was 13 years old. • and you'll pass multiple little towns Since then my children and their ' ,4 built right along 99W without a sep- children continue to utilize the Y. It Marvin and arate downtown. Today they're just will be great to take my grandchil- Judy Gerr, parking lots, with traffic backed up dren to the Y in Tigard, instead of Summerfield '° for miles.We are fortunate to have a driving to Sherwood as we do now. ' downtown not dissected by Hwy 99. icans can swim than ever before. year-round. Basketball, volleyball, — I'll be voting YES for the Swimming is a skill which just might exercise equipment, swimming and If we want to turn Downtown Tigard Downtown Tigard YMCA. save your life someday. With its an indoor track guarantee something into a family-friendly destination three swimming pools, the Tigard for everyone. spot, building the YMCA Communi- YMCA will provide aquatic training ty Recreation Center is the first step, It will be a refreshing for all ages, from toddlers to seniors. The YMCA is an inexpensive way probably the most important one. change to cast a vote I to stay in shape. There's a lot to like can feel good about. This 90,000 Sq. Ft. building offers about the Y. They are very safety The YMCA is the perfect choice to many physical activities under one conscious, there is ease-of-use, and operate our Community Center. I I like their emphasis on aquatic pro- roof Rain or shine, it will provide the Y's not dedicated to the me-only speak from personal experience. My grams. Studies show fewer Amer- social and exercise opportunities generation. It's for everyone! Let's make 2015. . . The Year of the Downtown Tigard YMCA Neal Brown . . . - , ... _ ____ It's the BEST choice for Tigard Fanno Creek Regional Trail 26 By Neal Brown will support this alternative. Community Center Project Leader , _ Tigard needs a community recreation 1 ccu. r We are asking you to join us and center built of concrete, steel, glass, - support Tigard.Please Vote YES! brick and mortar.A quality building ��r � \,1: t designed to last. R.0.laravar Mirror,* - We did not hire consultants to tell us '° °' `�" s - what to do. We talked to you Tigard needs to keep our kids, fami- firfir ` i r' '=. . , lies, and seniors safe. With multiple ;..- ~: `� .- - We walked door-to-door and talked options for transportation to and ...--...•°•'— - • -..to more than 2000 Tigard residents, from our YMCA, downtown Tigard ftgoase,:.'�: ...3: , to learn what you want in the Tigard is a much safer location than along w"°"""" Community Recreation Center. Highway 99W. ...... ` Tigard citizens recognize this is a This is a grassroots effort -----.---,0--- 0 grassroots effort to build and support to build and support our Ali our community. This was not created - by consultants or city staff It was community. This was not ' created by the people. created by consultants or city staff. A group of your neighbors, local professionals and residents of Tigard, We recommend a site on the Fanno Bister t Main Street - the Friends of the Downtown Tigard Creek Trail System near SW Main _ YMCA believe: and Burnham streets. Placed here, --°-- MM� the Community Recreation Center Tigard needs and wants a Communi- can be easily reached by mass transit ty Recreation Center. -the Tri-Met Station- as well as by Tigard resident Neal Brown first proposed the Tigard Community Rec- walking,hiking and bicycling. reation Center in 1998. He has worked tirelessly on this project ever Tigard needs the best nonprofit op- since. His association with the YMCA began as a true love affair: He erator-the YMCA, with 171 years met his wife Charlotte at the YMCA 36 years ago! y This is much more than a of experience managing community place to exercise. In our and the community meeting hall pen. It has taken many years of hard centers.NOTE: If anyone can find a simultaneously. NOTE: We will not work to get to the vote. We ask you Community Center people better operator we will support them. can visit, relax, enjoy a support substandard parking. to join us. Please vote YES! Tigard needs help with our down- cup of coffee and more... Our plan provides plenty of parking Every vote counts! town. The YMCA will bring value right in the heart of Tigard. spaces for people who choose to Please register to vote. to our City Center and turn it into a drive downtown. We understand that place where all citizens can meet, Tigard needs a Community Recre- not everyone wants to ride the bus. Register online at: recreate and socialize.NOTE: If ation Center with adequate parking anyone can find a better location we in order to operate both the YMCA The time has come to make this hap- Washington County Elections co.washington.or.us/elections/ - Or in person: YMCA-Tigard partnership 3700 SW Murray Blvd. #101 Beaverton, OR 97005 _ - 503846.5$00 a_- will benefit everyone ,, fvoork . Deadline to register Oct. 13 We will bring 175 paying jobs and 200 volunteer and scholarships for anyone in need. Under Plan opportunities to Tigard. The YMCA has been B, Silver Sneakers and Silver Fit members receive building families and communities for 171 years, discounted or free YMCA membership. and we are experienced at running large recreation centers-but you will be in control of your Tigard Our teen center and Y membership are free or S YMCA. We will be guided by a Board of Manag- very low cost for every teenager living in Tigard, 0 ers composed of Tigard citizens. providing youth with positive, safe, supervised - activities. We help teens stay in school, develop a By Bob Hall The YMCA is not a for-profit business. Our mis- healthy lifestyle, and stay away from drugs. President and Chief Executive Officer sion is to serve all who need us. We are a 501(C) YMCA of Columbia— Willamette (3)charity.We are not a church. When we come to There is another important benefit the Y will pro- . Tigard, we will be offering classes and services of vide Tigard. This is our social outreach to people The YMCA will provide Tigard with many bene- interest and value to everyone in your city. in need. We do a lot more than just provide pro- fits. Housed in this 90,000 Sq. Ft. indoor Commu- grams and recreational opportunities. We look for nity Recreation Center will be swimming pools We are sensitive to the needs of seniors living on people who are hurting and struggling- for what- and gymnasiums, child watch and a coffee shop, fixed incomes. We provide specialized exercise ever reason- and we are there to help. classrooms, exercise equipment,teen center, large programs and positive, uplifting classes and social I catered meeting hall and much more. activities for seniors. We have sliding fee scales Thank you for considering the YMCA for Tigard. AIS-2383 3.A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes):Consent Item Agenda Title: Proclaim 10/27/15 as Manufacturing Day in Tigard Prepared For: Joanne Bengtson,City Management Submitted By: Joanne Bengtson, City Management Item Type: Receive and File Meeting Type: Proclamation Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Should Mayor Cook proclaim October 27 as National Manufacturing Day? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST N/A KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Tigard's Economic Development Manger Lloyd Purdy noted that two Tigard-based manufacturing leaders - PolyCast and Fought& Co. -gave 30 Tigard High School students a tour of their facilities on October 2,2015 as part of National Manufacturing Day. This tour exposed students to career opportunities offered in the manufacturing sector and underscored the value of an educated workforce to the local economy. Lloyd noted that this is the first time the city has been able to connect local manufacturers with school kids for a National Manufacturing Day event. OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments National Manufacturing Day iv , .. ,,, i fi _. r''' ' ' r (I.VC al 011It City of Tigard National Manufacturing Day i ;< October 27, 2015 WHEREAS, Two Tigard-based firms, PolyCast Inc.and Fought&Company Inc. 1'';* hosted facility tours for 30 Tigard-Tualatin School District CE2 program students on October 2 to reveal how local firms add value to products that support and power V our local, regional and national economy;and r. WHEREAS, Manufacturing is the cornerstone of Oregon's economy,accounting for 81.2 percent of the Portland Metropolitan region's exports;and 1 ,>' ; WHEREAS,The manufacturing sector provides nearly 34,500 jobs for Oregonians v including careers like welders, mechanics, machinists, pipefitters,engineers, f accountants,IT professionals;and WHEREAS, Manufacturing fuels Oregon's economic growth, creates new and >�,I rewarding careers,and is estimated that for every traded sector manufacturing job a --- 1 in Oregon(one that produces goods and services used outside the region), 2.5 local sector jobs are generated;and )! IWHEREAS,The manufacture of emerging technologies like 3D printing, unmanned . aerial vehicles(UAV),solar cells,robotics,and wind turbine components provide high paying jobs for Oregonians and create a need for a well-educated workforce to continue growing this vital economic base for Oregon;and Y WHEREAS, Partnering with Tigard's economic development leaders like the Columbia-Willamette Workforce Collaborative,Worksystems, Inc.,the SW - Washington Workforce Development Council and WorkSource Oregon,and the * Tigard-Tualatin School District will assure that Tigard has a well-prepared 2 vg manufacturing workforce that is ready to make Oregon products today and in the v: • y future. !rl NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT I,John L.Cook,Mayor of the City of i, Tigard,Oregon,do hereby proclaim October 27,2015 as rt v NATIONAL MANUFACTURING DAY t. in Tigard,Oregon and urge all residents to recognize the vital role that local I.F, manufacturing firms play in developing a healthy local and national economy. I' ,C •Dated this day of ,2015. " IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Tigard to be affixed. I . ' John L.Cook,Mayor City of Tigard Attest: . - City Recorder �'�,y •. I - f --X 1A. .' ,q I r,r 9, 9`u {A5, y.*-.'"' s, A' 3 AIS-2410 3. B. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Approve City Council Meeting Minutes Submitted By: Carol Krager, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda Public Hearing: Publication Date: Information ISSUE Approve City Council meeting minutes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Approve minutes as submitted. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached council minutes are submitted for City Council approval: • October 13, 2015 These minutes will be on the November 10, 2015 consent agenda. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments No file(s) attached. AIS-2401 3. C. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: Receive and File: NPRA Conference Notes Submitted By: Carol Krager,Central Services Item Type: Receive and File Meeting Type: Consent - Receive and File Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Receive and file Councilor Woodard's National Parks and Recreation Association Conference Notes STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST No action is requested; these are for information purposes. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached are Councilor Woodard's National Parks and Recreation Association Conference notes referred to in his September 22, 2015 council liaison report. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A -Receive and File Items Attachments NPRA Conference Notes Councilor Woodard's Notes on 2015 National Recreation and Park Association Conference, September 15-17,2015 Tuesday- General Session Social equity means no matter the social class city recreation provides everyone an equal footing in fitness,health,recreational needs,goals and opportunities. US Surgeon General-Dr.Murthy states "Public recreation and community centers provide healthy lifestyle activities,advocate and support walkable communities with a wheelchair emphasis in design and development. He has a call to action-to create a nation of walkers. To do this requires: • Recreational programming with something for everyone. • Programs that motivate and inspire people to reduce risk of diabetes and heart disease • Places people can go they feel safe. • Community centers now educate our children on healthy lifestyle,not our schools. • Community recreation programs are now the policy makers where we live and where health disparity grows and the public health battle is becoming more parks and rec's oriented to mitigate this problem. • No kid should suffer because of where they live or social economic status. • The new city recreation build out model must be developed by the 8/80 model. Build for 8 and 80 year olds, than everything in between is addressed. Do not build programs for only 30 year olds and athletes. Too often potholes and pavement appear to be more important than fitness and health. Social equity challenges these budget priorities with a mindset that must change if we're to develop a sustainable city. How is it that with the means to drive to fitness and recreation areas have more rights than those that do not have means to a vehicle or resources to get those recreation facilities, services and programs? The first step to achieve a fit healthy lifestyle for all is to plan,design and develop safe neighborhood passage to activated space people can walk to near their neighborhoods.Like drivers, those that don't drive,or can't afford the luxury have the right to walk, or bike on safe public right of way. The Surgeon General proclaims that parks and recreation policies which address social equity save lives. NRPA saves lives through their multiple partnerships,grants,education,and community support events, etc. Tuesday- Build Voter Support for a Strong Ballot Measure Tuesday-Build an Inclusive Destination Place • Includes special needs play area space to reduce overstimulation,and emotional needs. • Interactive city learning experience • Playground for all kids. (Round Rock Texas). • Build through neighborhood fundraising partnered with city parks and recreation department MOU. A city recreation 501(c) 3 non-profit foundation (receives all donations, grants,bequests and per MOU,plans and implements CIP's). Wednesday-Actions Sports Parks from Design 237 If you don't build skate parks to city-specific riding challenges,or they do not invite bikers,cross cycling,BMX, or razor riders than you've invested in a facility that is not cradle-to-grave useful. For instance,how many of you skateboard vs. how many of you bike? If we're thinking about a biking facility then we must consider the latest sustainable innovations in the industry. If we build it they will come and it will become a destination place. These are great revenue producers with events, tournaments,slalom competition and intramural sports, skate camps,and officer-led biking safety courses. YMCA has held such organized events. All-terrain parks include adaptive plaza concepts, such as planters designed to grind on that are designed for timeless use and competition: $40-50sgft to build. Wednesday- Commercial Recreation Design Blunders and Glitches 251 This presentation had at least 50 Recreation Design Blunders and Glitches and shows us lessons learned in building a publically owned 21st Century City Recreation Facility. A list was provided of what not to do vs. to do during design and construction so tax payer dollars are not wasted. This slide presentation will be printed by city recorder and inserted into Councilor Goodhouse's weekly mail bag drop off as requested. If any other councilors would like a printed copy of this presentation or download file please make the request through staff. Wednesday-Take your Park Foundation to the Next Level 281 What do you want to be-a recreation provider for the city or region? Do you want to be an advocacy group for recreation?Capital improvement programs,public works and parks and recreation budgets must be kept separated. Will the foundation receive dollars,receive,sell and purchase properties for public recreation use? Foundations can insert themselves between public works and parks and recreation. Ask if the MOU with city parks and recreation and council agrees to allow the foundation to be a private non-profit,not required to reveal records or audits. Or will both agree on some transparency policy? Will the MOU specify who is responsible for advocacy, legislative support,or a feasibility study?Non-profits can do a variety of things but usually not all: Concept planning with task force,policy recommendations,education,design, management/operations,land acquisition,maintenance,construction,and administrative role. Who's the decision maker? A foundation accepts money. It is a bad idea for economic development, community planning and city engineers to manage recreation projects (but they can support). Foundation can be instrumental in project management with recreation industry specialists and consultants. An MOU may incorporate a volunteer coordinator. They should be metric driven and know how to recruit with sustained relative qualifier listings. Managing a strong volunteer base requires a full-time volunteer recruiter. Develop mission statement,values and sustainable scope for foundation organization. Park foundation may want to retain control over public governance. City council and staff may sit on boards with partnership recommendations. Thursday- Creating and Maintaining a Quality Internship lAW US Fair Labor Acts as applied to Non-Profit or For-Profit Lead Organizations. Advantages and disadvantages are in the notes. Thursday - City Parks as Classrooms Partner with schools for parks conservancy and education. Use in curriculum to build and sustain so the next generation learns about stewardship,ecology and taking care of the environment and parks. Thursday-National Bike Park Destination and Development Bike park community-Hilride Consulting specializes in this type of development facility amendments: Griffen Bike Park. NICA National and International Cycling Association. These have huge economic impact as they are a destination places. If community building,economic development, social equity,jobs,healthy lifestyle and moral leadership are important values,then cities must invest in recreational facilities to people of all ages, abilities and socio-economic class. Where memories are made,lessons learned and positive experiences are reflected upon by everyone. I can't think of any better way to create a sustainable city model where organized city recreation not only brings community together but teaches us how to maintain fitness levels,good health and work together for the common good. AIS-2387 4, Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Tree for All Award Presentation Submitted By: Carol Kruger,Central Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting - Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Clean Water Services will present the Mayor and Council with the Tree For All award for the work the city has done in the last decade and especially in the last year to help 5.7 million native plants take root in the Tualatin Basin. The presentation will mark the success of the Tree for All: 1 Million I 1 Year I 1 Water campaign. The presentation will also include the showing of a 3 minute video that wraps up the year (and features Tigard prominently!). Requested agenda item: Tree For All: 1 Million I 1 Year I 1 Water Award Presentation Bruce Roll,Watershed Director,Clean Water Services STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST None KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Tree for All(www.jointreeforall.org) is a community partnership of cities,nonprofits, farmers,volunteers and other who have joined hands (and shovels) to plant more than five million native trees and shrubs along the Tualatin River and tributaries in the last decade.The 2015-16 Tree for All Challenge was to plant one million of those trees and shrubs in one year. Clean Water Services'Watershed Director Bruce Roll will provide a report on the 1 Million, 1 Year, 1 Water campaign, the role the City of Tigard and its residents played in the campaign's success and present the Council with the Tree for All Award. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments No file(s)attached AIS-2342 5, Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Enterprise Zone: Resolution Expanding Tigard Enterprise Zone to Include the City of Lake Oswego Prepared For: Lloyd Purdy,Community Development Submitted By: Lloyd Purdy,Community Development Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting -Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE The City of Tigard and the City of Lake Oswego have an opportunity to collaborate on an economic development project by creating a multi-jurisdictional enterprise zone called the Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Pass a resolution to expand the Tigard Enterprise Zone to include 85 industrial/commercial tax lots in Lake Oswego creating the Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone.Authorize Tigard's economic development manager to make this request to Business Oregon and manage this expanded multi-jurisdictional program. Resolution includes two exhibits -Exhibit A is the Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone map,and Exhibit B is the list of new tax lots to be added. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY As discussed in the October 13,2015 Tigard City Council Business Meeting, the Tigard Enterprise Zone was created by Council Resolution 14-51 in October 2014. Enterprise zones offer qualified businesses located within a defined boundary a three to five year tax abatement on new investment(equipment,buildings,and facilities) when the firm also invests in new employees by increasing their workforce by 10%.To date,three firms in Tigard are eligible to participate in this program.The Tigard Enterprise Zone currently includes all the industrial,manufacturing and commercially zoned properties in Tigard eligible for this program based upon the state's economic hardship criteria. Currently,ten enterprise zones act as a tool for economic development in the Portland metro region. Forest Grove/Cornelius and Troutdale/Fairview are examples of cities that work together through enterprise zones that cross municipal boundaries.A similar partnership between The City of Tigard and City of Lake Oswego would result in the creation of the Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone. The City of Lake Oswego asked the City of Tigard to create this partnership through an amendment to the boundary of Tigard's current zone. Based upon discussion between staff from each city,we are confident an expanded enterprise zone will improve the regional economy. Lake Oswego has at least one company ready to make a multi-million dollar investment in new equipment and increase employment,but is prepared to move to another site outside of the Portland region.The enterprise zone program is one way Lake Oswego can retain this multi-national firm.An estimated 83% of the firms located in Tigard provide goods and services as part of a regional supply chain to firms outside of the City of Tigard. Supporting growth of companies in our region is good for Tigard businesses and for Tigard residents.An estimated 28,000 Tigard residents are currently in the workforce. The majority commute to a neighboring city,including Lake Oswego,for their job. This economic development partnership also sends a signal to the business community and regional leaders that the City of Tigard is collaborative and actively engaged in supporting business growth. Amending the Tigard Enterprise Zone boundary to support business growth in a neighboring city is allowed via a formal request to Business Oregon, the State of Oregon's economic development agency. Expanding the enterprise zone to include industrial land in Lake Oswego's Southwest Employment Area will add: •96 acres of property. •85 industrial zoned or commercial tax lots. •15 eligible businesses (estimated). •1 firm ready for an immediate investment within the next 12 months. The City of Lake Oswego hosted a stakeholder open house to discuss this topic on October 14,2015. Certification of a new firm to participate in the enterprise zone program typically takes six to ten hours of work for the Zone Manager. Tigard's Economic Development Manager will continue these duties. Based upon an IGA,Tigard will be reimbursed for staff time spent working with Lake Oswego firms. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Limit the Tigard Enterprise Zone to the boundaries of the City of Tigard. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS An expanded Tigard Enterprise Zone is consistent with the recommendations of Comprehensive Plan Goal 9 encouraging regional partnerships and economic development. This effort is also supported by the strategic vision of a more interconnected city,connecting us through an economic development collaboration with Lake Oswego. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION February 2014 Council discussion of Enterprise Zone program. October 2014 Resolution to create the Tigard Enterprise Zone. October 13,2015 briefing to Tigard City Council to discuss expanding the zone. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Information: No expense to City of Tigard. Intergovernmental Agreement will detail cost recovery of staff time. Attachments Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone Reolution Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone Map New Sites in Lake Oswego Listing CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A REQUEST TO THE STATE OF ORI:GON FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE TIGARD ENTERPRISE ZONE TO INCLUDE A PORTION OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO WHEREAS,the City of Tigard sponsors the Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone jointly with the City of Lake Oswego and consent of other taxing authorities; and WHEREAS,the enterprise zone as amended has a total area of 2.85 square miles. It meets other statutory limitations on size and configuration,and it is depicted here on a drawn-to-scale map (Exhibit A),and its boundary is here described in a list of parcels with tax identification number(Exhibit B);and WHEREAS,the municipal corporations,school districts,special service districts,etc.,other than the sponsoring governments,that receive operating revenue through the levying of ad valorem taxes on real and personal property in any area of the enterprise zone,as amended,were sent notice regarding this boundary change;and WHEREAS,the City of Tigard and City of Lake Oswego shall fulfill their duties and implement provisions jointly under ORS 285C.105 or elsewhere in ORS Chapter 285C and related parts of Oregon Law;and WHEREAS,the Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone does not grant or imply permission to develop land within the Zone without complying with prevailing zoning,regulatory and permitting processes and restrictions for applicable jurisdictions;nor does it indicate any intent to modify those processes or restrictions, except as otherwise in accordance with Comprehensive Plans as acknowledged by the State of Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission;and WHEREAS,the City of Tigard's economic development strategy focuses on encouraging private sector investment through the creation of strong relationships with public and private sector partners,as well as programs that support entrepreneurs and business owners;and WHEREAS,the City of Tigard encourages business investment,job creation,higher incomes for residents,greater diversity of economic activity, and business growth;and WHEREAS,the City of Tigard recognizes that regional collaboration with local partners improves the local and regional economy;and WHEREAS,in collaboration with the City of Lake Oswego,the two communities may apply to the state for an expansion of the Tigard Enterprise Zone to include a portion of the City of Lake Oswego;and WHEREAS,Lake Oswego and Tigard are partners using the State of Oregon's Enterprise Zone program to support collaboration in economic development in both cities;and WHEREAS,the State of Oregon,through ORS 285C.115 allows for the expansion of an enterprise zone in areas of economic hardship to encourage additional private sector investment through a three to five year tax credit on new investments for certain businesses,made in conjunction with an increase in employment;and WHEREAS,an enterprise zone allows industrial and some commercial firms making a new capital investment a waiver of 100 percent of the amount of real property taxes attributable to the new investment for up to a five year period after completion;and RESOLUTION NO. 15- Page 1 WHEREAS,there is no loss of current property tax levies to local taxing jurisdictions because land or existing buildings, machinery or equipment is not tax exempt;and WHEREAS,once the abatement period is over,the improvements are fully taxed for the life of the improvements resulting in a long-term return to the local taxing jurisdictions;and WHEREAS,an enterprise zone is an economic development tool that will:provide selected Tigard and Lake Oswego based firms with assistance in growing,making larger capital investments than might otherwise occur,accelerate investment or expansion,induce hiring,improve wages,bolster the early success of a business project or investment,and attract investment and facilities that would otherwise move or locate outside of the area;and WHEREAS,the proposed expanded enterprise zone has a total area of 2.7 square miles in Tigard and 0.15 square miles in Lake Oswego,and meets other State of Oregon statutory limitations on size and configuration with no part of the zone greater than 12 miles distant at its furthest point;and WHEREAS,this proposed zone expansion is based on qualifying Census tracts 203.02,204.01 and 320.05 based upon U.S. Census,American Community Survey Estimates,2009-2013 which includes land zoned for industrial and commercial uses comprising more than 85 tax lots;and WHEREAS,the proposed enterprise zone contains significant land zoned for industrial use,and acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission,as including industrial sites which are accessible,serviced or serviceable,and otherwise ready for use and further development. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED Under ORS 285C.115, the City of Tigard authorizes the expansion of the Tigard Enterprise Zone to include portions of Lake Oswego and seek approval from Business Oregon for this zone expansion. The name of the zone is changed to: Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone. The City of Lake Oswego does hereby join the zone as a new co-sponso r. The City of Tigard's Economic Development Manager,is authorized to submit documentation of this enterprise zone boundary to the Oregon Business Development Department(OBDD) for purposes of a positive determination under section 18,chapter 648,Oregon Laws 2015 (Enrolled House Bill 2643)on behalf of the zone sponsors. This change of the Tigard Enterprise Zone boundary takes effect on the date that this resolution is adopted and confirmed by Business Oregon. SECTION: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2015. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 15 - Page 2 1 Exhibit A► �SON� Tigard / �BRO GK MA'N=ST�m°GR� ) OV --_„,, ;-- , <> i L�_/ i- -T AYLORS=FERRY RD Lake Oswego I Enterprise Zone Qe N/GC311 Ob I r q IS ''? — n l I i c m ppL �— ;N t 1 i u Lake Oswego Portion of — �17 �aaet�o di Enterprise Zone o c o�i'f Y-_— --. � Tigard Portion of ----5 H r!"-7.,: ! Enterprise Zone / w / - 1 % > eP 1, ri? Tigard City Boundary �, �/ ? �rP , ±” ➢ <:FS PKwy 0 Lake Oswego City II / / \-- I G A\�O� r_) 1 MO.�THFST Itlm,sa.,.q..�'PDJ Boundary / - jr \ a I �\ ' I I County Boundary s" I Li 1 V �P - 5 ! 0 ir 1 J.41 �r N t / 0 I 1 '� r 1 If 1 �;� I co I r MELROSE ST LAKE I--- 1 I 1 II 1 i 1 -MCDONA•LD•ST KRUSE WAY .r -G A-AR-0E-S7 ---- 1�1 B-UL-L=MOUyN:T'AdN R ,` -----. Tigard MEADOWS fyD \ �,._._ pf 1. 1 -------- a ;��;/ Lake Oswego ; �P�M 9� a ,, WILSR000 ,exp. ` '� �.ea�^MI O---I i�� fEnterprise z< 5 . 7 \k rF '-- _ Zone 4 ' ` , '`„`�- o Oo, r o�il p�„,,,..0 a 1 ,,, j f N_` ',..>:)./ --_ _ BE �O ==DURHAM=RD—�— 5 O ° -- r--tl � , 0v J Kfl I CITY I _ .4- Li--— — W ?icAR°�gPs W , C N� M/1 !i/�7 Or/ / Map Creates 10r6/2015 co Ull Oil IMI m z p�u >Y �— 7U ALATGnM '' a LIP i - i lilt City of Tigard, Oregon TU AATIN=RD � o. 13126 SW Hall Blvd :�;�* Tigartl. OR 97223 �l kF J..e RI 603 639-4171 C H14�DS RD www tlgard or goy I I, -1I 1) natty:1%192168109.215t GIS_Pr otecls1F15 yrolectal2015\enterpnee 2one\enlerpnsa zone1117 mx0 Tigard/Lake Oswego (Amended) Property List additions TLO EZ Tax ID Number Owner Owner City Owner State Owner ZIP Sq Ft Total Value 1 21E18CB01200 MICRO SYSTEMS ENGINEERING INC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5571 201,980.00 $5,990,160 2 21E18BD03300 PATZER SUZANNE M BEAVERTON OR 97007-6056 6,398.30 $192,267 3 21E18BD03500 CDLW VENTURES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5360 25,929.20 $903,424 4 21E18BD03501 GREGOIRE LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034-5661 13,483.90 $295,933 5 2S113DD00200 CONWAY, MARY A SALEM OR 97302 27,442.80 $470,200 6 2S113DD00401 CARPENTER, MICHAEL C & LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035 134,164.80 $3,078,040 7 2S113DD00700 WHITE, SPENCER F REVOCABLE LIVIN NEWBERG OR 97132 40,510.80 $733,580 8 2S113DD00500 WHITE FAMILY TRUST LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035 21,780.00 $234,010 9 2S113DD00800 GAGE ASSOCIATES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 80,150.40 $1,353,430 10 2S113DD00600 WASHINGTON COUNTY HILLSBORO OR 97124 871.2 $260 11 2S113DD00400 WASHINGTON COUNTY HILLSBORO OR 97124 3,049.20 $910 12 2S124AA05800 GAGE ASSOCIATES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 21,344.40 $505,850 13 2S124AA05900 GAGE ASSOCIATES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 54,450.00 $836,650 14 2S124AA06000 GAGE ASSOCIATES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 38,332.80 $1,038,590 15 2S124AA05600 NATIONAL WATERWORKS INC ORLANDO FL 32802 89,733.60 $779,630 16 2S124AA05700 GAGE ASSOCIATES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 32,670.00 $153,140 17 2S124AA06100 GAGE ASSOCIATES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034 77,101.20 $1,595,390 18 2S124AA04600 HUNT,TROY E PORTLAND OR 97223 12,961.30 $362,970 19 2S124AA04500 GIBBS, CATHLEEN &JAMES OREGON CITY OR 97045 13,164.10 $442,870 20 21E18CC03000 HOLTMAN JANET GILBERT AZ 85295-9130 16,388.80 $272,462 21 21E18CC03100 HOLTMAN JANET GILBERT AZ 85295-9130 1,725.60 $7,559 22 21E18CC03200 SCO &CO LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034-7539 104,816.10 $1,329,510 23 21E18BA03900 EDMONDS SCOTT TRUSTEE LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-0563 8,320.80 $234,136 1 24 21E18BA04000 GOODWILL IND OF THE COLUMBIA PORTLAND OR 97214-4508 40,299.40 $736,592 25 21E18BA04100 MPD LLC VANCOUVER WA 98683 42,528.50 $935,658 26 21E18BA04200 CAREY STEVEN G LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5354 28,958.70 $825,539 27 21E18BC01600 PAGLINAWAN PATRICIA G LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5224 10,829.00 $278,291 28 21E18BC01700 LANDSHIRE ACRES COMPANY LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5309 32,540.30 $1,855,052 29 21E18BD00100 THE GALLARUS GROUP LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-3359 31,729.10 $547,518 30 21E18BD00200 PACIFIC PARTNER COMMERCIAL LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5371 38,769.40 $802,306 31 21E18BD00300 BRISBEE PEGGY TILLAMOOK OR 97141-1120 39,636.20 $614,337 Enterprise Zone Expansion: Exhibit B 32 21E18BD00400 NWB/CSPP-LAKE OSWEGO LLC MILL CREEK WA 98012-4740 43,406.10 $460,807 33 21E18BD00500 HYDE JOYCE P TRUSTEE LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034-2753 30,829.20 $662,835 34 21E18BD00600 SALEH HOLDINGS LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-4367 68,017.60 $2,891,431 35 21E18BD00601 VARNS STREET PROPERTIES LLC PORTLAND OR 97223-8145 42,509.70 $2,391,313 36 21E18BD00604 KALBERER COMPANY PORTLAND OR 97204-2330 58,560.90 $1,873,970 37 21E18BD00700 DEBAUW WILLIAM &VIRGINIA TIGARD OR 97223-4804 39,924.20 $1,556,478 38 21E18BD00900 SHIRAZI LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5344 8,604.20 $389,256 39 21E18BD01000 HOWARTH CHERYL L BEAVERTON OR 97007-4893 8,968.20 $404,430 40 21E18BD01100 KCM PROPERTIES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034-7224 14,307.90 $546,809 41 21E18BD01200 FS UNLIMITED LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034-6718 39,075.00 $563,982 42 21E18BD01300 WRIGHT WILLIAM TRUSTEE PORTLAND OR 97239-0627 67,905.20 $1,473,143 43 21E18BD01400 WILLOW LANE PROPERTIES LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5338 10,125.80 $288,301 44 21E18BD01500 STEVENS JOINT VENTURE LLC SHERWOOD OR 97140-0275 70,066.30 $1,914,441 45 21E18BD01900 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034-0369 41,626.00 $446,113 46 21E18BD02000 EVERETT RICHARD C LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-0513 78,418.50 $1,652,062 47 21E18BD02200 GMS PRODUCTS LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5315 31,362.50 $801,609 48 21E18BD02300 MOHAN INVESTMENTS LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5263 35,407.00 $721,792 Enterprise Zone Expansion: Exhibit B 49 21E18BD02400 HARP MEDICAL PLAZA LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5586 57,639.50 $4,130,544 50 21E18BD02402 WAL-MART PROPERTY TAX DEPT BENTONVILLE AR 72712 108,644.70 $2,532,400 51 21E18BD02403 MARK A PETROFF LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5384 25,738.40 $1,815,731 52 21E18BD02500 JONSSON PROPERTIES LLC AUSTIN TX 78704-4346 21,925.60 $1,185,805 53 21E18BD02600 WAL-MART PROPERTY TAX DEPT BENTONVILLE AR 72712 17,178.40 $367,871 54 21E18BD02700 JEAN BUILDING LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5303 15,334.90 $178,031 55 21E18BD02701 JEAN BUILDING LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5303 27,862.90 $1,215,102 56 21E18BD02800 ATLAS SPECIALTIES CORP SACRAMENTO CA 95838-3001 49,122.30 $900,430 57 21E18BD02900 R & D JEAN RD LLC TIGARD OR 97224-4715 49,203.40 $1,484,948 58 21E18BD03000 LAKE OSWEGO EXECUTIVE PARK LLC PORTLAND OR 97204-3132 25,515.50 $889,105 59 21E18BD03001 LAKE OSWEGO EXECUTIVE PARK LLC PORTLAND OR 97204-3132 24,608.70 $1,302,415 60 21E18CC03201 MO &CO LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97034-7539 62,582.80 $1,855,654 61 21E18BD03002 LAKE OSWEGO EXECUTIVE PARK LLC PORTLAND OR 97204-3132 44,247.00 $1,903,388 62 21E18BD03003 LAKE OSWEGO EXECUTIVE PARK LLC PORTLAND OR 97204-3132 3,937.50 $49,529 63 21E18CA03200 JMCM MORSE-JEAN RD LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5306 84,258.80 $732,042 64 21E18CA03201 BETHPAGE OSWEGO LLC NEWBERG OR 97132-6934 44,140.00 $1,798,636 Enterprise Zone Expansion: Exhibit B 65 21E18CA03300 BTLO LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-7047 45,143.90 $1,712,024 66 21E18CA03400 11TH HOUR LLC TIGARD OR 97281-0819 34,771.90 $618,195 67 21E18CA03500 PACIFIC-JEAN ROAD LAND CO LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5306 68,580.70 $813,083 68 21E18CA03600 MOODY MICHAEL& RONDA LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5308 9,999.60 $202,530 69 21E18CA03700 MOODY J MICHAEL& R K LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5308 9,999.40 $293,010 70 21E18CA03800 11TH HOUR LLC TIGARD OR 97281-0819 76,380.00 $553,423 71 21E18CA04000 11TH HOUR LLC TIGARD OR 97281-0819 37,671.30 $1,432,074 72 21E18AB01500 BOONES FERRY CROSSING LLC WEST LINN OR 97068-3631 41,500.20 $1,753,999 73 21E18AB01700 BOONES FERRY CROSSING LLC WEST LINN OR 97068-3631 38,187.80 $2,101,937 74 21E18CB00201 MICRO SYSTEMS ENGINEERING INC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-5571 326,690.40 $9,794,002 75 21E18CB01100 ELLIOTT ASSOCIATES INC PORTLAND OR 97232-2730 288,814.00 $5,381,727 76 21E18CB01101 KEYBANK NATIONAL ASSOC TRUSTEE CLEVELAND OH 44114 79,144.90 $1,859,707 77 21E18CB01103 CHINOOK INVESTMENT CO BEND OR 97708-5309 75,888.30 $1,493,696 78 21E18CC03300 TOTORO LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-7740 15,206.80 $977,076 79 21E18CC03400 TOTORO LLC LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-7740 7,405.20 $29,924 80 21E18AB03500 TAYLOR-MADE LABELS LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-0056 40,433.40 $376,578 Enterprise Zone Expansion: Exhibit B 1 81 21E18AB03600 TAYLOR-MADE LABELS LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035-0056 74,009.40 $1,870,393 82 21E18BA03700 VARNS STREET PROPERTIES LLC PORTLAND OR 97223-8145 68,056.40 $2,351,418 83 21E18BA03704 LES SCHWAB TIRE CTRS OF OR BEND OR 97708-5350 30,493.20 $592,960 84 21E18BA03800 LES SCHWAB TIRE CTR INC BEND OR 97708-5350 53,746.60 $1,796,631 85 21E18BA03801 HOFFMAN CATHERINE A SHERWOOD OR 97140-8489 24,525.20 $638,435 Enterprise Zone Expansion: Exhibit B AIS-2398 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes):25 Minutes Agenda Title: Continued QJ Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change for Fields Trust Prepared For: Gary Pagenstecher,Community Development Submitted By: Norma Alley, Central Services Item Type: Ordinance Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting Resolution -Main Public Hearing- Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing: Yes Publication Date: Information ISSUE At the October 13,2015 hearing,City Council continued the hearing on the proposed Fields Comp Plan amendment and Zone change until October 27th. Based on Rolling Hills neighbor testimony, Council requested staff draft a resolution to prohibit vehicular traffic generated from the Fields property from passing through the Rolling Hills neighborhood(attached). Council intends to take separate action on both the Ordinance and the Resolution. In addition,at Council's October 13th hearing,which was on the record,new information was offered by Tigard staff regarding the status of a Lot Line Adjustment being processed concurrently by the applicant on the Fields property.To be fair in the process,Staff has offered all interested parties the opportunity to submit additional information specific to the Lot Line Adjustment in writing to the Council. Written public comment related to the status of the Lot Line Adjustment may be considered by Council in their deliberation on the 27th,at their discretion. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Ordinance The Planning Commission recommends approval to City Council of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change subject to the Findings in Section IV of the attached staff report and the following recommended four conditions of approval: 1. The planned development overlay zone shall be applied concurrently with the proposed MUE zone; 2. Future development within the MUE zone shall include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the city's amended 2011 EOA; 3.The site shall be limited to a maximum of 630 a.m. peak hour trips and 630 p.m. peak hour trips. If the applicant or future property owners wish to allow for more trips,a Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA) with Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660-012-0060 analysis will be required to determine whether the limit can be revised or removed.The trip cap shall be implemented as a condition of approval on subsequent land use permits for proposed development and will be listed as a condition of approval in the ordinance adopting the zone change,if approved by the City Council;and 4.The applicant shall record an easement,restrictive covenant or similar instrument on the subject property that is acceptable to the city to ensure a 50-foot wide forested buffer is maintained along the eastern property boundary abutting the Rolling Hills subdivision. Resolution Staff recommends that Council consider the attached resolution prohibiting vehicular access from passing through the Rolling Hills neighborhood,as requested.As included in the Resolution,Staff also recommends the access prohibition be qualified to allow for emergency vehicular access to the Fields Property if it is determined to be necessary by emergency response agencies at the time the property is developed. In addition, consistent with the city's Strategic Plan,staff has specifically stated in the resolution that pedestrian and bicycle access through the neighborhood be expressly allowed. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Ordinance The proposed Mixed Use Employment Comprehensive Plan designation of the eastern portion of the site will allow development despite existing slope constraints. It will also reduce potential conflicts between uses on the subject property and abutting residential development.The proposed zone change from I-P to MUE has the potential to increase economic development in Tigard by allowing for a wider variety of potential development on the site that is not limited by the physical attributes of the site. [Please see additional information in the attached Planning Commission Recommendation] Resolution In 1979, the Citizen Action Committee for the 72nd Avenue Interchange requested the Tigard City Council to place a street plug at the west end of SW Varns Street and to place signs at the east entrance to SW Varns Street to prevent through traffic. In 1979, the Tigard City Council passed Resolution No. 79-86 creating a street plug at the west end of SW Varns Street and required installation of signs at the east end of SW Varns Street. On October 13,2015 the Rolling Hills neighbors testified at City Council on a proposed zone change (CPA2015-00004/ZON2015-00005) for the adjacent Fields Trust property with concerns regarding the prospect of through-traffic associated with likely future development. City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution to prohibit vehicular traffic originating from the Fred Fields Trust Property to pass through the adjacent Rolling Hills neighborhood. The proposed resolution would repeal Resolution No. 79-87. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Ordinance Council has the responsibility to approve,approve with modifications,approve with conditions,deny or adopt an alternative to an application for the legislative change or to remand to the commission for rehearing and reconsideration on all or part of an application transmitted to it under this title. Resolution Adopt,not adopt,or retain existing Resolution No.79-87. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION June 16,2015 Fields Industrial Property Project update March 24,2015 Public Hearing for Post Acknowledgement Plan Amendment to Economic Opportunity Analysis. December 9,2014 pre-development update and presentation of draft MOU September 9,2014 discussion of the grant for the Public Infrastructure Finance Plan from the Department of Land Conservation and Development August 9,2014 update on Public Infrastructure Finance Plan February 18,2014 Fields Property Site Analysis study October 13, 2015 - Quasi-judicial Hearing for Fields Comprehensive Plan and Zone Change. Attachments Resolution Ordinance PC Recommendation to Council Planning Commission Minutes Application Materials CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PROHIBITING VEHICULAR TRAFFIC ORIGINATING FROM THE FRED FIELDS TRUST PROPERTY TO PASS THROUGH THE ADJACENT ROLLING HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS OF THE DATE OF THIS REOLUTION IS WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S MAP AND TAX LOTS 2S1010001100,2S101CA00100,2S101CA00800,AND 2S101DB00400. WHEREAS,in 1979 the Citizen Action Committee for the 72nd Avenue Interchange requested the Tigard City Council to place a street plug at the west end of SW Varns Street and to place signs at the east entrance to SW Varns Street to prevent through traffic;and WHEREAS,the Tigard City Council passed Resolution No. 79-86 creating a street plug at the west end of SW Varns Street and required installation of signs at the east end of SW Varns Street and WHEREAS, on October 13,2015 the Rolling Hills neighbors testified at City Council about a proposed zone change (CPA2015-00004/ZON2015-00005) on the adjacent Fields Trust property with concerns regarding the prospect of through-traffic associated with likely future development;and WHEREAS,City Council directed staff to prepare a resolution to prohibit vehicular traffic originating from the Fred Fields Trust Property from passing through the adjacent Rolling Hills neighborhood. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The City of Tigard will prohibit vehicular traffic originating from the Fred Fields Trust Property from passing through the adjacent Rolling Hills neighborhood (with the exception of emergency vehicle access). SECTION 2: Pedestrian and bicyde access through the neighborhood will not be prohibited. SECTION 3: This resolution repeals Resolution No. 79-87. SECTION 4: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2015. Mayor-City of Tigard An.EST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 15- Page 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 15- AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT (CPA2015-00004) AND ZONE MAP AMENDMENT (ZON2015-00005) FOR THE 42.6-ACRE FIELDS TRUST PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SW HUNZIKER ROAD & SW WALL STREET, TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP FROM 37.4 ACRES OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (IL), 3.1 ACRES OF PROFESSIONAL COMMERCIAL (CP),AND 2.1 ACRES OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (L) TO 18.3 ACRES OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (IL) AND 24.2 ACRES OF MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT (MUE). THE PROPOSAL WOULD ALSO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM 37.4 ACRES OF INDUSTRIAL PARK (I-P), 3.1 ACRES OF PROFESSIONAL/ADMINISTRATIVE COMMERCIAL (C-P), AND 2.1 ACRES OF LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-3.5) TO 18.3 ACRES OF I-P AND 24.2 ACRES OF MUE. SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) APPLYING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE, 2) PRESERVERING EMPLOYMENT CAPACITY, 3) IMPOSING A TRIP CAP, AND 4) ENSURING A 50-FOOT FORESTED BUFFER. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE IS WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S MAP AND TAX LOTS 2S1010001100, 2S101CA00100,2S101CA00800,AND 2S101DB00400. WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.A of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires quasi-judicial zoning map amendments to be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050,using standards of approval contained in Subsection 18.380.030.B;and WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.A.2 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the council on an application for a comprehensive plan map amendment;and WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.B.1 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; and WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.B.2 of the Tigard Development Community Development Code requires demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinances;and WHEREAS, Section 18.380.030.B.3 of the City of Tigard Community Development Code requires evidence of change in the neighborhood or community, or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application;and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 18.390.060.G of the Tigard Development Code, a recommendation by the Planning Commission, and a decision by the council, shall be based on consideration of Statewide Planning Goals and guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statues; any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable;and any applicable Metro regulations;and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 17, 2015, and recommended approval of CPA2014-00004/ZON2015-00005 by motion passed unanimously;and ORDINANCE No. 15- Page 1 WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing on October 13, 2015, to consider the request for a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan and zone map amendment and determined that the amendments will not adversely affect the health,safety and welfare of the city and meet all applicable review criteria. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA2015-00004) and Zone Change (ZON2015-00005) are hereby approved by the City Council, subject to the conditions of approval in the Planning Commission Recommendation to Council dated August 24,2015. SECTION 2: The attached findings in the August 24, 2015 Planning Commission Recommendation are hereby adopted in explanation of the council's decision(Exhibit"A"). SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only,this day of ,2015. Carol Krager,City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of ,2015. John Cook,Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 15- Page 2 Exhibit A PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: FIELDS TRUST PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FILE NOS.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA2015-00004 Zone Change Amendment ZON2015-00005 PROPOSAL: The Fred W. Fields Trust proposes to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential (L) to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial (IL) and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment(MUE).The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P),3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUE. APPLICANT Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust OWNER: Fred W. Fields Revocable c/o Miller Nash Graham&Dunn LLP Living Trust Attention: Kelly Hossaini 111 SW 5th Ave,#3400 Portland,OR 97204 LOCATION: Southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road & SW Wall Street; WCTM and Tax Lots 2S1010001100,2S101 CA00100,25101 DB00300,and 2S101 DB00400. CURRENT ZONE/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: I-P: industrial park district. The I-P zoning district provides appropriate locations for combining light manufacturing, office and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants,personal services and fitness centers,in a campus-like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, are permitted in the I-P zone. In addition to mandatory site development review, design and development standards in the I-P zone have been adopted to insure that developments will be well-integrated,attractively landscaped,and pedestrian-friendly. C-P: professional/administrative commercial district. The C-P zoning district is designed to accommodate civic and business/professional services and compatible support services, e.g., convenience retail and personal services, restaurants, in close proximity to residential areas and major transportation facilities. Within the Tigard Triangle and Bull Mountain Road District, residential uses at a minimum density of 32 units/net acre, i.e., equivalent to the R-40 zoning district, are permitted in conjunction with a commercial development. Heliports, medical centers, religious institutions and utilities are permitted conditionally. Developments in the C-P zoning district are intended to serve as a buffer between residential areas and more- intensive commercial and industrial areas. R-3.5: low-density residential district. The R-3.5 zoning district is designed to accommodate detached single-family homes with or without accessory residential units at a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. Duplexes are permitted conditionally. Some civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. PLANNING COMMISSION RIXCOMMI:NDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC I IliARING (T.12015-00004/1;11 1.131;TRUST COAIPRI:1 IIiNSI VI:.PLAN AMIiNDMINT %ON201 I-00005/I°ILLDS TRUST%ONI:CIi.W01: PAGE 1 OF 18 PROPOSED ZONE/ COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: MUE: mixed-use employment. The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a regional mixed-use employment district bounded by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and I-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of uses including major retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses and housing; the latter includes multi- family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. A wide range of uses, including but not limited to community recreation facilities, medical centers, schools, utilities and transit-related park-and- ride lots, are permitted conditionally. Although it is recognized that the automobile will accommodate the vast majority of trips to and within the Triangle, it is still important to (1) support alternative modes of transportation to the greatest extent possible; and (2) encourage a mix of uses to facilitate intra-district pedestrian and transit trips even for those who drive. The zone may be applied elsewhere in the city through the legislative process. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters: 18.380;Comprehensive Plan Goals 1,2,9 and 10; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9 and 10; Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 9; the Oregon State Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) 660-012-0060; and Metro Title 4. SECTION II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends APPROVAL to City Council of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment- and Zone Change subject to the Findings in Section IV of this Staff Report and the following recommended conditions of approval. Amendments by the Planning Commission to the conditions of approval recommended in the staff report are indicated in bold itallic, below. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The planned development overlay zone shall be applied concurrently with the proposed MUE zone. 2. Future development within the MUE zone shall include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the city's amended 2011 EGA. 3. The site shall be limited to a maximum of 630 a.m. peak hour trips and 630 p.m. peak hour trips. If the applicant or future property owners wish to allow for more trips, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) with Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660-012-0060 analysis will be required to determine whether the limit can be revised or removed. The trip cap shall be implemented as a condition of approval on subsequent land use permits for proposed development and will be listed as a condition of approval in the ordinance adopting the zone change,if approved by the City Council. 4. The applicant shall record an easement, restrictive covenant or similar instrument on the subject property that is acceptable to the city to ensure a 50-foot wide forested buffer is maintained along the eastern property boundary abutting the Rolling Hills subdivision. SECTION III, BACKGROUND INFORMATION Pl,.\NNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2015-00004'FIELDS'I'RUS'1'COMPREHENSIVE PL.\N AMENDMENT Z()N2011-00005/FIELDS TRUST%ONI:CHANGE PAGE 2 OF 18 Planning Commission Hearing and Deliberation The Planning Commission held a hearing on July 20, 2015 to consider the request and take public testimony. The record was left open until August 3rd for additional testimony, and until August 10th for rebuttal testimony. All testimony was posted to the city's website for interested parties to review. The Commission continued the hearing to August 17, 2015 for deliberation. Neighborhood Testimony The Rolling Hills community testified, with some thirty comment letters, to a peaceful enclave, an oasis, where two generations of families have enjoyed a wonderful quality of life; where, as the traffic around them has grown intolerable, they have been able to preserve calm streets that foster close social ties among each other. Their testimony addressed four basic issues aimed at protecting the quality of life of the Rolling Hills neighborhood. 1) Identifying that traffic in the surrounding area currently exceeds the capacity of the street network; 2) Requesting closure of Varns Street at the Fields property to limit traffic through the neighborhood. 3) Supporting an historic 50-foot forested buffer along the full length of the neighborhood. 4) Requesting less intense zoning adjacent to the northern part of the neighborhood at 76th and Crestview. The commission supported the 50-foot forested buffer, as recommended through condition #4, but found that the transportation-related issues and compatibility of adjacent uses would more appropriately be addressed at the time of development application under a planned development review procedure, as recommended through condition of approval #1. Transportation Planning Rule Compliance ODOT provided testimony addressing the assumptions underlying the applicant's evidence submitted to satisfy the Transportation Planning Rule requirement for zone changes. General agreement was reached on the amount of development that would represent a reasonable worst case scenario with a 0.30 Floor Area Ratio. However,a difference remains with respect to the number of trips generated as determined by the type of development anticipated. Where ODOT prefers the Business Park land use type, the city agrees with the applicant that using the Office Park land use type better reflects the slope constraint on the site that underlies the proposed zone change. The city supports the August 3rd MacKenzie Memo recommendation for a trip cap of 630 AM and 630 PM peak hour trips be applied to the 24.56 acres subject to the zone change,as recommended through condition of approval#3. Jobs Capacity Maintained Recommended condition of approval #2 requires future development within the MUE zone to include a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity consistent with the city's amended 2011 EOA. This condition is supported by the applicant and was not an issue during the Commission hearing. Site History The 42.5-acre property that is the subject of this application was owned by Fred W. Fields for many years before his death in 2011. It is presently owned by the Fred W. Fields Trust. The current zoning designations on the property have been in effect for several decades. The industrially zoned portion of the property was nominally used as part of the Coe Manufacturing facility, located at 7930 SW Hunziker Road, directly across Wall Street. Although this property was never fully developed, in the late 1960s a rail spur was constructed along the western edge of the property abutting Wall Street. Beginning in the early 1950s, the southwestern end of the industrially zoned portion of the property was used as a brick-making facility. Remnants of that facility still exist, including a concrete foundation. In 2012, the Trust had an on-site horizontal mine shaft, which was used for clay removal, filled in for safety reasons. A single family home existed on the residentially zoned portion of the property, but was demolished in 2012. There have been no other uses of the property during the last 70 or so years. P]„ NNING COMMISSION Rh.COMMEND.\TION'1' )COUNCIL-AUGUST 1-,2015 PUBLIC IlEARING CP.\2015-00004/ItIIiLDSTRUST COMPREI IENSI\'h.PL..\N AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005/1F1I 7,LDS'IRUS'I'%ONE CI I.\NGI: PAGE 3 OF 18 City of Tigard/Fields Trust Cooperation The City has worked with Fred Fields over the years with respect to land use issues including acquisition of property for the Library in the early 2000s and acquisition, with Metro, of adjacent property to the east for natural resource conservation. This application is the outcome of efforts between the Fields Trust and the city to unlock the development potential of adjacent upland property, which has remained undeveloped in the heart of the city. The central problem has been a mismatch between the existing Industrial Park zoning designation and the slopes on the subject site being unsuitable for industrial development as outlined in Attachment 2 of the application: Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study, dated February 13,2014. The applicant's narrative describes this cooperative effort in detail. In February 2014, the results of the Development Analysis were shared with the City's Planning Commission and City Council. Both bodies gave the Trust and staff feedback on the Development Analysis, and expressed support for the overall direction recommended by that analysis. Both bodies anticipated a follow- up application from the Trust requesting a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change consistent with the Development Analysis recommendations. Infrastructure Finance Plan As a follow-up to the Development Analysis, the City applied for and received a grant from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) to prepare an infrastructure finance plan for the Fields Trust property, as well as the surrounding Wall Street/Hunziker Road industrial area to the west and north. The purpose of the study was to quantify the need for and appropriate size of public infrastructure in the area, with the hope of ultimately spurring economic development. The infrastructure study recognized that not only would the Fields Trust property need significant infrastructure investment, much of the adjacent industrial property - especially to the west of Wall Street - is substantially underdeveloped and would also benefit from public infrastructure investment. The infrastructure plan was completed late last year and continues to inform the City's actions regarding the Wall Street/Hunziker Road area, as well as the Trust's planning for its property. Economic Opportunities Analysis Amendment In March 2015, the City Council adopted an amendment to its 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) acknowledging that slope was not taken into account as a factor in determining the suitability of vacant or redevelopable land in the city for industrial uses. Both state law and Metro allow slope to be a limiting factor in the designation of industrial land. (See OAR 660-009-0015(3)(a)(B) and Metro's 2009 Urban Growth Report.) This omission resulted in an overstatement of available and suitable industrial land in Tigard, resulting in a deficit of industrial land supply. The amendment allows industrially zoned properties with significant slope, like the Fields Trust property, to be rezoned for more feasible uses and highlights the need, under an efficient land needs scenario, to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment. Site Information and Proposal Description The proposal is to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUE. The application is required to meet approval criteria set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC or Municipal Code)Title 18 Community Development Code. The application is submitted in response to site slopes and other constraints which make the eastern portion of the site unsuitable for industrial uses. No development plans accompany this land use application and no specific development plans exist for the majority of the portion of the property subject to the comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change. The proposed amendment and zone change is shown in the applicant's figure below. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-ALIGUS'I'17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2015-00004/FIELDS'1RUST COMPRI;I IENSIVIE PLAN AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005;FIELDS TRUST ZONE CI 1ANGI? PAGE 4 OF 18 Reid'Trust Zone Cheep 174/ C-GHundkesRdiW.NSt Existing i Proposed Zones y` NRJE -i. —. . _ I \‘, "dry_, WI.M 4, �' 1-1- w.w y...+ PR M..._.._. �ESTYlE7NST - . Proposed'I-P \'.\\ .».`M` Zoning `` ® •.. / SW VARNS ST Proposed MUE R-25 ��. R-3.5 .Zoning SW iNP ST __. amp,, R-12R-12 __ PR \ C-P ........=.=`= _— SW CHERRY OR F- \ i i \ MACKENZIE. C-P - - Vicinity Information The site is located south of Hunziker Road and east of Wall Street. The low density residential Rolling Hills neighborhood borders the subject site to the east. A railroad switching yard abuts the site on the southwest with a private rail spur running across the subject property adjacent and parallel to Wall Street. Red Rock Creek flows parallel to Wall Street to the west of Charter Mechanical and the city's Potso Dog Park located across Wall Street from the subject site. The Hunziker Industrial Core area extends further to the west from Red Rock Creek to SW Hall Blvd between Hwy 217 and the railroad. SECTION IV.- APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 18.380: 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in Subsection B below. A. The Commission shall make a recommendation to the Council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The Council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Section 18.390. The proposed zone change application to change the zoning on the subject site from I-P, C-P, and R-3.5 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC I TEARING CPA2015-00004,FIELDS TRUST COMPREIJENSIvi:PI„\N AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005,'FIELDS'IRUST ZONE CI L NGIE PAGE 5 OF 18 to MUE also involves a comprehensive plan map amendment from Industrial Park, Professional Commercial and Low Density Residential to Mixed Use Employment. Therefore, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to Council on the proposed zone change application and comprehensive plan map amendment. B. Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 18.380.030. B.1 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES The City has an acknowledged Comprehensive Plan consistent with the statewide planning goals. Therefore, consistency with the applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies as addressed in this section of the staff report constitute consistency with the applicable statewide planning goals. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. The applicant's representative sent out notices to surrounding property owners and neighborhood representatives, posted a sign on the property, and held a neighborhood meeting on May 6, 2015 in accordance with the City of Tigard's neighborhood meeting notification process (Application,Attachment 5); as noted in the summary, the primary concerns raised at the meeting were connection to Varns Street and potential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffer required by the City under previous land use rules. In addition, the City mailed notice of the Planning Commission hearing to property owners within 500 feet of the subject site, interested citizens, and agencies, published notice of the hearing, and posted the site pursuant to TDC 18.390.050 for Type III Procedures.These parties have the opportunity to attend the Planning Commission hearing and provide testimony. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the proposed comprehensive plan and zone change is consistent with the applicable Citizen Involvement Goal. LAND USE PLANNING Goal 2.1 Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. Policy 3. The City shall coordinate the adoption, amendment, and implementation of its land use program with other potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies. Notice and request for comments for the proposed zone change were sent to Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Metro, Washington County and Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). ODOT and Metro submitted comments on the proposal, which are included in the findings of this report, below. This policy is met. Policy 5. The City shall promote intense urban level development in Metro-designated Centers and Corridors, and employment and industrial areas. As shown in the applicant's materials 37.4 acres of subject property is included on Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map Qanuary 2014) as a designated Industrial Area. Of this amount, 17.9 acres would remain in the current I-P zone and 19.4 acres would be changed from Industrial Area to Employment Area by virtue of a zone change to MUE. Given the unsuitability of the eastern portion of the property for industrial uses, changing the comprehensive plan and zoning to MUE will enable the City to promote a more intense urban development of the site.This policy is met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2015-00004/FIELDS'IRUSf COMPREHENSIVE PL.\N AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005 1.1)S TRUST ZONE CHANGE NGE I'AGE 6 OF 18 Policy 6. The City shall promote the development and maintenance of a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed services and advance the community's social and fiscal stability. As stated in the applicant's narrative, the rationale for the map amendments is to allow for a range of development opportunities on the up-hill portion of the site that would offset the considerable development costs associated with site grading and public improvement requirements necessary to lead to industrial uses on the flatter, western portion. Ordinance 15-06 amended the comprehensive plan to account for the slope constraints on approximately 17 acres of the site that hamper the ability to construct large-footprint industrial buildings. The industrial uses, by themselves, would not provide sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services. The costs of developing this constrained parcel to accommodate industrial activities undermine the potential economic value of the parcel itself as currently zoned, and have led to it remaining vacant. In combination with the remaining I-P land, the proposed rezoning to MUE provides a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services for the site and advance the City's social and fiscal stability. This policy is met. Policy 7. The City's regulatory land use maps and development code shall implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses including: A. Residential; B. Commercial and office employment including business parks; C. Mixed use; D. Industrial; E. Overlay districts where natural resource protections or special planning and regulatory tools are warranted; and F. Public services. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IP to MUE. The need for industrial land is established in the city's 2011 EOA which indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant industrial is 48 acres and the 20-year supply is 50 acres. Although this action would decrease the industrial land area, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment since the MUE designation accommodates a variety of employment types some of which are also allowed in the IP zone,such as office use. The simultaneous designation of 2.1 acres from R-3.5 to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment-related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. In the context of the City's overall supply of residential land, a reduction of 2.1 acres of low density residential is minimal compared to the increase in residential capacity permitted in the MUE at 25 units per acre. The proposed MUE zone permits a number of residential, civic, commercial, and industrial uses not currently permitted in the C-P zone. Where no residential or industrial uses are permitted in the C-P zone, the MUE permits multifamily residential (R-25), light industrial, research and development, and some warehouse/freight movement. Civic uses are expanded in the MUE to include colleges, schools, and community recreation. Commercial uses such as commercial lodging, eating drinking establishments and sales oriented retail, where limited to a percentage of permitted uses in the C-P, are permitted outright in the MUE. On balance the proposal would provide a wider range of uses under the MUE zone suitable for a sloped site,while limiting several uses currently permitted in the IP zone, such as industrial services and wholesale sales. The City's regulatory land use maps and development code will continue to implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses. This policy is met. Policy 14. Applicants shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that land use applications are consistent with applicable criteria and requirements of the Development Code, the Comprehensive Plan, and when necessary,those of the state and other agencies. The applicant's narrative provides evidence that the application substantially complies with applicable criteria of the Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Administrative Rules, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the Tigard Community Development Code.This policy is met. PLANNING(:ONIMISSION RECOMMENDATION To COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC I-IEARING CP,\2015-00004/FIELDS TRUST COMPREI IE?NSI\'I?P1,iN AMENDMENT Z01\12011-00005/1;11 1.1)S TRUST ZONE CI I.\NGI? PAGE 7 OF 18 Policy 15. In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map shall be subject to the following specific criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available,or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation. Analysis of transportation impacts and public facility infrastructure (Application, Attachments 3 and 4) indicates that the site would have access to infrastructure with sufficient capacity to accommodate development of the site under existing zoning or proposed zoning, and future development of the site would improve both Hunziker Road and Wall Street. The Transportation Planning Rule analysis (Attachment 3) demonstrates that the PM peak trips for uses allowed in the existing and proposed zoning designations are similar; therefore, imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning will ensure the amendment has no significant impact on transportation facilities. As conditioned, this policy is met. B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services. As noted above, the applicant requests that the city condition the approval of the requested zone change with a trip cap that does not exceed the total number of automobile trips associated with the most intense use, a medical/dental office. With a condition of approval implementing a trip cap on the subject site, this policy is met. C. The new land use designation shall fulfill a proven community need such as provision of needed commercial goods and services, employment, housing, public and community services, etc. in the particular location,versus other appropriately designated and developable properties; The applicant's Development Analysis and Opportunity Study demonstrates that, due to slope constraints, the eastern portion of the subject property is constrained for large footprint industrial type development. The proposed alternative zone, MUE, permits multi-family residential development, which has been the focus of developer and real estate market interest in the site. The applicant has shown that the physically constrained portion of the property is more suitable for residential or office development than industrial. This policy is met. D. Demonstration that there is an inadequate amount of developable, appropriately designated, land for the land uses that would be allowed by the new designation; The proposal is for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning for land that is physically constrained and not appropriate for its existing industrial designation. Given that the current industrial designation is not appropriate for the site another more suitable designation is required. Under this action this criterion does not apply since MUE is an appropriate replacement designation but it is not necessarily related to whether there is an inadequate amount of MUE designation in other areas. This criterion does not apply. E. Demonstration that land uses allowed in the proposed designation could be developed in compliance with all applicable regulations and the purposes of any overlay district would be fulfilled. The applicant states uses allowed in the MUE zone can be arranged and clustered to fit into the site topography rather than requiring mass grading to create the large, flat sites that would be necessary for industrial uses. Subsequent Planned Development, Conditional Use and/or Site Development Reviews would ensure development would comply with all applicable development code regulations. The subject site is not currently designated with any overlay zones such as historic (I-ID) or planned development (PD).This policy is met. F. Land uses permitted by the proposed designation would be compatible, or capable of being made compatible,with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses. MANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC I IE.\RING CP.\2015-00004/FIELDS TRUST COMPREI IENSI\'E PLAN AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005/FIELDS TRUST ZONE C1-T.\NG E PAGE 8 OF 18 The applicant's Development Analysis and Opportunity Study identifies site constraints that any development would need to address. Constraints include slope and configuration of site, slope of Hunziker, Wall Street TSP classification and rail spur, wetlands, trees, limited access, and noise from the railroad switching yard. Surrounding land uses include low density sing-family attached and detached residential and industrial uses. The range of uses permitted in the MUE zone would require Conditional Use and/or Site Development Review to ensure development would comply with all applicable development code regulations and be compatible with surrounding land uses. However, the complexity of the site characteristics including environmental conditions and surrounding land uses suggests a process that provides flexibility in site design to maximize the opportunities and mitigate for the constraints of the site and surrounding land uses. Use of the Planned Development overlay zone is the be the best way to ensure permitted uses in the MUE zone are compatible, or are capable of being made compatible, with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses. This is demonstrated through the purpose statement of the Planned Development section of the Development Code: 18.350.010 Purpose A. The purposes of the planned development overly zone are: 1. To provide a means for property development that is consistent with Tigar d's Comprehensive Plan through the application of flexible standards which consider and mitigate for the potential impacts to the city;and 2. To provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the city alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code;and 3. To achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and ci(,y benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transition:n and 4. To preserve to the greatest extent possible the existing landscape fetures and amenities(trees, water resources, ravines, etc.) through the use of a planning procedure (site design and analysis,presentation of alternatives, conceptual review, then detailed review)that can relate the type and design of a development to a particular site;and 5. To consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer. neighbors, and the ci ,and 6. To provide a means to better relate the built environment to the natural environment through sustainable and innovative building and public faciliOl construction methods and materials. A planned development overlay on the proposed MUE zone would best ensure development's compatibility with site conditions. With a condition requiring the PD overlay,this policy is met. G. Demonstration that the amendment does not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. The subject site contains jurisdictional wetlands in the northwest area of the site, steep slopes along the southern edge of the site, and lower value significant habitat designation on the uplands portion of the site The applicant has proposed accepting a condition of approval on the zone change requiring a 50-foot forested buffer along the eastern boundary of the site, which would support the habitat values of the site. Staff suggests that the applicant alternatively provide the buffer by recording a buffer easement on the lot line-adjusted parcel containing the boundary. As identified in the planned development purposes above, the planned development standards are designed to balance environmental resource protection with context sensitive site design. This policy is met. Policy 16. The City may condition the approval of a Plan/Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use(s) and per specific design /development requirements. The applicant has determined that due to extraordinary development costs, the flatter western portion of the site (which would continue to maintain I-P zoning) is only likely to develop if the steeper eastern portion can also be developed with some mix of employment and/or residential use. Knowing that staff is interested in ensuring job capacity on the subject site, the applicant respectfully requests that the City allow any permitted use in the MUE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. The applicant cites the importance of flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions in support of this request. Pl.,\NNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-:1UGUS'1'17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2015-00004/1 11?I DS TRUST COMPR1:1 II NSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT %ON2011-00005/11E1.DS TRUST ZONE CHANGE PAGE 9 OF 18 Staff finds, consistent with findings in the amended 2011 EOA, that slope constraints reduce the subject site's suitability for some large-footprint industrial uses, but that there is potential for employment use of slope-constrained sites. The city's limited inventory of buildable lands highlights the need to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment within an efficient land needs scenario. Although the city supports opening the development potential of the whole site with the proposed zone change to MUE of the slope constrained portion of the site, it also must protect its employment capacity, which can best be managed through the planned development review process. Therefore, staff recommends a condition of approval to ensure the area of the subject property zoned MUE provides a minimum of 280 non-retail jobs to preserve employment land capacity and application of the PD overlay to provide a deliberate process that balances the interests of the owner, developer, neighbors, and the city. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicable Land Use olicies have been met. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend to City - Council a condition of approval requiring a definite land use (employment, 280 non-retail jobs) and a Planned Development Overlay be applied to allow for specific design/development requirements in order to meet the applicable Land Use policies. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal 9.1: Develop and maintain a strong,diversified, and sustainable local economy. Policy 3. The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made available. The applicant states that industrial development by itself is not able to economically offset the high cost of on-site grading costs, public improvements to abutting streets, and utility extensions. MUE rates of return would allow the high infrastructure costs associated with the development of this property to be financed by the development itself. The intent of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is to create flexibility that generates job-creating development in the City. This policy is met. Policy 5. The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands. The applicant states that under the current zoning, the site has remained undeveloped for many years due to the development constraints outlined in Section II of the Fields Property Development Analysis. The proposal would respond to market conditions by allowing a mix of uses on the eastern portion while preserving the western portion for industrial employers. The proposed zone change would allow a more efficient use of employment land than the current underutilized condition. Well designed and efficient development can be assured through the deliberative planned development process that provides flexibility in site design and such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. This policy is met. Policy 6. The City shall promote actions that result in greater, more efficient, utilization of its Metro-designated Employment and Industrial Areas. Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (Januar), 2014) shows the I-P-zoned parcels of the subject site (totaling 37.4 acres) as Industrial Areas. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE. The evidence in the application shows that despite relatively high demand for light industrial land and low supply, this site has not developed for light industrial use and is unlikely to do so in the future because of its unsuitable site characteristics and development constraints. The applicant states that the MUE zoning on the eastern portion allows the site to be developed with some combination of employment and multifamily workforce housing use and allows the site to be developed in a more flexible way. Development allowed under the MUE zone will help create a stronger, more diversified, and sustainable development on this site, which in turn will help PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL.-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC I IE.\RING CP.\2015-00004/FIELDS TRUST COMPREI IENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ''/.ON2011-00005/FIEI.DS7RUSF ZONE CIL1NGIi PAGE 10 OF 18 the local economy. Provided the MUE zone is indeed developed with mixed uses, including employment, the re-zone will promote greater, more efficient, utilization of Metro-designated employment and industrial lands. This policy is met. Policy 7. The City shall limit the development of retail and service land uses in Metro-designated industrial areas to preserve the potential of these lands for industrial jobs. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE. In accordance with Metro Title 4, Section 3.07.430,Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the I-P zone (Table 18.530.1, Note 2). In accordance with Metro Title 4, Section 3.07.440,Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the MUE zone (Table 18.520.1, Note 22). Approval of the proposed comprehensive map amendment would functionally convert 19.4 acres of the site into a Title 4 Employment Area from a Title 4 Industrial Area, where commercial retail uses are restricted, consistent with the purpose of Title 4 to protect a supply of sites for employment. This policy is met. Policy 12. The City shall assure economic development promotes other community qualities, such as livability and environmental quality that are necessary for a sustainable economic future. The proposed MUE rezone should unlock the development potential of the site. The city can assure economic development promotes other community qualities, such as livability and environmental quality by placing a PD overlay over the MUE zone to provide such added benefits through the planned development process as increased natural areas or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. This policy is met. Goal 9.3: Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business. Policy 1. The City shall focus a significant portion of future employment growth and high-density housing development in its Metro-designated Town Center (Downtown); Regional Center (Washington Square); High Capacity Transit Corridor(Hwy 99W); and the Tigard Triangle. The subject site is located outside of the listed plan districts. The disposition of employment and housing uses across the site should acknowledge the direction of this policy and can best be considered with the planned development process. This policy is met. FINDING: As show in the analysis above, the applicable Economic Development policies are substantially met with application of a condition of approval requiring a PD overlay and a minimum threshold of employment use within the proposed MUE zone. HOUSING Goal 10.1: Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. Policy 5. The City shall provide for high and medium density housing in the areas such as town centers (Downtown), regional centers (Washington Square), and along transit corridors where employment opportunities, commercial services, transit, and other public services necessary to support higher population densities are either present or planned for in the future (SW Pacific Hwy). The proposed zoning designation, MUE, permits "medium high-density" housing at 25 units/acre as an outright use. There appears to be market support for multi-family housing at this location (Fields Development Analysis II.2). Multi-family residential use on the subject property has been a key expectation for development in the proposed MUE zone. However, the subject site is not located in a town center,regional center or along a transit corridor. Currently, the site does not provide ready access to employment opportunities, commercial services, transit, or other public services necessary to support higher population densities. However, the hope is that the rezone will catalyze the transformation of the area where some of these opportunities and services will become available. The MUE zone allows commercial uses and staff recommends a condition of approval requiring a minimum job density for the PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-.\UGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC I-iE.\RING CPA2015-00004,/I:IELDS TRUST COMPREI IENSIVE PL.1N AMENDMENT %ON2011-00005/FIELDS TRUST ZONE CI LANGE P.\Gl i 11 OF 18 proposed MUE zoned area. In addition, the city's Public Infrastructure Finance Strategy is likely to lead to improved street connectivity y p ty en the area, and the Southwest Corridor Plan includes new access across 217 connecting SW Beveland with Wall Street, potentially with high-capacity transit service. Staff further recommends a condition requiring application of the PD overlay concurrently with the MUE zone. Planned Development Review for future development will create the best opportunity to consider an amount of development on a site, within the limits of density requirements, which will balance the interests of the owner, developer,neighbors,and the city. As conditioned, this policy is met. Goal 10.2: Maintain a high level of residential livability. Policy 6. The City shall promote innovative and well-designed housing development through application of planned developments and community design standards for multi-family housing. The proposed zoning designation, MUE, permits "medium high-density" housing at 25 units/acre as an outright use. There appears to be market support for multi-family housing at this location (Fields Development Analysis II.2). Multi-family residential use on the subject roperty has been a key expectation for development in the proposed MUE zone. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring application of the PD overlay concurrently with the MUE zone. Planned Development Review for future development will provide such added benefits as increased natural areas or open space in the city, alternative building designs, walkable communities, preservation of significant natural resources, aesthetic appeal, and other types of assets that contribute to the larger community in lieu of strict adherence to many of the rules of the Tigard Community Development Code. In addition a planned development process can help achieve unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering and lot size transitionen . With the PD overlay, the proposed MUE zone will promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned, this policy is met. Policy 7. The City shall insure that residential densities are appropriately related to locational characteristics and site conditions such as the presence of natural hazards and natural resources, availability of public facilities and services,and existing land use patterns. The proposed MUE zone allows for multifamily residential construction at a density of 25 units/acre. The subject site is distinguished by the hillside location with views out to the west, the presence of a mature stand of trees that characterizes the hill from views elsewhere in the city, and limited access to the transportation network and other services to support higher density residential development. As described above, there are transportation and access improvements being planned for the area. The applicant has offered to provide a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoining low-density residential neighborhood. The range of uses allowed in the MUE zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than the existing I-P zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts. With the PD overlay required as a condition of approval, the proposed MUE zone can promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned, this policy is met. Policy 8. The City shall require measures to mitigate the adverse impacts from differing, or more intense,land uses on residential living environments, such as: A. orderly transitions from one residential density to another; B. protection of existing vegetation,natural resources and provision of open space areas; and C. installation of landscaping and effective buffering and screening. The applicant has offered to provide a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoining low-density residential neighborhood. The range of uses allowed in the MUE zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than the existing I-P zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts.With the PD overlay required as a condition of approval, the proposed MUE zone can promote innovative and well-designed housing development. As conditioned, this policy is met. 9. The City shall require infill development to be designed to address compatibility with existing neighborhoods. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HE.\RING CPA2015-00004,/FFIEJ.DS TRUST COMPREI Il?NSIV1:PLAN AMENDMENT /,ON2011-00005'FIELDS TRUST ZONE CI L\NG): PAGE 12 OF 18 The applicant has offered to provide a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the eastern site boundary to protect the existing trees and adjoining low-density Rolling Hills residential neighborhood. The range of uses allowed in the MUE zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential use than the existing I-P zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses and associated traffic impacts. With the PD overlay required as a condition of approval, development in the MUE zone can support unique neighborhoods (by varying the housing styles through architectural accents, use of open space, innovative transportation facilities) which will retain their character and city benefits, while respecting the characteristics of existing neighborhoods through appropriate buffering. As conditioned, this policy is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, the applicable Housing policies, as supported by the recommended condition of approval requiring the PD overlay zone, can be met. 18.380.030.B.2 Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and FINDING: For the purposes of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change, the applicant has satisfactorily addressed the applicable Sections of TDC Chapter 18.380, Zoning Map and Text Amendments. The standards of TDC Chapter 18.390.050 for Type III-PC procedures are applicable to this proposal, as identified in 18.380.030. The applicant has submitted an Impact Statement as required under 18.390.050.B.e. The public facilities impact study is included as Attachment 4 to the application. The applicant concurs with the requirement to dedicate right-of-way along Hunziker Road and Wall Street in conjunction with future development. Because no development is being proposed as part of this application, no right-of-way dedication is warranted at this time. Anticipated uses include multifamily residential and office. Any proposed development must meet all of the applicable Tigard Development Code standards in effect at the time an application is submitted. As shown in the analysis above, the proposed comprehensive map and zone change amendment complies with the applicable standards of the Tigard Development Code. 18.380.030.B.3 Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. FINDING: In March of 2015 the City adopted a Post Acknowledgment Plan Amendment to the City of Tigard's 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (Ord 15-06), which 1) acknowledges that slope was not applied as a development constraint factor in the Inventory of Suitable Sites (Land Supply), 2) applies slope as a suitability constraint for properties currently zoned industrial (I-P, I-L, and I-H), and 3) qualifies the Assessment of Potential with respect to slope constraints. The slopes on the subject property represent the majority of the lands addressed by the EOA amendment. The subject amendment provides evidence of a mistake in the comprehensive plan in support of the proposal comprehensive plan and zone change from I-P to MUE.The proposal meets this standard for zone changes. 18.380.030.0 Conditions of approval. A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial, approval, or approval with conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050. A legislative decision may be approved or denied. FINDING: The land use action requested is quasi-judicial as it is limited to specific parcels and does not apply generally across the city. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommendation to Council may be for denial, approval, or approval with conditions. Staff has prepared proposed recommended conditions of approval for the Commission's consideration. APPLICABLE STATE AND METRO REGULATIONS OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES PI..\NNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CP.\2015-00004,FIELDS TRUST COMPRE11ENS1VE PLAN AMENDMENT ZON2011-00005/I I1?1.DS TRUST'ZONE Cl I.\NG1 P.\GE 13()I;18 Economic Development OAR 660 Division 9—Economic Development 660-009-0010 Application (4) For a post-acknowledgement plan amendment under OAR chapter 660, division 18, that changes the plan designation of land in excess of two acres within an existing urban growth boundary from an industrial use designation to a non-industrial use designation, or another employment use designation to any other use designation, a city or county must address all applicable planning requirements, and: (a) Demonstrate that the proposed amendment is consistent with its most recent economic opportunities analysis and the parts of its acknowledged comprehensive plan which address the requirements of this division;or (b) Amend its comprehensive plan to incorporate the proposed amendment, consistent with the requirements of this division;or (c)Adopt a combination of the above, consistent with the requirements of this division. FINDING: The City's 2011 EOA compares demand and supply of employment lands to evaluate the land inventory over a 20-year period. The Analysis indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial). This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IL to MUE. Although this action would decrease the area of land with an industrial designation, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment use since the MUE designation accommodates a variety of employment types. The simultaneous redesignation of two acres from Low Density Residential to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment-related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. The City of Tigard's EOA indicates that the City has a surplus of two acres of industrial land; however, Ordinance 15-06 recognized that the City is "now potentially in deficit for industrial zoned vacant land." The proposed zone change affecting the site would deplete the two-acre surplus by converting approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE; however, this depletion would be partially offset by converting 0.4 acres from C-P to I-P. Taken together, the proposed zone change would need to compensate for the jobs associated with a net reduction of 17 acres of industrial land. While there is no guarantee that the site would produce jobs under the existing zoning (as evidenced by the current lack of development), for the purposes of comparison, employment density assumptions from the EOA have been used to quantify the number of jobs that could be expected on 17 industrial acres. Based on 16.5 industrial jobs per acre (derived from the 794 jobs on 48 industrial acres identified in the EOA), 17 acres of industrial land would lead to an employment level of approximately 280 jobs. Approval of the zone change could therefore decrease the City's employment potential by 280 jobs unless these jobs can be accommodated elsewhere. The proposed MUE zone permits a variety of employment uses, including office uses, which are also allowed in the I-P zone. To the extent the proposed MUE zone preserves the ability to create jobs on the subject site, jobs capacity will not be decreased. To ensure preservation of jobs capacity, staff recommends a condition of approval that requires 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the MUE-zoned portion of the site. Analysis of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan economic policies, as addressed above in this report, supports the recommended jobs capacity requirement. Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660 Division 12 —Transportation Planning PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CPA 2015-00004/1'II;1.DSTRUST COMPREI II NSW I'.PLAN AMENDMENT %ON2011-00005,'FIELDS TRUST ZONE CI ANGE PAGE 14 OF 18 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP.As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan;or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. [...] (4) Determinations under sections (1)—(3) of this rule shall be coordinated with affected transportation facility and service providers and other affected local governments. FINDING: TPR compliance is demonstrated in Attachment 3 of the application. This analysis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning (note that this scenario assesses high traffic generators allowed under the zoning,regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built). Attachment 3 analyzes the trip generation potential of the entire 42.5-acre site as well as the 24.6 acres proposed to receive new zoning. Figure 3 and Figure 6 depict the existing and proposed zoning, respectively, illustrating that the zone change area is primarily proposed to be zoned MUE except for a triangular area near Hunziker Road proposed to be zoned I-P. Development of the eastern portion of the site (the proposed zone change area) with housing and office uses under the current zoning would generate on the order of 784 PM peak hour trips. In the zone change area, if the MUE zone were entirely multifamily housing and the I-P zone office park, trip generation would be 455 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 329 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were entirely office use, trip generation would be 715 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 69 trips). In the zone change area,if the MUE zone and I-P zone were a combination of general office and medical-dental office use, trip generation would be 856 PM peak hour trips (an increase of 72 trips). To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning.As conditioned, this regulation is met. METRO REGULATIONS Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 4—Industrial and Other Employment Areas 3.07.410 Purpose and Intent 3.07.420 Protection of Regionally Significant Industrial Areas 3.07.430 Protection of Industrial Areas 3.07.440 Protection of Employment Areas 3.07.450 Employment and Industrial Areas Map PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC Iit:.\RING CPA2015-00004/HELDS TRUST COMPREI IENSI\'I?PLAN.\MENDMENT %ON2011-00005/IMDS TRUST'ZONE Cll.\NGI± RAGE 15 OF 18 FINDING: Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (January 2014) shows the I-P- zoned parcels of the subject site (totaling 37.4 acres) as Industrial Areas. The proposed zone change affecting the site would convert approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE. In accordance with Section 3.07.430, Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the I-P zone (Table 18.530.1, Note 2). In accordance with Section 3.07.440, Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of commercial retail uses within the MUE zone (Table 18.520.1, Note 22). Approval of the proposed comprehensive map amendment would functionally convert 19.4 acres of the site into a Title 4 Employment Area from a Title 4 Industrial Area, where commercial retail uses are restricted, consistent with the purpose of Title 4 to protect a supply of sites for employment. This regulation is met. Section 3.07.450 allows the City to amend the use of lands on the Industrial and Other Employment Areas map based on satisfaction of a number of criteria. With the exception of a transportation impact analysis addressing regional freight movement for criteria #4, this site complies with those standards since the property is 1) not surrounded by RSIA or Industrial Area land; 2) the change would increase rather than decrease the acreage devoted potentially to employment uses; 3) the site is not designated as RSIA; 5) the zone change would not lead to retail or cultural uses that compete with Central City or Regional or Town Centers; and 6) the property designated Industrial Area subject to the amendment is less than 20 acres (namely, 19.4 acres). In addition, as described in Ord 15-06, the eastern portion of the site is not suitable for industrial uses due to topographic constraints. Therefore, a Title 4 map amendment from industrial to employment would be indicated, if supported by a transportation impact analysis. SECTION V. OUTSIDE AGENCY AND ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS LCDC, ODOT, Metro, and Washington County were notified and requested to comment on the subject proposal. Of these agencies,-ODOT and Metro provided comment. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) commented verbally on the proposal taking issue with the assumptions of the TPR analysis with respect to existing use trip generation. As of the publish date of this report, written comments have not been received. Condition 3 has been imposed to account for ODOT's concern and to allow for a revised TPR analysis. Metro commented on the proposal whose comments are included in the findings in this staff report. The City of Tigard's Public Works Department reviewed the proposal and commented that they have no objections to the proposal. The City of Tigard's Development Review Engineer reviewed and accepted the TPR analysis prepared by MacKenzie dated May 11,2015. SECTION VI. STAFF ANALYSIS ANALYSIS: Zone Change Request The proposed Mixed Use Employment Comprehensive Plan designation of the eastern portion of the site will allow development types which can better accommodate slope constraints while also reducing potential conflicts between uses on the subject property and abutting residential development. The proposed zone change, primarily from I-P to MUE, has the potential to increase economic development in Tigard by properly accounting for development economics applicable to the different portions of the site. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2015-00004/FIELDS TRUST COMPREI IENSIVF.PLAN AMF.NDMP:NI' ZON2011-00005/FIELDS TRUST ZONE CIL\NGE PAGE 16 OF 18 Outstanding Issues Planned Development Overlay Zone The complexity of the subject site's characteristics (Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study) including environmental conditions and surrounding land uses suggests a process that provides flexibility in site design to maximize the opportunities and mitigate for the constraints of the site and surrounding land uses. Use of the Planned Development overlay zone is the best way to ensure permitted uses and development design in the MUE zone are compatible with existing development and include the required employment capacity. (Condition 1) Protect Employment Capacity The applicant cites the importance of maintaining flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions to support a request that the City allow any permitted use in the MUE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. However, the city wishes to ensure employment capacity is maintained within mixed use zones and recommends requiring as a condition of approval a minimum job density on the proposed MUE portion of the site. (Condition 2) Transportation Planning Rule compliance The applicant proposes limiting trip generation of future uses permitted in the MUE zone to that allowed under the existing zoning, as shown m the Mackenzie TPR analysis dated May 11, 2015 (or as amended), to avoid a significant effect finding. The city will require a trip cap to limit future development to existing trip generation rates. Transportation analyses required with new development applications must be consistent with the trip cap limitation. (Condition 3) Rolling Hills Buffer The applicant proposes accepting a condition of approval of the zone change requiring a 50-foot buffer between the proposed MUE zone and the existing R-3.5-zoned Rolling Hills development to the east. The buffer was an artifact of the previous Comprehensive Plan, which is no longer in effect, to buffer potentially allowed industrial uses from the existing residential uses. However, the applicant's willingness to accept a condition acknowledges that a buffer remains important to the livability of the Rolling Hills neighborhood even with more intense commercial uses permitted under the MUE zone. (Condition 4) In lieu of a condition of approval with this zone change, the Fields Trust may otherwise record in advance of the Council hearing an easement, restrictive covenant or similar instrument to ensure a 50-foot wide forested buffer is placed on the subject property for the benefit of the city. Metro's Title 4 compliance The city will request an amendment of Metro's Title 4 map for the MUE zoned portion of the site from industrial to employment based on the suitability analysis of the subject site contained in the city's amended 2011 EOA. SECTION VII. PLANNING COMMISSION CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION CONCLUSION: Based on the foregoing findings and analysis, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed comprehensive plan map and zone change amendments are consistent with applicable provisions of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Tigard Development Code, statewide planning goals and the Transportation Planning Rule, and provides evidence of a mistake in the comprehensive plan (City of Tigard 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. To ensure consistency, the Planning Commission recommends certain conditions of approval. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of the proposed comprehensive plan map and zone change amendments with recommended conditions of approval and any others conditions the Council deems appropriate through the public hearing process. PL.\NNING COMMISSION ItIiCOMMIiNll.\TION'ti)COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC IWARING CP.\2015-00004/1FI lDS TRUST COMPRIiI ff.NSI\'Ii PL.\N,\MEN 1M1:N'f' ZON2011-00005/1 q1:LDS TItUS'1'ZONE CI 1.\NGI PA(I:17 OF 18 PASSED: THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST. 2015 BY THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION, � i ��-. Jason Rogers,Planning Commission President Dated this j ' day of August.2015. Exhibits A. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation B. Proposed Zoning PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL-AUGUST 17,2015 PUBLIC HEARING CPA2015-00004/FIELDS TRUST COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT %ON2011-00005,'FIEI.DS TRUST ZONE CI LANGE PAGE 18 OF 18 Legend IL OS MUE SW CRESTVIEW Site Taxlots CG:General Commercial CP: Professional Commercial IL: Light Industrial L: Low Density Residential M: Medium Density Residential MH: Medium-High Density Residential MUE: Mixed Use Employment OS:Open Space MH L SW YARNS ST MH SW FIR ST SW CHERRY DR z N ;co I-L S HUNZIk ER Ro MUE Legend Site Taxlots C-G:General Commercial C-P: Professional Commercial I-L: Light Industrial I-P: Industrial Park MUE: Mixed Use Employment PR: Parks and Recreation R-3.5: Low-Density Residential R-12: Medium-Density Residential R-25: Medium High-Density Residential SW CRESTVIEW ST SW YARNS ST W 2 J-- 0 R-3.5 "" R-25 C-G yty` MUE ?,lam SW FIR ST SW CHERRY DR C-P N r r- CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes August 17, 2015 CALL TO ORDER President Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: President Rogers Vice President Fitzgerald Commissioner Middaugh Alt. Commissioner Mooney Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Schmidt Absent: Alt. Commissioner Enloe; Commissioner Feeney; Commissioner Lieuallen Staff Present: Tom McGuire,Assistant Community Development Director; Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner; Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant;Lloyd Purdy, Economic Development Manager COMMUNICATIONS—None CONSIDER MINUTES August 3 Meeting Minutes: President Rogers asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the August 3 minutes; there being none, Rogers declared the minutes approved as submitted. President Rogers explained to the audience that this is a continued hearing from July 20th and is open for Planning Commission Deliberation only. He said they will not be opening the record unless they have more questions for new information to be presented. They will consider the written testimony that had been submitted since the previous hearing. President Rogers opened the public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED FIELDS TRUST PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE — CPA2015-00004, ZON2015-00005 REQUEST: The proposal is to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential (L) to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial (IL) and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUE. APPLICANT: Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust August 17, 2015 Page 1 of 4 LOCATION: Southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road& SW Wall Street ZONES: I-P: Industrial Park; C-P: Professional Commercial; R-3.5: Low-Density Residential QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STATEMENTS President Rogers read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no abstentions; no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Ex-parte contacts: None. Site visitations: Commissioners Schmidt, Middaugh, Muldoon, Rogers, Fitzgerald, Mooney had made site visits. No one wished to challenge the jurisdiction of the commission. DELIBERATION President Rogers asked each commissioner, one by one, to give their thoughts on the written testimony and the rebuttals that had been submitted and the case set before them. Following are comments from the commissioners: • The main concern written about was with regard to traffic. This case isn't about a development;it's basically just a zone change at this time. • In 1986 there was a Resolution to keep Varns Street closed. The city should recognize that when a development comes in. • Regarding the two pieces of property not in the Rolling Hills Development— the request to be considered wouldn't be appropriate here. Again, this is just a zone change. • This request isn't about extending the roads — this is a rezoning. When there is a planned development—we'll address that then. • There was a concern about the commissioners not actually observing the neighborhood— we've all been there now and we've all seen it. It's a great neighborhood— I appreciate the close-knit community and kind of wish I lived there. • I'm in support of the request. I hear the concerns, but believe they're being addressed well. • I appreciate the testimony from the neighbors. • A good turnout from a passionate neighborhood. Once a development comes up, the opportunity to speak again will be here. • I'm facing the same type of thing in the Summerfield development. Everyone in my neighborhood figured the trees in our neighborhood would go on living a long, long time and now they're building garden style/cottage type apartments and my neighborhood is up in arms. I get it—the fear is that everyone's going to cut through our neighborhood and traffic flow is going to increase and they're going to bypass Scholls Ferry—and as a paramedic I don't want to see kids hurt in the neighborhood —none of that stuff. But the only thing we can do at the end of the day is participate in the public process. There are rules that are set up and I've chosen to get involved on the Planning Commission so that I can be involved on things like this. I would encourage everybody - and I know there are some open seats on this commission— so this is my plug - to get involved within the City. • So there are a bunch of issues here (in the written comments). There's this whole concept of Varns Street. Again, I think this is not under consideration for the Planning Commission at this point. But if there was an agreement, the next step of this —regardless of what happens is - this process goes to the City Council. The City Council will hear this again. All of you here should attend. The piece about Varns Street you should bring up. If there was an agreement with the city you need to bring it to the Mayor and the Council—the elected August 17, 2015 Page 2 of 4 officials. We are all volunteers that were appointed by the current City Council. You need to contact the elected officials and make sure that hey—we had this agreement. Remember us! • When we eventually see a plan—that's the point where we will get involved in the design, screening, conditions, etc. Right now we're talking about general zone changes. So that's a different process. We're just a little early on this one. • Traffic Impact analysis —Undoubtedly, as I look at the 10,000 foot view, if we were to punch Varns through at that point it makes a direct shot into Hwy217; there's no question in my mind what would happen to this neighborhood. Again, that conversation's a little early—this is a different conversation here. What we should be encouraged with is that at the point the property is developed... there will be a traffic impact study done by the developer at that point. It's a requirement—as well as a mitigation plan. For example, Walmart had to do a traffic study and they had to do traffic mitigation as well. That has to occur. REVIEW OF CONDITIONS At this point the commissioners looked at the language of the conditions and deliberated on what they wanted the motion to look like. After a short deliberation, there was a motion. MOTION Commissioner Fitzgerald made the following motion: "I move for approval of application CPA2015-00004, ZON2015-00005 and adoption of the findings and conditions of approval contained in the staff report based on the testimony received. Condition 1 - regarding Planned Development Overlay Zone as stated in the staff's recommendation. Condition 2—Protect Employment Capacity as stated in the staff recommendation. Condition 3 — as modified by ODOT with the time city required trip cap of 6:30 am and 6:30 pm peak hour trips be applied to the 24.56 acres subject to the zone change. Condition 4—regarding the 50 foot historical forested buffer between the zones." Commissioner Muldoon seconded the motion. A vote was taken; all were in favor, none opposed. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY City Council will hear this case on October 13th. PUBLIC HEARING - CLOSED FIVE MINUTE RECESS ATTORNEY RIHALA'S BRIEFING City Attorney Shelby Rihala gave the commissioners a briefing regarding the differences between hearing Quasi-Judicial and Legislative cases. They had a roundtable type discussion with the commissioners and staff asking questions that Attorney Rihala answered. The attorney distributed August 17, 2015 Page 3 of 4 a flowchart regarding receiving evidence at a public hearing (Exhibit A). She went over the flowchart and answered various questions that the chart brought to mind. There was clarification about the 120-day rule, ex parte contacts, the jurisdiction of the commission, oral and written communications about the hearing with persons other than City staff or the City attorney, conflict of interest, etc. Tom McGuire, staff liaison to the commission, mentioned that a more detailed learning session is being planned for the beginning of next year. There will be a chance for all the commissioners (new and seasoned) to learn or be reminded about the nuances of serving on a Planning Commission. OTHER BUSINESS President Rogers let the commissioners know that Commissioner Smith had submitted his resignation from the commission. Commissioner Smith had missed seven out of the twelve meetings that had taken place so far this year. President Rogers reminded the commissioners that the bylaws state [under Section VIII Attendance]: "If any member is absent from six meetings within one year (or three consecutive meetings without reasonable cause),the issue shall be placed on the upcoming agenda, and upon majority vote of the commission, the commission may recommend that the position be declared vacant. The commission shall forward their action to the mayor and council,who shall vote whether to accept the commission's recommendation." President Rogers told the commissioners that he had spoken to Commissioner Smith personally and had reminded him of those bylaws. Commissioner Smith decided to resign and sent a resignation letter to President Rogers (copying staff) stating that he'd enjoyed serving on the Commission but that his life had taken a turn and at this time he was unable to commit to serving. He hoped that at some point in the future he would again re-engage and become a more involved Tigard citizen. ADJOURNMENT President Rogers adjourned the meeting at 8:36 p.m. Doreen Laughlin,Planning Commis ,.n Secretary togs • A esident ' .gers August 17, 2015 Page 4 of 4 I- Grant continuance of public hearing Evidence received at public hearing / Request by party to present additional evidence Continue to time,date,and place certain at least 7 days from initial hearing* J New evidence received I Request prior to conclusion of hearing that record be left open 1 J Record must be left open at least 7 days to submit additional written evidence* / No request for additional evidence r No new evidence received * Subject to 120-day rule. Leave written record open Record open at least 7 days* Written request for application to respond to new evidence submitted Reopen the record J Any person may raise new issues which relate to new evidence No request to respond EXHIBIT A Conclusion of testimony Request for final written argument Allow at least 7 days no new evidence allowed not subject to 120 day rule Applicant waives final written argument Final Decision MACKENZIE .• 1 1 DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT & ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION To City of Tigard For Fred W.Fields Trust SW Hunziker Road&SW Wall Street Submitted May 14,2015 Project Number 2130474.02 p401 MACKENZIE Since 1960 RiverEast Center 1 1515 SE Water Ave.Suite 100,Portland,OR 97214 U PO Box 14310,Portland,OR 97293 I T 503.224.9560 I www.mcknze.com M . TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT SUMMARY 1 II. INTRODUCTION &SITE ANALYSIS 2 Introduction 2 History 2 Efforts to Sell the Property 2 Development Analysis 2 Infrastructure Finance Plan 3 Economic Opportunities Analysis Amendment 3 Summary 3 Description of Request 4 Existing Site & Surrounding Land Use 4 Development Constraints 7 Primary Site Constraints 8 Private Street(SW Wall Street) Designation/Width 8 Secondary Site Constraints. 9 Prior Collaboration with the City 9 Proposed Concurrent Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change 10 Development Economics/Feasibility 12 Economic Benefit to the City 13 Employment Land Issues 13 Transportation Planning Rule 13 Public Utility Considerations 14 Neighborhood Meeting 14 Historic 50-foot Buffer 14 III. NARRATIVE &COMPLIANCE 16 Statewide Planning Goals 16 Goal 1, Citizen Involvement 16 Goal 2, Land Use Planning 16 Goal 3,Agricultural Lands 16 Goal 4, Forest Lands 17 Goal 5, Open Spaces,Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources 17 Goal 6,Air,Water and Land Resources Quality 17 Goal 7,Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards 18 Goal 8, Recreational Needs 18 Goal 9, Economic Development 18 Goal 10, Housing 19 Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services 20 Goal 12,Transportation 20 HApnajedA2L3047402\WP\RPTfityciligard-Cornpeher ePlanMapAmedmert-]5051adooc M . Goal 13, Energy Conservation 20 Goal 14, Urbanization 21 Other Goals 21 Oregon Administrative Rules 21 Economic Development 21 Transportation Planning Rule 22 Metro Regulations 23 Urban Growth Management Functional Plan 23 Tigard Comprehensive Plan 23 Citizen Involvement 23 Land Use Planning 24 Economic Development 26 Housing 28 Title 18 of the Tigard Municipal Code (Tigard Community Development Code) 29 Chapter 18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments 29 Chapter 18.390 Decision-Making Procedures 30 IV. CONCLUSION 31 ATTACHMENTS 1. Legal description and exhibit map of zoning districts,dated May 11, 2015 2. Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study,dated February 13, 2014 3. Transportation Planning Rule analysis, dated May 11, 2015 4. Public facilities impact analysis, dated May 11, 2015 5. Neighborhood meeting documentation 6. Copies of deeds 7. Pre-application conference notes One copy provided separately from bound submittal: 1. Original Application Forms and Submittal Checklists 2. Check for Application Fee H:\Projects\213017402\W P\RPT-0h'of TganiComprehensive Pbn Map Mrerdrnent-150514.doa M . I. PROJECT SUMMARY Applicant: Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust c/o Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP Attention: Kelly Hossaini 111 SW Fifth Avenue 3400 U.S. Bancorp Tower Portland, OR 97204 Owner: Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust Map/Tax Lot Number: 251010001100 (13.2 acres) 2S101CA00100 (24.2 acres) 2S101DB00300 (3.1 acres) 25101DB00400 (2.1 acres) Location: Southeast corner of SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street Site Address: Tax Lot 25101DB00400 had an assigned address of 13085 SW 76th Avenue from the former house (since demolished); remaining tax lots do not have assigned addresses since the properties are vacant Zoning: Tax Lots 2S1010001100 and 2S101CA00100 are zoned Industrial Park (I- P); Tax Lot 2S101DB00300 is zoned Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P); and Tax Lot 25101DB00400 is zoned Low-Density Residential(R-3.5) Comprehensive Plan: Tax Lots 2S1010001100 and 2S101CA00100 are designated Light Industrial (IL); Tax Lot 2S101DB00300 is designated Professional Commercial (CP); and Tax Lot 25101DB00400 is designated Low Density Residential (L) Adjacent Zoning: Light Industrial (I-L) to the north and south; I-L and Parks and Recreation (PR)) to the west; Professional/Administrative Commercial, Low-Density Residential (R-3.5), and Industrial Park(I-P) to the east Existing Structures: All four Tax Lots are vacant Request: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment & Zone Change to result in 18.3 acres designated Light Industrial (IL) and zoned Industrial Park (I-P) and 24.2 acres designated Mixed Use Employment (MUE) and zoned Mixed Use Employment(MUE) Project Contact: Mackenzie c/o Brian Varricchione 1515 SE Water Avenue,Suite 100 Portland, OR 97214 Phone: (503) 224-9560 Email: bvarricchione @mcknze.com H\Projects\213047402\WP\ I-City of Tgarckomprehensive PlanMapAmerd'nent-150514.dooc 1 II. INTRODUCTION & SITE ANALYSIS Introduction History The 42.5-acre property that is the subject of this application was owned by Fred W. Fields for many years before his death in 2011. It is presently owned by the Fred W. Fields Trust. The current zoning designations on the property have been in effect for several decades. The industrially zoned portion of the property was nominally used as part of the Coe Manufacturing facility, located at 7930 SW Hunziker Road, directly across Wall Street. Although this property was never fully developed, in the late 1960s a rail spur was constructed along the western edge of the property abutting Wall Street. Beginning in the early 1950s, the southwestern end of the industrially zoned portion of the property was used as a brick- making facility. Remnants of that facility still exist, including a concrete foundation. In 2012, the Trust had the related horizontal mine shaft, which was used for clay removal, filled in for safety reasons. A single family home existed on the residentially zoned portion of the property, but was demolished in 2012.There have been no other uses of the property during the last 70 or so years. Efforts to Sell the Property Over the years, there has been interest by industrial developers in the industrially zoned portion of the property. The issue that consistently prevented its sale, however, was that while the industrial property encompassed approximately 37.4 acres, only about half of that acreage was suitable for industrial development. The rest of the industrially zoned property was too steeply sloped to support the large- format structures typically used in such development. As discussed in the 2014 Development Analysis and Opportunity Study ("Development Analysis"), much of the western portion of the industrial property has a slope of 10-12%, while the regional standard for industrial land is a slope of less than 10% (see Attachment 2.) As a result of this inherent constraint on the usability of the industrially zoned portion of the property, offers from prospective purchasers included no value for the sloped acreage. In short, developers were only willing to pay for about 20 acres of the 37.4-acre industrial property. Further, the cost of grading the industrially zoned portion of the property to achieve even a minimally acceptable lot size and slope for industrial development increased the cost of development to the extent that the price a developer could pay for the land was even further suppressed. As a consequence, neither Mr. Fields nor the Trust ever received an acceptable offer. Development Analysis In 2013, the Trust decided that a holistic approach was needed to rethink how the property could be developed. The portion of the property suitable for industrial development seemed hopelessly stuck, and there had been no interest over the years in the commercially zoned or low-density residential- zoned portions of the property. The reality was that approximately 43 acres of land in the middle of a thriving suburban community, well-served by public infrastructure, seemed doomed to remain vacant even in a robust economy where developers simply could not find enough serviceable land to meet demand. It was at this point that representatives of the Trust met with City staff, including the City's new economic development director, Lloyd Purdy. Staff agreed that allowing the 43 acres to simply languish in the current stalemate was not acceptable. The City wanted the jobs, the residents, and the tax revenue that would be unlocked by taking a fresh view of the property. In the fall of 2013, the Trust hired Mackenzie to prepare a concept plan for the property to determine how the property could be rezoned and reconfigured to meet the City's objectives for the area, to align with market demand, and to meet the Trust's goal of selling the property for an acceptable price. Over FIVrojects'1,213047402\WP\RPT{Ry of Tigard-Comp eherKMe Plan Map anerdment-150514.do« 2 approximately four months, City staff, Mackenzie, Trust representatives, two commercial real estate brokers, and a seasoned industrial developer worked together to reach the conclusions embodied in the Development Analysis. The Development Analysis recommends that the western 20 acres or so of the Larger Property be partitioned from the remainder and retain its existing Industrial Park zone. The Development Analysis also recommends that the zoning designation for the remainder of the property be changed to Mixed Use Employment to accommodate a range of employment uses, as well as multi- family development. These recommendations coincided most closely with the objectives of the City, the market, and the Trust. In February 2014, the results of the Development Analysis were shared with the City's Planning Commission and City Council. Both bodies gave the Trust and staff feedback on the Development Analysis, and expressed support for the overall direction recommended by that analysis. Both bodies anticipated a follow-up application from the Trust requesting a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change consistent with the Development Analysis recommendations. Infrastructure Finance Plan As a follow-up to the Development Analysis, the City applied for and received a grant from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)to prepare an infrastructure finance plan for the Fields Trust property, as well as the surrounding Wall Street/Hunziker Road industrial area to the west and north. The purpose of the study was to quantify the need for and appropriate size of public infrastructure in the area, with the hope of ultimately spurring economic development. The infrastructure study recognized that not only would the Fields Trust property need significant infrastructure investment, much of the adjacent industrial property - especially to the west of Wall Street - is substantially underdeveloped and would also benefit from public infrastructure investment. The infrastructure plan was completed late last year and continues to inform the City's actions regarding the Wall Street/Hunziker Road area, as well as the Trust's planning for its property. Economic Opportunities Analysis Amendment In March 2015, the City Council adopted an amendment to its 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) acknowledging that slope was not taken into account as a factor in determining the suitability of vacant or redevelopable land in the city for industrial uses. Both state law and Metro allow slope to be a limiting factor in the designation of industrial land. (See OAR 660-009-0015(3)(a)(B) and Metro's 2009 Urban Growth Report.) This omission resulted in an overstatement of available and suitable industrial land in Tigard. The amendment allows industrially zoned properties with significant slope, like the Fields Trust property, to be rezoned for more feasible uses. Summary Much work has been done by the Fields Trust and the City since mid-2013 to arrive at this application for a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change. This work has already begun to have the desired effect in that the industrially zoned portion of the property that is suitable for industrial development has been under contract by an industrial developer since the fall of 2014. That developer continues to work with the City to bring the industrial portion of the Fields Trust property into full development. The current comprehensive plan map and zone change application will allow the remainder of the property to realize its potential, as well. H:\Projects\21304/4U2\WP\HPT-Gty of TigardC'omprehensr e Plan MapMnendment-150514.doa 3 M . Description of Request The proposal is to amend the comprehensive plan map from 37.4 acres of Light Industrial (IL), 3.1 acres of Professional Commercial (CP), and 2.1 acres of Low Density Residential to 18.3 acres of Light Industrial and 24.2 acres of Mixed Use Employment (MUE). The proposal would also amend the zoning map from 37.4 acres of Industrial Park (I-P), 3.1 acres of Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and 2.1 acres of Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) to 18.3 acres of I-P and 24.2 acres of MUE. The application is required to meet approval criteria set forth in the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC or Municipal Code) Title 18 Community Development Code.The application is submitted in response to site slopes and other constraints which make the eastern portion of the site unsuitable for industrial uses. No development plans accompany this land use application and no specific development plans exist for the majority of the portion of the property subject to the comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change.' All future development will be required to comply with applicable sections of the Community Development Code. Existing Site & Surrounding Land Use The property is located just south of Highway 217 and west of the SW 72nd Avenue exit. As illustrated in Figure 1, the subject site consists of four tax lots at the southeast corner of SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street within Tigard city limits. The total area of the four tax lots is 42.5 acres. ' ''7"/, , ' ‘K\N‘K`Irt, , --,.. ,:i.i.-., --,... , -: ,1"1".„ 11 '42,.. r - ,t 0 �'\\ \\:,, kfR RD 7►. 25101DB003r0 NI ` ,:,--4 / 7 0-4 @.r e . \ gig zsiol o ooaoc \ zslolcaooloat i i .■f`. I , 4,- l -Ai \\ GtG3 M1 _ ,. 25101000L100 �. :---t_____ — I ,� '\\ b> , , r- - MAITC,R,VCffi lini 1 y 1 L -. .-R { \ t ■Legend ----H fi r \ _ r Site fax lots \ \ a i \ - '. .../V'w'. \\ t°-r4L� n14•V49i ;-.,E• 7•4, ogr.34,. 0=$7Fef.1,,•. eft, 1 Approximately 0.4 acres of the C-P-zoned property will be rezoned to I-P and is currently under contract with an industrial developer, as described in the Introduction section. H:\Projetts\213047402\WP\RPT-Otyof Tigard-Comprehensive'Ian Map Amendment-150514 docx 4 Figure 1:Aerial Photo Table 1 specifies the existing area, comprehensive plan designation, and zoning for the four tax lots, while Figure 2 and Figure 3 illustrate the existing comprehensive plan designations and zoning. 1 Table 1: Existing Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Designations Al Area Existing Comprehensive Tax Lot Existing Zoning (acres) Plan Designation 251010001100 13.2 Light Industrial (IL) Industrial Park(1-P) 2S101CA00100 24.2 Light Industrial (IL) Industrial Park(I-P) 2S101DB00300 3.1 Professional Commercial (CP) Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P) 2S101DB00400 2.1 Low Density Residential (L) Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) -Sty ipukekt . ��'," CG f?ob IL e j ""ti, M i- U E 1� K� 44 4' sw CRESTVIEW ST SW YARNS ST W Q I— OS IL 3 MH L v, sw FIR ST Legend El Site Taxlots CG:General Commercial CP in CP:Professional Commercial IL:Light Industrial SW CHERRY DR W L:Low Density Residential Q M:Medium Density Residential 0 Z MIf:Medium-High Density Residential MH N MUE:Mixed Use Employment \ 1-------1__.____T- OS:Open Space N' Figure 2: Existing Comprehensive Plan Designations H:\Pmjects\2130,17402\WP\RPT-Oty of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.dooc 5 S(ti yUN2lKER C-G 322, MUE ,›j� I I, PR S SW CRESTVIEW ST SW VARNS ST W I— R-25 R-3.5 Legend I-p SW FIR Si Site Taxlots C-G:General Commercial C-P:Professional Commercial C-P I-L:Light Industrial 1-P:Industrial Park SW CHERRY DR MUE:Mixed Use Employment Q PR:Parks and Recreation R-3.5:Low-Density Residential R-12:Medium-Density Residential I L R-25:Medium High-Density Residential o Figure 3:Existing Zoning As illustrated in Figure 4, the site has approximately 345 feet of SW Hunziker Road frontage along its north side and abuts SW Wall Street (a private street) on its west side. Currently, the only public access to the site is from SW Hunziker Road. The site abuts the Portland & Western Railroad tracks and contains an unused rail spur along the west edge adjoining Wall Street that connects to property on the north side of SW Hunziker Road. The site contains a grove of mature evergreen trees along the eastern side which abuts existing lower density (R-3.5) residential properties. The property contains a low- quality wetland area near the northwest corner and site elevations range from approximately 240 feet along the eastern property line to approximately 150 feet along the western boundary, with slopes of ten to twelve percent on the eastern side and four to five percent on the western side. The property is currently vacant. H:\Projects\2130,17402\WP\RPT-Oty of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Mierdment-150514.docx 6 INI • Existing Conditions and Topography Rail Spur 1: } Low-Grade V Wetland Vegetated(Dean Water Services- 'q.4 1 designated Vegetated Corridor) SLOPE 1 O-6% l�'ti1 f r' j to.. FTrrL - s. 6.1-10% % - ,�. 10.1•NE .1e`` / i 14Jr "",,Utt. 4 •oa2z !!/✓ �P9PtdtPO Sri a < 133 ACRES COr /' Tax 1( II 00 I 242ACRE5 r'abr / , IP ZONE // MAP 1510100 l Tax lot 100 / I MAP 251011.A // 1 0r / I a I E...LOwl Densit NOUSe�g(R-3.) I, . 2 II _ II --L �-_-- _ vats 3.1 AO05 j ro -- I A #3szort C-0zD3E I -- — That AOO T Io*300 € Mrfu301q MAP 25i01011 lr > t Figure 4: Existing Conditions and Topography The site is in a transition area between low density residential properties (R-3.5) to the east and industrial properties (I-P) to the west and north. A dog park is located on the west side of Wall Street. The south side of the site is bounded by the Portland & Western Railroad tracks and beyond that is a 26- acre natural area purchased from Mr. Fields by Metro and the City in 2012. Development Constraints As discussed in the Introduction section, the property has been on the market for many years with the significant interest from the development community being only in the industrially zoned portion of the property. Even with that limited interest, development has thus far been deemed economically unfeasible due to site and market constraints as described in detail below. Generally, the location is desirable only for a limited set of uses due to access constraints, and there are significant topographical challenges with siting the uses allowed under the current I-P zoning designation. Previously considered uses include a bus barn for Tigard-Tualatin School District, City Public Works use, multiple industrial development users, and multi-family residential development. To date, none of these uses have been able to find a development pro forma that could be considered practical in the current market and feasible given the property's development constraints. The Development Analysis for this site was generated through a series of public/private joint venture workshops that included the property owner, local developers, local real estate brokers, the City of Tigard, and Mackenzie land use planners and civil engineers. The workshops and analysis were a collaborative effort to determine the highest and best use of the undeveloped Fields Property given: ■ Significant site constraints ■ The current and future development market • Regional needs/City needs for employment areas H:\Projects\2 1304 74 0 2\W P\HP I-t:Ry of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doe< 7 The analysis and recommendations contained in the Development Analysis were presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council in early 2014 for comment, leading to this Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change request. Listed below are the primary and secondary site constraints identified by the Development Analysis that significantly impact the development feasibility of the site: Primary Site Constraints) Primary site constraints consist of site factors which severely limit the development potential and will require significant cost or zoning modification to rectify. Slope and Site Configuration The slope and configuration of the majority of the site is not suitable for market-scale development allowed under current I-P zoning. • The site slopes from east to west, corresponding to the site's narrow dimension and limiting the ability to create flat areas for large buildings. • The western portion of the site could accommodate small industrial buildings (150-200' deep) if coupled with a 20-30' high retaining wall and/or extensive grading. The associated site costs have been cost prohibitive for several previous potential buyers. • As noted in the City's recent EOA amendment, the eastern portion of the site could not support large-footprint industrial structures due to slopes in excess of 10%. • Mid-scale commercial buildings such as high-end (Class A) offices could fit on the site; however, they would require partial basements and retaining walls or more extensive grading, as well as better access and vehicle connections to and through the site. Additionally, there doesn't appear to be a short or long-term market demand for Class A office with existing high vacancy rates nearby. • Narrow buildings such as multi-family residential or mixed-use buildings could be built into the slope with small retaining walls. However, current zoning does not support housing as an allowed use. Slope of SW Hunziker Road The slope of SW Hunziker Road as it abuts the north side of the property is not adequate for truck access that would be needed under current I-P zoning. The majority of the slope along the property's SW Hunziker Road frontage (the only public street frontage) is approximately 10%, which is too steep for trucks servicing allowed I-P uses on the site (4—5% is the maximum possible). The only current access to the property is along SW Wall Street (a private street). Additional access points off of Hunziker Road are needed for viable development. Private Street(SW Wall Street)Designation/Width The Transportation System Plan (TSP) designation and width of SW Wall Street (a private road) between adjacent development on the west side of SW Wall Street and the rail spur on the Fields Trust property is not wide enough for City Collector standards. 2 Note that some of the primary and secondary constraints do not directly affect the portion of the property that will have its zone changed through this application, but they affect the overall ability to develop the entire site. H:\Projects\213047402\W%RPT-arty of 1 Bard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.docx 8 � •t ` k! • The most appropriate vehicular access to the site has been found to be from a private street (SW Wall Street). SW Wall Street is included on the City's TSP as a Minor Collector, with a required width of 58'-96'. At different points along SW Wall Street in its current layout between the rail spur and existing buildings, the width is less than 58'. An adjacent property owner has rights to the rail spur and does not appear willing to abandon the spur, which would facilitate road improvements along Wall Street. • The TSP could potentially be amended to designate Wall Street as a Local Industrial street, which is a more feasible design section. • Wall Street could potentially be extended to SW Tech Center Drive (designated a Local Industrial Street in the TSP)to provide connectivity for the larger industrial area. Secondary Site Constraints: Secondary site constraints consist of site factors which impact the development potential and need to be addressed, but that do not appear to require zoning modification and are not cost prohibitive to the overall development. Wetland Area A low-quality wetland exists on the flattest parts of the site (see Figure 4 above), which is also the most appropriate location for industrial development due to slope and access considerations. The area is identified by Clean Water Services as a vegetated corridor but has not been deemed locally significant in the City's Local Wetland Inventory. This wetland could be mitigated only if applicable permits are granted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Oregon Department of State Lands. Remaining Trees An existing grove of mature trees exists along the eastern edge of the property.The trees act as a buffer to adjacent residential uses and could be potentially integrated into a development scheme that includes smaller scale buildings such as residential. On the other hand, the trees serve as a constraint for many of the currently approved uses in the I-P zone. Limited Access from Major Routes The site is in close proximity to Highway 217, SW 72nd Avenue, and Highway 99W, but is not easily accessed from all directions (e.g., from the northbound left-turn lane at the intersection on SW 72nd Avenue). Access difficulties are a potential issue for many use types currently allowed in existing I-P zoning. SW Tech Center Drive to the south of the site does not currently connect to SW Wall Street, but could be considered with future transportation improvements, subject to acquisition of the intervening property in the roadway corridor. Railroad Switching Yard Noise from the adjacent railroad switching yard could impact possible uses depending on needs. Prior Collaboration with the City Since 2013, the property owner and the City have collaborated to determine how this property may be successfully developed to benefit the community.The market strength of the site's potential future uses was discussed at workshops with City staff, the owner, and local industry/development experts. The need for and interest in potential uses that can be supported by the current market was identified by H:\Protects\213047402\W P\RPI-aty of lipid-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doa 9 CF- local developers and real estate brokers with experience in the Tigard area and reviewed with the workshop team to determine how to feasibly develop employment uses on the property. This analysis identified high market demand for both light industrial/smaller office/flex space (5,000—7,500 SF tenant spaces within larger building footprints, which typically need 150' deep x 250' wide buildings with 50' truck bays) and for multi-family residences (workforce to mid-range housing which would also support adjacent industrial and employment uses). Low demand was identified for Class A office space in suburban areas, retail, restaurants, specialty recreation (e.g., fitness centers), and "live/work" spaces in suburban areas. City staff and the owners made presentations to the Planning Commission (February 10, 2014) and City Council (February 18, 2014) to discuss the site constraints and identify potential approaches to developing the property. Based on the site conditions, the site was divided into two subareas, as shown in the Development Analysis (Attachment 2). The western side is relatively flat and would work well for commercial or industrial uses, whereas the eastern side is steeper with many trees and is not suitable for cost-effective, market-ready I-P zone development, but may be marketable as a mix of commercial and workforce (up to mid-level) housing. Proposed Concurrent Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change Based on extensive site analysis and collaboration with the City to identify the highest and best use for the site, the applicant is proposing to rezone the site to preserve as much of the developable industrial land as possible, resulting in approximately 18.3 acres of I-P on the western, flatter side and approximately 24.2 acres of MUE on the eastern, steeper side. Since a zoning map amendment must be consistent with the comprehensive plan map, in order to allow the zone change the City would also need to amend the comprehensive plan map to result in 18.3 acres designated IL and 24.2 acres designated MUE. A description and illustration of the two zoning areas can be found in Attachment 1. Table 2 specifies the existing and proposed comprehensive plan designation and zoning for the four tax lots, while Figure 5 and Figure 6 illustrate the existing comprehensive plan designations and zoning. Table 2: Existing and Proposed Map Designations Existing Proposed Area Existing Proposed Tax Lot Comprehensive Comprehensive (acres) Plan Plan Zoning Zoning 251010001100 13.2 IL IL& MUE I-P I-P & MUE 2S101CA00100 24.2 IL IL& MUE I-P I-P & MUE 2S101DB00300 3.1 CP IL & MUE C-P I-P & MUE 25101DB00400 2.1 L MUE R-3.5 MUE Abbreviation key: Comprehensive Plan designations Zoning designations CP=Professional Commercial C-P=Professional/Administrative Commercial IL=Light Industrial I-P=Industrial Park L=Low Density Residential MUE=Mixed Use Employment MUE=Mixed Use Employment R-3.5=Low-Density Residential Table 3 indicates the number of acres in the existing and proposed zones for each tax lot. H:\Projects\213047402\WP\RPT-Oty of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.dooc 10 Il Table 3:Areas of Existing and Proposed Zoning .I AMA ir Existing Zoning 11 Proposed Zoning Tax Lot I-P C-P R-3.5 111 I-P MUE acres (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) 2S1010001100 13.2 0 0 1.9 11.3 2S101CA00100 24.2 0 0 16.0 8.1 2S101DB00300 0 3.1 0 0.4 2.7 25101DB00400 0 0 2.1 0 2.1 Note:Figures between existing and proposed zones differ due to rounding. Abbreviation key: Zoning designations C-P=Professional/Administrative Commercial I-P=Industrial Park MUE=Mixed Use Employment R-3.5=Low-Density Residential SwyUNlikf IL � `c1 CG H RU > 67,/ MUE -i. SW CRESTVIEW ST A IL SW VARNS ST W Q OS MUE I 3 tO MH L . \ SW FIR ST Legend I Site Taxlots -CG:General Commercial CP MP CP:Professional Commercial IL:Light Industrial SW CHERRY DR w L:Low Density Residential > Q M:Medium Density Residential p Z MH:Medium-High Density Residential MH `.. ^r MUE:Mixed Use Employment \\ _\ [ �__ OS:Open Space N Figure 5:Proposed Comprehensive Plan Designations H:\Prooects\213O414D1\W P\HPl-(Ry of 1 igard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.dooc 11 sW NUftreoc., RO ��l, C-G siil y�yr MUE PR SW CRESTVIEW ST SW VARNS ST W lD MUE 3 R-25 R-3.5 Legend SW FIR ST Site Taxlots C-G:General Commercial C-P:Professional Commercial C-P I-L:Light Industrial I-P:Industrial Park SW CHERRY DR MUE:Mixed Use Employment PR:Parks and Recreation p 2 R-3.5:Low-Density Residential ^� R-12:Medium-Density Residential 4f/ R-25:Medium High-Density Residential Figure 6:Proposed Zoning Chapter 18.380 of the Community Development Code outlines the process through which the City evaluates amendments to the zoning map or comprehensive plan map, consisting of a Planning Commission recommendation followed by a City Council decision. The City's analysis will be based on all allowable uses under the zoning regulations, since specific future uses have not been determined. The amendment could lead to further development and job creation by allowing the economical use of an existing industrial property. Development Economics/Feasibility Over the course of the past few years, several development feasibility studies have been completed for this site. A PacTrust analysis demonstrated that the cost of developing even just the flatter portion of the property in the IP zone exceeded costs of other sites (primarily due to significant site grading and street construction) to a degree that would result in a development cost premium of 25-40%. By contrast, approving the zone change to apply MUE zoning to the steeper portion of the site allows development costs to be shared across the full extent of the site and brings the estimated cost of development in line with market demands. H:\Projeds\213047402\WP\RPT-City of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doa 12 ir Economic Benefit to the City Approving the proposed map amendments would have a number of economic benefits to the City. As a result of the increased viability of the site for development, the assessed value and property tax receipts increase significantly following development. Development would also generate revenues for the City such as permit fees and system development charges. Finally, the map changes have the potential to lead to several hundred jobs and the possibility of workforce housing (if some of the MUE portion were to develop with multi-family housing). Employment Land Issues Although the subject property represents a portion of the buildable Industrial acreage in Tigard, the site cannot be a significant source of economic development because of the constraints outlined above. This significantly diminishes the usefulness of the site for industrial development, which generally requires relatively large unconstrained acreage. The proposed map amendment would convert a site that is currently zoned I-P, C-P, and R-3.5 into a site zoned I-P and MUE. This action would preserve 18.3 acres for industrial use and create 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land that could be developed with retail goods and services, business/professional offices, civic uses, research and development, multi-family housing, or a mix of these uses. The EOA compares demand and supply of employment lands to evaluate the land inventory over a 20-year period. This report indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial/mixed use) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial). On March 24, 2015, the City Council adopted Ordinance 15-06 to amend the comprehensive plan and the EOA by applying slope as a suitability constraint for industrially-zoned property throughout the City. The City's updated analysis confirmed that approximately 17 acres on both I-P tax lots within this site (Tax Lots 2S1010001100 and 2S101CA00100) are slope-constrained for industrial uses requiring large- footprint buildings due to site slopes greater than 10%. The ordinance found that citywide, "the slope constraint reduces the suitability of a few sites for some industrial uses, but need not limit the potential for employment use of slope-constrained sites. However, a slope constraint on a third of the vacant industrial zoned land highlights the need to consider job density in employment land development and redevelopment." The proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change allows for different job density than large-footprint industrial buildings on the eastern portion of the site. To preserve and enhance the City's supply of employment lands, this proposal would increase the overall land area designated for employment uses by 2.1 acres by rezoning one parcel from R-3.5 to MUE and by maintaining the remainder of the site as either MUE or I-P. Transportation Planning Rule The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) stipulates that the City must demonstrate whether an amendment to the comprehensive plan and zoning map would have a significant effect on the transportation system. If the analysis demonstrates that a significant effect would occur, then the City must either deny the application or require mitigation to offset the traffic impact. Determinations of significance are made by the City in consultation with the roadway authority (which may be the City, Washington County,or ODOT). Attachment 3 describes the TPR analysis performed for this site. The TPR analysis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning, and it is important to note H:\ProJects\213047402\WP\RPT-Crty of Turd-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doa 13 that this scenario assesses high traffic generators allowed under the zoning, regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built. Attachment 3 analyzes the trip generation potential of the entire 42.5-acre site as well as the 24.6 acres proposed to receive new zoning. Figure 3 and Figure 6 depict the existing and proposed zoning, respectively, illustrating that the zone change area is primarily proposed to be zoned MUE except for a triangular area near Hunziker Road proposed to be zoned I-P. Development of the eastern portion of the site (the proposed zone change area) with housing and office uses under the current zoning would generate on the order of 784 PM peak hour trips. In the zone change area, if the MUE zone were entirely multifamily housing and the I-P zone office park, trip generation would be 455 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 329 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were entirely office use,trip generation would be 715 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 69 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were a combination of general office and medical- dental office use, trip generation would be 856 PM peak hour trips (an increase of 72 trips). To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Public Utility Considerations Demands on potable water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage are assessed in detail in the Public Facilities Impact Letter (Attachment 4). This assessment concluded that the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change should not negatively affect public utilities. Neighborhood Meeting A neighborhood meeting was held on May 6, 2015 to share information about the proposal and seek feedback from area residents and businesses prior to submittal of the land use application. Copies of the neighborhood meeting materials and summary are in Attachment 5; as noted in the summary, the primary concerns raised at the meeting were connection to Varns Street and potential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffer required by the City under previous land use rules. Historic 50 foot Buffer Historically, the City's Comprehensive Plan required a 50-foot buffer between the Fields Industrial Park- zoned property and the Rolling Hills subdivision to the east, as shown in Figure 7. The purpose of this buffer was to provide increased separation between industrial uses and the single-family residential neighborhood. When the City amended its comprehensive plan, this 50-foot buffer requirement was lost. At the May 6 neighborhood meeting, the Trust heard concern from residents of the Rolling Hills subdivision that the 50-foot buffer was no longer applicable. Although the Trust is requesting a zone change from an industrial zone to a less intensive mixed-use employment zone, the Trust would still like to honor the historic 50-foot buffer that neighbors have come to rely on. Therefore, the Trust would accept a condition of approval on the zone change requiring a 50-foot buffer between the portion of the Trust property that is now zoned Industrial Park and the Rolling Hills subdivision,as depicted in Figure 7. H:\Projects\213017402\WP RPT-Crty of Tigardtortgxehenswe Plan Map Amendment-150514.do« 14 is / sy �- iT / T 1510103oo30o lilt 1. `'o; 16 R,.. f \ r d' �. P s=_ i,47 WI / V \ III 0400 \-' 4 / t MICrG 7t \.\\� t - L .r sioi000ioo Y n i, - —� ±_— _ I i 11 I; Cs , '�Y'&HE'RY IX; _ 'I`f 1 ' 1 Legend \ \ �. o- Site Tazlots \ \ E\ 1---1._____E-- w r«, 50'Tree Suffer \ 0 »s 350 100 N\ J• v Figure 7:Historic Location of 50-Foot Buffer Between I-P Zone and Rolling Hills Subdivision H:\Rofects\213047402\Wp\RFi-Olvof Tigard-Cot nprehensive Plan Map nmencinert-150514.dooc 15 i III. NARRATIVE & COMPLIANCE This action proposes a comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change for property on the southeast corner of SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street. Map amendments are required to meet development standards set forth in the Tigard Community Development Code, codified as Municipal Code Title 18. Therefore, the following addresses the applicable Municipal Code criteria, together with statewide planning goals, Oregon Administrative Rules, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and Metro regulations. Pertinent code sections are cited either in their entirety or in a summation and are followed by a response. Statewide Planning Goals Goal 1, Citizen Involvement Objective: To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Response: Goal 1 broadly requires that local governments have mechanisms in place which solicit public participation in both quasi-judicial and legislative land use decisions. The City's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and the Community Development Code include citizen involvement procedures with which the review of this application complies. This process allows for citizens to communicate their input into the map amendment review conducted by the City at public hearings or by submitting written comments. A neighborhood meeting was held on May 6, 2015. Copies of the neighborhood meeting materials and summary are in Attachment 5; as noted in the summary, the primary concerns raised at the meeting were connection to Varns Street and potential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffer required by the City under previous land use rules. The Planning Commission will review the proposed comprehensive plan and zoning map amendment and make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application. Within the comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change process, the City mails notices to affected property owners and agencies, notice is published in the newspaper, and public hearings are held.This process complies with the Goal. Goal 2, Land Use Planning Objective: To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. Response: Goal 2 requires that each jurisdiction have a comprehensive plan and implementation measures such as a zoning code and area-specific plans. As a quasi-judicial land use action, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment is based on its conformance with relevant elements of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan and considerations related to that plan's established zoning districts. The procedural requirements for the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change involve assessment of the application's merits, notice to affected parties, and public hearings. The proposal is to change the planning and zoning designations of urban land within the Urban Growth Boundary in compliance with Goal 2. Notice of the proposed comprehensive plan and zoning map amendment is provided by the City to DLCD as required. Oregon Department of Transportation and other affected agency staff will also be provided the opportunity to comment. The City's decision is based on findings of fact. Goal 3, Agricultural Lands H:\Pmjects\2130 7402\WP\RPTtityof Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doc 16 M . Objective: To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. Response: This Goal is not applicable because the site is within the City of Tigard Urban Growth Boundary, and no identified agricultural resources are located on the site. Goal 4, Forest Lands Objective: To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state's forest economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the leading use on forest land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture. Response: This Goal is not applicable because the site is within the City of Tigard Urban Growth Boundary and City Limits. The majority of the site was previously cleared of trees with the exception of the variable-width tree buffer along the eastern site boundary. Goal 5, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources Objective: To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. Response: Goal 5 is a wide-ranging policy initiative intended to protect natural and historic resources generally, and is most commonly implemented through sensitive lands/critical areas ordinances that protect streams, riparian corridors, trees, wildlife habitat, and open space. According to the Tigard Wetlands & Stream Corridors map, dated November 1, 2010, the Local Wetlands Inventory did not identify significant or non-significant wetlands on this property. However, there is a wetland on the western portion of the site that is depicted as part of the Clean Water Services vegetated corridor. This wetland is unaffected by this application, since the I-P zoning for the wetland would not change. Development proposals of that portion of the site would need to account for presence of the wetland in accordance with local and state regulations. The Tigard Significant Habitat Areas map identifies the eastern half of the site as lower value habitat (this map appears outdated, since the majority of the tree cover has now been removed) and no areas as moderate value or highest value habitat. The Tigard Tree Groves map depicts the tree grove along the eastern site boundary; the presence of this grove would be unaffected by the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. The City provides incentives to preserve tree groves when developments are proposed. The subject site is not designated as open space or a scenic or historic area by the City. Comprehensive plan amendment proposals must demonstrate consistency with Goal 5. In most cases, however, Goal 5 considerations can only apply to a specific development plan, which is not proposed at this time. A re-designation of the subject property is consistent with Goal 5 inasmuch as it allows future site development to better accommodate natural features categorized under Goal 5. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is not in conflict with this Goal. Goal 6,Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Objective: To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state. Response: Intended to maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state, Goal 6 requires that all development be consistent with State and Federal standards related to air and water pollution, while also requiring that local governments establish plans which: • Designate alternative suitable sites for development which is likely to cause pollution discharge; • Designate urban and rural residential areas only where appropriate sewer services are available; • Buffer incompatible uses and; • Consider the carrying capacity of affected airsheds and watersheds. H:\Projects\213047402\WP\Rf'J-Otyof Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.d00c 17 The site is currently designated Light Industrial (37.4 acres), Professional Commercial (3.1 acres), and Low Density Residential (2,1 acres) on the comprehensive plan and is subject to City regulations regarding off-site impacts, so the potential harmful effects on air, water, and land resource quality are limited. Small-scale commercial, light industrial, or housing development produces relatively small impacts on environmental quality when performed in accordance with the City's development regulations. Re-designation of the eastern portion of the site from industrial to mixed use employment will have a positive benefit on the local airshed by limiting the potential for diesel particulate emissions. The proposal to amend the comprehensive plan map and zoning boundary to designate 18.3 acres for industrial use and 24.2 acres for mixed use employment would therefore have no negative impact with respect to this Goal. Goal 7,Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Objective: To protect people and property from natural hazards. Response: Pursuant to Goal 7, local governments "shall adopt comprehensive plans...to reduce risk to people and property from natural hazards," including floods and landslides. According to FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map 4102760517C, dated February 18, 2005, the site is not within a mapped flood hazard area. According to the Tigard Seismic Hazard map, the northwest and southern portions of the site are classified as category A(greatest seismic risk), while the remainder is classified as categories B or C (the categories are assigned based on tendency to experience damage due to any combination of liquefaction, amplification of ground shaking, or slope instability hazard). The Tigard Slope Instability Map does not illustrate any drainage hazard areas, debris flow hazards, or landslide hazard areas on site but does confirm that a small portion of the site has slopes in excess of 15%. Development of the site would need to comply with all applicable building code regulations and engineering requirements to minimize the potential for damage from natural hazards. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is not in conflict with this Goal. Goal 8, Recreational Needs Objective: To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Response: The site is across Wall Street from the Potso Dog Park. The site is presently designated for industrial, commercial, and residential development on the comprehensive plan map and has not been planned for recreational opportunities. Since the property is not identified for recreational use, the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change to industrial uses and mixed use employment would have no significant impact on the City's planning for recreational needs. Goal 9, Economic Development Objective: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. Response: Intended to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities, Goal 9 requires that land be designated for commercial and industrial uses according to the needs of the local and regional economy, current economic base, workforce, availability of land, availability of key public facilities, etc. Practically speaking, Goal 9 has encouraged communities to preserve employment land. Decisions based on Goal 9 considerations take into account more than the simple amount of buildable acreage, but also carefully evaluate the suitability of land to accommodate industrial development that would further economic opportunities. Currently, 2.1 acres of the site are zoned R-3.5, 3.1 acres are zoned C-P, and 37.4 acres are zoned I-P. The Tigard Buildable Lands Inventory map,dated January 1, 2014, indicates that the site was included in H:\Projec ts\21304 7402\WP\RPT-City of Tigard{.omprehersine Plan Map Amerxknent-I50514.doa 18 t the City's inventory of buildable lands at that time (including three-quarters of the parcel zoned R-3.5). However, as acknowledged when City Council adopted Ordinance 15-06, slope was not applied as a development constraint in the City's Buildable Lands Inventory or in the EOA. The City's updated analysis in Ordinance 15-06 confirmed that approximately 17 acres of the Fields Trust property are slope- constrained for industrial uses requiring large-footprint buildings due to site slopes greater than 10%. Consequently, other building formats are more appropriate in the slope-constrained areas, which is one of the motivating factors for the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. The zone change would result in 18.3 acres zoned I-P and 24.2 acres zoned MUE. The EOA indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial). Ordinance 15-06 concluded that approximately 17 acres of the Fields Trust property identified in the Buildable Lands Inventory and the EOA are too steep for some industrial uses, particularly those requiring large, rectangular buildings, truck courts, and associated parking areas. Approval of this application would change 19.4 acres from an industrial designation to a mixed use employment designation; however, the land would continue to be counted in the employment land inventory and available to promote economic growth. Furthermore, the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change would increase the amount of land available for economic development by converting 2.1 acres from residential (R-3.5) to employment use (MUE). The site can be put to productive use by designating the eastern portion as MUE in order to increase the developable area and allow a developer to spread costs across a larger area. By encouraging development of existing vacant land the zone change would increase the number of jobs available to the community. The EOA indicated that the City has a surplus of two acres of industrial land; however, Ordinance 15-06 recognized that the City is "now potentially in deficit for industrial zoned vacant land." The proposed zone change affecting the site would deplete the two-acre surplus by converting approximately 19.4 acres of land from I-P to MUE; however, this depletion would be partially offset by converting 0.4 acres from C-P to I-P. Taken together, the proposed zone change would need to compensate for the jobs associated with a net reduction of 17 acres of industrial land. While there is no guarantee that the site would produce jobs under the existing zoning (as evidenced by the current lack of development), for the purposes of comparison employment density assumptions from the EOA have been used to quantify the number of jobs that could be expected on 17 industrial acres. Based on 16.5 industrial jobs per acre (derived from the 794 jobs on 48 industrial acres identified in the EOA), 17 acres of industrial land would lead to an employment level of approximately 280 jobs. Approval of the zone change could therefore decrease the City's employment potential by 280 jobs unless these jobs can be accommodated elsewhere. The proposed MUE zone permits a variety of employment uses, including office uses, which are also allowed in the I-P zone. The City can conclude that the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change would preserve the ability to create jobs on the site. The applicant understands that staff will be recommending a condition of approval that 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the MUE-zoned portion of the site. Therefore, the proposed amendment is supportive of this Goal. Goal 10, Housing Objective: To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. Response:The comprehensive plan currently designates 2.1 acres of this site for Low Density Residential development (tax lot 2S101DB00400). These 2.1 acres are proposed to be changed to Mixed Use Employment. The current zoning (R-3.5) requires 10,000-square-foot lots so the tax lot could t,APro)ect 13047402\wad(2vrrnyofTigardrnmprehensive Flan Map Amendment-15OS14.do« 19 IM • accommodate around seven single-family homes. In the context of the City's supply of buildable residential land, a reduction of seven units may not be significant since it would decrease the city's residential land supply by a very small fraction (the 2014 Buildable Lands Inventory indicates that 307 acres of residential land were buildable). The Mixed Use Employment zone also allows for multifamily residential construction so housing could be accommodated even with the MUE zoning. The proposed amendment would not conflict with this Goal. Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services Objective: 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. Response: Goal 11 is primarily implemented by the City, which has adopted public facilities plans and standards. It is therefore not directly applicable to comprehensive plan amendments - such as the one proposed herein - which do not entail significant changes in public facilities plans. Any resultant development of the subject property will be connected to sufficient public infrastructure such as the water and sewer system, and shall provide drainage facilities in a manner consistent with adopted public facilities plans. The subject property lies within City Limits, and preliminary comments from the Development Engineering Department indicate that sanitary sewer and water service is available to serve the site (subject to capacity analysis). Public facilities are discussed in more detail in the Public Facilities Impact Letter (Attachment 4). Insofar as future development of the site is subject to the requirements of such plans, the proposal is consistent with Goal 11. Goal 12, Transportation Objective: To provide and encourage a safe,convenient and economic transportation system. Response: This Goal requires the City to prepare and implement a Transportation System Plan (TSP).The Tigard 2035 TSP (dated November 2010) assumed that the site would develop with more than five jobs per acre and performed transportation analysis accordingly. Since the proposed application would change the existing zoning, further transportation analysis is necessary. The TSP designates both SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street as collectors. Adjacent to the site, Hunziker Road is improved with two travel lanes plus a sidewalk along the north side of the road. The roadway was designed to accommodate the mix of commercial, industrial, and residential uses envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Wall Street is a private road improved with two travel lanes but no bicycle or pedestrian facilities. Development of the site under the proposed zoning would lead to additional street improvements to City standards. The application of Goal 12 to proposed comprehensive plan amendments typically requires an application to demonstrate that a proposal is consistent with the TPR, as implemented through OAR 660-012-0060. As discussed in the detailed TPR analysis (Attachment 3), redesignating the eastern portion of this site from I-P, C-P, and R-3.5 zones to MUE zoning has the potential to slightly increase traffic levels, depending on the type of the resulting development. To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change do not significantly affect the transportation network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Goal 13, Energy Conservation Objective: To conserve energy. Response: The subject property is in a desirable location for development because it is located close to SW 72nd Avenue, Interstate 5, Oregon Highway 217, the Portland & Western Railroad, and other commercial and industrial uses. The applicant's proposal would increase the likelihood of employment H:\Projects\213047402\WP\RPT-atyofTgard-CanprehensivePlan Map Me went-150514.doa 20 I � development in close proximity to other industrial sites, potentially leading to trip sharing, carpooling, and/or combined deliveries, thereby increasing energy efficiency. The proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change would permit development with the potential to create an energy- efficient land use pattern within the City. Goal 14, Urbanization Objective: To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. Response: The subject property is within the City, and no expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary is proposed. The proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change would not affect the City's Goal 14 compliance. Other Goals • Goal 15, Willamette River Green way • Goal 16, Estuarine Resources • Goal 17, Coastal Shorelands • Goal 18, Beaches and Dunes • Goal 19, Ocean Resources Response: Goals 15-19 are not applicable to this application. Oregon Administrative Rules Economic Development OAR 660 Division 9—Economic Development 660-009-0010 Application (4) For a post-acknowledgement plan amendment under OAR chapter 660, division 18, that changes the plan designation of land in excess of two acres within an existing urban growth boundary from an industrial use designation to a non-industrial use designation, or another employment use designation to any other use designation, a city or county must address all applicable planning requirements, and: (a) Demonstrate that the proposed amendment is consistent with its most recent economic opportunities analysis and the parts of its acknowledged comprehensive plan which address the requirements of this division;or (b) Amend its comprehensive plan to incorporate the proposed amendment, consistent with the requirements of this division;or (c) Adopt a combination of the above, consistent with the requirements of this division. Response: The EOA compares demand and supply of employment lands to evaluate the land inventory over a 20-year period. This report indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario, the City's 20- year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial). This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IL to MUE. Although this action would decrease the area of land with an industrial designation, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment use since the MUE designation accommodates a variety of employment types. The simultaneous redesignation of two acres from Low Density Residential to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment-related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. The response to Statewide Planning Goal 9 starting on page 18 provides additional H:\Projects\213047402\WP\RPT-C7ty of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.dooc 21 " f analysis demonstrating that the proposed amendment is consistent with the City's EOA. Analysis of comprehensive plan policies is included later in this report. Transportation Planning Rule OAR 660 Division 12—Transportation Planning 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9)or(10)of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan;or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. 1...] (4) Determinations under sections (1)—(3) of this rule shall be coordinated with affected transportation facility and service providers and other affected local governments. Response: TPR compliance is demonstrated in Attachment 3. This analysis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning (note that this scenario assesses high traffic generators allowed under the zoning, regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built). Attachment 3 analyzes the trip generation potential of the entire 42.5-acre site as well as the 24.6 acres proposed to receive new zoning. Figure 3 and Figure 6 depict the existing and proposed zoning, respectively, illustrating that the zone change area is primarily proposed to be zoned MUE except for a triangular area near Hunziker Road proposed to be zoned I-P. Development of the eastern portion of the site (the proposed zone change area) with housing and office uses under the current zoning would generate on the order of 784 PM peak hour trips. In the zone change area, if the MUE zone were entirely multifamily housing and the I-P zone office park, trip generation would be 455 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 329 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were entirely office use, trip generation would be 715 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 69 trips). In the zone change area, if the MUE zone and I-P zone were a combination of general office and medical-dental office use, trip generation would be 856 PM peak hour trips (an increase of 72 trips). To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation H:\Projects\213047402\WP\RPT-0ty of Tigarckomprehensr a Plan Map Miendment-150514.doa 22 I network, the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Metro Regulations Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 4—Industrial and Other Employment Areas 3.07.410 Purpose and Intent 3.07.420 Protection of Regionally Significant Industrial Areas 3.07.430 Protection of Industrial Areas 3.07.440 Protection of Employment Areas 3.07.450 Employment and Industrial Areas Map Response: According to Section 3.07.410, Title 4 seeks to provide and protect a supply of sites for employment by limiting the types and scale of non-industrial uses in Regionally Significant Industrial Areas (RSIAs), Industrial and Employment Areas. Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (January 2014) does not identify this site as a Regionally Significant Industrial Area (RSIA), so Section 3.07.420 does not apply. Metro illustrates the I-P-zoned parcels of this site (totaling 37.4 acres) as Industrial Areas adjoining other Employment Areas (west of Wall Street). In accordance with Section 3.07.430, Tigard's Community Development Code limits the size and scope of non-industrial uses within the I-P zone. This site is smaller than 50 acres, so further land division is allowed under Title 4 and City regulations. Approval of the proposed map amendments would convert 19.4 acres of the site into an Employment Area rather than an Industrial Area. The City's MUE zone standards comply with Section 3.07.440 by restricting the size and scope of commercial retail uses. Section 3.07.450 allows the City to amend the use of lands on the Industrial and Other Employment Areas map based on satisfaction of a number of criteria. This site complies with those standards since the property is not surrounded by RSIA or Industrial Area land; the change would increase rather than decrease the acreage devoted to employment uses; the site is not designated as RSIA; the Transportation Planning Rule ensures that transportation issues are properly evaluated and mitigated if necessary; the zone change would not lead to retail or cultural uses that compete with Central City or Regional or Town Centers; and the property designated Industrial Area subject to the amendment is less than 20 acres (namely, 19.4 acres). Furthermore, as discussed in the City's adoption of Ordinance 15-06, the eastern portion of the site is not buildable with industrial uses due to topographic constraints. Tigard Comprehensive Plan Citizen Involvement GOAL: 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. Response: The property owner and the City have collaborated extensively to determine how this property may be successfully developed to benefit the community, including workshops with City staff, local industry/development experts, the Planning Commission, and City Council. A neighborhood meeting was held on May 6, 2015 to share information about the proposal and seek feedback from area residents and businesses prior to submittal of the land use application. Copies of the neighborhood meeting materials and summary are in Attachment 5; as noted in the summary, the primary concerns raised at the meeting were connection to Varns Street and potential removal of the 50-foot vegetated buffer required by the City under previous land use rules. Notice of the application is mailed to area H:\P o eds\21304/402\WP\HP f-City of Tgard-Compreherxive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doa 23 V property owners and affected agencies, and the proposal is evaluated at Planning Commission and City Council public hearings so the public may participate in the planning process. Land Use Planning GOAL: 2.1. Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. POLICIES: S. The City shall promote intense urban level development in Metro-designated Centers and Corridors, and employment and industrial areas. 6. The City shall promote the development and maintenance of a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed services and advance the community's social and fiscal stability. Response: As discussed in the Metro Regulations response starting on page 23, 37.4 acres of this site is included on Metro's Title 4 Industrial and Other Employment Areas map (January 2014) as a designated Industrial Area. Of this amount, 17.9 acres would remain in the current I-P zone and 19.4 acres would be changed from Industrial Area to Employment Area by virtue of a zone change to MUE. Given the unsuitability of the eastern portion of the property for industrial uses, changing the comprehensive plan and zoning to MUE will enable the City to promote a more intense urban development of the site. The rationale for the map amendments is to allow for a range of development opportunities on the upland portion of the site that would offset the considerable development costs associated with site grading and public improvement requirements necessary to lead to industrial uses on the flatter, western portion. Ordinance 15-06 amended the comprehensive plan to account for the slope constraints on approximately 17 acres of the site that hamper the ability to construct large-footprint industrial buildings. The industrial uses, by themselves, would not provide sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services. The costs of developing this constrained parcel to accommodate industrial activities undermine the potential economic value of the parcel itself as currently zoned, and have led to it remaining vacant. The discussion above demonstrates that in combination with the remaining I-P land, the proposed rezoning to MUE provides a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed public facilities and services for the site and advance the City's social and fiscal stability. 7. The City's regulatory land use maps and development code shall implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses including: A. Residential; B. Commercial and office employment including business parks; C. Mixed use; D. Industrial; E. Overlay districts where natural resource protections or special planning and regulatory tools are warranted; and F. Public services. Response:The EOA indicates that under the Efficient Land Need Scenario,the City's 20-year demand for vacant employment land is 126 acres (48 acres industrial and 78 acres commercial) and the 20-year supply is 136 acres (50 acres industrial and 86 acres commercial). This application would change the plan designation of approximately 19.4 acres from IL to MUE. Although this action would decrease the industrial land area, there would be no net loss of acreage designated for employment since the MUE designation accommodates a variety of employment and housing types.The simultaneous redesignation of 2.1 acres from Low Density Residential to MUE would further enhance opportunities for employment- related development by enlarging the supply of employment lands. Overall, the site would provide 18.3 acres of industrial land and 24.2 acres of mixed use employment land. In the context of the City's overall supply of residential land, a reduction of 2.1 acres is not significant. A low-quality wetland is located on H:\Projects\2130 47402\W P\RPTdity of TigarclComprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.dooc 24 M . the western portion of the site; this wetland is unaffected by the zone change, and future development proposals would be subject to the City's sensitive lands regulations and state wetlands rules. 14. Applicants shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that land use applications are consistent with applicable criteria and requirements of the Development Code, the Comprehensive Plan, and when necessary, those of the state and other agencies. Response: This narrative provides evidence that the application complies with applicable criteria of the Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Administrative Rules, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and the Tigard Community Development Code. 15. In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map shall be subject to the following specific criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available, or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation; B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services; C. The new land use designation shall fulfill a proven community need such as provision of needed commercial goods and services, employment, housing, public and community services, etc. in the particular location, versus other appropriately designated and developable properties; D. Demonstration that there is an inadequate amount of developable, appropriately designated, land for the land uses that would be allowed by the new designation; E. Demonstration that land uses allowed in the proposed designation could be developed in compliance with all applicable regulations and the purposes of any overlay district would be fulfilled; F. Land uses permitted by the proposed designation would be compatible, or capable of being made compatible, with environmental conditions and surrounding land uses; and G. Demonstration that the amendment does not detract from the viability of the City's natural systems. Response: Analysis of transportation impacts and public facility infrastructure (included as Attachments 3 and 4) indicates that the site would have access to infrastructure with sufficient capacity to accommodate development of the site under existing zoning or proposed zoning, and future development of the site would improve both Hunziker Road and Wall Street. The Transportation Planning Rule analysis (Attachment 3) demonstrates that the PM peak trips for uses allowed in the existing and proposed zoning designations are similar; therefore, imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning will ensure the amendment has no significant impact on transportation facilities. Given the importance of providing an adequate employment land base for the City, redesignating 19.4 acres from IL to MUE and 2.1 acres from L to MUE would ensure that there is no net loss of employment capacity. While the change causes a nominal decrease in land designated residential, it will actually increase the amount of land available for potential multi-family development. The slope of the eastern portion of the site does not allow for large, flat building pads for industrial development, and the grades along Hunziker Road are too steep for truck turning movements into the site. Consequently, only the western portion of the site is feasible for light industrial uses. Residential or office uses could be constructed on the sloped area in the eastern part of the site. The key mechanism to allow a financially viable industrial development proposal on the western portion is to allow for non- industrial development of the eastern portion. The response to Statewide Planning Goal 9 starting on page 18 provides additional analysis demonstrating that the proposed amendment is consistent with the City's EOA. While the current I-P zone would allow for some non-industrial office usage on the sloped H:\Projects\213047402\W P\RPT-Oty of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.dooc 25 eastern side, the marketability of this area would be enhanced by the change to MUE, and improved marketability is more likely to lead to job-creating development of the west side. An illustration of a hypothetical marketable, site-appropriate development concept is included in Attachment 2 to demonstrate that development could conform to applicable regulations and provide a potential vegetated buffer between the site and the adjoining residential area. No overlay districts are found on the site. The Tigard Significant Habitat Areas map identifies the eastern half of the site as lower value habitat (this map appears outdated since the majority of the tree cover has now been removed) and no areas as moderate value or highest value habitat. The subject site is not designated as open space or a scenic or historic area by the City. Uses allowed in the MUE zone can be arranged and clustered to fit into the site topography rather than requiring mass grading to create the large, flat sites that would be necessary for industrial uses. The City's development regulations further ensure that relevant environmental regulations will be met. Therefore, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change would not detract from the viability of natural systems. 16. The City may condition the approval of a Plan/Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use(s) and per specific design/development requirements. Response: This report demonstrates that due to extraordinary development costs, the flatter western portion of the site (which would continue to maintain I-P zoning) is only likely to develop if the steeper eastern portion can also be developed with some mix of employment and/or residential use. The applicant understands that staff will be recommending a condition of approval that 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the MUE-zoned portion of the site. Due to the importance of flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions, the applicant respectfully requests that the City allow any permitted use in the MUE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. Further, in order to maintain compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule, the applicant proposes a condition of approval imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Economic Development GOAL:9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy. POLICIES: 3. The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made available. 5. The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands. 6. The City shall promote actions that result in greater, more efficient, utilization of its Metro- designated Employment and Industrial Areas. 7. The City shall limit the development of retail and service land uses in Metro-designated industrial areas to preserve the potential of these lands for industrial jobs. 12. The City shall assure economic development promotes other community qualities, such as livability and environmental quality that are necessary for a sustainable economic future. Response: Industrial development by itself is not able to economically offset the high cost of on-site grading costs, public improvements to abutting streets, and utility extensions. MUE rates of return would allow the high infrastructure costs associated with the development of this property to be financed by the development itself. Conversely, maintaining the existing zoning for industrial use does not produce sufficient economic value to fund needed public infrastructure to serve the site and therefore acts as a significant development constraint, prohibiting industrial use of the site. The intent of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change is to create flexibility that generates job-creating development in the City. Under the current zoning, the site has remained undeveloped for many years due to the development constraints outlined in Section II. The proposal would respond to market conditions by allowing a mix of uses on the eastern portion while preserving the western portion for industrial employers. This change would be a more efficient use of employment land than the H:\Projects\213047402\WP\RPT{tty of Tigardlornprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doa 26 current underutilized condition. The MUE zone restricts retail and service use of the property but allows lower-intensity uses than typical light industrial uses, which improves livability for the nearby residential properties. Because of site constraints outlined above and in Attachment 2, the eastern portion of the site is unsuitable for industrial use even though a large portion of the site could be described as "buildable" given a high enough expenditure of development costs. It is important to note, however, that theoretical "buildability" is not the relevant legal or practical standard for analyzing whether a particular site is appropriate for industrial use. Both under Goal 9 and from a market standpoint, a site can be "buildable" and still not be suitable for industrial use. Site suitability requires the consideration of a number of factors. In this case, even though a large portion of this site is theoretically "buildable," other factors implemented by OAR 660-009-0025 demonstrate the area proposed for the zone change is unsuitable for industrial use. The site characteristics and development constraints outlined in Table 4 and Table 5 make the property unsuitable for industrial use. Table 4: Site Characteristics Site Characteristics Site on on (OAR 660-009-0005(11)) The site is wedge-shaped with the narrowest portion abutting Hunziker Road at the north. The western boundary (Wall Street) is a private street. Access to the Site configuration including shape south is restricted by a rail line and access to the east is restricted by adjoining residential development. The site is longer in the north-south dimension than the east- west dimension. 37.4 acres of the site are zoned I-P, of which approximately 17 acres have been identified by the City Acreage as being slope-constrained for large-footprint industrial development. The site has slopes of ten to twelve percent on the eastern side and four to five percent on the western Topography side. The ground slopes from east to west in the site's shorter dimension, limiting the ability to create flat areas for large buildings. Limited visibility from Hunziker Road reduces the Visibility attractiveness of the rear portion of the site for certain development types. Specific types or levels of public facilities, Industrial access to roads is difficult due to slopes on services or energy infrastructure Hunziker Road and the rail spur along Wall Street. Proximity to a particular transportation or freight facility such as rail, marine A rail line is located immediately to the south of the site, ports and airports, multimodal freight or with an existing spur that connects to the Portland & transshipment facilities, and major Western Railroad. transportation routes H:\Projects V13047402\WP\RPT-Otyof Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map amendment-150514.dooc 27 M • Table 5: Development Constraints Development Constraints Site Condition (OAR 660-009-0005(2)) Wetlands Low-quality wetlands are present in the northwestern portion of the site. The Tigard Significant Habitat Areas map identifies the eastern half of the site as lower value habitat. This map Environmentally sensitive areas such as appears outdated since the majority of the tree cover has habitat now been removed. No areas are identified as moderate value or highest value habitat. A railroad spur is located on the western boundary; low Environmental contamination levels of soil pollution can be typical near railroad alignments. Slopes on the eastern portion of the site pose a significant constraint on industrial development. Slopes in Slope/topography excess of ten percent hamper the ability to construct large-footprint industrial buildings. General industrial and manufacturing buildings require relatively large unconstrained acreage to create industrial development. Cultural and archaeological resources No known cultural or archeological resources are on site. Infrastructure deficiencies Major extensions of utilities will be required to serve the site. Parcel fragmentation The site is comprised of four parcels, two of which are currently zoned I-P. The Tigard Seismic Hazard map classifies the northwest Natural hazards and southern portions of the site Category A (greatest seismic risk). The evidence shows that despite relatively high demand for light industrial land and low supply, this site has not developed for light industrial use and is unlikely to do so in the future because of its unsuitable site characteristics and development constraints. MUE zoning on the eastern portion allows the site to be developed with some combination of employment and multifamily workforce housing use and allows the site to be developed in a more flexible way. Development allowed under the MUE zone will help create a stronger, more diversified, and sustainable development on this site, which in turn will help the local economy. Housing GOAL: 10.2 Maintain a high level of residential livability. POLICIES: 7. The City shall ensure that residential densities are appropriately related to locational characteristics and site conditions such as the presence of natural hazards and natural resources, availability of public facilities and services, and existing land use patterns. 8. The City shall require measures to mitigate the adverse impacts from differing, or more intense, land uses on residential living environments, such as: A. orderly transitions from one residential density to another; 8. protection of existing vegetation, natural resources and provision of open space areas;and C. installation of landscaping and effective buffering and screening. H:\Projects\213047402\WP\RPT-Oty of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doa 28 L Response:The comprehensive plan currently designates 2.1 acres of this site for Low Density Residential development (tax lot 2S101DB00400). These 2.1 acres are proposed to be changed to Mixed Use Employment. The current zoning (R-3.5) requires 10,000-square-foot lots so the tax lot could accommodate around seven single-family homes. In the context of the City's supply of vacant residential land, a reduction of seven units may not be significant since it would decrease the city's residential land supply by a very small fraction. (The 2014 Buildable Lands Inventory indicates that 307 acres of residential land were buildable.) The Mixed Use Employment zone also allows for multifamily residential construction, so housing would continue to be accommodated even with the MUE zoning. As illustrated in Figure 1, some of the existing mature trees along the eastern site boundary may be able to buffer development from the adjoining residences. The range of uses allowed in the MUE zone is more compatible with the adjoining residential uses than the existing I-P zoning due to reduced likelihood of noise-generating uses. Title 18 of the Tigard Municipal Code (Tigard Community Development Code) Chapter 18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map. Approval of an ordinance amending the zoning map, comprehensive plan map, comprehensive plan, or development code shall be based on the following: A. Quasi-judicial amendments. Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type Ill-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in subsection D of this section. The approval authority shall be as follows: 1. The commission shall decide zone change applications which do not involve comprehensive plan map amendments; 2. The commission shall make a recommendation to the council on an application for a comprehensive plan map amendment;and 3. The commission shall make a recommendation to the council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Chapter 18.390. Response: This application is for a quasi-judicial zone change which also involves a concurrent comprehensive plan map amendment. The Planning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council and City Council makes the final decision. This standard is met. B. Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 1. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; 2. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; and 3. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. Response: This report provides evidence of compliance with comprehensive plan policies and other local, regional, and state approval standards. The City's adoption of Ordinance 15-06 amended the comprehensive plan and the EOA by accounting for slope constraints on industrially-zoned properties, including the subject site. The new information contained in this ordinance identified approximately 17 acres of the subject site with slopes in excess of 10%, which limits the ability to create large, flat sites H:\Projects\213(47402\WP\HPT-ity of TpardComprehenwe Plan Map Amendment-150514.60 29 r- ,,e- Nr r Ls required for many industrial uses. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change builds on the City's recognition of the prior oversight in the EOA's buildable land inventory. The Development Analysis (Attachment 2) supports the conclusion that the existing plan and zoning designation is inconsistent with the market requirements for industrial development (also see the response to the Comprehensive Plan Economic Development policies). By changing a portion of the site to Mixed Use Employment, the City can encourage economic efficiencies that lead to development within both the MUE portion and the I-P portion. C. Conditions of approval. A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial, approval, or approval with conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050.A legislative decision may be approved or denied. Response: The applicant has supplied evidence in support of the proposed zone change and comprehensive plan map amendment so the City has a sufficient basis for approval of the application. The applicant understands that staff will be recommending a condition of approval that 280 non-retail jobs be accommodated on the MUE-zoned portion of the site. Due to the importance of flexibility in response to ever-changing market conditions, the applicant respectfully requests that the City allow any permitted use in the MUE zone rather than restricting the site to a specific land use. Further, in order to maintain compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule, the applicant proposes a condition of approval imposing a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. Chapter 18.390 Decision-Making Procedures 18.390.050 Type Ill Procedure B. Application requirements. 1. Application forms. Type IiI applications shall be made on forms provided by the director as provided by 18.390.080.E.1. 2. Content. Type Ill applications shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b. Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; d. Include two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all persons who are property owners of record as specified in subsection C of this section. The records of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation shall be the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the notice list; e. Include an impact study. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system, and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet city standards and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the community development code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirements, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. Response: The applicant has submitted forms supplied by city staff and provided the materials noted in the list above. The public facilities impact study is included as Attachment 4. The applicant concurs with the requirement to dedicate right-of-way along Hunziker Road and Wall Street in conjunction with future development. Because no development is being proposed as part of this application, no right-of- way dedication is warranted at this time. H:\Projects\213017402\WP\HPT-City of T'igard{bmprehensue Plan Map Amendment-L50514.doa 30 IV. CONCLUSION The proposed Mixed Use Employment Comprehensive Plan designation of the eastern portion of the site will allow development types which can better accommodate slope constraints while also reducing potential conflicts between uses on the subject property and abutting residential development. The proposed zone change from I-P to MUE has the potential to increase economic development in Tigard by properly accounting for development economics applicable to the different portions of the site. As detailed above, the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change meets or exceeds the City of Tigard requirements and applicable statewide planning goals and administrative rules. The applicant respectfully requests approval of the application in order to advance the City's economic development objectives by bringing vacant land into productive use. H:\Projects\213047402\WP\RPT-Gty of Tigard-Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment-150514.doo 31 liE ORTHWEST RESIDENTIAL - COMMERCIAL - INDUSTRIAL Licensed in OR,WA&ID URVEYING, INC. 1815 NW 169`x'Place,Suite 2090 Telephone: 503-848-2127 Beaverton,OR 97006 Fax: 503-848-2179 I-P Zone Description May 11,2015 NWS Project Number 366 A tract of land located the northwest one-quarter and the southwest one-quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most westerly southwest corner of Lot 1 of "Tech Center Business Park", recorded in Book 53, Page 29 of Washington County Plat Records, said point also being on the northeasterly right-of-way line of the Southern Pacific Railroad and being the most southerly corner of that property described as Parcel V in the deed to Fred W. Fields as Trustee of the Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust, recorded on May 5, 2010 as Document Number 2010-033975, Washington County Deed Records; Thence along said northeasterly right-of-way line, North 41°55'03"West 1113.55 feet to the Point of Beginning; Thence leaving said northeasterly right-of-way line, North 29°34'10" East 1856.77 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of SW Hunziker Street (30.00 feet southerly from the centerline thereof, when measured at right angles); Thence along said southerly right-of-way line, North 71°51'14" West 421.12 feet to a point of curvature thereon; Thence continuing along said southerly right-of-way line, 43.75 feet along a tangent curve to the right with a radius of 230.00 feet, a delta angle of 10°53'59", and a long chord bearing North 66°24'15" West 43.69 feet to a point of tangency; Thence continuing along said southerly right-of-way line, North 60°57'15" West 3.78 feet to the northwest corner of that property described as Parcel VI in said deed to Fred W. Fields; Thence along the westerly line of said Parcel VI, South 29°34'10" West 1614.75 feet to said northeasterly right-of-way line of the Southern Pacific Railroad; Thence along said northeasterly right-of-way line, South 41°55'03"East 485.10 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described tract of land contains 18.31 acres,more or less. The basis of bearings for this description is survey number 32,010, Washington County Survey Records. ORTHWEST RESIDENTIAL - COMMERCIAL - INDUSTRIAL Licensed in OR,WA&ID URVEYING, INC. 1815 NW 169th Place,Suite 2090 Telephone: 503-848-2127 Beaverton,OR 97006 Fax: 503-848-2179 MUE Zone Description May 11, 2015 NWS Project Number 366 A tract of land located the northwest one-quarter and the southwest one-quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most westerly southwest corner of Lot 1 of"Tech Center Business Park",recorded in Book 53, Page 29 of Washington County Plat Records, said point also being on the northeasterly right-of-way line of the Southern Pacific Railroad and being the most southerly corner of that property described as Parcel V in the deed to Fred W. Fields as Trustee of the Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust, recorded on May 5, 2010 as Document Number 2010-033975, Washington County Deed Records; Thence along said northeasterly right-of-way line, North 41°55'03"West 1113.55 feet; Thence leaving said northeasterly right-of-way line,North 29°34'10" East 1856.77 feet to a point on the southerly right-of-way of SW Hunziker Street (30.00 feet southerly from the centerline thereof, when measured at right angles); Thence along said southerly right-of-way line, South 71°51'14" East 180.65 feet to a point of curvature thereon; Thence 36.08 feet along a tangent curve to the left with a radius of 230.00 feet, a delta angle of 8°59'21", and a long chord bearing South 76°20'55" East 36.05 feet to the northeast corner of that property described as Parcel H in the deed to Fred W. Fields and H. Suzanne Fields recorded May 1, 2006 as Document Number 2006-051473, Washington County Deed Records; Thence along the east line of said Parcel II and the East line of Parcel I from said Document Number 2006-051473, South 00°55'57" West 626.06 feet to the southeast corner of said Parcel I; Thence along the south line of said Parcel I,North 89°19'21"West 330.40 feet to the southwest corner thereof, said point being on the east line of that property described as Parcel IX in said Document Number 97-097055; Thence along the east line of said Parcel IX, South 01°20'51" West 671.06 feet to the southeast corner thereof, said point also being the northeast corner of said Parcel V; Thence along the east line of said Parcel V, South 01°11'55"West 1086.06 feet to the Point of Beginning. The above described tract of land contains 24.18 acres,more or less. The basis of bearings for this description is survey number 32,010, Washington County Survey Records. ZONING EXHIBIT MAP (PAGE 1 OF 2) LOCATED IN THE NW 1/4 AND THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, W.M., N60'57'15"W 3.78' CITY OF TIGARD, sw HUNZik£ WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON ., R sip, MAY 11, 2015 WESTERLY LINE OF 424/2' .0 C1 PARCEL VI C2 180,65 DOC. NO. 2010-033975 .` ,\cam PARCEL H 3 No: DOC. NO. N. - SCALE 1" = 400 FEET (o) ZONING 2006-051473 "' o BOUNDARY o CD . . * PARCEL I N 00 0 0 0 0 0 .0 DOC. NO. o ;n N 2006-051473 0) ' ' '■? N89'19'21"W ! - 1 �' :S' .\`b`' c';' 1' 330.40' CURVE INFORMATION ,;Zr 44, �o� Cl LENGTH = 36.08' ti0 0 RADIUS = 230.00' o �° FE DELTA = 8'59'21" = 3 fa- CHORD = S76'20'55"E 36.05' 0 0 Q / 17 v) a N C2 LENTH=43.75' .. t. _ `I RADIUS=230.00' \ Z °o DELTA=10'53159" �'s> o O° CHORD=N66'24'15"W 43.69' �� G�-�'v 035 POINT OF BEGINNING - 0 I ca -P ZONE pOG• o 2 LP �9PA >sss, =r 'p 9d o 10 C •6:5., cn 0 LOT 1 POINT OF BEGINNING "TECH CENTER BUSINESS PARK" MUE ZONE . BOOK 53 PAGE 29 PREPARED FOR: JOB NAME: FIELDS SURVEY FRED FIELDS NJ ORTHWEST REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST JOB NUMBER: 366 1815 SUITE 169th PLACE, C/o KELLY HOSSAINI BEAVERTON, OR 97006 MILLER NASH LLP DRAWING NUMBER: 366 ZONING PHONE:503-848-2127 3400 US BANCORP TOWER DRAWN BY: CHS SURVEYING Inc. FAX:50ng ftws vy.c 111 SW 5TH AVE. nwsurveying®nwsrvy.com PORTLAND, OR 97204 CHECKED BY: SFF ZONING EXHIBIT MAP (PAGE 2 OF 2) LOCATED IN THE NW 1/4 AND THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, W.M., sw y�41Z/K£ CITY OF 11GARD, j R cer WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON MAY 11, 2015 di 1 III I .. Av.- )4 I I 1 111 .::O:C:C:CA II =-1I1 ............• i _1 I_=I 11=I. ' _=:__AVAV SCALE 1" = 400 FEET i I I 1 -I I A� �� .I I I I I I I I /7 E4/421-1 I 1 AA 0 ., . . . . 0 0 / Fk? `.) I A ____ I, i I I Q^) I AV V.�-.Y_1■■ — 11 1 .. � � i I 1_11 I I I I .V �' A 17,"-111-1 I -. J, x, ...• c � III IA ' P ' _' c°`. ii1...1.. .AAAv = N I............grATATATATAI O Y A..-.-.....-.-.-.-.-...-A I �, 7.I.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�A 'P9icp '' RYA AVA p1 ,0 �v41 LOT 1 "VA "TECH CENTER BUSINESS PARK" NI BOOK 53 PAGE 29 PREPARED FOR: JOB NAME: FIELDS SURVEY FRED FIELDS NORTHWEST REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST JOB NUMBER: 366 1815 NW 169th PLACE, C/o KELLY HOSSAINI SUITE 2090 DRAWING NUMBER: 366 ZONING BEAVERTON, OR 97006 MILLER NASH LLP PHONE:503-848-2127 3400 US BANCORP TOWER DRAWN BY: CHS SURVEYING, Inc FAX:503-848-2179 111 SW 5TH AVE. nwsurveying®nwsrvy.com PORTLAND, OR 97204 CHECKED BY: SFF FIELDS PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS AND OPPORTUNITY STUDY February 13.. 2014 THE FIELDS PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS STUDY. This development analysis was generated through a series of joint venture workshops with the property owner, local developers, local brokers, the City of Tigard, and Mackenzie land use planners and civil engineers. The intent of the workshops and this analysis is to help determine the highest and best use of the undeveloped Fields Property,given: ■ • Significant site constraints • The current and future development market • Regional needs/City needs for employment areas OUR HISTORY. OUR FUTURE. OUR PROMISE. This exercise was taken on as a collaborative effort to determine how the Fields The values of our founder, Tom Mackenzie, remain the hallmarks of our firm. Property could be Upon this foundation we have,steadily and intentionally,built a team of experts focused on delivering the highest level of design excellence in service to our clients. This mark is our signature and our bond. I. Site Context 3 z 1.1 Site information 4 1.2 Site Context 7 o II. Development Constraints 8 11.1 Development Constraints 9 11.2 Market Context 13 Ill. Potential Solutions 14 111.1 Shared Goals 15 111.2 Development Options 16 111.3 Zoning Options 19 For more information please contact: .I' 111.4 Development Economics/Feasibility 21 Christine McKelvey, AIA, LEED AP Matt Butts, PE, LEED AP I... 0 111.5 Needs 22• •Land Use Planner Civil Engineer 111.6 Development comparison costs 23 cmckelvey @mcknze.com mbutts @mcknze.com .• '� 503.224.9560 n mcknze.com Portland,OR n Vancouver, WA n Seattle, WA mcknze.com The pages of this proposal were printed on recycled content paper using soy based ink. © 2013 Mackenzie Engineering Inc. Unless noted,all text,video recordings, photos,drawings,computer generated images and/or statements are owned by Mackenzie and protected by copyright and/or other intellectual property laws.No part of these pages,either text or image may be reproduced,modified,stored in a retrieval system or retransmitted,in any form or by any means,electronic,mechanical or otherwise without prior written permission.Mackenzie',and M.'"and all corresponding logos and designs are service marks and/or registered service marks of Mackenzie Engineering Inc.All rights reserved. • SITE CONTEXT What are the physical features of the Fields Property site? 1 .1 . . Size: 42.5 acres �� ! ` Site and Surrounding Propertied V ! ,N. �„ F v +`' �`'� - tom ' V _a, f: - j I -- -- Location: Just south of 217 and west of 4 1 • - �_.[ NTIttli SW 72nd Avenue exit '' ' °'�itk .� C-P i sr � .�. Zoning: I P, C-P, and R-3.5 ", "' _ ^'�— I.,..,,.., likt '\ I l —, I, _ Comp Plan Designation: IL, CP, and L R-3.51-4 Itti4114 1 _ !sit ilik '-411,\,,,, \ 41:, °!F �r I , ..,, ,Street Frontage: Approx. 345' along ` \ .. _ rii ,� -44\ SW Hunziker Road, contains private -� .,i, 711••• BO . r -7.- street (SW Wall Street) on west side __-______�__ --- . .■ .1,,,. \ . -NI . a 1 v . ,11 _ Topography: 4-5% slope on western . -- 4...--- r,ft 44 ,.. 1, 4. 1 .side, 10-12% on eastern side __ _ __ W' 1iI Existing Features: Remaining row of - 4 IP = _� . trees on eastern property line; unused , -- I '` � ,,, rail spur along (private) SW Wall Street . ~ !: e — — - -_ /,.,_ Ili 3 Wetlands: Low-quality wetland area 1_i _a � It % near northwest corner (Clean Water ` ' - Services Vegetated Corridor 1J4 f \ • i- ' \\ ' -�- -o! - N r WM l it 1\ Fields Trust February 13,2014 Existing Conditions - 2008 Survey 405orietikk. \.7 _ - 0 Existing Conditions and Topography _„ Rail Spur lk _ \ , Low-Grade Wetland (Clean Water Services- _ , \ ` r•- , /1 • o�sly leveled by site grade wetland designated Vegetated Corridor) -1'jsi� ,;44 , !� f developing (not on City inventory, but on SLOPE ,✓, 9'/,. \ Clean Water Services Vegetated Corridor map) 0 6r° z s(r��/'teat_} • Elevations range from 150' at western property 6.1 10% C/ \ / ' line to 240' at places along eastern property s � . ; • All structures on the site have been removed / 0,- ° ,ca 4 , .� '` eG gad Beget • • • dte _" �� /b. Cor i j .`C\G cy%I- r a - : \ ,•w Density Hous n`• (R-3.5 - R 3.5 -z sr _. . , aliemmt. i N tili :,.y :E - �_._.. - 4.,,s,, .. a, z IN, !! .- , .. , . ; ,t . iiii_ — —� l b Pral in: ' Fields Property Development Analysis �/� 2L304R4.o1 1vI • 1-. . , , . . • • -k ' tt,.14-10 , ■ 4 .., " • At. ' 1,, a •..4 ' et Y4F4:1}"S.4,...e4 4: ' ' • . IA 4Ai aat. 1-** • 4, •.- :.._ • Existing Conditions - SW Wall Street (Private) and Rail Spur Existing Conditions - Northern - and Eastern Edges of Site , . ., ... _ ,.... F., -. .t: PP* . View of Eastern Side of Site from cent Residential Area/SW Varns Street f iki ' 1 S . '0, ' it . ■ , , •, 4 !1 00 ir1116‘11i \ s A''. f.* ' '• , , : ,.--i- g, Ti ,..., . , .. . „tida., ., vr t I ' ' •p—Pit ' $ 1' . f __-_---- t t Viiil. - gill -N 41220,11.410.4 ' End of Rail Spur at Southernerty Line North Side of SW Wall Street and Rail Spur Northern Edge of Site Eastern Edge of Site from Adjacent Apts ..i,- .4. _ ,,, ,,,. ... . • , , : w::...16, , P.: - 1,:-'4..• -C i.4 oF A N - jpi •,\ 1 ,- 4 - - . ' , o , tii ,., t _ •• ''• V • 'OPP f * • . p - , Southwest Corner of SW Hunziker Road Northern Edge of Site Along SW Hunziker Northern Edge of Site Along SW Hunziker and SW Wall Street Rail Spur on South Side of SW Wall Street Road Road Fields Trust I-ebr Lid!y 1, 2014 1 . 2 SITE CONTEXT 2027 City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan,c,„ Designations 1 ; 06, _„ t rocri _1 4,, MUE I r I IL SITE F r_-_i _ 1 Ni Surrounding Area Current Zoning os c, ; i . * M :bc L �' A I «,"._ 1 MH t ST -.—_ 1: 1c } l �Iti � W OS c z= - R-4.5 C= Teri i< �� ` •,1 / _" • M.•, • N„4 . tBD 11 i - ". <,.,. _... SITE M U E 10_1 1.44_1P�' ,, . I ; \ LEGEND ir 0 Site Zoning District Dog Park on West Side of SW Wall Street North Side of SW Hunziker Road `-G —...4111/111111111111111 - iii i_H ti R-3.5 R-25 L -P ' ' 'P s' EN MU-CBD• t MUE R-12 R 12 t. _. .. . R-25 R 25 riira .. I-P R 3.s . a R-4.5 '444 •5 R 7 Northwest Corner of SW Hunziker Road View of Eastern Side of Site fromcent R-7 and SW Wall Street Residential Area/SW Varns Street R-12 Q e�M Fields Property Development Analysis M z15U4i4.U1 ■ ■ • I . DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS What factors are keeping the Fields Property from being developed, and what benefits will the City receive with the site development? 11 .1 The property has been on the market for several years with much interest from the development community; however, development has thus far been unfeasible. The general location is desirable only for a limited set of uses, and there are significant topographical challenges with the uses allowed under the current zoning designation of I-P. Previously considered uses include a bus barn for Tigard-Tualatin School District, City Public Works use, industrial development, and multi-family residential. Primary Issues w► - .. rrounding Proj ertles, and R.-II Existing Conditions and Topography {' = \ 1. Slope and configuration of majority of site not suitable for Rail Spur market-scale development allowed under current I-P zoning �' (e.g. 200' wide/deep or larger industrial/employment use Low-Grade wetland (clean Water Services- buildings) 1/1 tom`` designated Vegetated Corridor) ,.k../,‘ \ 1`,� r 2. Slope of SW Hunziker Road not adequate for truck access SLOPE - nder current 6% - 9/��45 , on north side of site (to support allowed uses under o 6%° Sri I-P zoning); existing grade is : 10%, recommended grade is : � d/ - 6.1 -10% ° L �S ;� ' 4-5%) _, fix' _ .. n • . os - \�\ '` 3. Transportation System Plan (TSP) designation and width e // 1, of SW Wall Street (private) between adjacent development aK\� �;t Sib M , -, and rail spur not wide enough for City Collector standards /� r `,,. -4-- --:, (SW Wall Street designated as future Collector on City's ,d'` _ • �' �,.='6,�j.. ' TSP) P� j Secondary Issues ° �� a� 0'Co,-r. S \ 1. Wetland area in flattest portion of site (low quality) - 4;��'' 6,\C) 2. Remaining trees along eastern property line (both positive _ ,�f ,' and negative factor) -' t <' a i ,< • .� . _ .rye 1 o 3. Limited access to site for some uses from Hwy 217, SW a 72nd Avenue, and Hwy 99W on existing roads y; , y 1 4. Possible Noise from adjacent railroad switching yard could s ,, lirmlprrim., De ' JCR-3.5) impact possible uses depending on needs f ;', _ NN, .. .�. - -_Anna is Cti i W i _ . ,swill, • t-' Fields Property Development Analysis 2L3O474.ui M • Example: Small industrial building (150-200' wide) �:.} f 7s% -.• - -, existing topograpy . _• .. a.. lac, •ti- "-`:;-fi-= of Cros ecio,s - - Primary Constraint 1: Slope and - 4` Example: Typical small office (100' wide) I II Configuration/Zoning • For western portion of the site's current zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation (IL), with the site's slope and configuration, allowed uses such as small industrial buildings (150-200' wide) would require a 20-30' high retaining wall and/or extensive - - - - - - grading, which has been found to be cost prohibitive for previous potential buyers • Smaller buildings such as offices would require partial basements and a smaller Example: Retail/Mixed-Use/Residential (50' wide) retaining wall, or more extensive grading which has been found to be cost prohibitive for this use • Narrow buildings such as multi-family residential or mixed-use buildings could be built into the slope with small retaining wall required (however, current zoning does not topography _ _ — — — - existing _topography !` support housing as an allowed use) Primary Constraint 2: Slope of SW Hunziker Road . :• , i,,, ` 4 • The majority of the slope along the property frontage of SW Hunziker Road (only • �� V' ' x. ■ public street frontage) is approximately 10%, which is too steep for trucks servicing . allowed uses on site (4-5% is the maximum possible) RTC• °1- ;y • Only current access to property is at SW Wall Street (currently a private street). , N 5 Access off of Hunziker Road is needed for development but the road is steeply sloped ,,• for majority of street frontage (10% +/-) and is not adequate for larger truck turning I radius required with many I-P zone uses. ' . ` —. Alt ,-1',',.0 , `tsv J { - -, Site on SW Hunziker Road Facing East Fields Trust I-ebr nary 15,2014 Example Street Sections: Current Layout Inadequate Collector Width, Adequate Local i g Industrial Width THREE-LANE >b I . Primary Constraint 3: Private Street (SW Wall Street) MINOR COLLECTOR 'S ,w. - i .a STANDARD "... Designation/Width --,,- • The most appropriate vehicular access to the site has been found to be from a private f CRSTIRC R11554 R27.11.R' ° "°" "" ' / cam 51101 street (SW Wall Street). SW Wall Street is included on the City's TSP as a Minor // Collector, with a required width of 58'-96'. At different points along the SW Wall �Al - Street in its current layout between the rail spur and existing buildings, the width is less SECTION 45. 5 n ,! , 5 (� than 58' A ,w. ,".� :Z.1 • SW Wall Street could potentially be amended in the TSP to be designated as a Local . Industrial street, which is a more feasible design section. Adjacent property owner has rights to rail spur and does not appear willing to support abandoning the spur to °a'"°""" i 1555,5.....1555,5..... facilitate road improvements along SW Wall Street /• Possible future connection to SW Tech Center Drive; SW Tech Center Drive is SECTION ,. N./ designated Local Industrial B pry,- !� __ _ .:• j. \ Secondary Constraint 1: Wetland Area 57 R4a 25 25 TWO-LANE 25 t r - 25'S • A low-quality wetland exists on flattest parts of the site, which has been found to be LOCAL INDUSTRIAL ISIDEYALK �.�„54 ,RM: II WAX the most appropriate location for industrial development STANDARD --- ____r-- e50• COI l5' ID251 G %' ' r% , .4.."h , 25' �'` � SECTION ° !R./ 5:1 ..s. -- f//��i�� . 1 1 I{SIDEWALK Ill TRAM.LAW TRAM.INE SiXWALK A jjf — —��I I I I RTAEO G WALL n .. �.� p{5� I fi �'- 4___ T Far ICTtO!lK _ \ n /I ,' P -I. .� / .00l I I� '_I- �i Z 26'SLaPE OI! --- we / 11 \ / tr .. 4- 4 SECTION SHOULDER\ C � tr 5' \/ 12 - - - I mOYWK /"—TRN6 lNl! 1RA,EL LVk 5IDE1u{K r �.. �� B i" I J 1 25'ACK / / �� 51101.111X5 "proximate Wetland Location Street Section Locations — Fields Property Development Analysis 2i. U4,4.U, ■ ., '+ . J �1 a 1 hr• , . A .,..-4.op ` Secondary Constraint 2: Remaining Trees � :; 4~ � - " " . . ' '6* i 10 ''" ' o . ' . .. +t -.1 . • A large amount of mature trees exist along the eastern edge of the property. They •� .. r ,,a .. ° ''4 ; K. act as a buffer to adjacent residential uses and could be potentially integrated into ' _4 44'x; ""' •' . - a development scheme that included smaller scale buildings such as residential, but ., ,w,, . 0 • serve as a constraint for many of the currently approved uses in the I-P zone - �T.•• Both positive and negative factor; some additional trees may need to be removed, , .,but retained trees could aid in separation of uses from existing single-family residential - - neighborhood* II -.-. / SW Corner of SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street Secondary Constraint 3: Limited Access from Major Routes ,., NANA -- • Site is close proximity to Hwy 217 but not easily accessed from all directions, such as , +1 l c°n"a :: ;,} ;,� 4-1-74.17-` - ,.. , from northbound left turn intersection on SW 72nd Avenue, a potential issue for many 4 " _ '— I... ,., .-"-+• ° �'? r, 1' - • ' 1i ♦ w M . Couns��ny� use types currently allowed in existing I-P zoning . , ;..,a- t /� , r "L�Pgee'r' 9 . E a ;40-,_LI 4 • SW Tech Center Drive to the south of the site does not currently connect to SW Wall - ., ∎p. t . I` -� . a I x ` - * i. •. Street, but could be considered with future City transportation improvements M'',;i - • .��r0 • t1 1., :I '1 / , . •. -:, �' _ .1�,, o 6 o %' �w Corporate li �i.�r� ,,iA �`'. � 1'Rr "111 F 1 y ' r . • "e S+_ ianno 4 sy~� tl • 06 I t r i,i-lHehi t-I '4' aW 401, ti k The City of Tigard development code currently requires a 50-foot property setback where the side or rear yard of an _ :. s jr11 a • SPk,.- industrial zone abuts a residential zone(see Table 18.530.2, Note 3). If the MUE-2 zone was applied to the sloped portion z ` ' = __1 "` f_� * "'` •'_` a * of the Fields Trust property,as discussed later in this document,the setback requirement could be reduced to 20'where J �. •'� _ h - t ' — f the Fields Trust property abuts the existing residential area(see Table 18.520.2). Table 18.530.2, Note 4 references an ' 't' .. a tw; idr \ 1, 41 = K raid St SW McDonald St •4-; ,j,,�, additional development requirement for industrial land abutting the Rolling Hills neighborhood,the neighborhood directly n t . 44. r`± ._ to the east of the Fields Trust industrial property. That requirement refers to compliance with a Comprehensive Plan policy, 'v • tt}1. ;.i. * _' '` �` ` .. i� ` � yr '�' ; -�� ''� '. �,:.� .�.'"'. Policy 11.5.1,that no longer exists.The City's current adopted and acknowledged Comprehensive Plan contains no such -#; - _ ��!� -�;�- .- �. _ _- rb�Int�ections•, policy.Therefore, Note 4 does not apply any additional restrictions on or requirements to development of the Fields Trust industrial property. Fields Trust February 1.5,2014 11 • 2 MARKET CONTEXT! The market strength of potential future uses of the Fields Property was discussed at the two workshops with City staff, the owner and local industry/development experts; the need for and interest in potential uses that can be supported by the current market was identified by local developers and real estate brokers with experience in the Tigard area and reviewed with the workshop team in order to feasibly develop employment lands on the Fields Property. Identified High Market Demand in the Area: • Light industrial/smaller office/flex (5,000-7,500 SF tenant spaces within larger building footprints). Typically need 150' deep x 250' wide buildings with 50' truck bays • Multi-family residential (workforce to mid-range, would also support adjacent industrial and employment uses). Good location, strong market demand• MEP MP I' :". - i•ht I :us r .1/Flex ample Ippl �.� �'_ Tii NI 1 i -... .\, . . ., ,. ,. .,,,,- ..-:., \ - • ri. „,...... . ---.., _______ ,: ,, --- -- _ - ,t____ 4, :.: '‘. „.. ,., . _ ., _, , L 1 . ,,„,6 ,.._ .. • - 'f.,.. . .. 7r I �• - ' I t7 s - ., . -------ii 01 :. .:1 C 1 —∎■l r ; 11 1 1 i*AO!' .,. ;Si :„it _ ,s \ _____ as _.•.` Identified Low Market Demand in the Area: • Class A Office in suburban areas (e.g.: Kruse Way scale and location) Rents have not increased significantly since the late 1990's, but construction costs have. • Retail Not close enough to freeway interchange. Only specialty "destination" big-box (with little to no pedestrian traffic) might be supported, but site is too sloped to accommodate it. Restaurants (location too far from main roads, other retail) • Specialty Recreation (e.g. fitness centers-demand more retail-centered areas) • "Live/work" spaces in suburban areas (without city center co-location to services and transit) Fields Property Development Analysis 21,304-/4u1 IA Iii . POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS What is the highest and best use for the Fields Property and what measures can be taken to support it? 111 .1 What are the primary goals for the site's optimal development, considering the highest and best use (based on the market, site features, and regional needs)? highest and best use: "the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value." — Appraisal Institute, The Appraisal of Real Estate Owner (Fields Trustee) Developer City of Tigard Metro • Want to see entire site sold and developed • Zoning that respond to market; develop uses • Bring new users/appropriate development to • Promote and sustain a strong and competitive such that it meets the needs of the community that are profitable, meet long term market Tigard which will help support the local econ- regional economy and provides the owner with a reasonable rate needs and serves as a community asset omy Protect industrial areas from non-job-creating of return on its investment • Make site more available for development to • Increase job opportunities uses other future users (such as through easier • Improve public infrastructure and connectivity access) in central locations of Tigard (particularly for freight mobility) Shared Goals: • Preserve and Put to Use IndAlffignilinployment Lands • Provide Needed Housing to Support Employment Lands,:, • Strengthen Transportation Connections and Freight Mobility Between Nearby Industrial Uses Resulting Question: What potential site layouts and uses would achieve these? Fields Property Development Analysis KA 215U4,4.U1 • 1 111 . 2 Subarea 1 ' r� Jq - , • Subarea 1 contains slopes closer to the eleva- o R'!I:4-F.a , q t„a p Site Subareas X7,4 rs�a:. _4 3,f o� tion of SW Wall Street and could be easily : 41, ' ' ,: `�, ��,, accessed from that street. This portion of the ''' -` Subarea 1: Western Side(Least Sloped) ; ~ ` „ ,<f k�BCR .o1h� site is less steeply slope (existing wetland would need to be mitigated and/or accommo- Subarea 2: Eastern Side (Most Sloped) t. ' '•. dated) ^�', rte\ ,�' �; f s 4V t % : I . . n� -ct,i, w • The Shape of subarea 1 is more appropriate to t- ._' - a«'� ; k`fidl`, accommodate small industrial buildings, flex/ '+` it �` : i. offices, retail, or other commercial use as cur- � � , ,•, rently zoned (I-P) tf ��q i i - t i -,:; '- ` =`- � , • 'y1�,. • Additional access could make this portion of x `'�_ the site more feasible for development if SW , ��: y. ��, "`'� 1 ,;.i Tech Center Drive was extended west and/or a , ` 4. - - z, • • • r• - secondary access was added off of SW Hun- As ` it { 4 ,- zikerwould be steeply sloped) t ` .: "` ,e• Subarea 2 ti;3 �- ; :� _ Subarea 1 ,: ~ . j1. Approx. `�; . • Subarea 2 has a steeper slope (10% +/-), with 4 aF-;,,� 20 acres - . ' , !ti no current access off of SW Hunziker. This por- °�%.� , tion of the site is non-rectangular shaped and ! �' '�� •'- �� ,t, Subarea 2 a;,s s , ��; contains a significant number of existing trees ` y Approx. 'e•. : './ ;� °s �. , , 1, • Additional access could make this portion of ; " 22.5 acres 1 i. the site more feasible for development if SW • , Tech Center Drive was extended west and/or a { • ” . - • - `°° - - "- i secondary access was added off of SW Hun- i'� �, '' v _.r I ti,F - ! +: _ _ :f�T . ziker (would be steeply sloped) /�//% 1 . . t is r%} i I pw1� iw u t , i 1 y ! • Subarea 2 does not easily accommodate ^ ' �' ,�� f" " ski industrial, larger office, retail, or other com- I a� i • , F, •mercial buildings due to topography con- `I , i> j!.I 1. straints and access. Smaller buildings with less , '. �. i ., intensive access needs (such as multi-family ' I i e ,at, 7,4€1 . .., - ■ suited to the steep sslopes, significant number I I "'1; ,, -�" 1, , "."" i° it 'ii of trees and surrounding residential uses. 1 ,f, Fields Trust February 13.2014 Note: This plan is not intended to be a proposed development plan for the site. It is intended to serve as an example of how the site could be developed Site-Appropriate to maximize employment and support residential uses ina way that would be A Hypothetical Marketable, Develo ment Concept* feasible under current market conditions. '4 _„i, Ass_ Based on previous market studies and develo ment options available on the property over the Potential Buildings/Uses (Approx.) s „ '/ - past few years, participants at the two workshops { 174,000 SF Industrial (43,500 SF Buildings) ,> Vogl held in January 2014 determined that a hypotheti- plan is needed to determine the marketable a eeded ode e Cal, p 40,000 SF Flex/Commercial (One 2-story building) //„A_,` � � �� capacity of the subareas to accommodate the / ,r 324,000 SF Multi-Family Residential , "� tr 'maximum amount of employment lands for the � ,�"' site given size, slope, location, and configuration. (27,000 SF Buildings) , , , This concept plan represents a hypothetical, mar- �'r �°�' #`� p p P YP � Truck Access �'�� .�}�''"�� _ ' ketable development concept scheme. Specific 1 -- uses and tenant types have not been identified; Vehicle Access ' the intent was to identify the most appropriate Existing and Potential ,r , zoning and use designation that could be sup- Future connections 'emu • ported by the development sector and would sup- from Public Streets - ' ,i 1 '\.,� • port the City's need for maintaining and increas- � `' �° `F. ing employment lands in the district. �� ,r''� ■M� =zpNE UE ZONE ` _ Subarea 1 • This potential site plan accommodates a mix of I ■ employment intense flex/light industrial build- i ! ■ ■ Approx. ,ter ings, office uses, and multi-family residential �__,_, 14111111114 *'''`..,,..._s, ♦ 20 acres • Subarea 1 could accommodate several poten- tial uses, but the high demand for small indus- / % r. Subarea 2 ■ trial spaces was determined to better meet the - 7 _ _ Approx.-7 ♦ �,` I market demands and regional industrial land needs -� (- 22.5 acres ._A ■ ♦� `�• ♦ _ . �, i. • Subarea 2 is less flexible due to constraints /" Potential buffer to existing housing s. N mentioned previously in this analysis. This - ` area was deemed appropriate for providing , needed housing or other smaller footprint �' t I i _ 1 _ v4 uses on steepest slope areas with the intent of ; ' "" ■ ..{ preserve as many mature trees around develo- I ment as possible ` z ' :, II --- MI + - 1 1 s f 2 I `r R' I Olp i.*t iR_ I Fields Property Development Analysis 2bu4 4.01 NI • , Public Improvements Identified to Support Maximum Potential Development Concept ASSUMPTIONS: Transportation Imrpovements • Subarea 1 can be accessed from SW Wall 1 Public Street Improvements Required , CQ' ' e'° Street (currently private, unimproved) c Gj Off-Site Improvement (Requires adjacent property •,a\ • Subarea 2 can be accessed from SW Hunziker owner cooperation) ,`�,� ,, _ Road at top of hill (auto access only) and from ,1� a potential future connection along SW Tech Potential Future Off Site Improvements `' / \ •Center Drive at the southern property /\\GO' \\, //Tjr�� . NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS: S. • Connect SW Tech Center Drive at the south- \�6) - east corner of the site to SW Wall Street (make Ga\ / \ 49 SW Wall Street public). Cannot be done in cur- rent configuration; options include: Qom© Pt • . �� • SW Wall Street changed to Local Indus- �t�a �\ trial/Commercial to match SW Tech Center �e� a .4 _ Drive Get` ' • Remove rail spur, install standard Minor r z�-� Approx. i Collector street improvements 'Se' �a�- I 071 r-- tr_` z,,, 20 acres • Potential need to install traffic signal at SW c 4. Wall Street/SW Hunziker �� G ■2/00z ..0;'c Approx. ��+ '� , 2, 22.5 acres Itac POTENTIAL OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: �� • Improve intersections of SW Hunziker Road L �� and SW 72nd Avenue/SW Hunziker Road/SW • • • • ,„ signal? Hall Boulevard :/.. • Pedestrian/bike connection over tracks via `.T — ped/bike bridge to public open space to the — . u south . ‘ / 47 (4'1' • •o I • 1O� I � N _ O u .L . v , F I Q E Fields Trust February 16.2014 111 • 3 7ONING OPTIONS The following epresents the findings of two workshops held in January 2014, and includes recommended zoning options to achieve the highest and best use of the entire Fields Property Potential Zoning Conducive to Marketable Development Concept • The site currently is zoned a mix of I-P, C-P, Proposed Zoning/Uses and R-3.5 Most of the site is zoned I-P; rest- I-P Zoning (Approx. 20 Acres) / dential uses not allowed. The proposed mar- ketable scheme includes rezoning a portion of MUE Zoning (Approx. 22.5 acres) the site to reflect market conditions and land / �_ .<\. , suitability. Possible uses include work-force housing on the steepest portion of the site to / support employment lands. ,` U ��% Ir i R-4.5 t ,S�, C-G 3,r ,\_ It ., . are SITE MUE r` li LEGEND / 1- �.ZNa II El Site � ® A prd . Zoning District • I C.G 'L" - 0 acres . - / I R3.5 R25 j� tL 1/i • • C '' ll 411;f4App P M `i I.�� ►ppro a, muE R-12 R-„ a c o r Wn R-25 I_P Rd5 / li Rd5 RI R-) 1 •• 7,/ • I =/• • Zoning that would accommodate the pro- posed marketable development concept •. I ' include: t • Subarea 1: Remain I-P I ; • ro • Subarea 2: Remain employment-focused ° z e soo 0 . . land, but allow residential through MUEzon- ing. r • . FI I II Fields Property Development Analysis M 21,SO4/4.01 • RECOMMENDED ZONING FOR RECOMMENDED ZONING FOR ECONOMIC BENEFIT TO THE SUBAREA 1: REMAIN I-P SUBAREA 2: CHANGE TO MUE CITY OF TIGARD WITH REZONE I-P: MUE: Land Value: Industrial Park District Mixed Use Employment District EXISTING LAND VALUE: Tigard Development Code 18.530.020: Tigard Development Code 18.520.020E:: • Current land value provides property taxes to The I-P zoning district provides appropriate loca- The MUE zoning district is designed to apply to a the City of Tigard of roughly $90,000/year tions for combining light manufacturing, office majority of the land within the Tigard Triangle, a LAND VALUE WITH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: and small-scale commercial uses, e.g., restaurants, regional mixed-use employment district bounded • Land value based on proposed development personal services and fitness centers, in a campus- by Pacific Highway (Hwy. 99), Highway 217 and densities described in this exercise would like setting. Only those light industrial uses with no 1-5. This zoning district permits a wide range of generate approximately $700,000-$800,000/ off-site impacts, e.g., noise, glare, odor, vibration, uses including major retail goods and services, year. (Value based on assumption of $20/1M are permitted in the I-P zone. business/professional offices, civic uses and hous- of development cost) ing. ALLOWED USES INCLUDE: Permits/System Development • Some civic/institutional (emergency services, ALLOWED USES INCLUDE: public support) • Multi-family housing (Max 25 units/acre) Charges: ONE-TIME DEVELOPMENT FEES TO THE CITY : • Commercial (lodging, entertainment, repair- • Commercial/retail support (lodging, eating/ oriented, fuel sales, office, self-service storage) drinking, sales-oriented, personal services, • Based on the cost of development and pos- • Industrial (light industrial, R&D, wholesale repair-oriented) sible densities proposed in this exercise, the permit fees and system development charges sales) (Warehouse not permitted) • Civic/institutional: utilities, recreation, cultural at time of development would likely be CONDITIONAL USES INCLUDE: institutions, day care, clubs/lodges between $4,000,000 and $7,500,000. • Some civic/institutional (utilities, recreation, CONDITIONAL USES INCLUDE: day care) • Limited industrial (light industrial, R&D, ware- Employment Opportunities: • Commercial (eating/drinking, sales-oriented, house) (Based on possible densities and uses proposed in the col- laborative workshop that would meet market needs) personal services, vehicle servicing) 1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL/fLEX OFFICE JOBS: • 400-700 Light Industrial/Flex Office jobs, con- centrated on the I-P subzones identified in this NOTE: THE MUE ZONE IS DESIGNED TO APPLY TO AREAS exercise. OFFICE JOBS: / 0<)/\\ WHERE EMPLOYMENT USES ARE CONCENTRATED AND • 150-250 Office Jobs, assumed to be provided ENCOURAGED. BY CHANGING A PORTION OF THE I-P ZONE in both the I-P and MUE subzones identified in this exercise. /L� WILL BE RE APPROPRIATELY ,, � TO MUE, THE PROPERTY W O O J/ WORK FORCE HOUSING: « ~�: ® ZONED TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE R-3.5 ZONE TO THE 300 possible new multi-family housing units to Z s ' � <, ' EAST AS WELL AS THE I-P ZONED PROPERTY TO THE WEST. support employment lands t/ � µ7F (NOTE: Employment numbers are based on size of building - i iN.0; -zr / THE MUE ZONE ACTS AS AN APPROPRIATE TRANSITION and user/SF allowed per the International Building Code in ' - �OU� ZONE FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO LIGHT conjunction with information provided by developers with i � � similar scale developements in the area.) j 1 ij INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT Fields Trust February 13.2014 111 . 4 DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS/ FEASIBILITY Over the course of the past few years, several development feasibility studies have been completed by developers looking at the property. Outlined below are highlights from various cost studies completed by PacTrust Development. Note that this data is preliminary and is was developed in order to determine development feasibility with the site being developed as it currently is zoned (I- P), and also to look at feasibility with approximately 50% of the site being rezoned to MUE. These numbers are based on current market values and are estimates only for purposes of determining development feasibility, return on investment, and economic value to the City of Tigard. EXHIBIT A below outlines the site conditions as they exist today in section. Undeveloped. EXHIBIT B illustrates a section through the site highlighting the maximum development poten- tial for the site with the site's current zoning (I-P). With the current zoning and market conditions, approximately 20 acres could be developed with a total build out of approximately 175,000sf. The total site coverage would be a maximum of 20% Slope < 10% I-P Zone Slope > 10% , R-3.5 Zone of the site. The estimated cost of development I - Existing excluding land costs is $22,100,000 ($126/s0 I Residential, including necessary off-site improvements, nec- v essary grading, permits and fees. The extraor- 2 p 66' Existing — dinary costs, due to site constraints, that must Industrial � vl I < - be absorbed by this development are between Building g _ ___ _ _ _ - - - - " ! $2,600,000 and $3,000,000. That equates to -! Q an additional $12-$15/SF of additional cost that 4iik - _.ry_. must be added on to the building costs, creating Ex i •It A: Existing,Site Con• ition a development cost premium of 25-40%. In this I-P Zone scenario, and even without the cost of land pur- -4----- Slope < 10% Slope > 10% ). , RX3 S�Zone chase, the project is not financially feasible. (Refer I g I Residential to the separately attached cost comparison of = Business Park Development Costs). -41 I 66' Existing N =l 444.-1' i Industrial = e I - T '��"' EXHIBIT C illustrates a section through the Building g o - - - = l site highlighting the proposed zone change for QI a approximately 22 acres as well as potential devel- v7 I o 0 opment as allowed in the MUE zone. With this Exhibit B: Maximum Development for I-P Zone use w o rezone-NOT financially viable Possible Tree Buff- proposed scenario, development costs are shared I-P Zone MUE-2 ri R-3.5 Zone by feasible development across the full extent 1 Slope < 10% Slope > 10% of the site, bringing the extraordinary site devel- I Existing opment costs to approximately $750,000. The Residential same industrial development identified in Exhibit Ijj e B could occur (175,000sf) on the 20 acres of I-P Existing N TIC , ,I_ , 66' zoned property, but an additional 22 acres of MUE Industrial = rl _ Building f° ma - _ - - f development could occur on the eastern portion g o _ _ _ _ - - It= of the site, bringing the estimated cost of devel- al -�- o .. - - r - - - r r - �� opment in line with market demands and crest- _ ing a viable development solution that will bring Exhibit C: Possible Development for property with partial MUE-2 Rezone development to employment lands in the City of Tigard. Fields Property Development Analysis IVI 2130474.01 . 111 . 5 How can the owner and development team work with the City to develop the Fields Property such that employment lands can be created? Highest and Best Use of the Property (based on the market, site features, and regional needs): highest and best use: "the reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value." — Appraisal Institute, The Appraisal of Real Estate Primary Constraints: Possible Solutions: 1. Slope and configuration of site not suitable 1. Re-zone a portion of the site for less inten- for market-scale industrial/employment uses sive use that better accommodates smaller (as majority of site is currently zoned) building footprints and surrounding residential uses. 2. Slope of SW Hunziker Road not adequate for 2. Re-zone site for more appropriate use and truck access on north side of site allow secondary site access along Hunziker 3. TSP designation and width of SW Wall Street 3. Re-designate SW Wall Street to classification (private) between adjacent buildings and rail with narrower standard spur not wide enough for City Collector stan- dards (SW Wall Street designated as future Collector on City's TSP) 4. Limited Freight Access and Connectivity 4. Connect SWWaII Street to SW Tech Center Drive Fields Trust ebr udi y l)14 111 . 6 PacTrust Development has successfully developed over 10,000,000 square feet of industrial and flex/office space, with most of that happening in and around the Willamette Valley area. In an effort to realistically look at business park development costs of the Fields Property in comparison to other recently developed properties in the area, PacTrust has assisted the team with compiling actual development costs of a recently completed industrial flex/office project of similar scale and density to estimated development costs on the Fields Property in Tigard. FIVE OAKS WEST BUSINESS COMPARISON OF BUSINESS PARK DEVELOPMENT COSTS: PARK, HILLSBORO, OREGON FIVE OAKS WEST BUSINESS PARK VS. FIELDS TRUST PROPERTY Five Oaks West Business Park is located in the Development Coverage: Five Oaks West, Beaverton: Fields Trust Property, Tigard: high-tech area of Hillsboro, Oregon. Currently a (Includes land area readily available and 34% Coverage 21% Coverage 34,875 square foot flex building is operational and appropriate for development) a pre-leased 54,000 square foot building is under construction. The total developed square footage is approximately 167,000 square feet. Fees and Permits: Fees and Permits: Fees and Permits: Soils and Environmental $.30/sf $.54/sf Architectural and Engineering $2.43/sf $2.87/sf Landscape Architecture $.17/sf $.39/sf Surveying $.19/sf $.16/sf i I Testing �-� $.32/sf $.35/sf ;4 --LL _ - ." =" Fees and Permits S !r $6.87/sf $8.12/sf. , - Total: $10.28/sf $12.43/sf `',, Construction Costs: Construction Costs: Construction Costs: Offsite and Streets $.38/sf $5.77/sf New Public Street needed Sitework $7.35/sf $25.97/sf Significant slopes/grading Landscape $2.10/sf $4.68/sf Coverage Hard Construction $26.61/sf $29.87/sf Price Increases 309 Contingency $2.31/sf $8.26/sf 10% vs 5% Total: $38.75 $74.55 Capitalized Interest: $1.16/sf $2.61/sf 311 ■lli,n, 310 FUTURE FUTURE Tenant Improvements: $11.75/sf $11.75/sf Cost Prior to Land Purchase: $61.94 $101.34 The cost/sf of building development for the Fields Property is estimated to be 61% IMI more than a typical business park development of similar size and density. Fields Property Development Analysis fri 2 13047401 . MACI< ENZI E .• DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED May 11, 2015 City of Tigard Attention: Mike McCarthy, Development Engineer 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Fields Property Zone Change Transportation Planning Rule Analysis Project Number 2130474.02 Dear Mr. McCarthy: Mackenzie is providing this Transportation Planning Rule Analysis letter for the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change for the property located at the southeast corner of SW Hunziker Street and SW Wall Street in Tigard, Oregon. This analysis incorporates your April 13, 2015, comments on our February 18, 2015, scoping letter. The property is just south of Beaverton Tigard Highway (OR-217) and west of the SW 72nd Avenue exit. The property is identified as NW %, SE %, Section 01, Township 2S, Range 1W, Tax Lot 100 (Washington County Assessor's Map 2S101CA), 300 (Washington County Assessor's Map 2S101DB), 400 (Washington County Assessor's Map 2S101DB), and 1100 (Washington County Assessor's Map 2S101). The property is 42.5 acres in size, and is currently zoned Industrial Park (I-P), Professional/Administrative Commercial (C-P), and Low-Density Residential (R-3.5). The comprehensive plan designations include Light Industrial (IL), Professional Commercial (CP), and Low Density Residential (L). The following table presents the existing and proposed comprehensive plan and zoning designations. EXISTING & PROPOSED MAP DESIGNATIONS I t Existing Proposed Proposed Zoning Tax Lot Area Comprehensive Comprehensive Existing Zoning (acres) acres) Plan Plan I-P MUE* 251010001100 13.21 IL IL & MUE* I-P 1.90 11.31 25101CA00100 24.16 IL IL & MUE I-P 16.04 8.12 2S101DB00300 3.07 CP IL& MUE* C-P 0.37 2.70 2S101DB00400 2.06 L MUE* R-3.5 0.00 2.06 *Mixed Use Employment (MUE) TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE This analysis will address Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requirements outlined in Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060(1) stating, "If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or(10) of this rule." OAR 660-012-0060(2) further states, "If a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, then the local government must ensure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and P 503.224.9560 • F 503.228.1285 • W MCKNZE.COM • RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 M ARCHITECTURE • INTERIORS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING • CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND USE PLANNING • TRANSPORTATION PLANNING • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • ortland,Oregon •• Vancouver.Washington •• Seattle,Washington H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 2 performance standards of the facility measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP through one or a combination of the remedies listed in (a) through (e) below, unless the amendment meets the balancing test in subsection (2)(e) of this section or qualifies for partial mitigation in section (11) of this rule. A local government using subsection (2)(e), section (3), section (10) or section (11) to approve an amendment recognizes that additional motor vehicle traffic congestion may result and that other facility providers would not be expected to provide additional capacity for motor vehicles in response to this congestion." In determining the analysis plan year, the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) Action 1F.2 additionally states, "When evaluating highway mobility for amendments to transportation system plans, acknowledged comprehensive plans and land use regulations, use the planning horizons in adopted local and regional transportation system plans or a planning horizon of 15 years from the proposed date of amendment adoption, whichever is greater." The City of Tigard Transportation System Plan planning horizon year is 2035. Therefore, according to the OHP, the analysis plan year is 2035 if a Transportation Impact Analysis is determined necessary by ODOT and City of Tigard Staff. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS FOR ENTIRE 42.5-ACRE SITE TPR analysis is based on the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning. For this analysis, the most intense development allowed under zoning rules was utilized. The TPR analysis assesses high traffic generators under the zoning, regardless of whether those uses are likely to be built. The City of Tigard Development Code allows 85% lot coverage in the C-P and MUE zones,' 80% lot coverage in the I-P zone,2 and FAR of up to 0.40 in the MUE zone3. Lot coverage includes both parking and building areas of a development, while FAR addresses only the building area. In order to address "reasonable worst case" scenarios, FARs were assumed for the C-P, MUE and I-P zones. Appendix 6 of the 2014 Metro Urban Growth Report references typical FAR values for developments in the Inner Westside market subarea (including Tigard) with FARs of 0.45 for Office and 0.30 for General Industrial, Warehouse, and Tech/Flex and Business Parks. This site has an area of 42.5 acres and multiple zoning designations under the existing and proposed conditions. Mackenzie planning, architecture, and engineering staff evaluated the site's development potential given the current and proposed zoning, site constraints, and likely tenant types.The slope of the eastern portion of the site does not allow for large, flat building pads for industrial development, and the grades along Hunziker Road are too steep for truck turning movements into the site. Consequently, only the western portion (along Wall Street) of the site is feasible for light industrial uses. Residential or office uses could feasibly be constructed on the sloped area in the eastern part of the site. Multiple trip generation iterations have been prepared to reflect these development restrictions. Current Zoning For the 37.37 acres currently zoned I-P, utilizing a 0.45 FAR, development potential would include a total of 732,527 sf of office use. For the 3.07 acres currently zoned C-P, utilizing a 0.45 FAR, development potential would include a total of 60,000 sf medical/dental office building. The residential R-3.5 zone is 2.06 acres, which could support up to seven single family homes given the minimum lot size of 10,000 sf and deductions for roadway and driveway access. 'Development Code Table 18.520.2 2 Development Code Table 18.530.2 3 Development Code Table 18.520.2 M . H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 3 Proposed Zoning With the proposal, 18.31 acres will remain zoned I-P, and 24.19 acres are proposed to be zoned MUE. Utilizing a 0.45 FAR development potential, as with the existing zone analysis, would include a total of 358,913 square feet of office buildings in the I-P zone. For the area proposed for MUE, a range of uses is allowed, including office and residential. In order to determine the highest trip generator, three options have been considered for the area proposed to receive new MUE zoning. • Option 1 consists solely of apartments in the MUE zone. The 24.19 acres zoned MUE will be developed using the maximum housing development of 25 units per acre or 605 total apartment units. ■ Option 2 consists of all office in both the I-P and MUE zoning. In the I-P zone, the FAR is 0.45 based on Metro's typical values, whereas the 24.19 acres zoned MUE utilize 0.40 FAR as specified by the Tigard Development Code. Development potential of the MUE zone will include a total of 421,487 sf of office use. • Option 3 consists of medical-dental office and office in the MUE zone. 3.44 acres will be developed as medical- dental office in the MUE zoning to include a total of 60,000 sf utilizing a 0.40 FAR. A 60,000 sf medical-office building is one of the largest building sizes surveyed in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. A larger medical-office building could not be supported without surrounding similar land uses, i.e., a hospital or other medical-dental offices. The development potential for the remaining 20.75 acres zoned MUE, utilizing a 0.40 FAR,would include a total of 361,548 sf office use. TRIP GENERATION FOR ENTIRE 42.5-ACRE SITE Trip generation estimates for the reasonable worst case site development under the existing and proposed zones have been prepared based on data contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The following table provides a summary of the three (3) land use scenarios described above and the selected ITE land use for the entire site, including the portions which would retain current zoning. Based on the mix of uses, all trips are expected to be primary trips—no pass-by or diverted linked trips would be generated. OPTION 1 -SITE TRIP GENERATION Land Use Zoning (ITE Land Use Code) Size Weekday AM Peak PM Peak Existing Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 732,527 SF 8,042 1,128 990 CP Medical-Dental Office Building (720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing (210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 10,301 1,286 1,214 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 358,913 SF 4,149 616 534 MUE Apartment(220) 605 Units 3,790 300 350 Proposed Zoning Trips 7,939 916 884 Trip Differential (2,362) (370) (330) M . H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 4 OPTION 2 -SITE TRIP GENERATION Zoning Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak PM Peak (ITE Land Use Code) Existing Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 732,527 SF 8,042 1,128 990 CP Medical-Dental Office Building (720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing(210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 10,301 1,286 1,214 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park (750) 358,913 SF 4,149 616 534 MUE Office Park(750) 421,487 SF 4,801 702 610 Proposed Zoning Trips 8,950 1,318 1,144 Trip Differential MEM 32 (70) OPTION 3 -SITE TRIP GENERATION Zoning Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak PM Peak (ITE Land Use Code) Existing Zoning I-P Office Park (750) 732,527 SF 8,042 1,128 990 CP Medical-Dental Office Building (720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing(210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 10,301 1,286 1,214 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 358,913 SF 4,149 616 534 Office Park(750) 361,548 SF 4,176 620 537 MUE Medical-Dental Office Building (720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 Proposed Zoning Trips 10,493 1,379 1,285 Trip Differential 192 93 71 Trip generation for Option 1 results in an anticipated difference between the current and modified zone to be -330 PM peak hour trips and -2,362 ADT. Trip generation for Option 2 anticipates -70 PM peak hour trips and -1,351 ADT. For comparison purposes, trip generation for Option 3 anticipates only 71 additional PM peak hour trips and 192 additional ADT. As presented in the previous tables, trip generation with the proposed zone change does not impose a significant effect on the transportation network. There is only a small increase in expected AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and daily traffic levels compared to the existing zoning in Option 3.As outlined in Options 1 through 3, the proposed MUE zoning would accommodate a variety of land use types, any combination of which could feasibly be developed within the trips that would be generated under the existing zoning. M . H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 5 TRIP GENERATION FOR PORTION OF PROPERTY PROPOSED FOR ZONE CHANGE To isolate the transportation impact of the proposed zone change, trip generation estimates were performed for the portions of the site that are proposed to receive new zoning. As with the trip generation estimates for the entire site, these estimates are based on the reasonable worst case site development under the existing and proposed zones based on data contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. Based on the mix of uses, all trips are expected to be primary trips- no pass-by or diverted linked trips would be generated. The table below tabulates the areas of each tax lot that are proposed to retain current zoning and that are proposed to receive new zoning. The two existing I-P lots are proposed to remain partially I-P, the currently zoned C-P tax lot is proposed to change to I-P and MUE, and the currently zoned R-3.5 lot is proposed to change to MUE. : ZONE CHANGE SUMMARY Same Zoning (acres) Zoning Change (acres) isting Zoning(acres) I-P I-P MUE 2S1010001100 I-P 13.21 1.90 0.00 11.31 2S101CA00100 I-P 24.16 16.04 0.00 8.12 2S101DB00300 C-P 3.07 0.00 0.37 2.70 2S101DB00400 R-3.5 2.06 0.00 0.00 2.06 Total 42.50 17.94 0.37 24.19 To effectively compare the trip generation for only the 24.56 acres of the site affected by a zone change, trip rates for each zone were established for the existing and proposed conditions using the same three options utilized for the entire site. Current Zoning For the 19.43 acres currently zoned I-P, utilizing a 0.45 FAR, development potential would include a total of 380,867 sf of office use. For the 3.07 acres currently zoned C-P, utilizing a 0.45 FAR, development potential would include a total of 60,000 sf medical/dental office building. The residential R-3.5 zone is 2.06 acres, which could support up to seven single family homes given the minimum lot size of 10,000 sf and deductions for roadway and driveway access. Proposed Zoning With the proposal, 17.94 acres will remain zoned I-P, and 24.56 acres are proposed to change to either I-P or MUE. 1 Utilizing a 0.45 FAR development potential as with the existing zone analysis would include a total of 7,253 square feet of office buildings in the I-P zone. For the area proposed for MUE, a range of uses is allowed, including office and residential. In order to determine the highest trip generator, three options have been considered for the area proposed to receive new MUE zoning. • Option 1 consists solely of apartments in the MUE zone. The 24.19 acres zoned MUE will be developed using the maximum housing development of 25 units per acre or 605 total apartment units. ■ Option 2 consists of all office in both the I-P and MUE zoning. In the I-P zone, the FAR is 0.45 based on Metro's typical values, whereas the 24.19 acres zoned MUE utilize 0.40 FAR as specified by the Tigard Development Code. Development potential of the MUE zone will include a total of 421,487 sf of office use. MI • H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 6 • Option 3 consists of medical-dental office and office in the MUE zone. 3.44 acres will be developed as medical- dental office in the MUE zoning to include a total of 60,000 sf utilizing a 0.40 FAR. A 60,000 sf medical-office building is one of the largest building sizes surveyed in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. A larger medical-office building could not be supported without surrounding similar land uses, i.e., a hospital or other medical-dental offices. The development potential for the remaining 20.75 acres zoned MUE, utilizing a 0.40 FAR,would include a total of 361,548 sf office use. Out of the 42.5 acres, 17.94 acres would retain the same zone designation and 24.56 acres are proposed to change to either I-P or MUE. Using the same land uses used for the entire site, three land use scenarios were compared for the 24.56 acres that are proposed to change in zone designations. The table below presents the three scenarios and the assumptions made for each. Below are the three scenarios and the corresponding trip generation for both the existing zoning and the proposed zoning. OPTION 1 -SITE TRIP GENERATION Land Use (ITE Land Use Code) Size Weekday AM Peak PM Peak Existing Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 380,867 SF 4,378 646 560 CP Medical-Dental Office Building (720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing (210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zonin: Trips 6,637 804 784 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park (750) 7,253 SF 485 134 105 MUE Apartment(220) 605 Units 3,790 300 350 Proposed Zoning Trips 4,275 434 455 Tri• Differential (2,362) (370) (329) OPTION 2 -SITE TRIP GENERATION Zoning Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak PM Peak (ITE Land Use Code) Existing Zonin: I-P Office Park(750) 380,867 SF 4,378 646 560 CP Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing (210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Tri•s 6,637 804 784 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park(750) 7,253 SF 485 134 105 MUE Office Park(750) 421,487 SF 4,801 702 610 Pro•osed Zoning Trips 5,286 836 715 Trip Differential (1,351) 32 (69) M . H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Transportation Planning Rule-150511.docx r— City of Tigard Fields Property Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 7 , _ . ______ .. . _ r OPTION 3-SITE TRIP GENERATION Zoning Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak PM Peak (ITE Land Use Code) Existing Zoning I-P Office Park (750) 380,867 SF 4,378 646 560 CP Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 R-3.5 Single Family Detached Housing (210) 7 Units 91 15 10 Existing Zoning Trips 6,637 804 784 Proposed Zoning I-P Office Park (750) 7,253 SF 485 134 105 Office Park(750) 361,548 SF 4,176 620 537 MUE Medical-Dental Office Building(720) 60,000 SF 2,168 143 214 Proposed Zoning Trips j 6,829 897 856 Trip Differential 192 93 72 Trip generation for Option 1 results in an anticipated difference between the current and modified zone to be -329 PM peak hour trips and -2,362 ADT. Trip generation for Option 2 anticipates -69 PM peak hour trips and -1,351 ADT. Trip generation for Option 3 anticipates 72 additional PM peak hour trips and 192 additional ADT. As presented in the previous tables, trip generation with the proposed zone change does not impose a significant effect on the transportation network. There is only a small increase in expected AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and daily traffic levels compared to the existing zoning in Option 3; therefore, we propose a trip cap be imposed on the site based on I anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. As outlined in Options 1 through 3, the proposed MUE zoning would accommodate a variety of land use types, any combination of which could feasibly be developed within the trips that would be generated under the existing zoning. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE COMPLIANCE As demonstrated in the trip generation calculations for the portion of the site proposed to change zoning (24.56 acres), the proposed comprehensive plan amendment zone change would have no significant effect as defined by the Transportation Planning Rule if the City were to impose a trip cap limiting future traffic to levels currently allowed under existing zoning. City standards for traffic studies, codified in Development Code Section 18.810.030.CC, outline a number of factors such as site development and trip generation that may trigger a requirement for a study. A traffic study is anticipated to be completed with each specific development application for the site if the thresholds are met. Sincere , Brent Ahrend, PE �i ki I 9, �4� 9� Senior Associate I Traffic Engineer �/ c: Kelly Hossaini — Miller Nash + oRtaocl co Marah Danielson—ODOT cS) 'tncy pZ "� .tom Brian Varricchione, Matt Butts, Janet Jones—Mackenzie eAR T WA EXPIRES: 12/31/ 3 r, H:\Projects\213047402\W P\L I R\L I R-City of 1lgard-1 ransportation Planning Rule-150511.docx MACKENZI E . DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED May 11, 2015 City of Tigard Attention: Gary Pagenstecher 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Fields Trust Zone Change(Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Public Services Impact from Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment&Zone Change Project Number 2130474.02 Dear Gary: In accordance with the application requirements for Type III land use decisions (Tigard Code 18.390.050.B.2.e), Mackenzie has reviewed potential impacts to the public services at the Fred W. Fields Trust property that may result from the proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change from the current combination of residential, commercial, and industrial zoning to a combination of only mixed-use and industrial zoning. The specific public services in question are transportation, drainage, parks,water, and sewer facilities. The existing and proposed comprehensive plan map designations and associated areas are indicated in Table 1. Table 1: Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Comprehensive Plan Map Zoning Existing Acreage Proposed Acreage Designation AIL Light Industrial (IL) Industrial Park (I-P) 37.4 ac 18.3 ac Professional Commercial (CP) Professional/Administrative 3.1 ac 0 ac Commercial (C-P) Low-Density Residential (L) Low-Density Residential (R-3.5) 2.1 ac 0 ac Mixed Use Employment (MUE) Mixed Use Employment(MUE) 0 ac 24.2 ac Total Site Area* 42.6 ac 42.5 ac *Total area differs due to rounding. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPACTS Oregon's Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) stipulates that the City must demonstrate whether an amendment to the comprehensive plan and zoning map would have a significant effect on the transportation system. Mackenzie's May 11, 2015, Transportation Planning Rule analysis examined the "reasonable worst case" scenario for both the existing and proposed zoning. The proposed zoning could result in a decrease of 329 PM peak hour trips or an increase of 72 trips M i.- 503.224.9560 • r 503.228.1285 • vv MCKNZE.COM • RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 ARCHITECTURE • INTERIORS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING • CIVIL.ENGINEERING • LAND USE PLANNING • TRANSPORTATION PLANNING • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • Portland.Oregon • Vancouver,Washington • Seattle,Washington H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 2 compared to the existing zoning, depending on the type of development that takes place. To ensure that the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not significantly affect the transportation network,the applicant proposes a trip cap based on anticipated trip generation allowed in the current zoning. It is anticipated that a traffic study would be required as part of future development proposals at this site in accordance with the specifications of Community Development Code Section 18.810.030.CC. Resulting transportation system upgrades may consist of improvements to Hunziker Road and Wall Street along the frontage, plus a possible extension of Tech Center Drive to connect with Wall Street, depending on the results of traffic analysis for specific development proposals. DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMPACTS Stormwater drainage is required to meet the standards of the City of Tigard as well as regulatory requirements of Clean Water Services. These standards do not differentiate between stormwater runoff from industrial, mixed-use, or multi- family residential sites. We expect that any development on the Trust properties will be required to provide on-site water quality and flow control facilities in accordance with Clean Water Services standards described in the Design and Construction Standards for Sanitary Sewer and Surface Water Management (R&O 07-20). The actual developed impervious area coverage for the site will depend on the final development layout; however, the various existing and proposed zones on the site allow equivalent impervious area coverage of up to 85 percent of the total site. Therefore, the proposed zoning is not expected to have a significant effect on the stormwater runoff or drainage system as compared to the existing zoning. Development of the site will require extension of public drainage facilities to collect runoff from the site and public roadways. Drain lines are expected to run within SW Wall Street and along the south side of the Potso Dog Park property, with discharge to Fanno Creek west of the site. Public storm lines should be sized to handle runoff from the fully developed contributory basin draining to the system. PARKS SYSTEM IMPACTS The project site is located within the City of Tigard Park District boundary (which encompasses the entire city limits) and is across the street from Potso Dog Park and near the "Fields Property" open space along Fanno Creek. The proposed zoning configuration would allow a higher population than the current zoning if the MUE portion were developed with multi-family housing as allowed by the Tigard Community Development Code. Therefore, the proposed zoning could result in consideration of additional park facilities to serve the subject site. However, the site is located near existing park facilities with sufficient capacity for additional users. Furthermore, the City imposes parks system development charges (SDC) on all land uses (residential, commercial, and industrial), so development of the site would generate new revenues that could be used to improve the parks system. Therefore, the proposed zone change is not anticipated to negatively impact the parks system. WATER SYSTEM IMPACTS The subject site is located within the City of Tigard water service boundary. The water system at the site has been sized to account for planned utility demands from the existing zoning configuration. Domestic and process water system Mr H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 3 demands can be estimated for each land use based on compiled historic data used in utility master plans. The 2009 Clean Water Services Sanitary Sewer Master Plan presents detailed unit flow rates for several land uses. Since sewer flow demand generally matches water service demands for a given site, the sewer flow estimates can be used to compare relative water demand changes between the zoning configurations. Table 2 summarizes generalized domestic water demands for the subject site zones. Table 2: Water Demand Comprehensive Plan Map Domestic Water r.Water Demand for Water Demand for Designation Demand Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning (gpd/ac) L(gpd) (gpd) Light Industrial (IL) 3,660 137,000 67,000 Professional Commercial (CP) 3,660 11,500 N/A Low-Density Residential (L) 1,000 2,100 N/A Mixed Use Employment(MUE) 2,950 N/A 71,400 Total Water Demand: 150,600 138,400 gpd=gallons per day ac=acre Fire flow demands are summarized in Table 3. Table 3: Fire Flow Demand Comprehensive Plan Map Fire Flow Water Fire Flow Demand Fire Flow Demand x Designation Demand x Acreage for Acreage for (gpm with duration) Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning Light Industrial (IL) 3,500 (3 hrs) 392,700 192,200 Professional Commercial (CP) 2,500 (2 hrs) 15,500 N/A Low-Density Residential (L) 1,500 (2 hrs) 6,300 N/A Mixed Use Employment (MUE) 3,000 (3 hrs) N/A 217,800 Total Fire Flow Demand: 414,500 410,000 gpm =gallons per minute As shown by the above calculations, the proposed zone change is expected to result in a minor reduction in water service demand compared to the existing zoning. Development of the site will require extension of public water mains to provide domestic and fire water service. Water lines are expected to run within SW Wall Street, with possible connection to public mains near the southeast corner of the site. Public water lines should be sized to handle the expected domestic and fire flow demands from the subject site, as well as portions of the water network affected by the system expansion. M . H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 4 SEWER SYSTEM IMPACTS The subject site is located within the City of Tigard sewer service boundary. The sewer system at the site has been sized to account for planned utility demands from the existing zoning configuration, including a recent capital improvement project to upgrade a sewer near the west edge of the site. Sewer collection and conveyance is required to meet the standards of the City of Tigard as well as regulatory requirements of Clean Water Services. The actual sewer demand for the site will depend on the final development layout and industrial uses on the site. Table 4 summarizes generalized domestic sewer demands for the subject site zones, based on projected flow demands presented in the 2009 Clean Water Services Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. inn Table 4: Sewer Demand 1 Domestic Sewer Sewer Demand for Sewer Demand for-' Land Use Zone Demand xisting Zoning Proposed Zoning (gpd/ac) gpd) (gpd) Light Industrial (IL) 3,660 137,000 67,000 Professional Commercial (CP) 3,660 11,500 N/A Low-Density Residential 1,000 2,100 N/A Mixed Use Employment (MUE) 2,950 N/A 71,400 Total Sewer Demand: 150,600 138,400 As shown by the above calculations, the proposed zone change is expected to result in a minor reduction in sewer service demand compared to the existing zoning. Specific industrial uses on the site may result in lower or higher sewer flows than the assumed demands; it is expected that specific needs would be addressed on a project-by-project basis to confirm the public system has capacity to accommodate high-flow sewer users without upgrades. Development of the site will require extension of public sewer lines to provide sewer service. Sewer lines are expected to run within SW Wall Street, with connection to the recently-upgraded line along the south side of the Potso Dog Park. Public sewer lines should be sized to handle the expected sewer flows from the fully developed contributory basin draining to the system. M . H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx City of Tigard Fields Trust Zone Change (Wall Street& Hunziker Road) Project Number 2130474.02 May 11, 2015 Page 5 SUMMARY In summary, our review of the public systems at the Fred W. Fields Trust property indicate the proposed zone change with a trip cap will not increase demands on the public infrastructure compared to the existing site zoning. Sincerely, A70:14„, 11141:1604",:e.„ Brent Ahrend, PE Brent Nielsen, PE Brian Varricchione, PE Traffic Engineer Civil Engineer Land Use Planning c: Kelly Hossaini—Miller Nash M . H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-City of Tigard-Public Services Impact-150511.docx MACKENZIE . DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED Notice of Neighborhood Meeting April 21, 2015 Re: Proposed Fields Trust Hunziker Road &Wall Street Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change Dear Interested Party: The Fred W. Fields Trust is the owner of the 42.5-acre property located at the southwest corner of SW Hunziker Road and SW Wall Street (tax lots 251010001100, 25101CA00100, 2S101DB00300, & 2S101DB00400). The Trust is considering proposing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for approximately 24 acres on the east side of the site from Light Industrial (IL), Professional Commercial (CP), and Low Density Residential (R) to Mixed Use Employment (MUE), and a concurrent zone change from Industrial Park (I-P), Professional Commercial (C-P), and Low Density Residential (R-3.5) to Mixed Use Employment (MUE), which allows for a range of uses including office and multi-family residential. The remaining approximately 18 acres on the west side of the site (facing Wall Street) is proposed to continue with Industrial Park zoning. Prior to applying to the City of Tigard for the necessary land use approvals, Mackenzie planners would like to discuss the proposal in more detail with the surrounding property owners and residents.You are invited to attend a meeting on: Wednesday, May 6,2015 Community Room,Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Station 51 8935 SW Burnham Street Tigard, OR 97223 6:00—7:00 PM Please note that this will be an informational meeting on preliminary plans. These plans may be altered prior to submittal of the application to the City. I look forward to more specifically discussing the proposal with you. Please call me at 503-224-9560 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ,A,,,,,,,, va.,;(46/..;„„ Brian Varricchione Land Use Planner Enclosure(s): Neighborhood Meeting Information Fields Trust Maps P 503.224.9560 • F 503.228.1285 • W MCKNZE.COM • RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 M ARCHITECTURE • INTERIORS • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING • CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND USE PLANNING • TRANSPORTATION PLANNING • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ■ r'ortland Oregon • Vancouver.Washington • Snatttr.Washington H:\Projects\213047402\WP\LTR\LTR-Neighborhood Meeting-150421.docx 71 II TIGARD Neighborhood Meeting Information The City of Tigard requires developers to hold a neighborhood meeting to notify affected property owners about their proposed development. This is done as part of the development review process for most land use applications. Below are some frequently asked questions about the neighborhood meeting process. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING? The purpose of the meeting is to allow the prospective developer to share with you what they are planning to do. This is your opportunity to become informed of their proposed development and to let them know what issues or concerns you have in regard to their proposal. WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING? After the neighborhood meeting, the prospective developer finalizes their submittal package (often taking into account citizen concerns) and submits an application to the city. Sometimes it takes awhile before the developer's application is ready to submit, so there could be several months between the neighborhood meeting and the submittal of an application. Once an application is submitted to the city,staff reviews it for completeness. Once an application has been deemed complete, the formal application review begins. It takes approximately 6-8 weeks from the time the application is accepted for a decision to be made. Many types of applications require a public hearing at which citizens are given the opportunity to provide comments or concerns. Property owners within 500 feet will be notified after a complete application is submitted. They will be provided an opportunity to comment. Any appeals are decided based on the provisions of applicable laws and the development code. WHAT IF THE PROPOSAL PRESENTED AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IS NOT WHAT IS ACTUALLY SUBMITTED? Applicants are not required to submit exactly what was presented at the neighborhood meeting if it generally follows the type of development proposed. This provides for the opportunity to address the neighborhood issues and address other changes necessitated by the development or staff. If the project is significantly different, a new neighborhood meeting would be required as determined by staff. HOW DO I KNOW WHAT ISSUES ARE VALID? A decision is reviewed based on compliance with Title 18 of the Tigard Municipal Code (also known as the Community Development Code). Review the city's development code to familiariZeyourself with what is permitted and what may not be permitted. A copy of the development code is available for viewing at the Tigard Public Library, on the city's web site at www.tigard-or.gov,or a copy may be purchased by contacting our records department www.tigard-or.gov/city_hall/services/public_records/. You may also contact city planning staff by calling 503.718.2421 and ask what the standards are for a specific issue. Be prepared, however, that you may not LIKE all the standards, but at least you know what they are. If a development meets the code standards,it can proceed. For your assistance, attached is a list of questions that may assist you in determining your position on a particular proposal. 1:\CURPI.N\Masten\Pre-Application Conference Packet\Neighborhood Meeting lnformation_Questions.doc Updated 3/25/2013 111 i • Typical Questions to Help Ensure Common TIGARD Neighborhood Concerns are Considered The following is a list of questions intended to aid you in formulating your own questions for proposed development in your area. Feel free to ask more or alter the questions to address your own unique concerns and interests PROCESS ► What applications are you (the developer) applying for? When do you expect to submit the application(s) so that neighbors can review it? What changes or additions are expected prior to submittal? / Will the decision on the application be made by city staff,Tigard Hearings Officer, Planning Commission or City Council? How long is the process? (timing) / At what point in the process are citizens given notice and the opportunity to provide input? / Has a pre-application conference been held with City of Tigard staff? • Have any preliminary requirements been addressed or have any critical issues been identified? • What city planner did you speak with regarding this project? (This person is generally the planner assigned to the land use case and the one to contact for additional information). STREETS / Will there be a traffic study done? What is the preliminary traffic impacts anticipated as a result of the development and how do you propose to mitigate the impacts if necessary? / What street improvements (including sidewalks) are proposed? What connections to existing streets are proposed? 1 Are streets proposed to be public or private? What are the proposed street and sidewalk widths? / 'What are the emergency access requirements and what is proposed to meet those requirements? ZONING AND DENSITY ► What is the current zoning? What uses are allowed under this zoning? / Will there be a re-zone requested by the developer? If yes, to what zone? ■ How many units are proposed for the development and what is the minimum and maximum number of units allowed in the zone? DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY ► What is your erosion control and drainage plan? What is the natural slope of the property? What are the grading plans? / Is there a water quality facility planned within the development and where will it be located? Who will own and maintain the facility? TREES AND LANDSCAPING ► What is the urban forestry plan and how will the applicable development requirements be met? / What are the landscaping plans? What buffering or fencing is required and/or proposed? ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ► How do I request more information or a follow-up meeting from/with the applicant? 1:\CURPLN\Masters\Pre-Application Conference Packet\Neighborhood Meeting lnformation_Questions.doc Updated 3/25/2013 9" �:� Fields Trust Zone Change i` ' Hunziker Rd & Wall St ``� ,� \_••.. � \ Site Map,k • , , , , ... ..„ ,oil:. , ,_4,9� �� Z.kE. -‘....1' i h lM LEGEND �� • Site Taxlots \ti. . y/ 2S, 11E1000301 Nr •, 1110.4111 //• 2S1'1DB00 ,0 E a/ ;4 f :,�\\ 2Sa101CA0 100 �; \...., 4 . .23:i _ „,,; li ., l Feet • 7 pr,rt ' I 0 100 200 400 • — j �, Q , I 1 inch=400 feet • \<\`\\; — -— - - SOURCE DATA GEOGRAPHIC PROJECTION: \ .\ .9 i Metro RLIS Lite Base Data, NAD 83!YARN.Oregon North I ��'�'jjjJJJ Aug 2014 Lambert Conformal Conls �J� `` \ � a �W 't,�j J Date:4/17!2015 Mop Created By RN \,\ r File:neighborhood meeting maps Project No 2130474.02 88r{ 1 ' ' on a FAQ ..___ . \� 257101000110 I — — i ' _ ' • _ - -� 1 .— - ' 99W ,.� I } ?CsC°vC Ti g. rd • `` -- r- Donald St -< _- ,f' \ 9` �'� Bonita sw 9Onrta Rd j i ti ! ' cs a,;5 Nokia©AND(.4 015'"' ' \ \ ! � Mi %•rsoft Corporation o e � MACI< ENZIE . ' ,\ -`-_ L - I 503.224.9560 • ■ 503.228.1285 • MCKNZE.COM __ GENTERIDR River Fast Comer,1515 SE Water Avenue 8100.Portlano,OR 9721A o 0 0 r.: s t • ii ro e v o harl _ tJ� G�+ icr �( � Trri r1� } C., I�;Uwllr's – <, r53 2014 MACKENZIE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED \N\n, Fields Trust Zone Change Hunziker Rd & Wall St CG,. , Existing Comprehensive Plai SWhvNI, ... . . .. IL SITE FRRp• LEGEND 1 i. Site Taxlots I"- MN CG:General Commercial _ CP:Professional Commercial 1 •I - • IL:Light Industrial CP_ - L:Low Density Residential M:Medium Density Residential SW CRESTVIEW gff ,. MH:Medium-High Density Residentia 4/� OS:Open Space vv _ Q g CI SW VARNS ST Feet <4/00( LLJ 0 100 200 400 Q 1 inch=400 feet ..----\2 I-- lip N IL OS MH SOURCE DATA: GEOGRAPHIC PROJECTION: Metro RIIS lite Base Data, NAD 83 HORN.Oregon North N Aug 2014 lambert Conformal Conic S W FIR ST •k;" Date:4/17/2015 Map Created By:81V •i File:neighborhood meeting maps Project No:2130474.02 1; ' /1 EAR e1 ail‘'C' \ :u, SW CHERRY DR Tig. rd 1 r M OS Donald St 1 Bonita sw Bonita Rd is el)15 Nokia©AND© 01540tt MH Mi5usoft Corporation o MACI< ENZI E . • 503.224.9560 • 503.228.1285 • :. MCKNZE.COM SW TECH CENTER DR IL RwcrFnst Con:m.1515 SE Water Avenue 4100.prntlane OR 9771.: IH *2014 MACKENZIE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 1 1L Fields Trust Zone Change Hunziker Rd & Wall St S T� ,C -G Existing Zoning I NI/44 RD SITE 42114 LEGEND AMO Site Taxlots �1� ® C-G:General Commercial C-P:Professional Commercial I-L C -L:Light Industrial C-P I-P:Industrial Park PR:Parks and Recreation PR �� SW CRESTVIEW ST R-3.5:Low-Density Residential R-7:Medium-Density Residential wv R-12:Medium-Density Residential R-25:Medium High-Density Residenti. • 41 SW VARNS ST 1-lJ IFeet 14.1 0 100 200 400 Q 1 inch=400 feet 2 I-- to N. N R-25 SOURCE DATA: GEOGRAPHIC PROJECTION. R-3.5 en Aug 2014 S Lite Base Data, LaNAD 83 mbert Conformal North [IV t- S W FIR ST Date:4/17/2015 Map Created By:RN File-neighborhood meeting maps Project NO 2130474.02 R-12 R-12 on FAR ■ _- .rriNot 5 SW CHERRY DR Tigard PR Donald St - - Bonita sw Bonita Rd P 1 15 Nokia©AND©= 01 b ! R-12 Mi?".,soft Corporation 11 9 MACKENZIE . 503.224.9560 • 503.228.1285 • MCKNZE.COM SW TECH CENTER DR DlverEast Ce0-"r.1515 SE water Avenue 4100 v verve"OR 97714 R-7 I-H ,.'2014 MACKENZIE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED y� - -__ Fields Trust Zone Change IL �� Hunziker Rd & Wall St CG Proposed Comprehensive PIS SivyvH2i KE LEGEND IL SITE ER y4...-. Site Taxlots t' CG:General Commercial j CP:Professional Commercial - IL:Light Industrial ', ' 1:Low Density Residential M:Medium Density Residential SW CRESTVIEW MH:Medium-High Density Residentia fit", MUE:Mixed Use Employment Nr IL OS:Open Space h SW VARNS ST II Feet yI 0 100 200 400 Q 1 inch=400 feet .....\2 H tD O5 MUE 3 MH N SOURCE DATA: GEOGRAPHIC PROTECTION. N Metro MIS TIM Base Data, NAD 83 HARN,Oregon North LAug 1014 Lambert Conformal Conic SW FIR ST_ .. 1 Date:4/17/2015 Map Created By:BN 1 - File:neighborhood meeting maps Project No:2130474.02 I f JI;L. -. _./ on FAN i if P S�pyt . 9sw) \ ui 1 S i \ SW CHERRY DR z„ Tlg. rd i M OS 'o.raid St Bonita sw 801,110 Rd i [u 15 Nokia©AND©�015'°n MH Mi?k soft Corporation '! o IL MACI< ENZI E . stlz 0560 • 503.228.1285 • •', MCKNZE.COM SW TECH CENTER DR 515 SE Water Avenue.0100.OorHenc ORO7214 '�2014 MACKENZIE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED yi Fields Trust Zone Change �J, Hunziker Rd & Wall St C-G Proposed Zoning SW Nv I/ N KERR LEGEND SITE °4, y Y site Taxlots 5 �;t� ..... C-G:General Commercial C-P:Professional Commercial l-� I-L:Light Industrial C-P I-P:Industrial Park MUE:Mixed Use Employment PR ,hti SW CRESTVIEW ST PR:Parks and Recreation R-3.5:Low-Density Residential PVV I-P R-12:Medium-Density Residential \\- R-25:Medium High-Density Residenti, 41)S SW VARNS ST Feet w 0 100 200 400 Q 1 inch=400 feet I I- kO N MUEN. R-25 SOURCE DATA GEOGRAPHIC PROJECTION. Metro 01.15 Lae Base Data, NAD 83 HARN,Oregon North _. R-3.5 Aug 2014 Lambert Conformal Conic SW FIR ST Date:4/17/2015 Map Created By.BN File:neighborhood meeting maps Project No.2130474.02 R-12 R-12 on a FAR p f C-P 541 991N -U-ii .S SW CHERRY DR Tigard 3 PR Donato St I-- Bonita $S4 Bonita Rd (—) riS !U;5 Nokia©AND®-�O1b'°" P Mi5�.,soft Corporation Q R-12 • l P MACKENZIE . ::503.224.9560 • 503.228.1285 • MCKNZE.COM SWTECH CENTER DR RlvorFas!e0DSr.1515SEWAJCrAvenuc RIO, ... ,N,,,,.: 2'2014 MACKENZIE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED I City of Tigard ° COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TlGARo Request for 500' Property Owner Notification Property owner information is valid for three (3) months FOR STAFF USE ONLY from the date of your request. Contact staff member Joe Patton: 503-718-2714 or joep @tigard-or.gov. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING LABELS Project name: Fields Trust Hunziker Road zone change #of sheets cost each sets Staff planner you are working with: Gary Pagenstecher P' "�°»"PrJ 6 1 p king „irnv,500 feet: $2.00 $ 12.00 Name of contact person: Brian Varricchione 11iterestedpo,fies: $2.00 $ Name of company: Mackenzie Generate lest: - - - $11.00 Phone: (503) 224-9560 TOTAL: $ 23.00 Email: bvarricchione @mcknze.com LAND USE ENVELOPES Please indicate all map and tax lot numbers (i.e. 1S134AB,tax #of lot 00100) that arc included in tour project or the addresses for #of envelopes cost each sets sheets all project parcels below: (if more than one (1) tax lot or if Mvpetn'°Inlets the parcel has no address,you must separately identify »%rnt»500 feet: 50.13 $ each tax lot associated with the project.) Lnere ted pwries: S0.13 $ 2S1010001100, 2S 101 CA00100, Generate Art: - - $11.00 2S101 DB00300, & 2S101 DB00400 Posrnae: S. $ TOTAL: $ REQUEST (only check one): D One (1) set of labels for notification of neighborhood meeting. After submitting your land use application to the city,the project planner will review your application for completeness and you will be notified by means of a completeness review letter. Please indicate what the completeness letter indicates you need: ❑Type II TWO sets of envelopes ❑ Type III or Type IV one set of envelopes (a second set may be required if decision is appealed) Land use case number. The contact person listed above will be notified of the amount to pay at the front counter in the Permit Center once the request is processed.A printed list of all property owners within 500 feet and interested parties will be provided at time of payment.Upon request,a PDF copy is available via email. City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • www.tigard-or.gov • 503-718-2421 • Page 1 of 1 I:\CURPLN\Masters\500'Property Owner Notification Request.docx Rev.20150325(previous versions obsolete) 1 , ■.#_ lm pliwg I „maw ----,...mm„ it1111'� w ew Area Notified (500 Ft) i � c ' �, . ' +l �� awaa►�ua • •. I �V,` . ' ■�i.,�. Fields Trust Hunziker Road zone char kr i ■�-� M 2S1010001100, 2S101CA00100, lik l 11, ��/ r \ Ra��,,_�h_�y 2S101 DB00300, &2S101DB00400 I Mackenzie �•ri `�!!� �\ 1111■•• P: (503) 224-9560 _�� j� a ` III; E: bvarricchione @mcknze com , , ‘,...,„,„ ....,:„. al., ■■■116. �� i � I \` i10 DBUor. �� Illt 0 \ + . l ® Subject Site - *lb J ` \\\ I„NI0 'C�00• a :: =� N■�=:■■. �� Notification Area m -+ \\ \ r a.aLyii Q \\\ I loR!!®ei..■' -, f•- _ e\ \\ ■IMIIIIIIIMM■,_ ammo - aaIIIMIIIN■ \\\\ it • ■�� I -a: \ \\ i!I - NMII .s 1■f 1 \c _ • • b\rlXty \ \\m 1 i WIL i 2s o 00 0 0 0 ; �� a.: a I!ui _ �y �1�. Property owner information is valid �� f or 3 months from the date printed on. ■� ti . r7� �!1 this map. �_ i. 1 \,\ I I�� .: 7ffill 1111" 1II1R 11 , 11 I11�rI H _ o p \\\\ ili al \ \ \. \ Map Printed.14-Apr-15 1 � � lil ft gi Sf...� 41 Irlformstlon on this map Is la gamtral location I„�-,1 rAi %m _ ` ' only and should De voan DIwXtl tM Davabpmenl i .`Il1\ no. .,._��`x • i`� DATA IS DERIVED FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES.THE CITY OF TIGARD ■z••∎- - MAKES NOT WARRANTY.REPRESENTATION.OR GUARANTEE AS TO THE ,,. _"'_ CONTENT.ACCURACY.TIMELINESS OR COMPLETENESS OF ANY OF THE Jul... ��r' r..... ', *7 �,,� �■- DATA PROVK/AHEREIN.THE CITY OF TIGARD ACLU ACIESI NO L■AAPR FOR ANVERRORS.E OMISSIONS.OFTI OR INACCURACIES IH THE �� i INFORMATION PROVIDED REGARDLESS OF HOW CAUSED. ijjl�� ' + \iii COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1 J ial .ul �fP „`i. me �'1 ',',�• ►'~�� 1I�'R■ >/. \\ A Place fo CaN Home" ■� City of Tigard ■ •5 R►1�.L��AM 1111. RD 13125 SW Hall Blvd �iv11�1�mt _-- �• •'�Qor�� unm � s 1,- MAPS Tgard,OR97223 .�+ a'llyd/!\ill ■� •�` 503639-4171 rlc,\uu �/ �� ® �� \ w wtigard-or.gov 1 �11�11�MI I�Dii[��■■■tat'i1 -• II 2S101DB00607 2S 101 DC05000 ABBLITT,RANDI I ALBERTINA KERR CENTERS 7700 SW CHERRY DR ATTN:JERALD A HOFFERT TIGARD,OR 97223 424 NE 22ND PORTLAND,OR 97232 2S101 DB00605 2S101DB00608 BIEKER LIVING TRUST BLAGGE,DIANNE E BY BIEKER,WILLIAM A&JOANNE K TRS 7404 SW DELAWARE CIR 7730 SW CHERRY DR TUALATIN,OR 97062 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DB00506 2S112BA06000 BOME,FRANS R BONITA LLC 7500 SW CRESTVIEW ST 8320 NE HIGHWAY 99 TIGARD,OR 97223 VANCOUVER,WA 98665 2S101BD00105 2S101DB00504 BR&G CO LLC BRETL LIVING TRUST 17608 SYDNI C T 11970 NW REEVES ST LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 PORTLAND,OR 97229 2S101DCO2700 2S101DCO2900 BRIAN,THOMAS M CHICK,MARIBETH A JOENE A 11575 SW PACIFIC HWY 7630 FIR ST PMB#120 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 DC01800 2S101DB00704 CONANT,JAMES&ALISSA COURREGES,TIMOTHY W&PAMELA J 7510 SW CHERRY DR 7425 SW VARNS ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 DC03000 2S101BD00104 DIMICK,HEATHER M&DAMON R EAST SIDE VAN AND STORAGE 7545 SW CHERRY DR INC TIGARD,OR 97223 4836 SE POWELL PORTLAND,OR 97206 2S101DB00619 multiple:2S1010001100 to 2S101DB00400 KIJJ NSON,'1'YI ER LIVING'MUST FIELDS,FRED W REVOCABLE LIVING ET J ENSON,MARGARET LIVING TRUST 111 SW 5TH AVE#3675 13280 SW 76TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97204 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DB00614 2S101DB00606 FREZZA,CONRAD NICHOLAS&APRIL GILES,DIANE P 13275 SW 76TH AVE 7710 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 DB00706 2S101DB00616 GTT T.PY E,REED T&ANDREA L GRILE,WILLIAM P&LINDA J FURMA 7480 SW VARNS ST 855 SIGNAL WAY TIGARD,OR 97223 COOS BAY,OR 97420 2S 101 DB00609 2S 101BD00103 GUTHRIE,GEORGE DEREK&DOLORES H G M CO,BY NORRIS BEGGS&SIMPSON 7665 SW FIR ST ATTN:BLAKE HERING TIGARD,OR 97223 121 SW MORRISON#200 PORTLAND,OR 97204 2S101 DB00800 2S101DC01900 HAMPTON RIDGE APARTMENTS LLC HERMANSON,PATRICIA M BY COOPER'S CHASE LLC 7530 SW CHERRY DR 17952 SW PARRISH LN TIGARD,OR 97223 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 multiple:2S101DB00200 to 2S101DB00201 multiple:2S101DB00100 to 2S101DB00103 HILLCREST HOLDINGS LLC HILLTOP BUSINESS CENTER LLC 9 SE 3RD AVE,STE 100 HUNZIKER LLC PORTLAND,OR 97214 9430 NW KAISER RD PORTLAND,OR 97231 2S101DB00613 2S101DB00707 HOLLIS,MARK&TONNA HOPKINS,BURTON C RUTH N 13235 SW 76TH AVE 7430 SW YARNS TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 DB00101 2S 101 CB00100 HUNZIKER PROFESSIONAL CENTER LLC HUTTIG,INC 3601 WREN ST 555 MARVIL.i.F CENTER DR LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 PO BOX 1041 CHESTERFIELD,MO 63006 2S101DB00503 2S101DB00501 JARAMILLO,GUS J&SANDRA L KING,EDWARD A&SONYA M 7580 SW CRESTVIEW ST 7505 SW CRESTVIEW ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 2S101 DC01700 2S 101 DB00505 KIRNAK FAMILY REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST KRAFT,CRAIG&JOAN C BY EMMEL&CLAIRE KIRNAK TRS 7585 SW CRESTVIEW ST 7490 SW CHERRY DR PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 DB00620 2S 101 DB00602 1,EA, FRIC S& MIRIAM M LEACHMAN,DIRK 7530 SW VARNS ST 7575 SW VARNS ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DCO2500 2S101DCO2400 MAYER,KENNETH D AND MEMOVICH,BARBARA J TR JANICE K 7630 SW CHERRY DR 7650 SW CHERRY ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 multiple:2S101CA00600 to 2S101CA00700 2S101CA00400 MERITAGE FIVE LLC MERITAGE FIVE LLC BY FHA&ASSOC FHA&ASSOC 155 B AVE#222 155 B AVE#222 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 2S101CC00100,251010001200 2S101DB00705 METRO MILLER,ROBERT CLARENCE ATTN OFFICE OF THE METRO ATTORNEY DOROTHY NELL 600 NE GRAND AVE 7475 SW VARNS PORTLAND,OR 97232 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101AC01800 2S101DB00618 MOSTUL,TERRY A&DEBBI C MYERS,KENNETH E 7585 SW HUNZIKER RD 13320 SW 76H TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 1 S 135CB00800 2S101DCO2800 OREGON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION PAYNE,KEVIN M RIGHT OF WAY SECTION 7615 SW CHERRY DR 355 CAPITOL STREET NE,RM 420 TIGARD,OR 97223 SALEM,OR 97301 2S 101 DB00601 2S 101 BD00300 PEARSON,H ODELL&DONNA M REV L PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING GROUP IN 7525 SW VARNS ST 16400 COT.LFGE BLVD TIGARD,OR 97223 LENEXA,KS 66219 25101 DB00604 2S101DCO2600 PIRKL,RAYMOND E&ROSE MARIE TR POWELL,JAMES WALTER TRUST 7745 SW VARNS ST BY POWELL,JAMES W TR TIGARD,OR 97223 7660 SW FIR ST TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 DB00502 2S 101 CB00200 RELVAS,PATRICIA D CONWAY SMITH GERIG WESTERN PROPERTIES L WALTON,MATTHEW D PO BOX 930 7545 SW CRESTVIEW ST WILSONVILLE,OR 97070 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DB00611 2S101DCO2100 STARKS,ELIZABETH STEWART,MARTIN D&CARLA E 7715 SW CHERRY DR 7570 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DB00603 2S101DC04500 S'1'ONI-:,MANE: E SUMMIT PROPERTIES INC 7675 SW VARNS ST 4380 SW MACADAM BLVD STE 330 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97239 2S101DB00612 2S101DCO2300 SUNNARBORG,MARSHALL H TAKAHASHI,WAYNE H JOANNE E SHARON S 7670 SW VARNS ST 7610 SW CHERRY ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S 101 DB00615 2S 101 DB00617 TAYLOR,IAN THACKERY,RUSSELL H III 13315 SW 76TH AVE 13360 SW 76TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101BD00200 multiple:2S101DC06400 to 2S101DC06500 TIGARD DISTRIBUTION CENTER LLC TIGARD,CITY OF 4800 SW MACADAM,STE 120 13125 SW HALL BLVD PORTLAND,OR 97239 ATTN:GARY PAGENSTECHER TIGARD,OR 97223 2S102DA00500 2S101DB00610 TIGARD-TUALATIN SCHOOL TROTTI,LOUISE DISTRICT 231 7705 SW CHERRY DR 6960 SW SANDBURG ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S1010001500 2S101DCO2200 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO VANDERBURG,JOHN SCOTT 1700 FARNHAM ST,10TH FL SOUTH 7590 SW CHERRY DR OMAHA,NE 68102 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 CA00200 2S 101 DC04000 WALL STREET INDUSTRIAL LLC WALTON CWOR SOUTHWEST 12 LLC A RICHARD VIAL EXECUTIVE CENTER LLC BY RYAN 7000 SW VARNS ST PO BOX 460169 PORTLAND,OR 97223 HOUSTON,TX 77056 2S 101 DC03101 2S 101 DCO2000 WEATHERFORD,BETTY L WIDMAN,THOMAS G 7495 SW CHERRY DR 7550 SW CHERRY DR TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101DC05200 2S101DC04900 WILLARD,SHAWN P WILSON,CHRISTOPHER E& 13469 SW 75TH AVE SHARON K TIGARD,OR 97223 13400 SW 76TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 2S101 DC05300 2S101DC04601 WORZNIAK,DENNIS&NANCY WPC TIGARD LLC 13493 SW 75TH PL 307 LEWERS ST 6TH FL TIGARD,OR 97223 HONOLULU,HI 96815 ALEXANDER CRAGHEAD BARRY ALBERTSON 12205 SW I IAll BO111,1-:VARI) 15445 SW 150TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223-6210 TIGARD,OR 97224 BEVERLY FROUDE BRAD SPRING 12200 SW BULL MOUNTAIN ROAD 7555 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 BRIAN WEGENER CAROL RENAUD—WACO CPO NEWSLETTER COORD. 9830 SW KIMBERLY DRIVE OSU EXT.SVC-CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT FACULTY TIGARD,OR 97224 155 NORTH 1ST AVENUE SUITE 200 MS48 HILLSBORO,OR 97124 CHARLIE AND LARIE STALZER DAVID KIMMEL 14781 SW JULIET TERRACE 1335 SW 66TH SUITE 201 TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97225 DAVID WALSH DAYLE D.&EVELYN O.BEACH 10236 SW STUART COURT 11530 SW 72ND AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 DON&DOROTHY ERDT ELLEN BEILSTEIN 13760 SW 121ST AVENUE 14630 SW 139TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 GENE MILDREN GLENNA THOMPSON MILDREN DESIGN GROUP 13676 SW HALL BLVD UNIT 2 7650 SW BEVELAND ST,STE 120 TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 GRETCHEN BIJEHNER HAROLD AND RUTH HOWLAND 13249 SW 136TH PLACE 13145 SW BENISH TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 HEIDI BRENNEMAN JIM LONG,CHAIR,CPO 4M 11680 SW TIGARD DRIVE 10730 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97223 JOI IN GOODI IOL1SI- JULIE RUSSELL CHAIR CPO 4B CHAIR 9345 SW MOUNTAIN VIEW LANE 16200 SW PACIFIC HWY SUITE H BOX 242 TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224 JULIE RUSSFT.i,CPO 4B CHAIR KEVIN HOGAN 12662 SW'IERRAVI F'W DRIVE 14357 SW 133RD AVENUE TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97224 LISA HAMILTON CPO 4B VICE CHAIR MONA KNAPP 13565 SW BEEF BEND ROAD 9600 SW FREWING STREET TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 NAOMI GALLUCCI NATHAN AND ANN MURDOCK 11285 SW 78TH AVENUE 7415 SW SPRUCE STREET TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 NEAL BROWN.GRI PATRICIA KEERINS MEADOWS INC REALTORS 15677 SW OREGON ST.APT 209 12655 SW NORTH DAKOTA STREET TIGARD,OR 97140 TIGARD,OR 97223 PATTY NEWTH REX CAFFALL 12180 SW MERESTONE COURT 13205 SW VILLAGE GLENN TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 ROSS SUNDBERG STACY CONNERY 16382 SW 104TH AVE 12564 SW MAIN STREET TIGARD,OR 97224 TIGARD,OR 97223 SUE RORMAN SUSAN BEILKE 11250 SW 82ND AVE 11755 SW 114TH PLACE TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 TODD HARDING&BLAKE HERING JR. VANESSA FOSTER NORRIS BEGGS&SIMPSON 13085 SW HOWARD DR 121 SW MORRISON,SUITE 200 TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97204 VICTOR DEFILIPPIS 13892 SW BRAYDON CT TIGARD,OR 97224 A AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING/POSTING NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE IMPORTANT NOTICE: THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO MAIL THE CITY OF TIGARD A COPY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTICE THAT PERTAINS TO THIS AFFIDAVIT AT THE SAME TIME PROPERTY I OWNERS ARE MAILED NOTICE,TO THE ADDRESS BELOW: City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223-8189 IN ADDITION,THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THIS AFFIDAVIT&COPIES OF ALL NOTICES AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION. MAILING: — I,sS��-4n►1Q,k Sk&v1(it ,being duly sworn,depose and say that on the 70 day of Ail , 20 15. ,I caused to have tnaiied•t!o each of e persons on the attached list,a notice of a meeting to discuss a roposed development at (or near) C'� 4fl1U t } 4171 .r , a copy of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed ttp said persons and were deposited on the date indicated above in the United States Post Office located at 122 ID /10,40. S"1, 1T49&i A OQ 9?213 , with postage prepaid thereon. S ature (In the presence of a Notary Public) POSTING: I, c;Zxilttla in t. 4'1 ✓ do affirm that I am (represent) the party initiating interest in a proposed land use application for CO Jrl nai+-e. PU1bv t nks'LL 711/1)— 0 zpiz_ciQ 11 , __affecting the I:td located at (state the approximate location(s) IF no address s) and all tax lot(s) currently registered) StJ kVA 4 C1k) tlltmiker— VAD1.I0O1rlDO t25 01 Cl}6DI� 2510 10 0+)301, 2� 2SI(�1DP C 101) ,and did on the 20 day of t4 q ,20.J personally post notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a el1ittilpfvl+LP 4 tVe I'tt C'11Qtj1rto t'Li t 2Ovi f' (Palle land use application,and the time,date and place of a neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposal. The sign was posted at SII++ .) �14i A-1.t �4' Q D jkS\ SE dc QA) W Ll� a OLAGI Sl �Q,1( cc - Amy- foi3p 1;03 n. .rlc, (State the location you posted notice on property) - L LJ , 1;6/ 1.- ignature ' (I(n the Lpresence of a Notary Public) (THIS SECTION FORA STATE OF OREGON,NOTARY PUBLIC TO COMPLETE/NOTARIZE) STATE OF 0 r ) County of a..uJ. )ss. Subscribed and sworn/affirmed before me on the Z.-15f-day of el i 1-i1 ,20 5 . t'at?, OFFICIAL SEAL REBECCA LYNN BRANDT Meee& //G ` � NOTARY PUBLIC-0AEGON NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON COMMISSION NO.469805 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JULY 08,2016 My Commission Expires: 0 7/0g/zol(p C\CURPI.N\Masters\Pm-Application Conference Packet\Affidat7t of Mailing-Posting Neighborhood Meeting.docx Updated 3/25/2013 MACKENZIE . 503.224.9560 • 503.228.1285 • ':' MCKNZE.COM MEETING NOTES RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 Portland. Viegcn • .-1 . tiF ,rile.Wasl r:ylon PROJECT NUMBER: 2130474.02 ISSUE DATE: May 8, 2015 PROJECT NAME: Fred W. Fields Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment &Zone Change RECORDED BY: Brian Varricchione, Land Use Planner TO: City of Tigard planning staff PRESENT: Attendees listed on attached sign-in sheets J. Clayton Hering—NAI Norris, Beggs &Simpson Kelly Hossaini—Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP Brian Varricchione—Mackenzie SUBJECT: Neighborhood Meeting(May 6, 2015) MEETING INFORMATION Neighborhood Meeting Wednesday, May 6, 2015 (6:00 PM) Tualatin Valley Fire Station 51 Community Room, 8935 SW Burnham Street,Tigard, OR 97223 PRESENTATION TOPICS Brian Varricchione introduced himself and Kelly Hossaini from Miller Nash, read the required opening statement from the City of Tigard, and described the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. The proposal would result in approximately 18 acres remaining in the Industrial Park zone and approximately 24 acres changing to Mixed Use Employment (MUE), which would accommodate a variety of commercial uses plus multi-family housing. The primary reason for the request is that the slopes on the eastern portion of the property are too steep for industrial uses and changing the designation could lead to development that would bring jobs to the community. It was noted that there were no development plans at this time for the proposed MUE portion. PRIMARY CONCERNS RAISED BY THE PUBLIC The primary concerns raised by attendees, who were mostly residents of the adjacent Rolling Hills subdivision, related to potential impacts of development on neighborhood character. The attendees universally opposed allowing a connection to Varns Street and provided a copy of Resolution 79-86, passed by City Council in 1979, which created a street plug to prevent through traffic. Attendees also opposed potential tree cutting that could result from development. The attendees noted that the City had at one time required a fifty-foot buffer along the eastern boundary of the existing Industrial Park- zoned property and inquired if the Trust would propose to maintain such a buffer, stating their preference that a buffer remain between their residences and future commercial or multifamily residential uses. H:\Projects\213047402\WP\MTG_MIN\MM-Neighborhood Meeting-150506.docx Neighborhood Meeting(May 6, 2015) Project Number 2130474.02 Page 2 OTHER ISSUES RAISED BY THE PUBLIC Members of the public raised a number of additional issues and questions as listed below. • Whether the neighborhood meeting was specifically for the zone change or whether it also addressed possible future development. • Whether the Trust would consider donating the sloped portion of the site to a charitable organization or keep it as a park rather than change the zoning to MUE. • Whether the eastern portion could be rezoned to allow single family residential use rather than MUE. • Whether the zone change could wait until a specific development proposal was available. • Concerns that property values for the residences could be affected by adjacent development and increased traffic. • Concerns about habitat reduction and wildlife impacts from tree cutting and future development. • Concerns about the potential impact of residential septic systems' greywater discharges on the Trust property, particularly with future site grading. • Concerns about what traffic levels would be associated with future development. • Concerns about commercial traffic passing through a residential neighborhood and how that would affect livability and safety, particularly if Varns Street became a cut-through street. • Observations that the residential area is now an island surrounded by industrial and commercial development. • Observations that the railroad spur could affect the ability of the site to develop. • Questions about whether wetlands were on site. • Questions about what types of uses are allowed in the MUE zone. • Questions about the ability of neighbors to influence decisions made by the City. • Questions about the public hearings process and a preference that the notice radius be enlarged. • A preference that access should be taken off Hunziker Road or Wall Street rather than Varns Street. • A preference for open space and wildlife habitat rather than development. • A general preference to keep the site in its current condition. • A statement that a zone change would lead to development so the neighbors should work together to make their opinions known to the City now rather than waiting for a development proposal. Enclosure(s): Sign-in sheets Meeting agenda Meeting handout H:\Projects\213047402\WP\MTG_MIN\MM-Neighborhood Meeting-150506.docx MACKENZIE . P 503.224.9560 • F 503.228.1285 • W MCKNZE.COM SIGN-IN SHEET RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 Portland,Oregon • Vancouver,Washington • Seattle,Washington PROJECT NUMBER: 2130474.02 PROJECT NAME: Fred W. Fields Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment&Zone Change SUBJECT: Neighborhood Meeting-May 6,2015,6:00 PM NAME REPRESENTING ADDRESS Pfilir-tDarvf-( g,e4e /S. 62 t Rrrilft—Pg? / /W7(z g( oQ � `7so 5� �+�✓ Gros s ti eDi n ,,i ship Q 21/t 7373—Ste) , V� A� gariara � Yestoodi 5e_f Ves 7(03® 5vV 0 L ✓ �' �� y (41" _3 a /45 7471 Er, c Leo( e ' 7.550 54) /4/1 s s+- '792 SA 40-bob _SL) ki.00t.5 s g7aa3 Pc,:\f" - PAT C.-Ar-vt.7 7 3 425 ‘,k) \I A Cvl, 5 r (10Wii& J C- 7 tF2 sty Vafws �- H;\Projects\213047402\PLANNING\neighborhood meeting\handouts\Fields ZC neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet.docx MACKENZIE . P 503.224.9560 • F 503.228.1285 • W MCKNZE.COM SIGN-IN SHEET RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214 Portland,Oregon • Vancouver,Washington • Seattle,Washington PROJECT NUMBER: 2130474.02 PROJECT NAME: Fred W. Fields Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment&Zone Change SUBJECT: Neighborhood Meeting-May 6,2015, 6:00 PM NAME REPRESENTING ADDRESS 6 e.6 -- e Lre..{-1•,--:_t_ S C 1 -7 G to s S W 1c,,. S F-rc,`C, ---r,v_-I. iati it' e er.;si. S4,1 7 7 5 c j, 'a( s ya/`ct_. 1 101 t L:i-i'\i \Li /7 /7 t d 5°0) di c re, y, 4 4, So Ki — 7 S-05 SW C.re 840 S' "- fr-/n/ ,")?"-GAW f'eie 7 5-7° t5-ot) y T, n1R K L�-AC J A& N -1515" SW VA RNS ST_ p n d t Ali* ,i - -7, o 5,,u .,„9 ,,,,. n 7 and ,�, t 7 z 7s Sub 1cr I-Kee- �,' E,v A, cCe I 7ssb JTh , --0-)- , -2y S F 767S -Stki V ST— C-7 uJi rik St-( F 7.`16 0 S (_)-) • C lec s i F -c r Suitt 3r0,11'41A4 61. 5 V S co v V`-e-- --.. ..A-- . s-,q . 13.17T SLO 1 to"( *e__ H:\Projects\213047402\PLANNING\neighborhood meeting\handouts\Fields ZC neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet.docx MACKENZIE . 503.224.9560 • 503.228.1285 • W MCKNZE.COM MEETING AGENDA RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100.Portland,OR 97214 Portland,Oregon • Vancouver,Washington • PROJECT NUMBER: 2130474.02 TODAY'S DATE: May 4, 2015 PROJECT NAME: Fred W. Fields Trust Comprehensive Plan Amendment&Zone Change MEETING DATE: May 6, 2015 MEETING TIME: 6:00 PM MEETING PLACE: Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Station 51,Tigard, Oregon PARTICIPANTS: Affected property owners and interested parties FACILITATOR: Mackenzie SUBJECT: Neighborhood Meeting I. INTRODUCTION • Brian Varricchione—Lane Use Planner, Mackenzie • Kelly Hossaini—Miller Nash (representing Fred W. Fields Trust) II. CITY STATEMENT OF PURPOSE Brian Varricchione, Mackenzie III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL Brian Varricchione, Mackenzie IV. DISCUSSION Meeting Attendees V. NEXT STEPS Brian Varricchione, Mackenzie c: Participants H:\Projects\213047402\WP\AGD-Neighborhood Meeting-150506.docx Fields Trust Zone Chang Spy, Rd &Wall St Ivy vi12i C-G Existing&Proposed Zorn KF,,,cRO MUE ne.a.lo„ic.,> ti� 4% Existing TnrtRi[ C-G,General Commercial 421.....4.4c.„ C-Y:Professional Commercial A:tight industrial I-P:Industrial Park ) MUE:Mixed Use Employment ,!� PR:Parks and Recreation I-L R-3.5:tom-Uenslty Residential PRSW CRESTVIEW ST R]Medium Density Residential Rat:MedWm-Density Residential Proposed'I P R 75 Medium Nigh-Density Residential Proposed zoning Zoning uzJ Proposed I-P zoning K 1 Proposed MUE Zoning SW VARNS ST Q X La R-25 Proposed MUE R-3.5 3 Zoning SW-FIR ST N PR i _ r- N - 5 SW CHERRY DR 4i .- -, >e i' P O 5 N �� R-12 IN �� r. MACKENZIE, C- of TLTtJO.• km e r Washington 0 County,O: 5: 4 AM 2010-033975 05/05/2010 AM D-DW Cnt=1 Stn=12 S PFEIFER $40.00$5.00$11.00$15.00-Total=$71.00 After recording,return to: 31 David M. Munro 01478751201000338750080088 I,Richard Hobemicht,Director of Assessment arx! Taxation and Ex-Officio County Clerk for Wash) ''15. !"� Thede Culpepper Moore Munro & Silliman LLP County,Onpon,do hereby certly that the vNthM ton e?_" ''�•' l instrument o!wrltinp was u cc and recorded In the ? `yam s 111 S.W. Fifth Avenue, Suite 3675 book o!records or sold cou 1 +^: Portland, Oregon 97204 Richard Hobernfeht,Director of A mint rtd Taxation,Ex-Officio County Clerk WARRANTY DEED FRED W. FIELDS, Grantor, conveys and warrants to FRED W. FIELDS, in his capacity as Trustee of the Fred W. Fields Revocable Living Trust under Revocable Living Trust Agreement dated February 17, 2009, Grantee,the real property situated in Washington County, Oregon, more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto. The true consideration for this conveyance is $0.00. Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of an indefeasible estate in the real property described above in fee simple, that Grantor has good right to convey the property, that the property is free from encumbrances except as specifically set forth herein, and that Grantor warrants and will defend the title to the property against all persons who may lawfully claim the same by, through, or under Grantor, provided that the foregoing covenants are limited to the extent of coverage available to Grantor under any applicable standard or extended policies of title insurance, it being the intention of Grantor to preserve any existing title insurance coverage. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES, AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF Until a change is requested, all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: Fred W. Fields,Trustee 1149 S.W. Davenport Street Portland, Oregon 97201 00234485.1 - 1 - ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007. DATED this 3X4,day of A/ , 2010. "hot W�2L Fred W. Fields STATE OF , �l ) gli COUNTY OF On , 2010, before me, f s- , i�r , personally PP a eared Fred W. Fields sonally known to me (or proved to me on the basil of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument he executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. No Public for �`�� My commission expires: 3 , OFFICIAL SEAL HELEN PARKER 5. NOTARY PUBLIC% Y ELC)N ; ( \ i EXHIBIT A Parcel I: The North one-half of Lot 1, EDGEWOOD ACRE TRACTS, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon. Parcel II: The South one-half of Lot 1, EDGEWOOD, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon. Parcel III: A tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the most Easterly Southeast corner of that certain tract described in deed recorded March 21, 1949, in Deed Book 293, Page 530, to Jane Brooks, running thence West along the South line of the Brooks tract above described, a distance of 330 feet; thence Northerly parallel to the most Easterly East line of the said tract described in the Brooks deed above mentioned, to a point on the South line of County Road No. 245; thence Southeasterly on the South line of said County Road No. 245 to a point on the East line of the tract described in the Brooks deed above mentioned; thence South along the East line of said Brooks tract to the place of beginning. Parcel IV: All that certain tract of land in the William Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39 in Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, conveyed to Beecher B. Robinson by deed recorded at page 193 of Volume 126, Washington County, Oregon Deed Records, and being more particularly described as follows, to-wit: Beginning at the Southwest corner of the aforesaid Robinson tract in the center of the County Road at the Northwest corner of Lot 1 of EDGEWOOD, a duly recorded subdivision of Washington County, Oregon, which beginning point is said to bear 5.60 chains West and 21.02 chains North of the Northwest corner of Section 12, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence from said point of beginning North 0°22' East in the center of the said County Road 969.4 feet to the Northwest corner of said Robinson tract; thence South 47°43' East 26.9 feet to an iron pipe; thence continuing South 47°43' East 431.1 feet to an iron pipe; thence South 99.0 feet to an Alder tree marked "C.8"; thence continuing South 16.0 feet to a point in the center of Fanno Creek, from which point an iron pipe bears North 19.9 feet; thence down stream following the center of Fanno Creek the following courses and distance: South 37°01' East 110.0 feet; South 26°58' West 126.0 feet; South 6°44' West 86.8 feet; South 30°08' East 40.5 feet; South 73°51' East 44.8 feet; North 53°56' East 71.7 feet; South 74°06' East 33.1 feet; South 4°44' West 72.6 feet; South 24°24' East 64.3 feet; South 51°2' East 137.0 feet; and 00234485.1 - I - South 11°35' West 42.7 feet to a point on the North line of said EDGEWOOD Subdivision; thence North 89°00' West along the North line of aforesaid subdivision 35.1 feet to a point in the center of Fanno Creek, from which point an iron pipe bears South 89°00' East 17.1 feet; thence running downstream in the center of Fanno Creek North 39°18' West 32.8 feet North 58°29' West 104.5 feet, South 86°48' West 41.6 feet and South 12°02' West 76.4 feet to a point on the North line of aforesaid subdivision, from which point an iron pipe bears North 89°00' West 28.0 feet; thence leaving Fanno Creek and running along the North line of said subdivision 528.0 feet to the place of beginning. SAVE AND EXCEPT THEREFROM that portion conveyed to the State of Oregon, by and through the State Highway Commission recorded August 20, 1965, in Book 656, Page 306, Records of Washington County. PARCEL V: Beginning at a stone at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon and running thence South 43°23' West along the Northwesterly line of said Donation Land Claim 734.0 feet to a point in the center of County Road; thence South 60°59' East in the center of said County Road; 1814.8 feet to a stone at the Northeast corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to R. and Sophia Hunziker by deed as recorded on Page 271 of Volume 90 of Washington County, Oregon Deed Records; thence South 29°34' West along the East line of said Hunziker tract 1652.9 feet to a point on the Northerly boundary of the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way; thence South 42°00' East along said Northerly boundary 120.0 feet to an iron pipe at the true point of beginning of the herein described tract; thence from the above described true point of beginning North 89°51-'/2' East along the North line of said Hunziker tract 998.4 feet to an iron pipe at the most Easterly Northeast corner thereof; thence South 1°14' West along the East line of said Hunziker tract 1085.6 feet to an iron pipe at the Northerly boundary line of the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way; thence North 42°00' West along said Northerly boundary 1457.2 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL VI: Beginning at a stone at the Northwest corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, in Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, and running thence South 43°23' West along the Northwesterly line of said Donation Land Claim 734.0 feet to a point in the center of the County Road; thence South 60°59' East in the center of said County Road 1814.8 feet to a stone at the Northeast corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to R. and Sophia Hunziker by deed as recorded on Page 271 of Volume 90 of Washington County, Oregon Deed Records; which point is the true point of beginning of the herein described roadway; thence from the above described true point of beginning South 29°34' West along the East line of said Hunziker tract 1631.8 feet to an iron pipe; which pipe is 20.0 feet from, when measured at right angles to the Northerly boundary of the Southern Pacific Railway right of way; thence South 42°00' East parallel to and 20.0 feet from, when measured at right angles to said Northerly boundary a distance of 144.7 feet to an iron pipe on the North line of said Hunziker tract; thence South 89°51-'/2' West along the said North line 26.8 feet to an iron pipe on the Northerly boundary of said Southern Pacific Railroad right of way; thence North 42°00' West along said Northerly boundary 141.1 feet to an iron pipe; 00234485.1 - 2 - thence North 29°34' East parallel and 20.0 feet from, when measured at right angles to the East line of said Hunziker tract a distance of 1646.0 feet to a point in the center of said County Road; thence South 60°59' East in the center of said road 20.0 feet to the point of beginning. PARCEL VII: Beginning at an iron pipe at the reentrant corner on the South line of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim No. 39, in Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon and running thence North 1°27'East 1020.7 feet to a square iron at the Northeast corner of EDGEWOOD; thence North 89°07' West along the North line of said subdivision 151.1 feet to a corner of that certain tract of and conveyed to R. and Sophia Hunziker by deed as recorded in Deed Book 90, Page 271; thence North 4°13' East along the property line 597.1 feet to the Southwest corner of that certain tract of land conveyed to the Oregon Electric Railway Company by deed as recorded in Deed Book 83, Page 163; thence South 43°44'East along the Southerly line of said tract of land 400.0 feet to the most Easterly corner thereof; thence South 41°35' East along the Southerly boundary of the Oregon Electric Railroad right of way 1796.9 feet to an iron pipe on the recognized South Iine of the said W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim; thence North 89°23' West on said recognized South line 1387.8 feet to the place of beginning. PARCEL VIII: Beginning at the Northwest center of Lot 2 of EDGEWOOD, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, and running East 13.24 chains (873.8 feet) to the Northeast corner of said Lot 2; thence South with the East boundary thereof 30 feet; thence West 2.68 chains (176.9 feet); thence North 79°30' West 0.827 chains(54.6 feet)to a pipe '/," in diameter; thence West 9.80 chains (646.8 feet), more or less,to the West boundary of said Lot 2; thence with said West boundary,North 20 feet to the place of beginning. PARCEL IX: Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon: Beginning 20 chains North and 20 chains West of the Southeast corner of the W.W. Graham Donation Land Claim; thence West 17.11 chains to stake;thence North 30° East 26.60 chains to center of County Road; thence South 72°48' East 9.91 chains to the Southwest corner of J.A. Keller's tract of land; thence South 10 chains to a stake;thence West 5 chains to a stake; thence South 10 chains to place of beginning. EXCEPTING THEREFROM a certain tract conveyed by Rudolph Hoohuli, et ux and George J. Erdner, et ux, to Beaverton and Willsburg Railroad Company as shown by instrument recorded in Deed Book 75, Page 420, on May 14, 1907. EXCEPT a tract of land in Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows: 00234485.1 - 3 - Beginning at the most Easterly Southeast corner of that certain tract described in deed recorded March 21, 1949, in Deed Book 293, Page 530 to Jane Brooks; running thence West along the South line of the Brooks tract above described, a distance of 330 feet; thence Northerly parallel to the most Easterly East line of the said tract described in the Brooks deed above mentioned to a point on the South line of County Road No. 245; thence Southeasterly on the South line of said County Road No. 245; thence Southeasterly on the South line of said County Road to a point on the East line of the tract described in the Brooks deed above mentioned; thence South along the East line of said Brooks tract to the place of beginning. SUBJECT TO: 1. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : April 12, 1948, in Book 284, Page 406 Favor of • Tillie Zurcher Affects • Parcels V & VI Tillie Zurcher conveyed an undivided one-half of her interest in said easement to her husband, Paul A. Zurcher, by instrument Recorded : January 4, 1951, in Book 315, Page 386 2. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : December 31, 1952, in Book 340, Page 167 Favor of • Portland General Electric Company, a corporation of Oregon For • Electrical transmission lines Affects • Parcels V, VI & IX 3. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : June 14, 1957, in Book 395, Page 58 Favor of • Portland General Electric Company Affects : Parcels V & VI 4. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : September 12, 1960, in Book 435, Page 312 Favor of • Tigard Water District, a municipal corporation, and the South Tigard Sanitary District, a municipal corporation For : Sewer lines and water lines Affects : Parcel VI 5. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : October 9, 1961, in Book 451, Page 10 Favor of • Northwest Natural Gas Company, a corporation of the State of Oregon For • Pipeline Affects : Parcels VI & IX 00234485,I - 4 - 6. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : December 8, 1965, in Book 580, Page 313 Favor of • City of Tigard, a municipal corporation of Oregon Affects Parcels VI, VII &VIII 7. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : December 27, 1965, in Book 575, Page 43 Favor of • D.H. Overmyer Warehouse Co., an Oregon corporation For Railroad spur track Affects Parcels VI & IX The above easement was assigned by instrument Dated : June 14, 1966 Recorded July 5, 1966, in Book 606, Page 590 To : Southern Pacific Company, a Delaware corporation 8. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : January 4, 1966, in Book 583, Page 258 Favor of Northwest Natural Gas Company, an Oregon corporation For Gas pipeline Affects • Parcels V & IX 9. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded March 16, 1966, in Book 592, Page 13 Favor of • Southern Pacific Company, a Delaware corporation For • Railroad track Affects : Parcel V 10. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : June 10, 1971, in Book 821, Page 413 Favor of Tigard Water District, a municipal corporation of Washington County, Oregon For Underground pipeline and/or mains for water Affects • Parcel VI 11. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded September 16, 1971, in Book 835, Page 507 Favor of • Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon corporation For • Anchor easement Affects • Parcels VI, VII, &VIII 12. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : December 15, 1971, in Book 847, Page 55 Favor of : Tigard Water District, a municipal corporation of Washington County, Oregon For Underground pipeline and/or mains for the purpose of conveying water Affects Parcel IV 00234485.1 - 5 - 13. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded July 20, 1972, in Book 878, Page 295 Favor of • Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, a municipal corporation and county service district of the State of Oregon For : Sewer Affects : Parcel I 14. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: • Recorded : July 20, 1972, in Book 878, Page 298 Favor of : Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, a municipal corporation and county service district of the State of Oregon For • Sewer Affects • Parcel II 15. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded April 18, 1973, in Book 920, Page 38 Favor of • Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County, a municipal corporation and county service district of the State of Oregon For • Sewer Affects • Parcels VII & VIII 16. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded September 15, 1975, in Book 1043, Page 992 Favor of • City of Tigard, a municipality of the State of Oregon For • Street dedication and slope easement Affects • Parcels VI & IX 17. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded September 15, 1975, in Book 1043, Page 994 Favor of • City of Tigard, a municipality of the State of Oregon For • Street dedication and slope easement Affects Parcels VI & IX 18. An easement created by instrument, including the terms and provisions thereof: Recorded : November 18, 1975, in Book 1054, Page 608 Favor of : City of Tigard, a municipality of the State of Oregon For • Street dedication and slope easement Affects • Parcel III 19. Any adverse claim based upon the assertion that some portion of said land have been removed from or brought within the boundaries thereof by an avulsive movement of Fanno Creek or has been formed by the process of accretion or reliction. (Affects Parcel IV) 00234485.1 - 6 - Alai-a 2700 %tee (2CCOr• 0/11V Washington County,Oregon 2006-051473 05101/2006 09:44:11 AM DABS Gid.1 Stne7 K GRUNEWALD — cv $15.00$6.00$11.00•Total c$32.00 1111111 11 11111111111 1111 111 '1 After recording, return to: \ Pacific NW Title Co. I,JsrtyHanson ODlnctoroffAOO6enentan Taxation *.3yJi, and Ex-Officio County Clerk for Wuhlnpto 9 Commercial Services Division Oregon,do hereby certify that the within Instrument of '<< 111 SW Columbia Ave., #200 records rp of received and recorded In the book of ....,,, . neoMs of add county. ��y% ?•'�.�' >• Portland, OR 97201 Jerry R Hanson,x-0fAdo County s and Taxation, Re: Order No. 06280596 zoo Until a change is requested, all tax statements should be sent to the following address: ca a= Z E`O t Fred W. Fields ley 1149 SW Davenport a Portland, OR 97201 1.2w-a BARGAIN AND SALE DEED ,° - r.N 11S F.W.F. Investment Company, a dissolved Oregon corporation, Grantor, conveys to 1$g° Fred W. Fields and H. Suzanne Fields, husband and wife, Grantee,the following described real y r- o o W property: The real property described on attached Exhibit A(TL 2S11DB-00300 and TL 2S11DB-00400 in the NW I/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 1, T2S,RI W, WM, in the city of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon). BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS,IF ANY,UNDER CHAPTER 1,OREGON LAWS 2005(BALLOT MEASURE 37(2004)). THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES,TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930 AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS,IF ANY,UNDER CHAPTER 1,OREGON LAWS 2005 (BALLOT MEASURE 37(2004)). The true consideration for this conveyance is $10 and other property or other value given or promised. Dated April 13, 2006. F.W.F. Investment Company By ( aJ. 4.i1z1,4 re W. Fields President -1- PDXDOCS:1501014.1 State of Oregon ) ss. County of Multnomah ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on April 13,2006,by Fred W. Fields, president of F.W.F. Investment Company, a dissolved Oregon corporation. I Notary Publiott;r Oregon My commission expires: 1 p - a 3 - -v 9 �...., OFFICIAL SEAL :: CHERYL A SCHOEBEL NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON '7 COMMISSION NO.396205 U1 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCTOBER 23,2009 • -2- PDXDOCS:1501 01 4.1 t • Exhibit A PARCEL I: A tract of land in the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 1,Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: BEGINNING at the most Easterly Southeast corner of that certain tract described in Deed recorded March 21, 1949, in Deed Book 293, Page 530, to Jane Brooks, running thence West along the South line of the Brooks Tract above described, a distance of 330 feet; thence Northerly parallel with the most Easterly East line of the said tract described in the said Deed above mentioned, a distance of 271 feet; thence Easterly,parallel with the above mentioned South line of the said Brooks Tract, a distance of 330 feet, to a point on the East line of the tract described in the Brooks Deed above mentioned; thence South along the East line of the said Brooks Tract, a distance of 271 feet, to the place of beginning. PARCEL II: A tract of land in the Northwest one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, in the City of Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the most Easterly East line of that certain tract described in Deed recorded March 21, 1949, in Deed Book 293, Page 530 to Jane Brooks,which point is Northerly a distance of 271 feet fro the most Easterly Southeast corner of said Brooks Tract described in the said Deed mentioned above; and running thence Westerly parallel with the South line of the Brooks Tract above described, a distance of 330 feet; thence Northerly parallel with the said most Easterly East line of the said Brooks Tract described in the said Deed above mentioned, to a point in the South line of County Road No. 245; thence Southeasterly on the South line of said County Road to a point on the East line of the tract described in the Brooks Deed above mentioned;thence South along the said East tine of the said Brooks Tract to the place of beginning. Page 5 of Preliminary Commitment Order Number: 06280596-W PRE-APPLICATION NOTES FOR FIELDS ZONE CHANGE/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT May 13,2014 STAFF PRESENT: Gary Pagenstecher,Lloyd Purdy, Greg Berry APPLICANT: Christine McKelvey/Mackenzie PROPERTY LOCATION: SE Corner of SW Hunziker and Wall Streets. TAX MAP/LOT#'s: 2S101CA TL 100;25101 TL1100;2S101DB TLs 300/400 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests a zone change and comprehensive plan amendment on approximately 23 acres, from I-P,C-P and R3.5 to R-25 or MUE;minor portion of C-P to I-P.The application is made within the context of a public/private partnership between the Fields Trust and the City to address site slope constraints which make a portion of the site unsuitable for some industrial uses and is based on the February 13,2014 Development Analysis and Opportunity Study,prepared by McKenzie. COMP PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Industrial Park,Professional Commercial,Low Density Residential ZONING: I-P,C-P,R3.5 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A neighborhood meeting is required for a quasi-judicial zone change/comprehensive plan amendment. APPLICABLE CRITERIA 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map A. Quasi-judicial amendments. Quasi-judicial zoning map amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type III-PC procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.050, using standards of approval contained in subsection B of this section. The approval authority shall be as follows: The commission shall make a recommendation to the council on a zone change application which also involves a concurrent application for a comprehensive plan map amendment. The council shall decide the applications on the record as provided by Chapter 18.390. B. Standards for making quasi-judicial decisions. A recommendation or a decision to approve, approve with conditions or to deny an application for a quasi-judicial amendment shall be based on all of the following standards: 1. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable comprehensive plan policies and map designations; (Goal 1, Citizen Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning, 2.1- policies 5, 6, 7, 14, 15, 16; Goal 9, Economic Development, 9.1, policies 3, 5, 6, 7, and 12; Goal 10, Housing, 10.2,policies 7 and 8). 2. Demonstration of compliance with all applicable standards of any provision of this code or other applicable implementing ordinance; (18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments; 18.390 Decision Making Procedures);and 3. Evidence of change in the neighborhood or community or a mistake or inconsistency in the comprehensive plan or zoning map as it relates to the property which is the subject of the development application. (COT 2011 Economic Opportunity Analysis/February 13, 2014 Development Analysis and Opportunity Study) C. Conditions of approval. A quasi-judicial decision may be for denial,approval, or approval with conditions as provided by Section 18.390.050. 18.390.050 Type III Procedure A. Preapplication conference.A preapplication conference is required for all Type III actions. B. Application requirements. 1. Type III applications shall be made on forms provided by the director. 2. Type III applications shall: a. Include the information requested on the application form; b.Address the relevant criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; d. Include two sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all persons who are property owners of record as specified in subsection C of this section. The records of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation shall be the official records for determining ownership. The applicant shall demonstrate that the most current assessment records have been used to produce the notice list; e. Include an impact study. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. 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; (Goals 1, 2, 9, and 10) 2.Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; (Oregon Administrative Rue 660, Division 9, Economic Development) 3. Any applicable METRO regulations; (Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan,Title 4 Industrial and other Employment Areas) 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies;and (Goal 1, Citizen Involvement; Goal 2,Land Use Planning;and Goal 9, Economic Development, Goal 10, Housing) 5. Any applicable provisions of the city's implementing ordinances. (18.380 Zoning Map and Text Amendments; 18.390 Decision Making Procedures). PROCESS Application for a Type III quasi-judicial zone change/comprehensive plan amendment: two hearings, one before the commission and one before the council. APPLICATION FEES: Comprehensive Plan Amendment $9,996 Quasi-Judicial Zone Change 3,761 Total $13,757 2 APPLICANT'S QUESTIONS: 1.Verification of the zone change request from I-P to R-25 (or MUE) for approximately 23 acres of the site. MUE is a zone which includes employment uses,in addition to multi-family housing at a maximum density of 25 units/acre, equivalent to the R-25 zoning district. Since the city is interested in preserving vacant land for employment uses to the extent possible,the city could support rezoning to MUE. 2. Specific criteria the City would like addressed,other than those that would be the result of the described Comp Plan/Zone Changes? Goal 2.1,Policy 16,permits the city to condition the approval of a Plan/Zoning map amendment to assure the development of a definite land use and per specific design/development requirements. Anticipating that the EOA land efficient need scenario will continue to apply and be in deficit given the findings in the Fields Property Development Analysis and Opportunity Study,please provide an analysis that addresses the suitability of the upland portion of the site for employment uses other than large-footprint industrial building types.The case for residential use in lieu of employment uses in the proposed MUE will need to be made. 3. Specific traffic concerns that the applicant should be prepared to address,other than those that would be the result of the Comp Plan/Zone Changes? See Development Engineering notes. 4.Wall Street classification/improvements? See Development Engineering notes. Attachments: TDT Rate Calculation Worksheet PREPARED BY: Gary Pagenstechert Associate Planner 3 City of Tigard —42.2-/ l'/p �� ' /tD a 1llT—COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAX �D Rate Calculation Worksheet T I GA AIM APPLICANT ArR C /V L- DATE 67/,/I s{ MAILING ADDRESS /S�s-SE W 3.r-f 2erg O O PREPARED BY /4,-1J CITY/ZIP/PHONE`Ro/2 La-rv-� 9 z I ,5( PLANS CHEC K/-4_Oa) 5- TAX MAP# Z t e' J C�I O O t o O, �S i s 10 oc 110 0 PROJECT TITLE ,a,5 ' o 1-1>I34:71)3 co $ -oo•�oo i� c�5 / -foL7r SITUS#ADDRESS / 3 c*-5 a .G 7'>-,q,,y FOIMFR USE(S) USE CODE UNITS X RATE _ Dr DESCRIPTION/NOTES X MIA YA • f�I 1gF�1f DGUMerN- YJo x = D� e✓Jdl sLi E.x15 i 1"Ee'Eb `7'0 TOTAL TDT,FORMER USE(S) 0., �35vh'E 5 "AO nl'r- L 3WLbJ KG-S/u 5 Es 1 F/Fps 74ii90,-Deitartler Anicky51 S PROPOSED USE(S) USE CODE UNITS X RATE _ �L ,r DESCRIPTION/NOTES f 1/0 /14 X 4/, ErZ = F1.1, 6(,e /741,000 C-EK 1'L+6H 1- bus i 2 710 -/!' x Sep 15-6.1 -4/0j 000 z3P-F-1 O E 3 2z0 3o0 x 3).c =#/, 297, 5-0 0 Soo AlA rE -- LIN x = ,� TOTAL TDT,PROPOSED USE(S) ,..2, 5e40,92,15 � C ,1 Cr 6/41 (Jig tirr'bA,.UY,o�ti olv 4531 SHIP, LESS TOTAL TDT,FORMER USE(S) — .2 3g� et z8 TDT INCREASE!(DECREASE) (INCREASE=TDT DUE) PAYMENT METHOD /j9/2 6G S CASH/CHECK EsAr4T7w i,Sr =&sr.Goo tE /741(÷642e2.= X90 gEs CREDIT ✓ � rOr iCE c t 1 N15 /pe- yv/(s 5= $.4/ fES BANCROFT AGREEMENT 3 74 �Es )0414171 = '��55� /o/, 5,7/ 3 7-A/Ek5 (PROMISSORY NOTE) #4p3 Q441"5.°4 x SOO - 1540/37,q, DEFER TO OCCUPANCY —7-6,-0429/2 _ .,/, 5-93 0w 5-4_es 1/0FS/CD/FORMS/TDT Rate Calculation Worksheet.rndd(Rev.4/22/09) PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING CPI ofMot Orem Community,Devctopment Shaping A getter Community PUBLIC FACILITIES Tax Mantel: 2S101CA,25101,2S101DB Tax Lolls): 100,1100,300,400 Use Type: Indust,Com,Residential These notes were prepared based on information provided by the applicant requesting a Comprehensive Plan/Zone Change. Mentioned improvements and dedications are those typically required. The extent of necessary public improvements and dedications which shall be required of the applicant will be recommended by City staff and subject to approval by the appropriate authority. There will be no final recommendation to the decision making authority on behalf of the City staff until all concerned commenting agencies, City staff and the public have had an opportunity to review and comment on the application. The following comments are a projection of public improvement related requirements that may be required as a condition of development approval for your proposed project. Right-of-way dedication (required with zone change): The City of Tigard requires that land area be dedicated to the public: (1.) To increase abutting public rights-of-way to the ultimate functional street classification right-of-way width as specified by the Community Development Code; or (2.) For the creation of new streets. Approval of a development application for this site will require right-of-way dedication for: ® SW Hunziker Street 37 feet from centerline of right-of-way. ® SW Wall Street, a designated collector in the Tigard Transportation System Plan, to a full dedicated width of 62 feet. If a new north-south street is constructed away from Wall St, it will need to meet the Local Commercial/Industrial street standard right-of-way width of 50 feet. Street improvements: (Required with development): ® Partial street improvements would be necessary to meet standards along SW Hunziker Street to match adjacent improvements with a pavement half-width of 23 feet, curb, storm drainage, 5' planter strip, street trees, street lights, 8' sidewalk, and other improvements to collector standards. ® Full street improvements would be necessary to meet standards along SW Wall Street. Sidewalk to a 36-foot paved width with 5' planter strip, street trees, street lights, 8' sidewalk, and other improvements to collector standards. If the street abuts a rail line that is in use, sidewalk and planter strip may be deleted along the rail side. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes-Fields Property Page 1 of 5 Development Engineering Traffic Analysis Requirements In accordance with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2, land Use Planning, Goal 2.1: In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map shall be subject to the following criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available, or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation; B. Development of land uses allowed by the new designation shall not negatively affect existing or planned transportation or other public facilities and services. A comprehensive traffic analysis is also required by Oregon Administrative Rule 660-012 — the Transportation Planning Rule A traffic study is required for the proposed zone change, and will be required to be confirmed prior to development. These studies will need to be coordinated with and approved by both the City of Tigard and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The actual study area will be determined after the applicant provides detailed and acceptable trip generation and distribution information. It is likely that the study area will include at least Hunziker St, its intersections with Hall Blvd and with 72nd Ave, the whole 72nd Ave/217 interchange area, and other intersections in the area. It is likely that the traffic study will identify capacity deficiencies in the area and will need to identify mitigation measures and/or proportional share contributions to mitigation measures that will need to be constructed and paid before development will be allowed on the subject property. Connectivity: The applicant will be required to construct a street connection through the subject property to SW Varns St. Railroad Issues The applicant will need to obtain approval from ODOT Rail and the owner of the rail line (Portland and Western Railroad) for any new rail crossings or any work affecting a street within 500 feet of a rail crossing. The rail line along the western portion of the subject property is considered by ODOT Rail to be active, and typical railroad requirements and standards apply. 18.730.040 Additional Setback Requirements: This section sets requirements for additional setback distance from roadways. The minimum yard requirement shall be increased in the event a yard abuts a street having a right-of-way width less than required by its functional classification on the city's transportation plan map and, in such case, the setback shall be not less than the setback required by the zone plus one-half of the projected road width as shown on the transportation map. This does not appear to be applicable in this case Agreement for Future Street Improvements: In some cases, where street improvements or other necessary public improvements are not currently practical, the improvements may be deferred. In such cases, a condition of development approval may be specified which requires the property owner(s) to provide a future improvement guarantee. The City Engineer will determine the form of this guarantee. The following street improvements may be eligible for such a future improvement guarantee: CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes-Fields Properly Page 2 of 5 Development Engineering (1.) This does not appear to be applicable in this case Overhead Utility Lines: Section 18.810.120 of the Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) requires all overhead utility lines adjacent to a development to be placed underground or, if approved by the City Engineer, a fee in-lieu of undergrounding can be paid. This requirement is valid even if the utility lines are on the opposite side of the street from the site. If the fee in-lieu is approved, it is equal to $ 35.00 per lineal foot of street frontage that contains the overhead lines. The existing utilities along SW Hunziker and Wall Streets will be required to be relocated underground as a condition of development. All utilities serving the property shall be placed underground. Sanitary Sewers: The applicant will need to verify adequacy of existing lines to accommodate the proposed development. Contact the City of Tigard Utility Billing Department for connection fees. Sanitary sewer service appears to be available from adjacent streets as shown on attached. The applicant will need to demonstrate adequacy to serve the intended uses of the subject property. The area around Varns Street to the east is without sewer service. The developer will be required per TMC 18.810 to extend the public sewers to Varns Street so that it may be further extended to provide service in that area. Water Supply: The City of Tigard provides public water service in this area. Coordinate with the City of Tigard Public Works Department for information regarding adequate water supply for the proposed development and connection fees. Water service appears to be available from adjacent streets. Fire Protection: Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District [Contact: John Wolff, 503-259-1504] provides fire protection services within the City of Tigard. The District should be contacted for information regarding the adequacy of circulation systems, the need for fire hydrants, or other questions related to fire protection. Storm Sewer Improvements: All proposed development within the City shall be designed such that storm water runoff is conveyed to an approved public drainage system. The applicant will be required to submit a proposed storm drainage plan for the site, and may be required to prepare a sub-basin drainage analysis to ensure that the proposed system will accommodate runoff from upstream properties when fully developed. Provide a plan that shows how the storm drainage system for the site connects to the public system. Storm drainage plan and calculations shall be submitted with the application for it to be considered complete. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes-Fields Property Page 3 of 5 Development Engineering Storm water detention is required. Storm water detention facilities must be reviewed and approved by the city. Storm water detention calculations shall be submitted to the Development Engineer for review and approval. The stormwater plan and facilities must meet Clean Water Services (CWS) standards. Storm Water Quality: The City has agreed to enforce Surface Water Management (SWM) regulations established by Clean Water Services (Resolution and Order No. 07-20) which requires the construction of on-site water quality facilities. The facilities shall be designed to remove 65 percent of the phosphorus contained in 100 percent of the storm water runoff generated from impervious surfaces. The resolution contains a provision that would allow an applicant to pay a fee in-lieu of constructing an on-site facility provided specific criteria are met. The City will use discretion in determining whether or not the fee in-lieu will be offered. If the fee is allowed, it will be based upon the amount of impervious surfaces created; for every 2,640 square feet, or portion thereof. Please contact the Building Division for the current fee. Preliminary sizing calculations for any proposed water quality facility shall be submitted with the development application. It is anticipated that this project will require: ® Construction of an on-site water quality facility. ❑ Payment of the fee in-lieu. Water quality treatment is required. Calculations for sizing of water quality treatment facilities must be submitted to the Development Engineer for review and approval. Water quality facilities also must be reviewed and approved by the city. Review and comply with provisions of Chapter 4 Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards (Runoff Treatment and Control). If the applicant can demonstrate that it is practically impossible to provide detention on specific small areas of the site, a fee-in-lieu may be considered for those specific areas. Other Comments: Water quality and detention facility design and construction must be certified by a professional engineer as meeting Clean Water Services requirements. After completion of the construction of these facilities, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the city on city-furnished forms for long-term maintenance of the facilities. This agreement will be recorded and city staff will be periodically inspecting the facilities for compliance with the terms of the agreement. TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT TAX In 1990, Washington County adopted a county-wide Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) which was replaced in 2008 by a Transportation Development Tax (TDT) that became effective 7/1/09. The TDT program collects fees from new development based on the development's projected impact upon the City's transportation system. The applicant shall be required to pay a fee based upon the number of trips which are projected to result from the proposed development. The calculation of the TDT incorporates the proposed use of the land and the size of the project. The TDT is calculated, due, and payable at the time of building permit issuance. In limited circumstances payment of the TDT may be allowed to be deferred until the issuance of an occupancy permit. Deferral of payment until occupancy is permissible only when the TDT exceeds the TDT rate for a single- family home. Pay TDT as required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes-Fields Property Page 4 of 5 Development Englneerintl PERMITS Public Facility Improvement (PFI) Permit: Any work within a public right-of-way in the City of Tigard requires a PFI permit from Development Engineering. A PFI permit application is available at the Planning/Engineering counter in the Permit Center at City Hall. For more extensive work such as street widening improvements, main utility line extensions or subdivision infrastructure, plans prepared by a registered professional engineer must be submitted for review and approval. The PFI permit application shall include any on-site water quality and detention facilities that may be required as part of the land use approval. The Permittee will also be required to post a performance bond, or other such suitable security. Where professional engineered plans are required, the Permittee must execute a Developer/Engineer Agreement, which will obligate the design engineer to perform the primary inspection of the public improvement construction work. The PFI permit fee structure is as follows: NOTE: If an PFI Permit is required,the applicant must obtain that permit prior to release of any permits from the Building Division. A PFI permit is required for this project. This permit must be obtained before any work begins on site. Building Division Permits: The following is a brief overview of the type of permits issued by the Building Division. For a more detailed explanation of these permits, please contact the Development Services Counter at 503-639-4171, ext. 304. Site Improvement Permit (SIT). This permit is generally issued for all new commercial, industrial and multi-family projects. This permit will also be required for land partitions where lot grading and private utility work is required. This permit covers all on-site preparation, grading and utility work. Home builders will also be required to obtain a SIT permit for grading work in cases where the lot they are working on has slopes in excess of 20% and foundation excavation material is not to be hauled from the site. Building Permit (BUP). This permit covers only the construction of the building and is issued after, or concurrently with, the SIT permit. Master Permit (MST). This permit is issued for all single and multi-family buildings. It covers all work necessary for building construction, including sub-trades (excludes grading, etc.). This permit cannot be issued in a subdivision until the public improvements are substantially complete and a mylar copy of the recorded plat has been returned by the applicant to the City. For a land partition, the applicant must obtain an Engineering Permit, if required, and return a mylar copy of the recorded plat to the City prior to issuance of this permit. Other Permits. There are other special permits, such as mechanical, electrical and plumbing that may also be required. Contact the Development Services Counter for more information. PREPARED BY: Greg Berry 5/1/14 DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER DATE Phone: [5031118-2468 E-mail: greg@tigard-or.gov Revised: March 2012 CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes-Fields Property Page 5 of 5 Development Engineering SUPPLEMENTAL CKET Carol Krager FOR ,' '7 ,90,90/_S O/ (DATE OF MEETING) From: Councilmail Councilmail Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 11:14 AM To: John Goodhouse; Marc Woodard; Marland Henderson;John Cook;Jason Snider; Council Email Dump; Marty Wine Subject: FW: Field's Trust and Tax Lots 25101DB00300 & 25101DB00400 From: aeodeetigaol.com Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 11:14:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US &Canada) To: John Cook; Councilmail Councilmail Subject: Field's Trust and Tax Lots 2S101DB00300 &2S101DB00400 Dear Sir: At the 10/13/15 meeting of the Tigard City Council Tom McQuire stated that Tax Lots 2S101 DB00300 & 2S101DB00400 no longer existed due to two very recent tax lot adjustments. Those two tax lots have been significant in the testimony from residents of the Rolling Hills neighborhood. Why would Tigard permit such tax lot adjustments when the lots were such an important part of the ongoing testimony and hearings related to the Field's Trust application for their zone changes? Was it someone's attempt to accomplish two zone changes without any proper notification to the immediate neighbors and without any involvement by the Tigard City Council? In any case it appears to be an attempt by someone to bypass the proper ethical procedures. For many months you and we have been discussing the original Field's Trust proposal for rezoning the Trust's owned property (File Numbers CPA2015-00004 and ZON2015-00005). The proposed Ordinance at the 10/13/15 Tigard City Council clearly includes Tax Lots 2S101 DB00300 & 2S101DB00400 as"3.1 ACRES OF PROFESSIONAL/ADMINISTRATIVE COMMERCIAL (C-P), AND 2.1 ACRES OF LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-3.5)" as part of the amendments to the Zoning Map. Is someone trying to accomplish their chosen goal of zone changes without going through the normal (and ethical) procedures? I assume the proposed ordinance stated on the 10.13.15 Tigard City Council Agenda is no longer valid since it appears to have errors related to the two previously mentioned tax lots, and that a new proposed ordinance will have to be written. I wish to suggest that all Tigard employees in any of the 'planning processes' be held to a very high standard of keeping the elected Tigard officials well informed on any steps (or side-steps) related to any matter that will properly be the final decision of the Tigard City Council. And when appropriate, or even advisable, to keep the effected citizens well informed. A'livable' city or town must have city employees and elected officials that the ciitzens can trust and respect. Sincerely. George Guthrie 7665 SW Fir Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 Norma Alley From: Carol Krager SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 10:10 AM FOR a ,D To: Norma Alley (DATE OF MEETING) Subject: FW: Fields Trust Submission-10/27/15 TCC Mtg Attachments: City Council Testimony 10-27-15 - Nick Frezza.docx; Fields Trust Property New Configuration.pdf C2D From: Nick and April F [mailto:nickandapril @hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 9:38 AM To: John Cook; Councilmail Councilmail Cc: Gary Pagenstecher; Carol Krager Subject: Fields Trust Submission-10/27/15 TCC Mtg Greetings Mayor and City Councilors, I am submitting the two attached documents to the official record for the upcoming October 27th City Council meeting related to the Fields Trust Rezoning Application. 1. Additional Testimony related to the new information of the recent lot-line adjustments. 2. Scanned drawing of the newly configured lots sourced from the Washington County Geographic Information System. Please review my submittals and thank you for your continued attention to this vitally important matter. Regards, Nick Frezza DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules "City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 Nick Frezza - Testimony for the Record -Tigard City Council - October 27, 2015 Fields Trust Rezoning Application At the October 13th City Council meeting my testimony focused on the possible rezoning of two small lots located at the West end of SW Varns Street in the Rolling Hills neighborhood. I brought to the Mayor and City Council's attention the profoundly negative impacts of greatly increased traffic and substantially reduced livability of the neighborhood should those two lots be rezoned and commercialized as MUE. The Council heard my concerns as they later engaged in a thoughtful discussion concerning the existing access point to those two lots which is via SW Varns. It was during this important discussion that Council requested clarification from staff about which lots were in question. Gary Pagenstecher responded by identifying the two lots in question as 25101 DB00300, zoned C-P and 25101 DB00400, zoned R-3.5. At this point, Tom McGuire, Assistant Community Development Director, joined Gary Pagenstecher at the dais and revealed surprising new information. A pair of recent "lot line adjustments" had effectively eliminated the two smaller lots. The timing of the introduction of this new information brought an abrupt and premature end to the Council's discussion of access to the Fields Trust property. County records show that only one of the two lots was in fact eliminated; the two acre plot zoned R-3.5 still exists. The small C-P zoned lot immediately adjacent to the North of the R-3.5 plot has been absorbed into the much larger Western plot and is now zoned as I-P. Please refer to the attached plot map sourced from the Washington County Geographic Information System. The recent lot line adjustments prompt two important questions: 1. How can the zoning on the "absorbed" 25101 DB00300 lot be changed from C-P to I-P without formal action being taken by the City Council? 2. Can a lot-line adjustment be used to circumvent a formal application for a zone change? With these new lot line adjustments, the previously separate C-P zoned lot is now part of the much larger I-P zoned lot. This newly created lot is bounded by SW Wall, SW Hunziker, as well as SW 76th Avenue which is wholly within the Rolling Hills neighborhood. The new configuration of this lot makes the future of vehicular access even more vitally important. The new, much larger lot is most easily and readily accessed directly through the Rolling Hills neighborhood via SW Varns and SW 76th Avenue. The home owners of Rolling Hills have not wavered in our objective to protect the neighborhood from the dramatically increased traffic and diminished livability that will result from allowing access to the Fields Trust property via the streets of Rolling Hills. Please do not sacrifice Rolling Hills. Take definitive action to keep Varns Street plugged at the West end and prevent Rolling Hills from being used as an access point to any new development resulting from the MUE zoning change on the Fields Trust property. Submitted to the official record October 26, 2015. Nick Frezza 13275 SW 76th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Page 1 of 1 t j,--.4 t. t - -lb 4 Geographic Information Systems ,• "` ezr- v\e,titeQ,Ncr_tA\-e8 Id ;. ., iir____,_,r, __,4 ,\ ‘ j .. sr. \ ...----__. I li 1 I i II fly:•r•:I I I rl W 3n. ____14 11u 1,hn • t :r I %) ;t- ■ JA 0 __4., n'N...--1 , i j —11Ih I ti f I pi ,I_,,, __-- r __--- ---1\ \ ri-, -r-..n.f R7iiTt— I �C.,; i ' • _ — 3rr3 = , 600ft f 1 http://washims.co.washington.or.us/InterMap/theDetails.cfm?x_coord=7623154.10407569&y_coord=648840.29187252&theA... 10/25/2015 Norma Alley Subject: FW: Fields Trust Submission Attachments: CC testimony 10-27-15.docx 1 Y1 ';;` j{E'r SUPPLEMENTAL_ FOR (DATE OF MEETING) From: Nick and April F [mailto:nickandapril @hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 3:13 PM To: John Cook; Councilmail Councilmail Cc: Gary Pagenstecher; Carol Krager Subject: Fields Trust Submission Greetings Mayor and City Councilors, I am submitting the attached two-page document to the official record for the upcoming October 27, 2015 City Council meeting related to the Fields Trust Rezoning Application. Thank you, April Frezza 13275 SW 76th Avenue Tigard, Oregon DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules "City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 April Frezza - Testimony for the Record -Tigard City Council - October 27, 2015 Fields Trust Rezoning Application The City's planning staff has compromised the City's goal of"Do the Right Thing." Taxlot numbers 2S101DB00300 and 25101 DB00400 have been discussed in two recent Planning Commission meetings, and the City Council meeting on October 13th. The same outdated plot map has been referenced the entire time. In fact, at the October 13th meeting, when Mr. Frezza offered to provide a copy of what was understood to be the current plot map to the City Council, the Mayor replied that the City Council had that same copy in their application packets, on their individual computer screens and on the overhead screens in front and in back of the room. It was not until later during property access discussions when the Council President asked for clarification on which lots were being referenced that the surprising news was delivered by the Planning staff that the two lots no longer existed. The two lot line adjustments were made in June and July of 2015. The lot line adjustments were not shared in the public proceedings or with the residents of Rolling Hills, leaving us feeling that there is an ulterior motive for these actions. At the very least, it is a blatant contradiction to the City's stated commitment of transparency throughout this process. We have lost trust in the City staff and the process. Two screenshots are provided: 1) The outdated plot map that has been referenced repeatedly 2) The current plot map with the lot line adjustments pulled from the County's online Geographical Information System Sincerely, April L. Frezza 13275 SW 76th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Page 1 of 2 Outdated plot map: -rf,,N o f/AR 4,0 LEGEND 6.11,6 1 1,.t..Iavk,t ,)/j C-G General Commercial .: C-P.Professional Commerc,al I-L / 1-L:Light Industrial /,II C-P I-P:Industrial Park //J PR:Parks and Recreation PR ha, SW CRESTVIEW ST R•3 S:tow-Density Residential yam, R Medium-Density edium-Density Residential 3Q' R-12:Medium-Density Residential 3 R-25:Medium High-Density Reskks h SW VARNS ST 1---1 r.__l ..l■ N.' w �I Ir.- ;n+ ;ri,� Q _ \l F— b R-25 N nr,.. �,,.. R-3.5 an aAIS4w.u..I. MOW.4.NMI -P SW FIR ST .,.,.-.M.ItIV Current plot map: ##��, Geographic Information Systems :,_)f Maps I i1 T `S 2 3 A 9.--. `S-� _�cc �b 30he Z 4iip SW r`Ni VS KS C` I - r ( — 3n►,cG� Z ct . 1. ,F:l.\ _. _ ,1 Page 2 of 2 Carol Krager From: Gary Pagenstecher Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 4:41 PM To: Carol Krager SUPPLEMENTAL 'A+CKET Cc: nickandapril @hotmail.com FOR Subject: FW: Fields Trust Zone Change GATE OF MEETING) Attachments: Email to Frezza (2).pdf; Record of Survey.pdf FYI,for the record. From: Hossaini, Kelly [mailto:Kellv.Hossaini@ MillerNash.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 2:44 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: Fields Trust Zone Change Gary- Please submit this e-mail and the two attachments into the record in response to the extended notice period regarding the Fields Trust property line adjustments. Earlier this year, the Fields Trust applied for and received two property line adjustments,one was approved on June 15, 2015, and the other was approved on July 23, 2015. The purpose of these property line adjustments was to conform the legal lots on the 42.5 acre Trust property to the boundaries of the proposed zoning, and to enable the Trust to sell the portion of the property that will remain Industrial Park, i.e.,the western 18 acres, separate from the remainder of the property. Attached is an e-mail to Mr. Frezza with that information. Also attached is the record of survey that was filed with Washington County on August 12, 2015,Survey# 32589,to effect the July 23, 2015, zone change. I have highlighted and labeled the record of survey to make the boundaries of the proposed new zoning configuration more obvious. As can be seen on the record of survey, the legal lot to be zoned MUE has frontage on Hunziker Street. At this time,the legal lots on the Trust property conform to what is on this filed record of survey and this record of survey conforms to the legal descriptions included in the zone change application describing the boundaries of the Industrial Park and Mixed Use Employment zones. The County may not have yet updated its tax maps to include Survey#32589, but Survey#32589,which is part of the City's July 23, 2015, property line adjustment decision,depicts the current legal configuration of the Trust property. Thank you -Kelly Hossaini Kelly Hossaini Partner, Real Estate and Land Use Team Leader Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP 3400 U.S. Bancorp Tower 1 111 S.W. Fifth Avenue I Portland,Oregon 97204 Direct:503.205.2332 I Office:503.224.5858 I Fax:503.224.0155 E-Mail I Bio I Social I Blogs Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:This e-mail message may contain confidential or privileged information. If you have received this message by mistake, please do not review, disclose, copy, or distribute the e-mail. Instead, please notify us immediately by replying to this message or telephoning us.Thank you. 1 Hossaini, Kelly From: Hossaini, Kelly Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 11:09 AM To: 'Nick and April F'; 'Gary Pagenstecher' Subject: RE: Fields Trust Lot Line Adjustment Nick- The first property line adjustment application was approved on June 15, 2015. The second was approved on July 23, 2015. The purpose was to reconfigure the legal lots on the property to enable the Trust to convey the western 18 acres of the property to an industrial developer and to conform the legal lots to the proposed zoning. There are two legal descriptions of the proposed IP and MUE zones that were included with the original application materials. Those legal descriptions are consistent with the approved property line adjustments. Thanks- Kelly Hossaini From: Nick and April F [mailto:nickandaprilc hotmail.com] Sent:Thursday, October 22, 2015 10:55 AM To: Hossaini, Kelly; Gary Pagenstecher Subject: Fields Trust Lot Line Adjustment Greetings, In preparation for the upcoming Council meeting, would you please share with me the date of the lot line adjustment and the reason(s) that action was taken. Thank you, your cooperation is much appreciated. Regards, Nick Frezza N.... Cl DETAIL(SCALE 1'=20'j L=1624' WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEYOR'S OFFICE RECORDOF SURVEY '3�7:"44S/p --TT� 32589 ACCEPTED FOR FILING 0-12 i5 of ° ' `-- FOR A PROPOSED PROPERTY UNE ADd1S NDIT 3 -C, C2 It -� i�2 SHEET 1 OF 2 LOCATED IN THE N.M. GRAHAM D.LC. N0. 39 4 s L=27.5I' -� z r - MTHENW1/4AlD THE SW1/4 OFSECTION1, S\I' T A'7/ 7 i OMNSMP 2 SOUTH, RANGE I ZEST. N.Y.. s, ., ,. aE _ CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON ► 607.7,- ''- S , � § — PREPARED FOR LEGEND JAY 31, 2015 PARm 1 PRR 095)MEN PROPERTY INi TRACT 3 / 412.1 4.- R — TED 4E3DSR 1REwcAa URIC M49551 C/o 21111 1.1055 0 9 9 0 SET 5i�N4EST sA n+c 91c l9 wa.PLtirnc CAA SWAPO) TRACT 3 z' c N 00S'P '1 laS NAVE UP f 3400 US 6AIKQ8 MDT m L=36.06 III SR 5191 AVE OOC MO.2015-046137 K OOC M0.2mY116Ai P095.04O.DI 97204 • FEW 5/9 1OI ROD•191 111159 PLASTIC GYP SIA14Pm ��'�AREA'7.4>s' , 9-08191+(51 9 RK»4G MC'.PER SN 32018 HELD AMSTED AREA°4159 ACRES w NARRATIVE M PURPOSE O 116 9,RKY 6 10 1101AOIi M TRACTS O • FauD s/6 RON 800 NTH num PEAS M CAP nAYPm EXCHANGE AREA 2 A PRIMED P90FFRFT LIE ADAISR4NI IEIMDI PARCEL I O 9-OAMIESI A1R1EY1t4G NC';PER SN 32370;HELD ti IRAR4FRED PRON TRACI 3 10 TRACT 4 000.011 MABFFIt M-051473.OOC1AOII M 20 AREA=2.695 AGES PARCEL 1 15-046635 AO 000AOrt MISER 2019-046637.Tit • f031D AIRSEY 140N1AE]Il.SEE 1ESi7iPD(M 9EET 2 32 00C 910 2053-119791 AD1151101 WAS APPRO.4D BY M OTT OF 1CARD 19(92 Doc Na 000.0 T NU1BDt IA9RRG10N CMItY COED R£COOS xi06 y CASE RE RIMIER U 201540304. EA51"G MIR0 U E .$, ;•-1 10 E ADJUSTED 1141D M BOADARI RESO1)1DN MO BAYS O<(CAROM tig xim' �lJy� i 2„ PER YT PREMOIS SLRIEYS 6 M 2001ER495 RECC1OCD AS -F 'G 9.IMY MISER 32010 MO SUMP M11BFR 3238 ALL CURVE INFORMATION - g PARCEL-0y" � �® wDm�a1s MENU. 0401 NOTED.p PER SAO �' 8 69 26' SLRYf5 / THIS 016595 9150 CVR4EC15 110 ERRORS ON ARMY IAA4BER 0 aAU10=27000 O� } 5®19'211 330.x' ° 4 DOC Ma 2006-027636 THIS S DE 1 ALSO 6 a CM 'A,4 ORS 1I SUR1-5 l PITA=659'21' P t• EXISTING PRCPERD INC T OAE729001 0956 L TIM 1915•AMY,AS MIMED 0183E OM=5769555T 3605 ' ' TO BE A0115111) .* 1 PAO 0.13E I M SEC01D CM 6 N M TA AO FOR LgENO1N•27.51• : bi FYOA ©.•Ea1 HAS M aECMN OF M RAILS=2xiW TRACT 4 WO/101011S IRE PLACED 70 PARR M NEW 8GPERD UQ DELTA-631'19- • r PAK11 1 13 OIOI•=M6625)3'11 21./9- •^ 00C 910 2006-051473 a OOC MO 2015-046176 0901441 AREA-LOSS AGES DX 910.2C05-022561 C1 (401 A PART) 6 ADJUSTED AREA-24.164 AS LENGTH=15.74' RADIOS-23100 O 1.IA=40149- O454D=44625638'W 16.14' PARCEL 2 178 r111/ R�7/21'16 23Rq 1tY 6 301 1t01 01 1EL5' / c BMOC 19 PAQ 43 a I t� 131 9 LOT 6 9 . a. ✓nn LOT 7 s# SW VARN$STREET A REGISTERED 1 PAA4Il 1 ,b. - 132 DOC 6 --- SCALE 1' = 100 FEET 20(-1441 4b QY 101 IT• • saB TRACT 1 B Q •DOC.M0.2015-046615 a '® O M/AREA-26.642 ACRES r 'd PROFESSI NAL A9 NAME: FIELDS SURVEY AWARD AREA-7209 AOiEs 29- }g^S Ljl 1■AND ESSURVEY0R 9 r"' LOT 11 1/( 141 ,pB NUMBER- 366 PRCPOS D AEI PR09R TT LIE TRACT 1 - /",--, OREGON / - 64,4 R 4>,2591 DRAWN BY: CHS II.SIIIAS AE -- 6 ,1/4.111M10.1 534463 CHECKED 6C. SFr .433 R LOT 12 in 914(4901 WE x/36/16 EXCHANGE AREA 1 MAIM No: 366 Nos P A 180249-0(0 FROM TRACT 1 TO TRACT 1 AREA=19433 ACRES _ N ORTHWEST r.4. 1815 NW 16949 PLACE, SUITE 2090 BEAVERTON, CR 97006 SET VOTICSS 1404100 52934.101 205'" 101 13 PHONE:503-848-2127 FAR:503-848-2179 TRUE`°"" "�"`°°�"PAD ' SEE SHEET 2 39 V °°� THAT 111 1E R1YO9D•5 PUNNED URVEYING, Inc. 9x OESfLOPI•pl a AM MHO. ''144134 SEE SHEET 1 RECORD OF SURVEY FOR A PROPOSED PROPERTY UNE ADJUSTMENT ' 0T n LOCATED N THE N.W. GRAHAM D.LC. NO. 39 rstcpasell 9t9 Pinson.IX TRACT 1 y: }, N MO NW 1/4 0 THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH. RANGE 1 WEST, W.Y., CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON COL w Alma-048135 LOT a ALLY 31, 2015 ORMUMAL AREA:27642 ACRES ' .d SHEET 2 OF 2 AOJ,ISRD AREA 4 1.109 ACRES .4" id" E , , V: 9115 • 32589 tilik 11111. 1 10113 2/2 I1 • �4 401 31 EXCHANGE AREA 1 is LEGEND TRANSFERED mow TRACT 1 TO TRACT 4 13 mu-19.431 AS o SET 5/6•,.30'604 RCA mint 111108 PLASM CAP SrmiPED 101 u 110R1M1E5'94420)110 IC.' '1 w • F010 5/6'604 RED 971 TE3109 PLASM CAP S18 t 5E1 971E0S 40741.14274 52974'1011 200' 01.•• ' V. '74ERT74EST S0ttE1IO PC:PER 511 42010.1112 ir.E MOO FALLS R 094 1t PAD y 1 a 1��I-7.74 • FOND 5/6'604 RID 9114 1110•PIAS70 CAP 51A1/72 911r 5 42101(2 9193 RAAOtD ■ 101 33 3 1 a 911 Of3410P1O17 i $ N 11mT74951 94414198 9C'.PER 91 32510 1432 • MAO%RSV 4061/441,91 OESCRP71015 tb A DOC 1• 000.11ER1 0660(8.14A9444071:01036411 9930 16W115 s ysy 101 34 to ��., ` "7 ��f�`rt. \ SCALE IT 100 FEET FOUND MONUMENT DESCRIPTIONS �- Q'5. -- 107 5/1'Rw R'CO NTH NO CAP:PER SN 15.938 BEARS manner an' Irt, 4.r. PLATTED VEST 1174E CF i lot 3s 5\\:\.\\\\ - a a {RCN 20111{9-RAY llt `J (L '44011746 HILLS-PLAT 2' Y 5/6'R04 R00 9174 40 CAP,PER 94 15,934 MU(0E RI01T-CF-91111K �0 11' OVERLAPS 0110 SMUT a ® 5/K RCN ROD UN 140 CAP,PER 94 9.693 BEARS S2T3d35r 0.55' -- 171014Rtt,A$9DVN ® s/1'Rw Rao rl74w C.4F PER 94 5,4601472 �9/ a � 3/4'RO4 PPE BER11S'4071(601,71D BOO PER 91 9,693,KID �O SI ® 3/4'ROM PPE BERT 1ED AT WO.COIN 06'.AS EOUNO 04 64 19.434 BEARS M1612461 063 N1(2 -1'ERN PROPERTY CL 40 3/4'ROM PEP PER imam 1975;HEW ® 5/1'604 RED 9174 NO CAP,MCNAIRI 6 DISTUntp POT'KWIC It75; BEARS 5%42567 1.69' OD 5/6'R01 ROD 941 40 CAP:PER'16119.19715:BEARS 4467231'£0.39' ® 5/6'RN RN■I NO UP,COIN 0.2;PfR 91 9,9.2 IE1D 61(0(57(EE7 QJ' S/6'RCN ROD 919 110 UP,DOW 0.1';PER 91 1.164,49.2 PROFESSIONAL l �E E1QDS SURVEY 6E) 3/4•8011 744;AS 941394 EW 91 19.293;20485 N6S46057 0.334' LAND SURVEYOR RCN PROPERTY IRE 136 5/6•R01 KO NTH 1O CA7�,PER'ROUI6 ILLS-PUT 2':HELD FOR NEST IN If• Y JOB NUMBER: 366 13 5/8'Rw ROD 974 40[AP;PER'ROUND ILLSMI 2' BEARS 748611956''/0.22• S3 [ao ;�f7 FA04 PLATTED 9101 tlE R 713U1C ILLS-PU7 2'(SEE 9l 3200 1011 1 d' I DRAWN HT: CMS 46001 MAIM 074 4AP1 ` sSU1tU J CHECKED En: SET CLET074 Il SAMS�. I.b 1/r Rot PRE IF O5':OR10M L4IXI401(BEARS S681YS81 0.56'FINN PUTTED 'TECH cam d)ytss PARK 91419 a1L 9/44/76 95T 16E 0'440.71£mils-PUT 2'(91 91 32010 ABOUT PUTTED OVERLAP) DRAWING NO: 366 ROS FM 150 HEW tT SS/6'6704 ROD MIN 110 CAP 19 AT BE10,DOW 26:AS SHOW ON 94 19,436: BOCK 53 PACE 29 - BEARS 148141:14.113.1 1 II C 4CRE RCN 1717P217Y Ulf \ ORTHWEST 151 I'R0.414 M WgETE FENCE t0•tr4 AS 9afN1 w 91 19.136:IFWD 1815 NW 169th PLACE.SUITE 2090 BEAVERTOW, OR 97006 137 PMONE.503-848-2727 FAX:503-848-2179 ....no.nrsrvy corn • 2 \ S URVEYING, Inc. SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR t a -a ) a C a r o l Krager (DATE OF MEETING) From: Gary Pagenstecher Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 9:09 AM To: 'Nick and April F' Cc: John Cook; Councilmail Councilmail; Carol Krager;Tom McGuire; Norma Alley Subject: RE: Fields Trust Lot Line Adjustments Nick, Per your request, I have forwarded your latest comment below to be included in the record. I would like to clarify that per Council's direction, no further public testimony will be accepted at the hearing tonight. The Council will have the comments received by noon today for their consideration.They will deliberate and decide on two motions:first,the Ordinance for the zone change and second,the Resolution for restricted vehicular access. See you tonight, Gary From: Nick and April F [mailto:nickandaorilc hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 11:10 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: John Cook; Councilmail Councilmail; Carol Krager Subject: Fields Trust Lot Line Adjustments Greetings Gary, This letter is in response to the email you forwarded to me yesterday from Kelly Hossaini. Please ensure this response is included in the additional testimony for tonight's City Council meeting related to the lot line adjustments and the Fields Trust Rezoning Application. While I appreciate the applicant's response to my testimony, at this point it is not important what may or may not be correctly reflected in the County's GIS database. The point is that when the Rolling Hills neighbors have had the opportunity to present our case before the Planning Commission and the City Council, we have been referencing outdated materials and neither the City nor the Applicant has advised us otherwise. Throughout these proceedings the neighbors have called for transparency and the City has repeatedly said it is committed to a transparent process. The surprise announcement of lot line adjustments leaves us thinking that there is backstage maneuvering occurring that puts the neighbors at a great disadvantage. I am left concerned that other documentation or facts have not been made available to us. Regards, Nick Frezza DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET October 27, 2015 FOR / D 017 -- .2 6 /S— Eric S. Lea (DATE OF MEETING) Neighbor; Rolling Hills Community 6 Tigard City Council Re: Fred Fields Trust Plan Amendment and Zone Change Case (CPA2015- 00004/ZON2015-00005) ; Lot Line Adjustments and Impact on Community Dear Mayor and members of the Tigard City Council, This communication is pursuant to the lots at the NE corner of the Fred Fields Trust property, whose lot line adjustment was disclosed at the Tigard City Council meeting on October 13, 2015. Please consider the following when making future decisions concerning the development of this property: DON'T—Be characterized by close-door procedures and decisions that lack public input and discussion. DO—Exercise transparency, and demonstrate good faith by conducting all business and discussions in open, public forums. DON'T—Ignore the conclusions of ODOT and your own Traffic Engineer and pass the problems already identified onto the citizens of Tigard. DO—Carefully weigh the facts. Make decisions based upon facts provided by NON- BIASED sources (ODOT, the City's own Engineer). Ask yourselves what the motivation of each vested party might be. How might that motivation impact their findings and conclusions? DON'T—Manipulate and dilute motions already proposed so they are powerless and ineffective. DO—Honor the spirit of the original motion presented by Councilman Goodhouse. In that motion the Councilman proposed an amendment to the approval of the zoning change that would prohibit access to the Fields Trust development via Varns st. (by any route). This was not simply an acknowledgement of resolution 79-86, but a much more bold, meaningful statement; one that would not easily lend itself to reversal or modification at any future council's whim, with or without public comment. The message was clear; No through traffic on Varns St. to future development on the Fields Trust property. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, ...__ ____ 4 . „....,,L, Eric S. Lea Citizen, Neighbor and Community Activist LeaE @yahoo.com (503) 430-8826 Cc: Mayor John Cook; Tigard City Council Lea, Eric S. • 2 AIS-2392 8. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): 30 Minutes Agenda Title: Briefing on Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Projects Prepared For: Lori Faha Submitted By: Carol Krager, Central Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The council will be briefed on Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Projects status for first quarter FY16. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST No action is requested; the council is asked to listen to the briefing. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY In order to keep the council informed on the status of current CIP projects, staff will provide regular project briefings. Several projects will be discussed at this meeting. The attached file provides a summary of CIP projects and status for first quarter of FY16, along with an example of the new Engineering Division project monthly status report. Copies of the October status reports for all CIP projects currently managed by Engineering will be provided to the council in the Thursday, October 22nd City Council Newsletter. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Staff provides the council with regular briefings on the status of CIP projects. The last briefing was July 28, 2015. Attachments PowerPoint AgendaQuick©2005-2015 Destiny Software Inc.,All Rights Reserved C I T Y O F T I G A R D Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done 11111 III TIGARD Capital Improvement Project Update FY 2015-16 First Quarter Tigard City Council Meeting October 27, 2015 C I T Y O F T I G A R D Adopted CI P FY2015/16 Engineering Projects Only Total Projects by Category ► Parks 3 Streets 5 / Water 2* / Sanitary Sewer 3 / Storm 6 ► Facilities 2 ► Com. Development 2 Lo/Tigard Water Partnership is not included II C I T Y OF TI G A R D Adopted CIP FY2015/16 Engineering Projects Only Total Projects by Category Projects Added* / Parks 3 / Parks 2 1 Streets 5 / Streets 1 / Water 2* / Water 1 1 Sanitary Sewer 3 / Sanitary Sewer 0 Storm 6 1 Storm 0 / Facilities 2 1 Facilities 0 / Com. Development 2 1 Corn. Development 0 *LO/Tigard Water Partnership is not included *New and projected to start this FY C I T Y O F T I G A R D Parks Projects Existing Projects Budget Schedule Dirksen Nature Park / The Education Center 0 0 / Oak Savanna Restoration • / Grant Applications • • 1 Tigard Street Trail and Public Space • • Fanno Creek Trail — RFFA Grant Added Projects Fanno Creek Remeander 0 0 Tiedeman Trail 0 •On Target 0 Minor Issues • Major Issues •Change in Budget or Schedule C I T Y O F T I G A R D Streets Projects Existing Projects Budget Schedule ► Pavement Management Program • • ► Walnut Street Improvements ► Pacific Hwy / Gaarde / McDonald Intersection 0 O. Upper Boones Ferry / Durham Adaptive Signal ► 95th / North Dakota Sidewalk (CDBG) Added Project ► Hunziker Core/Wall-Tech Center Drive 0 0 •On Target O Minor Issues • Major Issues 0 Change in Budget or Schedule C I T Y O F T I G A R D Water Projects Existing Projects Budget Schedule 1 Aquifer Storage and Recovery Well #2 Rehab 0 1 550 Zone Connection to Price Reservoir • 0 Added Project Red Rock Creek Waterline Relocation 0 0 •On Target 0 Minor Issues • Major Issues 0 Change in Budget or Schedule C I T Y C) F T I G A R D Sanitary Sewer Projects Existing Projects Budget Schedule I► Barrows / Scholls Ferry Sewer Line Extension (Phase 3) • ► East Tigard Sewer Replacement • • ► Walnut Sanitary Sewer 0 •On Target 0 Minor Issues • Major Issues •Change in Budget or Schedule C I T Y 0 I, T I G A R D Storm Projects Existing Projects Budget Schedule Greenfield Drive WQF Reconstruction • • Canterbury Lane Storm Line Upgrade • 0 rk Ridgefield Lane WQF Reconstruction • Outfall Retrofit Program • 0 �► Stormwater Master Plan • 0 1 River Terrace Stormwater Implementation 0 0 •On Target 0 Minor Issues • Major Issues ®Change in Budget or Schedule (2 1 '1' Y ( ) 1 '1' 1G A RD Facilities Projects Existing Projects Budget Schedule / Permit Center / City Hall / Police Building • Exterior Wall Repairs / Citywide Facilities Plan • •On Target O Minor Issues • Major Issues Change in Budget or Schedule C I T Y 017 T I G A R D Community Development Projects Existing Projects Budget Schedule Main Street Gateway Monuments • • Public Works Yard Demolition (Complete) •On Target 0 Minor Issues • Major Issues 0 Change in Budget or Schedule C I T Y O F T G A R D Main Street Gateway Monuments c` j't7 X11 ' ,� • VAA 44011111111" 6610,316,,,,_11* Ta Tq i WS • ..,,,.._7+0, *W •�. ,�' id" -,igneso retook" 401- C I T Y O F T I G A R D Dirksen Nature Park Oak Savanna Restoration 1 N 1{R •tw a,., 1 '� r ir*4r i � Ma'' +i, k r ai+ • ■ • I AIS-2349 7, Business Meeting Meeting Date: 10/27/2015 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Consider a Resolution Concurring with Washington County Findings Regarding Right-of-Way Vacation of an Unnamed Street Prepared For: Greg Berry,Public Works Submitted By: Sherri Russell,Public Works Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting Resolution -Main Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Should the council approve a resolution concurring with Washington County findings as to the vacation of a portion of County Roads Nos. 746 and 812? STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Staff recommends the council approve the attached resolution. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Board of County Commissioners of Washington County has resolved to vacate a portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812.The area to be vacated is under the jurisdiction of the county,but lies entirely within the city limits of Tigard. It is therefore necessary for the City of Tigard to concur with the findings of the county governing body per ORS 368.361. A map of the proposed vacation is included with the attached resolution and order from the county. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Deny the resolution which would result in conflicts with the proposed development of the surrounding area. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Promotes implementation of the River Terrace Community Plan. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION This is the first time the council will address this matter. Attachments Proposed Resolution VX'ACO Resolution CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 15- A RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY FINDINGS REGARDING VACATION OF A PORTION OF COUNTY ROADS NOS. 746 AND 812 WHEREAS, Washington County Board of Commissioners Resolution and Order No. 15-72 (the Order) ordered the vacation of a portion of County Roads Nos. 746 and 812,more particularly described in the Order attached to this Resolution as Exhibit 1;and WHEREAS,after receiving notice of the proposed vacation and prior to the County adoption of the Order,the City of Tigard reviewed the proposed vacation and concurs with the findings of the County;and WHEREAS, ORS 368.361(3) provides that a county body may vacate property that is under the jurisdiction of the county and that is entirely within the limits of a city if the city concurs with the findings of the county. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Based upon the above findings which are incorporated herein by reference the City Council concurs with the findings of Washington County as specified in Washington County Board of Commissioners Resolution and Order No. 15-72. SECTION 2: A copy of this Resolution shall be provided to the Washington County Surveyor's Office. SECTION 3: This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption. PASSED: This day of 2015. Mayor-City of Tigard A'11'EST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 15- Page 1 Exhibit 1 i. 1 AGENDA OFF DOCKET WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Agenda Category: Consent—Land Use&Transportation (CPO 4B) Agenda Title: VACATE A PORTION OF COUNTY ROAD NOS. 746 AND 812— AN UNNAMED COUNTY ROAD (VACATION NO.518) Presented by: Andrew Singelakis, Director of Land Use&Transportation SUMMARY: A petition was received by the Board to vacate a portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812,as shown on survey number 32,411,lying in the northeast one-quarter of Section 6,T2S,RI W, W.M., Washington County, Oregon,as described and shown in the attached Vacation Report. The portion of these unnamed County,Roads,proposed to be vacated, is unused right-of-way resulting from previous alignments of SW Scholls Ferry Road. Scholls Ferry Road has been re- aligned a few times since the original alignments of 746 and 812 were established in 1919 and 1922,and the alignment and right-of-way used for public purposes today has been established as County Road 3110. The adjacent property has dedicated additional right-of-way along SW Scholls Ferry Road for future public use. Vacating the proposed right-of-way will allow for the development of a new subdivision included in the River Terrace Community Plan. The vacation petition was signed by 100%of the abutting property owners. Staff has reviewed this request and has determined the vacation of this portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812 is in the public interest. There will not be any adverse impacts on the abutting properties or utilities. A Resolution and Order has been prepared granting the requested vacation and,when executed,it will complete Washington County's portion of the vacation proceedings. This right-of-way is in the city limits of Tigard. Pursuant to ORS 368.361(3), the City, by resolution or order, must concur in the findings of the county governing body to complete the vacation proceedings. Attachments: 1. Resolution and Order 2. Vacation Report with legal description and map(Exhibit"A") DEPARTMENT'S REQUESTED ACTION: Vacate the right-of-way described in the attached Vacation Report and request that the City Council of the City of Tigard resolve or order concurrence with this vacation pursuant to ORS 368.361(3). COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S RECOMMENDATION: RO a .._ 72 Agenda Item No. _ _ Date: 08/04/15 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON In the Matter of the Vacation of a portion of) RESOLUTION AND ORDER County Road Nos. 746 and 812, Situated in ) the Northeast One-quarter of Section 6, T2S,) NO. 15- 12 R1 W,W.M., Washington County, Oregon ) VACATION NO. 518 The above-entitled matter having come on regularly before the Board at its meeting August 4,2015; and It appearing to the Board that a petition has been filed to Vacate a portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812, as shown on survey number 32,411, and situated in the Northeast One-quarter of Section 6,T2S,R1 W, W.M., Washington County,Oregon. The petition was signed by owners of 100%of the property to be vacated and by the owners of 100%of the abutting properties, pursuant to ORS 368.351; and It appearing to the Board that said petition did describe the portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812 to be vacated, the names of the parties to be particularly affected thereby, and set forth the particular circumstances of the case; and It appearing to the Board that the portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812,proposed to be vacated, is under the jurisdiction of Washington County and entirely within the corporate limits of the City of Tigard, Oregon as described in ORS 368.361(3); and It appearing to the Board that the right-of-way proposed to be vacated is no longer needed for the use of the public;and It appearing to the Board that the County Road Official did examine the area proposed to be vacated and hereby submits to the Board the Vacation Report attached hereto,and by this reference made a part hereof; in accordance with ORS 368.351(1); it is therefore RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812, proposed to be vacated and more particularly described in the attached Vacation Report, is hereby vacated as it is in the public interest.This vacation shall become final upon the formal concurrence of the City of Tigard by either resolution or order pursuant to ORS 368.361(3); and it is further RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County Surveyor of Washington County, Oregon, be and hereby is authorized and directed to mark the vacated County Road on the plats and records of Washington County Oregon; and it is further RESOLVED AND ORDERED that the County Surveyor of Washington County, Oregon, is hereby authorized and directed to have this order of vacation recorded in the records of Washington County, Oregon, and cause copies of this order to be filed with the Director of Assessment and Taxation and the County Surveyor's office in accordance with ORS 368.356(3). Dated this 4th day of August,2015. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY,OREGON AYE NAY ABSENT DUYCK SCHOUTEN ✓ rY MALINOWSKI Chairperson ROGERS TERRY --- j. At A. . Recording Secretary 4 Approved as to form Assistant County Counsel Date: SSAy 31; 7.015 Page 2—R&O No.IS-ti 2. Vacation No. 518 DEPARTMENT OF LAND USE & TRANSPORTATION REPORT ON VACATION NO. 518 August 4, 2015 VACATION OF A PORTION OF COUNTY ROAD NOS. 746 AND 812) A request for vacation proceedings has been received by the staff for the Board of County Commissioners to vacate a portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812, as shown on survey number 32,411, and more particularly shown on Exhibit "A" and described as follows: That portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812, as shown on survey number 32,411, lying southwesterly of a line being 61.00 feet southerly of, and parallel with, the centerline of County Road 3110 (SW Scholls Ferry Road) and lying northeasterly of a line being 30.00 feet northerly of, and parallel with, the centerline of County Road 3282 T/J (SW Friendly Lane). Said portion of road is being situated in the Northeast One- quarter of Section 6, T2S, R1W, W.M., Washington County, Oregon, and being shown on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein. The owners of the property abutting the unimproved roadway to be vacated are: 2S1 06AD, TL 100 2S1 06, TL 200 Christopher and Sheri Ralston, Crescent Grove Cemetery Association, 21029 SW Lebeau Rd An Oregon Non-Profit Corporation Sherwood, OR 97140 9925 SW Greenburg Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF ROAD VACATION REQUEST 1) Conformance with the County's Comprehensive Plan The portion of County Road Nos. 746 and 812, described herein and proposed to be vacated, is not a part of the transportation plan in the area. This area is a part of the River Terrace Community Plan which shows this area as being a part of a future subdivision plat. The Road is not in use and will not be needed for future use. The adjacent owners of tax lot 2s106ad00100 have dedicated 61.00 feet of right-of-way along SW Scholls Ferry Road to meet the future needs of that adjoining transportation facility. 2) Use of the Right-of-Way This portion of road, proposed to be vacated, is unimproved and no longer in use. Once vacated, it will be incorporated into the lots of the adjoining land owners and will be developed through a proposed subdivision plat as part of the River Terrace Community Plan. 3) Impact of Utilities and Emergency Services Utility providers have been notified and existing power and phone poles have been located. All poles are in a dedicated easement to PGE or in adjacent rights- of-way that will remain. There are no adverse impacts to public utility providers or emergency services. 4) Limits of Vacation and Evaluation of"Public Road" Status The right-of-way proposed to be vacated is not needed for public use. It is within the city limits of Tigard and, pursuant to ORS 368.361(3), the city must concur with this vacation proceeding for it to become finalized. The limits of the right-of-way proposed to be vacated are logical and justifiable, and the vacation of this right-of-way will not have any adverse impacts on the abutting property. Based on the above statements, it is recommended that the Board of Commissioners grant the vacation of the road proposed herein, as it is in the public interest. .S,,r Gary A. Stockhoff, P.E. Washington County Engineer PROPOSED ROAD: . VACATION VACATION 518 A PORTION OF C.R. NOS. 746 AND 812 spy 2 NOT TO SCALE Gtn SW ROY ROGERS & SW 175TH AVENUE n 99+55.55 P.O.T. SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD 128+33.73 P.O.T. —SW SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD °' C.R. 3110 P�� C.R. 812 • BEGIN C.R. 812-END C.R. 746 ' ®�C.R. 746 pa 2 SW FRIENDLY LANE C.R. 3282T/J r [ ' 0 PGE 1 PGE EASEMENT PER 2010-028678 & 2010-054358 PGE 2 6' WIDE UNDERGROUND DISTRIBUTION LINE EASEMENT PER 2011-008326 SLOPE EASEMENTS — EASEMENTS FOR SLOPES, WATER, GAS, ELECTRIC AND - COMMUNICATION SERVICE LINES, FIXTURES AND FACILITIES PUBLIC UTILTY EASEMENT EXHIBIT 'A" 1